[00:00:01]
THANK YOU, SIR.[ CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS STATE OF OHIO Charter Review Commission]
IT IS SIX O'CLOCK ON TUESDAY, APRIL 23RD, 2024, AND I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS CHARTER COMMISSION, UH, REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TO ORDER, PLEASE.UH, MR. ROGERS, COULD YOU DO THE, UH, ROLE PLEASE, MR. ZICK? UM, I THINK HE'S HERE IN THE BUILDING, BUT HAS NOT MADE IT INTO THE ROOM YET.
SO WE'LL NOTE HIS TIME OF ARRIVAL WHEN HE GETS HERE.
UH, MR. DILLINGHAM PRESENT? MR. RUSSELL? PRESENT? MR. CAMPBELL? MRS. BERG.
SO, UH, WE WILL NOTE THAT MR. Z HAS ARRIVED, UM, OKAY.
SO, UH, MRS. BERG HAD NOTIFIED US YES.
UM, OF HER ABSENCE, UH, IN ADVANCE DUE TO ANOTHER COMMITMENT.
SO, UM, GIVEN THAT MS. SPURGE NOTIFIED US, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO EXCUSE HER ABSENCE.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, FOR MR. RUSSELL.
AND WHO WAS THE SECOND? MRS. SARUS? ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY, CALL.
MR. CAMPBELL'S NOT IN HERE YET.
SO IT PASSES, UM, SEVEN TO, AND ALL OF US WERE, UH, GIVEN MINUTES THROUGH EMAIL.
UH, HOPEFULLY HAD A TIME TO REVIEW THOSE.
UM, QUITE LONG, QUITE LONG, QUITE LONG, BUT VERY WELL DONE.
UM, ARE THERE ANY CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE MADE, MODIFICATIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE TO THE MINUTES? UH, IF NOT, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OUR APRIL 1ST MEETING.
AND ON THE MINUTES, WE CAN JUST SAY THAT, UH, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS OR CORRECTIONS IN MASS, I COULD STAND AS APPROVED.
SO JUST IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS OR CORRECT OR CORRECTIONS, UH, WE CAN JUST GO STRAIGHT TO A VOTE.
WELL, THERE WOULDN'T BE A VOTE THERE.
STAND AS APPROVED IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS, CORRECTIONS.
ANY OBJECTIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES? OKAY.
THEN WE WILL CONSIDER THEM APPROVED.
UH, TODAY ARE TOPICS OF DISCUSSION.
UM, SO POINT A CHARTER REVIEW, COMMISSION PROCESS, NEEDS, STAFF SUPPORT, AND OTHER ISSUES.
I'D JUST LIKE TO START OFF BY, UH, INTRODUCING THE CITY'S LEGAL TEAM HERE THAT IS PRESENT.
AS WE HAD DISCUSSED, UH, THEY WOULD BE PARTICIPATING IN THIS PROCESS.
SO, UH, FIRST I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE OUR, OUR NEW LAW DIRECTOR, UM, MR. CHRIS CONARD, UH, WHO'S SITTING HERE.
AND, UH, THE ASSISTANT LAW DIRECTOR, SARAH SPARKS, WHO'S DOWN HERE.
UH, THEY'RE BOTH WITH THE FIRM OF COOLIDGE WALL AND, UM, HAVE BEEN HIRED BY THE CITY TO, UH, HANDLE THE CITY'S LEGAL AFFAIRS.
UM, EITHER YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING, UH, START US OFF.
WELL, YOU MEAN THAT IT MARK IS OKAY.
YOU GOTTA TURN IT ON FROM THE BOTTOM AND THEN HIT THE LAST.
IT'S MAKING ME THINK OF SOMETHING.
THEN YOU WANT TO HAND IT UP HERE? I CAN DO IT FOR YOU.
UM, ACTUALLY, UH, COOLIDGE, UH, I THINK MAY HAVE BEEN AROUND ALMOST FROM THE EARLY BEGINNINGS OF, OF THE CITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS.
I DIDN'T SAY THIS AT THE COUNCIL MEETING, BUT I CAN SAY IT NOW.
UH, AS A LITTLE KID GROWING UP AND LISTEN TO WAVI, I REMEMBER THAT BRAD CLAY USED TO REFER TO THE MYTHICAL KINGDOM OF HUBER HEIGHTS, UH, AS THE, UH, THE EFFORTS TO BECOME AN INCORPORATED CITY WERE GOING ON.
UH, AND SO I WAS KIND OF FASCINATED TO LEARN THAT IT DIDN'T TAKE UNTIL 1981, THAT THAT ACTUALLY OCCURRED.
SO I WAS SURPRISED THAT IT HAD TAKEN THAT LONG IN MY BRAIN.
IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WOULD'VE HAPPENED IN THE MID SEVENTIES AT THE LATEST.
UH, SO ANYWAY, IT'S JUST EXCITING.
UH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THERE'S SO MANY THINGS GOING ON IN THE CITY.
THE, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, UH, THE, THE, JUST
[00:05:01]
THE EXCITING THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING.UH, AND I WILL TELL YOU, AS SOMEBODY WHO KIND OF GREW UP SOUTH OF TOWN, UH, EVERY TIME SOMEBODY GOES TO THE CONCERT VENUE, THEY COME BACK AND IT, THEIR IMPRESSIONS OF HUBER HEIGHTS HAVE BEEN MATERIALLY IMPACTED.
SO IT'S JUST EXCITING TO BE PART OF THAT, UH, AND WORK WITH ALL OF THE, THE GOOD CITIZENS OF, UH, OF HUBER HEIGHTS AND TO WATCH, UH, THE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTINUE.
AND THIS IS PART OF THE PROCESS OF WHAT WE DO.
YOU WANNA SAY ANYTHING? I'LL JUST ECHO WHAT CHRIS SAID.
SO I'VE BEEN AT COOLIDGE WALL FOR ABOUT THREE YEARS NOW.
I, UH, PRIMARILY WORK IN OUR PUBLIC SECTOR MUNICIPAL DEPARTMENT.
UM, SO I'M, LIKE CHRIS SAID, I'M VERY HAPPY TO BE HERE.
THIS IS SUCH AN EXCITING CITY WITH A LOT GOING ON.
UM, SO THAT WAS THE ONLY REALLY SUPPORT ISSUE I HAD.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF, UH, THERE WERE ANY FROM ANYBODY ELSE OR ANY HOUSEKEEPING ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS BEFORE WE GET INTO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
HEARING NONE, WE WILL CHARGE FORWARD.
UH, TODAY OUR, OUR GOAL IS TO REVIEW ARTICLE FIVE AND SIX, AND THEN WE'LL BE HEADING BACK TOWARDS THE ACTION ITEMS. UM, BUT WE'RE GONNA START IN ARTICLE FIVE, LEGISLATION, UH, SECTION 5.01 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS.
UM, AT THIS POINT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS IN THE AUDIENCE, SO ARE THERE ANY, UM, COMMENTS ON THIS SECTION FROM THE CHARTER COMMISSION? TONY, IS THIS WHERE WE MADE THE CHANGE AND ELIMINATED SOME OF THE READINGS? IT WAS, IT WAS ACTUALLY IN, UM, SECTION 5 0 4, WHICH WAS, UH, PART OF THIS ARTICLE, UH, WITH READINGS.
AND, UH, MARK MAKES A GOOD POINT THAT THAT WAS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE WAY WE OPERATED AS, UH, CITY, UM, AND AS A COUNCIL, UH, TO PASS LEGISLATION.
AND, UH, WHAT HAD HAPPENED, UM, PREVIOUSLY, OR WHAT WAS SPECIFIED IN THE CHARTER PREVIOUSLY WAS EVERY, UH, RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE PASSED BY COUNCIL, UH, REQUIRED THREE READINGS OF THE LEGISLATION BEFORE IT COULD BE ADOPTED.
UM, AND, UM, THAT WAS A, A LITTLE EXTREME IN, IN COMPARED TO OTHER, UH, MUNICIPALITIES AND SUCH, UH, PARTICULARLY WITH RESOLUTIONS.
UM, BECAUSE THE RESULT OF THAT WAS, IS IF YOU DIDN'T WAIVE THE READING AND PASS SOMETHING, UM, IMMEDIATELY AS AN EMERGENCY, THEN, UH, A RESOLUTION FOR SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS, UH, YOU KNOW, AUTHORIZING A, UH, COPIER CONTRACT, UM, WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THREE READINGS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOMETIMES TWO OR THREE WEEKS BETWEEN MEETINGS, SO YOU'D BE AUTOMATICALLY UP TO SIX TO SEVEN WEEKS, UM, TO GET TO THE THIRD READING.
AND THEN IT HAD TO BE, UH, IT HAD TO WAIT 30 DAYS TO BE EFFECTIVE AFTER THAT.
UM, SO YOU'RE TALKING ALMOST THREE MONTHS BEFORE SOMETHING COULD BECOME EFFECTIVE TO TAKE ACTION.
SO, UM, WHAT WAS CHANGED IS, UH, WE REDUCED THE NUMBER OF, UH, READINGS FROM THREE TO ONE FOR RESOLUTIONS AND FROM THREE TO TWO FOR ORDINANCES.
AND, UM, WE ALSO MADE RESOLUTIONS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, WHETHER THEY WERE PASSED AS EMERGENCY OR NOT.
SO THAT HAD THE EFFECT OF SOMETHING MORE MINOR COULD BE BROUGHT BEFORE, UH, COUNSEL AND APPROVED AND EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
WHEREAS, UM, THINGS THAT ARE A LITTLE MORE DELIBERATIVE, LIKE, UH, YOU'RE CHANGING AN ORDINANCE TO, UH, FOR ENFORCEMENT OF SOME TYPE OF ACTIVITY IN THE CITY, THOSE STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH TWO, TWO READINGS AND, UH, A 30 DAY WAITING PERIOD UNLESS THEY'RE PASSED BY EMERGENCY.
AND, UH, THAT WAS ONE, UH, THE VOTERS APPROVED.
UH, THE PREVIOUS MAYOR, UH, AT THE TIME CAMPAIGNED AGAINST THE CHARTER AMENDMENTS, UM, THAT HAD BEEN, UH, PUT BEFORE THE VOTERS.
UM, BUT WE WERE SUCCESSFUL IN PASSING.
UM, I THINK ALL BUT ONE THE LAST TIME.
SO THERE IS, THIS SECTION HAS HAD, UH, CLEANUP, UM, IN SECTIONS 5 0 4 AND 5 0 6 IN THE LAST ROUND, UM, AND 5 0 7.
SO, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS SOME WORK DONE ALREADY WITH THIS 5 11, 5 11, AND 12 ALSO WERE AMENDED.
[00:10:02]
YES.SO I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT 5 0 6.
WHERE IT SAYS THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE COULD, DO YOU WANT TO, MAYBE, COULD WE JUST GO IN ORDER AND THEN WE'LL HIT THAT AND WE GET TO 5 0 6? OKAY.
GOOD? UH, 5 0 3 FORM GUYS ARE MAKING IT EASY TONIGHT.
AND THAT'S THE ONE I JUST SPOKE TO, RIGHT? UH, 5 0 5 VOTE REQUIRED FOR PASSAGE? YES, MA'AM.
I HAVE SOMETHING ON 5 0 5 AS WELL,
I KNOW WE HAD TALKED AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT, UM, MANDATORY ATTENDANCE AS TO NOT DELAY A VOTE.
AND I WAS READING THROUGH THIS, AND I'M WONDERING IF MAYBE THERE IS, UM, VERBIAGE TO ADD ABOUT POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES FOR NOT SHOWING UP FOR MANDATORY VOTE REQUIRES.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE, BUT I'M WONDERING IF THIS IS THE RIGHT PLACE FOR THAT.
I THINK AS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME, UM, A LOT OF THESE INTERSECT WITH ONE ANOTHER OR, OR WHAT YOU DO IN ONE SECTION AFFECTS ANOTHER SECTION OF THE CHARTER.
UM, SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE THAT'S GONNA HAVE TO FALL UNDER THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD AND, AND I THINK SOME OF IT'S IN THE ACTION ITEMS TONIGHT, BUT, UM, THE WHOLE ISSUE OF, UM, HOW HOW MANY VOTES ARE GONNA BE REQUIRED TO PASS SOMETHING, UM, IS THE MAYOR GOING TO BE A VOTING MEMBER OF COUNCIL IN OUR PROPOSALS OR RECOMMENDATIONS? UM, AND THEN THE IMPACT OF PEOPLE NOT SHOWING UP FOR MEETINGS, OR WOULD SOME OF THE OTHER CHANGES POTENTIALLY ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES SATISFACTORILY, WHERE THERE WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE NECESSARILY A PENALTY ATTACHED.
SO, UM, I THINK WE SHOULD NOTE THAT POINT AND KIND OF PUT A PEN IN IT, BUT THEN GROUP IT WITH THAT LARGER DISCUSSION AND, AND IN TERMS OF THE, THOSE ITEMS. SURE.
BUT I, I, I THINK IT'S A, IT'S A GOOD POINT THAT MERITS SOME DISCUSSION.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM SECTION 5 0 5? MR. WEBB? UH, I WOULD WANT TO LIKE TO FURTHER COMMENT ON THAT TO SEE IF, UM, LEGAL COUNSEL, ARE YOU AWARE OF, UH, OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSION AND, UH, WHAT THE INTENT WAS WITH REGARD TO, UM, UH, WHAT JENNIFER'S, UM, SPEAKING ABOUT HERE? WELL, AT A, AT A VERY HIGH LEVEL, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD SAY IS WHEN YOU HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND YOU START THINKING ABOUT IT IS, AS YOU KNOW, AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW, YOU ARE ABOUT TO REALIZE CHANGING THE CHARTER IS A SIGNIFICANT EVENT.
UM, AND THERE ARE TIMES WHEN BEING MORE NIMBLE ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE.
AND SOME OF THESE ISSUES THAT I THINK THAT, THAT COUNSEL HAS HAD, UM, COULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE RULES OF, OF COUNSEL SOMETIMES WITHOUT HAVING TO GO BACK AND AMEND THE CHARTER.
BECAUSE SOMETIMES THE ISSUES THAT, THAT GO ALONG WITH DYSFUNCTION OF COUNSEL ARE UNIQUE TO A CERTAIN BODY.
AND AGAIN, I I, I, I'M A GUY WHO, WHO IS VERY RELUCTANT TO SUGGEST THAT CHANGES BE MADE IN A BROAD WAY.
YOU KNOW, WE GOT, WE HAVE LEGISLATURES OUT THERE ALL OVER THE PLACE THAT THEY SEE A PROBLEM, THEY THINK, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA MAKE A RULE TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM.
AND THEN THEY, THERE'S UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, AND THEN TO GO BACK AND FIX IT JUST BECOMES VERY, VERY DIFFICULT.
SO, UM, I WOULD SAY THAT I THINK THERE'S OTHER WAYS SOMETIMES TO FIX THE PROBLEM OTHER THAN A CHARTER AMENDMENT AND JUST LEAVE THAT AS A BLANKET STATEMENT.
ANYTHING ELSE? FROM 5 0 5? OKAY.
SO I WAS READING THROUGH THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY WHERE IT SAYS, CALLING INTO ORDER AN EMERGENCY CLAUSE BASED ON PUBLIC PEACE, HEALTH SAFETY, OR WELFARE NOT BEING, YOU KNOW, A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT.
I'M WONDERING IF THERE ISN'T A WAY FOR AN EMERGENCY CLAUSE TO BE ENACTED WHEN YOU HAVE, AND I'LL USE THIS EXAMPLE SPECIFICALLY, STORAGE FACILITIES, UM, WHO WANT TO BUILD IN HUBER WHILE GROWTH IS GOOD, NOT ALL GROWTH MAKES SENSE.
SO WOULD THERE EVER BE A WAY FOR AN EMERGENCY CLAUSE TO TAKE IN EFFECT IF THERE WAS A BUSINESS OF THE SAME TYPE, THE REQUEST TO BUILD IN HUBER ON THAT THIRD REQUEST WITHIN 12 MONTHS? FOR IN OUR ORGANIZATION, NOT TO SAY NO, BUT TO SAY, THIS IS OUR THIRD REQUEST OF THE SAME EXACT TYPE OF BUSINESS, THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE GOES INTO EFFECTS SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A FURTHER DISCUSSION ON IF SAYING YES TO THIS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY.
[00:15:01]
MAKES SENSE.SO FIRST OF ALL, LET ME JUST MAYBE FOR ALL THE COMMISSION MEMBERS EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE AND WHAT THAT MEANS.
UM, THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE, UM, IN THIS CONTEXT, UH, SOLELY HAS TO DO WITH WHEN THE LEGISLATION'S GOING TO BE EFFECTIVE.
SO, UM, WHEN IT'S ATTACHED TO, UH, LEGISLATION AS WE CALL DECLARING AN EMERGENCY, UM, IT MEANS THAT, UM, AND IT, IT'S POINTLESS NOW WITH RESOLUTIONS BECAUSE WHAT I JUST TALKED ABOUT, THEY'RE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY NOW ANYWAY.
BUT FOR AN ORDINANCE THAT'S NOT EFFECTIVE FOR 30 DAYS, THE WAY THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE WOULD BE USED IS IF IT'S ATTACHED TO THAT LEGISLATION, LET'S SAY IT'S A MORATORIUM ON, UH, STORAGE FACILITIES.
UM, THEN IF IT'S PASSED AS AN EMERGENCY, THEN IT'S EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT 30 DAYS.
BUT THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE DOESN'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE LEGISLATION, ONLY THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE LEGISLATION.
UM, THE OTHER THING THAT THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE DOES IS, UH, WHEN IT'S ATTACHED TO LEGISLATION, WHETHER A RESOLUTION OR AN ORDINANCE, IT, IT'S PASSED THAT WAY, UM, IT MAKES THAT LEGISLATION, UM, UNDER THE CHARTER NO LONGER SUBJECT TO REFERENDUM.
SO IF IT'S PASSED AS AN EMERGENCY, UH, REFERENDUM PROCESS CANNOT BE USED TO OVERTURN THAT DECISION OF COUNSEL.
AND I WOULD JUST ADD THAT THE LANGUAGE, PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE, THAT'S LEGALLY REQUIRED LANGUAGE, THAT IT HAS TO BE IN THOSE GENERAL CATEGORIES.
AND THEN, UH, TECHNICALLY IN YOUR LEGISLATION, THEN YOU NEED TO SAY WHY, WHICH ONE OF THOSE, YOU CAN'T JUST SAY IT'S FOR THE BENEFIT GENERICALLY.
TECHNICALLY, YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN EXPLANATION CLAUSE WITH THAT.
SO TO ADDRESS YOUR POINT, I THINK IF YOU WERE, UH, TRYING TO PUT SOMETHING INTO EFFECT QUICKLY MM-HMM,
AND THEN AGAIN, JUST HISTORICALLY, LOOKING BACK TO THE LAST CHARTER REVIEW, ONCE WE FIXED THIS, HOW MANY EMERGENCY LEGISLATIONS HAVE WE HAD SINCE VERY, VERY FEW, AND THEY'VE BEEN TRUE OR HEARD? YEAH.
