[00:00:01]
ALL RIGHT.[1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/MOMENT OF SILENCE]
AND WELCOME TO THE CITY OF SEDONA COUNCIL MEETING.UH, MAYOR PLU WILL BE, UH, PARTICIPATING REMOTE TODAY.
SO I WILL BE LEADING, UH, THE MEETING LOCALLY HERE.
I'D LIKE TO OFFICIALLY CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER AT 4:31 PM IF YOU HAVE SILENT, IF YOU HAVE CELL PHONES WITH YOU, PLEASE SILENCE THOSE AT THIS TIME.
AND THEN, UH, PLEASE STAND WITH ME FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
ALL RIGHT, AND NOW PLEASE JOIN ME IN OBSERVING A MOMENT OF SILENCE.
MADAM CLERK, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLE MAYOR PLU.
AND, UH, I'D CERTAINLY LIKE TO RECOGNIZE OUR NEWEST EDITION TO THE SEDONA CITY COUNCIL.
AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS OVER THE NEXT YEAR.
AND I'M ENJOYING SERVING WITH YOU VERY WELL, THANK YOU.
[3. CONSENT ITEMS - APPROVE]
ALRIGHT, ITEM THREE, CONSENT ITEMS. UH, DOES ANYONE FROM COUNCIL, STAFF, OR PUBLIC DESIRE TO PULL AN ITEM OFF OF THE CONSENT AGENDA? IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT ITEMS THREE.ITEM FOUR APPOINTMENTS, WE HAVE NONE.
[5. SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS BY MAYOR/COUNCILORS/CITY MANAGER & COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS]
ITEM FIVE.SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS BY MAYOR, COUNCILOR, CITY MANAGER, AND COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS.
WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO SHARE? COUNCILOR KINSELLA.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO INVITE THE COMMUNITY TO COME STUFF AT THE BUS.
UH, THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT WAS DONE LAST YEAR, GREAT TO A GREAT SUCCESS ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 8TH FROM NINE 30 TO FIVE 30 UP AT POSSE GROUND PAVILION.
UH, THE SEDONA COMMUNITY IS INVITED TO BRING NEW AND UNWRAPPED TOYS FOR AGES NEWBORN TO 16 TO STUFF THE BUS.
ALL THE TOYS WOULD BE DONATED TO SEDONA TOYS FOR TOTS, AND THE GOAL IS TO FILL A SEDONA SHUTTLE BUS WITH TOYS, WHICH WILL THEN BE DISTRIBUTED TO LOCAL FAMILIES.
UM, GIFT GIVERS CAN LOOK FOR THE SEDONA SHUTTLE BUS PARKED AT THE HALF CIRCLE DRIVEWAY UP AT THE POSSE GROUNDS PAVILION.
AND ESPECIALLY WANT TO THANK THE SEDONA AIRPORT AND THE SEDONA FIRE DISTRICT FOR PARTNERING IN THIS COMMUNITY EVENT.
AND TO ALL OF YOU WHO ARE PARTICIPATING, AND THANK YOU IN ADVANCE.
ANYBODY ELSE? YES, COUNCILOR DUNTON.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE COMMUNITY.
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO SHOWED UP TO THE VERDE VALLEY CAREGIVERS COALITION GALA, UM, IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS A GREAT SUCCESS AND WE ARE HELPING SENIORS THROUGHOUT THE VERDE VALLEY, UM, THROUGH THAT ORGANIZATION.
I ALSO WANTED TO, UH, THANK EVERYONE WHO SHOWED UP TO, UH, COMMUNITY LIBRARY SEDONAS GET LOUD EVENT.
UM, IT WAS VERY NOISY, AT LEAST UNTIL IT STARTED RAIN AND, UM, IT LOOKED LIKE THE KIDS WERE HAVING A GREAT DEAL OF FUN.
AGAIN, IT'S A MAJOR FUNDRAISER FOR OUR COMMUNITY LIBRARY.
UM, AND SO I APPRECIATE EVERYONE WHO SHOWED UP.
AND JUST AS A THANK YOU TO WHOMEVER ON STAFF, PUT UP THE AWESOME METAL POSSE GROUND SIGNS.
UM, IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THEM, YOU SHOULD GO AND SEE THEM.
SO I JUST WANTED TO DO A SHOUT OUT TO STAFF FOR HAVING DONE A LITTLE BEAUTIFICATION UP AT POSSE.
FIVE A EXECUTIVE SESSION REPORT.
THANK YOU MR. VICE MAYOR AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION TODAY.
UH, CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED ITEM THREE B, THE TWO PROP 2 0 7 A RS 12, 11 31 NOTICE OF CLAIMS, UH, TO A FUTURE DATE.
[6. PUBLIC FORUM]
ITEM SIX, PUBLIC FORUM.THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYONE TO COMMENT ON TOPICS THAT ARE NOT OTHERWISE ON OUR AGENDA TODAY.
IF THIS IS A TIME THAT YOU'D LIKE TO, UH, SHARE INFORMATION WITH COUNCIL AND, UH, CITY, THEN PLEASE FILL OUT A CARD AND BRING
[00:05:01]
IT UP TO, UH, OUR CLERK.UH, FIRST UP TODAY WE HAVE TIM PERRY, TIM, YOU KNOW THE PROCESS NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE, PLEASE.
MY NAME IS TIM PERRY AND I LIVE IN SEDONA IN TONIGHT'S INSTALLMENT OF THE LIES TOLD BY THE CITY OF SEDONA.
I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS ONE NUMBER THAT KEEPS GETTING THROWN AROUND, WHICH IS THE IDEA THAT SEDONA GETS 3 MILLION TOURISTS A YEAR, NOT ACCORDING TO STAFF'S RESEARCH.
AND I FEEL IT'S NECESSARY TO BRING THIS UP BECAUSE THIS 3 MILLION VISITOR NUMBER KEEPS APPEARING IN BOTH OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS LIKE CHRIS OWL'S VERY UNINFORMATIVE SPY CAMS PRESENTATION, AND IT KEEPS GETTING CIRCULATED IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
I GOT A CALL THE OTHER DAY FROM SOMEONE WHO WAS INCREDULOUS TO LEARN, WE DON'T GET 3 MILLION TOURISTS A YEAR.
ACCORDING TO THE CITY'S LATEST REPORT.
THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF VISITS NOT VISITORS TO SEDONA AVERAGED ABOUT 3.22 MILLION A YEAR.
OVER A THREE YEAR PERIOD, THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUAL VISITORS AVERAGED 1.39 MILLION OVER THAT SAME PERIOD.
1.4 MILLION VISITORS IS NOT 3 MILLION.
THAT NUMBER ALSO INCLUDES AS THE REPORT NOTES, INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE COMING TO SEDONA FROM EITHER YAVAPAI OR COCONINO COUNTY.
WELL, WE'RE IN BOTH THOSE COUNTIES.
THEY'RE NOT VISITORS, THEY ARE LOCALS.
IF WE PLUG THE 38% OF VISITORS WHO ARE LOCALS INTO THAT 1.4 MILLION NUMBER, WE COME UP WITH ABOUT 862,000 TOURISTS.
BUT THAT'S ALSO AN IMPOSSIBLE CALCULATION BECAUSE THE DIFFERENCE IS MORE PEOPLE THAN LIVE IN THE TWO COUNTIES, WHICH IS ABOUT 400,000.
BUT MOST OF THEM DO VISIT SEDONA EACH YEAR.
SO IF WE SAY ABOUT THREE OUTTA FOUR OF EVERYONE WHO LIVES IN OUR LOCAL COUNTIES, THAT'S 300,000 TO BE TAKEN FROM THE 1.4 MILLION, WHICH MEANS SEDONA GETS ABOUT 1.1 MILLION TOURISTS A YEAR.
I KNOW THE 3 MILLION TOURISTS A YEAR HAS BEEN ENORMOUSLY USEFUL TO STAFF.
OVERSTATING THE NUMBER, PRETENDING WE HAVE SOME SORT OF OVERT TOURISM PROBLEM, HAS BEEN GREAT FOR LAUREN IN BUILDING UP A WHOLE NEW CITY DEPARTMENT, HIRING MORE PEOPLE SPENDING MORE MONEY, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT PETE FURMAN WARNED ABOUT TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO WHEN THE DEPARTMENT WAS FIRST SET UP.
AND IT'S ALSO BEEN GREAT FOR THINGS LIKE STEPHANIE FOLEY GETTING HER 30% STAFF INCREASE AND TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS BUDGET INCREASE BY POINTING TO THIS IDEA THAT 3 MILLION TOURISTS A YEAR ARE OVERWHELMING SEDONA, EXCEPT THAT THEY'RE NOT, IT'S NOT 3 MILLION A YEAR.
IT'S NOT 7 MILLION A YEAR LIKE SOME PEOPLE HAVE CLAIMED.
AND IT'S NOT 50,000 A DAY, EVEN ON THE BUSIEST DAYS.
IT'S JUST OVER A MILLION TOURISTS A YEAR.
AND IF THIS COUNCIL IS INTERESTED IN GREATER TRANSPARENCY, STAFF NEEDS TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT AND STOP MISINFORMING THE PUBLIC.
ALRIGHT, NEXT UP IS SANDY MAGID.
HOPEFULLY I PRONOUNCED THAT RIGHT.
AND IF ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO FILL OUT A CARD AND SPEAK AT THIS TIME, THEY NEED TO DO SO.
PLEASE, SANDY, PLEASE START WITH YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UH, SANDY MCG, SEDONA, ARIZONA.
SO, UM, I LIVE ON INSPIRATIONAL DRIVE AND I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE SPEEDING GOING ON THIS STREET VIEW.
UH, I THINK BIRCH, THEY ALL HAVE SPEED BUMPS, SO IF YOU LIVE HALFWAY ON VIEW, YOU'LL GO UP AND AROUND TO AVOID THE SPEED BUMPS AND COME FLYING DOWN OUR STREET.
UM, I'VE LIVED HERE ALMOST 20 YEARS IN THE SAME HOUSE.
I OWN A HOUSE AND THIS IS AN ONGOING PROBLEM.
I BROUGHT VINNY TODAY 'CAUSE HE'S AN IMPORTANT PART OF OUR COMMUNITY.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T WANNA SEE SOMETHING HAPPEN TO HIM.
AND, UH, YEAH, IT'S VERY CONCERNING.
WE HAVE, UH, THE SCHOOL BUS COMES DOWN, HE'S FLYING, SHE'S FLYING.
WHO'S EVER DRIVING IT? IT, IT'S THE CONSTRUCTION, UH, VEHICLES.
I'VE, UM, HAVE TALKED TO THE POLICE STATION ABOUT IT.
UM, THEY DON'T SEEM ALL THAT INTERESTED AND BEING ON A PRIVATE ROAD WRITING TICKETS, BUT PEOPLE ARE GOING, YOU KNOW, NOT 34, THEY'RE GOING LIKE 60, 80 MILES AN HOUR UP AND DOWN THE STREET ALL HOURS.
[00:10:01]
AND IT'S SO DARK.THERE'S NO STREET LIGHTS, THERE'S OLDER PEOPLE WALKING THEIR PETS.
SO EVERYBODY IS IN THE STREET.
AND I'M JUST, UM, OH, WHEN THEY WERE DOING THE WATER, THE WATER COMPANY, THEY PUT UP TEMPORARY SPEED BUMPS AND UM, THAT REALLY HELPED.
SO, UM, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE A LOT OF MONEY.
UM, AND I THINK EVERYBODY WOULD, UM, BE MUCH SAFER AND HAPPIER IF, UM, WE COULD SLOW THINGS DOWN.
OUR RULES DON'T ALLOW US TO SPEAK DIRECTLY TO ITEMS THAT THE PUBLIC BRINGS UP, UH, DURING PUBLIC FORUM, BUT WE ARE ABLE TO REFER TO CITY STAFF AND I SEE NODDING HEADS OVER THERE THAT, UM, I THINK, UH, WE WILL, WE'LL REACH OUT.
SO STAFF WILL BE IN TOUCH WITH YOU.
JOE, ANY OTHER CARDS? NO, VICE MAYOR.
[7.a. Introduction of Emergency Management Coordinator, Chance Wnuck.]
RIGHT.ITEM SEVEN, PROCLAMATIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS.
UH, SEVEN, A INTRODUCTION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR.
CHANCE, I'M NOT GONNA TRY TO PRONOUNCE YOUR LAST NAME, CHANCE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, VICE MAYOR, COUNSELORS, UM, MAYOR ON VIRTUAL LAND.
UH, STEPHANIE FOLEY, CHIEF OF POLICE, AND I HAVE CHANCE OOK WITH ME.
UH, HE, UH, STARTED HIS, UH, CAREER WITH US LAST MONDAY, NOVEMBER 17TH.
AND I JUST WANTED TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION REGARDING, YOU CAN COME BE UP HERE BECAUSE I'M GONNA PASS THE MIC TO YOU.
UH, SO JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT CHANCE.
HE HAS HIS DEGREE, BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN JUSTICE STUDIES WITH A MINOR IN PSYCHOLOGY, ALONG WITH HIS MASTER'S IN LEADERSHIP, WITH AN EMPHASIS IN HOMELAND SECURITY AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.
HE ATTENDED THE NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL CENTER FOR HOMELAND DEFENSE AND SECURITY EMERGENCE PROGRAM AIMED AT DEVELOPING PROFESSIONALS IN THE FIRST HALF OF THEIR CAREER TO SUPPORT LONG-TERM GROWTH IN THEIR ORGANIZATIONS.
CHANCE PREVIOUSLY WORKED FOR COCONINO COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AS A COORDINATOR FROM SEPTEMBER OF 2022 TILL NOVEMBER WHEN HE STARTED WITH US.
CHANCE IS FAMILIAR WITH SEDONAS EMERGENCY PLANS AND PILOT SIREN PROGRAM AND MAINTAINS RELATIONSHIPS ACROSS BOTH YAVAPAI AND COCONINO COUNTIES THAT WILL HELP SUPPORT, UM, ALL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MISSIONS.
SO I'LL PASS THE MIC TO HIM JUST TO SAY A FEW WORDS AND, UM, THANK YOU.
I'M REALLY EXCITED FOR HAVING HIM.
I'VE ALREADY BEEN PASSING OFF SOME, SOME ITEMS AND HE IS HIT THE GROUND RUNNING AND HE IS SUPER EXCITED, SO I'M EVEN MORE EXCITED.
THANK YOU, CHIEF MADAM MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, COUNSELORS, THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO INTRODUCE ME TODAY.
CHANCE OOK, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR.
I WANNA SAY THAT I'M, I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.
I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT PREPAREDNESS, AND I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT KEEPING PEOPLE SAFE.
I THINK A LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE TALK ABOUT EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, WE TALK ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, WHAT FEMA IS OR ISN'T DOING, WHAT THE FUTURE OF FEMA LOOKS LIKE.
BUT I THINK WE'VE LEARNED OVER THE YEARS THAT EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND THAT MISSION REALLY MATTERS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.
WE'RE TAUGHT AS EMERGENCY MANAGERS AT ALL INCIDENTS BEGIN AND END LOCALLY.
AND THAT'S ESPECIALLY TRUE WHEN A WILDFIRE OR A FLOOD HAPPENS.
WE KNOW THAT THE PEOPLE MOST AFFECTED ARE OUR RESIDENTS, OUR BUSINESSES, AND OUR VISITORS.
BECAUSE OF THAT, I'M EXCITED TO START WORKING WITH CITY STAFF AND WITH THE COMMUNITY TO ADVANCE OUR PREPAREDNESS AND ADVANCE OUR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MISSION.
AND I'M INCREDIBLY EXCITED TO BE HERE TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CITY OF SEDONA.
[7.b. Citizen’s Academy participants, certificate presentation.]
ITEM SEVEN B CITIZENS ACADEMY PARTICIPANTS CERTIFICATE OF PRESENTATION.OUR PUBLIC RELATIONS ANALYST, KEEGAN HALL, HAS ABLELY RUN THE PROGRAM THIS YEAR, AND SHE WILL BE INTRODUCING THE PARTICIPANTS AND I WILL HELP WITH PRESENTING THE CERTIFICATES.
MAYOR PLU IN VIRTUAL LAND, UM, VICE MAYOR FOLTZ AND COUNSELORS.
MY NAME IS KEEGAN HALL AND I'M THE PUBLIC RELATIONS ANALYST.
I'M GRATEFUL TO HAVE FACILITATED ANOTHER SUCCESSFUL CITIZENS ACADEMY, MANY OF WHOM ARE BEHIND ME, AND I'M THRILLED TO INTRODUCE YOU TO THEM.
THEY ARE 26 WONDERFUL RESIDENTS THAT WE HAVE LIVING RIGHT HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO ARE PASSIONATE, THEY'RE INFORMED, THEY'RE EDUCATED, AND THEY'RE READY TO HIT THE GROUND RUNNING.
[00:15:01]
GET FAMILIAR WITH THE FACES THAT YOU SEE BEHIND ME BECAUSE THEY WILL BE INVOLVED.ONE IS LOOKING TO BE, UH, PLANNING AND ZONING.
UM, ONE IS AN ACTIVE VOLUNTEER ALREADY WITH OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, SO THEY ARE ENTHUSED AND DEDICATED TO THIS CITY.
SO WE'RE GONNA HAND OUT CERTIFICATES NOW FROM THE VICE MAYOR, AND AS SOON AS I'M DONE WITH THAT, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A GROUP PHOTO AND THEN WE'LL HEAD OUTSIDE FOR SOME TREATS.
SO I'LL CALL SOME NAMES AND COME ON UP TO THE FRONT AND STAY THERE SO YOU CAN GET A HANDSHAKE IN YOUR CERTIFICATE.
STEVEN MOTT, GALE TI WE WILL WAIT TILL.
THE TURBO FILLS AREN'T HERE, BUT THERE'S GEORGE, ERNIE AND NANCY.
UH, COLLEEN CLAYTON, DOUG SULLIVAN.
EXCUSE MY, I'LL JUST LOOK AT YOUR GABBY IN CARAVA.
AND LINDA WEAVER, WHERE YOU, I THOUGHT I CALLED YOU.
I'M GONNA HAVE YOU, I UNDERSTAND.
AND THEN THE COUNCIL COULD JUST STAND RIGHT BEHIND.
THAT'D BE AMAZING, RIGHT? MY MOUTH.
AND THEN COUNCIL JUST SQU IN AND YEAH.
[8.a. AB 3260 Public hearing/discussion/possible action regarding adoption of a Resolution and Ordinance updating the City of Sedona’s Consolidated Fee Schedule.]
[00:20:24]
OKAY.ADAM, ADAM, ITEM EIGHT, REGULAR BUSINESS ITEM.
A AB 32 60 PUBLIC HEARING DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE.
UPDATING THE CITY OF SEDONAS CONSOLIDATED FEE SCHEDULE.
AND JOE, YOU'LL BE HANDLING THAT.
MAYOR PLU VIA TEAMS AND COUNCIL.
UM, EACH NOVEMBER WE BRING TO YOU THE CONSOLIDATED FEE SCHEDULE UPDATE.
THIS YEAR WE'VE GOT THREE DEPARTMENTS, UM, THE CITY CLERK WITH THE SHORT TERM RENTAL FEE UPDATE IN, UH, THE IT DEPARTMENT WITH THE GIS FEE INCREASE, AND THEN THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
ARE THERE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS YOU HAVE? COUNCILLOR GONZAL.
UM, I DID HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING, UH, THE PUBLIC WORKS.
UH, ON PAGE 19, THERE IS THE PROJECT PERMIT INSPECTION, AND THE NOTES SAY THAT THERE'S NO CHANGE, BUT THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE SEEMS, APPEARS $60 PER HOUR, FIRST HOUR.
