[5:16] muddy in the

[5:18] water. All right, I'd like to call the

[5:21] uh May 7th Canal Winchester Charter View

[5:23] Commission meeting to order. Roll call,

[5:25] please. Miss Famous. Mr. Connor, here.

[5:29] Mr. Hust here. Mr. Ker here. Mr. Lan,

[5:33] here. Mr. Mcraer here. Mr. Milikin here.

[5:37] Mr. Scanland here. Mr. Steelman here.

[5:40] Mr. Bile here. Mr. Young here. Thank

[5:43] you. Need a motion to excuse Miss Bumis.

[5:46] Smooth. Second. Motion made by Mr.

[5:49] Connor. Second by Mr. Land. Roll call.

[5:52] Mr. Connor. Yes. Mr. Land. Yes. Mr.

[5:55] Mcreer. Yes. Mr. Melikin. Yes. Mr.

[5:59] Scanland. Yes. Mr. Steelmith. Yes. Mr.

[6:02] Bile. Yes. Mr. Young. Yes. Mr. H. Yes.

[6:06] Mr. Carson. Yes.

[6:09] All right. Uh, approval of minutes. Um,

[6:12] April 16, 2025 charter review M minutes.

[6:15] Do we have any issues with those?

[6:20] Hearing none. Need a motion to approve.

[6:23] So move.

[6:25] Second.

[6:27] Motion made by Mr. Vile, second by Mr.

[6:29] McBrer. Roll call. Mr. Vile. Yes. Mr.

[6:33] McFreer. Yes. Mr. Milligan. Yes. Mr.

[6:36] Scanland. Yes. Mr. Mr. Steelmith. Yes.

[6:39] Mr. Young. Yes. Mr. Connor. Yes. Mr.

[6:42] Hust. Yes. Mr. Ker. Yes. Mr. Land. Yes.

[6:49] Uh, public comments. Um, sorry I didn't

[6:53] get a check in with you guys. I was from

[6:55] behind. Do you guys have anything for us

[6:56] this evening? I don't think so. Neither

[6:58] of us were here last week. Okay.

[7:02] Good. Just didn't want to blow by. So,

[7:05] um, thank you, by the way. and relay the

[7:08] message to the other two that for all

[7:10] you've done. It's been much

[7:12] [Music]

[7:14] appreciated.

[7:16] Um all right. So items for discussion

[7:18] this

[7:20] evening review final redline charter. Um

[7:25] did we want to do presentation? Is that

[7:28] how we I remembered you wanted to walk

[7:31] us through it or So that's what So we

[7:33] can go line by line looking at the

[7:36] changes and then after and then as long

[7:38] as there's no controversy about any of

[7:41] them. Um at the end we have a couple

[7:43] options. If there's any disagreement

[7:45] that you want to voice on the record, we

[7:47] can make an individual motion so that

[7:49] there's a roll call vote and you can

[7:50] show that. Or if everyone's in agreement

[7:53] on the changes, which it seems like it's

[7:54] been that way, we can go through all of

[7:56] them, confirm that, wait till the end,

[7:58] and just make one big motion to accept

[8:00] the red line changes. So, I like that.

[8:03] Yeah. Yeah. Okay, let's do that.

[8:13] Sorry, I got the

[8:15] uh got these pulled up on my phone.

[8:19] [Music]

[8:24] Joe, I gave you the clicker over there

[8:26] if you want to just press the arrow.

[8:31] Oh, that's cool. Okay, so starting in

[8:35] the table of contents, there were a

[8:37] couple changes, but that was just for um

[8:40] changing the names of some things. So

[8:43] adding the salary of the mayor category,

[8:46] amending it to salary of city council

[8:48] members in article three.

[8:51] Um and then renumbering a couple things

[8:53] whenever we got rid of the intentionally

[8:57] omitted sections.

[8:59] So assuming that's what that was. Yeah.

[9:03] So assuming there's no disagreement

[9:05] there, we can move on.

[9:14] Is this not happen? Sorry if this is jumping a little bit quicker

[9:18] than I had assumed. So,

[9:22] article 1.01, we changed the name and

[9:26] the boundary

[9:28] um which was just to update it to get

[9:31] rid of the village of Canal Mestrs that

[9:33] has just been there for a while. Do you

[9:36] Is there a way to get the red line? Hang

[9:38] on one second. I think it's just

[9:40] not showing the Thank you.

