[00:00:02]
[Charter Review Commission on April 2, 2024.]
UH, GOOD EVENING AS WE HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT.I CALL THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 6:35 PM ON TUESDAY, APRIL 2ND, 2024.
WE WILL BEGIN TONIGHT'S MEETING WITH PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC INTERESTED IN SPEAKING TO THE BODY TO THIS BODY ARE WELCOME TO SIGN UP ONLINE FOR A FUTURE MEETING.
UH, WE HAVE MANY REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS TONIGHT, SO EACH SPEAKER WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK.
STAFF WILL CALL YOUR NAME AND THE ORDER SIGNED UP AND WILL BE ENFORCING STRICTLY, UH, THE TIME LIMITATIONS.
WITH THAT, I HAND IT OVER TO JAKE ANDERSON TO CALL THE SPEAKERS.
UM, SO WE HAVE 10 REGISTERED SPEAKERS TONIGHT, SO I'M GONNA CALL THE, THE FIRST FIVE JUST SO YOU KNOW WHAT ORDER YOU'LL BE IN.
UM, THE FIRST SPEAKER WILL BE MS. SINA NOLAN, THEN TAMMY BROWN RODRIGUEZ, THEN DANIEL RODRIGUEZ, THEN MARY BROOKS, AND THEN JILLIAN HAWKINS ZORN.
SO WE'LL START WITH MS. NOLAN.
MS. NOLAN, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
UM, I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON RANK CHOICE VOTING.
SORRY, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S AN ECHO.
UM, AND FIRST I WANNA THANK THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM, UH, DISTRICT 13 FOR VOTING AGAINST IT.
I THINK IT'S AN ABSOLUTELY AWFUL IDEA, WHICH IS WHY LESS THAN 20% OF PEOPLE SAYS AN A, B, C POLL, NOT A, YOU KNOW, RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY POLL.
LESS THAN 20% HAVE TRUST IN THEIR GOVERNMENT.
AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHY THIS IS A VERY NONPARTISAN ISSUE, AND THIS IS GONNA KILL ME, BUT I'M GONNA QUOTE FROM CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR, UH, FORMER CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR JERRY BRAT, WHO VETOED THEIR LEGISLATIVE BILL TO EXPAND RANK CHOICE VOTING.
QUOTE, IT IS OVERTLY COMPLICATED AND CONFUSING AND DEPRIVES VOTERS OF GENUINELY INFORMED CHOICES.
SUCH A SYSTEM WILL PRESENT MANY OPPORTUNITIES TO RIG THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM AS IF WE NEED MORE MEANS OF RIGGING.
I'M SORRY, YOU'VE GOT THE SECRETARY OF STATES AUDIT THAT SHOWS DOWS HAS GHOST VOTERS.
WE DO NOT TRUST OUR ELECTIONS.
WE'RE WORKING ON MACHINES THAT ARE NOT CERTIFIED BY CERTIFIED PEOPLE.
THEY CANNOT PASS THE LOGIC EVALUATION TEST, BUT WE GET WAIVERS FROM THE SOS BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO.
AND NOW YOU'RE THROWING THIS ON, IT'S REALLY, REALLY DISTURBING.
UM, I'M SURE YOU'RE GONNA HEAR FROM OTHER PEOPLE THAT WILL GO THROUGH THE POINT BY POINT, BUT I THINK OUR, OUR COUNTRY IS BASED ON ONE MAN, ONE VOTE WHEN YOU THROW OUT VOTES BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T, YOU KNOW, RANK THEM.
YOU DON'T HAVE ONE MAN, ONE VOTE ANYMORE.
AND WHICH CONSENT OF THE GOVERN.
THAT'S YOUR HONOR, IS, IS, IS WHAT WE NEED TO ABIDE BY.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MS. RODRIGUEZ.
OKAY, WELL, WE CAN GO PAST MS. RODRIGUEZ.
UM, SO WE'LL, WE'LL SKIP PAST THE RODRIGUEZ'S FOR NOW AND MOVE ON TO MARY BROOKS.
I DON'T HAVE MARY BROOKS ONLINE.
UH, MARY BROOKS IS NOT ONLINE, SO WE'LL, WE'LL MOVE PAST HER AS WELL.
UH, JILLIAN HAWKINS ZORN, WHO I BELIEVE WAS ONLINE THERE.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU GUYS OPENING THIS UP TO THE, TO THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK.
AND, UM, I, I HAVE A COUPLE OF POINTS THAT I'D LIKE TO, TO POINT OUT.
I AM AN ELECTION JUDGE, SO I AM ON THE FRONT LINES OF HOW, UH, ELECTIONS GO AND HOW PEOPLE APPROACH THE, UH, THE BOOTHS, UH, PRACTICAL, EVERYDAY USE.
I WILL, UM, I WILL SAY THE SAME THING THAT SERENA DID IS THAT WE HAVE NOT CERTIFIED OUR, OUR MACHINE SINCE 2019.
[00:05:01]
I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMISSION.NUMBER ONE, ARE YOU GUYS GONNA GO DOWN TO CENTRAL COUNT AND, AND VOTE? I'M NOT, I'M SORRY, NOT VOTE.
BUT ARE YOU GUYS GONNA BE THE ONES TO COUNT THESE? THAT'S NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO, OUR, OUR MACHINES ARE FAULTY.
UH, AND THEN WE'RE GONNA TRY TO PROGRAM THESE OLD MACHINES THAT AREN'T EVEN CERTIFIED TO DO THIS.
IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, BUT THE DATA ITSELF SHOULD SPEAK LOUDLY TO YOU THAT THE DATA'S THE DATA DOES NOT SUPPORT IT.
WE'RE ALREADY VULNERABLE, WHETHER YOU BELIEVE THAT OR NOT.
IT'S BEEN PRO PROVEN OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT THOSE MACHINES ARE VULNERABLE.
NOW WE'RE GONNA ADD ANOTHER LAYER OF THAT ANO.
WHO IS SUPPORTING THIS? WHO INTRODUCED IT? WHAT'S THE MONEY BEHIND IT? WHAT'S THE PURPOSE? WE'RE IN A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION YEAR.
WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD YOU EVER CONSIDER THAT IN A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION YEAR? UNLESS THERE ARE NEFARIOUS REASONS BEHIND IT.
THIS DOES NOT SUPPORT THE VOTER ON ANY LEVEL.
AND THERE IS DATA ALREADY OUT THERE.
WE DON'T HAVE TO GUESS AT THIS TO CONSIDER THIS EVEN TO THINK ABOUT IT.
I HAVE TO KNOW, I HAVE TO SAY, THIS IS NEFARIOUS.
THIS IS A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
YOU ARE GONNA HAVE TO GET THE MACHINES.
YOU DON'T HAVE TIME TO GET THE MACHINES READY BETWEEN NOW AND THE, THE, UH, THANK, THANK YOU MS. THORN.
BETWEEN NOW AND THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, MS. THORN, YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT MS. THORN THE REAL WORLD.
THIS INCREASES OUR IRREGULARITIES.
HAVING TO, TO, ALRIGHT, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS, OR LET ME READ THE NEXT FIVE SPEAKERS.
UM, WE HAVE MICHELLE HOPPER, THEN DIANE BRYANT, THEN JOHN PARKER, THEN MIKE HOOK, AND THEN AJ MASON.
AND THEN WE'LL RETURN TO THE THREE SPEAKERS THAT WE SKIPPED EARLIER.
SO, MS. HOPPER, YOU, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
UM, I STRONGLY URGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST, TO RANK CHOICE VOTING.
IT REDUCES VOTER TURNOUT AND IT RELIES ON MACHINES.
THE FURTHER ON DOWN THE LINE YOU GET, THE MORE HEAVILY YOU HAVE TO RELY ON THEM.
AND THEN IT REDUCES YOUR TRANSPARENCY.
IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO HAVE SOME SORT OF A, AN AUDIT, LIKE A HAND COUNT AUDIT.
UM, EVERYONE, REGARDLESS OF HOW THEY VOTE, THEY WANT A TRANSPARENT, FAIR, SECURE ELECTION.
AND RANK CHOICE VOTING IS JUST, IT'S A STEP IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.
UM, IT DISENFRANCHISES VOTERS, IT REQUIRES EVEN MORE RELIANCE ON THE COMPUTERS, WHICH THEY ARE HACKABLE.
UM, AND IT TAKES LONGER TO GET THE RESULTS.
WHY WOULD WE EVER WANNA DO THAT? UM, ALASKA AND MAINE HAVE IT NOW WHEN THEY'RE TRYING TO REVERSE COURSE.
UM, ALASKA HAS HAD THEIR LOWEST VOTER TO OUT IN HISTORY LAST YEAR, AND THEY WERE ONE OF THE LAST TO GET THEIR REELECTION RESULTS.
UM, RANKED CHOICE VOTING HAS BEEN BANNED IN AT LEAST FIVE STATES, FLORIDA, TENNESSEE, IDAHO, MONTANA, AND SOUTH DAKOTA.
