- Let's go ahead and call the order of this meeting. The video counts of processes on Thursday, May 21st,
- 2026. Let's just go around the table and do a call-in roll. We'll start each by left. I hope he stops
- for district three. Yes, about Piedmont Smith, district one. Sidney Zola, district six. Larry Allen,
- attorney. Sophia McDowell, clerk's office. Thank you all. So our agenda includes first,
- Any updates from the clerk's office or committee members? Then we'll talk about council member sponsorship
- of legislation, consent agendas, and then any time we have left, I thought we could start the Title
- II review, which has already been reviewed, but many comments and suggestions for changes are already
- in the red line. And then we can adjourn. Is there, and the adjournment is scheduled for 530. Any,
- Comments or changes for the agenda? Oh, yeah. All right. So are there any updates? First from the clerk's
- office. No. Hi. So sorry. Deputy Clint Crossley, I think, will be sharing some information, but she
- can't be here until about 4.30. OK. So I don't know about that.
- Any member of updates from committee members? I have one at the meeting last time. I discussed
- the transportation commission and dates to membership because of the challenge of getting somebody from
- CCSC on the lived within the city limits. And I managed to get a hold of Dr. Houston, CCSC.
- Superintendent and so the idea that I proposed for her was to take one of the council seats and make
- an MCCSCC and have her recommend three options and then have the interview committee interview the three
- options and then decide and have that be a council seat. I need to talk with the mayor and see if the
- mayor would be willing to give up a mayor seat instead because then that might be easier in terms of
- communication between the superintendent position and the seat. But Dr. Winston was super excited to
- be able to have somebody from her cabinet on it. And she thought that it was basically out of branch
- of possibility because of the residency. So she thought about doing something to remove that residency
- that's being blockage. So my next step is to talk to the mayor
- And also if you guys have any opinions on how we want to write that in, in terms of taking a recommendation
- from the superintendent. And the reason why I proposed the three is that's basically it's a CCAC, which
- is like recommend three and then the mayor has to choose which one she wants. So that recommending three
- and then the council being able to choose which one is kind of the same concept as that, but I'm,
- open to whatever and it's not been like from her perspective, as long as somebody from her staff get
- on, she's a different how we do. Any thoughts or opinions on that? I'll contact the Mayor's office.
- My goal would be, I was looking and actually all those seats are filled right now, but they all look
- like they expire, at least those four expire 131.7.
- My goal would be to get this change sometime in the fall or the next cycle when I think it is. So.
- Thank you. Absolutely. Okay. Does anybody have any like reference about whether it's accountancy, whether
- it's their seat, whether it's the pick three recommendations, like how. I'm, I'm not. Opposed to it
- being accounts to seat.
- as it was supposed to be a capsule seed. So that's fine with me. I like the idea of the PEC-3 Foundation.
- I think that where some I trust, you know, I'm also Mayor Winston. So if we send to Winston to recommend,
- obviously, for top researchers, you know, we'll be good. So I'm in favor. Thank you, sure, very much.
- Anybody else have any preferences around this?
- Any of them? I think it sounds good. Right now the MCCSCC, that's like this list of like preference
- will be given to and one of those is a council recommendation and one of those is a mayoral recommendation.
- But it's the only mayoral seat that's like a resident application. The only other mayoral appointment
- is the CCA. Okay. And so that's why it's like, I don't want to- Yeah, I'm just wondering when we were-
- Take that from the mayor's
- hot of recommendations unless the current mayor doesn't care, because it might be easier procedurally
- for it to be in the PIC 3 scenario. It might be easier procedurally for the PIC 3 to go to the mayor
- as opposed to the PIC 3 to go to the mayor to then go to council.
- Has the Transportation Commission been asked about this? I tried to mark about it. I have talked about
- it too. That one seat on the Transportation Commission, specifically the one from the MCCSC, is be allowed
- to be subject to this outside sublimits.
- So right now, there's something for people. We have the chair of the transportation commission happens
- to be here. So we're not talking about the seat. Yeah. So last, when we created this transportation
- commission, we have one. Actually, technically, there's two seats, a council seat and a marriage seat
- that has a list of preferences about their qualifications. And one of those preferences is somebody
- involved with MCCSE. And so the superintendent of MCCSE actually
- recommended and pointed, I think, her director of transportation toward applying for that, but they
- were not eligible for that position because they lived outside of the city limits. And so they could,
- she couldn't find anybody in that kind of a position within her staff that lived inside the city limits
- that would be appropriate for the commission. And so that's kind of been a challenge that
- We've thought all along that somebody very involved with MCCSE transportation would be really important
- to have on the transportation commission. The commission is full. I know. So all of the seats expire
- on January 1st of 2027. January 1st of 2027 is when the current seats expire. So it would be kind of
- like new membership. My proposal would be
- new membership list that would start with the seats next year. I guess I'm having trouble with who is
- the current member whose seat you're talking about. I'm not technically sure. It's either, let me find.
- There are two mayoral seats. One is the CCA and one is. It would be C1, C2, or C3. Or M2.
- Okay. But I thought we had kind of agreed it would be a. I'm going to ask the mayor and see if she cares.
- Okay. We've just got that seat filled. Yeah. So when like I started talking about this, I think that
- there was still an empty seat and that's just taken a bit, but all C1, C2, C3 and Bound 2 all expire
- 131-27. So it would be something that would take effect starting for the next cycle.
- of appointments so that nobody who is currently assigned would get kid prof. But that would stay effective
- in January. Yeah. OK. Yeah. February 1st. Right. Sure. Does that make sense? Yeah. Do you have any questions
- about that? I don't. OK. I'll go back to my sit-up. OK. Well. Yeah. And I'm happy to have that.
- It's funny that you're here right now because it was one of those things I first wanted to talk to the
- committee about it. And then when the committee was like, yeah, sure, go ahead and do it. And then I
- wanted to talk to the superintendent about it. And so the superintendent was like, go ahead and do it.
- And then it's like reporting back to all of the other trickle downs of who that needs to. Because I
- also need to communicate with staff liaisons for Transportation Management too about that.
- And that's all kind of in the next step category. All right, thank you for that update. Now that Deputy
- Clerk Crossley is here, do you have an update from the supplies as well? I do, actually. So my apologies
- for being a little tardy. Today's the last day, and I had to go pick up the last kid on their last day.
- Oh, I'm so old. And yeah, so I'm here.
- Update that I have for you all is 1 just completed the staff liaison training. So we had 2 sessions
- 1 just ended. We had 1 last Monday. We had another 1 on Wednesday feedback that we've received is pretty
- great. Actually, and we have 1 person come by the office today and said they couldn't understand how
- we all existed.
- Um, this entire time with boards and commissions and not having anybody be over that. So I, I agree.
