ADDENDUM
CITY OF CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/HOUSING AUTHORITY/SUCCESSOR AGENCY
Tuesday,December 13th, 2022
RegularMeeting
TAKING OF THE OATH OF OFFICE
The Oath is administered by the Second District Supervisor Zack Scrivner of Kern County Treasurer: Keith Middleton
The following items were added to the City Council agenda after publishing and posting, but less than 72 hours before the meeting. Socorro Chavez, City Clerk
ADDENDUM
CITY OF CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/HOUSING AUTHORITY/SUCCESSOR AGENCY
Tuesday,December 13th, 2022
RegularMeeting
TAKING OF THE OATH OF OFFICE
The Oath is administered by the Second District Supervisor Zack Scrivner of Kern County Mayor: Kelly Kulikoff
Councilmembers: Michael Kulikoff, Ronald
East Kern Health Care District : Rubi Foley, Karen Macedonio
PRESENTATION
Honoring the City of California City’s 57th Anniversary
PUBLIC HEARING
PH 1. CDBG Funds to build a Soccer Field on Old PAR 3 – Parks and Recreation
PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE
A. Mayor read the item
B. Mayor declare the Public Hearing open
C. Hear staff report
D. Council questions only
E. Ask city clerk to report on any communication(s)
F. Mayor call for public testimony
G. Close Public Hearing by motion
H. Council discussion
I. Council motion and vote
Recommendation
Council to discuss, take public testimony and direct staff to continue with the grant process.
The following items were added to the City Council agenda after publishing and posting, but more than 72 hours before the meeting. Socorro Chavez, City Clerk
ITEM NO. PH 1.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
DECEMBER 13, 2022
PREPARED BY: Theresa Oaks, Parks and Recreation Supervisor SUBJECT: CDBG Funds to build a Soccer Field on Old PAR 3 BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION:
CDBG funds to build a soccer field on Par 3. California City has been potentially allotted approximately $70,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. These funds, while limited are enough to allow staff to complete smaller projects. There is a significant need to expand our sports areas, allowing the public more room to play sports like soccer and football.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
RECOMMENDATION:
Council to discuss, take public testimony and direct staff to continue with the grant application process.
ATTACHMENTS:
N/A
AGENDA
CITY OF CALIFORNIA
CITY COUNCIL/HOUSING AUTHORITY/SUCCESSOR AGENCY
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 13TH, 2022
REGULAR MEETING @ 6:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBERS & VIA ZOOM
21000 HACIENDA BLVD., CALIFORNIA CITY, CA 93505
If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (760)373-7140 or via email at [email protected] . We request a 72-hour notification prior to the meeting in order for the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 American Disabilities ACT Title II) Zoom instructions and notes:
1. Web Link : https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84892682026
2. Meeting ID: 848 9268 2026
3. Public can dial into the Zoom line:
a. One tap mobile: +16694449171,,85423381555# US
b. Dial the following number: +1 669 444 9171 US
4. Comments
a.Public must join Zoom meeting to comment
b.Keep your mic on Mute until you are requested to speak c.Use the “Raise your Hand” button to request to speak or, d.Send a chat request to City Clerk for request to speak e.When requested to speak state your name for the record f. Re-mute when your time to speak has ended
Public is urged to listen to the meeting in a quiet place, to avoid background noise.
We also request public to MUTE your audio device when not commenting to avoid disruption during meeting. 1 December 13, 2022
** At this time, please take a moment to turn off your cell phones ** REGULAR MEETING AT 6:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Creighton, Kulikoff, Macedonio, Mayor Pro Tem Lessenevitch, Mayor O’Laughlin
ADOPT AGENDA
NEW BUSINESS
NB 1. Council declares the November 8, 2022, Kern County election results – City Clerk Chavez Recommendation
City Council adopt “Resolution No. 12-22-2959 of the City Council of the City of California City reciting the fact of the Municipal Election held on November 8, 2022, declaring the results thereof and such other matters as provided by law. Final Approval is contingent on Kern County certifying the election results.
COMMENTS BY OUTGOING OFFICIALS/RECOGNITION OF SERVICE
TAKING OF THE OATH OF OFFICE
Mayor: Kelly Kulikoff
Councilmembers: Michael Kulikoff, Ronald Smith
SECOND ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Creighton, Kulikoff M., Macedonio, Smith, Mayor Kulikoff
DESIGNATION OF MAYOR PRO TEMPORE
Pursuant to CCMC 2.1.104 (b),
Each time a Mayor is seated, the most senior member of the Council who has not yet served as Mayor Pro Tempore shall serve as Mayor Pro Tempore. The council member who has received the most votes during the most recent election shall serve as Mayor Pro Tempore if two council members have equal seniority. The council member who decline to serve as Mayor Pro Tempore shall be deemed to have served for determining succession. Mayor Pro Tempore shall serve at the pleasure of the council and may be removed by the affirmative vote of majority of the council, in which event a majority of the council shall select a successor.
CITY CLERK REPORTS/LATE COMMUNICATIONS
• Correspondence from J.M. Powers dated December 4, 2022, December 5, 2022, & December 6, 2022. He requested they be part of the official record. They will be attached to the minute meetings closest to the date he submitted.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
• Planning
• OHV
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CIVIC/COMMUNITY/ORGANIZATION ANNOUNCEMENTS
2 December 13, 2022
PUBLIC BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR
This portion of the meeting is reserved for the public to address the City Council on any matter not on the agenda and over which the City Council has jurisdiction. Comments are to be limited to three (3) minutes. The City Council will receive the comments but cannot engage in back-and-forth discussion with the public or make any decision. The City Council can direct staff to bring the item back to a future agenda for discussion.
NEW BUSINESS
NB 2. New Testing format for Dispatchers - by Jesse Hightower, Police Chief Recommendation:
Council approves the annual fee of $1,695 for better candidate selection and testing process NB 3. A motion of the City Council of the City of California City to grant an easement in favor of Southern California Edison Company, authorize the City Manager to sign the Grant of Easement, and to authorize the City Engineer the recordation of irrevocable offer of street dedication documents for Record of Survey No. 4094 – by Dr. Jim Hart , Interim City Manager Recommendation:
A motion of the City Council of the City of California City to grant an easement in favor of Southern California Edison Company, authorize the City Manager to sign the Grant of Easement, and to authorize the City Engineer the recordation of irrevocable offer of street dedication documents for Record of Survey No. 4094.
NB 4. California City’s Industrial, Commercial, and Residential Building Codes - by Mayor Kulikoff Recommendation:
Direct the City Manager to bring back an update to California City’s building codes.
NB 5. The future of all Commissions – by Mayor Kulikoff Recommendation:
Direct the City Manager per City Council direction
NB 6. Update the Exterior of City Hall including Signage and Landscaping – by Mayor Kulikoff Recommendation:
Direct the City Manager per City Council direction.
NB 7. Fast Track Resolution 10-22-2952 Discussion and Reconsideration – by Mayor Kulikoff Recommendation:
Reconsider the separation of Resolution 10-22-2952. Discuss Resolution 10-22-2952 . City Council to direct The City Manager
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS, AGENDA REQUESTS, AND AB1234 REPORTS This portion of the meeting is reserved for council members to present information, announcements, and items that have come to their attention. The Brown Act precludes Council, staff or public discussion. Short staff responses are appropriate. The Council will take no formal action. A Council member may request the City Clerk to calendar an item for consideration at a future meeting or refer an item to staff.
3 December 13, 2022
ADJOURNMENT
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54955 this Regular Meeting of the City Council will be adjourned to an Adjourned Regular Meeting to be held Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 4:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers. The City Clerk will post notice of the December 14, 2022 Adjourned Regular Meeting within 24 hours from the end time of this Regular Meeting as required by Government Code Section 54955.
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING: This agenda was posted on all official City bulletin boards and the City website at least 72 hours prior to the Council Meeting. Socorro Chavez, City Clerk
4 December 13, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. 12-22-2959
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 8,
2022; DECLARING THE RESULTS THEREOF AND
SUCH OTHER MATTER AS PROVIDED BY LAW
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Purpose
A Municipal election was conducted by the City of California City on November 8, 2022 in time, form and manner required by the Elections Code. Pursuant to resolutions, the Count Clerk canvassed the return of the election and certified the results.
Section 2. Votes Cast
The total votes (ballots) cast in this election for the candidates running for office in the City of California City :
Section 3. Election of Officers
(a) The candidates for Mayor were Kelly Kulikoff, Jose “Joe” Barragan, and Jeanie O’Laughlin The candidates for City Council were Shawn Bradley, Marcus Fair, Mark Goodell, Michael Kulikoff, Donald L Parris, Ronald V Smith Jr, and Kim D Welling.