SOME OF THE QUOTES FROM THE LEGISLATORS WHERE IT'S A BAD, COMPLICATED AND EXPENSIVE IDEA, UH, RANKED CHOICE VOTING CAN ELIMINATE TOP CANDIDATES.
IT'S OVERLY COMPLICATED AND IT TURNS ELECTIONS INTO A GAME OF ODDS.
UM, GAVIN NEWSOM IS ALSO AGAINST IT.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING THAT BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE CAN AGREE ON.
UM, SO LET'S NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES THAT THEY MADE BY FINDING, YOU KNOW, CHASING THE SHINY NEW OBJECT.
UM, THE END RESULT IS IT'S HARDER FOR VOTERS, IT'S HARDER FOR THE ELECTION OFFICIALS, AND IT MAKES IT HARDER FOR EVERYONE TO TRUST THE ELECTIONS.
UM, AND ANOTHER VERY IMPORTANT ASPECT OF ALL OF THIS IS THAT YOUR VOTERS EXPECT YOU TO UPHOLD YOUR OATH OF OFFICE AND REPRESENT OUR INTERESTS.
AND IT'S CLEAR THAT THE ANSWER IS NO TO MAKE CHOICE VOTING.
WE, WE'LL, WE WILL RETURN TO THOSE, UH, SPEAKERS AFTER, AFTER THE ONES I JUST CALLED.
UM, IF WE COULD PAUSE JUST ONE MOMENT.
UM, WE'RE HAVING TECHNICAL ISSUES NOW.
THE, UH, IF COMMS CAN HEAR ME, THE, THE WEBEX IS COMPLETELY SILENT.
SO CAN WE GET THAT SET BACK UP SO THAT PEOPLE CAN HEAR? UM, OH, MAYBE IT WAS JUST, UH, LET'S ALSO MAKE SURE THAT WE HIT OUR, I HIT THE BUTTON ON THE MIC TO SPEAK.
UM, FOR OUR ONLINE GUEST, IF YOU COULD NOTE AGAIN IN THE CHAT, LET ME KNOW YES OR NO THAT YOU CAN HEAR US ONLINE.
[00:10:05]
SO, MS. BRIAN, IF YOU WOULD JUST HIT THE BUTTON ON THE MIC IN FRONT OF YOU.AND NOW ONCE YOU HIT IT, GO AHEAD AND TRY.
HI, I'M DIANE BRYANT AND, UM, I'M HERE ABOUT RANKED CHOICE VOTING.
UM, I'M LIKE, WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT THE WAY IT IS? IT'S JUST FINE THE WAY IT IS.
WHY FIX SOMETHING THAT'S BROKEN? AND, UM, THERE ARE SO MANY, MANY STATES THAT HAVE GONE TO RANK CHOICE VOTING AND REGRETTED IT AND GONE BACK.
SO WHY CAN'T WE LEARN FROM THEIR MISTAKES INSTEAD OF CONTINUING ON? AND, UM, IT IS A SCHEME TO DISCONNECT ELECTIONS FROM ISSUES AND ALLOW CANDIDATES WITH MARGINAL SUPPORT FROM VOTERS TO WIN.
UM, THE AVERAGE PERSON IS NOT GONNA GO AND STUDY ALL THE DIFFERENT CANDIDATES TO FIGURE OUT WHAT NUMBER THEY'RE GONNA BE.
UM, IT OBSCURES TRUE DEBATES AND ISSUE DRIVEN DIALOGUES.
SO IN CANDIDATES AND ELIMINATES GENUINE BINARY CHOICES BETWEEN TWO TOP CANDIDATES.
IT ALSO DISENFRANCHISES VOTERS BECAUSE BALLOTS THAT DO NOT INCLUDE THE TWO ULTIMATE FINALISTS ARE CAST ASIDE TO MANUFACTURE A FALSE MAJORITY FOR THE WINNER.
AND IT'S JUST NOT A GOOD CHOICE.
WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA PAUSE FOR A SECOND JUST BECAUSE THE WEBEX, UM, THE, THE SOUND IS NOT GOING THROUGH THERE SO THAT OUR ONLINE PARTICIPANTS CAN'T CURRENTLY HEAR, UH, WHAT'S BEING SAID.
SO IF YOU WOULD JUST HOLD ON ONE MOMENT.
WE WILL GET BACK TO THE SPEAKERS, UH, IN JUST ONE SECOND.
MS. BRYANT, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON WITH TO MR. PARKER.
OKAY, THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO MR. HOOK.
RCV PROMISES, A FAIR, PROMISES A FAIRER AND MORE INCLUSIVE ELECTORAL SYSTEM.
BUT OUR RESEARCH SPANNING OVER TWO DECADES REVEALS CONCERNING PATTERNS THAT CHALLENGE THIS NOTION.
THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH RCV ARE ALARMINGLY COMMON AND CANNOT BE OVERLOOKED FROM BALLOT CONFUSION TO COMPLEXITY, EXHAUSTED BALLOTS AND CONFUSED VOTERS.
THE ISSUES ARE MANIFOLD, LONG BALLOTS AND EXTENDED DELAYS IN GETTING RESULTS ONLY COMPOUND THE PROBLEM.
MOREOVER, CERTAIN DEMOGRAPHICS EXPERIENCE HIGHER ERROR RATES AND MORE EXHAUSTED BALLOTS.
WITH RCV HIGHLIGHTING ITS INEQUITIES, THESE CHALLENGES UNDERMINE THE VERY ESSENCE OF DEMOCRACY, LEAVING VOTERS DISENFRANCHISED AND ERODING TRUST IN THE ELECTORAL PROCESS.
IT'S TIME WE ADDRESS THESE ISSUES HEAD ON AND SEEK SOLUTIONS THAT TRULY UPHOLD THE PRINCIPLES OF FAIRNESS, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCESSIBILITY IN OUR ELECTIONS.
UM, NEXT WE'LL HAVE MS. MASON, AJ MASON, MS. MASON, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
WHERE IS THE TIMER? UM, I HAVE IT ON MY PHONE AND THE PHONE WILL JUST DING WHEN IT'S DONE.
OH, I START IT ONCE YOU START SPEAKING.
UH, WE UNDERSTAND THAT TONIGHT'S AGENDA DOES NOT, UM, ENTAIL RANK CHOICE VOTING, HOWEVER, IT IS A, IT IS A CONCERN TO THE DALLAS, UH, RESIDENTS TO HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS IMPLEMENTED.
SO APPRECIATE Y'ALL ALLOWING US TO SPEAK ON IT EVEN THOUGH IT DOESN'T PERTAIN TO TONIGHT'S, UH, AGENDA.
FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THAT HAVING A FREE AND FAIR ELECTION IS SOMETHING THAT IS, UH, BIPARTISAN.
DOESN'T MATTER WHAT AISLE YOU, YOU PARTICULARLY, UH, LEAN ON FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS IS SOMETHING THAT IS IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US AS AMERICANS.
AND THERE'S HISTORY AND DATA THAT SURROUNDS RANKED CHOICE VOTING.
YOU CAN LOOK AT ALASKA, YOU CAN LOOK AT MAINE, PLACES LIKE THAT, THAT,
[00:15:01]
UM, HAVE IMPLEMENTED IT AND IT'S TRYING TO REVVER REVERSE THE COURSE.SO I GUESS I'M CONFUSED AS TO WHY WOULD WE TRY TO IMPLEMENT SOMETHING THAT IS OBVIOUSLY FAILING WITH RANK CHOICE VOTING.
I'M GONNA READ JUST SOMETHING REAL QUICK, UM, CONCERNING RANK CHOICE VOTING.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, A COMPUTER ALGORITHM IS WHAT MAKES THE DECISION.
HOW DOES THAT SOUND LIKE? SOMETHING THAT'S FREE AND FAIR FOR AMERICANS THAT A COMPUTER WILL DECIDE MY VOTE.
THAT'S A VERY CONCERNING ISSUE WITH RANK CHOICE VOTING.
YOU NO, UM, YOU NO LONGER WILL SELECT ONE CANDIDATE FOR YOUR ELECTORAL SUPPORT.
INSTEAD, ALL CANDIDATES ARE LUMPED IN AND YOU ARE TOLD TO RANK EACH ONE AGAIN.
LIKE THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SPOKEN BEFORE ME.
WHAT'S, WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE SYSTEM THAT WE ARE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE WHERE WE GET TO CHOOSE OUR CANDIDATE? IF ANYTHING I SAY WE NEED TO FIX THE, THE COMPUTERS AS THANK YOU.
ALRIGHT, WE WILL CIRCLE BACK NOW, UM, TO MS. TAMMY BROWN RODRIGUEZ, AND THEN MR. DANIEL RODRIGUEZ AND MS. BROOKS AND MR. PARKER IF THEY'RE HERE.
SO, MS. RODRIGUEZ, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
UM, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HEARING US AGAIN TONIGHT.
I KNOW I WAS HERE WITH YOU LAST WEEK AND MY STANCE IS STRONG.
