My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2024_0311
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2024
>
CC_Minutes_2024_0311
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/9/2024 1:53:58 PM
Creation date
4/9/2024 1:53:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
3/11/2024
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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,March 11,2024 <br /> Page 15 <br /> Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 8:00 p.m., and reconvened at <br /> approximately 8:08 p.m. <br /> Mayor Roe opened the meeting for public comment. <br /> Public Comment <br /> Mayor Roe offered an opportunity for public comment. <br /> Ms.Jeena Gurung Vomhof, HRIEC Commissioner <br /> Ms. Gurung Vomhof stated she liked the conversation and back and forth between <br /> the Council. She explained she is the only member that wants compensation, and <br /> she wanted the Council to give that as an option. She is a mom to two kids and has <br /> to answer to her husband by going to the meeting for two to three hours so she <br /> thought if she had compensation, she could do more because she knows she will be <br /> compensated for her time, and she can provide to her family. Also,being a business <br /> owner in the community, she gets contacted by many people about the commissions <br /> and how it works and asks about compensation as well. She explained they want to <br /> give back to the City but do need compensation for that because they need <br /> babysitters. <br /> Mr. David Tidball, HRIEC Commissioner <br /> Mr. Tidball expressed his appreciation for the seriousness the Council is taking in <br /> this discussion. He was at the joint meeting in February where the Commission had <br /> a chance to talk to the Council. He explained he has been taking notes and a couple <br /> of notions he would like to share is that he heard some things about evaluative <br /> processes that he had not heard before. Talking about Culture Brokers and wanting <br /> a group of citizens to follow up on what the City is doing with its DEI processes, <br /> policies, and things like that. Personally, he thought that was a good idea, but the <br /> Commission specifically toned that down in the new scope because the folks that <br /> had history on the Commission indicated it was not something they had been doing <br /> in the past. The second thing was about human rights is not so much about <br /> regulating that as promoting it.Again,the educated piece of that and simply holding <br /> that up as an important thing seems valuable to him and as far as the Commission <br /> goes, might be another aspect of how the Commission's work can be structured. <br /> Mr. Tidball stated the thing that interests him, that he has not heard about, is that <br /> several Commissioners at the last meeting noted how much of what the <br /> Commission has put in its scope document is what came out of the aspirations <br /> process. The kind of community that people think Roseville aspires to involves the <br /> kind of work that the Commission talked about in the scope document. There may <br /> be a way for the City,because the aspirations are going to have to be implemented <br /> on an ongoing basis, somebody is going to have to have input on an ongoing basis <br /> as to how that happens, how broad a scope of input you get into seeing, and how <br /> that happens. Mr. Tidball stated it seems to him, working with that content which <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.