Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

IT IS

[00:00:01]

2:01 PM.

AND THIS IS THE MEETING OF THE CITY GIRL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE.

I AM CHAIRMAN SMITH, UH, WITH ME TODAY.

I HAVE, UH, COUNCIL MEMBERS, UH, MOORE AND MORRIS, UH, CITY ATTORNEY, BRIAN BRADFORD, AND VARIOUS STAFF MEMBERS.

UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED HERE.

OH, I GUESS I SHOULD HAVE SAID THE DATE TO JULY 15TH.

SO THE 15TH 2021, UM, FIRST AGENDA ITEM IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 11TH MEETING.

UH, HAS EVERYBODY HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES? AND IS THERE A MOTION MR. CHAIRMAN? I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES.

IS THERE A SECOND, MR. CHAIRMAN? ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, BY COUNCIL MEMBER MORRIS, A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE.

AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO GET CONFUSING AT ALL.

I PROMISE.

YEAH.

UH, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE.

NONE OPPOSED THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY MOVING TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO AND ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

UH, FIRST IS ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS.

I SEE NO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WITH US TODAY.

MOVING ON TO ITEM TWO B UH, BY THE WAY, IF ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DO SHOW UP TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS, UH, MEMBERS, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND RECOGNIZE THEM AT THAT TIME.

UH, GIVE HIM A CHANCE TO SPEAK ITEM TWO B COUNCIL ETHICS POLICY, UH, COMES MANAV AND REQUESTED THAT ASC CONSIDER REWRITING THE COUNSEL'S ETHICS POLICY DUE TO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN STATE LAW SINCE ITS LAST REVISION, UH, LEGAL STAFF IS GOING TO HELP US DISCUSS THE CURRENT ORDINANCE AND WE'LL SET A PATH FOR, UH, WHAT OUR NEXT STEPS ARE GOING TO BE.

UH, WE'RE NOT PLANNING TO DO ANY MAJOR WORK ON THIS ITEM TODAY.

UH, THIS IS MORE OF JUST AN INTRODUCTION IN A, IN A KIND OF, UH, UH, BRIEFING ON IT.

UH, BRAD NEIGHBORS WITH US TO GIVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION.

GO AHEAD, SIR.

THANK YOU, SIR.

EXCUSE ME.

UM, I I'VE HANDED OUT A DOCUMENT TO YOU, UH, TO AT LEAST GET US STARTED, UH, ON THIS PROJECT.

UM, THIS INCLUDES A COUPLE OF PARTS.

UM, YOUR, YOUR FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT, UH, IS A COPY OR A CLIPPING OUT OF OUR CITY CHARTER.

UM, THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION.

SHOULD IT COME UP? UM, WHY DO WE HAVE AN ETHICS ORDINANCE OR WHY WOULD WE NEED ONE? WELL, THE CHARTER, UH, COMMANDS THAT WE HAVE ONE AND THIS WAS INSERTED INTO THE CHARTER SOME YEARS AGO, I THINK BACK IN EARLY TWO THOUSANDS.

UM, THE ONLY REASON THAT QUESTION WOULD COME UP, BECAUSE AS WE GO THROUGH THIS SHOOT, WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT, UM, UH, STATE LAWS THAT IMPACT AND, AND IN MANY RESPECTS OVERRIDE WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR CURRENT ETHICS ORDINANCE.

AND SO THEY'RE ALREADY COVERED, YOU DIDN'T SAY, WELL, WE COULD DO WHAT STATE LAW REQUIRES AND STILL COMPLIANT.

AND YES, I THINK IT'S TRUE, BUT WE'RE STILL GONNA HAVE TO HAVE, UH, AN ETHICS ORDINANCE NONETHELESS, AND WE CAN MAKE THEM SQUARE UP.

SECOND PART OF THIS IS A COPY OF THE CURRENT, UM, ETHICS ORDINANCE.

THIS WAS ADOPTED BACK IN 2004.

UM, YOU NEED TO HAVE THAT IN ORDER TO GIVE ME YOUR INPUT WHEN WE GET TO THAT STAGE AS TO WHAT YOU THINK, UH, AS, AS FAR AS THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT THIS ORDINANCE SHOULD SAY, MAYBE YOU LIKE IT AS IT IS, UH, NOT WITHSTANDING THE COMMENTS THAT, UM, WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT HERE IN JUST A MINUTE.

UM, MAYBE LIKE THE SUBSTANCE AND WE CAN TWEAK SOME WORDS OR, OR MAYBE YOU WANT TO, UH, DO AWAY WITH IT ENTIRELY AND START OVER.

ANY OF THOSE OPTIONS IS FINE.

UM, IN THE CONTEXT OF THAT, UM, WHAT ELSE COULD WE DO? WHAT COULD WE DO DIFFERENT, UH, THE CHAIRMAN AT ABOUT YOU GO, UH, TO LOOK INTO THE CITY OF RAL EX CURRENT ETHICS ORDINANCE, AND I'VE INCLUDED A COPY OF THAT STARTS AT PAGE 24 OF THIS DOCUMENT.

AND SO YOU HAVE ANOTHER EXAMPLE, I WOULDN'T SAY A MODEL, BUT ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF, UM, UH, AN ETHICS ORDINANCE FROM, UH, ONE OF OUR NEARBY SISTER CITIES AND, AND PERHAPS IT'S ILLUSTRATIVE OF WHAT WE WANT TO DO HERE.

I DON'T KNOW, I'M, I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT MODELS TO LOOK AT A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS WE COULD GO ABOUT IT.

UM, AS FAR AS OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE, I KNOW SOME OF YOU HAVE HEARD ME GRIPE ABOUT IT OVER THE YEARS.

UH, NOT BECAUSE IT'S BAD OR WAS A BAD EFFORT.

UM, BUT BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME PROBLEMS WITH IT, WHICH WE'LL GET INTO SOME DETAILS HERE SHORTLY.

UM, ON PAGE 28 OF THIS DOCUMENT, THERE'S

[00:05:01]

THE SHEET CALLED STATE LAWS ON, ON COUNCIL ETHICS.

NOW, THESE AREN'T NECESSARILY SPECIFIC TO CITY COUNCILS, THEY'RE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW THAT APPLIED TO MULTIPLE ENTITIES.

UH, MOST OF THESE IN THE TEXAS, THESE REFERENCES TO THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, UH, THEY'LL APPLY TO A SCHOOL DISTRICTS, COUNTIES, UH, SPECIAL DISTRICTS, SOMETIMES A TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, UH, PROVISIONS THAT ARE, UH, UH, APPLIES, UH, ACROSS THE BOARD AT VIRTUALLY ALL STATE AGENCIES AND SEVEN ENTITIES AS STATE.

UM, AS YOU GO THROUGH, AS WE GO THROUGH THESE EXAMPLES OF PROBLEMS, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE WHY THIS LISTING OF, UH, STATE LAWS IS RELEVANT TO THAT.

UM, THESE ARE THE LAW, THESE, THESE REFERENCES HERE, AND, AND I CAN, YOU, THERE ARE A LOT MORE, THESE ARE THE KEY ONES, UH, AND, AND YOU'VE SOMETIMES, UM, AT SOME YOU'VE, Y'ALL DEALT WITH THESE IN PARTICULAR.

UH, THE MOST COMMON EXAMPLE IS, UH, WE JUST REFER TO IT AS CHAPTER 1 71, THAT'S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND YOU HAVE TO FILE AN EXTENSION AFFIDAVIT.

AND, AND THEN WE ADD ON TO THAT IN OUR ETHICS ORDINANCE, BY ALSO MAKING YOU STEP OUT OF THE ROOM WHEN, UH, VOTES COMING UP ON SOMETHING FOR, FOR WHICH YOU HAVE A CONFLICT.

UM, SO THESE ARE STILL VERY PERTINENT, UH, AND, UH, WHETHER WE KEEP THEM OR SOME FORM OF THAT IN OUR ETHICS ORDINANCE OR NOT, WE STILL GONNA, WE'LL STILL ABIDE BY HIM AND WE'LL STILL CONFORM TO THEM.

UH, YEAH, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE AT LEAST RECOGNIZE THEM AS WE GO THROUGH, UH, REVISING IF THAT'S THE PLAN, UH, OUR CURRENT ETHICS ORDINANCE.

NOW HERE ARE SOME OF MY FAVORITES.

UH, THEY, AREN'T THE ONLY THINGS THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND CHANGING IN OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE, BUT THESE ILLUSTRATE SOME OF MY FRUSTRATIONS WITH THE ORDINANCE OVER THE YEARS.

UH, NOT THAT THE ORDINANCE IS BAD OR BAD WORK.

UM, YES, IT WAS SOMEBODY ELSE'S WORK AND IT'S ALWAYS EASIER TO CRITICIZE SOMEBODY ELSE'S WORK.

BUT, UH, WE KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE W WHEN YOU PUT TOGETHER A COMPLEX DOCUMENT, THE BEST FAVOR, YOU CAN DO YOURSELF AS TO GO BACK THROUGH IT AND DECONSTRUCT IT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE WRITING LAWS IN OUR ETHICS ORDINANCE IS A LAW, BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE TO THINK, YOU HAVE TO PUT YOUR PROSECUTOR HAT ON, THINK, OKAY, IF THERE WAS A VIOLATION, HOW WOULD I PROSECUTE THAT? HOW WOULD I MAKE AN EFFECTIVE CHARGE, UH, UNDER THIS ORDINANCE PROSECUTED THAT, UH, OFF FENCE.

AND THAT'S PRETTY HARD TO DO EASY, TO PUT A CONCEPT ONTO A PIECE OF PAPER, UH, MUCH HARDER TO PUT IT DOWN IN A PROSECUTABLE FORM THAT SAID, UM, I'LL GO THROUGH THESE VERY QUICKLY.

UH, AND BY THE WAY, I'LL, I'LL SEND THIS TO YOU ALL IN A PDF FORM TOO, OR WORD IF, IF YOU PREFER.

