1
00:00:01,680 --> 00:00:04,400
Welcome to the special meeting of the

2
00:00:04,400 --> 00:00:06,560
Springdale Town Council. It's a work

3
00:00:06,560 --> 00:00:09,040
meeting. Today is Friday, April 3rd,

4
00:00:09,040 --> 00:00:11,360
2026, and we're at the Canyon Community

5
00:00:11,360 --> 00:00:13,920
Center in Springdale, Utah. From the

6
00:00:13,920 --> 00:00:17,440
town, we have April Radits, Robin

7
00:00:17,440 --> 00:00:21,199
Romero, Tom Danzy, and Kendall Sagers.

8
00:00:21,199 --> 00:00:23,519
And on the dis from council, we have

9
00:00:23,519 --> 00:00:26,400
Kylo Tapam, Randy Eton, me, Barbara

10
00:00:26,400 --> 00:00:29,519
Bruno, Jack Burns, and Pat Campbell. And

11
00:00:29,519 --> 00:00:36,320
I'll entertain a motion to approve the work meeting agenda.

12
00:00:36,320 --> 00:00:38,000
>> I move we approve the work meeting

13
00:00:38,000 --> 00:00:38,719
agenda.

14
00:00:38,719 --> 00:00:39,520
>> Second.

15
00:00:39,520 --> 00:00:41,360
>> Got a motion by Randy and a second by

16
00:00:41,360 --> 00:00:42,640
Pat.

17
00:00:42,640 --> 00:00:43,840
>> Are we starting with me?

18
00:00:43,840 --> 00:00:45,120
>> Yes. Start with you tonight.

19
00:00:45,120 --> 00:00:46,160
>> I Randy.

20
00:00:46,160 --> 00:00:47,120
>> Barbara.

21
00:00:47,120 --> 00:00:48,320
>> I hat I.

22
00:00:48,320 --> 00:00:51,120
>> Okay. And we have one item on the

23
00:00:51,120 --> 00:00:53,199
agenda. It's a review and possible

24
00:00:53,199 --> 00:00:55,760
direction to staff regarding the town

25
00:00:55,760 --> 00:00:58,160
council meeting procedures and protocols

26
00:00:58,160 --> 00:01:01,760
and the contact is Tom Denzy.

27
00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:05,199
Thank you, mayor. Um, as the council is

28
00:01:05,199 --> 00:01:08,560
aware, the state law requires um all

29
00:01:08,560 --> 00:01:11,520
public bodies to adopt rules of

30
00:01:11,520 --> 00:01:13,680
procedure for the operation of their

31
00:01:13,680 --> 00:01:15,600
meetings. The purpose of those rules of

32
00:01:15,600 --> 00:01:18,960
procedure are to um ensure compliance

33
00:01:18,960 --> 00:01:20,799
with the Utah Open and Public Meetings

34
00:01:20,799 --> 00:01:25,520
Act um and to establish general um

35
00:01:25,520 --> 00:01:27,200
policies for how meetings are operated

36
00:01:27,200 --> 00:01:29,920
such that meetings are efficient um

37
00:01:29,920 --> 00:01:37,920
effective, transparent, civil, um all those things. Um, pursuant to that

38
00:01:37,920 --> 00:01:40,720
direction in the state law, the town has

39
00:01:40,720 --> 00:01:43,840
adopted rules of procedure and codes of

40
00:01:43,840 --> 00:01:47,119
and a code of contact, code of conduct

41
00:01:47,119 --> 00:01:50,479
for public bodies. Originally, um, these

42
00:01:50,479 --> 00:01:52,960
were adopted in 2012.

43
00:01:52,960 --> 00:01:57,119
Um, and then subsequently in 2023,

44
00:01:57,119 --> 00:02:00,960
the rules of procedure for operation of

45
00:02:00,960 --> 00:02:03,840
public meetings um, was updated and

46
00:02:03,840 --> 00:02:05,280
revised.

47
00:02:05,280 --> 00:02:08,879
Um but that that 2023

48
00:02:08,879 --> 00:02:12,879
um revision only only impacted the rules

49
00:02:12,879 --> 00:02:15,440
of procedure for meetings, not the

50
00:02:15,440 --> 00:02:17,920
general rest of the code of contact code

51
00:02:17,920 --> 00:02:22,160
of conduct for public bodies.

52
00:02:22,160 --> 00:02:25,840
Um in the the recent public officials

53
00:02:25,840 --> 00:02:29,599
training heard earlier earlier this year

54
00:02:29,599 --> 00:02:31,200
um there was a lot of emphasis put on

55
00:02:31,200 --> 00:02:34,400
the fact that um public bodies need to

56
00:02:34,400 --> 00:02:37,360
have these these rules procedure for the

57
00:02:37,360 --> 00:02:39,440
governed public meetings. And in

58
00:02:39,440 --> 00:02:40,800
response to that, the council in a

59
00:02:40,800 --> 00:02:42,560
preview in a in a recent meeting asked

60
00:02:42,560 --> 00:02:44,720
some questions about our current uh code

61
00:02:44,720 --> 00:02:47,680
of conduct and rules of procedure and

62
00:02:47,680 --> 00:02:50,879
also expressed a desire to um look at

63
00:02:50,879 --> 00:02:53,120
what our current policies are. So that's

64
00:02:53,120 --> 00:02:56,560
the purpose of today's meeting um is to

65
00:02:56,560 --> 00:02:58,640
look at where what we have now and to

66
00:02:58,640 --> 00:03:00,560
discuss if there are if there is a need

67
00:03:00,560 --> 00:03:04,159
for revisions or updates or changes to

68
00:03:04,159 --> 00:03:06,959
our current policies um and if so what

69
00:03:06,959 --> 00:03:08,800
those changes could be.

70
00:03:08,800 --> 00:03:11,599
Um there today is a is a work meeting.

71
00:03:11,599 --> 00:03:13,920
So you won't be taking any final action

72
00:03:13,920 --> 00:03:15,599
today. You won't be adopting a new

73
00:03:15,599 --> 00:03:18,400
policy or resolution or new specific

74
00:03:18,400 --> 00:03:20,560
codes. Um this is a work meeting. So

75
00:03:20,560 --> 00:03:22,560
this is your opportunity as a council,

76
00:03:22,560 --> 00:03:24,640
as a group, talk to one another, discuss

77
00:03:24,640 --> 00:03:27,280
what you think um would be the best

78
00:03:27,280 --> 00:03:30,319
policy for the town. Um and then you're

79
00:03:30,319 --> 00:03:33,360
welcome to give staff direction on any

80
00:03:33,360 --> 00:03:35,200
changes or revisions that you would like

81
00:03:35,200 --> 00:03:37,599
to see and we can uh incorporate those.

82
00:03:37,599 --> 00:03:41,440
and then bring back a a a revised copy

83
00:03:41,440 --> 00:03:45,360
or revised policy for you to act on.

84
00:03:45,360 --> 00:03:47,040
Um so that's that's kind of the purpose

85
00:03:47,040 --> 00:03:49,680
of today's meeting is just a just a

86
00:03:49,680 --> 00:03:52,959
discussion on those on on those topics.

87
00:03:52,959 --> 00:03:55,440
Um, just by way of a little bit of of

88
00:03:55,440 --> 00:03:59,760
more introduction, the state law that

89
00:03:59,760 --> 00:04:02,959
governs or or that that requires us to

90
00:04:02,959 --> 00:04:05,120
have these rules of procedure, as I

91
00:04:05,120 --> 00:04:09,120
mentioned, is is pretty um

92
00:04:09,120 --> 00:04:11,360
pretty pretty

93
00:04:11,360 --> 00:04:13,840
generic.

94
00:04:13,840 --> 00:04:15,760
Generics may be the right word. It's not

95
00:04:15,760 --> 00:04:17,440
real detailed. It doesn't go into into

96
00:04:17,440 --> 00:04:19,359
strict detail on you must do this, you

97
00:04:19,359 --> 00:04:21,359
must do that, you must do that. Um so

98
00:04:21,359 --> 00:04:23,520
there's a lot of discretion up to you as

99
00:04:23,520 --> 00:04:26,080
a public as as a council to determine

100
00:04:26,080 --> 00:04:28,240
what you think the the appropriate um

101
00:04:28,240 --> 00:04:31,040
operation for public bodies should be.

102
00:04:31,040 --> 00:04:33,520
Again the the underlying factors are

103
00:04:33,520 --> 00:04:35,759
that you um want to ensure compliance

104
00:04:35,759 --> 00:04:37,680
with the open and public meetings act

105
00:04:37,680 --> 00:04:39,840
meaning that all of your decisions and

106
00:04:39,840 --> 00:04:42,960
deliberations are taken in public. Um

107
00:04:42,960 --> 00:04:44,880
you want to have an effective and

108
00:04:44,880 --> 00:04:47,040
efficient meeting process. Nobody wants

109
00:04:47,040 --> 00:04:49,759
to be here till midnight. Um, and you

110
00:04:49,759 --> 00:04:52,960
want to have policies or or rules that

111
00:04:52,960 --> 00:04:54,960
govern, you know, just civil discourse

112
00:04:54,960 --> 00:04:57,280
to make sure that you as a council and

113
00:04:57,280 --> 00:04:59,280
other public bodies in Springdale are

114
00:04:59,280 --> 00:05:02,880
able to accomplish their work um in a in

115
00:05:02,880 --> 00:05:05,840
a manner that is respectful and and

116
00:05:05,840 --> 00:05:08,479
civil. So, that's what the state says

117
00:05:08,479 --> 00:05:10,800
needs to be need to be in your rules of

118
00:05:10,800 --> 00:05:12,800
procedure. Other than that, you can you

119
00:05:12,800 --> 00:05:14,560
can make them as as detailed or as

120
00:05:14,560 --> 00:05:16,880
non-detailed as you want. And in fact,

121
00:05:16,880 --> 00:05:18,960
um, I included a document from the Utah

122
00:05:18,960 --> 00:05:20,479
League of Cities and Towns that has

123
00:05:20,479 --> 00:05:22,800
examples of three other communities. And

124
00:05:22,800 --> 00:05:24,960
they go from pretty pretty basic, pretty

125
00:05:24,960 --> 00:05:28,240
generic to like super detailed, super

126
00:05:28,240 --> 00:05:30,720
intense. Totally up to you how you want

127
00:05:30,720 --> 00:05:32,080
to handle that. If you want to get to

128
00:05:32,080 --> 00:05:34,240
that level of of detail, that's fine. We

129
00:05:34,240 --> 00:05:36,080
can do that. If you want to be more

130
00:05:36,080 --> 00:05:40,000
general, we can do that as well. Um, so

131
00:05:40,000 --> 00:05:42,000
that's a a big long introduction of of

132
00:05:42,000 --> 00:05:43,680
why we're here and and what the purpose

133
00:05:43,680 --> 00:05:46,080
of today's meeting is. And I um

134
00:05:46,080 --> 00:05:47,520
anticipate just the council having a

135
00:05:47,520 --> 00:05:49,360
discussion on these on these policies

136
00:05:49,360 --> 00:05:53,110
and giving staff direction.

137
00:05:53,120 --> 00:05:55,120
» Any questions for Tom before we get

138
00:05:55,120 --> 00:05:56,240
started?

139
00:05:56,240 --> 00:05:59,039
>> Uh I I do, Mayor. Uh Tom, as I

140
00:05:59,039 --> 00:06:00,800
understand it, this breaks it down into

141
00:06:00,800 --> 00:06:02,400
how we conduct ourselves in a meeting

142
00:06:02,400 --> 00:06:07,440
such as this and uh civil interactions

143
00:06:07,440 --> 00:06:10,240
between staff and officials and the

144
00:06:10,240 --> 00:06:13,440
public. So is that is everything I read

145
00:06:13,440 --> 00:06:16,720
here all there is in the in the handbook

146
00:06:16,720 --> 00:06:18,639
about how we treat each other, how we

147
00:06:18,639 --> 00:06:20,319
deal with each other. That it

148
00:06:20,319 --> 00:06:22,400
>> in terms of our current adopted policy.

149
00:06:22,400 --> 00:06:23,199
Yes, that is correct.

150
00:06:23,199 --> 00:06:24,319
>> So there's nothing in there about

151
00:06:24,319 --> 00:06:28,309
harassment or

152
00:06:28,319 --> 00:06:29,600
offensive language. I mean there's

153
00:06:29,600 --> 00:06:31,919
nothing in there like that. So So we

154
00:06:31,919 --> 00:06:33,280
need to make sure that's in there. I'm

155
00:06:33,280 --> 00:06:35,120
saying that we should consider putting

156
00:06:35,120 --> 00:06:35,440
that.

157
00:06:35,440 --> 00:06:39,280
>> That could be a great addition. Correct.

158
00:06:39,280 --> 00:06:41,600
I thought I saw something about that

159
00:06:41,600 --> 00:06:43,600
somewhere. Maybe it was in the Utah

160
00:06:43,600 --> 00:06:48,160
League. So, um I think that we'll talk

161
00:06:48,160 --> 00:06:50,000
we'll we'll talk through Tom's staff

162
00:06:50,000 --> 00:06:52,720
report and we'll look at our current our

163
00:06:52,720 --> 00:06:56,240
current uh procedures, current rules.

164
00:06:56,240 --> 00:06:58,080
But just up front, I thought I'd ask a

165
00:06:58,080 --> 00:06:59,840
question. I assume that everybody looked

166
00:06:59,840 --> 00:07:01,759
at the examples from the Utah League of

167
00:07:01,759 --> 00:07:04,080
Cities and Towns, the three different

168
00:07:04,080 --> 00:07:06,000
types.

169
00:07:06,000 --> 00:07:09,199
Is anyone inclined to adopt one of these

170
00:07:09,199 --> 00:07:10,720
three

171
00:07:10,720 --> 00:07:14,400
um as a starting point which we could

172
00:07:14,400 --> 00:07:16,240
then alter a little bit or should we

173
00:07:16,240 --> 00:07:17,840
just go through our own and make

174
00:07:17,840 --> 00:07:20,400
alterations to that? Give me some

175
00:07:20,400 --> 00:07:23,520
feedback on that.

176
00:07:23,520 --> 00:07:25,759
>> Well, I think the short and formal is

177
00:07:25,759 --> 00:07:28,560
too short not formal enough. And I think

178
00:07:28,560 --> 00:07:31,680
the third example

179
00:07:31,680 --> 00:07:33,520
seems to almost follow Robert's rules of

180
00:07:33,520 --> 00:07:35,680
order. Not that we shouldn't adopt some

181
00:07:35,680 --> 00:07:38,319
of what Roberts had. So for me, I like

182
00:07:38,319 --> 00:07:41,199
the what?

183
00:07:41,199 --> 00:07:43,840
Short and uh what did you call it?

184
00:07:43,840 --> 00:07:44,800
>> You called it short.

185
00:07:44,800 --> 00:07:46,800
>> Short informal.

186
00:07:46,800 --> 00:07:49,360
>> Yeah, I like that one the best as a

187
00:07:49,360 --> 00:07:53,280
starting point. That's just me.

188
00:07:53,280 --> 00:07:55,440
>> I

189
00:07:55,440 --> 00:07:58,240
think all three have their merits. The

190
00:07:58,240 --> 00:08:02,720
for the third one. Um, I did appreciate

191
00:08:02,720 --> 00:08:05,520
like it how it spelled out all the the

192
00:08:05,520 --> 00:08:08,160
different ways that you might call for a

193
00:08:08,160 --> 00:08:11,360
motion and and then I started thinking,

194
00:08:11,360 --> 00:08:12,879
you know, as a council member, that is

195
00:08:12,879 --> 00:08:16,720
good information to have. However,

196
00:08:16,720 --> 00:08:18,319
I think we need to say what we mean and

197
00:08:18,319 --> 00:08:20,000
mean what we say. And if we were to

198
00:08:20,000 --> 00:08:23,680
adopt something that

199
00:08:23,680 --> 00:08:25,919
intense and that detailed, we are more

200
00:08:25,919 --> 00:08:28,080
likely to be breaking our own rules more

201
00:08:28,080 --> 00:08:32,080
often than not, which I'm I'm not a fan

202
00:08:32,080 --> 00:08:34,800
of. I would rather have something that

203
00:08:34,800 --> 00:08:38,959
is like more of a general framework that

204
00:08:38,959 --> 00:08:40,880
gives everybody a good basic

205
00:08:40,880 --> 00:08:44,080
understanding of how the meeting should

206
00:08:44,080 --> 00:08:48,389
run and then the details

207
00:08:48,399 --> 00:08:51,760
as of this council they flow really well

208
00:08:51,760 --> 00:08:55,839
and we've um come to kind of a good

209
00:08:55,839 --> 00:08:57,839
basic understanding of the way we like

210
00:08:57,839 --> 00:08:59,519
to do business at the table and I think

211
00:08:59,519 --> 00:09:01,839
that could shift as councils and mayors

212
00:09:01,839 --> 00:09:03,360
change.

213
00:09:03,360 --> 00:09:06,880
I would be reluctant to make something

214
00:09:06,880 --> 00:09:09,680
so detailed and formal that it ends up

215
00:09:09,680 --> 00:09:11,600
that you just end up breaking all of the

216
00:09:11,600 --> 00:09:13,360
rules you made for yourself.

217
00:09:13,360 --> 00:09:16,560
>> But I think the the the what is it the

218
00:09:16,560 --> 00:09:20,000
long and business casual I did like rule

219
00:09:20,000 --> 00:09:22,399
six and seven because pretty much that's

220
00:09:22,399 --> 00:09:24,080
how the mayor conducts the business now.

221
00:09:24,080 --> 00:09:27,750
No,

222
00:09:27,760 --> 00:09:29,440
» rules six and seven. You said

223
00:09:29,440 --> 00:09:31,839
>> six and seven. I mean, the mayor calls

224
00:09:31,839 --> 00:09:34,160
for a motion. We go back and forth. The

225
00:09:34,160 --> 00:09:35,519
only thing we don't have is a substitute

226
00:09:35,519 --> 00:09:38,959
motion, which is process I like.

227
00:09:38,959 --> 00:09:57,670
Um, and then when you get to rule,

228
00:09:57,680 --> 00:09:59,760
I'm sorry, rule six where it talks about

229
00:09:59,760 --> 00:10:03,360
u substitute motion.

230
00:10:03,360 --> 00:10:06,480
that one. And where is the one where it

231
00:10:06,480 --> 00:10:09,600
talks about

232
00:10:09,600 --> 00:10:11,760
rule one? I like rule one, which which

233
00:10:11,760 --> 00:10:15,600
we we seem to already follow.

234
00:10:15,600 --> 00:10:18,240
I mean, the the mayor announces the the

235
00:10:18,240 --> 00:10:20,720
agenda. The appropriate person makes the

236
00:10:20,720 --> 00:10:23,360
presentation. We get to ask technical

237
00:10:23,360 --> 00:10:25,839
questions about it. The motion is made,

238
00:10:25,839 --> 00:10:28,720
seconded. The mayor asks for discussion

239
00:10:28,720 --> 00:10:31,920
on the motion. Mayor asks for a vote. uh

240
00:10:31,920 --> 00:10:34,160
tall as a vote. I mean, we already do

241
00:10:34,160 --> 00:10:36,240
that, right?

242
00:10:36,240 --> 00:10:38,240
>> Rule number one.

243
00:10:38,240 --> 00:10:41,829
>> Yeah.

244
00:10:41,839 --> 00:10:44,560
» So, Pat, are you in the short and

245
00:10:44,560 --> 00:10:46,720
formal? Short and informal.

246
00:10:46,720 --> 00:10:48,880
>> Well, um um

247
00:10:48,880 --> 00:10:50,720
>> you're in the longest one. Okay. So,

248
00:10:50,720 --> 00:10:52,959
>> I like the short and informal to as a

249
00:10:52,959 --> 00:10:54,800
framework, but I do like some parts of

250
00:10:54,800 --> 00:11:02,550
the the uh long and business casual.

251
00:11:02,560 --> 00:11:04,720
So, are we inclined to go through what

252
00:11:04,720 --> 00:11:07,839
we have now and and talk?

253
00:11:07,839 --> 00:11:11,120
Well, let me do this.

254
00:11:11,120 --> 00:11:14,320
Let's start with the staff report

255
00:11:14,320 --> 00:11:16,399
because some of that is not even in the

256
00:11:16,399 --> 00:11:18,640
rules. This is this is sort of some of

257
00:11:18,640 --> 00:11:20,880
this is outside of the meeting even

258
00:11:20,880 --> 00:11:25,440
because it's meeting preparation, it's interactions with staff, that kind

259
00:11:25,440 --> 00:11:29,360
of thing. So, um,

260
00:11:29,360 --> 00:11:31,040
let's let's start with public

261
00:11:31,040 --> 00:11:35,360
participation portion of the agenda

262
00:11:35,360 --> 00:11:36,880
and some of the questions that were

263
00:11:36,880 --> 00:11:38,640
raised. What is the council's position

264
00:11:38,640 --> 00:11:40,640
regarding the expectation that public

265
00:11:40,640 --> 00:11:43,440
officials andor staff will respond to

266
00:11:43,440 --> 00:11:45,440
and answer questions from residents on

267
00:11:45,440 --> 00:11:49,360
the spot during the meeting?

268
00:11:49,360 --> 00:11:51,440
>> Feedback on that.

269
00:11:51,440 --> 00:11:52,959
>> I say no.

270
00:11:52,959 --> 00:11:53,839
>> You'd say what?

271
00:11:53,839 --> 00:11:55,040
>> I say no.

272
00:11:55,040 --> 00:11:59,279
>> Yeah. And and I really think it's um

273
00:11:59,279 --> 00:12:02,000
it's situational on that. I I think

274
00:12:02,000 --> 00:12:04,800
there's uh there's times when I would

275
00:12:04,800 --> 00:12:06,320
definitely say no. There's other times

276
00:12:06,320 --> 00:12:08,959
where I would say, you know, maybe maybe

277
00:12:08,959 --> 00:12:12,880
it's a good thing to to

278
00:12:12,880 --> 00:12:15,839
answer the question. I don't personally

279
00:12:15,839 --> 00:12:18,880
don't feel like there should be a we're

280
00:12:18,880 --> 00:12:22,240
never going to do this or we're

281
00:12:22,240 --> 00:12:24,480
uh we're always going to do this. I I

282
00:12:24,480 --> 00:12:26,480
think it's situational

283
00:12:26,480 --> 00:12:29,839
depending on the question. Um, you know,

284
00:12:29,839 --> 00:12:35,509
there's some things where um

285
00:12:35,519 --> 00:12:39,279
yeah, I I think there's just

286
00:12:39,279 --> 00:12:42,399
there's maybe too much information

287
00:12:42,399 --> 00:12:44,399
or it would make a meeting go too long

288
00:12:44,399 --> 00:12:47,519
or uh is it is not the appropriate time

289
00:12:47,519 --> 00:12:49,760
to to answer that question.

290
00:12:49,760 --> 00:12:52,000
>> Well, or or as long as it doesn't become

291
00:12:52,000 --> 00:12:52,959
a debate.

292
00:12:52,959 --> 00:12:55,440
>> Yeah. And and that's the other thing is

293
00:12:55,440 --> 00:12:58,079
that can exactly can

294
00:12:58,079 --> 00:12:58,480
>> Yes.

295
00:12:58,480 --> 00:13:00,800
>> get our meeting to

296
00:13:00,800 --> 00:13:02,959
>> Yeah. It's midnight and we're not quite

297
00:13:02,959 --> 00:13:04,079
finished yet.

298
00:13:04,079 --> 00:13:06,079
>> I'm less worried about that than I am

299
00:13:06,079 --> 00:13:07,920
about the fact that the questions we

300
00:13:07,920 --> 00:13:09,839
tend to get in that question comment

301
00:13:09,839 --> 00:13:13,200
period are gotcha questions. And so

302
00:13:13,200 --> 00:13:20,720
often they are meant to catch somebody off guard. and the

303
00:13:20,720 --> 00:13:22,720
person asking the questions has had a

304
00:13:22,720 --> 00:13:24,399
lot of time to think about the question

305
00:13:24,399 --> 00:13:26,399
and we are supposed to answer it on the

306
00:13:26,399 --> 00:13:31,040
spot and I seem to recall that um in the

307
00:13:31,040 --> 00:13:33,360
past and maybe Tom you could tell me if

308
00:13:33,360 --> 00:13:35,839
my my memory is accurate. I thought it

309
00:13:35,839 --> 00:13:38,000
used to be comments

310
00:13:38,000 --> 00:13:40,320
and questions of staff that the

311
00:13:40,320 --> 00:13:41,839
questions were only asked of staff and

312
00:13:41,839 --> 00:13:43,920
they were only questions about you know

313
00:13:43,920 --> 00:13:45,920
what's happening on Lion Boulevard,

314
00:13:45,920 --> 00:13:48,480
what's that kind of thing. Is that is my

315
00:13:48,480 --> 00:13:50,160
memory accurate or was that when I was

316
00:13:50,160 --> 00:13:52,800
on planning commission?

317
00:13:52,800 --> 00:13:56,160
>> Um yeah, I we there's been various

318
00:13:56,160 --> 00:14:00,880
permutations and I don't know that we

319
00:14:00,880 --> 00:14:04,240
that the the policy was ever that formal

320
00:14:04,240 --> 00:14:05,680
like you can make a comment to the

321
00:14:05,680 --> 00:14:06,959
public body but you can only ask

322
00:14:06,959 --> 00:14:08,079
questions of the staff. I don't know

323
00:14:08,079 --> 00:14:11,440
that was ever formally a policy as much

324
00:14:11,440 --> 00:14:13,839
as it was maybe a practice. Um, but

325
00:14:13,839 --> 00:14:15,600
regardless, this these are these are

326
00:14:15,600 --> 00:14:18,160
topics, you know, for the council to

327
00:14:18,160 --> 00:14:19,760
consider what you think is appropriate.

328
00:14:19,760 --> 00:14:21,920
So, you you can go however you want on

329
00:14:21,920 --> 00:14:23,199
that on that topic.

330
00:14:23,199 --> 00:14:28,320
>> I tend to agree with you, mayor. If if Riley comes to the microphone and she

331
00:14:28,320 --> 00:14:31,120
says, I think we should do that. And I

332
00:14:31,120 --> 00:14:32,399
agree with her and I go, you know,

333
00:14:32,399 --> 00:14:33,839
you're absolutely right. We should do

334
00:14:33,839 --> 00:14:36,720
that. That's a problem because the staff

335
00:14:36,720 --> 00:14:40,800
hasn't a chance to look at whatever the issue of complaint might be. It may

336
00:14:40,800 --> 00:14:42,480
be different than four of the people on

337
00:14:42,480 --> 00:14:45,199
the deis want. I wouldn't want somebody

338
00:14:45,199 --> 00:14:49,680
like me to say something like that and like now we own it.

339
00:14:49,680 --> 00:14:51,920
>> Well, and essentially when that happens,

340
00:14:51,920 --> 00:14:53,440
we're deliberating on something that

341
00:14:53,440 --> 00:14:55,920
wasn't noticed. If we're if we're

342
00:14:55,920 --> 00:15:00,880
answering a question, I think it's and that's like Randy when you say some

343
00:15:00,880 --> 00:15:03,279
it's it's situational.

344
00:15:03,279 --> 00:15:05,519
Yeah. Sometimes it'd be fine if if it

345
00:15:05,519 --> 00:15:06,800
were a question like what's happening on

346
00:15:06,800 --> 00:15:09,120
Lion Boulevard. Which of us answers

347
00:15:09,120 --> 00:15:11,760
that? Sometimes it's a question to a

348
00:15:11,760 --> 00:15:16,720
specific person. I feel

349
00:15:16,720 --> 00:15:18,880
personally more comfortable making it a

350
00:15:18,880 --> 00:15:21,040
comment period

351
00:15:21,040 --> 00:15:23,360
because if somebody in the community has

352
00:15:23,360 --> 00:15:25,040
a question, they certainly have the

353
00:15:25,040 --> 00:15:26,800
opportunity to contact staff anytime

354
00:15:26,800 --> 00:15:29,040
with that question if it's a a

355
00:15:29,040 --> 00:15:31,760
legitimate question about something h

356
00:15:31,760 --> 00:15:34,959
and not just a gotcha or something like

357
00:15:34,959 --> 00:15:37,279
that. So tell me how you feel about what

358
00:15:37,279 --> 00:15:39,199
I just said.

