* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          [CALL TO ORDER]
          [PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]
          [00:00:06]
          YES, WE'VE GOT JOE RIDDLE. 
          MR. RIDDEL. 
          RIDDELL. 
          HI. 
          SORRY. 
          HOW ARE YOU TONIGHT? THERE IT OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, I WANT TO COMPLIMENT THE FORMAT THAT Y'ALL PICKED FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING LAST WEEK. 
          I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY INFORMATIVE AND IT SHOWED THE GIVE AND TAKE AND QUESTIONS ABOUT WISDOM. 
          ONE THING ABOUT ONE THING OR ANOTHER, UM, I, I DID, UH, REVEAL THAT, UH, YOU'RE NOT GETTING MANY PEOPLE SHOWING UP. 
          SO I, WITH A SHORT NOTICE, I, IT WASN'T SURPRISING, BUT I ASSUME YOU'RE GONNA HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING, AND I HOPE YOU'VE MANAGED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO, UH, GET MORE PEOPLE THERE SHORT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT GROUPS THAT ARE INTERESTED, JUST PUTTING OUT ALERTS AND, UM, GETTING THEIR TROOPS OUT. 
          BUT, UM, THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO MENTION IS, UH, I KNOW Y'ALL HAVE BEEN ASKED TO PROVIDE, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS ON DIFFERENT PARTICULAR TOPICS. 
          I KNOW THERE'S DIFFERENCES, OPINION ABOUT 'EM. 
          I, I HOPE THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ULTIMATELY WILL REFLECT SOME OF THOSE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, I THINK IT'D BE A DISSERVICE IF YOU JUST, UH, SENT SOME RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL AND JUST SAID, WELL, THESE ARE THE ONES THAT PASSED BY THIS VOTES, AND THIS IS, THIS IS OUR INPUT TO YOU. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING ABLE TO GIVE YOU THIS INPUT. 
          SO GOOD LUCK. 
          THANKS. 
          [APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
OKAY. 
          WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM OUR REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 30TH, 2024. 
          AND THEN OUR SPECIALLY CALLED MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8TH. 
          DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE? DO WE HAVE TO DO, DO WE HAVE TO DO THEM SEPARATELY? NO. 
          UH, MYRNA DID INCLUDE COPIES OF THE MINUTES IN THE MATERIALS THAT WERE EMAILED OUT, BUT WE DO NOT HAVE PRINTED COPIES TONIGHT JUST BECAUSE IT WAS A COUNCIL. 
          THERE WERE COUNCIL MEETINGS TODAY, SO EVERYTHING WAS A BIT TIGHT. 
          IF WE WOULD LIKE TO DEFER THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING, WHEN WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE PRINTED MATERIALS IN FRONT OF US, I THINK THAT WOULD BE FINE. 
          OR IF SOMEONE THINKS WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO APPROVE, THEN PLEASE MAKE A MOTION. 
          OTHERWISE, I WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM. 
          I MOVE TO APPROVE. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          COMMISSIONER LASH MOVES TO APPROVE. 
          I'LL SECOND. 
          I ACTUALLY RECOMMEND. 
          ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER BOTKIN SECONDS. 
          UM, ALL IN FAVOR? A. 
          ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. 
          THE MINUTES PASS. 
          OKAY. 
          MOVING 
          [2. Discussion and possible action on the City Attorney Working Group initial recommendation report. (Chair Palvino, Commissioners Garcia and McGiverin)]
ON TO OUR FIRST DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS. WE HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY WORKING GROUP, UM, WHICH IS MYSELF, COMMISSIONER GARCIA, WHO'S NOT HERE TONIGHT. 
          AND THEN COMMISSIONER MCGOVERN IS ON THE PHONE. 
          PHONE. 
          UM, SO WE, I DID CIRCULATE, FIRST OF ALL, HOPEFULLY YOU ALL GOT THE UPDATED PRELIMINARY REPORT TODAY THAT CONTAINED ALL OF THE PAGES. 
          SO THAT WAS THE REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU ALL LAST TIME. 
          EXCEPT I MADE SURE TO SCAN IT CORRECTLY THIS TIME. 
          SO YOU SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN EVERY PAGE. 
          UM, AND THEN WE ALSO, THIS AFTERNOON, CIRCULATED THE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY AND, UM, HAVING CITY COUNCIL HAVE A DESIGNATED LIAISON WITHIN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. 
          WE DID BREAK THOSE UP INTO TWO SEPARATE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          THE FIRST RECOMMENDATION, UM, THAT IS COMING FROM OUR WORKING GROUP IS THAT THE CITY MANAGER CONTINUES TO APPOINT THE CITY ATTORNEY. 
          THAT IS NOT A CHANGE, BUT NOW IT WILL BE, UM, WITH CONFIRMATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          AND THEN THE SAME THING WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. 
          REMOVALS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL ALSO NEED TO OCCUR BY THE JOINT ACTION OF THE MANAGER AND COUNSEL. 
          UM, SO WE HAVE THE LANGUAGE OF THE PROPOSED CHARTER REVISION IN OUR RECOMMENDATION, UM, WHICH IS FAIRLY MINIMAL. 
          IT JUST ADDS THE CONFIRMATION BY COUNSEL PIECE. 
          AND THEN ALSO THE JOINT, UM, JOINT REMOVAL. 
          INTERESTINGLY, OUR CHARTER DID NOT ADDRESS REMOVAL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTLY. 
          SO, UM, THIS PROPOSED LANGUAGE WILL DO SO. 
          AND THEN IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT THE POLICY REASONS FOR THIS RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          SO, UH, THIS RECOMMENDATION IS, I DON'T KNOW, UH, BRIAN, DO, DO YOU WANNA ADD ANYTHING? I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE IN A POSITION WHERE YOU CAN SPEAK ABOUT OUR FIRST RECOMMENDATION OR WOULD LIKE TO ADD SOMETHING TO WHAT I SAID. 
          UH, ASSUMING YOU CAN HEAR ME, I AM IN A POSITION TO SPEAK, BUT NO, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO THE ONLY THING, SO THAT HAS NOT BEEN PROPOSED THUS FAR IS THE PROPOSED BALLOT LANGUAGE, JUST BECAUSE WE WANTED 
          [00:05:01]
TO PRESENT THIS RECOMMENDATION TO SEE IF, UM, WE VOTED IT UP OR DOWN BEFORE HAVING, UM, CAROLINE SPEND TIME DRAFTING PROPOSED BALLOT LANGUAGE. 
          SO WITH THAT, I, YES. 
          COMMISSIONER ALT MURANO, JUST TO CON UH, CONFIRM CONFIRMATION IS A RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY COUNSEL UNDER ITS REGULAR RULES. 
          THERE'S NO PARTICULAR TWO THIRDS OF IT OR SIX VOTES OR ANYTHING, JUST COME, WHATEVER, HOWEVER THEY TAKE ACTION. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. 
          GOT IT. 
          , WHAT THE QUESTION ON THE TABLE IS, THIS IS FOR DISCUSSION AND QUESTIONS ON THE PROPOSAL. 
          IT IS FOR DISCUSSION AND QUESTIONS ON THE PROPOSAL, AND THEN IF SOMEONE FEELS INCLINED TO MOVE TO ADOPT THE PROPOSAL, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO ADOPT IT. 
          SORRY, I DIDN'T MAKE THAT CLEAR. 
          OKAY. 
          NO, I, I WAS JUST, I WAS, UH, JUST MAKING SURE I KNEW WHERE WE WERE. 
          I, I GUESS I'VE, I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER MCGIVEN OR, OR MAYBE, UH, THE CHAIR ABOUT THE SECOND OF THE TWO PROPOSALS. 
          MM-HMM. 
           THE ONE THAT CONCERNS, UM, THE DESIGNATED LIAISON TO COUNSEL. 
          YES. 
          I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THIS TWO MEETINGS AGO IN WITH THE, OUR, OUR GUEST SPEAKER AS WELL. 
          CAN YOU REMIND ME OF THE, OF THE POLICY REASONS AND WHAT EXACTLY A DESIGNATED LIAISON, UM, MEANS AND WHAT IT'S INTENDED TO ACCOMPLISH? YES. 
          UM, BRIAN, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT SINCE YOU'RE VIRTUAL, AND THEN YOU CAN LISTEN AND ADD ANYTHING THAT I'VE MISSED. 
          SO THE IDEA IS, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW, THE WAY THAT OUR COUNCIL WORKS WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE KIND OF A DESIGNATED LIAISON. 
          SO THEY WOULD REACH OUT TO, EITHER THEIR STAFF WOULD REACH OUT TO EITHER PARTICULAR SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT WITHIN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S LEGAL DEPARTMENT, OR THEY MAY REACH OUT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTLY AND BE SENT TO THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE AN ATTORNEY WHO'S DESIGNATED TO KIND OF HELP THEM CRAFT THEIR POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          AND SO IT'S, IN KIND OF LOOKING AT WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIX HERE, IT'S THIS PERCEPTION THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS UNDER THE THUMB OF THE CITY MANAGER, THAT THEY'RE NOT TRULY AN INDEPENDENT COUNSEL. 
          AND SO ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE STARTED KIND OF VERY EARLY ON LOOKING AT WAS, WELL, SHOULD THE CITY COUNCIL HAVE INDEPENDENT ATTORNEY? WE WERE CALLING IT LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL, BUT IT'S THE COUNCIL'S COUNCIL. 
          AND THE FIRST THOUGHT WAS, WELL, WE COULD HAVE AN, A TRULY INDEPENDENT ATTORNEY THAT THE COUNCIL HIRED TO ADVISE THEM SEPARATE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY. 
          UM, BUT WE MOVED AWAY FROM THAT BECAUSE OF CHUCK'S CONCERNS. 
          HE WAS IN THE COUNTY THAT HE WAS IN, DID HAVE THAT STRUCTURE, AND THAT WAS THE SCENARIO HE TOLD US ABOUT, WHERE THE INDEPENDENT ATTORNEY HAD PROVIDED CERTAIN ADVICE TO THE COUNCIL, UM, THAT HE HAD OPPOSED, HIS OPPOSITION WAS IN WRITING, IT GOT MADE PUBLIC, AND THEN AFTER THE LEGISLATIVE BODY TOOK ACTION, HE HAD TO GO DEFEND THAT IN COURT WITH A MEMO OUT THERE OPPOSING RIGHT. 
          HIS LEGAL POSITION. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND SO HAVING AN ATTORNEY WITHIN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, THE HOPE IS IT WILL PROVIDE CONSISTENCY, BUT COUNSEL WILL STILL FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE AN ATTORNEY THAT IS WORKING WITH THEM ON POLICY PROPOSALS. 
          AND MY AND MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS REALLY THE MORE POINTED ONE, WHICH IS TO ME, THE NUB OF IT. 
          DOES IT REPRESENT A CHANGE IN THE PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE LAWYER THAT'S DESIGNATED AS A LIAISON TO THE COUNSEL? NO. 
          OKAY. 
          THE ATTORNEY IS REPRESENTING THE CITY. 
          THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I NEEDED TO HEAR. 
          AND JUST FOR A LITTLE BIT ADDITIONAL OR ADDITIONAL CLARITY OH, FOR ADDITIONAL CLARITY, UH, WITH REGARD TO THE SECOND PART OF THE PROPOSAL, IF I'M UNDER UNDERSTANDING YOU CORRECTLY, THE ATTORNEY WOULD WORK TO, UH, LIAISE SEPARATELY AND, AND APART FROM THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT, BUT WOULD ALSO ENSURE THAT THEIR OPINIONS OR ANY MERAN MEMORANDUM WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE POSITION OF THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. 
          HOW WOULD THAT THE, SO THE, THE WAY THAT WE HAVE STRUCTURED, OR THE WAY THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO STRUCTURE IT, IS THAT THERE WOULD BE A DESIGNATED LIAISON THAT IS AN ATTORNEY WITHIN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. 
          THAT PERSON WOULD BE THE CONTACT, THE FIRST CONTACT WHEN COUNSEL'S STAFF IS SAYS, HEY, I'VE GOT A POLICY RECOMMENDATION OR A POLICY IDEA. 
          I WANNA TRY TO FORMULATE AN ORDINANCE TO PRESENT TO COUNSEL. 
          STAFF WOULD REACH OUT TO THAT DESIGNATED LIAISON. 
          THAT PERSON WOULD NOT, IS NOT GONNA BE A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT IN EVERY AREA. 
          RIGHT. 
          OF SURE. 
          THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO DEAL WITH. 
          BUT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO COORDINATE WITH THE APPROPRIATE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS WITHIN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 
          [00:10:01]
AND KIND OF HAVE THAT COHESIVE, BE ABLE TO CONSOLIDATE THE OPINIONS AND GIVE COHESIVE ADVICE BACK TO COUNSEL. 
          DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? WELL, YEAH, BUT IN, IN PART, AND, AND I DON'T WANNA BELABOR AT THIS POINT. 
          I DO WANT TO GIVE OTHER FOLKS A CHANCE TO TALK, BUT I JUST AM CURIOUS THOUGH, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, I'M IN, I'M INCLINED TO SUPPORT IT. 
          I THINK IT, IT ALL MAKES SENSE TO ME, BUT I, I'M JUST CURIOUS ON THAT POINT, HOW DIS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT, UH, AND I, I'VE ALREADY FORGOTTEN HIS NAME, CHUCK CHUCK'S, UH, SET UP WHERE THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD BE SEPARATELY APPOINTED, HOW THIS WOULD AVOID A SORT OF CONFLICT WITHIN THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE OF DIFFERING OPINIONS. 
          UH, IT WA IT'S NOT, I MEAN, WE ALL KNOW ATTORNEYS ARE GONNA HAVE DIFFERING OPINIONS SOMETIMES. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          SO I DON'T THINK IT AVOIDS THAT PROBLEM, BUT I THINK WHAT IT DOES, IF YOU HAVE AN ATTORNEY WITHIN THE CITY'S CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WHO IS FAMILIAR WITH HISTORICAL INTERPRETATIONS, IT HELPS TO ALIGN FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, NO, IT'S NOT GONNA PREVENT ATTORNEYS FROM ARGUING ABOUT  ABOUT THE LEGAL OPINION, BUT I THINK IT WILL PROVIDE MORE CONSISTENCY THAN IF YOU HAD SOMEONE EXTERNAL TO THE LAW DEPARTMENT THAT HAD NO IDEA WHAT WAS HAPPENING INTERNALLY. 
          YES. 
          CAN I OFFER AN ANALOGY, AND MAYBE YOU CAN TELL ME IF I'M ON THE RIGHT TRACK, IF IT'S, IF IT'S SORT OF WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING. 
          SO I'VE GOT A, I'VE GOT A SMALL LAW FIRM AND WE REPRESENT OFTEN CORPORATE BODIES, RIGHT? AND SO WE, OUR DUTIES ARE TO THE CORPORATION OR THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE ENTITY. 
          UM, BUT WE SOMETIMES HAVE INDIVIDUAL LAWYERS WHO ARE INTERFACING WITH THE EXECUTIVES, THE CEO OR SOME OTHER OFFICIALS, UM, SORT OF ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS. 
          AND WE OFTEN DISAGREE AMONG OURSELVES IN THE, IN THE FIRM ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE CORRECT ACTION TO TAKE OR WHATEVER. 
          BUT THOSE DISAGREEMENTS ARE STILL CONTAINED WITHIN THE VEIL OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE. 
          IS THAT KIND OF THE, THE IDEA THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE THAT ALLOWS FOR SOME DISAGREEMENT INTERNALLY THAT'S STILL PROTECTED WHILE GIVING, UM, THE COUNSEL AN OPPORTUNITY TO FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE A, UH, A VOICE OR SOMEONE PARTICULAR WITHIN THE, YOU KNOW, THE GROUP OF ATTORNEYS THAT THEY CAN SPEAK TO. 
          IS THAT, IS THAT A, AN ANALOGY THAT'S FAIR. 
          YES. 
          I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          YES. 
          COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, UM, SO I'M ASSUMING THAT THAT COUNCIL'S ATTORNEY CITY COUNCIL'S ATTORNEY STILL IS WORKING FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY, RIGHT? CORRECT. 
          THERE'S CITY ATTORNEYS AND THERE'S ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEYS. 
          UM, SO I'M NOT REAL CLEAR WHAT THE REAL ADVANTAGE OF ADDING AN EXTRA LAYER IS, UM, WHEN ULTIMATELY IT'S THE CITY ATTORNEY WHO'S GOING TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY. 
          AND AS FOR IT NOT LOOKING LIKE THE CITY ATTORNEY IS UNDER THE THUMB OF THE CITY MANAGER, UM, THIS IS LIKE A HALFWAY SOLUTION. 
          UM, IF YOU WANT IT TO NOT LOOK LIKE THE CITY ATTORNEYS UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY MANAGER, THEN HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY HIRED AND FIRED BY THE COUNCIL PERIOD AND NOT HAVE THIS THING WHERE BASICALLY IT HAS TO BE THE MANAGER SAYS, YES, HIRE THIS PERSON. 
          AND THEN THE COUNCIL SAYS, FINE. 
          UM, AND VICE VERSA FOR, UM, REMOVING A CITY ATTORNEY. 
