[00:00:01]
GO.AS LONG AS I SEE BEAVER NUGGETS,
[ CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS STATE OF OHIO Charter Review Commission]
SOME TYPE OF BUZZ.I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION TO ORDER ON MONDAY, APRIL 1ST AT 6:00 PM UH, TONY, COULD YOU DO THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE? MR. ZICK? HERE.
I FORGOT TO PRACTICE MRS. SUMMERS HERE.
AND AT THIS TIME, WE ALSO NEED TO JUST INSERT QUICKLY AN OATH OF OFFICE, UH, FOR RICK AND JOHN, WHO WERE NOT AT OUR, UH, OPENING MEETING.
SO I JUST ASKED YOU GUYS TO STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND REPEAT AFTER ME.
I AND STATE YOUR NAME, I, RICHARD.
DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES TO SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF OHIO, CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF OHIO, THE CHARTER AND ALL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS, THE CHARTER AND ALL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS.
AND THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY, HONESTLY, AND THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY, HONESTLY, AND IMPARTIALLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES IMPARTIALLY, DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF MY OFFICE, OF MY OFFICE TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITIES.
YOU GUYS DID, UH, EACH SIGN THIS FORM AND I CAN NOT RAISE IT AT THE BOTTOM.
ITEM NUMBER TWO, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
UH, BEFORE WE HAVE MOTION TO APPROVE, ARE THERE ANY AMENDMENTS OR CHANGES? I KNOW WE ALL RECEIVED THIS VIA EMAIL.
SO WAS THAT EASTER? SUNDAY MINUTES?
SO IF THERE ARE NO AMENDMENTS OR CHANGES THAT ARE NEEDED, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE.
IS THERE A SECOND? YOU LOOK GOOD,
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MINUTES? MR. ROGERS? IF YOU COULD DO THE ROLE, PLEASE.
SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE INTO OUR TOPICS OF DISCUSSION.
THE FIRST IS A CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION PROCESS, NEED STAFF SUPPORT AND OTHER ISSUES.
AND I WOULD TURN THAT OVER, UH, TO MR. ROGERS.
UM, I WOULD JUST FIRST ASK IF ANY OF THE, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS HAD ANY QUESTIONS, UH, JUST GENERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT PROCESS OR MOVING FORWARD THAT WEREN'T ANSWERED LAST TIME, OR YOU MAYBE THOUGHT OF, UH, SINCE THEN? NO.
UM, THEN I'D JUST LIKE TO REVIEW ONE THING, WHICH WOULD BE, UM, THE PROCESS FOR THE, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UM, SO, UH, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS, AS WE GO THROUGH THE SECTIONS OF REVIEW, UM, THE CHAIR WILL ASK IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO PRESENT IN THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON A PARTICULAR SECTION OF AN ARTICLE.
AND, UM, IF SO, WE WILL ASK THOSE PEOPLE TO, UH, COME TO THE PODIUM AND, UH, STATE THEIR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND, UH, TO MAKE THEIR COMMENTS.
UM, BUT I WAS JUST GOING TO, UH, REVIEW A LITTLE STATEMENT THAT I HAD WRITTEN UP ABOUT PUBLIC INPUT.
THAT'S THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION WILL ACCEPT INPUT, COMMENTS AND OR RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC IN PERSON AT, AT THE PUBLIC MEETINGS OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
EACH MEETING AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH ARTICLE OF THE CITY CHARTER.
UNDER, UNDER DISCUSSION AT THAT SPECIFIC MEETING, UH, THERE IS, UH, A MEETING SCHEDULE WHICH LISTS THE ARTICLES OF THE CITY CHARTER THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED AT EACH MEETING.
THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE INPUTS, COMMENTS, AND OR RECOMMENDATIONS AT THIS PART OF THE DISCUSSION.
UH, THE GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC INPUT WILL BE SIMILAR TO THE GUIDELINES FOR CITIZENS' COMMENTS, UM, AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS, WHICH MEANS THERE IS A TIME LIMIT OF FIVE MINUTES.
UH, THESE MEASURES WILL ENSURE THE MOST TRANSPARENCY IN THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSIONS PROCESS BY ENSURING THAT ALL PUBLIC INPUT WILL BE RECORDED ON THE MEETING RECORDING IN THE MINUTES, AND AVAILABLE FOR REVIEWING IN PERSON AND BY THE LIVE STREAMING AND, AND THE ON-DEMAND RECORD.
SO WE JUST ASK FOR THE, UH, THE PUBLIC'S, UH, UH, COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE GUIDELINES, UH, AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS,
[00:05:01]
AND THE INTEREST OF, UH, KEEPING IT ORDERLY AND, AND MAKING SURE THAT WE GIVE EVERYBODY THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THAT FEEDBACK.SO, UM, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, THEN I, I HAVE NOTHING ELSE UNDER THAT SECTION.
THEN WE WILL MOVE INTO THE CHARTER REVIEW STARTING WITH ARTICLE ONE.
UM, ARTICLE ONE ONLY HAS ONE SECTION, 1.01, NAME, SUCCESSION AND BOUNDARIES.
UH, BEFORE THE COMMISSION HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE INPUT, WE WOULD ASK IF THERE ARE ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE INPUT IN SECTION 1.01.
UH, MY NAME'S PAUL SCHAFER, AND I LIVE HERE IN HUBER HEIGHTS.
BEEN HERE FOR ABOUT, UH, 20 YEARS NOW.
UH, IN SECTION 1 0 1, UNDER SUCCESSION AND BOUNDARIES, I WOULD LIKE THE, UH, COMMISSION TO CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT, UH, FOR THE BOUNDARIES AREA WHERE CURRENTLY DISCUSSES ANNEX AND TERRITORY THERETO THE MANNER IN WHICH IS AUTHORIZED BY THE LAWS OF OHIO STATE OR STATE OF OHIO.
IF THE COMMISSION WOULD CONSIDER HAVING A PUBLIC VOTE REQUIRED FOR THAT, RATHER THAN IT JUST GOING TO THE COMMISSION, DO WHAT? TAKING ALL ANNEXATIONS TO A PUBLIC VOTE.
WHAT'S THAT GOT TO DO WITH THE WORDING IN HERE IN TERMS OF THE BOUNDARIES? I'M SUGGESTING THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL PARAGRAPH ADDED TO INCLUDE A PUBLIC VOTE REQUIRED FOR EXTENSION OF THE BOUNDARIES BY ANNEXATION.
SO THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY, AND I, I HOPE BY THE NEXT MEETING, WE, WE WILL HAVE THE LAW, THE NEW LAW DIRECTOR PRESENT HERE AT THESE MEETINGS.
I UNDERSTAND THEY ARE GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN, IN THESE MEETINGS.
UM, I, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT YOU'RE PROPOSING.
UM, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE SECTION OF THE CHARTER TO ACCOMPLISH THAT, AND THAT WOULD BE A LEGAL QUESTION.
SO, UM, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO TAKE THAT DOWN AS A ACTION ITEM THAT WE WILL, UH, GET A LEGAL OPINION ON THAT.
BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE CERTAINLY, THERE COULD BE SOME DISCUSSION, UH, YOU KNOW, EITHER FROM YOUR POINT AS FOR THE RATIONALE FOR DOING THAT, UM, AND THEN AMONGST THE COMMISSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THAT'S SOMETHING THEY EVEN WANT TO SEE, UH, OKAY.
IF THE DETERMINATION'S MADE BY LEGAL, UH, THAT THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR THAT, I WOULD, OF COURSE, LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK AND ADDRESS FURTHER.
WHAT WE'LL DO IS THE ITEMS THAT WILL BE TAKEN AS ACTION ITEMS FOR FOLLOW UP THAT THE COMMISSION DIRECTS THAT THEY WANT TO PURSUE AS ITEMS TO INVEST MORE TIME IN STAFF WORK IN, UH, THEN THEY'LL BE BROUGHT BACK AT FUTURE MEETING AGENDAS AS ACTION ITEM UNDER THE ACTION ITEM SECTION AND DISCUSSED AT THAT TIME.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY ON 1.01? GOOD EVENING.
UH, RICHARD SHAW, UM, JUST A POINT OF ORDER, UH, WAS WONDERING WHY THE COMMISSION IS NOT, UH, SET TO REVIEW THE PREAMBLE AS IS, AS THE SET OF THE CHARTER REVIEW? UM, WE DIDN'T REALLY DISCUSS IT.
IT, IT COULD BE DISCUSSED AT RIGHT NOW UNDER ARTICLE ONE.
I MEAN, IT'S, I WILL STATE, UH, UH, IF THE CHAIR ALLOWS DISCUSSION ON THE PREAMBLE, I I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ON THAT.
UM, IT WAS DISCUSSED BACK IN 2016 UNDER THE PREAMBLE TO REMOVE THE SECOND PARAGRAPH IN ACCORDANCE WITH KETTERING, BEAVER CREEK, AND VANDALIA.
WONDERING IF THAT WOULD BE AN ACTION ITEM FOR THE, UM, NEW LAW DIRECTOR TO OPINE ON AND, UH, CONSIDER MOVING FORWARD.
AND AT THIS TIME, THAT IS IT FOR SECTION 1 0 1 AND PREAMBLE.
UM, I'M, I'M A LITTLE UNCLEAR WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IN THE PREAMBLE.
UM, IT MAY BE, IT MAY BE BEST IF I SUBMIT THAT IN WRITING OKAY.
UM, TO YOU AND HAVE THAT REVIEWED BY THE LAW DIRECTOR.
BUT I, I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO LET THE COMMISSION LOOK AT IT 'CAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES THAT ARE GONNA MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION SURE.
ON TO WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GONNA INVEST TIME IN DOING.
BUT, UH, YEAH, IJI JUST DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE EXACTLY PROPOSING.
AND, UM, AND, AND AGAIN, WITHOUT, WITHOUT IT SUBMITTED IN WRITING, UM, UNABLE TO REVIEW, UM, I DIDN'T PREPARE THAT HERE THIS EVENING.
'CAUSE LIKE I SAID, IT WASN'T ON THE AGENDA FOR REVIEW.
UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE YOU WANT, SO IF YOU WANNA SEND IT TO ME, I'LL SEND IT OUT TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE COMMITTEE ON 1.01?
[00:10:01]
UH, OKAY.THEN I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR TO THE COMMISSION MEMBERS.
AND THIS WOULD BE THE TIME IF MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION WANTED TO COMMENT IN RESPONSE TO THE, THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AS WELL.
UM, IT COULD BE DONE AT THIS POINT IN THE DISCUSSION.
SO WHEN WE RECEIVE THAT WRITTEN INFORMATION, WE'LL THEN, UH, COME BACK AS A DISCUSSION POINT AT THE NEXT MEETING, OR, OKAY.
UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE COMMENT THAT MR. SHAW MADE ON THE PREAMBLE, DO I NEED TO CALL THAT OUT TO TALK? UM, OKAY.
THAT WOULD BE ELIMINATING AN ANTI-DISCRIMINATION PARAGRAPH.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO, I, I WOULD HOPE THAT HE WOULD INCLUDE HIS RATIONALE FOR DOING THAT, RIGHT? YES.
SO, SHORT OF ANY INFORMATION, UH, RECEIVED FROM OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS, I ACTUALLY HAVE NO EDITS TO SECTION 1.01.
ANYONE ELSE WITH SUGGESTED EDITS, BUT I DO THANK THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS FOR THEIR INPUT AND LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING BACK FROM OUR LAW DIRECTOR AND HEAR AND HAVING THE WRITTEN, UH, FROM MR. SHAW.
SO, UH, MOVING ON INTO THEN, ARTICLE TWO, FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS ARTICLE TWO? OKAY.
I'M SEEING A LOT OF HEADS SHAKING NOTES, SO I WILL ASSUME THAT EVERYONE IS FINE WITH SECTION 2.01.
YEAH, THE FIRST THREE ARTICLES ARE REALLY KINDA LIKE THE 10,000 FOOT VIEW OF THINGS.
UM, SO YOU KNOW, MORE OF THE DETAILS ARE IN THE OTHER SECTIONS WHERE YOU, UH, MOVE AS YOU MOVE FORWARD.
AND WE WILL MOVE ON THEN INTO ARTICLE THREE POWERS.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE COMMUNITY WANTING TO SPEAK ON ARTICLE THREE? OKAY.
UH, ANYONE FROM THE COMMISSION WILL NEED TO SPEAK ON ARTICLE THREE.
THEN MOVING FORWARD, UH, ARTICLE FOUR, THE COUNCIL? NO.
UM, AND WITH THIS 1, 1 0 2, HE WAS ASKING FOR THE WHOLE OH, FOR THE WHOLE THING? YEAH.
ANYTHING? EVERYBODY'S GOOD WITH THOSE THREE SECTIONS? OKAY.
THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO ARTICLE FOUR, THE COUNCIL.
UM, AND AGAIN, WITH THIS ONE, WE'RE GONNA GO, UH, SECTION BY SECTION.
AND, AND AGAIN, WE'LL ASK COMMUNITY INPUT AT THE START OF EACH SECTION.
IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS 4.01? OKAY.
ANYONE FROM THE COMMISSION HAVE EDITS OR DISCUSSION POINTS THEY'D LIKE TO BRING UP IN 4.01? OKAY.
HEARING NONE, THEN WE'LL MOVE TO 4.02.
UH, NUMBER SELECTION AND TERM, ANYONE FROM THE COMMUNITY? YES, MR. SHAFFER, FOR THESE COMMENTS, I ACTUALLY DO HAVE WRITTEN COPY THAT I'D LIKE TO PASS OUT.
YOU, YOU, PAUL, YOU CAN BRING IT TO ME AND I'LL, I'LL DISTRIBUTE IT.
YOU CAN BRING IT TO ME AND I'LL DISTRIBUTE IT.
SPECIFICALLY WITH SECTION 4 0 2, I'M ADDRESSING TERM SPECIFICALLY, UM, ADDING A SECTION WITH REGARDS TO TERM LIMITS.
SO MY PROPOSAL IS TO AMEND ARTICLE FOUR, THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS CHARTER TO ADD TERM LIMITATIONS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
BELOW IS SUGGESTED WORDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE FOUR, THE CITY CHARTER TO ADD TERM LIMITS FOR CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR POSITIONS.
THE ARGUMENT FOR TERM LIMITS IS THAT IT ENSURES GREATER FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND LOWER TAXES.
THE ARGUMENT CONTINUES THAT THE LONGER POLITICIANS STAY IN OFFICE, THE MORE OF OUR TAX DOLLARS THEY SPEND TERM
[00:15:01]
LIMITS REDUCE THE LIKELIHOOD OF CORRUPTION AND OPEN OUR GOVERNMENT TO NEW PEOPLE WITH NEW IDEAS TO SOLVE OUR COUNTRY'S PROBLEMS UPON US.THE TERM LIMITS ARGUE IT WILL HARM POL THE POLITICAL PROCESS OR TURN AWAY OUTSTANDING INEXPERIENCED ELECTED OFFICIALS, OR DENY VOTER CHOICE.
TERM LIMITS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAYOR, LIKE ANY POLITICAL MEASURE, COME WITH THEIR OWN SET OF ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES.
HERE ARE SOME OF THE PROS AND CONS.
PROS PROMOTES A FRESH PERSPECTIVE, REDUCES INCUMBENCY ADVANTAGE, PREVENTS CORRUPTION AND POWER CONCENTRATION, AND ENCOURAGES CIVIC ENGAGEMENT.
UNDER CONS, THERE'S A LOSS OF EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE.
THERE'S A DISRUPT DISRUPTIVE EFFECT ASSOCIATED WITH THE LEADERSHIP.
THERE'S A POTENTIAL FOR CONSTANT CAMPAIGNING AND THERE'S LIMITED VOTER CHOICE.
TERM LIMITS CAN HELP PREVENT POLITICAL STAGNATION AND REDUCE THE RISK OF CORRUPTION THAT CAN ALSO RESULT IN THE LOSS OF EXPERIENCE, DISRUPTION IN LEADERSHIP, AND LIMIT OR EXPAND VOTER CHOICE.
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TERM LIMITS DEPENDS ON THE VARIOUS FACTORS, INCLUDING THE SPECIFIC CONTEXT OF THE CITY AND ITS POLITICAL CLIMATE AND CULTURE.
WE SHOULD RECOGNIZE THAT WE MAY BE A WHAT MAY BE A PRO TODAY MAY BE A CON TOMORROW AND VICE VERSA.
SO INSTITUTING TERM LIMITS NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED CAREFULLY.
OUR CITY FOUNDERS EMBEDDED IN THE CITY CHARTER PROCESS THAT ALLOWS US TO ADDRESS THIS CONCERN BY REQUIRING REGULAR CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSIONS TO EVALUATE AND UPDATE THE CHARTER TO ENSURE FLEXIBILITY IN ADDRESSING THIS CONCERN.
THE FOLLOWING QUESTION WAS PUT TO THE READERS AND FOLLOWERS OF THE HUBER HEIGHTS COMMUNITY FORUM GROUP ON, ON FACEBOOK ON THE 21ST OF FEBRUARY.
IN YOUR OPINION, SHOULD THE HUBER HEIGHTS CHA CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION DISCUSS AND EXPLORE ESTABLISHING TERM LIMITS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OR THE MAYOR OF HUBER HEIGHTS? BOTH OR NEITHER, THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY IS FOLLOWS.
AND OF COURSE, I'VE ATTACHED IN YOUR, UH, LITERATURE THERE A COPY OF THE SURVEY RIGHT OUT OF THE, UH, WEB POSTING, UH, TERM LIMITS FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS ONLY SHOWED 1%, AND THAT'S AN ARTIFACT OF THE SOFTWARE.
