Policy or Ordinance concerning new ordinances prior to adoption

[Charles West]

Attached is a memo and draft ordinance that can be converted to a policy outling procedures to follow prior to the adoption of new ordinances.

 

[Adam Benefield]

Great work Mr. West. I support ordinances like this that improves transparency, public engagement, legislative consistency, and.... helps reduce our city council meetings.

 

[Shane Saum]

Thank you, Charles, for taking the time to develop this proposal and for the thought that went into improving how Council deliberates before taking action. I have appreciated our discussions on this topic, as well as Robin's input and Tracie's shared experiences from how they do this in Jonestown. I think this is a positive step toward greater transparency and a more organized meeting structure, and I appreciate the effort to formalize a workshop process. It will only be as successful as we all make it, so I implore Council to give this a purposeful attempt.

I’d like to suggest a few adjustments that could strengthen the policy and make it more effective for the entire Council, staff, and public.

First, I fully agree with the exemptions you outlined for emergencies, state or federally mandated items, and routine administrative or budget matters. Those carveouts provide the flexibility we need to address time-sensitive issues while keeping the process consistent.

Second, I recommend expanding this procedure so that it applies to all actions before Council, not just ordinances. The goal would be to have a standing rhythm where the first meeting of each month serves as a workshop for discussion and background presentations, and the second meeting is reserved for formal votes. This would help us deliberate more thoroughly while still moving city business forward efficiently. Obviously Council has mechanisms to put items on an agenda, but I would ask that if we move forward with this, we all commit to sticking to the format.

Third, I support including a structured public comment process like the one Charles described, but I’d also like to enhance it by using the Council discussion board for greater visibility before items reach a workshop. When proposed actions are posted in advance, it gives both Council and the public time to review information, ask questions, and provide input early in the process.

I’d also like to see department heads and the City Manager use the discussion board to post background materials and draft documents prior to the workshop meeting. This would allow Council members to start reviewing and identifying questions ahead of time, making our workshops more productive and collaborative.

I believe this process should be adopted as a Council policy rather than an ordinance. A policy expresses our shared intent and provides flexibility for future councils to adjust their meeting structure if needed. It also gives us the ability to adapt when special circumstances arise.

Lastly, I recommend including a six-month review after implementation to assess how well the process is working, gather staff and citizen feedback, and make any improvements. And to maintain accountability, if an agenda item is incomplete or not ready for full discussion, I believe the Mayor should have the ability to pull that item until it’s fully prepared, assuming our Charter allows it.

Overall, I appreciate the direction of this proposal and believe these refinements would help us achieve a balanced, transparent, and purposeful process that benefits both Council and the community.

 

[Paul Roberts]

Colleagues,

Since my term concludes in two days, I will not be part of the decision on this item, but I did want to offer a few observations for the new Council to consider as the discussion continues. I genuinely appreciate the work that has gone into exploring a more consistent workshop structure, and I share the intention of improving deliberation and transparency for the community.

With that in mind, and simply as input for consideration, I offer the following points to help ensure the approach aligns with our Charter and Rules of Procedure:

1. Protect Councilmember Agenda Rights.
   The Charter grants the Mayor responsibility for preparing agendas, but it also explicitly protects the right of two Councilmembers to place an item on the agenda, which cannot be removed (City Charter §3.06(g)). Any new process should preserve that protection and avoid delaying items that have a second and are submitted in time for posting. The City Attorney has previously advised that roughly eight days prior to the meeting affords sufficient time for staff to include the item in the published packet.

1. Incorporate This Into the Rules of Procedure, Not as a Separate Ordinance.
   City Charter §3.13 states that “The Council shall establish by ordinance its procedures for conducting Council meetings.” To that end, we already have an ordinance establishing our Rules of Procedure, which is where meeting structure and workflow belong.
   Creating a separate standalone ordinance to govern meeting workflow would create two overlapping procedural laws and could conflict with both the Charter’s structure and the Rules of Procedure.
   If the Council wants an approach that is easier to adjust over time, the same structure can be adopted as a Council policy, provided it does not conflict with the Rules of Procedure or with Charter-protected agenda rights.

1. Workshop + Voting Rhythm.
   A “first meeting for workshop / second meeting for action” structure can work well, particularly when clear exemptions exist for emergencies, statutory or regulatory items, and routine administrative or budget actions. This allows thoughtful deliberation without slowing necessary city business.

1. Avoid Making Workshops a Prerequisite to Agenda Placement.
   A mandatory “pre-workshop requirement” should not function in a way that delays, conditions, or prevents an item that has a second and is submitted on time for the next agenda. Doing so would conflict with the Charter’s two-member agenda placement protection.

Practical examples include:
• holiday observance adjustments
• directives to staff (including operational matters and requests for information)
• authorization to pursue or accept grant funding
• scheduling a town hall or special meeting (which may be initiated by two Councilmembers)
• coordination with outside or regional agencies on time-sensitive matters
• ratification or correction of agreements
• personnel evaluations or performance discussions
• placing items onto committee or board agendas

These items should not be required to wait for a workshop cycle. If additional staff preparation is needed, Council can simply table the item when it appears on the agenda.

1. Town Halls and Special Meetings.
   The Rules of Procedure already allow special meetings to be called by the Mayor or upon request of two Councilmembers. Any “town hall” approach should continue to operate under those provisions—not be made contingent on workshop sequencing or staff approval.

1. Use of the Council Discussion Board.
   Posting draft documents and background materials in advance supports more informed discussion. Likewise, complete and accurate agenda packets published seven days before the meeting should continue to be the standard to ensure transparency and preparedness.

1. Six-Month Review.
   If implemented, a six-month check-in will allow the new Council to evaluate whether the structure is achieving its intended goals and make adjustments as needed.

Thank you again to everyone who has contributed their time and thought to this effort. I support the objective of improving clarity and deliberation, and simply recommend that the final version:

• Protect the Charter’s agenda-placement rights,
• Align with the Rules of Procedure, and
• Be adopted in a way that preserves flexibility and avoids unintended procedural conflicts.

— Paul