[00:00:01]
JAKE, CAN YOU HEAR ME THAT? I THINK THAT'S BETTER.
[Charter Review Commission on January 11, 2024.]
OKAY.UH, AS WE HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT.
UH, I CALL THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 6:31 PM ON THURSDAY, JANUARY 11TH, 2024.
ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC INTERESTED IN SPEAKING TO THIS BODY ARE WELCOME TO SIGN UP ONLINE FOR FUTURE MEETINGS.
UH, TONIGHT WE HAVE TWO REGISTERED SPEAKERS.
UH, WE HAVE MR. CHRIS ACK, AND, UH, WE ALSO HAVE MR. ALBERT MATA.
UH, EACH OF THOSE SPEAKERS WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO, UH, SPEAK ON YOUR TOPIC.
AND WITH THAT IN MIND, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL MR. KULAK TO THE PODIUM.
UH, I LIVE AT, UH, 1 2, 2 3 KINGS HIGHWAY IN KESSLER PARK, UH, AREA OF DALLAS.
UM, I'M JUST HERE TO, UH, ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER THE AMENDMENT THAT I PUT FORWARD, WHICH IS, I WAS LOOKING EARLIER AS NUMBER 50 ON THE AGENDA, OR THE LIST OF AMENDMENTS THAT WAS PROPOSED IS REALLY AROUND TAKING THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT THAT WE HAVE FROM THE CURRENT COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER FORM OF GOVERNMENT TO A MORE COUNCIL, UH, MAYOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT, UH, IN LOOKING AT, UH, REALLY THE TOP CITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOP 10, UH, AS FAR AS POPULATION GOES, SIX OUT OF THOSE 10 USE A COUNCIL, MAYOR, FORMER GOVERNMENT.
AGAIN, I WOULD JUST THINK THAT IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR THIS COMMISSION JUST TO LOOK AT THAT AND REVIEW IT.
UM, CERTAINLY I THINK, WHICH ALSO WOULD BE IMPORTANT IS ANY CONSIDERATION OF MOVING TO THAT FORM OF GOVERNMENT WOULDN'T CERTAINLY TAKE PLACE UNTIL THE NEXT MAYOR, MAYOR OIL OR COUNCIL ELECTIONS.
'CAUSE I THINK THAT THE CURRENT, UH, GROUP OF FOLKS THAT ARE ELECTED, WERE NOT ELECTED AND DIRECTOR THAT UNDER THAT FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
SO, UH, I WAS A FORMER HOMELESS COMMISSIONER, SO I KNOW THAT TIME COMMITMENT THAT IT TAKES TO BE ON COMMISSIONS.
AND CERTAINLY WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR TAKING THE TIME TO TRY TO MAKE DALLAS A BETTER PLACE.
AND JUST HOPEFULLY YOU'LL CONSIDER THE AMENDMENT THAT I PUT FORWARD.
UH, COMMERS, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? OKAY, THANK YOU, SIR.
UH, NEXT I'D LIKE TO CALL MR. ALBERT AMTA TO THE PODIUM.
THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME SOME TIME.
UM, I WANNA SPEAK ON A COUPLE OF AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED ALREADY.
I, I, I HAVE ALREADY SUBMITTED SOME OF MINE.
I'LL BE DISCUSSING SOME OF THEM.
UH, BUT I WANT TO BEGIN TO SPEAK ON AN AMENDMENT THAT I AM AGAINST.
I BELIEVE THERE ARE TWO PROPOSALS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED, UH, THAT PUT INTO CONSIDERATION THE CHANGING OF, OF THE LENGTH OF TERMS, UM, FROM THREE YEARS OR FOUR YEARS.
I, I, I THINK, UH, I AM IN FAVOR OF THE TWO YEAR TERMS. I AGREE THAT TWO YEAR TERMS ARE VERY SHORT AND THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH THAT, BUT I ALSO THINK THE BENEFITS OUTWEIGH SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WITH THAT.
FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS BEEN MENTIONED AS TO A REASON TO MOVE TO LONGER TERMS IS MAKING SURE THAT OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE MORE EXPERIENCED.
UM, WHILE I THINK THAT CAN BE A BENEFIT, THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A, A DRAWBACK FROM OUR CURRENT SYSTEM, BECAUSE OFTENTIMES THE ADVANTAGE OF INCUMBENTS LEADS TO REELECTION.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE LAST CYCLE THAT WE JUST HAD, WHICH WAS 2023, ALL INCUMBENTS FOR CITY COUNCIL THAT WERE RUNNING WON THEIR SEAT SEATED.
SO THE TWO YEAR TERMS THAT WE DO HAVE DOES STILL MAKE SURE, IN SOME WAY, DOES BENEFIT INCUMBENTS, MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE REWARDING IN SOME WAY EXPERIENCE.
I ALSO WANTED TO, UM, POINT OUT THE FACT THAT TWO YEAR TERMS DOES KEEP ELECTED OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABLE TO THE ELECTORATE.
SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT I DID SUBMIT WERE UPDATING, UM, CAMPAIGN FINANCE RULES.
I THINK IF WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT THIS TWO YEAR TERMS, A RULE THAT WE COULD PUT IN PLACE IS LIMITING SOLICITATION OF CAMPAIGN DONATIONS TO 180 DAYS, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS BEFORE AN ELECTION.
THAT MAKES SURE THAT OUR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE SPENDING AT LEAST 75% OF THEIR TERM, UM, GOVERNING AND NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE NEXT ELECTION.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT OTHER CITIES
[00:05:01]
IN THE STATE, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE THE CITY OF AUSTIN, THEY'VE ALREADY IMPLEMENTED.SO IT'S NOT ANYTHING NEW OR NOVEL.
HOW MUCH TIME DO I HAVE? SORRY, YOU, YOU GOT ABOUT A MINUTE LEFT.
THE LAST THING THAT I SUBMITTED IS, UM, WELL, ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I SUBMITTED, THE LAST THING I'LL SPEAK ON TODAY IS JUST, UH, ADVOCATING FOR UPDATING THE PARAMETERS FOR CITIZEN LED INITIATIVES.
UM, THE CURRENT PARAMETERS, I BELIEVE, MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR ANY GRASSROOTS GROUPS TO, UM, HAVE DIRECT EFFECT ON THEIR GOVERNMENT.
I THINK WE ARE REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY, BUT THERE SHOULD BE ROOM FOR DIRECT DEMOCRATIC MECHANISMS. UH, WE HAVE ONE IN PLACE, BUT TO ME IT'S MORE SYMBOLIC.
UH, WE DON'T REALLY EVER SEE BALLOT INITIATIVES THAT ARE SUBMITTED BY CITIZEN LED INITIATIVES.
I THINK SOME OF, OF THE THINGS THAT I SUBMITTED ARE BENEFICIAL BECAUSE THEY MAKE SURE THAT WE ALSO RESPECT, I GUESS, THE MANDATE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS IN ADJUSTING THE, UM, PARAMETERS FOR, FOR THE AMOUNT OF REGISTERED VOTERS YOU NEED.
UH, MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS? MR. MATA? MR. UH, I JUST, I JUST WANNA THANK BOTH MR. KLOCK AND MR. MATA FOR COMING OUT, UM, FROM DISTRICT ONE TONIGHT.
UH, I THINK THE ENTIRE DISTRICT, UM, I APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE TO OUR CITY, SO THANK YOU.
MR. MADDA, LIFE'S BUSY BEING HERE, CITY HALL ON A THURSDAY EVENING.
WHILE IT SOUNDS EASY IN REAL LIFE, IT'S NOT.
AND, UH, PROBABLY TELL THAT FROM THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE.
SO THANK YOU FOR CARING ENOUGH TO, TO SUBMIT IDEAS AND TO BE HERE TO TALK ABOUT 'EM AND POINT THEM OUT.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE BUSINESS OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION? ALRIGHT, HEARING NONE.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS, UH, TAKING ABOUT TAKING UP OUR MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER 12TH, 2023 MEETING.
UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE MINUTES? ALRIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND? OKAY.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MINUTES? MEMBERS? ALRIGHT, HEARING NONE.
UH, BEFORE WE GET INTO SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT, I WANTED TO, UH, TRY TO HAVE A DISCUSSION AMONGST OURSELVES ON, ON A COUPLE OF THINGS.
UM, UH, TONIGHT WE'RE GONNA BE TALKING ABOUT TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.
UH, I WANTED TO OPEN IT UP WITH A DISCUSSION OF THE UPCOMING SCHEDULE FOR REVIEW.
UH, AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE HAVE THREE MONTHS TO WORK THROUGH AMENDMENTS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.
AS OF LAST COUNT, THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 70 AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED ALREADY FOR CONSIDERATION, AND THERE'S STILL MORE THAT ARE COMING IN BETWEEN NOW AND A WEEK FROM TOMORROW, WHICH IS OUR, OUR DEADLINE FOR AMENDMENTS TO BE FILED.
UH, YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A DRAFT SCHEDULE FROM JAKE ON MONDAY.
I ASK HIM TO SEND THAT OUT SO YOU CAN REFERENCE IT, ALTHOUGH IT IS IN NO WAY FINALIZED.
UH, THERE'S ALSO A PRINTED VERSION THAT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU TONIGHT.
UH, BEFORE I FINALIZE THE AGENDAS FOR OUR FUTURE MEETINGS, UH, I WANTED TO BRING UP A FEW THINGS FOR CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION.
OH, YOU DON'T HAVE A PRINTED VERSION, NEVERMIND.
UM, BUT YOU SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN ONE BY EMAIL, AND IF YOU DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, LET US KNOW.
WE'LL MAKE SURE YOU GET A COPY.
BUT IT WAS JUST KIND OF A, A THINKING OUT LOUD TYPE THING.
I WANTED Y'ALL TO, TO SEE AS I'M TRYING TO WORK THROUGH SETTING THE AGENDA.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE'D HAD, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE AMENDMENT, SOME OF 'EM COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER.
SOME OF 'EM REQUIRE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANOTHER AMENDMENT BEFORE IT REALLY MAKES ANY SENSE.
AND SO, AS I'M LOOKING AT SETTING THESE ON AN AGENDA, UH, IT, IT PRESENTS SOME CHALLENGES.
AND, UM, WE TALKED AT A PRIOR MEETING, AND Y'ALL, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT WE WANTED TO BASICALLY HAVE EVERY, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENT SUBMITTED BY, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, BY STAFF, UH, CITY COUNCIL, ET CETERA.
UH, UNLESS IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT'S ABSOLUTELY NOT APPROPRIATE, NOT PROPER, SOMETHING WE CAN'T DO, UH, TO BE SET ON AN AGENDA ITEM, UH, FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER AND FOR THE, THE PUBLIC TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, THEIR, THEIR POINTS OF VIEW CONSIDERED.
IS THAT, AM I GETTING THAT CORRECT? WHAT WE DISCUSSED? OKAY.
SO GOING FORWARD ON THESE AGENDAS, UM, I'M GONNA TRY TO GROUP THEM BY
[00:10:01]
SUBJECT TO THE BEST WE CAN.YOU KNOW, I'M GONNA SET ALL OF THEM.
IT DOESN'T MEAN I AGREE WITH THEM.
IT DOESN'T MEAN I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR THEM.
'CAUSE THERE'S SOME, I'M NOT, I DON'T THINK.
UM, BUT I'M GONNA SET THEM ON AN AGENDA UNLESS IT'S SOMETHING JUST ABSOLUTELY WE CAN'T TACKLE.
FOR EXAMPLE, I BELIEVE I SAW A PROPOSED AMENDMENT DEALING WITH REVISIONS TO THE, THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION BOARD, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO.
SO THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING I JUST WON'T SET.
UH, BUT OTHERWISE I'M GONNA SET IT AND TRY TO GROUP IT.
THAT'S GONNA BE A LOT OF TOPICS.
UM, BUT THEN WE GET INTO ANOTHER ISSUE, AND I GUESS THIS IS REALLY WHERE I COULD USE SOME HELP AND SOME INPUT FROM Y'ALL.
UH, WE TALKED BEFORE ABOUT NOT VOTING ON ANY OF THE AMENDMENTS UNTIL WE GOT TO OUR LAST MEETING.
UM, BUT AS, AS STAFF HAS WISELY POINTED OUT, THAT COULD PRESENT SOME, SOME ISSUES IN THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, MEMORY ONLY LASTS SO LONG.
AND SO IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA, UH, TO, AS WE HAVE THE, THE ITEMS HEARD ON A PARTICULAR MEETING AT THE END OF THAT MEETING, TO POSSIBLY HAVE A MOTION TO INCLUDE THEM, UH, FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION AT, AT THE FINAL MEETING, UH, OR NOT.
UM, THAT WAY IT WOULD, MIGHT HELP US NARROW DOWN WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT WHEN WE HAVE THAT FINAL MEETING, WHEN WE VOTE ON ALL THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
AND IT WOULD JUST KIND OF, I GUESS, KEEP IT FRESH AND, AND, YOU KNOW, REFLECTING WHAT OUR THOUGHTS WERE WHEN WE HAD THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS TALKING TO US WHEN WE'RE, YOU KNOW, THIS THE, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS ON A GIVEN NIGHT, THE OTHER OPTION IS TO WAIT UNTIL BEFORE THE FINAL MEETING AND THEN, OR AT THE FINAL MEETING HAVE MOTIONS TO ADD WHATEVER AMENDMENTS WE WANT, UH, TO VOTE ON.
UH, I HOPE I EXPLAINED THAT WELL.
UM, BUT IS THERE ANY THOUGHTS, ANY COMMENTS ON WHAT THE COMMISSION WOULD PREFER ON THAT MR. YOUNG, UH, MR. CHAIR? I THINK I WOULD PREFER, UH, A SYSTEM SIMILAR TO WHAT MOST OF THE OTHER CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS DO, WHICH IS THEY TAKE UP AN AGENDA ITEM, THEY DEBATE IT, THEY VOTE, THEY MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.
THE, THE ONE EXCEPTION TO THAT IS, AS YOU POINT OUT, UH, WE HAVE TO APPROVE A, A FINAL PACKAGE.
AND I WOULD THINK IT OUGHT TO BE OPEN TO THE COMMISSION TO TINKER WITH THE PRELIMINARY VOTES BEFORE WE, UH, ADOPT THAT FINAL PACKAGE.
BUT THAT WOULD BE MY STRONG PREFERENCE, RATHER THAN TRYING TO TAKE 70 VOTES IN THE LAST DAY.
SO AS WE GO THROUGH EACH ITEM ON THE AGENDA, TO HAVE A MOTION TO INCLUDE IT OR, OR NOT, OR NOT, OR TO EXCLUDE IT, UH, OR AMENDMENT IN FOR THE FINAL LIST THAT WE WOULD THEN HAVE A ULTIMATE FINAL VOTE ON AT OUR LAST MEETING.
WHICH, WHICH WOULD BE OPEN TO AMENDMENTS AT THAT LAST MEETING.
MR. CHAIR, I'VE THOUGHT BETTER OF AMENDMENT NUMBER ACTS AND SO I WOULD, MY MOTION WOULD BE TO APPROVE THE FINAL LIST, BUT NOT INCLUDE AMENDMENT ACTS.
UH, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
I THINK THAT THAT WILL ALLOW US ALSO TO BE EFFICIENT AT OUR MEETING, UH, AND GET CERTAIN ITEMS THAT WE KNOW ARE NOT CONTROVERSIAL, UH, MOVE FORWARD IN PARTICULAR.
