Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents ask council to explain mismatch between spoken vote and published ordinance wording
Summary
Residents at the Nov. 3 Vandalia City Council meeting asked city staff to explain an apparent mismatch between what council members said they approved at a March hearing and the text of the published Ordinance 25-02, focusing on whether traffic-study recommendations must be implemented before final plan approval.
At the start of the public-comment period a resident asked for clarification about the published text of Ordinance 25-02, saying the ordinance on the city website and on an outside legal publisher does not match what was read and apparently approved at the second reading on March 3.
Robert Shanahan said he reviewed the March 3 video and read the councilmember’s remarks that he says included a specific condition: “the completion of a traffic study prior and implementation of changes prior to the approval of the final development plan.” Shanahan said the version published online appears to say only that the study be completed prior to approval, not that recommended changes must be implemented before final site-plan approval. “Is it the city’s policy to amend proposed ordinances on the fly, vote for them, then record something entirely different?” he asked.
City staff responded that they would review the ordinance and the meeting video and confirm whether any discrepancy exists. The deputy clerk said staff prepares ordinance text and uploads it to Granicus and the mayor signs the version as approved. Staff told speakers they would check the minutes and ordinance language and report back to council; the mayor said staff will look at the ordinance and video and bring any issue to council attention before future votes.
Other residents asked whether council is legally bound to follow planning commission recommendations. Staff and council clarified that the planning commission is a recommending body and council is not legally obliged to vote the same way as the planning commission.
The meeting record did not identify a formal remedy to alter a published ordinance if an error is found; staff said they would advise counsel and bring any necessary corrections to a future meeting. Residents urged the council to review and, if needed, correct published ordinance text before related final-plan votes.
