Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Council Rules topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oshkosh council adopts closed-session attendance clarification; defers broader "irrelevant matters" rule
Summary
The council voted to add a clarification to council rules about who may attend closed sessions and adopted that amendment; a proposed rule limiting agenda items deemed "political or ideological" prompted debate and was set aside for further discussion.
The Oshkosh common council on April 15 adopted an amendment to its council rules that clarifies who may be admitted to closed-session meetings, and it deferred action on a separate, broader proposed amendment intended to limit certain items placed on council agendas.
Council President Chris Larson read a proposed “irrelevant matters” amendment aimed at placing guardrails on agenda items. Larson read the proposed language into the record: “Unless otherwise required by law, the city manager shall not include on an agenda 1, any item on state or federal legislation that does not directly and explicitly impact the city; 2, any item concerning political or ideological topics; and 3, oppose a particular event, person, or organization as commonly known to represent a political or ideological stance, on a topic.” Larson said the language was intended to preserve staff time and maintain civil dialogue.
Several council members expressed concern about the proposed wording. Council member Nichols questioned who would define “political or ideological” and urged reliance on powers in the Wisconsin Constitution rather than a restrictive local rule. Council member Ford (identified in the record by last name) raised similar concerns about inadvertently limiting council members’ ability to bring matters forward. City Manager Grill advised that if a council member asked to add an item that might be construed as political, he would consult with the city attorney and the member and, if appropriate, place it on the agenda; Grill described the proposed language as a protective clarification based on practices he had used in previous positions.
Separately, Council member Larson moved to add a closed-session clarification to the council rules that specifies who may be admitted to closed sessions and under what circumstances. The motion to amend to include the closed-session update passed on roll call, 7-0. After further discussion and minor adjustments, the council then adopted the council rules as amended (including the closed-session clarification) by a roll-call vote of 7-0.
Larson also proposed adding “postpone indefinitely” as an action the council may take; members debated the practical implications and possible for indefinite limbo for items, and Larson ultimately rescinded that proposal pending further review.
The council’s actions change the published rules to include a specific closed-session attendance clarification while deferring adoption of the broader “irrelevant matters” restrictions pending more discussion and possible redrafting.
