Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates ordinance to shift agenda control to city administrator; residents warn it could limit public access
Summary
Councilmembers and residents spent much of the meeting debating a proposed amendment to Ordinance 80219 that would place agenda authority with the city administrator; opponents said the draft would eliminate citizens' ability to place items on the agenda and called for more public process.
A contentious discussion over who should control the city council agenda — the mayor or the city administrator — dominated the Oct. 14 Willow Park meeting as council members, the city attorney and residents debated proposed changes to Ordinance 80219.
The proposed amendment would revise Section 1.0 3.035 to give the city administrator (or designee) authority over agenda supplements and amendments, removing the mayor as a co‑designee. City Attorney (identified in the record as the attorney for the city) told the council that the ordinance from 2019 currently lists both the mayor and the city administrator as having agenda authority; the draft seeks to make the administrator the sole authority.
Residents and some council members voiced concern this version, as posted online, removed a separate provision that permitted members of the public to submit written requests to place items on the agenda. 'By removing the citizen's right to submit an agenda request in writing… this council would be taking away a step from openness and toward exclusion,' said one resident who asked the council to table the ordinance and hold public hearings.
Council members debated alternatives. Several said the core problem was not who had the final say but the lack of a clear internal timeline for preparing and publishing the agenda. One council member proposed a procedural fix: require a preliminary agenda by Monday (noon) and a final packet by Wednesday at 5 p.m., giving the city secretary sufficient time to compile material. The city attorney advised that timing and internal approval practices could be addressed by ordinance, resolution, or internal policy.
Council agreed to have the attorney draft revisions that would clarify process and bring a proposal back to the council. 'We are operating under two sets of books,' a council member said, urging staff to correct codification errors on the city website. The council did not adopt the ordinance that night; staff said they would prepare revised language and return it for consideration.