AND WITH NOW, UH, THE NEW INTENT BEING $50 PER HOUR, NON PRORATED SECOND HOUR.
AND I JUST WANTED CLARIFICATION ON THAT, PLEASE.
UM, KURT HARRIS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, CITY ENGINEER, THANK YOU, KATHY, FOR YOUR INPUT AND SO ON.
THAT'S A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT COST, THAT'S ACTUALLY NEVER BEEN USED TO DATE.
IT'S JUST TO PROVIDE CONSISTENCY THROUGH ALL OF OUR, UH, FEES.
AND SO FAR WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY NEED OF IT.
IT'S THERE JUST IN CASE A CERTAIN PERMIT APPLICATION WAS JUST SPECIFIC TO RIGHT OF WAY.
MOST OF THOSE CONCERNS ARE DEALT WITHIN OUR DEVELOPMENT THROUGH OUR INSPECTORS, UH, PROCESSES AND FEES SCHEDULED THROUGH THEIR, UM, IN DEVELOPMENTS.
IS THIS A REDUCTION IN FEE FOR THE FIRST HOUR? AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS GOES TO A THIRD HOUR? IT JUST DOESN'T.
I, I JUST WASN'T CLEAR ON THAT.
I, IT HASN'T EVER NEEDED TO HAPPEN YET.
AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE JUST DID THAT AS PART OF THE CONSISTENCY.
IT'S PLACEHOLDER TO THE FEE SCHEDULES OF SERVICES PROVIDED BY PUBLIC WORKS TO THE PUBLIC.
SO AT THIS TIME, IT'S A HIGHLY LIKELIHOOD IT'LL EVER BE USED.
AND THE LIKELIHOOD OF GOING PAST AN HOUR IS VERY REMOTE.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? NO QUESTIONS.
JOE, I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION ON PAGE 14 OF THE PACKET, THE SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT, LATE FEE IS THAT, AND IT MAY BE A CURT QUESTION, IS THAT BASED ON HARD COSTS, JUST LIKE THE PERMIT FEE ITSELF IS? YES.
I BELIEVE WE GAVE YOU THE BREAKOUT OF THAT IN THE PACKET FOR THE, THE, UM, THE FEE JUSTIFICATION.
AND THAT'LL BE A ONE-TIME FEE.
AND THAT'S, UM, RELATED TO THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS BROUGHT TO YOU ON OCTOBER 14TH THAT YOU APPROVED.
UM, WE'VE NOW GOT THE, UM, LATE FEE ADDED TO THE CONSOLIDATED FEE SCHEDULE, AND THEN THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED JANUARY 1ST AFTER, UM, THE CONSOLIDATED FEE SCHEDULE GETS APPROVED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DO WE HAVE ANY CARDS ON THIS ITEM? NO.
IN THAT CASE, WE'RE READY TO MOVE TO DISCUSSION.
UH, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE DIOCESE? SEEING NONE, I'LL CALL FOR A MOTION.
COUNCILOR KINSELLA, I MOVE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 25 DASH, I'M SORRY, 18.
CREATING A PUBLIC RECORD ENTITLED 2025 AMENDMENTS TO THE SEDONA CONSOLIDATED FEE SCHEDULE.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE.
UM, YOU KNOW WHAT? I, THERE'S TWO.
[00:25:01]
'CAUSE WE, AND WE NEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SECOND MOTION ON THAT.
REGARDING THE ORDINANCE, UM, I MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NUMBER 20 25 12 12, ADOPTING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FEE SCHEDULE.
[8.b. AB 3298 Discussion/possible direction regarding approval of an Ordinance amending Sedona City Code Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) by adopting a new Chapter 15.60 (At Risk Grading Permits). (First Public Meeting)]
RIGHT.EM, I, EM WHY I KEEP SAYING THAT.
POSSIBLE DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE DIRECTION REGARDING APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SEDONA CITY CODE TITLE 15, BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION BY ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER, 15.60 AT RISK GRADING PERMITS.
AND THIS IS THE FIRST PUBLIC MEETING AND KURT'S GONNA HANDLE THIS ITEM? YES, MR. VICE MAYOR, UH, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, UH, THIS IS, UH, STEMS FROM THIS, UH, RECENT STATE BILL, UM, HB 24 47, UH, WHICH NOT ONLY CHANGED, UH, DESIGN OR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW IN THE CITY.
UH, IT ALSO REQUIRES, UH, THE CITY TO HAVE AN AT-RISK GRADING PERMIT, UH, PROGRAM THE CITY HAS DONE AT-RISK GRADING PERMITS IN THE PAST, UM, THROUGH A MORE OF AN INFORMAL PROGRAM.
AND SO THIS IS, UM, WAS THE GOAL HERE WAS TO HAVE COUNSEL, UH, PUT THEIR STAMP OF APPROVAL ON IT AND MAKE IT AN OFFICIAL ORDINANCE SO THAT IT WOULD, UH, PROVIDE DIRECTION TO ALL DEVELOPERS IN THE FUTURE.
WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IN ORDER TO GET A HEADSTART ON YOUR, ON YOUR GRADING? UH, SO THE PROPOSAL, THIS IS THE FIRST MEETING.
UH, WE INTEND TO BRING THIS BACK JUST IN TWO WEEKS, UM, TO HAVE IT TAKE EFFECT EARLY NEXT YEAR.
UM, AND 30 DAYS AFTER COUNCIL APPROVAL, UM, FROM WHAT WAS IN YOUR PACKET.
UH, WE HAVE MET WITH SOME MORE WITH PUBLIC WORK STAFF.
UM, SOME OF THE KEY MEMBERS WERE ON VACATION THE LAST, UH, COUPLE OF WEEKS.
UM, AND SO WE DO ON YOUR, ON THE SCREEN, HAVE A FEW ADDITIONS, UM, THAT I CAN GO THROUGH.
I'LL GO THROUGH THOSE JUST REAL QUICKLY AND THEN I CAN TAKE QUESTIONS.
SO, UH, AT, IN THE PURPOSE SECTION, UH, TALKING ABOUT AT RISK AND, AND WHAT'S THE, WHATEVER AT RISK KIND OF MEANS.
WE DID ADD IN A SENTENCE ABOUT FAILURE TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT WOULD REQUIRE RESTORATION OF THE PROPERTY.
IT'S KIND OF, UH, INFERRED IN MANY PLACES IN THERE, BUT WE WANTED IT SPELLED OUT RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING.
UM, HERE IN, UH, THE PROPOSED 6 15 60 0 4 0, UH, IT WAS UNCLEAR A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHO'S GONNA BE REVIEWING THE COMMENTS 'CAUSE BOTH THE, THE APPLICANTS AND STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS.
SO, AFTER THE CITY HAS PROVIDED ITS FIRST REVIEW OF COMMENTS, UM, THERE WAS QUESTIONS ABOUT EASEMENTS AND HOW MUCH, UH, GRADING WORK CAN BE DONE IN, IN CERTAIN EASEMENTS.
UH, AND IT WAS DETER GENERALLY, UH, MOST OF THE EASEMENT OWNERS AREN'T GONNA HAVE A CONCERN, BUT THERE COULD BE SOME SCENARIO WHERE THEY DON'T WANT EARLY AT RISK GRADING OVER, OVER THE EASEMENT.
AND THAT COULD INCLUDE CITY LIKE SEWER EASEMENTS.
AND SO, UH, WE ADDED IN THAT THE AT-RISK PERMIT WOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED, UM, WITH, IF IT'S GOING TO INCLUDE ANY GRADING OVER AN EASEMENT WITH PERMISSION OF THE, UH, EASEMENT OWNER.
AND THEN, UH, A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE AT-RISK BONDS.
UH, WE WANTED IT TO BE IN EFFECT UNTIL THE ISSUANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PERMITS OR AT LEAST 60 DAYS THEREAFTER.
UM, AND ALSO JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE, THE RESTORATION OF THE PROPERTY.
WE HAD THIS AT RISK PERMIT REVOCATION, BUT WE WERE KIND OF MISSING SECTION B, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT'S REVOKED.
UM, AND WHEN IT'S REVOKED, UH, THE, THE BOND CAN BE CALLED, UM, AND THEN THEY HAVE 30 DAYS TO RESTORE THE PROPERTY.
UM, AND SO THAT'S WHAT THAT ADDITION IS THERE.
UM, SO THOSE WERE THE CHANGES, UH, FROM WHAT WAS IN THE PACKET.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS JUST THE FIRST MEETING.
WE INTEND TO BRING THIS BACK, UH, DEPENDING ON, UH, COUNCIL'S DIRECTION IN, IN TWO MORE WEEKS.
SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL.
KURT, COULD YOU PUT UP THE LAST CHANGE THAT YOU MADE AGAIN, ABOUT THE 30 DAYS? I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO YES, SORRY.
SO IT WAS, THERE WASN'T AN A BEFORE.
THIS WAS ALL JUST UNDER ONE SECTION.
SO I ADDED THE A AND THEN B'S RIGHT HERE.
DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION, COUNSELOR? FURMAN? UH, NO.
THIS WAS A, A, A QUESTION THAT I HAD, UH, STATED DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS.
AND I'M GLAD TO SEE SOME, SOME MOVEMENT HERE.
AND THIS HASN'T BEEN FULLY REVIEWED BY PUBLIC WORKS STAFF.
'CAUSE AGAIN, SOME OF 'EM ARE JUST GETTING BACK FROM VACATION, UH, YESTERDAY AND TODAY.
UH, BUT THEY'LL BE TAKING A LOOK AT WHATEVER WE END UP AT
[00:30:01]
TONIGHT, UM, TO BRING BACK TO COUNCIL IN TWO WEEKS.SO THE, THE GOAL WAS, IT'S HARD TO BRING IT BACK TO THE, UM, YEAH, THE EXACT ONE.
AND THEN OFTEN WITH UNSTABILIZED SOIL AND IT RECENTLY, UM, YOU KNOW, REMOVING ALL THE, THE TREES AND STUFF THAT WE OFTEN HAVE FLOODING ISSUES, UH, DURING A RAIN EVENT AND THEN MUD.
AND SO THEY WANTED A, A, A DETENTION BASIN OF SOME SORT.
UM, IF IT'S A LARGE LOT, IT'S GONNA NEED A BIGGER DETENTION BASIN.
A A SMALLER LOT OF, YOU KNOW, SMALLER ONE MIGHT BE SUFFICIENT.
UH, BUT THAT'S BEEN ONE OF THE ISSUES WITH SOMEONE WHO HAS GRADED A PROPERTY AND THEN NOT FOLLOWED THROUGH WITH THE, THE REST OF THE PROJECT.
AND THE GOAL OF THE BOND WOULD BE THAT IF THEY DON'T RESTORE THE PROPERTY, RECEDE IT, REPLANT IT, UM, AND STABILIZE IT THAT THE CITY COULD, UH, USE THE BOND TO DO THAT WORK.
UM, KURT, YOU SAID THAT THIS HAS BEEN USED AT RISK, PERMITS HAVE BEEN GRANTED IN THE PAST, BUT MORE ON AN INFORMAL BASIS.
UM, THESE VARIOUS, I'M GONNA CALL 'EM REMEDIES, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD.
ARE THESE ALL INSTANCES OF THINGS THAT THE CITY HAS EXPERIENCED WITH THESE AT RISK? SO I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH, UM, THERE HAVE BEEN PAST EXAMPLES.
I DON'T KNOW THAT ALL OF THESE, THESE ARE ALL ONES THAT THEY CAN ENVISION HAPPENING.
I DON'T THINK THEY'VE ACTUALLY EXPERIENCED EACH ONE OF THESE SCENARIOS.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCILOR FIVE, AM I CORRECT IN ASSUMING THAT ANY ENVIRONMENTAL, UM, ARCHEOLOGICAL, ET CETERA, REVIEWS WOULD BE DONE IN ADVANCE OF THIS? UM, THAT'S, SO YES, THAT'S DONE.
UM, BEFORE THEY CAN EVEN APPLY FOR THE AN AT RISK ONE, THEY HAVE TO HAVE PROVIDED THEIR FIRST REVIEWS ON THE, ON THAT GRADING PLAN.
SO IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE AS PART OF THAT PROCESS, OR THEY'VE COMPLETED THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, WHICH WOULD'VE BEEN DONE DURING THAT PROCESS AS WELL.
BUT I CAN DOUBLE, I CAN DOUBLE CHECK.
I'M GONNA LEAVE MYSELF A NOTE HERE.
ACTUALLY, I'LL JUST WRITE IT DOWN.
SO THE ANSWER IS YES, I BELIEVE, BUT LET ME DOUBLE CHECK.
AND DO THEY ALSO HAVE TO HAVE A STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PERMIT? UH, YES.
SO THAT IS PART OF THE LONG CHECKLIST THAT THEY HAVE TO, RIGHT HERE, PROPOSED STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN.
SO MISSED THAT AS PART OF THE APPLICATION THAT THEY NEED TO SUBMIT AND COMPLY WITH.
AND THEN SOME OF THESE GET DOWN HERE, UH, ARE MORE RARE, UM, LIKE THE 4 0 4, UM, PERMIT, UM, THAT GENERALLY WON'T BE APPLICABLE, BUT THEY, IT COULD, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON HOW CLOSE TO OAK CREEK IT IS.
UH, AND SO WE LIST THOSE IN THERE JUST IN CASE.
JUST WAITING FOR KURT TO FINISH WRITING.
SO STICKING WITH THIS LIST, UH, THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT ARE COVERED IN HERE ARE, ARE INFRASTRUCTURE, REALLY.
BUT MY QUESTION, AND I BROUGHT THIS UP IN MY MEETING YESTERDAY WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND DEPUTY MANAGER, UM, REGARDING AMENITIES.
UM, WHAT, WHAT I WAS THINKING, WHAT CAME TO MIND WAS WHEN PARK PLACE WAS BUILT, UH, THERE WAS, THESE WERE NOT PUBLIC, UM, INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES, BUT THERE WERE AMENITIES THERE THAT WERE NOT COVERED.
PEOPLE HAD NO WAY TO RECOUP THAT THOSE THINGS WERE NOT SUPPLIED, THAT THEY WERE NOT FINISHED.
COULD THERE BE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AT, AT RISK, YOU KNOW, A BOND THAT WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE SURE THAT THINGS GET FINISHED OUT.
IS THERE A WAY TO COVER AMENITIES? LIKE I'M THINKING OF IN SOME OF THE PROJECTS, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE APPLY DIGA, UM, AND PEOPLE GET, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPERS GET A BENEFIT FOR THAT, BUT WE'RE NOT COVERING AMENITIES THAT WE MIGHT BE REQUIRING OR ASKING FOR IN SOME OF THE DESIGN WORK SUCH AS SHADE STRUCTURES OR A DOG PARK OR A POOL, WHATEVER IT IS THAT'S IN THERE, RIGHT? UM, SHOULDN'T WE BE PROTECTING THOSE ITEMS AS WELL? SO THIS IS JUST FOR, UH, THE GRADING THAT OCCURS PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION.
AND IT WOULD BE ON A, GENERALLY A SINGLE OR MAYBE LIKE TWO PARCELS.
IT'S GONNA BE SO, SO THE SCENARIO YOU'RE THINKING OF, COUNCILOR ELLI, I THINK WOULD APPLY IN LIKE A SUBDIVISION.
UM, THAT'S WHERE AMENITIES COMING TO.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A MULTIPLE LOTS BUILT PARK PLACE WAS A, A SUBDIVISION.
THE CITY APPROVED THE SUBDIVISION PLAT, UH, AND INCLUDED SOME OF THOSE AMENITIES, UH, STAFF CAN DEFINITELY LOOK INTO.
AND, AND IN FACT, THIS IS, THIS HAS RAISED AN
[00:35:01]
INTERESTING QUESTION, UH, REQUIRING A, A BOND FOR THESE AT RISK PERMITS.AND IT, AND IT MAKES SENSE AND, AND A LOT OF CITIES DO BECAUSE THEY'RE AT RISK AND, AND THINGS DO GO WRONG.
UM, WE DO NOT CURRENTLY REQUIRE ANY TYPE OF BOND FOR, WE REQUIRE, UH, A BOND FOR SUBDIVISIONS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.
SO THE STREETS AND ROADS AND STUFF, BUT NOT FOR THE PRIVATE AND AMENITIES, BUT ALSO JUST IN A REGULAR DEVELOPMENT, THE CITY DOES NOT REQUIRE A BOND FOR, UH, CONSTRUCT ISSUE, CONSTRUCTION PERMIT OR ISSUE.
THE FINAL GRADING PERMIT DOESN'T REQUIRE A BOND EITHER.
UM, SO THAT'S THE, UM, RECENTLY THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP, LIKE THE ALCHEMIST PROJECT STARTED GRADING AND THEN HASN'T MOVED CURRENTLY.
UH, THERE'S NO, THE CITY DIDN'T, DOES NOT REQUIRE A BOND IN THAT TYPE OF SCENARIO.
SO WHAT YOU'RE ASKING COUNT COUNCILLOR KINSELLA IS SHOULD WE REQUIRE A BOND FOR THE COMPLETION OF PERMITS AND, UH, GRADING, FINAL GRADING, UM, PERMITS.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING STAFF'S GONNA BE LOOKING INTO, BUT WE DON'T, WE DO NOT CURRENTLY.
IT WOULDN'T FIT IN HERE AT THE AT GRADE SCENARIO.
UM, AND THIS, UM, I, I GUESS THEY COULD DO THIS AS PART OF A SUBDIVISION, UM, BUT IT WOULD STILL JUST BE THE INITIAL PART.
SO IF THIS WOULD ONLY BE CALLED AS IF THEY, THEY STARTED THE AT-RISK GRADING AND THEN FAILED TO EVEN MOVE.
IS WHEN THIS WOULD COME INTO EFFECT.
BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT STAFF IS ACTIVELY LOOKING INTO IT FOR THIS HAS RAISED THAT QUESTION, AND SO THAT'S, SO STAFF IS GONNA BE REVIEWING THAT? YES.
JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON COUNCILLOR ELLA'S QUESTION, IS STAFF ALSO LOOKING AT BEYOND TWO AMENITIES AND LIKE THAT COUNSELOR BROUGHT UP? OKAY.
AND, AND THERE'S, THERE, THERE'S, UH, THERE ARE OTHER CODE PROVISIONS THAT HELP CONTROL THAT TYPE OF SCENARIO.
UM, EVEN WITHOUT THE BONDING, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THINGS THAT THE CITY CAN DO, UM, CERTAIN NOTE, CERTAIN VIOLATIONS THAT CAN HELP CLEAN UP PROPERTIES.
NOT TO COUNCILOR ELLA'S POINT ABOUT NOT PROVIDING AMENITIES, BUT FOR LIKE THE ALCHEMIST THING, THERE'S, THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT THE CITY CAN DO WITHOUT HAVING TO CHANGE ORDINANCES RIGHT NOW.
BUT THIS SEEMS LIKE IF WE'RE GONNA REQUIRE PERMITS FOR THE AT RISK BEGINNING PART, SHOULD WE, OR BONDING SHOULD WE REQUIRE BONDING, UH, FOR THE REST OF THE PROJECT AS WELL.
AND SO THAT'S RAISED THAT QUESTION.
OTHER QUESTIONS, MAYOR PLU? ANY QUESTIONS? NO QUESTIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY CARDS ON THIS ITEM? NO.
BRINGING IT BACK TO DISCUSSION, THEN COMMENTS, I GUESS I'LL SAY, I SEE LUKE SEFTON SITTING OUT THERE AND I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE HERE FOR THIS ITEM.
IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HEAR A THUMBS UP? OKAY.
ANYBODY ELSE WITH COMMENTS? OKAY.
