[00:00:03] ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL TO ORDER THE CITY OF PRINCETON HOMEWARD CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING. TODAY IS FEBRUARY 19TH. TIME IS 639. WE WILL START WITH A ROLL CALL. JOSE RIOS IS NOT HERE. SUBELZEV IS NOT HERE. I, JASON RUTLEDGE, AM HERE. JIM POWELL? PRESENT. RANDALL ROBERTS IS NOT HERE. RYAN GERVAIS IS NOT HERE. TERRENCE JOHNSON? PRESENT. MARK CRISWELL IS NOT HERE. MISHA NEAL IS NOT HERE. MAXINE ELLIS? HERE. SCHOLAR SMITH IS NOT HERE. JODY SUTHERLAND? PRESENT. CAROLYN DAVID GRAVES IS NOT HERE. MARLO O'BARA? HERE. ALL RIGHT AND WITH TAHT WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE INVOCATION WILL WILL BE GIVEN TO US BY JIM POWELL. MOST LOVING AND GRACIOUS HEAVENLY FATHER, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE FUTURE, FATHER, OF THIS COMMUNITY YOU'VE PLACED US IN, THAT WE WOULD BE MINDFUL OF THE NEEDS OF OTHERS AND THAT WE WOULD HOLD TO YOUR POWER, FATHER, AS IT IS EVIDENT IN THIS COMMUNITY IN THE DAYS TO COME. BLESS THIS TIME TOGETHER THAT OUR DELIBERATIONS WOULD BE MEANINGFUL IN YOUR SIGHT. IN CHRIST'S HOLY NAME WE PRAY. AMEN. ALL RIGHT, WITH THAT THAT MOVES US ON TO THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND THEN TO THE PLEDGE OF THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL .HONORING THE TEXAS FLAG I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE TEXAS ,ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. THAT MOVES US ON TO PUBLIC APPEARANCE. THIS PORTION OF MEETING IS SET ASIDE FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE ON ANY ITEMS OF BUSINESS THAT'S 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 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 A SPEAKER'S INQUIRY OR TO RECITE EXISTING POLICY IN RESPONSE TO THE INQUIRY. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK SHALL, ONE, ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE DIRECTLY, NOT CITY STAFF OR OTHERWISE, TWO, BE COURTEOUS, RESPECTFUL, AND CORDIAL, AND THREE, 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. I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ANYONE FOR PUBLIC APPEARANCE. SO THAT [G. CONSENT AGENDA] WILL MOVE US ON TO ITEM G, THE CONSENT AGENDA. THE CONSENT AGENDA, ALL CONSENTED ITEMS ARE 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 ON THE AGENDA. THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM G.1-2026. I'M SORRY, G.1-208. CONSIDER APPROVING THE FOLLOWING HOME RULE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. JANUARY 15, 2026, HOME RULE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING. JANUARY 27, 2026, HOME RULE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING. WITH THAT POINT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION TO APPROVE MINUTES OF JANUARY 15, 2026. I SECOND THAT. WE ARE GOOD TO VOTE. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S 9-0. SORRY. ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION IS APPROVED 9-0. THAT MOVES US [H.1 2026-209 Review and consider all Committee-approved, proposed amendments to Chapters 1–15 of the Home Rule Charter for the City of Princeton, Texas; and take appropriate action.] INTO OUR REGULAR AGENDA, ITEM H.1-2026-209, REVIEW AND CONSIDER ALL COMMITTEE APPROVED PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTERS 1 THROUGH 15 OF THE HOME RULE CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF PRINCETON, TEXAS AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. WITH THAT, I WANT TO START OFF BY HANDING IT OVER TO GRANT. THERE ARE SOME AMENDMENTS THAT WERE MADE FROM THE LAST MEETING THAT HE WILL KIND OF GIVE US AN OUTLINE OVER AND THEN WE WILL JUMP BACK INTO WHERE WE LEFT OFF. YEAH, PERFECT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. GOOD TO SEE EVERYONE AGAIN. I KNOW WE HAD A, IT'S BEEN ABOUT A MONTH SINCE WE MET, SO IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL AGAIN. SO WE'LL START WITH SECTION, FLIP TO 6.02 DUTIES OF THE CITY SECRETARY. YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN BLUE WAS RECOMMENDED [00:05:03] AT THE LAST MEETING, SOME CHANGES. SO WE'LL KIND OF KNOCK THROUGH 6.02 AND THEN 10.05, 11.05 AND 12.07 AND THEN PICK BACK UP WHERE WE LEFT OFF. SO I'LL KICK IT BACK TO CHAIRMAN TO GO FROM HERE. ALL RIGHT. JUST WITH THE ASSUMPTION THIS IS PROVIDED TO US IN ADVANCE, I'M ASSUMING NO ONE HAS ANY CONCERNS WITH WHAT WAS STATED AND APPROVED FROM THE LAST MEETING. I'M GOING TO GIVE A BRIEF PAUSE TO JUST SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. IF NOT, THEN WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO THE SECTION WHERE WE LEFT OFF AT. AND PLEASE, OH YEAH, AND WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THOSE AS WELL. THANKS, GRANT, TO BE HONEST. SO WITH THAT, WE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION. IS THAT CORRECT, TO APPROVE THOSE? YEAH, SO LET'S START WITH 6.02. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE MADE THERE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE SECTION 6.02, DUTIES OF THE CITY SECRETARY, AS AMENDED AND STATED. WE HAVE A SECOND. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, WE ARE GOOD TO VOTE. THE NEXT SECTION IS 10.05. ANY QUESTIONS ON 10.05? IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE 10.05. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SECTION 10.05. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND. LET'S WAIT FOR IT TO CHANGE. IT'S 8-0. WE'RE MISSING ONE. ALL RIGHT. APPROVED 9-0. MOVES US ON TO SECTION 11.05. GIVE EVERYONE A CHANCE TO TURN THE PAGES. AND WITH THAT, IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE VERBIAGE FOR 11.05. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE SECTION 11.05 AS STATED. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND. WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE FOR 11.05. THAT IS APPROVED 9-0. AND OUR FINAL ONE IS SECTION 12.07. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE 12.07. I MOTION WE APPROVE SECTION 12.07 AS AMENDED AND STATED. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND. GOOD TO VOTE. I'D LIKE TO SAY ONE THING RAISED BY THIS, AND THAT I ACTUALLY, I THINK IT WAS RANDALL, WAS INQUIRING WHERE WAS IT, 400 CAME FROM, I BELIEVE IT'S IN THIS ONE. I ACTUALLY WENT BACK AND WATCHED THE VIDEO OF THAT, AND IT WAS VERY LOOSELY RELATED TO THE TURNOUT IN THE PRIOR ELECTION TO, I BELIEVE IT WAS IN 2022, AND THERE WASN'T A WHOLE LOT OF CONVERSATION OR THOUGHT THAT WENT INTO THAT WORD, INTO THAT NUMBER 400. IT WAS A PERCENTAGE OF THE PRIOR ELECTION, SO I DON'T SEE WHERE WE NEED IT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THE INPUT. WE'RE STILL, THERE WE GO, TWO MORE ON THE VOTE. ALL RIGHT. APPROVED 9-0. THAT FINALIZES THE PRE-ESTABLISHED OR PRE-DETERMINED, PRE-DISCUSSED, I SHOULD SAY, SECTIONS THAT WERE HANDLED IN THE LAST MEETING. THAT PUTS US BACK AT 12.10 FOR THIS MEETING, WHICH IS RESULT OF A RECALL ELECTION. LET IT BE KNOWN THAT THE TIME IS 648, AND WE DO HAVE MARK CRISWELL HERE THAT IS NOW PRESENT. 648. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT BRINGS US TO SECTION 12.10, RESULT OF A RECALL ELECTION. I'M GOING TO READ THAT JUST FOR THE RECORD. IF A MAJORITY OF THE VOTES CAST AS A, I'M SORRY, CAST AT A RECALL ELECTION IS AGAINST REMOVAL OF THE MAYOR OR A COUNCIL MEMBER NAMED ON THE BALLOT, THAT MEMBER SHALL CONTINUE IN OFFICE. THE MAJORITY OF THE VOTES CAST AS SUCH ELECTION ARE FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBER NAMED ON THE BALLOT. THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL IMMEDIATELY DECLARE THE OFFICE VACANT AND SUCH VACANCY SHALL BE FILLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHARTER. A MAYOR OR CITY [00:10:02] COUNCIL MEMBER THUS REMOVED IS, ONE, INELIGIBLE FOR APPOINTMENT TO FILL THE VACANCY CREATED. IF APPLICABLE, TWO, DISQUALIFIED FROM CANDIDACY AND ANY SPECIAL ELECTION CALLED TO FILL THE VACANCY CREATED, AND THREE, PROHIBITED FROM FILING FOR OFFICE OF THE MAYOR OR ANY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER UNTIL THE FIRST REGULAR CITY ELECTION OCCURRING AFTER FOUR YEARS FOLLOWING THE DATE OF REMOVAL. AND THAT IS 12.10. ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS ON THAT? THAT IS THE VERBIAGE THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED AND PRE-APPROVED. IF NOT, THEN WE CAN MOVE INTO ENTERTAINING A MOTION TO APPROVE IT AS STATED. SECOND. SORRY? I MISSED YOU, DAVID. DIDN'T WE ALREADY VOTE TO APPROVE IT? THIS WAS PRE-VOTED, SO WE'RE COMING BACK AND GOING THROUGH EVERYTHING NOW. SO WE HAVE A FIRST AND WE HAVE A SECOND. ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE INTO VOTING? THE SECOND WAS TERRENCE. I'M SORRY, IT WAS JIM. I APOLOGIZE. IT WAS JIM. THE SECOND WAS JIM. YEAH. SAME HAIRCUT. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE THERE. MOTION IS APPROVED 10-0. ALL RIGHT. THAT MOVES US INTO CHAPTER 13, FRANCHISES, STARTING WITH SECTION 13-04, RIGHT OF REGULATION. I'M GOING TO TRY TO SPEED READ THROUGH THIS. OH, YES, THANK YOU. SO THE TITLE, UTILITY AND PUBLIC SERVICES, FRANCHISES AND LICENSES, IS A CHANGE ON THE TITLE. SO I'M GOING TO, THAT IS THE TITLE. WE'LL START WITH, WE WANT TO DO TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS FOR THE TITLE? YEAH. SO LET'S START WITH THAT. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE TITLE CHANGE. