Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Remote Participation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Strafford County delegation adopts formal remote voting policy after lengthy debate
Summary
After extended debate and an unsuccessful amendment to require a delegation vote on each remote participation, the Strafford County delegation approved a policy allowing members to participate and vote remotely in accordance with RSA 91-A; the final roll-call vote was recorded as 21–11.
The Strafford County delegation voted to formalize a remote-participation policy for members using Zoom and other remote methods, passing an amended motion by roll-call 21–11 during its Dec. 11, 2024 organizational meeting.
Representative Southport moved the proposal to "continue the practice of allowing Strafford County delegation members to participate and vote in meetings remotely in accordance with RSA 91-A," requiring remote members to state their location, who else is present and a brief reason for not attending in person. The motion was seconded and opened for debate.
An amendment from Representative Kirkpatrick would have required the full delegation to vote on whether each remote participation reason is "reasonably practicable" and to record that determination and the stated reason in the minutes. Kirkpatrick said the change would align the language with the RSAs and remove a single-person determination by the chair, arguing it would reduce the potential for favoritism and create a public record of the delegation's determinations.
Opponents said a requirement to vote the entire delegation on each remote participation would be cumbersome and slow the body's work. "I think having to vote as a whole delegation over every remote participation is really unnecessary in keeping us from doing the business that the delegation is here to do," Representative Lamontagne said. Supporters of remote voting said it helps maintain quorums and allows members with job or health conflicts to participate.
The Kirkpatrick amendment failed on a roll-call vote (the transcript records 19 no, 14 yes). The mover then amended his original motion to remove parenthetical examples such as "illness, out of town." That amended motion was adopted on a subsequent roll-call; the transcript records a final tally of 21 yes and 11 no.
Members on both sides asked that objections and clarifications be placed in the official minutes. Some members recorded their opposition to remote voting for the record during the meeting; one delegate explicitly asked that their opposition be included in the minutes.
The policy passed by the delegation will guide remote participation in the 2025 term and reflect the county attorney's legal opinion referenced by members, who noted a suggested biennial reaffirmation of the practice.
