Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:03]

YEAH.

TODAY IS TUESDAY, FEBRUARY SESSION 2021.

IT'S 1132.

WE JUST FINISHED OUR SPECIAL CALL JOINT MEETING WORK SESSION WITH TRAVIS COUNTY FOR THE, UH, UPDATE THE, UH, FIRES.

AND DEMEC, UH, NOW WE'LL MOVE THROUGH, THROUGH OUR AGENDA

[B1. Briefing regarding petitions on potential charter amendments.]

COLLEAGUES.

I THINK WE'RE GOING TO START WITH THE BRIEFING ON THE, UH, POTENTIAL CHARTER AMENDMENTS WITH STAFF.

THAT'LL PROBABLY GET US CLOSE TO LUNCH.

UH, IF WE'RE ABLE TO, WE, WE RIDE DRY THE, TO PICK UP THE POOL ITEM EIGHT OR DIAPER, WHOLE CHAMBER FUNDING, AND THEN 32 AND 49.

UM, IF WE CAN OR NOT, UH, BUT THEN WE'LL BREAK FOR LUNCH AT ABOUT NOON.

UH, WE WILL, UH, COME BACK, UH, AFTER LUNCH, PROBABLY INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO GET THE REAL ESTATE PATTER AND THE, UH, MAY, 2021 ELECTION COME OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION AND DO THE POOL OF ITEMS. UM, AND I THINK YOU WERE LEAVING AT ABOUT THREE, BUT UTILIZE TO MAKE ON THOSE I'D I'D BE AMENABLE TO THAT.

WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE MIGHT GET TO IT IN TIME.

I JUST WANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO ITEM 49, UH, BEFORE THREE O'CLOCK SOUNDS GOOD.

WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAPPENS.

ALL RIGHT, MANAGER.

UH, WHY DON'T YOU, UH, BRING US WITH THE PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU, MARIN COUNCIL.

AND WE DO JUST HAVE ONE, A BRIEF WARNING, AND THAT IS ON THE PETITIONS FOR THE POTENTIAL CHARTER AMENDMENTS AND OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT HAS PREPARED A PRESENTATION.

AND SO I'M GOING TO FIRST TURN IT OVER TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO INTRODUCE HER TEAM.

AND THANK YOU, SPENCER.

UH, ASHLEY GLOSSER, WHO'S OUR DIVISION CHIEF FOR OPEN GOVERNMENT ETHICS AND COMPLIANCE GROUP IS GOING TO LEAD THE PRESENTATION AND IT WILL JUST BE THE HIGH LEVEL, UH, FACTUAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE VARIOUS PETITIONS SHE'S JOINED BY CAROLINE WEBSTER.

WHO'S ALSO AN ELECTION EXPERT AND THEN LEE CRAWFORD AND CHRIS COPPOLA WHO ARE BOTH IN OUR PUBLIC SAFETY, UH, GENERAL COUNSEL GROUP WILL BE THERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE, UH, THE FIREFIGHTER UNIONS PETITION REGARDING, UH, BARGAINING AND THE PETITION ABOUT THE SITTING IN LINE IN CERTAIN AREAS, CAMPING AND SOLICITATION.

SO IF ASHLEY IS THERE, SHE CAN TAKE IT AWAY.

GOOD MORNING.

THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THAT INTRODUCTION.

UM, I WILL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED AS ANNE NOTED.

WE ARE GOING TO DO A REVIEW OF THE PETITIONS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO LET'S SAY A CLERK'S OFFICE HAS RECEIVED THREE CITIZEN INITIATED PETITIONS.

I'M GOING TO PRESENT THESE IN THE ORDER IN WHICH WE RECEIVED THEM, WHICH IS WHAT IS HERE ON THE SLIDE.

THE FIRST TWO ARE BOTH PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENTS.

THE FIRST ONE IS FROM AUSTINITES FOR PROGRESSIVE REFORM AND THE OTHER ONE IS FROM THE AUSTINS FIRE FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION.

AND THEN THE THIRD ONE IS FROM SAVE AUSTIN NOW, BUT IT IS A POSITION UNDER OUR CITY CHARTER FOR INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND IT INITIATES AND ORNAMENTS.

THE FIRST TWO PETITIONS THE COURT HAS COMPLETED THE REVIEW OF, AND BOTH OF THOSE PETITIONS ARE VALID.

THE THIRD ONE FROM STEVE AUSTIN NOW IS STILL PENDING.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO JUMPING INTO THE FIRST PETITION THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY OSTOMATES FOR PROGRESSIVE REFORM, THE PURPOSE OF IT IS TO AMEND THE CHARTER IN SEVERAL WAYS.

THIS IS THE HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW.

THE FOUR B CHANGES THAT IT WOULD MAKE.

THE FIRST ONE WOULD BE TO CHANGE THE ELECTION DATE FOR ELECTING THE MAYOR.

THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE TO REQUIRE RANGE CHOICE, MOVING IN CITY ELECTIONS.

IF THAT'S ALLOWED BY STATE LAW, IT WOULD CHANGE THE FORM OF CITY GOVERNMENT FROM COUNCIL MANAGER, OUR CURRENT FORM TO MAYOR COUNCIL.

AND THEN IT WOULD REPLACE THE CITY'S CURRENT PUBLIC CAMPAIGN FINANCE PROGRAM WITH DEMOCRACY DOLLARS, WHICH ISN'T A DIFFERENT TYPE OF PUBLIC FINANCE PROGRAM.

SO THE FIRST ITEM HAS CHANGED IN THE MAYORAL ELECTION SCHEDULE.

THE CHARTER PETITION WOULD PROVIDE THAT THE NEW OR ELECTION WOULD THEN COINCIDE WITH THE GENERAL ELECTION IN NOVEMBER UNIVERSE FOR PRESIDENTIAL.

THIS WOULD BE A CHANGE FROM THE CURRENT MAYORAL SCHEDULE, WHICH ALEKS THE MAYOR DURING INVENTORIAL NOVEMBER GENERAL ELECTIONS AND PROVIDES A TRANSITION PERIOD SO THAT THE MAYOR ELECTED IN 2022 AND SERVE A TWO YEAR TERM AND THE MAYOR ELECTED IN 2024 AND LAYERS AFTER THAT WAS SERVED A FOUR YEAR TERM.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO MOVING TO THE NEXT PIECE OF THIS PETITION, WHICH HAS BE RANKED CHOICE VOTING, THE RANK CHOICE VOTING WOULD ALLOW VOTERS TO RANK UP TO FIVE CANDIDATES PER OFFICE IN AN ELECTION.

THE FIRST

[00:05:01]

PLACE BOATS WOULD BE COUNTED.

AND IF A CANDIDATE IN THAT FIRST ROUND RECEIVES A MAJORITY OF THE FIRST PLACE VOTE BY CANDIDATE IS THE WINNER.

IF THERE'S NOT A CANDIDATE THAT WINDS UP FOR THE FIRST ROUND, THE TABULATION WILL CONTINUE UNTIL THERE IS A WINNER RANK CHOICE VOTING WOULD, WOULD ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR A SUBSEQUENT RUNOFF AWARD.

SEAN, NEXT SLIDE.

SO A BRIEF EXPLANATION TO THE TABULATION ROUNDS.

IF THERE WASN'T A MAJORITY WINNER AFTER THE FIRST PLACE VOTES WERE COUNTED, THE CANDIDATE WITH A LOWER LEWIS AND VERBOSE WOULD BE ELIMINATED.

AND THEN THOSE BALLOTS THAT RANK THE ELIMINATED CANDIDATE FIRST WOULD BE RE TABULATED.

AND THOSE VOTERS SECOND PLACE CHOICE WOULD BE ADDED TO THE BOAT TOGGLES.

AND THAT WOULD CONTINUE UNTIL THERE WAS A WINNER.

SO AFTER THE SECOND ROUND VOTES WERE TABULATED, IF THERE WAS A MAJORITY WINNER, THE TABULATION WOULD STOP.

IF THERE WASN'T A BIT, NEXT SLIDE.

SO MOVING TO THE NEXT PART OF THIS PETITION, WHICH WOULD CHANGE THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT TO MARRY COUNCIL AS A HIGH LEVEL REVIEW, THIS CHANGE WOULD LEAD TO CITY COUNCIL CONTINUING TO BE AN 11 MEMBER BODY, BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE THE CREATION OF A NEW 11TH COUNCIL DISTRICT.

THE MAYOR WOULD BE ELECTED FROM THE CITY AT LARGE AND WOULD BECOME THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER.

THE MAYOR WOULD NO LONGER BE A MEMBER OF COUNCIL THAT WOULD HAVE VETO AUTHORITY OVER COUNCIL'S LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS.

AND THEN IN REGARDS TO THE POSITION OF CITY MANAGER, IT WOULD ELIMINATE THAT POSITION AND THAT PETITION LANGUAGE ENVISIONS THAT THIS WOULD BE EFFECTIVE AFTER THE 2022 ELECTION.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO CITY COUNCIL, AS I NOTED THE INDEPENDENT CITIZENS, REDISTRICTING COMMISSION WOULD REDRAW THE COUNCIL DISTRICTS.

THIS WILL CREATE A NEW 11TH COUNCIL DISTRICT.

UM, THANK YOU.

THAT'S THAT'S RIGHT.

IT WOULD CREATE A PRESIDENT OF COUNCIL POSITION.

THE PRESIDENT OF COUNCIL WOULD BE THE PERSON THAT WOULD PRESIDE OVER COUNCIL MEETINGS.

AND THEN OF COURSE, COUNCIL WOULD PASS ALL LEGISLATION, UM, THAT IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE MIRRORS.

EXCELLENT.

AND THEN THE MAYOR, THE MAYOR WOULD BECOME THE HEAD OF CITY GOVERNMENT FOR OFFICIAL AND CEREMONIAL PURPOSES AND A SIMILAR TO WHAT'S IN OUR CHARTER.

