Jun 18, 2024 City Council Meeting Work Session

[00:00:50]

MISS TEETER, I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I WANTED YOU ON THE CHARITY COMMITTEE.

THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE NEED TO. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. BY MY WATCH.

[1. CALL TO ORDER, ESTABLISH QUORUM]

CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO ORDER.

JUNE 18TH, LIKE I MENTIONED, 05:00.

WE DO HAVE A QUORUM WITH COUNCIL MEMBER JASON DE LEON, COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID WHITE AND MYSELF PRESENT, ISN'T HERE THIS EVENING?

[A. Pledge of Allegiance]

CAN YOU PLEASE RISE SO WE CAN RECITE THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU.

[2. CERTIFICATION OF PUBLIC NOTICE]

YES, SIR. MAYOR. THE MEETING WAS POSTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT ON

[3. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST]

SIR. GREAT. THANK YOU.

ITEM THREE. UNDER STATE LAW, A CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS IF A COUNCIL MEMBER OR CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THAT PERSON'S FAMILY HAS A QUALIFYING FINANCIAL INTEREST IN AN AGENDA ITEM, IF THERE IS A CONFLICT, THE MEMBER CAN PARTICIPATE OR VOTE ON THE

[4. PUBLIC COMMENTS]

[5. PRESENTATION AND REPORT]

[A. Presentation and Discussion Regarding the Charter Review Committee's Proposed Charter]

I WANT TO START BY I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE A COUPLE OF MEMBERS OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE. I'M GOING TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT.

DO YOU WANT TO COME UP? IF YOU DON'T MIND. INTRODUCE YOURSELVES. I KNOW YOU SAT ON OUR CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE, AND WE RECEIVED THE RECOMMENDATION.

I THINK WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS THEM TODAY.

IT WAS THEIR CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE, OR THERE'S NOT.

SO Y'ALL ARE THE ONLY TWO HERE FOR NOW, SO.

OH. THERE'S ONE. OKAY, WELL, IF YOU DON'T MIND, DO YOU MIND? JUST FOR THE RECORD, SO WE CAN HAVE YOU ALL. I INTRODUCE WHO'S HERE ON OUR END AS THE RECORD, IF YOU DON'T MIND INTRODUCING YOURSELF.

I'M DIANE TEETER, PROFESSOR EMERITA OF BIOLOGY AT SOUTH TEXAS COLLEGE, AND I'M PLEASED TO SERVE ON THIS COMMITTEE BECAUSE I.

ENTHUSIASTIC THAT YOU'RE DOING A FIVE YEAR PLAN INTO THE FUTURE, AND THAT I HOPE YOU'LL TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.

[00:05:02]

THANK YOU. YEAH. GOOD AFTERNOON, JAMES LOYA.

I WAS PART OF THE COMMITTEE AS WELL.

I REALLY ENJOYED THE PROCESS OF PARTICIPATING, AND I JUST LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THE CHANGES OR THE IMPLEMENTED RECOMMENDATIONS COME TO FRUITION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

GOOD AFTERNOON. ALBERT MORALES.

AND I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR TAKING ME INTO CONSIDERATION ALSO TO BE A PART OF THIS COMMITTEE. IT WAS A VERY INTERESTING PROCESS AND I REALLY ENJOYED IT.

I LOOK FORWARD TO, YOU KNOW, FINISHING THE REST OF THIS AND SEEING, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE CAN DO TOGETHER. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE THE LIST OF ITEMS THAT WERE PRESENTED TO US. SO I GUESS I'M LOOKING AT OUR CITY STAFF TO KIND OF GO OVER WHO'S GOING TO PRESENT THE, THE ITEMS, AND THEN THIS WILL BE AN OPEN DISCUSSION, BY THE WAY. SO WE HAVE RECEIVED THEM.

WE HAVE LOOKED AT THEM.

I THINK TODAY WE JUST WANTED TO PRESENT THEM TO EVERYONE, TO THE PUBLIC IN PARTICULAR, AS TO WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE FROM YOU ALL. SO MR. REESE. YES, SIR.

MAYOR WE DO HAVE SOME INFORMATION.

THIS IS THE CITY OF EDINBURGH. EVERYBODY KNOWS WHO YOU ARE. BUT FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE FOR THE PUBLIC'S SAKE, MY NAME IS CLARICE VALDEZ.

I'M THE CITY SECRETARY. THANK YOU.

WE DO HAVE SOME CHARTER HISTORY.

THE ORIGINAL CHARTER WAS COMMISSIONED AND WAS APPOINTED ON JUNE 26TH, 1946. THE ORIGINAL CHARTER AMENDMENT COMMITTEE WAS CREATED ON MAY 19TH, 1964, BY RESOLUTION NUMBER 159.

THE CHARTER AMENDMENT COMMITTEE WAS RECONSTITUTED ON JUNE 18TH, 1974, BY RESOLUTION 564, AND THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE WAS CREATED BY RESOLUTION 2574. ON AUGUST 15TH, 2023, THE ORIGINAL CHARTER WAS ADOPTED AND APPROVED ON APRIL 5TH, 1949, AND THEN LISTED ARE THE SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS. AND THIS IS OUR CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE.

JAMES LOYA, CYNTHIA GARZA REYES, ALBERTO MORALES, DIANE TEETER, ANDRES PALMA.

AND THIS IS A TIMELINE THAT WE PROVIDED.

THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE WAS CREATED IN AUGUST 15TH.

THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MET BIWEEKLY FROM DECEMBER 1ST UNTIL MAY 23RD, 2024. TODAY THE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION.

IF THE COUNCIL CONSIDERS IT WE WOULD NEED TO ORDER THE ELECTION ON JULY 2ND, JULY 16TH THROUGH AUGUST 6TH.

THE DEADLINE TO ORDER THE ELECTION WOULD BE AUGUST 19TH, 2024, AFTER THE ELECTION DATE.

CAN YOU TURN ON YOUR MIC? CHIEF. SORRY. THAT WOULD BE WITH AN ELECTION DATE OF NOVEMBER.

YES. YES, NOVEMBER. YES.

PROPOSITION. I READ IT.

YES. OKAY. SHOULD. ARTICLE TWO, SECTION TWO AND ARTICLE 18, SECTION ONE, SECTION TWO AND SECTION THREE BE AMENDED TO INCREASE TERM LIMITS? CAN YOU STOP? I'M SO SORRY TO HAVE TO STOP YOU.

I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR OUR CITY ATTORNEY. IN THESE AMENDMENT REVIEWS, I'M JUST. JUST FOR MY SAKE.

AND OF COURSE, MAYBE THE PUBLIC'S SAKE. ALSO IS WAS THERE CHARGES BY THE COUNCIL? I DON'T REMEMBER THAT THAT WERE MADE FOR THE REVIEW COMMITTEE TO REVIEW.

OR DID THEY JUST REVIEW THE CHARTER IN ITS ENTIRETY? BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT.

YEAH. NO. SURE. HAPPY TO TO PROVIDE SOME SOME SUMMARY INFORMATION AND BACKGROUND ON THIS.

AND OBVIOUSLY THE MEMBERS ARE WELCOME TO COME AND JUMP IN AND ADD ANYTHING THAT I MISS OUT ALSO. BUT THE COMMITTEE MET REGULARLY AS A FIVE MEMBER COMMITTEE.

CITY SECRETARY MYSELF WERE ALSO A PART OF ALL OF THE MEETINGS AS WELL.

AND SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE COMMITTEE DID WAS THEY WENT ARTICLE BY ARTICLE AND SECTION BY SECTION, LITERALLY READ THROUGH EVERY SINGLE WORD IN THE CHARTER AND IN THE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH THAT, QUESTIONS WOULD COME UP.

DISCUSSIONS WOULD BE HAD AMONGST THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

THERE WERE REQUESTS BY THE COMMITTEE FOR CITY STAFF TO LOOK INTO SOME THINGS.

I HAD SOME REQUESTS TO LOOK INTO CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE LAW.

AND THEN JUST THROUGH THE COURSE OF THIS DISCUSSION OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS GOING THROUGH EACH SECTION, THEY CAME UP WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY WANTED TO PRESENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TO TO AMEND THE CHARTER. A LOT OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT YOU'LL SEE AND I GUESS THE CITY SECRETARY OR MYSELF CAN GO THROUGH THEM, OR THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS CAN GO THROUGH THEM AND EXPLAIN THEM IF THEY WOULD LIKE.

BUT WHAT YOU'LL SEE IS THAT A LOT OF THE PROPOSITIONS THAT ARE BEING PRESENTED ARE SOMEWHAT CLEANUP IN NATURE.

THERE ARE SOME PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER THAT CONFLICT, FOR EXAMPLE, WITH THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION. TEXAS CONSTITUTION ALWAYS WINS IN A FIGHT AGAINST THE CITY CHARTER.

