- All right, it is nine o'clock. I will call the August 12th meeting of the election board to order. Are
- you guys up top? Are you guys good up top with the sound? You need a little bit? Okay. My understanding
- is there was a power surge and they're trying to get everything back up. So we will sit here and smile
- till you tell us we're good.
- I hope other five minutes just go that quickly. Okay, then we will first thing is we need to adopt our
- agenda which we have and it's posted. I will move to adopt the agenda as we have been given it. Second.
- Any discussion? We can do those in favor. Aye. Opposed? All right. Now we have to decide how we're going
- to address the complaints that we have.
- I'm going to leave that. You tell us what we need to do, sir. Well, I think you've got a couple of choices,
- right? I think looking through all the complaints, they all seem to be the same complaint from five
- different people, which is that there is a violation of Indiana Code 3815.5, which is entitled Ineligibility
- of a Person Defeated in Primary Convention or Caucus.
- that the allegation is that Mr. Davis is one who was defeated in a primary convention or caucus, and
- therefore he is ineligible to be on the ballot for this fall. I think there is one with a second complaint
- of history of disruptive behavior at voting locations. I'm not sure how that fits into where we're at
- in today's process.
- Um, but I guess those are kind of the, I think the primarily one that all of them complained about was
- the violation of Indiana code 3815.5. So if you wanted to have a hearing on that and then potentially
- a hearing on, uh, the failed, uh, the history of destructive behavior, voting locations. But my understanding
- is that that kind of hearings already happened.
- And so I'm not, I think that's kind of moot at this point. So I think the one issue before you is the
- violation of the 3815.5. I think you could probably combine all the complaints into one complaint. Let
- them either all come up and utilize the 10 minutes as a group. And then if, of course, if they need
- more time and you wish to give it to them, you can. And then Mr. Davis would have the opportunity to
- rebut that. And then he would get that same 10 minute guidelines
- Of course, you guys can give him additional time, or you could treat each individual one as, I mean,
- I hesitate to give that as an option, because once you decide the first one, you've kind of decided
- them all. If it's all the same code and all that, I don't think the information, it would be much more
- judicial economy if you had all of them give you why they think this is a violation, and then let him
- respond, because it's all the same code section. Thank you. Go ahead.
- Mr. Chair, I concur with the county attorney in that the complaints are similar. It does not seem to
- be the best use of our time to address them individually. And I would make a motion that we hear them
- as a combination of one complaint or that we hear it. We put them all together and hear them. Um, and
- I also agree that the behavior issue was addressed in a separate hearing and
- I am not interested in entertaining that piece today. I'll second that. Before we vote, do the- Excuse
- me. It's not your turn yet. It's not your turn yet. When it's your turn, sir, I will call on you. This
- is not your turn. Okay. I just want- What part of this is not your turn? Do you not understand? I would
- like to make some specific requests before the hearing begins here. If I may please.
- I think we're not to the point where the hearing is actually being conducted or start yet. We're determining
- how operationally it's going to occur, whether it's going to be one complaint versus five complaints.
- And I think that's the question before the board at this point. Where I was going to go before I was
- interrupted was to ask the petitioners if they have issues with combining all five of them into one.
- Mr. Tilford, yours is listed first. Can you find out for us and give us an answer from the other petitioners
- if they have an issue with that? Yeah. Well, the ones that are here. OK, so then I will call for the
- question then. Yes, ma'am. I would like to add that if
- As a group, they need more than 10 minutes. I would like to, at that point, address the additional time.
- OK. Thank you. OK. So the motion is to combine the five complaints into one. Those in favor, aye. Aye.
- Excuse me. I would like to ask for some specific request before this motion is passed, because my specific
- request affect the passing of this motion.
- Sir, I'm kind of going to look toward you on this. I guess I would ask Mr. Davis if his comments are
- concerning whether he believes there are separate questions before it, because essentially what the
- board is voting on is whether there's really just one question before, i.e. whether this is a violation
- of Indiana Code 3815.5, or do you think there is another question
- that is the complainants are asking, because the complainants have indicated that this is what they're
- asking. Yes, Councillor Cockerill, I do wish to clarify some issues surrounding the five challenges.