          I MEAN, IF IT'S THE CITY COUNCIL THAT'S SUPPOSED TO SEEM RESPONSIBLE, THEN LET THEM DO THE HIRING AND THE, UM, REMOVING, I, UH, AGREE WITH THAT SENTIMENT, HOWEVER, THAT'S GONE TO THE VOTERS TWICE AND FAILED. 
          AND SO WE ARE TRYING TO PROPOSE SOMETHING DIFFERENT THIS TIME, UM, THAT IS, YOU KNOW, A COMPROMISE POSITION. 
          AND THIS, BY HAVING THE CITY ATTORNEY, I MEAN, BY HAVING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE COUNCIL JOINTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. 
          UM, IT MAY NOT BE ALL THE WAY THERE, BUT I THINK IT DOES HELP TO LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD. 
          UM, AND, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS ALSO THE APPROACH THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE, UM, INTERNATIONAL MUNICIPAL LEAGUE ATTORNEYS IN THEIR MODEL CITY CHARTER, UM, AS KIND OF THE BEST APPROACH. 
          AND SO I THINK THAT WAS WHY WE LANDED ON, WE CERTAINLY DID CONSIDER HAVING COUNCIL A POINT, BUT THAT WAS WHY WE LANDED ON THIS JOINT MODEL. 
          I UNDERSTAND. 
          UM, IT JUST, I MEAN, THE COUNCIL HAS AUTHORITY OVER THE MANAGER ANYWAY, SO, RIGHT. 
          I MEAN, AND WE'VE SEEN IT MOST RECENTLY WHEN THE MANAGER HIRED A ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER THAT MM-HMM. 
           GOT SOME PUSHBACK, AND IMMEDIATELY THAT HIRING DIDN'T REALLY HAPPEN. 
          SO THE COUNCIL HAS AUTHORITY OVER THE MANAGER, 
          [00:15:01]
UM, ALREADY, I, I DON'T REALLY SEE THAT THIS ACCOMPLISHES ANYTHING OVER THE CURRENT SYSTEM. 
          I, I PERSONALLY FEEL LIKE HAVING THIS EXTRA LAYER WITH THE COUNCIL, I MEAN, THE COUNCIL IS NOT GOING TO BE OUT THERE RECRUITING AND INTERVIEWING A CITY ATTORNEY. 
          THEY'RE GONNA GET A RECOMMENDATION OF A FEW PEOPLE AT FIRST FROM SOMEBODY. 
          RIGHT. 
          LIKE, THEY DON'T HAVE EXACTLY, THERE TOO MANY OTHER THINGS. 
          SO I FEEL LIKE HAVING THE, THE CITY MANAGER MAKING THE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL, ACTUALLY, TO ME, THAT MAKES, TO ME THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          THEY ULTIMATELY HAVE B TWO POWER. 
          SO I SEE THIS AS THE COMPROMISE TO WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO SOLVE FOR, BECAUSE BY PUTTING IT DIRECTLY TO COUNCIL, THERE'S STILL GONNA BE SOMEONE IN BETWEEN THAT'S, THAT'S PROVIDING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL. 
          'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT GO AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S GOTTA BE THE SAME MANAGER UNLESS THERE'S SOMEBODY ELSE OUT THERE LIKE TO, TO DO THAT WORK, RIGHT? 'CAUSE COUNSEL'S NOT GONNA BE OUT THERE INTERVIEWING. 
          SO THAT'S WHERE I FEEL LIKE THIS IS THE COMPROMISE TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT THE, THE COMMITTEE WAS AT ACTUALLY OUT TO, TO DO. 
          AND IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE THE REALITY IS THEY CAN'T, THE COUNCIL'S NOT GONNA BE DOING THESE THINGS ON THEIR OWN. 
          AND I, CAN I, CAN I ADD SOMETHING? YES, BRIAN, UM, I, I JUST WANTED TO SAY, UM, DOES HE HAVE TO SHOW IN RESPONSE TO VIDEO THE COMMENT THAT COMMISSIONER GREENBERG JUST GAVE? AND I'M SORRY, CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER ONE. 
          UM, I'M SORRY, MR. MCG, WE, WE, UM, YOU NEED TO SHOW OR HAVE YOUR CAMERA ON IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN DISCUSSION. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          BECAUSE I, I'M NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO DO THAT. 
          SO, UH, I CAN GIVE YOU MY FEEDBACK NEXT TIME, I GUESS. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS BRIAN. 
          SO, OH, GO AHEAD. 
          NO, I WOULD, COMMISSIONER COLES, I WOULD, I WOULD JUST ADD, YOU KNOW, TO TO COMMISSIONER ER'S POINT, I MEAN, I, I DO THINK THAT NOT LETTING THE, UH, PERFECT BE THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD HERE, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT, IT, THERE IS SOME LOGIC TO HAVING COUNSEL WITH WHOM THE COMMISSION HAS A RAPPORT, HAS A REGULAR RELATIONSHIP WITH, HAS OBVIOUSLY NOT FULL AUTONOMY, BUT LIKE COMMISSION A, THE COMMISSION, THE COUNCIL COUNSEL IS WHAT I MEANT TO SAY. 
          OKAY. 
          IF I SAID NOT THAT, UM, BUT IT, I MEAN, I DO, I CAN SEE THE MERIT IN, UM, HAVING A COUNSEL THAT, A LEGAL COUNSEL THAT THE COMMISSION CAN RELY ON TO HAVE A, A MORE REGULAR CONVERSATION. 
          SOMEONE WHO'S, WHO'S ORIENTED TOWARDS, UH, ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL'S CONCERNS MORE SO MAYBE THAN THEY WOULD BE IF THEY WERE NOT IN THAT POSITION. 
          SO I, I UNDERSTAND THE, UH, I, I UNDERSTAND THE RELUCTANCE TO PUT THE ISSUE BEFORE THE VOTERS THAT THEY'VE ALREADY VOTED DOWN TWICE, WHICH IS TO SAY LIKE, HAVE THE, HAVE THE COUNCIL APPOINTED DIRECTLY BY, HAVE LEGAL COUNSEL APPOINTED DIRECTLY BY THE COMMISSION OR THE CITY ATTORNEY. 
          BUT I DO THINK THAT THIS, I CAN SEE HOW THIS ACCOMPLISHES SOMETHING. 
          I'M JUST CURIOUS AND, AND MY APOLOGIES IF THIS WAS ADDRESSED TWO WEEKS AGO, BUT MY MEMORY ONLY GOES BACK A WEEK. 
          SO HOW, WHY IS IT THAT THE MUNICIPAL LEAGUE FAVORED THIS APPROACH VERSUS OTHERS? UM, I THINK IT WAS THE BALANCE THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WHERE, UM, YOU KNOW, AND, AND IT REALLY, IT IS A PERCEPTION ISSUE, RIGHT? BOTH THE COUNCIL AND THE CITY MANAGER HAVE TO FEEL THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY IS INDEPENDENT AND GIVING ADVICE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, AND THEY ARE, RIGHT. 
          UM, THE STRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE RIGHT NOW HAS CREATED THE PERCEPTION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S ADVICE BEING SLANTED TOWARDS THE CITY MANAGER. 
          AND SO TO LEVEL THAT PLAYING FIELD, TO EVEN OUT THE PERCEPTION IT'S HAVING JOINT, THE JOINT ACTION, AND IT MAY, YOU KNOW, THEN THAT WAY YOU'RE MANAGING SORT OF THE POLICY CONCERNS, CONSIDER CONSIDERATIONS WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE FACTORS THAT MEGAN KIND OF MENTIONED OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD HIRE THE CITY MANAGER, AND THEN THE CITY MANAGER SHOULD BE THE ONE HIRING THE EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY. 
          BUT IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE INDEPENDENCE THAT THEY NEED TO EXHIBIT, THE COUNCIL SHOULD HAVE A SAY IN IT. 
          UM, AND, AND THAT IS, I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAJORITY OF HOME RULE CITIES IN TEXAS COUNCIL HAS A VOICE, UM, IN THE APPOINTMENT. 
          AND SO THAT'S, THAT IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE FOR. 
          AND I THINK THAT WAS THE REASON I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK. 
          AND IT IS IN ALL THE MATERIALS, WE INCLUDED THE MODEL CITY CHARTER, ALONG WITH THERE'S KIND OF POLICY EXPLANATIONS BEHIND IT. 
          UM, AND SO THERE IS KIND OF ADDITIONAL BACKUP THERE. 
          THAT'S THE BEST MEMORY THAT I HAVE, BUT I ALSO HAVE SHORT TERM MEMORY ISSUES. 
          SO, MADAM CHAIR, YES, COMMISSIONER TANO. 
          UH, I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE SUPPORTING BOTH OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          AS I SAID LAST TIME, I THINK THEY ARE AN ELEGANT AND 
          [00:20:01]
POLITICALLY PRAGMATIC COMPROMISE TO THE CONTEXT THAT WE ARE IN. 
          UH, MY PERSONAL OPINION IS THAT IN THE DIFFERENT SCHEMAS THAT WE HAVE OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT, UH, OUR COUNCIL IS RELATIVELY WEAK, AND OUR CITY MANAGER IS INCREDIBLY STRONG. 
          I FEEL THIS IS A, A MODEST RECALIBRATION TOWARDS WHAT I THINK IS THE OPTIMAL TYPE OF GOVERNMENT. 
          I ALSO BELIEVE THAT, UH, CITY COUNCIL IS DRAMATICALLY UNDERSTAFFED FOR A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT OVERSEE A MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR CORPORATION AND HAS A VARYING ENGAGED CITIZENRY THAT INCLUDES IN AREAS OF LEGAL CREATIVITY. 
          UH, BUT THE APPROPRIATE ROUTE FOR SOLVING THAT IS FOR THEM TO STAFF THEMSELVES MORE TO CREATE THINGS LIKE AN OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES LIKE MANY OTHER, UM, ENTITIES HAVE, UH, AND POTENTIALLY FROM TIME TO TIME TO PROCURE INDEPENDENT LEGAL ADVICE. 
          THE NICE THING ABOUT THE LIAISON IS THAT IT IS A PERSON THAT IS AVAILABLE TO THEM WHILE STILL REPRESENTING THE CITY, SO THAT IN SOME WAYS, THE, THE CUSTOMER INTERFACE IMPROVES WITHOUT CREATING A FRAGMENTATION THAT WOULD BE PROBLEMATIC SINCE OUR ATTORNEY IS IN, IN, IN CHARGE OF DEFENDING THE CORPORATION THAT IS THE CITY. 
          UM, THAT IS A SUBTLETY THAT I WANT TO THANK, UM, MY COLLEAGUE COMMISSIONER BOTKIN FOR SORT OF EXPLAINING PUBLICLY. 
          AND I WANTED TO REITERATE IT BECAUSE IT'S A DETAIL THAT I THINK IS, SHOULD BE VERY PERSUASIVE TO THE PUBLIC ABOUT WHY IT'S THERE. 
          I ALSO WANTED TO PREVIEW AN IDEA, UM, WHICH IS THERE'S A VARIETY OF, UM, PIECES THAT HAVE COME UP THAT WE ARE NOT GONNA GET TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON, INCLUDING COMMISSIONER, UH, GREENBERG'S, UH, INTEREST IN, UH, REFORMING HOW WE DO ETHICS. 
          IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE AS WE MOVE TOWARDS FENO FINALIZING OUR REPORT, UH, TO KIND OF HAVE AN APPENDIX OF THINGS FOR NEXT TIME, UH, AND THE NOTION OF HOW WE, UH, ADEQUATELY STAFF COUNSEL AND ALLOW IT TO HAVE MAYBE, UH, SOME OPTIONALITY AND OPTIONS AND HOW IT THINKS ABOUT, WELL, LEGAL OPINIONS AND LEGAL OPTIONS FOR ITSELF IN AREAS WHERE THERE IS SOME KIND OF STRUCTURAL DISPUTE WITH THE STAFF THAT THEY HAVE HIRED AND OVERSEE, UH, AROUND HOW TO PROCEED, UH, MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE, UM, TEASED OUT A BIT MORE. 
          OTHER THAN THAT, I AM, I AM READY TO PROCEED WHEN THE REST OF THE BODY IS READY TO PROCEED AND THANK THE COMM, THE WORKING GROUP FOR ITS WORK. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ALANO, AND JUST, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'VE, WE'VE GOT THESE BROKEN DOWN INTO TWO SEPARATE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          I DO THINK IF, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE IS SO INCLINED TO PUT THESE UP FOR A VOTE, I'M NOT GONNA MAKE THE MOTION MYSELF BECAUSE THEY CAME FROM MY WORKING GROUP, ALTHOUGH MAYBE I SHOULD, UM, YOU KNOW, WE CAN TAKE THEM UP SEPARATELY. 
          I WOULD SAY, I THINK THE RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, I FEEL LIKE IS MORE KIND OF FINAL, THE LANGUAGE ON, UM, THE APPOINTMENT OF THE DESIGNATED LIAISON. 
          THE WORKING GROUP HAS NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THAT IN DEPTH. 
          AND SO THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD BRING BACK FOR NEXT TIME. 
          YES. 
          COMMISSIONER VAN, UM, REAL QUICK, I'M HAPPY TO, TO MAKE A MOTION OR SUPPORT A MOTION FOR BOTH. 
          I THINK THERE, THERE ARE GOOD COMPROMISES. 
          I WOULD REQUEST THAT IN THAT FINAL REPORT, WE DO INCLUDE SOME OF THAT CONTEXT. 
          MM-HMM. 
           LIKE COMMISSIONER S MURANO DISCUSSED, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S, IT'S, I THINK ALL OF US HAVE SOME KIND OF UNDERSTANDING OF THIS, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S VERY, I'M NOT SURE IT'S COMMON KNOWLEDGE. 
          SO I THINK THAT, THAT, THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL BOTH FOR, FOR EXPLAINING OUR POSITIONS ON IT, EXPLAINING OUR POSITIONS TO COUNCIL ON IT AND EXPLAINING THAT TO THE PUBLIC. 
          YEAH. 
          NO, I, I AGREE. 
          AND WE WILL CERTAINLY, CAROLINE AND I ARE STARTING A DRAFT OF THE FINAL REPORT, AND WE CAN KIND OF TALK ABOUT HOW THAT'S GONNA COME TOGETHER AND HOW WE'LL ALL VOTE ON IT, UM, AT THE END. 
          BUT I DO, UM, AGREE THAT THAT KIND OF CONTEXT IS GOING TO BE HELPFUL. 
          COMMISSIONER COLES. 
          WELL, A COUPLE THINGS. 
          UH, WILL WE BE JOINED BY COMMISSIONER MCGIVEN LATER THIS EVENING? I'M WONDERING IF WE SHOULD, WE MIGHT POSTPONE. 
          I, I, I TOO AM READY TO SUPPORT IT, AND I'M WONDERING IF WE MIGHT WANT TO POSTPONE UNTIL HE CAN BE HERE TO VOTE IN PERSON. 
          IT WON'T HURT MY FEELINGS IF YOU VOTE WITHOUT ME. 
          WILL, WILL YOU BE HERE AT SOME POINT, OR ARE YOU LIKELY STUCK IN SAN ANTONIO FOR THE DURATION? UH, YEAH, I'M NOT GONNA, I'M NOT GONNA BE GOOD BEFORE Y'ALL. 
          UH, AND OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO COMMISSIONER MCGINN WILL NOT BE PARTICIPATING IN THE DISCUSSION OR VOTE TONIGHT, UNFORTUNATELY. 
          COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, UH, THIS IS JUST A QUESTION IN TERMS OF IF CITY'S ATTORNEY'S, IF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WANTED TO HAVE A LIAISON, DOES THIS NEED TO BE IN THE CHARTER? SO 
          [00:25:01]
WHAT'S THE RATIONALE FOR PUTTING SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WHICH IS JUST A REAL STRUCTURAL THING? UHHUH , I MEAN, THERE'S STILL GONNA BE THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS. 
          I TOOK THE SAME APPROACH WITH THIS AS WE DID ON OUR OTHER, FOR CONSISTENCY PURPOSES WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE. 
          DOES IT HAVE TO BE IN THE CHARTER? NO, I DON'T THINK IT DOES. 
          HOWEVER, WE ARE THE CHARTER, WE'RE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS ON REVISIONS TO THE CHARTER. 
          AND SO I THINK WE CAN, YOU KNOW, CONSIDER THIS AS A CHARTER AMENDMENT. 
          BUT THEN AS WE'RE DOING WITH, I THINK A FEW OTHER THINGS POINT OUT TO COUNSEL THAT THIS DOES NOT HAVE TO BE A CHARTER AMENDMENT. 
          IT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED IN OTHER WAYS. 
          I'M JUST WONDERING, IS THERE AN ADVANTAGE TO HAVING THIS IN THE CHARTER COMMISSIONER ALANO? IT REDUCES THE DISCRETION OF A ROGUE AND UNLI CITY ATTORNEY , WHICH IS NOT HOW THINGS HAVE BEEN IN RECENT HISTORY. 
          BUT YOU NEVER KNOW. 
          I MEAN, I THINK THE ADVANTAGE TO HAVING IT IN THE CHARTER IS THAT IT IS MORE PERMANENT, BUT, BUT ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MAKE TO COUNCIL AND OBVIOUSLY, AS YOU ALL KNOW, THEY GET TO CHOOSE WHAT THEY WANT TO SUBMIT TO THE VOTERS AS A CHARTER AMENDMENT. 