UM, YOU HAVE SUFFICIENT DIRECTION THEN FOR TONIGHT? UH, YEAH.
SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S, UH, WE'VE GOT THOSE PROPOSED CHANGES.
STAFF WILL BE DOING A FINAL REVIEW, AND YOU CAN SEE THIS IN YOUR PACKET IN TWO WEEKS.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'LL JUST PUT IT ON THE, THE CONSENT AGENDA UNLESS I HEAR ANY OBJECTION RIGHT NOW.
[8.c. AB 3280 Discussion/possible action on amending the Sedona City Council Rules of Procedures and Policies.]
ITEM EIGHT C AB 32 80 DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE ACTION ON AMENDING THE SEDONA CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURES AND POLICIES.AND KURT, YOU'RE STILL ON THE HOT SEAT? I'M STILL HERE.
UH, SO IF IT MIGHT BE EASIEST, I TOOK A, I HIGHLIGHTED, I HEARD BACK FROM, UM, SOME COUNSELORS AND, AND I, SOME OF THEIR IDEAS I ADDED, UM, IN HERE THAT I AGREED WITH AND THOUGHT WAS A GOOD IMPROVEMENT TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE.
UM, JUST THE HAND, JUST THE HAND I OF FOUR OR FIVE OF THEM I HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW.
UM, AND THEN I KNOW COUNCIL HOUSE ALSO HAD MORE THEY WANTED TO DISCUSS.
SO LET'S, IF IT'S OKAY, WE'LL START WITH THAT.
UM, BUT THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF, UH, COUNCIL'S FULL DAY MEETING THAT WE HAD, UM, UH, LAST MONTH ON THE RULES OF PROCEDURE.
UM, UH, AMENDING A NUMBER OF SECTIONS.
AND, UM, THIS DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THE LAST DAY.
IF WE DON'T, YOU KNOW, IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS NOW, WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND REVISIT THIS ANOTHER TIME.
UM, BUT WE'RE DOING PRETTY WELL ON TIME TONIGHT.
SO, UM, THE BEGINNING ONE IS HERE, THE, UH, ETHICAL RULES OF ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF ETHICAL CONDUCT.
AND, UH, COUNSELOR HAD A, STILL FELT THIS WAS WORDY AND PROPOSED A DIFFERENT CHANGE.
I FEEL LIKE IT MAKES THE MOST SENSE TO MAYBE JUST CUT OUT THE HIGHLIGHTED PART AND PUT, I WILL CONDUCT MYSELF SO I TO MAINTAIN PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN THIS CITY,
[00:40:01]
PERIOD.BECAUSE IT WAS THE GOVERNMENT TO ACT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THIS COMMUNITY.
THAT STARTS TO GET KIND, KIND OF WORDY.
UM, I THINK IT MIGHT JUST MAKE THE MOST SENSE, AND THIS IS A BROAD, YOU KNOW, THIS IS YOUR, YOUR CODE OF ETHICS.
UM, SO IF YOU WERE TO DELETE THAT, IT WOULD JUST SAY CONDUCT MYSELF.
SO AS THE MAIN PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN THE CITY.
UM, 'CAUSE NO MATTER I KEPT, I KNOW WE ALL TRIED TO KIND OF MAKE THIS SOUND MORE LIKE NORMAL LANGUAGE THAT IT WAS, IT WASN'T, IT WASN'T COMING OUT RIGHT.
WE HAVE LIKE 10 WORDSMITHS ON THAT.
UM, THERE WAS A SUGGESTION TO ADD, MAINTAIN CONFIDENTIALITY WE'RE REQUIRED.
UM, AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE DO ARE TRYING TO BE AS OPEN AS POSSIBLE.
UM, AND A LOT OF WHAT WE DO OBVIOUSLY IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE CONFIDENTIAL.
UM, BUT IT DOES COME UP AN OCCASION, UH, LIKE DURING LITIGATION OR EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.
AND THEN, AND WE CAN COME BACK AND GO THROUGH THIS.
UM, THERE WAS A SUGGESTION TO ADD WHERE YOU OCCURRED.
SO THIS IS RULE, UM, TWO E CONDUCT IN UNOFFICIAL PUBLIC SETTINGS.
AND IN THERE IT SAID COUNSELORS ARE TO REFRAIN FROM MAKING NEGATIVE PERSONAL COMMENTS ABOUT COUNSELORS.
UH, AND THERE WAS ONE SUGGESTION JUST TO ALSO MAKE REFRAIN FROM MAKING NEGATIVE COMMENTS ABOUT STAFF OR, OR, OR BEYOND THE CRITICISM OF COUNSELOR OR STAFF'S OPINION POSITION.
SO YOUR PER, YOU'RE OF COURSE ALLOWED TO DISAGREE AND CRITICIZE AN OPINION, UM, OR A POSITION, BUT NOT NECESSARILY GO TO PERSONAL ATTACKS.
AND SO ONE COUNSELOR SUGGESTED ADDING IN STAFF TO BOTH OF THOSE.
I'M NOT HEARING ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT.
I'M GONNA SCROLL DOWN TO THIS ONE.
UM, SO THIS IS RULE TWO L, ENFORCEMENT OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE.
THIS IS OUR PRIVATE REPRIMAND AND PUBLIC CENSURE.
I HAD A QUESTION THAT I GAVE YOU ABOUT G THREE.
MY CONCERN WAS THAT IT LOOKED LIKE, UH, THERE COULD BE A RESTRICTION ON CASUAL CONVERSATION, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE STRIKING THE RIGHT BALANCE AND NOT PUTTING SOMETHING ON THERE.
SO, UH, COUNCILLOR KINSELLA BROUGHT UP HERE WHERE IT SAYS COUNSELORS SHOULD AVOID DISRUPTION OF CITY STAFF FROM THEIR JOBS.
SHE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE STILL ALLOWED TO TALK CASUALLY WITH CITY STAFF MEMBERS.
I DIDN'T SEE THAT AS A CONFLICT.
UM, YOU'RE CERTAINLY ALLOWED TO SAY, HI, HOW ARE YOU? IF YOU HAVE A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP, TALK TO 'EM A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THEIR FAMILY.
YOU'RE JUST NOT ALLOWED TO DISRUPT THEIR JOB.
UM, AND THEN YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DIRECT STAFF AND ASK, YOU KNOW, INFORMATION THAT GETS INTO ALL THE REST OF THOSE, THOSE SECTIONS.
SO I DIDN'T SEE THAT AS AN ISSUE.
COUNSELOR KINSELLA, I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OTHER COUNSELOR FEELS LIKE THIS PREVENTS THEM FROM HAVING CA CASUAL CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF MEMBERS.
KURT, I THINK AS YOU CONTINUE TO ROLL THROUGH THIS, IF YOU CAN TELL US WHAT PAGE OF THE 43 OR WHAT PACKET PAGE SURE.
I DON'T HAVE, UH, SO THAT WE CAN KEEP UP WITH YOU.
YEAH, THE, THE, THE, THE PAGE OUT OF THE 43 IS IN THE PACKET.
I, I, I MEAN, I THOUGHT ABOUT ANY OTHER, I MEAN, YOU COULD PUT IN OTHER THAN CASUAL CONVERSATION, BUT I, I WAS CONCERNED BECAUSE I THINK SOMETIMES, UH, CASUAL CONVERSATIONS CAN RUN LONG AND BE MISCONSTRUED AS TO, YOU KNOW, INTERRUPTING.
BUT I, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE WERE PUTTING SOMETHING IN HERE THAT FURTHER TIED.
UH, UH, IT'S A PROHIBITION, UM, DISRUPTION PROBABLY FINE.
WE'LL SEE IF IT CREATES A PROBLEM.
WELL THEN MOVING DOWN TO PAGE, UM, SEVEN OF 43.
IT BEGINS ON PAGE SIX OF 43, THOUGH.
RULE TWO L ENFORCEMENT OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE ARE PRIVATE REPRIMAND AND PUBLIC CENSURE, UH, PROCEDURE.
THIS IS IN THE PRIVATE REPRIMAND.
UM, AFTER YOU, AFTER A COUNSELOR RECEIVE THE PRIVATE REPRIMAND, UH, THEY'RE THEN ELIGIBLE FOR, UM, AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BY COUNSEL, UM, TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN ADDITIONAL PRIVATE REPRIMAND IS NEEDED.
THE CLARIFICATION WAS ADDED IN BY THE COUNSEL TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE, UM, AT THIS POINT IT'S NO LONGER, UM, A, A MAYOR OR VICE MAYOR THING WITH THE COUNSELOR, DEPENDING ON WHO'S, WHO'S BEEN, UH, CHARGED WITH THE VIOLATION.
IT'S GONNA BE BY ALL OF COUNCIL.
SO THE HIGHLIGHTED PART BY THE COUNCIL IS WHAT WAS
[00:45:01]
ADDED IN.THIS ONE CAME UP, UM, AS WELL.
SO NOW WE'VE GOT THE COUNCIL, GOOD STANDING STATUS LOSS OF GOOD STANDING CAN BE DONE BY A, UH, TWO THIRDS VOTE OF COUNCIL OF THE PUBLIC CENSURE.
UM, AND THEN WE GET DOWN TO THE DURATION THAT IT'S GONNA REMAIN INTO EFFECT UNTIL COUNCIL RESCINDS IT BY A MAJORITY VOTE.
THE QUESTION WAS BROUGHT UP WHETHER THAT SHOULD BE A TWO THIRDS VOTE SINCE IT TOOK TWO THIRDS TO IMPOSE IT.
DO WE WANNA LOWER STANDARD TO BE ABLE TO RESCIND IT, UM, VERSUS THE HIGHER STANDARD OR THE COUNCILORS REELECTED? SO, UM, I DON'T HAVE STRONG FEELINGS EITHER WAY, IT SEEMS, I MEAN, KIND OF NICE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A LOWER BAR TO GET OUT OF, YOU KNOW, THE CORNER WITH YOUR CSU HAT ON THAN TO GET INTO IT.
BUT, UM, IT'S UP TO COUNCIL ON, ON THAT ONE.
SO, UH, YEAH, WHOEVER BROUGHT IT UP, CAN, THAT WAS ME.
I, I THOUGHT THAT SINCE IT WAS TWO THIRDS TO, YOU KNOW, GET THAT CENSURE, THAT THAT'S A PRETTY SERIOUS ACTION TO TAKE.
AND SINCE IT IS SO SERIOUS THAT THERE SHOULD BE AS MUCH CONSIDERATION GIVEN AND SUCH A THRESHOLD FOR LIFTING THE CENSURE.
SO IT WAS ME WHO RAISED THE POINT OF, OF BRINGING IT TO A TWO THIRD VOTE.
UM, I DO THINK THAT THAT'S A BETTER IDEA.
I DON'T THINK THAT THE THRESHOLD TO LIFT THE LOSS SHOULD BE LESS THAN TO HAVE IMPOSED IT.
WHAT DO OTHER COUNSELORS THINK? UH, COUNCILOR FURMAN? YEP.
I AGREE WITH COUNCILOR KINSELLA.
IT'S A SERIOUS ACTION AND IT SHOULD BE A EQUAL STANDARD TO LIFT.
COUNCILLOR HASSI, ANYTHING? I AGREE.
YOU AGREE WITH THAT? COUNCILLOR F I'M INDIFFERENT.
OKAY, MAYOR PLU, HOW ABOUT YOU? I AGREE, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION.
DO WE HAVE A STANDARD FOR HOW YOU, YOU KNOW, WHAT WERE, WHAT ARE THE DETERMINATIONS FOR WHETHER GOOD BEHAVIOR, AND I SAY THAT WITH QUOTES, HAS OCCURRED TO TAKE THE SANCTION AWAY.
DO WE HAVE ANY OBJECTIVE STANDARDS? NO.
THE, I MEAN, THE ONLY OBJECTION STANDARD IS YOU'RE COMPLYING WITH THE RULES OF PROCEDURE.
SO I THINK IF YOU'RE COMPLYING WITH ALL THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, UM, BUT OTHERWISE THE, IT'S UP TO COUNSEL TO DETERMINE THE DURATION IS HOW THIS IS SET UP.
SO COUNSEL IS NOT IMPOSING ANY, UH, SET DURATION OR ANY OTHER STANDARD HERE THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO, TO, TO BE, TO BE CONVERTED BACK INTO GOOD STANDING.
THERE'S A MAJORITY THAT SUPPORTS, UH, MAINTAINING THE HIGHER BAR.
SO LET'S GO WITH THAT AND CONTINUE ON, KURT.
SO I WILL CHANGE THAT TO TWO THIRDS VOTE OF THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL TO CORRESPOND WITH A DECISION ABOVE THAT IT TAKES TWO THIRDS OF THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL, UH, TO IMPOSE IT.
UH, THE NEXT ONE, IF I RECALL, UM, SO THIS IS RULE THREE, UH, PAGE 10 OF 43.
UM, UH, COUNSELOR KINSELLA BROUGHT UP A, UM, THE ABILITY TO APPEAL THE CHAIR'S, UH, DECISION.
SO, UH, PRESIDING OFFICER, WHOEVER'S CHAIRING THE COUNCIL MEETING, WHETHER THE MAYOR OR THE VICE MAYOR, UH, CAN MAKE ANY OF, HAS THESE FOLLOWING POWERS.
UH, BUT ANY OF THOSE POWERS, ANY OF THE FIRST THREE ANYWAY, CAN BE APPEALED TO ALL OF CITY COUNCIL.
UM, AND SO COUNCILOR KINSELLA HAD SUGGESTED PUTTING THAT IN TO RESOLVE QUESTIONS OF PARLIAMENTARY LAW PROCEDURE.
UM, IT STATES IT IN TWO AND, AND B TWO ALREADY.
UM, AND SO WE COULD PUT IT THERE, BUT IT ALSO APPLIED TO B ONE A AND B.
AND SO I FIGURED IT'D JUST BE BEST TO PUT IT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT THERE'S THIS APPEAL PROCEDURE RIGHT BELOW, UM, AHEAD OF THOSE THREE MOTIONS.
SO I'M NOT SURE IF THAT WORKS FOR YOU.
COUNCILOR KINSELLA PUTTING THAT IN, PARENTHETICALLY THAT THERE'S A REFERENCE DOES.
SO NOW IT'S, IT'S A FRONT END BEHIND.
SO, AND WE'VE DISCUSSED IT ALL OF COUNCIL KNOWS THAT IF THEY DON'T LIKE THE RULE, UH, THAT THE CHAIR'S MADE ON MOTIONS BEING OUT OF ORDER, UM, WHETHER SPEAKERS HAVE, YOU KNOW, ARE BEING UNC COURTEOUS OR GOING TOO LONG, UM, AND, OR, UM, ANY OTHER QUESTION OF PARLIAMENTARY LAW, THEY CAN IMMEDIATELY APPEAL THAT DECISION TO ALL OF CITY COUNCIL.
[00:50:06]
YEAH, SORRY, I DIDN'T WRITE THESE ALL DOWN.SO THE NEXT ONE IS IN THREE SIX, I THINK RULE THREE.
3D SIX COUNCILLOR KINSELLA HAD ONE.
AGAIN, I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR A PARENTHETICAL REFERENCE TO SECTION 11 SINCE SECTION 11 GOVERNS IT.
OH, I DON'T RE I MUST HAVE MISSED THAT ONE.
UM, AND THAT'S UP IN RULE BECAUSE IT CUTS OFF DISCUSSION.
NO FURTHER DISCUSSION WILL BE ALLOWED AFTER A MOTIONS ARE VOTED ON UNLESS THERE IS A MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
MOTIONS TO RECONSIDER HAVE AN ENTIRE SECTION THAT GOVERNS IT.
SO I THOUGHT THAT WE SHOULD PARENTHETICALLY PUT THAT REFERENCE TO C-SECTION 11.
YEAH, IT'S E 11 RULE RULE THREE 11, RIGHT? SORRY.
THREE E 11, RULE THREE, RIGHT? E 11, RIGHT, RIGHT.
MISSES ON ALL MY WHOLE, MY WHOLE PAPER HERE IS ALMOST DONE.
ALL RIGHT, KURT, WE'RE, WE'RE GETTING THERE.
UH, SO RULE THE NEXT ONE WAS IN CLEAR DOWN A RULE FOUR.
UM, SO THIS IS PAY PACKET PAGE 20, OR, UM, THE RULES PAGE 21 OF 43.
UH, THIS IS THE, UH, RANK CHOICE VOTING, UH, PROCEDURE.
SO THIS IS, AND THIS IS WHAT, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE WE SHOULD JUST HAVE A, WE COULD HAVE PREPARED, WE NEED A, A MOCK VOTE OR SOMETHING TO TRY IT OUT AND SEE IF WE ACTUALLY ALL LIKE IT.
UH, I, I THINK YOU SHOULD ACTUALLY, SO, OR WE'LL PUT IT IN HERE.
WE'LL TRY IT THE NEXT TIME IT COMES UP TO SEE IF WE LIKE IT, FIND OUT WE DO OR DON'T.
BUT, UM, UH, ONE GOOD SUGGESTION WAS FROM COUNCILOR FURMAN.
ANY NOMINATED COUNSELOR MAY WITHDRAW THEIR NAME AT ANY TIME.
UM, I FELT LIKE, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS ALREADY IN THERE, BUT IT'S CLEAR, CLEAR TO MAKE THAT KNOWN.
SO EVEN AFTER YOU'RE ON A BALLOT, UM, AND YOU WERE OKAY AT FIRST, AND THEN YOU HAVE SECOND THOUGHTS, AND YOU DON'T WANNA BE, YOU CAN WITHDRAW YOUR NAME, UM, AT ANY TIME IN THIS PROCESS.
UH, SO THAT'S, UH, ONE PROPOSED CHANGE, WHICH I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES.
UM, SO MY QUESTION IS, THIS STILL REQUIRES JUST, THIS LOOKS LIKE A LOT OF WORK FOR THE CLERK BECAUSE OF THE WRITTEN BALLOT.
THAT IS, IS THERE ANY WAY TO DO THIS THE SAME PROCEDURE OR RANK CHOICE VOTING, BUT BY A VOICE VOTE OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD NOT CREATE THE SAME BURDEN ON, ON THE CLERK? SO THE, THE WAY I SEE IT IS THE CLERK ACTUALLY JUST PREPARES A FORM OKAY.
AND PUTS EVERYONE'S NAME ON IT.
AND THEN YOU HAVE YOUR, SO YOU HAVE THE CANDIDATES ON ONE SIDE, AND THE, THE SPOTS ONE THROUGH HOWEVER MANY, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I FIND IT HARD TO FIND THAT TO BE MORE THAN THREE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE VYING FOR ANY ONE SPOT, BUT MAYBE THERE'S FOUR, MAYBE THERE'S FIVE.
UM, SO
USUALLY, YOU KNOW, UH, SOME PEOPLE ARE HAPPY NOT TO HAVE TO TRY TO CHAIR THE MEETING.
THAT'S AN EXTRA EXTRA BIRDED, YOU KNOW, THAT SOMETIMES DOESN'T COME WITH A LOT OF BENEFITS.
BUT, UM, SO THE FORM'S ALREADY PREPRINTED.
IT'S FOR COUNSEL TO FILL OUT THE FORM WITH THE, I MEAN, WE CAN, WE COULD, UH, YOU KNOW, FILL OUT THE CHOICES, YOU KNOW, UH, FILL OUT THE POTENTIAL CHOICES.
BUT THEN COUNCIL'S GONNA HAVE TO HAND WRITE IN WHO THEIR, WHO THEIR, THEIR CHOICES ARE ONE THROUGH THREE.
THAT'S THE PART WHERE IT GOT CUMBERSOME FOR ME, BECAUSE THEN THE, THE PAPERS HAVE TO BE COLLECTED AND, AND THE PAPERS GET COLLECTED, BUT THERE'S NOTHING TO DO.