- Before the presentation begins, I respectfully request clarification of the five can one filings
- will be treated as separate filings presenting substantially the same legal issue rather than as five
- cumulative presentations on the same issue. I also would like to request equal presentation time. The
- board's resolution establishes its hearing procedure
- including the order of presentation and opportunity for the candidates to respond. Because there are
- five challengers, I respectfully request clarification concerning the amount of time of each time each
- challenger will receive and the amount of time available to me to respond. If the challengers collectively
- receive more than the time allocated to myself, the candidate, I respectfully request comparable additional
- time so that I have a fair opportunity to address each challenge. I also, because the challengers will
- present first,
- I respectfully request a brief rebuttal opportunity after all five challengers have completed their
- presentations limited to new factual or legal matters raised during their presentations. And I also
- request that any factual assertion offered as testimony be made under oath consistent with the board's
- adopted procedures
- and that the documentary evidence offered by any party be identified and made a part of the record.
- Because this matter concerns ballot eligibility and presents constitutional issues, I respectfully request
- that the board issue a written decision setting forth its findings of fact, conclusions of law,
- and reasons for its disposition. Also, I respectfully request that the minutes reflect that I have expressly
- raised potential objections under the first and 14th amendments to the United States Constitution in
- Article 2, Section 1 of the Indiana Constitution. Thank you.
- And I guess my response to that is, at least for the first part, that's kind of what we're trying to
- decide. I think what the motion is, is that the complainants as a group will have 10 minutes and pursue
- it. And we will swear everybody in before they give testimony. That is clearly is going to happen. But
- they will have 10 minutes, and then you will have 10 minutes to respond. I think what you're questioning
- is, if they request from the board additional time after that, will you
- also get that additional time, and that would be a board's decision. I mean, I would recommend to the
- board that you do, right? I would have no issue with that. Right. And so I think. But what I want to
- clarify is if they have 10 minutes that one person makes their presentation, you will get 10 minutes.
- And then the following. And if we go beyond the 10, then you could have the same additional time. But
- you don't get 50 because they have five of them.
- If they use 10, you get 10. And I would like to clarify. So all five together, their total cumulative
- time has to be within 10 minutes. Unless it is extended by the election board, which is part of the
- procedures. Am I understanding this correctly, then if there are
- If there are five challengers, they will all have two minutes each to make their presentation. I do
- not believe that we are allocating amongst them their time. So if one of them wants to be their spokesperson
- and talk for the full 10 minutes, I think that is fully appropriate.
- But we do want to make sure that each of them gets the opportunity to make sure what their complaint
- about is said. And if that requires more time, they can ask the election board and the election board
- can choose to allow it or not, additional time. But as a group, they will have 10 minutes to, it's not,
- we're not going to say you get two, you get two, you get two. They as a group have 10, just like your
- response, you get the 10 minutes. And again, absent a request for additional time.
- And where does this stand with my request for rebuttal should some new evidence be provided that is
- not already a part of the packet record that? I guess that's part of your time, right, because a rebuttal occurs
- after the other group had made a statement. So really, if there is a first rebuttal period, it will
- begin with the complainants and then you will have an opportunity. I guess at this point in time,
- if you have, if you listen to what they say and you have concerns about it and you run out of your 10
- minutes, then you ask the election board, hey, can I have, I need to, I have some more information I
- want to give, can I have another couple minutes or another X amount of time to give that information,
- right? So since you go second, the,
- the complaintants would have the ability, would have the need to do a rebuttal because they would not
- have heard what you said when they were speaking. Does that make sense? I'm just trying to understand
- where I'm able to address any new factual information that might be presented as
- It seems more logical to me that I should be able to rebut that before I start my 10 minutes presentation.