I MEAN, I THINK THE CITY GOT TO A POINT PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE, EVERY, EVERY MEETING THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY LEGISLATION.
BEFORE WE MADE THIS CHANGE, IT SEEMED EVERY, AND IT WAS ONLY BECAUSE WE COULDN'T WAIT SOMETIMES TWO OR THREE MONTHS TO GET SOMETHING INTO EFFECT.
THE, SO THAT'S, THAT'S POLITICALLY IT, IT, IT WAS HARD FOR COUNCIL BECAUSE THEN THEY TOOK A LOT OF CRITICISM, WHY IS EVERYTHING AN EMERGENCY? YEAH.
BUT PEOPLE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE, THE PROCESS THAT WAS BEHIND THIS, THAT, UM, THEY WERE LEGALLY REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH THOSE THINGS.
SO JOHN, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT IN, IN THIS COPIER EXAMPLES THAT YOU GAVE AS, AS A PRIME EXAMPLE, EVERYTHING, UH, BACK IN THE DAY, EVERYTHING WAS AN EMERGENCY.
UH, IT SEEMED TWO OUT OF THREE AGENDA ITEMS WERE REQUIRED TO BE PASSED AS AN EMERGENCY JUST TO GET THE JOB DONE.
AND THEN THE, THE CHECK AND BALANCE ON EMERGENCY LEGISLATION IS, UM, IF YOU'RE GOING TO WAIVE A READING, UH, OF LEGISLATION OR TO ADOPT AN ITEM AS AN EMERGENCY, IT REQUIRES SIX AFFIRMATIVE VOTES OF COUNSEL, WHEREAS NORMAL THINGS ARE PASSED BY, UH, ONLY FIVE VOTES.
SO THERE'S A HIGHER THRESHOLD, UH, BY WHICH THE EMERGENCY LEGISLATION'S ADOPTED AS WELL.
SO THE, YOU KNOW, IT CAN'T BE JUST DONE, UH, WITH A SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE.
IT HAS TO HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY IN ORDER TO, UH, ENACT EMERGENCY LEGISLATION.
I WAS GONNA ASK ABOUT THE MAJORITY.
IS IT A TWO THIRDS MAJORITY OF PRESENT MEMBERS, OR IS TWO THIRD, TWO THIRDS MAJORITY OF FULL COUNCIL? IT'S, UH, TWO THIRDS OF THE MEMBERS THEN HOLDING OFFICE, WHICH WOULD BE, UH, SIX WITH OUR, OUR JURY COUNCIL.
BUT IF IT'S A NON-EMERGENCY ITEM, IT REQUIRES FIVE VOTES TO PASS.
GENERALLY SPEAKING, I WOULD SAY THAT AN EASY TOOL TO REMEMBER EMERGENCY IS SUPER MAJORITY.
IT TAKES MORE THAN JUST A MAJORITY.
SO IN A CASE WHERE YOU HAD LIKE, UH, EMERGENCY LEGISLATION THAT WAS IN ORDINANCE AND YOU WANTED TO PASS IT IN ONE MEETING, THERE WOULD FIRST HAVE TO BE A MOTION TO WAIVE THE SECOND READING, WHICH REQUIRES A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE OF SIX, THEN THEY WOULD VOTE TO ADOPT IT AFTER THE, UH, SECOND READING WAS WAIVED.
AND IF THEY'RE ADOPTING HIS EMERGENCY, THAT WOULD ALSO REQUIRE SIX VOTES.
[00:20:01]
DATE OF LEGISLATION.5 0 8 AUTHENTICATION AND RECORDING REVIEW.
CAN I JUST SAY SOMETHING ON 5 0 7, JUST SO ABSOLUTELY EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS.
AND, UH, PARAGRAPH A, THERE ARE CERTAIN TYPES OF, UM, LEGISLATION THAT ARE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THERE'RE AN ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION.
SO LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, ITEM A ONE APPROPRIATION OF MONEY.
SO THE BUDGET OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, UM, THAT HAS TO DEAL WITH APPROPRIATION OF MONEY, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT'S AN ORDINANCE OR NOT, UM, EMERGENCY LEGISLATION OR NOT.
IT'S EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, UM, BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF, OF THE TYPE OF LEGISLATION.
AND THAT'S THE SAME FOR, UH, TAX LEVIES.
UH, THESE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE DISCUSSED, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT'S NOT VERY, UH, COMMON, UH, SUBMISSION OF ANY QUESTION TO THE ELECTORATE.
UM, AND THEN CODIFICATION, UH, ITEMS AND OF COURSE, EMERGENCY ORDINANCES AS WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT.
SO THERE ARE SOME EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE AND THAT THIS IS THE SECTION THAT DEALS WITH THOSE EXCEPTIONS.
5 0 8 AUTHENTICATION AND RECORDING REVIEW.
CODIFICATION AND REPRODUCTION.
SO IT SAYS ON C, REASONABLE COST DETERMINED BY THE COUNCIL.
ISN'T EVERYTHING ONLINE FOR FREE? IT IS.
AND, UM, THIS WAS WRITTEN BEFORE, UH, THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAW.
SO, UH, REASONABLE, UH, MEANT A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS.
AND THE, IT'S STILL THE LANGUAGE THAT'S USED IN THE OHIO PUBLIC RECORDS LAW.
UM, WE CAN ONLY CHARGE FOR THE COST OF THE ACTUAL REPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS.
UM, AND IF THEY'RE AVAILABLE IN ELECTRONIC FORMAT AND WE SEND 'EM BY EMAIL, WE DON'T CHARGE AT ALL.
SO, UM, WHAT THIS IS KIND OF MEANT TO ADDRESS IS THOSE PEOPLE WHO WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, I WANT, UM, 2000 PAGES OF PAPER DOCUMENTS COPIED OF, YOU KNOW, EVERY ORDINANCE FROM THE LAST 10 YEARS.
UM, WE POTENTIALLY PROVIDE THAT, BUT WE WOULD, UH, YOU KNOW, CHARGE THEM FOR THE COST OF THE REPRODUCTION IN THAT CASE.
UM, IF NO ONE ELSE HAD ANYTHING I WAS GOING TO PROPOSE, UM, IN THE CODIFICATION SECTION, UH, B UH, ABOUT THE THIRD LINE FROM THE LAST, IT SAYS, THE CLERK OF COUNCIL SHALL CAUSE A NOTICE OF THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF ANY RE CODIFICATION THEREOF BY THE COUNCIL TO BE PUBLISHED ONE TIME IN A NEWSPAPER OF CIRCULATION IN THE CITY AT LEAST SEVEN DAYS PRIOR, WHICH WE DO.
UM, BUT THE LAST TIME AROUND, WE DID MAKE SOME CHANGES TO OTHER AREAS OF THE CODE WHERE, UM, NEWSPAPERS ARE KIND OF GOING AWAY.
AND, UH, IT'S A, IT'S A MUCH LARGER COST FOR US TO PAY TO DO THOSE TYPES OF ADVERTISEMENTS IN A NEWSPAPER GENERAL CIRCULATION.
BUT IN ONE OF THE OTHER SECTIONS, UM, WE CHANGED IT TO, IT'S POSTED IN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF LOCATIONS AND AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE, UM, AS THE LEGAL REQUIREMENT TO DO THAT.
AND, UH, THE MEDIUMS ARE JUST DIFFERENT NOW.
AND, UM, SO I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO MAKE A SIMILAR CHANGE TO THAT SECTION TO, UH, ALLOW FOR SOMETHING OTHER THAN A NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENT.
DIDN'T WE CHANGE FIVE 11 PUBLICATION? ISN'T THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? UM, I THINK THAT'S THE LANGUAGE YOU'RE, YOU'RE REFERRING TO, CORRECT.
THERE, IT SAYS, UM, IT'S PUBLISHED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE AND NOT LESS THAN THREE PUBLIC PLACES WITHIN THE CITY AS DETERMINED BY COUNCIL CHANGE LAST TIME.
SO I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO DO THAT WITH THE CODIFICATION ALSO, BECAUSE FOR WHATEVER REASON WE DIDN'T CHANGE THAT LAST TIME.
BY THE NEXT CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, PEOPLE MAY BE SAYING, WHAT'S THE NEWSPAPER? RIGHT.
AND AT THE TIME, LAST TIME, WE STILL HAD THE COURIER, SO, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS RELATIVELY INEXPENSIVE, BUT WHEN YOU GET TO SOME OF THE OTHER NEWSPAPERS, IT IT'S, IT CAN GET COSTLY, UM, THREE TO $500 FOR AN ADVERTISEMENT LIKE THAT.
[00:25:01]
IF THERE'S NOT AN, UH, MAJORITY OBJECTING, I WOULD MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE HAVE MR. ROGERS ADD THIS TO OUR ACTION ITEMS FOR NEXT WEEK WITH LANGUAGE WRITTEN UP FOR US TO BE ABLE TO VOTE ON EVERYBODY GOOD WITH THAT? OKAY.SO IF WE CAN ADD THAT TO THE, OKAY.
CAN, CAN I SAY IT THIS WAY SO I'M CLEAR IN MY BRAIN? IS YOU, YOU, YOU'RE LOOKING AT AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 5.11 PUBLICATION TO MIRROR THE CHANGES TO THE OHIO REVISED CODE.
AND THEN THAT WOULD, WOULD THAT ALSO LEAD TO A TEXT AMENDMENT WITHIN THE, THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES? UM, I'M THINKING IT MIGHT, BECAUSE SOME OF THE PUBLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR SOME TYPES OF CODE ZONING CODES AND OTHER THINGS, I'M, WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT, WELL, THIS, THIS PARTICULAR SECTIONALLY DEALS WITH CODIFICATION AGREED NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.
SO, UH, YEAH, WE TO CHANGE, LIKE THE PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS THAT EXIST FOR PLANNING AND ZONING CASES THAT ARE IN THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES, YES.
THAT WOULD REQUIRE LEGISLATIVE CHANGE TO DO THAT.
UH, THIS ONE IN SECTION 5 0 8 B UH, ONLY REFERENCES, UH, PUBLICATION IN A NEWSPAPER FOR CODIFICATION PURPOSES.
SO, DOES EVERYBODY KNOW WHAT CODIFICATION IS? PRETTY MUCH, YEAH.
EVERYBODY GOOD? THEN? ANYTHING ELSE FROM 5 0 8? OKAY.
AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD TO 5 0 9 TECHNICAL CODES.
AND WHAT 5 0 9 JUST BASICALLY DOES, IS TECHNICAL CODES, LIKE ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING, GET UPDATED AND CHANGED PERIODICALLY.
SO RATHER THAN HAVING A REFERENCE IN THE CITY CHARTER TO A SPECIFIC, UH, ADDITION OR, OR A SPECIFIC CODE, UM, THEN, UH, THIS ALLOWS COUNSEL TO ADOPT A CODE IN A, IN A AREA OF TECHNICAL EXPERTISE AND TO APPLY IT, BUT THEY CAN CHANGE IT IF, IF THE CODE IS UPDATED OR, OR MODERNIZED.
IS EVERYBODY GOOD WITH 5 0 9? YES.
OKAY, THEN WE'LL MOVE TO FIVE 10 AMENDMENT.
FIVE 11 PUBLICATION, WHICH, AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING.
AND THAT WAS CHANGED THE LAST CHARTER TO REVIEW PROCESS.
I, I MAY JUST SAY THAT THIS, THIS KIND OF RELATES TO THE DISCUSSION WE HAD BEFORE TOO, THAT IF, IF YOU'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT, UH, CHANGING THE VOTING, UH, PARAMETERS OF, UH, OF THE MAYOR OR, OR CHANGING THE VOTE COUNT IN SOME OTHER WAY, UM, IT'S GONNA IMPACT RIGHT SECTION FIVE 12.
SO, UM, I THINK PROBABLY, AND WE COULD HAVE THIS AT THE NEXT MEETING, IS JUST LUMPING ALL THOSE THINGS TOGETHER.
UM, AND I COULD HAVE A CROSS REFERENCE AVAILABLE TO ALL THE SECTIONS THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED.
THE COMMISSION COULD TALK THROUGH THE VARIOUS SUGGESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED OR ANY NEW ONES YOU MIGHT HAVE.
AND, UM, ONCE YOU DECIDE ON A, A COURSE OR DIRECTION THAT YOU THINK IF SOMETHING WARRANTS A CHANGE, UH, THEN WE COULD DO THE REAL WORK TO WRITE UP A PROPOSAL AND ADDRESS ALL THE, UH, RELEVANT SECTIONS IN TERMS OF LANGUAGE THAT WOULD NEED TO BE, UH, CHANGED AS A RESULT OF, UH, THAT PROPOSAL.
BECAUSE ONE THAT WE COULD TALK ABOUT THAT I DON'T THINK WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME IS JUST GIVE THE MAYOR A VOTE.
YOU KNOW, IF HE HAS A VOTE, THERE'S NO POINT TIEBREAKER, THERE'S NO POINT FOR TIEBREAKERS, THERE'S NO POINT FOR A MAYOR'S VETO.
THERE'S NO POINT FOR A LOT OF THE THINGS WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME, IF WE JUST GIVE 'EM A VOTE.
BUT THAT'S ONE OF MANY OPTIONS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED TONY ROGERS.
SO, UM, HYPOTHETICALLY WE DO THAT.
CAN YOU TELL ME HOW YOU THINK THAT WOULD IMPACT FIVE 12 HERE? I THINK LIKELY, WELL, ONE, THE TIE BREAKER TIE BREAKING VOTE WOULD GO AWAY.
UM, AND ARGUABLY, UH, YOU WOULD JUST ELIMINATE THE MAYOR'S VETO AS A RESULT TOO.
UM, BUT USUALLY THE MAYOR'S VETO IS
[00:30:01]
AN ABILITY TO GIVE A MAYOR WHO'S A NON-VOTING MEMBER OF COUNCIL, UM, A CHECK AND BALANCE ON THE ACTIONS OF COUNCIL.SO IF THEY HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AND ROLES AS, UH, THE OTHER MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, MEANING THE MAYOR HAVING THE RIGHT TO VOTE, UM, THAT SOMEWHAT NEGATES THE NEED FOR THIS PROVISION.
BUT BY GIVING THE MAYOR A VOTE, WOULD THERE BE ANY SORT OF VETO POWER? OR DOES EVERYTHING GO TO LIKE A, IS IT A SIMPLE MAJORITY? IS IT A, IS IT A SUPER MAJORITY, UH, FOR LEGISLATION TO BE PASSED? SO, I MEAN, IF THE MAYOR HAS A VOTE, THEN WE HAVE 10 VOTES AND THEN WE END UP FIVE FIVE.
WHERE DO WE GO FROM FROM THAT POINT? WELL, SO RIGHT NOW IT'S, UH, THERE'S ONLY EIGHT, OH, SORRY, MEMBERS OF COUNTY, I'M SORRY.
SO ONE ADVANTAGE OF THE MAYOR VOTING ALSO WOULD BE, IF EVERYBODY'S PRESENT, YOU HAVE AN ODD NUMBER OF, UH, VOTING MEMBERS.
SO, UM, IT WOULD BE HARDER TO GET TO A TIE
UM, SO, UH, IT WOULDN'T CHANGE THE NUMBER OF VOTES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO PASS LEGISLATION OR TO PASS SOMETHING BY A SUPER MAJORITY, IT WOULD JUST ADD THE MAYOR TO THAT MIX.
UM, SO IN THE CASE THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY, FOR EXAMPLE, WHERE, UH, WE HAD, UH, FOUR, FOUR TIE VOTES, AND THEN SOMEONE THOUGHT, UM, YOU KNOW, THEIR SIDE WASN'T GONNA WIN, SO ONE OF THEM DIDN'T SHOW UP TO THE MEETING AND THEN THE MAYOR COULDN'T BREAK THE TIE.
UH, THIS WOULD PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING BECAUSE, UH, IN THIS SITUATION, IF THE MAYOR WAS A VOTING MEMBER, THEN HE COULD STILL VOTE EVEN IF SOMEONE WALKED OUT TO AVOID A TIE.
UM, SO THAT WOULD BE THE FIFTH VOTE.
ANYWAY, TO PASS THE ITEM IN QUESTION, MR. CAMPBELL AND, AND TONY ON THE VETO, UH, THE MAYOR CANNOT BREAK A VE VETO LEGISLATION IF IT WAS A SIX.
IF IT'S PASSED BY, UH, SUPER MAJORITY IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, UH, THEN THE MAYOR'S POWER OF VETO DOESN'T APPLY ANYWAY.
IS THERE ANY USELESSNESS PROVISION, UM, LET'S SAY THAT, UM, AGAIN, HYPOTHETICALLY THE MAYOR HAS A VOTE AND THE VOTE COMES DOWN FIVE FOUR, AND THE MAYOR IS IN THE MINORITY.
IS THERE ANY USEFULNESS TO THIS POSITION, TO THIS, UH, UH, SECTION TO WHERE THE MAYOR COULD VETO THE PAST LEGISLATION? THAT THAT'S KIND OF THE TRADE OFF? IF YOU, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE THEM AN EQUAL MEMBER OF COUNCIL, THEN THE ARGUMENT WOULD BE, THE COUNTER ARGUMENT WOULD BE THEN WHY WOULD THEY HAVE A POWER, UH, GREATER THAN THE OTHERS, UH, TO, TO, TO VETO SOMETHING GOOD? UM, I WOULDN'T SAY IT'S IMPOSSIBLE, BUT IT, IT, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER PIECE TO THIS, I THINK YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER IS KIND OF TO CHRIS'S POINT A LITTLE BIT, ONE, YOU DON'T WANNA MAKE THESE CHANGES LIGHTLY, BUT TWO, UM, TO GET, TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES.
IT'S NOT JUST WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE AND AGREE TO, UM, IT HAS TO GO TO THE FULL COUNCIL TO BE, UH, RECOMMENDED, AND THEN THEY HAVE TO VOTE TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT, AND THEN THE VOTERS HAVE TO APPROVE IT.
SO YOU'RE GONNA WANT TO CREATE AMENDMENTS THAT YOU THINK HAVE A REASONABLE CHANCE OF SUCCESS AND BEING APPROVED BY THE VOTERS.
IN MY MIND, YOU KNOW, PART OF THAT, UH, PROMOTION OF THAT CHARTER AMENDMENT WOULD BE THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE HAVING SOME TRADE OFFS HERE IN TERMS OF, UH, THE POWERS OF THE MAYOR AND, AND, AND, UM, WHAT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO OR NOT ALLOWED TO DO IT.
HOW MANY TIMES HAS HE VETOED SOMETHING? UH, SITTING MAYOR, HOW MANY TIMES HAS HE VETOED? I DON'T THINK MAYOR GORE HAS VETOED AT ALL.
