OK, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED WITH OUR CITY OF ANGLETON SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, DATED
[DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:06]
TUESDAY, JANUARY THE 18TH, 2022 AT 6:01, WE DO HAVE A FORUM PRESENT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT SO I'LL CALL US TO ORDER.OUR FIRST REGULAR AGENDA ITEM IS DISCUSSION OF COUNCIL ACTION ON CHARTER REVIEW
[1. Discussion and possible action on Charter Review Commission amendments.]
COMMISSION AMENDMENTS.WE HAVE OUR CITY ATTORNEYS HERE TO PRESENT.
I'M ASSUMING THE FLOOR IS JUST FOR YOU GUYS TO TELL US.
NO NO AUDIENCE, NO GRANDSTANDING.
[INAUDIBLE] THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
THIS IS THE REPORT FROM THE CHARTER COMMISSION.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION SAYS YOU CAN'T CHANGE YOUR CHARTER.
FROM 1840, SOMETHING OFTENER THAN EVERY TWO YEARS, SO IT'S BEEN MORE THAN OFTENER THAN EVERY TWO YEARS.
BUT THEN I DIDN'T KNOW [INAUDIBLE] CHARTERS' USUALLY HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT YOU REVIEW IT.
YOU HAVE TO REVIEW IT EVERY SO MANY YEARS.
SO YOU'VE GOT A MINIMUM FLOOR.
YOU'VE GOT A MAXIMUM CEILING OF YOU NEED TO LOOK AT IT, AT LEAST USUALLY EVERY FIVE YEARS. THE CHARTER COMMISSION WAS A REALLY GOOD CHARTER COMMISSION, AS WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE VERY FIRST. EVERYBODY HAS A VOICE.
AND THEY I MEAN, THERE WASN'T UNANIMOUS VOTES ALL THE TIME.
THERE WERE A LOT, A LOT OF THEM, BUT NOT ALL OF THEM.
AND YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY RESPECTED.
EVERYBODY HAD A NICE DEBATE AND IT'S A POLICY CALL.
SO THE APPROACH TO THIS WAS TO UPDATE THE CHARTER, NOT MODERNIZE IT, NOT UPGRADE IT, BUT JUST UPDATE THE LANGUAGE BECAUSE A LOT OF IT'S FROM THE LATE 60S AND EARLY, AH, THE 70S.
SO THAT'S WHAT THE APPROACH WAS ALSO THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, AND I DIDN'T CHECK IT FROM THE LAST ELECTION. BUT THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION HAS 44 AMENDMENTS.
THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION HAS 25 LESS IS REALLY MORE IN THIS CASE.
AND SO THAT'S WHY YOU WILL SEE A LOT OF STRIKEOUTS IN THE CHARTER.
I MEAN, SOME OF THEM ARE OBVIOUS.
THERE'S A PROVISION IN THE CHARTER FOR SPECIAL POLICE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE EVER SEEN A MUNICIPAL SPECIAL POLICE OFFICER DON'T KNOW WHAT ONE IS, BUT WE GOT RID OF SPECIAL POLICE.
YEAH, IT'S A LITTLE SKETCHY IF WE CAN SAY IT IN ONE SENTENCE AS OPPOSED TO MULTIPLE PARAGRAPHS. AND THERE'S ONE EXAMPLE IN HERE.
IT GOT SQUEEZED DOWN TO MODERN OR TO MORE CURRENT LANGUAGE WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY IT THAT OFTEN. AN EXAMPLE IS YOU HAVE ALL THE GENERAL POWERS.
WELL, THEN WHY WOULD YOU LIST OUT EXAMPLES OF GENERAL POWERS? JUST SAY I GOT IT ALL AND LEAVE IT OPEN TO WHERE THE COURT, THE PEOPLE, WHOEVER IS REVIEWING IT CAN MAKE THOSE CHANGES.
EACH OF THESE CHANGES HAS TO BE A SEPARATE BALLOT.
AND VOTE OR ITEM ON THE ON THE BALLOT, SO THERE'S NO DO YOU APPROVE THIS CHARTER BECAUSE IT'S NOT A NEW CHARTER? SO THERE COULD BE.
YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY CHANGES WE MADE, BUT WE DID IT BY SECTION NUMBER.
AND SO IT WOULD GO BY SECTION NUMBER, IT WOULDN'T SPLIT UP SECTION NUMBER.
AND THERE'S AN EDUCATION COMPONENT OF IT.
YOU CANNOT SPEND TAX DOLLARS ADVOCATING FOR PASSAGE.
YOU CAN SPEND TAX DOLLARS EDUCATING WITHOUT SAYING VOTE FOR IT, BUT JUST EDUCATED.
THIS WILL. THIS WAS DONE BECAUSE OF THIS, WHICH WILL HELP DO THAT.
NO, THEY CAN, THE VOTER WILL DECIDE IF THAT'S A GOOD THING OR A BAD THING.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE SOME THAT PASS AND SOME THAT FAIL.
MAYBE, YOU KNOW, IT MAY BE A GRAND SLAM, BUT WHO KNOWS? AND I THINK THE TWO ISSUES THAT WILL BE THE MOST CHANGE IS MOVING TO THREE YEAR TERMS FROM TWO YEAR TERMS AND THEN HOW WE BLEND IN THE ELECTION.
SO WHAT THAT DOES IS THERE'S TWO OF EVERY CYCLE.
[00:05:04]
AND THERE'S NO SWEEP ELECTIONS.YOU CAN'T GET A MAJORITY IN ONE ELECTION, IT'S GOING TO TAKE AT LEAST TWO ELECTIONS TO GET FOUR WHERE YOU GET A QUORUM AND THE.
WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT DRIVING DOWN HERE, THE SECOND ONE IS TERMS. UM, PRIMPED, I MEAN, JUST THE THE UPDATES, THE STATE LAW ONES.
THERE WAS ANOTHER WELL, I'LL THINK ABOUT IT, I'LL FOCUS IN ON THAT.
SO BEFORE I START AND WE'LL GO THROUGH EACH ONE, IS THERE ONE THAT YOU ALL WANT TO JUMP TO, TO HAVE A QUESTION ON.
OH, I REMEMBERED IT BEFORE YOU DO, IT'S REMOVING YOUR POWER TO APPROVE DEPARTMENT HEADS.
WE HAD A LOT OF DEBATE ON THAT ONE.
THERE ARE PROS AND CONS, AND WE CAN GET TO THAT.
I MEAN, IT CAUSES SOME POLITICS BECAUSE IF A DEPARTMENT HEADS UNDER OR IN THE CROSSHAIRS FROM THE CITY MANAGER SAY RIGHTFULLY, THEY MAY TRY TO PAY TO PLAY POLITICS AND GO TO YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO CONFIRM WHETHER YOU APPROVE THAT REMOVAL.
WHICH WOULD BE BAD NOW IF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD IS IN THE CROSSHAIRS OF THE CITY MANAGER WRONGFULLY. THEN THERE'S THE DOWNSIDE OF NOT HAVING THAT OTHER STUFF IN THERE, THEN YOU YOU'RE HAVING SOMEBODY WRONGFULLY, WRONGFULLY, HOWEVER YOU DEFINE THAT ACCUSED.
IT'S ALSO IN THE APPEAL PROCESS MAKE A DECISION. RIGHT.
ABSOLUTELY. IT'S IN THERE, THEY CAN APPEAL TO THE COUNCIL.
SO WE'RE DEBATING THAT NOW OR WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT LATER, OK? SO ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS YOU WANT ME TO DO OR SECTION YOU WANT ME TO JUMP TO BEFORE WE START ON PAGE ONE, SECTION ONE? AND LET ME JUST ADD THAT I PUT THIS AT YOUR PLACE AND WHAT THIS IS GENERALLY IT'S NOT.
YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED PERCENT COMPLETE.
BUT WHEN I SAY THAT I COULDN'T RECAPTURE THE WHOLE EXPLANATION OF THE COMMISSION IN ONE LINE. BUT I HAVE IT BY SECTION AND THEN THE CATEGORIES FOR BASIS FOR CHANGE AS THEY WERE DISCUSSED BY YOUR CHARTER COMMISSION.
AND THEN I PUT THE CHECK MARKS FOR WHY THERE WAS THAT CHANGE.
SOME OF THEM WERE NOT CHANGED AND I'VE MADE THAT NOTATION AS WELL IN THERE.
I HAVE MY OTHER NOTES WITH ME, SO IF THERE WAS MORE, WE GET SOMETHING I CAN FILL YOU IN AND WHAT IT WAS THAT THE COMMISSION TALKED ABOUT.
BUT GENERALLY, THIS IS THE THINGS THAT THE COMMISSION TALKED ABOUT.
SO SECTION ONE POINT ONE, WE DELETED MAYOR, ADMINISTRATOR, AND ADDED MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
IN HOME RULE CITY, THERE ARE BASICALLY TWO TYPES OF.
GOVERNMENT. CITY MANAGER, WHICH IS WHAT YOU HAVE AND STRONG MAYOR, WHICH IS WHAT HOUSTON HAS. THERE'S NO THING CALLED COUNCIL MADE MAN OR MAYOR ADMINISTRATOR.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT GOT IN THERE.
THE GENERAL LAW CITY'S USUALLY HAVE ADMINISTRATORS.
BUT COUNCILMAN, THERE JUST ISN'T THAT BIRD EXISTENCE.
THERE WAS A TIME YEARS PAST THAT THE CITY MANAGER WAS REFERRED TO AS A CITY ADMINISTRATOR HERE IN TOWN. EVENTUALLY, IT MORPHED INTO CITY MANAGER IF THAT HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT, BUT CITY ADMINISTRATOR IS BASICALLY BY CONTRACT.
YOU CAN HAVE A CITY MANAGER AND A GENERAL LAW IF YOU HAVE AN ELECTION TO ELECT, TO GO TO THE CITY MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
BUT BECAUSE YOU ALL ARE HOME RULED, YOU JUST ESTABLISH IT RIGHT UP FRONT.
WE'RE GOING TO BE PROFESSIONALLY RUN BY A CITY MANAGER OR WE'RE GOING TO CHANCE IT ON ELECTION. AND THE MAYOR BRINGS IN A STRONG CHIEF OF STAFF EVERY TERM AND RUN RUN IT THAT WAY LIKE HOUSTON DOES.
SO THAT'S YOU'LL HEAR THAT A LOT TONIGHT.
SECTION 1.02 STATE LAW ALREADY REQUIRES YOU TO KEEP AN OFFICIAL MAP.
WE JUST PUT IT IN THERE AND WE REALLY TRIED NOT TO REPEAT STATE LAW IN HERE, BUT WE PUT IT IN HERE TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A MAP AND YOU'LL HEAR ME WITH A LOT OF WAR STORIES. BUT ALVIN AND MISSOURI CITY GOT IN AN ANNEXATION WAR FIGHT OVER SEEING A PLANTATION.
[00:10:01]
AND MISSOURI CITY WENT TO ALVIN AND ASKED FOR THE CITY MAP AND WERE GIVEN THE TOURIST BROCHURE. AND THEN I GOT TO HAVE A TRIAL WITH JERRY [INAUDIBLE], AND I STILL REMEMBER THAT TRIAL. SO SHE SAID THEY HAVE CROSSED THE COUNTY LINE AND I SAID I DIDN'T KNOW I WAS A YANKEE. BUT ANYWAY, SO NOW IT'S CLEAR WHERE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE KEPT, AND HOW OFTEN IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE UPDATED.BUT HAVING HAVING GONE DOWN THIS PATH BEFORE, WITH THE CITY MAP NOT CONFORMING TO THE WRITTEN DESCRIPTION OF THE CITY LIMITS.
THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN COMPARE THE CITY MAP TO.
BECAUSE THE CITY MAP IS PREPARED BY AN INDIVIDUAL ENGINEER.
WELL, IT'S TRUE. IT'S THE HOPE THAT THE CITY MAP IS CORRECT.
THE INTENT IS THE CITY MAP IS CORRECT, BUT WITHOUT A BACKUP WRITTEN DESCRIPTION.
ERRONEOUSLY, YES, IT COULD BE DRAWN DOWN TO EDGE OF THE STREET DOWN THE WRONG EDGE OF THE STREET, DOWN THE CENTER OF THE STREET.
AND IT COULD. LIKE, WE HAD TO COME INTO PLAY IN A IN A PART OF TOWN RECENTLY.
YOU PROBABLY GOT RECONCILED THAT PUT THE PUT THE LINE IN THE RIGHT SPOT.
ANNEXATION ORDINANCES GENERALLY DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE A METES AND BOUND DESCRIPTION, IT IS BEST PRACTICES TO HAVE A METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION SO YOU DON'T HAVE THAT PROBLEM.
YES, SIR. AND I'VE BEEN IN ANOTHER ANNEXATION WAR IN NORTH TEXAS.
YEAH, SO IT'S IT'S BEST TO HAVE A GOOD MAP.
NOW IT'S NOT AS IMPORTANT AS IT WAS BECAUSE THE LEGISLATURE HAS BASICALLY REPEALED ANNEXATION AS WE KNOW IT.
SO YOU DON'T HAVE THE ETJS GROWING AND AND ALL THAT LIKE YOU USED TO.
BUT THE MAP NEEDS TO BE IT NEEDS TO BE CORRECT.
BUT THIS IS JUST SAYING IT'S GOING TO BE KEPT AT CITY HALL AND KEPT UPDATED BECAUSE WE WANTED THAT PRESSURE FROM THE CHARTER TO THE ADMINISTRATION, WHOEVER IT IS TO KEEP THE MAP UPDATED BECAUSE YOU'RE DOING A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT LIKE YOU ALL ARE AND AND THEY'RE COMING INTO THE CITY, THAT MAP NEEDS TO BE CHANGED RIGHT THEN AND THERE EVERY TIME.
AND WITH [INAUDIBLE] IT SHOULDN'T BE THAT HARD.
OK. AS I MENTIONED, ANNEXATION UNDER ONE ZERO THREE.
I KNOW WE WERE TAKING OUT WORDS AND WE BOILED IT DOWN TO JUST SUBJECT TO, LIKE I SAID, THE LEGISLATURE IN 17 WOUNDED ANNEXATION AND THEN THEY BASICALLY OUTRIGHT KILLED IT IN 2019. SO THERE'S NO UNILATERAL ANNEXATION LIKE YOU ALL USED TO DO.
WHERE YOU COULD JUST TAKE IT, BY TAKE IT.
I MEAN, EXTEND YOUR REGULATORY SCHEME ON IT.
NOW YOU HAVE TO HAVE PERMISSION OF THE LANDOWNER AND YOU YOU ENTICE THEM TO COME INTO THE CITY BECAUSE YOU PROVIDE WATER.
OR WASTEWATER, SO THAT'S THAT'S THE MARKET FOR THAT.
CONTRADICTIONS OF BOUNDARIES, WE BOARD THAT WAY DOWN, AS YOU CAN SEE IN ONE POINT ZERO FOUR. ALL THIS IS HIGHLY CONTROLLED BY STATE LAW.
THE LEGISLATURE PREEMPTED CITIES FROM DOING IT AS FAR BACK AS 1960 WITH THE ANNEXATION ACT. IN THIS MISSOURI CITY, ALVIN CASE, I TALKED ABOUT, ALVIN HAS A ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY TWO MILE LONG, ONE HUNDRED FOOT WIDE ANNEXATION THAT GOES DOWN TO SAN LUIS PASS.
AND THE LEGISLATURE PUT A STOP TO THAT WHERE YOU WERE HAVING THESE LONG [INAUDIBLE] OR LARIAT ANNEXATIONS AS THEY CALLED THEM, SO YOU CAN ALWAYS CONTRACT YOUR BOUNDARIES.
HOUSTON IS ALWAYS GIVING AWAY LAND, SWAPPING IT WITH THE SUBURBS BECAUSE THE SUBURB WANTS THIS AND HOUSTON WILL SAY, ALL RIGHT, I'LL GIVE YOU THIS FOR THAT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO PUT A STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT ON IT SO WE CAN GET THE SALES TAX FROM IT, WHICH MAKES EVERYBODY THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAD AND THE COUNTY THAT IT'S IN BECAUSE THEN THEY DON'T GET THE SALES TAX TO BUILD THE ROADS, TO GET THE PEOPLE TO WORK.
BUT HOUSTON GETS THE MONEY TO KEEP THE ROADS UP WHERE THEY'RE WORKING.
[00:15:06]
SO IT'S ALL FAMILY, IT'S ALL LOCAL GOVERNMENT, SO WE'VE BOILED THAT DOWN TO JUST THAT ONE SENTENCE THAT BASICALLY SAYS FOLLOW STATE LAW.POWERS OF THE CITY TWO POINT ZERO ONE.
IT JUST HAD GENERAL, BUT THAT DIDN'T DIDN'T TELL US MUCH.
GENERAL WHAT? SO WE TITLED IT GENERAL POWERS.
YOU CAN SEE DELETED THE PARAGRAPH AND BOILED IT DOWN.
WE HAVE EVERYTHING PERMITTED UNDER STATE LAW.
YOU DON'T NEED TO SAY ANYTHING MORE THAN THAT, WE GOT IT ALL, AND THAT'S WHY THE HOME RULE AMENDMENT IS YOU HAVE ALL THE POWERS OF THE STATE EXCEPT WHERE THE STATE WITHHOLDS THE POWER OR PREEMPTS THAT POWER LIKE ANNEXATION, OR TAXES.
SO YOU CAN SAY IT IN FEWER WORDS, AND THAT IS UPDATING, AS I SAID TO THAT.
NOW THE COMMISSION WAS AWARE THAT THE POSSIBLE PUSHBACK FROM THE VOTERS, SO WE TRIED TO STRUCTURE IT AND STRIKE THAT BALANCE BETWEEN JUST WHAT ARE YOU DOING? YOU KNOW, JUST THIS WHOLESALE RIPPING AND SHREDDING AND TEARING OUT TO BE STRATEGIC ABOUT IT. AND ALSO TRY TO FRAME IT THAT WOULD BE MOST PALATABLE TO THE VOTERS BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE ULTIMATE SAY ON THIS YOU AS COUNCIL, HAVE THE RIGHT TO IGNORE THIS ENTIRE DOCUMENT AND NOT CHANGE A THING.
THAT'S YOUR POWER. YOU HAVE THE POWER TO MAKE YOUR OWN AMENDMENTS.
OR TO CHANGE WHAT THE PROPOSAL OF THE COMMISSION IS.
IF YOU WANT TO YOU WANT TO THROW THAT BALL, THEN THAT'S WHAT YOU DO.
ALL RIGHT. SO YOU'VE GOT TWO ZERO ONE THAT SAYS GENERAL, AND NOW WE CALLED IT GENERAL POWERS, AND THEN YOU HAD TWO ZERO TWO GENERAL POWERS ADOPTED.
EMINENT DOMAIN OR CONDEMNATION, WE RENUMBERED IT, BOILED IT DOWN TO ONE SENTENCE, WE GOT WHATEVER THE STATE GIVES US, AND THEY DON'T GIVE US A LOT.
BUT BASICALLY, IT'S FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR A GOVERNMENTAL PURPOSE.
SUPREME COURT SAID, YEAH, YOU CAN CONDEMN FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
TEXAS LEGISLATURE CAME BACK AND SAID, NO, YOU CAN'T.
SO WE CANNOT BE PRIMARILY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, IN OTHER WORDS, YOU CAN'T TAKE THE OLD LADY'S HOUSE BECAUSE SOMEBODY WANTS TO PUT A MALL IN.
THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. ALL RIGHT, ARTICLE THREE AND STOP ME IF I DRONE TOO MUCH.
CHRIS AND JUDITH JUMP IN ANYTIME.
YOU CAN SEE WHAT WE DELETED IN ONE.
IT'S FROM AN AMENDMENT IN 71 AND NO LONGER NEEDED.
WE SAID IN THREE THAT THE COUNCIL TERM.
AND WE BUMPED IT FROM TWO YEAR TERMS TO THREE YEAR TERMS AND THEN DID TERM LIMITS FROM THREE TWO YEAR TERMS, WHICH EQUALS SIX, TO THREE TO TWO THREE YEAR TERMS, WHICH EQUALS SIX. SO WE KEPT THE TERM LIMITS THE SAME.
NOW LET ME TELL YOU THE EFFECT OF THREE YEARS.
IT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT BALLGAME.
NO MORE APPOINT, NO MORE APPOINTING A.
IF YOU HAVE A VACANCY, NO MORE APPOINTMENTS, YOU WILL HAVE TO HAVE AN ELECTION.
TO CHOOSE OUR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS.
SOMEBODY LEAVES, SAY, EARLY JUNE.
