[00:00:02]
>> GOOD EVENING. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THE MEETING TO
[A. CALL TO ORDER]
ORDER FOR THE HOME RULES CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 27TH, 2025, AND WE'LL START WITH ROLL CALL.SUMBEL ZEB? ABSENT. JAISEN RUTLEDGE? ABSENT. JIM POWELL?
>> RYAN GERFERS? ABSENT. TERRANCE JOHNSON?
>> THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO NOW GO TO OUR INVOCATION, AND CAROLYN IS GOING TO PRESENT THAT FOR US.
THANK YOU. EVERYBODY STAND, PLEASE.
>> [INAUDIBLE] TO THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
>> THANK YOU. PUBLIC APPEARANCE.
THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS SET ASIDE FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE ON ANY ITEM OF BUSINESS THAT IS NOT FORMALLY SCHEDULED ON THE AGENDA AS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM.
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SHOULD COMPLETE A PUBLIC MEETING APPEARANCE CARD PRIOR TO THE MEETING AND PRESENT IT TO THE CITY SECRETARY.
SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED UP TO THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
THE COMMITTEE IS UNABLE TO RESPOND TO OR DISCUSS ANY ISSUES THAT ARE BROUGHT UP DURING THIS PORTION THAT ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA, OTHER THAN TO MAKE STATEMENTS OF SPECIFIC, FACTUAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO
[00:05:04]
A SPEAKER'S INQUIRY OR TO RECITE EXISTING POLICY IN RESPONSE TO THE INQUIRY.ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK SHALL ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE DIRECTLY, NOT CITY STAFF OR OTHERWISE.
BE COURTEOUS, RESPECTFUL, CORDIAL, AND REFRAIN FROM MAKING PERSONAL, DEMEANING, INSULTING, THREATENING, AND/OR DISPARAGING REMARKS AS TO MAINTAIN DECORUM AND SUPPORT THE EFFICIENT AND ORDERLY FLOW OF THE MEETING.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS FOR THIS EVENING? ALL RIGHT. THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA.
[G. CONSENT AGENDA]
ALL CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS LISTED ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE COMMITTEE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION.THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS UNLESS THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS SO REQUEST, IN WHICH EVENT, THE ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED IN ITS NORMAL SEQUENCE OF THE AGENDA.
THAT'S CONSIDERING APPROVING THE FOLLOWING HOME RULES CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.
IT'S THE MEETING MINUTES FROM AUGUST 6TH, 2025 HOME RULES CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE.
>> WE NEED A FIRST AND A SECOND.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
>> THANK YOU. FIRST BY ALLISON AND SECONDED BY SKYLER.
ALL IN FAVOR, GO AHEAD AND VOTE.
NOW WE'LL MOVE INTO OUR REGULAR AGENDA, AND WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 5: CITY DEPARTMENT'S FISCAL ADMINISTRATION.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAD ONE ABSTAINED, DAVID.
>> YOU VOTED? OKAY. [NOISE] EXCUSE ME.
NOW, WE'LL MOVE INTO THE REGULAR AGENDA.
[H.1 2025-162 Review and consider proposed amendments to Chapter 5 ("City Departments/Fiscal Administration") of the Home Rule Charter for the City of Princeton, Texas, as discussed at the August 6, 2025, Committee meeting; and take appropriate action.]
OUR FIRST ITEM IS H.12025-162 TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 5, CITY DEPARTMENT'S FISCAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE HOME RULE CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF PRINCETON, TEXAS AS DISCUSSED AT THE AUGUST 6TH, 2025 COMMITTEE MEETING AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.THIS IS FOR THE CHAPTER 5 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, PART 2 FOR SECTION 5.02 TAX ADMINISTRATION.
THE NEW LANGUAGE THAT WE HAD VOTED ON IS IN BOLD AND UNDERLINED, WHICH IS IN, I CAN JUST READ SECTION C, CORRECT?
>> SECTION C: "ALL TAXES DUE TO THE CITY SHALL BE PAYABLE AT THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ASSESSOR AND COLLECTOR, OR AT SUCH LOCATION, OR LOCATIONS AS MAY BE DESIGNATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL VIA CONTRACT OR OTHERWISE.
I MAY BE PAID AT ANY TIME AFTER THE TAX ROLLS FOR THE YEAR HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND APPROVED, WHICH COMPLETION AND APPROVAL SHALL BE NOT LATER THAN OCTOBER 1ST.
[00:10:01]
FEBRUARY 1ST OF EACH YEAR SUCCEEDING THE YEAR FOR WHICH THE TAXES ARE LEVIED.ALL SUCH TAXES NOT PAID PRIOR TO SUCH DATE SHALL BE DEEMED DELINQUENT AND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO SUCH PENALTY AND INTEREST AS MAY BE PROVIDED BY LAW.
FAILURE TO LEVY AND ASSESS TAXES THROUGH OMISSION AND PREPARATION OF THE APPROVED TAX ROLLS, SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION, SO OMITTED FROM THE OBLIGATION TO PAY SUCH CURRENT OR PAST DUE TAXES SHOWN TO BE PAYABLE BY RECHECK OF THE ROLLS AND RECEIPTS FOR THE YEARS IN QUESTION UNLESS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY LAW." ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I'LL GIVE EVERYBODY A MOMENT.
OTHERWISE, I'LL OPEN FOR A MOTION.
>> I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE MOTION AS PRESENTED.
GO AHEAD, THE VOTING IS OPEN, IF EVERYBODY COULD GO AHEAD AND VOTE. DID EVERYBODY VOTE?
>> OH, OKAY. BECAUSE I ONLY SEE 11, SO I WANT TO PUSH.
>> THANK YOU. THAT ITEM HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR SECTION 502.
[H.2 2025-163 Review Chapter 5 ("City Departments/FiscaI Administration") of the Home Rule Charter for the City of Princeton, Texas; consider any recommendations for amendments thereto; and take appropriate action.]
>> OKAY. NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM H.22025-163, REVIEW CHAPTER 5, CITY DEPARTMENT'S FISCAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE HOME RULE CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF PRINCETON, TEXAS.
CONSIDER ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS THERE TOO, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.
WE ARE NOW ON SECTION 5.05 : FAILURE TO ADOPT ANNUAL BUDGET.
IF THE CITY COUNCIL FAILS TO ADOPT THE BUDGET BY SEPTEMBER 30TH, THE AMOUNTS APPROPRIATED FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR SHALL BE DEEMED ADOPTED FOR THE ENSUING FISCAL YEAR ON A MONTH-TO-MONTH BASIS WITH ALL ITEMS IN IT PRO RATED ACCORDINGLY UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTS A BUDGET FOR THE ENSUING YEAR.
THE LEVY OF PROPERTY TAX WILL BE SET TO EQUAL THE TOTAL CURRENT FISCAL YEAR TAX RECEIPTS UNLESS THE ENSUING FISCAL YEAR BUDGET IS APPROVED BY SEPTEMBER 30TH OF THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.
WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN IT FOR ANY RECOMMENDATIONS.
I'LL GIVE EVERYBODY A MOMENT TO REVIEW.
[00:15:02]
>> IF THERE ARE NO RECOMMENDATIONS, WE CAN BRING IT TO A I'LL TAKE A MOTION.
>> I MOVE THAT IT BE ADOPTED AS READ.
>> THAT WAS MOTIONED BY JODY AND SECONDED BY SKYLER.
ALL IN FAVOR OR EVERYONE PLEASE VOTE.
DAVID. YES. I'M SORRY [OVERLAPPING] SORRY.
I'LL GET USED TO THAT BY TIME.
WE GOT YOUR VOTE. SOMEONE ELSE DID NOT VOTE.
[INAUDIBLE] NOW WE HAVE EVERYBODY.
SECTION 5.06 BONDS AND OTHER EVIDENCE OF INDEBTEDNESS.
THE CITY SHALL HAVE THE POWER TO BORROW MONEY ON THE FAITH AND CREDIT OF THE CITY.
THE CITY SHALL ALSO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE OR SELL BONDS, WARRANTS, CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, NOTES OF OTHER SECURITIES, AUTHORIZED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR PERMANENT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS OR FOR ANY OTHER PUBLIC PURPOSE, NOT PROHIBITED BY THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS AND TO ISSUE REFUNDING BONDS TO REFUND OUTSTANDING BONDS AND OTHER EVIDENCE OF INDEBTEDNESS OF THE CITY PREVIOUSLY ISSUED.
ALL SUCH BONDS SHALL BE ISSUED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS.
THE CITY SHALL FURTHER HAVE THE POWER TO BORROW MONEY FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING, ACQUIRING, IMPROVING, EXTENDING, OR REPAIRING OF PUBLIC UTILITIES, RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, OR ANY OTHER SELF-LIQUIDATING MUNICIPAL FUNCTION, NOT PROHIBITED BY THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND TO ISSUE REVENUE BONDS TO EVIDENCE THE OBLIGATIONS CREATED THEREBY.
SUCH BONDS SHALL BE A CHARGE UPON AND PAYABLE FOR THE PROPERTIES OF INTEREST THEREIN PLEDGED OR THE INCOME THEREFROM OR BOTH.
THE HOLDERS OF THE REVENUE BONDS OF THE CITY SHALL NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEMAND PAYMENT THEREOF, OUT OF MONIES RAISED OR TO BE RAISED BY TAXATION.
ALL SUCH BONDS SHALL BE ISSUED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS.
THE CITY SHALL HAVE THE POWER TO BORROW MONEY FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN ANY OTHER MANNER PROVIDED BY THE LAW, INCLUDING CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 271 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
ALL BONDS AND EVIDENCES OF INDEBTEDNESS OF THE CITY HAVING BEEN APPROVED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND REGISTERED BY THE COMPTROLLER OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS, SHALL THEREFORE BE INCONTESTABLE IN ANY COURT OR OTHER FORM FOR ANY REASON AND SHALL BE VALID AND BINDING OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY IN ACCORDINANCE WITH THEIR TERMS FOR ALL PURPOSES.. WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
>> GRANT, DO YOU EVER SEE ANY REALLY SUBSTANTIVE LANGUAGE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE JUST HEARD IN THESE TWO PARAGRAPHS IN OTHER CITIES?
>> REALLY SUBSTANTIVE? [INAUDIBLE]
IT'S PRETTY STANDARD. I DON'T HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS SECTION IN PARTICULAR.
TO YOUR POINT, IT'S PRETTY STANDARD.
>> CAN I JUST ASK A QUESTION? IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH,
[00:20:01]
ABOUT FIVE LINES DOWN? WHAT IS A REFUNDING BOND?>> THE SENTENCE THAT STARTS WITH THE STATE OF TEXAS?
>> GOT IT. I GUESS A BOND TO PAY OFF A PREVIOUSLY ISSUED BOND.
>> ON THE SECOND PARAGRAPH, THE THREE LINES DOWN, ANY OTHER SELF-LIQUIDATING MUNICIPAL FUNCTION.
I GUESS I'VE NEVER SEEN IT PRESENTED LIKE THAT.
>> EQUIPMENT OR FACILITY FOR POLICE, FIRE.
JUST BASICALLY WHAT THAT SECTION AND THAT SENTENCE SAYS FOR ANY LAWFUL MUNICIPAL PURPOSE.
I KNOW THE CITY ISSUED DEVON RECENTLY FOR LIKE I SAID, A POLICE FACILITY AND SOME EQUIPMENT AND SOME OTHER ASSOCIATED COSTS AND CONSULTANT EXPENSES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
I'VE SEEN THAT TERM USED BEFORE.
THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT MEANS IN LAYMAN'S TERMS.
>> IS THAT BASICALLY THE CATCH-ALL PHRASE I SEE PUBLIC UTILITIES, RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, AND THAT'S JUST DESIGNED TO COVER THE WATERFRONT?
HOW DO THE BONDS DIFFER? I DON'T KNOW IF IT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THIS, BUT FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THE ISD PROPOSES ISSUING A BOND, WE VOTE FOR IT, CORRECT? DOES THE SAME APPLY TO THE CITY? IF SO, DOES IT NEED TO SAY THAT THE CITY CAN ISSUE THE BONDS ONCE WE VOTE FOR THEM, OR?
>> THERE'S DIFFERENT TYPES OF BONDS.
THERE'S REFERENCE IN HERE TO CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION.
IF BY LAW, THE TYPE OF BOND THAT IS BEING ISSUED REQUIRES VOTER APPROVAL.
THEN OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE TO OBTAIN VOTER APPROVAL, AND THEN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SIGNS OFF ON ANY PUBLIC FINANCING OBLIGATIONS AS WELL.
IT JUST REALLY DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF FINANCING MECHANISM THAT THE CITY'S USING.
FOR INSTANCE, THE PARK BONDS. THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION THAT I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY.
ONE REQUIRES VOTER APPROVAL, ONE DOESN'T.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS, WE'LL TAKE A MOTION.
>> I MOVE TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING LANGUAGE IN SECTION 5.06 OF THE HOME ROLE CHARTER.
IF WE COULD ALL VOTE, PLEASE? WE DID. [INAUDIBLE]
>> WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND. LET'S TAKE ACTION ON THIS ONE, AND THEN WE CAN ALL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ON CERTAIN.
>> THANK YOU, AND EVERYONE APPROVED TO KEEP SECTION 5.06 AS IS.
NOW THAT WE'VE COME TO THE END OF SECTION 5, WE WILL OPEN THAT UP FOR I KNOW WE HAD A COUPLE OF PEOPLE THAT HAD SOME ITEMS THEY WANTED TO POTENTIALLY ADD AND DISCUSS.
CAROLYN, YOU HAD AN ITEM ABOUT THE BUDGET YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS.
CAROLYN, IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THE BUDGET ITEM.
>> JUST TO ADD A CLAUSE ABOUT TRANSPARENCY AND PUBLIC ACCESS, THAT THE CITY WILL MAINTAIN AN ONLINE BUDGET WITH INTERACTIVE ACCESS, THE CURRENT AND HISTORICAL BUDGET DATA, FINANCIAL REPORT, AND AUDITS RESULTS.
>> I THINK THE BULK OF WHAT YOU'RE REQUESTING IS ALREADY COVERED UNDER STATE LAW.
WE HAVE TO HAVE OUR BUDGET ONLINE.
ACTUALLY, THERE WAS A NEW LAW THAT WAS PASSED THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION THAT REQUIRES US TO NOW EVEN MOVING FORWARD TO PUT A COPY OF THE BUDGET ON THE AGENDA ANYTIME YOU'RE DISCUSSING THE BUDGET, AN AMENDMENT, OR ADOPTION.
A LOT OF THAT IS ALREADY COVERED UNDER STATE LAW.
I THINK THAT WAS A THEME FROM THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION WAS JUST ADDED TRANSPARENCY.
I THINK YOUR CONCERNS ARE ADDRESSED,
[00:25:01]
SO GOOD TO BRING UP.>> SKYLER, YOU HAVE AN ITEM THAT YOU WANTED TO BRING UP?
>> THIS FORENSIC AUDIT ATTACHMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD.
IT'S A FORENSIC AUDIT OF THE CITY OF PRINCETON FOR THE TIME PERIOD OF THE INITIAL FISCAL YEAR, THE HOME RULE GOVERNMENT ESTABLISHED 22 THROUGH THE FISCAL YEAR OF 2025.
THEN EVERY ONE YEAR THEREAFTER.
THE FORENSIC AUDIT IS TO INCLUDE A CASH TRANSACTION, RECONCILIATION, EXAMINATION OF CASH TRANSACTIONS TO ENSURE PROPER ACCOUNTING REPORTING AND SAFEGUARDING OF CITY FUNDS.
FILED BUDGET VERSUS ACTUAL EXPENDITURES AND BUDGET AMENDMENTS REVIEW, DETAIL ANALYSIS OF BUDGET VERSUS ACTUAL EXPENDITURES, AND REVENUES, INCLUDING THE REVIEW OF ANY BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH CITY COUNCIL-APPROVED APPROPRIATIONS.
FUND TRANSFERS REVIEW ALL TRANSFERS BETWEEN FUNDS TO VERIFY THEIR AUTHORIZATION, ACCURACY, AND PROPER RECORDING OF THE CITY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
REVIEW ALL ORDINANCES THAT HAVE BEEN PASSED BY THE PRINCETON CITY COUNCIL TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY HAVE BEEN RECORDED AND CODIFIED PROPERLY.
REVIEW CONTRACTS PURCHASES OVER $3,000 DURING FISCAL YEAR 2022-2025, AND REVIEW THE COLLECTION AND ALLOCATION OF IMPACT FEES REGARDING THE $17 MILLION MISALLOCATION THAT IS IN QUESTION.
REVIEW ALL CONTRACT EXPENDITURES AND TRANSACTIONS OF THE WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY FROM 2020 TO CURRENT.
TO INCLUDE A DETAILED ANALYSIS OF BUDGETED VERSUS ACTUAL EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES, INCLUDING THE REVIEW OF ANY BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH CITY COUNCIL-APPROVED APPROPRIATIONS.
REVIEW AND DISCLOSE ANY SERVICE OR CAPITAL EXPENDITURE, NOT WATER, SEWER SEWER-RELATED, FUNDED IN WHOLE OR IN PART BY CUSTOMER REVIEW.
>> CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT WAS ACTUALLY GIVEN TO US, IT WAS FROM A PUBLIC APPEARANCE, CORRECT?
>> WOULD THIS BE PART OF A RECOMMENDATION FOR COUNSEL TO CONSIDER, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE'RE LOOKING AT A FORENSIC AUDIT?
>> SURE. THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE A FORENSIC AUDIT IS NOT IN THE CHARTER.
I THINK THE PURPOSE BEHIND A FORENSIC AUDIT IS IF THERE'S SUSPECTED FRAUD OR MISUSE OF FUNDS, THAT YOU COUNSEL OR WHOEVER HAS A DUTY TO DO THAT.
I THINK WHAT'S MAYBE BEING DISCUSSED IS ADDING A NEW SECTION IN THE CHARTER TO REQUIRE IT ON A MORE FREQUENT BASIS.
BUT EVEN IF IT'S NOT IN THE CHARTER, COUNSEL CAN STILL ORDER A FORENSIC AUDIT IF THE NEED ARISES.
I THINK THAT WAS THE DISCUSSION IS MAYBE TO DESIGNATE A SECTION.
BY LAW, THE CITY HAS TO DO A FINANCIAL AUDIT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY HAS ALWAYS DONE AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO.
BUT I THINK THAT'S THE BASIS BEHIND THE DISCUSSION.
>> I'M NOT AGAINST A FORENSIC AUDIT, BUT THE AUDIT TO THE CHARTER WOULD BE A FORENSIC AUDIT COMES WITH A COST.
WE DON'T WANT TO ADD THAT BURDEN TO THE CITY AS PART OF THE CHARTER, ESPECIALLY WHEN COUNSEL IS ABLE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
I THINK MAYBE IT WOULD BE BETTER IF THAT BECOMES A PART OF OUR BYLAWS, THAT COUNSEL WILL BE ABLE TO DO THAT UNLESS IT'S ALREADY THERE, AND WE CAN PROBABLY LOOK AT THAT LANGUAGE AND SEE HOW WE CAN SUPPLEMENT OR IMPROVE WHAT'S ALREADY IN OUR BYLAWS.
AT LEAST IT'S SOMETHING THAT COUNSEL ACTIVELY WORKS ON.
BUT FOR COUNSEL TO DO IT, EVERYBODY UP THERE, SEVEN PEOPLE HAVE TO SAY YES.
WELL, NOT SEVEN, BUT THE MAJORITY HAVE TO SAY YES.
I'M NOT SAYING ANYTHING AGAINST CURRENT COUNSEL, BUT I AM SAYING THAT WE SAW WHAT IT WENT THROUGH JUST TO GET THE FORENSIC AUDIT FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER.
IT WAS NOT AN EASY FEAT TO DO THAT.
I WATCHED THE CDC AND WHAT THEY WENT THROUGH TO DO IT, IT WAS NOT AN EASY THING TO GET APPROVED TO DO.
THE COUNCIL CDC ARE ALL MADE UP OF RESIDENTS.
[00:30:05]
YOU ALL ARE HERE ON BEHALF OF WHAT THE RESIDENTS WANT.IT WAS LIKE FIGHTING TOOTH AND NAIL TO GET THAT FORENSIC AUDIT DONE, JUST ON THE COMMUNITY CENTER.
WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, ANYTIME A RESIDENT IS GOING TO ASK FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME TO COUNSEL AND FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL FOR IT. RANDALL.
>> I THINK THE INTENTION OF THIS ATTACHMENT IS THAT THERE BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PERFORM IT ON A PARTICULAR TIMELY BASIS.
I REALIZE THAT STATE REQUIRES IT, WHAT IS IT, EVERY FIVE YEARS?
>> FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT? THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT.
BUT FINANCIAL AUDIT, WE HAVE TO DO ANNUALLY.
>> FINANCIAL AUDIT IS HOW OFTEN?
>> EVERY YEAR. THIS ATTACHMENT ADDRESSES SOME SPECIFIC ISSUES.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE EVER BEEN REVIEWED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR ANYONE AT ALL.
AS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE, I DON'T KNOW, JIM, IF YOU READ MY EMAIL TODAY.
BUT FOR THE PAST EIGHT YEARS, OUR HOA HAS BEEN PAYING $3,000 A MONTH FOR SEWER FOR 80 GALLONS WORTH OF WATER USE A MONTH.
I'M JUST USING THAT IT AS AN EXAMPLE AS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE ATTACHMENT IS ADDRESSING HERE IS THAT DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF UTILITIES WOULD BE REVIEWED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS OR WHATEVER WE WOULD AGREE TO FOR FREQUENCY.
>> YOU MENTIONED WHAT THE CDC WENT THROUGH AND HOW THEY ARE HAVING A FORENSIC AUDIT, AND KNOWING THAT THE STARTING PRICE WAS POTENTIALLY UP TO $30,000 WITH THAT BEING THE STARTING PRICE.
THEN POTENTIALLY IF THEY FOUND ANYTHING, THEN THAT COULD BALLOON INTO MUCH MORE MONEY, SAYING AND PUTTING THIS INTO THE CHARTER AND SAYING THAT THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO DO FOR MULTIPLE YEARS TO START WITH AND EVERY YEAR GOING FORWARD, JUST BECAUSE AND HAVE THE EXPECTATION THAT THE CITY AND ALL OF THE TAXPAYERS ARE JUST GOING TO PAY FOR THIS WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF UNDERSTANDING ON WHAT THE PRICE WOULD BE, BECAUSE IT COULD BE JUST A BLANK CHECK THAT WE'RE WRITING EVERY SINGLE YEAR IS, I THINK, SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF WHICH FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN AND ALL OF THE PRESENTATIONS THAT WE'VE SEEN FOR THE FORENSIC AUDIT FOR THE CDC, THERE IS NO LIKE, CEILING.
