Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Subcommittees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Livingston URA delays forming subcommittees pending legal guidance
Summary
Board members discussed creating two-person subcommittees to advance projects between meetings but paused formal formation after questions about open-meeting requirements, staff involvement and ex parte risks; the URA voted to place the topic on the next meeting agenda for clarification with the city manager.
The Livingston Urban Renewal Agency discussed forming two-person subcommittees to advance work between monthly meetings but decided to postpone formal formation until staff and legal guidance are obtained.
Board Chair Allison Vicenzi opened the agenda item by reminding members that “we cannot have 3 or more members. That would be considered a quorum, and we would have to have the public announcement of the meeting.” Vice Chair Lisa Garcia had proposed marketing, outreach and related subcommittees to promote the URA’s programs in between regular meetings and said, “I would love to start a marketing subcommittee…promoting our new downtown enhancement program.”
Board member Sarah Knoebel and other members raised procedural concerns. Knoebel said, “Subcommittees can't further business on their own. Everything has to come back for a vote. You have to have a quorum,” and questioned whether staff would need to be present, whether meetings would require notice and whether volunteer workload would conflict with existing staff responsibilities. Board members also flagged legal risks related to ex parte communications on land-use or funding decisions.
Members of the public and past board members who attended told the URA the body historically has handled such work in public meetings rather than in small subcommittees. Jack Luther, speaking in public comment, said the URA “has never had subcommittees,” and another former board member echoed that history.
The board voted to place the subcommittee item on the next month’s agenda so City Manager Gager and legal counsel can clarify what is permissible under state open-meeting requirements, notice rules and ex parte disclosure obligations. No subcommittees were formally established at the meeting.
The discussion also identified follow-up steps: staff will be asked to clarify whether staff presence, meeting notice and minute-taking would be required for any formal subcommittee; the board will seek guidance about when outside meetings could trigger disclosure obligations for land-use applicants; and the board asked the chair to consult City Manager Gager before the next public meeting.
Board members emphasized they sought to advance previously approved public work more efficiently, not to make decisions outside public meetings. The item will return to the URA agenda after staff and legal clarification.
