My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007_0326_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2007
>
2007_0326_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/10/2012 12:38:43 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:20:48 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.
/
273
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
City Council Study Session <br />Monday, March 19,2007 <br />Page 3 <br />1 Councilmember Ihlan opined that the Ethics Commission should provide in- <br />� put in selecting speakers and/or topics for seminars or educational opportu- <br />;� nities for the City Council and staff; in addition to providing for an annual <br />� review of the Code of Ethics, providing for a degree of independence in their <br />5 review and making recommendations to the City Council. Councilmember <br />� Ihlan noted that, while the reinstatement of the Ethics Commission had been <br />� a unanimous City Council vote, the input as to make up and operating pro- <br />8 cedures was not unanimous; and she was supportive of an annual review of <br />+� the Code. <br />1 L� <br />1 t Further discussion included past operating procedures and their availability; <br />1� additional background information; whether or not to have a procedure; and <br />�:� whether the Commission should participate in training, with or without con- <br />14 straints. <br />J� <br />1 [� <br />1� <br />18 <br />1� <br />�.0 <br />�1 <br />��� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�6 <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�1 <br />�� <br />�3 <br />�� <br />�� <br />�6 <br />�� <br />�8 <br />�� <br />Mayor Klausing recognized the value of citizen advisory commissions and <br />their varying perspectives and areas of expertise. <br />Commissioner Pederson addressed details related to procedures for handling <br />complaints; and the preference for creating an explicit procedure that was <br />available prior to receipt of complaints. <br />Discussion included whether the City Council or Ethics Commission should <br />create such a procedure; and preferences for being proactive. <br />Mayor Klausing cautioned the need to consider potential legal issues or legal <br />liability for the City and the need to involve the City Manager andlor City <br />Attorney in the initial conversations prior to making a commitment and in an <br />effort to remain consistent in advisory opinions. <br />Commissioner Pederson clarified that the Ethics Commission was not envi- <br />sioning providing an opinion, but looking to the City Council for authority <br />to explore the issue and create a procedure with the City Attorney. <br />Councilmember Ihlan opined her support of being proactive; and cited the <br />City of Minneapolis' Ethics Code and their procedure as a good example. <br />Further discussion included the Ethics Commission providing a portion at <br />the beginning of their meetings for public comment, within reason and sub�- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.