[Administrative Services Committee on October 24, 2023. ]
[00:00:07]
THIS IS TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24TH, 2023.
IT'S 5:00 PM AND THIS IS A MEETING OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE.
I AM, UH, CHAIR DEBORAH MORRIS WITH ME, OUR COUNCILMAN HEDRICK AND COUNCILWOMAN LUT, AND A NUMBER OF STAFF MEETINGS.
UM, THE FIR OH, FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PUBLIC COMMENTS.
I DO NOT SEE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE.
WE WILL MOVE ON TO ONE A, WHICH IS THEN APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE YOU BOTH HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MINUTE, MINUTES, IT SHOULD BE IN YOUR PACKET.
AND WE'RE ALSO EMAILED EARLIER.
AND IF YOU HAVE, UM, ANY QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, OR IF YOU WANT TO OFFER A MOTION, A MOTION TO APPROVE.
ALL IN FAVOR RAISE HANDS THAT THAT IS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
ITEM TWO, ITEMS FOUR, CONSIDER INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
UH, ITEM TWO A IS TO DISCUSS AND REVIEW CURRENT POLICIES FOR NAMING CITY PROPERTY.
AND I BELIEVE THAT WE, UH, WE WENT OVER THIS AND PRETTY MUCH, UM, CAME TO, UH, AGREEMENT ON IT AT THE LAST MEETING.
BUT WE, UH, WE WERE ABSENT ONE MEMBER, AND WE WANTED TO WAIT AND BRING THIS BACK OVER FOR, UM, FINAL COMMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS BEFORE WE PASS IT ON TO COUNSEL.
SO, DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, HAVE YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK OVER THE DRAFT AS IT'S PRESENTED TO US? AND IS, ARE THERE ANY MORE, ARE CONCERNS, UM, CHANGES, ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO RAISE? NO, I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THAT.
I HAVE REVIEWED IT, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS.
ARE WE READY THEN TO PASS THIS ON AND PRESENT IT TO COUNSEL? YES, I'M IN FAVOR.
MAKE A MOTION TO PASS IT ON TO COUNCIL.
WE'LL BE OUTTA HERE VERY QUICKLY IF THIS KEEPS UP.
UM, ITEM TWO B IS TO DISCUSS AND REVIEW POLICIES FOR THE SPONSORSHIP OF NON-PROFIT EVENTS.
AND DO WE HAVE A, UH, STAT? WE DO.
WE GOT THE SECOND ITEM QUICKLY.
DIDN'T WANT YOU TO GET IT FORWARD.
THE, THIS REQUEST IS FROM STAFF AND IT'S FROM MYSELF AND TALKING WITH TIFFANY, OF COURSE, DANA LODGE.
AND Y'ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS ON APPROVAL OF NONPROFITS.
AND I THINK WE MAY HAVE BRIEFLY TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME, BUT THE HISTORICAL PROCESS IS WE HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FUNDS.
I I THINK IT'S 111,000 EACH YEAR THAT'S BUDGETED FOR NON-PROFIT ASSISTANCE FOR SPECIAL EVENTS.
SO, AND THE PROCESS FOR TWO DECADES, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHEN IT STARTED.
A LONG TIME, HAS BEEN ANYTHING OVER $5,000.
AND TYPICALLY IT'S SERVICES, IT'S POLICE OVERTIME, IT'S BARRICADES, IT'S PORTA-POTTIES.
THE NONPROFIT RUNS THE EVENT AND WE JUST PROVIDE THEM THAT ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE.
BUT ANYTHING OVER 5,000 INDIVIDUALLY COMES TO COUNCIL EACH AND EVERY TIME THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.
IT MAY BE 6, 7, 8, 9 TIMES IN A YEAR THAT Y'ALL INDIVIDUALLY GET TO REVIEW AND SEE IT.
SO A COUPLE OF THINGS BROUGHT THIS UP.
ONE, WE, SEVERAL MONTHS AGO WORKED WITH, YOU WORKED WITH, YOU KNOW, LEGAL AND WE REVISED THE AUTHORIZATION DOLLAR AMOUNT, WENT TO 250,000, THAT KIND OF THING.
UH, AND WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT OUR PROCESSES, UH, TO MAKE SURE WE HAD 'EM IN PLACE.
SO ANYWAY, HERE'S OUR THOUGHT AND RECOMMENDATION.
IF THE COMMITTEE AND THEN COUNCIL WOULD BE OKAY WITH THIS IS, LOOK WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND.
LIKE RIGHT NOW I'VE GOT 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 EVENTS THAT REGULARLY COME TO COUNCIL ON A REGULAR ANNUAL BASIS.
THE AMOUNTS VARY DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE EVENT AND WHAT THE NEEDS ARE.
AND INSTEAD OF YOU SEEING THEM INDIVIDUALLY, UH, OUR THOUGHT IS WE WOULD BRING IT TO YOU DURING THE BUDGET CYCLE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, SHOWING YOU HERE'S HOW MUCH FUNDING WE HAVE.
THERE IS SOME FUNDS, LIKE THIS YEAR WE HAD 11,000 OUT OF THE A HUNDRED, 11,000 THAT WASN'T ALLOCATED YET IN CASE WE HAD SOMETHING ELSE THAT COME UP.
SOMETIMES WHAT HAPPENS ALSO IS IF THE ROUTE OF A PARADE CHANGES, YOU HAVE CONSTRUCTION IN DOWNTOWN, YOU HAVE THINGS GOING ON THAT CHANGES IT.
SO IT, IT INCREASES THE COST A LITTLE BIT.
EXTRA BARRICADES, EXTRA STAFFING, WHATEVER IT MAY BE.
AND IT GIVES, THAT GIVES US A LITTLE FLEXIBILITY TO HANDLE ANY OF THOSE CHANGES.
AND THEN STILL DEAL IF A, IF ANOTHER ONE COMES UP.
BUT YOU COUNCIL WOULD STILL SEE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS IN THE BUDGET CYCLE,
[00:05:01]
WE COULD BRING YOU, HERE'S WHAT WE HAVE BUDGETED, HERE'S WHAT WE HAVE PLANNED NEXT YEAR.AND IT WOULD BE THESE ANNUAL ONES THAT YOU SEE EVERY YEAR.
WE HAD CERTAIN AMOUNTS BUDGETED, UH, AND THEN WE HAVE A SMALL AMOUNT LEFT OVER FOR SOMETHING ELSE THAT MAY COME UP OR ANY ADJUSTMENTS NEEDED.
AND THEN WHEN WE COME BACK, NOT ONLY WE DO SHOW YOU, NOT ONLY DO WE SHOW YOU THE FORECAST FOR THE NEXT YEAR, BUT WE'LL BRING BACK AND YOU WOULD SEE THE SAME THINGS.
WE CAN BRING BACK THE INFORMATION OF HERE'S WHAT HAPPENED IN EACH OF THESE EVENTS.
BUT INSTEAD OF DOING IT 7, 8, 9 TIMES A YEAR, YOU GET IT ONCE YOU GET IT ALLOCATED.
AND SOME OF THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, 9,000, 11,000, 12,000 AND YOU KNOW, A MUSEUM.
AND WE DO 'EM EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
SO SIMPLIFYING THAT PROCESS, STILL LETTING YOU KNOW, YOU STILL KNOW HOW MUCH IS BUDGETED, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE SPENDING IT ON.
WE FORECAST AND BUDGET WHAT WE'RE GONNA SPEND IT ON NEXT YEAR.
AND THEN WHEN WE COME BACK TO THAT SAME CYCLE, YOU GET TO SEE NOT ONLY DID WE FORECAST IT AND BUDGET IT, YOU SEE WHAT WE ACTUALLY SPENT, HERE'S WHAT THEY DID.
WE STILL HAVE THE SAME FORMS THAT SHOW WHAT THEY DID, HOW THEY ALLOCATED, WHAT THE COST WAS, ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
SO IT'S JUST TRYING TO STANDARDIZE IT INTO A ONCE A YEAR KIND OF THING.
UH, AND IT'S ALWAYS, IF COUNCIL EVER HAD A SPECIFIC QUESTION ABOUT ONE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, WE COULD HANDLE THAT SEPARATELY IF NEEDED.
BUT IT'S JUST SIMPLIFYING THAT PROCESS, UH, AND GOING THROUGH EACH OF THOSE.
BUT TO, TO MAKE THAT CHANGE, YOU'LL SEE THERE'S SOME DRAFT LANGUAGE.
WE'VE GOTTA CHANGE OF COUNCIL POLICY AND WE'VE GOTTA CHANGE IN ORDINANCE.
NOW DANA WOULD'VE BEEN HERE, BUT SHE'S BEEN SICK THE LAST TWO DAYS OR REALLY THIS, THE WEEKEND IN THE LAST TWO DAYS.