THEY CAN'T GIVE YOU A CEILING UNTIL THEY START LOOKING INTO IT.
THE OTHER THING IS WE ARE SAYING WE'RE DOING IT ON THE BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE, BUT THIS WAS A PETITION THAT HAS COME IN FRONT OF US NOW THAT ONLY HAD, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY, WE COULD GO BACK AND LOOK AT HOW MANY SIGNATURES THEY GOT, BUT IT WAS LESS THAN 300 FOR THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY AFTER THEY HAD BLANKETED THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY ASKING FOR THESE SIGNATURES.
SO MAYBE THERE'S COMMUNITY INTEREST.
WE HAVE HEARD IT ONLINE, BUT NOT ENOUGH FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SIGN THE PETITION TO WANT IT ON THE BALLOT.
>> YES. JUST THE CLARIFICATION ON MY END.
I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE THE DOCUMENT IN FRONT OF ME.
WHAT YEAR DID YOU WANT TO START DOING THE AUDIT?
>> THEN I'M HEARING THE WORD FORENSIC AUDIT.
THERE'S MULTIPLE TYPES OF FORENSIC AUDITS.
ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A FINANCIAL BALANCE SHEET AUDIT?
>> JUST TO BE CLEAR. THE WAY IT'S RIGHT NOW, FINANCIAL AUDIT HAS TO BE VOTED ON BY CITY COUNCIL.
BY ADDING IT TO THE HOME RULE CHARTER, IS THAT AN AUTOMATIC SOMEONE COMES UP.
THEY PETITION A FINANCIAL AUDIT,
[00:35:02]
AND IT HAS TO BE DONE, OR IS THERE STILL A VOTE TO BE?>> IT DEPEND UPON THE LANGUAGE.
>> IT WOULD DEPEND UPON THE LANGUAGE WE PUT IN THE CHARTER.
IF WE PUT IT IN THE CHARTER THAT A FORENSIC AUDIT HAS TO BE DONE, FOR EXAMPLE, FROM 2022-2025, AND THEN EVERY YEAR AFTER, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
THERE WOULD BE NO VOTING ON IT.
>> JUST BE PART OF THE BUDGET.
>> THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO IT.
IF OTHERWISE, IT COULD BE WORDED THAT IT WOULD BE BROUGHT TO COUNCIL TO BE VOTED ON TO PERFORM A FORENSIC AUDIT ON CERTAIN DEPARTMENTS.
>> THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FISCAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT AND ONE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE GOES TO THE LEVEL OF CHECKS AND DEPOSITS AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON.
THAT'S WHY THE PRICE TAG IS SO HIGH.
ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT, APPLIES TOTALLY DIFFERENT PRINCIPLES, NOT ENTIRELY DIFFERENT PRINCIPLES, BUT TOTALLY DIFFERENT PRINCIPLES TO COME OUT WITH THE PROCESS.
THE PRICE CAN BE IN THE SAME GENERAL RANGE, BUT THE OUTCOME IS TYPICALLY DIFFERENT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WANT TO PUT IN THE CHARTER, OR WHAT IS CONSIDERED THE MORE DETAILED EVERY TIME.
THAT'S PROBABLY A ONE TIME THING THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO LOOK AT AND SOMEHOW PROPOSE AND GET IT DONE, LEAVE IT ALONE. IT'S NOT AN ANNUAL THING.
I DON'T BELIEVE WE SHOULD PUT ON THE HOME RULE CHARTER.
MOST PEOPLE ONLINE DO NOT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FINANCIAL AUDIT AND A FORENSIC AUDIT.
I WORK IN CREDIT UNDERWRITING.
I KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN AUDIT, COMPILE STATEMENTS, REVIEWED STATEMENTS, ETC.
THE CITY HAS TO DO A FINANCIAL AUDIT EVERY SINGLE YEAR BY LAW.
FORENSIC AUDIT, THERE HAS TO BE SUSPECTED FRAUD?
I DON'T BELIEVE IT SHOULD GO ON THE HOME RULE CHARTER.
I BELIEVE THAT SHOULD BE LEFT TO CITY COUNCIL.
IF THE COMMITTEE IS ADAMANT TO ADD THIS.
I WOULD SUGGEST PUTTING IN THE LANGUAGE TO WHERE CITY COUNCIL VOTES FOR IT.
BUT THEN AGAIN, I DON'T SEE THE NEED IF PREVIOUS CHAPTERS OF THE HOME RULE CHARTER ALREADY CALLED FOR VOTES AND THE MAYOR BEING ABLE TO TO VETO THEIR VOTES.
>> I THINK IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE TO PUT A CONDITION ON THE CITY TO PAY FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT REGARDLESS.
I DO THINK, HOWEVER, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO PUT LANGUAGE IN THAT OBLIGATES THE CITY COUNCIL TO REVIEW THE ANNUAL FISCAL AUDIT ANNUALLY AND REVIEW IT FOR POTENTIAL FRAUD OR ALL THOSE THINGS THAT WOULD STEM INTO A FORENSIC AUDIT.
GIVING THE CITY COUNCIL THE OPPORTUNITY AND MAKE THEM PUT IT ON THEIR AGENDA, I THINK WE LIMIT IT TO REQUIRING A REVIEW, BUT NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRING THE AUDIT. THAT BE MY RECOLLECTION.
>> YES. A FINANCIAL AUDIT ISN'T NECESSARILY GOING TO REVEAL FRAUD OR EMBEZZLEMENT.
>> WHICH HAS BEEN A PROBLEM IN THE PAST.
I'M THINKING THAT A REQUIREMENT WHERE MAYBE NOT SO MUCH EVERY YEAR, LET'S SAY, EVERY TWO OR FIVE YEARS, WHERE A DETAILED AUDIT WOULD BE PERFORMED, THAT WOULD AT LEAST GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC TO SEE HOW THEIR MONEY IS ACTUALLY REALLY BEING SPENT.
THEN JUST A BROAD STROKE THAT SAYS, WE'RE TAKING MONEY, WE'RE SPENDING IT.
>> MY QUESTION IS, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR MY LAST PASS.
DOES THE CITY COUNCIL HAVE A SUBCOMMITTEE DESIGNATED FOR AUDITS AND/OR INTERACTION?
[00:40:02]
IT'S A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON THESE MATTERS.>> I COULD APPOINT COMMITTEE, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE ONE.
>> CAROLYN, WE'LL START WRAPPING THIS UP.
>> THIS IS THE REASON BECAUSE CONSIDERING THE COMMUNITY CENTER AUDIT THAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER, AND I'M SPEAKING AS A RESIDENT, NOT AS A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, CONSIDERING THE CHALLENGES WE HAD THERE, CONSIDERING THAT RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN COMING BEFORE COUNCIL.
TALKING AND HIGHLIGHTING FINANCIAL ISSUES, AND ALSO BECAUSE THE STATE IS MOVING TO HAVE A MORE TRANSPARENCY IN THE FINANCIAL AFFAIRS OF CITIES.
THAT IS WHY I AM RECOMMENDING THAT WE ADD TO THE CHARTER THAT WE'LL HAVE EVEN THOUGH IT'S STATE LAW, THAT WE HAVE THAT TRANSPARENCY, THAT VISIBILITY, IT'S POSTED ONLINE.
MAYBE INSTEAD OF A FORENSIC AUDIT, WHICH IF THE NEED ARISES, IT WILL GO BEFORE COUNCIL OR COUNCIL TO VOTE ON IT.
MAYBE WE CAN HAVE, AS RANDALL SUGGESTED, MAYBE EVERY 3-5 YEARS, WE CAN HAVE AN EFFICIENCY AUDIT, WHICH GOES A LITTLE BROADER IN SCOPE THAN JUST THE ANNUAL AUDIT THAT'S DONE.
THAT WILL HELP TO IDENTIFY THINGS THAT ARE FRAUDULENT.
IT WILL HELP TO IDENTIFY IF THE FINANCES ARE NOT HANDLED WELL AND MAY SIGNAL THE NEED FOR FORENSIC AUDIT.
>> YES, MA'AM. MAYBE A DUMB QUESTION.
I APOLOGIZE IF EVERYBODY ALREADY KNOWS.
>> WHO AUDITS OUR FINANCIAL YEARLY STATEMENTS NOW? WHAT CPA FIRM DOES?
>> WE JUST APPROVED A NEW FIRM.
IT'S TYPICALLY BEST PRACTICE TO CHANGE EVERY 3-5 YEARS.
YOU HAVE FRESH EYES AND CITY JUST DID THAT, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NAME ON THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY DO.
THEY HAVE A WHOLE SECTION DEDICATED TO MUNICIPAL AUDITS.
THERE'S 5-10 FIRMS THAT DO IT ALL AROUND THE STATE, AND THEY'RE ONE OF THEM.
>> ONE THING REAL QUICK, I GUESS WHILE I HAVE THE MICE. I'LL JUST CHIME IN.
EVERY LEGISLATIVE SESSION, THE STATE ADOPTS LAWS THAT MAKE IT HARDER FOR THE CITY TO GENERATE REVENUE LIKE FOR INSTANCE, WE'VE SEEN THE PROPERTY TAX BILL.
WE'RE POTENTIALLY REDUCING THAT.
I THINK MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO HAVE SOMETHING IN THE CHARTER THAT REQUIRES THE CITY TO EXPEND A LARGE CHUNK OF MONEY EVERY YEAR WOULD HURT THE CITY IN THE LONG RUN.
I THINK THAT'S JUST MY TWO SENSE.
A CHARTER IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN ENABLING DOCUMENT, NOT A RESTRICTING OR LIMITING DOCUMENT.
I THINK RIGHT NOW THE DISCRETION IS UP TO COUNSEL IF THERE IS EVIDENCE OF FRAUD OR WRONGDOING, THAT GETS BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION THE ATTORNEY'S ATTENTION, AND THEN WE LOOK AT IT AND DETERMINE IF IT'S NEEDED TO MOVE FORWARD IF THAT'S THE BEST USE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS.
BUT I THINK TO REQUIRE THE CITY MANAGER, EVERY YEAR TO BUDGET 100,000, $250,000, IT WOULD HINDER THE CITY IN THE LONG RUN BECAUSE THERE'D BE YEARS THAT YOU'D BE DOING A FORENSIC AUDIT FOR JUST BECAUSE THE CHARTER REQUIRES IT NOT BECAUSE THERE'S A NEED FOR IT.
>> WAIT, DAVID WAS NEXT. DAVID.
>> THIS WILL BE MY LAST TIME COMING ON THIS.
I'M OPPOSED TO ANY UNDEFINED SCOPE GOING INTO THE CHARTER.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT FORWARD A MOTION, THEN THAT NEEDS TO BE A VERY CONCISE, VERY LIMITED SCOPE.
WHAT WAS PRESENTED AND WHAT YOU READ THERE.
I KNOW I'VE READ THAT BEFORE, BUT I WOULD NEVER VOTE TO HAVE THAT SUBMITTED AS AS WRITTEN.
>> THANK YOU. JIM, BEFORE YOU, JODY, WAS.
>> GRANT, WHAT IS IT THAT STOPS THE CITY FROM CONDUCTING A FORENSIC AUDIT.
IF THERE'S ANY CAUSE REVEALED IN ANY FASHION, WHAT STOPS IT?
>> WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS STARTED AN AUDIT, AND THERE, [OVERLAPPING].