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE TITLE CHANGE TO CHAPTER 13, FRANCHISES. SECOND. UTILITY AND PUBLIC SERVICES, FRANCHISES AND LICENSES FOR THE NEW TITLE. AND I THINK WE HAVE A SECOND FROM, CAN YOU ONE MORE TIME FOR ME, TERRENCE? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A SECOND FOR TERRENCE ON RECORD. ANY QUESTIONS? IF NOT, WE CAN MOVE TO VOTE FOR THE TITLE CHANGE. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE VOTING. WE'RE, WE HAVE NINE IN. WE ARE MISSING ONE. TERRENCE. TERRENCE. OH, 10-0. THERE WE GO. ALL RIGHT. NOW THAT MOVES US INTO SECTION 13-04, THE ACTUAL BODY OF THE, OF THE SECTION, RIGHTS OF REGULATION. I APOLOGIZE. IN GRANTING, AMENDING, RENEWING, AND EXTENDING PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITY FRANCHISES, THE CITY SHALL RETAIN THE RIGHT TO ONE, REPEAL SUCH FRANCHISES BY ORDINANCE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS THEREOF, SUCH POWER TO BE EXERCISED ONLY AFTER DUE NOTICE AND HEARING TO REQUIRE ADEQUATE EXTENSION OF PLANT SERVICES AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SERVICES TO THE PUBLIC AND REQUIRE MAINTENANCE OF THE PLANT AND FIXTURES AT THE HIGHEST REASONABLE STANDARD OF EFFICIENCY BASED UPON APPLICABLE STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS. THREE, ESTABLISH REASONABLE STANDARDS OF SERVICE AND QUALITY OF PRODUCTS AND PREVENT UNJUST DISCRIMINATION IN SERVICES OR RATES. IMPOSED, I'M SORRY, FOUR, IMPOSED REGULATIONS TO ENSURE SAFE, EFFICIENT, AND CONTINUOUS SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC. THE FRANCHISE HOLDER IN AN OPENING AND REFILLING ALL EARTH OPENINGS SHALL RELAY THE PAYMENT AND DO ALL WORK, OTHER WORK NECESSARY TO COMPLETE RESTORATION OF STREETS, SIDEWALKS, OR GROUNDS TO A CONDITION EQUALLY AS GOOD OR BETTER THAN WHEN DISTURBED AND THEN WAS STRICKEN OUT AS AND. THEN NUMBER FIVE, UPON NOTICE TO FRANCHISE AND REASONABLY, AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD TO REGULATE, LOCATE, OR PROHIBIT THE DIRECTION OF ANY AND ALL POLES, WIRES, OR OTHER UTILITY EQUIPMENT, CONVEYANCE, OR STRUCTURE ON THE STREETS, ALLEYS, AND PUBLIC PLACES OF SAID CITY AND TO CAUSE THE SAME TO BE CHANGED, REMOVE, ALTERED, INCREASED, DIMINISHED, PLACED UNDERGROUND, OR TO BE SUPPORTED BY POLES OR SUCH MATERIAL. KIND, QUALITY, AND CLASS AS MAY BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, WHETHER THE SAME BE TELEGRAPHED, TELEPHONE, ELECTRIC, CABLE TELEVISION, OR OTHERWISE, AND TO ENFORCE THE PROVISIONS HEREOF BY APPROPRIATE ACTION IN ANY COURT OR COMPETENT JURISDICTION. AND SIX, THIS IS AMENDMENT, REQUIRE UTILITY AND FRANCHISE HOLDERS TO FURNISH AND ANY AND ALL FINANCE REPORTS, AUDITS, AND OTHER INFORMATION AS THE CITY COUNCIL DEEMS NECESSARY TO EXAMINE, AUDIT, AND AUDIT THE ACCOUNTS AND RECORDS OF THE FRANCHISE TO DETERMINE THE REASONABLENESS OF CHARGES, FARES, AND RATES CONSISTENT WITH SECTION 1306. THAT'S A MOUTHFUL. WITH THAT, IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, [00:15:01] I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE AS STATED. I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. I UNDERSTAND THAT FIVE AND SIX ARE TO THE SAME AUDIENCE, BUT WHY IS THE AND THERE WHEN THOSE ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ACTIONS? IS IT BECAUSE THAT YOU'D NEED THAT UPON NOTICE TO THE FRANCHISEE AND A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD? IS THAT WHY WE'RE PUTTING THE AND IN THERE? IT'S JUST A LIST. IT'S JUST LISTING THE FOUR. OH, BECAUSE IT'S A LIST. BECAUSE IT'S A LIST, YEAH, WE'RE JUST ADDING THE SIX TO THAT SECTION. ALL RIGHT, WITH THAT, IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE AS STATED. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE SECTION 13.04, RIGHT OF REGULATION, AS AMENDED. I SECOND. SECOND. ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE MARK BEATS YOU TO IT, JIM. SO WE HAVE A FIRST BY MAXINE AND A SECOND BY MARK CRISWELL. AND WITH THAT, WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE. AND NINE IN THE BUCKET, STILL MISSING ONE. ALL RIGHT. MOTION IS APPROVED, NINE, ONE. THAT MOVES US ON TO CHAPTER 14, GENERAL AND TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS. SECTION 14.01, CONTINUATION OF PRESENT OFFICES. BRENT, WOULD YOU LIKE THESE BROKEN UP OR ARE WE GOOD TO READ THEM ALL TOGETHER? YOU WANT BOTH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, SO I'M GOING TO READ THIS. CONTINUATION OF ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICES. ALL PERSONS HOLDING ELECTIVE OFFICES THAT ARE RETAINED UNDER THIS CHARTER WILL CONTINUE TO FILL THOSE OFFICES FOR THE TERMS TO WHICH THEY WERE ELECTED AND SHALL BE ELECTED PROSPECTIVELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2.01, FORM OF GOVERNMENT. ALL PERSONS WHO ON THE DATE THIS CHARTER IS ADOPTED ARE FILLING APPOINTIVE POSITIONS WITH THE CITY WHICH ARE RETAINED UNDER THIS CHARTER AND MAY CONTINUE TO FILL THESE POSITIONS FOR THE TERM FOR WHICH THEY ARE APPOINTED UNLESS REMOVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR BY OTHER MEANS PROVIDED IN THIS CHARTER. ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCE RELATED TO THE CREATION, APPOINTMENTS, TERMS, POWERS, AND DUTIES OF MUNICIPAL OFFICERS, THE PRINCETON MUNICIPAL COURT, AND THE PRINCETON POLICE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF THIS CHARTER ARE PRESERVED AND CONTINUE UNLESS EXPRESSLY IN CONFLICT WITH THE TERMS SET FORTH HEREIN IN WHICH CASE CHARTER PROVISIONS SHALL HAVE CONTROLLING EFFECT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THEY ARE OTHERWISE AMENDED OR MODIFIED BY ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. B, CONTINUATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES. ALL PERSONS HOLDING ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES AT THE TIME OF THIS CHARTER TAKE EFFECT SHALL CONTINUE IN OFFICE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR DUTIES IN THE CAPACITIES TO WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN APPOINTED SHALL HAVE BEEN MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THIS CHARTER FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SUCH DUTIES OR THE DISCONTINUANCE OF SUCH OFFICE, IF ANY, THE POWERS CONFERRED AND THE DUTIES IMPOSED UPON ANY OFFICE, DEPARTMENT, OR AGENCY OF THE CITY BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE SHALL IN SUCH OFFICE, DEPARTMENT, OR AGENCY BE ABOLISHED BY THIS CHARTER OR UNDER ITS AUTHORITY BE THEREAFTER EXERCISED AND DISCHARGED BY THE OFFICE, DEPARTMENT, OR AGENCY DESIGNATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNLESS OTHERWISE PROVIDED HEREIN. IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE 14.01 AS STATED. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE SECTION 14.01, CONTINUATION OF PRESENT OFFICE AS STATED. DO WE NEED A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A SECOND BY MARLO BARROW. A MOTION IS MADE BY MAXINE ELLIS. WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE. ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE 10.04. NEXT SECTION IS SECTION 14.02, ETHICS. AND IT READS, THE PROPER OPERATION OF DEMOCRATIC LOCAL GOVERNMENT REQUIRES THAT, ONE, CITY OFFICIALS ARE INDEPENDENT, IMPARTIAL, AND RESPONSIBLE ONLY TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY. TWO, ALL GOVERNMENT DECISIONS AND POLICIES ARE MADE USING THE PROPER PROCEDURES OF THE GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE. THREE, EXCEPT FOR THE COMPENSATION AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 13, I'M SORRY, 3.04 OF THIS CHARTER, PROVIDE IN EXCHANGE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL PERFORMANCE OF THEIR OFFICIAL DUTIES, NO CITY OFFICIAL HAS ANY PERSONAL FINANCIAL INTEREST THAT IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE PROPER DISCHARGE OF HIS OR HER DUTIES IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. FOUR, PUBLIC OFFICE SHALL NOT BE USED FOR PERSONAL FINANCIAL GAIN. FIVE, THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL BE MAINTAINED AS A NONPARTISAN BODY. AND SIX, CITY OFFICIALS FULLY COMPLY WITH ALL FEDERAL AND STATE STATUTES, LAWS, AND REGULATIONS CONCERNING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL, ONE, ADOPT, MAINTAIN, AND ENFORCE BY ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION A CODE OF ETHICS FOR THE PURPOSE OF, AMONG OTHER THINGS, ESTABLISHING AND DEFINING THE BOUNDS [00:20:01] OF REASONABLE ETHICAL BEHAVIOR BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND ALL APPOINTED OFFICIALS. AND TWO, CREATE AND APPOINT AN ETHICS REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF EVALUATING AND MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING ETHICS COMPLAINTS AND VIOLATIONS. THAT IS SECTION 14.01. IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE AS STATED. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE SECTION 14.02 ETHICS AS AMENDED. SECOND. I'LL SECOND. ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A FIRST BY MAXINE ELLIS, SECOND BY MARLO BARROW. WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE. AND SECTION 14.02 IS APPROVED 9-1. ALL RIGHT, MOVING TO SECTION 14.04, NEPOTISM. SECTION 14.04 HAS A PLETHORA OF INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN STRICKEN OUT. I'M GOING TO READ WHAT REMAINS. AND THAT READS, AS A CITY OFFICIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE STATE LAWS REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OR CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENT OF CERTAIN CLOSE RELATIVES. I THINK THAT'S IT. THAT IS IT. IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE SECTION 14.04. SOUTHERLAND WILL WHOLEHEARTEDLY MOVE FOR THIS. I HAVE A THIRD DEGREE OF CONSANGUINITY. I ALWAYS LOVE TO SEE THAT DISAPPEAR AFTER WATCHING FISTFIGHTS IN COURT OVER THAT. THANKS. I'LL SECOND THAT. ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A FIRST BY JOE SOUTHERLAND AND A SECOND BY MAXINE ELLIS. WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE. I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTARY, JODI. WE GOT EIGHT IN. NINE. MISSING ONE MORE. THERE'S ONLY NINE. YOU HAVEN'T VOTED YET. THERE WE GO. ALL RIGHT. JASON, JUST AS A QUESTION, GENERAL QUESTION BEFORE YOU MOVE ON. WHEN IT SAYS IN ANY OF THESE THINGS, THE CITY COUNCIL, CAPITAL C, CAPITAL C, WE CAN ASSUME THAT INCLUDES THE MAYOR, CORRECT? HE IS A PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, YES. THAT MOTION IS APPROVED 10-0. SORRY, GIVE ME A SECOND TO CHANGE MY PAGE. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO SECTION 1407, PROPERTY NOT SUBJECT TO GARNISHMENT AND EXECUTION. IT READS, NO PROPERTY OWNED OR HELD BY THE CITY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO ANY GARNISHMENT OR EXECUTION OF ANY KIND OR NATURE EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED BY STATE LAW. AND WITH THAT, I WILL MOVE TO ACCEPT SECTION 14.07 WITH THE RESTRICTION LISTED BELOW. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE GOOD TO VOTE. AND THAT MOTION IS APPROVED 10-0. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. NEXT SECTION IS SECTION 14.08, PUBLIC MEETINGS AND RECORDS. ALL MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ALL BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL BE GOVERNED BY THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 551, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO WITH REGARD TO THE POSTING OF AGENDA AND THE HOLDING OF PUBLIC MEETINGS. THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE ELECTRONIC NOTICE OF ALL MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ALL BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO SUBSCRIBERS VIA TEXT AND OR EMAIL. HOWEVER, THE CITY'S FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL NOT PREVENT THE CORRESPONDING MEETINGS FROM PROCEEDING AS LONG AS SAID MEETING IS DULY NOTICED IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW. THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF EVERY OFFICER, DEPARTMENT, OR AGENCY OF THE CITY SHALL BE OPEN TO INSPECTION BY ANY CITIZEN AT ALL REASONABLE BUSINESS HOURS PROVIDED THAT RECORD IS ACCEPTED FROM THE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE BY CHAPTER 552, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO SHALL BE CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC AND NOT CONSIDERED PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION. NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING, THE CITY SHALL MAINTAIN A PUBLIC-FACING ONLINE PORTAL OR WEBSITE WHERE MEETING AGENDAS, MINUTES, AND RECORDINGS, BUDGETS AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, AND PROJECT UPDATES ARE READILY AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR REVIEW. WITH THAT, I WANT TO CALL OUT THAT WE ARE RECOGNIZING THAT CAROLYN DAVID GRAVES IS NOW HERE. SHE SHOWED UP AT THE TIME OF 7.02. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION IF THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS FOR SECTION [00:25:01] 14.08. I MOTION THAT WE APPROVE SECTION 14.08, PUBLIC MEETINGS AND RECORDS, AS AMENDED. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND THAT. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE GOOD TO VOTE. TECHNICALLY, CAROLYN, SINCE YOU WALKED IN, WE'RE GOING TO NEED YOU TO EITHER ABSTAIN OR WRITE. ALL RIGHT. AND THAT MOTION PASSES 10-4. ONE ABSTAINED. THAT MOVES US ON TO SECTION 14.10, THE AMENDMENT OF THIS CHARTER, CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THESE IN TWO SEPARATE SECTIONS BECAUSE THAT'S A CHANGE TO THE TITLE. SORRY? WE DIDN'T MAKE ANY CHANGES. OH, OKAY. THAT'S FINE. ALL RIGHT. SO, AGAIN, SECTION 14.10, THE TITLE CHANGE IS AMENDMENTS OF THIS CHARTER, CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE. AND I'M GOING TO STOP THERE AND TAKE THAT AS ONE MOTION. AND SO IF NO ONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE UPDATED CHANGE TO THE TITLE. I MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE CHANGE FOR SECTION 14.10 TO CHARTER AMENDMENT OF THIS CHARTER, CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL RIGHT. PERFECT. WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE. WE ARE AT ONE MORE. ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION IS APPROVED 11-0. ALL RIGHT. NOW TO THE BODY OF SECTION 14.10. IT READS, AMENDMENTS OF THIS CHARTER MAY BE SUBMITTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE CITY FOR THEIR APPROVAL AT AN ELECTION NO MORE THAN ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS. HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 9, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL APPOINT A CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE AT LEAST ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS TO REVIEW, EVALUATE, AND RECOMMEND AMENDMENTS TO THIS CHARTER. THE MAYOR SHALL BE PERMITTED TO APPOINT AT LEAST TWO MEMBERS TO THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE WITH THE REMAINING MEMBERS APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND THAT IS IT FOR THAT. SO, IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. THERE IS A QUESTION. WE NEED TO ADD SOMETHING TO THIS THAT, JUST LIKE ALL BOARDS THAT WE HAVE, THAT ALL MEMBERS OF THE REVIEW COMMITTEE MUST BE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY. BECAUSE THE HOME RULES CHARTER IS ONLY FOR THE CITY RESIDENTS. THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT CAN VOTE ON IT ARE THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY. WE SHOULDN'T HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE PART OF THE ETJ OR OUTSIDE ABLE TO MAKE DETERMINATIONS ON THE CITY WHEN THEY CAN'T VOTE ON IT. I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE. IS THERE A VERBIAGE THAT WE CAN USE THAT'S PRE-STATED IN THE CHARTER SOMEWHERE? I THINK IT'S IN OUR BOARDS. JUST SOMETHING SIMPLE WE CAN ADD TO THIS. ALL COMMITTEE MEMBERS SHALL BE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF PRINCETON. COULDN'T YOU JUST SAY THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL APPOINT A CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE, MADE UP OF CITY RESIDENTS ONLY, AT LEAST ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS? WE CAN DO THAT TOO. WE JUST NEED TO HAVE IT IN THERE THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE UP OF CITY RESIDENTS ONLY. MY QUESTION, GRANT, IS WITH THIS AMENDMENT, WILL WE BE TYING OURSELVES TO A COMPLETELY SEPARATE MEETING? LIKE, WE APPROVE EVERYTHING ELSE AND THIS IS WHAT'S LEFT OVER. I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO YOU HOW YOU WANT TO DO IT. WE CAN TALK THROUGH IT. IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE OTHER COMMITTEE RULES THAT WOULD APPLY TO THIS ALREADY THAT WE COULD JUST USE? IT'S SPECIFIC TO EACH. SO EACH BOARD, EACH COUNCIL HAS IT IN THERE THAT EVERYBODY HAS TO BE A CITY RESIDENT. I THINK THAT THE LOGIC THAT MAXINE IS APPLYING, WHICH IS THE SAME VERBIAGE THAT'S APPLIED TO OTHER BOARDS, APPLY HERE. SO I THINK IT MAKES SENSE. SO THE AMENDMENT THAT SHE'S RECOMMENDING, THAT JULIE RECOMMENDED, WHICH IS THE COMMA, MUST BE A CITY RESIDENT OR SOME VERBIAGE TO THAT EXTENT. WOULD WE BE ABLE TO TAKE ACTION ON THAT [00:30:01] WITHIN THIS CURRENT STATE? YOU GUYS CAN. ONCE WE GET THROUGH, SEE IF THERE'S A FEW MORE AMENDMENTS AND WE CAN BRING IT BACK. OR IF IT'S THE ONLY PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND YOU GUYS ARE COMFORTABLE WITH IT. I'LL KIND OF LEAVE IT UP TO YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT ONE. SO WITH THAT, IF WE'RE OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE SECTION 14.10 UNTIL WE COMPLETE OUR REVIEW. BUT ONE MORE QUESTION, ONLY BECAUSE I THINK IT COULD BE CONFUSING. SO IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH, WITH NO CHANGES, WE SAID APPROVAL ON AN ELECTION NO MORE THAN ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS. BUT THEN IT SAYS TO APPOINT A CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE AT LEAST ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS. THE AT LEAST MEANS YOU COULD APPOINT A CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE TWICE IN TWO YEARS. WHY WOULD WE DO THAT? CAN WE JUST REMOVE THE AT LEAST? BUT WE HAVE A MOTION RIGHT NOW TO TABLE IT AND COME BACK TO THIS. OH. NO MORE THAN OFTEN. NO MORE OFTEN THAN ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS. I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T REALIZE IT WAS A FORMAL MOTION. NO, YOU'RE FINE. I DIDN'T PERCEIVE THAT AS A FORMAL MOTION. YOU SAID I WOULD, SO I THOUGHT YOU WERE SAYING THAT YOU WOULD MAKE A MOTION. OH, I'M SORRY. BUT NO, SO I THINK THAT WE'RE STILL OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. SO THE POINT THAT YOU'RE MAKING, JULIE, IS THE SECTION ABOVE IT THAT READS VOTERS OF THE CITY FOR THEIR APPROVAL AT AN ELECTION NO MORE OFTEN THAN ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS. AND