The following items represent unresolved design decisions required to implement the GA with Select Board model. They are decisions that belong to Ophir's residents.
MEETING STRUCTURE AND SCHEDULE
Select Board Meeting Frequency. Options include monthly, every three weeks, or biweekly cycles. The decision determines the balance between Board responsiveness and the time commitment placed on members.
General Assembly Meeting Frequency. A decision is required on the minimum and preferred frequency of GA meetings. The charter establishes a floor that may be exceeded through local practice or resolution. GA meeting frequency directly affects legislative throughput and the demand for special meetings under the Select Board drafting model.
Select Board and GA Interface Alignment. A related decision concerns how Select Board agenda throughput and GA meeting frequency are aligned in practice. If Select Board output exceeds the GA's ability to act within scheduled meetings, ordinance ratification shifts toward special meetings as the primary mechanism for legislative action.
SELECT BOARD COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE
Select Board Size. A decision is required on whether the Select Board consists of three or five members. This choice affects quorum structure, how members may communicate between meetings, and the Board's day-to-day coordination capacity.
Term Length and Staggering. Three-year terms were discussed in relation to NETM precedent. Whether terms are staggered at inception to preserve continuity across the Board's initial composition is unresolved.
Role Assignment and Rotation. A structure is needed for internal roles including Chair, Vice Chair, and Clerk. Options include fixed internal selection or scheduled rotation. No determination has been made.
Compensation Structure. Whether Select Board members receive equal compensation, and at what level, remains open. Compensation design interacts directly with workload expectations and meeting frequency.
FINANCIAL GOVERNANCE AND THRESHOLD ARCHITECTURE
Financial Threshold Structure. The charter must define the boundary between Select Board administrative authority and GA authorization. Decisions required include: whether thresholds are expressed as fixed dollar amounts or as percentages of budget or revenue; whether thresholds adjust over time through indexing or periodic recalibration; and whether threshold logic varies by category of decision. Calibration against Ophir's actual budget, revenue structure, and contract history is required before charter language can be finalized.
December 15 Compliance. Whether Ophir's existing December GA meeting practice complies with the mill levy certification deadline, and whether the proposed November-December calendar requires any charter or procedural change to ensure compliance, requires attorney or treasurer clarification.
ELECTORAL AND TRANSITION MECHANICS
Election Structure and Transition. How Select Board elections align with existing municipal election cycles, how the transition from the current governance structure would be managed, and how mid-term vacancies are filled are unresolved design questions.
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE
Officer Structure. The introduction of a Select Board assumes a board-centered governance structure consistent with New England Town Meeting precedent, in which the Board serves as the standing elected governing body rather than operating alongside a separately elected mayor. The open design question is not whether a mayor continues alongside the Select Board, but how functions currently assigned to Ophir's charter officers, including Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, Town Clerk, and Treasurer, are translated into the Select Board framework. This includes which functions attach to the Board Chair, whether any ceremonial or statutory functions require a designated officer role, and how Clerk and Treasurer responsibilities are structured within or alongside the Board.
Select Board Resolution Authority. The Select Board acts by resolution on matters within its administrative authority. The charter will need to define the scope of Board resolutions and distinguish them from General Assembly resolutions, which carry broader authority. The committee did not develop specific charter language for this distinction.
Administrative Coordination Between Meetings. How routine administrative coordination between GA and Select Board sessions is structured requires charter definition, including what authority the Town Manager holds between Board meetings and how operational continuity is maintained. A separate structural question concerns whether the Town Clerk functions as Board Clerk or remains organizationally independent.
CONTINUITY AND INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY
Legal and Executive Session Continuity. What procedures govern how ongoing legal matters and executive session context are carried forward across Board membership changes, and how participation records for privileged discussions are maintained across the term of a matter rather than a single meeting.
Intergovernmental Liaison Continuity. Whether liaison responsibility with USFS, San Miguel County, and other agencies is assigned personally to a Board member, attached to a Board role, or defined procedurally, and what happens to those relationships when a member leaves the Board mid-term.
Multi-Meeting Governance Tracking. How ongoing projects, contracts, and long-running administrative actions are formally tracked and reported to the GA across meeting cycles, and what charter obligation ensures continuity of prior commitments across changes in Board composition and meeting cycles.