[00:00:01] >> GOOD EVENING. THE TIME IS NOW 6:30 PM AND IT'S DECEMBER 18TH, 2025. [A. CALL TO ORDER] I HEREBY CALL TO ORDER THE AD HOC COMMITTEE. TASKED WITH REVIEWING THE COUNCIL RELATIONS POLICY RULES OF ORDER AND CODE OF ETHICS, COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO AS THE BYLAWS. WITH THAT, I'LL PROCEED WITH ROLL CALL. MR. WRIGHT, I'M HERE. MISS CAMPBELL. >> HERE. >> MR. GANGULI? >> HERE. >> MISS STANFORD. >> HERE. >> MR. WASHINGTON IS NOT HERE. MISS TODD. >> HERE. >> MISS JAMES IS NOT HERE AND THE MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS ARE HERE, AND AS SUCH, WE'LL PROCEED ACCORDINGLY. WITH THAT, WE'LL PROCEED TO ITEM C HERE, WHICH IS THE INVOCATION BY MISS CAMPBELL. >> THANK YOU. GRACIOUS GOD, AS WE GATHER TONIGHT TO SERVE OUR CITY, WE PAUSE WITH THANKFUL HEARTS IN THIS CHRISTMAS SEASON, A TIME OF LIGHT, HOPE, AND GOODWILL. WE ASK FOR WISDOM, PATIENCE, AND UNITY, AS WE MAKE DECISIONS THAT AFFECT OUR COMMUNITY, AND THAT WE MAY BE GUIDED BY COMPASSION, INTEGRITY, AND A SPIRIT OF PEACE. MAY THE JOY OF THE HOLIDAY SEASON REMIND US TO CARE FOR ONE ANOTHER, TO SEEK UNDERSTANDING, AND TO WORK TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD OF ALL. WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE, AND WE ASK FOR YOUR BLESSING ON THIS MEETING AND ON OUR CITY. AMEN. PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE. SORRY. >> FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM F HERE, WHICH IS PUBLIC APPEARANCE. I DON'T BELIEVE WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE HERE TODAY FOR PUBLIC APPEARANCE. WITH THAT, WE'LL PROCEED TO ITEM G, [G. CONSENT AGENDA] WHICH IS THE 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 A COMMITTEE MEMBER HERE TODAY, SO REQUEST IN WHICH EVENT THE ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED IN ITS NORMAL SEQUENCE ON THE AGENDA. FOR CONSENT AGENDA, WE HAVE G1 2025-049, WHICH IS CONSIDERED APPROVING THE FOLLOWING AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. THOSE MINUTES ARE FROM OUR NOVEMBER 5TH, 2025 AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER G1 2025-049. >> I'LL SECOND. >> WE'LL PROCEED TO TAKE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES 5-0. WITH THAT, WE'LL PROCEED TO ITEM 8, [H.1 2025-050 Review and consider all proposed amendments to Articles 1 – 9 of the Council Relations Policy, Rules of Order, and Code of Ethics (Bylaws), as previously discussed, recommended, and approved by the Committee; and take appropriate action. ] WHICH IS OUR REGULAR AGENDA HERE, STARTING WITH H12025050, WHICH IS TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER ALL PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLES 1-9 OF THE COUNCIL RELATIONS POLICY, RULES OF ORDER AND CODE OF ETHICS BY LAWS AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED, RECOMMENDED AND APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTIONS. WE HAVE IT HERE, IF WE WANT TO REVIEW THROUGH I THINK HERE. WE REVIEWED MOST OF THIS, SO IT'S MOSTLY THE CHANGES IN SECTION 9 THAT WE HAD TO REVIEW THERE AND MAKE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, ETC. >> I THINK THE BULK OF THE CHANGES ARE GOING TO BE, AS CHAIRMAN REFERENCED IN SECTION 9.4 ON THE COMPLAINT PROCESS. THERE ARE A COUPLE OTHER AREAS. EVERYTHING THAT'S DEPICTED IN BLUE TEXT IS NEW THAT HASN'T BEEN, I GUESS, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. WE CAN ROLL THROUGH OR SKIP AROUND, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO PROCEED. >> I KNOW THIS IS JUMPING AHEAD, BUT TO 4.12, WHEN IT'S TALKING ABOUT C, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS MUST ONLY USE CITY ISSUED EMAIL ADDRESSES, WE NEED TO PUT COUNCIL MEMBERS AND BOARD MEMBERS BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS OVER THE SUMMER, WE HAD MADE THE DECISION THAT ALL BOARD MEMBERS ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE CITY ISSUED EMAIL ADDRESSES. SHOULD A PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST BE MADE ABOUT A BOARD MEMBER, IT'S NOT THEIR PERSONAL ACCOUNTS BEING USED. IT'S A CITY ISSUED EMAIL ADDRESS. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD JUST AMEND THAT LITTLE SPOT THERE TO MENTION THAT. [00:05:08] 4.12 USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES C, MUST ONLY USE CITY ISSUED EMAIL ADDRESSES. >> I AGREE WITH YOU 100%. I WILL SAY IF YOU FLIPPED 8.4, OF COURSE, THERE'S NOT PAGE NUMBERS, BUT IT'S SECTION 8.4, COUNCIL MEMBER IS SYNONYMOUS TO MEMBER. ALL THOSE TERMS MEAN A MEMBER OF THE GOVERNING BODY. SO EVEN DOESN'T SAY. >> I GET THAT. BUT FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WITH PIR STUFF, I THINK WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IT IS ABSOLUTELY CRYSTAL CLEAR. NO ONE CAN COME BACK AND BE LIKE, YOU KNOW WHAT? I MISSED THAT DEFINITION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I WANT IT TO BE CLEAR THAT WE'RE ALL GETTING THIS AND CLEAR THAT THEY'RE ALL BEING ISSUED THEIR EMAIL ADDRESSES TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INFORMATION AND PROTECT THEIR PRIVATE RIGHTS TO THEIR EMAILS. I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR THE THOUGHTS OF EVERYONE ELSE. >> I THINK. [OVERLAPPING] >> GO AHEAD. >> GO AHEAD. >> IT WOULDN'T HURT TO REITERATE AND LIKE YOU SAID, MAKE THAT CRYSTAL CLEAR IN THIS CASE, TO ADD THAT. >> WE CAN ADD IT, THE REFERENCE TO SECTION 8.4, WHICH I THINK, YOU DID A GREAT JOB THERE CLARIFYING THAT. SOMETHING ALONG THAT LINE. IT'S NOT A SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE, BUT MORE SO LIKE, COUNCIL MEMBER ARE MEMBER, BECAUSE MEMBERS DEFINED TO HAVE THE SIMILAR MEANING THERE. I THINK IT'S HELPFUL FOR CLARITY. >> I DID, OF COURSE, IT'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF TIME SINCE OUR LAST MEETING. I ADDED IN SECTION 1.1, A NEW PARAGRAPH. BECAUSE 8.4, IT'S COUNCIL MEMBER TODD'S POINT, IT'S BURIED TOWARDS THE END, SO YOU WOULDN'T REALIZE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER MEMBER ALL THAT SYNONYMOUS UNTIL YOU GET TOWARDS THE END OF THE BY LAWS, BUT I ADDED THAT SECOND PARAGRAPH AND 1.1, JUST SO RIGHT FROM THE GET GO YOU REALIZE THAT WHEN YOU READ THROUGHOUT THE CONTEXT. I DID ADD THAT. WE DISCUSSED THAT. I KNOW IT'S BEEN EVERYONE SLEPT A COUPLE OF TIMES SINCE THE LAST MEETING, BUT IT'S UP TO THE COMMITTEE. I'M HAPPY TO ADD COUNCIL MEMBERS OR MEMBERS THROUGHOUT. BUT THERE'S A LOT OF INSTANCES WHERE WE WOULD MAYBE [OVERLAPPING]. >> I THINK WITH THAT, WE DON'T NEED TO CHANGE ANYTHING. THAT'S VERY CLEAR THAT IT'S SET FOR. I THINK THAT'S VERY CLEAR. FROM THE GET GO INSTEAD OF GOING BACK. I COULD UNDERSTAND IF WE DIDN'T HAVE IT, THEN WE WOULD NEED IT TO BE VERY CLEAR, BUT HERE IN 1.1, THAT'S CLEAR TO ME. BUT THAT'S A GREAT CALL OUT TO ENSURE CLARITY. >> CAN I ASK FOR CLARITY FROM YOU GRANT ON, I KNOW, I'M JUMPING AROUND. ON 5.3, ACTUALLY, NEVER MIND. THAT'S NOT WHAT I THOUGHT IT WAS. I ANSWERED MY OWN QUESTION. