Jul 16, 2024 City Council Special Meeting

REMIND EVERYONE, PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE.

[00:00:03]

WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL OURSELVES TO ORDER HERE TODAY ON JULY 16TH FOR A SPECIAL MEETING.

[1. Call to Order]

AND SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT HERE AND OPEN THE FLOOR FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

LET ANYONE SPEAK THAT WOULD LIKE TO DO.

WE HAVE WELL, WE DO WE HAVE A MICROPHONE OVER HERE TO THE RIGHT.

AND THEN AFTER THAT WE HAVE OUR AGENDA ITEM 3A AND I'LL HAND IT OVER TO OUR CHAIR, MRS. FREDA POWELL, AND SHE'LL RUN THAT PORTION OF THE MEETING.

SO AT THIS TIME WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 2 PUBLIC COMMENT.

[2. Public Comment]

GOOD MORNING. WE ARE THANKFUL THAT YOU'RE HERE WITH US TODAY FOR OUR SPECIAL MEETING.

FOR PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY WE WILL CALL YOU UP.

YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO ADDRESS COUNCIL TODAY.

AT THE END OF 2 AND A HALF MINUTES YOU'LL HEAR A WARNING BEEP.

AND THEN THAT GIVES YOU.

EXCUSE ME. I'M SORRY. I'M DOING THIS WITHOUT MY COMPUTER.

THAT LETS YOU KNOW YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS LEFT TO WRAP UP YOUR THOUGHTS.

SO IF YOU ARE SPEAKING ON SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ON TODAY'S AGENDA, PLEASE REMEMBER COUNCIL IS LIMITED IN HOW THEY MAY RESPOND TO YOU.

THEY MAY RECITE A STATEMENT OF FACT.

THEY MAY ASK THAT IT BE PUT ON A FUTURE AGENDA, OR THEY MAY REFER YOU TO STAFF.

OUR FIRST SIGN UP TODAY IS NOAH DAWSON, AND AFTER NOAH DAWSON WILL BE DAVID HUDSON.

MIC] IS THAT BETTER? YEAH. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE.

I JUST WANT TO BRIEFLY GO OVER THE EDITORIAL BOARD FOR THE AMARILLO PIONEERS PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, WHICH I'VE JUST PASSED OUT FOR THE COUNCIL.

THE PROPOSALS THAT WE HAVE, THEY ARE MODELED NOT TO STEAL A THUNDER FROM THE REVIEW COMMITTEE.

THEY ARE MODELED OFF OF THOSE.

SO A BIT OF A SPOILER WARNING FOR EVERYONE.

BUT THERE ARE SOME SLIGHT DIFFERENCES.

PROPOSITION A IS THE ONE THAT IS MOST LIKE THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

ONE LITTLE CHANGE THAT WE THINK SHOULD BE MADE IS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE PETITION PROCESS.

AND AS HEATED AS THINGS HAVE GOTTEN, I THINK ONE THING THAT WE CAN ALL BE THANKFUL FOR IS FOR THAT PART OF THE CHARTER.

THE PROCESS IS PRETTY CLEAR.

THERE ARE VERY CLEAR TIMELINES DEADLINES FOR EACH STEP OF THE PROCESS.

FOR EXAMPLE, UNDER THE INITIATIVE REFERENDUM SECTION, THE CITY SECRETARY HAS 21 DAYS TO VERIFY SIGNATURES.

THERE'S CURRENTLY NOTHING LIKE THAT IN THE RECALL SECTION.

THERE'S THE DEADLINE FOR HOW LONG YOU HAVE TO COLLECT SIGNATURES, AND THEN ONCE IT'S PRESENTED THEN THE PERSON HAS FIVE DAYS TO RESIGN, BUT THERE'S NO TIME LIMIT FOR HOW LONG THE CITY SECRETARY HAS TO VERIFY SIGNATURES.

NO TIME LINE FOR HOW LONG THE COUNCIL HAS TO CALL AN ELECTION IF IT GETS TO THAT.

SO WE'VE TAKEN AND INCORPORATED SOME LANGUAGE FROM INITIATIVE REFERENDUM PUT THERE.

PROPOSITION B OUR PROPOSAL MAINTAINS THE FOUR YEAR STAGGERED TERMS FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT AS MAYOR STANLEY SUGGESTED, WE PROPOSE KEEPING THE MERIT TWO YEARS.

THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT WOULD ALLOW VOTERS IN EVERY SINGLE ELECTION TO VOTE ON A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL, SO WE GOT SOME REAL STINKERS IN THERE.

WE'LL BE ABLE TO VOTE A MAJORITY OUT EVERY SINGLE TIME.

IT'S KIND OF USELESS IN OUR OPINION, IF YOU CAN ONLY VOTE OUT SOME MINORITY OF THE COUNCIL IN SOME ELECTIONS.

IT ALSO WOULD MOVE THE ELECTIONS TO NOVEMBER OF EVEN NUMBERED YEARS.

THIS WOULD INCREASE TURNOUTS.

AND ASIDE FROM THAT, IT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT A MAJORITY OF THIS COUNCIL RAN ON WHEN THEY GOT ELECTED.

I KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME ISSUES WHERE THE EXACT WAY THAT SOMETHING GOES THROUGH, YOU CAN SAY, WELL, YOU RAN ON THIS, AND THEN THEY PUT SOME ORDINANCE THAT HAS A LOT OF OTHER DETAILS IN IT.

THIS IS A FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD THING THAT THIS COUNCIL RAN ON, AT LEAST THE MAJORITY DID.

FOR PROPOSITION C GEOGRAPHIC AREAS THAT ARE PROPOSED BY THE COMMITTEE.

[00:05:07]

IT WOULD ALLOW, SAY, CANDIDATES A TO RUN IN NORTHEAST AMARILLO AND LOSE IN NORTHEAST AMARILLO TO CANDIDATE B.

HOWEVER [INAUDIBLE] MAY LEVERAGE VOTES FROM OUTSIDE THAT AREA TO BE ABLE TO WIN OVERALL.

IT FAILS TO ACHIEVE THE STATED PURPOSE OF REPRESENTATION.

OUR VERSION OF PROPOSITION D EXPANDS THE SCOPE TO ALSO HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL.

THE COUNCIL IS THE NEXT LEVEL WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART BELOW THE VOTERS.

AND SINCE THE CITY ATTORNEY CLIENT IS THE CITY, UNLESS WE'RE GOING TO MAKE CITY ATTORNEY AN ELECTED POSITION, THE COUNCIL IS BEST SUITED TO BE ABLE TO PICK SOMEONE WHO WILL ACTUALLY REPRESENT THE CLIENT.

IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VERSIONS OF THE PROPOSALS THAT I HAVE, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

IT'S GOOD TO TALK TO YOU.

I'M DAVID HUDSON, AND I'M A 40 YEAR RESIDENT OF AMARILLO.

AND I JUST CAME BACK FROM CHICAGO.

MY WIFE'S FAMILY REUNION IS THERE, AND I LOVE TO BE BACK IN AMARILLO AND WHENEVER I TRAVEL FOR BUSINESS, I ALWAYS APPRECIATED BEING BACK IN AMARILLO. IT'S A FANTASTIC PLACE, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS 104 DEGREES YESTERDAY WHEN I GOT BACK.

BACK IN 2011, I WAS PART OF THE AMARILLO UNITED GROUP THAT OPPOSED THE PROPOSITION THREE VOTING ON SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE MAKING OR PROPOSED MAKING AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPOSITION AND TENURE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND I RESPECT THAT AND APPRECIATE THAT.

I CAN SEE EXACTLY WHY YOU WANT TO DO THAT.

I'M JUST A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED THAT WE MAY BE OPENING UP PANDORA'S BOX IN THAT OTHERS ENTITIES MAY COME IN AND TRY TO TAKE OVER THE PROCESS.

AND THEN AND THEN IT MAY BE IT MAY BE LIKE, YOU KNOW, STARTING A WILDFIRE.

YOU LOSE CONTROL OF THAT.

I DO RESPECT THE TENURE ISSUE AND CONTINUITY OF THE COUNCIL.

I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT OUTSIDE ORGANIZATIONS COMING IN AND MAYBE TRYING TO TAKE OVER, OVER THE PROCESS AND TRYING TO VOTE FOR SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS LIKE THEY DO VERY COMMONLY.

THROUGH MY CAREER, I WAS OVERSAW 93 TOWNS AND CITIES FOR MY BUSINESS THAT I WORKED FOR.

AND, AND I SAW OTHER CITIES SUCH AS LUBBOCK GOING TO SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS.

AND BASICALLY IT RESULTS IN TURF WARS.

AND ULTIMATELY IT JUST TURNS INTO BACK SCRATCHING BETWEEN DISTRICTS AND THEN PORK BARREL SPENDING.

AND THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'M WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

AND I WISH EVERYBODY THE BEST.

I WORKED WITH FREDA FOR QUITE A WHILE, AND I ALWAYS RESPECT AND APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT SHE'S DONE FOR THE CITY, AND PARTICULARLY ON ALL THESE COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I KNOW SEVERAL OF YOU ALL.

AND AND SO THANK YOU FOR DOING AND SPENDING SO MUCH TIME ON THAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR.

THANK YOU DAVID. WE WE'LL TRY TO ADDRESS THAT TODAY.

WE HAVE SOME FOLLOW UP INFORMATION ON THE SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICT PIECE, VOTING RIGHTS AND WHATNOT.

MAYOR, THAT CONCLUDES EVERYONE THAT I HAD SIGNED UP.

OKAY. I SEE ONE HAND OVER HERE.

JAMES, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME UP AND GO AHEAD AND SPEAK.

APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS, DAVID.

I THINK THOSE ARE MAIN CONCERNS IN A LOT OF THIS AREA.

I APPRECIATE ALL Y'ALL'S WORK.

LIKE I'VE TOLD THE PEOPLE BEFORE, IT WAS SORT OF A PAINFUL TO WATCH BECAUSE OF WHAT Y'ALL WERE HAVING TO [INAUDIBLE].

NO NO NO. YEAH YEAH YEAH.

NO. OKAY.

RECOMMENDATION I KEEP I'M PRETTY PRAGMATIC, MAN.

ADD TO COUNCIL.

GOOD DEAL. DO THAT IN MAY.

IN MAY, EVERYBODY, RUN FOR ONE AND A HALF YEARS GET YOU TO NOVEMBER OF 26.

NOVEMBER IS A KEY DEAL.

AS SOON AS WE MOVE ELECTIONS TO NOVEMBER, MORE PEOPLE COME TO THE POLL.

ASK ME WHY? I DON'T KNOW, BUT WE'VE ELECTED COUNCIL AND MAYOR WITH UNDER 20,000 VOTES EVER SINCE I'VE BEEN WATCHING.

[00:10:04]

SO IF YOU DO THAT, THEN THIS NEXT IN 2026, START THE FOUR AND THE THREE RUN FOUR FOR FOUR, THREE FOR TWO.

AND THEN BY 28 WE'RE OFF.

IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THE FOUR YEARS NOW THE FOUR YEARS AS WE'VE TALKED WITH SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT HAS A PROBLEM IN ITSELF. FIRST OFF, QUALIFIED PEOPLE THAT REALLY YOU GUYS THAT ARE SERVING, YOU KNOW, HOW HARD TWO YEARS HAVE BEEN. AND SURE, YOU CAME IN AS SORT OF A ROOKIE, BUT MOST PEOPLE THAT SHOULD BE VOTED FOR ARE PEOPLE THAT PAY ATTENTION TO THE CITY ANYWAY.

AND THAT'S A PROBLEM.

SO TO TO GET GOOD PEOPLE TO STEP UP FOR A SOLID FOUR YEARS.

I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO RUN INTO I, I HOPE THERE WOULD BE I GET REFERRED TO BECAUSE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. OKAY, WELL, LOOK WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.

AND THEN LOOK AT THE COUNTS OF COUNTIES.

THEY'RE FLIPPING AND CHANGING ALL THE TIME, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE THE FOUR YEAR, YOU KNOW, NOW, DOES IT HELP? MAYBE. BUT MAYBE IT WON'T HELP, AS DAVID REFERRED TO, BECAUSE YOU CAN REALLY GET SOME AGENDAS THAT SHOULDN'T BE ROLLING ROLLING.

THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE THAT, JAMES.

DO I HAVE ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO OFFER PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE WE CONTINUE WITH OUR MEETING? OKAY. SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

AND AT THIS TIME, WE'RE GOING TO HAND THE THE MEETING OVER TO OUR CHAIR, MISS FREDA POWELL, FOR ITEM 3A.

[3.A. Presentation and Discussion of Charter Review Citizens Committee Recommendations]

I WANT TO SAY GOOD MORNING TO EVERYONE AND WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF EVERYONE'S TIME.

JUST WOULD LIKE TO START OFF BY THANKING THE COUNCIL FOR APPOINTING THIS COMMITTEE.

I'VE BEEN I COULDN'T HAVE BEEN MORE PROUD AND MORE HONORED TO WORK WITH A GREAT GROUP OF CITIZENS THAT RESPECTED EACH OTHER, OFFERED UP THEIR CONCERNS, THEIR THOUGHTS, THEIR IDEAS, THEIR COMMENTS.

AND SO I APPRECIATE THAT SO MUCH.

AND WE DID A LOT OF WORK OVER FIVE WEEKS, WHICH WAS VERY, VERY CHALLENGING.

AND SO THERE WERE TIMES WHERE WE WERE ON THE PAGE, OFF THE PAGE, BUT WE HAD VERY GOOD CONSTRUCTIVE DISCUSSION DURING THAT TIME.

AND SO I WANT TO TAKE A FEW MINUTES JUST TO INTRODUCE THE COMMITTEE.

AND AGAIN, I SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND EFFORT.

SO I'M FREDA POWELL.

I SERVED AS THE CHAIR.

GARY PITNER SERVED AS VICE CHAIR.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAD KIM BENSON, AUDREY CASTILLO, DEAN CRUMP, MICHAEL HANNING, TOBY HUDSON, SANDRA MCCART, RODNEY HILL, AND DONNA WARD.

AND I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE TWO MEMBERS THAT ARE NOT HERE THIS MORNING.

THAT'S MR. HENNING AND MISS KIM BENSON.

SO JUST SO THAT THE COUNCIL IS IS AWARE AND WE WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF OF EVERYONE'S TIME HERE TODAY.

SO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND PIVOT OVER TO DENNIS HAWKINS.

AND HE'S WITH BAKER TILLY OUR CONSULTING FIRM THAT WE HAVE WORKED WITH.

SO WE'LL START FROM THERE.

AND THEN YOU'LL HEAR A LITTLE BIT FROM OUR VICE CHAIR, MR. GARY PITNER AS WELL.

AND LET ME TAKE A MOMENT TO JUST SAY TO THANK YOU TO MR. DAWSON AND MR. HUDSON AND ALSO MR. SCHENCK, FOR THE COMMENTS THIS MORNING.

REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.

SO, DENNIS. THANK YOU FREDA.

I'M DENNIS HAWKINS, I'M WITH BAKER TILLY, AND IT'S BEEN MY PLEASURE TO WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE FOR THE LAST MONTH AND A HALF.

I WANT TO THANK THEM AND THE COUNCIL.

YOU APPOINTED A VERY GOOD COMMITTEE.

WE HAD A LOT OF ROBUST DISCUSSIONS, AND I THINK THAT LED TO A GOOD PRODUCT BEING PRODUCED BY THE COMMITTEE.

I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE CITY STAFF, FLOYD AND STEPHANIE AND BRYAN AND ALSO EMILY KOLLER FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WHO DID A TREMENDOUS JOB IN PRODUCING THE MAPS THAT WE WILL TALK ABOUT LATER ON.

OUR OVERARCHING GOAL, I THINK, IN THE COMMITTEE, WAS TO IMPROVE THE CHARTER, TO ENHANCE GOVERNANCE AND MAKE THE GOVERNMENT OF AMARILLO MORE RESPONSIVE TO THE PEOPLE AND MORE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PEOPLE AND ALSO TO IMPROVE THE STRUCTURE OF GOVERNMENT A LITTLE BIT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID EACH MEETING WAS THAT AS WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ADDRESSING THE VARIOUS QUESTIONS EACH WEEK

[00:15:06]

WE ALSO WANTED TO ENHANCE THE PARTICIPATION OF THE PUBLIC AND WE HAD SEVERAL COMMUNITY MEMBERS OFFER COMMENTS AT EACH MEETING.

THE COMMITTEE HAD A VERY OPEN DISCUSSION.

AND LET ME GET ON TO THE SLIDES HERE.

SOME OF THIS I'M JUST GOING TO SKIP BECAUSE IT'S BACKGROUND.

I THINK THE COUNCIL AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CHARTER IS.

IT'S BASICALLY THE CITY'S CONSTITUTION.

IT REALLY HAS NOT BEEN MODIFIED MUCH SINCE IT WAS ORIGINATED IN 1913.

THE LAST CHARTER AMENDMENT WAS IN 2020, AND THERE WERE TWO MEASURES ON THE BALLOT.

ONE PASSED AND ONE FAILED.

THE ONE THAT FAILED ADDRESSED FOR FOUR YEAR TERMS FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND IT FAILED BY A SMALL MAJORITY.

WE WERE VERY MINDFUL OF THE DIRECTION THAT THE COUNCIL GAVE US FROM THEIR MAY 9TH MEETING.

TALKING ABOUT INCREASING THE NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM 5 TO 7, INCREASING THE LENGTH OF THE COUNCIL TERMS TO FOUR YEARS, AND CONSIDER STAGGERING THE TERMS MODIFYING THE RECALL PROCEDURES TO MAKE THEM MORE ACCESSIBLE TO THE CITIZENRY.

HAVING THE CITY ATTORNEY REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON WHAT SHOULD BE BROUGHT FORWARD FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE NOVEMBER BALLOT. YOU'VE ALREADY MET ALL OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, AND I ALSO WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE COUNCIL MEMBER SCHERLEN AND COUNCIL MEMBER SIMPSON, WHO WERE THE LIAISONS TO THE COMMITTEE.

AND I THINK THEY THEY'RE VERY RESPECTFUL OF THE COMMITTEE.

THEY DIDN'T VOTE, BUT THEY OFFERED COMMENTS AT TIMES THAT WERE VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO HEAR.

WE STARTED OUT WITH A WORK PLAN.

IT WAS A VERY AGGRESSIVE WORK PLAN BECAUSE WE HAD A DEFINED DATE THAT WE NEEDED TO COMPLETE OUR WORK, AND WE ALL BUCKLED DOWN AND GOT IT DONE.

WE DID BAKER TILLY.

WE DID QUITE A BIT OF RESEARCH FOR THE COMMITTEE.

AND ALSO STEPHANIE IN THE CITY SECRETARY OFFICE PROVIDED ADDITIONAL DETAIL IN OUR RESEARCH.

BRYAN PROVIDED INFORMATION AND MICK ALSO PROVIDED INFORMATION ON VOTING RIGHTS ACT STATE LAW AND OTHER FACTORS.

SO WE HAD A VERY GOOD COLLABORATIVE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE THE CITY STAFF.

WE CHOSE, EXCUSE ME, TEN COMPARATIVE CITIES, SOME LARGER, SOME SMALLER.

BUT THEY PROVIDED A GOOD BACKGROUND OF THE WAY THAT DIFFERENT CITIES IN TEXAS APPROACHED MAYOR AND COUNCIL GOVERNANCE.

OUR COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS IN SUMMARY WE'RE REFERRING TO IT AS PROPOSITION A, WHICH WOULD REVISE THE RECALL PROCEDURES PRINCIPALLY.

THAT IS GOING TO I'LL GO INTO THE DETAILS AS WE GET TO EACH SLIDE.

PROPOSITION B WOULD ESTABLISH FOUR YEAR STAGGERED TERMS FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS, ESTABLISH TERM LIMITS LIMITING PEOPLE TO SERVE TWO FULL CONSECUTIVE TERMS, AND UPDATE THE VACANCY PROVISIONS TO MAKE MAKE THEM CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW IF YOU GO TO LONGER TERMS. AND WE ALSO ESTABLISHED A WHAT WE CALL RESIGNED TO RUN RULE.