SAY NO TO RANKED, UH, CHOICE VOTING.
I AM FROM ALASKA, AND YOU'VE HEARD TONIGHT SEVERAL EX EXAMPLES OF THE PROBLEMATIC SYSTEMS IN ALASKA USING RANKED CHOICE VOTING OUT OF 119 PEOPLE, 119,000 PEOPLE VOTED IN ALASKA FOR A HOUSE REPRESENTATIVE AND THEY HAPPENED TO VOTE REPUBLICAN.
75,000 VOTED FOR THE DEMOCRAT.
INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, THE PERSON THAT GOT 75,000 VOTES WON BASED ON RANK CHOICE VOTING.
ALL OF YOU RECEIVED AN EMAIL TO ME, PROBABLY TWO EMAILS FROM ME TODAY WITH VERY DETAILED INFORMATION.
UM, THE ASSOCIATION OF RANK CHOICE EDUCATION.ORG IS A FANTASTIC RESEARCH, UM, ENTITY THAT IS BIPARTISAN, THAT HAS PROVIDED THIS INFORMATION.
THEY'RE IN ALASKA AND THEY ACTUALLY HAVE REPEALED, EFFECTIVELY GOT THE RANK CHOICE VOTING TO BE REPEALED FROM ALASKA BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN SO PROBLEMATIC, SPECIFICALLY IN THE NATIVE COMMUNITIES.
AND HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT SOMEBODY WHO HAD LESS VOTES, 75,000, WON OVER SOMEBODY WHO RECEIVED 119,000? IT'S PROBLEMATIC IN SO MANY WAYS, THE DUE PROCESS IS GONE.
THERE'S NO WAY TO DO A FULL AUDIT.
THE ONE MAN, ONE VOTE IS GONE.
YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE STUDIES AND SUPREME COURTS HAVE STATED IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND HAVE STRUCK IT DOWN.
THAT TOO IS IN THAT EMAIL I SENT TO YOU TODAY AS THE DIRECTOR OF POLICY FOR YAKU BOOING'S MINISTRIES, WHERE I DO LEGISLATION FOR A LIVING.
UH, MR. RODRIGUEZ, YOU ALSO HAVE TWO MINUTES.
UH, UM, IF YOU, IF YOU HIT THE MIC BUTTON, GO, GO AHEAD.
AND Y'ALL HEARD OF FUZZY MATH? I'M SORRY.
WE HAVE ALL HEARD OF FUZZY MATH, RIGHT? THIS IS WHAT THIS SOUNDS LIKE.
THIS IMPLEMENTING RCV LOWERS VOTER TURNOUT RATES.
FOR EXAMPLE, BOTH MINNEAPOLIS ST.
PAUL MINNESOTA HAVE RUN LOCAL ELECTIONS USING RCV FOR MORE THAN A DECADE, AND BOTH LAG WELL BEHIND OTHER MAJOR METROPOLITAN CITIES AND MULTIPLE ELECTION VOTER TURNOUT.
IN FACT, COMPARATIVELY LOWER VOTER TURNOUT IN JURISDICTIONS USING RCV IS CONSISTENT PATTERN.
A STUDY OF SAN FRANCISCO ELECTIONS FROM 1995 TO 2011 REVEALED A STRONG RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A DECLINE IN
[00:20:01]
VOTER TURNOUT IN THE ADOPTION OF RCV.FURTHERMORE, DURING ODD AND OFF CYCLE ELECTION YEARS, RCV JURISDICTIONS HAVE ON AVERAGE 8% LOWER VOTER TURNOUT RATES THAN NON RCV JURISDICTIONS.
BECAUSE RCV IS MORE COMPLEX THAN TRADITIONAL VOTING, THE SYSTEM INHERENTLY DISCOURAGES NEW AND INFREQUENT VOTERS FROM PARTICIPATING BETWEEN VOTER CONFUSION, HIGH RATES OF VALID EXHAUSTIONS, AND THE DIFFICULTY OF TABULATING THE RESULTS.
RCV INCREASES THE OPPORTUNITY COST OF ELECTRICAL PARTICIPATION, ELECTRICAL ELECTORAL PARTICIPATIONS, BLESS YOU OVER THERE.
SO, AS YOU GUYS, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS IS FUZZY MATH.
WHEN YOU REALLY LOOK AT IT, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE HAVE TO MAKE THINGS MORE COMPLICATED.
AND REMEMBER, YOUR GRANDCHILDREN ARE GONNA GROW UP IN THIS WORLD, IN THIS COUNTRY.
SEE, WE NEED TO KEEP IT SIMPLE.
UM, I'M JUST GONNA CIRCLE BACK TO THE LAST TWO SPEAKERS, UH, WHO ARE NOT PRESENT.
MARY BROOKS, UH, WHO IS NOT ONLINE.
AND THEN, UH, MR. JOHN PARKER.
THAT CONCLUDES YOUR PUBLIC SPEAKING.
MEMBERS, OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES, UH, FROM OUR MARCH 26TH MEETING.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOVE TO APPROVE.
ALRIGHT, UH, DISCUSSION ON THOSE MINUTES.
NOW WE'RE GONNA MOVE INTO CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT.
AS WE MOVE INTO THAT PART OF THE AGENDA, WE WILL GIVE, UH, THE PEOPLE WHO SUBMITTED EACH OF THOSE AMENDMENTS, UH, THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK ON THEIR SUBMISSION.
FOLLOWING THAT, WE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE EACH ITEM.
I WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT A MOTION IS REQUIRED TO BE PUT ON THE FLOOR BEFORE DISCUSSION BEGINS.
DISCUSSION MUST THEN BE LIMITED TO THAT WHICH IS GERMANE TO THE MOTION.
WE WILL BEGIN NOW, UH, WITH AGENDA ITEM A.
THIS WAS INITIALLY ADVANCED BY OUR BODY ON FEBRUARY 6TH, 2024, BUT DURING OUR MEETING ON MARCH 4TH, 2024, COMMISSIONER HUNT MADE A MOTION TO REVISIT THIS ITEM.
AS SUCH, I'D LIKE TO GIVE, UH, COMMISSIONER HUNT THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK ON THAT, AND THEN WE'LL OPEN UP THE FLOOR TO MOTION THE DISCUSSION.
UH, I SEE THE HONORABLE MR. KINGSTON HERE.
UM, PHILLIP, I KNOW THAT YOU HAD PROPOSED THIS INITIALLY, BUT I THINK WE GOT THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT GARBLED.
UM, WAS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO SAY ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE ON IT? OKAY.
UM, MR. CHAIR, I'M GOING TO, UM, REVERSE COURSE ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.
I'M GOING TO MOVE TO EXCLUDE IT AFTER TALKING WITH STAFF, AFTER TALKING WITH MR. KINGSTON, UH, IT APPEARS THAT THERE ARE BETTER WAYS TO ADDRESS THIS AND THAT THIS, UM, AS PROPOSED WOULD, UH, BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PROCESS OF HIRING AT THE CITY.
UH, THAT'S TO EXCLUDE, UM, AMENDMENT 15.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE.
THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE CARRIES AGENDA ITEM B.
UH, THIS WOULD AMEND CHAPTER THREE, SECTION 13 B TO ALLOW EACH COUNCIL COMMITTEE TO ELECT THEIR OWN CHAIR AND VICE CHAIRS.
THIS PROPOSAL WAS SUBMITTED BY MINISTER DOMINIQUE ALEXANDER.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE HE'S HERE.
MR. ALEXANDER, YOU'RE NOT HERE.
UM, SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION REGARDING THIS AMENDMENT? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO EXCLUDE SECOND DISCUSSION.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE, SAY AYE.
THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE CARRIES AGENDA ITEM C.
THIS WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE MAYOR RECEIVE TWO COUNCIL MEMBER CO-SPONSORS FOR BOARD AND COMMISSION CHAIR APPOINTMENTS.
I'LL SEE THIS SUBMITTED BY COMMISSIONER CAMPBELL.
UM, I'LL GIVE YOU THREE MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT IT.
[00:25:01]
I WILL NOT USE ALL THREE MINUTES.THE POINT OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO ENCOURAGE MORE COOPERATION BETWEEN THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND THE, UH, THE REST OF CITY COUNCIL.
THESE CHAIR APPOINTMENTS, UH, AS WE CAN SEE FROM THIS PROCESS, BUT ALSO THAT PLAYS OUT IN MANY OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, UH, ARE PRETTY IMPORTANT AND CAN SET THE AGENDAS AND HAVE A LOT OF POWER.
AND SO THE POINT OF THIS IS JUST SO THAT IN THE EVENT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A NEW APPOINTEE THAT BECOME THAT FROM THE MAYOR.
THAT WOULD BE BECOME THE CHAIR OF SAID COMMISSION OR CHARTER, OR TASK FORCE, UH, SORRY, NOT TA, UH, NOT CHARTER, BUT, UH, BOARD.
THEN, UH, IT WOULD INCENTIVIZE THE MAYOR TO AT LEAST COME TO COUNCIL AND SAY, HEY, LOOK, I'M PUTTING THIS PERSON UP.
