[0:00] work session.
>> Okay. Um throughout the last few years,
[0:07] I think there's been different times
that council has either been made aware
[0:11] of interested um individuals uh
volunteering on our advisory boards or
[0:17] sometimes I think you've accidentally
even interviewed some individuals that
[0:21] would have been a great addition to an
advisory board only to find out that
[0:25] they don't live in Alamosa County. Um,
and what we've run into a few times is
[0:32] individuals that might work full-time or
own a business, but they don't live in
[0:36] Alamosa County, which means they're not
eligible. Or we may have individuals
[0:41] that live in Alamosa County um, but
they're working um, at center or
[0:47] somewhere else and and they don't have
that other nexus and therefore couldn't
[0:52] qualify to be on our advisory board. And
let me back up a little bit. Our
[0:57] advisory boards used to be that you had
to live within the city limits and
[1:02] council at one point in time felt like
you know there's a lot of great minds
[1:07] out there that care about the community
want to volunteer why don't we take the
[1:11] step of opening that up a little bit and
what we did is we took it to the voters
[1:17] because it is in the charter and it
allows someone who's living within
[1:20] Alamosa County so that's the first
standard is they have to live within
[1:24] Alamosa County that either owns a
business, property, or works full-time
[1:30] within city limits. So, someone has to
meet both of those criteria right now to
[1:36] serve on um a board. I think when you
guys came across some of these
[1:41] individuals um that would have been neat
to have on the board, you said in
[1:46] passing maybe we should relook at this
and maybe we should open it up to where
[1:51] if you live in the valley um type of
situation that you would be open to
[1:56] having them on a board. You would still
have your own checks and balances. You'd
[2:00] still do the interviews. It's still your
decision who you appoint to a board um
[2:05] type of situation. staff doesn't really
have much of an opinion on this, but if
[2:11] it is something that council's
interested in wanting to change and make
[2:14] it to where it is more open and you want
to do it this year for the election, we
[2:19] kind of need to know that so we can
start preparing and making sure the same
[2:23] time we're doing education on the street
sales tax that we also um do similar
[2:29] education for for this so people
understand why it's coming before them.
[2:34] So, with that, I'll I'll put it back to
council, but just as a reminder, there's
[2:38] there's the two different criterias,
Alamosa County, and then they have to
[2:43] either own property, work full-time, or
own a business. So, that's the current
[2:48] criteria. So, Mary, I'll turn it over.
>> Time. The expanded criteria is the St.
[2:53] Louis Valley, right?
>> So, you need to talk, you would want to
[2:56] talk through if you want to change both
of those. So, do you want to make the
[3:00] whole San Louis Valley, which is okay,
but that means um I think you
[3:05] interviewed a gentleman who lived in Rio
Grand but worked full-time at ASU. He
[3:11] would then qualify type of situation.
But the other example we had, we had
[3:16] someone who lives right in East Alamosa,
works for a different school district.
[3:21] Since they don't do any of those other
three, they still would not be eligible.
[3:26] So, you would want to talk through if
you want to change both of those
[3:30] criteria or not.
>> Okay.
[3:33] » So, just to be clear, it's not
>> Can you talking to the mic?
[3:37] » Just to be clear, it's not that you want
to change it. You can't do that change,
[3:40] but it's what issue do you want to
propose to the voters because it's a
[3:44] charter change. So, you're not doing
anything other than proposing if you
[3:49] want to a question to the voters.
>> Okay. All right. So, I'll open it up to
[3:56] council. You could just turn your mics
on and we'll we'll talk a little bit
[3:59] about it. Anybody has any first
comments? I'll start off. Looks like
[4:03] Carson and then Krebs,
you want to go first?
[4:07] » Um, mine's a quick 30 second. Um I'm
just thinking just for matter of time if
[4:13] we want to talk about one of the
components first like the valley type
[4:18] thing and then once we figure that out
then we move on to the second one and
[4:21] that way we're not confusing each other
and bouncing back and forth.
[4:25] » That would be my only
suggestion but whatever.
[4:30] » But other than that I'll turn it.
>> Let me see what he had to say.
[4:34] Okay.