SO IF A SITTING MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL WERE TO ANNOUNCE THEIR ELECTION FOR PUBLIC, ANOTHER PUBLIC OFFICE WITHIN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, THEY WOULD AUTOMATICALLY RESIGN FROM OFFICE. AND THIS IS A FEATURE THAT'S IN MANY CITY CHARTERS.

PROPOSITION C WOULD INCREASE THE COUNCIL TO SEVEN MEMBERS.

WE REFER TO THIS AS THE 133 MODEL WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMITTEE, SO IT WOULD HAVE THE MAYOR ELECTED AT LARGE, THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS ELECTED AT LARGE, AND THEN THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WOULD MUST RESIDE WITHIN A SPECIFIED GEOGRAPHIC AREA IN ORDER TO SERVE, AND THE COMMITTEE FELT THAT THAT WOULD PROVIDE SOME GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATION FOR AREAS THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN REPRESENTED ON THE COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY.

PROPOSITION D WOULD CLARIFY THE CITY MANAGER'S DUTIES AND REQUIRE THAT PRIOR TO APPOINTING AN EXECUTIVE LEVEL UNCLASSIFIED EMPLOYEE, SUCH AS A DEPARTMENT HEAD, THAT THERE WOULD BE CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE HIRING DECISION BEING MADE.

WE ALSO RECOMMENDED UPDATING TWO POLICIES, ONE IN THE GOVERNANCE, IT ENDS POLICIES TO ESTABLISH A PROCEDURE TO REGULARLY REVIEW

[00:20:06]

SECONDLY, WE WANTED TO EXPAND THE GOVERNANCE AND ENDS POLICIES THAT WOULD REITERATE THE POINT ABOUT THE CITY MANAGER'S CONSULTING WITH THE COUNCIL WHEN HIRING EXECUTIVE STAFF.

AND REALLY, WHAT THAT DOES IS PRESENT THE COUNCIL WITH AN OPTION.

YOU COULD HAVE THE CHARTER AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE CHARTER TO REQUIRE THE CONSULTATION, OR YOU COULD ADDRESS IT IN A POLICY MATTER IN GOVERNANCE AND ENDS.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE OR TOGETHER THEY WORK AS A KIND OF BOOTSTRAP EACH OTHER.

AND THEN LASTLY, WE AFTER A LOT OF DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMITTEE.

COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION WAS NO CHANGE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S POSITION, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER.

BRIEFLY GOING INTO PROPOSITION A, THE RECALL, THIS WOULD REDUCE THE NUMBER OF SIGNATURES REQUIRED TO GET A RECALL PETITION QUALIFIED FOR THE BALLOT.

CURRENTLY, THE REQUIREMENT IS 30% OF REGISTERED VOTERS, ONE FIFTH OF WHICH HAVE TO ATTEST THAT THEY VOTED FOR THE OFFICEHOLDER IN THE LAST ELECTION. COMMITTEE FELT THAT 30% OF REGISTERED VOTERS WOULD A VERY HIGH BAR TO REACH.

AND ALSO IT WAS IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO VERIFY WHETHER OR NOT PEOPLE CERTIFYING THAT THEY VOTED FOR THE OFFICEHOLDER IS FACTUALLY CORRECT.

SO WHAT WE'VE RECOMMENDED IS THAT THAT NUMBER BE REDUCED TO 30% OF THE NUMBER OF VOTES CAST IN THE LAST ELECTION FOR THAT OFFICE.

AND SO ONE OF THE SCENARIOS THAT WAS DISPLAYED OR DISCUSSED DURING THE COMMITTEE MEETING WAS IN AMARILLO THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 100,000 REGISTERED VOTERS. THE CURRENT CHARTER, WITH 30% OF THE REGISTERED VOTERS, WEREREQUIRED 30,000 SIGNATURES TO USE THE NUMBER THAT WAS JUST MENTIONED, 20,000 PEOPLE VOTING IN AN ELECTION, 30% OF THAT WOULD BE 6,000 VOTES, VOTER SIGNATURES.

SO THAT'S A GREAT MAKES IT MUCH MORE ACCESSIBLE FOR PEOPLE IF THEY WERE DISSATISFIED WITH AN OFFICE HOLDER.

WE ALSO COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT WE EXPAND THE TIME PERIOD TO GATHER THE SIGNATURES FROM 30 DAYS TO 60 DAYS.

COMMITTEE FELT THAT THAT WAS A MORE APPROPRIATE TIME FRAME FOR THE SIGNATURE GATHERING PROCESS.

IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS IN THE CHARTER NOW IS THAT YOU CAN'T RECALL SOMEONE WITHIN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF OFFICE, OR WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE END OF THEIR TERM.

THE PROPOSED CHARTER INCLUDES A PROVISION THAT YOU CANNOT RECALL AN OFFICE HOLDER WITHIN SIX MONTHS AFTER A RECALL ELECTION HAS BEEN HELD.

AND I THINK ONE OF THE CONCERNS OF THE COMMITTEE WAS THAT THAT THERE WOULD BE KIND OF THIS SERIAL RECALL EFFORT POTENTIALLY, AND SO PROVIDING A COOLING OFF PERIOD, IF YOU WILL MAKES RECALL PRESERVES IT AS WHAT IT IS AN IMPORTANT FEATURE IN THE CHARTER.

WE DID ALSO DID SOME SLIGHT UPDATING OF, OF LANGUAGE IN TERMS OF GENDER.

PROPOSITION B IS WHERE WE DEAL WITH TERMS VACANCIES AND TERM LIMITS.

HERE IS THE RECOMMENDATION WHERE WE PROPOSE CHANGING THE COUNCIL TO FOUR YEAR TERMS AND HAVING THEM STAGGERED.

THERE'S A CHART IN YOUR PRESENTATION THAT SHOWS ELECTION CYCLE OF WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN 2025, 2027, 2029 AND SO FORTH.

IF THE COUNCIL IF THE CHARTER WERE AMENDED TO GO TO A FOUR YEAR TERM, STATE LAW HAS A DIFFERENT PROCESS FOR APPOINTING IN THE EVENT OF A VACANCY. AND SO THIS MEASURE PUTS THE CHARTER IN CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW.

ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT IS IS IF THERE'S LESS THAN A YEAR REMAINING IN THE COUNCIL MEMBER OR MAYOR'S TERM, THAT CAN BE DONE BY APPOINTMENT BY THE COUNCIL IF IT'S MORE THAN 12 MONTHS REMAINING IN THE TERM, THEN THERE WOULD BE A NEED TO BE A SPECIAL ELECTION CALLED TO FILL THE VACANCY.

AND ALSO, THE COMMITTEE FELT THAT IT WAS A KIND OF A TRADE OFF FOR THE COMMUNITY IS IF YOU'RE ALLOWING PEOPLE TO RUN FOR FOUR YEAR TERMS, IS TO IMPOSE A TWO TERM LIMIT.

AND SO THE LANGUAGE IS TERM LIMITS IS TWO FULL CONSECUTIVE TERMS. AND SO THAT'S GIVES NOW IF SOMEONE WERE APPOINTED MID TERM LIKE IN THE EVENT OF A VACANCY, EITHER APPOINTED OR ELECTED THEY WOULD SERVE

[00:25:05]

PLUS HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE TWO FULL CONSECUTIVE TERMS. PROPOSITION C IS WHERE WE CHANGE THE SIZE OF THE COUNCIL FROM FIVE MEMBERS TO SEVEN MEMBERS, SO IT WOULD BE THE MAYOR AND SIX COUNCIL MEMBERS. IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMITTEE THAT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR CONTINUE TO BE VOTED ON A CITYWIDE BASIS.

WE FELT THAT THAT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO PRESERVE THAT CITYWIDE CONSTITUENCY.

THE CHANGE ALSO INCLUDES THAT THE MAYOR AND THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY LIVE ANYWHERE IN THE CITY.

BUT THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE REQUIRED TO LIVE IN SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHIC AREAS.

AND THOSE ARE ESTABLISHED INITIALLY BY THE COUNCIL ACTION BASED UPON THE 2020 CENSUS.

AFTER THE 2030 CENSUS, BEGINNING IN 2031, THERE WOULD BE A DISTRICT COMMISSION THAT WAS CREATED THAT WOULD ADVISE THE COUNCIL ON ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO THOSE BOUNDARIES. AND THEN IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMITTEE, AFTER A LOT OF DISCUSSION, TO KEEP CITY ELECTIONS IN MAY OF ODD NUMBERED YEARS. AND I THINK THE MAIN POINT OF ATTENTION WAS HAVING THE ELECTIONS FOR COUNCIL AND MAYOR IN MAY OF ODD NUMBERED YEARS PUTS CITY MATTERS AT THE FOCUS OF THE VOTERS.

THERE'S LESS CHANCE OF THERE BEING DELUSION OF INTEREST AND ATTENTION IF THE ELECTION FOR CITY OFFICIALS WAS MOVED TO THE NOVEMBER PRESIDENTIAL OR GUBERNATORIAL ELECTIONS.

AND SO THE COMMITTEE FELT THAT THIS WAS AN ELEMENT OF GOOD GOVERNANCE TO HAVE THE CITY ELECTIONS CONTINUE IN MAY OF ODD NUMBERED YEARS.

HERE'S THE CHART THAT I MENTIONED ABOUT THE THE DIFFERENT CYCLES OF ELECTIONS.

SO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THREE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, ASSUMING THAT THE CHARTER AMENDMENT WENT FORWARD, WOULD STAND FOR ELECTION IN 2025, BUT THEY WOULD ONLY SERVE A TWO YEAR TERM, AND THEN THEY WOULD BE UP FOR REELECTION IN 2027, AND THEN THEY WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR FULL FOUR YEAR TERMS. SO THERE'S A TRANSITION PLAN TO MOVE TO THE FOUR YEAR STAGGERED TERMS. GEOGRAPHIC AREA CRITERIA.

IT'S IMPORTANT THAT EVERYTHING BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH FEDERAL AND STATE LAW.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS IMPORTANT WAS RECOGNIZING GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES, THAT THERE WOULD BE NO GERRYMANDERING FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES.

THE GENERAL RULE OF THUMB, OR BEST PRACTICE, IS THAT DISTRICTS ARE DESIGNED THAT ARE COMPACT AND ARE CONTIGUOUS.

THEY'RE NOT WEIRD SHAPED.

THEY'RE MAKE SENSE GEOGRAPHICALLY.

MAINTAINING COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST.

THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE IN THE CITY, ABOUT NEIGHBORHOODS AND NEIGHBORHOOD IDENTITY AND PRESERVING THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

AND SOME OTHER ASPECTS RELATIVE TO THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT AND JUST FAIR REPRESENTATION AMONG THE CITIZENS.

THE COMMITTEE DID HAVE A DISCUSSION OF SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS, AND THE COMMITTEE WAS FELT THAT THAT WAS NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY AT THIS TIME, THAT PROVIDING THE GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ADDRESSED SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT ARE OUT IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT THAT SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS WAS NOT AN APPROPRIATE SOLUTION AT THIS TIME.

AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE CAME UP WITH THE ONE, THREE, THREE MODEL, WHERE SOME MEMBERS HAVE A GEOGRAPHIC AREA THAT THEY REPRESENT, BUT THEY ARE STILL ELECTED AT LARGE OR BY THE CITIZENS AT LARGE ON A CITYWIDE BALLOT.

WE DID SOME LOOKING AT GEOGRAPHY AND WHERE CANDIDATES HAVE COME FROM.

AND SO THIS ALSO CHART IS IN YOUR PACKET SHOWING WHERE CANDIDATES RESIDED IN THE 2023 ELECTION.

AND SO YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A CONCENTRATION IN A COUPLE OF AREAS OF THE CITY.

AND THEN WE LOOKED AT WHERE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE LIVED OVER THE LAST 20 PLUS YEARS.

AND AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE SOME GEOGRAPHIC CONCENTRATION IN THOSE AREAS.

I THINK THIS IS THESE TWO MAPS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT IN THE COMMITTEE'S CONSIDERATION OF INTRODUCING THE CONCEPT OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA REPRESENTATION.

WE TOOK A LOOK AT SOME OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF THE CITY.

AND AGAIN, I WANT TO COMMEND AND THANK EMILY KOLLER AND THE PLANNING STAFF FOR PRODUCING THESE MAPS IN A VERY SHORT ORDER.

IT GAVE US GAVE THE COMMITTEE SOMETHING TO REALLY LOOK AT AND CONSIDER IN ARRIVING AT ITS RECOMMENDATIONS.

[00:30:08]

AND THE PROPOSAL THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU IS WHAT WE CALL THE 133 MODEL WITH MAYOR AT LARGE THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS AT LARGE AND THREE WITH GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATION. AND THIS PROPOSAL D IS WHAT IS RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMITTEE.

PROPOSITION D ADDRESSES CITY MANAGER'S DUTIES.

IT'S A SMALL REVISION IN THE CHARTER.

CHARTER CURRENTLY TALKS ABOUT THE MANAGER SEEKING ADVICE AND CONSENT OF THE COUNCIL.

THAT'S A VERY CAN BE A DIFFICULT CONCEPT.

AND SO WE FELT THAT WHAT THE COUNCIL WAS REALLY LOOKING FOR OR WOULD BENEFIT THE CITY IS TO REQUIRE THAT THE CITY MANAGER CONSULT WITH THE COUNCIL PRIOR TO MAKING EXECUTIVE LEVEL APPOINTMENTS.

HERE WE GO INTO THE GOVERNANCE AND IN POLICIES RECOMMENDING THE INTRODUCTION OF A CHARTER REVIEW PROCESS ON A REGULAR BASIS.

THE COMMITTEE CONSIDERED RECOMMENDING THIS AS A CHARTER AMENDMENT, BUT FELT THAT THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS IN A GOVERNANCE AND GOVERNANCE AND ENDS POLICY WOULD BE A GOOD WAY TO INTRODUCE THE CONCEPT OF REGULAR CHARTER REVIEW.

AND IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WANTED TO CODIFY IN THE CHARTER A LATER DATE THAT'S AVAILABLE.

BUT WE FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO ESTABLISH A POLICY OF REGULAR CHARTER REVIEW.

SECONDARY POLICY, RECOMMENDED RECOMMENDATION AND GOVERNANCE, AND ENDS WOULD BE A RESTATEMENT OF PROPOSITION D THAT THE CITY MANAGER CONSULT WITH THE COUNCIL PRIOR TO MAKING EXECUTIVE LEVEL APPOINTMENTS.

AND SO HERE'S THIS.

AT THIS POINT, LET ME ASK, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE THE COUNCIL OR COMMENTS FROM ANY OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS? AND I'M SORRY, I'M A LITTLE HOARSE THIS MORNING, BUT I'M ADHERING TO THE CHAIRPERSONS DIRECTIVE THIS TO BE VERY SUCCINCT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

I'LL TRY TO PACE MYSELF A LITTLE BIT MORE THEN.

THANK YOU. SO HERE'S A SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED BALLOT MEASURES.

WE'VE KIND OF REFERRED TO THIS AS THE AMA MODEL, KIND OF BUILDING UPON THE INITIALS FOR THE CITY MEASURE A OR THE A WOULD BE MAKING THE CITY MORE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE CITIZENS OF AMARILLO THIS IS DONE BY THE PASSAGE OF PROPOSITION A TO SIMPLIFY THE RECALL PROCESS IN PROPOSITION B, TO MODIFY THE TERMS OF THE COUNCIL AND INTRODUCE TERM LIMITS, M IS MAXIMIZED ACCESSIBILITY TO THE CITIZENS OF AMARILLO.

PRIMARILY. PRIMARILY.

THIS IS DONE BY EXPANDING THE COUNCIL FROM 5 TO 7 MEMBERS, AND THERE'S DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION IN THE REPORT ABOUT THE RATIO OF COUNCIL MEMBER TO CITIZEN AND THIS MEASURE MOVING TO A SEVEN MEMBER COUNCIL AS THE CITY GROWS WILL KEEP THE CONSTITUENT REPRESENTATION NUMBER CLOSER TO WHERE IT IS CURRENTLY NOW.

SO IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT BY THE FOR THE COMMITTEE THAT WE MAKE THE COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR AS ACCESSIBLE AS POSSIBLE TO THE CITIZENS.

AND THIS IS WHERE WE INTRODUCED THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE GEOGRAPHIC AREAS.

AND THE LAST A IS ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNTABILITY.

AND THIS IS WHERE WE ADDRESS THE CONSULTATION OF THE CITY MANAGER WITH THE COUNCIL PRIOR TO PRIOR TO MAKING EXECUTIVE LEVEL APPOINTMENTS.

SO WE THOUGHT THAT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD MESSAGE TO TAKE FORWARD TO THE VOTERS.

AMA TO KEEP AMA RESPONSIVE.

HERE'S PROPOSITION A, AND AS I MENTIONED, THIS IS WHERE WE SIMPLIFY THE RECALL PROCESS, REDUCING THE REQUIREMENT TO 30% OF THE NUMBER OF VOTES CAST IN THE LAST ELECTION FOR THAT OFFICER, INCREASING THE TIME LIMIT FOR SIGNATURE GATHERING FROM 30 DAYS TO 60 DAYS, AND PROVIDE THAT THE RECALL OF YOU CANNOT HAVE A RECALL WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF ANOTHER RECALL ELECTION.

WE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE THAT SERIAL RECALL PROBLEM.

PROPOSITION B IS WHERE WE CHANGE THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL TERMS TO FOUR YEARS.

WE ADJUST THE PROCEDURES TO FILL VACANCIES TO BE CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW.

[00:35:05]

PROPOSITION C IS WHERE WE INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE COUNCIL FROM 5 TO 7 MEMBERS.

AND WE INTRODUCED THE THREE GEOGRAPHIC AREA REPRESENTATIONS.

WE MAINTAIN THE CURRENT CHARTER REQUIREMENT THAT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS BE ELECTED BY ALL RESIDENTS OF AMARILLO.

THE COMMITTEE FELT THAT WAS A VERY IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE TO MAINTAIN, AND SETS UP THE SCHEDULE OF HAVING THE TRANSITION ELECTION SCHEDULE BEGINNING IN 2025.

PROPOSITION D IS, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED BEFORE, THE CITY MANAGER'S APPOINTING AUTHORITY TO HAVE CONSULTATION WITH THE COUNCIL.

SO IN SUMMARY, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THE COMMITTEE IS RECOMMENDING FOUR PROPOSITIONS PROPOSITION A, THE RECALL PROPOSITION B COUNCIL TERMS VACANCIES AND TERM LIMITS C COUNCIL COMPOSITION, QUALIFICATIONS AND THE ELECTION CYCLE AND PROPOSITION D THE CITY MANAGER POWERS AND DUTIES. TWO POLICY ADDITIONS, THE CHARTER REVIEW AND THE CONSULTATION, AND FINALLY RECOMMENDING NO CHANGE TO THE POSITION OF CITY ATTORNEY.

SO I THINK AT THIS POINT WE CAN GO INTO DETAIL ON THE LANGUAGE OF ANY PROPOSITION, IF YOU CARE TO DO SO.

SO I THINK THAT GIVES A PRETTY GOOD OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS ARE, AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR TURN IT BACK OVER TO FREDA AND GARY.

POWELL, TO LET YOU SEE IF THERE'S SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS BEFORE YOU GIVE IT OVER TO GARY.

AND THEN I KNOW COUNCIL WILL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AND, AND TRY TO HOLD KIND OF THE OVERALL DISCUSSION FOR THAT, THAT LATTER PART.

OKAY. THANK YOU MAYOR.

WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS, IS START WITH COUNCIL FIRST TO SEE WHAT QUESTIONS YOU ALL HAVE FOR US.

AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE MY COMMITTEE AN OPPORTUNITY IF THEY HAVE SOME THINGS THEY'D LIKE TO SHARE AS WELL.

BUT I WANT TO START WITH COUNCIL FIRST.

AND SO WE ARE WE ARE READY.

COUNCIL ANYONE WANT TO GO FIRST OR MR. CRAFT IF YOU'VE GOT A FEW DOWN THERE, WE'LL JUST START WITH YOU AND WORK THIS WAY.

REALLY JUST MY MAIN QUESTION IS ON THE IS THERE ANY REASONING AS FAR AS THE CITY ATTORNEY PIECE? WHAT Y'ALL FOUND OR FINDINGS THAT Y'ALL HAD AS TO NOT APPOINTED BY COUNCIL.