>> WHAT STOPS IT FROM HAPPENING? IF THERE'S ANY CAUSE REVEALED IN ANY FASHION THROUGH THE AUDITING PROCESS THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE NOW, WHAT STOPS IT?
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
CITY ORDERS A FORENSIC AUDIT, YOU TALKING ABOUT WHEN THE CITY PUTS AN END TO IT OR THEY JUST KEEP GOING?
[00:45:03]
>> WHAT STOPS ONE FROM INITIATED?
>> I THINK IT'S JUST THE DISCRETION OF COUNCIL TO FEEL LIKE IT'S A GOOD, IF THERE'S EVIDENCE AND THERE'S NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT AND THERE'S FIDUCIARY DUTIES WHEN YOU SERVE ON COUNCIL.
>> IF THERE'S A REASON, FOUND SOME FASHION THROUGH ALL THE CITIZENRY, THROUGH ALL THE SOCIAL MEDIA, WHATEVER, IT CAN HAPPEN.
>> THERE IS ONE HAPPENING NOW.
>> WE'RE GOING TO WRAP THIS UP.
JIM, YOU'LL BE OUR LAST ONE, AND THEN WE'LL GO TO MOTION.
>> THIS MIGHT ADDRESS RANDALL'S ELEMENTS.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT HAS BASIC INTERNAL ACCOUNTING CONTROLS THAT ARE TESTED AND PROVED OUT BEFORE THEY COME UP WITH AUDIT PROCEDURES, AND THEY HAVE TO DO THAT EVERY YEAR.
IF THEY WERE TO COME AND SAY, THE WATER DEPARTMENT IS IN THE SEWER, I'M JOKING HERE, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO SAY, THIS WOULD BE THE SOURCE OF A FORENSIC AUDIT, OR THE CITY COUNCIL SAY, SEWERS GOT TO BE WHATEVER.
THEY THEN TAKE ACTION SEPARATE AND APART FROM THAT ANNUAL AUDIT, WHICH IS GOING TO DO THE SAME THING ANYWAY.
BUT NOT IN SUCH DEPTH AND SEPARATE BILLING SO THAT THE MONEY CAN BE SEPARATED BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT TO DO THE ANNUAL.
ANYWAY, MY POINT IS, THERE ARE CERTAIN CORE THINGS THAT ARE TESTED, AND IF THEY COME UP WANTING, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL KNOW WE HAVE THESE WEAKNESSES, AND MAYBE IF THEY WANT TO GO ON, MAYBE SOMEONE SAYS, WE NEED A FORENSIC AUDIT ON THE WATER DEPARTMENT OR WHATEVER HAPPENS TO BE, THEN THEY CAN INITIATE AND PROCEED FORWARD WITHOUT IMPEDIMENT TO THE ANNUAL AUDIT, BUT STILL HAVE THAT DETAIL TO SATISFY FORENSIC OBJECTIVES.
>> WITH THAT RANDALL, YOU WILL BE THE LAST ONE, THEN WE'RE GOING TO CALL FOR A MOTION.
HAVE WE EVER HAD A FORENSIC AUDIT EVER IN THE CITY OF PRINCETON? NO. THANK YOU.
>> POINT OF ORDER. HE HAS READ THIS AS A RECOMMENDATION, OR DO WE HAVE A FIRST AND SECOND?
>> AND A SECOND. I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND STATUS.
>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THIS?
>> I'M ACTUALLY THINKING OF WITHDRAWING THE MOTION.
>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE TO SECOND THAT?
>> WAIT, I'LL SECOND THAT TO WITHDRAW.
>> WE'RE GOOD. WE HAD THE FIRST WITHDREW, SO WE'RE GOOD.
I'M THINKING HERE AS A RESIDENT.
BUT AS A RESIDENT, I AM NOT GOING TO READ STATE LAW, BUT I'M GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THE CHARTER.
IF I CAN HAVE SOMETHING ADDED TO SHOW THE CITY IS GOING TO HAVE AN ONLINE BUDGET.
I WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THESE THINGS.
MAYBE WE CAN JUST TAKE THE STATE LAW PORTION OF IT AND ADD IT TO OUR HOME RULE CHARTER, SO RESIDENTS CAN SEE THAT THERE IS SOME TRANSPARENCY AND SOME ACCOUNTABILITY.
[OVERLAPPING] INTO THE PROCESS.
>> CAROLYN, THAT IT'S ALREADY OUT THERE BECAUSE GETTING MY INFORMATION FOR THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, BUDGETS ARE ONLINE.
I PULLED ALL MY NUMBERS FROM THE BUDGETS.
>> I KNOW IT IS. BUT MAXINE, YOU ARE SUPER RESIDENT.
YOU RESEARCH AND YOU LOOK AT THINGS.
WHEN YOU JUST THINK ABOUT THE FLOW OF HOW THINGS ARE IN PRINCETON, AND WHAT I BELIEVE GETS LOST IN TRANSLATION IS THAT MANY RESIDENTS DON'T THINK ABOUT HOW WE ARE, WHERE WE ARE TODAY, BECAUSE OF JUST THIS POPULATION EXPLOSION, THE CITY WAS NOT PREPARED FOR THIS.
YOU WERE DEALING WITH A CITY THAT IS ACCUSTOMED TO GOVERN AND JUST HAVE THE GROUP COME TOGETHER FOR 10 OR 7,000 PEOPLE, AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, 40-SOMETHING THOUSAND.
[00:50:01]
WHEN THINGS GET LOST IN TRANSLATION, SOMETIMES IT'S GOOD TO HAVE SOME DOCUMENTATION TO FILL THE GAP.>> THANK YOU, JULIE. I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME AND FORWARD MOVEMENT, THAT I KNOW THAT CAROLYN HAS A POTENTIAL WELL, ADDITIONAL SECTION, I GUESS TO ADD.
DAVID HAD MENTIONED EARLIER, I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT THOSE BE CRAFTED AND BROUGHT BACK TO US IN WRITING NEXT WEEK, SO THAT WE COULD ALL LOOK AT IT IN WRITING TO VOTE ON IT, SO THAT WE COULD MAYBE MOVE FORWARD.
>> WELL, AND WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS PREVIOUSLY TO DO THIS.
WE'VE DISCUSSED IT MULTIPLE TIMES.
NOT CAROLYN. ALLISON AND MYSELF HAVE BROUGHT THINGS FORWARD IN WRITING TO PROPOSE.
>> DO WE HAVE THEM? [OVERLAPPING]
>> I HAVE DONE. WE'VE PASSED THEM OUT MULTIPLE TIMES.
>> FOR THIS SECTION? THAT'S WHAT I MEAN. SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS.
>> FOR THIS SECTION, I PREVIOUSLY DID PASS OUT A COUPLE OF THINGS FOR THIS SECTION.
>> NO, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE NEW PIECES, AND WE ALL SAID WE'RE GOING TO WAIT TILL THE END TO DISCUSS THOSE ITEMS. NOW WE'RE AT THE END OF CHAPTER 5 TO DISCUSS THEM.
>> THEN DO WE HAVE ALL OF THOSE DRAFTED THINGS, WE JUST SUBMIT THEM, AND AT THE END, WE DISCUSS THEM?
>> WELL, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, GRANT.
IF THEY'RE FOR A SPECIFIC CHAPTER, WE SHOULD DISCUSS THEM FOR THAT CHAPTER.
>> IF A MOTION THEN IS MADE TO HAVE THAT LANGUAGE RETURNED NEXT WEEK, THAT WE REFINE IT, RETURN IT, WE MAKE THAT MOTION, AND WE COME BACK.
WE WILL DISCUSS AND ADOPT IT NEXT WEEK.
I'M NOT SHARING THE MEETING MAXINE, YOU ARE.
>> YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION, CAROLYN, FOR WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE ADDED.
>> NO. WHAT GRANT IS SAYING IS YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION FOR AN ITEM TO BE ADDED.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE SOMETHING ADDED, YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT.
JULIE, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT TIME AND EVERYTHING.
BUT NOT EVERYBODY WILL ALWAYS HAVE THE TIME TO PREPARE IN ADVANCE AND GET IT TO US IN ADVANCE.
EVERYBODY HAS TO BE PERMITTED THAT OPPORTUNITY TO PUT OUT A MOTION IF THEY WOULD LIKE.
BUT I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, AND WE HAVE DISCUSSED IT BEFORE.
>> I THINK ALSO, THOUGH, SOMETIMES AS YOU'RE DISCUSSING SOMETHING, IDEAS SOMETIMES COME TO YOU THAT YOU DIDN'T PREVIOUSLY THINK OF.
>> WE ALWAYS HAVE TO ALLOW TIME FOR THAT AS WELL.
>> CAROLYN, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION REGARDING WHAT YOU WERE SAYING IN REGARDS TO THE BUDGET, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO MAKE THAT MOTION.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADD A SECTION TO CHAPTER 5 OF THE HOME RULE CHARTER, SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING TRANSPARENCY AND PUBLIC ACCESS.
THAT SECTION WILL BE DRAFTED BASED UPON THE RECENT TEXAS STATE LAW ADDRESSING THAT VERY ISSUE.
WAS MOTION BY CAROLYN, SECONDED BY JOSE. JULIE.
>> MY REQUEST IS THAT'S A VERY BROAD MOTION,
[00:55:04]
AND WHAT WAS MOVED CANNOT BE ADDED TO THE CHARTER BECAUSE IT'S BROAD WITH NO ACTUAL LANGUAGE ASSIGNED TO IT.CAN WE EITHER WORK ON THE LANGUAGE OR TABLE THE MOTION.
I AGREE WITH WHAT ALLISON IS SAYING, I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE SAID, MAXINE, THAT SOMETIMES THINGS COME TO YOU, BUT IT'S ALSO EASIER TO PICK SOMETHING APART THAT EXISTS THAN TO HAVE HOWEVER MANY OF US, THERE ARE 15 PEOPLE, TRY TO WRITE IT.
MY COMMENT IS THAT I WOULD LIKE LANGUAGE ATTACHED TO THIS MOTION BEFORE I VOTE.
>> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO.
I'M NEVER GOING TO AGREE WITH THE POSITION THAT CITIZENS ARE TOO DUMB TO READ OR THAT THEY'RE TOO DUMB TO PAY ATTENTION OR THAT THEY CAN'T FOLLOW THE YELLOW BRICK ROAD TO GLORY.
BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY UNREASONABLE TO ADD BY REFERENCE THE PART OF STATE LAW THAT TALKS ABOUT BUDGETS.
IF YOUR INTENTION IS TO WRITE A MOTION UP THAT INCLUDES BY MOTION, BUT NOT THE TEXT BECAUSE THE PROBLEM IS IF WE PUT IT IN AS TEXT, AND STATE LAW CHANGES, WE'RE OUT OF COMPLIANCE.
I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND PUTTING ANYTHING INTO OUR CHARTER THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO CHANGE WHEN WE'RE LOCKED OUT OF CHANGES FOR TWO YEARS.
>> EXACTLY. I WILL SAY ANYBODY AND PRETTY MUCH EVERYBODY IS ON SOCIAL MEDIA.
NO MATTER WHERE YOU LOOK ON SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE BUDGET WAS PUT OUT THERE.
BECAUSE IT WAS NOT JUST THE CITY PAGE, BUT I KNOW IT WAS ON THE ARCADIA FARMS PAGE, IT WAS ON THE THREE DIFFERENT CITY OF PRINCETON PAGES.
IT WAS ON THE PRINCETON FOR PROGRESS PAGE.
