Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Council Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates inquiry rules, communications access and a council planning session
Summary
Cleveland Heights — Committee members used extensive time in the Jan. 21 meeting to debate council governance, oversight and communications, including a proposal to revive inquiry-legislation to formalize how council requests information from department heads, a possible communications consultant for council, and a multi-session planning meeting to set council goals and processes for 2025.
Get email alerts on the Council Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cleveland Heights — Committee members used extensive time in the Jan. 21 meeting to debate council governance, oversight and communications, including a proposal to revive inquiry-legislation to formalize how council requests information from department heads, a possible communications consultant for council, and a multi-session planning meeting to set council goals and processes for 2025.
Councilman Cobb and others said they intend to draft an ordinance to define the council’s authority and orderly processes for requesting information and for summoning department heads to committee or regular meetings. Council members who supported the idea described it as a way to provide consistent expectations and avoid ad hoc or uneven requests; one member said the approach was modeled on ordinances used by other jurisdictions and county examples.
A parallel discussion centered on communications. Several council members proposed advancing a process to hire a communications consultant or part‑time contractor to help the council communicate through newsletters or targeted outreach. The mayor responded to critique of city communications by restating the administration’s role: "I am the primary spokesperson for the city," and saying city communications reflect the administration’s position; the mayor said he was willing to consider council requests in good faith but would evaluate each request on whether it aligned with the city’s position and benefit to the city.
Council members also discussed a planning session (described as a 90‑minute block or several 90‑minute blocks over two or three days) to set council priorities, address committee organization and improve internal processes. Some council members urged the president and vice president to present a clear roadmap for how council leadership will improve collaboration, committee assignments and risk management; others emphasized the charter review’s deadlines and competing priorities.
No formal legislation was adopted at the Committee of the Whole; members agreed to bring drafts of inquiry-related ordinance language back for committee review, to continue the conversation about a communications consultant and to schedule the council planning session with administration staff support.