BUT ALSO WE'LL HAVE THE CHANCE TO LISTEN AND CONTINUE TO HEAR FROM OUR CONSTITUENCY BECAUSE WE MAY CHANGE OUR MINDS, UH, AT THE END OF THE DAY, BUT, BUT WE'LL HAVE ALREADY DEALT WITH THEM WHILE THEY'RE FRESH IN OUR MIND AND WHILE WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING THEM.
I ALSO THINK WE COULD BENEFIT, UM, BECAUSE OUR NEXT MEETING IS AFTER THE LAST SUBMISSION IS GONNA BE ALLOWED AFTER THE JANUARY 19TH DEADLINE.
I THINK WE WOULD BENEFIT IF AT THE NEXT MEETING, CITY STAFF, CITY ATTORNEY, ALL OF OUR SUPPORT STAFF WITHIN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND THE CHAIRMAN, PUT TOGETHER A LIST OF CHARTER SUBMITTED CHARTER AMENDMENTS THAT ARE REALLY NOT CHARTABLE IN YOUR OPINION, AND ALLOW US TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF TABLING OR VOTING DOWN THAT ENTIRE LIST TO ALLOW US TO COOL DOWN THE THINGS THAT ARE REALLY NOT CHARTABLE, WHETHER WE LIKE THEM OR NOT.
SO, SO FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, I'D MENTIONED, I ALLUDED TO, AND I HAVEN'T READ IT IN A WHILE, SO I CAN'T QUOTE IT VERBATIM, BUT THERE WAS SOMETHING DEALING WITH POLICE AND FIRE PENSION.
SO YOU, YOU WOULD LIKE FOR ME TO STILL PLACE THAT ON THE AGENDA FOR US TO VOTE TO TABLE IT OR ME JUST EXCLUDE IT FROM THE AGENDA SINCE IT'S, I DON'T KNOW IF LIKE TABLING INDEFINITELY OR VOTING
[00:15:01]
IT DOWN WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE.BUT I THINK IT, WE WOULD BENEFIT IF AT THE JANUARY 23RD MEETING WE GET A LIST OF EVERYTHING THAT WE REALLY SHOULD NOT PUT IN A CHARTER AND WE CAN JUST REMOVE IT FROM THE LIST OF 70 AND ALLOW US TO JUST RIP THAT BANDAID OFF AND, AND, AND GET THE LIST DOWN AS LOW AS POSSIBLE FOR THE ONES THAT REALLY DESERVE OUR ATTENTION.
AND WE GET TO TALK MORE IN DEPTH ABOUT SHOULD THIS BE IN OUR CHARTER, BECAUSE IT'S THINGS WE COULD PUT IN THE CHARTER.
UH, I THINK IT'S ALL IN HOW THESE THINGS ARE GROUPED.
AND I, WE TALKED ABOUT A DECISION TREE, UH, SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED, BUT THERE'S SOME DECISIONS THAT FIRST THE DECISION HAS TO BE MADE ON WHEN THE ELECTION IS, OR DO WE HAVE TO DECIDE ON TERMS FIRST, OR, I MEAN, THERE'S AN ORDER TO THIS PROCESS AND I JUST, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT THE GROUPING IS NOT LIKE IN ORDER OF HOW THEY WERE PRESENTED, BUT THAT IT, THERE'S A LOGICAL GROUPING OF THE AMENDMENTS.
NO, THAT, THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I INTEND TO DO.
AND YOU KNOW, WE, WE DO HAVE THE, YOU KNOW, THE THREE GENERAL GROUPS TECHNICAL, LIKE WE'RE TAKING UP, YOU KNOW, UH, TONIGHT, UH, UH, I'M DRAWING BLANK.
SO WE'LL HAVE 'EM BROKEN INTO THAT.
BUT I'M ALSO LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, THE, THERE'S SOME, THERE'S SEVERAL PROPOSALS ON CHANGING, UH, TERM LIMITS, UH, CHANGING, UH, AND ALL THOSE NEED TO GO TOGETHER AND, AND, YOU KNOW, UH, MOVING ELECTIONS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT PROBABLY NEEDS TO GO ON WITH TERM LIMITS BECAUSE THEY ALL, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT, YOU LOOK AT 'EM AND, YOU KNOW, UH, THEY DON'T SEEM TO BE RELATED ONCE YOU DIG INTO IT.
AS WE KNOW, THEY ARE RELATED, THEY HAVE OVERLAP.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA DO THAT.
I, I AGREE WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER LAMA SAID, AND ALSO COMMISSIONER DE LA FUTA.
I, I THINK THERE'S THINGS THAT WE KNOW THAT DO NOT BELONG IN THE CHARTER THAT ARE THINGS THAT I WOULD RATHER WE HAVE A METHOD TO REMOVE THEM FROM WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING SO THAT WE CAN SPEND THE TIME WE NEED TO, WITH THE TOPICS THAT HAVE MULTIPLE LEGS TO THEM AS TO HOW THOSE ARE GONNA PLAY OUT.
I JUST WOULD LIKE FOR US TO HAVE MORE TIME TO SPEND ON THAT RATHER THAN SPENDING TIME ON THINGS THAT WE KNOW AREN'T GOING ANYWHERE.
I JUST WANNA SECOND, UH, WHAT COMMISSIONER LOWERY AND, AND MR. UH, DELA FUENTE ALSO, THAT RECOMMENDATION, I THINK IS SMART RATHER THAN JUST NOT PLACING THEM ON AN AGENDA.
THE FOLKS THAT SUBMITTED THESE AMENDMENTS, I THINK, DESERVE TO HAVE A VOTE ON THEM.
UH, THEY WENT THROUGH THE TIME OF THEIR DATA, SUBMIT IT, THEY WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS TO SUBMIT IT PROPERLY.
SO I THINK THEY DESERVES TO BE AT LEAST VOTED ON.
UM, EVEN IF WE DON'T THINK THEY'RE GONNA PASS ANY MUSTER, UH, I THINK THE, THE BETTER WAY TO TREAT THIS WITH THE FULL TRANSPARENCY OF THE COMMISSION IS TO HAVE IT SET FOR A VOTE AS OPPOSED TO JUST NOT SET ON AN AGENDA.
SO I, I AGREE WITH BOTH OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
UM, Y'ALL, THIS IS REALLY HELPFUL TO ME 'CAUSE I WAS REALLY STRUGGLING, UH, OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE GO FORWARD WITH THIS.
SO THIS HAS BEEN VERY HELPFUL AND I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR TO ME ON, ON HOW WE SHOULD DO THIS.
UH, I APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S HELP ON THAT.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? MR. CHAIR? I, I JUST HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION IS I'M TRYING TO PIECE TOGETHER A FEW DIFFERENT THINGS.
SO I KNOW THAT THERE IS, THERE IS A SHEET THAT WE WERE ASKED TO THAT, A YES OR NO TO, UH, OF WHICH I'VE YET TO COMPLETE, BUT ALSO I THINK IT MAY BE NOT WORTH COMPLETING UNTIL WE KNOW OFFICIALLY WHAT AMENDMENTS ARE ACTUALLY MAKE UP THE FULL LIST.
BUT IS IT, SO THERE, THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE ON THAT LIST THAT I THINK ARE NOW DETERMINED TO POTENTIALLY TO BE THINGS THAT ARE JUST NOT WORTH OUR TIME.
AND THIS, PERHAPS THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
THE EXCEL SPREADSHEET THAT WAS SENT TO ALL THE COMMISSIONERS, WHICH I'VE YET TO COMPLETE.
UM, ARE THERE AMENDMENTS ON THERE THAT WE ALREADY KNOW ARE MOOT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO BE ABLE TO MAKE ANY CHANGE THAT YOU WERE ASKING US TO PUT A YES OR NO TO.
THAT IS A FULL LIST OF AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED.
UH, THERE, THERE IS NOTHING EXCLUDED FROM THAT FOR ANY REASON, UNLESS IT WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE SUBMITTER.
SO, TO, SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES.
