[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:00] Department of Emergency Management is to proactively reduce these disaster risk and reliably manage consequences through collaborative work with Maryland's communities and partners. In Maryland, emergency management is a system of systems. We cannot do it alone. We are the counties and the local drawer sections coupled with the state working with our state agencies and partners and with our private sector partners. We cannot do it alone. No one can
[0:29] And it's only through that system of systems that we do it.
[0:33] The Annapolis City doc hazard mitigation project is an excellent example of this type of work, of everyone coming together.
[0:41] So the investment today comes a result of years of partnership and collaboration with the residents, business owners, and governments at every level.
[0:50] And I have to say we've been talking about, it started in 2019, I started in state emergency management in 2004, this was a discussion.
[0:58] And then it was a discussion of flooding back into the 1700s for
[1:02] Ellicott City, and when it comes time for a model, this will not only be a model,
[1:06] but there's another really, really good model in Frederick City that started with Agnes.
[1:11] And it took 20 years to build, and about three or four years ago, there was a flooding event, and it worked, it worked.
[1:19] So we know that this funding will bring a significant return on investment for
[1:23] every dollar invested as I mentioned will save six in disaster recovery.
[1:28] And while the dollars matter, what really matters is our community and our survivors.
[1:34] That's where our focus is.
[1:36] So the hazard mitigation efforts on this scale mean more days that residents and visitors
[1:43] can enjoy Maryland State Capitol and the beautiful waterfront.
[1:47] More days that local businesses have to grow and thrive.
[1:51] and fewer days spent mucking out livelihoods and homes were wondering if the next storm or king tide will be worse than the last one.
[2:03] So this project is proof that together we can do things which shape a more resilient Maryland where communities thrive and where no one is left behind.
[2:14] So, from the emergency management community to all of you, one, congratulations to thank you and number three, we're not leaving.
[2:24] We are not leaving until it's done.
[2:26] And we'll be here for another 20 years to make sure it works so we can write that down.
[2:30] All right, thank you very very much.
[2:35] Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
[2:38] Thank you, Team Maryland.
[2:40] Before we take questions, I do want to acknowledge a few other folks.
[2:43] and Sarah mentioned, my former partner and colleague, Ben Cardin, he was also tenacious
[2:51] about this project and we worked very closely together and just like Congressman Elfrith
[2:57] picked up the baton from John Sarbanes in the house, Angel Alster Brooks has helped pick
[3:04] up that baton in the United States Senate so I just want to thank her she could not be here.
[3:08] So let's give them both a round of applause.
[3:13] So we're happy to answer any questions, and if not, we do have a check, cash it fast.
[3:23] Any question?
[3:30] Yeah.
[3:31] I'm sorry, I couldn't.
[3:33] Can you respond to the letter you sent from the administration relative to the Legionella?
[3:39] Oh, can we talk to you after about I'm happy to do one-on-one or what?
[3:42] Yeah.
[3:43] Thank you.
[3:44] Any other questions?
[3:47] Okay, time for the real fact, all right.
[3:50] So we, Senator Kip, I mentioned one of the person I've got to say.
[3:53] Yes, of course.
[3:53] I also want to call out Lieutenant General Superintendent of the Naval Academy, Mike Borg-Scholte, who was incredibly helpful.
[4:01] And I just want to acknowledge his thanks.
[4:03] He's peppered as well.
[4:04] When do you get in the middle here?
[4:05] All right.
[4:05] I don't know if it's going to work.
[4:07] I don't know if it's going to work.
[4:47] Yeah.
[5:50] El capitan se pata del cuerpo de bomberos, aquí de la ciudad de Nápolis. En esta semana
[5:56] está más hablando de prevención de incendios en la cocina. La causa principal de incendios
[6:00] en casa proviene del uso de la cocina. La causa principal de incendios en la cocina es
[6:07] falta de su previsión. Punto número 1. Con usted cocinando, use un reloj al arma automático.
[6:14] Punto número 2. Siempre mantenga una tapa cerca o a la mano con usted cocinando.
[6:19] Si está cocinando con aceite o manteca y toma fuego, ponga la tapa sobre el
[6:25] sartén y espere que se enfrié. Punto número tres, aseguro de mantener una
[6:30] área limpia y organizada cuando esté cocinando. Y punto número cuatro, este es
[6:38] seguro que mantenga una zona libre de niños o lo menos de tres pies o un metro.
[6:44] Por ser caso, hay un diseño que está fuera de su control, llame al 9-11 inmediatamente.
[6:52] Acuérse de probar sus detecores de humo mensualmente, hago un plan de escape también y practiclo.
[6:59] Mantente seguro en apolís. Muchísimas gracias.
[7:33] o crear una de las calientes de los milito Teach.
[7:36] Esos consortios tirados.
[7:36] Nada más llamars a esa speechlessía y national,
[7:40] y todos crawling de casa,
[7:44] cómo suerte todo hace uneden en las cum band now
[7:45] la transparency.
[7:48] Necesitamos que la comunidad tiene.
[7:48] No estamos aquí, le imagcio si hay preguntas,
[7:50] les tienes que dejar sentar a manos.
[7:54] Bания de la destana es muy bueno y que
[7:58] quieres pensansen de un hombre sol hasta la quise.
[8:05] ¡Sagtala LIKE sygemas para laadianaria de help!
[8:07] nos souten, cuando hablan con mi rueda con las条adas de la kamezana,
[8:12] en el nivel, debajo de los car Wash,
[8:13] es el másover por la zona de la propaganda.
[8:15] Cuando eso te llaras, creamos que tienes que ver por el pecho de la fecha de la des Colombia
[8:19] y el mismo tiempo de la fecha.
[8:22] ¿Ahora han podido tener una fecha de la fecha de la reveña del irro de la fecha?
[8:25] Vamos a trabajar en un honor del Perú, los deccios y las vuestras.
[8:28] Si está 된 un millonero peor,
[8:30] tiene la fecha del que hace la fecha del peor en Marvariques,
[8:33] quedamos en un lugar cuando la familia se descargan los Pv.
[8:34] Vamos a ir al centro y llorar los escotos,
[8:37] llevamos un poco de toplos a la tromptu o en el montañ.
[8:41] Entonces, vamos a ver cómo podríamos cambiar,
[8:44] por favor, el interés...
[8:44] ven y podrás y ver todo muy bueno la mascara...
[8:46] la pate de la pate...
[8:48] y podemos undertaking un poco.
[8:49] Y me parece muy alleen que a los coches es el electrico,
[8:51] si lo hiciste, vende un poco.
[8:52] La grabada es a salvo con sus colegios,
[8:54] es un balón de la eleja de la pate del propio,
[8:57] y hasta las pate de la zona se регuzen por la pate,
[8:59] y las cosas son bien y lo hicieron, excepto por la taja...
[9:02] So come on over leave your worries behind and get that laid back feeling that only you'll find an east port on the bay
[9:09] Ah,
[9:34] y vamos a tener que volver a limpiar todo esto y ya que estamos a provecho para hacer una capacitación sobre cómo vamos a colocar
[9:41] Bien la basura
[9:45] Primero levantamos todo
[9:48] Y lo colocamos dentro de la bolsa de basura luego lo atamos y lo colocamos dentro del contenedor de basura
[9:55] lo tapamos, ya que estamos aprobando.
[10:00] Chamos y miramos también el reciclado. Esta bolsa no tiene que estar en el reciclado. Y vaciamos todo esto nuevamente, colocamos la capa. Así que vamos a pedir que vuelva nuestra monstruo de la basura. Y vamos a mirar que tiene para ver si se puede reciclar o no. Esto de metal acá abajo no se puede reciclar. Todo ese plástico finito de las bolsas de basura tampoco entran en reciclado. Este cuchillo de metal tampoco.
[10:29] Por favor, me encuentra que cuando saca su asura estas son las formas de poder hacerlo para poder evitar que les denavizos o que le hagan una multa.
[11:05] los domes y espires de mi little town
[11:07] rizan de la hurraza
[11:09] y la luz de suijos en el ojo
[11:11] en un anapalista en la caja.
[11:14] Me voy a la ciudad de Acadria
[11:16] y me voy a llorar a los meditantes
[11:18] y tener algunos funos.
[11:20] Y en la caja de la caja de la caja
[11:21] se pueden tomar un poquito.
[11:22] Me voy a llorar las ojo
[11:23] en la caja de las ojo
[11:25] y entonces, en el capítulo,
[11:26] no hay que esperar.
[11:27] No hay que poder que se ve
[11:29] en un anapalista en la caja.
[11:52] ¡Hey Annapolis! ¡It's go time!
[11:58] ¡On demand transit that takes you where you want to go!
[12:03] ¡It's fast! ¡It's easy! ¡And it's an affordable way to get around Annapolis!
[12:08] ¡Going to the doctor! ¡It's go time! ¡Going shopping! ¡It's go time!
[12:13] ¡Exploring Annapolis! ¡It's go time! ¡It's easy to schedule your ride!
[12:17] Use el app para llamar transportación dispuesto a 410-263-7964.
[12:27] Set your pick up and your destination and we'll be right there.
[12:32] Simply track the bus on the app so you'll know exactly when we'll be there to pick you up.
[12:38] Ok, once you are on the bus,
[12:40] just $2 per ride
[12:42] and only $1 per seniors
[12:44] or you can use your daily, weekly, monthly
[12:48] or annual bus pass.
[12:50] Getting around a necklace is easy
[12:53] with a necklace scope time.
[12:55] On Demand Transit,
[12:57] so you are on board.
[13:25] Hey, saliva la basura!
[13:29] Ahí vamos a tener que volver a limpiar todo esto
[13:32] y ya que estamos a provecho
[13:34] para hacer una capacitación
[13:35] sobre cómo vamos a colocar
[13:36] bien la basura primero levantamos todo y lo colocamos dentro de la bolsa de
[13:45] basura luego lo atamos y lo colocamos dentro del contenedor de basura lo tapamos ya
[13:54] que estamos aprovechamos y miramos también el reciclado esta bolsa no tiene que
[13:59] estar en el reciclado y vaciamos todo esto nuevamente colocamos la capa así que
[14:06] Vamos a pedir que vuelva nuestra monstruo de la basura y vamos a mirar que
[14:11] tienen para ver si se puede reciclar o no. Esto de metal acá abajo no se puede
[14:16] reciclar. Todo este plástico finito de las bolsas de basura tampoco entran en
[14:20] reciclados. Este cuchillo de metal tampoco.
[14:25] Por favor tome en cuenta que cuando saca
[14:27] su basura estas son las formas de poder hacerlo para poder evitar que les
[14:31] de navísos o que le hayan una multa.