UM, AND THE WHOLE, WE DID AT ONE POINT, UH, WENT BACK AND DID A, A HISTORICAL SEARCH WHEN WE WERE HAVING THIS ISSUE ON, ON ONE PARTICULAR ITEM.
AND, UM, I THINK THERE WERE LESS THAN 10 IN THE WHOLE HISTORY OF THE CITY.
SO IT'S NOT A WIDELY USED, UH, HOUR ANYWAY.
HOW MANY TIMES HAS HE BROKEN A TIE? I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT THAT'S, UH, THAT'S SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER QUESTION.
I THINK, I THINK IT WAS MORE THAN THAT, BUT, UH,
SOMETIMES HE'S, THESE ARE STATEMENTS OF THE OBVIOUS, BUT IF YOU DON'T STAY THEM, PEOPLE ASSUME THINGS THAT MAY NOT BE ON THE SAME PAGE.
YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT UNDER YOUR HOME RULE POWERS WITH WITHIN CERTAIN LIMITS, AS LONG AS YOU DON'T INVADE GENERAL LAWS.
[00:35:01]
UM, AND SO THERE MAY HAVE BEEN GOOD REASONS FOR THE MA THE MAYOR'S VETO, THEY MAY STILL EXIST.UM, BUT THAT'S CERTAINLY AN UNUSUAL FORM IN A CITY MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT BECAUSE THE PRESUMPTION IS COUNCIL'S THERE.
THE CHECKS AND BALANCES ARE THE ABILITY TO RECALL INDIVIDUAL, UH, PUBLIC OFFICIALS.
YOU'VE GOT INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM OPTIONS, UH, AND IN THEORY IT DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN, BUT COUNCIL CAN ACTUALLY RECONSIDER CERTAIN ACTIONS THAT IT TAKES, UH, WHEN THOSE MOMENTS OCCUR.
UM, IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE, ALTHOUGH I COULD GET THERE, THAT A RESOLUTION ULTIMATELY WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT, THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT THAT SOMEBODY WOULD WANT TO VETO.
BECAUSE RESOLUTIONS BY DEFINITION, YOU WANT THE ONE READING AND EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE THEY TEND TO BE SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NOW.
AND THE IMPACT OF WHATEVER THAT ACT IS, IS OF A SHORT DURATION ORDINANCES TEND TO BE MORE PERMANENT.
YOU NEED TO BE MORE THOUGHTFUL.
UH, AND THAT'S WHY YOU TYPICALLY SEE REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS, DEVELOPMENTS ALL IN THE FORM OF ORDINANCE, UH, RESOLUTIONS AND POWER.
BUT ORDINANCES ARE THE ONES THAT REALLY GIVE IT THE GO AHEAD.
UM, I WOULD SUSPECT THAT, THAT IF WE DID SOME TYPE OF, OF RESEARCH TO OTHER COMMUNITIES, YOU WOULD SEE VERY, VERY FEW PLACES HAVE VETO POWER.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S WRONG FOR HUBER HEIGHTS, BUT, UH, SO I AGREE WITH YOU
HOW MANY OF THOSE PLACES LET THE MAYOR VOTE? UH, I, I SUSPECT THAT MOST PLACES LET THE MAYOR VOTE AS WELL.
THE, YOU KNOW, HISTORICALLY A MAYOR HAS BEEN REALLY THE OFFICIAL DESIGNEE FOR THE, THE OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS THAT RELATE TO THE CITY.
SO THERE'S NO CONFUSION ABOUT THAT CEREMONIAL ROLE.
BUT THAT CEREMONIAL ROLE ALSO CARRIES OBLIGATIONS BECAUSE THE ELECTORS TRUSTED THAT PERSON TO, TO, AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AND ALL THE DUTIES AND POWERS THAT COME WITH THAT FOR OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS, I THINK THAT'S TYPICALLY THE MODEL.
DO DO YOU SEE ANY, I'LL CALL 'EM CONSEQUENCES,
SO IF IT'S THE NORM, I WOULD DEFAULT TO THE NORM UNLESS THERE'S A REASON THAT YOU WENT, I MEAN, WHATEVER THOSE REASONS WERE THAT EXISTED FOR THE VETO, I MEAN, THERE'S GOTTA BE AN INTERESTING PROCESS THAT GOT THAT INTO THE CHARTER.
UH, WHATEVER THOSE REASONS WERE.
WELL, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, FROM A LAW DIRECTOR'S PERSPECTIVE, SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE KIND OF POLICY DECISIONS FOR THE CHARTER COMMISSION.
ULTIMATELY, COUNSEL DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT IT GETS TO THE ELECTORATE FROM A A WATER DIRECTOR'S PERSPECTIVE.
UM, IT, IT'S, IT'S AN INTERESTING SCENARIO, BUT IT'S, THAT'S NOTHING MORE THAN THAT.
THE ONLY REASON I BRING IT UP IS I THINK THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'VE HAD ABOUT VOTING AND PEOPLE NOT ATTENDING VOTES IS BECAUSE THE MAYOR DOESN'T HAVE A VOTE AND THE VETO EXISTS.
I THINK BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE A VOTE.
AND I THINK YOU SOLVE A LOT OF THESE ISSUES THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SOLVE RIGHT NOW.
IF YOU GIVE HIM A VOTE, I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING ELSE.
THAT'S MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION, JUST FROM THE HISTORICAL VIEWS THAT I'VE SEEN AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED.
THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY TIMES HAS HE VETOED, HOW MANY TIMES HAS HE BROKEN A TIE? BECAUSE IF HE HAS A VOTING RIGHT, THEN, YOU KNOW, TO TONY'S ARGUMENT, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT PEOPLE STEPPING OUT BECAUSE OF A TIE.
WE'LL SAY, NEVER SAY NEVER, BUT
IT REDUCE NOW TOOL WILL STEP OUT, REDUCE THE IMPACT OF THOSE ACTIONS SHOULD SOMEONE TAKE THOSE ACTIONS.
SO THEN WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS IF THE MAYOR GETS A VOTE AND WE HAVE A TIE
UM, BUT, UM, YOU GET INTO SOME OF THE TECHNICALITIES OF ROBERT'S RULES, BUT IF THERE WERE A TIE, ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED COULD IN THEORY BRING BACK A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION CONSIDERATION AT A LATER DATE.
SO IT, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY KILL WHATEVER THE ACTION IS.
SO IF ONE PERSON WAS ABSENT AND IT WAS A FOUR FOUR TIE, SURE IT WOULDN'T MEET THE THRESHOLD TO HAVE THE FIVE REQUIRED VOTES THAT, THAT IT WOULD NOT PASS AT THAT AT THAT TIME.
AND THEN WE DO HAVE A PROVISION FOR RECONSIDERATION IN THE COUNCIL RULES.
AND I, AGAIN, JUST FULL DISCLOSURE, I MEAN, WATCHING EVERYTHING THAT'S HAPPENED OVER THE 25 YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE, UH, I'VE ALWAYS FELT LIKE WE DID, YOUR DAD AND EVERYBODY DID A GREAT JOB.
I THINK THEY, THEY SET IT UP CORRECTLY.
I JUST NEVER UNDERSTOOD WHY THE MAYOR DIDN'T HAVE A VOTE.
THEN WE STARTED HAVING VOTING PROBLEMS. AND I, YOU KNOW, I JUST FEEL LIKE SOME OF THAT GETS SOLVED IF WE HAVE SOME, SOME CHANGES TO THAT ISSUE.
SO, AND, AND HONESTLY, I DON'T CARE HOW WE CHANGE IT.
I JUST HOPE WE CHANGE IT SO WE DON'T HAVE THOSE ISSUES.
WELL, AND I THINK THIS IS EASIEST WAY, WHETHER THE MAYOR, WHETHER GETS A VOTE OR WHETHER IT'S ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, I THINK THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT CONVOLUTED
[00:40:01]
WAYS YOU COULD GET TO WHERE YOU WANT TO GET.I THINK THIS IS THE EASIEST WAY TO GET WHERE YOU WANT TO GET.
SO IS THIS, IS THIS THE ONE FOR ONE WE GET RID OF? WE ADD ONE AND GET RID OF ONE AND THAT'SS THE SIMPLEST? I, I AGREE WITH WHOEVER SAID IT.
I DON'T SEE HOW YOU GIVE A MAYOR A VETO WHEN HE HAS A VOTE.
YEAH, I, I I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF TALKING OUT SIDES, YOUR MOUTH HERE.
SO I NO, THAT WOULDN'T MAKE A LOT OF LOGICAL SENSE.
SO I THINK IF YOU GIVE HIM A VOTE, THEN YOU JUST, YOU JUST, YOU JUST SEND FIVE 12 AND THERE'S NO VETO.
ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT CHARTER REVIEW PROCESS IS IT, IT AGAIN, WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE INTERESTED TO KNOW WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES DO, UH, SARAH AND I BELONG TO THE OHIO MUNICIPAL ATTORNEY'S ASSOCIATION, THE OMAA, AND, AND WE GET DAILY EMAILS FROM A VARIETY OF LAW DIRECTORS AND SOLICITORS ASKING QUESTIONS.
IF YOU WOULD BE, IF YOU'RE INTERESTED OUTTA JUST CURIOSITY, IF NOTHING ELSE, FOR US TO SEND OUT AN EMAIL TO SAY, HEY, HOW MANY OF YOUR COMMUNITIES HAVE MAYOR VETO AND ARE THEY ALLOWED TO VOTE? WE COULD.
IT'S NOT, I THINK THAT'S GOOD INFORMATION.
I, I I THINK IT'S, YEAH, I KNOW WE DON'T ALWAYS WANNA DO WHAT OTHER PLACES DO.
I THINK WE, WE STAND ON OUR OWN AT SOME, SOME, YOU KNOW, ISSUES.
BUT I THINK IT'S, LIKE YOU SAID, I'D BE INTERESTED TO SEE HOW MANY MAYORS OUT THERE JUST ACTUALLY DON'T GET TO VOTE AT ALL.
WELL, AND IF THEY DO HAVE THE VOTE AND THE VETO POWER AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S CERTAINLY WORTH A PHONE CALL TO FIND OUT WHAT ISSUES THEY'VE HAD AND, AND YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY WOULD RECOMMEND TO A COMMUNITY IF THEY WERE CONSIDERING SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I MEAN, I, IF, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY, IF HUBER HEIGHTS HAS ONLY USED THE VETO, HUBER HEIGHTS MAYOR HAS ONLY USED THE VETO PROCESS 10 TIMES IN 43 YEARS.
I MEAN,
I THINK EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES THAT THERE'S SOME ISSUES WITH, I I LACK OF PARTICIPATION.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WANNA CALL IT.
I MEAN, WITH, WITH NOT GAMING ASSISTANCE.
AND I THINK THIS POTENTIALLY, I MEAN, I'M STILL TRYING IN MY HEAD TO, TO RUN THROUGH EVERY NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCE TO THIS, BUT I, AND I DON'T WANNA DO IT LIGHTLY.
AND I KNOW COUNSEL WILL HAVE THEIR OWN DISCUSSIONS ON THIS, SO WHATEVER WE DECIDE MAY, MAY BE MOOT, BUT I, I SEE HOW THIS MAY BE A GOOD SOLUTION TO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.
SO KIND OF A TWO-PARTER, UM, 5 0 7, IT SAYS THAT FOR THE EMERGENCY LEGISLATION, I THINK IT'S 5 0 7, OR WAS IT OH 5 0 6, THAT YOU NEED TWO THIRDS OF A VOTE.
AND, UM, WHAT IF, WHAT IF EVERYONE'S NOT HERE? WHAT IF ONLY FIVE PEOPLE ARE HERE, SIX PEOPLE ARE HERE, WHAT IF IT TIES? I, I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN GET BEHIND, YOU KNOW, A TIE FOUR, FOUR, AND THEN IT JUST IS, IS A NO, I DON'T KNOW.
I FEEL LIKE THERE NEEDS TO BE, WELL, THAT'S THE WAY IT IS NOW.
UM, SO IT'S TWO THIRDS OF THEM, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, THEN HOLDING OFFICE, AND THAT DOES INCLUDE THE MAYOR.
AND THAT, UH, EVEN THOUGH HE DOES HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE, SO, UH, YOU NEED, UH, FOR, BECAUSE THIS IS EMERGENCY, THEN THAT'S SIX VOTES, UH, THAT HAVE TO BE HAD.
SO THE TIE DOESN'T REALLY IMPACT EMERGENCY LEGISLATION BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE SIX OR YOU CAN'T PASS.
YOU COUNT THE MAYOR AS PART OF THE TWO THIRDS, BUT HE DOESN'T GET TO VOTE, CORRECT.
OH, THAT'S, I, I DON'T EVEN SEE HOW WE'RE DOING THAT
PUT YOU HAVE A SECOND PAGE FOR EVERYBODY'S INFORMATION.
I CAN KEEP LOOKING, BUT I LOOKED UP THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF KETTERING AND THE CHARTER, THE, UH, CITY OF RIVERSIDE BOTH, UH, PROVIDE THE MAYOR A VOTE, BOTH GIVE THE MAYOR NO VETO.
I JUST THINK THAT'S KIND OF FUNNY THAT WE COUNT HIM TOWARDS THE TWO THIRDS, BUT HE'S NOT AN ACTUAL VOTE.
SO WHAT HAPPENS IF, WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE ARE ONLY FIVE OR SIX PEOPLE? WHAT IF THERE ARE ONLY SIX PEOPLE HERE PRESENT? YOU CAN HAVE A QUORUM, YOU CAN STILL RUN A MEETING, CAN YOU HAVE, YOU JUST WON'T HAVE THE EMERGENCY LEGISLATION.
YOU JUST CAN'T HAVE THE EMERGENCY LEGISLATION.
AND, AND ONE OPTION IS THAT DOES EXIST IN THOSE SITUATIONS TOO, IS COUNSEL CAN PUSH IT TO ANOTHER READING.
SO LET'S SAY THEY WERE PLANNING TO ADOPT IT THAT NIGHT, BUT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH VOTES OR ENOUGH PEOPLE EVEN PRESENT TO, TO, UH, VOTE WITH THE SUPER MAJORITY.
UM, THEY COULD PASS IT TO ANOTHER READING, WHICH MEANS IT JUST DEFERS THE DECISION UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING WHEN EVERYBODY, BUT THEN IT COULD BE THE MUSICAL CHAIRS AGAIN, WHERE SOMEBODY'S OUT AND SOMEBODY'S OUT.
I MEAN, HOW, HOW DO YOU PREVENT THAT? WELL, WE'LL BE TALKING LATER ON ABOUT, UM, REMOVAL OF COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT THERE IS A PROVISION IN THERE THAT, UH, SAYS IF YOU MISS THREE CONSECUTIVE MEETINGS OF COUNCIL UNEXCUSED, UH, THAT IS GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL, BUT THEN IT TAKES SIX VOTES TO REMOVE SOMEBODY.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF A TOOTHLESS.
AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS FROM THE LAW DIRECTOR, IF WE HAVE, YOU SAID IF IT'S TIE
[00:45:01]
VOTE, THE MAYOR GETS TO VOTE, IT'S FOUR FOUR, THEN IT'S A NO VOTE.WHAT, WHAT DO OTHER CITIES DO? IS IT ALL NO VOTES OR IS THERE, IT JUST SEEMS THAT HAPPENS.
UM, AND THEN, THEN IT'S A POLITICALLY, UH, THERE'S A DECISION THAT GOES ON THE, THEN THE WAY THAT ALL THE POLITICAL DISCUSSIONS, UH, GO ON WHETHER OR NOT TO BRING THE LEGISLATION BACK COMPROMISE COMPROMISED SOMETIMES.
UM, BUT EVEN THE LEGISLATURE AND STUFF, UH, IT'S, THEY HAVE SIMILAR PROVISIONS.
IF, IF, UH, THERE'S NOT A MAJORITY, IF IT WOULD BE A TIE, IT WOULD NOT PASS.
THAT'S PRETTY COMMON UNDER A ROBERT'S RULES ORDER.
I DO THINK, BY, AGAIN, JUST TO YOUR POINT IN TRYING TO SOLVE FUTURE ISSUES, I THINK BY GIVING THE MAYOR A VOTE, YOU LESS THAN THAT LIKELIHOOD OF THAT HAPPENING TOO, THOUGH.
SO I THINK THAT'S, IF WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE MULTIPLE ISSUES OF VOTING ISSUES, I THINK THAT THAT MAY BE OUR ANSWER.
BUT I, AGAIN, I'M WHAT DO YOU GUYS, THE COUNCIL PEOPLE, WHAT DO YOU THINK, UM, CHRIS, THE SECOND APPROACH THAT, THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, UM, DURING THE, THE FIRST MEETING WAS WHAT CONSTITUTES A MAJORITY? UH, BECAUSE OUR DEFINITION MAJORITY OF, UH, OF COURSE, IS BASED ON THE TOTAL NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEMBERS AS OPPOSED TO, UH, I FORGET WHO BROUGHT IT UP, BUT SOMEONE SAID, COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT.
HOW SIGNIFICANT OF AN IMPACT WOULD THAT BE? I MEAN, UH, HAVE YOU SEEN THAT IN, IN OTHER PLACES? AND, UH, YES.
UH, THAT, THAT'S A DISCUSSION POINT.
I MEAN, EVERY, I MEAN, SARAH IS USUALLY THE PERSON WHO GOES, LOOKS AT THE CHARTER
BUT YEAH, I MEAN, I, WE ROUTINELY GO BACK TO THE CHARTER AND SAY, OKAY, WE HAVE TO CONFIRM IS THIS COMMUNITY A MAJORITY OF THE QUORUM OR A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL? AND THEN DOES IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE IF IT'S AN ORDINANCE OR A RESOLUTION? AND IT CAN MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE.
I MEAN, IF YOU'VE GOT, IF YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COUNCIL, THE BODY, BY DEFINITION, YOU'RE, IF THE MAYOR VOTED, YOU'D BE LOOKING AT FIVE VOTES EVERY TIME.
BUT IF IT'S THE MAJORITY OF THE QUORUM, UH, YOU COULD BE A HAVE IN THEORY, HAVE A THREE TO TWO VOTE.
UM, I, I DON'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER FOR THAT.
UM, IN, I, I THINK IN COMMUNITIES, SOME COMMUNITIES HAVE HAD HISTORIES OF VERY, VERY, UM, HARMONIOUS RELATIONSHIPS AMONG THE COUNCIL FOR DECADES AND THOSE COMMUNITIES, UM, I THINK, UH, A MAJORITY OF THE QUORUM PROBABLY MAKE SOME SENSE, BUT I MAYBE IN DIVISIVE COMMUNITIES, IT, IT DOESN'T, I I, I DON'T REALLY KNOW.