THAT WAY IT'S NOT SOMEONE THAT EVERYONE HATES.
AND THE, AND THE MAYOR GETS THE LAST SAY.
I, I'M OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS ON THIS.
UH, THIS IS A, AN IDEA THAT I THOUGHT THAT WOULD JUST MAKE THE SYSTEM OR THE APPOINTMENT SYSTEM A LITTLE BIT MORE FAIR, UH, TO THE REST OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
BUT, UH, I'M OPEN FOR ANY SUGGESTIONS AND, UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTARY.
MS. LEMASTER, IN 1989, WHICH YOU'VE HEARD ME TALK ABOUT BEFORE, THIS WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR THINGS, UH, A NEW POWER FOR THE MAYOR TO HAVE.
IN FACT, THEY DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A COMMITTEE SYSTEM AT THAT POINT, AND I SAID THEY DIDN'T HAVE A COMMITTEE SYSTEM THEN.
AND THE CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT WE PASSED CREATED THAT.
AND THEN THE MAYOR BEING ABLE TO MAKE THE APPOINTMENTS OF THE CHAIRS.
AND IT WAS A WAY TO TAKE BASICALLY A WEAK BEAR TO A LITTLE BIT STRONGER BEAR.
AND I JUST WANNA PAUSE BEFORE, I MEAN, I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM OTHERS, BUT I AM WORRIED ABOUT, I MEAN, SO MUCH OF WHAT WE HAVE DONE HERE FOR THE LAST SIX MONTHS HAS BEEN WHO HAS THE POWER? AND I SEE PEOPLE TAKING POWER AND TRYING TO SUBTRACT POWER.
SO I JUST, I'D LOVE TO KNOW WHAT THE REST OF, UH, OR SOME, SOME OF THE OTHER COMMISSION MEMBERS THINK ABOUT THIS.
IT, MY GENERAL RESPONSE TO THAT.
AND THEN I, I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM ESPECIALLY THE FOLKS THAT HAVE SERVED ON, ON COUNCIL BEFORE.
BUT, UH, MY GENERAL RESPONSE IS THAT, IS THAT THE POWER SHOULD LESS OR SHOULD REST OF THE MOST, LIKE SMALL DE DEMOCRATICALLY, UH, ACCOUNTABLE OFFICE, WHICH IS GONNA BE THE INDIVIDUAL OFFICE HOLDERS ON CITY COUNCIL.
UNLESS, SO ONE INDIVIDUAL LIKE THE MAYOR.
THAT'S KINDA WHERE MY HEAD'S AT NORMALLY SPEAKING.
BUT I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR AGAIN FROM OTHER FOLKS THAT HAVE BEEN ON CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ISSUE, MR. YOUNG.
WELL, I SUPPORT THE CONCEPT THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER CAMPBELL JUST ARTICULATED, BUT I HAVE TO RAISE A QUESTION.
UH, IF, IF A MAYOR CAN'T GET TWO COS SIGNATORIES, HE OR SHE MIGHT WANT TO THINK ABOUT RESIGNING AS MAYOR.
UH, SO I WONDER IF THIS IS GOING TO HAVE ANY PRACTICAL EFFECT AND BE WORTH THE, THE MECHANICAL BUREAUCRACY THAT IT WOULD CREATE.
SO I ALSO SUPPORT THE UNDERLYING CONCEPT.
AND IN FACT, THE NEXT AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT ARE ADDRESSING THE SAME CONCEPT.
I ALSO WILL SHARE THE, I I DON'T THINK THIS SOLVES THE PROBLEM.
I, I DON'T, I MEAN, I'M NOT EVEN SURE IT HELPS THE PROBLEM BECAUSE THERE'S, THE MAYOR'S GONNA HAVE TWO PEOPLE CHAIRS OR SOMETHING ELSE THAT IS GONNA JUST DO IT.
SO IT, I DON'T THINK IT ACCOMPLISHES WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.
AND SO I DO THINK IT DOES ADD SOME ADDITIONAL BUREAUCRACY AND ALSO TENDS TO IMPACT THE POWER DYNAMIC.
MAYBE THAT'S, THAT'S A GOOD THING.
BUT, UM, AND THE, AT THE END OF THE DAY, I, I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT OPTION.
I WOULD LIKE TO CONCUR WITH WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER MCGOO AND COMMISSIONER YOUNG AND LAMA STATED.
I, I DO THINK IT, IT, UH, REDISTRIBUTES POWER, THE MAYOR IN OUR CITY HAS LIMITED POWER TO BEGIN WITH.
AND I DON'T THINK IT ACCOMPLISHES, UH, THE GOAL BECAUSE THE COMMISSIONER IS CORRECT.
ANY, ANY MAYOR CAN GET TWO PEOPLE TO CO-SPONSOR WITH.
SO I DON'T THINK IT, AND IT DOES CREATE MORE BUREAUCRACY.
AND HAVING WORKED FOR THE CITY FOR 31 YEARS, WE HAVE QUITE A BIT.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION? COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT.
DON'T SEE ANY, SO CAN WE GET A MOTION? SOMEONE ELSE WANNA GO? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO EXCLUDE.
THERE'S A MOTION TO EXCLUDE THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
[00:30:03]
OKAY.THE MOTION TO INCLUDE, EXCLUDE, SAY AYE.
THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE CARRIES AGENDA.
UH, THIS WOULD AUTHORIZE A LIMITED POWER OF VETO FOR THE MAYOR WITH A CITY COUNCIL OVERRIDE OF TWO THIRDS VOTE.
AND THIS WAS, UH, SUBMITTED BY COUNCIL, UH, COMMISSIONER MAGOO.
UM, THREE MINUTES TO TELL US ABOUT IT, PLEASE.
UM, SO THIS IS ALL COMING FROM THE SAME AMENDMENT THAT HAS BEEN, UM, KIND OF BROKEN OUT INTO SEVERAL DIFFERENT PARTS.
THE UNDERLYING PURPOSE OF THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT COMMISSIONER CAMPBELL WAS TALKING ABOUT, IS, UM, TRYING TO REQUIRE, ASSERT THAT THERE IS ADDITIONAL DISCUSSIONS, COLLABORATIONS AS IT RELATES TO THE TWO BIGGEST THINGS THAT OUR, OUR CITY COUNCIL PUTS FORWARD, WHICH IS OFTEN BILLION DOLLAR DECISIONS LIKE A BOND AND OUR BUDGET EACH YEAR.
UM, WHAT HAPPENS, AND THIS IS LARGELY GONNA BE ADDRESSED IN THE NEXT, UM, ITEM AS WELL, BUT WHAT HAPPENS IS WE GET, THE COUNCIL GETS A BUDGET THAT IS REALLY ALMOST COMPLETELY COOKED EVERY YEAR.
THE CITY MANAGER HAS THE MONTH OF JULY, PUTS FORTH, UM, A BUDGET.
AND THE COUNCIL THEN IS USUALLY LEFT WITH WHAT IS, UH, AFFECTIONATELY REFERRED TO AS THE HUNGER GAMES TO FIGHT AFTER VERY LITTLE PIECES OF, UM, THE BUDGET THAT DON'T HAVE HUGE IMPACTS.
AND IN MANY CASES, YOU KNOW, WHEN I FIRST GOT ELECTED, I WAS HUGELY EXCITED ABOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS.
'CAUSE I THOUGHT, OKAY, WE'D HAVE ALL THESE, WE COULD, WE COULD REALLY HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT OUR PRIORITIES ARE AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN, IN OUR DISTRICTS AND OTHER PEOPLE'S DISTRICTS.
AND THERE WOULD BE THIS, THIS COLLABORATIVE DISCUSSION.
UM, AND INSTEAD IT, IT BASICALLY COMES DOWN TO A BUDGET THAT'S PRESENTED.
AND ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO BE CUT AGAIN, WHAT THE PRACTICE OF THIS IS, WE GET A LIST OF LIBRARIES AND, UM, PUBLIC SAFETY AND THINGS THAT WE'LL NEVER WANT TO CUT.
AND THOSE ARE THE ONLY THINGS THAT WE CAN CUT IN THE BUDGET.
AND SO THAT WHOLE PROCESS IS JUST OUTTA WHACK.
AND SO THE MOTIVE OR THE INTENT BEHIND THIS IS TO REQUIRE THERE TO BE, UM, YOU'LL SEE IN THE LATER AMENDMENT THERE TO BE ADDITIONAL DISCUSSIONS OF PRIORITIES THAT EACH COUNCIL PUTS FORWARD.
AND THEN HERE IS TO SAY, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT DD ONE CITY ELECTED OFFICIAL IE THE MAYOR, UM, HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REQ, I WOULD SAY, REQUIRE THERE BE DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE CITY MANAGER AND THE COUNCIL.
AND BY WORK, BY VIRTUE OF THE MAYOR TO SAY, UM, NO, THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH THIS BUDGET.
THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH THE BOND.
