pages: CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-09-07 | 7 | in providing public information found by the Commission; noted the OGC may recommend to the City, the steps necessary to cure or correct the violation; inquired whether the section needs another section which discusses Council's process to cure or correct. The City Attorney responded in the negative; stated the issue of public information is typically administrative action; Council does not take action on administrative actions; staff left the language included under the administrative section; the section for Brown Act violations differs. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she is concerned about the time period between the OGC making a recommendation and the matter being brought to Council; inquired what happens to the decision made by Council in the meantime and whether the decision continues moving forward or becomes stalled. The City Attorney responded the language provides that the City is encouraged to maintain the status quo; stated the action will largely depend on the situation; the original Council action will be effective by operation of law; if a scenario were Council directing staff to lobby for a particular bill that has a timeframe, staff will likely proceed, notwithstanding a Commission decision; outlined a scenario related to planting trees over a three year time period in which a two-month delay would likely cause no difference; staff would likely delay action in said scenario. Councilmember Knox White expressed support for the consideration given to the matter; stated staff has worked to find a compromise that provides some accountability; future OGC's might be a ruling body and might not necessarily have impact on the City doing business; the changes meet the compromise admirably and provide flexibility to the City whereby the harm from a finding is reduced; the proposed language gives the public the ability to know that findings of violations will be re-heard and cured; expressed support for the staff recommendation. Councilmember Knox White moved introduction of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Vella seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that he would like to hash the matter out even further; he is not convinced of the language being proposed; expressed concern about maintaining the status quo pending final review by the Commission; stated if Council makes a decision that the OGC subsequently finds troubling, the current language leaves the decision of Council moving forward or not depending on the immediacy of the issue as outlined by the City Attorney; noted the legislation matter situation will allow Council to move forward even when the OGC has found the matter troubling; City staff needs to factor in and vet the possibility of the OGC having questions regarding certain matters; if the OGC finds a troubling matter, Council should not want to move the matter forward even if it is time-sensitive; Council should re-visit and hold off on executing matters deemed troubling by the OGC; the term should read: Continued July 20, 2021 Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 7, 2021 3 | CityCouncil/2021-09-07.pdf |