My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006_0612_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2006
>
2006_0612_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 10:16:21 AM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:34:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
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.
/
250
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 Regular Meeting— OS/22/06 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 29 <br />Discussion ensued regarding process. <br />Councilmember Pust opined her support of leaving Item F in the <br />proposed code, noting the ability of a Councilmember to identify <br />themselves as speaking on their own; and opining that she saw <br />no violation of First Amendment rights in the language. <br />Councilmember Maschka expressed concern that the language <br />was vague. <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Maschka; Ihlan and Kough. <br />Nays: Klausing and Pust. <br />Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, by adding a provision identified <br />as Item "It" to Section 3(Ethical Considerations), on page 6 of <br />the Ethics Code, to add language, "Authoritv. No public official <br />shall exceed his or her authority, or breach the law, or ask others <br />to do so." <br />Discussion ensued regarding the vagueness of this proposed <br />amendment. <br />City Attorney Anderson noted that the "breach the law" language <br />was already in the proposed code; and the proposed amendment <br />should delete "...or breach the law,". .. <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke in support of the motion, opining <br />the definition of the City Council and City Manager's authority <br />and roles. <br />City Attorney Anderson advised that several of the language <br />concerns dropped from this version of the code were dropped <br />because it was determined that there were more appropriate <br />methods to address an employee, or the City Manager, exceeding <br />their authority through the City Council's disciplinary authority <br />that the City Council holds over the City Attorney and that the <br />City Manager holds over the employees under direct supervision. <br />Mayor Klausing spoke against the motion. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.