Planning board flags inconsistent remote‑participation rulings and urges procedural clarifications

Board members asked staff to seek clarity after noting differing outcomes for council members who attempted remote participation in recent quasi‑judicial hearings.

One member said several recent council hearings showed inconsistent rulings — on some dates a councilor who joined remotely could vote, on others they could not — and asked for a uniform approach. The clerk replied that staff provides legal advice to council but sometimes councilors choose a different course; the clerk also noted technology can impair effective participation.

Members also discussed procedural improvements for planning-board hearings, including a suggestion to impose time limits for closing required site-development approvals (SDPAs) so those conditions do not remain open indefinitely.