Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Midway council pauses proposed ordinance changing appointment process to review mayor/council roles
Summary
The council discussed an ordinance to amend how members are appointed to city commissions, seeking more transparency and council involvement. Members asked staff to research legal constraints and return with options on whether applications should go to the full council for review prior to mayoral recommendation.
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The council discussed Ordinance 2025‑08, a draft change to the Midway City Municipal Code that would alter the appointment process for city boards, commissions and committees to increase council involvement. Staff framed the draft as a compromise that would keep the mayor and council engaged in the full appointment process: reviewing applications, participating in candidate screening and voting on appointments.
Several councilmembers said the planning commission in particular carries added statutory responsibilities and raised concern about allowing a mayor—or any single official—to “stack” a commission. One councilmember said the council had been left out of prior nomination processes and requested greater transparency: “I wanted to be involved in the entire process,” the member said.
Council members discussed several procedural options: (1) continue the current process (mayor nominates, council votes), (2) require that all applications be distributed to council prior to the mayor making a recommendation, or (3) establish a formal screening procedure with council input. Legal staff cautioned that deliberations and final appointments must occur in open public meetings under state law; while individual councilmembers may convey a private concern directly to the mayor, the council cannot conduct collective deliberations by email.
After discussion the council voted to continue the ordinance to a future meeting and directed staff to research whether the proposed procedural changes are consistent with state open‑meeting and appointment statutes and to return with draft language that clarifies whether the distribution of all applicants to council and a mayoral recommendation is permissible and how nominations should be placed on the agenda.