359
00:15:39,199 --> 00:15:43,519
I think questions can be really

360
00:15:43,519 --> 00:15:47,120
productive, but I also agree with the

361
00:15:47,120 --> 00:15:50,720
issue of questions

362
00:15:50,720 --> 00:15:55,120
imply an answer which imply a back and

363
00:15:55,120 --> 00:15:59,440
forth and I think it is very

364
00:15:59,440 --> 00:16:01,360
uh we should proceed with a lot of

365
00:16:01,360 --> 00:16:04,000
caution in getting into a back and forth

366
00:16:04,000 --> 00:16:06,720
or a debate or which easily turns into

367
00:16:06,720 --> 00:16:10,000
an argument between somebody at the

368
00:16:10,000 --> 00:16:13,199
podium and people on the diet and or

369
00:16:13,199 --> 00:16:16,880
staff. Like I don't think that that is

370
00:16:16,880 --> 00:16:19,759
absolutely ever a productive

371
00:16:19,759 --> 00:16:24,079
relationship to be having five of us and

372
00:16:24,079 --> 00:16:26,880
one commenter. It I think it gets

373
00:16:26,880 --> 00:16:29,279
chaotic really quickly. Could get

374
00:16:29,279 --> 00:16:32,560
chaotic really quickly. So um I think

375
00:16:32,560 --> 00:16:35,360
how do you how do you allow simple

376
00:16:35,360 --> 00:16:36,800
questions? what's happening on Lion

377
00:16:36,800 --> 00:16:41,590
Boulevard or

378
00:16:41,600 --> 00:16:43,839
something like that

379
00:16:43,839 --> 00:16:46,320
and not allow something that could end

380
00:16:46,320 --> 00:16:50,470
up

381
00:16:50,480 --> 00:16:51,759
a back and forth

382
00:16:51,759 --> 00:16:54,959
>> or a deliberation that ends up in a

383
00:16:54,959 --> 00:16:58,240
decision because at first

384
00:16:58,240 --> 00:17:00,800
that reaction a lot of times as a

385
00:17:00,800 --> 00:17:02,320
council member you think oh that sounds

386
00:17:02,320 --> 00:17:03,839
like a good idea and then you look into

387
00:17:03,839 --> 00:17:05,679
it more and you're like actually I did

388
00:17:05,679 --> 00:17:09,439
not consider all of these e um external

389
00:17:09,439 --> 00:17:10,959
factors and now that I have more

390
00:17:10,959 --> 00:17:13,120
information, my opinion has changed. And

391
00:17:13,120 --> 00:17:17,520
very rarely if ever since I've served

392
00:17:17,520 --> 00:17:19,679
have I had to make a split-second

393
00:17:19,679 --> 00:17:23,520
decision without having time to

394
00:17:23,520 --> 00:17:27,600
thoroughly consider my answer. Um I tend

395
00:17:27,600 --> 00:17:30,080
to not want to do business like that.

396
00:17:30,080 --> 00:17:31,840
So, I would think that we would not want

397
00:17:31,840 --> 00:17:35,520
to be inviting split-second decisions or

398
00:17:35,520 --> 00:17:37,360
representations of the entire council

399
00:17:37,360 --> 00:17:40,960
without being able to consider the

400
00:17:40,960 --> 00:17:43,280
problem completely.

401
00:17:43,280 --> 00:17:46,320
But I also think that there is a lot of

402
00:17:46,320 --> 00:17:49,200
uh

403
00:17:49,200 --> 00:17:50,480
for somebody to come in front of the

404
00:17:50,480 --> 00:17:52,000
room and make a comment about something

405
00:17:52,000 --> 00:17:53,679
that maybe we haven't considered. That's

406
00:17:53,679 --> 00:17:55,200
a great way to put a pin in something

407
00:17:55,200 --> 00:17:58,160
and say, "Okay, yes, actually we all

408
00:17:58,160 --> 00:18:00,320
heard that. Maybe we do think we need to

409
00:18:00,320 --> 00:18:02,799
follow up on it or consider that issue

410
00:18:02,799 --> 00:18:04,400
more completely. So I think comment

411
00:18:04,400 --> 00:18:06,080
periods are very valid. I don't want to

412
00:18:06,080 --> 00:18:09,280
see that uh diminished but maybe we do

413
00:18:09,280 --> 00:18:11,200
limit questions

414
00:18:11,200 --> 00:18:13,440
>> or maybe it's a hybrid and you know

415
00:18:13,440 --> 00:18:16,960
comments three minutes or less continue.

416
00:18:16,960 --> 00:18:18,559
Obviously, we want to hear the comments

417
00:18:18,559 --> 00:18:20,480
and we can choose to act on them or not.

418
00:18:20,480 --> 00:18:23,760
But maybe if it's a question

419
00:18:23,760 --> 00:18:26,720
that isn't something

420
00:18:26,720 --> 00:18:28,559
answered by staff because staff can

421
00:18:28,559 --> 00:18:30,160
answer a question without seeming to

422
00:18:30,160 --> 00:18:36,559
deliberate, maybe then the response is I will think about that and get back to

423
00:18:36,559 --> 00:18:38,720
you if it's for one of us specifically.

424
00:18:38,720 --> 00:18:40,559
That's another kind of a hybrid way to

425
00:18:40,559 --> 00:18:43,760
>> I think so that I also think that

426
00:18:43,760 --> 00:18:46,400
>> in thinking of me recent meetings um and

427
00:18:46,400 --> 00:18:48,080
someone comes to the podium and they

428
00:18:48,080 --> 00:18:51,200
have a problem and we aren't responding

429
00:18:51,200 --> 00:18:57,120
it it does appear as if we

430
00:18:57,120 --> 00:18:59,360
aren't following up on the issue when

431
00:18:59,360 --> 00:19:02,880
really I'm doing my very best to not

432
00:19:02,880 --> 00:19:04,960
turn that comment period into a back and

433
00:19:04,960 --> 00:19:07,919
forth. So I I wonder kind of what the

434
00:19:07,919 --> 00:19:10,160
public perception is when somebody comes

435
00:19:10,160 --> 00:19:12,480
up with a genuine issue and we all are

436
00:19:12,480 --> 00:19:14,240
just sitting there.

437
00:19:14,240 --> 00:19:16,640
>> But would wouldn't it I think as the

438
00:19:16,640 --> 00:19:20,080
mayor suggested we'll get back to you or

439
00:19:20,080 --> 00:19:22,960
the contact person might be Tom or Nile

440
00:19:22,960 --> 00:19:25,679
on that issue to give them somebody to

441
00:19:25,679 --> 00:19:29,200
go to. But I think you're right. If we sit there like five lumps in a log

442
00:19:29,200 --> 00:19:30,559
that's not good.

443
00:19:30,559 --> 00:19:32,080
>> But at least give them somebody to talk

444
00:19:32,080 --> 00:19:32,640
to.

445
00:19:32,640 --> 00:19:34,480
>> But we're sitting there with intention,

446
00:19:34,480 --> 00:19:36,559
right? It's not that we don't care and

447
00:19:36,559 --> 00:19:38,559
that we didn't hear. It's that we are

448
00:19:38,559 --> 00:19:41,440
not going to turn this into a back and

449
00:19:41,440 --> 00:19:43,039
forth.

450
00:19:43,039 --> 00:19:45,440
>> So, it's simple enough to to make it a

451
00:19:45,440 --> 00:19:47,919
comment period only because it's not

452
00:19:47,919 --> 00:19:52,000
like we it's not like we don't respond

453
00:19:52,000 --> 00:19:53,919
and staff doesn't respond to questions

454
00:19:53,919 --> 00:19:57,200
that are about things. You know, if if

455
00:19:57,200 --> 00:19:59,520
the question is why do you why do you

456
00:19:59,520 --> 00:20:01,120
treat your husband that way or something

457
00:20:01,120 --> 00:20:03,360
like that, then that's not a legitimate

458
00:20:03,360 --> 00:20:05,440
question. and we get things that

459
00:20:05,440 --> 00:20:09,120
ridiculous sometimes. So, I I think

460
00:20:09,120 --> 00:20:10,799
legitimate questions can be asked

461
00:20:10,799 --> 00:20:12,240
outside of our council meeting and

462
00:20:12,240 --> 00:20:14,400
comments should be allowed. Anything

463
00:20:14,400 --> 00:20:16,000
anybody wants to say in a council

464
00:20:16,000 --> 00:20:17,039
meeting personally?

465
00:20:17,039 --> 00:20:18,559
>> Well, and I think that we have to be

466
00:20:18,559 --> 00:20:20,400
really careful. I mean, I think we're

467
00:20:20,400 --> 00:20:23,520
talking about um you know, innocent

468
00:20:23,520 --> 00:20:25,600
questions being asked. I think we have

469
00:20:25,600 --> 00:20:27,919
to remind ourselves that sometimes we

470
00:20:27,919 --> 00:20:30,640
don't want to create a venue where

471
00:20:30,640 --> 00:20:33,280
questions can be asked, where answers

472
00:20:33,280 --> 00:20:35,120
are expected that have legal

473
00:20:35,120 --> 00:20:37,679
ramifications.

474
00:20:37,679 --> 00:20:40,159
And um so I think we have to be really

475
00:20:40,159 --> 00:20:43,280
cautious about that. You know I I I

476
00:20:43,280 --> 00:20:46,559
think that it in a a certain in one way

477
00:20:46,559 --> 00:20:48,960
I think it is situational and I think it

478
00:20:48,960 --> 00:20:51,919
can be entertained on a case by case but

479
00:20:51,919 --> 00:20:55,760
I think our protocol should be that we

480
00:20:55,760 --> 00:20:58,320
are seeking public.

481
00:20:58,320 --> 00:21:02,240
So that's this particular question

482
00:21:02,240 --> 00:21:05,360
is what I'm hearing from everybody is

483
00:21:05,360 --> 00:21:08,880
really uh when we when we put our agenda

484
00:21:08,880 --> 00:21:11,200
out

485
00:21:11,200 --> 00:21:13,840
we are specifically saying this is a

486
00:21:13,840 --> 00:21:16,159
time for public comments

487
00:21:16,159 --> 00:21:25,190
>> only and not questions. And you know my response originally was

488
00:21:25,200 --> 00:21:28,159
I agree that I would not

489
00:21:28,159 --> 00:21:31,360
respond to a question from somebody that

490
00:21:31,360 --> 00:21:33,520
I thought was

491
00:21:33,520 --> 00:21:37,120
uh at all a gotcha question number one

492
00:21:37,120 --> 00:21:41,919
or a question that should have staff

493
00:21:41,919 --> 00:21:46,720
uh looking at this or or andor attorney

494
00:21:46,720 --> 00:21:48,720
looking at something. I think that's

495
00:21:48,720 --> 00:21:52,480
obviously something we didn't want. I uh

496
00:21:52,480 --> 00:21:54,720
I agree that that comment period should

497
00:21:54,720 --> 00:21:57,679
be a I mean that that

498
00:21:57,679 --> 00:22:01,280
agenda item should be a comment

499
00:22:01,280 --> 00:22:05,600
opportunity. The one thing I I I kind of

500
00:22:05,600 --> 00:22:07,760
think about when I think about this

501
00:22:07,760 --> 00:22:10,640
particular item is

502
00:22:10,640 --> 00:22:12,960
we um

503
00:22:12,960 --> 00:22:15,840
we have certain items on our agendas

504
00:22:15,840 --> 00:22:20,640
that are public have or are are for

505
00:22:20,640 --> 00:22:21,919
public comment and and

506
00:22:21,919 --> 00:22:24,080
>> public hearing. public public hearing

507
00:22:24,080 --> 00:22:27,679
and we have other items that are not and

508
00:22:27,679 --> 00:22:34,549
uh I sometimes wonder if uh

509
00:22:34,559 --> 00:22:38,159
some of our residents, you know, are

510
00:22:38,159 --> 00:22:41,600
feel a little stifled in that there's

511
00:22:41,600 --> 00:22:45,200
one of these items that are not a,

512
00:22:45,200 --> 00:22:48,000
you know, a public comment

513
00:22:48,000 --> 00:22:51,600
or a a public hearing, but it's an it's

514
00:22:51,600 --> 00:22:52,559
a

515
00:22:52,559 --> 00:22:54,000
item where they want some more

516
00:22:54,000 --> 00:22:58,080
information and how do they

517
00:22:58,080 --> 00:23:01,760
um you know are we saying in the meeting

518
00:23:01,760 --> 00:23:04,000
you can't do that and in the meeting

519
00:23:04,000 --> 00:23:07,120
you've got beforehand you've got to ask

520
00:23:07,120 --> 00:23:09,440
your question beforehand

521
00:23:09,440 --> 00:23:12,400
and that's that's where I get a little

522
00:23:12,400 --> 00:23:14,640
bit concerned about

523
00:23:14,640 --> 00:23:16,880
um

524
00:23:16,880 --> 00:23:19,280
the perception from our residents and

525
00:23:19,280 --> 00:23:21,360
businesses that

526
00:23:21,360 --> 00:23:24,159
uh you know this public meeting or that

527
00:23:24,159 --> 00:23:26,080
this meeting we're having of the town

528
00:23:26,080 --> 00:23:27,919
council there's some items on there

529
00:23:27,919 --> 00:23:29,760
where the public just doesn't get to say

530
00:23:29,760 --> 00:23:31,760
anything.

531
00:23:31,760 --> 00:23:33,280
They just listen to what we have to say

532
00:23:33,280 --> 00:23:36,320
and then we vote on it. Boom. That's it.

533
00:23:36,320 --> 00:23:39,679
>> Well, we haven't we haven't been So the

534
00:23:39,679 --> 00:23:41,200
question that's coming up, should

535
00:23:41,200 --> 00:23:43,200
comments be accepted for all topics or

536
00:23:43,200 --> 00:23:45,600
only topics not on the current agenda?

537
00:23:45,600 --> 00:23:47,679
So that's kind of where you're going

538
00:23:47,679 --> 00:23:48,320
here.

539
00:23:48,320 --> 00:23:50,720
>> Yeah. And we have not had a policy that

540
00:23:50,720 --> 00:23:52,159
you can't comment on things on the

541
00:23:52,159 --> 00:23:54,320
agenda. Now, I can tell you that most

542
00:23:54,320 --> 00:23:58,080
other municipalities I know of don't

543
00:23:58,080 --> 00:24:00,880
allow comments on topics on the agenda

544
00:24:00,880 --> 00:24:02,559
because then you turn a non-public

545
00:24:02,559 --> 00:24:05,679
hearing into a deacto public hearing. I

546
00:24:05,679 --> 00:24:07,039
don't know if we're worried about that

547
00:24:07,039 --> 00:24:11,440
or not. I think I think, you know,

548
00:24:11,440 --> 00:24:13,360
somebody could certainly submit a letter

549
00:24:13,360 --> 00:24:14,960
in advance and tell us how they feel

550
00:24:14,960 --> 00:24:19,120
about something. Um but maybe maybe what

551
00:24:19,120 --> 00:24:21,840
we do is we do a compromise here where

552
00:24:21,840 --> 00:24:24,799
we we do limit it to comments only but

553
00:24:24,799 --> 00:24:27,760
we don't limit it to comments or topics

554
00:24:27,760 --> 00:24:30,880
not on the agenda. I mean we we don't

555
00:24:30,880 --> 00:24:33,600
need to it doesn't have to be all or

556
00:24:33,600 --> 00:24:35,919
nothing but I can tell you that like in

557
00:24:35,919 --> 00:24:38,559
Rockville I think that's on here. um

558
00:24:38,559 --> 00:24:40,799
Rockville, you can't comment on items on

559
00:24:40,799 --> 00:24:42,720
the agenda and you can't comment at all

560
00:24:42,720 --> 00:24:45,600
if you're not a resident or a or a

561
00:24:45,600 --> 00:24:47,600
property owner in Rockville.

562
00:24:47,600 --> 00:24:50,000
>> And Tom and I have had a conversation

563
00:24:50,000 --> 00:24:52,320
about that. And he feels like the more

564
00:24:52,320 --> 00:24:54,159
open we are, the better. And it's

565
00:24:54,159 --> 00:24:55,919
someone who's not a member of the

566
00:24:55,919 --> 00:24:58,480
community. Maybe that's okay.

567
00:24:58,480 --> 00:25:00,960
>> I Yeah. And I do actually have strong

568
00:25:00,960 --> 00:25:06,559
feelings about that. I it um has always

569
00:25:06,559 --> 00:25:08,240
gotten under my skin a little bit when

570
00:25:08,240 --> 00:25:10,000
somebody comes up and feels like they

571
00:25:10,000 --> 00:25:12,720
have to tell us their address.

572
00:25:12,720 --> 00:25:14,880
Honestly, you you cared enough to show

573
00:25:14,880 --> 00:25:17,600
up and make a comment. I don't care if

574
00:25:17,600 --> 00:25:20,880
you rent, live, have a business,

575
00:25:20,880 --> 00:25:25,919
if you, know, teach yoga here. It doesn't

576
00:25:25,919 --> 00:25:28,080
matter to me. the fact that you cared

577
00:25:28,080 --> 00:25:32,159
enough to show up. I think that that um

578
00:25:32,159 --> 00:25:34,480
says a lot and we should be open to we

579
00:25:34,480 --> 00:25:36,240
have a very unique community in the

580
00:25:36,240 --> 00:25:39,279
sense that many people who who are here

581
00:25:39,279 --> 00:25:41,360
and live a vast majority of their life

582
00:25:41,360 --> 00:25:43,919
here do not actually live here and we

583
00:25:43,919 --> 00:25:46,480
should be open to hearing from those

584
00:25:46,480 --> 00:25:50,080
people who participate in the community

585
00:25:50,080 --> 00:25:52,880
um have skin in the game. I don't think

586
00:25:52,880 --> 00:25:55,840
that it should be tied to property

587
00:25:55,840 --> 00:25:57,279
ownership. I think

588
00:25:57,279 --> 00:25:58,640
>> I don't feel like I need to know their

589
00:25:58,640 --> 00:26:00,320
address, but I think it's helpful to

590
00:26:00,320 --> 00:26:02,640
know if they're a resident or not.

591
00:26:02,640 --> 00:26:03,200
>> I agree.

592
00:26:03,200 --> 00:26:06,080
>> I I I really value third party

593
00:26:06,080 --> 00:26:08,799
perspective. So, it helps me know if

594
00:26:08,799 --> 00:26:11,200
somebody is commenting on something

595
00:26:11,200 --> 00:26:13,360
that's

596
00:26:13,360 --> 00:26:15,360
>> Did you guys just lose me?

597
00:26:15,360 --> 00:26:16,880
>> Um

598
00:26:16,880 --> 00:26:20,240
uh but that um

599
00:26:20,240 --> 00:26:22,240
uh they may or may not part of our

600
00:26:22,240 --> 00:26:22,799
community.

601
00:26:22,799 --> 00:26:24,880
>> But you do you want to do you want to

602
00:26:24,880 --> 00:26:27,919
limit it to residents only like or

603
00:26:27,919 --> 00:26:28,320
>> No.

604
00:26:28,320 --> 00:26:29,840
>> All right. So I don't either. I agree

605
00:26:29,840 --> 00:26:31,520
with K.

606
00:26:31,520 --> 00:26:33,919
>> They're all everybody that works,

607
00:26:33,919 --> 00:26:37,600
visits, lives in, owns property in

608
00:26:37,600 --> 00:26:39,600
>> the town are stakeholders.

609
00:26:39,600 --> 00:26:44,159
>> So I mean we our our council meetings

610
00:26:44,159 --> 00:26:45,360
unless we have something really

611
00:26:45,360 --> 00:26:47,919
controversial, there's rarely people out

612
00:26:47,919 --> 00:26:49,919
here. And I agree with Kyla. I want more

613
00:26:49,919 --> 00:26:50,880
people to come,

614
00:26:50,880 --> 00:26:52,320
>> but I understand that,

615
00:26:52,320 --> 00:26:53,440
>> but I do want to know where they're

616
00:26:53,440 --> 00:26:53,840
from.

617
00:26:53,840 --> 00:26:56,480
>> Yeah. Yeah. And that's fine.

618
00:26:56,480 --> 00:26:59,120
>> Especially when they're I think I think

619
00:26:59,120 --> 00:27:02,559
when it's relevant to us to know whether

620
00:27:02,559 --> 00:27:04,480
they're a resident or not is when we're

621
00:27:04,480 --> 00:27:06,799
talking about

622
00:27:06,799 --> 00:27:08,720
spending town funds or that kind of

623
00:27:08,720 --> 00:27:11,279
thing. I think that a resident has more

624
00:27:11,279 --> 00:27:15,360
validity than I mean we had we had a a

625
00:27:15,360 --> 00:27:17,120
meeting a few years ago where we were

626
00:27:17,120 --> 00:27:19,520
talking about buying a building and

627
00:27:19,520 --> 00:27:22,240
people from Virgin were yelling at us

628
00:27:22,240 --> 00:27:24,159
about what we should be doing. You all

629
00:27:24,159 --> 00:27:26,559
remember that and I'm not sure that I

630
00:27:26,559 --> 00:27:28,559
mean they they have the right to say so

631
00:27:28,559 --> 00:27:30,320
but I certainly value what our residents

632
00:27:30,320 --> 00:27:32,480
say more than I value someone who is not

633
00:27:32,480 --> 00:27:33,120
a resident.

634
00:27:33,120 --> 00:27:34,880
>> No. And I'm fine with that if they

635
00:27:34,880 --> 00:27:36,880
identify but I don't think we should

636
00:27:36,880 --> 00:27:39,840
limit it.

637
00:27:39,840 --> 00:27:41,520
Alison said we should open it to

638
00:27:41,520 --> 00:27:43,840
>> and I also think that let's say in the

639
00:27:43,840 --> 00:27:46,400
next year we have like this explosion of

640
00:27:46,400 --> 00:27:48,400
we have so many public comments we

641
00:27:48,400 --> 00:27:50,000
aren't going to get out of here at a

642
00:27:50,000 --> 00:27:52,320
reasonable time and our meetings are

643
00:27:52,320 --> 00:27:54,159
running over and it's really diluting

644
00:27:54,159 --> 00:27:57,039
the process for our residents. Obviously

645
00:27:57,039 --> 00:27:59,600
at that point we address that issue of

646
00:27:59,600 --> 00:28:02,240
saying okay this has gotten out of hand.

647
00:28:02,240 --> 00:28:02,720
Um

648
00:28:02,720 --> 00:28:04,240
>> yeah we can change this too.

649
00:28:04,240 --> 00:28:06,399
>> Yes. So, I don't foresee that issue

650
00:28:06,399 --> 00:28:09,200
happening, but I'm not saying like we

651
00:28:09,200 --> 00:28:11,840
want everything all the time. Let's be

652
00:28:11,840 --> 00:28:14,960
here for hours and hours. Let's just um

653
00:28:14,960 --> 00:28:16,960
at this point

654
00:28:16,960 --> 00:28:19,600
commenting is not out of hand as far as

655
00:28:19,600 --> 00:28:21,440
like how many people are lined up at the

656
00:28:21,440 --> 00:28:22,159
podium.

657
00:28:22,159 --> 00:28:23,760
>> Yeah, especially with the three minute

658
00:28:23,760 --> 00:28:24,559
limit.

659
00:28:24,559 --> 00:28:27,760
>> So, in interest of time, should we try

660
00:28:27,760 --> 00:28:30,159
and just follow this answer these

661
00:28:30,159 --> 00:28:31,279
questions and

662
00:28:31,279 --> 00:28:32,640
>> Well, we kind of are. So,

663
00:28:32,640 --> 00:28:33,919
>> seems like we're jumping around.

664
00:28:33,919 --> 00:28:35,919
>> The only one that we It's all one thing

665
00:28:35,919 --> 00:28:38,320
though. So, let me let me nut this out

666
00:28:38,320 --> 00:28:40,480
here. The only question we haven't yet

667
00:28:40,480 --> 00:28:43,120
answered is whether the the comment

668
00:28:43,120 --> 00:28:44,720
period should continue to be at the

669
00:28:44,720 --> 00:28:45,919
beginning of the meeting or should it be

670
00:28:45,919 --> 00:28:48,000
at the end? In Leverkin, they put it at

671
00:28:48,000 --> 00:28:51,039
the end because they feel like the

672
00:28:51,039 --> 00:28:52,480
questions might have been answered by

673
00:28:52,480 --> 00:28:54,559
then and and then you don't end up with

674
00:28:54,559 --> 00:28:57,200
a deacto public hearing. But I think

675
00:28:57,200 --> 00:28:59,120
that

676
00:28:59,120 --> 00:29:01,679
I think personally that it should be at

677
00:29:01,679 --> 00:29:03,200
the beginning. How does everybody else

678
00:29:03,200 --> 00:29:04,240
feel about that?

679
00:29:04,240 --> 00:29:05,760
>> I think it should be at the beginning

680
00:29:05,760 --> 00:29:07,440
because someone may say something that

681
00:29:07,440 --> 00:29:09,440
I'm not aware of.

682
00:29:09,440 --> 00:29:11,600
>> Um and and and just and I don't want to

683
00:29:11,600 --> 00:29:13,840
get this off track again, but in terms

684
00:29:13,840 --> 00:29:16,399
of the comments, is there any appetite

685
00:29:16,399 --> 00:29:19,200
for uh because I know you're talking

686
00:29:19,200 --> 00:29:21,360
here about uh you can only comment on

687
00:29:21,360 --> 00:29:24,559
non-aggenda items. any appetite for if

688
00:29:24,559 --> 00:29:26,159
it's a public hearing, your comment

689
00:29:26,159 --> 00:29:28,960
needs to occur then and not during the

690
00:29:28,960 --> 00:29:30,799
general comment period so there's no

691
00:29:30,799 --> 00:29:31,840
repetition.

692
00:29:31,840 --> 00:29:33,600
>> Yeah. And that is our current rule is

693
00:29:33,600 --> 00:29:36,240
that you if somebody gets up to comment

694
00:29:36,240 --> 00:29:37,760
about something that has a public

695
00:29:37,760 --> 00:29:40,320
hearing later, we usually would say in

696
00:29:40,320 --> 00:29:42,399
fact we could say that up front.

697
00:29:42,399 --> 00:29:44,720
>> Do you have comments that are not about

698
00:29:44,720 --> 00:29:46,880
something on a public hearing? So the

699
00:29:46,880 --> 00:29:50,000
last question we have in this list is

700
00:29:50,000 --> 00:29:52,559
what is so so here's where I think we

701
00:29:52,559 --> 00:29:54,880
are now. It's it's continues to be at

702
00:29:54,880 --> 00:29:56,960
the front first of the meeting. It

703
00:29:56,960 --> 00:29:59,840
continues to be anyone who wants to make

704
00:29:59,840 --> 00:30:01,840
a comment. It continues to be three

705
00:30:01,840 --> 00:30:05,039
minutes and it's a comment period only.

706
00:30:05,039 --> 00:30:06,720
Is that accurate to say?

707
00:30:06,720 --> 00:30:08,880
>> Well, yeah. And then just this one

708
00:30:08,880 --> 00:30:11,120
middle thing. It should comments be

709
00:30:11,120 --> 00:30:13,360
accepted for all topics. And I think we

710
00:30:13,360 --> 00:30:15,279
decided all topics. We would take

711
00:30:15,279 --> 00:30:17,360
comments on all topics and if it's for a

712
00:30:17,360 --> 00:30:19,760
public hearing, we'll ask them to wait

713
00:30:19,760 --> 00:30:22,559
for that. So the last one is what is the

714
00:30:22,559 --> 00:30:24,240
responsibility of the town to add

715
00:30:24,240 --> 00:30:26,159
information submitted by members of the

716
00:30:26,159 --> 00:30:28,559
public during the public participation

717
00:30:28,559 --> 00:30:30,399
portion of the meeting to the many

718
00:30:30,399 --> 00:30:32,559
meeting minutes. We've been getting more

719
00:30:32,559 --> 00:30:34,640
of that as you know and one particular

720
00:30:34,640 --> 00:30:36,960
resident has submitted the same thing

721
00:30:36,960 --> 00:30:39,919
for three meetings in a row that become

722
00:30:39,919 --> 00:30:42,960
an issue in the minutes you know lengthy

723
00:30:42,960 --> 00:30:44,480
things.