THEN YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S CONFLICTING WITH THE SECOND SECTION. WELL, I JUST WONDER, HOW WOULD YOU HAVE A, WHY WOULD THE CITY COUNCIL APPOINT A CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE TWICE IN THOSE TWO YEARS WHILE YOU'RE WAITING TO MAKE NEW AMENDMENTS OR PUT NEW AMENDMENTS ON THE BALLOT? BECAUSE THIS AT LEAST HERE IN GREEN INDICATES THAT YOU COULD DO IT MORE OFTEN. YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK SO. SO THE CONSTITUTION LIMITS ON HOW OFTEN WE CAN AMEND THE CHARTER. IT'S ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS. NOW, THERE'S NO LIMIT, I GUESS, THEORETICALLY, ON HOW OFTEN A COUNCIL WOULD APPOINT A COMMITTEE. YOU'RE JUST, THE COMMITTEE COULD BE APPOINTED AND SAY, WELL, YOU DID ALL THIS WORK, BUT WE CAN'T LEGALLY CALL AN ELECTION UNTIL. SO I'LL JUST SAY I'M MORE ACCUSTOMED TO SEEING A COMMITTEE FORMED AT LEAST ONCE EVERY FOUR YEARS OR FIVE YEARS, RIGHT? BECAUSE YOU CAN ONLY CALL AN ELECTION EVERY TWO YEARS. SO, I MEAN, TO YOUR POINT, ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS. SO IF YOU CHANGE THAT, CHANGE ONE OR THE OTHER. EITHER CHANGE THE TWO YEARS OR GET RID OF THE AT LEAST IS MY RECOMMENDATION. YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THEM APPOINTING A REVIEW COMMITTEE MORE OFTEN THAN THEY CAN ACTUALLY AMEND THE CHARTER, IS YOUR POINT? OKAY, ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT POINT. SORRY. DAVID. SO RIGHT NOW WE'VE ONLY BEEN A COMMITTEE FOR EIGHT MONTHS. AND IF WE FINISH HERE IN THE NEXT HOUR OR SO, WE'LL HAVE EIGHT MONTHS. THAT'S ANOTHER 16 MONTHS THAT BY THIS, IF THEY DIDN'T GET TO PUTTING IT ON THE BALLOT, IF YOU SAY JUST ONCE IN TWO YEARS, THEY COULDN'T RECONVENE THE COMMITTEE IF THERE WAS A CHANGE IN INTEREST OR A NEW PUBLIC INTEREST OR SOMETHING THAT CAME UP. SO YOU WOULD BE LOCKING YOURSELVES IN, MAXINE, FOR EXAMPLE, TO IF WE HAD ANOTHER MAYORAL ISSUE OR CITY COUNCIL ISSUE AND WE NOTICED THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG IN THE CHARTER OR WE WANTED TO HAVE IT CHANGED TO, IF YOU TAKE THAT OUT OR YOU MAKE IT FINE, FIXED, YOU PUT YOURSELF IN A POSITION WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT IT. SO YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE IT, TO REVIEW IT. THEY COULD COME BACK. THE CITY COUNCIL COULD COME BACK THREE OR FOUR MONTHS AGO. WE MISSED SOMETHING OR THERE WAS SOMETHING MISSED. LET'S DO A REVIEW. LET'S PULL ANOTHER GROUP TOGETHER AND HAVE THEM GO THROUGH IT. YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT. RIGHT. YEAH. OKAY. SO AT THIS POINT, I THINK IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A MOTION TO PIN THIS UNTIL THE END OF THE... OH, I COULD? YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. OR A MOTION TO MAKE A CHANGE WITH THE ADJUSTED VERBIAGE. MARK, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YES. WE MENTIONED ADDING THE WORD FOR RESIDENT IN THERE. I GUESS FOR ME, HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY THAT'S NECESSARY IF ANYBODY IN THE ATJ CANNOT VOTE, CANNOT DO ANYTHING A RESIDENT CAN DO. WHY ARE WE SPECIFICALLY PUTTING [00:35:01] THE DEFINITION IN HERE? BECAUSE SOMEONE THAT IS NOT A RESIDENT OF THE CITY WHO DOESN'T HAVE VOTING POWER COULD ALSO HAVE THE... COULD BE APPOINTED TO THE HOMEBREW CHARTER COMMITTEE AND THEN BE A PART OF THE DECISION MAKING FOR WHAT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE RESIDENTS OF PRINCETON. NO, THEY SHOULDN'T. THAT'S A... THEY SHOULDN'T. THAT'S A PAPER SHOULDN'T. THEY SHOULDN'T. THERE'S NOTHING TO SAY. IT SHOULDN'T. WOW. WITHOUT IT IN THERE, IT COULD HAPPEN. IT'S HAPPENED. YES. SO FROM MY UNDERSTANDING... LET'S LET HIM CLEAR HIS QUESTION. SORRY. IN ANY CASE, I'M SIMPLE, SO I'VE GOT TO JUST ROLL WITH ME. PART OF THE COMMITTEE, YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT A NAME AND AN ADDRESS TO BE REVIEWED. WHO REVIEWS THIS LIST BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL DOES IT? NO, WE DIDN'T. OH, SO WE GOT OUR BACKSTAB. BUT WAIT A MINUTE, MARK. I'M SORRY. WE ALL DID NOT SUBMIT OUR NAMES. THE CITY COUNCIL, ON THEIR OWN, JUST CHOSE US... APPOINTED. AND UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S ALWAYS THAT CRACK THAT IT COULD SLIP THROUGH OF THAT INFORMATION NOT BEING VERIFIED. SO BY HAVING IT IN THE CHARTER ENFORCES IT AND HOPEFULLY ENSURES IT IS. BECAUSE IF THERE DOES SAY YOU LIVE IN THE ETJ AND IT WAS IN THE CHARTER, THEN WE COULD REMOVE YOU FROM THE COMMITTEE. BUT AT THIS TIME, BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN THE CHARTER, WE CAN'T REMOVE YOU. YEAH. COUNCIL HAS BROAD DISCRETION. OKAY. HEARD. DON'T AGREE AT ALL, BUT HEARD. BECAUSE WE'RE PUTTING A RULE IN FOR A BACKSTAB PROCESS THAT'S ALREADY THERE. IT'S NOT. IT'S NOT THERE. IT'S NOT THAT THE COUNCIL APPOINTS INDIVIDUALS. YES. RIGHT. AND IT'S NOT. MARK, NOT EVERYBODY HAS A RULE FOLLOWER. OKAY. DOES IT REALLY MATTER? IT DOESN'T. THAT'S WHAT I'M LIKE. LET'S NOT PUT IT IN THERE. I, FOR ONE, AM NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO HAVING SOMEBODY OFF THE ETJ ON THE COMMITTEE. THE COMMITTEE TAKES PUBLIC INTEREST, APPLIES SOME COMMON SENSE TO OUR RULES, AND THEN PROVIDES A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. AND THEN THE CITY COUNCIL DECIDES WHAT OR IF ANY OF IT ACTUALLY GETS SENT TO THE PUBLIC. AND THEN THE PUBLIC, WHICH IS JUST CITY RESIDENTS, VOTES TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY WANT IT OR NOT. IF IN ALL OF THAT PROCESS A COUPLE PEOPLE FROM THE ETJ WHO MIGHT ACTUALLY HAVE A GOOD IDEA OR MIGHT ACTUALLY HAVE SOME KIND OF A POSITIVE INFLUENCE THAT'S NOT A SILOED GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST CITY RESIDENTS, I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD GET FLUSHED OUT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS. AND JUST ARBITRARILY SAYING, BECAUSE YOU LIVE IN THE ETJ, AND OH, BY THE WAY, YOU MIGHT BE PART OF THE CITY LIMITS NEXT MONTH OR NEXT YEAR OR WHEN THE NEXT VOTE COMES, IS SOMEHOW THAT THOSE PEOPLE MAY NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO CONTRIBUTE, I THINK IS A LITTLE SHORT-SIGHTED. DULY NOTED. YEP. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? OKAY. MS. ANTHONY, YOU WERE MAKING A MOTION? I AM MAKING A MOTION THAT WE ADD AND WE KEEP THE SAME PROCESS AS ALL OF OUR BOARDS AND COUNCIL THAT YOU DO HAVE TO BE A RESIDENT OF THE CITY TO BE A PART OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. AND WITH THAT, WE ARE GOOD TO VOTE. SECTION 14.0. MR. CHAIRMAN, I'VE GOT A QUESTION. WHAT ARE WE VOTING ON? I MEAN, I DIDN'T HEAR ANY SPECIFIC WORDS. SHE'S TALKING ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF THE BOARDS AND STUFF. ADDING THE VERBIAGE THAT YOU NEED TO BE A RESIDENT OF THE CITY TO BE ON THE BOARD, THE SAME VERBIAGE THAT WE USE FOR ALL OTHER. THE GREEN SECTION. ADOPTING THE SAME VERBIAGE THAT'S IN OUR OTHER BOARDS' COMMISSIONS REQUIRING RESIDENCY IN THE CITY. GOT YOU. [00:40:03] WE PROBABLY COULD, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, GRANT, IF YOU HAVE THAT AT HAND, MAYBE COME BACK TO THIS ONE. YEAH, IF WE'RE OKAY TO PAUSE THIS, MAYBE IF YOU CAN GRAB THAT UP, WE CAN COME BACK TO IT AND VOTE ON IT. YEAH. AND GRANT WILL LOOK THAT UP. I JUST GO THROUGH THE REST OF IT AND THEN MAYBE COME BACK WITH THAT VERBIAGE SO THAT WAY YOU HAVE THAT. GRANT'S GOOD AT DESIGNING THAT VERBIAGE FOR US. AMBER, IF WE CAN SCRAP THIS ONE, THANK YOU. IN YOUR VERBIAGE, IS IT JUST CITY RESIDENTS OR CITY RESIDENTS AND QUALIFIED VOTERS? GRANT WILL BRING BACK THE VERBIAGE THAT'S UTILIZED IN THE BOARDS. WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE IT TO GRANT TO GET THE PROPER VERBIAGE FOR IT. YEAH. SO, MAXINE. RIGHT, YEAH, WE'VE GOT TO MAKE A MOTION TO GIVE IT TO HIM. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION. IS IT ONLY CITY RESIDENTS OR IS IT CITY RESIDENTS AND QUALIFIED VOTERS? YOU NEED TO BE A CITY RESIDENT AND A QUALIFIED VOTER. ARE WE? YOU HAVE TO MEET BOTH CRITERIA. YOU HAVE TO MEET BOTH CRITERIA. SO, SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T VOTE CAN BE A RESIDENT, CAN JOIN A COMMITTEE. IF THEY'RE A CITY RESIDENT, CORRECT. SO, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING FOR. OKAY. BECAUSE EVEN ON BOARDS, YOU DON'T NEED TO BE A REGISTERED VOTER TO BE ON A BOARD. YOU JUST NEED TO BE A CITY RESIDENT. SO, MY 17-YEAR-OLD SON CAN BE ON THE BOARD? YES. NO, YOU HAVE TO BE 18. YOU HAVE TO BE AT LEAST 18. HE'S A RESIDENT. SO, I THINK WE CAN SIMPLIFY THIS REALLY EASILY. THE VERBIAGE THAT'S UTILIZED FOR ALL OF OUR BOARDS RIGHT NOW HAS VERY CLEAR DISTINCTIONS AROUND RESIDENCY, QUALIFICATIONS. YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE THE VERBIAGE IN FRONT OF ME TO TELL WHETHER OR NOT IT SAYS QUALIFIED VOTER, BUT THAT VERBIAGE WE'VE APPROVED AND IT'S BEEN THE VERBIAGE WE USE FOR ALL THE REST OF OUR BOARDS. WHAT SHE'S ULTIMATELY RECOMMENDING IS TO TAKE THAT EXACT SAME VERBIAGE AND APPLY IT HERE. FOR THIS. WHAT GRANT WILL BE ABLE TO DO WHEN SHE'S ABLE TO MAKE THE MOTION, HE WILL BE ABLE TO PULL THAT VERBIAGE UP AND RESTATE WHAT THAT VERBIAGE IS. AND AT THAT POINT IN TIME, ONCE WE GET A MOTION TO PAUSE THIS ONE AND BRING IT BACK IN THE BACK END, HE CAN READ THAT VERBIAGE. AND GUESS WHAT? WE CAN TEAR IT APART AT THAT POINT. BUT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO PAUSE THIS ONE SO WE CAN GET ON TO THE REST OF IT. SO, ARE WE TABLING IT UNTIL THE END? WE'RE TABLING IT UNTIL THE END. OKAY. SO, I RESCIND MY MOTION AND TABLE SECTION 14.10 UNTIL THE END. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE. TO TABLE IT. YES. ALL RIGHT. MOTION APPROVES 11-0. I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. ALL RIGHT. THAT MOVES US TO SECTION 14.13, MEANING OF WORDS. THIS WILL BE FUN. THE PROVISION OF THIS CHARTER SHALL BE LIBERALLY CONSTRUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF AFFECTING THE OBJECTS AND THE ENDS THEREOF. UNLESS SOME OTHER MEANING IS MANIFEST, THE WORD CITY SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO MEAN THE CITY OF PRINCETON. WORDS IN THE PRESENT TENSE INCLUDE FUTURE TENSE AND, EXCEPT WHEN A MORE CONSTRICTIVE MEANING IS MANIFEST, SINGULAR MAY MEAN PLURAL. THE WORD COUNCIL SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO MEAN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PRINCETON. THE GENDER OF THE WORDING AS CONTAINED IN THIS CHARTER SHALL ALWAYS BE INTERPRETED TO MEAN EITHER SEX. I'M MAKING A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE SECTION 14.13, MEANING OF WORDS, AS AMENDED. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND FROM DAVEY YOST. WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE UNLESS THERE'S QUESTIONS. JULIE, IT HAS ALREADY BEEN A LONG DAY. MOTION IS APPROVED 11-0. ALL RIGHT. SECTION 14.14, EFFECTIVE DATE, THIS CHARTER, AND ANY AMENDMENTS HERETO SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING ADOPTION BY THE VOTERS AND ENTRY OF THE OFFICIAL ORDER BY THE CITY COUNCIL DECLARING THE SAME AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE. SORRY. AFTER ADOPTION, THE MAYOR SHALL CERTIFY TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE AN AUTHENTICATED COPY OF THE CHARTER ON THE CITY'S SEAL SHOWING APPROVED BY THE VOTERS. THE CITY SECRETARY SHALL RECORD THE CHARTER IN A BOOK KEPT FOR THAT PURPOSE AND MAINTAIN THE SAME AS THE OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE CITY. IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I MOTION WE ACCEPT SECTION 14.14, EFFECTIVE DATE, AS AMENDED. I SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A SECOND BY CAROLYN DAY GRAVES, FIRST BY MAXINE ELLIS, AND WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE. [00:45:04] ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION IS APPROVED 11-0. THAT TAKES US BACK TO OUR FUN SECTION. IT TAKES US TO CHAPTER 15, ADOPTION OF THE CHARTER. OH, SORRY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THERE'S A BACK PAGE. THANK YOU, MR. CRISWELL AND ALLISON, FOR KEEPING ME HONEST. CHAPTER 15, WHICH IS SECTION ADOPTION OF THE CHARTER. IT'S A COMPLETE STRIKETHROUGH. I'M NOT GOING TO READ WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE. I MOVE TO STRIKE SECTION 15. I SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE. MOTION IS APPROVED 11-0. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO JUMP BACK TO THE PREVIOUS SECTION THAT WAS IN DISCUSSION, SECTION 14.10. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO AMENDMENTS OF THIS CHARTER, CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE. AND I WANT TO GIVE IT OVER TO GRANT TO KIND OF READ THE VERBIAGE THAT'S IN THE BOARD'S SECTION. AND THAT WAY THAT'S KIND OF ON EVERYBODY'S MIND BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THE AMENDMENTS. BEFORE YOU DO THAT, I DO HAVE ONE COMMENT. WHEN I WAS READING ABOUT HOME RULES CHARTERS, IN THE ACTUAL HOME RULE CHARTER, THE TEXAS LAW, IT DOES STATE THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE HOME RULE CHARTERS DO HAVE TO BE RESIDENTS OF THAT CITY. FOR THE INITIAL COMMITTEE? YES. THAT'S THE ONLY ONE WHERE A COMMITTEE IS REQUIRED. AND AFTER THAT, A COMMITTEE IS NOT REQUIRED UNLESS YOU PUT IT IN YOUR CHARTER THAT A COMMITTEE SHALL BE. IT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL'S DISCRETION. BUT YOU ARE CORRECT, THE INITIAL COMMITTEE, BUT NOT AFTER THAT, IT CAN BE MADE UP HOWEVER COUNCIL WANTS IT TO BE MADE UP, AS FAR AS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CHARTER. I'M STEPPING AWAY. MAXINE WILL TAKE OVER FROM THIS POINT UNTIL I RETURN. GRANT. OKAY. I GUESS BACK TO ME. SO IF THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO IMPOSE A RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT FOR THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE, WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE IS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE LANGUAGE THROUGHOUT THE CHARTER AND THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS CHAPTER, WOULD BE AT THE VERY LAST SENTENCE, WE'RE BACK AT 14.10, WOULD BE THE MAYOR SHALL BE PERMITTED TO APPOINT AT LEAST TWO MEMBERS TO THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE WITH THE REMAINING MEMBERS APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL MEMBERS COMMA, EACH OF WHOM SHALL BE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF PRINCETON. AND THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH HOW IT'S, IT IS THROUGHOUT THE CHARTER ALREADY. SO THAT'S IF, IF THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION AND, AND APPROVE THAT, THAT'S WHAT I, THAT'S HOW I WOULD FIT IT INTO THIS, THIS SECTION. OKAY. SO WE'LL OPEN THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION. I DO THINK DAVID'S CONCERN NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED BECAUSE THAT LANGUAGE SIMPLY SAYS RESIDENT. AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY, I DON'T THINK A FIVE-YEAR-OLD IS IN QUESTION, BUT I DO THINK A 17 YEAR OLD AND 18 YEAR OLD, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE ALL POTENTIAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS, WHICH IF THAT'S WHAT WE VOTE TO HAVE HAPPEN, THAT'S FINE. I THINK THAT THOUGH IT REQUIRES FURTHER CLARIFICATION. IS THERE SOMETHING THAT STATES THEY HAVE TO BE 18? WELL, I THINK ONE EASY WAY TO CLARIFY THE AGE IS IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THE RESIDENCY, RESIDENCY AND REGISTER VOTER, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO AT LEAST BE 18 TO VOTE. SO WE CAN KILL TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE AND DO IT THAT WAY. AND THAT'LL GIVE YOU YOUR AGE THAT YOU'RE A RESIDENT. AND THEN THE REASON WHY I KEEP SAYING REGISTER VOTER IS I WANT SOMEBODY ON THE COMMITTEE THAT'S GOING TO GO OUT THERE AND VOTE. AGREE. AGREE. AND THAT, I GUESS THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT BEHIND ME DOING THIS, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE NOT IN THE CITY AND YOU'RE NOT A REGISTERED, YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO VOTE FOR ANYTHING. CITY CAN'T VOTE FOR MAYOR. YOU CAN'T VOTE FOR COUNCIL. YOU CAN'T VOTE FOR ANYTHING. YOU CAN ONLY VOTE IN A NATIONAL ELECTION. IF YOU'RE NOT AN OFFICIAL RESIDENT, BUT GOING BACK TO THE AGE, WHAT WOULD PREVENT DAVID, FOR EXAMPLE, HIS 17 YEAR OLD SON APPLYING FOR EDC OR CDC. I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY A ROADBLOCK IN PLACE THAT WHEN AN APPLICATION AND A NAME GOES THROUGH, SOMEBODY HAS TO LOOK AT IT. [00:50:01] NOT AGE. BUT YOU'D HAVE TO BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY THE REJECTION, BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT COULD BE LEGITIMATELY ARGUED THAT THERE'S NO RESTRICTION ON THAT. SO WITHOUT THE CLARIFICATION, THAT'S THE ONLY, IF WE WANT A CERTAIN AGE MINIMUM, THEN I THINK WE NEED TO CLARIFY. DON'T GET ME WRONG. I HAVE A GREAT KID AND I THINK HE'S REALLY SMART. AND I THINK HE WOULD DO A REALLY GOOD JOB ON ONE OF THESE COMMITTEES. SO I'M NOT ADVOCATING AGAINST HAVING SOMEBODY WHO'S A CITIZEN OF GOOD CHARACTER THAT'S PICKED BY A CITY COUNCILMAN DOES SERVE AS A INTELLECTUAL PERSON ON THE COMMITTEE. I JUST WANTED TO PUT IT OUT THERE THAT THIS COULD BE A CONCERN FOR SOME PEOPLE. BUT I LIKE WHAT YOU WERE SAYING. I THINK THE DIFFERENCE WITH THIS COMMITTEE. SO LIKE TERRENCE WAS SAYING, LIKE THE OTHER COMMITTEES HAVE BYLAWS, WHICH TELLS YOU LIKE RESTRICTIONS AND STUFF. AND THIS COMMITTEE IS A NOMINATION COMMITTEE. SO THIS ISN'T SOMETHING WHERE ANYBODY CAN JUST APPLY OFF THE STREET. THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE THE COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO NOMINATE PEOPLE. SO THERE'S NOBODY THAT'S GOING TO COMPLAIN AND SAY LIKE, YOU DIDN'T PICK ME. IT'S GOING TO BE SOMEBODY THAT'S NOMINATED BY CERTAIN PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO SAY, THAT'S HOW WE GOT IT ALL ON IT. SOMEBODY KNEW US OR SOMEBODY ASKED US TO, IF WE WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS. SO THERE ISN'T GOING TO BE PEOPLE COMPLAINING THAT THEY APPLIED AND DIDN'T GET CHOSEN. AND THEN THE OTHER COMMITTEES DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THOSE TYPES OF THINGS PUT IN HERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE BYLAWS THAT KIND OF NAVIGATE THOSE ISSUES. SO WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. BEFORE WE MAKE THE MOTION, CAN WE CONSIDER WHAT DAVID SAID? I AGREE THAT WE PROBABLY WOULD NEED TO SAY THAT THERE'LL BE RESIDENTS OF VOTING AGE, ONE. AND TWO, THAT AT COUNCIL'S DISCRETION, THAT THEY COULD APPOINT A MEMBER OF THE ETJ OR AN EXPERT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TERMINOLOGY TO COME UP WITH. BUT SOMEONE, AS DAVID SAID, WHO WOULD ADD SOME VALIDITY TO THE REVISION OF THE CHARTER. BUT GOING BACK TO WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, MARK, IN