[00:10:02]

BUT SOME OF THESE SUGGESTIONS, YOU'LL SEE PUT THE LANGUAGE OF THE CHARTER IN LINE. THAT'S ONE EXAMPLE OF A CLEANUP.

BUT WE'LL GO THROUGH KIND OF ALL THE PROPOSITIONS AND YOU'LL SEE WHAT SOME OF THOSE CLEANUPS ARE AND THEN WHAT SOME OF THOSE ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS ARE AND THEN I BELIEVE THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS MIGHT EVEN DISCUSS AN ITEM OR TWO THAT THERE WAS NO CONSENSUS TO PUT FORWARD AS A RECOMMENDATION.

BUT STILL SOME OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS WANTED TO DISCUSS.

GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

GOOD ARTICLE TWO, SECTION TWO AND ARTICLE 18, SECTION ONE, SECTION TWO AND SECTION THREE BE AMENDED TO INCREASE TERM LIMITS OF THE MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MUNICIPAL MUNICIPAL JUDGE SO THAT THEY CAN SERVE NO MORE THAN THREE YEAR TERMS FOR LIFE RATHER THAN TWO TERMS, AND ALSO INCLUDE REVISIONS SO THAT TERM LIMIT PROVISIONS FOR ELECTIVE OFFICES ARE CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT THE CITY CHARTER.

WOULD ANYBODY WANT TO ELABORATE ANYTHING ON THIS ITEM? I DO HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

MAYBE FOR THE MEMBERS I'VE C PROPOSED THIS.

I JUST MAYBE WANTED TO GET SOME BACKGROUND AS TO WHAT WAS BEHIND EXTENDING IT FROM TWO TERMS TO THREE TERMS. I TAKE PRETTY SACRED WHEN THE VOTERS VOTE A CERTAIN WAY.

I KNOW THAT THE VOTERS HAVE TO VOTE BASED ON WHAT'S BEFORE THEM.

SO I DO GET THAT. AND I THINK AT THE TIME MY QUESTION MAY BE BEFORE I ASK THE MEMBERS FOR OUR CITY ATTORNEY IS TERM LIMITS WERE ENACTED, I BELIEVE, OVER TEN YEARS AGO.

RIGHT. AND THE AMENDMENT BACK IN 20, 2011, IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, ACTUALLY, IT'S HAPPENED TWICE NOW.

SO THE FIRST TIME WAS WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO BACK IN 2011.

AND AT THAT TIME, TERM LIMITS WERE IMPOSED FOR THREE TERMS OF FOUR YEARS, I BELIEVE. AND THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER CHARTER AMENDMENT IN 2018 TO REDUCE THAT FROM THREE THREE TERMS TO TWO TERMS. AND SO THAT WAS THE MOST RECENT AMENDMENT BACK IN 2018.

GOT IT. AND SO I GUESS MY QUESTION FOR THE COMMITTEE AND ANYBODY IS WELCOME TO ANSWER, WHAT IF I CAN GET SOMEONE TO EXPLAIN WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO GO FROM TWO TERMS TO THREE TERMS. ANYBODY. AND BY THE WAY, THIS IS INFORMAL.

AND WE DO HAVE A NEW MEMBER COMING IN. SO WE ASKED EVERYBODY TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES MR..

SO IF YOU DON'T MIND. AND IT'S JUST FOR THE RECORD IF YOU DON'T MIND ON THE MIC, I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. BUT WE'RE WE DO MINUTES AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHO'S HERE. AND GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS ANDRES PALMA AND I AM A PROUD RESIDENT OF EDINBURG, TEXAS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

AND JUST WANT THE RECORD.

REFLECT. OUR MAYOR PRO TEM DAN DIAZ, HAS ALSO JOINED US.

SO WITH ANYONE. JUST WANT TO ELABORATE ON.

GO AHEAD. MA'AM, YOU CAN STEP RIGHT UP TO THE PODIUM.

I'M SORRY. ONE OF THE REASONS WAS FOR LONG TERM CONTINUITY. THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT JUST FOR ONE TERM OR TWO TERM, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE THREE TERMS. PLUS, WE'RE GOING TO ALSO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A LEARNING CURVE.

IF WE HAVE A COUNCILMAN THAT COMES IN EARLY AND HE DOESN'T QUITE KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

AND THIS TAKES A LOT OF PREPARATION AND A LOT OF STUDY THAT HE HAS TO UNDERGO.

SO IN ORDER FOR THERE TO BE CONTINUITY AND CONTINUITY AND FLOW.

THIS IS SOME OF THE REASONS.

ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. COUNCIL.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM IN PARTICULAR RAISING THE AMOUNT OF TERMS FROM 2 TO 3 TERMS. ANY I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT YOU WERE JUST HAPPY TO HAVE US WANTED US AN EXTRA TERM, THAT'S WHY.

NO, BUT BUT I WILL SAY, IS THIS FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THE IN 2018, WHEN THE CHARTER PASSED FOR THE TWO TERMS, THAT MEANS A COUNCIL MEMBER COULD STAY TWO TERMS IN THEIR CURRENT SEAT AND THEN JUMP TO ANOTHER SEAT. AM I CORRECT? IT'S A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION.

AND SO THE WHEN THOSE AMENDMENTS WERE PASSED IN 2018 THERE WAS NOT EXPLICIT LANGUAGE ABOUT LIMITING TERMS TO PLACE ONE VERSUS PLACE TWO VERSUS PLACE THREE.

AND OF COURSE, ALL OF THE COUNCIL SPOTS ARE CITYWIDE, RIGHT? THEY'RE NOT SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS. AND SO WITHOUT THAT KIND OF EXPRESS LIMITED LANGUAGE, IT COULD BE INTERPRETED THAT SOMEBODY COULD JUMP FROM PLACE ONE TO PLACE TWO, PLACE THREE, AND DO TWO TERMS IN EACH SPOT.

SO THE WAY IT'S SET RIGHT NOW, IF I WANTED TO NEXT YEAR, I COULD JUMP TO ANOTHER SEAT AND STILL HAVE ANOTHER TWO TERMS. PRETTY MUCH. WELL THAT'S ILLEGAL. YEAH.

SO THAT IS A LEGAL QUESTION THAT WOULD NEED TO BE DECIDED, I THINK. THERE ARE THERE ARE WAYS TO INTERPRET IT.

[00:15:04]

CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE CLEANUP ASPECTS OF THIS CHANGE, IS THAT IT DOES MAKE IT EXPLICIT THAT THE TERM LIMIT APPLIES TO ANY PLACE.

SO SOMEBODY COULDN'T JUMP FROM PLACE ONE TO PLACE TWO TO PLACE THREE AND RESTART THE TERM LIMITS. SO WHAT IF A PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEMBER DECIDES THEY WANTED TO RUN AND THEY'VE ALREADY SERVED 12 YEARS? ARE THEY? DOES THAT MEAN THEY CANNOT SERVE ANYMORE AFTER THAT? THAT'S RIGHT. SO THIS WOULD THIS WOULD BE RETROACTIVE AND IT WOULD APPLY TO ANYBODY THAT'S ALREADY SERVED.

SO ANY NUMBER OF TERMS THAT HAVE BEEN SERVED WOULD COUNT TOWARDS THE LIMIT.

THANK YOU. BUT IN THAT POSITION ITSELF, COUNCIL MEMBER MAYER.

RIGHT. IS THAT. THAT'S CORRECT.

DIFFERENCE IN. YES. SO JUST TO PIGGYBACK TO THAT QUESTION, SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COUNCIL MEMBERS.

IF SOMEBODY HAS SERVED AS COUNCIL MEMBER, IT'S CLEAR THAT THEY COULD RUN FOR MAYOR.

BUT DOES IT APPLY ALSO FOR MAYOR.

COULD THEN SERVE AS COUNCIL MEMBER? YES, IT APPLIES TO THAT AS WELL.

SOMEBODY WHO RAN FOR MAYOR AND TERM LIMITED OUT COULD RUN FOR COUNCIL MEMBER AND START NEW TERMS AS OUR CURRENT CITY CHARTER IS IN PLACE.

IS THAT. YES, EVEN EVEN AS THE CURRENT CITY CHARTER IS WRITTEN? OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? ANY COMMENTS? I WOULD JUST SAY PERSONALLY, THIS IS JUST I'M ONE PERSON I'M GOOD WITH EIGHT YEARS. I THINK TWO TERMS IS GOOD.

I THINK THAT'S JUST ME PERSONALLY.

I KNOW THERE'S DIFFERENT OPINIONS. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. BUT IT'S UP TO EVERYONE HERE AND THEN ULTIMATELY, OBVIOUSLY UP TO THE VOTERS, RIGHT. SEE WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE. BUT I THINK ANYTIME PEOPLE SEE ANYTHING WITH TERM LIMITS OR THEY, I THINK THEY'LL SEE IT AS A WAY THAT WE WANT TO STAY AS LONG AS WE CAN IN OFFICE.

AND I THAT'S JUST ME PERSONALLY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? I MEAN, NOW WE CAN MOVE ON. YEAH.