CAN YOU WAIT TILL NOVEMBER TO HAVE THAT ELECTION OR DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE IT WITHIN A CERTAIN UH, DAYS OF VACATING [INAUDIBLE].
TYPICALLY IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE NEXT UNIFORM ELECTION DAY.
THAT'S GENERAL RULE. WHY DO WE WANT TO DO THAT? WHY DO WE WANT TO NOT BE ABLE TO APPOINT AND HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN ELECTION WHICH IS COSTLY TO THE CITY? AND IT ALSO IS A TIMELY ISSUE.
SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING HOT? YOU DON'T HAVE THAT EXTRA VOTE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
YOUR FIRST YEAR ON COUNCIL, YOU'RE LEARNING.
I GOT THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT THE.
IF SOMEBODY LEAVES AND YOU HAVE TO THINK
[00:20:01]
I WAS AFTER. OK, THAT'S STATE LAW.UM, IF YOU RUN OR ANNOUNCE TO RUN FOR ANOTHER ELECTIVE OFFICE THAT IS PAID DEPENDING WHERE YOU ARE IN THAT THREE YEAR TERM, YOU HAVE AUTOMATIC RESIGNATION.
IT HAPPENED IN HARRIS COUNTY, WHERE IN THE SWEEP, A COUNTY COURT AT LAW JUDGE WON.
AND THEN IT WENT TO HIS HEAD AND HE DECIDED HE WOULD ANNOUNCE BEFORE HE WAS EVEN SWORN IN TO RUN FOR DISTRICT JUDGE.
HE LIKED IT SO MUCH AND HE AUTOMATICALLY RESIGNED.
AND THEN IT WAS LIKE THE OLD JOKE.
AND THEY HELD HIS FEET TO THE FIRE.
HE COULD NOT RETRACT HIS ANNOUNCEMENT, AND HE AUTOMATICALLY THAT STATE LAW AUTOMATICALLY RESIGNED. SO YOU'D BE VERY CAREFUL IF YOU HAVE A THREE YEAR TERM AND YOU'RE EXPLORING THAT, YOU HAVE TO GET WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY.
YOU OFFICIALLY ANNOUNCE THAT THAT YOU DON'T AUTOMATICALLY RESIGN THE SEAT THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO HOLD. AND LASTLY, WHICH SOUNDS KIND OF WEIRD, BUT IT REQUIRES A MAJORITY VOTE IF YOU HAVE THREE YEARS, SUBSIDIES AS OPPOSED TO A PLURALITY.
PLURALITY VOTE MEANS WHOEVER THE HIGHEST VOTE GETTER IS.
SO YOU DON'T NEVER HAVE A RUNOFF.
YOU DON'T HAVE THE EXPENSE OF ANOTHER RUNOFF AND LOWER TURNOUT AND ALL THAT.
BUT YOU HAVE SOMEBODY THAT DOESN'T HAVE A MAJORITY THAT COULD WIN IF YOU HAVE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE RUNNING FOR A POSITION.
SO THAT'S THE DOWNSIDE TO THREE YEARS.
THE UPSIDE IS YOU HAVE TWO GOOD YEARS WHERE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING, YOU UNDERSTAND THE BUDGET, YOU KNOW WHERE THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IS, YOU KNOW WHAT A CITY MANAGER DOES AS OPPOSED TO LEARNING ALL THAT.
IS ONE BETTER THAN THE OTHER, I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT I'VE SEEN TWO YEARS, I'VE SEEN THREE YEARS. I'VE GOT CITIES THAT HAVE BOTH.
OH. I'VE GOT I KNOW OF ONE CITY, I'VE NEVER REALLY CHECKED IT, BUT THEY HAVE A.
BASICALLY, A ROUND ROBIN MAYOR.
SO IT'S EACH CITY COUNCIL MEMBER GETS TO BE THE MAYOR FOR THREE MONTHS A YEAR.
HOW WOULD YOU LIKE THAT MERRY GO ROUND? IT WORKED FOR THEM CAN SOMEONE REEXPLAIN TO ME IF SOMEONE RESIGNS AFTER, LET'S SAY, A COUPLE OF MONTHS INTO THEIR AFTER BEING ELECTED.
HOW SOON DOES THIS ELECTION HAVE TO BE HELD TO REPLACE THAT PERSON? SO THERE A MAY UNIFORM ELECTION DATE IN NOVEMBER? SO IF YOU HAVE A THREE YEAR TERM TYPICALLY YOU CAN.
OR YOU'RE REQUIRED TO CALL AN ELECTION AT THE NEXT UNIFORM ELECTION DATE.
OK, NOW TO CALL AN ELECTION FOR THAT DATE, YOU HAVE TO BACK UP SEVENTY EIGHT DAYS.
SO THE NOVEMBER ELECTION IS AUGUST 16TH.
I KNOW THAT BECAUSE I'M DOING ANOTHER CHART HERE.
WE HAVE TO DO IT. WE WANT TO DO A NOVEMBER ELECTION.
SO BY AUGUST 16TH, IF THE GUY RESIGNED IN JUNE, YOU COULD CALL THE ELECTION IN AUGUST 16TH. YOU'RE GOING TO RUN FROM JUNE TO NOVEMBER BEFORE YOU HAVE THE SUCCESSOR.
SO THAT WOULD JUST REMAIN VACANT.
NOBODY WILL ACTUALLY BE AT THE TABLE WHEN THAT HAPPENS.
IF YOU IF IF YOU GO BACK THREE YEARS OR MORE.
AND WHAT IF THEY RESIGNED SEPTEMBER 1ST LOOKING LIKE THEY RESIGNED SEPTEMBER 1ST AND WE HAD YEAH, WE HAD IN ONE CITY LADY, WE SAID JUST, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY YOU HAVE YOU MISS THREE IN A ROW. YOU'RE OUT. JUST COME ONCE EVERY THREE TIMES.
AND WE LIMPED ALONG TILL WE COULD GET CLOSE ENOUGH TO AN ELECTION.
WAS IT EFFECTIVE? NOT REALLY [INAUDIBLE] WAS CHECKED OUT.
THAT JUST SEEMS COSTLY TO A CITY, A SMALL CITY.
I AGREE. YOU MEAN LIKE AN UNFUNDED MANDATE? YES. YES, IT IS.
SO YOU HAVE TO RUN AN ELECTION AND THEY ARE ANYWHERE BETWEEN FOUR AND TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS. THAT'S OUR ELECTION RIGHT NOW.
WE HAVEN'T HAD ONE IN A WHILE, BUT WE'VE ACTUALLY BEEN SAVING MONEY TECHNICALLY FOR ABOUT SIX THOUSAND. YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY FIVE.
WE WENT BACK AND FORTH, WE HAD IT AT TWO YEARS AND WE WENT ON DOWN THE ROAD AND SEVERAL
[00:25:05]
MEETINGS LATER WE CAME BACK AND NO LET'S LOOK AT THREE AGAIN AND.AND THEY FINALLY SETTLED ON THREE YEARS BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THE EXPERIENCE WAS WORTH IT.
AND AS I TOLD THEM, I'M NOT HERE TO TELL YOU HOW TO RUN YOUR CITY, I'M HERE TO GIVE YOU OPTIONS, YOU TELL ME HOW YOU WANT YOUR CITY RUN AND I CAN'T TELL YOU WHICH IS BETTER.
I'LL JUST TELL YOU THOSE ARE THE TWO OPTIONS AND THE CONSEQUENCES.
FROM THAT ASPECT OF GETTING A LITTLE BIT OF TRAINING, YOU PROBABLY FEEL COMFORTABLE IN YOUR SEAT.
I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH ALREADY.
THERE'S OTHER STUFF LIKE YOU COULD.
I WASN'T VERY PRODUCTIVE BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT I WAS.
I WASN'T AS COMFORTABLE DOING THAT.
THERE WERE SOME ONLINE COURSES THAT THE CITY WOULD OFFER.
YOU KNOW, THE STAGGERED TERMS, WHICH YOU HAVE SOMEWHAT STAGGERED TERMS. MM HMM. BUT NOT ALLOWING A SWEEP ELECTION THAT IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE TWO YEARS AND TWO ELECTIONS BEFORE SOMEONE.
AND SO IF IT'S REALLY THAT BIG A PROBLEM, I THINK THE PRESSURE WOULD BUILD WHERE YOU HAVE IT OTHERWISE.
IT'S GOING TO DISSIPATE OVER THOSE TWO YEAR PERIODS.
IS THAT THE POSSIBILITY, SURE, BUT ROSENBERG JUST HAD A CHARTER ELECTION.
AND THEY WENT TO EVERYBODY'S UP ON THE SAME YEAR.
AND SO TOMORROW WE WERE TALKING ABOUT CANADA SIGN UP TOMORROW.
THERE'S GOING TO BE A BIG LONG LINE BECAUSE EVERY ALL SEVEN SEATS ARE UP.
I TOLD THEM IT WAS CRAZY, BUT THEY WENT FROM EVERYBODY UP AT THE SAME TIME TO STAGGERED ELECTIONS, AND THEY COULDN'T STAND SEEING POLITICAL SIGNS EVERY YEAR.
AND SOMEONE ALWAYS RUNNING, SO THEY WANTED IT ONE AND DONE AND SUFFER, YOU KNOW, SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES. I'LL BE THE FIRST TO THROW IT OUT THERE THAT I THINK MY ISSUE WITH THIS IS THAT IF YOU GO FROM TWO, THREE YEARS TO THREE, TWO YEARS, THE PROBLEM IS STILL THE CURVE THAT I FEEL WHEN YOU FINALLY HIT THE FIFTH YEAR, YOU YOU REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND YOUR SIX YEAR YEAR OFF.
TO ME, IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE TO HAVE IT EIGHT YEARS.
AND I MEAN, I'M NOT SAYING THAT PEOPLE SAY THAT.
WELL, BY EXTENDING THAT, YOU'RE YOU'RE ENABLING SOMEBODY TO STAY ON COUNCIL LONGER.
WHAT I'M THINKING IS IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT SOMEBODY IS DOING, YOU CAN GET THEM OFF WHENEVER YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN VOTE THEM OUT.
BUT I I SEE ALL THE AREA CITIES AROUND HERE THAT HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT LAST LONGER.
AND ONE OF THE PROBLEMS ANGLETON IS ALWAYS SUFFERED IS BY THE TIME YOU TURN OVER THE COUNCIL, USUALLY THE CITY MANAGER, OR THAT THAT'S TURNING OVER TOO OR HAS TURNED OVER AT LEAST ONCE DURING THAT THAT TIME THAT EVERYTHING YOU DID STUDIES AND AND PLANNING AND EVERYTHING, IT ALL TURNS OVER AGAIN, TOO.
SO I FEEL LIKE THE CITY WASTES SO MUCH MONEY BECAUSE NOW THERE'S A WHOLE NEW BRAIN TRUST AND THEY'RE ALL LEARNING AND THEY DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY, JUST LIKE WE'RE SITTING HERE LOOKING AT THIS CHARTER, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY WERE DOING BACK THEN.
JUST OVER THE YEARS, IT IT JUST KIND OF GETS FORGOTTEN ABOUT WHAT THE PURPOSE WAS OR WHAT THEY WERE DOING. SO I ALWAYS THINK THAT I'VE SAID FROM THE VERY START WAS EIGHT YEARS WOULD BE BETTER, BUT I DON'T I'M NOT SAYING I HAVE AN ANSWER ON HOW THAT WOULD STAGGER WITH, YOU KNOW, FOUR YEAR TERMS TWO OR I DON'T KNOW.
DO FOUR OF YOU RARELY SEE A CITY DOING FOUR, FOUR, TWO YEAR TERMS? I MEAN, THAT WAY THEY GET VOTED ON MORE OFTEN.
WHAT IS THIS? THIS IS JUST COUNCIL OR IS THIS IMPLY TO THE MAYOR? EVERYONE. SO I SEE, ON THE VERY BACK OF YOUR CHARTER, YOU'LL SEE THE TRANSITION ELECTIONS, HOW THAT WOULD WORK OUT IT'S THE LAST TWO PAGES.
HERE'S KIND OF WHAT I'M THINKING ABOUT.
HERE'S WHAT I'M THINKING ABOUT WITH THE TWO THREE YEARS.
I MEAN, JUST BEING IN THIS POSITION, I SEE THE VALUE OF HAVING SOME EXPERIENCE, BUT IT COMES AT A COST.
THE COST COULD BE LITERALLY A FINANCIAL COST, THE OTHER COST COULD BE AN UNFULFILLED POSITION FOR ANYWHERE, FOR UP TO ABOUT THREE MONTHS, FOR THREE BETWEEN THREE AND FOUR MONTHS. UM, WHICH AGAIN.
[00:30:04]
PLUS THE ADDITIONAL COSTS GOING BACK TO THIS, THAT YOU COULD HAVE TO HAVE A RUNOFF, WHICH WAS A SUBSEQUENT ELECTION IN CASE THERE'S NOT A SIMPLE MAJORITY.SO THERE IS THAT BALANCE THERE, WHICH MAKES ME THINK THAT IF YOU WERE WILLING TO GO TO THREE YEARS.
AND BECAUSE OF THE COST ARE SO HIGH, IT MAY BE BETTER TO JUST GO TO A FOURTH YEAR.
I DON'T KNOW THAT MAKES SENSE IN MY MIND, IT MAY NOT MAKE SENSE TO YOU, BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL THAT EXTRA STEP FOR JUST ONE EXTRA YEAR.
TO EXPOSE OURSELVES TO ONE EXTRA YEAR ON COUNCIL THEN MAYBE, OR DO YOU CHANGE TERM LIMITS AND HAVE THREE THREE YEAR TERMS, AND YOU HAVE NINE YEARS.
I MEAN, I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT.
DO YOU THINK THE MAYBE HARDER TO THE PUBLIC? I DON'T KNOW WHY, TOO, BECAUSE IT'S STILL ONLY TWO TERMS TOO, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ONLY ONE LAST YEAR TO FOUR YEAR TERMS IS EIGHT VERSUS THREE THREE YEARS IN TERMS OF BEING NINE.
I DON'T KNOW THE THIRD YOU'RE HEARING THE THIRD TERM.
I KNOW WE PRESENTLY HAVE THREE TERMS, BUT IT'S STILL CAPPED AND IT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE FROM SIX AND NINE. WELL, THIS IS THE DEBATE AND THE OTHER ONE JUST REAL QUICK THOUGHT.
AND I'M JUST I'M NOT SAYING I HAVE THE ANSWER THESE ARE JUST IDEAS, RIGHT? IS WOULD WE CONSIDER POTENTIALLY LEAVING COUNCIL AS TWO THREE YEARS OR CAPPING AT SIX AND MAKING MAYOR A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT LIKE A TWO FOUR YEAR TERM? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE LIKE WHERE, BECAUSE THERE IS SOMETHING TO BE SAID FOR CONSISTENCY OF UM, AND I KNOW JOHN'S POINT, I GET JOHN'S POINT ABOUT MAKING A CHANGE IF IT'S NEEDED, BUT IT STILL WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AT SOME POINT IN ELECTIONS AND PLUS THE WAY OUR CITY WORKS, THAT NOBODY'S MORE POWERFUL THAN ANYBODY ELSE.
I MEAN, THE MAYOR OBVIOUSLY IS THE MAYOR, BUT AS FAR AS VOTING, YOU KNOW, IT'S COUNTS AS ONE. SO IT'S NOT LIKE IF PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THE WAY THE MAYOR WAS DOING THINGS.
I'M NOT, THIS IS NOT DIRECTED TO JASON, BUT I'M JUST THINKING, YOU KNOW, IF ENOUGH CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS VOTED IN THE OPPOSITE, IT WOULDN'T MATTER.
SO IN OPPOSITION, SO YOU CAN SLICE IT ANY WAY YOU WANT.
WHEN YOU DEBATE THESE, WHATEVER A MAJORITY OF YOU ALL WANT, IF YOU DON'T WANT TO CHANGE IT AT ALL, THEN. IT FAILS IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE IT AND MAKE IT THIS WAY, WHATEVER FOUR OF YOU CAN SCRAPE TOGETHER THE VOTE FOR IS WHAT IT WOULD BE TO PASS THAT AND SEND IT TO THE VOTERS. THAT'S Y'ALL'S CALL.
TO ME, IT'S. AND YOU'RE RIGHT, IT IS IT'S THE CITIZENS CALL, AND I MEAN, I WOULD HAVE NO ANIMOSITY EITHER WAY IF, SAY, WE COME UP WITH AN IDEA AND THE VOTERS DON'T LIKE IT, THAT'S FINE. I'M JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE.
YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE SAY, WELL, WHY ISN'T ANYTHING GET, YOU KNOW, DONE? WELL, SOMETIMES IT TAKES SIX YEARS TO SEIZE A PROJECT THROUGH.
AND SOMETIMES LONGER AND WELL, THEN SOMEBODY ELSE COMES ON AND SAYS, OH, WE'RE GOING TO FUND THIS OVER HERE INSTEAD, AND THEN THAT PROJECT STOPS.
SO IT'S UP TO THE CITIZENS, REALLY.
AND I WOULDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM EITHER WAY, WHATEVER THEY WANT.
SO I WOULD SUGGEST STICK A PIN IN THIS ONE AND WE CAN COME BACK TO IT SO WE CAN GET IT THROUGH THE THROUGH THE DOCUMENT BECAUSE I KNOW THAT ONE'S.
I HAVE ONE QUESTION LOOKING ON THE LAST TWO PAGES OF TRANSITION ELECTIONS.
MM HMM. I SEE FOR THE 2022 VOTE, UM, COUNCIL POSITION THREE IS WELL WILL BE A TWO YEAR TERM. MM HMM.
WHY IS THAT ONE ACCEPTED, AN EXEMPTION FROM THE 2025.
SO I DIDN'T KNOW THE POSITIONS OF ANY I DON'T KNOW Y'ALL'S POSITIONS SO TO START, TO MAKE IT WHERE IT ALL ENDS AT THE RIGHT TIME, SOMEBODY HAS TO TAKE THE SHORT STICK. OKAY.
THAT'S THE THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO PUT IT.
WHEN WE ADOPTED A CHARTER IN [INAUDIBLE] WE LITERALLY HAD A BOX WITH A SHORT STICK.
AND THE TWO AT LARGE IS BECAUSE WE BEAT THEM AT LARGE.
I THINK, ANYWAY, ONE OF THEM DREW THE SHORT STICK.
MAYBE THE CHARTER REVIEW, PEOPLE KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING.
[00:35:03]
OKAY, SO WE'LL COME BACK TO THREE ZERO ONE, LET'S FINISH THREE ZERO ONE, THOUGH, IF YOU'LL TURN THE PAGE.AND HERE WE HAVE THE MAYOR IS CURRENTLY LIMITED TO TWO TERMS OR SIX CONSECUTIVE YEARS.
AND THEN YOU SEE, IN SEVEN PARTIAL TERMS ARE NOT COUNTED.
SO IF YOU IF SOMEBODY RESIGNS IN THE MAY ELECTION AND SOMEBODY RESIGNS IN JUNE, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ABOUT FIVE MONTHS EMPTY AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO GET ELECTED.
THAT THAT SHORTEN TERM DOES NOT COUNT TOWARDS THEIR TERM LIMITS, SO SOMEBODY COULD CONCEIVABLY SERVE EIGHT YEARS PLUS ALMOST ANOTHER ONE OR ALMOST TWO MORE YEARS, JUST DEPENDING ON HOW IT FALLS.
SO IF YOU KNOCK OFF AN OPPONENT, FILL THEIR SEAT, TAKE THIS PARTIAL TERM, YOU GET TO SERVE LONGER AND THAT'S THREE ZERO ONE, AND THAT ONE WILL BE I MEAN, THAT'S WORTHY OF SOME DEBATE. OKAY, ON THREE POINT ZERO TWO QUALIFICATIONS, WE MADE THE QUALIFICATIONS FOLLOW STATE LAW, BUT WE NEEDED TO DETERMINE FROM WHAT DATE FROM THE DATE YOU'RE SWORN IN OR FROM THE DATE YOU DECLARE FOR OFFICE OR THE FILING DEADLINE.
AND WE PICKED. THEY PICKED THE FILING DEADLINE.
NOTHING MAGIC, JUST THAT'S A DATE CERTAIN.
SO THREE POINT ZERO FIVE A THIS IS FROM EIGHTY THREE.
VACANCIES IN OFFICE, WE DELETED THE WHOLE THING BECAUSE ALL THAT IS CONTROLLED BY STATE LAW AND THE ELECTION CODE.
SO YOUR CHARTER CAN'T TRUMP STATE LAW, SO WE JUST TOOK IT OUT.