          UM, BUT I THINK PROPOSING IT AS A CHARTER AMENDMENT WAS MY PREFERRED APPROACH. 
          HERE I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE, UM, WORKING GROUP. 
          OKAY. 
          DO WE NEED TO VOTE SEPARATELY ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS? I WOULD PROBABLY RECOMMEND TO VOTE SEPARATELY. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WOULD YOU MIND REVISING YOUR MOTION? UM, YES. 
          UM, I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE ADDED LANGUAGE SUBJECT TO CONFIRMATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER THE DEFINITION OF CITY ATTORNEY. 
          AND THEN THE FINAL SENTENCE, THE CITY ATTORNEY SHALL SERVE UNTIL REMOVED FROM THE OFFICE BY JOINT ACTION OF THE CITY MANAGER AND COUNCIL. 
          OKAY. 
          , THIS DOCUMENT. 
          SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE WORKING GROUP THAT THE CITY MANAGER APPOINTS. 
          THE CITY ATTORNEY APPOINTS AND REMOVES THE CITY ATTORNEY WITH THE CONFIRMATION BY CITY COUNCIL. 
          UH, DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND. 
          COMMISSIONER BACHAN. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. 
          AYE. 
          AYE. 
          DO WE HAVE ANY OPPOSED? I'M GONNA ABSTAIN. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER GREENBERG ABSTAINS. 
          OKAY, SO RECOMMENDATION ONE PASSES. 
          YES. 
          CAN I MAKE COMMENT ON THAT? SO YOU MIGHT REMEMBER THAT I HAD RESERVATIONS ABOUT THIS HAVING BEEN A FORMER ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY AND MY MIND HAS CHANGED. 
          AND THE REASON IS THIS ALLOWS THE REPRESENTATIVE WILL OF THE PEOPLE TO BE EXPRESSED THROUGH COUNSEL. 
          MUCH LIKE IN OUR FEDERAL SYSTEM, WE HAVE EXECUTIVE APPOINT, LEGISLATIVE, CONFIRM. 
          SOME STATES FOLLOW THAT FOR THEIR CHIEF LEGAL OFFICER. 
          UM, OF COURSE, OUR STATE, WE ELECT OUR CHIEF, UM, LEGAL OFFICER. 
          AND SO I THINK THAT THIS GIVES THAT BALANCE, AND THAT'S WHY I HAVE BEEN PERSUADED THIS IS THE WAY TO GO. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT CONTEXT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN COMMISSIONER, LAST, DID YOU ALSO HAVE A MOTION ON THE SECOND RECOMMENDATION? QUICK QUESTION ON THAT SEC. 
          QUICK QUESTION ON THE SECOND ONE. 
          UM, THE, THE BACKUP THAT I HAVE FROM THE EMAIL, THE RECOMMENDATION LANGUAGE ON BOTH IS THE SAME. 
          AM I READING THAT INCORRECTLY? YOU'RE READING? I WAS, IT IS IN DRAFT. 
          THIS ONE IS IN DRAFT FORM. 
          AND SO WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST ON THE SECOND ONE IS LET US BRING IT BACK NEXT TIME. 
          OKAY. 
          THE UPDATED, BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE FOR THE WORKING GROUP TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THIS LANGUAGE ONE MORE TIME, AND THEN WE CAN UPDATE THE RECOMMENDATION. 
          OKAY. 
          IT SAYS ROLL. 
          I KNOW. 
          JUST, UM, OKAY. 
          SO THAT CONCLUDES ITEM NUMBER TWO. 
          SO MOVING ON 
          [3. Discussion and possible action on the Petition Process Working Groups initial recommendation report on revisions to the petition process. (Commissioners Cowles, Dwyer, and McGiverin)]
TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE PETITION PROCESS WORKING GROUP. 
          UM, AND WE DO HAVE BACKUP MATERIAL THAT WAS PROVIDED BOTH BY EMAIL AND THEN YOU HAVE A COPY, UM, IN YOUR MATERIALS TODAY. 
          AND SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE WORKING GROUP. 
          UM, UM, COULD I MAKE SOME A SUPER QUICK COMMENT BEFORE WE, WE HAND IT TO, TO JC TO DISCUSS HIS PROPOSAL? UM, SO WE, LAST MEETING WHEN WE MET AS OPPOSED TO THE, THE TOWN HALL, UM, IT SEEMED LIKE WE WERE PRETTY MUCH IN AGREEMENT ON, ON THE, THE BULK OF THE PROPOSALS THAT WE HAD BEFORE US. 
          SO THE BACKUP FROM LAST TIME, UM, FOR THIS ITEM. 
          AND, UH, I HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO AS THOROUGHLY WORK IN THE, THE FEEDBACK FROM LAST TIME, SO I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN THAT'S WHY WE DON'T HAVE A NEW PROPOSAL RIGHT NOW, RATHER THAN PRESENT SOMETHING THAT MAY NEED MORE EDITS. 
          I JUST WANTED TO HOLD 
          [00:30:01]
OFF ON THAT UNTIL WE DO HAVE THAT TIME. 
          SO THE NEXT MEETING, UM, SHOULD BE ABLE TO PROPOSE THAT AND HOPEFULLY VOTE ON IT. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S HELPFUL CONTEXT. 
          AND SO COMMISSIONER DWYER, UM, THE WOULD, WAS THIS YOUR MATERIAL, THE MATERIALS THAT YOU PROVIDED? YES. 
          AND THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION? YES. 
          SO THIS WAS A DRAFT RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS CO DRAFTED, UH, BY MYSELF AND COMMISSIONER MCGIVEN. 
          UM, I'M HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT IT TODAY. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHETHER COMMISSIONER MCGIVEN WOULD LIKE TO BE PRESENT FOR THE VOTE. 
          UM, I HAVE A FEELING THAT WE ARE GONNA HAVE MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS, AND SO IF WE WANT TO JUST KIND OF TALK THROUGH IT, UM, I, I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AND ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ITEMS KIND OF ON THE PERCENTAGES JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT EXACTLY HOW THIS IS GOING TO WORK. 
          SO MAYBE WE CAN TALK, IF YOU WANT US TALK THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATION AND THEN WE CAN OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION. 
          YEAH, WELL, I CAN JUST SORT OF LAY IT OUT. 
          UM, SO THIS IS THE SAME COMPROMISE THAT WAS FLOATED LAST TIME. 
          UM, I THINK IT WAS LAST TIME WE WERE ALL TOGETHER, MINUS ME. 
          AND, UH, ESSENTIALLY IT'S, IT, IT TAKES THE FORM OF A TRIGGER LOCK. 
          SO, UM, IF THE LEGISLATURE WERE TO ALLOW THE CITY TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THE RAW NUMBER OF 20,000 AND THE PERCENTAGE OF 5% OR ANY PERCENTAGE, THE CITY WOULD THEN CHOOSE 5% FOR CHANGES TO THE CHARTER AS WELL AS ALIGN CHANGES, UH, VIA PETITION TO, UH, FOR INITIATIVES AND REFERENDUMS TO ALIGN WITH THAT. 
          SO THIS HOPEFULLY TAKES CARE OF THE LARGEST CONCERN THAT I HAD HEARD AROUND THE PRIOR RECOMMENDATION, WHICH WAS THAT WE WERE INADVERTENTLY CREATING A, A PERVERSE INCENTIVE OF SORTS FOR FOLKS TO, UH, MAKE CHANGES TO THE CITY CHARTER AS OPPOSED TO GOING THROUGH REGULAR PETITIONER REFERENDUM PROCESSES. 
          UM, THE LEGAL LANGUAGE WAS, UH, DRAFTED BY COMMISSIONER MCGOVERN. 
          A, HE'S A FINE LAWYER, SO I'M GUESSING THAT THIS LANGUAGE PASSES LEGAL MUSTER AS MUCH AS IT DOES MY PLAIN READING OF IT, BUT IT HAS NOT GONE THROUGH LEGAL. 
          SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THERE'S ANY RED FLAGS THERE THAT NEED TO BE DISCUSSED. 
          UH, I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THIS LANGUAGE WOULD MAKE UP A NEW SECTION OF THE CHARTER, UH, UNDER SUBSECTION, UNDER SECTION FOUR. 
          UM, AND THAT'S MAINLY BECAUSE I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT A BETTER PLACE TO, TO PUT IT. 
          AND SO I'M VERY OPEN TO ANY CHANGES OR RECOMMENDATIONS THERE AS WELL. 
          UM, IT'S PRETTY PLAIN ON ITS FACE. 
          I, I WANTED TO REALLY QUICK, UM, TALK ABOUT A COUPLE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED LAST TIME, UH, AND RESPOND TO THOSE. 
          UM, ONE WAS AROUND THE POLITICAL VIABILITY OF THIS CHANGE AND WHETHER THERE'S GONNA BE A STICKER SHOCK ASSOCIATED WITH A CERTAIN NUMBER. 
          UM, IF WE MOVE TO 5%, I THINK WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS, THE, THE EFFECTIVE NUMBER WOULD BE SOMEWHERE AROUND 29,000, UM, QUALIFIED VOTERS. 
          AND IN MY MIND, I PERSONALLY DON'T THINK MOVING FROM 20,000 TO 29,000 IS UNREASONABLE FOR A CITY WITH OVER HALF A MILLION QUALIFIED VOTERS. 
          UM, EVEN THOUGH IF I DID FIND IT DISQUIETING, I DON'T THINK THAT POLITICAL VIABILITY SHOULD BE A PRIMARY CONCERN OF THIS COMMISSION. 
          UM, AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, YOU KNOW, IT'S SORT OF OUR JOB TO JUST GET THE POLICY RIGHT AND MAKE A COLLECTIVE RECOMMENDATION. 
          AND THEN OUR POINTERS AND CITY COUNCIL WHO HAVE A MUCH BETTER READ ON PUBLIC OPINION THAN ANY OF US WILL MAKE THE CALL AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS SHOULD GO ON A BALLOT. 
          UM, SO THAT'S MY RESPONSE TO THAT CONCERN. 
          UH, THERE WAS ALSO A CONCERNED VOICE ABOUT LEAVING THIS DECISION EFFECTIVELY IN THE HANDS OF THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE. 
          UH, HAVING WORKED WITH, UH, THE LEGISLATURE A LOT. 
          THIS IS ALSO NOT MY OPTIMAL SOLUTION. 
          IT IS A COMPROMISE. 
          UM, I JUST REMIND US THAT WE'RE ALREADY FIRMLY IN THE HANDS OF THE LEGISLATURE ON THIS AND PRETTY MUCH EVERY ISSUE THEY CAN PREEMPT US OR SUBVERT US HOWEVER THEY LIKE. 
          OUR JOB IS JUST TO SAY WHAT'S RIGHT FOR AUSTIN. 
          UM, AND THEN THE LAST THING THAT WE HEARD FROM THE GRASSROOTS ADVOCATES, UM, A COUPLE TIMES WAS THAT THE MARKET HAS SOLVED THIS PROBLEM ALREADY. 
          ESSENTIALLY THERE'S NO REASON TO RAISE THE THRESHOLD BECAUSE, UH, THE PRICE OF LABOR FOR DOING PETITIONS HAS RAISED IT FOR US. 
          I'D SAY THAT WE SHOULD BE RECOMMENDING MORE DURABLE POLICY THAT, YOU KNOW, UPHOLDS OUR VALUES REGARDLESS OF THE STATE OF THE LABOR MARKET. 
          I THINK, UM, IT MIGHT BE, MIGHT VERY WELL BE TOO EXPENSIVE TO RUN A GRASSROOTS PETITION DRIVE RIGHT NOW, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT FIVE OR 10 YEARS FROM NOW WILL BRING. 
          UM, SO I THINK OUR POLICY SHOULD BE MORE RESPONSIVE TO THE VALUE OF A SIGNAL A A SINGLE SIGNATURE IN OUR CITY, AND NOT TO THE COST OF OBTAINING IT, WHICH IS GONNA VARY OVER TIME. 
          UM, THOSE WERE BASICALLY THE ONLY THINGS I WANTED TO ADDRESS. 
          I'M HAPPY TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THAT OR FURTHER POINTS. 
          SO THIS 
          [00:35:01]
WAS HELPFUL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I, UM, I MEAN, ON THE ISSUE, UH, I'VE BEEN GRAPPLING WITH THIS AS I'M SURE YOU ALL HAVE. 
          UM, AND I DID GO BACK ON THIS QUESTION OF ARE WE GOING TO DIVERT, YOU KNOW, IF WE INCREASE THE DURABLE THRESHOLD, THE SIGNATURE THRESHOLD, ARE WE GOING TO BE DIVERTING PEOPLE TO A CHARTER AMENDMENT? AND KIND OF GRAPPLING WITH, WELL, HOW DOES THIS INTERPLAY ALSO WITH US MOVING POTENTIALLY THE ELECTION DATES TO MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION. 
          AND I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT OUR RESOLUTION AND, YOU KNOW, COUNSEL DID ONLY SPECIFICALLY ASK US TO LOOK AT MOVING THE, UH, ELECTION DATE FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS. 
          NOT, AND I KNOW WE MADE AN EARLY DECISION TO COMBINE THOSE TWO KIND OF IN ONE RECOMMENDATION, BUT THAT TO ME PROVIDES ANOTHER POTENTIAL SOLUTION TO THIS ISSUE OF, YOU KNOW, CONCERN ABOUT DIVERTING PEOPLE TO CHARTER AMENDMENTS IS IF WE MOVE THE ELECTION DATE FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION, BUT NOT CITIZEN INITIATED PETITIONS FOR UM, INITIATIVES. 
          AM I USING THE CORRECT? I WONDER YES. 
          THEN, YOU KNOW, THAT ALONG WITH THE TWO YEAR LIMITATION ON CHARTER AMENDMENTS ANYWAY, SORT OF RESOLVES THAT ISSUE IN MY MIND. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHAT Y'ALL'S THOUGHTS ARE ON THAT, BUT I'VE BEEN THINKING ON THIS AND WANTED TO PUT IT OUT THERE. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER BEMAN, UM, THANK YOU FOR SAYING THAT. 
          I AGREE WITH THAT A LOT BECAUSE I THINK, AT LEAST FOR MYSELF COMING INTO THIS COMMISSION, I THINK, YOU KNOW, AND A FEW OTHER PEOPLE I'VE TALKED TO, UM, THOUGH OBVIOUSLY I CAN'T SPEAK FOR, FOR ANYONE ELSE ON THE COMMISSION, UM, I SORT OF SAW THE PROBLEM AS WE HAVE THESE ELECTIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN VERY LOW TURNOUT ELECTIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING, THEY SEEM TO BE HAPPENING WITH MORE FREQUENCY. 
          THERE SEEMED TO BE THE INTENTION OF HAVING THESE TOOLS AVAILABLE FOR AUSTINITES SEEMS TO BE GETTING A LITTLE TWISTED IN SOME OF THESE ELECTIONS AND SOME OF THESE PETITION SCENARIOS. 
          UM, AND I IMMEDIATELY COMING IN THOUGHT THAT THE SOLUTION TO THAT WAS TO MAKE IT HARDER TO GET ON THE BALLOT. 
          UM, AND AFTER TALKING TO FOLKS, AFTER TALKING, LISTENING TO A LOT OF THE FEEDBACK WE'VE HEARD, YOU KNOW, MY POSITION ON THIS, AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, HAS MOVED TO, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S NECESSARILY THE RIGHT SOLUTION BECAUSE AS YOU SAID, THERE ARE OTHER SOLUTIONS AND I THINK WE'RE CONSIDERING ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE SOLUTIONS, WHICH IS MOVING THEM TO HIGHER TURNOUT ELECTIONS. 
          UM, THE OTHER CONCERN THAT I WOULD HAVE THAT THAT, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER DWYER AND COMMISSIONER MCGOVERN FOR THE WORK THAT YOU PUT IN ON THIS, UM, BECAUSE I KNOW THIS IS A, THIS IS DEFINITELY A COMPROMISE FROM WHERE WE STARTED ON, ON SOME OF THESE THINGS. 
          UM, BUT ONE OF THE CON CONCERNS THAT, THAT YOU DIDN'T ADDRESS WAS THE FACT THAT IT IMPACTS DIFFERENT TYPES OF GROUPS DIFFERENTLY. 
          SO RAISING THE THRESHOLD IS A PRETTY BLUNT INSTRUMENT. 
          WHEN YOU RAISE THE THRESHOLD, YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE MAKING IT A LITTLE BIT HARDER FOR FOLKS WHO HAVE LESS MONEY TO BE ABLE TO LAUNCH THESE INITIATIVES BECAUSE IT DOES COST A LOT OF MONEY. 
          AND IF THE SIGNATURES THAT YOU GET ARE IN SOME WAY A FUNCTION OF THE MONEY THAT YOU HAVE TO PUT INTO IT TO HIRE CANVASERS, TO ADVERTISE, TO OUTREACH, UM, TO VERIFY THOSE SIGNATURES, UM, IT'S NOT GOING TO IMPACT THE CORPORATIONS. 
          IT'S NOT GONNA IMPACT UBER AND LYFT AT ALL. 
          RIGHT? IF THEY, IF THEY HAVE THE MONEY TO PUT INTO IT, THEY'RE STILL GONNA BE ABLE TO GET THEM ON THE BALLOT. 
