Plymouth Town Meeting attendees expressed strong concerns over the presence of advocacy groups during the session, particularly regarding the distribution of materials related to contentious issues. A heated exchange highlighted the discomfort of some members who felt that allowing groups to set up booths inside the meeting venue was inappropriate, especially during lunch breaks. One resident, visibly upset, drew a parallel to extreme scenarios, suggesting that if a neo-Nazi group were present, it would provoke widespread outrage, questioning why similar concerns were not raised about other groups.

The moderator acknowledged the responsibility for permitting the use of the building for such activities, explaining that historically, the town has allowed informational tables but typically outside the main meeting area. The moderator clarified that while they strive to uphold freedom of speech, they also aim to maintain order during town meetings. They noted that several groups had requested to present information, including those related to airport expansion and a resolution concerning Gaza, but emphasized that not all requests could be accommodated within the meeting's framework.

In response to the concerns raised, the moderator invited feedback on the policy regarding informational tables, indicating a willingness to reassess how such activities are managed in the future. The discussion underscored the ongoing tension between free expression and maintaining a respectful environment during town meetings.

Additionally, the assistant town moderator addressed technical issues related to electronic voting, explaining that late motions had disrupted the flow of the meeting. She reiterated the importance of adhering to deadlines to ensure smooth proceedings, highlighting the challenges faced by the team in preparing materials on short notice.

As the meeting continued, it became clear that the community is grappling with balancing diverse viewpoints while fostering a respectful dialogue in public forums. The moderator's invitation for feedback suggests a potential shift in policy, aiming to address the concerns of residents while still allowing for community engagement.