My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2023_0911
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2023
>
CC_Minutes_2023_0911
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/26/2023 3:37:55 PM
Creation date
9/26/2023 3:37:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
9/11/2023
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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, September 11, 2023 <br /> Page 8 <br /> Mayor Roe explained the normal process for a future agenda item would be to have it on <br /> for the next meeting in Section 8, to have guidance from the Council as to how to do it. <br /> He asked if there was any desire on the part of the Council to bypass that process and put <br /> it on the agenda without that step. <br /> Councilmember Strahan thought that the Council could do that. She knew the City <br /> Attorney would be absent, which might be their primary consideration. She asked the <br /> City Attorney Tierney if she would be back in two weeks' time. <br /> City Attorney Tierney indicated she would be back. <br /> Councilmember Strahan thought the Council could consider adding this topic to the <br /> agenda in two weeks when City Attorney Tierney is at the meeting for guidance and <br /> counsel. <br /> Mayor Roe asked if there was any Council objection to putting this item on the agenda in <br /> two weeks. <br /> Councilmember Etten wondered how much more would the City know in two weeks. He <br /> indicated the City Council had a flurry of information over the weekend, things seem to <br /> keep shifting, and he does not want to prejudge this and move too fast. He thought one of <br /> the concerns is that the State Legislature did not take their time to talk to the people who <br /> are affected by this, whether it is the teachers, schools, cities, or police departments, so he <br /> did not want the City to jump in the same way. If the City Attorney comes back and says <br /> they will be ready to have a robust discussion on September 25th, that is fine but if the <br /> City Attorney comes back and indicates she did not know how the attorneys can handle <br /> all of this and have really robust discussion, then he does not want to push it <br /> unnecessarily. <br /> Mayor Roe indicated this topic could be placed on the September 25th agenda and then if <br /> that needs to change,based on what can be accomplished by staff and the attorney by that <br /> time, an adjustment can be made to the October 9th meeting. <br /> Councilmember Schroeder indicated there is a process. <br /> Mayor Roe stated after discussion, he determined the City Council did have sufficient <br /> objection to bypassing the normal process for councilmember-initiated items, so the item <br /> would be placed in Section 8 of the September 18th agenda per the process in the council <br /> rules. <br /> 12. Adjourn <br /> Etten moved, Strahan seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 6:52 p.m. <br /> Roll Call <br /> Ayes: Strahan, Etten, Schroeder, Groff, and Roe. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.