The Lake Orion Village Council rejected a motion last week that would have required a two-thirds majority approval to add items to the prepared agenda.
As it stands, a simple majority is all that is required to add an item to the agenda during a meeting.
The concept was brought forth by Ken Van Portfliet, who said he was responding to some public requests.
It would have called for a ‘super majority,? or five votes (instead of four), to add an item to the prepared agenda.
The prepared agenda includes all items submitted in written form to the village clerk by the Tuesday preceding the meeting (usually six days in advance).
‘How can an agenda be protected so that we just don’t have large, highly important items added at the last moment with no data?? Van Portfliet said. ‘A five-vote would be one way to assist in that protection.?
‘Where is the insufficiency in the way it stands now?? asked President Pro Tem David Churchill. ‘I think it hinders the council’s ability to act expediently.?
Council members discussed the issue largely in relation to ’emergency? items that might need to be added at the last minute.
‘This is just to add an item to the agenda. This is not to make a final vote,? noted Julie Drabik, who voted for the measure along with Van Portfliet and Mike Toth.
Examples were used citing various items like shed removal, until the council president spoke up.
‘What this really is, is about the decision we made to terminate the village manager,? said President Rob Reetz. ‘Let’s call it what it is.?
‘I agree that a simple majority, as called for by the charter right now, is sufficient,? he added. ‘I fail to see how five (votes) would make a difference.?
Van Portfliet disagreed.
‘The difference it would have made is not necessarily that the village manager would have stayed or left, but that the voters, the public, would have had the opportunity to be informed about something that was impacting their community prior to it happening,? he responded. ‘That’s what’s been asked of me and that’s why I put it on the agenda.?
‘The outcome probably would have been the same,? Van Portfliet added of the manager’s termination, ‘but it probably would have been handled differently.?
‘When you’re talking about something this big, you might want to slow down and make sure it’s the right thing,? Toth said. ‘You’re not going to on the same day, in a session of Congress, get rid of a president, and it’s the same thing that happened here. We had 80 people in here saying, ‘just slow down.??
Councilman Doug Dendel said he was against amending the current charter. Ultimately, he, Churchill, Reetz and John Ranville agreed and the motion failed.
‘Times have changed,? Reetz said. ‘We’re going to move forward as a council, and hopefully we’ll work together as a council, not this divisive rift that we have going on here. I would like to see this council work together for the betterment of the village.?