(b) The total votes cast at City, precincts, as well as through absent voter ballots to the person above named for the respective offices are listed on Exhibit "A", attached. (c) The City Council determines and declares: Kelly Kulikoff was elected Mayor; Ronald Smith and Michael Kulikoff were elected to Full Term City Council. (d) The City Clerk shall immediately deliver a certificate of election to each elected person and shall administer the Oath of Office to each elected person. The elected persons shall then be inducted in their respective offices.
Section 4. Certification
The City Clerk shall enter on the City's records a statement of the results of the election, showing: the votes (ballots) cast, the candidates, the offices, the number of votes at each precinct for each candidate and the total number of votes for each candidate.
NB 1.
5 December 13, 2022
PASSED AND ADOPTED on December 13, 2022 by the City Council of the City of California City, County of Kern, State of California, by the following vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
_________________________________________
Kelly Kulikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________________________
Socorro Chavez, City Clerk
(seal)
6 December 13, 2022
7 December 13, 2022
Late Communications
8 December 13, 2022
9 December 13, 2022
10 December 13, 2022
11 December 13, 2022
12 December 13, 2022
13 December 13, 2022
ITEM NO.
DEPARTMENT REPORT
reReREPORT
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
December 13, 2022
PREPARED BY: Inge Elmes, OHV Manager
SUBJECT: OHV MONTHLY DEPARTMENT REPORT
Events
Thanksgiving holiday brought many OHV visitors with a count of 342 visible RV groups seen from Twenty Mule Team Parkway. Staff will now prepare for the New Year’s holiday weekend. Vendor row will be fully operational with returning local vendors beginning Wednesday, December 28th from 8am-5pm through Sunday, January 1st, 2023.
Operations
Ground crew continues to maintain OHV riding areas, install signage, and upkeep amenities. Park aides are preparing for the next holiday.
Manager Updates
Staff is focused on closing out previous grant year and project agreements for the current G22 grant cycle.
Finance Report
For the month of November, OHV sales totaled $59,659.00. These numbers are actuals and reflect only amounts received within each month. Please refer to Monthly Permit Sales report for FY totals. *Not all proceeds are deposited in the same month.
**OHV sales are deposited to specific OHV Permit Program GL revenue codes #29-3992 through #29- 3998. Please refer to financial statement for details.
***Some merchandise was purchased by staff at a discounted rate. All sales for merchandise are allocated to GL revenue code 29-3691.
14 December 13, 2022
Nov 2022 MONTHLY OHV PROGRAM SALES FY 22/23
SALES QTY CASH CHECK CREDIT CARD PAYPAL TOTALS YTD TOTALS Single Permits (Prorated) $10
Single Permits $15 843 $6,915 $660 $4,815 $255 $12,645 18,510.00 Small Family (Prorated) $40
Small Family $60 380 $7,620 $420 $14,640 $120 $22,800 30,060.00 Large Family (Prorated) $80
Large Family $100 59 $2,500 $200 $3,000 $200 $5,900 7,700.00 OHV 4 Pack (Prorated) $35
OHV 4 Pack $50 135 $3,550 $300 $2,750 $150 $6,750 9,150 RV Pass (Prorated) $15
RV Pass $30 99 $1,410 $120 $1,410 $30 $2,970 4,440.00
Single Dump Pass $5 67 $280 $55 $335 445
Single Water Pass $5 62 $180 $130 $310 390
Additional Permits (Prorated) $5
Additional Permits $10 120 $590 $40 $570 $1,200 1,660.00 Free Free 88 0
Residents Permits Free 14 0
Paypal Fees - $4 $4 21 $84 $84 $280
Holiday Week Day - Power $25 2 $25 $25 $50 50
Holiday Week Day - Water $15 2 $15 $15 $30 30
Non-Holiday Weekday-Power $15 285.00
Non-Holiday Weekday-Water $10 90.00
Holiday Weekend - Power $40 2 $40 $40 $80 200
Holiday Weekend - Water $20 2 $20 $20 $40 80
Non-Holiday Weekend-Power $25 550.00
Non-Holiay Weekend-Water $15 195
Shower Tokens $0.50 1686 $737 $106 $843 1,401.00
Transient Lodging $150
Vendor Fees $1 $405 $975 $1,380 1,380.00
Special Event Fees $5 $0 0
Map Sales $3 30 $30 $60 $90 108
Donations $1 $91 $91 143
Hoodies $40 64 $640 $1,700 $2,340 2,760.00
Short Sleeve Shirts $20 7 $20 $130 $150 500.00
Long Sleeve Shirts $30 5 $60 $90 $150 315.00
Caps $20 18 $80 $280 $360 690.00
Bucket Hats $20 2 $40 $40 130.00
Visors $15 3 $30 $15 $45 60.00
Beenies $15 41 $250 $360 $610 715.00
Tumblers $25 3 $15 $30 $45 130.00
Magnets $5 6 $10 $20 $30 40.00
Stickers $3 22 $39 $27 $66 114.00
Coffee Mugs $15 4 $30 $40 $70 130.00
Shot Glasses $8 22 $81 $74 $155 155.00
MONTHLY TOTALS $25,663 $2,715 $30,442 $839 $59,659 $82,886.00 15 December 13, 2022
November 2022 Planning Staff Report
DEPARTMENT REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 13, 2022
FROM: PLANNING/INTERWEST
SUBJECT: MONTHLY PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
Staff
1-Planning Clerk (LaShelle Cooper)
1-Planning Admin (Marie Stowers)
1-City Planner (Open Position)
1-Consulting Company (Interwest)
The city will present to council a staff report for continued services with Interwest on a month-to-month basis. In the meantime, HR and City Manager are looking for alternative venues to recruit for an in-house city planner.
Projects/Applications
This report includes the following items:
• A summary of projects and revenue for the month of November 2022 • A list of approved closed, open and new projects for November 2022 Project Backlog
We continue to make progress with the backlog of projects.
Thank You
16 December 13, 2022
PROJECT TYPE NOVEMBER TOTAL FY TOTAL
CUP: NA
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS: NA
LOT MERGERS: NA
SPR: 5 NA
SPR MINOR: 4 NA
TENATIVE PARCEL MAPS: NA
VARIANCE: NA
ZONE CHANGE & GPA: 1 NA
ZONE TEXT AMENDMENTS: NA
PROJECT TYPE NOVEMBER TOTAL FY TOTAL
CUP: 2
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS:
LOT MERGERS: 1
SPR M: 3 11
SPR: 3 13
TENATIVE PARCEL MAPS: 4
VARIANCE:
ZONE CHANGE & GPA:
ZONE TEXT AMENDMENTS:
PROJECT TYPE NOVEMBER TOTAL
CUP: 1 NA
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS: 1 NA
LOT MERGERS: 10 NA
SPR M: 7 NA
SPR: 53 NA
TENATIVE PARCEL MAPS: 8 NA
TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS: 1 NA
VARIANCE: 3 NA
ZONE CHANGE & GPA: 8 NA
PROJECT TYPE NOVEMBER TOTAL FY TOTAL
CUP:
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS:
LOT MERGERS: 375.00 $
SPR: $ 2,865.00 $ 21,650.00
TENATIVE PARCEL MAPS: $ 1,604.50
TENATIVE TRACT MAPS:
VARIANCE:
ZONE CHANGE & GPA: $ 7,375.00
Other:
TOTALS $ 2,865.00 $ 31,004.50
PLANNING RECAP
Covers Period November 1 - 30, 2022
REVENUE (Non Reimbursable)
NEW PROJECTS
APPROVED / COMPLETED PROJECTS
OPEN PROJECTS
17 December 13, 2022
Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF C SPR 18-38 APN 203-062-03 Sunepoint SPR 18-38 closed. Applicant will need to resubmit for a new project with new company name. IS/MND 12/4/2019 11/30/2022 InterwestC SPR 21-17 Padron/APN 210-263-14 DENIED IS/MND 03/18/21 11/30/22 Interwest C SPR 21-42 SVF/APN 216-180-18 CANCEL. Applicant to resubmit for new project. NOE 10/25/21 01/15/22 Interwest NC SPR M 22-40 7026 Xavier/RV Repair Shop APPROVED 11/08/2022 NA 09/12/22 11/08/22 Planning NC SPR M 22-42 King Trillion Networking/8116 CCB APPROVED 11/22/2022 NA 09/14/22 11/22/22 Planning NC SPR M 22-48 DNR DMV/8201 CCB Suite APPROVED 11/22/2022 11/22/2022 Planning Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF NC SPR M 22-48 DNR DMV/8201 CCB Suite APPROVED 11/22/2022 NA 11/8/2022 11/22/2022 Planning C SPR 22-49 XO Quality/APN 206-032-02 TBD 09/29/22 12/05/22 InterwestC SPR 22-50 SFV Remodel/APN 216-180-23 TBD 10/25/2022 12/05/22 Interwest NC SPR 22-51 Family Dollar Expansion/APN 208-381-02 TBD 12/05/22 Interwest C SPR 22-52 Hovanes/APN 206-032-32 TBD 11/14/22 12/05/22 InterwestC SPR 22-53 Hovanes/APN 206-032-37 TBD 01/18/22 12/05/22 Interwest NC SPR M 22-54 Taste of Fire/8209 CCB APPROVED 12/5/2022 NA 10/26/2022 12/05/22 PlanningNC SPR M 22-55 Saucey Sliders/APN 205-330-33 NA 11/22/2022 12/05/22 PlanningNC SPR M 22-56 Allison Morgan Family & Comm/APN 299-072-01 NA 11/23/2022 12/05/22 Planning ZC 22-06 Alina Shapiulaeva/APN 225-201-09
