Council declines ordinance 11 o2-24 after code-of-conduct change between readings

Lead City Council voted on a motion to not approve Ordinance 11 o2-24 after members and the city attorney concluded a code-of-conduct provision had been removed between the ordinance’s first and second readings, a change the attorney described as substantial.

Speaker 1 explained the ordinance would rework chapter 33 (organizations) to reorganize language for commissions and boards and that section 33-01 originally included a parks-and-recreation provision that was replaced with the code-of-conduct text in the first reading. Between the first and second readings staff removed the code-of-conduct provision and the attorney advised that omission constituted a substantial change requiring another reading. Speaker 8 moved “to not approve ordinance 11 o 2 dash 24 on this reading,” and the motion carried on a voice vote.

The council’s instruction to staff was to rewrite the ordinance without the code-of-conduct text (or to place the code of conduct in the personnel policy) and return it to the council as a fresh first reading and subsequent second reading if appropriate. Council members debated whether the code of conduct belongs in an ordinance or in the personnel policy, with several members noting that policy language is handled differently than ordinance language and that a personnel policy change would not follow the same 'substantial change' reading requirements as an ordinance.

Next steps: staff was directed to return a rewritten ordinance (or a separate personnel-policy proposal) for formal consideration; the council did not adopt any portion of Ordinance 11 o2-24 at this meeting.