Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Council Procedures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Councilors debate internal rule conflicts; motion to postpone ad hoc meeting fails 3–3
Summary
Councilors debated apparent conflicts in council procedural rules and whether an ad hoc committee meeting should be postponed pending review; a motion to postpone split 3–3 and failed.
Councilors spent a portion of the March 10 meeting debating inconsistencies in the council’s procedural rules, focusing on how ad hoc committees are appointed and when committees should sunset.
Councilor Cheney raised specific conflicts among Rule 7 (quorum), Rule 15(b), Rule 24(j) and Rule 25, and asked that the city manager review the rules and that the council send the matter to committee for revision. Councilor Wolcott pointed to language in section J that allows the mayor to appoint members and noted a sentence that permits one council member to be appointed as both a member and a liaison; Wolcott said the combined reading raised the possibility of exceeding the intended council representation on advisory committees.
Councilor Cheney moved to instruct the city manager to postpone the ad hoc committee meeting scheduled for the next evening until the rule conflicts were clarified. The city manager said he would make changes if the body so directed, but he noted a significant amount of work already went into setting the meeting.
The motion to postpone failed on a tie, 3–3. Supporters of holding the meeting said delaying at short notice would be unfair to volunteers who had agreed to serve; proponents of postponement said clarifying the rules was necessary to remove procedural vulnerability and reduce risk of later legal challenge.
Ending: The ad hoc committee meeting remains scheduled; councilors asked the manager to review the rules and provide recommendations for potential amendments.