- Uh, so, you know, so, yeah, so that that's it there. And then we have two dates that are coming up in
- June for board members and commissioners as well. Um,
- I would like to give a little bit of an update. I know council members had gave a. In the meeting yesterday,
- an update about staff or council member liaisons and just kind of wanted to remind everybody like. It's
- it's a really good role if we just really use those to the.
- Like, advantage of what they can be. So I just encourage you all to keep encouraging everybody that
- hasn't had a chance to reach out or if you have, and it's been a while. To reach out in particular,
- I think it would be handy for. Council member daily, especially like. We have.
- I know you're the liaison for CAPS. And so I know you got the email that, or you might not have had
- a chance to look at it, because you've also been busy. So there was an email that I sent, and I think
- Council Member Pimot-Smith was attached to it as well. There's just a communication issue with one of
- the commissions. And so that you have staff liaison. I keep calling it staff liaison. That you are the
- liaison too. And so that's just on your radar.
- The last thing that I kind of wanted to bring to the attention of you all, I know we've talked about
- this before, but I want to bring it up again because we just had another, I just got word today that
- another council appointment for the environmental commission, they have their meeting tonight and that
- individual is also going to be resigning after tonight. So the mayor's office already has one, two, three,
- Can you share who the individual is? It's Shannon Gake, and she just got reappointed this year. So I
- am reaching out to her tomorrow once I send out her thank you letter after everything is gone, because
- I don't want to do a prenatal or in case she decides to change her mind. But in the event that she doesn't,
- what I'm going to start doing is kind of like an exit interview. And people would like to or feel comfortable
- in giving that information to us, because I'd like to know
- what's happening with people if they are willing to give that information to us as to why, you know,
- they're deciding to resign and she just got reappointed. So I'm curious to know like what that's all
- about, if there's anything that we can do on our end to make anything better, a smooth process for people
- with boards and commissions related, that kind of thing. But that means that this commission as of tomorrow
- will have,
- for vacancies. And I bring that up because I think the NOVAC report had mentioned probably condensing
- the EC with B cost there. And I'm not saying that anybody should condense it or merge the two together.
- However, what I am saying is because this could affect their core room, which ultimately could affect
- the business that they're doing. I think this committee should start thinking about possibly making
- this commission a little bit smaller with the vacancies. I think the mayor's office, I think ideally
- would be okay with that. As of right now, we don't have any applications for this. The press release
- went out earlier this week to highlight the mayor's vacancies before we knew Shannon is resigning, but
- we don't have it.
- So I just wanted to, you know, bring that to your attention as well. How many is it right now? 12. Yeah.
- Yeah. It's, it's a pretty big, um, commission. Yeah. Yeah. Do you happen to know why there were 12 seats
- on them? No, not at all.
- I mean, it was created in 1971, so who knows? Maybe an hour barrier? Maybe 12. Maybe there were nine
- and then there were 12, and then who knows how many times it fluctuated or changed for whatever reason.
- Yeah, but it just looks like this commission, and I've been here almost a little over four years now,
- has never really seen full occupancy.
- when it comes to all the seats being filled. Okay, well that's something to consider then to maybe decrease
- the number of spots then. It's, what is the breakdown? It just looks like six. Mayor, there was six.
- But it makes sense for it to be,
- an odd number of people. Most commissions are. Yeah. I would think that maybe reduce it to 90. You think
- that that might. That too. Yeah. I think that could be a good number because remember that's also something
- that you all did as a committee for CAPS. Because remember CAPS was in a similar situation where they
- would have people resign and it was hard to backfill, which ultimately made corn issues for them.
- As a result, it was condensed, I think from like 12 to nine. Oh, which committee has going to transit
- board, not the transportation, but the transit board. That's a thank you. When I tell you, I already
- know that is all in my memory. It is all over here to have some comments.
- Okay, because those there are some seats that will be up and July. Yeah. Yep. Okay. So. Sure, we put
- a pin on the in this for the next time to perhaps have a proposal to reduce the number of seats on the
- seat or something that you feel we should do right away.
- Well, is there even time to divert right away in terms of having those meetings we have left, but also
- in the sense of sitting together? No. I mean, we would, the legislation would need to be ready, like,
- correct ready by next Friday to vote on it before the break. Cause we would need, unless we wanted to
- do a, to try to get it all through on a first reading on June 10th, but I've got, I don't think that
- It's a big enough deal that this is not the first thing that we should use. I first vote on first training
- for especially how bad is the quorum issue? Are we gonna stop them from meeting all summer if we don't
- do this before? See, it depends because with summer people go on summer break and
- I think there's another liaison that will step in for the current liaison. She's out, but it depends,
- because I think I see a lot of people during the summer that travel and they either will attend virtually
- or they won't come at all. So if those seated people don't show up, then ultimately that could affect horror.
- I think we've brought this up before, but I believe the mayor's administration and council, past council
- attorneys have had a different interpretation of what or it's. So the council attorneys have said it's
- a majority plus one of members appointed. Whereas I've heard people in the mayor's administration say,
- no, it's a majority plus one of the seats
- So if it's of the ones appointed, they wouldn't have as much trouble before. And I think that has changed.
- I think everybody has now settled on it being a majority plus one of appointed and not the number of
- seats. I think literally the agreement between the attorneys shifted. So there was a former agreement
- that was number of seats, and now it's the number of appointed. Is that what you understand?
- Yes, then we're slightly concerned about making. Yeah, so they would just, if they have 8 members. They
- would be 5 in that case. I said that maybe it does not need to happen. So, why don't we just put this
- to our next meeting? We'll have legislation that we go over that review. Is this somebody want to reach
- out to that you see.
- Well, do you want to piggyback that with the transportation commission change and how does that change
- in board and commission membership stuff? Yeah, that sounds great. Because especially if there's no
- rush on the alarm out kind of thing, then like, you know, my goal for that was to, especially now that
- like the January thing, to send it through like July, August. So whenever we come back to the break,
- having that be in the first time sometime.
- If you prepare so as long as we're good at that time. If you could possibly do any issue with doing
- it after the break. Okay, anything else from the clerk's office. No, that's it. I think the only of
- it. Well, there is the only other addition that I would say with the boards and commission leaves on
- training for board members.
- and commissioners is I'm actually a little bit more excited than I was with the staff liaisons because
- just kind of given some of the circumstances that we've kind of seen recently with quite a few, I think
- they will definitely benefit from the training, especially when it comes to, I know there's been a question
- of does the chair set the agenda or does the staff liaison set the agenda? The answer is,
- Chair Sensi, but that person is also in works with the staff liaison and the staff liaison should not
- just be taking it all. So I think as we're open this past training session with staff, and I think the
- goal for me is hopefully the intent is people will all know now what is expected of them. And then that's
- also when we will roll out the code of conduct as well.
