Branson aldermen approve ‘at‑will’ removal language for volunteer boards after adding six‑day notice

The Branson Board of Aldermen voted to approve bill 65‑22, an ordinance clarifying that appointments to city boards, commissions and committees are served “at will” and may be ended at the discretion of the appointing body, while adding a new rule that the appointee and the body they serve on must be notified at least six days before the removal request is considered.

The change was presented in a staff report by Holly Dodge, who described the amendment as a clarification of existing practice and a way to avoid creating a “public property interest” in volunteer terms that could trigger a requirement for a for‑cause public hearing. Dodge said, “This is a requested change in regards to clarification of the ability for the board when they vote on appointments… that appointment is not for the full term. It limits it to the being at will for the board.”

Aldermen debated adding procedural protections. One alderman proposed and the board adopted an amendment requiring written notice “to the appointee and the board, commission, committee, or council to which the appointee is requested to be removed at least 6 days prior to being considered by the board.” Resident Beth Schultz asked during public comment, “Is 6 days enough to have them have a notification?” The board discussed that the six‑day period is intended to allow the appointing body or committee time to respond or call a special meeting if desired.

Alderman Glenn Schultz said he supported the amendment and praised the deletion of vague language that he said could be “weaponized.” He said the change and the added notice requirement make expectations clearer for volunteers and protect against misuse in the future. “I like the amendment,” Schultz said during debate.

City staff noted that certain state statutes create different removal procedures for some bodies: a board of adjustment is removable for cause only after written charges and a public hearing (statute cited in discussion as RSMo 89.080), and the planning commission likewise may be removed for cause after a public hearing (statute cited as RSMo 89.320). City staff told aldermen those statutory requirements would supersede the ordinance where applicable.

Votes at a glance - Consent agenda approved by roll call 6–0. Items approved included final reading of bill 65‑19 (an ordinance amending chapter 94 of the Branson Municipal Code pertaining to Food Truck Court), final reading of bill 65‑20 (an ordinance approving a final subdivision plat for the Summit at Branson Estates), and final reading of bill 65‑21 (an ordinance amending section 2‑136 of the Branson Municipal Code pertaining to powers and duties of the city administrator). The consent vote was recorded as 6 yes, 0 no. - Bill 65‑22 (ordinance amending section 2‑201 regarding removal of members of boards, commissions, committees and councils) was approved as amended by voice vote; the record shows the motion carried but does not include a roll‑call tally in the transcript.

The board’s action replaces earlier, broader language about misconduct and potential property‑interest claims with a clearer statement that service on volunteer bodies is at the pleasure of the board, while adding a procedural notice requirement intended to give appointees and the entities they serve an opportunity to respond. The ordinance’s effective date was not specified in the meeting transcript.