In a survey that garnered responses from nearly half the Town Meeting membership, 71% said Town Meeting should be a hybrid between in-person and remote.
Of the 140 responses, 31, or 22%, said hybrid meetings should be offered only to those who need them, and 9, or 6%, said Town Meeting should always be held in person.
The survey, distributed in December 2025 by then-Town Moderator Michael Crowley, gauged Town Meeting members’ views on the Town Meeting process.
“I’m glad that there was a survey to collect that feedback,” said Precinct 7 Town Meeting member Paul Gormisky, just elected to his third term. “I think the most important thing for me was the pretty broad support to have some sort of a hybrid option. I’m a parent, I have two young kids. It helps a lot to have that flexibility and still be able to participate in all of the meetings.”
Adam Dash, elected Town Moderator last week, said his intention is to continue hybrid meetings. On Monday, he appeared before the Select Board to present his letter, arguing for a hybrid annual Town Meeting on May 4.
Some questions on the survey were specific to the special Town Meeting in October, which was moderated by Crowley, while others were more general, such as whether people thought the town should consider using consent agendas. A consent agenda groups together similar, typically routine, articles that aren’t expected to be controversial. Of the 140 responses, 36 said yes, 43 said ‘yes, but only if related,’ while 48 said no, and 13 said they were unsure.
According to Gormisky, a consent agenda might improve the efficiency of Town Meeting by reducing the time spent on articles that historically generate little debate.
“I don’t know if I was surprised, but I found it notable that there wasn’t much agreement on that point and there were pretty diverse opinions,” he said. “I don’t know if it’s how the question was phrased, but I think it would be interesting to come up with a really concrete proposal, and people might be more on board with it.”
Dash said consent agendas are “fairly common,” despite their infrequent use in Belmont.
“It’s a way to dispense all at once with items that are traditionally unanimously approved with no discussion,” he said. “I obviously need to talk to town counsel… but I think conceptually it’s a good tool to save time on items that traditionally have not had any discussion and spend our time on items we wish to [discuss].”
He emphasized that members could ask to withdraw certain items from a consent agenda if they wished to discuss, but also that a consent agenda would not appear on the warrant without first informing the Town Meeting body.
Other questions posed to Town Meeting members included whether time limits should be set on articles, and — on a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being well-managed — how well-managed the lines for speakers were both in the auditorium and online. Of the 140 people who responded to the question about the lines, 35% ranked it 5, 28% ranked it 4, and 25% ranked it 3. The remaining respondents ranked accessibility a 2 or 1.
As for setting time limits on each article, 32 said “yes, for routine, non-controversial articles,” 31 said ‘yes, for each article,’ and 63 said ‘do not set limits.’
According to Dash, he is working with Town Clerk Ellen O’Brien Cushman and Warrant Committee Chair Paul Rickter to create an informational video for new and old Town Meeting members. The video will explain the structure of Belmont’s government, how Town Meeting flows, and how the budget is developed.
In addition to that, Dash plans to hold office hours, much like he did when he served as a Select Board member, to continue gathering input from Town Meeting members.
“I’m working on a lot of things right now,” Dash said. “There’s a lot to do in addition to making changes to Town Meeting itself, which are underway.”
Town Meeting Member Seats
According to O’Brien Cushman, all Town Meeting member seats were filled by vote at the April 7 election.
Write-in candidates still need to accept their election, she added.
Additionally, there will likely be one or more caucuses as a result of potential resignations by Town Meeting members who were elected to an office that already entitles them to be at-large Town Meeting members.
