[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:04]
>> ALL RIGHT. AS THE TUESDAY, JANUARY 3 AT 6:30 P.M. WE ARE AT THE CITY HALL WITH THE QUORUM PRESENT. THIS MEETING MAY BE CONVENED INTO A CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEEKING CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL ADVICE. INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND ON THE POSTED AGENDA ON THE CITY WEBSITE OR HERE AT CITY HALL.
OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEM WILL BE DISCUSSED AFTER THE REGULAR SESSION. WE WILL BE MOVING DIRECTLY INTO
[3A. Presentation of recommendations from the Charter Review Commission.]
THE WORK SESSION.% THE FIRST ITEM IS ITEM 3-A.PRESENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION. AND I HAVE ONE CARD IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. THERE IS A CARD OUTSIDE YOU CAN FILL OUT. GIVE... JUST GIVE IT TO ME.
RICHARD COLE, STATE YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE.
YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES. >> RICHARD COLE.
3801 OLD SAGE DRIVE ROWLETT. THIS MAY BE PREMATURE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM. SINCE WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN IT ON THE AGENDA YET. I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.
ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. SPECIFICALLY, THE RECOMMENDATION FOUND IN SECTION 5.04. MUNICIPAL JUDGE.
THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMITTEE... OF THE COMMISSION IS TO STRIKE THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE.
THE REMOVAL OF OR TERMINATION OF ANY MUNICIPAL JUDGE SHALL BE CONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
THEY ARE RECOMMENDING WE REMOVE THAT FROM THE CHARTER I THINK DOING THAT MAY SUGGEST TO VOTERS THAT WHAT IS BEING RECOMMENDED IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
THEREFORE, DOESN'T IT MAKE MORE SENSE TO KEEP THE LANGUAGE CURRENTLY IN THE CHARTER THAT THE CRC IS RECOMMENDING TO STRIKE AND TO SIMPLY ADD THE RECOMMENDATION LANGUAGE THE CRC IS ADDING TO SECTION 504. I CAN READ THAT TO YOU.
IT WILL COME UP ON THE OVERHEAD. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
ADDRESS IT IS COUNCIL. >> THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHTY.
THEN CHARTER COMMISSION. LISA BOWERS, YOU WANT TO
INTRODUCE YOUR TEAM? >> ABSOLUTELY.
EVERYBODY HERE HOPEFULLY KNOWS ME.
I'M LISA BOWERS. WE ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. MEMBERS ON THE BOARD: THEY WERE ALL A REALLY GREAT HELP. I WOULD LIKE TO REALLY THANK BRIAN GLARYD GLEARD. WE APPRECIATE THE RESEARCH YOU DID. YOU ARE DEFINITELY A DETAILED
>> (LAUGHTER). >> I WOULD LIKE TO GAVE SHOUT-OUT TO LAURA. SHE TODAY GREAT JOB KEEPING US KIND OF ON TRACK AND HERDING THE CATS.
SHE DID AN AWESOME JOB AT THAT. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO GIVE A SHOUT-OUT TO KELLY MCKEE. EVERYBODY DID A GREAT JOB OF REALLY RESEARCHING EVERYTHING, ALL OF THE DIFFERENT ITEMS WE HAD. BUT KELLY TOOK THE ENORMOUS TASK OF PUTTING EVERYTHING INTO AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET THAT WOULD
COVER THE TABLE. >> WE REALLY DO APPRECIATE THAT HARD WORK. SO HERE WE GO.
BASICALLY, I'M NOT GOING TO READ THIS TO YOU.
I KNOW EVERYONE HERE CAN READ. THE CITY CHARTER CAME... THE CITIZENS VOTED TO ADOPT THE HOME RULE IN 1979.
THERE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSIONS, AND DIFFERENT ELECTIONS THAT HAVE HAPPENED.
WHAT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION DID IS THEY LOOK AT WHAT COUNCIL... AT WHAT COUNCIL ASKED THEM TO LOOK AT.
SO WE WERE APPOINTED IN JULY. THE CITY COUNCIL GAVE US A SCOPE
OF REVIEW. >> CURRENTLY, YOU COULD ONLY
[00:05:08]
HAVE SIX MONTHS FOR THE COMMISSION REVIEW, AND THEN OBVIOUSLY, EVERYTHING BECOMES A PUBLIC RECORD.JEFF, I BELIEVE YOU BROUGHT IT UP.
I KNOW Y'ALL DID IT IN JULY. WE WERE RATIFIED IN AUGUST.
WE STARTED OUR MEETINGS IN SEPTEMBER.
OBVIOUSLY, WE HAD FOUR MEETINGS. WE DID HAVE A PUBLIC INPUT MEETING. THERE ARE, IN FACT, A COUPLE OF THE MEETINGS RECORDED. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT ANY OF THOSE, YOU ARE CERTAINLY WELCOME TO.
THE CITY COUNCIL REQUESTED... I THINK IT IS FIVE OR SIX ITEMS FOR US TO LOOK AT. THE FIRST ONE IS TO HAVE THE COURT CLERK BE APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER AS OPPOSED TO BEING APPOINTED BY THE COURT. BY THE JUDGE.
THE SECOND ONE WAS REVIEW THE VACANCIES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR CITY COUNCIL PEOPLE. THEY WANTED TO LOOK AT HOW SPECIAL MEETINGS COULD BE CA CALLED.
CURRENTLY, THE WAY THE LANGUAGE IS RIGHT NOW, FOUR MEMBERS... IT TAKES FOUR MEMBERS TO CALL A SPECIAL MEETING.
AND THATK A SHULLLY... ACTUALLY VIOLATES THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.
THEY REALLY WANTED TO GET THAT CHANGED.
THE MUNICIPAL JUDGE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT HOW A MUNICIPAL JUDGE CAN BE REMOVED. AND HOW THE REVIEW COMMISSION WORKS. IF THEY ARE LIMITED IN SCOPE.
WHAT THEY LOOK AT. IF THEY CAN LOOK AT EVERYTHING THEY WANT TO LOOK AT. SO LIKE I SAID,... EVEN A TALKER LIKE ME, I HAVE TO TAKE A LITTLE SIP.
SUBCOMMITTEES WERE ASSIGNEDDED IN OUR VERY FIRST MEETING.
THERE WERE PEOPLE ON EACH SUBCOMMITTEE.
AT EVERY MEETING, WE CAME BACK, AND THEY GAVE A REPORT.
AND THEY COMPARED THE NORMAL 20 CITIES THAT PEOPLE... THAT WE USUALLY USE. AND SO EACH COMMITTEE FOCUSED ON ONE AREA, AND SO FOR INSTANCE, THE FIRST COMMITTEE... I WAS ON THE SCOPE COMMITTEE, SUBCOMMITTEE.
I CAME BACK AND REPORTED AT THE SECOND MEETING THAT I THOUGHT PEOPLE SHOULD... THE COMMISSION SHOULD HAVE... THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO LOOK AT WHATEVER THEY WANTED TO.
SO THAT WAS THE PROCESS. SO HERE ARE THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE COME UP WITH. WE VOTED ON MOST OF THESE KIND OF SEPARATELY, INDIVIDUALLY, SOMETIMES WE HAD THREE THINGS TO VOTE ON ON ONE ITEM. SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ATTENDANCE IS... THAT YOU INCLUDE SPECIAL MEETINGS IN THE ATTENDANCE RECORD.
AS WELL AS REGULAR MEETINGS. AS YOU CAN SEE.
IN THE RED. THE SECOND ONE IS THAT SPECIAL MEETINGS CAN BE CALLED BY ANY THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
THAT ALLOWS FOR US TO STAY WITHIN THE GUIDELINES OF THE OPEN MEETINGS. THE MUNICIPAL COURT, SO THIS IS WHERE WE DECIDED TO GO BACK AND CHANGE... HAVING THE CHIEF JU JUDGE... NO LONGER HAVE THE CHIEF JUDGE APPOINT THE CHIEF CLERK. WE DECIDED... WE THOUGHT IT SHOULD GO BACK TO THE CITY MANAGER.
[00:10:01]
ANY CHIEF JUDGE OR ASSOCIATE JUDGE MAY BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE WITH OR WITHOUT CAUSE BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL. I DON'T KNOW THAT RICHARD'S SUGGESTION THERE MIGHT BE A GOOD SUGGESTION.>> REAL EASY TO FIX BY SIMPLY SAYING AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF
THE SENTENCE... >> THERE WE GO.
WELL, YOU KNOW, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, I'M NOT SURE WE HAVE COME TO IT. AT OUR PUBLIC MEETING, WE DID HAVE SOME GOOD PUBLIC INPUT AS WELL.
I WAS VERY HAPPY AND VERY PLEASED NAST THERE WERE ACTUALLY PEOPLE THAT CAME TO OUR MEETING. THAT WAS AWESOME.
>> WOULD THAT BE A SUPER MAJORITY?