SHE'S POINTING AT ME, SO I GUESS I GET TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION OR TRY TO RESPOND TO THAT QUESTION.

THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION AROUND THAT ISSUE.

WE UNDERSTOOD THAT THAT WAS A MATTER THAT YOU ALL WANTED US TO PAY ATTENTION TO, SO WE DID.

I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE LOOKED AT THE HISTORY OF THE SITUATION IN TERMS OF HOW THIS ATTORNEY COMES ABOUT IN TERMS OF BEING APPOINTED BY THE MANAGER, HISTORICALLY AND HOW GENERALLY THAT HAS SERVED THIS CITY.

WELL. SO THAT WAS THAT WAS ONE OF THE FACTORS, A CONCERN THAT WE HAD MOVING TOWARD AN ACTUAL DIRECT COUNCIL APPOINTMENT TO THE POSITION IS IT DOES HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO INTRODUCE POLITICS INTO THAT APPOINTMENT, WHICH COULD, UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULDN'T WANT TO DO AS A COMMUNITY WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE PRODUCTIVE AS A COMMUNITY, IN OUR OPINION.

AND THESE ARE CERTAINLY ONLY OUR OPINIONS IN THAT REGARD.

PLUS, WE FEEL AS THOUGH WITH THE CLARIFICATION OF THE THE RELATIONSHIP AND THE TEAM RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE COUNCIL AND THE MANAGER IN THE APPOINTMENT OF FOLKS THAT WE HAVE CLARIFIED THAT AND THERE SHALL BE CONSULTATION WITH THE COUNCIL ON THE APPOINTMENT OF SENIOR LEVEL STAFF THAT INCLUDES THE CITY ATTORNEY.

SO YOU ALL WOULD BE INVOLVED AS A COUNCIL VERY DIRECTLY IN THAT, IN THAT SITUATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER IN THAT APPOINTMENT, ALONG WITH THE OTHER SENIOR UNCLASSIFIED POSITIONS.

SO I GUESS IN A NUTSHELL COUNCILMAN, THOSE WERE THE REASONS THAT WE SUGGESTED TO AVOID THE POTENTIAL OF POLITICS.

NOT THAT YOU GUYS WOULD DO ANY OF THAT, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT ARE GOING TO STAND THE TEST OF TIME.

KEEP IN MIND THAT OUR, OUR, OUR CHARTER, ONE OF THE FIRST AS A COUNCIL MANAGER IN THE STATE IS SIMPLE, IT'S BROAD, IT'S GENERAL.

AND IT HAS SERVED US VERY, VERY WELL.

[00:40:01]

AND I THINK THAT'S THAT'S GOOD.

SO ALL THOSE THINGS ROLLED TOGETHER CAUSED US TO COME TO A CONSENSUS IN THAT MATTER.

THANK YOU SIR. THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION.

LET ME RESPOND TO THAT JUST A LITTLE BIT TOO I WAS VERY MUCH FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY BEING HIRED DIRECTLY BY THE COUNCIL.

SO MY VANTAGE POINT WAS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

GARY SAID. CONSENSUS.

I JUST GAVE UP, BUT THERE WERE 3 OR 4 OF US THAT WANTED THE CITY OF CITY ATTORNEY TO BE HIRED BY THE COUNCIL.

THERE WAS THE FEELING THAT WE AREN'T IN YOUR SHOES.

WE DON'T KNOW THE PROBLEMS THAT YOU'RE HAVING WHEN YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE KIND OF ADVICE THAT YOU NEED AND YOU'VE DONE THE WORK AROUND TO GO TO AN OUTSIDE FIRM, WHICH IS GREAT.

BUT SINCE WE'VE GOT AN OUTSIDE FIRM WITH THE MCKAMIE FIRM, WE'VE GOT AN INTERNAL ATTORNEY, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO A WORKAROUND TO GET YOU SOME DIRECT ADVICE.

I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY A DECISION THAT COUNCIL NEEDS TO MAKE BECAUSE YOU'RE MORE PRIVY TO YOUR NEEDS THAN WE WOULD BE IN OUR SITUATION AND PROBLEMS YOU'VE ENCOUNTERED.

BUT ONE SUGGESTION THAT I MIGHT HAVE IF WE'VE GOT TWO OUTSIDE LAW FIRMS, WHY DON'T WE PICK ONE? IF MCKAMIE IS DOING A GREAT JOB OR YOU DON'T, YOU FEEL LIKE HYDE WOULD DO BETTER GET A PROPOSAL FROM BOTH OF THEM AND CONSIDER HAVING ONE OUTSIDE LAW FIRM.

THE CITY ATTORNEY REALLY CAN DO MORE TRANSACTIONAL, AND I THINK HE AND HIS STAFF ARE PRETTY COVERED UP WITH TRANSACTIONAL LAW, HUMAN RESOURCES, CONTRACTS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

I THINK YOU NEED THE SPECIFIC EXPERTISE OF THE HYDE FIRM OR THE MCKAMIE FIRM, BUT I DON'T THINK WE NEED TWO OUTSIDE LAW FIRMS. SO PERHAPS GET A PROPOSAL FROM BOTH OF THEM.

PICK ONE THAT YOU FEEL CAN GIVE YOU THE BEST ADVICE THERE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT [INAUDIBLE].

YEAH. COUNCIL MEMBER ONE OF THE POINTS I THINK IS IMPORTANT, AND IT WAS IMPORTANT IN THE COMMITTEE'S DISCUSSION WAS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE CITY ATTORNEY IS APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR THE CITY COUNCIL, THE CLIENT IS THE CITY.

AND I THINK THAT'S THE THING THAT WAS ONE OF THE IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS IS WHO APPOINTS IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN RECOGNIZING THAT THE CLIENT IS THE CITY.

AND THAT'S THE JOB OF THE CITY ATTORNEY TO REPRESENT THE CITY, ITS EMPLOYEES, ITS OFFICERS.

AND I WOULD JUST TO SANDRA'S LAST POINT SOMETIMES THERE ARE REASONS TO HAVE MULTIPLE OUTSIDE LAW FIRMS. YOU MAY NEED SOMEONE, FOR EXAMPLE, TO DEAL WITH CONSTRUCTION LAW OR ELECTION LAW OR OTHER KINDS OF SPECIALTY AREAS.

AND SO I WOULDN'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING TO HAMPER THE COUNCIL OR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S ABILITY TO OBTAIN OUTSIDE ASSISTANCE IF NEEDED, BUT THE POINT REMAINS THAT THE CITY IS THE CLIENT, REGARDLESS OF WHO DOES THE APPOINTMENT.

RIGHT. THEN THE LAST QUESTION IS ON THIS TOPIC.

WAS THERE ANY DATA AS FAR AS HOW MANY CITIES OPERATE WITH A ATTORNEY APPOINTED BY COUNCIL VERSUS CITY MANAGER? YES. THERE WAS.

IT'S IN THE PACKET.

YES. OKAY.

WE ARE ACTUALLY ONE OF THE FEW CITIES THAT DOESN'T HAVE IT IN THAT ORDER.

I WAS ONE OF THE FEW THAT DIDN'T AGREE.

AND I FEEL LIKE MAYBE THEY THOUGHT THIS WASN'T A MAJOR ISSUE AS MUCH AS THE OTHERS, BUT I FEEL THAT THIS IS A BIG ISSUE, AND I FEEL LIKE THE CITY LEGAL TEAM SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS CAN USE AND THEM NOT FEAR THEIR JOB.

SO I DEFINITELY THINK THAT THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY PLACED IS CAUSING POLITICS ACTUALLY WITHIN THE CITY ORGANIZATIONAL CHART.

I THINK THIS MAKES IT A LOT EASIER FOR YOU GUYS TO USE IN MY OPINION.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU AUDREY, IF THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTIONS I GOT ON THIS.

IF YOU FIND IT DENNIS IN HERE, IF YOU JUST LET ME KNOW WHILE WE'RE MOVING THROUGH THIS.

I DON'T WANT TO TAKE UP TIME FROM THE REST OF THE COUNCIL.

BEFORE WE GO ON TO COUNCILMAN TIPPS, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COUNCIL THAT WANTS TO OFFER ANY POINT ON THIS DISCUSSION FROM OUR SIDE, AS FAR AS THE CITY ATTORNEY MAY BE A NEED OR MAYBE GIVE SOME FEEDBACK ON HOW IT'S WORKING OUT WITH HYDE KELLY AND GOING AHEAD AND DOING THE

[00:45:09]

DO I HAVE ANYBODY DO WE WANT TO OPEN DISCUSSION ON THIS? JUST FROM OUR SIDE YEAH.

I MEAN, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT TOPIC, I THINK IT'D BE GOOD TO GO AHEAD AND VET THIS ONE.

WELL, I MEAN, I, I SEE BOTH SIDES OF THIS OR VIEWING IT.

I THINK IF WE, IF IT WERE ENTERTAINED THAT WE APPOINTED A CITY ATTORNEY, I THINK THE JOB DESCRIPTION HAS TO CHANGE.

I THINK TO DENNIS'S POINT, AS IT STANDS, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S JOB AND THE CLIENT IS THE CITY.

WE ARE NOT THE WE'RE NOT THE CITY.

AND THAT WE'RE I MEAN, WE REPRESENT THE PEOPLE.

SO I THINK IF THAT'S THE CASE, IT'S A IT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT JOB DESCRIPTION.

IF, IF WE MOVED IT TO THAT, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE ROLE OF CITY ATTORNEY IS.

SO THEN THEN IT PUTS IT AT ODDS OR COULD BE AT ODDS HAVING A CITY ATTORNEY ANSWER TO COUNCIL BUT YET REPRESENT THE CLIENT. DOES IT MAKE SENSE [INAUDIBLE].

AS A AS AN ATTORNEY, THE CLIENT GETS TO DECIDE TO FIRE HIS ATTORNEY IF HE DOESN'T LIKE HIM.

LIKE YOU'RE NOT DOING A GOOD JOB.

I'M GOING TO FIRE YOU. WELL, WE'RE NOT THE CLIENT.

SO I THINK, IN MY OPINION, THE WAY THE WAY THAT WE'VE COME UP WITH TO HAVE THE OUTSIDE COUNSEL WITH HYDE, I THINK HAS WORKED OUT GREAT BECAUSE YOU KNOW, TO DENNIS'S POINT, WE GET TO, WE GET TO CHOOSE SOMEONE WITH AN EXPERTISE, WHICH I THINK YOU HELP FIND YOU KNOW THROUGH [INAUDIBLE] YOU KNOW, WE HAD SOMEBODY THAT SAID, HEY, HE'S GREAT AT THIS.

THAT'S WHAT WE NEEDED, RIGHT? I MEAN I'VE USED HIM A COUPLE TIMES.

I THINK OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE USED HIM.

I THINK THAT'S A GREAT SETUP.

NOW WE HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE WITH THE MONEY THAT WE'RE SPENDING.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK IF WE MOVED IT TO WHERE IT WAS A COUNCIL APPOINTED ATTORNEY, IT'S A COMPLETE DIFFERENT JOB DESCRIPTION.

THEN WE HAVE TO COME. WE HAVE TO CHANGE WHAT CITY ATTORNEY DOES, THAT'S MY OPINION.

CORRECT. DENNIS, IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND YES TO COUNCIL MEMBER CRAFT'S QUESTION, THE CHART THAT I WAS REFERENCING WAS PART OF THE JUNE 13TH MEETING AND THE CHART OF THE TEN COMPARABLE CITIES, SEVEN HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL, TWO CITIES HAVE THE CITY MANAGER APPOINTING BUT SUBJECT TO COUNCIL APPROVAL, AND THOSE TWO CITIES ARE LAREDO AND GRAND PRAIRIE.

AND KILLEEN HAS THE APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY BY THE CITY MANAGER SOLELY.

SO KILLEEN IS THE CURRENT ONE THAT SPEAKERS]. APOLOGIES TO THE CITIZENS OF.

WELL, DENNIS, I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND ADDING THAT IN, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST OFFER MAYBE BACK TO SANDRA'S COMMENT.

I'M NOT SURE IF IF MICK IS IS RETAINED, LIKE ON A RETAINER OR IF HE'S CHARGING HOURLY.

I KNOW MR. HYDE IS AN HOURLY RESOURCE, SO IF WE'RE NOT USING HIM, WE'RE NOT PAYING HIM.

AND I THINK THAT GOES TWO BEING YOU KNOW, PRETTY GOOD WITH FRUGAL WITH OUR WITH OUR MEANS.

AND SO WHERE WE ARE USING HIM AND BEING A CONTRACTOR THAT LIKES TO HAVE MORE THAN ONE SUBCONTRACTOR.

I DON'T NECESSARILY FEEL LIKE YOU'VE GOT TO PICK BETWEEN ONE OR THE OTHER.

I THINK IT'S THE WAY YOU STRUCTURE THOSE FEES.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE INSIDE CITY ATTORNEY, AND I THINK THAT IT VERY MUCH DOES LEND ITSELF TO A TON OF PAPERWORK THAT IS MUNICIPAL AND IS CONTRACT AND IS YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING FROM HR NEEDS AND DOWN.

I THINK COUNCILS NEEDS ARE VERY MUCH DIFFERENT IN WHAT DOES THE STATE LAW SAY? CAN YOU STUDY THIS? CAN YOU GO OUT AND FIND THIS INFORMATION? WHAT IS MY RISK ANALYSIS LIKE FROM YOUR POSITION? THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT MORE FUNDAMENTAL I THINK FOR LIKE THE HYDE KELLY FIRM AND WHAT THEY TYPICALLY DO.

SO WE COULD REVIEW MAYBE THE WAY IN WHICH WE'RE WE'RE RETAINING OUTSIDE COUNSEL AND GO TO THAT HOURLY RATE AND THEN WE CAN REVIEW THAT BUDGET WISE.

MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT SPENDING MORE MONEY THAN WE SHOULD.

PLUS WE WE DO USE MULTIPLE FIRMS. SO I WANT TO I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THERE'S LOTS OF ATTORNEY FIRMS. IT'S NOT JUST THOSE TWO.

MICK WAS THE ONE THAT YOU YOU ADDRESSED [INAUDIBLE].

I'M UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT HE WAS ON CONTRACT WITH THE CITY.

SO IF I MISSED THAT, IF HE'S HOURLY, THEN, YOU KNOW, I SIMPLY DON'T KNOW AND INFORMATION HERE.

BUT I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL COULD REVIEW.

AND THEN I DO FEEL LIKE WE'VE, WE'VE GAINED WHAT WE NEEDED.

AND I THINK THAT MY OVERALL GOAL HERE TODAY WOULD BE TO HELP LEAD THIS COMMITTEE AND THIS SIDE OF THE COUNCIL TO

[00:50:08]

I THINK THIS IS ONE THAT I COULD EASILY SLIDE DOWN.

AND NOT NECESSARILY PUT TO THE VOTER AT THE RISK OF IF WE PUT EVERYTHING TO THE VOTER, WHAT WE SEE HISTORICALLY IS NOTHING PASSES.

AND SO WHAT WE WHAT WE WANT TO PUT TO THE VOTER ARE THESE ARE OUR, OUR NEEDS, NOT OUR WANTS.

AND I THINK THIS MAY BE SOMETHING THAT IS NOW MIGRATING ITSELF MORE TO A WANT.

WOULD ASK IF COUNCIL HAS ANY OTHER COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. DID DID WE WANT TO GO? LET'S GO THIS WAY.

DID YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON ANY OTHER ITEMS? YEAH. JUST ONE. FOR THE THE THREE FOR THE GEO.

THE THREE POSITIONS.

RIGHT. THAT THE THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT.

HOW HOW DID YOU ALL CHOOSE PROPOSAL C FOR THE THREE? I MEAN, WHY WHY THAT ONE? THERE SHE GOES AGAIN.

WELL, OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE TO BEGIN TO DO AT LEAST YOUR GENERIC WORK IN TERMS OF BALANCING THE POPULATION.

BALANCING THE VOTING AGE POPULATION GEOGRAPHICALLY.

SO YOU'RE HONORING THE ONE MAN, ONE VOTE CONCEPT.

YOU DON'T HAVE ONE DISTRICT WITH A WHOLE LOT MORE PEOPLE THAN, THAN ANOTHER.

AND THESE GENERAL AREAS DO THAT.

NOW, KEEP IN MIND IF THIS IF THIS MOVES FORWARD, YOUR STAFF IS GOING TO HAVE TO GET SOME ASSISTANCE FROM PROBABLY LEGAL COUNSEL OUT THERE THAT THAT DO THE REDISTRICTING JOB FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

AND LOOK AT AND BE SURE WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, WHAT YOU WOULD BE PROPOSING TO THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO PASS LEGAL MUSTER, AND THAT WOULD NEED TO TO HAPPEN.

SO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE IS SIMPLY HOW IN GENERAL TERMS IT MIGHT BE.

SO DON'T TAKE THOSE PARTICULAR BOUNDARIES FOR, FOR GOSPEL.

YOU KNOW, AT THE I THINK OUR DISCUSSION AND AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO REPRESENT THE, THE BOTTOM LINE AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT THE CONSENSUS OF THE GROUP WAS AND NOT MY PERSONAL OPINION OR THE OR ANYBODY ELSE'S OPINION.

BUT WHAT WE PUT IN OUR REPORT TO PRESENT TO YOU TODAY, I THINK THE KEY MATTER IN TERMS OF FEELING AN OBLIGATION TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE RESTS WITH THIS MAP RIGHT HERE.

AND IT'S IT'S A MAP THAT'S THE LAST 20 YEARS WHERE OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS IN CITY HALL LIVE IN OUR COMMUNITY AND AND ALSO OUR DESIRE FOR GOOD GOVERNMENT.

I MEAN, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS MAKE SUGGESTIONS TO IMPROVE OUR GOVERNMENTAL PROCESSES AS IT RELATES TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CITIZENS AND THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THIS MAP OVER THE LAST 20, AND THIS CAN'T BE AN ANOMALY BECAUSE IT'S IT'S THERE'S TOO MANY YEARS THAT HAVE GONE BY 20 YEARS WORTH.

WE'VE ONLY HAD TWO ELECTED OFFICIALS SERVING ON THAT DAIS UP THERE WHO RESIDED EAST OF INTERSTATE 27, THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR AND THE DUMAS EXPRESSWAY, AND EVERYBODY ELSE, THE HUGE, HUGE MAJORITY IN SOUTHWEST AMARILLO, A FEW FROM NORTHWEST AMARILLO.

SO AS WE LOOKED AT THIS WHETHER, YOU KNOW, FEELING AS THOUGH THIS WAS WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW IS AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE.

WE WANTED TO DO SOMETHING TO TRY TO ADDRESS THAT SITUATION SO THAT ALL OF OUR CITIZENS CAN FEEL AS THOUGH THEY HAVE ACCESS TO, AND CAN BE A PART OF THEIR CITY'S PROCESS.

NOW, YOU KNOW, IT'S CLEAR TO TO UNDERSTAND AND THIS IS A FACT TOO, MOST OF THE VOTERS ON A TYPICAL ELECTION CYCLE ARE IN SOUTHWEST AMARILLO. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, I CAN ALSO UNDERSTAND CITIZENS ON THE EAST SIDE ALMOST GIVING UP.

WITH THIS KIND OF HISTORY, WHY SHOULD I GO VOTE? YOU KNOW, THE BEST KIND OF GOVERNMENT, IN MY OPINION, IS THE GOVERNMENT THAT'S CLOSEST TO THE PEOPLE AND THAT'S THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT AND THE ABILITY TO TO KNOW PEOPLE, KNOW YOUR NEIGHBORS, GO TO THE SAME YOU KNOW, YOUR KIDS GO TO THE SAME SCHOOLS.

YOU SEE THESE PEOPLE AT CHURCH, YOU SEE THEM SHOPPING, YOU SEE THEM AT THE GAS STATION, YOU SEE THEM AT THE GROCERY STORE, THAT'S ACCESSIBILITY.

AND THERE'S A BIG PART OF OUR CITY THAT HAS NOT BENEFITED FROM THE KIND OF ACCESSIBILITY THAT A PARTICULAR GEOGRAPHIC AREA HAS.

SO THAT LED US TO WANT TO TRY TO DO SOMETHING.