I'm just kind of looking for
[4:37] clarification and and forgive me if I'm
not getting it, but so so we're wanting
[4:41] to come up with language for the ballot
because we have to pitch this to the
[4:45] voters if we're going to change it. And
>> if you want to make a change, if you
[4:48] don't want to make a change, then we we
don't do anything. But if you do want to
[4:52] make a change, we do have to take it to
the voters because it's in the charter.
[4:56] » So it would be us wanting to make Hold
on. If we want to make a change, we have
[5:02] to come up with a language, put it on
the ballot, then the voters will vote on
[5:06] yes or no, whether they want to change
the charter. That's a municipal vote. Or
[5:09] do county resip
vote?
[5:12] » Yeah.
>> Um
[5:16] Okay. All right.
>> All right. I don't see any other mics.
[5:22] So, we'll kind of take into
consideration um what councelor Kreb
[5:27] said so we don't get too confused. But I
just want to ask one question of
[5:31] clarification.
So let's use this example. It's a recent
[5:35] example. Um as far as a youth advisory
member being on the board, um a parent
[5:41] reached out to me that's lives in Rio
Grand County and their kid goes to
[5:45] school in Monav Vista, but they're
really active. They really want to be
[5:49] active in um politics and learning from
other political leaders and being on
[5:55] boards. Would that youth be able to be
on a Alamosa advisory board? If we do
[6:00] the St. Louis Valley, allow St. Louis
Valley participants to be on our
[6:04] advisory committee.
>> You would have to change both. So, you
[6:07] have to change the part that says they
can be from the valley.
[6:11] » Okay.
>> Um outside of Alamosa County
[6:13] essentially, and then you have to change
the part that they don't have to be here
[6:18] full time type of thing.
>> Be here full time. And that's what we
[6:21] would be discussing about being on a
ballot if we were to do both. if you
[6:25] want to do both. Yes. Or you can choose
to do one
[6:28] » or none.
>> And I'm gonna give one more real
[6:30] example. Every year, um, councelor Yan
Vehill has his group of students from
[6:37] center come in and and they're real
active and they follow up and reach out
[6:42] wanting to be more involved too. So
that's once again would be something
[6:45] changing both. If a student from uh
center wanted to participate on some of
[6:51] our our advisory committees down the
road as a youth,
[6:54] » you would need to change both of those.
>> Okay. I just want to give that
[6:57] classification. Okay. Council cars. Um
so,
[7:07] and this is purely for clarification. Um
for example, I'm going to use a real
[7:11] world person like Ruthie right now.
Ruthie Brown. Ruthie Brown does not
[7:16] qualify right now.
>> He qualifies right now.
[7:18] » Does qualify to be on the board. Okay.
So, that's kind of the criteria I'm
[7:22] trying to
>> Okay. So,
[7:23] » basically, we're just we're just going
to expand Alamosa County if we make any
[7:26] change at all. We're going to expand
from Mosa to the valley.
[7:30] » Yes.
[7:33] » I think that's board applicable. You
know what I mean? I think that's that's
[7:37] kind of I mean I get it's got to be one
big broad stroke but um like what if
[7:45] there's a board that is you know you
need input on living in the municipality
[7:49] or
>> then don't appoint somebody that's not
[7:52] going to match up.
>> So just wait them out in the criteria in
[7:55] the in the
>> you're not forced to appoint anybody.
[7:58] It's just saying who's eligible to apply
and serve if you appoint them.
[8:05] Okay. And and I'm just thinking through
legalities right here. So if I'm a
[8:09] constituent and and we're looking for
something municipality rep, I mean, you
[8:14] know, city Alamosa proper rep and that's
what part of the criteria is, then this
[8:19] non-Alamosa proper rep would that's
interviewing would not fit that
[8:23] criteria. So that would legally cover us
from any um like discriminatory
[8:30] » accusation. So, so what they're saying,
councelor Carson, is that ultimately
[8:34] it's us who decide who are on these
advisory committees. It just expands our
[8:39] reach to get a bigger pool of people.
>> Yeah, you asked an interesting question.
[8:44] » Yeah, I'm just I'm just thinking about
the legalities.
[8:46] » I don't think it's that interesting.
>> Oh, it is.