NOW FOR THE CITY MANAGER, UM, THE MAYOR WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ADMINISTERING THE CITY GOVERNMENT.

HE OR SHE WOULD HIRE AND DIRECT THE CITY WORKFORCE SUBJECTING CIVIL SERVICE RULES.

THEY WOULD PREPARE THE BUDGET AND SUBMIT THAT TO COUNCIL.

AND THEN ALSO PREPARE FINANCIAL REPORTS AND ADVISE COUNSEL ON THINGS.

FINANCES, NEXT SLIDE.

SO FOR ORDINANCES AND A MAYOR AND COUNCIL FORM OF GOVERNMENT COUNCIL, WE CONTINUE TO PASS ALL ORDINANCES.

HOWEVER MAYOR COULD APPROVE OR VETO THE ORDINANCE WITHIN 10 DAYS.

IF THERE'S NO ACTION, THEN THE ORDINANCE IS EFFECTIVE.

MEANING IF THE MAYOR NEITHER SIGNS IT WE'RE ACTUALLY TAKES AFFIRMATIVE ACTION TO MEET HIM.

AS THE ORDINANCE WOULD BECOME INFECTIVE COUNCIL MAY OVERRIDE THE VETO WITHIN 45 DAYS AFTER RECEIVING THE VETO AT THE FIRST MEETING, AFTER THE VETO VETO WOULD REQUIRE A TWO THIRDS VOTE OF COUNCIL, WHICH IS EIGHT MEMBERS, OR IT REQUIRE A THREE FORCE VOTES AND COUNCIL, WHICH HAS NINE MEMBERS.

IF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED A TWO THIRDS VOTE TO AGREE.

SO THIS IS JUST A CHART OVERVIEW OF WHAT CHANGED IN TERMS OF APPOINTMENTS.

THE CITY CLERK AND CITY AUDITOR WOULD NOT CHANGE.

CITY COUNCIL CURRENTLY APPOINTS THOSE POSITIONS.

AND WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULD CHANGE CURRENTLY THE CITY ATTORNEY APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER.

IT WOULD CHANGE TO THE MAYOR, APPOINTING THE CITY ATTORNEY WITH CONFIRMATION BY COUNCIL AND THE CITY ATTORNEY COULD BE REMOVED BY THE MAYOR OR BY A TWO THIRDS VOTE OF COUNCIL IN REGARDS TO THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, HUMAN RESOURCES, PLANNING, GROWTH MANAGEMENT, AND LAND DEVELOPMENT, ALL WHICH ARE SPECIFICALLY WE'LL SIT OUT IN OUR CHARTER, THE APPOINTMENT AUTHORITY, WHICH SHIFT FROM THE CITY MANAGER TO THE MAYOR, AS WELL AS OTHER DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS, WHICH WAS SHIFT FROM THE CITY MANAGER TO THE MAYOR.

NEXT SLIDE.

AND THEN ON THIS SLIDE, IT'S THE CONTINUATION OF APPOINTMENTS FOR MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES AND THE CLERK.

THE CURRENT APPOINTING AUTHORITY IS CITY COUNCIL THAT WOULD CHANGE TO THE MAYOR WITH A CONFIRMATION FROM THE COUNCIL, AND THEN THEY COULD BE REMOVED BY THE MAYOR.

ALSO WITH THE CONFIRMATION AND THE COUNCIL, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS 13 MEMBERS APPOINTED BY COUNCIL.

NOW THAT WOULD CHANGE TO 11 BEING APPOINTED BY COUNCIL AND TWO BY THE MAYOR AND IN THE MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION WOULD NOT

[00:10:01]

CHANGE THE CITY COUNCIL WILL CONTINUE TO APPOINT THOSE NUMBERS SINCE THAT BODY NEXT SLIDE.

SO THE LAST COMPONENT OF THIS PETITION IS DEMOCRACY DOLLARS.

SO THE PETITION WOULD REPEAL THE CURRENT FAIR CAMPAIGN FINANCE PROGRAM THAT THE CITY HAS.

AND WE REPLACED IT AGAIN WITH THIS KIND OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE PROGRAM, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THE CITY CLERK TO MAIL $25 BOUNCERS TO ALL REGISTERED VOTERS WITHIN THE CITY, BEFORE EVERY CITY GENERAL ELECTION, THE PARKWAY MAIL UP TO TWO VOUCHERS PER ELECTION FOR VOTER ONE FOR CITY COUNCIL.

AND THEN ONE FOR MAYOR, IF THOSE OFFICES ARE ON THE BALLOT AND THEN THE VOTERS CAN THEN CONTRIBUTE THOSE BACHELORS TO A CITY COUNCIL OR MAKE A ROW CANDIDATE OF THEIR CHOICE, IF THAT CANADA HAS CHOSEN TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM.

SO CANADA HAS BEEN RECEIVED DEMOCRACY, DOLLAR CONTRIBUTIONS, ONLY IF THEY AGREE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM, WHICH MEANS THEY HAVE TO QUALIFY BY RECEIVING AT LEAST TWO TIMES THE NUMBER OF SIGNATURES REQUIRED FOR A PLACE ON THE BALLOT AND BY RECEIVING AT LEAST 150 CONTRIBUTIONS.

AND THEY MUST ALSO AGREE TO ACCEPT CERTAIN CONDITIONS ON THEIR CAMPAIGN, WHICH ARE THAT THEY WILL NOT SOLICIT FUNDS ON BEHALF OF THE PAC POLITICAL PARTY OR AN INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE ENTITY.

THEY MUST ALSO AGREE TO PARTICIPATE IN THREE DEBATES AND AGREE ON LIMITS TO CONTRIBUTIONS.

THE AGGREGATE VOUCHER LIMITS WOULD BE 300,000 FOR MY ROLE RACE OR RUNOFF, AND THEN 75,000 FOR COUNCIL RACE OR RUN OFF THE LANGUAGE OF THE PETITION DOES NOT PROHIBIT CONTRIBUTIONS FROM, FROM SOURCES OTHER THAN THE VOUCHERS, BUT IT DOES PROVIDE THE LIMITS ON CONTRIBUTIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE CITY CHARTER IN CITY CODE WILL CONTINUE TO BE AN EFFECT IN WHAT THE BE CONFIDE WITH NEXT SLIDE.

SO NOW MOVING TO THE SECOND PETITION THAT WAS FILED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE IS THE PETITION FROM THE AUSTIN'S FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS PETITION WOULD BE TO ADD A NEW PROVISION TO THE CITY CHARTER, WHICH WOULD CREATE A BINDING ARBITRATION PROCESS FOR LABOR CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE CITY AND AFA.

IF NEGOTIATIONS WERE TO REACH AN IMPASSE, IT PERMITS EITHER THE CITY OR AFA TO DEMAND OUR CREATION.

IF CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS ARE NOT COMPLETED WITHIN 60 DAYS, IT WOULD PROVIDE THAT THE ARBITRATION WOULD OCCUR BEFORE A THREE MEMBER PANEL.

THE ARBITRATION PANEL WAS MAKING THE FINAL BINDING DECISION ON ALL ISSUES.

AND THEN FINALLY THE PETITION ESTABLISHES A TIMETABLE AND STANDARDS FOR DECISIONS.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

AND NOW MOVING INTO THE LAST PETITION THAT'S BEEN FILED WITH THE CLERK'S OFFICE, WHICH IS FROM SAY BOSTON.

NOW THE PURPOSE OF THIS PETITION WOULD BE TO REPLACE THE CURRENT CITY CODE PROVISIONS ON CAMPING, AGGRESSIVE COMPLICATION AND OBSTRUCTION IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA WITH CITY CODE PROVISIONS THAT WERE IN PLACE BEFORE PASSAGE OF THE JUNE, 2019 ORDINANCE ON CAMPING SOLICITATION AND SITTING OR LYING ON PUBLIC SIDEWALKS AND SLEEPING OUTDOORS.

THERE IS ONE EXCEPTION.

THE PETITION ORDINANCE EXPANDS THE AREA WE'RE SITTING LYING OR SLEEPING IS PROHIBITED.

AND WE HAVE A MAP AND A AMENDMENTS THAT WILL SHOWCASE OUT THE PETITION SPANS THAT AREA.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

SO IN REGARDS TO CAMPING THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IN THE PETITION, THE PROHIBIT CAMPAIGN IN PUBLIC AREAS, NOT DESIGNATED AS A CAMPING AREA BY THE AUSTIN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.

NEXT SLIDE.

AND THE PETITION, UM, WOULD ALSO PROHIBIT AGGRESSIVE SOLICITATION OR SOLICITATION IN CERTAIN AREAS OR DURING CERTAIN TIMES, WHICH WOULD BE ON BUSES OR BUS STATIONS FOR SIMILAR KINDS OF ROTATIONS FACILITIES WITHIN 25 FEET OF AN ATM OR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION AT A CROSSWALK NEAR SCHOOL ENTRANCES OR EXITS AT SIDEWALK CAFES OR PATIO AREAS AND BARS AND RESTAURANTS.

AND THEN FINALLY IT WOULD PROHIBIT SOLICITATION AND WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN FROM 7:00 PM TO 7:00 AM, NEXT SLIDE, AND THEN IT WOULD PROHIBIT SITTING OR LYING DOWN ON A RIGHT OF WAY FOR SLEEPING OUTDOORS AND AREAS OF DOWNTOWN AND AROUND THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS CAMPUS.

NEXT SLIDE.

AND THEN HERE IS A MAP THAT SHOWCASES, UM, THE ORDINANCE THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAD PRIOR TO JUNE, 2019 AS THE WHITE GRAY AREA, WHICH IS THE CURRENT RESTRICTED AREA THAT PETITION WOULD EXPAND THAT AREA TO INCLUDE THE DARK GRAY AREA, WHICH GOES UP AROUND THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS CAMPUS UP TO 38TH STREET AND THEN A LITTLE BIT FURTHER EAST.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE AROUND, UM, FISCHBACH, SANDY, AND THEN THAT AREA AROUND MAINER AND THAT SAME TIME.