[9:45] Where we at? Is this

[9:48] because it should be under here?

[9:54] Matt, you just did that for me and I

[9:56] can't remember how to do it. Well, I

[9:58] think it I think it has to do with this

[10:01] computer. Let me see what I can do real

[10:03] fast.

[10:04] Um because you see how it doesn't give

[10:07] me and but do all of you have the red

[10:08] line in front of you too? Okay. So if

[10:11] you want follow I can just keep

[10:13] scrolling through and we'll follow that

[10:15] way.

[10:17] These are some of these ones are pretty.

[10:20] So hold on let's try this. Maybe. Yeah.

[10:25] There we go. All right. Great. So uh

[10:29] there were no go away then.

[10:33] I don't know what's happening on this

[10:34] computer today. I apologize for that's

[10:37] fine. I don't where to go.

[10:42] One

[10:43] more time.

[10:48] Okay, I'm not touching anything.

[10:51] Yeah. Okay. Word is on here. We are

[10:56] there. It's part of the problem. All

[10:58] right. So, we are now at article two.

[11:00] There were no changes. So that was

[11:02] great. Um, article three will start

[11:08] with getting rid of so we just basically

[11:12] changed to start getting rid of

[11:14] subsection A and then 1 2 3 because

[11:18] there is no subsection B. So it just

[11:21] didn't make a lot of sense to have it.

[11:22] So it'll just start with that text and

[11:23] then these subsections will be letters.

[11:27] Um, next in the in subsection what is

[11:31] now subsection D, it is just

[11:34] simplifying what this uh language is. I

[11:38] think it basically says the same thing.

[11:40] Um, we had agreed on. Um, so again just

[11:44] making it easier to read, less words

[11:48] involved. Um, article

[11:51] 3.02 just clarifying language by getting

[11:53] rid of the word next.

[11:57] Um, article

[11:58] 3.03 just changed the title to

[12:01] clarify certain

[12:04] things. Um, article

[12:07] 3.04. Again, this was just a change to

[12:10] clarify that for the clerk of council

[12:12] and the day-to-day duties here when

[12:14] there's not meetings or anything, um,

[12:15] that the officers of council can

[12:17] delegate supervision to the to the mayor

[12:20] or the designate. Um, again, nothing too

[12:23] controversial here.

[12:25] Um, article

[12:27] 3.05. This was a suggestion from y'all

[12:31] regarding modernizing the notice

[12:33] procedures, which again just makes sense

[12:36] given that we're in 2025

[12:38] now. Um, 3.07. So, this was the first

[12:43] big change that you guys have made um in

[12:46] terms of determining the salary of city

[12:47] council members. it's tying it to the

[12:49] Overs

[12:51] standard. Um, which again is an

[12:53] objective metric that is set by the

[12:56] state of Ohio. Um, and it's just

[13:00] clarifying for council instead of them

[13:02] having to vote on their salary every

[13:04] time, which again could be self-

[13:05] serving. And two is also uncomfortable.

[13:07] If they're a good politician, they

[13:09] probably won't vote to raise their

[13:10] salary. And two, it puts it in the hands

[13:12] of the voters if this were to make it to

[13:15] the

[13:16] ballot. Is there

[13:19] So nothing on the ballot will have a

[13:20] monetary number at all, right? No, this

[13:24] would not. So the only thing will be

[13:25] when we get to the mayor's salary, if

[13:27] council approves that, it would show the

[13:28] 60 to 85 range, but in terms of the oper

[13:32] minimum, it wouldn't show a monetary

[13:35] number, but that's available online if

[13:37] people wanted to look it up. I know.

[13:43] Okay. Um there's nothing further there.

[13:47] We'll move to council

[13:50] vacancies, which that was just changing

[13:52] it from 30 to 60 days to give council

[13:54] more time. Um, and clarifying the

[13:56] qualified under section 3.02b is just uh

[13:59] making it easier to read and refer back

[14:01] to qualifications for member of

[14:04] council. Um, moving on to article

[14:08] 4.04. This was just this was all one

[14:11] paragraph at first. The language isn't

[14:13] actually changed. It's just breaking up

[14:14] to make it easier to read.

[14:16] Um

[14:19] 4.05 we got rid of the journal because

[14:22] it was unclear what the journal was for

[14:24] anybody here or I think for employees.