JUST A MAJORITY. >> JUST A MAJORITY?
>> WE DISCUSSED THE SUMMER MAJORITY FOR PROBABLY 30 MINUTES. WE WENT WITH THE MAJORITY.
>> THAT IS MAJORITY OF THE FULL COUNCIL.
NOT MAJORITY OF THOSE PRESENT? >> THAT IS CORRECT.
IT MUST BE THE FULL COUNCIL. >> OKAY.
>> ACTUALLY, THIS ONE... DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT?
>> I THINK THE WAY IT IS WRI WRITTEN, AND AS IT WOULD BE APPLIED, IF IT WERE TO BE APPLIED AS WRITTEN, IT IS THE MAJORITY OF WHOEVER IS PRESENT AT THE MEETING.
IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE THE MAJORITY OF THE FULL COUNCIL, WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE PRESENT, SPECIAL WORDS NEED TO BE USED.
THOSE WORDS DON'T EXIST IN THIS LINE.
>> THE INTENTION OF THE COMMISSION... BY MAJORITY VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL IS WHAT IT SAYS NOW.
>> OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL. >> OH, MAYBE I'M LOOKING AT A DIFFERENT VERSION. OKAY.
>> WHEN I SEE YOUR FACE DO THAT THING, I'M, LIKE, NO, NO.
YOU NEED TO SAY WHAT YOU ARE THINKING.
THE INTENT OF THE COMMISSION IS THE FULL CITY COUNCIL.
WE NEED A BOLD UNDERLINE WITH THAT.
THIS SUGGESTION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL DETERMINE THE MINIMUM SCOPE WAS ACTUALLY INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC.
WWE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT. AND THEN WE ALSO WANTED TO CHANGE... WE FELT LIKE THE SCOPE OF THE COMMISSION, THE WORK OF THE COMMISSION REALLY NEEDS LONGER THAN SIX MONTHS AND MOVE THAT TO 12. BECAUSE THAT IS... REALLY, SIX MONTHS IS, LIKE, SIX MEETINGS. THAT IS NOT REALLY A LOT.
ESPECIALLY IF YOU WANTED TO LOOK AT OTHER THINGS, NOT JUST WHAT THE COUNCIL HAS ASKED YOU TO. I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE RESEARCHED... I DON'T KNOW. TWO OR THREE THINGS IN ADDITION TO THAT. IT TOOK US EVERY MEETING...
EVERY MEETING WAS FULL. WE RECOMMENDED THAT IT IS EXTENDED TO 12 MEETINGS. THAT IS OUR PRESENTATION.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMISSION?
>> JUST WANTED TO SAY I APPRECIATE EVERY ONE OF Y'ALL FOR YOUR DEDICATION TO THIS. ABSOLUTELY VALUABLE.
I THOUGHT EVERY... EVERYTHING THAT Y'ALL DID AND RECOMMENDED IS... EXCEPT FOR ONE THING. BUT EVERY BIT OF IT WAS REALLY GOOD. AND NEEDS TO BE DONE.
AND SO THANK YOU ALL. >> AWESOME.
>> SO I HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS. I WAS A LITTLE... I GUESS I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND. WE JUST HAD A CHARTER REVIEW.
THEN TWO YEARS LIGHTER. YOU SEE A LOT OF RECOMMENDATIONS. MOST OF IT I AGREE WITH.
THE 12 MONTHS MAKES COMPLETE SENSE.
THERE SEEMS TO BE A HYPER-FOCUS ON ONE THING.
SO I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS WHERE THAT CONVERSATION STARTED, WHAT THAT CONVERSATION... WHAT WAS BEHIND IT, WHAT THE CONVERSATION WAS AT THE PUBLIC FORUMS. WHY IT SEEMED TO BE SO CENTERED AROUND OUR MUNICIPAL JUDGE.
IN TERMS OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE.
>> I BELIEVE THAT IT WAS THE... IT WAS A HOT TOPIC, OBVIOUSLY, THROUGHOUT ALL OF LAST YEAR. AND WE MADE A POINT... I KNOW I MADE A POINT. I KNOW OTHER PEOPLE MADE A POINT TO SAY THAT WE ABSOLUTELY DID NOT WANT TO CONSIDER WHAT WAS GOING ON CURRENTLY AS THE BASIS OF EVERYTHING THAT WE DO.
WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS FROM... WE WANT THIS CHARTER TO BE ABLE TO STAND FOR THE NEXT 25 YEARS. SO A CURRENT SITUATION IS IT
[00:15:05]
BROUGHT UP AN ISSUE, BUT THAT WASN'T THE REASON THAT WE SH SHOULD, WE SHOULD AMEND THE CHARTER.THE REASON THAT WE SHOULDN'T AMEND THE CHARTER WAS BECAUSE THE COUNCIL WANTED MORE FLEXIBILITY TO HANDLE A
SITUATION. >> I APPRECIATE THAT.
BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CONVERSATION WAS EVER HAD WITH FULL COUNCIL. IT MAY HAVE BEEN HAD WITH SOME INDIVIDUALS OF THIS COUNCIL, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THERE WAS EVER A MEETING INTERNALLY IN TERMS OF WHERE WE DISCUSSED THAT ONE OF THE OBJECTIVES WAS GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THE MUNICIPAL
THERE WAS A WORK SESSION. I THINK YOU WERE ABSENT.
NO. WE HAD A WORK SESSION ABOUT IT.
ABOUT THE SCOPE OF THE CHARTER. THE REVIEW.
WE ABSOLUTELY DISCUSSED THOSE THINGS.
>> THERE WAS A PRESENTATION AND EVERYTHING WITH THESE ITEMS.
>> OKAY. WELL, I CAN APPRECIATE THAT.
I WASN'T HERE, I WASN'T HERE. I WOULD STILL LIKE SOME MORE LEGAL ADVICE IN TERMS OF... I KNOW THAT YOU SAY THAT THIS IS LEGAL. EVERY JUDGE AND EVEN SOME OTHER CITY ATTORNEYS THAT I HAVE TALKED TO STILL SAY UNDER STATE LAW THAT THIS IS NOT... THAT THE MUNICIPAL JUDGES ARE NOT ALLOWED
TO BE DISMISSED BY COUNCIL. >> THE COMMISSION DID, IN FACT, CANVASS OTHER CITIES. EVERY CITY HAD THE SAME RESULTS.
THEY ALL REQUIRE F OR AUTHORIZE REMOVAL BY MAJORITY VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL. NOT BY THIS OTHER VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE PROCEEDINGS THAT THE OTHER TWO ALTERNATIVES THAT
STATE LAW ALLOWS. >> AND IT IS WORTH NOTING THAT THE TMC... WHAT IS IT? TCMA, WHATEVER YOU JUST SAID.
THAT THEY ALSO PROVIDE SOME OPINIONS AND LETTERS SAYING THAT, OH, IT CAN'T BE DONE. BUT IF IT IS IN THE STATE STATUTE AND IT PROVIDES THIS AVENUE, THEN YOU CAN'T ARGUE
WITH THAT. >> THAT OTHER AVENUE APPLIES TO GENERAL LAW. RIGHT? THEY DON'T HAVE THE MEANS TO DO THIS.
WE DO. >> THE OTHER TWO ALTERNATIVES
APPLY TO COURTS OF RECORD. >> OKAY.
WHETHER THE COURTITTE IS A COURT OF RECORD.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE STATUS OF THE CITY.
WHETHER OR NOT THE COURT IS A COURT OF RECORD.
THE CITIES THAT WERE LOOKED AT DO HAVE THAT IN CHAIR CHARTER.
>> WHICH WERE THE CITY THAT IS WE LOOKED AT?
>> HOW MANY OF THEM HAD THAT OUT OF THE ONE THAT IS WE LOOKED AT?
>> ANYBODY REMEMBER? >> MOST, IF NOT ALL.
>> WE COULD HAVE THAT ANSWER FOR YOU THURSDAY.
>> THERE YOU GO. I WOULD... LAURA, YOU HAVE THE MAGNIFICENT SPREADSHEET. YES?
>> YES. >> I WOULD, I WOULD ASK IF YOU WANTED TO SEND THAT OUT TO COUNCIL.
SO THEY COULD HAVE THAT PRIMARY SOURCE.
>> AND YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THAT CONVERSATION WAS HAD... I'M GOING TO SAY FOR THE RECORD, THAT I BELIEVE THAT THIS WAS POLITICALLY MOTIVATED BY... I HATE TO SAY IT.
THERE WAS AN ISSUE. THAT WAS AN ISSUE THAT CAME UP DURING A CAMPAIGN. THERE WERE CERTAIN CAMPAIGN PROMISES THAT WERE TO BE MADE. NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN, THIS IS ON A CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION. YOU CAN SAY EVERYTHING YOU WANT.
THIS WA VERY, VERY MUCH POLITICALLY DRIVEN.
I'M THE LONE VOICE ON THIS. I KNOW.