[00:15:01]

SO THAT IS THE LAST SLIDE THAT WE HAVE IN THE PETITION.

SO, UM, THANK YOU.

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MAY HAVE COLLEAGUES, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THIS PRESENTATION ELLIS, THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I MIGHT HAVE MORE AFTER A FEW MORE PEOPLE HAVE A CHANCE TO ASK QUESTIONS, BUT AS FAR AS THE RANKED CHOICE VOTING, THERE IS A CLAUSE ABOUT, UM, THE STATE LAW SUPERSEDES THAT THAT WOULD APPLY CORRECT.

OR IT'S A PROVISION IN THE PETITION THAT SAYS THAT IT WOULD COME INTO EFFECT IF IT WAS ALLOWED BY STATE LAW, STATE LAW DOES NOT CURRENTLY ALLOW RANK CHOICE VOTING.

SO THERE WOULD BE NEED TO BE A CHANGE ON THE STATE LEVEL FOR THE THING ABOUT SOMEBODY ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THAT PARK, THE PETITION, IF IT WERE APPROVED BY THE VOTERS.

THANK YOU.

WELL, THANKS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, CANCER POOL.

SO ASHLEY, ON THAT PIECE WHERE THE STATE STATUTE DOESN'T PERMIT RANKED CHOICE VOTING, DO WE STILL, ARE WE STILL REQUIRED TO PUT THAT ON THE BALLOT OR IS THERE THE ABILITY NOT TO PUT IT ON BECAUSE IT VIOLATES STATE LAW IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE DUTY TO PUT IT TO THE VOTERS AND THE PETITION DOES HAVE THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT SAYS IF ALLOWED BY STATE LAW AND BY THE LANGUAGE ITSELF, IT SEEMS PETITIONER SEEMS TO HAVE ENVISIONED THAT WOULD ONLY COME INTO EFFECT ONCE IT WAS ALLOWED BY STATE LAW.

SO I THINK IT WOULD JUST KIND OF BE IDLE AS WHOLE IF, AND WHEN IT WAS ALLOWED BY STATE LAW, IF IT'S APPROVED BY VOTERS.

GOTCHA.

AND THEN ON THE, UM, ON THE MAILER OR VETO WITHIN 45 DAYS OF AN ORDINANCE PASSING OR A RESOLUTION PASSING, ARE WE STILL BOUND? UM, SO IT WOULD TAKE EIGHT OR NINE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO OVERCOME A MAYOR'S VETO WITHIN THE 45 DAYS, BUT THOSE EIGHT OR NINE PEOPLE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CONFER OR DISCUSS THEIR OBJECTIONS, RIGHT.

BECAUSE WE WOULD STILL BE LIMITED TO QUORUM RULES.

SO THAT ONLY FIVE PEOPLE AT THE MOST COULD EVER TALK ABOUT A PARTICULAR ACTION, CORRECT.

THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT WOULD STILL APPLY TO ANY KIND OF A SPECIALIST AMONG COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THANK YOU.

THANKS.

ANYTHING ELSE? UH, COUNCIL MEMBER TOHO AND COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN.

THANK YOU.

I ACTUALLY HAVE QUITE A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PETITIONS AND I'M NOT SURE WHETHER WE HAVE THE TIME ALLOCATED TODAY TO, TO HAVE THEM HAVE A FULL CONVERSATION ABOUT IT.

SO I, I HOPE THAT WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY AS WELL.

UM, A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS THOUGH, ABOUT THE, WHAT WOULD BE JUST A HUGE TRANSFORMATION OF OUR GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE TO, TO A STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM.

THIS IS A CONVERSATION THAT I REALLY WOULD NOT WANT TO UNDERTAKE WITHOUT REALLY EXTENSIVE COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS.

AND CLEARLY THAT HAS NOT TRANSPIRED IN THE WAY IT WOULD ORDINARILY ORDINARILY HAVE HAPPENED, UM, BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC.

AND, AND TYPICALLY THESE ARE CONVERSATIONS THAT THE CITY HAS A ROLE IN, AND WE USUALLY HAVE A CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION COMPRISED OF DIFFERENT VOLUNTEERS WHO REALLY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK AND TO HEAR PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF AND GET INFORMATION.

SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I'M REALLY ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THIS BEFORE THE COUNCIL MAKES A DETERMINATION OF, OF WHEN TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT.

UM, AND, AND HAS THAT, YOU KNOW, CAREFUL VOTE ABOUT WHAT THE BALLOT LANGUAGE IS.

SO I'VE BEEN, AS I UNDERSTAND YOUR PRESENTATION AND THE REALLY QUICK REVIEW I'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO OF THE, OF THE CHANGES, I MEAN, IN A WAY THIS CREATES, THIS CREATES A, I MEAN, ONE WAY TO THINK ABOUT THIS ROLE IS THAT IT'S THE CITY MANAGER, THE MAYOR IS, IS LIKE THE CITY MANAGER, BUT THAT HAS A VETO POWER OVER THE COUNCIL'S ACTIONS.

UM, BECAUSE THE CITY MANAGER, THE MAYOR WOULD, WOULD BE STANDING IN THE PLACE WHERE THE CITY MANAGER IS CURRENTLY IN TERMS OF, UM, MAKING DEPARTMENTAL APPOINTMENTS, BUT ALSO IMPLEMENTING SOME AND MANAGING AND MANAGING THE WHOLE OPERATION OF THE CITY.

ARE THERE ADDITIONAL, I MEAN, THAT'S QUITE A CHANGED ROLE FOR THE MAYOR AND, AND FOR AN ELECT THE POSITION IT'S IT'S, UM, IT CALLS ON A LOT OF QUALIFICATIONS THAT WOULD BE CRITICAL

[00:20:01]

TO DOING THAT JOB WELL.

AND IS THAT, DOES THIS, UM, DOES THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT INCLUDE ANY NEW QUALIFICATIONS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE RUNNING FOR MAYOR? AND CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE ARE? IF SO THE POTENTIAL LANGUAGE HAS NOT CHANGED.

THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR MAYOR WILL CONTINUE TO BE, UM, HAVING RESIDED WITHIN THE CITY IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS AND WITHIN THE STATE FOR THE LAST 12 MONTHS, I BELIEVE I CAN CHECK THAT, UM, THAT IT WOULD MAINTAIN THOSE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.

ARE THERE OTHER ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR THOSE WHO SERVE AS MAYOR? AND LET ME JUST SAY, I AM, IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME TO HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT, UM, OUR CURRENT MAYOR WHO HAS AN ENORMOUS ARRAY OF SO MAY WANT TO JUST MAKE THAT POINT.

UM, I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT, UM, THIS, THE CITY MANAGER, SPENCER CROCK, WHO ALSO HAS AN ENORMOUS ARRAY OF SKILLS.

I MEAN, I, AS WE HAVE THIS CONVERSATION IN HER COMMUNITY, I'M GOING TO ENCOURAGE THOSE WHO TALKED TO ME ABOUT IT, YOU KNOW, TO REALLY THINK ABOUT, ABOUT IT.

UM, NOT WITH SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS IN MIND, BUT, AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE, YOU'RE PLEASED WITH THE JOB THEY'RE DOING.

UM, BUT REALLY WITH, WITH AN EYE TOWARD HOW THIS COULD, HOW THIS WOULD COMPLETELY TRANSFORM OUR SYSTEM.

SO CURRENTLY, SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE MAYOR, THERE ARE NO NEW QUALIFICATIONS BEING ADDED IN, UM, FOR THIS STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM.

WHAT ARE THE CURRENT QUALIFICATIONS? ARE THERE OTHERS, OTHER THAN THE ONE YOU MENTIONED ABOUT RESIDENCY, ARE THERE PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, EXPERTISE OR PROFESSIONAL TRAINING OR BACKGROUND THAT THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR SOMEBODY WHO SEEKS TO RUN FOR THAT POSITION? THERE ARE NOT ANY OTHER INITIAL REQUIREMENTS.

I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO EVALUATE, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE PETITIONS THAT THIS WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE DOING ON THE BALLOT.

IF THIS WERE ADOPTED IN THE FUTURE, I THINK IT WOULD REQUIRE AN EVALUATION OF BOTH STATE LAW AND OTHER CITY CHARTERS AND SEE IF ADDITIONAL QUALIFICATIONS COULD BE ADDED BECAUSE THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, COMMONWELL CITIES HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY, UM, IN TERMS OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR CANDIDATES.

UM, BUT THERE ARE ALSO SOME STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS THERE.

THANK YOU.

I THINK I'LL SUBMIT THROUGH THE Q AND A, OR, OR MAYBE I CAN JUST SAY IT HERE ON THE DIAS.

I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO KNOW, UM, YOU KNOW, TO JUST HAVE ATTACHED TO THIS PRESENTATION, A LIST OF THE CURRENT QUALIFICATIONS FOR MAYOR AND SOME SENSE, UM, MAYBE FROM ONE OF THE PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS OF WHAT KINDS OF QUALIFICATIONS ARE WELL, WHAT KINDS OF QUALIFICATIONS ARE TYPICALLY REQUIRED FOR A CITY MANAGER OF A CITY THIS SIZE? AND PERHAPS ONE WAY TO GET AT THAT WOULD BE TO LOOK, LOOK BACK AT SOME OF THE JOB REQUIREMENTS THAT WE INCLUDED IN OUR JOB SEARCH FOR OUR CURRENT CITY MANAGER.

SINCE WE DID THAT ONE FAIRLY QUICKLY, FAIRLY RECENTLY, THAT WOULD JUST HELP I THINK, GET A SENSE OF, OF, UM, WHAT REQUIREMENTS ARE TYPICALLY ASKED FOR.

SO DOES THE MAYOR, UM, THE MAYOR, THE MAYORAL VETO WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE FROM HOW WE USUALLY, UM, IN THIS CITY BRING FORWARD ACTS OF LEGISLATION.