PLANNING PROJECT LIST
Tuesday, December 13, 2022
NEW PROJECTS NOVEMBER 2022APPROVED/CLOSED PROJECTS NOVEMBER 2022 NOTE: NEXT MEETING THE PROJECTS LISTED ABOVE WILL BE MOVED TO ASSOCIATED PROJECT TYPE ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES AND NEW PROJECTS WILL BE LISTED ABOVE. **ALL PROJECTS ON FOLLOWING PAGES ARE SEPARATED BY PROJECT TYPE 18 December 13, 2022
Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF NC CUP 22-03 RV Park/APN 218-010-04 Applicant to revise site plan TBD 8/9/2022 11/22/2022 Interwest Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF Unknown LLA 22-01 George Mamayan/APN 302-273-31,32 and 33 Surveyor has submitted correction to applicant N/A 1/12/2022 6/2/2022 Interwest Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF C LM 19-02 Leland Krelle/APN's 299-263-01 & 08 Waiting for Resubmittal - Applicant to provide redundant deed & title guarantee N/A 03/27/19 02/01/22 InterwestC LM 19-03 Leland Krelle/APN's 299-263-04 & 05 Waiting for Resubmittal - Applicant to provide redundant deed & title guarantee N/A 03/27/19 02/01/22 InterwestC LM 19-04 Leland Krelle/APN's 261-111-05, 06, 09 & 10 Waiting for Resubmittal - Applicant to provide matching deed & title N/A 09/23/19 02/01/22 Interwest C LM 21-02 Arvin Bagdsaryan/APN's 216-010-14 & 30 Under Review - Revised submittal received on 12-7-21 N/A 02/19/21 02/01/22 Interwest Unknown LM 21-06 Jason VanCuren/APN's 206-032-20 & 21 Waiting for Resubmittal - Applicant to provide info requested on 07/23/2021 & 09/07/2021 N/A 03/29/21 02/01/22 InterwestUnknown LM 21-07 Patrick Henderson/APN 302-271-01 & 39 Under Review - Sent to Engineer on 10/19/2021 N/A 10/07/21 02/01/22 Interwest C LM 22-01 APN 299-263-01 & 08/All One Solution Waiting on client corrections N/A 02/22/22 04/06/22 Interwest NC LM 22-02 APN 203-420-02 & 30/Urgent Care Planning Review N/A 03/15/22 04/24/22 InterwestNC LM 22-03 APN 225-221-02 & 03/Karo Dzheragyan Planning Review N/A 04/07/22 Interwest C LM 22-05 Nestle/APN 206-031-27 & 28 Planning Review NA 06/20/22 Interwest Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF C SPR M 22-37 El Patron/22510 Curtis Pl Unit 300 In review NA 08/17/22 12/05/22 Planning NC SPR M 22-41 Cal City Carwash/8217 CCB applicant sold property and business. See SPR 22-57 NA 09/12/22 12/05/22 PlanningNC SPR M 22-55 Saucey Sliders/APN 205-330-33 applicant needs to submit additional paperwork NA 11/22/2022 12/05/22 PlanningNC SPR M 22-56 Allison Morgan Family & Comm/APN 299-072-01 applicant needs to submit additional paperwork NA 11/23/2022 12/05/22 Planning NC SPR M 22-57 Cal City Carwash/APN 213-231-11 applicant needs to submit additional paperwork NA 12/4/2022 12/05/22 Planning
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTLOT MERGERSITE PLAN REVIEW (MINOR)CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 19 December 13, 2022
Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF C SPR 20-02 Altanova/APN 302-077-15 Planning Review IS/MND 01/23/20 05/02/22 Interwest C SPR 20-11 Green Canna/APN 216-162-06 Awaiting payment prior to review of the project. IS/MND 04/22/20 03/29/22 InterwestC SPR 20-13 Cannaplex/APN 302-310-16 Circulated internally for comments. N/A 10/19/20 05/31/22 InterwestC SPR 20-14 CoreCivic/APN 350-031-02 Planning Review (applicant non-communicative) EIR 05/15/20 05/02/22 Interwest C SPR 20-16 Urban Leaf/APN 302-271-37 Circulated internally for comments. NOE 07/09/20 04/06/22 InterwestC SPR 20-24 Complex Greens/APN 216-140-06 Circulated internally for comments. IS/MND 11/18/20 04/06/22 Interwest C SPR 20-30 Yerba Gardens/APN 302-271-37 Planning Review IS/MND 08/26/20 05/02/22 Interwest C SPR 20-32 Cantebury/APN 206-041-44 & 206-041-07 Planning Review IS/MND 08/25/20 05/02/22 Interwest C SPR 20-44 Leland Krelle/APN 216-120-04 Awaiting payment prior to review of the project. IS/MND 10/30/19 01/13/22 Interwest C SPR 20-45 Leland Krelle/APN 216-113-08, 09 and 10 Awaiting payment prior to review of the project. IS/MND NA 01/10/22 InterwestC SPR 21-04 Soft Gold/PN 216-010-04 Planning Review IS/MND 02/05/21 04/06/22 Interwest C SPR 21-05 Greenfield/APN 206-041-05 & 06 Planning Review IS/MND InterwestC SPR 21-21 Gary Allen Shaw/APN 206-042-36 Waiting for Resubmittal - Applicant to provide site plan and additional documents IS/MND 04/06/21 01/10/22 Interwest NC SPR 21-31 JBL & Associates, Inc/APN 213-491-07 04/20/21 Interwest C SPR 21-32 Urban Design Specialists/APN 206-031-19 Circulated interally for comments. IS/MND 04/05/21 06/07/22 Interwest C SPR 21-39 Apo Jan, APN 299-263-01 & 08 Pending LM 22-01, applicant working on additional engineering NOE 08/31/21 06/07/22 InterwestC SPR 21-48 Willow Wellness/APN 206-032-33 Awaiting payment prior to review of the project. IS/MND NA 03/02/22 Interwest C SPR 21-52 Green Farmhouse/APN 299-263-04 Applicant has COAs and is working on updates NOE 07/09/21 04/06/22 Interwest NC SPR 21-53 Arrow Engineering/APN 225-221-02 &03 MND being corrected by consultant, circualted for comments internally IS/MND 11/08/21 05/02/22 Interwest C SPR 21-56 Mr.Calderon/APN 212-320-36 Incomplete application, awaiting for resubmittal IS/MND 12/14/21 01/14/22 Interwest C SPR 21-58 Canniland/APN 350-140-10 Applicant has COAs and is working on updates. SPR/MND approved by Director on 7/21/22. IS/MND 12/22/21 06/07/22 InterwestC SPR 22-01 760 Line/APN 216-010-16 CEQA is done, applicant is working on updates per COAs IS/MND 01/24/22 06/07/22 InterwestC SPR 22-02 California Jungle/APN 206-041-42 Planning Review - need to be circulated internally IS/MND 01/18/22 05/20/22 Interwest C SPR 22-03 Vass Green/APN 216-130-01 Planning Review - need to be circulated internally IS/MND 01/18/22 05/20/22 Interwest C SPR 22-04 Exotica Nursery Gardens/APN 206-042-07 Planning Review - need to be circulated internally IS/MND 01/18/22 05/20/22 InterwestC SPR 22-05 7 Leaves/APN 216-150-19 Planning Review - need to be circulated internally IS/MND 01/20/22 05/20/22 InterwestC SPR 22-07 El Patron/APN 216-170-05 Planning Review - need to be circulated internally NOE 01/27/22 05/20/22 Interwest C SPR 22-08 Traditional Ranch/APN 457-020-05,11,12, 26 Planning Review - need to be circulated internally IS/MND 02/09/22 05/20/22 Interwest C SPR 22-10 GG Wholesales/APN 206-032-25 Planning Review - need to be circulated internally IS/MND 02/18/22 05/20/22 InterwestC SPR 22-11 Allay Essence/APN 299-264-02 Planning Review - need to be circulated internally IS/MND 02/22/22 05/20/22 Interwest C SPR 22-12 Hovanes/APN 302-273-03 Planning Review - need to be circulated internally IS/MND 03/03/22 05/20/22 InterwestC SPR 22-13 Hovanes/APN 302-271-07 Planning Review - need to be circulated internally IS/MND 03/15/22 05/20/22 Interwest NC SPR 22-14 Oasis AG/APN 225-092-13
