Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Boards And Commissions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Longmont council clarifies how advisory boards should feed council work, not direct operations
Summary
Councilmembers sought clearer boundaries and processes for advisory boards, agreeing boards may bring topics but must avoid directing staff; liaisons and majority-board support will be used to route items to council and staff will provide packets earlier for better engagement.
Longmont's study session included an extended discussion on how advisory boards and commissions should work with council and staff.
Sandy Cedar, assistant city manager, opened the session by asking how council wants boards to operate and whether boards should have autonomy to set their own topics or primarily respond to council referrals.
Council members said they value board input but want to avoid boards providing operational direction to staff. Several council members urged common practices: councils should refer topics to boards when council wants their input, a majority of a board should vote to send a proposal to council, council liaisons should carry items forward, and staff should provide advance materials so boards can give informed feedback.
Council also suggested specific process changes: move board updates to the end-of-month council meeting so boards can report on recently completed meetings; give boards two topic appearances per council presession; and clarify expectations about when a board's recommendation is advisory versus directive. Staff agreed to return draft operating agreements and to trial a new presession submission form to automate topic requests.
Next steps: Staff will revise operating-agreement language to add a clarification that boards do not give operational direction to staff, and will pilot the automated presession form and improved packet delivery to boards.