SO CURRENTLY THE COUNCIL CAN BRING FORWARD AN ORDINANCE OR A RESOLUTION.

UM, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IF THIS PASSES, THE MAYOR WOULD HAVE A VETO RIGHT OVER, OVER ORDINANCES, WOULD THE SAME BE TRUE OF RESOLUTIONS.

THERE IS NOT A VETO AUTHORITY PROVIDED IN THE PETITION OVER RESOLUTIONS, JUST ORDINANCES, BUT ANY RESIDENT, IS IT ANY ORDINANCE THAT'S BROUGHT FORWARD BY AF OR COUNCIL MEMBERS? NOT SURE IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, IT WOULD BE ANY ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BE ENACTED BY CITY COUNCIL.

UM, THE PETITION DOES INCLUDE AN, A NUMBER OF LOCATIONS, UM, THAT THE COUNCIL HAS TO ACT BY ORDINANCE.

UM, I'M NOT, IT SEEMS TO TAKE AWAY SOME, SOME ABILITY FOR A RESOLUTION.

IT SEEMS THAT COUNCIL WOULD BECOME A LEGISLATIVE BODY THAT WOULD ENACT BY ORDINANCE, UM, AND DIRECT THE MAYOR TO IMPLEMENT THE REQUIREMENTS.

THE ORDINANCE HAS PASSED BY COUNCIL AND THEN MAYOR HUSBAND OF AUTHORITY OVER THOSE ORDINANCES.

I'M SORRY.

I'M NOT COMPLETELY UNDERSTANDING THAT.

SO YOUR SISTER, JUSTIN, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S, AND IT MAY BE, IT MAY BE A POINT THAT, THAT I JUST NEED BLUR WITH YOU OFF LINE, BUT THE FACT, I MEAN, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT MOST, EVEN IF SOMETHING STARTS WITH A RESOLUTION THAT COMES BACK TO THE COUNCIL AS AN ORDINANCE.

AND SO IT WOULD BE AT THAT POINT, UM, THAT THE MAYOR WOULD HAVE A VETO ABILITY.

SO JUST FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, I'M ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE THINGS I'M DOING AS I EVALUATE THIS PROPOSAL IS TO GO BACK AND THINK

[00:25:01]

AGAIN, NOT JUST, UM, NOT JUST ABOUT THIS CURRENT COUNCIL, BUT HOW ON PREVIOUS IN PREVIOUS COUNCILS, UM, THE MAYOR HAS, FOR EXAMPLE, NOT SUPPORTED CHANGES TO THE CHAPTER THREE 80 AGREEMENTS THAT REQUIRED TO REQUIRE A LIVING WAGE.

AND SO IN THAT CASE, I BELIEVE THE COUNCIL WAS MAKING THOSE CHANGES TO THE CHAPTER THREE 80 AGREEMENT AND THE LIVING WAGE REQUIRING AN ADD IN A LIVING WAGE REQUIREMENT.

AND THAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IN ORDINANCE.

SO IF THE COUNCIL, UM, VOTED AFFIRMATIVELY FOR THAT, THE MAYOR WOULD THEN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VETO IT.

IS THAT CORRECT? IF THIS PASSES AND DOES THE MAYOR, I DIDN'T SEE THIS, BUT I MAY HAVE MISSED IT.

DOES THE MAYOR HAVE TO, ARE THERE ANY PARAMETERS UNDER WHICH THAT VETO CAN HAPPEN? UM, FOR EXAMPLE, DOES IT NEED TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR ILLEGAL OR TOO EXPENSIVE? ARE THERE ANY GUIDELINES FOR, FOR WHEN THAT MAYOR WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE, TO ISSUE A VETO? THE PETITION DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY LIMITATIONS, WHICH JUST PROVIDES A RIGHT TO THE MARRIAGE AND VETO AND ORDINANCE PASSED BY COUNCIL.

OKAY.

HE DOES HAVE TO PROVIDE HERE.

SHE DOES HAVE TO PROVIDE A REASON FOR THE VETO THAT THERE'S NOT A REQUIREMENT THAT THERE'LL BE CERTAIN PARAMETERS AND EXERCISING THE VETO.

OKAY.

SO IT, AND I THINK YOU SAID IT WITH THIS WORD, SO THERE ARE NO LIMITATIONS FOR THAT VETO, THE, THE MAYOR CAN IN ESSENCE VETO, ANY ACTION OF COUNCIL.

PERFECT.

THANK YOU.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

UM, I THANK YOU.

MY QUESTIONS RELATE TO THE, HOW THE BUDGET IS DONE UNDER THE STRONG MAYOR PROPOSAL.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS IF, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY THAT THE MAYOR PREPARES THE BUDGET, HOW DOES IT WORK FROM THERE AND LOOKING AT THE PETITION? AND IT LOOKS VERY SIMILAR TO HOW IT WOULD WORK TO CURRENTLY WITH THE CITY MANAGER, THE PETITION WITH AMEND, UM, THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE CITY MANAGER AND CHANGE THAT.

SO IT WOULD APPEAR THAT, YOU KNOW, GENERALLY IT'S KIND OF SUBSTITUTED CITY MANAGER IS SUBSTITUTED FOR MAYOR.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION ABOUT THAT, BUT IT JUST PROVIDES THAT THE MAYOR WOULD PREPARE THE BUDGET ANNUALLY SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS ADMINISTRATION AFTER ADOPTION.

HOW DOES IT WORK WITH REGARD TO VETOES AND HOW DOES IT WORK WITH REGARD TO THE DIRECTION? YOU KNOW, WHEN WE DO THE BUDGET, A LOT OF TIMES WE ALSO INCLUDE WITH THE BUDGET, WE ADOPT THE BUDGET, BUT WE ALSO INCLUDE, UM, DIRECTIONS SOMETIMES, UH, TO, TO, UM, STAFF, TO CITY STAFF ON HOW WE WANT THEM TO IMPLEMENT A PARTICULAR PROGRAM OR OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO, CAN YOU, IT MAY BE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY MANAGER, OR IF YOU, YOU, UM, UH, FROM LEGAL, I'M NOT SURE WHO THE APPROPRIATE WILL, YOU KNOW, I, WE CAN THINK ABOUT THAT AND GET BACK WITH YOU WITH AN ANSWER.

UM, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE SINCE THE MAYOR IS THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR AND EXECUTIVE IN THIS PETITION, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE AN EVALUATION OVER, UM, COUNCIL'S ABILITY TO INSTRUCT THE MAYOR AND HOW THAT WOULD WORK AT DIFFERENT TIMES.

SO I THINK IT'S PROBABLY A TOPIC BY TOPIC QUESTION THAT CITY LAW AND, AND ALL OF US WOULD LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, IF THIS, IF THE VOTERS WERE TO APPROVE THIS, UM, I WILL LEAVE THAT AT THAT IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANYTHING TO ADD, THAT IS SOMETHING I'D LIKE TO CHECK IN TO FURTHER.

OH, I'M SORRY.

UM, AND DID YOU, THANKS.

THANK YOU.

I WAS JUST GONNA, GONNA ADD COUNCIL MEMBER THAT THE, WHAT ASHLEY SAID IS CORRECT, ESSENTIALLY THE MANAGER'S REPLACED BY THE MAYOR.

SO EVERYTHING ABOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS WOULD BE SIMILAR TO HOW IT IS NOW, EXCEPT THAT IT WOULD BE THE MAYOR DOING IT RATHER THAN THE CITY MANAGER.

OKAY.

SO THE QUESTION THAT BRINGS UP THE QUESTION, IF THE MAYOR HAS VETO POWER OVER, OVER CERTAIN ITEMS, AND THERE'S A DIRECTION RELATED TO SOMETHING THAT THE MAYOR HAD VETOED OR MAY WANT TO BE TOW IN THE FUTURE, I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WORKS FROM A BUDGET.

I WILL, I WILL ASK MORE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, BUT I HAVE SOME, UM, CONCERNS ABOUT CONCERNS ABOUT THAT RELATED TO THE BUDGET.

I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION.

IS IT OKAY TO CONTINUE LAYER? WELL, LET ME JUST COME BACK TO IT.

LET'S GET SOME OTHER PEOPLE, BUT I THINK VANESSA, THANK YOU, MAYOR COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN.

I THINK YOU AND I ARE ON THE SAME WAVELENGTH, BECAUSE MY QUESTION IS AROUND THE BUDGET.

UM, IT'S THE BUDGET PROCESS?

[00:30:01]

THE TIMELINE IS THAT DETERMINED BY OUR CITY CHARTER OR DOES THE CITY MANAGER CURRENTLY, AND IN EFFECT, IF WE MOVED TO A STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM, WOULD THE MAYOR HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO CHANGE THE TIMING OF WHEN WE ADOPT THE BUDGET? THERE WERE SOME STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS ABOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS TO THOSE WOULD STILL BE IN PLACE.

UM, AFTER THAT, THEN IT WOULD BE WITHIN YOUR COURT.

SO POST CHANGES TO THE FISCAL YEAR.

SO THE BUDGET WOULD RUN ON THE SAME SCHEDULE, BUT IT IS NOW OKAY, BUT WOULD THE MAYOR THEN HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MOVE IT? CAUSE I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, CONSEQUENCES.

AND YOU KNOW, WHAT WE SEE THE STATE LEGISLATURE IS THAT THE GOVERNOR ISSUES HIS VETO AFTER THE LEGISLATURE GOBBLES OUT.

SO IN FACT, YOU DON'T HAVE QUORUM TO BE ABLE TO OVERRIDE THE GOVERNOR'S VETO.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT COUNSEL TAKES A BREAK IN JULY, UM, TO TEND TO OTHER DUTIES.

AND SO IN EFFECT, THE MAYOR COULD THEN STRATEGICALLY VETO ITEMS AT A TIME WHEN COUNCIL IS NOT MEETING.