[15:00] Capitalist fire department that can help you serve of safety and the kitchen. Tip 1. When
[15:06] frying, boiling, or simmering, stay in the kitchen, never leave the home and always
[15:12] use a timer. Tip 2. If a grease fire starts, never try to extinguish with water. Use a lid
[15:19] to cover over the pot, turn the burner off, and wait until the pan cools down. Tip 3. Always
[15:27] keep your cleaning and cooking surfaces free of any clutter.
[15:33] And tip four, remember to always keep
[15:36] a three-foot distance around a cooking area a three-feet kids zone as I like to call it. And remember,
[15:43] if you're unable to control the fire, get out of your house and dial 911 immediately. And never forget
[15:50] every month to test your smoke alarms, have an escape plan and practice your escape plan. Unattended
[15:56] cooking is the leading calls of home fires and home fire
[16:00] entries. For more information on tips on how you can serve
[16:04] of safety in the kitchen, visit www.firepreventionweek.org.
[16:09] Stay safe, Annapolis.
[16:23] Here, them geese, they're flying high
[16:26] through this crystal shimmer of that October sky. Just like
[16:30] them, I'm flying away down the muddy waters of the Chesapeake Bay.
[16:35] So come on, Captain, raise that main. Can't wait to get back
[16:38] again to a napalus on the bay. I can see the domes and spires in my little town rise from the
[16:46] horizon like the jewels on a crown in a napalus on the bay. So meet me at the city dark and give
[16:53] us a hug and we'll shuffle off to Middletons and have us some fun. Crab pot steaming we can pick us
[16:59] a few. I'll shut the oysters if you make the stew. So come on captain, don't maybe wait. It's no ill-win
[17:06] and it blows us away to Annapolis on the day.
[18:12] We are here on Annapolis Day celebrating the boy who harnessed the wind.
[18:18] A guy who overcame adversity,
[18:24] a young brown boy from Projects, and I'm celebrating for
[18:28] not just me, for many others that have seen other situations of adversity.
[19:11] Every single thing that's been braiding and teaching how to pull, teaching how to step up,
[19:16] you've got to be the word on it, that all of them is the way out.
[19:24] Being raised in with the culture of women of hairdressers that I looked up to
[19:29] growing, I was heavily equipped. I used to sit in hair salons and watch the lady's
[19:34] work and I really learned a lot about being a hair stylist through my mentors in
[19:38] front of me. I mean I have clients like Rihanna, Nicki Minaj, Kelly Gold, and Yara
[19:43] Chittity. I like Glamrs here, I like Confident here, I like had just me slept on and
[19:47] lived in and ruffled up. I told myself that I could dream and I told myself that
[19:53] that could in a situation where I wasn't supposed to.
[19:57] And so me standing here today is a huge honor.
[20:00] Because when I started my journey, I had no idea this could be. But I kept growing and I kept doing it. Here we are today. I'm getting the keys to the city. On behalf of the city of Annapolis, we present you with the keys to the city. I
[20:22] honestly want to say thank you so much. Listen, I've been working really, really hard. And I love what I do. I love Annapolis. I want to be able to create space for younger individuals to be empowered.
[20:35] to be uplifted to find mentorship and to really strategize ways to really uplift.
[20:41] And so I am going to start a nonprofit here in Annapolis,
[20:48] to hear up with all of my mentors.
[20:51] And we are going to come with something spectacular.
[20:53] It means more to me than the aculate.
[20:56] It's really about the honor for me.
[21:00] It's really, I'm really honored and grateful.
[21:03] And that's what it means to me.
[21:04] It's really, I have a lot of humility for what my ancestors did with me.
[24:05] City Council for Thursday, July 16th, 2026 will be called to order at 4.30 p.m.
[24:11] At the time, would everyone willing and able to please stand in the pledge of allegiance?
[24:16] Pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which stands.
[24:22] One nation under God, indivisible, but liberty and justice for all.
[24:33] On the agenda.
[24:33] The first item on the agenda is ID-144-26 Maryland Citizens Health Initiative.
[24:41] Thank you.
[24:42] We have Dr. Andrew York and Vincent DeMarco.
[24:45] Please come on up.
[24:49] I'm
[24:52] happy to have you join us today.
[24:54] I'm a fan who's married, could be also as Julius Lightford, I can do Julius Lightford,
[24:58] does that matter?
[24:59] Have a seat!
[25:00] And make sure you speak into the microphone and then re-say what you just said. All right, sorry. And the mics are always all. You don't need to press anything, just talk into the mic. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. My name is Vinny DeMarco, I'm the president of the Maryland Health Care for All Coalition. Dr. Andrew York, who's the chair, who's executive director of the Tribune Drug Affordability Board, is walking into the building right now, should be here in a second. And with me also is Dr. Julius Sleiko, who's a member of the Prescription Drug Affordability Board.
[25:29] Thank you. We have an hour set aside for the whole presentation. We'd like to divide it in half. Hopefully this is not news to you
[25:35] Where you have a half hour to present whatever you want to present. And then we have a half hour for the council to ask questions
[25:41] Then we have another presentation starting at 5.30. Well, thank you. And we probably won't need all that time
[25:48] We appreciate this very very much. I just want to make sure am I working this? How do I?
[25:54] The laptop I think we're asking about the mic
[26:06] Thank you all very, very much. Again, I'm Vinnie DeMarco. I'm the President of Maryland Healthcare for all coalition. And we work on making quality, affordable healthcare, affordable for everyone.
[26:19] We've been around since 1999, this is not my first time before this council, we've been here before talking about all sorts of issues and making requests for support, and there's Dr. Andrew York.
[26:34] Request for support, which the council has always given us, and we've made a lot of progress in Maryland.
[26:41] I also want to recognize my good friend John Tower, your chief of historic preservation.
[26:46] We also did on a 30-mile bike ride with me at 5am this morning, so we're still alive to talk about it.
[26:53] But thank you again for having us.
[26:56] One of our major accomplishments was in 2019, when we got enacted the first in the nation
[27:05] prescription drug affordability board, and we built a powerful broad coalition to get that done
[27:13] because it wasn't easy, and there was a reason no other state had done it, big pharma opposes it big time, and
[27:22] basically put a strangle hold on the whole country to do something about it.
[27:26] However, we were able to overcome that, and thanks in part to people like yourselves, because the City Council of Annapolis endorsed it, and many other local
[27:35] jurisdictions, your wonderful county executives Stuart Pittman was one of our strong supporters, and one of our most effective
[27:42] of advertisements was a TV ad with Stuart Pittman and Barry Glassman of Harper County, a bipartisan
[27:48] approach showing how this is important.
[27:51] So I want to first start by thanking you all and everybody in Maryland for making this happen.
[27:56] To step back a little, drugs don't work if people can't afford them.
[28:02] And we all know that the problem of high cost drugs is very, very serious.
[28:08] and 43% of people just can't afford the drugs they desperately need either they're uninsured
[28:15] or their copays are so high and for many reasons they leave the drugs on the table or have to
[28:21] make decisions to cut other things they need they're rent school for their kids we've heard stories
[28:28] that are just heartbreaking of this problem also we all suffer because 25% maybe a
[28:38] third of our health insurance premiums are because of high cost drugs.
[28:42] So even if you have a plan that covers your drugs completely, you're paying for these
[28:47] high cost drugs through your higher insurance premiums because of them.
[28:52] And local governments and state governments are really strapped because of these high cost
[29:00] drugs.
[29:01] Stewart Pittman, who I talked about this all over the country, says that in Interong County,
[29:06] You all spend twice as much on the cost of drugs for local employees than on libraries.
[29:14] It's just ridiculous the amount of money that does not have to be that way.
[29:20] And forever, it's not been that way in other nations.
[29:23] In other nations, France, Britain, everywhere else Canada, when the drug companies say I'm just making these numbers up,
[29:30] I want to charge you $100,000 for this drug, they say that's nice, you can charge that, but we're only paying $20,000.
[29:35] That's the way it's worked in other countries.
[29:39] But not here, until Maryland's prescription drug affordability board and the National
[29:45] Enflation Reduction Act under President Biden until those two laws, we did not do that.
[29:51] We just let them charge whatever they want.
[29:53] And I will never forget one of my heroes, Elijah Cummings, when he was chair of the House
[29:59] It's over six.
[30:00] The committee had a hearing of top drug executives, and he was grilling them, and why are you charging so much? And one of them had just raised a drug by 5,000% that was desperately needed for people. And he said, why did you do that? And his answer to Congressman Cummings was because I can. And that's what has been the way they've been thinking. Well, luckily now, in Maryland and nationally for Medicare, that's not the case anymore.
[30:28] And what we want to do today is give you an update on where we are with the prescription drug affordability board.
[30:35] And I'll give a broad order overview, and Dr. York can give you a lot more details.
[30:40] And then answer your questions about it.
[30:47] The public always supports the prescription drug affordability board overwhelmingly.
[30:52] Democrats or Republicans all over the state, people understand the need for
[30:57] this legislation. This is just who the board is. This is the board today with the chair being
[31:05] Van Mitchell, former delegate from Charles County, former health secretary of Maryland,
[31:10] a terrific man who did a great job setting the board up. He is resigning and there's going to be
[31:15] a new board chair soon. But he's been there since 2019. One of the best decisions was hiring Dr.
[31:21] York who will talk about the second is great.
[31:23] And then we have Dr. George Benjamin, who's the head of the American Public Health Association,
[31:31] Dr. Jerry Anderson, a prominent Hopkins professor of knows everything about drug pricing,
[31:37] Dr. Julia Slyco from University of Maryland, and Dr.
[31:43] Dr. Steven Rockauer.
[31:45] So those are the members of the board, and then Dr. York is their executive director.
[31:54] There have been challenges and obstacles, and one of the challenges has been that our former governor basically slow-walked things and vetoed a critical bill to provide funding for the board.
[32:09] And I mentioned these things because our opponents are saying this Board of
[32:14] Enorances 2019 and hasn't done anything yet.
[32:17] Well, a lot of that fault lies at the foot of Larry Hogan who just really
[32:22] slow-walked it, vetoed the critical funding measure, which legislates over term.
[32:27] But that delayed things tremendously.
[32:29] As soon as Governor Westmore took over, he said I'm going to make the PDAV work.
[32:35] put money there where it was needed, made sure they had everything they needed.
[32:41] So thanks to the leadership and commitment of Governor West Moore,
[32:45] the board has now been able to make progress.
[32:50] When was that start, when was that up?
[32:52] When is that up when the board was able to start making progress?
[32:56] Well, 2023, when the governor came in, he injected some a million additional dollars to make up.