IT WAS A, IT'S WHERE THEY COUNT FOR THE ROUNDING AREA TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING ROUNDS UP TO A HUNDRED.
TERM LIMITS FOR BOTH COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAYOR HAD 110 VOTES, OR 96% OF THE VOTES.
TERM LIMITS FOR NO TERM LIMITS, UH, RECEIVED 3% OF THE VOTES OR FOUR VOTES.
AND I'VE PROVIDED YOU THE WEB LINK FOR THAT AND READ.
YOUR COMMENTS ARE INCLUDED THERE, AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO READ THOSE.
CONSIDERING ALL OF THESE THINGS, I MAKE THE FOLLOWING MOTION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
I MOVE THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL RECOMMEND AND APPROVE A RESOLUTION PROPOSING TERM LIMITATIONS FOR MAYOR AND COUNCIL BY AMENDING ARTICLE FOUR, THE CITY CHARTER, AND THAT SUCH AMENDMENT BE SUBMITTED TO THE REGISTERED VOTERS FOR APPROVAL OR REJECTION AT THE REGULAR ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5TH.
THE PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT WORDING WOULD BE AS FOLLOWS, NOTWITHSTANDING, ANY OTHER PROVISIONS IN THIS CHARTER, NO PERSON SHALL BE ELIGIBLE TO SERVE MORE THAN TWO TERMS CONSECUTIVELY AS A COMP COUNCIL MEMBER, OR MORE THAN TWO TERMS CONSECUTIVELY AS MAYOR.
SELECTION OR APPOINT ELECTION OR APPOINTMENT TO SERVE THE UNEXPIRED PORTION OF A TERM SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED A FULL TERM FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS LIMITATION.
IF THE REMAINING TERM IS LESS THAN 24 MONTHS ELECTION, BUT OR APPOINTMENT TO SERVE THE UNEXPIRED PORTION OF A TERM SHALL BE CONSIDERED A FULL TERM FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS LIMITATION, IF THE REMAINING TERM IS EQUAL TO OR MORE THAN 24 MONTHS.
UH, MUCH OF THE NEXT PARAGRAPH IS ACTUALLY ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE CHARTER, BUT IT'S REITERATED HERE THAT EACH INCUMBENT COUNCIL MEMBER AND MAYOR POSITION WILL VACATE ON THE 31ST OF DECEMBER AT THE END OF THE SECOND TERM OF AN INCUMBENT, REGARDLESS OF THE RESULTS OF AN ELECTION, INCLUDING RESULTS THAT LEAVE THE POSITION UNFILLED CONSISTENT WITH THE SELECTIONS OF SECTION 4.07 C OF THIS CHARTER COUNCIL SHALL FILL WITHIN 30 DAYS BY VOTE OF A MAJORITY OF THE REMAINING COUNCIL MEMBERS, ANY UNFILLED VACANCY RESULTING FROM THE TERM LIMITS, SHOULD AN ELECTION NOT RESULT IN THE POSITION, POSITION BEING FILLED.
ALSO, COUNCIL, YOUR FIVE MINUTES ARE ALMOST UP.
I'VE GOT ONE PARAGRAPH SUMMARIZE.
MAY I FINISH? YEAH, YOU CAN SUMMARIZE.
ALL CITY COUNCIL POSITIONS COUNT AS THE SAME.
A AGAIN, THE LANGUAGE IS THERE.
UM, I, I ASK THAT THE CITY, UH, THAT THIS COMMISSION CONSIDER THAT FOR ADOPTION.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT WOULD LIKE INPUT INTO 4.02?
[00:20:03]
GOOD EVENING, ALL.I'M DAN WHITE, LONGTIME RESIDENT OF HUBER HEIGHTS.
I DIDN'T COME THAT PREPARED AS MR. SCHAEFFER WAS.
I'M HERE TO VOICE MY THOUGHTS ON THIS SECTION OF, UH, THE CHARTER.
UH, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WOULD LOOK, HOW IT WOULD BE WORDED, BUT I THINK THAT THE ELECTORS OF HUBER HEIGHTS DESERVE A VOICE IN HOW THEIR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ARE ELECTED, HOW LONG THEY SERVE.
AND THIS IS ONE WAY OF, UH, ADDRESSING THAT ISSUE.
AND I'M NOT, I'M NOT EVEN SURE HOW ALL THIS IS GONNA WORK.
UH, IT'S BEEN EIGHT YEARS SINCE THE LAST ONE.
AND, UH, I KNOW THAT WAS A TOPIC ALSO, AND IT WAS JUST KIND OF NEXT EARLY ON.
SO I HOPE THIS BODY DOESN'T NIX IT WITHOUT SOME DISCUSSION AND SOME CONSIDERATION, UH, AS FAR AS THE ELECTORS HAVING A VOICE IN, IN THIS PART OF THE CHARTER.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE COMMUNITY? MR. MR. SHAW? IT'S RICHARD, CORRECT? YES.
UM, I, UH, AM ALSO HERE STANDING HERE TODAY.
UM, UH, AFFIRMING MY, UH, SUPPORT FOR TERM LIMITS, UM, AS STATED BY, UH, MR. SCHAFER, I THINK HAS DONE AN AMAZING JOB OUTLINING THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE, PROVIDING SOME PROS AND CONS.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, I WOULD, UH, REQUEST THAT EACH ONE OF YOU, UH, UH, YOU THE COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, EXPLORE, UH, WHAT TERM LIMITS HAVE DONE IN THE STATE OF OHIO.
UM, AND, UH, I I WILL SAY THERE ARE MANY CITIES THAT HAVE BEEN OPERATING, UH, WITHIN THE STATE OF OHIO FOR MORE THAN 25 CONSECUTIVE YEARS.
UM, WITH TERM LIMITS, WITH NO ISSUES, NO APPOINTMENT PROBLEMS, NO PROBLEMS FINDING PEOPLE TO RUN FOR OFFICE.
UH, ADDITIONALLY, 10 OF THE LARGEST CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES HAVE TERM LIMITS THAT'S IMPACTFUL.
10 OF 10 OF THE LARGEST CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES HAVE TERM LIMITS.
UM, THE, THE SECOND LARGEST CITY IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY HAS TERM LIMITS.
UM, SO THE, THESE ARE DEFINITELY THINGS TO THINK ABOUT AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
I HAVE A WHOLE LIST OF OTHER, UM, PROS AND CONS, UH, AND, AND ARGUMENTS TO BE MADE FOR TERM LIMITS.
UM, THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS, UH, UM, DISCUSSED IN, IN GRAVE DETAIL.
I WOULD, UH, I REQUEST EACH ONE OF YOU TO LOOK BACK ON, UH, MAY 4TH, 2016.
AT THE LAST TIME THIS WAS DISCUSSED.
UH, IT WAS A VERY LENGTHY DISCUSSION.
UM, I WILL SAY AT THAT TIME, UH, ABOUT HALF OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION AT THAT TIME SUPPORTED TERM LIMITS.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY, UH, DUE TO A, UH, I'M GONNA CALL IT A A, A, LIKE-MINDED DIFFERENCES.
UM, IT, UH, NEVER REALLY MADE IT TO COUNCIL.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE PUBLIC NEVER GOT AN OPINION ON THAT AT THE BALLOT BOX.
UM, I WOULD ASK, UM, FOR A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, MR. ROGERS, UM, IF THE, UH, TRY TO REVIEW COMMISSION WAS TO SUBMIT ANYTHING, UM, TO COUNSEL FOR RECOMMENDATION, COUNSEL THEN APPROVED IT.
UM, AND I, I'M GOING TO ASSUME THOSE ITEMS WOULD BE POSSIBLY ON THE, UH, THE NOVEMBER BALLOT.
UM, COULD YOU TELL ME, UM, UH, WHAT COST, UM, PER EACH, UH, RECOMMENDATION, UH, IS IT TO THE TAXPAYERS TO PUT THOSE ON THE BALLOT? I DON'T HAVE CURRENT NUMBERS FOR THAT.
UM, UH, THERE, THERE IS, THERE IS A COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, THAT THE, THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS PASSES ONTO THE CITY.
BUT I'D HAVE TO GET, UH, THAT UP, THAT INFORMATION UPDATED.
I, IF, IF, AND I GUESS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS THAT WOULD BE A VERY, UM, MINIMAL NUMBER.
UH, IT WOULDN'T BE ANYTHING IMPACTFUL LIKE, UH, UH, $10,000, $5,000, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
IT, IT, IT'S LESS IMPACTFUL WHEN YOU HAVE, UH, GENERAL ELECTIONS WHERE THERE'S A NUMBER OF ITEMS ON THE BALLOT ALREADY.
UH, IT'S THE ONES WHERE THERE'S LESS ON 'CAUSE THERE'S LESS PEOPLE TO SHARE THE COST OF THE ELECTIONS.
WOULD IT BE YOUR OPINION AS THE, UH, CLERK O OF THIS COUNCIL AND A MASTER CLERK, UH, THAT IT WOULD BE, UH, THE LESS, MOST, LESS IMPACTFUL, UH, TO HAVE IT ON A PRESIDENTIAL NOVEMBER ELECTION? THAT'S A LITTLE SUBJECTIVE, SO I'M NOT GONNA ANSWER THAT ONE.
BUT, BUT, UH, IT WOULD COST LESS THAN A MAY PRIMARY.
UM, I, I WOULD DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSION TO DEFINITELY REVIEW THAT AND GIVE THE PUBLIC AN OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, UH, TO OPINE ON, ON THIS MEASURE.
AND, UH, FINALLY EITHER PUT THIS, UH, ITEM TO, UH, TO REST OR CODIFY IT IN OUR, UH, CHARTER.
YOU KNOW, I'M A, I'M A STATS GUY.
[00:25:01]
SURVEYED.HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN THAT FORUM? UH, AS OF TODAY, 627.
I WILL ALSO, UH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A MEMBER IN ORDER TO REVIEW WHAT'S IN THAT WEBSITE.
IT'S NOT A CLOSED WEBSITE, SO IT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
AND WE HAVE SOME 200 VISITORS.
SO ROUGHLY ABOUT 800 COULD HAVE POTENTIALLY COMMUNITY MEMBERS COULD HAVE, COULD HAVE POTENTIALLY SEEN THAT.
YOU HAVE NO WAY OF TELLING WHETHER THOSE PEOPLE ARE HUBER HEIGHTS RESIDENTS VERSUS, UH, RESIDENTS OF OTHER COMMUNITIES.
I, I CAN GENERATE THE LIST OF NAMES OF PEOPLE WHO DID REGISTER A VOTE, AND THAT CAN BE CHECKED AGAINST THE VOTER RECORDS.
I'M, I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE STATS THERE.
ANY OTHER COMMUNITY INPUT? IF NOT, WE, WE'LL OPEN IT UP TO COMMISSION MEMBERS.
ANYTHING IN 4.02 THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS? I HAVE A QUESTION.
I'M CURIOUS IF ANYONE HAS THE INFORMATION ON WHETHER OR NOT ANY OF THE LAST TWO TO THREE ELECTIONS HAVE HAD PEOPLE RUN CONTESTED, OR IF IT WAS A ONE PERSON VOTE FOR EITHER AWARD, A MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBER, WE COULD GET THAT INFORMATION.
I KNOW AT THE LAST, UH, ELECTION THAT WAS JUST HELD LAST YEAR, UH, WE HAD, UM, TWO CONTESTED TO, OR NO, THREE, THREE UNCONTESTED UNCONTESTED, AND ONE CONTESTED.
ONE OF 'EM HAD STARTED OUT CONTESTED, BUT, UH, THE OPPONENT DROPPED OUT OF THE RACE.
AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS ONLY ONE INCUMBENT OKAY.
IN THE, IN THE POOL LAST YEAR.
AND THAT WAS MR. WEBB IN THE LAST VOTE.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM, IF WE, IF WE DID DECIDE TO BRING THIS TO A VOTE, WHAT, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF SOMEBODY DID RUN UNCONTESTED AND THEY WERE GOING, THAT WOULD BE A THIRD TERM IF THEY WENT UNCONTESTED.
IF, IF WE DECIDED THAT IT WAS, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE, THEY'VE HIT TWO TERMS, THIRD TERM OF IT, THEY GO UNCONTESTED.
DO THEY? WELL, IF, IF SOMETHING WAS PROPOSED, YEAH.
OH, YOU, YOU'RE SAYING LIKE, IF THEY HAD ALREADY SERVED TERMS AND HOW THAT, LIKE A GRANDFATHER CLAUSE, RIGHT.
HOW DO, HOW DO, HOW, HOW DO WE AS A COMMISSION PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER FOR SOMEBODY WHO'S FULFILLED TWO TERMS? NOW TWO POINTS IS THEY'RE GOING UNCONTESTED FOR AND THERE'S NOBODY TO FILL THE SEAT.
DO THAT, DOES THAT PERSON, WELL, THAT WOULD BE THE THINGS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE WORKED OUT.
I WOULD SUGGEST WITH ALL THESE, UH, YOU KNOW, PROPOSALS AND INITIATIVES THAT THE, UH, CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION CONSIDER THEM.
UM, AND THEN MOVE FROM THE STANDPOINT OF WHETHER IN CONCEPT YOU WANT TO LOOK AT DRAFTING SOMETHING THAT WOULD ADDRESS THESE TYPES OF ISSUES OR NOT.
UM, I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO SPEND A LOT OF STAFF AND LEGAL TIME CHASING SOMETHING DOWN OR WRITING SOMETHING THAT, UM, THE COMMISSION'S NOT ULTIMATELY GONNA SUPPORT.
AND MAYBE, YOU KNOW, UH, LOOKING AT THAT AS PART OF THE PROCESS TO DETERMINE WHETHER YOU WANT TO SUPPORT IT.
BUT, UH, SO I THINK, UH, FIRST THE, UH, COMMISSION WOULD DISCUSS THESE ITEMS, UH, COME TO A CONSENSUS ABOUT HOW THEY'D LIKE TO PROCEED WITH THAT ITEM.
AND THEN FROM THERE, THE DETAILS WOULD BE WORKED OUT SIMILAR TO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU WERE ASKING.
I DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE, UH, COMMUNITIES AND, AND ENTITIES THAT HAVE TERM LIMITS WHERE, UH, WHEN THEY'RE IMPLEMENTED, UM, THEY'VE HAD A CLAUSE THAT SAID IF SOMEONE'S ALREADY BEEN IN INCUMBENT, UH, THAT DOESN'T COUNT TOWARDS THE TERM LIMITS.
IT ONLY STARTS AT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TERM LIMITS.
UM, SO THERE, THERE'S A NUMBER OF WAYS THAT COULD BE DONE IF OKAY, IT WERE TO BE DONE, UH, YOU KNOW, UM, TERM LIMITS COULD BE TWO TERMS. IT COULD BE THREE TERMS. IT COULD BE, UH, YOU KNOW, NO TERMS. SO, UH, SO THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS ON THE TABLE.
UM, BUT I'D ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT 'EM AND HAVE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT 'EM.
AND THEN DECIDE WHAT AS A GROUP YOU THINK YOU WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND TO COUNSEL, UM, IN EACH RESPECTIVE, UM, SECTION.
SO, UH, THIS IS IN REGARDS TO MR. SHAVER'S UP.
I SEE WHAT YOU PROPOSED, BUT I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT SAID THAT THEY COULD COME BACK AFTER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, SAY IN TWO YEARS, AND THEY WANTED TO RUN AGAIN AFTER A TWO YEAR LAW.
IS THAT SOMETHING YOU WOULD BE OPEN TO? I'VE NOTICED, I'VE NOTICED OTHER CITIES DO THINGS LIKE THAT.
[00:30:01]
INTERESTING THAT YOU BROUGHT THAT UP.'CAUSE I HAD A PARAGRAPH IN THERE AT ONE POINT THAT, UH, MADE IT A TWO TERM LIFETIME LIMIT.
AND, UH, I REMOVED THAT AND DECIDED TO THAT THE COMMISSION SHOULD ADDRESS THAT.
AND I THINK IT REALLY IS UP TO THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE SOME OF THESE DETAILS.
AND YOU'RE GONNA COME UP WITH ISSUES LIKE, WHEN DOES IT START? WHEN DOES IT, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO YOU COUNT THAT, THAT I THINK IS, UH, WHY YOU, THIS PANEL'S BEEN EMBODIED.
I THINK IN MR. SCHAFER'S PROPOSAL, THAT THE FACT THAT HE STATES NO MORE THAN TWO TERMS CONSECUTIVELY, UH, IMPLIES THAT, UM, AS LONG AS THEY WERE NON-CONSECUTIVE TERMS THAT THEY COULD RUN FOR OFFICE AFTER, UH, ABSENCE OF SOME PERIOD.
SO, UH, I'LL JUST SAY THIS FOR THE COMMISSION'S CONSIDERATION, I THINK, UM, OUR CITIZEN MEMBER'S INPUT ON THIS IS PROBABLY MOST VALUABLE.
UM, BUT AS MY ROLE AS A CITY EMPLOYEE ON THIS COMMISSION, UM, I DO FIND, UM, SOME CONSISTENCY IN LEADERSHIP TO BE OF VALUE.
UM, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES OUR STAFF, UH, OUR CITY MANAGER, OTHER PEOPLE COME IN FROM THE OUTSIDE, UH, AND REALLY LEAN ON SOME EXPERIENCED MEMBERS OF BOTH COUNCIL AND STAFF TO UNDERSTAND THE INNER WORKINGS OF THE CITY, UH, OF OUR GOVERNMENT.
