Select Board asks Conservation Commission to review public Zoom access after contested vote

The Southampton Select Board voted July 14 to ask the town’s Conservation Commission to review whether remote access to a recent public hearing worked as advertised after members of the public said they could not join the meeting.

Resident Jeff Boder of 46 Pleasant Street told the board the commission’s 2–1 vote on a solar project on Pleasant Street was likely invalid because “the Zoom link was not working” and “the most important person to be there tried and tried and tried. Couldn't get on.” Richard Adams of 40 Pleasant Street echoed that an engineer expected to participate could not connect and left questions unanswered.

Chair read a draft letter the board will send to the Conservation Commission asking the commission to examine whether the Zoom platform or access information “functioned as intended throughout the meeting,” whether technical difficulties affected public access, what steps were taken to restore remote access or otherwise accommodate members of the public, and whether any further action is appropriate. The draft also notes that determination of Open Meeting Law violations is outside the Select Board’s authority and would be handled through the statutory complaint process.

Board members said the goal was to ensure public concerns are formally communicated and to preserve transparency. The Select Board moved and approved sending the letter; no formal finding about the underlying Conservation Commission vote was made by the Select Board.

The Select Board’s action requires the Conservation Commission to respond in writing summarizing any findings and actions it intends to take. The board’s letter emphasizes public confidence depends on both compliance with applicable law and meaningful transparency in how meetings are conducted.

The Select Board forwarded the letter after the public-comment period and closed the item without taking additional action on the solar proposal itself. The Conservation Commission has not yet provided a response, and any determination about the validity of the earlier vote would follow the statutory complaint process.