UM, BUT THAT WAY YOU'RE NOT JUST DEALING WITH PAPERS HERE AND DEFINITIONS HERE, I'VE PICKED OUT SOME OF THESE IN PARTICULAR, UH, AFFINITY, BUSINESS EDITOR, CONSTANT QUIDDITY PENNY, CONSTANTLY SWEATY, OR, OR THINGS THAT, UH, ARE ALWAYS RELEVANT TO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND THAT SORT OF THING.

UH, YOU'LL SEE THAT THEY REFER BACK TO THIS, UH, SECTIONS 5 73 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE.

THAT'S THE NEPOTISM PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW APPLIES ALL THE WAY THROUGH STATE NEPOTISM MAY WORK JUST FINE, MAYBE NOT.

UM, THERE ARE OTHER DEFINITIONS OR SIMILAR DEFINITIONS DEFINITIONS THAT WE CAN BORROW FROM, UM, MORE PERTINENT PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW PROBABLY FIT AND WORK HERE BETTER.

AND BY THAT, I MEAN, IT'S WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT.

IT'S CHAPTER 1 71 CONFLICT, PROBABLY MORE WORKABLE.

WE'LL GET INTO MORE DETAIL AS WE GO ALONG, ASSUMING I'M GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, UH, WHAT THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO DO HERE.

AND NOW THIS IS AN INTERESTING ONE.

THIS LAST ONE, AND THIS, THIS DEMONSTRATES THE POINT I JUST MADE AS FAR AS DECONSTRUCTING THING.

SO WE LOOK AT THE TERM RELATIVE, AND I THINK WITH THE COMMITTEE THAT PUTS THIS ORDINANCE TOGETHER, WANTED TO DO SAY, OKAY, NOT ONLY IN, IN MODERN TERMS, WE HAVE RELATIVES,

[00:10:01]

UM, MOTHERS, FATHERS, SONS, DAUGHTERS, WIVES, WHATEVER.

WE ALSO HAVE.

THESE LIVING RELATIONSHIPS ARE KIND OF IN THIS NETHERWORLD.

UM, YOU HAVE A LIVE IN GIRLFRIEND.

WELL, WHY SHOULDN'T WE SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THAT? YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING BUSINESS WITH YOUR LIVING GIRLFRIEND, COUNSEL BUSINESS WITH YOUR LIVING GIRLFRIEND.

WHEN, IF THAT WAS YOUR WIFE, EVERYBODY WOULD SAY, WELL, CLEARLY YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

AND SO THEY WANTED TO ENCOMPASS THIS IDEA OF, UH, THESE LIVE IN RELATIONSHIPS, WHICH IS FINE.

HOWEVER, THE WAY THEY PUT THIS DEFINITION TOGETHER CREATES SOME REAL PROBLEM BECAUSE, UM, THEY SAY RELATIVE, OKAY, IT'S SOMEBODY RELATED TO THE RELATIVE WITHIN THE FIRST DEGREE OF CONSEQUATING OR AFFINITY, IF YOU'RE WONDERING WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS, ONE MEANS MARRIAGE ONE MEANS BLOOD.

ONE MEANS MARRIAGE CONCENTRATED BLOOD AFFINITY, MARRIED LEGAL TERM, BUT THE WAY THEY PUT THE SENTENCE TOGETHER, ANY PERSON RELATED TO AN OFFICER, AN OFFICER'S SPOUSE OR A RESIDENT OF THE SAME HOUSEHOLD WITHIN THE FIRST DEGREE OF ? WELL, BY PUTTING THAT MODIFIER AFTER RESIDENT OF THE SAME HOUSEHOLD, THEY SAY RESIDENT OF THE SAME HOUSEHOLD WITHIN THE FIRST DEGREE OF CONTINUITY OR AFFINITY, WHICH WIPED OUT THE WHOLE IDEA THAT IT'S JUST THE LIVING GIRLFRIEND, PRESUMABLY SOMEBODY WHO'S NOT LIVING IN SOME KIND OF RELATIONSHIP WITH A PERSON AS A GIRLFRIEND WHO IS RELATED AND FORESTRY AS A FINANCIER CONCEPT.

SO, YOU KNOW, THAT THOSE LITTLE THINGS CAN BE REAL IMPORTANT.

AND THAT'S THE KIND OF THING THAT WE NEED TO GO THROUGH AND FIX IN THIS ORDINANCE.

UH, THIS IS SOMEWHAT SIMILAR ON THE NEXT PAGE ON PAGE 30 IS SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIC INTERESTS.

IT'S A DEFINED TERM IN CHAPTER ONE 70 ON A RECOGNIZED OR AT STATE IS WHAT CONSTITUTES A CONFLICT.

WE CAN BE MORE STRICT ON WHAT THAT IS.

THERE ARE A DOLLAR THRESHOLDS OR PERCENTAGE OF, UH, UH, OWNERSHIP, INTEREST IN THRESHOLDS AND STATE LAW.

WE CAN GO DOWN FROM THAT AND MAKE IT TIGHTER.

UH, THAT'S FINE.

UM, UH, MY PROBLEM IS, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE SOME CONSISTENCY BECAUSE, UH, IF THERE'S A BODY OF LAW BUILT AROUND, UH, UH, AN EXISTING STATE STATUTE, WE CAN BORROW FROM THAT.

BUT AS SOON AS WE CHANGE THE CONCEPTS TOO FAR, THEN IT, IT OFFERS NO GUIDANCE TO US.

SO CONSISTENCY, I THINK IS IMPORTANT THERE.

UM, NOW HERE'S THE ODD PART OF THIS, AND I THINK IT'S, IT'S JUST, UH, AN OVERSIGHT IN DRAFTING.

UM, WENT BACK TO THIS RESIDENCE, SAME HOUSEHOLD, UH, THIS DEFINITION PRECLUDES THIS SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIC INTEREST FROM APPLYING IN THAT SITUATION TO A RESIDENT OF THE SAME HOUSEHOLD, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THEY PUT THIS TOGETHER.

IT SAYS IF A PERSON HAD RELATED TO THE AUSTIN FIRST DEGREE OF CONSTANT QUIDDITY OR AFFINITY, OKAY, WHAT ABOUT THE RESIDENT? THE SAME HOUSEHOLD FORGOT ABOUT THAT PART.

I DON'T THINK THEY MEANT TO.

I THINK THEY MEANT TO COVER THAT SITUATION, BUT IT'S NOT INCLUDED HERE.

IF IT'S NOT IN THE WORDS, IT'S NOT ENFORCEABLE, NO JUDGE IS GOING TO INTERPRET A CRIMINAL STATUTE IN A WAY THAT, SO I KNOW WHAT YOU MEANT.

HE EITHER SAYS IT OR IT DOESN'T SAY IT.

I SUGGEST THAT WE FIXED IT TO SAY WHAT WE WANT IT TO SAY ON PAGE 31.

UH, THERE'S SOME NOTES ON THIS SECTION 10 52, AND IT'S KIND OF A CATCH ALL PROVISION OF THE CURRENT ETHICS ORDINANCE TALKS ABOUT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

AND IT'S, UH, OKAY, YOU YOU'RE, YOU'RE A MEMBER, YOU'RE AN OFFICER, UH, MAY NOT PARTICIPATE IN ANY VOTER DECISION WHERE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS.

LET'S STOP THERE.

WHAT IS THAT? DO YOU KNOW? BECAUSE YOU MAY KNOW, BUT IT'S NOT IN THE WORDS.

IF IT'S NOT IN WORDS, IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE.

EVEN IF YOU KNOW WHAT IT MEANS.

IT HAS TO BE AN ORCHARD.

UM, THEY DIDN'T PROVIDE A DEFINITION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

NOW WE'VE DONE OVER THE YEARS.

JUST KIND OF USE THIS AS, AS A WARNING, AS A, AS A WARRANT PROVISION, BECAUSE Y'ALL OCCASIONALLY APPROACH AND SAY, I HAVE THIS SITUATION AND BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

AND YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO.

I SAID, WELL, LOOK, THE ORDINANCE SAYS

[00:15:01]

YOU CAN'T PARTICIPATE IF YOU HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

OKAY, NEXT QUESTION IS, WHAT'S THE CONFLICT INTEREST DON'T KNOW THEY DIDN'T PROVIDE ONE HERE, BUT I WOULD SUGGEST THAT I MUST CAUTION YOU STAY AWAY FROM THIS SITUATION.

SO THIS ORDINANCE HAS BEEN HANDY IN THAT RESPECT, BUT I THINK IT'S IT'S BEST THAT WE EITHER PROVIDED DEFINITION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR GO BACK THROUGH THE MORE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS WHERE THEY, THEY CLEARLY, THEY DON'T USE THE TERM CONFLICT AND INTEREST, BUT THEY SAY, YOU SHALL NOT.

YOU MAY NOT.

AND THAT DICTATES WHAT YOU CAN AND CANNOT DO, AND WE CAN READJUST THOSE, UH, BROADEN THEM WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO DO.

UM, AND NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO COME UP WITH A DEFINITION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST, PROBABLY OVERKILL, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE MORE PARTICULAR PROVISIONS IS ORDINANCE, GET THE COUNCIL WHERE IT WANTS TO GO.

WE JUST NEED TO TWEAK SOME OF THAT.

UM, 10 52, SAME PAGE 31, 10 52, SUBSECTION J THIS IS A I'LL CALL IT THE INFAMOUS, UH, CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE LIMITATION.

WE HAVE A $600 HARD STOP HERE, UH, WRITTEN INTO THE ORDINANCE.

YOU CAN'T TAKE A CONTRIBUTION, UM, FROM ANY PERSON OVER $600.

AND SHE CALLS ON THAT ALMOST EVERY CONTESTED ELECTION CYCLE.

I WOULD SAY, JUST FORGET IT BECAUSE COURTS HAVE SAID IT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

AW, BUT IT'S IN THE BOOKS.

I SAID, OKAY, HERE'S ONE OF THOSE WARNOFF THINGS.

SOMEBODY CAN BEAT YOU UP POLITICALLY FOR TAKING CONTRIBUTIONS OVER THIS AMOUNT, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A CRIME, NOT UNDER OUR ORDINANCE OR ANY, UH, LAW THAT I'M AWARE OF BECAUSE, UH, THE SUPREME COURT HAS SAID YOU IT'S VOLITIVE OF FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, UH, TO LIMIT CA CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS, UH, OF THAT NATURE, ESPECIALLY FROM INDIVIDUALS.

