|
1. |
What are the key elements of the issue? What precipitated it?
Key elements: Are longer RTC posting and/or agenda item noticing periods needed for some Council meeting agenda items? If so, which items/issues are appropriate for longer posting periods?
What precipitated this Study Issue: At the April 20, 2004 Council meeting the City's Finance Department presented RTC 04-137, Proposed Fiscal Year 2004/2005 Utility Rates. During the public hearing, a representative of the Chamber of Commerce requested that Council postpone making a decision since the time between posting the RTC until the actual Council meeting was inadequate in their view. The RTC was posted to the City Web site Friday afternoon, consistent with City policy, and the Council meeting was held the following Tuesday evening. The Chamber representative indicated that this was not enough time to notify their membership of the issue, gather members' feedback, and provide that feedback to City Council.
Council acknowledged the request, and also asked staff to prepare a study issue paper on whether longer posting and/or agenda noticing periods were needed or appropriate for some Council meeting items/issues (such as development permits and fee rates).
|
|
2. |
How does this relate to the General Plan or existing City Policy?
Goal 7.2A. To have a community in which citizens are informed about local issues and have access to City services and personnel.
7.2A.2b. Identify those citizens impacted by significant Council actions and ensure that they receive timely information on how to participate in the decision making process. |
|
3. |
Origin of issue: |
|
|
|
Council Member(s): |
Fowler, Chu, Lee |
|
|
|
|
General Plan: |
|
|
|
|
|
City Staff: |
|
|
|
|
|
Board or Commission (identify name of the advisory body from the list below): |
|
|
|
|
|
(Arts, Building of Code Appeals, BPAC, Child Care, Heritage, Housing and Human Services, Library, Parks and Recreation, Personnel and Planning) |
|
|
Board or Commission ranked this study issue _____ of _____
Board or Commission ranking comments:
|
|
|
4. |
Multiple Year Project? |
Yes___ |
No X__ |
Expected Year Completed |
2005 |
|
5. |
Estimated work hours for completion of the study issue (use 5 or 8-hour increments): |
|
|
(a) Estimated work hours from the lead department |
80 |
|
|
|
(b)Estimated work hours from consultant(s) if applicable: |
|
|
|
(c)Estimated work hours from the City Attorney's Office: |
10 |
|
|
(d)Estimated work hours from Finance: |
10 |
|
|
|
(e)Estimated work hours from other department(s): |
|
|
|
|
|
Department: |
HRD |
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
Department: |
LIB |
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
Department: |
CDD |
|
40 |
|
|
|
|
Department: |
DPR |
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
Department: |
DPW |
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
Department: |
DPS |
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
Department: |
IT |
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Estimated Hours: |
200 |
|
|
|
|
|
6. |
Expected participation involved in the study issue process? |
|
|
(a) Does Council need to approve a work plan? |
Yes ___ |
No X___ |
|
|
(b) Does this issue require review by a Board/Commission? If so, please list below: |
Yes X |
No ___ |
|
|
|
The draft study issue report will be routed to all boards and commissions for comment at their discretion. |
|
|
|
|
(c) Is a Council Study Session anticipated? |
Yes___ |
No _X__ |
|
|
(d) What is the public participation process?
Public hearing at Council meeting. |
|
|
7. Cost of Study: Please mark appropriate item below.
X Costs covered in operating budget – Neighborhood and Community Services
Costs covered by project - <project name>
Budget modification needed for study - <$ Amount>
|
|
Explain below what the additional funding will be used for:
|
|
8. Potential fiscal impact to implement recommendations in the Study
approved by Council, if any: None anticipated; will be confirmed by Study Issue |
|
|
|
|
Mark a range for the items below: |
$500 or none |
$50K or less |
$51K - $100K |
$101K - $500K |
$501K or more |
|
|
Capital expenditure range |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenditure range |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
New revenues/savings range |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Explain impact briefly:
|
9. Staff Recommendation for this calendar year:
“For” Study ___ Explain:
“Against” Study ___ Explain. If staff suggests that this study should not be considered again in the future or deferred at this time, please include this in your explanation:
No Recommendation _X__
|