SO I'M CURIOUS IF THE BUDGET, AND SO I'M THINKING IF THEY COULD MOVE THE BUDGET PROCESS TO A DIFFERENT TIMES.

I THINK WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT IN A MORE DETAILED WAY.

I, I WOULD JUST ECHO WHAT SANDRA SAID.

YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE BUDGET IS DICTATED BY DEADLINE AND ST.

LAW, WHICH THE MAYOR COULD NOT CHANGE.

UM, IF THERE WERE A STRONG MAYOR THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED, UM, GENERALLY IT WOULD OPERATE ON THE SAME KINDS OF WAS SCHEDULED.

WE HAVE NOW, YOU KNOW, HOW SPECIFIC THAT IS TO COUNSEL'S CALENDAR, UM, AND HOW THAT WOULD WORK.

AND WE'D HAVE TO THINK ABOUT AND GET BACK TO YOU.

OKAY.

AND JUST SO I'M SUPER CLEAR, THE STATE WHEN MUNICIPALITIES ADOPT THEIR BUDGET, THAT IS GOVERNED BY STATE LAW, IS THAT CORRECT? THERE ARE TIMEFRAMES THAT WE HAVE TO MEET TO OPERATE WITHIN STATE LAW.

SPECIFICALLY, IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE OUR TAX RATE IS GOING TO BE THAT WHERE WE HAVE TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO THE CONTROLLER.

SO I WILL, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THERE'S A SPECIFIC DAY THAT WE HAVE TO ADOPT THE BUDGET THAT WE HAVE TO RUN ON A CERTAIN CYCLE TO MEET ALL OF THOSE DEADLINES FOR ST.

MODEL BY INFORMING THE OTHER THINGS.

WE HAD A TAX RATE ELECTION IN NOVEMBER, AND WE HAD TO OF COURSE HAVE THE BUDGET DONE SO THAT WE COULD CALL THIS TAX REDUCTION FOR NOVEMBER.

SO TO MEET CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS, THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW A CERTAIN TIME TO SCHEDULE.

GOTCHA.

THANK YOU.

OKAY, AWESOME.

THANK YOU.

I HAVE, UM, SEVERAL QUESTIONS, BUT FIRST I WANTED TO JUST CLARIFY, I WASN'T SURE IF YOU, YOU CLOSED THE LOOP, CAN THE MAYOR OF EACH OF THE BUDGET, THERE'S NO LIMIT IN THE PETITION ON THE MAYOR BEING ABLE TO BE ABLE TO BUDGET.

SO I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT.

IT IS CONSIDERED AN ORDINANCE UNDER THAT.

AND SO IF THE COUNCIL HAD HOPED TO GO TO THE VOTERS WITH A TAX RATE ELECTION, WHICH IS TIME SENSITIVE AND THE MAYOR VETOED, IT WOULD THEN VITO ALSO THE ACTION TO GO TO THE TAX RATE ELECTION, OR IS THAT NOT AN ORDINANCE? REPEAT THE LAST PART OF YOUR QUESTION.

SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, GIVEN THE QUESTIONS THAT A COUNCIL MEMBER FONTAS ASKED, IF THERE'S A WAY GIVEN THAT WE HAVE TO CALL AN ELECTION FOR A TAX RATE ELECTION, WHERE THE MAYOR TO VETO THE BUDGET AND THE BUDGET CALLED FOR A TAX RATE ELECTION, I'M NOT ADVOCATING, I'M JUST TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THE DIFFERENT PIECES.

WOULD THE MAYOR, WOULD SHE BE ABLE TO, UM, BE TOW THE TAX RATE ELECTION AND THE BUDGET EFFECTIVELY BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DO IT WITHIN, YOU KNOW, NORMALLY WE'D BE DOING THAT BUDGET DECISION WITHIN A COUPLE OF DAYS FROM WHEN WE'D HAVE TO CALL A DOC'S RATE ELECTION.

I THINK THAT'S ALSO A QUESTION THAT WE'D HAVE TO THINK ABOUT AND GET BACK TO YOU AND REQUIRE SOME LEGAL ANALYSIS.

UM, WE, THE FIRESIDE, LET ME KNOW THAT THE BUDGET CALENDAR IS SET BY STATE LAW.

SO I THINK THAT KIND OF ECHOES WHAT I JUST SAID, THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN LIKE END POINTS THAT WE HAVE TO MEET, UM, TO BE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW IN TERMS OF ORDERING THE ELECTION.

YOU KNOW, WE ALSO HAVE TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW IN TERMS OF THE DEADLINE TO ORDER AN ELECTION.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT IF WE SAY GIVEN, WE HAVE THAT DEADLINE AND WE DON'T PASS THE BUDGET UNTIL SAY A WEEK BEFORE THAT DEADLINE, THEN THE MAYOR, IF SHE WERE TO VETO THAT, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE MAYOR TO, UM, PREVENT US FROM CHOOSING TO PROVIDE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO THE VOTERS BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T DO IT WITHIN, YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO CALL AN ELECTION.

YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO CALL, EVEN CALL A MEETING TO OVERRIDE THE VETO WITHIN A TIMEFRAME.

W I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, RIGHT? CAUSE YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE NOTICE UNDER OPEN MEETINGS ACT TO, TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

SO,

[00:35:01]

OKAY.

THE, THE ANSWER TO THOSE QUESTIONS, COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER WOULD BE YOU'RE CORRECT THERE THAT VETO COULD PREVENT THE ELECTION.

I THINK THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO BUILD IN TIMEFRAMES, UM, TO PLAN FOR ANY KIND OF CONSEQUENCE THAT COULD HAPPEN.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

AND THEN UNDER CURRENT LAW STATE LAW, UM, CONSTRAINTS, THE ABILITY OF THE CITY MANAGER WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN APPOINTMENTS, PARTICULARLY THE CHIEF OF POLICE.

CAN YOU DETAIL WHAT THOSE CONSTRAINTS ARE FROM STATE LAW WITH RESPECT TO THE CHIEF POLICE? UM, AND, UM, WOULD ANY OF THAT CHANGE BY MOVING TO A STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM? I WILL DEPLETE CRAWFORD.

YES.

GO AHEAD.

YEAH.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL LEE CRAWFORD HERE, UH, IN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, STATE LAW PROVIDES THAT THE CHIEF OF POLICE ACTUALLY SERVES IN THE ROLE OF POLICE CHIEF ACT THE PLEASURE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, WHO IS CURRENTLY THE CITY MANAGER AND WHO WOULD BE THE MAYOR.

IF THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT WERE ADOPTED, IF THE CHIEF OF POLICE IS REMOVED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND THE CHIEF OF POLICE UNDER THE STATE LAW HAS THE RIGHT TO RETURN TO THE SAME CLASSIFICATION, TYPICALLY ASSISTANT CHIEF THAT MAYBE NOT THAT THE CHIEF OF POLICE HELD IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BEFORE HE OR SHE WAS APPOINTED POLICE CHIEF OR ALTERNATIVELY, IF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE WISH TO SORT OF COMPLETELY TERMINATE THE EMPLOYMENT OF THE POLICE CHIEF AS A MEMBER OF THE CITY WORKFORCE.

IN OTHER WORDS, NOT RETURNED TO THE POSITION THAT YOU CAME FROM, BUT EXIT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THEN THE CHIEF OF POLICE HAS THE RIGHT UNDER STATE LAW TO GO THROUGH A CIVIL SERVICE HEARING JUST AS A REGULAR POLICE OFFICER WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL A DISCIPLINARY ACTION THROUGH THE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM.

SO THAT'S THE CURRENT LAW AND NOTHING IN THIS PETITION WOULD AFFECT THAT BECAUSE THAT'S A MATTER OF STATE LAW.

THAT'S NOT CONTROLLED BY OUR CHARTER.

THE ONLY THING THAT THIS PETITION WOULD DO WOULD BE TO CHANGE THE ROLE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE FROM THE CITY MANAGER TO THE MAYOR.

OKAY.

IF YOU COULD, UM, PROVIDE ME AND IT'S FOLLOW UP THE, THE, UM, ILLEGAL EASE AROUND THAT, THE STATUTE THAT WOULD BE, THAT'D BE GREAT.

UM, SO, UM, THERE'S ANOTHER PART OF THIS.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE JUST DOING ONE SECTION OF THE INITIATIVES IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OTHERS, BUT THERE'S ONE THAT, TO ME SEEMS INTIMATELY LINKED, WHICH IS THE SWITCH, THE SWITCH TO, UM, THE PRESIDENTIAL YEARS FOR THE MAYORAL ELECTION.

UM, AS I READ IT, THERE WAS NOTHING IN HERE THAT DETERMINES WHETHER OR NOT THE MAYOR SHOULD SHE CHOOSE TO, COULD PURSUE THREE TERMS OR NOT.

SO WHEN WE SWITCHED TO TEN ONE, WE MADE IT SO THAT, UM, THE FOLKS WHO GOT THE TWO YEAR SHORT STRAW WERE ABLE TO DO 10 YEARS, IS THAT IN OPERATION FOR, UM, THE MAYORAL PROPOSAL HERE, THE PETITION DOESN'T CONTAIN LANGUAGE SIMILAR TO THE TRANSITION TO TEN ONE THAT HAD THE, YOU KNOW, FROM THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT DREW THE TWO YEAR TERM COULD PURSUE ANOTHER HIPPER SUE, ANOTHER TERM THAT'S NOT IN THIS POSITION.

SO WOULD THERE STILL BE A TWO YEAR, TWO TERM TERM LIMIT? I THINK THAT WOULD ALSO BE SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO THINK ABOUT.

THEY DO CARRY OVER THE TERM LIMIT, UM, LANGUAGE THAT PROVIDES THAT THEY CANNOT SERVE MORE THAN TWO TERMS WITHOUT HAVING THE PETITION.

UM, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT TO DETERMINE WHETHER THAT LANGUAGE WOULD APPLY TO THE TWO YEAR TERM PLUS A FOUR YEAR TERM, OR IF IT WOULD BE TO YOUR TERM PLUS TWO, FOUR YEAR TERMS. OKAY.