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR 9.4, WHERE I THINK IT'S 9.4 C. I THINK WE INCLUDE AN APPEALS PROCESS. I'M NOT SURE IF WE NEED THAT BECAUSE THEN IT WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL OBLIGATION FOR THE REVIEW BOARD TO CONSIDER APPEALS. BUT TO MORE SO SAY, IF YOU DID NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT INFORMATION IN YOUR COMPLAINT, IT WOULD BE REJECTED. HOWEVER, THEY COULD SUBMIT IT AGAIN WITH NEW INFORMATION, AND THEN IT STARTS OVER THE PROCESS INSTEAD OF HAVING AN APPEAL. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT MAKES MORE SENSE. [00:10:01] BUT WHICH THEN INCLUDING NEW INFORMATION, IT AVOIDS HAVING SOMEONE SUBMITTING THE SAME COMPLAINT OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I THINK THAT WOULD BE BETTER INSTEAD OF HAVING THE REVIEW COMMITTEE HAVING TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL. BECAUSE THE THING IS, YOU COULD SAY, WELL, I THINK, MY COMPLAINT HAS ENOUGH INFORMATION, SO I'M GOING TO APPEAL, AND THEN IT'S GOING TO BE A WASTE OF TIME FOR THEM TO CONSIDER SOMETHING THAT YOU DIDN'T SUPPLEMENT. >> I'M HAPPY TO ADJUST. HOWEVER, I KNOW WE'VE DISCUSSED IN PARTICULAR 9.4 THE MOST IS PROBABLY THE MOST SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE OVERALL TO THE BYLAWS, JUST THE WHOLE COMPLAINT PROCESS, COMPLETELY CHANGING. OF COURSE, AS LONG AS I'M REVIEWING, I WOULD ALWAYS ERR ON THE SIDE OF LETTING THE COMPLAINT MOVE FORWARD AND NOT KILLING THE COMPLAINT, THE INITIAL REVIEW. AS LONG AS THEY PROVIDE SOME DOCUMENTATION, I WOULD ALWAYS ERR ON ON THAT SIDE. BUT I THINK THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW IS THAT IF ON FIRST SUBMISSION, THE CITY ATTORNEY RECEIVES A VAGUE COMPLAINT, THEY CAN REQUEST CLARIFICATION. IT'S ALMOST LIKE THEY GET ANOTHER BITE AT THE APPLE. YOU SUBMIT IT AND IF THE CITY ATTORNEY REVIEWS AND THEY'RE LIKE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH, THEY NOTIFY AND THEN THEY HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME TO ADDRESS THE COMMENT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY, PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION. THEN AFTER THAT, IF IT'S STILL NOT ENOUGH, IT'S DENIED, THEN IT WOULD GO THEY COULD APPEAL TO THE ETHICS COMMITTEE. OBVIOUSLY, YOU ALL THE COMMITTEE NOT ME, SO I'M HAPPY TO MAKE WHATEVER CHANGES ALL WANT. I KNOW WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS. MAYBE ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE DON'T KNOW UNTIL AFTER YOU HAVE THE FIRST COUPLE OF COMPLAINTS, THIS IS IN EFFECT FOR A WHILE, WHETHER IT'S EFFECTIVE. >> IT'S JUST A I MEAN OTHERS COULD THINK. I JUST THINK HAVING AN APPEALS PROCESS, IT'S LIKE, HEY, IT'S A COMPLAINT. IF YOU'RE GIVING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY AT FIRST TO SUPPLEMENT IT WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND YOU REFUSE TO PROVIDE THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SO THEN YOU DENY IT. I'M NOT SURE IF IT MAKES SENSE TO SAY, "HEY, WE NEED TO HAVE THE REVIEW COMMITTEE DETERMINE AN APPEAL." WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IS RESUBMIT A PROPER COMPLAINT WITH THE INFORMATION WE REQUESTED INSTEAD OF GETTING THEM COMING IN TO REVIEW SOMETHING. THAT'S JUST MY TOUGH PROCESS THERE. WE COULD KEEP IT AND THEN AT A LATER DATE, IF IT'S NOT EFFECTIVE, THEN WHOEVER REVIEWING THIS COULD CHANGE IT. I JUST THINK IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO SUPPLEMENT THEIR COMPLAINT. >> I DID PUT IN THERE, AND WE CAN CHANGE THIS AS WELL, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO APPEAL WITHIN THREE BUSINESS DAYS. IT'S NOT LIKE THE APPEAL LINGERS ON FOREVER. IF THE CITY ATTORNEY SAYS, HAVE TO HAVE A CHANCE TO SUPPLEMENT, COME BACK AND SAY, STILL NOT ENOUGH. THEY WOULD HAVE TO APPEAL WITHIN THREE BUSINESS DAYS. I KNOW WE HAD QUITE A BIT. THE COMMITTEE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THIS AT THE LAST MEETING. THIS WAS ONCE AGAIN JUST A STAB AT IT, BUT WE CAN [OVERLAPPING]. >> WE CAN KEEP IT. IT'S NOT NOTHING THAT'S LIKE A ERROR. [NOISE] I CAN LIVE WITH IT. THEN LATER ON, IF WE'RE HAVING A LARGE AMOUNT OF APPEALS, THEN WE MAY REVISIT THAT TO SAY, "HEY, THIS IS WHAT YOU NEED TO DO," BUT I CAN LIVE WITH IT. THE GOAL HERE TODAY IS TO [LAUGHTER] PROVIDE THIS RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL. >> ONE MORE SECTION. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT 9.4 AND WE CAN REVISIT AND GO BACK TO IT. BUT ANOTHER AREA I WANTED TO POINT OUT WHERE THERE WAS A CHANGE WAS SECTION 1.8 B AS IS BOY. PREVIOUSLY, THE COUNCIL LIAISON WAS EXPECTED TO PROVIDE A REPORT TO THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL THE CITY MANAGER. I SCRATCHED THAT LANGUAGE OUT AS WE DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING. THAT WAS ONE OF THE MATERIAL CHANGES FROM THE LAST MEETING. >> I WAS WONDERING IF ON 6.1, THE STAFF PRESENTATIONS, IF WE CAN ADD A SECOND SENTENCE INDICATING THAT THOSE PRESENTATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE SHARED TO THE PUBLIC. THERE'S BEEN MULTIPLE OCCASIONS WHERE THOSE PRESENTATIONS AREN'T GIVEN TO AMBER, SO SHE CAN'T REALLY ATTACH THEM TO THE AGENDA. THEN WE COME TO A COUNCIL MEETING AND NOW THERE'S A PRESENTATION BEING PULLED UP THAT WAS NOT ATTACHED WHEN AMBER WAS ABLE TO SEND OUT THE AGENDA. [00:15:01] I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S UNDERSTOOD THAT IF THEY DO THAT, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET THAT OVER TO HER, SO SHE CAN ADD IT. I JUST DON'T LIKE THE LOOK OF THAT, BECAUSE SHE'S PUTTING ALL THE WORK INTO GETTING THAT AGENDA OUT THERE. THEN SUDDENLY IF SHE DOESN'T HAVE ALL THE PIECES. NOW WE LOOK DISORGANIZED WHEN WE'RE UP THERE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT ALL GETS TO HER. >> SURE. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD ADD, I WILL SAY, IT'S NOT AMBER. THERE ARE SOMETIMES THAT WE DON'T HAVE PRESENTATIONS BECAUSE WE'RE WAITING ON I'LL GIVE THE EXAMPLE OF PUT BOND. WE'RE WAITING ON THE SALE, USUALLY IS THAT MORNING OF A COUNCIL MEETING SO WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE NUMBERS. THAT'S WHY SOME OF THOSE ARE A LITTLE BIT LATE, BUT THERE ARE OTHER INSTANCES WHERE WE DON'T GET IN TIME, BUT I THINK THAT'S A GOOD AD TO ADD TO THAT 6.1. >> ALSO, IT'S BEEN A WHILE, SO I CAN'T REALLY REMEMBER IF WE ADJUSTED IT. WHEN PEOPLE COME FOR THE PUBLIC APPEARANCE AND THEY FILL OUT THAT FORM, WE'RE REQUIRING THEM TO GIVE THEIR ADDRESS AT THE PODIUM. I KNOW SOME OF THE BOARDS DON'T ACTUALLY FOLLOW THROUGH IN MAKING THAT HAPPEN, BUT I'M NOT REALLY COMFORTABLE ASKING OUR RESIDENTS TO JUST PUT OUT THERE THEIR ADDRESS. >> I THOUGHT WE SCRATCH THAT. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IS [OVERLAPPING]. >> THIS VERSION DOES MARK THAT REQUIREMENT OFF. I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH SECTION, BUT I KNOW IT IS [OVERLAPPING] >> I KNOW IT'S ONE OUR EARLY COMMENTS. I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT BECAUSE A RESIDENT HAD MADE A COMMENT ABOUT IT AGAIN, HAVING TO SAY THEIR ADDRESS UP HERE AND I JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK. >> WE REMOVED THAT SECTION AND AS WELL AS THE TIMING AS WELL. >> HAVE WE IDENTIFIED A PROGRAM OR PLAN, WHETHER IT'S LIKE A GOOGLE FORM OR SOMETHING FOR EITHER IT'S THE ABILITY TO PRE FILL OUT THE APPEARANCE CARD OR TO SUBMIT THEIR OPINIONS AND STUFF LIKE THAT IF THEY CAN'T BE PRESENT, SO THAT OUR SECRETARY'S INBOX ISN'T GETTING OVERWHELMINGLY FULL IN ADDITION TO EVERYTHING ELSE NOT JUST BUT ONE WHERE IT'S LIKE A DIGITAL FORM AND ORGANIZE IT FOR YOU OR IS IT ONE YOU HAVE TO PRINT OFF. BUT IT GOES BACK TO YOUR EMAIL. HOW ON A GOOGLE FORM, SOMEONE FILLS IT OUT, IT DOESN'T FILL YOUR INBOX. YOU JUST GO TO THE FORM, AND HERE'S THE INFORMATION. MY CONCERN IS AN OVERWHELMING SWARM TO YOUR INBOX, AND THEN YOU MISS SOMETHING CRITICAL INFORMATION THAT ALSO HAS TO GET OUT. I WANT TO KNOW IF WE'VE PUT ANYTHING IN PLACE, OR ARE WE LOOKING AT A WAY TO MITIGATE SWARMING YOUR INBOX OR IF WE SHOULD CONSIDER CREATING A SECONDARY CITY EMAIL SPECIFICALLY FOR THOSE THINGS TO GO TO, SO THAT YOUR INBOX CAN HAVE A SEPARATION OF THAT. OBVIOUSLY, YOU'RE THE ONE WHO DOES IT ALL THE TIME. I WOULD LOVE YOUR FEEDBACK ON IT. I JUST KNOW HOW MY INBOX CAN GET, AND I KNOW THAT'S NOTHING COMPARED TO WHAT YOU'RE PROBABLY GETTING. >> FOR THE SECTION WE MENTIONED WITH THE ADDRESS, IT'S 6.2B, SO WE SCRATCH THAT. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, SO YOU BEAT ME TO IT. THANK YOU. >> WE ALSO PROVIDED THEM FIVE MINUTES 6.3A, SO THAT'S GREAT CHANGES. DON'T HAVE TO SAY YOUR ADDRESS, AND WE'LL GIVE YOU MORE TIME. >> ANOTHER AREA WHERE THERE WAS A MATERIAL CHANGE WOULD BE 4.10D. JUST CLARIFYING THAT YOU'LL SEE THE LANGUAGE IN GREEN WHERE IF SOMEONE ABSTAINS FOR A NON-LEGAL CONFLICT, THAT IT'S CONSIDERED A NO VOTE, [00:20:01] BUT ALSO JUST CLARIFYING THAT THAT PERSON IS COUNTED PRESENT FOR QUORUM PURPOSES. COMPARED TO FOR A LEGAL CONFLICT, IT'S NOTHING VOTE, BUT ALSO YOU'RE NOT COUNTING PRESENT FOR QUORUM PURPOSES, SO JUST CLARIFYING THAT, YOU'LL SEE THE BLUE LANGUAGE THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING. >> JUST A QUESTION. YOU'RE SAYING THAT AT A MEETING, WE HIT THE BARE MINIMUM, WE BARELY HAVE A QUORUM, SOMEBODY HAS TO ABSTAIN FOR A LEGAL MATTER, WE CAN'T VOTE BECAUSE, I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM. >> IT HASN'T HAPPENED HERE, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, BUT IT'S INEVITABLE, IT WILL HAPPEN AT SOME POINT. MOVE ALONG TO I GOT TAB THE AREAS WHERE I MADE SOME CHANGES, 8.4. WE WERE THERE PREVIOUSLY, BUT YOU'LL NOTICE THAT AT THE BOTTOM ADDED, MAYOR PRO TEM IS SYNONYMOUS WITH VICE CHAIRPERSON. WE DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING, SIMILAR TO HOW MAYOR IS SYNONYMOUS WITH CHAIR JUST TO CLARIFY THROUGHOUT HERE. THERE ARE INSTANCES WHERE THE MAYOR PRO TEM IS MENTIONED, BUT NOT NECESSARILY THE VICE CHAIR. >> I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THIS OUTSIDE OF THIS DOCUMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO PUT IT IN, BUT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THE DEPUTY. SHOULD THE DEPUTY BE INCLUDED IN OUR BYLAWS, OR IS IT JUST THAT THE MAYOR HAS THAT ABILITY TO NAME THE DEPUTY MAYOR AND ASSIGN THEM SPECIFIC POWERS IN THAT AREA? IT WOULD GO MAYOR PRO TEM DEPUTY. >> I THINK IF THAT POSITION IS CREATED, BY COUNCIL CREATED VIA ORDINANCE, AND THEN WE WOULD UPDATE THIS ONCE THAT'S DONE, AND THEN EXPAND UPON IT IF NEEDED. >> WOULD WE HAVE TO MAKE AN ORDINANCE WHEN WE ALREADY HAVE IN HERE THAT THE MAYOR CAN ASSIGN POWERS AT THEIR CHOICE, THEY CAN GIVE POWERS TO SOMEONE ON THE COUNCIL? I DON'T THINK IT NECESSARILY REQUIRES AN ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT'S HIS RIGHT TO DO IT. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF, SHOULD WE ADD IN HERE THAT OUTLINE BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT THE DIFFERENT ROLES, BUT EXPLAINING THAT SHOULD HE NAME A DEPUTY MAYOR, THEIR POSITION IS NUMBER 3, AND THE PRO TEM ISN'T AS ACTIVE, THEY STEP IN WHEN NEEDED, WHEREAS THE DEPUTY IS ASSIGNED TASKS AND RESPONSIBILITIES THAT THEY OVERSEE ON BEHALF OF THE MAYOR. SHOULD THAT GO IN HERE OR DO WE WAIT AND DO AN AMENDMENT WHEN THE MAYOR NAMES A DEPUTY? >> I THINK THE LATTER, OBVIOUSLY. ONCE THAT POSITION IS CREATED, THERE MAY BE SOME AREAS WHERE WE WANT TO ASSIGN SOME ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES THROUGHOUT THE BYLAWS TO THE DEPUTY MAYOR. BUT I FEEL LIKE THERE'S MAYBE FURTHER CONVERSATIONS BEFORE WE. I THINK AT SOME POINT, IF THAT POSITION IS CREATED, IT'LL BE BAKED INTO HERE, BUT I FEEL LIKE THOSE CONVERSATIONS NEED TO HAPPEN FIRST. >> IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, IN SECTION 8.4 HERE, WHERE STATES AND SIMILAR, SHOULDN'T THAT COVER POTENTIALLY IF THAT PERSON WILL ACT AS A CHAIR? I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S A CATCH-ALL THAT WOULD COVER THAT. BUT TO GRANT'S POINT, IF THE ROLE IS NOT CREATED YET, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO ANTICIPATE IT UNTIL IT'S CREATED, THEN WE COULD MAKE THAT CHANGE. BUT IN THAT CASE, I THINK SIMILAR IS LIKE A CATCH-ALL. DID I MISS SOMETHING? >> WELL, I GUESS WE'LL BE SCHEDULING ANOTHER MEETING AT THE END OF THIS MEETING MOST LIKELY. [LAUGHTER] >> WE COULD REVIEW THIS AGAIN. >> SAFELY ARE GOOD WITH ALL OF THIS BUT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DISCUSSED. FOR EXAMPLE, IT'S NOT A HOME RULE THING; IT WOULD BE AN US THING. WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE ANYTHING IN PLACE FOR SELECTING A CITY MANAGER. IT JUST GETS CREATED, AND I THINK WE NEED A SKELETON THING FOR IT. IS IT POSSIBLE TO ACCEPT THESE BUT KEEP OUR COMMITTEE, AND OUR COMMITTEE MEETS AGAIN TO FOCUS ONLY ON THESE NEW ASPECTS THAT WE WOULD BE ADDING TO THIS? THIS IS THE AMENDED PART, WE'VE ACCEPTED THE AMENDED PART, [00:25:01] NOW WE DISCUSS THESE NEW ELEMENTS THAT NEED TO BE ADDED. THAT WAY, WE CAN GET THE BALL ROLLING WITH THESE THINGS, ESPECIALLY SECTION 9.1. THIS IS A LOT. I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR EVERYONE'S THOUGHTS ON THAT. IF WE ARE ON BOARD WITH ALL OF THIS GOING FORWARD, WOULD YOU ALL STILL BE WILLING TO CONTINUE MEETING TO ADD THESE OTHER ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT ARE MISSING COMPLETELY FROM OUR DOCUMENT? >> I WOULD BE WILLING TO STAY FOR A FUTURE COMMITTEE MEETING SOMETIME. >> I'D BE WILLING TO STAY AS WELL BECAUSE THE PROCESS OF FINDING PEOPLE, VETTING THEM, AND GETTING THIS ALL ESTABLISHED WAS A TIMELY PROCESS. [LAUGHTER] >> IT'S CERTAINLY A BENEFIT THAT YOU GUYS ARE FAMILIAR WITH THIS. WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH THIS FOR FIVE OR SIX MONTHS, SO IT HELPS THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE. BUT YES, TO YOUR POINT, IF WE SENT THIS TO COUNCIL, IF YOU GUYS SENT THIS TO COUNCIL TO LOOK OVER, IT CAN BE AMENDED AS OFTEN AS IT'S NEEDED. IF A