REGARDS TO THAT PERSON BEING A REGISTERED VOTER, THEN YOU'RE NOT 100% ASSURED THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE OF A VESTED INTEREST BECAUSE IT'S IMPACTING THEM HERE IN THE CITY. IT'S IMPACTING WHERE THEY LIVE BY HAVING TO BE A CITY RESIDENT AND A REGISTERED VOTER. CAN'T WE JUST TRUST OUR CITY COUNCIL TO PICK SOME PEOPLE? HOLY CRAP. NO. I'M GOING TO BE OUTRIGHT HONEST AND OPEN AND SAY NO. WELL, IF I MAY, I THINK THAT BECAUSE OUR BOUNDARIES ARE NOT STATIC, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT THE CITY OF DALLAS. WE HAVE BOUNDARIES THAT POTENTIALLY AND PROBABLY WILL EXPAND OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS. I DO THINK, AT LEAST IT MADE ME STOP AND THINK, AND I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHERE I SIT ON THIS, HOWEVER, IT IS SOMETHING I BELIEVE WE SHOULD ALL CONSIDER. SOMEBODY WHO LIVES OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY TODAY AND MAY LIVE INSIDE THE BOUNDARY IN SIX MONTHS, IT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE VALUE OF THE INPUT OF THAT PERSON BECAUSE THEY ARE, AT SOME POINT IN TIME, PROBABLY GOING TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CITY. JUST BECAUSE IT MADE ME STOP AND THINK, AND I HAD NEVER ACTUALLY THOUGHT ABOUT IT, SO THANK YOU. I JUST THINK IT'S WORTH EACH OF US INDIVIDUALLY CONSIDERING. I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER ELEMENT, AND I COULD BE SWAYED EITHER WAY. I SEE THE LOGIC. I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER ELEMENT THAT I THINK WE HAVE TO CONSIDER HERE. AND MAYBE WHILE I WAS AWAY, YOU GUYS DISCUSSED THIS, SO LET ME KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE. BUT WOULD WE BE OKAY IF, LIKE, LET'S SAY A QUORUM IS SEVEN, AND THERE'S FOUR THAT'S PART. ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT? THE FOUR THAT ARE NOT CITY RESIDENTS, WE'RE FINE WITH THAT. THE MAJORITY OF THE VOTES WITHIN THIS RIGHT ARE NOT CURRENTLY. SO THE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANSWERING TO THAT ARE THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY, WE'RE STRUCTURING THIS IN A WAY TO WHERE NON-RESIDENTS HAVE A VOICE THAT ARE IMPACTING THEM. AND MAYBE SIX MONTHS FROM NOW THEY WILL, BUT RIGHT NOW THIS CHANGE WILL IMMEDIATELY IMPACT THEM. [00:55:03] I WOULD SAY THAT IF THEY WERE THE LAST VOICE ON WHO OR ON WHAT GETS ON THE ROLLS FOR THE VOTE, I WOULD BE MORE ALONG THE LINES OF SAYING, YEAH, THEY NEED TO BE A CITY RESIDENT. BUT THE SIMPLE FACT THAT EVEN THOUGH WE'RE DONE, NONE OF THIS WORK THAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE LAST EIGHT MONTHS NECESSARILY WILL EVEN MAKE IT TO A BALLOT. I GET IT. LIKE, AT SOME POINT YOU'VE GOT TO TRUST THE PEOPLE YOU ELECTED LAST TIME, AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE THEM, GET RID OF THEM AND PUT SOMEBODY ELSE ON THE COMMITTEE AND DO IT AGAIN. BUT IF YOU LIMIT THE PEOPLE WHO CAN BE ON IT TO JUST THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE CITY, YOU COMPLETELY ELIMINATE ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE WHO MIGHT HAVE SOME INPUT THAT COULD BENEFIT THE CITY. AND IT'S ARBITRARY, AND I THINK IT'S JUST OVERDONE. GRANT, WHAT OTHER HOMELESS CHARTERS HAVE YOU REVIEWED THAT HAVE A RESIDENCY RESTRICTION? I MEAN, I CAN'T THINK OF ANY OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. I WILL SAY PROBABLY MOST CHARTERS LEAVE IT UP TO THE COUNCIL TO APPOINT, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, ABSENT SOMETHING IN THE CHARTER, IT'S THE COUNCIL THAT WOULD BE THE ONE THAT WOULD APPOINT IT ANYWAYS. I WILL SAY THAT IT'S PROBABLY MOST COUNCILS DO APPOINT RESIDENTS FOR THAT REASON, BUT I THINK I SEE THE POINT WHERE THERE'S NO HARM IN HAVING A NON-RESIDENT ON THE COMMITTEE TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT. HEY, THIS IS HOW OUR CITY DOES IT, OR THIS OUTSIDE LOOK. BUT THERE'S NOT A LOT OF RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS THAT I'M AWARE OF IN CHARTERS. IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T HAVE ONE. PROCEDURALLY, IF THIS MOTION WAS VOTED DOWN, SO THE LANGUAGE STAYS THE WAY THAT IT IS HERE, AND A COUNCIL MEMBER NOMINATED SOMEONE LIVING OUTSIDE OF THE – SOMEONE WHO'S NOT A RESIDENT, DOES THAT BECOME THEIR DECISION AMONG THEM SINCE IT'S NOT EXPLICITLY LAID OUT IN THE CHARTER? THE COUNCIL MEMBERS DEBATE AMONG THEMSELVES AS TO WHETHER THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE OR NOT. YEAH, AND IT ALL DEPENDS ON THE – YOU KNOW, ABSENT REQUIREMENTS IN THE CHARTER, IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW COUNCIL WANTS TO APPOINT THE MEMBERS. LIKE THIS GO-AROUND, I THINK IT WAS EACH COUNCIL MEMBER SELECTED THREE INITIALLY. THEY JUST WENT AND SELECTED THREE AND HAD A LIST, AND THAT'S WHO – BUT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE NEXT GO-AROUND THERE WILL BE AN APPLICATION PROCESS. I DON'T KNOW. IT'S UP TO WHATEVER COUNCIL WANTS TO DO. BUT THIS TIME AROUND, THE COUNCIL DIDN'T KNOW WHO LIVED IN ETJ AND WHO DIDN'T. THEY JUST HAD A LIST OF NAMES AND PICKED. YEAH, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE EITHER GOING TO TRUST OUR COUNCIL OR WE'RE NOT. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO TRUST THEM, LEAVE IT THE SAME. IF WE'RE NOT, PUT A RESTRICTION IN THERE. YEAH, JUST ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION OR SUGGESTION. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. THERE'S NO MOTION RIGHT NOW. BUT YOU GUYS COULD – YOU KNOW, WHEN WE WRAP THIS UP AT THE COMMITTEE, THE DELIVERABLE TO COUNCIL IS A FINAL WRITTEN REPORT. SO IF YOU GUYS DON'T WANT TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT, YOU COULD MAKE A NOTE THAT THIS IS ONE OF THE DISCUSSION TOPICS THAT THE COMMITTEE WAS KIND OF – JUST KIND OF AS A FYI FOR THE NEXT COMMITTEE. YOU COULD INCLUDE THAT IN THE REPORT AS SOMETHING TO LOOK AT. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION NOW, YOU CERTAINLY CAN. I KNOW YOU CAN STILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. THAT'S JUST ANOTHER IDEA, TOO, THAT WE COULD REFERENCE IT IN THE REPORT. I THINK IT'S A GREAT POINT, GRANT. I DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY FROM VICE CHAIR ELLIS. YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THE MOTION, WE GET A SECOND. WE GO THROUGH THE VOTING PROCESS. IF IT DOESN'T MAKE IT THROUGH, THEN WE CAN ALWAYS ADD IT AS A NOTE. IT'S UP TO YOU. I'M ON THE FENCE BACK AND FORTH BECAUSE I PICTURE – AND I'M NOT SAYING THIS WOULD HAPPEN, BUT WHO'S TO SAY SINCE THE COUNCIL GETS A LIST, NOT KNOWING WHERE PEOPLE LIVE IN THAT CITY, NON-CITY, THAT THE MAJORITY OF THIS NEXT REVIEW COMMITTEE, THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE COULD BE ETJ PEOPLE. WELL, CAN WE SPECIFY THAT COUNCIL GETS THE ADDRESS? MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE SELECTED, THE ADDRESS WAS KNOWN THAT THEY'RE IN THE CITY. KEEP IT SIMPLE. AND IF YOU STILL FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT IT, LET'S PUT THE MOTION OUT THERE AND VOTE. SO MY MOTION IS THAT WE PUT IN – WE AMEND 14.10 TO HAVE GUIDANCE THAT THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE TO BE CITY RESIDENTS THAT ARE REGISTERED VOTERS. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO FORWARD. [01:00:01] DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL RIGHT. AND WE ARE GOOD TO VOTE. ALL RIGHT. MOTION – OH, STILL HAVE ONE MORE. MOTION FAILS 5-6. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT SETTLES THAT FOR 14.10. I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE CHANGES CURRENTLY ADDRESSED IN 14.10 AS IS. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND. YEP. I'LL GIVE AMBER A SECOND TO CLEAR IT. MOTION IS APPROVED 9-2. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT BEING SAID, GRANT, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT FINALIZES ALL THE AMENDMENTS. WE CAN MAKE A NOTE. YEAH. WE WILL END UP MOVING INTO THAT. THAT FINALIZES ALL THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE'VE COVERED SO FAR THROUGH THERE. I DO WANT TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY, ANY LAST-MINUTE ADJUSTMENTS, WE WILL COME BACK TO ADDING THAT NOTE AS PART OF THE WRITTEN REPORT. ANY LAST-MINUTE ADJUSTMENTS OR SECTIONS THAT WANT TO BE DISCUSSED BEFORE WE CLOSE? I WANT TO REVISIT ONE ITEM. SORRY, GUYS. PLEASE. OKAY. SO I WOULD LIKE TO REVISIT SECTION 4.02. OKAY. SO, GRANT, I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO SECTION 4.02. LET ME OPEN THAT ONE UP AND READ IT THROUGH, AND THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GO INTO IT. SO CHAPTER 4, CITY MANAGER, SECTION 4.02, DIRECTION AND SUPERVISION OF EMPLOYEES, NONINTERFERENCE BY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS AND REMOVALS OF DEPARTMENT HEADS. READS, NEITHER THE MAYOR NOR ANY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER SHALL IN ANY MANNER DICTATE THE APPOINTMENT OR REMOVAL OF ANY CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE WHOM THE CITY MANAGER OR ANY OF HER SUBORDINATES ARE EMPOWERED TO APPOINT, NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING, BUT IS A STRIKEOUT. I APOLOGIZE. ONE, THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS AND FULLY AND FREELY DISCUSS WITH THE CITY MANAGER ANYTHING PERTAINING TO THE APPOINTMENT OR REMOVAL OF ANY CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE WHOM THE CITY MANAGER