My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2012_0827
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2012
>
CC_Minutes_2012_0827
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/12/2012 8:48:05 AM
Creation date
9/11/2012 10:44:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/27/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
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,August 27,2012 <br /> Page 23 <br /> Recognizing that this issue is divisive, Mr. Oren expressed his disturbance in <br /> the City Council being put in the position to speak for who he is as a Roseville <br /> citizen; or telling me what he's going to say or to speak on his behalf. As serv- <br /> ants of the City of Roseville, and if individual Councilmembers felt strongly one <br /> way or the other on this issue, Mr. Oren suggested that they— as individuals — <br /> work hard for that particular side, but not to do so as an officer of the City of <br /> Roseville. Mr. Oren opined that it was the job of the City Council to support <br /> the entire City,not one group or another, but the whole City. As a Roseville cit- <br /> izen, Mr. Oren asked that the City not tell him how to think <br /> Anne Collopy,3155 Old Highway 8 <br /> Ms. Collopy clarified that she was speaking only for herself as a Roseville citi- <br /> zen, not for any other agency or group. Ms. Collopy recognized that this was an <br /> emotional issue with strong opinions held by all. However, Ms. Collopy echoed <br /> the comments of a previous speaker that this was not an issue for the City <br /> Council to take a position either way. While having heard the arguments on <br /> both sides, Ms. Collopy advised that she looked at it from a different angle,hav- <br /> ing come from a family of teachers, and recognizing that words are very power- <br /> ful and have many definitions and meanings. When taking such an important <br /> term as "marriage," Ms. Collopy opined that one could not be intellectually <br /> honest from the perspective of world civilizations, take the word to mean any- <br /> thing other than what it was originally intended to mean. For a special interest <br /> group to take that term and say it means something other than what you've al- <br /> ways understood it to mean and thereby change the definition of that word, Ms. <br /> Collopy opined that you were then manipulating language in law, with stagger- <br /> ing consequences that would carry over in all levels of government and legal as- <br /> sociations. Ms. Collopy opined that this was a critical issue; and for statements <br /> to be made about hostility toward gay people if one disagreed with their posi- <br /> tion; or leaving an impression that one's disagreement with a position indicated <br /> hatred was nothing more than bullying. Ms. Collopy asked that the language of <br /> the constitution not be manipulated. <br /> Tom Schroud, 1142 Rose Place <br /> Mr. Schroud referenced other items on tonight's agenda in comparison to this <br /> item on the proposed marriage amendment; and opined that its inclusion on a <br /> City Council agenda was completely out-of-line. Mr. Schroud took issue with <br /> the comments of the HRC Chair, opining that they were blatantly false; and flat- <br /> ly rejected the HRC comments and their resolution. Mr. Schroud further opined <br /> that, if a citizen disagreed with any of the State's laws, there was a process <br /> through their legislative delegation to address those concerns in a different <br /> method. Mr. Schroud opined that the right to marriage was not a civil right; and <br /> for the City Council to get involved in this political issue when other elected of- <br /> ficials are already in place to address it, was attempting to supercede their pow- <br /> ers, and was not their job. Mr. Schroud opined that it was the job of the City <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.