‘Slap in the face’: Fairfax council ‘handbook’ riles critics

A proposed procedural guide governing the Fairfax Town Council will face review when its new members are seated next month.

The “handbook” – a 10-page document intended to guide how meetings are conducted and new agendas are prepared – was pilloried by residents and council members-elect Frank Egger and Mike Ghiringhelli during a meeting on Nov. 19 as an underhanded effort to silence its newest members.

The document calls for a majority vote of the council in order to place an item on an agenda. It also specifies that the mayor – or vice mayor in the mayor’s stead – will coordinate with the town manager on the development of agendas.

The Town Council voted unanimously to pull the item from the consent calendar and put it up for discussion when the new council is seated on Dec. 4. The council also voted unanimously to push a repeal of the rules of order in the town code to a meeting on Jan. 9.

The issue proved time-consuming and contentious. Following the first vote, Mayor Barbara Coler pounded the gavel and called for a five-minute break following repeated disruptions from the crowd in attendance.

Egger, a former council member who lost his seat in 2005, accused the council of attempting to run roughshod over the public’s will.

“I served seven terms as mayor of Fairfax and always honored a request from any council member to place an item on the agenda that they wanted to discuss,” he said. “Having this on a special meeting with only 24 hours notice just a couple of weeks before we get sworn in is a clear slap in the face to the voters of Fairfax.”

Ghiringhelli, also a former council member, said he did not recall council rules ever working like that when he served.

“I think there was a clear mandate by the citizens of Fairfax that Frank and I are involved and this seems like, to me anyway, a lame-duck move to change the rules in midstream. That’s how I’m feeling about it,” he said.

Town Manager Heather Abrams said the handbook was being prepared as a result of a May 1 meeting during which council goals were adopted. The goals included the drafting of a boards and commission training manual, she said.

Town Attorney Janet Coleson said the document was intended to codify practices that were already followed. She said it was considered a “living document” and the rules could be changed by the council with a majority vote.

“This is very common to have a rules and procedures manual for council members,” she said. “It’s not meant to change anything.”

Councilmember Stephanie Hellman said the rules regarding majority votes is considered standard practice for the current council.

“I do understand how it looks and how it is being perceived and how it is making people uncomfortable, so I don’t know that it will change anything if we pull it,” Hellman said.

Councilmember Bruce Ackerman, who was not re-elected, noted that though the handbook did not change current practice, he acknowledged the public’s concern and said the new council should consider it.

“I think that it’s probably in the best interest for the town if it doesn’t go forward tonight,” he said.

Doug Kelly, a candidate who lost in the Nov. 5 contest, said passage of the handbook without the new members would betray the will of the voters.

“It’s not collegiate. It’s not working well with others. It’s not listening to the town and I don’t think it’s going to work out very well,” he said.

As part of the second vote, the town also voted unanimously to repeal a portion of the code governing quorums at meetings, which indicated that members of the public could go to councilmember’s houses and demand they attend meetings.

“I think that’s an extremely odd and problematic revision to have in the code,” Coleson said.