2002_0107_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Consequently, I suggest that the City Council Standing Rules of Procedure address the procedures by which the Council chooses to guide itself at Council meetings and I suggest the Council Ieave other City issues, dealing with subjects other than meeting procedures, for another day. If this were done, the City Council would deal with proposed rules 1-12, and leave the subjects of rules 13- 17 to address on another day. 3. A Balanced Budget. Several proposed rules have budgetary implications. For example, rules 5 and 6 create additional responsibilities to perform currently unbudgeted functions. I suggest the Council consider how they would pay for such changes, inasmuch as these issues were not brought up during last year's budget hearings and, so, were not budgeted. Although it is the Council's choice, I question using contingency funds so early in the year, especially for such seemingly non-critical purposes as those addressed in proposed rules 5 and 6. B. Specific Comments. With these general comments in mind, here are my specific comments about each proposed rule. Proposed Rule 1. Fine. Proposed Rule 2. Fine. Proposed Rule 3. I wonder whether public comment at 5:30 gives the public a full and fair opportunity to attend and be heard. The community is accustomed to 6:30 meetings. Some people may have a diff'icult time showing up at 5:30 for public comment. Additionally, I don't know what is meant or implied by the proposed rule that "the Mayor, with the assistance of the City Manager, shall be responsible for preparation of agenda matters." If it means the Mayor shall edit Staff Reports, I think that puts the Mayor in an administrative role. P1ainly, the Mayor or any Council Member is free to agree or disagree with Staff Reports. In addition, the Mayor or any Council Member is free to specify whatever public policy issues they want addressed as agenda items at Council Meetings. Since I have been here, 4