Plainfield — The Board of Selectmen has imposed new limits on public comment, which some residents say restrict their speech.
The rules, which passed Monday in a 2-1 vote, prohibit speakers from commenting on issues that do not relate to agenda items and cap comments to three minutes per individual. Speakers must also provide their names for the record. Additionally, the guidelines forbid back-and-forth interactions between the public and the speaker.
First Selectman Kevin Cunningham and Selectman Arthur Gagne supported the new rules while Selectwoman Peggy Bourey opposed them.
After the meeting, residents pushed back on the agenda-only content requirement and said the board’s existing practice of not publishing meeting materials and explanatory documents with its agendas obstructs their ability to speak on action items.
Cunningham said Plainfield’s governing body previously had no rules for its public comment period. He said that at times residents would speak for more than 10 minutes and discuss issues unrelated to the board.
“It was very helter-skelter,” Cunningham said in an interview after the meeting. “People walk up to the microphone and they want to talk about something going on on the Board of Finance or they want to talk about something happening town police-related. Really, that’s not the time to speak on that.”
Cunningham said such concerns are better suited for his office.
“I can help to redirect them and explain things for them. But when we’re talking about the business of the town that’s on the agenda for your selectmen’s meeting — that’s what we like to talk about,” Cunningham said.
Plainfield resident Jennie Kapszukiewicz, who chairs the town’s Agriculture Commission and Open Space Advisory Committee, called the new restrictions “concerning.”
“Let’s say they’ve gone into the selectman’s office multiple times and gone on deaf ears, that (the public comment period) is the only public format that an individual in town can go to and vocalize in front of a group of people,” Kapszukiewicz said following the meeting.
“When it restricts you to agenda-only items, it means that there is no more public platform — ever — for a citizen to voice a concern about anything,” Kapszukiewicz said.
At the start of the meeting, Kapszukiewicz asked the board to not vote on the new guidelines until the public could review the requirements.
The proposed language was not included in the board’s agenda and the residents did not hear the complete guidelines until Bourey read them aloud during the selectmen’s discussion that preceded the vote.
Samantha Derenthal, a resident who in November 2024 ran unsuccessfully for state representative from the 44th District on the Democratic ticket, called for more transparency.
“I am all about keeping order, but there is a feeling that the ability to comment publicly is hindered by not having all of the information and having vague agendas,” Derenthal said. “If we make public comment at the beginning (of the meeting), we actually don’t know what the agenda items mean.”
Cunningham’s position is that meeting materials are not public information until the board votes on them.
“It’s not public meeting information until you actually have it in your hand once we talk about it,” Cunningham said.
Cunningham said he does not know whether all agenda items will come to a vote and that it is not uncommon for the board to add materials at the last minute. Cunningham said some supplementary items can exceed hundreds of pages and that town clerks lack the bandwidth to scan the documents. Cunningham said publishing this information would require Plainfield to hire a new employee.
“Personally, I think it’s just too much information that is not vetted out yet by the selectmen,” Cunningham said.
Cunningham said the practice of only publishing the agenda, as well as the new requirements for public comment, is common in other towns.
Russell Blair, the director of education and communications for the Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission, said that neither state nor federal law requires towns to publish meeting materials with their agendas. However, once a document is created by or comes into the possession of a municipal employee, elected official or board member, Blair said it becomes “fair game under FOI” and the public can request copies of the document.
Blair added that municipal boards are free to make their own rules for public comment and that time limits, agenda-only content restrictions and requiring speakers to identify themselves for the record are not uncommon.
As the board debated the new guidelines, Bourey, the one selectwoman who opposed them, expressed concern that “putting all these different rules and restrictions” could impact residents’ ability to “feel comfortable coming to speak to public officials,” and exacerbate low turnout at board meetings.
Bourey ultimately made a motion to pass a version of the rules that did not include the prohibition on back-and-forth dialogue between the speaker and members of the public. Bourey said she believed board members should retain the ability to answer questions residents ask during public comment.
When Cunningham and Gagne stood by the prohibition, citing their desire to prevent the board’s public comment period from devolving into a debate with the public, Bourey voted against the new rules.
During the discussion, Cunningham said the guidelines are “something we can start with.”
“We can also modify it in the future if we find the need to add more,” Cunningham said.
a.cross@theday.com