My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2011_1128
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2011
>
CC_Minutes_2011_1128
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/27/2011 1:12:47 PM
Creation date
12/27/2011 1:12:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
11/28/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,November 28, 2011 <br /> Page 8 <br /> time, while this year the functions had been separated, and results found that more <br /> efficiencies were found with a separate crew working continuously on cleaning <br /> gutters and basins; as well as operating with the City's new vacuum sweeper. <br /> Councilmember McGehee noted that she continued to hear many comments from <br /> seniors who use the leaf pickup program, since they are able to get their leaves to <br /> the street, but not able to bag them; and also had difficulty in finding a service to <br /> take care of their leaves unless they employed a lawn service contractor through- <br /> out the entire season. Councilmember McGehee stated that the comments she <br /> was fielding expressed desire that the leaf pickup program not be ended. <br /> McGehee moved, Johnson seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1421 (Attach- <br /> ment A) entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 314.05, Fee Schedule — <br /> Adopting the 2012 Fee Schedule;" as amended through revisions on bench <br /> handout to pages 7, 8 and 9; and retain $5.00 per DVD copying charge for now. <br /> Councilmember Willmus questioned if the question could be separated to address <br /> the leave pickup program from the remainder of the proposed ordinance; and so <br /> moved. <br /> Mayor Roe declared the motion failed due to lack of a second. <br /> Councilmember McGehee questioned if staff was confident that the proposed fees <br /> were consistent with other communities in the metropolitan area; with Mr. Miller <br /> expressing confidence that they were comparable. <br /> Roll Call <br /> Ayes: Willmus; Johnson; McGehee; and Roe. <br /> Nays: None. <br /> b. Consider an Ordinance Amending City Code, Chapter 302 Pertaining to <br /> Non-Renewal of Liquor License <br /> City Manager Malinen provided a brief summary of the proposed City Code <br /> Chapter 302 revisions as detailed in the RCA dated November 28, 2011 (Attach- <br /> ment A). <br /> Mayor Roe questioned language in line 27 of the proposed ordinance, and wheth- <br /> er it should be ..."suspension, revocation or `renewal' or if it should read 'NON- <br /> renewal.' <br /> City Attorney Mark Gaughan concurred with Mayor Roe, that the language <br /> should be `NON-renewal.' <br /> Johnson moved, Willmus seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1422 (Attach- <br /> ment A) entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Title Three, Section 302.15B(3) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.