[00:55:01]

SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE NOT SUGGESTING THE SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS, IN THEIR PURE SENSE, IN TERMS OF ONLY THOSE IN THAT PARTICULAR GEOGRAPHIC AREA, VOTE FOR THE RACE IN THEIR THEIR AREA.

SO EVERYBODY, AS WE'RE PROPOSING, WILL CONTINUE TO BE ELECTED BY THE ENTIRE CITIZENRY OF THE CITY.

YET AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE TRYING TO PUT SOME TECHNIQUES STRUCTURALLY IN PLACE THAT WOULD HOPEFULLY ADDRESS THIS KIND OF SITUATION, WHICH I, I THINK AND I'M SPEAKING PERSONALLY HERE, IS NOT A HEALTHY SITUATION AS IT RELATES TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT GOVERNANCE IN THIS COMMUNITY OR ANY COMMUNITY.

YEAH. SO YOU DID I THINK THIS MAP DEFINITELY DEPICTS GIVES A GREAT PICTURE.

DID Y'ALL LOOK AT A MAP OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE RUN AND WHERE THEY HAVE COME? MAYBE THEY LOST.

THERE'S A MAP IN THERE'S A MAP IN THERE.

IT HAS.

OKAY. DENNIS, THAT WAS JUST IN 23.

DID YOU LOOK AT IT.

I THINK WE ASSUME THAT THAT 23 WAS PROBABLY PRETTY, PRETTY REPRESENTATIVE OF OF WHAT'S HAPPENED.

OKAY. I THINK IT'S FAIR.

I MEAN, YOU COULD CERTAINLY DELVE INTO.

AND AS YOU ALL DO, YOUR DUE DILIGENCE AS TO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO OR NOT DO IN TERMS OF PUTTING BEFORE THE PUBLIC, THAT MIGHT VERY WELL BE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO LOOK AT.

YEAH. OKAY. BUT THE PROOF OF THE PUDDING IS WHO SERVED.

YEAH. AND YOU AND YOU DID ADDRESS.

YOU BROUGHT IT UP, GARY.

I GUESS YOU GUYS LOOKED AT VOTER TURNOUT.

WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS VOTER TURNOUT IN THAT SOUTHWEST QUADRANT IS, IS THAT THAT'S WHERE THE MAJORITY IS.

SURE. LIKE YOU SAID, MAYBE THEY'VE GIVEN UP.

YOU KNOW, THE OTHER SIDE IS LIKE, MAN, WHY DO I EVEN GO VOTE? OR WHY SHOULD I CAMPAIGN OVER THERE? RIGHT. YOU KNOW. RIGHT.

OKAY OKAY.

PERFECT. THANK YOU.

BUT IF THE SEVEN, THE SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS DON'T PASS ON THE BALLOT THIS IS NO LONGER I MEAN, THERE'S NO ALTERNATIVE FOR A MAP WITH FIVE MEMBERS, CORRECT? CORRECT. RIGHT. THE WAY THIS IS STRUCTURED, THOSE THOSE ARE JOINED TOGETHER AT THE HIP.

WE COULDN'T FIGURE OUT A WAY TO DO THAT OTHERWISE WITHOUT POTENTIALLY ONE PASSING AND THEN THE OTHER NOT.

AND YOU'RE IN KIND OF A BIND.

GOTCHA. AT THAT POINT.

AND YOU KNOW A LOCAL GOVERNMENT LIKE RUNNING A BIG SHIP, I MEAN, IT TAKES A LOT OF IT TAKES A LOT OF EFFORT TO TURN THE SUCKER ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

I SAW A CARTOON THIS MORNING AS I WAS HAVING MY BREAKFAST BANANA AND MY CUP OF COFFEE THAT I THINK HAS SOME APPLICABILITY HERE, BELIEVE IT OR NOT. OKAY, NOW, SOME OF YOU I KNOW, I KNOW, SHERWIN REMEMBERS FRED FLINTSTONE AND HIS WIFE WILMA, RIGHT? I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THE REST OF YOU REMEMBER FRED FLINTSTONE.

THEY'RE IN THERE IN BEDROCK, BUT THIS CARTOON WAS AN IMAGE OF FRED AND WILMA SITTING IN THE CAR THAT FRED POWERS WITH HIS FEET, AND THEY WERE IN FRONT OF A SHOWROOM WINDOW FOR A TIRE STORE.

NOW, KEEP IN MIND THAT FRED'S CAR HAD FOUR SQUARE STONE TIRES ON IT, WHICH MUST HAVE BEEN A LOT OF EFFORT FOR FRED TO TO TO MAKE MOVE.

BUT IN THIS TIRE STORE THEY WERE PRESENTING A BRAND NEW MODEL TIRE, YOU KNOW, NEW TECHNOLOGY.

AND IT WAS A ROUND STONE TIRE, YOU KNOW.

SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE, I THINK, IS MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SYSTEM THAT'S THERE.

AND SURE, I'M SURE THERE WERE PEOPLE IN BEDROCK PARTICULARLY IF YOU WERE SELLING SQUARE STONE TIRES.

YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, FRED.

YOU'LL NEVER BE ABLE TO PARK ON A HILL AGAIN BECAUSE YOUR TIRE, YOUR CAR IS JUST GOING TO ROLL DOWNHILL.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT WAS PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA THAT HE GOT ROUND TIRES.

SO, I MEAN, THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT WE WERE, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T COME WITH ANY PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS.

BUT WE DID WANT TO DO THE VERY BEST WE COULD BRINGING YOU NOT A SERIES OF PROPOSALS THAT WOULD FIX EVERYTHING, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE TOO LONG.

AND BESIDES, WE'D NEVER GET THERE.

BUT WE WANTED TO BRING YOU KIND OF THE TOP TIER THINGS THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD MAKE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BETTER IN THE CITY OF AMARILLO.

AND I THINK WE WE SEE THE BENEFIT IN WHAT YOU'VE DONE AND AND THE INTENTIONALITY TO IT.

YOU'VE DEFINITELY I THINK YOU'VE DEFINITELY BEEN VERY CONCISE.

AND SO I KNOW MISS SANDER HAD HER HAND UP, BUT, MRS. POWELL, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? I WAS JUST GOING TO GIVE MISS MCCART AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY

[01:00:01]

I DID SOME CURSORY RESEARCH DOING POPULATION BY ZIP CODES, TAKING EVERYTHING NORTH OF I-40 AND EAST OF I -27. OUR POPULATION IN AMARILLO IS APPROXIMATELY 201,000.

JUST TAKING A FAST INTERNET RESEARCH OF POPULATION NORTH AND EAST OF I-40 AND I-27 111,000 OF OUR RESIDENTS LIVE NORTH OF I-40 AND EAST OF I-27.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT AND YOU PICK YOUR DISTRICTS, I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TO HAVE THREE NORTH OF I-40 AND EAST OF 27.

HOWEVER, THE VOTING ACT WON'T LET US DO THAT.

THEY'VE GOT TO BE THERE'S GOT TO BE A VARIANCE OF LESS THAN 10% IN POPULATION OF VOTING AGE BETWEEN THOSE DISTRICTS, WHETHER FRED THINKS SO OR NOT. BUT THAT WAS ONE THING THAT WE DID LOOK THAT I LOOKED AT WAS WHERE IS OUR POPULATION? AND WE KNOW THAT WITH THE BEEF PLANTS GOING IN AND AMAZON, WE'RE GOING TO SEE GROWTH TO THE NORTH AND THE EAST OF THE CITY.

SO I THINK WE CAN'T IGNORE THAT ANYMORE.

THAT'S A BIG DISTRICT, IF YOU LOOKED AT THAT MAP TO HAVE ONE PERSON RESIDING OUT THERE, THAT'S A DARN BIG DISTRICT, AND I KNOW THAT ENCOMPASSES OUR A LOT OF OUR BLACK COMMUNITY, OUR HISPANIC COMMUNITY, AND THEN A LOT OF THE BLUE COLLAR COMMUNITY THAT'S EAST OF I- 27 THAT ARE GOING TO BE WORKING IN THOSE BEEF PLANTS.

SO THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE WE'RE AFTER.

LET'S BRING THEM UNDER THE TENT.

THAT WAS THE THE DEAL.

OKAY. THANK YOU MA'AM.

DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER COUNCIL COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? I WOULD LIKE TO I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE SOMETHING FOR COUNCIL AND FOR THE COMMITTEE.

I WOULD TELL YOU THAT TYPICALLY, WHAT YOU SEE, THERE'S A LOT OF WORK IN THIS, AND I THINK A TYPICAL COUNCIL MAY SAY, HEY, LET'S NOT TAKE ON A CHARTER ISSUE IN OUR FIRST TERM.

LET'S TRY TO DO THIS IN OUR SECOND TERM AND PLAN THIS OUT.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE'LL TRY ONCE AND THEN WHATEVER HAPPENS, HAPPENS, WE'LL BE DONE.

THIS COUNCIL HAS SHOWN ITSELF TO BE A VERY HARD WORKING, DILIGENT COUNCIL, TAKING THE ADDITIONAL TIME TO TRY TO TRULY REPRESENT THE POPULATION HERE.

SO I WOULD SAY THAT THAT WE WOULD PROPOSE AN INCREMENTAL VIEW.

I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF WISDOM IN, IN KNOWING, OKAY, WE DON'T HAVE ONE SWING HERE AND WE'VE GOT TO HIT IT OUT OF THE PARK.

WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT POTENTIAL CHARTER AMENDMENT NEXT YEAR OR THE YEAR AFTER.

AND SO IN THE WAY IN WHICH WE WE MAY HAVE SOMETHING FAIL YOU PUT IT UP, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT THAT DELAY THAT SETBACK.

RIGHT. BUT IF WE IF WE WANT TO AMEND THE CHARTER LOOK AT IT AGAIN.

I MEAN, WE WE WOULD DISCUSS THAT AND I THINK THAT WE WOULD PUT THE WORK IN FOR THAT.

SO IN IN THE ISSUE OF HOW YOU'VE TIED THIS TOGETHER THIS IS A FIGHT WITH NO PRIZE IF I LOOK AT YOUR MAP.

AND I WANT TO SAY THAT IN A VERY CRITICAL WAY, YOU'VE DONE A GOOD JOB WITH GIVING US THE BEST PRIZE OUT HERE AND SAYING, HEY, HERE'S THE MAP, AND YOU'VE SHOWN THE VALUE OF THE 111,000 PEOPLE.

BUT IF I LOOK AT THE MAP, IF YOU'LL SHOW THAT ONE, THREE, THREE AGAIN HONESTLY, IT REALLY KIND OF CARVED ITSELF OUT WHERE YOU COULD ALMOST PUT YOU KNOW, THOSE THREE MEMBERS ALL STILL IN THOSE SAME NEIGHBORHOODS, NOT REALLY EVEN REACHING TO THE THE EAST SIDE.

AND SO GO TO.

YES. SO IF YOU IF YOU LOOK AT THAT PROPOSAL YOU'RE LOOKING YOU KNOW OKAY. SHOW ME THE ONE THAT.

IS THAT. OKAY, SO.

SO EVEN WITH YOUR PROPOSAL.

MY BIGGEST PRIORITY HERE IS TO ADD THE ADDITIONAL TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY SECOND PRIORITY IS TO TO EXTEND THE THE TERMS AND STAGGER THEM.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE MAYOR HELD TO TWO YEARS.

REASON BEING, I'M IN THAT ROLE I SEE HOW PER THE CHARTER, WITHOUT THE BODY OF COUNCIL TOGETHER I HAVE A LOT OF INFLUENCE.

I TRULY HAVE A LOT OF ABILITY TO AFFECT STAFF, TO AFFECT SOME SOME OUTCOMES, TO MAKE DECISIONS AND TO GIVE DIRECTION.

YOU KNOW, WHERE WHERE OUR MEETINGS ARE TWO WEEKS APART, AND THEN MY ACCOUNTABILITY IS TO THEM.

SO IF I DO MAKE A PUSH OR AN INFLUENCE THAT WAY HONESTLY, WHAT I HAVE TO DO IS JUST SAY, HEY, MAN, YOU KNOW, HERE, HERE'S WHERE I'M GOING.

HERE'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO, TRUST ME, YOU KNOW, WORK WITH ME HERE.

SO THIS POSITION HAS MUCH MORE INFLUENCE.

[01:05:03]

I LIKE THE FACT THAT IT COULD BE HELD AT TWO YEARS.

JUST BECAUSE OF THE ABILITY FOR YOU TO NEED TO BE RUNNING YOU TO HAVE THAT FOUR YEARS IS A IS A LONG PERIOD OF TIME TO TO BE BACK THERE AND TO POINT AND DIRECT. AND SO IF YOU KEPT THE MAYOR AT TWO YEARS AND YOU TOOK THE OTHER SIX AT FOUR.

IT ALSO LEVELS THE PLAYING FIELD A LITTLE BIT MORE.

SO FOR THE REPRESENTATION OF WHAT THE BODY THEN CAN DO.

AND WE'VE SEEN WHERE WHEN YOU HAVE A MAYOR WHO, YOU KNOW, HAS A HEAVY HAND THE BODY ACCOUNTS WILL NOT NECESSARILY EVEN A FACTOR IN A LOT OF THE DECISIONS, THE DAY TO DAY DECISIONS THAT HAPPEN.

SO TO TRY TO LIMIT SOME OF THE MAYORAL INFLUENCE, I THINK YOU COULD YOU COULD STAY AT THE TWO YEARS WITH THAT.

AND THEN IN STAGGERING THE TERMS, THAT IS THE CONTINUITY THAT WE NEED, WE WE'VE LOOKED AT IT.

YOU'VE LOOKED AT IT, FREDA, YOU CAN'T STAGGER FIVE.

YOU JUST CAN'T GET IT DONE.

AND IT'S NOT IT DOESN'T PROVIDE CONTINUITY.

WE NEED THE ADDITIONAL TWO, BUT IN THE WAY IN WHICH WE'RE GOING TO FIGHT A FIGHT, I THINK WE NEED TO COUNT THE COST.

AND THEN WHAT'S THE PRIZE? WHAT'S THE PRIZE MONEY? IN FIGHTING THIS FIGHT, YOU RUN THE RISK OF LOSING THE ADDITIONAL TWO REPRESENTATIVES THAT YOU NEED.

YOU RUN THE RISK OF NOT STAGGERING THESE TERMS, EXTENDING THESE TERMS? . AND FOR WHAT, A RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT.

YOU KNOW, COULD YOU LOOK AT THIS RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT IN THE FUTURE? I THINK YOU COULD, IF YOU WANTED TO.

IT GREATLY GOES TO KIND OF THAT SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICT ISSUE OF, LIKE, ARE WE ANY MORE AT RISK OF BEING SUED? YOU KNOW, ON BEHALF OF A SINGLE MEMBER VOTING RIGHTS ISSUE WITH SEVEN THAN FIVE? TRUTH IS, WE'RE NOT.

SO ADDING THE TWO TERMS OR ADDING THE TWO POSITIONS AND EXTENDING THE TERMS, IT DOESN'T PUT A TARGET ON YOU ANY MORE SO THAN YOU ALREADY HAVE.

BUT WITH THOSE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS AND THE WAY YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COMMUNICATE THIS, AND YOU KNOW THAT THE THE LANGUAGE IS GOING TO COME BACK FROM THE OTHER SIDE, WE ARE PICKING A FIGHT THERE.

AND WE MAY GET OUTPLAYED IN THE WAY THAT IT WOULD BE PRETTY EASY TO JUST BRAND THAT, OH, WELL, THEY'RE FOR SINGLE MEMBERS.

AND HERE'S WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE PROBLEM.

AND LET ME SHOW YOU THE ONE SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICT WITH 15 DISTRICTS.

THAT IS CHAOS.

AND IF THIS IS WHAT YOU WANT, THEN JUST VOTE YES.

I MEAN, I WOULD I WOULD SAY THAT THAT IS A HARD ISSUE TO OVERCOME WHEN YOU LEAVE IT THAT EASY OF A TARGET TO SHOOT AT, WHEREAS YOU PUT IN THE RECALL PROVISION YOU PUT IN THE ADDITIONAL TWO MEMBERS, THAT IS WHERE YOU'RE GETTING THE GREATEST ADDITIONAL REPRESENTATION, IN MY OPINION. AND YOU DO THOSE STAGGERED TERMS. NOW WE'RE RUNNING THE CITY LIKE A BUSINESS.

WE'RE DOING WHAT WE SAID WE WOULD DO.

WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY, IF YOU STAGGER THEM TO WHERE, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD TURN THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL YOU LEAVE THE MAYOR AT TWO, AT ANY GIVEN POINT IN TIME, YOU COULD ALWAYS TURN THE MAJORITY, BUT THEN YOU COULDN'T TURN THE ENTIRE COUNCIL OVER AND START OVER.

THERE'S SO MANY GOOD THINGS THAT PREVIOUS COUNCIL AND MAYOR DID THAT I DON'T NECESSARILY EVEN GET TO CONTINUE FORWARD BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYBODY ALREADY WORKING ON THOSE ITEMS. AND THEN WE GET HIT WITH EVERYTHING YOU CAN IMAGINE, AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO TAKE OFF RUNNING WITH EVERYTHING WE CAN DO FOR YOU GUYS.

SO IT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT, I THINK, TO TO MAYBE PRIORITIZE THAT UP AT THE NUMBER ONE SLOT AND TO ADD THOSE TWO ADDITIONAL MEMBERS WITH THE STAGGERED TERMS. AND I WOULD ADVOCATE NOT FOR THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT.

AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING IT, AND I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE TRYING TO GO WITH IT, BUT I WOULD ADVOCATE IN THE SENSE OF THAT'S THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD SIZE FIGHT WITH NO PRIZE.

IF I LOOK AT THE MAP AND I'M BEING CRITICAL, BUT I'M JUST SAYING IN THE WAY IN WHICH WE'RE TRULY NOT GOING TO REPRESENT MUCH OF THAT EAST OF I-27, THE DUMAS HIGHWAY THERE ON THE NORTH SIDE.

AND I THINK IT MORE SO THAN IT NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENTING.

I JUST THINK IT'S THE THING WE CAN'T COMMUNICATE.

SO I'LL LEAVE IT THERE.

GLADLY TAKE CRITICISM BACK OR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND REMARKS.

I AGREE WITH THE TWO YEARS FOR THE MAYOR.

THERE DIDN'T SEEM TO BE MUCH APPETITE FOR THAT WITH THE COMMITTEE, AND I THINK IT WAS BECAUSE WE HAVE SUCH A SENSE OF FAIRNESS IN THE TEXAS PANHANDLE WHERE IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR.

AND BUT THERE WERE SEVERAL OF US.

I KNOW KIM WAS WAS VERY STRONG ABOUT WANTING THE TWO YEARS FOR THE MAYOR, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE EASIER TO SELL.

VERY HONESTLY, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE OBJECTING TO FOUR YEAR TERMS THAT ARE HAVING A KNEE JERK TO THAT, TO ME, IF WE LEAVE THE MAYOR AT TWO, IT'S PRETTY EASY TO SELL TO SAY YOU DON'T LIKE THE FOUR YEAR TERMS, HOW ABOUT GIVING THE FOUR YEAR TERMS TO THE COUNCIL? BUT YOU CAN REELECT THE MAYOR TOO.

[01:10:02]

SO I AGREE ON THAT.

I THINK THAT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL.

WELL, I WOULD SAY FOR FOR ME, I'M NOT QUITE THERE YET.

AND I MEAN, I KIND OF ENVISION TODAY'S MEETING OF US ACCEPTING INFORMATION AND KIND OF LEARNING ABOUT THIS AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE KIND OF BEEN ON A TIMETABLE FOR THIS, AND I GUESS WE'LL HAVE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT OUR TIMETABLE LOOKS LIKE IF WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT A NOVEMBER BALLOT.

BUT BUT I'D LIKE TO AT LEAST GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME.

I MEAN, THIS IS JUST NOW GETTING OUT TO THE PUBLIC.

I THINK WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME OPPORTUNITY BEFORE I'M EVEN MAKING A FINAL DECISION ON WHAT TO DO, IS I'D LIKE TO GET A LITTLE BIT OF PUBLIC FEEDBACK ON SOME OF THIS. I DO HAVE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS, BUT BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT THE PUBLIC HAS TO SAY ABOUT THIS AND KIND OF FACTOR THAT INTO THE EQUATION.

