Remote participation is something we've been continuing to look at for years (and even briefly tried a few years ago). However, it's lower on our priority list.
Here are some of the reasons that it's a lower priority:
Remote participation means we need to have reliable Internet access at every meeting, which is difficult. Many venues do not provide Internet access (or for many that do, it's an afterthought and doesn't work very well; or costs extra), and using cellular connectivity costs more and is still unreliable. We'd need to research and choose a meeting system (such as Skype--listed as an example, not necessarily as the choice of what it would be), and then set it up and monitor it every meeting.
At most meetings, the benefits would be small: Already, you can listen to the recording of a meeting (available to staff), or read the minutes (available to the public)--which are detailed. You can send a report in advance if you are staff. Not very much discussion usually happens during the official meeting. Remote participation wouldn't provide the benefits of mingling and networking for the breakout portion. And individual breakouts can choose to do an online call as it stands currently, without needing remote participation to be set up for the official meeting portion.
There are some meetings where extensive discussion occurs, or voting. This is where the biggest benefits would exist. However, for voting to elect director positions, there are privacy concerns for the comment period because we can't control what happens to the audio when it's streamed to remote callers, and I'm not sure where opinions on the board and staff lie as to whether this is a good idea.
Because of the time to research and set this up, and maintain it each meeting; the limited benefits; and the privacy concerns for the comment period for elections; this has been a low priority. However, if people have ideas about good ways of doing this, or can spend the time to help research and set it up, we may still be able to do it.
