Ossipee residents debate petition to bar part-time town employees from serving as selectmen

A packed Ossipee Town Selectboard meeting on an unspecified February evening centered on a petition asking voters to bar part-time town employees from serving on the selectboard when they also hold town jobs.

Supporters of the petition told the board they fear the appearance of conflicted decision-making when one person holds both enforcement and policymaking roles. ‘‘The appearance of a conflict of interest alone was enough to make it look like it was a conflict of interest,’’ one resident said, urging the board to let voters decide whether to separate the roles.

Several residents and a selectman who signed the petition said they had repeatedly heard concerns from constituents about a single official wearing multiple hats—as building inspector, zoning officer and a selectboard member—and argued the change would preserve public trust. One commenter described the issue as primarily about perception and looked to future governance rather than past disputes.

The official named in the petition, who serves as the town’s zoning and building officer as well as a selectman, defended his record and described his process for handling complaints. ‘‘I refer cases to the zoning board of adjustment,’’ he said, adding that he does not act as judge and jury and that enforcement actions may be appealed to the zoning board or courts. He distributed a packet of zoning cases to demonstrate ongoing enforcement work.

Selectboard members and other residents noted practical consequences of a quick change: the official said that, under the petition’s proposed 30‑day effective window, he would be out of the enforcement role and the town would face immediate gaps in active legal cases and inspections. ‘‘If this passes, it passes within 30 days. That means I’m out,’’ he said, warning that ongoing court cases and inspections could be disrupted.

Board members acknowledged the tension between removing perceived conflicts and maintaining continuity for ongoing enforcement actions. Some urged voters to weigh the policy question; others emphasized the difficulty of finding qualified replacements if the position were vacated abruptly. The board did not take a vote on changing job titles or on removing the official that night; the petition proceeds through the warrant process for town meeting consideration.

The board also clarified procedural limitations: repeal or amendment of zoning ordinances must proceed through the planning board under RSA 675:4, and separate statutory deadlines apply to petition warrant articles.

The matter is scheduled for consideration through the town’s warrant and ballot process, where voters will make the final determination.