Recently, on April 11, 2016, the board of selectmen invoked the rule of necessity. Reason given, two members of the BOS had a conflict of interest because the budget was being discussed. This is a five member board and there was one member not present at the meeting. Four members were present, three members are needed to have a quorum so a meeting can take place. With only two members sitting at the table, chairman of the board John Columbus stated the rule of necessity allowed them to continue. Here is what it says; Advisory 05-05: Rule of Necessity, from state ethics commission:
Example: A five-member elected board has a meeting involving a matter in which the board is legally required to act and four members are present (one member is sick at home). Two of the four present members have conflicts. A quorum is three. The one member who is sick at home does not have a conflict. The rule of necessity may not be used because, even though a quorum of the board which is able to act is not present at that particular meeting, there is a quorum of the board which is able to act. The absence of one member does not permit the use of the rule of necessity.
Example: A five-member elected board has a meeting involving a matter in which the board is legally required to act and four members are present (one member is sick at home). Two of the four present members have conflicts. A quorum is three. The one member who is sick at home does not have a conflict. The rule of necessity may not be used because, even though a quorum of the board which is able to act is not present at that particular meeting, there is a quorum of the board which is able to act. The absence of one member does not permit the use of the rule of necessity.
My thought is someone needs to read that book that someone said Templeton needs to be run by. I am not sure what book was being referred to, either a book of law or a comic book. You can decide on that one.
