pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2015-02-02.pdf, 20
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2015-02-02 | 20 | Commissioner Dieter stated this is for the old VHS because for the new videos, the City has a contract with no limit; the City could keep videos for 40 or 50 years. The City Clerk stated the way technology and capacity are increasing, she would assume that the City would be able to keep that up; at this point, the City does not have 10 years, but videos would be kept up once the City goes past the 10 years. Vice Chair Foreman stated he is okay with leaving it the way it has been changed. The Assistant City Attorney stated the other part of Section 7 is that with the dissolving of redevelopment agencies, the Community Improvement Commission is now the Successor Agency to the Community Improvement Commission; a technicality in terms of the name of that particular policy body. Commissioner Dieter stated there are two references in the Sunshine Ordinance to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA) which has been disbanded; the City does not even have that anymore. The Assistant City Attorney stated he asked the Community Development Director about whether that should stay and she suggested that it stay in there. Commissioner Bonta stated if the City is keeping videos from the prior 10 years, the ARRA did exist at that time; this is to make sure that the City keeps the ARRA videos. The Assistant City Attorney stated Section 8 on Public Comment by Members of the Policy Body has some language added at the end to make it clear that while members of policy bodies certainly have the right to voice their opinion, it is not intended to prohibit the City Council from removing members if the Council feels the member has gone beyond their assigned duties. Vice Chair Foreman stated that he is not sure why it is in there; if it is a constitutional right, it is a constitutional right; questioned why does it have to be codified; stated what bothers him about it is there are certain things that City Council members cannot comment on as a matter of law if Councilmembers are playing a judicial role; for instance the rules of procedure state that if there is a public hearing on a matter, such as a development plan, Section 1-C prohibits a Councilmember from discussing or commenting on a public hearing issue outside of a Council meeting; certain proceedings are considered to be judicial in nature and Councilmembers are not allowed to make comments until they vote. Commissioner Dieter inquired whether Vice Chair Foreman is commenting on the addition or the entire provision, to which Vice Chair Foreman responded the entire provision; stated because Councilmembers do not have a full constitution right to comment on these things if Council is going to be making a judicial type of decision; during the campaign, certain candidates said they could not comment on a matter Meeting of the Open Government Commission February 2, 2015 20 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2015-02-02.pdf |