LOOK, I'LL LET YOU TALK IN A SECOND, BRIAN.
IF THIS IS WHAT OTHER CITIES DO, I WOULD STRONGLY, STRONGLY URGE THAT IT IS A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE.
REGARDLESS OF WHAT THOSE POLITICAL ISSUES WERE, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE ISSUES WE HAD HERE BEFORE.
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS A REASON WHY THE COURT IS SEPARATE FROM POLICE AND IT IS SEPARATE AND SHOULD BE SEPARATE FROM THE POLITICAL BODY. BECAUSE NOW YOU HAVE A JUDICIAL BODY THAT HAS THE RIGHTS TO TAKE AWAY SOMEBODY'S FREEDOM THAT HAS INFLUENCE OVER THAT PERSON BY POLITICALLY APPOINTED POSITIONS BY THE PUBLIC. SO IF THEY DON'T LET THE PERSON GO THAT THEY WANT LET GO, IF THEY DON'T REDUCE THE FINE FOR THE PERSON THEY WANT REDUCED, THEIR JOB CAN BE PUT TO THE TEST. I DON'T THINK THAT IS THE SPIRIT OF WHAT OUR POLITICAL BODY SHOULD BE.
THE COURTS ARE HELD AT A HIGHER STANDARD.
JUDGING SHOULD BE HELD TO A HIGHER STANDARD.
IF WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH OUR JUDGE, YOU TAKE THEM TO THE JUDICIAL REVIEW COMMISSION. YOU FIGURE OUT HOW TO HANDLE THAT. DEFINITELY NOT THROUGH A MAJORITY VOTE OF A POLITICALLY APPOINTED BODY BY THE CITIZENS OF THAT JURISDICTION. IT IS NOT RIGHT.
[00:20:03]
IN MY OPINION. AND SO I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. I WASN'T AT THAT MEETING.I APOLOGIZE THAT I WASN'T THERE. IF THAT IS THE VIEW OF FULL COUNCIL, MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION, I WON'T SUPPORT IT. I WOULD URGE YOU STRONGLY TO AT LEAST GO TO A SUPER MAJORITY. SO THAT IS A SUPER MAJORITY TO BE ABLE TO LET A POSITION GO THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO PUT PEOPLE IN JAIL. SO I YIELD THE FLOOR.
THANK YOU, BRIAN, FOR YOUR TIME. >> NO PROBLEM.
I JUST WANTED TO... MY AP APOLOGIES.
MY FAMILY ALWAYS INTERRUPT EACH OTHER.
>> YOU ARE ITALIAN. >> ITALIAN.
I WANTED TO SAY, MATT, I THINK YOU ARE WRONG ON THE ORIGIN OF THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE I THINK I ORIGINATED THIS ISSUE, AND TH THIS... FOR THIS CHARTER REVIEW.
WHEN WE WERE HAVING ALL OF OUR CONTROVERSY BACK IN THE SPRING, I KID SOME RESEARCH... I DID SOME RESEARCH.
I ACTUALLY FOUND THE STATUTE THAT ALLOWS THE CHARTER CITIES TO DISMISS THEIR MUNICIPAL JUDGES.
I DID NOT WANT TO INTERJECT THAT INTO THE POLITICS OF THE MOMENT.
IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE. YOU ARE RIGHT.
OKAY? REMOVAL OF A JUDGE IS A VERY IMPORTANT AND SERIOUS MATTER. IT SHOULD NOT BE DONE LIGHTLY.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IT IS, IN MY VIEW, STANDARD PRACTICE THAT THE LEGISLATURE WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE FOR THE CITY OF ROWLETT, HAS THE AUTHORITY, BOTH AT A FEDERAL, A STATE, AND MUNICIPAL LEVEL, TO REMOVE A JUDGE. NOW, TYPICALLY, IT IS A SUPER MAJORITY. THE DATA...
EVEN AT THE COUNTY LEVEL, THE COURTS OF RECORD PROVIDES FOR MULTIPLE MEANS IN THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION TO REMOVE, BY LEGISLATURE, JUST THE SAME AS IT DOES WITH THE FEDERAL... THE FEDERAL, THE HOUSE... THE HOUSE IMPEACHES.
THE SENATE TRIES. TWO-THIRDS VOTE OF THE SENATE.
NOW, THEY DO NOT IDENTIFY MUNICIPAL JUDGES IN THE CONSTITUTION. BUT THE LEGISLATURE HAS PROVIDED IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE FOR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR CHARTER CITIES TO EXERCISE THAT LEGISLATIVE POWER.
AND JUDGES SERVE AT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.
THE SAME AS WE DO. THAT IS WHY THIS CAME ABOUT.
WHEN I LOOKED AT THAT, WE STARTED LOOKING AT CHARTER.
WE SAW SOME OTHER THINGS IN HERE.
ONE OF THE THINGS IS A CORRECTION THAT WENT IN THE LAST CHARTER REVIEW. WE HAVE A CONFLICT IN OUR ORDINANCES RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE ON THE BOOKS THAT SAYS THE CITY MANAGER APPOINTS THE COURT CLERK.
WE HAVE IN THE CHARTER, A LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THE MUNICIPAL JUDGE APPOINTS THE COURT CLERK. INTERESTINGLY, THAT LANGUAGE CAME FROM THE LAST MUNICIPAL JUDGE WHEN WE WERE ON THE COMMITTEE IN 2021. SO THIS IS REALLY A CLEAN-UP.
I KNOW IF SOMETHING CAME TO COUNCIL WHILE I WAS ON COUNCIL, THE THINGS THAT I WOULD LOOK AT AS TO WHETHER TO EXERCISE THE RIGHT TO REMOVE WOULD BE ABOUT BEHAVIOR AND PERFORMANCE AND NOT ABOUT JUDGMENT. THAT IS HOW... I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN CODIFY THAT INTO THE CHARTER.
THAT IS REALLY THE INTENT. EVEN IN THE CONSTITUTION, IT TALKS ABOUT AND OUT PUTS IT IN CAPITAL G AND CAPITAL B.
GOOD BEHAVIOR. THTHAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A TOUGH E TO DEFINE, RIGHT. DAVID? THE SAME THING APPLIES IN THE STATE LANGUAGE.
IT TALKS ABOUT SOME OTHER, YOU KNOW, NOT RUNNING THE COURT PROPERLY. THAT KIND OF THING.
IT DOES NOT GET INTO DECISIONS. I'M SENSITIVE TO YOUR CONCERN.
AT THE SAME TIME, WE ARE TALKING A MUNICIPAL JUDGE.
MISDEMEANOR CLASS A, I THINK. >> C.
>> C. IT IS LESS IMPORTANT IN A SENSE FOR US THAN FOR THE STATE TO GET IT RIGHT.
WE STILL WANT TO GET IT RIGHT. SO I WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE SUPPORT AND WOULD ARGUE NEXT THURSDAY, I GUESS IT IS, TO GO TO SOME LEVEL OF SUPER MAJORITY. I THINK IT SHOULD BE EASIER TO APPOINT THAN TO REMOVE. TYPICALLY, IN ALL POSITIONS.
THAT WOULD BE THE SAME WITH CITY ATTORNEYS.
THE SECRETARY. IT PROTECTS THE MINORITY VIEW.
THAT IS WHY YOU SEE THAT, I THINK, IN THE TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY FOR APPROVAL OF OFFICES OF THE CABINET AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> SO I APPRECIATE ALL OF THAT. I CAN GET BEHIND.
THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE AN ARGUMENT WITH SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT IT WOULD BE FOR CAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, MISCONDUCT OF THE CITY'S ETHICS POLICY STANDARDS, OF THE...
WHATEVER OUR BOARD OF HANDBOOKS IS FOR CITY EMPLOYEES.
ANYTHING ELSE OTHER CITY EMPLOYEES WOULD BE HELD TO, IF THEY WERE GOING TO BE LET GO. THAT IS WHAT WE SHOULD HOLD THAT
[00:25:02]
STANDARD TO. FOR THIS PERSON AS WELL AS TO WHAT THEIR... OBVIOUSLY, IF THEY ARE VIOLATING THEIR CANONS, THAT WOULD BE REASON FOR DISMISSAL. IF THEY HAVE VIOLATED THE CODE OF ETHICS OR ONE OF THE OTHER PRINCIPLES THAT COULD GET SOMEBODY FIRED FROM THE CITY, BUT NOT FOR CAUSE.YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN BY THAT. NOT FOR SPECIAL INTEREST CAUSES,
THERE IS A LOT OF DISCUSSION, I THINK...
>> WE DID TAKE A VOTE ON EACH... EACH SEGMENT OF THAT PROPO PROPOSITION, WE DID TAKE A VOTE ON.
YOU CAN GO BACK AND YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT.
AND EACH... YOU KNOW, IS IT GOING TO BE A SUPER MAJORITY OR JUST A MAJORITY OR ALL OF THOSE, IN PARTICULAR, THINGS THAT WE VOTED ON AND CAME TO A CONSENSUS ON?