I I DON'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER FOR YOU OTHER THAN, UH, AS THE LAW DIRECTOR, WHEN I GO BACK AND LOOK, I GO, OH GOSH, THIS IS GONNA BE A PROBLEM.
WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE A QUORUM.
IT COUNCIL'S DIVIDED, AND IT JUST, IT BECOMES A PROBLEM FOR STAFF, THE MANAGER.
YOU KNOW, IT, THERE'S NOT A GOOD ANSWER THERE.
UNLESS YOU WANNA LOWER THE BAR.
AND ALSO, I'LL ADD TO THAT, I THINK IT BE WHEN YOU HAVE A RULE WHERE IT'S A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL OF THE BODY AND YOU HAVE A BODY WHERE PEOPLE DON'T ATTEND, I'VE EXPERIENCED THAT IN OTHER CITIES WHERE WE'VE GONE SEVERAL MONTHS NOT BEING ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION BECAUSE PEOPLE WEREN'T SHOWING UP.
AND SO THAT CITY HAD TO TRY TO DEAL WITH, OKAY, WELL WE NEED TO START THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SOME SORT OF REPERCUSSIONS FOR NON-ATTENDANCE.
I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE MEMBERS THAT ARE ENGAGED AND ATTENDANCE ISN'T A PROBLEM, THEN HAVING IT BE, UM, MAJORITY OF THE BODY MAY NOT BE AN ISSUE.
AND I'LL ADD TO THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, AS THE NEW LAW DIRECTOR, THIS IS AN OBSERVATION, IS THAT, UH, FOR A, A CITY THE SIZE OF HUBER HEIGHTS, TO HAVE A NINE PERSON COUNCIL IS A PRETTY LARGE COUNCIL.
I MEAN, FIVE TYPICALLY IS THE NORM.
SO, I MEAN, YOU COULD MAKE POLICY ARGUMENTS ON EITHER SIDE.
THERE'S NO RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWER FUNDAMENTALLY, BUT EVEN CHANGING IT FROM MAJORITY OF THE QUORUM COULD SOLVE OUR PROBLEM WHEN PEOPLE DON'T SHOW UP, IT COULD.
AND, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I THINK THAT YOUR, YOUR CHARTER ALREADY SAYS IT, DOESN'T IT, TONY? THAT IT'S A, A QUORUM FOR QUORUM OF THE MAJORITY OF THE QUORUM FOR RESOLUTION, BUT A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL FOR ORDINANCE? NO, NO.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A, A QUORUM, A MAJORITY OF COUNSEL FOR EVERYTHING.
UM, YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK YOU HAVE TO THINK OF THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THAT.
I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF LOWERING, UH, THE, THE QUORUM, UH, MAINLY BECAUSE, UH, WHEN YOU DO THAT, IT, IT, THEN IT COMES DOWN TO WHO SHOWS UP.
[00:50:01]
KNOW, UH, AT A MEETING THAT YOU COULD HAVE DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT OUTCOMES DEPENDING ON WHO'S AT A PARTICULAR MEETING.AND, UM, I THINK TO YOUR POINT, CHRIS, UH, THE ISSUE OF, UM, CONSISTENCY WITH STAFF AND, AND THE DIRECTION OF COUNSEL, UM, THAT CREATES A LITTLE MORE VOLATILITY, UH, IN, IN OUTCOMES, UM, OVER TIME.
CHRIS, ATTORNEY JOHN GOTMAN OUT OF, UH, COLUMBUS HELPED US WRITE THIS.
AND I KNOW THAT HE HAD WORKED ON THE DUBLIN CITY OF DUBLIN CHARTER, AND I THINK MAYBE THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPOINTS THEIR MAYOR AS A COUNCIL MEMBER.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE ALL, UH, ALL ELECTED AS COUNCIL MEMBERS.
THAT COUNCIL ITSELF DESIGNATES THE MAYOR NOW I SEE THAT, YES.
SO THE REASON WHY I BRING THAT UP, WHEN WE'RE IDENTIFYING THESE CITIES THAT THE MAYOR GETS A VOTE, HOW'S HE ELECTED? YEAH.
YOU KNOW, IS IT AN INDEPENDENT MAYOR ORAL BALLOT? ALRIGHT.
IS, IS THAT RIVERSIDE? I NEVER WE'RE INDEPENDENT MAYOR BALLOT.
WELL, OBVIOUSLY AS YOU SEE BOTH, UM, I, IT IS INTERESTING WHEN THERE ARE, WHEN IT'S AN INTERNAL DECISION ON WHO WILL BE THE, THE COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE, UM, AND, AND HOW THAT PLAYS OUT.
UM, I'VE REPRESENTED TWO, UH, COUNCILS WHERE THEY DO IT.
NO ONE RUNS AS THE MAYOR OR THE PRESIDENT OF COUNCIL, DEPENDING ON THE TERMINOLOGY.
UM, BUT, UH, SO MARK, IF I'M CLEAR, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW AGAIN ON THAT? UH, JUST WHEN YOU IDENTIFY WHICH CITIES HAVE MAYORS THAT VOTE.
WERE THE ELECTED AS A MAYOR OR ELECTED AS A COUNCILMAN.
AND I THINK IN THE CASES THAT THEY'RE ELECTED AS A COUNCIL PERSON, THEY HAVE ADDED TO THEIR ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITY THE CEREMONIAL DUTIES OF A MAYOR.
THEY HAVE, AND IN OUR MAYOR MANAGES OR SUPERVISES THE THREE EMPLOYEES.
WE HAVE THE ATTORNEY, THE CLERK, AND THE CITY MANAGER.
SO OUR MAYOR HAS ADDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS, TYPICALLY.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT JOHN'S WELL, AGAIN, COMMON WAS BACK THEN BECAUSE NOT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE THE TIME.
AND, AND YOU KNOW, WHAT I'VE OB OBSERVED IS SOMETIMES IT'S REALLY NICE TO HAVE A MAYOR WHO'S RETIRED
AND THE MAYOR GETS PAID MORE THAN THE COUNCIL MEMBERS DO.
WE'RE, WE'RE ATTENDING CEREMONIAL FUNCTIONS, BEING THERE FOR THE RIBBON CUTTINGS, SUPERVISING THE CLERK, THE CORRECT ATTORNEY AND THE, UH, CITY MANAGER.
AND THERE ARE MODELS WHERE THERE IS A PRE A PRESIDENT OF COUNCIL WHO'S ELECTED, WHO, UH, RUNS THE MEETING.
AND THEN THE MAYOR IS A ANOTHER POSITION SEPARATE FROM THE RESIDENT COUNCIL.
SO I THINK TIP CITY MAYBE IS THAT WAY, BUT I KNOW THERE'S A NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEETINGS I'VE BEEN TO THAT HAVE BOTH THE PRESIDENT OF COUNCIL AND A MAYOR.
NO, I'M JUST, SO MATT, YOUR DAD DIDN'T SIT WITH COUNCIL.
I THINK HE SAT WITH THE STAFF AND YOUR DAD UNDER A STATUTORY FORM OF GOVERNMENT RAN THE CITY AND I THINK THE CITY MANAGER WORKED FOR HIM.
SO THE THOUGHT BEHIND JOHN GOTMAN HAVING THAT WRITTEN INTO OUR CHARTER, I'M NOT SURE, BUT I THINK IT WAS THE CHARTER COMMISSIONERS WHO DECIDED THAT.
AND I REMEMBER THERE WAS A LOT OF GIVE AND TAKE.
WELL, YOU KNOW, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE WARD REPRESENTATIVES, SO YOU HAVE DISTRICT REPRESENTATION AS WELL.
AND, AND I THINK THAT A LOGIC BEHIND THAT WOULD'VE BEEN ON WHY YOU HAVE THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL VOTING IS BECAUSE THAT PROBABLY DOES A BETTER JOB OF ENSURING THE INDIVIDUAL REPRESENTATION FOR THE, THE, THE AREAS OF THE CITY.
UM, AND SO IN THAT CONTEXT, THERE, THERE WAS A, A, A WILL OF THE, THE GROUP AND THE PEOPLE GROUP THAT.
SO I THINK MAINTAINING THAT CONSISTENCY IS PROBABLY AN APPROPRIATE STEP.
SO I, I THINK IT BEING OUTDATED MIGHT BE BECAUSE YOUR DAD WAS AN ADMINISTRATOR, RIGHT? YEAH.
YOU KNOW, HE WOULD GET OFF WORK AND GO TO CITY HALL AND WORK ALL NIGHT.
AND I THINK THE TRANSITION INTO A CHARTER STYLE, WE TRIED TO MIRROR SOME OF THAT.
WELL, HAVING JOHN GOTMAN HELP YOU AND ASSIST YOU WRITE YOUR ORIGINAL CHARTERS, THE BEST OF THE BEST, IS HE? OH YEAH.
JOHN GOTMAN IS CONSIDERED TO BE THE DEAN.
I THINK HE'S PROBABLY PASSED AWAY NOW.
HE HAS, WHEN I MET HIM, HE WAS QUITE OLD.
UH, BUT, UH, HE'S CONSIDERED TO BE THE, THE DEAN OF THE, OF OHIO MUNICIPAL LAW IS WELL REGARDED AS AN EX SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT.
SO TONY, YOU MENTIONED THAT NOT NECESSARILY WE COME UP WITH THESE ITEMS AND, AND, AND WE THINK THAT THEY WOULD BE APPROVED BY THE VOTERS, BUT I THINK IN THIS REGARD, IT WOULD BE APPROVED BY THE VOTERS HAVING THE MAYOR
[00:55:01]
VOTE AND ELIMINATE THE VETO.AND I THINK JOHN AND, AND, AND THE FOLKS DOWN AT THIS END OF THE DIOCESE MAKE GOOD POINTS.
I THINK, UH, I THINK THERE'S A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO THINK THE MAYOR ALREADY VOTES.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF TRUTH.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT THINK HE DOES VOTE.
I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WISH HE VOTED
WELL, AND I, I THINK I AGREE WITH SOMETHING TONY SAID EARLIER, AND THAT IS, UH, GETTING RID OF THE VETO, UH, IT IS A PALATABLE TRADE OFF FOR MOST PEOPLE.
IN OTHER WORDS, UM, WE NEED TO KEEP THIS AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE GOING TO THE VOTERS AND SIMPLY SAYING THAT, UM, THE MAYOR, UH, WE'RE LOOKING AT BRINGING THE MAYOR, UH, THE POWER OF A VOTE AND ELIMINATING THE VETO.
UH, THERE'S A BALANCE THERE THAT I THINK WOULD SIT WELL WITH THE VOTERS.
WELL, AND THAT'S JUST LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT, JUST TRYING TO FIX THE VOTE.
WHEREAS THIS, I THINK IS THE EASIEST WAY TO SAY WE'RE TRYING TO FIX VOTING.
WE'RE TRYING, YOU KNOW, SO I, I, YEAH.
I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT'S AN OUTDATED WAY IN WHICH WE DO IT NOW.
AND THEN ANOTHER INCONSISTENCY TO YOUR POINT IS WHEN YOU COUNT A QUORUM, THE MAYOR DOESN'T COUNT FOR AS PART OF THE QUORUM.
I, I DON'T, I, I GUESS I NEVER UNDER THE CHART, I GUESS I NEVER TUNED INTO THAT, HIM COUNTING AS THE
IT, HE COUNTS IN THE PERCENTAGE, BUT HE DOESN'T COUNT THAT QUORUM.
I GET, I THINK THIS SOLVES SOME OF THOSE INCONSISTENCIES THAT WE SEE.
I MEAN, AND WE'VE HAD TO GO ON BEFORE, RIGHT? YEAH.
'CAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE A FORUM.
WE'VE HAD SITUATIONS WHERE THE MAYOR HAS BEEN HERE AND, UH, FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE FIFTH COUNCIL MEMBER.
EVEN THOUGH HE, THE MAYOR WAS HERE, SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PROCEED WITH THE MEETING.
SO, SO THAT WOULD MAYBE BE A UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE.
WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO ADJUST THAT.
IF HE GETS TO VOTE, HE COUNTS AS A QUORUM MEMBER, HE COUNTS AS QUORUM MEMBER.
SO THAT WOULD BE ONE SECTION WHERE WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO YEAH.
ADJUST TONY, HISTORICALLY, WHEN, WHEN THERE, THERE APPEARS TO BE CONSENSUS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF PROCEDURAL DO, DO YOU VOTE THEN TO SAY WE WANNA SEE A DRAFT OF AN AMENDED CHARTER SECTION? HOW DOES THAT WORK? THAT WAS, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY WAY OF KIND OF WRAPPING UP THE DISCUSSION
I KNOW IT'S ON OUR ACTION ITEMS FOR NEXT MONTH TO TALK ABOUT ALL THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST WEEK WHEN IT COMES TO THIS ALONG WITH NOW THIS.
SO, UH, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, UM, WE CAN AUTHORIZE TONY TO COME UP WITH A DRAFT OR SOMETHING FOR NEXT, FOR OUR MAY 6TH MEETING, I THINK IT IS.
AND ADD THAT TO OUR ACTION ITEM DISCUSSION.
CAN I ASK ONE QUESTION REAL QUICK? SURE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT, BUT WITHIN THAT VERBIAGE, CAN WE MAKE A COMMENT THAT WE WILL BE CHANGING WHAT QUORUM MEANS HOLISTICALLY, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK AND CHANGE THIS AND THIS AND THIS.
SO HERE'S WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE IS IF WE'RE GONNA PULL ALL THESE POINTS TOGETHER IN, IN DISCUSSION AROUND VOTING AND, AND ALL THE MISCELLANEOUS ELEMENTS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED IN THE DIFFERENT SECTIONS, UM, IF, IF IT WAS THE COMMISSION'S WISH, I WOULD COME BACK WITH KIND OF LIKE A ROADMAP OF ALL THE COMPONENT PIECES THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.
AND THEN I THINK THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE FOR THIS COMMISSION TO HAVE A ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT, UH, WHICH MODEL YOU THINK YOU WOULD LIKE TO PURSUE.
AND WHEN WE HAVE THAT DIRECTION, UM, THEN LEGAL AND MYSELF WOULD WORK TOGETHER TO DRAFT THE ACTUAL CHARTER AMENDMENT LANGUAGE, UH, THAT WOULD MAKE THE CHANGES.
AND THEN WHEN THAT'S BROUGHT BACK TO YOU AND IT REACHES A LEVEL OF SATISFACTION, IF IT DOES AT SOME POINT, UH, THEN YOU WOULD FORMALLY VOTE TO MAKE THAT A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL AND, AND THEN COUNSEL WOULD TAKE THAT DIRECTION.
SO, SO IF I'M HEARING YOU, 'CAUSE I HAVE TO REPEAT SOMETIMES TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IT.
BUT THEN WE WOULD JUST HAVE A LIST OF THOSE CHARTER AMENDMENTS THAT MIGHT BE IMPACTED, WHICH THEN HAS A QUESTION THAT YOU DO NOT NEED TO ANSWER TODAY.
BUT THIS WILL BE THE BURNING QUESTION THAT COUNCIL WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH.
AND YOU MIGHT WANNA MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THOUGH, IS DOES THIS ALL GO ON AS ONE BALLOT ITEM TO CHANGE THE ENTIRE CHARTER, OR DOES YOU VOTE ON EACH ONE INDIVIDUALLY AS A INDIVIDUAL ITEM TO VOTE ON IT? IF THINGS TEND TO BE PRO FORMA AND THEIR CLEANUP ONE IS JUST SO MUCH EASIER.
[01:00:01]
BUT IF YOU HAVE CONCERN AND YOU DON'T WANT TO JEOPARDIZE CLEANUP BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETHING POTENTIALLY CONTROVERSIAL, THEN YOU, YOU CAN DIVIDE THAT ONE UP.LAST TIME THEY WERE ALL INDIVIDUAL TO SUBJECT MATTER.
SO, BUT YEAH, I DON'T WANNA HAVE TO, WE DID FIVE MONTH THOUGH OVER TWO VOTING S WE DID IT OVER TWO ELECTION 'CAUSE WE HAD SO MANY YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT.
WE DID ONE, UH, AT THE GENERAL ELECTION AND ONE AT THE PRIMARY ELECTION.
SO UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, WE'LL HAVE TONY GIVE US THE ROADMAP FOR THE VARIOUS THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BETWEEN LAST MONTH OR LAST MEETING IN THIS MEETING.
AND THEN NEXT MEETING WE'LL HAVE THAT DISCUSSION TO KIND OF FINE TUNE THE DIRECTION WE WANT HIM TO GO IN.
AND THEN WE'LL START LOOKING AT DRAFT PROPOSALS IN FUTURE MEETINGS BASED ON NEXT MONTH'S DISCUSSION OR NEXT MEETING'S DISCUSSION.
'CAUSE UNTIL YOU HAVE A REAL, UH, SENSE OF, YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT TO RECOMMEND IT, IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, A WASTE OF TIME AND RESOURCES TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME WRITING LANGUAGE IF THAT'S NOT A DIRECTION WE'RE ULTIMATELY EVEN GONNA LOOK AT.
SO, BUT THE PLAN IS TO GET THIS UNDER NOVEMBER GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT.
THAT WAS THE, UH, THE GOAL, WHICH MEANS, UH, WE'D HAVE TO, UH, HAVE THIS BEFORE COUNCIL BY SAY THE END OF JUNE.
WE, WE NEED TO HAVE SOME PRETTY SOLID DRAFTING IN THAT ROADMAP OF DRAFTING FOR REVIEW BY JUNE, I WOULD SAY.
BECAUSE I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE FIRST MEETING THAT ANY AMENDMENT UH, NEEDS TO BE TO THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS 90 DAYS PRIOR TO THE ELECTION.
SO THAT MEANS COUNCIL HAS TO ACT ON THE RECOMMENDATION PRIOR TO THAT 90 DAYS.
SO IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO HAVING TONY MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT ROADMAP FOR NEXT MEETING'S DISCUSSION? SURE.
THEN HEARING NONE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO ARTICLE SIX.
UH, SO SECTION 6.01, APPOINTMENT QUALIFICATIONS AND COMPENSATION.
SO TONY MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS ONE ITEM THAT DIDN'T PASS, UM, LAST REVIEW THAT WAS IN 6.01 RELATED TO RESIDENCY.
UM, I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD PROBABLY HAVE A DISCUSSION AT LEAST ABOUT THAT.
GREG, JOHN, YOU WERE ON THE LAST COMMISSION.
SO, AND CHRIS CAN SPEAK TO THIS.
SO THERE WAS A SUPREME COURT DECISION RULING, UH, EVEN IN HOME RULE CITIES RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF AN ADJOINING COUNTY.
UM, I MENTIONED IT NOT 'CAUSE IT AFFECTS ME.
I OBVIOUSLY CAME FROM OUTSIDE THE REGION.
UM, IF I'M GONNA MOVE, I MIGHT AS WELL MOVE TO THE CITY I'M WORKING IN.