- And that is not how this is set up. So we'll just have to disagree on that. I actually think we have
- a motion from the board. Do you guys need any more information to vote on that motion? Go ahead. The
- only thing I wonder is,
- Since we took the poll about them agreeing to the 10 minutes, is it possible to pull them to say, are
- you planning to present any new evidence? Or are you sticking to this? Because if there is new evidence,
- that may change how we feel. Well, I think if there's new evidence, I think that would be part of the
- contemplation of, do we give Mr. Davis more time, right? I think if they bring in a bunch of new evidence,
- then I think you should
- listen to him and determine whether he needs more time. I think why don't we get to the point where
- we're actually receiving evidence to determine if there's any new one. I would totally concur.
- I would concur. I'm surmising the evidence. It's not going to be surprising. Correct. And if it is,
- then we have to react, right? I just don't expect a whole lot of new stuff here. And that was exactly my point.
- that I don't believe we're gonna have anything other than what they listed or they would have submitted
- it for consideration. What could have changed from the time that these? And I guess from my stance,
- if we have a conversation about whether there's any new evidence and then we get the evidence, then
- are we just having the same conversation twice, right? And I think from a process perspective, that
- is not efficient. If we allow additional time for the complainants, we will allow additional time
- from Mr. Davis. So the motion is to combine all five. Should I actually call the roll? Clerk Brown?
- Yes. Danny Shields? Yes. Penny Giddens? Yes. All right. So again, I asked Mr. Tilford, but whoever you
- guys would choose to have to speak, please sign in and you would have 10 minutes if you want to allocate
- that amongst different people.
- We don't have a problem with that. Bear with me while I sign in. Haven't started yet.
- before you begin, can I have anybody who is going to give any testimony or information today raise their
- right hand? Do you swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury that the information you will give
- at this hearing today is the truth to the best of your knowledge? I so swear. Yes, I so swear. I noticed
- four people swear.
- Ms. Moore, who's sitting next to you? Yes. D. Owens. Okay. I'm just making sure I have for the record
- who all had their hands raised and swore. So it was D. Owens, Regina Moore, Mr. Tilford, and Mr. Davis.
- Oh, and? Roberta Robbins. Are we ready? Are we good?
- Mr. Selfert, at your convenience. Thank you, Mr. Shields, staff, and also Mr. Taylor. Do we need to
- officially open the hearing? I believe you do. And I believe, TSD, can we make sure we have the 10 minute
- clock on the screen so people can see it? Thank you. OK, then I will officially open the hearing. Now
- start his 10 minutes. Go ahead, sir. Thank you.
- As far as evidence, I, believe it or not, once in a while look through the CATS recordings of prior
- meetings. I stumbled across the June 4th meeting in this room, and I still shudder at that. I empathize
- with those people who had to be here at that time and some other times because of Mr. Taylor. When I
- first heard
- Davis, excuse me, Davis. When I first heard that he was, in spite of losing the earlier portion of the
- election, considering or attempting to follow up and still be considered in the fall, I thought, what
- can I do? I've been through elections before and failed. Democratic primary for the U.S. House, Indiana
- Ninth District, when Shelley beat everybody, I came in like fourth out of five.
- at a common courtesy of anything else, try to fight that. You can have some courtesy, some consideration
- for others, and accept defeat. For me, to further this is a disservice not only to the individuals involved
- here, not only within the voters here, but against the whole election process upon which this country
- is founded. Again, my evidence is that meeting, which is on record and people can look at it,
- The behavior exhibited during that, which was disruptive, is too mild a term. He interfered with the
- process, and I want to put a stop to it if at all possible. Do I have any questions? So you're referring
- to the fact that you feel like he was told about the sore loser law? I'm referring back primarily that
- one meeting was recorded over and over and over again. They're trying to enforce normal decorum and timing.
- And we had to wait for him to appear, had to wait for the show and tell, which is an embarrassment.
- All these things were under the heading of disruptive, time consuming, and needless. You're trying to
- be courteous. And again, I'm trying to project something here. But courtesy wasn't working during those
- meetings. We have to do something else, more blunt. That's basically all I had to say.
- Thank you. We still have eight minutes if someone wants to use it. Go ahead, just come up and sign in.
- Hello, my name's Dee Owens, and I'll be very fast as I was on my piece of paper. I think allowing a
- write-in candidate at this point who was a previous candidate is clearly in opposition to the law. We
- just have to follow the law. That's all there is. Mr. Davis already lost. That's the law of the state
- of Indiana. We need to follow the law. I think it's quite simple. That's all I have. Do you have questions?