724
00:30:44,480 --> 00:30:47,760
Um the council always has the option of

725
00:30:47,760 --> 00:30:49,360
asking that something be put in the

726
00:30:49,360 --> 00:30:52,640
minutes should the public be allowed to

727
00:30:52,640 --> 00:30:54,080
ask that something be put in the

728
00:30:54,080 --> 00:30:57,120
minutes. And I have personal experience

729
00:30:57,120 --> 00:31:00,480
with this where it's problematic in my

730
00:31:00,480 --> 00:31:02,159
opinion because anybody can write

731
00:31:02,159 --> 00:31:05,039
anything down whether it's true or not

732
00:31:05,039 --> 00:31:07,600
and put it in the minute minutes and

733
00:31:07,600 --> 00:31:10,880
it's a permanent record

734
00:31:10,880 --> 00:31:12,799
that I have a problem with and that's

735
00:31:12,799 --> 00:31:14,880
happened.

736
00:31:14,880 --> 00:31:17,679
So let's let's discuss that last issue.

737
00:31:17,679 --> 00:31:20,000
Do we want to do we want people in the

738
00:31:20,000 --> 00:31:22,399
audience to be able to add a document to

739
00:31:22,399 --> 00:31:24,799
the minutes or should they just be able

740
00:31:24,799 --> 00:31:27,520
to say it to us and

741
00:31:27,520 --> 00:31:29,440
leave it at that unless one of us asks

742
00:31:29,440 --> 00:31:30,799
that it be put in the minutes.

743
00:31:30,799 --> 00:31:32,399
>> Well, if there's a concern about a

744
00:31:32,399 --> 00:31:34,080
public record, it's already recorded.

745
00:31:34,080 --> 00:31:36,480
Yes. What they say is recorded.

746
00:31:36,480 --> 00:31:37,679
>> It is recorded.

747
00:31:37,679 --> 00:31:39,279
>> So, if the issue is I want to make a

748
00:31:39,279 --> 00:31:41,760
public record, it's recorded.

749
00:31:41,760 --> 00:31:43,919
But someone is more likely to go back

750
00:31:43,919 --> 00:31:45,519
and read the minutes than they are to go

751
00:31:45,519 --> 00:31:49,840
listen years later to a public record.

752
00:31:49,840 --> 00:31:50,000
Well,

753
00:31:50,000 --> 00:31:52,000
>> I just think in the interest of of of

754
00:31:52,000 --> 00:31:53,919
workload

755
00:31:53,919 --> 00:31:57,120
um if um I I I understand the rationale

756
00:31:57,120 --> 00:31:59,840
for I want what I say to be in in the in

757
00:31:59,840 --> 00:32:02,480
the minutes,

758
00:32:02,480 --> 00:32:05,360
but we would act on it in council if it

759
00:32:05,360 --> 00:32:07,200
was an issue. Then it would become part

760
00:32:07,200 --> 00:32:09,120
of the minutes. But if somebody comes in

761
00:32:09,120 --> 00:32:10,799
with some hairbrain stuff and that could

762
00:32:10,799 --> 00:32:11,600
happen.

763
00:32:11,600 --> 00:32:12,640
>> It has happened.

764
00:32:12,640 --> 00:32:14,240
>> Yeah. And then Robin has got to reduce

765
00:32:14,240 --> 00:32:17,360
all this stuff to writing. I just think

766
00:32:17,360 --> 00:32:20,559
it's it's I think it's more than we

767
00:32:20,559 --> 00:32:21,919
should.

768
00:32:21,919 --> 00:32:24,320
>> So if one of So if somebody has

769
00:32:24,320 --> 00:32:27,039
something in writing, a bunch of photo

770
00:32:27,039 --> 00:32:28,640
copies or something like we've seen

771
00:32:28,640 --> 00:32:30,480
before, but anything in writing and

772
00:32:30,480 --> 00:32:32,559
they're not on council and they say, "I

773
00:32:32,559 --> 00:32:35,279
want this in the minutes." I think that

774
00:32:35,279 --> 00:32:38,559
one of us should sponsor that to go into

775
00:32:38,559 --> 00:32:40,480
the minutes and not just anybody should

776
00:32:40,480 --> 00:32:42,880
be able Does that make sense?

777
00:32:42,880 --> 00:32:46,799
>> Do we have to do it in that moment? Like

778
00:32:46,799 --> 00:32:48,399
they get up and they read a statement

779
00:32:48,399 --> 00:32:51,360
and they're like and I want this in the

780
00:32:51,360 --> 00:32:56,559
minutes and then at that moment we say

781
00:32:56,559 --> 00:32:59,360
I agree I would like to have this in the

782
00:32:59,360 --> 00:33:00,720
minutes. I don't I don't know that

783
00:33:00,720 --> 00:33:01,039
that's

784
00:33:01,039 --> 00:33:02,320
>> I think we have to

785
00:33:02,320 --> 00:33:03,760
>> but I think we have to say it at some

786
00:33:03,760 --> 00:33:04,720
point. No.

787
00:33:04,720 --> 00:33:05,279
>> Yeah.

788
00:33:05,279 --> 00:33:06,960
>> It should be done in the meeting. It

789
00:33:06,960 --> 00:33:09,039
doesn't have to be like immediately.

790
00:33:09,039 --> 00:33:09,840
>> Okay.

791
00:33:09,840 --> 00:33:12,640
>> Oh yes, in the minutes. Boom. But at

792
00:33:12,640 --> 00:33:13,919
some point during that meeting, you

793
00:33:13,919 --> 00:33:15,519
could go back and say, "Hey, you know

794
00:33:15,519 --> 00:33:17,519
what? So and so made this comment at the

795
00:33:17,519 --> 00:33:20,399
beginning of the of the meeting and I

796
00:33:20,399 --> 00:33:21,840
thought that was really important and I

797
00:33:21,840 --> 00:33:23,760
would like that to be added to the

798
00:33:23,760 --> 00:33:25,200
minutes." As the mayor mentioned, as

799
00:33:25,200 --> 00:33:26,399
council members, you all have that

800
00:33:26,399 --> 00:33:29,120
privilege. you have the right to to

801
00:33:29,120 --> 00:33:30,960
request anything that you want to be

802
00:33:30,960 --> 00:33:33,279
added to the minutes.

803
00:33:33,279 --> 00:33:36,240
>> If I can add something, um just to be

804
00:33:36,240 --> 00:33:38,000
clear, anytime somebody makes a public

805
00:33:38,000 --> 00:33:39,919
comment, it is it is part of the

806
00:33:39,919 --> 00:33:41,200
minutes. It's I think you're talking

807
00:33:41,200 --> 00:33:44,159
about mayor when they provide documents

808
00:33:44,159 --> 00:33:45,840
and like you said pictures. It's it's

809
00:33:45,840 --> 00:33:48,720
the question of whether you want what

810
00:33:48,720 --> 00:33:51,440
they are handing out to all of you to be

811
00:33:51,440 --> 00:33:53,360
included because their comments are

812
00:33:53,360 --> 00:33:54,880
already going to be included, right?

813
00:33:54,880 --> 00:33:56,399
That's just part of the record. Yeah,

814
00:33:56,399 --> 00:33:57,679
>> but yeah, I just want to make sure that

815
00:33:57,679 --> 00:33:59,360
everybody's clear that that's what we're

816
00:33:59,360 --> 00:34:00,880
talking about. Their comments are always

817
00:34:00,880 --> 00:34:02,399
going to be included. It's whether or

818
00:34:02,399 --> 00:34:04,640
not any additional supplemental

819
00:34:04,640 --> 00:34:07,440
information you want to be included,

820
00:34:07,440 --> 00:34:09,359
right?

821
00:34:09,359 --> 00:34:12,320
>> Yeah, this is an

822
00:34:12,320 --> 00:34:15,119
Yeah, I've felt split between this. I

823
00:34:15,119 --> 00:34:17,679
see the importance of like the minutes

824
00:34:17,679 --> 00:34:20,159
being a complete reflection, but then I

825
00:34:20,159 --> 00:34:23,440
also know there have been times we have

826
00:34:23,440 --> 00:34:26,079
had things passed out to us that really

827
00:34:26,079 --> 00:34:29,119
are fairly off topic and maybe even

828
00:34:29,119 --> 00:34:32,639
weren't commented on. Um, I'm just

829
00:34:32,639 --> 00:34:33,839
thinking of times we've shown up and

830
00:34:33,839 --> 00:34:36,960
there have been things on our desks and

831
00:34:36,960 --> 00:34:40,550
they're

832
00:34:40,560 --> 00:34:42,639
I mean obviously relevant to something

833
00:34:42,639 --> 00:34:44,480
but maybe not relevant to that meeting.

834
00:34:44,480 --> 00:34:46,560
>> I just like what Tom said. You know, I I

835
00:34:46,560 --> 00:34:48,639
think that it should be our call

836
00:34:48,639 --> 00:34:52,399
>> as to whether or not we think it should

837
00:34:52,399 --> 00:34:54,159
>> as a written document in the minutes

838
00:34:54,159 --> 00:34:56,480
>> as a a written document. Yeah, we've

839
00:34:56,480 --> 00:34:58,960
already said anybody can make comments,

840
00:34:58,960 --> 00:35:01,440
but do we really, you know, do does that

841
00:35:01,440 --> 00:35:03,359
mean that anybody has the right to write

842
00:35:03,359 --> 00:35:05,359
something down and have it become a

843
00:35:05,359 --> 00:35:07,920
matter of permanent record? And it

844
00:35:07,920 --> 00:35:09,440
sounds like where we're going here is

845
00:35:09,440 --> 00:35:12,160
that one of us must ask that that be put

846
00:35:12,160 --> 00:35:14,079
in permanent record, the written

847
00:35:14,079 --> 00:35:16,560
document. We all good with that?

848
00:35:16,560 --> 00:35:17,119
>> Yes.

849
00:35:17,119 --> 00:35:19,440
>> Okay. So, I think we're done with this

850
00:35:19,440 --> 00:35:21,920
first part, public participation. So,

851
00:35:21,920 --> 00:35:23,920
the comment period is a comment period

852
00:35:23,920 --> 00:35:27,040
only. It's still a three minute max and

853
00:35:27,040 --> 00:35:28,960
that's fair to everybody. We can't we

854
00:35:28,960 --> 00:35:32,560
can't eb and flow on that. Um it can be

855
00:35:32,560 --> 00:35:35,200
about any topic including things in the

856
00:35:35,200 --> 00:35:37,599
meeting and if it's a public hearing

857
00:35:37,599 --> 00:35:39,280
we'll ask them to wait and comment at

858
00:35:39,280 --> 00:35:43,920
that time and any document that that

859
00:35:43,920 --> 00:35:47,440
they have one of us must sponsor so to

860
00:35:47,440 --> 00:35:49,200
speak to put in the permanent written

861
00:35:49,200 --> 00:35:51,599
record of the meeting. Did I miss

862
00:35:51,599 --> 00:35:53,760
anything? Just a quick question on a on

863
00:35:53,760 --> 00:35:56,880
a threem minute limit. What um there are

864
00:35:56,880 --> 00:35:58,560
times not frequently but there are times

865
00:35:58,560 --> 00:36:00,960
when somebody makes a comment interested

866
00:36:00,960 --> 00:36:03,760
about maybe a perspective.

867
00:36:03,760 --> 00:36:05,680
Would we be able to ask council people

868
00:36:05,680 --> 00:36:08,560
ask questions about parts of their

869
00:36:08,560 --> 00:36:09,680
comment or should we just leave that

870
00:36:09,680 --> 00:36:10,160
alone?

871
00:36:10,160 --> 00:36:11,599
>> I think we'd leave it alone because if

872
00:36:11,599 --> 00:36:13,200
it's comments only. Got it.

873
00:36:13,200 --> 00:36:16,640
>> Um and I think you could follow up if

874
00:36:16,640 --> 00:36:18,320
you wanted to. We could follow up with

875
00:36:18,320 --> 00:36:20,320
that person. Any of us.

876
00:36:20,320 --> 00:36:20,960
>> So

877
00:36:20,960 --> 00:36:22,640
>> Okay. Thank you. Yeah, I think we need

878
00:36:22,640 --> 00:36:25,119
to if it's comments only, then it's

879
00:36:25,119 --> 00:36:28,950
comments only.

880
00:36:28,960 --> 00:36:32,079
Okay. So, the next item on the staff

881
00:36:32,079 --> 00:36:34,000
report is meeting preparation, meeting

882
00:36:34,000 --> 00:36:35,520
packets, other public body

883
00:36:35,520 --> 00:36:37,119
communications.

884
00:36:37,119 --> 00:36:40,870
Um,

885
00:36:40,880 --> 00:36:43,280
so

886
00:36:43,280 --> 00:36:45,680
we did have a situation recently where

887
00:36:45,680 --> 00:36:47,520
there was a contract put in front of the

888
00:36:47,520 --> 00:36:51,119
council that that had a lot of a lot of

889
00:36:51,119 --> 00:36:57,030
corrections that needed to be made. Um,

890
00:36:57,040 --> 00:37:00,560
it those in fact need to be made. Um, so

891
00:37:00,560 --> 00:37:03,920
Pat, I'm I'm not you you made a lot of

892
00:37:03,920 --> 00:37:05,440
good corrections that needed to be made,

893
00:37:05,440 --> 00:37:07,599
but we did it in the meeting,

894
00:37:07,599 --> 00:37:08,960
>> right?

895
00:37:08,960 --> 00:37:10,800
>> If there's that much to go through, just

896
00:37:10,800 --> 00:37:13,200
in the interest of time,

897
00:37:13,200 --> 00:37:15,440
that would be

898
00:37:15,440 --> 00:37:17,200
I think let's talk about this. It would

899
00:37:17,200 --> 00:37:19,760
be better if you called Garen ahead of

900
00:37:19,760 --> 00:37:21,760
time and said, I see a lot of issues.

901
00:37:21,760 --> 00:37:23,520
Let's talk about this. And potentially

902
00:37:23,520 --> 00:37:25,359
pull that until it's cleaned up a little

903
00:37:25,359 --> 00:37:27,440
bit rather than take so much time at the

904
00:37:27,440 --> 00:37:27,680
meeting.

905
00:37:27,680 --> 00:37:28,320
>> I agree.

906
00:37:28,320 --> 00:37:31,119
>> Okay. So, I think that hadn't happened

907
00:37:31,119 --> 00:37:32,960
before and you didn't know that was that

908
00:37:32,960 --> 00:37:35,520
was something you could or but

909
00:37:35,520 --> 00:37:37,280
>> my impression was that you had to do it

910
00:37:37,280 --> 00:37:39,599
in the meeting or at least ask for it to

911
00:37:39,599 --> 00:37:41,200
be done in the meeting. But knowing that

912
00:37:41,200 --> 00:37:42,720
we could do it ahead of time and say,

913
00:37:42,720 --> 00:37:44,800
"Listen, here's what I suggest. What do

914
00:37:44,800 --> 00:37:47,760
you think?" And the vision come to us

915
00:37:47,760 --> 00:37:48,480
beforehand.

916
00:37:48,480 --> 00:37:50,560
>> Yeah. When when there's a lot I think if

917
00:37:50,560 --> 00:37:52,720
it's one or two things, that's fine.

918
00:37:52,720 --> 00:37:54,160
>> I guess I'm kind of wondering though is

919
00:37:54,160 --> 00:38:01,910
what if Pat is is suggesting changes to

920
00:38:01,920 --> 00:38:03,200
That's not what we're talking about

921
00:38:03,200 --> 00:38:06,079
here. We're talking about there were

922
00:38:06,079 --> 00:38:10,160
>> will shall grammatical punctuation

923
00:38:10,160 --> 00:38:12,240
>> those kinds of things. I think if it's

924
00:38:12,240 --> 00:38:14,560
substantive substantial issues, we

925
00:38:14,560 --> 00:38:16,400
should talk about it as a group. But if

926
00:38:16,400 --> 00:38:19,680
it's just, you know, I see this typo, I

927
00:38:19,680 --> 00:38:21,200
>> those kinds of things could be cleared

928
00:38:21,200 --> 00:38:22,240
up in advance.

929
00:38:22,240 --> 00:38:24,560
>> Right. Technical versus substantive.

930
00:38:24,560 --> 00:38:26,960
Yeah. Right. Like I I totally agree that

931
00:38:26,960 --> 00:38:30,079
if somebody is going to change the the

932
00:38:30,079 --> 00:38:31,839
meaning of the document, that's why

933
00:38:31,839 --> 00:38:35,359
we're in council, but if somebody sees a

934
00:38:35,359 --> 00:38:38,320
typo, a misnumbering,

935
00:38:38,320 --> 00:38:41,839
um then yeah, I think it would be even

936
00:38:41,839 --> 00:38:45,280
much easier for me to digest a document

937
00:38:45,280 --> 00:38:48,720
if those grammatical things are cleared

938
00:38:48,720 --> 00:38:51,119
up. And let's so let's just you know if

939
00:38:51,119 --> 00:38:54,640
you see them on Tuesday maybe that does

940
00:38:54,640 --> 00:38:56,400
need to just be taken off the agenda and

941
00:38:56,400 --> 00:38:59,599
telling technically cleaned up and then

942
00:38:59,599 --> 00:39:04,240
we talk about the substance at the next meeting. So I guess that's kind

943
00:39:04,240 --> 00:39:05,920
of actually relying on staff a little

944
00:39:05,920 --> 00:39:07,680
bit to say if a council member is coming

945
00:39:07,680 --> 00:39:09,760
to you and you feel like that the

946
00:39:09,760 --> 00:39:12,160
changes are you know dealing with the

947
00:39:12,160 --> 00:39:15,760
substance then that's kind of a

948
00:39:15,760 --> 00:39:19,440
well let's have council look at it and

949
00:39:19,440 --> 00:39:21,520
Yeah, I really I think here we're just

950
00:39:21,520 --> 00:39:24,720
talking about when there are quite a few

951
00:39:24,720 --> 00:39:27,200
technical items to clear up and not when

952
00:39:27,200 --> 00:39:28,640
it's something that we have to talk

953
00:39:28,640 --> 00:39:31,920
about our our thoughts about the

954
00:39:31,920 --> 00:39:34,000
substance.

955
00:39:34,000 --> 00:39:37,359
Um, and if it's just I see a typo on

956
00:39:37,359 --> 00:39:38,960
page five, that could be done in the

957
00:39:38,960 --> 00:39:42,150
meeting.

958
00:39:42,160 --> 00:39:44,160
But if when when there's a lot, I think

959
00:39:44,160 --> 00:39:49,920
that that maybe could be done before and um we could get the new version

960
00:39:49,920 --> 00:39:52,160
before that meeting or otherwise we

961
00:39:52,160 --> 00:39:54,000
could push it to the next meeting.

962
00:39:54,000 --> 00:39:58,960
Agreed on that. Okay.

963
00:39:58,960 --> 00:40:01,839
And then so what is the most effective

964
00:40:01,839 --> 00:40:03,520
and appropriate time and method for

965
00:40:03,520 --> 00:40:05,520
contacting staff with questions about

966
00:40:05,520 --> 00:40:07,680
meeting agenda items? So, so the

967
00:40:07,680 --> 00:40:09,680
community development

968
00:40:09,680 --> 00:40:11,839
um department has opened up Thursday

969
00:40:11,839 --> 00:40:14,720
afternoons as a time that they are open

970
00:40:14,720 --> 00:40:17,599
for conversations with council members.

971
00:40:17,599 --> 00:40:22,000
Is there a time you would not want us to

972
00:40:22,000 --> 00:40:24,560
contact you? Is there a best time? Is

973
00:40:24,560 --> 00:40:26,800
there a worst time? I think that's

974
00:40:26,800 --> 00:40:32,630
something you could answer.

975
00:40:32,640 --> 00:40:35,440
Is this is this question related to

976
00:40:35,440 --> 00:40:38,640
council or public

977
00:40:38,640 --> 00:40:39,760
>> council?

978
00:40:39,760 --> 00:40:41,119
>> Well, I I I think

979
00:40:41,119 --> 00:40:41,839
>> any Yes.

980
00:40:41,839 --> 00:40:44,160
>> Yeah. I I I I mean obviously your

981
00:40:44,160 --> 00:40:46,079
experience is as council members, but

982
00:40:46,079 --> 00:40:48,000
this the policy that you're discussing

983
00:40:48,000 --> 00:40:49,520
applies to all public bodies.

984
00:40:49,520 --> 00:40:50,000
>> Okay.

985
00:40:50,000 --> 00:40:52,960
>> So, I think the question is um as as

986
00:40:52,960 --> 00:40:54,640
staff absolutely that's our job to be a

987
00:40:54,640 --> 00:40:56,720
resource for all of the public bodies in

988
00:40:56,720 --> 00:40:59,200
the town and to um support you in doing

989
00:40:59,200 --> 00:41:02,800
the most effective job possible. Um

990
00:41:02,800 --> 00:41:04,560
question is

991
00:41:04,560 --> 00:41:07,119
um what's the most effective way to to

992
00:41:07,119 --> 00:41:10,800
have that happen? Is that to get a phone

993
00:41:10,800 --> 00:41:13,280
call on Sunday afternoon saying, "Hey,

994
00:41:13,280 --> 00:41:15,599
I've got a question about this contract

995
00:41:15,599 --> 00:41:18,319
or is it maybe wait till Monday

996
00:41:18,319 --> 00:41:21,040
morning?" Um, similarly like if the

997
00:41:21,040 --> 00:41:28,240
meeting is Wednesday night and we get a email from a public body member at

998
00:41:28,240 --> 00:41:30,640
3:30 on Wednesday afternoon saying,

999
00:41:30,640 --> 00:41:33,119
"Hey, I've got all these issues with

1000
00:41:33,119 --> 00:41:36,079
this item that

1001
00:41:36,079 --> 00:41:38,079
doesn't give us a lot of time to to

1002
00:41:38,079 --> 00:41:40,000
prepare and respond." So So that that's

1003
00:41:40,000 --> 00:41:42,960
just the the idea. how can we best

1004
00:41:42,960 --> 00:41:47,040
support you and um the the timing of

1005
00:41:47,040 --> 00:41:49,599
when those questions come to us helps us

1006
00:41:49,599 --> 00:41:51,359
better support you. Does that make

1007
00:41:51,359 --> 00:41:52,000
sense?

1008
00:41:52,000 --> 00:41:55,760
>> Yeah. And and I think barring like major

1009
00:41:55,760 --> 00:41:58,319
manager emergencies, obviously I'm not

1010
00:41:58,319 --> 00:42:00,960
talking about that. I would not expect

1011
00:42:00,960 --> 00:42:03,280
staff to be answering after hours or on

1012
00:42:03,280 --> 00:42:04,960
the weekend

1013
00:42:04,960 --> 00:42:06,960
>> if I thanks for taking my call this

1014
00:42:06,960 --> 00:42:09,990
weekend.

1015
00:42:10,000 --> 00:42:11,760
» Um

1016
00:42:11,760 --> 00:42:13,040
We'll classify that as as as

1017
00:42:13,040 --> 00:42:14,319
emergencies.

1018
00:42:14,319 --> 00:42:16,880
>> Yeah. I mean,

1019
00:42:16,880 --> 00:42:19,119
in general practice, right? Like if I'm

1020
00:42:19,119 --> 00:42:21,119
emailing on Friday evening, because

1021
00:42:21,119 --> 00:42:22,560
that's when I've read the packet, I

1022
00:42:22,560 --> 00:42:25,040
really am not expecting, me personally,

1023
00:42:25,040 --> 00:42:27,839
I'm not expecting your answer until you

1024
00:42:27,839 --> 00:42:31,440
get back into the office. Um, and I

1025
00:42:31,440 --> 00:42:34,160
think that that's reasonable to expect

1026
00:42:34,160 --> 00:42:36,720
that our staff gets to have evenings and

1027
00:42:36,720 --> 00:42:40,880
weekends barring any emergency.

1028
00:42:40,880 --> 00:42:42,160
Thank you, Kaylin. And I think that's

1029
00:42:42,160 --> 00:42:44,079
kind of at the heart of the question is

1030
00:42:44,079 --> 00:42:46,079
knowing that yeah, you know, for your

1031
00:42:46,079 --> 00:42:47,359
convenience, you may be reviewing

1032
00:42:47,359 --> 00:42:49,200
something on a Friday night or a

1033
00:42:49,200 --> 00:42:51,040
Saturday afternoon and it's fresh on

1034
00:42:51,040 --> 00:42:52,960
your mind and you send an email. When a

1035
00:42:52,960 --> 00:42:55,839
staff member gets that on the weekends,

1036
00:42:55,839 --> 00:42:59,839
they feel like, "Oh my goodness, this is pressing. I've got to respond to

1037
00:42:59,839 --> 00:43:03,599
that." and and just having some some

1038
00:43:03,599 --> 00:43:06,800
um mutual understanding about yes, it's

1039
00:43:06,800 --> 00:43:08,880
convenient for you to send that email on

1040
00:43:08,880 --> 00:43:11,119
the weekend, but you're not necessarily

1041
00:43:11,119 --> 00:43:13,599
demanding a response

1042
00:43:13,599 --> 00:43:15,040
as soon as you send it or within a

1043
00:43:15,040 --> 00:43:16,480
certain amount of time after after you

1044
00:43:16,480 --> 00:43:17,599
spend it. Just just having that

1045
00:43:17,599 --> 00:43:19,440
understanding I think is what that that

1046
00:43:19,440 --> 00:43:21,440
>> just because I don't have a life doesn't

1047
00:43:21,440 --> 00:43:26,069
mean I think

1048
00:43:26,079 --> 00:43:27,599
» I guess for me I just don't want to feel

1049
00:43:27,599 --> 00:43:29,680
like I'm limited like if I missed my

1050
00:43:29,680 --> 00:43:32,079
Thursday slot I missed my opportunity. I

1051
00:43:32,079 --> 00:43:33,520
don't want to feel like that.

1052
00:43:33,520 --> 00:43:35,760
>> Absolutely. Yeah. And and mayor, just

1053
00:43:35,760 --> 00:43:38,800
one minor clarification on the on the

1054
00:43:38,800 --> 00:43:42,880
office hours that so this this um thing

1055
00:43:42,880 --> 00:43:43,839
that the community development

1056
00:43:43,839 --> 00:43:47,200
department has done is is on Thursday

1057
00:43:47,200 --> 00:43:49,280
afternoons is actually the the last

1058
00:43:49,280 --> 00:43:52,319
Thursday of the month. That's just like,

1059
00:43:52,319 --> 00:43:54,880
hey, come talk to us about big items,

1060
00:43:54,880 --> 00:43:57,040
big issues in the town that you see

1061
00:43:57,040 --> 00:43:59,359
going on.

