Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Master Plan Subcommittee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board discusses master-plan subcommittee schedule and whether council-membership affects voting on recommendations
Summary
Board members reviewed the schedule for master-plan element reviews, clarified that subcommittee meetings are not formal OPMA sessions and need not keep minutes, and flagged a governance question over whether a planning-board member who sits on the council should vote on recommendations that will go to that council; the board said legal guidance will be sought.
Members of the Township of Washington Planning Board spent a portion of the June 3 meeting outlining the schedule for reviewing remaining master-plan elements and debating procedural rules for subcommittees and recusal.
Planner Joe Burgess and other members said the subcommittee will continue iterative reviews of elements (zoning, climate, green team inputs) and that while subcommittee meetings are not formal Open Public Meetings Act hearings they may keep internal notes. "They're not formal meetings required by OPMA," Burgess said, but added that notes are often taken for internal use and to inform draft revisions.
Board members pressed whether a planning-board member who also sits on the Township Council should vote on recommendations that will be forwarded to that council. The chair and board attorney said participation in discussion is permitted but that acting and later voting at both levels can raise concerns; the group agreed to seek legal opinions and review relevant case law. One member expressed frustration, saying he felt his vote had been restricted by the need to avoid recommending to a body he later would sit on.
The board agreed to continue subcommittee work promptly and to provide opportunities for the public to comment on future drafts of the master plan.
