Wayland pushes boundaries again with effort to launch remote participation in Town Meeting
By CHRIS HILL, chris.hill@waylandpost.org
In a move that could reshape the democratic landscape of Massachusetts towns, Wayland is leading the charge to make remote participation in Town Meetings a reality.
With supporters highlighting increased accessibility, the effort represents both a bold innovation and a test of tradition.
“Wayland has always been at the forefront,” said Dave Bernstein, chair of the Wayland “ELVIS Committee”, or, more formally, the Electronic Voting Implementation Subcommittee.
“We were the first to adopt electronic voting back in 2011, and now we’re looking to make another leap forward.”
A decade of innovation
In 2011, Wayland became the first town in Massachusetts to implement electronic voting at its Town Meeting. The initiative prioritized privacy, accuracy, and speed. Over a decade later, Bernstein and his committee are seeking to extend that spirit of innovation to remote participation.
The potential benefits of such a system are clear: broader access to Town Meetings for residents who face challenges attending in person, such as those with disabilities, caregiving responsibilities, or scheduling conflicts.
“We’re hearing from residents who say, ‘If I can shop and bank online, why can’t I participate in Town Meeting this way?’” Bernstein said.
Currently, Wayland’s Annual Town Meeting sees an average turnout of around 600 participants, out of roughly 11,000 registered voters. By contrast, even local town elections, with no state or federal races on the ballot, draw three times as many voters. Bernstein refers to this as the “participation gap,” which he hopes remote options could help bridge.
During the pandemic, participation at Town Meetings dropped as low as 200-300 people.
“We estimate that with remote participation, we could involve 1,500 to 2,000 people,” Bernstein said. “But there’s always the question: Will participation be meaningful and high-quality?”
Historical significance of Town Meetings
Town Meetings are a cornerstone of New England democracy, dating back to the 17th century. These gatherings offer every registered voter a direct say in local governance—from approving budgets to shaping policy.
While this participatory model has endured for centuries, it has also faced challenges in adapting to modern life. Remote participation represents a significant shift in the evolution of this tradition.
Open Town Meetings, such as Wayland’s, are particularly emblematic of the state’s dedication to grassroots democracy. Maintaining high levels of engagement has become increasingly difficult, however, especially as residents juggle demanding schedules and accessibility concerns.
Legislative and technical hurdles
For all its promise, the path to enabling remote participation is complex. While Massachusetts law permits remote attendance for representative Town Meetings with elected representatives, open Town Meetings such as Wayland’s require legislative approval for the change.
The Wayland Select Board authorized a Home Rule petition to the Massachusetts legislature to legalize the practice. A Home Rule petition is a formal request by a city or town to the state legislature for permission to enact a local practice not currently allowed under state law.
State Senator Jamie Eldridge (D-Acton), whose district includes Wayland, acknowledges the challenges.
“I think it’s a very good idea. There’s a recognition that we need to make voting much easier,” Eldridge said. “But there’s also resistance to changing the traditional format.”
Eldridge pointed out that on average it takes up to six years for a Home Rule petition to get approval. His comments underscore the uphill nature of the battle. Resistance stems from concerns about security, logistical complexity, and maintaining the integrity of deliberative processes.
Town Moderator Miranda Jones notes that these are valid concerns, but she believes Wayland’s proposed measures go above and beyond to address them.
“In some ways, you can try all you can to protect the security of the system, but at some point, you have to let it go,” Jones said. “You have to trust that what you have done is enough and things will work.”
Addressing skepticism and building support
Critics of remote participation point to the risk of proxy voting, where individuals might cast votes on behalf of others. To counter this, the ELVIS Committee has proposed measures such as video check-ins, periodic identity rechecks, and real-time audits. Every vote cast remotely would be encrypted with secret audit codes known only to each voter.
Since the adoption of electronic voting in 2011, Wayland’s Town Meetings have become shorter—by an average of two to three hours—and more deliberative. Electronic voting is responsible for much of that, but Bernstein points out that other measures adopted by the Select Board have also helped to improve the process. By voting electronically and in privacy, voters are freed from the fear of public scrutiny and are better able to focus on the merits of the issues.
“Electronic voting has shown us that technology can enhance Town Meeting without diminishing its integrity,” Bernstein said. “Remote participation is the next logical step.”
Technical details of implementation
The ELVIS Committee has outlined a detailed plan for making remote participation as seamless and secure as possible. Each remote participant would log into a secure web portal using a voter code and password issued by the Town Clerk. Video check-ins at the start of the meeting would confirm the identity of participants, with the rechecks during the session to prevent proxy voting.
Votes would be encrypted and logged in real-time, with audit trails available for public review. In the event of a widespread internet outage or security breach, the town moderator would be empowered to suspend proceedings and allow remote participants time to join the in-person Town Meeting.
“Our goal is a friction-free user experience that maintains the integrity of the process,” Bernstein said.
Balancing act: accessibility vs. deliberation
One of the biggest philosophical questions surrounding remote participation is how it might impact the deliberative nature of Town Meetings. Wayland has a long tradition of robust debate, a point of pride for its residents. Jones acknowledges this tension but believes the benefits outweigh the risks.
“In Wayland, historically, we like debate,” Jones said, pointing to the burgeoning use of “consent calendars” for routine items to speed things up. “But we also need to evolve. If something like a consent calendar can make meetings quicker, I’m ready to try it again. The same goes for remote participation.”
Proponents argue that remote access could enrich debates by involving a broader cross-section of the community. With more participants representing diverse perspectives, discussions may become more comprehensive and representative of the town’s population.
Future vision
Convincing the state legislature to make remote participation in open Town Meetings possible is the ELVIS Committee’s focus, Bernstein said. The committee is busy incorporating improvements based on suggestions made during presentations they have given to Wayland residents and officials, to state legislators, and to people from other towns.
The committee’s ultimate goal is to make remote participation not just a possibility, but a seamless and secure reality. And if successful, Wayland’s efforts could serve as a model for other towns across the Commonwealth.
The Home Rule petition will be brought up again in the Legislature in January. The Select Board’s commitment will be critical, Bernstein emphasized.
“This is where the Select Board can really help us,” he said.
A tradition evolving
Wayland’s history of innovation uniquely positions it to tackle this challenge. From electronic voting to remote participation, the town continues to explore ways to make democracy more inclusive and efficient.
“This is about giving more people a voice,” Eldridge said. “And that’s something we should all strive for.”
New England towns are watching closely as Wayland again charts a new course to innovate the centuries-old tradition of participatory democracy.
