Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Procedures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board asks new counsel to finalize local rules and procedures
Summary
The Planning Board asked newly engaged land‑use counsel Kevin Stout to consolidate and adapt a compiled draft of rules and procedures for the Village, flag items that conflict with village code, and return a revised draft. Members discussed remote‑voting rules, advice of counsel language and application completeness standards.
The Village of Mermanic Planning Board on June 25 asked newly engaged land‑use counsel Kevin Stout to prepare a revised draft of planning‑board rules and procedures based on a compilation of examples and member comments.
Chair explained the board had assembled a draft from multiple municipal examples and would like Kevin and his firm to "take the pen" and help tailor the document to the village. Several members raised substantive items for counsel to address: conflicts with village code (for example rules on remote voting and required public accessibility), whether language about Robert's Rules of Order should remain, and replacing the term "executive session" with specific "advice of counsel" language to reflect state public‑meeting limitations.
On remote participation, a member relayed a trustee's concern that remote voting rules must comply with village code (remote participants must announce their location and be publicly accessible); members agreed counsel should identify and remove or revise draft language that conflicts with the code.
Members also asked counsel to draft a practical completeness standard so the board can reliably determine when an application package is sufficient to "start the clock" on reviews without repetitive iterative filings. The chair said counsel should also advise who on staff is the appropriate point person to make that determination.
On minutes and records, the chair reiterated the board's practice that meeting video serves as the meeting record, and the board will prepare written minutes for review and vote; members asked counsel to check timeliness requirements to ensure compliance with state requirements.
The board asked members to send suggested edits to counsel within one week so Kevin could consolidate them for the next meeting. No formal vote was taken; members agreed to keep the item on future agendas until adoption.
