Tigard council debates and directs rewrite of proposed ground rules, delays final adoption

Tigard — The Tigard City Council reviewed and substantially revised draft council ground rules at a lengthy public discussion, ultimately asking the city attorney and new city manager to return a reworked draft later in June rather than adopt the rules tonight.

Council members spent the meeting debating the text of a multi-page proposal required by the city charter and focused on several recurring concerns: whether the preamble’s phrase “no surprises” was appropriate and where it should appear, how councilors may request agenda items or non‑agenda items, and how mayoral authority interacts with council participation in board and committee appointments.

The debate centered on the meaning and placement of the phrase commonly described as “no surprises.” Council President Wolf defended the spirit behind the language, saying it was about avoiding items “that were completely unexpected, unplanned for, that staff's not prepared for,” while several councilors worried the phrase could be read as constraining members’ ability to raise issues. The council voted informally to change the wording to “we don't intentionally surprise each other” and to move that phrase into the code‑of‑conduct section rather than leave it in the preamble.

Councilors also pressed for clearer procedures for bringing items onto future agendas and for the use of non‑agenda time. Several council members said they wanted a written process that preserves the mayor’s role in setting agendas under the charter while ensuring individual councilors have an organized method to request topics. Councilor Robbins offered to draft consolidated language after the meeting that would clarify timelines and the number of councilors needed to sponsor a future agenda item; councilors asked the city attorney and city manager to incorporate that drafting work.

The rules governing board and committee appointments drew sustained attention. Council language in the draft would allow one or two councilors who volunteer to observe interviews with applicants and asked the mayor to provide the council with applications, interview notes and a written recommendation at least two weeks before appointment. Councilors discussed preserving the mayor’s role in making recommendations while increasing council visibility into the interview process. The body also directed staff to add explicit language that council appointments are approved by council resolution.

City Attorney Rahala and City Manager Brent Stockwell will return a revised draft reflecting the council’s direction. Stockwell, who began his first week on the job prior to the meeting, told the council he and the attorney would work on clarifying notice and timing issues and advised the group to consider a ‘‘look‑ahead’’ on agendas so members and the public can see upcoming topics.

Councilors and staff did not adopt the ground rules at the meeting. The council directed staff to prepare a revised version for review at a later meeting in June, after which the council may consider formal adoption.

The discussion included repeated references to the city charter text governing council rules (charter sections discussed during the meeting) and several procedural clarifications the council asked staff to document. The community member who phoned earlier in the meeting had raised related concerns about ambiguity in section 3.6 of the proposed rules, and the council acknowledged that public input in the process had helped surface several points needing clearer language.

The council’s decision to delay final action allows staff time to incorporate specific edits the council requested, including clearer timing for agenda requests, a defined role for councilors at board interviews, and an explicit statement that council appointments are approved by council resolution. The city attorney will prepare revised language that preserves the charter’s allocation of mayoral responsibilities while adding the procedural clarity councilors asked for.