          SO REALLY IT'S MORE, THE WAY I SEE IT, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE, PUNITIVE ISN'T THE RIGHT WORD. 
          IT JUST, IT, IT MAKES IT A LITTLE HARDER FOR THE GRASSROOTS GROUPS. 
          AND SO THAT IS MY CONCERN, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE I DO THINK THERE ARE OTHER SOLUTIONS, AND THIS IS A PRETTY BLUNT ONE. 
          UM, I DO APPRECIATE THAT, THAT IT'S SORT OF, UM, YOU KNOW, A TRIGGER LAW AS OPPOSED TO A FLAT INCREASE, BUT 29,000, THAT'S, THAT'S A LOT COMPARED TO 20,000, THAT'S ALMOST 50% MORE. 
          AND SO I'M PRETTY HESITANT ON THIS. 
          UM, I WOULD LIKE MORE TIME TO THINK IT OVER. 
          UM, I'M NOT SURE THAT I WOULD BE READY TO MAKE A VOTE EITHER WAY ON THIS TONIGHT, BUT, UM, I JUST DID WANNA SHARE THAT ADDITIONAL CONCERN AS WELL. 
          I'M CHAIR, SO, UM, COMMISSIONER DWYER, I JUST, I'M CURIOUS, AND I, AND I ALSO APPRECIATE THE AMOUNT OF TIME. 
          I KNOW YOU'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON, ON, UM, CRAFTING THIS AND, AND BEING RECEPTIVE TO, TO OPINIONS. 
          I'M JUST CURIOUS, IS THERE ANYTHING, UH, IN ANY KIND OF LIKE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OR MAYBE COMMENTS THAT LEGISLATORS ARE MAKING OR ANYTHING EVEN JUST IN THE ZEITGEIST THAT LEAD YOU TO BELIEVE THAT THE LEGISLATURE MIGHT AT ANY POINT CHANGE, MODIFY THIS LAW TO, TO BE, TO, TO ALLOW MUNICIPALITIES TO DO THESE? IN THE ALTERNATIVE? NO, ONLY MY OWN COMMON SENSE THAT AS CITIES GROW, THE 20,000 THRESHOLD IS GONNA BECOME ARTIFICIALLY LOW FOR MORE AND MORE OF THEM. 
          BUT NO, I HAVE NOT HEARD OF ANY TALK OF THIS. 
          SO, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE HAD A, A, UH, VERY PLEASANT DEBATE, IF YOU WOULD, SO, YOU KNOW, MY POSITION, BUT I GUESS MY, MY CONCERN WOULD BE EVEN SETTING THAT ASIDE, MY CONCERN, I WOULD HAVE SOME CONCERN IN PUTTING SOMETHING IN FRONT OF THE, THE VOTERS TO VOTE ON THAT ISN'T 
          [00:40:01]
REALLY ATTACHED TO ANY SORT OF YEAH. 
          ANY, ANYTHING THAT SUGGESTS THAT IT COULD BE OF ISSUE OR GERMANE TO KIND OF, KIND OF ANYTHING. 
          UM, I JUST, JUST IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY WE'VE ALL TALKED ABOUT SORT OF THE, IN FACT, I THINK THIS, THIS POINTS TO SORT OF LIKE TRYING TO ADDRESS THE, UH, PETITION FATIGUE OR THE, THE ISSUE FATIGUE THAT VOTERS HAVE OF, OF VOTING ON SO MANY DIFFERENT ISSUES. 
          THAT WOULD JUST, THAT WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL CONCERN THAT I WOULD HAVE IS, IS THIS SOLVING A PROBLEM? I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE, AND I KNOW YOU'RE, YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT NOT WANTING TO COME BACK TO THIS, NOT HAVING A CITY COMMISSION HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS AND MODIFY THIS, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE IS ANY REASON TO BELIEVE THIS MIGHT EVER COME INTO PLAY OTHER THAN OUR OWN SORT OF THINKING OF THIS WOULD BE A SENSIBLE THING FOR THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO DO. 
          WOULD YOU LIKE MY RESPONSE ON THAT? UM, YOU'RE RIGHT. 
          WE CANNOT CONTROL WHAT THE LEGISLATURE DOES. 
          UM, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS I LIKE ABOUT WHAT, HOW COMMISSIONER MCGINN, UM, DRAFTED THIS LANGUAGE IS THAT IT REALLY READS LIKE MORE OF A STATEMENT OF INTENT, UM, THAN ANYTHING ELSE. 
          AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO GO ON THE RECORD AS A CITY IS TO WHAT WE PREFER, THE WAY THING WE PREFER THINGS TO BE. 
          UM, AND TO THE QUESTION OF, UM, I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS YOUR PRIMARY CONCERN? JUST, IS THERE A REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THIS COULD EVER BE ENACTED? YES, REALLY. 
          WHAT WAS, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, MANN'S PRIMARY CONCERN? OH, SORRY. 
          MY PRIMARY CONCERN IS THAT IT'S NOT GONNA IMPACT, UM, IT'S NOT REALLY GONNA IMPACT THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE THE MONEY FOR THIS ALREADY. 
          SO THE, YOU KNOW, THE CORPORATION, SO IF, IF ONE OF OUR CONCERNS IS THAT THERE'S MONEY BEING PUMPED IN FROM OUTSIDE, YOU KNOW, CORPORATIONS, THAT IT'S GETTING ITEMS ON THE BALLOT FOR FOLKS TO GO OUT TO THAT THE CITY HAS TO SPEND MONEY ON THAT ELECTION FOR, UM, THEN I DON'T THINK THIS ACTUALLY ADDRESSES THAT. 
          AND TO THE QUESTION OF WHETHER, UH, THE CHANGE IN DATE IS A STRONG ENOUGH DOSAGE FOR THE PROBLEM, UM, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE CHANGE IN DATE ALSO. 
          BUT, UM, IF WE MOVED TO ADOPT THIS AND NOT THAT, SO ESSENTIALLY DECOUPLING THE, THE ISSUE IN TIME MAKING IT SO IT'S NOT COMPETITIVE WITH ANOTHER, UM, TYPE OF CHANGE IN NOVEMBERS, UM, YEAH, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD SORT OF SOLVE THE PROBLEM. 
          BUT I THINK WE NEED BOTH. 
          UM, I THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE HARD TO BE GET, TO GET ON THE BALLOT AND IT SHOULD BE HARD TO PASS, UH, BECAUSE AGAIN, I THINK THIS, THESE ARE ISSUES THAT YOU COULD ARGUE ABOUT WHY NO ONE SHOWS UP TO VOTE ON THESE THINGS, WHETHER IT'S THE DATE OR THE WEATHER OR, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC EDUCATION. 
          BUT THE FACT IS PEOPLE AREN'T SHOWING UP TO VOTE ON THESE SINGLE ISSUE QUESTIONS. 
          AND SO I THINK THAT ARGUES FOR, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE REMOVING THEM FROM THE PUBLIC SPHERE. 
          YEAH, AND I, I THINK THE WAY I WAS THINKING OF IT WAS MORE SO AS A WAY TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF, YOU KNOW, WE'RE CONCERNED IF WE INCREASE THE THRESHOLD FOR INITIATIVE PETITIONS, THAT WE'RE GONNA BE DRIVING PEOPLE TO CHARTER CHANGES IF WE MOVE THE ELECTION DATE ONLY FOR CHARTER CHANGES TO MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION. 
          THAT COMBINED WITH THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE TO WAIT TWO YEARS TO DO A CHARTER AMENDMENT CREATES A DISINCENTIVE FOR THAT. 
          RIGHT. 
          I, I AM LESS CONCERNED IF WE MOVE ONLY CHARTER ELECTIONS TO MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION COMBINED WITH THE TWO YEARS. 
          I'M LESS CONCERNED THAT INCREASING THE DURABLE THRESHOLD, SIGNATURE THRESHOLD IS GONNA SOMEHOW DIVERT PEOPLE TO MAKING CHANGES TO THE CHARTER BECAUSE THERE'S A LOWER SIGNATURE THRESHOLD. 
          IN THAT CASE, IT MIGHT MAKE MORE SENSE TO REVERT BACK TO THE PRIOR PROPOSAL. 
          I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF OTHERS AGREE OR OR DISAGREE WITH THAT, BUT YES, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, WELL, I MEAN, ASIDE FROM THE FACT THAT I'M AGAINST MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT PERIOD, RIGHT? UM, I THINK IT SAYS IN THE CHARTER THAT THE INITIATIVE PETITIONS WILL BE THE SAME RULES AS THE CHARTER, UM, RULES. 
          SO IF THE STATE CHANGES THE RULES FOR CHARTER PETITIONS, WE DON'T NEED TO DO ANYTHING. 
          IT'S GONNA CHANGE, YOU KNOW, IF, ISN'T THAT THE WAY THE CHARTER'S WRITTEN CURRENTLY? BUT I THINK THAT'S THE CHANGE THAT WE'RE DEBATING IS, BUT IF, IF THE, UM, LEGISLATURE DECIDES TO CHANGE IT TO 30,000 OR 5%, THEN THAT'LL AFFECT US ON BOTH TYPES OF PETITIONS, NOT JUST THE CHARTER BECAUSE OF THE WAY OUR CHARTER'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW. 
          SO WE DON'T NEED TO PUT 
          [00:45:01]
IN THIS KIND OF COMPLICATED THING THAT THE VOTERS ARE GONNA SCRATCH THEIR HEADS ABOUT. 
          IT'S ALREADY THERE, IT'S THERE. 
          IF WE DON'T INSERT A DURABLE SIGNATURE THRESHOLD FOR INITIATIVE PETITIONS, I MEAN, I THINK IF WE CHANGE THAT, THEN IT'S NOT THERE. 
          AND THAT WAS KIND OF WHAT THIS LANGUAGE WAS AIM AND REGARDING, REGARDING THE STICKER SHOCK, YOU KNOW, SAYING, OH, IT'S ONLY 29,000. 
          UM, WHEN I SPOKE TO THE CLERK, SHE SAID, IT DEPENDS, I MEAN, THERE ARE PETITIONS THAT, UM, APPLY TO THE, UM, ETJ AND THEN THE REQUIREMENTS ARE MORE LIKE 33,000. 
          WE ACTUALLY GOT SOME CLARITY ON THAT, CAROLINE, IF YOU WANNA ADDRESS IT. 
          SO I RESEARCHED THAT ISSUE. 
          YES. 
          AND, UH, IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO LOOK IN SEVERAL PLACES, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, THE ELECTION CODE, OUR CITY CHARTER, UM, BUT THE PETITIONS CAN ONLY BE SIGNED BY PEOPLE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OR WHEN, I'M SORRY, NOT CAN ONLY BE SIGNED, BUT THEY, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THE NUMBER OF HOW TO CALCULATE HOW MANY SIGNATURES, THAT PERCENTAGE THAT SHOULD BE BASED ON CITY LIMIT VOTERS ONLY, AND NOT INCLUDE LIMITED VOTERS OR THE ETJ VOTERS, EVEN IF IT'S AN ELECTION THAT THOSE FOLKS MAY END UP BEING ABLE TO, TO VOTE IN. 
          OH, THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. 
          SURE. 
          YES, COMMISSIONER COLES. 
          SO J AND JUST SO I'M, I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS MATTER. 
          SO IF THE, IF THIS IS ENACTED AND THE TEXAS STATE GOVERNMENT DOES MAKE THIS VERY SPECIFIC CHANGE, THIS WOULD ESSENTIALLY THEN, THEN IT WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE IN THE HANDS OF, OF WHOM, AND MAYBE THIS IS A, A WOULD IT BE CITY COUNCIL WHO WOULD DECIDE WHAT THE THRESHOLD IS IN THIS SCENARIO THAT THIS IS DESIGNED TO ADDRESS WHERE THE STATE GOVERNMENT SAYS OUR CITIES, YOU CAN USE AN EITHER A FIXED NUMBER OF QUALIFIED VOTERS OR, UH, A PERCENTAGE. 
          OUR CHARTER IS WRITTEN TO SAY WE REFLECT STATE LAW. 
          I FORGET THE EXACT TERMINOLOGY, BUT I'M WONDERING WOULD, WOULD THIS BE ACCOMPLISHING, JUST TAKING IT OUTTA THE HANDS OF WHOMEVER WOULD THEN MAKE THAT DECISION? AND I, I THINK WE'RE FOLLOWING A FEW SORT OF HYPOTHETICAL STEPS, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHAT THIS IS MEANT TO ADDRESS ANYWAY. 
          BUT THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT WOULD ACCOMPLISH, RIGHT? IS THAT IT WOULD TAKE THE, TAKE THIS CHOICE OUTTA THE HANDS OF THE DECISION MAKERS THAT WOULD THEN BE GRANTED THAT UNDER STATE LAW AND OUR CITY CHARTER AND SAY, NO DECISION MAKER, PRESUMABLY CITY COUNCIL. 
          IS THAT WHO IT WOULD BE? YOU MUST USE 5% AND NOT A FIXED NUMBER. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? UH, THIS IS CAROLINE. 
          I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, ACTUALLY. 
          UM, IF I, YEAH, I'M SORRY. 
          I DON'T, I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION. 
          NO. 
          YES, AND I, AND I, I RECOGNIZE THAT I COULD PHRASE IT BETTER AND ALSO BECAUSE I THINK IT'S, IT THERE WE'RE DEALING WITH A, A COMPOUNDING NUMBER OF HYPOTHETICALS, BUT THE CITY CHARTER CURRENTLY TIES, WHAT ELSE? SHOOT, I DON'T HAVE THAT LANGUAGE. 
          YEAH, IT, SO TO INTERJECT, THE CITY CHARTER CURRENTLY TIES OUR INITIATIVE AND REFER REFERENDUM ELECTIONS TO THE SAME WAY THAT CHARTER AMENDMENT ELECTIONS ARE CONDUCTED. 
          AND SO THAT LEADS US TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 9.004, WHICH IS ABOUT CHARTER AMENDMENT ELECTIONS. 
          AND SO YOU, I MEAN, WHAT YOU ALL ARE KIND OF TALKING ABOUT HERE IS, IS EITHER LEAVING THAT LANGUAGE IN THE CHARTER AND THEN IF THE LEGISLATURE CHANGES IT, OUR NUMBERS CHANGE AS WELL PER STATE LAW OR REMOVING THAT SO THAT, UM, OF COURSE THE CHARTER AMENDMENTS ARE STILL GONNA BE RUN ACCORDING TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, BUT INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM COULD BE RUN ACCORDING TO A DIFFERENT AMOUNT IF, IF YOU UNCOUPLED THAT BASICALLY REMOVED THAT PHRASE THAT TIES IT TO HOW CHARTERS ARE RUN. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION OR NOT. 
          WELL, I GUESS MY ONE QUESTION IS WHO IN, IN THIS, LET'S SAY THAT THE, WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, I, I THINK THAT THE LAYERS OF HYPOTHETICALS MAKE ME THINK MAYBE THIS QUESTION IS, IS JUST BETTER. 
          I'M FOLLOWING YOU, COMMISSIONER COS YEAH, I'M FOLLOWING. 
          I GET IT. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          I KNOW WHAT TO DO. 
          I ALSO, AND NOT TO SAY THAT I DON'T THINK THAT I, I JUST, I'M WONDERING IF MAYBE I, MAYBE IT'S BETTER MADE AS A POINT AND NOT AS A QUESTION AND SO I'LL IT THERE. 
          MADAM CHAIR? YES, COMMISSIONER ALDO. 
          UM, MS. I THINK MS. VAN MANON WAS EARLIER IN THE QUEUE, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO GET IN THE QUEUE. 
          OKAY. 
          SUPER QUICK. 
          UM, I MAY HAVE MISSED IT SOMEWHERE IN THE RECOMMENDATION, BUT IS THERE A LANGUAGE IN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT REFERENCES WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, A RECOMMENDATION TO CHANGE THE, THE STATE LAW THRESHOLD FOR CITY CHARTER AMENDMENTS? WOULD THAT BE ADDED TO THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE AGENDA? IS THAT PART OF THIS AT ALL? IS THERE, BASICALLY, IS THERE ANY FOLLOW UP TO THAT IN TERMS OF TRYING TO GET THE STATE LEGISLATOR 
          [00:50:01]
TO CHANGE OR NOT CHANGE THAT THRESHOLD? NO, BUT I LIKE IT, COMMISSIONER ANO, I WANTED TO ADDRESS, UH, YOUR QUESTION BECAUSE I THINK I UNDERSTAND IT. 
          AND THEN I WANTED TO, UH, MAKE AN OBSERVATION, UM, ABOUT SOME OF THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS WE'RE DISCUSSING AND MY EVOLUTION AND MY THINKING OF THEM. 
          SO IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE TWO OF THE HANDOUT WITH, UH, RED, IT DOES HAVE THIS LANGUAGE THAT IS VERY PRESCRIPTIVE AND IT SAYS THEN THE THRESHOLD TO AMEND THE CHARTER WILL BE 5% OF THE NUMBER OF QUALIFIED VOTERS IN THE CITY. 
          AND SO IT'S VERY HAND TYING, BUT AS YOU'RE SAYING, A LOT OF VERY SPECIFIC THINGS NEED TO HAPPEN. 