WE'RE HOPING SHE WAS GONNA BE HERE.
UH, IF WE STILL NEED TO LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE AND MAKE SURE THIS MAY NOT BE THE FINAL.
I THINK WE STILL, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE COMMITTEE WAS OKAY WITH IT.
FIRST WE HAVE SOME DRAFT, SO IF YOU AGREE, WHAT WE PROBABLY DO IS IT'LL GIVE US, WE'LL COME BACK NEXT MONTH WITH THE FINAL RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE.
UM, AND THEN WE COULD, UH, AFTER THAT, WHENEVER THE NEXT OPPORTUNITY TO GET TO THE FULL COUNSEL.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S OUR INTENT BEHIND IT.
TRYING TO SIMPLIFY THE PROCESS.
STILL GIVE COUNSEL THE INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THESE.
JUST NOT DO IT INDIVIDUALLY, DO IT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
UH, AND THEN WE GOTTA TWEAK ALL THE LANGUAGE IN THE COUNCIL POLICY INSTEAD OF COUNCIL THIS, IT'S CITY MANAGER THIS, IT'S THAT, THAT KIND OF CHANGING THE LANGUAGE IN THE SAME THING IN THE ORDINANCE.
SO, AND WITH THAT, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
AND SHE'S USUALLY THE TALKER, NOT ME, SO.
SOMETIMES I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT
I KNOW ANYONE THAT KNOWS YOU WELL, WE CAN RIVAL, WE CAN.
I FOUND SOMEBODY THAT CAN TALK ALMOST AS WELL, AS MUCH AS I CAN.
WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
QUESTIONS? YES, I HAVE A QUESTION.
DOING THIS ONE TIME APPROVAL, DOES THIS PRECLUDE ANY NEW EVENTS COMING? 'CAUSE I'M CONCERNED IF WE HAVE $111,000 AND THOSE SEVEN OR EIGHT EVENTS THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE SCHEDULE, DOES THAT TAKE UP ALL THE MONEY? OR IS THERE ANYTHING LEFT FOR IF A NEW ORGANIZATION SOMEONE CAME AND WANTED TO PUT ON AN EVENT? SO RIGHT NOW, ASSUMING ALL THE AMOUNTS OF THE OTHER STAYED THE SAME AND WHEN THEY CHANGE, THEY USUALLY DON'T CHANGE DRASTICALLY.
IT COULD CHANGE A LITTLE BIT UP OR DOWN, DEPENDING ON THE LOCATION OR THE ROUTE, THAT KIND OF THING.
WITH 11,000 THAT DEPENDING ON THE SIZE WITH THAT 11,000 WE HAVE LEFT OVER, WE CAN HANDLE EITHER.
AND WE DO GET SOME, WELL, SO LET ME FINISH THAT THOUGHT.
SO WE COULD HANDLE ANOTHER MODEST ONE.
WHAT WE DO, WHAT WE'VE BEEN PARTNERING WITH 11,000 SO WE COULD HANDLE A MODEST ONE.
NOW THE OTHER THING COULD BE IS AS WE GO THROUGH THE DISCUSSION AND GET INTO BUDGET, DOES THAT NUMBER NEED TO GROW NOW IN ADDITION TO THE FUNDING TO SUPPORT THEM, WE GOTTA LOOK AT STAFFING CHALLENGES AND EVERYTHING GOES WITH THAT.
'CAUSE THE SPECIAL EVENTS TEAM IS DOING A GREAT JOB.
THEY'RE DOING ALL SORTS OF THINGS, BUT WE'VE PUSHED THEM, STRETCHED THEM TO WE, AND THESE ARE EVENTS SPONSORED BY OTHER NONPROFITS THAT WE ASSIST WITH.
SO THEY'RE NOT AS BIG A WORKLOAD, BUT THERE STILL IS SOME.
SO I THINK THERE'S A WAY TO HANDLE THAT.
UM, AND IT WOULDN'T PRECLUDE IT.
AND WHAT WE COULD ALSO DO AND, AND PUT INTO OUR PRACTICE OF IF ONCE WE RUN OUT, IF WE WERE TO RUN OUT AND THEN WE HAD OTHER REQUESTS, WE COULD COME BACK TO COUNCIL, YOU KNOW OF LOOK, WE'RE OUT OF THIS 111,000, WE'VE GOT ANOTHER REQUEST.
WE OCCASIONALLY MAKE MIDYEAR BUDGET.
WE DO A BUDGET AMENDMENTS THREE TIMES A YEAR, WHATEVER IT IS, THREE OR FOUR TIMES A YEAR.
AND IF WE NEEDED ANOTHER 10 OR 15,000 BASED ON THAT, WE COULD ADD TO THAT.
THIS WOULD BE THE 11, THE, THIS AUTHORIZATION AT BUDGET CYCLE WOULD BE AUTHORIZATION TO SPEND WHATEVER THE BUDGETED AMOUNT UP TO THAT 111,000.
IF WE KEEP GETTING REQUESTS IN, UH, WE COULD BRING IT TO COUNCIL IF WE NEEDED ADDITIONAL FUNDING.
SO I THINK THERE'S A WAY FOR US TO HANDLE THAT.
'CAUSE WE'VE, WE, WITH THESE, WE TRY TO REALLY WORK WITH THESE NONPROFITS
[00:10:01]
TO WHEN WE CAN MAKE IT, MAKE IT WORK.AND WE DO A WHOLE BUNCH OF SMALLER ONES.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS TELLING YOU TOO.
THERE'S, THERE'S SEVERAL THAT ARE NOT THE 5,000 LIMIT.
THESE ARE JUST THE ONES THAT ARE OVER THAT AMOUNT.
SO THE GOAL IS TO CONTINUE TO DO AS MANY AS WE CAN TO SUPPORT THEM AS MUCH AS WE CAN.
AS LONG AS LIKE ALL OF 'EM, WE CAN DO IT SAFELY AND THEY MEET ALL THE, THE TYPICAL STANDARD REQUIREMENTS.
THEN TO ME, THE OTHER OTHER COMMENT I HAVE IS ON B FOUR, AN EXPENSE AND REVENUE REPORT FOR ANY PREVIOUS YEAR'S, EVENTS MUST BE INCLUDED WITH THE APPLICATION.
THAT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING TO ME.
I GUESS IT COULD BE TAKEN SEVERAL WAYS THAT YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE A REVENUE REPORT FOR ANY OF THE PREVIOUS EVENTS, ANY OF THE PREVIOUS YEARS.
OR YOU HAVE TO HAVE, PROVIDE FOR ANY EVENT OR ANY EVENTS PLURAL, THAT YOU DID THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
IT'S JUST CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE, CLEAN THAT RIGHT.
ANY, WHAT? DID YOU DO THIS EVENT LAST YEAR? I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU INTENDED.
THAT WAS SPONSORED BY THE CITY AND NOT SOME ORGANIZATION THAT IF THEY PUT ON ANY EVENT, THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE ALL THE REVENUE SO WE CAN CLEAN THAT UP.
THE, THE PRACTICE HAS BEEN, THEY FILL OUT THE FORM.
NOT ONLY DO THEY APPLY, GO THROUGH AND THEN ONCE WE'RE DONE THEY FILL OUT AN UPDATE TO SHOW WHAT ALL WAS DONE, WHAT WAS SUSPENDED, ANY NET REVENUE OR WHATEVER THEY, THEY HAVE LEFT OVER THAT.
SO WE'LL WE CAN CLEAN UP THAT LANGUAGE AS WE WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY AND HIS TEAM.
WILL YOU BRING A, UH, AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THAT ANNUAL REPORT WOULD LOOK LIKE BASED ON THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR? SURE.
WE CAN BRING IT BACK NEXT TIME.
WE'LL HAVE A COUPLE EXAMPLES OF WHAT GETS SUBMITTED.
'CAUSE I'LL FORGET, BUT SHE WON'T.
SO, SO ARE WE CLEAR, AND THAT'S ALREADY AN EXISTING PART OF OUR REQUIREMENTS ON THE APPLICATIONS? OR IS THIS A NEW THING THAT'S COMING IN? NOT A NEW REQUIREMENT? THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON THE EXPENSE REPORT, RIGHT? OH YES.
THAT'S ALREADY AN EXISTING REQUIREMENT.
WE'RE JUST GONNA CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE TO MAKE IT MORE CLEAR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, CONCERNS? WE READY FOR THEM TO, UH, CLEAN THIS UP AND BRING IT BACK TO US PERHAPS NEXT MONTH? YEP.
COMING UP ON, UH, THE HOLIDAY SEASON.
SO LET'S, LET'S MAKE THE MOST OF THIS WHILE WE CAN.
SO IF APPROVED, IF FINALLY APPROVED AT THAT TIME, AND COURSE IF COUNSEL FINALLY APPROVES IT, WE WOULD, WE'LL FIND A TIME.
