Someone needs a new City Administrator, or new rules, or something.

That someone is Sartell, MN.

The St. Cloud Times reports…

But in Sartell, the council has opted to omit one common ingredient.

Somewhere between the Pledge of Allegiance and adjournment, most area city councils include a public comment period. The brief segment of the meeting gives residents a chance to talk directly to council members about any topic they choose, from budget decisions to potholes.

Alone among a dozen area cities, Sartell doesn’t have an open comment period at its council meetings. Instead, the first point of contact for residents is often with staff at City Hall.

City Administrator Patti Gartland says that approach is more efficient, allowing staff to determine what type of action is required.

“A lot of the time we’re able to address the issue with the person,” Gartland said. “It may not be a policy issue. It may be an operations issue that doesn’t need council attention.”

When issues arise that do require council action, Gartland said they are placed on the council agenda.

Sartell Council Member Joe Perske said he appreciates the information that city staff provides, but he has some concerns about the system. He said getting a topic on the council’s agenda is not always easy.

“Often that never happens,” Perske said. “They’re told, ‘We can’t put that on the agenda because it’s not the right time for this topic. It will come up in the fall or the next bonding cycle. Even as a council member my requests to put topics on the agenda are sometimes dismissed.”

Whoa!

Citizens aren’t allowed to speak to the entire city council and council members requests for agenda items are denied … and the City Administrator says the system is “efficient?”

Let’s just say I wouldn’t be a very obedient citizen of Sartell if I lived there.

It irks me when I read about a local official who does something dumb. Really dumb.

After all fighting dumb is what “Why Your City Council Makes Dumb Decisions and What You Can Do About It” is all about.

Then I read this from Orland, CA …

Mayor Wade Elliott’s suggestion to move City Council meetings from Monday to Tuesday nights was rejected by his colleagues this week.

Elliott brought the proposal up during the council’s comment period – even making a motion to adopt it – but it did not go far.

Elliott also asked to change the meeting time to 6 p.m. in order to get everybody home earlier, he said. Councilman Bruce Roundy advised him the change had not been agendized for action, so a vote could not be taken at Tuesday night’s council meeting.

Now I don’t give a hoot if Orland, CA holds their meetings on Monday or Tuesday. Or, what time they hold their meetings.

But a Mayor makes a motion on an issue that isn’t on the agenda?

It just makes me want to scream!

It gives all Mayors a bad name.

Here we go again…

Fresno, California (KFSN) — Fresno’s City Council is coming under fire for praying before its meetings. A group of non-believers claims the prayers are unconstitutional and they’re threatening to sue the city. But Council members are defiant and vowing to fight.

Can’t we get over this?

There have been legal challenges to prayer at government functions and ABC30 Legal Analyst Tony Capozzi said the Supreme Court has been clear in its response.

“The fact that they invoked Jesus Christ doesn’t mean they’re promoting a religion,” he said.

But Capozzi said the Council has to walk a fine line, making sure it invites members of different faiths to give the invocation.

The atheist group said it’s nearly impossible to represent all faiths, as well as people without faith.

Here it is if anyone wants to read it …Supreme Court decision  Marsh v. Chambers.

Congress opens with a prayer. State legislators start with a prayer. City Councils can start with a prayer.

Would you pay $40 to hear your Mayor deliver the State of the City address?

He or she would have to be really entertaining wouldn’t they? Even then forty bucks … Nah.

According to the Modesto Bee such a plot was uncovered in Modesto.

Modesto leaders sent mixed messages this week about the mayor’s State of the City address, calling it a City Council meeting and then changing course to avoid breaking an open government law.

The state’s Ralph M. Brown Act prohibits city councils from charging admission to their meetings. But Modesto appeared to be doing just that when it called Mayor Jim Ridenour’s annual speech a City Council meeting.

Ridenour is delivering the speech at a Feb. 17 Chamber of Commerce luncheon that costs $40 to attend. Because the City Council is expected to attend, the city clerk sent out a public notice calling the event a council meeting and listing one agenda item: the State of the City speech.

That put the city on the wrong side of the Brown Act, which says it’s illegal for city councils to hold meetings in facilities that bar people on the basis of race, gender, religion or “where members of the public may not be present without making a payment or purchase.”

Brown Act expert Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, said Modesto could avoid the violation if it let the public listen to the speech without paying the $40 lunch fee.

“While they can offer things there like lunch or coffee for a fee, the part that they can’t charge for is admission,” Scheer said. “That has to be permitted for free. This is either a situation where they are required literally to provide a free lunch or they have to have a mechanism where people can opt out of eating.”

Past State of the City speeches have been sparsely attended, aside from government employees, their families and a few business leaders. Organizers of this year’s event say they hope to bring the speech to a wider audience.

