A citizen‑initiated article that would have required all town public bodies to record meetings and to make recordings and minutes available to the public within a short timeframe was debated and ultimately indefinitely postponed.

Brian Gressler presented the motion seeking to require recordings be made available via the town website within five business days, and to standardize minutes posting. Town counsel and other officials cautioned the meeting that specific language in the proposed bylaw could conflict with state public‑records practice and open‑meeting law regulations, and that requiring recordings or storage on third‑party platforms could create practical and legal complications.

Town Councilor Greg Corbeau warned that the proposal as drafted could create a situation in which committees could not meet if recording equipment were unavailable, saying, “if the recording equipment is unavailable, then the board or committee would be unable to meet,” and explaining the public‑records implications of requiring recordings and storage. The petitioners offered an amendment to soften the storage requirement (allowing links to externally hosted recordings), but counsel expressed concern that outsourcing records storage could conflict with the Supervisor of Public Records’ rules.

Given those questions and multiple requests for further legal review and clearer language, a motion to indefinitely postpone the article carried. Several speakers urged continued work on increased remote access and timely minutes — and a number of speakers urged a narrower, legally vetted proposal to return to a future meeting.