Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Committee Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PLDRC debates bylaws: members weigh changes to attendance rules, public notice and compensation
Summary
At its Sept. 18 meeting, the PLDRC spent substantial time discussing proposed bylaw changes including how absences should be counted, whether the commission can excuse absences for good cause, options for online public notice vs. newspaper publication, and member compensation; counsel agreed to draft language for the commission’s review.
A significant portion of the Sept. 18, 2025 PLDRC meeting was devoted to discussing bylaws, membership vacancy rules and operational procedures. Commissioners asked staff and county counsel for draft language to address a set of recurring governance issues: how absences are counted, whether the PLDRC should be able to excuse absences for ‘good cause’ before a member is automatically removed, how the counting period should be measured (calendar year vs. appointment year), and whether public notices can be moved online rather than relying solely on newspaper publication.
Key points: - Attendance rules: The bylaws currently provide that missing more than two meetings (the committee referenced three strikes in a year) can result in automatic removal and require reappointment by County Council. Commissioners proposed adding an internal appeals mechanism so the PLDRC could excuse a third absence for good cause (medical issues, caregiving, or other unavoidable reasons) rather than forcing the member to seek reappointment through Council. Counsel confirmed an “excused for good cause” provision is typical and said the PLDRC could vote to excuse an absence in particular cases; counsel agreed to draft alternative language for the commission to review (transcript SEG 2168–2176; SEG 2236–2244).
- Counting period for absences: Commissioners requested moving absence accounting from calendar year to appointment-year or term-year (April to April was discussed) so counting aligns with each member’s term; counsel agreed to research how the ordinance language could be modified (transcript SEG 2266–2278).
- Public notice and newspaper reliance: Commissioners discussed the statutory option to publish required notices online in lieu of a newspaper of general circulation (with an annual published notice that the jurisdiction is using the web). Counsel explained the policy tradeoffs — cost savings and timeliness versus ensuring adequate notice for residents without internet access — and offered to research options and a recommended approach for the commission to forward to County Council (transcript SEG 2688–2772).
- Compensation and packet delivery: Commissioners questioned whether the long-standing $200 monthly expense allowance (set by council resolution decades ago) still reflects costs for preparing packets, mailing and travel. Counsel noted compensation must be set by County Council and staff agreed to prepare cost information for council consideration (transcript SEG 2910–2920).
Quotes and clarifications: - Commissioner Costa urged an ability for the PLDRC to excuse absences for legitimate reasons before automatic removal: “I’d like to have that option that if a member emails in advance ... and the reasoning are a b c d … we have that so that we can actually do it on the day that they missed the meeting” (transcript SEG 2396–2404). - Counsel on excused absences: “Unless excused by the PLDRC ... for good cause is all the language that I need. And, like, the process kinda sorts itself out” (transcript SEG 2252–2255).
Next steps: County counsel (staff attorney) will draft alternative bylaw language addressing excused absences, consecutive vs. appointment-year counting, and provide options regarding notice publication and packet delivery/compensation for the commission to consider at a future meeting.
