Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Minutes And Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Biddeford Zoning Board questions minutes after 2–1 vote, tables issue for committee review
Summary
Board members debated whether minutes from a prior meeting correctly recorded the result of a 2–1 vote in light of an ordinance requiring a majority of the full membership to reverse a code-enforcement decision; the board voted to refer the question to a committee and table final approval.
The Biddeford Zoning Board of Appeals on June 1 deferred final action on minutes from a recent meeting after members debated whether the minutes accurately recorded the result of a 2–1 vote and whether the city ordinance requires a majority of the full board to reverse a code-enforcement decision.
The chair read the relevant ordinance language aloud, saying, “the concurring vote of a majority of the membership of the board shall be necessary to rule or decide on any issue,” and argued the minutes’ wording—that the appeal had "failed"—may be incorrect because only two members voted to deny the appeal. The chair said he had recused himself at the prior hearing and noted that with a five‑member board a majority would be three votes.
Board discussion turned on whether correcting the minutes would change the legal status of the prior action. One member asked for clarification of the practical effects, noting an appeal to Superior Court is already under way; another said phrasing and motion language (motions made in the negative) contributed to confusion. Legal counsel advised that the ordinance’s text supports reading a 2–1 vote as insufficient to reverse the building inspector when the rule requires a majority of the full membership.
Faced with the procedural dispute, a board member moved to refer the issue to the executive committee and table approval until a future meeting; that motion was seconded and approved. The chair said the committee will propose a date for the follow-up and that staff will circulate draft meeting timing to members for the July meeting window.
The board then moved on to a scheduled legal training. No final changes were made to the minutes at this meeting; the referral and the committee review are the next steps.
Because this matter involves the board’s formal minutes and a pending appeal, the committee review and any subsequent edits to the minutes could affect the record relied on in court. The board scheduled staff to circulate proposed committee dates and indicated it will seek additional legal or ordinance drafting guidance before acting on the minutes again.
