Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procedural topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board debates limits on testimony, schedules executive session
Summary
Board members debated whether to impose time limits on applicants and objectors after a lengthy hearing; counsel cautioned that cutting testimony can create grounds for appeal, and the board agreed to an executive session to review procedural concerns.
Members of the Fair Haven Planning Board of Adjustment spent a substantial portion of the meeting discussing whether the board can limit hearing time for applicants and objectors and how to avoid procedural errors that could prompt appeals.
One board member proposed giving equal time allotments to each side to prevent very long hearings. Counsel replied that while the board can limit testimony that is irrelevant, duplicative or improper, “if you cut it off, you need to state the reason that you’re doing that,” and warned that unjustified limitations can create grounds for appeal.
The exchange covered witness qualifications, relevance of photographs and testimony, and the need to balance orderly meetings with giving applicants their opportunity to present. Members disagreed about whether prior hearings crossed the line into improper conduct; several asked the board attorney to provide case law. The chair suggested an executive session after the public meeting to explain the board’s concerns and the legal background in more detail. The board then voted to enter a roughly 10–15 minute executive session; no official action was taken during the closed portion, per the chair.
The board also addressed approval and memorialization of minutes and a technical resolution from the prior meeting; members agreed to discuss detailed concerns about those minutes in executive session.
The board returned to public session only after the executive session was completed and no additional formal action was announced on the record at that time.
