My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007_0226_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2007
>
2007_0226_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/10/2012 12:37:15 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:20:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
205
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
] <br />� <br />� <br />4 <br />� <br />� <br />� <br />� <br />c� <br />�� <br />11 <br />]� <br />] ;� <br />14 <br />15 <br />1 t� <br />1T <br />Rosev'rl�e City Council Meeting Minutes <br />Special Meeting of February 10,2007 <br />Page 3 <br />Councilmember Pust suggested Councilmembers make every effort to reduce as <br />much paper as possible to facilitate responsible environmental conservation. <br />Councilmember Kough arrived at this time; and Mayor K�ausing briefly summa- <br />rized discussion to-date and the next discussion of proposed Rule 4 from City <br />Manager Malinen's memorandum. <br />Discussion ensued regarding proposed Rule 1 entitled "Timing of Council Packet <br />Formation and Delivery," and Rule 3 entitled "City Council-Requested Items and <br />Location on Agendas." Discussion included the goal as well as the reality of al- <br />lowing 10 days advance notice for an item appearing on the agenda; location of <br />those items on the agenda; whether items should be limited to Work Sessions; <br />waiting period for discussion of items of interest to individual Councilmembers; <br />and First Amendment rights and representative government concerns in limiting <br />individual Councilmembers' ability to bring forth items. <br />1� Councilmembers, by consensus, agreed that receiving DRAFT agendas in elec- <br />1�� tronic format rather than paper would be sufficient for information and would <br />�� avoid confusion with the FINAL agenda in paper format. <br />�� ] <br />�� Councilmember Ihlan supported using Rule 3 as a guideline in bringing items to <br />�� Work Sessions, but would r��� support the provision that items could be placed on <br />�� a Council agenda at the request of at least two Councilmembers, and not by indi- <br />�5 vidual request. <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�l <br />�� <br />3� <br />� <br />��� <br />� <br />�� <br />�� <br />Councilmember Kough concurred. <br />Mayor Klausing opined that he interpreted the provision as a response to previous <br />concerns voiced by Councilmember Ihlan regarding pursuing items and balancing <br />the rights of individual Councilmembers while allowing the body to manage their <br />meeting agendas. <br />Councilmember Pust opined that in accordance with current rules there was no vot- <br />ing at the Work Session and even if a minority wanted to have an issue voted on, if <br />new items were considered only at a Work Session a vote was prevented on that <br />topic with no representative option for a vote up or down. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.