UM, THERE, THERE ARE PROBABLY SOME WIRE AROUND, THEY HADN'T BEEN HEAVILY TESTED IN THE COURT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE COMMITTEE IS INTERESTED IN ANY KIND OF WIRE ROUNDS AT THE VERY LEAST.

WHAT I RECOMMEND FOR THIS COMMITTEE IS THAT WE STRIKE THAT PROVISION.

IT'S CONFUSING AND IT'S UNENFORCEABLE.

AND BRAD, THE ARGUMENTS I'D HEARD ABOUT THAT IS SINCE THIS IS A POLICY FOR SITTING COUNCIL MEMBERS, THAT A CHALLENGER WOULD BE ABLE TO COME IN, RAISE MORE THAN THAT TAKE MORE THAN $600 FROM IT FROM AN INDIVIDUAL AND NOT BE SUBJECT TO THIS POLICY AT ALL.

RIGHT.

SO IT ONLY APPLIED TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, WHICH IS WEIRD BECAUSE THAT'S AN UNEQUAL AND ONLY IF YOU'RE SUCCESSFUL.

RIGHT.

RIGHT.

SO COUNSELOR.

YEAH.

THAT'S VERY GOOD POINT.

YEAH.

YEAH.

SO WE WILL, UH, I'LL LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THAT JUST, UH, STRUCK COMPLETELY DOES.

CAUSE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

YOU HAVE TO DO IT TOMORROW.

NOBODY'S GIVEN ME $601.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THAT.

NEED TO DO SOME QUICKLY.

YEAH.

YEAH.

UM, IF THERE ARE ANY MORE QUESTIONS ON THAT, UH, PAGE 32, UM, THIS IS THIS, UH, THERE, THERE ARE MORE PARTS TO THIS SECTION 10 54 THAN WHAT I HAVE QUARTERED HERE, CLIPPED AND PASTED HERE, UH, CONFLICTING OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT.

I REMEMBER IT BEING A REAL DEBATE WHEN THE ORDINANCE WAS PUT TOGETHER.

AGAIN, I'M NOT THE DRAFTSMAN OF THE ORDINANCE.

I DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH DIRECT KNOWLEDGE, BUT I DO REMEMBER THE COMMITTEE THAT THEY PUT THIS TOGETHER, STRUGGLING OVER THIS BECAUSE, UM, I THINK A LOT OF IT WAS DIRECTED AT, UM, WHAT LOOKS LIKE AN EMPLOYMENT SITUATION, BUT IT'S NOT REALLY, LET'S SAY THAT YOUR RETAIN AN ATTORNEY, YOU KNOW, I, AND, AND YOU PAY ME LOTS OF MONEY EVERY MONTH TO BE YOUR ATTORNEY, BUT I'M NOT YOUR EMPLOYEE.

UH, AND THEN YOU COME IN, I GET ON THE COUNCIL AND YOU COME IN WITH THE ZONING APPLICATION, WHAT DO WE DO? NOT OVER THE 10% THRESHOLD, UM, THAT WOULD TRIGGER THE STATE LAW.

UM, NOW W W WE HAVE THIS VENDOR, UH, STATUTE THAT COULD AT LEAST MAKE US DISCLOSE IT, BUT IT MAY NOT BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

AND I, I REMEMBER THE, THE COMMITTEE WANTING SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN HERE.

OKAY.

WE, WE CAN DO THAT.

I THINK WE CAN CAPTURE THAT.

UM, MY PROBLEM HERE IS THIS B THIS EXCEPTION, IF THE EMPLOYMENT IS THE OFFICIALS PRIMARY SOURCE OF INCOME, I WOULDN'T THAT BE OVER A 10%.

I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE, BUT THAT EXCEPTION

[00:20:01]

JUST SWALLOWS UP THE RULE.

I THINK, I THINK WE CAN REWORD THIS ENTIRE SECTION IF IT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE COMMITTEE THAT WE RETAINED SOME NOTION OF, UH, EXCLUDING PROHIBITING, CONFLICTING OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT.

I THINK WE CAN DO A BETTER JOB THAN WHAT WE HAVE ON HERE NOW.

AND AGAIN, THESE ARE JUST EXAMPLES.

THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT NEED FIXING IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT, UM, THAT'S ONE OF THOSE THAT WE SHOULD ADDRESS, UH, SECTIONS 10, SIX IN 10 61, THESE DISCLOSURES THEY'RE ALREADY REQUIRED UNDER STATE LAW.

IN FACT, WE DON'T REQUIRE A DIFFERENT KIND OF FORM OR ANYTHING ELSE.

UM, SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY'RE EVEN TO KEEP AN, OUR ORDINANCE BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THAT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE ANYWAY, UNLESS UNLESS, UM, YOU WANT TO LOWER THOSE THRESHOLDS, IT WOULD TRIGGER THOSE DISCLOSURES UNDER STATE LAW.

YOU COULD DO THAT.

UM, NOW THE, THE THRESHOLDS IN STATE LAW ARE KIND OF LOW.

I MEAN, IF ANYTHING YOU'D THINK THEY WOULD RAISE THEM BECAUSE, UH, UH, THE, THE NUMBERS INVOLVED LIKE $2,500, WHATEVER IT MAY BE.

IT'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY.

AND IN 2020 $1, I THINK WE'D PROBABLY BE OKAY WITH JUST STICK ON THE STATE LAW THERE.

SO THAT'LL SHORTEN OUR ORDINANCE.

SO, ALL RIGHT, UH, THIS, THE, THESE NEXT SEVERAL SECTIONS, THEY ROLL INTO THE SORT OF THE PROCEDURAL ASPECTS OF OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE.

AND WE HAVE, UM, SOME PRETTY GOOD PROCEDURES BUILT INTO THIS, BUT I CAN TELL YOU FROM EXPERIENCE IT'S LIMITED, UM, BECAUSE WE HADN'T HAD THAT MANY CLAIMS UNDER OUR ETHICS ORDINANCE, BUT YET IN PRACTICE, THEY BECOME RATHER CUMBERSOME.

UM, I THINK I'VE HANDLED THE ONLY TWO FORMAL, UH, COMPLAINTS.

I BELIEVE WE'VE HAD THREE, UH, UNDER OUR, THAT ETHICS ORDINANCE OVER THE YEARS.

ONE WENT TO WHAT I CALL A FULL HERE.

UM, ONE, UH, UH, AS I RECALL WAS UNTIMELY, UH, AND ANOTHER, UM, WASN'T FRIVOLOUS AS WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT HERE, UH, WASN'T FRIVOLOUS, BUT IT DIDN'T THAT THE CLAIM FROM THE COMPLAINANT DIDN'T STATE A VIOLATION OF, UH, ANY PROVISION OF OUR ETHICS ORDINANCE.

IT JUST ON THE FACE OF IT, DIDN'T MAKE IT PASS THAT TEST.

NOW THAT'S NOT WRITTEN INTO THESE PROCEDURES NECESSARILY, BUT IF YOU DON'T STAY AT A CLAIM, THEN THERE'S NO REASON TO PROCEED, UM, WITH THE, UH, WHAT'S THE CLAIM AND PUTTING TOGETHER WHAT WE CALL THIS, UH, ETHICS REVIEW BOARD.

AND THEN WE HAVE THIS ETHICS REVIEW PANEL AND WHICH OTHER STUFF, UH, THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION ON PAGE 33, THAT I INCLUDED IS JUST A, UM, SORT OF GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF SOME OF THE PRACTICAL PROBLEMS THAT WE RUN INTO HERE.

IT SAYS, OKAY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS, PROBABLY A REAL GOOD IDEA, BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO SET UP SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE USED AS A WAY TO TORTURE AND TORMENT, UH, PEOPLE ON COUNCIL, UH, BY POLITICAL OPPONENTS OUT THERE WHO WANT TO DO NOTHING OTHER THAN TORTURE AND TORMENT, THEY HAVE NO SUBSTANCE.

THEY WANT TO THROW SOMETHING IN AND, AND CREATES DISRUPTION.

SO ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS NOW, FRIVOLOUS COMPLAINTS OR BAD FAITH COMPLAINTS, THEY'RE GOING TO BE THERE.

CAUSE MOST OF THESE ARE GOING TO BE, UM, POLITICALLY MOTIVATED.

OKAY, IT'S A GOOD COMPLAINT OR A BAD COMPLAINT.

THERE'S USUALLY SOME POLITICAL COMPONENT TO SOMEONE COMING FORWARD WITH AN ETHICS COMPLAINT DIRECTED AT ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO YOU HAVE TO BE AT LEAST AWARE OF THAT.

UH, THE PROBLEM IS AS ILLUSTRATED SET FORTH IN THE NOTE HERE IS, UH, OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE DOESN'T REALLY, UM, DO WELL WITH THIS IDEA OF, UH, FRIVOLOUS COMPLAINTS.

UH, THERE SHOULD BE A BACKSTOP ON, UH, CHECKING TO SAY WHO W WHAT YOU DON'T WANT TO YOU, UH, CREATE ALSO IS, UM, AN ASICS ORDINANCE THAT IS LOOSE ENOUGH THAT IF SOMEBODY, THE TARGET OF A COMPLAINT OR HIS OR HER ALLIES HAVE ENOUGH FORCE AGO, MR. CITY

[00:25:01]

ATTORNEY, I WANT THIS THING TO GO AWAY.

WELL, THEN IT KIND OF MAKES THE ORDINANCE WORTHLESS.

WE WANT TO WANT TO DO THAT.

AND WE, AS STAFF DON'T WANT TO BE IN THAT SITUATION, THAT'S AN UNCOMFORTABLE SITUATION.

UM, YOU KNOW, ALONG THOSE LINES, ONE THING WE MIGHT LOOK INTO IS PUTTING SOME TEETH INTO IT THAT IT'S, IT'S A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE TO EVEN SUGGEST THAT, YOU KNOW, TO ATTEMPT TO, NOW THERE'S TALKING THIS ORDINANCE ABOUT EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS.