WE NEED TO KEEP WORKING AT IT UNTIL WE GET IT RIGHT.
AND, UM, BUT THAT HAS, HAS TO ACCOMPANY ITSELF WITH AN OVERRIDE SO THAT IF THE COUNCIL, THIS CAN'T JUST BE A ROGUE MAYOR GOING OFF AND SAYING, NO, NO, NO.
IF THE COUNCIL HAS, UH, THE, THE REQUIRED OVERRIDE, THEN THEY VOTE TO OVERRIDE THE MAYOR'S VETO AND YOU KEEP MOVING FORWARD.
THE ISSUE WITH ALL THIS THAT YOU'LL SEE IN THIS TIME IS THE TIMELINES.
THERE ARE STATE REQUIRED TIMELINES THAT SAY WHEN THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS TO PASS THEIR BUDGET.
AND SO TRYING TO MAKE A VETO WORK WITH THAT, THOSE TIMELINES IS GOING TO TAKE SOME, UH, PEOPLE SMARTER THAN ME NECESSARILY.
UM, BUT AS, AS I'VE TALKED TO, UM, PREVIOUS MAYORS, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS, CERTAINLY MAYOR ROWLINGS THAT WAS, UM, HAS ADVOCATED FOR THIS PARTICULARLY, AND OTHERS TO TRY TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE THERE BE ADDITIONAL, UH, COLLABORATION IN THE TWO BIGGEST ITEMS THAT, THAT OUR COUNCIL PUTS FORWARD, AT LEAST FINANCIALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE BUDGET AND THE BOND.
AND SO THAT IS, THAT IS THE INTENT BEHIND, UM, ITEM D.
AND THEN I'LL SAVE OTHER DISCUSSION FOR ITEM E.
UH, THANK YOU, UH, MEMBERS ALSO, JUST SO YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, UH, WE DO HAVE THE DIRECTOR OF BUDGET MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
I WON'T CALL THEM UP UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS YOU WANT TO ASK THEM.
UH, WITH THAT IN MIND, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, UH, FOR MR. MAGOO ON THIS? YES, I, I HAVE A QUESTION.
UH, COMMISSIONER, WHY VEST THIS ADDITIONAL POWER WITH THE MAYOR AND NOT DIRECTLY TO THE COUNCIL? WELL, IT, IT DOES, IT HAS TO START SOMEWHERE.
THE, THE MAYOR IS, IS FIRST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IT'S THE ONLY CITYWIDE ELECTED OFFICIAL.
SO IT IS THE PERSON THAT IS TASKED WITH REPRESENTING EVERYBODY AT EVERY AREA OF OUR CITY.
UM, AND SO I THINK THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE PLACE TO, TO GO.
THE SECOND PIECE IS, IT CAN'T BE EXCLUSIVELY WITH, WITH
[00:35:01]
THE MAYOR.AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S THE OVERRIDE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE, THE COUNCIL HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, MAYOR, YOU'RE WRONG.
AND THE TWO THIRDS OVERRIDE POWER THAT THE WOULD BE RESERVED BY THE COUNCIL.
IS THAT CONSISTENT WITH, WITH OTHER CITIES AND OF THE SIZE WHO HAVE GRANTED THE POWER OF, UH, VETO POWER TO THEIR MAYOR? YEAH, I, I HAVE NOT DONE THE RESEARCH LOOKING AT OTHER CITIES, SO I DON'T WANNA COMMENT ON IF THAT'S THE SAME OR NOT.
SO SO TWO THIRDS IS JUST A NUMBER THAT YOU CAME UP WITH.
IT'S ANY, YEAH, ANYTIME WE HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY ON OTHER ITEMS, IT'S, IT'S A COMMON PRACTICE IN THE CITY.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, MR. CHAIR.
UM, I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS, UM, ABOUT THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
ONE OF THE REASONS I VOTED TO EXCLUDE THE LAST, UH, PROPOSAL THAT WOULD'VE REQUIRED THE MAYOR TO GET TWO CO-SPONSORS FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
'CAUSE IT CHANGES THE POWER DYNAMICS, UH, OF THE COUNCIL.
UM, WE HAVE A CITY MANAGER COUNCIL FORM OF GOVERNMENT, AND WE HAVE SOME CHECKS AND BALANCES WITHIN THAT.
BUT WE DO NOT HAVE A STRONG MAYOR.
OUR CITY HAS VOTED AGAINST A STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM.
AND NOT TO SUGGEST THAT THIS IS PROPOSING THAT, BUT THIS IS CREEPING A LITTLE TOWARDS THAT, THAT END OF THE SPECTRUM.
AND I, I, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO TAKE POWER AWAY FROM OUR MAYOR BY REQUIRING, UH, HIM OR HER TO GET APPROVAL OR, UM, TO NOMINATE CHAIRS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
BUT I ALSO DON'T WANNA GIVE THE PAYER THE MAYOR SUCH EXTENSIVE POWER OVER THE PURSE STRINGS BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS SUCH AN INCREDIBLE, UH, POWER.
AND I THINK A, A TWO THIRDS OVERRIDE DOESN'T QUITE KEEP THE PLAYING FIELD EQUAL.
SO WITH DUE RESPECT, I'LL, UH, BE VOTING TO EXCLUDE THIS ITEM, MR. YOUNG, I HAVE SOME CONCERNS.
AND APPARENTLY COMMISSIONER MAGOO, UH, HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THOSE ABOUT HOW THE TIMING OF THIS WOULD WORK, PARTICULARLY WITH THE BUDGET, UH, AS WRITTEN, THIS IS, UH, A EITHER OR THE MAYOR VETOES THE ENTIRE BUDGET, OR HE DOESN'T, OR SHE DOESN'T.
UH, IF THE MAYOR VETOES THE BUDGET AND IT IS, UH, THE LAST DAY TO ADOPT THE BUDGET, THEN THE COUNCIL IS CONDEMNED TO TRYING AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN UNTIL SOMETHING PASSES.
LIKEWISE, ON A BOND ELECTION, IF, IF YOU VETO A BOND ELECTION, YOU CAN ALWAYS BRING IT UP TWO WEEKS LATER.
BUT WITH THE CITY HAS A TENDENCY TO PUSH THE DEADLINE FOR ORDERING AN ELECTION, UH, TO, UH, ORDER THE ELECTION AT THE LAST POSSIBLE DATE.
AND THEN YOU'RE IN THE SAME SITUATION OF, WELL, WE EITHER PUT THE ELECTION OFF SIX MONTHS, UH, OR WE, UH, STAY ALL NIGHT TO TRY AND FIND SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY CAN AGREE ON.
UH, I ALSO SHARE, UH, COMMISSIONER HUNT'S CONCERNS.
AND, UH, I JUST AM NOT SURE THAT THIS IS A PROPOSAL I CAN SUPPORT MS. LOWERY.
UH, FOR MANY YEARS I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR ONE OF THE LARGEST BUDGETS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, UH, AND PUT IT TOGETHER EVERY YEAR.
AND ALL OF THE MECHANICS THAT WENT INTO THAT, INCLUDING THE BILLING SYSTEM TO DO WATER BILLS.
UH, THE TIMING ON THIS, I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT, AS WELL AS THE CONCERNS THAT COMMISSIONER HUNT MENTIONED.
BUT TO PUT THE CITY'S BUDGET TOGETHER IS A MASSIVE UNDERTAKING.
AND FOR, TO HAVE SOMEONE TO HAVE THE POWER TO JUST SAY, NO, WE'RE NOT GONNA DO THAT.
WE HAVE BILLS THAT HAVE TO BE PAID.
WE HAVE CONTRACTS THAT HAVE TO BE ISSUED.
THERE'S A LOT OF IMPACTS TO THAT.
THAT WOULD BE VERY NEGATIVE TO THE CITY AS A WHOLE, IN MY OPINION.
MS. LEMASTER, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
UM, JUST, I JUST HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY VETO POWER WOULD FORCE MORE COLLABORATION.
IT, IT SEEMS TO ME IT WOULD SPARK MORE FIGHTS, BUT I HELP ME UNDERSTAND.
SO AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, THERE IS, UM, POTENTIALLY ZERO INCENTIVE FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO, UM, SIT DOWN AND TALK WITH THE MAYOR, AND IN SOME CASES THE MINORITY, MINORITY OF COUNCIL MEMBERS.
SO RIGHT NOW, AS LONG AS THE CITY MANAGER HAS EIGHT VOTES, THERE'S THE WHOLE BUDGET CAN START SKEWING IN CERTAIN DIRECTIONS, UM, BASED ON WHO THOSE EIGHT PASSERS
[00:40:01]
OF THE BUDGET ARE.SO WITHOUT SOME CHECK ON THAT, UM, THERE'S, AND IT HAS PROVEN TO BE THE CASE, THERE ARE SOME TIMES WHERE THE, A BIG PORTION OF THE CITY AND THE COUNCIL HAVE NOT MUCH INPUT INTO AT LEAST SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE IMPORTANT PRIORITY AREAS ARE OF THE CITY.
