CC_Minutes_2007_0206 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Roseville City Council - Minutes of 2/06/07 Special Meeting Pg30f 10 Councilmember Kough spoke of his frustrations in not being able to bring something up on a Council agenda that had just come to his attention, when he couldn't meet the Wednesday noon deadline, and his desire to represent his constituents by dealing with their concerns in a more immediate manner. Councilmember Kough advocated for a Councilmember's right to bring up issues at any time for the body to consider. Councilmember Kough opined that he tried not to make up his mind regarding how he will vote until after the discussion is held at the meeting, specifically regarding land use issues, and the need to receive and encourage public comment without limit, as currently practiced. City Manager Malinen noted the need to avoid redundancy, the challenge in enforcing rules related to eliminating redundancy, and the need for the body, as well as the public, to be respectful of the process. Mr. Malinen noted several items already addressed: paperless packet concepts; getting draft agendas with more advance notice; and ways to implement discussion in Study Session to provide sufficient discussion prior to considering action at a regular business meeting. Mr. Malinen offered his, and staffs, support for assisting the City Council to process information over a longer period of time; and using a "three-prong" approach to issues to provide Council consideration and discussion at more than one opportunity for better decision-making. Councilmember Pust opined that she was encouraged to hear tonight's discussion; and that, obviously, each individual needed to remind themselves to be respectful of each other, and to continue to work on those communication skills. Councilmember Pust shared several suggestions, and responses, to previous comments of Councilmembers Ihlan and Kough regarding how to improve Council processes: I) Councilmember Pust opined that the Council meeting was not the "Council's" but the "public's" and should end on time for the good of the participating and/or viewing public, as well as for the Council's ability to make good decisions in a timely manner. 2) Councilmember Pust suggested that the City Council examine and further review the current practice of hearing additional, often- repetitive public comment at the Council level for land use cases, when the legally-noticed Public Hearing was heard at the Planning Commission level; and whether it was appropriate to hear testimony at the Council level when those meetings are not noticed as Public Hearings for land use cases.