Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civic Procedures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woburn planning board debates uniform public‑comment time limit after Baron v. Kolenda
Summary
Board members reviewed proposed procedural rules and the Massachusetts case Baron v. Kolenda; several members supported a content‑neutral five‑minute time limit for speakers at public hearings to reduce chair liability, while others raised enforcement and fairness concerns and proposed drafting alternative language for review.
Members of the Woburn City Planning Board spent a substantial portion of the Oct. 22 meeting reviewing proposed procedural rules and discussing public‑comment controls in light of the Massachusetts decision Baron v. Kolenda.
Former chair Claudia Volgin, who spearheaded the rule revisions, said the case made clear that a content‑neutral time limit is the most legally defensible guardrail for public testimony. "A content neutral time restriction on speakers is the only thing that will be held up because it is uniformly applied," she said, urging a standard five‑minute limit for every speaker in public hearings.
Other members cautioned about implementation and potential legal risk if the limit were applied inconsistently. One planning board member suggested drafting two versions of the proposed paragraph (one with a uniform five‑minute limit and one without) for further review. Several members said strict uniformity would be important if a time limit is adopted; others noted the board rarely faces hearings with large numbers of speakers and questioned whether strict timing would be necessary.
The board also discussed distinctions between public hearings and non‑hearing business meetings, whether nonverbal signs should be regulated, and broader edits to procedural language. Members agreed to have staff and volunteers draft clearer options and return proposed language for the board to consider at a future meeting.