[33:33] Well, welcome, everybody. We're gathered here in a great American city, the great city of Annapolis, the sailing capital of the world, an historic city where George Washington resigned his military commission, symbolizing the transfer and peaceful transfer of power and making it clear that in America we have no kings.
[33:58] a city that's not afraid to tell all of its past, including its role in the slave trade.
[34:07] In an appless, people learn from our past. They don't try to whitewash and hide their past.
[34:14] A city that is the home, the proud home of the Naval Academy, a city where millions of people
[34:22] But
[34:24] we hope that we can get back to a sound footing where our department is advising and making recommendations to a citizen body to select art.
[34:34] We do a pretty good job at that.
[34:36] We've been complemented on the level of analysis and in our recommendations.
[34:41] We go very deep.
[34:42] The previous board was very supportive of the work the staff was doing.
[34:47] So we function best in that capacity.
[34:50] as as advisers to citizens so we hopefully the board the council can get through this process and
[35:00] Let me get us back on that sound footing. Thank you, director. You would never want to put your position where you are leading and charging not by choice. We appreciate that feedback. I think that really should help guide us to doing what is best and that is ensuring that the art and public places commission has its authority as it was designed originally in the code. What a fantastic idea for a city to have. It's incredible. And it was really fun.
[35:30] We had some issues with members on the board not always working well together, but we were heading in the right direction and I hope we can get back on that sound footing and it may be even approve, approve, improve upon that and I've reviewed a lot of the amendments and the ordinance that's in front of you, so I'll be here this evening if you have questions I can perhaps practical resource for you, or at least share our real world experience with the commission.
[36:00] Well, thank you for that and I would say the arts community probably really appreciates
[36:03] what you're saying tonight and so thanks that we'll call on you if there are any questions
[36:08] by myself or fellow Alderman Thorpe, please.
[36:13] So let's jump and before we do, I'm on my Thorpe.
[36:18] Do you have anything you'd like to share, express or anything of that nature, okay?
[36:22] Okay, so I will start by sharing that I and alongside Mayor, members of the, some
[36:33] of the members of the arts community, Cynthia, thank you so much.
[36:37] For hours, days, weeks, months have been working to bring a unified voice and update to
[36:48] this code according to what I know the mayor is looking to provide an update to what is currently
[36:54] there. Alongside our amenders, Alderman Savage, Alderman Huntley and Alderman O'Neill. And so
[37:02] I am going to ask first if Alderman Savage you like to share any of your thoughts or not
[37:10] necessarily as it regards to the amendment, but any thoughts before I jump into what I'm going to
[37:15] to ask a motion, or I'll make the motion for a substitute amendments and we can go through amendment 11 together so that everyone's educated and in the know of what's included in this.
[37:28] Thank you for the offer, Mr. Chair, but I don't have anything to add.
[37:32] I'm looking forward to going through the amendment.
[37:35] Great, thank you.
[37:36] All right, so I am going to ask a motion, put forth one, that there be a substitute motion on the floor.
[37:47] or substitute amendments to all of these amendments.
[37:51] Amendment 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and amendment 11 be a committee amendment presented to the council.
[38:02] Did you have a question or thought?
[38:04] Well, I can't.
[38:06] How come we go about that?
[38:07] Could you maybe just sort of recommend that amendments 1 through 10 be withdrawn and
[38:14] And then proceed on decision making for amendment 11, if that's what the goal is.
[38:23] Yes, so I will move that and thank you because that's what I was looking for.
[38:28] So I'm like, that's what I was looking for.
[38:31] Okay, so move that amendments 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, B with drawn and amendment 11 be put forth for a favorable recommendation.
[38:42] I also will request that amendment 11 will not have only my name upon, oh, is that okay?
[38:50] Yeah, I think it should have your name because we haven't voted on as a committee yet, so I want to make sure that I'm very comfortable with it being your name.
[38:56] Okay, okay, thank you, so that's the motion on the floor.
[39:00] May I have a second for that motion for a conversation or at least a discussion?
[39:03] So, is the quiz that we're going to withdraw?
[39:10] That's right.
[39:10] So, my point is, I don't think we can withdraw the amendment.
[39:15] I think we can withdraw, but you can recommend withdrawal.
[39:19] Right.
[39:20] Recommend withdrawal.
[39:21] All right. So, how about this?
[39:22] Well, I'm going to go over the amendment and then we'll make that so that, because I want to make sure that everyone
[39:27] even knows what's in this amendment before we even discuss any withdrawals or anything like that,
[39:32] because maybe we'll say, well, this amendment ain't nothing unless just vote on the other amendments instead.
[39:36] Is that okay? That way, that way we get an overview of that okay, perfect.
[39:41] Amendment 11, I'm so the summary, and I'm not going to go through every single bit,
[39:47] but the summary is the art fund relocated.
[39:50] It's definitions, authority shift, membership, new funding source, new oversight mechanism,
[39:57] and also a section stream line.
[40:00] So that's 2.48.750. The motion is to repeal and reenact sections. I'm not even going to go through all those, but the ones that are not going to be included in the code is sections 2.48.71.0, section 2.48.760, and section 2.48.770. For repealing the following portion of the city code of the city of an app was 2026 edition.
[40:29] Section 2.48.710 and Section 2.48.730 and enactment with amendments to Section 6.30.1010 are fun.
[40:42] I'm going to request that Cynthia or maybe the law office can share why are some of the sections crossed out and why are some added in the repealing or an act in section just for clarification purposes.
[40:54] Hi.
[41:03] Cynthia Reuter, legislative and policy analyst in the Office of Law.
[41:12] So, the arts
[41:15] and public places law is in one chapter in the chapter that makes up the entire law is
[41:26] in several sections.
[41:30] Some of the sections are being changed. A couple of these is section
[41:35] Questions are being repealed, just stricken out entirely, and one of them is moving to another section.
[41:44] That is the art fund creation, the section that establishes the art fund.
[41:51] That fund would be going to title six, which is the finance title and then goes under the special funds section.
[42:02] Thank
[42:05] you. There are no questions on that. We're going to get to the meat of it. So the majority
[42:09] of the legislation and the whereas clauses remain the only addition or additions that are included
[42:17] is instead of the word deficiencies, it was added areas needing updating and also instead of set
[42:24] forth it is outlined. So the reason why areas needing updating was there one because the word
[42:29] deficiencies didn't really rub, it was the best use of word, and it's consistent with
[42:35] the next whereas which says the City Council has determined that updating the definition of
[42:39] duties and responsibilities. So that's the reason why areas that are updating and outline was
[42:44] included in that whereas clause there. Moving forward, in the definition section, art activation
[42:54] remain the same. Number two, art fund means the fund has established pursuant to, so it wasn't
[43:02] changed substance, the substance wasn't changed, it just said pursuant to, so that people can be
[43:06] directed to where to go in the code. Number three, all of that remains the same. Four, it was added
[43:15] that it would be practices in the visual, literary, musical, performing, or other arts. This is to be
[43:23] more inclusive of the different types of artists who may be out there.
[43:29] The remaining of that piece stay the same.
[43:31] Commission stay the same for number five.
[43:34] Number six, we added means planning and zoning director or their designee, seeing that the
[43:40] director may not always, as her tonight, be the sole person interested or leading this process.
[43:49] And so they may provide a designate in this process to help lead that.
[43:55] Number seven remains the same.
[43:57] Number eight, the only addition is or other mediums, so that we can encompass other forms of art, again, to be more inclusive.
[44:07] Nine remains the same, ten remains the same, eleven, the same, twelve, we just added other mediums, and we use the more commonly spelling of frescoes.
[44:17] So number 12, that's the only additions there.
[44:21] 13, we added, or presentation, so means any creation,
[44:27] or presentation of visual art or performing art,
[44:31] saying that artists may not only create art,
[44:34] but they may also present such as dancing, for example.
[44:37] The remaining of 13 stayed the same.
[44:41] Next, section 6.30, 0.010,
[44:44] is being re-titled due to it moving to a new section in the title, Revenue and Finance.
[44:54] So that's why we titled that differently.
[44:57] Okay, funnestamish or remain.
[45:00] It's the same. Going down, the change for number one is 1D. It says, practice or present art in public places. For e, it's developed, display, or support versus just support of art in public places. Two, all monies in the art fund shall be appropriated by the city council for art in public places. The commission may instruct the director to use the funds for expenses related to the
[45:29] administration of this article.
[45:31] This piece here was again shifting that authority away
[45:35] from the director, as mentioned tonight, was requested,
[45:39] and giving that authority back to the commission.
[45:42] Are there any questions thus far from my fellow Alderman?
[45:48] Okay, going forward, we have see is the next change.
[45:53] It says here, in addition of may apply for
[45:56] and receive monies from the art fund
[45:58] and the reporting on the use of funds and work with the law office, as well as other members.
[46:03] We felt that this was a great addition because it's important to know where the money is going and to have proper reporting processes.
[46:12] Moving forward, nothing changes until five, so one, two, three, four stays the same, five, the addition, ensuring timely payments of funds to artists and arts organizations.
[46:23] It was shared by members of the arts community that they do not often receive the funds in
[46:29] time, nor do the arts organizations receive their monies in time, and so in work with the
[46:35] office as well.
[46:36] We figure that adding this piece here may not necessarily always take place, but it's
[46:41] setting in the code that this is what we're going to strive to do.
[46:44] Okay?
[46:45] Moving forward to funding sources.
[46:47] All other men, a savage is amendment, which was the dedicated hotel tax revenue, was incorporated into this piece here.
[46:56] And it highlighted that the extent of the hotel tax revenue to that extent that it's dedicated to the commission.
[47:04] It was encouraged by the law office that there may be a time, there may be a time that the state will no longer provide these monies to go to the hotel tax.
[47:14] A revenue for the Arts and Public Places Commission, and so we added to the extent and the remainder of that is the same.
[47:23] We are highlighting that according to the code and upon receipt by the city, it must be deposited into the art fund and
[47:31] held and accounted for by the finance director as part of the art fund, ensuring that the money is only used for arts purposes.
[47:37] We added revenue deposited under this paragraph may not be used for any purpose other than to carry out this article, and it's subject to the same use, distribution, and decision-making provisions that apply to other art fund monies.
[47:51] And so this is just ensuring, just like we saw with education fund, that the monies are only used for what they are dedicated for.
[47:58] Often times, as you will know, cities will take money and spend the elsewhere, but we want to show that no this money is only for the arts community or this commission.
[48:06] The next is nothing has changed in section duties and responsibilities.
[48:13] I'm in that portion until later, where we get to A1 city property.
[48:19] We incorporated here, determined the acquisition, commissioning, placement, relocation, maintenance, removal, so all of these are the same.
[48:28] And disposition of art and public places on city owned property.
