Resident says planning-board notice fell short; council counsel says meeting was duly noticed

During public comment at the council's Jan. 5 meeting, resident Michelle Arminino raised concerns about the way the planning board handled notice for a Dec. 18, 2025 meeting that considered a redevelopment study for a proposed solar field.

Arminino said she attended the planning-board session and "was the only member of the public," and she argued the agenda language and notice did not make the item clear to the public. "I think it was improperly noticed," she said, urging the council to ensure future hearings and designations are properly advertised so residents can participate.

Mr. Reno, speaking for planning/administration counsel, replied that the item had been listed on the planning board agenda as a discussion item with possible formal action and that, in his view, the meeting was a public meeting duly noticed. He also noted statewide shifts in how public notices will be posted: "We're phasing out the print media as the primary focus of obtaining public notices...it'll be much easier for people to find in one place where all of the public notices are," he said.

The exchange ended with both positions on the record: a resident asserting the notice fell short and counsel stating the process met current requirements. The council did not announce a corrective action at the meeting; the issue remains a public-record concern for the planning board and council to monitor going forward.

Context: The redevelopment designation referenced by the commenter would allow the planning board to prepare a redevelopment plan describing a potential solar field; the council's role in that sequence was described as part of future deliberations and plan review, not as an immediate construction approval.