THAT GOES TO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, DAVID, HOW PEOPLE CAN FOLLOW THE YELLOW BRICK ROAD.
IF THEY CHOOSE TO. THAT'S THE THING.
AGAIN, BACK TO WHAT DAVID WAS SAYING, IF STATE LAW CHANGES IN JANUARY, THE CHARTER CAN'T CHANGE FOR ANOTHER THREE YEARS?
>> [INAUDIBLE] I THINK I HAVE A SQUARE.
WHATEVER THE LANGUAGE TURNS OUT TO BE, WE ARE JUST MIRRORING STATE LAW.
I HATE TO BE IN A POSITION OF OPPOSING ANY POSITION WHEN THE MOST EFFECTIVE COUNSEL FOLKS TAKES THAT.
I THINK THAT'S A WONDERFUL JOB, BUT THE CHARTER IS BURDENED WITH ENOUGH LANGUAGE AS IT IS.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BE RESTATING STATE LAW TO JUST FOR THIS TYPE OF PURPOSE, IT'S ADMIRABLE, BUT I GET IT. THANK YOU.
>> JUST MAKE SURE BY ON THE SAME PAGE, THAT TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 102.
WE JUST MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
MAJORITY OF THE CITIES ALREADY DO IT ONLINE.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD PUT ANY CHANGES IN THERE THAT WILL AFFECT POTENTIAL STATE LAW, BECAUSE I FORGOT WHO SAID IT, WE WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE IT EVERY TIME THEY FLIP.
>> CORRECT. YES. IT'S ALSO AVAILABLE AT THE LIBRARY.
WE DO. [LAUGHTER] VERY SMALL ONE, BUT DIFFERENT SUBJECT.
>> DOES THE STATE LAW ADDRESS FORENSIC AUDIT?
>> WE'VE MOVED AWAY FROM THAT.
>> I'VE LISTENED, AND I WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION.
ONE OF THE ITEMS FOR CHAPTER 5 THAT I WOULD LIKE TO PUT OUT THERE IS A CITIZEN BUDGET OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.
THIS IS A CITIZEN BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
IT'LL BE APPOINTED ANNUALLY BY THE COUNCIL TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE PUBLIC INPUT ON THE PROPOSED ANNUAL BUDGET BEFORE FINAL ADOPTION.
[01:00:09]
I'LL OPEN THAT FOR DISCUSSION.>> WHAT IS OUR CURRENT BUDGET PROCESS?
>> THE CITY MAKES IT, AND THE CITY PRESENTS IT TO COUNCIL, AND THEN THERE IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I MEAN, ONE STEP FURTHER, LIKE AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, WE HAD A BUDGET WORK SESSION.
IT'S BY LAW, WHAT YOU SAID IS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT, BUT I KNOW EVEN SINCE A COUPLE OF YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN AROUND AND MIKE'S COME ON BOARD AND THE NEW COUNCIL THAT THEY'VE GONE A STEP FURTHER AND BEYOND.
WORK SESSIONS, TOWN HALLS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
COUNCIL OR CITY MANAGEMENT CAN CHOOSE TO DO THOSE IF THEY PLEASE.
ALREADY. ON TOP OF ALL THE STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, THE POSTING ONLINE, ETC.
>> YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING.
>> THAT'S WHEN PUBLIC HEARING YOU COMMIT.
>> IS THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING?
>> I WAS TRYING TO WRITE DOWN EVERYTHING YOU SAID THAT THIS COMMITTEE WOULD BE APPOINTED ANNUALLY BY COUNCIL.
WHAT ELSE DID YOU SAY? WHAT ARE THE JOBS?
>> TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE PUBLIC INPUT ON THE PROPOSED ANNUAL BUDGET BEFORE FINAL ADOPTION.
>> THAT WAS SECONDED BY DAVID. JODY?
>> YES. SOMETHING SPECIFIC HAPPENED, SAY, TO MAKE THIS SEEM NECESSARY THAT CAN BE POINTED TO?
>> I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT THERE'S SOMETHING SPECIFIC, BUT IT DOESN'T HURT TO HAVE ANOTHER SET OF EYES.
>> AS OPPOSED TO THE CURRENT INPUT PROCESSES?
>> THIS GIVES THE PUBLIC, NOT REALLY US, BUT WHAT I MEAN, IT GIVES US THAT ABILITY TO LOOK AT THE BUDGET AND GIVE INPUT BACK TO COUNCIL.
>> THERE'S A BIT OF A PHILOSOPHICAL BENT. WHEN HEARING THAT.
GRANT, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT IS PREDOMINANT IN OTHER CITIES, OR IS THIS A UNIQUE THING, OR WHAT?
>> I'M NOT AWARE OF ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN A CHARTER.
I MEAN, THERE MIGHT BE SOME CITIES THAT MAYBE HAVE SOME INTERNAL COMMITTEES, AND BUDGET COMMITTEES BUT I'M NOT AWARE OF A REQUIREMENT IN A CHARTER TO HAVE A BUDGET.
>> CERTAINLY, I JUST FEEL LIKE SINCE OUR HANDS ARE TIED THAT WE GOT TO DO STUFF BECAUSE OTHER PEOPLE DO, BUT IT'S AN ITEM OF CURIOSITY.
>> DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION MIXING FOR THE SIZE OF THE COMMITTEE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT?
>> YOU'RE WELCOME. DAVID, I SAW YOUR MIC ON, DID YOU? CAROLYN.
>> I WAS GOING TO ASK, THIS COUNCIL THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, WILL THEY BE INDIVIDUALS [NOISE] WHO UNDERSTAND PUBLIC BUDGETING, NO ACCOUNTING, AND WILL BE ABLE TO?
>> THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SELECT THEM.
>> RIGHT. THE CITY COUNCIL IS GOING TO SELECT THEM.
BUT DOES EVERYBODY THAT'S ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE KNOW ABOUT DRAINAGE AND KNOW ABOUT.
>> I'M JUST LOOKING AT THINGS IN TERMS OF TIME.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE COUNCIL BEING A GROUP INSTEAD OF A COMMITTEE BEING SET UP.
BUT I'M JUST THINKING HOLDING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND HAVING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC COME IN AND COMMENT IT'S POSTED ONLINE.
>> BUT THEN YOU HAVE THE WHOLE CITY LOOKING AT IT.
>> THIS IS COMING FROM SOMEONE WHO CREATES THE BUDGET FOR THEIR CHURCH.
[01:05:03]
OBVIOUSLY, I GET IT.WE'RE DEALING WITH MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WITH THE CITY AND LESS THAN A SMALL CHURCH.
HOWEVER, I UNDERSTAND THE WARNING OF THE PUBLIC INPUT.
HOWEVER, IF THE COMMITTEE IS ONLY 10, 15 MEMBERS, IS THAT REALLY A GOOD REPRESENTATION OF THE PUBLIC VERSUS HOW IT CURRENTLY IS RIGHT NOW WHERE THE PUBLIC CAN COME INTO A CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND, SAY, DURING PUBLIC HEARING, HEY, I WANT.
>> FIVE MINUTES, AND FIVE MINUTES YOU HAVE TO SPEAK.
>> IT'S FIVE MINUTES, HOWEVER, IT'S [OVERLAPPING] TWO MEETINGS EVERY MONTH.
>> BUT THEY ONLY HAVE ONE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE BUDGET.
>> CORRECT. BUT THE MORE PEOPLE THAT YOU GET INPUTS FROM, NOT JUST ON THE BUDGET, BUT IN ANYTHING.
THE MORE PEOPLE THAT CHIME IN, THE MORE CONVOLUTED THINGS GET.
IF WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET FOR A CITY, THE AVERAGE PERSON IS GOING TO SAY, $50,000,000 FOR PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND? BECAUSE TO MOST PEOPLE HERE IN PRINCETON, EVEN HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IS A LOT OF MONEY.
I UNDERSTAND THAT CITY COUNCIL IS GOING TO APPOINT THESE PEOPLE.
HOWEVER, WE ALREADY ELECT CITY COUNCIL TO REPRESENT US.
THEY'RE THE ONES THAT ARE VOTING ON THIS, THEY'RE LOOKING AT THIS BUDGET AND VOTING ON IT.
I JUST THINK IT JUST CREATES MORE NOISE AND COULD ACTUALLY END UP BEING MORE DAMAGING THAN IT COULD POTENTIALLY HELP THE CITIES, BUT THAT'S JUST MY TWO SENSE.
>> I'M REALLY OPINIONATED TONIGHT. SORRY, GUYS.
I REALLY STRUGGLE WITH HOW MUCH TIME WE SPEND DEGRADING THE PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY AS BEING IGNORANT, UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT A BUDGET OF HALF $1,000,000 OR $50 MILLION, I'M IDEAL IN BUDGETS AND HALF A BILLION DOLLARS AND UP.
YOU WOULDN'T THINK THAT BECAUSE WEAR FLIP FLOPS IN A T SHIRT.
BECAUSE OUR PEOPLE ARE RURAL, DOESN'T MAKE US HICKS OR HILLBILLIES OR ANYTHING ELSE, IT MAKES US PEOPLE THAT LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE DALY LOOP OR DOS LOOP.
I'D APPRECIATE IT IF WE COULD FIND A WAY TO MAKE OUR POINTS WITHOUT DEGRADING THE PUBLIC.
>> HAVING THE CITY COUNCIL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL WORKING GROUP THAT THEY SELECT OF COMPETENT PEOPLE TO REVIEW THE BUDGET, INDEPENDENT OF THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY COUNCIL, WHICH IS VERY OVERTAXED, AND I'M SURE THAT THEY WOULD LOVE TO SPEND MORE TIME LOOKING AT THE BUDGET.
BUT TO FIND A FEW PEOPLE, THEY CAN LOOK AT IT AND GO, DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I DON'T THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE TO HAVE THAT KIND OF A WORKING GROUP.
DOES IT BELONG IN THE CHARTER? THAT'S A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION, BUT I REALLY THINK THAT WE DO OURSELVES A DISSERVICE BY NOT RECOGNIZING THAT WE'VE GOT VERY TALENTED AND COMPETENT PEOPLE IN THE CITY OF PRINCETON.
>> I AGREE. YES, IT'S VERY SAD TO HEAR HOW MANY PEOPLE DEGRADE OR MINIMIZE THE LEVEL OF INTELLIGENCE OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN PRINCETON.
I HEAR IT ALL THE TIME AND WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH VERY HIGH END KNOWLEDGE.
WE NEED TO RESPECT, WE'RE CITIZENS AS WELL, AND EVERYBODY NEEDS TO SHOW RESPECT FOR EVERYBODY'S CITIZENS.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE CLARIFICATION THAT THOSE WERE NOT MY WORDS.
THOSE ARE BEING WORDS THAT ARE BEING SAID BY ALL.
THOSE WERE DEFINITELY NOT MY WORDS, SO I WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU ALL DON'T PUT ANY WORDS IN MY MOUTH.
>> WELL, YOU'RE LOOKING AT ME.
>> WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE YOU'RE IN FRONT OF ME.
SURE, I WAS LOOKING AT DAVID AND TERRANCE, ALSO.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO ECHO THE SAME SENTIMENT.
MY COMMENTS WERE IN NO WAY INTENDED TO DENIGRATE ANY OF THE RESIDENTS OF PRINCETON, WE HAVE SOME WONDERFUL, VERY TALENTED, CAPABLE, INTELLIGENT PEOPLE IN PRINCETON.