- So that is it. Wonderful. Thank you so much. You're welcome. All right. Let's move on to council member
- sponsorship of legislation. So I did a meet with Deputy Mayor Gretchen Knapp to talk about this proposal
- that we discussed at our last meeting. She is concerned that this will add to more work for staff.
- But, you know, she was kind of resigned. This is what we think will be better for council. This is what
- we're going to do and they'll deal with it. But she was concerned that having to get a sponsor, that
- person may, you know, ask for changes or ask for meetings and that will add some more staff time.
- She was, on the other hand, she was not at all concerned about finding sponsors. This whole idea that
- we had, like, oh, we'll make a list of who is most interested in sponsoring what. She was like, the
- department heads know who was interested and who they would reach out to. It didn't sound like she thought
- that would be necessary at all. So, it takes less staff time to find a council sponsorship than it does
- to present to council and have it failed. They didn't talk to anybody.
- Or on it, I mean, I feel like that that would be less stressful than having like, I mean, sometimes
- there's a million questions that kind of like almost like contention Russian asking like, or the whole
- like, didn't you think of this? And then they look stupid sort of thing. Like, I mean, I feel like I've
- heard that concern with staff before after presentations and feeling like, wow, that was really tough.
- And they weren't anticipating that kind of reaction and that that didn't
- Like that made me feel kind of hopeful. This would be, we can kind of paint it as like a, this is actually
- meant to increase communication, not make your life harder. Yeah. To increase communication upfront.
- Instead of in front of a camera. It's the whole community. Yeah.
- If we look at the actual legislation in the packet, I did combine two whereas clauses as was recommended
- in our last meeting. And then I did put an exception sentence. So now it says, no proposed ordinance
- or resolution shall be considered by the council unless sponsored by a member of the council. Exceptions,
- no council member sponsorship shall be required for annual budget related legislation
- nor for appropriation ordinances brought forward outside the annual budget process. Do you all think
- that covers what we discussed last night? And I'm also looking at, Larry, if that language meets the
- legalese standards. I mean, I think it's the way you have it, and it's clear enough that at least we
- know what you want to accept it out of the rules. And we could.
- If we're concerned about what does annual budget related legislation mean, because that is the rules
- and procedure. Oh, sure. Yeah. Thanks for joining us. And thanks for changing it in the synopsis too.
- I think that will make it clearer. So, is this okay to move this forward? I mean, given scheduling it.
- May or may not come forward for recess. Sure. I move that we, the CCP, recommend, well, I guess it's
- not an ordinance yet. Disordinance. To be considered by the full council. Second. All right, let's go.
- We both second. Okay. Courtney can take it. It's fine. Okay. I'm the second second.
- Okay, we all like it. Give it to bolden. All right, let's do a roll call those council members like,
- yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. I will vote yes. Yeah, thank you very much. You're an ideal Oh my goodness,
- we're supposed to go to public comment first.
- Darn it. I apologize. A retroactive public public online public. All right. Moving on to consent agendas.
- So, um, I did ask, um,
- Larry Allen to look at the legislation that we talked about previously. Do you have any feedback for
- us, Larry? Yes, a little bit. So in terms of the legislation as it's currently written, I think there
- are two questions posed to me. One was about the language of the catch-all language in consent agendas.
- So the other non-controversial and administrative actions is what it reads right now. That language
- is basically trying to mirror Robert's rules, which is the entire genesis of consent agendas. They are
- commonly used for boards and commissions. Under Robert's rules, they refer to this as a consent calendar
- instead of a consent agenda, but it's the exact same idea. It does that thing. We don't know what happened.
- Oh, OK. We'll find out in 25 seconds. All right.
- I got distracted with that. Sorry. No, it's fine. So under Robert's rules, the way that that portion
- reads, I'll just read it to you so you have a sense of how it's mirroring it, if that's OK. Legislature,
- city, town, or county councils, or other assemblies which have a heavy workload, including a large number
- of routine or non-controversial matters, may find a consent calendar or agenda useful tool, a useful
- tool for disposing of such items or business.
- the rules behind it. So I think in terms of a catch-all language, I think that's a good idea. Not because
- the list that you all have already have in there is a prescriptive view of consent agendas is faulty,
- but it does give you some flexibility if you have a project where you end up having to contract with
- somebody directly.
- Or if you have decided to do some sort of personnel thing that you've already discussed, you know everybody
- is on the same page and you just want to move it through on the agenda. It's really anything in there
- that is clearly agreed upon everybody it just takes a quick vote.
- The other thing to keep in mind, I'm sure you heard this before key to consent agendas is any 1 council
- member who wants to have something removed from the consent agenda. And so you just request for that
- item to be removed from the consent agenda. And then it gets, it just gets placed in its normal part
- of the agenda. So, I, if it's if it's an ordinance or a resolution.
- potentially, if you did something like that. If it was a resolution, it would go to whatever reading
- it is in the agenda, and that's where it falls in the type of agenda. If it's a report, it's going to
- go into the report section right after you do the consent agenda, that kind of thing. An exciting feature.
- I don't think we knew about that. No, we didn't. So, at this point, it changed the order of business.
- to do approval of consent agenda and then consideration of items from the consent agenda right after
- it. Yeah, I think that that's unnecessary, that consideration of items removed from consent agenda,
- unless they really don't fall within something of your calendar or that agenda order as it is, but that
- probably isn't necessary to have in there unless you really, you can of course, these are your rules,
- so if you want to have a special
- area and everybody's up front about that's the rules, that's how we do this. Is there any special designated
- section of the agenda for items removed from the consent agenda? Yes, we can do that. If you want to
- simplify it and just have a consent agenda, period, then anything that's removed from that would just
- go out to the normal agenda portion. That's typically how it works with others. I'd prefer that. That
- it just reverts back to where it would go. That makes sense. So then.
- So then we reinstate approval of minutes. Yeah, I guess I. Appointments to boards and commissions. Just
- to include anything in the consent agenda. Right. So I guess then I prefer the way that we had it. So
- then we could get rid of the approval of minutes and get rid of the appointments to boards and commissions.
- But those would come after immediately anyway. No, but they come after.
- Yes, all the support we have reports in the middle and then sometimes there's that weird thing like
- when we have to accept reports specifically, especially when like it gets funky sometimes. Oh, sorry.
- Well, my only question, and this is actually maybe I should hold off. This is opening the new can of
- worms. So God. Well, I was going to totally open the can of worms because
- I am actually having second thoughts about this whole thing, because if we have something, if we, first
- of all, I overall in the scope of our work, I just don't think it's that important to institute and
- such. Secondly, I think it could be very obnoxious for staff who have to be there in case the item on
- the consent agenda is pulled from the consent agenda.
