I dunno about that. 29-32C kinda of states the issuing authority has a part in this process (this is that part of the statutes that outlines the BFPE).
(c) Any person aggrieved by the action of an issuing authority may file with the board a clear and concise statement of the facts on which he relies for relief, and shall state the relief sought by the appellant. The receipt by the board of the appellant's statement shall initiate the appeals process, and no appeal may be rejected for mere lack of formality. The board shall, within ten days next following receipt of the appeal, set a time and place at which the appeal shall be heard. The board, while such appeal is pending, may request such additional information from the appellant and from the issuing authority as it deems reasonably necessary to conduct a fair and impartial hearing, and shall require of the issuing authority from whose decision or action the appeal is being sought a statement in writing setting forth the reasons for such failure, refusal, revocation or limitation. Failure or refusal of the issuing authority to furnish such written statement, or to supply the appellant with an application, at least ten days prior to the hearing shall be cause for the board to grant the relief sought, forthwith and without further hearing.
I see what you're saying, but I also see intent in the statute. That being said, 29-32C has also helped many citizens over the past year with towns refusing to "show their cards" as to why they were denied. When the citizen has not received a reason for his denial within ten days, I've see them as rather quick hearings (like 5 minutes!).