UH, DO YOU KNOW OF ANY OTHER COUNCIL MANAGER, FORMER GOVERNMENT WHERE THE, UH, MAYOR HAS VETO POWER ON THE BUDGET? I, I HAVE, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE AREAS WHERE THEY, THE MAYOR DOES HAVE VETO POWER, BUT I'M NOT, I HAVE NOT RESEARCHED THE DIFFERENT CITIES, ANY COUNCIL MANAGER FORM GOVERNMENT.
I, I, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK TO IT IF I'M INCORRECT, BUT I BELIEVE THERE ARE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT, CAN I GET A MOTION? I'LL MOVE TO INCLUDE, IS THERE A SECOND? A SECOND.
WE HAVE A SECOND FOR MS. CLAP.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO INCLUDE AMENDMENT 1 0 8.
NAY MAY'S HABIT, THE MOTION DOES NOT CARRY ANY OTHER MOTIONS ON THIS AGENDA ITEM BEFORE WE MOVE ON.
AGENDA ITEM E, THIS WOULD REQUIRE THE CITY MANAGER TO SEEK AND OBTAIN THE CITY COUNCIL'S POLICY PRIORITIES BEFORE SUBMITTING THE CITY MANAGER'S ANNUAL BUDGET AND REQUIRE THE CITY MANAGER'S AN ANNUAL BUDGET TO REFLECT THOSE PRIORITIES.
THIS IS AMENDMENT 1 0 8, UH, WAS ALSO, UH, SUBMITTED BY COMMISSIONER MCGOO, AS HE REFERENCED A BIT EARLIER.
SO I'LL TURN FORWARD WITH HIM TO TELL US ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT.
SO THE, THE OTHER ONE YOU WEREN'T BUYING, BUT HOW ABOUT THIS ONE?
AGAIN, IT'S, YOU, YOU'D THINK THIS IS JUST COMMON SENSE, BUT THE INTENTION BEHIND IT IS TO ENCOURAGE THERE TO BE THIS ADDITIONAL COLLABORATION AND EARLIER ON, UM, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY PRIOR TO, TO BREAK AND WHEN TO COUNCIL BREAK IN JULY.
AND, UM, WHERE THERE'S, I MEAN, I'D, I'D EVEN SUPPORT MOVING THE DATES UP AHEAD OF TIME, BUT EITHER WAY, JUST IN TRYING TO GET MORE, MORE CONVERSATION, MORE COLLABORATION ON ITEMS THAT ARE SUPER IMPORTANT AS IT RELATES TO THE BUDGET.
MR. YOUNG, UH, COMMISSIONER MAGOO, IS IT YOUR INTENT THAT THE MANAGER RECEIVED THIS INFORMATION FROM THE COUNCIL AS A BODY OR FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AS INDIVIDUALS? I, I DIDN'T SAY SPECIFICALLY, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD BELIEVE IT WOULD BE AS A BODY.
I MEAN, UH, SO IT WOULD BE AN AGENDA ITEM? CORRECT.
AND THE COUNCIL WOULD VOTE ON ITS BUDGET PRIORITIES? CORRECT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? I, I DID HAVE A QUESTION.
IF YOU CAN ALL CAN HEAR ME, MR. SISE? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
UH, COMMISSIONER MAGOO, THANK YOU FOR THE THOUGHTFUL PROPOSALS.
UM, I COULDN'T GET ON BOARD WITH THE LAST ONE FOR, UH, UH, A SET OF REASONS.
UH, THIS ONE IS ONE THAT I'M MORE INCLINED TO WANNA SUPPORT, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION AS TO THE SECOND ELEMENT OF THE AMENDMENT, WHICH IS THAT THE BUDGET WILL ULTIMATELY REFLECT THE POLICY PRIORITIES.
UH, AND AS I READ THE, THE LEGAL SORT OF MANIFESTATION OF THIS, OF, OF WHAT YOU'VE PROPOSED, IT LITERALLY SAYS, UH, IN SECTION ONE THAT THE ESTIMATE SHALL REFLECT THE CITY COUNCIL POLICIES, PRIORITIES.
UM, AND SO I'M JUST KIND OF WONDERING WHAT WOULD, WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE IN REFLECTION? WOULD IT, WOULD THE BUDGET HAVE TO SAY THIS ISSUE WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL MEMBER X, THIS ISSUE WAS SOMETHING BROUGHT UP BY COUNCIL MEMBER Y, WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE IN PRACTICE? SO, I, I DON'T THINK IT'D HAVE TO BE AS SPECIFIC AS TO WHO BROUGHT IT UP OR WHOSE PRIORITY IT WAS.
ASSUMING THAT IT DOES COME FROM THE BODY, THE BODY WOULD ESTABLISH WHAT THE PRIORITY IS, AND THEN THERE WOULD BE A, A CORRESPONDING ALLOCATION OF HOW THIS IS ADDRESSING THAT PRIORITY, THEN IT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL TO VOTE FOR THE BUDGET, LIKE THEY WOULD ANYTHING ELSE, UM, UP OR DOWN, BUT AT LEAST IT WOULD BE IN THERE.
WELL, SO I GUESS MY SECOND AND FINAL QUESTION WOULD BE, IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, UM, AS BOTH A, A CITY STAFF MEMBER AND
[00:45:01]
AS A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER HAVING OPERATED, UM, WITH MULTIPLE MAYORS, UM, AND WITH MULTIPLE CITY MANAGERS, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THIS IS, THAT IT IS PERHAPS A CONSISTENT TREND THAT CITY MANAGERS DON'T DO THIS OR THAT PERHAPS CITY MANAGERS DO DO THIS, BUT THERE'S, UM, FOR THE FUTURE YOU WOULD JUST WANT IT TO BE INSTITUTIONALIZED, KNOWING IT'S A PRACTICE THAT IS EXHIBITED? YEAH, I, I MEAN, CITY MANAGERS DO THIS.IT'S TO THEIR ADVANTAGE AND INTEREST TO DO SO.
IT, IT JUST SHOULD BE A PROCESS.
WHAT, THROUGH MY EXPERIENCE, I'VE SEEN THERE'D BE DECISIONS WHERE THEY DECIDED NOT TO.
AND SO THAT JUST HAS LED TO A, A DIFFERENT PROCESS AROUND THE HORSESHOE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT GETS DONE, BUT IT'S JUST NOT VERY, NOT VERY CLEAN, NOT VERY TRANSPARENT.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I'D, I'D MUCH RATHER HAVE THE, THE DEBATE ON PRIORITIES BE IN PUBLIC AND THEN LET THE, LET THE PUBLIC SEE HOW THE THINGS ARE BEING ADDRESSED, UM, IN, IN THE, IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN.
SO IT, IF I'M, IF I'M SOMEONE LOOKING TO BECOME THE CITY MANAGER OF DALLAS, AND I KNOW THAT IN THIS FORM OF GOVERNMENT IT IS A, UH, UH, WEAK MAYOR SYSTEM, UH, I KNOW I HAVE A TON OF RESPONSIBILITY THAT'S GONNA BE ASKED OF ME AS A CITY MANAGER.
AND MY, I WOULD AT LEAST GO AND LOOK AT THE CITY CHARTER TO UNDERSTAND BETTER WHAT, UH, MY, MY ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITIES ARE.
WHILE THIS MAY, UM, FEEL LIKE, PERHAPS EVEN IF IT'S A THING THAT IS DONE, IF IT'S NOT STATED IN THE DOCUMENT, UM, AND YOU DON'T WANNA DO IT, UH, YOU'LL DO WHATEVER YOU WANNA DO.
I LIKE THE IDEA OF SORT OF INDUCING THROUGH LEXICON IN THE CHARTER, UM, COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH.
AND SO, COMMISSIONER MCGOO, IF YOU MOVE THIS FORWARD, I'M HAPPY TO SECOND AND I WILL BE IN FAVOR OF, UM, INCLUDING THE LANGUAGE MR. DE LA PUENTE.
SOMETHING THAT WE, I THINK AS A COMMISSION HAVE ASKED OURSELVES THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS IS, IS THIS SOLVING A PROBLEM? AND IT SEEMS LIKE FROM THE EXCHANGE THAT JUST HAPPENED, THIS IS NOT REALLY SOLVING A PROBLEM THAT EXISTS WITHIN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
UH, CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH CURRENT AND FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE INDICATED, AT LEAST TO ME, THAT THEY DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY MANAGERS HAVE ALWAYS DONE PRETTY WELL.
SO I'LL BE VOTING TO EXCLUDE, UM, JUST BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY AT A TIME WHEN, UM, I THINK WE ARE LOOKING AT PROBABLY SENDING OVER 10 PLUS BALLOT MEASURES TO COUNSEL AND TOTALITY.
UM, AND I JUST DON'T THINK THIS MEETS THE THRESHOLD OF NECESSITY AT THIS TIME.
MS. HUNT? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
I WHOLLY AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENT THAT THE CITY MANAGER SHOULD REVEAL THE COUNCIL'S PRIORITIES AND HIS PROPOSED BUDGET, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS PROPER FOR THE CHARTER BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A SHOULD.