AND SO, UM, I REALLY DO APPRECIATE MR. SCHAEFFER, UH, ALL OF HIS, UM, PROPOSALS TO US, BECAUSE THEY DO PROVIDE BOTH THE PROS AND THE CONS.
UM, AND I UNDERSTAND BOTH SIDES OF IT, UM, AS A, BUT AS A, UH, STAFF MEMBER FOR THE CITY, I DO FIND, UM, SOME EXPERIENCE IN OUR GOVERNMENT TO BE, UH, OF SIGNIFICANT VALUE.
UH, HAVING SERVED ON THE LAST, UH, CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, UM, ONE OF THE, WELL, THE CONSENSUS AT THAT TIME WAS AN ELECTION IS, IS A DECIDER OF WHO, UH, YOU KNOW, IT DID, IT'S ITS OWN, UM, TERM LIMITS PROCESS.
UM, MR. SCHAFFER'S COMMENTS IN HERE ABOUT IT, UH, THAT TERM LIMITS ENSURE GREATER FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND LOWER TAXES.
THERE'S NOTHING TO SUPPORT THAT.
I MEAN, WE HAVE GREAT FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THIS CITY, AS IS PROVEN BY OUR, OUR AUDITS EVERY YEAR.
AND THE, UH, POLE THAT WAS USED IN USED ON HERE IS, UH, IS NOT STA STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE WE HAVE 43,000 PEOPLE IN THIS CITY, AND ONLY A HANDFUL OF THEM EVEN KNOW THIS FACEBOOK EXIST.
SO, UM, I, I DON'T SUPPORT TERM LIMITS.
I BELIEVE THAT, UH, THE VOTERS DECIDE THEY GIVE US A RESPONSIBILITY AND THE TRUST TO DO OUR JOBS AND WE DO IT, UM, THE BEST THAT WE CAN.
AND, AND THAT WAS, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
ANY OTHER INPUT? GO AHEAD, MR. WEBB.
UM, UH, TO MR. SHAW'S COMMENT, UH, REGARDING, UH, YOUR QUESTIONING TONY ROGERS ON THE, THE COST OF, UH, PLACING THIS ON THE BALLOT, I WOULD ASK THAT THE COMMISSION DISREGARD THAT AND, UH, I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE MAKING DECISIONS ON, UM, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO FORWARD TO COUNSEL AND WHAT COUNSEL WILL EVENTUALLY FORWARD TO THE BALLOT, UH, ON THE BASIS OF WHAT IT MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT COST.
UM, SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF ONLY, I'LL JUST SAY I DON'T CARE WHAT IT COSTS.
IF WE HAVE GOOD SUGGESTIONS HERE THAT ARE BROUGHT FORWARD, I DON'T THINK THAT WHETHER OR NOT IT MIGHT COST MORE OF THIS TIME OR LESS NEXT TIME IS A VALID ARGUMENT.
I THINK THE COMMISSION SHOULD MOVE FORWARD, UM, THROUGH THE CHANGES THAT WE'RE SUGGESTING WITHOUT REGARD TO THAT.
SO, UH, I HOPE I'M, UM, UH, I DON'T MEAN TO OFFEND YOU, RICHARD.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS I DON'T THINK COSTS SHOULD BE, UM, A CONSIDERATION WHEN THIS COMMISSION IS MAKING, IS DELIBERATING ON MAKING CHANGES TO PUT BEFORE THE VOTERS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I, I, I'LL JUST, MY 2 CENTS PERSONALLY, UH, I KEEP WAITING FOR A PRESIDENT TO RUN ON.
I'M GONNA PUT TERM LIMITS IN, UH, BECAUSE I DO GET TIRED OF AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, UH, THE LIFETIME POLITICIANS.
UM, HOWEVER, WHEN I LOOK AT OUR LOCAL
[00:35:01]
LEVEL, AND I LOOK AT THE LAST ELECTION, UM, WHERE THERE WERE FOUR POSITIONS THAT WERE OPEN, UH, THERE WAS ONLY ONE INCUMBENT AND WE HAD THREE NON RACES.UM, I JUST FEEL AT THIS TIME, IT MAY NOT BE THE BEST FOR THE CITY OF FEWER HEIGHTS, UM, BECAUSE THERE'S NOT AS MUCH INTEREST RIGHT NOW.
NOW WHEN WE RUN OUT AND HAVE TWO, TWO ELECTION CYCLES, AND WE'VE GOT A PRIMARY THAT'S NEEDED BECAUSE WE HAVE MORE THAN TWO RUNNING, AND WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, TWO RUNNING IN EVERY SINGLE PLACE IN, IN NOVEMBER, UM, THEN I DO THINK WHAT MR. SCHAEFER HAS PUT FORTH DOES, UH, NEED TO BE CONSIDERED.
UM, BECAUSE IT IS THE FOUNDING FATHERS WHO PUT THE CHARTER TOGETHER DID ASK US TO REVIEW IT ONCE EVERY 10 YEARS OR SO.
UM, I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS THE BEST TIME, UH, TO DO A TERM LIMIT, UH, JUST GIVEN OUR RECENT HISTORY WITH, UM, WITH OUR LAST ELECTION.
SO, ANYTHING ELSE WITH 4.02? YES.
UM, TONY, I KNOW WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT LANGUAGE CLEANUP.
CAN WE CHECK WITH THE LAW DIRECTOR AGAIN ABOUT REMOVING HISTORICAL LANGUAGE, UH, WHETHER IT'S NECESSARY IN THERE? SO THE EXAMPLE IS, EXCEPT FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD, BEGINNING JANUARY 1ST, 1984, AND ENDING DECEMBER 31ST, 1985.
THAT SEEMS ANTIQUATED TO ME, BUT IF WE HAVE TO LEAVE IT, THAT'S FINE.
I'D JUST LIKE TO ASK THE QUESTION.
UM, I DO KNOW WHEN WE HAD THE DISCUSSION LAST TIME, UH, THE LAW DIRECTOR THEN HAD STATED THAT, UH, IT WAS THERE FOR HISTORICAL REFERENCE AND, AND SHOULD REMAIN.
THE, THE OTHER THING IS THAT, UM, WHEN WE PUT SOMETHING ON THE BALLOT, WELL, PEOPLE UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE INTENT OF THAT IS.
I MEAN, NANCY MAKES A GOOD POINT BECAUSE IT, AT SOME POINT YOU, THERE HAS TO BE VOTER EDUCATION AND THE VOTERS HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE VOTING ON.
AND TYPICALLY, UH, THE MORE COMPLICATED IT IS, THE HARDER IT IS TO GET IT PASSED.
ANYTHING FURTHER FOR 4.02? YES.
SO GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE'VE HAD VERY LITTLE INTEREST, I GUESS, IN RUNNING FOR COUNCIL, I THINK YOU SAID THERE WERE A FEW THAT WERE NON-CON CONTESTED RACES RECENTLY.
AND I SEE HERE THE WORDING SAYS WE HAVE DISTRICTS AND THEY OVERLAP, AND WE'VE AT LARGE.
WHAT IF ALL OF COUNSEL WAS AT LARGE? AND I'VE DONE A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH ON IT, AND I CAN SHARE MY PROS, BUT WOULD THIS BODY BE INTERESTED IN DISCUSSING MM-HMM.
I CAN GO THROUGH MY PROS IF YOU WANT.
SO, UM, HAVING AN ALL AT LARGE COUNCIL WOULD ENSURE REPRESENTATION OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
IT MAY FOSTER A SENSE OF UNITY AND COMMON PURPOSE ACROSS THE CITY.
WE'D BE LESS SUSCEPTIBLE TO GERRYMANDERING.
COUNCIL CAN FOCUS ON CITYWIDE ISSUES WITHOUT BEING TIED TO SPECIFIC DISTRICTS.
THOSE ARE SOME, IF YOU HAVE ANY, I'D LIKE TO HEAR THEM.
ANY COMMENTS ON WHAT MS. SUMMERS HAS BROUGHT FORTH? YES.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT, BUT I, FOR NANCY UH HUH I, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT, BUT I THINK, I DON'T THINK THERE'S A SINGLE PERSON ON THIS COUNCIL THAT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THEY ALREADY REPRESENT THE WHOLE CITY.
AND ANY RESIDENT CAN GO TO ANYONE THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE TALKING TO ABOUT ANY ISSUES.
SO I'M, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE, WHAT THE OVERALL BENEFIT WOULD BE TO THAT.
I THINK IT'D BE THEN BECOME A CITYWIDE ELECTION FOR EACH PERSON.
WELL, YEAH, IT WOULD AND NOT WITHIN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IT WOULD REQUIRE, UH, MORE SIGNATURES TO RUN.
AND, UM, AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE A, A MASS SELECTION, CORRECT? YEAH.
A SITUATION LIKE THAT, I WOULD ENVISION FOUR UP.
AND IF EIGHT GO IN, THERE WOULDN'T EVEN NEED TO BE A PRIMARY.
YOU JUST TAKE THE TOP FOUR IN NOVEMBER.
SO, SO THAT WOULD ELIMINATE A PRIMARY, BECAUSE IF EIGHT PUT IN, OR 10 PUT IN TOP FOUR RIGHT.
VOTE GETTERS IN NOVEMBER ARE THE ONES THAT EARN THE FOUR POSITIONS THAT ARE OPEN.
THAT'S HOW IT'S DONE IN A LOT OF COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE ALL, AT LARGE PEOPLE IS, UH, THERE COULD BE UNLIMITED NUMBER OF CANDIDATES, BUT THEN THE TOP VOTE GETTERS, UH, FILL THE SEATS THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
SO IT'S KINDA LIKE WINTER OR TAKES WHILE
[00:40:02]
MAD.I JUST WANTED TO SAY I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU SAID AS FAR AS BEING ABLE TO APPROACH ANYONE ON COUNCIL.
I AGREE THAT THAT IS TRUE, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE PEOPLE MIGHT BE MORE HARDENED IN THEIR STANCE IF THEY'RE, OH, THIS IS MY WARD, AND, AND WHILE THEY'RE VOTING ON EVERYTHING CITYWIDE, WHY NOT MAKE THEM ALL? YOU KNOW, THAT WAY THERE'S NO NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE'S INTERESTS ARE A WHOLE, THAT WAS MY THOUGHT.
I, I SEE, I SEE WHERE THAT COMES TO PLAY WHEN IT COMES TO, IF SOMETHING'S GOING ON IN MY WARD, I WANT TO GET THAT DONE, OR I'LL HOLD SOMETHING BACK BECAUSE IT'S NOT GETTING DONE ON MY STREET OR IN MY, IN MY PARK, IN, IN MY SECTION IN THE TOWN.
SO I, THE AT LARGE THING, WINNER TAKE CALL DOES MAKE SENSE.
SO ON ONE, ON ONE SIDE, AND THEN ON THE OTHER HAND, RIGHT, YOU SITTING UP THERE LIKE, WELL, I HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FOR MY AREA AND I KNOW SOMETHING'S GONNA GET DONE IF I GO TALK TO THAT PERSON.
SO HOW DO YOU MAKE THE TRANSITION AT THE NEXT, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE PASS THAT MM-HMM.
AND WHEN THEIR TERM IS UP, IT'D BE THOSE FOUR WHOSE TERMS ARE UP RUNNING FOR REELECTION.
AND THEN THE NEXT CYCLE WOULD BE THE NEXT FOUR.
SO I THINK IT'S 1, 2, 6, AND AN AT LARGE ARE IN ONE CYCLE.
SO ALL OF 'EM WOULD THEN JUST BE CONSIDERED AT LARGE AND THEY WOULD STILL RUN ON THE SAME CYCLE.
AND THEN, WHAT'S THAT? LEAVE 3, 4, 5, AND ANOTHER AT LARGE IN THE OTHER CYCLE.
AND AGAIN, THEY'D ALL STILL BE INCUMBENTS, BUT THEY'D BE RUNNING IN A CITYWIDE ELECTION, NOT A WARD ELECTION.
WOULD THAT MEAN IN THE THIRD CYCLE THAT ALL WOULD COME UP BE BECAUSE THERE, THERE ARE FOUR UP EVERY TWO YEARS.
SO EVEN IN THE WARD SYSTEM, THERE'S FOUR, FOUR COUNCIL POSITIONS UP EVERY TWO YEARS.
THAT'S, THAT'S AN INTERESTING, YES.
I MEAN, I CAN SEE BOTH SIDES AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
'CAUSE I DO AGREE YOU CAN GO TO ANYONE ON THE COUNCIL AND YOU'RE HEARD.
UM, I WILL SAY THAT WITH CONSTRUCTION GOING ON ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME BEING ABLE TO CALL, YOU KNOW, MR. WEBB AND HE KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, HE IS A FEW MINUTES AWAY.
HE CAN COME TO THE CONSTRUCTION SITE AND CHECK IT OUT.
AND ON TOP OF THAT, I THINK GIVEN THE RIDICULOUS AMOUNT OF CONVERSATION THAT HAPPENED AROUND WHO'S SITTING ON THIS COMMISSION, I THINK AN AT LARGE COUNCIL WOULD ONLY FERVOR CONVERSATION AND SILLY CONSPIRACY THEORIES ABOUT OH THREE OF THE FOUR ARE NORTH OF 70 VERSUS REPRESENTING THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
I THINK, WHILE I AGREE, I I THINK UNIFYING IT MAKES GOOD SENSE FOR US AS WE'RE GROWING.
I THINK KEEPING IT AS AWARD SQUASHES SOME OF THE SILLINESS THAT HAPPENS OUTSIDE OF THESE TYPES OF MEETINGS.
UM, MY PERSONAL FEELING ON THIS IS THAT I BELIEVE THAT THE WARDS WERE CREATED SO THAT WE WOULD HAVE REPRESENTATION FROM ACROSS THE CITY.
NOW EVEN SO CURRENTLY YOU COULD HAVE TWO AT LARGES, A WARD REP AND THE MAYOR ALL FROM WARD TWO.
UH, SO I MEAN, WE, WE HAVE SOME OF THAT NOW, BUT AT LEAST WITH THE WARD SYSTEM, WE ARE GUARANTEED REPRESENTATION FROM, UM, I'LL USE THE, THE TERMS THAT YOU SEE A LOT ON FACEBOOK.
SO, UH, NORTH OF 70 AND SOUTH OF 70, OR CENTER OF TOWN AND, UM, THAT SIDE OF TOWN.
I THINK THAT HAVING WARD REPS AT LEAST ALLOWS THE CITY TO HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM EACH OF THE DIFFERENT AREAS IN TOWN, AS OPPOSED TO, UH, AT THE ABSTRACT, IF, UH, UNDER A AND ALL AT LARGE POSITION, EVERY MEMBER OF THIS COUNCIL, INCLUDING THE MAYOR, COULD BE, UM, I'LL PICK ON MINE, WARD
IT COULD BE, UH, FROM CARRIAGE TRAILS, OR EVERY MEMBER OF THIS COUNCIL, INCLUDING THE MAYOR, COULD BE FROM, UH, WHAT'S, UH, UH, MARK'S WARD FIVE OR FIVE.
UH, SO I, I JUST DON'T SEE THAT AS BENEFICIAL TO THE PEOPLE.
ANGELA, I THINK THAT, UH, IT WOULD, UH, CONSOLIDATE.
IT COULD HAVE THE POSSIBILITY OF CONSOLIDATING SO MUCH OF THE REPRESENTATION IN ONE
[00:45:01]
PARTICULAR PART OF TOWN.UH, I'LL, I'LL ALSO ADD ONTO THAT BY SAYING IT ISN'T, IT ISN'T CHEAP TO RUN A CAMPAIGN.
SO AS WE MOVE TO AN ALL AT LARGE, THE CITY CAMPAIGNS ARE EVEN LARGER REQUIRING MORE FUNDING THAN A, THAN A, UH, WARD CAMPAIGN.
SO WITH THAT, I, I GUESS I WOULD HAVE SOME RESERVATION THAT WE MIGHT BE PRICING PEOPLE OUT OF THE MARKET, UH, BEING ABLE TO RUN FOR THEIR LOCAL WARD SEAT.
UH, MAYBE EVEN JUST, UH, GETTING A TASTE OF IT AS OPPOSED TO SHOOTING FOR AN AT LARGE POSITION CITYWIDE.
SO THAT WOULD BE MY OBJECTION TO IT.
UM, ANY OTHER INPUT? NO, BASED ON THE VOTING RECORD OF HUBBERT HEIGHTS, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET MUCH TURNOUT ANYWAY,
UM, IT, IT, I MEAN, SO I MEAN, THE AWARD SYSTEM MAKES, IT DOES MAKE SENSE TO HAVE REPRESENTATION FROM EVERYWHERE.
I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING THAT LARGE, BECAUSE IT GIVES EVERYBODY A FEELING, A SENSE OF, OH, COMMUNITY, WE'RE GONNA GET TOGETHER AND VOTE.
RIGHT? BUT THEY'RE NOT GONNA SHOW UP TO THE POLLS ANYWAY.
SO, I MEAN, WHAT ARE WE, I DUNNO.
I'M JUST, I'M KIND OF, I, I LIKE THE WORD SYSTEM.
I, I DO, I, I DO APPRECIATE ANGELA'S STANCE, BUT I, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, LIKE YOU SAID, TO HAVE SOMEBODY THAT LIVES IN YOUR WARD REPRESENTING YOU.
YOU KNOW, AND I, AGAIN, WE TALK ABOUT NORTH OF 70, SOUTH OF 70, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THAT PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN CARRIAGE TRAILS UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT GOES ON IN, YOU KNOW, WARD FIVE OR, YOU KNOW, WHEREVER WE'RE AT, SO.
I KNOW WE'RE NOT A LARGE CITY, BUT I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP SOME INTEREST IN THOSE SECTIONS OF THE CITY.