Fire comments received, waiting on engineering comments, MND in IW review. SPR/MND approved by Director on 7/21/22. IS/MND 03/14/22 06/05/22 Interwest
SITE PLAN REVIEW - Under Review & Verification of Project Status 20 December 13, 2022
C SPR 22-18 Accurate Green/APN 206-041-04 04/05/22 Interwest C SPR 22-20 Mr. Vardan/APN 216-150-41 04/29/22 InterwestC SPR 22-22 Hovanes/APN 206-042-02 06/07/22 InterwestC SPR 22-24 Nestle PM/APN 206-031-27 & 28 Interwest C SPR 22-25 HR Cali/APN 206-042-14 & 15 06/27/22 Interwest C SPR 22-31 GOK Unlimited/APN 206-042-43 07/18/22 Interwest C SPR 22-35 Biedenharn Equities/APN 206-042-28,29,16 TBD 08/18/22 08/29/22 Interwest NC SPR 22-36 RV Park/APN 218-010-04 TBD 08/09/22 InterwestNC SPR 22-38 Dollar General/APN 213-110-26 TBD 08/18/22 Interwest C SPR 22-39 Rani Zahr/APN 302-077-02 TBD 08/16/22 InterwestC SPR 22-43 SM&MS Pure Line/APN 206-032-36 Incomplete application, awaiting for resubmittal TBD 09/27/22 Interwest NC SPR 22-44 Kudu Solar TBD 10/06/22 InterwestNC SPR 22-45 Bellefield Solar TBD 10/06/22 InterwestNC SPR 22-46 Hyundai PH 1b/APN 235-243-05 TBD 10/11/22 12/05/22 Interwest C SPR 22-47 Calrox/APN 302-271-09, 10,11,12,13 TBD 08/25/22 12/05/22 InterwestC SPR 22-49 XO Quality/APN 206-032-02 TBD 09/29/22 12/05/22 InterwestC SPR 22-50 SFV Remodel/APN 216-180-23 TBD 10/25/2022 12/05/22 Interwest NC SPR 22-51 Family Dollar Expansion/APN 208-381-02 TBD 12/05/22 Interwest C SPR 22-52 Hovanes/APN 206-032-32 TBD 11/14/22 12/05/22 InterwestC SPR 22-53 Hovanes/APN 206-032-37 TBD 01/18/22 12/05/22 Interwest Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF Unknown TPM 12223 APN 302-271-38 PC approved TPM, now in Final Map Review TBD 4/14/2021 InterwestUnknown TPM 12300 L. Krelle/APN 203-273-34 PC approval 12-2019, in Final Map Review, needs updated COAs IS/MND 4/19/2021 04/06/22 Interwest Unknown TPM 12324 APN 216-114-01 PC approval 12-2019, in Final Map Review, needs updated COAs IS/MND Interwest NC TPM 12374 V. Lungari/APN 350-031-02 Correctional Facility - EIR in public review period IS/MND 11/10/2020 02/04/22 Interwest C TPM 12401 A. Tsaturiyan/APN 302-273-30 PC approved TPM, now in Final Map Review IS/MND 4/13/2021 07/05/22 Interwest C TPM 12407 APN 302-271-19 PC approved TPM, now in Final Map Review IS/MND 4/12/2021 07/05/22 Interwest C TPM 12417 APN 302-271-15 PC approved TPM, now in Final Map Review IS/MND NA 07/05/202 Interwest C TPM 12450 APN 229-010-37 PC approved TPM, now in Final Map Review IS/MND 12/16/2021 2/27/2022 Interwest Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF TTM 22-01 APN 302-274-01, 02, 03, 04 & 05 3/22/2022 Interwest
TENATIVE PARCEL MAPSTENATIVE TRACT MAPS
21 December 13, 2022
Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF NC VAR 20-03 Shell/APN 225-061-12 601 Cal City Blvd Waiting for resubmittal - Email sent to applicant on 07/06/2021 NOE TBD Pending Interwest NC VAR M 21-02 M.Ellison/9532 Rea Ave/10' instead of 8' Planning Review - Documents received on ___________ N/A 04/21/21 Pending Interwest NC VAR M 21-03 J. Heller/9800 Joshua Bld. Block Wall Waiting for Resubmittal email sent on 04/21/2021 N/A 3/1/2021 Pending Planning Cannabis (C)
Non-Cannabis (NC)
TYPE PROJECT APPLICANT/APN PLANNING PROJECT STATUS CEQA TYPE APP DATE ACTIVITY DATE STAFF C ZC 21-05 Arias/299-173-02, 03, 04 City Council consideration of the Appeal on 11-9-21 - Appeal withdrawn NA 04/12/21 NA InterwestC ZC 21-06 M. Ellison/APN 299-173-02, 03, 04 PC July 2022 IS/MND 4/6/2021 06/07/22 Interwest C ZC 21-07 R. Milner/APN 225-201-12 PC July 2022 IS/MND 10/18/2021 06/07/22 Interwest C ZC 22-01 Mr. Leaf/APN 302-020-22 PC July 2022 IS/MND 3/16/2022 06/07/22 InterwestC ZC 22-02 Olivia Davidson/APN 302-391-19 3/30/2022 Interwest NC ZC 22-04 Padron/10856 Hanover 8/11/2022 Interwest
ZC 22-05 Arrow Engineering Services/APN 350-031-19 8/24/2022 InterwestZC 22-06 Alina Shapiulaeva/APN 225-201-09 *LEGEND ABBREVIATIONS **CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) LEGEND ABBREVIATIONS
CUP CEDH MLLA MNDLM EIRNASDRSPRSPR MSPR ETPMTBDVARZCZT
VARIANCESZONE CHANGES
DIRECTOR'S HEARINGLOT LINE ADJUSTMENTSLOT MERGERS
FOOTNOTE:
Red text indicates payment still needed. No approval will be given without full payment of fees.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITZONE TEXT AMENDMENTSNOT APPLICABLESTAFF DEVELOPMENT REVIEWSITE PLAN REVIEWSITE PLAN REVIEW MINORSITE PLAN REVIEW E (BUSINESS - EXISTING BLDG.)TENATIVE PARCEL MAPSTO BE DETERMINEDVARIANCEZONE CHANGE 22 December 13, 2022
NB 2.
23 December 13, 2022
24 December 13, 2022
25 December 13, 2022
26 December 13, 2022
27 December 13, 2022
28 December 13, 2022
CITY COUNCIL
Consent Agenda Item: NB 3.
December 13, 2022
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dr. Jim Hart, Interim City Manager
SUBJECT: A motion of the City Council of the City of California City to grant an easement in favor of Southern California Edison Company, authorize the City Manager to sign the Grant of Easement, and to authorize the City Engineer the recordation of irrevocable offer of street dedication documents for Record of Survey No. 4094.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Background:
Southern California Edison (SCE) has been working closely with the city to develop a plan to address their power needs. SCE is actively working on short- and long-term solutions. One of the short-term solutions they have developed is to build multiple small substations on their distribution grid called Pole Tops (PT) to serve some of the immediate needs until they can complete their long-term solutions. A couple of months ago, SCE reached out to former city manager Doug Dunford inquiring about potential locations to build one of their facilities. Doug provided a couple of available locations that the city owned that met the requirements to build electrical facilities. SCE selected one location that provided enough space to build their facility and was near the load center near the airport, this location is at the northwest corner of Baron Blvd and Mendiburu Rd.
SCE provided grant of easement and right of way documents for city’s approval and execution.
The City Engineer and Wiley Hughes Surveying have completed a Record of Survey No. 4094 of the city owned parcels APN 302-062-48 and 302-062-24 to provide right of way for public and utility purposes. SCE’s proposed project is in the area covered by the Record of Survey.
RECOMMENDATION:
A motion of the City Council of the City of California City to grant an easement in favor of Southern California Edison Company, authorize the City Manager to sign the Grant of Easement, and to authorize the City Engineer the recordation of irrevocable offer of street dedication documents for Record of Survey No. 4094.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION: None
Attachments:
- SCE Grant of Easement
- Easement area
- Record of Survey No. 4094
- Irrevocable offer of street dedications
29 December 13, 2022
30 December 13, 2022
31 December 13, 2022
32 December 13, 2022
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that on the day of ,2022, at a regularly scheduled City Council Meeting, the City of California City consented to the making of this Grant of Easement and the recordation thereof.
Kulikoff Mayor, City of California City
ATTEST:
Socorro Chavez
City Clerk
33 December 13, 2022
201
’
80’
34 December 13, 2022
35 December 13, 2022
36 December 13, 2022
15,477
© Latitude Geographics Group Ltd.