NORMALLY WE'D BE BRINGING IT DURING THE BUDGET, BUT WE'LL FIND A WAY TO INTERJECT IT AND GET IT ON THAT NORMAL CYCLE TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE ALL THESE THINGS.
AND THAT PUTS US ON TO TWO C, DISCUSS AND REVIEW CITY COUNCIL POLICY, DISRUPTION OF MEETINGS AND VIOLATIONS OF RULES OF DECORUM.
AND, UH, MR. ENGLAND, WE'LL BE LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING FROM YOU.
GLAD TO BE HERE AT FIVE WITH Y'ALL TODAY.
AND, UM, IT WAS ACTUALLY A RESULT OF A CONVERSATION THAT I WAS HAVING WITH ANOTHER, UM, GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY, A LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY WHERE THEY WERE DEALING WITH SOME DISRUPTIONS IN THEIR PUBLIC MEETINGS.
AND THE QUESTION OF HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO DISRUPTIONS IN, IN PUBLIC MEETINGS CAME UP AND, AND WE WERE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION BACK AND FORTH AND, UM, ONE OF THE THING, ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT, THAT THEY WERE DEALING WITH IS THEY WERE WANTING TO CRIMINALLY TRESPASS SOMEBODY FROM A PUBLIC MEETING.
AND I WAS EXPLAINING TO THEM THE HAZARDS INVOLVED AND EVERY, AND HOW YOU HAVE TO HAVE MULTIPLE STEPS, YOU NEED A WRITTEN POLICY.
AND AS I WAS EXPLAINING, THE WRITTEN POLICY THAT I THOUGHT WE HAD IMPLEMENTED ALREADY YEARS AGO TURNED OUT WE NEVER IMPLEMENTED IT.
WE HAD WORKED ON IT, ME AND BRAD HAD WORKED ON IT PROBABLY FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AGO AND JUST NEVER IMPLEMENTED IT AT THE TIME.
NEVER BROUGHT IT TO COUNCIL BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY WE'VE NEVER REALLY HAD AN ISSUE WITH DISRUPTIONS.
BUT AS YOU GO ON YOUTUBE AND YOU GO ON SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU START TO SEE A LOT OF PUBLIC MEETINGS BEING DISRUPTED BECAUSE THE DISCOURSE, THE PUBLIC DISCOURSE HAS BECOME SO, UM, UM, VOLATILE HERE IN THE LAST FEW YEARS BECAUSE WE SEEM TO BE, AS A SOCIETY, UH, MOVING FURTHER AND FURTHER APART ON, ON PUBLIC POLICY POSITIONS.
AND AS A RESULT, UM, UM, SO OFTEN, UM, UM, WHAT ONE CONSIDERS A DISRUPTION OTHERS MAY NOT.
AND THEN WHAT DO YOU DO IF THERE IS AN ACTUAL DISRUPTION AND WHAT IS THAT ALL ABOUT? AND SO THIS POLICY IS INTENDED TO TALK ABOUT THAT AND TALK ABOUT SOME DUE PROCESS STUFF.
UM, AND SO THERE'S SOME CONTEMPORARY CONCERNS RELATED TO THE, TO DOING ANY RULES OF ORDER FOR PUBLIC MEETINGS.
AND ONE OF THOSE IS JUST WHAT I TALKED ABOUT, THE POLARIZATION OF PUBLIC POLICY MATTERS.
UM, WE SEEM TO BE MOVING FURTHER AND FURTHER APART AND WE, IT'S, IT'S HARD FOR THE PUBLIC TO FIND COMMON GROUND TO HAVE A, A RESPECTFUL DISCOURSE IN PUBLIC.
[00:15:01]
TRIES TO, UM, UM, QUIETEN THE OTHER OR SHOUT DOWN THE OTHER UNTIL THERE'S NO DISCOURSE AT ALL.SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE A POLICY IN PLACE.
NOW WHAT'S REASONABLE, UM, UM, FOR THE, THE COUNCIL TO DETERMINE A POLICY IS WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S, IT, IT NOT ONLY, UM, MEETS TEXAS LAW, BUT IT ALSO OF COURSE, UM, UM, IS IN CONFORMANT TO YOU WITH THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE RIGHT TO SPEAK FOR THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT ORDERLY MEETINGS BECAUSE THERE IS A FINE LINE THERE AND THERE'S SOME CASE LAW OUT THERE ON THAT AS WELL.
UM, BUT ALSO WE NEED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HATE SPEECH AND WHAT IS HATE SPEECH BECAUSE, UM, WHAT WE THINK OF HATE SPEECH HAS BEEN FORMED BY OUR, OUR PUBLIC CONVERSATIONS ON THE MEDIA OR OTHER PLACES.
AND THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY FROM A JEWISH PRUDENCE PERSPECTIVE WHAT HATE SPEECH ACTUALLY IS.
AND SO WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT IN DISCUSSING.
AND BY THE WAY, Y'ALL, OF COURSE, LIKE ANY OTHER COMMITTEE MEETING, IF Y'ALL WANNA INTERRUPT ME, JUST INTERRUPT ME.
UM, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS AT ANY MOMENT.
SO, UM, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT COMES UP IS WHAT IS THIS RIGHT? TO HAVE AN ORDERLY MEETING VERSUS THE RIGHT TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC? NOW, ONE OF THE INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT OUR COUNCIL MEETINGS IS THEY'RE LIMITED PUBLIC FORUM.
THAT MEANS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO SAY OR DO ANYTHING.
SO AN EXAMPLE OF A PUBLIC FORUM WOULD BE LIKE A SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF CITY HALL OR A SIDEWALK IN A PARK OR A, UM, SIDEWALK IN SOME OTHER, UH, AT A, AT A, AT A COURTHOUSE OUT IN FRONT OF A COURTHOUSE.
THOSE ARE TRADITIONAL AREAS THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS SAID.
THESE ARE PUBLIC FORUMS. THIS IS WHERE PEOPLE GO TO REGRESS.
IF THEY HAVE A, IF THEY WANT TO REGRESS OR HAVE A REGRESS WITH THE GOVERNMENT, THEY GET TO GO TO THESE PLACES AND SAY, AND EXPRESS THEMSELVES PRETTY MUCH, NOT COMPLETELY, BUT PRETTY MUCH ANY WAY THEY WANT TO.
AND THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T GET TO, EXCEPT FOR THE HEALTH AND SAFETY MATTERS.
THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T REALLY GET TO REGULATE THAT.
UM, UM, BUT OUR COUNCIL MEETINGS AND OUR BOARD MEETINGS ARE LIMITED PUBLIC FORUMS. AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE COURT CASES IS, IS, AND WE DO THIS, WE GET TO REGULATE TIME, PLACE, AND MANNER.
AND YOU SEE THAT WITH TIME IN OUR COUNCIL MEETINGS, IN OUR BOARD MEETINGS.
WE HAVE THREE MINUTES THAT WE GIVE PEOPLE.
WE HAVE IN SOME INSTANCES 10 MINUTES FOR APPLICANTS, BUT WE GENERALLY GIVE PEOPLE THREE MINUTES TO, TO, UM, COME AND SPEAK ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC CONCERN.
AND THEN THE PLACE, THE PLACE WE HAVE IN OUR RULES OF ORDERS, THEY GET TO COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND THEY GET TO SPEAK FROM THE PODIUM.
THEY DON'T GET TO SHOUT FROM THE AUDIENCE.
UM, THEY HAVE TO COME TO THE, UM, PODIUM AND SPEAK FOR THEIR THREE MIN AND THEN THE MANNER OF SPEECH.
UM, AND THIS IS ONE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, HOW WE DO THAT CURRENTLY IS WE DO THAT.
WE SAY YOU CAN'T HAVE SIGNS IN THE, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS IF THEY ARE GONNA DISRUPT SOMEBODY'S VIEW, BUT YOU CAN HOLD UP A SIGN IF IT'S IN YOUR LAP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT WHAT YOU CAN'T DO IS YOU CAN'T, UM, UM, DISRUPT SOMEBODY ELSE'S VIEW OF WHAT'S GOING ON UP FRONT.
SO YOU CAN'T HAVE LARGE SIGNS.
AND SO THAT'S KIND OF THE MANNER, ONE EXAMPLE OF A MANNER OF SPEECH REGULATIONS.
AND OF COURSE Y'ALL HAVE ADOPTED THE RULES OF REGULATION.