- I just think it's going to be confusing. Who decides whether something is not controversial? Even though
- I put in here routine interlocal agreements, well, what if we don't like the way that Monroe County
- Building Department has done the building inspections even though we've had them do it for 20 years.
- In the hierarchy of
- What is important to me to change in Title II? This is pretty fun. I think it would help us save some
- time, but I definitely do think that those are other questions that need to be answered before we do
- this, which is, how are we still going to manage to respect staff time? Because we have kind of introduced
- this, now staff has to be in first and second reading, we've increased staff time already. And so,
- If we're gonna do this, we need to make sure that it actually decreases staff time in a meaningful way.
- Well, it decreases meeting time in a meaningful way. I don't necessarily think decrease meeting time
- in a meaningful way. I mean, they're already like approval of minutes and boards and commissions are
- pretty fast. Yes. And everything else that's kind of on this list, the SWARF routine, does seldom, like
- we just don't have them very often.
- And it almost might be, I can just imagine things being pulled off the consent agenda because somebody's
- also like, wait a minute, what is that again? And then, cause if it's not a consent agenda, then we
- can't talk about it at all, right? Is that right? There's no debate. Yeah, there's like no debate or
- discussion on consent agenda items. And so then like, if anybody has any questions about what anything
- is and like, can't you imagine somebody having a question about an inter-local agreement that's like,
- super small and light and then we have to move to take it off the consent agenda and then we have to
- put it in somewhere else and then it's like making a bigger deal and like I could just imagine it taking
- more time as much as I can imagine at the saving time. Yeah and my can of worms was I guess kind of
- related to the question asking but like public comment time. Yeah right. Public wants to comment on
- do we just then say they're allowed to do it during
- Hearing a public comment, you know, at what point do they get to, right? When do they get to make comment
- on anything on there? Well, and then, and then like some of those funky things are actually like in
- terms of acceptance of certain types of reports and things like that. Some of those are required by
- the state to have a public comment time. So we can't put them on the consent agenda item anyway, because
- we have to have the public comment and we don't have a good space on our agenda for things like that.
- Like it's funky. Well, why don't we revisit this in like six months and see if we're still feeling the
- same way. And then at that point, we cannot. I think we have some stuff coming up that maybe this isn't
- a priority, but we can, yeah, we could re-discuss it maybe in November or as a new CCP next year. Right.
- Between now and then, could we, like, kind of highlight things on, like, each agenda going, you know,
- like, how many things on this agenda would go on a consent agenda? And maybe take a note of, like, well,
- these are all of the things that we expected to be non-controversial. Like, right, yeah, go. In advance.
- Exactly. I say we actually table this until the December, until our last meeting of the year.
- For the rest of the year, we'll pay attention, do a very unscientific survey between the four of us.
- There's a reason I said unscientific. Okay, so I moved to table this until our December
- Uh, CCP meeting second. All right. Uh, let's vote on that council members. Yes. That's a member daily.
- Yes. Council member Stossberg. Yes. I will vote. Yes. Okay. Um, to be slightly out of order. I apologize.
- Uh, did you all. Yeah, we just, you did, but.
- One question is, did you receive a comparative analysis of what other municipalities are doing? Did
- you actually get that? I do have something like that. Can you share with me and then what I would suggest?
- I can find that it actually exists.
- it together for you in a more concrete. So when you take it back up in December, you can have
- some comparators as well. Because some places do it differently where they consider ordinances
- and resolutions of all their consent agenda, not just these types of limits. The other thing that I
- was going to kind of pass Larry about, and that if anybody else is interested,
- Would we be allowed to have a shared Google Doc where the four of us kind of write notes around that?
- No. OK. I mean, yes and no. So here's the way it could work. We could set up a system where you all
- can write. And this is actually something, just a spoiler, that we're actively working on. It's something
- you could submit.
- The issue with Google Docs is because the potential of you could all simultaneously edit it, that the
- violation of open door law. However, if it's a locked document, so you submit it to your portal, it's
- one way and you can read it on a document, but not live edit it together, that complies. So if one of
- us created it and made the others commenters? No, because you're still receiving information that way.
- But if one of you,
- create it, there might be a way, let us, I think you'll find that the way we're working is that there
- would be a submission portal through like a survey that automatically uploads to a doctor that you can
- read. Unfortunately, it's not Indiana, you know, just because we want to have this done in the open
- doesn't allow us to take a stand. So I know that that's the modern way of working, but it's not Indiana's way.
- Like, I just hate to think like, oh, like Sydney analyzed whatever, and she came to this conclusion,
- and then Isabelle did the exact same thing. Well, and that's what we're trying to combat as well is
- because I think that's why I know it sounds more complicated, but to have a place where you all can
- look and see what everybody else has asked and questions, I think that that's okay as long as it's not
- why that didn't break the public answers counselor piece. Okay, so just let us know if that. It is coming
- imminently. It is built.
- We are in the testing phase. And so we hope to be rolling it out in the next couple of weeks. So I apologize,
- it's time a little bit time. My purpose of that is just to maximize our collective time so that we're
- not too creating. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. Thank you. Nobody wants to. Is there any member of the public
- who would like to give their opinion on consented at this? Please join us. It just needs to be on the owl.
- I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth. Great. Steve Wolf. I think Consentogen is a good idea. It's
- a tool that is useful. You don't have to use them. You just can have them. Like, if you don't have them
- now, why not have it? My favorite example of what's good for Consentogen is the Jag Grant.
- It's never been controversial in the history of the council, but every year it comes up for reauthorization.
- No one ever comments on it. It's as anodyne as it gets. It's a good example of legislation that can
- be done through consent agenda. I think the biggest issue is just that like many other tools in Roberts,
- this council just long had a habit of doing things in a sort of a bespoke way with a limited
- portion of Roberts, and it's a pleasure to see you all rediscovering, you know, Roberts. I'm grateful
- for it. But, you know, I think maybe the committee might be a little overly worried about, like, the
- consent agenda would require
- members, as a courtesy to other members, to let their concerns be known before a meeting, say, I'm planning
- on taking this off the consent agenda. I am going to just confess here that as a member, I, in my early
- days, did not always read the packet and would be reactive to issues during the meeting, only when it
- came up. And that's a kind of
- approach as a council member that I want to discourage in my successors. You know, like if you do your
- homework, you won't have any train wrecks in the meeting. And I confess here, I didn't always do my
- homework. I just wanted to seek kind of absolutions for giving this near for my homework. But that's
- really what this is about. The consent agenda would call out members who aren't doing their homework.
- And that's really, I think, what
- you know, might affect its use. So I wouldn't be afraid of it. I don't think it's what you've done is
- the motion to table is fine, but it's nothing to be afraid of. It's just an extra tool, but it does
- sort of expose the collaborative habits of the various members of council. So I don't want you to, I
- want to encourage you not to be afraid of the idea. Like it's just an extra tool. Thanks. Thank you.
