Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Council Handbook topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council sends proposed handbook revisions back to Rules Committee after debate
Summary
Councilmembers debated multiple proposed edits to a draft City Council handbook, including shifts to a values-based code of ethics, approaches to urgent referrals, and a proposal to allow limited rollover of apparel/travel funds. The council voted 6–1 to return the handbook to the Rules Committee for further work.
San Leandro City Council on May 5 directed staff to return proposed updates to the City Council member handbook to the Rules Committee for additional revision and deliberation.
City Clerk Kelly Clancy presented the item, noting it had been discussed at a prior meeting and at Rules Committee. Council discussion focused on several proposed changes submitted by Council Member Simon, who proposed a values-based code of ethics adapted from other cities and a set of specific edits to the handbook. Suggested changes debated included: replacing parts of the existing rules with values-based ethical statements; changing vice mayor nomination language; creating a standing process for urgent referrals and future agenda items; and allowing a limited one-year rollover of apparel/training funds for community benefit.
Several council members supported a values-based approach but flagged the need for specific accountability language and legal review. Vice Mayor Bowen and others recommended returning proposed ethics language to Rules so the committee can refine definitions and accountability mechanisms. Council Member Azevedo asked that unspent apparel funds be allowed to roll over for one year; other members requested clear criteria for any council-held community-benefit spending.
Action: Council Member Aguilar moved and Council Member Bolt seconded a motion to send the handbook back to the Rules Committee for further edits and to return it to the full council later. The motion passed 6–1 (Council Member Simon voted no). The motion does not itself adopt changes to the handbook; it referred the packet back to the Rules Committee for additional work and legal review.
What to expect next: Rules Committee will reconvene to consider the edits and will present revised language to the full council at a future meeting. Councilmembers asked that legal and staff review the proposed ethics language for enforceability and Brown Act compliance before it returns to the full council.