1062
00:43:59,359 --> 00:44:01,040
Don't feel like every single question

1063
00:44:01,040 --> 00:44:02,960
that you have has to wait until that

1064
00:44:02,960 --> 00:44:04,880
Thursday afternoon of the last month to

1065
00:44:04,880 --> 00:44:06,720
be answered. That's just a dedicated

1066
00:44:06,720 --> 00:44:08,079
time that community development has set

1067
00:44:08,079 --> 00:44:09,520
aside to talk about big community

1068
00:44:09,520 --> 00:44:12,400
development issues. But absolutely, like

1069
00:44:12,400 --> 00:44:15,920
I said, staff is here to support and to be a resource for the for the

1070
00:44:15,920 --> 00:44:18,640
town. And as much as possible, we make

1071
00:44:18,640 --> 00:44:20,720
ourselves available during business

1072
00:44:20,720 --> 00:44:23,280
hours to to treat or to answer questions

1073
00:44:23,280 --> 00:44:24,880
from council and commission on a

1074
00:44:24,880 --> 00:44:27,839
priority basis. I think the the real

1075
00:44:27,839 --> 00:44:29,839
question is just an understanding on

1076
00:44:29,839 --> 00:44:31,119
what the expectation from the council

1077
00:44:31,119 --> 00:44:32,400
and the commission is in our in our

1078
00:44:32,400 --> 00:44:35,040
response particularly on off hours

1079
00:44:35,040 --> 00:44:36,000
questions.

1080
00:44:36,000 --> 00:44:37,680
>> So a couple things, one is that that

1081
00:44:37,680 --> 00:44:40,160
Thursday that you've set aside for us to

1082
00:44:40,160 --> 00:44:42,240
talk with you, we should make an

1083
00:44:42,240 --> 00:44:43,920
appointment so that we make sure there

1084
00:44:43,920 --> 00:44:45,440
aren't more than two of us there at the

1085
00:44:45,440 --> 00:44:48,560
same time. And then the other thing is

1086
00:44:48,560 --> 00:44:51,359
maybe we just agree here that, you know,

1087
00:44:51,359 --> 00:44:54,880
we're all retired. This is our only job.

1088
00:44:54,880 --> 00:44:57,359
And so we often there's no difference

1089
00:44:57,359 --> 00:45:00,160
between Tuesday and Sunday for us. So if

1090
00:45:00,160 --> 00:45:02,960
we are looking at something on a Sunday

1091
00:45:02,960 --> 00:45:03,760
and we

1092
00:45:03,760 --> 00:45:06,640
>> Sunday

1093
00:45:06,640 --> 00:45:10,079
>> and and we we're just, you know, getting

1094
00:45:10,079 --> 00:45:12,240
our stuff done and we send it to you on

1095
00:45:12,240 --> 00:45:14,720
a Sunday, do not feel obligated to

1096
00:45:14,720 --> 00:45:16,800
answer it on a Sunday. I think if it's

1097
00:45:16,800 --> 00:45:19,280
urgent, we'll text you instead. Is that

1098
00:45:19,280 --> 00:45:21,040
fair enough? We'll text instead or we'll

1099
00:45:21,040 --> 00:45:24,079
put in the subject urgent. But I think I

1100
00:45:24,079 --> 00:45:25,680
think

1101
00:45:25,680 --> 00:45:27,520
You know, like I don't think we have to

1102
00:45:27,520 --> 00:45:29,920
lose sleep Sunday night because we're

1103
00:45:29,920 --> 00:45:31,200
thinking, "Oh, I got to remember to ask

1104
00:45:31,200 --> 00:45:32,640
that question tomorrow." We could ask it

1105
00:45:32,640 --> 00:45:34,720
now, but we don't need to expect an

1106
00:45:34,720 --> 00:45:37,280
answer now. Is that fair?

1107
00:45:37,280 --> 00:45:39,520
>> And I think for the public facing side,

1108
00:45:39,520 --> 00:45:41,520
we need to kind of say the same thing to

1109
00:45:41,520 --> 00:45:44,240
the to the public and the residents.

1110
00:45:44,240 --> 00:45:48,800
Like staff gets evenings and weekends to

1111
00:45:48,800 --> 00:45:53,119
not answer your your emails. Um, and you

1112
00:45:53,119 --> 00:45:56,000
can expect have an answer during

1113
00:45:56,000 --> 00:45:58,640
business hours. Um, and and I think

1114
00:45:58,640 --> 00:46:01,839
that, you know, I'm a big quality of

1115
00:46:01,839 --> 00:46:04,480
life person that helps our staff have

1116
00:46:04,480 --> 00:46:06,400
quality of life that they are not having

1117
00:46:06,400 --> 00:46:08,720
to check their email or feel bad that an

1118
00:46:08,720 --> 00:46:11,760
email has been sent Friday and they

1119
00:46:11,760 --> 00:46:13,680
didn't get into it until Monday. I think

1120
00:46:13,680 --> 00:46:15,760
that's very reasonable.

1121
00:46:15,760 --> 00:46:19,119
And though this is not exactly on point,

1122
00:46:19,119 --> 00:46:22,800
if if an email comes to us, town council

1123
00:46:22,800 --> 00:46:25,440
in general, uh I want to talk about

1124
00:46:25,440 --> 00:46:27,440
this. I want an answer on this. I have a

1125
00:46:27,440 --> 00:46:29,520
complaint about that.

1126
00:46:29,520 --> 00:46:32,880
Um and a response comes from staff at

1127
00:46:32,880 --> 00:46:35,440
some point. Do do

1128
00:46:35,440 --> 00:46:37,920
can we get what that response is so we

1129
00:46:37,920 --> 00:46:40,480
know what it was? Does that happen as a

1130
00:46:40,480 --> 00:46:42,480
routine basis? I'm thinking about the

1131
00:46:42,480 --> 00:46:45,119
most recent email that we got.

1132
00:46:45,119 --> 00:46:48,400
Oh, okay. Yeah, good good point. So, so

1133
00:46:48,400 --> 00:46:50,079
some somebody in the community emails

1134
00:46:50,079 --> 00:46:53,119
the council with a with a concern and

1135
00:46:53,119 --> 00:46:55,119
staff may be included or it's forwarded

1136
00:46:55,119 --> 00:46:59,040
on to staff. Either way, um then you as

1137
00:46:59,040 --> 00:47:01,359
a council would like to be aware of

1138
00:47:01,359 --> 00:47:03,359
whatever response goes back from staff

1139
00:47:03,359 --> 00:47:05,920
to that to that person who asked the

1140
00:47:05,920 --> 00:47:08,240
question or express or raise the

1141
00:47:08,240 --> 00:47:09,680
>> I would, but I don't know how the rest

1142
00:47:09,680 --> 00:47:11,599
of people feel. I think that would be

1143
00:47:11,599 --> 00:47:13,680
really nice actually to know what staff

1144
00:47:13,680 --> 00:47:16,160
said.

1145
00:47:16,160 --> 00:47:21,750
>> Absolutely. Great great uh addition.

1146
00:47:21,760 --> 00:47:26,000
» Well, I just I want to say that uh

1147
00:47:26,000 --> 00:47:28,800
recently in the last couple weeks when

1148
00:47:28,800 --> 00:47:31,599
Rick was still town manager something

1149
00:47:31,599 --> 00:47:35,440
and he called me from his cruise.

1150
00:47:35,440 --> 00:47:38,480
>> So I expect that kind of dedication from

1151
00:47:38,480 --> 00:47:41,839
this state. Tom doesn't cruise.

1152
00:47:41,839 --> 00:47:43,760
>> However,

1153
00:47:43,760 --> 00:47:47,920
that being said, uh I do not expect the

1154
00:47:47,920 --> 00:47:50,800
staff. I'm I'm like everybody else here

1155
00:47:50,800 --> 00:47:53,119
retired. I will send you stuff whenever

1156
00:47:53,119 --> 00:47:54,480
I'm thinking about it because that's

1157
00:47:54,480 --> 00:47:57,760
what I need to do. Uh but I don't expect

1158
00:47:57,760 --> 00:48:00,720
a response until working hires.

1159
00:48:00,720 --> 00:48:01,119
>> Yes.

1160
00:48:01,119 --> 00:48:03,119
>> And and thank you. and and and let me

1161
00:48:03,119 --> 00:48:06,079
just also clarify that in in many

1162
00:48:06,079 --> 00:48:08,000
instances the town manager is exempt

1163
00:48:08,000 --> 00:48:09,760
from a lot of things and I think this is

1164
00:48:09,760 --> 00:48:13,280
one of those areas. Um so absolutely if

1165
00:48:13,280 --> 00:48:14,720
there's if there's an emergency if

1166
00:48:14,720 --> 00:48:19,920
there's a need urgent request um that the council needs to to communicate

1167
00:48:19,920 --> 00:48:21,520
with the manager absolutely that's

1168
00:48:21,520 --> 00:48:23,520
anticipated and expected. I think this

1169
00:48:23,520 --> 00:48:27,040
is just for like normal routine uh town

1170
00:48:27,040 --> 00:48:28,640
operations, town business types of

1171
00:48:28,640 --> 00:48:29,760
communications.

1172
00:48:29,760 --> 00:48:31,359
>> Yeah.

1173
00:48:31,359 --> 00:48:33,040
So, I think we've probably said enough

1174
00:48:33,040 --> 00:48:35,040
about that. Uh, the next question, what

1175
00:48:35,040 --> 00:48:36,800
are the responsibilities of members of

1176
00:48:36,800 --> 00:48:39,119
public bodies relative to documents and

1177
00:48:39,119 --> 00:48:40,880
records that are classified as town

1178
00:48:40,880 --> 00:48:44,720
records, which is closely tied to the

1179
00:48:44,720 --> 00:48:46,480
next one. What are responsibilities of

1180
00:48:46,480 --> 00:48:49,359
staff members to protect confidentiality

1181
00:48:49,359 --> 00:48:51,520
when information is proprietary or not

1182
00:48:51,520 --> 00:48:54,000
publicly available?

1183
00:48:54,000 --> 00:48:56,079
Um, I think we all learned at the

1184
00:48:56,079 --> 00:49:01,750
training that

1185
00:49:01,760 --> 00:49:05,520
the a lot of information that comes to

1186
00:49:05,520 --> 00:49:09,440
council only can only be released upon a

1187
00:49:09,440 --> 00:49:11,599
grammar request. Robin, clarify this for

1188
00:49:11,599 --> 00:49:14,720
me because we talked about it. So, so if

1189
00:49:14,720 --> 00:49:17,440
it's something say our our council

1190
00:49:17,440 --> 00:49:19,119
reports, our manager reports that are in

1191
00:49:19,119 --> 00:49:21,599
the council packet, those can be

1192
00:49:21,599 --> 00:49:24,559
grammar, but only a certified document

1193
00:49:24,559 --> 00:49:26,640
handler can hand those out legally.

1194
00:49:26,640 --> 00:49:27,119
Right.

1195
00:49:27,119 --> 00:49:30,480
>> Correct. Okay. So, um, your records

1196
00:49:30,480 --> 00:49:33,520
information management team, um, we all

1197
00:49:33,520 --> 00:49:36,400
go through annual training. We have to

1198
00:49:36,400 --> 00:49:39,119
test every year. It's it's an ongoing

1199
00:49:39,119 --> 00:49:40,880
thing. Um, as you're aware, in the

1200
00:49:40,880 --> 00:49:43,200
legislature, uh, legislative session,

1201
00:49:43,200 --> 00:49:46,319
this this uh, recent one, they made some

1202
00:49:46,319 --> 00:49:48,000
changes to grammar. We don't expect you

1203
00:49:48,000 --> 00:49:49,680
guys to know all those things, but they

1204
00:49:49,680 --> 00:49:51,200
do expect us to know those things

1205
00:49:51,200 --> 00:49:53,599
because that's our job. So our

1206
00:49:53,599 --> 00:49:55,520
responsibility is to make sure that we

1207
00:49:55,520 --> 00:49:57,760
are sharing the information as it's

1208
00:49:57,760 --> 00:49:59,920
requested, redacting information that is

1209
00:49:59,920 --> 00:50:03,280
protected and you know any any other

1210
00:50:03,280 --> 00:50:05,200
things that if there's documents that

1211
00:50:05,200 --> 00:50:07,680
have been classified a certain way that

1212
00:50:07,680 --> 00:50:10,880
we're following Utah State code.

1213
00:50:10,880 --> 00:50:11,280
>> Okay.

1214
00:50:11,280 --> 00:50:13,839
>> So um if anybody wants information,

1215
00:50:13,839 --> 00:50:15,440
they're more than welcome to submit a

1216
00:50:15,440 --> 00:50:17,599
grammar request and we'll provide the

1217
00:50:17,599 --> 00:50:18,880
information that we're allowed to

1218
00:50:18,880 --> 00:50:22,240
provide. It's it's actually pretty easy

1219
00:50:22,240 --> 00:50:24,400
to do and make requests. We've had

1220
00:50:24,400 --> 00:50:25,920
plenty of members of the community that

1221
00:50:25,920 --> 00:50:30,400
have done it. Um but we would ask that

1222
00:50:30,400 --> 00:50:35,839
um you know people that are certified in records management be the ones to

1223
00:50:35,839 --> 00:50:37,760
release that. Um not only that, there's

1224
00:50:37,760 --> 00:50:40,160
also the requirement that when there is

1225
00:50:40,160 --> 00:50:41,920
a grammar request, that also creates

1226
00:50:41,920 --> 00:50:44,160
another record. So, we have to keep a

1227
00:50:44,160 --> 00:50:47,359
record of requests and um that's not

1228
00:50:47,359 --> 00:50:48,800
something that we would expect you guys

1229
00:50:48,800 --> 00:50:52,000
to do um you know to retain something

1230
00:50:52,000 --> 00:50:55,599
for 3 years until you know the retention

1231
00:50:55,599 --> 00:50:57,760
schedule allows us to to get rid of it.

1232
00:50:57,760 --> 00:50:59,280
So, that's kind of why we have

1233
00:50:59,280 --> 00:51:01,520
everything and most municipalities as

1234
00:51:01,520 --> 00:51:03,760
far as I'm aware also follow that. They

1235
00:51:03,760 --> 00:51:05,680
have very specific people that handle

1236
00:51:05,680 --> 00:51:09,119
those records requests.

1237
00:51:09,119 --> 00:51:11,520
>> Okay. And

1238
00:51:11,520 --> 00:51:14,160
I don't I don't know if this is the

1239
00:51:14,160 --> 00:51:19,280
right place to ask this question, but I saw recently a pretty hefty legal

1240
00:51:19,280 --> 00:51:22,000
bill for a grammar request. When do we

1241
00:51:22,000 --> 00:51:23,920
have to get our attorney involved in

1242
00:51:23,920 --> 00:51:26,319
that?

1243
00:51:26,319 --> 00:51:30,640
Um if it it so

1244
00:51:30,640 --> 00:51:33,440
we typically don't include our attorney

1245
00:51:33,440 --> 00:51:36,000
unless it is things uh that have been

1246
00:51:36,000 --> 00:51:38,559
requested about specific

1247
00:51:38,559 --> 00:51:42,079
um you know legal things. So, if

1248
00:51:42,079 --> 00:51:44,400
somebody say just because it's at the

1249
00:51:44,400 --> 00:51:46,000
top of my mind, hey, I want to know

1250
00:51:46,000 --> 00:51:49,440
about how that whole subway thing went,

1251
00:51:49,440 --> 00:51:51,280
then we would probably include our

1252
00:51:51,280 --> 00:51:53,040
attorney and say, you know, are there

1253
00:51:53,040 --> 00:51:55,040
any legal documents that are attorney

1254
00:51:55,040 --> 00:51:57,680
client privileged because they would be

1255
00:51:57,680 --> 00:52:00,079
the subject matter expert on that. I

1256
00:52:00,079 --> 00:52:02,880
would not be. Um, and that's kind of

1257
00:52:02,880 --> 00:52:05,200
when we would include them. uh sometimes

1258
00:52:05,200 --> 00:52:09,119
they have records that um we may not

1259
00:52:09,119 --> 00:52:10,800
because they're talking with the other

1260
00:52:10,800 --> 00:52:13,040
attorneys. There could be a lot of

1261
00:52:13,040 --> 00:52:14,800
additional information that we don't

1262
00:52:14,800 --> 00:52:18,000
necessarily have that our attorney um

1263
00:52:18,000 --> 00:52:23,520
because of that client privilege would have that. So that's kind of when

1264
00:52:23,520 --> 00:52:26,640
we start to involve them. So, you make

1265
00:52:26,640 --> 00:52:28,800
that decision based on what someone is

1266
00:52:28,800 --> 00:52:30,800
asking for and and sort of whether it

1267
00:52:30,800 --> 00:52:34,400
was a a legal matter or just a Okay.

1268
00:52:34,400 --> 00:52:35,839
>> Right. Um, there might be some other

1269
00:52:35,839 --> 00:52:37,119
times that we would reach out to them

1270
00:52:37,119 --> 00:52:40,079
and ask them, you know, like, hey, how

1271
00:52:40,079 --> 00:52:42,559
should this be classified? Um, the state

1272
00:52:42,559 --> 00:52:44,800
of Utah allows us to classify records

1273
00:52:44,800 --> 00:52:46,640
when they're requested. We don't have to

1274
00:52:46,640 --> 00:52:48,559
classify every record once it's

1275
00:52:48,559 --> 00:52:50,880
requested. So, sometimes we'll reach out

1276
00:52:50,880 --> 00:52:52,480
and ask them, you know, is this a record

1277
00:52:52,480 --> 00:52:55,280
that should be classified this way? um

1278
00:52:55,280 --> 00:52:56,720
you know and kind of get their their

1279
00:52:56,720 --> 00:52:58,800
legal expertise on that. But most of the

1280
00:52:58,800 --> 00:53:01,040
time, I mean, state code is is pretty

1281
00:53:01,040 --> 00:53:02,800
straightforward when it comes to grammar

1282
00:53:02,800 --> 00:53:05,359
and and how we classify records.

1283
00:53:05,359 --> 00:53:05,839
>> Okay.

1284
00:53:05,839 --> 00:53:08,319
>> So, Robin, doesn't grandma though say

1285
00:53:08,319 --> 00:53:10,319
you only have to provide what you have

1286
00:53:10,319 --> 00:53:13,359
on hand? Like you just referenced, the

1287
00:53:13,359 --> 00:53:15,760
attorney may have additional. I mean,

1288
00:53:15,760 --> 00:53:19,200
you're not required to see that.

1289
00:53:19,200 --> 00:53:21,680
>> Uh that might be a little bit of a

1290
00:53:21,680 --> 00:53:23,119
slippery slope because that's an

1291
00:53:23,119 --> 00:53:25,200
attorney question. It probably is. Um,

1292
00:53:25,200 --> 00:53:26,880
if they're asking for something

1293
00:53:26,880 --> 00:53:29,280
specifically and we know that the record

1294
00:53:29,280 --> 00:53:31,040
exists, it's a record and we have to

1295
00:53:31,040 --> 00:53:34,000
provide it if it's not classified as

1296
00:53:34,000 --> 00:53:37,599
protected or private, right? So, um, you

1297
00:53:37,599 --> 00:53:39,599
know, there there would be situations

1298
00:53:39,599 --> 00:53:42,079
where they do have those records. I

1299
00:53:42,079 --> 00:53:43,520
think the thing that you're thinking of

1300
00:53:43,520 --> 00:53:45,520
is if somebody says, "Hey, I want this

1301
00:53:45,520 --> 00:53:47,040
record." record if that record doesn't

1302
00:53:47,040 --> 00:53:50,400
exist, we as a municipality are not

1303
00:53:50,400 --> 00:53:53,680
required to create a record to service

1304
00:53:53,680 --> 00:53:56,319
that request. So if we don't maintain

1305
00:53:56,319 --> 00:53:59,359
that record, then we we don't keep it.

1306
00:53:59,359 --> 00:54:01,040
But we also have to site the reason why

1307
00:54:01,040 --> 00:54:04,160
we can't produce the requested record.

1308
00:54:04,160 --> 00:54:06,240
So usually when we're responding to

1309
00:54:06,240 --> 00:54:08,720
grammar, we're also citing codes, which

1310
00:54:08,720 --> 00:54:11,440
again is why we don't u you know ask

1311
00:54:11,440 --> 00:54:13,520
that you guys respond because we have to

1312
00:54:13,520 --> 00:54:16,480
site a lot of Utah codes explaining what

1313
00:54:16,480 --> 00:54:17,680
the record is, if there was any

1314
00:54:17,680 --> 00:54:20,079
redaction, what state code requires us

1315
00:54:20,079 --> 00:54:23,599
to redact, a lot of things like that. So

1316
00:54:23,599 --> 00:54:26,800
um yeah, if if it's not a record that we

1317
00:54:26,800 --> 00:54:29,920
maintain, then obviously we we're not

1318
00:54:29,920 --> 00:54:31,680
going to create a record. The state does

1319
00:54:31,680 --> 00:54:34,079
not require us to create a record in

1320
00:54:34,079 --> 00:54:39,119
order to provide a requested record.

1321
00:54:39,119 --> 00:54:42,720
Thank you. Welcome. So maybe next we can

1322
00:54:42,720 --> 00:54:45,440
look at the um the rules of order and

1323
00:54:45,440 --> 00:54:47,680
procedures. It's at the end of our

1324
00:54:47,680 --> 00:54:50,400
packet. It's we did adopt this in March

1325
00:54:50,400 --> 00:54:53,440
of 2023 and it's the one that's on the

1326
00:54:53,440 --> 00:54:55,520
back of our agenda every month that

1327
00:54:55,520 --> 00:54:58,720
talks about um procedures and also shows

1328
00:54:58,720 --> 00:55:01,359
the public hearing format.

1329
00:55:01,359 --> 00:55:03,440
Pat, you made a comment earlier in the

1330
00:55:03,440 --> 00:55:06,480
meeting that maybe we should prohibit

1331
00:55:06,480 --> 00:55:08,720
profanity. I don't think that is on

1332
00:55:08,720 --> 00:55:11,119
here. So, is that something you'd like

1333
00:55:11,119 --> 00:55:12,240
to have added?

1334
00:55:12,240 --> 00:55:14,800
>> No, I was looking at when it goes down

1335
00:55:14,800 --> 00:55:17,119
to

1336
00:55:17,119 --> 00:55:19,760
some of the examples that were given

1337
00:55:19,760 --> 00:55:22,720
>> in the from the league.

1338
00:55:22,720 --> 00:55:24,720
>> Wasn't really there was in the conduct

1339
00:55:24,720 --> 00:55:27,440
section and this had to do with the

1340
00:55:27,440 --> 00:55:29,680
thing in 2012.

1341
00:55:29,680 --> 00:55:31,760
So, I'm not quite sure. That's why I

1342
00:55:31,760 --> 00:55:33,599
asked the question initially. Are we

1343
00:55:33,599 --> 00:55:36,240
talking about the code of conduct as one

1344
00:55:36,240 --> 00:55:38,960
issue and then procedures in town

1345
00:55:38,960 --> 00:55:41,280
council differently? Correct.

1346
00:55:41,280 --> 00:55:45,680
>> Yeah. Really good distinction. So, the

1347
00:55:45,680 --> 00:55:47,839
state law actually refers to your rules

1348
00:55:47,839 --> 00:55:49,680
of procedure, how you operate your

1349
00:55:49,680 --> 00:55:52,160
meetings. Code of conduct is something

1350
00:55:52,160 --> 00:55:55,599
that that can be a a part of. The the

1351
00:55:55,599 --> 00:55:57,200
rules of procedure can be a subset of

1352
00:55:57,200 --> 00:55:59,119
your code of conduct. Um, but the code

1353
00:55:59,119 --> 00:56:00,880
of conduct can be much bigger and it and

1354
00:56:00,880 --> 00:56:03,359
it it talks about things other than just

1355
00:56:03,359 --> 00:56:06,720
meetings, but it could reference like

1356
00:56:06,720 --> 00:56:09,760
>> to answer civil question. Uh, mayor,

1357
00:56:09,760 --> 00:56:12,559
>> the harassment, profanity, all that

1358
00:56:12,559 --> 00:56:14,799
stuff. I was thinking that that should

1359
00:56:14,799 --> 00:56:16,319
be something that's included in the in

1360
00:56:16,319 --> 00:56:17,839
the code of conduct part.

1361
00:56:17,839 --> 00:56:18,319
>> Okay.

1362
00:56:18,319 --> 00:56:20,160
>> Not not in the the procedural part.

1363
00:56:20,160 --> 00:56:21,599
>> And we'll get to that next. So,

1364
00:56:21,599 --> 00:56:23,920
>> exactly. So on the on the sheet that I

1365
00:56:23,920 --> 00:56:25,200
referred to that's on the back of our

1366
00:56:25,200 --> 00:56:28,000
agenda, is there anything there knowing

1367
00:56:28,000 --> 00:56:29,920
that we changed it only two years ago

1368
00:56:29,920 --> 00:56:32,480
and we we for example, one of the things

1369
00:56:32,480 --> 00:56:35,680
we added was after the after we closed

1370
00:56:35,680 --> 00:56:37,280
the public hearing, we're giving the

1371
00:56:37,280 --> 00:56:39,839
applicant another opportunity to talk to

1372
00:56:39,839 --> 00:56:42,240
us to clarify anything that they heard

1373
00:56:42,240 --> 00:56:45,520
during the public hearing. Um, is there

1374
00:56:45,520 --> 00:56:47,520
anything else

1375
00:56:47,520 --> 00:56:50,240
in the public hearing format that that

1376
00:56:50,240 --> 00:56:55,190
you think ought to be changed?

1377
00:56:55,200 --> 00:56:57,839
And also, is there anything in the rules

1378
00:56:57,839 --> 00:57:01,119
of order that you think is inappropriate

1379
00:57:01,119 --> 00:57:08,150
or anything that should be added?

1380
00:57:08,160 --> 00:57:09,839
» No questions.

1381
00:57:09,839 --> 00:57:13,680
>> Okay, thanks for that. Anybody?

1382
00:57:13,680 --> 00:57:14,960
stands out for me.

1383
00:57:14,960 --> 00:57:15,359
>> Okay.

1384
00:57:15,359 --> 00:57:17,920
>> I I I think it I think things could be

1385
00:57:17,920 --> 00:57:19,280
added to it, but I like it the way it

1386
00:57:19,280 --> 00:57:20,240
stands now.

1387
00:57:20,240 --> 00:57:20,640
>> Okay.

1388
00:57:20,640 --> 00:57:23,200
>> Yeah,

1389
00:57:23,200 --> 00:57:25,280
>> I think it's fine. I think it's serving

1390
00:57:25,280 --> 00:57:27,200
us well and the changes that were made a

1391
00:57:27,200 --> 00:57:29,359
couple years back have done, you know,

1392
00:57:29,359 --> 00:57:31,119
what we needed them to do.

1393
00:57:31,119 --> 00:57:36,079
>> Okay. So, I think what remains is our

1394
00:57:36,079 --> 00:57:38,480
conduct policy.

1395
00:57:38,480 --> 00:57:40,559
And I said at the first meeting that we

1396
00:57:40,559 --> 00:57:42,480
had these examples from the league and I

1397
00:57:42,480 --> 00:57:44,720
wondered if we wanted to simply adopt

1398
00:57:44,720 --> 00:57:48,480
any of those and it seemed to me that we

1399
00:57:48,480 --> 00:57:50,319
didn't want to exactly adopt any of

1400
00:57:50,319 --> 00:57:52,640
those. But is there one of those that

1401
00:57:52,640 --> 00:57:55,040
might be a good starting point or do we

1402
00:57:55,040 --> 00:57:56,799
want to look at our current conduct

1403
00:57:56,799 --> 00:58:00,319
policy and word smmith and make changes

1404
00:58:00,319 --> 00:58:02,079
to that?

1405
00:58:02,079 --> 00:58:04,160
You know, the one thing that I picked up

1406
00:58:04,160 --> 00:58:07,839
um in a couple of these is that

1407
00:58:07,839 --> 00:58:11,440
um the council should only speak after

1408
00:58:11,440 --> 00:58:16,150
they're recognized by the mayor.

1409
00:58:16,160 --> 00:58:18,079
» That's pretty formal.

1410
00:58:18,079 --> 00:58:19,520
>> I think it's really formal.

1411
00:58:19,520 --> 00:58:20,160
>> I don't

1412
00:58:20,160 --> 00:58:24,160
>> Yeah, I I agree.

1413
00:58:24,160 --> 00:58:25,520
>> You're okay if we don't do that.

1414
00:58:25,520 --> 00:58:28,319
>> Oh, of course. Yeah. I know.