UM, BUT WHEN YOU ESTABLISH THOSE RULES, AND THIS IS ONE OF THEM, UM, THE GOVERNMENT BODY HAS TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO VIOLATE THE PROTECTIONS THAT, UM, UM, THE ATTENDEES ENJOY UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
AND THIS IS A, A QUOTE OUT OF A NINTH CIRCUIT CASE, UH, WHICH IS, WHILE A SPEAKER MAY NOT BE STOPPED FROM SPEAKING BECAUSE THE MODERATOR DISAGREES WITH THE VIEWPOINT HE IS EXPRESSING, IT CERTAINLY MAY STOP HIM IF HIS SPEECH BECOMES IRRELEVANT OR REPETITIOUS TO THINK ABOUT.
THE IRRELEVANT PART IS IN BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, NOT IN THE, AND IN WORK SESSIONS, BUT NOT IN THE GENERAL, IN THE REGULAR MEETING WE SAY THAT YOU GET TO COME SPEAK ON MATTERS THAT ARE ON THE AGENDA.
SO IF YOU DON'T SPEAK ON A MATTER THAT'S NOT, IF YOU SPEAK ON A MATTER, IT'S NOT THE AGENDA THAT'S MAKES IT IRRELEVANT.
AND WE DON'T HAVE TO LET HIM SPEAK.
NOW, WE'VE ALWAYS DONE A GOOD JOB.
THE MAYOR HAS ALWAYS DONE A GOOD JOB, THE LAST FEW MAYORS OF JUST LETTING PEOPLE SPEAK WITH THREE MINUTES.
AND THAT'S ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, THE BROADEST POLICY YOU CAN HAVE IS PROBABLY A REALLY GOOD POLICY 'CAUSE IT KEEPS US OUTTA SOME FIGHTS.
AND SO HE'S, UH, THIS CURRENT MAYOR AND OUR PREVIOUS MAYORS HAVE ALL BEEN REALLY GOOD ABOUT, UM, UM, RULING ON WHETHER SOMETHING'S, UM, UM, IRRELEVANT OR NOT, OR IF IT'S ON THE AGENDA OR NOT.
BUT YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO SET IT BY POLICY IF YOU WANT TO, IF YOU WANT, IF YOU WANT TO HAVE, FOR EXAMPLE, WORK SESSION, WE'RE LIMITED RIGHT NOW TO WHERE IF IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA, YOU DON'T SPEAK ON IT.
IF COUNCIL WANTED TO, YOU COULD, YOU COULD OPEN IT UP AND SAY, YOU CAN HAVE OPEN MIC.
NOW, FROM MY OFFICE PERSPECTIVES, WE DON'T LIKE OPEN MIC EVEN AT THE REGULAR MEETING BECAUSE IT PUTS Y'ALL IN.
SOME, IT, IT COULD POTENTIALLY PUT EVERYONE IN AWKWARD POSITIONS.
WHEN SOMEBODY GETS UP AN OPEN MIC AND STARTS PERSONALLY ATTACKING YOU AND USING REALLY PROFANE, REALLY RACIST OR JUST REALLY OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE, IT PUTS US IN A DIFFICULT SPOT BECAUSE IT'S AN OPEN MIC, WHICH MEANS BASICALLY WE'RE NOT LIMITING YOUR SPEECH AT ALL IN THIS THREE MINUTES.
ALL WE'RE SAYING IS YOU HAVE TO COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND, AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SAY WHAT YOU'RE GONNA SAY.
[00:20:03]
SO THAT GETS ME TO HATE SPEECH.UM, AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT THERE REALLY ISN'T SUCH THING AS HATE SPEECH IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
UM, AND HATE SPEECH IS A TERM THAT'S BECOME POPULAR IN THE LAST 20 YEARS BECAUSE, UM, UM, AS A GENERATION YOUNGER THAN MYSELF, UM, AS THEY HAVE, UM, GROWN ACCUSTOMED TO, UM, UM, ANTI-BULLYING, UM, IN SCHOOLS, WHICH THEY DIDN'T REALLY DO A GREAT JOB REGULATING WHEN I WAS IN SCHOOL.
THEY'VE BECOME VERY SENSITIVE TOWARD HOW WE SPEAK WITH ONE ANOTHER.
AND THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S COME UP RECENTLY IS WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO HAVE HATE SPEECH? AND YOU CAN GO ON YOUTUBE RIGHT NOW AND YOU CAN SEE, UM, AND IT'S USUALLY SCHOOL BOARD, SO IT'S NOT TYPICALLY COUNCIL MEETINGS, BUT WE DO SEE IT IN COUNCIL MEETINGS WHERE, UM, I'M ALWAYS CRINGING BECAUSE I SEE WHERE THE, UM, MODERATOR LIMITS PEOPLE'S SPEECH SAYING THAT YOU CAN'T SPEAK LIKE THAT, THAT'S OFFENSIVE, OR THAT'S HATE SPEECH AND I'M NOT GONNA ALLOW IT IN THIS MEETING.
AND ABOUT SIX MONTHS LATER, SURE ENOUGH, THERE'S A LAWSUIT BEEN FILED AND THEY END UP PAYING OUT, UM, UM, UH, SETTLEMENT OF THE LAWSUIT, INCLUDING ATTORNEY'S FEES.
AND SO I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF THAT HERE IN A SECTION.
BUT IF YOU, IF YOU GO THROUGH THE JURISPRUDENCE, YOU'LL SEE COURTS HAVE PROTECTED THE, THE FREE SPEECH, SPEECH RIGHTS OF NAZIS.
UM, THIS CAME OUT OF PHILADELPHIA WHERE THEY WANTED TO GET A PERMIT FOR PARADE AND THE CITY DENIED IT 'CAUSE THEY WERE NAZIS AND THEY SUED PHILADELPHIA LOST.
AND THEN IN LOS ANGELES, LAWSUIT WAS SETTLED FOR 215,000 TO A MAN WHO WORE AKKK HAT, NOT A HAT A HAT AT A MEETING.
AND, UM, UM, HE WENT UP TO THE, IT WAS ACTUALLY A PLANNED COMMISSION MEETING IN LOS ANGELES.
HE WENT TO THE PLAN COMMISSION MEETING WEARING THE HAT THAT THE, UM, THE CHAIR INSISTED THAT HE REMOVE THE HAT.
HE REFUSED, THEY WOULDN'T LET HIM SPEAK.
AND THIS IS A QUOTE FROM JUSTICE ALITO SPEECH THAT DEMEANS ON THE BASIS OF RACE, ETHNICITY, GENDER, RELIGION, AGE, DISABILITY, OR ANY OTHER SIMILAR GROUND IS HATEFUL.
BUT THE PROUDEST POST OF OUR FREE SPEECH JURISPRUDENCE IS THAT WE PROTECT THE FREEDOM TO EXPRESS THE THOUGHT THAT WE HATE.
UM, AND THAT'S WHEN FREE SPEECH IS, THAT'S WHY FREE SPEECH IS SO DIFFICULT BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN SAY SOME REALLY VILE THINGS AND HATEFUL THINGS.
SO THE FIRST MINUTE CONSIDERATIONS WHEN DRAFTING THIS ARE THE TIME, PLACE, AND MANNER RESTRICTIONS, THAT'S WHAT WE DO.
WE DON'T REGULATE CONTENT EXCEPT FOR CONTENT AT WORK SESSION AND AT BOARDS.
UM, AND THEN, UM, UM, OPEN MICROPHONES OF COURSE, WE DISCUSSED ALREADY IN THE DANGERS OF THAT.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS YOU'LL SEE IN HERE IS A DEFINITION OF A DISRUPTION OF A MEETING.
AND IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S SOMETHING I PULLED OUT OF, UM, A COUPLE DIFFERENT CASES.
AND A DISRUPTION OF A MEETING IS SUBSTANTIALLY.
IT'S WHERE AN EVENT SUBSTANTIALLY INTERFERES WITH THE BODY'S ABILITY TO CONDUCT BUSINESS.
OKAY? SO IT'S NOT JUST AN ANNOYANCE, IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ACTUALLY INTERFERING WITH THE BODY'S ABILITY TO, TO FINISH THE, UH, BUSINESS.
AND OF COURSE, I ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE BUILT IN PLENTY OF DUE PROCESS.
'CAUSE THAT'S IMPORTANT PART OF ANY KIND OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IS THAT IF YOU REMOVE SOMEBODY'S, IF YOU RESTRICT SOMEBODY'S FIRST AMENDMENT, SECOND AMENDMENT, FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS, YOU BETTER BUILD IN SOME DUE PROCESS.
SO IF AS WE GO THROUGH THIS, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE ARE SOME, UM, ACTIONS THAT THE MAYOR OR A, UM, CHAIRPERSON CAN TAKE, UM, THAT'S GOING TO RESTRICT THEIR FUTURE RIGHTS.
AND SO WE NEED TO BUILD SOME DUE PROCESS IN THERE.
AND SOME OF THESE ARE JUST, UH, UM, SUGGESTIONS ON MY PART.
AND Y'ALL MAY NOT LIKE MY TIMEFRAMES.
Y'ALL MAY NOT LIKE MY SUGGESTIONS.
