Mary Byrne
After several hybrid Town Meetings, the Select Board voted to return to its original, in-person format this month, with no remote option for the upcoming Town Meeting.
“The town operated just fine … through 2019 with the live meeting,” said Select Board Chair Roy Epstein. “I think everybody who was part of that understood the value of that.”
Some residents, however, are concerned about the message sent to Belmont residents.
“The world isn’t that way anymore,” said former Precinct 1 Town Meeting member Jessica Hausman. “So it’s not a good enough reason to say people can’t be involved in town government because they’re not in the right stage of life, or the right health position, … or the right financial position.”
Town Meeting begins on April 29 at 7 p.m. at Belmont High School.
The vote last week followed a presentation by Town Moderator Michael Widmer, who recommended holding the meeting in-person with a remote option. At the same time, he emphasized the added burden of the remote option, both on the clerk’s office and for information technology (IT) staff, and the added cost of the technology it requires.
Town Meetings were fully remote from 2020 to 2022 because of the COVID pandemic, Widmer said. In spring 2023, the Annual Town Meeting was held entirely in person because there was no legislation to say otherwise.
Fully Remote Meeting
The town recently hosted a fully remote Special Town Meeting in January. Before that, in light of legislation extending the ability to host hybrid meetings, the November Town Meeting was held in person with remote access. Widmer said roughly 25% of members opted to attend remotely – a higher percentage than expected. On the second night, 30% of people attended remotely; on the third night, 34% — or about 85 members — attended remotely.
“The meeting went well, but it was a huge amount of work on the part of the town clerk’s office, the town administrator’s office, the schools, Belmont Media, and IT,” he said. “There was one major concern in my view, and that was that a large number of people – too many Town Meeting members – took advantage of the remote option.”
Still, Widmer told Select Board members, it was too early to say the “experiment failed,” and he was open to another hybrid Town Meeting.
“I have heard from some Town Meeting members who were in person and some who were remote,” said Town Clerk Ellen O’Brien Cushman. “The remote, some of them, felt like they were missing out on the reactions. That cannot be undervalued or overvalued. I think that’s really important.”
Select Board member Matthew Taylor said he understands the value of in-person meetings but does not want to diminish the importance of the increased access the remote option offers residents who cannot make it in person due to work travel, sickness, or caring for a relative.
Hausman said she agrees the remote option may have been over-used at past Town Meetings, but she didn’t want to minimize its importance. Seven years ago, as a mother to a newborn, she developed mastitis because there was no break for her to pump; in 2018, she developed a seizure disorder that kept her from attending Town Meeting unless her father, a retired doctor who was 75 at the time, accompanied her. She said a remote option would have given her access to the meetings.
Hausman said limiting Town Meeting to those in attendance sends a message that only people of a certain demographic can be part of elected local government.
“Some people did absolutely abuse remote access for Town Meeting, but there has to be a third way,” she said. “Both sides are right, and they both have to have a solution other than just a flippant solution of ‘We’ll just go back to [in-person].’ The ramification of what they’re saying is huge.”
Precinct 8 Town Meeting member Paul Roberts also expressed concern about the decision.
“Town Meeting, I think, pretty clearly tried to embrace hybrid meetings,” he told the Select Board Monday night. “We have enabled participation by a wide range of participants who otherwise might not have been able to participate.”
Epstein was in favor of in-person meetings. After Widmer’s presentation, Vice Chair Elizabeth Dionne was swayed to support the in-person-only option. While the decision lay in the Select Board’s hands, she noted that the moderator and town clerk had the responsibility to implement it.
“The quality of the debate is better in person,” she said. “It’s an important piece of community building. … The only reason [remote] worked was our highly capable staff and our extremely experienced moderator.”
After about 30 minutes of discussion, Epstein and Dionne voted in favor of the in-person-only meeting, while Taylor voted no.
“It is incumbent upon us to remember the access issue … outside of providing remote access,” Dionne said. “What can we do about physical access, about health and safety?”
At Monday night’s meeting, the board stood by its April 5 decision for the meeting to be held in person, with physical accommodations for those who wished to mask or keep their distance from others.
“In my judgment, I did not see a material increase in total Town Meeting participation in November,” Epstein said. “What was very clear was a big substitution from live attendance to remote attendance. I thought there was a majority view, at least on Friday, that a live meeting was preferable and there was skepticism … that one-third of Town Meeting really had such pressing obligations that they couldn’t attend live.”
Other Business
In other Town Meeting business, Town Administrator Patrice Garvin shared the 24 proposed warrant articles with the board.
In addition to a few housekeeping items and standard articles, Town Meeting members will consider three Planning Board articles, including one about restaurant parking. They will also consider an article related to capital spending for the Chenery boilers and an article seeking to create an override mitigation fund.
