My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2002_0107_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2002
>
2002_0107_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/16/2017 3:29:03 PM
Creation date
10/25/2010 1:45:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
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
�O"�`�e�5. <br />December 25, 2001 <br />Dear Greg <br />You had asked for comments and reactions to your recent memo suggesting changes in the <br />Council operating procedures. <br />First of all let me discuss generally the concerns I see: <br />In my opinion, several of the suggested rules may conflict with statute. If the Council starts off <br />with questionable procedures, they could be opening themselves up to legal challenges from <br />persons who do not get their variances, land use changes, or rezonings. The essence of their <br />challenges would center on the fact that the operating rules are contrary to statutes and therefore <br />the Council actions are not legal. While I am not an attorney, we both have seen in our <br />municipal experience, a number of new and novel approaches by attorneys that have been <br />upheld. <br />The new procedures are also setting up the Council for action by employees or contractors. <br />Should the Council choose to terminate a City Manager or a contract, a strong argument could be <br />made that under the new rules, the Council was not legally constituted and therefore not able to <br />take a legal action. <br />Needless to say, even if the courts did rule in the Council favor on any issue, these rules <br />unnecessarily ❑put blood in the water- and would encourage more lawsuits resulting in even <br />higher costs to the taxpayer. <br />Secondly and in my mind probably the most important, is that the new rules take away your vote <br />as a council member. Currently the Mayors' position is as presiding officer, but otherwise he or <br />she has no more power or a stronger vote or role than any other individual council member. The <br />Mayors' position does tend to be more out-front as a community representative, but this is <br />primarily a perfunctory role. <br />What the proposed rules do is to provide the Mayor with power, which may be used against you <br />or any other Council member. Let me specific. <br />A. Allows only the presiding officer to present petitions, memorials or other <br />communications. (You have now lost your voice). <br />B. Allows the Mayor to set the seating arrangement and voting order. That <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.