AND I WILL SAY THAT I REMEMBER AT FIRST WHEN THE CHARTER COMMITTEE WAS, WAS FORMED WAS IT WHAT WAS THE TIMELINE? I KNOW I SAW IT SOMEWHERE. WAS IT OVER A YEAR AGO? WAS IT TWO YEARS AGO WHEN IT WAS FORMED? IT WAS LAST YEAR. IT WAS LAST YEAR.

FOR ME PERSONALLY, COMING INTO OFFICE, THE FIRST, I THINK THE FIRST YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF WAS A LEARNING FIGURING OUT, CLEANING UP. THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING THAT WAS INITIATED, INITIATED IN THE PAST THAT WE WANTED TO CONTINUE WAS NOT GOING TO BE STALLED, WAS NOT GOING TO BE HALTED.

SO THERE WAS SORT OF A BUFFER OR A LEARNING CURVE WHERE WE REALLY COULDN'T INSTITUTE ANYTHING OF OUR OF IDEAS, ANYTHING OF OUR INITIATIVES, BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH TO FINISH AND CLEAN UP.

SO I REMEMBER AT FIRST I KIND OF LIKED THE IDEA OF ADDITIONAL TERMS. IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, EIGHT YEARS IS A LONG TIME TO TO ESTABLISH, BUT THAT'S ASSUMING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO WIN YOUR SECOND TERM, BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T WIN YOUR SECOND TERM, WELL, THEN YOU REALLY ONLY HAVE HALF OF YOUR FIRST TERM TO GET SOMETHING DONE.

BUT EXTENDING IT A THIRD TERM, I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE ANY OF THE LEARNING CURVE IN THE BEGINNING, BECAUSE YOU STILL HAVE TO BE REELECTED. I KNOW THAT I WAS ALSO FORWARD IN THE BEGINNING, ONLY BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF LIMITS PLACED ON CITY MANAGEMENT.

THERE'S. WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER SEARCH, WE WENT THROUGH THE EDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SEARCH.

THERE WAS A LOT OF TALK OF LONGEVITY.

SHOULD I RELOCATE TO THE CITY OF EDINBURG, TEXAS, FROM CALIFORNIA? BEING THAT THERE WAS A LIMIT ON HOW LONG YOU COULD BE A CITY MANAGER, AND WE DON'T WANT THAT. WE DON'T WANT SOMEONE TO COME DOWN AND MOVE THEIR WHOLE FAMILY AND SAY, HEY, YOU'RE ONLY GOOD HERE FOR EIGHT YEARS.

SO IT WAS ALL KIND OF TRYING TO STAY UP ON THE SAME SHEET OF MUSIC WITH WITH CITY MANAGEMENT. AND SO IT WAS JUST KIND OF THE TALK, RIGHT? OF COURSE, THIS GOES TO THE VOTERS, AND I KNOW THE TERMS WERE WERE VOTED ON IN 2018. I'M OKAY WHETHER IT PASSES OR NOT.

I THINK THAT YOU STILL HAVE TO BE REELECTED.

AND THE VISION THAT YOU HAD, YOU GET TO CARRY IT ON AND HOPE YOU'RE HOPING THAT IF YOU DON'T GET REELECTED, WHOEVER'S THERE CONTINUES WITH YOUR GOOD INITIATIVES. BUT THANK YOU TO THE THE THE CHARTER COMMITTEE, WHICH IS ALL RESIDENTS.

I KNOW. I WALKED IN LATE, I'M SURE EVERYBODY WAS INTRODUCED, BUT THIS IS INDEPENDENT RESIDENTS WHO ARE INVOLVED.

AND DE PALMA JUST CAME UP HERE.

HE'S ALSO THE CHAIR OF ONE OF OUR 2040 COMMITTEES.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD PEOPLE TRYING TO MAKE EVERYTHING BETTER.

SO I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND EVERYTHING THAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING.

AND PIGGYBACK OFF OF WHAT MAYOR PRO TEM DIAZ WAS SAYING.

I DON'T THINK IT WAS JUST FOR THE CITY MANAGER EITHER. I THINK THE THE CITY CITY

[00:20:01]

AND I BELIEVE THAT OUR CITY ATTORNEY.

AM I CORRECT, OMAR, ON THAT? YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TERM LIMITS FOR FOR APPOINTEES.

YEAH, THAT'S ANOTHER PROPOSITION. CORRECT.

BUT THE WAY IT WAS SET UP BEFORE, THEY COULD ONLY SERVE EIGHT YEARS.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO CLEAN THAT UP SO THAT IF THEY IF THEY'RE DOING A GREAT JOB, THEY'RE ABLE TO SERVE MORE THAN EIGHT YEARS. CORRECT.

RIGHT. BUT THAT'S ANOTHER PROPOSITION. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T CONFUSE ANOTHER PROPOSITION. CORRECT. AND GOING BACK TO WHAT MRS. MR. WAS SAYING, IT IS A LEARNING CURVE.

A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK THAT YOU GET ELECTED IN OFFICE AND THAT YOU KNOW HOW TO HOW EVERY DEPARTMENT WORKS. IT TOOK ME ALMOST A YEAR JUST TO LEARN EVERYONE'S NAMES AND EVERY DEPARTMENT, BECAUSE YOU ONLY GET TO SEE THEM EVERY TUESDAY, EVERY, YOU KNOW, SO OFTEN.

SO JUST TO LEARN THAT, I THINK OUR MAYOR HAD A COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OVER US BECAUSE HE SERVED AS CITY MANAGER.

AND SO HE GAVE ME AN ALREADY KNOWING EVERYONE'S NAMES AND ALL THAT.

AND I'M OVER HERE LIKE, WHAT? TOM IS THAT TOM? WHO'S THAT? YOU KNOW, SO SO IT IS DEFINITELY A LEARNING CURVE.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING I'M GLAD THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE MRS. TEETER, BECAUSE IT'S A BIG THING FOR PEOPLE TO NOT REALIZE THAT IT IS A LEARNING CURVE TO BE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL. SO THANK YOU.

YEAH. CORRECT. MAYOR HAS ABOUT A TEN YEAR HEAD START ON ALL OF US HERE IN CITY GOVERNMENT. ALL RIGHT.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.

SHOULD ARTICLE TWO, SECTION FOUR BE AMENDED TO REVISE THE PROCESS FOR FILLING VACANCIES ON THE CITY COUNCIL TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, WHICH REQUIRES THAT VACANCIES WITH MORE THAN ONE YEAR BE ORDERED TO A SPECIAL ELECTION.

I CAN JUMP IN ON THIS ONE BECAUSE THIS ONE'S VERY LEGAL AND TECHNICAL IN KIND OF NATURE.

THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CLEANUPS. AND SO THE CHARTER CURRENTLY SAYS THAT ANY VACANCY IS FILLED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO IF ANY MEMBER VACANCY IS CREATED FOR ANY REASON, THE CITY COUNCIL FILLS THAT SPOT.

THAT CONFLICTS WITH THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, WHICH REQUIRES THAT IF THERE IS MORE THAN A YEAR LEFT ON THAT TERM, THAT THERE HAS TO BE A SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL THAT. SO THIS IS MAKING THE CHARTER FLOW WITH THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION.

NEXT. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, THOUGH.

LET'S JUST SAY SOMEONE.

WAS IN OFFICE. THEY PASSED AWAY TWO YEARS INTO THEIR TERM.

OR MAYBE, SAY, THREE YEARS INTO THE TERM.

SOMEONE RUNS OR GETS ELECTED, OR TWO YEARS INTO THE TERM, THEY GET RUN, THEY GET ELECTED. THEY WIN THEIR ELECTION.

SO THAT'S TWO YEARS THAT THEY'VE SERVED, AND THEN THEY'RE ABLE TO DO TWO MORE TERMS AFTER THAT. WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY WERE TO GO INTO A FOURTH TERM AND THEY ALREADY SERVED TWO MORE YEARS? YOU KNOW, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THE TERM THAT'S FILLED AND IS NOT A COMPLETE TERM DOESN'T COUNT TOWARDS THE TERM LIMITS. AND THAT'S HOW IT'S DRAFTED IN THE IN THE CHARTER AS WELL.

SO THEY'LL FINISH THOSE TWO YEARS AND THEN THEY COULD RUN FOR A TERM.

THAT'S CORRECT. YES. THAT MAKES SENSE. AND SO RIGHT NOW JUST TO BE CLEAR ON WHAT THE STATE CONSTITUTION SAYS IF, IF, IF IT'S LESS THAN A YEAR WE, WE HAVE TO APPOINT OR HOW DOES THAT WORK? JUST SO I'M CLEAR. SO THE WHAT THE SURE.

WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS IS THAT IF IT'S A YEAR OR LESS A HOME RULE CHARTER CITY CAN CHOOSE TO APPOINT RATHER THAN ELECT.

AND OUR CURRENT CHARTER THAT'S THE OPERATIVE LANGUAGE IS TO APPOINT.

