Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council clarifies agenda-placement policy after public concerns about the town manager27s review role
Summary
Council discussed Council Policy No. 8 and Town Code 30.5 clarifying how items are placed on the agenda, and council members agreed that department decision requests are vetted administratively while councilmembers can place items with support from another member; an earlier motion to remove language was withdrawn.
Councilmembers requested a discussion of Council Policy No. 8 (how items are placed on agendas) and Town Code 30.5 at the May 28 meeting to respond to public claims that the town manager had been blocking council agenda items.
Town staff reviewed the policy manual and town code. Council Policy No. 8 allows the mayor, two councilmembers or the town manager to place an item on the council agenda; the mayor or two councilmembers are asked to submit requests in writing to the town manager with supporting documentation. Town Code chapter 30 (mayor and council) explains the clerk27s role preparing the agenda and 30.5 requires that ordinances, resolutions and contracts be reviewed "as to form" by the town attorney and routed for administrative review before presentation to council.
Town attorney and acting town manager clarified that "as to form" refers to legal form (statutory and code requirements) and that the town manager and staff review department-submitted council decision requests to confirm budget and procedural completeness. Staff said there is an administrative review process to ensure legal sufficiency and budget verification; department requests are not the same as a councilmember request to place a topic on the agenda.
Councilmembers pressed whether the town manager could reject an item requested by a councilmember. Staff said the town manager reviews administrative decision requests and could ask for corrections or additional information; a town manager27s rejection of a councilmember-originated agenda item was described as not standard practice for ordinary council requests, and the council27s earlier motion to remove verbiage was withdrawn after clarification.
Councilmember Rasa said she had raised the topic after residents circulated accusations that items were being buried or blocked; the discussion was intended to clarify process for the public. Vice Mayor Susie Tubbs and other councilmembers noted that, in practice, staff often coordinate timing and may delay placement for logistical reasons (deadlines for packet publication, staff availability or travel) rather than deny council items outright.
No formal ordinance or code change was made; staff said an emergency or last-minute item process exists and that council could pursue future code changes if members desire to align handbook language and town code.
