CC_Minutes_2010_0104 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

DRAFT Regular City Council Meeting Monday, January 04, 2010 Page 8 specifically with curfew issues as detailed in his alternate language, with the rul- ing of the Mayor as a first step rather than stopping to take a vote and upsetting the flow of discussion. Mayor Klausing, based on his observations in administering the meetings, noted the need to do something to make the current Rule #6 more consistent; and con- curred that the first sentence, as suggested by Councilmember Roe, should be stricken. Mayor Klausing expressed his preference for language in paragraph two in Attachment B from City Manager Malinen. Councilmember Ihlan expressed her preference for Mayor Klausing's proposed language as the simplest and most direct. Councilmember Johnson concurred with Mayor Klausing's language as well By consensus, the first sentence was stricken. Mayor Klausing read his proposed language for Rule #6, minus that first sentence. Klausing moved, Ihlan seconded, to amend Rule #6 of the Roseville City Council Rules of Procedure deleting the first sentence and deleting the second paragraph in the current version (dated Apri121, 2008); hereafter to read as follows: "The Council recognizes that meetings are for the benefit of the citizens of Rose- ville so Council meetings will end by 10:00 p. m. Councilmember meetings may be extended upon the vote of the City Council, but at no time will a meeting run past 11:00 p. m. If Council business remains on the agenda, the Council may con- tinue the meeting to a future date or table such items until the next meeting, if needed. " Roll Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing. Nays: None. Klausing moved, [Johnson] seconded, approval of the Council Rules of proce- dures as amended. Roe moved, Johnson seconded, as an amendment to the motion, adoption of "Rosenberg's Rules of Order: Simple Parliamentary Procedures for the 21St Cen- tury" (Attachment C) to the Request for Council Action dated January 4, 2010. Mayor Klausing offered his support for the motion, noting that nothing prevented action consistent with Roberts Rules of Order if an issue became more compli- cated than those Rules of Order in Rosenberg's procedures.