- Thank you.
- and we don't have any other public. So we shall move along to Title II review. So this is something
- that was initiated by Council Member Asare in February of last year. He wrote up a whole big item of
- legislation and sent it to the council staff and said, here are my revisions for Title II.
- they were not in a red line version. I put them into a red line version a couple of months later. Then
- last summer, I did meet with council staff and clerk staff, I think twice, to talk about some of the
- recommended changes. What we did instead of just relying on the changes that
- Isak brought forward, we kind of just started at the top of the chapter on Common Council in code and
- started going down the list and looking at his changes, but also considering other changes. And so that
- is what you have here in the packet with a lot of red line and comments. And of course, this was mainly
- done by Christine Chang, who
- of who's no longer with the council office, but we have a good start here, I think. I figured since
- we've knocked out some agenda items this year for this committee, we could just come back to the committee
- and take a look and see which we might want to go ahead and proceed with. Accompanying this red line,
- Chapter 2.04,
- is another document, rules of procedure. So here we took things out of Title IV and put them into,
- or 2.04, and put them to a separate document. So the idea is we don't need all the detail of how we
- administrate if we do things in code. And we want to be a little more flexible and put them into just
- a document that guides our procedures that's separate, that can be reviewed.
- Yeah, it's been referenced in code. So yes, preliminary questions, please. So in this red line document,
- there's a couple of different colors. What do they mean? Well, I'm not sure since Christine is here
- to explain it. I think that where it's not
- a suggested change. Oh, you can't see that. Okay. I think the, the red bold, the bright red bold is
- from ESOCK. And then the darker red is something that's things that we subsequently. Like the staff.
- There's also a purple. Yeah. Well, I think that purple is what's being counted as the darker.
- Do you want to share it on the screen at all? I think that's because she was compiling one document
- from a couple different ones. And I know that like Lisa had these changes like on paper, like she had
- a paper copy of code that she had been making notes on.
- But the color differences that you're seeing are more dates of when they're added as opposed to persons.
- I believe you that these are different changes for different people. It's not, I'm sorry, I'm not trying
- to. I'm just looking at the original Google Docs. So like, purple's in October, bright red is in November.
- You know, it's kind of. I found the purple setting. I thought that. Oh yes, it's like a line down there.
- Yeah. I thought that you were thinking of the purple as kind of like a purpley red.
- The maroon, maroon, maroon. There's some in green that I did. So if we go through here, the duties of
- president, that first change, the bright, bold red color, I believe, is Hermeson. Because it's not
- It's not a suggestion, right? You click on it in, okay, you guys have a PDF. I'm in the Google Doc,
- and you click on it, and it doesn't reflect any, that anybody made a change. So I think that was- So
- that would have been your original document. That was I, I was trying to find the link to join. You
- created for us. I didn't see when you counted them, right? Really? Yeah.
- That's why I was trying to find the email. First, I was checking the document. It is on the forward-facing
- one, just on the internal one. I will send the beginning. Is that OK? So one thing I do want to go back and do
- is compare this to what Isaka originally sent. But I just think if memory serves, I think his changes
- are in here in one way or another. I think, I mean, what I remember of that is that it was mostly crossing
- a whole lot of things out. Yes. Yes. And did you create then the start of this administrative manual
- at the end?
- No, Christine did an IAS. Okay, so Christine is the one that started that. The PDF didn't include any
- comments, did it? Correct.
- The workaround for that is you have to download it to a Word document and then convert it to a PDF.
- Oh, it's complicated. It's very niche knowledge. I'm impressed that you know that. I know everything.
- So is somebody going to share this or should I? I think Larry's going to share his screen. OK, and can
- you share the Google Doc, Larry? OK, perfect.
- Oh, no. Are you blocked? Sun City computers allow and others do not. OK, yeah, you're good. Well, that
- is helpful with the comments, actually. Yes, I'm sorry. I didn't realize the comments didn't come through.
- Okay. So is it okay if we just start going through this? I'm good with it. All right. So delete and
- employees because this section doesn't talk about employees of council. That's pretty evident. Then
- duties of the president. It said it shall preserve
- Order and decorum. We strike that out and say, ensure that council goals and procedures are followed.
- That's more specific. And then that last phrase, in the absence of the president, the vice president
- shall preside. We took that out because we created a new paragraph duties of vice president. Now the
- sergeant at arms,
- Yeah, why did all that get deleted? Because we do not follow it. So it says, the chief police or his
- designee shall act as sergeant at arms, shall be the duty of sergeant at arms to preserve order in the
- council chambers under the direction of presiding officer, to act as a messenger of the council under
- the direction of the city clerk by serving notices of special meetings.
- upon council members and to procure the attendance of absent council members when the board is not present.
- Procure the attendance. I've told my kids before, if they're like, don't go to city council tonight,
- don't go. I'll be like, oh man, the police will show up and drag me. I gotta go. That is true.
- I said that I don't want to strike that thing though because we are doing part of it and that we do
- have a designee survey in the chamber as security and that if if there was a problem with actually last
- year the year before I mean the sergeant of arms that has had to remove unruly public from the chamber
- under direction of the president but does it work and and it's it's
- extraordinarily rare, but they're having cases where the sergeant in arms, we just haven't had one.
- So would that make it a problem if we have it codified about a sergeant in arms and there isn't one
- available for us? Well, we do have it codified. Well, yeah, there isn't. So should we have? Well,
- I mean, say the meeting cannot proceed if there is no sergeant in arms. The last sentence is the craziest
- to me. To surrender any dangerous weapon
- Other than a firearm. Well, that's because they can't do that. I know. I know. I just like the way that
- it's well, but it does say further down that a gun cannot be intentioned with this blade. Yeah. Is there
- any state code that does say as to, oh, that's firearm. Yeah. Is this?
- I mean, I assume it's not in state code that we have to have a slide committee on this, because else
- Christine wouldn't have crossed that out. But I know, I understand what you're saying, Hopi, that we
- do like to have a police officer there. And the only reason why they're there is because- To preserve
- order, we could just keep the first part. We can take out the part where they have to act as messenger
- and go cure the attendance of absent members.
- When a quorum is not present. I do actually remember what in 2023, when there was a certain member who
- was delayed because of something about bicycle parking and a scooter that like lost power or something.
- Then the quorum was not reached and the meetings had to start like 20 minutes late. Yes. I don't know
- if the Sargent of Art is in for keyword check or not.