SITUATION ARISES, LIKE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW, COUNCIL COULD ADOPT IT, BUT THEN STILL MAKE A CHARGE OF THE COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT CERTAIN AREAS TO TAKE A MONTH OR TWO OR THREE. YOU CAN AMEND THIS AS FREQUENTLY AS POSSIBLE. THAT'S THE GOOD THING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS AND THE CHARTER. >> MY NEXT QUESTION THEN IS, THIS DOCUMENT REQUIRES US TO MEET EVERY TWO YEARS, LIKE ASSEMBLE THE BOARD. SHOULD WE THEN PUT IN A TERM THING THAT DURING THAT TWO YEAR PERIOD, IN THE EVENT THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE REVISED, THESE ARE THE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE CALLED FORWARD, AND SHOULD SOMEONE DECLINE FROM COMING OR HAVE RESIGNED OR STEPPED DOWN, AT THAT POINT, COUNCIL WOULD APPOINT A NEW PERSON TO REPLACE THEM TO ENSURE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO DESIGNED THE DOCUMENT ARE STILL WORKING THROUGH IT, AND WE'RE NOT, AS GINA SAID, RESTARTING, ANYTIME SOMETHING NEEDS TO HAPPEN? THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT IT WENT THROUGH. >> I PROBABLY WOULDN'T LIST INDIVIDUALS IN THE BYLAWS HIMSELF. [OVERLAPPING] >> I JUST MEANT A TERM. SETTING THE TERM OF THIS IS THE BOARD, WE'D BE ON THE TERM FOR TWO YEARS. ANYTIME WITHIN THE TWO YEARS, SHOULD SOMETHING NEED TO BE CHANGED, WE WOULD BE THE ONES CALLED. THEN THE NEXT TERM OF APPOINTMENTS WOULD HAPPEN, AND THOSE WOULD BE THE INDIVIDUALS FOR TWO YEARS. IF SOMEBODY DROPS OUT, COUNCIL WOULD APPOINT A NEW MEMBER TO THE BOARD, SIMILAR TO THE OTHER BOARDS. >> IT IS. I'LL SAY RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO TERM LIMIT FOR THE COMMITTEE. IN THE INSTANCE THAT THE BYLAWS NEED TO BE AMENDED, COUNCIL WOULD REACH OUT TO THE CURRENT COMMITTEE AND SAY, ARE YOU INTERESTED IN SERVING STILL? IF NOT, APPOINT PEOPLE TO FILL THAT POSITION. BUT ABSENT A TERM LIMIT, I WOULD SAY IT'S FOREVER ON THE COMMITTEE UNTIL YOU DON'T WANT TO BE ON THE COMMITTEE. >> WELL, BUT THEN THAT'S WHEN PEOPLE FORGET THEY'RE EVEN A PART OF IT, I GUESS. >> I GUESS FREQUENT EMAILS. WE COULD BE THE REVOLVING, I GUESS, LIKE A REVOLVING LINE OF CREDIT. [LAUGHTER] >> I GUESS THAT GOES ON TO THE AMBER ON THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS LIST FOR COUNCIL TO PUT IN A DISCUSSION FOR, AD HOC, AND THE HOME RULE COMMITTEE THAT THE MEMBERS OF THOSE BOARDS HAVE THEIR TERM FOR THE WHOLE DURATION OF THE TWO YEARS, SHOULD SOMETHING HAPPEN YADA YADA YADA. AS GINA JUST MENTIONED, THE ETHICS COMMITTEE, WE NEED TO HAVE THAT ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA TO DISCUSS ITS ESTABLISHMENT SINCE WE ARE PROPOSING HERE WITH THIS. >> THOSE ARE GREAT POINTS. I THINK WE NEED TO BRING THAT TO THE COUNCIL'S ATTENTION, AND THEN THEY CAN PLACE IT ON THE AGENDA AND THEN IT CAN HAPPEN. >> THAT'S WHAT OUR FUTURE AGENDA LIST IS AMBERS GOT THIS GREAT LIST GOING, AND SHE PUTS IT ON THERE AND BRINGS THEM UP TO US. >> ANY OTHER CHANGES TO SECTION 9 OR OUR RECOMMENDATION, I THINK IT LOOKS GOOD, AND KEEP IN MIND, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL, SO THEY COULD POTENTIALLY PUSH IT BACK DOWN AND POTENTIALLY ADD ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE MUST CONSIDER. KEEP THAT IN MIND AS WELL. [00:30:13] >> UNLESS AMBER, DID WE GET QUORUM OR DID WE NOT GET QUORUM? NO QUORUM FOR YES. NO QUORUM? >> ANY ADDITIONAL CHANGES, IF NOT, I WILL PROCEED WITH A MOTION AS IT RELATES TO THIS HERE. >> OTHER THING, DO WE HAVE A LIST OF THE THINGS THAT HOME RULE CHARTER STATED IN THEIR MEETINGS WOULD BE ITEMS THAT SHOULD BE KICKED OVER TO US? BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD STUFF TO SEND OVER TO THEM, THEY'VE HAD STUFF TO SEND TO US, AND AT THE BEGINNING, WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING A JOINT MEETING TO TALK, BUT WE NEVER DID. AGAIN, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE FORWARD, WHICH IS GREAT. I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF WE HAD A MASTER LIST OF THOSE ITEMS. >> NO, I HAVEN'T CREATED A MASTER LIST. I WILL SAY MOST OF THE THINGS THAT THE HRC HAS BROUGHT UP, YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY ADDRESSED OR IN THE PROCESS OF ADDRESSING. I THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF, OF COURSE, THERE'S THEY CAN'T AMEND UNLESS THE VOTERS APPROVE IT. THEY PROPOSED SOME THINGS THAT MAY REQUIRE AMENDMENTS TO THE BYLAWS BECAUSE THIS CAN'T BE INCONSISTENT WITH HRC, BUT THAT'S TO BE DETERMINED. WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE AMENDMENTS AND THEN ADJUST AS NEEDED BUT THERE HAS BEEN SOME DISCUSSION. I DON'T HAVE A RUNNING LIST, BUT LIKE I SAID, MOST OF THE THINGS THAT HRC BROUGHT UP, YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN PROACTIVE AND ALREADY ADDRESSED IN HERE. >> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IF WE PASS THE MOTION TONIGHT, THIS GOES TO COUNCIL AND THAT WILL BE MADE AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT, AND THEN GOING FORWARD, WE CAN HAVE A FUTURE COMMITTEE MEETING AS NEEDED TO MAYBE MEET WITH HRC OR MAKE ANY OTHER FUTURE CHANGES. >> WELL, I WOULD ASK THAT WE MEET AND SCHEDULE SOMETHING BECAUSE WE HAVE AN INTERIM CITY MANAGER. WE'RE GOING TO BE STARTING THE PROCESS TO HIRE A CITY MANAGER. WE NEED TO MEET AND DISCUSS WHAT BASIC OUTLINE WE WANT TO PUT IN PLACE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE CITY MANAGER, BECAUSE THERE REALLY ISN'T ONE. IT'S JUST A WILDCARD. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO GET SOLID INSIGHT ON IT BECAUSE, PERSONALLY, I'LL JUST THROW IT OUT THERE. I THINK ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO INTERVIEW THE CANDIDATES SO THEY CAN GET AN IDEA OF STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES, AND DO WE HAVE THE STRENGTH TO SUPPORT AN AREA THAT SOMEONE MAY NOT BE STRONG IN BECAUSE IF WE CAN'T SUPPORT THAT AND THEIR GROWTH IN IT, THEN WE'RE JUST SETTING THEM UP TO FAIL. IT'S UNDERSTANDING THEM AND THEIR MATCH WITHIN THE CITY. >> [OVERLAPPING] WOULD THAT FIT IN HERE THOUGH? IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO CREATE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO A SEARCH COMMITTEE POLICY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THIS, BUT LIKE A SEPARATE DOCUMENT THAT'S CLEAR AND NOT JUST FOR THE CITY MANAGER, BUT FOR DIFFERENT OFFICIALS, WHETHER IT'S AN ASSISTANT, ANYBODY THAT'S BEING APPOINTED OR HIRED BY THE COUNCIL. I'M NOT SURE IF WE NEED TO PUT IT IN HERE. >> I THINK IT WOULD START WITH US, AND IF IT ENDED UP BEING A SECONDARY DOCUMENT TO THIS, IT COULD BE. BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT IT'S THIS BODY WHO SHOULD BE THE ONES DISCUSSING THAT. >> WE COULD DISCUSS IT. I'M NOT SURE IF WE NEED TO MERGE IT IN THIS. WE COULD DISCUSS IT AND CREATE A [OVERLAPPING] SECOND DOCUMENT. >> MY ONE REQUEST IS, CAN WE ADD PAGE NUMBERS AND AN INDEX TO THE VERY BEGINNING SO WE CAN QUICK SEARCH IT? >> I WILL CLEAN THIS UP SUBSTANTIALLY. I