          UH, ONE OF THE ONES THAT IS THE MOST SORT OF, I THINK, DIFFICULT TO ENVISION FOR ME ANYTIME SOON IS THAT BOTH THE CHARTER AND MUNICIPAL CODE, UH, WOULD BE THAT BOTH OF THEM WOULD BE EMPOWERED BY THE LEGISLATURE TO HAVE SOMETHING LIKE A, UH, PERCENTAGE OF QUALIFIED VOTERS THAT IS SET LOCALLY. 
          UM, THEY COULD PICK FOUR AND THEN THAT SORT OF KNOCKS OUT OUR ABILITY TO DO FIVE, OR THEY COULD SAY 25,000 WITHOUT DOING A PERCENTAGE. 
          UM, AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, THAT I'VE BEEN LISTENING HARD FOR AND HAVE BEEN PERSUADED BY IS THE SORT OF NOTION THAT, UH, IT IS HARD TO DO 20,000 REGARDLESS OF POPULATION SIZE. 
          AND SO IF WE THINK OF IT NOT AS DOES A PRO IS, ARE YOU PROVING WHEN YOU SUBMIT YOUR PAPERWORK THAT THERE'S A PROPORTION OF THE CITY THAT FEELS COMFORTABLE SIGNING, BUT RATHER HAVE YOU MET THIS BLACK OR WHITE THRESHOLD OF THERE IS ENOUGH INTEREST IN ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY? UM, I'VE BEEN PERSUADED BY THAT, BUT THE THING THAT REALLY PERSUADED ME, UH, WAS GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT THE 20 YEARS OF WHAT THE ACTUAL PETITION ORDINANCES WERE. 
          UH, AND IT IS NO SURPRISE TO I OF YOU, RIGHT? I HAVE CENTER LEFT POLITICS AND, AND FRIENDS WITH SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT COME HERE, BUT I COULD NOT FIND ANY, EVEN ONES THAT I VOTED AGAINST WHERE I FELT THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ON THE BALLOT. 
          UH, WHAT WAS AN ISSUE WAS THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ON THE MAY BALLOT. 
          WHEN I STARTED TO SORT OF REFLECT ON WHAT WAS REALLY UPSETTING ME IN TERMS OF HOW THINGS HAVE GONE WITH PETITION, UH, WITH PETITIONS AND MANY OF THE THINGS THAT I ENDED UP VOTING FOR RIGHT OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS THAT I, OVER THE LAST 15 YEARS AND THE LAST 20 YEARS OF LOOKING AT IT, UH, AS I SAID AT OUR DEBATE, UH, TOWN HALL, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT LABOR UNIONS ASK US TO DO. 
          THERE'S THE PROGRESSIVE GROUPS, THERE ARE SOME GRASSROOTS ONES I MENTIONED ONE THAT KIND OF MADE AN IMPRESSION ON ME, WHICH WAS THE MORE AGGRESSIVE SMOKING ORDINANCE, WHICH IS NOT NECESSARILY IN THE, IN OUR RECOLLECTION, BUT I WOULDN'T HAVE WANTED TO MAKE IT HARDER TO GET THAT ON THE, ON THE BALLOT. 
          UM, AND THEN WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE THE HANGOVER OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH, UH, THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY REFORMS. BUT AS I'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, AS I'VE BEEN REFLECTING ON THAT, THE THING THAT WAS FRUSTRATING ABOUT THAT EPISODE WAS NOT THE 20,000 MARK. 
          IT WAS THE MISDIRECTION, THE MIS CONFUSION, THE FACT THAT IT WAS IN MAY AND THEREFORE LOW TURNOUT AND THEREFORE VENUE SHOPPING. 
          UM, IT WASN'T, IT WASN'T THOSE ISSUES THAT REALLY KIND OF DROVE MY, UM, FRUSTRATION AT, AT, AT THAT EPISODE. 
          AND THEN LOOKING AT THE OVERALL ROSTER OF THINGS THAT HAD BEEN PUT, EVEN THE THINGS THAT WERE, YOU KNOW, I DID NOT AGREE WITH OR DIDN'T LIKE HOW THEY HAPPENED, LIKE THE TNC, YOU KNOW, OR, UH, UH, VOTE. 
          WHAT REALLY SORT OF DROVE MY CONCERN AS I REFLECTED UPON THAT LIST AND LOOKED AT THAT LIST, WHICH I'M GONNA PRODUCE FOR YOU ALL, 'CAUSE I THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE A SIMILAR REACTION, WAS NOT THAT SILLY STUFF OR TANGENTIAL STUFF WAS BEING PUT BEFORE US, BUT SOME OF IT WAS BEING PUT BEFORE US IN THIS DISHONEST WAYS. 
          BUT MOSTLY IT WAS BEING PUT BEFORE US AT A TIME THAT I DO NOT FEEL IS INCLUSIVE OR REFLECTED OF THE MEDIAN VOTER. 
          UM, I DID TALK TO MY APPOINTER, UH, WHO I BELIEVE REMAINS INTERESTED IN, IN MAKING IT THE, A HIGHER HURDLE FOR THINGS TO, TO GET ON THERE. 
          AND, UH, THERE WERE 
          [00:55:01]
SEVERAL OPTIONS OFFERED, UH, IT THAT COULD COMPLEMENT A 5% APPROACH, WHETHER IT BE CHANGING THE 5% TO THE PERCENTAGE THAT GETS US TO 20,000 TODAY SO WE CAN ORGANICALLY GROW AND NOT HAVE THIS CLIFF IF 20 YEARS FROM NOW WE HAVE A DEMOCRATIC TRIFECTA STATEWIDE, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S VERY EASY FOR US TO CALL SOMEONE AND PASS POLICY. 
          THERE WAS THE IDEA OF ASKING THAT THE 20,000 BE EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED ACROSS SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS, WHICH WOULD POSE ITS OWN SORT OF DIFFICULTY, BUT IT WOULD BE INCLUSIVE, UH, AND ALIGN WITH I THINK THE INCLUSIVITY WE'RE LOOKING AT WITH SOME OF THE OTHER MEASURES. 
          SO I THINK THAT AS I'VE GONE THROUGH THIS PROCESS, I'VE REALIZED, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THE 20 K, IT'S A BUNCH OF OTHER ISSUES, UH, THAT KIND OF HAVE CAUSED AND DRIVE MY CONCERN. 
          THAT SAID, IF WE COULD FIND A WAY TO EQUITABLY RAISE, UH, THE REQUIREMENT IN A WAY THAT IS MORE GRADUAL, UH, OR IN A WAY THAT ALIGNS WITH SOME OF THE INCLUSIVE THINGS WE'RE TRYING TO DO, LIKE THE, UH, ALL SMDS HAVE TO, ER DISTRICTS HAVE TO HAVE THEIR 2000, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE OF INTEREST TO ME. 
          IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT LATE IN THE PROCESS TO BE THINKING OF THESE PERMUTATIONS. 
          I ALSO TO CONCLUDE, WANNA ADDRESS, UH, AN OPTION THAT YOU'RE BRINGING UP, UH, WHICH I THINK I'VE DIRECTLY, BUT I WANT TO BE MORE CLEAR ABOUT IT. 
          THE, THE RESOLUTION THAT CREATED US DID NOT SPECIFICALLY SAY CONSIDER A NEW DATE FOR THE ORDINANCE INITIATIVES. 
          IT IS VERY MUCH FOCUSED ON THE CHARTER. 
          I THINK AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH THIS PROCESS FOR ME, AND I'VE CONVEYED THIS TO MY APPOINTER, I THINK THAT IS NOT AN OVERSIGHT, BUT, UH, I, I THINK SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE CORRECTED, UH, BY TRYING TO ALSO THINK ABOUT THE ORDINANCE INITIATIVES. 
          AND AS I REVIEWED THAT LIST OF THE 20 YEARS OF THE 20 SOME ORDINANCES WE'VE DONE, WHAT REALLY STUCK OUT AT ME IS HOW MANY OF THEM WERE IN MAY AND HOW MANY OF THEM HAVE REALLY LOW TURNOUTS. 
          AND SO THE IDEA OF SACRIFICING THE MOVE OF THE ORDINANCE INITIATIVES TOWARDS THE HIGHER TURNOUT ELECTIONS, UH, THAT'S ONE THAT CAUSES ME CONCERN. 
          UM, I WOULD PREFER AN APPROACH WHERE WE DO NOT RAISE THE REQUIREMENT IN TERMS OF 20 K OR FIND A WAY FOR THE 20 K TO BE MORE INCLUSIVE, BUT KEEP ASKING THE MEDIAN VOTER, UH, TO VOTE. 
          I WAS ALSO VERY MOVED BY EQUITY ACTION, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO SUPPORT WAITING FOR A MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION OR AS THEY HAVE NEVER INDICATED, THEY'RE INTERESTED IN, UH, ANY TYPE OF PERMUTATION TO AN INCREASE. 
          UH, WHICH I THINK POINTS TO MAYBE HOW THE COMMUNITY WILL REACT AND THE WHAT THE COUNSEL WILL HEAR ONCE WE GIVE THEM OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          THANK YOU FOR MY EXTENDING COMMENT. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SANA. 
          THAT'S VERY HELPFUL. 
          CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG. 
          SO, UM, AS FAR AS, I THINK IT'S A MISCHARACTERIZATION, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT EQUITY ACTION TO SAY THAT THERE WAS A VENUE SHOPPING, I THINK THEY WERE CLEAR THAT THEY WANTED THEIR INITIATIVE ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT AND IT JUST WASN'T ABLE TO BE, UM, VALIDATED IN TIME. 
          BUT ONE THING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP WAS A DEADLINE SO THAT THEY CAN SUBMIT AND KNOW THAT THERE ALLOWING FOR ENOUGH TIME FOR A PETITION TO BE VALIDATED FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTION. 
          IS THAT FEASIBLE? UM, NOT REALLY . 
          SO IT CAN, IF WE ARE GIVEN A DEADLINE, LIKE I MENTIONED, AT MINIMUM IT'LL TAKE US 30 DAYS. 
          BUT WHAT HAPPENS IF WE, WE'VE BEEN IN A SITUATION WHERE WE'VE RECEIVED THREE PETITIONS WITHIN ONE WEEK, HOW I, I WON'T BE ABLE TO MEET THE DEADLINES. 
          UM, I THINK IT WOULD BE BEST FOR WHO OR A PETITIONER TO SUBMIT A PETITION WELL IN ADVANCE. 
          I MEAN, I THINK THE, THE, THE DEADLINE SHOULD BE PUT ON THEM. 
          THAT'S JUST MY  OPINION. 
          WELL, AND THAT'S THE OTHER APPROACH. 
          I MEAN THE DEADLINE THAT WOULD, SORRY, IS THERE A DEADLINE THAT WOULD WORK? 'CAUSE THAT IS WHAT WAS SAID. 
          COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, ARE YOU REFERRING TO A DEADLINE TO SUBMIT THE PETITION IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE ON 
          [01:00:01]
THE NOVEMBER BALLOT? CAN I, I CLARIFY. 
          ARE YOU REFERRING TO WHAT COMMISSIONER VAN MENON HAS PROPOSED IN TERMS OF, BECAUSE COMMISSIONER VAN MENON PROPOSED A, A FIX, WHICH WOULD BE THAT, THAT A, UH, GROUP GOES, PRESENTS THE, THEIR PETITION THAT THEY, THEY INTEND TO GATHER, GATHER SIGNATURES FOR, AND THE CITY CLERK CAN GIVE THEM A DEADLINE BY WHICH THEY CAN SUBMIT IT TO GET ON THE BALLOT. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO, SO LONG IS, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE NICE IF, IF THEY LOOK AT THE DATE THAT AN ELECTION, THE NOVEMBER ELECTION NEEDS TO BE CALLED, THEN THEY SUBMIT THEIR PETITION 90 DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THAT, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO, I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, I'M CONFIDENT THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO VALIDATE IF WE EVEN RECEIVED TWO PETITIONS. 
          UM, BUT IF YOU GOT FOUR MM-HMM. 
           WELL, BUT IN COMMISSIONER VAN MEN'S, UM, PROPOSAL, YOU WOULD BE SETTING YOUR OWN DEADLINES BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PETITIONS YOU'VE RECEIVED AND BASED ON WHEN YOU RECEIVED THEM. 
          SO I GUESS IF I'M UNDERSTANDING COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, MAYBE WE'RE, WE'RE NOT COMMUNICATING, I DON'T KNOW. 
          MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING MORE TO IT BECAUSE IF, IF THE CLERK'S OFFICE IS SETTING THEIR OWN DEADLINES, THEN IT SEEMS LIKE THAT THAT PROBLEM WOULD BE OBVIATED. 
          RIGHT. 
          WHAT I UNDERSTOOD FROM THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE, UM, LAST WEEK, WAS IT LAST WEEK, UM, IS THAT THE CLERK'S, THE CLERK SHOULD BE GIVEN A DEADLINE TO VALIDATE A PETITION. 
          UM, THAT IS WHERE, THAT'S HOW I UNDERSTOOD. 
          AND I CANNOT, I CAN'T SAY YES, WE CAN HAVE IT DONE WITHIN 30 DAYS, UH, BECAUSE WE HAVE THOSE INSTANCES WHERE WE'VE HAD THREE PETITIONS SUBMITTED WITHIN ONE WEEK. 
          WHAT I, WHAT WE ARE SAYING OR RECOMMENDING IS THAT LIKE THE LETTER OF INTENT, WHEN THEY SUBMIT THAT THEY SHOULD KNOW. 
          WE CAN LET THEM KNOW. 
          IF THEY'RE SAYING WE WANT THIS ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT, THEY SHOULD REACH OUT TO US. 
          I WOULD ASSUME THEY WOULD KNOW WHEN THE ELECTION NEEDS TO BE CALLED. 
          AND SO THE, THE CIRCULATOR PETITIONER, YOU KNOW, THEY SHOULD LOOK AT THAT DEADLINE OR WHEN THE, THE, UH, ELECTION NEEDS TO BE CALLED AND SUBMIT THAT PETITION 90 DAYS BEFORE THAT DATE. 
          THAT GIVES US PLENTY OF TIME TO VALIDATE THE PETITION. 
          UM, SO RIGHT, AND I MEAN, THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD THE COMMENTS IS THAT PETITIONERS WANT CLARITY ON WHEN THEY NEED TO SUBMIT THE PETITION TO GET ON THE BALLOT. 
          AND I THINK IMPOSING AN ARTIFICIAL DEADLINE ON THE CLERK DOESN'T, NEC DOESN'T REALLY DO ANYTHING TO ACCOMPLISH THAT GOAL. 
          WHAT ACCOMPLISHES THAT GOAL IS ESTABLISHING A DEADLINE TO SUBMIT THE PETITION IF YOU WANNA GET ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT. 
          YES. 
          AND SO I THINK IT'S KIND OF TWO SIDES OF THE, THE COIN OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT I, AND I THINK WE DO HAVE A PROPOSAL THAT ADDRESSES THAT. 
          I DON'T KNOW, COMMISSIONER MAYMAN AND IF YOU WANNA SPEAK MORE TO THAT ISSUE. 
          YEAH, I THINK, UM, SO WE DID DISCUSS THIS AT THE, AT THE MEETING TWO WEEKS AGO, THE MEETING PRIOR TO OUR TOWN HALL. 
          UM, AND I BELIEVE WHERE WE LANDED ON THAT IS, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY WE'RE NOT TRYING TO IMPOSE A DEADLINE THAT THE CLERK CAN'T MEET POTENTIALLY BECAUSE THAT'S, IT'S NOT FAIR AND IT'S NOT GOOD POLICY. 
          SO, UM, SO I THINK THAT WHERE WE LANDED ON THAT IS SORT OF THE, THE, THE CLERK, UM, YOU KNOW, RECOMMENDING A DATE BY WHICH, UM, THOSE, THOSE SIGNATURES WOULD NEED TO BE SUBMITTED IN ORDER TO BE, BE ABLE TO GET ON THE APPROPRIATE BALLOT. 
          UM, AND REALLY IT'S THE, IT'S THE COMMUNICATION I THINK IN THAT PROPOSAL THAT'S KEY BETWEEN THE PETITIONERS AND THE CLERK'S OFFICE. 
          YES, COMMISSIONER ALDO IN OUR PACKAGE, IF WE HAVE INTENT AND ONLY MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTIONS FOR ORDINANCE INITIATIVES AND PREFERENCE FOR MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTIONS, FOR CHARTERS, WHICH WILL GET KNOCKED OUT AS WE HAVE CHARTERS BECAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION AND THE TWO YEAR RULE. 
          I THINK WE'RE GONNA GIVE THE STAFF AND THE COMMUNITY THE ABILITY TO DEVELOP ADMINISTRATIVE CLARITY, BECAUSE IT WILL BE CLEAR, SORT OF YOUR SHOT IS IN 18 MONTHS, SO YOU HAD BEST DO THIS BY THIS, DO THIS BY THIS. 
          I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENS IN OUR CURRENT SYSTEM IS SORT OF MAY IS ALWAYS AVAILABLE AND MARKING OUT THERE, UM, AND WE DON'T HAVE THE INTENT, UH, PIECE. 
