Rehoboth’s meeting procedure needs work

Rehoboth Beach officials recently broke from 60 years of tradition when they decided to eliminate workshops and make every meeting a voting meeting. At the same time, they also decided to allow a topic to be introduced and voted on in the same meeting.

The changes were made in the name of efficiency.

“We have no intent to limit or stifle public input. The purpose of this change is to provide the board with flexibility to act when an issue has been adequately noticed, publicly discussed and is ripe for consideration,” said Mayor Stan Mills in a statement that appeared on the city’s website soon after the changes were made in December.

Commissioners didn’t waste any time taking advantage of the new rules, approving code changes related to special-event applications and awarding a contract for the annual water meter replacement program during their first subsequent meeting.

The meeting agenda and support documents for both items were included online well in advance of the meeting, but wording on the agenda for the special-events topic doesn’t indicate what commissioners were specifically going to be considering.

Instead, prior to the meeting, a member of the public considering whether or not the topic was worth showing up to comment on would have had to read through the agenda item report, a red-line version of the affected code, and the city’s schedule of fees and penalties to fully comprehend the staff recommendations.

Also, the discussion during the meeting didn’t get into the specific recommendations. It was an overview of the agenda item report, and commissioners barely discussed the topic. The changes – primarily the creation of a tiered system for use of the Bandstand – were approved unanimously.

We recognize this new system is still a work in progress, but this is not how alterations to code should be made. No matter how seemingly simple they are, code changes deserve a public vetting of all the proposed revisions at one meeting, and then an opportunity for people to comment at a following meeting. Otherwise, public input will be limited and stifled.