Sep 24, 2026 Charter Review Commission

Name: Sep 24, 2026 Charter Review Commission
Uploaded: 2026-09-24T00:00:00Z
Duration: 2 h 10 min 1 s
Description: Four affirmative votes. Are you, I guess that's not how I read it. 'Cause it said, any abstention not required by law shall be counted as a vote against the matter under consideration.

Fulshear, TX · 2026-09-24 · More Fulshear, TX meetings · More Texas meetings

View original source →

Agenda

[0:02] I.Call to Order

[0:30] Business - A

[1:30] Business - B

Transcript

Download: Text · SRT

SOURCE TRANSCRIPT

This transcript is downloaded from the source you provided but we haven't reviewed it for accuracy. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record. You can also request an AI-transcription of the audio file with the button to the left.

Transcript source note: This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.

[0:03] GOOD EVENING. UM, I WILL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION. IT IS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24TH, SIX. WELL, I STARTED TALKING AT SIX 30, BUT NOW IT'S 6:31 PM WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. UH, THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS ON THE AGENDA IS CITIZENS' COMMENTS. ARE THERE ANY CITIZENS' COMMENTS TONIGHT? NO COMMENTS. WE WILL GO ON TO ITEM FOUR, BUSINESS SUBTOPIC, A CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 27TH, 2026. THEY WERE IN THE PACKET. THEY WERE IN THE, THEY WERE, THEY WERE IN THE PACKET. I'LL MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND I. WE HAVE A MOTION BY MS. BUELL, A SECOND BY MR. KEATING TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 27TH, 2026. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OR REVISIONS OR ANYTHING THAT ANYONE HAS REGARDING THE MINUTES? IF NOT ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. A. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED. NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS, THIS DISCUSSION AND ACTION FOR ARTICLES THREE THROUGH SEVEN, IF WE MAKE IT THAT FAR OF THE CHARTER. UM, MR. Z, WE MADE IT THROUGH, I THINK, SECTION 3.05 AT THE MEETING WE HAD IN AUGUST. UM, THERE WERE SEVERAL AREAS WHERE WE HAD DISCUSSION AND, UH, MR. SANTI SAID HE WOULD GO BACK AND BRING LANGUAGE. DO YOU WANNA GO THROUGH THOSE? I COULD BRING THAT LANGUAGE BACK LATER BECAUSE THAT GOT, THAT GOT LOST IN TRANSLATION. SO, SO WE CAN JUST PROCEED FORWARD FROM, PROCEED FORWARD AT STARTING AT THREE, OUTTA SIX, AND I'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE EVERYTHING YOU NEED. PLENTY TIMES FOR Y'ALL REVIEW IT. VERY GOOD. THAT IS WHAT WE WILL DO THEN. UM, DID ANYONE HAVE ANY OTHER FINAL COMMENTS ON 3.05 BEFORE WE GO ON TO 3.06? I THINK THE ONLY DISCUSSION I REMEMBER WERE PEOPLE TRYING TO COME UP WITH THE HISTORY OF WHAT IT STARTED AT AND WHEN IT GOT CHANGED. BUT I DON'T, I DON'T RECALL ANYONE SUGGESTING DIFFERENT NUMBERS FROM WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN THE CHARTER. I, I SUGGESTED LOOKING AT SOME SORT OF AN INDEX, BUT IT'S PROBABLY NOT THAT IMPORTANT. THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, DONATING THEIR MONEY OR NOT WANTING THEIR MONEY OR WHATEVER. SO I'LL JUST LET THAT RIDE. I DON'T REALLY CARE. I MEAN, INSTEAD OF EACH TIME, MAYBE FIVE YEARS LOOKING AT, DO WE NEED TO INCREASE IT OR WHATEVER, PUTTING SOME SORT OF A INDEX IN SO IT WOULD INCREASE. BUT, UH, I HAVE A COMMENT ON 3.01 QUALIFICATIONS. I WASN'T HERE, BUT I DID WATCH THE VIDEOS AND IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THE TERM LIMITS AND THERE WAS REFERENCES TO LIKE, DRINKING FROM A WATER HOO, A FIRE HYDRANT, OR, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT YOU HAVE TO LEARN IN A VERY QUICK AMOUNT OF TIME. AND BONNIE BROUGHT UP A GOOD COMMENT THAT SHE HAD DONE THE SRE FACTS AND SHE HAD GONE TO SOME MEETINGS AND I WAS JUST WONDERING IF WE COULD ADD SOMETHING IN QUALIFICATIONS SAYING THAT IF YOU WANTED TO RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL, WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO HAVE ATTENDED THAT COURSE OR SOME OTHER COURSE. SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO THAT THEY DO HAVE SOME KNOWLEDGE OR MAYBE SHOW THAT THEY'VE ATTENDED X NUMBER OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS SO THAT THEY HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT THEY SHOULD EXPECT. ALTHOUGH THEY DO GO TO A TML INTRODUCTION. IT'S WHAT, THREE DAYS WHEN YOU'RE ELECTED? YES. YEAH. BUT THAT'S LIKE BROAD. BUT THIS WOULD BE VERY SPECIFIC TO SRE. 'CAUSE I BELIEVE SRE FACTS, YOU LEARNED ABOUT ALL THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND, AND YOU MEET A LOT OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE RENTING THE CITY. SO IT MAY BE SOMETHING MM-HMM . I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN ADD THAT AS A QUALIFICATION, BUT I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL. UM, I GUESS MY CONCERN WOULD BE THAT THAT WOULD NARROW DOWN THE LIST OF POTENTIAL CANDIDATES TO A REALLY SMALL POOL. POTENTIALLY. YEAH. HOW MANY, I MEAN, WHAT IS IT LIKE MAYBE 10 TO 20 PEOPLE THAT ATTEND THAT EVERY YEAR? ABOUT 20. ABOUT 20. I THINK IT'S A GREAT PRIMER, BUT I, I THINK THE VOTERS SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. WHAT, WHAT HAVE YOU DONE PREVIOUSLY IN THE CITY? WHAT BOARDS HAVE YOU BEEN

[5:01] ON? ARE YOU ATTENDING COUNCIL? ARE YOU PARTICIPATING IN WHATEVER LEADERSHIP STRUCTURE IS IN PLACE, WHETHER IT'S FALSE OR FACTS OR EVEN THE POLICE, UM, ACADEMY, UH, CITIZENS, POLICE ACADEMY, ANY OF THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. I THINK THE VOTERS SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THOSE TYPE OF, OF THINGS. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF EVEN, AND THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY, I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF STATUTORILY LIKE WE COULD ENFORCE SOMETHING LIKE THAT FOR SOMEBODY TO BE ON THE BALLOT JUST TO GET A PLACE ON THE BALLOT. SO STATE LAW DICTATES SOME, SOME SPECIFICS, UH, AND FOR QUALIFI TO BE QUALIFIED FOR OFFICE. UM, AND THEN WITHIN THOSE SPECIFICS, IT STATES THAT YOU CAN CHANGE TWO OF THOSE SPECIFICS. ONE IS LENGTH OF RESIDENCY IN THE JURISDICTION OR THE CITY. AND THE OTHER IS, UM, HOW OLD YOU HAVE TO BE BEFORE YOU CAN RUN FOR OFFICE. AND THOSE ARE THE TWO THAT YOU CAN CHANGE IN THE SPECIFICS, BUT THEN AT, AT THE VERY END, UM, AND ANY OTHER QUALIFICATION AS REQUIRED BY LAW. AND OUR CHARTER IS CONSIDERED TO BE A LAW. AND SO THAT GIVES HOME RULE CITIES SOME FLEXIBILITY TO PLACE ADDITIONAL, UM, QUALIFICATIONS FOR OFFICE. UH, THE, THE ONE THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED NOW, UM, WOULD BE UNIQUE. , I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER CITY THAT WOULD REQUIRE YOU TO GO THROUGH ANY SPECIAL TRAINING BEFORE YOU'RE QUALIFIED FOR OFFICE. NOT A SINGLE CHARTER THAT I'M AWARE OF, AS A MATTER OF FACT. 'CAUSE TYPICALLY FOLKS DO WHAT YOU JUST SUGGESTED IS THE VOTERS DETERMINE, WELL, YOU KNOW, THE, WHEN SOMEONE'S RUNNING FOR OFFICE, I'VE SAT ON THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. I'VE SAT ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN ON THE ARTS BOARD, UM, AND THESE ARE MY QUAL. THIS IS WHAT I, YOU KNOW, I, I'M AN ELECTRICIAN, , I KNOW HOW ELECTRICITY WORKS. I, YOU KNOW, I, I BRING THIS, THIS TO THE TABLE MM-HMM . AND, AND THIS IS WHAT I'M RUNNING ON TYPICALLY, OR THEY JUST HAVE A LOT MORE FRIENDS THAN EVERYBODY ELSE IN TOWN AND THEY GET ELECTED. I THINK, DIDN'T WE BRING UP ALSO TWO YEARS FOR RESIDENCY IN THE CITY AND THEN ONE YEAR IN THE DISTRICT? YEAH. YEAH. AND YOU CAN'T DO THAT. YOU CAN, THAT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT YOU CAN'T DO. YOU CAN, ONE YEAR, 12 MONTHS IS THE MAX YOU CAN GO. OKAY. AND A AND A DISTRICT AS WELL. YES. 12, 12 MONTHS IS THE MAXI CAN GO. THAT'S THE JURISDICTION FROM WHICH THEY, THEY, THE, THEY, THEY LIVE. AND SO, SO, UM, IF YOU'RE IN THE CITY, THAT'S A JURISDICTION. 12 MONTHS. IF YOU'RE IN A DISTRICT, THAT'S A JURISDICTION, THAT'S 12 MONTHS. OKAY. AND THEN THE STATE 12 MONTHS, THAT'S THE HIGHEST YOU CAN GO ONE YEAR. OKAY. AND WE SAID NO FELONY CONVICTIONS AND MUST BE A REGISTERED VOTER FOR THOSE. AND ALL OF THAT IS ALREADY IN THE STATE LAW. YEAH. AND I, I THINK AT THE TIME, UH, DAN SANTI TOLD US THAT YOU CAN RUN FOR STATE OFFICE OR SENATOR, WHATEVER, JUST ON SIX MONTHS RESIDENCIES. SO YEAH. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. THE STATE LAW SAYS, UM, I BELIEVE THIS, I DON'T HAVE IT MEMORIZED, BUT I BELIEVE THE STATE LAW IS SIX MONTHS IN BOTH SIX MONTHS IN THE JURISDICTION AND SIX MONTHS IN THE, AND, BUT 12 MONTHS IN THE STATE. SO YOU HAVE TO LEAVE AT LEAST 12 MONTHS IN THE STATE, BUT SIX MONTHS IN THE JURISDICTION, THAT BEING THE DISTRICT OR IF YOU'RE A STATE REP, THE DISTRICT THAT YOU'RE, THAT YOU'RE LIVING IN, I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL REMEMBER, BUT THERE WAS A BIG BROUHAHA ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT DONNA CAMPBELL ACTUALLY LIVED IN NEW BRAUNFELS OR SOMEWHERE ELSE WHEN SHE FIRST GOT ELECTED. I DON'T KNOW, 12 YEARS AGO OR SO. YEAH, THERE WAS A GENTLEMAN ON THE HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE BOARD THAT HAD HIS RESIDENCE LISTED AS A WAREHOUSE WITHOUT A BATHROOM IN IT. SO THERE YOU GO. . BUT TO GRACE'S ORIGINAL POINT, I, THERE'S SOME VALIDITY TO IT. I DON'T KNOW KNOW HOW THAT BECOMES ENFORCEABLE. IT'D BE HIGHLY SUGGESTED BE, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU WANT THE CHARTER TO BE LIKE SUGGESTING THINGS. YEAH, THAT'S BAD. THE CHARTER BET, BECAUSE THAT COMES DOWN TO INTERPRETATION AND YOU GET THREE LAWYERS IN A ROOM AND YOU'RE GONNA GET 16 DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS. YEAH. SO I'M NOT A FAN OF, OF SUGGESTIONS IN THE CHARTER. UH, THE, THE CHARTER IS A, IS A DOCUMENT THAT'S SUPPOSED TO LAY OUT HOW YOUR GOVERNMENT OPERATES AND WHAT THOSE OBLIGATIONS ARE. AND THEY SHOULD BE SET IN A VERY BLACK AND WHITE WAY AS BLACK AND WHITE AS WE CAN DO, UH, FOR PURPOSES OF ENFORCEMENT. I SUSPECT IF WE SEND OUT A SURVEY TO CITIZENS THAT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW THE EXISTENCE OF THAT PROGRAM WOULD BE A VERY SMALL NUMBER. SO IF YOU'RE DEPENDING ON, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE TO BE LOOKING FOR THAT FROM A CANDIDATE IN THEIR STUFF, THEY'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO KNOW THAT. THAT'S SOMETHING TO BE LOOKING FOR. SO IF WE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT IT NEEDS, AND WE CAN DO IT, IT PROBABLY SHOULD BE IN HERE BECAUSE OTHERWISE THERE'S NOT GONNA BE AN INCENTIVE TO MAKE IT HAPPEN. AND IT'S A RELATIVELY NEW PROGRAM AS WELL. RIGHT.

[10:01] SO, I MEAN, TECHNICALLY I BELIEVE THE QUALIFICATIONS TO SERVE ON A BOARD AND COMMISSION IS SIX MONTHS RESIDENCY. SO I MEAN, IF YOU TIME YOUR HOUSE PURCHASE, RIGHT? YOU COULD SERVE ON A BOARD AND COMMISSION FOR SIX MONTHS BEFORE YOUR HEALTH RUN FOR ACCOUNT AND HAVE SIX MONTHS EXPERIENCE. BUT, UM, YEAH, I MEAN, I KNOW, YEAH, FOR MYSELF IT WAS INCREDIBLY BENEFICIAL, BUT I THINK I WISH WE COULD DO SOMETHING WITH THE TIME LIMIT, THE 12 MONTHS OR WOULD BE LONGER. BUT I MEAN, IT'S PROBABLY JUST MORE INCUMBENT UPON PEOPLE WHO SERVE ON THE BOARDS TO JUST BE VOCAL ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS TO SERVE ON THOSE BOARDS AND SUPPORT CANDIDATES THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THE CITY AND MORE OF A PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY THING. HOPEFULLY THE VOTERS WILL MAKE, UM, GOOD JUDGMENT CALLS ON EXPERIENCE AND INTEREST, ET CETERA, KNOWLEDGE. UM, SO LET'S GO ON TO 3.06 GENERAL POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE CITY COUNCIL. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS, ANY REVISIONS, ANY CHANGES, ANYTHING THEY WANNA BRING UP ON 3.06 UNDER, I, I HAD A NOTE HERE THAT DAN LEFT, I APOLOGIZE MM-HMM . WHERE Y'ALL HAD BEEN DISCUSSING 3 0 3 AND DISCUSSING, UM, TERM LIMITS AND TERMS AND LENGTH OF TERM. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WERE GONNA GO BACK TO? YES. OKAY. HE WAS GONNA, HE WAS GONNA PUT SOME LANGUAGE TOGETHER AND, AND WE HAD, I THINK THE TWO MAIN OPTIONS WE CAME UP WITH WAS EITHER FOUR. I THINK THE CONSENSUS WAS THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS AND ALTERNATIVELY WAS THE POTENTIAL OF FOUR, TWO YEAR, TWO YEAR TERMS. MM-HMM. BUT THE, BUT THE GENERAL CONSENSUS WAS THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS AND IT WAS GO HOME, THINK ABOUT IT, AND COME BACK A MONTH LATER AND TRY TO, YEAH. SO DO Y'ALL WANNA GIMME SOME SPECIFIC DIRECTION ON WHICH OF THOSE YOU WOULD Y'ALL WANNA HAVE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION? HOLD ON. I HAD SOME CONCERNS BECAUSE, JUST APOLOGIES TO SARAH JOHNSON, BUT, UM, SHE WAS APPOINTED IN AUGUST OF 2021. YES. SHE HAD 18 MONTHS LEFT OF THAT TERM. SHE WAS ELECTED IN MAY OF 23. SHE WAS REELECTED IN MAY OF 25. THEN THE REDISTRICTING HAS GIVEN HER ONE YEAR SO SHE CAN SERVE YET ANOTHER FULL TERM OF TWO YEARS. MM-HMM . SO THAT'S ALMOST 10 YEARS. SO DO WE SAY THREE, 10 YEARS OR EIGHT YEARS? THREE TO BACK, BACK TO BACK OR CONSECUTIVE, DO WE SAY SIX YEARS OR THREE FULL TERMS OF TWO YEARS? SO YOUR CONCERN IS THAT THE PARTIAL TERM OR A SHORTENED TERM BECAUSE OF REDISTRICTING DOESN'T COUNT AS A TERM FULL TERM. RIGHT, BUT SAME ON THE APPOINTMENT. BUT IT, BUT IT CAN, IT CAN USUALLY WHEN I DRAFT, USUALLY WHEN I DRAFT THESE, 'CAUSE IT'S ALWAYS WHAT YOU'VE JUST BROUGHT UP IS A CONCERN AND IT'S NOT, AND IT'S NOT USUALLY BECAUSE OF, OF THINGS THAT ARE BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE CANDIDATE. LIKE IT SEEMS TO HAVE APPEARED HERE. IT'S USUALLY BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED THAT SOMEONE'S GONNA TRY TO JIVE THE SYSTEM. UH, UM, CITY, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SHALL, SHALL NOT SERVE MORE THAN THREE CONSECUTIVE TERMS, UH, CONSECUTIVE. RIGHT? AND SO SOMEONE GOES, AH, YOU KNOW WHAT I THINK, UM, I THINK I'LL JUST RESIGN THREE MONTHS EARLY AND, UM, THEN RUN AGAIN. RIGHT? NO, I DIDN'T, THAT WASN'T A FULL TERM. AND SO WE INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THAT THE SERVICE OF ANY PARTIAL TERM IS CONSIDERED A FULL TERM. SO THAT THAT'S ALWAYS SO THAT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER YOU SERVE ONE YEAR OF YOUR THREE YEAR TERM OR TWO YEAR TERM OR THE FULL TERM, THAT COUNTS AS A TERM FOR PURPOSES OF THE CONSECUTIVE TERMS. WE JUST MAKE IT CLEAR. UM, AND THEN TYPICALLY THOUGH, UH, IF THERE ARE TWO YEAR TERMS OR THREE YEAR TERMS, AND THERE'S AUTHORIZED TO BE AN APPOINTMENT AT THE END OF, UH, IF THERE'S ONLY A YEAR LEFT, WHICH THE CONSTITUTION AUTHORIZES WILL INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THAT APPOINTMENT TO A VACANCY DOESN'T COUNT AS A FULL TERM. RIGHT. BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOU WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO GET SOMEONE TO AGREE TO BE APPOINTED TO A VACANCY IF THEY KNEW THAT IT COUNTED FOR A FULL TERM. AND SO TYPICALLY WE'LL PUT LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT SAYS SERVICE, ANY SERVICE DURING ANY TERM IS CONSIDERED A FULL TERM FOR PURPOSES OF CONSECUTIVE TERMS, UNLESS IT OCCURS BY APPOINTMENT TO FILL A VACANCY. AND THAT SOLVES THOSE PROBLEMS. THAT'S GOOD. BECAUSE THE REDISTRICTING WILL HAPPEN AGAIN. SO YEAH. BUT THAT DOESN'T, WELL, THE NEXT REDISTRICTING SHOULD BE A PART OF THE NATURAL REDISTRICTING, WHICH WON'T TRIGGER THE REVOTE FOR ALL SEVEN OR ALL EIGHT, RIGHT. WHICH IS THE NEW STATE LEDGE. IT'LL BE A CENSUS . YEAH, IT'LL BE A CENSUS