[48:33] and establish the method for the competitive selection of art to be displayed in public places.
[48:40] The director may provide recommendations, so we added this piece here that the director may provide recommendations to the commission on these matters just again to highlight the partnership between the director and the commission, not necessarily the director's ship of the director to the commission.
[48:55] So next we have here procedure development, we added instead of recommend, we said developing that the commission will now have that authority to do so, and then we have three funding allocation versus recommendations because the power for the monies to be used to or awards cost related to seeking and receiving art funding grants should still remain in the authority of the arts commission.
[49:18] We also added inter-governmental coordination, coordinate with city agencies,
[49:24] boards, committees, and commissions as appropriate to fill its duties and reporting requirements.
[49:31] Number five, we added the word the consistent with the adopted commission procedures and available resources.
[49:40] Are there any questions or thoughts thus far?
[49:43] Yeah, Mr. Chairman, in A2, procedure development, it says develop procedures for section 248, 710, but there is no longer a 248, 710, so that just needs to, I believe say 630, zero.
[50:00] Number 1-0. Absolutely. So thank you for that. So if you don't mind, we could make a make and a request for the amendment to this, to strike out Section 2.48.710 and incorporate the new Section 6.30.0110. Art Fund. Is that, is that what you say?
[50:32] And then building on that, Mr. Chairman, that line developed procedures as specified in that section for the art fund.
[50:43] And I'm trying to figure out where that refers to in 248, 710, or 630, 010.
[50:53] So for clarification, if you don't mind, I sent you, is what's being stated, Section 2.48.710, was that properly titled in number two?
[51:07] So A2, was that properly titled, should it be Section 2.48.710 or should it be the other?
[51:16] I'm sorry, I'm on page 8-8-8-8-A-2 procedure development.
[51:32] Mr. Chairman, I think and I think that might apply to paragraph C, distribution of funds which it's title of distribution of funds.
[51:43] But then it says commission shall establish procedures for apply for and receive
[51:50] which is why it deserves your funds, so I think that's where it applies to a C.
[51:55] So I think we're okay.
[51:59] My question is, who is the approval authority under the legislation for the procedures?
[52:10] In other words, A2 says that the commission shall develop.
[52:17] It changes it from recommend to develop procedures as specified.
[52:23] The
[52:27] point of clarification, when we go from recommend to develop,
[52:35] are we, again, the magic
[52:37] word that was used in the last conversation, which I'm really uncomfortable with, as we
[52:41] write legislation, are we implying that the commission approve their procedures, or is
[52:58] those procedures.
[53:02] Okay, yes, please, all in advance.
[53:04] I'll take a stab at this looking at the Assistant City Attorney,
[53:07] but the Council, I don't know, four or five years ago,
[53:10] did pass legislation that has a rules creation procedure.
[53:17] And I believe the City Attorney recently was saying that if it's called for
[53:21] the legislation, again, assuming that gets typically developed by
[53:25] I've seen a manager or at least approved internally.
[53:31] And then they don't come back, they come back to the council to the rules and government,
[53:34] not necessarily for approval, but just for review.
[53:37] I believe that's the procedure, but-
[53:39] Yeah, that legislation needs work though.
[53:41] There's a lot of issues with it, and
[53:43] Alderman Smith-Brennan, I've talked about it in the past, probably need to renew that conversation.
[53:47] But I wouldn't rely on that provision to shape your decision making here,
[53:54] because that law might change.
[53:59] I just don't get your hopes up, I guess, because there's some cleanup
[54:02] language, certainly, and that needs to be done with that legislation.
[54:04] It's a little wacky.
[54:07] What would you recommend for this particular instance?
[54:10] What happens with the way it's currently worded is what would happen?
[54:16] Would that be developed by offs of law, the procedures?
[54:22] I mean, the way that this is written is that the commission would be developing
[54:25] the procedures. I think the question that Alderman Thorpat was, who would be sort of approving
[54:30] those procedures? And I think the question becomes, does someone need to approve those
[54:34] procedures, or an entity need to approve those procedures, or should it be in connection with
[54:40] planning and zoning directors, you know?
[54:42] What, just a quick question. What, does that, what happens with like the Planning Commission,
[54:47] or building board of appeals, or board of appeals, they all have their own internal procedures?
[54:53] There's, I mean, maybe this is a side question.
[54:56] I'm not sure who approved those.
[54:57] Does that tell you both all?
[54:58] Those boards themselves.
[55:00] So what they'll do is they will have their roles of procedure. They will add it to the agenda. It's all publicized. They will take public comment presumably. I don't know if every single board in commission do that. And then the boards themselves vote to approve those procedures. Do you like to share something, director? Yes. So the previous board to its credit developed some very good procedures in coordination with our department.
[55:28] and with the Anne-Arundel County Arts Council that has a long history of being real experts in this area.
[55:35] We met in open sessions, we met here on a Saturday, and they developed procedures for selecting art for balancing interests, and these are procedures that all reflect what public arts commissions around the country do.
[55:52] So they're very specialized and they're not rules of procedure so much like with boards that deal with planning and development, but there were procedures about how to select art, how to balance it, how to make sure there was represented and a broadly of the community.
[56:09] So, I think, to the word, and I heard someone here say the same thing, I was thinking, it's not so much
[56:17] develop or prove or recommend, it's essentially they have the authority to establish those
[56:22] procedures.
[56:23] And just recommendation, the kudos go to the person in the back of the room who I overheard say that.
[56:30] Because essentially that's what we did and that's what we imagine the next commission would do.
[56:36] It's exactly, that sounds right to me, and it's crystal clear, they establish it.
[56:42] Exactly.
[56:42] I love that now would be more than willing, because that was the original age from the community,
[56:47] but I'd be more than willing to update that, develop word to establish if that could be done.
[56:53] Could I suggest, yes, please?
[56:55] Language for it?
[56:56] Yes.
[56:56] Yes.
[56:56] Persuant to section 630-010, the Commission shall establish procedures for the art fund.
[57:09] Mr. Chairman, can I just ask?
[57:10] Yes, the folks have spoken up.
[57:12] Are you good with the establish?
[57:15] Is that?
[57:16] Oh, you're good with it.
[57:17] Yeah, that's fine.
[57:19] Okay.
[57:21] So, make a note that I would am accepting that recommendation to this amendment without vote.
[57:32] I mean, I would like that to be the case.
[57:34] So, pursuant to this establish, so that's keeping in mind that's what number two will technically be in the new presentation to the council.
[57:43] I'm so number three, to the other point that Alderman Thorpe made about section 2.48.710, that was all fine, there was any questions or?
[57:55] Alderman Thorpe made a very good point, and this fixes that.
[58:00] Okay, and is that according to three as well with the funding allocation pursuant to that numbers also okay?
[58:07] Okay.
[58:08] Yep.
[58:08] Okay, great.
[58:09] So we have funding allocations, so allocate the art funds for costs related to seeking and receiving art funding grants was the only addition.
[58:16] Then we went to intergovernmental coordination, coordinating with city agencies, boards, committees and commissions as appropriate to fill its duties and reporting requirements.
[58:28] And for public engagement, we added the word the, so that's chairman.
[58:32] Yes.
[58:33] What is the intent of deleting historic preservation commission?
[58:38] Does this substantively change anything with their ability to weigh in on art in the historic district?
[58:47] It does not, and working with the law office, we actually went a little bit, had a little conversation about that.
[58:54] And mention it's not required to include any specific committee seeing that the Historic Preservation Commission or
[59:01] commission is automatically usually involved in the conversation.
[59:05] And so including city agencies, boards, committees, and commissions, it includes the Historic Preservation Commission because this commission automatically works with the Historic Preservation Commission.
[59:18] Now, for clarification, I do want to make sure that was correct, that was in conversation with myself.
[59:22] I'm going to ask you, so I do want to make it in Cynthia, so I want to make sure that that-
[59:26] I don't know specifics because I actually didn't tell me, but I would say that because the language in there that's added says coordinating with the city agencies, boards, committees and commissions as appropriate, that that contemplates those situations, inclusive of historic preservation commission and other commissions or boards.
[59:44] Okay,
[59:47] moving forward to page 9.
[59:50] We have membership and terms instead of membership appointment and terms, so it's membership in terms, membership, the commission shall, and this is an incorporation of a few of the amendments or.
[1:00:00] So we have the commission shall consist of nine members who shall be appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the city council. With the goal of representing the diversity of a napless within the commission, a preference shall be given to appointing one member from each ward and one member at large who has professional art expertise or knowledge of a broad range of art disciplines. See additional at large members may be allowed pursuant to subsection C, which we'll get to shortly.
[1:00:30] terms, member terms shall be three years commencing.
[1:00:33] This is, oh yes.
[1:00:35] Yes.
[1:00:36] Part of the interruption, but just a question on the membership part, just more to point out, there was some discussion in the breakout group we had as far as whether or
[1:00:49] not a requirement should be put in here as far as some of the members having our background, and I see that is included for the at large, but
[1:00:58] But did you give consideration to giving that, having some kind of requirement for the majority or portion of the general members?
[1:01:07] And composing all of the members.
[1:01:10] Now, if that doesn't clearly, isn't clearly written, I think we should maybe adjust the language.
[1:01:15] But this is to say that all of the members should have professional art expertise or knowledge.
[1:01:21] That's the recommendation of a broad range of art disciplines.
[1:01:24] So it's the goal of represented diversity, preface shall be given to one member from Ward and one member at large who has professional art.
[1:01:32] Okay, so I think that language isn't as clear there.
[1:01:35] If we can maybe clarify that, yes please.
[1:01:39] If you change the word has to have, it becomes plentiful.
[1:01:45] Everybody.
[1:01:48] All everybody, which I think is what I, where I'm all in the savage, I was called you
[1:01:53] Admiral Savage, all in the Savage is trying to go.
[1:01:58] So I am accepting that as thank you, I know you're not on the committee, but I'm absolutely
[1:02:06] if we can update that word has to be have instead.
[1:02:10] Is that, is that what the intent of the working group was?
[1:02:21] I don't know if there is, I would venture to say that most of the people testifying were clear on that, but I don't think there was consensus established necessarily from those who were there, but Mr. Feiffer may have a different assessment of that, but I wasn't.
[1:02:38] I think that's what it is.
[1:02:39] Because I know the mayor wants flexibility and I think he was worried that might tie his
[1:02:48] hands a little too much.