0.5 Legend
1:
WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere
0 0.24 0.5 Miles Notes This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for general reference only. The County of Kern assumes no liability for damages, incurred by the user of this information, which occur directly or indirectly as a result of errors, omissions or discrepancies in the information.
Sections
Section Corners
Parcels Land
Southern California Edison Easement Map
37 December 13, 2022
ITEM NO. NB 4.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
DECEMBER 13, 2022
PREPARED BY: Mayor Kulikoff
SUBJECT: California City’s Industrial, Commercial, and Residential Building Codes
BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION
During the November 22, 2022 City Council meeting, Councilmember Kulikoff requested this item on the December 13, 2022 City Council meeting agenda.
FISCAL IMPACT
Minimal fiscal impact for discussion.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
Direct City Manager per Recommendation.
Other City Council direction.
RECOMMENDATION
DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO BRING BACK AN UPDATE TO CALIFORNIA CITY’S BUILDING CODES.
ATTACHMENTS
NONE.
38 December 13, 2022
ITEM NO. NB 5.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
DECEMBER 13, 2022
PREPARED BY: Mayor Kulikoff
SUBJECT: The Future of All Commissions
BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION
During the November 22, 2022 City Council meeting, Councilmember Kulikoff requested this item on the December 13, 2022 City Council meeting agenda.
FISCAL IMPACT
Minimal fiscal impact for discussion.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
Direct City Manager per Recommendation.
Other City Council direction.
RECOMMENDATION
DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER PER CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION.
ATTACHMENTS
NONE.
39 December 13, 2022
ITEM NO. NB 6.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
DECEMBER 13, 2022
PREPARED BY: Mayor Kulikoff
SUBJECT: Update the Exterior of City Hall Including Signage and Landscaping
BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION
During the November 22, 2022 City Council meeting, Councilmember Kulikoff requested this item on the December 13, 2022 City Council meeting agenda.
FISCAL IMPACT
Minimal fiscal impact for discussion.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
Direct City Manager per Recommendation.
Other City Council direction.
RECOMMENDATION
DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER PER CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION.
ATTACHMENTS
EXTERIOR – CITY HALL (PICTURES)
40 December 13, 2022
41 December 13, 2022
42 December 13, 2022
43 December 13, 2022
44 December 13, 2022
45 December 13, 2022
46 December 13, 2022
47 December 13, 2022
ITEM NO. NB 7.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
DECEMBER 13, 2022
PREPARED BY: Mayor Kulikoff
SUBJECT: Fast Track Resolution 10-22-2952 Discussion and Reconsideration
BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION
During the November 22, 2022 City Council meeting, Councilmember Kulikoff requested this item on the December 13, 2022 City Council meeting agenda. On October 11, 2022, City Council directed the City Manager to separate Resolution 10-22-2952 into a resolution and administrative policy by a vote of 5-0.
FISCAL IMPACT
Minimal fiscal impact for discussion.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
Direct City Manager per Recommendation.
Other City Council direction.
RECOMMENDATION
RECONSIDER THE SEPARATION OF RESOLUTION 10-22-2952. DISCUSS RESOLUTION 10-22- 2952. CITY COUNCIL TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER.
ATTACHMENTS
RESOLUTION 10-22-2952
ROSENBERG’S RULES OF ORDER
48 December 13, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. 10-22-2952
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CALIFORNIA CITY INTRODUCING FAST TRACK PERMITTING
POLICY
WHEREAS, the Permit Streamlining Act (“PSA”), California Government Code § 65920 et seq, enacted in 1977 was established in order to expedite the processing of permits for development projects by imposing time limits within which state and local government agencies must either approve or disapprove permits; and WHEREAS, on May 28, 2019, the City of California City (“City”) adopted Resolution 05-19-2090 which temporarily waived, for a period of 3 years, residential development impact fees for water and sewer and water connection fees; and directed staff to develop a “Fast Track Resolution” for adoption as policy to include expedited review and decision of entitlements subject to the PSA and a separate process for expedited review, and permitting of building and engineering plans and documents; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 05-19-2090, the Fast Track process shall include timelines for processing project, entitlement and environmental documents; and WHEREAS, “Fast Track” is defined as a commitment by City staff to expedite the plan review and permit process within a structured timeline, tracking status of applications from submission to approval; and
WHEREAS, on April 27, 2021, the City of California City adopted Resolution 04- 21-2857 extending the temporary waiver of the development impact fees and water connection fee for 5 years commencing from March 23, 2021. All other provisions of Resolution 05-19-2090 shall remain in full force and effect including the City Council’s instructions to staff to develop a Fast Track permitting process; and WHEREAS, on January 14, 2020, the City of California City adopted Resolution 01-20-2815 establishing a new Master Residential Plan Review fee for residential Master Plan sets, which contain identical sets; and
WHEREAS, local community developer and Kern County Taxpayers Association Director, Mr. D.J. Twohig and then City Manager, Doug Dunford, of California City, cohosted meetings July 7, 2022, and July 14, 2022, including assembly of developer working group both virtually and in City Hall chambers, respectively, to specifically address the development industry questions and comments relating to unnecessary impediments involving entitlement and permitting processes; and 170
49 December 13, 2022
October 11, 2022
WHEREAS, Interim City Manager, Dr. Jim Hart, and Mr. Twohig continued the developer working group meeting September 29, 2022, to review and conclude the Draft ‘Fast Track’ Resolution 11-10-2952; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the burdens that unnecessary impediments and delays in processing applications for entitlement and new construction permits pose in attracting and sustaining momentum with residential, commercial, industrial development; and
WHEREAS, the City further recognizes the significance and importance of developers’ investment of ingenuity, capital, time and talent, while encountering risks, etc. as necessary to create jobs, tax base and housing opportunities in the community; and WHEREAS, as part of the permitting process, under California Residential Code (“CRC”) R106.1, Submittal Documents consisting of construction documents and other data shall be submitted in 2 or more sets with each application for a permit. The construction documents shall be prepared by a registered design professional where required by the statutes of the jurisdiction in which the project is to be constructed. Where special conditions exist, the building official is authorized to require additional construction documents to be prepared by a registered design professional.
WHEREAS, the building official is authorized to waive the submission of construction documents and other data not required to be prepared by a registered design professional if it is found that the nature of the work applied for is such that reviewing of construction documents is not necessary to obtain compliance with the CRC; and WHEREAS, under Health and Safety Code 17960 (a), the governing body of a local agency may authorize its enforcement agency to contract with or employ a private entity or persons on a temporary basis to perform the plan-checking function; and WHEREAS, under Health and Safety Code 17960 (d), when there is an excessive delay in checking plans and specifications submitted as a part of an application for a residential building permit, the local agency shall, upon request of the applicant, contract with or employ a private entity or persons on a temporary basis to perform the planchecking; and WHEREAS, the City Manager or Building Official is responsible to ensure the plan review and permit process is concurrently managed within a structured timeline in accordance with state law; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager or designee is responsible for tracking the status of applications from submission to approval, adopting local conditions for a rural community as prescribed in the CRC; and
WHEREAS, City staff and developer working group collectively recommend adopting the following public relations message to enhance the City’s customer service 171
50 December 13, 2022
October 11, 2022
orientation, “Our Vision includes Fast Track permitting and attractive residential permit fees.”
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of California City resolves as follows:
Section 1. Plan check shall occur upon submission and within 10 working days for residential building plan check and within 30 days for commercial building plan check.
Timelines for Entitlements subject to the PSA: 30 calendar day responses to Site Plan Review (“SPR”) applications and environmental documents (if complete). Staff will launch iWorQ tracking and issue passcodes to applicants to monitor the processing. Upon submission of entitlement application, a hearing date will be calendared (subject to completed application). Applicants will be informed by the Planning Department within 10 working days of application for SPR as to whether the application is complete. SPR review and Planning Director’s hearing shall be completed within 90 calendar days of the date an application is determined complete and all fees have been paid by the applicant.
An application number (receipt) will be issued and date stamp upon submission.
Section 2. City Manager is accountable to build the management team which includes City employees, entities and/or private persons as necessary to manage staff professional responsiveness and timelines noted in Section 1 herein (consistent with the PSA and Health and Safety Code § 17960.1.
Section 3. Responsiveness to phone calls, emails, and/or over the counter communications shall occur before leave daily or the following work day at start up.
Section 4. Staff will accept both electronic and/or over the counter submissions of applications as described in CRC.
Section 5. Staff will apply CRC regulations to permit applications, including, but not limited to, local known climatic, topographical or geological conditions.
Section 6. Soils testing shall not be required on residential projects unless greater than one acre or the soil cannot support greater than 1500 psf. Foundation designs by registered design professionals may include design specification for worst case local soil conditions.
