Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Authority topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council removes planned ‘no-confidence’ resolution after corporation counsel says it exceeds charter
Summary
Mayor and council accepted a written opinion from corporation counsel finding a proposed symbolic vote of no confidence in the city manager outside the council’s charter authority; the communication was read into the record and Resolution 10 was removed from the agenda.
Norwich — At its June 15 meeting the Norwich City Council removed a proposed resolution calling for a vote of no confidence in the city manager after the corporation counsel advised the item was not a lawful council action.
Corporation counsel Amy Seaffort’s written opinion, read into the record by the city clerk, concluded that "a vote of no confidence, whether symbolic or advisory, falls outside the scope of the Norwich City Charter" and that the charter establishes exclusive procedures for appointment, supervision and removal of the city manager. President Prom Deluchia moved to add the counsel letter to communications under suspension of the rules; the council then accepted the communication by roll call.
The opinion cites chapters of the Norwich charter and explains that the charter provides a specific removal process that includes written notice and a hearing opportunity; Seaffort advised that placing a symbolic vote of no confidence on the council agenda would therefore be inconsistent with the charter’s exclusivity provisions. Councilors who had supported placing the resolution on the agenda said they had intended to raise concerns about how a specific incident was handled, not to require removal of the manager.
Council members debated whether the resolution’s wording had been intended as a censure or as a procedural step. Alderman Nash said he did not seek the manager’s removal but wanted to “spur our community to work together” and to press for stronger collaboration between volunteers and the administration. The city manager, John Salomone, said the charter and his employment agreement require specific personnel procedures and that a symbolic vote would publicly criticize an employee without the procedural protections of formal personnel action.
No disciplinary action against the manager was taken at the meeting; President Prom Deluchia announced that speakers who had come to address Resolution 10 would have an opportunity to speak during non-agenda public comment. The council recorded roll-call votes to add and accept the counsel communication before removing Resolution 10 from the agenda.
