Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Bylaws Term Limits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DDA discusses term limits for board seats; informal consensus favors retaining limits pending clarification
Summary
Board members debated term limits in the DDA bylaws on Aug. 27. The current bylaw allows up to two consecutive four‑year terms with a one‑year break before reappointment; members expressed pros and cons and the board indicated an informal preference to retain term limits while staff seeks clarification from Michigan Main Street.
The City of Coldwater Downtown Development Authority spent a substantial portion of its Aug. 27 meeting discussing term limits in its bylaws and the practical effects on board recruitment and institutional knowledge.
Under the existing bylaws, board members may serve up to two consecutive four‑year terms and must be off the board for at least one year before being eligible for reappointment, the presiding officer said. The rules also state a member remains in a position until a successor is appointed.
Members debated the tradeoffs. Supporters of term limits said turnover brings fresh ideas and prevents stagnation. Opponents said Coldwater faces a limited pool of eligible downtown business or property owners and residents, and continuity and institutional knowledge are valuable for long‑running projects. Several board members said the board has seen natural turnover in recent years and that recruitment may be easing as downtown activity increases.
Board members also asked staff to clarify several points in the bylaws: whether partial terms (completing another member's unexpired term) count as a full term toward the two‑term limit, and how to interpret the requirement that a majority of members have an "interest in property" in the DDA TIF district (what constitutes "interest" — owner, business operator, manager, resident). The presiding officer noted he had messaged Michigan Main Street to confirm whether term limits are mandatory for accreditation or only recommended and asked staff to report back.
No formal bylaw amendment or vote was taken; the meeting produced an informal board consensus favoring retention of term limits but directing staff to seek an authoritative interpretation from Michigan Main Street and to clarify bylaw language for future action.
Ending: The board asked staff to accelerate efforts to recruit eligible candidates and to clarify bylaw wording around partial terms and qualification criteria.