NOW, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD YOU COULD TALK TO 10 PEOPLE, DIFFERENT PEOPLE, AND GET 11 DIFFERENT OPINIONS.

BUT BUT I DO THINK AND AGAIN, WE'VE KIND OF PUT OURSELVES COUNCIL'S KIND OF PUT OURSELVES IN THIS BECAUSE WE'VE SET THIS TIMELINE IF WE'RE LOOKING AT NOVEMBER, WHICH I THINK IS STILL SOMETHING TO LOOK AT.

BUT FOR ME, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME, AND I GUESS WE'LL HAVE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT A TIMELINE WOULD LOOK LIKE BETWEEN NOW AND I THINK AUGUST 19TH, WHICH IS WHEN WE'D HAVE TO HAVE ALL THAT DONE TO CONTINUE TO GETTING A LITTLE BIT MORE FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY EITHER WAY ON THIS.

OKAY. THANK YOU SIR.

OKAY. TOM I AGREE WITH LES TOTALLY.

I WOULD RATHER SEE US TODAY ACCEPT THEIR PACKAGE, TAKE THE TIME TO RESEARCH, BECAUSE FOR YOU THREE GUYS, ME AND LES WERE IN EVERY MEETING.

THIS IS ALL NEW, AND YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO NEED THE TIME TO REALLY GO THROUGH AND DIG THROUGH THAT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US PUT THIS UP ON THE COMMUNITY BOARD OF SOME KIND, WHETHER WE PUT IT ON THE AMARILLO CITY WEBSITE OR WHATEVER, WHERE THE CITIZENS COULD SEE THIS, WHERE THE CITIZENS CAN RUN AN ANALYSIS ON IT AND ACTUALLY GIVE US, LIKE LISTED FEEDBACK.

I PRETTY WELL KNOW WHERE I STAND ON SOME OF THESE ISSUES, BUT I WANT TO REPRESENT THE CITIZENS AND NOT MY VIEWPOINT.

SO I WOULD RECOMMEND US JUST TAKING IT, US TABLING IT AND THEN HAVING DISCUSSIONS LATER MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU.

OKAY. I DEFINITELY HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I LIKE THE PACE THAT THIS COUNCIL WORKS AT.

THE CITIZENS LIKE THAT AS WELL.

I THINK WE, WE DEFINITELY WANT TO LISTEN AND HEAR, NOT NOT JUST ATTEND A MEETING AND THEN GO AND DO.

HOWEVER THIS IS A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY THAT YOU GET TO HAVE A GOOD DISCUSSION.

SO I WOULD SAY DON'T HOLD BACK YOUR YOUR QUESTIONS AND, AND YOUR CONSIDERATIONS YOU KNOW, YOU JUST HEARD A CONSIDERATION OF IS MAY OR I'M SORRY, IS NOVEMBER THE BEST TIME FOR THIS, OR WOULD WE BE LOOKING AT MAY.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S A CONSIDERATION WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE TASKED YOU WITH THAT.

SO WHILE WE'RE HERE, MAKE THE MOST OF OUR TIME.

WE DEFINITELY WILL RECEIVE THIS.

WE WON'T TAKE ACTION ON THIS.

WE WILL HAVE A FOLLOW UP COUNCIL MEETING WHERE COUNCIL WILL THEN RE REDISCUSS AND REVISIT THESE ITEMS. BUT I DEFINITELY DON'T WANT TO MISS THE OPPORTUNITY YOU HAVE TODAY TO HEAR FROM YOU GUYS.

AND I WOULD SAY, I MEAN, I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE RULE OUT A NOVEMBER ELECTION AT THIS POINT.

I MEAN, I JUST THINK AND THIS IS A BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK US AS FIVE WOULD PROBABLY AGAIN, YOU GUYS GO DO YOUR HOMEWORK.

JUST KIDDING. BUT BUT MAYBE BE NOT JUST WAIT, BUT BE A LITTLE BIT PROACTIVE.

I MEAN, TO TO THIS COMMITTEE'S THE WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE IS.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE DON'T THAT WE JUST SAY IT CAN'T BE IN NOVEMBER, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, LET'S LET'S EXPEDITE OUR HOMEWORK TO TRY TO GET AS MUCH COMMUNITY INPUT, SAY, IN THE BECAUSE WE'RE MEETING AGAIN IN COUNCIL NEXT WEEK, WHICH IS IF IT IF IT WINDS UP ON THE AGENDA, THEN WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER CONVERSATION AND DISCUSSION.

SO I'M NOT SAYING ELIMINATE IT, BUT LET'S LET'S LEAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TOO.

AND THEN MAYBE AS A COUNCIL, WE'RE KIND OF PROACTIVE IN TRYING TO GET FEEDBACK FROM THE REACHING OUT, SEEKING FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY ON THIS.

OKAY. YES, SIR.

BACK TO THE THE FOUR YEAR TERM A LITTLE BIT.

AND THIS IS JUST ME PERSONALLY, ONE OF THE REASONS FOR A LONGER TERM IS TO GIVE YOU GUYS A CHANCE TO EXECUTE, EXECUTE ON ON YOUR PROMISES, EXECUTE ON GETTING THINGS DONE IN THE CITY.

TWO YEARS IS AN AWFULLY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.

AND I THINK YOU'VE SEEN THAT.

AND I THINK IT ALSO IS A DECENT THE TWO YEAR TERM IS A DISINCENTIVE TO LONG TERM DECISION MAKING.

[01:15:03]

BUT THEY MIGHT NOT BE THE POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT DECISION RELATING TO YOUR NEXT RUN FOR OFFICE, IF YOU SO CHOOSE TO DO SO.

I MEAN, WE'RE GETTING YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO BE FILING HERE PRETTY QUICK, AND I'D BE SURPRISED IF ANY OF YOU TELL ME THAT THIS WASN'T A REAL SHORT PERIOD OF TIME THAT'S GONE BY.

AND I THINK WE'VE SEEN SOME EXAMPLES AS RECENTLY AS AS LAST WEEK'S COUNCIL MEETING IN TERMS OF DECISIONS THAT WEREN'T MADE ALONG THE WAY THAT ARE REALLY LONG TERM DECISIONS THAT HAVE IMMEDIATE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS THAT MIGHT MAY BE A LITTLE BIT LESS PALATABLE POLITICALLY IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE, BUT ARE THE RIGHT LONG TERM DECISIONS.

SO, I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THAT'S AN IMPORTANT PIECE.

AND PLUS WE WANT EXPERIENCED COUNCIL MEMBERS.

WE WANT AN EXPERIENCED MAYOR.

WE WANT YOU GUYS TO GET IN THERE AND KNOW WHAT IT IS YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO DO, AND KNOW THE CONTEXT OF THE DECISIONS THAT YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE, AND HAVE A CHANCE TO LIVE SOME OF THAT FOR A WHILE BEFORE YOU'RE ASKED TO, TO MAKE A DECISION.

AND THAT'S THAT'S THE FOUR YEAR TERM AND THE LONGER PLANNING TERM.

AND JUST PERSONALLY, I THINK THAT GOES MAYER.

I'M GOING TO DISAGREE WITH YOU THERE.

I THINK THAT GOES FOR THE MAYOR, JUST AS IT DOES A COUNCIL MEMBER.

IN TERMS OF THAT EXPERIENCE AT THE HELM.

THERE'S NO MORE IMPORTANT POSITION TO HAVE EXPERIENCE AT THE HELM, IN MY OPINION, THAN THE MAYOR'S POSITION.

SO THAT'S SOME SOME BACKGROUND IN TERMS OF GOING TO SEVEN.

THAT'S A GROWING PAIN THING.

WE WE LIVE FOR THE FIRST 40 OR 50 YEARS OF THE EXISTENCE OF THIS CITY WITH A THREE PERSON COUNCIL, THE MAYOR, AND TWO, THAT'S HOW THE THAT'S HOW THE CHARTER WAS CRAFTED IN 1913.

THAT LASTED UNTIL 1955 WHEN WE WENT TO THE CURRENT FIVE MEMBER BODY.

AND WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN THE MIDDLE 1950S WAS VERY RAPID GROWTH IN THIS CITY, THE MOST RAPID GROWTH THAT WE HAVE EVER SEEN.

WE HAVE NOT DUPLICATED IT SINCE, QUITE FRANKLY, AND WE WERE PASSING THE 100,000 MARK IN 1950 WHEN THEY WENT TO THE FIVE PERSON COUNCIL.

WE'RE NOW PASSING THE 200,000 MARK, AND SO THAT ADDITIONAL REPRESENTATION GETS US BACK DOWN TO ACTUALLY A PER PERSON, PER ELECTED OFFICIAL NUMBER.

THAT'S PRETTY CLOSE TO WHAT IT WAS IN 1955.

SO THAT DOES MAKE GREAT, GREAT SENSE.

BUT AGAIN, WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE TODAY IS PRESENTING YOU OUR FINDINGS AND OUR COLLECTIVE OPINIONS AS A BODY MAY OR MAY NOT BE OUR INDIVIDUAL OPINIONS, BUT IT'S THE OPINIONS OF THE BODY WHICH YOU CONSTITUTED TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO YOU.

AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE OFFENDED.

I THINK I CAN SPEAK FAIRLY FOR EVERYBODY.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE OFFENDED BY MASSAGING MANIPULATING.

WE MIGHT NOT AGREE.

I MEAN, WE STILL GET TO VOTE, TOO.

BUT NONETHELESS I THINK WE HAVE DONE OUR JOB, AND I THINK WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB AT THE END OF THE DAY.

I AGREE.

SO MAYOR AND COUNCIL, YOU GUYS GAVE THIS COMMITTEE A CHARGE, AND WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WENT OUT THERE AND, YOU KNOW, GOT AS MUCH INFORMATION, DID THE RESEARCH OR HAD THE CONSULTANT DO THE RESEARCH, AND INDIVIDUALLY WE DID RESEARCH ON OUR OWN.

BUT WE'RE BRINGING WE JUST WANT TO BRING BACK SOME GOOD RECOMMENDATIONS AND ONCE COUNCIL HAS A HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY REVIEW ALL OF THE INFORMATION BECAUSE IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION AND REALLY DIGEST IT.

WHATEVER DECISIONS YOU ALL COME UP WITH, THE COUNCIL HAS THE FINAL AUTHORITY TO, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE WHATEVER DECISIONS YOU ALL WANT TO IN REGARDS TO THE DIFFERENT PROPOSALS THAT WE HAVE RECOMMENDED.

NOW, I WANT TO GIVE OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN OR SPEAK OR OFFER ANY THOUGHTS.

I'VE GOT A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS.

I GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS I'D LIKE TO ASK, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

JUST. NO, JUST GO AHEAD. I THINK I'VE ALREADY GOTTEN A COUPLE OF THEM ANSWERED.

SO RUN THROUGH SO.

SO I SEE A AS D IS PRETTY MUCH STANDALONE.

THERE'S NOTHING THAT HAPPENS IN A OR D THAT REALLY AFFECTS ANY OF THE OTHER PROPOSITIONS PER SE, THEY JUST KIND OF STAND.

BUT WALK ME THROUGH THE SCENARIOS.

WELL, LES, EXCEPT FOR MAYBE YOU COULD PROBABLY MAKE AN ARGUMENT THAT THE SHORTER LEASH IS PART AND PARCEL OF THE TERM.

NO, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF THE I MEAN, SURE, THAT ONE COULD PASS AND FOR TWO YEAR TERMS IT DOES SO THE RECALL THAT THAT REALLY BUT WALK ME THROUGH WHAT HAPPENS IF B PASSES C DOESN'T AND VICE VERSA, WHAT HAPPENS?

[01:20:02]

THE COMMITTEE'S DECISION WAS TO SEPARATE THOSE.

AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE CAME WITH THE B AND THE C.

SO B IS AFFECTING THE TERMS AND THE RECALL.

I'M SORRY, TERMS AND VACANCIES.

AND THE LARGER MEASURE C TALKING ABOUT GOING TO SEVEN MEMBERS.

AND THAT WAS DONE PURPOSELY BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT IF MEASURE B WERE TO PASS, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE LET ME GO BACK TO THE. YOU COULD HAVE MEASURE B PASS, OR YOU COULD HAVE MEASURE C PASS, AND THAT WOULD ALTER THE FUNCTION OF THE COUNCIL BUT THEY ARE NOT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE B IN ORDER TO HAVE C OR VICE VERSA IF YOU.

I'M SORRY, AM I ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION COUNCIL MEMBER? SO BUT WITH B WE WOULD REMAIN AT FIVE MEMBERS BUT WE GO TO FOUR YEAR STAGGERED TERMS. THAT'S CORRECT. SO THERE WOULD BE A THE COMMITTEE'S DECISION WAS FOUR YEARS WAS KIND OF AN IMPORTANT FEATURE.

SO LET'S MAKE THAT MORE OR LESS A STANDALONE.

THE EXPANSION TO SEVEN MEMBERS WAS ALSO A STANDALONE.

AND THAT WOULD BE THAT WAS THE REASON FOR C.

SO YOU COULD GET B PASSED, FOR EXAMPLE, AND YOU'D HAVE YOUR FOUR YEAR TERMS. IF YOU HAD C PASSED THEN YOU'D HAVE YOUR SEVEN MEMBERS.

AND SO BY SPLITTING IT, I THINK THE COMMITTEE'S CONSENSUS WAS KIND OF PUTTING IT ALL IN ONE EGGS IN ONE BASKET IF YOU HAVE ONE BIG MEASURE. SO THEY'RE INDEPENDENT OF EACH OTHER.

BUT IF WE HAD B FAIL AND C PASS, THEN WE WOULD GO TO SEVEN MEMBERS WITH TWO YEAR TERMS. CORRECT OKAY. OKAY.

GOT IT, GOT IT. I THINK THE MAYOR I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT FOUR YEAR VERSUS TWO YEAR SEVEN VERSUS FIVE.

LET ME JUST A QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED OF, YOU KNOW, SOME SOME HAVE SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, REALLY PROBABLY HARD TO FIND FIVE PEOPLE TO SERVE AS CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIND SEVEN? AND NOT TO SAY THAT'S JUST A QUESTION THAT I GET ASKED IS, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, YOU LOOK AT THE TIME COMMITMENT OR THAT TYPE OF THING KIND OF TALK ABOUT THE FIVE VERSUS SEVEN A LITTLE BIT MORE AND THE VALUE OF DOING THAT.

AND, YOU KNOW, WILL YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE WILLING TO STEP UP TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT? HOW MANY PEOPLE RAN LAST TIME? AND I'M NOT I'M NOT TAKING A STAND OR THE OTHER I'M JUST SAYING THESE ARE QUESTIONS THAT I'M GETTING ASKED ABOUT THAT AS TO, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION IS, HEY, IT'S HARD ENOUGH, YOU KNOW, DOES SOMEBODY WANT TO RUN FOR A FOUR YEAR TERM VERSUS TWO YEAR TERM? YOU KNOW YOU KNOW, CAN WE FIND, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT IF I POINT TO MY RIGHT, I'VE GOT A GENTLEMAN SEATED AT THE END THAT WOULD HAVE MADE AN EXCELLENT COUNCILMAN.

AND AND WE WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE HAD HIM ON THE TEAM, YOU KNOW.

I HAD YOU KNOW, OPPONENTS THAT WERE, THAT WERE VERY GOOD AND LOVED THE COMMUNITY AND BROUGHT THEIR OWN SKILL SET.

I THINK WE'VE ALL RAN AGAINST GOOD CONTENDERS.

I THINK DEAN IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF OF SOMEBODY THAT BRINGS THAT WHEREWITHAL THAT, YOU KNOW, CONTRIBUTES EVERYWHERE HE GOES.

AND SO I DON'T SHARE.

I'VE TAKEN THAT SAME CRITICISM, MAN WE GET IT'S HARD TO FIND FIVE, HOW ARE WE GOING TO FIND SEVEN? WE LIVE IN 210,000 POPULATION CITY.

YOU KNOW SO I DON'T SHARE THAT.

I THINK THAT THERE ARE OUR GREATEST ASSET IN THIS TOWN IS US, OUR PEOPLE.

WE LIVE AROUND SOME OF THE BEST PEOPLE ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH.

AND SO FOR US TO HAVE SEVEN ON THE TEAM WE'RE LOSING OUT ON ON SOME PEOPLE THAT THAT DIDN'T GET ELECTED RIGHT NOW.

WE'VE HAD ELECTIONS LES WHERE 12 PEOPLE RAN FOR MAYOR.

REMEMBER THAT ONE? YEAH. YOU KNOW, 12 PEOPLE WILL RUN FOR MAYOR.

DON'T SHOOT THE QUESTION I'M JUST SAYING THIS, THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE ARE ASKING ME, AND I WANT TO GET THIS OUT ON THE TABLE.

TELL THEM.

WHAT? LES LET ME JUST LET ME ANSWER THAT IN TERMS BACK TO THE 210,000 PEOPLE.

SURE. THEY'RE GOING TO BE PLENTY OF QUALITY INDIVIDUALS TO SERVE, PARTICULARLY IF WE CAN FIND WAYS TO ENCOURAGE THE HALF OF THE POPULATION THAT'S REALLY NOT ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN THE PROCESS TO PARTICIPATE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I MADE MY LIVING WORKING FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ACROSS THE TEXAS PANHANDLE, ALL OF WHICH WERE VERY SMALL LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

AND THERE WERE QUALITY PEOPLE SERVING.

I MEAN, THERE WERE A FEW OUT THERE, BUT THERE WERE QUALITY PEOPLE SERVING ON THOSE COUNCILS, EVEN IN THE SMALLEST COMMUNITIES.

[01:25:08]

AND THERE'S NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT WE CAN'T HAVE SEVEN EASILY HIGHLY QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS SERVING ON THE COUNCIL, THE PEOPLE, THE PEOPLE ARE OUT THERE. I'M CONFIDENT A COUPLE OTHER THINGS BECAUSE I THINK THE SEVEN VERSES FIVE, FOUR YEAR, TWO YEAR MAYOR, TWO YEAR VERSUS FOUR YEAR WE CAN DIG INTO. BUT I DON'T THINK WE TALKED MUCH ABOUT THE NOVEMBER VERSUS MAY.

CAN YOU KIND OF GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE COLOR IN THE DISCUSSION AND CONVERSATION AND THE KIND OF HOW THE HOW THE GROUP GOT TO HAVING STICKING WITH MAY AS KIND OF THE BEST, THE BEST THING FOR GOVERNANCE OF THE CITY? OKAY. I'LL START.

WE DID SPEND A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THAT AND WE ENDED UP WITH THE STATUS QUO.

IN, IN TERMS OF, AGAIN, TRYING TO LIMIT AND PRIORITIZE THE, THE NUMBER OF BALLOT PROPOSITIONS TO GO BEFORE THE PUBLIC TO KEEP THAT AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE.

I THINK I THINK AND THESE FOLKS CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

I THINK THAT WAS THAT WAS PART OF OF THAT.

I, I THINK TOO THE, THE WHERE WE ARE NOW IN TERMS OF THE SPRINGTIME ELECTIONS ALLOW OUR CITIZENS, WHETHER THEY REALIZE IT OR NOT AND MAYBE WE NEED TO DO MORE REALIZATION ON OUR PART TO UNDERSTAND THIS.

WE'RE VOTING ON OUR LOCAL, OUR LOCAL GOVERNANCE IN THE SPRINGTIME.

WE'RE VOTING FOR OUR CITY FOLKS IN THE SPRINGTIME, WE'RE VOTING FOR OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT FOLKS.

IN THE SPRINGTIME, WE'RE VOTING FOR OUR COMMUNITY COLLEGE GOVERNANCE IN THE SPRINGTIME.

AND SO IT GIVES US A CHANCE AS THE ELECTORATE, TO BECOME FAMILIAR WITH SOME THINGS GOING ON IN THE CITY THAT OTHERWISE WE MIGHT NOT BE IN A POSITION TO DO, BECAUSE WE'RE FOCUSED ON A JILLION OTHER RACES THAT ARE THAT ARE TAKING PLACE IN NOVEMBER.

SO I YOU KNOW, I THINK THOSE ARE THOSE THOSE ARE THE REASONS THAT WE ENDED UP, AND IT'S NOT THE CITY IS A NONPARTIZAN ELECTION, AS IS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS A NONPARTIZAN SITUATION, AS IS THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND PARTIZAN POLITICS.

