pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2015-03-30.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2015-03-30 | 2 | Vice Chair Foreman concurred; stated the Section should be deleted it in its entirety; that he does not need to be told he has a constitutional right to speak out; he does not know why the Section would be in the Sunshine Ordinance; everyone has the right to speak out as individuals as long as long as speaking for themselves; boards and commissions have the right to speak out as a body even if disagreeing with Council; the only control Council should have is to relieve members of duties; the Section does not add anything. Chair Aguilar sated the Section is not just indicating members have a constitutional right to speak out; inquired if Vice Chair Foreman wants to remove the entire Section, to which Vice Chair Foreman responded in the affirmative. Chair Aguilar inquired if Commissioner Dieter want to remove the last sentence, to which Commissioner Dieter responded in the affirmative. Vice Chair Foreman read the Section; stated if Council disagrees with a Commission on something the only right is what they have in the Charter, to relieve members of duties; that he does not have any idea what the second sentence accomplishes; in the next part simply restates what is in the Charter; he does not see a purpose served by any of it. Commissioner Dieter stated that she does not mind having everybody know that they can speak out for themselves; she does not have a problem reminding folks that just because they are on a board or commission does not mean they do not have a voice in the community; what she does have a problem with is telling policy bodies that they cannot take a position that contradicts a policy or decision of the City Council, which is the opposite of the intent of Boards and Commissions that exist to advise Council; for instance, if the City Council decides not to implement bus rapid transit on the West End and the Transportation Commission strongly opposes the position, they should have a right to address or send a letter to the City Council; the whole purpose of Boards and Commissions is to advise even if it against what the City Council deems fit. Vice Chair Foreman stated as a compromise, he would not have any problem with leaving in the first sentence through "Section 2-91-6(e)" and leaving out the next sentence: "Policy bodies shall not sanction, remove or deprive members of the rights;" he does not know what purpose the language serves; he does want to deprive the City Council from criticizing members any more than he wants to deprive any member from criticizing the City Council; he would take the sentence out altogether and leave in the part about the City Charter even though it is just restated; he would take out the sentence prohibiting formal action; stated the first sentence should stay in, the second sentence should be deleted, the third underlined sentence should stay in, and the final sentence should be deleted. Commissioner Dieter stated she had no problem with the Vice Chair Foreman's recommendation. Meeting of the Open Government Commission March 30, 2015 2 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2015-03-30.pdf |