The Harwich Charter Commission is weighing a significant shift in the town’s legislative calendar, debating a move toward a semi-annual town meeting model to better manage increasingly dense warrants. During its January 15 session, the Commission explored the merits of codifying a Fall Town Meeting specifically for zoning and planning matters, a change intended to boost public participation and relieve the pressure of multi-night spring sessions. Member Richard Waystack advocated for the change, noting that I think people are more inclined to go to two shorter meetings than one that lasts three or four nights. He suggested that while the spring meeting would handle the budget, the fall session could focus on regulatory shifts, though he cautioned that wording must prevent it from simply becoming Town Meeting Two.

The proposal faces questions regarding voter fatigue and logistical hurdles. Paul Doane expressed concern about the town's ability to maintain attendance at multiple sessions, asking, Do we feel one meeting is insufficient? I worry about trying to get people to attend two meetings. In response, P. Doane volunteered to analyze the last two annual warrants to see how articles could be logically divided between financial and regulatory categories. Sandy Hall noted that a split model might give more time for publicity on citizen petitions and bylaw changes, while Lou Lowny admitted personal frustration with late-night deliberations, stating, I don't like staying at a meeting until 11:00 PM because I stop listening. The Commission also touched on the needs of younger residents, with Brenda suggesting that Younger people have said they would love a Saturday meeting because they can't come at night.

The Commission reached a firm consensus on the status of regulatory boards, deciding to retain the appointed nature of the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). The discussion was sparked by a memo from ZBA Chair Brian Sullivan, who argued that technical, quasi-judicial boards must apply the law rather than public sentiment. While R. Waystack initially questioned if appointments yield better candidates than elections, he was ultimately swayed by the legal protections of an appointed board. S. Hall argued that if a board member follows the law but it's unpopular, they shouldn't be removed by a whim of the voters, noting that the Select Board can more easily remove a rogue appointed official than an elected one. Brenda added that state law may already mandate the ZBA remain appointed, leading the group to drop the idea of making the board an elected body.

Ethics and decorum also took center stage as R. Waystack proposed that the Charter mandate a formal Code of Conduct. His draft proposal would require the town to maintain a code applicable to all elected and appointed officials to ensure a level of civility in town government. The town shall adopt and maintain by ordinance or policy a code of conduct applicable to elected and appointed officials, R. Waystack suggested, citing past instances where committee interactions were not appropriate. Chair Linda Cebula supported the inclusion of such a requirement in Chapter 3 of the Charter, though the commission plans to consult with legal experts to ensure the mandate is enforceable without creating an endless drafting process.

Looking ahead, the Commission is prioritizing outreach to both the public and former town leadership. A special meeting is tentatively set for February 5 to gather insights from former Select Board members who have served over the last 30 years. L. Cebula expressed concern over the lack of public emails received by the Commission so far and intends to bring in consultants to refine their survey strategy. Motion Made by R. Waystack to approve the minutes of the January 8th meeting. Motion Passed (7-0-0). Amidst the heavy workload, L. Cebula highlighted the seasonal pressure on town volunteers, noting she is currently chairing three committees during tax season and stating, I don't know what I'm doing. There's just so much going on.