[8:48] » I
to you guys can't discriminate against
[8:52] people on protected classes, right? But
if you interview individuals and you
[8:59] don't feel any of them would be a good
fit for the board for reasons that are
[9:03] not related to protected classes, you
don't have to appoint anybody regardless
[9:08] where they live, regardless where they
work, all anything like that. So the
[9:12] only thing from a legal perspective for
discrimination is protected classes. But
[9:17] if you feel like someone who lives in
Alamosa interviews very well and would
[9:23] be a better fit than the person
interviewing for Monav Vista, that is
[9:27] your prerogative.
>> Yeah, but that doesn't keep them from
[9:30] pulling any sort of card at all. You
know what I mean? I'd like to hear the
[9:33] lawyer the opinion ma'am. I'm sorry.
>> No, Heather's right. People can sue for
[9:38] whatever they want. And if someone's
going to sue based on not being
[9:41] appointed, they would have to point to
age, sex, race, uh, gender, orientation,
[9:50] you know, one of those protected
classes.
[9:52] » But the reason I said it's an
interesting question is Boulder is being
[9:55] sued right now, uh, because they kicked
someone off of their board for
[10:02] essentially working with someone suing
the city. and that person is suing
[10:08] Boulder on First Amendment free speech
grounds. I think they're going to lose
[10:15] both free speech grounds and
uh due process that that they were
[10:20] deprived of a property interest without
due process. I think they're going to
[10:24] lose. I think they should lose, but
that's an issue that gets raised
[10:28] sometimes.
>> And I got that. But the thing is is
[10:31] there's still the reckoning with it. You
understand what I'm saying? Well, so
[10:34] explain to me what
>> that's the same no matter what your you
[10:39] you've just expanded the potential
number of people, but you haven't
[10:43] changed those kinds of grounds for a
lawsuit at all. You haven't increased
[10:48] our liability at all by doing that.
>> Okay. And and I mean All right. I I get
[10:54] what you're saying.
>> All right. Thank you.
[10:57] » Thank you, Councelor Carson, Councelor
Hensley, and Councelor Cribs.
[11:01] So,
having been on CML and seeing a lot of
[11:06] things that happen in other cities and
towns, one of the things that there's a
[11:11] couple things that concern me on this
and the first one is I don't see it
[11:15] happening here, this whole political
type of thing, but there are in the
[11:20] larger cities where they bring in
certain people from a political
[11:24] standpoint and they campaign and or um
try to get on certain boards or get
[11:29] voted in because they have a specific
motive. So, it concerns me a little just
[11:35] that you could have a different city or
something that has a alter ulterior
[11:41] method or reasoning to getting onto one
of our boards that may not have to do
[11:46] with our city. So, what that leads me to
really believe I kind of like the way
[11:51] it's set up now. I potentially could be
open to the idea of going outside of
[11:55] Elamosa, but I feel like they need to
have a reason. And I know this kind of
[12:00] dis this um doesn't allow for the
students maybe as much, which does bum
[12:06] me out a little, but the bottom line is
I think they need to have some real
[12:10] teeth in the game of having a business
here or working full-time here or
[12:15] something, not just be a St. Louis
Valley um resident who is interested in
[12:21] Alamos. I just feel like that can open
up some cans of worms in the future that
[12:26] we may may not be aware of. So I guess
that would be my concern.
[12:31] » Hey, thank you uh councelor Hansy for
your comments. Councelor Crebs and then
[12:35] councelor Carson.
>> Thank you mayor.
[12:38] » I guess um for
my comment um as it relates to um what
[12:44] if we choose this person over that
person? The application questions that
[12:49] we ask don't address those at all. We
don't mention anything like that. So, we
[12:54] would actually have no idea unless they
offer that information in the interview
[13:00] about where they're from type thing.