1415
00:58:28,319 --> 00:58:30,559
>> Well, I I you know, when I was looking

1416
00:58:30,559 --> 00:58:33,920
through all of these these three

1417
00:58:33,920 --> 00:58:36,559
different scenarios,

1418
00:58:36,559 --> 00:58:39,040
um

1419
00:58:39,040 --> 00:58:40,880
I thought that we we do a lot of them

1420
00:58:40,880 --> 00:58:43,599
anyway. our our rules,

1421
00:58:43,599 --> 00:58:46,559
our procedures set up that way. But I

1422
00:58:46,559 --> 00:58:48,880
think some of these are are way too

1423
00:58:48,880 --> 00:58:51,920
formal for

1424
00:58:51,920 --> 00:58:54,720
>> for what we're we've been doing in the

1425
00:58:54,720 --> 00:58:57,760
past and for our meetings.

1426
00:58:57,760 --> 00:59:00,160
>> I kind of like our procedures the way

1427
00:59:00,160 --> 00:59:01,520
they are right now.

1428
00:59:01,520 --> 00:59:03,920
>> And that's kind of what I was saying in

1429
00:59:03,920 --> 00:59:06,000
the beginning is I think all three have

1430
00:59:06,000 --> 00:59:08,480
their merits. However, I would like to

1431
00:59:08,480 --> 00:59:11,440
see us mean what we say and say what we

1432
00:59:11,440 --> 00:59:15,760
mean. And if we we need I don't think we

1433
00:59:15,760 --> 00:59:18,480
could adopt any of those three and have

1434
00:59:18,480 --> 00:59:20,720
it honestly be a good reflection of how

1435
00:59:20,720 --> 00:59:22,799
we currently run our meetings. And I

1436
00:59:22,799 --> 00:59:25,599
think we currently run our meetings

1437
00:59:25,599 --> 00:59:28,960
like councilwise. I don't expect Barbara

1438
00:59:28,960 --> 00:59:31,119
to acknowledge me before I speak. And I

1439
00:59:31,119 --> 00:59:32,720
don't I don't Yeah, I don't know that I

1440
00:59:32,720 --> 00:59:34,160
could be on board with that. But I would

1441
00:59:34,160 --> 00:59:36,720
hate for that. That's just an example of

1442
00:59:36,720 --> 00:59:40,480
something all three or all five, sorry,

1443
00:59:40,480 --> 00:59:43,119
all five of us

1444
00:59:43,119 --> 00:59:44,720
wouldn't support. And I think there are

1445
00:59:44,720 --> 00:59:46,480
many other things in the documents that

1446
00:59:46,480 --> 00:59:48,559
that's just not how this particular

1447
00:59:48,559 --> 00:59:52,240
council runs. We have a nice flow. Um,

1448
00:59:52,240 --> 00:59:54,400
now if council changes and the mayor

1449
00:59:54,400 --> 00:59:57,040
changes, I can see how maybe the dynamic

1450
00:59:57,040 --> 00:59:59,359
changes and

1451
00:59:59,359 --> 01:00:02,480
uh maybe these rules would apply. But I

1452
01:00:02,480 --> 01:00:04,400
think whatever we need to set forth

1453
01:00:04,400 --> 01:00:07,440
needs to be open enough to let the

1454
01:00:07,440 --> 01:00:10,000
natural flow of or the dynamic of the

1455
01:00:10,000 --> 01:00:12,480
group shine. And I think that's what we

1456
01:00:12,480 --> 01:00:13,119
do now.

1457
01:00:13,119 --> 01:00:15,119
>> I think we do pretty well. I think we're

1458
01:00:15,119 --> 01:00:18,400
respectful of each other and and um

1459
01:00:18,400 --> 01:00:22,559
yeah, even when we disagree, nobody's out of line or anything like

1460
01:00:22,559 --> 01:00:24,960
that. So, let's just let's just assume

1461
01:00:24,960 --> 01:00:26,480
we're going to we're going to look at

1462
01:00:26,480 --> 01:00:28,400
our current conduct policy, which is

1463
01:00:28,400 --> 01:00:30,559
which says exhibit up on on the top of

1464
01:00:30,559 --> 01:00:31,920
it there.

1465
01:00:31,920 --> 01:00:33,839
And let's just we don't have to go

1466
01:00:33,839 --> 01:00:36,240
through every item but so for example

1467
01:00:36,240 --> 01:00:38,559
the first item is general conduct what

1468
01:00:38,559 --> 01:00:40,400
officials shall do. Is there anything

1469
01:00:40,400 --> 01:00:43,359
there that anyone wants to talk about?

1470
01:00:43,359 --> 01:00:45,520
>> I think the first thing just as an

1471
01:00:45,520 --> 01:00:47,920
overview this thing is

1472
01:00:47,920 --> 01:00:50,559
I went through this and cut it in half

1473
01:00:50,559 --> 01:00:53,119
because it's highly repetitive. It talks

1474
01:00:53,119 --> 01:00:55,280
about the staff should do this. The town

1475
01:00:55,280 --> 01:00:57,680
council should do this instead of saying

1476
01:00:57,680 --> 01:01:00,160
a category that's town council and

1477
01:01:00,160 --> 01:01:02,640
staff. This is what we do. Staff does

1478
01:01:02,640 --> 01:01:04,319
this, which is different than council.

1479
01:01:04,319 --> 01:01:05,599
does this, which is different

1480
01:01:05,599 --> 01:01:07,440
than staff.

1481
01:01:07,440 --> 01:01:10,480
Literally, I cut this from 2,000 words

1482
01:01:10,480 --> 01:01:13,599
to to 1100 words by just eliminating the

1483
01:01:13,599 --> 01:01:14,400
repetition.

1484
01:01:14,400 --> 01:01:16,559
>> And you know that there were two copies

1485
01:01:16,559 --> 01:01:18,319
of the same thing, right?

1486
01:01:18,319 --> 01:01:18,960
>> Right.

1487
01:01:18,960 --> 01:01:21,280
>> Yeah. So, it wasn't that you just Okay.

1488
01:01:21,280 --> 01:01:23,599
So, for example, Pat, so in the what's

1489
01:01:23,599 --> 01:01:25,280
up on the screen, what did you cut out

1490
01:01:25,280 --> 01:01:27,280
of there?

1491
01:01:27,280 --> 01:01:39,030
>> See, here we are.

1492
01:01:39,040 --> 01:01:40,720
One thing that Kyler was just saying,

1493
01:01:40,720 --> 01:01:43,040
wait to be acknowledged by the chair

1494
01:01:43,040 --> 01:01:44,480
before speaking.

1495
01:01:44,480 --> 01:01:47,359
>> Oh, we're going to take that out. Yeah.

1496
01:01:47,359 --> 01:01:49,520
Where was that?

1497
01:01:49,520 --> 01:01:51,200
>> It's not so much that I cut things out.

1498
01:01:51,200 --> 01:01:53,200
I said I consolidated them.

1499
01:01:53,200 --> 01:01:55,040
>> I think might be a better way to

1500
01:01:55,040 --> 01:01:56,720
describe it.

1501
01:01:56,720 --> 01:01:59,520
>> Um, let's take C out. Wait. wait to be

1502
01:01:59,520 --> 01:02:00,799
acknowledged by the chair before

1503
01:02:00,799 --> 01:02:05,349
speaking.

1504
01:02:05,359 --> 01:02:07,839
I think where that might apply is the

1505
01:02:07,839 --> 01:02:12,160
public maybe um you know we've had it in

1506
01:02:12,160 --> 01:02:14,319
the past where

1507
01:02:14,319 --> 01:02:16,640
somebody says

1508
01:02:16,640 --> 01:02:19,040
can I say something

1509
01:02:19,040 --> 01:02:21,280
and I think at that point yes they do

1510
01:02:21,280 --> 01:02:24,880
need to wait for the chair to say

1511
01:02:24,880 --> 01:02:26,640
>> yeah and in fact it's my prerogative

1512
01:02:26,640 --> 01:02:29,520
whether I let them or not but um this is

1513
01:02:29,520 --> 01:02:33,599
officials this is so in this in item. I

1514
01:02:33,599 --> 01:02:36,400
think we do want to take that out.

1515
01:02:36,400 --> 01:02:38,799
What about D? Is that redundant? I mean,

1516
01:02:38,799 --> 01:02:40,400
move to require the chair to enforce

1517
01:02:40,400 --> 01:02:47,589
these rules.

1518
01:02:47,599 --> 01:02:53,109
What about

1519
01:02:53,119 --> 01:02:54,559
» I don't have an issue with much of this

1520
01:02:54,559 --> 01:02:56,319
until we get to the electronic equipment

1521
01:02:56,319 --> 01:02:58,559
part.

1522
01:02:58,559 --> 01:03:00,640
>> So, I I had a question about number

1523
01:03:00,640 --> 01:03:02,720
eight, protect the public good. public

1524
01:03:02,720 --> 01:03:04,720
officials do not represent a specific

1525
01:03:04,720 --> 01:03:06,400
neighborhood, business, individual or

1526
01:03:06,400 --> 01:03:08,880
interest. And I wanted to talk about

1527
01:03:08,880 --> 01:03:11,280
that a little bit because three of us in

1528
01:03:11,280 --> 01:03:13,680
on the council live on the Anastasia

1529
01:03:13,680 --> 01:03:18,160
Plateau and that comes up way too much.

1530
01:03:18,160 --> 01:03:20,160
Does anybody else agree that that that's

1531
01:03:20,160 --> 01:03:22,079
brought up much?

1532
01:03:22,079 --> 01:03:24,640
>> That's brought up by others

1533
01:03:24,640 --> 01:03:29,520
>> by Yeah. others. because I feel like

1534
01:03:29,520 --> 01:03:31,280
we still represent the whole community

1535
01:03:31,280 --> 01:03:32,960
and we're not making decisions just

1536
01:03:32,960 --> 01:03:35,839
because of our own neighborhood.

1537
01:03:35,839 --> 01:03:38,400
>> So yeah, I think it's different in

1538
01:03:38,400 --> 01:03:40,799
because we aren't a lot of bigger

1539
01:03:40,799 --> 01:03:42,079
municipalities, right? They have a

1540
01:03:42,079 --> 01:03:44,240
district and that's your person is

1541
01:03:44,240 --> 01:03:47,520
representing your district and they

1542
01:03:47,520 --> 01:03:50,079
and and that's not how we run.

1543
01:03:50,079 --> 01:03:52,480
>> Yeah. We're at large so to speak. But I

1544
01:03:52,480 --> 01:03:54,720
also think that it is a good statement

1545
01:03:54,720 --> 01:03:59,280
because I think the it's inevitable that

1546
01:03:59,280 --> 01:04:01,039
you know your neighborhood the very

1547
01:04:01,039 --> 01:04:04,079
best, right? You live there, you're

1548
01:04:04,079 --> 01:04:05,520
there the most. You see your

1549
01:04:05,520 --> 01:04:08,000
neighborhood. It's inevitable that Randy

1550
01:04:08,000 --> 01:04:09,599
knows Valley View Drive better than I

1551
01:04:09,599 --> 01:04:11,280
do.

1552
01:04:11,280 --> 01:04:11,839
>> I hope.

1553
01:04:11,839 --> 01:04:14,559
>> Yes, I do.

1554
01:04:14,559 --> 01:04:17,920
>> So, I think that I mean I see what you

1555
01:04:17,920 --> 01:04:21,200
mean that some

1556
01:04:21,200 --> 01:04:24,720
Having three of you living up there, it

1557
01:04:24,720 --> 01:04:27,359
feels it feels like Anastasia is is well

1558
01:04:27,359 --> 01:04:29,200
represented because three of you know it

1559
01:04:29,200 --> 01:04:31,440
better. I'm not up there very often.

1560
01:04:31,440 --> 01:04:34,559
>> I guess what I'm where where I want to

1561
01:04:34,559 --> 01:04:37,200
go with this is I just want to state

1562
01:04:37,200 --> 01:04:39,920
publicly that just because I live on the

1563
01:04:39,920 --> 01:04:42,480
Anastasia plateau does not mean that

1564
01:04:42,480 --> 01:04:44,240
when I make decisions it's just to

1565
01:04:44,240 --> 01:04:45,839
protect my own neighborhood. I'm making

1566
01:04:45,839 --> 01:04:47,440
decisions I think are good for the whole

1567
01:04:47,440 --> 01:04:50,799
town. And I think it's a good idea for

1568
01:04:50,799 --> 01:04:53,520
us to never say, "Well,

1569
01:04:53,520 --> 01:04:55,200
I wouldn't want this in my neighborhood,

1570
01:04:55,200 --> 01:04:56,799
so I'm voting against it." And I don't

1571
01:04:56,799 --> 01:04:58,720
think we would anyway, but I just want

1572
01:04:58,720 --> 01:05:02,799
us to be kind of aware of the fact that

1573
01:05:02,799 --> 01:05:05,119
we do represent the whole town and we

1574
01:05:05,119 --> 01:05:08,000
need to to speak that way. Does that

1575
01:05:08,000 --> 01:05:08,880
make sense?

1576
01:05:08,880 --> 01:05:12,160
>> Yeah. And I think this is

1577
01:05:12,160 --> 01:05:13,839
personally I think this is what this is

1578
01:05:13,839 --> 01:05:15,039
basically saying.

1579
01:05:15,039 --> 01:05:16,319
>> Yeah, it's a good reminder.

1580
01:05:16,319 --> 01:05:18,240
>> It's telling it's telling the residents

1581
01:05:18,240 --> 01:05:21,359
and businesses and anybody else public

1582
01:05:21,359 --> 01:05:23,839
officials do not represent a specific

1583
01:05:23,839 --> 01:05:25,440
neighborhood business or individual.

1584
01:05:25,440 --> 01:05:28,960
When they're speaking, they are speaking

1585
01:05:28,960 --> 01:05:31,119
for the public and for the town in

1586
01:05:31,119 --> 01:05:34,240
general. So, I like the statement where

1587
01:05:34,240 --> 01:05:38,559
it is. I think it's fine. Um,

1588
01:05:38,559 --> 01:05:41,520
and I think that's the statement is

1589
01:05:41,520 --> 01:05:47,200
speaking to everybody else. Here's the way public officials will be

1590
01:05:47,200 --> 01:05:48,880
conducting themselves.

1591
01:05:48,880 --> 01:05:51,680
>> Okay. Can you scroll that down to the

1592
01:05:51,680 --> 01:05:55,510
rest of this section?

1593
01:05:55,520 --> 01:05:58,160
I think we all turn our electronics off.

1594
01:05:58,160 --> 01:06:00,160
I've never heard one of our phones ring.

1595
01:06:00,160 --> 01:06:03,839
Let's see. except my security camera but

1596
01:06:03,839 --> 01:06:05,039
keeps going off.

1597
01:06:05,039 --> 01:06:05,440
>> But I do

1598
01:06:05,440 --> 01:06:06,480
>> but we don't see that.

1599
01:06:06,480 --> 01:06:10,480
>> I do have a question about uh if we text

1600
01:06:10,480 --> 01:06:13,359
during a meeting if if I if this is

1601
01:06:13,359 --> 01:06:15,680
something that comes up and I don't know

1602
01:06:15,680 --> 01:06:17,280
what the answer is and I go, you know, I

1603
01:06:17,280 --> 01:06:19,920
wonder what so and so thinks about this.

1604
01:06:19,920 --> 01:06:22,640
It would be highly inappropriate, yes, a

1605
01:06:22,640 --> 01:06:24,880
violation of the open meetings act if I

1606
01:06:24,880 --> 01:06:26,000
were to text somebody and say, "Hey,

1607
01:06:26,000 --> 01:06:28,160
what do you think?" Right? What if I

1608
01:06:28,160 --> 01:06:31,119
text an attorney or uh not Mr. Harden,

1609
01:06:31,119 --> 01:06:32,880
but somebody else? What's the legal

1610
01:06:32,880 --> 01:06:35,280
issue on that? I shouldn't be permitted

1611
01:06:35,280 --> 01:06:38,319
to do that unless I

1612
01:06:38,319 --> 01:06:41,680
openly say it. Correct.

1613
01:06:41,680 --> 01:06:43,280
In other words, I I wonder what the

1614
01:06:43,280 --> 01:06:46,079
legal opinion is on this.

1615
01:06:46,079 --> 01:06:47,599
>> We're all looking at you, Tom.

1616
01:06:47,599 --> 01:06:50,799
>> I think there should be a prohibition of

1617
01:06:50,799 --> 01:06:53,359
me texting somebody outside that

1618
01:06:53,359 --> 01:06:53,760
meeting.

1619
01:06:53,760 --> 01:06:55,440
>> So, you can certainly put that in your

1620
01:06:55,440 --> 01:06:58,240
rules. Absolutely. Um whether or not

1621
01:06:58,240 --> 01:07:00,640
it's it's it's it's exactly prohibited

1622
01:07:00,640 --> 01:07:02,559
by the Open and Public Meetings Act. Um

1623
01:07:02,559 --> 01:07:05,280
I'll let Robin weigh in if I say this

1624
01:07:05,280 --> 01:07:09,520
incorrectly, but um I Pat, I I think

1625
01:07:09,520 --> 01:07:11,200
you're right. I think if you were having

1626
01:07:11,200 --> 01:07:12,960
a a private side conversation with

1627
01:07:12,960 --> 01:07:14,240
someone outside of the meeting, that

1628
01:07:14,240 --> 01:07:16,319
flies in the face of an open and public

1629
01:07:16,319 --> 01:07:17,839
meeting, right? because you're privy to

1630
01:07:17,839 --> 01:07:20,160
information and you're you're you're

1631
01:07:20,160 --> 01:07:21,680
then

1632
01:07:21,680 --> 01:07:24,079
uh acting on or conveying or making

1633
01:07:24,079 --> 01:07:25,599
decisions on that information that the

1634
01:07:25,599 --> 01:07:28,400
rest of the council does not have.

1635
01:07:28,400 --> 01:07:30,000
If you were to if if you were to

1636
01:07:30,000 --> 01:07:31,680
disclose it and say, "Hey, I just texted

1637
01:07:31,680 --> 01:07:33,440
my personal attorney and here's what he

1638
01:07:33,440 --> 01:07:35,599
said about this."

1639
01:07:35,599 --> 01:07:38,799
Maybe. But but again, I think you could

1640
01:07:38,799 --> 01:07:40,400
by policy say, "We're just not going to

1641
01:07:40,400 --> 01:07:42,240
do that." Robin, do you have a different

1642
01:07:42,240 --> 01:07:44,400
opinion? I I think the only thing that I

1643
01:07:44,400 --> 01:07:47,200
would really want to add is that um I

1644
01:07:47,200 --> 01:07:49,599
think it's more of the public perception

1645
01:07:49,599 --> 01:07:52,000
when you're on your phone because they

1646
01:07:52,000 --> 01:07:53,760
don't know what conversation whether

1647
01:07:53,760 --> 01:07:57,440
it's you know hey what's for dinner you

1648
01:07:57,440 --> 01:07:59,520
know are you having a conversation about

1649
01:07:59,520 --> 01:08:01,920
the the current topic or are you

1650
01:08:01,920 --> 01:08:03,680
thinking about you know when is this

1651
01:08:03,680 --> 01:08:05,680
meeting going to end what am I coming

1652
01:08:05,680 --> 01:08:08,319
home to you know things like that so I I

1653
01:08:08,319 --> 01:08:11,119
think for perception purposes it's you

1654
01:08:11,119 --> 01:08:14,640
know it it would be good to not do that

1655
01:08:14,640 --> 01:08:16,000
to just say, you know, we're just not

1656
01:08:16,000 --> 01:08:18,880
going to do that. But that's that's kind

1657
01:08:18,880 --> 01:08:24,080
of my my personal feeling on that. So So

1658
01:08:24,080 --> 01:08:26,319
>> on the other hand, if if we were talking

1659
01:08:26,319 --> 01:08:30,480
about something and and somebody said,

1660
01:08:30,480 --> 01:08:33,440
"I'm not sure if there are 10 or 20 of

1661
01:08:33,440 --> 01:08:35,920
those in town." And we could quick text

1662
01:08:35,920 --> 01:08:37,679
somebody and find out and say, "I just

1663
01:08:37,679 --> 01:08:39,759
checked and there are 20." That could be

1664
01:08:39,759 --> 01:08:41,279
useful information

1665
01:08:41,279 --> 01:08:42,719
>> which is real different than us sitting

1666
01:08:42,719 --> 01:08:44,640
there texting throughout a meeting,

1667
01:08:44,640 --> 01:08:45,359
>> right?

1668
01:08:45,359 --> 01:08:49,040
>> Which would be poor poor conduct. I

1669
01:08:49,040 --> 01:08:49,920
agree. But

1670
01:08:49,920 --> 01:08:51,279
>> and again, I think that speaks to

1671
01:08:51,279 --> 01:08:52,080
perception

1672
01:08:52,080 --> 01:08:54,480
>> that so I think just at our just use

1673
01:08:54,480 --> 01:08:56,159
discretion. I think all of us are good

1674
01:08:56,159 --> 01:08:58,960
at being present in the meeting and

1675
01:08:58,960 --> 01:08:59,839
>> absolutely.

1676
01:08:59,839 --> 01:09:00,480
>> Yeah.

1677
01:09:00,480 --> 01:09:02,319
And I'll say for the record that

1678
01:09:02,319 --> 01:09:03,839
there are times I'm on the phone, but

1679
01:09:03,839 --> 01:09:05,520
that's because my phone actually has

1680
01:09:05,520 --> 01:09:07,440
better access to some of our documents

1681
01:09:07,440 --> 01:09:13,040
than my iPad as far as accessibility

1682
01:09:13,040 --> 01:09:16,080
just because it's newer. So, there are

1683
01:09:16,080 --> 01:09:18,080
times that and I I should be aware of

1684
01:09:18,080 --> 01:09:19,679
the public perception that people don't

1685
01:09:19,679 --> 01:09:21,679
actually know what I'm doing on my phone

1686
01:09:21,679 --> 01:09:23,440
and that I'm reading packet material and

1687
01:09:23,440 --> 01:09:27,040
not reading text messages about what's

1688
01:09:27,040 --> 01:09:31,040
for dinner. I try to ignore those.

1689
01:09:31,040 --> 01:09:34,960
Um I I this is a great uh discussion.

1690
01:09:34,960 --> 01:09:37,600
You may I I think it may be as a

1691
01:09:37,600 --> 01:09:40,000
suggestion um if you want to keep that

1692
01:09:40,000 --> 01:09:41,600
flexibility and not have a blanket rule

1693
01:09:41,600 --> 01:09:43,600
of we're never going to text ever and

1694
01:09:43,600 --> 01:09:45,040
that's that's that's good. I think for

1695
01:09:45,040 --> 01:09:46,560
the reasons that you mentioned, mayor, I

1696
01:09:46,560 --> 01:09:48,400
think having a policy also that states

1697
01:09:48,400 --> 01:09:51,759
if we do that, we are going to disclose,

1698
01:09:51,759 --> 01:09:54,080
hey, I just texted so and so for this

1699
01:09:54,080 --> 01:09:57,199
answer and it's 20, not 10. Again, just

1700
01:09:57,199 --> 01:09:59,840
so that everybody on the council and who

1701
01:09:59,840 --> 01:10:02,320
is attending the meeting understands

1702
01:10:02,320 --> 01:10:04,239
the the information that the council is

1703
01:10:04,239 --> 01:10:05,600
acting on. Again, that's the whole point

1704
01:10:05,600 --> 01:10:07,120
of the open and public meetings act is

1705
01:10:07,120 --> 01:10:10,719
that meetings are conducted in public.

1706
01:10:10,719 --> 01:10:13,440
>> Yeah. But I do think that switching it

1707
01:10:13,440 --> 01:10:16,080
to silent is is important and I think we

1708
01:10:16,080 --> 01:10:18,640
all do that. Uh what about that number

1709
01:10:18,640 --> 01:10:22,239
K? Is that let's see shell immediately.

1710
01:10:22,239 --> 01:10:24,320
>> Did you say number K?

1711
01:10:24,320 --> 01:10:28,320
>> Okay. Number K. Letter K.

1712
01:10:28,320 --> 01:10:30,960
>> K-shaped economy.

1713
01:10:30,960 --> 01:10:32,560
>> Yeah.

1714
01:10:32,560 --> 01:10:34,159
>> You say number, I say letter.

1715
01:10:34,159 --> 01:10:36,400
>> It's okay. I just was uh making sure I

1716
01:10:36,400 --> 01:10:38,560
heard you right.

1717
01:10:38,560 --> 01:10:41,600
>> You always hear me right. Okay. So I

1718
01:10:41,600 --> 01:10:45,040
guess that should stay, huh? Okay. So

1719
01:10:45,040 --> 01:10:48,239
let's look at conduct conduct with coic

1720
01:10:48,239 --> 01:10:53,910
officials. That second one there.

1721
01:10:53,920 --> 01:10:55,440
» Pat, is there anything on there you took

1722
01:10:55,440 --> 01:10:57,679
out?

1723
01:10:57,679 --> 01:11:00,320
>> No, I I trimmed it down a bit, but I

1724
01:11:00,320 --> 01:11:04,550
everything in there is

1725
01:11:04,560 --> 01:11:06,000
» good with me.

1726
01:11:06,000 --> 01:11:08,320
>> So were you an editor in a previous

1727
01:11:08,320 --> 01:11:08,960
life?

1728
01:11:08,960 --> 01:11:10,800
>> I read police reports. until I was sick

1729
01:11:10,800 --> 01:11:13,280
to my stomach.

1730
01:11:13,280 --> 01:11:14,880
>> So, you just shortened the stuff. Is

1731
01:11:14,880 --> 01:11:16,320
that what you're saying? You rewrote

1732
01:11:16,320 --> 01:11:17,840
them.

1733
01:11:17,840 --> 01:11:19,360
>> You didn't strike them out. You just

1734
01:11:19,360 --> 01:11:20,239
kind of shorten them.

1735
01:11:20,239 --> 01:11:22,719
>> Just kind of trimmed them down. And I'd

1736
01:11:22,719 --> 01:11:24,560
be happy to send

1737
01:11:24,560 --> 01:11:25,679
>> I was just going to ask

1738
01:11:25,679 --> 01:11:29,360
>> version or if it's all there

1739
01:11:29,360 --> 01:11:30,880
>> draft.

1740
01:11:30,880 --> 01:11:35,120
>> Um Pat, why don't you send your draft to

1741
01:11:35,120 --> 01:11:36,320
Robin?

1742
01:11:36,320 --> 01:11:41,189
>> I can send it all to you now.

1743
01:11:41,199 --> 01:11:43,760
And as they're reworking this to bring

1744
01:11:43,760 --> 01:11:46,000
back to us, they can take a look at your

1745
01:11:46,000 --> 01:11:46,719
suggestions.

1746
01:11:46,719 --> 01:11:47,280
>> I'll do that.

1747
01:11:47,280 --> 01:11:48,880
>> Because as long as you're not changing

1748
01:11:48,880 --> 01:11:52,719
the the point and the gist,

1749
01:11:52,719 --> 01:11:57,360
>> if you like the language better, I don't

1750
01:11:57,360 --> 01:11:59,199
know who's going to write this, if it's

1751
01:11:59,199 --> 01:12:02,560
Tom or Robin or April or whatever, but

1752
01:12:02,560 --> 01:12:04,560
maybe just let them have those and if

1753
01:12:04,560 --> 01:12:06,000
they see something that makes complete

1754
01:12:06,000 --> 01:12:07,520
sense that you give them, they can

1755
01:12:07,520 --> 01:12:08,719
change that. I'll do that

1756
01:12:08,719 --> 01:12:10,960
>> because we'll we'll be the final um

1757
01:12:10,960 --> 01:12:13,120
we'll do the final vote on this anyway.

1758
01:12:13,120 --> 01:12:16,320
So um so one question I had avoid

1759
01:12:16,320 --> 01:12:18,400
offensive negative comments and practice

1760
01:12:18,400 --> 01:12:20,000
civility.