Section 7. Per City Master Plan, Residential septic design may follow the historical local conditions for septic installation, per engineer recommended specifications.
Section 8. Staff will review within 1-5 working days, Master Plan Set Plot Plans (which include the subject Site Plan) for those new residential sites when identical and referenced to a previously approved Master Plan. Applicant may defer Survey Plat, solar and fire sprinkler design, subject to field inspection. 172
51 December 13, 2022
October 11, 2022
Section 9. Severability. If any section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Resolution. The City Council of California City hereby declares that it would have adopted the Resolution and each section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, sub-sections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions to be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
This Resolution was approved on the ___ day of October 2022 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
_____________________________
Jeanie O’Laughlin, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ ______________________________ Socorro Chavez, City Clerk Victor Ponto, City Attorney
173
52 December 13, 2022
October 11, 2022
Rosenberg’s Rules of Order
REVISED 2011
Simple Rules of Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century By Judge Dave Rosenberg
53 December 13, 2022
II
MISSION and CORE BELIEFS
To expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians.
VISION
To be recognized and respected as the leading advocate for the common interests of California’s cities.
About the League of California Cities
Established in 1898, the League of California Cities is a member organization that represents California’s incorporated cities.
The League strives to protect the local authority and automony of city government and help California’s cities effectively serve their residents. In addition to advocating on cities’ behalf at the state capitol, the League provides its members with professional development programs and information resources, conducts education conferences and research, and publishes Western City magazine.
© 2011 League of California Cities. All rights reserved.
About the Author
Dave Rosenberg is a Superior Court Judge in Yolo County. He has served as presiding judge of his court, and as presiding judge of the Superior Court Appellate Division. He also has served as chair of the Trial Court Presiding Judges Advisory Committee (the committee composed of all 58 California presiding judges) and as an advisory member of the California Judicial Council. Prior to his appointment to the bench, Rosenberg was member of the Yolo County Board of Supervisors, where he served two terms as chair. Rosenberg also served on the Davis City Council, including two terms as mayor. He has served on the senior staff of two governors, and worked for 19 years in private law practice. Rosenberg has served as a member and chair of numerous state, regional and local boards. Rosenberg chaired the California State Lottery Commission, the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board, the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, the Yolo County Economic Development Commission, and the Yolo County Criminal Justice Cabinet. For many years, he has taught classes on parliamentary procedure and has served as parliamentarian for large and small bodies.
54 December 13, 2022
1 Table of Contents
About the Author ............................................................................................................ii Introduction ....................................................................................................................2 Establishing a Quorum ...................................................................................................2 The Role of the Chair ......................................................................................................2 The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion ........................................................2 Motions in General .........................................................................................................3 The Three Basic Motions ................................................................................................3 Multiple Motions Before the Body .................................................................................4 To Debate or Not to Debate ............................................................................................4 Majority and Super-Majority Votes ...............................................................................5 Counting Votes ................................................................................................................5 The Motion to Reconsider ..............................................................................................6 Courtesy and Decorum ..................................................................................................7 Special Notes About Public Input ..................................................................................7 55 December 13, 2022
2 Establishing a Quorum
The starting point for a meeting is the establishment of a quorum.
A quorum is defined as the minimum number of members of the body who must be present at a meeting for business to be legally transacted. The default rule is that a quorum is one more than half the body. For example, in a five-member body a quorum is three.
When the body has three members present, it can legally transact business. If the body has less than a quorum of members present, it cannot legally transact business. And even if the body has a quorum to begin the meeting, the body can lose the quorum during the meeting when a member departs (or even when a member leaves the dais). When that occurs the body loses its ability to transact business until and unless a quorum is reestablished.
The default rule, identified above, however, gives way to a specific rule of the body that establishes a quorum. For example, the rules of a particular five-member body may indicate that a quorum is four members for that particular body. The body must follow the rules it has established for its quorum. In the absence of such a specific rule, the quorum is one more than half the members of the body.
The Role of the Chair
While all members of the body should know and understand the rules of parliamentary procedure, it is the chair of the body who is charged with applying the rules of conduct of the meeting. The chair should be well versed in those rules. For all intents and purposes, the chair makes the final ruling on the rules every time the chair states an action. In fact, all decisions by the chair are final unless overruled by the body itself.
Since the chair runs the conduct of the meeting, it is usual courtesy for the chair to play a less active role in the debate and discussion than other members of the body. This does not mean that the chair should not participate in the debate or discussion. To the contrary, as a member of the body, the chair has the full right to participate in the debate, discussion and decision-making of the body. What the chair should do, however, is strive to be the last to speak at the discussion and debate stage. The chair should not make or second a motion unless the chair is convinced that no other member of the body will do so at that point in time.
The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion
Formal meetings normally have a written, often published agenda.
Informal meetings may have only an oral or understood agenda. In either case, the meeting is governed by the agenda and the agenda constitutes the body’s agreed-upon roadmap for the meeting. Each agenda item can be handled by the chair in the following basic format:
Introduction
The rules of procedure at meetings should be simple enough for most people to understand. Unfortunately, that has not always been the case. Virtually all clubs, associations, boards, councils and bodies follow a set of rules — Robert’s Rules of Order — which are embodied in a small, but complex, book. Virtually no one I know has actually read this book cover to cover. Worse yet, the book was written for another time and for another purpose. If one is chairing or running a parliament, then Robert’s Rules of Order is a dandy and quite useful handbook for procedure in that complex setting. On the other hand, if one is running a meeting of say, a five-member body with a few members of the public in attendance, a simplified version of the rules of parliamentary procedure is in order.
Hence, the birth of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order.
What follows is my version of the rules of parliamentary procedure, based on my decades of experience chairing meetings in state and local government. These rules have been simplified for the smaller bodies we chair or in which we participate, slimmed down for the 21st Century, yet retaining the basic tenets of order to which we have grown accustomed. Interestingly enough, Rosenberg’s Rules has found a welcoming audience. Hundreds of cities, counties, special districts, committees, boards, commissions, neighborhood associations and private corporations and companies have adopted Rosenberg’s Rules in lieu of Robert’s Rules because they have found them practical, logical, simple, easy to learn and user friendly.
This treatise on modern parliamentary procedure is built on a foundation supported by the following four pillars:
1. Rules should establish order. The first purpose of rules of parliamentary procedure is to establish a framework for the orderly conduct of meetings.
2. Rules should be clear. Simple rules lead to wider understanding and participation. Complex rules create two classes: those who understand and participate; and those who do not fully understand and do not fully participate.
3. Rules should be user friendly. That is, the rules must be simple enough that the public is invited into the body and feels that it has participated in the process.
4. Rules should enforce the will of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority. The ultimate purpose of rules of procedure is to encourage discussion and to facilitate decision making by the body. In a democracy, majority rules. The rules must enable the majority to express itself and fashion a result, while permitting the minority to also express itself, but not dominate, while fully participating in the process.
56 December 13, 2022
3 Ninth, the chair takes a vote. Simply asking for the “ayes” and then asking for the “nays” normally does this. If members of the body do not vote, then they “abstain.” Unless the rules of the body provide otherwise (or unless a super majority is required as delineated later in these rules), then a simple majority (as defined in law or the rules of the body as delineated later in these rules) determines whether the motion passes or is defeated.
Tenth, the chair should announce the result of the vote and what action (if any) the body has taken. In announcing the result, the chair should indicate the names of the members of the body, if any, who voted in the minority on the motion. This announcement might take the following form: “The motion passes by a vote of 3-2, with Smith and Jones dissenting. We have passed the motion requiring a 10-day notice for all future meetings of this body.”
Motions in General
Motions are the vehicles for decision making by a body. It is usually best to have a motion before the body prior to commencing discussion of an agenda item. This helps the body focus.
Motions are made in a simple two-step process. First, the chair should recognize the member of the body. Second, the member of the body makes a motion by preceding the member’s desired approach with the words “I move … ”
A typical motion might be: “I move that we give a 10-day notice in the future for all our meetings.”
The chair usually initiates the motion in one of three ways:
1. Inviting the members of the body to make a motion, for example, “A motion at this time would be in order.”
2. Suggesting a motion to the members of the body, “A motion would be in order that we give a 10-day notice in the future for all our meetings.”
3. Making the motion. As noted, the chair has every right as a member of the body to make a motion, but should normally do so only if the chair wishes to make a motion on an item but is convinced that no other member of the body is willing to step forward to do so at a particular time.
The Three Basic Motions
There are three motions that are the most common and recur often at meetings:
The basic motion. The basic motion is the one that puts forward a decision for the body’s consideration. A basic motion might be: “I move that we create a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.”
First, the chair should clearly announce the agenda item number and should clearly state what the agenda item subject is. The chair should then announce the format (which follows) that will be followed in considering the agenda item.
