My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Legal Review Committee Agenda and Packet 2020 05 20
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
LEGAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
>
2020 Legal Review Committee Agendas and Packets
>
Legal Review Committee Agenda and Packet 2020 05 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/12/2020 10:34:49 AM
Creation date
6/9/2020 11:36:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
5/20/2020
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council Legal Review Committee <br />Meeting Minutes <br />May 6, 2020 <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />distancing, and alternative ways to take public input. Staff is looking for feedback <br />from the Committee and recommendations for City Council. <br />City Attorney Kelly stated the City needs to be mindful that any action the City <br />takes that could be perceived as restricting people from speaking at a public <br />hearing could be problematic. <br />Councilmember Leh noted Council adopted a rule on this in April and we are <br />currently following that. These are unprecedented times and certain things need <br />to proceed, we are trying to figure out a way to do it. <br />Councilmember Leh stated he can't foresee an easy set of recommendations to <br />give back to Council on this item given the lack of information from the State at <br />this time. <br />Councilmember Brown stated he prefers some kind of hybrid meeting with both <br />in -person and electronic participation, but we can't even do that right now with <br />the 10-person limit. <br />City Attorney Kelly stated currently even the limitation of 10 people at gatherings <br />is not clear and there are varying interpretations of this. It is also not clear if this <br />applies to governing bodies. We will need more information before moving <br />forward with anything. <br />City Manager Balser stated she has heard there may be an exemption for public <br />hearings; but it is hard to know if people will feel comfortable attending a <br />meeting. She also noted the City is setting a public example and should be <br />cautious in this approach. She stated other cities are planning to go back to in - <br />person when the allowed group size goes up to 50 people. <br />Councilmember Fahey stated there are possibilities of in -person meetings in a <br />large room with social distancing. <br />Councilmember Brown stated scheduling people for public comment is an option. <br />Councilmember Leh asked what the impacts are if we postpone this discussion <br />until June. City Manager Balser stated that at this time do have some land use <br />issues subject to referendum that are cannot move through the Planning <br />Commission and City Council processes. <br />Councilmember Leh stated he doesn't think Council is interested in changing the <br />regulation about not holding public hearings on items subject to referendum at an <br />electronic meeting. Councilmember Brown and Councilmember Fahey agreed. <br />Public Comments <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.