13:12The most pressing topic was the proposal to introduce a recall mechanism for elected officials. This proposal emerged from recent events involving a planning board member, Mr. Gun, whose actions prompted discussions on accountability and governance. The recall process would begin with a citizen-initiated petition, requiring signatures from 15% of registered voters within 20 days. Once certified, the select board would notify the official in question, who would have five days to resign. If they chose not to resign, an election would be triggered. The board reflected on previous attempts to introduce recall mechanisms, noting that a similar measure had passed at a town meeting in 2019 but stalled in the legislature.

23:11Board members recognized the high threshold required for a recall, acknowledging that while it could serve as a tool for accountability, it also posed challenges. They discussed the need for a system that holds officials accountable without concentrating power. The board was divided on the feasibility of the recall process, with some members expressing skepticism about its complexity and suggesting that changing the planning board to appointed positions might be more beneficial.

40:49The planning board’s transition from an elected to an appointed body was another point of discussion. The board cited difficulties in filling planning board positions, including uncontested elections and write-in candidates, as reasons to consider appointments. Members noted that this change could lower barriers to participation and ensure qualified individuals contribute to the planning process. The proposal would require a special town meeting and subsequent ballot votes, with a plan to align the vote with the middle school vote scheduled for September 30.

Concerns about the implications of appointing the planning board were raised, with some members worried about potential tensions with the select board if not managed properly. The board recognized the need to balance streamlining processes with ensuring accountability and transparency.

31:17The urgency for these governance discussions stemmed from an incident involving Mr. Gun, who trespassed on a local family’s property and allegedly made inappropriate remarks. The incident, reported to the planning board chair, led to a series of communications with the town officials and prompted a public censure from the planning board. Despite the censure, Mr. Gun did not resign, prompting the select board to request his resignation unanimously. Concerns about Mr. Gun’s behavior, including physical conduct towards a town resident, led to discussions about increasing security measures at future meetings to ensure safety.

41:28Members emphasized the need for protective measures, considering the potential threats posed by Mr. Gun’s history.

01:23Finally, the board addressed the scheduling of a special town meeting, initially set for July 9 but later moved to July 15, to avoid conflicts with the Fourth of July holiday and ensure resident participation. The meeting would open the warrant for discussion, including proposals for the recall petition language and the planning board’s transition to an appointed body. The board also discussed communication strategies to keep residents informed about the special meeting, committing to using various channels to ensure widespread awareness.