          AND SO I THINK WE, THE FUTURE STATUS QUO, I, IF ALL OF THE THINGS WE SEEM TO BE COALESCING AROUND IS A CONSENSUS FOR REFORM OR ARE ACHIEVED, WOULD CREATE ORDER IN A WAY THAT WOULD CHANGE, I THINK SOME OF THE, UH, EXPERIENCE THAT SOME OF THE ACTIVE GROUPS HAVE AND ALSO ENABLE SOME, UH, MORE, UH, RATIONALITY 
          [01:05:01]
AND CLARITY. 
          BECAUSE I THINK IF THE CLERK KNOWS THERE ARE FIVE GROUPS PETITIONING FOR NEXT YEAR, YOU WILL NEED TO VALIDATE X, Y, Z, THEN THEY HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TRANSPARENCY ABOUT HOW TO MANAGE THAT WORKLOAD TO MEET THE EXPECTATION THAT EVERYBODY IS CLEARLY WORKING TOWARDS, WHICH IS THE MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION, BECAUSE THAT'S POLICY. 
          SO IN SOME WAYS, THE PROBLEMS THAT WE'VE EXPERIENCED RECENTLY DON'T GET PORTED OVER IF THE COMPREHENSIVE PACKAGE GETS ADOPTED BECAUSE THEY ARE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES. 
          UM, THE ONE THAT I THINK I DID NOT INCLUDE, RIGHT, IS, IS NEEDING MORE, MORE SIGNATURES, UM, BECAUSE I, IN, IN SOME WAYS IF WHAT WE WANT TO HAVE IS THE CLARITY AND, UH, ALLOW THE CLERK WITH ITS STAFFING RESOURCES AND TIMELINE TO BE ABLE TO DO THINGS, THE FOUR PETITIONS AT 30 K, EVEN WITH SAMPLING, ET CETERA, IT, IT'S JUST A, A, A SLIGHT BURDEN. 
          AND WHAT IS IT GETTING US IN TERMS OF KNOCKING OUT, UM, THINGS THAT WE DON'T REALLY LIKE? UH, AS I SAID IN MY PREVIOUS COMMENT, WHEN I LOOK AT THE LIST OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT BEFORE US A A LOT OF THOSE STUFF, EVEN THOUGH I DIDN'T VOTE FOR THEM, I THINK WE ARE LEGITIMATE THINGS TO ASK THE, THE PUBLIC. 
          YES. 
          COMMISSIONER KIN, YOU KNOW, I, I HAVEN'T SAID MUCH ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL, BUT I, I WANTED TO TO SPEAK JUST TO EMPHASIZE THE POINT THAT COMMISSIONER ULTA MURANO IS MAKING. 
          UM, BECAUSE I THINK OF THE, OF THE CHOICES THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US, THE, UH, CHANNELING THESE ELECTIONS TO THE MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION, I THINK IS THE MORE IMPORTANT OF THE TWO. 
          I MEAN, I, MY ON, ON THE THRESHOLD QUESTION, MY VIEWS ALIGN MORE WITH MR. DWYER ABOUT PERCENTAGES. 
          I THINK THE COMPROMISE THAT THEY'VE ARRIVED AT IS SENSIBLE TO ME, AND I THINK I WOULD CHOOSE THAT AS A STANDALONE. 
          UM, BUT TO ME IT, IT IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN THE, THAN THE ELECTION DATE ISSUE. 
          I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONE THAT IS GONNA BE MORE SENSIBLE AND IMPACTFUL, UH, AND ADDRESS A LOT OF THE, THE ISSUES THAT THE COUNCIL WAS, WAS RECOGNIZING IN THE, UH, IN THE CHARGE THEY GAVE TO US. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, THEY, THEY REALLY CAN'T BE, UM, EVALUATED SEPARATELY, INDEPENDENTLY, UM, BECAUSE I, I DO THINK THEY'RE GONNA, THEY'RE GONNA AFFECT EACH OTHER, BUT OF THE TWO I, I DO THINK THE, THE ELECTION DATE ISSUE IS THE MORE IMPORTANT OF THEM. 
          AND IT IS ONE THAT I STRONGLY, UH, HOPE THAT THE, THE COMMISSION ENDORSES, UH, THAT THAT PROPOSAL. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER BOTKIN, COMMISSIONER DWYER, UH, COMMISSIONER TI MURANO. 
          COULD I CLARIFY YOUR FEELINGS ON THE THRESHOLD? UM, IF I UNDERSTOOD YOUR PRIOR COMMENTS CORRECTLY, YOU OR, OR YOUR APPOINTER WOULD BE POTENTIALLY AMENABLE TO, UM, A CHANGE TO A PERCENTAGE WHERE THAT PERCENTAGE TO MATCH UP ROUGHLY WITH THE CURRENT 20,000 THRESHOLD. 
          UM, THAT CHANGE WOULD NOT HAVE THE EFFECT OF IMMEDIATELY THROWING INITIATIVES AND REFERENDUMS OUT OF WHACK WITH THE CHARTER IN TERMS OF THE, THE CREATING THE, THE PERVERSE INCENTIVE. 
          BUT IT WOULD HAPPEN OVER TIME, SLOWLY AT FIRST. 
          UH, IS THAT PROBLEMATIC FOR YOU? I WOULD BE PREPARED TO SUPPORT THAT AS IT IS A PRIORITY TO MY APPOINTER. 
          UH, BUT THAT'S JUST ONE VOTE. 
          AND COMMISSIONER VAN MANON DOES, WOULD THAT ALSO, UM, ALLAY YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT ON GRASSROOTS GROUPS WHERE WE HAD TO GO TO A PERCENTAGE THAT ALIGNED EFFECTIVELY WITH 20,000 FOR THE TIME BEING? I KNOW IT MAY NOT BE A POPULAR OPINION, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY LOVE A PERCENTAGE FOR THIS AT ALL BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE CONSIDERATIONS BEYOND THE SIZE OF THE POPULATION THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT. 
          UM, I'M NOT PREPARED TO SAY YES OR NO TO WHETHER OR NOT I WOULD SUPPORT THAT BECAUSE I WOULD'VE TO THINK ABOUT IT A LOT MORE HERE, SOME MORE DISCUSSION ON IT. 
          BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT TO, TO SORT OF FIND A HAPPY MEDIUM. 
          UM, I GUESS ANOTHER CONCERN THAT I WOULD HAVE IS IF WE'RE, I, I KNOW YOU DIDN'T WANT TO THINK ABOUT SORT OF LIKE THE POLITICAL CONCERNS. 
          IT REALLY IS COUNCIL'S, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL'S PREROGATIVE TO THINK ABOUT THE POLITICAL CONCERNS AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN PUT SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT THAT THEY FEEL LIKE THEY CAN POLITICALLY DEFEND TO THE VOTERS. 
          UM, BUT I ALSO DO WORRY THAT SOME OF THESE REALLY IMPORTANT REFORMS MIGHT SUFFER IF THERE ISN'T ENOUGH SUPPORT FOR ONE THAT'S GONNA BE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER PROFILE, LIKE THE THRESHOLD. 
          SO THAT'S ANOTHER CONCERN THAT I WOULD HAVE POTENTIALLY EVEN WITH THAT NOW. 
          'CAUSE YOU, WHEN IT'S A PERCENTAGE, EVEN IF THE ROUGH PERCENTAGE CURRENTLY WOULD BE, OR THE ROUGH NUMBER OF THAT WOULD BE CURRENTLY ABOUT 20,000, UM, I THINK IT WOULD STILL TAKE A LOT OF EXPLANATION BECAUSE THE, THE BALLOT LANGUAGE WOULD STILL SAY, YOU KNOW, SHOULD 
          [01:10:01]
THAT THRESHOLD BE SET AT WHATEVER PERCENTAGE. 
          UM, SO I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF MESSAGING THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE AROUND THAT. 
          I WOULD, AGAIN, I'D STILL WANNA HEAR FROM, FROM SOME FOLKS ABOUT IT. 
          I HAVEN'T REALLY CONSIDERED THAT, UM, THAT IN ITSELF AS A PROPOSAL, BUT, UM, I DO, AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE, THE EFFORT TO, TO TRY AND FIND A COMPROMISE HERE. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GREENBERG. 
          UM, I HAVE A COMMENT. 
          I'M SURPRISED AT THE DISCUSSION OF WHAT POINTERS WANT. 
          UM, THE APPOINTER APPOINTED THE COMMISSION AND THEN OUR JOB IS TO LOOK AT WHAT WE THINK IS THE BEST STRATEGY. 
          THE COUNCIL THEN GETS TO DECIDE WHAT THEY PUT ON THE BALLOT. 
          UM, I DON'T THINK OUR JOB IS TO, UM, DEFEND AND RUBBER STAMP WHAT THE COUNCIL WANTS. 
          IT'S TO CONSIDER THE ALTERNATIVES AND, AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND THEY CAN DE DECIDE WHAT TO DO WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION. 
          UM, WELL THANK YOU FOR THAT LECTURE ON HOW TO DO MY JOB. 
          YOU YOU'RE WELCOME. 
          BUT WE DISAGREE ON THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, AND THEN THE QUESTION I HAVE IS FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY, UM, IS THERE CERTAINTY THAT IF WE PUT A REQUIREMENT THAT THOSE ELECTIONS BE ONLY NOVEMBER OF EVEN YEARS, THAT THIS WILL FLY LEGALLY OR WILL IT BE CHA POSSIBLY CHALLENGED? SO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS EXPLICITLY STATES THAT CAN BE PUSHED IN NOVEMBER. 
          SO THAT'S ALREADY THAT I LOOKED FOR CASES AND SUCH WHERE THAT WAS CHALLENGED AND IT'S NOT BEEN CHALLENGED, UM, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM AND RECALL. 
          UH, WHICH I KNOW YOU'RE NOT PROPOSING MOVING RECALL, BUT THOSE, THE AUTHORITY TO HAVE THOSE ELECTIONS EXIST ONLY BECAUSE THEY'RE IN OUR CHARTER. 
          AND SO IF WE LIMIT IT TO, YOU KNOW, NOT TO HAVING IT ON CERTAIN DATES OR HOW OFTEN THEY'RE HELD OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK THAT 'CAUSE PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT WITHOUT TO EVEN DO THOSE THINGS WITHOUT OUR CHARTER SAYING, SO, SO I DON'T, I THINK IT WOULD PASS LEGAL MUSTER. 
          YEAH. 
          A CHALLENGE IF IT WAS CHALLENGED. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, LASH, COMMISSIONER DRYER. 
          I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF, YOU KNOW, AT THREE, IS IT, WHETHER IT'S 3% OR 4%, WHATEVER EQUATES TO 20,000 RIGHT NOW. 
          BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS A MIDDLE GROUND, RIGHT? LIKE WE'RE, WE'RE NOT INCREASING THE NUMBER TODAY, BUT WE ARE ELIMINATING THE BLUNT OBJECT SO THAT EVERYONE KEEPS USING AS A REFERENCE OF BEING ABLE TO GROW WITH OUR POPULATION. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S, TO ME THAT IDEA IS SOMETHING TO MOVE US ALONG IN STOP ADVOCACY. 
          YES. 
          I DO HAVE A QUESTION. 
          UM, HAVE WE, HAVE WE DECIDED WHEN WE'RE GONNA SCHEDULE VOTES ON THESE KIND OF THINGS? I WAS JUST GETTING TO . 
          UM, AND, AND I HAVE A SELFISH REASON TO ASK BECAUSE I, IT IS LIKELY THAT I'LL, UH, BE ABSENT ON THE FEBRUARY 29TH MEETING MM-HMM. 
          . 
          UM, AND SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UH, SEE WHAT IS GOING ON ON THAT MEETING  AND, AND WHAT OUR VOTE SCHEDULE MIGHT BE. 
          YES. 
          I MEAN THE, I'M LOOKING FOR MY SCHEDULE HERE. 
          UM, I MEAN, IT'S SOUNDING LIKE WE ARE COMING TO SOME CONSENSUS ON SOME PIECES OF THIS. 
          I MEAN, I STILL THINK THAT THE, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE DURABLE SIGNATURE THRESHOLD WHERE, AND WE DON'T, OBVIOUSLY DON'T NEED TO BE A CONSENSUS. 
          I THINK WE'RE GONNA VOTE ON SOME THINGS WHERE WE ARE DISAGREEING. 
          UM, BUT I THINK IN TERMS OF OUR DISCUSSION, IT SOUNDS LIKE ON THE TRANSPARENCY MEASURES WITH THE PETITION, I THINK WE ARE READY TO SEE KIND OF A FINAL RECOMMENDATION ON THAT. 
          UM, AS WELL AS THE MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION, MOVING THE ELECTION DATES FOR THE CHARTER AND, UM, CITIZEN INITIATED INITIATIVES. 
          UM, AND SO I DO THINK POTENTIALLY WE COULD HAVE A VOTE, UM, ON THOSE AT THE 20, AT THE MEETING ON THE 29TH. 
          UM, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY ANYBODY CAN MOVE AT ANY TIME TO VOTE ON ANY OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THERE ARE OTHER VOTES THAT HAPPEN ON THE 29TH AS WELL. 
          BUT WE ARE GONNA TALK ABOUT OUR FUTURE MEETING SCHEDULE AND OUR ADDITIONAL MEETING DATES AND TOWN HALLS. 
          BUT I, I'M HEARING WES MOVING TOWARDS SOME KIND OF VOTE. 
          UM, I THINK I'M IN MY MIND, YOU KNOW, READY TO SEE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROPOSE SOMETHING ON THOSE TWO ISSUES. 
          AND I APOLOGIZE FOR TAKING A AGENDA ITEM OUT OF ORDER. 
          NO, NO, YOU'RE FINE. 
          YOU'RE FINE. 
          THERE IS SOME DISCUSSION ON, I WAS ACTUALLY ABOUT TO, I'M NO, I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT IT UP 'CAUSE I WAS ABOUT TO, UM, TALK ABOUT WHAT IF WE WERE READY TO SEE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS ON THOSE TWO ISSUES. 
          SO, UM, IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION FROM THE PETITION PROCESS WORKING GROUP? IF NOT, I THINK WE WILL MOVE ON WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'LL HOPEFULLY HAVE A FINAL RECOMMENDATION. 
          DO YOU THINK THAT IS DOABLE, UM, COMMISSIONER VAN MAYMAN ON THE TRANSPARENCY MEASURES TO HAVE SOMETHING READY TO RECOMMEND BY THE NEXT MEETING? YES, I DO. 
          I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT ALL 
          [01:15:01]
OF THE, THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE HEARD IN THERE. 
          SO HOPEFULLY IT WILL BE THE, THE, THE FINAL RECOMMENDATION AND THE FINAL VOTE. 
          OKAY. 
          GREAT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WITH THAT, WE 
          [4. Discussion and possible action on the Initiative/Charter/Referendum Mechanics Work Groups initial recommendation on proposition lettering. (Commissioners Altamirano, Botkin, and Ortega)]
WILL MOVE ON TO, UM, ITEM NUMBER FOUR, THE MECHANICS WORK GROUP. 
          I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S ANYTHING ADDITIONAL FROM THIS WORK GROUP. 
          WE'VE DISCUSSED THE ELECTION DATES, I THINK AS PART OF ITEM NUMBER THREE. 
          AND SO, UM, I KNOW YOU ALL HAVE PROPOSED WHAT I THINK IS A FINAL RECOMMENDATION ON THAT. 
          YES, WE'VE HAD A FEW ROUNDS OF DISCUSSIONS AS A BODY AND, UH, IN DECEMBER I THINK WE SETTLED ON BOTH CHARTER AND ORDINANCE INITIATIVE, MOVING TO MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTIONS. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , UH, OUR LOVELY CITY LEGAL TEAM HELPED US CRAFT LANGUAGE THAT THEY WILL FEEL COMFORTABLE DEFENDING IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL IN FRONT OF OUR POINTERS. 
          UH, AND THAT IS IN VERSION FOUR OF THE RECOMMENDATION, UH, AS WELL AS OTHER EXTENSIVE, UH, LANGUAGE. 
          AND THIS IS WHAT WE DEBATED, I DEBATED WITH MYSELF, UH, AT OUR, UH, MEETING. 
          UH, I PERSONALLY FEEL THAT THIS IS THE ELIXIR TO MANY OF THE ILLS, UH, THAT BROUGHT THIS BODY TO BE. 
          AND WHENEVER THE BODY IS READY TO TAKE ACTION, I THINK WE SHOULD. 
          OKAY. 
          YES. 
          COMMISSIONER VAN MANON, ARE WE READY FOR A MOTION ON MOVING THE ELECTION DAYS? I WOULD LOVE TO MAKE A MOTION. 
          I'M READY FOR A MOTION. 
          I WOULD LOVE TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION. 
          I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION ELECTIONS FOR CITIZEN INITIATED CHARTER CHANGES AND INITIATIVES HELD ON MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION. 
          OKAY. 
          DO I HEAR A SECOND? I SECOND. 
          OH, , WE HAVE TWO SECONDS. 
          SORRY. 
          COMMISSIONER ORTEGA, I THINK YOU WERE SLIGHTLY, SLIGHTLY AHEAD. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. 
          AYE. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY, ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, THE MOTION PASSES. 
