Public works employees and labor supporters told the Greenbelt City Council they want the city to change its charter and labor code so non‑managerial municipal workers can form a union and engage in collective bargaining.

The petition was read aloud by Michael Canavan, who identified himself as a 39‑year resident and a five‑and‑a‑half‑year city Public Works employee. "We only ask that the city's current authorities for collective bargaining for police be expanded to also include the city's public works employees," Canavan said while presenting a signed letter and the names of employees who support the move.

Why it matters: Council would have to change the city charter and municipal code to create a formal recognition process or other local mechanism for public‑sector bargaining, because municipal employment law differs from private‑sector rules. Council members and the city manager repeatedly noted that implementing a recognition and bargaining process requires legal review and coordination with human resources.

City Manager (identified in meeting transcript as City Manager) said staff will consult the city solicitor and labor counsel to define the steps needed. "I've discussed the matter with our director of human resources and in engaging our legal team to talk through the process," the City Manager said during council discussion. Council directed staff to draft the next steps so the city and employees can consider options.

Council discussion and next steps: Council voted at the meeting to add the item to the agenda for consideration the same night and later, after additional public comments and internal discussion, approved a motion directing staff to begin gathering information to draft ordinance/charter amendment language. In the meeting record, council members and residents urged timely action while reserving opportunity for public input and legal review. Several council members asked staff to analyze prior processes used when the police collective bargaining framework was established and to present options such as voluntary recognition, certification procedures, and impasse resolution mechanisms.

Voices from the meeting: Labor supporters included a LiUNA representative who asked council to back the employees’ effort; resident advocates spoke in favor of rapid recognition to support labor‑management relations in the city. At least one council member urged that the matter be publicly noticed and discussed in future meetings so residents — especially members of Greenbelt Homes, Inc. (GHI) and multifamily communities — could comment.

What was decided: Council’s instruction to staff was procedural: begin gathering legal and administrative information necessary to draft charter amendment language and outline likely next steps, including potential costs and a public engagement process. Staff said it will consult the city solicitor and outside labor counsel as needed and return to council with options and a recommended timeline.

What is not decided: No charter language or final policy was adopted at the meeting; no certification method, bargaining unit definition, or impasse procedure was approved. Council members said any formal charter amendment would require subsequent readings, public notice and further council action before it could take effect.