SO THERE'S ONLY SEVEN BALLOTS TO COUNT.
WE'RE NOT TALKING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT IN NEW YORK CITY WITH, YOU KNOW, MILLIONS OF BALLOTS TO TRY TO COUNT AND RANK.
UH, SO YOU HAVE THE SEVEN, IF THERE'S A MAJORITY IN THAT FIRST COUNT, THEN IT'S OVER.
IF THERE'S NOT A MAJORITY, THEN THE LOW ONE GETS ELIMINATED, WHICH, UH, WILL, THEN THOSE BALLOTS MIGHT, WILL END UP WITH A NEW FIRST CHOICE PERSON.
UM, WHOEVER HAD THE LOWEST RANKING.
AND SO YOU JUST, YOU'RE GONNA, YOU GONNA SCRATCH THAT OUT AND THEN YOU'LL COUNT AGAIN.
AND SO THERE'S, IT'S REALLY JUST GONNA BE A, A QUICK TABULATION.
THE ONLY WAY THAT WE COULD PROBABLY DO THAT QUICKER OR BETTER IS MAYBE IF WE HAD SOME TYPE OF APPLICATION OR, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, THE ONLY, WE NEED A FULL SOFTWARE, BUT A SPREADSHEET OR SOMETHING THAT COULD HELP US TABULATE AND,
[00:55:01]
UM, CALCULATE THAT ALL QUICKER THAN LOOKING AT THE SEVEN BALLOTS.UM, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT ANYTHING FOR THE CLERK TO WRITE ON THEREAFTER.
SO, UM, I FEEL LIKE IT'D BE A PRETTY QUICK PROCESS.
AND YOU'LL, UNTIL IT'S NOT
UM, THERE'S NO LOW PLACE AND THEN YOU'RE JUST GONNA, YOU'RE, UM, HAVE TO, HAVE TO DO, YOU KNOW, WHICH IS WHY I PUT IT IN THERE.
UH, EVENTUALLY, UH, A TIE AMONG TWO ACTIVE CANDIDATES, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO A MAJORITY VOTE.
SO SOMEONE'S GONNA HAVE TO MOVE FOR A MOTION AND, AND SEE IF SOMEONE CAN GET FOUR VOTES, GET SOMEONE TO SWITCH.
SO THE OTHER WAY THAT THEY DO IT, UM, WHICH YOU CAN SEE UP HERE, UM, EARLIER IN THE PROCESS, UM, WE DO IT FOR THE LOWEST CHOICE, BUT I DIDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE MAKING THAT FOR THE HIGH CHOICE.
SO YOU PUT THE TWO NAMES IN A HAT AND DRAW 'EM OUT.
SO I FEEL LIKE THAT WAS OKAY TO REMOVE THE LOW, UH, IF THERE'S TIE FOR THE LOWEST FIRST CHOICE VOTE.
SO IF TWO, IF THERE'S SIX COUNSELORS AND YOU END UP WITH, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DO IT, I GUESS.
YEAH, IF FOUR VOTE FOR ONE, UH, THAT'D BE A MAJORITY ALREADY.
SO, BUT
SO NOW YOU GOT TY FOR THE LOW, UM, BY LAW, ONE OF, ONE OF THE LOW VOTES GETTERS IS GONNA GET TOSSED OUT.
SO I HAD ASKED KURT ABOUT WHY THE COUNSELOR APPOINTMENT, WHICH WAS D DID NOT FOLLOW THE SAME RANK CHOICE SINCE YOU'D MOVED TO RANK CHOICE FOR THE OTHER TWO, UM, POSITIONS.
AND IT SOUNDED AS IF IT JUST HADN'T COME UP IN CONVERSATION.
SO I WONDERED IF THERE WAS SOME INTEREST IN THAT, GENERAL INTEREST IN IT, OR IF YOU WANT TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST AND HAVE RIGHT CHOICE FOR SOME AND REGULAR FOR OTHERS AND SEE HOW IT WORKS OR JUST WHY IT WAS NOT CONSISTENT.
YEAH, SO MY RESPONSE TO THAT, UH, COUNSELOR JOSEE, IF I CAN SHARE WITH THE REST OF THE COUNCIL, WAS ONE, THE APPOINTMENT PROCESSES SEEMED TO WORK PRETTY GOOD AND BEEN WELL RECEIVED FOR THE COUNSELORS.
APPOINTING NEW COUNSELORS HAVE BEEN OPEN AND IT'S BEEN A GOOD PROCESS.
UH, TWO, THE RANK CHOICE VOTING IS UN UNTRIED AND UNTESTED IN, IN THE REAL WORLD.
SO WE DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANNA APPLY IT TO EVERYTHING JUST YET.
UM, AND THEN, YEAH, THREE, IT JUST HADN'T COME UP.
SO, UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY IT WASN'T, I, I THOUGHT THE COUNSELOR APPOINTMENT PROCESS HAS BEEN WORKING REALLY WELL.
UM, HAVING SEEN IT, UH, THIS TIME AND THEN I THINK IT WAS THREE YEARS AGO.
WE USED IT TWICE IN ONE YEAR AND IT WENT PRETTY WELL THEN TO, UM, BUT IT'S, IT IS A POSSIBILITY.
THERE'S, SO I, YOU KNOW, I CHECKED WITH THE STATE LOGIN AND OUR COUNCIL, AND IT'S JUST THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO APPOINT THEM.
IT DOESN'T SAY THAT THEY HAVE TO APPOINT A REPLACEMENT BY MAJORITY VOTE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
IT JUST SAYS COUNCIL HAS TO APPOINT THEM.
AND I, I DON'T HAVE A STRONG FEELING ABOUT IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
IT'S JUST MORE OF A QUESTION FOR THE GROUP.
WELL, I WAS SOMEWHAT SUPPORTIVE OF THAT IDEA JUST TO BE CONSISTENT IN THE PROCESS.
I'M ALSO SUPPORTIVE OF THE IDEA OF US PRACTICING AT ONE POINT, SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY,
WOULD THAT WORK FOR YOU, KURT? UH, YEAH.
I THINK WE COULD HAVE A A I, I PERSONALLY THINK WE MAY HAVE ALREADY SPENT MORE TIME TALKING ABOUT THIS THAN WHAT IT TAKES TO EXECUTE THIS.
SO I'D LIKE TO SEE US MOVE ALONG.
I I WAS GONNA ASK A QUESTION AS TO WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? WHAT'S THE PROBLEM WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE? THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL TOLD ME THEY WANTED TO RANK CHOICE VOTING ON THESE TWO POSITIONS.
BUT I WANNA KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEM IS WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE.
NOT JUST 'CAUSE WE THINK BRAND CHOICE VOTING IS A COOL IDEA, BUT WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH? IT CAME OUT OF OUR DISCUSSION THE LAST TIME THIS WAS UP THOUGH, AND WE WERE, WE WERE SORT OF STUMBLING OVER THE PROCESS BECAUSE THERE WAS A PERCEIVED ISSUE WITH IT.
BUT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT IN DEPTH.
AND THEN RANK CHOICE VOTING WAS WHAT WAS FLOATED AS A WAY TO POSSIBLY ADDRESS THAT.
SO THAT'S WHY KURT CAME UP WITH THIS.
NOW I AGREE, COUNSEL, KINSELLA CONSISTENCY OF PROCESS, I THINK IS WHAT WE WE'RE THINKING ABOUT.
[01:00:02]
HE HAS UNPROVEN AND UNTESTED FOR SURE.SO CURRENT, YOU'VE, I I'M, I'M GONNA LEAVE IT AS IS.
I'VE HEARD TWO THAT MAYBE WANT TO MAYBE WANT TO, ONE'S A NOT SURE ONE'S SUPPORTIVE OF APPLYING THIS TO THE COUNSELOR APPOINTMENT PROCESS.
UH, BUT MY THOUGHTS WERE STILL, WE CAN PUT THIS IN AND TRY IT OUT AND THEN, UH, AND WE CAN PRACTICE IT AT THE, AT THE, IF THERE'S ROOM, UM, AT THE COUNSELOR RETREAT, DO A MOCK ONE.
UM, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
I DON'T THINK IT TAKE MORE THAN 30 MINUTES.
THE ACTUAL, WE CAN HAVE IT READY AND VOTE AND THEN IT JUST DEPENDS ON MUCH DISCUSSION.
COUNSEL WANTS TO HAVE, IT'S LIKE IF YOU OVER LUNCH OR SOMETHING AT THE FIRST BEGINNING, GIVE US THE BALLOTS.
FILL IT OUT, HAND IT BACK, THAT'S DONE.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IT'LL BE CUR WE'LL MAKE A, UH, DETERMINATION IF THAT THERE WAS A GLITCH IN THAT OR NOT.
WILL, AND, YOU KNOW, REPORT IT AND IF WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT IT, WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT, BUT PROBABLY WE WON'T.
DO YOU SEE IT THE SAME WAY? YEAH.
I DON'T SEE NECESSARILY THAT IT'S, WE DON'T NEED TO STOP THE OTHER PART OF THE RETREAT WHILE THE BALLOTS ARE BEING COUNTED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
AND WATCH, YOU KNOW, THE LOGISTICS.
WE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN PUBLIC.
I MEAN, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO HIDE PEOPLE'S VOTES.
SO THERE, HOW DOES THIS WHOLE PROCESS WORK? THE BALLOTS, I BELIEVE, IN MY OPINION, HAVE TO BE PUBLIC.
THEY'RE, UM, HOW YOU'RE VOTING AND YOU CAN'T MAKE A DECISION IN, YOU COULDN'T DO THIS VOTE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, LET'S SAY.
AND SO KEEPING IT SECRET WOULD BE THE SAME THING AS TRYING TO HIDE IT.
AND SO I THINK THEY'RE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS AND, UM, IT HAS TO BE DONE PUBLICLY.
WELL, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, AND THAT WE'RE NOT TAKING AWAY THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT.
TO KNOW WHAT COUNSELORS DECISIONS ARE AND WHO THEY'RE VOTING FOR.
SO THE, THE BALLOTS ARE PUBLIC.
UM, THEY'LL BE, WE'LL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY I THINK TO DISPLAY, YOU KNOW, THE VOTE COUNT.
UM, BUT AT A MINIMUM, THE, THE ACTUAL BALLOTS THEMSELVES WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AND WE COULD, YOU KNOW, COPY 'EM OR DO WHATEVER WE NEED TO TO KEEP THAT PUBLIC COUNCILOR DONE.
I'M, I'M GETTING JUST A LITTLE CONFUSED HERE, BECAUSE WE JUST WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS BASICALLY.
UM, WE HAD, YOU KNOW, WE STARTED OUT WITH SEVEN CANDIDATES OR 11 CANDIDATES OR WHATEVER IT WAS.
AND WE, WE SAID WHO WE, WE WANTED, WHICH WAS BASICALLY RANK CHOICE.
AND WE SAID WE'RE GONNA TAKE THE TOP FOUR.
SO WE TOOK THE TOP FOUR, WE DID INTERVIEWS, WE DID, AND THEN WE CAME BACK AND WE SAID, FIRST CHOICE, BASICALLY WHO, WHO WANTS TO SAY WHO THEY WANT FIRST? AND SO THAT WE WENT THROUGH ALL SEVEN OF US.
WE ALL SAID WHO WE WANTED TURNED OUT THERE WAS A MAJORITY.
AND SO THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL WORK TO BE DONE.
IF IT HADN'T BEEN A MAJORITY, WE WOULD'VE SAID, WELL, THAT DIDN'T GET, UM, EVERYBODY, LET'S SEE WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DO THIS AGAIN.
OR MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT WHY WE THINK ONE PERSON MIGHT BE BETTER THAN ANOTHER, OR WHATEVER IT IS.
WE, WE JUST KIND OF WENT THROUGH THIS AND IT WOULD'VE WORKED THIS WAY.
NO, NO MATTER WHAT, IF WE DIDN'T HAVE A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN MY MIND.
I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT GETTING RID OF THE INTERVIEWS, I'M ASSUMING.
'CAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW THESE PEOPLE UNTIL YOU INTERVIEW THEM.
THE INTERVIEWS WERE CONSISTENT IN THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED SO THAT WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OR A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF EACH INDIVIDUAL AFTER, AFTER THE INTERVIEWS.
AND THEN WE ALL DID BASICALLY A VOICE VOTE.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS WE WOULD'VE SAID THIS PERSON'S NAME AND NOBODY WOULD RAISE THEIR HANDS THIS PERSON'S NAME, AND NOBODY WOULD'VE RAISED THEIR HANDS.
I MEAN, WHAT, HOW IS THIS GONNA BE DIFFERENT? I KNOW KATHY'S ACHING TO TELL ME HOW IT'S, IT'S SO IMPORTANT.
BECAUSE I THINK COUNSELOR, WHAT YOU'RE ADDRESSING IS THE APPOINTMENT TO FILL VACANCIES FOR A COUNSELOR, WHICH I AGREE.
WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS HERE WAS MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR SUCCESSION.
WHAT I HEARD WAS THIS WAS FOR ALL POSITIONS, INCLUDING COUNSELOR.
SO CURRENTLY IT'S MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR APPOINTMENT ONLY IN THE CHANCE OF VACANCY, UH, COUNSELOR HOSSEINI HAD, UH, PROPOSED IT TO INCLUDE COUNSELOR APPOINTMENT.
AND I HEARD COUNCILOR FURMAN SAY HE WAS INTERESTED IN, NO ONE
[01:05:01]
ELSE HAD SAID THEY WERE INTERESTED IN APPLYING IT TO COUNSELOR APPOINTMENT.AT THIS TIME, WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT APPLIES TO MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR.
I'M NOT SURE THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE JUST DID WITH COUNSELORS, QUITE HONESTLY.
AND ISN'T THAT THE PROCESS WE WENT THROUGH WHO WANTED TO NOMINATE THEMSELVES OR BE NOMINATED? THERE WAS A PROCESS, IF I MAY, UM, GO AHEAD COUNSELOR.
IT WAS, I THINK THAT, UM, ACTING MAYOR AT THE TIME, HOLLY PLU WAS A VERY, UM, SMART IN HOW SHE POISED THAT AND HAD US GO THROUGH A PROCESS THAT DID HELP REDUCE ANY CONFUSION OR ONGOING DISCUSSION.
AND SHE HAD A A, A METHOD IN MIND THAT WORKED OUT AND WAS WITHIN, WE DID NOT HAVE A RULE OF PROCEDURE IN PLACE AT THAT POINT, WHICH IS WHY SHE CAME UP WITH SOMETHING.
CORRECT ME, KURT, IF I'M WRONG.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIX NOW, WAS THE LACK OF A PROCEDURE AND THE RANK CHOICE VOTING THAT KURT HAS COME UP WITH AND WHY WE ON THE DAY HAS HAD THE DISCUSSION AND SAID, RANK CHOICE, VOTING, WE, BECAUSE IN EFFECT, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE USE.
SO THIS IS REALLY JUST A CODIFICATION ISSUE.
SO, SO WHY ARE WE HAVING THIS LONG CONVERSATION OVER SOMETHING WE DO ANYWAY AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO WRITE IT DOWN.
NO, THE, THE RANK CHOICE VOTING WOULD BE NEW.
UM, THE MAYOR'S SUCCESSION DIDN'T, IT JUST SAID THEY WERE GONNA, THE COUNCIL'S GONNA APPOINT A NEW MAYOR TO, YOU KNOW, FILL THE VACANCY.
IT DIDN'T DESCRIBE THE PROCESS AT ALL.
SO THAT'S WHERE THIS STEMMED CAME FROM.
WE DID HAVE A PROCESS FOR APPOINTING VICE MAYORS.
WE HAD A PROCESS FOR COUNCIL APPOINTMENT.
A REAL PROCESS FOR THE MAYOR'S SUCCESSION.
I MEAN, ALL, ULTIMATELY, ALL ACTIONS BY COUNCIL ARE JUST, CAN BE DONE BY MAJORITY VOTE.
UM, SO YOU DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO DESCRIBE IT MORE THAN YOU NEED A MAJORITY VOTE.
HOWEVER YOU GET THERE, YOU GET THERE.
UM, BUT THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL AT THE LAST MEETING, UH, EXPRESSED INTEREST IN THE RANKED CHOICE VOTING FOR THE, FOR THE MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR.
SO DO WE, EVERYBODY WAS LIKE NODDING.
SO DO WE STILL HAVE CONSENSUS FOR RANK CHOICE VOTING FOR MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR OBJECT.
WE STILL HAVE CONSENSUS FOR THAT.
AND WHAT ABOUT FOR A COUNSELOR REPLACEMENT? ARE WE STAYING WITH WHAT IT, WHAT WE JUST DID? OR ARE WE WANTING TO ALSO ADOPT RANK CHOICE FOR THAT? I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE IT THE WAY IT WAS.
YOU KNOW, I'M UP FOR CHANGE, BUT APPARENTLY I, I I CAN COUNT VOTES TOO.
COUNCILOR HOI NODDING YES TO WHAT? OH, I'M FINE WITH LEAVING THAT PROCESS AS IT IS LEAVING AS IS.
AS LONG AS WE ALL RECOGNIZE THERE IS NO PROCESS DEFINED IN OUR RULES.
NOW IT, IT'LL BE CREATED AT THE TIME OF THIS NEXT OCCURRENCE ONCE AGAIN, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
I THINK YOU'VE GOT A CONSENSUS.
WE'LL LEAVE THE R CHOICE AND WE'LL LEAVE THE COUNSELOR APPOINTMENT.
ALRIGHT, SO RULE FIVE, UM, RAISE THE INTEREST.
THIS IS A PACKET PAGE OR YOUR RULES OF PROCEDURE.
I WAS ASKING FOR A, AGAIN, ANOTHER PARENTHETICAL REFERENCE TO THE PROCESS DETAILED IN B ONE SINCE THAT'S WHAT GOVERNS IT.
I'M GETTING MY, SORRY, I FORGOT TO HIGHLIGHT IT.
OKAY, LEMME HIGHLIGHT IT HERE.
UM, OKAY, CAN YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN NOW? SO C RULE B FIVE ONE ABOVE.
THEY USED TO BE COMPLETELY OR FURTHER AWAY, BUT THEY'RE GETTING PRETTY CLOSE NOW, SO.
ALRIGHT, EVERYONE OKAY WITH THAT ADDITION? SORRY, I FORGOT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT ONE.
ADDING IN JUST A REFERENCE, WE PUT THE SAME MANNERS OF ICE MARY ELECTED MM-HMM
UM, WHICH IS THE RANK CHOICE VOTING.
AND WE'RE JUST REFERENCING THE RULE AND AS OPPOSED TO IT USED TO SAY MAJORITY VOTE.
UM, RULE FIVE, UH, THIS HAD BEEN PROPOSED AT THE LAST MEETING THAT WE INCLUDE THE P-S-P-R-S LOCAL BOARD IN HERE.
UH, BUT THEN, UM, COUNCILOR FURMAN WAS DILIGENT AND REVIEWED THE, I THINK HE'S APPOINTED TO THE PS P-S-P-S-P-R-S BOARD.
SO WE REVIEWED THE STATUTE AND THAT BOARD ACTUALLY ISN'T A CREATION OF CITY COUNCIL.
UM, IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CONTROL.
ONE HAS TO BE DONE BY MAYOR, UM, WITH APPROVAL.
YES, MAYOR, UH, NOT APPOINTMENT,
[01:10:01]
BUT MAYOR, WHATEVER THE TERM IS, THE MAYOR SUGGESTS, OR, UH, I GUESS THE MAYOR APPOINTMENT WITH COUNCIL APPROVAL IS WHAT IT SAYS.UM, AND THEN THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HAVE TO BE TWO FROM, YOU KNOW, UM, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THEN SOME CITIZEN.