- They also don't serve notices. Right. Yeah. Under the direction of a city clerk. And if we keep the
- first sentence, most of the second sentence, and I suppose the last sentence we should leave in for
- safety. Absolutely. I mean, the fact is, I don't feel safe if there's not a search. Yeah. And I mean,
- there was, I can't remember why anymore, but there,
- was at least one meeting when I was president that there wasn't a sergeant in arms and I messaged the
- chief was like, why isn't there anybody here? And it was because the usual person was out. And so it
- was just a coordination issue and so he came at late, but. Yeah, there was an issue recently where we
- had like a big crowd of people there and we didn't have one. I got up and I moved a little bit and I
- said, yeah, I don't, we can't do this. They're not okay. And she called them and got somebody to go
- right away. Yeah.
- So what if we just keep the chief of police or his designee, or their designee, I don't need to close
- my mask. Yes. Shall act as sergeant at arms. It shall be the duty of the sergeant at arms to preserve
- order in the council chambers and to the direction of the presiding officer. The sergeant at arms may
- request any person at attendance at a council meeting to surrender any dangerous weapon other than a
- firearm is to find at any unknown. Perfect. Yes, I think that's it. Now, do we need
- to keep employees then in the title because Sergeant Adams is an employee of the city. But they're not
- one of ours. Not an employee of council though. This is the chapter that has common council. Member
- of council either though. Isn't that an officer? There you go. Officer? I don't know, but the officer
- here is an
- Is implied that it's a president vice president. Yeah. Maybe we just need to put a little star by there
- and rethink this whole title. The title is not binding on anything in terms of the interpretation. So,
- whether it says employees or not, it doesn't really, it's not going to, no one's going to be like, oh,
- this entire title is legally invalid because it didn't say employees. It actually does not matter.
- I don't get it. If I saw employees, I would assume it would have our counsel attorney in there. Oh,
- I know. I agree. I'm just wondering because it has that sergeant at arms as if we keep the sergeant
- arms in there and change that title or maybe have maybe move the sergeant arms into a different article.
- I don't know.
- If we put it under meetings and rules of procedure, then the sergeant at arms shall be present at all
- regular and special meetings of the full council. Because if we move it under meetings and rules of
- procedure, then we would have to, I think, specify that the sergeant at arms is only expected for full
- meetings of council. If we put it under the language that we required to
- not have a meeting there. If one is not, if we have another scenario where they're outside, are we required
- to shut the meeting? I would just leave the bird is. All right. But we can, I mean, maybe play with
- this. This is the first pass. I'm sure that when we get a clean up bird, we can say something. All right.
- There's just a lot of stuff in here. I want to make sure that we don't get caught up in that stuff,
- but it's not super legally binding.
- Okay, so then we decided to delete all this duties of city clerk, basically because it's under common
- council. City clerk is not under the common council. And then I guess we, you know, we can invite the
- city clerk to tell us if any of this needs to be in our code. And then we put it in a new chapter, our
- city clerk. So I welcome the clerk.
- Yeah, we'll defer to Cliff Holden, but I think so much is already codified in the state code that there
- may not be a reason to duplicate it. So it would be things outside of state code, perhaps. That's my
- suspicion. Is there any way that it makes sense to have our code refer to state code? Possibly. Because
- of the responsibilities of this. But I think maybe this is a question, but if code is silent, then it
- does default to state code anyway.
- So it might not be necessary to say less is more, maybe. First pass. OK. You do have to have a problem.
- There's no catch-all. So state code's updated. Then this becomes, if this stuff's deferred to state
- code, state code's going to control it. But then this is going to be out of date. It creates updating
- problems. That happens. Yeah, for sure. You did a lot of it again. Yes.
- Okay, then we added duties of the parliamentarian. I like that. I think it makes sense. There's no vice
- president duties. I didn't have a problem with the text. Okay, and then we go to article two. Another
- thing about this whole session is that it has articles. No other part of municipal code has articles.
- And so I find it rather strange. So we have 2.04. And then we have 2.0. It just continues 2.04. Yeah.
- I mean, I don't know if we want to think about relabeling some of these numbers. But anyway, that's.
- Could I add one piece of information to you? So we will be working on making the online code accessible
- So a lot of that numbering system is going to be updated. Timeline, there's three phases in my head,
- one year, two year, and three year. I think it'll be done in three years if it's done well. So that's
- the goal. But some of the not using them in numerals, a lot of the accessibility stuff that our codifier
- is not doing, we will be doing. If you wanted to mirror the rest of code, we'll just call these chapters.
- And it will be like,
- chapter 2.04, chapter 2.04. Right, but even, see, it's all 2.04. I think a lot of this is under logistics,
- which maybe would be better suited for a second pass through. Yeah. Okay. So regular meetings. I have
- a hard time with 531. Okay.
- So this is a little strange. Yeah, I had a little note on this, that this seems sparse and no longer
- seems to make sense in context. The only sentence in A is the council made by majority vote dispense
- with any regular session or to change the date of the meeting, but at least one meeting is healthy.
- Maybe it doesn't give any context about
- what it is that we're talking about. I don't know, it's weird. We maybe change it to at least one meeting
- is held, at least one regular session meeting is held each month, generally at 6.30 on, I don't know,
- the first Wednesday to third Wednesday, or if we want to say that, and then say,
- The council may by majority vote dispense any regular sessions or to change the date of a meeting. Yeah,
- that makes no sense. The council will need at least. I mean, sure. And we'll adopt an annual schedule.
- Yeah. Yeah. Is like, should we?
- Should we put in code that we will adopt an annual schedule? Yes, by December 31st of the previous year.
- And then. Basically, we can change it as we want. If you already have this, this is kind of if you could
- have a, I mean, you should definitely have the floor for what's required.
- Yeah, and see, that's because in E, it started out by saying that we can schedule a summer recess. Like,
- E was specific to summer recess and then on the edit to it, it changed. So we can probably actually
- strike all of E as long as we put in the annual schedule approval, but the.
- Um, so it will be something like the council will meet at least once per month and will adopt an annual
- schedule prior to the start of each calendar year. Council may by majority vote dispense with any regular
- session or change the date of the meeting provided. Yeah, no, period. Yeah, and then see 1st pass, right?
- 1st pass council should not be down the holidays.
- Well, and then if the schedule meeting falls on a legal holiday, the council may majority vote reschedule
- the meeting. Is that kind of a move point? Because if we do the annual schedule, we look for that. Yeah.
- And we already have an A that we can change the set of the date if we need to. So we just need to keep
- the council shall not be on legal holidays as defined in Indiana code. Yeah. And maybe do we want to
- keep that specific code reference?
- Is that code runtime still all applicable? I think that's just a mistake. It's just that you should
- because it's where the legal holidays are listed. OK. And then
- The current PD, oh, yeah, we can get rid of that. Okay, so then see. The year following its election,
- the council shall hold its 1st, regular meeting. No later than the 2nd of January. So here we're. The
- goal was to try to be less specific in case we decide we're going to start meeting Thursday. You things
- are going to start meeting at 7 or, you know.
