Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee clarifies rule ambiguity on special-permit vote thresholds; removes solicitor ordinance from committee
Summary
Committee members questioned when two-thirds votes are required for zoning matters and asked the city solicitor to clarify. The committee also voted to remove an ordinance regarding the city solicitor (Article 4, section changes) from committee for placement or further processing.
Committee members discussed ambiguity in the council rules about when a two-thirds vote (8 of 11) is required for zoning ordinances, special permits and related matters. The discussion produced no change to the rules but the committee asked the city solicitor to review and provide guidance.
Council members cited Rule 12 and the rulebook’s asterisks and asked whether flex development or other items still require a two-thirds vote. Council President Sullivan, speaking as a member of the committee and an attorney, pointed committee members to state law—“general law chapter 40A section 5” and “general law chapter 48 section 5”—as the sources that generally determine when supermajority votes apply for zoning matters and special permits. Sullivan said the rules as drafted refer the matter back to the city solicitor so the presiding officer and clerk will know whether to call for an 8-vote (two-thirds) or 6-vote threshold on any particular item.
Separately, the committee moved to remove document 37 (Article 4c — city solicitor ordinance language) from committee study after noting it had been approved with changes at a prior full council meeting. The move to remove was seconded and carried in committee roll call votes.
Votes at a glance - Direction to city solicitor to review voting-threshold language and confirm when two-thirds is required — direction recorded; no formal ordinance change at this meeting. - Motion to remove Ordinance (Article 4, city solicitor changes) from committee study — moved and seconded; committee roll-call: 5–0; motion approved. The prior full council action approving the ordinance was recorded as 9 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent on May 7 (per minutes cited in the packet).
Why it matters: The threshold for supermajority votes affects whether certain zoning and special-permit decisions require 8 votes. The committee sought solicitor guidance to reduce confusion and ensure correct vote counts on future zoning matters.
What’s next: Committee requested a formal review and written guidance from the city solicitor about application of two-thirds vs. simple-majority thresholds under state law and the council rules.