- Thank you. Any others? Well, no. OK, why don't we pause and there's seven minutes and 51 seconds left
- if we need it. So then I guess we'll, Mr. Davis?
- Davis, you have 10 minutes now for your presentation or rebuttal as whatever you wish to call it. May
- I ask a question regarding the presentation of evidence during my rebuttal exhibits that I wish to be
- introduced into the record? When I hand these items to
- Mr. Cockerill or to you all the election board, I would like that time where I'm standing up and physically
- handing items not to count against my 10 minutes. Are there things we're going to have to see at that
- time? Yes. Or can we see them at the end of your presentation?
- Because your presentations, we're not going to act on anything until your presentation is finished.
- So is there any reason you couldn't give us your whatever at that point in time and we just deal with
- it then before we vote? Yes. If I'm allowed to hand over my evidence or my exhibits following my 10 minutes,
- That would work. I just want to make sure that my response, my proposed order, my candidate filing,
- my reference to the packet materials, and my requested election results for the primary, for the clerk,
- for the race of clerk to the Circuit Court of Monroe,
- be able to be entered as exhibits and that you all, as board members, are able to take an appropriate
- amount of time to consider all of these items as evidence in the whole. Again, you're the attorney,
- Jeff. I think that the question is, can this election board rewrite Indiana state law?
- And the answer is, no, we can't. I'm sure there are state laws that all three of us would like to rewrite.
- We can't. That's what the legislature does. And you know that. And the question here is, this is what,
- and we've reached out to the state election board. This is what they say Indiana codes states. And we
- really have no desire to change what that law states.
- So you have 10 minutes, make your presentation why, and I guess for lack of a better term, why we shouldn't
- apply state law when it applies to you to the election. So you have 10 minutes to do that, sir. Respectfully,
- I am not in any way saying that state law does not exist. His clock should be running right now. Restart. OK.
- start your 10 minutes right now. And it was restarted for you. Okay, I need to be able to see the time
- on my monitor. It's on the screen in front of you. It's the blue bar at the top of the screen. In the
- upper left hand corner of your screen. It's right across the entire top. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay.
- Good morning members of the board. I appreciate the opportunity to address the five challenges to my
- candidacy. I want to begin by making one thing clear. I accept the result of the May Democratic primary.
- I participated in that primary and I did not receive the Democratic nomination. I am not asking this
- board to overturn that result.
- and I am not asking to be recognized as the Democratic nominee. I subsequently filed an independent
- write-in candidate, candidacy for Monroe County Clerk in the November general election. The issue before
- the board is therefore whether Indiana's sore loser statute may constitutionally be applied
- to prevent me from participating in the general election altogether. The statute, I recognize the language
- of Indiana code 3-8-1-5.5. It says that a person defeated in a primary is not eligible to become a candidate
- for the same office
- in the next general election. I also recognize that Indiana's 2026 Election Administrator's Manual says
- that the statute applies to a defeated candidate who wants to run as a writing candidate. So I'm not
- asking the board to pretend that the statute does not exist. My position
- is that the board must consider whether applying that statute to my independent write-in candidacy is
- consistent with the United States Constitution and the Indiana Constitution. The Democratic primary
- and the November general election serve different functions. The primary determined who would represent
- the Democratic party. I accept that determination.
- But I am not seeking to represent the Democratic Party. I am seeking to participate in independently,
- to participate independently in the general election. The Democratic Party's nominee remains the Democratic
- Party's nominee. Nothing I'm asking this board to do changes that. The Supreme Court has held in Anderson v.
- Celebreze or Celebreze, and Burdick v. Telushi, that election restrictions affecting political association
- must be evaluated by considering the character and the magnitude of the burden on the candidates and
- voters, and voters, and that the precise... Can we stop the clock, please?
- Okay, that's only one bill. Okay, all right. Let's see. Let me begin again. The election restrictions
- affecting political association must be evaluated by considering the character and magnitude of the
- burden on candidates and voters and the precise governmental interest asserted to justify that burden.