- You'd have to plan that like two years in advance. That would like the trickle-down effect of like changing
- Harvey V. United would change every county council screwed and then. Well, yeah, but even other folks
- that use council chambers like ECA meets on Thursday nights and Plain Commission meets on Monday nights.
- Like, oh my gosh, the trickle-down effect. Well, anyway. Yeah.
- We're trying to remove specificity so that it's not as hard to change if we. Yeah. Like that, that makes
- sense. Okay. So here it tries to address the situation we had in January of 2024 when the Council President
- of the biggest year was not a member. Right. My question here was,
- Why shouldn't it first be the VP from the year before? Because there may not be a member either. And
- so it's best as a catch-all to say whoever has the greatest number of total years of service. I mean,
- I don't think any VP is going to be offended if it goes to somebody who's been there long enough.
- I mean, it's like 10 minutes of the first meeting.
- It's also just like presiding over an election, and like really any of us could do it. I think that
- just needs someone. Just a way to make it a fair designation without any debate. The longest tenure,
- like there's always an answer. Unless, and I'm seven for this. Christine did put it in the notes somewhere.
- What if everybody on the council is new?
- But I think we can cross that bridge when and if we ever get there. Oh my God. This is all just extra
- nice to do from India state code. So the state code says you shall elect your officers. It doesn't say
- the mayor, but you have to do it. So yeah. OK. All right. Then we can just make it. Well, do we need
- to define at all who's going to preside over this? That's what I was going to say. We can just make
- it so vague that by tradition, the president does. Do we just scratch it?
- No, because I think what Courtney said is important unless we just put it into the rules of procedure.
- But I think it is important to designate who will do this so that it's not like, oh, my buddy here is
- going to preside and give me more time. I mean, we want to make it impartial. OK. Yes, I hear you. Well,
- good, because I thought I was saying the same thing you were saying. No, actually, I was trying to say
- in your spirit of keeping it vague, like updates, I was like, why can't we keep this vague? So that's
- not a huge, I was actually saying the opposite, but I understand your argument. Yeah, but I would say
- that too. I would say, well, if we just scratch it out entirely and don't define it, then it's kind
- of assumed that it would be the president from the prior year or the vice president from the prior year
- and like going down. Well, I would rather not have those assumptions, but I wouldn't mind putting that
- in the rules of procedure around the code.
- I think we just need to say it somewhere, just so that like, that's fine. Whenever there's a new council
- body, like, you know, what's expected. Yeah. Yeah. I don't feel precious about the topic. It's okay.
- Okay. D, in subsequent years, the council shall hold its first meeting no later than the second. We
- continue to elect officers, the council president. Okay. E, we decided
- We don't need to eat because it's been covered. Right. Because it's just the holidays and gee, I'm so
- thankful to get rid of G because that nearly created a problem.
- In terms of the potential of vetoes and the lab to over a resource. So. Yeah, I like getting rid of
- the members residents to. Do not show up at my house. But in the emergency meetings, I like the cost
- off. Oh, I notice left in the members. Yeah, that's.
- But I was actually like wondering if we should put. Personal notification on there or something to allow
- for. Oh, no, I guess it's in person.
- Yeah, I don't know. I guess I was wondering if we should have snail mail in there. That was the thing.
- It was like, what if, I mean, we're not actually going to write snail mail, but like a paper document,
- like handing somebody a paper document, like if we should keep that in there as a possibility, or like
- mailing a paper document or, I don't know, because what if all the technology dies and the only thing
- that's worth it?
- So just adding writing. Yeah, so we could change email to by writing either written communication. So
- we can say written communication instead of for email right because couldn't that be
- a paper document or an email, if you just say written communication? Yeah, I mean, if I'm contract drafting,
- I'm going to say in writing electronically or, you know, like I'm going to cover both. OK.
- But. Electronically or physically? Yeah. Yeah. So in person, in writing, which makes it clunky. Right.
- Or by telephone. And does that imply it could be text or code? I think you're covered by both the writing
- and the telephone. Yeah. Oh, true. That's what I was saying. Yeah.
- Yes, text messages are in writing. Unless you do a voice. Unless you do a voice now, which also is.
- Oh, I see when you were voicemail though. Yeah. But I guess we're going to send a voicemail message
- over the telephone, sort of. I don't know. So keeping us on track. Yeah, and we still have public comment.
- All right. So
- Budget meetings, deleted. Because it's in state code, that's what we do. And the details of how we do
- it can be a little smaller. First procedure. The council shall perform its duties. No, really? Yes.
- Yes, we should. Should we specify that in any way in terms of the annual meeting?
- schedule that's going to get referenced up in A of the 2.0405 to say something like the annual meeting
- schedule includes the regular meetings, no special sessions, and budget meetings. I could go into rules
- of procedure. Let's see. Yeah. Budget meetings. See, we put this, if you look at the rules for a major
- document. I mean, putting it in here where you modified A,
- the 2.04050A to add in that note about approving the annals of medical meetings, that the annals of
- medical meetings will include regular meetings, non-special session. Yeah, I don't think we need to
- add that there. Okay. But if you feel- I just want to make sure that it's there somewhere so that there's
- an understanding that this is something that council is responsible for. Well, if you look at,
- most for rules of procedure page 27 of the packet. Right. I have under council meetings, adoption of
- annual schedule. Yeah. Meetings generally first and third Wednesday, no legislation for first reading
- and the last session of the year. Right. So I think there we could put the details of the schedule shall
- include budget meetings. I guess I'm wondering where are these rules of procedure going to be kept and
- so like for a community member,
- They would be on this website, I think. They posted it, yeah. But if they're reading BMC, is they going
- to be able to know where to go from there? We can add, at the very start of this chapter, a paragraph
- that says, more specific rules, a procedure can be found here.
- are in a separate document that can be requested from the council office or I don't know how, but can
- we allow it to link in GMC Sophia? I'm sorry, say that again. Are we allowed to link within GMC? Yeah.
- I would just say refer to them so people can ask. It's also behavior change. I think they'll know to
- not look at code after a certain point. You can make the announcement at each meetings.
- the rules for procedure here. Yeah. I think what I would say is I would add a specific reference to
- it. Like this may be found as the rules and proceedings as adopted by so they know like you can have
- multiple forms and then it's on your front facing webpage kind of pie rules and procedure council meetings.
- And that's probably sufficient. Links and code, links get broken too often. Site changes all that stuff.
- And it's also
- You'd have to have the full URL or otherwise to code. Well, speaking of which look 2.04.075 and council
- rules procedure. Council shall adopt and maintain a council rules procedure document. So there we go.