IT DOESN'T REALLY FIT IN THERE, BUT THAT IDEA THAT YOU, YOU CAN'T GO PRIVATELY AND SAY, I WANT THIS TO GO AWAY THAT, OKAY, THAT CONSTITUTES SECOND CHARGE OR AN AGGRAVATED CHARGE OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE.

SO WE CAN ADDRESS THAT AS WE GO ALONG.

UM, HERE'S JUST AN EXAMPLE OF THINGS TO THINK ABOUT, UM, PAGE 34.

UH, I, I MENTIONED THIS JUST IN PASSING A MOMENT AGO, IT'S AN ETHICS REVIEW PANEL IS A COMPONENT OF AN ETHICS REVIEW BOARD.

IN REALITY, THEY'RE ALWAYS AD HOC.

SO WE'LL GET A COMPLAINT.

WE NEED SOMEBODY OTHER THAN, UNLESS WE WANT TO GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, GOING TO BE SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE CITY COUNCIL, UH, DETERMINING THE MERITS OF THAT BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL COMMITTEE WANTED A SEPARATE BOARD OR A SEPARATE PANEL, OR A SEPARATE WHATEVER, NOT TO CITY COUNCIL RESOLVING.

UM, AND THAT'S FINE.

WE CAN DO THAT, OR WE CAN GIVE IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

UH, THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE NOW IS WE HAVE THIS, UH, ETHICS REVIEW BOARD, WHICH ISN'T A PERMANENT THING.

AND THEN WE HAD THIS PANEL AND IT'S, IT'S VERY AWKWARD.

IT JUST DOESN'T WORK VERY WELL.

I THINK WE'RE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THE AD HOC NATURE OF THESE CAUSE THESE KINDS OF COMPLAINTS ARE, UH, VERY INFREQUENT.

UM, AND IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN TAKE CARE OF AS WE GO ALONG IN THE PROCESS OF THIS.

NOW, SPEAKING OF PROCESS, MY LAST POINT, IT'S ON PAGE 35 AND I, AS AN ATTORNEY, THIS REALLY REACHES OUT TO ME COUPLE PROBLEMS HERE.

SO THE, OUR CURRENT RULES SAY THAT, UH, THE COMPLAINANT, UM, CAN ATTEND A MEETING, MAKE A STATEMENT, UH, HAVE, UH, LEGAL ACCOUNTS OR ANOTHER ADVISOR.

UM, AND WE DON'T WANT TO COME, UH, THE COMPLAINANTS LAWYERS SPEAKING ON NOW, THIS IS THE COMPLAINANT, NOT THE TARGET.

UM, BUT, UH, NOT SO SURE THAT, UH, THE, THE COMPLAINT, WHAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE HERE IS THAT THE COMPLAINT BELONGS TO THE CITY AT THE POINT THAT, UH, THE PAPERWORK IS CONSIDERED TIMELY AND IT STATES A CAUSE OF ACTION OR ANYTHING.

IT'S NOT THE COMPLAINANTS CASE.

THEY MAY BE A WITNESS, BUT THEY'RE NOT PROSECUTING IT AS SUCH.

UH, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING IN A CIVIL CONTEXT HERE, THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A CRIMINAL VIOLATION HERE.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RESOLVING, UH, THE MERITS OF AN, OF AN ETHICS COMPLAINT THAT WOULD HAVE SOME SORT OF CIVIL PENALTY ATTACHED TO IT, NOT A MONETARY PENALTY, BUT, OR REPRIMAND OR A SANCTUARY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, UH, AGAINST THE TARGET OF THE COMPLAINT.

UM, WHAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IS THAT THERE'S A HAND, A CLEAN HANDOFF IT SIDES WHERE, OKAY, THE COMPLAINANT, UH, IS A WITNESS AND AN UNNECESSARY WITNESS.

UM, BUT, UH, WE, WE DON'T WANT TO, UM, PUT THE COMPLAINANT IN CHARGE OF THINGS.

AND SO, UM, AND, UM, I KINDA MESSED UP THIS NOTE AT THE END, UH, GETTING TWISTED UP ON SOME OTHER THINGS I APOLOGIZE HERE, BUT, UM, WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE, UH, THE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS OF THE TARGET OF THE COMPLAINT TO, BECAUSE EVEN IF YOU'RE A COUNCILMAN YOU'RE SWORN IN AND EVERYTHING, YOU STILL HAVE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS WHEN THERE'S A PENALTY TO ATTACK, EVEN IF IT'S A MODEST PENALTY, LIKE A CENTER OR REPRIMAND, OR KIND OF A SLAP ON THE HAND, UM, YOU KNOW, YOUR DUE PROCESS RIGHTS INCREASE, THE LEVEL OF PROCESS DO INCREASES, UH, THE BROADER, THE PENALTY OR THE HIGHER, THE NATURE OF THE PENALTY.

UM, THE PROBLEM HERE IS, UH, YOU KNOW, WHERE DO WE PLUG IN ON THAT DUE PROCESS CONTINUUM? BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW, UH, THE ULTIMATE RESULT, THE ULTIMATE RECOMMENDATION OF THE ETHICS REVIEW PANEL.

ANYWAY, THERE'S MY POINT HERE IS THERE'S SOME

[00:30:01]

WORK TO BE DONE AS FAR AS, UH, THE PROCEDURE, UH, TO BE USED, UH, IN IMPLEMENTING THIS, UNLESS WE GO TO A STRIPPED DOWN VERSION THAT IT PURELY CONTEMPLATES, UM, UH, PROSECUTION OF ETHICS COMPLAINTS AS CRIMES, WHICH WOULD ALL HAPPEN IN OUR MUNICIPAL COURT.

AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ALL THESE PANELS OR BOARDS OR ANYTHING ELSE.

NO, BRAD, WE'VE GOT A FRAUD WASTE AND ABUSE COMMITTEE THAT WORKS THROUGH THE AUDIT FUNCTION.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IS JUST MORE OF AN AD HOC VERSION OF THAT, WHERE WE TAKE THE COMPLAINT AND THEN, THEN WE OPERATE ON IT INTERNALLY, DO OUR INVESTIGATION ENGAGE THE, THE PERSON WHO'S THE TARGET OF THE COMPLAINT AND RESOLVE IT WITHIN THAT BODY? IS THAT THIS A SIMILAR STRUCTURE TO WHAT YOU'RE KIND OF PROPOSING HERE? YEAH.

I THINK IT'S SOMETHING, UM, LESS FORMAL, BUT MORE IN KEEPING WITH REAL PRACTICE.

YEAH.

UM, AND THE, THE PROBLEM IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE, EVEN THOUGH YOU HIRE US AS ATTORNEYS TO BE SOMEWHAT NEUTRAL AND DETACHED AND EVERYTHING, UM, YOU STILL HIRE, YOU STILL HIRE US.

AND, AND THERE'S ALWAYS THAT, UM, UH, QUESTION OF WHETHER WE'RE TRULY DETACHED, UH, A B SAME FOR THE INTERNAL AUDITOR OR WHATEVER.

I DON'T KNOW.

I HAVEN'T REALLY HAD TO FIX THAT UNLESS YOU BROUGHT IN SOMEBODY FROM THE OUTSIDE AND THAT MAY BE FINE, BUT YOU GOT TO SPEND A LOT OF MONEY IN MOST CASES ON SOMETHING THAT'S NOT GOING ANYWHERE BECAUSE THERE'S VERY RARELY A COMPLAINT BECAUSE THEY'RE OFTEN POLITICALLY MOTIVATED.

UM, THEY GENERALLY DON'T HAVE MUCH BASIS.

UH, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT CAN'T HAPPEN.

UM, AND IT, THE THING IS IF IT DID, IF THERE WAS A REAL SUBSTANTIAL VIOLATION OF THE ETHICS OR THAT'S PROBABLY A CRIME AND WHICH CASE ON I GOTTA BE OUT, I'LL HELP YOU ANYWAY.

I WANT TO BE PROSECUTING, UH, YOU KNOW, AND SO, UM, THAT, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE FIGURE OUT THAT PROCESS.

I MIGHT LOOK AROUND AT A COUPLE OTHER, UM, UH, MORE SOPHISTICATED ETHICS ORDINANCES AND SEE IF THEY'VE GOT OUR BETTER APPROACH TO IT.

OKAY.

QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS UPON END.

SO YOU HAD MENTIONED, AND I JUST SCAN THROUGH ALL THIS, UM, QUICKLY WHILE SITTING HERE, YOU HAD MENTIONED THE RALLIED ORDINANCE, AND I THINK YOU SAID SOMETHING FAVORABLE ABOUT IT.

IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU KIND OF WERE LEANING TOWARD US STREAMLINING AND GOING TO SOMETHING MORE ALONG THOSE LINES.

DID I HEAR YOU OF THE RALLY THAT ORDINANCE? I IT'S A GOOD SAMPLE, UH, EXAMPLE, UM, STREAMLINING WE CAN, I, I THINK, UM, THE EASIEST WAY OR THE BEST WAY, RATHER OF DOING THINGS IS IF THE STATE HAS ALREADY REGULATED THAT CONDUCT, UNLESS YOU WANT TO BE MORE STRICT, UM, LET'S LEAVE THAT TO THE STATE LAWS.

WE CAN RECOGNIZE THEM IN THIS ORDINANCE BECAUSE THEY'RE THERE.

IT'S NOT LIKE WE COULD EVER IGNORE THEM OR OVERWRITE THEM.

UH, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY UNDER MOST OF THEM TO BE MORE STRICT.

UH, YOU COULDN'T BE LESS STRICT THAT WOULD, UH, BE PREEMPTED, BUT IF IT'S ALREADY THERE, LET'S RECOGNIZE IT.

IT'S ALREADY THERE AND WORK THAT INTO THE PROCEDURE AND ALL, AND GO FROM THERE.

UM, AND AGAIN, BROWSING AT, UH, AT A RUN THROUGH RELATIVE ORDINANCE.

