Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter And Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council divides over appointing treasurer now versus waiting for charter changes
Summary
Councilors split on whether to appoint a treasurer under the existing charter or delay until pending municipal charter changes would consolidate treasurer and collector roles. Debate included legal, procedural and practical concerns; motions to table and to reconsider were filed and multiple roll-call votes occurred.
Councilors spent more than an hour debating whether the body should appoint a treasurer at this time or wait for pending charter revisions that would combine treasurer and tax collector duties.
Councilor Bacon urged the council to follow the current charter and appoint the treasurer now, calling a vote a "vote of confidence" and arguing it would not "undo any other votes". He said the charter currently authorizes the council to appoint a treasurer and described an appointment as compliance with voter direction.
Other councilors raised procedural concerns and potential operational issues. Councilor McGrath Smith said she worried an immediate appointment could create technical problems — including gaps in who can sign checks and potential ethics questions if one person held both treasurer and collector responsibilities under differing charter language. Councilor Panitch and others urged patience to allow the municipal modernization and home rule petition process to finish, arguing it would provide a smoother, less risky transition.
The council considered multiple motions: keeping the item on the table, reconsidering the prior action, and conducting a roll-call reconsideration. Several roll-call votes were recorded (some recorded as divided 7–6 or 4–9 outcomes on motions to reconsider or table). The transcript documents extensive back-and-forth on legal advice, voter intent, turnout statistics for the ballot question, and how the city solicitor's opinions should guide action.
Outcome: The record shows multiple procedural votes (table, reconsideration) occurred; the item remained contested in the meeting record and procedural steps (reconsideration motions and roll calls) were used. The transcript does not show a final, uncontested adoption of an appointment for a treasurer at the meeting.