AND SO THAT'S REMAINING IN PLACE FOR WHEN THE CITY IS ABLE TO DO THAT.

BUT OTHERWISE IT HAS TO BE A SPECIAL ELECTION.

SO RIGHT NOW IF, IF THERE BE A VACANCY WITH MORE THAN 12 MONTHS, WE HAVE TO HAVE AN ELECTION WE CAN'T APPOINT. THAT'S CORRECT.

AND COULD WE? I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS, COULD WE ADD LANGUAGE HERE THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO APPOINT OR NOT? I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS.

NO. SO IF THE THE CONSTITUTION WOULD NOT ALLOW THAT.

GOOD. SO THIS IS JUST BEING CLEAR WITH THE OR IN LINE WITH THE CONSTITUTION.

THAT'S CORRECT. YES. OKAY.

ANYBODY ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR TO CLEAN UP.

SO THANK YOU. GO AHEAD.

PROPOSITION C SHOULD ARTICLE TWO.

SECTION THREE. ARTICLE FIVE.

SECTION THREE. ARTICLE SIX.

SECTION ONE, ARTICLE EIGHT, SECTION TWO AND ARTICLE 18.

SECTION ONE BE AMENDED SO THAT THE CITY'S APPOINTED POSITION.

CITY MANAGER. CITY ATTORNEY, CITY SECRETARY, AND MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK EACH SERVE UNTIL REMOVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

MY ONLY ANY COMMENTS ON THIS BEFORE I MAKE SOME COMMENTS, AND MY ONLY QUESTION IS WHAT LANGUAGE WAS IN PLACE BEFORE WHEN IT GOT CHANGED? AND IS THAT LANGUAGE THAT WE CAN ENACT BACK INSTEAD OF I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING IT THIS WAY. SO SURE. SO SO THE FIRST THING I'LL SAY IS THAT THE THE CHARTER IS INCONSISTENT.

THERE ARE ARTICLES THAT DEAL JUST WITH THE CITY MANAGER, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT ARE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT ANOTHER SECTION REGARDING TERM LIMITS MIGHT SAY. SO THERE'S CONFLICTS ALREADY KIND OF THROUGHOUT THE CHARTER.

BUT THE OPERATIVE TERM LIMIT LANGUAGE, WHICH I BELIEVE IS ARTICLE 18 CURRENTLY SAYS

[00:25:05]

AND SO THAT'S TWO TERMS OF FOUR YEAR TERMS, SO A TOTAL OF EIGHT YEARS EVEN FOR THE APPOINTED POSITIONS. BUT THIS NEW LANGUAGE CLEARS THAT UP, RIGHT? SO THIS THIS NEW LANGUAGE MAKES IT CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER PROVISIONS, WITH THE PROVISIONS THAT WERE IN PLACE IN OTHER SECTIONS THAT SAY THAT THE POSITION CONTINUES TO BE REMOVABLE AT WILL BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BUT THAT THE APPOINTEES SERVE IN THEIR POSITIONS UNTIL REMOVED AND DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC SET NUMBER OF TERMS OR SPECIFIC SET NUMBER OF YEARS.

PERSONALLY. PERSONALLY, I REALLY LIKE THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF WHAT I WAS MENTIONING WHEN WE WERE SEARCHING FOR A CITY MANAGER.

WE FELT THAT WE DIDN'T GET THE POOL WE WANTED INITIALLY, BECAUSE WHY WOULD THEY RELOCATE FOR A RIGHT? YOU'VE GOT A SHELF LIFE OF EIGHT YEARS.

I THINK IF SOMEBODY IS GOOD, LIKE FOR CONTINUITY OF GOVERNMENT, FOR JUST BRINGING GOOD TALENT TO OUR AREA AND TO OUR CITY.

I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO DO AWAY WITH THOSE LIMITS.

SO THANK YOU FOR THIS ITEM.

ANYBODY OBJECT WITH PUTTING LANGUAGE INSTEAD OF UNTIL REMOVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL? I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE HAD BEFORE.

THAT'S WHY I MEAN IT'S SAME.

THAT'S CORRECT. I DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO THINK THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GO VOTE TO REMOVE ALL THESE POSITIONS. I MEAN, LOOK, YOU GOT TO REMEMBER, WHEN PEOPLE GO VOTE, ESPECIALLY IN NOVEMBER THEY'RE VOTING FOR PRESIDENT, THEY'RE VOTING FOR ALL THESE BIG POSITIONS, AND THEY'RE GOING TO GET AT THE BOTTOM SECTION OF THIS THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE FOR THESE SECTIONS, AND THEIR HEAD IS ALREADY GOING TO BE RIGHT.

THERE'S A LOT OF ITEMS. SO I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT REMOVING ANY POSITIONS.

JUST I MEAN, IT'S JUST CLEARING IT UP.

OBVIOUSLY, WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. BUT I'D LIKE TO INCLUDE IN THAT THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL. IT'S ALMOST THE SAME THING, YOU KNOW. IF POSSIBLE.

I THINK THAT'S THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS THERE BEFORE. BUT ANYWAY.

BUT I'M GOOD WITH THIS SECTION.

I APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE.

CAN THAT STILL BE INCLUDING THIS IN HERE? WELL, SO ULTIMATELY, JUST TO BE CLEAR, IT'S UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER THE SPECIAL ELECTION. OR AND SO WHATEVER LANGUAGE THE CITY COUNCIL PREFERS, YOU'RE ABLE TO DO THAT.

THIS WAS CRAFTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COMMITTEE.

RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. YEAH, BUT ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM. LET'S, LET'S LET'S HAVE IT ADDED BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS BACK ON ANOTHER MEETING.

RIGHT? YEAH. BUT I JUST WANT TO HEAR FROM THE COMMITTEE. ARE YOU ALL OKAY WITH IT? IT'S ALMOST THE SAME THING.

IT JUST I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO GET THE IDEA THAT, I MEAN, THESE ARE APPOINTED POSITIONS WE HAVE, AND WE'RE NOT TRYING TO REMOVE ANYONE.

IT'S JUST THE TERM LIMITS REALLY, AT THIS POINT.

BUT THERE'S THE COMMITTEE.

OKAY WITH THAT? OR AT THE PLEASURE OF THE CITY COUNCIL INSTEAD OF.

GO AHEAD AND. PROPOSITION D SHOULD ARTICLE THREE, SECTION NINE BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THAT THE CITY'S ORDINANCES AND NOTICES BE PUBLISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW? WELL GO AHEAD. ANY COMMENTS BY ANYBODY? I HAD A COMMENT ON AS COMPARED TO WHAT? WHAT DO WE HAVE NOW? WELL, IT SAYS RIGHT NOW THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE A LOCAL PAPER. AND SO WE USED TO HAVE THE EDINBURG DAILY REVIEW AND SO EVERYTHING USED TO BE PUT ON THERE. WE CURRENTLY PUT THEM ON THE WHERE DO WE PUBLISH OUR NOTICES RIGHT NOW ON THE ADVANCE NEWSPAPER.

OKAY. AND SO RIGHT NOW.

HOW DOES THAT DIFFER TO THE STATE'S LAW. RIGHT.

IT DOESN'T IT ACTUALLY PUTS IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.

SO STATE LAW HAS ITS OWN REQUIREMENTS FOR WHAT NEEDS TO BE PUBLISHED IN A NEWSPAPER.

WHAT KIND OF NEWSPAPER? THE CITY IS FOLLOWING THAT LAW CURRENTLY, JUST LIKE THE MAYOR SAYS.

JUST REMOVES THE REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE A LOCAL NEWSPAPER BECAUSE THERE IS NOT ONE.

OKAY, SO MY QUESTION THEN, MAYBE FOR MISS CLARICE IS IF THIS PASSES, WHAT CHANGES? THERE ISN'T MUCH CHANGES.

IT WOULD STILL BE PUBLISHED IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER, BUT IT ALSO WE ALSO PUBLISH IT ON OUR WEBSITE. WE CAN PUBLISH IT ANYWHERE WE WANT TO.

IS THIS PART OF THE ONE WITH THE CONTRACT? YES. THAT'S RIGHT, THERE WAS ONE.

THERE'S ORIGINALLY IT SAYS THAT WE HAVE TO CONTRACT WITH A LOCAL NEWSPAPER, BUT WE DON'T CONTRACT WITH THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER, WE JUST PUBLISH. YES, I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE CONSISTENT WITH WHERE WE PUBLISH OUR NOTICES AND HOW WE PUBLISH THEM, SO THAT PEOPLE ARE AWARE AND KNOW WHERE TO GO.

FOR SURE. RIGHT. AND THIS WOULD BE CONGRUENT WITH ANY CHANGES WITH STATE LAW.

WE WOULD FOLLOW SUIT. YES.

[00:30:02]

WELL, THAT THAT THAT WOULD BE MY ORDINANCE. WE CAN MAKE AN ORDINANCE AT ANY TIME TO MAKE IT. THIS IS A MINIMUM STANDARD.

