My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-08-24-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2024
>
04-08-24-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/5/2024 2:41:08 PM
Creation date
4/5/2024 2:34:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
247
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
discussion, and then Council, by majority, would direct to have it placed on a future <br />agenda or not. <br />• If the item is directed for future discussion, the Council would either place it on the <br />subsequent agenda or have Staff bring it back at a future meeting. <br />For example, at the at the end of a meeting Council would review the next work session agenda. <br />If a Councilmember wanted to add a topic to that meeting or for future discussion, they could <br />raise the topic, make their case as to why they want to discuss it and one other Council would <br />need to agree to wanting it on a future meeting, and at least a majority of the Council would <br />direct Staff to place it on an agenda or not. <br />This would also solve the issue of a single Councilmember bringing a concern forward, i.e. the <br />entire Council would agree to move it forward or not. It would also address resident initiatives, if <br />a resident were to approach a member of the Council or the whole Council during Public <br />Comment, during this review period Council as a whole, could either direct Staff to move an <br />initiative forward for more discussion or not. <br />It should be noted that under this guidance, Staff will still need to bring items forward for <br />discussion, and will require some flexibility in -terms of adding items to agendas without Council <br />having vetted them first. It is assumed Staff items will be operational in nature, while Council's <br />will be policy in nature. Also, exceptions may need to be made for Councilmembers adding <br />items if they are time -sensitive and have a significant impact to the City that could also not wait <br />for the normal Council vetting process. <br />If Council wants to move forward with a policy similar to the above, or suggest additional edits, <br />Staff can draft a policy for approval at the next Council meeting. <br />Regarding Council priorities, Staff compiled a list under Attachment A of recent items Council <br />has ranked in terms of items to consider. Many of the items are up for consideration at this work <br />session and/or later in April. Staff would recommend Council review this list in addition to their <br />upcoming agendas at each work session. <br />Lastly, Council may want to consider removing the standing item of Council Tracker on the <br />agenda for each work session and replace with it with the aforementioned above agenda review <br />and priorities list; however, if we do this Staff would recommend Council not regularly skip this <br />item on the agenda. <br />Budget Impact <br />N/A <br />Attachment <br />Attachment A: Ranked Council Priorities for Upcoming Discussions <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.