ACHTUNG: This is not a “fair and balanced” article. It is an editorial by the editor.
I hear tell that the city henceforward plans to mandate the presence of the city clerk rather than the city manager at Planning Commission meetings.
I respectfully ask that the city reconsider this move.
Planning Commission meetings customarily have included the city manager for quite a long time, and I believe it’s good policy. The commission often enough is confronted with requests and proposals that require the expertise of the city manager, especially on zoning regulations and past practices. Therefore, it would be wise to have that expertise readily available rather than having to wait at least another day to solicit information or opinions.
This is not to say the city clerk is ignorant of local policies and procedures. It is to say the clerk is required to be fluent in other responsibilities of city government.
I have personally witnessed such instances when the commission has needed to consult with someone who has a working knowledge of policies and procedures as they arise in meetings.
I understand there has been talk in the past that someone is needed to capture the minutes of meetings, but I’ve noticed that such responsibilities can be handled adequately by a member of the commission. It’s been done up until now, and despite some indications by commissioners they don’t like to do such things at meetings, the system has worked. Perhaps the best example is the Dorr Township Planning Commission, which assigns Commissioner Rich Osbun such duties and he’s done a splendid job.
So I suppose I’m offering up my opinion as, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
And I truly believe “it ain’t broke.”