THAT'S CORRECT. A MINIMUM STANDARD FOR EVER CHANGE BY THE STATE. BUT IF WE RECOMMEND STAFF, WE WANT IT IN THE MONITOR.

WE WANT IT IN THE LARGEST, LARGEST LOCAL CIRCULATING NEWSPAPER.

THE LOCAL I THINK IS THE KEY WORD.

WELL LARGE I THINK LARGEST LOCALLY YOU DO ADVANCED.

YOU COULD DO, YOU KNOW, PAMPHLETS.

BUT IF YOU DO LARGEST YOU COULD MAKE THE ARGUMENT AS A NEWSPAPER.

THAT'S WHAT I THINK THEY'RE TRYING TO CLEAN UP. RIGHT, RIGHT. BUT THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS, IT COULD BE PLACED ON OUR WEBSITE AND THAT WOULD MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THAT STATE LAW. RIGHT.

IT DEPENDS ON ON WHAT'S BEING NOTICED.

BUT THERE THERE ARE CERTAIN NOTICES THAT MUST BE IN A NEWSPAPER.

AND SO THE CITY CURRENTLY HAS COMPLYING WITH THAT. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE CHARTER DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING AS FAR AS CITY OPERATIONS GOES. OKAY, GREAT. PROPOSITION E SHOULD ARTICLE THREE, SECTION ONE AND SECTION TWO BE AMENDED TO CLARIFY THAT NEWLY ELECTED CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR TAKE OFFICE AT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOLLOWING AN ELECTION, AND THAT A MAYOR PRO TEM BE CHOSEN BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE MEETING.

SO WHY DO WE NEED TO HAVE THIS IN HERE? SO THIS IS THIS IS ANOTHER CLEANUP.

SO CURRENTLY IT REFERS TO A MAY ELECTION WHEN ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE SWORN IN.

AND OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T DO OUR ELECTIONS IN MAY ANYMORE.

THE CITY MOVED TO A NOVEMBER ELECTION.

AND SO AS A RESULT, THE LANGUAGE IS KIND OF OUT OF DATE.

AND SO THIS IS JUST A REVISION TO SAY, AFTER A CITY'S GENERAL ELECTION IS WHEN THE OFFICERS OR THE ELECTED OFFICIALS TAKE OFFICE.

IT'S. I'M CURIOUS. WE DON'T HAVE AN ELECTION EVERY YEAR. IT'S EVERY TWO.

IT'S EVERY TWO YEARS. CORRECT.

AND SO DOES THIS MEAN THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A APPOINTED MAYOR PRO TEM FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD, OR HOW DOES THIS WORK? BECAUSE THAT CURRENTLY WE'RE NOT DOING THAT RIGHT NOW. WELL SO GOOD QUESTION. SO THE THE CHARTER HAS A REQUIREMENT AS TO WHEN A MAYOR PRO TEM HAS TO BE APPOINTED AND IT'S AFTER AN ELECTION. IF YOU RECALL, THIS CITY COUNCIL ALSO MADE AN ORDINANCE ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO REQUIRING THAT IN ADDITION TO THAT, A MAYOR PRO TEM ALSO BE CHOSEN EVERY YEAR.

I THINK THE IDEA BEING THAT THERE WOULD BE SOMEBODY DIFFERENT IN THAT POSITION, OR AT LEAST THE OPTION FOR SOMEBODY TO BE DIFFERENT EVERY YEAR.

SO THAT DOESN'T CHANGE.

THE CHARTER REQUIREMENT CONTINUES, WHICH IS AFTER ANY ELECTION, A MAYOR PRO TEM MUST BE CHOSEN.

BUT THEN THE CITY ORDINANCE CONTINUES. ALSO, IT JUST DOESN'T SPECIFY MAY I GUESS THAT'S CORRECT. RIGHT. AND FOR THE COMMITTEE THAT SOMETHING MAYOR PRO TEM HAS ALWAYS BEEN A TITLE THAT'S BEEN RESERVED.

SOMEBODY WOULD HOLD IT TWO YEARS, THREE YEARS, SOMETIMES A WHOLE TERM. WHEN WE CAME IN OFFICE, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A JUST A MATTER OF RESPECT TO LET EVERYONE HOLD THAT TITLE, AND WE CHANGE IT YEARLY.

THAT WAY EVERYONE CAN SERVE AS MAYOR PRO TEM AND KIND OF BE REFERRED TO THAT AND FILL IN FOR THE MAYOR WHEN HE'S NOT AVAILABLE. AND I KIND OF WASN'T SURE ABOUT WHY WAS THIS HERE.

I THOUGHT IT KIND OF REFERRED TO THAT, BUT WE TOOK IT A STEP FURTHER AND JUST DO IT ANNUALLY. OKAY. GO AHEAD.

PROPOSITION F SHOULD. ARTICLE FOUR, SECTION FOUR BE AMENDED TO CONFORM THE CITY'S POSTING OF THE NAMES OF CANDIDATES IN A CITY ELECTION WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATE LAW.

RIGHT. SO THIS IS ALSO JUST ANOTHER GENERAL CLEANUP. THE CHARTER AS WRITTEN RIGHT NOW, HAS A SET NUMBER OF DAYS, AT LEAST TEN DAYS BEFORE THE PRINTING OF BALLOTS TO POST CANDIDATES NAMES.

BUT THE EASIER THING IS JUST TO CONFORM WITH STATE LAW SO THAT THE CITY IS NEVER OUT OF LAPS. WITH THAT, AND THERE'S NO RISK OF A CONFLICT WITH.

WITH THAT SAID, I REMEMBER MCALLEN A FEW YEARS BACK.

YOU KNOW, THE BIG THING WAS, DID THEY LIVE INSIDE CITY LONG ENOUGH FOR THE INSIDE CITY? THE CANDIDATE POSSIBLY.

DO WE HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THAT FOR CANDIDATE VERIFICATION? YOU KNOW, ARE YOU A RESIDENT OR HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT? REMEMBER, MCALLEN WAS GOING THROUGH SOME I THINK THEY WENT THROUGH SOME LITIGATION OR THREATENED LITIGATION.

I DON'T REMEMBER THE SPECIFICS OF THE MCALLEN CASE.

THAT SO THAT QUESTION IS NOT NOT REALLY GERMANE TO THIS PARTICULAR ARTICLE OR SECTION. BUT THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE COULD PROBABLY GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION IN TERMS OF WHAT'S DONE TO VERIFY RESIDENCY.

OKAY. WE JUST LOOKED. I GET IT LATER.

OKAY. THERE IS A PROCESS.

I GUESS THERE IS A PROCESS WE HAVE, THAT'S ALL.

I MEAN, I DIDN'T GO THROUGH IT.

I'VE BEEN HERE 30 YEARS, SO.

OKAY. GO AHEAD. PROPOSITION G SHOULD ARTICLE TWO, SECTION TWO AND ARTICLE FOUR, SECTION FIVE A BE AMENDED TO CONFORM CITY

[00:35:01]

I THOUGHT THIS WAS ALREADY IN PLACE OR ALSO A CLEANUP.

SO THE THE CURRENT CHARTER SAYS OR ONLY REQUIRES A PLURALITY VOTE.

AND SO THIS IS THIS HAS CAUSED CONFUSION IN PREVIOUS ELECTIONS WHERE A CANDIDATE WHO RECEIVES, FOR EXAMPLE, 40% OF THE VOTE IN A THREE PERSON RACE QUESTIONS? WHY IS THERE A RUNOFF IF THE CHARTER SAYS IT'S JUST A PLURALITY? AND THE REASON THERE'S A RUNOFF IS BECAUSE THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION REQUIRES THAT THERE BE A 50% PLUS WINNER FOR THOSE ELECTIONS.

AND SO THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION REQUIRES SOMETHING.

OUR CHARTER SAYS SOMETHING DIFFERENT. THIS IS A CLEANUP TO CONFORM. DOES THE RUNOFF HAVE TO BE TWO WEEKS. YEAH. CAN WE CHANGE THAT TO ONE WEEK OR.

THAT'S ALL THAT'S SET BY STATE LAW.

OKAY. YES. ALL RIGHT. PROPOSITION EIGHT.

SHOULD ARTICLE SIX, SECTION ONE BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE A FULL TIME CITY EMPLOYEE? I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS, OMAR.

IN THOSE CITIES THAT HAVE A CITY ATTORNEY, IS THAT ALSO BUILT INTO THEIR CITY CHARTER, OR IS THAT JUST BY ORDINANCE? I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS.

WELL, TO BE CLEAR, MOST MOST CITIES DON'T HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT, RIGHT? SO THAT'S, IT'S IT'S UNIQUE REALLY TO LARGER CITIES.

BUT MORE OFTEN THAN NOT IT'S FOUND IN CITY ORDINANCE, NOT NECESSARILY IN CITY CHARTER, BUT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE DID COME UP WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION.