- That matters here because the burden imposed by Indiana code section 3-8-1-5.5 is not simply a filing
- requirement. If the statute is applied to me, I cannot be a candidate for Monroe County Clerk in the
- November general election at all. That affects my political association.
- but it also affects voters who may wish to support an independent candidacy. I anticipate that the board
- may consider Hero v. Lake County Election Board a Seventh Circuit decision. Hero is important, but the
- factual distinction is critical. In Hero, the candidate was removed from the Republican primary ballot,
- but he still had alternative routes to the general election.
- The Seventh Circuit therefore characterized the burden as minor. Here, the challenged statute does something
- different. It eliminates the general election candidacy itself. There's no alternative independent or
- right in route left for me if
- Indiana Code Section 3-8-1-5.5 is applied. That distinction is reinforced by the Indiana Supreme Court's
- later discussion of Hero in Morales v. Rust. The Indiana Supreme Court emphasized the availability of
- alternative routes to the general election ballot in conducting that a restriction was minor. Those
- alternative routes are precisely what
- Indiana Code Section 3-8-1-5.5 removes in this case. I recognize the state's legitimate interests. Indiana
- has an interest in the integrity and finality of primary elections, but I accept the primary result.
- Indiana has an interest in protecting political parties' ability to choose their nominees.
- But I am not asking to be the Democratic nominee. Indiana has an interest in avoiding voter confusion.
- But I am running as an independent write-in candidate, not as the Democratic nominee. Indiana has an
- interest in orderly elections. But Indiana already has a statutory
- statutory procedure governing right-end candidates. The question is therefore whether those interests
- require the additional step of completely prohibiting my participation in the general election. Members
- of the board, I respectfully ask that you deny the five challenges and allow my independent right-end
- candidacy to proceed.
- If the board concludes that Indiana Code 3-8-1-5.5 nevertheless requires my removal,
- I respectfully request a written decision identifying the factual and legal basis for that conclusion.
- I also respectfully request that the record expressly reflect that I have raised objections under the
- first and 14th amendments to the United States Constitution and Article II and Section 1 of the Indiana
- Constitution. I am not asking for this board to overturn
- the Democratic primary. I am asking for the opportunity to participate independently in the November
- general election. Thank you. Thank you. Again, I'm not the attorney. I think what you need to do now is I
- is close the hearing and then deliberate amongst yourselves on what you wish to rule on. And then if
- you can make that decision today, fine. I think if you want to acknowledge Mr. Davis's request of including
- the, that he raise objections to the First and Fourth Amendment and under, was it Article 22 of the
- Indiana Constitution?
- Uh, Article two, section one of the Indiana Constitution and also what would would be the appropriate
- time for me to turn in my exhibits? I think you could turn those in, although I guess. They were necessary
- for the for the board's consideration, obviously, so would. I think if you if you handed them to me,
- I would mark them.
- that would be as exhibit one to how many are there? Well, I have I would like to make sure that everything
- that is in the packet for this hearing be made part of the official record. I have a proposed I have
- a response, a formal written response to the
- To the challenges and I also have a proposed order. I also am submitting a copy of my actual independent
- write-in filing and I have requested that the official results of the primary race for Monroe County
- for clerk to the Circuit Court be introduced as a
- evidence were an exhibit as well and my understanding is that Ms. Ferris has been able to locate that
- and she can submit it to Mr. Councilor Cockerill. Those are certified results right? Yeah they've already
- also been emailed to Cockerill as well. We could we can include the certified results of the election
- as as an exhibit. All right then I can I again may I am I allowed to
- in the hearing and then we deliberate. Is that what you suggest? I think you add the testimony.
- I think Mr. Davis should hand me whatever exhibits he wants to be included. That's fine with me. So
- that I can mark them and hand them to you so you can look at them before you make your decision. So
- if you have those exhibits, I do. Just a point of clarification. I won't need to
- The already in the official record will be the packet information, the letter from the for the hearing,
- the complaints and also to the policies and procedures for this hearing. Those are also all of those
- will be included in the record. Is that correct? I will have to see what's in the packet and we'll have
- to see what the election board
- But I guess what I need you to do is any new information I need to have, because then I have to go talk
- to the complainants to make sure that they don't have any objections to these being entered as exhibits
- to this hearing. And if they do, then we've got to talk about something. But if not, you'll get to see
- them first. But I don't have them, so I can't show them to you.