LESS IS MORE VACANCIES GENERAL.
YOU SEE HOW WE DELETED THREE PARAGRAPHS AND DID ONE SENTENCE.
ALL VACANCY SHALL BE FILLED PURSUANT TO STATE LAW.
THIS CAME FROM A GUY THAT WAS DOING A CHARTER AND THE CITY HALL WAS NEXT TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS, LITERALLY THE TRAIN JUST, THE WALL SHOOK WHEN THE TRAIN CAME BY, AND HE WAS WORRIED ABOUT A DERAILMENT AND TAKING OUT A COUNCILMAN.
THE CHANCES ARE, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE WE ALL GET COVID AND DIE AND THEN WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN? SOME PEOPLE PUT RESTAURANTS RIGHT NEXT TO TRAIN TRACKS.
EMERGENCY, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO GET THE ATTENTION OF THE GOVERNOR TO APPOINT A SUCCESSOR GOVERNMENT. THIS IS ALL ABOUT CONTINUITY OF GOVERNMENT.
HOPEFULLY YOU CAN GET THE COUNTY'S ATTENTION AND GET THEM TO APPOINT AND THEN START THE PROCESS OF AN ELECTION.
THAT'S HOW THAT ALL BOILS DOWN ON A DISASTER CLAUSE.
UM, DOOMSDAY TYPE OF PROVISION NO ALL RIGHT. THE REST OF IT WE DELETED.
POWERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOW THERE WERE SIX, SIXTEEN DELINEATED POWERS FOR ILLUSTRATION. THAT'S A WASTE OF PAPER.
SO WE JUST SAID YOU HAVE ALL THE POWERS OF SELF-GOVERNMENT.
WHY? BECAUSE YOU DON'T NEED TO ILLUSTRATE THAT YOU HAVE ALL OF IT.
YOU HAVE EVERYTHING THE STATE THE STATE HAS, IT IS YOUR CONSTITUTION, AS OPPOSED TO HAVING TO SAY, WELL, YOU'VE GOT THE POWERS TO ADOPT AND MODIFY AN OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY. WELL, GUESS WHAT, THE STATE LAW TELLS ME I HAVE TO ADOPT AND MODIFY.
I DON'T NEED TO SAY IT IN THE POWER THAT I'VE GOT IT BECAUSE.
ONE, THE STATE ALREADY REQUIRES ME, AND I HAVE THE POWER BECAUSE I'M A I'M A HOME RULE CITY. SO IT'S JUST AGAIN COMPRESSING IT AND UPDATING THE LANGUAGE.
I GET THAT, BUT A LOT OF TIMES THE CITIZENS THAT GO TO THESE WEBSITES TO LOOK THIS UP ARE TRYING TO SEE. AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO TELL THEM, GO TO THE STATE LAW TO GO TO THE HOME
[00:40:02]
RULE. SO NOW THEY'RE COMING.BASICALLY, THEY HAVE TO DIG A LITTLE BIT DEEPER TO GET TO THE ANSWERS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR. I THINK THAT WAS THE PURPOSE WHEN THIS WAS PUT IN WAS TO REALLY DEFINE WHAT THE COUNCIL HAS POWERS TO DO TO WHERE SOMEBODY COULD GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL OR TO THE CITY WEBSITE AND LOOK UP OUR CHARTER AND SEE SPECIFICALLY WHAT DO WE DO? BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE ASK, WHAT IS THE CITY COUNCIL DO? OR SOMEBODY WILL SAY, I LOOKED IT UP AND I SEE WHAT Y'ALL DO.
BUT IN THAT SAME RIGHT, IF WE HAVE OUR POWERS LISTED HERE AND THERE'S A POWER THAT WE HAVE THAT ISN'T LISTED THERE, THAT'S CORRECT.
IT WILL BE LIKE, WELL YOU DON'T HAVE THAT POWER.
THAT'S TRUE. BUT BY STATE LAW, WE ACTUALLY DO.
SO WHAT WE DID IS TOOK THEIR SENTENCE THAT THE ORIGINAL DRAFTERS DID WHENEVER THEY DRAFTED THIS AND JUST SAID, YOUR FIRST SENTENCE IS GREAT.
YEAH, YOU DIDN'T NEED TO GO AND ILLUSTRATE IT.
AND I MEAN, YEAH, I MEAN, I GET IT.
MY OPINION IS THE FIRST WORDS ARE BY WAY OF ILLUSTRATION AND NOT LIMITATION, BUT STILL THEY WERE JUST BEATING A DEAD HORSE.
RIGHT. BECAUSE THE SECOND SENTENCE SAYS BY WAY OF ILLUSTRATION, BUT NOT LIMITATION, THEY'RE THEY'RE BASICALLY SHOWING THAT THEY STILL HAVE MORE.
SO THE QUESTION IS WHY DO YOU NEED TO ILLUSTRATE IT? YEAH BUT. CAN WE ADD A HYPERLINK? YOU KNOW? WE WANT IT TO BE OUR RULE OF LAW, SO WE WANT IT TO ACTUALLY [INAUDIBLE] AGAIN, LESS IS MORE.
IT'S ACTUALLY CLEAR BECAUSE OF THE SCENARIO OF MARCUS ILLUSTRATED, BUT NOT LIMITED TO.
I GET THAT I'M WE'RE FOR SIMPLIFICATION.
THAT'S FINE, I'M JUST SAYING THAT FOR SOMEBODY WHO'S TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WE'RE BASICALLY SAYING, WE'RE PUNTING AND SAYING, GO TO THE STATE WEBSITE, GO FIGURE IT ALL OUT.
WHEREAS THIS WAS VERY KIND OF LIKE.
IF YOU WANT TO JUST CREATE A WEB PAGE THAT SAYS THE ROLE OF CITY COUNCIL IS X Y Z.
THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY DIRECTLY ATTACHED TO YOUR CHARTER.
THAT'S FINE, IT WOULD SAY, AS LONG AS THEY CAN FIND IT AS WELL, I'M SAYING I'M TRYING TO BE TRANSPARENT TO THE CITIZENS OF THE FOLLOWING AND HAVE ADDITIONAL POWERS THAT SET FORTH BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE.
BUT THESE ARE THE THINGS YOU CAN EXPECT TO HEAR.
THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF HOME RULE.
UNLESS THE STATE SAYS YOU DON'T.
[INAUDIBLE] WE'RE GOING TO DO BREVITY AND BREVITY THROUGHOUT.
OTHERWISE, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A CHARTER, BUT THEY'LL JUST GIVE UP LOOKING AT BECAUSE IT'S JUST TOO TOO WORDY.
RIGHT, AND THAT'S THE FLIP SIDE TO YOUR ARGUMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR CHARTER NOW, I MEAN, IT'S LONG, IT IS LONG.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, JUST FOR ME, I HAVE TO ACTUALLY USE IT.
I'M NOT EVEN TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IT.
SO, YOU KNOW, FOR JUST THE GENERAL PERSON THAT LIVES IN YOUR CITY, THAT'S GOING THROUGH ALL OF THAT. I TRY TO PUT MYSELF IN THE SHOES OF A VOTER, AND SO I LIVE IN HOUSTON, SO I HAD THE FIREMEN INITIATIVE TO EQUAL PAY FOR THE POLICEMEN, THAT CHARTER INITIATIVE BALLOT WAS SIX PAGES LONG.
I'M IN THE BUSINESS AND I SAID, I'M NOT VOTING FOR THIS IF I HAVE TO READ SIX PAGES, NO [INAUDIBLE]. I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, JUST SAY OUR PAY SHALL BE THE SAME AS THE POLICE PERIOD.
NO, THEY HAD TO GO ALL THESE PAGES.
THREE POINT ZERO EIGHT MEETINGS OF COUNCIL.
SO. WE SAID IT'S GOT TO BE BY ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION.
WE TOOK OUT IT HAS TO BE IN CITY HALL BECAUSE IT'S THE CONSTITUTION, YOU DON'T WANT A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT IF YOU WANT TO MEET SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY, SO THE CITY COUNCIL MAY DESIGNATE A LOCATION BY ORDINANCE AND PUBLICATION.
THE FIRE TRUCK THAT JUST PASSED BY CRASHED INTO THIS COUNCIL CHAMBER AND YOU COULDN'T MEET HERE IN CITY HALL.
WELL, YOU'VE GOT A CHARTER THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO MEET IN CITY HALL, SO NOW YOU CAN MEET IN MIKEY'S BAR, WHICH WILL WORK SO.
SO THAT'S WE GAVE THE COUNCIL MORE FLEXIBILITY ON WHERE YOU WANT TO MEET, IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A MEETING OR A RETREAT, YOU CAN HAVE ONE THAT'S OUTSIDE OF CITY HALL.
THE AG UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS ABUSED THE PROCESS AND HAD A REGENT MEETING IN MEXICO, WHERE THERE WERE JUST HAPPENED TO BE A LOT OF WHITE WING DOVE AND THE AG SAID YOU CAN'T GO OUT
[00:45:05]
OF THE NATION TO HAVE A BOARD MEETING, SO IT HAS TO BE REASONABLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE POPULATION. SO IT'S PARALLEL AND REASONABLY ACCESSIBLE TO A MEETING FOR ANGLETON.PROBABLY. I DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH HEARTBURN, IT'S JUST UP TO 88.
IS MEETING CANCUN? PROBABLY NOT. I'M JUST WONDERING, WE'VE HAD A WE'VE HAD A COUNCIL RETREAT ONCE WHERE WE WENT TO THE MARRIOTT IN LAKE JACKSON, WHERE WE HAD A LOT OF STAFF AND EVERYBODY THERE ALL DAY. I'M JUST WONDERING IF THAT WAS SOMETHING WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF.
I WOULD SAY IF YOU'RE WITHIN THE COUNTY, YOU'RE PRETTY SAFE.
AND THEN I GOT A LITTLE PTSD OVER GENDER WARS, SO PUT IT IN THE CHARTER, THE MAYOR OR TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY PLACE AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
YOU'D HAVE IT WHERE COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD PLACE AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA THAT THE MAYOR DIDN'T WANT. THE MAYOR WOULD TAKE IT OFF THE AGENDA AND THEN ANOTHER ONE PUT IT DOWN THERE AND THAT COUNCILMAN WOULD TACK OR TAKE THAT OFF THE AGENDA.
MAYOR CAN PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.
THE CITY MANAGER CAN PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.
ANY TWO OF YOU CAN PUT SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA.
SO JUST. NO ONE HAS DICTATORIAL RULE TO REMOVE SOMETHING, RIGHT? [INAUDIBLE] NO TYRANNY OF THE MINORITY ON THIS.
I'VE THIS IS IN ALMOST EVERY CHARTER I HAVE DRAWN UP RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR COUNCIL.
THEY HAVE MORE DUST ON THEM THAN ANYTHING ELSE I DO BECAUSE THEY GO IN A DESK DRAWER OF THE MEETING PODIUM UP THERE AND NOBODY EVER LOOKS AT THEM AGAIN.
THERE'S A WHOLE WE WROTE A WHOLE BLOG ON HOW YOU COUNT VOTES AND WHAT IS A QUORUM, AND YOU WOULDN'T BELIEVE THE GYMNASTICS YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH IF YOU DON'T DEFINE YOUR QUORUM BECAUSE YOU CAN'T IGNORE A VOTE.
SO WHAT IS MORE, WHAT IS HALF OF SEVEN? WELL, IT'S THREE POINT SIX OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND NO YOU'VE GOT TO COUNT THAT POINT SIX, SO YOU'VE GOT TO GO UP.
BUT IF YOU HAD A BOARD MEMBER OF ONE HUNDRED AND ONE, YOU TRY TO GET A MAJORITY OF THAT AND IT SAYS MORE THAN A MAJORITY.
I MEAN, YOU WANT TO GO TO SLEEP AND NOT GO TO JAY GRADY RANDALL PC.COM TYPE IN COUNT AND YOU'LL SEE AN ARTICLE ON IT AND IT'LL IT'LL SET YOUR HAIR ON FIRE.
SO WE DEFINED IT AS FOUR MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OR A QUORUM PERIOD AND MAKE CLEAR THAT THE MAYOR, SINCE HE VOTES, IS PART OF COUNCIL, SO HE COUNTS.
AND. SO HERE IS A CHANGE THAT WAS NOT MADE. YOU'LL SEE IN THE MIDDLE APPROVAL OF A MEASURE SHALL REQUIRE THE AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS WHO ARE PRESENT.
SOME CHARTERS SAY OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL, SO IF YOU HAVE FOUR HERE AND IT TAKES FOUR TO PASS SOMETHING, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A UNANIMOUS VOTE IF THREE OF YOU ARE ABSENT. THAT'S NOT WHAT IS HERE.
IT JUST SAYS THE MAJORITY OF YOUR PRESENT, SO IT WOULD TAKE THREE TO PASS SOMETHING, IF ONLY FOUR SHOW UP.
BUT IT CAN'T BE LESS THAN THREE.
THREE TEN. YOU DON'T NEED A CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION ON HOW YOU PASS AN ORDINANCE, IT'S GONE. THREE.
THE NEW THREE TEN IS OFFICIAL BONDS FOR CITY EMPLOYEES.
WE RENUMBERED THAT INVESTIGATION BY COUNCIL.
WE RENUMBERED THAT AND PUT IN A FINE UP THE FINE FROM $200 TO $500, WHICH IS YOUR MAXIMUM MAXIMUM FINE.
AUDITS ARE REQUIRED EVERY YEAR BY STATE LAW, SO YOU GET RID OF THE AUDIT PROVISION, YOU DON'T NEED THAT. AND THAT'S ALL OF THREE, SO ADMIN SERVICES HERE IS THE CITY MANAGER.
SO WE PUT IN TO TAKE THE POLITICS OUT OF IT.
IT'S TO HIRE A CITY MANAGER, REQUIRES A SUPERMAJORITY, NOT A MAJORITY, A SUPERMAJORITY OR FIVE. TO TERMINATE HIM TAKES FIVE.
YOU DO THAT BECAUSE SOMETIMES HE HAS HE OR SHE HAS TO TAKE AN UNPOPULAR POSITION, IT MAY
[00:50:03]
BE UNPOPULAR WITH COUNCIL AND RUNS AFOUL OF A FACTION, AND YOU ALL ARE NOT FACTIONALIZED.AND THIS THWARTS THAT UNDUE POLITICAL PRESSURE.
SO MAKE A GOOD HIRE BECAUSE IT TAKES FIVE, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TAKE FIRE FIVE TO GET RID OF THEM. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, THOUGH, RIGHT? NO, IT CAN BE.
WE CAN LEAVE IT AS IS WITH THE MAJORITY, BUT THIS TAKES.
I DO THIS FOR CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEYS, NOT BECAUSE I WANT JOB SECURITY, ALTHOUGH I DO, BUT.
WE'RE ENFORCING THE POLICY YOU ADOPT, AND SOMETIMES THAT TICKS OFF A SUBSTANTIAL MINORITY OF COUNCIL. OR THEY GET A LOT OF PRESSURE FROM THE RESIDENTS FOR DOING SOMETHING.
YOU HAVE FIVE. THAT'S OUR JOB, THOUGH, RIGHT? YEAH. TO BE THE VOICE OF THE CITIZENS.
SO I MEAN, WE HAVE TO GET VOTED IN AND OUT JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.
SO I THINK CITY ATTORNEY OR CITY MANAGER SHOULD FOLLOW THE SAME RULES WE DO.
IT ONLY TAKES A MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS TO VOTE US OUT.
IF THERE WERE ENOUGH CANDIDATES AS THEY SAY, THREE.
WELL, LESS THAN A MAJORITY, I'M JUST OUT THERE, THAT'S FINE, BUT YOU'RE MAKING MY POINT AS WELL. IT JUST DOESN'T EVEN TAKE 50 PERCENT AND PLURALITY, PLURALITY.
I'M JUST, I UNDERSTAND TRYING TO POSITION YOURSELVES SO IN INSULATED.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I MEAN, IT GOES TO THE.
ON A MORE NATIONAL SCALE, IT GOES TO THE FILIBUSTER TYPE SITUATION.
MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE PUTTING FORTH LEGISLATION THAT IS NOT PARTISAN, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO FIND LIKE IT'S A SUPERMAJORITY.
I UNDERSTAND WHY IT MAKES SENSE TO ME, TOO.
I'VE SEEN A LOT OF CITY MANAGERS FIRED FOR PURELY POLITICAL REASONS, AND THAT DOESN'T HELP THE PROFESSIONAL RUNNING OF THE CITY, IT MAY BE RESPONSIVE TO THE LATEST VOTER FEELING WHICH Y'ALL ARE SUBJECT TO.
RIGHT, BUT IF YOU WANT YOUR PROFESSIONAL BUREAUCRATIC, I DON'T MEAN THAT IN A PEJORATIVE SENSE, BUT BUREAUCRATIC CITY EMPLOYEES TO RUN REGARDLESS OF THE POLITICS, THAT'S WHY YOU WOULD HAVE A SUPERMAJORITY IN THERE TO TRY TO INSULATE THE CEO OF THE CITY FROM THAT TYPE OF PRESSURE, I MEAN, YOU ALL ARE A POLICY BOARD.
CITIES, COUNCILS ARE POLICY BOARDS AND NOT OPERATIONAL BOARDS.
THAT'S WHAT HE'S SUPPOSED TO DO.
FROM YOUR POLICIES, SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE IN THERE, I MEAN, SOME HAVE THEM SOME DON'T, IF YOU CAN REMEMBER. I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME TO GET THIS DOCUMENT READY, BUT.
IT WAS. THE FEELING IN THE ROOM, THE SENTIMENT OF CHARTER MEMBERS.
NO, NO ONE, NO ONE SAID, LET'S NOT DO THAT, EVERYBODY SAID, LET'S DO IT.
SO I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT YOUR HISTORY BEFORE 2017 TO KNOW IF THAT'S EVEN AN ISSUE.
IT'S HAPPENED A COUPLE OF TIMES, IT SEEMS TO ME, AND I'M NOT BEEN IN THIS ARGUMENT MUCH, BUT. UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE THE POSITION THE CITY OF ANGLETON IS IN, I FEEL LIKE.
SOME CITY MANAGERS NOT SAYING PRESENT COMPANY INCLUDED, BUT [INAUDIBLE] CITY OF ANGLETON AS A STEPPING STONE TO A HIGHER PAY OR PROMINENT BIGGER CITY OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, OR PRESTIGIOUS SO.
SURE. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE LESS LIKELY TO HAVE TO UTILIZE THE TERMINATION TO LOOK FOR THE PLACEMENT. WELL, IT'S HAPPENED THREE TIMES I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL.
OK, WELL, LET ME ASK YOU, JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING, CAN YOU SAY IT MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SAY THIS, BUT CAN YOU STATE THAT IT WAS NOT NEAR [INAUDIBLE].
ONE OF THEM WOULD HAVE WOULD HAVE BEEN PROBABLY NOT A SUPERMAJORITY.
CHRIS, DO YOU HAVE ANY FEELINGS ON THIS? [LAUGHTER] AND SEE, THAT'S WHY EVEN A MAJORITY NO, I THINK WHEN YOU HAVE GREAT LEADERSHIP, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S A
[00:55:01]
MAJORITY OR SUPER MAJORITY, I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE SAFE.IT JUST REALLY GOES DOWN TO WHAT OUR PREFERENCE IS.
I PERSONALLY BELIEVE IT SHOULD JUST BE A MAJORITY IS THAT WE'LL JUST HAVE TO RESPECTFULLY SAY THE OPPOSITE OF JOHN IS BE SUPER MAJORITY BECAUSE I THINK IT IS TO BE THE FULL COUNCIL THAT MAKES THAT DECISION AND NOT JUST FOUR PEOPLE THAT HAPPEN TO SHOW UP BECAUSE SOMEBODY GETS SICK AND IT'S.
GETS TO THAT POINT, YOU NEVER WOULD WANT TO GET TO THAT POINT.
I CAN GO AND I WOULD WANT THAT WHOLE COUNCIL TO BE HERE AT THE TABLE TO MAKE THAT DECISION. YEAH, FOR IT, FOR TO PROTECT.
I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT. PROTECT THE INDIVIDUAL, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE COULD GET ONE THAT WE'VE HAD THAT WOW.
IF WE'D HAVE JUST HAD THE FOUR PEOPLE IN, THE MAJORITY PROBABLY COULD HAVE WENT JUST LIKE THAT. AND IT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE WENT LIKE THAT WITH ALL SEVEN, SIX OF US SITTING HERE.
I WOULD SAY KIND OF HANG ON TO THIS, MAYBE CHEW ON IT, ESPECIALLY IF THE GUYS [INAUDIBLE] OR THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS KIND OF THEIR SENTIMENT ON THIS, THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.
