My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2017_0109
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2017
>
CC_Minutes_2017_0109
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/21/2017 2:47:31 PM
Creation date
1/30/2017 10:00:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
1/9/2017
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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, January 09, 2017 <br />Page 21 <br />Councilinember Etten stated his understanding of the order of Itein 7(Business <br />Iteins) to be deter�nined by staff given their iinportance, urgency and public inter- <br />est in a particular item; but sought clarification as to how that detennination <br />would be made. <br />City Manager Tnidgeon responded that it would be fluid and based on a combina- <br />tion of things. , Mr. Trudgeon noted that he moved approval of ineeting ininutes <br />and the consent agenda to the end of the agenda. However, if something was re- <br />inoved from the consent agenda, Mr. Trudgeon noted his intent was to deal with it <br />at the beginning of section 7 out of respect for staff and their tiine. For the rest, <br />Mr. Trudgeon opined that it depended on what topics were inost important to deal <br />with that night. <br />Councilmember Etten agreed with shifting some items, opining that often some <br />important things were left until late at night; but questioned the proposed location <br />of iteins removed from consent as there inay be questions of staff requiring their <br />continued presence. <br />Discussion ensued on the consent agenda regarding asking questions of staff be- <br />fore the meeting; retaining the discipline of the consent agenda; and the key to <br />getting that infonnation before a motion. <br />While understanding the concerns expressed by Councilmember Etten, Coun- <br />cihnember Willmus stated his interest in giving the proposed order a try to see <br />how it worlced. Councilmember Willinus noted his interest in reordering the <br />agenda to focus on putting public hearings and action consideration at the front <br />end before a series of presentations and typically those iteins for which the public <br />may be in attendance, seelcing respect for their time as well. <br />Councilmeinber McGehee concurred with Councilmember Wilhnus' suggestion <br />to give the proposed order a try. However, specific to questions on consent items, <br />Councilmember McGehee noted that while she may have already talked to staff <br />on a particular itein, she occasionally removed it from the consent agenda to make <br />a point. Councihnember McGhee agreed with scrolling items 5 and 10 on the <br />screen versus taking up meeting time. <br />Mayor Roe noted another option for item 5 may be the practice of some other city <br />councils to make live announcements at the end of the meeting rather than at the <br />beginning. Mayor Roe suggested putting announcements on the screen, but if just <br />received that day, they could be added to the end; while keeping recognitions at <br />the front. <br />Mayor Roe opined that he liked the idea of the fiiture agenda review scrolled, but <br />opined he'd like it lcept on the agenda as well. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.