During the on Dec. 10 Hudson Planning Board, members voted 5-2 to end a trial period allowing public comment on non-agenda items. This decision concludes a three-month experiment despite some board members favoring an extension.
Some of the key reasons given for the majority’s decision included:
- Redundancy of Forum: Some board members argued that the Planning Board was becoming “just another place to voice your opinion,” noting that the same public comments were often already being delivered at Board of Selectmen meetings.
- Existing Input Channels: Members of the majority emphasized that the public already has opportunities to provide input on all specific items listed on the board’s official agendas.
- Procedural Preference: The chair and other majority members expressed a preference for keeping discussions focused within the board itself once a motion is on the floor, rather than allowing open-ended public debate.
- End of Trial Period: The policy had been a three-month experiment, and the majority felt it had not demonstrated enough value to warrant a permanent adoption or extension.
The 5-2 vote proceeded despite arguments from dissenting members who suggested extending the trial for another three months to see if more constructive use of the time would develop.
The original reason for conducting the came from Warrant Article 28, an advisory measure passed by Hudson voters during last year’s March Elections. That article directed all public meetings in the town to include dedicated time for public input. This article is closely tied to the discussion regarding the sunsetting of public comments.
A three-month trial period for public comments on non-agenda items was adopted by the Planning Board in September of this year as a temporary measure. This experiment aimed to assess the impact of allowing residents a dedicated time to discuss topics not listed for action on the agenda.
