Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Boards Appointments Reappointments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission tightens board-appointment rules; requires reapplication for reappointment
Summary
The commission approved charter language requiring names of board applicants to be public, giving the council access to applications, and requiring members seeking reappointment to submit a new application; members debated holdover rules.
The Lansing Charter Commission voted May 27 to revise Article V appointment procedures for city boards and commissions, adding transparency for applicants and requiring reapplication for reappointment.
The commission adopted language that (1) requires the mayor to make public the names of individuals seeking membership on city boards, (2) gives the council access to applicants’ eligibility information, and (3) requires any board member seeking reappointment to submit a new application for consideration.
Why it matters: the changes aim to increase transparency in municipal appointments and to create a formal process for reappointments that allows council review rather than permitting indefinite service without affirmative reappointment.
Commissioners discussed the longstanding practice that board members whose terms have expired often “hold over” until a successor is named. City legal staff and the clerk briefed the commission on the legal default: absent a contrary charter or ordinance provision, Michigan case law permits a holdover so that boards can continue to function where successors are not yet available. Clerk Swope and staff noted that the city already maintains lists of expiring terms and that the mayor’s office typically files a list of appointments for council consideration in May.
The commission added the reapplication requirement as an amendment to the appointment procedure. Kristin (city attorney’s office representative) and Emery (staff memorandum author) explained that the mayor must establish a public procedure to accept applications and that the new sentence requiring reapplication fits under that procedure.
Commissioners also debated whether to set a fixed deadline (for example, 30, 60 or 90 days before term expiration) for reapplication. Several commissioners suggested the mayor’s published procedure should include a timeline; the final amendment directs the mayor to establish and publish the application procedure, which may include timing rules.
The commission approved the amended Article V language; motions to adopt the revisions passed by voice vote. The commission also asked staff to ensure the charter and existing appointment ordinances are aligned and to clarify any remaining process details for the next meeting.
Looking ahead: the clerk and city attorney’s office will check parallel ordinances and may propose additional wording if the commission wants a fixed reapplication deadline or to limit holdover authority.