JUST MAINLY WANTED YOU GUYS TO SEE ALL THE CHANGES, PAGE NUMBERS, AND THEN THERE'S AN INDEX, I THINK, IN THE CURRENT VERSION. I'LL MAKE SURE THERE'S AN INDEX WHEN IT'S ADOPTED. [00:35:08] >> DO WE NEED TO LIST OUT THE INDIVIDUAL THINGS THAT WE NOTED, OR IS THE MOTION WITH THE STATEMENT OF WITH THE DISCUSSED AMENDMENTS APPLICABLE? >> AS A WHOLE, THE ONE I HAVE NOTED WAS 6.1 ON THE STAFF PRESENTATIONS. >> THEN 4.12 C WITH THE EMAIL ADDRESSES, ENSURING THAT THEY ARE WE GOING TO ADD THAT? BECAUSE AGAIN, I DON'T THINK WE'RE ACTUALLY GIVING WE HAVE SOMEONE. DO YOU HAVE AN EMAIL ADDRESS FOR PLANNING AND ZONING? >> NO. I DON'T. >> THAT'S WHY I'M THINKING SOMETHING TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE. BECAUSE I TRIED SENDING AN EMAIL TO SOME OF THE NEWER PEOPLE AND I CAN'T FIND THEIR EXISTENCE IN LIFE. ALSO, NOT GOING TO LIE, PART OF THE REASON WHY I WOULD LIKE IT ADDED THERE IS I DO INTEND TO PUSH FOR ELECTRONIC DEVICES FOR SOME OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS. THERE ARE NO COMPUTERS UP THERE ANYMORE. IF A BOARD MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW THINGS, FOR EXAMPLE, PLANNING AND ZONING, WHO SHOULD BE REVIEWING THINGS SENT TO THEM, LIKE MAPS AND SUCH. THEY SHOULD HAVE QUESTIONS THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR INFORMATION FOR AND THEY'RE GETTING, WHICH WOULD BE IN THEIR CAPACITY AS A ZONING. THE ONLY WAY TO GIVE IT TO THEM IS THROUGH THE EMAIL, BUT THEN THE ONLY WAY FOR THEM TO VIEW IT IS ON A PERSONAL DEVICE, WHICH THEN AGAIN OPENS THEM TO PUBLIC INFORMATION. CAN YOU IMAGINE A BUSINESS OWNER USES THEIR CELL PHONE TO LOOK AT THE MAPS AND SOME RESIDENT DECIDES TO PIR IT. NOW THEY CAN'T DO WORK. THEY CAN'T MAKE CALLS BECAUSE THEIR PHONE GETS TAKEN BY THE CITY FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST. IT'S NOT A SITUATION I WOULD LIKE US TO BE IN. THAT'S ALSO PART OF THAT ITEM. IT'S NOT IT DOESN'T JUST MENTION EMAIL ADDRESSES. IT OPENS THE DOORS THAT SHOULD WE GET TO THAT POINT THAT WE CAN PROVIDE ELECTRONIC DEVICES OF SOME SORT. >> FOR 4.12? >> YES. >> WE COULD ADD THAT. IT DOESN'T HURT. 4.12 FOR THE CHANGES THERE, AND THEN FOR 6.1, BUT BEFORE THAT, I'LL JUST ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE CHANGES FOR THOSE SECTIONS. THEN AT THE END, I'LL JUST MAKE A SINGLE MOTION WITH THOSE CHANGES TO SEND IT TO CITY COUNCIL. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION AS IT RELATES TO 4.12. >> I MOTION TO APPROVE THE CHANGES TO 4.12 TO ADD THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS TO C. >> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. PROCEED TO TAKE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES. WITH THAT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION AS IT RELATES TO 6.1 AS RELATES TO PRESENTATION. >> I MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT TO ITEM 6.1 REQUIRING THAT STAFF PRESENTATIONS BE SHARED TO THE PUBLIC. >> I SECOND. >> PROCEED TO TAKE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES 5 0. YOU GOT THOSE GRAND FORD THE 5.0. ANY OTHER CHANGES OR RECOMMENDATION? [00:40:01] >> YES, I DO HAVE A QUESTION. THIS GOES BACK TO PUBLIC INFORMATION ON 7.7. I'VE TALKED TO SOME PEOPLE IN OTHER CITIES. I'VE TALKED TO PEOPLE WHO KNOW PEOPLE WHO WORK IN OTHER CITIES. OUR BOARD MEMBERS WHEN THEY REQUEST STUFF, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO REQUEST IT AS A RESIDENT, WHICH HAS IN THE PAST, RESULTED IN THEM NOT GETTING ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO THINGS THEY ARE VOTING ON UNTIL AFTER THE DATE THAT THEY VOTE BECAUSE AGAIN, THE MEETING ONLY HAS TO BE POSTED NOW THREE BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE THEY MEET, AND THEY CAN TAKE UP TO TEN DAYS TO GET INFORMATION. I WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE IN HERE THAT IT IS NOT JUST COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY CAN REQUEST DOCUMENTS AND GET THEM WITHOUT HAVING TO DO THE TEN DAY RULE. I WANT TO ENSURE THAT THEY HAVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION WHEN THEY ARE VOTING. BUT ALSO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE HELD TO THE SAME PENAL CODE, THEY CAN'T RELEASE THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN A CONSISTENT PROBLEM IN SOME AREAS WHERE THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH AS A RESIDENT TO ASK FOR STUFF AND NOW THEY'RE VOTING. THEN IT'S AFTER THE VOTE THAT THEY GET INFORMATION. THEY'RE LIKE, IF I HAD THIS, I COULD HAVE BROUGHT IT UP, AND NOW WE'RE IN THIS BIND. >> THEY SHOULDN'T SHOULDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT. I THINK THE SAME FORM THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS USE SHOULD BE APPLICABLE TO BOARD MEMBERS. BUT WE CAN ONCE AGAIN, JUST LIKE WE DID FOR 4.12, WE CAN CLARIFY AND 7.7 AND HAVE SEPARATE FORMS. >> I JUST HAVE A CLARITY QUESTION. WHEN THESE MEETINGS OCCUR AND THE AGENDAS ARE MADE, THINGS THAT ARE ON THE AGENDA, THE COUNCIL AND THE BOARD MEMBERS DON'T RECEIVE THE INFORMATION THAT IS ON THE AGENDA PRIOR TO THE MEETINGS FOR THEM TO REVIEW? THEY'RE PREPARED [OVERLAPPING] >> WE GET THE AGENDA ITEM. THREE DAYS BEFORE AND IT HAS THOSE SAME LINKS. IF WE WANT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SUCH AS I LIKE TO ASK FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND SUCH. I CAN REVIEW IT BEFORE WE GO TO DISCUSS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. I HAVE TO REQUEST THAT EXTRA INFORMATION. IF I REQUEST IT, I WILL GET IT AS A COUNCIL MEMBER. A BOARD MEMBER HAS TO ASK AS A RESIDENT AND IT'LL TAKE A 10-DAY WAIT PERIOD. IT'S GIVING THEM THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY TO ASK FOR THOSE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS. THE OTHER THING THAT I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT AND I DON'T KNOW GRANT THIS IS A THING, IF IT ACCIDENTALLY CREATES A WALKING FORUM OR ANYTHING. I FEEL LIKE IF A PERSON IS REQUESTING DOCUMENTS, THAT WHEN THEY'RE SENT TO THAT PERSON, IT SHOULD AUTOMATICALLY BE SENT TO THE ENTIRE BOARD OR THE ENTIRE COUNCIL. THEN THEY CAN BE LIKE, THIS PERSON ASKED FOR THIS DOCUMENT, MAYBE THEY'LL TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND SEE SOMETHING VERSUS IT'S ONLY ONE PERSON ASKING AND LOOKING AT IT. MAYBE IT'LL ENCOURAGE MORE INVOLVEMENT, AND IF NOT, AGAIN, THAT COMES UP, BUT WHEN WE'RE DISCUSSING THINGS, IF THEY'RE SAYING, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, IT'S WELL, I REQUESTED THE INFORMATION. YOU ALSO RECEIVE THE SAME INFORMATION AS I DID. IF YOU'RE CHOOSING NOT TO LOOK INTO IT, IF YOU'RE NOT TO BE DILIGENT, THEN ACCORDING TO THE ETHICS THING, YOU CAN'T VOTE. IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO EDUCATE YOURSELF ON IT ACCORDING TO OUR DOCUMENT, YOU CAN'T VOTE ON THE ITEM. I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO ADD IN HERE THAT WHEN ONE MEMBER ASKS FOR SOMETHING, IT GETS SHARED TO ALL OF THEM. MAYBE POTENTIALLY IF PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIFICALLY ASKS FOR SOMETHING, IT SHOULD AUTOMATICALLY GO TO COUNCIL SINCE THE RELATION BETWEEN DOCUMENTATION AND STUFF LIKE THAT AND THE ZONING PROCESS, IT MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL FOR US TO KNOW, HEY, THIS COMMISSIONER WAS LOOKING AT THIS FYI. >> I THINK THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE ALL THE EMAILS TO BE UP FOR YOU ELIMINATED TO EVERYONE THAT THIS PERTAINS TO. >> I THINK SO IF WE'RE STICKING WITH 7.7, IN THE EXAMPLE YOU GAVE EVERY BOARD MEMBER WE NEED TO FILL OUT THE FORM. >> NOT IF WE MAKE IT THE RULE THAT IF A BOARD MEMBER FILLS IT OUT, THEN WE ADD TO THE FORM, WHICH BY WE MAKE A DIGITAL. THIS PAPER THINGS [OVERLAPPING] >> I AGREE. >> WE ADD TO IT. MAYBE A CHECK BOX. IT SAYS, PLEASE SHARE THIS WITH ALL OF MY BOARD OR ALL OF MY COUNSEL AND THE PERSON FILLING OUT THE REQUEST CHECKS IT. THAT ALSO SHOW YOU IF SOMEONE'S NOT TRYING TO SHARE, THEY'RE GOING TO NOT CHECK THE BOX, BUT MAKE IT AN OPTION THAT WE HAVE THE CHOICE THAT [00:45:03] WAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE EVERY PERSON FILL OUT THAT FORM. IT'S THE PERSON WHO'S REQUESTING HAS THE RIGHT TO OFFER THAT INFORMATION TO EVERYONE ELSE ON THAT BOARD. I ALSO FEEL LIKE AT THAT POINT, IT COULD BE MAYBE THIS IS AMBER PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. IT MIGHT CREATE SOMETHING A LITTLE EASIER FOR YOU, LIKE MAYBE I'M JUST GOING TO GO CALL IT APPLE TREES. SAY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT APPLE TREES OR WHATEVER. YOU WOULD HAVE AN APPLE TREE FOLDER. ANYTIME ANY OF US ASKED FOR SOMETHING, YOU JUST DUMP IT INTO THAT FOLDER AND WE WOULD HAVE APPLE TREE. YOU'D SEND IT OUT LIKE SOMEONE HAS ASKED INFORMATION ABOUT APPLE TREE. HERE'S YOUR THING, AND WE HAVE THE LINK AND WE CAN CLICK IT, AND THEN YOU JUST DUMP IT INTO THAT FOLDER. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD OR WOULD NOT BE EASIER FOR YOU. I THINK IT MAY POTENTIALLY REDUCE SOME OF THOSE REQUESTS BECAUSE WHAT IF I'M ASKING FOR A DOCUMENT AND THREE OTHER PEOPLE ARE ASKING FOR THE SAME DOCUMENT. IF WE CAN REDUCE THAT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL BECAUSE I KNOW YOU GET A LOT. I'M ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.[LAUGHTER] I HAVE CHILLED DURING THE HOLIDAY SEASON. I'VE CHILLED. [INAUDIBLE] I'VE BEEN TRYING TO BE GOOD. BUT I JUST WANT TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE IT MORE EFFICIENT. >> I'M JUST THINKING MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED THE BY LAWS, BUT WE COULD PUT IN THE FORM. >> I JUST WANT TO REAL QUICK. A RESIDENT JUST REACHED OUT. THEY DIDN'T HEAR WHAT AMBER SAID AND THEY WANTED A SUMMARY. THEY CAN'T HEAR AMBER OVER THERE. YOU WANT TO PUSH A QUICK SUMMARY OF WHAT YOU JUST SHARED ABOUT HOW THE OTHER CITIES AND THAT. SORRY. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? I KNOW THAT I'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH OTHER CITIES THAT THEY ARE KNOWN TO. IF ONE COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTS SOMETHING, THEN THEY DO SHARE IT WITH THE ENTIRE COUNCIL, WHICH I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE DOING SO THAT IT MAKES EVERYONE AWARE OF, HEY, THEY'RE REQUESTING THIS INFORMATION, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS PERTAINING TO AN AGENDA ITEM OR WHATEVER, THEN THEY ARE GETTING THE SAME INFORMATION AND THEY'RE AWARE OF THAT INFORMATION SO THAT IF YOU'RE DISCUSSING IT THEN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY CAN BE AWARE OF BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION IN FRONT OF THEM. AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN JUST PUT ON A LETTERHEAD AND JUST SEND IT OUT TO THE ENTIRE COUNCIL AND MAYOR AND BOARD MEMBERS AND JUST SAY, HEY, MOVING FORWARD, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. THIS IS HOW IT'S GOING TO BE, OR IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT NEED TO BE PUT IN, I DON'T KNOW IF IT CAN BE. >> I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN ROPE IT IN AS WELL BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S DIFFERENT MECHANISMS FOR DOING THAT. I THINK TO YOUR POINT, IT'S A GOOD IDEA AND A LOT OF CITIES DO THAT. I THINK TO COUNSEL [INAUDIBLE] INITIAL QUESTION, IT'S NOT A WALKING QUORUM CONCERN UNLESS IT TURNS INTO A CONVERSATION. THE SENDING OUT THE DOCUMENT IS NOT IT'S THE CORRESPONDENCE THAT. >> YOU CAN USE THE BCC SEND OUT SO WE DON'T ACCIDENTALLY DO A QUORUM. YOU SAID THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT CREATING A DIGITAL FORM BECAUSE I KNOW TERRENCE AND I WOULD BE FOREVER GRATEFUL. >> I COULD JUST CREATE ONE. [INAUDIBLE] >> CAN WE HAVE THE LINK? IT WASN'T IN OUR UPDATE, OUR WEEKLY UPDATE. >> CHECK WITH HER BECAUSE I KNOW SHE'S OF THE UPDATE. >> I'LL DIG MORE THROUGH THIS UPDATE. [00:50:01] >> SHE [INAUDIBLE] >> THIS WILL BE EXCELLENT BECAUSE IT IS A STRUGGLE DOING THE FORM AND STUFF ALL THE TIME. I GUESS IF YOU'RE OPEN TO THE MOTION FOR 7.7 TO INCLUDE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS FOR REQUESTING INFORMATION, AND SO THAT THROUGH 7.7, THEY'RE INCLUDED AND HELD TO THE SAME STANDARD OF MAINTAINING THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF THINGS REQUESTED WITHIN THEIR CAPACITY AS AN APPOINTED OFFICIAL. IS THAT YOU OPENED IT THAT? >> YEAH, YOU CAN MAKE THE MOTION. [LAUGHTER] >> JUST DOUBLE CHECKING DOWN. I'D LIKE TO MOTION THE AMENDMENT TO 7.7 TO INCLUDE THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THROUGH A-E TO ENABLE THEM TO USE THEIR APPOINTED CAPACITY TO HAVE ACCESS TO DOCUMENTATION, BUT ALSO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR CONFIDENTIALITY UNDER TEXAS PENAL CODE. >> I'LL SECOND. >> WE'LL PROCEED TO TAKE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES FIVE VOTES. NOW LOOKING AT IT, THE TITLE OF THE DOCUMENT. I'M NOT SURE. WE NEED TO CALL IT COUNCIL RELATIONS, OR COUNCIL AND BOARD RELATIONS OR MAYBE I DON'T KNOW. IT'S STILL COUNCIL RELATIONS BECAUSE THEY APPOINT THESE FOLKS, SO LET'S MAKE IT SIMPLE, BUT LOOKING AT IT. I'M NOT SURE IF IT WOULD WARRANT AN UPDATE. >> IT COULD BE ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS RELATION POLICY. >> OR THE RELATIONS POLICY FOR ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS, TAKE OUT THE COUNCIL FOR RELATIONS POLICY AND RULES OF ORDER AND CODE OF ETHICS FOR ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS. >> IN 8.4, WE DO SAY THAT COUNCIL INCLUDES BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES. >> BUT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO CREATE THEIR OWN BY LAWS AND STUFF. I AGREE THAT QUESTIONING THE TITLE AND POTENTIALLY REVISING IT WOULD BE ALSO, IT'S RESPECTFUL TO THEM, THAT THEY'RE NOT AN AFTER THOUGHT. I JUST THAT A LOT OF THEM FEEL LIKE THE UGLY STEPCHILDREN OF THE CITY, [LAUGHTER] WHEN THEY DON'T REALLY GET THOUGHT OF UNTIL AN AFTERTHOUGHT. >> MEAN WITH MISS CAMPBELL'S POINT, I THINK WE CAN JUST KEEP IT