UM, IT WAS ALSO CONTROVERSIAL AT THE TIME, EVEN THOUGH IT COULDN'T BE ENFORCED THROUGH CHARTER OR THE COURTS ULTIMATELY ANYWAY, I GUESS IT DOESN'T QUITE MATTER IF IT'S IN THERE.
UM, THE REASON THAT THE CITY CAN GET AROUND IT IS BY INCLUDING THAT IN MY EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT.
SO I SIGNED MY EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT, I AGREE TO BE A RESIDENT, THEREFORE I CAN BE BOUND BY THAT.
UM, IS THIS SOMETHING WE WANNA TRY AND CLEAN UP OR LET THE, THE ISSUE LIE HERE IS MY OPINION, UM, AND THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE A DECISION FOR COUNSEL AND, UM, OUR RESIDENT MEMBERS.
UM, DOES IT RESTRICT COUNCIL IN FINDING TALENT, UH, ESPECIALLY LOCALLY IF THAT TALENT DOESN'T WANNA MOVE FROM, FROM RIVERSIDE TO HUBER HEIGHTS? THE FLIP SIDE I UNDERSTAND IS THAT THE MANAGER IS MANAGING THE CITY, MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS ON WATER UTILITY RATE INCREASES THAT WOULD AFFECT THEM AS WELL AS THE REST OF THE RESIDENTS.
SO I'M JUST GONNA LAY IT OUT THERE AND MAYBE LET YOU GUYS GIVE YOUR INPUT.
I, I PERSONALLY DON'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH ANYONE LIVING OUTSIDE OF THE CITY AND WORKING SOMEWHERE ELSE, BECAUSE, LET'S FACE IT, MAJORITY OF HUBER HEIGHTS WORKS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY AND LIVES HERE.
UM, IT, I DO FIND IT, IT'S PROBABLY, ESPECIALLY NOW WITH THE HOUSING MARKET THE WAY IT IS AND MOVING FORWARD, WHO KNOWS WHAT THE HOUSING MARKET'S GONNA BE.
UM, IF FOR SOME REASON YOU DECIDED TO MOVE ON TO THE CITY OF CINCINNATI OR WHATEVER, AND WE FIND TALENT IN MADISON COUNTY AND THEY DON'T WANNA MOVE FROM MADISON COUNTY TO HUBER HEIGHTS, THEY WANNA MAKE THAT 45 MINUTE DRIVE OR 40 MINUTE DRIVE TO HUBERT HEIGHTS EVERYWHERE.
I, I CAN'T, YOU KNOW, IF COUNCIL DECIDED THAT THAT PERSON IS GOOD FOR THE CITY, BUT THEY LIVE 40 MINUTES AWAY, ARE WE SHOOTING OURSELVES IN THE FOOT BECAUSE WE DON'T, BECAUSE WE, BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIVE IN HEBREW HEIGHTS? NO.
UM, BECAUSE THE OHIO SUPREME RULE HAS RULE THAT THAT IS AN UNENFORCEABLE PROVISION.
SO IT, IT, IT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE IT OUT BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS, WELL, I SHOULDN'T SAY EVERYBODY, BUT THE PEOPLE THAT IT, THAT THAT NEED TO KNOW KNOW
[01:05:01]
THAT IT'S NOT ENFORCEABLE.BUT THEN YOU GET INTO THIS ISSUE OF, UH, IS IT MISLEADING CITIZENS TO BELIEVE SOMETHING EXISTS THAT DOESN'T? UM, BUT THEN THE FLIP SIDE OF THAT IN MY MIND SOMETIMES IS PEOPLE WILL SAY, WELL, THAT, THAT MEANS IF WE'RE VOTING ON IT, THEN WE HAVE A CHOICE.
UH, BUT IT'S THE ONLY WAY THAT WE CAN REMOVE IT IS, I SHOULDN'T TAKE, TAKE THAT BACK.
I HAVE TO LOOK AT YOUR CHARTER, BUT SOME CHARTER AMENDMENTS I THINK MIGHT BE ABLE TO BE DONE IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
BUT BOTTOM LINE, I WOULD SAY THAT THIS IS PROBABLY LEFT TO A BETTER, AS A STANDALONE CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT YOU DON'T BUNDLE UP WITH EVERYTHING.
BECAUSE THE REALITY IS IN EVERY MANAGER CONTRACT I'VE DRAFTED THE FIRST QUESTION THAT'S ASKED, WILL YOU MOVE? AND IF THEY REALLY WANT THAT PERSON, THAT BECOMES THE NEGOTIATION.
IF YOU WON'T LIVE IN THE CITY, WILL YOU LIVE IN THE TOWNSHIP? WILL YOU, WHERE WILL YOU LIVE? WHERE ARE YOU PLANNING ON LIVING? AND THEN YOU MAKE THE DECISION.
AND IF IT'S A DEAL BREAKER, IT'S A DEAL BREAKER.
UM, RICK, I MEAN, YOU, YOU, YOU, YOU LIVE IT, YOU KNOW IT.
I MEAN, YOU, YOU'VE TALKED TO OTHER MANAGERS, I ASSUME THAT'S WHAT GOES ON.
SOMETIMES THERE WOULD BE A MANAGER WHO WOULD LOCALLY WOULD PROBABLY NOT CONSIDER THE POSITION IF THEY HAD TO MOVE INTO THE CITY.
BUT AGAIN, IF IT'S NOT IN THE CHARTER, IT LEAVES IT UP TO COUNCIL TO DECIDE IF THAT'S SOMETHING THEY WANT TO DO OR WANT TO WAIVE.
MY RECOMMENDATION TO TO, TO THIS COMMITTEE OR THIS COMMISSION IS, I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON THE ISSUE.
I I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL THAT IT BE REMOVED, BUT DEPENDING ON WHAT THE REST OF THE CHARTER AMENDMENTS LOOK LIKE, FIGURE OUT WHERE YOU PUT THAT IN.
AND, AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME WITH IT.
BUT AGAIN, I THINK THAT, THAT THAT'S WHETHER OR NOT THE COMMISSION THINKS IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU HAVE A CHARTER THAT MIRRORS NOW EXISTING OHIO LAW.
UM, MY PERSONAL OPINION AGAIN IS THAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THAT CITIZENS KNOW WHAT IT, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S IN WRITING IS IMPORTANT AS YOUR BIBLE IS CORRECT.
'CAUSE IT WILL BE MISLEADING TO SOME PEOPLE IF IT, IF IT MIRRORS, IF IT MIRRORS THE CURRENT STATUTES, THEN RIGHT.
I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE REMOVE THAT QUALIFICATION.
OR, OR I CAN'T THINK OF THE TERM, BUT YOU KNOW, BASICALLY IF WE STRIKE THE LAST SENTENCE YES, THEN IT'S GOOD.
AND THAT WAS OUR RECOMMENDATION LAST TIME,
AND IT DIDN'T PASS AND IT DIDN'T PASS.
THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF, UH, AND IT DIDN'T PASS.
SO IT WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT DID NOT, AND I WILL SAY IT AGAIN.
I THINK WE SHOULD REMOVE THE LAST SENTENCE.
AND I THINK IT'S, WHAT ABOUT CHANGING THE LAST SENTENCE TO IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOU LIVE IN THE CITY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.
HOW ABOUT WE PUT YOUR VERBIAGE THAT YOU SAID THAT THAT COUNCIL WILL, AND I DON'T HAVE THE WORDS TO SAY, BUT THAT THAT'S WHAT SAYING THAT COUNCIL WILL NEGOTIATE WITH, YOU KNOW, THE CITY MANAGER OWN RESIDENCY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
RIGHT? I I DON'T, YOU COULD ALSO DO IT MORE BLANKET INSTEAD OF JUST REMOVING IT.
YOU COULD SAY, UM, RESIDENCY OF THE CITY MANAGER WILL BE DEPENDENT ON, UH, EXISTING OHIO LAW.
AND, AND, AND AS NEGOTIATED BY COUNCIL AND AS NEGOTIATED BY COUNCIL.
AND I ACTUALLY THINK THAT WOULD SPUR MAYBE A BETTER VOTE THAN WE HAD LAST TIME.
'CAUSE I THINK EVERYBODY SAW IT AS WELL, THIS GUY'S GONNA LIVE THIS GUY CLEVELAND AND COME HERE AND TELL US WHAT TO DO.
AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WERE INTENDING.
WELL, WE HAD ALL GROUP, UH, RESIDENCY DENIERS.
YOU KNOW FOR SURE SAID NO MATTER WHAT THE SUPREME COURT YEAH.
THAT WE STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO YEAH, I WOULD TERMINATION.
BECAUSE THEN IT'S JUST SELLING IT AS WE'RE UPDATING IT TO MATCH.
I THINK THAT'S, IS THERE ANYONE OPPOSED TO THAT? NO.
SO TONY, IS THERE A WAY WE COULD ADD THAT FOR NEXT, SINCE I THINK THIS IS PRETTY CUT AND DRY, JUST ADD IT TO THE NEXT ACTION ITEM FOR NEXT WEEK, FOR NEXT MEETING.
WE CAN, WE CAN DRAFT UP LANGUAGE ON THAT PRETTY QUICKLY, TONY.
AND JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS, I WILL CONTINUE TO LIVE IN THE CITY HERE.
I WAS GONNA SAY FOR YOUR CONTRACT, RIGHT.
UH, IT WILL BE PORTRAYED AS THEY ARE REMOVING THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT FOR THE CITY MANAGER.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY DID LAST TIME.
AND, UH, THERE WAS NO AMOUNT OF RATIONAL ARGUMENT THAT WOULD CONVINCE THEM OTHERWISE.
SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO BE REALLY, REALLY CAREFUL IN HOW THIS IS WORDED.
I, I LIKED WHAT WAS SUGGESTED.
I DO, UH, IF, IF WE WANTED TO HAVE A GLIMPSE OF A CHANCE OF PASSING BECAUSE, UH, AGAIN,
[01:10:01]
THEIR MESSAGE WON'T BE, UH, AND I USE THEY AS A GENERAL TERM OF THAT DARK SHADOWY BODY OUT THERE THAT SEEMS TO, UH, UH, THINK THERE'S A CONSPIRACY GOING ON.BUT THEY'RE GONNA COME FORWARD AND SAY, OH LOOK, THEY'RE ELIMINATING THE RESIDENTS REQUIREMENT FOR CITY MANAGER NOW.
SO, UH, THE WORDING HAS TO, HAS TO REALLY FUNCTION FOR THE VOTERS SO THAT THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND NO AMOUNT OF TELLING 'EM, UH, RESIDENCY RULES ARE, UM, ILLEGAL.
DIDN'T WORK LAST TIME, JUDGE JOHN.
AND CHRIS, UH, WE TALKED AT ONE OF THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS THAT, UH, ONE THING WE COULD DO BETTER WAS VOTER EDUCATION AROUND THE CHARTER AMENDMENTS.
WE DIDN'T DO MUCH OF THAT THE LAST TIME BEYOND ADVERTISES REQUIRED IN A NEWSPAPER OR GENERAL CIRCULATION OF WHAT ALL THE AMENDMENTS WERE.
SO I THINK, UH, THE VOTER EDUCATION IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THIS PROCESS ALSO.
UM, THE, UH, ARE YOU FAMILIAR, HAVE ANY OF YOU SEEN THE CLAYTON CHARTERS A CONVERSATION FOR ANOTHER TIME WITH THE CLAYTON CHARTER AS IT RELATES TO SUPPORTING OF LEVY CAMPAIGNS AND OTHER ITEMS? RIGHT.
UM, SO I WAS INVOLVED, UH, TAKING ON THE STATE AUDITOR WHEN THEY, UH, CHARGED THE BROOK SCHOOL BOARD, UH, WITH CRIMINAL CONDUCT BASED UPON, UH, THE EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE CAMPAIGN LEVY IN RESPONSE TO THAT, I BELIEVE IT'S CLAYTON, UH, HAD A CHARTER AMENDMENT PASSED THAT ALLOWS THEM TO DO SIGNIFICANT THINGS IN USING PUBLIC MONEY TO SUPPORT, UH, UH, INITIATIVE.
I, I'M NOT USING THE WORD INITIATIVE IN A LEGAL SENSE, BUT, UH, PROMOTING, UH, BALLOT AND BALLOT ITEMS, LEVIES OTHER THINGS, WHICH I, I AM INTRIGUED BY.
AND IF THIS GROUP IS INTERESTED IN SEEING THAT, I WOULD, UH, GET A COPY BEFORE YOU, 'CAUSE YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN THAT.
AND I, AND I, AND I WILL TELL YOU ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I LIKE ABOUT IT, WHETHER I LIKE THAT EXACT LANGUAGE OR NOT, 'CAUSE IT'S PRETTY BROAD, IS THAT WE SPENT SO MUCH TIME, YOU PROBABLY HAVE ALREADY HAD THAT BEFORE YOU GOT A LEVY GOING ON.
AND YOU SAY, WHAT CAN I SAY? WHAT CAN I NOT SAY? AND ONE OF THE ABSURDITIES IS FOR THE ELECTED OFFICIALS.
SO THE VICE MAYOR MARK CAMPBELL, YOU GO AND YOU SAY, OR OR TONY GOES, THE MANAGER GOES, YOU READ THAT, THAT DECISION COMING OUT OF THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE, YOU HAVE TO TELL THEM, I AM NOT HERE IN MY OFFICIAL CAPACITY.
I AM HERE AS A CITIZEN OF HUBER HEIGHTS TO TELL YOU WHY WE NEED THIS LIVE, THIS, THIS LEVY.
YOU HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE THERE, TONY, THAT YOU GUYS THAT YOU SHOW THE BOOK, SHOW YOU ARE NOT ON THE CLOCK.
AND IF YOU READ THE DECISION CLEARLY ABOUT THE ONLY TIME AN ELECTED OFFICIAL CAN MAKE THE STATEMENTS IS WHEN YOU'RE ON THE DS UP HERE.
NOW HOW IN THE HE DOUBLE HOCKEY STICKS, DOES IT MAKE ANY SENSE THAT THE SAME ELECTED OFFICIALS VOTE YES, I WANT TO PUT A LEVY ON THE BALLOT AND THEN THEY CAN'T GO TALK TO THE CITIZENS ABOUT WHY THEY WANT IT ON THE BALLOT.
WHY AM I VOTING? YES, IT'S THE DUMBEST THING I'VE EVER SEEN.
UH, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT LANGUAGE.
I'VE BEEN FALLING OPPOSED TO SEEING THAT LANGUAGE TO CONSIDER.
I CAN PROBABLY PULL IT UP NOW, BUT THAT'S A EFFECTIVE MEETING.
ONE MEETING, MEETING THE NEXT ONE SO THAT WE, WE GOT A LOT OF, HAVE TOO MUCH AT THE NEXT, WE GOT A LOT AT THE NEXT MEETING.
UM, ANYTHING ELSE ON 6.01? OKAY, SO MOVING ON TO 6.02 HOURS AND DUTIES, EVERYBODY.
JUST CURIOUS IT, JUST THE WAY THE LANGUAGE IS, YOU KNOW, DO THEY NEED A REASON? LIKE DO THEY HAVE TO STATE A VALID REASON? JUST THE WAY IT'S WORDED SEEMS VERY OPEN.
UH, ALL OF, WELL, THE CITY MANAGER'S BOUND BY A CONTRACT.
SO IT WOULD, IT, THE REMOVAL WOULD HAVE TO BE UNDER THE CONDITIONS OR TERMS OF, OF THAT EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT.
UH, FOR PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF AND THE OTHER NON-UNION PEOPLE HERE AT THE CITY WERE ATWELL EMPLOYEES.
SO YOU CAN BE DISMISSED FOR ANY REASON.
UM, AS I'M AN APPOINTED POSITION, THEN MINE WOULD BE ALSO BY FIVE VOTES OF COUNSEL TO DISMISS.
BUT THE AVERAGE PERSON HERE WORKING AT THE CITY NON-UNIONIZED, IS A ATWELL EMPLOYEE.
[01:15:01]
A GREAT QUESTION, HOWEVER, AND RICK, I HAVEN'T SEEN YOUR CONTRACT, BUT I, IS THERE JUST CAUSE LANGUAGE IN THERE? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.HERE, HERE'S THE WAY MOST CITY MANAGERS, I GUESS, PROTECT THEMSELVES.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE IN A POSITION INFLUENCED BY POLITICS, WHICH MAY NOT ALWAYS CARRY A GOOD OR VALID REASON FOR OUR REMOVAL, WHICH IS WHY MOST CITY MANAGER CONTRACTS HAVE SOME TYPE OF SEVERANCE PACKAGE INCLUDED IN IT.
AND SOME CONTRACTS THEN ALSO CAN HAVE JUST CAUSE LANGUAGE SO THAT YEAH, YOU CAN REMOVE, BUT WITHOUT THE, JUST CAUSE YOU'RE GONNA END UP HAVING TO EITHER PAY THE UNEXPIRED TERM OR SEVERANCE OR SOME OTHER NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT TO GET THEM OUT.
AND YOU'LL ALMOST NEVER SEE A CITY MANAGER LEAVE INVOLUNTARILY.
ALTHOUGH EXTERNALLY IT MAY APPEAR VOLUNTARILY, BUT IT'S INVOLUNTARY WITHOUT A SEVERANCE PACKAGE, IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
AND THE ONLY REASON I ASK, 'CAUSE WHAT HAPPENED THE LAST TIME, IF SOME PEOPLE DECIDE, HMM, WE WANNA SLOW THINGS DOWN AGAIN, WE'LL GET RID OF THAT GUY AND THEN JUST NOT SHOW UP FOR VOTES.
THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO, UH, VOTE TO YEAH.
AND THEN, AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS THAT WOULD ADDRESS THAT IS THAT MANY OF THE CONTRACTS, AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOURS RICK SAYS, BUT THEY HAVE A ANNUAL AUTOMATIC ANNUAL RENEWAL MUST GIVE NOTICES GIVEN NOT TO RENEW.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM 6.03? IS THERE ANY INTEREST IN CHANGING THAT FROM FIVE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL TO SAY JUST LIKE THE VICE MAYOR
NO, I LIKE YOU, BUT I'M STILL GONNA VOTE NO, BECAUSE WHO'S VICE MAYOR NEXT YEAR.
SO THEN MOVING ON TO 6 0 4, ACTING MANAGER, ANY PRETTY BENIGN.
SO THAT WOULD THEN TAKE US INTO ITEM NUMBER FOUR OF OUR AGENDA ACTION ITEMS. UH, ALL OF US WERE EMAILED THE TRACKING FORM, UH, THAT KIND OF TRACKS OUR ACTION ITEMS. I'D BE HAPPY TO WALK US THROUGH THIS.
SO, UH, ITEM ONE, UM, THE FOLLOW UP WAS, UH, RESEARCH WITH THE LAW DIRECTOR TO DETERMINE IF ARTICLE ONE IS THE APPROPRIATE SECTION OF THE CITY CHARTER TO REVIEW A PUBLIC VOTE ON ANNEXATION AS IT PERTAINS TO BOUNDARIES.