[15:02] REDISTRICT, IT WON'T BE A VOLUNTARY REDISTRICT. SO, UM, BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S, WELL, YEAH, BECAUSE OUR LANGUAGE EXPLICITLY CALLS IT OUT, A PERSON MAY NOT SERVE MORE THAN THREE CONSECUTIVE TERMS, PROVIDED THE PARTIAL TERMS SHALL BE EXCLUDED FROM SUCH LIMITATIONS. SO, UM, WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF PEOPLE THAT THIS APPLIED TO. THEY, THEY SERVED, UM, NO, KEN, WELL EVEN, AND THEN EVEN MR. PATTERSON SERVED SEVEN YEARS BECAUSE OF THE ONE YEAR DIDN'T COUNT TOWARDS THAT TERM LIMIT. AND ALL THAT CAN BE DRAFTED AROUND, LIKE ALL OF THAT CAN BE DRAFTED AROUND, BUT OTHER ISSUES THAT YOU NEED TO BE THINKING ABOUT. Y'ALL HAVE FIVE DISTRICTS, TWO AT LARGE, AND A MAYOR TECHNICALLY THREE DIFFERENT OFFICES. RIGHT? RIGHT. OFFICE OF DISTRICT, OFFICE OF AT LARGE, COUNCIL MEMBER AND OFFICE OF MAYOR. SO HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH THAT? DO ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS, REGARDLESS OF DISTRICT OR AT LARGE, IS THAT CONSIDERED ONE OFFICE FOR PURPOSES OF CONSECUTIVE TERMS? CAN SOMEONE SERVE THREE? LET'S ASSUME WE DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO SERVE MORE THAN THREE CONSECUTIVE TERMS, WHATEVER YEARS THAT IS. RIGHT? 2, 3, 4, WHATEVER. NOBODY CAN SERVE MORE THAN THREE CONSECUTIVE TERMS. ALRIGHT, SO THREE CONSECUTIVE TERMS IN THE OFFICE OF COUNCIL MEMBER AND CAN THEN YOU TURN AROUND AND RUN FOR MAYOR, WHICH IS A SEPARATE OFFICE, OR DOES THERE NEED TO BE A GAP THERE? SO ALL OF THOSE ARE, ARE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE FIGURED OUT. I JUST DRAFTED, UH, FOR, UM, I WAS JUST AT A COMMISSION MEETING, LIKE, I CAN'T REMEMBER. MONDAY NIGHT. MONDAY NIGHT, , WHAT IS TODAY? THURSDAY? YES. UM, AND I TOOK SOME OTHER LANGUAGE. THEY, THEY WANTED, UM, THEY WANTED COUNCIL, THEY DON'T HAVE, THEY'RE ALL AT LARGE. UM, BUT THEY WANTED COUNCIL MEMBERS TO BE ABLE TO SERVE NO MORE THAN TWO CONSECUTIVE TERMS AND THE MAYOR TO SERVE NO TWO, NO MORE THAN TWO CONSECUTIVE TERMS. THEY WANTED THOSE TO BE CONSIDERED SEPARATE OFFICES. AND YOU COULD GO BACK TO BACK TO BACK TO BACK MAYOR TO A COUNCIL MEMBER, WHICH RARELY HAPPENS, OR COUNCIL MEMBER TO MAYOR. SO YOU COULD TECHNICALLY SERVE FOUR CONSECUTIVE TERMS, TWO AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, TWO AS THE MAYOR, AND THEN YOU HAD TO SIT OUT. AND THEN I'VE HAD OTHER FOLKS THAT SAY, NOPE, WE DON'T WANT THAT TRANS YOU GOT, IF YOU'RE, YOU'VE GOTTA SIT OUT A YEAR BEFORE YOU CAN RUN FOR MAYOR. SO THOSE ARE ALL POLICY DECISIONS, BUT THEY CAN ALL BE DRAFTED AROUND, UH, BASED ON WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. YEAH. AND I THINK HISTORICALLY THE INTENT WAS COUNCIL AS ONE AND THEN MAYOR AS AS ANOTHER. SO YOU COULD RUN FROM COUNCIL INTO MAYOR OR MAYOR INTO COUNCIL. NOW HAVE YOU TREATED THE AT LARGE VERSUS THE DISTRICTS? THO THOSE WERE TREATED THE SAME. THEY WERE NOT. SO IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU'RE IN A DISTRICT OR AN AT LARGE, YOU'RE A COUNCIL MEMBER. AS A COUNCIL MEMBER. AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, OKAY. FROM WHAT I, THE MAYOR DOESN'T GET A VOTE, SO CORRECT. TO ME, THAT'S NOT AS, IT'S, I WISH CJ WAS, ELLA WAS HERE FOR THE ORIGINAL DRAFTING. RIGHT. UM, BUT I THINK THAT WAS THE INTENT. YEAH. WHAT I, WHAT I RECALL ON TERM LIMITS, IT WAS LIKE SIX YEARS, WHETHER IT'S SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICT OR AT LARGE SIX YEARS, AND YOU HAVE TO SIT OUT. YEP. CORRECT. OR RUN FOR MAYOR. YEAH. BUT THERE, THERE WAS NO DIFFERENCE IN HOW THEY TREATED SINGLE MEMBER VERSUS AT LARGE. AND I'M HAPPY WITH THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW, DO WE WANNA DO A SHOW OF HANDS JUST TO GET A FEEL FOR HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ON BOARD WITH THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS VERSUS FOUR, TWO YEAR TERMS? UM, EVERYBODY WHO LIKES THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS, I AND I FLIPPED. I CHANGED MY MIND FROM WHEN I WAS HERE A MONTH AGO. I WAS ADAMANT. SO IT LOOKS, I ADAMANT WE GOT UNANIMOUS, ADAMANT WE GOT UNANIMOUS. CONSENT WAS ADAMANT ABOUT THREE. I WAS ADAMANT ON THREE, TWO YOUR TERMS, BUT YOU GOT ME AARON ON THE POLITICKING. SO THERE YOU GO. CASE MAYOR IS NOT, YOU KNOW, I DID HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS EVEN REACH OUT WHO SAID, YOU KNOW, THE MORE I THINK ABOUT THAT, THE MORE IT WAS, IT WAS THE POLITICKING COMMENT THAT GOT ME. YEAH. AND I'M SORRY, I'M NOT A POLITICIAN, SO I DID THAT DIDN'T EVEN OCCUR TO ME. BUT, AND IF YOU DO TWO, FOUR, THEN THAT'S JUST ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR A SITTING COUNCIL MEMBER TO DECIDE NOT TO RUN. CORRECT. YEAH. AND SO YOU CAN DRAFT THE LANGUAGES. THREE, THREE. WE GOT CONSENT, SO I'M SURE WELL, I'M, I'M, I, I DON'T, I, YOU CAN THROW ALL THE BUMP, ALL THE DARTS MUCH. I THROW THE WRENCH AND I JUST WANNA THROW A WRENCH IN IT. RIGHT. I'M NOT THROW A WRENCH, BUT SOMETHING ELSE TO THINK ABOUT. SO, UM, CURRENTLY TWO YEAR TERMS, CORRECT? CURRENTLY WE HAVE TWO YEAR TERMS, RIGHT? SO WE WANNA CHANGE IT TO THREE YEAR TERMS AND, UH, NO MORE THAN SERVICE IN, UH, UM, FOR TWO CONSECUTIVE TERMS IN COUNCIL. 3, 3, 3 CONSECUTIVE TERMS. 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3. WE'RE GIVING THAT DOWN. WE'RE GIVING THEM NINE YEARS. YEAH. IF THEY, IF THEY WANT ALL NINE YEARS, THEY MAY NOT. OKAY. AND SO YOU CAN MOVE FROM COUNCIL MEMBER TO MAYOR. SO YOU COULD SERVE ALL, ALL NINE YEARS IF YOU WANTED. RIGHT. YOU COULD SERVE 18 YEARS, RIGHT? YOU COULD SERVE 18 YEARS IF YOU'RE A REAL GLUTTON FOR

[20:01] PUNISHMENT. AND I'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN AND IT'S ACTUALLY WORKED OUT WHERE I'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN. IT'S BECAUSE THE MAYOR IS REALLY, REALLY GOOD. THAT COUNCIL PERSON'S REALLY GOOD AND THEY'RE DOING GREAT THINGS THAT PEOPLE STILL WANNA SEE 'EM, OTHERWISE THEY DON'T GET ELECTED. I MEAN, IT'S, I'VE ACTUALLY SEEN IT. STAFF IN RICHMOND WOULD BE REAL GOOD EXAMPLES FOR YOU. YEAH, SURE. SO HERE'S THE, HERE'S THE MAIN QUESTION. IS THAT ALL ONE SUBJECT MATTER OR DO YOU WANNA HAVE TWO BALLOT ITEMS? ONE FOR THREE YEAR TERMS AND ONE FOR THREE LIMIT AND ONE FOR TERM LIMITS? SO WE ALREADY HAVE THE THREE TERM LIMITS, CORRECT? YES. OH, YOU DO? OKAY. WE ALREADY HAVE THREE. WE HAVE THREE, TWO YEARS. SO I THINK, SO I'M MOVING THINK IT'S JUST ONE FROM TWO YEAR TO THREE YEAR TERMS. SO TWO, DO YOU WANT TWO SEPARATE BALLOT ITEMS? IN OTHER WORDS, DO YOU WANT THE EXTENSION TO THREE YEAR TERMS TO BE TIED TO THE CHANGE IN THE TERM LIMITS? AND IF SO, THEY, IT'S ONE, IT'S ONE OR NOTHING. AND THAT'S LEGAL TO DO IT THAT WAY. BUT YOU NEED TO MAKE THAT DECISION. YEAH. THINK IT'S TWO SEPARATE BALLOT ITEMS. WELL, I'D RATHER HAVE ONE BALLOT ITEM. I THINK IF YOU HAVE TWO SEPARATE ITEMS, PEOPLE CAN LIKE VOTE ONE WAY ON ONE AND THEN CONFUSE IT AND, AND BASICALLY CONTRADICT THEMSELVES ON THE OTHER ONE. I, I, I'D RATHER HAVE ONE ITEM. I, SINCE WE'RE ALREADY AT THREE, THREE YEAR, THREE TWO YEAR, I THINK GOING TO THREE, THREE YEAR IS A NATURAL ONE, ONE ITEM. IT MAKES SENSE TO ME. IF WE WERE LIKE, ABSOLUTELY, LIKE FIVE, TWO YEARS AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO THREE THREE, THEN, THEN THAT MIGHT, OH, WELL BRING BACK LANGUAGE. YEAH. NEXT MEETING. WELL, YOU WILL HAVE IT PRIOR TO THE MEETING, BUT IT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING FOR, FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. WAS THERE A DISCUSSION LAST TIME ABOUT OUT PLURALITY VERSUS MAJORITY WHEN YOU GO TO THREE YEARS, YOU HAVE TO WIN THE MAJORITY. SO YEAH, SO WE ALREADY ARE, WE ARE ALREADY SET UP THAT WAY. SO IT'S NOT A CHANGE, IT WON'T BE A CHANGE FOR OUR VOTERS AS FAR AS WE HAVE TO HAVE A RUNOFF IF PEOPLE DON'T GET A MAJORITY. SURE. AND THEY'LL, I'LL ALSO BE BRINGING BACK SOME LANGUAGE. I HAVEN'T READ YOUR VACANCY, FILLING A VACANCY LANGUAGE, BUT IF YOU GO TO A THREE YEAR TERM, YOU CAN NO LONGER APPOINT FOLKS TO FILL THE VACANCY UNLESS THERE'S LESS THAN A YEAR REMAINING ON THE TERM. UM, AND THAT HAS TO BE SPECIFICALLY IN YOUR CHARTER. SO LANGUAGE WILL BE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT DOES THAT FOR YOU TO LOOK AT. AND THEN THE OTHER IMPACT OF, UM, HAVING THREE YEAR TERMS AS OPPOSED TO TWO YEAR TERMS RESIGNED TO RUN IS THE RESIGNED TO RUN PROVISION. RIGHT? IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN A YEAR AND 30 DAYS LEFT ON YOUR TERM AND YOU RUN FOR ANOTHER OFFICE OF AMMONIA, AMMONIA, THEN IT'S AN AUTOMATIC RESIGNATION. RESIGNATION OF YOUR EXISTING, I JUST WANNA RETHINK THIS, . NO, I THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY PART OF THE REASON I'M FOR IT IS THE ZO TO RUN ASPECT. SO, AND THEY, BUT, AND THEY GET, THEY SERVE, THEY DON'T, IT'S NOT AN AUTOMATIC, IT'S AN AUTOMATIC RESIGNATION, BUT THEY DON'T, IT'S, YOU DON'T LEAVE THE DAIS. THEY CONTINUE TO SERVE UNTIL THEY, UNTIL EITHER THEIR OFFICE IS, IS FILLED OR YOU KNOW, A FILLED EITHER BY SPECIAL ELECTION, IF THERE'S MORE THAN A YEAR AND 30 DAYS, IT WOULD BE A SPECIAL ELECTION OR THEY TAKE OFFICE IN, IN THEIR NEXT OFFICE. AND THAT ELECTION LINES UP ALREADY WITH THE ELECTION THAT WOULD BE FOLLOWING IN MAY. ANYWAY, THAT'S NOT WHAT BOTHERED ME. THE WHAT BOTHERED ME WAS WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE APPOINTMENTS. THEY CAN'T APPOINT ANYONE THREE YEAR TERMS IF YOU CANNOT APPOINT, IF THERE IS MORE THAN A YEAR AND 30 DAYS LEFT ON THE, SO WOULDN'T YOU JUST HAVE AN MTC NO, NO. YOU HOLD A SPECIAL ELECTION SPECIAL. THERE'S ALREADY GONNA BE AN ELECTION. WE HAVE TO PAY FOR AN ELECTION. IT DEPENDS. THERE'S ALREADY GONNA BE AN ELECTION. IT DEPENDS, RIGHT? IT DEPENDS ON WHEN THEY RESIGN. IT HAS TO BE HELD WITHIN 120 DAYS. AND SO USUALLY THIS IS MY EXPERIENCE IS THAT THE INDIVIDUAL WHO, IF THEY'RE WANTING TO RESIGN, IF IT'S THEY, THEY TIME IT SO THAT THERE DOESN'T, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR AN EXTRA ELECTION. THAT'S USUALLY WHAT THEY DO. IT DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK OUT THAT WAY. UM, BUT YOU, YOU COULD BE IN A SITUATION WHERE, AND HONESTLY I, I'VE BEEN DOING THIS 25 YEARS AND I'VE PROBABLY SEEN IT FIVE TIMES AND I REPRESENT 40 OR 50 CITIES. SO IT DOESN'T HAPPEN A LOT. BUT IT COULD HAPPEN WHERE SOMEONE, THEY DIE , THEY DIE. I'VE HAD LITERALLY HAD THIS HAPPEN. THEY GOT ELECTED A MONTH LATER THEY WERE DEAD. OOPS. THAT'S TERRIBLE. SO THAT'S A VACANCY IN THE SEAT, A THREE YEAR TERM. THEY HAD TO HOLD A SPECIAL ELECTION IN NOVEMBER. THAT WAS AN EXTRA ELECTION FOR THEM. BUT, BUT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN. IT JUST DOESN'T. WELL, THE FEW THAT WE'VE HAD, ONLY TWO THAT I KNOW OF THAT WE'VE HAD WERE THEY GOT A JOB SOMEWHERE ELSE AND HAD TO LEAVE. YEAH. I MEAN, THEY DIDN'T HAVE A CHOICE OF WHEN, SURE. YEAH. YEAH. SO IT DOES HAPPEN, BUT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN. YOU, YOU, IN MY EXPERIENCE, WHO KNOWS WHAT HAPPENS IN THE FUTURE MAKING THE CITY INCUR MONEY FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION? POSSIBLY. POSSIBLY. AND, AND THAT WILL BE PUT. SO WHEN, WHEN, WHEN WE PUT, IF THIS GOES, IF Y'ALL CHOOSE TO, I CAN'T REMEMBER, ARE Y'ALL THE FINAL DECISION MAKERS ON WHETHER OR NOT THIS GOES ON THE BALLOT? NO. CAN COUNSEL MAKES THE FINAL DECISION. OKAY.

[25:01] UM, I THINK THERE'S A DIFFERENCE ON WHETHER WE SAY WE WANT IT ON THE BALLOT OR WHETHER WE TELL COUNSEL. WE JUST WANT THEM TO THINK ABOUT IT. OKAY. THEY MAKE THE FINAL DECISION. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S, WELL, REGARDLESS IF IT GOES ON THE BALLOT, THERE'S A NOTICE REQUIREMENT UNDER THE LAW, THE, UM, THAT HAS TO BE IN THE NEWSPAPER, AND IT'S ALWAYS ON THE WEBSITE. IT'LL, FOR EACH BALLOT PROPOSITION, THERE WILL BE A FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. SO THE CITIZENS WILL NOT ONLY BE AWARE OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT, THEY'LL BE AWARE OF THE POSSIBLE, THE POSSIBLE FINANCIAL IMPACT. AND, AND IT'LL JUST SAY THERE COULD BE AN EXTRA COST TO THE CITY FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION, UM, IF A VACANCY OCCURS WITHIN ITS TIMEFRAME, AND THEN THE, THE PUBLIC WILL BE NOTIFIED OF THAT, THEY'LL BE INFORMED OF THAT, AND THEY CAN VOTE ACCORDINGLY. AND THE FORTUNATE THING IS, WE ARE ALREADY GONNA HAVE ELECTIONS EVERY MAY. IF WE HAVE TO BE A PART OF A NOVEMBER ELECTION, OUR, OUR CITY SHARE OF THAT IS GONNA BE MUCH SMALLER BECAUSE THE COUNTY SHARE IS MUCH LARGER IN NOVEMBER THAN IN MAY. SO I THINK WE'VE ONLY HAD ONE VACANCY SINCE 2017. THAT BEING LISA MARTIN AND CHRIS BARON. I THINK WE'VE ONLY HAD ONE. WE HAD TWO. WE HAD THE KENT POOL, BUT THAT WAS BEFORE 2017. IT WAS APRIL OF 2018. BUT YES, YOU'RE CORRECT. YEAH. IT'S, IT ALL. WE HAVEN'T HAD, WE HAD FOR A WHILE. WE WERE HAVING 'EM ALL THE TIME AND THEN IT SLOWED DOWN. YEAH. AND WITH LISA IT WAS 2022 OR 23. YEAH. KNOCK ON WOOD. AND I THINK BOTH OF THOSE WOULD'VE TAKEN US TO THE MAY ELECTION. I THINK YOU'LL BE FINE. I MEAN, FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE, I MEAN, I DON'T THINK YOU'LL GET IMPACTED. WOULD WOULD, YEAH, OF COURSE. IN FIVE YEARS, IF YOU GUYS HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION EVERY YEAR, PLEASE DON'T COME BACK AND HIT ME. 'CAUSE , ANY OTH ANY OTHER DETAILS YOU WANNA BRING UP FOR US ON 3 0 3 RAMIFICATIONS WE SHOULD KNOW OF? NO, I THINK WE'VE COVERED 'EM ALL. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WELL THEN, GENERAL POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE CITY COUNCIL SECTION 3.06. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANNA BRING UP ON CHANGES, REVISIONS, THINGS THAT AREN'T CLEAR? ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS? I HAD ONE QUESTION ON, ON B IT SAYS FROM TIME TO TIME IS MAYBE REQUIRED BY LAW. THAT DOESN'T SEEM VERY SPECIFIC. AND SO I I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THERE'S A REASON THAT IT'S WORDED THAT WAY OR, WELL, I MEAN, FROM TIME TO TIME WOULD BE AT LEAST EVERY 10 YEARS WITH THE CENSUS, YOU LOOK AT IT, RIGHT? YEAH. THEY, THAT'S THIS WELL, THAT SAYS REQUIRED BY LAW. YEAH. YEAH. THAT THE REASON FOR THAT. WELL, YOU DON'T EVEN NEED THAT, QUITE HONESTLY. UM, IT JUST MAKES IT CLEAR THAT WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW. OKAY. THAT'S FINE. AND FEDERAL LAW REQUIRED, THAT'S FINE. YOU CAN'T HAVE A 10% DEVIATION IN POPULATION, SO, RIGHT. AND WE WERE SO OUT OF WHACK THAT OH YEAH, I UNDERSTAND WHY WE DID IT. I, NO, I, I, YEAH. OKAY. AND WE KNEW, WE EVEN KNEW IN, IN THE REDISTRICTING IN 21 WHEN WE ACTUALLY DID IT THAT IT WAS A POSSIBILITY THAT WE WERE GONNA HAVE TO, WE DO IT AGAIN, REDRAW MM-HMM . UM, WE DIDN'T KNOW AT THAT TIME THE RAMIFICATIONS FROM THE STATE LEGISLATION WHEN WE MADE THAT DECISION IN 2021. BUT, AND WHAT MOVING FORWARD, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE THAT SITUATION AGAIN UNLESS SOME YEAH. I, I THINK THE ONLY REASON WE'RE GONNA RUN INTO A MID THAT, THAT I COULD FORESEE US RUNNING INTO A MID DECADE RE REDRAW IS SHOULD WE HAVE A MASSIVE ANNEXATION OBJECTION. RIGHT. THAT'S THE ONLY THING I CAN, THAT WOULD DRASTICALLY IMPACT THOSE NUMBERS, BUT OKAY. ONTO SECTION 3.07, THEN PROHIBITIONS. AND THIS IS MOSTLY TELLING THE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT THE CITY MANAGER GETS TO DO WHAT HE DOES, AND YOU SHOULDN'T REALLY INTERFERE WITH THE CITY MANAGER MANAGING, DOING THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITY OF SHORE. THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF HOW I READ SECTION 3.07 MOSTLY GOOD WITH IT. ANY, ANY CONFUSION THAT ANYONE HAS ON THAT OR ANY CHANGES OR ANYTHING THAT ANYBODY WANTS TO BRING UP ON SECTION 3.07? PROHIBITIONS? NO. OKAY. HEARING NONE GO ON TO SECTION 3.08. POWER AND DUTIES OF THE MAYOR ON THIS ONE. A THE SENTENCE ENDS WITH MAY REMOVE THE SAME AT ANY TIME AND, AND THERE IS NO NOTHING. WELL, OH, WELL, I THINK IT'S JUST GOING ON TO BE, HOWEVER, HAVING SET THERE AND DONE APPOINTMENTS, , UM,