THINGS ARE ON THERE THAT ARE NOT CHARTABLE BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM THE CITY ATTORNEYS.
UM, WE DID MAKE NOTES, UM, AND, AND SOME OF THEM THAT WE, THAT WE SAID ARE NOT CHARITABLE, BUT THERE ARE SOME THAT DON'T HAVE THAT NOTE ON THERE YET.
THE LIST OF, UH, OF THOSE KIND OF AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE CHAIR.
UM, AND I, I CAN WE, WE, WE CAN GIVE THAT TO THE COMMISSIONERS AS WELL, OR NO? YES.
[00:20:01]
GIVE THAT TO COMMISSIONERS AS WELL.UM, SO THAT, SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THAT.
UH, AND THEN SO THEN THE SECOND QUESTION IS THE EXERCISE THAT WE ARE GOING THROUGH WITH THE YES NO, THAT IS ULTIMATELY GENERATING FOR YOU, MR. CHAIR, THE THINGS THAT YOU ARE SAYING SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN GREEN OR YELLOW, YOU KNOW, NOT, NOT CONSIDERED YET BY YOU, BUT SOME, YOU TALKING ABOUT THE EXCEL SPREADSHEET? MM-HMM.
THAT WAS JUST JUST ME IN TRYING TO DETERMINE WHAT WOULD BE SET.
BUT AS WE'VE DISCUSSED, AND, AND I WENT THROUGH THAT THOUGH AS I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT MEETINGS AND TRYING TO HAVE AN AGENDA FOR Y'ALL THAT SHOWED WHAT WAS GONNA BE FOR EACH MEETING, BUT I COULDN'T DO IT.
UM, AND THUS THE CONVERSATION EARLIER WE HAD, SO WHAT, WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO THEN IS EVEN THOUGH THERE'S SOME THINGS AS WE LOOK AT THAT LIST, THAT JUST NOT SOMETHING WE CAN DO.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'LL KEEP, YOU KNOW, BEATING THE, THE, THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION COMMISSION YEAH.
BUT I'M GONNA SET EVERYTHING, UH, FOR US TO HAVE A VOTE ON, YOU KNOW, WE'LL, I WILL READ IT OUT LOUD.
UH, 'CAUSE PEOPLE TOOK TIME, YOU KNOW, TO SUBMIT THOSE.
AND, AND THEY'RE IMPORTANT TO, TO CITIZENS WHO SUBMITTED THEM.
SO WE'LL, WE'LL VOTE YAY OR NAY ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY WILL BE INCLUDED ON OUR FOR CONSIDERATION AT THAT FINAL MEETING.
AND OF COURSE, AS WE DISCUSS, AMENDMENTS CAN BE MADE AT THAT TIME.
SO, SO THE, SO THE EXCEL SPREADSHEET WAS JUST KIND OF AN EXERCISE TO HELP ME DETERMINE WHAT SHOULD BE SET.
BUT GIVEN OUR CONVERSATION TONIGHT, IF Y'ALL HAVEN'T DONE THAT, DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT, BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA SET EVERYTHING FOR, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT.
BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO PLAY OUT THE SCENARIO OF, WELL, WHAT IF 15 OF US SAID NO TO THREE THINGS THAT ARE CONSIDER, THAT ARE CONSIDERABLE, BUT WE, WELL, NONE OF US THINK THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER IT.
UM, I GUESS IT THAT IT'S, THAT IS MOOT NOW.
BECAUSE IF WE'RE NOT GONNA USE THE EXCEL SPREADSHEET, THEN JUST EVERYTHING'S GONNA BE ON THERE.
WHETHER IT'S CONSIDERED OR NOT, OR WHETHER 15 OF US WOULD'VE SAID IF WE WOULD'VE FILLED THE EXERCISE OUT, WE DON'T WANNA CONSIDER IT.
AND THE, THE EXCEL SPREADSHEET WAS JUST KIND OF A, A TOOL TO HELP ME IN, IN SETTING THE AGENDAS.
AND I WAS ACTUALLY PLEASED TO SEE THAT MOST PEOPLE THAT DID IT, WE KIND OF HAD A CONSENSUS ON MOST OF THE ITEMS, I THINK.
BUT, UH, SO HOPEFULLY THAT WILL CONTINUE.
UH, HARGER ARE GOOD THINGS TO COME, BUT, SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT FINISHING THAT.
IT HAS NO SUBSTANTIVE MEETING.
IT WAS JUST A TOOL TO HELP ME TO PLAN.
THE NEXT SEVERAL MEETINGS BEFORE APRIL.
ANYBODY ELSE? YES, I HAVE A QUESTION.
MR. CHAIRMAN, ACTUALLY FOR MR. ANDERSON.
IN THOSE INSTANCE INSTANCES WHERE THE RESIDENTS HAVE MADE A SUBMISSION, UM, THAT DID NOT PASS LEGAL MUSTER, HAVE WE INFORMED THE SUBMISSION THAT THE SUBMITTER TO LET THEM KNOW, TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO EITHER REVISE OR RESUBMIT? I IN SOME CASES, YES.
UM, IN OTHER CASES, WE'VE NOTED THAT ON THE PUBLIC DOCUMENT, JUST, UM, FOR, I THINK THERE WERE, THERE WAS THIS ONE SUBMITTER WHO SUBMITTED SEVERAL THAT WERE NOT, UH, CHARTABLE, FOR EXAMPLE.
UM, AND I DID REACH OUT TO HIM DIRECTLY, UM, VIA THE EMAIL THAT HE LEFT.
UM, BUT IN OTHER CASES, UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT, THAT THAT'S BEEN MADE KNOWN TO THEM OTHER THAN JUST A NOTE ON THE DOCUMENT.
I CAN REACH OUT TO THEM ALL THIS WEEK.
UM, IF, IF THEY'RE PUT ON THE LIST, UM, FOR CHAIR OT AND LET THEM KNOW, I THINK THAT WILL BE FAIR.
JUST BECAUSE THEY, THEY'VE SPENT THEIR TIME, UM, UH, DOING THE SUBMISSION, UH, JUST LET THEM KNOW THAT WE JUST DIDN'T DISREGARD OUT THEIR INPUT.
IT'S JUST THAT THEY DIDN'T PASS A CERTAIN LEGAL THRESHOLD AND GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, TO EITHER RESUBMIT OR GIVE THEM A, A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHY IT WASN'T CONSIDERED.
WELL, WE'LL MOVE ON TO, UM, THE AMENDMENTS WE HAVE TONIGHT.
UH, WE HAVE A LARGE LIST OF TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TONIGHT.
NINE NINE AMENDMENTS ARE ON THE AGENDA LISTED IN ORDER OF AMENDMENT SUBMITTAL.
UH, FOR TONIGHT, I WILL READ EACH AMENDMENT AND A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF IT, THEN OPEN THE FLOOR FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, UM, AT THE END OF EACH AMENDMENT, I WOULD ASK SOMEBODY TO EITHER MAKE AN MOTION TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE THE AMENDMENT, UH, RELATIVE TO OUR, YOU KNOW, FINAL MEETING.
UM, WE DO HAVE, UH, CITY REPRESENTATIVES HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON THEIR RESPECTIVE AMENDMENTS.
UH, THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE CITY, JACK IRELAND, IS HERE ALONG WITH CITY SECRETARY, UH, BILL RE JOHNSON, AND MULTIPLE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEYS.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THEM, LET ME KNOW.
AND I WILL GIVE YOU THE FLOOR TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
I ASK THE COMMISSIONERS LIMIT THEIR QUESTIONS TO THREE MINUTES.
[00:25:02]
YOU CAN ASK AS MANY QUESTIONS AS YOU'D LIKE IN THAT TIME UNTIL YOU SEE THE FLOOR OR YOUR TIME LIMIT RUNS OUT.AND JAKE WILL BE KEEPING TIME FOR US TONIGHT.