>> LOOKING AT THE OTHER CITIES, WERE MOST OF THEM... DID THEY REQUIRE A SUPER MAJORITY OR JUST THE MAJORITY?
>> I BELIEVE JUST THE MAJORITY. >> JUST THE MAJORITY.
GENERALLY. >> WE ARE HAVING SOME GOOD CONVERSATION ON CAUSE OR WITHOUT CAUSE.
PHILOSOPHICALLY, I AGREE WITH CAUSE.
OPERATIONALLY, IT CREATES PROBLEMS BECAUSE IN A COURT OF LAW, YOU CAN ALWAYS ARGUE THAT WHATEVER THE CAUSE IS DIDN'T EXIST. THAT YOU GO TO CAUSE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN EF DEN CHAIR EVIDENTIARY LEVEL OF DEMONSTRATION OF CAUSE FOR THAT TO BE I FEKTIVE.
I DIDN'T THINK THAT OUR CITY SHOULD BE IN THAT POSITION.
WE DON'T WANT A DRAWN-OUT COURT PROCESS FOR TWO, THREE YEARS WITH POTENTIAL DAMAGES. IF WE DON'T PRODUCE THE RIGHT INFORMATION. SO...
>> GOOD CONVERSATION. >> WE ARE TO HAVE THIS ON THURSDAY. RIGHT?
(LAUGHTER). >> I HAVE A QUESTION AS WELL.
IT MIGHT BE CARRYING OVER TO THURSDAY.
IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW.
ON THE FINANCIAL SIDE OF IT. I LOOKED IN THE PACKET.
IT TALKS ABOUT A TO BE DETERMINED COST.
THEN IT HAS A BUDGET OF ALMOST $150.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THIS EFFORT IS GOING TO COST.
THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY. >> AN ELECTION.
>> WE PUT IT ON THE SAME ELECTION, THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO. PUT IT ON THE...
>> THAT IS WHAT I HOPE WE WOULD DO.
WHERE DID YOU COME UP WITH THE BUDGET OF $150,000?
>> THAT IS THE COUNTY ELECTIONS OFFICES.
THEY HAVE INCREASED THEIR PRICES FOR ELECTIONS.
>> THAT IS NOT JUST FOR THE CHARTER REVIEW.
THAT IS JUST FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION.
>> TO EVEN PLACE SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT.
>> THE $150,000 THAT IS SHOWN IN THE PACKET IS WHAT IS IN OUR CITY'S BUDGET ALLOWED FOR ELECTIONS.
>> RIGHT. >> WE MAY SPEND PART OF THAT, ALL OF IT. WE WILL SPEND SOME OF IT.
JUST HOLDING THE REGULAR ELECTION THAT WE HAVE TO HOLD
THIS YEAR. >> ARE WE SPENDING EXTRA FOR
>> OKAY. >> IT WILL BE NOMINAL BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PROPOSITIONS YOU ADD IN ADDITION TO YOUR GENERAL
ELECTION. >> BECAUSE WE ARE ALREADY HAVING
>> WE KNEW THAT. >> IT IS ALSO BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO PARTI PARTICIPATE.
WE CONTRACT WITH BOTH DALLAS COUNTY AND ROCKWALL COUNTY.
DALLAS COUNTY HAS A JOINT ELECTION CONTRACT.
WE PARTNER WITH SEVERAL OTHER ENTITIES TO HOLD THAT ELECTION WHICH GIVES US LOWER COST, BUT THEY RECENTLY RAISED THEIR COST SIGNIFICANTLY. SO THAT FINAL COST IS ALSO DETERMINED BY THE NUMBER OF ENTITIES WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE
ELECTION IN MAY. >> SO YOU GO ROUGHLY FROM
$90,000 TO ALMOST $150,000? >> NO.
THAT IS THE TOTAL AMOUNT IN THE BUDGET.
IT COULD BE $90,000. IT COULD BE $30,000.
WE WON'T REALLY KNOW THAT UNTIL WE GET THE RESULTS OF EVERYTHING. EVERYTHING CALCULATED.
>> AND THE FINAL AUDIT. >> RIGHT.
UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS THE WAY THE COUNTY DOES IT.
THERE IS NOT A WAY TO COMPLETELY PREDICT... I MEAN, YOU CAN PREDICT YOUR TURNOUT. YOU ARER IN GOING TO BE SPOT-ON.
>> I HAVE GET ALL OF THAT. MAYBE MY MISUNDERSTANDING WAS THIS EFFORT... I DIDN'T WANT IT TO COST ANY MORE THAN WE WOULD HAVE NORMALLY PAID. BECAUSE LIKE MATT SAID, WE ARE ONLY A COUPLE OF YEARS INTO THE LAST REVIEW.
I HATE TO SPEND A TON OF MONEY FOR SOMETHING THAT COULD WAIT
ANOTHER... YES. >> ANOTHER FEW YEARS.
>> YES. IF THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN AN OFF-ELECTION, THEN YEAH. IT WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL
>> WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT.
[00:30:01]
THAT IS NOT WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE.WE ARE ALREADY ON THE BALLOT. WE ARE ALREADY HAVING AN
ELECTION. >> MATT, I KNOW WE ARE SHORT ON TIME. I WANT TO MENTION THAT WHEN WE DID HAVE THIS DISCUSSION BACK IN JULY, I BELIEVE IT WAS, JULY 19, YES. COUNCIL AT THAT TIME FELT IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT TO APPOINT A CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
THIS WASN'T JUST DONE IN A VACUUM OF THE COUNCIL EITHER MAKING THIS DECISION OR NOT MAKING THIS DECISION TO HOLD AN ELECTION. WE WANTED THE OUTSIDE SUPPORT GUIDANCE, INSIGHT FROM A CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION TO ACTUALLY HAVE, HAVE THEIR EYES ON THAT AND DETERMINE IF IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. AND SO THAT IS WHY WE CAME UP WITH THE GROUP THAT WE DID. TO TAKE KIND OF MORE INDEPENDENT LOOK, A MORE APOLITICAL LOOK AT THOSE ITEMS THAT WE VIEW AS
BEING IN THE SCOPE. >> THEY FELT THOSE NEEDED CHANGE
OR NOT. >> THERE IS... THANK YOU, JEFF.
THERE IS ONE THING ON HERE THAT I DO HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT.
I WILL GET IT MORE ON THURSDAY. REGARDING THE ABILITY FOR THE JUDGE TO HIRE THEIR STAFF. THAT'S WHERE I GET VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH... FIRST OFF, THE CITY MANAGER IS NOT APPRISED TO THE DAILY OPERATION OF THE COURT.
THE CITY MANAGER ISN'T GOING TO KNOW THE BEST KAND TODAY FOR THE COURT BECAUSE OF THAT. THAT WAS THE MAIN REASON WHY WE MADE... WE ADDED IT ON THE LAST CHARTER ELECTION.
AND THIS CBS APPROVED AS MUCH. IF WE AMENDED THE ORDINANCE TO BE IN LINE WITH THE CHARTER, THEN THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO.
BUT TO MAKE THE CITY MANAGER BE THE ONE TO HAVE TO HIRE AND FIRE STAFF OF A DEPARTMENT THAT HE DOES NOT OVERSEE OR HAVE ANY RESPONSIBILITY OVER, I THINK, IS JUST NOT APPROPRIATE.
>> BUT IT WAS WITH THE INPUT OF THE JUDGE...
>> BY CONSENT OF THE PRESIDING JUDGE.
WITH THE INPUT. AND THE REASON THAT WE BELIEVED THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR IT TO GO THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, IS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS RIGHT OR FAIR IF A NEW MUNICIPAL JUDGE COMES IN, AND YOU HAVE HAD A COURT CLERK WHO HAS BEEN DOING A FINE JOB, THAT THEY WOULD LOSE THEIR JOB BECAUSE SOMEBODY ELSE... BECAUSE WE HAD A NEW COURT CLERK. AND SO WE LOOKED AT IT FROM THE COURT... WE LOOKED AT IT FROM THE CLERK'S POINT OF VIEW.
NOT FROM THE JUDGE'S POINT OF VIEW.
>> WELL, I THINK THAT IS... >> I CAN SEE THE CLERK IS THE CLERK OF RECORD FOR EVERYTHING THAT GOES ON IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT. THE JUDGE IS NOT.
I THINK THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT CONTINUITY AS WELL.
>> THERE WAS. >> YOU DON'T WANT TO TURN THE CLERK OVER EVERY TWO YEARS. .
>> THE THOUGHT PROCESS IN THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS, WE ARE ABOUT CHECKS AND BALANCES AS WELL.
THE COURT CLERK WOULD NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE LETTING ANYONE KNOW IF THERE WERE PROBLEMS WITH THE JUDGE.
BECAUSE THE JUDGE HIRES AND FIRES.
>> YEAH. >> I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE TRUE IN ANY CASE IN A WORK ENVIRONMENT.