[30:01] I DO HAVE A, A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS ON THIS. AND THE FIRST BEING, SHOULD WE ADD THE LANGUAGE EXCEPT WHERE OTHERWISE, UH, PROHIBITED OR INSTRUCTED BY LAW? AND WHERE I'M REALLY GOING AT IS EDCA AND B CANNOT BE APPOINTED BY THE MAYOR BY STATE STATUTE. THOSE ARE APPOINTED BY COUNCIL. UM, AND THEN ALSO EVEN OUR CHARTER CONFLICTS WITH THIS AND SAYS THAT THE CHARTER COMMISSION SHALL BE APPOINTED BY THE BODY OF COUNCIL VERSUS MAYOR. SO IS THERE A CLEANUP THAT WE NEED TO, UM, TO HAVE HAPPEN HERE IN ONE? GREAT, GREAT QUESTION. I'M, UH, LET ME SORT OF ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THOSE POINTS. FIRST. UM, 3.08 DOES SAY, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY THIS CHARTER. SO THAT HANDLES THE ISSUE WITH, UM, WHO APPOINTS THE CHARTER COMMISSION. SO 3.08 SAYS ACCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY THIS CHARTER. YOU'RE RIGHT. YEP. OKAY, PERFECT. AND THEN, SO I AM THE ONE THAT, THAT DREW THE WRENCH INTO THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT AND THE, INTO THE EDC BOARDS. I'M THE ONE THAT SAID THAT THIS IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW. UM, IT ACTUALLY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW. IT WAS IN MY MIND, IT WAS JUST BEING MISINTERPRETED. UM, WHAT THIS SAYS IS THAT THE MAYOR SH TWO POINTS, THIS SAYS THE MAYOR SHALL NOMINATE AND BY AND WITH THE APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL, SHALL APPOINT THE MEMBERS OF ALL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OF THE CITY. EDC IS NOT A BOARD AND COMMISSION OF THE CITY. IT IS THE BOARDING COMMISSION OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, WHICH IT'S ITS OWN SEPARATE ENTITY. IT'S NOT THE CITY. SO THAT'S THE FIRST POINT. LIKE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN, IN MY MIND, THAT'S LIKE CLEAR CORPORATE DIVISION. IT'S NOT THE CITY, IT'S AN EDC. IT'S GOT ITS OWN BYLAWS. IT'S GOT ITS OWN CORPORATE DOCUMENTS. IT'S GOT IT, IT'S SEPARATELY INCORPORATED BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH CONFUSION ON THAT. IS THERE SOMETHING WE COULD PUT IN HERE JUST AS AN EDUCATIONAL POINT TO LET PEOPLE KNOW, CLARIFY. SO, AND THEN MY NEXT POINT IS, IS THAT THE STATUTES VERY CLEARLY IN STATE LAW SAYS THAT THE GOVERNING BODY SHALL APPOINT. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS. NOW WE, I DON'T, I RECOMMEND JUST RELYING ON THOSE TWO THINGS BECAUSE THE MINUTE WE PUT SOMETHING IN HERE THAT SAYS, EXCEPT FOR THE EDC, THE LEGISLATURE'S GONNA GO OUT AND THEY'RE GONNA DO SOMETHING THAT SAYS THE MAYOR CAN APPOINT THE EDC AND THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE A CONFLICT. SO I DON'T, I DON'T LIKE DOING THOSE TYPES OF THINGS BECAUSE I DON'T TRUST THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE. IT'S WHY I DON'T CITE STATUTES IN THE, IN THE, IN THE CODE. IT'S WHY I DON'T RECITE TO OTHER LAWS OUTSIDE THE CHARTER. 'CAUSE THE LEGISLATURE CHANGES THINGS. UM, BUT STATE LAW VERY CLEARLY STATES THAT THE EDC IS APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNING BODY. IT'S IN THE STATUTE, WHICH IS, AND THIS VERY CLEARLY STATES THAT THE, THE, HE NOW, THE MAYOR, HE OR SHE NOMINATES, UM, ALL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OF THE CITY. AND THE EDC IS NOT A BOARD OF COMMISSION OF THE CITY. IT IS THE BOARD OF COMMISSION OF A SEPARATE INDEPENDENT CORPORATION. MAYBE IT'S JUST HOW THE AGENDA ITEMS ARE WRITTEN ON PACKET. IT'S, IT'S HOW WE'VE PRACTICED THAT. SO HONESTLY, MAYBE WHAT IT SHOULD BE IS A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL. YEAH. TO HANDLE EDC, UH, APPOINTMENTS AT A SEPARATE DATE AND TIME, OR AT LEAST IN A SEPARATE AGENDA ITEM OR A SEPARATE MANNER ITEM, A SEPARATE AGENDA THAN, THAN WHERE COUNCIL VOTES ON IT. AND THE MAYOR IS JUST KIND OF OUT, OUT OF THE DISCUSSION. YEAH. THERE'S JUST SOME, THERE SOMETHING WE NEED TO DO, SOMETHING TO HELP. I KNEW IT COMING IN BECAUSE FOR EDUCATION, I, I KNEW COMING IN THAT IT WASN'T MY RESPONSIBILITY 'CAUSE WE HAD ALREADY DEALT WITH THE ISSUE. UM, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THERE WAS A, UH, AN EXPECTATION THAT I WAS STILL GONNA NOMINATE THAT PROCESS. AND SO I, I JUST THINK WE GOTTA MAYBE IT, MAYBE IT IS NOT SOMETHING ON THE CHARTER, BUT MAYBE A DIRECTIVE TO COUNSEL TO CONSIDER A SUGGESTION TO COUNCIL, A SUGGESTION TO COUNCIL, UM, ON POLICY FOR THE CITY TO ADOPT TO THAT. YEAH. TO, TO ADOPT A POLICY THAT CLEARLY DELINEATES, UM, THAT THE COUNCIL, THAT THE COUNCIL APPOINTS THE EDC AS IT IS NOT A BODY OF THE CITY, BUT RATHER ITS OWN ENTITY. AND THEN THE OTHER RISK YOU RUN, IF YOU PUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON THE BALLOT AND IT FAILS, THEN EVERYBODY'S BEING LIKE, WHOA. SO, OKAY. SO THE MAYOR, MAY MAYOR GETS TO, YEAH. MM-HMM . SO THAT'S THE RISK THAT YOU TAKE OFF. I THINK WE CAN CLEAR IT UP IF WE CAN JUST GIVE SOME SORT OF DIRECTION TO COUNCIL, DIRECTION TO COUNCIL. YES. SO MAKE A SUGGESTION, A POLICY SUGGESTION. YES. THE WAY THIS IS WORDED, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE MAYOR NOMINATES AND WITH APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, APPOINTS MEMBERS OF THE BOARDS OF COMMISSIONS, AND THEN THE MAYOR MAY REMOVE SAME AT ANY TIME. SO COUNCIL APPROVAL IS NOT

[35:01] REQUIRED FOR THE MAYOR TO REMOVE MEMBERS OF THE BOARDS. I HAD THAT NOTE TOO. UM, THAT'S, THAT'S THE WAY I WOULD YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE WAY I READ IT AS I'M SITTING HERE. UM, YES. THAT'S HOW I READ IT. AS I'M, AS I'M SITTING HERE, UM, HOWEVER, THERE MAY BE SOME NUANCE TO HOW LANGUAGE LIKE THIS HAS BEEN INTERPRETED BY THE COURTS. AND I WOULD WANNA LOOK AT THAT FIRST BEFORE OKAY. BEFORE I CAME DOWN ON THAT. YEAH. IF YOU'D LOOK AT THAT, I THINK THAT'D BE HELPFUL. I, I WILL SAY, AND WHAT IS THE PRACTICE AT OTHER CITIES? YEAH. WHAT I MEAN, MY PRACTICE WAS EII ASKED THEM FOR NOMINATIONS ACROSS THE BOARD. WELL, I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT REMOVAL. I'M ABSOLUTE POWER. IT'S THE REMOVAL PIECE. RIGHT. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY, SOMEBODY AND REMOVES THEM, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT, I DON'T THINK WE EVER REMOVED ANYBODY WHO, I DON'T THINK WE EVER REMOVED ANYBODY. I THINK IT WAS JUST BY RESIGNATION. WE, WE HAD MORE VACANCIES THAN ANYTHING ELSE. YEAH. I I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S EVER REMOVED ANYBODY . BUT I DO THINK, TO YOUR POINT, LET'S FIND OUT WHAT THE LEGISLATE, WHAT THAT MEANS IF THERE'S A RULING. BECAUSE IT, IT SEEMS KIND OF ODD THAT CITY COUNCIL WOULD APPOINT THEM. YEP. AND THEN THE MAYOR COULD JUST REMOVE, OH, I TAKE THAT BACK. THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN A ONE REMOVAL. I, I THINK IT ALL HAPPENED AT AN APPOINTMENT TIME. I THINK IT ALL HAPPENED AT APPOINTMENT TIME. BECAUSE HE MOVED. YEAH, HE MOVED OUT OF, BUT ALSO, I DO WANNA LET Y'ALL KNOW THAT ALL OF COUNCIL NOMINATED, NOT JUST THE MAYOR. SO WE GET NOMINATION FOR ALL IONS FROM ALL COUNCIL. CORRECT. BUT THAT'S, THAT'S UP TO THE MAYOR. THAT'S UP TO THE MAYOR'S CHOICE TO DO THAT DISCRETION. YEAH. SO, YEAH. SO THAT'S HOW I STARTED SAY THAT. YEAH, THAT'S HOW OVERVIEW. BUT HE DOES, YEAH. THAT, THAT'S AT THE, I STARTED DOING THAT AND I THINK DON HAS CARRIED THAT OVER TO REQUEST FOR THE NOMINATIONS FROM THE INPUT. WE WANTED INPUT. UM, BUT THE WAY THE CHARTER READS, THEY DON'T HAVE TO ASK FOR THAT INPUT, SO. RIGHT. I THINK IT'S LIKE BILL SAID, THE REMOVAL OF THAT JUST NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE MORE CLEAR. YEAH. IF YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT, THAT WOULD, MY UNDERSTANDING IS, SO LET ME ASK THIS. IF, IF, IF I LOOK, AND THE CASE LAW IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTERPRETATION THAT I THINK IT IS, THAT WOULD MEAN THAT IT TAKES COUNCIL'S APPROVAL TO APPOINT, BUT THE MAYOR CAN REMOVE IT ANYTIME. NO COUNCIL APPROVAL REQUIRED. ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT? OR DO YOU WANT ME TO BRING BACK LANGUAGE THAT CHANGES THAT, THAT SAYS REMOVAL NEEDS? ALSO THE CONSENT OF COUNCIL. I DON'T WANT THE CONSENT. I I KIND OF LIKE THE IDEA THAT COUNCIL, I MEAN YEAH. YEAH. AND NOT THAT WE'VE HAD THIS ISSUE, BUT YOU'D HATE TO THINK THAT SHE HAD A MAYOR THAT JUST BASHED HEADS WITH ONE PERSON AND THAT SOMETHING VINDICTIVE HAPPEN THAT WASN'T REALLY BEFORE. QUE QUESTION IS THAT COVERED UNDER PERSONNEL MATTERS THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION? IT DEPENDS ON THE BORDER COMMISSION. IF IT'S THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THE ANSWER IS YES. ANY OTHER BORDER COMMISSION OF THE CITY, THE ANSWER IS NO. AND REMEMBER PARKS AND REC. YEAH. BECAUSE THEIR ADVISORY. YEAH. WELL THE, THE LAW SAYS THAT YOU CAN GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER PERSONNEL FOR EMPLOYEES OR OFFICERS AND, UM, OFFICERS, NOT OFFICER ARE, YOU'RE AN OFFICER OF THE CITY. IF YOU SIT ON THE P AND Z AND YOU'RE AN OFFICER OF THE CITY, IF YOU SIT ON THE ZBOA, BUT YOU ARE NOT AN OFFICER OF THE CITY IF YOU'RE ON THE PARKS COMMISSION OR THE, YOU KNOW, AND STATE LAW ALREADY SAYS CITY COUNCIL DOES VOTES ON EDC BOARDS. IT HAS TO BE A SENIOR COUNCIL DECISION FOR THEM. CORRECT. SO I ONLY BRING THAT UP. IS IT IF THERE'S AN INDISCRETION THAT SOMEBODY'S, AND THE ONLY REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE IF, BECAUSE IF, IF YOU WANNA MAKE A CHANGE, IF IT COMES OUT THE WAY I THINK IT IS GOING TO, AND YOU WANNA MAKE A CHANGE FOR THAT, I CAN BRING BACK LANGUAGE THAT DOES THAT. IF NOT, I'LL JUST COME BACK AND TELL YOU WHAT THE ANSWER IS. I, I LIKE, I LIKE THE IDEA OF SAYING IT'S A COUN THAT IT'S AN AGENDA ITEM ON A CITY COUNCIL MEETING. THERE'S SEVERAL, SEVERAL OPINIONS INSTEAD OF JUST ONE. JUST ONE. YEAH. I MEAN, IF THE ENTIRE COUNCIL VOTES ON IT, THEN YOU KNOW, THERE'S AN ISSUE. I'LL BRING BACK SOME LANGUAGE IF IT'S, IF IT'S INTERPRETED THE WAY THAT I THINK IT IS, AND THEN Y'ALL CAN DEBATE IT AT THE NEXT MEETING. OKAY. OKIE DOKIE. AND I GUESS IF IT'S A MATTER THE INDIVIDUAL WANTED TO KEEP OUT OF THE PUBLIC, THEY COULD SIMPLY RESIGN AND NOT HAVE TO TRUE. OKAY. YEP. ANYTHING ELSE ON 3.08 ON B? UH, THE, YEAH. THE MAYOR SHALL ANNUALLY ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AS TO THE STATE OF THE CITY. DO WE WANT TO PUT SOMETHING IN THERE THAT AS A FREE EVENT THAT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC SO THAT IT'S NOT, I MEAN, I KNOW WHEN YOU DO THE THINGS THEY'RE PAID FOR, BUT IT SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE CAN ATTEND. YEAH. WE ALWAYS COUNTED THOSE AS SEPARATE. I THINK THAT WHETHER OR

[40:01] NOT MAYBE WE ALWAYS INTERPRETED THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE FREE. UM, BUT I, YEAH. WHAT IF, WHAT IF INSTEAD OF SAYING ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL, DO YOU LIKE IT? WOULD IT LIKE IF YOU SAID, ADDRESS THE PUBLIC? YEP. I MEAN, 'CAUSE EVEN, EVEN, EVEN WHEN THEY'VE HAD LIKE A CHAMBER FUNCTION, THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN, AT LEAST AS FAR AS I CAN RECALL, THERE WAS ALWAYS ANOTHER EVENT SCHEDULED THAT WAS ALWAYS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC ANYWAY. WELL, WHEN THE CHAMBER STARTED DOING THEM, BUT BEFORE THAT, THERE WAS ONLY A FREE EVENT EVERY YEAR THAT THE EVERY EVERYONE WAS INVITED. YEAH. WHICH WAS NICE. COULD, WELL, IT DOES COUNT. SO THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GETTING AT, IS TO ENSURE THAT IT REMAINS OPEN AND FREE TO THE PUBLIC. UM, SO I THINK, WHICH WOULDN'T, IT WOULDN'T DISALLOW. YEAH. THE CHAMBER COULD DO IT COULD, BUT IT COULD BE THAT YOU COULD JUST SIMPLIFY THE MAYOR, SHALL IT ANNUALLY ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AS TO THE STATE OF THE CITY AT A SPECIAL CALLED OR REGULARLY SCHEDULED. THAT'S WHAT I WAS YEAH, I WAS GONNA SAY REGULARLY SCHEDULED. UH, CITY COUNCIL, CITY COUNCIL MEETING. LIKE THE, THAT WAY IT'S THAT WAY. IT ENSURES THAT IT'S ALWAYS LIKE IN FEBRUARY, LIKE SAY LIKE, YEAH. THE, IN THE THE SECOND REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE CALENDAR YEAR, SO MANY TIMES THE STATE OF THE CITY, THEY'RE GOING TO SHOW SLIDES AND DO A PRESENTATION AND DO A POWERPOINT. YEAH. DO YOU WANT THAT DURING A CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SIT THERE FOR, HOW ABOUT WE THREE HOURS? JUST GIVE COUNCIL THE, THE COUNCIL ON THE GROUND AT THE TIME, THE FLEXIBILITY TO DO IT AT A SPECIAL MEETING OR A REGULAR MEETING, YOU COULD SAY THE MAYOR SHALL ANNUALLY ADDRESS THE CITY AS TO THE STATE OF THE CITY AT A PROPERLY POSTED AND OPEN MEETING. OPEN THAT, THAT'S A GOOD ONE. WORKS. YEAH. YEAH. BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU HAVE GREAT INTENTIONS OF DOING IT IN FEBRUARY, BUT THE COUNT, THE, BUT IT ENDS UP GOING, IT GOES TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE NEXT ELECTION. EXACTLY. , EXACTLY. THAT HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES. PARDON? MS. BANK, THE LAST ONE THAT HE HAD. CAN YOU, I THINK THE LAST ONE THAT HE HAD, YOU HAD TO PAY TO GO HERE, THE CITY ADDRESS. I THINK DON HAS ALWAYS DONE IT AT A ACCOUNT AT LIKE A SPECIAL, SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING. THERE STILL A FREE ONE AT FIVE 30, ESPECIALLY 12 ONE. AND THEN YES, THERE WAS THE OPTIONAL PAID ONE FOR THE CHAMBER. OKAY. I JUST, AND THOSE ARE USUALLY LIKE, I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, I, NEVERMIND, I'M NOT GONNA SAY WHAT I'M THINKING. SO , THEY'RE, THEY'RE KIND OF, LEMME SAY THIS, THAT IT IS NOT UNUSUAL FOR CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE TO GET SPONSORSHIP AND PAY FOR THE, FOR, FOR SOMETHING AND THEN THEY INVITE THE MAYOR TO SPEAK ON THE STATE OF THE CITY. I'M NOT NECESSARILY SURE THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND, IT'S KIND. I'VE DONE ONE YEAR. ONE YEAR I DID FOUR DIFFERENT CHAMBER EVENTS. YEAH. I DIFFERENT FOR FOUR DIFFERENT CHAMBERS. SO, AND I THINK YOU ALSO DID THE COUNTY CHAMBER ONE, I THINK I IN THE COUNTY CHAMBER AND THE, AND THEN STILL DID THE ONE FOR COUNCIL. RIGHT. UM, PRIOR TO A REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING. I'LL BRING BACK SOME LANGUAGE BASED ON WHAT I JUST HEARD. I, I HAD A QUESTION ON C. YES. CAN WHAT IS FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PURPOSES? SO THAT'S ACTUALLY A LEGISLATIVE CASE. YEAH. UNDER STATE, UNDER UNDER STATE LAW, IF THE GOVERNOR DECLARES AN EMERGENCY IN YOUR AREA. SO THE STATUTE ACTUALLY MAKES THE MAYOR, THE, THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COORDIN COORDINATOR, DIRECTOR OR SOMETHING. AND THE MAYOR CAN'T APPOINT SOMEBODY AS AN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT. BUT STILL THE DECISIONS FALL UNDER THE MAYOR'S AUTHORITY. EVEN IF THIS WASN'T IN THERE, THAT WOULD BE THE CASE. THAT WOULD BE THE CASE, CORRECT. SO WHAT IT REALLY ALLOWS IT, WHAT IT REALLY ALLOWS THE MAYOR TO DO IS, LET'S SAY WE DO HAVE A HARVEY STATE DECLARES A FLOOD HE CAN GO INTO A'S HARDWARE, GET EVERY RAKE, EVERY SHOVEL, EVERY THING HE DOGS HE CAN COMMANDEER, HE CAN COMMANDEER ACE HARDWARE AND USE ALL THOSE SUPPLIES TO HELP THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY. AND THE CITY WILL GET REIMBURSED FOR THOSE EXPENSES. GAS HAS GAS STATION TO SIGN TO DECLARE HA GAS, OPEN UP A GAS STATION, GET FUEL, ORDER A FUEL TRUCKS, UM, ALSO SIGN ON DISASTER DECLARATIONS, ALL OF THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. AND SO IT, IT IS STATUTORILY A RESPONSIBILITY OF THE MAYOR TO DO THOSE THINGS. OKAY. YEAH. THEY GET TO COMMANDER IF THEY WANT TO. YEAH. FORTUNATELY, THANKFULLY, THAT DOESN'T, THAT IS NOT THE, THE NORM. BUT IT, BUT I WILL TELL YOU, IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY, WE'RE STOOD UP, WE'RE READY TO GO. WE KNOW WHERE THE CLOSEST, UH, MILITARY BATTALION IS THAT THAT HAS TRUCKS TO COME IN AND HELP IN THE EVENT OF A FLOOD. WE KNOW WHERE THE STAGING IS AT.