ONCE EVERYONE GETS A CHANCE TO SPEAK, WE CAN MOVE TO A SECOND ROUND OF QUESTIONS OF ONE MINUTE EACH.
UM, AND WE ALSO, I THINK WELL STRIKE THAT.
SO THE FIRST AMENDMENT, UH, WE HAVE BEFORE US IS TO ALLOW THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN ESTIMATED BUDGET TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY AUGUST 15TH INSTEAD OF ON AUGUST 15TH.
UH, SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 11, SECTION ONE, UH, AMENDMENT 22.
UM, THIS IS AGENDA ITEM A SUBMITTED BY COMMISSIONER TERRY LOWRY.
IT WOULD AMEND LANGUAGE IN CHAPTER 11, SECTION ONE, WHICH DICTATES WHEN THE ANNUAL BUDGET ESTIMATE FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR WOULD BE SUBMITTED BY THE CITY MANAGER TO CITY COUNCIL.
UH, COMMISSIONER LOWRY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING ON THIS AMENDMENT? UH, THANK YOU, UH, MR. CHAIR.
UH, MR. IRELAND IS HERE IF YOU'D LIKE TO.
TYPICALLY, THE CITY BUDGET IS PRESENTED ON THE SECOND TUESDAY OF AUGUST, SO IT'S ALMOST NEVER ON THE 15TH.
SO THIS IS REALLY A HOUSEKEEPING TO MAKE AN ACCURATE STATEMENT.
UH, WITH THAT I OPEN THE FLOOR TO QUESTIONS.
UH, HEARING NO QUESTIONS, CAN I GET A MOTION TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE THIS AMENDMENT? ALRIGHT.
MS. HUNT MOVES TO INCLUDE, IS THERE A SECOND? MR. DE LA FUENTE SECONDS? UH, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
UH, THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS TO AMEND CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS TO MATCH THE REQUIREMENTS IN ELECTION CODE IN CHAPTER FOUR, SECTION SIX, THIS AMENDMENT 35.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD AMEND CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS TO CONFORM WITH THE TEXAS ELECTION CODE, WHICH REQUIRES A CANDIDATE TO HAVE LIVED FOR ONE YEAR CONTINUOUSLY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS PROCEEDING THE FILING DEADLINE.
UH, WOULD THE CITY SECRETARY LIKE TO GIVE A BRIEF SUMMARY OF WHY THIS IS NECESSARY? MR. CHAIR, MY NAME IS TAMMY PALINO.
I'M THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
I WOULD, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, I'D LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN THAT THE REST OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR TONIGHT ARE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS PROPOSED SOME IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CITY SECRETARY.
AND THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY BASED ON CHANGES TO STATE LAW SINCE THE LAST, UM, ELECTION, UM, FOR THE CHARTER OR CASE LAW THAT HAS STRUCK DOWN A PROVISION IN THE CHARTER OR PRACTICAL, UM, TYPE OF CHANGES THAT WE SEE EVERY DAY, UM, THAT NEED TO BE KIND OF ALIGNED WITH THE PRACTICE OF THE CITY.
UM, AND THEN I DID INVITE, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I JUST WANTED, UM, WE HAVE SOME EMPLOYMENT SECTION, UM, ISSUES THAT I'VE ASKED JENNY BURETT, SHE'S OUR DEPUTY CHIEF OF OUR EMPLOYMENT SECTION TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM.
WE HAVE ONE OR TWO CHANGES FROM MARK BAGOT, WHO'S OUR BANKRUPTCY AND COLLECTIONS ATTORNEY.
UM, AND HE'S HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM.
AND THEN LAURA WILLOW AND, UM, THE CITY SECRETARY ARE GONNA ANSWER YOUR ELECTION QUESTIONS.
SO I I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE AND KIND OF WORK THROUGH THESE WITH YOU ALL.
UM, UH, MEMBERS, ANY, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT? UH, YES.
THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE, I NOTICED THAT THE REQUIREMENT TO RUN FOR ANY COUNCIL OFFICE, INCLUDING MAYOR, IS TO BE OF AGE 18.
THAT STRUCK ME AS A LITTLE YOUNG, BUT, UH, IS THAT THE RULE OF THE LAW IN TEXAS THAT 18 ONE CAN RUN? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENT? UH, MS. HUNT? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
UM, TAMMY, I UNDERSTOOD, UH, MS. PALINO, UM, I UNDERSTOOD THE POINT OF CHANGING AND ALIGNING THE FILING DEADLINE THE SIX MONTHS PRIOR TO THE FILING DEADLINE, THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS.
I'M WONDERING THOUGH ABOUT, UM, SINCE THE STATE ALREADY HAS THE REQUIREMENT OF THE, OF RESIDENCY AND
[00:30:01]
FOR 12 MONTHS, WHY IS IT NECESSARY FOR US TO INCLUDE THAT PARTICULAR PIECE THAT'S MENTIONED HERE TWICE? AND IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S ALREADY COVERED BY STATE LAW, SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHY THAT WAS INCLUDED HERE.I'M GONNA ASK LAURA AND WILLOW TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
SO WE, WE JUST THINK THAT THE PROVISION IN THE CHARTER AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW IS IN COMPLETELY WORDED.
AND SO WE'VE, WE'VE NOW, WITH THE UNDERLINES, WE'VE TAKEN THE LANGUAGE AND MIRRORED IT RIGHT AFTER, UM, OR DIRECTLY AFTER, UM, SECTION 1 41 0.001 OF THE, UH, ELECTION CODE.
SO IT WAS, IT, IT JUST DIDN'T INCLUDE, I THINK THE FACT THAT THE MAYOR ALSO HAS TO RESIDE HERE FOR 12 YEARS.
A ANY OTHER QUESTION? UH, MR. YOUNG, UH, DID YOU GIVE ANY THOUGHT TO, IN INSTEAD OF TRACKING THE SPECIFICS OF THE ELECTION CODE TO GENERICALLY SAYING THAT A CANDIDATE MUST MEET ALL OF THE CANDIDACY REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN THE ELECTION CODE, UM, AND THIS MAY BE A, A LONG SHOT, BUT WHAT HAPPENS IF IN THE NEXT SESSION THEY CHANGE THE 12 MONTHS TO 18 MONTHS OR TO SIX MONTHS OR ADD SOMETHING ELSE? IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN, WE WOULD DEFINITELY ABIDE BY THE STATE LAW REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE CHARTER SAID.
UM, BUT TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, IN GOING THROUGH THE CHARTER, WE TYPICALLY DON'T JUST REFER TO SECTIONS IN STATE LAW BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE TO GO LOOK IT UP FOR THEMSELVES.
AND WE WANT LAY PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO KNOW, UM, JUST BY READING OUR CHARTER WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY.
CAN I GET A MOTION TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE THIS AMENDMENT? I MOVE TO INCLUDE MS. CLAP MOVES TO INCLUDE? IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.
ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT.
UH, NEXT UP ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM C.
UH, THIS AMENDMENT WOULD DELETE SUBSECTION, UH, SUBSECTION C OF SECTION SIX OF CHAPTER FOUR, ELECTIONS AND REFERENDUMS, WHICH STATES THAT IN ORDER FOR A PERSON TO APPEAR ON THE BALLOT AS A COUNCIL CANDIDATE, THE CITY SECRETARY MUST VERIFY THE TRUTH OF THE CANDIDATE'S AFFIDAVIT OF RESIDENCY.
UH, MADAM SECRETARY JOHNSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I WOULD.
I'LL JUST PROVIDE A BRIEF STATEMENT.
THE TEXAS LAW DOES NOT PROVIDE LOCAL FILING AUTHORITIES SUCH AS THE CITY OF DALLAS TO MAKE A CONCLUSIVE DETERMINATION ABOUT THE LOCATION OF A PERSON'S RESIDENCE.
AND, AND IT ALSO REQUIRES THAT SUCH DETERMINATION MUST BE MADE BY A COURT OF LAW.