SIMPLE TO THE POINT. ANY OTHER CHANGES? IF NOT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I THINK SO WE APPROVED MOTIONS FOR 4.12, 6.1 AND 7.7, IS THAT CORRECT? >> GRANT. I DO HAVE A QUESTION, AND IT MAY OR MAY NOT GO TO THIS BECAUSE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT AND IT MIGHT BE ORDINANCE THAT SELECTION PROCESS FOR APPOINTING SOMEONE TO THE BOARD. I KNOW THAT THERE'S CONFLICTING STATEMENTS. ONE IS LIKE SOMEONE CAN JUST MOTION TO APPOINT SOMEONE, AND THE OTHER IS SEAT TO SEAT RELATIONS, SO 1357 ARE ALL UP RIGHT NOW. IT WOULD BE COUNCIL MEMBERS 135 AND SEVEN, WHO WOULD MAKE THE MOTIONS FOR THEIR SEATS, AND THEN THE REST OF US WOULD EITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE TO GO DOWN THEIR LIST OF PEOPLE AND AFTER THERE'S NO REALLY SET NUMBER, WE SHOULD PROBABLY SET A NUMBER. AFTER WE HIT A NUMBER, THE MAYOR THEN JUST APPOINT SOMEBODY IF COUNCIL DOESN'T AGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THAT COUNCIL MEMBER TO THE SEAT, DOES THAT GO HERE? BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S TWO CONFLICTING DOCUMENTS ON THAT. >> SECTION 1.3 IS THE CURRENT PROCESS. I THINK PREVIOUSLY, I'M TRYING TO THINK IT WAS AMENDED DECEMBER 23. [00:55:08] THE FORMER PROCESS WAS EACH COUNCIL MEMBER HAD SELECTED ONE PERSON FOR EACH BORDER COMMITTEE. THEY SELECTED THEY WERE RESPONSIBLE, YOU PLACE ONE WAS RESPONSIBLE FROM PLACE ONE OF EVERY BUT THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLEX THAN THAT. THE DESIRE THE COUNCIL AT THE TIME WAS TO CHANGE IT TO THE CURRENT PROCESS WHERE EVERYONE HELP SELECT ALL THE POSITIONS AND THEN YOU DESIGNATE A SEAT NUMBER AT THE END. BUT THAT CAN BE CHANGED. >> MY QUESTION ON THAT IS, WE HAVE MEMBERS SERVING ON THE BOARDS WHO DON'T ASK QUESTIONS, WHO SHOW VERY LITTLE INTERACTION, AND THERE'S NO ONE TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE. WHEREAS IF IT WAS SEAT TO SEAT, THEN IF I SAW A SEAT 2 ON ONE OF THE BOARDS, WHO'S MAYBE MISSING A LOT OF MEETINGS OR SOMETHING, THEN IT WOULD BE MY THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE I WOULD REACH OUT AND BE LIKE, HEY, WHAT'S GOING ON, SEE WHAT'S GOING ON THERE. THEN IF IT COMES TIME LIKE A SITUATION OF LIKE, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU'RE NOT REALLY MEETING WHAT WE NEED ON THE BOARD, THEN I WOULD BE THE ONE WHO WOULD BE EXPECTED TO MAKE THE MOTION FOR REMOVAL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IF THAT WAS THE CASE. WITHOUT THAT, IT'S A FREE FOR ALL AS TO WHO CAN GO AND HAVE SOMEONE APPOINTED OR REMOVED OR IS ACCOUNTABLE OR WHO'S GOING TO CHECK IN. I JUST PUT THAT OUT THERE. STUFF FOR US TO TALK ABOUT. YOU WOULD THINK THAT. YOU WOULD THINK THAT EVERYBODY WOULD HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE. BUT I'M NOT SURE IF YOU KNOW THIS. BUT NOT EVERYONE FEELS THAT THEY HAVE AN ACTIVE ROLE RESPONSIBILITY IN THEIR CAPACITY. WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE EVERYBODY ACTIVELY DOING THINGS AS A COUNCIL MEMBER ENTIRELY, I GUESS, THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE BEEN SAYING. IT'S NOT REALLY FAIR TO EVERYONE ELSE TO BE LIKE ON THEM TO BE MONITORING ALL THE BOARDS AND ALL THE THINGS. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> JUST TO USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE. FOR EXAMPLE, YOU SAY PLACE 2, SOMEBODY ELSE'S PLACE 1, AND THEN THE BOARD MEMBER SAYS, WELL, PLACE 1 SHOULD COME TO ME. I FEEL LIKE IF YOU LEAVE IT OPEN, THEN PLACE 2 COULD GO TO ANYONE. INSTEAD OF HAVE IT RESTRICTED TO JUST WELL IT'S PLACE 2, LET ME TALK TO THAT PERSON SO THEY'RE ACTIVELY ENGAGE. BUT IF PLACE 4, 5 AND 6 ARE NOT DOING IT AND IT'S JUST YOU, WOULD CLOSE THAT DOOR ON YOU. BUT LEAVING IT OPEN, YOU COULD GO STRAIGHT ACROSS THE BOARD AND SAY YOU'RE NOT DOING A GOOD JOB WITHOUT ANY PUSHBACK BECAUSE YOU'RE HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE WITHOUT ANY RESTRICTIONS. >> IT'S WHAT I AGREE WITH TOO, BECAUSE THEN IT DOES LEAVE THE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT ARE PAYING ATTENTION OPEN TO ADDRESS ANYBODY ON ANY COMMISSION AND ANY SEAT. >> [OVERLAPPING] THEN I AGREE COUNCIL MEMBER LIKE YOU TO JUST GO ACROSS THE BOARD AND SAY, LOOK, I KNOW FIVE IS NOT HOLDING YOU A LOT. >> I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. >> ONE, BUT, WHATEVER IT MAY BE, SO TO NOT CLOSE YOU OFF. >> AS LONG AS YOU GUYS ARE COOL WITH IT, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THEY WOULD NOT WANT ME TO HAVE THAT ACCESS. BUT YES. I MEAN, I'M ALWAYS OPEN TO IF SOMEONE WANTS TO NEEDS TO REACH OUT AND SUCH, I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN. I WILL SEE, WE'VE GOT THE QUORUM NUMBER GETTING FLIPPED 357, IT'S QUORUM BIG CHANGE. >> ISN'T IT A COLLECTIVE EFFORT FOR EVERYONE TO VOTE IF THEY THINK SOMEONE IS NOT PARTICIPATORY IN THE COUNCIL MEETINGS OR ENGAGED IN WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE MEETINGS? IS THAT A COLLECTIVE? IS IT UP TO EVERYONE TO SAY, HEY, GRANT NOT PARTICIPATORY IN, ENGAGING IN WHAT THE CONVERSATIONS ARE, OR IS IT MORE PEOPLE GOING ALONE TO GET ALONG VERSUS THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ENGAGED. BECAUSE SOMETIMES THAT POSES A PROBLEM. WHEN YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMPLACENT AND SET IN OLD WAYS AND HAPPENS, IT BECOMES THE NORM, TO GO ALONG TO GET ALONG AND DON'T SAY ANYTHING JUST PASS EVERYTHING BY. THEN YOU MAY HAVE TWO NEW WHIPPER SNIPERS JUST LIKE EAGER BEAVERS, [01:00:03] WANT TO CHANGE THE WORLD [LAUGHTER]. ROME WASN'T BUILT IN ONE DAY, BUT THEY'RE STILL ACTIVE, BUT YOU STILL HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE THAT. I GUESS WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY IS HOW DO YOU CIRCUMVENT THE SEVEN PEOPLE THAT'S NOT ENGAGING IN READING AND GIVEN HONEST OPINIONS AND FEEDBACK. >> I GUESS WE ADD THAT TO AN ADDITIONAL ITEM WE CAN COME BACK TO SINCE WE HAVE TO COME BACK TO FOR THE CITY MANAGER STUFF. MAYBE WE LOOK AT POLICY PROCEDURE TYPE THING, FOR ADDRESSING BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS, WHO ARE BECAUSE IT DOES SAY IT'S AT OUR LEISURE FOR COUNCIL. BUT MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE, A PROCESS IN PLACE THAT IF WE FEEL THAT SOMEONE IS NOT DOING THE JOB THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING IF THEY'RE NOT MEETING THE BAR. MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE A PROCESS OF WE'VE CHECKED IN WITH YOU, SO THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING THROUGH A COMPLAINT PROCESS ABOUT IT, BUT A SEPARATE PROCESS WHERE YOU KNOW SOMEONE TALKS WITH THEM AND SO ON. [OVERLAPPING] YES, ACCOUNTABILITY CHECK. WE HAVE THAT IN PLACE. IT ALSO PREVENTS PEOPLE FROM WILLY NILLY JUST FEELING LIKE I WANT YOU, AND YOU REMOVE TAKE THAT AWAY, MAKE IT SURE IT'S FAIR AND EQUITABLE. WOULD YOU GUYS BE OPEN TO THAT? WE JUST ADD THAT TO A LIST OF AN ADDITIONAL ITEM WE COME BACK TO PUT INTO THIS DOCUMENT. >> WE COULD CONSIDER THAT. BUT TO KNOW