[45:01] WE KNOW ALL THOSE THINGS SO THAT WE CAN MAKE THOSE, THOSE CALLS AND MAKE IT HAPPEN. OKAY. GOOD QUESTION. MM-HMM . IF YOU WANNA MAKE SOMEBODY THE DESIGNATED SIGNING, I'M SURE THEY WOULDN'T CARE. . INDEED. I, THERE'S, I THINK CHARLIE GAVE US SOME GOOD ADVICE AT THE BEGINNING IS YOU DON'T MAKE LEGISLATION BASED OFF OF LIKE ONE-OFF EVENTS, BUT I JUST, THERE'S A, A CITY, UH, UP IN THE NORTHEAST WHERE THE CITY COUNCIL MADE VOTED, UM, TO REMOVE FLOCK CAMERAS AND THE MAYOR DECLARED A STATE OF EMERGENCY AND REFUSES TO REMOVE THEM. OH, HI. WELL, THAT STATE OF EMERGENCY IN TEXAS IS ONLY GOOD FOR 36 HOURS WITHOUT COUNCIL APPROVAL. SO THERE YOU GO. OKAY. SO 36 HOURS OR 72, DEPENDING ON THE DISASTER, I'M NOT SURE THAT THIS, THAT THE WAY YOUR LANGUAGE IS DRAFTED, UM, WOULD AUTHORIZE BECAUSE THIS DOESN'T AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. OKAY. IT SIMPLY AUTHORIZES IN THE STATE OF EMERGENCY IN A, TO AUTHORIZE, UM, FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PURPOSES, WHICH IS A VERY, UM, BOIL VERY SPECIFIC TERM THAT IS STATUTORY, UM, AND BY THE GOVERNOR FOR PURPOSES OF MILITARY LAW. SO I DON'T THINK THIS AUTHORIZES THE MAYOR TO DECLARE EMERGENCY AND THEN SAY, NOW I HAVE ALL THESE POWERS. YEAH. THERE'S ALSO A WHOLE OTHER SET OF GUIDELINES FOR WHAT QUALIFIES AS DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME CHARTERS OUT THERE THAT SAYS THE, THE CITY, THE MAYOR IS AUTHORIZED TO DECLARE EMERGENCIES IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. YOUR CHARTER DOES NOT SAY THAT. YEAH. OKAY. BUT LIKE EVEN A DR UH, EVEN GOING TO STAGE ONE DROUGHT, THE MAYOR HAS TO SIGN OFF ON THAT. OKAY. SO THAT MAKES ME FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE. ANYTHING ELSE ON 3.08? MOVING ON TO 3.09 CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS, PARAGRAPH A. OKAY. I HAVE A COMMENT ON PARAGRAPH ON PARAGRAPH A THERE. UM, I THINK THERE WERE QUITE A FEW COMPLAINTS WHEN WE STARTED HAVING THOSE SPECIAL COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETINGS AT FIVE 30 BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE STILL IN TRAFFIC TRYING TO GET TO THE MEETINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. AND ONCE UPON A TIME, I KNOW OUR CHARTER SAID THEY WILL BE ON THE, I THINK THIRD THURSDAY, TUESDAY, THURSDAY, 7:00 PM UM, SO I'M, I'M A, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF PUTTING A TIME AND MAKING SURE IT'S NOT BEFORE SIX O'CLOCK AT THE VERY EARLIEST. BUT THAT'S, THAT'S ME. SO I DON'T OPEN THAT UP FOR OTHER DISCUSSION. I, I JUST THINK THAT, UM, THE MORE YOU CAN MAKE THIS AVAILABLE AND, AND I KNOW THERE'S VIDEOS, BUT IT'S NOT THE SAME THING AS BEING AT THE MEETING AND BEING ABLE TO DO CITIZENS' COMMENTS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. SO I KINDA LIKE THE IDEA OF PUTTING A TIME IN THERE AGAIN, SO THEY DON'T CREEP UP TOO EARLY. BUT I'M OPEN TO OTHER OPINIONS. SO, JUST A LITTLE HISTORY, THE REGULAR MEETING WAS SCHEDULED FOR THE THIRD TUESDAY OF THE MONTH AT 7:00 PM AND THEIR, I BELIEVE IN THEIR ORIGINAL CHARTER. AND THEN WE VOTED ON A CHANGE BECAUSE WE WERE DOING WORKSHOPS AT FIVE 30, FOLLOWED BY THE MEETING AT SEVEN. AND IT WAS RESULTING IN DUAL POSTINGS AND WHATEVER. AND I THINK THAT'S WHY THE COMMISSION CHANGED IT. BUT, UM, I'M OPEN EITHER WAY. I, I FEEL LIKE SOME CITIES DO THEIR, DO THEIR WORKSHOPS AT NINE O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING AND THEN RECESS AND COME BACK IN THE EVENING. I THINK, I MEAN, WHEN CITY COUNCIL MOVED TO FIVE 30 THERE, I MEAN THERE WAS COMMUNITY PUSHBACK AND THE COUNCIL LISTENED AND THEY MOVED THEM TO BACK TO SIX O'CLOCK. SO, I MEAN, I THINK, I MEAN, IF YOU WANNA GET REELECTED, YOU LISTEN TO THE CONSTITUENTS . RIGHT. SO I MEAN, I, I AGREE WITH YOU, BUT I, I GUESS I GET A LITTLE NERVOUS ABOUT PUTTING, LIKE, GETTING THAT SPECIFIC INTO THIS LIKE LEGAL LANGUAGE AND JUST BECAUSE WHAT IF SOMETHING WILD AND CRAZY HAPPENS AND, YOU KNOW, SEVEN O'CLOCK JUST BECOMES REALLY UNDOABLE OR UNREASONABLE. UM, OR IT FALLS ON SOME WEIRD HOLIDAY OUT OF THE BLUE, WHICH IS THANKSGIVING OR SOMETHING, WHICH HAPPENS. , I'VE HAD TO HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS MOVE MEETINGS, ESPECIALLY COUNCILS THAT HAVE THEIR MEETINGS ON MONDAYS. TUESDAYS USUALLY AREN'T THAT BIG OF A DEAL, BUT

[50:01] WHEN THEY HAVE THEIR MEETINGS ON MONDAYS OR UM, UH, THURSDAYS, UM, UM, HOLIDAYS FALL ON THOSE DAYS ON A ON OCCASION. AND SO IF YOU WERE, AND THOSE DATES CHANGE YEAR TO YEAR, JUST AS ANOTHER LITTLE THING TO THINK ABOUT AS YOU'RE DISCUSSING. I I DO LIKE THE IDEA, SORRY, OF HAVING A, A SET TIME THAT IT CANNOT BE BEFORE JUST BECAUSE THIS IS HOUSTON AND TRAFFIC, IT'S HARD TO MAKE THESE MEETINGS IF YOU SET THEM. IT'S HARD TO MAKE A SIX 30 MEETING FOR ME, BUT , BUT JUST WITH THE TRAFFIC OUT HERE, IT'S, IT'S IMPO. IF YOU WANT PEOPLE TO COME, YOU CAN'T MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO GET HERE WITHOUT TAKING THEIR OWN TIME OFF OF WORK TO GET HERE. SO I'M NOT SAYING IT NEEDS TO BE SET FOR A SPECIFIC DAY OF THE MONTH OR A SPECIFIC TIME, BUT I THINK IT SHOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, LIKE AFTER BUSINESS HOURS OR SOMETHING SO THAT WE KNOW IT'S NOT GOING TO START TOO EARLY AND, AND THEN IT CAN BE THERE. IS THAT FOR ALL MEETINGS OR THE REGULAR MEETING? I WOULD SAY ALL SPECIAL AND REGULAR. BUT IF YOU'RE DOING A WORKSHOP, IS THAT CONSIDERED A SPECIAL MEETING OR YES. WELL, IT, WELL IT DEPENDS. WELL, WORKSHOP ISN'T REALLY A TERM. UM, IT'S REALLY A SPECIAL MEETING JUST SO YOU'RE EITHER, YOU'RE EITHER, YOU'RE EITHER HOLDING A REGULAR MEETING OR A SPECIAL MEETING, MEETING MEETING. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU CALL IT UNDER THE LAW, IT'S, IT'S A MEETING YOU CAN CALL A WORKSHOP. SO THAT WOULD ELIMINATE, SO WE USED TO DO BUDGET WORKSHOPS THAT WE WOULD RETREAT FOR AN ENTIRE DAY OR TWO DAYS TO WORK ON BUDGETS. NOW I COULD, I COULD MAKE AN ACCEPTION FOR ENTIRE, SO IF YOU SAY BUDGET, YEAH, IT'S ALL MEETINGS. THEN NOW WE'VE ELIMINATED THOSE WORKSHOPS. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TRIED TO BE CONSCIOUS OF, AT LEAST WHEN I WAS SITTING, SITTING UP HERE AND HAVING TO SET THAT SCHEDULE WAS ALSO STAFF. UM, AND THEIR TIME, UM, BECAUSE THEIR, THEIR SALARY. AND SO WE WERE TRYING TO KEEP THE RE SO FOR A LONG TIME IT WAS SEVEN O'CLOCK REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING, UM, ON THE THIRD TUESDAY. AND THAT WAS, WITHOUT A DOUBT, THAT WAS WHEN WE WERE GONNA DO THE MAJORITY OF, THAT'S WHEN WE WERE GONNA DO CONSENT AGENDA. THAT'S WHEN WE WERE GONNA TALK ABOUT ANY HOT BUTTON ISSUE. IT WAS ANY OF THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. UM, BUT THOSE MEETINGS STARTED CREEPING TO 11, 12 O'CLOCK AT NIGHT. UM, SO THAT'S WHEN THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD TWO MEETINGS A MONTH INSTEAD OF ONE MEETING. SO WHAT WE DID IS WE STARTED DOING A FIVE 30 SPECIAL KIND OF WORKSHOP, BUT WE DIDN'T TAKE ANY ACTION OUTTA THAT WORKSHOP. WE SAVED THOSE TILL WE COULD HEAR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. AT SEVEN O'CLOCK, THE CHARTER LISTED SAW THAT WE WERE DOING THAT DECIDED, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE'RE GONNA REMOVE THE SEVEN O'CLOCK. AND SO WE JUST BUMPED IT TO FIVE 30 AFTER FEEDBACK, BUMPED IT BACK TO SIX. UM, BUT THEN EVEN THEN WE WERE STILL GOING LATE. SO THAT'S WHEN WE ADDED THE SECOND MEETING. UM, AND SOMETIMES WHEN YOU GET IN BUDGET SEED, WHEN YOU GET IN BUDGET SEASON, YOU COULD HAVE THREE OR FOUR MEETINGS A MONTH, UM, FOR THREE TO FOUR HOURS JUST TRYING TO KNOCK OUT BUDGET. AND SO THAT'S JUST A LITTLE HISTORY ON HOW WE GOT TO WELL, AND CURRENTLY ROSENBERG HAS THREE MEETINGS A MONTH. SUGAR LAND HAS THREE MEETINGS A MONTH. MISSOURI CITY HAS TWO FOR SURE. KATIE HAS TWO VERY REGULARLY. SO, AND RICHMOND, I'M TO GOD, TWO MEETINGS MAKES A WHOLE LOT, TWO MEETINGS A MONTH MAKES A WHOLE LOT MORE SENSE THAN A SIX HOUR MEETING WAS. YEAH. AND RICHMOND AND SUGARLAND BOTH DO DAYTIME KIND OF SPECIAL MEETINGS AND THEN TAKE ACTION WORKSHOP, THEY WORKSHOP 'EM AND THEN DO THE MEETING OF AN EVENING. SO THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE CLARIFICATION ON REGULAR MEETINGS VERSUS SPECIAL MEETINGS. THAT'S WHY I ASKED WHAT THE WORKSHOPS COUNT. 'CAUSE I DON'T THINK A ALL DAY BUDGET SHOULD START AT 7:00 PM BUT I DO THINK IF YOU HAVE ITEMS THAT YOU WANT THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO COMMENT ON, 'CAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BE TAKING ACTION ON THEM, THAT WE SHOULD MAKE IT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO COME AT EASE. SO I MEAN, IS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW NOT WORKING? I THINK IT'S WORKING VERY WELL. YEAH, I DO TOO. AND UH, YOU KNOW, IT SAYS THAT, UH, THE COUNCIL SHALL MEET ON A MONTHLY BASIS, REGULAR MEETING IN TIME AND PLACE TO TERM BY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. SO THAT GIVES 'EM SOME FLEXIBILITY TO CHANGE THAT. I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW IS WORKING FINE AND WHERE PEOPLE REALLY HAVE AN INTEREST, THEY COME AND 30 PEOPLE TALK ABOUT THE SAME OPEN ITEM MEETING. RIGHT. UM, SO TRYING TO PUT SPECIFIC TIMES IN HERE I THINK JUST LIMITS COUNSEL ON, ON WHAT THEY CAN DO. I THINK IT'S WORKING FINE. HONESTLY. I THINK IF A CITIZEN HAS A LOT OF INTEREST IN A CERTAIN SUBJECT, THEY'RE GOING TO BE HERE. IT'S NOT

[55:01] THAT THEY NEED, THEY'LL BE HERE EVERY WEEK AND WANT TO COME EVERY WEEK. IF THEY WANT TO MAKE CITIZENS' COMMENTS, IT'LL BE ON A CERTAIN AGENDA ITEM FOR THAT ONE DAY OR TWO DAY ONE MEETING OR TWO MEETINGS. THEY'RE, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AN ISSUE AT EVERY SINGLE MEETING. YEAH. I MEAN, I TEND TO AGREE WITH JOEL. I THINK, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER THING TO KEEP IN MIND IS THE DURABILITY OF THE CHARTER. RIGHT. AND ENABLING COUNCIL TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THEIR DUTIES IN A REASONABLE MANNER WHILE STILL BEING REASONABLE AND CONTEMPLATING THE PARTICIPATION OF CITIZENS. SO, UM, I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN. UH, YOU, THERE'S ADMITTEDLY A TRUST FACTOR THAT YOU HAVE TO EXPECT THAT THE COUNCIL IS GOING TO BE REASONABLE AND NOT SET IT AT, YOU KNOW, 11:00 AM ON A MONDAY. RIGHT. THAT THEY'RE GOING TO, FOR THOSE MATTERS THAT, UH, WHERE ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. DO IT AT A TIME WHEN THE MAJORITY OF PUBLIC CAN PARTICIPATE. NOT THAT IT WON'T REQUIRE EFFORT ON THE PART OF THE PUBLIC, BUT DO SO IN A MANNER THAT, UH, CONTEMPLATES THE DURABILITY AND GIVES SOME FLEXIBILITY, ESPECIALLY WITH REQUEST, YOU KNOW, WITH RESPECT TO STAFF TIME. RIGHT. AND, AND OTHER THINGS OF THAT NATURE. SO JUST, JUST MY THOUGHTS. I DO THINK EVEN IF WE DON'T TAKE ANY ACTION, WE COULD REMIND COUNCIL TO BE COGNIZANT OF THE PUBLIC'S TIME. SO IF MEETINGS ARE HELD EARLIER, ALLOW FOR PUBLIC, THEY CAN ALLOW FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS AT ANY POINT IN TIME. I THINK THEY ARE. AND AN AGENDA. SO COUNTS WE HAVE NOW FOR SURE. YEAH. YEAH. ANYTHING ELSE ON SECTION 3.09? UM, I HAVE A QUESTION ON C MM-HMM . CAN WE MAKE IT WHERE THERE IS A REQUIREMENT TO VOTE ? UM, YES. YOU CAN INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS, UM, ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS SHALL VOTE ON MA ALL MATTERS COMING BEFORE THEM UNLESS THEY HAVE AN ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST UNDER THE LAW AND HAVE FILED THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES AND, UH, AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. ALRIGHT. RIGHT, RIGHT. NOW SOMEONE DOESN'T HAVE A REASON TO BE OFFICIALLY RECUSED AND THEY ABSTAIN. THAT COUNTS AS A NO, IT COUNTS AS A NO, BUT IT DOES. THEY GET, IT DOES, IT DOESN'T COUNT AS A NO. LIKE IT'S NOT WRITTEN DOWN AS A NO, BUT SO HERE'S THE ISSUE. IS THAT IT? BUT OUR, BUT OUR CHARTER DOES EXPLICITLY, IT'S A NO VOTE IF YOU DON'T VOTE. OH, THAT DOES OUR CHARTER SAY? IT DOES. IT'S EXPLICIT. YEAH. IT TURNS INTO A NO. YES. SO PEOPLE CAN EVEN SO EVEN IF YOU'RE ABSENT, IT'S A NO VOTE YES. BY OUR CURRENT CHARTER. AND SO WHAT, WHAT CAN HAPPEN? IT HASN'T HAPPENED YET, SO, BUT IT CAN BECOME A GAME. OKAY. YEAH, NO, IT DOES. AND SO IT, IT COULD BE, IT DOES, I MEAN, I'VE GONE TO COUNCIL MEETINGS WHERE COUNCIL MEMBERS LIKE, UH, UM, HAVE SOMEONE CALL THEM IN THE MIDDLE OF THE COUNCIL MEETING AND THEY GET UP JUST BEFORE THE AGENDA ITEM THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO VOTE ON, AND THEY LEAVE AND THEN THEY , THEN THEY COME BACK. I MEAN, POLITICAL GAMES CAN BE PLAYED WITH ANYTHING AND YOU, IT'S, I MEAN, YOU CAN'T DRAFT AROUND THAT. RIGHT. PEOPLE ARE GONNA FIND THEIR THINGS. YEAH. SO THE EXPLICITLY PROVIDED THAT ANY ABT NATION NOT REQUIRED BY THE LAW SHALL BE COUNTED AS A VOTE AGAINST THE MATTER UNDER CONSIDERATION. SO HOW DOES THAT PLAY OUT IF THE COUNCIL MEMBER HAS AN ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST? AS LONG AS IT'S A CON, AS LONG AS IT'S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. DOES IT SAY THAT IN THERE? YES. YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO IT SAYS, PROVIDED THAT THE AFFIRMATION NOT REQUIRED BY LAW SHALL BE COUNTED BY AS A VOTE AGAINST THE, SO IT'S ALREADY COUNTED AS A NO VOTE. ALRIGHT. THAT'S INTERESTING COUNT. AND, AND, AND IT'S NOT JUST IF THEY ABSTAIN, IT'S ALSO IF THEY'RE NOT HERE, IF THEY'RE NOT PHYSICALLY PRESENT. SO SOMEBODY CAN MAKE A MOTION IF IT'S NOT AN EXCUSED ABSENCE. IF IT'S NOT AN EXCUSED ABSENCE. SO, SO NOW YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION THAT SCARES, THAT SCARES ME A LITTLE BIT. EXACT. AND, AND THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S NOT EXACTLY WHERE YOU WERE GOING WITH IT, BUT THAT'S THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THE CURRENT CHARGES. I DID NOT, I DON'T THINK I REALIZED THAT. UM, I KNOW, I, I ACTUALLY, I KNOW I DIDN'T KNOW THAT, THAT IT COUNTED AS A, AS A NO VOTE. I MEAN, I'VE READ YOUR CHARTER. I GUESS I JUST MISSED IT OR FORGOT IT. I'M 60 AFTER ALL. I GUESS I GOTTA READ THINGS MORE OFTEN. UM, BUT I, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT PLAYS OUT ON A VOTE BECAUSE IS IT A, ARE YOUR, 'CAUSE YOUR VOTES ARE PRESENT IN VOTING. RIGHT? SO IF THERE ARE FIVE PEOPLE HERE, I DON'T KNOW. I HAVE TO, YOU START WITH I HAVE TO, I HAVE TO THINK THROUGH IT. IT SOUNDS SCARY. YOU, SO THERE, THERE ARE MULTIPLE TIMES THAT I WALKED UP TO THE, THE DA AND I STARTED WITH TWO NO VOTES BEFORE WE EVER BECAUSE RIGHT. 'CAUSE OF ABSENCES. 'CAUSE OF ABSENCES. YEAH. ESPECIALLY A SPECIAL MEETING.

[1:00:01] ANY OF THAT KIND OF STUFF. YEAH. SO, AND YOU NEEDED FOUR AND YOU HAD TO HAVE FOUR TO PASS. YOU NEEDED FOUR TO PASS. THERE'S ONLY FIVE PEOPLE THERE. THERE'S ONLY FIVE PEOPLE THERE. SO TWO PEOPLE VOTE AGAINST AND YOU'RE DEAD ACTUALLY. AND THERE, THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHEN YOU ONLY HAD FOUR PEOPLE PRESENT. WOW. BECAUSE YOU GET A QUORUM. YEAH. BUT YOU START WITH THREE NO VOTES. IT'D BE A LOT SAFER TO JUST CHANGE THAT SO THAT YOU ARE OBLIGATED TO VOTE. UM, UM, UNLESS YOU HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND YOU HAVE FILED YOUR CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT, THEY'LL STILL PLAY THOSE POLITICAL GAMES. BUT, BUT AT LEAST THEY WON'T WIN BECAUSE THEY'LL MAYBE THEY WANT IT TO BE A NO VOTE. THEY JUST DON'T WANT IT TO BE ON THE RECORD. WELL, I THINK, YEAH, THAT'S, I GUESS THAT'S PART OF MY CONCERN IS THAT, AND, AND I THINK THAT'S WHY 'CAUSE IF THEY WANTED IT TO BE A YES VOTE, THEY WOULD VOTE. YEAH. YOU GET, YOU COULD POTENTIALLY GET TO CLAIM A STANCE THAT YOU DIDN'T ACTUALLY TAKE. NO. YEAH. I'LL LEAVE IT TO Y'ALL TO DISCUSS HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE. WELL, I THINK THAT'S WHY THIS LANGUAGE IS IN HERE. THE WAY IT IS IS IT'S LIKE, WELL IF, IF YOU THINK YOU'RE GONNA TRY TO GET AWAY WITHOUT STATING A POSITION, WE WILL HAVE A POSITION FOR YOU. RIGHT. AND THAT'S HOW IT WILL COUNT. BUT IT PUNISHES THOSE WHO HAVE A LEGITIMATE REASON. AND BECAUSE WHEN DO THEY HAVE TO GET PERMISSION AFTER THE VOTE IS TAKEN? HOW DO YOU CHANGE A VOTE AFTER IT'S BEEN TAKEN? SO THEY'RE NOT THERE, THEY DON'T GET PERMISSION FOR NOT BEING THERE BECAUSE THEY FOUND OUT THAT THEIR DAUGHTER'S IN THE HOSPITAL AND THEY'RE LIKE, I CAN'T BE AT THE MEETING TONIGHT. I'VE GOTTA BE AT THE HOSPITAL. WELL, AND THAT WAS ONE THING. IS THERE SOMETHING IN HERE, HOW IS THAT HANDLED? ABSENCES? BECAUSE THERE WAS ONE THING ON IT AFTER THE FACT I THOUGHT. RIGHT. BUT AFTER THE FACT, THE VOTE HAS ALREADY BEEN TAKEN. I THOUGHT SO. SO YEAH, YOU CAN'T CHANGE THE VOTE. YOU CAN'T CHANGE THE VOTE. FACT, IT DOESN'T MATTER. YEAH. IT'S STILL NO VOTE. SO YOU'RE, SO YEAH, YOU'RE PROTECTING AGAINST POLITICAL GAMESMANSHIP, BUT YOU'RE ALSO, IN MY MIND, JUST PUT IT OUT THERE FOR YOUR DISCUSSION, YOU'RE ACTUALLY PUNISHING THOSE WHO HAVE LEGITIMATE REASONS TO BE ABSENT AND THAT ARE IN FAVOR OF SOMETHING. WELL, I GUESS, I GUESS MY CONCERN BEING, AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE LANGUAGE IS ON ABSENCES IN HERE, BUT I ALWAYS THOUGHT IT WAS REALLY STRANGE THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD HAVE A HEART ATTACK AND BE IN THE HOSPITAL AND YOU WEREN'T EXCUSED, BUT YOU COULD BE EXCUSED IF YOU TOLD PEOPLE 30 DAYS AHEAD OF TIME THAT YOU WERE GONNA BE ON VACATION. THAT THAT DID NOT SEEM EXACTLY RIGHT TO ME, ISSUES YEARS AGO. THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHY YOU SHOULDN'T PUT THINGS IN YOUR CHARTER BASED ON A SINGLE ISSUE, BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS. I THINK MY, YEAH. AND MAYBE THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES. SO, I MEAN, YOU GUYS CAN SAY NO, BUT I THINK JUST MY CONCERN IS THAT IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT COMES BEFORE THE COUNCIL, AND THE COUNCIL HAS BASICALLY HAS NO LEGAL RIGHT OR LEGAL AUTHORITY TO SAY NO, THEY HAVE TO VOTE YES. THEN, AND SOMEONE ABSTAINS, THEN ALL THEN, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT VOTE YES. HAD TO VOTE YES. EVEN IF THEY DIDN'T WANT TO. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LIKE A MINISTERIAL TYPE THING. SO THE, I DON'T KNOW THAT LIKE PLATS THAT HAVE TO BE APPROVED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YEAH. AND THERE, SO LET ME LEMME SO IT IS, THERE ARE PLENTY OF CHARTERS THAT REQUIRE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO VOTE UNLESS THEY HAVE AN ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST UNDER THE LAW. THAT'S PER, THAT'S, I'VE PUT THAT LANGUAGE IN MULTIPLE CHARTERS. RIGHT. IN OTHER WORDS, WE DON'T WANT COUNCILMEN, WE KNOW POLITICAL GAMES CAN BE PLAYED, YOU CAN MISS A MEETING, WHATEVER. RIGHT? YEAH. BUT IF YOU'RE AT THE DIOCESE, UM, AND, AND I'VE HAD MAYORS LIKE, COUNCIL MEMBER LEAVE THE ROOM, TAKE THAT PHONE CALL, GO. ALL RIGHT, WELL, WE'RE JUST GONNA, UM, PUSH PAUSE ON THIS ONE AND WE'LL WAIT TILL WE HAVE A FULL COUNCIL HERE AND THEN WE'LL TAKE A VOTE ON THIS. RIGHT? SO IT TAKES PEOPLE TO BE PEOPLE. BUT HERE'S THE, HERE'S THE ISSUE WITH AN ABSTENTION. IF YOU HAVE AN ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST UNDER THE LAW, YOU FILE THE APPROPRIATE PAPERWORK AND YOU ABSTAIN FROM VOTING, YOU ARE NOT COUNTED TOWARDS THE QUORUM FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE VOTE. SO IT'S NOT A TECHNICAL NO VOTE BECAUSE YOU'RE, IT'S LIKE YOU'RE NOT EVEN THERE. IT CHANGES THE VOTE COUNT. RIGHT. BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE A ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST OF THE LAW, YOU ARE COUNTED TOWARDS THE QUORUM FOR PURPOSES OF THE VOTE. AND SO IT IS TECHNICALLY A NO VOTE. IT IS TECHNICALLY A NO VOTE. IF YOU'RE ON THE DAIS AND YOU ABSTAIN, IT IS TECHNICALLY A NO VOTE IF YOU DON'T HAVE AN ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN THE LAW. AND THAT'S WHERE THIS ISSUE OF ABSTAINING REALLY ARISES AS IF IT'S ACTUAL ABSTENTION UNDER THE LAW, OR IT'S JUST, I DON'T FEEL LIKE VOTING ON THIS HEART ISSUE. YEAH, I GUESS I WOULD. AND YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING YOU WANT 'EM TO VOTE ON THE HEART ISSUES. I WANT 'EM TO HAVE TO VOTE ON THE HEART ISSUES. MM-HMM . YEAH.