SO, I MEAN, I'M STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT, GIVEN A CONTEXT OF TERM LIMITS, WHAT YOUR ACTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY IS WITH A MAYOR IN HIS OR HER SECOND TERM, WHEN, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S PRETTY CHALLENGING TO GET THOSE PETITIONS.

UM, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THERE'S ANY ACCOUNTABILITY, UM, IN THERE, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE AMOUNT THAT WE WOULD BE, UM, DELEGATING.

AND THEN CAN YOU TELL US UNDER A TEN ONE WHEN TEN ONE WAS INSTITUTED, UM, A CHOICE WAS SPECIFICALLY MADE TO PUT THE MAYORAL UP A NON-PRESIDENTIAL YEARS.

I BELIEVE THAT WAS SO THAT THERE WOULD BE HIGHER TURNOUT FOR THE COUNCIL ELECTIONS THAT WERE ON THE NON, UM, PRESIDENTIAL YEARS.

AND I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED THAT THE WAY THIS SHAKES OUT, THEN YOU HAVE COUNCIL ELECTIONS FOR FIVE OFFICES THAT WILL ALWAYS BE WHERE THERE'S LESS TURNOUT.

WHEREAS THE OTHER ONES WILL HAVE A WHOLE LOT MORE TURNOUT AND IT KIND OF, UM, IT'S NOT A VERY LEVEL PLAYING FIELD ACROSS THE 10 OR 11.

SO CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT UNDER TEN ONE, WHY THE CHOICE WAS MADE? AND THAT MAY BE MORE A QUESTION.

I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN WAS ON THAT COMMITTEE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A QUESTION FOR LEGAL OR FOR COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN.

[00:40:03]

I WILL DEFER TO OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN HAS SOMETHING TO ADD.

UM, I WAS NOT HERE DURING THE TEN ONE TRANSITION PROCESS, SO I CAN GIVE YOU A, WHAT WAS CONTAINED IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT I, I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE ALL THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION.

WELL, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER ALL I CAN REALLY, UH, AT THE MOMENT IS THAT THE INTENT, UM, OF THE COMMISSION AND THE INTENT OF TEN ONE.

UM, AND IN FACT, BOTH THE PROVISIONS THAT WERE PUT ON BY THE COUNCIL WAS TO ALLOW FOR GREATER REPRESENTATION AND TO TRY TO DO WHAT WAS POSSIBLE TO ALLOW FOR, UM, GREATER REPRESENTATION ACROSS THE WHOLE CITY, WHICH IS THE BASIC POINT, UH, OF TEN ONE.

OKAY.

UH, CAN YOU HEAR ME, MAYOR? YES, GO AHEAD.

I WANT TO KNOW, UH, IF, IF, UH, IF WE HAVE THE ELECTION HERE IN MAY AND IT PASSES, WE'LL BE THE FIRST ELECTION FOR THE NEW MIRROR, WILL, WOULD IT BE UNDER A STRONG MIRROR THE FIRST TWO YEARS, OR DO YOU NEED TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS OF TRYING TO DETERMINE WHEN WOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED? THE WAY THE PETITION IS LAID OUT IS, UM, THE SELECTION WAS HELD IN, MAY IT ENVISIONS THAT THE REDISTRICTING COMMISSION WOULD START WORK ON REDRAWING THE CITY TO INCLUDE 11 COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE STRIKES.

AND THEN THE STRONG MAYOR WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED AFTER THE NOVEMBER 22 ELECTION.

SO THAT FOLLOWING JANUARY, WHEN THE MAYOR WAS SWORN IN, SO A STRONG MAYOR WAS STARTED IN JANUARY OF 2023 ON THIS TOPIC BEFORE WE BREAK, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOLLOWING UP ON COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHENS, UM, COMMENTS ABOUT THE BUDGET QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BUDGET.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BECAUSE WE ADOPT THE BUDGET.

THE COUNCIL ADOPTS THE BUDGET AS AN ORDINANCE.

ANY CHANGES TO THAT BUDGET WOULD ALSO BE SUBJECT TO A MAYORAL VETO.

AND AGAIN, AS I'M TRYING TO THINK THROUGH, YOU KNOW, WHEN A MAYOR HAS BEEN IN A DIFFERENT POSITION FROM THE COUNCIL, UM, REFLECTING BACK ON THE YEAR THAT THE YEAR THAT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BONDS FAILED AND SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS WEREN'T GOING FORWARD, AND THERE WAS A MID-YEAR BUDGET AMENDMENT BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME SURPLUS FUNDING AND $10 MILLION WAS ALLOCATED TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO THAT THOSE PROJECTS THAT HAD THOUGHT THEY WERE GOING TO GET BOND FUNDS WERE ABLE TO CONTINUE.

UM, AND THOSE WERE SUPPORTED BY THE COUNCIL, BUT NOT FAIR.

SO THAT, BECAUSE THAT IS HAPPENING, THAT KIND OF A BUDGET AMENDMENT, UM, EITHER DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS OR DURING A MID-YEAR BUDGET PROCESS IS HAPPENING VIA AN ORDINANCE, I WOULD ASSUME THOSE KINDS OF THOSE KINDS OF CHANGES ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO MAYORAL VETO.

IS THAT CORRECT? I DON'T SEE ANY LANGUAGE IN THE PETITION THAT WOULD EXCLUDE ANY TYPE OF ORDINANCE TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE VETO AUTHORITY.

UM, AS I SAID BEFORE, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK, UM, IF THE VOTERS WERE TO APPROVE THIS MEASURE TO IMPLEMENT STRONG MAYOR OF WE'VE BEEN BEING NUMBER OF PROCESSES THAT THE LAW DEPARTMENT AND OTHER CITY EMPLOYEES WOULD LOOK AT TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY HOW THAT WOULD WORK.

UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN ANSWER EVERY QUESTION, BUT THERE'S CERTAINLY NOT ANYTHING IN THE PETITION THAT LIMITS THE VETO AUTHORITY TO A SPECIFIC KIND OF ORDINANCE, BECAUSE YOU WERE SAYING IN THE EXCHANGE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN, THAT THE MAYOR PRESENTS THE BUDGET.

UM, BUT IT'S VERY LIKELY AND COMMON AND ALWAYS HAPPENS THAT THE COUNCIL MAKES AMENDMENTS TO THAT BUDGET, MAYBE SHIFTING SOME FUNDS AROUND OR ADDS MONEY, OR IN THE EXAMPLE I DESCRIBED, IF THERE'S A MID-YEAR BUDGET PROCESS, WE'LL MAKE ALLOCATIONS OUT OF THAT.

AND SO, SO THOSE WOULD, THOSE WOULD BE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE COUNCIL TO RESPOND TO CONSTITUENTS AND, AND MAKE CHANGES TO THAT.

UM, BUT THOSE TWO WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE MAYORAL PERFECT.

TO THIS SUBJECT, INCLUDING INCLUDING A BUDGET WE'RE NUTS.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DEMOCRACY DOLLARS, BUT IF THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE STRONG MAYOR, I'LL DEFER THOSE FOR THEM.

YEAH.

TALK FOR A MINUTE ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, UM, AND, UM, STAFF, UH, PARTICULARLY, YOU KNOW, DIRECTORS AND ASSISTANT CITY MANAGERS RIGHT NOW, WE, UM, THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE, UH, HOLDS OUR CITY MANAGER ACCOUNTABLE.

MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IS THAT UNDER STRONG MAYOR, THAT IS THE ROLE OF THE MAYOR.

UM, AND

[00:45:01]

IN TERMS OF HOLDING STAFF ACCOUNTABLE IS NOT THE ROLE OF, UH, THE COUNCIL, UM, IS THAT CORRECT? THE PETITION DOES PROVIDE THAT THE MAYOR WOULD BECOME THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATOR SIMILAR TO THE ROLE OF CITY MANAGER NOW AND WOULD OVERSEE THE DUTIES OF THE CITY AND WHAT WAS HAPPENING WITHIN THE CITY.

SO THE CITY COUNCIL DOESN'T HAVE A MECHANISM FOR HOLDING THE MAYOR ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE ACTIONS OF, OF STAFF, UH, OR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS.

IS, IS THAT, IS THAT RIGHT? I WILL.

UM, I DON'T, I THINK, I THINK SIMILAR TO NOW, YOU KNOW, THERE'S LIMITATIONS ON, UM, LET ME, LET ME DEFER ON THAT QUESTION AND I WILL GO BACK.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE I LOOK THROUGH THIS ONE MORE TIME.

SO LET ME THINK ABOUT THAT AND GET BACK TO YOU.

OKAY.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF MY CONCERNS BECAUSE, UM, AS THE, AS THE, UH, SYSTEM CORRECT, RIGHT NOW AS OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT, NOW, COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK DIRECTLY WITH OUR ADMINISTRATIVE, UH, FUNCTIONS DIRECTLY WITH OUR CITY MANAGER.

AND WE HAVE ENJOYED OR RELATIONSHIPS THAT ARE, UM, COLLABORATIVE WITH OUR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGERS, WITH OUR DIRECTORS AND WITH OTHERS ON OUR STAFF, WHICH ALLOWS US TO REALLY REPRESENT OUR CONSTITUENTS, UM, MOST DIRECTLY, PARTICULARLY WITH CONSTITUENTS WHO ARE HAVING, UM, DIFFICULTIES WITH PARTICULAR ISSUES.

SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT A SYSTEM THAT IS SET UP SUCH THAT, YOU KNOW, SOME MEMBERS WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, UH, AND WOULD NOT HAVE THAT DIRECT ACCESS.

SO, UH, AFTER YOU GET A CHANCE TO REVIEW, I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY HOW THAT WORKS.

THAT APPEARS TO BE, UM, THE SITUATION TO ME.