[1:02:52] But I think this is, the way this is worded would be, even if you substitute the have would
[1:03:01] be professional art experience or knowledge in a broad range, I think that's general enough
[1:03:07] that I think we just want to make sure we don't have people who don't have any kind of interest or
[1:03:14] focus on argument. And I think the earlier words preference shall be given. In other words,
[1:03:22] there's not a shall have nine years of experience or whatever, so preference. So if
[1:03:29] if the mayor was to think that we needed a finance person as part or I made that up, but
[1:03:41] Okay, so have that's that will be have instead of has and we have here terms, member terms
[1:03:51] shall be three years commencing on the date indicated during confirmation that was
[1:03:55] emphasized by the law office to make sure that we know that as soon as they are confirmed
[1:03:59] I'm not appointed, which is part of the former language at some point, that it be confirmation.
[1:04:09] Be, the confirmation shall designate the term of each commission member so that the terms
[1:04:12] of not more than three commission members shall expire in any year.
[1:04:15] That's Alderman Huntley, I believe, had an amendment similar to this, and so that's where
[1:04:20] the incorporation of that amendment is.
[1:04:22] This vacant positions, we have, if a ward specific position on the commission is vacant for three months or more,
[1:04:30] the mayor and council shall no longer be required to adhere to the ward requirement pursuant to subsection B.
[1:04:35] I know this was a positive response in our meeting that we had with the members in the mayor.
[1:04:40] The position may then be filled by a city resident living in any ward who shall be considered an at large member.
[1:04:46] That's why in membership C, we says additional at large members may be allowed pursuant to subsection C.
[1:04:52] So that's where subsection C is in the vacant positions where another at-large member may be considered.
[1:04:57] And then we have the new at-large member shall serve for the-
[1:05:01] And when this at-large position is vacated, it shall return to being ward specific. Now, some that just came to mind in that moment of this. When we say is vacated, let's say the at-large position is vacated before the term has expired. Would it then return based off of this, it would return to being ward specific. So should we incorporate language that
[1:05:30] that if I said it's after the remaining of that term, and then it would be word specific.
[1:05:37] So I think that's what the point of this one was, is that in the vacancy era, it can
[1:05:43] be any of the person because we want to make sure that we have a membership serving, but
[1:05:48] after that term expires, then we want to go back to that word specific.
[1:05:53] So just maybe a recommendation from the law office, if you don't mind, would that make more
[1:05:57] or sense, or leaving it as it is, and something.
[1:06:00] I mean, yeah, you would probably, instead of saying vacated,
[1:06:03] you would probably want to say at the expiration of that term,
[1:06:06] or something along those lines.
[1:06:07] Right.
[1:06:09] So when this at large position is vacated after the expiration of the term,
[1:06:19] it's a return to be in more specific.
[1:06:22] Okay.
[1:06:22] Yes.
[1:06:23] Yes.
[1:06:24] Yes, because technically it will automatically be vacated
[1:06:27] because the term is ended and they need to appoint a new member to that position.
[1:06:30] So I think that would make the most sense.
[1:06:32] So the way it's worded now, it seems to me that if somebody leaves before their term is over
[1:06:39] or leaves when their term is over, or just when their term is over,
[1:06:49] that it should,
[1:06:50] the way it's worded now, then it would go back to being word specific.
[1:06:54] So if the way it's worth it now, if we didn't have somebody from Ward 9 filling it and we picked
[1:07:02] in that large person at the end of their term, if they're actually, if they're not, if they're
[1:07:09] re-nominated, it's never vacated. So it depends what the intent of the group was. Because the way it's
[1:07:20] That's where it now, it's not vacated and they can be re-nominated over and over, and it's never vacated.
[1:07:27] Is it technically vacated after?
[1:07:30] So that's why I said at the expiration of the term, because tell them at the ropes point, if it's an at large member.
[1:07:37] If the intent is not allowed for the at large member to continue to have, to be reappointed essentially, then you want to be specific and say at the end of the term.
[1:07:46] You don't want to say anything about vacated because that can lead to the situation the element of the work was just describing.
[1:07:53] Okay, so instead of when this at large positions vacated, just at the expiration of this term, so just cross that whole piece out of this.
[1:08:00] Or at the expiration of the remaining term.
[1:08:03] Okay.
[1:08:04] At the expiration of the remaining term, it shall return to being word specific, or at the expiration of the remaining term of the at large position.
[1:08:14] Yeah, you do want to keep that at large position there at the end of the remaining term of the at large position at shall return to being ward specific.
[1:08:28] Say temporary at large position.
[1:08:34] Right.
[1:08:34] Instead
[1:08:39] of the new at-large member,
[1:08:43] we have to change other language prior to that to make it clear and flow.
[1:08:52] In number two, Cynthia, where it is considered an at-large member, you can say it considered a temporary at-large member, and then in three and four, put temporary before at-large.
[1:09:07] So, what the inclusion here is then is considered a temporary at large member 3, the temporary at large member show serve for the main term 4 at the expiration of the at large, the temporary at large position.
[1:09:31] and it shall return to being more specific.
[1:09:34] You got that, you'll phrase that properly.
[1:09:36] That's what we have for those three.
[1:09:41] Okay, thank you, and thank you.
[1:09:45] So we have D,
[1:09:48] it's just the letter change
[1:09:50] and we added a four, which is the commission
[1:09:54] and this is for the security of those members
[1:09:57] members who may not meet the required members who may not meet the required members
[1:10:01] And in participation, I know a lot of boards and commissions have had some concerns around this, and I know the mayor, as well as some other members, wanted to ensure that if necessary, the mayor would have the right to dismiss those members. And so it says here for the commission in consultation with the director shall establish participation requirements. And any commission member who fails to meet such requirements may be recommended to the mayor for dismissal prior to the end.
[1:10:29] of their term pursuant to chapter 2.48,
[1:10:32] Board's Commission and Committees, yes.
[1:10:34] That's a question for the citizenship attorneys.
[1:10:37] I think we already have some language in here
[1:10:39] regarding that applies to all the Board's and Commissions
[1:10:43] as far as membership.
[1:10:44] Like do we need something extra in here?
[1:10:46] Does this conflict?
[1:10:48] There is something in the code.
[1:10:49] You're testing my knowledge here
[1:10:51] and I don't like it on the top of my head.
[1:10:53] There is something in the code.
[1:10:55] I believe it's attendance only
[1:10:58] where if a board or commission member misses a certain period, a certain amount of meeting within a 12-month period, the chair is required to write a letter to the mayor and then a decision can be made as to whether that person should continue serving on the board or commission.
[1:11:13] So if there's anything sort of, I guess, in addition to that baseline that's already in the code, then this would be slightly different.
[1:11:21] I don't know entirely what is meant by participation requirements other than pure attendance, but
[1:11:28] that could, depending on what the intent is here, could technically be different, but to answer
[1:11:33] your question, yes, there is something that's already in the code, whether or not that covers what's
[1:11:38] intended here, I can't speak to them. I guess my question is, because I'm a little hesitant to
[1:11:45] to make a, not just duplicative, but additional requirement, it may make it a little difficult in the future.
[1:11:56] I just think it having a consistency among boards and how we treat the membership elsewhere is important.
[1:12:02] I thought there might even something having to do with ethical.
[1:12:06] It's for the council.
[1:12:08] I think it's the council having the ability to remove another council member for
[1:12:16] Sir, I can look, I mean, I'll look into it, no.
[1:12:20] Okay, thank you very much.
[1:12:22] Please.
[1:12:23] I think we may want to ask, Mr. I think you've got a good point.
[1:12:26] I think we may want to ask Mr. Feiffer, I believe it's the mayor's intent to clarify the participation
[1:12:34] rules for our boards and commissions in the code.
[1:12:40] And if so, I think all of them in savage is actually anticipating something, I mean, we
[1:12:46] We could put it in here, as is, and just appeal it if we did that, or we could just not address it here.
[1:12:53] Yes, there is a modernization of the boards and commissions draft.
[1:13:00] Bill is starting to work through the process of approval, so, and would have some of those language in there, I think.
[1:13:06] But it is obviously not, hasn't been introduced, let alone passed by the council yet, so it's a little impromptu.
[1:13:13] Well, if you keep it in, I think only this average point is well taken.
[1:13:18] We keep it in and appeal it later in case we don't address it later.
[1:13:25] Or that's what I would recommend it's okay.
[1:13:28] Yeah, I'm literally I'm taking all this is about all of us making sure we get something to
[1:13:33] afford.
[1:13:33] So if you would recommend that, then let's move forward with it.
[1:13:37] Thank you.
[1:13:38] So we have E, of course we're changing that F, reporting requirements.
[1:13:43] This is number one, the Finance Director shall submit the financial status of funds granted
[1:13:49] by funding source for the previous, by each funding source for the previous year to the
[1:13:53] commission by October 1.
[1:13:55] This is an accordance with the November 1 deadline that the state code requires.
[1:14:01] And so it says for number 2, an accordance with Maryland code, annotation, LC, 2603, honor
[1:14:06] Number four, November one, of each year, the commission shall submit a report to those listed in paragraph three concerning its A, use of hotel tax revenue during the preceding year, and B, activities during the preceding year regarding the use of funds granted by the commission.
[1:14:21] Three, the report shall be provided to the, and this is also in the state code, Annapolis Mayor and City Council, Maryland Senate Budget and Taxation Committee, the Maryland House Committee on Ways and Means, and members of the Maryland General Assembly representing the city of an app.
[1:14:36] So this was in partnership with the law office to ensure that we resembled exactly what the code says and to be clear on the reporting requirements.
[1:14:46] G, the only updates are in C, define a competitive selection process for versus prescribe a method for the competitive selection of, D, outline the process for.
[1:14:59] Thank you very much.
[1:15:00] Instead of prescribed procedures for the selection, e, establish how money will be awarded from, instead of prescribed procedures for awarding monies from. And f, we added to address other matters appropriate to the administration of this article, we added including procedures for timely responses to and processing of applications and reporting requirements, that's just for consistency earlier on in this code update. For two, it was added in parentheses, the title of
[1:15:36] So, in parentheses, and with quotes, we have the regulations, promulgation, and posting on
[1:15:42] City's website. That's pulled directly from this chapter here. I'm going to believe
[1:15:47] that was added by Cynthia to make sure that this was clearly stated or to find it in the code.
[1:15:55] Moving forward, if there are no questions, no changes to the remainder of section 2.48.74 of
[1:16:03] the art selection that was okay until we reach a selection process.
[1:16:08] All of that has been struck, stricken out.
[1:16:11] And in addition, we have the commission shall establish and
[1:16:15] publish the criteria by which applications and requests for proposals for
[1:16:19] our and public places will be assessed.
[1:16:22] The commission in coordination with the director shall review and update the criteria as necessary.
[1:16:27] The commission shall publish findings for all art selection and funding decisions,
[1:16:31] including the procedures followed in the decision making process.
[1:16:34] B, selection added, a one, the commission shall inform the director in a timely manner of its decision on the selection of art to be displayed in the city.