Y'ALL MAY THINK THEY'RE TOO HARSH.
YOU MAY NOT THINK THEY'RE HARSH ENOUGH.
BUT WHAT I, WHAT I'M CERTAIN OF IS WE SHOULD NOT BE RESTRICTING SOMEBODY'S RIGHT TO COME TO A PUBLIC PLACE PERMANENTLY TO, UM, ADDRESS THE GOVERNMENT ON PUBLIC POLICY MATTERS.
AND SO, UM, UH, YOU SEE, YOU, YOU HAVE SEEN SOME GOVERNMENTAL BODIES DO THAT.
UM, AND, UM, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND BECAUSE, UH, ANY KIND OF PERMANENTLY RESTRICTION OF FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS IS PROBABLY VERY, UM, UNWISE THINGS TO DO.
UM, CAN I, YES, JUST WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, FREE SPEECH AND, AND I THINK MOST OF US HAVE, HAVE BECOME GRADUALLY, UH, THANKS TO YOU MORE, WELL-VERSED IN THAT.
UM, WHERE IS THERE A LINE WITH SPEECH, UM, THAT BECOMES CRIMINAL, LIKE MAKING A THREAT? YES.
ARE YOU ADDRESSING THAT LATER? I, I, I'LL ADDRESS IT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT, AND IT'S NOT OTHERWISE A VIOLATION OF LAW.
SO YES, THERE ARE SOME RESTRICTIONS THAT WE, Y'ALL CAN AUTOMATICALLY DO.
AND SOME OF THOSE ARE CRIMINAL MATTER.
SO IF I THREATEN YOU, IF I SAY THAT'S NOT CONDITIONAL.
IF I SAY, I'M GONNA GO, DO, YOU KNOW, IF I'M GONNA COME OVER THERE, I'M GONNA KICK YOUR BUTT.
THAT'S A CRIMINAL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW VIOLATION.
UM, UM, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT.
SO SOMEBODY COME UP TO THE OPEN MIC, DOESN'T GET TO TELL THE MAYOR ALL THE BAD THINGS HE'S GOING TO DO TO HIM OR HIS FAMILY, UM, UM,
[00:25:01]
BECAUSE THAT'S A THREAT.IT COULD BE EVEN A TERRORISTIC THREAT DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE THREAT ITSELF.
SO THAT'S ONE THAT I, I, I TRY TO STEER AWAY FROM.
THERE IS ACTUALLY CASES ALSO, UM, UM, THIS IS MORE RELATED TO SIGNS, BUT, UM, PORNOGRAPHY IS ALSO, UM, A TYPE OF EXPRESSION THAT CAN BE REGULATED BY THE GOVERNMENT.
NOW, YOU MIGHT ASK, WELL, WHAT'S PORNOGRAPHY? WELL, YOU KNOW, THE SUPREME COURT STRUGGLES WITH THAT QUESTION TOO.
AND IN FACT, THERE'S A FAMOUS QUOTE THAT Y'ALL HAVE HEARD.
I'M SURE THAT I CAN'T REALLY DEFINE IT, BUT I KNOW WHEN, WHEN I SEE IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S ONE OF, IT'S ONE OF THOSE QUOTES.
SO, BUT PORNOGRAPHY, UM, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S ANOTHER, UM, TYPE OF SPEECH THAT CAN BE REGULATED.
UM, AND ANY TYPE OF VIOLATION OF LAW WHERE, UM, IT'S MAINLY RELATED TO THREATS, TERRORISTIC THREATS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S, AND THEN THAT'S CERTAINLY NOT PERMITTED SPEECH, BUT SORT OF THAT NAME CALLING EVEN CALLING YOUR CHILDREN NAMES, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
AND THERE'S ALSO DISORDERLY CONDUCT.
NOW, THIS IS A TRICKY ONE THAT EVEN OUR POLICE OFFICERS, UP UNTIL ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO, MITCH ACTUALLY HAD MIKE, I GUESS IT WAS PROBABLY LONGER, PROBABLY 15 YEARS AGO, HAD MIKE MAKE SURE THAT OUR POLICE OFFICERS UNDERSTAND DISORDERLY CONDUCT.
'CAUSE YOU WOULD BE SURPRISED IN THE STATE OF TEXAS HOW MANY POLICE OFFICERS DO NOT UNDERSTAND DISORDERLY CONDUCT, BECAUSE POLICE OFFICERS TEND TO THINK THAT DISORDERLY CONDUCT IS OFFENSIVE SPEECH.
IT'S BAD WORDS THAT YOU USE THAT COULD OFFEND ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC.
AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THE LAW SAYS AT ALL.
UNDER THE PENAL CODE, THE LAW SAYS THAT IT'S OFFENSIVE SPEECH THAT IS MOST LIKELY TO BREACH IT'S OFFENSIVE SPEECH THAT IS, THAT TENDS TO BREACH THE PIECE.
AND AN EXAMPLE OF THAT WOULD BE, IT'S NOT OFFENSIVE, IT'S NOT A VIOLATION OF LAW FOR ME TO FLIP YOU OFF TO GET TO EXTEND THE MIDDLE FINGER.
NOW, IF I JUMP UP INTO YOUR FACE AND EXTEND THE MIDDLE FINGER RIGHT INTO YOUR FACE, AS AIN'T JUST FROM YOUR NOSE, WELL THAT'S GONNA TEND TO BREACH THE PIECE.
IT'S GONNA RESULT IN, IN, UM, A VIOLENT ACT.
SO THAT WOULD BE AGAINST THE LAW.
UH, BUT THERE IS A LINE THERE.
SO IT IS ACTUALLY A CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED SPEECH.
AND SO OUR T-SHIRTS THAT SAY F THE POLICE OR F THE CITY COUNCIL OR FA INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBER, THAT'S ALL PROTECTED.
UM, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE, A COURT WOULD LOOK AT AND SAY, THIS WOULD TEND TEND TO INCITE VIOLENCE.
AND THAT'S KIND OF THE KEY THERE IS IF IT'S SPEECH THAT WOULD TEND TO INCITE VIOLENCE, AND YOU CAN FILE A DISORDERLY CONDUCT, BUT YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL BECAUSE IT'S, UM, UM, ESPECIALLY WITH ANY KIND OF, UM, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF THE ARGUMENT THAT YOU SEE AND YOU SEE A LOT MORE CONVICTIONS WITH RACIST REMARKS.
'CAUSE THOSE, THOSE TEND TO INCITE VIOLENCE.
AND WE CAN SAY, SAY AS A COUNTRY, WE'VE SEEN IT OVER, YOU KNOW, IN THE SUMMER OF 20 21, 20 22, UM, WHERE WE HAD ALL THE VIOLENCE, UM, UM, THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.
AND SO RACISM'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT, BUT IT'S STILL PROTECTED.
UM, SO IT'S, UM, IT'S REALLY A DETERMINATION BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCE.
BUT YES, THERE IS A DISTINCTION.
WELL, CIRCLING BACK TO PORN, IF THE PORN IS, IS WRITTEN TEXT PORN, DOES THAT STILL FALL ONTO THAT? WE REALLY CAN'T OBSERVE WHAT'S WRITTEN ON THE SIGN THAT IS YES, PROBABLY SO.
'CAUSE PORNOGRAPHY, WE ONLY NEED DIRTY PICTURES, RIGHT? IMAGES IS WHAT THE COURTS HAVE LOOKED AT WHEN THEY LOOKED AT PORNOGRAPHY YAHOO AND NOT WORDS.
SO, WELL, THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW? NOT RIGHT NOW, NO.
OKAY, LET'S GO OVER THE PO LET'S GO OVER THE RECOMMENDED POLICY.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIRST PAGE ON SUBSECTION A, THAT'S JUST THE STANDARD, UM, UM, UM, INTRODUCTION TO TO WHAT THIS POLICY'S ABOUT.
AND IT'S AN AFFIRMATION THAT, THAT THIS COUNCIL CERTAINLY VALUES THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC MEETINGS.
BUT SUBSECTION B, THAT'S WHEN WE GET TO, YES, WE RECOGNIZE YOUR RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE AND WE WANT YOU TO PARTICIPATE, BUT WE ALSO HAVE A, WE ALSO HAVE A RIGHT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE REASONABLE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE GETS TO PARTICIPATE EQUALLY, AND THAT YOU'RE NOT, UM, UM, BY EXERCISING YOUR RIGHTS, YOU'RE NOT, UH, NEGATIVELY AFFECTING SOMEBODY ELSE'S RIGHTS.
AND THIS IS WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THE WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO SUBSTANTIALLY, OR WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO, UM, VIOLATE, UM, OR HAVE A MEETING DISRUPTION.
AND IN IT, YOU, YOU LOOK DOWN ABOUT SIX LINES.
