Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charter Review Commission struggles with quorum; commissioners urge appointing authorities to replace inactive members
Summary
Commissioners reported repeated quorum shortfalls, discussed options to lower the quorum threshold or request resignations from nonattending appointees, and received legal counsel that removal authority rests with the appointing bodies (city council or mayor).
Members of the Charter Review Commission spent the latter part of the meeting discussing chronic attendance problems that have left the group short of a quorum in multiple recent sessions.
Commission leadership and counsel described the operational impact: the commission is supposed to have 11 members but has regularly operated with six or seven active participants. Commissioner Ed (the solicitor) advised that the commission itself does not have authority to remove appointed members and that the appointing authorities — either the mayor or city council depending on who made the appointment — must act to replace or request resignations from nonparticipating members. "Go to the appointing authority," counsel advised, explaining that removals or replacements are not within the commission's unilateral power.
Members proposed several practical remedies: asking appointing officials to seek resignations, filling current vacancies quickly, considering lowering the quorum requirement if the council approves changes, or rescheduling meetings to times that could improve attendance. Commissioners also discussed requesting an extension of their review timeline if they cannot complete required tasks within the six-month window specified for charter questions.
No formal vote on quorum changes was taken; the commission agreed to pursue outreach to the mayor and council to remedy vacancies and to place membership and quorum issues on a future agenda.