[1:05:01] SO RIGHT NOW, IF THEY ABSTAIN, THEIR VOTE IS NO ON THE HEART ISSUE. YEAH. YEAH. AND YOU KNOW, THAT'S MAYBE FINE IF YOU'RE PRESENT AND VOTING, BUT IF YOU'RE, AGAIN, IF YOU'RE NOT THERE FOR LEGIT REASONS, YOU'RE PUNISH. I MEAN, IN MY MIND, YOU'RE, YOU'RE PUNISHING THAT PERSON, BUT HMM. FEELS LIKE, HONESTLY, I DON'T EVEN KNOW. IT FEELS LIKE IN MY MIND I'M LIKE, I DON'T, IS THAT EVEN LEGAL? I MEAN, I, IT PROBABLY IS, BUT I'VE NEVER LOOKED AT IT. COULD THOSE NOT BE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES THOUGH, TO THAT IF SOMEONE ISN'T IN ATTENDANCE, LIKE, COULD WE TREAT THAT SEPARATE DIFFERENTLY THAN IF SOMEONE IS IN ATTENDANCE? BUT LIKE THAT ABSTENTION MEANS NO. YEAH. I MEAN, MOST OF THE TIME YOU'RE, YOU'RE QUORUM IS OF WHOEVER IS PRESENT, RIGHT? YEAH. SO YOU'VE GOTTA GET THE THREE VOTES OUT OF FOUR TO PASS. YOU'VE GOTTA GET, YOU KNOW, A THREE OUT OF FIVE OR A THREE OUT OF FIVE OR FOUR OUTTA SIX. SO THE, THE EASY EXAMPLE, THE EASY EXAMPLE IS IF, IF TWO PEOPLE ARE ABSENT, THEY'RE JUST, THEY'RE GONE FROM THE MEETING WHENEVER THEY'RE ON VACATION, WHENEVER, AND YOU HAVE FIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU HAVE FIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT, EXCUSE ME. AND SCENARIO NUMBER ONE. SO IT MEANS THAT OUTTA THIS FIVE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOUR PEOPLE VOTE IN FAVOR. CORRECT? RIGHT. SO SCENARIO NUMBER ONE, COUNCIL MEMBER A HAS NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST UNDER THE LAW. NONE. THEY JUST ABSTAIN. THE REMAINING FOUR PEOPLE HAVE TO VOTE IN FAVOR IN ORDER FOR THAT TO PASS. CORRECT. RIGHT. IF THEY HAVE AN ACTUAL ABSTENTION UNDER THE LAW AND THEY FILED THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST QUESTIONNAIRE AND THEY ABSTAIN FROM PARTICIPATING IN VOTE, THREE OF THE REMAINING FOUR ARE NECESSARY TO PASS THAT. THAT'S THE PRACTICAL EFFECT. I'M WONDERING IF SOME, IF YOU HAD A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT DIDN'T WANNA TAKE A HARD VOTE, IF THEY WOULD JUST, IF KNOW, AND HOPEFULLY THERE AREN'T MANY PEOPLE RUNNING FOR OFFICE THAT HAVE THAT MENTALITY, BUT YOU WONDER, WELL, IF, IF THEY FEEL PERFECTLY FINE JUST TO ABSTAIN SO AS TO NOT TAKE A POSITION, COULD THEY THEN ALSO STRETCH THAT TOO? WELL, I DON'T WANNA TAKE A VOTE ON THIS, SO I'LL JUST SKIP THE MEETING. AND THEN YOU STILL DON'T HAVE THEIR POSITION ON THAT ISSUE. I DON'T KNOW. YEAH. I GUESS YOU DON'T HAVE THEIR POSITION. BUT THEN THEY'RE ALSO JUST, THEY COULD SAY, WELL, I WASN'T AT THE MEETING SO I DIDN'T GET TO SAY, YOU KNOW, OR I, BUT, BUT THIS IS HOW I WOULD'VE VOTED. OR THAT TYPE OF A THING. BUT, UH, THEY'RE AT THE MEETING, SO YOU HA YOU'RE GETTING THEM ON RECORD. IT JUST, IT, I GUESS IT IS, IT SEEMS A STRANGE SITUATION THAT YOU COULD BE IN A POSITION WHERE YOU, LIKE YOU SAID, LIKE IN A PLOTTING DECISION. LIKE, YOU CAN'T SAY YOU CAN'T VOTE NO UNLESS YOU ABSTAIN. LIKE WHAT IF, WHAT IF THE WHOLE CITY COUNCIL JUST DECIDED TO ABSTAIN? UNLESS, UNLESS, UNLESS YOU'RE RECUSED FOR YEAH. LEGAL PURPOSES. BUT THIS IS, THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE, WHERE I GUESS I'M TALKING ABOUT WHERE THERE'S NO LEGAL REASON TO, THAT YOU NEED TO ABSTAIN. YEAH. I MEAN, YOU'RE, YOU ARE CORRECT. CITY COUNCIL COULD CHOOSE, BUT, BUT TO THAT POINT, CITY COUNCIL COULD CHOOSE NOT TO MOTION ON AN ITEM, AND THEREFORE IT NEVER MAKES IT TO A VOTED DICE. YEAH. SO THEY CAN, I MEAN, THERE ARE OTHER WAYS I THINK MY, OH, AND, AND, AND IF YOU CAN VOTE YEAH. THAT GOES THAT WAY, THEN YOU'VE GOT THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL WHERE, YOU KNOW, THEY STOOD ON THAT ISSUE ANYWAY. I MEAN, HONESTLY, WHEN I'M SITTING UP HERE, I, OR I GO, SO I GO TO, I GO TO FIVE COMMISSIONER COURTS EVERY WEEK IN TWO COUNCIL MEETINGS. RIGHT. I KNOW IF THEY DON'T TAKE A VOTE, THEY'RE ABSTAINING. THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE SAYING NO. RIGHT? YEAH. IT DOESN'T MATTER. THE PUBLIC KNOWS THAT THAT'S A NO VOTE. RIGHT. MY BIGGER CONCERN IS THE ABILITY OF COUNCIL, THE WAY OUR CHARTER IS WRITTEN, THAT MUST REQUIRE THE AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF A MAJORITY OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL. RIGHT. SO IT'S THE MANIPULATION THAT YOU CAN PULL OFF WHEN THERE ARE ABSENTEES WITH HOW YOU MAKE YOUR MOTION. SO YOU CAN MOVE IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE TWO WHO ARE ABSENTLY MOVE TO DENY INSTEAD OF MOVE TO APPROVE, MOVE TO APPROVE, YOU MOVE TO DENY YOU CAN, YOU CAN MANIPULATE THAT VOTE BASED ON A MOTION BECAUSE YOU'RE TAKING A VOTE ON THE FULL BODY OF COUNSEL. SO YOU DON'T HAVE, AND

[1:10:01] SO THE MAYOR NEVER WOULD EVEN BREAK A TIE. YEAH. YOU DON'T HAVE, EVEN IN THE EVENT OF A TRUE, THERE WAS A RECUSAL, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A, THERE WAS A LEGAL RECUSAL, TRUE LEGAL RECUSAL AL FOR THERE TO BE ANY KIND OF TIE BREAKER SCENARIO. NOT THAT IT, I MEAN, I'M FINE WITH THE MAYOR NEVER HAVING A VOTE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. BUT WHAT I, WHAT I DO STRUGGLE WITH IS YOU HAVE LEGITIMATE ABSENCES BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE TRAVELING FOR WORK BECAUSE FAMILY MEMBERS GET SICK. AND NOW YOU STACK THE, YOU MAKE THE MOST IN SUCH A WAY THAT THERE'S ONLY ONE OUTCOME. THAT'S WHAT I STRUGGLED WITH. I DON'T ALSO DON'T HAVE PRESIDENT VOTING. YOU, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MAJORITY OF COUNCIL NO MATTER WHAT. NO MATTER. SO IT IS, IT IS, THE VOTE STARTS WITH THE VOTE OF A MAJORITY OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL. YEAH. OKAY. SO YOU START WITH SEVEN VOTES, NOT PRESIDENT VOTING. IT'S, YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST YOU ALWAYS FOUR. YOU, YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOUR. CORRECT. BUT YOU CAN HAVE FOUR. IT'S JUST THAT VOTE HAS TO BE UNANIMOUS. 'CAUSE THE THREE, 'CAUSE YOU GOT THREE NO VOTES JUST GOING INTO, IF YOU ONLY, IF YOU ONLY HAVE FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU'VE GOT THREE NOS TO START. THE, THE OTHER THING IS INTERESTING, THE, THE LANGUAGE ABOUT, UH, UNLESS IT'S AN EXCUSED ABSENCE, I DON'T REMEMBER THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE EVER TOOK TALLIES. AND IF WE HAD TWO PEOPLE MISSING, WAS IT, WERE THEY EXCUSED OR NOT EXCUSED? I DON'T EVER REMEMBER HAVING THAT DISCUSSION. WELL, WE ALWAYS STARTED, WE, WE BASICALLY KNEW THAT WE WENT INTO EVERY VOTE, AT LEAST WHILE WE, WITH, WITH ANYBODY ABSENT AS AN AUTOMATIC NOTE, EXCUSED OR NOT. WE JUST, YEAH. BECAUSE EVEN IF SOMEONE, EVEN IF SOMEONE GOT AN EX AN EXCUSE 30 DAYS AHEAD OF TIME WHEN THEY WEREN'T THERE, THEIR VOTE STILL COUNTED AS A NO. MM-HMM . EXCUSE IT OR NOT. SO IT'S STILL A NO. SO IT'S REALLY AN ISSUE OF THE FULL, OF THE FULL COUNSEL. RIGHT. FOR MOST THINGS, IT'S A MAJORITY OF SEVEN, WHETHER THEY'RE HERE OR NOT. RIGHT. SO TWO ARE ABSENT, THOSE ARE NO. AND UNLESS IT'S REQUIRES A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE, WHICH SOME THINGS DO. RIGHT. SO IT'S REALLY NOT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PRESENT. IF YOU HAVE FIVE PEOPLE PRESENT THAT GET A MAJORITY OF THOSE FIVE, IT'S STILL THE MAJORITY OF THE SEVEN. RIGHT. AND WHAT, WHAT, WHAT HE'S SAYING IS USUALLY IT'S A PRESENT TO VOTE. YEAH. SO IF FIVE ARE HERE, FIVE IS NOW YOUR QUORUM NUMBER. AND SO YOU'RE GETTING THREE, YOU GOTTA GET THREE. GOTTA GET PASSED, GET THREE VOTES. YEAH. RIGHT. SO THAT'S, I LIKE THAT. YOU KNOW WHAT MEAN? THAT'S THE, THERE ARE, I THINK I MIGHT HAVE ABSTAINED ONE TIME, BUT I DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO WILL ABSTAIN BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO TAKE A POSITION ON THE VOTE. RIGHT. THEY DON'T WANT, THERE'S CONSTITUENTS TO HEAR THEM SAY YES OR NO. AND THEY'LL ABSTAIN. PRESIDENT V DOES THE COMMON. WE ALSO DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN. IT HAPPENED OCCASIONALLY, MAYBE, BUT NOT VERY OFTEN. IT'S HAPPENED IN THE LAST THREE MONTHS. MM-HMM . HOW DO YOU DIFFERENTIATE, OR HOW DOES THE COUNSEL DIFFERENTIATE IF THEY'RE ABSTAINING FOR AN ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST VERSUS YOU HAVE TO FILE THE PAPERWORK AHEAD OF TIME? HOW DO THEY NOTIFY THE PUBLIC? THEY USUALLY SAY IT DURING THE MEETING AND STEP DOWN OFF THE DAYS. THE ONES I'VE GONE TO, THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN. THAT'S WHY. YEAH. IF IT'S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO STATE IT. UM, AND I'LL, I'LL, AND EVEN WALK OFF, I MEAN, I, I, I, I WAS APPOINTED TO A YMC BOARD, YMCA BOARD AND WE HAD A-Y-M-C-A VOTE COME OUT LEGALLY. DID I HAVE TO, UH, I DON'T KNOW. BUT I DID. I RECUSED MYSELF. MS. K LED THE, THAT PORTION OF THE MEETING. I WALKED DOWN AND SAT DOWN. I WASN'T EVEN UP HERE. AND, AND I RECALL SEVERAL TIMES WHERE PEOPLE SAY, MAYOR, I AM NOT VOTING ON THIS. I HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AND THEY ANNOUNCE IT RIGHT THERE. THEY SHOULD BE DECLARING THAT THERE'S A CONFLICT. AND THAT CAN EVEN BE GUIDANCE THAT WE GIVE TO COUNCIL. THEY NEED TO DECLARE THE CONFLICT. WELL, THAT'S AN ARGUMENT BASED ON INFORMATION THEN THE QUORUM NUMBER CHANGED FOR THAT VOTE? NO, TO THIS POINT IT HAS NOT BECAUSE OF THIS LANGUAGE IN THE CHARTER. THE CHARTER LANGUAGE, THE CURRENT CHARTER, THE CURRENT CHARTER IS RIGHT NOW, EVEN IF THERE IS AN ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST, IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE QUORUM. IT'S STILL THE FULL, IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE WAY THE CHARTER IS WRITTEN BECAUSE THE CHARTER READS THE MAJORITY OF THE FULL SETTLED COUNCIL. OKAY. SO NO MATTER WHAT, YOU STILL GOTTA HAVE FOUR POSITIVE VOTES. FOUR VOTES, OKAY.

[1:15:01] FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES. ARE YOU, I GUESS THAT'S NOT HOW I READ IT. 'CAUSE IT SAID, ANY ABSTENTION NOT REQUIRED BY LAW SHALL BE COUNTED AS A VOTE AGAINST THE MATTER UNDER CONSIDERATION. SO IT'S NOT A NO VOTE. SO JUST 'CAUSE THEY GO SIT DOWN, IT DOESN'T MAKE IT A NO VOTE. OH, OKAY. BUT IT STILL REQUIRES FOUR TO PASS. OKAY. 'CAUSE THE QUORUM STATE SAME. 'CAUSE THE QUORUM DIDN'T CHANGE. RIGHT. I THINK THE QUORUM SHOULD CHANGE. WELL, IT, BUT IT, BUT OUR CURRENT, THE MAJORITY OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL. SO EVERY VOTE IS BASED ON SEVEN. NO, I'M SAYING, BUT WE SHOULD CHANGE THAT. OH, I I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S EXACTLY, HEY, WE'RE ON THE EXACT SAME PAGE. ALL THE SAME PAGE. THAT'S EXACTLY, I MEAN, IT'S CLEAR THAT THE, THE POLICY BEHIND HOW ALL THIS WORKS TOGETHER IS THAT THERE MUST ALWAYS BE AT LEAST FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT AGREE THAT SOMETHING SHOULD BE PASSED COR THE WAY IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN. YES. WELL, ON THE ONE, ON THE ONE HAND, THAT MEANS, OKAY, YOU'VE GOT SEVEN ELECTED REP REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE CITY. AND THE WAY THAT'S WRITTEN IT, IT BASICALLY SAYS YOU'RE, YOU'RE GETTING A WIDE ENOUGH NUMBER OF VOTES ON THE COUNCIL THAT HOPEFULLY THAT MEANS THAT YOU'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE REPRESENTING THEIR 10,000 OR HOWEVER MANY PEOPLE ARE IN THEIR DISTRICT, THAT YOU'VE GOT A MAJORITY OF THE VOTERS IN THE CITY WHO ALSO ARE LIKE, WHO ALSO ARE IN FAVOR OF THAT. WHEREAS IF YOU CHANGE THE QUORUM TO A SMALLER NUMBER, THEN POTENTIALLY YOU'VE GOT REPRESENTATIVES THAT ONLY REPRESENT LIKE 30% OF THE CITY OR 40% OF THE CITY, OR SOMETHING LESS THAN 50% OF THE CITY. YEAH. BUT IF THEY'RE NOT, I MEAN THAT'S, THAT'S THE OTHER THING. I SEE. BUT IF THEY'RE NOT PRESENT, THEY'RE, THEY'RE VOTING. NO, THEY KNOW. WELL, I'M, I'M SAYING IF YOU LET IT GO TO THREE OUT OF FIVE IS GOOD ENOUGH INSTEAD OF FOUR OUT OF SEVEN. HA HAS THIS BEEN, I MEAN, A PROBLEM, LIKE I'VE BEEN COMING TO YOUR MEETINGS FOR A LONG TIME THERE AND I DON'S KNOW THAT I'VE, THERE'S ONLY BEEN WHERE THERE'S BEEN MORE THAN ONE COUNCIL MEMBER. THERE, THERE'S BEEN A COUPLE OF TIMES WHERE IN ON INCONSEQUENTIAL VOTES, UM, WHERE IN, BECAUSE THEY WERE WORRIED ABOUT NUMBERS AND IT DIDN'T MATTER IN THE END, IT DIDN'T MATTER BECAUSE IT ALL WORKED OUT THE WAY IT SHOULD HAVE ANYWAY. THE, THE MOTION WOULD BE MADE IN THE OPPOSITE. OH. SO INSTEAD OF VOTING A MOTION TO DISAPPROVE, WE MOVED TO DISAPPROVE TO DENY MOST MOTION. WE MOVED TO DENY. WELL, THAT'S A POLITICAL DECISION. THAT'S WHAT THAT MOTION'S MADE FOR POLITICAL REASONS. CORRECT. BUT BECAUSE I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THOSE MOTIONS, BUT, BUT IT STARTS WITH THE, BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY THE TWO NO VOTES. RIGHT. OKAY. WELL, I'M JUST, I I, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS I ALWAYS SAY IS, IS THERE A PROBLEM WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE? AND SO THAT'S, I'M JUST BRINGING THAT BACK TO YOUR ATTENTION. AND I, I DON'T THINK IT'S AN INHERENT PROBLEM NECESSARILY, BUT I THINK IT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. I THINK THIS GOT DISCUSSED TO DEATH WITH THE VERY, VERY ORIGINAL CHARTER COMMISSION. AND THERE WERE STRONG FEELINGS THAT WE SHOULD HAVE FOUR VOTES. IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE SHOULD HAVE FOUR VOTES IN FAVOR TO MAKE SURE IT'S A GOOD REPRESENTATION OF A MAJORITY OF THE VOTERS OF THE CITY. I THINK THAT'S WHAT I RECALL. BUT THE, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION OF THIS IN THE VERY FIRST YEAH. YOU WERE THERE, MS. BANKS GOING, GOING BACK TO 2016 OR WHENEVER. WELL, I THINK BONNIE WANTED TO COMPEL YOU TO ACTUALLY VOTE, SO, I DUNNO. AND, AND THIS TRACK . YEAH. AND, AND THIS BASICALLY, IT SAYS, WELL, IF YOU DON'T VOTE, YOU'RE GONNA BE COUNTED AS A NO. I MEAN, SO IT'S LIKE IF YOU REFUSE TO TAKE A POSITION, THAT POSITION IS BEING ASSIGNED TO YOU. YEAH. I JUST, BUT, AND THERE COULD BE A SITUATION WHERE THAT'S A BENEFIT, NOT A NEGATIVE. AND I, AND I WILL SAY THIS, I DO REMEMBER AT LEAST ON ONE OCCASION, AND THIS WAS LIKE A MINISTERIAL THING. IT'S LIKE, YOU HAVE TO DO THIS. THIS IS, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T HAVE DISCRETION. YOU HAVE TO APPROVE THIS. AND WE DID OCCASIONALLY GET A COUNCIL MEMBER HERE, THERE ON VERY, VERY LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES. BUT THEY WOULD STILL VOTE NO. JUST BECAUSE ON PRINCIPLE THEY DIDN'T LIKE IT. YEAH. MM-HMM . SO I MEAN THAT, THAT STILL HAPPENED OCCASIONALLY, NOT OFTEN, BUT OCCASIONALLY. WE DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF NO ABSTENTIONS. UM, NO, WE REALLY DIDN'T. SO DO WE REALLY HAVE PEOPLE WHO WERE VERY OPINIONATED YEAH. , WHO DIDN'T MIND SHARING THEIR OPINIONS. DO WE REALLY HAVE THE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THAT IF YOU HAVE AN EXCUSED ABSENCE, THAT YOU'RE NOT, AND YOU'RE NOT THERE, THEN IT'S NOT AUTOMATICALLY A NO VOTE. NO. BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE,