IT SAYS, A MEETING DISRUPTION SHALL BE A VIOLATION OF THE RULES OF PO PROCEDURES AND POLICIES THAT SUBSTANTIALLY INTERFERES WITH THE BODY'S ABILITY TO CONDUCT BUSINESS.
AND YOU SEE THIS THROUGHOUT THE CASE LAW WHERE, UM, UM, YOU HAVE TO HAVE FACTS IN IT.
THEY SAY, BUT BECAUSE THEY WERE ACTING LIKE THIS, WE WERE HAVING TO STOP AND ADDRESS THAT BEHAVIOR BEFORE WE COULD CONTINUE WITH OUR BUSINESS.
AND SO IT USUALLY TAKES SEVERAL
[00:30:01]
WARNINGS TO WHERE THE, THE CHAIRPERSON OR THE MAYOR OR WHOEVER IS LEADING THE MEETING WHO SAYS, WHO, WHO WARNS SOMEBODY AND SAYS, LISTEN, YOUR BEHAVIOR'S OUT OF LINE, YOU NEED TO STOP, OR THERE'S GONNA BE CONSEQUENCES.HE, HE CAN TELL 'EM TO SIT DOWN.
THEY NEED TO SIT DOWN AND BE QUIET.
IF THEY CONTINUE, HE CAN THEN ASK 'EM TO LEAVE.
THEY CAN BE REMOVED BY A POLICE OFFICER OR A MARSHAL FROM THE MEETING.
AND, UM, AS WE GET THROUGH THE POLICY, WE'LL ADDRESS WHAT OTHER OPTIONS AFTER THAT THE, THE MAYOR HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO.
AND IT'S REALLY UP TO THE MAYOR AND THE, OR THE CHAIRPERSON AND HOW THEY WANNA RUN THEIR ON THEIR MEETING.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF DISCRETION GIVEN TO THE CHAIRPERSON AND THE MAYOR IN THAT REGARD.
UM, AND THEN SUBSECTION C, IT TALKS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE IS A VIOLATION.
AND THAT'S WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE PRESIDING MEMBER SHALL WARN THE INDIVIDUAL THAT HE OR SHE IS IN VIOLATION OF THE RULES OF ORDER AND ADVISE A PERSON IF THEIR DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR CONTINUES, THAT THEY WILL BE ASKED TO SIT DOWN AND REMAIN QUIET FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING.
AND IF THEY CONTINUE TO FURTHER DISRUPT THE MEETING, THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY ORDER THE INDIVIDUAL TO LEAVE THE PREMISES.
AND IF THEY REFUSE TO LEAVE, OF COURSE, AT THAT POINT THEY CAN ASK THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER PRESENT.
UM, THERE'S ALWAYS ONE WHILE WE HAVE COMMITTEES OUT FRONT, AND THERE'S ALWAYS A POLICE OFFICER PRESENT DURING COUNCIL MEETINGS, AND SO THEY CAN ACTUALLY REMOVE THEM FROM IT.
AND IT'S AT THAT POINT WHERE THE MAYOR OR THE, UH, CHAIRMAN HAS, THE CHAIRPERSON HAS THE OPTION OF, UM, ASKING THAT THEY BE CRIMINALLY TRESPASSED.
AND WHAT THAT BASICALLY MEAN IS THE CHAIRPERSON OR THE MAYOR WOULD, WOULD TELL THE, UM, UH, LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER PRESENT THAT, UM, THAT THEY, UM, UM, BELIEVE THEY SHOULD BE CRIMINALLY TRESPASSED FOR SEVEN DAYS INITIALLY, UH, I'M SORRY, FOR, UM, 30 DAYS INITIALLY.
I DON'T SUSPECT THAT, THAT OUR MAYOR WOULD WANT TO DO THAT VERY OFTEN, BUT THERE MIGHT BE A CIRCUMSTANCE IN WHICH HE DID.
AND SO, BECAUSE HE'S TAKEN AWAY SOME RIGHTS THERE, HE'S TAKING, UH, TAKING AWAY THE RIGHT TO VISIT, THEY NEED TO HAVE A PLACE TO GO AND APPEAL THAT DECISION.
AND I RECOMMENDED THAT THIS COMMITTEE DO IT, IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THIS COMMITTEE, IT CAN BE ANOTHER COMMITTEE.
UM, UM, BUT KEEP IN MIND THAT IT'S THE MAYOR'S SOLE DISCRETION ON WHETHER THEY'RE GONNA DO THAT UNDER THIS POLICY.
AND SO THERE NEEDS TO BE A CHECK THERE, CHECK THERE.
AND QUITE FRANKLY, THERE'S THIS CONCEPT IN IN LAW WITH THAT THE COURTS USE WHEN SOMEBODY'S HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT, AND IT'S CALLED A SHOW CAUSE HEARING.
AND BASICALLY WHEN YOU'RE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT, THE THE JUDGE CAN SEND YOU TO JAIL IMMEDIATELY.
BUT STATE LAW REQUIRES, AND THIS IS IN EVERY STATE, MAYBE NOT LOUISIANA, BUT IN MOST EVERY OTHER STATE, UM, UM, STATE, UH, STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT YOU HAVE A SHOW CAUSE HEARING ON, ON AS TO WHY THEY SHOULD BE KEPT IN JAIL.
AND IT NEEDS TO BE DONE WITHIN THE FIRST 24 HOURS.
AND SO WHAT JUDGES HAVE DONE, HOW THAT'S WORKED ITSELF OUT IN PRACTICE IS JUDGES WILL HAVE THESE SHOW CAUSE HEARINGS AND GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY OF THE SUSPECT OR OF THE PERSON THAT WAS DISRUPTIVE TO A CHANCE TO APOLOGIZE TO THE COURT AND SAY THAT I'M NOT GONNA DISRUPT THE COURT ANYMORE.
AND THE COURT TAKES THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.
THEY USUALLY TIME SERVE AT THAT POINT, THERE'S NO OTHER FINE.
OCCASIONALLY THE PERSON DOESN'T APOLOGIZE AND DOESN'T SAY THAT I'M, I'M NOT GOING TO, UM, DISRUPT THE COURT GOING FURTHER.
AND THEY SIT IN JAIL FOR A LITTLE BIT FOR 48 HOURS, 72 HOURS, WHEREVER THE LAW ALLOWS.
AND THAT'S THE IDEA HERE WITHOUT THE JAIL IS THE IDEA HERE IS, IS A, A SHOW CAUSE HEARING OR AN APPEAL, NUMBER ONE, IT ALLOWS Y'ALL NOT JUST ONE PERSON, BUT A BODY OF THREE TO SAY THE MAYOR WAS APPROPRIATE HERE.
AND I THINK THAT BASED ON WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US HERE TODAY, WE THINK THAT IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS, IT'S NOT ENOUGH TIME FOR YOU TO COOL OFF AND YOU NEED TO BE NOT COME BACK TO A COUNCIL FOR THE NEXT 30 DAYS.
AND SO IT GIVES Y'ALL AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.
ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? OKAY, SO 30 DAYS GOES BY, LET'S GIVE, USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE, AND THEY COME BACK AND THEY DO IT AGAIN.
IT'S THE SAME PROCESS EXCEPT THIS TIME THE MAYOR HAS THE AUTHORITY TO CRIMINALLY TRESPASS 'EM FOR, UH, 90 DAYS, I BELIEVE, OR 180 DAYS, NO, 90 DAYS.
AND THEN, AND THEN AGAIN, THEY CAN APPEAL IT TO Y'ALL AND THEY CAN, THEY CAN COME BEFORE Y'ALL AND Y'ALL CAN ASK THEM TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THEY SHOULD NOT BE CRUMBLY, TRESPASSED FOR 90 DAYS.
AND IF THEY COME BACK AGAIN AFTER THEIR 90 DAYS IS UP AND THEY DO IT AGAIN, IT GOES 180 DAYS AND IT GOES UP TO ONE YEAR.
AND THAT'S AS FAR AS OUT AS I WOULD RECOMMEND.
AND, AND THAT WOULD BE VERY EXTREMELY, QUITE FRANKLY, CONSIDERING I HAVEN'T SEEN SOMEBODY GET REMOVED FROM COUNCIL CHAMBERS IN THE LAST 20 YEARS.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF MITCH, IF YOU'VE EVER SEEN SOMEONE EVER GET REMOVED IN THE LAST 30 SOME ODD YEARS.
I CAN'T IMAGINE THIS EVER HAPPENING, BUT IT'S A GOOD POLICY TO HAVE IN PLACE IN CASE IT DOES HAPPEN.
AND IF YOU FLIP OVER, YOU'LL SEE F UM, IT, IT DESCRIBES WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO.