1761
01:12:20,000 --> 01:12:22,320
That kind of covers not using profanity,

1762
01:12:22,320 --> 01:12:24,560
right? We don't need to specifically say

1763
01:12:24,560 --> 01:12:27,600
not to use profanity.

1764
01:12:27,600 --> 01:12:29,760
Plus Kylo wouldn't be able to make her

1765
01:12:29,760 --> 01:12:37,830
point without it. So

1766
01:12:37,840 --> 01:12:38,320
Okay,

1767
01:12:38,320 --> 01:12:41,040
>> thanks for the check. I needed that.

1768
01:12:41,040 --> 01:12:44,320
>> Okay, contact with city staff. What

1769
01:12:44,320 --> 01:12:46,400
about that? Anything in there that

1770
01:12:46,400 --> 01:12:49,600
anybody wants to talk about?

1771
01:12:49,600 --> 01:12:51,840
We talked about when to contact them. We

1772
01:12:51,840 --> 01:12:54,880
talked about um weekends and evenings,

1773
01:12:54,880 --> 01:12:57,840
so we don't need to redisuss that.

1774
01:12:57,840 --> 01:12:59,600
>> I I can't believe Randy doesn't have a

1775
01:12:59,600 --> 01:13:04,709
comment about the the heading there.

1776
01:13:04,719 --> 01:13:07,120
conduct with city staff,

1777
01:13:07,120 --> 01:13:09,120
>> not town step.

1778
01:13:09,120 --> 01:13:10,080
>> Let's change that.

1779
01:13:10,080 --> 01:13:12,000
>> In our own document.

1780
01:13:12,000 --> 01:13:13,840
>> Our own document. How

1781
01:13:13,840 --> 01:13:17,199
>> embarrassing. Um

1782
01:13:17,199 --> 01:13:20,080
>> I wanted to ask just a little bit about

1783
01:13:20,080 --> 01:13:22,000
um D

1784
01:13:22,000 --> 01:13:25,600
conduct with town staff. Um recognizing

1785
01:13:25,600 --> 01:13:28,320
that we each have you know our own

1786
01:13:28,320 --> 01:13:30,640
assignment per department.

1787
01:13:30,640 --> 01:13:31,840
>> Which part is this? Uh

1788
01:13:31,840 --> 01:13:34,239
>> D. Okay.

1789
01:13:34,239 --> 01:13:36,159
refrain from giving direction to staff

1790
01:13:36,159 --> 01:13:38,400
on behalf of the public body without

1791
01:13:38,400 --> 01:13:40,560
having received the express authority of

1792
01:13:40,560 --> 01:13:44,800
the public body to do so. Um is is that

1793
01:13:44,800 --> 01:13:47,360
in concert with us

1794
01:13:47,360 --> 01:13:51,280
uh working independently you know with

1795
01:13:51,280 --> 01:13:58,790
uh each department

1796
01:13:58,800 --> 01:14:01,440
I have you know I I'm glad we're talking

1797
01:14:01,440 --> 01:14:02,480
about this. I was going to bring this

1798
01:14:02,480 --> 01:14:07,040
up. So, so we all have we all as council

1799
01:14:07,040 --> 01:14:09,440
members have our own responsibilities

1800
01:14:09,440 --> 01:14:11,520
and some of us have departments and some

1801
01:14:11,520 --> 01:14:13,280
of us have people and some of us have

1802
01:14:13,280 --> 01:14:15,120
functions.

1803
01:14:15,120 --> 01:14:18,640
Do we as a body feel that if we want to

1804
01:14:18,640 --> 01:14:21,760
for example talk to Ryan Gooler about

1805
01:14:21,760 --> 01:14:24,239
how he's doing something should we talk

1806
01:14:24,239 --> 01:14:26,400
to to Jack and involve him in that

1807
01:14:26,400 --> 01:14:29,040
conversation or should we feel free to

1808
01:14:29,040 --> 01:14:31,040
go directly to Ryan? And that's is that

1809
01:14:31,040 --> 01:14:32,800
the question you're asking?

1810
01:14:32,800 --> 01:14:34,640
>> And I think it's a good conversation to

1811
01:14:34,640 --> 01:14:38,080
have. Um, so so there's that. There's

1812
01:14:38,080 --> 01:14:39,520
the council piece and the the

1813
01:14:39,520 --> 01:14:47,120
responsibility council. There's also the town staff piece. And that's that.

1814
01:14:47,120 --> 01:14:50,800
So if someone reports, so Robin reports

1815
01:14:50,800 --> 01:14:53,679
to Tom. If we want to talk to Robin

1816
01:14:53,679 --> 01:14:56,080
about something, should we go through

1817
01:14:56,080 --> 01:14:58,640
Tom? And so let's have conversations

1818
01:14:58,640 --> 01:15:01,520
about both of that. the the the staff

1819
01:15:01,520 --> 01:15:04,400
reporting and the council responsibility

1820
01:15:04,400 --> 01:15:06,239
and how

1821
01:15:06,239 --> 01:15:08,080
I mean we don't have to change anything

1822
01:15:08,080 --> 01:15:09,600
but let's at least have a conversation

1823
01:15:09,600 --> 01:15:10,480
about that.

1824
01:15:10,480 --> 01:15:12,080
>> Well, it's just following chain of

1825
01:15:12,080 --> 01:15:14,480
command. So, it's not creating anything

1826
01:15:14,480 --> 01:15:15,040
new

1827
01:15:15,040 --> 01:15:16,400
>> in the private sector. You would

1828
01:15:16,400 --> 01:15:19,120
definitely follow chain of command.

1829
01:15:19,120 --> 01:15:25,270
>> Oh, wait. Are we talking about like

1830
01:15:25,280 --> 01:15:27,600
» I am trying to think of a Robin specific

1831
01:15:27,600 --> 01:15:30,080
question which I have like have had

1832
01:15:30,080 --> 01:15:33,120
clumps of them in the past.

1833
01:15:33,120 --> 01:15:35,760
Hey Robin, I noticed that when I call

1834
01:15:35,760 --> 01:15:37,920
the phone tree,

1835
01:15:37,920 --> 01:15:39,679
you're still listed as deputy clerk.

1836
01:15:39,679 --> 01:15:40,719
That was something I had a long time

1837
01:15:40,719 --> 01:15:43,120
ago. Do I really have to go to Tom?

1838
01:15:43,120 --> 01:15:44,320
>> Well, that's what we're talking about.

1839
01:15:44,320 --> 01:15:46,480
Like I feel like burdening Tom with that

1840
01:15:46,480 --> 01:15:49,520
when Tom's got a million other manager

1841
01:15:49,520 --> 01:15:51,520
fires. Like

1842
01:15:51,520 --> 01:15:56,400
if I have a big issue,

1843
01:15:56,400 --> 01:15:56,800
gosh,

1844
01:15:56,800 --> 01:15:58,560
>> I think we're talking about performance

1845
01:15:58,560 --> 01:15:59,520
or conduct.

1846
01:15:59,520 --> 01:16:01,760
>> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Because if I'm

1847
01:16:01,760 --> 01:16:05,760
having an issue, then I could say I

1848
01:16:05,760 --> 01:16:08,080
don't want to go over Robin's head and I

1849
01:16:08,080 --> 01:16:11,920
don't want to go around Tom. like these

1850
01:16:11,920 --> 01:16:13,920
I this would be really hard to put in

1851
01:16:13,920 --> 01:16:15,760
black and white I think

1852
01:16:15,760 --> 01:16:17,280
>> but these are bigger things than that

1853
01:16:17,280 --> 01:16:20,480
Kyla the these are

1854
01:16:20,480 --> 01:16:23,360
so one of the questions I have if I if I

1855
01:16:23,360 --> 01:16:26,560
went directly to Jameson's the wrong

1856
01:16:26,560 --> 01:16:28,640
example if I went directly to Christian

1857
01:16:28,640 --> 01:16:31,360
about something I think he'd be pretty

1858
01:16:31,360 --> 01:16:34,640
intimidated and and

1859
01:16:34,640 --> 01:16:40,880
I I think I think maybe we should be at least working

1860
01:16:40,880 --> 01:16:44,080
through the managers and Robin you're a

1861
01:16:44,080 --> 01:16:46,719
manager too so you're you know so so

1862
01:16:46,719 --> 01:16:48,320
maybe

1863
01:16:48,320 --> 01:16:51,040
or Tom give us some rules of thumb

1864
01:16:51,040 --> 01:16:53,600
>> yeah so um in in terms of like

1865
01:16:53,600 --> 01:16:55,920
performance and and things I think

1866
01:16:55,920 --> 01:16:59,040
that's already covered in C says discuss

1867
01:16:59,040 --> 01:17:02,080
directly with the town manager or DCD we

1868
01:17:02,080 --> 01:17:04,159
may want to change that I don't know why

1869
01:17:04,159 --> 01:17:07,360
the DCD was included in 2012 but anyway

1870
01:17:07,360 --> 01:17:09,360
discuss directly with the town manager

1871
01:17:09,360 --> 01:17:11,520
any displeasure with or concerns about a

1872
01:17:11,520 --> 01:17:15,520
department member or staff. So like if you say gosh I've really got an issue

1873
01:17:15,520 --> 01:17:17,040
with the way that so and so is doing

1874
01:17:17,040 --> 01:17:19,199
stuff rather than going to them directly

1875
01:17:19,199 --> 01:17:20,880
or even to their supervisor probably

1876
01:17:20,880 --> 01:17:22,480
first to come to the town manager and

1877
01:17:22,480 --> 01:17:23,840
say let's talk about this and then we

1878
01:17:23,840 --> 01:17:25,920
can come up with the appropriate um way

1879
01:17:25,920 --> 01:17:28,159
to handle the situation. So that's

1880
01:17:28,159 --> 01:17:30,239
>> so let's cross off for DC.

1881
01:17:30,239 --> 01:17:31,280
>> Yeah.

1882
01:17:31,280 --> 01:17:34,239
>> Well actually but we are going to the

1883
01:17:34,239 --> 01:17:36,000
DCD.

1884
01:17:36,000 --> 01:17:37,760
Look at his name thing.

1885
01:17:37,760 --> 01:17:40,080
>> Yeah. For a minute.

1886
01:17:40,080 --> 01:17:42,560
I don't know. Every order. So

1887
01:17:42,560 --> 01:17:46,239
>> So Tom, you're saying C really is saying

1888
01:17:46,239 --> 01:17:49,840
don't go to the council person over the

1889
01:17:49,840 --> 01:17:51,840
department. Go to the town manager.

1890
01:17:51,840 --> 01:17:55,040
Well, if if it's like a if it's like a a

1891
01:17:55,040 --> 01:17:56,960
performance issue, if it's hey, so and

1892
01:17:56,960 --> 01:17:59,840
so is not pulling their weight or um so

1893
01:17:59,840 --> 01:18:03,280
and so did did this which is um you know

1894
01:18:03,280 --> 01:18:04,960
counter to town policy or you know some

1895
01:18:04,960 --> 01:18:06,480
something that that would require some

1896
01:18:06,480 --> 01:18:09,199
kind of coaching or or things like that

1897
01:18:09,199 --> 01:18:10,400
then yeah I think it's appropriate to

1898
01:18:10,400 --> 01:18:13,120
come to the town manager first. Um so

1899
01:18:13,120 --> 01:18:16,320
that's that's that's C. Um, I love the

1900
01:18:16,320 --> 01:18:17,920
way that we have things set up with

1901
01:18:17,920 --> 01:18:20,640
council members having um responsibility

1902
01:18:20,640 --> 01:18:22,000
for different departments and there's a

1903
01:18:22,000 --> 01:18:25,760
council liaison. If it's something um

1904
01:18:25,760 --> 01:18:28,560
like a project that the council is

1905
01:18:28,560 --> 01:18:30,000
working, excuse me, a specific

1906
01:18:30,000 --> 01:18:31,600
department is working on like say you

1907
01:18:31,600 --> 01:18:33,520
have a question about the Russian olive

1908
01:18:33,520 --> 01:18:37,360
and tamarisk removal project. Um then

1909
01:18:37,360 --> 01:18:38,719
yeah, you don't have to come to the town

1910
01:18:38,719 --> 01:18:41,120
manager for that. Um, you could say to

1911
01:18:41,120 --> 01:18:44,800
Kyla, "Hey, Kyla. Um, I I want to talk

1912
01:18:44,800 --> 01:18:50,880
to Kendall or Nile about the Russian olive removal project, right?"

1913
01:18:50,880 --> 01:18:52,800
And and you can just go straight to to

1914
01:18:52,800 --> 01:18:54,080
that department through the council

1915
01:18:54,080 --> 01:18:56,239
liaison, right? I I think that's we've

1916
01:18:56,239 --> 01:18:57,920
got that all set up. It doesn't require

1917
01:18:57,920 --> 01:19:01,360
the whole council to say, "Can Jack go

1918
01:19:01,360 --> 01:19:03,679
talk to Nile about invasive species

1919
01:19:03,679 --> 01:19:04,880
removal?" You don't need to do that. You

1920
01:19:04,880 --> 01:19:06,320
don't need to come to the town council.

1921
01:19:06,320 --> 01:19:08,159
I think looping in the council liaison

1922
01:19:08,159 --> 01:19:10,080
for that department would be appropriate

1923
01:19:10,080 --> 01:19:14,880
>> and it may it may save having to go to

1924
01:19:14,880 --> 01:19:16,960
Nyall and let him do his other work too

1925
01:19:16,960 --> 01:19:19,280
because Kyle Kyla is likely to be able

1926
01:19:19,280 --> 01:19:23,440
to answer that question. So do we agree

1927
01:19:23,440 --> 01:19:25,280
then that if we have a question about

1928
01:19:25,280 --> 01:19:27,120
something going on with the department,

1929
01:19:27,120 --> 01:19:28,640
we start with the council member

1930
01:19:28,640 --> 01:19:31,440
responsible for that department?

1931
01:19:31,440 --> 01:19:34,080
Does that make sense?

1932
01:19:34,080 --> 01:19:37,280
>> Does I also feel like

1933
01:19:37,280 --> 01:19:38,800
I

1934
01:19:38,800 --> 01:19:40,960
am not the gatekeeper and I'm never

1935
01:19:40,960 --> 01:19:43,120
going to tell another council member

1936
01:19:43,120 --> 01:19:45,040
don't go ask staff.

1937
01:19:45,040 --> 01:19:46,480
>> Right. But if you can answer

1938
01:19:46,480 --> 01:19:48,480
>> blanket approval to talk to Nyall. So

1939
01:19:48,480 --> 01:19:50,560
>> yeah like I don't want that to be the

1940
01:19:50,560 --> 01:19:52,000
perception

1941
01:19:52,000 --> 01:19:55,120
>> that I that any one of us has to say

1942
01:19:55,120 --> 01:19:57,040
like if I have a question for Garen that

1943
01:19:57,040 --> 01:19:58,480
I have to go through Barbara. I don't

1944
01:19:58,480 --> 01:20:00,080
know. Yeah. Well, I mean this thing is

1945
01:20:00,080 --> 01:20:04,400
saying uh refrain from giving directions

1946
01:20:04,400 --> 01:20:07,520
and and so I think questions our

1947
01:20:07,520 --> 01:20:09,440
directions are are very different.

1948
01:20:09,440 --> 01:20:12,000
>> Yeah. I think if you have a question, I

1949
01:20:12,000 --> 01:20:14,080
think it's appropriate

1950
01:20:14,080 --> 01:20:16,560
for me to go to Ryan asking,

1951
01:20:16,560 --> 01:20:18,159
>> you know, a manager,

1952
01:20:18,159 --> 01:20:20,320
>> but if I'm going to give directions, I

1953
01:20:20,320 --> 01:20:22,400
think I should go through.

1954
01:20:22,400 --> 01:20:24,960
>> Yes, I like that distinction and thanks

1955
01:20:24,960 --> 01:20:27,360
for rereading that because I

1956
01:20:27,360 --> 01:20:30,239
>> I feel like that is like absolutely we I

1957
01:20:30,239 --> 01:20:32,080
should not be giving direction to

1958
01:20:32,080 --> 01:20:34,080
>> Absolutely not. Right. Well, and and it

1959
01:20:34,080 --> 01:20:35,760
says giving direction, but I think the

1960
01:20:35,760 --> 01:20:37,440
conversation we're having, we are

1961
01:20:37,440 --> 01:20:42,719
talking about even asking questions. So,

1962
01:20:42,719 --> 01:20:47,040
again, if if I want to know

1963
01:20:47,040 --> 01:20:51,520
the status of the Tamaris project,

1964
01:20:51,520 --> 01:20:53,520
Kylo, should I should I come to you and

1965
01:20:53,520 --> 01:20:55,679
say, "What's the status of the Tamaris

1966
01:20:55,679 --> 01:20:57,679
project?" And you might say, "Talk to

1967
01:20:57,679 --> 01:20:58,960
Nyall," or you might just tell me

1968
01:20:58,960 --> 01:21:01,120
because you probably know. Which which

1969
01:21:01,120 --> 01:21:03,440
should we do first?

1970
01:21:03,440 --> 01:21:05,040
Should I go to Nile or should I go to

1971
01:21:05,040 --> 01:21:07,120
you? We just want to we just want to set

1972
01:21:07,120 --> 01:21:08,239
a protocol.

1973
01:21:08,239 --> 01:21:10,239
>> Yeah. And and I don't I don't know that

1974
01:21:10,239 --> 01:21:12,159
it's

1975
01:21:12,159 --> 01:21:14,000
I wonder if it's black and white because

1976
01:21:14,000 --> 01:21:15,840
there are times when maybe I am less

1977
01:21:15,840 --> 01:21:18,320
busy, right? And so maybe I could but I

1978
01:21:18,320 --> 01:21:22,320
also as much as I know I do not know a

1979
01:21:22,320 --> 01:21:24,880
lot of the intricate moving details that

1980
01:21:24,880 --> 01:21:27,040
council members

1981
01:21:27,040 --> 01:21:29,520
uh might want to get into with a staff

1982
01:21:29,520 --> 01:21:30,000
member.

1983
01:21:30,000 --> 01:21:33,280
>> Yeah. And I the way I would answer that

1984
01:21:33,280 --> 01:21:35,120
you asked Kyle the way I would answer it

1985
01:21:35,120 --> 01:21:38,400
if you ask me is I would say it's more

1986
01:21:38,400 --> 01:21:40,400
appropriate

1987
01:21:40,400 --> 01:21:42,640
to go to the

1988
01:21:42,640 --> 01:21:45,440
if it's a question go to the manager

1989
01:21:45,440 --> 01:21:49,440
>> and ask that question but I this item D

1990
01:21:49,440 --> 01:21:51,840
is talking about specifically

1991
01:21:51,840 --> 01:21:52,880
giving directions.

1992
01:21:52,880 --> 01:21:54,239
>> Yeah that's I think that's

1993
01:21:54,239 --> 01:21:54,800
straightforward.

1994
01:21:54,800 --> 01:21:56,480
>> I think that one's straightforward. If

1995
01:21:56,480 --> 01:21:58,159
you're if we're going to expand this

1996
01:21:58,159 --> 01:22:00,320
into questions,

1997
01:22:00,320 --> 01:22:04,960
u you know, if you have a question about

1998
01:22:04,960 --> 01:22:06,880
the sewer,

1999
01:22:06,880 --> 01:22:09,840
you don't necessarily have to come to me

2000
01:22:09,840 --> 01:22:11,920
before going to Rob because Rob's going

2001
01:22:11,920 --> 01:22:14,960
to be able to answer that detail or

2002
01:22:14,960 --> 01:22:18,400
streets much better than I could. So,

2003
01:22:18,400 --> 01:22:21,120
I'm very comfortable with anybody going

2004
01:22:21,120 --> 01:22:23,280
and asking them that question.

2005
01:22:23,280 --> 01:22:23,760
>> Okay.

2006
01:22:23,760 --> 01:22:25,920
>> Not having to go through me on that. So

2007
01:22:25,920 --> 01:22:29,199
use your discretion. You can go directly

2008
01:22:29,199 --> 01:22:32,159
to the manager. I would just say be

2009
01:22:32,159 --> 01:22:35,440
careful about going to and don't give

2010
01:22:35,440 --> 01:22:36,960
direction without, you know, do that

2011
01:22:36,960 --> 01:22:38,639
through the manager, but be careful

2012
01:22:38,639 --> 01:22:41,920
about there are people on our staff that

2013
01:22:41,920 --> 01:22:44,560
would would be very intimidated by us

2014
01:22:44,560 --> 01:22:46,159
going directly to them. So let's just

2015
01:22:46,159 --> 01:22:48,320
use our best judgment. Is that fair?

2016
01:22:48,320 --> 01:22:50,800
>> Yeah. And and definitely Yeah. Start

2017
01:22:50,800 --> 01:22:52,639
with the manager. I think if the person

2018
01:22:52,639 --> 01:22:55,520
is listed next to an item as the staff

2019
01:22:55,520 --> 01:22:58,239
contact, they should be comfortable and

2020
01:22:58,239 --> 01:23:04,080
confident in dealing with that item and otherwise like you said the people

2021
01:23:04,080 --> 01:23:05,679
maybe that we aren't dealing with very

2022
01:23:05,679 --> 01:23:07,679
often like some of the streets crew or

2023
01:23:07,679 --> 01:23:10,960
parks people absolutely that is not a

2024
01:23:10,960 --> 01:23:14,960
common connection that I have with many

2025
01:23:14,960 --> 01:23:17,440
of those people and so I would not

2026
01:23:17,440 --> 01:23:19,040
specifically

2027
01:23:19,040 --> 01:23:21,920
uh be cornering them and asking them

2028
01:23:21,920 --> 01:23:24,480
questions and I also think that the the

2029
01:23:24,480 --> 01:23:26,960
road can you know communication needs to

2030
01:23:26,960 --> 01:23:29,600
be open from staff's perspective too if

2031
01:23:29,600 --> 01:23:33,600
they are having like beingounded by or

2032
01:23:33,600 --> 01:23:35,120
inappropriately

2033
01:23:35,120 --> 01:23:36,719
asked questions and they're not

2034
01:23:36,719 --> 01:23:39,760
comfortable like then we obviously I

2035
01:23:39,760 --> 01:23:42,000
think I'm open to hearing that feedback

2036
01:23:42,000 --> 01:23:43,920
and saying you know Robin really wants

2037
01:23:43,920 --> 01:23:46,159
you to lay off on um asking her about

2038
01:23:46,159 --> 01:23:50,310
the phone tree she doesn't know

2039
01:23:50,320 --> 01:23:52,719
So like

2040
01:23:52,719 --> 01:23:54,480
um

2041
01:23:54,480 --> 01:23:56,719
I think it's kind of like we should open

2042
01:23:56,719 --> 01:23:58,239
up the communication to say if

2043
01:23:58,239 --> 01:23:59,760
something's not working on the staff

2044
01:23:59,760 --> 01:24:02,400
side too, we I would like to know about

2045
01:24:02,400 --> 01:24:03,520
that.

2046
01:24:03,520 --> 01:24:04,239
>> Okay.

2047
01:24:04,239 --> 01:24:05,840
>> Now,

2048
01:24:05,840 --> 01:24:07,760
sorry, can I just say something really

2049
01:24:07,760 --> 01:24:10,159
quick? So as you know, we have the staff

2050
01:24:10,159 --> 01:24:11,600
report from the community development

2051
01:24:11,600 --> 01:24:14,159
side every month and within that we have

2052
01:24:14,159 --> 01:24:16,159
our special projects. We've started

2053
01:24:16,159 --> 01:24:18,560
listing who the staff contact is. And

2054
01:24:18,560 --> 01:24:20,639
the reason for that is so that you can

2055
01:24:20,639 --> 01:24:22,960
come to us directly and ask about the

2056
01:24:22,960 --> 01:24:25,520
invasive species project or America 250

2057
01:24:25,520 --> 01:24:27,679
and items like that because we are kind

2058
01:24:27,679 --> 01:24:30,560
of the experts on that project.

2059
01:24:30,560 --> 01:24:33,040
>> Thank you for pointing that out.

2060
01:24:33,040 --> 01:24:35,040
>> I mean, we all see the report, but it

2061
01:24:35,040 --> 01:24:37,040
didn't it wouldn't necessarily we

2062
01:24:37,040 --> 01:24:38,400
wouldn't necessarily connect that to

2063
01:24:38,400 --> 01:24:40,320
that's who you should talk to. So So

2064
01:24:40,320 --> 01:24:42,000
we've probably talked enough about that.

2065
01:24:42,000 --> 01:24:43,840
What about this next conduct with the

2066
01:24:43,840 --> 01:24:46,639
public? Anything that we

2067
01:24:46,639 --> 01:24:47,760
want to

2068
01:24:47,760 --> 01:24:49,440
>> change? It seems really straightforward.

2069
01:24:49,440 --> 01:24:50,719
Yeah.

2070
01:24:50,719 --> 01:24:51,280
>> How about

2071
01:24:51,280 --> 01:24:52,800
>> I have a question on the next one.

2072
01:24:52,800 --> 01:24:53,520
>> Okay.

2073
01:24:53,520 --> 01:24:56,159
>> Anybody? Anybody on the public?

2074
01:24:56,159 --> 01:24:56,960
>> Okay.

2075
01:24:56,960 --> 01:24:59,440
>> Uh this one uh conduct with our other

2076
01:24:59,440 --> 01:25:02,719
agencies. Do we need anything about

2077
01:25:02,719 --> 01:25:07,510
dealing with the press?

2078
01:25:07,520 --> 01:25:09,120
Well, that's that's an interesting

2079
01:25:09,120 --> 01:25:12,960
conversation because I am technically

2080
01:25:12,960 --> 01:25:14,480
one of my responsibilities, not

2081
01:25:14,480 --> 01:25:16,080
technically, one of my responsibilities

2082
01:25:16,080 --> 01:25:19,040
is being the media contact. And when the

2083
01:25:19,040 --> 01:25:21,120
media contacts me, if it's your project,

2084
01:25:21,120 --> 01:25:24,159
I might refer them to you,

2085
01:25:24,159 --> 01:25:26,400
>> but but they come through me to be

2086
01:25:26,400 --> 01:25:27,600
referred to.

2087
01:25:27,600 --> 01:25:29,440
I it' probably be good to at least have

2088
01:25:29,440 --> 01:25:31,760
something in writing so that you know we

2089
01:25:31,760 --> 01:25:35,280
state who the initial contact is and you

2090
01:25:35,280 --> 01:25:37,840
can designate as you decide.

2091
01:25:37,840 --> 01:25:40,960
>> Could we add a a section that talks

2092
01:25:40,960 --> 01:25:43,679
about inquiries from the media and

2093
01:25:43,679 --> 01:25:48,080
specifically say that that Tom is the

2094
01:25:48,080 --> 01:25:50,400
staff member that's the point of contact

2095
01:25:50,400 --> 01:25:52,080
and I'm the council member that's the

2096
01:25:52,080 --> 01:25:54,400
point of contact and we can we can refer

2097
01:25:54,400 --> 01:25:55,840
them out to other people. Is that

2098
01:25:55,840 --> 01:25:57,360
appropriate? Does everybody think that's

2099
01:25:57,360 --> 01:25:59,120
appropriate?

2100
01:25:59,120 --> 01:26:01,760
>> Okay.

2101
01:26:01,760 --> 01:26:03,440
>> Or do you want to be Robin? you're look

2102
01:26:03,440 --> 01:26:08,149
like maybe you want to

2103
01:26:08,159 --> 01:26:14,229
» you know one

2104
01:26:14,239 --> 01:26:16,400
» one item I'll bring up in regards to

2105
01:26:16,400 --> 01:26:20,800
this is I've uh

2106
01:26:20,800 --> 01:26:23,920
NPR reporter that contacted me and said

2107
01:26:23,920 --> 01:26:26,159
he wanted to talk to me about the the

2108
01:26:26,159 --> 01:26:28,159
Utah Renewable

2109
01:26:28,159 --> 01:26:33,040
Communities Act and Um,

2110
01:26:33,040 --> 01:26:35,120
you know, and he hasn't contacted me yet

2111
01:26:35,120 --> 01:26:38,950
on that, but

2112
01:26:38,960 --> 01:26:40,880
I know a lot more than you do.