[1:16:46] Reason for constantly consistently adding directors, we want to be clear that this is in coordination partnership with the director.
[1:16:54] We added the commission shall consider any recommendations made by the director before making art selection or funding decisions.
[1:17:01] See, large expenditures and appeals review process in asking the law office from members of the arts community.
[1:17:08] They felt more comfortable with the 50,000 or more.
[1:17:11] The office said there was no reason for it to just be 40,000 and the range of 40 to 50,000 was acceptable.
[1:17:17] So we incorporated large expenditures that the Rules and City Government Committee in collaboration with the City's Office of Law, Finance, Department and City Manager shall create a procedure to review projects costing $50,000 more.
[1:17:29] This shall be a timely review process by the Rules and City Government Committee, completed solely to assess whether the commission has followed appropriate procedures and to determine what, if any, further procedural steps may be needed.
[1:17:41] The rules and city government committee shall not consider or address any artistic criteria in its deliberations.
[1:17:47] The rules and city government committee shall provide a final recommendation to the city council and commission based on its review.
[1:17:53] The appeals process of review process is the exact same except for the financial piece of the $50,000 or more in conversation with the law office.
[1:18:02] And members of the arts as well as in that meeting we had with all of them in savage present.
[1:18:06] We discussed their possibly being going through the process of a committee or forming some type of committee with the
[1:18:13] Departments Office of Law, Finance Department City Manager, and
[1:18:17] We discussed the finance committee. We discussed the road city government committee seeing that this is focused on rules
[1:18:23] We figured at least after that meeting we figured that the rules of city government committee made sense
[1:18:29] At least that was agreed upon by a few persons and we also wanted it to be sure
[1:18:35] that we are not dictating or going beyond what's allowed by the rules and city government committee of making any, you know,
[1:18:44] deliberative decisions to reverse decisions made by the commission.
[1:18:47] It's only a recommendation seeing that the council, the full council is the only body that could do that.
[1:18:52] So we would recommend to the council and the commission that, hey, after review,
[1:18:57] We felt in coordination with the Office of the Law Finance Department of City Manager that you miss these steps, and you need to consider these steps.
[1:19:05] And that's for the expenditures and the appeals.
[1:19:08] Oh, yes, come on.
[1:19:09] Please, come on.
[1:19:10] I do it.
[1:19:11] This was actually the most...
[1:19:14] I think, yeah, I think this needs to be looked at a little bit closer.
[1:19:19] I have a few concerns.
[1:19:21] Both the large expenditures and the appeals, but the appeals process I'll start with that.
[1:19:28] I'm not sure what the goal is here, in terms of usually when people appeal a decision that's made by a border commission, there's some sort of attached right, like it's a property right, whether it's, you know, a peer at the end of their, you know, they want to redo their peer at the end of their bulkhead, or it's an employment right because they're appealing a disciplinary action going to the civil service board.
[1:19:55] Here I'm not sure what would someone be appealing the fact that they didn't get awarded great
[1:20:00] There's no like inherent right to money being awarded a grant. And so how would that look? Is sort of question number one? And then it doesn't really have like finality to it. It says that the rules and city government would make a recommendation to the city council and the commission based on its review, but the council doesn't have that oversight over the commission, any border commission's decision making. Usually if someone appeals a decision by the board, a border commission, a quasi judicial border commission, it's a petition for judicial review.
[1:20:29] which goes to Circuit Court. So this sets up a totally different process than what other appeal
[1:20:35] processes are in our code. And I'm not suggesting that there be petitions for
[1:20:39] judicial review on a award or lack of grant money for art. It's not what I'm
[1:20:45] suggesting at all, but I think that that just goes to show that there probably isn't a method
[1:20:51] for appealing these types of situations. There can be other ways where you can accomplish
[1:20:56] like if the goal is to make sure that the commission is following procedures, it could be through
[1:21:02] the reporting that they have to provide and making sure that they're following those procedures as
[1:21:06] intended versus allowing someone who feels a grief to appeal that decision of the commission.
[1:21:14] I know all of them in savage if you're okay with me calling the member first.
[1:21:22] Thank you Mr. Chair. My main concern on this in incorporating the rules and city government
[1:21:28] government committee into the appeals and approval process is it adds politics to a quasi-judicial
[1:21:37] board, specifically a quasi-judicial board that is in charge of a lot of money.
[1:21:44] That is the question of the last board that we had to disband.
[1:21:52] When you incorporate elected officials, we start coming in with our own views of what
[1:21:57] is and is not our, and even though we have the, you shall not consider or address any
[1:22:02] artistic criteria and its deliberations we're going to.
[1:22:06] Not us specifically, that is the royal way.
[1:22:11] We need to take the politicians out of these judicial boards as much as possible.
[1:22:17] I really think adding us into this process is going to just make the process even more
[1:22:24] dysfunctional.
[1:22:25] If I can also simplify what Alderman Shannon Meyer just said, there's a whole reason why
[1:22:29] there's separation of powers in government, and so another way to put what he's saying is that it's there's the potential for the legislative branch to infringe on the executive branch, which is not something that is legal.
[1:22:41] So if literally this is a canvas, I know this is talking about this is this is a canvas right here, so are we suggesting that we just take out or if this would be possible to just take out the rules of the city government committee and all these pieces and just have the city's office law finance department and
[1:22:58] city manager be the person's just across the board in this section?
[1:23:03] So for the large expenditures, I think, yes, that's a little easier than the appeal section
[1:23:09] because I think appeals, you still have to, what is someone appealing and why and what
[1:23:14] does that put other people, what kind of position does that put other people in?
[1:23:18] Let's say there is a grant that's awarded to an artist and then someone who didn't get
[1:23:23] awarded that grant wants to appeal it, what does that mean for the person who had the grant
[1:23:27] awarded to them. So I think appeals is probably something you want to consider strongly whether to
[1:23:32] even have an appeals process and figure out conceptually what you want that to look like before
[1:23:39] you legislate it. But with the expenditures, I think that, you know, not maybe not so much the
[1:23:45] office of law to be honest with you, but finance and city manager usually in other areas of the code,
[1:23:50] the city manager is the authority to make those decisions if it's something like emergency procurement
[1:23:54] Or the city manager can make the decisions transfer funds up to $25,000.
[1:24:00] So that authority already rests with the city manager solely.
[1:24:03] So that is something to consider as well.
[1:24:05] But like in consultation with the finance director, it's certainly reasonable as well.
[1:24:10] Okay, all of them in savage.
[1:24:15] Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[1:24:17] Yeah, too.
[1:24:18] Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[1:24:19] I think the appeal process is kind of something I was proposing.
[1:24:22] But I think it's, I think it's, it was worded like poorly, in the sense that my original intention anyway wasn't to have like an actual appeal process, which is what you may be thinking of more just a public review as far as because some of these, I think the concern with the expense, the grant approvals of over $40,000 or $50,000 was just, that's a lot of money we want a little more oversight and the idea of,
[1:24:52] that I was thinking is like, well, because I think at one point I was proposed to go over those amounts, the approval would go to the
[1:25:00] The director, I think the sponsors of this amendment are saying, well, let's keep that approval with the commission. And so then I was thinking, well, how do we provide some oversight? And that's where I would have the idea, well, if those high dollar grant approvals. If somebody had a concern about anything regarding it, they could then at least come to the not for formal approval, but they could come to a committee. And then the committee would review just the process to say, well, look, they followed the process, they followed the code, there's nothing to see here.
[1:25:29] We're confident with, but they couldn't opine on the actual content of as far as appropriate
[1:25:36] or inappropriate or inappropriate or we don't like how that looks.
[1:25:38] It was more just a, I'm not 100% sold, committed to that idea, but that's kind of what I was going for, so.
[1:25:45] Is it something that could be accomplished through like the reporting mechanism?
[1:25:49] Like, because the reporting, if that's publicly posted and that allows any member of the public
[1:25:54] and seeing that to sort of raise concerns that they may have and that can be raised to,
[1:26:00] whomever, without going through like this process as outlined. I do appreciate you saying you
[1:26:05] didn't really meet an appeals process because I was truly baffled as to what that was look like.
[1:26:10] But I think that there's a way that you can probably accomplish what you're looking for through the
[1:26:15] reporting mechanism. Or the procedures mechanism perhaps. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'd be fine. I think either
[1:26:21] There are both of those.
[1:26:23] Striking number two.
[1:26:24] Yes.
[1:26:25] I guess my question, and it's a hard question,
[1:26:31] is should there be an appeals process?
[1:26:38] In other words, again, trying to cover like possible scenarios,
[1:26:46] those.
[1:26:50] If we're entrusting the commission to make decisions of what art should be installed,
[1:27:01] or use what this one has been used for. But if there is an outcry from the residents,
[1:27:08] that the art is not consistent with the
[1:27:19] intent of the, you know, I don't want to give examples because it's so hard, but look at, you know, the challenge of statues across the country is a good one.
[1:27:27] Are we saying that when this there is an appeals process, but it also states that it doesn't
[1:27:44] shall not consider or address any artistic criteria, which is also a tough thing to define.
[1:27:54] It actually is one of those things.
[1:27:56] I don't know how to define it, but I know it when I see it, not to quote the Supreme Court.
[1:28:01] But this is a hard one, and I think we need to make sure that we get this right that we protect the artistic rights of specifically the commission, I guess, really.
[1:28:23] While also ensuring that we represent the citizens, so is this a tough one?
[1:28:33] And I don't think we, I don't know if to leave, keeping this in or deleting it addresses it.
[1:28:41] I mean, I, I think the conversation to the city council is going to have to be where, where are we on this?
[1:28:47] I mean, I, you know, whether it's statutes or whether it's art at Kennedy Center, I mean,
[1:28:53] it's clearly a tough issue that's how to move forward.
[1:29:00] And it's
[1:29:05] your own savage, please, thank you.
[1:29:07] So yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair, just have to listen to you and Assistant City Attorney, I think
[1:29:12] it would, I would, personally, I think it would be best just to remove that section two.
[1:29:19] I think it does open up a little too much just can of worms and a little and plus I was just sitting here thinking to it
[1:29:26] It's it'd be a little too unique because no other body no other board or commission has it and I don't think it's
[1:29:34] Worth creating a brand new process for arts commission
[1:29:38] New members will consider something like that and so they could in their own procedures
[1:29:43] Yeah, so I think that's the better place to do it. You guys is my point. Yeah, well
[1:29:47] So, we will strike this out of this amendments.
[1:29:51] Could I also comment on, if you've done with that, or the previous section, the number one, the large expenditures on D.
