Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montclair council directs staff to study earlier agenda packets amid debate over rules manual
Summary
The Montclair City Council voted 5–0 to direct the city manager to assess whether staff can produce council agenda packets earlier (to be available the Wednesday before meetings) after an extended discussion over staff capacity, public notice and a proposed policy/procedure manual that split members over Rosenberg's vs. Robert's rules.
Montclair — The City Council voted unanimously to ask staff to study whether agenda packets can be issued earlier so members and the public have more time to review materials before Monday meetings.
The council’s action — a directive for the city manager to meet with department heads and return to the council with feasibility and impacts — came after council member Mendez proposed moving staff meetings and packet distribution earlier to give council members more time to review agenda materials and ask questions in advance.
"I'm just asking to give us another day or 2," Council member Mendez said, arguing that more review time would help members do their due diligence. City Manager Ed Star told the council that advancing the packet risks producing "raw" reports for time‑sensitive items and could require staff schedule changes; he also warned of impacts to vendor payment cycles if the calendar were moved further in advance.
The discussion folded into a wider review of a draft city policy and procedure manual. Several council members voiced concern about provisions in the draft, including a proposed five‑minute speaking guideline for members, how interruptions and staff responses are handled, how mail addressed to individual council members is processed, and whether to adopt Rosenberg's Rules of Order or the more comprehensive Robert's Rules of Order.
Council member Lopez said he was uncomfortable with the five‑minute cap as written and worried it could be applied inflexibly. "Some issues warrant a lengthy discussion," Lopez said. Others, including Mayor Dutre and Mayor Pro Tem Martinez, said the draft was intended as a working document and could be adjusted.
After debate about staff workloads, Brown Act timing constraints and the needs of residents and vendors, Mayor Dutre revised his original motion and instead directed staff to meet with department heads and return to the council with options at the next meeting. The council approved the direction, 5–0.
The council also agreed on a process for refining the policy manual: members will submit redlined edits, the mayor and Council member Roux will work as an ad hoc committee with staff, and draft revisions will be returned for further review. Staff were asked to provide Word-format documents so council members can propose strike‑through language.
Next steps: City Manager Star will meet with department heads to assess operational impacts and return to the council with a recommendation and timeline, and council members will provide proposed edits to the draft manual by the requested deadline.
