pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2015-02-02.pdf, 14
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2015-02-02 | 14 | must do something and passive meeting bodies may do something in terms of conducting business. Vice Chair Forman stated that he has a problem with that; the State Code uses the term "advisory bodies" in the Section that matches this; what the State Code basically says is that the City Council has to have regular meetings, but advisory bodies, such as the Planning Board, do not have to have regular meetings; then, it goes on to talk about how their [board/commission] meetings shall be considered like regular meetings; the Ordinance takes from a Section that has nothing to do with passive meeting bodies; advisory bodies cannot be removed because unless the intent is to broaden the State law to say that not just City Council but advisory bodies also have to give all these notices, then there is nothing wrong with taking out "except for advisory bodies" if that is the intent. Chair Aguilar inquired whether policy bodies as defined in the Ordinance include advisory bodies, to which Vice Chair Foreman responded in the affirmative. The Assistant City Attorney stated to address Vice Chair Foreman's concern, perhaps the intent was the City Council must have regular meetings that advisory bodies as used in the Government Code do not; if that is the intent, staff would have to indicate that it is only the City Council that must do this and other policy bodies do not; that wordsmithing can be done if that is where the Commission wants to go with not requiring all bodies, other than City Council, to establish a time and place for holding regular meetings. Vice Chair Foreman stated he gets the impression the intent was to mimic State law, except when you get over to F, which really starts getting confusing; F says special meetings of any policy body, including advisory bodies, that may choose to establish regular meeting times may be called at any time by the presiding officer; then, it goes back to passive meeting bodies. The Assistant City Attorney stated that he is not clear whether the intent was advisory bodies referred to passive meeting bodies or whether the intent was to refer to passive meeting bodies, such as the Planning Board, Open Government Commission and Recreation and Park Commission; that he is not certain of the intent. Commissioner Dieter stated there would not be any problems if they were called boards and commissions. Chair Aguilar inquired whether there was not a definition for advisory bodies, which is why it was being taken out, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative; stated there was not a definition of advisory body. Vice Chair Foreman stated the problem is that there are two different kinds of advisory bodies; there are advisory bodies that are established by formal action of the Council, which come under the State law and there are advisory bodies that are appointed by Meeting of the Open Government Commission February 2, 2015 14 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2015-02-02.pdf |