My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-26-2012 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
09-26-2012 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/25/2012 12:36:33 PM
Creation date
9/25/2012 12:00:54 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
196
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
office felt the language existed in a number of other Palo Alto policies. <br />Mr. Keene suggested that they ask the City Attorney how they would incorporate <br />Saratoga's policies within Palo Alto's existing framework. <br />Council Member Klein stated his willingness to accept Mr. Keene's suggestion. <br />He also stated that the iPad was not creating the problem; if somewone wanted <br />to violate the Brown Act they could use a pencil and paper and pass notes. <br />Council Member Holman stated her agreement and suggested being as <br />forthcoming as possible. <br />Council Member Klein stated he wanted to be clear that he did not wish to set the <br />focus on the iPad as what may cause a problem. <br />Council Member Burt asked for clarification on the amended language. <br />Council Member Holman stated the Amendment was to incorporate policy <br />language from the City of Saratoga policy that would address the concerns of <br />Brown Act violations while using iPads. <br />Council Member Burt stated that the issue should be focused around <br />reconfirming prohibition of communication among Council Members or Applicants <br />or members of the public from matters before them. He stated that he did not <br />know why there would be something that goes beyond that. He also stated that <br />there was no prohibition that you cannot read another piece of paper at a Council <br />meeting, or that you could not turn to a Colleague and mention something that <br />has nothing to do with the Agenda. He stated that Saratoga's requirement would <br />say, "As regarding electronic communication, you're forbidden to look at <br />telecommunication." He felt that this was an unnecessary rule and was suddenly <br />popping up because there was an additional means of communication now. He <br />stated he would not support Amendment as proposed; although, he would <br />support a policy which clarified there could be no electronic communication of <br />any kind among Council Members or between Council Members and members of <br />the public or anyone with matters before the Council during the meeting. <br />Council Member Holman stated the intention of the Amendment was not to copy <br />Saratoga's policy but to address the issues that if there were iPads at the Dais, <br />that there was a.policy in place that the public could see that the electronics <br />issue had been addressed. <br />Council Member Burt stated that was not the stated Amended language and felt <br />FILENAME 7 <br />37 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.