[1:30:00] You mentioned, well, the first question is your colleague was talking about, well, maybe this shouldn't really be coming to a committee or in particular rules. And we did talk about economic matters. Some of us, so that could be a possibility. If it's determined it's worth a lot of bringing to the committee. But in case, on D, my concern is that you have, let's see, rules of our mission provide a final recommendation to the city council.
[1:30:29] But you don't state what the recommendation is for, like, the council gets the recommendation
[1:30:36] of what do we do? Is it for our approval? It's not, unless I'm missing it in here, it's
[1:30:41] not stated anywhere why we're even getting a recommendation because we don't have any
[1:30:45] power or control over this process other than what we're doing here, if you understand what
[1:30:52] I'm saying.
[1:30:55] That's why I was suggesting if you were going to eliminate any committee that it should be the city managers decision after consultation with the finance director as opposed to bringing in a standing committee and then also making recommendations to the city council because to the alderman's point, the city council doesn't make that ultimate decision as to the expenditure of the funds, at least as written it doesn't either.
[1:31:23] Yes. So let's go back. I think we need to talk about that. I think that's, so I think there's a couple things that are involved in this conversation.
[1:31:35] The first one easy. Easiest one first. I think timely is in the eyes of the beholder and maybe we want to put a number of days on that.
[1:31:45] Right,
[1:31:48] timely.
[1:31:52] 60 days, 30 days. I'm willing to make more sense to put it to this piece here.
[1:31:59] Yeah,
[1:32:06] just offer suggestion. I know not on the committee. I'm trying to stay in my, but you are today.
[1:32:17] If somebody wanted to propose, perhaps, I would suggest maybe just striking B through D, just keeping A, but also removing the rules and city government committee.
[1:32:28] So it would just say something akin to the city's office of law, finance department, city managers, I'll create a procedure to review projects costing $50,000 or more.
[1:32:40] Reviewing doesn't mean approval, they would just review it for the things we're talking about, make sure it's a sound decision and following procedures.
[1:32:46] I think that it's still accomplished, at least I think partially what we're trying to do with this language, is that?
[1:32:53] Do you think I'd be in alignment with what we're talking about, because it's really B.C. and D is there because it's really going through the committee process.
[1:33:01] But if we just want to cut off literally from B, all the way down to the second D, we could do all of that, because we already did, too.
[1:33:09] So would you recommend that being the case?
[1:33:12] So we are being all the way down to the second D.
[1:33:14] Yes, the second D because two had a D.
[1:33:17] So I was saying the second D.
[1:33:18] Oh, gotcha.
[1:33:20] But now we're trying to get it.
[1:33:21] Oh yeah, so if you are recommending that this would be okay,
[1:33:27] I see what, I don't see a being a problem at all
[1:33:29] with us just updating this to be.
[1:33:32] The city's office of law, finance department,
[1:33:34] and yes, I think the city manager is fine to keep there.
[1:33:36] a shall create a procedure to review projects cost of it. Now, they're creating a procedure,
[1:33:43] but as I say, they're going to review it. Shall create a procedure and review projects?
[1:33:49] Well, the procedure, presumably, because it's reviewing projects would also encompass
[1:33:56] who would be reviewing the projects if it came to it. And they would, they can say the
[1:34:03] And I think, you know, generally the suggestion of the recommendation, at least coming from me and me, I don't want to speak on behalf of my entire office, but the city manager is going to be like the head honcho in that regard, right?
[1:34:12] So the city manager, hopefully she's not listening and realizing that we're trying to throw more work at her, but there's going to be, you know, right?
[1:34:20] She stuck around, maybe she could defend herself a little bit, but that would be, you know, that would be included in that procedure who would be reviewing the projects.
[1:34:34] The fact of the matter is the rules in city government is really not going to create.
[1:34:40] So the people, the office of law, so should it say the city's office of law, finance department,
[1:34:48] city manager shall create a procedure to review projects costing $50,000 from war.
[1:34:52] and, uh,
[1:34:56] and, uh,
[1:35:00] The rules or whatever, that bring the rules to the rules committee to review. And we don't have approval authority, but that also gives it public transparency. That be included, provide, provide a reporter, provide an update on its review to the rules of the city government committee, would that be appropriate or inculcated? So again, that could probably fall under the reporting mechanism that I think is located elsewhere.
[1:35:29] in this legislation that could fall under that category that like there's some sort of summary
[1:35:35] data however it should look if that's reported to the appropriate entity based on you know whether
[1:35:41] it's how many projects were over 50 grand to be honest with you I don't know how common it's going
[1:35:47] to this is going to come up I don't know that it's going to come up at all but that sort of has
[1:35:53] That's a listing at minimum of those projects that cost $50,000 more and what went into the procedure
[1:36:02] surrounding them.
[1:36:03] So I believe that Oldman Thorpe is stressing is that in the instances that that does
[1:36:08] happen so that we don't have to wait for the reporting to come about, because how often will
[1:36:13] they give us these reports, so I know we have annual reports, but I think what is being
[1:36:18] said is, in the instance that a 50,000 project or more comes about and they have to create those
[1:36:25] procedures to review it, following their review, they should come to the City Council Committee,
[1:36:31] rules of the City Government and at least share what they did in a public form. Is that, I believe,
[1:36:38] this one? So would that be okay to include here?
[1:36:42] I think if you if you want to add tack on sort of that like publication element to a you certainly can do so.
[1:36:53] So let's think of yes. Oh, yes.
[1:36:57] What you finished the wording part. I just want to ask how we went from 40,000 to 50,000 and it's not that I disagree with it
[1:37:05] I just don't know the criteria but it actually wasn't so after asking it was that it a 40 to 50,000 dollar range was
[1:37:13] would be feasible, and some of the members of the RCME felt that $50,000 for them was a little bit more realistic
[1:37:22] or sound because most projects are beneath that, and so they should have the full authority
[1:37:27] usually to just grant those projects, but that's what the reasoning for it going for 40 to 50 was.
[1:37:35] I mean, again, don't read into my questions any disagreement, but is there 40 to 50 a sweet spot that there's a lot of them?
[1:37:46] I mean, does the number increase when you go from 40 to 50 from, you know, from 23 projects to one?
[1:37:56] No, to be realistic, it was, to be honest, of course, it was, it doesn't make any difference.
[1:38:03] If it's 40 to 50, so it's okay, well, 50 should be okay.
[1:38:08] But it wasn't many major or any reasons to call out, that will increase the amount or decrease
[1:38:16] the amount.
[1:38:18] But for language purposes, if we can maybe think of what language could be added, because
[1:38:23] As we already are agreeing that B through D is now stricken out and number two is already
[1:38:30] stricken out fully.
[1:38:32] I'm sorry.
[1:38:32] How do you can do something simple, like as a C1B, each large expenditure shall be presented
[1:38:39] to the City Council in a report or something like that within 60 days of the expenditure
[1:38:44] or something along those lines?
[1:38:46] Okay.
[1:38:47] Okay, so for expenditures costing $50,000 more, is what you're saying?
[1:38:52] For expenditures costing $50,000 or more, the stuff's law, if I swear on the same managers,
[1:39:00] shall present or present.
[1:39:05] He has some great language.
[1:39:07] You want to come on, give us the way?
[1:39:08] I would just say you could say something to the effect of at the conclusion of the review
[1:39:15] to project described in A, a report will be delivered to the council in X amount of days, you know, the EPIC.
[1:39:22] All right, so the council and all is, okay, let's do that. If that's okay, I'm going to incorporate that way,
[1:39:30] everyone can see it at the same time, especially.
[1:39:37] So, thank you, Cynthia.
[1:39:43] We are on page 15 now for page 14, we're striking out, no, everything was already stricken out.
[1:39:51] So number one, stricken, all that out.
[1:39:53] And we're adding the commission and the director shall ensure that the city or
[1:39:56] commission has a written agreement with the artists before taking.
[1:40:00] Artists or artists before taking any action to describe in this section, what are the actions? Well two, we're crossing that out, moving it and doing artworks, artworks selected, displayed, performed, pursuant to this article may be located or performed in or near any publicly accessible space owned by the city, alternatively with the written agreement from the non-city owner. These artworks may also be located or performed in publicly, accessible spaces on private property or other non-city.
[1:40:30] government property. Three, visual art owned by the city may also be loan for exhibition in a publicly accessible space on non-city property, upon such terms and conditions as recommended by the commission and approved by the director and with written agreement with the owner of that property.
[1:40:48] So that's where one, where we need permission from the artist because often times the art can be moved without the artist's knowing.
[1:40:57] And since it's their art, I know members of the arts community were saying they would feel more welcoming if at least they were notified before their art was just moved from place to place.
[1:41:08] I'm for, crossed out, remove, strike, stricken through, of the commission shall advise the
[1:41:14] director of, so I'm seeing here that it's, so if we can remove the, it's recommendation
[1:41:23] regarding the design, execution, placement, or performance of a work of art, or art activation
[1:41:28] in connection with this article.
[1:41:30] Are there any thoughts or feedback or anything like that, or there's just a lot of questions?
[1:41:36] Just going up a little bit, because there's two number threes, and then it looks like the first three, starting with city officials and employees that's struck, and then it's replaced by visual art, and then there's a second three that has the same language that was struck in the first three.
[1:41:54] Is that a copy? Is that just a copy? It didn't need to be removed.
[1:42:00] I believe it's a miscount, and I think that the intention was just to move three down below visual art owned by the city.
[1:42:14] So, second three is supposed to be four.
[1:42:17] Okay, I just wanted clarification on that since it was struck before if it was intended to be renumbered or struck again.
[1:42:24] So, that three would be removed, that extra three.
[1:42:30] So, through the second three would become four, four becomes five, and there is no other five, that their original five was struck.
[1:42:40] So, what's being said though is that the number three underneath we have the update, but under that it's the same number three.
[1:42:47] So, is that same number three needing to be shaken out and removed?
[1:42:51] She's saying that it just needs to be renumbered to four.
[1:42:54] Okay, that's the intention was to move that in which below.
[1:42:57] Yes, yes.
[1:42:58] If you just remove the first number, the number actual numeric number three, it appears that
[1:43:06] the first block of blue that starts artwork selected displayed is actually a part of the
[1:43:12] visual art owned by the city.
[1:43:16] See what I'm saying?
[1:43:17] Again, so that both those blues are number two because it's talked it's about public
[1:43:26] stress-owned spaces, baby loan for, was the intent to put those two together?
[1:43:32] No, I think it was, they were saying it was a format where that should be number two.
[1:43:38] That should be number three, that should be number four.
[1:43:41] That'll be number five.
[1:43:42] Okay.
[1:43:42] Okay, got it.
[1:43:45] Yes, please.