- You still have two minutes and 51 seconds. Seven minutes. Seven minutes. I'm sorry. You know, sometimes
- you get arthritis. You can't read your own handwriting. Kylie will tell you mine wasn't good, but I
- didn't have arthritis. They still have seven minutes and 51 seconds. And he has two minutes and, I think,
- 15, if I remember correctly. Yeah, that's fine.
- Go ahead. This is a conversation amongst the board. This is not talking right now to petitioners. It
- seems to me that the issues raised are not issues for the election board to deal with.
- The issues raised are whether or not this is the Indiana Code is a violation of the Constitution. That's
- not our job to determine. Our job is to determine whether or not the statute applies. I'll let him finish.
- Okay, so. Bonds, proposed order, and then why. I'm going to go short tonight. Thank you very much. Okay.
- Yes. Yes. Yes. I'm okay with you, with the petitioners, having a little bit of time to look at this
- before they respond. I assume you guys are. Yeah, I will declare the meeting in recess while they do
- that. All right.
- seen the exhibits, and I'm going to call the meeting back to order. Do any of the complaints want to
- use any more of your seven minutes? You're free to head up there.
- Hi, D. Owens again. Having heard the presentations and having reviewed the exhibits, I would like to
- kindly say that this is the wrong venue for this argument, that this board has no authority over the
- United States Constitution. And therefore, you can only rule, of course, on what's in front of you,
- the law that's in front of you, and the evidence that's in front of you.
- Anyone else? Well, ma'am, that is exactly the thought that I had that if we don't write the law, we
- read the law and make decisions based upon what it says. It seems to me that if Mr. Davis wants to be
- on the ballot as a write-in candidate,
- He needs to seek injunctive relief that we can't offer. And if you wish to try, if you wish to file
- suit somewhere to be put on the ballot, that same constitution you're talking about gives you that right.
- But I'm going to make a motion to honor the challenges and
- declare that Mr. Davis is not eligible to be a write-in candidate in the November general election.
- Second. Excuse me. Sorry to interrupt, but I do have rebuttal time left. Two minutes. The hearing has
- it, well. We just heard a rebuttal. You have two minutes. Two minutes and how many seconds?
- What was that? Just give him three minutes.
- Okay, again, I reserve the right to seek injunctive relief through the courts such that my candidacy
- remains intact as a write-in candidate.
- it sounds like your motion that is upcoming would need to specifically address that issue that I do
- have the possibility to seek relief from the courts and that also the constitutional issues both federally
- and the Indiana State Constitution
- allow me to present those evidence and those facts. And I wish that everything that has, I wish to request
- that findings of fact with your decision, written formal findings of fact be included in the record
- such that I will have as full of record as possible to proceed with my court request for relief.
- It's very, very important that my ability to present challenges is recognized by the board and that
- these are preserved such that
- One, such that I might be able to simplify and expedite my lawsuit, because time is of the essence.
- The ballot is soon to be printed. I need to move this through the courts as soon as possible, starting
- with the lower court, and then if necessary, appealing to the appellate level, and if necessary, appealing
- to the Indiana
- Supreme Court. Therefore, I request that your findings of fact be formally written expressing your objections
- to my candidacy as write-in for the position of clerk to the Circuit Court of Monroe. Thank you. Mr.
- Counselor.
- Does the televised meeting not serve as evidence? I think it may or may not. I think the real easy solution
- was when we create the order, we will add language that says, Mr. Davis was in the primary. Mr. Davis,
- for clerk, Mr. Davis lost the primary, was not the leading vote getter from the primary, something in
- the primary.
- That is the factual basis for you to make the decision that he can't be on the ballot in November, right?