[14:27] So again nothing too

[14:30] controversial. Uh 4.07 was there were a

[14:34] couple interesting changes. This was

[14:36] just adding categories for what can be

[14:39] um legislation that takes effect

[14:40] immediately. And the purpose for it was

[14:43] that some of these have to take effect

[14:45] immediately and under the current

[14:46] process it's labeled as emergency

[14:49] legislation. Um which it's just if

[14:51] everything looks like an emergency then

[14:53] it's just tougher to get through. So

[14:55] just clarifying that this is stuff that

[14:57] can get through right away. Makes more

[14:59] sense for go back when we we talked

[15:02] about in

[15:04] uh category to add to this is

[15:07] resolutions. Um resolutions are not law

[15:10] type of thing. So, um if that's

[15:12] something they they also they're just

[15:14] required one reading. Um for example,

[15:16] the other night at council we did a

[15:18] resolution to uh recognize police week

[15:21] next week and that type of thing. Um

[15:23] those are the ones that we were are kind

[15:25] of going through. Um and they have a one

[15:30] the previous charter had three readings.

[15:32] Is that correct, Amanda? And so we took

[15:34] it from three readings now to one

[15:36] reading required and but it still has a

[15:38] 30-day I think it's always been one.

[15:40] It's a long time here, but it still has

[15:42] the 30-day requirement. Yeah, but it

[15:44] still has a 30-day effected period and

[15:47] some of these things while you know the

[15:48] resolution for the police week, we're

[15:50] still going forward even though it

[15:52] officially doesn't take effect, but we

[15:55] could amend that on the fly too if

[15:57] that's of interest to you guys.

[16:00] Yeah. Okay. Subsection 11 resolutions

[16:05] number 11.

[16:10] Did Did we discuss these in our

[16:12] meetings? Yes. All of these. We can go

[16:15] back through them and discuss like No,

[16:17] that's all right. Because they broke

[16:19] down what was how many times an

[16:21] emergency was used and that the numbers

[16:24] on it. I remember that. I just

[16:30] That's a lot of Yeah.

[16:34] Don't necessarily remember a couple of

[16:36] those, but that's okay. You want to we

[16:38] can talk to him if you want. Yeah. Say

[16:39] which which ones do you not remember Mr.

[16:41] Carson?

[16:44] The grant or loan applications off from

[16:47] another government. So that is when we

[16:50] are putting um applications in for like

[16:53] Ohio public works commission funds, Ohio

[16:56] water development funds um you know a

[16:59] federal grant um application. This is

[17:02] not us going to a bank. This is us

[17:05] putting something in for from another

[17:07] government. So,

[17:09] a lot of times there's a short period of

[17:11] time to do that, right? Yeah.

[17:14] Application deadlines.

[17:20] Good to keep going. Yeah. Okay.

[17:24] Um, we will now move on all the way down

[17:27] to 4.13.

[17:32] So again, this is just a modernizing

[17:35] thing, posting things on the official

[17:36] website instead of having to put it in a

[17:39] newspaper. Um, particularly since I

[17:41] think the dispatch is the only one that

[17:43] might qualify for canal at this point.

[17:45] Okay, there might be a daily reporter,

[17:48] but yeah.

[17:52] Um, article five is just changing the

[17:55] title of it because the city

[17:56] administrator section was already within

[17:58] it. So, just if someone's looking for

[18:01] stuff about city administrator, it's

[18:02] easier to find that way. Um, article

[18:06] 5.03 though, this was another big change

[18:08] that you guys have made after a lot of

[18:10] deliberation in terms of figuring out

[18:12] what to do with a permanent vacancy and

[18:15] temporary vacancies in the office of the

[18:16] mayor. Um, I know we had talked through

[18:18] this thoroughly, but if there are any

[18:21] changes that you guys wanted to discuss

[18:22] or talk through, we're happy to do so.

[18:27] Just clarifying and I think we did but

[18:30] we managed to figure out the veto with

[18:32] this language. Correct. Yes. Yeah, it

[18:34] should be in there.

[18:37] A4 A4. Yeah, the

[18:40] which I will scroll. Yeah. Okay. Just

[18:43] want to make sure.

[18:46] Um any questions about that before we

[18:48] move

[18:50] on. Okay. We are now on to article 5.05.

[18:55] 05 which is

[18:59] mayor's veto power. So again, this is

[19:02] just clarifying um certain legislation

[19:05] that wasn't subject to the veto power.

