The bold new world of doing the public’s business under a pandemic emergency raises more questions than elected leaders can easily answer, including where they do it.

Denver City Council made history on April 6 when it conducted its first-ever virtual meeting, an attempt to maintain social distancing yet continue governing while COVID-19 remains a threat.

The Monday evening meeting was derailed by technical issues, however, as members attempted to do a hybrid-style meeting with seven members gathered physically in the council chambers (albeit far apart), and six participating online through the virtual meeting platform Zoom. The latter group was disconnected mid-meeting, and their voices and votes went unaccounted for.

A day later, in an email obtained by Colorado Politics, Council President Jolon Clark distributed to the council a document of legal guidelines that included a “strong recommendation” to always have at least seven members in the chambers, and to cancel the meetings if the quorum cannot be met.

“It was never more evident that we need that fail safe than when the technology did not cooperate last night,” Clark wrote to his colleagues Tuesday evening. “(Your) willingness to be present eases the stress on those among our membership who are high risk, or have someone close to them who is sick, and I am grateful for your willingness to come down, and also to those of you who have made it clear to me that you will come in if/when we need a 7th.”

Clark’s email was part of a longer thread initiated by Councilwoman Candi CdeBaca, who asked why all members could not participate in meetings using the same platform. She was one of the members who joined the meeting online on Monday night.

“If there are councilmembers who insist on sitting in the big cushy dais seats, can they use their laptops with headphones so you have a full Zoom call instead of an impossible combination of echoes and tiny people buzzing around the chambers while Zoom participants wait for an effective meeting?” she wrote.

Councilwoman Jamie Torres responded less than 10 minutes later and referred to the city charter’s quorum rules, which, up until the council made a recent amendment, did not allow virtual meetings.

“I’m not there just to sit in ‘big cushy dais seats,'” Torres retorted, “I’m there to help ensure we have quorum in the room.”

Councilman Kevin Flynn also weighed in to back up Torres, adding that “for the time being until we have a clear legal foundation for all-virtual meetings, having at least seven in the chamber each Monday will provide an indisputable quorum under the charter and inoculate us from process challenges to actions we take.

“It may be necessary to have more than seven in the chamber if we anticipate that a member who is present in the chamber may be voting no on an item,” he continued, “as could be the case next week.”

Flynn on Wednesday evening did not immediately respond to Colorado Politics’ request for more information about what could be a debated item on next week’s council meeting agenda.

Councilwoman Kendra Black chimed in not long after Flynn to reaffirm her commitment to “coming to the Council Chamber to vote each week for legal reasons you mention and because it is my job. The state’s stay at home order exempts municipal government for a reason.

“Of course, there are some real health concerns that prevent some members from attending,” she added. “Our meetings are open to the public, and staff has to be there. We should be there too.”

Her response rubbed CdeBaca the wrong way.

“Thanks for the clarification on your job description and interpretation of our federal, state and local stay at home orders,” she wrote back to Black. “Pure brilliance. I never thought of either.”

Clark over the phone on Wednesday night remarked on the tense exchange.

“Everybody is struggling, and everybody is feeling stressed out. This is a hard time for all of us as we are separated from our loved ones,” he said, adding that his mother recently had to celebrate her 75th birthday alone due to stay-at-home orders.

“Show me any group of people in the city who are not stressed out as they’re working to continue to function. I don’t know that I’ve seen in it,” he said. “We’re all human beings and we’re trying to figure this out the best we can and do the best we can.”

At the end of the day, Clark said, it’s a matter of having “to weigh and contemplate how are we living up to our charter responsibility and our open meetings responsibility of having open and transparent government.”

The state legislature is struggling with the same issue. On Wednesday the Executive Committee, made up of leaders from both parties and both chambers, discussed moving deliberations online during the state emergency.

After a long discussion, they decided to continue to pursue options, especially for legislators vulnerable to the disease or who live with people who are. They concluded, however, that holding the remainder of the legislative session online would be difficult to accomplish efficiently and could lead to legal hurdles.