pages: CityCouncil/2020-02-04.pdf, 14
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2020-02-04 | 14 | weigh-in on matters and provide opinions on issues; the null and void provision is meant to be said tool; null and void can supersede Council decisions and represents a power that is above the Council; noted the problem with null and void is that there is no basis in the City Charter; stated Section 3-1 of the Charter vests all power in the City Council; Section 3-2 states Council may delegate powers to commissions in a manner only consistent with the Charter; expressed support for being consistent with the Charter and for understanding the basis of how the null and void provision aligns; stated the City Charter Sections 3-1, 3-2 and 1-2(D) are vested in Council making rules and having powers; Council can delegate rules to commissions and boards; the rules cannot be delegated in a way that places the Council in an inferior position; the City should come up with a tool to address situations in which the public has not properly been noticed; null and void is not the only tool available; members of the public and the OGC can come up with a variety of other tools that checks the City Council if a decision is made that was not properly noticed; noted Council can create an ordinance which allows the OGC to flag situations that clearly show a decision being made which has not been adequately noticed; stated penalties could require a 4-1 Council vote in order to move the item forward; there will be times when the Council makes a mistake; when checks are created, it should align with the City Charter; there are many ways to create remedies similar to null and void. Vice Mayor Knox White expressed support for Councilmember Daysog's comments; noted that he was previously on the Sunshine Task Force; discussed meetings developing the Sunshine Ordinance; stated each member of the Task Force desired the OGC to have teeth, not just alerts; the one violation yielded a battle-mode response from the City and prompted reconsideration of the null and void provision; stated there should have been an easy cure to the issue; that he agrees with Councilmember Daysog's, as well as staff's, comments; null and void is not a legal finding and is problematic; there will always be a legal implication; expressed concern for removing the provision in hopes that OGC findings are considered; stated actions of Council take time to implement; should violations be found, the Sunshine Ordinance should dictate the violation be agendized on the next reasonable agenda for consideration of either concurrence or non-concurrence with the OGC's findings; there should be a reasonable way to cure the issue; the simplest path would be to re-hear the item and cure; the public is given an opportunity to come back to the policy making body, at a properly noticed meeting and weigh in on the topic; outlined his experience related to the Transportation Commission improperly noticing an item; expressed concern about the finding being perfunctory; expressed support for something that replaces null and void with an acceptable alternative; stated that he does not support staff's recommendation of removing null and void. Councilmember Oddie expressed support for Councilmember Daysog's comments; noted there are restraints at the State level; stated the City can pass any law; however, if the law is unconstitutional, it should not be passed; expressed support for replacing null and void with something that allows for the ability to call out Council in the event an item is passed which violates the Sunshine Ordinance; stated the opinion of the OGC will have weight; expressed concern for someone using null and void to try and overturn Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 12 February 4, 2020 | CityCouncil/2020-02-04.pdf |