SO, UH, I KNOW SARAH SAID SHE HAD SOME INFORMATION ON THIS, AND JUST TO GIVE YOU THE CONTEXT, WE HAD A CITIZEN HERE, UH, LAST TIME WHO HAD, UH, WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE FOR ADMITTING THE CHARTER TO PRECLUDE, UM, ANNEXATION WITHOUT A PUBLIC VOTE, APPROVING AN ANNEXATION.
SO FROM MY RESEARCH, UM, ANNEXATIONS AND THE PROCESS FOR THAT IS SET FORTH IN THE OHIO REVISED CODE.
IT'S A STATUTORY PROCESS AND IT'S CONSIDERED A GENERAL LAW.
SO, YOU KNOW, ACCORDING TO HOME RULE HOME, YOU CAN'T ENACT LAWS THAT ARE IN CONFLICT WITH GENERAL LAWS.
THERE'S A CASE ACTUALLY HERE IN THE SECOND DISTRICT IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY WHERE, UM, I THINK IT WAS, I ACTUALLY BROUGHT THE CASE WITH ME.
IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN CITY OF UNION TRIED TO DO AND ACT A SIMILAR, ACTUALLY, THEY HAD A SIMILAR PROVISION IN THEIR CHARTER WHERE, UM, ANNEXATIONS ANNEXATIONS THAT THE CITY WERE TO BRING FORTH HAD TO BE VOTED ON BY THE ELECTORS.
AND THAT WAS FOUND TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND IN CONFLICT WITH GENERAL LAWS.
SO ESSENTIALLY, AND THE COURT SAID THAT THAT PROVISION IN THEIR CHARTER WAS VOID.
SO I, YOU COULD PUT IT IN YOUR CHARTER, BUT IT WOULD BE A VOID PROVISION AND IT WOULD NOT BE UPHELD IN A COURT.
THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO NOT
WELL, THANK YOU FOR THE, YOUR RESEARCH AND, UM, THE, THE QUICK RESPONSE AND TURNAROUND.
JUST, YOU REALLY JUST GOT IT TODAY.
SO YEAH, JUST FOR, FOR MY KNOWLEDGE, AND I, I HATE TO INTERRUPT LIKE THIS, BUT DOES OHIO REVISED CODE SUPERSEDE LOCAL ORDINANCES IN EVERY NO.
THAT'S A HOME, THAT'S THE HOME RULE DISCUSSION.
AND SO WHEN IT COMES TO LAWS OF GENERAL CONCERN THAT IMPACT ALL THE CITIZENS OF OHIO, IN THEORY, IT, IT, IT BECOMES MORE COMPLICATED THAN IT SOUNDS BECAUSE ANY CITY MANAGER WILL TELL YOU THAT THE OHIO LEGISLATURE KEEPS TRYING TO INTERFERE WITH HOME RULE.
UM, BUT THERE'S A GENERAL PROPOSITION.
[01:20:01]
HOME RULE POWERS ARE BROAD AND WE CAN DO WHAT WE WANT.THAT'S A STARTING PLACE ON ASSUMPTION.
SO WE'LL BRING CLOSURE TO THAT ONE WITH THAT, UH, LEGAL OPINION.
UH, ITEM TWO, UM, MR. SHAW, UM, WHO WAS PRESENT HERE PREVIOUSLY AT THE MEETING, UH, WAS GOING TO SUBMIT SOME INFORMATION ABOUT REMOVING THE SECOND PARAGRAPH FROM THE PREAMBLE OF THE CITY CHARTER.
I DID NOT RECEIVE THAT, UH, SUBMISSION.
SO, UH, UNLESS THERE'S AN OBJECTION, I THINK WE JUST MOVE ON AND, AND UNLESS WE RECEIVE THAT AT SOME POINT, UH, NOT AN OBJECTION, TONY, BUT A, AFTER READING IT AND READING IT AGAIN, AND I THINK READING IT FOR A THIRD TIME, UH, I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT THE REASONING WOULD BE BEHIND REMOVING IT.
IT, UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S ANTIQUATED OR, UM, UH, OUTTA PLACE IN OUR, IN OUR CHARTER.
UM, THIS IS WHERE IT SAYS, UH, THROUGH THIS CHARTER, WE EXPRESS OUR BELIEFS AND CONVEY OUR TRUST.
SO ITS CONCEPT SHALL LONG DOOR WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE.
I'M SORRY, WITHOUT REGARD TO AGE, RACE, COLOR, SEX, MARITAL STATUS, HANDICAP, RELIGION, ANCESTRY, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN.
UH, SO I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT, UH, WHAT THE BEEF IS WITH IT.
CAN ANYONE GIVE, I THINK, I THINK NANCY ASKED HIM THAT AND HE SAID HE WOULD RATHER PRESENT IT IN WRITING THAN TALK ABOUT IT AT THE MEETING, WHICH IS WHY WE WERE WAITING FOR THAT PRESENTATION FROM HIM.
DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT? I SURE DO.
UM, AND I DON'T WANT TO GO OFF THE RAILS, BUT, UM, THERE'S A REASON WHY THIS SECOND PARAGRAPH IS IN HERE.
UM, IF WE JUST ON A BASE LEVEL, LOOK AT WHERE WE ARE AS A SOCIETY, WE HAVEN'T REACHED A POINT TO WHERE WE CAN TAKE THIS OUT OF OUR, OF OUR CHARTER YET.
UM, THERE'S STILL SOME DOG WHISTLES BEING MADE.
THERE'S STILL SOME THINGS BEING SAID, WHETHER IT BE IN PERSON ON THE INTERNET MM-HMM.
I MEAN, WE STILL, OUR, OUR, OUR CONSTITUTION, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, IT SAYS THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.
WE'RE STILL NOT AT THAT POINT YET, IN MY OPINION.
SO I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR ANYBODY ELSE.
I'M JUST SPEAKING FOR THOMAS DILLINGHAM
IN MY OPINION, WE ARE NOT AT A POINT TO WHERE WE CAN TAKE THIS OUT YET.
THOMAS, THAT SPEAKS TO EXACTLY WHAT I WAS FEELING ON THIS AS WELL.
AND I THINK IT'S VISIONARY, I MEAN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, CHRIS, IT HAS NO FORCE OF LAW IN ANY WAY, RIGHT? I MEAN, BUT I WOULD DESCRIBE IT AS ASPIRATIONAL.
OKAY, SO WE'LL MOVE ON PAST THAT ONE.
UM, ITEM UH, THREE WAS, UH, THERE WAS A QUESTION ASKED ABOUT, UM, THE LAST THREE ELECTIONS AND HOW MANY CANDIDATES WE HAD HAD, UM, IN THOSE ELECTIONS, UH, RELATIVE TO, UM, THE DISCUSSION ABOUT TERM LIMITS.
SO I PUT TOGETHER THE INFORMATION FOR EVERYBODY.
CHRIS, WOULD YOU LIKE ONE? YEAH, I'M LOOKING FOR IT.
I I'M SURE I GOT THE EMAIL ADDRESS.
THIS WAS, UH, SOMETHING I'VE DONE TOGETHER SEPARATELY FOR THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
SO, UH, IT WAS A QUESTION WAS ASKED, CAN WE GET THAT INFORMATION FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS? UH, SO THAT WAS 2019 21 AND TWO THREE.
UH, THOSE ARE THE YEARS OF COUNCIL ELECTIONS.
UM, SO YOU'LL SEE FROM THIS DATA THAT IN, UH, THE PRIMARY OF, UH, 2019, THERE WAS NOT ANY PRIMARY FOR MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL POSITIONS.
UM, IN THE GENERAL ELECTION IN 2019, THERE WERE THREE UNCONTESTED, UH, CITY COUNCIL RACES, MEANING THERE WAS ONLY, UM, ONE CANDIDATE FOR THE POSITION AVAILABLE.
THERE WAS ONE CONTESTED CITY COUNCIL RACE, UH, IN 2019.
THAT WAS THE AT LARGE RACE, AND THERE WERE TWO CANDIDATES.
AND THEN IF YOU WANT THE VERY SPECIFIC INFORMATION,
[01:25:01]
I'VE ATTACHED THAT FOR EACH OF THE ELECTIONS REFERENCED HERE.UH, THAT SHOWS YOU THE, UH, THE CANDIDATES THAT RAN FOR WHAT OFFICE AND WHAT THE, UH, FINAL VOTE TOTALS WERE, UM, FOR THOSE RACES.
THEN IN, UH, 2021, UH, THERE WAS A PRIMARY, UM, IN ONE CONTESTED RACE.
THERE WERE THREE CANDIDATES THAT FILED FOR, UH, WARD THREE.
UM, AND THE MAYOR'S RACE WAS ALSO CONTESTED WITH, UH, THREE CANDIDATES.
SO UNDER OUR CHARTER, IF THERE'S MORE THAN TWO PEOPLE RUNNING FOR THE SAME OFFICE, THEN, UM, THERE'S AN AUTOMATIC PRIMARY TO, UH, REDUCE THAT DOWN TO TWO CANDIDATES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION.
SO, UH, THAT INFORMATION IS ALSO ATTACHED.
AND THEN, UH, FROM THAT PRIMARY INTO THE GENERAL, UH, ELECTION IN NOVEMBER OF 21, UH, THERE WERE FOUR CONTESTED CITY COUNCIL RACES, UH, WITH TWO CANDIDATES IN EACH RACE.
UM, BUT I DID MAKE A NOTION, UH, NOTATION THAT, UH, IN ONE OF THOSE CONTESTED RACES, A SITTING, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER FROM ANOTHER SEAT WAS RUNNING AS A CANDIDATE, UH, FOR A SEPARATE SEAT ON COUNCIL.
AND THEN IN THE MAYOR'S RACE, UM, THERE WERE TWO CANDIDATES IN THE GENERAL ELECTION.
UM, AND AGAIN, THERE WAS A CANDIDATE WHO WAS A SITTING COUNCIL MEMBER WHO WAS RUNNING FOR MAYOR AT, AT, UH, FROM A SAFE SEAT.
UM, SO THAT INFORMATION'S ATTACHED.
AND THEN IN OUR LAST, UH, ELECTION CYCLE FOR, UH, CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS IN 2023, UH, THERE WAS NO, UH, PRIMARY AS THERE WERE NO, UM, MORE THAN, UH, TWO CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR ANY ONE OFFICE.
AND THEN IN THE GENERAL ELECTION IN, UH, NOVEMBER, THERE WERE TWO UNCONTESTED RACES.
UM, WARDS ONE AND TWO, UM, OR YEAH, TWO UNCONTESTED AND ONE AND TWO, AND THEN TWO CONTESTED, UH, IN THAT WAS AT LARGE IN WARD SIX.
BUT I DID MAKE A NOTATION THAT IN THE AT LARGE RACE, UH, THERE WAS ONE CANDIDATE ON THE BALLOT, AND THE OTHER WAS ONLY A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE.
AND AGAIN, THAT INFORMATION IS ATTACHED, AND THIS INFORMATION CAME FROM THE, UH, MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS.
SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS WE DON'T HAVE AN OVERWHELMING AMOUNT OF CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR SEATS.
THAT WOULD BE MY, UH, INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA THAT I'VE PROVIDED.
YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I SEE AS WELL.
BELIEVE SO, ESPECIALLY WHEN TWO OF THE CONTESTED WERE ALREADY COUNCILMEN RUNNING FROM A SAFE SEAT THAT HAD NOTHING TO LOSE MM-HMM.
SO, AND I WOULD NOT CONSIDER A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE, UH, A CONTEST.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT INFORMATION? OKAY.
THEN MOVING ON TO, UM, ITEM FOUR.
UH, YOU HAD REQUESTED SOME INFORMATION ABOUT TERM LIMITS AND, UM, OTHER LOCAL CITIES IN TERMS OF WHETHER THEY HAVE TERM LIMITS.
SO I PREPARED ANOTHER HANDOUT HERE, SIR.
AND WHILE I WAS, UM, DOING THIS, UM, ALSO JUST GATHERED INFORMATION ON, UH, THESE COMMUNITIES, WHICH HAD WARD SYSTEMS AND WHICH HAD, UH, AT LARGE, UH, SYSTEMS, JUST BECAUSE THAT QUESTION HAD ALSO BEEN RAISED.
SO I CAME UP LATER, I THOUGHT I'D DO ALL THE RESEARCH AT ONE TIME, SO, NO.
SO, UM, THE DIRECTION I WAS GIVEN WAS TO JUST LOOK AT LOCAL COMMUNITIES.
SO, UH, WE LOOKED AT ALL OF THE CITIES, UM, IN GREEN COUNTY, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, AND MIAMI.
SO THEY'RE ALL LISTED HERE IN GROUPED BY COUNTY.
UM, CITIES ARE LISTED IN THE FIRST COLUMN, THE SECOND COLUMN SHOWS, UM, WHICH HAVE AWARD SYSTEM AND WHICH HAVE AN AT LARGE SYSTEM.
UM, YOU WILL SEE THE NOTATION.
CHRIS, HERE'S A HANDOUT IF YOU WANTED TO.
I, I'VE GOT IT PULLED UP ON THE COMPUTER.
UM, TROY IS A STATUTORY CITY, SO, UM,
[01:30:02]
THAT'S WHY THAT NOTATION IS THERE AS FAR AS THE OHIO REVISED CODE.AND THEN ON THE TERM LIMITS, UM, THE ONES THAT ARE INDICATED AS HAVING TERM LIMITS, UM, AS PART OF THEIR, UH, CITY CHARTER.
UM, IN THOSE CASES, THERE WERE ONLY FIVE, UH, FROM AMONGST THESE CITIES, UH, LOCALLY.
AND, UH, THE RELEVANT LANGUAGE FROM THEIR CHARTERS THAT DEALS WITH TERM LIMITS IS ATTACHED AS A, UH, REFERENCE FOR THOSE FIVE.
THAT GIVES US A LITTLE BIT OF, UH, READING TO DO BETWEEN NOW AND OUR NEXT MEETING.
MAYBE THAT'S, UH, YEAH, JUST MORE SOME INFORMATION TO DIGEST AT THIS STAGE, UH, FOR MORE DETAILED DISCUSSION ON THE TERM LIMITS.
UM, THE REASON FOR ATTACHING THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE FOR THOSE THAT HAVE IT IS THERE'S DIFFERENT PROVISIONS AND, AND DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES AND HOW THEY APPLY TERM LIMITS.
AND THEN, UM, IF YOU RECALL, WE ALSO HAD A, A WRITTEN PROPOSAL FROM A CITIZEN THAT ALSO ADDRESSED TERM LIMITS IN A VERY SPECIFIC WAY.
SO, UM, BUT JUST FOR THE PUBLIC, THE WARD SYSTEM, JUST SO EVERYONE IN THE PUBLIC KNOWS, UM, OUT OF THE 22 CITIES THAT WERE LISTED, ONLY SIX HAVE WARDS.
15 DO NOT HAVE WARD SYSTEM, UM, WITH THE TERM LIMITS, AGAIN, OF THE 22 CITIES, UM, FIVE HAVE TERM LIMITS, 16 DO NOT.
AND AGAIN, THE MATH, I KNOW THEY'RE 22.
TROY, AS HE SAID, UM, USES THE ORC AS THEIR GUIDELINES.
UH, JUST SO THE CITIZENS THAT ARE LISTENING SEE, KIND OF HAVE THE NUMBERS OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN FRONT OF US.
ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? THEN ITEM, UH, FIVE WAS, UM, WE WERE SUPPOSED TO CONTINUE A DISCUSSION ON ARTICLE FOUR, SECTION 4 0 2, NUMBER SELECTION AND TERM OF THE CHARTER.
AND, UM, I THINK THIS WAS ALSO, UM, BROUGHT UP BY A CITIZEN, UM, DUNNO IF YOU WANNA HAVE THE DISCUSSION HERE, RIGHT? YEAH.
THE, UM, ONE THING I'D LIKE TO BRING UP IN THE 4.02 THAT WE DID NOT DISCUSS LAST MEETING, UH, BUT I, UH, I THINK SOME OF US HAVE HAD IT IN OUR NOTES, UM, TO DISCUSS, BUT WE ALL FORGOT, IS THE RUNNING FROM THE SAFE SEAT.
UM, YOU KNOW, I I I FIND IT TO BE A LITTLE UNFAIR THAT HALF THE COUNCIL AT A TIME CAN ONLY HALF THE COUNCIL COULD RUN FOR MAYOR, UH, FROM A SAFE SEAT, AND THE OTHER HALF CANNOT BECAUSE THEY'RE IN THE SAME ELECTION WITH HIM.
UM, AND THEN THE REVERSES OF THAT IS TRUE, THE THREE THAT ARE, UM, IN THE ELECTION CYCLE WITH THE MAYOR COULD RUN FOR THAT AT LARGE SEAT IN A SAFE FROM A SAFE SEAT.
AND I JUST, ME PERSONALLY, I THINK IF YOU'RE GONNA RUN FOR AN OFFICE, YOU OUGHT TO HAVE SKIN IN THE GAME.
UM, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T, IF YOU'RE TRYING TO RUN FOR MAYOR, YOU CAN'T RUN FOR MAYOR AND A CITY COUNCIL POSITION AT THE SAME TIME.
YOU CAN ONLY FILE A PETITION FOR ONE.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S FAIR THAT AS A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER MIDWAY THROUGH YOUR TERM, THAT YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO RUN FOR AN OFFICE, UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, KEEP YOUR SEAT IF YOU LOSE.
UM, AND I, I KNOW THAT'S HAPPENED IN THE, THE PAST COUPLE OF ELECTION CYCLES, UH, WHERE PEOPLE HAVE RUN FROM A SAFE SEAT.
UM, AND, AND I THINK IT CREATES A LOT OF DIVISIVENESS.
I THINK PART OF OUR ISSUES THAT WE SAW IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WERE, YOU KNOW, THOSE ELECTIONS WERE NOT PLEASANT ELECTIONS.
THERE WERE, UH, THINGS THAT WERE SAID THAT WERE PRETTY BAD ON, UH, TO PEOPLE THAT THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN HAD TO COME TOGETHER AND WORK TOGETHER.
AND I THINK THAT MAKES IT PRETTY HARD.
YOU KNOW, I, I'M NOT A HISTORY BUFF, BUT I DID WATCH HAMILTON, UM, AND, AND I KNOW BACK IN THE DAY WHEN, WHEN AARON BURR RAN, YOU KNOW, AGAINST, UM, OH GOSH, I'M FORGETTING IT, THOMAS JEFFERSON, THAT WAS THE FIRST THING JEFFERSON SAID TO AARON BURR WAS, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE MY VICE PRESIDENT.
I'M GONNA CHANGE THAT BECAUSE EVERYTHING YOU SAID ABOUT ME.
UM, SO I JUST THINK THAT ADDS FUEL TO A CONTENTIOUS COUNCIL IF THERE IS ONE.