I MEAN, THE DIRECTORS OF EACH DEPARTMENT HAS THE ABILITY TO HIRE THEIR TEAM AND FIRE THEIR TEAM AS THEY SEE FIT.
OBVIOUSLY, IF IT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK. BUT TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION HERE, I'M NOT COMPLETELY COMFORTABLE WITH, AND YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO PUT THE CITY MANAGER ON THE SPOT, BUT I'M ABOUT TO.
IS THIS SOMETHING YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH?
>> LET ME SAY THIS. FIRST OFF, I'M NOT SURE I KNEW THAT WAS COMING. THURSDAY, I DEFINITELY WILL HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT IT. I WOULD HAVE SOME CONCERNS.
JUST TO BE BLUNT ABOUT IT. I WOULD HAVE SOME CONCERNS.
THEY ARE CITY EMPLOY EASY. AND THEY HAVE THE RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS UNDER THE, THE CITY'S PERSONNEL RULES.
POLICIES. AND FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, I HEAR WHAT IS BEING SAID. I THINK... I NEED SOME TIME TO MAYBE CHAT WITH MY TEAM ABOUT IT.
BUT YOU KNOW, MY REAL CONCERN WOULD BE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY MANAGER COULD INADVERTENTLY AFFECT THE PERFORMANCE OF THE
[00:35:02]
JUDGE BY MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT REMOVING PERSONNEL OR NOT REMOVING PERSONNEL AND YET DOES NOT SUPERVISE THOSE PEOPLE.>> IT WOULD BE THE SAME THING IF YOU HAD TO HIRE AND FIRE PATROL STAFF. RIGHT?
>> TECHNICALLY, I COULD DO THAT ANYWAY BY CHARTER.
WOULD NOT DO THAT. IN THAT WAY.
RIGHT? NOW, A CITY ATTORNEY... I'M FINE WITH FIRING THAT. (LAUGHTER).
>> ACTUALLY, SOME OF THIS IS COVERED IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE THAT NEXT.
>> I WOULD SAY THURSDAY WOULD BE FINE FOR ME TO DISCUSS THAT M MORE. I JUST... YOU KNOW, I HAVE SOME QURNS. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO TALK THAT
I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE MOVE ON.
OUR NEXT WORK SESSION COULD RUN POTENTIALLY LONG.
WE ARE ALREADY PAST 7:00. >> I'LL BE HAPPY TO BE HERE ON THURSDAY AS WELL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
WE ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO COME ON THURSDAY.
AND IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS, WE WILL ABSOLUTELY WANT TO HEAR
>> THANK YOU ALL. >> ALL RIGHT.
[3B. Discuss an update to the Council Rules of Procedure.]
ITEM 3-B. DISCUSS AN UPDATE TO THE COUNCIL RULES AND PROCEDURES. DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, LAURA, SO DIDN'T THINK THERE WAS A NEED TO DO A PRESENTATION... A POWER POINT PRESENTATION FOR THIS. WE WILL GET INTO THE DOCUMENT AND FOLLOW THE RED LINES. I'LL EXPLAIN THAT PROCESS.SO THIS WAS IN THE PACKET. Y'ALL HAD TIME TO LOOK AT THIS.
FIRST AMENDMENT. A LOT OF THIS WAS CLEANUP.
SOME OF IT WAS NEW THINGS. I'LL GO OVER THAT.
OBVIOUSLY, THE HIGHLIGHTED YELLOW IS THE ADDITIONS.
SO RULES OF ORDER. MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL COMPLETE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER.
WITHIN 30 DAYS OF BEING ELECTED. THIS WAS MORE OF A THOUGHT.
>> OF, YOU KNOW, I HAVE NEVER DONE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER TRAINING. HONESTLY, I WOULD FIND IT VALUABLE. EVERY MEMBER WOULD FIND IT VALUABLE TO AT LEAST KNOW HOW, HOW TO MAKE MOTIONS OR CALL A POINT OF ORDER OR USE PROCESS THAT IS WE DON'T DEAL WITH AT EVERY COUNCIL MEETING. VERY RARELY, ARE WE HAVING TO REFER TO THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER.
YOU NEVER KNOW. >> IS 30 DAYS ENOUGH?
I KNOW THEY CONDUCT A CLASS... >> THERE IS ACTUALLY ON-LINE TRAINING THAT WE CAN DO. WE COULD... YEAH.
IT WILL BE... LAURA AND I WILL KIND OF LOOK AT SOME OPTIONS.
WE COULD EXTEND IT TO 90 DAYS. I JUST FIGURED 30 DAYS WAS ENOUGH IF WE ARE GOING TO DO AN ON-LINE PLATFORM.
KIND OF LIKE WE DO THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT REQUIREMENTS AND
ON-LINE TRAINING. >> WE COULD SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE
AND SAY 60 DAYS. >> WE COULD DO 60 DAYS.
>> ONE QUESTION, THOUGH, THAT COMES UP.
IS THAT REQUIRED OF MEMBERS WHO ARE REELECTED OR JUST NEW
MEMBERS? >> THAT IS ONLY NEW MEMBERS.
>> WE SHOULD PROBABLY SAY THAT. >> ONE TIME.
WE WILL... LAURA IS WRITING THAT DOWN.
THANK YOU, LAURA. NEXT ONE IS MATERIAL DISTRIBUTION. THE CITY MANAGER, CITY SECRETARY OR CITY ATTORNEY SHALL PROVIDE THE CITY COUNCIL WITH CENTRAL DOCUMENTS IN THE PACKET 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. SO FIRST THING IS THERE WAS NOTHING LISTED ABOUT US EVEN NEEDING A PACKET.
SO I FIGURED THAT WAS GOOD TO AT LEAST ADD JUST TO MAKE THINGS CLEAR. THE OTHER THING IS NEARLY EVERY CITY I HAVE DONE RESEARCH ON, THEY INCLUDE A PART OF, LIKE,...
THE WAY THAT THEY DO IT IS DIFFERENT THAN THE WAY WE DO IT.
WE ARE KIND OF COMPLICATED. SORRY BUT WE ARE.
THERE IS A PLATFORM THAT WE CAN USE WHERE YOU CLICK ON THE ITEM.
IT PULLS UP THE PACKET TO THAT SPECIFIC ITEM AND THE PRESENTATION TO THAT SPECIFIC ITEM.
WE ARE GETTING ALL THE INFORMATION IN ADVANCE FOR US TO DO THE RESEARCH AND COME FULLY PREPARED.
THAT WAY WE ARE NOT HAVING TO LEARN THINGS ON, YOU KNOW... OH, HERE IS THE INFORMATION. OH, AND WE NEED A DECISION.
SO THIS GIVES US MORE TIME. I KNOW THE DIRECTORS ARE, LIKE, OH, GOSH. WHY? BECAUSE NOW THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THE PRESENTATIONS FOR
THE DEADLINE. >> IT IS HELPFUL TO HAVE PRESENTATIONS. NOT EVERYTHING GETS A PACKET.
THE DOCUMENT COULD BE SLIMMER IF YOU HAVE THE PRESENTATION.
>> YEAH. ACTUALLY, IT WOULD BE PRETTY
[00:40:03]
MUCH BE... YOU PULL UP ITEM PER ITEM.YOU GET INFORMATION PARTICULAR TO THAT ITEM.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO SCROLL 300, 400 PAGES.
>> NOW YOU ARE SPEAKING OUR LANGUAGE.
>> THEN THE INTERNET CRASHES BECAUSE YOU HAVE GONE 700 PAGES
AND IT CAN'T KIEP. >> THIS CLEANS IT UP.
IT WILL BE A PROCESS TO CHANGE OVER TO THIS.
IT IS NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING TO SWITCH.
IT IS A DIFFERENT KIND OF PLATFORM THAT WE ARE GOING TO USE. I DON'T EVEN KNOW THE COST OF.
THAT IT MAY BE ON THE BOOKS FOR A WHILE.
>> DOES IT AFFECT WHAT GETS PUBLISHED FOR THE PUBLIC?
>> NO. THEY WILL GET MORE INFORMATION.
>> THE PRESENTATION OF IT. ALL THE SAME INFORMATION.
>> IT IS MORE TRANSPARENT REALLY.
IT ALLOWS US TO HAVE THE PRESENTATION IN OUR POSSESSION.
RIGHT NOW WE ONLY SEE IT AND WE HAVE TO ASK FOR IT IF WE WANT
IT. >> YOU HAVE SEEN THIS IN OTHER
GARLAND IS A REALLY GOOD EXAMPLE.
THEY HAVE A REALLY GOOD SYSTEM. >> I WILL SAY WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE OUR PRESENTATIONS INCLUDED IN THIS BECAUSE THINGS CAN CHANGE RIGHT UP TO A COUNCIL MEETING.
YOU ARE USUALLY WORKING ON THOSE PRESENTATIONS SOMETIMES FIVE MINUTES BEFORE YOU HAVE TO COME IN HERE AND PRESENT IT.