[19:06] Anyway,

[19:08] um if you refer back to 4.06 and

[19:11] 4.07A, I think that is talking

[19:15] about the legislation that goes into

[19:17] effect immediately, too. So, just

[19:19] clarifying that it's not really

[19:21] functional for a mayor to have to veto

[19:23] something the day it's or at the council

[19:25] meeting that is passed at or anything

[19:27] like that.

[19:33] Um, we'll go on to

[19:35] 5.06. City administrator, it's a pretty

[19:37] simple change, but consequently, you

[19:39] guys had discussed you wanted council to

[19:41] be able to confirm sort of like a US

[19:44] Senateesque type thing where at least

[19:46] they have to vote. Um, it's simple.

[19:48] Majority is the one we made it here.

[19:49] There's only seven members anyway.

[19:52] So, uh, and then again, just for the

[19:55] contract administration, it's just

[19:57] eliminating that convoluted statutory

[19:59] term and saying it's just the amount set

[20:01] by council that they consider

[20:04] it. And then 5.07 now is the new section

[20:09] regarding the salary of the mayor. Um,

[20:13] we had made a couple changes since we

[20:16] had last discussed it that after

[20:18] consulting with that, who's the law

[20:19] director that I work with. Um, and we

[20:22] have them in front of you if you guys

[20:23] want to look at it. The main change was

[20:25] that we had determined after reading

[20:27] ethics laws um, and some of the case law

[20:29] on it and when the charter actually goes

[20:32] into effect that council would be able

[20:34] to vote on changing the mayor's salary

[20:37] as early as next year for the current

[20:38] term. Um but then so that's why that's

[20:42] where that language at the beginning is

[20:44] that's labeled in red and then at the

[20:46] end this is just clarifying that the

[20:48] mayor is taken completely out of the

[20:50] process because that is where a lot of

[20:52] the ethics laws also were implicated. Um

[20:55] even though the ethics the ethics

[20:56] commission took a really hardline stance

[20:58] that doesn't really line up with

[20:59] statutes but this is just clarifying

[21:01] that to make sure that everything is

[21:04] good on that front. So it'll be this not

[21:06] what's in our

[21:08] Yes. Not that correct. That's Yeah,

[21:11] that's correct. Well, that might be No.

[21:13] So, that is the most updated. So, we we

[21:15] literally sent this like two hours ago.

[21:17] So, the the the version that you guys

[21:19] got last night didn't include this.

[21:21] Okay. But it'll be So, the version that

[21:23] we adopt would be that's the only change

[21:25] from

[21:26] what you guys had received.

[21:30] The I did have the the one question I

[21:32] had about this is it says

[21:39] Where is it? C um mayor salary shall

[21:43] take place at one of council's two

[21:45] regular meetings in October each year a

[21:47] regular mayoral election is

[21:49] held. So it's not going to change until

[21:53] so at that point. So there's two

[21:55] components to this. So one would be if

[21:57] it's passed by the voters, council would

[22:00] have the first shot to change it for

[22:01] this term and then going forward it

[22:04] would be a pre election pre-term vote by

[22:08] council because Amanda if you want to

[22:10] talk through the budgetary reasons for

[22:12] that. So um well the I can speak to the

[22:16] October time frame. Um, I think the

[22:20] original language proposed said it would

[22:22] be done, I believe, in January, but as

[22:24] most of you are probably familiar with

[22:26] our budget process, we do that in the

[22:28] fall. So, in order for me to have some

[22:30] concept of what the mayor is going to

[22:31] make to include it in the budget, I need

[22:33] it a little earlier. Typically, the um

[22:35] city council gets the budget at the end

[22:37] of October, the beginning of November um

[22:39] for the next fiscal year. So, from a

[22:42] timing perspective, that's why we put it

[22:44] in um October. give them as much time to

[22:47] talk about it as possible, but enough

[22:49] time for me to get it into the budget.

[22:51] So

[22:54] now, the only catch is that obviously we

[22:56] wouldn't know who the next mayor would

[22:57] be in October, but there was really no

[23:00] way to make it perfect to align with the

[23:02] budget process and wait for a perfect

[23:05] time to for council to address it. Mhm.

[23:09] I just The reason I brought it up is

[23:10] because I know there was talk about

[23:12] addressing it with council in the next

[23:15] meeting.

