Lincoln City Council: Bateman urges aldermen to return to a committee structure

 

[June 13, 2019] 

LINCOLN 

At the Tuesday night meeting of the Lincoln City Council, newly elected alderman Kevin Bateman asked that the city council consider returning to a committee structure. Bateman is transitioning from the Logan County Board to the city council after serving with the county for several years.

On the county board a committee structure is used to address specific issues within the county departments, then summaries of decisions are taken before the full board for final discussion and voting.

Bateman said that the committee structure is far better than having a single committee of the whole board where issues are “brought forward for the first time to all of us and we try to cram it down our throat or kick the can down the road.”

In his introduction of the topic Bateman said that there were issues that could have been addressed properly and more effectively if a committee had done the work prior to the Committee of the Whole (COW). “These are all things that could have been discussed in a committee structured government without us coming here and hearing it for the first time.”

Bateman also said, “I would really like this council to consider starting a discussion about going back to some kind of committee structure government where the aldermen actually make policy, bring policy forward and change policy.

Bateman noted that he had discussed this with Aldermen Tracy Welch and Kathy Schmidt, who both were in favor of his suggestion.

City Administrator Beth Kavelman agreed with Bateman noting that she has more than 26 years of previous experience with the city of Lincoln as the clerk as well as the mayor of the city. During that time committee structure was in place and it worked very well. She noted that there was equal power within the council and that it complied with the aldermanic form of government.

Welch added that he also agreed and thought the first step should be to ask the city attorney to investigate what changes would have to be made. Welch later noted that going back to a committee form of government would alter the job description and duties of a city administrator as well as the department heads. He said that it would have to be a process.

Bateman said he knew one objection would be the added meetings for aldermen. He said he didn’t think it was as bad as some might think. He said that the city could go to a two committee structure, and stay with only four meetings a month. He said if an alderman didn’t have an interest in a specific committee meeting topic, he or she would not have to attend.

Under the Illinois Public Meetings Act, and based on the total number of aldermen on the council, there can be no discussions outside of council chambers that include more than two aldermen. Bateman said because of that, aldermen can’t talk about things before a meeting, so a lot of discussion that could take place before hand does not because there is no committee to address the topic.

Referring to his county government career, Bateman sited an example when a county committee had worked on new policy and ordinances for more than a year, hammering out all the fine details then presenting it to the board of the whole for voting. He said that process worked out very well.

Bateman had said that he wasn’t trying to re-invent the wheel. Kavelman picked up on that and said he was correct, the city would not be doing something new, they would be returning to a practice that was a success in previous councils. She noted that the committee meetings were called and usually aldermen on a given committee would meet prior to a regular or COW meeting to discuss their topics. She said an extra 30 minutes to one hour on the night of the meeting was not a large investment of time.

Kathy Horn is one of two sitting aldermen who has past experience with the committee structure. She commented that she thought the committee structure worked very well and she would be open to returning to that form of government.

Welch suggested that Bateman write a proposal for the committee structure. Hoblit asked if the council wanted him to work with Bateman. He reminded the council that earlier there had been a request that Hoblit investigate some of the legal details of going back to a committee structure.

Bateman said that he could summarize his idea. He suggested two committees, one covering infrastructure – Sewer, Streets, Building & Zoning, Building and Grounds, Police and Fire. The second committee would be a legislative committee that would handle finance, insurance and legal.

Kavelman said that she didn’t believe two committees would work. She said that there were eight aldermen so there had to be eight committees with each alderman chosen to chair one committee. She said that was the equalization of power and that an aldermanic government means equal power among all aldermen.

Steve Parrott said that there were a lot of “unknowns” that needed to be cleared up. He said that a 5 p.m. start time for meetings was not going to work for him personally and he was also not anxious to attend city meetings for four hours at a time.

Jeff Hoinacki is the other alderman who was on the council when committee structure was in place. He said his issue was the separation of departments meant that the full council didn’t have access to all the bills from all the departments. He couldn’t see where or how money was being spent if he was not on the committee for a specific department.

He noted that the aldermen do now receive monthly spreadsheets that outline the bills submitted and paid. Bateman said, yes they do and they still could. He said payment of bills would still be part of the consent agenda and that aldermen would still receive all the same financial information they do now.

Kavelman said she understood Hoinacki’s point, but at the same time the committee meetings were open to all aldermen. In addition, the aldermen did see all the bills when they signed off on them in their packets at each meeting.

Bateman talked about holding multiple committee meetings on one night. He said it could get long, but in most cases it is not.

Parrott said his objection was in the nights when those meetings did go exceptionally long. He said that four hour meetings were not good for the aldermen, they lost their (thought) track and had difficulty keeping focused when they are in discussions for such a long evening.

Welch said that the one thing he did not want to see happen was for the city body of government to become the county board. He said, “We are not the county board. Our constituents are different, our issues we deal with are different. I could support a committee structure, but I will not support a committee structure if it turns into chaos like this.” He went on to say he still wanted to see a written proposal from Bateman.

Kathy Schmidt noted that as a new member of the council, she is upset that she doesn’t always understand what is being presented in the COW and regular meetings. She feels that a committee structure would be beneficial to all because it would offer more detail and more information before the voting session and would make her feel like she was making better informed decisions.

Welch’s wife Annette is a member of the Logan County Board and has served that board for a few years now. Welch said that she has shared comments about the committee process. He said that there are times when she tells him that a meeting lasted too long because the discussion process went “on and on and on and on,” when it might not have had to.

Bateman quipped, “But I’m not there now.” Welch returned with, “No, you’re here, that’s my point.”

Bateman went on to say that he would work directly with Welch on the proposal because Welch, while Welch does support a committee structure, he has a different point of view than Bateman about what that would look like. Bateman also said that it could be made to work so that aldermen were not investing a lot more time, but would be accomplishing more.

Kavelman said she would add one last point. In the new alderman orientation packets the history of the city government had included an outline of the previous committee structure that aldermen could now look at and understand better. She added again, that for the aldermanic form of government there would have to be eight committees.

City Treasurer Chuck Conzo noted that he had worked with the finance committee back in that era and it had gone very well in his opinion. He noted on that committee there were only two members, Melody Anderson and Kathy Horn.

Welch commented “For the record, I think eight committees is too much.” Conzo replied that he thinks two committees would be too few.

At this point in time there is no action to be taken on this topic by the full council. It is expected that this topic will come back to future Committee of the Whole meetings.

[Nila Smith]