[1:20:01] YOU HAVE SOMEONE SAID THAT EARLIER. NO. WELL, BECAUSE THE WAY IT READS, IT READS THAT IN ANY ABSTENTION NOT REQUIRED BY LAW SHALL BE COUNTED AS A VOTE AGAINST THE MATTER UNDER CONSIDERATION. RIGHT. SO, OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE OTHER THING, YOU KNOW, WE COULD GO ON FOR THE, I HAD A POINT I WANTED TO MAKE ON F BUT I DON'T THINK WE'LL EVER GET THERE TONIGHT. UM, I THINK THAT, UH, FOR ME, YOU KNOW, EVEN THE EXCUSED ABSENCES, I MEAN, I REALLY DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DO THOSE, UH, AS A COUNCIL. I DON'T, I I MEAN, 'CAUSE IF YOU DON'T MAKE THREE, IF YOU MISS THREE MEETINGS, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE BASICALLY OUT. SO I KNOW PEOPLE TRAVEL, MOST OF THE PEOPLE ARE ON COUNCIL, HAVE JOBS AND THAT SORT OF THING. BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE, THEY'RE GONE AND THEY HAVE EXCUSED ABSENCES, ONE THEN, NOT THEN, THEN ANOTHER, AND THEN ANOTHER AND THAT SORT OF THING. RIGHT. AND THEY'RE NOT THERE TO VOTE. SO, UM, THEY'RE NOT REALLY ABLE TO DO THEIR JOB. SO THAT, I MEAN, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT. YEAH. THAT'S, WE GET TO THREE 10. JUST ONE QUICK COMMENT, BUT I I GET YOUR DRIFT. YES, SIR. THIS IS A PRETTY ESOTERIC DISCUSSION. AND THE AVERAGE CITIZEN HAS NO IDEA ABOUT THIS AUTOMATIC NO VOTE OR ABOUT WHAT AN ABSTENTION MEANS. THEY THINK AN ABSTENTION MEANS SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS. AND SO IF WE, IF WE DID DECIDE TO CHANGE THIS, I THINK WE OUGHT TO CHANGE IT TO SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE. THAT'S WHAT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WOULD INTERPRET IT AS. AND THAT'S, THAT'S THE FOURSOME TO VOTE. DON'T ALLOW SOMEBODY TO ABSTAIN IF THEY'RE PRESENT, UNLESS THEY HAVE, UH, THEY ACTUALLY VOICE OR IF, IF FILED, WHY THEY HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND THEY CAN ABSTAIN WITH A CONFLICT WITH A TRUE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. BUT THEY CAN'T JUST ABSTAIN BECAUSE THEY DON'T THINK THEY'LL, THEY DON'T WANNA TAKE A POSITION. WELL, I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE PRESENT TO VOTE COMES INTO PLAY, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT MOST PEOPLE EXPECT IS, WELL, THE OTHER DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ABSTAINING AS A REQUIREMENT UNDER THE LAW AND JUST ABSTAINING BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE VOTE, IS THAT IF YOU'RE JUST ABSTAINING BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO VOTE AND YOU DON'T HAVE AN ACTUAL CONFLICT, YOU CAN STILL PARTICIPATE IN THE VOTE AND TRY TO SWAY THE VOTE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. YOU JUST END UP NOT VOTING. IF YOU HAVE AN ACTUAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN THE LAW, YOU'RE NOT AUTHORIZED TO EVEN PARTICIPATE IN THE DEBATE AND THE DISCUSSION AND THE DIS THE DISCUSSION. SO YOU, YOU DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TRY TO VOICE YOUR OPINION TO SWAY THE VOTE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. SO THAT'S ALSO A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TRUE AN ABSTENTION WITHOUT UNDER THE, A REQUIREMENT OF THE LAW AND AN ABSTENTION WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF LAW. YES. I, I THINK I WOULD SAY TO JOEL'S POINT, IT, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS POINT, SO MAYBE IF WE COULD SEE A DRAFT OF SOME LANGUAGE THAT SAYS SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF BEING PRESENT TO VOTE, AND THEN WE CAN COME CIRCLE BACK ON THIS LATER AND HAPPY TO BRING BACK LANGUAGE THAT WITH A LITTLE MORE DIRECTION FROM THE BODY. , I'M HAPPY TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT BECAUSE RIGHT NOW I'M, I DON'T KNOW, I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WANT BASIS OF A GROUP. I, I THINK THE WAY WE'VE BEEN DOING IT IS OKAY, I MEAN, IF YOU'RE NOT HERE, IT'S A NO VOTE. IF YOU ABSTAIN, IT'S AN NO VOTE. A, A VOTE AGAINST. RIGHT. RIGHT. AND WE'VE BEEN DOING THAT. UH, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'VE GOTTA HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY OF THE SEVEN, THEN YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S FIVE NOT FOUR. RIGHT. SO, AND I THINK, I THINK IT WORKS OKAY. I MEAN, I, I I DON'T APPRECIATE PEOPLE ABSTAINING, UM, BECAUSE THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO PUT A POSITION OUT THERE AND IT'S A POLITICAL MOVE. BUT IF THEY WANT TO DO THAT, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT. WELL, THE COUNCIL COULD ADOPT. UH, SO THE VERY NEXT RULE COUNCIL SHALL ADOPT RULES AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING ALL MEETINGS. RIGHT. THEY COULD, THEY COULD PUT THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD PUT THAT INTO A POLICY. SHOULD THEY, SHOULD THEY CHOOSE? I BELIEVE, UM, I'M OKAY THE WAY IT'S, AND I, AND I'M GONNA SAY I, I'M OKAY WITH IT. I JUST WANT EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND SOMETIMES THE, THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE WAY, IT'S THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT'S WRITTEN AND TO THE, I THINK A COUPLE PEOPLE HAVE SAID, I MEAN, IT, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN. SO NO, IN TERMS OF IS WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE. IT'S NOT A, NOT A COMMON PROBLEM. NO. AND, AND FROM THAT SAME STANDPOINT, THEN TRYING TO GET VOTERS TO APPROVE, MAKING A CHANGE ON SOMETHING THAT IS, ONCE AGAIN, SOMETHING THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND, THEY'RE GONNA PROBABLY VOTE AGAINST IT IF THEY VOTE AT ALL. IF THEY VOTE AT ALL, IF THEY GO TO THE POLLS. RIGHT. NO, I, I UNDERSTAND. BUT YEAH, WE, WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL THAT WE'RE THAT'S A GOOD POINT. IF WE'RE CHANGING SOMETHING THAT THEY DON'T, THAT'S NOT GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD, THEN IT MAY NOT BE OBVIOUS WHY WE'RE DOING IT. THAT'S A GOOD POINT. ALSO,

[1:25:04] I HAD A COMMENT ON B. YES. SO WHEN THE THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS OR THE, YOU KNOW, CALL MAKE A CALL A SPECIAL MEETING, DOES THAT HAVE TO BE IN WRITING OR EMAIL? OR HOW, HOW WAS THAT DONE? I DON'T PROCEED. I DON'T KNOW. IT ONLY TOOK ONE FOR ME TO CALL A MEETING. SO, UM, THE, I THINK THAT, I THINK THE RULES WE PLAYED BY IS YOU NOTIFIED THE EITHER THE MAYOR OR THE CITY MANAGER OKAY. IN WRITING. AND IT HAPPENED EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE. OKAY. UM, I MEAN, I, THAT TWO OR THREE WOULD, IT MAY NOT BE AN ISSUE. YEAH. UM, OKAY. I, I DON'T KNOW OF A TIME WHEN A MEETING WASN'T CALLED, BUT MM-HMM . IT MAY HAVE HAPPENED. OKAY. I, AND THEN THE SAME THING KIND OF DOWN ON E IF YOU KNOW, YOU, THE CITY MANAGER PLACES AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA. IF THE COUNCIL, IF REQUESTED TO DO SO DURING THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, OR THE MAYOR BY THE MAYOR OR THE CONCURRENCE OF TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS, IS THAT ONCE AGAIN A WRITTEN KIND OF THING, HOW THAT'S DONE ? YEAH, THAT'S WHERE, THAT'S REALLY WHAT I WAS GOING. I DON'T THINK WE EVER HAD A REQUEST FOR SPECIAL MEETINGS. 'CAUSE WE HAD MEETINGS ALL THE TIME. BUT, UM, THE AGENDA ITEMS, UM, EITHER WRITTEN TO THE MAYOR OR USUALLY THE CITY MANAGER WOULD GET THAT REQUEST. RIGHT. I THINK, OKAY. SO THAT'S A PROCEDURAL THING. SO WE DON'T NEED TO, WE TOOK UP PRACTICE, WE TOOK A COUNCIL, KNEW WE HAD PRACTICE, ALL YOU HAD TO DO IS ASK ME AND I'D PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. UNDERSTOOD. SO, AND I, AND I HAVE SEEN LIKE ONE OR TWO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WHERE SOMETHING COMES UP IN THE DISCUSSION AND THEY'LL MAKE SOMEONE ON THE DAY WILL MAKE A MOTION, CAN WE HAVE THIS ON THE NEXT AGENDA? RIGHT. PLEASE HAVE THIS ON THE NEXT AGENDA AND ANOTHER PERSON WILL SECOND IT. AND SO IT GETS ADDED TO A FUTURE MEETING AGENDA. RIGHT. I, I THINK I JUST SEE, YOU KNOW, IT, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT CONCURRENCE FROM TWO, IF IT WERE OUTSIDE OF A MEETING, TWO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WANTED TO DO SOMETHING, IT NEEDS TO BE IN WRITING OBVIOUSLY, BUT MAY MAYBE THAT WE DON'T NEED TO DOCUMENT THAT TASK. IT HAPPENS AUTOMATICALLY. IF IT'S AT THE DAY DAUS, WHICH IS THIS IS REFERRED TO OR YEAH, IF IT'S AT THE DAUS, BUT IF IT'S OUTSIDE OF THAT, OUTSIDE OF THAT, I WOULD SEND AN EMAIL TO THE CITY MANAGER. THE CITY MANAGER MANAGER. WHAT I AGREE. YEAH. AND SOMETIMES I WOULD TALK TO ONE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER, SO AT LEAST THERE WERE TWO OF US THAT I KNEW OF THAT WERE, WELL, OTHERWISE IT WOULDN'T, THERE WOULDN'T BE TWO. NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN IF YOU JUST SENT ONE BY YOURSELF. WELL, AND THIS SAYS YOU NEED THREE, BUT I WAS ALWAYS TOO SCARED MEMBER. THAT'S FOR A SPECIAL MEETING MEMBER. THAT'S FOR A SPECIAL MEETING. THAT'S FOR A SPECIAL MEETING. BUT THAT'S SPECIAL MEETING. THIS IS ON AGENDA ITEMS. IT JUST TAKES TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS. YEAH. OKAY. ALRIGHT. MAYBE IT'S NOT A PROBLEM. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE ON SECTION 3.09? I HAD A COMMENT ON, ON F, BUT IT'S NOT THAT BIG A DEAL. I THINK THAT, UH, I HAD A CITIZEN AS ASK ME ABOUT THIS. SO THE LAST SENTENCE ON F IF THE MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEMPUR ARE BOTH ABSENT, ANY COUNCIL MEMBER MAY BE APPOINTED TO PRESIDE AT THE MEETING. AND THEIR QUESTION WAS, HOW DOES THAT HAPPEN? AND BY WHOM? WHEN IT'S HAPPENED? I'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN AT AN EDC MEETING, AND IT WAS JUST A MOTION FROM WHOEVER WAS THERE TO LET SO AND SO RUN THE MEETING AND ANOTHER PERSON SECONDED IT. SO I GUESS HE COULD JUST TAKE A MOTION FROM THE REMAINING MEMBERS THAT ARE ON THE DEUS. THAT'S FINE. AGAIN, IT'S NOT CLEAR, YOU KNOW, AND YOU'RE RIGHT. I, I DON'T RECALL IT EVER HAPPENING EITHER, SO. YEAH. AND THAT'S THE, I MEAN, THAT'S HOW IT WOULD PLAY OUT PRACTICALLY. I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY TO BE IN YOUR CHARTER. NO. YEAH. I HAVE SEEN IT AT AN EDC MEETING THOUGH, WHERE THERE WERE ABSENCES. I, I'M VERY GOOD WITH ON, ON D. UM, I'M VERY GOOD WITH THE WAY IT READS. HOWEVER, I'VE OBSERVED, UM, THAT MOST BODIES, UM, LIMIT DISCUSSION TO AGENDA ITEMS. AND SO I'M JUST ASKING THE QUESTION, IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONSIDER? I'M FINE WITH THE WAY IT IS. I HONESTLY, WE HAVEN'T HAD TRAIN WRECKS LIKE I'VE SEEN IN OTHER PLACES. BUT YEAH, I HONESTLY PREFER FOR IT NOT TO BE ONLY AGENDA ITEMS, BECAUSE OCCASIONALLY WE HAVE PEOPLE FROM VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS THAT JUST COME UP AND WANNA LET EVERYBODY KNOW ABOUT SOME EVENT THEY'RE HANDLING OR SOMETHING THAT THEIR ORGANIZATION ACCOMPLISHED. WELL, YOU CAN ALSO HANDLE THAT WITH PROCLAMATIONS OR ANNOUNCEMENTS. YEAH. BUT IT'S, I MEAN, YOU HAVE, I MEAN, PROCLAMATIONS, YOU HAVE TO PLAN AHEAD OF TIME AND

[1:30:01] GET THE LANGUAGE AND BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. VERSUS SOMEONE JUST SAYING, WE'RE DOING SUCH AND SUCH, PLEASE COME. YOU KNOW, AND I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO ANNOUNCEMENTS. BUT, AND THAT'S, I MEAN, IT'S NOT A PROBLEM WE'VE NECESSARILY SEEN, SO IT MAY NOT BE WORTH SOLVING. I'M JUST WATCHING THE POLITICAL CLIMATE. OKAY. AND IF SOMETHING BAD DID HAPPEN, I GUESS THEY COULD CHANGE IT AND THEIR RULES OF PROCEDURE OR WHATEVER CURRENTLY I LIKE IT. WHERE IT'S COULD THEY CHANGE THAT IN THEIR, BY ADOPTION OF POLICY, SUBJECT TO LIMITATION, MAYBE OPPOSED, YEAH, I GUESS SO. YEAH. OKAY. LET'S MOVE ON TO SECTION THREE POINT 10 VACANCIES. , WE MIGHT GET INTO SEC ARTICLE FOUR BEFORE THE NIGHT'S OVER, IF WE'RE LUCKY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ON SECTION THREE POINT 10 VACANCIES? DO YOU WANNA EDUCATE US AND MAKE SURE WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GETTING OURSELVES INTO AGAIN? OR IS EVERYBODY STRAIGHT WITH OUR PROPOSAL TO GO TO THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS? BECAUSE SOME OF THIS LANGUAGE MAY BE ON VACANCIES CHANGES JUST BECAUSE OF THAT. YEAH. IT, IT, IT, IT WILL, I WILL COME BACK WITH LANGUAGE AND THEN YOU CAN REVISE AS YOU FEEL NECESSARY. BUT THE LANGUAGE I USUALLY BRING BACK WILL SAY SOMETHING, UM, TO THE EFFECT OF VACANCY SHALL BE FILLED BY SPECIAL ELECTION. UNLESS THERE ARE LESS THAN, UM, UNLESS THERE IS LESS THAN ONE YEAR REMAINING ON THE TERM. AND IF THERE IS LESS THAN ONE YEAR REMAINING ON THE TERM, CITY COUNCIL SHALL HAVE THE, UM, PREROGATIVE TO EITHER, UM, FILL, FILL THE VACANCY BY APPOINTMENT TO, UM, UM, HOLD A SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL THE VACANCY OR TO LE OR TO HAVE IT FILLED AT THE NEXT REGULAR ELECTION. SO BASICALLY IT'S APPOINT SOMEBODY FOR THE LAST, IF THERE'S LESS THAN A YEAR LEFT, APPOINT SOMEBODY, LEAVE IT VACANT UNTIL THE NEXT REGULAR ELECTION, OR HOW TO HOLD A SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL THE VACANCY. YEAH. SO IT GIVES, JUST GIVES THEM THE BROAD OPTIONS. YEAH. 'CAUSE THERE'S ONLY A YEAR LEFT. SO I ALMOST WANNA MAKE A MOTION HERE ON THIS ONE, BUT I, I WON'T UNLESS THE DISCUSSION CONTINUES FOR A LONG TIME. BUT WHATEVER LANGUAGE, I THINK YOU, SO LOOKING AT THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THREE YEAR TERMS, THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS AND THAT SORT OF THING, AND HOW IT WOULD CHANGE VACANCIES AND THE REQUIREMENT TO, UH, HAVE AN ELECTION, BUT COME BACK WITH LANGUAGE FOR US ON THE VACANCIES, BUT MAKE SURE IT'S NOT PERMISSIVE. I MEAN, THEY MAY, WHEN YOU USE THE WORD MAY, IT MEANS YOU DON'T HAVE TO. RIGHT. SO I THINK MAY IS MAY FILL THE VACANCY BY APPOINTMENT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO. I'M HAPPY TO, IF YOU WANT TO GIVE ME, WELL, I'LL, WHAT I'LL DO IS I'LL BRING BACK THE LANGUAGE AND Y'ALL CAN TWEAK IT HOWEVER YOU WANT. I BRING IT BACK SO THAT IT GIVES THEM A CHOICE. BECAUSE IF, BECAUSE IF IT DOES, YOU WON'T ALWAYS HAVE A VACANCY. RIGHT. WITH 12 MONTHS LEFT, YOU MIGHT HAVE A VACANCY, UM, WITH ONLY THREE MONTHS LEFT. WELL, YOU'RE NOT, DO YOU REALLY WANNA APPOINT SOMEBODY TO A FILL A THREE MONTHS VACANCY? MAYBE YOU WANNA LEAVE IT VACANT AND ALLOW IT TO BE FILLED AT THE REGULAR ELECTION. I THINK SO. I THINK YOU HAVE TO GIVE SOME FLEXIBILITY. AND THERE'S ALSO SOME HOLDOVER PROVISIONS. I THINK THE PROCESS WE'VE COME UP WITH THAT THE CITY'S BEEN FOLLOWING TAKES LONGER THAN THREE MONTHS. IT DOES. SO, YEAH. I MEAN, IT'S LIKE YOU DECLARE IT, YOU TAKE APPLICATIONS, YOU LOOK AT THIS, YOU DO THAT, YOU, I MEAN OUR, OUR PROCESS. BUT THAT'S ALSO IS MORE THAN THREE MONTHS. BUT THAT'S ALSO NOT A REQUIREMENT OF THE CHARTER. THAT IS A PROCESS THAT'S POLICY. HAS ELECTED POLICY THEY'RE USING RIGHT NOW HAS ELECTED TO, TO FOLLOW TWO YEARS. UM, WELL, I THINK, I THINK THE LANGUAGE, THE POINT I WAS GONNA MAKE, I THINK THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE GONNA COME BACK WITH IS GONNA BE MORE SPECIFIC. RIGHT. AND THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. SO NO, I DON'T TRY TO GUESS THE SCENARIOS. I, AND Y'ALL CAN, I'M, I'M HAPPY TO DRAFT IT. HOWEVER, I, I'M GONNA BRING BACK LANGUAGE WHERE, WHICH IS THE NORMAL LANGUAGE THAT I RECOMMEND, AND THAT IS THE NORMAL LANGUAGE THAT PEOPLE ADOPT. THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S RIGHT FOR THE CITY OF FULCHER. Y'ALL CAN REVISE IT HOWEVER YOU WANT. IF YOU WANT TO BREAK IT DOWN. I THINK I'VE DONE IT ONCE WHERE IT WAS BROKE WHERE THEY ASKED THAT I BREAK IT DOWN. LIKE IF THERE'S LESS THAN FOUR MONTHS REMAINING ON THE TERM, THEN X IF THERE'S LESS THAN SIX MONTHS REMAINING, THEN Y AND IF THERE'S LESS THAN 12 MONTHS, THEN THEY HAVE TO DO THIS. AND SO WE CAN DO IT THAT WAY. BUT I'D PREFER TO BRING THAT LANGUAGE RATHER THAN DEBATE IT TONIGHT. I'D PREFER TO BRING THE LANGUAGE SO YOU CAN SEE IT, AND THEN YOU CAN HAVE A FULL DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. AND WE CAN, I'LL TWEAK IT. HOW DID THE HOLDOVER PROVISIONS AFFECT