[23:16] So, does that will that not apply? Now,

[23:18] it's it still will because if this would

[23:21] have be not adopted by the citizens or

[23:24] by council, we would still have to still

[23:27] that rate for the next two years per for

[23:31] the existing chart.

[23:35] Cool.

[23:37] Everything make sense?

[23:39] All right, we will move on to article

[23:41] six. This was another change that we

[23:43] discussed early on. Um, you guys had

[23:45] expressed a want to make sure that

[23:48] council is required to provide for fire

[23:50] and police protection. And even though

[23:52] it in effect was always going to be that

[23:54] way, this just really mandates it. Um,

[23:57] if I recall, the discussion was only

[23:59] around police and not the fire. Um, not

[24:03] putting the shall in there for fire.

[24:06] Correct me if I'm wrong because because

[24:09] it's it's pretty common to have township

[24:12] fire um and putting shall in there would

[24:16] then require some type of contractual

[24:19] agreement with Madison Madison or Violet

[24:23] or something like that. So if I recall

[24:24] it was only police. Yeah I think

[24:29] I have in my notes that we struck from

[24:31] time to time for fire protection but

[24:33] kept the word may. Okay. Rather than

[24:36] shall. So it would state council may

[24:40] provide for fire protection by contract.

[24:43] Correct. That is a mistake by us. We

[24:45] will fix that. Should it be may on both?

[24:47] Is that what we No, because shall was

[24:50] for the police. Yeah. Always have a

[24:53] police contract. Yeah. So yeah, for the

[24:56] police it would be they can contract or

[24:59] they have to start their department.

[25:00] Start their own department. Those are

[25:01] the only two options. Yeah. Good.

[25:07] Okay. So that that has changed in my

[25:09] version even though it's not changed

[25:10] live up there. Great. Thank you.

[25:13] Absolutely.

[25:15] Um so 6.02

[25:18] legal services. Again, this was just

[25:20] updating it because I think this

[25:21] language was originally written at the

[25:23] beginning of the charter. Um so it was

[25:26] just modernizing it and simplifying it.

[25:29] Um and then all the changes in 6.2 6.02

[25:33] 2 are reflecting that. So 6.02B because

[25:36] the law department already

[25:38] exists. Um that really didn't need to be

[25:42] there anymore. That language that was

[25:44] struck. Mhm. But we had nothing else

[25:48] there. So you can keep on moving

[25:53] to article 7. This was another big

[25:56] discussion that we had talked through

[25:57] regarding the structure of the planning

[25:59] and zoning commission. So this was the

[26:01] way that we had this was the best way we

[26:04] could find to write what you guys had

[26:06] wanted by adding a member of council.

[26:08] They would be the chair and then

[26:09] explaining when they would vote and when

[26:12] they wouldn't in specific

[26:15] scenarios, but if you guys wanted to

[26:17] talk through that or get a better

[26:18] explanation, we're happy to do so. I

[26:20] just have a quick uh spelling issue in

[26:24] section A. Um the red line it says the

[26:27] eighth member instead of the eighth

[26:30] member in my copy. Oh, I saw that. No,

[26:34] that's right. You are correct. That has

[26:37] been changed.

[26:39] Thank you for catching that.

[26:42] Red line or red line.

[26:44] Well, that's what's funny. I as we were

[26:46] reading through some of the articles,

[26:47] there's like a missing period every now

[26:48] and then. So, this is interesting to

[26:52] catch. Um, but any other questions about

[26:55] the planning and zoning section?

[26:58] Yeah, 7.02, it was already gone. We just

[27:02] made sure we just clarified that to make

[27:04] it easier to read. Um, and then

[27:06] renumbered these sections. Uh, the merit

[27:09] system, that was another big um

[27:11] discussion in terms of it just being

[27:13] really complicated to understand. So,

[27:16] this was and be I know you can't see all

[27:18] of it, but it would be in front of you,

[27:19] too. um is this was just an easier way

[27:22] to explain what that section was saying.

[27:24] To the best of my understanding, you

[27:26] don't have a

[27:28] four

[27:29] 7.04. The four is not struck out.

[27:38] 7.043. Yeah,

[27:41] it is. It's It's very hard to see. Is it

[27:44] on the floor?