Second, following that agenda format, the chair should invite the appropriate person or persons to report on the item, including any recommendation that they might have. The appropriate person or persons may be the chair, a member of the body, a staff person, or a committee chair charged with providing input on the agenda item.
Third, the chair should ask members of the body if they have any technical questions of clarification. At this point, members of the body may ask clarifying questions to the person or persons who reported on the item, and that person or persons should be given time to respond.
Fourth, the chair should invite public comments, or if appropriate at a formal meeting, should open the public meeting for public input.
If numerous members of the public indicate a desire to speak to the subject, the chair may limit the time of public speakers. At the conclusion of the public comments, the chair should announce that public input has concluded (or the public hearing, as the case may be, is closed).
Fifth, the chair should invite a motion. The chair should announce the name of the member of the body who makes the motion.
Sixth, the chair should determine if any member of the body wishes to second the motion. The chair should announce the name of the member of the body who seconds the motion. It is normally good practice for a motion to require a second before proceeding to ensure that it is not just one member of the body who is interested in a particular approach. However, a second is not an absolute requirement, and the chair can proceed with consideration and vote on a motion even when there is no second. This is a matter left to the discretion of the chair.
Seventh, if the motion is made and seconded, the chair should make sure everyone understands the motion.
This is done in one of three ways:
1. The chair can ask the maker of the motion to repeat it;
2. The chair can repeat the motion; or
3. The chair can ask the secretary or the clerk of the body to repeat the motion.
Eighth, the chair should now invite discussion of the motion by the body. If there is no desired discussion, or after the discussion has ended, the chair should announce that the body will vote on the motion. If there has been no discussion or very brief discussion, then the vote on the motion should proceed immediately and there is no need to repeat the motion. If there has been substantial discussion, then it is normally best to make sure everyone understands the motion by repeating it.
57 December 13, 2022
4 First, the chair would deal with the third (the last) motion on the floor, the substitute motion. After discussion and debate, a vote would be taken first on the third motion. If the substitute motion passed, it would be a substitute for the basic motion and would eliminate it. The first motion would be moot, as would the second motion (which sought to amend the first motion), and the action on the agenda item would be completed on the passage by the body of the third motion (the substitute motion). No vote would be taken on the first or second motions.
Second, if the substitute motion failed, the chair would then deal with the second (now the last) motion on the floor, the motion to amend. The discussion and debate would focus strictly on the amendment (should the committee be five or 10 members). If the motion to amend passed, the chair would then move to consider the main motion (the first motion) as amended. If the motion to amend failed, the chair would then move to consider the main motion (the first motion) in its original format, not amended.
Third, the chair would now deal with the first motion that was placed on the floor. The original motion would either be in its original format (five-member committee), or if amended, would be in its amended format (10-member committee). The question on the floor for discussion and decision would be whether a committee should plan and put on the annual fundraiser.
To Debate or Not to Debate
The basic rule of motions is that they are subject to discussion and debate. Accordingly, basic motions, motions to amend, and substitute motions are all eligible, each in their turn, for full discussion before and by the body. The debate can continue as long as members of the body wish to discuss an item, subject to the decision of the chair that it is time to move on and take action.
There are exceptions to the general rule of free and open debate on motions. The exceptions all apply when there is a desire of the body to move on. The following motions are not debatable (that is, when the following motions are made and seconded, the chair must immediately call for a vote of the body without debate on the motion):
Motion to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the body to immediately adjourn to its next regularly scheduled meeting. It requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to recess. This motion, if passed, requires the body to immediately take a recess. Normally, the chair determines the length of the recess which may be a few minutes or an hour. It requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to fix the time to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the body to adjourn the meeting at the specific time set in the motion. For example, the motion might be: “I move we adjourn this meeting at midnight.” It requires a simple majority vote.
The motion to amend. If a member wants to change a basic motion that is before the body, they would move to amend it. A motion to amend might be: “I move that we amend the motion to have a 10-member committee.” A motion to amend takes the basic motion that is before the body and seeks to change it in some way.
The substitute motion. If a member wants to completely do away with the basic motion that is before the body, and put a new motion before the body, they would move a substitute motion. A substitute motion might be: “I move a substitute motion that we cancel the annual fundraiser this year.”
“Motions to amend” and “substitute motions” are often confused, but they are quite different, and their effect (if passed) is quite different.
A motion to amend seeks to retain the basic motion on the floor, but modify it in some way. A substitute motion seeks to throw out the basic motion on the floor, and substitute a new and different motion for it. The decision as to whether a motion is really a “motion to amend” or a “substitute motion” is left to the chair. So if a member makes what that member calls a “motion to amend,” but the chair determines that it is really a “substitute motion,” then the chair’s designation governs.
A “friendly amendment” is a practical parliamentary tool that is simple, informal, saves time and avoids bogging a meeting down with numerous formal motions. It works in the following way: In the discussion on a pending motion, it may appear that a change to the motion is desirable or may win support for the motion from some members. When that happens, a member who has the floor may simply say, “I want to suggest a friendly amendment to the motion.” The member suggests the friendly amendment, and if the maker and the person who seconded the motion pending on the floor accepts the friendly amendment, that now becomes the pending motion on the floor. If either the maker or the person who seconded rejects the proposed friendly amendment, then the proposer can formally move to amend.
Multiple Motions Before the Body
There can be up to three motions on the floor at the same time.
The chair can reject a fourth motion until the chair has dealt with the three that are on the floor and has resolved them. This rule has practical value. More than three motions on the floor at any given time is confusing and unwieldy for almost everyone, including the chair.
When there are two or three motions on the floor (after motions and seconds) at the same time, the vote should proceed first on the last motion that is made. For example, assume the first motion is a basic “motion to have a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.” During the discussion of this motion, a member might make a second motion to “amend the main motion to have a 10-member committee, not a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.” And perhaps, during that discussion, a member makes yet a third motion as a “substitute motion that we not have an annual fundraiser this year.” The proper procedure would be as follows:
58 December 13, 2022
5 Motion to close nominations. When choosing officers of the body (such as the chair), nominations are in order either from a nominating committee or from the floor of the body. A motion to close nominations effectively cuts off the right of the minority to nominate officers and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to object to the consideration of a question. Normally, such a motion is unnecessary since the objectionable item can be tabled or defeated straight up. However, when members of a body do not even want an item on the agenda to be considered, then such a motion is in order. It is not debatable, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to suspend the rules. This motion is debatable, but requires a two-thirds vote to pass. If the body has its own rules of order, conduct or procedure, this motion allows the body to suspend the rules for a particular purpose. For example, the body (a private club) might have a rule prohibiting the attendance at meetings by non-club members. A motion to suspend the rules would be in order to allow a non-club member to attend a meeting of the club on a particular date or on a particular agenda item.
Counting Votes
The matter of counting votes starts simple, but can become complicated.
Usually, it’s pretty easy to determine whether a particular motion passed or whether it was defeated. If a simple majority vote is needed to pass a motion, then one vote more than 50 percent of the body is required. For example, in a five-member body, if the vote is three in favor and two opposed, the motion passes. If it is two in favor and three opposed, the motion is defeated.
If a two-thirds majority vote is needed to pass a motion, then how many affirmative votes are required? The simple rule of thumb is to count the “no” votes and double that count to determine how many “yes” votes are needed to pass a particular motion. For example, in a seven-member body, if two members vote “no” then the “yes” vote of at least four members is required to achieve a two-thirds majority vote to pass the motion.
What about tie votes? In the event of a tie, the motion always fails since an affirmative vote is required to pass any motion. For example, in a five-member body, if the vote is two in favor and two opposed, with one member absent, the motion is defeated.
Vote counting starts to become complicated when members vote “abstain” or in the case of a written ballot, cast a blank (or unreadable) ballot. Do these votes count, and if so, how does one count them? The starting point is always to check the statutes.
In California, for example, for an action of a board of supervisors to be valid and binding, the action must be approved by a majority of the board. (California Government Code Section 25005.) Typically, this means three of the five members of the board must vote affirmatively in favor of the action. A vote of 2-1 would not be sufficient. A vote of 3-0 with two abstentions would be sufficient. In general law cities in Motion to table. This motion, if passed, requires discussion of the agenda item to be halted and the agenda item to be placed on “hold.” The motion can contain a specific time in which the item can come back to the body. “I move we table this item until our regular meeting in October.” Or the motion can contain no specific time for the return of the item, in which case a motion to take the item off the table and bring it back to the body will have to be taken at a future meeting. A motion to table an item (or to bring it back to the body) requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to limit debate. The most common form of this motion is to say, “I move the previous question” or “I move the question” or “I call the question” or sometimes someone simply shouts out “question.” As a practical matter, when a member calls out one of these phrases, the chair can expedite matters by treating it as a “request” rather than as a formal motion. The chair can simply inquire of the body, “any further discussion?” If no one wishes to have further discussion, then the chair can go right to the pending motion that is on the floor.
