Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables ordinance defining council liaisons to boards and commissions for further discussion
Summary
Councilwoman Tasha Williams introduced an ordinance to define council liaisons' roles to boards and commissions; after extended debate about mandatory reporting, minutes publication and subcommittees the council voted to table the ordinance until March 4 for further revision.
An ordinance introduced Feb. 4 to define the role, duties and reporting expectations for city council liaisons to boards and commissions was tabled after extended debate about whether duties should be mandatory, whether council liaisons should be required to report and how to improve public access to boards’ minutes and meeting schedules.
Why it matters: Council liaisons serve as points of contact between the council and boards or commissions that handle land use, redevelopment, historic preservation and other local authorities. The ordinance sought to standardize roles and require periodic reporting, but several council members argued mandatory reassignment language and penalties were unnecessarily punitive.
Councilwoman Tasha Williams — the ordinance sponsor — said the measure was meant to clarify and preserve institutional memory: “We do not have anything in our e-codes that defines what a liaison's roles from city councils to our boards and commissions are. So this is simply just to provide what that process looks like and not just for this council, but for any members elected to this council beyond us,” she said.
Opponents argued the proposal’s compliance section — which said failure to perform liaison duties “may result in reassignment by the council president” — created a contradiction with the sponsor’s claim it would be non-mandatory. Councilwoman Feliciano also urged requiring that boards publish minutes and meeting information on the city website as a complementary step.
Several council members suggested alternative approaches: reversing the flow of information so councils formally provide feedback to boards; asking boards to hold at least some meetings at times accessible to working residents; and codifying subcommittee rules in a separate ordinance. Legal and procedural staff said they were preparing subcommittee language and examples from other municipalities.
Outcome: After debate, the council voted to table the ordinance until the March 4 meeting to allow for further drafting and discussions about publication of minutes, subcommittee rules and the ordinance’s compliance language.