[27:50] Yeah, sorry. This was I was whenever I

[27:52] was writing this one out, fixing the

[27:54] numbers, it was hard to keep track where

[27:55] I was. Yeah. Yeah, it was in way, but

[27:59] yes, it is there. Sorry. Okay. Um I was

[28:02] right there with you,

[28:05] and we will we will confirm that the

[28:07] letters and numbers add up too in the

[28:08] final review. So, we'll double we'll

[28:11] double check that.

[28:13] Um 705 again is omitted. So then that

[28:18] led to 706 becoming

[28:20] 704. 707 to becoming 705. Um no changes

[28:27] there. Finance tax department we did not

[28:31] have any changes in article

[28:34] 8. Article nine. So, this was just

[28:37] clarifying

[28:39] um again in eliminating ambiguity and

[28:42] just making it the maximum amount of

[28:44] signatures set by the county board of

[28:46] elections. Um so again, I would hope

[28:49] that's not too controversial, but we can

[28:51] discuss again if you guys would

[28:55] like and

[28:57] then 11.01c

[29:00] 01C was the next change and this was

[29:04] just uh you guys had wanted to add some

[29:06] accountability in terms of unexcused

[29:07] absences for council members. Um so just

[29:11] cutting that down from 4 to 2 and 6 to

[29:17] 4 and then I think that was it the u

[29:22] effective dates. Yeah. Effective date,

[29:25] which that's that's stock language,

[29:27] which we'll just implement at the end of

[29:29] the two. I don't think there's really

[29:30] any policy to discuss. I I do have a

[29:32] question about 9.01 the nominations. Oh,

[29:35] yeah. Um, what is the maximum set by

[29:38] Franklin County?

[29:40] That is a fantastic question. I can look

[29:42] that up real

[29:43] quick. But I think it I think it has

[29:46] percentage of

[29:48] voters. I don't I don't know what the

[29:50] role number is now, but I know it's

[29:51] always based on the amount of votes in

[29:54] the county in the previous governor's

[29:56] election, I think. So, it it's it

[29:59] fluctuates all the time. I'm not sure

[30:00] what it is right now, but we can I just

[30:02] I don't want it to be higher than 3%.

[30:06] Because that's what it was before or

[30:08] that's 3% of the electors. I'm sorry.

[30:10] That's maximum

[30:12] as well. So, and I think those

[30:15] provisions I think the state also has a

[30:16] maximum for signatures. Yeah, the state

[30:19] mandates that because they don't

[30:20] essentially want to go through and get

[30:22] have someone get like 300 uh signatures

[30:25] and then they have to go through and

[30:27] verify all those. It just kind Yeah. I

[30:28] just didn't know like maximum versus

[30:31] minimum like what's the minimum versus

[30:33] maximum that's set by the that's set by

[30:36] the state set by the county board of

[30:38] election. Well, yeah, but through the

[30:40] county. Yeah, but it's all state. You

[30:43] know, I think I think I see where you're

[30:44] going. We can clarify the language too

[30:46] of what the 1% is talking about if

[30:49] that's where a point of confusion might

[30:51] be. Should Should they post both be does

[30:54] the county board of elections set the

[30:56] minimum and the maximum? Yeah, that's

[30:58] Yeah, we can we can we can just make it

[31:00] the minimum and maximum. Yeah, it's a

[31:02] great idea.

[31:06] Okay.

[31:13] Yeah, especially if that ends up

[31:14] becoming out of date at some point, that

[31:16] would be good to just add the broader

[31:17] language. Yeah.

[31:25] All right, that has been added. Um, is

[31:29] there any discussion left? Any

[31:32] questions? Anybody had any disagreements

[31:34] you wanted to make sure was on the

[31:35] record?

[31:40] And I read the full sentence. Disregard

[31:43] what I was asking about that. It makes

[31:45] sense after I read the full thing. So

[31:47] cool. Never mind.

[31:51] Yeah. When you started when you brought

[31:53] it up, I read it again and I was like,

[31:54] "Wait, he's got a point." Then I read it

[31:56] again.

[31:58] I was like, "Wait, that does make

[31:59] sense." Put a sentence in there at the

[32:01] end. Say, "Read this twice." Yeah. Yeah.

[32:04] Or maybe three times. That might make

[32:06] sense. Finally.

[32:09] Okay. Um, okay. So, um, I guess correct

[32:15] me if I'm wrong, but at this point, we

[32:17] can

[32:18] [Music]

[32:20] pause for audio. Um, I guess take a roll

[32:24] call vote on final

[32:27] approval of I guess the the charter as a

[32:31] whole

[32:32] is as we've gone through it with all the

[32:34] red line

[32:37] um additions, amendments, what have you.

