pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2015-02-02.pdf, 21
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2015-02-02 | 21 | because it is a judicial matter that they would have to act on; that was wrong because there is an exception that if you are in a campaign, you can comment; but if you are not in a campaign, you cannot comment because you would be disqualifying yourself from making the decision; stated that he does not know why this language is included or needed; stated that he does not need the Code to tell him that he has a constitutional right to say what he wants to say; in this particular case, it may lead a Councilmember to believe that they can make a comment on a zoning matter when they are specifically prohibited from doing so. Commissioner Dieter stated it makes no sense to say that the Council can remove a member; that she is not sure why that is in the Sunshine Ordinance; they also cannot write a letter that contradicts a policy. Vice Chair Foreman inquired why it is in the Sunshine Ordinance. Commissioner Dieter concurred; stated the entire Section could be removed; particularly the addition; otherwise it should include that members of the City Council can be removed by referendum and address how they could be removed. Commissioner Bonta stated the general structure is that the City Council appoints other policy bodies that serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and Council; it might be ill placed; Council does have the ability to remove members of a policy body. Vice Chair Foreman stated that does make sense but he does not know why it is in the Sunshine Ordinance. Commissioner Dieter inquired what does the section have to do with accessing government, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded he thought that revising the ordinance that members of policy bodies can make public comment, it should be clear some right was not being created that would prevent the City Council from removing a member; then, the person could turn around and sue the City under some right that has been now created in the Ordinance; the addition is a protective measure; Vice Chair Foreman makes a good point that the statement is probably broader than what it really says; the intent was to make sure a person still has a right as a citizen to make comments, but it is not quite as black and white as the language would suggest. Commissioner Dieter inquired whether the City Charter includes that Council can remove a member of an appointed body, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded that he does not recall it being included. Commissioner Dieter inquired if it is not in the City Charter why is it in the Sunshine Ordinance, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded the ordinance indicates that policy body members have a right to comment on governmental actions; that would not necessarily preclude a majority of the City Council from being able to remove them; that he does not want the Ordinance giving a person a right to sue the City on the grounds that they were illegally removed. Meeting of the Open Government Commission February 2, 2015 21 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2015-02-02.pdf |