AND IT'S ALL CONTROLLED BY STATE LAW.
AND SO IT REALLY JUST DOESN'T, WE HAD PUT IT IN HERE 'CAUSE WE'RE LIKE, WELL WHAT ABOUT THE P-S-P-R-S WHERE WE'RE MISSING IT IN THIS PROCESS.
IT DOESN'T FIT IN THIS PROCESS.
IT'S A STATE CONTROLLED LOCAL BOARD AND WE DON'T CONTROL.
IT'S REALLY, IT'S, WE CONTROL TO SOME EXTENT IT'S MAKEUP, BUT NOT THE PROCEDURE AND HOW THEY'RE ELECTED AND APPOINTED.
SO I PROPOSE JUST TAKING THAT ONE OUT.
ALRIGHT, HEARING NO CONCERNS WITH THAT.
UM, I THINK THAT WAS THE EXTENT OF IT.
UM, SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS. SO, UH, THIS IS RULE SEVEN.
UM, AND THIS IS ABOUT PROCEDURE FOR COUNSEL.
THE LIAISON DUTIES, AND THIS IS A GOOD ONE THAT YOU BROUGHT UP.
I DON'T ATTEND THOSE MEETINGS, SO I DON'T OFTEN SEE WHAT YOU GUYS ARE FORCED TO MAYBE VOTE ON OR NOT VOTE ON.
BUT IN THERE, IT CURRENTLY SAID THAT LIAISONS SHOULD, SHOULD NEVER VOTE OR MAKE COMMITMENTS ON ANYTHING WITHOUT DELEGATION FROM COUNCIL.
UH, BUT THEN IT WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST MEETING.
BUT, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THEY'RE JUST ASKING YOU TO VOTE ON MINUTES OR, OR THE NEXT MEETING OR THINGS LIKE THAT, UH, THAT DON'T SEEM, SO WE PUT IN SUBSTANTIVE, UH, BUT THEN THE QUESTION CAME UP AS WELL, WHAT DOES SUBSTANTIVE MEAN? UM, AND SO I TRIED TO COME UP WITH A DEFINITION HERE OF WHAT SUBSTANTIVE MEANS TO GIVE COUNSELORS SOME DIRECTION.
SO THAT'D BE LIKE, UH, ON THEIR BUDGETS OR CONTRACT OR PROJECT APPROVAL OR POLICY CHANGES THAT YOUR LOCAL, YOUR, YOUR BOARD IS TRYING TO VOTE ON.
THAT'S A, YOU'RE JUST A LIAISON ON.
SOMETIMES YOU HAVE VOTING RIGHTS, SOMETIMES YOU DON'T, UM, OR MAKE ANY COMMITMENTS ON SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS WITHOUT DELEGATION FROM COUNSEL, BUT LEAVE IT OPEN THAT YOU CAN STILL VOTE ON NON-SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS AND COMMENT ON THINGS LIKE PROCEDURAL MOTIONS AND IMPROVING MEETING MINUTES.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT FULLY RESOLVES COUNSEL'S CONCERNS WITH THOSE AND GIVES YOU DIRECTION OR IF IT MUDDLES IT FURTHER.
YEAH, THANK YOU MAYOR OR VICE MAYOR
IT DOESN'T QUITE RESOLVE IT FOR ME, BUT, AND I WENT BACK AND I LOOKED AT BOTH CP W AND AMWA, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE LAST YEAR ON BOTH BOARDS AND IT'S NOMINATION ELECTION OF BOARD MEMBERS, WHICH I THINK WOULD FIT IN YOUR, UH, SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS, CATEGORIES.
UM, DEFINITELY BUDGETS ARE IN THERE APPROVING OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COORDINATOR AGREEMENT, EVEN MEETING SCHEDULES THAT MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY BE IN THEIR, UM, BYLAWS.
THAT'S A WORD THAT I'LL LET SOMEONE ELSE SAY,
SO, YOU KNOW, AND, AND, AND I, AND I COULD UNDERSTAND PERHAPS PEOPLE'S SENSITIVITY AROUND BUDGET, BUT YOU KNOW, AT LEAST FOR BOTH OF THESE TWO ORGANIZATIONS, SEDONAS BUDGET CONTRIBUTION IS IN THE SINGLE DIGIT THOUSANDS, TWO, $3,000 MEMBERSHIP FEES, 5,000 MAYBE FOR
UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, ALL THESE, UH, BUDGETS ARE DRAWN UP AND REVIEWED BY THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEES, WHICH INCLUDES OUR CITY STAFF, RIGHT? WHO THEN MAKE SURE THAT IT FITS WITHIN THE BUDGETS THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY HAVE.
AND MY GUESS IS THAT THE CITY MANAGER IS AWARE OF THAT.
SO, AND THEN THESE THINGS MOVE QUICKLY.
UH, THERE REALLY ISN'T TIME FOR IT TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL.
AND THEN THE OTHER CATEGORY OF THINGS THAT WE DO ARE TAKING POSITIONS ON STATE LAWS, OUR BUDGET, UH, UH, LAW PROPOSALS, SENATE, AND HOUSE BILLS THAT ARE MOVING FORWARD.
UH, AND CERTAINLY IN THE PAST, I'VE ALWAYS, IF ANYTHING EVEN CLO COMES CLOSE TO AFFECTING THE CITY, I ALWAYS CHECK IN WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY AND WHATNOT.
BUT AS YOU, WE ALL KNOW THESE TAKING POSITIONS ON, ON, UM, ON, ON LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS ALSO MOVES AT BREAKNECK SPEED.
SO THANK YOU COUNCILOR FURMAN AND I HAVE THE SAME, UH, CONSIDERATIONS FOR NACOG AS THE CITY'S REGIONAL BOARD MEMBER.
AND, UH, WE'RE, EVERYTHING THAT THAT COUNCILOR FURMAN TALKED ABOUT ALSO FALLS UNDER THAT NACOG ROLE, EXCEPT THAT NACOG DOES NOT, UM, LOBBY, UH, FOR ANY PARTICULAR LAWS THAT'S, UH, NOT, UH, ALLOWABLE.
SO, UM, AND, AND IT'S THE SAME ISSUE WITH TIMING.
SO ARE WE, ARE WE GIVING OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS ENOUGH LATITUDE OR NOT? UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S REALISTIC THAT I'M GONNA BE ABLE TO COME BACK HERE AND SAY, HEY, THE HEAD START ORGANIZATION, YOU KNOW, HERE'S THEIR BUDGET, HERE'S WHAT THE, UH, AGING, UH, BUDGET IS, UH,
[01:15:01]
AND SO FORTH.AND BE ABLE TO DO THAT IN A TIMELY BASIS.
SO I, I MEAN, UH, TO EXAM, TRY TO PLACE SOME OF THOSE I WOULD CONSIDER MEETING SCHEDULES OFFICER'S APPOINTMENT TO BE KIND OF NON-SUBSTANTIVE.
PROCEDURAL MOTIONS IS WHERE I WOULD'VE CLASSED THOSE.
BUDGETARY MATTERS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S UP TO COUNCIL.
YOU COULD MOVE IT AS A NONS SUBSTANTIVE ITEM.
A OPINING ON STATE LAW, THOUGH, I FEEL LIKE IS SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL'S HELD PRETTY CLOSELY.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE PROPOSED LEGISLATION.
I, I WOULD PROBABLY, BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE WITH COUNCIL AND WHAT'S GOING ON, THAT'D BE A SUBSTANTIVE ITEM NO MATTER.
SO OTHER THAN COUNCILOR FURMAN'S, COUPLE OF LIAISON ROLES AS ANYBODY ELSE IN A POSITION THAT THEY WOULD BE OPINING ON STATE LAW.
BE, YEAH, I, I DIDN'T DO THE WORK.
I'D BE CURIOUS ABOUT WHAT OTHER CITIES, THERE'S OTHER CITY REPRESENTATIVES ON THE CP W WHEN WE DO THIS, GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND THEY'RE PROBABLY, I'M CURIOUS WHERE THE HANDCUFFS ARE ON THEM OR NOT, OR NOT.
THEY PROBABLY, IT COULD BE NOT
I THINK THEY'RE JUST, JUST, OKAY.
SO WE NEED RESOLUTION ON THIS.
MY, MY SUGGESTION IS, IS TO NOT, UH, OVERBURDEN THE LIAISONS.
I MEAN, YOU COULD, OTHER THAN ON THE LEGISLATIVE MATTERS.
I MEAN, SO THIS WAS BROUGHT UP FOR GOOD REASON BECAUSE IT SAYS LIAISONS SHOULD NEVER VOTE OR MAKE COMMITMENTS ON ANYTHING WITHOUT DELEGATION FROM COUNCIL.
SO THAT WAS A PRETTY ABSOLUTE STATEMENT.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S NOT BEEN WORKING, HOW IT'S BEEN WORKING AT ALL.
UM, SO I MEAN, YOU COULD ALWAYS JUST DELETE THAT WHOLE SENTENCE.
WE COULD ALSO DO A LIST OF DO'S AND DON'TS THAT, AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS KIND OF TRYING HERE.
HERE'S THE, OKAY, ONE HERE, BULLET POINT CONCERN.
YOU DO THESE 10 THINGS, CONCERN YOU CAN'T DO THESE 10 THINGS AND HOPEFULLY WE COVER EVERYTHING.
INSTEAD OF LEAVING IT TO SUBSTANTIVE, NON SUBSTANTIVE, I MEAN, I CAN ARGUE COUNCILOR HERMAN, YOUR RESPONSE, YOU KNOW, I'M KIND OF, IF THE CONCERN IS LEGISLATIVE ITEMS THAT AFFECT THE CITY OF SEDONA, I GET IT.
BUT IF IT'S POLICY MATTERS THAT APPLY TO ELSEWHERE IN THE STATE AND WE'RE WORKING WITH A GROUP OF POLICY PEOPLE TO DEVELOP A POSITION, I, I'M NOT, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULD WANNA, 'CAUSE IT'S NOT THE CITY'S POSITION, IT'S THE, IT'S THE ORGANIZATION'S POSITION.
COUNCILOR KINSELLA TO THAT POINT THOUGH.
BUT IF, IF YOU'RE TAKING A POSITION ON AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE OR SOMETHING, AND YOU'RE SAYING IT DOESN'T HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE CITY, BUT THE CITY DOES TAKE POSITIONS ON SOME ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND CERTAINLY WHAT HAPPENS AT THE STATE LEVEL DOES FILTER DOWN AND HAVE IMPACT ON THE CITY.
SO I I I DON'T, I REALLY FEEL THAT WE SHOULD NOT, A LIAISON SHOULD NOT BE OPINING ON LEGISLATION WITHOUT DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL.
OH, NO MATTER WHAT THAT LEGISLATION IS, IT ALL IMPACTS US.
SO YOU'LL HANDICAP THE FUTURE CP WAC BOARD MEMBER FROM EVER VOTING ON LEGISLATIVE POSITIONS.
IT IS ESSENTIALLY THE POSITION THAT, I KNOW THERE'S A TIMING ISSUE HERE.
THERE, THERE'S A TIMING ISSUE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A TIMING ISSUE.
BUT WHAT HAPPENS IF IN A, IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT, UM, BECAUSE WE HAVE RULES AROUND, UH, OUR ABILITY TO ABSTAIN.
WOULD YOU HAVE THE ABILITY IN THAT POSITION WOULD LIAISON, HAVE AN ABILITY TO ABSTAIN SINCE THERE IS NOT DIRECTION FROM THE CITY? YES.
AND WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE MM-HMM
WE, WE ALLOW THE, UH, UM, UP TO ONE MEMBER VOTING IN OPPOSITION THAT WE CAN STILL MOVE FORWARD.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE UNANIMOUS, BUT IT'S MORE THAN MAJORITY.
SO, SO I THINK THAT ON MATTERS OF LEGISLATION, WE WOULD BE ASKING FOR AN ABSTENTION FROM OUR DESIGNEES THAT, UH, TAKES AWAY OUR VOICE TO DO THAT.
I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE WE NEED TO HAVE SOME GUARDRAILS, WHATEVER THEY MIGHT BE THAT DOESN'T PREVENT THE LIAISON FROM EXERCISING GOOD JUDGMENT.
AND IN YOUR EXAMPLE, ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD BE BRING BACK TO COUNCIL.
SO THAT'S REALLY NOT A, AN EXAMPLE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD HAVE BROUGHT BACK, YOU KNOW, NOTIONALLY, I WOULD START WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY AND OUR LEGISLATIVE POLICY FOLKS TO MAKE SURE IT'S ALREADY CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY POSITIONS.
AND IF IT'S NOT, THEN PERHAPS WE WOULD BRING IT TO COUNCIL OR I, THE PERSON I WOULD JUST ABSTAIN.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POLICY POSITIONS, ABOUT, UH, UH, AND, AND I JUST WENT BLANK ON THE WATER MANAGEMENT AREAS OR, YOU KNOW, THINGS THAT JUST DEFINITELY DON'T APPLY TO US.
BUT PRESCOTT AND PRESCOTT VALLEY AND CHINO, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE VERY, THEY, THEY HAVE A WELL-FORMED POSITION ABOUT IT AND THE REST OF THE GROUP AGREES WITH
[01:20:01]
THE POSITION.SO ARE YOU TYPICALLY ASKED TO OPINE OR VOTE ON SOMETHING THE FIRST TIME YOU HEAR IT? OR IS IT BUILDING? WELL, YEAH, LIKE THESE LEGISLATIVE THINGS, THEY GET, WE DON'T EVEN DO THESE IN THE MEETINGS.
OUR RULES ALLOW US TO DO IT BY EMAIL THROUGH THE GROUP.
AND WE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO USUALLY REACT WITHIN TWO OR THREE DAYS AND THEN TAKE A POSITION.
I THINK NOT ALL LIAISONS FITS ARE THE SAME.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THEM THE SAME.
SO WE HAVE LIAISONS WHERE IT'S A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY MM-HMM
AND IN THOSE LIAISON SHIPS, WE'RE NOT MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, WE'RE LIAISONS.
WE DON'T VOTE ON ANYTHING, WHETHER IT'S SUBSTANTIVE OR NON SUBSTANTIVE.
WE TAKE NO ROLE WHERE THERE IS OVERSIGHT.
AND THEN THERE'S OTHER ASSIGNMENTS, I'M GONNA CALL THEM WHERE I THINK PETE AND I KNOW IN THE PAST, AND MAYBE EVEN YOU BRIAN, ARE ACTUAL OFFICERS OF THE ORGANIZATION.
AND YET OUR RULES MAKE IT OUT TO BE THAT DEAL WITH THE SITUATIONS IN THE SAME WAY WHEN IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE TO THAT END, WHICH ARE THE SHARED GOVERNANCE ROLES.
I REALLY THINK IT IS A LIMITED NUMBER.
SO, SO BASICALLY BE CALLED OUT SEPARATELY.
THIS IS THIS, THIS IS IN THE SHARED GOVERNANCE.
THIS IS IN THE SHARED GOVERNANCE, UH, MAYOR PLU SECTION ONLY.
IT DOESN'T, IT'S NOT IN THE INFORMAL VOLUNTARY OR THE FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIP.
AND WHAT'S THE LIST OF THE LIAISON ROLES THAT APPLY HERE? YEAH, LET'S, LET'S TAKE THEM OUT, YOU KNOW, CALL THEM OUT SO THAT IT'S CLEAR.
IT'S NAAH, IT'S WHO, IF IT'S ARIZONA FORWARD CO PLATEAU WATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
GREATER ARIZONA MAYOR'S ASSOCIATION HOUSING COMMITTEE.
THE LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITY'S AD HOC POLICY COMMITTEES.
ALL THE, ALL OF THE POLICY COMMITTEES.
NACOG UA, THE PUBLIC SAFETY, UH, P-S-P-R-S.
SEDONA WASTEWATER MUNICIPAL PROPERTY CORPORATION, WHICH I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
DO, DO WE NEED TO CONTINUE ON THIS ITEM AND DO SOME HOMEWORK? SO HERE'S, I THINK SO.
I MEAN, IF YOU DON'T MAKE A CHANGE TO IT RIGHT NOW, THEN YOU'RE STUCK WITH THE THEY CAN'T VOTE PERIOD WITHOUT COUNCIL INPUT.
SO YOU SAID YOU COULD RE YOU COULD REMOVE THAT.
YOU COULD JUST DELETE IT AND THEN JUST TRUST THE COUNSELORS.
I'VE TRIED TO HERE CHANGE UP THE SUBSTANTIVE AND NONS SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS. LET'S SEE IF I CAN ZOOM IN A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR EVERYONE TO I SEE.
I CAN'T SEE WHAT, WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE PROBLEM I HAVE.
I CAN, I'LL READ IT REAL QUICK.
LIAISONS SHOULD NEVER VOTE ON SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS. AND THEN IN PARENTHESES, CONTRACTOR PROJECT APPROVAL POLICY POSITIONS OR LEGISLATION THAT AFFECT THE CITY AND IN PARENTHESES, OR MAKE COMMITMENTS ON SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS WITHOUT DELEGATION FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS MAY VOTE AND COMMIT ON NON SUB COMMENT ON NONS SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS. AND THEN IN PARENTHESES, THESE ARE THE NONS SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS, BUDGETARY MATTERS, PROCEDURAL MOTIONS, MEETING SCHEDULES, OFFICER APPOINTMENT, APPROVING MEETING MINUTES, POLICY POSITIONS OR LEGISLATION THAT DO NOT AFFECT THE CITY.
AND I, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, JUST SPEAKING, CERTAINLY ONE OF THE ACTIONS THAT WE TOOK NOT IN THE LAST YEAR, WHICH IS WHY I DIDN'T MENTION IT, BUT WE RECEIVED A GRANT FROM THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION TO DO A GROUNDWATER MODEL, YOU KNOW, OF THE PLATEAU.
WE RECEIVED A GROUND, THIS WAS THE COCONINO PLATEAU WATER ADVISORY COUNCIL.
AND SO WE RECEIVED A GRANT CONTRACT AND THEN WE ACTUALLY ISSUED A CONTRACT WITH, UH, THE SAME CONSULTANT THAT WE HIRED OUR ARIZONA WATER HIRED AND APPEARED HERE TO DO THAT WORK.
I MEAN, I TRUST COUNSELORS TO GENERALLY GET IT RIGHT.
YOU COULD, BUT HOW YOU COULD BE AN OFFICER IN AN ORGANIZATION AND NOT
I, YOU FEEL, DO YOU FEEL CONSTRICTED? PETE AND BRIAN? YOU'RE THE ONES THAT HAVE THESE ORGANIZATIONS.
YEAH, I CERTAINLY DON'T KNOW HOW, YOU KNOW,
[01:25:01]
I AM THE VICE CHAIR OF THE ORGANIZATION AND NOT VOTING ON BUDGETARY MATTERS.WELL, THAT MIGHT BE OUT NOW, BUT CONTRACTS AND SOME OF THESE THINGS, I JUST, I DON'T, IT'S NOT THE RIGHT ROLE.
SEDONA HAS ALWAYS IT FOR MY ROLE.
NOW, UH, UM, COUNSELOR MARTINEZ WAS ALSO THE VICE CHAIR BEFORE ME.
AND I THINK IT GOES BACK BEFORE THEN.
WE'VE ALWAYS HAD AN OFFICER ROLE IN THE ORGANIZATION.
SO THESE LIMITED NUMBERS OF ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THESE WATER BOARDS AND ACOG, WHOEVER'S REPRESENTING THE CITY NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO ACT AND, AND NOT HAVE TO ABSTAIN.
I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'LL FEEL ABOUT THIS.