AND I COULD SEE JOHN'S POINT TOO.
I'M SIDE BY SIDE, SO I CAN I CAN MAKE THE CASE THAT IT HAS TO BE A FULL COUNCIL VOTE AND A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL.
I COULD MAKE THAT CASE. YEAH, I AGREE WITH YOU.
I WOULDN'T WANT FOUR PEOPLE TO SHOW UP AND OUST THE SO THEN YOU HAVE THE THREE.
WHO DON'T WANT TO GET RID OF THE MANAGER YOU GOT FOUR THAT ARE WANTING TO GET RID OF THE MANAGER. THEY WALK OUT.
NOW YOU DON'T HAVE A FULL VOTE OF THE COUNCIL, SO YOU, YOU HAVE THAT TYRANNY.
IT'S TRUE WE DID HAVE SOMEBODY WALK OUT ONE NIGHT.
ONE, TWO, THREE FOUR FIVE SIX SIX.
A MAJORITY BEFORE OF SIX, A SUPER MAJORITY.
YEAH, BECAUSE I WAS YEAH, YOU NEVER SAY 51 PERCENT.
MM HMM. OR YOU COULD SAY OVER 50 PERCENT.
THEY'RE KIND OF LEANING TOWARDS SUPER MAJORITY AND HAVE EVERYBODY HERE BECAUSE THIS IS SOMEBODY YOU HAVE TO LIVE WITH FOR HOPEFULLY A LONG TIME.
YOU GOT YOU HAVE FOUR PEOPLE FOUR PEOPLE SAY YES, TWO PEOPLE SAY NO.
AND, OF COURSE, HOPEFULLY THAT INFORMATION DOESN'T GET BACK TO THE MANAGER WHO GETS IS HIRED. BUT ALL THE TIME YOU'RE THINKING, OK.
YOU KNOW, IT BECOMES KIND OF A STRUGGLE.
THAT THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM WITH ONE THIRD OF THE COUNCIL.
I MEAN, I AGREE, I MEAN, IT'D BE GREAT IF WE COULD.
KNOW THAT IN ADVANCE, RIGHT? AND BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE.
AND TO TRY AND USE GREATEST VERBIAGE, BUT THE BUREAUCRACY OR THE BUREAUCRATIC METHOD.
AND AGAIN, NOT IN A PEJORATIVE TERM, BUT TO ALLOW FOR CONTINUITY, I THINK, IS WHAT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF THIS HAS BEEN STREAMLINED TOWARDS GOING BACK TO THE ISSUE OF CITY COUNCIL.
WHILE THERE WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, IN CITY COUNCIL, BE A DETERMINATION AT SOME POINT OR EXPIRATION OF TERMS. I DON'T KNOW. IT JUST SEEMS TO BE MORE LOGICALLY CONSISTENT WITH THAT SAME STEP.
BUT WE HAVEN'T CHOSEN WHICH WAY WE'RE GOING THERE EITHER.
I'M JUST SEEING WHERE THIS IS HEADED NOW.
THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE. YEAH, IT'LL BE A DISCUSSION.
SO IN BE, EVEN THOUGH YOU ALL HAVE A CONTRACT, WE MANDATED IT IN THE CHARTER THAT YOU HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THEM [INAUDIBLE] AND C OR THE BOTTOM OF B, SAYS BRACKETS IT BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO REVIEW A GUY TO DEATH AND RUN THEM OFF THAT WAY, YOU HAVE TO REVIEW THEM AT LEAST ONE TIME.
BUT NOT MORE THAN TWICE IN ANY ONE YEAR ON A PERFORMANCE REVIEW, NOW, IF YOU KNOW IF YOU NEED TO CALL A MANAGER IN BECAUSE HE MESSED UP.
THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS, THIS IS JUST THE ANNUAL REVIEW.
SO AGAIN, THIS KIND OF IT'S IN THE CHARTER, SO IT'S ONLY THIRTY ONE PAGES, SO YOU JUST GET THERE AND YOU SAY, WELL, WE'VE GOT TO DO OUR ANNUAL REVIEW.
I'VE HAD CITIES GO, OH, WE FORGOT AND WE DIDN'T MAKE IT A WRITTEN REVIEW.
[01:00:06]
THIS OTHER CITY HAD A WRITTEN REVIEW, AND THEY WEREN'T DOING WRITTEN REVIEWS BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL SUBJECT TO OPEN MEETINGS ACT.WELL, YOU KNOW, THAT MAY CHILL SOME OF THE RESPONSE VERSUS GET IT IN WRITING.
SO YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT GOES FOR DEFICIENCIES YOU HAVE.
OK. HERE IS C1, WHICH IS THE THE ONE I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE CITY MANAGER SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO APPOINT AND REMOVE ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS AND DIRECTORS.
CITY MANAGER. THERE'S AN APPEAL TO THE CITY MANAGER.
CITY MANAGER IS NOT NORMALLY IT'S NOT THAT WELL, IT COULD BE, BUT MOST OF THE APPEAL.
THOSE APPEALS ARE BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT HEAD IS CITY MANAGER. BUT THE CITY MANAGER HAS FINAL SAY.
SO I GET IT, BUT I I HATE GIVING AWAY THE THE COUNCIL'S OVERSIGHT.
AND IN THAT CASE, NOTHING TO SAY BAD ABOUT CHRIS, BUT I'VE SAT HERE AND SEEN BAD SITUATIONS. SO THAT'S WHAT CONCERNS ME AND WE LOSE GOOD EMPLOYEES THAT WAY.
DO YOU ALLOW A LITTLE POLITICS OR DO YOU CREATE A LITTLE HITLER? YOU KNOW, AND WELL, I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID POLITICS, BUT I MEAN, WE STILL IN THIS COUNCIL THERE ARE SIX OF US.
WE'RE ALL GOING TO HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
SO I MEAN, AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE WE ALL DON'T AGREE ON EVERYTHING A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE TIME.
SO LET ME JUST PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE.
SO IF I DECIDE TO TERMINATE SOMEONE AND THEY APPEAL AND YOU ALL SAY, NO YOU'RE NOT.
WELL, HOPEFULLY THOSE OF US SITTING HERE UNDERSTAND THE SITUATION AND CAN AND RULE FAIRLY AND IMPARTIALLY ON THAT.
IF, SAY, THE CITY MANAGER WAS WRONG IN THAT CASE, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AND SAY, LOOK, HERE'S WHY WE FEEL THIS WAY. WE NEED TO HAVE THAT EXECUTIVE SESSION OR IN PUBLIC, WHICHEVER ONE.
IF THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING WRONG AND CITY MANAGER WANTS TO GET RID OF THEM, I THINK YOU WOULDN'T HAVE US STOPPING YOU ON THAT.
IF IT'S LEGITIMATE, IT'S A LEGITIMATE CLAIM.
IT'S GOING TO CAUSE THE CITY MANAGER POTENTIALLY TO GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.
SO WHAT IF WE'RE THE SECOND SENATE SAYS THE CITY MANAGER SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO APPOINT AND REMOVE ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS AND DIRECTORS UPON CONSULTATION WITH CITY COUNCIL OR AFTER CONSULTATION WITH CITY COUNCIL.
SURE. I MEAN, IT'S NOT THAT WE STOP HIM, BUT HE COMES TO US AND EXPLAINS WHY I AM REMOVING THIS DEPARTMENT HEAD AND AT LEAST WE HAVE FEEDBACK AND WE CAN CONSULT WITH HIM.
MEANING DON'T THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA.
X I DO AGREE WITH YOUR DECISION OR MAYBE AN ALTERNATIVE.
IT'S YOUR CALL, CITY MANAGER OR WHOEVER YOU ARE.
[INAUDIBLE] IS GOING TO MAKE SURE HE HAS THE BACKING OF AT LEAST A MAJORITY OF COUNCIL.
AND I THINK IT'S A WISE THING TO DO, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DEPARTMENT HEADS. THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE THE NEXT SENTENCE TALKS ABOUT EMPLOYEES, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT EMPLOYEES, I'M TALKING ABOUT DEPARTMENT HEADS AND DIRECTORS.
BUT THAT SHOULD BE A DECISION THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER RUNNING IT.
MY POSITION HAS ALWAYS BEEN KIND OF LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I STEP BACK. I'M NOT IN THE DAY TO DAY BUSINESS.
THAT'S THE CITY MANAGER'S JOB.
THAT'S THE DIRECTORS AND THE WHOEVER, YOU KNOW, DEPARTMENT HEADS JOBS.
HOWEVER, IF WE'RE GOING TO REMOVE ONE OF THOSE HEADS, I WANT CITY COUNCILMAN OR CITY MANAGER TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL AND PROBABLY IN CLOSED SESSION AND TELL US WHY I AM INTENDING TO DO THIS.
AND HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DO IT IN CLOSED SESSION BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PUT IN THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT REVIEW DEPARTMENT HEAD?
[01:05:02]
YEAH, I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT WE DID.THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO BRING THAT OUT IN OPEN.
THEY DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO ATTEND.
THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCE.
OKAY. WELL, I MEAN, THEN IF THEY DO, IF THEY HAVE TO DO IT IN PUBLIC, THEN I GUESS WE'LL AIR OUR DIRTY LAUNDRY IN PUBLIC.
I MEAN, IF THE PERSON WANTS THEIR WANTS TO KNOW WHY THEY'RE BEING.
SO I MEAN, I SAY DIRTY LAUNDRY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CALL IT THAT, I MEAN, IT MAY JUST BE IT COULD BE AS SIMPLE AS JUST A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN.
YOU KNOW HOW SOMEBODY SEES THE FUTURE, IT COULD BE SOMETHING LIKE, YEAH, THIS PERSON IS A THIEF. I MEAN, SO IF THEY WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE, THEN SO.
LAST NIGHT, I WAS AT A COUNCIL MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION OVER A DEPARTMENT HEAD.
WITH YELLING AND SCREAMING AND CRYING.
AND JUST LIKE IN A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN, THERE'S NO CRYING IN BASEBALL AND THERE SHOULD BE NO CRYING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
AND THIS CHARTER DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL AFFIRMATION OF A TERMINATION OF A DEPARTMENT HEAD, THIS DEPARTMENT HAS ALL BEEN OUT OF SHAPE.
BECAUSE THE CITY MANAGER LEFT INTERIMS IN HE REORGANIZES THE ORG CHART AND TAKES [INAUDIBLE] OUT FROM UNDER THIS PERSON IN MUNICIPAL COURTS.
THEN SHE BECOMES UNHINGED OVER IT, IT'S THREATENING TO RUN AGAINST COUNCIL MEMBERS, I MEAN, IT'S [INAUDIBLE], IT'S A SPECTACLE.
BUT THAT'S AND MY ADVICE TO COUNCIL IS GET OFF THAT ROLLER COASTER.
LET THE MANAGER MANAGE THE EMPLOYEES.
WELL, I'M NOT SAYING AFFIRMATION I DIDN'T SAY WITH AFFIRMATION OF CITY COUNCIL.
I SAID WITH CONSULTATION, THERE'S TO ME A DIFFERENCE.
AND IF WE NEED TO FIND THAT, YOU KNOW, SAYING DOES NOT REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL, JUST CONSULTATION, I FEEL LIKE THERE HAS TO BE COMMUNICATION AND I FEEL LIKE THERE SHOULD BE AT LEAST. CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE AT LEAST IT ADVISED AS TO WHY AGAIN. I'M ONLY TALKING ABOUT DEPARTMENT HEADS AND DIRECTORS.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT YOUR DAY TO DAY.
SO ARE ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS EQUAL? WE'LL SEE DOWN HERE AND POLICE CHIEF OF POLICE.
NOW THAT'S A PRETTY HIGH PROFILE POSITION.
AND TO ME, THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN.
YEAH, IT WORKS, COUNCILS SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN THAT.
WELL, CLEARLY SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I KIND OF LIKE TO BE ADVISED OF THE INCOMING DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FIRING SOMEBODY.
WE'RE I'M LOOKING AT HIRING THE REPLACEMENT.
WELL. WHAT'S THIS PERSON BRINGING TO THE TABLE? I AGREE I WAS GOING TO BRING UP THE HIRING PART AS WELL.
SO ARE YOU SAYING THIS IS CAUSING CONSULTATION FOR BOTH HIRING AND TERMINATING? YEAH, WE CAN'T BE I DON'T WANT TO BE MICROMANAGING THIS CITY.
I DON'T EVEN GET TO DO THAT AT HOME.
ARE YOU, WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS OR THE NEXT TWENTY FIVE YEARS? RIGHT? I WILL NOT BE PRACTICING LAW IN TWENTY FIVE YEARS, I GUARANTEE THAT.
MY THOUGHT PROCESS BECAUSE WE'VE SAT THIS TABLE, WE'VE HAD INSTANCES WHERE.
YOU KIND OF WENT SOMEWHERE DOWN THIS RABBIT HOLE OR DOWN THIS TRAIL AND YOU GET THE PHONE CALL FROM THE INDIVIDUAL WHO'S IN QUESTION.
AND THEN IT'S LIKE THEY DON'T SEEM TO UNDERSTAND IT'S STILL BUSINESS, BUT THEY WANT THEIR FRIENDSHIP. I HATE BEING IN THAT POSITION WHERE NOW IT'S LIKE I'M HAVING TO CHOOSE A SIDE BETWEEN MY CITY MANAGER WHO I TRUSTED AND WE HIRED TO WORK TO DO THE JOB OF THE CITY.
BUT THEN YOU HAVE THE INDIVIDUAL, BUT YOU MAY HAVE KNOWN FOR 15 YEARS WHO MAY BE NOW THE SUBJECT OF QUESTION.
THAT'S A HARD POSITION TO BE IN.
I MEAN, SMALL TOWN, EVERYBODY KNOWS EVERYBODY.
I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO PUT SOMEBODY IN THAT POSITION BECAUSE IT.
IT CREATES HEARTBURN AND IT CREATES PRESSURE AND IT.
YOU GUYS AIN'T BEEN HERE FOR SOME OF THAT, AND WHEN YOU GET ACCOSTED WALKING OUTSIDE AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE A POLICE ESCORT, THAT'S ROUGH.
AND THAT'S I THINK IT PUT US IN THAT POSITION BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE SOMETHING CONCRETE BECAUSE OF THAT.
NOW I COULD SEE WHERE WE COULD BE THE GRIEVANCE BOARD FOR THAT.
YEAH, CERTAINLY YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO TO GRIEVE IT AND PLEAD YOUR CASE.
[01:10:02]
BUT TO DO THAT, LIKE YOU SAID, THE MICROMANAGE EVERY DAY NO HE HAS DONE A GREAT JOB AT COMMUNICATING WITH US AND GO, HEY, THIS IS WHAT I'M THINKING.THIS IS KIND OF WHERE X Y Z CANDIDATE, YOU KNOW, HE HAS COMMUNICATED THAT TO US LOOSELY.
SO I THINK THERE SHOULD BE SOME PROCESS TO TO KIND OF TELL US IF I'M GETTING A PUBLIC WORKS FOLKS COMING INTO THE PROCESS.
BUT IT'S THE ONE THAT'S THE HEARTBURN FOR ME.
I'VE BEEN THERE PRIOR TO BEING MAYOR AND BEING ON COUNCIL TO GET BECAUSE YOU'RE STILL THE FRIENDS OF THESE FOLKS AT CITY HALL.
WE'RE NEIGHBORS, WE SIT SIDE BY SIDE.
YOU MAY GET A GUY AT THE END OF THE TABLE WHO'S NOT LIKE THE GUY WE HAVE NOW IN TEN YEARS, AND IT COULD BE THE BOOK OF BEAR THAT CREATES THAT HEARTBURN FOR US.
AND I WANT SOME PROTECTION FOR ME OR OF THE FUTURE FOLKS SITTING HERE WHERE YOU'RE NOT IN THAT POSITION TO BE THE ONE WHO GETS YELLED AT AND ACCOSTED OUTSIDE OF THIS, THESE THESE FOUR WALLS BECAUSE SOMETHING DIDN'T GO RIGHT.
I WOULDN'T TRUST THAT THAT INDIVIDUAL DOTTED HIS I'S CROSSED HIS T'S.
THAT'S HOW HE GOT TO ALL WE GOT.
HE DIDN'T FACILITATE YOUR TRANSFER.
YOU DID. YOU FACILIZE YOUR TRANSFER HOPEFULLY OUT OF HERE.
SO THAT'S MY MY, MY MY FEELING GUYS ON THIS.
AND THIS HAS BEEN TOSSED AROUND FOR YEARS.
IT'S THE IT'S THE BEAR IN THE ROOM.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS WITH EVERY CITY MANAGER WHO HAS SAT AT THE TABLE AND NOW IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE MAKE IT RIGHT, MAKE YOU BETTER, MAKE IT EASIER FOR US.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S RIGHT, BETTER OR NOT.
AND IF I WANT TO GO IN AND FIRE SOMEBODY MY MY, MY PROFESSIONAL JOB RIGHT NOW, I HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN HR DEPARTMENT WHO'S GOING TO CHECK ME? I CAN'T JUST GO FIRE THEM AT WILL.
THAT'S WHY I SAY ALL I'M SAYING IS LIKE TRAVIS HERE TALKING ABOUT CONSULTING WITH COUNCIL. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA AS LONG AS THERE'S CONSULTATION BECAUSE I'M NOT TRYING TO PROTECT US FROM CHRIS.
CHRIS IS NOT THE ONE I'M AFTER HERE.
I'VE SAT IN THIS CHAIR AND HAD THREE SITUATIONS WHERE I SAW GOOD PEOPLE GET FIRED FOR A LOT LESS BECAUSE IT WAS A PERSONALITY DISAGREEMENT AND NOTHING THAT THE EMPLOYEE DID WRONG. JUST THE FACT THAT CITY MANAGER DIDN'T LIKE THEM AND THEY WERE GONE.
AND YOU KNOW, SO FAR, I'VE SUPPORTED CHRIS ON EVERY ONE OF HIS DECISIONS, AND HE CAME WITH ALL HIS, YOU KNOW, DOCUMENTATION IN ORDER, JUST LIKE AN HR BOARD WOULD DO, REVIEW IT, MAKE THE DECISION AND MOVE ON.
THAT'S ALL. THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY I'M SAYING I HAVE A LOT OF ISSUE WITH TAKING THAT AND STRIKING THAT OUT.
IF I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU.
GO AHEAD. WE CAN EASILY PUT IN A PHRASE AFTER CONSULTATION WITH COUNCIL.
SO THAT DECISION CAN STILL BE MADE WITH HIM, BUT IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A VETO POWER, WHICH WOULD EMPOWER AN EMPLOYEE DISGRUNTLED EMPLOYEE TO CALL YOU UP AND ACCOST YOU, WALK INTO THE PARKING LOT BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE A CORRECT.
YOU CAN'T MAKE THAT DECISION, RIGHT? YOU CONSULTED.
BUT CHRIS, HOW MANY DEPARTMENT HEADS OR DIRECTORS, DO YOU HAVE? SEVEN OR EIGHT.
BUT THERE ARE ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS, RIGHT? YOU'VE GOT A COURT ADMINISTRATOR.
SO IT REALLY OUGHT TO SAY NOT DEPARTMENT HEADS [INAUDIBLE].
BUT YOU HAVE TO CATEGORY, WOULD IT JUST SIMPLY BE DEFINED AS ANYBODY WHO DIRECTLY REPORTS TO YOU? RIGHT? SO LIKE [INAUDIBLE] DOES GRANT, SHE WORKS DIRECTLY FOR ME, SHE'S [INAUDIBLE].
THAT'S WHY I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO WATCH WHAT YOU CALL THAT OTHERWISE.
YOU KNOW, HOW DOES ALL THESE EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULES.
YOU GOT TO WRITE IT SIMPLE ENOUGH SO THAT IT'S.
RIGHT. AND THEN YOU NEED AN ORGANIZATION CHART ON TOP OF THAT.
SO, WELL, I MEAN, QUITE HONESTLY, WOULD IT NOT BE IN THE JOB TITLE OR DESCRIPTION LIKE THEIR HR LIKE SO SO DIRECTOR, SO-AND-SO DEPARTMENT, HEAD OR HEAD OF DEPARTMENT OR WHATEVER DEPARTMENT OR DEPARTMENT, HEAD OR WHATEVER.
SO YOUR CHARTER RIGHT NOW HAS DEPARTMENT HEADS.
BUT THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT YOU HAVE SOME POSITIONS THAT ARE KNOWN AS DIRECTORS.
SO YOUR POLICY, YOUR HR POLICY RIGHT NOW HAS DEPARTMENT HAS BOTH WORDS.