AND IN FAIRNESS TO THEM, THEY ACTUALLY CAME UP WITH IT BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL DECIDED THAT THEY WANTED TO IMPLEMENT IT.

AND SO IF THEY MAY HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS ON IT, BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IT USUALLY APPEARS IN ORDINANCE.

AND OF COURSE THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ALREADY MADE THAT IN CITIES ORDINANCE CURRENTLY.

ANYBODY WISH TO ELABORATE ON THAT? OR AND I KNOW HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH OMAR.

RIGHT. BUT MY QUESTION WOULD BE IS IF THERE IS A VACANCY IN OUR WITH OUR ATTORNEY AND WE HIRE A COMPANY FOR THE TIME BEING UNTIL WE FIND SOMEONE ELSE, ARE WE ALLOWED TO DO THAT IF THIS PASSES? SO THE THE CHARTER DOES ALLOW THE CITY COUNCIL TO HIRE ADDITIONAL COUNSEL BESIDES THE CITY ATTORNEY.

IT'S VERY EXPLICIT IN THERE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THAT ABILITY.

SO IF THE POSITION WERE EVER BECOME VACANT AND OBVIOUSLY THE CITY STILL NEEDS LEGAL SERVICES PROVIDED IF THE STAFF THAT WAS THEN CURRENTLY IN PLACE WASN'T ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. THE CHARTER DOES ALLOW THE CITY COUNCIL TO HIRE ADDITIONAL CONSULTANTS OUTSIDE LAW FIRMS, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

HOW MANY CITIES ARE CURRENTLY HAVE A FULL TIME CITY ATTORNEY IN THEIR CITY? I WOULDN'T HAVE THAT SPECIFIC DATA.

IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER IT'S BUT IT'S MORE OFTEN A CONTRACTUAL POSITION AS OPPOSED TO AN IN-HOUSE POSITION. THANK YOU.

GREAT. PROPOSITION I SHOULD ARTICLE SEVEN, SECTION ONE, SECTION THREE AND SECTION FOUR BE AMENDED TO CLARIFY THAT THE CITY'S FINANCE DIRECTOR IS THE HEAD OF THE CITY'S DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE RATHER THAN THE CITY MANAGER, AND THAT THE FINANCE DIRECTOR REPORTS TO THE CITY MANAGER.

YEAH, I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS BEING UPDATED.

I THINK WHEN THE CITY GOT CREATED, CITY MANAGER WAS OVERSEEING A LOT OF THE DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING FINANCE.

SO I THINK THAT CLEARS UP, THAT CORRECTS.

IT CONFORMS WITH THE CITY'S ACTUAL OPERATIONS, WHICH SAY THAT THERE IS A FINANCE DIRECTOR.

SO THIS RECOGNIZES THAT POSITION AND THAT PERSON.

PROPOSITION J SHOULD ARTICLE EIGHT, SECTION ONE BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THAT THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE BE AN ATTORNEY WHO HAS PRACTICED IN THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR AT LEAST THREE YEARS, AND OTHERWISE CLARIFY THAT THE MUNICIPAL COURT HAS THE JURISDICTION AND SHOULD BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.

ANY COMMENTS? ANYONE STRAIGHTFORWARD.

OKAY. AND JUST I'LL JUST ASK THIS QUESTION AGAIN.

I GUESS ANOTHER ONE OF A FEW CITIES THAT ARE MUNICIPAL JUDGES ELECTED AND THOSE OTHER CITIES IS THAT THERE'S A SIMILAR REQUIREMENT.

I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS.

NO, GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT'S NOT.

SO STATE LAW ALLOWS MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGES TO BE ELECTED TO BE ATTORNEYS OR NON-ATTORNEYS, SIMILAR TO JUSTICES OF THE PEACE.

BUT SOME, SOME CITIES DO REQUIRE THAT THEIR MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE BE AN ATTORNEY.

GOT IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

PROPOSITION K, SHOULD ARTICLE EIGHT BE AMENDED TO ADD SECTION THREE SO THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY APPOINT ONE OR MORE ASSOCIATE MUNICIPAL JUDGES WHO WOULD SERVE,

[00:40:03]

BUT MY POINT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT THERE'S AN ELECTED JUDGE, AND I THINK THAT HE NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO PICK HIS JUDGES SO THEY CAN WORK TOGETHER, NOT AGAINST EACH OTHER.

I'M AFRAID THAT THIS MIGHT MAKE THE VOTERS FEEL THAT THEY ELECTED SOMEONE, AND COUNCIL IS ABLE TO APPOINT OTHERS.

BUT ANY BACKGROUND ON THIS? DID WE TALK TO THE JUDGE ABOUT THIS BY ANY CHANCE? DOES HE WAS HE BRIEFED ON THIS? I HAVE NOT SPECIFICALLY SPOKEN WITH THE JUDGE ABOUT THIS.

HAS ANYBODY TALKED TO THE JUDGE ABOUT THIS? OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO GET HIS INPUT.

OBVIOUSLY, HE'S OUR JUDGE.

AND GIVEN THAT RESPECT, I GUESS AFTER THIS, WE CAN MAYBE GET HIS FEEDBACK. CURRENTLY, WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE CORRECT THAT WE.

SO THE CITY DOES HAVE AN ORDINANCE IN PLACE THAT ALLOWS FOR NOT ASSOCIATE JUDGES, BUT FOR TEMPORARY JUDGES, WHICH UNDER STATE LAW IS DIFFERENT FROM AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE. THE CITY HAS THE ABILITY TO PASS AN ORDINANCE ALLOWING FOR ASSOCIATE JUDGES SO IT CAN BE DONE BY CHARTER OR BY ORDINANCE.

THE COMMITTEE TALKED ABOUT THIS, DISCUSSED IT, AND MADE THE RECOMMENDATION.

AND SO THEY'RE PRESENTING TO CITY COUNCIL.

SO OBVIOUSLY CITY COUNCIL HAS THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY ON THIS AND CAN DISCUSS WHOEVER THEY WOULD LIKE. I HAVE A QUESTION. DO TEMPORARY JUDGES, DOES THAT COME WITH PAY LIKE A MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE? IN THE CITY'S CHARTER? I'M SORRY. THE CITY'S ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS FOR TEMPORARY JUDGES.

YES, THEY CAN BE PAID.

IT'S NOT SET BY ORDINANCE.

IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SET BY CITY COUNCIL. AND THIS PROPOSITION, WOULD THIS BE A PAID JUDGE ALSO? AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. THIS THIS CREATES THE ABILITY FOR CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE THOSE APPOINTMENTS.

CITY COUNCIL DOESN'T HAVE HAVE TO MAKE THEM.

AND IF THE CITY COUNCIL DOES MAKE THEM, THEY CAN USE AN ORDINANCE TO FLESH OUT THE DETAILS OF THE POSITION.

THE QUESTION, THE WAY IT'S SET UP RIGHT NOW, IF THERE WAS AN APPOINTED JUDGE OR A TEMPORARY JUDGE, CAN HE WORK AT THE EXACT SAME TIME THE CURRENT JUDGE WORKS? TEMPORARY JUDGES CANNOT.

THERE THEY ARE. THEY'RE DEFINED DIFFERENTLY THAN JUDGE THAN ASSOCIATE JUDGES.

WE COULDN'T HAVE THE JUDGE WORKING WITH THE TEMPORARY JUDGE TO BE EFFICIENT, TO GET CASES RAN THROUGH.

RUNNING TWO COURTS AT THE SAME TIME. RIGHT. SO STATE LAW DEFINES THEM DIFFERENTLY.

AND THEY ARE BACKUPS TO AND NOT IN ADDITION PART AND PART OF THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS IF WE HAVE A TEMPORARY JUDGE, HE TECHNICALLY DOES NOT HAVE TO REPORT TO THE JUDGE. THE ELECTED JUDGE HE REPORTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE CITY MANAGER.

I UNDERSTAND THIS ORDINANCE THAT ASSOCIATE JUDGE WOULD IT SAYS RIGHT HERE TO ESTABLISH MUNICIPAL JUDGE, JUDGE OR PRESIDING JUDGE, IF YOU BECOME THE PRESIDING JUDGE, THOSE JUDGES, JUST LIKE THE COUNTY WOULD REPORT TO THAT JUDGE FOR ANY OFF TIME, ON TIME, ALL THAT STUFF.

SO IT JUST CLEANS UP A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT WE HAVE GOING ON RIGHT NOW.

AND IF YOU WANT TO GROW THE COURT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOME CHANGE BECAUSE ALL YOU'RE GOING TO DO IS PUT ANOTHER JUDGE.

YOU COULD HAVE THE ELECTED JUDGE NEVER SHOW UP AND JUST BRING A BEING A TEMPORARY JUDGE AND DO ALL THE WORK. OR YOU COULD HAVE THE ELECTED JUDGE PLUS AN APPOINTED JUDGE, AND YOU COULD HAVE TWO COURTS GOING ON AT THE SAME TIME IF NEED BE. THAT'S KIND OF THE DIFFERENCE WITH WHAT PLAYS IN PLAYS IN THIS.