AND I'M NOT SEEING HOW THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE COULD HOLD AN ELECTED OFFICIAL ACCOUNTABLE, UM, AND, UM, AND NOT BE BLOCKED FROM WORKING DIRECTLY WITH, UH, STAFF.

THANK YOU.

IT WAS OVER ALTAR.

THANK YOU.

I WANTED TO BUILD ON A COMMENT THAT COUNCIL MEMBER TOVA MADE EARLIER ABOUT THE NORMAL CITY CHARTER PROCESS.

UM, SO IF, UM, LEGAL CAN SPEAK TO HOW WE ORDINARILY HANDLED CHARTER AMENDMENTS IN TERMS OF DEVELOPING THOSE AND THE PROCESS, AND THEN ALSO, YOU KNOW, IF ANY, THESE COORDINATES CHANGES PASSES, UM, WHAT THAT MEANS FOR OUR FUTURE ABILITY TO GO THROUGH THAT KIND OF BROADER PROCESS.

SURE.

HISTORICALLY, LET ME BACK UP AND SAY THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE PROVIDES THAT A CHARTER CAN BE AMENDED.

AND ONE OF TWO WAYS EITHER CITY COUNCIL CAN PLACE AN ITEM ON THE BALLOT, OR THERE CAN BE A PETITION PROCESS WHEREIN CITIZENS CAN COLLECT SIGNATURES ON A PETITION TO PLACE A CHARTER AMENDMENT ON THE BALLOT.

HISTORICALLY FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN, WHEN CITY COUNCIL HAS PLACED AN AMENDMENT ON THE BALLOT, UM, COUNCIL HAS CREATED A CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.

I'M NOT SURE HOW MANY OF THE WEEK WE'VE HAD, BUT I KNOW WE RECENTLY HAD ONE IN 2018, AND I KNOW THERE WAS ONE THAT WAS CREATED DURING THE 2012 AND ONE TRANSITION.

UM, AND THE CHARTER COMMISSION USUALLY HAS CREATED BY CITY COUNCIL WITH SOME DIRECTION ON WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION TO REVIEW AND LOOK AT AND ADDRESS AND COME UP WITH ANY PROPOSALS FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS.

UM, SO THAT IS HISTORICALLY BEEN THE APPROACH OF THE CITY.

AND THEN I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ALSO ASKING IS ABOUT THE PROVISION IN THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, WHICH PROVIDES THE, A CITY CHARTER CANNOT BE AMENDED MORE OFTEN THAN TWO YEARS.

SO THAT MEANS THAT IF THERE IS AN ELECTION, THIS MAY OF 2021, THE CITY'S CHARTER, COULDN'T BE AMENDED AGAIN UNTIL MAY OF 2023 AT THAT, AT THAT JUNCTURE.

SO IT PRECLUDES, YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE CHARTER PROGRAM MOMENTS DURING THE, EXCEPT FOR TWO YEAR INTERVALS.

OKAY, COOL.

THANKS.

SO, ASHLEY, UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE IN THE STRONG MAYOR PROPOSAL, THE MAYOR IS A LEGISLATOR, IS THAT RIGHT IN THE ACTION OF VETOING, UH, ORDINANCES ESSENTIALLY DESCRIBES THE MAYOR AS THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR AND EXECUTIVE, HOWEVER, PETITION DOES ALSO PROVIDE THE MAYOR WITH VETO AUTHORITY.

OKAY.

SO, AND THE VETO AUTHORITY, UH, WOULD REST GENERALLY WITH, UH, WITH THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, IS THAT RIGHT? I, I, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S AN ANSWER TO THAT.

I, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE CERTAIN LEGAL AUTHORITIES WITH AN EXECUTIVE BRANCH THAT ARE OUT THERE.

SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE'D HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, HOW THREE BRACES IN GOVERNMENT WORK, BUT, AND THEN IF I'M REMEMBERING RIGHT THERE, ONE OF THE CHANGES IN THE CHARTER THAT WERE ATTACHED

[00:50:01]

TO THE PETITION SAID THAT THE MAYOR ALSO WOULD RULE ON APPEALS FROM EMPLOYEES.

I WILL, I, I DID NOT SEE THAT, BUT I WILL.

THAT WILL BE SOMETHING I WILL ADD TO LOOK.

UM, I KNOW THAT THERE, THE MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE PROCESS WOULD REMAIN, UM, YEAH, IT STRIKES OUT CITY MANAGER AND INSERTS MAYOR AS THE ARBITER ON APPEALS FOR EMPLOYEES IT'S TOWARD THE END, RIGHT? YEAH.

OKAY.

SO THAT'S THE JUDICIAL BRANCH.

SO WE'VE COVERED THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, POTENTIALLY JUDICIAL BRANCH.

AND THEN AS THE ADMINISTRATOR, HE IS THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, WHICH IS WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT PREVIOUSLY, WHICH I THINK IS PRETTY MUCH UNDERSTOOD.

SOUNDS TO ME LIKE WE HAVE EFFECTIVELY COLLAPSED OR CONFLATED THE THREE SEPARATE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT, WHICH ARE PRETTY MUCH A BASIC TENANT AND HALLMARK OF OUR PARTICULAR FORM OF DEMOCRACY IN THE UNITED STATES.

OKAY.

AND I'M NOT, I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO ANSWER THAT.

OBVIOUSLY THAT'S THE INTERPRETATION THAT I'M PUTTING ON THIS, WHICH IS WHAT IS WAVING SOME PRETTY SIGNIFICANT RED FLAGS TO ME ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL, BUT ALONG WITH THE FACT THAT, UM, I CAN'T FIND VERY MANY, IF ANY PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT WHO WERE, UM, CONSULTED ABOUT THIS PROPOSITION, THE PETITION TO, TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH IT.

SO I DON'T THINK THAT AT LEAST TO THE EXTENT THAT MY NORTH CENTRAL DISTRICT OF THE CITY WAS ENGAGED AND PARTICIPATED, UM, I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A VERY GOOD ENGAGEMENT.

UM, CERTAINLY MY DISTRICT, WHICH VOTES PRETTY ROBUSTLY, AS WE KNOW, WE SAW THE NUMBERS WE HAD ABOUT 45,000 PEOPLE VOTING OUT OF DISTRICT SEVEN, JUST IN THE DISTRICT SEVEN RACE IN NOVEMBER, WHICH, UH, EXCEPT FOR, I THINK DISTRICT 10 PROBABLY ECLIPSED ALL OF THE OTHER COUNCIL DISTRICTS THAT WERE ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER.

UH, OF COURSE THAT'S A PORTION OF THE ENTIRE ENGAGEMENT, UM, BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE VOTING FOR PRESIDENT.

I'M ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE SUBSET ON THE, ON THE DISTRICT.

SO I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE FACT THAT IT, IT, THIS IS COMING FROM A SMALL GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS THAT THEY DIDN'T ACTUALLY REACH OUT AS BROADLY.

UH, CERTAINLY NOT IN MY PART OF THE DISTRICT, UH, WHERE WE WOULD HAVE SEEN THAT ENGAGEMENT, INCLUDING ME, UM, RIGHT AS, AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL IN THOSE, UH, COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS.

UM, I HAVE SOME OTHER REALLY DISTINCT, UH, CONCERNS AND SKEPTICISM ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL.

UM, BUT I THINK I'LL JUST LEAVE THAT THERE, THE LACK OF BROAD-BASED INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND WHAT LOOKS TO ME TO BE LIKE A COLLAPSING OF THE THREE BRANCHES OF SEPARATE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT INTO ONE, INTO ONE REALLY, REALLY, REALLY STRONG INDIVIDUAL.

UM, AND THE WILD SWINGS IN POLICY THAT COULD FRANKLY HAPPEN IF YOU REMOVE AND THE MAYOR EVERY FOUR YEARS, YOU COULD HAVE WILD SWINGS IN POLICY WITH NO THROUGH, WITH NO THROUGH THREAD, UM, UH, FROM ONE TERM TO THE NEXT.

AND AS WE ALL KNOW, IT'S THE RELIABILITY AND PREDICTABILITY OF GOVERNMENT, UM, AND THE LACK OF DRAMA THAT MOVES OUR, OUR COMMUNITY FORWARD.

UM, I, UH, I'LL CONTINUE TO STUDY THE PROPOSAL AND I LOOK FORWARD TO OUR CONVERSATIONS IN OUR, IN OUR SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, BUT I, I HAVE GRAVE RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE PROPOSAL UNDER THE STRONG MAYOR.

OKAY.

BEFORE WE BREAK FOR LUNCH, UM, THANKS.

SORRY TO CIRCLE BACK AROUND TO SOMETHING ELSE, BUT THE DEMOCRACY DOLLARS, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND SOME OF, CAN YOU PLEASE HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT PROVISIONS OF THE FAIR CAMPAIGN FINANCE FUND ARE REPEALED AS, AS I'M LOOKING OVER SOME OF THE CORRESPONDENCE WE'VE RECEIVED OVER IT, AND THEY HAVE ONE, UM, WRITER POINTS OUT THAT THE CURRENT FAIR CAMPAIGN FINANCE FUND HAS A LIMITATION ON EXPENDITURES THAT CANDIDATE CAN MAKE FROM HIS OR HER OWN FUNDS, AS WELL AS AN OVERALL CAP ON THE AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURES THEY CAN MAKE IT MAKE.

UM, IS THAT ACCURATE BASED ON YOUR READING? YES.

SO,

[00:55:01]

UM, THIS PETITION WOULD REPEAL CITY CODE SECTIONS TWO TO 11 THROUGH TWO TO 17, AND THEN TWO TO SIX, ONE THROUGH TO TWO 65.

SO WHAT WOULD APPEAL ALL OF THE CURRENT FAIR CAMPAIGN FINANCE PROVISIONS, WHICH WOULD ALSO INCLUDE REPEALING THOSE THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED ABOUT THE LIMITATIONS ON EXPENDITURES AND USE OF PERSONAL FUNDS BY THE CANDIDATE? OKAY.

