pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2016-02-01.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2016-02-01 | 2 | prohibited except for accessing agenda materials; and 3) not withstanding those admonitions, devices could be used for innocuous purposes, such as a calculator, looking up a date or contacting a family member; the provision would be largely self- policing. Acting Chair Foreman provided a handout; stated after he reviewed the October Council staff report, which rejected the Commission's more liberal approach, he took it upon himself to attend the Council meeting and defend the Commission's language; he also presented his personal view that the language should be even broader, should not tie into devices, and should address what is prohibited; suggested the language at the bottom of his handout; stated the language does not say what can be done, rather it says what cannot be done with devices; the only thing that should be prohibited is receiving or sending private communications about the meeting; outlined the City Council discussion from the minutes; stated the majority of the Council provided direction to staff; however, staff has come up with something that is almost directly contradictorily to what at least three Councilmembers want; he has drafted a paragraph in line with what a majority of Council requested; he talked with the Assistant City Attorney who raised the issue of quasi-judicial matters; provided the example of the Commissions' quasi-judicial complaint hearing; stated the complainant and public have a right to see everything Commissioners consider in making a decision; suggested a two tier system: one for general legislative matters and one for quasi-judicial matters; stated his recommendation is much shorter and does not provide the rationale. Commissioner Dieter provided a handout; stated that she listened to the City Council discussion; everyone agrees the purpose of the provision is to prohibit communicating electronically with others during meetings because of the appearance it gives; rather than spelling out all of the different allowable scenarios, the provision should be kept general and say what members should do; the language could be even shorter than Acting Chair Foreman's suggestion; the first original sentence could be retained and rather than staff's proposed language, one sentence could cover everything; the sentence would be: "therefore communicating electronically with others during meetings is prohibited;" it is not necessary to tell anybody using a device is allowed if there is an emergency; the language can be streamlined a little bit more to achieve the purpose. In response to Acting Chair Foreman's inquiry, Commissioner Dieter stated her understanding is the provision's purpose is to have members not communicate with each other; members should be paying attention to what's being done; using an electronic device to look up a word is fine; communicating gives a bad appearance. The City Clerk stated the Sunshine Task Force included the provision because they did not want somebody to not go on record publicly and try to influence the decision makers during the meeting; communication is what the Task Force honed in on. Commissioner Dieter stated the Sunshine Ordinance just states do not communicate on electronic devices while at the dais, which covers everything and is very simple. Meeting of the Open Government Commission February 2, 2015 2 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2016-02-01.pdf |