AND THIS IS AGAIN, THIS IS ME TALKING PARTIZAN POLITICS HAS BECOME SO INTENSE.

I WOULD HATE TO SEE OUR LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES BECOME SUBJECTED TO THAT.

I DON'T THINK THAT SERVES US.

AND THIS AGAIN, THIS IS GARY TALKING.

I DON'T THINK THAT NECESSARILY SERVES US WELL.

I THINK IT MAKES SENSE FOR OUR NONPARTIZAN LOCAL ELECTIONS TO BE FREESTANDING, TO PROVIDE THE FOCUS OUT THERE AND NOT TO BE CLUTTERED BY OTHER THINGS THE PUBLIC'S TRYING TO MAKE DECISIONS ON AS THEY GO TO THE BALLOT BOX.

AND IN TEXAS, YOU KNOW, WE VOTE ON A JILLION THINGS BECAUSE OF THE WAY OUR CONSTITUTION WORKS.

SO WE WE'RE GOING TO BE REALLY FAR DOWN THERE ON THE ON THE LIST.

AND WE HAVE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THIS NOVEMBER IS THE BEST TIME OR WHETHER OR NOT IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING TO LOOK AT LATER ON, BUT WE KIND OF THOUGHT WE'D LEAVE IT TO YOU GUYS GET PAID, YOU GET THE $10 A WEEK, YOU KNOW, SO, YOU KNOW, GOOD LUCK WITH THAT.

WELL, THERE'S SOME LOGISTICS INVOLVED IN IT TOO, THAT WE TOOK STRONG CONSIDERATION.

WE WERE FOCUSED ON GOING TO STAGGERED TERMS TO MOVE THAT TO NOVEMBER.

IT WOULD REQUIRE EITHER EXTENDING YOUR TERMS FOR A YEAR AND A HALF, OR RUNNING FOR PART OF YOU RUNNING FOR A YEAR AND A HALF, AND THE ONES THAT WERE RUNNING FOR FOUR YEAR TERMS, RUNNING FOR THREE AND A HALF AND THEN GETTING BACK ON IT.

THE OTHER PART OF IT IS IF YOU GO TO THE THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS, YOU'LL HAVE SOME PEOPLE RUNNING IN A PRESIDENTIAL YEAR AND SOME PEOPLE RUNNING IN A MIDTERM YEAR, AND THOSE VOTES ARE GOING TO BE VERY DIFFERENT.

MANY MORE PEOPLE VOTE, AS WE KNOW, IN A PRESIDENTIAL THAN THEY DO IN A MIDTERM.

SO WE HAD THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.

AND IT'S MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE TO RUN IN A PRESIDENTIAL YEAR AND A MIDTERM YEAR IN ANOTHER LIFETIME.

I WAS BUSINESS MANAGER OF A TV STATION.

AND I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, AS OF TODAY, THOSE PRIME TIME SPOTS ON TV HAVE BEEN LONG SINCE CONTRACTED FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL AND THE MIDTERM.

THEY'RE DONE BY NATIONAL AGENCIES, AND THEY'RE BOUGHT SIX MONTHS IN ADVANCE OF AN ELECTION FOR A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

[01:30:03]

YOU MIGHT GET RUN OF SCHEDULE AT 11:00 AT NIGHT FOR A MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE SPOT, AND IT'LL BE THE SAME THING WITH PRINT AND MAILING.

EVERYTHING GOES UP, SO IT'S MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE TO RUN IN A IN A PRESIDENTIAL OR A MIDTERM IN NOVEMBER DATE.

PLUS THE FACT THAT, AS GARY SAID, OUR CITY ELECTIONS ARE OUR CITY.

THEY DON'T GET OUR MAYOR AND OUR COUNCIL BURIED WAY DOWN BALLOT BECAUSE THERE MAY BE A LOT MORE PEOPLE VOTING, BUT I WOULD MAINTAIN THAT HALF OF THOSE PEOPLE VOTING DO NOT GIVE A RAT'S REAR ABOUT WHO'S ON THE MAYOR OR THE COUNCIL.

THEY'RE GOING TO GO IN THERE AND IF THEY'VE HEARD A NAME AND IF THEY HAVEN'T HEARD A NAME, THEY'LL LOOK DOWN AND GO, I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, I'LL JUST CHECK ONE.

YOU WILL HAVE MORE UNINFORMED VOTERS VOTING IN A FOUR YEAR OR IN A NOVEMBER THAN YOU WILL IN A OFF YEAR.

ONE FINAL QUESTION IS, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS TO THIS RIGHT NOW, BUT IN THE GEOGRAPHIC, I GUESS THIS COULD APPLY WHETHER YOU'RE AT LARGE OR GEOGRAPHIC.

WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU RELOCATE DURING A TERM? THE THE PROPOSED CHARTER LANGUAGE FOR THE GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SAYS THAT THEY MUST MAINTAIN THEIR RESIDENCE IN THAT GEOGRAPHIC AREA THROUGH THEIR ENTIRE TERM IF THEY NO LONGER RESIDE IN THAT AREA, THEN THEY FORFEIT THEIR OFFICE.

SO THEN YOU WOULD BE IN AN APPOINTMENT OR A SPECIAL ELECTION SCENARIO.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NOVEMBER DECEMBER I'M GOING TO PUT STEPHANIE ON THE SPOT HERE.

THERE ARE SOME SOME COST.

NOW THE COST SHOULD BE A DRIVING FORCE HERE.

BUT THERE ARE SOME COST CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE CITY IN TERMS OF THE OPERATION OF MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS SPRING VERSUS NOVEMBER.

RIGHT, STEPHANIE. THAT IS CORRECT.

SO MAY OF ODD NUMBERED YEARS IS GOING TO BE YOUR MOST COST EFFECTIVE, COST EFFICIENT TIME TO HOLD ELECTIONS FOR YOUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

AND THE REASON FOR THAT? BECAUSE YOU HAVE A LOT OF OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES THAT WE GET TO SHARE COSTS WITH THROUGH OUR CONTRACTS WITH THE COUNTIES.

IN NOVEMBER, YOU'RE ONLY UP ON THE BALLOT WITH THE COUNTIES, AND THEN IN MAY OF EVEN YEARS, WE WOULD BE ON OUR OWN FOR ELECTIONS BECAUSE THE COUNTIES TYPICALLY DO NOT CONTRACT, THAT'S THE ONE TIME FRAME.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO CONTRACT WITH A CITY BECAUSE THEIR MACHINES ARE USUALLY LOCKED DOWN FROM THE PRIMARIES.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

OF A PRIOR, I BELIEVE, A PRIOR PUBLICATION THAT YOU GAVE US FROM THE LAST COUNCIL, AND I THOUGHT THAT I HAD SEEN THE COST TO THE CITY, THAT THE COUNTY HELD IT TO $45,000, AS OPPOSED TO $95,000 IF WE ARE NOT CONTRACTED.

I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT SPECIFICALLY, SANDRA.

I KNOW IT TYPICALLY IS AROUND $40,000 A COUNTY, SO IT'S AROUND $80,000 WHEN WE'VE DONE IT IN MAY, IF WE DON'T HAVE A RUNOFF.

SO DEFINITELY CLOSE ON THAT.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT NOVEMBER WOULD LOOK LIKE.

WE HAD A RUNOFF IN A NOVEMBER, THEN WE'D HAVE A FULL ELECTION COST TO HAVE A RUNOFF AFTER A NOVEMBER ELECTION OR A MIDTERM. YES.

YEAH. AND SAME IN MAY ON THAT.

SO LAST YEAR WHEN WE HAD A RUNOFF, WE SPENT AN ADDITIONAL $60 TO $70,000 TO HAVE THAT RUNOFF.

I WANT TO GIVE THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE, THE COMMITTEE, AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN, HAVE SOME THOUGHTS, SOME CONCERNS, BECAUSE YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN VERY PATIENT AND VERY QUIET.

BUT I KNOW YOU WANT TO SHARE SOME SOME ITEMS WITH THE COUNCIL, SO I WANT YOU TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

WELL, THIS IS DEAN CRUMP I WOULD JUST SAY I MEAN, I THINK WE HAVE PRETTY GOOD REPRESENTATION OF THE VOICE OF OUR COMMITTEE, THAT'S WHY WE SIT OVER HERE AND JUST LISTEN.

BUT I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE, I GUESS I'M GOING TO KIND OF GO BACK TO SOMETHING TOM SAID WHEN HE SAID, WE NEED TIME TO DIGEST THIS AND GO TO THE GO TO THE CITIZENS AND SEE WHAT THEY SAY.

UNDERSTAND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU GUYS AS COUNCIL TO TO TO DO THAT RESEARCH AND TAKE HEED OF WHAT THIS COMMITTEE, WHICH IS A GROUP OF CITIZENS HAVE, HAVE DONE.

THE CONVERSATION WAS DEEP.

WE DIDN'T ALWAYS AGREE BUT I THINK THE CONSENSUS IS SOME IS IS THESE ARE THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE MADE.

[01:35:06]

IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO PUT THEM ALL ON THE BALLOT THIS TIME, MAYBE YOU DO SPREAD THAT OUT, THAT'S THAT'S NOT A BAD THOUGHT EITHER.

BECAUSE I DO KNOW THAT IF YOU IF YOU WEREN'T IN THIS ROOM WHEN WE HAD THESE DISCUSSION AND YOU'RE A CITIZEN THAT'S JUST LOOKING AT THIS FROM A HIGH LEVEL, YOU KNOW, I THINK TERM LIMITS IS GOING TO BE A BIG DEAL.

PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SEE THAT AS TERM LIMITS.

I THINK WE HAD PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT THAT.

AND BUT I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO, TO REALLY TAKE HEED OF WHAT THE CITIZENS SAID, THESE NINE PEOPLE AND WHAT THE OTHER CITIZENS SAY ABOUT IT AND NOT, I GUESS, IMPOSE YOUR OWN PERSONAL OPINIONS ON IT AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I THINK.

JUST TAKE THE ADVICE AND AND TAKE IT FOR WHAT IT'S FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH.

BUT I THINK THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE IS, IS A GOOD, ECLECTIC, DIVERSE HOPEFULLY REPRESENTATION OF A LOT OF CITIZENS.

BUT THE, THE CITIZENS NEED TO NEED TO WEIGH IN, OF COURSE.

BUT I GUESS THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAD TO SAY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THE PROPOSITION A THE RECALL EASING THAT PROCESS AND CLARIFYING THAT PROCESS WE THOUGHT WAS IMPORTANT TO THE CITIZENS AND KIND OF GIVES THEM US, GIVES THE COUNCIL SOME ACCOUNTABILITY BACK TO THE CITIZENS.

SO WE THOUGHT THAT WAS IMPORTANT AS FAR AS THE THE CHANGES TO NUMBER OF COUNCILMAN AND TERM LIMITS AND GEOGRAPHIC AREAS, TO BE HONEST.

SO WE SPLIT THAT UP AS MUCH AS WE COULD, BUT SOME OF THEM KIND OF OVERLAPPED.

TO ADDRESS COUNCILMAN TIPPS QUESTION A LITTLE EARLIER IN THE, IN THE DISCUSSION, SO WE ALL SETTLED ON THE FACT THAT WE WANTED TO INCREASE THE COUNCIL. WE THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR AMARILLO TO INCREASE THE NUMBER TO SEVEN.

SO THAT WAS THAT WAS A NO BRAINER.

BUT OF COURSE, HOW TO DO THAT? THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.

AND THERE WAS A WIDE RANGE ON JUST THIS COMMITTEE FROM LEAVING IT THE WAY IT WAS ALL THE WAY TO SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS AND EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN. AND SO I THINK WE WE DID OUR BEST TO COME TO A CONSENSUS AND A MIDDLE GROUND ON WHAT THAT LOOKED LIKE FOR THE CITY AND, AND HOW THAT WAS BEST MOVING FORWARD FOR EVERYBODY.

SO I THINK IT, I THINK IT REPRESENTED A COMPROMISE, JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE WHEN YOU WHEN YOU COME WITH A TEAM OF PEOPLE, YOU COMPROMISE AND FIND SOME MIDDLE GROUND AND SO THAT'S THAT'S HOW WE LANDED ON THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THOSE MAPS.

OF COURSE, ONCE WE DECIDED THAT WE WOULD HAVE PREFERRED A BALANCED REPRESENTATION OF THREE AND THREE VERSUS FOUR AND TWO THAT ELIMINATED TWO OF THE MAPS.

AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE THE TWO MAPS THAT HAVE THREE VOTING DISTRICTS ON IT, I THINK THE GOAL WAS TO BALANCE OUT NATURAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND AREAS OF REPRESENTATION WITHIN THE CITY.

SO THE FIRST THREE MEMBER MAP THAT WE LOOKED AT, PROPOSAL C, KIND OF LUMPED A WEST CLIFF AND LA PALOMA IN WITH NORTH HEIGHTS AND SOME OF THE NORTHEASTERN NEIGHBORHOODS.

WE DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS RIGHT.

SO THAT'S HOW WE LANDED ON D WHICH WAS ACTUALLY A NEW WAY TO THINK OF THE CITY, BECAUSE I HAVE THE CITY DIVIDED UP IN THE IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT I'VE WORKED FOR SO MANY YEARS. BUT THIS WAS A DIFFERENT WAY OF LOOKING AT IT.

AND I THOUGHT IT WAS IT WAS REALLY WELL DONE.

SO IT IT MADE A WESTERN HALF, SOUTHEASTERN HALF AND A NORTH NORTHEASTERN PORTION.

YOU ELIMINATE THE AIRPORT AND THEY'RE BASICALLY EQUAL.

SO THAT'S HOW WE THAT'S HOW WE CAME ABOUT IT RIGHT WRONG OR INDIFFERENT, THAT WAS THE GOAL OF THE COMMITTEE.

AND LASTLY THE THE CITY MANAGER APPOINTING THE ATTORNEY VERSUS IT, REPORTING TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

I KNOW THAT'S BEEN A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE, AND I'LL JUST GIVE MY $0.02, AND THAT WAS AS SOMEBODY THAT'S BEEN INVOLVED IN LAWSUITS AND LITIGATION WITH THE CITY I UNDERSTAND, AS MY PLACE IN THE CITY THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY REPRESENTS THE CITY, JUST LIKE IT'S BEEN SAID IN THIS MEETING, REPRESENTS THE CLIENT.

AND IF I WANT MY PERSONAL INTEREST REPRESENTED, THEN I HAVE TO FIND MY OWN REPRESENTATION.

AND AND THAT'S THE JOB I TOOK ON AND THE AND I HAVE THAT UNDERSTANDING WHEN I DECIDE TO SERVE THE PUBLIC AND, AND I WOULD THINK IT'S NO DIFFERENT FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER.

AND THAT WAS, AGAIN, MY PERSONAL OPINION AND MY CONTRIBUTION TO THAT THAT DISCUSSION.

BUT OVERALL, LOTS OF DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON THIS COMMITTEE, LOTS OF GREAT DISCUSSION.

AND I THINK EVERYTHING WAS, LIKE WE SAID, A COMPROMISE OF OPINIONS AND A TEAM EFFORT.

[01:40:08]

SO KIND OF GOING ON WHAT BOTH OF THEM SAID WE WE'RE A COMMITTEE OF RESIDENTS THAT THAT WE'RE JUST GIVING YOU GUYS RECOMMENDATIONS AND YOU GUYS TAKE IT AND RUN WITH IT. AND I HOPE THAT TODAY HELPS GIVE YOU GUYS SOME FEEDBACK, AT LEAST THE THREE THAT WEREN'T IN EVERY SINGLE MEETING.

THOSE TWO POOR GUYS HAD TO LISTEN.

WE HAD ONE MEETING THAT I DON'T KNOW IF IT ENDED YET.

HAS IT ENDED? BUT ANYWAY, THAT WAS OUR GOAL, A WIDE RANGE OF PEOPLE TO TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS.

AND KIND OF THEY KIND OF HID IT SO I'LL KIND OF GO THROUGH MY NOTES.

BUT ADDING MEMBERS OBVIOUSLY KEEPS UP THE POPULATION AND DECREASES THE WORKLOAD OF OF THE FIVE PEOPLE IN FRONT OF US.

THE GEOGRAPHIC IDEA, HE JUST KIND OF HIT ON THAT.

BUT TO GIVE EVERYONE A VOICE THAT WAS OUR KEY WAS TO GIVE EVERY AREA A VOICE THAT THAT WAS A VERY BIG DISCUSSION AND SPLITTING IT UP, LIKE TOBY SAID THAT WOULD THAT WOULD DO THAT IF YOU WENT TO SEE IT, PROBABLY WOULDN'T DO IT AS WELL IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, MR. TIPPS. AND THAT AND IT ALSO GOES ON TO WHAT WHAT MR. SIMPSON WAS, WAS ASKING ABOUT, CAN WE GET ENOUGH PEOPLE TO RUN IF WE PUT THIS MAP TOGETHER AND SAY, OKAY, WE NEED PEOPLE FROM THESE AREAS, HOPEFULLY THAT THAT CREATES TWO MORE SPACES IS WHAT WE WERE THINKING.

OBVIOUSLY THE STAGGERED TERMS, I THINK EVERYBODY LIKES THE STAGGERED TERMS. I USED TO COACH AND SO I NEVER I USED TO COACH BASKETBALL.

I NEVER USED TO LIKE SUBBING FIVE IN AND FIVE OUT.

WE BASICALLY JUST DID THAT, EXCEPT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MR. MAYER BUT BECAUSE YOU GOT TO KEEP THAT CONTINUITY.

SO THAT THAT ONE TO ME IS A NO BRAINER IF WE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO, TO MAKE THAT ON THERE.

BUT THE LAST TWO POINTS WHERE WE REALLY TALKED ABOUT VOTER FATIGUE AND EDUCATION, EXCUSE ME.

AND SO TRYING TO EXCUSE ME, TRYING TO KEEP ALL OF THAT NARROWED DOWN, WAS WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO WORRY ABOUT ON THE VOTER FATIGUE.

THE EDUCATION PART, I THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM TO TRY TO EDUCATE ALL OF US AND ALL OF OUR ALL THE REST OF THE RESIDENTS ON WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE.

SO THAT'S MY PIECE.

WELL, I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT THEY SHARED AND THANK YOU FOR LETTING US SERVE.

AND I THINK EVERYONE WAS VERY RESPECTFUL OF ONE ANOTHER AND GAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS TO SAY.

ONE, AMARILLO IS GROWING AND IT'S TIME THAT WE GROW WITH IT.

SO SOME OF THESE CHANGES ARE VERY NECESSARY.

TWO I KNOW YOU GUYS HAD SOME QUESTIONS AS FAR AS WHERE DID WE COME UP WITH THE THREE SEPARATE DISTRICTS OR AREAS? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU ALL.

DO YOU THINK THAT THE FOUR WOULD BE BETTER SERVING FOR THE COMMUNITY OR NONE IS WHAT YOU'RE THINKING? AND THEN ALSO, I THINK A LOT WITH WHAT THEY'RE SAYING EDUCATING THE CITIZENS, I THINK JUST KIND OF GETTING SOME FEEDBACK OF WHAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC WANTS.

I MEAN, DO THEY WANT THIS OR DO THEY NOT? BECAUSE I AGREE WITH WHAT COLE STANLEY WAS SAYING MAYOR STANLEY WAS SAYING YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WE WANT SOMETHING TO PASS, SOMETHING LIKE TO HELP BRING SOME POSITIVE CHANGES.

SO, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE NOT IMPORTANT AND IT'S OKAY TO PUT THEM IN THE BACK BURNER MAYBE FOR THE FUTURE, BUT REALLY FOCUS ON SOME IMPORTANT THINGS AND MAKING POSITIVE CHANGES IN THE CITY.

OKAY, MAYOR, DO YOU ALL HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SHARE? I THINK YOU'VE PRETTY MUCH HEARD FROM FROM THE COMMITTEE.

YEAH SO I'LL ASK MY COUNCIL.

DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANYTHING FOR OUR CONSULTANT HERE? I'VE GOT A COUPLE ITEMS I WANT TO HIT, BUT THEN WOULD ASK IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER HERE FOR THE COMMITTEE OR OUR CONSULTANT. MR. CRAFT, I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY THAT SERVED ON THIS COMMITTEE.

