Here's one of those legal interpretations relished by SK-B.
In Citizen Participation Continued I wondered aloud whether or not a citizen of Dummerston could expect to have their request for an agenda item considered at a Brattleboro Selectboard meeting.
Today the Chair of the Brattleboro Selectboard sent me an e-mail with the following: "The process does not change whether the request comes from a citizen of Brattleboro or not."
Since the posting was about the actual sponsoring of agenda items and not merely speaking in general to an ongoing issue Mr Steidle appears to be saying unequivocally that anyone has an equal right to the process that places items on our town agenda.
The discussion might have ended right here if Mr Steidle hadn't added "...I suggest you...get clarification (before posting)." So I duly returned to reread the Rules of Conduct to obtain that clarification. Well, here's the rub.
In section F the Rules enumerate very specifically parties that may request, and how, to have an item placed on the agenda. It seems to be attempting to cover all the possibilities. Included, we find in paragraph F4, "...by written request of a BRATTLEBORO (my emphasis) citizen or group."
This is curious. If it is true that anyone will be equally considered for an item placed on the agenda, and the process is the same for everyone, why should there be a list at all of some (Town Manager, SB Chair and Vice Chair, State and Federal entities) who can? Or, if we are to believe that the particular parties listed are there for some special reason then can we assume that it says "Brattleboro" citizens for some special reason?
In other words, the Rules do not say that anyone is excluded from this process yet it makes a point of saying who IS included. Would it not be proper to assume that the authors who wrote the Rules and the Selectboard that approved them thought about them very carefully?
Not quite. I was one of the SB members who approved them! I read them when they were put in front of me but nothing at all registered about this particular rule. I was only on the Board about three months and I didn't have other past experiences to put this item into focus.
Altho I may very well have blown by it thinking that it made some sense that only a Bratt citizen could be at least guaranteed access to the agenda setting process. My thinking would have been along the lines of what rights I might have in a sovereignty other than my own. I can't vote in any jurisdiction other than my own. Is there a connection? I'm not sure.