HOWEVER, WE'RE JUST SAYING I'LL NEED JUST NEEDING CLARIFICATION ON THE MAKEUP OF THIS PROPOSED OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.
[01:10:08]
AS MYSTERIA SAID, HAVING A COMMITTEE WITH JUST INDIVIDUALS SELECTED BY COUNSEL MAY WORK AGAINST A BUDGET BEING APPROVED AND GOING FORWARD.IF WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE CAPABLE AND COMPETENT, AND DAVID USED SOME REALLY GOOD WORDS TO DESCRIBE A COMMITTEE THAT WOULD BE PUT IN PLACE, WELL, THAT WOULD PROBABLY GO A LONG WAY TO HELP COUNCIL APPROVE THE BUDGET AND ALLOW THE CITY TO HAVE A BETTER BUDGET.
THEN MARK, YOU'LL BE OUR LAST ONE. THANK YOU.
>> MAXINE, I SUPPORT YOUR SUGGESTION HERE AND THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE.
I ALSO SUPPORT DAVID'S COMMENT. I'M SORRY.
>> I KNEW THAT YOU DIDN'T INTENTIONALLY MEAN THAT STUPID PEOPLE WOULD INTERFERE WITH THE PROCESS.
BUT HOWEVER, IT IS WE THE PEOPLE.
THIS IS A DEMOCRACY, AND I THINK THE PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE INPUT, OBVIOUSLY, WE ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE THEM THE POWER TO MAKE BUDGET DECISIONS.
THEY ARE ONLY THERE TO MAKE SUGGESTIONS, OBSERVATIONS.
THE SAME THING THAT ANYBODY CAN MAKE IN A PUBLIC HEARING HERE AS WELL.
I WOULD CERTAINLY ALWAYS ENDORSE THAT BECAUSE AS POWER CONSOLIDATES, IT GETS PROBLEMATIC.
SPEAKING FOR MYSELF PERSONALLY, I WORK FOR A CHURCH THAT HAS A BUDGET OF $23,000,000 THIS YEAR, AND I WORK WITH MULTI BILLION DOLLAR AND TRILLION DOLLAR COMPANIES AS A CONSULTANT, SO I'M WELL AWARE OF VARIETY OF THINGS BEYOND A 50 OR $100,000 EXPENDITURE.
>> AGAIN, JOSE, IF YOU TOOK THAT I WAS DIRECTING TOWARDS YOU, I WASN'T IT'S JUST DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF ME, AND WAS JUST, IN GENERAL LOOKING. YOU'RE WELCOME.
>> THANK YOU, RANDALL, MARK. AWESOME.
>> I KNOW WE HAD A FIRST AND A SECOND.
>> I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF WE WERE READY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE VOTE FOR THE WORDING AS IS, UNLESS SOMEBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WORDING THAT WE HAVE HERE.
>> NO, WE ARE READY TO OPEN IT FOR.
>> YOU IN CHARGE. YOU LET US KNOW.
>> ONE THING I JUST ASKED TERRANCE ONE THING CONCERNS ME ABOUT THE TIMING, AND ANY COMMITTEE WORK IS ALWAYS GOING TO ADD TIME.
NOT NECESSARILY BAD, JUST IT WILL ADD TIME.
IF CITY COUNCIL WAS JUST PRESENTED WITH THE BUDGET NOW, MY ASSUMPTION BASED ON THIS MOTION IS THAT THIS COMMITTEE WOULD HAVE SEEN THE BUDGET BEFORE THAT AND COME UP WITH RECOMMENDATIONS BEFORE THAT SO THAT WHEN THE BUDGET WAS PUT IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL IS SEEN THE BUDGET WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS, AND I'M WONDERING FROM THE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT ME AND CAN ANSWER THIS, WHAT'S THE BUDGET TIMELINE LOOK LIKE ANYWAY? CAN IT BE BACKED UP BY AT LEAST A MONTH SO THAT THE COMMITTEE COULD ACTUALLY REVIEW IT?
>> I WILL JUST SAY IT MAY NOT BE MADE KNOWN TO THE PUBLIC, BUT THE BUDGET PROCESS IS VERY LENGTHY.
I THINK IT'S A FOUR PLUS MONTH LONG ENDEAVOR.
EVERY PORTION OF THE BUDGET THE CITY DEPARTMENTS INVOLVED, LIKE FOR INSTANCE, EDC, CDC, THEY PROVE THEIR OWN BUDGET.
THERE ARE STATUTORY DEADLINES THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE IN ORDER TO POST IT IN TIMELY MANNER, SO WE CAN ADOPT IT IN TIMELY MANNER BECAUSE THE TAX RATES TIED.
I THINK IT WOULD ADD AN ADDITIONAL LAYER TO THE TIMING COMPONENT.
>> GREAT, I'M SORRY TO DISAGREE.
IT WOULDN'T ADD ADDITIONAL LAYER.
THIS IS LITERALLY THE SAME THING WE'RE DOING WITH A PUBLIC HEARING.
IT'S JUST LETTING THEM SEE IT FIRST.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO CHANGE THE TIME FRAME OF IT.
I THINK IT'S JUST IF WE DO VOTE, I'M NOT SAYING VOTE, YES OR NO, BUT IF WE VOTE, IT'S JUST THE COUNCIL'S RESPONSIBILITY TO APPOINT THAT TO GO THROUGH THE PROPOSED BUDGET, TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR IT, BECAUSE THAT'S ALREADY IN OUR LAWS TO DO SO.
>> THE IDEA IS TO HAVE THAT COMMITTEE WORK IN PARALLEL WITH THE COUNCIL.
WHEN IT'S RELEASED TO COUNSEL, IT'S RELEASED TO THAT COMMITTEE AT THE SAME TIME, IS THAT THE GENERAL IDEA?
>> THEN DURING THE WORK SESSION,
[01:15:02]
LIKE WHAT YOU JUST HAD, YOU WOULD HAVE THE COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE AVAILABLE TO YOU FOR REVIEW AT THE SAME TIME DURING THE WORK SESSION.IF I'M CORRECT, THE BUDGET WAS AVAILABLE ABOUT THREE WEEKS PRIOR, MAYBE A LITTLE MORE TWO WEEKS.
>> JUST A QUICK QUESTION, MAXINE.
>> THEN WE'LL OPEN IT PER VOTE.
>> TO CLARIFY IN YOUR PROPOSAL, BECAUSE ON CHAPTER 5, SECTION 5.05, IF THE CITY DOES NOT ADOPT A BUDGET BY SEPTEMBER 30, WE GO ON A MONTH TO MONTH BASIS, WHICH THEN OPENS UP A WHOLE ANOTHER CAN OF WORMS. IF THE COMMITTEE, DOES NOT FINALIZE BY THIS TIME, WOULD THEY BE MEETING, BECAUSE.
>> THAT WOULD ALL BE UP TO COUNSEL AND COUNSEL WOULD PROVIDE THEM A DEADLINE THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE IT REVIEWED BY.
IF IT WAS THIS YEAR, THEY WOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN ELECTED.
THE COUNCIL WOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN SET OR THE COMMITTEE.
THEY WOULD HAVE HAD THE BUDGET ALREADY AND THEY WOULD HAVE PRESENTED THEIR FINDINGS TO THEM BY THE WORK SESSION, WHICH WAS JUST THIS PAST MONDAY.
>> BECAUSE THE ONLY REASON I'M ASKING IS BECAUSE OUR COMMITTEE, WE WERE LOOKING TOWARDS HAVING ALL OF THIS COMPLETED BY A CERTAIN DATE.
>> RIGHT. BUT WE'RE DIFFERENT.
>> CORRECT, BUT WE STILL FAILED TO MEET THAT DEADLINE.
I'M THINKING AHEAD AND TO US, THE HOME RULE, IN MY OPINION, DOESN'T HAVE AS I DON'T WANT TO USE THE TERM AS BIG OF AN IMPACT.
THAT'S NOT THE PROPER TERM I WANT TO USE.
BUT THE CITY'S BUDGET THIS HAS DIRECT CONSEQUENCES ON. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE COUNSEL WILL GIVE THEM A DEADLINE THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET.
>> I'M SORRY, I KNOW YOU SAID ME LAST.
I'M GOING TO GO LAST ONE MORE TIME.
IT WAS A FIRST AND THEN A SECOND.
BUT JUST TO MAKE IT CLEAR, THIS COMMITTEE, NOWHERE IN THIS WORDING SAYS THEY HAVE TO APPROVE ANYTHING.
>> ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS BE APPOINTED, GIVE REVIEW AND GIVE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS, JUST LIKE IT'S ALREADY A LAW NOW FOR THE PUBLIC.
ARE THERE ANY CHANGES TO THE WORDING THAT ANYBODY'S CONCERNED ABOUT OR SHOULD WE MOVE FORWARD WITH VOTING?
>> YES, MA'AM. A CITIZEN'S BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE SHALL BE APPOINTED ANNUALLY BY THE COUNCIL TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE PUBLIC INPUTS ON THE PROPOSED ANNUAL BUDGET BEFORE THE FINAL ADOPTION?
>> WITH THAT AMBER, COULD YOU OPEN THE VOTING, PLEASE? [LAUGHTER] IT'S NOT OPEN YET.
THERE IT IS. [BACKGROUND] YOURS DIDN'T WORK.
THAT DID NOT PASS FOUR FOR AND EIGHT AGAINST.
THEN THE ONE OTHER ITEM THAT I HAD FOR A NEW SECTION, SECTION 5 WAS THE PUBLIC VOTE ON MAJOR BOND PROJECTS.
NO ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS EXCEEDING $5,000,000 SHALL OCCUR WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL AT A GENERAL OR SPECIAL ELECTION.
>> I'LL JUST CHIME IN AND SAY, SO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS HAVE TO HAVE VOTER APPROVAL, IRRESPECTIVE OF [OVERLAPPING], SO WE'RE ALREADY COVERED THERE.
>> I THINK YOU INTENTION ARE ALREADY COVERED.
>> PERFECT. THEN I WITHDRAW THAT AND WE CAN NOW GRANT.
IS THAT FOR EVERY GENERAL REGARDLESS OF DOLLAR AMOUNT?
>> FOR GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.
THERE'S OTHER FORM OF PUBLIC FINANCE, BUT FOR GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, IT REQUIRES A VOTE OF THE PUBLIC.
WHETHER IT'S 109 MILLION OR NINE MILLION, THAT'S JUST THE NATURE OF A GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND.
THERE'S CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATIONS THAT DON'T, BUT GENERAL OBLIGATION.
[01:20:02]
>> WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE TO CHAPTER 6, CITY SECRETARY, AND WE'LL START WITH SECTION 6.01.
GOT TO OPEN ITEM H.3 2025-164,
[H.3 2025-164 Review Chapter 6 ("City Secretary") of the Home Rule Charter for the City of Princeton, Texas; consider any recommendations for amendments thereto; and take appropriate action.]
REVIEW CHAPTER 6, CITY SECRETARY OF THE HOME CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF PRINCETON, TEXAS.CONSIDER ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS THERE TOO, AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.
[NOISE] NOW, WE'LL GO BACK TO CHAPTER 6.
CITY SECRETARY SECTION 6.01 APPOINTMENT, REMOVAL, AND COMPENSATION.
THE CITY SECRETARY SHALL BE APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER WITH THE ADVICE AND CONSENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE CITY SECRETARY SHALL RECEIVE SUCH COMPENSATION AS SHALL BE FIXED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
IF THE CITY SECRETARY IS TEMPORARILY UNABLE TO PERFORM APPOINTED DUTIES, THE CITY SECRETARY OR CITY MANAGER MAY DESIGNATE AN ALTERNATE.