WHAT IF THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT THAT, THAT THE CITY MANAGER AND THE WHAT AND THE CITY ATTORNEY WERE INVOLVED, LIKE PETE SAYS THAT'S WHAT HE TRADITIONALLY DOES.
IF IT'S A, IF IT'S AN ISSUE WHERE IT'S TIME SENSITIVE, WOULD THAT SATISFY? CAN I OFFER A COUNTER? GO AHEAD.
COUNCILOR KINSELLA, THANK YOU.
WHAT IF, WHAT IF, BECAUSE OF THE TIMELINESS OF THE ISSUES, WHAT IF THESE LIAISONS WERE EMPOWERED TO VOTE AND HAD TO REPORT THE VOTE BACK AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING THAT WE HAVE SO THAT IF THERE WERE ANY ISSUE OR CONFLICT, WE WOULD THEN HAVE THE ABILITY TO AT LEAST CONSIDER IT FOR, FOR RESCINDING IT.
I'M JUST LOOKING FOR SOMETHING THAT PROTECTS.
'CAUSE I DON'T WANNA COME INTO A CONFLICT.
WE HAVE, AND RECENTLY IT WAS ILLUSTRATED VERY WELL TO US ABOUT THE UNILATERAL DECISIONS.
WHAT IS ONE PERSON'S, UM, OH THIS IS NO BIG DEAL, IS ANOTHER PERSON'S LIFE OR DEATH.
RIGHT? WE DO NOT ALL SEE THINGS THE SAME WAY.
WE HAVE SPLIT VOTES ON COUNCIL ALL THE TIME, WHATEVER.
I'M TRYING TO AVOID OUR CONFLICT WITH OUR OWN RULES ABOUT UNILATERAL DECISIONS.
SO IF IT WAS REPORTED BACK AND WE AT LEAST HAD THE ABILITY SO THAT SOMEBODY WASN'T CONSTRICTED, BUT WE WOULD KNOW HOW SOMEBODY'S VOTING, IF IT IS CONTRARY TO HOW WE FEEL, WE WOULD THEN BE ABLE TO DEBATE THAT AND POTENTIALLY TAKE AN ACTION IF, AND I BELIEVE THIS WOULD BE RARE IF IT WERE NECESSARY.
SO COUNCILOR KINSELLA, I THINK THAT AS PART OF OUR SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS BY MAYOR COUNCILORS, CITY MANAGER AND COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS, THAT IS THE RIGHT PLACE TO DO WHAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF.
AND I THINK THAT SHOULD BE DONE ANYWAYS BECAUSE THAT'S JUST AN IMPROVEMENT THAT WE NEED TO, TO MAKE AS A COUNCIL BODY.
SO, 'CAUSE THERE WAS RATTLED OFF ABOUT WHAT, 15 DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS AND I'VE NEVER HEARD OR RARELY HAVE HEARD, UM, OF ANYBODY PARTICIPATING IN THOSE GIVING, THIS IS WHAT WE VOTED ON LAST TIME, OR THIS IS WHATEVER.
ONCE IN A WHILE YOU'VE DONE SOMETHING WITH TWO OF YOUR ORGANIZATIONS.
BUT AS I SAID 15 ABOUT WERE RATTLED OFF AND I'VE NEVER HEARD ANYTHING OF, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF THAT.
THERE'S A ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT THERE.
SO I'VE BROUGHT UP THAT, LIKE WITH NAAG FOR THE CBDG PROGRAM, THAT THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF THE METHOD OF DISTRIBUTION CHANGING IN THE FUTURE.
AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT OUR CITY MANAGER ALSO WAS INVOLVED IN BECAUSE IT MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED IN THE IMMEDIATE TERM, BUT HAS THAT CANS BEEN KICKED DOWN THE CURB? AT LEAST FOR ANOTHER YEAR? PRESUMABLY.
SO THE, THERE'S A PROPOSAL I THINK FROM WHAT I'M HEARING FROM COUNCILOR KINSELLA OF WE'RE NOT GOING TO ESSENTIALLY HANDCUFF THE LIAISONS IN THESE SHARED GOVERNANCE ROLES.
BUT THE EXPECTATION IS THAT WE WILL PROVIDE, THOSE LIAISONS WILL PROVIDE A REPORT OUT OF VOTES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING.
IS THERE SUBSTANTIVE VOTES? RIGHT? YES.
SO HERE'S WHAT I TRIED TO WRITE DOWN.
CAPTURING THAT LIAISON SHOULD NOT VOTE OR MAKE COMMITMENTS ON SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS WITHOUT DELEGATION FROM COUNT.
ON THE VOTE OR COMMITMENT AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING.
AND COUNCILOR FAFF, YOU HAD SOMETHING TO ADD.
SO IS THE REPORT FOR PURPOSES OF ALLOWING US TO RESCIND IT? NO.
SO THE WAY THAT'S GONNA WORK FOR THE OPEN MEETING LINE, 'CAUSE IT'S NOT AGENDA IS, IS YOU GET THE REPORT.
IF SOMEONE DISLIKES THE REPORT, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO, AT THE END OF THE MEETING IN THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS SAY I'D LIKE A, A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM ON SO-AND-SO COUNSELOR'S REPORT.
BUT MY POINT IS, ARE THESE ORGANIZATIONS JUST GONNA START IGNORING US? 'CAUSE IT'S LIKE, WELL, WE'RE GONNA, WE GOTTA VOTE FROM PETE, BUT HE'S GONNA HAVE TO GO BACK TO COUNCIL AND THEN HE'S GONNA REPORT IT AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA AGENDIZE WHETHER THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT.
AND THEN, I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE AT SOME POINT THEY'RE
[01:30:01]
JUST GONNA SAY, OKAY, SIT DOWN.WELL, SINCE IT'S NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE, UM, THAT COUNCIL'S EVER BEEN, THAT I KNOW OF THAT COUNCIL'S EVER BEEN UPSET OVER A LIAISON'S POSITION OR VOTE, I THINK THAT'D BE PRETTY RARE THAT WE WOULD EVER TRY TO RE OVERTURN IT.
BUT THEN, SO WE'RE CREATING A RULE TO SOLVE A PROBLEM THAT DOESN'T EXIST.
WELL, THE PROBLEM EXISTED THAT THEY, IT THE PROBLEM EXISTED IN THE RULE, SO THEY COULDN'T VOTE.
WE'RE TRYING TO, THAT'S INTERESTING.
I I DON'T, WE WERE VOTING IN CONTRADICTION TO A RULES OF PROCEDURE.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIX.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE IN OUR RULES OF, IN CP WAC OR NAM A A RECONSIDERATION OF A VOTE LANGUAGE.
I'M NOT, I I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THAT.
SO
SO, NO, I AND YOU, YOU LATER EXPRESSING THAT, YOU KNOW, A LIAISON LATER EXPRESSING THAT THEY MISSPOKE OR WERE WRONG AND THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ABOUT ALL THE CORRECTION YOU COULD PROBABLY DO.
AND SAY IF I HAD GIVEN THE CHANCE, AGAIN, I'D VOTE DIFFERENTLY OR SOMETHING, COUNSEL TOLD ME I HAD TO COUNCILOR DUNN.
SO I WAS, I WAS GOING TO THE POINT OF AFTER SOMEONE'S SENT A REPORT, IF SOMEBODY ON COUNCIL TRULY BELIEVES THAT THIS IS A DISCUSSION THAT WE NEED TO DO FOR THE CITY BASED ON WHAT THAT VOTE WAS, THEN IT'S AN AGENDIZED ITEM FOR THE FUTURE.
IF THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO AGREE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE SPOKEN TO.
SO WE GET INFORMATION AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT THE VOTE, IT'S ABOUT HEARING WHAT THOSE ISSUES ARE.
BECAUSE I'M NOT A WATER EXPERT, RIGHT.
I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN ACOG, I'M NOT FOLLOWING IT.
BUT FROM THOSE REPORTS, I MIGHT SAY, WOW, THAT'S AN ISSUE POTENTIALLY FOR, YOU KNOW, UM, TRANSPORTATION.
RIGHT? DO THEY, THEY'RE HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION GROUPS.
THAT'S SOMETHING MAYBE WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT.
SO JUST FEELS LIKE IT'S, IT'S EDUCATIONAL AND THOSE OF US ON COUNCIL MAY SAY THERE'S, THERE'S IMPORTANT THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING HERE THAT DO IMPACT THE CITY, BUT WE NEED TO DISCUSS IT AS A CITY.
AND MAYBE THAT WOULD INFORM SOME FUTURE VOTE FOR NAAG OR SOME FUTURE VOTE FOR THE WATER DISTRICTS OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE.
BUT I, I DON'T THINK THIS IS ABOUT RESCINDING.
I THINK THIS IS ABOUT SAYING HOW DOES THIS IMPACT SEDONA? HOW DO WE WANT THIS TO IMPACT SEDONA TO SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE DOING INSIDE SEDONA AND SHOULD WE BE GIVING INFORMATION BACK TO THOSE LIAISONS THAT THEY NEED TO TAKE BACK AND THEY NEED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THOSE ORGANIZATIONS.
AND THOSE ARE ALL FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS BASED ON THAT REPORT.
SO THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO SAY.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'VE LANDED.
I SEE PLENTY OF SHAKING HEADS THERE.
SO I WILL DELETE THE PRECEDING TWO SENTENCES, INCLUDING THE ORIGINAL OFFENDING ONE AND WHAT WILL BE LEFT IS WHAT'S IN HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN NOW.
AND FOR, UH, MAYOR PLU WILL READ IT TO YOU, IT WILL READ, LIAISON SHOULD NOT VOTE OR MAKE COMMITMENTS ON SUBSTANTIVE ITEMS WITHOUT REPORTING ON THE VOTE OR COMMITMENT AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING.
ALRIGHT, WELL THEN THE LAST ITEM I BELIEVE FOR DISCUSSION, UH, COUNCILOR KINSELLA WANTED TO DISCUSS OUR APPENDIX A OUR SERVICE CONTRACT LANGUAGE.
WE HAD ALREADY SAID WE'RE GONNA STRIKE THE EXPANSIONS NOT WARRANTED AT THIS TIME.
UM, COUNCILLOR KINSELLA, UH, WANTED TO BRING THE BEFORE COUNCIL WHETHER WE SHOULD LIST OUT OUR CURRENT SERVICE CONTRACT PROVIDERS, UM, HERE BY NAME.
UH, THEY'RE FOR, I JUST THOUGHT SINCE THEY DON'T CHANGE FREQUENTLY, THAT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE THE LIST INCLUDED RIGHT THERE.
BUT I WAS ONLY THINKING ABOUT THE SERVICE CONTRACT PROVIDERS, NOT THE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, BUT THOSE ARE FINANCIAL, UM, RELATIONSHIP, DIRECT FUNDING BY THE CITY, COUNCILOR DUNN.
DO WE HAVE ANY PLACE ELSE THAT WE ACTUALLY LIST ALL THESE OUT AND WHAT THEY, THEY DO? 'CAUSE I, I THINK THIS SHOULD BE A LINK IF WE HAD A PAGE ON OUR SITE THAT TALKS ABOUT WHO OUR CONTRACT PROVIDERS ARE, WHAT SERVICES THEY PROVIDE TO THE CITY, WHAT OUR EXPECTATIONS ARE FROM THEM, THAT WOULD BE THE RIGHT PLACE IN US TO LINK TO THEM.
WELL THAT'S, AND IT'S ALSO IN THE BUDGET, IT'S IN A NUMBER OF PLACES, BUT RELATED TO OUR, UM, INFORMATION PAGES ON THE SMALL GRANT PROCESS AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, WE HAVE A PAGE ABOUT HOW, UH, UM, ENTITIES, NONPROFITS ARE FUNDED BY THE CITY AND DETAILS ALL OF THAT.
SO, AND IT JUST FEELS LIKE THAT'S THE RIGHT PLACE TO PUT IT BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH THAT MIGHT CHANGE, WHAT THEY DO FOR US MIGHT CHANGE OVER TIME.
AND SO THAT'S ACTUALLY EQUALLY IMPORTANT TO THE NAME OF THE ORGANIZATION.
[01:35:01]
WE COULD RIGHT AFTER THE FIRST SENTENCE UP HERE, PUT THE CONTRACT SERVICE PROVIDER WEB LINK AND HYPERLINK IT.SO IF WE HAVE THAT WEBSITE, WE'LL PUT A HYPERLINK INTO IT.
COUNCILOR ELLA, I DO HAVE ANOTHER ITEM SINCE I THINK WE'RE THROUGH THAT LIST.
IS THAT CORRECT, KURT? YEAH, I'M THROUGH EVERYTHING THAT, UM, I'M AT THE END OF THE DOCUMENT THAT WAS SENT TO ME FROM THE COUNSELING.
I DO HAVE SOMETHING THAT I DON'T SEE ADDRESSED IN THE RULES OF PROCEDURE THAT I WAS THINKING MIGHT BE AN ISSUE THAT WE WOULD WANNA ADDRESS, WHICH IS WE HAD LAST YEAR A, UH, CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE AN ORGANIZATION APPROACHED US AND WAS ASKING IF THE CITY COULD DESIGNATE, UM, THE, THAT ORGANIZATION'S MASCOT OR WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL IT, AS AN OFFICIAL REPRESENTATION OF THE CITY, SUCH AS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE WHATEVER TREE IS THE CITY TREE, OR THIS IS THE CITY FLOWER, OR THIS IS THE CITY BIRD.
SO WE HAD NO WAY OF ADDRESSING THAT REQUEST THAT CAME FORWARD.
SO I WAS WONDERING IF WE COULD TALK ABOUT THOSE DESIGNATIONS.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WOULD GO INTO RULES OF PROCEDURE? IT SEEMS LIKE IT PROBABLY WOULD.
UM, HOW WE WOULD ADDRESS THAT, BECAUSE ALTHOUGH THERE ARE MULTIPLE TYPES OF TREES, SOME PEOPLE LIKE ONE TYPE, SOME OTHERS LIKE ANOTHER, SOME PEOPLE LIKE ONE BIRD, SOME PEOPLE LIKE ANOTHER BIRD.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE SOME ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE A DIRECT LINK INTO THE CITY THAT MAY HAVE AN ORGANIZATION WITH HEADQUARTERS IN SEDONA THAT ACTUALLY MAYBE MIGHT RUN A FESTIVAL THAT ACTUALLY BRINGS, UH, INCOME INTO SEDONA.
YOU KNOW? SO THERE SHOULD BE MAYBE CASES WHERE SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS CONSIDERED.
HOW DO WE DO THAT BECOMES A QUESTION.
MY ANSWER IS WE JUST DON'T, I MEAN, IF YOU DESIGNATE, YOU KNOW, ONE BIRD, THE OFFICIAL BIRD OF SEDONA, THEN THE NEXT PERSON'S GONNA SAY, WELL, I PREFER THE QUAIL.
AND OKAY, SO NOW THAT'S THE, YOU KNOW, OFFICIAL GROUND-BASED BIRD OF SEDONA, AND THEN SOMEBODY ELSE SAYS, BUT I LIKE RAVENS.
AND THEN, I MEAN, I JUST, I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD JUST STAY OUT OF THE BUSINESS OF MAKING OFFICIAL WHATEVERS.
BUT AGAIN, UM, I GENERALLY AGREE WITH YOU, BUT WHEN THERE IS AN ORGANIZATION THAT HAS A, A DIRECT LINK TO THE CITY, DO YOU THINK THAT THAT, THAT, DOES THAT CHANGE YOUR POSITION AT ALL, SUCH AS THEY'RE HEADQUARTERED IN THE CITY, PRODUCE A FESTIVAL THAT BRINGS PEOPLE INTO THE CITY THAT BRINGS, UM, RETAIL INCOME? I'M JUST ASKING IF THAT CHANGE.
I MEAN, IF WE WANNA MAKE A PROCLAMATION, I'D MAKE A PROCLAMATION, BUT I DON'T THINK, I MEAN, IF WE OPEN THE DOOR TO, YOU KNOW, THE OFFICIAL KLEENEX BOX OF CITY OF SEDONA, WE'RE GONNA HAVE PEOPLE COMING OUT OF THE WOODWORK ASKING FOR DESIGNATIONS.
AND I JUST, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD USE OF STAFF TIME.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD USE OF OUR TIME PERSONALLY.
OTHER THOUGHTS? COUNCILOR FURMAN
I, I TEND TO AGREE WITH COUNCILOR FAF THAT YOU OPEN THE DOOR OF THIS THING.
IT CAN JUST, WE COULD SPEND A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT WE DON'T CURRENTLY TALK ABOUT NOW, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT BENEFITS US MUCH.
AND THEN TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE, COUNCILOR KINSELLA, AS MUCH AS WE ALL LOVE, UH, MIKE RAINAN, THE MOUNTAIN BIKE FESTIVAL, SOME OF US MAY LIKE IT MORE OR NOT, BUT IT WOULD, IT QUALIFIES AN ORGANIZATION AND SOMEBODY MIGHT BRING FORWARD THE ACTIVITY, THE OUTDOOR ACTIVITY, SEDONAS OFFICIALS CITY ACTIVITY IS MOUNTAIN BIKING.
AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST NOT A CONVERSATION THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN ON THIS DAIS.
ANYBODY ELSE WANNA WEIGH IN? MAYOR, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY THAT WE HAVE NO PROCESS TO EVEN DECIDE THESE THINGS, BUT WE'RE WE'RE CUTTING IT, IT ALL OFF FROM ANY DECISION WE COULD ALWAYS VOTE.
NO, WE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A PROCESS.
AND I STILL DON'T THINK WE HAVE A REAL PROCESS FOR ACKNOWLEDGING PEOPLE.
SO WE ACKNOWLEDGED SEVERAL PEOPLE, TWO PEOPLE THIS YEAR WITHOUT A REAL PROCESS.
IT'S, AND SO I THINK WE'RE SHY OF THE PROCESS.
SO, YOU KNOW, THAT THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS THAT WE DID, AND, AND THEN WE SAID, WELL, LET'S JUST USE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THE PROCLAMATIONS.
WHICH IS REALLY NOT THE SAME THING AT ALL.
WE SAID, WE'LL JUST USE THE PROCLAMATIONS, BUT CORRECT.
SO A MONTH, A MONTH AGO, WE ADDED IN RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS TO THE PROCLAMATION SECTION AND CHANGED IT FROM, UM, TWO COUNSELORS TO THREE.
UM, AND SO IF, YOU KNOW SOMEONE, IF THREE COUNSELORS WANTED TO SUPPORT A PROCLAMATION THAT
[01:40:01]
SOMETHING BE DESIGNATED, SOMETHING, THERE'S A PRO A PROCEDURE FOR IT ALREADY.I, I LIKE THE PEOPLE KNOW WHAT IT MEANS, HOW ONE GETS DETERMINED.
SO EVEN IN THIS SITUATION WHERE YOU HAVE, UH, A, A PERSON ON THE COUNCIL WHO SAYS THIS IS A REALLY GOOD INDIVIDUAL, I THINK THEY SHOULD BE, I THINK THEY SHOULD BE, UH, REWARDED, AWARDED IN SOME KIND OF A RECOGNITION.
AND, BUT THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO OBJECTIVE STANDARD FOR HOW THAT OCCURS.
AND IT'S THE SAME THING WITH THE EXAMPLE THAT COUNSELOR ELLI JUST GAVE.
THERE'S NO STANDARD HOW THESE THINGS, IT DETERMINE.
IT'S JUST WHETHER OR NOT SOMEBODY ON ANY PARTICULAR DAY OF THE WEEK FEELS INCLINED TO DO SOMETHING.