- I don't know if you think
- Y'all think we should put that higher up? I think probably we should put it higher up, but this is the
- first pass. Right. So I mean, for my like personal processing, it would be helpful.
- to like for changing the order of things to not have a red line version where you're doing that. So
- then it's like, so it can be read without all the cross-throughs and then go, okay, like this makes
- sense up here and like these two things relate to each other, but they're far away. Yeah. So we'll get
- us to hash out once we've hashed out all of the. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Then we have parliamentary authority,
- which crossed out and put into the rules of procedure.
- Oh, is that where, is that a note on the side that it's crossed out and then move to rules and procedure?
- Yes. Okay. Yeah, it's hard because it really would benefit to have the notes on your screen at the same
- time so you'd see that, yes, move to rules and procedure. And the same with amendment and suspension
- of rules. Then we have forum.
- The presiding officer shall take the chair, the hour designated, that thought was not necessary to put
- in code. Do we need to keep that the city clerk needs to call a roll though? No, that'll be in rules
- of procedure as part of it. It's already in our agenda. Or if it's a section, if there's a new- There's
- a collection of the clerk, yeah. Then we have majority members, the council constitute,
- Again, delete, the sergeant at arms procures the attendance. That was really strict. And then seating
- up members, limits on debate, a move to annul the procedure. Asks us for meeting, I added that the city
- clerk should also be informed. I thought that was actually a rule. I'm surprised it wasn't there. Yeah.
- Sorry, Weary.
- At the end of this paragraph on absence from meeting, there's two. Yeah, they're a little. Well, we
- crossed out. We skipped a whole page there. Yeah, we crossed out CDF members. Yeah, because that's going
- to go into the.
- Rules and procedures and the limits on debate is going to go into rules and procedures. Correct. Then
- we're at absence from meeting. Then we have- There's two periods that they don't apply right now. Yes.
- It's gone. My God, people. Nobody's criticizing. I'm helping. There's two periods that they don't apply
- right now. Okay.
- Conflict of interest, orderliness of members, is that move too? Yes. How about orderliness of CCP members?
- That's not required. This is true. Wait a minute, orderliness of members. I don't think we put that.
- No, we did. We did put that in there. Okay. All right. And then,
- We should probably go to public comment. Wait, where did we leave off? Is everything that's crossed
- out in entirety moved into the rules and procedures document? Unfortunately, I can't say that for sure.
- I looked and no. No. Some of them are just covered up. We need to do a comparison then. Yeah. Where
- did we leave off? Conflict of interest. 150. Okay.
- Well, let's leave off there and go to public comment. Is there anybody in the public who would like
- to comment on the Title II revisions? Is this why you're here today? Yes. We're happy to actually get
- it. Well, we'll have up to three minutes. Excuse me if I'm bothering you. Alice, the conference room
- is. So fair. Thank you. Of course.
- Hi, Steve Wolin. I have quite a few things to say, but they could all be summarized by maybe don't be
- so. There's a lot of wisdom in the code. I'm going to hear you speak for the code, that a lot of it
- was there for a reason. There's clearly plenty of it that needs to be cut. But for example, I'm just
- stunned that you would cut the sergeant at arms.
- Like, um, uh, I know, but, but just the, you know, to take the sergeant arms out of the text when you
- need it, you need it, even if you never, I mean, and I'll also point out that, uh, uh, when it came
- to the question of who should preside 1971, there was a wholesale turnover of the council. Charles,
- it was elected president of the council when she had no experience.
- You can may have that. What happens to this body? Look how long these rules have lasted and through
- how many different types of councils and philosophies. If it's a wholesale turnover of council, what
- kind of rules will they have? Shacking structure rules of procedure is a good idea, but I'd be hesitant
- to offload as much as you all are thinking about doing.
- I always thought that the clerk was the clerk of the common council and that's why their official duties
- were listed in that section. I don't know that necessarily binds the clerk inappropriately to note that.
- I do agree about the end of the year and veto overrides that rule can go. I've got a lot of opinions
- and I'm going to be following you all this with interest, but the specificity of these rules was the point.
- The council isn't supposed to be flexible. You all just noticed that everybody else bases their schedule
- on council meetings. Why do you want to be more flexible for your own convenience? Or, I mean, the point
- is that you're a deliberative body. You're deliberating. The rules are supposed to be literally deliberate.
- The word has those two meanings, but they're in the same word for a reason. So how's my time doing?
- What time do I have left? 45 seconds. All right.
- It's impossible for me to comment on everything that's going on. It's all going so fast, I'm going to
- have to read and maybe submit something in writing. But just one last thing, I'll point out the conflict
- of interest section. If you take it out of what it rules of procedure, it says to the public, maybe
- it's not as important to you all. Maybe there's a reason it's in code that it sends a message that this
- is what the council is willing to put into the law.
- you get my message. I don't know, just take things a little, nevermind, I'll stop. Thank you.
- Thank you. So next steps with code revisions, was this helpful or was this too many cooks in the kitchen
- here today? Because we could have another session like this and just keep it. I think it was helpful.
- I think it was helpful. I do kind of echo Steve. I did run this question out, what's the benefit to
- having this in a separate document versus the code?
- And I think that we should really ask ourselves that in terms of which things we should keep in code
- versus remove from code. And I think that question of why are we trying to give ourselves flexibility
- is good. Like, what's the purpose of the flexibility? And if we want to do something that I can't do
- now, then allowing that specific thing
- are might be a better path to follow. If there's something specific, like for example, the defining
- exactly when summer recesses and exactly when you can't meet over recesses, exactly when winter recesses,
- to make that more flexible, there's a really good solid reason for that. It's a just in case. Is there
- anything else that we need to do?
- I don't think so. When is our next meeting? I think we already have scheduled after recess, right? The
- clerk's office, no offhand. Let me check. I don't believe so. I think that one is scheduled. Okay. Well,
- this time of the week is still good for people. Yes. Come back after recess.
- Yeah. So that's the third. So we're not having another meeting until after recess. And would that be
- August? If you could send it to the first email, we can get it noticed and scheduled. Okay, fine.
- Thank you. Thank you. Are we usually meeting on the third Wednesday? Is that what we're asking now?
- This is the third Wednesday. Third? Thursday. Oh, my God. Yeah. Okay.
- Thursday, it would be the 16th of July, but there are five Thursdays in July. Let's try for the 23rd
- of July. So that will work for people. Yeah, because I'll be on vacation the 16th. Yeah, it's the day
- after a regular session.
- And that is also the day before our first fiscal committee meeting after recess. And 4 to 5.30. Yeah,
- that's the preference of crates. And it's also the day after quote one registration for Kelly Direct.
- So, you know, be fragile with me.
- All right, thank you all.