IF SOMEONE IS PROHIBITED FROM ATTENDING FUTURE MEETINGS, WHETHER IT'S SEVEN DAYS OR 180 DAYS OR ONE YEAR, THE THINGS THAT ARE GONNA BE GIVEN IS
[00:35:01]
NOTICE THAT HE OR SHE HAS BEEN CRIMINALLY TRESPASSED AND THEY'LL BE BY THE POLICE OFFICER.IT'LL EITHER BE WRITTEN NOTICE OR IT'LL BE ON THE, WHAT I DIDN'T, WHAT I'VE LEARNED IN THIS IS NOWADAYS WE CRIMINALLY TRESPASS PEOPLE USING BODY CAMERAS.
AND SO THEY GIVE THE WARNINGS ON BODY CAMERAS AND THE PERSON ACKNOWLEDGES AND THEY MOVED ON.
SO THEY HAVE THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PERSON ON THE BODY CAMERA.
SO I'LL LEAVE IT, EITHER BE DONE THAT WAY OR IT'LL BE DONE IN, IN WRITTEN FORM.
OR NUMBER TWO, UM, UM, THEY'LL ALSO BE GIVEN A NOTICE OF THEIR RIGHT TO APPEAL.
AND SO IF SOMEBODY HAPPENS TO GET CRIMINALLY TRESPASSED, THEY'LL SAY, LISTEN, YOU CAN'T COME BACK FOR 30 DAYS, BUT YOU HAVE THIS RIGHT TO APPEAL AND YOU HAVE SEVEN DAYS TO APPEAL THIS DECISION OF THE MAYOR.
BUT THE THIRD THING WE'LL GIVE 'EM IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT WRITTEN TESTIMONY AND SUBJECT.
AND THIS IS WHAT I CHANGED, UM, BETWEEN THE LAST VERSION I GAVE Y'ALL ON THIS ONE.
IT'S THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO SUBMIT WRITTEN TESTIMONY SUBJECT TO THE RULES OF ORDER TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD BY THE CITY SECRETARY AT A PUBLIC MEETING FOR AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA OR DURING THE OPEN MICROPHONE PERIOD OF A REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING.
AND THE REASON I PUT THAT IN THERE IS BECAUSE THERE IS A RISK IN RESTRICTING SOMEONE'S ACCESS TO PUBLIC MEETINGS.
AND THIS AT LEAST GIVES THEM A CHANCE TO SPEAK INTO AN ISSUE THAT COUNCIL'S DEBATING IN THE FORM OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY THAT WILL BE READ ALOUD INTO THE RECORD AS LONG AS IT'S SUBJECT TO THE RULES OF ORDER.
IN OTHER WORDS, A WRITTEN TESTIMONY CAN'T BE MORE THAN THREE MINUTES.
IT'S GOTTA BE, UM, IF IT'S NOT AT A, IF IT'S NOT AT A OPEN MIC, IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING, IT HAS TO BE RELATED TO AN ITEM THAT'S ON THE AGENDA.
UH, AND SO THAT'S THE IDEA WITH NUMBER THREE.
THOUGHTS, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? NO, I HAVE SOME COMMENTS.
FRANKLY, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH ANYTHING PAST LETTER C
I THINK ASKING 'EM TO LEAVE THE PREMISES AND END RIGHT THERE, THEY CAN COME BACK THE NEXT WEEK IF THEY WANT AND HAVE THE SAME THING RUN OFF AGAIN IF THEY WANNA HAVE THEIR THREE MINUTES.
I THINK THIS WHOLE PROCEDURE OF GOING INTO MULTIPLE DAYS, AND BECAUSE THIS SAYS NOT ONLY YOU GIVE EXAMPLES OUT OF A MAYOR, BUT ALSO AS THE PRESIDING MEMBER OF A COMMITTEE, I CAN SEE A SITUATION WHERE THERE'S SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T LIKE SOMEONE COMES INTO A COMMITTEE MEETING, THEY GET RUN OFF, AND THEN THAT COMMITTEE PERSON HAS A GRUDGE.
THAT CHAIR HAS A GRUDGE AND WANTS TO ENACT IT.
THERE'S ALSO SOME PROBLEMS I HAVE WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE COMMITTEE.
IF THEY'RE NOT AVAILABLE, THEN IT GOES TO ANOTHER COMMITTEE.
I MEAN, I'M CHAIR OF SEVERAL COMMITTEES.
I DON'T KNOW IF I WANT THE TIMS COMMITTEE OR THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE COMMITTEE, YOU KNOW, RULING ON SOMEONE'S ABILITY NOT TO COME TO A DIFFERENT BORDER OR COUNCIL MEETING.
SO I'M FINE WITH JUST CUTTING OFF AT SEA.
HAVING THE CITY SECRETARY AND THAT PERSON NOT BEING ABLE TO HAVE THEIR VOICE HEARD AT A MEETING.
THEY'RE ABLE TO COME BACK THE NEXT TIME IF THEY WISH.
THERE'S STILL A LOT OF ISSUES.
I HAVE PAST LITERACY, SO OKAY, I AM REALLY FINE EITHER WAY.
I THINK THAT IF SOMEONE IS, I, THE THING IS, I DON'T THINK THAT ANYONE, LIKE YOU SAID, NOBODY'S BEEN THROWN OUT IN 20 YEARS, AND IF THEY ARE, IT'S PROBABLY QUITE EGREGIOUS BEHAVIOR.
SO, UM, THE ABILITY TO BAR THEM FROM COMING FOR IN INCREASED AMOUNT OF DAYS TO ME, UM, GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF, YOU KNOW, LET THEM COOL DOWN.
UM, BUT IF I'M, THE ONLY THING THAT I WORRY ABOUT IS IF, IF THEY COME BACK AT THAT NEXT MEETING AND THEY DO IT AGAIN, AND THEN THEY COME BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING AND THEY DO IT AGAIN, WHAT IS YOUR RECOURSE AFTER THAT IF YOU ELIMINATE THOSE OTHER OPTIONS? SO EFFECTIVELY, I MEAN, WE HAVE COUNCIL COM COMMIT, WE HAVE A WORK SESSION, AND THE NEXT DAY A COUNCIL MEETING, THEY MIGHT WANNA SAY SOMETHING AT A WORK SESSION AND BE ABLE TO COME BACK THE VERY NEXT DAY.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT SPECIFIC SITUATION, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEET MONTHLY MAYBE, AND COUNCIL AT LEAST EVERY OTHER WEEK, WE MIGHT HAVE A WEEK BETWEEN THAT GIVES 'EM SEVEN DAY COOLING.
SO IT'S BUILT IN AT THAT POINT ALREADY, UH, YOU KNOW, A SMALL COOLING DOWN PERIOD ALREADY.
SO JUST TO ME, ANOTHER REASON NOT TO HAVE ANYTHING PATI, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S MY OPINION.
NO, I, I I ABSOLUTELY SEE WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.
MM-HMM,
UM, BUT I, I DO MAYBE EVEN ELIMINATE THE, YOU KNOW, THE SHORTER TIME PERIODS, ALLOW THEM TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, AT THE NEXT SESSION AND THEN ASK THEM NOT TO COME BACK IF THEY FURTHER DISRUPT.
AND THIS IS REALLY FOR SERIOUSLY EGREGIOUS BEHAVIOR.
IT'S NOT FOR, YOU KNOW, JUST SOMEBODY YELLING AT COUNSEL OR, OR, YOU KNOW, STAFF IT, THIS IS SOMEONE WHO'S, YOU KNOW, SCARED EVERYONE AND, AND MADE THEM FEEL EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE AND LIKE THEY'RE, THEIR, THEIR SAFETY IS, YOU KNOW, BEING ATTACKED IN SOME WAY.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD, IN A CASE LIKE THAT, THAT'S
[00:40:01]
WHEN I WOULD IMPLEMENT THIS POLICY.COUNCILMAN HENDRICKS, UM, UM, PERSPECTIVE ON THIS IS I'LL SAY IS THE SAFEST MM-HMM,
I'LL SAY THAT BECAUSE THERE IS A RISK IN CRIMINALLY TRESPASSING.
SOMEBODY, EVEN WITH THE DUE PROCESS BUILT IN, THERE IS A RISK THAT A COURT SOMEWHERE MIGHT SAY, YEAH, I DON'T LIKE THIS, I DON'T LIKE THE WAY THIS FEELS.
SO, UM, IT'S NOT 100% CERTAIN I'M COMFORTABLE WITH IT, BUT THERE IS, THERE IS A RISK THERE.
SO YOUR, YOUR SUGGESTION IS DEFINITELY THE MOST CONSERVATIVE AND SAFEST ROUTE TO GO FROM A RISK PERSPECTIVE.
ANYTHING ELSE? UM, MAYBE ANOTHER OPTION AS FAR AS TIME PERIOD.
WHAT ARE YOU, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON IT? I, UM, I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS IT A LITTLE MORE BEFORE WE THROW IT BACK FOR YEAH.