I KNOW AS A TASK, AND JUST THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU ALL PUT FORWARD TO US TODAY.

MY ONLY QUESTION I'M I KNOW YOU PROBABLY HIT ON IT, MAYOR, BUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S IT LOOK LIKE MOVING FORWARD? WHAT'S OUR NEXT STEP? WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO? YEAH, I THINK THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING TO TRY TO TAKE US HERE.

SO I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FOR YOU THAT I THINK IF YOU CLARIFY THEM.

MY EXPERIENCE WITH THIS IS, IS THAT IT'S REALLY EASY TO MISCOMMUNICATE IT'S ALSO EASY TO MISUNDERSTAND.

AND SO PREVIOUSLY IT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS STATED, WELL, THE COUNCIL'S TRYING TO EXTEND THEIR TERM.

NO, THE COUNCIL WASN'T TRYING TO EXTEND THEIR TERM THEY WERE THEY WERE THEY WERE PUTTING IT TO US FOR US TO VOTE ON AS THE CITIZENS SO THAT WHOEVER WON THAT NEXT SEAT WOULD HAVE THAT FOUR YEAR TERM.

SO HERE IS WHAT HAPPENS IN MY OPINION.

AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW YOUR, YOUR SPECIFIC EXPERTISE IN NOVEMBER VERSUS MAY.

[01:45:07]

WE WANT TO REALLY LISTEN MORE.

WE WANT TO GATHER ALL THIS UP, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'VE GOT AN EASY TARGET TO SHOOT AT.

WELL, WHEN WE'RE RUNNING FOR OFFICE IN MAY I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE IN FORUM AFTER FORUM OF PEOPLE SAYING, WELL, ARE YOU RUNNING FOR A TWO YEAR TERM? ARE YOU RUNNING FOR A FOUR YEAR TERM? WELL, TECHNICALLY I'M RUNNING FOR A TWO YEAR TERM, BUT I'M RUNNING ASKING YOU TO EXTEND THE NEXT GUY'S TERM TO FOUR YEARS.

AND SO, DENNIS, BREAK THAT DOWN FOR US IN.

YOU WOULD THEN BE TWO YEARS POSTPONED.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO BE 2027 BEFORE YOU WOULD ENACT ANY OF THIS FROM A FIVE TO A SEVEN FROM A FROM A TWO TO A FOUR STAGGERED, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

THAT'S CORRECT.

AND SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK WE WERE VERY MINDFUL OF IS HOW DO YOU MAKE THAT TRANSITION.

AND SO IT MADE SENSE TO HAVE THE CHARTER CHANGES GO BEFORE THE VOTERS IN NOVEMBER, SO IF THERE WERE CHANGES APPROVED, THEN THOSE WOULD TAKE EFFECT IN THE 2025 ELECTION CYCLE.

AND SO AT THAT POINT IN TIME, IF THE CITIZENS WERE TO APPROVE THE FOUR YEAR TERM, THEN WE WOULD BEGIN THAT TRANSITION PROCESS AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.

IF YOU HAD THE ELECTION FOR THE CHARTER CHANGES IN MAY OF 2025.

THE THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, WHO ARE ELECTED IN MAY OF 2025, WOULD SERVE UNTIL 2027, AND YOU WOULD JUST PUT OFF THE TRANSITION PERIOD FOR ANOTHER COUPLE OF YEARS, AND THEN YOU WOULD START THAT CYCLE.

YOU WOULD TELL YOUR CITIZENRY, ESSENTIALLY, HEY, WE LISTENED, WE HEARD YOU GUYS, AND WE'RE GOING TO WAIT TWO YEARS BEFORE WE CAN DO ANYTHING.

SO YOU MAY HAVE RAN ON THAT PLATFORM AND ADVOCATED FOR IT, AND THEN IT'S LIKE, WELL, TWO YEARS FROM NOW WE'LL GET TO SEE THE FRUIT OF THAT THAT YOU GUYS ALL VOTED FOR.

SO IF WE DO THIS IN NOVEMBER, NOT ONLY DOES IT SEPARATE THE CHARTER, IT GIVES THE CHARTER AN OPPORTUNITY TO STAND ALONE AWAY FROM A POTENTIAL CANDIDATE.

IT DOESN'T MUDDY THE WATER WHERE YOU'RE NOT CONSTANTLY ANSWERING THE QUESTION OF NO, I'M ONLY RUNNING FOR TWO YEARS, BUT YOU'RE VOTING FOR A FOUR YEAR.

WELL, HOW DO I VOTE FOR A FOUR YEAR TERM? AND I ONLY ELECTED YOU FOR TWO.

AND THEN WHY DO I HAVE TO WAIT THREE YEARS, YOU KNOW, TO REALLY SEE THE FRUIT OF THIS? SO, SO THAT DEADLINE, I THINK FOR US IN WE STARTED THIS RIGHT BACK THERE.

WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THE CHARTER AMENDMENTS.

WE CAME UP WITH SOME OF THESE.

YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE REALLY NICE.

WE'RE HAVING TO FUNCTION THIS WAY.

THESE GUYS ARE LEARNING THE WHOLE TIME.

LIKE, WHY DO WE DO THIS? HOW DOES THAT FUNCTION? AND SO I THINK WE'VE GOT TO FINISH IT.

AND I WOULD BE AN ADVOCATE FOR NOVEMBER.

SO I DO WANT TO LISTEN AND I DO WANT TO HAVE CONSIDERATION, BUT I ALSO DON'T WANT TO REMAIN SILENT UP NEXT TO THE MICROPHONE.

WHY HAVE YOU HERE? SO THE WAY THAT THAT WOULD WORK ALSO SPLITTING APART SOME OF THESE SUGGESTIONS.

SO WE WANT TO LISTEN TO YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT WE WANT TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE OF OF MAYBE WHAT COMES FROM BEHIND THOSE.

SO IN THE WAY IN WHICH YOU DO PUT THIS UP IN NOVEMBER, YOU NOW KNOW WHO, WHO YOU'RE RUNNING FOR, WHAT YOU'RE RUNNING FOR IN MAY.

SO YOU OPEN TWO ADDITIONAL SEATS UP SO YOU GET THAT REPRESENTATION.

BUT THEN DO DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY CONSIDERATION.

DO YOU DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION? ESPECIALLY AS OUR CONSULTANT.

THE RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT PRETTY HOT TOPIC.

AND YOU'VE GOT IT TIED IN WITH SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS HIGHLY IMPORTANT.

AND SO LIKE WHAT WOULD WHAT WOULD BE THE LOSS IN LETTING IT STAND ALONE SO THAT THE CITIZENS COULD VOTE THE RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT DOWN? AND CAN YOU AMEND THAT WHERE IF IF A DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN B IS IS NULL AND VOID, MEANING YOU WOULDN'T HAVE A RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT, I DON'T KNOW.

WELL, I DON'T KNOW.

WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE.

IF YOU IF YOU SAID BECAUSE RIGHT NOW YOU'VE GOT IT TIED WITH SEVEN MEMBERS AND THE RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT.

SO IF WE WANTED TO CONSIDER SEVEN MEMBERS, JUST AS YOU GUYS HAVE ALL SAID, I HAVEN'T HEARD ONE PERSON SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE JUST WANT TO STAY AT FIVE.

SO WE PUT THAT OUT AND WE VOTE FOR THAT.

NOW, I HAVE HEARD SEVERAL THAT ARE LIKE RESIDENTIAL, I'M ON THAT SIDE.

LIKE, I DON'T I DON'T SEE A GREAT BENEFIT IN IT.

I HEAR WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, BUT MAYBE IN THE FUTURE WE COULD WE COULD MIGRATE THAT WAY.

BUT I DON'T WANT TO TIE IT.

I DON'T REALLY WANT TO CONNECT IT.

SO WHAT IF FIVE, WHAT IF SEVEN FAILS AND YOU STAY AT FIVE RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT PASSES.

CAN YOU CAN YOU DO THAT AT THAT POINT? WELL, THAT'S WHY ONE OF THE REASONS WE ARRANGED THE PACKAGE THE WAY WE DID, BECAUSE IF YOU GET THE SEVEN AND YOU HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENT, SO YOU DON'T GET INTO A SITUATION WHERE YOU HAVE COMPETING MEASURES AND IF ONE PASSES AND ONE DOESN'T, YOU HAVE CONFUSION.

[01:50:07]

AND SO GOING TO THE FOUR YEAR TERMS IS ONE THING.

GOING FROM FIVE TO SEVEN WAS THE OTHER.

I MEAN, WE COULD PUT IT TOGETHER AND PACKAGE IT ANY WAY THAT YOU WANTED.

BUT WE ARE TRYING TO BE MINDFUL.

THE COMMITTEE WAS TRYING TO BE MINDFUL OF SOMETHING THAT WOULD WORK, THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE POTENTIAL CONFLICTS IF ONE PASSED AND ONE DIDN'T.

DO YOU DO YOU EVER PROPOSE IF A THEN B AND AND THIS WOULD BE THE STANDALONE.

SO I'M NOT I'M NOT SAYING THAT I SHOULD ADVOCATE TO ELIMINATE IT.

I DON'T WANT TO LISTEN THAT WAY WHERE I'M LIKE IT'S JUST IT'S GOT RISK AND I CAN'T I CAN'T MITIGATE THAT.

SO I'M JUST GOING TO NOT PUT IT OUT THERE.

AND I THINK IF YOU TIE IT TO SOMETHING AS SIGNIFICANT AS THE SEVEN MEMBERS.

SO WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE IF YOU SAID, OKAY, SO A IS SEVEN MEMBERS LET'S SAY OKAY.

SO IF A PASSES THEN B PASSES, CAN YOU ALLOW YOUR YOUR CONSTITUENTS TO VOTE FOR OR AGAINST THAT, KNOWING THAT YOU COULD PASS THAT, BUT IT WOULDN'T MATTER IF A FAILED? PASSED FOR THE THREE DISTRICTS, YOU'D HAVE FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT THREE OF THEM WOULD BE RESIDENT REQUIRED.

BUT I'M ASKING, CAN YOU CAN YOU PROP A LANGUAGE ON THE BALLOT THAT SAYS, OKAY, A IS TO GROW THE COUNCIL FROM 5 TO 7, SO YOU'RE ADDING TWO MEMBERS. B IS IF A PASSES, THEN B IS VOTABLE AND SO LIKE YOU VOTE ON IT DURING THE PROPOSITION.

AND IF THAT PASSED THEN YOU WOULD END UP WITH SEVEN AND RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS.

BUT IF NOT YOU ENDED UP WITH SEVEN PASSING AND B FAILED OR SEVEN DIDN'T PASS AND B WAS NOT CONSIDERED.

LET ME TAKE YOUR MIC.

LET ME. YEAH. LET ME TAKE A SHOT.

THAT IS A LEGAL QUESTION.

AND NONE OF US ON THIS SIDE OF THE TABLE ARE ATTORNEYS.

I WOULD ASK BRYAN IF HE COULD OPINE OFF THE TOP OF HIS HEAD AS TO WHETHER YOU COULD MAKE PROPOSITIONS CONTINGENT UPON THE PASSAGE OR NOT PASSAGE OF ANOTHER.

WE KIND OF, I THINK, ENDED UP WITH AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT WAS PROBLEMATIC.

SO IS IT OR ISN'T IT? OR CAN YOU DO SUCH? YOU'RE GOING TO LOVE THIS ANSWER FROM A LAWYER.

IT DEPENDS.

I KNOW I'M GOING TO GET A VERY SPECIFIC ANSWER, RON.

EXACTLY TO YOUR OPINION.

WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THIS, THERE MAY BE A WAY.

IT WOULD DEPEND UPON HOW YOU WORDED EACH PARTICULAR BALLOT PROPOSITION TO GIVE YOURSELF ROOM.

NOW, YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS, IF ONE SHOE DROPS, HOW WOULD THE OTHER SHOE DROP.

AND THERE MAY BE A WAY TO DO THAT WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF AN ORDINANCE, WHAT I WOULD CALL AN ENABLING ORDINANCE THAT OCCURS AFTER THE AFTER THE PASSAGE OF SUCH A THING.

SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS, IS IN REGARD TO THE MAYOR'S QUESTION LEGAL RESEARCH THAT AND SEE IF THERE IS A WAY WE MIGHT HAVE MULTIPLE OPTIONS THAT WE COULD BRING BACK.

ONE MORE THING FOR YOU.

YOU KNOW, AND I THINK ONE OF THE IDEAS OF COUPLING THE GOING TO SEVEN AND GOING TO THE THREE GEOGRAPHIC AREAS WAS THE IT WOULD BE LESS DISRUPTIVE TO BEGIN THE GEOGRAPHIC PROCESS OF THE POINT IN TIME THAT YOU'RE EXPANDING THE COUNCIL, AND THAT MIGHT MAKE THOSE TWO THINGS MORE PALATABLE PARTICULARLY, WE UNDERSTAND THE LIGHTNING ROD ISSUE OF THE GEOGRAPHIC THING.

WE THINK A LOT OF THAT IS BECAUSE OF MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND THE UNDERSTANDING THAT'S GENERALLY PROBABLY HELD OUT THERE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TRADITIONAL SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICT, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

WE'RE SIMPLY TALKING ABOUT CREATING THREE PLACES WHERE THERE WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT FOR THAT PERSON TO LIVE WITHIN THAT GEOGRAPHY, JUST LIKE THERE ARE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FIVE OF YOU RIGHT NOW, BEING MEANING WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE CITY OF AMARILLO.

IT'S NOT A SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICT ISSUE.

IT'S A IT'S A REPRESENTATION ISSUE.

AND BACK TO OUR EXCESSIVE BACK TO OUR ACCOUNTABILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY.

IT'S ABOUT TRYING TO CARVE OUT A BETTER WAY AROUND WHEEL ON FRED'S VEHICLE, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR THE PUBLIC TO HAVE BETTER ACCESS TO TO BEING A PART OF THIS BODY.

MAYOR STANLEY, SO WHAT I'M WHAT I'M HEARING IN THE COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW IS THAT YOU HAVE SOME OF THE CITIZENS THAT ARE IN THE NORTH AND

[01:55:07]

AND SO THAT'S AND WE DIDN'T JUST GET HERE, YOU KNOW, THIS WAY TODAY IT'S BASICALLY BEEN THAT WAY.

AND SO MY TIME OF SERVICE ON THE COUNCIL, I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN PROUD TO SERVE AT LARGE AND TO REPRESENT THE ENTIRE CITIZENS OF AMARILLO.

AND I WAS AND I YOU KNOW, I FELT REALLY GOOD WHEN PEOPLE COULD JUST PICK UP THE PHONE AND I DON'T CARE WHAT AREA OF TOWN THEY LIVED IN, AND THEY CALL ME AND THEY NEEDED HELP WITH WHATEVER, I WAS ON IT.

BUT I THINK THAT'S I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT RIGHT THERE IS JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE VOICES ARE HEARD.

AND IT'S IT'S 2024 YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE VOICES ARE BEING HEARD, BUT I'M JUST ONE OPINION.

GEOGRAPHIC DEAL, OR I WANT THE GEOGRAPHIC OR I DON'T WANT SEVEN.

I THINK THAT'S THE POINT HE'S GETTING ACROSS IS SAYING WHEN YOU TIE THAT, YOU'RE LIMITING SOMEBODY TO CHOOSE.

NOW WE DON'T WANT TO THERE'S TOO MANY, RIGHT? BUT I THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT HE'S GETTING AT IS, IS TO SEPARATE THOSE THINGS.

YOU ACTUALLY GET TO HEAR FROM THE CITIZENRY TO SAY, THIS IS TRULY WHAT I WANT.

BUT WHEN WE COMBINE IT WITH THERE'S TWO THINGS MESHED TOGETHER.

NOW, YOU MIGHT SAY, WELL, I KIND OF LIKE THIS, BUT I DON'T LIKE THIS.

AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO VOTE, WHERE IF YOU SEPARATE IT AND I DON'T KNOW.

AND I'M AGAIN, THIS IS A DISCUSSION.

I'M JUST THROWING THIS OUT THERE TO SAY AND I DON'T KNOW, I THINK THAT THAT'S WHERE YOU WERE GOING IS TO SAY, HEY, WE NEED TO TRULY HEAR FROM THE CITIZENS.

THIS ISN'T FOR US TO DECIDE IT ISN'T FOR YOU GUYS TO DECIDE, IT'S FOR THE VOTER.

SO WE'VE GOT TO DECIDE WHAT TO PUT OUT THERE TO LET THEM DECIDE.

AND THAT'S I THINK THAT'S THE ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO HEAR WHAT DOES OUR COMMUNITY WANT? AND WHEN WE TIE THINGS TOGETHER, MAYBE WE'RE NOT HEARING AND WE'RE FORCING A DECISION THAT MIGHT NOT BE.

I THINK THAT THAT'S WHERE THAT'S WHERE THAT WAS GOING.

AGREED. YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE I'M DRIVING.

AND SO I WANTED TO COME BACK TO YOU REAL QUICK BEFORE WE TAKE OUR NEXT STEP HERE.

WELL, I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE CONSULTANTS IT DEPENDS EQUIVALENT ANSWER.

WHAT I WOULD THE SCHEDULE THAT WE'RE WORKING ON NOW ASSUMES THAT THE COUNCIL WANTS TO MOVE THIS FORWARD FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTION.

SO WE HAVE A COUPLE OF TIME CRITICAL DATES THAT WE NEED TO BRING THINGS BACK TO THE COUNCIL FOR THE ADOPTION, FIRST READING AND SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE, AND THEN THE CALLING OF THE ELECTION BY I THINK IT'S AUGUST 19TH, SO WE HAVE A COMPRESSED TIME FRAME.

WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE COULD DO IS WE'VE WE'VE GIVEN YOU AN ALTERNATIVE OF A, B, C, D.

WE COULD WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY AND DO SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH AND SEE IF WE COULD COME UP WITH ANOTHER PACKAGE OF PROPOSALS FOR THE BALLOT. THAT WOULD DO WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IS SPLITTING THE FIVE AND THE SEVEN FROM THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA, AND SEE WHAT WE COULD COME UP WITH, OR HAVING SOME SORT OF CONTINGENT LANGUAGE IN ONE OR BOTH OF THE PROP OF SEVERAL PROPOSITIONS.

SO I THINK WHAT WHAT I WOULD ASK OR SUGGEST IS THAT WE KEEP TO OUR SCHEDULE AND BRING BACK TO THE COUNCIL IN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO A PROPOSAL FOR ORDINANCES.

AND SO THE COUNCIL COULD CHOOSE AT THAT POINT WHETHER WHAT TO PUT FORWARD ON THE BALLOT IF YOU DECIDE TO GO FORWARD IN NOVEMBER AND THEN BASED ON THAT DECISION, THEN WE WOULD HAVE THE SECOND READING.

SO WE PREPARE BASICALLY ALTERNATIVE ORDINANCES FOR YOU TO LOOK AT AND DECIDE WHAT COURSE OF ACTION TO TAKE.

I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST PRUDENT THING TO DO, AND IT GIVES US TIME TO DO SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH AND FIGURE OUT HOW WE COULD PUT THINGS TOGETHER TO ATTAIN WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.

AND MAYOR THE THE SCHEDULE AS IT IS RIGHT NOW FOR CITY COUNCIL, JULY 23RD WOULD BE THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE.

AUGUST 13TH WOULD BE THE SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE, AND THEN THE BALLOT MEASURES WOULD BE AUGUST 19TH.

AND THAT WOULD BE THAT'S THE DEADLINE PER THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE.

AND THEN NOVEMBER 5TH, OF COURSE, WOULD BE THE ELECTION.

[02:00:02]

AND I WOULD ASK, MRS. CHAIR, IF YOU FEEL LIKE THIS IS THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND YOU WOULD LIKE US TO HAVE YOU GO AHEAD AND PREPARE SOME ALTERNATES.

BASED ON THIS DISCUSSION, I THINK WE WE'VE BASICALLY LIMITED IT TO WE APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE DOING HERE.

WE MAY PRIORITIZE A FEW OF THESE A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY IN THE LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE, BUT SPECIFICALLY BREAKING APART THE RESIDENTS REQUIREMENTS SEPARATE ON A IF A PASSES, THEN B COULD PASS OR FAIL.

IF A FAILS, THEN B WAS NULL AND VOID.