AND I, AND I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT, MR. WEBB, I THINK POTENTIALLY YOU COULD, YOU COULD RUN, YOU KNOW, AN ENTIRE, YOU KNOW, MY WHOLE STREET, WE'RE ALL GONNA RUN AND WE'RE GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA BE CITY COUNCIL FOR HOWEVER LONG.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S A DANGEROUS PROPOSITION LONG TERM, I THINK.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO THANK ANGELA FOR BRINGING IT UP, BECAUSE I THINK ABSOLUTELY.
I THINK BRINGING FRESH IDEAS IS THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS COMMISSION.
UH, THIS DISCUSSION IS NOTHING NEW.
UH, YOU ACTUALLY HAD TWO CHARTER COMMISSIONS IN THE ORIGINAL CHARTER COMMISSION.
THERE WAS A SPLIT ON THE COMMISSION, AND THIS WAS ONE OF, UH, JUST A HANDFUL OF ITEMS THAT THE COMMISSION WAS SPLIT ON, OR THE ELECTED OFFICIALS ALL GOING TO BE A LARGE, OR WAS THERE GOING TO BE A BLEND BETWEEN DISTRICTS AND AT LARGE? UM, THAT FIRST CHARTER WAS DEFEATED, AND I THINK THERE WAS SOME NEGOTIATION THAT TOOK PLACE IN THE SECOND CHARTER COMMISSION.
AND WE HAVE WHAT WE CURRENTLY DO.
AND I THINK IT'S, IT WARRANTS DISCUSSION.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM 4.02? I THINK WE SHOULD, UH, DECIDE HOW GIVE STAFF DIRECTION ON THE TERMINAL.
SO WHAT I WAS JUST SAYING TO THE CHAIR WAS, UM, BEFORE WE MOVE ON, WE DO, UM, I WOULD LIKE SOME DIRECTION FOR STAFF AS FAR AS WHAT THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN TERMS OF TERM LIMITS.
DO YOU WANT TO JUST BRING WHAT WAS PRESENTED BACK FOR SOME FUTURE DISCUSSION? UM, IF, IF WE'RE GONNA INVEST, UH, STAFF AND LEGAL'S TIME IN, IN DRAFTING SOMETHING, UM, THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UM, THEN I, I WOULD PREFER THAT BE DONE BY A MOTION OF THE COMMISSION.
UM, OTHERWISE WE COULD JUST SCHEDULE IT FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION, UM, AT THE NEXT MEETING.
AND, UH, AFTER YOU'VE HAD TIME TO DIGEST WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED, UM, MAYBE DO SOME RESEARCH ON YOUR OWN AND THEN COME BACK WITH SOME MORE THOUGHTS ABOUT IT, ABOUT HOW WE PROCEED, THAT'D PROBABLY BE THE PREFERRED OPTION.
MS. WE, UM, UH, MR. ROGERS, I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, NOODLE THIS OVER ON MY OWN A BIT.
I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, UH, DIG UP SOME RESEARCH.
UH, SO IS THAT A MOTION, UH, TO ADD THIS TO DISCUSSION TO THE NEXT MEETING? UH, I WOULD THINK SO.
I, I'LL, I'LL BACK THAT UP BY SAYING THAT, UH, RICHARD MENTIONED SOME STATISTICS THERE THAT, UH, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH.
I, I'D LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT WHAT COMMUNITIES HAVE DONE THAT HAVE, UH, TERM LIMITS IN PLACE AND WHAT, UM, WHAT THOSE TERM LIMITS LOOK LIKE IN THEIR, UH, CHARTER LANGUAGE.
I, I THINK IN EVERYTHING I'VE DONE IN, IN MY FIELD, UM, A PRESENTATION OF
[00:50:02]
WHO HAS WHAT AND HOW IT WORKS IS ALWAYS DUE DILIGENCE.I AM, UH, I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT THIS WILL BE DISCUSSED AT A, UH, UM, ANOTHER, UH, MEETING WE NEED A SECOND TO, AND THEN TO VOTE ON THAT.
WELL, HERE I WOULD, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS IF WE'RE JUST GONNA MOVE IT AS AN AGENDA ITEM, AND THERE'S CONSENSUS TO DO THAT, I DON'T THINK WE NEED A FORMAL MOTION.
UH, IF WE'RE GOING TO DIRECT STAFF TO DRAFT, YOU KNOW, A PROPOSAL, UH, AROUND CERTAIN CONDITIONS, UM, THEN I THINK THAT SHOULD REQUIRE A, A MOTION TO, TO MOVE FORWARD.
IS, IS EVERYONE OKAY DISCUSSING TERM LIMITS AGAIN AT OUR NEXT MEETING? YES.
SO WE WILL ADD THAT AS A DISCUSSION ITEM.
NO, THAT, AND THAT ACTUALLY WHERE I WAS GOING.
IF, UM, IF THE COMMISSION WANTED THAT AT A NEXT MEETING, UM, UH, TO ALLOW STAFF TIME TO ALLOW ME TO MAKE SURE I HAVE THAT, UM, RESEARCH PREPARED FOR MR. WEBB AND THE COMMISSION, UM, OR IF YOU WANTED TO DO IT, MAYBE NOT THE NEXT MEETING, THE MEETING AFTER I, IT'S ENTIRELY UP TO THE COMMISSION.
I CAN, I CAN PRESENT RESEARCH AT DROP OF A HAT, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THERE'S ENOUGH TIME FOR THE COMMISSION TO DO THEIR OWN RESEARCH AS WELL.
MS. HUNTERS OR MS. ICK, AM I ALLOWED TO ADDRESS THIS? YES.
I, I WOULD APPRECIATE MORE INFORMATION, BUT I THINK, NOT JUST STATISTICS.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE COMPARABLE NEIGHBORHOODS.
WHAT HAVE OTHER COMMUNITIES THE SIZE OF HUBER DONE, THOSE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE MOVED TO TERM LIMITS? WHAT WAS THE CAUSE OF THAT? WHAT, WHAT KIND OF TRIGGERED ALL OF THAT? WHAT WERE THEY BEFORE? SO I THINK NOT JUST LOOKING AT WHAT IS LARGEST HERE IN OHIO, I WANNA SEE WHAT'S COMPARABLE TO HUBER AS FAR AS AGE, SIZE, ECONOMIC STATUS, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
IF IT'S OKAY WITH THE COMMISSION, I WOULD, I WOULD ASK THAT WE PUT THAT ON OUR MAY 6TH AGENDA, WHICH GIVES MR. SHAW A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO GET THINGS TO US.
UM, AND MR. SHAW, IF THERE'S A WAY THAT YOU COULD EMAIL IT TO MR. ROGERS, UM, AHEAD OF TIME, OBVIOUSLY PRESENT IT, BUT JUST TO GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS IT, BECAUSE SINCE IT WILL NOT BE ON THE APRIL 23RD MEETING, IT WOULDN'T BE AN, THERE WOULDN'T BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO DISCUSS IN PERSON.
BUT IF YOU COULD SEND US YOUR INFORMATION PRIOR TO THEN, UM, THEN WE WILL ADD IT TO THE MAY 6TH AGENDA WHERE YOU COULD OBVIOUSLY COME UP AND ADDRESS, BUT WE WOULD'VE ALREADY HAD YOUR INFORMATION BE ABLE TO REVIEW A LITTLE BIT.
UH, WOULD THE, UH, COMMISSION, UH, ALLOW THE OPPORTUNITY FOR MYSELF TO MEET, UH, WITH THE CLERK OF COUNSEL, AS HE DOES HAVE A WIDE RANGE OF, UH, CLERK CONNECTIONS.
UM, SO AS I SUBMIT THE CITIES, HE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET SOME OF THE WHO'S AND WHY'S, WHICH I THINK WAS REQUESTED BY A COMMISSIONER MEMBER.
I MEAN, I WAS GONNA SAY THAT, UM, WELL, UH, I KNOW MR. SHAW'S ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THIS.
AND, UH, I, I THINK HIS INPUT IS VALID AND, AND IMPORTANT.
UM, WE SHOULDN'T RELY ON JUST ONE SOURCE OF INFORMATION OKAY.
SO IF THERE ARE OTHER MEANS OR PEOPLE HAVE INDIVIDUAL, UH, CONNECTIONS THAT THEY COULD, UH, BRING SOME INFORMATION, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY STAFF CAN DO SOME RESEARCH.
UM, WE CAN ALSO MAKE AVAILABLE THE DISCUSSIONS ON TERM LIMITS FROM THE LAST CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, UH, BOTH N VIDEO AND IN MINUTES.
NOW, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THAT MIGHT NOT BE AS, UH, UPDATED JUST FROM THE PERSPECTIVE THAT MAYBE OTHER COMMUNITIES HAVE CHANGED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER IN, IN THE INTERIM.
BUT, UH, IT WOULD KIND OF, UH, PROVIDE SOME OF THE RATIONALE FOR THE THINKING, UH, BEHIND THE DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE THE LAST TIME AROUND.
AND I KNOW YOU ADVOCATED FOR THAT IN, IN THAT ROUND.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUMENT, UH, YES.
FROM THE LAST PROCESS AS WELL.
NOW, UM, I I, ONE FINAL COMMENT AND I'LL, UH, I'LL YIELD MY TIME.
UM, IS IT JUST THE STATE OF OHIO? WOULD THE COMMISSION LIKE TO SEE ANY, UH, PROVISIONS FROM ANY OTHER STATES? UM, UH, WORK THAT I'VE DONE WITH NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES PREVIOUSLY? ANYTHING ELSE OF THE NATURE? DO WE WANT TO KEEP IT TO OHIO? I, I, MY PERSONAL BELIEF, I, I'D LIKE TO KEEP IT TO OHIO AND OKAY.
PREFERABLY IN THIS AREA TO SEE WHAT'S WORKING IN THIS AREA.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM 4.02? AND OBVIOUSLY THAT FUTURE DISCUSSION ON TERM LIMITS WILL TAKE PLACE? MAY 6TH.
ANYONE FROM THE COMMUNITY YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS? 4.03 ELIGIBILITY? ANYTHING FROM THE COMMISSION ON 4.03? I THINK THAT'S PRETTY STANDARD.
YES, ACTUALLY, I SEE HERE THE POINT, I SEE HERE THAT THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT THEY HAVE TO BE A RESIDENT FOR ONE
[00:55:01]
YEAR, AT LEAST ONE YEAR BEFORE THE ELECTION.COULD WE INCREASE THAT? COULD, I THINK WE SHOULD, I THINK, I THINK IT TAKES A WHILE TO REALLY GET INTO THE CITY AND UNDERSTAND THE INS AND OUTS OF THE CITY IN ONE YEAR.
AND I THINK TWO MIGHT BE MORE REASONABLE.
THE CITY HAS CHANGED QUITE A BIT.
I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH TWO.
I JUST GO BACK TO WHAT WE JUST DISCUSSED.
I MEAN, I JUST, WE'RE MAKING IT HARDER AND HARDER TO GET PEOPLE TO BE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I JUST, I, I DON'T DISLIKE TWO YEARS.
I THINK IT'D BE A GREAT IDEA,
YOU KNOW, I, THAT'S THE ONLY, THAT'S THE ONLY CONCERN I HAVE.
I THINK IT'S, I AGREE WITH YOU.
I THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOME KNOWLEDGE OF THE CITY WHERE YOU'RE GONNA, YOU KNOW, LIVE.
BUT I ALSO THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S ANOTHER ROADBLOCK.
SO JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.
AND TO MRS. BERGER'S POINT, UH, PREVIOUSLY, I THINK JUST IN ANYTHING, NOT JUST SPECIFICALLY THIS ITEM THOUGH, UH, THE COMMISSION HAS TO CONSIDER HOW THAT WOULD BE EXPLAINED AND, AND THE, THE RATIONALE RIGHT.
TO THE VOTERS, UH, TO GET IT PASSED.
'CAUSE YOU CAN DO ALL THIS WORK, BUT IF IT DOESN'T, UH, ULTIMATELY GET ADOPTED, THEN, UM, OR AT LEAST GET A VOTE, YOU KNOW? YES.
I WOULD JUST BE INTERESTED IN KNOWING HOW MANY PEOPLE WHO SERVE ON COUNCIL, HOW LONG HAVE THEY LIVED HERE BEFORE THEY GOT ELECTED? WELL, I CAN TELL YOU JUST IN, UH, ANECDOTALLY, IT, YOU KNOW, BEEN IN MOST CASES A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF, OF TIME THAT, UH, THE PEOPLE WHO SERVED IN COUNCIL.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON 4.03? I DISLIKE IT.
ANYONE INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE TWO YEARS? OR ARE WE OKAY WITH ONE? BUT, BUT AGAIN, YES.
MR. WEBB, UH, MR. ROGERS, THE, THE ONE YEAR REQUISITE IS MIRRORED, UH, WITH OUR BOARD AND COMMISSIONS AS WELL, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
UM, IF, UH, IF COUNCIL OR IF, UH, THIS COMMITTEE WERE TO CONSIDER THAT, WOULD, UH, WOULD THERE BE ANY REQUIREMENT TO CHANGE THE, UM, THE SAME, TO THE SAME PERIOD FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OR NO, IT, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO HAVE THE SAME PERIOD, UH, TO MIRROR THAT.
WE'VE JUST DONE THAT, THAT WAY.
UM, TO KIND OF JOHN'S POINT, YOU KNOW, UH, IF YOU WERE TO INCREASE THE ELIGIBILITY IN TERMS OF, UH, RESIDENCY, UH, FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS OR CANDIDATES FOR COUNCIL, UM, THEN MAYBE KEEPING, UH, THE BOARD AND COMMISSION, UH, AT ONE YEAR WOULD BE A WAY FOR NEWER RESIDENTS TO GET INVOLVED FIRST IN THE CITY OF GOVERNMENT BEFORE RUNNING FOR ELECTED OFFICE.
ANYONE INTERESTED IN, YOU KNOW, MULLING THAT OVER FOR THE MONTH AND PUTTING IT TO NEXT MEETING? JUST AS A QUICK DISCUSSION? OKAY.
UH, CAN I ASK A, UH, AN OFF THE CUFF QUESTION? UH, CERTAINLY, UH, I'LL ASK IT OF COUNCILMAN CAMPBELL BECAUSE HE'S LIVED ALL OVER THE PLACE HERE.
SO MARK, UM, THE LANGUAGE AS IT READS, SAYS THAT THEY, UH, UH, SHALL HAVE RESIDED IN THE RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS FOR ONE YEAR PRIOR TO.
SO HOW DOES THAT WORK WITH REGARDS TO, TO WARDS? UM, UH, IF WE WERE TO CHANGE THIS TO A TWO YEAR PERIOD, UH, YOU WOULD HAVE TO LIVE IN THAT WARD FOR TWO YEARS, CORRECT.
AS WELL AS AT LARGE, YOU KNOW, YOU'D HAVE TO LIVE WITHIN THE CITY FOR TWO YEARS.
ANYTHING ELSE ON 4.03? AND THEN JUST MULL THAT OVER AND THEN WE WILL DISCUSS IT ONE MORE TIME NEXT MONTH.
UH, SECTION 4.04, MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR.
ANYONE FROM THE COMMUNITY WANTING TO ADDRESS THAT? UH, ANYONE FROM THE COMMISSION SECTION
[01:00:01]
4.04? AND I'LL GO WITH, I, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE SECTION TO DO IT, BUT I, I GUESS AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER, I WAS FRUSTRATED WITH A YEAR OF STAGNANT VOTING.YOU KNOW, WE'D HAVE A COUNCIL PERSON ABSENT AND NOTHING COULD EVER HAPPEN.
'CAUSE IT WAS FOUR TO THREE, FOUR TO THREE, FOUR TO THREE, WE COULD NEVER GET THAT FIFTH VOTE.
UM, AND, AND AGAIN, I, I DON'T CARE WHICH WAY IT GOES, I DON'T CARE WHOSE SIDE YOU'RE ON, BUT TO HAVE NINE MONTHS, A YEAR OF NO MOVEMENT BY OUR CITY COUNCIL IS NOT DOING A SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY.
UM, SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF IT GOES IN THIS SECTION, BUT SOMEWHERE, I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT AND FIX IT.
WHETHER IT'S, IF A COUNCIL MEMBER IS ABSENT, THE MAYOR IS ALLOWED TO VOTE, INSTEAD OF JUST WAITING FOR A FOUR FOUR TIE, UM, THAT WAY THEY, THERE'S MORE OPPORTUNITY TO GET TO THAT FIFTH VOTE TO WHERE ACTION CAN TAKE PLACE.
AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE SECTION TO ADDRESS THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A BETTER SPOT TO ADDRESS THAT.
UM, BUT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE SOME CHANGE TO WHERE, AND AGAIN, I DON'T, I DON'T CARE WHICH SIDE YOU'RE ON, YOU KNOW, FOUR TO THREE AND SOMEBODY ABSENT EVERY TIME, REGARDLESS OF WHO'S, 'CAUSE I THINK ONE YEAR IT WAS ONE SIDE AND ONE YEAR IT WAS ANOTHER SIDE.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT IS JUST VERY FRUSTRATING AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER TO SEE NO MOVEMENT, UM, ESPECIALLY IN A POSITION AS BIG AS CITY MANAGER, UH, IN A CITY MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT THAT NO ONE HAD A QUESTION OR WANT TO CHANGE IN, IN ARTICLE TWO, I THINK IT WAS.
UM, SO AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS A SECTION TO ADDRESS IT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME WAY OF MOVEMENT IN, YOU KNOW, CONTENTIOUS TOPICS WHERE IT IS FOUR TO FOUR TO IF SOMEBODY'S ABSENT TO ALLOW A FIFTH VOTE.