I WOULD, I WOULD MAYBE URGE THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE PRESENTATIONS BECAUSE THOSE... THEY ARE VERY, VERY BUSY.
THIS IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN. YOU WILL HAVE PRESENTATIONS.
THEN YOU ARE GOING TO GET, WELL, THAT CHANGED.
THIS INFORMATION IS CHANGED. THAT IS HOW FAST SOMETIMES
THINGS CAN HAPPEN. >> SO WE, WE CAN MAYBE DO SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE WHICH IS WHEN AVAILABLE.
BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND SOME THINGS DO CHANGE.
BUT THERE ARE SOME THINGS WHERE LIKE THIS, FOR EXAMPLE, IF I WERE TO DO A POWER POINT, THIS WOULDN'T CHANGE.
RIGHT? THERE ARE SOME THINGS LIKE THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION. IF THAT WAS A PRESENTATION, THAT
DIDN'T CHANGE LAST MINUTE. >> BUT SOME OF THEM WOULD.
YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE... >> THAT IS OKAY, THEN.
>> DURING BUDGET SEASON, THOUGH, PARTICULARLY THE CERTIFIED VALUES, IT IS UP TO, LIKE, FIVE MINUTES BEFORE WE START THE COUNCIL MEETING. THERE ARE, THERE ARE EXAMPLES.
WE HAVE ALREADY TALKED TO OUR STAFF ABOUT IT.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I DO AGREE WITH YOU, MATT.
YOU KNOW, I WOULD PREFER NOT TO, BUT IF WE WERE TO TARGET 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE, THAT MAY NOT BE THE END OF THE WORLD.
A WEEK AHEAD OF TIME WOULD BE ASKING A LOT.
>> SO WHAT I HAVE SEEN IN SOME OF THESE OTHER CITIES THAT I THINK THE MAYOR IS MENTIONING IS THAT THERE WILL BE AN AGENDA ITEM. THEN YOU HAVE A LINK.
A CLICKABLE LINK TO THAT PACKET ITEM.
A CLICKABLE LINK TO THAT PRESENTATION.
I DON'T KNOW THAT IT IS NECESSARILY WE NEED TO BE PROVIDED WITH. THAT IT NEEDS TO BE MADE AVAILABLE. AHEAD OF TIME.
YOU COULD UPLOAD, YOU KNOW, YOUR AGENDA ITEM HERE.
AND YOUR PRESENTATION HERE FOR THIS ITEM.
BECAUSE IT IS DONE A WEEK IN ADVANCE.
SOME OF THESE OTHER ONES THAT RUN UP UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE, THE LINK DOESN'T GO LIVE UNTIL FIVE MINUTES BEFORE THE COUNCIL
MEETING IS NECESSARY. >> THAT MAY BE FINE FOR CERTAIN ITEMS. THE ONES THAT ARE, YOU KNOW...
YOU ARE SCRAMBLING AT THE LAST MINUTE.
YOU CAN DEFINE WHICH ONES THOSE ARE.
RIGHT? I THINK STAFF CAN TELL YOU, LISTEN, THIS ONE... I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS READY 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE. WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO UPLOAD IT BEFOREHAND. I'LL UPLOAD IT WHEN IT IS
AVAILABLE. >> A GOOD EXAMPLE IS WHEN WE SELL BONDS. EVEN STAFF DOESN'T KNOW THE FINAL SELL NUMBERS UNTIL THE DAY OF.
>> YEAH. >> THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WHERE IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE. AND WE CAN REFLECT THAT IN THE LANGUAGE WE WILL ADD FOR THAT. WHEN IT IS... WHEN AVAILABLE, WHEN THE PRESENTATIONS ARE UP AND READY,... LIKE THE CHARTER COMMISSION PRESENTATION TONIGHT. WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN THE PACKET AS TO WHAT THEY ARE RECOMMENDING.
AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GOOD TO HAVE THAT.
>> YOU KEEP SAYING CITIES. COULD YOU TELL ME WHICH CITIES?
>> I HAVE SEEN IT IN PLENTY OF CITIES.
>> OUR SYSTEM IS A LITTLE OUTDATED.
OURS, YEAH. >> IN PARTICULAR, HAVING THE ABILITY TO HAVE A LINK TO A DOCUMENT THAT YOU CAN UPDATE ON THE FLY, AS OPPOSED TO A PACKET PDF THAT IS PUBLISHED, ONCE IT IS PUBLISHED, THAT IS IT. IF LAURA WANTS TO MAKE CHANGES TO IT, SHE HAS TO GO IN AND UPLOAD AN ENTIRE NEW PACKET AND
[00:45:01]
PUT "REVISED" AT THE END OF IT. SO EVERYBODY KNOWS IT IS A REVISED PACKET. INSTEAD OF ONE PRESENTATION THAT THERE MIGHT BE A MINOR CHANGE RUN THE WHOLE THING OVER AGAIN.WHEN THERE IS A CHANGE TO A STAFF REPORT.
>> IT IS NOT ONEROUS TO UPDATE THE PACKET.
IT IS NOT ONEROUS. IT IS JUST A PDF DOCUMENT.
IT CRASHES. >> IF YOU DOWNLOAD IT TO YOUR IPAD, IT DOESN'T CRASH. YOU CAN PULL YOUR WHOLE PRESENTATION UP EXCEPT FOR THE LAST BIT OF INFORMATION.
THAT IS NOT DONE. AND THEN PUT AN UPDATE.
A TIME-STAMP FOR THELIK SO WE KNOW...
>> THAT SEEMS... YEAH. WE WILL WORK WITH THE LANGUAGE ON THIS. OBVIOUSLY, WHEN THIS COMES FORTH, WE WILL VOTE ON THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
IF THINGS NEED TO CHANGE, WE C CAN...
>> CAN WE GET... IS IT TOO HARD TO DO A SAMPLE OR DO A PARALLEL?
>> WHAT DO YOU MEAN? >> CAN WE DO IT BOTH WAYS ONCE?
>> WE HAVE LOOKED AT THREE DIFFERENT SOFTWARES.
SINCE THIS WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED.
DENISE, LAURA, AND I HAVE BEEN THROUGH THREE DIFFERENT ONES.
TRYING TO FIND THE RIGHT ANSWER. OUR CURRENT WEBSITE PROVIDER HAS ONE AS WELL. IT IS SIMILAR.
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT PRESENTATIONS.
WE EVEN LOOKED AT GOING DIGITAL WITH OUR PACKETS.
TO MAKE IT EASIER. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT ANSWER IS. WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT IT.
WE HAD TO HAVE THE FINAL DISCUSSION.
>> IT SEEMS LIKE THERE IS TWO OBJECTIVES.
ONE IS MAKE SURE WE CAN PROVIDE AS MUCH INFORMATION AS WE.
CAN ALSO, NOT SPEND TOO MANY MAN HOURS ON THESE.
>> SIMPLIFY THE PROCESS. AND MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNCIL TO ACCESS THESE DOCUMENTS.
>> AND MOST OF ALL, CONFUSE THEM.
>> THAT IS EASY. >> ARE WE ASKING LAURA TO SEND
OUT THESE POWER POINTS? >> NO, NO.
IT IS GOING TO BE... WELL, SHE WILL SEND THE LINK TO THE PORTAL WHERE IT HAS ALL OF THE... BASICALLY...
>> I WAS THINKING THE CAPACITY AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
>> SO THIS IS TWO SEPARATE CONVERSATIONS.
ONE CONVERSATION IS PROVIDING COUNCIL WITH THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN TERMS OF THE PRESENTATIONS.
THE SECOND CONVERSATION IS HOW THAT INFORMATION IS PRESENTED TO
THE PUBLIC ON OUR WEBSITE. >> OKAY.
>> THAT IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THIS IS DISCUSSING.
>> OKAY. >> HOW IT LOOKS IS A DIFFERENT
IT IS MATERIAL DISTRIBUTION. BUT YEAH.
IT IS KIND OF THE TECHNI TECHNICALITY...
>> THIS IS DO IT. HOW IT IS DONE IS A DIFFERENT
CONVERSATION. >> THAT IS THE HARD WORK YOU ALL GET PAID TO FIGURE OUT. NOT US.
>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT? CITIZEN MATERIAL DISTRIBUTIONS. CITIZENS MAY PROVIDE HARD COPY DOCUMENTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
IT IS NOT WRITTEN ANYWHERE. WE HAVE KIND OF ADD IT IN THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT CONTINUES PAST OUR TIMES HERE.
THERE IS A REASON WHY WE DON'T ALLOW CITIZENS TO PLUG IN USB
DRIVES OUR COMPUTERS. >> THAT IS ADDRESSED IN A
>> AT THAT POINT, IT SAYS THEYS MUST PROVIDE A PAPER COPY.
BUT THIS IS DIFFERENT. >> YES.