While I agree with um councelor Hensley
[13:06] to a little bit that there is some risk
involved, I think that we might benefit
[13:12] by opening up the and making it bigger
even if it's slightly bigger. And I
[13:19] don't want to exclude any counties and I
don't not sure if I really wanted to do
[13:23] it by counties but I think we are
missing a a good potential especially
[13:28] when it does come to the youth
and and when we get to exclusions I mean
[13:33] I we could even say that youth of a
certain age if they want to serve on a
[13:38] board are excluded from the full-time
obviously or maybe be a full-time
[13:43] student or something of that nature. Um,
but other than that, I'm
[13:49] I'm I'm listening, but I'm really not
seeing too much of the downside of
[13:54] opening it up to the entire county
>> or valley. Sorry.
[13:59] » Thank you, Council Kribs. And um, Miss
Martinez, for clarification purposes,
[14:04] can you clarify, if I'm not mistaken,
when they fill out application, isn't
[14:08] that information on there that you put
in the packet with us?
[14:11] » Yes.
>> Shows exactly what I just wanted to make
[14:13] sure.
>> Yeah.
[14:15] Yep.
>> All right.
[14:16] » Ask them because usually it's an address
or they have to state they're in the
[14:19] city or county. So, we have to ask them.
>> Okay. Thank you. And councelor Carson
[14:24] and councelor Martinez.
>> Um,
[14:31] is there I guess what I would ask
Heather is um
[14:38] what uh what are the real positives that
you see with this? like what are the
[14:43] what I mean not not to put you on the
spot but I you know when I was asking
[14:48] the other question it would seem like
you know what I'm saying like what are
[14:52] me just enlighten me a little bit as to
what opening this pool up does because
[14:56] again I I I do we saw it in real time
with Douglas County and the way they
[15:00] built their waterboard and the way
people were just drawn in from different
[15:04] towns and and and they were greasing
people in real time. it was like right
[15:08] happening right in front of our eyes.
And so that is a really valid point that
[15:12] Liz brings up. People are, you know,
this is a political world and it doesn't
[15:17] always have to be red or blue. It can be
money or or water or, you know, whatever
[15:22] it is. And so, um, it is it is a risk
that we take when we open that up. So,
[15:28] I'm just curious what what are the
positives to doing this, I guess.
[15:32] And so I I if and again I I
don't necessarily think it's broken. So
[15:40] this is more coming from I think you
interviewed a really um energetic
[15:47] individual um that lived in Rio Grand
but worked full-time at ASU and would
[15:52] have I think some of the comments I
heard would have been a great addition
[15:56] to whatever board they were applying
for. Um, so it it it could be that there
[16:02] are some neat individuals out there that
have passions that align with some of
[16:06] our boards um and they're willing to do
it. I know this isn't your question, but
[16:12] conversely, I don't
there are I was going to say I'm not
[16:16] sure we're we're not getting enough
volunteers, but there might be a few
[16:20] boards that we do struggle a little bit
more than other boards.
[16:24] » Okay. Okay. So then I asked this, is it
possible, Eric, for you to come up with
[16:28] language that changes the charter enough
to where we have the freedom to make
[16:33] those choices on a more dynamic basis
than we do now? You know what I mean?
[16:38] Like I don't know if that helps or not.
>> Oh, I'm confused by So right now you
[16:44] guys do the interview and you appoint
who you think it needs to be. There's
[16:49] nothing forcing you to appoint certain
people or who to appoint not to appoint.
[16:54] So that wouldn't change. All this does
is give you a bigger pool of applicants.
[16:59] » I get that. When I was talking about the
legal risks, I wasn't necessarily
[17:03] talking about protected classes. I was
talking about the the the agenda driven
[17:08] people that could say we didn't put them
on this board for reason A, B, or C. So,
[17:12] if you don't think there's risk of that,
I mean, that was more my concern was
[17:16] protecting us from something like Liz
brought up is because you do have people
[17:19] with agendas that could want to they may
want to change the library. They may
[17:24] want to change, you know what I mean,
the trails, you know, they may want to
[17:28] change ATV rules. You know what I'm
saying? And you might have somebody that
[17:32] gets on the board. You understand what
I'm saying? As as Don pointed out, if
[17:36] you do, if the voters approve this
change,
[17:41] you may want to revisit the kinds of
questions that you ask, especially of
[17:45] people who don't have an obvious
>> tie to Allar to try to get at why the
[17:51] heck do you want to
>> volunteer your time to serve, you know,
[17:55] spend five hours a month driving 50
miles to serve on one of our advisory
[18:00] boards, which doesn't even get to do
anything. But if someone interviews for
[18:04] the library board and they think they
say, "I'm running because I think that
[18:09] the library is a mess and it needs a new
direction and all of that and and you
[18:14] guys don't agree with that." Then you
probably don't think it's going to be a
[18:17] good fit to put them on the library
board. That's not a legally protected
[18:21] class.
