Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Participation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident asks for clearer notice and slide procedures; committee agrees to draft guidance
Summary
A resident urged the Communications Committee to recommend clearer notice when state or agency public‑comment periods open on local developments and to allow presenters to submit slides or handouts in advance; the committee agreed to draft quick‑reference guidance for residents and chairs and tabled formal action until next month.
During public comment, resident Lori Yamashida asked the Communications Committee to consider ways for residents and presenters to communicate more effectively, including advance slide or handout submission and explicit notice when agency public‑comment periods open on local projects.
"I want to ask the township to notify residents when the DP has a public comment period on a proposed development," Lori said, citing a local case she followed at 488 Harleysville Pike and offering three example handouts (a website link to an open comment period, a one‑line summary of concerns, and a slide comparison showing a proposed bus‑stop configuration). She volunteered to be a test presenter to try different formats.
Committee members and staff responded that printed handouts are acceptable at meetings and that file attachments are routinely received by township staff, but chairs have discretion over whether to incorporate electronic slides during a meeting. Staff noted IT scans attachments from flash drives and encouraged residents to email materials in advance to facilitate review. Members recommended producing an informal quick‑reference for residents and for chairs explaining what materials may be submitted, how to notify committees in advance, and how chairs might indicate limits on public comment.
The committee agreed on three near‑term objectives: create guidance for residents on preparing materials for meetings, prepare a short checklist chairs can use to clarify what they will accept, and draft recommendations the committee could present to boards or chairs for voluntary adoption. A member moved and the committee seconded to table further deliberation until the next meeting so staff could check IT and legal constraints; the motion passed on a voice vote.
Why it matters: clearer guidance could reduce confusion for first‑time attendees and help residents present concise, verifiable information to committees; a resident’s example involving a development at 488 Harleysville Pike prompted particular attention because it illustrated how residents may miss external public‑comment windows.
What’s next: communications staff will draft the quick‑reference guidance and present it to the committee at the next scheduled meeting.