>> QUESTION, EITHER TO THE COUNCIL OR TO A GRANT FOR THE WORD CONSENT, THAT MEANS IT'S VOTED ON AND AGREED FROM THE COUNCIL?
>> NO, I WOULD NOT SAY CONSENT.
IT CAN BE MAYBE DIRECTION OR YOU DISCUSSING IT BACK.
IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, FOR INSTANCE, YOU MOVE FORWARD.
SINCE CITY MANAGER HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPOINT.
NO, I WOULD NOT INTERPRET CONSENT THAT WAY.
>> MAXINE, HOW LONG DO WE PLAN ON MEETING TONIGHT?
>> WE START AT 6:30, SO WE'LL GO TO 8:30.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON SECTION 6.01? IF THERE'S NO.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR GRANT.
JUST CURIOUS, OUT OF ALL OF THE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE REPRESENTED BY THE CITY, WHY ARE JUST OBVIOUSLY THE CITY MANAGER.
BUT OTHER THAN THE CITY MANAGER, THE CITY SECRETARY AND THE CITY ATTORNEY, THE ONLY ONES MENTIONED SPECIFICALLY IN THE CHARTER?
>> ALSO THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE, TOO.
THAT'S JUST THE COUNCIL MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT, YOU'RE DELEGATING THE AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER TO HIRE EVERYONE ELSE.
CITY SECRETARY'S SPELLED OUT JUST TO ADD ADDITIONAL DUTIES AND TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE CITY REQUIRES A CITY SECRETARY, THEY'RE SPELLING OUT, SO IT'S JUST PRETTY COMMONPLACE, SOME CITIES GO A STEP FURTHER AND REQUIRE A CHIEF OF POLICE, BUT OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU HAVE A POLICE DEPARTMENT.
>> THANK YOU. I DID HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR 6.01, THAT THE APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF THE CITY SECRETARY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO COUNCIL CONFIRMATION BY MAJORITY VOTE.
JUST A RECOMMENDATION. RANDALL, I SAW YOUR MIC ON, DID YOU, AND THAT WAS.
>> THAT MIGHT HAVE APPEARED INCORRECTLY.
>> THANK YOU. THAT'S A MOTION, IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO SECOND THAT.
>> THE APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF THE CITY SECRETARY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO COUNCIL CONFIRMATION BY MAJORITY VOTE.
>> I KNOW IT'S BEEN FIRST AND SECOND, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M HEARING IT OUT LOUD.
A POTENTIAL HIRE, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT PUBLIC TO VOTE TO SAY YES OR NO TO HIRE THEM.
MY FEAR IS IN ALL HONESTY, IS LEGALITY BEHIND IT.
JUST SAYING THAT I'M NOT SAYING VOTE OR NOT.
I'M JUST SAYING LEGALLY IT FEELS OFF BECAUSE YOU'RE NOW LETTING ANYBODY
[01:25:05]
STAND UP HERE FOR YOUR PANEL OF SIX OR SEVEN AND SAY YES OR NO, IN PUBLIC. THAT'S ALL I GOT.>> I'M READING WITH ADVICE AND CONSENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL, DOESN'T THAT ACT IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ENGINEER HERE?
>> SHE'S INCLUDING THE PUBLIC.
>> SHE'S INCLUDING REMOVAL, BUT SHE'S ALSO.
>> ADD PUBLIC VOTE REQUIREMENT.
>> ALSO UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD CONSENT BE NON PUBLIC? WHAT MARK WAS SAYING, HOW WOULD IT AVOID THE [BACKGROUND]
>> WITH CONSENT, IT'S MORE OF A, YOU HAVE A CANDIDATE POOL, AND THE COUNCIL MAY IN CLOSED DOOR SESSION, SAY THESE FOUR ARE QUALIFIED, THESE THREE AREN'T VERSUS SETTING OUT IN FRONT OF A PUBLIC FORUM AND BASICALLY HIRING SOMEBODY IN THE PUBLIC EYE.
IF YOU NOTICE I HIRE A LOT OF PEOPLE.
>> YES. CAN I HEAR THAT LANGUAGE ONE MORE TIME?
>> THE APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF THE CITY SECRETARY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO COUNCIL CONFIRMATION BY MAJORITY VOTE.
>> I ACTUALLY THOUGHT ABOUT THIS BEFORE, JUST HEARING THAT.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY WHERE IT SAYS WITH THE ADVICE AND CONSENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL, SO JUST BASICALLY CLARIFYING AND BECAUSE I READ THE WORD CONSENT THAT COUNCIL HAS TO APPROVE IT.
BUT THE WAY THAT MARK AND GRANT WERE EXPLAINING IT, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY APPROVE IT.
THEY JUST CONSENT TO THIS ONE, THIS ONE, THIS ONE.[BACKGROUND]
>> I THINK EVERYWHERE ELSE A CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, AND MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE, IT DOESN'T SAY CONSENT, IT USES MORE AFFIRMATIVE LANGUAGE SUCH AS APPOINT.
I THINK I WASN'T A PART OF THE ORIGINAL COMMITTEE, BUT I WOULD FEEL LIKE CONSENT WAS MAYBE IN THERE FOR A REASON JUST TO GIVE DIRECTION BUT NOT NECESSARILY BE THE FINAL SAY AND TAKE A PUBLIC VOTE.
I THINK THERE'S DIFFERENT LANGUAGES FOR A PURPOSE.
LIKE I SAID, I WASN'T AROUND THE TIME, BUT THAT'S JUST HOW I WOULD INTERPRET IT.
>> THE LANGUAGE IN THE MOTION, IS IT BEING ADDED TO WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE OR IS IT REPLACING SOMETHING, OR IS IT THE ONLY THING THAT'S GOING TO BE, HOW IS IT GOING TO GO IN THERE?
>> IT WOULD BE MORE TO CLARIFY, REPLACE.
>> IT'S IN ADDITIONAL SENTENCE OR IT IS REPLACING SOMETHING?
>> IT WOULD REPLACE THE FIRST SENTENCE AND THEN THE REMAINDER OF THE DESCRIPTION WOULD REMAIN THE SAME.
>> IT'S MORE TO CLARIFY BECAUSE AGAIN, THE WAY THAT WE ALL THERE'S 12 OF US SITTING HERE RIGHT NOW AND HOW MANY OF US ARE INTERPRETING THE WORD CONSENT DIFFERENTLY.
MARK YOU ARE INTERPRETED DIFFERENTLY THAN I DID.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT WHEN WE TAKE A VOTE UPON A CONSENT AGENDA, WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT CONSENT MEANS.
THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE CAN VOTE ON IT.
>> THANK YOU. JOSE, I'M SORRY.
>> IT'S OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO ECHO MARK'S CONCERNS REGARDING THAT THE PUBLIC AND POSSIBLE LEGAL CHALLENGES THAT MAY ARISE FROM THAT.
WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO, I GUESS, MAYBE ADD SOMEWHERE ON THERE THAT, TO THE WAY YOU SAID IT, BUT ADDING THAT THEY WOULD DO THIS, FOR EXAMPLE, DURING, LIKE, EXECUTIVE SESSION, OR OUT OF THE PUBLIC EYE JUST TO AVOID THAT.
>> THEY VOTE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION? THEY CAN'T VOTE IN EXECUTIVES SESSION.
>> THEY COULD MAKE A DECISION THERE AND DISCUSS THE CANDIDATE, BUT THE VOTE ITSELF WOULD HAVE TO BE OUT HERE IN PUBLIC.
>> THERE'S NO MEETINGS OR ANYTHING THAT ARE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS WHERE COUNCIL CAN VOTE?
>> THEY CAN'T VOTE, BUT THEY COULD GIVE DIRECTION THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH EITHER CANDIDATE A OR B, CITY MANAGER GO, MAKE THE OFFERS AND [BACKGROUND]
[01:30:02]
>> THAT'S JUST A RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE OF [OVERLAPPING]
>> I THINK I'M JUST THE INTENT IS TO JUST CLARIFY THAT WORD BECAUSE IT SAYS WITH THE ADVICE AND CONSENT OF CITY COUNCIL AND TO ME, IF I'M GIVING YOU CONSENT TO DRIVE MY CAR, I APPROVED YOU TO DRIVE MY CAR.
>> YOU'RE APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER, SO I THINK THAT'S.
>> SEE THERE'S SOME CONTRADICTING VERBIAGE IN HERE.
CAROLYN, YOU HAD YOUR MIC ON AND THEN JULIE, I'LL COME BACK TO YOU.
>> I WAS JUST THINKING THAT THIS WOULD PUT US IN THE SAME PREDICAMENT THAT WE DISCUSSED WHEN HIRING THE DEPARTMENT HEADS.
THAT PUBLICLY THAT COULD BECOME A LITIGIOUS ISSUE AND ONE THAT THE CITY MAY NOT BE PREPARED TO HANDLE IF IT'S HANDLED.
BUT BY ADVICE AND CONSENT, AS GRANT WAS EXPLAINING, COUNCIL CAN IN EXECUTIVE SESSION ADVISE AND GIVES CONSENT.
BUT IF COUNCIL CAN JUST GIVE DIRECTION.
BUT IF IT'S A VOTE THAT COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO TAKE IT WOULD BE PUBLIC ANYWAY.
>> FOR THE WORD CONSENT, WHY WOULD THAT NOT BE COUNCIL VOTING, GIVING THEIR CONSENT THAT JULIE ZELLER WILL BE THE NEXT CITY MANAGER? COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION AND SAY UP AT THE DIAS, WE AGREE WITH JULIE ZELLER BEING THE NEXT CITY MANAGER.
>> I THINK THE DIFFERENCE WAS ON THAT MARK SAYING IS ONCE YOU PUT THEM OUT IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC, YOU'RE SAYING, WE'RE HIRING THIS PERSON, YES OR NO, VERSUS BEHIND THE SCENES.
HEY, JIM, JOSE, MAXINE, HERE'S MY CANDIDATE POOL, I'M THINKING ABOUT HIRING ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUALS.
GIVE ME YOUR CONSENT AND YOUR THOUGHTS AND THEN YOU WOULD GIVE ME WHAT YOU WANT, BUT AS THE CITY MANAGER, I STILL APPOINT HOW IS LISTED HERE, THE PERSON THAT I'M GOING WITH.
>> MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE BECAUSE CITIES DIFFER ON THIS.
SOME, I WOULD SAY PROBABLY MAJORITY, CITY SECRETARIES ARE APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER THAT I'M AWARE OF.
SOME THAT ARE APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL.
I THINK THE COMMITTEE, WHATEVER DIRECTION YOU THINK IS BEST FOR THE CITY, JUST MAYBE CLARIFY THAT THE ADVICE AND CONSENT OF CITY COUNCIL, I INTERPRET IT AS WE'RE GIVING FINAL AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER, BUT WE'RE EXPECTING YOU TO GET OUR DIRECTION AND INPUT BEFORE GOING AND ACTUALLY HIRING THAT INDIVIDUAL.
BUT THAT'S NOT THE ROUTE THAT THE CITY WANTS TO GO, THEN I WOULD RECOMMEND CHANGING THAT FIRST INCENTIVE, MAKE IT CLEAR.
I'VE JUST PULLED UP SALINAS, FOR INSTANCE, CITY MANAGER SHALL APPOINT, SUSPEND OR REMOVE THE CITY SECRETARY PERIOD.
THERE'S NO WITH ADVICE AND CONSENT.