- I mean, I think what Mr. Davis needs to show the court is it's clearly this is the issue that the decision
- was based upon, and that would give him the ability to show, hey, this was kind of a cut and dry issue
- from the election board's perspective. His perspective is that the statute's wrong, right? So that should
- give him what he needs to proceed.
- Precisely what he asked for is what I said, is that if you want to seek injunctive relief, go ahead,
- but we're going to follow Indiana State law. And you cannot deny him the ability to do it? None of us
- wish to do that. None of us have any desire to do that. And there will be minutes of the meeting will
- also be available very quickly.
- Were his three minutes up or did he have? Yes, yes, his three minutes were up. I had 10 seconds, actually.
- And with that, I would like to say that formally reasoned out findings of fact and conclusions of law
- be included in whatever order that you might propose today.
- Okay, go ahead. I'm just saying we had a motion and a second on the table. Are you Mr. Chair?
- Call the roll, please. Clerk Brown? Yes. Danny Shields? Yes. Penny Giddens? Yes. And I'm going to maybe
- ask you something at the end. Sure. At the end of this meeting is that when we're done with this meeting,
- if we could recess for maybe 20 minutes to half hour, I want to
- get him the documentation he needs to move forward. And I think I'll just need a little bit of time
- to get the order clear. You need us for that part of it? Well, I think you guys need to come back and
- actually approve the final document. That's fine. I have no problem. I think it'll be quick. I think
- I'm just going to need a few minutes. It looks like our next thing on the list is a resolution to approve
- the absentee board workers. I believe that's absentee board workers for that one.
- I will restart our board meeting. Thank you, officially. Ms. Kiley, do we have the workers we need to
- appoint? Yes, so I actually emailed them to Mr. Cockrell as well. I am going to forward them on to you.
- I know, Chrissy, you did CC Ms. Githens on the update to hers, but the one from Corey is the same as
- the one that was presented at the last meeting. That has been seen, yes.
- Then I'll make a motion that we approve and appoint those workers. I will second that motion. Discussion?
- No discussion. Those in favor aye. I really please that so many are returning to work in the primary.
- That was really. It's that fancy new room. All right then. All right then I will adjourn, excuse me,
- not adjourn. I will recess the meeting to give Mr. Cockrell the time he needs
- Ms. Kiley has a smile. Yes, ma'am. I was going to say, do you want to do roll call on the appointments?
- If we need to, then we will. Go ahead. Just to make sure it's clear. That's fine. That's fine.
- Clark Brown? Yes. Danny Shields? Yes. Penny Givens? Yes. OK, now I will recess the meeting while Mr.
- Cockerill gets his paperwork that he needs. OK, so I'm going to call the meeting back to order.
- We have a couple of corrections to this we would like. In the second paragraph at the bottom, there's
- a unnecessary space between M and E in member. And number five on the one, two, three, fourth paragraph,
- Nancy Goswami did not attend. Other than that, I think we're good with this.
- So I think what you guys can do is go ahead and move to to exit to authorize the execution of that document
- as your formal decision from this hearing. Excuse me. I'm sorry to interrupt, but I believe that I should
- have the right to read the document and point out any inaccuracies before it's approved so that I can so that
- so that it's recorded officially, those objections. So when I'm in court, it'll be easy for the courts
- to have access to everything. This is our document, correct? Correct. So we decide what happens with
- this document, correct? Correct. So if we make a motion to accept this document as written, that's within
- our program, correct? Correct. I'm making that motion at this time. Second.
- Would you call, well, she's not here right now. Kylie, would you call the roll? Nicole Brown. Yes. Danny
- Shields. Yes. Penny Githens. Yes. Okay, then. I'll get those. Corrections. Two corrections made and
- I'll bring you up something. And we'll sign those, yes. The signature page. Yeah, the signature page.
- Excuse me, Councilor Cockerill, can you please bring up the copy of the corrected document for me as well?
- Okay, I'd like it to be known that I haven't been able to review this document to check for any inaccuracies
- that might limit my right to appeal. I'll make a motion. Will you adjourn? Second. Those in favor, aye.
- Okay, we will see you. Do we have anything we have to do before the September meeting? No, next meeting
- will be September. Thank you very much. Thank you.