My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2002_0107
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2002
>
CC_Minutes_2002_0107
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:37:47 AM
Creation date
6/20/2006 11:34:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
1/7/2002
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
<br />ROSEVILLE CITY COUNCIL <br />COMMENTS ON PROPOSED STANDING <br />RULES AND PROCEDURES <br /> <br />1. As a general comnlent, the current Rules and Procedures should be revie\ved to <br />see if there is even a need to revise. If there is no consensus that changes are <br />necessary, no Inodification is needed. However, if changes are necessary, <br />Inodifications should be Inade to the existing Rules and Procedures unless it is <br />determined at a public hearing that a conlplete revision is necessary. At a <br />Ininimum, a copy of the current Rules and Procedures should be provided to the <br />City Council and the general public for review prior to any action taken by the <br />City Council. <br /> <br />2. Rule 2- This Rule should be lTIodified to separate Work Sessions froln City <br />Council Meetings and schedule thenl on separate days. By separating these <br />meetings it guarantees that the public \vill have a better chance to be involved and <br />provide their input. In addition, it allows time between a City Council Meeting <br />and a Work Session for an applicant, the general public, or the City to study a <br />matter currently before the City Council. At a nlininl1illl, scheduling a public <br />n1eeting at 5:30 PM almost guarantees that lTIen1bers of the general public \vill not <br />be able to participate. <br /> <br />3. Rule 3- This Rule should be Inodified pursuant to the comn1ents above. In <br />addition, the topic of Public Comment should always be scheduled before the City <br />Council starts on the other agenda itelns scheduled for hearing on that date. I <br />would also think that Approval of Minutes of prior meetings and the Consent <br />Agenda should be at the top of the Agenda followed by Public Comnlent. <br /> <br />Why would the Mayor and the City Manager be responsible for the preparation of <br />the Agenda? The City Manager and his staff are 1110re than capable in ternlS of <br />drafting the Agenda for a scheduled Work Session, or City Council Meeting. If a <br />City Council Member, or the Mayor has a specific question regarding an Agenda <br />item they can address that ll1atter with the City Manager. This is a nlanagelnent <br />issue of the City and would be best handled by the City Manager and his staff. <br />This language should be Inodified accordingly. <br /> <br />4. Rule 4- What do the current Rules and Procedures specify in this situation? <br /> <br />5 Rule 5- \\That do the current Rules and Procedures specify in this situation? If the <br />current Rules and Procedures are silent regarding this 111atter, this 111ay be an issue <br />the City Council should address. <br /> <br />6. Rule 6- What do the current Rules and Procedures specify in this situation? <br /> <br />7. Rule 7- \Vhat do the current Rules and Procedures specify in this situation? <br />This rule appears to be unnecessary. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.