Let’s see … Sparsely attended in the past when the speeches were free and they hoped for a larger crowd by charging $40?

Even if this wasn’t illegal, the idea was ill conceived from the start.

Can a Local Government Committee take votes by secret via email?

Some people in Racine believed they could.

Then to reaffirm that illegal email vote, they took another vote under “Old Business” on their next agenda.

Strike Two!

But it was just unintentional mistake. Sure.

State laws do vary but this is pretty basic.  Email votes are not legal.

Don’t even ask.

Sometimes a City Council has what they believe is a good idea. Then they try it.

This brings us to Spartanburg, SC. where Tammy tells the story…

City Council is going to start holding workshops every fourth Monday during City Council meetings. The purpose of the workshop is for Council and the public to have an in-depth learning experience about a particular issue facing the City. The workshop will last about 30 minutes. This week’s workshop is about Stormwater Utility.

Now…you may think to yourself…that doesn’t sound very interesting and well…hey, it may not be. BUT, if you want to understand more about what’s going on in your community learning about stormwater utility is important because it is something that MUST be addressed and it is expensive and it’s even more expensive if we’re not proactive.

Tammy, Tammy, Tammy, a workshop about Stormwater Utilities?

Yes, it is important. Yes, it is expensive.

But starting a new workshop program with riveting Stormwater Utility issues?

Good luck Spartanburg. I hope you pack them in.

But, I doubt it.

It’s like talking to a fence post.

Does your city council start their meeting with a prayer? It’s been done for a couple hundred years in many places.

Tampa is arguing over this issue.

“I’m not sure you realize how repugnant and degrading your opening prayers are for those of us without superstition,” said Frank Prahl. “Why should you waste your time and insult people who don’t believe as you do?”

He suggested starting meetings with simple words of inspiration, perhaps a short story or a poem.

I personally don’t believe as they do. I consider myself an Agnostic. But, I do no find prayers “repugnant and degrading.” I am also not insulted. If nothing else it is tradition and I have nothing against traditions.  I would much rather listen to a prayer than be forced to listen to some dumb poem someone else thinks is inspirational.

So, just for the record, make no mistake about it, this Agnostic votes prayer over poem to start a local government meeting.

Followed by the Pledge  of Allegiance to tweak those non-believers.

What say you?

When is the public allowed to speak at a local government meeting and how long are they allowed to speak at that meeting … those are the questions?

Joe Guarino tells us what is happening in Greensboro. They are moving the public speakers from the beginning of the meeting to the end and also limit the time a speaker can talk.

I definitely believe that the time given to a speaker must be limited. I have heard my share of rambling nonsense from the podium. If I want to speak at my City Council I am limited to three minutes.

But moving the public speaker segment to the end of the meeting? After the  decisions of the meeting have been made? I can’t go along with that idea.

How about you? What do you think?

What are your City Council rules on this subject?

I admit it, I don’t know everything about politics.

In fact I was stunned when I learned that a Governor (at least in one state) can suspend a City Council Representative.

JACKSONVILLE, Fla.– The city council was short a member at Tuesday night’s meeting. Council member John Meserve was suspended by Florida Governor Charlie Crist about half an hour before the council meeting.

Meserve is facing charges of brokering and selling real estate in Mayport without a license.

Is this one of those things that somehow just escaped me for all these years?

Can every Governor suspend an Alderman?

Can those same Governors suspend a County Board Supervisor?

Can your Governor do these things?

Let me know.

Paper or plastic normally refers to bags. 

But not this time.

Cincinnati won’t buy Kindle e-readers for all its elected officials after all – backlash over the new technology appears to have killed the idea a majority of council approved last month.

Among the budget cuts voted for by five members of council after contentious budget talks was $22,662 in annual savings found by canceling hundreds of copies of council documents. Buying the Kindle DXs for document reading would have cost $7,200 instead. Vice Mayor Roxanne Qualls, who already has a Kindle, pitched the idea as a saver of money and copying time.

But now, after council members including Republicans Leslie Ghiz and Charlie Winburn blasted the Kindle purchase and said they didn’t want one, each council member will decide whether he or she wants one, Councilwoman Laketa Cole said.

If those who oppose the Kindles still want to print out their agendas and ordinances, they’ll have to pay the city clerk’s office for every page after January. How much each page will cost should be determined this week.

Printing out copies defeats the purpose, said Cole, chairwoman of council’s finance committee. That’s because the copying costs council tried to cut still will be borne by the taxpayers – just via some council members’ office budgets rather than the clerk’s budget.

“Didn’t citizens tell us to think outside the box?” Cole said.

Has any other local government tried to go Kindle? It certainly looks to me to be an idea worth pursuing.

How about it students?

Paper or plastic screen?