SO THAT'S WHY REALLY, THAT'S WHY DIRECTORS ARE ADDED BECAUSE YOUR CITY USES BOTH.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO JIVE YOUR, YOUR, YOUR POLICIES.
WE CHARTER, YOU KNOW, OTHERWISE YOU HAVE TO CHANGE EVERYTHING THE WAY YOU, YOU CALL YOUR PEOPLE. WHAT YOU WANT IS A DIRECTOR IS A DEPARTMENT.
[01:15:01]
I DON'T KNOW HOW WE GOT FROM POINT A TO POINT B, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE ARE.COURT ADMINISTRATOR, RIGHT? BUT SHE REPORTS TO YOU, RIGHT? RIGHT. BUT SEE, BACK IN THE DAY, THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR USED TO REPORT HIM TO THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE.
THEY THEY CARVED THAT OUT, ESPECIALLY YEARS AGO AND PUT THAT THERE.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHY IT GOT LIKE THAT.
PROBABLY THE TITLE SHOULD CHANGE OR.
WELL, GIVEN THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT YOU HAVE, YOU'VE GOT DIRECTORS, YOU'VE GOT DEPARTMENT HEADS. SO DO ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS AND DIRECTOR HEADS, THE DIRECTORS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS REPORT TO YOU.
WELL, THEN THAT'S THE COMMON DENOMINATOR.
CITY MANAGER. RIGHT? DOESN'T THAT COVER EVERYBODY, ANY EMPLOYEE THAT REPORTS DIRECTLY TO THE CITY MANAGER EXCEPT LIKE HE SAID, THAT ONE LADY WHO'S THE GRANT WRITER.
BUT SHE REPORTS DIRECTLY TO YOU, YEAH.
FUTURE THERE WOULD BE A ORGANIZATION GROWS. MY [INAUDIBLE] SHOULD DOCTRINALLY ONLY BE LIKE 10 PEOPLE.
[CHUCKLING] IN THE [INAUDIBLE] STRUCTURE, IT'S SEVEN.
RIGHT, SO AS WE LOOK AT THE GROWTH, THOSE THINGS [INAUDIBLE].
I KNEW I WAS CLOSE. YOU'RE CLOSE, SIR.
[CHUCKLING] OPTIMAL IS SEVEN, I THINK YOU CAN GO EIGHT.
SO HERE'S SOMETHING THAT COMMISSION DIDN'T TALK ABOUT.
I'VE RUN ACROSS RECENTLY, IS, WHO APPROVES THE ORG CHART? IS IT JUST THE CITY MANAGER? SO IN THIS CITY, I MENTIONED THE COUNCIL DID NOT LIKE THE FACT THAT HR WAS UNDER ANOTHER DEPARTMENT HEAD AND DID NOT DIRECTLY REPORT TO THE MANAGER OR ASSISTANT MANAGER.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS HORRIBLE ORGANIZATION, AND THE CHARTER WAS NOT CLEAR ON WHO APPROVES THE ORG CHART. THE MANAGER [INAUDIBLE] DRAFTED, SOMEBODY'S GOT TO OR SHOULD APPROVE IT AND THAT IS PERHAPS AN AMENDMENT.
COUNCIL CAN, ON ITS OWN, GENERATE A PROPOSAL-- AN ORG CHART APPROVAL.
DO YOU HAVE ONE? YEAH, I'VE SEEN ONE SOMEWHERE.
THAT'S WHAT THE COUNCIL PROCEDURE APPROVES.
DUSTED WITH THE STUDIES THAT JOHN APPROVED.
DID WE DO A STUDY ON THAT, JOHN? WE PROBABLY DID A STUDY THREE TIMES.
WELL, THE CHARTER COMMISSION DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THAT AT ALL.
IS THAT UNFUNDED? IT'S UNFUNDED.
[INAUDIBLE] FIFTY DOLLARS, JOHN.
[CHUCKLING] DO YOU WANT CONSULTATION WITH COUNCIL ON WHATEVER YOU CALL THE DIRECT REPORTS? YES. YES.
BUT NOT A VETO OR AN APPROVAL? NO, BECAUSE IN MY EYES, WELL, EVEN IF IT'S A VETO, OR I DON'T EVEN WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO APPEAL TO COUNCIL BECAUSE WHATEVER THE FINAL DECISION IS, IF THAT MANAGER CAN'T FIND A WAY TO WORK IT OUT WITH THAT EMPLOYEE, THEY SHOULDN'T BE WORKING TOGETHER ANYWAYS.
PERSONALLY, I DON'T WANT TO CHANGE WHAT'S IN THERE, BUT I'M WILLING TO MOVE TO CONSULTATION AS LONG AS WE'RE INVOLVED TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY MANAGER ON THAT.
[INAUDIBLE] YEAH. SO THEN NUMBER SIX, THE MANAGER HAS TO FAITHFULLY AS OPPOSED TO UNFAITHFULLY ATTEND ALL COUNCIL MEETINGS.
UH, AND THEN THE WINTER STORM HIT.
[CHUCKLING] AND ABIDE BY ALL TEXAS LAW BECAUSE THERE'S NEVER THERE WAS NO REQUIREMENT THAT YOUR CITY, WE'D THINK THAT WOULD BE A GIVEN, BUT NOW IT'S STATED IN YOUR CONSTITUTION THAT YOU'VE GOT TO FOLLOW ALL THE LAWS.
JUST TIGHTEN THAT NOOSE A LITTLE TIGHTER.
ALL RIGHT, DEPARTMENT OF POLICE.
SO WE'RE BACK TO CONSULTATION OR APPROVAL OR VETO.
[01:20:08]
THAT'S THE FIRST ONE FOR THE CHIEF.I THINK, LIKE I SAID, FOR THE GUYS, THE SECOND MOST IMPORTANT POSITION THAT YOU'LL PROBABLY HIRE FOR THE CITY IS YOUR CITY MANAGER AND YOUR CHIEF OF POLICE.
SO I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE AND SAYING YES, THAT RIGHT THERE WOULD BE BETTER.
I WOULD BE MORE APT TO SAY YES, LET THE COUNCIL HELP APPROVE THAT INDIVIDUAL.
FOR THE CHIEF OF POLICE? YES. SO IF YOU'LL NOTICE, BY THE WAY THE REVISION IS DONE, THE COMMISSION SAID THEY CHANGED THEIR MINDS. FIRST THEY WENT AND SAID, NO, NO, NO CITY COUNCIL SHOULDN'T APPROVE AND THEN THEY WENT BACK AND SAID, NO, NO, NO, NO, WE THINK.
SO IT'S INTERESTING THAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT BECAUSE THEY SWITCHED THEIR POSITIONS.
YEAH, BECAUSE I THINK FOR ME, THE CAVEAT TO THAT IS WHAT IF THAT PERSON GETS THERE IN FOUR MONTHS HAS TO HIRE A POLICE CHIEF.
HE DOESN'T KNOW THE DYNAMICS OF THE COMMUNITY.
WHAT WE MAY SEE WAS FIT IN A CANDIDATE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE WERE BEING PART OF THE PROCESS. I THINK THAT JUST THAT WOULD HELP ME OUT FOR JUST ONE SCENARIO, BUT IT'S VERY HIGH PROFILE.
YEAH, YOU KNOW, HOW DID WE DO BEFORE? WHAT'S THE MOOD OF THE COMMUNITY? [INAUDIBLE] SEE, THAT'S WHY WE LIKE YOU, CHRIS, BECAUSE YOU YOU'RE WILLING TO WORK WITH US AND WHERE WE'VE HAD SEEING MANAGERS WHO DON'T CARE AND THEY THINK THEY KNOW BETTER THAN EVERYBODY, AND THEY'RE TWO MONTHS IN AND THEY THINK THEY CAN MAKE THE DECISIONS.
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO PROTECT OURSELVES.
ALL RIGHT. I'LL SAY JUST, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, PART OF THAT DISCUSSION IS TO PROTECT YOU ALL, TOO. I THINK JASON SAID IT, YOU KNOW, IT KIND OF TAKES YOU OUT OF THE FRAY AND PUTS THE HEAT ON ME.
SO IF IT'S A BAD DECISION, YOU ALL COULD SAY THE CITY MANAGER MADE IT, MAYBE WE CAN MAKE A CHANGE OR, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER OR YOU PULL THEM IN AND HAVE A NOT SO PLEASANT--AND THAT'S WHAT HOPEFULLY THE CONSULTATION WOULD BE, IS IF THAT, YOU KNOW, YES, CHRIS, SURE.
IT KEEPS YOU OUT OF THAT FRAY.
I DON'T THINK WE'LL EVER BE OUT OF THAT FRAY AS ELECTED OFFICIALS OF THE CITY.
WE'LL GET DRUG INTO WHY ARE YOU NOT STEPPING IN? WE'LL GET THAT, BUT I THINK THIS IS A GOOD MEDIUM BETWEEN THE TWO.
OK, CITY SECRETARY, AGAIN, WE REMOVE THE APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL AND PUT FRANCIS COMPLETELY UNDER THE THUMB OF CHRIS.
DOES THAT NEED TO ALSO BE SPECIFIED AS CONSULTATION? IF YOU WANT.
I WANT TO BE CONSISTENT, SO KNOW, 40, 50/50, 30/20, WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, YOU ALL HAVE DIRECT INVOLVEMENT, CITY SECRETARY. SO, YOU ALL OUGHT TO HAVE THAT INPUT BECAUSE SHE DOES WORK FOR YOU ALL.
RIGHT. OK, NO NEED FOR A CITY TREASURER DELETED NEW FOUR POINT ZERO FOUR CORPORATION COURT KNOWN AS MUNICIPAL COURT.
ARE WE STRIKING THE CITY TREASURER BECAUSE WE HAVE NO MONEY? [CHUCKLING] BECAUSE IF SO, I LIKE THAT IDEA.
NO MONEY, YOU CAN'T SPEND ANYTHING.
IT'S LIKE THE INSPECTOR OF BRANDS.
IF TOOK A TEXAS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO GET RID OF, JUST SAYING.
SO WE CLEANED UP THE COURT SECTION AND MADE SURE THAT CITY COUNCIL CAN APPOINT JUDGES AND ASSOCIATE JUDGES HERE AND TOOK OUT THE FACT, YOU KNOW, REQUIRING CLERKS AND DEPUTY CLERKS AND YOU DON'T NEED THAT IN YOUR CONSTITUTION, YOU SET UP THE [INAUDIBLE].
4.05 IS THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THE NEXT ONE.
SUPER MAJORITY AGAIN REQUIREMENT.
SAME ARGUMENT YOU HEARD ALREADY ON THE CITY MANAGER AND THE POLITICS SIDE.
[INAUDIBLE] THAT'S AFTER THIS PASSES.
[01:25:06]
I DON'T THINK YOU ALL EVER APPROVED US.COME TO THINK OF IT, SCOTT JUST SAID I WAS SIGNING INTERIM ATTORNEY AND ONE DAY, HE TOLD ME, JUST STRIKE THE INTERIM.
I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE IF I DO APPROVE OF THE INTERIM.
[CHUCKLING] YEAH, JERRY'S STILL OUT.
WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR TWO YEARS NOW.
DOES THAT SAY WHO THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULD REPORT TO? I MEAN, OR IS IT JUST--CITY ATTORNEY WORKS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, NOT THE CITY MANAGER.
WE ARE A LITTLE FREE RADICAL OUT THERE, JUST FLOATING AROUND AND MAKING TROUBLE.
IS THAT HOW THIS IS WORDED, WHERE IT SAYS IT'S OH, JUST ASKING--NO, IF HE OR SHE IS APPROVED BY COUNCIL, THEN IT'S A DIRECT REPORT TO COUNCIL.
SUGARLAND, IT IS A STRICTLY CORPORATE STRUCTURE CITY, SO EVERYTHING REPORTS TO THANK YOU, THE CITY MANAGER, WHO IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE COMPANY.
I'VE NEVER HAD A CITY ATTORNEY JOB OTHERWISE, BUT YOU NEED THAT INDEPENDENCE FROM THE CITY MANAGER. WE WORK FOR YOU.
SO MY THINKING OUTSIDE OF CITY ATTORNEY, HE IS THE CEO OF THE CITY, SO EVERYBODY REPORTS TO HIM.
AND IT'S HAND IN GLOVE AND WHEN IT'S NOT HAND-IN-GLOVE, IT'S NOT PRETTY [INAUDIBLE].
I HAD TO MAKE A POINT OF THAT.
A LITTLE BIT DISTASTEFUL, BUT IT SEEMED TO GET THE MESSAGE ACROSS.
SO 4.06, FIRE DEPARTMENT, WE STRUCK THE WORD VOLUNTEER AND WE REORGANIZED THE WHOLE PARAGRAPH, AND THIS IS COMING OUT OF STATE LAW AND THIS IS WHAT CHIEF MYERS CAME UP WITH.
SOUNDS GOOD. SO HERE'S A GOOD PLACE TO PUT THE ORG CHART LANGUAGE I WAS SPEAKING OF IN 4.07. THE CITY COUNCIL ABOLISHES OR CONSOLIDATES OFFICES.
SO YOU WANT TO GET RID OF PUBLIC WORKS? GET RID OF PUBLIC WORKS? WE'LL DRESS THIS UP A LITTLE BIT WHERE IT SAYS YOU APPROVE THE ORG CHART.
SO YOU SAID THE ORGANIZATION OF THE CITY, THE CITY MANAGER STAFFS AND RUNS THE ORGANIZATION OF THE CITY.
TROUBLE READING HIM OVER THERE, SO LIKE A LETTER C FOR THAT SOMEWHERE, OR SPEAKERS] JUST CHECKING.
HE'S BARELY AWAKE. SAVE SOME FOR THE REST OF US.
LOOKS GOOD. B IS JUST HE CAN APPOINT ASSISTANCE.
SO WE'LL SLIP AN ORG CHART LANGUAGE IN THERE.
OKAY, ELECTIONS, HERE IT SAYS IT FOLLOWS TEXAS ELECTION CODE.
THERE IS A WHOLE CODE ON ELECTIONS.
YOU DON'T NEED TO DEFINE QUALIFIED VOTER.
THAT'S PREEMPTED BY STATE LAW.
CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS PREEMPTED BY STATE LAW.
FILING FOR OFFICE PREEMPTED BY STATE LAW BALLOTS.
OTHERWISE, YOU HAVE IT IN HERE AS BEING A MAJORITY, YOU'VE NOT HAD IT AS PLURALITY.
WE JUST FINISHED A CHARTER REVIEW ON ANOTHER CITY AND THERE IS A REAL PUSH TO DISCUSS PLURALITY JUST TO CUT OUT BECAUSE IT'S LOCAL GOVERNMENT, IT'S NOT STATE, IT'S NOT FEDERAL, IT'S LOCAL.
WHY HAVE RUNOFF ELECTIONS? IT FELL FLAT. EVERYBODY WANTED MAJORITY AND I WON'T TELL YOU MY STORY THEN.
SOMETIMES RUNOFF ELECTIONS WORK.
SO, WHAT I CALL IRR, YEAH, INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM AND RECALL, GENERAL POWERS, WE ADDED EXCEPTIONS TO WHAT IS SUBJECT TO THESE.
YOU WANT THESE EXCEPTIONS IN THERE, LIKE THE LEVYING OF TAXES.
THE ZONING DISTRICT, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE SOME FINALITY AND STABILITY,
[01:30:10]
SO TAXPAYERS OR DEVELOPERS OR WHOEVER IT IS, CAN RELY ON THAT PARTICULAR LAW, AND IT'S NOT SUBJECT TO THE WHELM OF AN IRRATIONAL POPULATION THAT'S BEEN WHIPPED UP INTO A FRENZY. WE PUT IN A NEW WAY TO DO RECALL PETITIONS, AND IT'S ON ALL OF THEM, AND THAT IS A NOTICE.WHAT WE FOUND OUT CITIES ARE GOSSIPY LITTLE PLACES AND SO THERE'S ALWAYS A RUMOR RUNNING AROUND THAT SOMEBODY'S FILING A PETITION TO THE LATEST ONE WAS GET RID OF A SMOKING ORDINANCE BANNING SMOKING IN RESTAURANTS.
WELL, IS IT TRUE OR IS IT NOT TRUE? YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO PLAN.
SO IF YOU'RE REALLY GOING TO DO A PETITION, YOU HAVE TO GIVE A NOTICE THAT YOU'RE DOING A PETITION. IT'S TYPICALLY FIVE VOTERS THAT SIGN IT.
SOMEBODY SETS IS IN CHARGE OF THE PETITION AND YOU'VE GOT A TIME CLOCK THAT YOU PUT IT ON , BUT YOU HAVE A START DATE, A CLEAR START DATE.
WHEN YOU GET THE NOTICE, YOU'RE NOT SITTING HERE GOING WELL, THAT HUNDRED AND EIGHTY DAYS, WHEN WAS THAT FIRST SIGNATURE SIGNED? NO, IT'S A NOTICE.
BOOM. CLEAR, YOU KNOW, YOU ANSWER A LAWSUIT 20 DAYS AFTER THE EXPIRATION.
AFTER THE EXPIRATION 20 DAYS ON THE FIRST MONDAY, YOU HAVE A DATE CERTAIN, SO THAT'S WHAT THE FIRST A, B AND C.
QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT FORM AND RECALL OF THE PETITION, 6.04.
WE'RE TAKING OUT HE AND SHE AND THE AND JUST MAKING IT NEUTRAL WHERE THEY ARE CHARGED OR THE SIGNER.
6.04, STATING THAT IT'S NOT LIKE PAYING YOUR TAXES, ALTHOUGH THAT'S A LITTLE TENDER FOR ME, WHERE YOU PUT IT ALL IN A GROCERY BAG AND YOU TAKE IT TO THE CPA AND EXPECT HIM TO SORT THROUGH IT.
FRANCIS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO SORT THROUGH PETITIONS.
THEY'VE GOT TO BE UNIFORM SIZE PAPER, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE AN 8.5X11 AND THE SIGNATURES ON IT AND MAKE IT SURE THAT THAT IS COUNTED AS ONE INSTRUMENT.
SO NOT ON A NAPKIN FROM THE RESTAURANT.
[CHUCKLING] NO, EXACTLY, OR THE BACK OF AN ENVELOPE OR ANY OF THAT.
THE REST OF THE STUFF REMAINS UNCHANGED.
RECALL RESTRICTIONS, NOT WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF AN ELECTION.
YOU DON'T WANT THE EXPENSE OF TRYING TO BE RECALLED WITH AND YOU HAVE TWO MONTHS LEFT ON YOUR TERM. MM HMM AND IT'S A PRETTY HARD BURDEN. 6.12 AND YOU HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT IF THE CITY FAILS TO CALL AN ELECTION, THE COUNTY JUDGE CAN.
SPLASH PAD AT NATURE PARK PROPOSED IN THE CITY IN FORT BEND COUNTY, IT HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF LITERALLY 26 SEPARATE AGENDAS SINCE 2016.
IT HAS GONE THROUGH TWO PETITIONS.
ONE VOTE BY THE COUNCIL TO SEND IT TO THE VOTERS.
VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY APPROVED IT AND NOW THE RUMP GROUP IS MAD THAT IT WAS APPROVED BY FIVE THOUSAND VOTES, SO THEY'VE GOT ANOTHER PETITION THAT THEY PRESENTED TO COUNCIL THAT MET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THAT REQUIRED THEM NOT TO SIGN ANY CONTRACTS OF THE INITIATIVE THAT WAS JUST APPROVED.
THEY'VE SPENT MORE MONEY ON A SPLASH PAD IN THE NATURE CENTER THAN THEY CARE TO THINK, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A TIME OUT PROVISION, BUT THE COUNCIL IS SO MAD AND IT'S THE FORMER MAYOR DOING IT SO MAD AT THE FORMER MAYOR FOR GETTING A FEW HUNDRED SIGNATURES TO PUT THIS ONCE AGAIN ON THE BALLOT.
THAT PITCHFORKS AND TORCHES SHOWED UP IN THE COUNCIL MEETING, SAYING WE VOTED ON THIS IN
[01:35:04]
NOVEMBER, YOU BETTER CONTINUE IT AND COUNCIL FLATLY REFUSED TO CALL AN ELECTION ON THE BALLOT PETITION. CALLING THE FORMER MAYOR'S BLUFF, SAYING YOU SPEND YOUR MONEY AND SUE US. HARDBALL POLITICS.OH, SO THAT WOULDN'T HAPPEN IN THIS CITY, BECAUSE I COULD GO DOWN TO COUNTY JUDGE, AND SAY, CALL THE ELECTION IF HE OR SHE'S WILLING TO DO IT.