MEETING DECORUM. THIS IS MAKING THINGS MORE CLEAR. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHIG ON THE BOOKS ABOUT DECORUM OTHER THAN A CODE OF ETHICS.
>> I WAS PART OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
THE MORE I READ THAT, THE ONE THING I HAVE A PROBLEM, WITH HOW DO YOU MANAGE FACIAL EXPRESSIONS? YEAH, I MEAN, THAT IS AN EXPRESSION.
(LAUGHTER) I WAS TALKING AND BLAKE JUST DISRESPECTED ME.
>> OBVIOUSLY, THE CHAIR OF THE MEETING WOULD HAVE THE...
>> OBVIOUSLY, IT DOES PRESENT A CHALLENGE.
>> IT SEEMS ANTI-ITALIAN TO ME. (LAUGHTER).
>> THERE ARE MANY TIMES WHERE I WILL, I WILL HAVE A FACIAL
>> I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD EVEN HAVE THIS.
BECAUSE ALL OF US ARE GUILTY OF THIS.
>> THE PART WHERE FACIAL EXPRESSIONS WAS GOING TO BE HARD TO ENFORCE... AND I'M NOT THAT BIG O'.
>> A FAN OF IT,. >> IF YOU CAN'T ENFORCE IT, THEN
[00:50:01]
DON'T PUT IT IN. >> DON'T PUT IT IN.
>> THE PART ABOUT SPEAKING WHEN ANOTHER PERSON IS SPEAKING.
>> YOU TOO. >> YOU COVERED THAT.
>> BLAKE, EXCUSE ME. YOU COVERED THERE THAT THAT DOES CAUSE DISRUPTION. WE ALL HAVE... I MAY ASK FOR A CLARIFICATION. I MAY LEAN OVER TO MATT FOR A
CLARIFICATION. >> WHEN IT IS DISRUPTING IS WHEN
IT IS A PROBLEM. >> DISRUPTION COVERS IT.
>> THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEANING OVER AND ASKING A QUICK QUESTION AND CARRYING ON A LONG CONVERSATION.
>> THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHERE I'M, LIKE, ARE YOU DONE?
TALKING? >> BECAUSE I CAN HEAR EVERY WORD YOU ARE SAYING OVER THERE. AND I'M TRYING TO HEAR THIS
PERSON. >> WE WILL CORRECT THAT.
WE WILL TAKE OUT THE FACIAL EXPRESSION.
I WASN'T A BIG FAN OF THAT MYSELF.
I PUT IT IN THERE JUST AS A SUGGESTION.
I WOULD HAVE TO ENFORCE IT AGAINST MYSELF, TOO.
POINT OF ORDER. I'M SHOWING FACIAL EXPRESSION.
I NEED TO STOP. >> AFTER WHAT WE SAW TODAY ON THE HOUSE FLOOR, YEAH, MAYBE JUST THE FACIAL EXPRESSIONS.
BUT COUNCIL MEETINGS CAN BE DISRUPTIVE.
AND PARTICULARLY, WHEN Y YOUR CY MANAGER CAN'T HEAR REALLY WELL.
AND PEOPLE KEEP ASKING QUESTIONS.
>> BUT IT ALL... IN ALL SERIOUSNESS, THOUGH, WE HAVE SEEN VIDEO, PARTICULARLY, IN OTHER COUNTRIES PEOPLE GO AND THEY DO HAIR-PULLING AND OTHER KINDS OF THINGS, TOO.
I THINK SOMETHING REASONABLE. THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE STARTING OFF WITH. YOU KNOW, SPECIFICALLY, NEGATIVE OR DISRESPECTFUL GESTURES IS APPROPRIATE.
FACIAL EXPRESSIONS IS A LITTLE HARDER FOR PEOPLE TO KIND OF JUST... YOU KNOW, JUST WHEN THEY ARE THINKING ABOUT SOMETHING.
>> WELL, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS FOLLOW ROBERT'S RULES WHICH REQUIRE THAT A PERSON HAVE THE FLOOR BEFORE THEY SPEAK.
>> YEAH. THIS IS JUST KIND OF HIGHLIGHTING THE POINT THAT WE NEED TO BE RESPECTFUL OF EACH OTHER'S TIMES WHEN WE ARE SPEAKING AND NOT CARRY ON SIDE CONVERSATIONS THAT DISRUPT THE REST OF US.
>> AND VIDEO CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE.
A MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL WHO PARTICIPATES IN A REGULAR MEETING VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE AS PROVIDED BY 3.7 OF THIS POLICY MAY ONLY PARTICIPATE IF THE MEMBER IS UNABLE TO PHYSICALLY ATTEND THE MEETING AS A RESULT OF ILLNESS.
THERE IS A STATE STATUTE THAT DOES ALLOW THIS, AND THAT IS PART OF #.7. SCROLL DOWN.
>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION? >> YES.
>> NOW I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.
BUT IF I'M SICK, I'M NOT GOING TO GET ON THE VIDEO CONFERENCE.
>> THAT IS YOU. I PROBABLY WON'T.
>> I DON'T HAVE TO. >> IF I'M SICK, I'M SICK.
I WANTED TO GET ON THE VIDEO CONFERENCE.
I COULDN'T COME BECAUSE THIS WAS DURING... YOU KNOW, STILL COVID WAS GOING AROUND. I DIDN'T WANT TO EXPOSE OTHER PEOPLE. I FELT OKAY.
BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO EXPOSE OTHER PEOPLE TO WHATEVER I HAD.
BUT IT WAS A RESPIRATORY. >> SHE HAD SYMPTOMS. AT THAT POINT IN TIME, EVEN SYMPTOMS WERE, LIKE, STAY HOME.
IN THAT CASE, IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE.
THIS COULD HAVE BEEN... THERE ARE OTHER ENTITIES THAT ARE MORE LENIENT. OH, WELL, YOU KNOW, IF YOU ARE OUT, THEN YOU CAN DO A VIDEO CONFERENCE.
WELL, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE A MUCH LENIENCY TO THOSE...
THAT SAYS OKAY, TAKE A VACATION. WE WILL SEE YOU ON VIDEO
CONFERENCE. >> I WOULD PREFER IF IT WAS UNABLE TO ATTEND SUCH AS... OKAY, BRIAN WAS OUT OF THE COUNTRY. IF HE SCHEDULED HIS FLIGHT TO NOT COME IN IN TIME TO GET TO THE MEETING, THEN FINE.
YOU DON'T LET HIM PARTICIPATE. IF HIS FLIGHT GOT DELAYED AND
THERE ARE NO... >> THAT IS REALLY HARD TO GET INTO THE DETAILS THERE. I THINK KEEPING IT SIMPLE, KEEPING IT TO ILLNESS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE, LIKE, ON
YOU GOT SICK AT THE AIRPORT. >> IT IS THAT BEACH IN THE BACKGROUND. (LAUGHTER).
>> SICK ON VACATION. (LAUGHTER).
>> YEAH. >> SO I GUESS YOU COULD ABUSE THE SYSTEM LIKE THAT IF YOU WANTED TO.
YOU KNOW. WHATEVER YOU ARE GOING TO SAY.
>> JUST DON'T GET ON DRUNK. >> OKAY.
HERE IS 3.7. HERE IS WHERE IT IS COVERED.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, ANY MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY PARTICIPATE REMOTELY IN A MEETING OF THE GOVERNMENTAL BODY BY MEANS OF VIDEO CONFERENCE CALL IF THE VIDEO AND AUDIO FEED... YOU CAN READ.
THIS IS PRETTY MUCH CUT AND PASTE OUT OF THE STATUTE.
>> AND HERE IS THE WHOLE STATUTE.
>> RIGHT, RIGHT. >> MAYOR, CAN I COMMENT ON 2.14?
[00:55:03]
>> IT DOES SAY "PARTICIPATES IN A REGULAR MEETING." ARE WE SPECIFICALLY STATING ONLY REGULAR MEETINGS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR VIDEO CONFERENCE? OR WOULD IT BE REGULAR AND
I MEAN... >> IF YOU ARE SICK, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IF IT IS REGULAR OR SPECIFIC.
>> WE WILL SCRATCH THAT. TY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS? CONCERNS? QUESTIONS? OKAY. I'LL COUNT ON PAM NOT BEING HERE
IF SHE IS SICK. >> YOU KNOW, I HAVE NEVER MISSED
IT IS AMAZING. >> I THINK YOU ARE A RECORD.
>> I WOULD ASK THAT THIS INCLUDE A STIPULATION THAT YOU MUST NOTIFY STAFF BECAUSE THERE ARE STEPS WE HAVE TO TAKE TO PREPARE
TO ENABLE THIS. >> THAT IS TRUE.
WE WILL ADD THAT IN THE SECTION AHEAD.
THE ONE IN FRONT OF 2.4. >> IS THERE SORT OF A LEAD TIME?
>> YEAH. WE NEED TO KNOW HOW QUICK I.T.