[32:42] Um,

[32:44] again, council decides after we send it

[32:47] to them whether they take it whole cloth

[32:51] or piece meal it or scrap it all

[32:54] together. So, so the chair will make a

[32:57] motion to approve the updated uh redline

[33:01] chart. So, moved. Motion made by chair,

[33:05] second by Mr. Connor. Roll call. Mr.

[33:08] Milligan. Yes. Mr. Connor. Yes. Mr.

[33:10] Hust. Yes, Mr. Carer.

[33:15] Yes, Mr. Lan. Yes, Mr. Mcraer. Yes,

[33:33] [Music]

[33:35] he's got something.

[33:38] Mr. Scanland. Yes. Mr. Steelman. Yes,

[33:41] Mr. Vile. Yes, Mr. Young. Yes.

[33:46] All right. And uh lastly, personally, I

[33:48] just want to thank every Yeah, go ahead.

[33:49] We also have one more motion, sorry,

[33:50] that you need to make, too. It would

[33:52] just be a motion to allow the chair,

[33:54] Chuck, to work with the law department

[33:55] to finalize the final report that will

[33:57] be sent to council for them to consider

[33:59] it, too. Okay. And you can do that by

[34:01] voice, I think.

[34:04] Um, all in favor?

[34:08] I thank you.

[34:10] Um, Mr. Milikin, um, the charter review

[34:14] commission five years ago when they met

[34:16] the the chair, um, actually came to the

[34:19] council meeting to kind of present. Um,

[34:21] I was going to see if that's something

[34:23] you were interested in doing or if you

[34:25] would rather staff do it. Just um, all

[34:28] of you planned on being there. I think,

[34:30] um, I know Stacy had interest in being

[34:33] there. I think the more people the

[34:36] marrier. Um, by all means, everybody

[34:38] show up and support all.

[34:42] I'll hold your hand. I don't have a

[34:43] timeline on

[34:45] that. The next meeting when that meeting

[34:50] doing the math, we have to have it done

[34:53] by

[34:55] I think it's July. July because so city

[34:58] council takes the second meeting in July

[35:00] off every year as their recess in order

[35:02] to get this to um the board of elections

[35:05] in time. has to be done before August,

[35:08] which would push us back to their first

[35:09] meeting in July, which

[35:12] I it's July 7th. Seventh. Seventh. Does

[35:15] that sound right? Yeah. Um, so if they

[35:17] want to do three reads on it,

[35:20] first meeting in June would be the

[35:21] latest we could do it. So,

[35:24] um, my thought is we'll let Mr. Milikin

[35:28] work with the law department, get this

[35:29] all squared away, and then we'll send

[35:31] everyone an email with that meeting

[35:33] date. Um, just so you're aware of uh if

[35:36] you are able to attend and would like

[35:37] to, you'll know when it's going to

[35:38] happen. So,

[35:42] yes, I will send me a copy of it,

[35:46] please.

[35:49] Juicy.

[35:52] Uh, well, depending on which meeting it

[35:55] is, it might be.

[35:58] All right. Um so again I just wanted to

[36:01] thank everybody for uh their

[36:02] participation. Everybody's uh thoughts

[36:05] and opinions were uh highly valued. I

[36:08] mean it's a fun process for me

[36:11] personally and hopefully it was for you

[36:12] and um I encourage everybody to stay

[36:16] involved in our local government and

[36:19] that's what makes us great is we got so

[36:20] many good people here.

[36:22] So it's been nice working with you all.

[36:25] That uh chair will make a motion to

[36:27] adjourn. Need a second. Second.

[36:31] Mr. Steelmith. Motion made by the chair.

[36:33] Second by Mr. Sealsmith. Roll call. Mr.

[36:36] Milikin? Yes. Mr. Steelmith? Yes. Mr.

[36:39] Vile? Yes. Mr. Young? Yes. Mr. Connor?

[36:42] Yes. Mr. H? Yes. Mr. Ker? Yes. Mr. Lan?

[36:46] Yes. Mr. Mcer? Yes. Mr. Scan?

[36:52] Yes. Well done. Thank you all very much

[36:55] for your

May 7, 2025, Charter Review Commission Meeting

Transcript