Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board raises legal questions after dismissal of historic board administrator; staff to return a staffing plan in July
Summary
A board member cited 1983 Chapter 566, section 6, saying the board must have an appointed historic board administrator; city officials said staff reductions followed city HR rules and promised a proposed staffing plan would return to the board for review at the July meeting.
During other business, a board member identified as Deb raised concern about the recent dismissal of the historic board administrator and cited the 1983 enabling legislation for the historic district (Chapter 566, section 6) to ask how the board would appoint or vote on a new administrator. "It states that the board appoints the historic board administrator to assist the board in carrying out its powers and its duties," the member said.
Giovanni responded that the legislation also contemplates the historic board administrator as a city employee and said staffing decisions related to reductions were carried out under city rules for municipal employees. Giovanni and staff indicated a memo laying out a proposed plan for administering the board going forward had been circulated and that the plan would be placed on the July meeting agenda for discussion and possible board action. He and other board members said the board could discuss expectations and that the city manager's role in appointments (and any required board vote) would be clarified by city HR and legal staff ahead of the July meeting.
The board agreed to review the memo and to bring questions to city staff so the issue could be formally addressed at the July meeting. No formal vote on a new administrator was taken at the June meeting.
