Charter Review Committee limits vice‑chair voting for precinct committee, approves several charter edits

The Plymouth Charter Review Committee voted to amend proposed charter language so precinct vice chairs may sit in place of their precinct chair in that chair’s absence but may not vote, the committee recorded at its meeting. The motion to replace the second sentence of section 7‑1‑1 with language allowing vice chairs to participate but not cast votes passed 8–1 after an extended discussion about consistency and accountability.

Chair Al Costello called the votes and oversaw debate about whether allowing a vice chair to vote could produce inconsistent outcomes when committee make‑up changed from meeting to meeting. Supporters argued the amended wording preserves a precinct’s voice while ensuring the person who actually deliberated and is accountable to voters casts policy votes. Opponents warned it could weaken the precinct’s representation when chairs are frequently absent.

Betty (identified in the record as M. Kavako), who had requested reconsideration, said she did not want the vice chair to decide votes for a precinct: "I don't feel that the vote should be taken by the Vice chair," she said, arguing the chair has the responsibility and relationship with precinct members that the vice chair often lacks. Steve (a committee member leading the drafting effort) said the COPC’s new appointment and selection authorities make consistent membership more important: "given this new responsibility ... there should be some consistency," he said, urging a rule that limits voting to the elected chair.

The committee adopted compromise language proposed on the floor to read, in part, "Precinct vice chairs may sit in place of their precinct chair in the absence of the precinct chair but may not vote." Tim made the motion to replace the sentence; Mr Hanlin seconded it. The minutes record the roll‑call-style affirmation as: Mr Bolon (yes), M Kavako (yes), Chair Al Costello (yes), Mr Hanlin (yes), Mr Hutchinson (yes), Mr La (yes), Mr Paisa (no), Mr Le (yes) and Miss Voltr (yes); the committee recorded eight yes votes and one no.

The committee also addressed several editorial and substantive items in the draft charter. After discussion about provisions omitted during a prior reorganization, the committee voted to remove two sentences in the town‑manager qualifications paragraph that had set a minimum requirement of "at least five years of full‑time paid experience" and an open clause allowing the town to add additional qualifications. Supporters said the select board should retain flexibility to determine appropriate qualifications; the committee approved removing the two sentences and agreed to reinsert the rest of the section as redline/black text in the next draft.

On election administration language, the committee amended the provision governing the lottery that decides candidate ordering to require public notice at least 48 hours before the lottery rather than the earlier draft language referencing publication "during the week preceding" the lottery. The change was adopted by show of hands; the committee recorded the vote as unanimous.

Committee members also agreed to continue detailed line‑by‑line work on the draft charter, to deliver an updated consolidated document (version 730 / 29‑2 / 24730 as referenced in the meeting) to members for final review, and to prepare a short chapter‑by‑chapter summary and a single presentation night for precinct chairs followed by caucus Q&A sessions ahead of Town Meeting. Staff confirmed that the current working draft and a feedback email address are posted on the CRC website and that incoming comments will be routed to the committee for triage.

Votes at a glance

- Amendment to section 7‑1‑1 (precinct vice chairs may sit but may not vote): motion by Tim; seconded by Mr Hanlin; recorded outcome 8 yes, 1 no (names as recorded in meeting minutes). Approved. - Removal of two sentences in the town‑manager qualifications paragraph (removing a specific five‑year experience requirement and the sentence about additional qualifications): motion made and seconded on the record; approved (vote recorded in minutes; committee instructed staff to reflect the change in the next draft). Approved. - Election‑lottery notice timing changed to at least 48 hours before the lottery: motion recorded and adopted by show of hands (unanimous). Approved.

What happens next

Staff will publish the revised draft and an explanatory cover sheet on the committee website and circulate the updated packet to committee members. The committee plans a presentation night for precinct chairs and encouraged members of the committee to attend precinct caucuses to answer questions and correct misperceptions before Town Meeting.

(Article based only on committee proceedings recorded in the meeting transcript. Spellings and name forms follow the transcript record where members’ names appear inconsistently; the article flags those inconsistencies in the audit.)