SYRACUSE -- Two city council members have requested a special Jan. 31 meeting so a resolution regarding council appointments can be reconsidered.
The meeting is to be held at Syracuse City Hall immediately following a 6 p.m. training session, which the council scheduled with Utah League of Cities and Towns legal counsel Gary Crane.
Attempts to reach the two council members, Karianne Lisonbee and Craig A. Johnson, for comment were unsuccessful.
In an email to City Recorder Cassie Brown, Lisonbee stated she wanted to have on the special meeting's agenda the reconsideration of Resolution 12-02 regarding council appointments "in order to bring the actions of the council in line with state and municipal code," said City Attorney Will Carlson.
The request for the two-item meeting by the two newly elected council members comes on the heels of an effort at a Jan. 10 council meeting by Johnson and Councilmen Matt Kimmel and Larry Shingleton to appoint Shingleton to the North Davis Sewer District Board as the city's representative.
The council voted 3-1 to have Shingleton replace Councilman Douglas Peterson on the sewer board. Peterson opposed the action, and Lisonbee abstained from voting.
The sewer board appointment pays up to $5,000 a year.
But the effort by the majority of the council was thwarted by legal staff representing Syracuse, the sewer district and the ULCT.
Attorneys representing those groups concluded the council overstepped its bounds because Mayor Jamie Nagle, as the city's chief executive officer, makes the appointment recommendations and because Peterson was appointed to the district board in June to fill Kimmel's unexpired four-year appointment. That term does not conclude until the end of 2013.
The council removed Kimmel from the board at the request of sewer district officials after ethics questions arose surrounding Kimmel.
The matter has since been turned over to the Davis County Attorney's Office for investigation.
With the exception of the email Lisonbee and Johnson sent to the city, Nagle said she has had no communication with the pair, despite reaching out to them.
The concern is that, should Lisonbee and Johnson challenge the opinion of the attorneys who have been consulted on the city's appointments, it will only result in a public relations black eye for the city, Nagle said.
Carlson said he doesn't know whether Lisonbee and Johnson want to challenge the city's decision to leave Peterson on the board or if they simply want to clarify the council's earlier action.
The second item Lisonbee and Johnson asked to be heard involves a proposal to provide residents with some type of hardship waiver to avoid having to pay a $10 delinquent charge on their water bills. The council recently imposed the fee to cover the city's costs in having to collect on nonpayments.