SO FOR THAT IS THE REASON WHY I SUBMITTED THIS AMENDMENT.
UH, MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS MR. YOUNG? UH, YES.
MS. MORRISON? UH, WITHOUT CASTING ANY DOUBT ON MS. JOHNSON'S, UH, KNOWLEDGE OF, OF THIS SUBJECT, CAN YOU CONFIRM WHAT SHE SAID ABOUT THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS? YES, THERE IS SIGNIFICANT CASE LAW THAT DOES FIND THAT THE FILING AUTHORITY DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE FINDINGS OF FACT ON THE VERACITY OF, UM, A RESIDENCY FILING.
SO IF I AM A VOTER IN A DISTRICT, FOR EXAMPLE, AND I WANT TO CLAIM THAT A OR MAYBE I'M A RIVAL CANDIDATE AND I WANT TO CLAIM THAT, UH, A PERSON DOES NOT MEET THIS REQUIREMENT, MY REMEDY IS TO FILE A LAWSUIT AND GET AN ADJUDICATION.
ONLY A COURT CAN MAKE THAT FINDING.
I JUST, WHAT, WHAT DOES IT CURRENTLY LOOK LIKE TO TRY TO DO THIS? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? YES.
CURRENTLY IT SAYS THAT THE CITY SECRETARY IS REASONABLY ABLE TO VERIFY THE TRUTH OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF RESIDENCY.
AND SO HOW DOES YOUR OFFICE DO THAT? HOW DO YOU ATTEMPT TO DO THAT? I DON'T, SO I FOLLOW THE, THE STATE REQUIREMENT.
SO AT THIS, FOR THE PAST ELECTIONS, I HAVE NOT, YOU HAVEN'T DONE IT, STAYED WITHIN THE FOUR CORNERS OF THAT, THAT DOCUMENT.
AS, AS SOMEONE WHO HAS RUN, BEEN SUED, BECAUSE I WAS TOLD THAT I DIDN'T LIVE WHERE I LIVED, I KNOW THE COURT IS PROBABLY THE PLACE WHERE THIS HAS TO BE ADJUDICATED.
'CAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW SOMEONE, WHEN I FILED THE PAPERWORK, WOULD'VE KNOWN IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
[00:35:01]
I, BY THE WAY, I WONI, I REMEMBER SOME, UH, RESIDENCY CHALLENGES WHEN I WAS IN A LEGISLATURE AND I, I HAVEN'T READ THOSE CASES IN YEARS AND YEARS, BUT I THINK IT WAS LIKE RE THEY SAID LIKE, RESIDENCY'S A STATE OF MIND, AT LEAST FOR THE STATE LEGISLATURE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WORKS ELSEWHERE, BUT IT'S YEAH.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON THIS AMENDMENT MEMBERS? UH, ALL RIGHT.
HEARING NONE, CAN I GET A MOTION TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE IT? I'D LOVE TO MAKE THIS, I'D LOVE TO MAKE THIS MOTION.
YOU'D PROBABLY LIKE TO SECOND IT TOO IF YOU COULD.
AND THIS WE HAVE A SECOND FOR MS. CLAP.
NEXT UP ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM D.
IT'S AN ADDITION TO CHAPTER 24, MISCELLANEOUS PROVISION OF THE CHARTER.
THIS AMENDMENT ALLOWS FOR AN ALTERNATIVE DEADLINE IF A DEADLINE HAPPENS TO FALL ON A WEEKEND OR HOLIDAY.
UH, I WILL NOW OPEN UP, UH, THIS TOPIC FOR QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
UH, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE CITY GOVERNMENT HERE IN DALLAS ONLY HAVE ONE CATEGORY OF HOLIDAY, BUT THE STATE OF TEXAS HAS THREE CATEGORIES OF HOLIDAY, FULL, PARTIAL, AND OPTIONAL.
I'M ASSUMING THE INTENT OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO ONLY INCLUDE FULL HOLIDAYS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND NOT TO INCLUDE PARTIAL AND OPTIONAL.
UH, THE STATE LAW HAS TWO CATEGORIES.
JUST YOU, YOU KNOW, YOUR REGULAR HOLIDAY, AND THEN THERE ARE A FEW OPTIONAL HOLIDAYS.
SO THIS WOULD NOT APPLY TO PARTIAL STAFFING HOLIDAYS NOR THE OPTIONAL HOLIDAYS.
UH, YEAH, I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS WOULD APPLY TO OPTIONAL HOLIDAYS, BUT KEEP IN MIND THE, THE LANGUAGE WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD IS JUST THAT IF YOU HAVE IT ON THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY, UM, THEN YOU'LL HAVE CONSIDERED TO HAVE MET THE DEADLINE THAT, UH, YOUR ACTION IS TIMELY.
SO EVEN THOUGH CITY HALL MIGHT BE OPEN ON A STATE OPTIONAL HOLIDAY, UH, WE WOULD PROBABLY JUST COMPLETE THE ACT BY THAT DAY AND NOT HAVE TO EMPLOY THIS PROVISION WHERE WE WOULD WAIT UNTIL THE FOLLOWING, UM, BUSINESS DAY.
IT'S, IT'S JUST AN OPTION THAT IT'S AN OPTION WOULD HAVE.
AND WE, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD JUST WANNA COVER ALL OF OUR BASES WITH THIS ONE PROVISION.
OKAY? SO IN CASE, UM, IN CASE, YOU KNOW, ANY OF THOSE HOLIDAYS CHANGE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE COVERED BY THIS PROVISION, THEN OKAY.
SO YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO DO SOMETHING AFTER TEXAS INDEPENDENCE DAY, BUT THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE CITY WOULD TAKE THAT COURSES UNLIKELY.
WHEN TEXAS INDEPENDENCE DAY FALLS DURING THE WEEK, WE'RE OPEN.
SO WE WOULD COMPLETE WHATEVER REQUIRED ACT BY THAT DAY, MOST LIKELY.
UH, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO HOW BROADLY THIS IS PROPOSED.
IS THIS PROPOSED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF, UH, CHAPTER THREE, SECTION ONE, OR IS IT APPLIED MORE GENERALLY? WE ARE PUTTING THIS IN THE MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS AT THE END OF THE CHARTER SO THAT IT WILL BE, UM, APPLIED GENERALLY.
BUT THE PROVISION YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT CHAPTER THREE, SECTION ONE IS WHY THIS CAME UP.
BECAUSE THIS PAST JUNE, WE WERE ALL HERE ON JUNETEENTH, UM, SO THAT THOSE COUNCIL MEMBERS COULD TAKE OFFICE THAT DAY AS REQUIRED BY THE CHARTER.
AND WOULD IT APPLY TO ACTIONS OF CITIZENS IN THEIR DEALINGS WITH THE CITY AS WELL AS TO ACTIONS BY THE CITY? YES.
SO IT PROBABLY DOESN'T COME UP, BUT IF, IF, UH, SOMEHOW JANUARY 31 WAS ON A SUNDAY, I COULD PAY MY TAXES ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY ONE TAXES TO THE CITY.
YEAH, I, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.
I WOULD HAVE TO, BUT, UH, I MEAN, IT SEEMS TO ME THERE, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THAT THAT'S GOVERNED BY STATE LAW, RIGHT? SO I WORRY ABOUT A, A SLIGHT CONFLICT ON, ON ISSUES WHERE STATE LAW PROVIDES A DEADLINE, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, MY, MY FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM IS DUE ON THE, ON THE 31ST AND IT'S A SUNDAY, OR, UM, YOU KNOW, UH RIGHT, THAT IF WITH THIS PROVISION, YOUR FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM WOULD BE CONSIDERED TIMELY FILED ON THE NEXT RIGHT.
IS THE FOLLOWING BUSINESS DAY.
UM, WE HAVE A MOTION TO INCLUDE, UH, IS THERE A SECOND? I HAVE A SECOND FOR MS. CLAP.