OR ANY OF HER SUBORDINATES ARE EMPOWERED TO APPOINT, AND TWO, I THOUGHT THOSE SHOULD BE OF AS WELL, OF HER SUBORDINATES ARE EMPOWERED TO APPOINT, AND TWO, THE CITY MANAGER AND MAYOR SHALL AGREE IN WRITING BEFORE APPOINTING AN OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE TO SERVE AS A CITY DEPARTMENT HEAD. FOR THE PURPOSE OF INQUIRIES AND FOR INVESTIGATIONS, THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY COMMUNICATE WITH CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES WHO ARE SUBJECT TO THE DIRECTION AND SUPERVISION OF THE CITY MANAGER, PROVIDED NEITHER THE MAYOR NOR ANY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER SHALL IN ANY MANNER GIVE ORDERS TO SUCH OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES, EITHER PUBLICLY OR PRIVATELY. IF THE CITY MANAGER IS TEMPORARILY UNABLE TO PERFORM APPOINTMENT DUTIES, THE CITY COUNCIL OR CITY MANAGER MAY DESIGNATE AN ALTERNATE. ALL RIGHT, WITH THAT, IT IS OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS. OKAY, SO I'M PRETTY SURE I MISSED THIS MEETING. I ONLY MISSED TWO, BUT I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THEM. THAT MY ONLY CONCERN IS, AND I WAS KIND OF EXPLAINED WHY IT WAS DONE THIS WAY INSTEAD OF GOING BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL, IS THAT THE MAYOR AND THE CITY MANAGER HAVE TO AGREE TO ANY APPOINTMENT. IS THAT WHAT IF THEY, FOR SOME REASON, JUST NEVER AGREE? AND IT'S LIKE THEY ALWAYS ARE AT A STALEMATE FOR WHATEVER REASON. THEY JUST DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER FOR WHATEVER REASON. WHAT IS THE TIEBREAKER? IS THERE A TIEBREAKER? BECAUSE IF THEY DON'T AGREE ON THE APPOINTMENTS OF SOMEBODY FOR A POSITION, WHEN WILL THE POSITION GET FILLED IF THEY DON'T AGREE ON ANY OF THE APPLICANTS? AND THERE IS NO TIEBREAKER, SO IT SAYS THEY HAVE TO AGREE. SO IF THEY NEVER AGREE, WHAT HAPPENS? THE POSITION JUST REMAINS OPEN FOREVER? THE CONVERSATION ON THAT PARTICULAR MEETING WAS, IT BOILED DOWN TO THAT, THAT THE CITY MANAGER AND THE MAYOR HAD TO COME TO TERMS WITH EACH OTHER TO PROVIDE A CANDIDATE THAT BOTH OF THEM WOULD BE WILLING TO LIVE WITH. SO WHAT IS THE TIEBREAKER? THERE IS NO TIEBREAKER. IF THEY DON'T AGREE, THEN IT'S A NO. FOREVER. [01:05:01] HOPEFULLY THEY CAN BE ADULTS AND THEY CAN MOVE ON. YEAH, HOPEFULLY THERE ARE ROLES WITHIN THE CITY. BUT THAT'S MY CONCERN. SHOULDN'T THERE AT LEAST BE AT SOME POINT, IF THERE'S FOUR OR FIVE CANDIDATES THAT COME THAT ONE LIKES AND THE OTHER DOESN'T AND IT CONTINUES, THAT THERE SHOULD BE AT SOME POINT SOMEBODY LIKE THE COUNCIL THAT GETS TO SAY, OKAY, NOW THE DECISION COMES TO US? WELL, IF IT WENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL, THEN THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD BE OVERRIDING THE CITY MANAGER. THAT'S NOT APPROPRIATE EITHER. RIGHT. BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO TELL THE CITY MANAGER THAT HE HAS TO MANAGE WITH THE STAFF THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE HIM? THAT'S NOT FAIR EITHER, RIGHT? SO THE WHOLE POINT BEHIND HAVING HIM HAVE THE APPOINTMENT AUTHORITY IS SO THAT HE CAN RUN THE CITY WITH THE MAYOR, WITH APPOINTED OFFICIALS. THAT'S THE ONLY ONES THAT IT WAS, IS APPOINTED OFFICIALS, RIGHT? RIGHT. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO AGREE WITH WHO THE GARBAGE MAN IS OR THE DOG CATCHER GUY. IF THEY JUST DON'T AGREE, THEN THE POSITION COULD STAY OPEN FOREVER. I MEAN, IF THEY JUST DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER AND THEY JUST DON'T AGREE. THAT CONDITION WOULD BE EXTREMELY HOSTILE FOR BOTH THE CITY MANAGER AND THE MAYOR. I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BEHOOVE THEM TO AGREE. AND TO YOUR POINT EARLIER THAT YOU MADE, DAVID, I THINK THAT THOUGH THE COUNCIL WOULDN'T COME INTO THIS DECISION AS FAR AS HAVING THE OVERALL AUTHORITY AND SAY IN IT, I DO BELIEVE THE COUNCIL PROBABLY WOULD HAVE SOME SWAY INTO, LIKE, SOMEONE NEEDS TO MAKE A DECISION REAL QUICK. RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT I'M JUST SAYING IS THERE MAYBE NEEDS TO BE SOMEWHERE WHERE THERE'S THIRD-PARTY INVOLVEMENT AT SOME POINT. WELL, I'M GOING TO BE CLEAR. I'M NOT SAYING I THINK THERE'S OFFICIALLY THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A CHANGE HERE TO WHERE COUNCIL HAS A SAY. I'M SAYING THAT BECAUSE TYPICALLY IN THOSE SCENARIOS, LIKE, IT'S NOT DONE IN A VACUUM. THE CITY MANAGER AND THE MAYOR ARE NOT GOING TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THAT CAPACITY WITHOUT COUNCIL GETTING ON SOMEONE'S CASE ABOUT MAKING A DECISION. OKAY. THAT WAS MY ONLY CONCERN IS SEEING THAT AND THERE'S NO TIEBREAKER IN THERE. AND I WANT TO ADD TO THAT IS THIS MAKES IT MORE OF A PARTNERSHIP, RIGHT, IN TERMS OF HOW THEY MANAGE THE CITY. IT FORCES THEM. BECAUSE I SEE THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE MAYOR HAVING SOME INPUT IN THAT BECAUSE IF ANYTHING GOES WRONG IN THE CITY, THAT BLAME GOES TO THE MAYOR. SO THIS GIVES THEM SOME SKIN IN THE GAME IN TERMS OF THE MANAGEMENT THAT'S IN PLACE. BUT, YEAH, I WOULD ASSUME THAT WE WOULD HAVE ELECTED A PROFESSIONAL AND HIRED A PROFESSIONAL, AND THEY COULD BE PROFESSIONAL IN FORMING THAT PARTNERSHIP TO PUSH THINGS FORWARD. AND JUST LIKE WHAT THEY MENTIONED, I CAN ALMOST ASSURE YOU THAT COUNCIL WOULD HAVE AN OPINION IN TERMS OF, HEY, LET'S GET THIS ON THE ROAD. ABSOLUTELY. AND I WOULD HOPE, NO MATTER WHAT, LET'S SAY JASON AND I, OUTSIDE OF HERE, WE DON'T AGREE ON ANYTHING, BUT WHEN WE'RE HERE DOING OUR JOB, WE HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER AND PARTNER AND PUT ASIDE OUR DIFFERENCES, WHETHER WE LIKE EACH OTHER OR NOT OR ULTIMATELY MAY NOT GET ALONG. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO PERFORMING A JOB, THEN WE HAVE TO PUT THOSE DIFFERENCES ASIDE. YEP. AND I CAN SAY THAT THERE ARE LEVERS IN THIS DOCUMENT TO WHERE IF THE MAYOR IS HOLDING UP CITY BUSINESS IN THAT MAGNITUDE TO WHERE IT'S JUST, I DON'T LIKE THIS PERSON FOR THAT, WE HAVE AN OPTION TO REMOVE THAT MAYOR. MM-HMM. AND JUST TO BE ON PUBLIC RECORD, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID, MAXINE, AND HONESTLY, IF TWO PEOPLE, ONE HIRED, ONE ELECTED, CANNOT, THEN WE HAVE THE WRONG PEOPLE IN POSSIBLY BOTH POSITIONS. WELL, AND THAT GOES BACK TO THE WHOLE, IN GENERAL, YOU KNOW, UP THERE AND THE WHOLE THING. RIGHT. YEP. EXACTLY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NOPE. THAT WAS MY ONLY CONCERN. ANY OTHER SECTIONS THAT WE WANT TO DOUBLE-CLICK ON? GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE, GO. ALL RIGHT. WAIT. SORRY. WAIT, JODY. SECTION 3.01, I'M TRYING TO RECALL THE SPECIFIC DISCUSSION ON THIS. IT'S JUST BASICALLY THAT A THEORETICAL CONCERN, THE MAYOR DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH POWER, AND NUMBER TWO, I'M TRYING TO RECALL IF WE ADOPTED THIS FROM OTHER CITIES AND WHAT THEIR EXPERIENCE IS. IF ANYONE KNOWS. JODY, HUMOR ME AND LET ME READ 3.01, AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION. YEAH, YEAH. NO, THAT'S NOT HUMOR. PLEASE DO. ALL RIGHT. THIS IS CHAPTER 3, CITY COUNCIL, SECTION 3.01, MAYOR. THE PERSON ELECTED MAYOR SHALL BE THE GOVERNMENTAL AND CEREMONIAL HEAD OF THE CITY GOVERNMENT PRESIDING OVER THE COUNCIL MEETINGS AND ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN DEBATE REGARDING ANY ITEM, BUT SHALL ONLY CAST A VOTE ON MATTERS AS A MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL AS NECESSARY TO BREAK TIES BETWEEN THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING ON THE ITEM. THE MAYOR SHALL HAVE A ONE-TIME VETO POWER OVER EACH ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, WHICH CAN BE OVERWRITTEN BY TWO-THIRDS SUPERMAJORITY VOTE OF THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS, EXCLUDING THE MAYOR PRESENT AND VOTING ON THE ITEM AT THE NEXT REGULAR OR SPECIAL MEETING. NOTWITHSTANDING SECTION 4.03, SECTION 2 OF THIS CHARTER, [01:10:01] THE MAYOR SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO PLACE ITEMS ON THE OFFICIAL AGENDA OF ALL CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR SHALL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBERS' SEATS FOR PURPOSES OF THE LIMITATIONS ON SUCCESSIVE TERMS IN THIS CHARTER, BUT OTHERWISE THE MAYOR SHALL BE CONSIDERED A MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL. AND BACK TO YOU, JODY. WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION? WELL, REALLY IT'S ONLY FOCUSED ON THE VETO. I'M TRYING TO RECALL WHY WE FELT THIS WAS NECESSARY. IS IT A THEORETICAL THING THAT WE FEEL THE MAYOR DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH POWER OR THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR IT DO, OR IS SOMETHING IN PARTICULAR HAPPEN, OR WHY WAS THIS BROUGHT UP, OR WHY IS IT NEEDED? I WANT TO FEEL LIKE I RECOMMENDED THIS ONE, BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER SPECIFICALLY, SO IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN ME. SO THE PRACTICALITIES OF IT WAS THAT AT THE TIME THAT WE DISCUSSED THIS, THERE WAS A LOT OF CONSTERNATION BETWEEN THE MAYOR AND THEN CITY MANAGER, AND THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE COMMITTEE THAT BELIEVED THE CITY MANAGER NEEDED TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO, A, PUT THINGS ON THE AGENDA WHICH WASN'T FORMALLY DEFINED WITHIN THE CHARTER. HE WAS ALLOWED TO HAVE SOME INFLUENCE, BUT NOT NECESSARILY THE ACTUAL RIGHT TO PUT IT ON THERE, SO THAT WAS