THAT I'M THINKING OF IT, MAYBE TO HAVE COUNCIL GO TO THE BOARD CHAIR PERSON SO THAT THERE'S NO INFLUENCE, LIKE SO IT'S WELL, THE COUNCIL IS WORKING THROUGH YOU, TO AVOID THAT. POTENTIALLY TO SAY, HEY, BOARD MEMBER, I NOTICED THAT X Y Z IS NOT PARTICIPATING, IS NOT SAYING THAT THEY CAN'T PROVIDE OPINIONS OR WHATNOT, BUT TO TALK TO THE BOARD MEMBER TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO THE MEMBERS TO THAT EFFECT. >> WHY DON'T WE ADD SOME LANGUAGE FOR LIKE PERIODIC REPORTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT FROM BOARDS OR SOME REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. WELL WE HAVE TRANSPARENT. >> WE HAVE THE LIAISONS, DEPENDING ON HOW ACTIVE THEY ARE ON THEIR BOARD. I DO LIKE THAT THOUGH BECAUSE IT GIVES THE CHAIR, SOMETHING LIKE YOU ARE THE CHAIR. IT'S LIKE A RESPECT YOU ARE THE CHAIR MAYBE ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR. THEY GET TO DO THEIR OWN OPTION, COME BEFORE COUNCIL AND PRESENT SOMETHING OF WHAT THEIR BOARD HAS DONE AND ACCOMPLISHED. GIVES THEM ACCOUNTABILITY SHOWS, WE ARE RESPECTING YOU AT THE BOARD CHAIR TO DISCUSS WHAT YOU'RE DOING, WHERE YOUR DIRECTION IS GOING, MAYBE THEY WANT TO MAKE A CHANGE TO THEIR BYLAWS AND WHATNOT, THEY SHOULD HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. I LOVE THE IDEA OF WE WOULD GO TO THE CHAIR AND DISCUSS, HEY, THESE ARE CONCERNS, AND THAT'S STEP 1, TOO BEFORE REMOVAL PROCESS. WE GO TO THE CHAIR, WE LET THE CHAIR OR THE VICE CHAIR ADDRESS IT. I ALSO WOULD ALLOW WITH A SOLID PROCESS IN PLACE, THE BOARD MEMBERS THEMSELVES WOULD KNOW, HEY, IF MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBER IN THIS OTHER SEAT ISN'T ASKING QUESTIONS, ISN'T SHOWING ENGAGEMENT. THEY WOULD KNOW WHAT PROCEDURES ARE IN PLACE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. WHO TO TALK TO, SUCH AS WE PUT IT CLEAR, YOU GO TO YOUR CHAIR OR YOU GO TO THE VICE CHAIR. THAT WAY, THERE ISN'T JUMPING ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP AND TRYING TO GET SOMETHING DONE. THERE'S A SET. YES. THE CHAIN. >> NOT SINGLED OUT? >> YES. >> THESE ARE ALL GREAT IDEAS. I THINK, WE COULD CREATE SOME TO THAT EFFECT. [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] BUT ANY OTHER CHANGES HERE FOR THIS SECTION 9, IF NOT, I PROCEED WITH A MOTION HERE. ANY OTHER CHANGES? MISS STANFORD, CAMPBELL? INCLUDING THE CHANGES APPROVED HERE TODAY AS TO 7.7412, AND 6.1, I HEREBY MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ALL PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLES 1 THROUGH TO 9 OF THE COUNCIL RELATIONS POLICY, [01:05:03] RULES OF ARDER AND CODE OF ETHICS, COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO AS THE BY LAWS, AS DISCUSSED DURING TONIGHT'S COMMITTEE MEETING, AND SEND THE PROPOSED AMENDED BYLAWS TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR REVIEW, CONSIDERATION, AND POSSIBLY ADOPTION DURING A FUTURE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. >> SECOND. >> WITH THAT, WE'LL PROCEED TO TAKE VOTE ON THIS MOTION. MOTION CARRIES 5O. WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM H22 025051, [H.2 2025-051 Consider selecting the dates and times of future Committee meetings; and take appropriate action.] WHICH IS TO CONSIDER SELECTING THE DATES AND TIMES OF FUTURE COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED SOME ITEMS. THE CITY COUNCIL MAY RECOMMEND ADDITIONAL CHANGES HERE. WE COULD SET A DATE AND POTENTIALLY WE COULD MOVE THAT DATE, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN THIS MAY GO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL, SO WE CHOOSE A FUTURE DATE THAT'S PAST THAT. THEN, IF ANYTHING, WE CAN AWAY ADJUST THAT DATE. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU GUYS AGREE WITH THAT? >> I DO. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THERE. I'M GOING TO GO 98% POSITIVE THAT THAT FIRST COUNCIL MEETING IN JANUARY IS PACKED BECAUSE WE'VE GOT HEARINGS AND STUFF THAT WE HAVE TO DO. US MEETING FOR THIS COMMITTEE, I WOULD SAY SHOULD BE AFTER THAT. POSSIBLY MAYBE WAIT I MEAN, PUT IT TOWARDS THE VERY END, MAYBE NOT LIKE MISSED BOTH OF THOSE COUNCIL MEETINGS IN JANUARY. WE MEET AT THE END OF JANUARY, SOMETHING TO DISCUSS THESE NEW ITEMS. BE I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING TO GET PACKED IN IN JANUARY. I MEAN, WE JUST LIFTED THE MORATORIUM AND THAT WAIT LIST WAS [INAUDIBLE]. >> WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO HAVE IT IN FEBRUARY THEN POTENTIALLY I THINK YES, OR AT LEAST THE VERY LAST WEEK OF JANUARY SO THAT IF WE NEED TO GO BACK TO COUNCIL FOR SOMETHING, WE CAN GET IT IN AT THAT FIRST MEETING THAT COUNCIL WILL HAVE IN FEBRUARY. >> [INAUDIBLE] AGENDA IN JANUARY. >> I THINK I THINK THIS PART LIKE THIS APPROVAL WILL PROBABLY BE ABLE TO MAKE IT WITHIN THE FIRST OR PROBABLY SECOND, HONESTLY, BE A LOT OF HEARINGS ON THE FIRST. THE SECOND MEETING IN JANUARY WOULD BE THE MOST LIKELY TIME THAT THIS WOULD HIT IT UP THERE. >> THE 26 WOULD BE THE NEXT ONE BECAUSE THE 12TH IS OUR FIRST ONE. SO THAT WOULD BE WHEN THIS DOCUMENT WOULD GO BEFORE COUNCIL MOST LIKELY. >> WHICH IS THE 26? >> YES. >> WE CAN GET IT IN 26, I SUGGEST THAT WE MEET. WELL, IT'S APPROVED, POTENTIALLY THE 29TH. THAT WOULD PROPOSE THE 29 AT 6:30. >> I WOULD SECOND THAT BECAUSE IT WOULD ALSO GIVE US TIME THOSE TWO WEEKS FROM THAT COUNCIL MEETING ON MONDAY TO MAKE ANY CHANGE IF WE NEED TO GET IT BACK TO COUNCIL. I THINK THAT'D BE GREAT. I WOULD SECOND THE JANUARY 29. >> JANUARY 29 AT 6:30. >> WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND. I GUESS WE'LL JUST BE CONSISTENT. [OVERLAPPING]. >> JUST TAKING SOME NOTES. I THINK WE'RE MISSING A VOTE. MOTION CARRIES 5O. REAL QUICK BEFORE YOU ADJOURN. I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR VOLUNTEERING THE TIME. I KNOW WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS SINCE IT'S BEEN QUITE MAYBE SIX MONTHS, BUT I THINK THE BYLAWS THAT WE HAVE THAT WE'RE SAYING TO COUNCIL NOW IS SUBSTANTIALLY BETTER THAN WHAT WE STARTED WITH. THIS IS, VOLUNTEER POSITIONS. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME AND SCHEDULING, ESPECIALLY WE'RE HERE TILL CHRISTMAS AND CARVING OUT TIME. IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE TO GET TO MEET SOME OF YOU. I KNOW A LOT OF YOU ALL, BUT IT'S BEEN A GOOD PROCESS. I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYONE. PERFECT. [OVERLAPPING] >> HAT IS FOR ALL OF THE DRAFTS. >> APPRECIATE IT. >> I WANT TO THROW OUT THERE THAT Y'ALL ARE AMAZING, AND SEATS 135 AND SEVEN ON ALL OF OUR BOARDS ARE NOW ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS. CASE YOU'RE INTERESTED. WE'RE LOOKING FOR APPLICANTS. >> THANK YOU ALL, AS WELL TO MY CO CHAIR. THAT'S HERE EVERY DAY. THANK YOU ALL. APPRECIATE IT. WITH THAT, I'LL MOVE TO ADJOURN OR CONCLUDE TODAY'S MEETING. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> THANK YOU ALL AND SEE YOU ON JANUARY 29 AT 6:30 PM. THANKS. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.