IT'S FINE AS IT IS, THAT'S HOW I INTERPRET IT, BUT IF THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION THEN.
>> I'LL JUST ADVICE, I REMEMBER THE FIRST.
I ACTUALLY DON'T RECALL OUR DISCUSSION THE FIRST TIME WE DID THIS ON THIS PARTICULAR.
>> IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, IT WAS[OVERLAPPING] NO, IT WAS BOILER PLATED. JULIE.
>> MY CONCERNS HAVE BEEN MENTIONED, BUT I AGREE WITH MARK ABOUT THE LEGALITY AROUND HIRING IN PUBLIC, LIKE THIS.
THE LAWS MAY BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE THIS WAS IN CALIFORNIA, BUT AT THE CHARTER SCHOOL WHERE I WAS THE DIRECTOR, THERE WAS EMPLOYEE ACTION VOTED ON IN CLOSED SESSION.
IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT BECAUSE WE WERE THE EMPLOYER, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE.
I DON'T KNOW, BUT IT DOES CONCERN ME TO HAVE A POTENTIAL EMPLOYEE BEING VOTED ON IN PUBLIC BY COUNCIL MEMBERS AS OPPOSED TO AGREEMENT IN PRIVATE THAT IS THEN DISCLOSED IN PUBLIC.
>> ISN'T THE CITY SECRETARY SOMEONE MORE THAN JUST AN EMPLOYEE? AREN'T THEY, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, A CORPORATE OFFICER, SO TO SPEAK, OF THE CITY AND SO THEY HOLD A POSITION THAT'S VERY HIGH IN THE STRUCTURE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF OUR CITY AND SO PUBLIC INPUT ON THAT I THINK WOULD BE IMPORTANT.
>> THANK YOU, RANDALL. DAVID, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? I SAW THE MIC ON FOR YOU?
>> WE KEEP GOING AROUND AND TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THINGS, BUT ALONG WITH WHAT RANDALL JUST SAID,
[01:35:03]
OUR TASKS AND DUTIES ARE MORE DESCRIPTIVE THAN JUST A SECRETARY.SHE'S ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR PRETTY MUCH MANAGING THE ELECTIONS, TRACKING RECORDS, OUR BOOKKEEPING, THAT'S A DIFFERENT TERM.
KEEPING TRACK OF ALL DOCUMENTS AND THOSE THINGS.
LIKEWISE, WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE DIRECTOR'S CONVERSATION, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH VOTING ON HIRING SOMEBODY.
I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AROUND REMOVING SOMEBODY.
I'D SAY, I DON'T THINK THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO BE TIED IN A MIX OF THAT AN ACTIVITY PUBLICLY, SO THE INCLUSION OF REMOVAL IN THAT CONTEXT IS WHAT I PROPOSE.
>> I CAN RE-WORD IT AND REMOVE THE WORD REMOVAL AS WE DID IN THE PREVIOUS ITEMS AND JUST HAVE IT BE THE APPOINTMENT.
>> I THINK WE'VE HAD A FIRST AND A SECOND, SO I THINK WE HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH VOTE UNLESS SOMEBODY'S TAKING THE MOTION BACK?
>> AMBER, COULD YOU OPEN THE VOTING?
>> THE SECOND, SKYLER, DID YOU SECOND IT?
[BACKGROUND] WE'VE GOT EVERYBODY BECAUSE TERRANCE LEFT.
HE HAD TO LEAVE. WITH THAT MOTION DOES NOT PASS.
I WILL MOTION TO RE-WORD, TO TAKE OUT THE WORD REMOVAL AND JUST BE THE APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY SECRETARY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO COUNCIL CONFIRMATION BY MAJORITY VOTE.
ANYONE LIKE TO SECOND THAT MOTION? [BACKGROUND] SORRY, AMBER.
CUT ALL THIS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY NOW. I TOLD HER.
RANDALL, ARE YOU ABLE TO TURN YOUR MICROPHONE ON EVEN THOUGH IT STILL SAYS VOTING? [BACKGROUND] NO, WE'RE NOT VOTING YET.
>> WE HAD IT FIRST, WE HAVE AN OFFICIAL SECOND.
>> I MADE A NEW MOTION AND RE-WORDED IT.
>> BECAUSE I DIDN'T HEAR MY NAME [BACKGROUND].
>> MY MOTION WAS TO RE-WORD THE FIRST MOTION TO REMOVE THE WORD REMOVAL AND PUT IN THERE, THE APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY SECRETARY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO COUNCIL CONFIRMATION BY MAJORITY VOTE.
>> THANK YOU. SECOND BY RANDALL.
>> ONE THING FOR THE COMMITTEE TO KEEP IN MIND IS THAT UNDER THAT SCENARIO, YOU WOULD HAVE COUNSEL APPOINTING THE CITY SECRETARY, AND THEN THE REMOVAL WOULD FALL TO YOUR CITY MANAGER.
BECAUSE THE CHARTER SAYS IF IT'S SILENT, THE CITY MANAGER SHALL APPOINT, SUSPEND OR REMOVE EMPLOYEES NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR IN THE CHARTER.
THAT COULD POTENTIALLY IF YOU'RE GIVEN ONE BODY THE HIRING AUTHORITY OR
[01:40:01]
ONE INDIVIDUAL THE REMOVAL AUTHORITY SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND.>> IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT YOU JUST SAID, GRANT, IT'S STILL UP TO THE CITY MANAGER TO BRING A CANDIDATE BEFORE COUNCIL, SO THEY WOULDN'T HAVE THE APPOINTMENT AUTHORITY.
THEY WOULD JUST HAVE THE CONFIRMATION AUTHORITY.
>> I MIGHT SUGGEST CLARIFYING THAT COMMITTEE.
JUST MAYBE CLARIFYING THAT IT'S COUNCIL DOESN'T HAVE FINAL AUTHORITY, THAT THEY JUST HAVE TO AFFIRM IT IN THE OPEN.
BUT WE CAN BRING LANGUAGE BACK, IF THIS MOTION PASSES, SO EVERYONE CAN CAN LOOK AT IT AND WE CAN TWEAK IT AS NEEDED.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T GET INTO A SITUATION WHERE.
IF NOT, WE OPEN THAT UP FOR A VOTE.
WITH THAT, WE ONLY HAVE A FEW MINUTES LEFT. CAROLYN.
>> UNDER THE CITY SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE ANY DEFINITE PROCESSES OR PROCEDURES FOR SUCCESSION OR APPOINT IN AN INTERIM? IS THAT IN OUR BYLAWS OR SHOULD WE ADD IT?
>> IT'S IN THAT PARAGRAPH, IF THE CITY SECRETARY IS TEMPORARILY UNABLE TO PERFORM.
[BACKGROUND] WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE THE REMAINDER OF CHAPTER H.32025-164, CHAPTER 6 CITY SECRETARY H.42025-165, CHAPTER 7 CITY ATTORNEY AND H.52025-166, CHAPTER 8 MUNICIPAL COURT.
WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THEM TO OUR NEXT MEETING.
WE WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN H.62025-167,
[H.6 2025-167 Consider selecting the dates and times of future Committee meetings; and take appropriate action.]
CONSIDER SELECTING THE DATES AND TIMES OF FUTURE COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND APPROPRIATE ACTION.BEFORE WE START THE DISCUSSION, I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR AMBER AND POSSIBLY GRANT AS WELL.
IT SAYS ON HERE THAT THE AD HOC COMMITTEE AND THE CDC MEETINGS ARE GOING TO BE IN THE CGA TRAINING ROOM.
I THOUGHT, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE'RE NO LONGER PERMITTED TO DO THAT.
[BACKGROUND] I'M LOOKING AT SEPTEMBER 10TH AND SEPTEMBER 17TH.
>> CDC AND AD HOC WILL BE IN THIS ROOM ON WEDNESDAY THE 10TH AND THE 17TH.
>> THE TWO PUBLIC MEETING. THE CGA IS SEPARATE.
IT'S A COUNCIL, I DON'T REMEMBER IT. CORRECT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE AND CLARIFY.
WITH THAT, IF WE CONTINUE ON WEDNESDAYS LIKE WE HAVE, WE HAVE SEPTEMBER 3RD.
>> I'M GOING TO CHIME IN REAL QUICK.
CAN WE AVOID JUST BECAUSE OF THE NEW POSTING LAWS AND MONDAY BEING A HOLIDAY, WE'RE NOT GOING BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE THE THIRD.
>> THEN WE EITHER HAVE TO MOVE TO A THURSDAY, OR WAIT UNTIL THE 24TH FOR OUR NEXT MEETING OR WE COULD DO IT TUESDAY THE NINTH OR AGAIN,
[01:45:05]
WE HAVE THURSDAY THE 4TH, 11TH OR 18TH.[BACKGROUND] NEXT MEETING WOULD BE THE 11TH ON A THURSDAY.
>> IS THAT AN OFFICIAL MOTION?
>> THAT IS AN OFFICIAL MOTION.
>> I SECOND THAT MOTION, 11TH AT 6:30.
>> MOTION BY MYSELF, SECONDED BY MARK FOR THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 11TH AT 6:30 P.M. BEFORE WE LEAVE WOULD IT BE BENEFICIAL SEEING THE OCTOBER CALENDAR AND HOW FILLED IT ALREADY IS IS TO ALSO MAKE OUR NEXT MEETING.
>> WELL, OUR NEXT MEETING IF WE DID THE 11TH, TYPICALLY, IT WOULD BE THE 18TH.
BECAUSE WE WERE DOING EVERY WEEK.
THE ONLY REASON WE TOOK OFF TWO WEEKS WAS JUST FOR A LITTLE BREATHER FROM THE LAST MEETING.
>> COULD WE MOVE TO JUST TO TWO WEEKS? SINCE THERE'S NO DEADLINE TO MEET, TO HIT, I DON'T SEE THE NEED TO HAVE IT EVERY SINGLE WEEK.
>> WELL, WE ALREADY HAVE A MOTION, AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED JUST ON THE 11TH.
THE VOTING IS OPEN FOR THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 11TH AT 6:30 P.M.
MOTION PASSES FOR OUR NEXT MEETING TO BE ON THURSDAY THE 11TH AT 6:30 P.M.
WELL, RIGHT NOW FOR OCTOBER, WE CAN DO THE 24TH.
>> WHAT IS THE POSSIBILITY OF MOVING ALL OUR FUTURE MEETINGS TO THURSDAY NIGHT?
>> I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE WEDNESDAY IS CHURCH NIGHT AND I WOULD PREFER TO GO TO CHURCH ON WEDNESDAY.
>> THE SAME IS GOING TO HAPPEN FOR ME IN THE MIDDLE OF SEPTEMBER.
>> WE COULD DO THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 25TH BECAUSE THIS ROOM IS AVAILABLE.
I MOTION THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 25 AT 6:30 P.M.
IF WE KEEP WITH THURSDAY AND WE LOOK AT OCTOBER.
IF WE'RE GOING TO DO EVERY OTHER WEEK, THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE OCTOBER 9TH AND OCTOBER 23RD.
MY MOTION WOULD BE THURSDAY OCTOBER 9TH AND THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23RD AT 6:30 P.M.
ALL IN FAVOR FOR THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9TH AT 6:30 P.M. AND THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23RD.
[01:50:08]
[BACKGROUND] VOTING IS OPEN.JUST NEED ONE OTHER PERSON TO VOTE.
>> SECOND BY JOSE, AND WE ARE ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU, EVERYBODY.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.