INITIATIVE GOING THROUGH THE SAME THING ABOUT THE NOTICE PROVISION.
WE GAVE FRANCIS DOUBLE THE DAYS FOR HER TO REVIEW THE PETITION TO TEN DAYS AND YOU GO THROUGH AND CALL AN ELECTION.
NEXT, SECTION REFERENDUM, SAME THING.
NOTICE AND HERE, WE PUT IN A TIMEOUT PROVISION, AND I RARELY GET ON THE SOAPBOX AND SAY, YOU SHOULD PASS THIS, BUT THIS IS WHAT I'M SAYING YOU SHOULD PASS JUST FROM MY EXPERIENCE WITH TWENTY SIX DIFFERENT AGENDAS.
LITERALLY TWENTY SIX DIFFERENT AGENDAS.
A PETITION FOR A REFERENDUM THAT FAILS MAY NOT BE SUBMITTED AGAIN FOR TWO YEARS.
SO A REFERENDUM IS WHERE YOU TRY TO STOP SOMETHING, THE COUNCIL IS DONE.
SO IF THAT FAILS, COUNCIL CAN MOVE FORWARD, AND THEY CAN'T BE HIT OVER THE NEXT SIX YEARS LIKE WE HAVE IN THIS OTHER CITY WITH CONTINUAL BOMBARDMENT OF PETITIONS AND INITIATIVES AND CITY ATTORNEYS HAVING TO OVERRULE PETITIONS AS INVALID AND BLAH BLAH BLAH.
QUESTIONS SO FAR, THE VOLUNTARY SUBMISSION OF LEGISLATION BY COUNCIL IS WHAT THIS OTHER CITY DID THAT WAS APPROVED.
SO THAT'S GOOD. WE DIDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING ON IT.
FORM OF THE BALLOT IS REQUIRED BY THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE.
THAT WOULD BE PLAUSIBLE TO THE VOTERS TO JUST TAKE THAT OUT, I MEAN, YOU COULD TAKE IT OUT, BUT LEAVE A LITTLE SOMETHING IN THERE.
UM, AND AGAIN, THE NEXT ONE, 6.17 IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS LAW.
THERE IS A LAW CALLED THE CODE CONSTRUCTION ACT THAT GOES THROUGH AND TELLS YOU HOW TO RECONCILE INCONSISTENT STATUTES AND ORDINANCES.
YOU DON'T NEED IT IN YOUR CONSTITUTION.
SO WE DELETED THE REST OF 6.19 THROUGH 6.22.
WITH ME SO FAR? OKAY, WE'RE ON THE DOWNHILL SLOPE, MUNICIPAL PLANNING AND ZONING.
WE WANTED TO FORMALLY CREATE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
JUST TO LEGALIZE ALL THOSE YEARS OF WORK.
CLEANED UP THE LANGUAGE AND LEFT IT AT THAT.
YOU DON'T NEED 7.02 ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY OR A PLANNING COMMISSION, IT'S ALL IN ONE AS A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
YOU COULD SEPARATE THEM, LIKE HOUSTON DOESN'T HAVE A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ZONING AND IF YOU GO BEFORE THEM AND YOU'RE SO USED TO SAYING P AND Z, YOU GET SHAMED SAYING WE'RE JUST A PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THAT'S SO YOU CAN HAVE THEM COMBINED AND YOU HAVE THEM COMBINED AND THEN YOU HAVE A ZBA CALLED THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN 7.04 AND IT JUST BASICALLY SAYS COUNCILORS ALL APPOINTED ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW, PERIOD, DELETE ALL OF THE OTHER STUFF.
YOU DON'T NEED IT BECAUSE IT'S STATE LAW.
DOES THIS MEAN THAT SOMEBODY WHO WAS ON THE BOARD THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN A CITIZEN OF ANGLETON BECAUSE IF YOU HAD SIX POSITIONS AND FIVE OF THEM HAD TO BE INSIDE THE CITY? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STATE LAW SAYS, SO THIS ONE SPELLED IT OUT, SO I'M NOT SURE.
DOES THAT MAKE EVERY BOARD AND COMMISSION WE HAVE INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS? WHAT DO YOU MEAN FOR WHOEVER IS SITTING ON THEM NOW? I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ME.
YES, IF IT'S CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE PUTTING IN HERE, ARE THE OTHER ONES THE SAME WAY WHERE IT ALL HAS TO BE INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS? ANYTHING WITHIN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, YES, BUT I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING ME WHETHER OR NOT THE CONSISTENCY YOU HAVE NOW COMPLIES, AND I'M ASSUMING IT DOES.
[01:40:02]
I DON'T KNOW WHO'S ON YOUR BOARDS, BUT--THIS RELATES TO JUST THE ZONING BOARD, IT'S NOT REFERENCING TO LIKE A SENIOR COMMISSION, DON'T YOU OH NO, THAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE THIS IS YOUR ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, YOUR P&Z, THAT'S LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.SO YOUR OTHER COMMISSIONS, THAT'S YOUR POLICIES.
THAT'S WHY I WAS MAKING SURE. [INAUDIBLE] RIGHT, BUT THEY'RE A CORPORATION THAT HAS BYLAWS, SO YOU COULD PUT THAT IN YOUR BYLAWS.
I'M JUST WONDERING, IT'S JUST A QUESTION.
WAS IT, THOUGH? WAS IT JUST A QUESTION OR IS THERE SOMETHING BEHIND THAT? IT'S JUST A QUESTION.
I MEAN, IF YOU WERE IN A SITUATION WHERE YOU HAD PLENTY OF PEOPLE SIGNING UP FOR STUFF, THEN YOU MIGHT WANT TO ANALYZE, YOU KNOW, BUT YOU'RE NOT IN THAT POSITION RIGHT NOW AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, SO YOU'RE GRATEFUL TO HAVE RESIDENTS.
IF YOU WANTED TO CHANGE YOUR FISCAL YEAR FROM OCTOBER, TO SOME WEIRD THING LIKE MISSOURI CITY DOES IN MARCH, YOU COULD.
WHY YOU WOULD DO THAT, I HAVE NO IDEA.
IT'S FINE LIKE IT IS; LEAVE IT ALONE.
THE ONLY TIME YOU'D EVER WANT TO CHANGE FOR ME PERSONALLY WOULD BE IF YOU WERE MOVING IT TO A CALENDAR YEAR INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, GOING JANUARY TO DECEMBER JUST TO FOLLOW THE CALENDAR, BUT WITH ANGLETON CURRENT SITUATION OF THEIR FISCAL CALENDAR YEAR, I THINK THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
GIVE YOU ALL TIME TO LOOK AT THE BUDGET ON THAT LEARNING CURVE AND WE TOOK OUT ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE CHARTER SAID THAT YOUR BUDGET HAD TO BE.
IF YOU DON'T LIKE HOW THE BUDGET IS, TELL THE MANAGER ONCE MORE AROUND THE TRACK AND GET A BETTER BUDGET, BUT THEY'VE NEVER SEEN A MANAGER NOT PRODUCE A GOOD BUDGET AND THAT'S WHY WE PUT IN WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION THAT'S NECESSARY.
ALL THE OTHER ANTICIPATED REVENUE PROPOSED EXPENDITURES, THE NEXT SEVERAL PAGES IS NOT AS TIGHTLY CONTROLLED AND CHANGES BI-ANNUALLY BY THE TEXAS TAX CODE AND THE LEGISLATURE EVER TIGHTENING ROLE IN MUNICIPAL FINANCE.
SO YOU DON'T HAVE THE YOU NOW HAVE THE NO NEW TAX REVENUE RATE AS OPPOSED TO THE WHAT WAS IT, I FORGOT.
NOT ROLLBACK RATE--ROLLBACK RATE, WASN'T IT? THERE WAS THE ROLLBACK RATE AND THERE WAS THE DE MINIMIS, YEAH, ALL THAT'S YOU KNOW, IT CHANGES. IT'S SO FLUID RIGHT NOW.
YOU DON'T WANT IT IN YOUR CONSTITUTION.
SO YOU CAN SEE FROM PAGE 22, 23 TO 8.03 WE DELETED EVERYTHING.
IT'S ALREADY IN THE TAX CODE, IT'S ALREADY IN STATE LAW, IT'S PREEMPTED.
SO IT WAS JUST A MAJOR SLASH AND BURN.
ANY COMMENTS? BONNIE, AS A FORMER CITY COUNCIL MEMBER.
I THINK WE CAN. YEAH, IF YOU HAVE A COMMENT.
I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM YOU. ALWAYS GOOD TO HAVE FEEDBACK.
JUST SPEAK INTO THE MIC, SO THE PUBLIC CAN HEAR.
ARE WE TALKING SPECIFICALLY WHERE WE ARE NOW OR I GUESS WHERE I HAVE SOME HEARTBURN, IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT FROM AS STATED BY COUNCIL SO FAR HAS TO DO WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S RIGHT TO HIRE AND FIRE.
[01:45:02]
HAVING WORKED UNDER OVER YEARS, NOT ALWAYS AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, BUT I'VE WORKED UNDER AT LEAST FOUR CITY MANAGERS AND I CAN SAY THE THE WORST HEARTBURN HAD TO DO WITH COUNCIL GETTING IN THE WAY OF THE CITY MANAGER TRYING TO DO HIS OR HER JOB AND I DON'T CARE HOW YOU CUT IT. YOU HAVE WAYS TO FIRE THE CITY MANAGER.IF IT GETS THAT BAD, THEN THAT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT, BUT I DON'T THINK THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO BE IN THE DAY TO DAY HIRING AND FIRING OF PERSONNEL.
IF THEY'RE DISPLEASED WITH IT, YES.
TALK WITH YOUR CITY MANAGER, BUT TO MAKE IT A CARTE BLANCHE THING, NO.
I'VE SAT THROUGH SOME REALLY HORRIBLE CLOSED SESSION MEETINGS THAT SHOULD NEVER, EVER, EVER HAVE HAPPENED.
THEY WERE NOT FAIR TO ANY OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED.
SO MY TWO CENTS WORTH A LOT OF THE OTHER CHANGES, I THINK, ARE GREAT.
I WAS JUST TOTALLY IMPRESSED, TOTALLY IMPRESSED WHEN I FIRST READ THIS REPORT SO--WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT TERMS? ACTUALLY, I KIND OF LIKE THE IDEA THAT JOHN CAME UP WITH WITH THE EIGHT YEARS BECAUSE IN MY PARTICULAR CASE, IT WAS THE END TOWARD THE END OF THE SECOND TERM AND ESPECIALLY IN THE THIRD TERM, I WAS REALLY KIND OF GETTING MY WINGS GOING AND THEN I WAS TERM LIMITED.
I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE DONE TWO MORE YEARS AND THAT I WOULD HAVE FELT LIKE I HAD KIND OF CYCLED THROUGH SOME OF THE PROJECTS I ENDED UP HAVING TO LEAVE AS WE HAD FINALLY TURNED THE CORNER ON SEVERAL THINGS.
SO I DIDN'T GET TO PARTICIPATE AS WE WENT ON THROUGH.
AT FIRST, I THOUGHT I REALLY LIKED THE THREE YEAR TERMS AND I'VE EVEN PLAYED WITH THE IDEA OF DO YOU DO TERM LIMITS OR DON'T? THERE'S PROS AND CONS.
I THINK I WOULD HAVE TO STAY WITH THE TERM LIMITS.
MAYBE INCREASE IT. I DON'T THINK A FOUR YEAR TERM IS GOOD, I THINK THAT'S TOO LONG, BUT I THINK FOUR TWO YEAR TERMS IS A DOABLE THING BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY'S BEEN ON COUNCIL TOO LONG, CHANCES ARE PRETTY GOOD THAT SOMEBODY ELSE IS GOING TO RUN.
YOU WILL HAVE A CHANGE OF PERSONNEL.
IT IS FRUSTRATING TO HAVE TO DO POLITICKING EVERY TWO YEARS, SO TO SPEAK, IT TAKES UP A LOT OF TIME AND ENERGY WHEN YOU'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON WHAT'S GOING ON IN COUNCIL, BUT, EITHER THE FOUR TWO-YEAR TERMS OR TWO THREE-YEAR TERMS WOULD BE MY TOP CHOICES.
THANK YOU. YEAH, I APPRECIATE IT.
THANK YOU. [CHUCKLING] GOOD TO SEE YOU.
DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON A SECTION IN HERE FOR MEETING TIME LIMITS OR? I WOULD LOVE--I TIMED MYSELF BECAUSE I MADE A POINT I'M GOING TO BE HOME BY EIGHT O'CLOCK. [CHUCKLING] MEETINGS THAT GO BEYOND NINE O'CLOCK UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE NEEDS TO BE RESCHEDULED OR IT NEEDS TO BE TERMINATED.
I CAN'T IMAGINE ANY BUSINESS THAT NEEDS TO GO BEYOND THAT TIME.
SOME OF OUR BIGGEST ITEMS ARE LIKE UNTIL 11 O'CLOCK AT NIGHT.
MAYBE THE ITEMS ARE NOT BEING HANDLED WELL.
SO, MY TWO CENTS AND I'M GETTING OUT OF HERE BEFORE I SAY SOMETHING I SHOULDN'T.
[CHUCKLING] THANK YOU, BONNIE.
[INAUDIBLE] BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE POWER [INAUDIBLE] THE TAX CODE, WE JUST DIDN'T WANT THAT MISCONSTRUED BY SAYING WE WITHDRAW OUR POWER OF TAX, SO WE JUST LEFT IT.
THEN WE DELETED A BUNCH OF OTHER STUFF THAT WE ALREADY HAVE UNDER THE TEXAS TAX CODE LIKE TAX LIENS. OF COURSE YOU HAVE TAX LIENS, YOU COLLECT TAX LIENS.
TAX COLLECTION LAWYERS ARE NOT LOOKING AT YOUR CHARTER.
[INAUDIBLE] 8.04, WHICH WAS 8.28, THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS.
INSTEAD OF GOING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND REVENUE BONDS WHICH THE LEGISLATURE AGAIN IS SEVERELY RESTRICTED FOR CITIES.
WE JUST SAY YOU HAVE THE POWER TO ISSUE BONDS.
THAT'S ALL [INAUDIBLE]. WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO [INAUDIBLE].
[01:50:03]
WE DID CHECK WITH THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, [INAUDIBLE] POWER.[INAUDIBLE] SEE THAT CONTROL [INAUDIBLE] THE PRACTICAL EFFECT, THE [INAUDIBLE] CENTER POINT OR TEXAS, NEW MEXICO POWER [INAUDIBLE] TYPICALLY [INAUDIBLE] YOUR MIC, PEOPLE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
THEN WE DELETE 9.03 AND 9.04 DEFINING FRANCHISES, YOU CAN DO FRANCHISES.
THE STATE HAS MOSTLY PREEMPTED THOSE LIKE THE TELEPHONE COMPANY, THE ELECTRIC COMPANY, THE CABLE COMPANY, THE GAS COMPANY AND USING CITY RIGHT-OF-WAYS.
SO IT'S NOT A BIG MONEYMAKER ANYMORE, BUT IT'S OUT THERE.
WE LEFT RIGHT OF REGULATION IN, JUST RENUMBERED IT AND 9.05, IF YOU EVER OWN A UTILITY LIKE I THINK BRYAN OWNS A UTILITY AND COLLEGE STATION OWNS A UTILITY, BUT THEY DON'T TWIRL THE SAME WAY, SO THEY CAN'T SHARE POWER ON PURPOSE. IT'S WHAT I HEARD.
SO THEN TO GENERAL PROVISIONS [INAUDIBLE] OFFICE, WE KEPT THE SAME PUBLIC RECORDS AS WE ALL KNOW, IS NOW UNDER THE PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. DOESN'T NEED TO BE IN THE CHARTER.
NOTICE OF THE CLAIM, WE'D LIKE TO KEEP THAT IN THERE BECAUSE WE CAN PLAY HAVOC WITH PLAINTIFFS ATTORNEYS THAT ARE TRYING TO SUE THE CITY, THE REST OF THEM ARE RENUMBERED.
YOU HAVE A NEPOTISM, WHICH IS UNIQUE IN THE CHARTER.
TEXAS IS CRAZY STRICT ON NEPOTISM.
WE HAD TO TELL A COUNCIL MEMBER KNOW YOUR DAUGHTER CANNOT BE HIRED AS A SUMMER LIFEGUARD BECAUSE YOU'RE OWN COUNCIL, EVEN IF SHE DIDN'T VOTE, EVEN IF COUNCIL DIDN'T HIRE BECAUSE IT WAS THE CITY MANAGER HIRING HER.
TEXAS IS INSANELY CRAZY ON NO NEPOTISM, SO JUST FYI.
9 AND 10 WAS WHEN THE NEW CHARTER WAS ADOPTED, AS WAS 11.
10.07, JUST AS THE GENERAL LAWS APPLY TO OKAY.
10.08, WE ADDED NON SUBSTANTIVE REVISIONS ON REMEMBERING.
SO ONE CHARTER, THE LAWYER, NOT MY LAW FIRM, SENT THE DRAFT TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE, SO THE OFFICIAL CHARTER OF THE CITY HAS ALL THE EDITING IN IT.
SO IF WE HAD THIS NON SUBSTANTIVE REVISIONS, WE COULD JUST SIMPLY BY ORDINANCE CHANGE THE COMMENTS THAT ARE OUT THERE AND PUT A COLON IN WHERE A COLON SHOULD HAVE GONE INSTEAD OF WHATEVER. SO THAT'S THAT.
RENUMBERED SEVERABILITY INSTEAD THEY'RE CALLING IT SEPARABILITY.
USE THE CORRECT WORD AND HERE'S THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE AND MADE IT A REVIEW EVERY FIVE YEARS INSTEAD OF EVERY OTHER YEAR.
EVERY OTHER YEAR WAS A LITTLE MUCH.
10.16 WAS NOW OUT OF DATE BECAUSE THAT WAS FOR THE FIRST CHARTER AND WE DEFINED THE WORD CITY AND THEN THE TRANSITION ELECTIONS TO GO TO THREE YEAR TERMS, THIS WILL HAVE TO BE REWORKED IF YOU DO.
PERHAPS IT WILL HAVE TO BE REWORKED IF YOU DO TWO YEAR TERMS, IF YOU'RE CHANGING TERM LIMITS, BUT NOW THAT I'M THINKING OF IT, PROBABLY NOT SINCE YOU ALREADY HAVE TWO-YEAR TERMS AND THAT GENTLEMAN.
TALKED ABOUT THE THREE [INAUDIBLE] WOULD THAT CHANGE OR STAY THE SAME? YOU NEED TO REBALANCE, YOU MEAN.
YEAH. WHERE IT'S NOW, REFRESH MY MEMORY, HOW MANY ARE ELECTED IN ONE CYCLE? THREE. THREE IN ONE CYCLE AND HOW MANY IN THE OTHER? THREE.
MAYOR AND EVEN NUMBER OF SEATS IN ONE YEAR AND THE ODD NUMBERED SEATS ARE IN THE OTHER YEAR. I THINK THAT'S BALANCED.
[01:55:03]
YEP, I HAVE A QUESTION, WHAT ARE THE CONS OF THE CURRENT SYSTEM? THE CURRENT SYSTEM? YEAH, WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING IT, WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE WAY IT IS RIGHT NOW? RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE TWO YEAR TERMS AND YOU'RE MAXED OUT AFTER TWO, TWO-YEAR TERMS, FOUR YEARS. SO THE CHARTER COMMISSION DECIDED THREE YEAR TERMS AND YOU'D BE MAXED OUT AT TWO.I'M SORRY, THREE, SIX AND SIX.
SO I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE CHARTER COMMISSION'S POSITION WAS WHAT GRADY HAD SAID.
WHAT YOU SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE FIRST YEAR IS TRAINING, RIGHT? SO THEY THOUGHT THAT THE THREE YEARS WOULD BE BETTER.
SO WHAT THE CONS ARE, THAT WOULD BE JOHN AND JASON WOULD BE ABLE TO TELL YOU THAT.
SO I THINK SOME OF THE DISCUSSION TOO WAS THAT THEY FELT THAT EVENTUALLY WE SHOULD INCREASE THE [INAUDIBLE] THAT WOULD PROVIDE AGAIN POTENTIAL STABILITY.
THE GOVERNMENT AS A WHOLE, IF YOU HAD PEOPLE THAT WERE IN, LIKE YOU ALL SAID, EIGHT YEARS INSTEAD OF JUST SIX. WHY WOULDN'T YOU JUST ADD ANOTHER INSTEAD OF TWO PUT THREE TWO-YEAR ? . WELL, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, AND I'M JUST SPEAKING MY PERSPECTIVE, JUST FORTUNATE ENOUGH THAT WHEN I GOT ELECTED, THINGS STARTED TO BE MORE POTENTIAL FOR US AND SO IT WAS ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT EVEN LIKE TODAY, LET'S JUST SAY I HAD AN OPPONENT THIS LAST GO ROUND AND. I DIDN'T MAKE IT, SO LET'S SAY I ONLY DID TWO TWO-YEAR TERMS. WE STARTED MANY PROJECTS.