2113
01:26:40,880 --> 01:26:42,800
>> I would refer him to you. I would

2114
01:26:42,800 --> 01:26:46,000
>> Yeah. And I know I believe more than Tom

2115
01:26:46,000 --> 01:26:48,000
about that. So,

2116
01:26:48,000 --> 01:26:49,840
>> you were also mentioned in that press

2117
01:26:49,840 --> 01:26:50,880
release. Yeah.

2118
01:26:50,880 --> 01:26:53,199
>> Randy, like your name specific in that

2119
01:26:53,199 --> 01:26:55,440
press release, which is maybe why he

2120
01:26:55,440 --> 01:26:57,280
>> Yeah, it might have been why. But I

2121
01:26:57,280 --> 01:26:59,360
think he was contacting he is contacting

2122
01:26:59,360 --> 01:27:02,080
you as a board member of that.

2123
01:27:02,080 --> 01:27:04,400
>> Yeah, he is. Not as a spring council

2124
01:27:04,400 --> 01:27:06,000
member. You're right. I think that's

2125
01:27:06,000 --> 01:27:08,719
>> that's a good point. That's so that's a

2126
01:27:08,719 --> 01:27:09,679
very good point.

2127
01:27:09,679 --> 01:27:13,520
>> I think it's probably wise to have

2128
01:27:13,520 --> 01:27:16,639
something in writing in that I've been

2129
01:27:16,639 --> 01:27:18,880
interviewed for

2130
01:27:18,880 --> 01:27:21,199
a couple different things. part of it,

2131
01:27:21,199 --> 01:27:24,400
you know, being a council but also being

2132
01:27:24,400 --> 01:27:28,400
next park service employee and

2133
01:27:28,400 --> 01:27:31,120
something that I do on a regular basis

2134
01:27:31,120 --> 01:27:33,760
is just whoever's interviewing me to

2135
01:27:33,760 --> 01:27:35,679
tell them this is my personal opinion.

2136
01:27:35,679 --> 01:27:37,440
I'm not representing the town or the

2137
01:27:37,440 --> 01:27:39,520
park. You know, it's

2138
01:27:39,520 --> 01:27:46,229
>> Yeah. And that's that's a good point.

2139
01:27:46,239 --> 01:27:49,280
So, yeah, I think you know, typically

2140
01:27:49,280 --> 01:27:52,000
when someone come someone from the media

2141
01:27:52,000 --> 01:27:54,400
comes to me,

2142
01:27:54,400 --> 01:27:56,960
they're often asking the town's position

2143
01:27:56,960 --> 01:27:58,960
on it. They're not they're not coming to

2144
01:27:58,960 --> 01:28:01,920
me as an expert in in anyone field. And

2145
01:28:01,920 --> 01:28:04,400
I think that's different. So I think

2146
01:28:04,400 --> 01:28:06,880
again use your destruct your discretion

2147
01:28:06,880 --> 01:28:10,000
but but I think we should identify who

2148
01:28:10,000 --> 01:28:12,480
the prime point of contacts are on both

2149
01:28:12,480 --> 01:28:16,390
staff and council.

2150
01:28:16,400 --> 01:28:19,120
Did we answer your question because you

2151
01:28:19,120 --> 01:28:22,960
that was about the media really which is kind of other agencies and kind

2152
01:28:22,960 --> 01:28:24,320
of its own animal.

2153
01:28:24,320 --> 01:28:26,080
>> Yeah. And then maybe this is a little

2154
01:28:26,080 --> 01:28:29,360
bit off topic, but do we and unless we

2155
01:28:29,360 --> 01:28:31,840
have it in here, do we need to say

2156
01:28:31,840 --> 01:28:34,719
anything about um that you know

2157
01:28:34,719 --> 01:28:37,120
politically were neutral and that we

2158
01:28:37,120 --> 01:28:39,120
don't represent any political

2159
01:28:39,120 --> 01:28:44,470
affiliation as a as a

2160
01:28:44,480 --> 01:28:45,199
» or not?

2161
01:28:45,199 --> 01:28:47,440
>> Well, it's a nonpartisan position

2162
01:28:47,440 --> 01:28:49,120
>> and we just assume that people know

2163
01:28:49,120 --> 01:28:50,560
that. Um,

2164
01:28:50,560 --> 01:28:53,840
>> yeah. I don't think any of us run as

2165
01:28:53,840 --> 01:28:56,560
independent, Republican, Democrat when

2166
01:28:56,560 --> 01:28:58,560
we run

2167
01:28:58,560 --> 01:29:03,440
like in the state legislature or

2168
01:29:03,440 --> 01:29:05,760
etc. So,

2169
01:29:05,760 --> 01:29:08,000
>> so I don't I don't know that in this

2170
01:29:08,000 --> 01:29:10,719
code is is I don't know that there's any

2171
01:29:10,719 --> 01:29:13,600
need to say it in this code.

2172
01:29:13,600 --> 01:29:15,440
If you think we should, we could say

2173
01:29:15,440 --> 01:29:17,840
we're politically neutral and represent

2174
01:29:17,840 --> 01:29:20,880
only the town's best interests, but this

2175
01:29:20,880 --> 01:29:22,719
is something that's for us internally

2176
01:29:22,719 --> 01:29:25,679
and not for residents necessarily to

2177
01:29:25,679 --> 01:29:27,440
read. They can read it if they want to,

2178
01:29:27,440 --> 01:29:29,040
but

2179
01:29:29,040 --> 01:29:30,480
>> Well, can I can I make a comment on

2180
01:29:30,480 --> 01:29:30,800
that?

2181
01:29:30,800 --> 01:29:31,120
>> Yeah.

2182
01:29:31,120 --> 01:29:33,199
>> Yes, it is. This is a a document that's

2183
01:29:33,199 --> 01:29:35,280
going to guide you as a as a public

2184
01:29:35,280 --> 01:29:36,719
body, you and the planning commission,

2185
01:29:36,719 --> 01:29:38,960
and and that way it is kind of

2186
01:29:38,960 --> 01:29:41,520
internally facing. However, once it's

2187
01:29:41,520 --> 01:29:45,520
adopted, it's your policy. And if you

2188
01:29:45,520 --> 01:29:47,120
violate, this is the point that Kylo was

2189
01:29:47,120 --> 01:29:48,880
making earlier. If you if you violate

2190
01:29:48,880 --> 01:29:51,280
your policy, whether it's not it's

2191
01:29:51,280 --> 01:29:55,520
intended for the the public or not,

2192
01:29:55,520 --> 01:29:58,560
you do open yourself up to some exposure

2193
01:29:58,560 --> 01:30:01,199
there, right? And I I I don't know

2194
01:30:01,199 --> 01:30:03,520
exactly. It's hard to say what that

2195
01:30:03,520 --> 01:30:05,280
liability is without having a specific

2196
01:30:05,280 --> 01:30:11,679
situation, but if you say, "Hey, this is our internal policy." So it's to guide us, but we can kind of do

2197
01:30:11,679 --> 01:30:14,400
whatever we want and and you kind of

2198
01:30:14,400 --> 01:30:17,360
knowingly or willfully violate that that

2199
01:30:17,360 --> 01:30:23,360
could expose you to some risk. So all I'm saying is

2200
01:30:23,360 --> 01:30:25,440
treat treat it treat it as an official

2201
01:30:25,440 --> 01:30:28,159
policy that that should be binding on on

2202
01:30:28,159 --> 01:30:30,639
what you do. Does that make sense? So

2203
01:30:30,639 --> 01:30:33,040
Tom, given given what you just said, do

2204
01:30:33,040 --> 01:30:36,800
should we go back to

2205
01:30:36,800 --> 01:30:38,800
where we talked about not representing

2206
01:30:38,800 --> 01:30:41,440
anyone neighborhood?

2207
01:30:41,440 --> 01:30:44,480
Should we say something about

2208
01:30:44,480 --> 01:30:49,440
we don't represent anyone political?

2209
01:30:49,440 --> 01:30:51,440
>> No, that I'm not saying that that should

2210
01:30:51,440 --> 01:30:53,440
policy. I'm just saying that

2211
01:30:53,440 --> 01:30:56,719
>> if you do adopt that as your policy,

2212
01:30:56,719 --> 01:30:58,880
>> say we are we are non-political. we

2213
01:30:58,880 --> 01:31:00,800
don't represent any political ideology

2214
01:31:00,800 --> 01:31:03,760
or point of view or yada yada yada but

2215
01:31:03,760 --> 01:31:06,239
then there's something that you unitedly

2216
01:31:06,239 --> 01:31:08,400
as a town feel really strongly about and

2217
01:31:08,400 --> 01:31:11,199
you want to make a statement about

2218
01:31:11,199 --> 01:31:12,080
>> then you can't

2219
01:31:12,080 --> 01:31:14,400
>> okay so let's leave it alone

2220
01:31:14,400 --> 01:31:16,400
>> okay

2221
01:31:16,400 --> 01:31:19,920
>> I do have a question about if we if we

2222
01:31:19,920 --> 01:31:23,679
attend another town's

2223
01:31:23,679 --> 01:31:27,120
town council or planning commission

2224
01:31:27,120 --> 01:31:28,800
and we want to influence their decision

2225
01:31:28,800 --> 01:31:32,080
for some reason. We could do that. Do we

2226
01:31:32,080 --> 01:31:34,480
need to disclose who we are before we do

2227
01:31:34,480 --> 01:31:36,239
that?

2228
01:31:36,239 --> 01:31:37,920
>> Are you speaking as a resident of

2229
01:31:37,920 --> 01:31:38,960
Springdale or a

2230
01:31:38,960 --> 01:31:40,080
>> resident of Springdale and I don't like

2231
01:31:40,080 --> 01:31:41,760
what Rockville is doing?

2232
01:31:41,760 --> 01:31:44,880
>> So, so if if you're saying, "Hey, I'm a

2233
01:31:44,880 --> 01:31:46,800
resident of Springdale and I don't like

2234
01:31:46,800 --> 01:31:48,239
what you're doing and this is, you know,

2235
01:31:48,239 --> 01:31:50,480
that that's

2236
01:31:50,480 --> 01:31:52,560
>> then you're fine. If you're saying the

2237
01:31:52,560 --> 01:31:54,719
town of Springdale does not like what

2238
01:31:54,719 --> 01:31:56,320
Rockville is doing, no, that would be

2239
01:31:56,320 --> 01:31:59,280
inappropriate without first coming and

2240
01:31:59,280 --> 01:32:01,040
discussing that policy position with the

2241
01:32:01,040 --> 01:32:02,880
rest of the council.

2242
01:32:02,880 --> 01:32:05,199
>> But I think he's also asking so if so if

2243
01:32:05,199 --> 01:32:09,040
he went to the to the Leverkin council

2244
01:32:09,040 --> 01:32:11,120
meeting and stood up and spoke and said,

2245
01:32:11,120 --> 01:32:14,000
"I'm a resident of Springdale and I have

2246
01:32:14,000 --> 01:32:16,320
an opinion about this." Does Pat, are

2247
01:32:16,320 --> 01:32:18,000
you asking if you should disclose that

2248
01:32:18,000 --> 01:32:19,360
you're not just a resident, but you're a

2249
01:32:19,360 --> 01:32:21,520
council member? That's was the point of

2250
01:32:21,520 --> 01:32:23,360
my question because somebody may know,

2251
01:32:23,360 --> 01:32:24,560
not that they would, but somebody may

2252
01:32:24,560 --> 01:32:25,920
know who I am and they may think, well,

2253
01:32:25,920 --> 01:32:27,920
he's speaking for

2254
01:32:27,920 --> 01:32:29,840
>> the town and and you don't want to make

2255
01:32:29,840 --> 01:32:30,800
they don't want to give that impression,

2256
01:32:30,800 --> 01:32:32,000
but that's the impression they have.

2257
01:32:32,000 --> 01:32:33,840
Should at least put that on the record.

2258
01:32:33,840 --> 01:32:35,040
I'm speaking as a resident of

2259
01:32:35,040 --> 01:32:36,480
Springdale. I don't like this or I do

2260
01:32:36,480 --> 01:32:37,199
like that or whatever.

2261
01:32:37,199 --> 01:32:39,040
>> Yeah, I I I think I think that's wise.

2262
01:32:39,040 --> 01:32:40,480
You know, just in case someone does know

2263
01:32:40,480 --> 01:32:42,320
that you are a council member, you say,

2264
01:32:42,320 --> 01:32:46,000
"Hey, I'm from Springdale. Um I serve on

2265
01:32:46,000 --> 01:32:47,440
the town council, but I'm not speaking

2266
01:32:47,440 --> 01:32:48,880
as a town council member. I'm speaking

2267
01:32:48,880 --> 01:32:50,480
as a resident of Springdale. Just to

2268
01:32:50,480 --> 01:32:51,679
make it clear that that's your personal

2269
01:32:51,679 --> 01:32:53,040
opinion and you're not representing the

2270
01:32:53,040 --> 01:32:56,709
rest of the council.

2271
01:32:56,719 --> 01:32:58,159
» And we probably don't need to put that

2272
01:32:58,159 --> 01:33:00,320
in here. It's a good discussion, but we

2273
01:33:00,320 --> 01:33:03,760
>> we had a discussion about this.

2274
01:33:03,760 --> 01:33:07,360
When is it a year, two years ago,

2275
01:33:07,360 --> 01:33:10,320
about um like signing letters of support

2276
01:33:10,320 --> 01:33:13,199
or or making letters um you know, did

2277
01:33:13,199 --> 01:33:14,800
the the town supports this or doesn't

2278
01:33:14,800 --> 01:33:16,239
support that? And you came to a very

2279
01:33:16,239 --> 01:33:18,960
similar position that you as an

2280
01:33:18,960 --> 01:33:21,120
individual can support or not support

2281
01:33:21,120 --> 01:33:24,239
whatever you want. But if you are saying

2282
01:33:24,239 --> 01:33:26,400
this the town of Springdale supports

2283
01:33:26,400 --> 01:33:29,199
this, you cannot do that in your

2284
01:33:29,199 --> 01:33:30,880
capacity as a town council member

2285
01:33:30,880 --> 01:33:34,719
without first getting the um majority

2286
01:33:34,719 --> 01:33:36,159
support of the rest of the council. It

2287
01:33:36,159 --> 01:33:37,360
would be I think it would be a very

2288
01:33:37,360 --> 01:33:38,320
similar situation.

2289
01:33:38,320 --> 01:33:40,560
>> So question I got a couple days ago I

2290
01:33:40,560 --> 01:33:46,159
got a letter from Forever Project. This stuff happens a lot. They wanted me

2291
01:33:46,159 --> 01:33:48,239
to sign a letter of support for their

2292
01:33:48,239 --> 01:33:50,480
grant application to finish the sewer in

2293
01:33:50,480 --> 01:33:53,360
Z National Park and I signed that as

2294
01:33:53,360 --> 01:33:56,159
mayor of Springdale. Is that okay? Or

2295
01:33:56,159 --> 01:33:58,480
should I be getting council's opinion on

2296
01:33:58,480 --> 01:34:01,679
whether it's okay for me to sign that? I

2297
01:34:01,679 --> 01:34:04,080
don't sign at Springdale council or town

2298
01:34:04,080 --> 01:34:05,920
of Springdale. I signed it Barbara Bruno

2299
01:34:05,920 --> 01:34:09,199
mayor. But

2300
01:34:09,199 --> 01:34:12,159
>> yeah, do you remember what if we I can't

2301
01:34:12,159 --> 01:34:13,360
remember if we adopted an official

2302
01:34:13,360 --> 01:34:15,280
policy or if it was just kind of a an

2303
01:34:15,280 --> 01:34:16,400
informal decision.

2304
01:34:16,400 --> 01:34:19,520
>> I believe it was an

2305
01:34:19,520 --> 01:34:22,480
>> I don't Sorry. Go ahead. Yeah, I I think

2306
01:34:22,480 --> 01:34:25,120
that was kind of the

2307
01:34:25,120 --> 01:34:26,719
if I'm remembering correctly, the gist

2308
01:34:26,719 --> 01:34:30,080
of the conversation was that if if you

2309
01:34:30,080 --> 01:34:32,000
were going to be providing your support

2310
01:34:32,000 --> 01:34:34,800
that it would be a a a conversation

2311
01:34:34,800 --> 01:34:38,080
amongst the council members. Um, but if

2312
01:34:38,080 --> 01:34:40,400
it was just an individual, yeah, I

2313
01:34:40,400 --> 01:34:43,040
support this, then it's just you as an

2314
01:34:43,040 --> 01:34:44,400
individual, right?

2315
01:34:44,400 --> 01:34:46,880
>> And it doesn't obligate Springdale in

2316
01:34:46,880 --> 01:34:48,480
any way. I think if there was something

2317
01:34:48,480 --> 01:34:50,719
that obligated Springdale, that's an

2318
01:34:50,719 --> 01:34:52,800
easy answer that the council needs to

2319
01:34:52,800 --> 01:34:55,199
talk about it. But something we should

2320
01:34:55,199 --> 01:34:57,199
decide here because I get these all the

2321
01:34:57,199 --> 01:34:59,120
time and it's it's always sorry for the

2322
01:34:59,120 --> 01:35:02,000
late notice. I need this tomorrow.

2323
01:35:02,000 --> 01:35:06,960
So when when should I not sign that as

2324
01:35:06,960 --> 01:35:08,960
mayor? Sign something like that as mayor

2325
01:35:08,960 --> 01:35:14,790
of Springdale?

2326
01:35:14,800 --> 01:35:16,320
Other council members, how do you feel

2327
01:35:16,320 --> 01:35:18,639
about this?

2328
01:35:18,639 --> 01:35:20,639
>> I I kind of think if you're signing

2329
01:35:20,639 --> 01:35:24,639
something as mayor, that's your opinion

2330
01:35:24,639 --> 01:35:28,320
and your title. If you're signing it as

2331
01:35:28,320 --> 01:35:31,199
town of Springdale,

2332
01:35:31,199 --> 01:35:33,280
then that implies you're representing

2333
01:35:33,280 --> 01:35:34,960
everybody. I mean, I guess that does

2334
01:35:34,960 --> 01:35:36,880
imply that you're representing us. Well,

2335
01:35:36,880 --> 01:35:41,440
I I kind of feel like when when

2336
01:35:41,440 --> 01:35:43,760
people are asked to do something like

2337
01:35:43,760 --> 01:35:48,560
this, um it does add a little emphasis

2338
01:35:48,560 --> 01:35:50,639
to you're not just Barbara Bruno, but

2339
01:35:50,639 --> 01:35:52,960
you're a mayor.

2340
01:35:52,960 --> 01:35:55,199
But I don't think

2341
01:35:55,199 --> 01:35:56,960
anybody reading it is going to

2342
01:35:56,960 --> 01:35:59,360
necessarily say, well, the town of

2343
01:35:59,360 --> 01:36:02,719
Springdale has an official

2344
01:36:02,719 --> 01:36:04,320
uh view of this,

2345
01:36:04,320 --> 01:36:06,800
>> you know. So, I don't I don't see that

2346
01:36:06,800 --> 01:36:10,480
as a problem. I think that just is

2347
01:36:10,480 --> 01:36:13,440
what maybe adds a little bit of extra

2348
01:36:13,440 --> 01:36:16,480
credibility to this person signing this

2349
01:36:16,480 --> 01:36:20,159
document. And and you know, I I see this

2350
01:36:20,159 --> 01:36:22,320
on in a lot of different documents of

2351
01:36:22,320 --> 01:36:24,800
people will sign on and say, I support

2352
01:36:24,800 --> 01:36:27,840
this and I'm actually on the council and

2353
01:36:27,840 --> 01:36:29,520
you know,

2354
01:36:29,520 --> 01:36:31,040
>> but we do that all the time when it

2355
01:36:31,040 --> 01:36:33,040
comes to like political endorsements,

2356
01:36:33,040 --> 01:36:34,239
right? What's that?

2357
01:36:34,239 --> 01:36:37,199
>> I mean, when you when you uh sign or or

2358
01:36:37,199 --> 01:36:39,360
give a political endorsement, you say,

2359
01:36:39,360 --> 01:36:40,639
you know, I'm I'm the mayor of

2360
01:36:40,639 --> 01:36:42,639
Springdale and I endorse so and so, you

2361
01:36:42,639 --> 01:36:44,639
don't need to get do that. So, I don't

2362
01:36:44,639 --> 01:36:45,840
see a problem with that.

2363
01:36:45,840 --> 01:36:48,960
>> Yeah. And I don't do that.

2364
01:36:48,960 --> 01:36:50,719
>> I think that's a slippery slope. But I

2365
01:36:50,719 --> 01:36:53,760
could I could as an individual

2366
01:36:53,760 --> 01:36:55,520
>> because like Randy says, that adds a

2367
01:36:55,520 --> 01:36:57,360
little bit of weight to

2368
01:36:57,360 --> 01:36:58,639
>> what you're trying to say. That's why

2369
01:36:58,639 --> 01:37:00,639
they're asking, you know, like so there

2370
01:37:00,639 --> 01:37:02,719
is a there are two county commissioners

2371
01:37:02,719 --> 01:37:04,639
that are

2372
01:37:04,639 --> 01:37:06,480
>> running for office and they both asked

2373
01:37:06,480 --> 01:37:10,000
for an endorsement. So, you know,

2374
01:37:10,000 --> 01:37:13,350
certainly

2375
01:37:13,360 --> 01:37:15,440
um if if I were saying, "Oh, yeah,

2376
01:37:15,440 --> 01:37:17,760
Springdale endorses you," then I have no

2377
01:37:17,760 --> 01:37:19,520
right to do that as mayor.

2378
01:37:19,520 --> 01:37:21,600
>> I could say, "I, Barbara Bruno, endorse

2379
01:37:21,600 --> 01:37:22,960
you if I did."

2380
01:37:22,960 --> 01:37:24,960
>> But do you sign it as mayor?

2381
01:37:24,960 --> 01:37:26,400
>> I don't sign it.

2382
01:37:26,400 --> 01:37:28,080
>> No, I mean for those political

2383
01:37:28,080 --> 01:37:28,719
endorsements.

2384
01:37:28,719 --> 01:37:30,560
>> I don't sign political endorsements.

2385
01:37:30,560 --> 01:37:30,960
>> Yeah.

2386
01:37:30,960 --> 01:37:32,800
>> Um and they haven't asked me to put

2387
01:37:32,800 --> 01:37:34,480
anything in writing. Well, I shouldn't

2388
01:37:34,480 --> 01:37:43,109
say that. I did.

2389
01:37:43,119 --> 01:37:44,960
» But but this gets back to the letter of

2390
01:37:44,960 --> 01:37:46,639
support thing, right? So you're signing

2391
01:37:46,639 --> 01:37:49,679
it as mayor Barbara Bruno mayor town of

2392
01:37:49,679 --> 01:37:53,679
Springdale but you're not signing it bar

2393
01:37:53,679 --> 01:37:55,920
mayor Barbara Bruno on behalf of the

2394
01:37:55,920 --> 01:37:58,080
town council or on behalf of the town of

2395
01:37:58,080 --> 01:37:59,440
Springdale and you're not saying this is

2396
01:37:59,440 --> 01:38:01,280
the town's position right

2397
01:38:01,280 --> 01:38:03,679
>> so I think what the council is saying is

2398
01:38:03,679 --> 01:38:06,159
that's okay if you say I want to I'm

2399
01:38:06,159 --> 01:38:07,840
signing this as a mayor as a council

2400
01:38:07,840 --> 01:38:10,639
member because that adds some kind of of

2401
01:38:10,639 --> 01:38:13,679
weight to my opinion that's that's fine

2402
01:38:13,679 --> 01:38:15,760
as long as what's contained in the

2403
01:38:15,760 --> 01:38:17,840
document that you're signing is clear

2404
01:38:17,840 --> 01:38:19,600
that it is your opinion and is not the

2405
01:38:19,600 --> 01:38:22,960
official policy of the town. Is that is

2406
01:38:22,960 --> 01:38:24,320
that what I'm understanding?

2407
01:38:24,320 --> 01:38:24,560
>> Yeah.

2408
01:38:24,560 --> 01:38:26,400
>> So, how about if I get something where

2409
01:38:26,400 --> 01:38:29,840
there's any question that I run it

2410
01:38:29,840 --> 01:38:31,920
through the clerk

2411
01:38:31,920 --> 01:38:35,600
>> or or Tom and they get a quick if if

2412
01:38:35,600 --> 01:38:37,360
time is important, they get a quick

2413
01:38:37,360 --> 01:38:39,920
message out saying mayor's planning to

2414
01:38:39,920 --> 01:38:42,159
sign this unless unless you object by

2415
01:38:42,159 --> 01:38:44,239
tomorrow or something. Is that fair? Did

2416
01:38:44,239 --> 01:38:45,760
didn't we do that one other time? Mayor,

2417
01:38:45,760 --> 01:38:47,199
>> we did have something that came. I'm

2418
01:38:47,199 --> 01:38:48,800
trying to think of what it was and I was

2419
01:38:48,800 --> 01:38:50,080
I know. I couldn't

2420
01:38:50,080 --> 01:38:52,400
>> government shutdown stuff. There was

2421
01:38:52,400 --> 01:38:52,800
something.

2422
01:38:52,800 --> 01:38:54,239
>> No, it was on the other side of the park

2423
01:38:54,239 --> 01:38:55,600
for some reason,

2424
01:38:55,600 --> 01:38:57,440
>> but we did do something like that. And I

2425
01:38:57,440 --> 01:38:58,880
can't remember what for the likely what

2426
01:38:58,880 --> 01:39:01,199
it was.

2427
01:39:01,199 --> 01:39:02,800
>> I guess for me it was the way it was

2428
01:39:02,800 --> 01:39:05,280
worded. I couldn't support it. I can't

2429
01:39:05,280 --> 01:39:06,320
remember what it was.

2430
01:39:06,320 --> 01:39:10,960
>> Yeah. Rick came out to us and um

2431
01:39:10,960 --> 01:39:12,400
>> who wins the prize? Who comes up with

2432
01:39:12,400 --> 01:39:14,480
it? Come on.

2433
01:39:14,480 --> 01:39:17,440
I thought it was during

2434
01:39:17,440 --> 01:39:20,560
beginning of last year.

2435
01:39:20,560 --> 01:39:22,400
There were several things that kept

2436
01:39:22,400 --> 01:39:23,600
coming up

2437
01:39:23,600 --> 01:39:28,149
>> and one of them

2438
01:39:28,159 --> 01:39:31,040
» was it that joint letter that was with

2439
01:39:31,040 --> 01:39:34,880
several other communities about about

2440
01:39:34,880 --> 01:39:35,440
the

2441
01:39:35,440 --> 01:39:37,440
>> state taking

2442
01:39:37,440 --> 01:39:38,960
state

2443
01:39:38,960 --> 01:39:39,280
right

2444
01:39:39,280 --> 01:39:40,400
>> of public lands.

2445
01:39:40,400 --> 01:39:43,440
>> Yeah. We we didn't Yeah. And I would

2446
01:39:43,440 --> 01:39:45,199
never sign on to something like that

2447
01:39:45,199 --> 01:39:47,040
without the council weighing in.

2448
01:39:47,040 --> 01:39:48,400
>> That was an example where where the

2449
01:39:48,400 --> 01:39:49,760
mayor came to us and said, "What do you

2450
01:39:49,760 --> 01:39:53,920
guys think?" Right. So,

2451
01:39:53,920 --> 01:39:56,239
>> okay. So, what So, what what we've got

2452
01:39:56,239 --> 01:39:58,880
is you're absolutely free to speak as

2453
01:39:58,880 --> 01:40:00,960
individuals.

2454
01:40:00,960 --> 01:40:02,960
You should probably disclose that you

2455
01:40:02,960 --> 01:40:04,800
are a council member and that you're not

2456
01:40:04,800 --> 01:40:07,520
speaking on behalf of the council.