SO, SO MAYOR, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BECAUSE WHAT, UM, KURT JUST READ TALKS ABOUT NOT JUST PROCLAMATIONS, BUT ALSO RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS IN THAT IT FOLLOWS THE SAME PROCESS.
SO IF YOU WANTED TO RECOGNIZE AN INDIVIDUAL, YOU WOULD JUST FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS AS NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT.
IS THAT OKAY IF I RESPOND? BRIAN? YES, GO AHEAD, MAYOR.
I I UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT WHEN IT COMES TO A PROCLAMATION, WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS A COUPLE OF TIMES THIS YEAR.
PROCLAMATIONS GET, SOMEBODY WANTS US TO GIVE THEM A PROCLAMATION.
IF PEOPLE DON'T OBJECT IN ESSENCE, THEN THEY GET A PROCLAMATION.
BUT THERE'S NO, AND THE SAME THING WITH THE AWARD RECOGNITION.
ACTUALLY THE AWARD RECOGNITION TALKING ABOUT UNILATERALLY WAS MADE BEFORE WE EVEN CHANGED THE RULES.
AND WE HAD A SCURRY TO CHANGE THE RULES BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY A COMMITMENT TO AN INDIVIDUAL.
AND I DON'T WANT, UH, PEOPLE ARE WORTHY.
BUT WHEN YOU USUALLY GET AN AWARD, WHEN SOME SORT, OR EVEN A PROCLAMATION, THERE'S SOME OBJECTIVE STANDARD TO HOW IT IS DONE, NOT JUST THREE COUNSELORS.
BECAUSE SOMETIMES I'VE SEEN THIS HAPPEN, COUNSELORS WILL SAY, OH SURE, YEAH, GO AHEAD.
AS OPPOSED TO THE WORTHINESS OF IT.
AND THEN WHEN THERE'S AN ISSUE POTENTIALLY WITH AN ORGANIZATION THAT IT BECOMES AN ISSUE OF OBJECTION.
SO SOMEBODY OBJECTS TO THE PROCLAMATION THAT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.
IT FEELS VERY ARBITRARY TO ME.
SO YOU WANT SOME CRITERION BY WHICH THEY ARE JUDGED TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE WORTHY.
IS THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.
WHAT WOULD YOU THINK ABOUT HAVING A RESIDENT WORKING GROUP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO DO WHAT THIS, THIS SEEMS LIKE A GOOD IDEA, BUT THEN TO, TO TO, TO VET THIS STUFF? A BIRD? IT'S THE SAME THING WITH THE BIRD.
AND IT COULD BE A BIRD, IT COULD BE A FLOWER, IT COULD BE ANY, IT COULD BE A BOOK, WHO KNOWS.
BUT THERE'S NO PROCESS FOR WHICH TO GO THROUGH A, A, UH, OBJECTIVE WAY OF LOOKING AT IT.
AND THEN YOU CAN ALWAYS SAY YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IT.
BUT RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE A WAY OF DETERMINING THAT.
BUT EVEN IF WE HAVE A RESIDENT CITIZENS GROUP, WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL IT, THAT'S GONNA GO AND MAKE THESE DECISIONS, THEY STILL NEED SOME BASIS IN WHICH TO MAKE THE DECISION.
SO THEY STILL NEED THE CRITERION.
SO AT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT SOUNDS FUNDAMENTALLY WHAT I'M HEARING IS WE DON'T HAVE THE CRITERION BY WHICH THESE DECISIONS CAN BE MADE.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO MAKES THEM.
I'D HAVE THE RESIDENT WORKING GROUP WORK ON THAT.
BRING THAT BACK TO COUNSEL FOR APPROVAL, THEN LET THEM DO THE VETTING.
I MEAN, I DON'T THINK OUR RULES AND PROCEDURES SHOULD HAVE THIS ALL I, TO ME, PROCLAMATIONS AND RECOGNITION, THAT'S SURE WE DECIDE ON IT, BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY A COUNCIL RULE AND PROCEDURE IN MY MIND, COMPARED TO EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH AS PART OF THIS DOCUMENT.
I THINK IT'S PROCEDURE THOUGH.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR, WE'RE LACKING A PROCEDURE IS WHAT I'M CONCERNED WITH AND WHAT I THINK MAYOR IS EXPRESSING, AND THIS IS THE PLACE FOR THE PROCEDURES.
SO WELL, SHOULD WE HAVE A COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE WORK ON A PROCEDURE? LIKE, I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO TRY TO DRAFT IT FROM THE DIOCESE RIGHT NOW.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S PRODUCTIVE.
[01:45:02]
WELL, AND WE JUST, YOU KNOW, WE JUST TRIED TO CREATE A, A MORE SUBSTANTIVE PROCEDURE ON LIAISONS AND, AND WE ENDED UP GIVING THAT BACK TO THE COUNSELOR TO HAVE MORE FREEDOM.SO, AND THIS REQUIRES THREE COUNSELORS.
SO I'M NOT SURE THAT WE HAVE AN ISSUE THAT I SEE.
WE CAN'T TRUST THREE COUNSELORS TO GET IT.
I MEAN, YOU ONLY NEED ONE MORE THEN
COUNCILOR ELLA, QUESTION KURT.
SO IN YOUR MIND, WOULD A DESIGNATION ACT THE SAME WAY THEN SOMEBODY REQUESTING SOMETHING TO BE NAMED THE CITY? YOU CAN, A PROCLAMATION CAN, CAN BE, UH, YOU CAN PROCLAIM ANYTHING.
LIKE THERE'S NOT A LIMIT THERE.
YOU COULD PUT A TIMEFRAME ON IT.
YOU COULD DO, YOU KNOW, FOR A YEAR YOU'RE SAYING NO, YOU COULD DO WHATEVER TIMEFRAME OR NO TIMEFRAME UNTIL SOMEONE PROCLAIMS A NEW ONE, UNTIL COUNCIL PROCLAIMS A DIFFERENT ONE.
SO, I MEAN, I THINK IT'S, IT'S THERE.
COUNCILLOR HOSSEINI, MAYBE IF THE PROCLAMATION IS CAREFULLY WORDED, IF THE PROCLAMATION IS CAREFULLY WORDED, YOU COULD HAVE THE BIRD BE THE BIRD FOR THE MONTH.
WHAT THAT IS ACTUALLY WHERE WE ENDED UP LAST YEAR WITH.
BUT BECAUSE THERE WAS NO DESIGNATION PROCESS.
BUT IF, UH, COUNSEL'S ACCEPTING OF OUR ATTORNEY'S GUIDANCE THAT THIS CAN BE USED FOR THAT KIND OF A MORE PERMANENT DESIGNATION.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT THE GROUP IS INTERESTED IN.
THEY'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW MM-HMM
IT'S, I'M NOT HERE TO EDIT THEIR REQUEST
SO, SO, SO COUNCILOR KINSELLA IN THE, IN THIS SPECIFIC EXAMPLE THEN, ARE WE SAYING THAT THREE COUNSELORS AGREEING TO A PROCLAMATION? THAT'S IT, THAT'S ALL IT TAKES? NO.
THEN IT COMES TO COUNCIL FOR MAJORITY.
WE'RE ON CONSENT TODAY WHEN EVERYONE'S HERE TO RECEIVE IT.
SO IT'S
SO THEN THAT SUGGESTS THERE IS SOME NEED FOR PROCESS IMPROVEMENT.
THAT, THAT THE ACTUAL, IS THERE A REASON THEY'RE CONSENT GIVING OF THE PROCLAMATION NEEDS TO BE AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING TO WHEN THE PROCLAMATION IS APPROVED, REQUEST.
THEY'RE NOT UNAPPROVED OR YOU JUST DON'T PUT IT ON CONSENT.
SO PROCLAMATIONS, THAT'S NOT THE PROBLEM.
NO, THE ISSUE THAT COUNCILOR FURMAN JUST TALKED ABOUT IS LIKE, IF THERE'S GONNA BE AN OBJECTION TO A PROCLAMATION, IT'S HAPPENING WHEN THE PEOPLE ARE SITTING THERE WAITING TO RECEIVE IT, THAT'S NOT GOOD.
EXCEPT TO REJECT IT BEFORE THE MEETING
YOU KNOW, YOU GOT 20 PEOPLE SITTING THERE WAITING FOR THEIR WHATEVER, AND THEN NO ONE'S GONNA WANT TO VOTE NO.
SO YEAH, I MEAN SEPARATED, BUT I, I FEEL LIKE IT'D BE PRETTY, SHOULD BE PRETTY FEW AND FAR BETWEEN THAT WE'RE USING THIS FOR PEOPLE OR OBJECTS OR ANIMALS OR COUNCILOR DUNN.
HOW MANY, HOW MANY PROCLAMATIONS DO YOU DO? WE GO THROUGH A YEAR, MORE OR LESS A DOZEN.
SO IT'S, IT'S, THIS IS NOT A EVERY COUNCIL MEETING, 10 KIND OF THING.
AND AWARDS ARE EVEN FEWER AND RECOGNITION IS EVEN FEWER.
I WOULD SAY A DOZEN IS A HIGH NUMBER.
THERE'S BEEN YEARS WHERE WE'VE HAD THREE OR FOUR.
WELL, I THINK THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN A, THAN A DESIGNATION.
I MEAN, WHAT YOU'RE ARGUING, COUNCILOR KINSELLA IS US TAKING A POSITION AS A CITY THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE WHATEVER WITHOUT ANY OTHER THING OTHER THAN ONE, ONE GROUP HAS COME AND SAID, MAKE MY WHATEVER THE CITY, WHATEVER.
AND, UM, THERE'S BEEN NO CONVERSATION WITH THE REST OF THE CITY ABOUT THAT.
AND SO FOR ME, THAT, THAT CERTAINLY SAYS RESIDENTS SHOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO VOICE AN OPINION AND THEN TO COUNCILOR FURMAN'S.
IF YOU'RE GONNA MAKE IT ABOUT, WELL, THEY'RE HEADQUARTERED HERE AND THEY BRING IN MONEY TO THE CITY, WELL THEN WE HAVE A LOT OF FESTIVALS.
YOU KNOW, DOES YOGA BECOME THE, YOU KNOW, THE EXERCISE OF SEDONA OR WHATEVER? SO I, I THINK, I THINK IT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT THING TO SAY WE WANNA OFFICIALLY DESIGNATE SOMETHING AND THAT DOES REQUIRE US TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE
[01:50:01]
COMMUNITY FOR SURE.BUT THERE IS A, THERE IS A WAY OUT THAT I THINK WE SAID YOU COULD MAKE A DESIGNATION.
I THINK IT WOULD NEED TO BE IN A TIME LIMITED WAY AS A PROCLAMATION.
YOU, YOU COULD SAY IT'S HUMMINGBIRD MONTH IS FEBRUARY RIGHT.
OF THIS, OF THIS YEAR, AND WHICH IS WHAT WE DID, WHICH IS WHAT WE DID.
AND I THINK THAT'S A OF FINE THING, BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION THAN SAYING HUMMINGBIRDS ARE THE BIRD OF SEDONA FOREVERMORE.
AND I, PERHAPS THE REQUEST FOR A DESIGNATION, UM, IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE AN AGENDIZED ITEM, YOU KNOW, ON THE, YOU KNOW, FOR DISCUSSION THE SAME WAY AS WE DO OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS.
SO IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO BRING THAT FORWARD, A COUNSELOR WOULD NEED TO PROBABLY ASK FOR IT, EITHER THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER OR THROUGH GETTING, YOU KNOW, THE THREE SPONSORS AND YOU KNOW, AND ASKING FOR IT TO BE AGENDIZED OR DOING THE FUTURE MEETINGS PORTION, UM, VERSUS A PROCLAMATION THAT WE RECOGNIZE THIS BIRD IS, YOU KNOW, WONDERFUL AND WANNA CELEBRATE IT DURING THIS MONTH.
I THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE.
BUT THAT GOES TO THE MAYOR'S POINT, THAT WE DON'T HAVE A PROCESS FOR THAT.
THAT WE DO, UH, UNDER WHAT THE, OUR ATTORNEY IS TELLING US.
NO, I MEAN, EVEN WHAT YOU JUST SAID, COUNCILOR IS DESIGNATION'S A DIFFERENT PROCESS.
IF IT'S A DIFFERENT PROCESS, THEN WE DON'T HAVE ONE RIGHT NOW.
WHICH I JUST SAID WOULD COME FORWARD AS LIKE A FULL AGENDA.
SO YOU'RE DEFINING THE PROCESS HERE ON THE DIE IS AROUND THAT.
AND WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING INSIDE OF OUR RULES AND PROCEDURES THAT WOULD TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT IS PERMANENTLY DESIGNATED AND THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SO FAR.
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, KURT, IF A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM CAME UP AND SOMEBODY SAID, LET'S DESIGNATE, YOU KNOW, THE DANDELION IS SEDONAS CITY FLOWER.
IF YOU USE DESIGNATION, I'D SAY NO.
BUT IF YOU SAY, I WANNA PROCLAIM THE DANDELION AS A CITY'S FLOWER, THEN
IT'D BE UP TO THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL TO PASS IT OR NOT.
SO WHERE'S THAT? LEAVE US, SAY THE DESIGNATION, SAY THE DESIGNATIONS CAN ALL BE MADE BY A PROCLAMATION.
PROCLAMATION HAS TO BE PUT ON THE AGENDA BY THREE COUNSELORS VOTED ON AT A SEPARATE MEETING FROM, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE PROCLAMATION OR AWARD OR WHATEVER WOULD ACTUALLY TAKE PLACE SO THAT WE DON'T EMBARRASS OURSELVES OR EMBARRASS PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE WHEN WE TELL 'EM, OH, SORRY.
SO THAT TAKES CARE OF PROCLAMATIONS AND AWARDS.
MAY YOU TAKE CARE OF DESIGNATIONS.
YOU SAY OUR DESIGNATIONS WILL BE DONE.
THEN THAT WOULD LEAVE THE PEOPLE APPLYING FOR OR FILLING OUT THE REQUEST FOR A PROCLAMATION, SUBMITTING THEIR PAPERWORK MUCH EARLIER, MUCH EARLIER.
WHICH IS BAD IN ORDER TO GET THEN ON A CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO THEN GET POSSIBLY MAYBE TO ANOTHER COUNCIL MEETING FOR APPROVAL.
MAY I SUGGEST THAT IF A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL IS INTERESTED IN STAFF COMING UP WITH SOME POTENTIAL MODELS FOR HOW THIS COULD WORK, WE COULD GO DO THAT AND BRING IT BACK TO YOU AND THEN YOU COULD DECIDE IF ANY OF THEM WORK FOR WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.
I THINK MERCIFULLY, THAT SOUNDS FANTASTIC.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEM
SO I'D LIKE TO APPROVE THE, THE RULES THAT WE HAVE FOR NOW ANYWAY.
UM, I MEAN WE CAN LEAVE IT OUT.
I JUST THREW IN A SENTENCE, SIR.
I, I WANNA PROPOSE SOMETHING, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE VOTED ON TONIGHT.
WHAT WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT FUTURE AGENDA ITEM? YEAH, IF IF IT'S RELATED TO THIS.
WE CAN, YOU CAN DISCUSS IT NOW.
UM, A RULE OF PROCEDURE, BRING IT UP AND, WELL, IT'S ACTUALLY IN ETHICS.
I MEAN, IT'S IN OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE TO BRING IT UP.
WE'RE WE'RE DOING GREAT ON TIME OR, OR WE CAN, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP AN ISSUE THAT HAS BOTHERED ME FOR A WHILE AND IT JUST, IT JUST RAISED ITS HEAD AGAIN.
AND THAT IS WHEN WE ARE IN A ALMOST LIKE QUASI-JUDICIAL SITUATION WHERE WE ARE HEARING A, UH, AN APPEAL.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE EX PARTE COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPELLANT AND WE HAVE NOTHING IN OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE THAT, THAT, UM, PREVENTS THAT.
SO THE APPELLATE CONTACTS EACH COUNCIL MEMBER, AND THEN
[01:55:01]
I WOULD SAY PROBABLY THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL MEMBERS MEET WITH THE APPELLATE AND WE HEAR THEIR SIDE OF THE STORY, BUT WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING A COUNCIL MEETING WHERE THAT SIDE OF THE STORY IS PRESENTED IN A FORMAL WAY.AND I VIEW THIS AS, YOU KNOW, LIKE THE RULES OF LITIGATION WHERE YOU DO NOT HAVE COMMUNICATIONS WITH ONE PARTY, WHERE THE OTHER PARTY'S NOT PRESENT.
THE OTHER PARTY BEING, OF COURSE, US, BUT THAT'S NOT COUNSEL, THAT'S STAFF.
SO I FEEL REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE WHEN SOMEBODY CONTACTS ME.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MY REST OF MY COLLEAGUES FEEL, BUT I THINK IT JUST PUTS US IN A VERY AWKWARD POSITION.
WE DON'T HAVE THE AGENDA BILL, WE DON'T HAVE THE DOCUMENTATION.
WE'RE LISTENING TO THEIR SIDE OF THE STORY.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IN A, UH, IN A JUDICIAL PROCESS, YOU WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
I, I RECOGNIZE THERE'S A DIFFERENCE, BUT IT JUST MAKES ME VERY UNCOMFORTABLE.
AND I WANTED TO BRING IT UP AND SEE HOW MY FELLOW COUNSELORS FELT ABOUT THAT.
COUNCILOR FAFF, UM, QUESTION FOR KURT.
IF WE DO HAVE THESE EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, SOMEONE APPEALS TO US, WE DON'T GIVE THEM WHAT THEY WANT, THEY APPEAL TO THE SUPERIOR COURT.
ARE THESE EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS GONNA COME BACK TO HANAS? POTENTIALLY.
UM, HOW WOULD THAT PLAY OUT? I MEAN, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT WAS SAID DURING THERE AND WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO USE, BUT YES, THEY, THEY, THEY HAVE, UM, NOT HERE, NOT RECENTLY IN MY EXPERIENCE, BUT I'VE SEEN APPELLANTS WHEN IT GETS APPEALED TO THE SUPERIOR COURT, QUOTE COUNSELOR SO-AND-SO SAID OR SAID SOMETHING AT A PRIVATE MEETING, YOU KNOW, BUT GENERALLY THE COURTS, I DON'T KNOW, THAT HASN'T, THE ONE TIME I'VE SEEN THAT IT DIDN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE NECESSARILY.
THE COURT WAS LOOKING AT WHAT DID THE BODY DO, YOU KNOW, NOT THAT, WHAT ONE DID ONE COUNSELOR SAY AT A PRIVATE MEETING? SO, I MEAN, I LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING, YOU KNOW, A LIST OF ACTIVITIES WHERE WE WON'T HAVE EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS.
SO YOU, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO ON ANY AND EVERYTHING, YOU KNOW, NOT TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CORPSMAN COUNCIL, BUT WITH APPLICANTS ON ANYTHING ELSE.
UM, THE ONE, THE ONE THAT'S IN HERE IS ON APPEALS FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING OFFICER.
'CAUSE YOU ARE ACTING IN A QUASI-JUDICIAL CAPACITY AT THAT POINT, RIGHT? SO WHAT MAYOR P PUGS PROPOSING WOULD JUST BE BASICALLY ADDING IN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
SO THOSE ARE YOUR TWO APPEALS.
YOU GET 'EM FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OR YOU GET 'EM FROM PLANNING AND ZONING.
SO LIKE, THERE'S APPEALS OF PLANNING, ZONING OF THE ZONING AND DIRECTOR'S INTERPRETATIONS.
THOSE GO TO P AND Z FIRST AND THEN TO COUNCIL, UM, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW THAT STAFF'S GONNA DO NOW WILL GO TO P AND Z.
SO EVERYTHING COMES THROUGH P AND Z OR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BEFORE THEY COME TO COUNCIL.