INCLUDED. WITH REGARDS TO THE VETO POWER, THE DISCUSSION REVOLVED AROUND WHETHER WE WOULD GIVE HIM VETO POWER OR WE WOULD GIVE HIM A VOTE. AND THE TERMINATION, EVEN WITH THE CURRENT MAYOR'S INPUT, HE STATED THAT HE WOULD BE FINE WITH A VETO. THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION BACK AND FORTH OVER SEVERAL MEETINGS, BUT THE FORMAL LANGUAGE THAT CAME OUT WAS PUTTING FORTH A VETO THAT DIDN'T NECESSARILY GIVE HIM A VOTE ON EVERYTHING, SO HE DIDN'T HAVE TOTAL INFLUENCE ON EVERYTHING, BUT IT GAVE HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO FORCE THE CITY COUNCIL TO HAVE MORE THAN JUST A MAJORITY VOTE ON THINGS THAT HE FELT WERE IMPORTANT. SO IF IT'S A REALLY GOOD IDEA, THEN MORE PEOPLE WOULD VOTE FOR IT. IF IT'S NOT, THEN IT JUST GAVE HIM A LITTLE BIT MORE INFLUENCE THAN WHAT HE HAD BEFORE. THANKS, DAVID. THANK YOU. AT LEAST THAT'S MY MEMORY OF IT. YES. YEP. GOOD THERE, JODY? NO, THAT'S FINE. I WAS JUST GOING TO SEE IF I HEARD ANYTHING NEW. OKAY, THANKS. GOOD. ALL RIGHT. GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE FOR ANY OTHER ITEMS. IF NOT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO FINALIZE THESE AMENDMENTS WITH... JASON, THE NOTE THAT GOES WITH 14. YEP, GOT YOU. SO I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH GRANT PRIOR TO THE MEETING STARTING. SO PART OF THIS PROCESS IS THAT WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE A REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL OF ALL THE AMENDMENTS, SO ON AND SO FORTH, KIND OF A LITTLE BACKGROUND HISTORY BEHIND THEM, THE REASON BEHIND THEM, SO ON AND SO FORTH. THERE'S TWO WAYS WE CAN GO ABOUT DOING THIS. WE CAN COME BACK. WE CAN HAVE GRANT CREATE A REPORT. WE CAN ALL COME BACK AND REVIEW THE REPORT, AND WE ALL CAN VOTE WITH THE VERSION OF THE REPORT THAT HE'S REFINED AND PRESENT THAT TO COUNCIL, OR WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST ALSO. AND THIS IS MY RECOMMENDATION, JUST TO KIND OF SAVE YOU GUYS, UNLESS YOU FEEL OTHERWISE. I'M HAPPY TO GO EITHER WAY. YOU CAN APPOINT MYSELF AND MAXINE TO WORK WITH GRANT. FOR HIM, BASICALLY, HE'S GOING TO TAKE THIS EXACT SAME THING THAT WE HAVE HERE, AND HE'S GOING TO UTILIZE THIS TO CREATE A REPORT, AND WE WILL HELP HIM REFINE THE BACKGROUND, THE LOGIC BEHIND IT, AND THEN THAT WILL BE PRESENTED TO COUNCIL. SO I WANT TO PRESENT THAT AS THE OPTIONS. WITH THAT, WE WILL ADD THE NOTE TO 14.10 AS PART OF THAT REPORT. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'M OPEN TO HEARING ANY RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO WHICH WAY YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS. DO YOU WANT TO COME BACK AND HAVE GRANT PRESENT THE REPORT? WE CAN COME BACK ONE MORE TIME. OR HE CAN JUST WORK WITH MYSELF AND MAXINE, AND WE CAN PRESENT THAT WITHOUT THE GROUP HAVING TO COME BACK COLLECTIVELY. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG ON ANYTHING THERE, GRANT. NO, THAT WAS VERY WELL SAID. I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING THAT WILL BE IN THE REPORT THAT YOU GUYS HAVEN'T SEEN. THE MEAT AND POTATOES IS, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE JUST WENT THROUGH, KIND OF FINALIZED TONIGHT. SO THE REPORT WILL HAVE ALL THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, MAYBE A COVER LETTER, KIND OF MAYBE SOME DIALOGUE, EXPLAINING SOME OF THE REASONING BEHIND SOME OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. AND THAT WAS THE CHARGE FROM COUNCIL INITIALLY TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN REPORT. SO THERE WON'T BE ANYTHING IN THE REPORT THAT YOU GUYS HAVEN'T ALREADY APPROVED. THE REPORT WILL BE PUBLIC RECORD? YES. SO I'M GOING TO NEED TO MAKE A MOTION OR JUST SHOW OF HANDS. IF SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SECOND OPTION FOR APPOINTING MAXINE AND JASON TO WORK WITH GRANT TO FINALIZE THE REPORT TO SUBMIT TO THE COUNCIL BY... GRANT, HELP ME OUT WITH THIS. [01:15:01] NAME ON IT, GRANT. THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING? PUT YOUR NAME ON IT. THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING IS MONDAY, ACTUALLY. NO, IT'S MONDAY. I WOULD, FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS, I WOULD PREFER NOT TO HAVE A DEADLINE JUST BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S GOING TO TAKE US TO PREPARE AND TO GET IT ON A COUNCIL AGENDA. YEAH, BUT I'LL DO RESPECT, GRANT. WE NEED A DEADLINE. BUT I'LL DO RESPECT. IF YOU DO A DEADLINE, JUST... CAN WE DO LIKE A TIME FRAME, LIKE 45 DAYS, 60 DAYS? THAT'S FINE. THAT'S FINE. AND I'M OPEN TO, I'M AVAILABLE, SO I'M HAPPY TO WORK ON IT AS MUCH AS NEEDED. THE REPORT WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL SO THAT THESE AMENDMENTS, IF DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY THE COUNCIL, WILL BE ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT? OKAY. YEAH, WE'VE MISSED THE MAY. OKAY, SO JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, IS THIS REPORT GOING TO HAVE NARRATIVE FOR AND AGAINST AMENDMENTS? IS THIS GOING TO BE... BECAUSE I THINK IF YOU WANTED TO DO IT AS A... CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING. I'D LIKE TO SEE IT BEFORE IT GOES IN, I GUESS, IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY, I THINK. I'M NOT SAYING I HAVE TO WRITE IT. I THINK HAVING ONE MORE SHOT WHERE WE CAN COME IN AND GIVE CONTEXT TO THE REPORT. YOU KNOW, SO SAY 30 DAYS TO PREPARE IT, A COUPLE WEEKS FOR US TO REVIEW IT, COME BACK SIX WEEKS. I'M GOOD EITHER WAY TYPE THING. I WAS JUST TRYING TO SAVE YOU GUYS FOR ANOTHER MEETING, BUT I'M HAPPY TO COME BACK ONE MORE IF YOU'D LIKE. YEAH, I MEAN, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WE ARE A COMMITTEE. WE'RE NOT JUST TWO PEOPLE. AND WITH THE GREAT JOB THEY'VE DONE, EVEN, WITH THE GREAT JOB THEY'VE DONE, I THINK WE OUGHT TO COME BACK. WELL, WE DO HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW. NO, HE DIDN'T GET ANYTHING. I HAVE A QUESTION, I GUESS, FOR CLARIFICATION'S SAKE. SO DO WE WANT TO HAVE A MEETING TO PUT TOGETHER THE REPORT AND HAVE A MEETING TO REVIEW THE REPORT, OR DO WE WANT THESE TWO PEOPLE TO WORK WITH GRANT TO PUT TOGETHER THE REPORT AND THEN WE JUST WANT TO HAVE A MEETING TO REVIEW THE REPORT? I MAKE A MOTION OFFICIALLY TO REQUEST THAT GRANT, THE HEAD AND THE VP OF THE COMMITTEE, PROVIDE A REPORT BY MARCH 31ST TO THE COMMITTEE TO REVIEW AND TO SET OUR FOLLOW-UP MEETING THE 16TH OF APRIL TO APPROVE THE REPORT. THAT GIVES US ENOUGH TIME. DO YOU HAVE A VACATION OR SOMETHING? I SECOND IT. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A FIRST AND SECOND. ANY QUESTIONS? IF NOT, WE HAVE A VOTE OPEN. YES, WOULD THAT TIMELINE KEEP US ON TRACK FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTION SO THAT WAY WE DON'T HAVE TO SPEND ADDITIONAL CITY FUNDS FOR ANOTHER ELECTION? YES, THE DEADLINE FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTION IS GOING TO BE MID-AUGUST, SO THERE WILL BE PLENTY OF TIME. AS LONG AS THE COUNCIL CAN GET IT TAKEN CARE OF, I HOPE SO. THE BENEFIT OF HAVING US ALL REVIEW IT AND HAVE THE FOR'S AND AGAINST'S AND WHATNOT, I THINK WE'D HAVE A MUCH BETTER REPORT. I AGREE. I'M WONDERING IF MAYBE WE SHOULDN'T SAY MAYBE THAT RATHER THAN SAYING APRIL 16TH, WE COULD SAY WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE REPORT OR 10 TO 15. SO IF THERE IS, YEAH. I THINK YOU DID TWO WEEKS, RIGHT? 14 DAYS FROM 10 TO 15. YOU GUYS ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE ME. I KNOW THIS IS LIKE ONE OF OUR LAST MEETINGS. NO, I'M NOT GOING ON VACATION. I JUST KNOW THAT WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. RIGHT. YEAH. AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED. YEAH. YES. MARCH 31ST, REPORT COMPLETION BY THE 31ST. APRIL 16TH FOR. TO US. AND THEN APRIL 16TH IS THE MEETING, SO IT SHOULD GIVE US A MINIMUM TWO WEEKS TO FINISH UNLESS Y'ALL DO. APRIL 16TH. GET DONE EARLIER, THEN IT GIVES US MORE TIME TO REVIEW. MM-HMM. IS SHE 17? BECAUSE BASED ON OUR CHARTERS, YOU CAN SHOW THEM. UH-HUH. WE STILL HAVE TWO MORE LEFT TO VOTE. MARLO. MOTION PASSES 11-0. THAT IS SET AND DONE. SO GREAT. YOU HAVE THAT TOTAL WITH THE DATES AND EVERYTHING, 31ST, 16TH, AND THE NOTE TO BE INCLUDED. WITH THAT, THAT CLOSES OUT. WELL, I MADE A MOTION TO CLOSE IT OUT, RIGHT? CORRECT. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE OUT ITEM 2026-209. I'M NOT [01:20:05] GOING TO READ THE WHOLE THING, SO. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CLOSE ITEM H.1-2026-209. THANK YOU. AND WE HAVE A SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WHO'S THE SECOND? ME. MARK. MARK CRISWELL. ALL RIGHT. TWO MORE? ONE MORE? ALL RIGHT. 11-0. ALL RIGHT. MOVING [H.2 2026-210 Consider selecting the dates and times of future Committee meetings; and take appropriate action.] TO ITEM H.2-2026-210. CONSIDER SELECTING THE DATES AND TIMES OF FUTURE COMMITTEE MEETINGS TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. I THINK BARRY DID THAT. THAT HAS BEEN HANDLED WITH THE LAST ITEM. YEP. WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THAT AS IT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED. I MOTION WE CLOSE ITEM H.2-2026-210. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. AND WE'RE GOOD TO VOTE. 11-0. THAT MOVES US TO OUR FAVORITE ITEM OF THE NIGHT, ITEM I, ADJOURNMENT. STAY HERE IF YOU WANT. I'M GOING HOME. HAVE A GOOD NIGHT. WE ARE ADJOURNED. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.