I DON'T SEE THAT THERE IS A REQUIREMENT IN HERE THAT YOU COULD LEGALLY REBUT AND SAY, WELL, THE CITY MANAGER DIDN'T REALLY FOLLOW THE COUNCIL'S PRIORITIES.
AND THE CITY MANAGER SAYS, YES, I DID.
SO I, I DON'T, I, I APPRECIATE THE SENTIMENT AND I SUPPORT THE SENTIMENT, BUT I CAN'T SUPPORT PUTTING THIS IN THE CHARTER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALRIGHT, CAN I GET A MOTION I'D MOVE TO INCLUDE? OKAY.
AND SINCE YOU CHOSE MOTION TO INCLUDE, THERE WAS SOMETHING PASSED OUT EARLIER IS THE ATTORNEY'S MEMO, UH, SENT EVERYONE EARLIER, AND IT'S ON YOUR DESK, BUT IF YOU'LL GO TO PAGE SIX OF 16, THERE WAS AN OPTION ONE AND AN OPTION TWO.
UH, YOU'LL HAVE TO TELL US WHICH ONE OF THOSE IS INCLUDED IN YOUR MOTION TO APPROVE, PLEASE, OR INCLUDE.
AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE DIFFERENCE IS THE REQUIREMENT OF SHALL CONVENE AN OPEN SESSION.
IS THAT CORRECT? ATTORNEYS? I THINK IT'S BY THE DATE, YEAH.
FOR OPTION TWO, THERE'S A REQUIREMENT THAT COUNSEL MEETS AN OPEN SESSION BY A CERTAIN DATE, AND YOU'D HAVE TO LET US KNOW WHAT THAT DATE IS SO THAT THEY COULD DISCUSS THEIR POLICY PRIORITIES AND HAVE THE CITY MANAGER BE
[00:50:01]
PART OF THAT DISCUSSION IN OPEN SESSION.AND THEN THE OTHER, THE FIRST OPTION IS JUST, IT'S A, LEAVES IT A LITTLE BIT MORE VAGUE.
IT JUST SAYS, AFTER THE CITY MANAGER HAS SOUGHT AND RECEIVED THE POLICY PRIORITIES FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, THEN HE SUBMITS HIS BUDGET, UM, BY THE 15TH DAY OF AUGUST.
I, I GUESS WITHOUT HAVING A SPECIFIC DATE IN MIND, I WOULD GO WITH OPTION ONE WOULD TO INCLUDE MS. LAMAER.
YOU HAD A QUESTION? YES, I HAD A QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER MAGOO.
UH, WELL, WELL, I THINK WAS HER QUESTION MAYBE, OH, NO, NO.
FOR THE ATTORNEYS IT'S SEPARATE.
IS THE QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEYS OR IS IT OKAY.
SO THERE HAD TO BE A SECOND ON THE MOTION THEN BEFORE I COULD RECOGNIZE YOU FOR THAT SECOND.
WE HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. SOLI LINE.
MS. LEMASTER QUESTION FOR THOUGHT, SINCE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A NEW CITY MANAGER, W WOULD THIS KIND OF LANGUAGE, WHAT IF WE RECOMMENDED THAT THE COUNCIL INCLUDE THIS AS A JOB REQUIREMENT FOR THE INCOMING CITY MANAGER? WOULD THAT DO IT? WOULD THAT ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU WANT TO ACCOMPLISH? I MEAN, IT, ANYTHING THAT ADDS TO THE REQUIREMENT IS HELPFUL.
UM, I DON'T THINK IT GETS THERE TO REALLY, UH, COMMISSIONER ALI'S POINT OF, IF IT'S JUST IN THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY MANAGER THAT'S THERE, YOU KNOW, IT'S THERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN PUT WHATEVER YOU WANT IN THE JOB DESCRIPTION AND HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
AND, UM, BUT IT DOES, IT'S NOT REQUIRED.
WELL, I WAS THINKING MORE IN THE CONTRACT OF THE WHOEVER THE NEXT CITY MANAGER WOULD BE.
YEAH, BECAUSE I AGREE WITH YOU THAT THERE IS A, CAN BE A LACK OF COMMUNICATION DURING THE BUDGET TIME.
BUT I'M ASKING, I DON'T HAVE A PROPOSAL.
I MEAN, YEAH, I, I DON'T EITHER.
I WOULD, I I WOULD ADVOCATE BOTH.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT WAS OPTION ONE.
AND HAVE A SECOND ON THAT, UM, BY COMMISSIONER SLIS.
UH, IF THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION, THEN ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ALRIGHT, SO THE MOTION DOES NOT CARRY AGENDA ITEM F.
THIS WAS STA ESTABLISHED AN OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN WITHIN THE FUNCTION OF THE CITY AUDITOR.
THIS IS AMENDMENT 37, UH, SUBMITTED BY MR. MARCUS WOOD.
HE DID SEND, UM, A MESSAGE JUST SAYING THAT HE FEELS LIKE HE, HE'S MADE HIS POINT, UH, IN THE MULTIPLE EMAILS AND, AND, UH, OPPORTUNITIES TO SPEAK.
UM, I WILL NOTE, UM, UH, BUT JUST BY WAY OF APOLOGY, I JUST SENT OUT SOMETHING, UM, FROM THE CITY AUDITOR, UM, THAT, THAT ADDRESSED THIS ITEM.
IT JUST CAME TO YOUR EMAIL INBOX.
I WAS SUPPOSED TO SEND IT YESTERDAY, UM, AND FORGOT.
BUT, UM, THE CITY AUDITOR IS HERE TO DISCUSS THE, THE PROPOSAL AS WELL.
UM, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COMMISSION IS INTERESTED IN, UM, LOOKING AT FURTHER, COULD WE ASK THE, UH, CITY AUDITOR TO COME UP? I BELIEVE WE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS.
UH, MR. SWAN, IF YOU WOULD, MS. CLAP, I WOULD JUST LIKE YOUR COMMENTS ON THIS AND HOW YOU THINK IT WOULD WORK WITHIN THE OFFICE.
MARKWAN CITY AUDITOR, UM, MR. WOOD PROPOSED THIS, UM, EMAILED ME AT THE SAME TIME.
UH, I, IN MY, IN MY RESEARCH, CAN YOU JUST TALK ME, GET MY RESEARCH.
UH, THERE'S ONLY A HANDFUL OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAT HAVE A SIMILAR FUNCTION, BUT IT DOES EXIST IN THE CITY OF PORTLAND AND ANCHORAGE, ALASKA AND THE CITY OF DETROIT, OR THE BIGGER CITIES THAT HAVE A INDEPENDENT, A BUDS PERSON, UM, TO HELP CITIZENS AND RESIDENTS WHEN THEY GET FRUSTRATED THROUGH THE SYSTEM AND TRYING TO FIND A SOLUTION TO THEIR ISSUES.
MR. MILLS, WHO WOULD THIS INDIVIDUAL REPORT TO WITHIN THE CITY? UH, WELL IF THIS PROPOSAL WOULD BE FOR THE REPORT TO THE CITY AUDITOR, MR. DE LA FUENTE.
UH, SO I SEE IN THE EMAIL THAT YOU, UH, ASKED TO BE FORWARDED TO THE COMMISSION THAT, UH, YOU MAY NOT TAKE AN OFFICIAL POSITION ON WHETHER THE CITY SHOULD HAVE AN OMBUDSMAN, BUT THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT IT DOESN'T BELONG IN THE CHARTER.
AM I READING THAT CORRECTLY? UM, I GUESS, DID I SEND THAT EMAIL? OH,
I IT MIGHT BE FROM SOMEBODY ELSE, BUT IN THE EMAIL THAT WAS JUST, THAT WAS FORWARDED TO US.
[00:55:01]
MARK SWAN.THAT'S, THAT, THAT WAS SOME TIME BACK THAT WAS TRYING, IT'S NOT THE MOST RECENT ONE.
UM, AND, AND I'M HAPPY TO READ THAT IF YOU'D LIKE, JUST NO, NO, NO, THAT'S FINE.
NO, AT THE TIME WHEN I FIRST STARTED RESEARCHING, IT JUST SEEMED KIND.
UM, MAYBE IT, YOU KNOW, WILL THIS WORK IN THE CITY OF DALLAS? WE DON'T KNOW.
AND, AND MEMORIALIZE IT IN THE CHARTER FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD DID NOT SEEM LIKE MAYBE THE MOST PRUDENT THING TO DO IN MY MIND, BUT I WOULD BE WILLING TO, OUR BUDGET GETS APPROVED INDEPENDENTLY BY THE WHOLE COUNCIL, AND I WOULD BE WILLING TO, IF THE COMMISSION WOULD PREFER NOT TO PUT IT IN THE CHARTER, BUT STILL STILL THINKS IT IS A GOOD IDEA, I COULD PROPOSE IT AS PART OF MY BUDGET RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL.