AND IT DOES NOT, IT DOES NOT PUT ANY NEW ONES IN ITS PLACE.

SO THERE WOULD BE, THERE WOULD BE NO LIMITATION ON THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS OF ONE'S OWN FUNDS, CORRECT.

PUT INTO A CAMPAIGN IF THEY'RE RECEIVING DEMOCRACY DOLLARS AND THERE ARE NO, THERE ARE NO CAPS ON OVERALL FUNDRAISING.

SO YOU COULD, YOU COULD GET THE DEMOCRACY DOLLARS AND, AND DO AS MUCH FUNDRAISING AS YOU COULD OR WANTED TO.

CORRECT.

RIGHT NOW, THING IN THIS PETITION THAT WOULD SERVE AS A OVERALL CAP, THERE ARE THE VOUCHER AGGREGATES, THEY GET LIMITS IN TERMS OF WHAT A CANDIDATE CAN RECEIVE THROUGH THE VOUCHER PROGRAM.

AND THEN AS I NOTED IN THE PRESENTATION, IT DOES PROVIDE THAT, YOU KNOW, OTHER CONTRIBUTION LIMITS WOULD HAVE TO BE COMPLIED WITH, FOR EXAMPLE, UM, CURRENTLY I THINK WITH THE ADJUSTED CPI, THE CANDIDATE CAN RECEIVE $400 FROM THE INDIVIDUAL.

SO THAT WOULD STILL BE THAT'S IN OUR CITY CHARTER AND A DIFFERENT SECTION OF THIS WOULD STILL BE IN EXISTENCE.

BUT I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THIS POSITION THAT THE PROVIDE A CAP ON.

I THINK WE WERE ASKING FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF DOLLARS THE CANDIDATE COULD RAISE, PROVIDED THEY COMPLIED WITH THE OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS THAT WOULD EXIST ELSEWHERE IN OUR CHARTER CODE AND THEN WITHIN STATE LAW.

SO, OKAY, THANK YOU.

YES.

YES.

THAT'S WHERE HER OLDER.

SO THE PETITIONERS CHOSE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AS A CHARTER AMENDMENT RATHER THAN AN ORDINANCE CHANGE.

BUT LEGALLY, BECAUSE WE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE, I THINK WE JUST NEVER GOT AROUND TO IT WITH, UM, COVID AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

UM, WE COULD MOVE FORWARD WITH A DEMOCRACY DOLLARS PROGRAM VIA ORDINANCE, WHICH THEN WOULD MAKE IT MUCH EASIER FOR US TO AMEND IT AS NEEDED AND ADJUST IT, UM, AS WE IN A SEATTLE, ET CETERA, LEARN ABOUT HOW THIS WORKS, BUT THE CHARTER APPROACH, UM, MEANS THAT THERE'S VERY LITTLE FLEXIBILITY THAT CORRECT, IN ORDER TO AMEND THE CHARTER, THEN IT DOES REQUIRE AN ELECTION COUNCIL CANNOT.

AND THEN THE CHARTER BY AN ACTION OF COUNCIL.

SO YES, IF THIS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOW, I'M GOING TO SHOW A DUTY TO BE PUT FORWARD TO THE PEOPLE.

IF THIS IS ADOPTED THE ONLY WAY TO AMEND THE INSTRUMENT, SUBSEQUENT CHARTER AMENDMENT ELECTION, WHICH CAN'T HAPPEN FOR ANOTHER TWO YEARS PLUS, AND THEN, UM, HOW IS THIS FUNDED AND HOW IS IT THAT THEY CAN PUT A, UH, CHARTER AMENDMENT IN THAT HAS FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS, OR IS IT THAT THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PUT A ORDINANCE FORWARD THAT HAS FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS, BUT IT'S OKAY IF IT'S IN THE CHARTER, OUR CITY CHARTER PROVIDES THE, UM, THE PEOPLE CANNOT INITIATE AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REQUIRE APPROPRIATION CITY FUNDS.

THIS IS A CHARTER AMENDMENT, SO THIS IS DIFFERENT.

SO THERE'S NOT A PROHIBITION IN STATE LAW ABOUT, ABOUT, YOU KNOW, UM, PUTTING FORWARD AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD REQUIRE TO APPROPRIATION.

HOWEVER, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE DOES REQUIRE THE FISCAL IMPACT BEING, UM, DEVELOPED FOR THIS AND INCLUDED THAT THE ELECTION NOTICE.

SO VOTERS WILL BE ABLE TO SEE THE POTENTIAL FISCAL IMPACT OF ANY AND ALL CHARTER AMENDMENTS THAT ARE ON THE BALLOT.

OKAY.

BUT GOING BACK TO MY ORIGINAL QUESTION, WE COULD PUT FORWARD IN, OR NOT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, CAUSE IT WOULDN'T SUBSTITUTE FOR THE INITIATIVE, BUT WHERE THIS TO NOT PASS, WE STILL WOULD BE ABLE TO PUT FORWARD AN ORDINANCE THAT DID THE SAME THING, SOMETHING SIMILAR, BUT WITH BETTER RULES, IF WE CHOSE AND THE BUNKERS DECLINED IT, I DON'T SEE A PROHIBITION ON COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING A DIFFERENT KIND OF PUBLIC FINANCE PROGRAM THROUGH ORDINANCE CURRENTLY OUR CURRENT PUBLIC FINANCES, THE ORDINANCE, UM, AS LONG AS IT COMPLIED WITH THE PROVISIONS IN THE CITY CHARTER THAT ARE ABOUT CAMPAIGN FINANCE, WHICH ARE IN ARTICLE THREE, SECTION EIGHT, K KELLY, I JUST HAVE A FOLLOW-UP ON ALISON'S ASHLEY, BUT THEN THAT, THAT ORDINANCE CHANGE WOULD THEN BE SUBJECT TO VETO BY THE MAYOR IF STRONG MAYOR IS ON THE BALLOT AND THEN IT WAS VOTED IN, YOU KNOW, I GUESS IF WE ARE, IF WE WERE THINKING, IF, IF DEMOCRACY DOLLARS WERE TO NOT PASS STRONG, MAYOR DOES PASS AND THEN COUNCIL WANTED TO IMPLEMENT ITS OWN VERSION OF DEMOCRACY DOLLARS.

IT'S THAT POINT? ASSUMING THOSE TWO THINGS, THEN YES, THAT ORDINANCE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO BEAT UP BY THE MAYOR.

AND THEN LAST QUESTION, CAN THE MAYOR VITO AND OVERRIDE A VETO

[01:00:01]

OR DOES THAT NEVER HAPPEN? THERE'S NOTHING IN THE PETITION THAT WOULD PROVIDE AN OVERRIDE OF AN OVERRIDE.

OKAY.

THANKS.

SURE.

UM, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TIME EITHER TODAY OR ON THURSDAY AND EXECUTIVE SESSION TO ASK SOME LEGAL QUESTIONS? CAUSE I DO HAVE SOME LEGAL QUESTIONS ABOUT OTHER PETITIONS OR PETITIONS IN GENERAL OF THE THREE.

IT'S OUR INTENT TO DO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TODAY.

GREAT.

THANK YOU.

RESET COLLEAGUES.

ALL RIGHT.

SO WE'RE GOING TO BREAK FOR LUNCH AND WE'LL DO AN HOUR OF THAT.

UH, GIVEN, UH, AM'S CONCERN OR WANTING TO BE HERE.

LET'S COME BACK AT ONE 30 TO HERE AND WE'LL HANDLE THE REMAINING TWO.

WE'LL HANDLE THE POLE ITEMS AND THREE BOWL, UH, ITEMS. UH, AND THEN WE'LL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND HANDLE THOSE THINGS SUPPOSE THAT TODAY.

SO, UH, HERE AT 1232, THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE IN RECESS TILL ONE 30.

AND I'LL SEE YOU ALL BACK ON THIS CHANNEL WITHIN THREE POLI OKAY.

WORK SESSION HERE ON FEBRUARY 2ND, 2021.

TIME IS ONE 34.

WE HAVE THREE

[A. Pre-Selected Agenda Items]

HOLD ITEMS. UH, AND THEN WE HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

ALISON, YOU PULLED THE FIRST ITEM, WHICH WAS NUMBER EIGHT.

YES.

THANK YOU.

UM, SO I THINK, UM, I REALLY JUST PULLED IT TODAY TO GIVE MY COLLEAGUES AN UPDATE ON THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN HAVING WITH STAFF OVER THIS ITEM AND THE, UM, DIRECTION THAT WE ARE EXPLORING.

UM, I HOPE THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO POST SOMETHING TOMORROW TO GIVE YOU, UM, A HEADS UP FOR THURSDAY, BUT I DID WANT TO JUST HIGHLIGHT A FEW OF THE DIRECTIONS THAT WE ARE GOING AGAIN.

I DON'T YET HAVE LANGUAGE.

I JUST HEARD BACK FROM STAFF WITH SOME SPECIFICS, UM, LAST NIGHT.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS HOW REGULARLY THE DATA SHOULD BE UPDATED THAT UNDERLIES THE FUNDING MODEL.

UM, SOME OF IT IS TIED TO, UM, POPULATION AND A LOT OF IT IS TIED TO DATA THAT CHANGES OVER TIME.

UM, SO YOU KNOW, THE, WE WANT TO LOOK AT PROVIDING SOME DIRECTION ON HOW OFTEN THEY NEED TO UPDATE THE UNDERLYING DATA.

UM, AND THAT IS LIKELY TO ALIGN WITH WHEN THEY, UM, ARE NEGOTIATING AND EXECUTING, UM, NEW CONTRACTS.

AND THEN, UM, WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT IF A NEW EQUITY CHAMBER IS ADDED BEING, UM, COMES JOINTLY FROM THE EQUITY NON-EQUITY CHAMBER BUCKETS AND IS NOT, UM, ALWAYS COMING OUT OF SIMPLY THE MECCA CHAMBERS, UM, BUCKET SO THAT THEY FACE A SHRINKING