Inter Governmental Committee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Inter-Governmental Committee met on February 9, 2010, at 1:00 p.m., with Madam Chair presiding. The meeting included two agenda items: Council & Public Comment, which was informational in nature, and an Update on Committee Items, which was deferred. During the meeting, the committee heard four public comments and took one motion to a vote. The session resulted in limited substantive action, with the committee deferring discussion of committee items to a future meeting.

Attendance

The following individuals were present at the meeting on February 9, 2010:

• James
• Crosbie
• Myers
• Gray
• Blues
• Beard
• Henson
• Feigel
• Lawless
• Martin

No absences or late arrivals were recorded.

Votes and Decisions

Motion to Reassign Downtown Development Authority Oversight

A motion was passed to remove the authority of the Downtown Development Authority from the Inter-Governmental Committee and assign it to the agency oversight committee. 23:01

The motion was made by Blues and determined by voice vote. The motion passed.

Public Comment

The Council discussed the procedures and legal implications of engaging in dialogue during public comment on items not on the agenda.

Crosbie 0:00 initiated the discussion after E911 workers raised concerns during public comment. He questioned whether the Council could legally engage in dialogue on non-agenda items and emphasized the need for clarity in policy, noting that no rule currently prohibits such discussion.

Feigel 6:01 raised legal concerns about engaging in dialogue during public comment on non-agenda items, citing potential violations of open meetings law. He referenced a prior experience where a city attorney advised against such discussions to ensure public transparency and fairness.

Lawless 10:27 supported the ability to question public speakers on non-agenda issues, particularly when critical information is first revealed during public comment, such as in the E911 case. He emphasized the importance of gathering facts before making decisions.

Blues 15:51 clarified that no rule currently prohibits discussion after public comment. He suggested that the Council should clarify the practice through a memo rather than amending the rules.

Contested Items

Engagement During Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items

A procedural dispute arose during the meeting regarding whether the Council could legally discuss issues raised by the public during comment periods when those issues were not listed on the meeting agenda.

The disagreement centered on the appropriate scope of Council engagement with public input. Some members expressed legal concerns about transparency implications, arguing that discussing non-agenda items could create procedural or legal problems. Other Council members countered that such dialogue is both permissible and necessary, particularly when members of the public present urgent matters or introduce new information that warrants immediate discussion.

The nature of the dispute was fundamentally procedural, reflecting differing interpretations of the Council's authority and obligations when responding to public comment on topics outside the formal agenda.

Council & Public Comment

The committee discussed the legal parameters governing Urban County Council's ability to engage in dialogue with the public during public comment periods on issues not appearing on the meeting agenda. 0:00

Discussion and Research

The committee reviewed research from other Kentucky cities and consulted legal opinions to determine whether any rules or regulations prohibit council members from interacting with the public during public comment on non-agenda items. Based on this review, the committee reached consensus that no such prohibitive rule exists.

Key Participants

The discussion involved committee members Crosbie, Susan Lamb, Feigel, Lawless, and Blues.

Outcome

The committee agreed to issue a clarifying memo to all council members and chairs to communicate the findings regarding council members' legal authority to engage with the public during public comment periods on matters not listed on the agenda.

Update on Committee Items

Paul Schoninger provided updates on several pending committee items 19:38.

Items Ready for Next Meeting: - The Social Services Needs Assessment was reported as ready for presentation at the next meeting - The Division of Youth Services committee update was ready for discussion

Follow-up Actions: - The E911 call center management issue was scheduled for follow-up

Organizational Changes: - Downtown Development Authority oversight was moved to the agency oversight committee

Other Items: Several additional items were either deferred or remained pending pending further information.

Participants: The discussion involved Paul Schoninger, Crosbie, Lawless, and Blues.

Outcome: The agenda item was deferred.