[00:40:03]
NEXT IS AGENDA ITEM E.UH, THAT'S A CHANGE TO LANGUAGE.
AND CHAPTER THREE, SECTION THREE, COUNCIL QUALIFICATIONS.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO PAY TAXES AND LIABILITIES, UH, BE RELATED TO HOLDING OFFICE.
UH, CITY'S CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS HERE TO, TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? MEMBERS COMMENTS? WHAT WOULD BE A LIABILITY DUE TO THE CITY RELATING TO HOLDING OFFICE? THIS, UM, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ATTEND, UM, UH, THEIR MEETINGS, THEIR THEIR REGULAR MEETINGS, THEIR COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
AND THEN IF YOU DON'T HIT THAT ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENT, YOU OWE, THAT COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD OWE BACK THE CITY, UM, SOME OF THE SALARY THAT WAS PAID.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
CAN I GET A MOTION TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE? ALRIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.
UH, THAT WOULD ALLOW THE CITY TO ACCRUE LIENS ON A MONTHLY BASIS AS OPPOSED TO ONLY HAVING A LIEN ON JANUARY 1ST.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS ONE, MR. YOUNG? UH, YES.
UH, ABOUT THE, UH, PROVISION THAT IS TRIGGERED BY RECEIVERS, TRUSTEES, OR OTHER PERSONS BECAUSE OF INSOLVENCY BANKRUPTCY, RECEIVERSHIP OR OTHERWISE? UH, DOES THE TEXAS TAX CODE AUTHORIZE THAT SECTION? NO.
WELL, HERE'S WHAT I'M GETTING AT.
WE COLLECT, OR WE, WE LEVY THE TAXES THAT THE STATE TELLS US TO LEVY WITH THE EXEMPTIONS AND SO FORTH THAT THEY ALLOW US TO PROVIDE FOR, AND IT'S VERY HEAVILY REGULATED BY STATUTE.
CAN WE BY CHARTER SAY, WELL, IF YOU GO INTO INSOLVENCY OR RECEIVERSHIP BEFORE THE LEVY, THEN THE LEVY IS LAST YEAR'S LEVY UNLESS THE LEGISLATURE HAS AUTHORIZED THAT.
I THINK THE ANSWER TO THAT, SIR, IS THE BANKRUPTCY CODE IS FEDERAL LAW AND IT WOULD SUPERSEDE, THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME.
BUT LET'S TAKE BANKRUPTCY OUT OF THE LOOP.
UH, THE TEXAS TAX CODE HAS PROVISIONS ABOUT LEVY AND SO FORTH, AND IT'S BASED ON THE CERTIFIED TAX ROLES FOR THE CURRENT YEAR.
AND IF THERE'S TO BE AN EXCEPTION SUCH AS THERE WAS, UH, SOME YEARS AGO, UH, THAT WAS DONE BY STATUTE, I JUST DON'T WANT TO GET A, OR TO MAINTAIN A PROVISION IN THE CHARTER THAT IN FACT IS UNAUTHORIZED BY THE TEXAS TAX CODE.
SIR, I, I'D HAVE TO GET BACK ON THAT, THAT WHAT GENERATED, UH, THIS PROVISION WAS PRIMARILY THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX.
NO, I, I SUPPORT THE, THE CONCEPT AND THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED, BUT THAT, UH, THAT RECEIVER, TRUSTEE, OR OTHER PERSON SECTION KIND OF THREW ME A LITTLE BIT.
AND I GUESS ONE ANSWER WOULD BE IF IT'S ALREADY IN THE CHARTER AND HASN'T DONE ANY HARM SO FAR, THEN MAYBE IT WON'T DO ANY HARM IN THE FUTURE, BUT, WELL, I APOLOGIZE.
IT HADN'T BEEN AN ISSUE THAT I WAS AWARE OF AND, ALRIGHT, THANK YOU, UH, MEMBERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? UH, HEARING NONE, CAN I GET A, A MOTION TO APPROVE OR EXCLUDE OR INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE? ALRIGHT, MR. SISE, UH, MOVES.
[00:45:02]
AYES HAVE IT.UH, THAT WOULD BE A CHANGE IN THREE LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CHARTER RELATING TO APPEAL DEADLINES FOR POLICE, FIRE, AND CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD CHANGE THE DEADLINE FOR APPEALS TO 10 DAYS RATHER THAN FIVE.
THE CITY'S PERSONNEL RULES ALREADY REFLECT A 10 DAY DEADLINE.
UH, I'LL OPEN UP TO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS AT THIS TIME.
I HEAR NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
CAN I GET A MOTION TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE MOVE APPROVAL? ALRIGHT.
ITEM H UH, WOULD CLOSE A LOOPHOLE WITHIN THE CHARTER, UH, WITHIN THE CHAPTER OF THE CHARTER THAT GOVERNS CIVIL SERVICE AND PERSONNEL.
CURRENTLY EMPLOYEES ARE REQUIRED TO SERVE A SIX MONTH PROBATIONARY PERIOD.
THIS WOULD REQUIRE A CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE TO SERVE A NEW PROBATIONARY PERIOD IF THAT EMPLOYEE MOVES TO A SWORN POSITION AND THE POLICE OR FIRE DEPARTMENTS, UH, MEMBERS QUESTIONS? COMMENTS ON THIS TOPIC? ALRIGHT, HEARING NONE, MR. CHAIR, MR. SLIS? WELL, I'LL DEFER TO CHAIRMAN.
I MEAN, COMMISSIONER MCG GO FOR A SECOND.
I JUST, HAS THIS BEEN AN ISSUE? I MEAN, WHO'S, WHO'S WANTING TO CHANGE THIS? YES, SIR.
THIS ACTUALLY DID OCCUR, UH, A YEAR OR TWO AGO WHERE THERE WAS AN EMPLOYEE WHO HAD PASSED THEIR CIVILIAN PROBATIONARY PERIOD.
UM, THEY THEN WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF TRAINING AS PART OF THE DPD AND, UM, ENGAGED IN SOME MISCONDUCT.
AND THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT THEY COULD, THEY ACTUALLY HAD CIVIL SERVICE APPEAL RIGHTS.
AND DUE TO THAT CONFUSION, UH, THAT'S THE GENESIS OF THIS, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
ALRIGHT, MEMBERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT.
CAN I GET A MOTION TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE? OKAY.
UH, THIS IS THE FINAL AMENDMENT FOR CONSIDERATION TONIGHT.
UH, THIS WOULD CHANGE THE LANGUAGE OF REGISTERED VOTERS TO RESIDENTS IN CHAPTER EIGHT, SECTION 11, WHICH TALKS ABOUT BALLOT INITIATIVES AND REFERENDUM OF ORDINANCES.
THIS WOULD ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT THAT RESIDENTS WHO WANT TO FILE AN INTENTION TO CIRCULATE A PETITION BE REGISTERED VOTERS.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? MS. HUNT? UH, THIS IS THE ONLY, UH, PROPOSAL THIS EVENING THAT I HAVE JUST A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ABOUT.
UH, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN A CITY REFERENDUM BEFORE, AND I, I, WHAT I REMEMBER TAMMY, WAS THAT WE'VE GOTTA GET FIVE SIGNATURES FROM REGISTERED VOTERS.
THAT'S KIND OF THE START OF THE PROCESS AFTER THAT, YOU HAVE TO GATHER IT.
AT THE TIME I DID IT, I THINK IT WAS 50,000, 60,000 SIGNATURES OF REGISTERED VOTERS BASED ON THE LAST ELECTION, I BELIEVE, BASED ON THE EXACTLY.
THEY HAD TO HAVE ID BADGES, THEY HAD TO BE REGISTERED VOTERS IN THE CITY, UM, THAT, THAT THEY WERE IN TYPICALLY PETITIONED SIGNATURE GATHERERS COME FROM OUT OF STATE, UM, SOMETHING I'VE LEARNED.