UM, AND I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW, I, I'M JUST
[01:35:01]
INTERESTED IN WHAT EVERYONE ELSE WOULD HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE RUNNING FROM A SAFE SEAT.SO, WHEN THAT OCCURRED, LOOKING AT THE CHARTER ON VACANCY, THEN, WAS THERE CONTENTION AND THEN FILLING THE VACANCY AS WELL? THE, THE, THE TWO THAT RAN FROM SAFE SEATS LOST.
OH, THEY BOTH RAN ON SAFE SEATS.
OH, THEY BOTH RAN FROM SAFE SEATS.
SO, AND THEN HAD TO GO TO WORK WITH THE MAYOR THAT THEY RAN AGAINST, AND THE COUNCIL PERSON AT LARGE THAT THEY RAN AGAINST.
BACK FROM THEIR WARD POSITION THAT THEY WERE IN A SAFE SEAT WITH.
BUT BOTH HAVE YOU HAD SITUATIONS WHERE SOMEBODY'S RUN FROM A SAFE, SAFE SEAT AND THEN CREATED A VACANCY THAT HAD TO BE FILLED BY COUNCIL? WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT YET.
SO I GUESS MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE THAT IF YOU ARE A SITTING MEMBER OF COUNCIL AND YOU DECIDE TO RUN A FOR ANOTHER, WHETHER IF YOU'RE IN THAT LARGE RUNNING FOR AWARD SEAT OR YOU'RE A COUNCIL MEMBER RUNNING FOR COUNT OR RUNNING FOR MAYOR, YOU HAVE TO FORFEIT YOUR SEAT AND DECLARE THAT.
SO THEN THAT OPENS UP ANOTHER SEAT FOR SOMEONE ELSE, BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAID, NOW I HAVE TO SIT NEXT TO THE GUY WHO, RIGHT.
I TALKED A WHOLE BUNCH OF MESS ABOUT, AND NOW WE HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER TO PROVIDE A STRAIGHT ROAD FOR OUR CITY.
THAT, I MEAN, THAT'S LIKE, THAT'S LIKE THE COURT, LIKE THE RUNNING BACK, YOU KNOW, MESSING WITH THE QUARTERBACK'S GIRLFRIEND AND THEN THEY GOTTA GO, THEY GOTTA GO PLAY A IN A BIG GAME ON SATURDAY.
THAT, THAT'S JUST NOT, THE OTHER ISSUE I HAVE WITH IT, AND IT'S A LITTLE LESS CONVOLUTED, IS YOU HAVEN'T EVEN FINISHED YOUR OBLIGATION THAT YOU WERE ELECTED FOR.
YOU HAVEN'T, YOU WERE ELECTED TO A POSITION BY YOUR BOARD REPS OR BY GENERAL CITY, AND NOW YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, WHICH IN MY MIND COULD POTENTIALLY CREATE SOME ISSUES BECAUSE IF I DO GET ELECTED NOW, I'M PART OF THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR THE PERSON THAT'S GONNA FILL THAT SEAT.
SO, YEAH, I I, I DO THINK IT CREATES SOME ISSUE ISSUES.
I, I'M GONNA APPROACH IT FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE.
SO WE'VE DISCUSSED ABOUT THE MAYOR HAVING A VOTE, BUT NOT HAVING A SUPER VOTE.
SO HE DOESN'T GET A VETO ALONG WITH THAT VOTE.
THERE IS HALF OF COUNCIL THAT CAN RUN FOR MAYOR AND KEEP THEIR COUNCIL SEAT AND ANOTHER HALF THAT CANNOT.
SO FOR SURE, MR. WEBB, WELL, AS ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO CAN RUN AGAINST THE MAYOR, BECAUSE I, I HAPPEN TO BE ONE OF THOSE FOUR.
UM, BUT YOU'LL NOTICE I DIDN'T DO IT THE LAST TIME AROUND.
I'M JUST GONNA GO INTO SOME HISTORY HERE.
AND THE FACT THAT WE DID HAVE, UH, TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS RUN AGAINST THE MAYOR LAST TIME AND ANOTHER COUNCIL MEMBER RUN AGAINST AN AT LARGE COUNCIL MEMBER LAST TIME, THREE.
AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DIVISION, IT CREATED DIVISION AMONGST THIS COUNCIL THAT, UH, WAS DESTRUCTIVE IN ITS NATURE.
I MEAN, IT, IT TOOK ITS TOLL ON THIS COUNCIL AND WAS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE WENT THROUGH A PERIOD OF MANY MONTHS OF, I CAN ONLY CALL NON PRODUCTIVITY.
WE COULDN'T GET ANYTHING DONE.
UM, I'VE LOOKED AT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, THOMAS, AND I REALLY THINK IF I COULD, UH, SINCE WE HAVE THE LAW DIRECTOR HERE, HE CAN START FRAMING THIS OUT FOR ME.
BUT I REALLY THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE A THING WHERE IF I, UM, AS ONE WHO CAN, IF I DECIDE TO RUN AGAINST THE MAYOR UPON CERTIFICATION OF MY PETITIONS AT MONTGOMERY COUNTY AT THE BOARD OF ELECTION, THE DAY MY CERTIFICATIONS, UH, PETITIONS ARE CERTIFIED, UH, THAT'S THE DAY I, UM, RESCIND MY COUNSEL SEAT.
SO I'D LIKE TO SEE LANGUAGE JUST THAT CLEAR THAT SURE, I CAN RUN AGAINST THE MAYOR, BUT, UM, ONCE MY PETITIONS ARE CERTIFIED, UM, THAT I MISSING MY COUNCIL SEAT.
DOES THAT, AND WHAT DOES THAT DO TO VOTING? SORRY.
DOES THAT ALLOW FOR ENOUGH TIME FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO GET INTO THE, TO, IF YOU BECOME, IF YOU WERE RUN AGAINST THE, THE MAYOR MM-HMM.
SO, UH, TONY WOULD DO, UH, AS HE ALWAYS DOES A, UM, UH, ADVERTISEMENT, PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT FOR, UM, COUNSEL'S LOOKING FOR APPLICANTS FOR THE POSITION OF, AND THE COUNSEL WOULD GO THROUGH THE INTERVIEW PROCESS, UM, AND AND THAT PERSON WOULD JUST FULFILL YOUR TERM.
AND THEN THEY WOULD FILL THAT SEAT THROUGH APPOINTMENT, BUT BECAUSE YOUR POSITION WAS RESCINDED, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE SAY IN THAT ANYMORE.
'CAUSE IT, YOU WOULD NOT BE A SITTING COUNCILMAN.
AND, AND THE ONLY REASON I SAY I, I'M USING THIS AS AN EXAMPLE.
[01:40:01]
UH, THE MOMENT MY PETITIONS ARE CERTIFIED WITH THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS IS BECAUSE AT THAT POINT I'M IN THE CAMPAIGN.UM, AND ONCE I'M IN THE CAMPAIGN, IN, IN MY OPINION, THAT'S WHERE EVERYTHING STARTED, ALL THE NEGATIVE, UH, ATTACKS AGAINST, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO RUN FOR MAYOR IF I COME HERE EVERY WEEK AS A SITTING COUNCIL MEMBER AND COMPLIMENT THE MAYOR ON A GREAT JOB HE'S DOING.
THE ONLY WAY I CAN RUN FOR MAYOR IS IF I COME HERE EVERY COUNCIL MEETING AND PAINT THE MAYOR IN AS BATTLE LIGHT AS POSSIBLE, OR A COUNCIL MEMBER AT LARGE WHO I MIGHT BE RUNNING AGAINST.
SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN IS TAKE THAT AWAY.
IF, IF I DECIDE TO MAKE THE DECISION, UH, MATT, YOU SAID SKIN IN THE GAME, AND I AGREE WITH THAT.
IF I DECIDE TO PUT SOME SKIN IN THE GAME AND RUN AGAINST THE MAYOR OR RUN AGAINST THE A SITTING AT LARGE POSITION, UH, ONCE MY, UH, ATE MY PETITIONS, ONCE MY PETITIONS ARE CERTIFIED BY MONTGOMERY COUNTY, UH, I'M OUT AS COUNCIL MEMBER HERE AND GOOD LUCK TO ME IN MY, UH, MAYORAL RACE OR EVEN AT AT LARGE COUNCIL OR AT LARGE RACE.
SO ARE YOUR PRIMARIES PARTISAN? NO, NO, NO.
NONE OF THE ELECTIONS HERE BURDEN.
SO WHY WOULD THERE, SO WHY WOULD THERE BE ANY PRIMARY ELECTIONS TO BEGIN WITH? MORE THAN TWO.
WE HAD MORE THAN TWO CANDIDATES, UH, FOR THE POSITION OF MAYOR.
BUT WHY WOULDN'T THAT JUST BE ELECTED ON THEM TO THE GENERAL CHARTER STATION? CHARTER SESSION CHARTER.
AND THAT CHRIS, UH, IN HONESTY, THAT DRUG TO PROCESS OUT EVEN FURTHER LAST TIME, MET MORE.
IF YOU HAVE TWO PEOPLE OR MORE RUNNING FOR MAYOR, THERE'S A PRIMARY OR ANY COUNCIL COUNSEL OR ANY COUNCIL POSITION, AND THEN HOW MANY, HOW MANY PROCEED TO THE GENERAL 2, 2 2 TO THE GENERAL TOP TWO GO GETTERS.
DO YOU STILL HAVE THE PRIMARY, YOU SKIP THE PRIMARY AND IT GOES STRAIGHT TO NOVEMBER.
BUT YOU HAVE TO PETITION JANUARY.
WELL, WHEN THE, THE, UH, PRIMARIES WERE IN MARCH, YOU, IT WAS DECEMBER YES.
THAT YOU HAD TO HAVE YOUR PETITIONS IN.
SO YOU'RE STARTING ALMOST A YEAR AHEAD OF THE GENERAL ELECTION WITH THE PROCESS TO FILE.
AND DISRUPTIVE IS TOO KIND OF A WORD TO USE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT IT DOES TO THIS BODY.
UH, THE WAY THIS IS SET UP NOW, IT'S NOT DISRUPTIVE.
IT IS DESTRUCTIVE BECAUSE WE SAW, UH, THIS COUNSEL GO THROUGH TURMOIL DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME.
NOW I THINK NEEDLESSLY SO AND SO I SAW SARAH OVER THERE WHILE YOU WERE BRINGING UP THIS SUBJECT OR LOOKING UP
'CAUSE IT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING TOO, WHICH IS I I I'VE NEVER LOOKED INTO WHETHER OR NOT ONE CAN ELIMINATE, UH, A RUNNING FROM A SAFE SEAT.
MY INSTINCTS ARE YOU PROBABLY CAN, UH, THROUGH A CHARTER AMENDMENT.
UM, SO I THINK THAT THAT WOULD, THAT'S GONNA REQUIRE SOME WORK.
AND I'M ASKING, ARE YOU INSTRUCTING US TO GO DO THAT WORK
SO I THINK WE'RE IN AGREEMENT TO GO DOWN THAT PATH AND OKAY.
SEE WHAT WE SEE, WHAT WE FIND SUBMISSION.
THE, THE OTHER PART OF THIS DISCUSSION, AND THE REASON IT WAS ON HERE WAS THE TERM LIMITS DISCUSSION.
SO I WOULD SAY WE JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, PUSHED THAT OFF TO ANOTHER MEETING.
UM, I DON'T THINK YOU'RE PREPARED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
YOU WANTED THE INITIAL DATA, WHICH I'VE GIVEN YOU.
AND, UH, THEN WE CAN CONTINUE THAT DISCUSSION DOWN THE ROAD.
UM, NUMBER SIX WOULD BE WHERE WE'RE, UM, THERE WAS A SUGGESTION MADE TO CHANGE THE, UM, RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT FOR CANDIDATES FOR CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR FROM, UH, ONE YEAR TO TWO YEARS.
ANY FURTHER CONVERSATION ON, ON THAT ITEM.
AND THAT WAS, UH, SECTION 4 0 3 OF THE CHARTER.
AND, AND I WOULD, I WOULD SAY IT MAY DEPEND ON DECISIONS THAT THIS BODY MAKES MOVING FORWARD.
YOU KNOW, IF WE GO AWAY FROM WAR SYSTEM, WE MAY WANT TO UP IT BECAUSE IT'S A CITYWIDE ELECTION.
IF IT STAYS WARD TO ALLOW MORE PEOPLE IN, WE MAY WANT TO KEEP IT AT ONE.
I, I DON'T KNOW, THAT'S JUST MY KNEE JERK REACTIONS.
UM, BUT AGAIN, I THINK THAT CAN ALL BE LUMPED INTO THE DISCUSSION WITH TERM LIMITS.
[01:45:01]
THE PATH OF THE WARD SINCE WE HAVE THE DATA WARD OR NO WARD, I MEAN, WOULD YOU COUNT IF THEY GREW UP HERE, WENT AWAY AND THEN CAME BACK SO THEY HAVE A GOOD UNDERSTANDING AND HISTORICAL, RIGHT? I MEAN, FOR PEOPLE TO DO THAT? YEAH.I MEAN, THE WAY IT SAYS NOW IS YOU HAVE TO MAINTAIN RESIDENCY IN THE CITY AT LEAST ONE YEAR PRIOR TO FILING, UH, THE PETITION FOR THE PETITION FOR ELECTION, RIGHT? YEAH.
IT SAYS IMMEDIATELY OR IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THE ELECTION.
AND TONY, THAT APPLIES TO WARDS AS WELL, RIGHT? SO IF CORRECT, IF I'M APPLYING RUNNING FOR WARD C, THAT RESIDENCY IS ONE YEAR WITHIN THAT WARD, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO, UH, PARKING LOT, THAT DISCUSSION.
YEAH, I WOULD SAY PARK THAT FOR WHEN WE HAVE ALL THE OTHERS WITH IT THAT KIND OF GO ALONG WITH IT.
WHO BROUGHT THAT? WAS THAT ANGELA? DID YOU HAVE A PARTICULAR REASON FOR THAT? MY THOUGHT WAS WHEN YOU GET ONLINE AND YOU SEE WHAT PEOPLE SAY ABOUT THE CITY AND YOU'RE, YOU JUST MOVED HERE, YOU MIGHT HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND YOU MIGHT GET A LOT OF OPINIONS FORMED, JUST WHAT YOU SEE.
BUT ONCE YOU LIVE HERE AND YOU EXPERIENCE IT, AND YOU, I JUST FEEL LIKE IT REALLY GIVES YOU A BETTER ADVANTAGE.
AND, AND PARTIALLY THE TWO YEAR WAS IF WE GO TO AN ALL AT LARGE, THEN I THINK THERE MIGHT BE MORE COMPETITION.
WHEREAS RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO COMPETITION.
AND, AND THEN I WANTED TO MENTION TOO, THE, MAYBE WE CHANGE IT TO LIVE IN THE CITY INSTEAD OF LIVE IN THE WARD IF WE STAY WITH THE WARD SYSTEM.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S WORTH CHANGING, BUT I THOUGHT, OKAY.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THAT? AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO, UM, SEVEN.
UM, RICK HAS PUT TOGETHER, UH, AS SUGGESTED A PROPOSAL FOR AMENDMENT TO, UM, SECTION 4 0 6 C, UH, OF THE CHARTER, WHICH IS INTERFERENCE WITH ADMINISTRATION.
SO YES, I, UH, DIDN'T PUT THE WHOLE SECTION IN THERE, BUT BASICALLY THE DISCUSSION FROM LAST TIME WAS, UM, I THINK THERE'S BEEN THE IMPRESSION THAT, UH, COUNCIL IS NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK WITH ANY MEMBER EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY OTHER THAN THE CITY MANAGER.
UM, I WILL SAY THAT IN THE FIRST SENTENCE, IT DOES SAY THAT, UM, UH, AND EXCEPT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATIONS OR, OR, AND INQUIRIES, BUT I EVEN MISSED THE INQUIRIES PART THE FIRST TIME.
SO I THINK TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO COUNCIL MEMBERS, UM, YOU KNOW, MY LANGUAGES PROPOSES THAT THIS DOES NOT PRECLUDE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL FROM REPORTING ISSUES OR REQUESTING INFORMATION IN A MANNER AVAILABLE TO ANY OTHER RESIDENT OF THE CITY.
UM, SO THAT WAY IF THERE'S A PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ISSUE, COUNCIL'S FREE TO GO TO THE, THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.
IF THERE'S A POLICING ISSUE, THEY'RE FREE TO CALL THE POLICE CHIEF.
THEY JUST CAN'T INTERFERE, UM, IN THE OPERATION OF THE CITY OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.
UH, SO ONE THING WE DIDN'T, JUST, IF I COULD JUST PREFACE THIS INFORMATION, IS AS RICK POINTED OUT, WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THIS, UH, INQUIRIES LANGUAGE IN HERE.
UM, AND ANOTHER OPTION THAT WAS DISCUSSED ALSO WAS, DOES THE CURRENT PROVISION IN THE CHARTER, UH, ALLOW THE CITY MANAGER TO PROVIDE CONTEXT TO THIS SECTION? UH, MAYBE THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER OR, UH, SOME TYPE OF POLICY STATEMENT? JOHN, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU.
NO, I, I JUST A, AS A LONG TIME CITY EMPLOYEE
I JUST FEEL LIKE WE'RE A PARAMILITARY ORGANIZATION WITH A CHAIN OF COMMAND.
I, I HAVE A HARD TIME ANSWERING CERTAIN QUESTIONS FROM PEOPLE IF MY BOSS ISN'T AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON.
SO I, WHILE I LIKE THIS LANGUAGE, I STILL THINK SOMEHOW YOU SHOULD BE ABREAST OF WHAT'S WHAT'S BEING SAID AS WELL.
I MEAN, LET'S JUST TAKE YOUR ZONING IDEA OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, ON A SATURDAY, MR. WEBB CALLS, YOU KNOW, THE ZONING MANAGER AND YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT'S GOING ON.
YOU SHOW UP MONDAY AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE MET WITH A MESS THAT'S HAPPENED OVER THE WEEKEND.
SO WHILE, WHILE I AGREE THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH HOOPS NO OTHER CITIZEN WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH, I STILL THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A PROVISION WHERE THE CITY MANAGER'S MADE AWARE OF WHAT THE, WHAT THE SITUATION IS.
I MEAN, THAT'S, I, I JUST, I KNOW HOW I WOULD FEEL AS A, AS A EMPLOYEE WHERE MY BOSS WASN'T AWARE AND I WAS MAKING DECISIONS OR DOING THINGS AND MY BOSS HAD NO IDEA, AND HE WALKS IN MONDAY AND
[01:50:01]
THERE'S SOME EXPLAINING TO DO.I JUST THINK IT'S POTENTIALLY PROBLEMATIC.
AND THAT'S JUST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AS AN EMPLOYEE.