AND I'M NOT SAYING EXACTLY THAT, BUT IT'S, UH, IT'S A LOT EASIER TO UNDERSTAND THAN OURS.

IT'S, UM, MORE COMMON ENGLISH WHERE PEOPLE WHO WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF ANY OF US WERE DOING SOMETHING WRONG, WOULD BE ABLE TO READ IT AND PROBABLY UNDERSTAND IT WITHOUT HAVING A LAWYER.

UH, I'M PRETTY MUCH ALWAYS IN FAVOR OF THAT COMMON LANGUAGE.

ANYTIME WE CAN PULL THAT OFF, UM, IT'S FOUR PAGES, RIGHT.

UM, SO THERE'S A LOT TO LIKE ABOUT THAT.

AND, AND I WANT TO SIT THERE AND GO THROUGH IT SLOWLY AT HOME, UM, TO THE DETAIL, BUT, UM, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU SEE IT BEING A, UM, A POSITIVE THING FOR US TO BASICALLY SHRINK, CONDENSE AND MAKE PLAIN ENGLISH OUR ORDINANCES? RIGHT.

OKAY.

YEAH.

OKAY.

UM, I'M WITH YOU ON THAT.

ALL RIGHT.

WELL, THAT WAS MY QUESTION.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HEARD YOU, RIGHT.

SO THANK YOU.

SO

[00:35:01]

I DO AGREE THAT, UM, JUST BASED ON WHAT YOU'VE SAID AND THE DIFFERENT AREAS WHERE YOU NEED TO GO WHEN YOU MOVE TO REWORD AND YOU WANT TO MAKE IT MORE PLAIN AND MAKE IT MORE TO THE POINT, I THINK THAT THAT'S EXACTLY WHO WE WANT TO DO, KEEP IT SIMPLE, UH, KEEP IT.

AND I'LL LIKE, WHAT, UH, COUNCILMAN MORRISON JUST STATED TO, UH, MAYBE JUST LOOK AT THIS ENTIRE PACKAGE AND IF WE CAN, LET'S STRIKE IT DOWN.

LET'S MODIFIED, LET'S PUT IT INTO LAYMAN'S TERMS, SUCH THAT IT DOES MAKE SENSE.

AND THAT AREA WHERE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, UH, HAVING, UH, THE COMMITTEE, THIS COMMITTEE BE, UH, I DIDN'T, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU SAID THAT, UH, IT'S NOT PERMANENT, BUT IF, IF THAT'D BE THE CASE, THEN WE PROBABLY SHOULD MAKE SURE THAT THIS COMMITTEE OR THIS ETHICS GORDON'S COMMITTED, THAT IT IS A PERMANENT COMMITTEE SUCH THAT WE CAN MAINTAIN CONTROLS SUCH THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO, AS YOU STATED, UH, THE, THE, THE LITIGANT DOESN'T HAVE, UH, THE POSSIBILITY OF TAKING CONTROL THAT WE ALWAYS HAVE THE CONTROL.

AND BASED ON WHAT I SEE BY WAY OF, UH, THE, UM, THE PENALTIES, THE, THESE ARE CIVIL PENALTIES, THERE ARE NOT PENALTIES THAT ARE GOING TO WANT ITS REMOVAL, OF COURSE.

BUT AGAIN, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE THE ONES WHO HAVE CONTROL OF THAT.

AND SO BY SOLIDIFYING THE COMMITTEE IN SUCH A MANNER THAT WE MAKE THE DECISIONS, BUT NOT THE COUNCIL PER SE, BECAUSE WE WANT TO PROTECT THE COUNCIL, BUT THAT THE COMMITTEE IS ABLE TO MAKE THAT DECISION AND ABLE TO MAKE A SUBCOMMITTEE THAT'S ABLE TO MAKE DECISIONS.

I THINK THAT THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE WAY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT GO.

ALL RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT.

I AGREE.

UM, AND TO YOUR POINT, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR GENERAL RULES FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS IS, IS THAT WE DON'T, UH, WE DON'T GOVERN THEIR BYLAWS OR THEIR ABILITY TO HAVE A FORM AND, AND DISPOSE OF SUBCOMMITTEES AT WILLS.

SO I THINK THEY'D HAVE THAT FREEDOM, UM, FROM THE, HMM, LET ME RETHINK THIS.

WHEN WE DID OUR LAST CHARTER REVIEW, WHAT WE, WE TACKLED IT IN A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS.

THE FIRST THING WE DID WAS WE HAD LEGAL GO THROUGH AND ELIMINATE ANY CONFLICT OR PREEMPTION OF STATE LAW, OR THAT, THAT WOULD HAVE AFFECTED THE CHARTER.

AND SO THEY DID THE TECHNICAL WORK FIRST.

UM, THEN THEY WENT THROUGH AND THEY CLEANED UP CLUMSY WORDING TO MAKE THINGS MORE READABLE.

AND THEN THEY TOOK ALL OF THE INPUT THAT WE HAD AS A COUNCIL, UH, FOR, UH, FUNCTIONAL CHANGES THAT WE WANTED TO DO.

AND THEN THEY PUT THAT INTO LEGALEES.

AND I SEE THAT AS, AS ANOTHER POSSIBLE PATHWAY, WE WOULD TAKE TO AMENDING THIS ORDINANCE.

UM, BUT I DON'T WANT TO STICK US WITH THIS TEMPLATE EITHER IF YOU GUYS REALLY WANT TO SEE IT CONSOLIDATED AND SHRUNK DOWN, SO WE'LL LEAVE IT TO YOU GUYS ON HOW YOU WANT TO PROCEED.

UH, WHAT I WOULD THEN SUGGEST IS EVERYBODY READ THIS WHEN YOU GET HOME, UH, COMMUNICATE WITH BRAD, UH, AND ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S A FUNCTIONAL DIFFERENCE YOU WANT, IF SOMETHING THERE'S SOMETHING PHILOSOPHICALLY DIFFERENT THAT YOU WANT TO DO, AND LET'S GET THAT OUT THERE EARLY.

SO THEY HAVE THE TIME TO KIND OF, UH, TAKE THAT IDEA AND CONSIDER IT WITHIN THE WHOLE OF THE SCOPE OF THE DOCUMENT AND HOW THEY WANT TO STRUCTURE EVERYTHING.

AND THEN WE CAN MEET ON THIS AGAIN NEXT MONTH.

UH, IT'D BE LATE IN AUGUST, UM, PROBABLY FOR THURSDAY.

SO HOPEFULLY YOU'RE STILL HERE.

OH, I'M STILL WORKING ON IT, BUT ALL RIGHT.

CAUSE WE'LL, I MEAN, IF WE, IF WE NEED TO GET OUT AHEAD OF YOUR DEADLINE, WE'LL MEET AS MANY TIMES AS WE NEED TO, MAN.

YOU JUST, YOU TELL US, OKAY, CHAIRMAN, SIR, BECAUSE WE ARE ALL LOOKING AT DEADLINES.

I THINK THAT HE PRETTY WELL UNDERSTANDS AT THIS POINT, WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR AND, UH, WHAT MAY BE EVEN BETTER IS WITH HIS UNDERSTANDING, LET HIM GO AND DO WHAT HIS WORK IS, AND THEN BRING THAT BACK TO US.

UH, US, OUR, YOU CAN GET IT TO US MAYBE A LITTLE AHEAD OF TIME SO WE CAN REVIEW IT AND THEN WE CAN COME HERE AND MAKE SOME DECISIONS ABOUT IT.

WHAT ARE YOU THERE? SURE.

I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

AND LIKE I SAID, Y'ALL FEEL FREE TO COMMUNICATE WITH HIM DIRECTLY ON IT.

GET YOUR IDEAS OUT THERE, GET YOUR EDITS, UH, IF YOU'LL SEND IT OUT TO US IN WORD FORMAT, AND THEN WE CAN DO THE CHANGE TRACKING AND THE COMMENTS AND ALL THAT.

AND, UM, I THINK WE'RE IN GOOD SHAPE.

WE'RE GOOD.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT.

LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS TO SEE FACILITY NAMING AND DEDICATION BLACKS.

UH, THIS WAS REFERRED TO US BY MAYOR LOMAE.

UH, HE'S ASKED US TO DEVELOP POLICY REGARDING FACILITY NAMES AND DEDICATION PLAQUE INFORMATION.

UH, WE DO HAVE A VERY, VERY SMALL POLICY ON THIS ALREADY.

IT'S FAIRLY WEAK AND UNHELPFUL.

UH, SO HE HAS ASKED US TO REDO IT IN YOUR PACKET TODAY.

UH, I'VE INCLUDED

[00:40:01]

A, JUST A, A SAMPLE, UH, THAT I FOUND OUT THERE ONLINE THAT THAT KIND OF ADDRESSES EACH OF THE MAJOR POINTS, BUT IT'S VERY CLUNKY AND VERY BUREAUCRATIC.

UH, AND IT IT'S REALLY, IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING THAT I HOPE WE DON'T PASS IN ITS CURRENT FORM.

LET ME PUT IT THAT WAY.

AND I'VE GOT SOMETHING IN MY EYE HERE, SO I'M TRYING TO GET IT OUT.

I'M NOT CRYING.

I PROMISE ONCE ONE OF YOU HAS GOT CUT ONIONS UNDER YOUR DESK.

ALL RIGHT.

I THINK IT'S JUST AN EYELASH REALLY GLAD THIS GETS RECORDED FOR POSTERITY'S SAKE TOO.

THANK YOU.

UH, I JUST GET CHOKED UP WHEN I LOOK AT ORDINANCES, YOU KNOW HOW IT IS GUYS.

ALRIGHT.

UM, MATT, DID YOU HAVE, WAS IT YOU OR WAS IT BRIAN THAT HAD THE OLD ORDINANCE COPY? YOU GOT IT.

AWESOME.

THERE'S ONE COMING AT YOU.

I CAN JUST PASS THEM DOWN TO THREE.

ALL RIGHT.

SO IN PLAIN LANGUAGE, HERE'S THE ISSUE.

WE'VE GOT A CITY COUNCIL THAT PASSED A BOND IN 2019.

