Committee debates absenteeism, discipline and signing council rules; staff asked to research options

The Sweet Home Charter Review Committee spent extensive time debating how to address council attendance, potential discipline for repeated unexcused absences, and whether councilors should be required to sign a code of conduct or council rules.

Members discussed a voter‑approved state measure referenced in the meeting that would make excessive unexcused absences a disqualifying factor; some committee members supported adding an unexcused‑absence threshold (10 unexcused meetings in a calendar year was discussed), while others urged careful due process and clear appeal language to avoid political misuse. Several members recommended that any discipline mechanism include explicit procedures for notification, excusal requests, and an appeal pathway.

The committee asked staff to compile examples from other Oregon cities and charter language nationwide on: attendance thresholds, disciplinary steps, how to define which meetings count (regular meetings, work sessions or executive sessions), and any due‑process safeguards. The city attorney and staff said they would research typical removal procedures and sample language and return at the next meeting.

Committee members also discussed whether council rules should be acknowledged in writing. Several members suggested that councilors sign an acknowledgement that they have read council rules or a code of conduct as part of onboarding; staff said other cities require such acknowledgements and that the committee could direct the charter to reference council rules without embedding overly prescriptive procedures in the charter text.

Committee members framed the work as attempting to balance enforceability and fair process. The committee did not adopt any final charter language on absences at the meeting; it asked staff for comparative research to inform future drafting.