Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, February 23, 2015 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />Page 15 of 19  <br />  <br />9. VIDEOTAPING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS (continued) <br /> <br />Walsh stated the Planning Commission is where a lot of the original vetting gets done on the issues and <br />that it is interesting to see the passion that some people have in those discussions and the issues that were <br />debated prior to it reaching the City Council. <br /> <br />Printup stated it is also helpful to be able to watch it versus just reading the minutes. Printup noted at <br />times there are items that are brought up at the Planning Commission that are not discussed at the City <br />Council meeting. <br /> <br />Cornick stated he did attend the February meeting and that the Planning Commission indicated they are <br />neutral to negative on it and that in his view their input should be taken into consideration. <br /> <br />Denise Leskinen, Planning Commission Chair, stated the Planning Commission did discuss this item <br />briefly at their February meeting and that of the five Planning Commissioners who were present, two <br />were neutral and three were opposed. <br /> <br />Leskinen noted the points raised were the fact that the Planning Commission is a recommending body to <br />the Council and that any actual decisions are made at the City Council level. A question was raised <br />regarding why the City would want to expend the money to videotape the Planning Commission meeting <br />when the Council is where the decisions are made. Leskinen noted there were only five commissioners <br />present at the meeting when this was discussed but that the consensus was opposed to videotaping. <br /> <br />Leskinen stated if this is something the Council is seriously considering implementing, she would like to <br />have the opportunity to discuss it when there is a full panel of the Planning Commission present in <br />fairness to all of them but that ultimately it the City Council’s decision. <br /> <br />Levang stated she raised this issue more than a year ago when the City was able to contract with <br />Mediacom and when the City was looking at what could be done with the PEG channel. Levang <br />indicated she did attend a Planning Commission meeting back then and asked them for their input but <br />heard that they did not see any reason to add that in. <br /> <br />Levang stated as she started to think about it a little more, she changed her mind and now feels that there <br />is really no good reason to videotape the Planning Commission meetings since there would be <br />redundancy with the applications. Levang stated when people come to their first planning meeting, the <br />residents do feel intimidated and that this would add further intimidation. Levang stated the City wants <br />people to participate in the process and that the residents are given ample notice of the meetings and <br />asked to participate. <br /> <br />Levang stated she was also informed by one of the Planning Commissioners that because they are <br />appointed, they do not wish for the kind of scrutiny or the invasion of privacy like Council. Levang <br />stated the City Council should respect that and that she is not in favor of videotaping the meetings. <br /> <br />McMillan indicated she has never felt strongly one way or the other on this issue in the past but that the <br />City now has the ability to videotape the meetings. McMillan stated she does have a couple of concerns <br />and the first is that the City has a number of residential applications whereas Wayzata and Minnetonka, <br />which film their Planning Commission meetings, have more commercial applications. McMillan noted