Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Meetings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nonresident tells Vestal board some public-comment rules may be unconstitutional
Summary
During the meeting’s public-comment period, a nonresident told the board that several posted rules are unconstitutional, cited Cheevers v. Town of Union (1999), and urged the town to consult counsel and increase committee transparency.
During the final public-comment period, a nonresident criticized the board’s pre‑meeting rules for public speakers and told the board that several of those rules “wouldn’t stand a court challenge.”
The speaker urged the town to review its rules with counsel, criticized the use of moratoria and work sessions as potential means to delay or pre-decide matters, and cited the 1999 case Cheevers v. Town of Union—described as a precedent that limited conducting governmental business by serial communications outside open meetings. The speaker also questioned committee transparency and the availability of committee minutes.
The board did not engage in extended debate on the legal claims during the hearing; the supervisor encouraged residents to attend Monday meetings where issues are discussed and factual questions can be answered before formal votes on Wednesdays. No formal change to the board’s public-comment rules was adopted at the meeting.
The remarks were made during the designated public-comment period; any legal or procedural changes would require consultation with town counsel and possible formal action by the board.
