So, I asked myself–what is the FAQ actually for?

I don’t think the answer is “make the regulations easier to understand.” That sounds good, but it can lead straight into the trap of rewriting the regulations in friendlier language.

The better goal may be more modest and more useful:

A FAQ should help people understand where to start.

It should help residents, applicants, commissioners, and staff recognize when the regulations may matter, what practical steps come next, and where to find the official information. It should help people avoid obvious mistakes. It should answer the ordinary process questions that may not be spelled out clearly in the regulations at all.

So, maybe an FAQ should be a bridge, not a shortcut.

Most people don’t begin with a regulatory question. They begin with a normal project question.

Can I build a fence?  Can I cut down trees?  Can I put in a patio?  Can I build a wall?  How do I know if there are wetlands on my property?  How far does my project need to be from a wetland or stream?  Do I need to attend the commission meeting?  Where is the application form?  What should my site plan show?  How long does this process take?  Why can’t the commission approve my application the night it is received?

Those questions don’t always need a final yes or no answer. Often, they are really asking something more basic: “Am I in the kind of situation where I should contact staff, check a map, submit an application, attend a meeting, or read the regulations more carefully?”

That is where a FAQ can be useful.

So, I don’t think an FAQ should say, “Yes, you can build a fence,” or “No, you do not need a permit.” That answer may depend on location, nearby wetlands or watercourses, soil conditions, disturbance, installation methods, grading, clearing, access, and local regulations.

But a FAQ can say that fences in or near regulated areas may require review. It can explain that online maps are only a starting point. It can tell someone who to contact before they begin work. It can explain what information the town may need in order to answer the question properly.

That doesn’t replace the regulations. It helps someone understand why the regulations may matter.

This became clearer to me after working as a wetlands agent for a while and answering real questions. My FAQ wasn’t something I wrote perfectly at the beginning, and never touched again. It grew over time as I saw what people actually asked, what they misunderstood, what they left out of applications, and where they got stuck.

I’m thinking that’s probably how a lot of useful FAQs are written.  They’re assembled from repeated questions, confusion, overlooked details, repeated emails answering the same questions, etc.

If applicants keep submitting site plans without distances to wetlands, the FAQ may need a clearer site plan section.

If people keep assuming an online wetlands map is official, the FAQ should explain that maps are only a guide.

If residents don’t understand why the commission can’t approve an application in the first meeting, the FAQ should explain the basic receipt and notice process.

If people keep asking whether they need to attend a meeting, the FAQ should answer that directly.

A good FAQ is grown from repeated conversations, questions, or confusion.  It can also include practical town-specific information that does not really belong in the regulations. The town’s Wetlands Regulations may explain authority, procedures, definitions, review standards, and enforcement. They may not clearly explain where meetings are held, whether Zoom is available, how to use the online permitting system, where the forms are located, who to email, what time applications are due, how fees are paid, or what an applicant should bring to a meeting.  It answers practical process questions you can’t find in Section 4.2(c).

I quickly learned that residents aren’t usually trying to avoid the rules. Of course, that happens too often–but a lot of times, they may just not know where the process begins, or that there is a process at all. A contractor may know how to build the wall but not know that the location puts it inside an upland review area—or that your town requires a permit while the neighboring town didn’t.  A homeowner may know there is a wet area behind the house but may not know whether the town map is an accurate source. An applicant may submit a plan that makes sense to them or that worked in another town, but that doesn’t show the information this specific commission wants or needs to review the application.

The FAQ can help with those problems.  It can also reduce dependence on informal town hall folklore.  Someone remembers an old list. A retired staff member had a cheat sheet. A commissioner remembers how the previous chair handled a certain kind of application. A note in a file says one thing. The current regulations say another. Sometimes that informal knowledge is useful–a lot of it comes from real experience.  But informal knowledge can become a problem when people start treating it like authority.

An FAQ can help by turning repeated practical knowledge into public guidance, while still pointing back to the official source documents. It shouldn’t preserve old cheat sheets, rumors, old habits, or the “Fred used to always do it this way” staff preferences.

That may be one of the most important parts of writing one. I shouldn’t ask, “What do we usually tell people?” I learned to ask, “Is what we usually tell people or give people still accurate?”