I SAY I, I ALSO HAVE COMMENTS ABOUT THAT, BUT I, I HAD IT FOR SECTION 4.12.
I JUST, I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE TO PUT IT.
'CAUSE I DO IN 4 0 4, IT TALKED ABOUT THE MAYOR VOTING WHEN IT WAS FOUR TO FOUR AS THE CASTING, THE DECIDING VOTE.
SO I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE COULD ADD THAT THERE, OR, AND, AND I DON'T CARE IF IT'S THE MAYOR THAT GETS THE VOTE, OR IF WE JUST SAY IN THE EVENT OF AN ABSENCE, FOUR WINS SOMEWHERE DOWN THE ROAD.
UM, YOU KNOW, MY DAD SERVED FOR FIVE YEARS AND NEVER HAD A VOTE, SO I'M OKAY WITH THE MAYOR NOT HAVING A VOTE.
UM, BUT I JUST, I'M NOT OKAY WITH BEING STAGNANT FOR A YEAR.
DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE CHANGES AROUND, UH, VOTING, THERE WOULD BE THE POTENTIAL THAT THERE WOULD BE A NUMBER OF SECTIONS THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY SUCH A CHANGE.
SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY THE BEST IS TO, UH, KEEP THOSE THOUGHTS OUT THERE AND HAVE SOME GENERAL DISCUSSIONS AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
AND THEN MAYBE WE COULD HAVE A KIND OF A CATCHALL DISCUSSION TO SEE HOW YOU WOULD LUMP THAT TOGETHER IN WHAT DIRECTION.
AND THEN IF THAT WAS THE DIRECTION WE'RE GONNA MOVE IN, THEN WE'D, WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE VARIOUS SECTIONS TO SEE WHAT THE IMPACT OF, UH, THAT RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE.
SO ANYTHING THEN FROM 4 0 4, MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR.
UH, MOVING THEN TO SECTION 4 0 5, JUDGE OF QUALIFICATIONS? ANYONE FROM THE COMMUNITY? ANYONE FROM THE COMMISSION? 4 0 5.
THEN WE'LL MOVE TO 4 0 6 PROHIBITIONS.
ANYONE FROM THE COMMUNITY WISH TO ADDRESS? 4 0 6? ANYONE FROM THE COMMISSION? ANY OF THE SECTIONS UNDER 4 0 6? YES, I DID HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL UNDER B.
UM, I FEEL THAT WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT CITY COUNCIL CAN EXPRESS ITS VIEWS FREELY AND OPENLY, UM, WITH THE MANAGER, UM, AND NOT DIRECTLY SPEAK TO A CITY, UM, EMPLOYEE, I FEEL THAT THAT'S VERY OPEN TO INTERPRETATION.
UM, I COULD SEE POTENTIAL FOR RETALIATION AND OR INTIMIDATION.
IT FEELS VERY HEAVY HANDED ON THE COUNCIL SIDE.
AND I'M NOT IMPLYING THAT ANYONE ON COUNCIL HAS ACTED IMPROPERLY, BUT I COULD SEE, YOU KNOW, FUTURE FORWARD IF SOMEONE AT THE CITY DOES SOMETHING THAT A COUNCIL MEMBER DOES NOT LIKE, THEY
[01:05:01]
HAVE THE RIGHT IN WRITING TO GO AND SPEAK TO SOMEONE ABOUT IT.AND THAT CITY EMPLOYEE HAS, UM, VERY LITTLE SAY SO IN THAT FACT, UNLESS I'M READING IT WRONG.
WELL, I, I THINK IT'S LIKE A CHECK AND BALANCE.
I MEAN, UH, WE DO HAVE A MODIFIED COUNCIL MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT HERE IN HUB HEIGHTS.
SO, UM, THAT MEANS THAT EXCEPT FOR THE CLERK OF COUNCIL AND THE CITY MANAGER AND THE LAW DIRECTOR, EVERY OTHER STAFF MEMBER REPORTS TO THE CITY MANAGER.
UM, AND ONLY THE CITY MANAGER HAS THE RIGHT TO DISCIPLINE OR, UM, TO TERMINATE THE EMPLOYMENT OF THOSE EMPLOYEES OUTSIDE OF THE THREE THAT WORK DIRECTLY FOR COUNSEL.
UH, ON THE OTHER HAND, WHAT THIS IS SAYING IS IF COUNSEL HAS SOME CONCERN THAT THEY'RE AWARE OF ABOUT THE EMPLOYEE, THAT THEY COULD BRING IT TO THE CITY MANAGER'S ATTENTION, AND THAT WOULD NOT BE, UH, THE SAME AS HAVING THE POWER TO REMOVE THEM.
IT WOULD JUST BE TO OFFER FEEDBACK OR INSIGHT OR INPUT, UM, INTO THE ACTIONS OF AN EMPLOYEE.
I THINK WHAT'S MISSING FROM HOW IT'S WRITTEN THEN IS WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT EMPLOYEE THEN IS AN INVESTIGATION, YOU KNOW, DONE ON THEIR END.
BECAUSE WHAT IT FEELS LIKE IS, IF, IF A COUNCIL MEMBER HAS SOMETHING TO SAY, THEY CAN SAY IT, BUT I, I THINK WHAT I'M MISSING IS THE EMPLOYEE'S ABILITY TO SPEAK ON THEIR OWN BEHALF ABOUT SOMETHING.
AND, AND I CAN TAKE THIS, SAY MAYBE YOU WANNA, SO WHEN IT COMES, ESPECIALLY TO, UH, A BULK OF OUR STAFF, WHICH ARE UNIONIZED CITY EMPLOYEES, THERE'S A, UM, DISCIPLINARY PROCESS THAT HAS TO BE GONE THROUGH.
THERE HAS TO BE EVIDENCE, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO UNIONIZED EMPLOYEES, EVEN THE CITY MANAGER HAS, UM, CHECKS AND BALANCES TO GO THROUGH BEFORE REMOVAL.
SO REGARDLESS OF, UM, A DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER THAT MIGHT BRING AN ISSUE TO LIGHT, THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SPECIFIC PROCESS.
UM, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES WHO ARE CONSIDERED AT WILL EMPLOYEES, UM, THAT CAN BE REMOVED, BUT WE, WE MIRROR THAT PROCESS FOR ANY DISCIPLINARY REMOVAL OF AT-WILL EMPLOYEES AS WELL.
SO, UM, ONE COMPLAINT DOES NOT EQUAL, UM, DISCIPLINARY REMOVAL.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, A CITY MANAGER, WE ARE HELD TO A CODE OF ETHICS THROUGH OUR ASSOCIATION THAT ENSURES THAT WE ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, MANAGING APPROPRIATELY.
SO THIS SECTION DOESN'T CONCERN ME.
UM, IN FACT, IN SOME WAYS IT, IT ALLOWS COUNCIL TO BRING TO ME INFORMATION THAT I MIGHT NOT OTHERWISE HAVE, UM, JUST BECAUSE I CAN'T BE EVERYWHERE IN THE CITY AT ONCE.
SO, UM, I DO APPRECIATE, UM, YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS THOUGH.
BUT I THINK THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CHECKS AND BALANCES IN PLACE THAT WOULD PREVENT, UM, AN IMPROPER DISCIPLINE OR REMOVAL OF AN EMPLOYEE.
AND I'M SURE THERE IS, JUST THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, IT FEELS VERY OPEN.
SO, BUT IF YOU, THERE'S ALSO A PERSONNEL APPEALS BOARD.
IT'S A CITIZEN APPOINTED BOARD THAT, UH, IS A, A STEP IN THE PROCESS OF APPEAL FOR NON BARGAINING UNIT EMPLOYEES.
UM, IS IT OUTSIDE CHECK AND BALANCE? OKAY.
SO WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, I AM COMFORTABLE WITH THE LANGUAGE NOW.
AND THEN THE ONLY, UH, ITEM I HAD WAS ITEM C.
I USED TO BE A FIREFIGHTER MYSELF.
I'M A BIG CHAIN OF COMMAND KIND OF GUY.
UM, AND I'VE, I'VE NOTICED WITH CITY COUNCIL, UM, SINCE I'VE COME HERE EIGHT MONTHS AGO, IS VERY DILIGENT IN TERMS OF WORKING ALL OF THEIR CONCERNS THROUGH ME.
UM, WHAT I'D LIKE TO ASK THE COMMISSIONER, PARTICULARLY THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, IS, UM, THERE ARE SOME ITEMS THAT ARE SIMPLY INFORMATION GATHERING.
UH, IT'S NOT ASKING AN EMPLOYEE TO TAKE ACTION, IT'S JUST ASKING FOR INFORMATION.
UM, I WOULD BE OPEN, UH, IN MY ROLE TO CONSIDERING LANGUAGE IF COUNCIL WANTED TO, UM, WHERE THEY COULD REACH OUT TO A DEPARTMENT HEAD TO GET INFORMATION WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH ONE OR TWO STEPS.
UM, BUT I JUST WANTED TO OPEN THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
UH, I'M ALSO PERFECTLY FINE WITH HOW THE LANGUAGE IS TODAY.
IS, UM, DOES THE CHARTER REALLY NEED TO BE CHANGED? UM, CAN IT NOT JUST BE A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN YOU AND THE COUNCIL? MM-HMM.
SO I THINK THAT'S TRUE AS WELL.
UM, I, I DO WANNA RELIEVE ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO MAY, LET'S SAY, REACH OUT TO MIKE GRAY TO FIND OUT WHEN WE'RE REPAINTING LINES, UM, OF
[01:10:01]
ANY, UM, FEAR OF, YOU KNOW, OTHER, UH, PEOPLE ACCUSING THEM OF NOT WORKING THROUGH THE COUNCIL MEMBER.AND I SIMPLY BRING THIS UP BECAUSE I'VE WORKED WITH OTHER COUNCILS WHERE, UM, THEY'VE, I, I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE AS A CITY MANAGER.
SO, YOU KNOW, UM, IN A SENSE, I WANT COUNCIL TO FEEL FREE TO, UM, HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH MY DEPART, MY DEPARTMENT HEADS AT THE VERY MOST ABOUT THINGS.
WELL, DON MILLARD SPECIFICALLY, YOU KNOW, DON HAS A LOT OF ISSUES GOING ON.
AND TO BE ABLE TO PICK UP THE PHONE AND SAY, DON, TELL ME WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.
WELL, AND I DON'T WANT COUNSEL TO FEEL THAT THEY'RE RESTRICTED MORE THAN OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
SO, FOR INSTANCE, A COMMUNITY MEMBER CAN CALL DON ABOUT A ZONING COMPLAINT OR A CODE ENFORCEMENT COMPLAINT.
AND I DON'T WANT COUNSEL TO FEEL AS THOUGH THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT PROCESS.
I MEAN, COUNCIL IS A, IS A RESIDENT OF THE COMMUNITY AS WELL.
I THINK THE PURPOSE OF SECTION C IS REALLY TO, UM, PREVENT COUNCIL FROM DICTATING ORDERS OR DIRECTION TO STAFF MEMBER OF THE CITY MANAGER.
AND I THINK, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE COULD VERBALLY HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S HOW WE UNDERSTAND IT.
OR IT COULD BE CLARIFIED IF WE'D LIKE TO IN THE CHARTER.
UH, RICK, I, I KIND OF AGREE WITH YOU BECAUSE AS YOU READ THIS PARAGRAPH, THE, UH, THE SENTENCE THAT SAYS, UH, COUNCIL LORDS MEMBERS SHALL DEAL WITH OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES WHO ARE UNDER DIRECTION AND SUPERVISION OF YOU.
UH, THE FOLLOWING, UH, LINE WHERE IT SAYS, NEITHER COUNCIL NOR ITS MEMBERS SHALL GIVE ANY ORDERS TO ANY SUCH EMPLOYEE.
SO I THINK WE ALL KNOW GIVING ORDERS MEANS EXACTLY WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE, BUT DEAL WITH CAN GET MUDDY.
AND, UM, AS COUNSEL KNOWS, UM, WE'VE HAD THAT ISSUE COME UP BEFORE.
UM, IT'S, I THINK DEAL WITH IS JUST VAGUE ENOUGH OF A TERM THAT IT CAN MEAN WHATEVER SOMEBODY WANTS IT TO MEAN.
WE SHOULD CLEAN THAT UP A LITTLE BIT.
IF COUNSEL IS, UH, PERMITTED TO INQUIRE OF ZONING, UH, AT A, A RESIDENCE REQUEST, THEN I THINK MAYBE THIS PARAGRAPH NEEDS CLEANED UP A BIT SO THAT COUNSEL IS PERMITTED TO INQUIRE OR ASK WHATEVER.
UM, YEAH, THE, THE WORDS I WROTE WAS INFORMATION GATHERING.
I THINK THAT'S PERFECTLY APPROPRIATE FOR ANY CITIZEN OR COUNCIL MEMBER FOR THAT MATTER.
UM, BUT IF YOU SEE HERE, IT DOES SAY MEMBERS SHALL DEAL WITH CITY OFFICER, THE EMPLOYEES, AND THEN YOU GO SOLELY THROUGH THE MANAGER.
AND SO I THINK THERE WOULD BE SOME, UH, HESITANCY ON THE PART OF COUNCIL MEMBERS TO, UH, COMMUNICATE AT ALL WITH DEPARTMENT HEADS.
AND I THINK MAYBE THAT'S WHERE WE KIND OF, THAT'S WHERE MANAGER AND COUNCIL WORK TOGETHER.
THAT DEPARTMENT HEADS ARE SOMEBODY THAT THEY CAN ALSO JUST ASK OF INFORMATION AND, UM, YOU KNOW, MAYBE REPORT ISSUES TO LIKE ANY, LIKE ANY CITIZEN, FRANKLY.
SO COULD I ASK THAT YOU WRITE UP HOW YOU'D LIKE TO CC MM-HMM.
FOR US TO REVIEW? I WILL DO THAT, IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THE COMMISSION.
I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THIS PARAGRAPH IS IN THERE.
THAT'S, UH, APRIL TO KEEP ME FROM CALLING UP MY GRAY AND TELLING HIM I WANT MY STREET PLOWED FIRST.
WELL, IT SAYS YOU CAN'T DO THAT, BUT IF YOU WANTED TO ASK MIKE GRAY WHAT STREETS HAVE BEEN PLOWED, I THINK THAT'S, UH, THERE YOU GO.
SO, UH, I, THERE ARE PROBABLY SOUND REASONS FOR THIS TO BE IN THERE.
UH, UH, YOU MAY KNOW, UM, MORE ABOUT THOSE REASONS THAN, THAN I WOULD, BUT I THINK THAT, UM, THERE IS A, UH, I WON'T CALL IT A FEAR, BUT THERE'S, I'M APPREHENSIVE TO CALL, UH, ANY DEPARTMENT HEAD TO ASK THEM ANYTHING FOR FEAR OF, UH, INTERFERING WITH ADMINISTRATION.
SO, AND I THINK IT HAS BEEN WEAPON WEAPONIZED IN THE PAST, AND, AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THIS UP AND SEEING IF WE COULD DO A REWORK MM-HMM.
I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR.
WHICH ACTUALLY MAKES YOU LESS CAPABLE THAN ANY OTHER CITIZEN OF THE CITY TO REPORT AN ISSUE OR ASK FOR INFORMATION.
SO, YES, I CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A REWORK PRESENTED TO US, SO IF YOU CAN BRING THAT TO OUR APRIL 23RD MEETING.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM 4.06? OKAY.
MOVING TO 4.07 VACANCIES, FORFEITURE OF OFFICE, FILLING OF VACANCIES, ANYTHING FROM THE COMMUNITY.
[01:15:02]
OKAY.THEN FROM THE COMMISSION, I WILL NOTE THIS WAS ONE OF THE SECTIONS THAT WAS AMENDED, UM, IN THE LAST CHARTER REVIEW PROCESS.
AND, UH, IT MAINLY, UH, CREATED A SITUATION WHERE WE WANTED TO CLARIFY LIKE SOME OF THE POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP HERE.
UM, PREVIOUSLY, UM, THERE WAS SOME LANGUAGE IN HERE THAT SAID AFTER THE 30 DAYS HAD EXPIRED, THAT COUNCIL FAILED TO FILL A VACANCY.
THE MAYOR COULD, UM, MAKE THE APPOINTMENT, UM, SAID SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF, UH, AS, AS SOON AS THEY SEE FIT, OR AS YOU KNOW, WAS VERY, VERY VAGUE.
SO, UH, WE HAD A SITUATION WHERE THAT DRUG ON FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME WITHOUT, UH, THE, THE VACANCY BEING DONE BY THE MAYOR, THOUGH THE COUNCIL WAS RESTRICTED TO THE 30 DAYS.
SO THE, UH, THE CHANGE THAT WAS MADE THE LAST TIME WAS, UH, THAT THE, THE MAYOR ONLY HAD EIGHT CALENDAR DAYS, UH, TO MAKE THE APPOINTMENT AFTER COUNCIL FAILED TO DO THAT SO THAT A POSITION WOULD NOT REMAIN VACANT FOR A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME.
ANYTHING FROM THE COMMUNITY? OKAY.
ANYTHING FROM THE COMMISSION? I THINK THE SECTION'S DELIBERATELY VAGUE.
AND THAT, YOU KNOW, MY POSITION REQUIRES, UH, YOU TO REALLY BE A JACK OF ALL TRADES AND, AND DO A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS.
SO I, I THINK YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S APPROPRIATE AND THAT IT GIVES COUNSEL THE FLEXIBILITY TO DICTATE MM-HMM.