I'D SUPPORT RESTRICTING EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS IN THOSE SPECIFIC SITUATIONS.
COUNCILOR KINSELLA, I'D LIKE TO DEFER TO COUNCILOR FERMAN.
I, I THINK THAT WE NEED A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT QUASI-JUDICIAL MIGHT BE.
SO IT'S JUST, I FELT THAT YOU STRUCK IT, BUT IN THE PAST, WHY WAS ONLY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN OUR RULES BEFORE THERE'S A, BECAUSE IT'S A SPECIFIC, BECAUSE IT'S A JUDICIAL PROCEED, QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEED.
WHY? IT'S PLANNING AND ZONING APPEALS ARE NOT A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING.
AND SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE EX PARTE COMMUNICATION AND A P AND Z APPEAL.
AND THAT'S BEEN THE PRACTICE, UH, AT THE DISCRETION OF ANY COUNSELOR.
COUNSELORS HAVE REFUSED TO TALK TO APPELLANTS IN THE PAST, AND THEN SOME COUNSELORS ARE COMFORTABLE TALKING TO THEM AND SO THEY MEET WITH THEM.
UM, AND EITHER WAY IS, IS FINE.
COUNSEL CAN GO EITHER DIRECTION.
NO ONE CAN FORCE YOU TO MEET WITH ANYONE.
UM, SO YOU COULD ALWAYS, RIGHT NOW IT'S BASICALLY IN THE COUNSEL'S DISCRETION FOR P AND Z APPEALS PROHIBITED FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPEALS.
WE PROBABLY HAVE, YOU KNOW, ONE OR PROBABLY TWO EVERY THREE YEARS IS WHAT WE GET APPEALS FROM P AND Z OR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
DO WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE OF THOSE IN LIGHT OF 2 4, 4 7? I, I DON'T THINK SO NECESSARILY.
UM, MOST TIME P AND Z WAS GOING WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION ANYWAY, SO THEY WERE ALIGNED.
AND SO I DON'T SEE NECESSARILY THAT'S GONNA LEADING TO MORE APPEALS.
FOLLOWING UP ON THAT THOUGH, THE NEW RULES SAY THAT THE DIRECTOR NOW MAKES MORE DECISIONS WHEN AN APPLICANT DOESN'T LIKE A DIRECTOR'S DECISION, IS THAT GOING TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? IT GOES TO P AND Z.
UM, AND THEN JUST IF THEY DON'T LIKE P AND Z'S DECISION, THEN CITY COUNCIL THOSE, AND AGAIN, SO THAT'S NOT, SO WHAT ACTUALLY GOES TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? HEARING VARIANCES? VARIANCE REQUESTS, VARIANCE.
[02:00:01]
UM, ANYONE WHO FEELS LIKE THE SIZE, SHAPE, OR TOPOGRAPHY THERE, A LOT PROHIBITS THEM FROM ACTING IN AND BUILDING ON THE SAME MANNER THAT THEIR NEIGHBORS GET TO, GETS THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE FOR SETBACK OR HEIGHT OR SOMETHING BECAUSE THEY HAVE SOMETHING STRANGE THAT THEY'RE LIMITED IN BUILDING.SO THE LAST VARIANCE REQUEST WAS QUAIL TAIL TRAIL.
UM, AND I BELIEVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING OFFICER MAYBE APPROVED THAT, BUT COUNSEL REVERSED THAT, THAT WAS TWO PLUS YEARS AGO.
COUNCILOR HOI SPEAKING AS THE NEWBIE, I WOULD ACTUALLY APPRECIATE THE CLARITY OF HAVING, OF DISALLOWING EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS FOR APPEALS.
IT WOULD GIVE ME A COMFORT LEVEL THAT I CAN EASILY REJECT A CONVERSATION THAT I PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANYWAY.
UM, I I, I JUST LIKE THE IDEA OF IT AND I'VE HAD A REQUEST WITHIN THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS, SO IT'S ON MY MIND.
OH, SO THAT'S, SO THAT IS TRUE.
SO CURRENTLY, SO FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE, UM, REZONES AUTOMATICALLY COME TO COUNCIL, UM, ANYONE REQUESTING A REZONE THAT'S NOT AN APPEAL FROM P AND Z.
UH, THAT'S JUST THE STANDARD PROCEDURE.
SO THIS WOULD NOT AFFECT THAT.
YOU COULD STILL MEET OR NOT MEET ON ANYONE REQUESTING A REZONING.
EVEN IF P AND Z VOTED TO DENY P AND Z MADE A RECOMMENDATION IN A REZONE, THEY DIDN'T MAKE A A DECISION.
THIS ONLY AFFECTS APPELL, THE APPELLATE PROCEDURE AS, AS IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN IN HERE.
AGAIN, COUNSELORS ARE, I MEAN, FREE TO MEET OR NOT MEET, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT TO GO EITHER WAY.
UM, RE REZONE, I MEAN, I DO FEEL LIKE REZONES ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A, YOU'RE APPEALING TO YOUR, YOUR GOVERNMENT, YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO TRYING TO CONVINCE 'EM TO DO SOMETHING.
AND SO, UM, THOSE HAVE NEVER OFFENDED ME IF THEY GET ALL THE SHOTS THEY CAN GET TO TRY TO GET A REZONE, THAT'S A HARD THING TO DO GENERALLY ANYWAYS.
AND SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO GO THAT FAR.
AND I'M NOT SURE IF COUNT OR MAYOR PLU WAS WORRIED ABOUT THOSE ONES.
COUNCILOR ELLA? YEAH, I WOULD.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE LANGUAGE IF IT'S RESTRICTING IN THE APPEALS PROCESS ONLY.
I THINK THAT THAT'S MAKES GOOD SENSE.
UM, I AM MORE COMFORTED BY WHAT YOU JUST SAID OCCURRED BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT WE, I I, I DON'T WOULDN'T WANNA USE THIS.
WE, THERE'S TIMES WHEN WE'RE CONTACTED BY APPLICANTS ON A VARIETY OF TYPES OF ISSUES AND YOU KNOW, WE ALWAYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY WE WANT, WE DON'T WANT TO OR WE WILL.
BUT I THINK THAT THIS WOULD BE REALLY RESTRICTING, UM, IF IT WENT BEYOND THE APPEALS PROCESS, BECAUSE THAT'S SORT OF WHAT WE SIGNED ON FOR.
PEOPLE WANNA LOBBY US AS LONG AS IT'S NOT AN APPEAL PROCESS AND IT'S GETTING IN THE WAY OF THAT, I THINK PEOPLE DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO LOBBY US, UM, FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR WHAT THEY WANT OR SEE.
UH, IT'S UP TO US IF WE WANT TO MAKE THAT APPOINTMENT OR NOT.
I WOULDN'T WANNA RESTRICT, TO ME THIS IS RESTRICTING THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO CONTACT US IN AND SIT DOWN AND MAKE THEIR CASE.
WE, YOU KNOW, STAFF, WHETHER LET'S SAY IT'S A ZONING QUESTION, STAFF WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE THE CASE AND THE PRESENTATION, THE PACKET OF MATERIALS WE GET.
THERE ARE MANY TIMES THAT WE, PEOPLE HAVE BEEN VERY WELCOMING OF MEETING WITH VARIOUS APPLICANTS.
UH, I THINK RECENTLY THIS HAS COME UP BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT MAYBE ARE FALL INTO A DIFFERENT CATEGORY.
BUT AGAIN, I DO DON'T WANNA RESTRICT AND MAKE THAT SOME PEOPLE WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO US AND OTHERS DON'T.
SO I I I WOULD NOT SUPPORT GOING BEYOND THE APPEAL PROCESS, BUT I DO THINK IT'S ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO HAVE THIS RESTRICTION IN FOUR WHEN WE ARE ACTING ON AN APPEAL.
FURMAN COUNCILOR ELL, WHEN YOU SAY THE APPEAL PROCESS, ARE YOU SAYING KEEP THE LANGUAGE THAT EXISTS? IS THAT THE APPEAL PROCESS? IS THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OR ARE YOU GOING BEYOND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? NO, I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO BE ACTING IN AN APPEAL FOR PLANNING AND ZONING, IT MAKES SENSE THAT WE, UM, THAT WE NOT HAVE AN EX PARTE SINCE WE ARE, IT'S AN ACTUAL APPEAL PROCESS TO SOMETHING THAT HAS WHERE SOMEONE ELSE HAS HAD AUTHORITY.
BUT IF IT'S SOMETHING WHERE PLANNING AND ZONING IS ONLY MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO US AND WE'RE THE FINAL AUTHORITY, THAT'S NOT AN APPEAL PROCESS.
AND I THINK, AS I SAID, PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXPECT THAT THEY CAN MAKE A CASE TO US TO POINT SOMETHING OUT.
AND WHAT ARE THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES THERE WHERE PLANNING AND ZONING MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS, DECIDES NO, DECIDES AND THERE WOULD BE APPEAL IF IT CAME TO COUNCIL? OH, UM, UH, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, UH, WAS THE ONE THAT COMES UP MOST FREQUENTLY, COUNCILOR DONE.
[02:05:01]
I THINK PUTTING EXAMPLES IN HERE OF WHAT IS NOT ALLOWABLE FOR EX PARTE AND WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWABLE FOR EX PARTE WILL ACTUALLY HELP.'CAUSE WHAT WE, I THINK WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH IS CLARITY.
LIKE CUP IS ONE THING, BUT LIKE, UM, YOU KNOW, OXFORD SUITES WITH THE, UH, COMMUNITY PLAN AND THE CHANGE IN THE COMMUNITY PLAN AND IT, IT GOES FROM ONE TO ANOTHER.
OR, UM, YOU TALKED ABOUT ZONING AND REZONING, WHICH IT DOESN'T, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION THAT COMES FROM PLANNING AND ZONING.
IT'S NOT A DECISION AND THE DECISION ULTIMATELY IS MADE HERE.
SO ANYONE WHO'S GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS TECHNICALLY HAS ACCESS TO US BECAUSE NOT AN APPEAL.
AND THEN WE ALL KNOW INFAMOUSLY THERE WAS AN APPEAL THAT WENT THROUGH, UM, WITH RESIDENTS, UH, VERSUS THE, THE DEVELOPER AND AND THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY RECENTLY.
BUT THAT WAS AN APPEAL, A REAL APPEAL IN MY MIND.
AND SO THAT WOULD'VE BEEN DISCOUNTED.
SO I THINK MAYBE HAVING SOME EXAMPLES, UM, FOR CLARITY IN HERE THAT YOU WOULD SAY DO AND DO NOT MEET WOULD HELP.
SO THAT WE ARE MAKING A DECISION THAT'S EITHER WE CAN SAY, I'M SORRY, IT'S NOT IN OUR RULES AND PROCEDURES, OR, I REALLY DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE TALKING WITH YOU ABOUT THIS AND THEREFORE I DON'T WANT TO MEET, WHICH IS DIFFERENT.
SO I FEEL LIKE THE APPEALS ARE, ARE LIMITED AND THEY'RE CLEARLY STARTED WITH SOMEONE FILLS OUT THE FORM TO REQUEST AN APPEAL AT P AND Z OR BOARD OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
AND THEN, UM, THAT WOULD, I THINK IT WOULD'VE REALLY JUST FALL ON STAFF.
WE COULD THEN LET YOU KNOW, A AN APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED IN P AND Z CASE OR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE, WHATEVER, AND JUST LET YOU KNOW.
UM, AND, UH, WE CAN REMIND YOU THAT THE EX PARTE RULE IS NOW IN EFFECT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO LIST OUT ALL THE DIFFERENT EXAMPLES.
SO THE, THE MAJORITY, THIS WOULD ONLY LIMIT THE APPEALS AND IT'S GONNA BE CU PS FROM P AND Z OR VARIANCES FROM BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ARE THE TWO APPEAL PROCEDURES PRIMARILY.
EVERYTHING ELSE P AND Z JUST RECOMMENDS.
SO OTHER COMMENTS SINCE THE MAYOR RAISED IT, DID THAT ADDRESS HER CONCERN? YEAH, MAYOR.
BUT YOU'RE GOING TO WRITE LANGUAGE OCCUR, RIGHT? THE, SO THE, THE ONLY LANGUAGE, UH, MAYOR IS THAT IT USED TO JUST SAY AFTER AN APPEAL FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, UH, THEN NO COMMUNICATION ALLOWED.
IT'LL NOW SAY AFTER AN APPEAL FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
UH, NO EX PARTY COMMUNICATION.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY MORE ITEMS? OH, JUST TO CLARIFY, SO WHAT'LL BE THE PROCESS? WILL WE GET AN EMAIL THAT SAYS THERE'S BEEN AN APPEAL? CORRECT.
SO ANYTIME THERE'S AN APPEAL, WE CAN MAKE SURE WE EMAIL IT TO ALL COUNSEL AND TO, TO KNOW.
UM, AND I THINK WE ALREADY DO GENERALLY, BUT I'LL MAKE SURE THAT IT'S DONE PROMPTLY.
UM, AND SO THAT COUNSEL KNOWS IMMEDIATELY.
YES, WE CAN CITE THE RULE, THAT'S ALL.
AND DID WE NAIL DOWN THE WHOLE, WELL, I WANTED TO KNOW IF DESIGNATION THING PROC AS A PLACEHOLDER UNTIL WE CAN COME SOMETHING BETTER.
DO YOU WANNA JUST PUT IN DESIGNATIONS, MAYBE MADE BY PROCLAMATION WITH THE SUPPORT OF THREE COUNSELORS, BUT MUST BE REVIEWED AT TWO COUNCIL MEETINGS? AND IS THE DESIGNATION BY DEFINITION TIME UNLIMITED? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THERE'S IT CAN BE.
'CAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A PROCEDURE POLICY.
IT COULD BE TIME UNLIMITED OR IT COULD BE FOR TIME.
I STILL AGREE WITH COUNCILOR F'S INITIAL POSITION THAT IT'S JUST NOT A PATH THAT WE SHOULD GO DOWN.
SO WE'LL JUST LEAVE IT OUT FOR NOW.
I THINK WE'RE DOWN INTO SEMANTICS ALMOST, RIGHT? I MEAN, IF A DESIGNATION CAN BE TIMED DELIMITED AND THEN UNTIMED, DELIMITED MEANING FOREVER, IT'S JUST GONNA COME BACK TO COUNCIL AT SOME POINT WHEN THE QUAIL SOCIETY MOVES INTO TOWN AND THEY WANT THAT TO BE THERE, THE CITY BIRD, UM, IT'S STILL GONNA COME IN FOR COUNCIL.
'CAUSE WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO UNDO THE DESIGNATION FOR THE PRIOR IN ORDER FOR US TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE NEXT.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S GETTING SUPER COMPLICATED HERE.
UM, I WOULD PERSONALLY JUST TAKE IT OUT AND JUST LEAVE IT AS A PROCLAMATION THAT, YOU KNOW, WE LOVE THIS BIRD ANIMAL PLANT, WHATEVER IT IS FOR THIS MONTH.
OR IF WE WANTED TO SAY FOR THE SPRING, I DON'T REALLY CARE, BUT I DON'T WANNA END UP BEING UNLIMITED ON TIME.
[02:10:01]
I THINK, ON A FUTURE COUNCIL TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE FACT THAT THERE'S GONNA BE SOMEBODY ELSE WHO'S GONNA COME ALONG.I THINK IT CAN BE HANDLED WITH A PROCLAMATION AND, UM, AVOID DESIGNATIONS.
SO THERE'S A MAJORITY RIGHT THERE THAT WOULD PREFER TO ELIMINATE THE IDEA OF A DESIGNATION.
UH, MAYOR, WOULD YOU WANNA WEIGH IN BEFORE WE UH, CALL IT? NO.
OKAY, SO NOTHING ON DESIGNATIONS FOR NOW.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY MORE ITEMS FOR KURT ON THIS SUBJECT TODAY? THIS SUBJECT, THE RULES OF PROCEDURE SUBJECT? YES.
SO AT THE LAST MEETING, THAT VERY EXHAUSTIVE MEETING THAT YOU HAD, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION, UM, RELATED TO LOBBYISTS AND MEMBERSHIPS AND, AND COUNCIL COMMITTEES AND WHETHER HOW THE PROCESS WORKED FOR COMMUNICATION WITH LOBBYISTS AND, UM, IT SOUNDED LIKE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO BE LOOKED AT BY, BY STAFF.
SO MY QUESTION IS, IS, WELL FIRST OF ALL IT'S NOT HERE, SO IT HASN'T HAPPENED YET, BUT IS THIS SOMETHING THAT'S ONLY LOOKED AT ONCE A YEAR? DO WE ONLY OPEN THIS UP ONCE A YEAR? OR IT CAN BE OPENED UP AT ANY TIME.
SO, UH, YEAH, HISTORICALLY WE'VE DONE IT ONCE A YEAR.
WE GET DIRECTION AT THE COUNCIL RETREAT AND THEN GET THE CHANGES ALL DONE BY JANUARY, FEBRUARY.
UM, BUT WE STARTED EARLY THIS YEAR AND THERE'S, BUT THAT'S JUST BY PRACTICE, NOT BY ANY POLICY.
IT CAN BE, IT CAN BE BROUGHT UP ANYTIME THE RULES OF PROCEDURE.
WELL, IT DOES SEEM LIKE BEFORE THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION GETS IN FULL SWING.
STAFF DID SAY WE WERE GONNA LOOK INTO, AND THE COUNCIL REQUESTED SOME TYPE OF POLICY ON HOW COUNCIL INTERACTS WITH THE LOBBYISTS AND LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AND WHATNOT, AND WE HAVE NOT, UH, BEEN ABLE TO GET ANYTHING TOGETHER ON THAT YET.
SO, BUT WHEN WE DO, I DON'T KNOW.
WELL, THE, UM, OUR CONTRACTED LOBBYIST AND THEN LAUREN BROWN WHO'S TAKING OVER THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS PIECE FOR STAFF, THEY HAVE PREPARED A DRAFT FOR, UM, POTENTIAL LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES THAT THEY, THAT I'M REVIEWING AND CAN GET ONTO YOUR CALENDAR.
UM, IN TERMS OF LIKE YOUR, UM, RULES OF ENGAGEMENT, SO TO SPEAK, ON HOW THAT PIECE HAPPENS, YOU KNOW, WE'LL HAVE SOME EXAMPLES FROM OTHER CITIES, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING ON, UH, FORMULATING DRAFT LEGISLATIVE POSITIONS FOR YOU ALL.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT, I'D LIKE TO CALL FOR A MOTION, UM, PACKET.
I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE AND POLICIES AS AMENDED.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, I WILL CALL FOR A VOTE.
THANK YOU KURT, FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS.
WE'LL UPDATE THE PAGE NUMBERS OR THE, UM, RULE NUMBERS THEY'VE GOTTEN OFF A LITTLE BIT AND TRY TO, UM, MAYBE ALSO PUT IN THE SECTIONS ON THE LONG SECTIONS AND GET THAT CLEANED UP AND GET A NEW PDF OUT TO COUNCIL, UM, NEXT WEEK.
[8.d. AB 3066 Discussion/possible action regarding ideas for future meetings/agenda items.]
WE'RE READY FOR, UH, ITEM EIGHT D, AB 30 66.DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING IDEAS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS, AGENDA ITEMS. ANYONE HAVE ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO BRING UP TODAY? SEEING NONE, WE ARE ADJOURNED UNTIL TWO.
WAIT, WHY IS IT SAY THAT WE DON'T HAVE A MEETING TOMORROW? NO MEETING TOMORROW.
[10. ADJOURNMENT]
WE'RE ADJOURNED UNTIL NEXT MONTH.HAPPY THANKSGIVING ONE AND ALL.