WE'VE GOT SOME BUILDINGS THAT ARE GOING TO GO IN IN 2026.

WE'VE GOT DEDICATION, BLACKS THAT USUALLY STATE, UH, EITHER.

AND I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN CONSISTENT OVER THE YEARS, UH, THAT HAS THE COUNCIL NAMES ON IT.

SOMEHOW MY NAME ENDED UP ON THIS STUFF, FIRE STATION FIVE PLAQUE, I THINK.

ALL RIGHT.

NOTHING TO DO WITH STATION FIVE.

AND SO THE IDEA IS HOW DO WE APPROPRIATELY HONOR THE FOLKS WHO WERE INVOLVED, UH, HOW DO WE TACKLE THIS THING? AND, AND, AND HOW DO WE MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY? WHICH IS USUALLY WHAT ASC IS ABOUT IS JUST HOW DO WE MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY? WE ALSO NEED TO COME UP WITH A WELL, YOU ACT LIKE CHOKING A LITTLE BIT ON THE IRONY ON THE IRONY.

NICE.

UH, THE OTHER QUESTION IS HOW DO WE NAME BUILDINGS? UM, AND I, IT'S A SHAME THAT BRAD JUST LEFT BECAUSE HE'S ASKED FOR A PARTICULAR SEWAGE PUMP AT ONE OF THE TREATMENT PLANTS TO BE NAMED IN HIS HONOR.

AND I'M A CLIENT OF COURSE, TO, TO HELP HIM WITH THAT.

BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT ARE OUR RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR NAMING BUILDINGS? UM, IS THIS A COUNCIL DECISION? IS IT A STAFF DECISION? UM, AND, AND THAT SORT OF THING.

NOW, WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT THE PLAQUES, I WANT TO WARN YOU THAT THE LONGEST COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA ITEM IN OUR HISTORY WAS THE CONTENTS OF A REFRIGERATOR MAGNET FOR AWS IN THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS.

I'M TOLD IT TOOK ALMOST FOUR HOURS FOR THEM TO AGREE WHAT WENT ON THE REFRIGERATOR MAGNET.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO TRY AND BEAT THAT RECORD TODAY FOR EVERYBODY.

THAT'S THE WHO TO CALL MAGNET.

YEAH.

OH YEAH.

FOUR HOURS.

SORRY.

WE SPENT THREE HOURS TRYING TO DEFINE THE WORD PATIO.

SO IT'S A DIFFERENT, WE'RE GOING TO, LET'S SEE IF WE CAN KEEP THE SAME GUEST.

SO IF YOU'VE GOT YOUR PACKET, LET'S START WITH THE PLAQUES.

CAUSE I THINK ONCE WE GET THE PLAQUE DONE, EVERYTHING ELSE IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

UM, I PROVIDED THE SAMPLE IN YOUR AGENDA SOMEWHERE.

I'VE GOT IT IN HERE.

I THOUGHT I HAD IT IN HERE.

THAT ONE, CAN I BORROW THAT REAL QUICK? CAUSE YOU'RE MORE ORGANIZED THAN I AM THINKING.

SO, UM, THIS IS JUST A SAMPLE PLAQUE FOR THE HAMSTER PARK AND GO-KART TRACK, UH, THAT I DID NOT GET PUT THROUGH THE BOND PROGRAM.

I'D REALLY HOPED FOR, UH, OF WHAT SOMETHING COULD LOOK LIKE.

IT'S GOT WAY TOO MANY ELEMENTS INTO IT, BUT I WANTED TO GET IT ALL ON ONE PAGE.

SO WE KNEW WHAT SORT OF THING WE WERE WORKING WITH.

AND SO THE QUESTION IS WHEN WE DO THESE DEDICATION PLAQUES, WE CAN BASE IT OFF THE, THE COUNCIL THAT PASSED THE, THE FUNDING FOR IT, WHETHER IT BE IN THE BOND PACKAGE OR WHETHER IT BE IN THAT YEAR CIP, UH, WE CAN DO, WE CAN LEAVE THE COUNCIL OFF OF IT COMPLETELY.

UH, I'M LOOKING FOR IDEAS.

SO Y'ALL JUMP IN WHENEVER I THOUGHT STRIKES YOU STAFF.

YOU'RE WELCOME TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS AS WELL.

IF YOU'VE GOT IDEAS, UH, THEY'RE JUST AS GOOD AS OURS.

SO JUMP UP HERE AND GRAB A MIC AND JUST START GOING NOW A KICKBACK AND WATCH BRILLIANCE OCCUR.

OH YEAH, YOU CAN HAVE YOUR PAPERBACK.

THERE YOU GO.

CRICKETS, CRICKETS.

HERE WE GO.

YEAH.

UM, WELL I LIKE YOUR HAMSTER PARK AND GO-KART TRACKS, SO THAT THAT'S GOOD.

UM, THE, I JUST SEE A DRAMA, UH, INVOLVED IN THIS WHO GETS LEFT OFF.

RIGHT.

AND, AND WHO GETS, YOU KNOW, ERRONEOUSLY ADD.

SO I I'M VERY TORN ABOUT HAVING, I MEAN THE BOND PROGRAM THAT KIND OF MAKES SENSE TO ME CAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE THINGS GOT THERE, UH, FUNDING, BUT HAVING, HAVING BOTH THAT AND THE COUNCIL

[00:45:01]

PICKING AND CHOOSING AND TRYING TO NOT MAKE MISTAKES ABOUT WHO ACTUALLY APPROVES SOMETHING VERSUS THEY CAME IN ON THE CUSP, THAT WOULD JUST BE DIFFICULT TO ME.

SO, UM, MY, MY FIRST IMPULSE WOULD BE TO SAY, JUST DON'T EVEN GO WITH THE COUNCIL, LEAVE AT THE BOND PROGRAM, BUT THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT AREN'T JUST BOND PROGRAM AND THAT'S, THAT'S THE RUB.

YEAH.

SO IF WE LOOK AT THE SKATE PARK, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE'VE MOVED TO 10 DIFFERENT PLACES AND, AND HAD ALL SORTS OF DRAMA FOR THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PASSED IN THE OH FOUR BOND.

RIGHT.

SO DO WE PUT THE OH FOUR BOND COUNCIL ON THAT, THAT DEDICATION PLAQUE? OR DO WE PUT IN THE COUNCIL THAT, THAT FINALLY FUNDED OR CREATE SUCH PROBLEMS? I KNOW THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TO SOLVE.

YEAH.

YEAH.

SO, AND THAT'S VERY TRUE BECAUSE WE, WE HAVE MULTIPLE BOND PROGRAMS AND THIS, THIS WILL BE A VERY UGLY PLAQUE IF IT'S JUST DENSE WITH A MILLION FINE.

SO, UM, MITCH MAY BE HERE TO SAY THIS.

OH GOOD.

I HOPE HE HAS A BRILLIANT IDEA.

USUALLY DOES ANYTHING LESS WOULD BE AN INSULT TO THIS ENTIRE BODY? I LIKE TO BRING SOLUTIONS WHEN I CAN.

AND THIS ONE I WAS GOING TO TELL YOU, I'VE REACHED OUT TO, I DID AN INFORMAL SURVEY, JUST REACHING OUT TO MY COUNTERPARTS AT OTHER CITIES.

EVERYBODY DOES IT DIFFERENT CAUSE THEY ALL STRUGGLE WITH THERE.

ISN'T A SINGLE, EVERYBODY DOES IT THIS WAY.

IT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN.

AND FOR THE THINGS YOU'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT, IS IT WHEN COUNCIL APPROVED IT AND WAS AS Y'ALL KNOW, I MEAN THE BOND PROGRAM IS A UNIQUE THING, HAS ITS OWN UNIQUENESS, BUT OTHER LARGE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS THAT GET APPROVED IS IT WHO APPROVES THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN? YOU KNOW, THE CONSTRUCTION WHEN THE, UH, THE, THE BIDS GET APPROVED, BUT EVEN IN SOME OF THE LARGER PROJECTS, SOMETIMES THERE'S MULTIPLE BIDS.

IS IT THE BIGGER OF THE TWO OR THREE BIDS? IS IT WHICH ONE IS IT? OF COURSE THEN, IS IT THE, YOU KNOW, WHO'S ON COUNCIL WHEN IT OPENS, WHICH YOU OFTEN ARE THE ONES THAT WERE INVOLVED LEADING UP TO THAT, BUT THERE'S, WE, WE, WE HAVEN'T FOUND A CLEAR CUT ANSWER AND WE'VE FOUND IT ALL OVER THE BOARD WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING, BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A DIFFICULT ISSUE.

YOU KNOW, A SIDE ISSUE IS WE IT'S BEEN OUR PRACTICE, UH, FOR IF IT'S A LIBRARY, THEN THE LIBRARY BOARD GOES ON THERE TOO.

IF IT'S A PARKS REC CENTER, THE PARKS BOARD GETS LISTED THERE.

THOSE ARE PRETTY MUCH THE ONLY TWO BOARDS THAT THAT HAPPENS WITH.

UH, BUT THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CHALLENGES FOR US AS, AS, AS WELL.

BUT IN, AS YOU, YOU ALREADY MENTIONED THE OTHER THING I WAS GOING TO MENTION, WELL, SOMETIMES IT'S THE, OKAY, IT'S THE 2004 BOND GOT APPROVED AND THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT JUST DIDN'T HAPPEN DURING THAT TIMELINE.

WE'RE GETTING TO SOME OF THOSE NOW.

SO WHERE DOES THAT FIT? SO DID WE GO BACK TO THE COUNCIL THAT APPROVED? AND SOMETIMES IT'S A COMBINATION OF FUNDING, RIGHT? WE HAD WHATEVER, A MILLION DOLLARS LEFTOVER FROM 2004 AND WE HAD TO ADD MORE NOW.

SO, UM, I LIKE TO BRING SOLUTIONS TO YOU.

I DON'T HAVE AN EASY, CLEAR SOLUTION HERE.

UM, LET ME, LET ME PITCH AN IDEA.

AND THAT WAY IT'LL GIVE PEOPLE SOMETHING TO AT LEAST TELL THEM, TELL ME I'M WRONG AT CAUSE TO DO THAT.

