Moderators urge stricter time limits, consent calendar expansion and pre‑meeting discipline to streamline Concord town meeting

A panel of moderators — including current moderator Carmen Reese and former moderators Ned Perry and Eric Van Loon — told the Concord Town Meeting Study Committee that Concord can preserve deliberation while reducing time spent on annual town meeting through several procedural changes.

Eric Van Loon offered a practical "top 10" list of changes: limit individual public speakers to one minute in many cases, alternate pro/con speakers, eliminate or shorten ceremonial speeches, expand the consent calendar where appropriate, require a pre‑meeting between the moderator and presenters to set expectations, and bundle materials online. Van Loon described staged limits (e.g., 7 speakers per side, then a 15‑minute pause to test whether further debate is productive).

Ned Perry drew on decades of moderator experience and said moderators should enforce clear end times, use the gavel to maintain order and provide large‑print materials for accessibility. He also urged committee members to observe peer towns that have adopted clickers and hybrid meeting approaches to learn practical lessons.

Carmen Reese said she has used one‑minute limits during outdoor meetings and that an overall per‑article time cap is feasible and has been used successfully elsewhere. She cautioned that some substantive bylaw changes cannot be placed on a consent calendar without pushback from town council, and that bandwidth limitations at the venue make complete paperless access difficult. Reese said moderator pre‑meetings with presenters are essential and that outreach — hearings, League of Women Voters forums and clearer pre‑meeting pros/cons materials — can reduce time spent explaining basics at the microphone.

Committee members supported the idea of setting expectations publicly in advance (publicizing any new time limits or rules) and of preparing pros/cons summaries for major warrant articles so voters are better informed before the meeting. Several members and public commenters warned against truncating deliberation entirely — David Allen and others said they have changed votes because of debate at town meeting — so the committee faces a trade‑off between efficiency and the value of open deliberation.

The committee did not adopt formal rules at this meeting but asked staff and volunteers to draft potential proposals, gather peer‑town examples and return with recommendations for the committee to consider before its December report to the select board.