However, if even one person wishes to discuss the pending motion further, then at that point, the chair should treat the call for the “question” as a formal motion, and proceed to it.
When a member of the body makes such a motion (“I move the previous question”), the member is really saying: “I’ve had enough debate. Let’s get on with the vote.” When such a motion is made, the chair should ask for a second, stop debate, and vote on the motion to limit debate. The motion to limit debate requires a two-thirds vote of the body.
NOTE: A motion to limit debate could include a time limit. For example: “I move we limit debate on this agenda item to 15 minutes.” Even in this format, the motion to limit debate requires a twothirds vote of the body. A similar motion is a motion to object to consideration of an item. This motion is not debatable, and if passed, precludes the body from even considering an item on the agenda. It also requires a two-thirds vote.
Majority and Super Majority Votes
In a democracy, a simple majority vote determines a question. A tie vote means the motion fails. So in a seven-member body, a vote of 4-3 passes the motion. A vote of 3-3 with one abstention means the motion fails. If one member is absent and the vote is 3-3, the motion still fails.
All motions require a simple majority, but there are a few exceptions.
The exceptions come up when the body is taking an action which effectively cuts off the ability of a minority of the body to take an action or discuss an item. These extraordinary motions require a two-thirds majority (a super majority) to pass:
Motion to limit debate. Whether a member says, “I move the previous question,” or “I move the question,” or “I call the question,” or “I move to limit debate,” it all amounts to an attempt to cut off the ability of the minority to discuss an item, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
59 December 13, 2022
6 Now, exactly how does a member cast an “abstention” vote? Any time a member votes “abstain” or says, “I abstain,” that is an abstention. However, if a member votes “present” that is also treated as an abstention (the member is essentially saying, “Count me for purposes of a quorum, but my vote on the issue is abstain.”) In fact, any manifestation of intention not to vote either “yes” or “no” on the pending motion may be treated by the chair as an abstention. If written ballots are cast, a blank or unreadable ballot is counted as an abstention as well.
Can a member vote “absent” or “count me as absent?” Interesting question. The ruling on this is up to the chair. The better approach is for the chair to count this as if the member had left his/her chair and is actually “absent.” That, of course, affects the quorum. However, the chair may also treat this as a vote to abstain, particularly if the person does not actually leave the dais.
The Motion to Reconsider
There is a special and unique motion that requires a bit of explanation all by itself; the motion to reconsider. A tenet of parliamentary procedure is finality. After vigorous discussion, debate and a vote, there must be some closure to the issue. And so, after a vote is taken, the matter is deemed closed, subject only to reopening if a proper motion to consider is made and passed.
A motion to reconsider requires a majority vote to pass like other garden-variety motions, but there are two special rules that apply only to the motion to reconsider.
First, is the matter of timing. A motion to reconsider must be made at the meeting where the item was first voted upon. A motion to reconsider made at a later time is untimely. (The body, however, can always vote to suspend the rules and, by a two-thirds majority, allow a motion to reconsider to be made at another time.)
Second, a motion to reconsider may be made only by certain members of the body. Accordingly, a motion to reconsider may be made only by a member who voted in the majority on the original motion. If such a member has a change of heart, he or she may make the motion to reconsider (any other member of the body — including a member who voted in the minority on the original motion — may second the motion). If a member who voted in the minority seeks to make the motion to reconsider, it must be ruled out of order. The purpose of this rule is finality. If a member of minority could make a motion to reconsider, then the item could be brought back to the body again and again, which would defeat the purpose of finality.
If the motion to reconsider passes, then the original matter is back before the body, and a new original motion is in order. The matter may be discussed and debated as if it were on the floor for the first time.
California, as another example, resolutions or orders for the payment of money and all ordinances require a recorded vote of the total members of the city council. (California Government Code Section 36936.) Cities with charters may prescribe their own vote requirements. Local elected officials are always well-advised to consult with their local agency counsel on how state law may affect the vote count.
After consulting state statutes, step number two is to check the rules of the body. If the rules of the body say that you count votes of “those present” then you treat abstentions one way. However, if the rules of the body say that you count the votes of those “present and voting,” then you treat abstentions a different way. And if the rules of the body are silent on the subject, then the general rule of thumb (and default rule) is that you count all votes that are “present and voting.” Accordingly, under the “present and voting” system, you would NOT count abstention votes on the motion. Members who abstain are counted for purposes of determining quorum (they are “present”), but you treat the abstention votes on the motion as if they did not exist (they are not “voting”). On the other hand, if the rules of the body specifically say that you count votes of those “present” then you DO count abstention votes both in establishing the quorum and on the motion. In this event, the abstention votes act just like “no” votes.
How does this work in practice?
Here are a few examples.
Assume that a five-member city council is voting on a motion that requires a simple majority vote to pass, and assume further that the body has no specific rule on counting votes. Accordingly, the default rule kicks in and we count all votes of members that are “present and voting.” If the vote on the motion is 3-2, the motion passes. If the motion is 2-2 with one abstention, the motion fails.
Assume a five-member city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, and further assume that the body has no specific rule on counting votes. Again, the default rule applies.
If the vote is 3-2, the motion fails for lack of a two-thirds majority. If the vote is 4-1, the motion passes with a clear two-thirds majority. A vote of three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain” also results in passage of the motion. Once again, the abstention is counted only for the purpose of determining quorum, but on the actual vote on the motion, it is as if the abstention vote never existed — so an effective 3-1 vote is clearly a two-thirds majority vote.
Now, change the scenario slightly. Assume the same five-member city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, but now assume that the body DOES have a specific rule requiring a two-thirds vote of members “present.” Under this specific rule, we must count the members present not only for quorum but also for the motion. In this scenario, any abstention has the same force and effect as if it were a “no” vote. Accordingly, if the votes were three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain,” then the motion fails. The abstention in this case is treated like a “no” vote and effective vote of 3-2 is not enough to pass two-thirds majority muster.
60 December 13, 2022
7 Appeal. If the chair makes a ruling that a member of the body disagrees with, that member may appeal the ruling of the chair. If the motion is seconded, and after debate, if it passes by a simple majority vote, then the ruling of the chair is deemed reversed.
Call for orders of the day. This is simply another way of saying, “return to the agenda.” If a member believes that the body has drifted from the agreed-upon agenda, such a call may be made. It does not require a vote, and when the chair discovers that the agenda has not been followed, the chair simply reminds the body to return to the agenda item properly before them. If the chair fails to do so, the chair’s determination may be appealed.
Withdraw a motion. During debate and discussion of a motion, the maker of the motion on the floor, at any time, may interrupt a speaker to withdraw his or her motion from the floor. The motion is immediately deemed withdrawn, although the chair may ask the person who seconded the motion if he or she wishes to make the motion, and any other member may make the motion if properly recognized.
Special Notes About Public Input
The rules outlined above will help make meetings very publicfriendly. But in addition, and particularly for the chair, it is wise to remember three special rules that apply to each agenda item:
Rule One: Tell the public what the body will be doing.
Rule Two: Keep the public informed while the body is doing it.
Rule Three: When the body has acted, tell the public what the body did.
Courtesy and Decorum
The rules of order are meant to create an atmosphere where the members of the body and the members of the public can attend to business efficiently, fairly and with full participation. At the same time, it is up to the chair and the members of the body to maintain common courtesy and decorum. Unless the setting is very informal, it is always best for only one person at a time to have the floor, and it is always best for every speaker to be first recognized by the chair before proceeding to speak.
The chair should always ensure that debate and discussion of an agenda item focuses on the item and the policy in question, not the personalities of the members of the body. Debate on policy is healthy, debate on personalities is not. The chair has the right to cut off discussion that is too personal, is too loud, or is too crude.
Debate and discussion should be focused, but free and open. In the interest of time, the chair may, however, limit the time allotted to speakers, including members of the body.
Can a member of the body interrupt the speaker? The general rule is “no.” There are, however, exceptions. A speaker may be interrupted for the following reasons:
Privilege. The proper interruption would be, “point of privilege.” The chair would then ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate points of privilege relate to anything that would interfere with the normal comfort of the meeting. For example, the room may be too hot or too cold, or a blowing fan might interfere with a person’s ability to hear.
Order. The proper interruption would be, “point of order.” Again, the chair would ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate points of order relate to anything that would not be considered appropriate conduct of the meeting. For example, if the chair moved on to a vote on a motion that permits debate without allowing that discussion or debate.
61 December 13, 2022
1400 K Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 658-8200 | Fax (916) 658-8240
www.cacities.org
To order additional copies of this publication, call (916) 658-8200. $10
© 2011 League of California Cities. All rights reserved.
Printed on recycled paper.
62 December 13, 2022