          UH, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE MECHANICS WORKING GROUP BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE? I GUESS BEFORE WE, I'M WONDERING HOW, HOW, WHAT MIGHT BE INTERPRETED TO CITY COUNCIL IF THEY SEE, 'CAUSE I'M, I'M SUSPECTING THE TWO MISSING COMMISSIONERS WOULD'VE SUPPORTED THAT AND WOULD SUPPORT OTHER THINGS THAT ARE MAYBE IN, UH, I MEAN THAT WILL BE NOTED IN THE FINAL REPORT THEN THAT THEY WEREN'T PRESENT. 
          CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE? OKAY. 
          ITEM NUMBER FIVE 
          [5. Discussion and possible action on Recall Petitions Work Group recommendations. (Commissioner Van Maanen)]
IS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE RECALL PETITIONS WORK GROUP COMMISSIONER VAN MANON. 
          SURE. 
          UM, SO A, AGAIN, SIMILARLY, I, I DIDN'T HAVE THE THE TIME TO PREPARE, YOU KNOW, THOROUGH FINAL VERSIONS OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          AND I DIDN'T WANNA PRESENT SOMETHING THAT, WHAT, THAT I DIDN'T THINK POTENTIALLY WAS FINAL THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO SPEND A WHOLE LOT MORE TIME ON DISCUSSING. 
          AND, UM, ESPECIALLY FOR CERTAIN THINGS THAT I THINK ARE, ARE, YOU KNOW, PRETTY, PRETTY READY TO MOVE FORWARD, LIKE THE NOTICE OF INTENT AND INCLUDING THE RE RECALLS IN THAT. 
          UM, I DO THINK THAT BECAUSE RECALLS SHOULD BE EFFECTIVELY THE LAST RESORT WHEN YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION THAT YOU WANT ON COUNCIL, I DO WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE APPROACHING THAT VERY CAREFULLY. 
          UM, AND SO JUST BY WAY OF EXPLAINING SOME OF THE DELAY ON THAT, I JUST THINK IT'S, IT'S SUCH A HEAVY SUBJECT THAT WE REALLY DO DESERVE TO, OR IT DESERVES TO BE CONSIDERED VERY CAREFULLY. 
          SO, UM, WORKING ON THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, I, I FULLY INTEND TO HAVE A FINAL RECOMMENDATION ON, UM, THE, THE TRANSPARENCY ITEMS, UM, WHICH IS THE NOTICE OF INTENT, BUT ALSO THAT INCLUDES ALL THE TYPES OF PETITIONS, UM, AS WELL AS CAMPAIGN FINANCE. 
          UM, I THINK, AGAIN, THERE ARE STILL SOME OPEN LEGAL QUESTIONS ON THAT, BUT I THINK THAT AN EFFECTIVELY WRITTEN RECOMMENDATION CAN STILL WORK WITH SOME OF THOSE OPEN LEGAL QUESTIONS. 
          UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE CERTAINLY OTHER, OTHER ITEMS TO DISCUSS, BUT I'LL HAVE PROPOSALS FOR THOSE NEXT TIME. 
          BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT IT MIGHT BE A SHORTER MEETING TODAY 'CAUSE OF IT, SO. 
          WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT UPDATE. 
          WE KNOW YOU'RE WORKING DILIGENTLY ON THIS, UM, AS WELL AS ALL YOUR OTHER MATTERS IN LIFE, SO THANK YOU. 
          I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION ON THE NOTICE OF INTENT. 
          IF THERE ARE TWO, UM, TWO, UH, PETITION ITEMS PRESENTED AT THE SAME TIME THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR IN NATURE, IS THERE ANY METHOD TO REJECT THOSE? SO THE NOTICE OF INTENT WOULDN'T REALLY ADDRESS THAT. 
          IT'S NOT REALLY ON THE MERITS OF THE, THE INTENDED PETITION. 
          IT'S REALLY JUST TO, TO PUBLICLY NOTICE THAT THERE ISN'T A PETITION BEING PRESENTED AND, AND SIGNATURES ARE BEING SOUGHT FOR IT. 
          SO I GUESS THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT QUESTION. 
          UM, AND MAYBE NOT THE, NOT THE SAME. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WHEN THE NOTICE OF TENANT SUBMITTED, IS THERE ANY WAY I, I'M JUST WONDERING TO TRY AND AVOID WHAT WE HAD LAST, WAS THAT LIKE LAST FALL? LAST NO, LAST SPRING. 
          IS THERE A WAY THAT SAYS LIKE, THESE ARE TOO SIMILAR, THEY'RE GOING TO CAUSE CONFUSION. 
          [01:20:01]
IS THERE A WAY THROUGH THAT PROCESS THAT SOMETHING COULD BE SAID SO WE DON'T END UP IN THE SITUATION THAT WE HAD LAST TIME WITH A PD STUFF? WELL, AND IF I MAY TOO, I MEAN, I THINK THAT THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE PASSED REGARDING CONFLICTING BALLOT MEASURES, UHHUH WOULD ADDRESS THAT. 
          I MEAN, IT WOULD GO ALL THE WAY TO THE VOTE. 
          BOTH MEASURES WOULD GO ALL THE WAY TO THE VOTERS AND THEN THE ONE THAT GOT THE MOST VOTES WOULD SUCCEED. 
          BUT I THINK I WOULD HAVE CONCERNS WITH PUTTING SOME SORT OF DETERMINATION ON THE CITY OR THE CLERK'S OFFICE BEFORE THEY, BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT WOULD INCREASE LITIGATION. 
          YEAH, THAT'S FINE. 
          JUST CURIOUS IF THERE'S SOMEONE'S LIKE, THIS IS GOING TO BE TOO CONFUSING. 
          I, I THINK IF WE PUT IN SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE WOULD GET SUED. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          AND WE PROBABLY WOULD NOT WIN. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER VAN MANNEN, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I, UH, LEARNED A LOT FROM MR. MCGOVERN AND THE, UH, DEBATE WE HAD, UH, AT OUR TOWN HALL. 
          AND I FEEL COMFORTABLE SUPPORTING AN INCREASE TO 15% FOR RECALL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          I'M HOPING THAT WE WILL HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE THAT THRESHOLD NEXT TIME. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON RECALL, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION THAT WE'D LIKE TO HAVE BEFORE WE MOVE ON? NOPE. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          MOVING ON TO ITEM 
          [6. Discussion and possible action regarding community engagement of the Charter Review process from the Outreach Work Group. ]
NUMBER SIX, THE OUTREACH WORK GROUP. 
          SO WE DID, UM, CONGRATULATIONS TO EVERYONE ON A PUBLIC, ON A SUCCESSFUL TOWN HALL. 
          WE DID ONE. 
          SO NOW I FEEL CONFIDENT THAT WE CAN, UM, DO ANOTHER AND TO YOU MADAM CHAIR. 
          OH, THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, AND TO EVERYONE WHO PREPARED REMARKS AND DEBATED, THANK YOU ALL FOR DOING THAT. 
          UM, I DO THINK IT WAS A GOOD, GOOD DISCUSSION AND WE GOT A LOT MORE PUBLIC COMMENT THAN WE DID AT THE LAST ROUND OF CHARTER REVIEW. 
          SO I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT A GOOD START. 
          UM, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT DOING AT LEAST ONE MORE TOWN HALL, SO WE NEED TO DECIDE WHEN THE DATE IS. 
          AND I THINK TO MR. DEL'S COMMENTS, PROVIDING MORE ADVANCED PUBLIC NOTICE, UM, I THINK IS A, A COMMENT THAT I'VE HEARD, UM, FROM OTHERS AS WELL. 
          SO IN LOOKING AT OUR UPCOMING MEETING SCHEDULE, WE HAVE OUR NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING ON FEBRUARY 29TH. 
          AND THEN MY PROPOSAL IS THAT WE USE OUR MARCH 7TH MEETING AS OUR NEXT PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN WE SCHEDULE ONE ADDITIONAL MEETING IN MARCH TO FINALIZE OUR REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          I DID TALK WITH CAROLINE, YOU KNOW, MARCH 7TH IS KIND OF OUR 365 DAYS SINCE OUR RESOLUTION PASSED, BUT, UH, WE ARE COMFORTABLE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE OUR WORK COMPLETED, THAT WE STAY INTACT AS A GROUP UNTIL WE ACTUALLY SUBMIT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL. 
          SO I STILL THINK WE'RE FAIRLY ON TRACK. 
          I'M HOPING WE CAN GET OUR FINAL REPORT DONE BY MID-MARCH. 
          UM, BUT THAT WOULD BE MY PROPOSAL FOR KIND OF HOW WE HANDLE THE NEXT FEW MEETINGS. 
          SO WE WOULD, WE WOULD MEET FEBRUARY 29TH. 
          WE WOULD HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 7TH, AND THEN WE WOULD CHOOSE ANOTHER DATE IN MID-MARCH, UM, PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, TWO WEEKS OR SO AFTER OUR THURSDAY, MARCH 7TH MEETING. 
          SO THAT WOULD PUT US AT THE 21ST, MARCH 21ST, UM, AS OUR FINAL MEETING DATE. 
          I'M SEEING NODS THAT WORKS FOR ME. 
          I, THE, THE, I, THERE'S A, A BIG EVENT USUALLY OCCURRING IN MID-MARCH HERE IN AUSTIN. 
          UH, SO PEOPLE MIGHT BE TIED UP THAT WEEK BEFORE, BUT THE 21ST I THINK IS PROBABLY A, A GOOD WEEK FOR EVERYBODY. 
          YEAH. 
          I HAVE TO AVOID SCHEDULING ANYTHING THE WEEK OF, UM, SOUTH BY. 
          SO, UM, THE 21ST, WE'LL FOLLOW UP BY EMAIL. 
          UM, MYRNA WILL FOLLOW UP BY EMAIL JUST SO THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO LOOK AT YOUR CA CALENDARS NOW. 
          UM, BUT WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH A COUPLE OF DATES THAT WEEK OF MARCH 18TH WITH THE PREFERENCE BEING THE 21ST TO HOLD IT ON THURSDAY. 
          UM, BUT IF THAT DOESN'T WORK, IF WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE A QUORUM, WE'LL FIND ANOTHER DAY, HOPEFULLY THAT WEEK THAT THAT WILL WORK. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, IS EVERYONE COMFORTABLE AGAIN HOLDING OUR TOWN HALL MEETING HERE AT CITY HALL WITH A VIRTUAL OPTION, KIND OF THE SAME WAY THAT WE DID IT LAST TIME? OR DOES ANYONE FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO HAVE A DIFFERENT METHOD OF OUTREACH OR GO SOMEWHERE DIFFERENT? COMMISSIONER ALANO, UH, CITY HALL IS FINE. 
          THE ROOM DID FEEL A BIT CAVERNOUS AT TIMES. 
          UM, SO MAYBE A, IF A SMALLER ROOM, UH, MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATE, UNLESS WE'RE EXPECTING A LOT OF PEOPLE, UM, OR WE COULD SET IT UP DIFFERENTLY. 
          MM-HMM. 
           SO IT DOESN'T FEEL SO HIERARCHICAL AND DISTANT. 
          UM, THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S MY MY IMPRESSION. 
          IS THE FORMAT GONNA BE THE SAME 
          [01:25:01]
OR ARE WE GOING TO DO SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE TRADITIONAL WITH, UH, FOLKS GIVING US THEIR THREE MINUTES OF, OF COMMENTS? SO FIRST TO ADDRESS YOUR COMMENT ON THE ROOM. 
          I MEAN, I AGREE. 
          MY, I THINK MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO HAVE IT IN THIS ROOM IF IT'S AVAILABLE. 
          IF WE DO HAVE TO GO BACK TO, UM, CHAMBERS, YOU KNOW, THERE IS AN ISSUE WHEN WE HAVE VIRTUAL PARTICIPANTS. 
          I THINK WE WILL HAVE TO BE ON THE DI I MEAN, WE CAN, I CAN TALK TO MYRNA ABOUT IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT ROOM SET UP THAT WE'LL WORK WITH VIRTUAL PARTICIPANTS, BUT I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF THE TRADE OFF. 
          IT'S EASIER TO HAVE VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION IN THIS ROOM, I THINK, UM, IF WE WANT AN INFORMAL ENVIRONMENT. 
          UM, BUT WE'LL CONFIRM WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE THERE. 
          UM, AND THEN AS TO THE FORMAT, MY THOUGHT IS WE MAY, BECAUSE WE ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS OR APPROVED RECOMMENDATIONS, WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE A FINAL REPORT YET. 
          UM, BUT MY THOUGHT IS WE COULD, IT COULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE TRADITIONAL, UM, IN THAT, YOU KNOW, AHEAD OF TIME WE PROVIDE A BULLET POINT LIST OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'VE APPROVED AND THEN WE CAN SEEK FEEDBACK ON THOSE DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          BUT I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO ANY THOUGHTS THAT YOU ALL HAVE ABOUT HOW WE SHOULD STRUCTURE IT. 
          COMMISSIONER ORTEGA, SO I HAVE A CONCERN THAT THE PUBLIC IS INTERESTED BUT MAY NOT WANT TO BE DEALING WITH AUSTIN TRAFFIC TO GET DOWN HERE. 
          MM-HMM. 
           ON A WEEKNIGHT. 
          IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO ON A, ON A SATURDAY? I'M LOOKING AT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. 
          IT'S POSSIBLE. 
          I JUST NEED TO KNOW IN ADV WELL IN ADVANCE BECAUSE I NEED TO COORDINATE WITH OUR IT, AV, YOU KNOW, TEAM, A TXN, UM, AND SECURITY. 
          SO I NEED TO KNOW WELL IN ADVANCE. 
          AND THAT BEGS MY SECOND QUESTION, WHICH IS, DO WE NEED TO DO THAT HERE OR SHOULD WE GO OUT TO A COMMUNITY LOCATION WHERE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE PARKING THAT MIGHT WANT TO ATTEND AND NOT HAVE, NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR? OF COURSE, THEY MIGHT GET A VALIDATION IF THEY PARK HERE, THEY WOULD, THEY'LL GET A VALIDATION. 
          PARKING WOULD BE FREE. 
          UM, IF WE DO, IF YOU ARE CONSIDERING AN, UM, OFFSITE LOCATION, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A LOCATION WHERE WE CAN PROVIDE THE A, YOU KNOW, RIGHT. 
          BTXN AND AB SERVICE AND SECURITY SERVICE. 
          BECAUSE WITH ALL THE EMAILS THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED IN OUR INBOX, I KNOW THAT THERE'S PUBLIC INTEREST AND I, I MEAN, MY PERSONAL OPINION IS THAT THAT IS ADDRESSED WITH THE VIRTUAL OPTION. 
          I AM NOT, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO SCHEDULE ANYTHING ON THE WEEKENDS. 
          UM, AND SO MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO HOLD IT ON, YOU KNOW, THURSDAY AT 7:00 PM I MEAN, SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID LAST TIME AND HAVE A VIRTUAL OPTION. 
          I THINK IF WE, WE NOW HAVE THREE WEEKS TO GET THE WORD OUT. 
          UM, AND SO, AND WE'VE PROVIDED A NUMBER OF OTHER AVENUES FOR FOLKS TO CONTACT US, INCLUDING A CONSOLIDATED EMAIL ADDRESS. 
          UM, AND, AND PEOPLE HAVE FOUND IT OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE THEY ARE EMAILING US. 
          UM, AND SO WE ARE CONSIDERING THAT INPUT AS WELL. 
          SO I FEEL LIKE WE'VE PROVIDED ENOUGH AVENUES, UM, FOR DIFFERENT WAYS FOR PEOPLE TO CONTACT US AND EXPRESS THEIR OPINION. 
          UM, BUT I'M COMFORTABLE HOLDING IT ON A THURSDAY UNLESS OTHERS THINK DIFFERENTLY. 
          AND I'M FINE WITH IT. 
          I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT UP AS A YEAH. 
          AS A POINT OF DISCUSSION, BECAUSE WHEN I WALKED IN CITY, UM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT THE TOWN HALL, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS, UM, I DIDN'T KNOW SHE WAS GOING TO SPEAK, BUT ONE OF THE EVENTUAL SPEAKERS WAS THERE WAITING AND SHE SAID SHE RUSHED DOWN TO GET HERE THINKING THAT SHE WOULDN'T FIND PARKING, THAT THERE'D BE A ROOM FULL OF PEOPLE THAT SHE WOULDN'T FIND A SEAT. 
          IT WAS VERY SURPRISED TO SEE THERE WAS ABOUT 10 ATTENDEES. 
          MM-HMM. 
          . 
          SO I KNOW IT'S SOMETHING OF IMPORTANT PUBLIC INTEREST COMPARED TO THE PARTICIPATION THAT WE RECEIVED LAST TIME. 
          I THINK WE, IT, IT WAS A SUCCESS, YOU KNOW, THAT WE HAD THE NUMBER OF SPEAKERS THAT WE HAD. 
          UM, YOU WERE ON THE 2018 ON THE 2018 COMMISSION. 
          YEAH. 
          I THINK WE HAD TWO OR THREE PEOPLE SHOW UP AND WE HELD THREE PUBLIC MEETINGS. 
          WE HELD SOME ON SATURDAY, UM, AND WE WERE OUT IN THE COMMUNITY AND WE GOT MUCH LESS PARTICIPATION THAN WE DID, UM, HOLDING IT HERE AND HAVING A VIRTUAL OPTION. 
          AND Y'ALL DID IT ON SATURDAY. 
          WHY? BECAUSE THERE WAS A CONSENSUS OF THE NO. 
