My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-09-2015 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2015
>
03-09-2015 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/2/2015 3:18:37 PM
Creation date
4/2/2015 3:18:00 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
488
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
. MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,February 23,2015 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> 9. VIDEOTAPING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS (continued) <br /> Minnetonka is approximately 90 percent commercial applications with a few residential variances. <br /> McMillan stated she can see videotaping the meetings when a majority of the applications are <br /> commercial. <br /> McMillan stated she also looked back at 2014 and that the largest number of views was regarding the <br /> Lakeview application,which was a unique situation. McMillan stated perhaps on some of the more <br /> unique applications the City could film them,such as the Comprehensive Plan update,but that she does <br /> not see the need to videotape the meetings given the large amount of residential applications. McMillan <br /> stated it is likely some people will feel uncomfortable and that they are not familiar with appearing before <br /> the Planning Commission. <br /> McMillan stated the second item to consider is the fact that the City Council is elected versus being <br /> appointed. McMillan stated one of the reasons why the Council is taped is because they are elected <br /> officials and that the videotaping of the meetings gives the residents an opportunity to see how the <br /> Council acts. <br /> McMillan stated the third consideration is the fact that the Planning Commission really has all of their <br /> items as public hearings,with notice being given to the neighbors. McMillan stated in her view it is <br /> important for those neighbors to be in attendance at that meeting if they decide they want to say <br /> something about the application,which would not be possible if they simply viewed it at home. <br /> McMillan stated she would like to keep that public involvement. <br /> Printup stated more engagement could occur by videotaping the meetings and that it is a public meeting. <br /> Levang stated the Council should also listen to the input from the Planning Commissioners in making this <br /> decision. <br /> Printup asked if Council Member Levang would change her mind if the majority of the Planning <br /> Commissioners would say they were fine with it. <br /> Levang stated in her view she has a good sense of it already and that it would not change her mind. <br /> Levang indicated she has attended and watched a number of Wayzata meetings to see what is happening <br /> in their commercial district but that she is not interested in their residential applications. Levang stated <br /> people are more interested in commercial applications and that in her view not a lot of people are <br /> interested in individual residential applications. <br /> Walsh stated transparency is a key and that people volunteer to be on the Planning Commission. <br /> Levang stated videotaping the meetings was not what was agreed to when they accepted the position. <br /> Walsh noted the majority of what the Planning Commission is vetting is placed on the Consent Agenda at <br /> the City Council. <br /> Printup moved,Walsh seconded,to videotape the Planning Commission meetings. <br /> Page 15 of 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.