Hartford commissioners question mandatory 'shall' language in Two Rivers draft plan
Hartford planning commissioners warned that mandatory 'shall' and 'must' wording in the Two Rivers regional plan could trigger Act 250 interventions and conflict with local zoning and certified‑local historic‑preservation procedures; they asked staff to craft focused comment language before the regional hearings.
The full story
Committee member (speaker 1) opened by identifying three priorities and singled out mandatory wording: "The 1st issue is the so called mandatory policies, mandatory language, shalls and musts and wills." The commission discussed how 'shall' language moves a provision from aspirational guidance toward enforceable criteria that could be used in Act 250 reviews, and members urged clearer definitions so towns like Hartford would not face unintended enforcement or unfunded mandates.
Sign up to keep reading.
Your free newsletter brings you what your city council, county, and school board discussed and decided.
Keep reading for free
Create a free account to finish this story and see the video, transcript and key details.
Continue with GoogleContinue with emailAlready have an account? Log in