CAN GET THIS SET UP. IT HAS TO BE... THIS LIVE FEED WOULD HAVE TO BE ABLE TO BE VIEWED BY NOT ONLY THE COUNCIL BUT THE PUBLIC. WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT THAT SYSTEM. SOME JURISDICTIONS HAVE IT.
THERE IS SOMETHING OUT THERE. WE HAVE TO FIGURE IT OUT.
>> WELL, YOU DID VIRTUAL MEETINGS DURING COVID.
>> THAT IS DIFFERENT. >> EVERYBODY WAS VIRTUAL.
>> RIGHT. THE CAPABILITY IS THERE.
>> THE HYBRID, WE FOUND, WAS MORE DIFFICULT.
>> DOING IT HYBRID IS DIFFERENT. >> HOW MUCH EXTRA MONEY IS THIS?
>> WE WILL FIGURE IT OUT. WE WILL FIGURE IT OUT.
I MEAN, I WANT TO FIGURE THIS OUT BEFORE WE COME BACK FOR
INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. >> WE HAVE UNTIL OUR CITIZENS...
THIS IS GOING TO BE EXTRA MONEY. >> I WANT TO HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION BEFORE WE GO AND APPROVE THIS.
THIS IS JUST A SUGGESTION BRINGING FORWARD TO Y'ALL TO SEE IF WE CAN WORK ON THIS TO BRING INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
NEXT. >> CAN WE STOP AT 3.4 FOR A SECOND? WE JUST TALKED ABOUT MEETINGS BY CALLED BY 3:00. DO WE WANT TO KEEP THIS?
>> NO. WE WANT TO UPDATE THIS.
>> THIS TALKS ABOUT WORK SESSIONS.
>> MAYBE WE SAY... THAT WAY IF THE CITIZENS VOTE NO AGAINST IT, WE SAW THAT... WE SAY THAT IN ALLIANCE WITH THE CHARTER.
THESE MEETINGS CAN BE CALLED. FIGURE OUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> AS A CHARTER MOVES,. >> I LIKE THAT.
>> DID YOU GET THAT, LAURA? OKAY.
>> I TRY TO CATCH THAT STUFF. OH.
>> I DON'T KNOW HOW I MISSED THAT.
>> (LAUGHTER). >> THEY GET CARTE BLANCHE TO DO ANYTHING. IT SAID MAY.
>> JUST PUT FACIAL EXPRESSIONS. >> YEAH, RIGHT.
OKAY. THIS IS... YOU CAN SEE THIS IS KIND OF RIDICULOUS. THIS WAS, LIKE, RUB-ON NIGHTMARE. ... A RUN-ON NIGHTMARE.
THERE WAS NO REASON. IT IS THE CHAIR OF THE MIDDLE EASTING AT THE END OF THE DAY. WHOEVER THAT MAY BE.
THAT JUST CLEANED IT UP. NEXT.
THE STUFF THAT IS ALREADY COVERED IN ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. IT IS KIND OF A DUPLICATE EFFORT TO LIST THOSE TWO THINGS IN THERE.
WE ALREADY FOLLOW ROBERT'S RULES.
LISTING THAT IS NOT DOING ANYTHING FOR COUNCIL PROCEDURES.
THIS IS GOING TO BE, IF WE AGREE, A NEW ITEM ON EVERY REGULAR AGENDA OR SPECIAL AGENDA.
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY REQUEST TOPICS TO BE PLACED ON AN AGENDA FOR A SUBSEQUENT MEETING.
ANY DELIBERATION OR DECISION SHALL BE LIMITED TO A PROPOSAL TO PLACE THE TOPIC ON THE AGENDA FOR SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS.
THIS JUST ALLOWS US TO SAY IN OUR MEETINGS, THERE IS GOING TO BE SEPARATE ITEMS. YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD DISCUSSION ABOUT COUNCIL RULES AND PROCEDURES.
[01:00:06]
SO IT GOES FORWARD. >> THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS ON MOST OF OUR COMMITTEE AND COMMISSIONS BOARD?
>> THAT KIND OF ALLIANCE IT WITH OUR BOARDS.
>> I KNOW WE ARE RUNNING RIGHT HERE.
DO WE NEED TO REPLICATE THE CHARTER LANGUAGE IN THE SECTION
THREE? >> REGULAR MEETINGS, SPECIAL
MEETINGS? >> SKIPPED RIGHT BY ME.
>> WHICH ONE? >> SECTION THREE.
WE HAVE BASICALLY, THE SAME LANGUAGE HERE AS WE HAVE IN THE
>> SECTION THREE. ALL OF SECTION THREE.
TYPES OF MEETINGS. >> WELL, THIS...
>> TYPES OF MEETING. SECTION 3.
THAT IS TAKING THE LANGUAGE STRAIGHT OUT OF THE CHARTER.
THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? THE CITY ATTORNEY, DO YOU THINK
IT IS GOOD TO KEEP IT IN THERE? >> IT IS A NICE REMINDER.
IF YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T HAVE TO. YEAH.
>> NEXT. THIS IS JUST ENSURING THAT WHEN WE ASK FOR AN ITEM TO GO ON THE AGENDA THAT MEETS THE CHARTER REQUIREMENTS, YOU HAVE TWO MEMBERS.
THAT IT IS DONE AND NOT PUT ON AN AGENDA THAT WE DIDN'T ASK FOR IT TO GO ON. SO BRIAN CAN'T SAY, WELL, I CAN'T PUT IT ON THIS ONE THAT YOU ASKED FOR IT.
I WILL PUT IT ON THE ONE TWO MONTHS FROM NOW.
SORRY. YOU WILL HAVE TO MAKE ROOM.
>> WELL, WE MAY PUSH BACK. OR AT LEAST... YOU KNOW, BE ABLE TO SAY, HEY, WE HAVE TO WORK. THE PEOPLE WHO ASK TO PUT IT
ON... >> YOU CAN WORK WITH THEM ON IT.
>> WE CAN SAY LOOK, I KNOW YOU JUST SAID, DO YOU MEAN, LIKE, THE NEXT ONE? OR IT'S GOT TO BE THIS ONE.
THERE IS TIMES WHERE THERE ARE SOME TIME-SENSITIVE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THAT DISCU DISCUSSION... THERE COULD BE OTHER TIMES THAT WE PUT SOME OTHER STUFF AT THE END OF THE MEETING BECAUSE WE CANNOT, NOT HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
I'M RUSHING THROUGH AGAIN. THIS WAS RIDICULOUS.
I DON'T KNOW WHO CAME UP WITH THIS.
IT JUST COMPLICATED... THERE IS NO REASON FOR IT.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? NO ONE? THIS WAS INTERESTING AND NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE. BASICALLY, WHAT THIS SUGGESTED WAS THAT IF I WERE TO GO TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AMEND SEEK SOME GUIDANCE ON ABISSUE, THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO SHARE THAT CONVERSATION WITH ALL OF THE... THAT IS NOT ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE. WELL, IT WOULD BE THE SAME TH THING... IF YOU HAD AN ISSUE OR YOU WERE CONCERNED ABOUT SOMETHING, WHY SHOULD... IT IS NOT MY BUSINESS TO KNOW.
>> I DON'T THINK HE IS COMFORTABLE.
THERE WAS NOTHING ANYWHERE ABOUT A LIAISON.
THAT IS JUST PUTTING IT IN THERE.
THAT THERE IS A LEE LIAISON. WHAT IT MEANS.
OTHER THAN THAT, IT IS KIND OF AN UNWRITTEN POLICY THAT WE FOLLOW. THAT IS NOWHERE TO BE FOUND.
THIS PUTS IT IN WRITING. CORRECTIONS THERE.
THE CITY RESIDENCE. WE CHANGED THAT PROCEDURALLY.
>> I THINK THAT WAS IT. >> ALL RIGHT.
SO THAT IS ABOUT IT. ANYTHING ELSE? WE WILL WORK ON FINDING OUT THE SOLUTIONS TO THESE NEW PROBLEMS WE HAVE CREATED. AND GET AN ANSWER AS TO THE COST BEFORE OR AS WE BRING IT TO INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
[4. DISCUSS CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS]
ANYTHING YOU WANT TO PULL FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION? ANY QUESTIONS? WE HAVE ONE?>> I DO HAVE TO MENTION THAT THE MINUTES WERE UPDATED, AND I DID SEND THAT UPDATE TO DOWN SILL. AND CONSENT.
IF YOU WOULD JUST HAVE THE MOTION REFLECT THAT... APPROVE AS PRESENTED AND UPDATE. I DID SEND THE SUGGESTIVE
LANGUAGE. >> WE ARE MOVING OUT FAST.
WE TALK ABOUT RESPONDING TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS.
ET CETERA, ET CETERA. YOU WANT TO ADD THAT.
[01:05:02]
>> WE WILL FIND THAT. >> THANK YOU.
>> SEE YOU IN THE REGULAR ROOM. WE WILL
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.