I'M NOT READY TO THROW IT BACK EITHER.
THE, UH, AND I UNDERSTAND NONE OF US WANT TO BE CTING PEOPLE AND HAVING THEM SIT OUT, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING ANY OF US WANT.
HOWEVER, AFTER RECENT EVENTS WHERE A PARKS BOARD MEETING WENT COMPLETELY OFF THE RAILS WITH A SCREAMING MELTDOWN PERSON WHO REFUSED TO LEAVE OR BE QUIET, IT ISN'T LIKE THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED.
IT HASN'T HAPPENED IN CHAMBERS, BUT IT CERTAINLY HAPPENED RIGHT IN THIS ROOM.
UM, AND SCARED A LOT OF PEOPLE, A LOT OF CITIZENS.
SO THIS IS SERIOUS AND I THINK IT'S WISE FOR, HAS US TO HAVE.
UM, AND, AND THE, THE COMMITTEE CHAIR, UM, IN THAT CASE, NOT HAVING ANY KIND OF WRITTEN, UH, MAP OR FORMULA OR ROUTE TO GET THROUGH IT, DID NOT KNOW WHAT TO DO AND ENDED UP PUSHING THE PANIC BUTTON, IT WAS THAT BAD.
SO, UM, I AM NOT COMPLETELY SHY ABOUT SAYING WE NEED SOMETHING THAT'S FIRM.
UM, I WOULD KIND OF PREFER THE TRIGGERS IF WE'RE GONNA BUILD IN ADDITIONAL TRIGGERS OTHER THAN SAYING LEAVE AND HAVING A MARSHAL ESCORT THEM OUT, PRESUMABLY AT THAT POINT, IF WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE ANY KIND OF AN ADDITIONAL STEP, THAT'S A POTENTIAL.
I'M COMPLETELY FINE WITH HAVING THE MAYOR CHOOSE IF, IF ASC IS NOT AVAILABLE, IF WE WERE TO GO THAT ROUTE, THE MAYOR'S THE MAYOR AND, AND IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR HIM OR HER TO CHOOSE, UH, WHATEVER ALTERNATE COMMITTEE WOULD BE USED.
SO I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THAT.
THE IDEA OF BANNING SOMEONE FROM THIS HOUSE FOR, FOR A YEAR.
UM, I'M JUST NOT, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
UM, HONESTLY, 30 DAYS I'M PRETTY COMFORTABLE WITH OVERALL AS BEING JUST A COOL DOWN PERIOD, UM, IF IT CAME TO THAT.
AND THAT'S PROBABLY ABOUT AS MUCH AS I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH TIME BY TIME.
AND IF SOME, YOU KNOW, COULD IT HAPPEN IF SOMEBODY KEEPS COMING BACK EVERY 30 DAYS AND, AND THEN WE'VE GOT NOTHING, IT COULD, UM, I KIND OF DOUBT IT WOULD.
IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T, I I SHOULD, I DIDN'T MEAN TO MI UM, I DIDN'T MEAN TO SKIP OVER THIS PART.
THERE IS ACTUALLY AN ALTERNATIVE BESIDES CRIMINAL TRESPASS IN TEXAS.
THERE'S A LAW OF DISRUPTION OF MEETINGS.
AND SO IF WE WERE TO ARREST THEM, IT WOULDN'T JUST NECESSARILY BE CRIMINAL TRESPASS ARREST.
IF THEY'RE ACTUALLY DISRUPTING THEM, DISRUPTING THE MEETING, THEN UM, YOU CAN ARREST THEM AND CHARGE THEM.
IN THEORY, IT'S REAL JAIL TIME, IT'S REALLY REAL PROBATION TIME.
UM, AND SO THERE WOULD BE, THERE WOULD BE ALTERNATIVE LEGAL, UM, ACTIONS THAT WE CAN TAKE BESIDES JUST CRIMINALLY TRESPASSING THEM.
THEY CAN ACTUALLY BE ARRESTED AND TAKEN TO JAIL.
AND PROBABLY IF SOMEBODY WAS A REPEATED VIOLATOR, UM, I I'M SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF ARRESTS AND BEING CHARGED WITH COUNTY CRIMES, UM, UM, MIGHT PERSUADE THEM TO BEHAVE THEMSELF IN THE FUTURE.
SO THAT, SO THAT'S A POINT WELL TAKEN.
SO IF WE, THE DIFFERENCE, AND THE ONLY THING THAT I'M, I'M KIND OF BLINKING AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CUTTING IT OFF AT C AND GOING JUST THE NEXT HALF STEP DOWN TO SAYING IF THIS IS REPEATED THAT YOU GIVE THEM A 30 DAY COOL DOWN PERIOD.
UM, I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I'M HAVING, HAVING SEEN THE MESS THAT HAPPENED RECENTLY.
UH, THAT'S WHERE I'M KIND OF VACILLATING.
SO YOU'RE KIND OF SAYING TO D AND REMOVING E BASICALLY.
SO THAT'S, WELL, IF YOU GO D THEN YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE, THE HEARING PROCESS AND YES.
ADD ALL THAT REMAINDER A PART OF IT.
[00:45:01]
THAT'S STILL PART OF D.SO IF YOU GO D THE D WOULD STAY, BUT THEN E WOULD GO AWAY AND THEN I WOULD LEAVE F JUST BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S, IT IS ONLY A SINGLE MEETING, BUT IT IS A MEETING AND IT BUILDS IN AT LEAST A RIGHT TO BE HEARD.
AND THAT, THAT ALSO AND THE, THE READING, THE WRITTEN TESTIMONY INTO THE RECORD AND ALL THE REST OF THAT, I, I CAN SEE THAT BEING A, A MASSIVE MIGRAINE AS WELL, BECAUSE AT THAT POINT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S EVEN BEING DISCUSSED.
AND SO YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE SITTING IN THE CHAMBERS HEARING A ONE-SIDED STORY ABOUT SOME DRAMA, AND YOU'RE ACTUALLY READING IT OUT LOUD IN THE ROOM.
I, I JUST DON'T SEE THAT GOING GOOD PLACES.
SO THAT BEING THE CASE, I GUESS I WOULD, UM, I WOULD CERTAINLY BE, UH, COMFORTABLE WITH GOING, GOING THROUGH C UM, AND I GUESS IF THAT DOWN THE ROAD, IF WE FIND WE'VE GOT MORE PERSISTENT PEOPLE, THAT THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD ALWAYS, UH, REVISIT.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THROUGH C BUT NOT D THROUGH C, BUT NOT D.
AS LONG AS THERE'S AN AVENUE TO GET UNSAFE CHARACTERS OUT OF COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
AND I THINK IT WOULD ALSO BE GOOD IF THIS, UH, PASSES COUNCIL'S APPROVAL AND, UH, I THINK EVERY, UM, BOARD AND COMMITTEE CHAIR SHOULD RECEIVE A NICE PRINTED CARD WITH THESE INSTRUCTIONS JUST SO THAT THEY ARE AWARE BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T WANT, YOU KNOW, IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE A COMMITTEE CHAIR WAS NOT, UM, WAS NOT CLEAR ON WHAT HE WAS ALLOWED TO DO OR NOT ALLOWED TO DO.
WHICH PUT HIM IN A TREMENDOUS DISADVANTAGE IN KEEPING ORDER.
SO COMMITTEE, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, AND OFFICIALLY SAY ARE WE ALL AGREED TO SEND? WELL, ONE, ONE FURTHER QUESTION.
'CAUSE YOU'VE MENTIONING THAT WE DON'T MENTION BOARDS OR COMMITTEES TILL D SO DO WE NEED TO SAY SOMETHING? I'LL, YES, THAT'S A GOOD POINT.
I'LL MENTION, I'LL PUT IT UP, I'LL PUT IT UP THERE.
ALSO, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND AS FAR AS IMPLEMENTING THIS IS WE WERE ABOUT TO DO, WE'RE ABOUT TO GO THROUGH OUR NOVEMBER, UM, UPDATE OF COUNCIL POLICIES.
AND SO I COULD, WE COULD JUST MAKE THIS PART OF THAT PROCESS OR WE CAN MAKE IT A SEPARATE ITEM.
WHAT, WHATEVER YOUR PLEASURE IS DOING IT ALL AT ONCE.
IS DO YOU CARE ONE AWARE OR THE OTHER? I'M ON DAUGHTER CLOSE ENOUGH TO THAT.
SOMETHING IS, UH, SOMETHING'S BETTER THAN NOTHING.
AND YOU GOT TO USE SOME OLD STUFF, RIGHT?
UM, COMMITTEE WITH THAT, WE ARE TO, UM, ITEM THREE, WHICH IS TO ADJOURN.
SO AT 5:48 PM WE ARE ADJOURNED.