[1:35:01] THESE VACANCIES AS WELL AS THAT FULL VOTE OF COUNSEL? SURE. GREAT. GREAT QUESTION. SO MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, WHEN A VACANCY IS CREATED, THAT PERSON HOLDS OVER IN THEIR OFFICE UNTIL THEY'RE, UNTIL THEY'RE, UM, IT'S FILLED UNTIL IT'S FILLED. UM, WHICH MEANS THAT IF A VACANCIES, A VACANCY IS CREATED AND THEY'RE STILL OTHERWISE, AND THEY ARE STILL A HOLDOVER OF THE CONSTITUTION, THEN IF THEY'RE, IF THEY'RE COMPLYING WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS, WHICH SOME PEOPLE DON'T, THEY WILL CONTINUE TO COME TO THE MEETINGS, THEN THEY WILL CONTINUE TO PARTICIPATE UNTIL THE OFFICE IS FILLED. OF COURSE, IF THEY'RE DEAD, THEY'RE NOT COMING. RIGHT. OR IF THEY'RE IN THE HOSPITAL AND THEY'VE RESIGNED FOR THOSE REASONS, THEY'RE NOT COMING. SO THERE'S ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT VARIABLES OUT THERE, BUT I THINK THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. OKAY. FOR THE ABSENCES THAT ARE EXCUSED, IS IT STILL THREE CONSECUTIVE EXCUSED ABSENCES AND THEN THEIR POSITION IS VACANT? IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE SUGGESTING? OR RIGHT NOW IS IT THEY CAN HAVE UNLIMITED EXCUSED ABSENCES? I THINK IT'S JUST CONSECUTIVE ABSENCES. AND THEN WHAT WE ALWAYS DID, IF SOMEONE KNEW THEY WERE ON A BUSINESS TRIP AND THEY WEREN'T GOING TO BE THERE, THEN AT THE COUNCIL MEETING THEY COULD ASK TO BE EXCUSED. SO THEN THAT NEXT MEETING, THAT DIDN'T COUNT AS A, AS A MISSED MEETING. AND REMEMBER, THESE ARE THE REGULAR MEETINGS AND THERE'S ONLY 12 REGULAR MEETINGS A YEAR. I WAS JUST ASKING FOR CLARIFY. YEAH. SO THAT'S WHERE WE GET WHERE IT GETS STICKY IS PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO GET EXCUSED FOR SPECIAL MEETINGS. SO THEY MIGHT MISS FOUR MEETINGS IN A ROW. BUT TECHNICALLY I'VE ONLY MISSED ONE MEETING. CAN YOU PUT IN A REQUIREMENT OF OVERALL, LIKE PERCENTAGE OF ATTENDANCE? 'CAUSE SOMEONE COULD MISS EVERY OTHER MEETING AND BE MISS 50%? YEAH, SURE. I MEAN, YES. I MEAN, WE CAN DO IT. IT'S DIFFICULT BECAUSE PERCENTAGE OF WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE MEETINGS HELD, I GUESS IF YOU LIVE, IF YOU MISS 50% OF THE MEETINGS HELD, BUT THEN WHAT IF YOU, YOUR TWO MEETINGS INTO THE YEAR, YOU, YOU MAKE THE, YOU MISS THE FIRST MEETING AND YOU, YOU'RE ALREADY, YOU'VE ALREADY 50% OF THE FIRST TWO MEETINGS. SO I, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN DO, I, I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DO IT. I GUESS YOU COULD SAY DURING, DURING ANY CONSECUTIVE 12 MONTH PERIOD, IF YOU'VE MISSED 50% OF THE MEETINGS, I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY WAY IT WOULD REALLY WORK. THAT'S A PRETTY BAD TRACK RECORD. IF YOU'VE MISSED HALF THE MEETINGS DURING 12 MONTHS ON COUNCIL, THAT'S PRETTY BAD. AND AGAIN, I MEAN, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A ACTUAL PROBLEM THAT WE'RE ENCOUNTERING THAT LIKE A PROBLEM TO SOLVE. BUT I DO JUST THINK THAT THERE'S, SOMEONE CAN NOT BE PRESENT QUITE A BIT, BUT MANAGE TO BE CONSECUTIVE PRETTY OFTEN. AND, YOU KNOW, AND WE WANT OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THE EXPECTATION IS THAT THEY WON'T GET ELECTED THE NEXT TERM. YEAH. BUT WE'RE GIVING THREE YEAR TERM, WE'RE GIVING THEM A THREE YEAR TERM . THAT'S FAIR. I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT. HONESTLY, IF A, IF A COUNCIL MEMBER MISSES, I DON'T KNOW. DO YOU WANT 50%, 40%? I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PERCENTAGE WOULD BE. SO, SO THAT, YOU KNOW, MY GUESS I WASN'T AROUND. I WAS AROUND, BUT I'VE FORGOTTEN. BUT IT, THIS IS PROBABLY IN HERE BECAUSE THIS IS THE WAY IT WORKED WHEN YOU WERE A GENERAL LAW TEPE CITY. LIKE THIS IS THIS LANGUAGE, RIGHT. IS RIGHT OUT OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. MM-HMM . THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WITH TEXAS GENERAL LAW CITIES. IF YOU MISS THREE, THREE MEETINGS, THREE, THREE CONSECUTIVE MEETINGS WITHOUT AN EXCUSED ABSENCE, YOU VACATE YOUR SEAT. I'VE BEEN REPRESENTING TEXAS GENERAL LAW CITIES FOR 20 YEARS. I'VE NEVER HAD A COUNCIL MEMBER VACATE A SEAT BECAUSE THEY MISSED THREE CONSECUTIVE MEETINGS. NEVER. NOT ONCE. I HAVE, I HAVE SEEN MEMBERS MISS THREE CONSECUTIVE MEETING. AND THAT'S BECAUSE MEETING THEY NEVER MISSED THREE CONSECUTIVE MEETINGS. YEAH. THEY, THEY ALWAYS SHOW UP. I'M NOT SAYING IT DOESN'T HAPPEN. YEAH. BUT I'M, I'M SAYING IN 20 YEARS I'VE NEVER SEEN IT IN A TEXAS GENERAL LAW CITY. AND THAT'S THE LAW. I'VE SEEN IT WITH BOARD MEETINGS, BOARD MEMBERS OCCASIONALLY, BUT NOT COUNCIL HERE IN SHORE. ANYWAY, ANYWAY. YEAH, YOUR, YOUR OBSERVATION IS CORRECT. CITIES USUALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH APPOINTED BOARD MEMBERS MAKING THEIR MEETINGS. 'CAUSE FOR WHATEVER REASON, THEY DON'T TAKE IT AS IMPORTANTLY. BUT COUNCIL MEMBERS, THEY, THEY, THEY TEND TO TAKE IT PRETTY SERIOUSLY.

[1:40:01] THAT'S MY EXPERIENCE ANYWAY. I THINK IT'S GOOD THE WAY IT, I THINK IT'S GOOD THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, BECAUSE THE INTENTION IS IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE THAT GETS ELECTED AND THEN THEY DECIDE THEY REALLY DON'T HAVE TIME AND THEY'RE NOT REALLY THAT INTERESTED, AND IF THEY MISS THREE MEETINGS, THEN YOU VACATE THE SEAT AND THEN COUNSEL CAN MAKE A DECISION ON HOW TO MOVE FORWARD VERSUS JUST SAYING, YOU HAVE NO ACTION. RIGHT. IF THEY'RE NO LONGER INTERESTED, THEY'RE NOT SHOWING UP. AT LEAST HERE YOU HAVE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS, OKAY, THREE CONSECUTIVE MEETINGS VACATE THE SPOT, WE'LL FILL THE SPOT. MM-HMM . I DO FEEL THOUGH, THAT IF, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU ENCOUNTER THAT CIRCUMSTANCE, SO LET'S TAKE THAT SCENARIO, WHAT YOU MIGHT ENCOUNTER IS SOMEONE WHO JUST DOESN'T PRIORITIZE THE MEETINGS. SO ARE THEY LIKELY TO SKIP THREE IN A ROW? PROBABLY NOT. LIKE THAT'S QUITE, THAT'S A LONG TIME TO, TO NOT MAKE IT. BUT YOU MIGHT FIND THAT, YEAH. EVERY OTHER MONTH OR YOU KNOW, EVERY TWO OR THREE MONTHS, THEY JUST DIDN'T BOTHER TO PLAN THEIR FAMILY VACATION AROUND THE MEETING. AND BECAUSE IT WASN'T A PRIORITY TO THEM, IF, I MEAN, YOU'D HOPE IT WOULDN'T COME TO THAT SORT OF A SITUATION. I THINK, I MEAN, AND THIS MIGHT BE UNCOMFORTABLE TOO, BUT IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE THAT AFTER THEY GET INTO THE OFFICE, THEY HAVE SOME KIND OF MEDICAL ISSUE THAT BECOMES VERY DISTRACTING SOMETIMES. WE DON'T ALWAYS WANNA BE HONEST WITH OURSELVES ABOUT HOW MUCH THAT'S DISTRACTED US AND HOW MUCH IT'S TAKEN US AWAY. SO SORT OF TAKING IT A LITTLE BIT OUT OF THAT PERSON'S DECISION, IF THAT PERSON SORT OF WANTS TO HANG ON TO THEIR CITY COUNCIL SPOT, BUT THEY CAN'T TRULY PUT IN THE TIME, GIVEN THERE'S, THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY POWER OR AUTHORITY HERE FOR OTHER MEMBERS OF COUNCIL TO RECOMMEND THAT SOMEONE STEP DOWN OR, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT PUTTING IN THAT EFFORT. UNLIKE SOME MEMBERS OF CONGRESS THAT WE COULD REFER TO MM-HMM . I MEAN, DITTO, BUT . YEAH. SO PART OF THE STRUGGLE YOU GET INTO IS , YOU HOPE THAT EVERYBODY WHO TAKES AN ELECTED SEAT WILL FILL THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THAT. UNFORTUNATELY, NOT EVERYBODY WHO DOES DOES. UM, AND THERE'S AN INHERENT RISK, UM, WITH THAT. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN LEGISLATE THAT OUT AS MUCH AS WE WANT TO BECAUSE, WELL, HER BONNIE IS SUGGESTING IF THEY MISS X PERCENTAGE, SOME NUMBER, SOME UNKNOWN AT THIS POINT, PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL MEETINGS HELD OVER THE COURSE OF, LET'S SAY A YEAR. YEAH. 12 MONTHS. YEAH. IT'S LIKE, HAS, HAS THIS BEEN A, A PRIORITY FOR YOU AT LEAST 60% OF THE TIME, OR 67% OF THE TIME, OR, I MEAN, 50 IS LIKE BARE MINIMUM , THAT'S A FAILING GRADE, IN MY OPINION. YEAH. WELL, I THINK BECAUSE I GUESS, AND I JUST THINK IN, AND IT WOULD TAKE 12 MONTHS OF EXPERIENCE BEFORE YOU COULD ACT ON IT. BUT YEAH, YOU'D HAVE TO TAKE 12 MONTHS AT YEAH. YOU'D HAVE TO BE THERE FOR 12 MONTHS BEFORE YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO TRULY JUDGE ON. BUT I, THAT'S THE SITUATION, UH, LIKE A MEDICAL SITUATION COULD BE REALLY DIFFICULT. YOU CAN'T RECALL ON THAT. WHO'S GONNA BE THE PERSON WHO RUNS AGAINST SOMEONE WHO'S GOING THROUGH A DIFFICULT MEDICAL TIME. RIGHT. LIKE, NOBODY WANTS TO BE THAT PERSON, BUT, YOU KNOW, BUT IT JUST, I MEAN, AND YOU WOULD HOPE THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD BE ABLE TO POTENTIALLY COUNSEL THAT PERSON AND TAKE THEM ASIDE AND SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU COULD STEP ASIDE OR SOMETHING, BUT JUST IT . YEAH. I MEAN, I GUESS IT PLAYS OUT IF SOMEBODY'S GONNA, IF SOMEBODY'S GONNA BE INSIST ON HOLDING ONTO THEIR SEAT YEAH. FOR SOME SORT OF POWER OR GLORY OR SOMETHING THAT IS BEYOND MY . YEAH. UH, BUT I MEAN, I GET, I GET WHERE YOU'RE GOING. I, I DO. AND I'M OKAY IF Y'ALL WANNA SAY 75% OF ALL MEETINGS. I, OKAY. I, I WOULD JUST SUGGEST JUST THINKING ABOUT THIS. SO THIS IS OUR SECOND MEETING. UH, WE'RE NOW THREE AND A HALF HOURS. SEE TWO NOW THREE AND, UH, HOURS AND 15 MINUTES. AND WE'RE NOT THROUGH, UH, THE, THE . THE REST OF 'EM START MOVING PRETTY QUICK. SHOULD, WELL, I THINK, I THINK SO, RIGHT? BUT A LOT OF THIS STUFF IS REALLY, THE THINGS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE SORT OF SUBJECTIVE. IT'S, IT, IT'S NOT REALLY THINGS THAT AREN'T WORKING WITH OUR CHARTER. YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST LOOKING

[1:45:01] AT, YOU KNOW, OKAY, COULD IT BE THIS OR COULD IT BE THAT? BUT I THINK AS LONG AS IF THERE'S SOMETHING SPECIFIC THAT'S NOT WORKING, THAT WE THINK IS NOT WORKING, I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING OUR TIME. DO WE WANNA DO A SHOW OF HANDS AND SEE IF THERE'S ENOUGH, UH, MOMENTUM ON THIS TO TELL CHARLIE TO BRING LANGUAGE BACK, OR IF IT'S ENOUGH PEOPLE NOT PERSUADED TO THE POINT THAT IT'S WORTH THE EFFORT OF DOING THAT. SHOW OF HANDS IS SOMEBODY, DOES ANYBODY, HOW MANY PEOPLE WANT TO SEE SOMETHING LIKE THEY GET THROWN OFF OF, THEY GET DECLARED VACANT. LET'S, LET'S USE, WE'RE KICKING THEM OUT. LET'S USE, LET'S USE SOME, UM, POLITICALLY CORRECT LANGUAGE HERE. MEMBERS GET, UH, DECLARED VACANT. IF THEY MISS MORE THAN 25% OF MEETINGS IN A 12 MONTH CON CONSECUTIVE 12 MONTH PERIOD. SHOW OF HANDS. DO ENOUGH PEOPLE LIKE THAT IDEA THAT WE SHOULD TELL CHARLIE TO DRAFT THAT LANGUAGE. OKAY, WE'LL JUST LET IT DROP. IT'S A, IT'S A GOOD IDEA. BUT I THINK IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT IT JUST DOESN'T REALLY COME UP IN REAL LIFE. IF WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, I'D BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONCERNED ABOUT IT. I AGREE. LET'S GO ON TO ARTICLE FOUR. CITY ADMINISTRATION, CITY MANAGER, QUALIFICATIONS, APPOINTMENT AND COMPENSATION. AND I WILL SAY THIS 4 0 1 POINT A WAS, UH, DISCUSSED TO DEATH FIVE YEARS AGO. SO I'M HAPPY TO LEAVE A THE WAY IT IS BECAUSE THAT WAS A PAIN PAINFULLY LONG DISCUSSION FIVE YEARS AGO THAT WAS, WENT THROUGH EVERY PERMUTATION POSSIBLE FIVE YEARS AGO. I AGREE. YAY. WE WENT THROUGH, WE WENT THROUGH FOUR, WE WENT THROUGH SECTION, WE WENT THROUGH 4 0 1 IN LESS THAN TWO MINUTES. SECTION 4.02, CITY MANAGER POWERS AND DUTIES, WHO HAS ANYTHING THAT THEY WANNA BRING UP UNDER SECTION 4.02. I WILL COME UP WITH ONE. UM, AND, AND I WILL SAY I WAS PERSONALLY FRUSTRATED BY THIS, UM, WHEN I WAS SERVING ON COUNCIL, I THOUGHT THAT THE CITY MANAGER AT THE TIME WAS JUST PAINFULLY UH, AVERSE TO PROVIDING INFORMATION TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO I KIND OF LIKE TO SEE ON HERE, AND I'VE SEEN IT IN OTHER CHARTERS, THAT THEY SHOULD MAKE REGULAR REPORTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITY. OKAY. THAT'S ANOTHER ONE THAT WE HAD A LONG CONVERSATION ON THE LAST TIME, FIVE YEARS AGO. YEAH. AND DECIDED, NO, THEY DIDN'T NEED TO DO THAT. YES. I DON'T REMEMBER YET. THAT'S WHAT WE PUT IN HERE. I JUST REMEMBER THE LONG CONVERSATION , YOUR HONOR, I, IT, IT LOOKS LIKE AS I READ THROUGH IT, IT MAY, I DON'T KNOW. I WASN'T, I WASN'T HERE FOR THAT DISCUSSION, BUT THERE IS SECTION 14 THAT SAYS PERFORM SUCH OTHER DUTIES AS ARE SPECIFIED IN THIS CHARTER OR MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE CITY, WHICH IN MY MIND MEANS IF CITY COUNCIL WANTS REGULAR, QUARTERLY OR WEEKLY UPDATES ON SOMETHING, THEY CAN DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER . AND THAT THAT IS WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE NEW NUMBER SEVEN IS EVEN MORE SPECIFIC. I THINK NUMBER SEVEN COVERS THAT. YEAH. MAKE SUCH REPORTS AS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY REQUIRE CONCERNING OPERATIONS. IF COUNCIL EVEN BETTER, IF COUNCIL REQUIRES SOMETHING, CITY MANAGER HAS TO DO IT, PERIOD. THE JURY DIDN'T COMPLY, THEN YOU FIRE THE CITY MANAGER. THAT'S HAPPENED THREE SIGNATURES AGO. GETTING, GETTING, GETTING SURPRISED BY A $2 MILLION BUDGET AMENDMENT IN JULY, TWO OR THREE MONTHS WHERE YOU HAVE TO APPROVE THE NEW BUDGET. THAT WAS, THOSE WERE BAD SURPRISES. THIS IS JUST A QUESTION, NOT A SUGGESTION, BUT FOR THREE WHERE IT SAYS, ATTEND ALL MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, UH, DOES THE CITY MANAGER HAVE PERMISSIONS TO APPOINT LIKE THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER TO ATTEND IF HE'S ON VACATION?

[1:50:01] OR DOES HE ACTUALLY, THERE'S AN HAVE TO BE AT ALL OF THEM. THERE'S AN ACTING CITY MANAGER IN 4 0 3. OKAY. SO IT'S AT ATTEND ALL MEETINGS OR AS APPOINTED SOMEBODY ELSE WHO'S APPOINTED TO ATTEND IN HIS PRESENCE. YEAH. THERE WERE PROVISIONS THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE FOLLOWED IN ORDER FOR SOMEBODY ELSE TO BE ACTED, YOU KNOW? UH, SO TECHNIC I'M HOPING TECHNICALLY THEY WERE ABLE TO LEAVE, IS WHY I'M ASKING. YES. IF THEY WERE ON VACATION, THEY APPOINTED AN ACTING CITY MANAGER FOR THE TIMEOUT, WHICH THAT'S KIND OF 4.03, WHICH CORRECT. WHICH, MY COMMENT THERE WAS WE HAVE AN ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, SO SHOULDN'T THAT AUTOMATICALLY BECOME THE ACTING? SO AT THE TIME OF THIS, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE, BUT WE HAVE THAT NOW. CORRECT. WE DID. SO RATHER THAN WE COULD UPDATE THAT TO SAY ITS CITY MANAGER SHALL ACT AS THE ACTING CITY MANAGER IF THE CITY MANAGER'S NOT AVAILABLE. THE, THE ONLY CONTINGENCY I WOULD PUT FORTH ON THAT IS THERE ARE OCCASIONALLY MOMENTS WHERE BOTH THE CITY MANAGER AND THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER MIGHT HAVE TO TRAVEL FOR A CONFERENCE OR A TRAINING MAN. SOME, EVEN SOME MANDATORY THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED THAT WOULD PUT BOTH ABSENT THEN MAYBE CASE WHEN YOU SAY THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER OR APPOINTEE OR, I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT IS, I THINK IT'S ALREADY MANAGER OR YOU DON'T HAVE AN, I THINK THERE'S ALREADY A UNDERSTANDING THAT IF THERE'S AN ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, THEY'RE ACTING WHEN THEY'RE GONE. AND HISTORICALLY THAT WAS THE CASE. EVEN WHEN WE DID HAVE A CITY MANAGER ACTING, THE ACTING WOULD GO TO THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. 'CAUSE WE'VE HAD DIFFERENT ASSISTANT MANAGERS AT DIFFERENT TIMES. UM, BUT THEN THERE WERE ALSO THE PROVISION, 'CAUSE THERE WERE TIMES WHEN THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER RESIGNED. AND SO THIS ALLOWED TO APPOINT CHIEF AS THE ACTING CITY MANAGER OR TO APPOINT THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AS THE ACTING CITY MANAGER. AND THAT I THINK THUS THE LANGUAGE. SO I THINK IT'S GIVEN IF THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER IS HERE, THAT THEY ARE SERVING THAT RESPONSIBILITY. RIGHT. BUT, BUT THE CURRENT LANGUAGE WOULD JUST, DOESN'T ALLOW FOR FLEXIBILITY. DOESN'T SAY IT ALLOWS THE FLEXIBILITY FOR IT TO BE SOMEBODY ELSE. YEAH. WOULD THAT BE A CORRECT INTERPRETATION? ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. GO BACK TO THAT WHERE YOU SAID THAT WHEN A CITY MANAGER OR SOMEONE WHERE THE, UH, ACTING CHIEF CAN BECOME, WHAT'D YOU SAY? SO THERE, SO, SO IF, IF YOU ALL REMEMBER WE PREVIOUSLY, UM, THAT WE, WE HAVE HAD SITUATIONS WHERE THE CHIEF OF POLICE ACTED TEMPORARILY. HE ACTED ACTUALLY AS THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER. AND THEN, BUT THERE WERE ALSO A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS WHEN WE WERE ABSENT A CITY MANAGER, WHETHER HE WAS ON VACATION OR WHATEVER. AND, UM, BECAUSE OF THE PREVIOUS CHIEF'S EXPERIENCE, HE WOULD BE APPOINTED AS THE ACTING CITY MANAGER. BUT IT WAS FOR A DAY OR TWO DAYS OR A WEEK OF VACATION. IT'S NOT AN, IT'S NOT AN INDEFINITE APPOINTMENT. IT'S FOR A SPECIFIC TIME. AND THEY WOULD ALSO, OR THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO NOTIFY MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF, OF WHO WAS ACTING AS CITY MANAGER WHEN THEY ARE ABSENT. WOW. I THINK BEFORE WE GOT THE CHARTER, ISN'T IT? YEAH. MM-HMM . SO WE KNEW WHO TO GO TO IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY AND THE EVENT OF WHAT'S, I MEAN, CITY OPERATIONS, YOU GOTTA KNOW WHO TO GO TO. I DON'T RECALL EVER GETTING AN EMAIL LIKE THAT. SOUNDS LIKE, AS I SAID, IT WAS POST UPDATED. YEAH. YOU, I GUESS WE ARE ON TO SECTION 4.0. WELL WE'VE KIND OF DISCUSSED 4.03, SO GO ON TO 4.04 I GUESS. RIGHT. CITY ATTORNEY. THIS IS SHORT AND SWEET. THERE'S ONLY LIKE TWO SENTENCES IN THIS WHOLE THING AND IT DOESN'T GIVE DUTIES OR ANYTHING ELSE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. IT JUST SAYS THIS IS WHAT IT TAKES TO HIRE, THIS IS WHAT IT TAKES TO FIRE. NO CHANGES. NO MUNICIPAL JUDGE. THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL APPOINT MUNICIPAL JUDGE OR JUDGE IS IF NEEDED. UM, I KNOW. I DON'T SEE HOW TO CHANGE THAT SENTENCE. , I GUESS MY QUESTION THERE WAS LIKE, THERE'S FOUR OF 'EM. UH, OR THAT ARE, I GUESS IT SAYS THE CITY MANAGER AND THIS ONE'S CITY COUNCIL, BUT JUST THE OTHER ONES REFERENCE