[1:43:47] Just a question, I don't understand the number four, I guess there should be number five,
[1:43:52] but since the Commission shall advise the director of its recommendation regarding the design, excuse the placement or performance of a work of our activation and connection with this article.
[1:44:04] This puts the control of where it's located in the director's hands.
[1:44:11] but then up a tire on number two,
[1:44:22] I guess, gives control when it's city-owned property or if it's
[1:44:27] non-city-owner, yet number two kind of puts it in the place of control in the
[1:44:36] supply.
[1:44:40] So to answer
[1:44:41] that, though, that's the original code. So maybe we need to update the word advise and
[1:44:52] Have it be notified or something of that nature because that's the original code number 4 is the original code and we're just putting
[1:45:00] Back from the original code, what was there?
[1:45:06] So maybe we need to change what the original code said. But what's your, what's your intent that you're looking for? Is there, is, have that be in the control of the commission? As far as the deal has that right, it's just they're going to, they're going to share with the director. Hey, this is our recommendation, whether it be get feedback or whether the director gave feedback, but it's really sharing the update as if any other coordination piece of this is done.
[1:45:31] I want to change that language or if we have suggestions, I say we can do that.
[1:45:38] I just, it's the original code that was placed back.
[1:45:49] I just, I guess I'm not quite clear in my own head at the moment as far as who,
[1:45:55] who has the approval to determine where they are exactly where it should go.
[1:46:00] And I'm just thinking, you know, did, maybe we can ask the director to have the director to give recommendation,
[1:46:07] Because I could see some instances where it might not make sense in the city might be like, no, we really don't want to locate it here
[1:46:13] but I feel like it's not too clear.
[1:46:15] Director, could you be ahead?
[1:46:16] If I can jump in real quick.
[1:46:18] Sure.
[1:46:18] Well, while Chris is walking up, you do have under, I'm just going to tell you, page 8 of 17, where it has a commission,
[1:46:26] she'll have the following duties and responsibilities, at least for city property.
[1:46:29] The commission determines acquisition, commissioning, and placement of art and public places on city owned properties.
[1:46:34] So, at least as it relates to city owned properties, the earlier in the legislation the commission is the one that decides where the, at least at a minimum the placement and what else does it already forgotten, acquisition commission placement relocation maintenance removal and disposition of art in public places.
[1:46:52] So, to Alderman Savage's point, there's a little bit of a conflict there at least as it relates to the city owned property.
[1:46:57] And Director Jakubiak, what has that process been like in the past few of mine sharing for this specifically
[1:47:04] when it comes to the design execution placement, has the commission just shared, hey this is where it's going to go
[1:47:10] and you've proved that or did they ask, is this okay if we do this, like what has that been?
[1:47:17] First of all, are we talking about the installation of, say, paintings and photographs in City Hall?
[1:47:24] Is that what we're referring to or are we talking about art selection and art selection?
[1:47:28] Okay, so those decisions are made at time of selection of the art, or
[1:47:35] the selection of the candidate for a grant.
[1:47:40] In effect, the commission will review a recommendation from the Department of Planning and
[1:47:45] make a recommendation, so it's immediately known to us.
[1:47:52] There's no formal advising the director, the director knows, the director's ex officio member of the commission.
[1:48:03] So there is some redundancy, I think as the Assistant City Attorney said, there's a section that on page 13 of 17 at the bottom that says the commission shall inform the director in a timely way of its decision on the selection of art to be displayed in the city.
[1:48:18] Right? And then on page 15 where we are, it kind of says the same thing.
[1:48:28] What was the first page you mentioned? About 13. Yes.
[1:48:31] The bottom under selection. Right.
[1:48:41] It doesn't include the design execution or performance piece, but.
[1:48:49] Right.
[1:48:49] The commission
[1:48:56] is really not making recommendations on those things so much.
[1:49:00] If they are, they're placing them as conditions on a grant.
[1:49:06] We will, you know, we will approve your grant provided that you executed
[1:49:13] a different way, for instance.
[1:49:15] Okay, so what I'm hearing that maybe is for selection 1, B1.
[1:49:20] And we are taking four, or now five really, and maybe just adding the terms regarding the,
[1:49:29] so it would be the commission, shall I inform the director at a timely manner of its decision on or regarding the design, execution, placement or performance of a work of art or art activation and connection with this article.
[1:49:41] Well, that combined those two and be more clear.
[1:49:46] So we would take one, leave it as it is, and adjust it just a little, by taking five, the commission shall advise director of its recommendations, and the piece that says, regarding the design execution placement performance, we would do that, add that piece to one.
[1:50:00] So, that is the commission shall inform the director in a tiny manner of its decision regarding the design, execution, placement, or performance, performance, of a work of art or our activation connection with the article. I think it depends on if you want to combine this election in the display process. Which are currently separated out. So, I think really what you're looking at is just changing. I was looking at 14 for the moment. I think we're looking at changing the word recommendation on page 15
[1:50:29] to decision so that it conforms to what's earlier in the, in the code I can't even remember
[1:50:37] what page it was.
[1:50:38] I think what I pointed out on page, whatever, it's so blending together, it's pointless.
[1:50:45] Yes, so on page eight, where it outlines the commission's duties and responsibilities
[1:50:53] which says that they have those duties and responsibilities, so to conform with that
[1:50:58] just changing recommendation to decision on page 15.
[1:51:06] Great. So we would do the Commission shall
[1:51:08] advise director of its decision.
[1:51:14] Okay. Thank you.
[1:51:17] We've reached almost the end of the only major update in the end of the section was for
[1:51:25] clarification surrounding the appointments of members for the staggering of them. So it says
[1:51:32] This is notwithstanding section 2.48.720B2A for the initial appointments made after adoption of this ordinance.
[1:51:38] The mayors shall stagger the members' terms so that approximately one-third of the initial terms
[1:51:44] expire in each of the first three years consistent with section 2.48.720B2B.
[1:51:51] Upon the expiration, this is number two of initial, thank you, director.
[1:51:55] of each initial stagger term, all subsequent terms for that seat shall be for the three year term required by session 2.48.72, 0b to a, and this ordinance shall take effect upon passage.
[1:52:12] So this is the piece, I believe, Oldman Huntley mentioned about the stagger of terms, and we just had to clarify saying that most of the members may be appointed at once in the beginning.
[1:52:24] And so, if the law office, maybe you could provide, I think this was the last edition probably today.
[1:52:30] I think this was the last one that needs to be updated because we realized that earlier on the code,
[1:52:35] we said the staggered terms, but there was no, how do you stagger terms when you have five or more members
[1:52:40] being appointed at the same time?
[1:52:42] So, I think that number one and two should probably be under the terms.
[1:52:46] It's kind of unusual to have language like that under section two and legislation,
[1:52:50] So since there's already that term provision, I think if you just move it over there.
[1:52:56] So in terms, we will take one and two,
[1:53:07] so terms, we only have an A and a B.
[1:53:10] So maybe making it C or D or making it a one, two.
[1:53:15] And then however, the formatting purposes Cynthia, we could do that.
[1:53:19] And then we can just go back to what it said originally, which is this ordinance shall
[1:53:25] take effect upon passage. I could just stay all the same.
[1:53:35] That's all of the amendment.
[1:53:39] Is there any thoughts, comments, feedback, suggestions, recommendations, anything on this?
[1:53:47] Yes. I just wanted to say I think commend you on consolidating all those amendments. I've
[1:53:54] So, you did a very good job of responding to and summarizing the concerns that we heard at the breakout session.
[1:54:05] Will, I know it's difficult to do this, but that's why we have committees.
[1:54:09] So, thanks for getting it done.
[1:54:12] You, actually, and the artist's people and the community, the family, everyone.
[1:54:17] All of them in Santa Maria, did you have any thoughts or anything?
[1:54:21] Still adjusting.
[1:54:29] I commend you for the effort in the process these take time and it's worth taking the time to get it right thank you very much.
[1:54:39] I know that we're inching up on the deadline for this where the mayor will have to appoint members.
[1:54:48] He is most comfortable appointing members following an action by the council saying that the law office had recommended we do so.
[1:54:57] So
[1:55:05] So, Mr. Chair, because I came back in due to another appointment, came back in a little bit late, and I'm playing a little bit of ketchup on this. I am personally going to abstain, but because I hate voting on things that I am not entirely sure what's going on for. It's be reckless of me. But what I would recommend the committee do due to the sense of urgency around this process is either
[1:55:33] They're given a positive recommendation on the amendment or no recommendation on the amendment and then move forward with the legislation as a whole.
[1:55:42] Thank you for that. My fellow council member and committee member, are you comfortable with that to make an emotion to have to do a favourable or no recommendation?
[1:55:53] I am comfortable making a favourable recommendation and move forward with the legislation.
[1:55:57] Okay, I'll second that.
[1:56:00] And all in favour?
[1:56:01] Oh yes, please.
[1:56:04] Probably for Kaylon Sanity, but am I on when you're saying moving forward with the legislation are you talking about a amendment 11?
[1:56:09] Yes, I'm in a lot of.
[1:56:10] Or are you making any sort of recommendation as it relates to amendments one through ten?
[1:56:14] Because you started to earlier than you decided to table it once you went through a amendment 11 and you were going to revisit it.
[1:56:20] So you may want to parse that out a little bit so it's clear.
[1:56:25] So, we are recommending that amendments 1 to 10 is withdrawn and a favorable recommendation
[1:56:33] for amendment 11.
[1:56:35] Was that proper to the language of earlier today when we had to come see?
[1:56:38] Yeah, sure.
[1:56:39] Yeah, I think that's what I said.
[1:56:41] Are you okay with that?
[1:56:42] Sure.
[1:56:42] Okay.
[1:56:43] I will second that.
[1:56:44] All in favor?
[1:56:45] Aye.
[1:56:46] And thank you all for that transparency at all.
[1:56:49] I shall abstain.
[1:56:51] Okay.
[1:56:52] We have one abstinence as well.
[1:56:55] So, we have reached it.
[1:56:58] Do you want to recommend the legislation as amended now with amendment 11?
[1:57:03] See I got you, Kayla, and I got you.
[1:57:04] Is there a motion to recommend this legislation as amended to the full council in our next
[1:57:10] meeting?
[1:57:11] So, I will second that all in favor.
[1:57:13] Hi.
[1:57:14] I thank you.
[1:57:15] Abstention.
[1:57:16] And one abstention.
[1:57:20] Okay, we have reached officially the end of our agenda.
[1:57:23] I know we've sent at the time we are so appreciative of all the work of course we're here for the people
[1:57:29] I will ask for motion to adjourn this meeting. So moved. All right, section. Okay. There are no objections
[1:57:36] Meeting is adjourned.