Mr. Kadelski asks whether residents want someone like me running town meetings. I would ask residents whether they want regulations changed without proper notice to the public and without a public hearing.
My decision was simple: if the Board was going to consider changing a regulation, the public deserved advance notice and an opportunity for everyone—not just a select group in attendance—to weigh in. That is why I supported holding a separate public hearing before any deliberation on changes.
I believe transparency means giving all residents a chance to participate, not just those who happen to be in the room on a particular night.
Some meetings did not include a general public comment period because prior meetings had become disruptive and difficult to manage. As Chair, it's important to maintain order and ensure the Board can complete its work while still providing appropriate opportunities for public input through hearings and scheduled agenda items.
That decision was not about silencing anyone. It was about balancing public participation with the Board's responsibility to conduct business effectively.
The agenda did not indicate that the Board would be considering changes to the regulation, and the Board had not yet discussed the issue. In my view, the agenda was not specific enough to support deliberation or action on a regulatory change that evening.
Mr. Kadelski asks whether residents want someone like me running town meetings. I would ask residents whether they want regulations changed without proper notice to the public.