          HAD THAT COMMISSION TO, WE HAD, WE HAD A VISITOR, UM, WHO WAS FLYING IN TO TALK TO US ABOUT DEMOCRACY DOLLARS AND THAT WAS THE DAY THAT THAT VISITOR COULD COME IN AS MY RECOLLECTION OF WHY WE HAD IT ON SATURDAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , COMMISSIONER DWYER, THE PARTICIPATION DIDN'T FEEL SUPER SUCCESSFUL TO ME, UM, BOTH IN TERMS OF THE NUMBERS AND MR. DEL'S POINT EARLIER THAT THEY WERE ALL SORT OF FOLKS AFFILIATED WITH GROUPS THAT ARE PRACTITIONERS IN THIS SPACE. 
          UM, I'M JUST SAYING THAT TO SAY IT LIKE I DON'T HAVE ANY SOLUTION HERE, JUST THAT I'M WILLING TO DO WHATEVER IT WOULD TAKE TO, UH, IMPROVE 
          [01:30:01]
PARTICIPATION, WHETHER THAT'S A SATURDAY OR A DIFFERENT FORMAT OR, OR WHATEVER. 
          UM, THE ONLY OTHER COMMENT I WANTED TO MAKE WAS THAT WE DID MAKE A VERBAL PROMISE TO FOLKS THAT THE FIRST ONE THAT THEY WOULD, WE'D BE TALKING ABOUT SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT, THAT ONE, BUT THAT THE SECOND ONE AS I TOOK IT, WOULD BE MORE OPEN OR THERE WOULD BE MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO SAY WHATEVER YOU WANNA SAY ABOUT WHATEVER. 
          UM, SO IF WE ARE GONNA STRUCTURE IT AROUND OUR RECOMMENDATIONS, PROVIDING SOME SORT OF FORMATTING PIECE OR TIME PERIOD FOR FOLKS TO JUST SPOUT OFF ON WHATEVER THEY THINK SHOULD BE IN THE CITY CHARTER IS PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA. 
          YEAH, NO, THAT'S A GOOD POINT. 
          MY MY THOUGHT WAS WE COULD AHEAD OF THE MEETING PROVIDE KIND OF A BULLET POINT LIST, BUT THEN PUBLIC COMMENT WOULD NOT BE LIMITED IN ANY WAY TO, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          THE WAY WE DID IT LAST TIME IS SORT OF, WE WERE SEEKING FEEDBACK ON SPECIFIC ISSUES, BUT I THINK FOR THIS NEXT ONE, KEEPING IT OPEN IS A GOOD CALL. 
          YES. 
          COMMISSIONER BOTKIN, DID YOU HAVE COMMENTS? NO, NO. 
          I, I, I, IN TERMS OF, UH, AGENDA, I, I DO STRONGLY, UH, THINK THAT WE OUGHT TO SORT OF PUBLISH OUR, YOU KNOW, EXPECTED RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, AND INVITE FEEDBACK ON THOSE SPECIFICS. 
          I THINK, IN FACT, MR. RIDDELL MIGHT HAVE BROUGHT THAT UP IN ONE OF OUR, UH, PRIOR MEETINGS, UM, TO GIVE PEOPLE A TARGET TO, TO SHOOT AT. 
          I MEAN, MM-HMM. 
          , THEY NEED TO KNOW WHAT WE'VE GOT ON OUR MIND AND WHAT WE'RE ABOUT TO APPROVE, AND THAT'S THE, THIS WILL BE THE CHANCE FOR THEM TO WEIGH IN ON THAT. 
          I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT. 
          MADAM CHAIR. 
          YES, COMMISSIONER. 
          I THINK, UH, GIVING THE PUBLIC THE CHANCE TO HAVE THEIR THREE MINUTES ON OUR ADOPT LIST IS THE RIGHT WAY TO GO. 
          I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THURSDAY AT 7:00 PM UM, UH, WHILE RECOGNIZING ITS LIMITATIONS, UH, IT'S ABUNDANT LIMITATIONS. 
          UH, ONE THING THAT THAT IMPLIES IS WE SHOULD TRY AND ADOPT AS MUCH AS WE CAN. 
          UM, FEBRUARY 29TH, AND I FEEL WE'RE VERY CLOSE. 
          I FEEL WE, WE'VE GOT SORT OF THREE AREAS, UH, RECALL NOTICE OF INTENT AND THE PETITION'S THRESHOLD LEFT. 
          AND I, I HAVE A SENSE THAT THERE IS A CONSENSUS IN THERE, SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN EXIT THE 29TH WITH THE, THE REST OF THE LIST AND BE ABLE TO HAVE IT READY FOR THE SEVENTH. 
          UH, I ALSO DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE AN, UH, AN ADDITIONAL MEETING IF, EVEN IF WE ARE SORT OF, UH, SUBSTANTIVELY FAIRLY DONE BY THE 29TH, BUT I DO THINK WE SHOULD MAKE IT OUR GOAL FOR IT TO BE OUR, OUR LAST MEETING SO THAT WE CAN, UM, UH, BE ROUGHLY ON TIME AND ALSO KNOW, KNOW WHEN WE CAN CELEBRATE THE GOOD WORK OF OUR, OF OUR COLLEAGUES. 
          UH, I THINK MID MARCH IS THE RIGHT, THE RIGHT, UH, TARGET. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS REGARDING OUTREACH? COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, THIS IS JUST A QUESTION. 
          HOW CAN YOU TELL IF A LETTER CAME FROM THE CONSOLIDATED EMAIL VERSUS CAN YOU TELL, I DON'T KNOW. 
          DO YOU KNOW THAT MYRNA? I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING THE, WELL, THERE'S A CONSOLIDATED EMAIL, BUT IF SOMEONE SENDS AN EMAIL TO OUR CHARTER REVIEW EMAIL, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THAT GOT SENT TO OUR CHARTER REVIEW EMAIL VERSUS BEING SENT DIRECTLY TO US? BECAUSE THE EMAILS ARE SAYING YOUR NAME USUALLY TO COMMISSIONER, DA DA DA. 
          I THINK THE EMAILS THAT WE HAVE ALL RECEIVED HAVE BEEN DIRECTED TO US BECAUSE I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY INDICATION THAT THOSE CAME THROUGH THE CONSOLIDATED EMAIL. 
          UM, BUT I MEAN, WE CAN SEND A TEST EMAIL THROUGH THE CONSOLIDATED EMAIL AND SEE HOW IT COMES THROUGH. 
          IF Y'ALL, IF YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT, THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL INFORMATION BEFORE OUR NEXT TOWN HALL. 
          AND I BELIEVE THAT ALL OF YOU ARE BEING BLIND COPIED THOSE WHO ARE SENDING THE EMAILS KNOW, UM, OR HAVE LIKE, I'M GONNA, NO, MAYBE I SHOULDN'T. 
          UM, , THEY JUST KNOW THAT A COMMISSION SHOULD BE BLIND COPIED MM-HMM. 
          , UM, OR A BODY. 
          AND UM, BUT OTHERWISE THERE REALLY ISN'T, I WASN'T BEING COPIED, SO I DIDN'T KNOW, I MEAN, UM, THE CHAIR WAS FORWARDING THOSE TO ME. 
          UM, MAYBE WE CAN ADVERTISE THAT THEY SHOULD COPY THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION EMAIL. 
          UM, I MEAN, IT'S FINE WHAT THEY'RE DOING SO LONG AS I GET A COPY AND WE CAN HAVE THAT FILED. 
          OH, THERE'S A LOT OF THEM. 
          'CAUSE I DON'T, OH, I KNOW. 
          I'VE BEEN FORWARDING EVERY SINGLE ONE. 
          YES. 
          MM-HMM. 
           EVEN THE ONES THAT GET, UM, QUARANTINED, I RELEASE THEM AND THEN FORWARD THEM WHEN THEY COME THROUGH. 
          I HAVEN'T GONE BACK AND, UM, DONE AN AUDIT TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING THAT WAS QUARANTINED GOT RELEASED, BUT THE, EVERYTHING THAT COMES THROUGH TO MY INBOX, I'M FORWARDING ALONG. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? DISCUSSION 
          [01:35:01]
ON THE OUTREACH WORKING GROUP? NO. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR THE, SO I KNOW THE CITY DID, THEY DID A PRESS RELEASE CORRECT? FOR THE FIRST TOWN HALL. 
          I ASSUME THAT THEY WILL AGAIN? YES. 
          SO, UM, MIA WAS NOT ABLE TO BE HERE TONIGHT, BUT SHE DID REACH OUT ABOUT AS SOON AS WE KNOW THE DATE FOR OUR NEXT TOWN HALL MEETING, SHE WANTS TO GO AHEAD AND GET A PRESS RELEASE OUT AND THEN THEY ALSO ARE DOING A RELEASE ON SOCIAL MEDIA. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, AND SO I'LL LET HER KNOW TOMORROW MORNING THAT WE'VE DECIDED TO USE OUR F OUR MARCH 7TH MEETING AS THE NEXT TOWN HALL AND THEN SHE CAN GET EVERYTHING OUT. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, I THINK THAT'LL BE REALLY HELPFUL BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE A FEW, UM, A FEW POTENTIAL, LIKE LONGER FORM STORIES I GUESS IN THE WORKS. 
          AND, UM, I THINK A LITTLE BIT MORE NOTICE WILL BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR, FOR FOLKS WORKING ON THOSE. 
          SO I'LL, UM, WE WILL FOLLOW UP WITH AN EMAIL TO LET YOU ALL KNOW WHEN THE PRESS RELEASE GOES OUT. 
          I'LL ASK MIA TO LET EVERYONE KNOW. 
          AND THAT WAY IF YOU DO HAVE CONTACTS THAT YOU WANNA SEND IT ALONG TO, TO TRY TO GET THE WORD OUT YOU CAN. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          ANY OTHER OUTREACH COMMENTS? NO. 
          OKAY. 
          AGENDA 
          [7. Discussion and possible action of future meetings and meeting location. ]
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. 
          WE, WE'VE DISCUSSED ALREADY, WHICH IS FUTURE MEETING, UM, DATES AND LOCATIONS. 
          UM, UH, 
          [8. The Commission may discuss and identify future agenda items, topics, or presentations. ]
NUMBER EIGHT IS OUR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. COMMISSIONER TANO, WE HAD DISCUSSED HAVING THE STAFF POTENTIALLY BRIEF US ON THE CLEANUP AMENDMENT. 
          UH, IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE I AM, I WANTED TO ENSURE, UH, BOTH ONE PARTICULAR ITEM WAS THERE, BUT ALL, UH, THAT HAS TO DO WITH RECENTLY UPON OPPOSITE LAW, BUT ALSO JUST TO SEE THE TONE OF OUR CLEANUP ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE. 
          UH, IS THAT STILL SOMETHING WE'RE DOING OR IS THAT GONNA GO DIRECTLY TO COUNCIL? UH, NO, WE ARE STILL PLANNING TO DO THAT. 
          SO THE REASON THAT THERE WAS A DELAY IS BECAUSE, UH, WE WANTED TO RUN IT BY THE CITY MANAGER TO INFORM HIM AND HIS STAFF. 
          SO WE ARE ACTUALLY DOING THAT TOMORROW MORNING AND AS SOON AS WE DO THAT, THEN, UM, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, AND, AND OF COURSE I DEFER TO THE CHAIR, BUT IT COULD GO ON YOUR NEXT MEETING AGENDA TO, UH, YEAH, TO REVIEW THE STAFF REPORT FOR YOU ALL SO THAT YOU'LL HAVE, YOU CAN HAVE A COPY OF IT AND UM, WE ALSO HAVE A DOCUMENT, A MEMO THAT BASICALLY EXPLAINS WHY, WHY THE CHANGES ARE BEING MADE. 
          YES, I DO THINK WE SHOULD HAVE THAT ON OUR FEBRUARY 29TH AGENDA. 
          THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP, COMMISSIONER. 
          AND THEN A SECOND ITEM, UH, IT, EARLIER IN ONE OF MY EXTENDED COMMENTS I MENTIONED THERE BEING A, A SET OF TOPICS THAT WE JUST KIND OF HAVE RUN OUT OF TIME TO GET ON. 
          I CAMPAIGN FINANCE IS ONE OF THEM. 
          UM, IF WE HAD HAD MORE TIME AND THERE IS NO, UH, ACCUSATIONS HERE IS JUST THE PROCESS OF HAVING A TIME LIMITED BODY THAT HAS DELIBERATED EXTENSIVELY. 
          IF, IF WE HAD HAD MORE TIME, I WISH WE COULD HAVE REVISITED SOME OF THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE ITEMS. UM, THERE'S A TOPIC I MENTIONED ABOUT, UH, MPO REFORM, WHICH I THINK WILL PICK UP STEAM, UH, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG'S, UH, UM, PROPOSALS AROUND ETHICS AND SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE MENTIONED. 
          UM, I WONDER IF IT WOULD BE THE, IF THE BEST PATH FOR US CREATING AN APPENDIX IF PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IS, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR ME TO DRAFT ONE, IT'S A ONE PAGER WITH A LIST AND SOME, UH, EXPLANATION FOR THE 29TH SAYING THESE ARE TOUGHEST. 
          WE NEED TO GET TO WORTHY OF RECON RECONSIDERATION. 
          UM, BUT EITHER BY COUNCIL THEMSELVES WHEN THEY LOOK AT THE ENTIRE PACKAGE AND OR IN DUE TIME BY FUTURE CHARTER REVISION COMMISSIONS, BY A WAY OF SAYING THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE WORTHY AND MAY BE TIMELY BUT WE'RE OUTSIDE OF OUR SCOPE OR WE SORT OF SIMPLY RUN OUT OF TIME. 
          UM, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT OTHER FOLKS WOULD WANNA ADD SOME ITEMS TO? UH, AND I THINK THE CRITERIA IS NOT EVERYBODY AGREES WITH THAT EVERYTHING, BUT RATHER IT'S A GRAB, A GENTLY WORDED GRAB BAG OF THINGS FOR PEOPLE TO CONSIDER AS OPPOSED TO A YOU MUST DO THIS OR THIS IS ESSENTIAL AND YOU MUST AND SHALL. 
          UM, BUT RATHER, UH, THESE ARE SUNDRY TOPICS THAT MIGHT BENEFIT FROM PEOPLE LOOKING AT THEM. 
          UH, AND SO I'D BE HAPPY TO DO THE FIRST DRAFT AND THEN FOLKS CAN UH, SHARE IT THROUGH STAFF AND THEN FOLKS CAN ADD THEIR ITEMS. UM, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL SINCE WE REALLY DID FOCUS ON OUR, OUR, OUR CORE ITEMS, UH, SO MUCH. 
          UH, AND I THINK THERE ARE SOME OTHER TOPICS THAT MIGHT BE TIMELY, UH, BUT WE SIMPLY DIDN'T GET ENOUGH TIME TO FOCUS ON. 
          I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. 
          I WOULD SAY INSTEAD OF DOING IT AS AN APPENDIX, WE MAY WANNA CONSIDER INCORPORATING IT INTO THE ACTUAL REPORT AS 
          [01:40:01]
A SECTION OF THE REPORT. 
          AND THAT WAY ON ITEMS WHERE WE RECEIVED BRIEFING AND PRESENTATION, WE CAN ACTUALLY INCLUDE THE PRESENTATIONS TOO AS AN APPENDIX TO THE REPORT TO PRESERVE THOSE. 
          UM, FOR THE NEXT, WHEN THE NEXT COMMISSION COMES, THEY CAN LOOK BACK AT OUR REPORT AND SEE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF BUILD OFF OF THAT WORK. 
          AND SO CAROLINE'S GETTING STARTED. 
          I'VE SENT HER A WORD VERSION OF THE 2018 REPORT AND SHE'S GETTING STARTED ON PREPARING OUR FINAL REPORT. 
          AND SO IF YOU WANT TO SEND THAT INITIAL LIST TO HER COMMISSIONER ALT MURANO, WE CAN BUILD THAT IN. 
          COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, I WOULD INCLUDE THE REFERENDUM PETITIONS. 
          I MEAN, RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT PRACTICAL TO DO A REFERENDUM PETITION BECAUSE THEY NEED TO BE DONE BEFORE, UM, A LAW IS ENACTED, WHICH IN GENERAL IS 10 DAYS. 
          UM, AND THERE WAS IN 2018 A PROPOSAL TO GIVE THAT THE SAME 180 DAYS AFTER A BILL HAS PASSED. 
          UM, THE, I MEAN, COUNSEL WON'T LIKE THAT FOR SURE, BUT I MEAN, IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO A REFERENDUM, IN THEORY IT SHOULD BE THE ABILITY TO DO A REFERENDUM IN PRACTICE. 
          'CAUSE IN THEORY IT'S IN THE CHARTER, BUT YOU CAN'T DO IT IN 10 DAYS IN PRACTICE. 
          THAT CAN GO ON THE LIST. 
          I'LL ADD IT TO THE LIST. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY OTHER ITEMS, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, TOPICS OR PRESENTATIONS THAT WE'D LIKE TO REQUEST FOR THE NEXT MEETING? NOPE. 
          OKAY. 
          WITH THAT I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. 
          I MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. 
          I SECOND. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          I DON'T KNOW. 
          LET'S VOTE ON THAT. 
          ANY POST? NO.
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.