Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rba Notification topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Dardenne Prairie aldermen ask city attorney to draft rules requiring ward notification for RBAs

Board of Aldermen, City of Dardenne Prairie · March 13, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Aldermen voted to ask the city attorney to draft options to revise city code so that an RBA affecting property in a ward includes notification or a signatory from an alderman representing that ward; the motion passed by voice vote.

Aldermen in Dardenne Prairie voted during a work session to ask the city attorney to prepare proposed language revising city code to formalize how requests for board action (RBAs) are handled when they affect a particular ward.

The motion was made by an alderman (Speaker 2), who described repeated resident frustration when RBAs or discussions about ward-specific projects occurred without the impacted ward alderman being involved. "If it impacts people or property in a specific ward, at least one alderman is notified," the alderman said, urging code language or a protocol to ensure notification and representation. The motion asked the city attorney to propose options to revise the cited city code section (spoken as "1 10.195") to reflect RBA procedures and returned to the board for consideration.

Supporters said formalizing notice would give aldermen more time to engage constituents and avoid surprises when items hit the public agenda. One colleague said recent practice of including ward aldermen early in development discussions had been beneficial and urged the board to adopt similar, consistent steps. Dissenting questions focused on whether existing work-session practice already provides adequate notice and whether a formal code change is necessary.

On the motion, the maker spoke to preparing options and returning them to a future work session for discussion. The motion was seconded (Speakers 8 and 6 voiced seconds during the discussion), the chair called for the vote, members responded "Aye," and the mayor announced the motion carries by voice vote. The motion directs staff and the city attorney to draft proposed code language or procedural options for future board consideration.

Next steps: the city attorney will prepare proposed options for board review and a subsequent work-session discussion; no specific timeline for the return of draft language was provided during the session.