Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Open Meetings topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents say town failed to post documents 24 hours before meeting; board pledges review

Shelter Island Town Board · March 11, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Multiple public commenters said the town failed to post documents for four agenda items at least 24 hours before the meeting, which they described as an Open Meetings Law violation; the board acknowledged the timing issue and agreed to review posting practices and chapter 11 of the comprehensive plan publicly.

Pam, a resident who spoke during public comment, told the board four agenda items lacked materials on the town website at least 24 hours before the meeting and said discussing them without those documents available ‘‘is a violation of the open meetings law.’'

"This is a violation of the open meetings law," Pam said, adding that residents need access to committee lists, meeting minutes and information on how subcommittees vetted changes. She requested the town post the missing language for the ADU exemption, the irrigation code changes, the site‑plan review application materials and the comprehensive‑plan timetable so the public can follow along.

A representative of the Shelter Island Association echoed Pam's concerns and asked the board to prioritize public review of chapter 11 (implementation) of the comprehensive plan before it advances to county review or a public hearing. Moderator acknowledged receipt of the complaint and said the board would review the posting locations and timing and would be mindful of public access as drafts and hearing versions are prepared.

Why it matters: Open Meetings Law standards and clear public notice are fundamental to public trust in municipal decision‑making. Board members discussed practical constraints — staff posting schedules and website navigation — and several members supported postponing contentious items so the public has time to review materials before a hearing.