BUT IF YOU GUYS WILL RUN THAT DOWN AND COULD BRING THAT BACK ALONG WITH ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU THINK NEEDS TO BE FURTHER CLARIFIED? IS THAT IS THAT A DIRECTION YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE TO TAKE? YES. AND AND THAT WAY YOU HAVE HOPEFULLY 2 OR 3 OR ALTERNATIVES TO LOOK AT, AND YOU MAY WANT TO GO BACK TO THE INITIAL, OR YOU MAY WANT TO ACCEPT THE YOU KNOW, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

OKAY. SO THANK YOU.

MAY I OFFER A SLIGHTLY SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TAKE? WE HAVE MET OUR CHARGE WITH THE PRODUCT THAT'S BEEN DELIVERED.

IT'S NOW IN YOUR ARENA.

YOU STILL HAVE THE CAPACITIES AND CAPABILITIES TO WORK WITH YOUR CONSULTING FIRM AND FOR FURTHER MASSAGING.

I REALLY MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE THAT THE COMMITTEE HAS DONE ITS DUE AT THIS POINT.

WE'VE PRESENTED THE PROPOSAL AND AND IT'S IN YOUR COURT NOW TO CONSIDER, REVISE, AMEND, DELETE WHATEVER YOU CHOOSE TO DO AND THAT THE CONSULTING ARRANGEMENT IS BETWEEN I MEAN THE CONTRACTS BETWEEN BAKER, TILLY AND THE CITY.

AND IF YOU ALL SEE FIT TO, TO USE THEM TO, TO RECRAFT THIS TO, TO YOUR LIKING TO GO BEFORE THE PUBLIC.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT AND, AND SAVE A LITTLE TIME ALONG THE WAY IN TERMS OF TRYING TO INVOLVE THE COMMITTEE, WHO'S ALREADY, IN MY OPINION MET OUR CHARGE.

BELIEVE IT OR NOT, I AGREE WITH.

DO YOU? CAN WE GET THAT IN THE MINUTES? MR. MAYOR, I HAD A QUESTION.

YES. AND PERHAPS FLOYD OR BRYAN OR STEPHANIE CAN ADD.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMING BACK WITH SOME OTHER ALTERNATIVES FOR THE COUNCIL, 23RD IS A WEEK FROM TODAY. I WONDER IF THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF HAVING THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE IN A SPECIAL MEETING TO GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO BRING SOMETHING BACK, OR IS THE 23RD A FIRM DATE THERE? NO. THERE IS. AND SO WE HAVE BUDGET WORKSHOP 29TH THROUGH THE 1ST, I BELIEVE.

AND SO NOT THAT WE REALLY WANT TO TRY TO PUT SOMETHING ELSE IN AND TAKE TIME AWAY FROM THAT, BUT THE BODY WILL BE TOGETHER FOR THOSE 3 TO 4 DAYS ANYWAY.

SO MISS COGGINS, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO MAKE SURE? YEAH, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS FAR AS THE AMOUNT OF DAYS THAT WE NEED BETWEEN THE READINGS.

EXACTLY. THAT'S RIGHT, MISS COGGINS, DO YOU.

YOU HAD TOLD ME AT ONE TIME, TELL US AGAIN WHAT THE THE LIMITATION IS ON THE FIRST AND SECOND READING.

WE WE JUST NEED TWO READINGS.

WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE ANY TIME BETWEEN THEM.

THE ONLY TIME WHEN WE HAVE TO DO THAT IS ON OUR BUDGET APPROVALS.

AND THAT'S STATE LAW.

SO AS LONG AS WE READ THEM TWICE, WE CAN HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING.

WHAT DID YOU HAVE COUNCILMAN CRAFT? I WAS GOING TO SAY IF IT'S LEGAL, DO THE FIRST READING ON THE 13TH OF AUGUST AND THE SECOND READING ON THE 19TH, AND STILL CALL THE ELECTION ON THE 19TH.

IS THAT LEGAL? YES, IF THAT'S HOW YOU WANT TO DO IT.

AND THAT SECOND READING CALLS THE ELECTION.

SO WHENEVER THAT'S DONE, AS LONG AS IT'S PRIOR TO OR ON AUGUST 19TH SO THE ONLY OTHER THING BEFORE WE GO BACK TO YOU, DENNIS MAN, I'M DRIVING A LITTLE BIT HERE, LIKE, SO IF IF THIS COMMITTEE IS COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, THEN I WANT TO MAKE SURE MY COUNCIL IS COMFORTABLE WITH EACH ONE OF THEM REACHING OUT TO YOU DIRECTLY AND ALSO WORKING THROUGH MR. HYDE. I THINK HE WOULD BE THE ONE THAT THAT I WOULD REACH OUT TO AND HIT THIS, YOU KNOW, SEPARATION WHAT DOES IF A THEN B LOOK LIKE AND LET HIM WORK DIRECTLY WITH YOU.

AND SO DOES COUNCIL WANT TO PROCEED IN THAT MANNER, OR DOES COUNCIL THINK THAT WE, WE WOULD WANT MAYBE TO CONTINUE TO WORK ALONG WITH THE COMMITTEE? WELL, I AGREE WITH GARY I THINK THE COMMITTEE'S DONE A GREAT JOB AND THEY FULFILLED THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PROVIDING IT TO US.

WHAT I, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A COUNCIL DISCUSSION WITH LOOKING AT SOMETHING CONCRETE. I MEAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO I MEAN, IF WE DON'T MEET AGAIN UNTIL THE 13TH TO DISCUSS THIS, WE'RE UNDER A TIME CRUNCH.

[02:05:03]

SO, AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE 23RD IS A TOPIC WHERE WE WHERE WE MAYBE TALK ABOUT, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW, I JUST I WOULD I DON'T WANT TO WORK INDIVIDUALLY WITH THE CONSULTANT AND THEN THAT WERE BUT BUT WE MAY GET INTO A GROUP AND SAY SOMEBODY BRINGS UP SOMETHING THAT MAYBE WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT.

SO I BECAUSE I DON'T I WOULD RATHER US, YOU KNOW, MAKE DECISIONS AS A GROUP RATHER THAN NECESSARILY WORKING ONE ON ONE.

NOW, WHAT THAT TIMETABLE WOULD LOOK LIKE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I MAY SAY, WOW, THIS IS GREAT, BUT THE MAYOR MAY HAVE SOMETHING THAT SAYS AND THEN, WELL, WHERE, YOU KNOW, BUT I NEVER HAVE A CHANCE TO ADDRESS IT OR WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO GET BACK ABOUT IT.

SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THE LOGISTICS ON THAT LOOK LIKE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AT LEAST ONE DISCUSSION WHERE WE'RE DISCUSSING WHAT THAT 13TH AND 19TH ORDINANCE THAT WE WOULD READ TWICE WOULD LOOK LIKE.

MR. MAYOR, WE COULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION NEXT WEEK.

WE COULD DO WHAT WE CAN TO BRING BACK ALTERNATIVES IN THE NEXT WEEK.

HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH THE COUNCIL, GET FURTHER DIRECTION.

THEN WE WOULD BRING BACK THE ORDINANCES ON THE 13TH AND THE 19TH, IF THAT WOULD SUIT THE COUNCIL'S NEEDS.

AND WE DO HAVE WE HADN'T BEEN USING IT MUCH, BUT WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO USE THE MESSAGE BOARD TO HAVE SOME OF THESE DISCUSSIONS.

IF IF OUR FIRM BRINGS FORTH ALTERNATIVES, WE COULD POST IT AND DISCUSS IT.

NOW, WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING A GOOD JOB OF USING THAT.

SO I MEAN, THAT'S I MEAN THAT'S THE WHOLE THING.

RIGHT. RIGHT. VERSUS BECAUSE TO YOUR POINT LES, I MEAN, YOU HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH DENNIS AND YOU'RE ALL FOR IT AND SOMEBODY ISN'T IF IT'S OUT THERE ON THE MESSAGE BOARD, THAT WOULD SUFFICE.

BUT I AGREE WITH YOU, WE NEED TO GET TOGETHER.

AND OR MAYBE IT'S A COMBINATION OF THE TWO.

I MEAN, WE COULD PROBABLY ACCOMPLISH A LOT OF GROUND THROUGH THAT.

BUT I DO THINK ONE, ONE CONVERSATION WHERE WE ARE, WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT, OKAY, WE GOT TO WE GOT TO VOTE UP OR DOWN ON THIS.

AND WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF IN A TIME CRUNCH.

BUT SOME TYPE OF CONVERSATION BEFORE THAT I THINK WOULD BE BENEFICIAL.

I WANT TO BE MINDFUL OF THE OPEN MEETING ACT ALSO BECAUSE NOW I'M NOT WELL VERSED IN THE TEXAS LAW, BUT IN CALIFORNIA THAT COULD BE CALLED WHAT WE CALL A DAISY CHAIN, WHERE I TALK TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND FORM A CONSENSUS.

SO I WOULD PREFER TO HANDLE THESE THINGS IN PUBLIC TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE.

SORRY, STEPHANIE. SO JUST TO MAKE A NOTE ON THAT, IF WE USE THE MESSAGE BOARD THAT IS AN APPROVED FORMAT BY THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT SO MIC]. SO THANK YOU.

I JUST WANT TO BE CAREFUL THAT WE DON'T DO ANYTHING INADVERTENTLY VIOLATE THE LAW.

SO WE'VE GOT SOME SOME OPTIONS.

Y'ALL CAN CORRECT MY I DON'T HAVE MY CALENDAR, BUT YOU CAN CORRECT ME 23RD DISCUSSION.

COMING BACK, HAVING A COUPLE ALTERNATES FOR US THERE, DENNIS, YOU'LL WORK WITH THE LAWYER, WHICH I THINK HE'LL HE'LL TURN IT AROUND FOR YOU QUICKLY.

29TH STEPHANIE, CAN YOU LOOK AT THE 29TH? THAT'S FOLLOWING TUESDAY.

IT'S THE IT'S A MONDAY.

THE 29TH IS A MONDAY.

THE 30TH IS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.

THAT'S A BUDGET.

THAT'S A BUDGET DAY.

SO WE HAVE THE 30TH, THE 31ST, THE FIRST AND THE SECOND THAT WE COULD PUT THIS ON AS A, AS A DISCUSSION FOR A QUICK UPDATE AND STILL DO THE OTHER BUSINESS AT HAND, OR WE DO STRICTLY BUDGET THAT WEEK, WE COME BACK.

IS IT THE NINTH THAT I'M LOOKING AT, OR? WHAT'S THE DATE AT THE 5TH OF AUGUST? THE 5TH OF AUGUST, WHICH IS THE FIRST MONDAY.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT SO WE DO HAVE ONE OPEN DAY THERE THAT WE WE'RE NOT SCHEDULED TO MEET.

OTHERWISE WE'RE SCHEDULED TO MEET THE ENTIRE TIME.

SO WHAT I'M TRYING NOT TO DO TO MY COUNCIL IS SCHEDULE YOU EVERY WEEK AWAY FROM YOUR JOBS AND AND TO COLLABORATE SOME OF THIS.

SO I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE 23RD DISCUSSION AND LEAVING OURSELVES THE 30TH OR ONE OF THOSE DAYS DURING BUDGET WORKSHOP OR CATCHING IT ON THE 6TH TO AVOID THE NEED TO, TO HAVE TO VOTE ON THE 19TH.

WHICH I JUST THINK IF, IF WE WORK PRETTY WELL TOGETHER, WHICH I EXPECT US TO, I DON'T THINK WE'LL HAVE TO CALL THE SPECIAL SESSION ON THE 19TH.

WOULD WOULD JUST NEED A LITTLE INFO AND FEEDBACK FROM COUNCIL.

AND THEN I THINK WE'RE WE'RE READY TO WRAP UP HERE.

SO COUNCIL, WHAT'S YOUR COMFORT LEVEL AT MOVING AT THAT PACE, KNOWING THAT THE MESSAGE BOARD IS AVAILABLE AND THAT WE'RE PUSHING OUR CONSULTANT PRETTY HARD? GOOD OKAY OKAY.

YEAH WHEN YOU FINISH I JUST ONE MORE QUESTION.

OKAY. SO I THINK TO WRAP UP THEN NEXT STEPS WE'LL CONNECT YOU WITH MR. HYDE. LET HIM TAKE THAT FOR YOU.

DIRECT YOU TO COME BACK ON THE 23RD.

WE'LL HAVE ON ON OUR AGENDA DISCUSSION ITEM FOR YOU.

[02:10:02]

AND MR. MAYOR, I JUST WANT TO RESERVE THE RIGHT TO WORK WITH THE CITY MANAGER ON OUR SCOPE OF SERVICES, BECAUSE THIS IS EXPANDING WHAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY PUT IN OUR BID.

SO I MAY NEED TO ASK FOR SOME AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT, GIVEN THE ADDITIONAL WORK THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, BUT I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING I NEED TO RAISE.

OKAY. YEAH, BRING THAT BACK AT THE 23RD, IF YOU WOULD.

WE'LL DO OKAY. THANK YOU SIR.

ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THIS SIDE BEFORE WE GO BACK TO LES? OKAY. COUNCILMAN SIMPSON.

THERE'S ONE FINAL QUESTION IS, WHAT ADVICE WOULD YOU GIVE US TO A COUNCIL TO HAVE A SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME ON THIS? AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT APPROVAL.

I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT WHAT ARE SOME KEY FUNDAMENTAL THINGS SO THAT WE, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT WE PRESENT SOMETHING THAT'S CLEAR, EASY TO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT THAT PEOPLE CAN BE, YOU KNOW, THAT IT'S EASY TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ON.

AND AGAIN, AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT VOTERS DON'T DON'T DIG INTO THINGS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE JUST BUSY.

THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TIME ON THAT.

SO I THINK KIND OF WALK US THROUGH WHAT ARE THE KIND OF THE ONE OR 2 OR 3 KEY THINGS THAT COUNCIL SHOULD BE LOOKING AT TO MAKE THIS SUCCESSFUL, AND THEN HAVING SOMETHING ON THERE THAT THAT IS BENEFICIAL TO HELP EASILY EDUCATE THAT PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND.

WE CAN WORD IT IN A WAY THAT PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND IT, SO THAT WE CAN REALLY GET THE THAT WE'RE OFFERING A CHANCE FOR THE CITIZENS TO HAVE THIS INPUT.

WELL, THE FIRST THING IS, AND IT'S BEEN MENTIONED BEFORE, IS AVOID VOTER FATIGUE.

SO I THINK THAT PUTTING TOGETHER A LIMITED NUMBER OF VOTER OF MEASURES IS A GOOD IDEA.

I THINK ALSO MAKING THINGS AS CLEAR AND EASY TO UNDERSTAND AS POSSIBLE.

SOMETIMES HAVING TOO MANY IF THEN KIND OF FEATURES MAKES IT MORE CONFUSING TO PEOPLE MAKING THE LANGUAGE VERY CLEAR SO THAT IF YOU VOTE YES, YOU KNOW YOU'RE VOTING YES AND NOT WORD IT IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT'S CONVOLUTED.

SO FEWER NUMBER OF MEASURES, CLEAR LANGUAGE, EASY CONCEPTS, AND SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN EASILY HAVE MESSAGE DISCIPLINE THAT THE COUNCIL THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THERE ARE SUPPORTIVE.

KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE VOTING ON, THERE'S A CLEAR MESSAGE, AND IT'S CONSISTENT.

AND I THINK THE WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION, I BELIEVE, AT THE, AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL IS THAT THE STUDIES I'VE READ SAY THAT GENERALLY YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE MORE THAN FOUR MEASURES, IDEALLY THREE, BUT FOUR IS DOABLE.

AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT INFLUENCED US IN RECOMMENDING NO MORE THAN FOUR.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ADDRESSES YOUR QUESTION, BUT MAKE IT CLEAR, EASY TO UNDERSTAND AND NO HIDDEN AGENDAS IN THE MEASURE SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW WHAT THEY'RE VOTING ON AND WHAT IT MEANS WHEN THEY VOTE ON IT.

YEAH. HEY, MAYOR.

VERY GOOD. YES, SIR.

JUST TO RECAP, SO WHENEVER WE COME BACK WITH THE ALTERNATIVES, WHERE DID WE LAND ON THE MAYOR STAGGERED AT TWO YEARS.

IS THAT GOING TO BE PART OF THAT ALTERNATIVE? YEAH. WE DIDN'T LAND, SO WE'RE STILL IN THE DISCUSSION.

SO I THINK AS A DIRECTION SOMETHING LIKE THAT I THINK COULD BE HANDLED AT THAT DISCUSSION MEETING.

I DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO DIRECT YOU TO WRITE UP EVERY POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE OR ALTERNATE THAT YOU WOULD THINK OF.

I THINK PERHAPS JUST THE RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT WOULD BE THE ONLY ONE I'M DRIVING FOR.

AND REAL QUICK, ONE THING WITH THAT, AND AGAIN, WE'RE STILL IN THE DISCUSSION, BUT WHEN YOU WE MENTIONED TERM LIMITS AND IF YOU GO MAYOR TWO YEARS AND FULL TERMS I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS.

DOES THAT MEAN THAT HE'S LIMITED AT FOUR YEARS I MEAN TWO TWO YEAR FULL TERMS? OKAY. WELL I DON'T THINK THAT WAS ADDRESSED.

SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

THIS WAS THE EIGHT YEARS VERSUS TWO FULL CONSECUTIVE TERMS. WAS WAS WHAT WE WENT THROUGH IT QUITE A BIT AT THE COMMITTEE.

LET US WORK ON THAT LANGUAGE AND SEE WHAT WE CAN COME UP WITH.

WELL, WE GREATLY APPRECIATE YOUR EXPERTISE AND AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY WITH YOUR ADVICE.

AND I THINK WITH YOUR ADVISEMENT, COMING BACK WITH THOSE DIRECTIONS AND FOUNDATIONS, THEN I THINK WE'RE GOING TO LAND WHERE WE NEED TO BE.

AND THIS THIS STARTED OFF VERY CLEAR FOR US, YOU PRESENTED IT VERY WELL.

I KNOW IT WASN'T CLEAR.

YOU KNOW, KIND OF AT THE START IN THE DISCUSSION.

[02:15:02]

AND THIS IS, THIS IS VERY WELL PRESENTED AND EASY FOR US TO DIGEST.

MR. PITNER, ONE MORE THING.

IT'S KIND OF TO LES'S ISSUE EDUCATION, EDUCATION, EDUCATION.

AND I THINK THAT THE OLD PUBLIC I'M GOING TO THE OLD PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION HAT'S GOING TO COME ON AND I'M GOING TO PUT IT ON.

I THINK IT'S THE FIRST.

ONE OF THE FIRST EDUCATIONAL PIECES NEEDS TO BE FOR YOUR COUNCIL TO BRIEF YOU ALL ON WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T DO, AND WHERE THOSE LINES OF DEMARCATION ARE IN TERMS OF TAKING PERSONAL POSITIONS IN FAVOR OF YOU CAN DO THAT. YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T USE CITY RESOURCES.

I MEAN, YOU ALL GENERALLY UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT TAKE SOME TIME FOR THERE TO BE A PRIMER ON THIS.

I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT.

YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU ALL WENT INTO YOUR TERMS WANTING TO REESTABLISH TRUST BETWEEN THE CITY GOVERNMENT AND YOUR ELECTEDS.

AND I THINK YOU'VE GONE A LONG WAY TO DOING THAT.

AND I THINK IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU ALL TO CASH IN SOME OF THOSE CHIPS ON THE TRUST IF YOU WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THESE DEALS, THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT.

SO PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO UNDERSTAND PRECISELY WHERE THOSE LINES OF DEMARCATION ARE SO THAT YOU CAN HAVE, AS A CITIZEN, YOUR FULL THROATED OPINIONS OUT THERE FROM PEOPLE THAT YOU KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO TRUST YOU.

OKAY. ANYTHING FROM ANYONE ELSE HERE TODAY? MR. CHAIR, YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? NO. I THINK WE JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU.

AND NOW WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE ON THE COMMITTEE, SO THANK YOU.

YEAH. APPRECIATE YOU GUYS.

MOTION AND A SECOND TO ADJOURN I'LL ASK FOR.

I MOVE TO ADJOURN THIS MEETING SECOND.

GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND.

YOU'RE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.