WE HAVE A PRETTY STANDARD FORMAT FOR, UH, FOR OUR PLAQUES.

AND THAT'S, THAT'S THE FORMAT THAT I PUT INTO THE PACKET.

WHY DON'T WE DO WE'LL LIST THE COUNCIL THAT APPROVED THE FUNDING FOR THE YEAR THAT THE GROUND WAS BROKEN OR THAT THE PROJECT BEGAN.

AND I MEAN THE ACTUAL PHYSICAL WORK, THE CONSTRUCTION WORK, AND THAT THAT'LL BE THIS TOP SECTION, BOTTOM SECTION SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTORS.

SO IF YOU HAD A, AN OLD COUNCIL PERSON WHO WAS JUST INVOLVED IN IT FROM END-TO-END, AND THAT THAT LITTLE SECTION WOULD BE COMPLETELY DECIDED BY CITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL HAS NO PLAY IN IT BECAUSE THAT WOULD GET WAY TOO POLITICAL TOO QUICK.

AND WE ENJOY PUTTING OFF ALL THE HARD DECISIONS ON TO PAID STAFF, BECAUSE AT LEAST YOU GUYS GET A PAYCHECK TO DO IT.

I MEAN, THAT'S SOMETHING RIGHT.

UH, I THINK I COUNTED THE OTHER DAY AND DURING MY TENURE AS POLICE CHIEF AND NOW AT CITY HALL, I THINK I'M RIGHT AT 40 COUNCIL MEMBERS.

SO THAT'S GOOD.

SO YEAH, I MEAN, WE COULD, UM, YOU KNOW, WE COULD, WE COULD LEAVE THAT SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTOR TO SAYING, SO IF SOMETHING IS THE BRAIN CHILD OF A, OF A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT,

[00:50:01]

AND IT DOESN'T TAKE OFF FOR 10 YEARS, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, I KNOW JACKIE FAGAN HAS BEEN INVOLVED.

I'D LOVE TO SEE HIS NAME ON SOME THINGS.

UH, CAUSE HE'S JUST, HE'S THERE YEAR AFTER YEAR.

UM, AND YOU KNOW, THERE ARE JUST PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE THOSE, THOSE COMMUNITY LEADERS AND THEY DON'T NEED TO BE COUNCIL PEOPLE, YOU KNOW? SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE, IF WE DO NEW BOXING GYM, I WANT MR. SLAVE HIS NAME ON IT SOMEWHERE, RIGHT.

ON A DEDICATION PLAQUE.

CAUSE HE'S PUT HIS LIFE INTO IT.

SO WE, WE COULD DO AND, YOU KNOW, LOOK, MY NAME'S GOING TO BE ON STUFF.

I HAD NO BUSINESS AND LIKE FIRE STATION FIVE AND IT WILL BE NOT ON SOME STUFF THAT I DID HAVE SOME BUSINESS IN AND THAT'S JUST EGO AT THAT POINT.

IT DOESN'T MATTER.

IT REALLY DOESN'T TO ME, I KNOW TO ME, IT'S A THOUGHT ANYWAY, SO I'LL PITCH THAT IDEA AND TAKE SOME FEEDBACK.

ALRIGHT.

I LOVE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTORS RATHER THAN MORE LISTS OF CITY COUNCIL PEOPLE BECAUSE THAT, YEAH, THERE ARE, THERE ARE PEOPLE BESIDES US, UM, WHO CONTRIBUTE HUGELY TO OUR NEW THINGS.

SO I LIKE THAT.

UM, I CAN ONLY PICTURE THE, THE LOOK OF DISMAY ON BRIAN BRADFORD'S FACE WHEN WE TELL HIM, OKAY, YOU'RE IN THE HOT SEAT, YOU GET THE, YOU GET TO PICK, NO, HE HE'S GOT A GOOD CONTRACT.

SO I DON'T THINK HE CARES AT THIS POINT.

YEAH.

YEAH.

UM, THAT'S TRUE.

BUT WE CAN ALWAYS DO THAT.

OKAY.

UM, I DO LIKE, I LIKE THE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTORS RATHER THAN HAVING IT, ALL THESE COUNCIL PEOPLE.

AND IF, IF THIS IS MARKED, IF THE COUNCIL AT THE TOP IS MARKED BY GROUNDBREAKING.

YEAH.

UM, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WOULD FALL OUT IN THE TRANSITION BETWEEN APPROVAL AND GROUNDBREAKING.

SO THAT THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, THAT THEY APPROVED THE CIP FUNDING FOR THE GROUNDBREAKING.

SO IF YOU VOTED TO FUND IT, YOUR NAME GOES ON THE BLACK, EVEN THOUGH YOU ROLL OFF COUNCIL BEFORE THE GROUNDBREAKING HAPPENS.

YES.

IF IT'S A, IF IT HAPPENS IN YOUR BUDGET YEAR.

OKAY.

BECAUSE WE NEVER KNOW WHEN A DEDICATION CEREMONY IS GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT IF, YOU KNOW, YOU VOTED ON IT AND IN FEBRUARY AND WE BREAK GROUND IN JULY AND YOU'VE FALLEN OFF COUNCIL, YOU SHOULD GET THAT INVITATION.

I, I, I AGREE.

AND THAT WAS MY CONCERN IS, UM, I WAS, AND I WAS SITTING HERE TRYING TO THINK BACK OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS AND FIND AN EXAMPLE OF A COUNCIL MEMBER WHO WAS A SIGNIFICANT PART OF A DECISION.

AND THEN, UM, YOU KNOW, CAME OFF.

OKAY.

YEAH.

I MEAN, DAVID GIBBONS WAS MY FIRST CHILD ON NAMING SCHOOL ROAD AND WE'LL BREAK GROUND ON THAT LATER THIS YEAR, BUT HE WASN'T HERE THIS YEAR TO, TO APPROVE THE CIP.

SO HIS NAME WOULDN'T BE ON IT, BUT HE MIGHT BE LISTED AS A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTOR.

AND IT MAYBE THAT WOULD BE THE CATCH CATCH ALL THAT'S WHERE YOU MAKE UP FOR PEOPLE WHO'VE FALLEN OFF KIND OF ACCIDENTALLY OR THROUGH WHATEVER CIRCUMSTANCES.

I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO GO DIG OUT THE 2004 CITY COUNCIL LIST TO PUT THEIR NAME ON THE SKATE PARK.

UM, BUT MAYBE ONE OR TWO OF THEM HAD SOME REAL INVESTMENT IN, OR MAYBE WE WANT TO PUT OUR YOUTH COUNCIL NAMES ON THERE OR AS CONTRIBUTORS AND, AND YOU KNOW, YOUR SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTORS, YOU CAN PUT YOUR PARKS BOARD IN YOUR LIBRARY, BOARD MEMBERS DOWN THERE AND, AND IT JUST, IT'S SORT OF THAT CATCH ALL BUCKET FOR, UM, FOR PEOPLE.

OKAY.

YEAH.

SO MY, SO DAVID GIBBONS WAS THE ONE I WAS THINKING ABOUT WITH OUR, YOU KNOW, ANNOUNCING OF GROUNDBREAKING FOR THE FIRE STATION OR THE TRAILS.

I MEAN, HE DID ALL OF THAT.

YEAH.

YEAH.

AND HE WASN'T ON COUNCIL WHEN IT ACTUALLY OCCURRED.

RIGHT.

SO IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE, WOULD HE GET CREDIT, UM, HERE, BECAUSE GET IT DOWN THERE AS OPPOSED TO UP THERE? RIGHT.

WELL, IT WAS IN THE BUDGET YEAR THAT HE WAS ON COUNCIL AND HE APPROVED IT AND WE BROKE GROUND THAT YEAR.

UM, I THINK WE, I THINK WE BROKE GROUND OR IT WAS FUNDED FOR THAT.

IT WAS, IT WAS FUNDED FOR THAT YEAR WHEN HE WAS ON COUNCIL.

YEAH.

UH, YEAH.

AND THAT TH THAT'S THE HARD ONE, RIGHT? THAT, THAT TOP SECTION, I MEAN, I THINK THAT SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTORS IS EASY, FIGURING OUT WHOSE NAME TO PUT AT THE TOP IS HARD.

RIGHT.

SO, AND I'M JUST PUTTING MYSELF IN THAT, IN THAT POSITION COMING IN AND, UM, WHICH, WHICH WE SAW HAPPEN, WHERE WHEN YOU ARE THERE FOR THE BROWN, GRAY BRICK GROUND GRADING THE GROUNDBREAKING AND YOU MAKE THE SPEECHES AND YOU WILL DO ALL THIS STUFF, AND THEN YOU DO THE RIBBON CUTTING, BUT YOU HAD NO.

UM, AND I'M THINKING WITH MYSELF, CARVER, THE CARVER CENTER, REMODEL AND RENOVATION.

YEAH.

UM, I CAME IN

[00:55:01]

AND THAT WAS ALREADY A DONE DEAL.

YEAH.

BUT IT WAS, UM, BUT IT WASN'T, YOU KNOW, I WAS THERE AT THE, AT THE RIBBON CUTTING AND WAS ASKED TO SPEAK AND I JUST SAID, YOU KNOW, WHAT I, I CONTRIBUTED TO THIS WAS MY SPEECH, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, I'M THANKFUL FOR IT.

AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, KUDOS TO THE PEOPLE WHO CAME BEFORE ME AND WE WOULD HAVE WANTED TO HAVE HAD ANITA'S NAME AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT AS A, AS A CONTRIBUTOR.

RIGHT.

RIGHT.

I'M LOOKING AT THINGS LIKE THE BOXING GYM WHERE I KNOW YOU AND I'VE BEEN HEAVILY INVOLVED, BUT IT WILL PROBABLY HAPPEN IF IT DOES AFTER WE'RE OFF COUNSEL JUST THAT'S THE NATURE OF THE BEAST.

SO, ALL RIGHT.