>> I got you. So, I guess my my question
[18:26] are over. I I would leave it to you guys
to figure out if you want to change
[18:30] that. If you think it's not broken, like
Heather said, if it's not broken, then
[18:33] why are we trying to fix it? But I mean,
you know, I'm not whatever you guys
[18:38] think. I'm I guess I'm game with just
support whatever you guys think because
[18:43] everybody have valid points. But again,
this brings up good point.
[18:46] » All right. Thank you, Council Gar. Let's
go to Council Martinez. So, I'm just
[18:51] thinking about some of the points you
brought up, which isn't legal like Eric
[18:55] said, but it's optics and and um I know
we're taking it to the voters and
[19:03] they'll approve it or they won't. But
then if people that apply from the city
[19:07] of Alamos are like, "We applied, but you
chose this person from Monav Vista." The
[19:12] city council is going against they're
not even taking people from Alamos in
[19:16] consideration. And it's not a legal
issue because we can choose whoever we
[19:19] we want. But then it becomes optics and
that the city is not representing the
[19:23] city and it becomes kind of a political
issue because you know
[19:28] we are we're not appointed we're
elected. So that's one thing. And then
[19:33] as far as Liz's comment goes, I think
people can interview really well and
[19:38] then turn out to be something completely
different. So we can say, "Hey, this
[19:42] person loves the library board. They
think our library is great." and then
[19:46] they come in and we hear well Monavista
does theirs this way or we do it this
[19:51] way here and then we have to deal with
that kind of crap. So, I think maybe
[19:55] opening it up to the county, people who
live within the county, cuz they do, I
[20:02] mean, people in East Talamosa have to
shop in the city. You know, people in
[20:07] Monavista don't have to shop in the
city. They do a lot of times because
[20:12] most a lot of times they work here, but
they don't have to shop here. People in
[20:17] East Amos, they kind of do. There's not
a whole lot out there that they can get
[20:22] elsewhere. So that's just my thoughts.
>> And good thoughts. Good thought. Good
[20:27] thoughts. Uh council cribs,
>> let me throw this out here. At the
[20:31] beginning you said that there there are
two requirements. One is the location
[20:34] and the other one is um work full-time,
own a business. What if it was one or
[20:40] the other?
they would still have a tie to Alamosa
[20:44] in some way, either financially owning a
business or working here or they live
[20:49] here and they might work in center at
the school, you know, that kind of
[20:55] thing. So that way we can capture people
that have a vested interest in
[21:01] » Say it one more time. Say it one more
time.
[21:03] » So if I'm understanding correctly, we
still have you have to live in Alamosa
[21:09] County. So if they meet that criteria,
that alone would allow them to be on it.
[21:14] And instead of it being an and it would
be an or. So if they live in Alamosa
[21:20] County but work at a different school
district because they live in Alamosa
[21:24] County, they would still qualify. And
since it's an or if they own a business,
[21:30] own property, or work full-time, there's
three. Thank you. It doesn't matter
[21:34] where they live within the valley as
long as they're meeting one of those
[21:38] three criteria. So it changes the and to
an or
[21:46] that's municipal state.
>> Okay. One more time with the R. So I
[21:52] understand Alamosa County if they live
in Alamosa County and R. Say it one more
[21:57] time.
>> Okay. So right now it's an and which
[22:01] means you have to live in Alamosa County
and you have to either own property, a
[22:07] business or work full-time
>> because it's an and
[22:11] » well or or live in the city. If you live
in the city, that's all.
[22:14] » Yeah, that's all you need to live in the
city. Okay.