BASICALLY MY FIRST TO SECOND YEAR OF MY FIRST TERM.
IT HAS TAKEN ALMOST FIVE YEARS TO GET THOSE PROJECTS COMPLETE.
WELL, JUST THE BALL OFF THE GROUND, THE HOMES.
THAT'S ONE ASPECT OF IT, BUT THEN IT'S TAKEN A WHILE TO GET.
I STILL, EVEN THOUGH I WAS ON COUNCIL FOR MANY YEARS, I WAS STILL LEARNING THERE.
STILL, TODAY THERE ARE STILL THINGS I I'M STILL GOING.
HOW IS THAT? WHAT IS THAT? SOMEBODY TOLD ME THAT. SO I JUST SEE THAT IT'S BENEFICIAL TO KEEP SOMEBODY FOR THAT CONTINUITY BECAUSE WHAT IF? AND THEN HERE'S THE OTHER BALANCING PART.
YOU ELECT THREE PEOPLE EVERY YEAR.
WHAT IF AFTER THAT NEXT ELECTION, YOU GOT THREE NEW FOLKS AND NOW YOU'VE GOT THREE OTHER FOLKS? OR HEAVEN FORBID, WHAT IF SOMEBODY HAD TO STEP DOWN? THAT WAS NOT UP FOR ELECTION.
YOU CAN HAVE POTENTIALLY FOUR NEW FOLKS COMING ONTO COUNCIL WITH TWO VETERANS, THEN IT'S A HUGE LEARNING CURVE FOR EVERYBODY.
WHERE'S THE CITY GOING TO BE AT TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD? IF THAT WAS THE COURSE OF ACTION? YOU'RE NOW SLOWING DOWN, HITTING STUMBLING BLOCKS, TRAINING ON THE GROUND.
I MEAN, I COULD HAVE GONE EITHER WAY.
I MEAN, I SEE WHAT PEOPLE DON'T LIKE TERM LIMITS OR THEY DO LIKE TERM LIMITS, BUT TO ME, THE VOTERS ARE YOUR TERM LIMITS, THAT'S A, BUT B, JUST EVEN AS THE MAYOR TRYING TO GET THINGS PUSHED THROUGH--I DON'T WANT TO USE THE WORD PUSH--MAYBE MOVING FORWARD, IT TAKES A LOT OF TIME TO GET TRACTION.
IT TAKES TWO TO THREE YEARS TO GET THAT TRACTION.
IT TAKES FOUR TO FIVE YEARS TO BUILD A SUBDIVISION, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN FORTUNATE.
WE'VE BEEN BLESSED, BUT WHAT IF DURING MY REIGN I WASN'T HERE? WHERE WOULD THAT MOMENTUM GO? CERTAINLY, LOOK AT THESE, EVERYBODY ELSE AT THE TABLE AS WELL.
WE'RE ALL THINKING THAT, BUT IT'S SLOW GOVERNMENT IS A SLOW PROCESS.
I AM NOT FOR SITTING AT THIS TABLE FOR 12 OR 15 YEARS.
NO WAY. NOW COUNCIL AND THEN A COMBINATION OF MAYOR OFF AND ON, YEAH, THAT'S OK, BUT A CONSTANT 15 TO 16 YEARS? WOW, THAT'S A LOT.
THAT'S A LOT. I WON'T SPEAK FOR SUBDIVISIONS, BUT I WILL SPEAK FOR STREETS.
I STARTED THE STREET PROJECT IN 2016 AND WE'VE ONLY FINISHED TWO STREETS.
THAT JUST GOES TO SHOW YOU HOW LONG THIS TAKES BEING THAT RIDGECREST AND SOME OF THE OTHER ONES WILL BE DONE THIS YEAR.
I MEAN, THAT'S MOMENTUM FINALLY GOING, BUT THAT STARTED IN 2016, JUST FROM THE STUDIES AND EVERYONE GOING THROUGH IT AND THE RANKINGS AND FUNDING, IT TAKES FOREVER AND SO FOR ME, I'M NOT AGAINST TERM LIMITS.
I THINK TERM LIMITS ARE FINE, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD AT LEAST EXTEND THE TERM LIMITS A LITTLE BIT LONGER TO WHERE YOU HAVE A COUNCIL WHO IS KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CAN CAN KEEP
[02:00:02]
MOVING FORWARD, AND THEY CAN STILL HAVE THE VOTER CHECK ON THEM.BECAUSE IF YOU'RE NOT DOING YOUR JOB UP HERE, YOU WILL GET VOTED OUT, SOMEONE WILL RUN AGAINST YOU AND I THINK THAT'S TO ME, THAT'S REALLY THE LIMITATION, BUT I THINK KEEPING THE LIMITATION HARD FAST OF, SAY, YOU KNOW, EIGHT YEARS, I THINK IT FINE.
WHAT ARE THE PROS OF INSTEAD OF JUST ADDING TWO MORE YEARS TO EIGHT YEARS KEEPING THE CURRENT VOTING SYSTEM AND GOING TO THREE YEARS? TWO THREES? THREE THREES? WELL, THAT'S OBVIOUS, BUT I'M SAYING, WELL.
YOU'RE SAYING TWO THREES INSTEAD OF THREE TWOS? WELL, I'M SAYING INSTEAD OF CHANGING THE WHOLE SYSTEM, WE COULD JUST ADD YOU CAN HAVE TWO MORE YEARS, YOU HAVE EIGHT YEARS--BUT THEY'RE STILL THAT POTENTIAL IN TWO YEARS THAT YOU GET VOTED OUT, YOU COULD GET VOTED OUT, BUT YOU'RE SHOWING THE PUBLIC YOU ARE GOOD TO REMAIN THERE, BUT THERE'S STILL THAT OFF CHANCE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO REMEMBER IT'S STILL A POPULARITY CONTEST, YOU MAY STILL BE GREAT AT THIS TABLE, BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE POPULARITY OUT THERE, YOU MAY NOT BE AT THE TABLE.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? SO I WAS JUST THINKING, I THINK SOMEBODY SAID THAT HERE, EVEN THREE, THREE YEAR TERMS. NINE, YOU KNOW, IS THAT A LITTLE LONG? BUT AT LEAST I GET YOU THROUGH THE FIRST SIX.
AND IF YOU'RE NOT DOING A JOB IN SIX, THEN THAT VOTER, THEY'LL FIND YOU.
THEY'RE GOING TO COME GET YOU, YOU KNOW? WELL, I MEAN, LET'S JUST PUT IT THIS WAY, I WOULD CONSIDER EIGHT YEARS.
THE PROBLEM, POTENTIALLY WITH TWO YEAR TERM CYCLES.
WELL, THERE'S A NUMBER OF PROBLEMS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT YOUR FIRST TERM GETTING THROUGH IT, YOU'RE STILL WALKING IN THE DARK, RIGHT? YOU'RE STILL TRYING TO FIND YOUR WAY THROUGH IT.
YOU HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN THROUGH THE BUDGET CYCLE AT MOST, YOU'VE BY THE TIME YOU'RE SEEKING YOUR, I GUESS, YOUR SECOND TERM, YOU WILL YOU ALMOST COME RIGHT ON THE DOT--EXCUSE ME, WHEN YOU WALK INTO COUNCIL, YOU WALK RIGHT INTO BUDGET.
I MEAN, YOU GET ELECTED IN MAY AND BY END OF JUNE, JULY, YOU'RE STARTING HARD IN THE BUDGET. THAT'S CRAZY.
YOU'VE ONLY BEEN WITH THE CITY FOR SIX WEEKS.
YOU MAY HAVE MADE TWO MEETINGS, THREE TOPS AND NOW YOU'RE ALREADY VOTING ON A BUDGET.
THE OTHER POTENTIAL PROBLEM, SO FIRST TERM, YOU'RE BASICALLY IN THE DARK.
OK? DOING THE BEST YOU CAN, DOES IT MAKE YOU MEAN YOU'RE NOT MAKING EDUCATED OR INFORMED DECISION, YOU HAVE PEOPLE LIKE GRADY AND JUDITH AND PEOPLE LIKE THE CITY MANAGER HELPING YOU WALK THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
BUT AND THEN THE OTHER PROBLEM YOU HAVE IS IF THE CITY EVER BECAME AND WOULD ACTUALLY BE, YOU COULD MAKE AN ARGUMENT, GOOD THING, BUT IF PEOPLE WERE ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN ELECTIONS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOOD FOR YOU TO HAVE TO CAMPAIGN EVERY OTHER YEAR OF YOUR ELECTION TERM.
IF IT GOT TO THE POINT, WHERE IT WAS THAT COMPETITIVE, LIKE IF THERE WERE MULTIPLE PEOPLE RUNNING AGAINST INCUMBENTS, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY WITHIN EVERYBODY'S RIGHT TO DO THAT.
NOBODY'S, YOU KNOW, GRANTED, YOU KNOW, PERMANENT STATUS.
THEN, IF YOU'RE CAMPAIGNING, YOU'RE NOT FOCUSED ON, SAY, YOU'RE RUNNING THE CITY, YOU KNOW, THERE IS, YOU CAN'T THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH FINITE TIME.
I MEAN, JUST THIS. I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE YOUR PERSONAL JOB, YOU HAVE YOUR FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES, YOU'RE TRYING TO DO A GOOD JOB ON CITY COUNCIL.
OH, AND BY THE WAY, YOU NEED TO CAMPAIGN EVERY OTHER YEAR FOR EIGHT YEARS.
WHY WOULDN'T YOU JUST DO TWO FOUR-YEAR TERMS? WELL, THAT'S WHERE I'M KIND OF LEANING TOWARDS.
I'M GLAD YOU'RE SAYING THAT BECAUSE, AND I HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS BEFORE.
IT'S NOT LIKE THE FIRST TIME I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS, BUT LIKE, I MEAN, IF, LET'S SAY JASON SAYS, YOU KNOW, DOING A GOOD JOB OR IF YOU'RE SOMETHING TO [INAUDIBLE] THE VOTERS IN FOUR YEARS OR THREE AND A HALF YEARS BECAUSE YOUR NEXT TERM'S COMING UP, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO KNOW, RIGHT, DO I WANT TO PUT UP WITH TRAVIS TOWNSEND FOR ANOTHER FOUR MORE YEARS? NO, I DON'T.
I DON'T LIKE THE WAY HE VOTES ON THINGS.
OK, WHATEVER AND SO I THINK AFTER FOUR YEARS, YOU COULD EASILY DRAW AN OPPONENT, WHICH IS FINE. AGAIN, NOBODY'S PERMANENTLY STATIST UP HERE, BUT AT LEAST IT'S ONLY ONE CAMPAIGN YOU'RE GOING THROUGH, IT'S NOT EVERY OTHER YEAR AND FOUR YEARS GETS YOU THROUGH AT LEAST ALMOST THREE FULL BUDGET CYCLES OF YOU UNDERSTANDING MAKING AN EDUCATED VOTE ON.
PLUS, I MEAN, QUITE HONESTLY, IF THE PRESIDENT UNITED STATES CAN SIT FOR FOUR YEARS, I THINK SOMEBODY IN THE CITY OF ANGLETON CAN SIT FOR FOUR YEARS.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I JUST I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE TWO AND TWO.
I WANTED TO ASK THIS QUESTION, THOUGH.
WHO CAME UP WITH WAS IT A VOTER INITIATIVE? WAS IT A VOTE-DECIDED TERM LIMITS? WHERE DID THE TWO THREE OR THE THREE TWOS COME FROM?
[02:05:09]
ORIGINALLY? WAS THAT LIKE WAS THAT SENT TO THE VOTERS THEY VOTED UPON TERM LIMITS OR IT WAS ALWAYS BEEN TERM LIMITS? WHY DO I FEEL LIKE THAT CAME ABOUT IN THE 80S? OK, SO BUT NOBODY RECENTLY.I DON'T REMEMBER WHEN IT CAME ABOUT.
I REMEMBER VOTING FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THOSE SOCIAL IDEAS.
WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO BE A PERMANENT FIXTURE.
OK, I'M FINE WITH IT. I'M NOT AGAINST TERM LIMITS PER SE.
I MEAN, I CAN SEE ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST.
THE PROBLEM WITH LONGER TERM AND I HAVEN'T SEEN IT HERE, BUT I'VE SEEN IT IN OTHER CITIES. YOU GET A LOON ON COUNCIL, YOU'VE GOT FOUR YEARS OF THAT.
FOUR YEARS OF CRAZY OR THREE YEARS OF CRAZY.
THAT'S WHY I THOUGHT THREE THREES WOULD BE A LITTLE MORE PALATABLE BECAUSE THEN YOU KNOW, PERSON TO SIT ON COUNCIL, PUT IT THAT WAY, FOR THREE TO FOUR YEARS.
RIGHT AND I GET THAT AND I'LL SAY WITH THE THREE THREE IDEA, IT STAYS WITH OUR THREE YEAR THREE TERMS. OK, IT GETS THREE YEARS AND I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER FACTOR THAT COULD PLAY INTO THAT AND HER THIS DISCUSSION, BUT IF YOU WERE A COUNCIL MEMBER AND YOU DID TWO OF YOUR POTENTIALLY THREE TERMS, YOU MAY JUST DECIDE THAT'S ENOUGH.
I'VE DONE SIX YEARS, I WANT TO DO SOMETHING ELSE WITH MY TIME AND YOU MAY NOT GET PEOPLE FULFILL THEIR FULL NINE YEARS ANYWAY.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT BREAKDOWN WOULD BE, BUT IT PROBABLY MORE THAN NOT PEOPLE WOULD FULFILL IT. BUT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE 30, 40 PERCENT WHO'D SAY, YOU KNOW, TWO TERMS EQUALING SIX YEARS MAY BE ENOUGH FOR ME.
WHEN MY FIRST TWO YEARS WERE UP AND IT WAS TIME TO CAMPAIGN AGAIN, MY NIGHTLY PRAYER WAS PLEASE NOBODY TO RUN AGAINST ME.
[CHUCKLING] I ENJOY DOING THIS, BUT I DON'T WANT TO GO OUT AND PUT OUT CAMPAIGN SIGNS.
BLESS THEIR HEART. DO THAT STUFF, BUT I WAS, PERSONALLY, I CONSIDERED IT A VOLUNTARY THING, AND I STILL DO, AND TO KNOW THAT I WOULD ONLY HAVE TO CONSIDER DOING THAT EVERY THREE YEARS MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT MORE PALATABLE.
I THINK ALL WE'RE TALKING REALLY IS SEMANTICS OF WE'RE ALL, I THINK, IN AGREEMENT OF ADDING ONE EXTRA TERM.
JUST HOW DOES THAT TERM LOOK? IS IT THREE YEAR? IS IT A TWO YEAR OR DO WE JUST SAY WITH TWO TERMS AND EXTEND IT TO FOUR YEARS? I THINK TO ME, THREE THREES IS PROBABLY THE BEST WAY TO GO AND I SEE CAMPAIGNING IN THE FUTURE. IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH.
[INAUDIBLE] THINK THE DYNAMICS THAT WE'RE IN TODAY, JUST AS A COUNTRY, I THINK CAMPAIGNING IS A TOUGH ONE.
THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING BACK TO THE, WE'RE NOT THERE YET, BUT SOME YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SOME MUNICIPALITIES. OK.
PEOPLE ARE VERY, YOU KNOW, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CONTESTED RACES, BUT PEOPLE ARE VERY RESPECTFUL GENERALLY, OK? AND UM, BUT AS THE CITY GROWS, THE LESS PEOPLE ACTUALLY KNOW THEIR OPPONENTS, SO THEY'RE MORE LIKELY TO TO STIGMATIZE THEIR OPPONENT AS SOMETHING WHERE IT GETS A LITTLE MORE CONTENTIOUS AND THE OTHER THING ABOUT IT IS, IS LITERALLY IF YOU'RE RUNNING HAVING A CAMPAIGN EVERY OTHER YEAR THAT COULD KEEP CANDIDATES FROM GETTING INVOLVED BECAUSE WHO WANTS TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS, LIKE CECIL SAID, WELL, I'M SERIOUS, IF YOU'RE REALLY SINCERE ABOUT DOING YOUR JOB, YOU WANT TO KEEP IT, IF SOMEBODY IS WILLING TO TAKE YOU ON EVERY TWO YEARS, YOU'RE LIKE, MAN, I JUST DON'T KNOW IF IT'S WORTH THE TIME BALANCE BECAUSE SOMEBODY [INAUDIBLE] THERE.
IT'S ALSO TIME, BUT IT'S ALSO MONEY, YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT YOU'RE REALLY GOING TO CAMPAIGN; YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO BOTH.
SO UNLIKE GRADY, I'M [INAUDIBLE].
[CHUCKLING] I'M SKEPTICAL OF EVERYTHING.
MR. GLOOM AND [INAUDIBLE] OVER HERE.
SO FROM A CITY MANAGER PERSPECTIVE, I LIKE THE THREE YEAR TERMS FOR THE FACT THAT AGAIN, IN MY MIND, YOU GROW COUNCIL MEMBERS, IT GIVES THEM SOMETHING THAT THEY LIKE, JASON SAID, TRAVIS, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST IN.
[02:10:01]
LIKE CECIL SAID, IT TAKES A LITTLE BIT OF THE SORT OF REELECTION PRESSURE OFF, IF THERE IS GOING TO BE WHATEVER.I LIKED IT BECAUSE IT WAS SORT OF AGAIN FROM MY EXPERIENCE, IT WAS POTENTIALLY LIMITING THE CHANGE OR GROWING COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT FEEL THAT THEY'RE GROWING PROGRAMS AND THEY'RE ABLE TO SEE THINGS THROUGH VERSUS A BUDGET AND YOU'RE ON FIRST YEAR OR SECOND YEAR GET EXECUTES ON AND THEN YOU MAY DECIDE NOT TO RUN AGAIN OR MAYBE GET VOTED OFF OR WHATEVER, AND YOU'RE DONE. I DON'T THINK WE'RE GIVING, REMEMBER THEY'RE CITIZENS VOLUNTEERING THEIR TIME, GIVING THEM A SENSE OF ACCOMPLISHMENT AND REWARD FOR WHAT THEY'VE DONE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GETTING PAID TO DO IT.
SAME THING WITH PARKS OR ABLC OR WHATEVER.
I MEAN, WE'RE REWARDING THEM FOR THE FACT THAT THEY CAN ACCOMPLISH A PROJECT OR ACCOMPLISH STREETS ACCOMPLISH DEVELOPMENTS, ACCOMPLISH WHATEVER.
STARTED OFF OUR [INAUDIBLE] IN 2017 AND THAT'S WHENEVER LAKESIDE STARTED LIKE AROUND THE SAME TIME, AND IT'S JUST NOW BEING BUILT, FIVE YEARS LATER.
I HEAR THIS IN EVERY CITY: IT TAKES SO LONG TO GET SOMETHING DONE.
YEAH. THAT'S IN EVERY CITY, BUT WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE REAL' EASY.
I LIKE THE THREE AND THREE IDEA.
LET'S CREATE LONGER STABILITY, LET'S ALLOW FOLKS TO STAY ON LONGER.
HELPS DEAL WITH PROFESSIONAL GROWTH AS A COUNCILPERSON.
AND THEY HAVE TO WIN TWO ELECTION? RIGHT. YEAH.
SUBJECT TO RECALL [INAUDIBLE]. AND I'M REMINDED THIS GOES BEFORE THE POPULACE TO VOTE.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE TRYING TO CAMPAIGN TO KEEP OURSELVES IN OFFICE.
WE'RE ALL IN OPEN SESSION TONIGHT AND THEY CAN ALL HEAR US AND AND I THINK THAT'S STAND BY IT. ANOTHER THING TO THINK ABOUT IS WE'RE NOT DEVIATING TOO FAR FROM WHAT THE CURRENT STRUCTURE IS.
IF WE DO DECIDE A THREE THREE.
WELL, WE'RE ALREADY AT THREE TERMS. WE'RE TWO THREES, WE'RE GOING TO THREE THREE.
