About

The council’s record

Every roll call the Chico City Council took since November 2008: 3,116 votes from 454 sets of minutes, with the full text of the minutes to search. What was moved, the outcome, and who voted how, as the clerk wrote it, each linked to the City’s own minutes. History, not a scorecard.

The record runs from Nov 18, 2008 to Sep 1, 2026. Nothing newer is read: the City’s meeting portal (chico-ca.granicus.com) asks crawlers not to visit, and we respect that. For later meetings, see the City’s own archive.

Where the words appear in the minutes’ full text: discussion, public comment and reports as well as motions.

  • Aug 3, 2010·8/03/10 Council Meeting

    …vided one more time in August of 2011. 4.2. ITEMS ADDED AFTER THE POSTING OF THE AGENDA - None 5. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR Geoff Kerber addressed his concerns over the short course disc golf plans for Hancock Park. He spoke in opposition to the action of CARD to place a course at this park which was set up for passive use only. 6. ADJOURNMENT Adjourned at 9:18 p.m. to August 17, 2010 at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber for a joint meeting with the Planning C…

    Read the minutes

  • May 18, 2010·5/18/10 Council Meeting

    …Council recessed at 8:25 p.m. for a 15 minute break. The meeting was reconvened and all members of Council were present. 4. REGULAR AGENDA 4.1. CONSIDERATION OF CONVEYANCE OF HUSA RANCH/NOB HILL AND HANCOCK NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND TRANSFER OF JURISDICTION OF LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 001-08 TO CHICO AREA RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT The City Council considered the next in a series of property transactions contemplated by the Memorandum of Intergovernmen…

    Read the minutes

Read from the City’s minutes, every era of them (scanned ones by OCR), by matching each motion with the “AYES / NOES / ABSENT” lines below it and each name against that meeting’s roll call. A name the parser couldn’t match is left out, not guessed. The consent calendar (one vote adopting many routine items) is its own topic. Read the motion before drawing a conclusion: a “no” can be a vote against an amendment, not the policy.