[22:17] » So anyways, so that's the and scenario
right now. Don is talking about changing
[22:22] it to an or. So, if you live in Alamosa
County, we don't care if you own
[22:29] property within the city. We don't care
if you work in the city. We don't care
[22:33] if you own a business in the city. If
you live in Alamosa County, that's a
[22:37] close enough nexus that we feel you
should qualify to be able to apply to a
[22:43] board. Or if you own you can live in any
of the counties within the valley, but
[22:49] and but you have to own a business,
property, or work full-time.
[22:55] Okay, I get it now.
>> Well, that that's that's sounds pretty
[23:00] decent, but I'm gonna go to councelor
Hensley.
[23:02] » So, personally, I feel like it's not
broken. So, I'm not really gung-ho about
[23:08] changing it. That would be my first
choice. If we went this route, I
[23:13] actually feel like even Alamosa County,
any of them, if it's not in the city,
[23:18] they need to have they need to work have
a place or something here, even if
[23:24] they're in the county. I just again, I
just think there has to be something
[23:28] tied to the city. We are city
um boards, things like that. So, there
[23:35] has to be a true tie to the city would
be my second choice. So for me
[23:39] personally, even if it's just county
residents, I still feel like they have
[23:42] to have the link to the city.
>> So the only interest you really have
[23:47] from a second option is instead of it
being limited to Alamosa County, you're
[23:53] open to it being for the valley, but you
want to keep that nexus. You want to
[23:57] keep the three criteria.
>> And I'm going to be honest, my first
[24:00] vote is probably going to be more just
to keep it the way it is.
[24:03] » Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Well, we're
having some healthy debate today. Good
[24:07] deal. Councelor Vio,
>> I'm with Liz. Keep it the way it is.
[24:12] Don't mess with it. Leave it alone. Um,
for the reasons Mr. Martinez brought up
[24:18] a really good point that I didn't even
think about is if we put on someone from
[24:23] Swatch who wants to be on our library
board when we had some folks from
[24:27] Alamosa who want to do it.
Um, [clears throat]
[24:31] and then what Liz and Mike were saying
about
[24:36] someone wanting to be on a board and
trying to put their own agenda on there
[24:40] and that screwing everything up and keep
it the way it is. Keep it the way.
[24:45] » Okay. Councelor Krebs and then councelor
Carson,
[24:47] » can we take this opportunity then? Um,
so I'm getting the gist of the board and
[24:52] I'm perfectly okay with that. Can we
take a moment and discuss um the
[24:57] definition of full-time work? Because I
think for for one of my boards, for
[25:02] example, a person who qualifies or or
technically didn't qualify because they
[25:07] didn't have a full-time job. They're an
artist. So, technically their their job
[25:12] is being a full-time artist, but
everywhere.
[25:16] » Can can we pin that maybe for a
different time kind of discussion
[25:21] » because I just wanted to make sure that
that was touched on. Um, at least as if
[25:25] we say they work full-time. They do work
full-time, but but and you could say
[25:30] that for plumbers, you could say that
for house cleaners.
[25:33] » We disqualified someone for that.
>> No, no,
[25:36] » no. But it it's it's it's a debate. It's
a thing. And and it can we put something
[25:41] in there for for youth about being a
full-time student so we don't
[25:45] accidentally exclude a youth under the
current
[25:50] standards?
Right now, a youth that lives in Alamosa
[25:54] County and goes to school within the
Alamosa school district is eligible.
[25:59] » Okay.
>> So, Okay. All right. Thank you.
[26:03] » We're going to go to Council Carson.
Councelor Hensley, then I'll have a
[26:06] comment as well. Council Carson,
>> I just want to let everyone up here know
[26:11] that I agree with all of you. [laughter]
>> You guys are all
[26:16] » all the time.
>> Thank you.
[26:18] » All right. Council say thank you
councelor Carson.
[26:22] » I think I think you'd start muddying the
water too if we start really getting
[26:25] into definition. I I think if I was have
if you were going to pin me to a
[26:29] definition I would say that their their
business address has to be in the city.
[26:34] You know like plumbers I'm married to an
electrician. He definitely doesn't
[26:38] always work in Alamosa but his address
or his business is Alamosa. I would just
[26:44] say we don't want to take we do are not
recommending to take anything to the
[26:48] voters to try to do definition
>> like that is way too that's beyond
[26:53] » I agree.
