The Crestwood Board of Aldermen will operate under new rules governing conduct when it next meets on Tuesday, July 26.

Aldermen recently voted 6-2 to approve an ordinance governing conduct at board meetings, including adopting Robert’s Rules of Order. The ordinance also establishes rules and order of business, rules of debate, procedures for public comment and aldermanic attendance at meetings by teleconferencing or videoconferencing.

Board members Richard Breeding of Ward 1 and Jerry Miguel of Ward 3 were opposed.

Board President Grant Mabie of Ward 3 began working on the ordinance a few months ago.

More recently, he worked with City Administrator Kris Simpson and City Attorney Lisa Stump on the measure.

Board members first discussed the ordinance at their May 24 meeting, with Ward 4 Alderman Tim Anderson suggesting several amendments to the measure.

After a lengthy discussion, Mayor Gregg Roby noted three aldermen were absent — Justin Charboneau of Ward 2, Breeding and Miguel — and said he believed all eight aldermen should be present to discuss the proposed ordinance.

Aldermen agreed to postpone consideration of the measure until their June 14 meeting, when a first reading of an amended ordinance was approved, after several amendments were made to the measure.

On June 28, aldermen again discussed the ordinance at length, making several amendments, before voting to give final approval to the measure.

The approved ordinance allows the board to bring charges against an alderman “who violates the confidentiality of a discussion at a closed meeting … or who releases a record validly closed under the Missouri Sunshine Law.” An alderman found guilty of such a charge could be removed from office with a supermajority vote of the full board, according to the ordinance.

“That sentence is actually an insertion proposed by the city attorney, if I’m not mistaken,” Mabie told the Call, adding that such language is included in “a substantial minority” of other city codes.

“… If you read Robert’s Rules, the way they phrase it is — and Robert’s Rules talks in terms of executive sessions rather than closed sessions and some municipalities use that term as well — and they talk about members are honor bound not to reveal things that are confidential,” he said.

“State law provides — it doesn’t provide the penalty, but it provides the prohibition, and I don’t believe it’s statutory, I believe it’s just in the case law and it’s really derived from almost a spinoff of I guess the common law and when an attorney has an organizational client — whether it’s a corporation, a board of directors or a city council, a governmental client — and it’s who has the power to decide what confidential information is revealed and it’s always the client’s prerogative … Generally, the case law provides that one member can’t choose to divulge confidential information … State law doesn’t provide a penalty, but leaves it up to each entity to decide its own penalty …”

Procedures for public comment also have been changed under the new rules.

Before 2004, residents had two opportunities to address city officials during Board of Aldermen meetings — a public comment period near the beginning of the meeting and a public comment period near the end of the meeting.

The public comment period near the beginning of the meeting was for people to speak about items not on the agenda for that particular meeting.

Since early 2004, the Board of Aldermen agenda has had a designated period for public comment for non-agenda items. In addition, residents have been allowed to address the board on all items as aldermen work their way through the agenda.

But under the new ordinance, one period for public comment will be offered in which speakers will be allowed five minutes to address the board. No additional speakers will be heard after the designated public-comment period, unless authorized by a majority of the board.

“Irrelevant, disruptive, or abusive re-marks from the public may be closed off at any time by the presiding officer …,” the ordinance states. “Questions may be asked of the mayor and city administrator. No question shall be asked of an alderman, the city attorney or any city employee other than the city administrator except through the presiding officer.”

The new ordinance also addresses decorum for city officials and residents.

Regarding residents, the ordinance states, “Any person who, after a warning from the presiding officer, continues to make impertinent, threatening or slanderous remarks or who shall become disruptive while addressing the Board of Aldermen shall be forthwith, by or at the instruction of the presiding officer, removed from the meeting and/or barred from further addressing the board, unless permission to continue be granted by a two-thirds vote of the board.”

Residents creating a disturbance or disrupting a meeting could face a fine ranging from $25 to $500.

Under the ordinance, board members’ participation at meetings via teleconferencing, videoconferencing or other electronic or remote means will not be permitted unless pre-approved by a majority of the Board of Aldermen.

“Such remote attendance must allow for simultaneous communication with the remote member,” the ordinance states.

After the board voted 6-2 to approve the ordinance, Roby said, “I’m just going to say I’m disappointed that this couldn’t be a unanimous decision. There’s obviously issues within this document that certain aldermen don’t agree with, and I will say I’ll be looking very strongly and reviewing this very thoroughly before I put my signature to it.”

Roby told the Call last week that he had signed the ordinance.

“… I would have liked for it to have been a unanimous decision, but when it wasn’t, then I wanted to know why two members of the board felt that it shouldn’t be passed,” he said. “And after speaking to both of those individuals, I determined what they’re really concerned about are some of the issues that are actually in old code, and old code throughout the city, which, of course, we’re working on.

“So there will be additional changes as we move forward that will affect those Robert’s Rules …”