CC_Minutes_2015_0105 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,January 5,2015 Page 15 Under that proposed scenario, Councilmember Etten noted that public comment would be coming back to back. As the maker of the motion, Councilmember McGehee noted that the documents brought forward by Councilmember Etten as the seconder of the motion had been public documents for years, and seemed to her not necessary for receiving public comment as part of this process. However, Councilmember McGehee expressed her support for receiving public comment once the City Council and staff process was complete, but not between pulling together documents, but providing the public's evaluation of what the City Council and staff had done in advance of the summary being drawn up but after public feedback to allow altering things if so indicated. Mayor Roe questioned if this was not in the same spirit of what Councilmember Willmus was proposing. Councilmember Willmus opined that the interpretation by Councilmember McGehee stilled missed allowing public comment during the process. Councilmember McGehee suggested returning to Councilmember Etten's defini- tion of a leadership retreat, opining that it was up to the City Council to figure out how to work together and establish priorities on issues the community had already vetted in writing. Councilmember McGehee opined that she therefore didn't see the need for the leadership retreat requiring more public input along the way, but was supportive of receiving it after the fact and before final adoption of the sum- mary. Councilmember McGehee noted that the public could always communicate with individual Councilmembers throughout the process by phone, in writing or via e-mail as usual. Mayor Roe ruled that the proposed friendly amendment was not considered friendly by the maker and seconder of the original motion. Councilmember Laliberte expressed her disagreement with Councilmember McGehee's comments, opining that the Imagine Roseville 2025 and Comprehen- sive Plan had been out there awhile, and that was her problem, that they had been out there for awhile. Therefore, Councilmember Laliberte noted the value of a fresh annual survey. While not necessarily in favor of a separate and second or third meeting for hearing public comment, Councilmember Laliberte suggested making it part of Session 1 to allow the public to weigh in if they felt the issues of the day are not addressed in existing documents. Councilmember Laliberte opined that she thought the feedback received in the community survey was very good, with some carrying over and some new input. In her personal research on Mr. Rapp, Councilmember Laliberte advised that she had reached out to four different council members from three different communi-