SO, AND THE AMENDMENT HERE THE LAST TIME WAS JUST, UH, TO CHANGE THE, UH, WORDING ABOUT THE SUPERVISION OF THE DE DEPUTY CLERK OF COUNSEL.
PREVIOUSLY, THE DEPUTY CLERK REPORTED TO COUNSEL DIRECTLY, UM, AND THE CHANGE WAS MADE TO, UH, HAVE THAT, THE DEPUTY REPORT TO THE CLERK OF COUNSEL.
SO, HEARING NONE, THEN WE WILL MOVE TO 4.09 INVESTIGATIONS.
ANYONE FROM THE COMMUNITY, FROM THE COMMISSION.
SECTION FOUR POINT 10 COMPENSATION.
ANYONE FROM THE COMMUNITY, FROM THE COMMISSION? I, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO BRING UP, UH, THE ISSUE, UM, HERE THAT MAYBE, UM, THERE WOULD BE SOME CONSIDERATION OF, UM, THIS IS A VERY, UM, STRINGENT, UM, PROVISION FOR HOW COUNCIL COMPENSATION COULD, CAN BE CHANGED.
AND, UM, ONE OF THE RESULTS OF THIS WAS THAT, UM, COUNCIL WENT FOR 20 SOME YEARS, I THINK, WITHOUT ANY ADJUSTMENT, AND THE RATE OF PAY FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS, UM, IT WAS $300 WHEN THE CITY WAS ESTABLISHED, AND IT WAS $300 UNTIL, I THINK, RICHARD, YOU COULD CORRECT ME IF I MARK OR NANCY, BUT TILL ABOUT, WHAT, FIVE OR FIVE YEARS AGO OR SO? MM-HMM.
SO ABOUT FIVE OR SIX YEARS AGO.
SO IT, IT WENT TO ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF OF DISCUSSION.
UM, THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD SUGGEST, AND I'VE SEEN IT DONE A LOT OF PLACES, AND, UH, IT, IT SEEMS FAIR TO ME, UH, BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS THE COMPENSATION, UM, ONE PIECE OF IT, BUT IT'S ALSO TIED TO, UH, THE, UH, BENEFIT THAT, UM, COUNCIL MEMBERS OR ELECTED OFFICIALS GET AS PART OF THE OPRAH'S, UM, PENSION SYSTEM, THE, THE CREDIT FOR SERVICE.
UM, AND SO, UM, I WOULD RECOMMEND MAYBE CONSIDERATION OF A PIECE THAT THIS IS JUST AUTOMATICALLY ADJUSTED SIMILARLY TO EITHER WHAT'S DONE TO THE EMPLOYEE FOR OTHER EMPLOYEES OR FOR, UH, COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT.
UM, THE REASON BEING IS, UH, THE STATE STARTED WITH THE PENSION SYSTEM NOW THAT THEY, THEY HAVE A BENCHMARK, UM, THAT IF YOU, YOU'RE NOT PAID OVER THIS BENCHMARK, WHICH I THINK IS ABOUT WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW, $675, UH, THEN YOU GET A PRORATED AMOUNT OF SERVICE CREDIT AND, AND THE PENSION FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS.
AND WHERE IT USED TO BE, REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU GOT PAID, YOU GOT A FULL YEAR OF SERVICE CREDIT.
UM, SO, UM, ONE OPTION WOULD BE TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S JUST ALLOWS
[01:20:01]
FOR AN ADJUSTMENT BASED BY ON SOME, UM, MEASURE THAT IS, YOU KNOW, FIXED AND, AND CONSISTENT, BUT, YOU KNOW, TIED TO, UH, WHAT'S DONE FOR OTHER PEOPLE IN OTHER POSITIONS, UH, RATHER THAN THIS KIND OF CONVOLUTED PROCESS WHERE COUNSEL HAS TO APPROVE THEIR OWN INCREASE.THEY CAN ONLY DO IT IN A A FIVE MONTH PERIOD, UM, AT THE BEGINNING OF AN ELECTION YEAR.
UM, UM, IT, IT, IT SEEMS A LITTLE STRINGENT, UM, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
AND, UH, IT WOULD KIND OF TAKE THAT OUT OF THE POLITICAL REALM AND JUST PUT IT IN TO A, AN ORDERLY TRANSITIONAL PROCESS.
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHAT THE PROCESS IS FOR EMPLOYEES, BUT I'M OKAY WITH THAT.
AS LONG AS THEY'RE SHOWING UP FOR THEIR VOTES.
IS IT MY UNDERSTANDING THAT COUNSEL, IF NOT EXCUSED, ARE THEY PAID WHEN THEY ARE NOT EXCUSED? THERE'S NO PROVISION TO, OKAY.
WHEN IT COMES TO EMPLOYEES, WE NEGOTIATE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS.
TYPICALLY, UH, OUR BARGAINING AGREEMENTS AND OUR NON BARGAINING STAFF ARE AROUND THE SAME WAGE INCREASE EACH YEAR.
UM, I WAS GONNA GO A DIFFERENT ROUTE.
THIS, SO AT MY PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT, WE HAD A SIMILAR PROBLEM.
OUR COUNCIL HAD FALLEN BELOW THE FULL PENSION BENEFIT.
UH, I KNOW WHAT WE DID RECENTLY WITH OUR, UM, BID REQUIREMENT WAS WE TIED IT TO STATE CODE.
SO IF STATE, CURRENTLY AT 75,000 YOU HAVE TO BID, IF STATE INCREASES IT TO 80,000, THEN OURS AUTOMATICALLY INCREASES.
UM, WOULD IT BE REASONABLE TO SAY THAT COUNSEL WILL BE AT THE RATE THAT RECEIVES A FULL PERS CREDIT UNLESS OTHERWISE VOTED BY COUNCIL? IF THEY WERE TO VOTE HIGHER THAN THAT, BUT AT LEAST IT WOULD BE A CONSTANT, LIKE IN CHARTER, YOU'RE ALWAYS GONNA GET YOUR YEAR CREDIT OUT OF THE PENSION.
AND THAT, THAT WAS MY SECONDARY PART OF WHAT I WAS SAYING.
'CAUSE YOU KNOW, IT MOVES AND THAT'S SET AT A STATE BENCHMARK BY, UM, THE PENSION SYSTEM THAT EVEN IF IT JUST MOVED WITH THAT MM-HMM.
WOULD BE SOME PROGRESS WHERE COUNSEL WOULDN'T HAVE TO TAKE ACTION TO DO THAT, THAT IT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY ADJUST TO MAINTAIN THAT LEVEL OF BENEFIT.
PERSONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE LANGUAGE WRITTEN UP ON THAT FOR US TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION FOR NEXT MONTH.
GOOD WITH, SO I THINK IF TONY AND I'LL WORK TOGETHER ON THAT.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT TOPIC? OKAY.
SO I BELIEVE WE ARE AT SECTION FOUR 11 INDEPENDENT AUDIT.
ANYTHING FROM THE COMMUNITY ON FOUR 11, ANYTHING FROM THE COMMISSION? YES.
RICK, DON'T WE DO THAT EVERY YEAR? UH, WE, YES, WE DO DO AN INDEPENDENT AUDIT EVERY YEAR ANYWAY, SO YEAH.
WE'RE, WE'RE AHEAD OF THE CURVE ON RIGHT.
I, I WILL SAY, I THINK WHAT THE TWO YEARS GIVES US IS WE HAVE HAD DELAYS IN THE PAST, SO IT MIGHT TAKE US 14 OR 15 MONTHS.
SO I THINK THE TWO YEARS IS A GOOD, YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO SECTION FOUR 12.
CORMAN MAJORITY VOTES, ANYTHING FROM THE COMMUNITY ON SECTION FOUR 12.
FROM THE COMMISSION SECTION FOUR 12, MR. SHOPPER, IS THIS WHERE WE WOULD DISCUSS WHAT YOU HAD BROUGHT UP? COULD BE.
I WOULD WELCOME, UH, TONY IF, IF WE HAD SOME LANGUAGE PRESENTED, MAYBE SOME OPTIONS AND SOME FURTHER DISCUSSION.
AND THAT'S CERTAINLY POSSIBLE.
AND THERE'S A LOT OF MODELS OUT THERE, UH, TO DO THAT, UH, FOR INSTANCE, SOME CHANGE.
THE, THE LEVEL OF IT, UH, SOME OF 'EM HAVE WHERE THE RULES FOR THE NUMBER OF VOTES REQUIRED CHANGE BASED ON THE NUMBER, UH, EITHER COUNCIL MEMBERS THEN HOLDING OFFICE OR THE COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT AT A MEETING.
SO, UM, THERE'S A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT WAYS THAT IT COULD BE REWRITTEN TO ALLOW SOME FLEXIBILITY, SOME TO ADDRESS THE POINTS, UH, THAT MATT MADE.
BUT, UM, ALSO JUST TO, UM, DEAL WITH VACANCIES, UM, VACATIONS, YOU KNOW, AND THINGS LIKE THAT, UM, THAT SOMETIMES HAVE BEEN PROBLEMATIC IN GETTING THE NECESSARY VOTES TO EITHER HAVE A QUORUM FOR A MEETING OR TO PASS AN ITEM, UM, OF LEGISLATION.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SOME LANGUAGE THAT WOULDN'T HELP ADDRESS THAT ISSUE.
[01:25:02]
YES, MA'AM.UM, BEFORE WE SEE FORMAL LANGUAGE, TONY, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT OPTIONS ARE FIRST.
I THINK THE OPTIONS WOULD PROBABLY, UH, BE EASIER TO, SO YOU COULD KIND OF GET A FEEL FOR WHAT, WHAT DIRECTION YOU WANNA GO.
AND THEN WHEN WE NARROW IN ON SOMETHING, THEN WE COULD, YOU KNOW, WORK TOWARDS WRITING THE VERY SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY.
AND ON TOP OF THAT, NOT JUST THE OPTIONS, I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT HAVE OTHER COMMUNITIES SIMILAR TO US DONE WHEN PEOPLE ARE INTENTIONAL ABOUT NOT VOTING.
LIKE ARE THERE CONSEQUENCES? LIKE, COULD YOU CALL IN, YOU KNOW, A NO CONFIDENCE VOTE ON THAT PERSON? WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? YEAH, SOMETIMES THERE'S, UM, YOU'LL SEE IN A LOT OF CHARTERS WHERE THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, WORDS LIKE COMPEL AND YOU CAN MAKE 'EM DO THIS, BUT THEN THERE'S NO TEETH TO IT IN TERMS OF HOW THAT CAN BE DONE.
SO, UM, SO I WOULD SAY WE WANT TO HAVE A SYSTEM THAT WORKS GOOD, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE CONSEQUENCES ATTACHED TO IT THAT AREN'T ENFORCEABLE EITHER.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING, YOU KNOW, IF AN EMPLOYEE CHOOSES NOT TO SHOW UP TO WORK, AT SOME POINT, THERE'S A CONSEQUENCE.
IF AN ELECTED OFFICIAL CHOOSES NOT TO WORK, THERE SHOULD BE A CONSEQUENCE.
AND, AND MAYBE THAT CAN ALSO BE ADDRESSED IN FOUR 10 WHEN YOU BUILD YOUR, YOUR FINANCIAL PIECE, MAYBE YOU PUT IN FOR AN UNEXCUSED ABSENCE, THEY LOSE ONE 12TH OF THEIR PAY FOR THAT UNEXCUSED ABSENCE.
AND IF THEY FALL BELOW THE THRESHOLD OF THE ONE YEAR SERVICE, SO BE IT.
AND I THINK PARAMETERS ON THAT AS WELL, YOU KNOW, A ONE ABSENCE, THEY ARE SICK, FAMILY'S SICK, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO ON VACATION.
I'M THINKING MORE LIKE 2, 3, 4 IN A ROW, OR AN INTENTIONAL NO-SHOW TO DELAY WORK FROM PROGRESSING.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I'M MY HEAD IS MAYBE THAT, MAYBE THAT WOULD BE THE TEETH.
BUT MAYBE IF THEY MISS THREE MEETINGS AND THEIR PAY IS PRORATED.
HOW, HOW DO WE DEFINE INTENTIONALITY THOUGH? UM, THAT'S THE DIFFICULT, I MEAN, WE COULD HAVE, YOU COULD MISS THREE MINUTES THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, FOUR MEETINGS THROUGHOUT A YEAR.
ONE COULD BE A VACATION, ONE COULD BE A SICKNESS, ONE COULD BE A RIGHT.
I MEAN, IS THAT INTENTIONAL? OH, YEAH.
MY, YOU KNOW, MY GRANDFATHER CROOKED, SO I'M OUTTA HERE.
BECAUSE IF YOU CHOOSE TO BE A PUBLIC SERVANT, YOU'RE CHOOSING RIGHT.
TO SIT UP HERE AND DO YOUR JOB.
BUT INTENTIONALITY IS, IS, YOU KNOW, NOW WE ALL KNOW SOMEBODY COMES UP HERE AND THEY'RE GOING TO, THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T SHOW UP BECAUSE IT'S A BIG VOTE.
WE CAN KIND OF DECIPHER THAT JUST BASED ON LOGIC.
BUT TO PUNISH SOMEONE FOR, FOR A LIFE, CORRECT.
WELL, AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERED AN EXCUSED ABSENCE, YOU KNOW, AN ILLNESS, YOU KNOW, A PRE-PLANNED VACATION WHERE YOU HAD LET ALL OF THE OTHER COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR KNOW WHEN YOU WEREN'T GOING TO BE OUT, THAT YOU'D MISS THE VOTE.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, BEREAVEMENT LEAVE IS, IS BY ALL MEANS ACCEPTABLE.
I'M TALKING ABOUT SOMEONE WHO'S SUPPOSED TO BE THERE WHO JUST DOESN'T SHOW UP TO THE MEETING WITH NO REASON, NO APPROVAL, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR TO WORK.
LIKE, YOU CAN'T JUST, HOW DO YOU PROVE IT NOT SHOW UP? I GUESS, I GUESS WHAT I DO, WE DO, WE SAY IF, IF, IF, IF WE HAVE FIVE PEOPLE PRESENT, THAT FIVE PEOPLE RE REGARDLESS OF WHAT SIDE YOU'RE ON, OF THE SPECTRUM YOU'RE ON.
I MEAN, AND THEN THAT WAY, IF, IF YOU'RE ON, IF YOU'RE ON THE, ON THE BAD SIDE OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE VOTE THAT YOU, THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE SHOWN UP FOR, THEN SORRY ABOUT, YOU MEAN, IS THAT, IS THAT SOMETHING, OR, OR DO WE, OR DO WE WANT TO DISCUSS THE FACT THAT WE WANT TO HAVE A THREE, THREE FOURTHS VOTE FOR, OR A TWO THIRD? I MEAN MM-HMM.
WHAT'S THE NUMBER THAT WE WANT TO BE AT RIGHT.
TO MAKE, TO ENSURE, OR WHAT'S THE NUMBER THAT WE WANT TO BE AT TO ALLOW THE MAYOR TO BE ABLE TO STEP IN AND SAY, HEY, YEAH, X, Y, Z PERSON'S NOT SHOWING UP.
WE'RE NOW GONNA ALLOW THE MAYOR TO VOTE ON AN ISSUE THAT'S BEEN ON THE, ON, IS IT SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN ON, ON, ON THE AGENDA FOR THREE MEETINGS AND NOW THE MAYOR HAS THE ABILITY TO STEP IN BECAUSE WE MM-HMM.
AND NOW WE'RE, NOW WE'RE AT A POINT WHERE WE NEED TO MAKE A DECISION.
I THINK THEY'RE ALL GOOD OPTIONS.
I'D, I'D LIKE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, AND, AND WE DISCUSSED THAT BECAUSE I MEAN, I, I THINK I AGREE WITH YOU, YOU KNOW, IT'D BE HARD TO PROVE.
HOWEVER, I, I DON'T THINK CURRENT STATE IS ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE AT THAT POINT, THEY'RE NOT JUST DAMAGING THE WORK FROM PROGRESSING IN HUBER.
THEY'RE DAMAGING HUBER'S BRAND.
AND YOU WANNA KNOW WHY PEOPLE DON'T
[01:30:01]
SHOW UP TO VOTE IS BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE ABSOLUTELY ZERO INTEREST.AND, AND SHOOT, I KNOW I'M, I WAS BLESSED TO RECEIVE AN AWARD THROUGH MY FORMER ATHLETIC DIRECTOR ASSOCIATION.
I'M PROBABLY GONNA HAVE TO MISS WORK TO DO IT, AND BECAUSE I'M OUTTA PERSONAL DAYS, I'M GONNA TAKE AN UNPAID DAY.
AND EVEN THOUGH THAT TO ME IS A PRETTY GOOD EXCUSED ABSENCE, IT DOESN'T FALL WITHIN THE OHIO REVISED CODE LIMITS OF MY POSITION.
SO SIMILARLY TO A COUNCIL PERSON THAT DOESN'T SHOW, YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE TEETH IN THEIR SALARY, JUST LIKE I HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
AND FOR MY PERSONAL SELF, IS IT WORTH, YOU KNOW, LOSING $300 FOR THAT DAY FOR ME TO RECEIVE THAT AWARD, SO KNOW WHAT THEY SAY, MONEY TALKS, MONEY TALKS, AND I, I, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE OPTIONS IF THAT'S POSSIBLE.
THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT BOTTLES FOR PAY.
I, I, UH, SOME CITIES DO IT, THEY COUNCIL'S PAID BY THE MEETING VERSUS, UH, A FLAT RATE.
UM, I THINK TORONTO WOULD USED TO DO THAT.
I'M NOT SURE IF THEY STILL, UM, HAVE IT SET UP THAT WAY.