THAT'S IT. RIGHT, SO THREE, TWO YEAR TERMS IS THE WAY I SEE IT, AND MAYBE I'LL SAY IT THE OTHER WAY AROUND, BUT UM, AND NOW ALL YOU'RE DOING IS TO EACH TERM, AND I THINK ABOUT THEM AS TERMS AND NOT THE WHOLE, BUT EACH TERM, IT'S JUST ONE EXTRA YEAR, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, YES, IT ADDS UP TO A POTENTIALLY NINE YEARS AS OPPOSED TO SIX, BUT THE BIG THING IS THAT IT'S ONE TERM AT A TIME BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHAT YOU'RE ALL LOOKING AT ANYWAY.
IT'S ONE TERM AT A TIME. THAT'S ALL YOU'RE ASSURED.
YOU COULD EASILY LOSE, OR HONESTLY, PEOPLE JUST MAY MOVE ON WITH THEIR LIVES AND FOR WHATEVER REASONS BE DONE WITH IT.
I THINK THAT'LL BE MAYBE SOMETHING THAT THE VOTERS WOULD BE MORE LIKELY THAN, SAY, A TWO FOUR YEAR TERM. THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A BIGGER JUMP.
I'D RECOMMEND WE DO THE [INAUDIBLE] THEN WE CHANGE THE SCHEDULING SO THAT IT'S EVERY TWO YEARS. YEAH, [INAUDIBLE] SCHEDULE IS NOW.
RIGHT, I'M JUST CLARIFYING THAT SO IF WE GO TO THREE YEARS--SO WOULD THIS SCHEDULE KIND OF STAY IN LINE WITH THIS BECAUSE [INAUDIBLE] IT SHOULD.
THREE YEAR, IT WOULD MAINTAIN KIND OF THIS.
YEAH, BECAUSE AFTER 2030 EVERYBODY'S ON THE SCHEDULE AND YOU JUST GET ONE OTHER TERM ADDED TO IT. WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION IN RESPECT TO SOMETHING ELSE YOU TALKED ABOUT [INAUDIBLE] MEETING. I THINK I'M THE ONLY ONE THAT PROBABLY EVEN CARES ABOUT THAT, BUT RESIGNATION IN THE CASE WHERE YOU ARE SITTING ON THIS COUNCIL AND YOU'RE RUNNING FOR A POSITION. THE ONLY TIME THAT CAN HAPPEN IS IF IT COUNCIL MEMBER DECIDES TO RUN FOR MAYOR.
THAT'S CORRECT, RIGHT? RESIGN? IT'S A PAID POSITION THAT THEY'RE RUNNING FOR.
DEPENDS ON IN THEIR TERM, BECAUSE IT SAYS THAT FOLKS WOULD HAVE TO RESIGN IN THE MIDDLE OF YOUR TERM.
[INAUDIBLE] LESS THAN A YEAR, LET ME SEE IF I CAN FIND IT REAL FAST.
[02:15:03]
SO, IS THE MAYOR'S POSITION CONSIDERED A PAID POSITION THEN? [INAUDIBLE] WHY WOULD IT? I DON'T THINK WOULD BE A PROBLEM. [INAUDIBLE] I'LL GIVE YOU THE 50 DOLLARS.I'M SAYING, THROW THE MONEY OUT THE WINDOW.
THANK GOODNESS FOR TECHNOLOGY.
DOES A COUNCIL MEMBER AUTOMATICALLY RESIGN FROM THE OFFICE WHEN ANNOUNCING A CANDIDACY FOR ANOTHER ELECTED OFFICE.
THIS IS FROM TML? IT DEPENDS, OF COURSE.
ARTICLE 16, SECTION 65 OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, OFTEN CALLED RESIGN TO RUN PROVISION, APPLIES TO CITIES WITH COUNCIL TERMS OF MORE THAN TWO YEARS.
IN CITIES WITH TERMS OF MORE THAN TWO YEARS OF CITY OFFICIAL WHO HAS MORE THAN ONE YEAR AND 30 DAYS REMAINING IN THE CURRENT TERM AND WHO ANNOUNCES A CANDIDACY FOR ANOTHER OFFICE AUTOMATICALLY RESIGNS FROM THE FIRST OFFICE.
A HOME RULE CITY, THOUGH, MAY PROVIDE IN ITS CHARTER THAT A MAYOR OR COUNCIL MEMBER WHO BECOMES A CANDIDATE FOR ANOTHER OFFICE AUTOMATICALLY RESIGNS HIS OR HER CURRENT OFFICE, EVEN IF THE TERM OF OFFICE IS TWO YEARS.
WELL, YOU ALL DON'T HAVE THAT LATTER PART.
SO IF REMAINING IN YOUR TERM, YOU HAVE MORE THAN ONE YEAR AND 30 DAYS REMAINING, THEN YOU AUTOMATICALLY RESIGN.
IF YOU'RE WITHIN ONE YEAR AND 30 DAYS, SAY 29 DAYS, THEN YOU DO NOT AUTOMATICALLY RESIGN [INAUDIBLE] TO ANNOUNCE YOUR CANDIDACY, BUT YOU'D STILL HAVE TO BECAUSE THE DEADLINE FOR FILING DEADLINES IN FEBRUARY, THAT'S GOING TO BE--YOUR TERM IS GOING TO BE FOR OUR CITY COUNCILS ARE WHAT? MAY, THEY'RE UP IN MAY.
SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO RESIGN IN THAT CASE.
THE SELECTION'S NOT UNTIL MAY. I KNOW, BUT IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO NEXT YEAR.
NO, NO, IT WOULD BE ENFORCEABLE NEXT YEAR.
IF IT'S VOTED ON BY THE VOTERS THIS MAY, THEN IT'S ENFORCED NEXT YEAR WHEN WE'RE ALL UP AGAIN OR WHEN SOME OF US ARE UP AND I'M POSITION THREE.
SO I'M THE UNLUCKY ONE THAT GETS THE EVERY TWO.
WAIT, I THOUGHT--THAT'S A BIT BY DESIGN.
SO YEAH, I GOT THE VENMO MONEY, RIGHT? OH YEAH. OKAY, GOOD.
[CHUCKLING] BUT WE ALL CAN CHANGE FROM THREE TO WHATEVER NUMBER YOU WANT.
YEAH. SO DOES THAT, WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO CHANGE THAT BECAUSE OF THAT, THAT'S FOR SURE, BECAUSE I MEAN, THE ONLY THING ABOUT THE THREE YEARS, IT DOES COME WITH MORE STRINGS ATTACHED. RIGHT? I MEAN, THERE ARE MORE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS THAT COME INTO PLAY, WHICH IS THE MANDATORY ELECTION TO REPLACE IT, YOU KNOW, WHICH IN MAJORITY AS OPPOSED TO A PLURALITY SIMPLE PLURALITY.
SO I MEAN, IT DOES HAVE CONSEQUENCES THAT COULD POTENTIALLY.
POP UP FROM TIME TO TIME, IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN REGULARLY, BUT HOPEFULLY SOMEBODY WHO'S ON CITY COUNCIL IS COMMITTED TO FINISHING THAT TERM, YOU KNOW, BUT THINGS HAPPEN, LIFE HAPPENS. SO COUNCIL'S HAD A PRETTY GOOD TRACK RECORD OF PEOPLE FINISHING THEIR TERM.
HERE'S THE DEAL. UNDER TEXAS LAW.
JUST LIKE IN YOUR PHYSICS CLASS, IN HIGH SCHOOL, NATURE ABHORS A VACUUM.
TEXAS WILL NOT LET AN OFFICE GO UNFULFILLED.
SO EVEN THOUGH YOU AUTOMATICALLY RESIGNED, YOU'RE A HOLDOVER UNTIL THAT ELECTION COMES.
SO YOU COULD STILL VOTE AND STILL ATTEND COUNCIL MEETINGS, YOU WOULDN'T BE HOLDING THE POSITION, YOU'RE HOLDING IT AS A HOLDOVER UNTIL THE ELECTION BECAUSE THEY CAN'T APPOINT TO FILL THE VACANCY.
MAKES SENSE. SO YEAH, I RESIGN, BUT I'M A HOLDOVER AND WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD ONE IN HARDEN COUNTY, NOT HARDEN, LIBERTY, WHERE A WOMAN WHO HADN'T BEEN TO A COUNCIL MEETING IN MONTHS CAME IN JUST TO STICK IT TO THE MAYOR, I THINK, OR WHATEVER IT WAS, JUST BECAUSE SHE WAS STILL A HOLDOVER AND THEY HADN'T APPOINTED A REPLACEMENT.
I LIKE HER STYLE. [CHUCKLING] IT WORKS.
I MEAN, IT'S VERY RARE, RIGHT, WHERE YOU HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBER, WHO'S ON AN ODD CYCLE FROM THE MAYOR AND THEN THE MAYOR JUST HAPPENS TO BE TERM LIMITED.
[02:20:02]
THAT IS ODD, BUT HOLDOVERS HAPPEN EVERY DAY IN OUR PRACTICE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ANOTHER BLOG ARTICLE. TOP IN RESIGNATIONS AND YOU'LL SEE A CARTOON.YOU HAVE AN EMAIL LIST? YOU DO. I DO. EVERYBODY IS SUPPOSED TO BE ON IT.
YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE GETTING IT IN YOUR EMAIL.
YOU WANT TO VISIT THIS AGAIN? WHAT DO WE NEED TONIGHT? WHAT'S ON YOUR AGENDA? SAYS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION.
SO ARE WE? HAVE YOU CALLED YOUR GENERAL ELECTION YET? NO. WHEN ARE YOU CALLING IT? SO YOU'VE GOT UNTIL FEBRUARY.
I MEAN, TAKE ACTION TO CALL THE ELECTION, BUT YOU NEED TO, I GUESS YOU COULD CALL THE--I'D WAIT TILL FEBRUARY.
YES. CAN THIS WAIT UNTIL YOU CALL THE ELECTION TO HAVE IT IN THE FORMAT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO POST IT OR CAN IT BE LIKE A MONTH LATER OR SOMETHING OR WHAT? [INAUDIBLE] YOU WANT THE BALLOT LANGUAGE? YES, SO WHAT DOES YOUR , TRYING TO REMEMBER IF THE ELECTION OFFICIAL REQUIRED US TO HAVE A BALLOT LANGUAGE WHEN WE CALLED THE SPECIAL ELECTION FOR A CHARTER AMENDMENT.
I JUST DON'T RECALL. IF THEY DO, THEN WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE A BALLOT LANGUAGE FOR EACH ONE OF THESE. WE'RE HAVING A REGULAR COUNCIL ELECTION THIS MAY.
DOES THIS CONSTITUTE A SPECIAL ELECTION TO ADD ONTO THAT? YES. OKAY. HOPEFULLY, WE DON'T.
SO, I DIDN'T GO COUNT THE SECTIONS.
HOWEVER MANY SECTIONS THAT ARE TOUCHED AND LIKE ON THE RENUMBERING, YOU CAN LEAVE THOSE OFF IF YOU WANT TO TRY TO SHORTEN THE BALLOT AND IF THE PARK PASSES, THE NON-SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES JUST GO BACK IN AND CHANGE IT THEN.
TRY TO NOT OVERWHELM THE VOTERS.
I DON'T KNOW. UM, IN FEBRUARY, YOU CAN CALL A SPECIAL ELECTION, I WILL DOUBLE CHECK TO SEE IF YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE BALLOT LANGUAGE WHEN YOU CALL THE SPECIAL ELECTION DONE.
OTHERWISE, YOU'RE JUST GOING TO BE VERY BUSY.
THE SPECIAL ELECTION [INAUDIBLE] BE HELD EXACT NO LATER THAN 90 DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION OR SOMETHING? SEVENTY EIGHT SO YOU WOULD CALL IT WHEN YOU CALL THE I MEAN, YOU COULD DO FEBRUARY 16TH, BUT IF YOU HAVE IT THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY, YOU JUST CALL IT THEN.
SO YOU'LL HAVE AN ORDINANCE CALLING A GENERAL ELECTION, SAYING WHICH SEATS ARE UP AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE AN ORDINANCE CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS.
I CAN FIND THE ANSWER TOMORROW, BUT I'LL BE LISTING ALL THE BALLOT CHANGES.
WE COULD HAVE SOMETHING ON OUR WEBSITE [INAUDIBLE] WE'VE DONE PAMPHLETS ON AN EDUCATIONAL BASIS.
NOW, LAST YEAR, I DID THE CITY OF MEADOWS PLACE ACROSS 59 FROM STAFFORD.
WE CREATED A BRAND NEW, BEAUTIFUL CHARTER THAT WENT DOWN IN FLAMES.
BASED ON THEY DIDN'T THINK THEY WERE 5000.
YOU HAVE TO GET OUT THERE AND SELL IT.
IT'S JUST NOT GOING TO FLOAT OUT THERE AND NATURALLY WOW THEM WITH MY PENMANSHIP AND WELL, WE CAN'T SELL IT.
YOU HAVE TO INFORM. WELL, GET OUT THERE AND INFORM THEM, EDUCATE THEM, EDUCATE THEM UP.
AND WE'D HAVE A PAMPHLET TO SAY, YOU KNOW, STATE LAW, YOU KNOW, LIKE ELECTION CODE STUFF IN THERE. THIS IS PREEMPTED BY STATE LAW IN THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE, SEE WWW .STATEGOV.BLAH BLAH BLAH.
WE EDUCATED FOLKS ABOUT THAT [INAUDIBLE].
SO I MEAN, WHAT ABOUT I WANT TO GO BACK REAL QUICK ON THE CONSULTATION TO REMOVE AND
[02:25:03]
DIRECTORS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS.IS THERE ANYTHING THAT'S PROHIBITING THAT CONSULTATION TO BE AN EMAIL? NO.
SO, I MEAN, I DON'T SEE WHY WE WANT TO KEEP THAT LANGUAGE, I'M REMOVING THIS PERSON BECAUSE OF X; CALL ME, IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT, YOU KNOW? BUT CAN HE STILL DISCUSS IT AMONG ALL SIX OF US? SURE, HE'S NOT AN ELECTED OFFICIAL.
SO JUST LIKE I [INAUDIBLE] IS THE STATUS OF WHATEVER AND I HAVE MY REPLY TO ALL BUT PLEASE GIVE ME A CALL IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION AND I GET FIVE OR SIX PHONE CALLS [INAUDIBLE] AND I WON'T NECESSARILY PUT ALL THE DETAILS IN THERE BECAUSE [INAUDIBLE] SOME OTHER STUFF.
YOU GET THE GIST. [INAUDIBLE].
I'M NOT SAYING, I MEAN, I'M JUST SAYING THE WORD CONSULT DOESN'T DEFINE HOW THAT CONSULTATION HAS TO BE ADMINISTERED.
WE COULD RUN INTO EACH OTHER AT ONE OF OUR FINER ESTABLISHMENTS--AND SO, THAT'S A PERFORMANCE THING. IF I'M NOT PROVIDING YOU THE CONSULTING YOU NEED THEN YOU ALL SAY, HEY CHRIS, WE'RE NOT GETTING THE MEAT AND POTATOES AND WHATEVER, WE'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THAT SOME OTHER TIME [INAUDIBLE].
WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER ISSUE THAT I TOOK FROM TONIGHT? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I MEAN, WE'LL ALL COME BACK TO THAT, BUT THE OTHER ISSUE FROM TONIGHT WOULD BE THE MAJORITY VERSUS SUPER MAJORITY FOR THE REMOVAL OF YOUR CITY MANAGER AS WELL AS YOUR CITY ATTORNEY.
I THINK WE NEED SOME GUIDANCE ON WHERE WE'RE GOING THERE.
SO MOST OF THE STUFF IS NON-CONTROVERSIAL, WE CAN DRAFT THE ORDINANCE FOR THAT.
I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO ADD ONE FOR ORG CHART APPROVAL AND THEN YOU ALL CAN DEBATE THAT IN FEBRUARY. MAYBE WE CAN MAKE A NOTE OF SOME OF THE KEY THINGS WE JUST WANT TO REVISIT OR SOMETHING. TERM LIMITS, SUPER-MAJORITY SOMETHING AND THAT WAY WE CAN SAY, HEY, WE HAD DISCUSSION JANUARY THESE WERE THE FIVE OR SIX POINTS THAT YOU ALL WANTED TO REVISIT PRIOR TO FINALIZING.
SO I'M LOOKING AT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, AND THE ONLY PLACE IT MENTIONS THE ACTUAL TEXT IS WHEN YOU PUBLISHED THE NOTIFICATION FOR THE ELECTION.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE THAT TALKS ABOUT IT HERE, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LOCAL.
[INAUDIBLE] YEAH, I DON'T KNOW.
WHEN DO YOU PUBLISH THE NOTICE FOR THE ELECTION? I THINK WE CAN CALL THE ELECTION WITHOUT THAT INFORMATION AND THEN GO BACK AND [INAUDIBLE] IF WE NEED TO.
WE DID IT FOR ROSENBERG, I JUST DON'T REMEMBER IF WE DID IT AT THE SAME TIME OR NOT.
NO, WE DO THE SAME THING FOR HERE, WE CALL FOR THE ELECTION ON THREE POSITIONS, BUT NOT WHAT'S IN THE THREE LIKE WHO IS IT? [INAUDIBLE] BUT I THINK YOU JUST CALL IT FOR A CHARTER AMENDMENT AND THEN GO BACK AND [INAUDIBLE] I CAN GO LOOK AND SEE WHAT WE DID ON THE ROAD ELECTION BECAUSE THAT WAS A CHARTER AMENDMENT, BUT RIGHT, I'M THINKING, BRANDON, IN MY OFFICE DID ROSENBERG AND HE'LL KNOW OFF THE TOP OF HIS HEAD.
[INAUDIBLE] NONETHELESS, [INAUDIBLE] CORRECT.
AND THEN YOU CAN, MULL IT OVER AND SEE IF YOU WANT CONSULTATION OR SUPERMAJORITY OR THREE THREES. SO IF THERE'S OTHER THINGS YOU WANTED LIKE YOU'RE REREADING THIS AND YOU SAY, HEY, I WANT TO DISCUSS THIS AGAIN, PLEASE EMAIL FRANCIS [CHUCKLING] AND [INAUDIBLE] LIST OF FIVE OR SIX THINGS [INAUDIBLE].
SO THAT WOULD BE AT THE FEBRUARY 8TH MEETING.
OR WE CAN CALL A SPECIAL MEETING IF WE NEED TO IF THAT'S NOT ENOUGH TIME OR WE NEED AN EXTRA MEETING, WE STILL HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME BEFORE THE 16TH.
SORRY, I'M JUST SAYING. THE 16TH IS THE LAST DAY? YEAH, AND WE HAVE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON THE 8TH AND THE 22ND.
THAT'S WHY I SAID IT HAS TO BE FEBRUARY 8TH.
WE HAVE A MEETING NEXT WEEK AS WELL? OKAY, YEAH. YES.
OK, SO WE HAVE MARCHING ORDERS.
IT SOUNDS LIKE IT. ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? WE ARE TO THE PART OF THE MEETING THAT I KNOW EVERYBODY ENJOYS.
[02:30:01]
WAIT A MINUTE, CAN WE ON THE RECORD SAY HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO MICKEY SVOBODA? YES. JUST REAL QUICKLY.THANK YOU, MICKEY, FOR ATTENDING TONIGHT AND FOR YOUR BIRTHDAY.
WE APPRECIATE IT. HAPPY BIRTHDAY! NO PROBLEM. [CHUCKLING] CAN I SAY ONE OTHER THING? GO AHEAD, SIR. REAL QUICK.
OH YES AND THANK YOU, FRANCIS, AND THANK YOU TO ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION FOR TAKING THEIR TIME.
PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS WE CAN.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO SECOND GUESS YOU.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR COMMITMENT TO THE CITY BECAUSE WE KNOW, ESPECIALLY OF ANYBODY, WHAT IT TAKES TO GIVE UP YOUR TIME AND TO INVEST IT RIGHT HERE BACK IN ANGLETON.
SO SO IF ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS THAT'RE OUT THERE LISTENING, WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND YOUR EFFORTS, AND I'M VERY PLEASED AND I ECHO, I KNOW BONNIE WAS IN HERE EARLIER, I FEEL LIKE I'LL COME UP WITH THE FOUNDATION OF A GOOD CHARTER.
OBVIOUSLY, WE'LL BE PUT BACK TO THE VOICE OF THE VOTERS, BUT I JUST WANT TO THANK THOSE PEOPLE BECAUSE AGAIN, I DON'T WANT THEM TO GO UNAPPRECIATED BECAUSE AND THEIR NAMES ARE MICHELLE TOWNSEND, SCOTT MYERS, WILLIAM JACKSON AND JAIME MORENO AND RACHEL RITTER.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'RE TO THAT SPECIAL PART.
SO, MIKEY, YOU CAN GO CELEBRATE HIS BIRTHDAY.
THANK YOU, GUYS. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.