Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rules Of Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Simsbury selectmen approve revised rules of procedure after long debate on public comment limits
Summary
The Simsbury Board of Selectmen approved revisions to its rules of procedure Dec. 1 after members debated whether public comment should be limited to 'electors' or broadened to 'residents and taxpayers,' clarified decorum standards for elected officials, and removed a blanket ban on cellphones.
The Simsbury Board of Selectmen on Dec. 1 approved a revised set of rules of procedure that narrows some prior wording and broadens others after an extended debate about who can speak during public audience.
The board's action follows hours of discussion about whether the public comment period should be restricted to "electors" (registered voters) or expanded to include "residents and taxpayers." Speaker 2 led the discussion and said the board favored widening access because "electors" would exclude nonregistered residents; after debate members recorded a 5-to-1 consensus in favor of the "residents and taxpayers" language.
Why it matters: the changes govern how and when town residents can address their government and clarify who may be moved from the beginning of a meeting to the end if many people sign up to speak. Critics said stricter limits risk chilling speech and could unfairly exclude people with legitimate business before the board; supporters said clearer rules were needed after disruptions at a recent meeting.
What the board changed: among the agreed edits were removal of an absolute ban on cellphones in meetings, explicit coverage of elected officials in harassment-free workplace language, and new wording that allows the chair to propose shorter speaking times or to move remaining speakers to the end of the meeting with the board's consent. Members also clarified procedures for addressing disorderly or disruptive conduct (motions to recess, point-of-order steps) and deleted redundant prohibitions that duplicate existing state open-meeting law.
During the debate, members repeatedly cautioned against crafting rules that would unduly prevent legitimate speakers from participating. "We don't want to chill opportunity for someone with legitimate business to come before this board," said Speaker 6. Others pushed for clear guardrails to prevent out-of-town actors from derailing meetings.
The board voted to adopt the revisions as discussed. The vote followed procedural motions and the board's stated consensus points recorded during the meeting. The rules can be revisited or amended, and members noted the charter remains the controlling legal document where conflicts might arise.
The board will publish the updated rules with redline notes and plans to revisit any substantive concerns during future agenda cycles.