UM, AND THEN THE, THE OTHER POINT JUST FOR EVERYBODY IS UNDERSTANDING ON THE EXCUSED VERSUS UNEXCUSED ABSENCES UNDER THE CURRENT CHARTER, THE REAL, REALLY THE ONLY EFFECT OF THE, UH, UNEXCUSED VERSUS EXCUSED ABSENCES IS THAT, UM, IF YOU END UP WITH THREE CONSECUTIVE, AND THAT'S THE KEY WORD, CONSECUTIVE UNEXCUSED ABSENCES, THAT IS ONE OF THE, UH, GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL FROM OFFICE, BUT THEN IT STILL REQUIRES SIX PEOPLE TO, TO REMOVE THAT PERSON, EVEN IF THEY'VE HAD THREE UNEXCUSED CONSECUTIVE ABSENCES.
SO, UH, SOMETIMES, LIKE ALL THE INTENTS OR ELEMENTS OF THE CHARTER DON'T LINE UP TO GIVE A SATISFACTORY RESOLUTION TO THE ISSUE AT END.
BUT I, I HAVE SOME NOTES HERE TO, UH, COME BACK WITH SOME OPTIONS ON, UM, QUORUM AND VOTING, UM, IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DISCUSSION, UH, PRESENT SOME OF THOSE OPTIONS TO YOU WITH, UH, RESPECT TO HOW SECTION 4.10 COULD BE IMPACTED WITH COMPENSATION AND THE ROLE OF THE, UH, THE MAYOR'S VOTE IN, IN, INTO THOSE OPTIONS AS WELL.
SO, UH, I WOULD SAY THAT THAT MIGHT TAKE A LITTLE WORK YEAH.
UM, THAT MAYBE WE'D WANNA PUSH THAT OUT TO MEETINGS, UM, TO MAY 6TH IF YOU'D LIKE A, A BETTER WORK PRODUCT.
I THINK FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE DO WANT THE BEST POSSIBLE VERSIONS TO TAKE A LOOK AT, SO MAY 6TH WOULD BE FINE FOR THAT.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM FOUR 12, MR. WEBB? JUST TO FURTHER THE DISCUSSION A A BIT, UH, THERE HAVE BEEN CASES WHERE, UH, A COUNCIL PERSON HAS MISSED, UH, MULTIPLE MEETINGS, AND IT WASN'T, UH, JUST TO PULL THE GLOVES OFF.
IT WASN'T TO INFLUENCE A VOTE OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
WE HAD A COUNCIL PERSON WHO DIDN'T SHOW UP.
UH, AM I ROLLING THAT MARK CAMPBELL? SO, UM, AT THAT POINT, UH, I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE INTENT HERE WAS.
YOU GOT A COUNCIL PERSON, LET'S JUST SAY THAT, UH, DON GETS REALLY BORED WITH COUNCIL AND DECIDES THAT HE'D RATHER SPEND HIS MONDAY NIGHTS WATCHING FOOTBALL.
SO I MISSED THREE MEETINGS IN A ROW AT THAT POINT.
THIS IS A GREAT THING TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST COUNCILMAN WEBB, WHO JUST ISN'T SHOWING UP.
BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S TOUGH ENOUGH LANGUAGE IN HERE TO HANDLE SOME OF THE SITUATIONS WE SAW OCCUR.
AND THAT IS WHERE WE HAD PEOPLE INTENTIONALLY MISSING MEETINGS TO SKEW THE VOTE ON A PARTICULAR, UM, ISSUE BEFORE COUNSEL.
UH, I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ADDRESSING.
UM, SO, UH, I AGREE THIS, THIS NEEDS TO BE CLEANED UP TO THE POINT WHERE, UM, I, I, I THINK WE'RE ALSO DEALING WITH TWO ISSUES HERE.
I DO, I I'M HEARING YOU ABOUT COMPENSATION OR, OR, UM, WHAT WE WOULD DO IF SOMEBODY CONTINUES TO MISS MEETINGS.
BUT I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE AWAY ANY KIND OF OPTION WHERE MISSING A MEETING ALLOWS, UM, UH, ANY SECTION OF COUNSEL TO SWAY THE VOTE EITHER WAY.
AND WE'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN YEAR AFTER YEAR.
SO, UM, I, I KNOW WHY THIS IS WRITTEN THERE, AND I DO THINK IT, IT'S ORIGINAL INTENT WAS SOMEBODY WHO JUST ISN'T SHOWING UP FOR MEETINGS ANYMORE.
HERE'S HOW WE GET RID OF THEM.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU FROM WATCHING AND BEING A PART OF THE PROCESS OVER THE YEARS, THAT THREE CONSECUTIVE UNEXCUSED ABSENCES DOESN'T HAPPEN.
[01:35:01]
SO IT REALLY ISN'T APPLICABLE.IF, IF YOU WANT TO EXCUSE THE VOTE, YOU AND, UH, ME AND MATT WILL TAKE TURNS ALTERNATING, AND WE'RE NEVER GONNA HAVE THREE CONSECUTIVE ABSENCES, AND WE'RE GONNA SKEW THE VOTE.
SO, ANYTHING ELSE FROM SECTION FOUR 12 MM-HMM.
IS THERE A, IS THERE A WAY TO WRITE LANGUAGE TO WHERE IF THERE WAS AN ITEM, IF THERE WAS AN ITEM THAT'S BEEN ON THE AGENDA, AGAIN, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 MONTHS, IS THERE A WAY TO WRITE LANGUAGE TO WHERE THERE IS A FINAL VOTE? I, OR, OR, OR DOES THAT, OR DOES? I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS HE'LL BRING UP WITH THE OPTIONS IS GIVING US DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
WHETHER, WHETHER IT'S THE MAYOR GETS TO VOTE OR WHETHER YOU DON'T HAVE TO HIT THE FIVE, AND MAYBE IT'S JUST THE MAJORITY OF WHO'S THERE TO WHERE IF SEVEN SHOW UP NOW FOUR IS THE WINNER, IF SIX SHOWS UP, THREE TO THREE, AND THEN THE WHOEVER CAN BREAK, BREAK THE TIE FOUR WOULD STILL BE THE WINNER.
UM, I THINK THOSE ARE SOME OF THE OPTIONS THAT HE'S GONNA BRING TO US TO WHERE WE CAN WEIGH THOSE OUT.
THIS IS A P THIS IS A PARAGRAPH WHERE WE COULD REALLY FIX A LOT OF STUFF.
YOU KNOW, UM, BECAUSE ACTUALLY IF WE DID IT RIGHT, WE COULD TAKE THAT WHOLE SECTION ABOUT MISSING THREE CONSECUTIVE, BECAUSE IT HAS NO TEETH.
YEAH, I, I, I AGREE WITH YOU, NANCY.
AND, UH, IT'S ONE WHERE TWO, YOU, YOU HAVE TO THINK A FEW STEPS AHEAD TO THINK OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS THAT IT'LL HAVE TOO.
WE'LL HAVE TO GIVE IT SOME GOOD DELIBERATION.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM SECTION FOUR 12? WE'RE GETTING THERE.
UM, IN LIGHT OF THE RECENT CONVERSATION, AND, AND I, UH, UH, WOULD, UH, UH, WELCOME THE CONTINUED, UH, CONVERSATION DEBATE, UH, FROM MR. DON WEBB, UH, ALWAYS, UH, INTELLECT AND INTELLIGENT CONVERSATION.
UM, BUT WHEN, WITH REGARDS TO COUNCIL MEMBERS MISSING MEETINGS, UM, UNFORTUNATELY, SECTION FOUR 13, UM, HAS NO PARAMETERS SET FORTH IF A COUNCIL MEETING IS CANCELED IN LESS THAN 24 HOURS OF NOTICE, UM, BY THE MAYOR AT HIS SOLE DISCRETION, UM, AS THEREFORE NOT SET WITHIN THE POWERS OF THE CHARTER UNDER THE, THE SECTION, UH, IT WOULD BE REQUESTED, UM, FROM THE PUBLIC THAT THIS COMMISSION TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, UH, AND PUT, UM, SOME TEETH PER SE OR SOME DIRECTION IN THERE, UM, AS THOSE INSTANCES HAVE ALSO OCCURRED PREVIOUSLY.
AND YOU'RE REFERRING TO SECTION B SPECIFICALLY? IS THAT THE 24 HOUR? IF I, IF I MUST BE HONEST, MR. CHAIR.
UM, I THINK THE ENTIRE SECTION PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE REVISED.
SO SECTION B WITH THE 24 HOUR NOTICE REALLY FOR, IT APPLIES TO IN THE OHIO OPEN MEETINGS ACT, WHICH WAS ADOPTED AFTER THIS WAS ADOPTED, UM, WE HAVE TO GIVE 24 HOUR ADVANCE NOTICE OF ANY MEETING UNLESS IT'S AN EMERGENCY MEETING.
EXAMPLE OF EMERGENCY MEETING WOULD BE, UH, WHEN WE HAD THE CYBER ATTACK, UH, HERE A FEW MONTHS AGO.
AND, UM, THEY BECAME AWARE OF IT IN THE AFTERNOON.
AND BY SEVEN O'CLOCK, COUNCIL WAS MEETING, UM, AFTER HAVING MADE NOTIFICATION TO, UH, CERTAIN ENTITIES TO AT LEAST PUT THE WORD OUT THERE.
UM, SO WE CAN, WE CAN LOOK AT THIS.
UM, TO RICHARD'S POINT, UM, ABOUT, UH, THE MAYOR MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT THE MEETING, I THINK SOME OF THAT HAS BEEN CLEANED UP A LITTLE BIT IN THE RECENT CHANGES TO THE RULES OF COUNCIL, WHICH, UM, YOU KNOW, SPECIFY A PROCESS FOR THE MAYOR TO DO THAT IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS.
BUT IF IT'S NOT AN EMERGENCY, THEN, UH, THEN IT HAS TO BE DONE THROUGH A VOTE OF COUNCIL.
AND, UH, THERE WERE, IF ANYONE FOLLOWS THE MEETINGS, UH, OUR LAST COUNCIL MEETING, THERE WERE SEVERAL MOTIONS ON THE AGENDA TO MAKE AMENDMENTS TO THE, UH, CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE, UH, TO ALLOW COUNCIL TO PERFORM THAT ROLE RATHER THAN THE, THE MAYOR TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES UNILATERALLY.
AND, UM, I THINK, UM, THE OTHER THING WITH THE, THE LAST MINUTE CANCELLATION OF MEETINGS FREQUENTLY, THAT'S TIED TO THE FACT THAT WE KNOW
[01:40:01]
THAT WE DON'T HAVE A QUORUM.WE'VE HAD ENOUGH MEMBERS NOTIFY US THAT, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE PRESENT AT THE MEETING, AND THEN THE MEETING IS CANCELED BY, FOR LACK OF A QUORUM.
SO, UM, IT, IT'S NOT REALLY ACTIVELY THE MAYOR CANCELING THE MEETING.
IT'S, HE'S ANNOUNCING THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION, WHICH IS WE CAN ALL SHOW UP FOR THAT MEETING, BUT THERE'S NOT GONNA BE ENOUGH PEOPLE PRESENT TO HOLD THE MEETING BASED ON THE, THE RULES OF QUORUM AS THEY CURRENTLY STAND IN THE CHARTER.
AND I, I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THE CLARITY OF THIS.
UM, THE, THE SECTION FOUR 13 AND FOUR 14 CONVERSATION ACTUALLY GOES HAND IN HAND.
I KNOW WE'RE NOT AT SECTION FOUR 14 YET.
UM, BUT AS SECTION FOUR 14 STATES, UH, THE RULES OF COUNSEL SHALL NOT CONFLICT WITH THE CHARTER.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY, SECTION FOUR 13, UH, USES THE LANGUAGE AS BEEN PREVIOUSLY UPDATED BACK IN 2016, USING THE WORD SHALL HOLD ONE MEETING EACH MONTH.
HOWEVER, THERE IS NO TEETH IF COUNSEL DOES NOT HOLD THAT ONE MEETING PER MONTH.
UM, AND AGAIN, THAT THAT HAS RECENTLY HAPPENED, UH, WITH, UM, WITH NO HOPES OF, UH, RESCHEDULING THAT MEETING.
THEREFORE, THE BUSINESS OF THE COMMUNITY WAS NOT DONE AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE MAYOR, EXCEPT FOUR 13.
DOESN'T PROVIDE ANY TEETH OR VALIDITY TO THAT CONVERSATION.
THAT, UH, THAT GOES ON TO MY CONTINUATION THAT I BELIEVE THIS COMMISSION SHOULD DEFINITELY TAKE A REVIEW OF THE SECTION.
AND TO MR. SHAW'S POINT, UM, IN, IN MY 17 YEARS HERE OR WHATEVER, I, I MEAN, I CAN ONLY RECALL ONE TIME, WHICH WAS THE MOST RECENT EXAMPLE, CORRECT.
WHERE, UH, THERE WAS NOT ONE COUNCIL MEETING AT LEAST ONE COUNCIL MEETING IN A MONTH.
BUT IT, IT HAS HAPPENED ONE TIME.
AND I GUESS I WOULD JUST SAY RICHARD, TOO.
I, I, THE MAYOR DIDN'T, JUST AT A SOLE DISCRETION, WE HAD INDICATIONS THAT THERE WAS NOT GONNA BE A QUORUM OF PEOPLE AVAILABLE FOR THAT MEETING.
SO I I, I WOULD SAY THE ONLY, UH, AND, AND NOT TO DEBATE THE SUBJECT, UH, THAT ALSO GOES BACK TO, UM, CERTAIN COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, CONVERSATION ON INTENT.
SO HOW DO WE WRITE THE CHARTER WHERE, AGAIN, UH, BACK TO THE CHAIR'S, PREVIOUS COMMENTS, NO MATTER WHAT SIDE, UM, BECAUSE THE CHARTER IS, NEEDS TO BE AN OPEN-MINDED DOCUMENT THAT IT'S NOT THE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE CURRENTLY HOLDING OFFICE OR PREVIOUSLY HOLDING OFFICE.
THIS IS THE, THE, THE CITY'S, UH, CONSTITUTION MOVING FORWARD FOR ALL PEOPLE.
UM, AND, AND BECAUSE IN 17 YEARS YOU SAID HAVE, IT'S ONLY HAPPENED ONCE, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT DEMANDS, UH, CHANGE IN THE CHARTER.
UM, I THINK IF MEETINGS ARE CANCELED, ARE CANCELED BECAUSE WE KNOW WE ARE NOT GONNA HAVE QUORUM, I SAY HAVE THE MEETING, BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO TAIPEI OR POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES TO ADD TEETH TO IT, THEN MAYBE YOU DO NEED TO MEET, JUST SO YOU COULD SAY WE DON'T HAVE QUORUM.
NOT TO WASTE ANYONE'S TIME, HOWEVER, IF WE'RE GOING TO HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE.
A LOT OF THAT COULD GET CLEANED UP WITH OUR CURRENT STUFF.
SO TONY, WE DID HAVE AN EMERGENCY MEETING LAST YEAR OVER THE CYBER ATTACK.
I DON'T SEE A PROVISION IN HERE FOR EMERGENCY MEETINGS, AND I DON'T WANNA BROKE OR FIX WHAT'S NOT BROKEN.
DO WE JUST DEFAULT TO REVISED CODE IN THAT CASE? WE DO IN THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT.
AND, UM, WE DID ADD IN THE CHANGES TO THE RULES OF COUNCIL THIS YEAR, UH, SPECIFIC SECTION ON EMERGENCY MEETINGS.
UH, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE CHANGES THAT WAS ADOPTED.
SO I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE PROBABLY OKAY ON THAT.
AND IF, IF, I DON'T THINK YOU WANNA GET TOO STRICT IN DEFINING THE TYPES OF MEETINGS IN THE CHARTER, BECAUSE CHARTER, IF HIGH REVISED CODE OR THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT IS AMENDED IN SOME WAY TO, TO BE DONE DIFFERENTLY, THEN THAT WOULD NECESSITY A CHANGE IN THE CHARTER AS WELL.
AND WHICH IS DIFFICULT TO DO AS WE'RE ALL AWARE NOW,
UM, SO, UM, I, I THINK WE'RE COVERED GOOD.
PARTICULARLY IN RESPECT TO EMERGENCY MEETINGS AT THIS POINT.
SO I DID SOME RESEARCH OF SOME OTHER, UH, CITIES WHO HAVE DONE CHARTER REVIEWS AND AMENDMENTS RECENTLY.
UM, I GUESS THIS QUESTION IS FOR COUNCIL, UM, DURING THE PANDEMIC, UH, THE STATE OF OHIO RELAXED THEIR REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE IN-PERSON MEETINGS, IS THERE ANY DESIRE TO CREATE SOME PROVISION IN THE CHARTER FOR VIRTUAL MEETINGS FOR SPECIFIC REASONS? WE CAN'T DO THAT.
CAN WE? I THINK YOU CAN DO IT UNDER HOME RULE AUTHORITY.
BUT I, I, I'D HAVE TO RESEARCH THAT FURTHER DURING THE PANDEMIC AS,
[01:45:01]
UH, MR. ZICK IS REFERENCING, UM, THE STATE GAVE, UH, CLEAR AUTHORITY TO DO ELECTRONIC MEETINGS DURING A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME, WHICH IS NOW ENDED.UM, I'VE HEARD OF COMMUNITIES THAT ARE DOING ELECTRONIC MEETINGS NOW.
SOME OF THEM, UM, DON'T HAVE THAT AUTHORITY IN THEIR CHARTER, BUT THEY STILL CONTINUE TO DO THEM, WHICH PROBABLY ISN'T A GOOD IDEA.