SO, SO IN THE SIMPLEST TERMS, UM, I, UM, RUN INTO, UH, MY BATTALION CHIEF AT KROGER'S, AND I LET HIM KNOW THAT THERE'S A FIRE HYDRANT LEAKING ON MY COURT.
AND IS THAT THE PROPER WAY? SHOULD THAT BE AN ACCEPTABLE WAY FOR ME TO DO THAT? AND I THINK THAT'S A, THAT'S A GOOD EXAMPLE.
I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S AN EASY THING.
I MEAN, BECAUSE ONE, I'M JUST GONNA CALL THE WATER COMPANY.
BUT I, I, I, I THINK WE'VE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF COMMUNICATION TOO.
I THINK AN INFORMATIONAL PIECE LIKE THAT TO ME IS ONE THING, YOU ASKING ME A QUESTION ABOUT OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES WITHIN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR SOMETHING ELSE? MM-HMM.
I GUESS I'M CONCERNED ON THE BACK END ABOUT THE FEEDBACK LOOP.
SO I, I MENTIONED THAT TOO OF BATTALION CHIEF AT CARTERS.
BUT, UM, LIKE YOU SAID, RICK WOULD HAVE NO IDEA OF THAT.
UM, AND SO, UM, SO I WANNA START FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF I'M SIMPLY OFFERING AN OPTION.
I ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE A PREFERENCE.
I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY CONCERN OF COUNSEL DOWN THE CHAIN WHERE IT NEEDS TO GO.
UM, I THINK MR. CAMPBELL MENTIONED THAT IN THE PAST IT HAS BEEN WEAPONIZED TO ACCUSE MEMBERS OF IT HAS BEEN.
AND I, I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR, TO BE HONEST.
THAT'S, YEAH, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING.
I DON'T, I THINK MR. CAMPBELL, I SHOULD BE ABLE TO SIT HERE AND TALK ABOUT THINGS AS A CITIZEN TO A EMPLOYEE OR EVEN A CITIZEN TO A CITIZEN.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE COVERING OURSELVES ON CERTAIN TOPICS AND SITUATIONS THAT, THAT THE CITY MANAGER IS AWARE OF SOMETHING AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS,
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT HE'S AWARE OF CERTAIN THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING.
AND MAYBE THAT'S JUST, LIKE YOU SAID, MAYBE IT'S JUST AN ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER TO US THAT, HEY, IF THESE THINGS HAPPEN, I WANNA BE AWARE OF IT.
YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.
I'M JUST SAYING FULL ACCESS COMES WITH SOME ISSUES.
I THINK PART OF, LIKE IN, IN MY CAREER WHEN I'VE HAD SOMEONE COME UP AND I FEEL LIKE SOMEBODY ABOVE ME NEEDED TO KNOW, I WOULD IMMEDIATELY PUT THEM IN THE LOOP.
I JUST THINK THERE MAY BE SOME EMPLOYEES THAT AREN'T AS ASTUTE TO MAKING THAT AWARENESS HAPPEN.
SO IS THERE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN LIKE DEPARTMENT OR DIRECTOR LEVEL EMPLOYEES? AND I WAS ACTUALLY THINKING, I'M WORKING IN THE STREETS DEPARTMENT.
I WAS ACTUALLY THINKING THE SAME THING.
SO I DIDN'T INCLUDE IT, BUT IT DID COME TO MIND.
IT'S LIKE, WELL, I WOULD PREFER THAT COUNCIL EITHER WORK WITH ME YES.
AND THAT MAY BE WHAT WE PUT IN THERE.
SO INSTEAD OF AVAILABLE AT ANY OTHER RESIDENT, BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, ANY OTHER RESIDENT OTHER THAN A COUNCIL IS DIFFERENT THAN A COUNCIL MEMBER WHO CARRIES SOME AUTHORITY WITHIN THE, THE CITY OPERATIONS.
SO, UM, LET ME PUT SOME MORE THOUGHT INTO THIS ONE AND I'LL COME BACK NEXT MEETING WITH A LITTLE MORE.
ITEM EIGHT WAS, UH, THE ISSUE ABOUT, UH, DOING AN AMENDMENT RELATED TO COUNCIL COMPENSATION.
UH, THAT'S NOT SCHEDULED, UH, UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING.
SO, UH, RICK AND I WILL BE BRINGING SOMETHING BACK TOGETHER ON THAT.
UH, NUMBER NINE, UH, IS ALSO, UH, ITEM FOR THE NEXT MEETING KIND OF FALLS INTO THE GENERAL DISCUSSION THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HAVING ABOUT QUORUM AND MAJORITY VOTES AND, UH, CONSEQUENCES, UH, FOR MISSING MEETINGS.
SO THAT'S ALL TIED INTO THE OTHER DISCUSSION.
UH, ITEM 10 IS, UM, WE HAD A, A CITIZEN SPEAK ABOUT THEIR PERCEIVED NEED TO, UH, MAKE AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 4.13, WHICH IS, UH, COUNCIL MEETINGS.
UM, OVER THE ISSUE ABOUT THE MAYOR HAVING THE ABILITY TO, UH, SCHEDULE OR CANCEL, UH, MEETINGS ON THEIR OWN AUTHORITY.
UM, MY MY PERSONAL OPINION IS THAT, UM, THERE'S NOT REALLY A NEED TO CHANGE THIS IN THE CHARTER.
UM, IT'S SPELLED OUT IN MORE DETAIL IN THE RULES OF COUNSEL AND, UH, WITH, WITH GREAT CLARITY.
AND, UM, IT'S REALLY NOT BEEN A MAJOR ISSUE.
THERE WAS ONE INCIDENT WHERE A MEETING WAS CANCELED AND THERE WAS, UH, SOME CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING THAT.
BUT I THINK THE MOST RECENT REVISIONS TO THE RULES OF COUNCIL THAT WERE JUST PUT INTO EFFECT THIS YEAR AFTER THAT INCIDENT, UM, HAVE ADDRESSED THOSE ISSUES.
SO, UM, BUT IT, IT'S UP FOR YOU GUYS TO DECIDE IF, MY PERSONAL
[01:55:01]
OPINION IS, IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE, I WOULD RATHER THAT BE A RULE OF COUNCIL THAN A CHARTER.SO, AND I THINK OUR LAW DIRECTOR WOULD PREFER IT TO STAY RULE OF COUNCIL.
'CAUSE HE SAID THAT EARLIER, SO.
ANY, ANY OBJECTION TO, TO THAT WITH ITEM 10? OKAY.
THEN ITEM 11 WAS A LEGAL QUESTION THAT IT WAS RAISED ABOUT, UM, AS A HOME RULE COM, UH, COMMUNITY, UH, THE ABILITY TO CONDUCT MEETINGS VIRTUALLY ABSENT THE, UH, ORDERS OR EXEMPTIONS THAT WERE PUT IN PLACE IN THE COVID ERA, UH, WHICH HAVE NOW EXPIRED.
UM, I, I HAVE HEARD, UH, ANECDOTALLY OF COMMUNITIES IN OHIO THAT ARE STILL HAVING VIRTUAL MEETINGS.
UM, WELL IT'S INTERESTING WHEN WE HAVE THIS CONVERSATION.
UM, SO ONE, UM, VARIETY OF REASONS.
UM, I I, I SUBSCRIBE THIS TO AGE I THINK PEOPLE OUGHT ME, IS THAT, THAT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LAW OF RECORD.
AND I'M SHARING WITH YOU MY BIASES, HOWEVER, IN LOOKING AT THIS.
AND I DON'T KNOW, SARAH, DID YOU DO ANY QUICK RESEARCH ON THIS? EITHER A LITTLE, BUT I COULD NOT FIND A DEFINITIVE ANSWER.
WELL, IT APPEARS THAT COLUMBUS HAS PASSED A CHARTER AMOUNT, CHARTER AMENDMENT APPROVED THAT ALLOWS THEM TO HAVE VIRTUAL MEETINGS.
AND I THINK THAT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH HOME RULE POWERS.
UM, I, I THINK THAT IT IS POSSIBLE AND I'M AWARE OF, I THINK, UH, I THINK YELLOW SPRINGS, AND I DON'T THINK THEY DID A CHARTER AMENDMENT.
I'D HAVE TO CONFIRM THIS 'CAUSE I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT FOR A WHILE.
BUT I THINK THAT THEY STILL WILL DO VIRTUAL MEETINGS AND, AND CONSIDER THAT A HOME RULE POWER.
UM, I THINK IT'S A BETTER DECISION LEFT TO THE ELECTORATE AND THE CITIZENS IN MY OPINION.
BUT AGAIN, THAT'S A POLICY DECISION.
I WON'T SAY THAT IS A MATTER OF LAW.
UM, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT WHAT COLUMBUS DID.
I ACTUALLY AM TALKING TO ONE OF THE COLUMBUS, UH, LAW DIRECTORS OR ASSISTANT LAW DIRECTOR ON SOME OTHER STUFF.
UM, BUT UH, IF THIS BODY IS INTERESTED IN LOOKING INTO THAT, UM, I CAN PULL UP, GET THAT CHARTER AMENDMENT, YOU KNOW, LET YOU TAKE A LOOK AT IT, THEN YOU CAN IN A WEIGH THAT.
UM, AND I THINK CHRIS TOO, IT WASN'T JUST HAVING EVERYBODY BE IN A VIRTUAL MEETING, IT WAS ALSO THE QUESTION OF ONE PERSON CAN'T BE AT THAT MEETING BECAUSE THEY'RE TRAVELING.
COULD THEY JOIN THE MEETING VIRTUALLY? YES.
AND SO, UM, THIS IS THE, I'LL JUST HIT A COUPLE HIGHLIGHTS HERE TO AVOID THIS MISSING MEETING ISSUE.
UM, SO VOTERS APPROVED THE CHARTER AMENDMENT LAST NOVEMBER, 2023.
COUNSEL APPROVED AN ORDINANCE IN THIS ARTICLES FROM, WELL ACTUALLY IT MUST HAVE BEEN EARLIER, THAT IS FROM AUGUST, 2023.
SO CHARTER AMENDMENT, THEN ORDINANCE, UM, THEY SUPPORT IT THROUGH HOME RULE.
UM, THEY CAN NOW MEET IN PERSON VIRTUALLY OR IN A HYBRID FORMAT, UH, SO LONG AS THE, THE PRESIDENT'S GIVEN NOTICE.
SO I THINK, AND THEY ALSO, IF THEY MEET VIRTUALLY, I THINK THEY'VE GOT BUILT INTO THEIR CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT THEY'VE GOTTA HAVE CERTAIN GROUNDS.
I THINK THAT THE ISSUE YOU MIGHT RUN INTO IS IF THAT COUNCIL MEMBER OR THE MISSING ELECTED OFFICIAL IS NOT THERE, THERE HAS TO BE ENOUGH TIME.
YOU STILL HAVE TO MEET NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.
AND IF I CAN JUST SAY ONE OTHER THING.
SO I ACTUALLY, COMING FROM MY OLD POSITION IN MOUNT VERNON AND I HAD A MORE SEASONED CITY COUNCIL THAT YOU WOULD THINK WOULD BE OPPOSED TO IT, UM, THEY ENJOYED THE ZOOM COUNCIL MEETINGS MORE BECAUSE IT PROVIDED MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR PARTICIPATION.
UM, SO IT'S NOT SO MUCH THAT MAYBE THE COUNCIL ISN'T IN THIS ROOM DOING COUNCIL WORK.
IT'S WHETHER SOMEBODY AT HOME WHO MIGHT ONLY BE ABLE TO WATCH THE MEETING TODAY COULD ASK TONY, CAN I COMMENT DURING THE COMMENT SECTION AND THEN HAVE THE FLOOR FOR THAT.
UM, THEN WE'D BE HERE ALL NIGHT.
SO, WELL, THERE'S NO QUESTION.
THERE'S MORE PUBLIC, I THINK ANECDOTALLY WHAT I HEARD ACROSS THE STATE WAS MORE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN ZOOM MEETINGS.
'CAUSE YOU CAN SIT FROM THE LUXURY OF WELL AT YOUR KITCHEN TABLE.
UM, I DO THINK THAT, UH, WE WOULD WANT TO BAKE INTO THAT, THAT THE ABILITY OF, YOU KNOW, COUNSEL AGAIN, TO MAKE RULES THAT, THAT AS IT NEEDS TO FREELY AND THAT'S BAKED INTO THE CHARTER.
UM, BUT AGAIN, IT'S CLEARLY A POLICY DECISION ON WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
NOT RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWER FROM A LAW DIRECTOR STANDPOINT, IF YOU CAN DO IT, YOU CAN DO IT.
I, IT APPEARS I THINK YOU CAN.
I THINK IF WE CHANGE THAT SO PEOPLE CAN JOIN VIRTUALLY, WHAT WOULD THAT DO TO WHAT'S CONSIDERED AN EXCUSED ABSENCE?
[02:00:01]
WELL, I I WOULD ASSUME IT, IT WOULD NOT BE AN ABSENCE IF, IF THEY WERE PERMITTED TO JOIN VIRTUALLY AND THEY DID.OR WHAT IF THERE'S SOMETHING HAPPENED THAT YOU COULDN'T CHANGE THE MEETING NOTICE, YOU KNOW, I, I HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO FIGURE THAT OUT, RIGHT? IF YOU'RE MEETING IN PERSON CAN THAT THEY, THAT COUNCIL MEMBER THEN, 'CAUSE YOU'RE ALREADY GONNA HAVE THE VIRTUAL MEETING ANYWAY.
YOU'RE JUST NOT ALLOWING FOR THAT INTERACTION COMMENT, PERIOD.
SO I, I THINK WE CAN DO IT ALL AND IT'LL SOLVE ITSELF.
I THINK WE JUST GOTTA DIG IN A LOT DEEPER THAN WE ARE NOW.
SO ARE WE BEING ASKED TO LOOK INTO THAT
IS, IS ANYONE OPPOSED TO GATHERING MORE INFORMATION ON THIS TOPIC? OKAY.
SEND MORE INFORMATION OUR WAY, WE WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT.
AND SOMETIMES THESE ARE MORE OF A TECHNOLOGY ISSUE THAN THEY ARE YEAH.
A LEGAL OR A GOVERNANCE ISSUE.
UM, YOU DON'T HAVE THE GOOD ENOUGH TECHNOLOGY TO SUPPORT IT.
AND THEN THE LAST ITEM WE HAD WAS, UH, ITEM 12, WHICH WAS, UM, UH, PROPOSAL FROM PUBLIC COMMENTS TO, UM, CHANGE SECTION 4.14 OF THE CHARTER, WHICH IS THE RULES OF COUNSEL.
UH, THIS WAS THE ONE THAT MR. SCHAFFER HAD, UH, BROUGHT FORWARD IN HIS WRITTEN PROPOSAL.
AND, UM, THE, I THINK MRS. BERG HAD HAD SOME EXCHANGE BACK AND FORTH WITH HIM ON THIS.
AND, UH, SHE ASKED HIM IF CHANGING, UH, SOME OF THE VERBIAGE IN THIS SECTION TO SHALL VERSUS, UH, THE CURRENT LANGUAGE, WOULD THAT BE SATISFACTORY? AND I THINK HIS ANSWER WAS YES.
BUT YOU KNOW, I, AGAIN, I JUST DIDN'T KNOW WHAT LEVEL OF, UH, APPETITE THERE WAS FOR GOING DOWN THIS ROAD, MAKING A CHANGE TO THIS SECTION.
I THINK THE, I'M JUST, I'M REREADING FOUR 14.
I'M NOT FINDING ANY, EVERYWHERE.
IT SAYS, SHALL THE COUNCIL SHALL BE CONTINUING BODY, THE COUNCIL SHALL ADOPT.
SO IT'S SAYING, SHALL EVERYWHERE.
I GUESS I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING.
SO I, I GUESS I'M NOT, THIS IS, IF YOU REMEMBER, HE WAS BRINGING UP THE SITUATION WHERE CERTAIN COUNCIL MEMBERS UNDER DEPOSITION HAD SAID THAT THEY SAW THE RULES OF COUNSEL AS JUST BEING FOR GUIDANCE PURPOSES.
UM, AND HE WAS TRYING TO MAKE A CASE, UH, FROM THOSE DEPOSITIONS, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS BINDING OR RIGHT.
REALLY WHAT THE COUNCIL MEMBERS THINK IN PRACTICE, BECAUSE THE RULES OF COUNCIL HAVE THE, UH, AUTHORITY AND FORCE OF ACTION THAT IS SPELLED OUT HERE IN THE CHARTER.
AND THEY ARE ADOPTED BY THE, A MAJORITY OF COUNCIL TO GOVERN THEIR OPERATIONS.
SO I, I DON'T KNOW REALLY WHAT A LANGUAGE CHANGE WOULD BE THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD REALLY GET THE INTENDED RESULT OF WHAT MR. SCHAFER'S TRYING TO ACHIEVE.
UM, AND I THINK IT'D BE A HARD SELL TO EXPLAIN WHY YOU WERE MAKING THE CHANGE TO THE VOTERS.
I'M, I'M OKAY WITH LEAVING FOUR 14 ALONE, YOU GUYS IN AGREEANCE.
SO I THINK WE'VE GOT AN AGREEMENT TO MOVE OFF OF FOUR 14.
SO WITH THAT, I THINK WE'VE COVERED ALL 12 OF THE ACTION ITEMS. OBVIOUSLY WE'VE GOT SOME HOMEWORK TO DO WITH, UH, THE RESEARCH THAT'S BEEN HANDED TO US, UM, BEFORE NEXT MEETING.
OUR NEXT MEETING IS, UH, SCHEDULED FOR MAY 6TH.
UM, THE THREE, UH, ARTICLES TO BE REVIEWED ARE ARTICLE SEVEN, EIGHT, AND NINE.
ARTICLE SEVEN IS ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS.
ARTICLE NINE IS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
UM, SO PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU DO YOUR HOMEWORK AND, AND, UH, REVIEWING THOSE THREE ARTICLES AND THEN BE PREPARED TO DISCUSS, UM, THE ITEMS THAT ARE STILL LEFT ON OUR ACTION BOARD.
ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMMISSION THIS EVENING? UH, I JUST WANT TO ADD THAT, THAT IT IS NOT LIKELY THAT SARAH AND I WILL ATTEND BOTH MEETINGS.
I, WE WANTED TO GO TO THE FIRST ONE SO WE COULD GET A FLAVOR.
I KNOW THAT I WON'T BE ABLE TO BE HERE ON MAY 6TH.
ANYTHING FURTHER? IF NOT, THEN AT 8 0 5 WE ARE ADJOURNED.
[02:05:04]
THANK YOU FOR COMING TO MY CROSS.WE, WELL, SOMETIMES YOU CAN CUT TO THE CHASE ON WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T DO.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I, AND SOME OF THEM CAME WELL PREPARED.
I DO CHARTER DAMN SEES HOW MY DAD HELPED DRAFT MOST OF THIS ORIGINAL CHARTER.