Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Motion to shorten public‑meeting notice from 7 to 5 days fails after debate over transparency
Summary
An ordinance to reduce required public meeting notice from seven days to five days (Ordinance 16‑95) failed to receive majority support after aldermen debated accessibility and flexibility for rescheduled meetings; the motion failed for lack of majority.
City Attorney Worsham presented Ordinance 16‑95, a housekeeping change to reduce the city's required notice for public meetings from seven days to five to match common statewide practice. Several aldermen argued that seven days provides better access and time for constituents to engage; Alderman Wilson said she preferred keeping the seven‑day standard "on the side of the public". The mayor and other members argued that shorter notice provides needed flexibility for rescheduled meetings and to avoid delaying time‑sensitive actions.
After extended discussion, the motion to adopt the ordinance failed for lack of majority. The city attorney noted the proposed change reflected common practice elsewhere, but dissenting members said the city should err on the side of more notice to improve public participation. No budget or legal consequences were enacted because the measure did not pass.
