Council reviews proposed amendments to council rules on meeting schedule, seating and public recording
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
SubscribeSummary
A councilmember recommended multiple changes to the council rules packet — clarifying meeting dates, allowing councilmembers to choose seats for their term, limiting excusal notice to the clerk of counsel, and removing a restriction on public recording — while the mayor said the packet would not be voted on tonight and further review including legal input will follow.
Councilmember (unnamed in the transcript packet speaker) reviewed the council rules included in the meeting packet and proposed several amendments on Jan. 15. Key recommendations included specifying regular meeting dates (first and third Thursdays at 6 p.m.) with language for holiday or emergency rescheduling; allowing councilmembers to select their seats for their term rather than having the mayor assign seating; limiting notifications about absences to the clerk of counsel; and reinstating public recording rights that an earlier draft had restricted.
The speaker said the rule that would prohibit members of the public from recording meetings raised First Amendment concerns and recommended allowing public audio/video recording. "I think what we should just add, the general public may record the meetings if they want to because that, in my mind, is a First Amendment issue," the councilmember said. Other members discussed historical committee work that produced the current rules and noted an ad hoc committee had worked on the packet. The mayor said the version in members’ packets had been sent in error previously and that changes would be reviewed; he said the council would not vote on these rule changes at the current meeting and suggested staff and the law director would assist with a fuller review.
Council members agreed to review the packet further; the mayor said an ad hoc committee could be appointed if more work were needed and that the law director would be engaged to ensure consistency with the city charter.
No ordinance or binding change to the rules was adopted at this meeting.
