Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select board debates handbook edits, tightens remote‑participation language and adds attire guidance
Summary
Board members reviewed proposed handbook edits that would give the chair authority over agenda items, set stricter criteria for remote participation citing RSA 91‑A:2,3, and add a code‑of‑conduct item on appropriate attire and snacks; members agreed to refine language and vote next week.
Brentwood’s select board worked through proposed edits to its handbook that would clarify who determines agenda content, impose stricter conditions on remote participation, and add conduct guidance on attire and snacks.
The proposed edits would change existing handbook language so the chair “determine[s] agenda items, maintain[s] order and control of the agenda” and would adjust the town administrator’s duties to prepare agendas at the chair’s direction. The board agreed in principle to align appendices B and C with that change and to return with a consolidated redline.
On remote participation, the draft cites RSA 91‑A:2,3 and would permit remote attendance only when it is not reasonably practical to attend in person, require a roll‑call vote to approve a remote participant and require the absent member to state for the record why it is not reasonably practical to attend. The draft lists acceptable reasons such as illness, family emergency, childcare issues, or out‑of‑state travel and adds language discouraging routine remote attendance (for example, frequent travel for employment). One member said the additions merely ‘‘put some meat on the bones’’ of the state statute; another asked whether the added definitions risked contradicting the law. “The blue part seems above and beyond what the law says,” a board member said; others argued the town may add clarifying rules that do not conflict with state law.
Members also debated a proposed etiquette/code‑of‑conduct addition that would ask members to dress in ‘‘appropriate attire’’ and limit food during meetings to medically necessary needs or provided snacks; members favored keeping the language general (‘‘appropriate attire’’ rather than a detailed list). The board discussed how to process medical notes for accommodations and agreed confidential handling (to the chair or town administrator) would be acceptable.
The board did not finalize all language and asked staff to consolidate edits and return with the amended handbook for a vote at the next meeting.
