Some aldermen see consent agenda as more efficient, while others are concerned about transparency

QUINCY — Two aldermen expressed concerns Monday night after the first reading of the creation of a consent agenda for future Quincy City Council meetings, and Mayor Linda Moore admits the ordinance might need a little tweaking to eventually get the votes needed to pass.

“We have two more weeks, so we’ve got plenty of time to continue to look at this,” she said.

When City Clerk Laura Oakman made the first reading during the meeting, Kelly Mays (R-3) was the first alderman to comment.

“If we did this, the goal of the consent agenda is not to hide items but just to be more efficient in the way we run our meetings,” she said. 

Mays then referred to a sample consent agenda that was prepared for aldermen for Monday’s meeting. She asked for a copy of that agenda to be on the screen during the City Council’s live videos so people knew what was being approved — even if it wasn’t read aloud by Oakman, which she does now for each agenda item.

“We may want to have the agenda, or at least the consent agenda, up and scrolling prior to the (start of each) meeting so that if somebody comes a little bit early, they can see what’s on (the consent agenda) as well,” Moore said.

Greg Fletcher (R-1) said he didn’t think he could support the ordinance. 

“Our meetings are not that long, and if they are that long, then that’s just the way it is,” he said. “That’s what I signed up for on Monday nights. I think we need to look at everything individually so there’s no confusion from anybody out here or at home.”

The ordinance calls for the consent agenda to be prepared by the city clerk and include matters determined as “routine” by the clerk and the mayor. Items listed on the consent agenda will be enacted by one motion and one roll call vote. No separate discussion of any items listed on the consent agenda will occur unless an alderman requests for it to be removed from the consent agenda and considered individually. A request does not require a second from an alderman.

“It would be mostly those items where we have a voice vote,” Moore said.

Corporation Counsel Bruce Alford gave the example of an agenda following a utilities committee meeting which would have “10 to 12” resolutions, and eight of them are passed by the full City Council without questions.

“The idea is, by putting those on the consent agenda, we can get them done quickly,” he said. “Then hopefully that gives us more time to debate on the other ones that you do have questions on so that we can get deeper into debates.

“I think at last week’s meeting, we were here approximately two hours. There were probably a couple of things we just tabled last week that we might have discussed if we had a short meeting like tonight’s meeting. Hopefully we’ll get to things quicker by doing it this way. … We can pull up a bunch of those type of things together and then move on to things that we’re going to discuss and have questions.”

Jeff Bergman (R-2) said he understood what Alford said about the “no brainer” items passing without discussion.

“But it’s still tax dollars being spent, and it still should be information given to the public,” he said, speaking for the people who watch the meetings on cable television each week. “I’m trying to figure out how the public’s going to follow along, unless we do read the consent items before we vote on it.”

After the meeting, Moore said reading each agenda item — but taking one vote for the consent agenda — is a possible compromise.

“Somebody who’s blind who can hear us but can’t see (the consent agenda on a TV screen) … yeah, that might be an answer,” Moore said.

Bergman agreed that the ordinance would make the City Council more efficient the time management during meetings.

“(Reading each item on the consent agenda) is more transparent for the public and the taxpayers,” Bergman said. “Laura can read through the title of all eight items and what we’re voting on. We don’t have to go into details, but at least each one is read because it is on the agenda for the public to see, and they should hear it also.”

Moore also liked the suggestion of Ben Uzelac (D-7), who asked aldermen to try the consent agenda for three months.

“If we’re hearing from our constituents that they’re not feeling (they’re) in the loop, or we’re not enjoying it the way that we think we would, then we can reevaluate,” Uzelac said. “If we’re never willing to try new things, then we’re never going to push the city forward. I’m willing to give it a shot, as long as we’re willing to have a discussion later on and be honest with ourselves about whether it’s going well or not.”