[1:55:02] DIRECTION, SUPERVISION OF APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL AND SECTION 4 0 5 JUST AS APPOINTMENTS. SO CAN WE NOT REMOVE A JUDGE? OH, THERE YOU GO. THERE'S A GOOD QUESTION. STATE STATUTE, UM, SPELLS OUT REMOVAL OF, OF, UM, JUDGES, MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES, AND STATE STATUTE ALSO COVERS QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE MUNICIPAL JUDGE. UM, YES. UM, IF DE YES, DEPENDING UPON YOUR, WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE A COURT OF RECORD OR YOU'RE NOT A COURT OF RECORD. OKAY. IF YOU'RE A COURT OF RECORD, YOU HAVE TO BE AN ATTORNEY. IF YOU'RE NOT A COURT OF RECORD, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE AN ATTORNEY. WHAT DETERMINES IF YOU'RE A COURT OF RECORD, IT'S A PROCESS THAT YOU GO THROUGH WITH THE STATE TO THAT. IF YOU HAVE TO MEET CERTAIN CRITERIA AND THEN YOU'RE A COURT OF RECORD. AND ARE WE A COURT OF RECORD OR NOT? I DO NOT KNOW. I'M, I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR PROSECUTION. I DO KNOW OUR CITY, OUR MUNICIPAL ATTORNEY. ARE YOU A COURT OF RECORD ATTORNEY? OKAY. WE THINK THAT WE'RE A COURT OF RECORD. OKAY. I WAS GONNA SAY, I BELIEVE WE ARE TOO. I WILL, I'LL BRING UP JUST A POINT OF CONVERSATION. SIX, SEVEN, AND EIGHT. UM, CITY MANAGER SHALL APPOINT REMOVE ALL OF THESE POSITIONS WITH THE APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL WHO SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE DIRECTION SUPERVISION OF THE CITY MANAGER. UM, IS THERE A, I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS RIGHT, WRONG, INDIFFERENT, I'M JUST ASKING A QUESTION. TO ME, IT PUTS COUNSEL IN A VERY, OR COULD PUT THE CITY MANAGER IN A VERY AWKWARD POSITION IF THEY REQUEST REMOVAL AND NO REMOVAL IS DONE AT THAT POINT. YOU'RE IN ESSENCE REMOVING, YOU'RE REMOVING ONE OF THEM. YOU'RE EITHER BECAUSE IT, IT'S PROBABLY NOT GONNA CONTINUE TO WORK. I AGREE. AND ESPECIALLY CITY SECRETARY AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. I MEAN, WE'VE, WE'VE HIRED A CITY MANAGER TO MANAGE, LET HIM MANAGE. I DON'T SEE WHY, AND I DON'T MIND HAVING THE GUARDRAILS. THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING. YEAH. I JUST, I I'M CURIOUS AS TO THE REAL LIFE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS, OF WHICH ONE OF ALL, CHIEF POLICE, CITY SECRETARY, AND THE FINANCIAL OFFICER. UM, IF I, I CAN GIVE YOU PROS AND CONS. I MEAN, I NOT, I DON'T LIKE PROS AND CONS 'CAUSE ONE PERSON'S PRO AND ANOTHER PERSON'S GONE. I THINK WHERE I'M, AND I DUNNO WHERE THE FEEDBACK IS COMING FROM. I THINK WHERE I'M GOING IS IF COUNCIL WANTS TO DO ONE THING AND THE CITY MANAGER IS RECOMMENDING SOMETHING ELSE, AND THESE CRITICAL POSITIONS, UM, YOU'RE ALMOST AT A, YOU'RE, YOU'RE AT AN IMPASSE. YOU'RE MAKING A DECISION. ONE, ONE OF THE TWO PARTIES IS GOING AWAY. THAT'S AN ACCURATE OR BOTH? THAT'S AN ACCURATE STATEMENT. YEAH. OR BOTH. THAT'S PROBABLY TRUE. MM-HMM . THE, UM, ANYTIME YOU TAKE THE POSITION OUT OF IT, WHOEVER IT HAPPENS TO BE RIGHT. TAKE, TAKE, TAKE THE POSITION OUT OF IT. ANYTIME YOU HAVE, ANYTIME YOU HAVE A, A REQUIREMENT THAT COUNSEL CONFIRM EITHER THE APPOINTMENT OR REMOVAL OF A PARTICULAR EMPLOYEE, THAT BECOMES A POLITICAL APPOINTMENT. RIGHT. UM, AND I'VE SEEN IT TIME AND TIME AGAIN WITH VARIETY OF DIFFERENT, WHETHER IT'S CITY SECRETARY, CHIEF OF POLICE, FIRE CHIEF. I'VE NEVER SEEN A FINANCE OFFICER BE SUBJECT TO THAT, BUT THOSE ARE USUALLY THE ONES THAT, THAT I, THAT I SEE. AND THE, THE, THE TREND IS GOING AWAY FROM THAT. IN OTHER WORDS, NOT HAVING THAT CONFIRMATION IN A COUNCIL MANAGER, COUNCIL MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT, AND I SEE IT TIME AND TIME AND AGAIN, THE, YES, THEY'RE UNDER THE DIRECTION AND CONTROL OF THE CITY MANAGER, BUT THEY, IF THEY START GETTING CROSSWISE, THE PERSON WHO IS CAN ONLY BE FIRED UNLESS THEY CAN BE, UNLESS IF THAT FIRING IS CONFIRMED BY COUNCIL, THEY'RE GOING TO CHURCH WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBERS. THEIR KIDS ARE GOING TO THE SAME SCHOOL AS THE COUNCIL MEMBERS. THEY BECOME VERY GOOD FRIENDS WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND THEN YOU HAVE THIS INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEM AND THE CITY MANAGER CAN'T GET RID OF 'EM BECAUSE THE CITY COUNCIL'S NOT GONNA FIRE THEIR FRIEND. AND IT'S A POL IT BECOMES A POLITICAL ISSUE AND A POLITICAL APPOINTMENT. THEY GET IN GOOD WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND YOU CAN'T EVER GET RID OF 'EM IF THEY'RE NOT PERFORMING THEIR JOB BECAUSE THE COUNCIL DOESN'T SEE WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS. THEY'RE JUST DOING A, HE SAID, SHE SAID, SHE SAID, SHE SAID, HE SAID, SEE, HE SAID THING. AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS IS, I GET PAID A LOT OF MONEY BECAUSE IT'S GOTTA COME TO CITY COUNCIL AND THEN OPEN CLOSED, NAVIGATING THE HR ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH, WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF THE GOVERNING BODY, HAVING TO CONFIRM, LIKE NAVIGATING ALL THAT IS NOT CHEAP. IT'S, IT'S

[2:00:01] NOT CHEAP TO NAVIGATE ALL THAT. SO THERE'S, THERE ARE ALL THOSE THINGS THAT'S ON THE, THIS IS A DIFFICULT SIDE. ON THE OTHER SIDE THAT I HEAR ALL THE TIME AS WELL. WE DON'T WANT OUR CITY MANAGER TO HAVE, UH, AUTHORITY AND CONTROL OVER THESE KEY POSITIONS. WE THINK THESE KEY POSITIONS SHOULD BE CONTROLLED BY, BY THE GOVERNING BODY. UM, SO WE WANNA PUT SOME GUARDRAILS. I THINK. I THOUGHT I HEARD THAT. I HEARD THAT. BUT IT, THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT IT BECOMES A POLITICAL APPOINTMENT AND THAT IT CREATES PROBLEMS INTERNALLY AND THAT EVENTUALLY SOMEBODY LEAVES OR YOU HAVE DIS SUCH DYSFUNCTION AT THAT LEVEL FOR WHATEVER THAT DEPARTMENT HAPPENS TO BE. THAT MORALE GOES DOWN, THAT THINGS DON'T GET ACCOMPLISHED THE WAY THEN THEY GETS ACCOMPLISHED. AND IT, AND IT JUST, YOU KNOW, SPINS UNTIL SOMEBODY, SOMEBODY LEAVES ONE OF THE TWO, WELL, ESPECIALLY THE CITY SECRETARY AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. THOSE JUST TO ME SEEMED LIKE A WASTE OF CITY COUNCIL TIME. . YEAH. I I WILL SAY IS, UH, SOMEONE WHO SERVED ON CITY COUNCIL, VERY RARELY WAS THERE ANYTHING LIKE, WHAT EXACTLY IS THE CITY SECRETARY DOING AND WHAT EXACTLY IS THE CFO DOING? AND, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THE, THE CHIEF OF POLICE WAS A LOT MORE INVISIBLE. I THINK THAT'S JUST DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE JOB. BUT AS FAR AS, UH, MARYELLA, AND I DON'T, I DON'T EVEN KNOW THE NAME OF THE CFO RIGHT NOW. I'VE, I'VE FORGOTTEN WHO IT WAS 'CAUSE IT'S NOT ERIN ANYMORE. I KNEW ERIN AFTER SEVERAL YEARS, BUT, UM, I KNEW HER NAME ANYWAY. BUT, UM, THE, THE CFO AND THE CITY SECRETARY, THOSE, THOSE DO SEEM TO BE VERY, VERY ADMINISTRATIVE. THE, AND MAYBE IT'S JUST BECAUSE OF THE WAY OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT OPERATES AND BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A, UM, COMMUNITY FOCUSED POLICING EFFORT THAT THERE IS JUST SO MUCH MORE VISIBILITY HERE IN SHORE WITH THE POLICE FORCE. SO I, I, I COULD, I COULD SEE DOING AWAY WITH 4.08 AND 4.09. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT 4 0 6. IS IT 4 0 7? OH SEVEN AND OH EIGHT NINE IS WORDS AND COMMISSIONS. OH YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I MEANT. SORRY. SEVEN AND EIGHT. YES SIR. DO WE HAVE ANY HISTORY OF HOW WE GOT IN HERE? WELL, I, I THINK REMEMBER, I MEAN, 2016 WE'RE, IT WAS GENERAL LAW, COUPLE HUNDRED PEOPLE STARTING AND THERE'S GENERAL LAW AND YOU'RE STARTING FROM ZERO. AND YOU COUNCIL AND MAYORS PROBABLY STILL WANTED TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF HOW DO WE DO THIS? RIGHT. AND I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT. I I'M JUST CFO. YEAH, YEAH. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT. AND I MEAN, I EVEN WONDERED IF IT SHOULDN'T BE, OKAY, THESE POSITIONS ARE HIRED, HIRED BY COUNSEL, BUT THEN NOW THAT WE'VE GOT SOMEBODY ELSE TO SUPERVISE, AND SO I'M NOT, I'M NOT ADVOCATING FOR THAT EITHER, BUT MAYBE ON THE POLICE SIDE IT'S A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT. IT'S, YOU KNOW, I, I JUST, I JUST SEE THIS POTENTIAL TENSION, NOT EVEN POTENTIAL, BUT IT WOULD BE REALLY HARD FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO WALK IN AND SAY, AND I WILL USE THE CITY SECRETARY BECAUSE I GOT TO WORK HAND IN HAND WITH THEM ON A DAY, ON A DAILY BASIS. IT WOULD BE REALLY HARD IF THE CITY MANAGER CAME IN AND SAID, I'M FIRING YOUR CITY SECRETARY. AND WHAT, AND YOU THOUGHT THAT PERSON HAD BEEN DOING AN OUTSTANDING TIME. I THOUGHT SHE'S BEEN DOING AN OUTSTANDING JOB. AND YOU'RE SAYING, I MEAN SHE DOESN'T ALL NO, SHE ALL, THEY ALWAYS DID A FANTASTIC JOB . SO, UM, BUT THEY ALWAYS DID A FANTASTIC JOB. BUT THAT, I MEAN, THAT, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THIS IS, IS I CAN, I CAN SEE HOW QUICKLY THIS COULD BECOME A POINT OF CONTENTION AND EVEN A MORALE PIECE FOR CITY STAFF. AND SO I, THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO BRING IT. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE GUARDRAILS. UM, BUT I, I KIND OF, I'M OKAY LEAVING IT. I'M OKAY WITH TAKING SEVEN AND EIGHT OUT. I'M OKAY WITH FLIPPING THE SCRIPT AND I'D LIKE TO TAKE SEVEN AND EIGHT OUT SIX. I STILL, I'M SHOW OF HANDS, I'LL AGREE WITH THAT. SEVEN AND EIGHT. I'M OKAY WITH SEVEN AND EIGHT. SEVEN AND EIGHT COMING OUT SIX. I LEAN ACTUALLY THE OTHER WAY OF YEAH. LIKE GIVING COUNSEL MORE. UM, BUT I DUNNO, I DON'T KNOW WHY THERE WOULD BE A DIFFERENCE. WELL, I, I, TO ME IT'S IT'S PROFILE COMMUNITY. IT'S PROFILE COMMUNITY VISIBILITY AND LIKE I SAID, EXTREMELY COMMUNITY FOCUSED. WELL, AND THE CHIEF OF POLICE IS OVERSEEING 40 EMPLOYEES RIGHT NOW. HUGE DEPARTMENT. YES. THE WHOLE DEPARTMENT.

[2:05:01] THE BIGGEST DEPARTMENT. YEAH. IT'S THE BIGGEST BUDGET. IT'S THE BIGGEST BY FAR THE MOST EMPLOYEES. IT'S THE PROBABLY THE HIGHEST RISK. YES. DOES CITY COUNCIL HAVE ANY OTHER, DO THEY MANAGE THE CHIEF OF POLICE IN ANY OTHER WAY OR NO, IT'S JUST IN, IF THEY HAVE NO OTHER OVERSIGHT OTHER THAN CONFIRMING THE CITY COUNCIL, HE HAS TO REPORT, UH, POSITION. HE HAS TO DO AN ANNUAL REPORT TO COUNCIL. BUT THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S A STATE REQUIREMENT HEALTH PROFILE, THAT'S A PROFILE REPORT. COUNSEL HAS NO OVERSIGHT ON ANY OF THE CITY EMPLOYEES. MINUS EXCEPT THE CITY MANAGER. OH. ALBEIT, LIKE IF SOMEONE HAD A HUGE COMPLAINT ABOUT SOMETHING, A COUNCIL MEMBER COULD TALK TO THE CITY MANAGER ABOUT IT. LIKE IF, IF SOMEBODY WAS JUST TOTALLY TWISTED OFF ABOUT PERMITTING OR PLATTING OR SOMETHING A POLICE OFFICER DID, DEFINITELY A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER CAN TALK TO THE CITY MANAGER ABOUT THAT. WELL THAT'S A, THAT'S A CONVERSATION NOT OVERSIGHT, RIGHT? THAT'S, YES. AND THAT HAPPENS. AND IT'S NOT A CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM FOR A MEETING. HOW DOES EVERYONE FEEL ABOUT THE CHIEF OF POLICE STAYING, STAYING OR GOING OR I LIKE STAYING. HE'S GOTTA AT LEAST STAY. SO STAY IN MY OPINION. I GUESS I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BECAUSE IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT WOULD BE POINTING TO POLITICAL OFFICE BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BECOME FRIENDLY WITH MARY ELLEN AND KATIE, THEN WOULDN'T YOU ALSO BECOME FRIENDLY WITH THE, THE CHIEF OF POLICE? AND IF THE CITY MANAGER FEELS LIKE HE'S NOT DOING A GOOD JOB, BUT HE'S BEST FRIENDS WITH YOU, WOULDN'T THAT BE THE SAME ISSUE WE JUST TALKED ABOUT? LIKE YEAH, TO ME I THINK IT IS. I DON'T, I DON'T SEE THAT YOU'RE JUST DIFFERENTIATING THE THREE POSITIONS BECAUSE THINK ONE IS MORE I OUT OR MORE VISIBLE OR MORE SOMETHING THAN THE OTHER TWO. SO THEN I WOULD KEEP ALL THREE OF THEM IN. YEP. . SO DON'T FORGET, I'M NOT ADVOCATING FOR OR AGAINST QUITE HONESTLY. BUT JUST DON'T FORGET THAT Y'ALL HAVE STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT IT, WHAT YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE. BUT REMEMBER THE QUESTION IS, IS THIS SOMETHING YOU SHOULD PUT BEFORE THE VOTERS FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION? CORRECT. THAT, I MEAN, IF YOU SAY NOW, WELL, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF IT, THEN YOU'RE TAKING THAT AWAY FROM THE VOTERS. SO, AND THAT'S OKAY, BUT LET'S MAKE DECISIONS ON THIS IS A GOOD POLICY OR THIS IS A BAD POLICY FOR THE CITY. UM, SHOULD THIS POLICY, IS THIS POLICY WORKING? OR SHOULD THE VOTERS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO CHOOSE A DIFFERENT POLICY? THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT AND TALKING ABOUT. YEAH, AND I THINK WHERE I WAS GOING HONESTLY WITH IT WAS MORE OF ALMOST A SEPARATION IN, IN AUTHORITY BETWEEN THE CITY MANAGER AND WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THIS BUILDING AND THE, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, UM, ALMOST MAYBE EVEN GOING, I DON'T KNOW IF I WANT TO GO THIS FAR, BUT I'VE CONSIDERED SHOULD THE POLICE CHIEF BE HIRED BY COUNCIL VERSUS BY THE CITY MANAGER? WELL, UM, IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN THAT WOULD MEAN A WHOLE DIFFERENT LANGUAGE, BUT I THINK CORRECT, AS IT STATES, AS IT IS STATED NOW AS 4 0 6, I THINK IT'S THE SAME AS 4.07 AND 4.08. AND I THINK THAT ALL THREE OF THEM SHOULD BE REMOVED BECAUSE THE CITY COUNCIL IS NOT, DOESN'T HAVE ANY OVERSIGHT. AND THE CITY MANAGER IS THE PERSON WHO'S GOING TO ACTUALLY BE DOING THE DAY-TO-DAY INTERACTIONS. THEY'RE THE ONE WHO ACTUALLY KNOWS THE PERFORMANCE OF THESE PEOPLE. SO TO, TO ME, TO ALLOW THEM TO DO THEIR JOB. AND IF WE HAVE FAITH IN THEM TO BE THE CITY MANAGER, WE, THEY WERE APPOINTED BY YOU GUYS, THE CITY MANAGERS OR THE CITY COUNCIL, LIKE THEN THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THEIR JOB. THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIRE THE CHIEF OF POLICE IF THEY THINK HE NEEDS TO BE FIRED. AND THE CITY SECRETARY AND THE CFO WITHOUT BRINGING IT BEFORE YOU GUYS, THE CITY COUNCIL. AND I'LL, I'LL GO THE OTHER DIRECTION AND SAY, I THINK IT'S AS IMPORTANT AS THE CITY ATTORNEY AND I'D PUT THE CHIEF OF POLICE UP THERE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY AS OPPOSED TO CITY SECRETARY AND CFO. MAYBE, UH, WE SLEEP ON THIS ONE AND IT OH, AND I WAS GOING TO SAY WE ARE PAST OUR, MAYBE WE SLEEP ON THIS ONE ADJOURNMENT. THAT'S WHY I LOOKED AT THE CLOCK. MAYBE WE SLEEP ON THIS ONE. WE, WE ARE, YES. WE ALMOST MADE IT THROUGH ALL OF FOUR. THIS IS, WE ARE VERY CLOSE. IF, IF IT PLEASES THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, UM, I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PLACE TO STOP FOR THE EVENING BECAUSE WE COULD

[2:10:01] PROBABLY GO ON AND AND CHEW ON THIS FOR ANOTHER GOOD HALF HOUR ANYWAY. NO, NO, NO, NO. ABSOLUTELY. WE, WE SAID THESE MEETINGS WERE GONNA LAST FROM SIX 30 TO EIGHT 30 AND WE ARE 10 MINUTES I THINK. DO YOU NEED A MOTION? 11 MINUTES PAST THAT NOW. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. , WE HAVE A MOTION BY GRACE AND A SECOND BY RAMONA TO ADJOURN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. UM, WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. SO I GUESS OUR NEXT MEETING IS THE FOURTH THURSDAY OF OCTOBER. SEND WHAT HAPPENING? OH, UM, FANTASTIC. WE'LL, JUST THE PARTY , THEY'RE GOING TO FEED US. FULL SURE IS HOSTING THIS ONE? YES. OKAY. IT'S THE HALLOWEEN PARTY. SO LOOK, WATCH, WATCH YOUR EMAIL FOR AN EMAIL FROM MARIELLA OR KATIE OR WHOEVER AND RESPOND WHEN SHE SAYS SHE NEEDS TO KNOW WHEN WE CAN HAVE THE NEXT MEETING. OKAY. AND THANK YOU ALL FOR ALL THE WONDERFUL DISCUSSION AND, UM, THE THOUGHT THAT PEOPLE ARE PUTTING INTO THIS. I APPRECIATE IT GREATLY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.