OR THERE'S MAYBE SOME OTHER WORDS THAT CAN MAKE IT HAPPEN, BUT IT CAN'T HAPPEN RIGHT NOW. THAT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THAT PART.

ALL RIGHT. ANYBODY ELSE? GO AHEAD. PROPOSITION L SHOULD THE CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED BY REVISING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF ARTICLES 712.

SORRY, 1216 TO CLARIFY THE PROCEDURES FOR PETITIONING A RECALL INITIATIVE OR REFERENDUM ELECTION, INCLUDING REQUIRING THAT ALL PETITIONS BE SIGNED BY A CERTAIN NUMBER OF QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE CITY.

MAKING CLEAR THAT THE POWERS OF INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM DO NOT EXTEND TO ORDINANCES RELATING TO BONDS, THE CITY FINANCES AND BUDGETING, OR CAUSING THE CITY TO SPEND MONEY REMOVING THE REQUIREMENTS THAT PETITION BE CIRCULATED ONLY BY A COMMITTEE OF CIRCULATORS AND ESTABLISHING.

ESTABLISHING THAT SIGNATURES TO PETITION REMAIN EFFECTIVE FOR 30 DAYS PRIOR TO THE FILING OF THE PETITION WITH THE CITY.

CAN WE GET SOME BACKGROUND ON THIS? SURE.

SO THE CITY, WHAT WE HAVE NOW? RIGHT. SO THE CITY HAS ARTICLES IN PLACE THAT ALLOW FOR INITIATIVES, PETITIONS AND FOR RECALLS.

[00:45:01]

EACH OF THOSE HAVE DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT MUST SIGN A PETITION IN ORDER TO INITIATE ONE OF THE THREE THE ONE OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES IS TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT SO THAT IT'S THE SAME NUMBER ACROSS THE BOARD, AND THAT NUMBER IS TIED TO A PERCENTAGE OF THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED IN THE PREVIOUS ELECTION. THERE IS ONE PROVISION, AND I BELIEVE IT'S THE RECALL PROVISION THAT HAS SOME CONFUSING LANGUAGE WHERE IT COULD BE INTERPRETED THAT WHAT IT'S CALLING FOR IS A PERCENTAGE OF THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY VOTED IN THE PREVIOUS ELECTION, AS OPPOSED TO A NUMBER THAT'S EQUAL TO THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO VOTED IN THE PREVIOUS ELECTION. SO THIS CLEANS UP THAT LANGUAGE AS WELL TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IT'S NOT YOU DON'T HAVE TO FIND, YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, 100 PEOPLE WHO VOTED IN THE LAST ELECTION, YOU ONLY HAVE TO FIND 100 REGISTERED VOTERS DEPENDING ON WHATEVER THAT THAT NUMBER IS. AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE ARE SOME CHANGES THAT ARE COMING IN THAT WERE RELATED TO THE FEDERAL CASE INVOLVING THE CITY AND GROUND GAME ON THE MINIMUM WAGE PETITION.

IN THAT CASE, THERE WERE SOME PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER THAT RESTRICTED THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO COULD COLLECT SIGNATURES.

A FEDERAL JUDGE FOUND THAT TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

AND SO THIS ALSO REMOVES THAT LANGUAGE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE JUDGE'S RULING.

SO IT'S A HANDFUL OF CLEANUPS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED IN THESE ARTICLES.

OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU.

AND PROPOSITION M, SHOULD ARTICLE 17, SECTION 11 BE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THAT THE CITY APPOINT A CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE CITY CHARTER AND RECOMMEND AMENDMENTS, IF ANY, EVERY FIVE YEARS DURING YEARS ENDING IN 0 OR 5.

DOES THAT MEAN THAT THIS CHARTER WILL BE DURING AN ELECTION? LIKE IF THIS GETS APPROVED, OR IT CAN JUST BE AT ANY TIME? THIS WOULD MAKE IT DURING AN ELECTION.

SO THERE'S NOT A SPECIAL ELECTION RIGHT OUTSIDE OF IT.

BUT I MEAN, ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER THE ELECTION.

AND SO IF THE CITY COUNCIL WANTED TO ORDER IT AT A DIFFERENT TIME FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION, THEY COULD. WELL, THIS JUST MAKES US HAVE THE COMMITTEE.

THAT'S CORRECT. SO WE'RE NOT SITTING HERE WITH STUFF THAT'S 15, 20 YEARS OLD. THAT'S RIGHT.

WHETHER WE DO ANYTHING AT THAT TIME OR THE COUNCIL DOES ANYTHING AT THE TIME, IT'S UP TO COUNCIL. THAT'S RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT. THOSE ARE THE PROPOSITIONS, MAYOR.

THOSE ARE THE PROPOSITIONS. OKAY, COUNCIL, IS THERE ANY COMMENTS OR ANYTHING ON THESE PROPOSITIONS AT THIS TIME, ANY OF THE ONES THAT WERE PRESENTED? I'D LIKE TO JUST THANK THE COMMITTEE.

THANK YOU FOR THE JOB THAT YOU DID.

THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME INSIGHT THAT WAS TAKING PLACE TO HELP ACCOMPLISH WHERE YOU'RE AT. THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY.

THANK YOU ALL FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK AND GIVING UP YOUR TIME. I KNOW IT'S TIME AWAY FROM YOUR FAMILIES, BUT THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO THE CITY OF EDINBURGH IS DEFINITELY GOING TO BENEFIT THIS FOR YEARS TO COME. SO THANK YOU.

ANY COMMENTS FROM ANYBODY IN THE COMMITTEE? ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? NO. OKAY. GO AHEAD, MA'AM.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'M A TEACHER, A PROFESSOR. AND I THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE.

AND WHEN I LOOK AT THE CITY OF EDINBURGH, WE'VE JUST HAD OUR ALL-AMERICAN CITY.

AND I LOOK AT THE STAFF, AND I LOOK AT OUR RESIDENTS HERE, AND I SAY, WOW, YOU KNOW, THIS IS REALLY A SUPER PLACE TO BE.

BUT THEN I ALSO THINK THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER THE FUTURE, AND THAT FUTURE IS GOING TO BE THAT THIS IS A BUSINESS AND WE'RE RUNNING OUR CITY AS A BUSINESS. WE HAVE 100,000 PEOPLE.

WE HAVE A BUDGET OF $155 MILLION.

DOLLARS. ALL OF YOU, I'M SURE, ARE DOING A FULL TIME JOB.

I KNOW YOU'RE DOING A FULL TIME JOB BECAUSE I CAN SEE ON SOCIAL MEDIA I CAN COME TO THE MEETINGS. I CAN LOOK AT ALL OF THE RECORDINGS.

I KNOW HOW MUCH IT TAKES OUT OF YOUR TIME AND YOUR FAMILY'S TIME, AND THEREFORE, I HAVE TO ASK THAT YOU DON'T CONSIDER WHAT I'M GOING TO SUGGEST AS

[00:50:01]

BUT I'M ASKING THAT YOU CONSIDER THIS FOR THE POSITION THAT YOU HOLD NOW, AND THAT POSITION THAT YOU HOLD NOW SHOULD PAY A LIVING SALARY.

WE CAN DO THIS BY SALARY, JUST AS YOU'VE.

HAVE. VOTED FOR GROUND GAME TO PAY THE CITY EMPLOYEES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS OVER THREE YEARS TIME.

SO PLEASE CONSIDER THE FUTURE AND THAT.

OUR CITY IS NO LONGER A POOR CITY.

OUR CITY IS RICH IN PEOPLE HUMAN CAPITAL.

OUR CITY IS LOOKING TO THE FUTURE.

WE DO NOT HAVE ANOTHER CHANCE UNTIL FIVE MORE YEARS THAT WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT PAYING PEOPLE FOR THEIR TALENT AND FOR THE JOB THAT THEY DO.

SO I THINK THIS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.

AND I KNOW MAYOR SAID NEVER, NEVER WILL I DO THIS UNDERNEATH MY ADMINISTRATION. BUT WE SHOULD NEVER SAY NEVER BECAUSE WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE POSITION AND NOT JUST THE PERSON.

AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE FOR YOURSELF, WHICH I HOPE ALL OF YOU DID IN THE LAST ELECTION, THAT YOU HAVE ENOUGH COURAGE TO THINK ABOUT THE POSITION THAT YOU HOPE THAT OTHER PEOPLE WILL WANT TO TAKE UP, WHERE IT IS NO LONGER A PENURY SITUATION, AND IS A SITUATION THAT GIVES A PAYING WAGE FOR THE WONDERFUL TALENT THAT WE ELECT WHEN WE ELECT THE MAYOR AND COUNCILMAN HERE IN EDINBURGH.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MRS. PETER. AND I WILL STATE I DID TALK TO MISS TEETER IN THE PAST ABOUT THIS AND REALLY WHERE I'M COMING FROM IS WE ALL KNEW WHEN WE WERE RUNNING THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO GET PAID. SO I WOULD FIND IT HARD FOR ME TO SUPPORT AN INITIATIVE FOR, FOR US TO GET PAID. RIGHT.