JUST TRYING, TRYING TO BE FAIR AND TO HONOR, HONOR COUNSEL WHO ACTUALLY HAD, WE'RE DEEPLY, WE'RE ACTUALLY THERE TO, UM, TO CHAMPION IT, TO APPROVE THE FUNDING, TO FIGHT FOR IT, TO DO ALL THOSE THINGS.

YEAH.

AND JUST, JUST WANTING TO HONOR THEM IF WE'RE GOING TO, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS AND LIKE, I DON'T GIVE A FLIP ABOUT HAVING MY NAME ON PLAQUES.

I GET YA.

I GET YA.

WELL, I'M ALSO LOOKING AT THINGS LIKE THE TENNIS CENTER AT TUCKERBIL, YOU KNOW, THAT MAY BE A, UH, GERRY TO FAIL JUNIOR.

IT MAY BE A BOB DAY, MAYBE A JEFF RANGE WHO HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO REALLY WORK IN A FUNDRAISE, YOU KNOW, SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTOR TO OUR NEW ANIMAL SHELTER.

YES.

DARE I SAY, MARIANNE WICKERSHAM.

OH, I WOULD LOVE IT.

EXACTLY.

AND SO YOU KIND OF, YOU KIND OF GET THOSE, THOSE CITIZENS WHO'VE REALLY PLAYED KEY ROLES.

WHO'VE BEEN HOGGING THE MIC ED JUMPIN, MAN.

I DON'T THINK YOU'RE ALL GOING TO MIC AT ALL.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, UH, I NEED THIS HISTORY.

I NEED THE, UH, THE CONVERSATION THAT I'VE JUST HEARD AND, UH, BECAUSE I'M THE NEW KID ON THE BLOCK.

AND HE GIVES ME A VERY UNIQUE POSITION OF NOT HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT MY NAME BEING ON ANYTHING.

SO IT'S GOING TO HAVE THERE, BUT IT GIVES ME A UNIQUE POSITION THAT I'M ABLE TO ALSO SEE IT FROM ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE AND THAT AS I SEE A LOT OF EGOS.

YEAH.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE, THAT'S WHAT REAL, TRULY GOING TO BE DEALING WITH.

BECAUSE I, I REMEMBER DURING MY CANDIDATES SEE THAT I HAD, UH, A GENTLEMAN GOT VERY UPSET WITH ME BECAUSE HE FELT THAT I HAD ATTRIBUTED A PROJECT OR SOME WORK THAT HAD BEEN DONE TO ANOTHER PERSON THAT THAT PERSON REALLY FELT THEY HAD DONE.

AND AS I'M SITTING HERE LISTENING, I CAN SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE FEELING THAT WAY.

AND I THINK THAT WE, WE REALLY DO.

I MEAN, SOMETHING THAT'S SO SIMPLE, BUT WE STILL REALLY DO NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE CONSTRUCT IT.

AND I'M SAYING THAT BECAUSE INITIALLY THAT'S, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN A LOT OF EAGLES ONCE WE GET INTO IT.

AND IT'S NOW WE WE'VE PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE.

I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE OKAY.

SO I'M THINKING, FIRST OF ALL, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE NEED TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS THOUGH QUICKLY.

YES.

BECAUSE THESE BUILDINGS ARE GOING TO BE COMING INTO PLAY PRETTY SOON.

WHAT IS OUR PERIOD OF TIME THAT WE REALLY HAVE TO PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE TODAY? OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

WELL THAT BEING THE CASE THEN, UH, I THINK THAT YOU, YOUR, YOUR CONVERSATION SO FAR HAS BEEN, UH, RIGHT ON POINT.

UH, WE DO NEED TO, I, I LIKE THE IDEA OF, UH, THE, THE TOP PORTION BEING FOR PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY BROKE THE GROUND, WHO ACTUALLY THE PROJECT, UH, OCCURRED FOR HER.

AND THEN THE, THAT BOTTOM SECTION THERE, IT KIND OF COMING TO A POINT OF TRYING TO SAY, OH, THESE ARE THE CONTRIBUTORS.

AND, UH, I'M NOT SO CERTAIN I EVER THE, OH, WHO'S GOING TO MAKE THAT DECISION, UH, STAFF PROBABLY BECAUSE, BUT EVEN THAT CAN BECOME SOMEWHAT POLITICAL.

OKAY.

BUT, UH, UM, I'M, I'M THINKING MORE, SO STAFF THAN I WOULD SAY, COUNCIL, BECAUSE ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE GOING TO FEEL IN SOME SHAPE, FORM OR FASHION, THEY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT.

OKAY.

SO IF WE NEED TO MAKE A QUICK DECISION, UM, IF THIS SOMETHING'S GOING TO BE BINDING ON US, OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MAKE A DECISION ON NOW AND STILL COME BACK AND REALLY GIVE IT SOME REAL CAREFUL CONSIDERATION? WE CAN ALWAYS CHANGE THE RULES LATER.

UM, I DEFINITELY NEED TO GET SOMETHING OUT TODAY.

UM, BUT YEAH, WE CAN ALWAYS CHANGE THE RULES LATER.

I MEAN, THAT'S THE BENEFIT OF OUR STRUCTURE.

WE'RE ALWAYS CONSTANTLY TWEAKING AND EVOLVING AND CORRECTING.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE ALWAYS BEEN AN ADVOCATE OF IS WE HAVE PROFESSIONALS AMONG THOSE.

WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO CAN DO THE RESEARCH FOR US.

WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO, UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE REAL DOG AND THE GAME IS TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET IT RIGHT.

AND SO I WAS THE INTERN BACK TO MITCH, JUST LISTENING TO WHAT HE HAS ALREADY DONE.

HE SAYS, I'VE BOUGHT YOU SOME, WHAT I FEEL MAY BE SOME SOLUTIONS.

AND, UH, BASED ON THE CONVERSATION AS YOU'VE HEARD IT SO FAR, WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS? WELL, I THINK PART OF THIS IS WE DO NEED DIRECTION FROM THE COMMITTEE

[01:00:01]

SOON, TODAY AS POSSIBLE.

BUT THE QUESTION IS HOW SOON THEY GET IT IN FRONT OF THE FULL COUNCIL, UH, ON THIS FOR A FINAL DECISION.

UM, UH, I THINK ALL OF THIS IS DOABLE AND LIKE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT EVERY CITY STRUGGLES WITH THIS, UM, ON HOW BEST TO DO IT.

AND I THINK IT'S JUST A MATTER OF PICKING WHERE'S OUR POINT, IS IT, YOU KNOW, THE FUNDING MECHANISM WHEN IT GETS FUNDED, BUT EVEN THEN WE WANT TO MAKE SURE, CAUSE LIKE YOU CAN APPROVE THE CIP, UH, FEBRUARY, MARCH, USUALLY BY THE BEGINNING OF MARCH, BUT ELECTIONS OCCUR MAY AND TERM LIMITS OR WHATEVER.

SO YOU COULD APPROVE THE CIP, BUT THEN THE CONTRACT MAY NOT COME BACK, YOU KNOW, ON THE ACTUAL DESIGN FOR SIX, NINE MONTHS, WHATEVER LATER.

SO STILL WHATEVER THAT POINT IS, IS IT PROVING THE DESIGN CON OR THE ACTUAL BID THAT THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, IS IT APPROVING THE CIP? IS IT, AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, EARLIER OR LATER OR WHATEVER, WHATEVER THAT POINT IS FOR REALLY THE TOP HALF IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHICH COUNCIL GETS LISTED BASED ON THAT POINT IN TIME, WHATEVER THAT POINT IS.

UH, AND THEN THERE IS, AND THE HISTORICAL WE'VE DONE A LOWER SECTION THAT HAS SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTORS, YOU KNOW, CITY MANAGER, IF IT'S A PARKS BUILDING THAT YOU PUT THE PARKS DIRECTOR ON THERE, THE PARKS BOARD GETS LISTED.

OFTENTIMES THE DESIGN ARCHITECT FIRMS NAMES LISTED DOWN AT THE BOTTOM KIND OF THING, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS WE CAN FILL IN.

BUT THEN IN ADDITION TO ALL THAT THERE'S OPPORTUNITY FOR THE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTORS.

YOU KNOW, OUR ONLY CHALLENGE THERE WILL BE.

IT'S JUST MAKING SURE AS WE MOVE FORWARD OVER THE MANY, MANY PROJECTS WE HAVE THAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT I WOULD ASK IS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU MENTIONED A COUPLE OF NAMES ALREADY ON FOLKS THAT I MAY NOT KNOW THAT, AND I'LL BE TALKING TO MY STAFF OF WHO'S BEEN INVOLVED, WHATEVER ANIMAL SHELTER REC CENTER LIBRARY, MAKING SURE THAT I HAVE THOSE NAMES WHEN I WORK WITH STAFF TO PUT THAT SIGNIFICANT LIST, THAT KIND OF THING.

CAUSE THAT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE OUR CHALLENGE.

AND, AND THE REAL ANSWER IS NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, NO MATTER WHAT POLICY YOU COME UP WITH, WE'RE GOING TO DO THE BEST WE CAN.

WE MIGHT MISS SOMEBODY AT SOME POINT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO TRY NOT TO MISS ANYBODY.

YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE POLICY, YOUR LEVEL IS REALLY WHAT'S THE POLICY LEVEL FOR THE TOP PART.

THE BOTTOM PART WE CAN FIGURE OUT FROM SIGNIFICANT TRIBUTARIES FROM, I THINK WE CAN MAKE THAT WORK.

SO, UM, AND THEN IT'S JUST A TIMELINE, CAUSE WE DO HAVE SOME THINGS COMING UP, YOU KNOW, UH, AUDUBON REC CENTER WILL BE IN THE KNEE.

WE'RE STILL STILL SOME DELAYS THERE WITH FURNITURE AND OTHER THINGS AND PARTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT IN THE NEAR FUTURE, WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING THAT AND WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING SOME OTHER OPENINGS.

UH, SO THEN IT'S JUST A MATTER OF, AND OF COURSE YOU CAN, YOU, AS COUNCIL, AS A WHOLE CAN CHANGE THE POLICY AND MAY CHOOSE TO OVER TIME OR TWEAK IT, MODIFY IT, YOU KNOW, AND MOVE