My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10-05-2009 Council Minutes (2)
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2009
>
10-05-2009 Council Minutes (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/7/2014 10:58:20 AM
Creation date
3/11/2013 3:20:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
10/05/2009
Council Meeting Type
Work Session Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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 WORK SESSION October 5,2009 <br /> DRAFT <br /> 91 <br /> 92 3. City Code Project—City Clerk Bartell reported that she is prepared to request council <br /> 93 approval of the final updated city code. The current city code is comprised only of a three-ring <br /> 94 book into which staff loosely inserts new ordinances. The update process brings all approved <br /> 95 ordinances(since the last update in 1993)into the code,brings statutory references up to date and <br /> 96 institutes changes recommended by the code attorney,the League of Minnesota Cities and the <br /> 97 city attorney. As well,the code would be placed on-line for increased availability to the public. <br /> 98 The review process to this point has involved several council work session reviews of proposed <br /> 99 changes as well as an expectation of independent review of non-substantive changes by council <br /> 100 members. Ms.Bartell noted that she is seeking the council's direction to bring the updated code <br /> 101 forward for public hearing and final approval. The proposed approval process is defined in the <br /> 102 staff report;the council directed the city clerk to proceed with the process outlined. <br /> 103 <br /> 104 Televising of city meetings—At a special council meeting immediately preceding the work <br /> 105 session,the council had considered a proposal to amend the city charter to require televising of <br /> 106 city council meetings. The amendment was not approved but the council added discussion of the <br /> 107 topic of televising city meetings to the work session agenda. A council member noted that the <br /> 108 city attorney has already recommended language that could potentially be used in the city code <br /> 109 (distributed). The questions for the council(as framed by one council member)are:a) should <br /> 110 there be a requirement that all council meetings be televised;b)should city meetings that aren't <br /> 111 currently televised(EDAC and Charter Commission)be added;and c)should the`open mike" <br /> 112 portion be televised inclusively? The council agreed with all those items but some members <br /> 113 expressed concern that questions remain about costs and logistics. There would obviously be <br /> 114 different requirements for live televising versus taping and playback. A council member asked <br /> 115 about the option of someone bringing equipment to the community room and taping; <br /> 116 Administrator Tesch indicated he would check on that possibility. Mr.Tench said he will do <br /> 117 some more research so that the council can discuss this again in a month. The council <br /> 118 recognized that there are clearly questions remaining on how this can work. Would the council <br /> 119 chambers be used exclusively,or would the community room be retrofitted for taping or live <br /> 120 production? Would Park Board meetings have to be rescheduled? A council member suggested <br /> 121 that the discussion has primarily been focused on the general concept of televising and the <br /> 122 benefit of transparency to the public but the discussion needs to include how the process can be <br /> 123 done well—more discussion is needed in that light. There was a suggestion that the council <br /> 124 could attempt a process in the council chambers without a big investment as a pilot and see how <br /> 125 it works out. <br /> 126 <br /> 127 The council concurred to direct the city attorney to bring forward an ordinance that encompasses <br /> 128 all boards and the charter commission. A council member pointed out that the council doesn't <br /> 129 have the authority over the charter commission—the attorney should opine on that.There is an <br /> 130 expectation that the council will have that information at the next work session and also that it <br /> 131 will be a discussion item at the joint council and charter commission meeting that is pending. <br /> 132 <br /> 133 The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. <br /> 134 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.