2457
01:40:07,520 --> 01:40:12,159
It's okay to sign a letter of support or

2458
01:40:12,159 --> 01:40:14,719
whatever you want

2459
01:40:14,719 --> 01:40:17,600
with your um credential as a council

2460
01:40:17,600 --> 01:40:20,320
member or a mayor. If whatever you're

2461
01:40:20,320 --> 01:40:22,880
signing is clear that it is your

2462
01:40:22,880 --> 01:40:24,239
opinion, you're not speaking on behalf

2463
01:40:24,239 --> 01:40:28,000
of the town. If you are asked to sign

2464
01:40:28,000 --> 01:40:29,199
something on behalf of the town, and

2465
01:40:29,199 --> 01:40:32,320
this probably would most likely um

2466
01:40:32,320 --> 01:40:34,400
pertain to the mayor. If you're asked to

2467
01:40:34,400 --> 01:40:36,320
sign something that is on behalf of the

2468
01:40:36,320 --> 01:40:38,800
town, we'll distribute that to the rest

2469
01:40:38,800 --> 01:40:40,639
of the council and just make sure you

2470
01:40:40,639 --> 01:40:41,840
don't have a problem with it before

2471
01:40:41,840 --> 01:40:42,880
mayor you sign.

2472
01:40:42,880 --> 01:40:43,360
>> Sounds good.

2473
01:40:43,360 --> 01:40:44,800
>> Perfect. Okay.

2474
01:40:44,800 --> 01:40:48,310
>> Agree.

2475
01:40:48,320 --> 01:40:50,800
» And then contact with other town bodies.

2476
01:40:50,800 --> 01:40:53,040
That's, you know, I think that's

2477
01:40:53,040 --> 01:40:57,430
straightforward, too.

2478
01:40:57,440 --> 01:41:00,159
» And then the ethical conduct

2479
01:41:00,159 --> 01:41:02,480
straightforward, right? No, I think

2480
01:41:02,480 --> 01:41:06,870
we're missing two things there. I

2481
01:41:06,880 --> 01:41:08,800
» unless it's unless it's documented

2482
01:41:08,800 --> 01:41:11,440
elsewhere. Nothing in here about uh

2483
01:41:11,440 --> 01:41:14,159
required annual training, ethics,

2484
01:41:14,159 --> 01:41:15,840
conflicts of interest, open meetings,

2485
01:41:15,840 --> 01:41:17,360
public records, laws, harassment,

2486
01:41:17,360 --> 01:41:19,440
discrimination. Is that is that where

2487
01:41:19,440 --> 01:41:21,119
that should be that we should require

2488
01:41:21,119 --> 01:41:25,040
training for staff and officials there?

2489
01:41:25,040 --> 01:41:28,320
And and the second question I have is

2490
01:41:28,320 --> 01:41:30,239
the last time we looked at this was 14

2491
01:41:30,239 --> 01:41:32,320
years ago. Should we put a clock on it

2492
01:41:32,320 --> 01:41:34,080
and say that town council should review

2493
01:41:34,080 --> 01:41:39,679
this like every four years and and and

2494
01:41:39,679 --> 01:41:41,360
compare it with current state law or

2495
01:41:41,360 --> 01:41:43,440
current practice? I mean there's there's

2496
01:41:43,440 --> 01:41:44,960
no time there's no clock on this. That's

2497
01:41:44,960 --> 01:41:47,440
why it lasted 14 years.

2498
01:41:47,440 --> 01:41:49,760
>> Yeah. So to to answer your first

2499
01:41:49,760 --> 01:41:52,960
question, I the that number one under

2500
01:41:52,960 --> 01:41:55,520
ethical conduct talks about the two

2501
01:41:55,520 --> 01:41:56,320
hours of training

2502
01:41:56,320 --> 01:41:58,080
>> that covers it then. Okay.

2503
01:41:58,080 --> 01:41:59,679
>> You're saying you want you want that to

2504
01:41:59,679 --> 01:42:01,760
be more detailed or precise.

2505
01:42:01,760 --> 01:42:03,119
>> Well, it says shall receive, but it

2506
01:42:03,119 --> 01:42:04,480
doesn't. No, it says every year. Okay,

2507
01:42:04,480 --> 01:42:05,920
never mind. It's annual. It's in there.

2508
01:42:05,920 --> 01:42:08,000
Disregard.

2509
01:42:08,000 --> 01:42:09,679
>> So, so your first that's okay for your

2510
01:42:09,679 --> 01:42:10,480
>> That's good then. Yes.

2511
01:42:10,480 --> 01:42:12,880
>> Okay. So, then the second concern is how

2512
01:42:12,880 --> 01:42:14,320
often are they updated? How

2513
01:42:14,320 --> 01:42:15,840
>> Oh, how often do you review this whole

2514
01:42:15,840 --> 01:42:16,320
thing?

2515
01:42:16,320 --> 01:42:17,600
>> Yeah. And you can put something in

2516
01:42:17,600 --> 01:42:20,239
there. That's fine. Um we, you know, we

2517
01:42:20,239 --> 01:42:21,840
have kind of those kind of same kind of

2518
01:42:21,840 --> 01:42:23,760
shot clocks like on our general plan. We

2519
01:42:23,760 --> 01:42:24,960
say we're going to update that every

2520
01:42:24,960 --> 01:42:29,679
five years. So, we can do that. That's just one more thing that we put

2521
01:42:29,679 --> 01:42:32,480
on our on our tickler calendar to make

2522
01:42:32,480 --> 01:42:33,679
sure that we get done. But I think it's

2523
01:42:33,679 --> 01:42:34,800
a good idea.

2524
01:42:34,800 --> 01:42:36,880
>> Yeah. And and

2525
01:42:36,880 --> 01:42:44,550
if I can say my opinion on that. um

2526
01:42:44,560 --> 01:42:46,800
unless there's a something that comes

2527
01:42:46,800 --> 01:42:50,159
out in in the state code uh that we

2528
01:42:50,159 --> 01:42:52,639
really need to look at and look at our

2529
01:42:52,639 --> 01:42:55,600
procedures because then we would be in

2530
01:42:55,600 --> 01:42:58,159
conflict with what a state statute says.

2531
01:42:58,159 --> 01:43:00,880
I'm not sure that we need to do this

2532
01:43:00,880 --> 01:43:03,040
every four years or five years or

2533
01:43:03,040 --> 01:43:05,199
anything like that. I think I think what

2534
01:43:05,199 --> 01:43:09,280
we've uh we we've seen with this that

2535
01:43:09,280 --> 01:43:11,760
has kind of withtood the test of time

2536
01:43:11,760 --> 01:43:13,920
and

2537
01:43:13,920 --> 01:43:17,520
we're still okay with what was was put

2538
01:43:17,520 --> 01:43:20,000
in place several years ago,

2539
01:43:20,000 --> 01:43:20,880
>> 14 years ago.

2540
01:43:20,880 --> 01:43:21,679
>> Yeah.

2541
01:43:21,679 --> 01:43:23,840
>> And I don't really feel like we need to

2542
01:43:23,840 --> 01:43:26,239
have a time clock that says we need to

2543
01:43:26,239 --> 01:43:29,360
look at this every so often. I think uh

2544
01:43:29,360 --> 01:43:32,080
when there's something that does come up

2545
01:43:32,080 --> 01:43:35,280
that triggers well you know that goes

2546
01:43:35,280 --> 01:43:38,000
against the way we've been operating uh

2547
01:43:38,000 --> 01:43:40,000
that the state passes for instance or

2548
01:43:40,000 --> 01:43:42,400
the federal government passes then we

2549
01:43:42,400 --> 01:43:45,760
need to come back and look at it but I

2550
01:43:45,760 --> 01:43:47,679
think it's it's those sort of things

2551
01:43:47,679 --> 01:43:50,000
that would trigger us to go back and

2552
01:43:50,000 --> 01:43:52,719
look at these procedures

2553
01:43:52,719 --> 01:43:56,159
>> because if if it ain't broke

2554
01:43:56,159 --> 01:43:59,360
>> don't fix That I guess my philosophy

2555
01:43:59,360 --> 01:44:01,760
>> kind of view that a little different,

2556
01:44:01,760 --> 01:44:03,280
you know, and it it's a little bit of

2557
01:44:03,280 --> 01:44:07,040
the appearance of of not only compliance

2558
01:44:07,040 --> 01:44:11,199
with your codes of conduct or whatever,

2559
01:44:11,199 --> 01:44:14,320
but it's showing your due diligence to

2560
01:44:14,320 --> 01:44:18,880
it. And that um you know, kind of on the

2561
01:44:18,880 --> 01:44:20,639
surface, yeah, I didn't look at this for

2562
01:44:20,639 --> 01:44:23,840
14 years. You know, the appearance of

2563
01:44:23,840 --> 01:44:26,719
that to me isn't all that great.

2564
01:44:26,719 --> 01:44:29,440
versus Robin brought up something a

2565
01:44:29,440 --> 01:44:31,679
little bit earlier on a recent change

2566
01:44:31,679 --> 01:44:35,440
with grandma in the recent uh

2567
01:44:35,440 --> 01:44:39,360
legislation sess session legislature

2568
01:44:39,360 --> 01:44:42,960
session. Um it's that's the very thing

2569
01:44:42,960 --> 01:44:45,280
that kind of triggers

2570
01:44:45,280 --> 01:44:48,080
the importance of revisiting this. I

2571
01:44:48,080 --> 01:44:50,080
mean it's it's a it's kind of an easy

2572
01:44:50,080 --> 01:44:52,400
thing to do. I don't think it has to be

2573
01:44:52,400 --> 01:44:57,760
a a council work session to update it

2574
01:44:57,760 --> 01:45:01,440
necessarily if they're minor changes but

2575
01:45:01,440 --> 01:45:03,520
yeah I think every 14 years is a bit

2576
01:45:03,520 --> 01:45:07,440
much I I think it's uh five years you

2577
01:45:07,440 --> 01:45:08,239
know is

2578
01:45:08,239 --> 01:45:10,480
>> well what if when a new council comes in

2579
01:45:10,480 --> 01:45:12,239
every four years

2580
01:45:12,239 --> 01:45:14,960
>> they are given this document and asked

2581
01:45:14,960 --> 01:45:17,679
to sign that they've read it and if

2582
01:45:17,679 --> 01:45:19,679
there was something that were blurringly

2583
01:45:19,679 --> 01:45:22,310
out of

2584
01:45:22,320 --> 01:45:23,760
or something like that. They would say,

2585
01:45:23,760 --> 01:45:24,960
"Well,

2586
01:45:24,960 --> 01:45:27,840
>> what about that?"

2587
01:45:27,840 --> 01:45:30,960
>> Well, and and Jack, I I think I'm

2588
01:45:30,960 --> 01:45:33,920
hearing you correctly. You know that um

2589
01:45:33,920 --> 01:45:36,560
and I think we agree on this. something

2590
01:45:36,560 --> 01:45:40,239
comes up like on grandma or something

2591
01:45:40,239 --> 01:45:42,239
then yeah I think it's appropriate for

2592
01:45:42,239 --> 01:45:44,480
us to look at or if the state as I said

2593
01:45:44,480 --> 01:45:50,960
if the state statute changes that is u

2594
01:45:50,960 --> 01:45:54,960
contradiction to what our procedures are

2595
01:45:54,960 --> 01:45:57,760
but

2596
01:45:57,760 --> 01:45:59,920
if we don't have a trigger like that I'm

2597
01:45:59,920 --> 01:46:02,480
not sure that we need to to look at this

2598
01:46:02,480 --> 01:46:06,000
every so many years it's those golden

2599
01:46:06,000 --> 01:46:08,320
rule stuff where it doesn't change much

2600
01:46:08,320 --> 01:46:09,679
or doesn't change.

2601
01:46:09,679 --> 01:46:11,199
>> Yeah. But it's, you know, I think it's

2602
01:46:11,199 --> 01:46:13,119
always just kind of fine-tuning. It's a

2603
01:46:13,119 --> 01:46:15,440
work in progress. We've we've in, you

2604
01:46:15,440 --> 01:46:17,119
know, we've added some things we didn't

2605
01:46:17,119 --> 01:46:19,840
have before dealing, you know, with the

2606
01:46:19,840 --> 01:46:21,360
media, stuff like that.

2607
01:46:21,360 --> 01:46:22,320
>> Yeah.

2608
01:46:22,320 --> 01:46:24,480
>> So, it doesn't hurt to just fine-tune

2609
01:46:24,480 --> 01:46:25,040
it.

2610
01:46:25,040 --> 01:46:27,199
>> Yeah. And and despite what we have or

2611
01:46:27,199 --> 01:46:30,880
haven't changed, we've had some very

2612
01:46:30,880 --> 01:46:35,199
good, productive conversations today

2613
01:46:35,199 --> 01:46:38,480
concerning a lot of topics that are of

2614
01:46:38,480 --> 01:46:42,239
importance to the public and just

2615
01:46:42,239 --> 01:46:46,320
general council procedure.

2616
01:46:46,320 --> 01:46:48,560
Um, so whether or not we've changed the

2617
01:46:48,560 --> 01:46:51,600
document a lot, I feel like

2618
01:46:51,600 --> 01:46:54,320
the check-in and the work session has

2619
01:46:54,320 --> 01:46:58,080
been really productive. Um,

2620
01:46:58,080 --> 01:46:59,840
so I'm not I don't know that like saying

2621
01:46:59,840 --> 01:47:02,000
it needs a time clock on it so that that

2622
01:47:02,000 --> 01:47:07,830
you meet and sit down, but um

2623
01:47:07,840 --> 01:47:09,360
I don't know. I have found this very

2624
01:47:09,360 --> 01:47:10,880
valuable and I feel like we've all been

2625
01:47:10,880 --> 01:47:14,880
able to kind of say kind of get on the

2626
01:47:14,880 --> 01:47:16,719
same page about the way we operate. Not

2627
01:47:16,719 --> 01:47:18,080
that we weren't, but just to sit down

2628
01:47:18,080 --> 01:47:19,760
and say it out loud. I think it's been

2629
01:47:19,760 --> 01:47:21,199
really nice.

2630
01:47:21,199 --> 01:47:23,199
>> I think it's been a really good robust

2631
01:47:23,199 --> 01:47:25,520
conversation. I guess the question is

2632
01:47:25,520 --> 01:47:28,560
how often, you know, maybe it maybe it's

2633
01:47:28,560 --> 01:47:30,400
10 years.

2634
01:47:30,400 --> 01:47:32,880
>> I was thinking eight. I mean, two, if

2635
01:47:32,880 --> 01:47:36,639
we're changing seats every two years

2636
01:47:36,639 --> 01:47:41,040
essentially, right? Somebody's up on the block every two

2637
01:47:41,040 --> 01:47:41,920
years.

2638
01:47:41,920 --> 01:47:43,440
>> Um,

2639
01:47:43,440 --> 01:47:45,679
if you did eight, I mean, you could you

2640
01:47:45,679 --> 01:47:47,679
could have a completely new council in

2641
01:47:47,679 --> 01:47:49,280
eight years.

2642
01:47:49,280 --> 01:47:52,400
>> You could also have a strikingly similar

2643
01:47:52,400 --> 01:47:54,880
council in eight years. Well, what

2644
01:47:54,880 --> 01:47:56,960
occurs to me is that we come in, we come

2645
01:47:56,960 --> 01:48:00,000
into these positions,

2646
01:48:00,000 --> 01:48:01,760
and I don't know about you, I didn't see

2647
01:48:01,760 --> 01:48:03,840
this for a long time. I mean, a lot of

2648
01:48:03,840 --> 01:48:06,080
this is intuitive anyway, and you you

2649
01:48:06,080 --> 01:48:07,760
come in and you pick up on how it's

2650
01:48:07,760 --> 01:48:09,280
already being done and how people are

2651
01:48:09,280 --> 01:48:12,239
already treating each other, but I think

2652
01:48:12,239 --> 01:48:14,480
at a minimum, when someone comes into

2653
01:48:14,480 --> 01:48:16,719
the office new, they ought to be given a

2654
01:48:16,719 --> 01:48:17,679
copy of this.

2655
01:48:17,679 --> 01:48:19,600
>> And and I think that's a really good

2656
01:48:19,600 --> 01:48:21,280
idea.

2657
01:48:21,280 --> 01:48:23,440
and every council can decide when it's

2658
01:48:23,440 --> 01:48:25,440
time to update it. I think I don't I

2659
01:48:25,440 --> 01:48:27,679
don't know that we need a trigger, but I

2660
01:48:27,679 --> 01:48:29,920
think it should be given out and I think

2661
01:48:29,920 --> 01:48:31,840
in some ways it'll selfcorrect because

2662
01:48:31,840 --> 01:48:34,480
people who are new on council and get it

2663
01:48:34,480 --> 01:48:36,000
will be like, well, wait a minute, we

2664
01:48:36,000 --> 01:48:38,159
should talk about this.

2665
01:48:38,159 --> 01:48:45,760
And I mean, maybe this is silly or not silly. I

2666
01:48:45,760 --> 01:48:48,239
don't know. Uh some of it or lots of it

2667
01:48:48,239 --> 01:48:52,239
could apply to commission which

2668
01:48:52,239 --> 01:48:53,119
>> I think it does.

2669
01:48:53,119 --> 01:48:54,480
>> It all applies to the commission. Yeah.

2670
01:48:54,480 --> 01:48:56,159
These are rules of procedure and and

2671
01:48:56,159 --> 01:48:57,760
codes of conduct not just for the

2672
01:48:57,760 --> 01:48:59,920
council but the commission, the historic

2673
01:48:59,920 --> 01:49:01,679
preservation commission, art review

2674
01:49:01,679 --> 01:49:03,440
board, all of our public

2675
01:49:03,440 --> 01:49:06,320
>> any specifically. Kyla says elected and

2676
01:49:06,320 --> 01:49:07,040
appointed.

2677
01:49:07,040 --> 01:49:10,320
>> It does say appointed. Okay. Um, I I

2678
01:49:10,320 --> 01:49:13,520
will say that reading as many versions

2679
01:49:13,520 --> 01:49:17,440
as we were given, I liked the um I liked

2680
01:49:17,440 --> 01:49:19,600
having all of the versions because I

2681
01:49:19,600 --> 01:49:22,320
would have had questions, but in the end

2682
01:49:22,320 --> 01:49:24,880
I was like, wait, which what did ours

2683
01:49:24,880 --> 01:49:26,800
specifically say and which version was

2684
01:49:26,800 --> 01:49:29,840
that? Um, anyway, so I think we've been

2685
01:49:29,840 --> 01:49:33,840
coming at it from a very council

2686
01:49:33,840 --> 01:49:35,440
perspective.

2687
01:49:35,440 --> 01:49:37,920
>> Yeah. Um,

2688
01:49:37,920 --> 01:49:40,480
>> but knowing that we do have quite a bit

2689
01:49:40,480 --> 01:49:42,400
of turnover on all of the other public

2690
01:49:42,400 --> 01:49:43,760
bodies that this is important

2691
01:49:43,760 --> 01:49:46,880
information for everybody to have and

2692
01:49:46,880 --> 01:49:50,000
for us to keep up on. And I'll say for a

2693
01:49:50,000 --> 01:49:53,760
third time, I fully believe in in

2694
01:49:53,760 --> 01:49:55,440
everything we do, we should mean what we

2695
01:49:55,440 --> 01:49:58,080
say and say what we mean. And I think

2696
01:49:58,080 --> 01:50:00,239
that's really important that we are

2697
01:50:00,239 --> 01:50:03,840
willing to create and make and follow

2698
01:50:03,840 --> 01:50:07,360
our our rules and we should only be

2699
01:50:07,360 --> 01:50:10,000
willing to put on the books what we can

2700
01:50:10,000 --> 01:50:12,800
uh follow and enforce. So yeah, and I

2701
01:50:12,800 --> 01:50:14,239
like that there were a few things we

2702
01:50:14,239 --> 01:50:16,000
talked about and decided not to write

2703
01:50:16,000 --> 01:50:18,800
down. That gives us some flexibility.

2704
01:50:18,800 --> 01:50:21,440
And in the final section, conduct of

2705
01:50:21,440 --> 01:50:23,119
town staff, I thought everything was

2706
01:50:23,119 --> 01:50:25,199
okay there. Pat, did you see anything

2707
01:50:25,199 --> 01:50:26,639
glaring there?

2708
01:50:26,639 --> 01:50:29,119
>> Yeah. Um,

2709
01:50:29,119 --> 01:50:31,679
if I'm reading this correctly,

2710
01:50:31,679 --> 01:50:33,840
treat everyone with courtesy, civility,

2711
01:50:33,840 --> 01:50:35,600
and refrain from inappropriate behavior

2712
01:50:35,600 --> 01:50:38,960
and drugs. Is that does that cover

2713
01:50:38,960 --> 01:50:41,440
harassment and and bullying and

2714
01:50:41,440 --> 01:50:43,920
discrimination? Does that cover all that

2715
01:50:43,920 --> 01:50:45,920
or that spelled out elsewhere in the

2716
01:50:45,920 --> 01:50:47,360
code of conduct? Do we need to talk

2717
01:50:47,360 --> 01:50:49,360
about that at all?

2718
01:50:49,360 --> 01:50:51,199
>> Um, I realize is that there's a there's

2719
01:50:51,199 --> 01:50:53,119
a federal umbrella, so regardless, we

2720
01:50:53,119 --> 01:50:54,800
have to follow it. Yeah, there there are

2721
01:50:54,800 --> 01:50:58,000
a number of policies that that that that

2722
01:50:58,000 --> 01:51:00,000
address that. It it wouldn't hurt to be

2723
01:51:00,000 --> 01:51:01,920
more um specific there if you wanted to.

2724
01:51:01,920 --> 01:51:04,480
I mean, our our town personnel policy

2725
01:51:04,480 --> 01:51:06,000
addresses that and as you mentioned,

2726
01:51:06,000 --> 01:51:08,000
there's there's federal statutes about

2727
01:51:08,000 --> 01:51:10,159
harassment, but I don't think it would

2728
01:51:10,159 --> 01:51:12,719
hurt to just reiterate it there as well.

2729
01:51:12,719 --> 01:51:14,960
>> Well, it reference, you know, town

2730
01:51:14,960 --> 01:51:18,320
personnel policy.

2731
01:51:18,320 --> 01:51:20,239
>> Yeah. And you have mandatory training on

2732
01:51:20,239 --> 01:51:21,600
harassment and that kind of thing,

2733
01:51:21,600 --> 01:51:25,119
right? So, so maybe maybe as Jack said

2734
01:51:25,119 --> 01:51:31,360
even in this just re refer to shall take training as as laid out in

2735
01:51:31,360 --> 01:51:33,440
the policy manual or something like

2736
01:51:33,440 --> 01:51:36,239
that.

2737
01:51:36,239 --> 01:51:37,520
>> That would that cover it for

2738
01:51:37,520 --> 01:51:43,910
>> I think so. Sure.

2739
01:51:43,920 --> 01:51:48,870
» There anything else before we adjourn?

2740
01:51:48,880 --> 01:51:51,280
I I thought it was cute that David

2741
01:51:51,280 --> 01:51:53,679
Church said, "I'm not proud of it, but I

2742
01:51:53,679 --> 01:51:55,679
wrote it."

2743
01:51:55,679 --> 01:51:59,119
>> But, you know, I I instantly went in

2744
01:51:59,119 --> 01:52:01,679
with a filter then and being like,

2745
01:52:01,679 --> 01:52:04,560
>> "Okay, what's bad about this? What is it

2746
01:52:04,560 --> 01:52:06,480
that is not

2747
01:52:06,480 --> 01:52:10,800
>> is not worthy of me adopting?" Like,

2748
01:52:10,800 --> 01:52:13,199
>> what am Yeah, it totally changed the way

2749
01:52:13,199 --> 01:52:14,320
I reviewed the documents.

2750
01:52:14,320 --> 01:52:15,280
>> Yeah, I thought that was interesting

2751
01:52:15,280 --> 01:52:17,119
because I felt the same way as, oh, this

2752
01:52:17,119 --> 01:52:18,880
is flawed. I need to I need to see

2753
01:52:18,880 --> 01:52:20,080
what's flawed about it. But

2754
01:52:20,080 --> 01:52:21,040
>> was it not bad?

2755
01:52:21,040 --> 01:52:23,119
>> It wasn't. No, I think he was saying it

2756
01:52:23,119 --> 01:52:25,040
was overdone. I think that's really what

2757
01:52:25,040 --> 01:52:25,840
he was saying.

2758
01:52:25,840 --> 01:52:27,920
>> He didn't leave many stones unturned.

2759
01:52:27,920 --> 01:52:28,639
>> No. Do

2760
01:52:28,639 --> 01:52:30,880
>> you have you all had the chance to meet

2761
01:52:30,880 --> 01:52:33,040
David Church and spend time with him?

2762
01:52:33,040 --> 01:52:35,360
>> I have.

2763
01:52:35,360 --> 01:52:38,000
>> That's his personality. is extremely

2764
01:52:38,000 --> 01:52:38,639
smart,

2765
01:52:38,639 --> 01:52:41,520
>> super intelligent, excellent attorney

2766
01:52:41,520 --> 01:52:44,320
and also very

2767
01:52:44,320 --> 01:52:46,080
self- aacing,

2768
01:52:46,080 --> 01:52:49,280
down to earth, humble kind of guy. So,

2769
01:52:49,280 --> 01:52:50,800
>> and if you saw him, if you've been to

2770
01:52:50,800 --> 01:52:52,480
any of the league conferences, you'd

2771
01:52:52,480 --> 01:52:54,560
know he is because he's always there. He

2772
01:52:54,560 --> 01:52:57,040
He's still going. He uses a cane and he

2773
01:52:57,040 --> 01:52:58,880
he's a funny guy. Funny, I mean,

2774
01:52:58,880 --> 01:53:01,440
humorous, enjoyable.

2775
01:53:01,440 --> 01:53:03,440
>> One of his sons following in his

2776
01:53:03,440 --> 01:53:07,199
footsteps. Is this the same guy?

2777
01:53:07,199 --> 01:53:07,840
Yes.

2778
01:53:07,840 --> 01:53:09,520
>> Is he an attorney, too?

2779
01:53:09,520 --> 01:53:11,679
>> Oh, I didn't know who's he with He's not

2780
01:53:11,679 --> 01:53:12,880
with the league,

2781
01:53:12,880 --> 01:53:13,920
>> is he?

2782
01:53:13,920 --> 01:53:14,560
>> Oh, he is.

2783
01:53:14,560 --> 01:53:16,800
>> Well, so Church Blazedale is David

2784
01:53:16,800 --> 01:53:18,639
Church's

2785
01:53:18,639 --> 01:53:20,560
uh firm, and I think Matt Church is also

2786
01:53:20,560 --> 01:53:21,760
with Church Blazedale.

2787
01:53:21,760 --> 01:53:22,480
>> Oh, okay.

2788
01:53:22,480 --> 01:53:24,400
>> If I if I remember,

2789
01:53:24,400 --> 01:53:26,320
>> because I think their attorney they use

2790
01:53:26,320 --> 01:53:28,960
now is Todd.

2791
01:53:28,960 --> 01:53:30,960
>> Yeah.

2792
01:53:30,960 --> 01:53:33,119
But but the firm they use is probably

2793
01:53:33,119 --> 01:53:36,800
that firm. Anyway, um

2794
01:53:36,800 --> 01:53:39,119
we ready for a motion to adjourn?

2795
01:53:39,119 --> 01:53:42,239
>> We'll second. Motion by Randy, second by

2796
01:53:42,239 --> 01:53:43,280
Kyla.

2797
01:53:43,280 --> 01:53:44,960
>> Randy Barbry

2798
01:53:44,960 --> 01:53:47,840
>> had I

2799
01:53:47,840 --> 01:53:49,840
church is actually with Manning, Curtis,

2800
01:53:49,840 --> 01:53:52,560
Bradshaw, and Bedar,

2801
01:53:52,560 --> 01:53:54,880
not with Church Blaze.

2802
01:53:54,880 --> 01:53:58,080
My bad.