My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014-07-14 Reg
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
2014
>
2014-07-14 Reg
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2014 3:20:45 PM
Creation date
8/22/2014 3:20:40 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Dr. Carr made a motion to approve Bill 9231, seconded by Mr. Glickert. <br /> <br />Roll Call vote was: <br />AYES: Mr. Jennings, Mr. Kraft, Mr. Glickert, Mr. Sharpe, Dr. Carr and Mayor <br />Welsch. <br />NAYS: None <br /> <br />Bill Number 9231 carried unanimously and became Ordinance number 6961. <br /> <br />N. NEW BUSINESS <br />RESOLUTIONS <br />1. Resolution 2014 – 26 <br /> Adoption Council Rules approved by a majority at Council’s <br />June 30, 2014, Study session. Introduced by Mr. Sharpe and seconded by Mr. <br />Glickert. <br /> <br />Dr. Carr asked that a copy of her detailed comments be attached to the minutes. <br /> <br />Dr. Carr stated that the changes to Council’s Rules and Procedures effectively gagged <br />the voice of the minority members and thereby silenced the voices of their constituents. <br />Dr. Carr stated that the minutes will now be a record of what was done at a meeting and <br />not what was said. She stated this removed any insight that may be garnered years from <br />now as readers try to understand the rationale for the policy decisions, as well as <br />transparency and accountability. <br /> Also Dr. Carr noted the rules now state that, “Any Resolution that has been finally <br />disposed of at a meeting may not be brought back or renewed at a subsequent meeting <br />for twelve months. Any Resolution that is the same, or essentially the same, will be <br />considered out of order during the time period of twelve months”. Dr. Carr asked what <br />was meant by “disposed of”. She stated that if disposed of meant anything other than <br />defeated by vote, then it would be a limitation of a member’s right to make a motion, a <br />challenge to a member’s free speech and a removal of a member’s right to represent their <br />constituents. <br /> <br />Mr. Kraft stated that the discussion should be about the merits or problems associated <br />with changes to the rules. He stated that the revision to the rule says that Council shall <br />follow Robert’s Rule of Order by preparing the minutes in a proper fashion; “The minutes <br />will be a record of what was done at the meeting, and not what was said”. “The City Clerk <br />shall keep a journal of the proceedings of the Council, including the kind of meeting, <br />dates, times and presence of participants. The body of the minutes shall identify all <br />speakers, including an abstract or text of each address and include motions made, any <br />amendments thereto, points of order, the dispositions of these matters, and the time of <br />adjournment”. Mr. Kraft noted if anyone would like to have their entire comments <br />included in the record, they can provide the City Clerk with a copy, as they have done in <br />the past. <br /> Mr. Kraft stated that the revision regarding the introduction and disposal of resolutions <br />was a compromise which states that members will no longer be able to remove items <br />from the agenda. Any two members can submit an ordinance or resolution only once in a <br />twelve month period once it has been disposed of. <br /> <br />CITIZEN’S COMMENTS <br />Patricia McQueen, 1132 George Street, University City, MO <br />Ms. McQueen expressed her opposition to the proposed change to how minutes will be <br />5 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.