>> Okay.
[26:54] » So so I'm I'm just going to say
something. Um
[27:01] I know that there are a lot of people in
Alamosa County. Let's say we didn't open
[27:04] it up to the valley and I can understand
that. But if you I think there is a good
[27:08] reason to consider opening up to Alamosa
County uh people whether they work here
[27:13] or not because there are people who live
out in the county that might bring some
[27:18] value uh with some of their ideas and
suggestions uh to our boards and
[27:22] advisory boards. They may not work here
now, but maybe at one time they did work
[27:27] in the city or work at a university or
uh just a thought, but it's going to
[27:32] boil down to um what what you all decide
as a team. Um but I I don't see too much
[27:39] harm if we open it up to Alamos, the
county residents um myself.
[27:46] So based on the com conversation, if I
was going to summarize, I feel like I
[27:51] heard one, two, three, four, five people
say, "It's not broken. Let's not fix it
[27:58] type of thing." And I'm hearing one
person say, "I think we should talk
[28:02] about being more open, but it it seems
the numbers are the other way." Am I am
[28:08] I misunderstanding anything?
>> Okay.
[28:12] » I think I think you're absolutely right,
Councelor Carson. Agree with you.
[28:16] We're going [laughter] with this. We're
on a roll. Mayor, I don't know if we um
[28:20] want to close your discussion and do a
little bit of time for any potential
[28:24] public comment um type of thing.
>> Yes, we we can go ahead and and close it
[28:29] um for public comment. And I I want to
thank council for the good healthy
[28:34] conversation and healthy uh debate. Um
really appreciate that. Okay, so it
[28:39] looks like um
we're going to leave things like they
[28:44] are.
[28:47] So, if we're opening it up to public
comment, did you want to do that?
[28:51] » Yes. So, what I'm going to do right now
only only if your comments are related
[28:55] to what we just talked about. If your
comments are not related to what we just
[29:00] talked about, we will have a meeting
that's starting at 7:00 and you'll be
[29:05] able to make your comments at our open
city council meeting under the citizen
[29:10] comment section. Okay? And the comment
cards are not don't I would not use the
[29:14] comment cards for this. I would just
open it up like you normally do.
[29:17] » Okay. So, if anyone wants to make a
comment about what we were just talking
[29:20] about, go over to the mic right there
and you can start making your comments.
[29:24] And we do ask that you keep your
comments to within 3 minutes. We do time
[29:29] those comments. If you're still talking
at the 3minut mark, we will politely ask
[29:33] you to uh stop making your comments.
Also, here on city council, uh we
[29:38] practice civility, meaning that we are
mindful and respectful, not
[29:42] interrupting, cheering, or clapping when
someone's making comments because we
[29:46] don't want them to lose the thoughts
that they uh want to speak on. Okay? So,
[29:51] if you have any comments, just please go
up to the mic and you can start making
[29:55] your comments.
[29:59] Go ahead. You go right there.
[30:10] Um, my name is Rebecca. I currently
moved to Alamosa about two years ago.
[30:15] Um, if I start crying or anything, don't
mind that. That's my anxiety. People
[30:20] people really bother me. Um, the
conversation I just came into, it sounds
[30:25] like a really great idea. Um, a lot of
people that I've actually met come from
[30:31] the San Louise area and stuff and they
come here for the help. So, that really
[30:36] says something if it says anything.
Um, it sounds like you guys are trying
[30:42] to do a great job and really appreciate
you guys. Thanks for letting me speak
[30:46] the first time.
>> Thank you. Thank you.
[30:51] » Okay. Anyone else any comments regarding
uh what we just talked about? If not, I
[30:57] don't see any. Uh, let's go to Zoom and
we'll go to the Zoom participant.
[31:03] We'll go to Zoom. If you're on Zoom and
you have any comments you would like to
[31:06] make, use the raise your hand feature at
the bottom of the screen and raise your
[31:09] hand and we'll recognize you.
I don't see any hands raised. I don't
[31:14] see anybody on Zoom. All right. So,
we're going to go ahead and close this
[31:17] segment and uh give council a little bit
of time back and we'll come back at 7
[31:21] o'clock. We're good.