AND THEN THEY, THEY COME AND, AND WORK.
UM, AND, AND SO THAT BUCKLEY DECISION SEEMS A LITTLE IN OPPOSITE HERE, WHERE OUR ISSUE IS ABOUT WHETHER FIVE PEOPLE CAN BRING SOMETHING AS A REFERENDUM TO THE CITY AND SIGN IT.
[00:50:01]
IF SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE AND PROPOSE SOMETHING FOR A BALLOT INITIATIVE, THEY SHOULD AT LEAST BE A REGISTERED VOTER.UM, BUT I, AND I CAN UNDERSTAND IN THE BUCKLEY DECISION HOW THAT WAS SEPARATE ABOUT THE PETITION SIGNATURE GATHERERS, BUT I THINK HERE, I THINK IT'S REASONABLE FOR US TO HAVE SOME BAR, SOME STANDARD, UH, OF NOT JUST BEING A RESIDENT, BUT BEING INTERESTED ENOUGH AS A RESIDENT TO BE A REGISTERED VOTER.
UM, SO THAT, AND, AND I CAN BE DISSUADED FROM THAT IF THERE ARE SOME, SOME GOOD ARGUMENTS ON THE OTHER SIDE.
BUT MY INITIAL REACTION TO SEEING THAT, UH, WAS, WAS AS I STATED, SO THANK YOU.
AND, AND THEN CAN I POP IN HERE AND, AND JUST ASK SOMEBODY, UH, EXPLAIN, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT THIS IS FOR, WHY IT CAME ABOUT LITTLE BACKGROUND? WELL, I'M NOT AN EXPERT ON THE REFERENDUM PROCESS, BUT THIS CHANGE SIMPLY AFFECTS THE INITIAL, UM, FIVE SIGNATURES REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE INITIAL, UH, REFERENDUM.
THE REQUIREMENT FOR THAT, IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PEOPLE, UM, SIGNING THE PETITION, THOSE ARE STILL REQUIRED TO BE RE REGISTERED VOTERS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
BUT OUR UNDERSTANDING OF BUCKLEY, UM, SPECIFICALLY AS TO THIS CHANGE IS THAT THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE FIVE PEOPLE THAT ARE GONNA MAKE THE APPLICATION HAVE TO BE REGISTERED VOTERS WAS UNWARRANTED AND, UM, ONEROUS ON THE FIVE RESIDENTS WHO WANTED TO AT LEAST MAKE THE APPLICATION.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY'RE STILL NOT GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO GET REGISTERED VOTERS TO SIGN THE PETITION, IT'S JUST SAYING THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE REGISTERED VOTERS.
AND, YOU KNOW, I COULD GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF THAT.
I MEAN, YOU COULD HAVE FIVE RESIDENTS WHO ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BE REGISTERED VOTERS WHO WANNA APPLY AND GET THE SIGNATURES, UM, ON, UH, FOR A REFERENDUM.
AND SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THAT IS OUR READING OF BUCKLEY IS THAT, THAT THIS INITIAL PIECE, WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING ELSE IN THE PROCESS.
JUST THIS PIECE WHERE IT REQUIRES THEM TO BE REGISTERED VOTERS.
AND I'M HAPPY TO HAVE LAURA OR WILLOW WHO HAVE READ THE CASE MANY TIMES, UM, IN, IN GETTING READY TO PROPOSE THIS CHANGE, UM, TO SPEAK ON IT AS WELL.
SO, YOU KNOW, BUCKLEY SAYS THAT ADDING THAT VOTER REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT, UM, ISN'T WARRANTED BECAUSE THE REQUIREMENT WITHIN CUT DOWN ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO CAN SUBMIT, UH, THOSE PETITIONS.
UM, ALSO THERE WAS SOME DICTA IN BUCK BUCKLEY THAT SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, ARGUING THAT IT'S MORE DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE WHO IS A RESIDENT.
UM, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THAT VOTER REGISTRATION PROOF, UM, THE, YOU KNOW, THE COURT WAITED AND SAID, YOU KNOW, THAT JUST MEANS THAT YOU WERE REGISTERED AT SOME TIME WHILE YOU WERE LIVING HERE AND MAYBE YOU'RE STILL CURRENTLY REGISTERED, BUT YOU'VE MOVED WHERE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU SIGN THE ATTESTATION, UM, AND SWEAR THAT YOU ARE A RESIDENT THAT YOU KNOW IN TIME THAT IS SOMETHING YOU'RE SWEARING TO AT THE MOMENT, YOU'RE SUBMITTING YOUR PETITION VERSUS, YOU KNOW, VOTER REGISTRATION COULD HAVE BEEN FROM MONTHS AGO.
MR. DE LA FUENTE, CAN WE GET CLARIFICATION ON WHAT CLASSES OF PEOPLE THIS WOULD IMPACT? OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I THINK PEOPLE THAT AREN'T CITIZENS, PEOPLE THEORETICALLY UNDER THE AGE OF 18, PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF A FELONY BUT HAVE BEEN RELEASED FROM JAIL, BUT HAVEN'T COMPLETED PROBATION, PAROLE.
IS THERE ANYONE I'M MISSING? NOT, NOT THAT I CAN THINK OF OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
IF, IF ANY OF THESE PEOPLE WERE TO SAY, SUE THE CITY OF DALLAS, DO YOU THINK THIS IS A LAWSUIT THAT WE COULD THEORETICALLY WIN OR MOST LIKELY WHEN, I MEAN WE, I DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW HOW BROADLY BUCKLEY IS GOING TO BE APPLIED ACROSS TEXAS.
UM, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY A LAWSUIT WE'D LIKE TO AVOID.
PARDON MY IGNORANCE, BUT BUCKLEY IS, IS IT A FEDERAL CASE? IS IT TEXAS SUPREME COURT CASE? WHAT, WHAT JURISDICTION? IT WAS SUPREME COURT CASE.
AND THE ISSUE HAD TO DO ALSO WITH POLITICAL EXPRESSION.
IT'S A CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION.
AND POLITICAL, UM, YEAH, POLITICAL EXPRESSION AND BEING ABLE TO PETITION AND REDRESS THE GOVERNMENT.
AND YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN AMENDMENT THAT GAVE ME A LITTLE HEARTBURN COMING INTO THIS MEETING, UH, JUST WITH THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF IT.
BUT AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS SAID SHOULD BE THE REQUIREMENT, AND IF WE HAVE SOMETHING CONTRARY TO THAT, IT COULD CREATE LIABILITY FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
[00:55:01]
YES.ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS MR. YOUNG? UH, JUST A COMMENT.
I I FIND SOME IRONY THAT, UH, A REQUIREMENT THAT YOU FIND FIVE REGISTERED VOTERS TO JOIN YOUR COMMITTEE IS CONSIDERED ONEROUS, BUT A REQUIREMENT THAT YOU GET 60,000 REGISTERED VOTERS TO SIGN THE PETITION IS NOT THAT SAID, I DON'T THINK LIMITING THE COMMITTEE TO REGISTERED VOTERS SERVES ANY COMPELLING CITY INTEREST.
AND SO IF IT KEEPS US OUTTA TROUBLE TO AMEND IT, THEN PERHAPS WE OUGHT TO AMEND IT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? UH, HEARING NONE.
CAN I GET A MOTION TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE MR. SISE MOVES A SECOND.
MR. DE LA FUENTE? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THAT'S THE LAST ITEM I HAVE ON OUR AGENDA.
UH, THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THIS COMMISSION IS ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 23RD AT 6:30 PM I'LL FINALIZE THE AGENDA FOR THAT MEETING, UH, AND ASSURE THAT YOU HAVE TIME TO REVIEW THE AMENDMENTS THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED BEFOREHAND WITH NO FURTHER ITEMS TO DISCUSS.
THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION IS CONCLUDED AT 7:27 PM JANUARY 11TH, 2024.
NICE WORK YOU GOT DONE BEFORE.