Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Remote Participation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Strafford County subcommittee flags questions about Zoom voting and roll-call procedures ahead of delegation meeting
Summary
Members debated whether remote participants can vote if a Zoom connection drops, whether roll-call should be used, and recommended checking with the county attorney; the subcommittee favored preregistration and brief caucuses before the full delegation vote.
Subcommittee members raised procedural concerns about allowing remote participation and voting when the full delegation meets to appoint a replacement commissioner. Members said the county has approved Zoom use for meetings in the past, but uncertainty remains about how to handle connection loss during a vote.
A member summarized prior practice: "We already approved use of Zoom for votes, in January, and we follow the state regulations." Another member urged consultation with the county attorney, saying if a remote participant loses connection midvote, the group may need to postpone or otherwise address the situation. The chair said they favor preregistration for Zoom participants and noted that if Zoom triggers remote participation, the body should switch to roll-call voting to preserve an auditable record.
Why it matters: the full delegation expected to vote on the commissioner replacement could include remote participants. Members said clear rules will be necessary to avoid inadvertent disenfranchisement if a connection drops and to ensure the vote record is accurate.
Next steps: subcommittee members asked staff to check with the county attorney about the precise legal requirements for remote voting and to design a voting procedure (including roll-call) appropriate for the delegation meeting. The subcommittee did not adopt a binding rule in this meeting; members said they would confirm the approach with legal counsel before the full delegation session.