AND SO I APPRECIATE THAT.

IT DOES TAKE A LOT OF WORK, BUT WE KNEW WHAT WE WERE SIGNING UP FOR.

AND BUT IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING FOR US TO CONSIDER.

THE OTHER THING I'LL SAY IS, I KNOW THAT THE COMMITTEE DID CONSIDER THIS RIGHT. AND I THINK THERE WERE SOME DEBATES ON THIS.

AND OBVIOUSLY IT DIDN'T MAKE IT TO, TO OUR.

SO I HAVE TO TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT AS WELL.

RIGHT. THAT YOU ALL THAT WE APPOINTED DID CONSIDER THIS AND I KNOW YOU ALL WAITED.

I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS SOME PRETTY LIVELY DEBATES, WHICH IS GREAT.

BUT THAT'S WHAT I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT.

BUT THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS.

I APPRECIATE THAT, AND THANK YOU FOR NOTICING THE HARD WORK THAT, YOU KNOW, ELECTED OFFICIALS PUT IN AT THE TIME FROM THEIR FAMILY. AND BUT LIKE WITH MAYORS GOING BACK TO, YOU KNOW, WE KNEW WHAT WE WERE GETTING OURSELVES INTO WHEN WE RAN OUR ELECTION AND IT'S IT'S DEFINITELY I COMMEND YOU JUST FOR, YOU KNOW, TAKING THAT YOUR TIME AND SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT.

AND BUT I AGREE THE NEXT GENERATION.

I CAN SEE THAT THE THAT THAT VOLUNTEERISM.

VOLUNTEERISM IS GOING AWAY.

YOU'RE YOU'RE STARTING TO SEE IT. I HAVE LITTLE BROTHERS AND THEY.

ARE LIKE I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DO THAT. WHAT YOU DO FOR FREE AND ALL THIS I WOULD NOT BE DOING THAT. AND, AND AND I GET IT BECAUSE WITH SOCIETY THE WAY IT IS, YOU'RE HAVING TO WORK TWICE, THREE TIMES AS HARD JUST TO STAY AFLOAT IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD. AND AND SO UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S THE CASE.

BUT I DEFINITELY THANK YOU FOR, FOR SEEING THAT AND.

TAKING YOUR TIME AND AND VOICING YOUR CONCERNS.

YEAH. AND MISS TEETER IF YOU RECOGNIZE THE NAME.

THOSE THAT WATCH THIS MISS TEETER OFTEN GETS GETS HER HER LETTERS POSTED ON THE.

AND THE MONITOR. AND THE THE LETTER TO THE EDITOR.

AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR ADVOCACY.

SHE OBVIOUSLY LOBBIED ALL OF US.

AND AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO THE CHALLENGE I WANT TO GIVE TO THE CHARTER COMMITTEE THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. IS BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT PAYING OUR POSITIONS, I'D LIKE TO SEE CAMPAIGN.

REFORM CAMPAIGN SPENDING LIMITS DONATION LIMITS ON WHAT YOU CAN RAISE.

MAYBE WE CAN ATTACK THAT SIDE FIRST AND THEN CONSIDER SOMETHING A LITTLE LATER.

BUT LIKE THE MAYOR SAID, NOT NOT NOT ALONG OUR TERMS, BUT SOMETHING THAT WILL MAKE THINGS A LITTLE EASIER FOR EVERYONE ELSE AND CLEAN UP THAT SIDE OF OF THE ELECTIONS.

BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. WELL, I GUESS THAT LEAVES ME.

I PERSONALLY, I PERSONALLY WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF SOMETHING IN THIS PART, BECAUSE WHAT I'M SEEING FROM WHAT I'VE BEEN ON MY TIME ON COUNCIL IS THIS IS WE'RE NOT SET UP TO HAVE ANY BLUE COLLAR MEN OR WOMEN THAT, THAT GO TO WORK WITH A NAME TAG ON THEIR SHIRT TO BE SET UP HERE.

IF YOU'RE NOT FINANCIALLY STABLE AND YOUR FINANCES AND STUFF,

[00:55:04]

EACH ONE OF US, WE GET ZERO, WE GET A LUNCH BACK HERE AND WE GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. BUT YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALL WE'RE ALL DOING WELL.

NO COMPLAINT THERE. BUT FOR THE FUTURE, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS IT COST US MONEY EVERY DAY. WHETHER I GO TO SEE A SITE ON MY OWN OR I HAVE TO GO TO AN EVENT, AND I HAVE TO TAKE TIME OFF FROM WORK, WHICH IS TAKE MY MY VACATION TIME OR MY PERSONAL TIME OR MY TIME OR WHATEVER IT IS.

I GUESS I'M CLOSER TO THE BLUE COLLAR PERSON OVER HERE.

I'M NOT ASKING FOR IT. NOW, IF WE EVER DID SOMETHING LIKE THIS, IT'S HARD FOR THE COUNCIL THAT SITS HERE BECAUSE PEOPLE THINK YOU'RE JUST DOING IT FOR YOURSELF, NOT WITH THE ASPECT THAT YOU HAVE.

IF I SAW SOMETHING LIKE THIS, I'D LOVE TO VOTE IT IN AND MAKE IT TAKE EFFECT, LIKE IN 2030. THAT'S WHY THE PEOPLE THAT ARE SITTING AT THIS COUNCIL AT THE TIME THAT IT DID HAPPEN, DIDN'T TAKE EFFECT.

I'M NOT SURE A LIKE A FULL TIME JOB, LIKE A COUNTY COMMISSIONER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT SOME TYPE OF STIPEND LIKE MCALLEN GETS A LITTLE STIPEND FOR REVENGE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A LOT, BUT IT HELPS COVER SOME OF THE GAS COSTS AND STUFF THAT THEY GO THROUGH. BUT I'D BE IN FAVOR OF IT, AND I DEFINITELY WOULDN'T WANT TO BE THE COUNCIL THAT SITS HERE AND TRIES TO PUSH IT THROUGH BECAUSE OF THE BACKLASH WE WOULD GET.

SO IF WE EVER TRY TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, I THINK IT SHOULD BE THAT IF YOU COULD VOTE IT IN, IT TAKES EFFECT TWO TERMS DOWN THE ROAD, OR SIX YEARS FROM THE DATE IT IS VOTED.

BECAUSE MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE WON'T BE HERE, THEY'D ASK FOR IT. SO THAT WOULD BE MY OPINION ON IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

WELL THANK YOU. CHARTER COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY STAFF.

THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR WORKING ON THIS. DEFINITELY A LOT OF WORK PUT INTO THIS.

AND DEFINITELY SOMETHING FOR US TO CONSIDER.

THE NEXT STEPS ARE, IS IT GOING TO COME BACK TO US OR WHAT? WHAT'S THE NEXT STEPS ON THIS? YEAH. SO I MEAN, I GUESS AT THIS POINT THE COMMITTEE HAS DONE ITS WORK AND SPENT MANY MONTHS DOING IT. BALLS IN THE CITY COUNCIL'S COURT.

NOW IN TERMS OF WHEN YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS UP TO EITHER MAKE CHANGES OR TO ORDER AN ELECTION WITH THIS BALLOT LANGUAGE.

OKAY, WELL, FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS.

I WOULD LIKE FOR OUR MUNICIPAL JUDGE TO BE VISITED WITH, YOU KNOW, ON THE LANGUAGE RELATED TO THAT ITEM.

I DO WANT TO GET HIS FEEDBACK.

BUT ALSO COUNSEL. IF IT'S OKAY, WE CAN BRING IT BACK NEXT MONTH BECAUSE I THINK THE DEADLINE TO GO ON THE NOVEMBER ELECTION IS AUGUST 19TH.

RIGHT? IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. SO MAYBE WE'LL BRING IT BACK.

THE SECOND MEETING IN JULY, IF THAT'S OKAY WITH YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY ANY OTHER CHANGES IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THE COMMITTEE? OKAY.

THAT WAY THERE'S ANY OTHER CHANGES.

WE THEN NEED TO PREPARE THE NOTICE.

RIGHT. FOR THE ELECTION FOR AUGUST.

SO. OKAY. GREAT. ALL RIGHT.

IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, WE DO HAVE ANOTHER OUR REGULAR MEETING RIGHT AFTER THIS. IS THERE A MEETING TO ADJOURN THIS WORK SESSION? SO MOVED. MOTION SECOND, WITH THE QUICK DISCUSSION,

[6. ADJOURNMENT]

ADJOURNMENT. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. WE'RE NOW ADJOURNED.

WE'LL GET STARTED OUR REGULAR MEETING IN ABOUT FIVE MINUTES.

THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.