UM, I THINK THERE IS SOME, UH, FLEXIBILITY, UH, WITH US BEING A HUM RULE COMMUNITY, BUT I, AGAIN, I WOULD NEED TO CONSULT WITH THE LAW DIRECTOR AND, AND DO A LITTLE RESEARCH ON THAT TO BE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD DO.
I'D JUST LIKE COUNCIL TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY IF THERE WAS A TIME, LET'S SAY NEXT MONDAY WHEN WE MOVED OUR MEETING, INSTEAD OF MOVING OUR MEETING, IF WE SIMPLY MADE IT A VIRTUAL MEETING AND, AND HAD IT AS SCHEDULED.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD SUGGESTION.
WE'LL, WE'LL PUT THAT ONE TO MAY TOO, BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT TO DISCUSSION
IT LOOKS LIKE MR. SCHAFER IS GONNA COME TO THE MIC.
I THINK MR. SCHAEFFER HAD A PROPOSAL ON THIS ATTACHED TO HIS PREVIOUS, UH, PAGE, DISTRIBUTED PAGE IN HIS PACKET.
I DIDN'T, WAS NOT AWARE HOW WE WERE GONNA CONDUCT MEETINGS TONIGHT, SO I INCLUDED IT ALL TOGETHER.
SO FOR SECTION FOUR 14, RULES OF COUNSEL SHOULD BE AMENDED TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THESE RULES ARE NOT GUIDELINES, BUT ARE MANDATORY AND ARE TO BE FOLLOWED UNLESS APPROPRIATELY AMENDED.
NUMEROUS TIMES IN THE RECENT PAST, INCLUDING IN DEPOSITION TESTIMONY PROVIDED BY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE COUNCIL HAS CHARACTERIZED THE RULES OF COUNCIL AS GUIDELINES.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN SWORN TESTIMONY DURING A RECENT DEPOSITION OF MAYOR JEFF GORE, HE SAID, AND I QUOTE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING WOULD BE REFERRING TO THE RULES OF COUNCIL, THAT THEY ARE GUIDELINES TO TRY TO OPERATE WITHIN WITH EMPHASIS ADDED TO THE WORDS GUIDELINES AND TRY, I ASK THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER AND PROPOSE AMENDING THE CHARTER WORDING THAT WOULD REMOVE THE AMBIGUITY WITH REGARDS TO THE RULES OF COUNSEL BEING GUIDELINES.
THE AMENDED WORDING MUST ASSURE THAT IT IS CLEAR THAT THESE RULES ARE NOT OPTIONAL AND MUST BE FORMALLY AMENDED, SUCH THAT THE ALL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL'S ACTIONS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMON LEGAL INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY? MR. SHAW? THANK YOU.
I'M SORRY, MS. BURGE, WAS YOUR QUESTION TOWARDS IT WAS MR. SCHAFER? IT, IT, IT, UH, IT WAS.
SO IF IT'S OKAY, MR. SHAW, LET MS. BURGE PLEASE ASK HER QUESTION OF MR. SCHAFER.
WHY, WHY WOULD WE NEED TO, UH, CHANGE THE RULES OF COUNSEL IN THE CHARTER VERSUS TIGHTENING THE LANGUAGE AND THE RULES OF COUNSEL? EITHER WOULD BE A PRO.
WELL, THE RULES OF COUNSEL, AS I READ THEM, OR IDENTICAL TO THE WORDS IN THE CHARTER, AND YET THE COUNCIL IS INTERPRETING THE GUIDELINES TO BE, OR THE RULES TO BE GUIDELINES, YET THEY'RE THE SAME WORDS THAT ARE IN THE CHARTER.
WELL, IF WE PUT SHALL IN THE WORD, IN THE RULES OF COUNCIL, DOESN'T THAT ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING? WOULD THAT CHANGE YOUR PERCEPTION OF THE RULES AS BEING GUIDELINES? WOULD IT CHANGE MY PERCEPTION? YES.
THEN THAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT.
I, I, UH, WOULD SUGGEST THAT COUNSEL HAS TO ACT AS A BODY ON ANYTHING AND RIGHT.
THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE RULES OF COUNCIL.
SO, YOU KNOW, ONE INDIVIDUAL SUCH AS THE MAYOR ALONE CANNOT PROVIDE THE INTERPRETATION OF, OF HOW THE RULES OF COUNCIL EXIST OR ARE APPLIED.
I MEAN, COUNCIL ONLY ACTS AS A BODY IN REGARDS TO THESE THINGS.
THERE IS ALSO A PROVISION IN THE RULES OF COUNCIL THAT ALLOWS FOR, UM, COUNSEL TO SUSPEND ANY OF THE RULES TEMPORARILY OR, OR, OR PERMANENTLY, UM, UM, FOR A PERIOD OF TIME OR, OR NOT.
SO, UM, SO THERE ARE SOME WAYS THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THERE, BUT YOU KNOW, ONE PERSON CANNOT UNILATERALLY DICTATE THE, UM, NO ONE PERSON APPLICATION OF ONE PERSON IS NOT TATING THE APPLICATION.
ONE PERSON IS INTERPRETING HOW IT IS TO BE APPLIED IN A VERY, IN VARIOUS SITUATIONS.
SOME OF THEM, WHICH ARE NOT, DO NOT INVOLVE SITTING HERE AT COUNSEL, UH, COULD BE INTERACTIONS ASSOCIATED
[01:50:01]
WITH EMAIL.SO, UM, I CAN GET INTO THE SPECIFIC, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE WANT TO GO THERE, BUT I'D RATHER NOT.
WELL, I MEAN, I'LL, I, I WOULD DEFER TO THE COMMISSION IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, THEIR APPETITE FOR GOING DOWN THIS ROAD, BUT WE SHOULD PROBABLY ALSO HEAR FROM MR. SHAW AS WELL.
UM, I WILL BE SHORT AND YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME BACK TO MR. SCHAFER TO GO DOWN THAT ROAD.
UM, HERE, UH, HERE IN THIS SECTION, UH, IT DOES STATE THAT THE RULES OF COUNSEL CANNOT CONFLICT WITH THE CHARTER.
HOWEVER, NOWHERE IN THIS SECTION DOES IT SAY WHAT HAPPENS IF THE RULES OF COUNCIL CONFLICT WITH THE CHARTER, BECAUSE IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, AS OF RIGHT NOW, AND WE JUST HAD THAT DISCUSSION REGARDING THE MEETINGS, THERE ARE SECTIONS OF THE RULES OF COUNCIL THAT DO CONFLICT WITH THE CHARTER.
UM, A ADDITIONALLY, I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE SECTIONS THAT, UH, OF THE RULES OF COUNSEL THAT ARE LEFT OPEN FOR INTERPRETATION.
SO, BACK TO MR. SCHAEFFER'S QUESTION, WHO MAKES THAT INTERPRETATION? BECAUSE NOWHERE IN THE CHARTER DOES IT SAY, THIS IS THE JUDGE, JURY, AND EXECUTIONER OF THE INTERPRETATION.
UH, IS THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL? IS THAT THE LAW DIRECTORS? THAT THE CLERK OF COUNCIL? UM, BECAUSE THE RULES OF COUNCIL IS A SET OF RULES TO GOVERN COUNCIL.
UM, SO IF COUNCIL TAKES THE RULES AND GOVERNS ITSELF, UM, THE CHARTER IS SET FORTH BY THE PEOPLE TO GOVERN THE, THE ELECTED OFFICIALS.
UM, HOWEVER, THAT TYPE OF LANGUAGE TEETH IS NOT SET FORTH IN THIS, IN THIS SECTION.
SO YEAH, THE, THE CHARTER SETS THE RULE THAT COUNCIL ESTABLISHES ITS OWN RULES.
UH, IF, IF YOU HAVE SOME EXAMPLES YOU'D LIKE TO SEND ME ABOUT WHERE YOU THINK THERE'S CONFLICTS WITH THE CITY CHARTER AND THE RULES OF COUNSEL, I'D BE INTERESTED TO LOOK AT THAT.
BUT I THINK THE ULTIMATE INTERPRETATION ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS IS THE LAW DIRECTOR DETERMINES WHETHER, UH, THE, UH, COUNSEL OR ANY MEMBERS OF COUNCIL HAVE ACTED IN, UH, APPROPRIATE ACCORDANCE WITH THE, THE RULES OF COUNCIL AS THEY ESTABLISHED AND THE CHARTER, ANYTHING FROM THE COMMISSION ON FOUR 14.
I MEAN, JUST AS AN OUTSIDER LOOKING IN, I MEAN, WE'VE GOT COUNCIL PEOPLE HERE, AND I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHAT MR. SCHAFFER'S DISCUSSING, BUT I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR I DON'T, I DON'T READ THIS AS A, AS A OPTION OR AS A GUIDELINE.
I IS, I SEE, SHALL REPEATEDLY THROUGH THE DOCUMENT, AND I, I DON'T VIEW IT AS A GUIDELINE.
SO I, YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR TOO.
UH, EVERYTHING SAID SHALL, SHALL, SHALL, WHICH TO ME MEANS NOW MAYBE THERE IS ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE'S SOME EXAMPLES THAT NEED TO BE LOOKED AT BY THE LAW DIRECTOR OR SOMEBODY ELSE'S TONY SAID TO, TO, YOU KNOW, BRING THAT INTERPRETATION IN LINE WITH WHAT, YOU KNOW, THE RULES OF COUNCIL ARE VERSUS WHAT THE, WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS.
BUT I THINK IT'S PRETTY SPECIFIC.
I, I THINK WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY, AND MAYBE RICHARD SIMILARLY, UH, WAS THAT IT'S NOT WHAT YOU SUGGEST SOME CHANGES TO THE, TO THE CHARTER THAT YOU'RE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT IN THE DOCUMENT OF THE RULES OF THE COUNCIL ITSELF.
THAT IT, IT CREATES AN AMBIGUITY.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? SO, UM, MAYBE FOLLOWING THIS KIND LANGUAGE THAT THIS, THIS COMMISSION IS DISCUSSED TODAY, IS THERE'S NO TEETH IN THE CURRENT LANGUAGE TO ENSURE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RULES, THE RULES OF COUNCIL COMPORT WITH THE CHARTER.
SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE RULES CERTAINLY SAY SHALL, BUT THE INTERPRETATION AS RECORDED IN TESTIMONY THAT'S UNDER OATH BY AT LEAST TWO OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, IS THAT IT IS INTERPRETED AS A GUIDELINE.
SO YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT REALLY TALKING ABOUT A CHARTER CHANGE.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE APPLICATION OF THE RULES OF COUNSEL, OF THE RULES OF COUNSEL, OR THE TEETH IN THE CHARTER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RULES OF COUNSEL COMPORT WITH THE CHARTER.
YEAH, I, YEAH, I, I I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I, I, THERE'S JUST A DIFFERENCE IN THE APPLICATION OF IT.
AND THEN THAT THE, THE RULES OF COUNSEL COMPLY WITH THE CHARTER.
I, I FIND IT INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE THAT THE CHARTER SAYS SHALL, AND THE INTERPRETATION IS GUIDELINE, AND THAT THAT INTERPRETATION IS THE INTERPRETATION OF PEOPLE THAT SIT ON COUNCIL.
[01:55:01]
THAT'S A PROBLEM.BUT WHERE IT SAYS IN SECTION 4.14 SHALL, IT'S TALKING LIKE, SHALL ADOPT BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF ITS MEMBERS, THEY DO THAT, SHALL SHALL IT, IT THE CHARTER DOESN'T SPEAK TO SHALL IN THE APPLICATION OF THE INDIVIDUAL PROVISIONS OF THE RULES OF COUNCIL.
PERHAPS IT SHOULD
WELL, IF WE COULD, LET'S JUST READ THAT LAST SENTENCE.
SO IT SAYS, THE RULES OF COUNSEL SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE NUMBER COMPOSITION AND MANNER OF APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEES OF THE COUNCIL, AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS THE COUNCIL SHALL DETERMINE TO BE NECESSARY FOR THE PROPER FUNCTIONING AND GOVERNMENT OF THE COUNCIL.
SO IF WE TAKE OUT THE, THE MIDDLE PART, WE TAKE OUT NUMBER COMPOSITION.
THE THING ABOUT COMMITTEES AND APPOINTMENTS, THE RULES OF COUNCIL SHALL PROVIDE, UM, FOR OTHER MATTERS, UH, UM, AS THE COUNCIL DETERMINES TO BE NECESSARY FOR THE PROPER FUNCTIONING AND GOVERNMENT OF THE COUNCIL.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT SAYS THAT THE RULES OF COUNSEL SHALL PROVIDE FOR.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WHAT'S HERE IN OUR, UM, IN OUR CHARTER AS IT SPEAKS TO THE RULES OF COUNSEL, I THINK IT'S ACCURATE AS WE'RE LOOKING IN THE, AT THE, AT THE CHARTER LANGUAGE HERE, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN INTERPRETATION OR, UM, CONSIDERING, UH, SOME, UM, INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES OF COUNSEL, I THINK THAT WOULD BE PROPERLY HANDLED THROUGH THE COMPLAINT PROCESS THAT, UM, IS IN THE RULES OF COUNSEL.
IF, IF SOMEONE FEELS THAT THERE'S BEEN A VIOLATION OF THE RULES OF COUNSEL, THEN THE, THE COMPLAINT PROCESS IS LISTED WITHIN THE RULES OF COUNSEL AS TO HOW TO ADDRESS THAT.
UH, AS, I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY HERE IS, I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU CAN ADD A WHOLE LOT TO THIS SECTION THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE WHAT'S ENFORCEABLE, NOT ENFORCEABLE WITHIN THE RULES OF COUNSEL, BECAUSE THAT PROVISION IS ALREADY IN THE RULES OF COUNSEL.
RULES OF COUNSEL, UH, CLEARLY HAS A PROVISION FOR, UM, REPORTING, UH, VIOLATIONS OF RULES OF COUNSEL AND, UH, COMING WITH A, UH, INVESTIGATION INTO, INTO SUCH.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SORRY, IT'S WAY PAST MY BAD TIME.
UH, BUT IF THAT DOES MAKE SENSE, I'M, I'M NOT SURE THAT THIS SECTION NEEDS TO BE, UM, CHANGED VERY MUCH TO, TO THE QUESTION OF HAVING NOT HAVING TEETH AGAIN WITH REGARD TO VIOLATIONS OF THE CHARTER, I THINK THE TEETH IS IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF A CLAIM OF VIOLATION OF, OF, OF THE CHARTER.
AND AGAIN, THAT WOULD GO THROUGH THE, UH, INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS.
I FEEL LIKE ANYBODY FEEL LIKE TALKING ABOUT THIS? NO, I APPRECIATE THE EDUCATION.
'CAUSE I DID NOT REALIZE THERE WERE THAT IN THE RULES OF CHARTER, SO, OR RULES OF COUNCIL.
SO IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE, THE ACTUAL RULES OF COUNSEL HAVE THEIR OWN DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS ROOTED IN THE RULES OF COUNSEL.
AND THE CHARTER JUST ESTABLISHES THAT COUNSEL MAKES THE RULES OF COUNSEL.
YEAH, THERE'S, THERE'S A COMPLAINT PROCESSES.
MR. WEBB'S SAID IN THE RULES OF COUNCIL, THERE'S NOT REALLY A DISCIPLINARY PROCESS BECAUSE THESE ARE ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS.
SO, UM, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, THE OHIO OPEN MEETINGS ACT ALLOWS FOR EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, AND THOSE ARE PROTECTED, UH, CONVERSATIONS THAT AREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC.
BUT IF SOMEONE DOES, THERE'S NOT REALLY A CONSEQUENCE TO THAT.
UM, YOU COULD DO AN ETHICS VIOLATION POTENTIALLY.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT'S HARD TO LOOK AT IT AS, YOU KNOW, HOW DO YOU ENFORCE SOME OF THESE THINGS? WE'VE HAD CENSURE BEFORE WHERE COUNSEL'S VOTED AS, UH, A BODY TO CENSURE SOMEONE.
BUT THERE'S A LOT OF PROVISIONS IN HERE THAT, UM, ULTIMATELY THE, THE ONLY RECOURSE IS TO REMOVE SOMEONE FROM OFFICE, AND THAT'S A VERY STEEP HELD DECLINE ONE.
[02:00:02]
ANYTHING FURTHER? OKAY, SO MOVING ON IN THE AGENDA.UH, NUMBER FOUR, ACTION ITEMS. THERE ARE NONE.
UM, AND THEN YOU GO TO NUMBER FIVE.
WE HAVE OUR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, UH, NEXT MONTH OR NEXT, NOT NOT NEXT MONTH.
OUR NEXT MEETING WOULD BE, UH, TUESDAY, APRIL 23RD, RIGHT HERE AT SIX O'CLOCK.
UM, AT THAT MEETING, WE'LL BE DISCUSSING ARTICLE FIVE, LEGISLATION AND ARTICLE SIX, THE CITY MANAGER.
AND THEN, AND THEN UNDER ACTION ITEMS, WE'LL BRING BACK THE, UH, THE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED TONIGHT FOR THE NEXT MEETING.
AND THEN SIMILARLY, WE'LL DO THAT AT THE MAY MEETING, MAY MEETING AS WELL, UH, WITH THE ITEMS THAT WERE PUSHED TO MAY.
SO ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THE GROUP.
UH, SO FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR THEIR PATIENCE AS THE FIRST TIME I'VE RAN A MEETING.
AND CERTAINLY DO WANT TO THANK OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS FOR, UH, THEIR VERY VALUABLE INPUT.
WE GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT IN OUR PROCESS.
UH, SO IF THERE IS NOTHING FURTHER THAN AT 8 0 1, I ADJOURN THIS MEETING, UH, DON.