City Tightens Board Appointee Rules

It wasn't supposed to be this complicated.

Requirements to hold office on the Fredericsksburg Fire Prevention Code Appeals Board are now a little bit tighter geographically speaking. In considering a measure which would have allowed non city residents to hold office on the Fire Prevention Code Appeals Board, the City Council instead voted to restrict membership on the Board of Building Code appeals to city residents by a vote of five to three.

The city uses one group of people to serve in both on both boards, citing areas of shared expertise and the small number of appeals heard by both.
But there was a kink. The two boards, despite sharing membership, had conflicting residency requirements. There is no residency requirement for the Board of Building Code Appeals, while the Fire Prevention Code Appeals Board required its members to live in city limits.

Ward Three Councilor Fred Howe was critical of stripping the residency requirement from the city code. He argued that candidates for city boards be city residents.

"For the life of me, I don't understand why we have to turn our back on the requirement," said Howe. He argued for an alternative which would, in some manner, restrict membership on both boards to city residents but still allow exceptions to appoint outsiders.

Ward Four Councilor Bea Paolucci argued against exceptions, advocating for tighter residency requirements for both boards.

Mayor Thomas Tomzak and Ward Two Councilor George Solley were in favor of looser restrictions for the two appeals boards. They argued that the technical expertise required to sit on the two boards made it necessary to broaden the pool of potential applicants for the positions.

"There are areas of expertise that are required of this board that are not required of other boards," said Solley. "We it seems like we're hamstringing ourselves just because we like the idea that we have a city resident, when in fact it allows flexibility."

Tomzak noted that despite the looser requirements, the City Council would still have the final say over all appointments.

After a point of order to bring the quasi-informal debate into line with the procedures of Roberts Rules of Order, Solley's motion to pass the measure as written – loosening residency restrictions – was taken up. Soon, At-Large Councilor Kerry Devine's proposed substitute motion  requiring city residency to hold office on the two boards was taken up as well.

A brief flurry of debate followed, including some floated alternative residency requirements pushed by Howe and Ellis which would have allowed for a mix of restrictions, Devine's motion was voted on.

By a vote of five to three, the council passed Devine's motion. Her vote was joined by Paolucci, Ellis, and Howe to defeat Tomzak, Greenlaw and Solley.