AND THEN IF THEY WANTED TO GO FORWARD WITH IT, ALSO BEING IN THE CITY AUDITOR'S OFFICE, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO GET THE RESULTS.
I THINK THE, THE GOAL BEHIND THIS FUNCTION IS TO GET SOLUTIONS FOR PEOPLE WHO BECOME FRUSTRATED WITH ALL THE FRAGMENTED DEPARTMENTS AND JUST DON'T SEEM TO BE ABLE TO GET AN ANSWER TO THEIR CONCERNS.
AND SO, UH, AGAIN, I HAVE THE CITY AUDITOR HAS POWER TO RECOMMEND, BUT DOESN'T HAVE POWER TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN.
UM, SO I, YOU KNOW, IT'D BE AN EXPERIMENT TO SEE HOW, HOW WELL IT ACTUALLY GOT RESULTS.
AND IT MIGHT BE MORE PLACED BETTER MAYBE AS A, A FUNCTION IN 3 1 1 OR IN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
AND I THINK HAVING IT OUTSIDE THE CHARTER GIVES US MORE FLEXIBILITY.
AND I APOLOGIZE FOR POTENTIALLY PUTTING WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH AS I TRIED TO JUGGLE READING YOUR EMAIL TO ASK QUESTION.
I DID PUT THAT IN AN EMAIL SEVERAL WEEKS AGO.
ANY OTHER QUES, UH, MR. YOUNG, UH, NOT A QUESTION, BUT A COMMENT.
ARE YOU READY FOR THAT? YES, SIR.
UM, I FIRST WANT TO THANK MARCUS WOOD FOR TAKING THE LEAD ON THIS.
MARCUS IS A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT NINE WHO HAS BEEN FOR DECADES INTERESTED IN IMPROVING IN VARIOUS WAYS THE RESPONSIVENESS OF THE CITY TO ITS CONSTITUENTS.
I THINK THE IDEA OF AN EMB OMBUDSMAN IS A GREAT IDEA.
FRANKLY, I THINK OUR 3 1 1 SYSTEM IS BADLY BROKEN.
I THINK IT FOCUSES ON THROUGHPUT AND PROCESSING COMPLAINTS AND CLOSING COMPLAINTS AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY RATHER THAN SOLVING THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE BROUGHT TO ITS ATTENTION.
I THINK AN OMBUDSMAN WOULD ALSO AID THE COUNCIL OFFICES IN REMOVING SOME OF THEIR CONSTITUENT SERVICE BURDEN.
WHAT I CONSISTENTLY ADVISE PEOPLE TO DO WHO ARE FRUSTRATED BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET A SOLUTION OUT OF THE CITY STAFF IS EITHER TO SIGN UP FOR OPEN MIC AT COUNCIL, UH, AND OR TO CONTACT THEIR COUNCIL OFFICE BECAUSE THE COUNCIL OFFICES, UM, OPERATE AS MANY OMBUDSMANS AND I THINK THIS WOULD, UH, WOULD RELIEVE THEM OF SOME OF THAT BURDEN.
THAT SAID, I CONCUR WITH THOSE WHO BELIEVE THAT THIS DOES NOT BELONG IN THE CHARTER.
I THINK THIS WOULD BE AN EXCELLENT CITY ORDINANCE.
UM, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE, UH, NOT SO EXCELLENT A CHARTER AMENDMENT.
AND SO I WOULD MOVE TO EXCLUDE THIS ITEM.
UH, WE HAVE A SECOND ON THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE DISCUSSION.
MR. YOUNG, UH, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU JUST SAID.
I JUST WOULD LIKE, CAN YOU ELABORATE MORE ON WHY YOU THINK IT IT SHOULD, IT BELONGS MORE IN THE CITY ORDINANCE THAN IN THE CHARTER FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.
I THINK THE COUNCIL SHOULD EVALUATE WHETHER IT BELONGS UNDER THE AUDITOR OR UNDER THE, UM, PERHAPS THE, UH, OFFICE OF MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OR IN SOME OTHER LOCATION.
I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE AUDITOR THAT IT WOULD BE EXPERIMENTAL IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
IT MIGHT BE AN EXPERIMENT THAT SUCCEEDS, BUT IT MIGHT ALSO BE AN EXPERIMENT THAT FAILS.
THIS IS PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, LIKE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS.
UM, IF THIS MOTION TO EXCLUDE SUCCEEDS, LIKE I BELIEVE IT WILL, UM, BUT OBVIOUSLY I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF INTEREST AROUND THIS HORSESHOE THAT THIS IS GENERALLY A GOOD IDEA THAT JUST DOESN'T BELONG IN THE CHARTER.
WHAT'S THE PROCESS TO COMMUNICATE THAT TO COUNCIL? WELL, I BELIEVE THAT, UM, YOU CAN EITHER OPT TO DO THAT AS A BODY.
UM, IN 2014, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION PUT IN THEIR LETTER TO COUNCIL AND ULTIMATELY THEIR, UM, UH, PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL A RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY LIKED BUT DID NOT BELONG IN THE CHARTER.
UM, AND IT'S JUST A SUGGESTION FOR THE COUNCIL TO LOOK INTO.
UM, ALTERNATIVELY, YOU COULD ALSO REACH OUT, UM, JUST DIRECTLY TO YOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND, AND MAY MAYBE MAKE THEM AWARE OF THIS CONVERSATION AND AWARE OF, UH, OF THE FACT THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT.
THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A PERSONAL LEVEL, UM, WAY THAT YOU CAN GAUGE.
[01:00:01]
CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION DID LIKEWISE.ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE, SAY AYE.
THIS WOULD CLARIFY THAT CITY COUNCIL'S APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ARE AT WILL.
THIS IS AMENDMENT 13, UH, SUBMITTED BY MR. KINGSTON, AND HE'S ALREADY ON DECK.
JUST A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS ON THE PARK BOARD AND ON THE RANK CHOICE VOTING, JUST NO, WE WON'T DO ANY.
UM, THE, UH, THIS ONE IS ANNOYING TO HAVE TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION, FRANKLY, BECAUSE THE CHARTER ALREADY MAKES IT EXCRUCIATINGLY CLEAR THAT BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS ARE AT WILL.
UM, I HAVE ANALYZED THE LANGUAGE FOR YOU IN THE EMAIL I SENT YOU THE OPERATIVE LANGUAGES THAT SUCH MEMBERS SHALL SERVE FOR A TERM AS PROVIDED BY ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL NOT TO EXCEED TWO YEARS FROM OCTOBER 1ST OR UNTIL THEIR SUCCESSORS ARE APPOINTED AND QUALIFIED NOT AND UNTIL THEIR SUCCESSORS ARE APPOINTED AND QUALIFIED.
UM, IT WAS ALWAYS THE INTENT OF THE DRAFTERS OF THE CHARTER THAT BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS SHOULD BE AT WILL.
UM, THIS IS NOT A BAD THING, 12 A, THE ETHICS CODE ALREADY SPECIFIES THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE NOT TO DOMINATE OR OTHERWISE INAPPROPRIATELY INFLUENCE THEIR APPOINTEES.
SO THERE IS NO DANGER OF THAT.
THE PROBLEM BECOMES WHEN WE HAVE CHANGES ON COUNSEL THAT AFFECT A FUTURE COUNSEL PERSON BY THE APPOINTMENTS OF HIS OR HER PREDECESSOR.
AND THE CITY ATTORNEY CREATED CHAOS IN 2021 BY FIRST CONVENING THE REDISTRICTING COMMISSION BEFORE THE DATA FROM THE, FROM THE CENSUS BUREAU WAS AVAILABLE.
I CONTEND THAT THE REDISTRICTING COMMISSION THIS LAST TIME WAS ILLEGALLY CONSTITUTED AND FRANKLY HAD NO AUTHORITY.
WE'RE KIND OF PAST THAT NOW, BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT GREAT.
SO, UH, ONE HOLDOVER APPOINTMENT ON THE RE REDISTRICTING COMMISSION WAS STILL THERE, REFUSED A REQUEST TO RESIGN.
AND THE CITY ATTORNEY WHO NO LONGER WORKS HERE FOR SOME REASONS, RULED THAT SHE WOULD, COULD ONLY BE REMOVED FOR CAUSE.
THERE IS A CAUSE REMOVAL PROVISION IN THE CHARTER, BUT IT IS SEPARATE FROM THE AT WILL REPLACEMENT PROVISION THAT THIS WILL CONTINUE TO OCCUR EVERY 10 YEARS WHEN WE HAVE CHANGES IN THE COUNCIL AT THE SAME TIME AS WE'RE DOING REDISTRICTING.
BUT IT ALSO COULD ARISE IF YOU HAVE AN APPOINTEE WHO CONTINUALLY, UH, FLOS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL MEMBER.
IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR SOMEBODY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT REPEATEDLY.
BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS ARE THERE TO SMOOTH THE PATH FOR THEIR COUNCIL MEMBER.
AND SENDING FORWARD THINGS THAT THEY KNOW WILL NOT BE RECEIVED WELL IS EXTREMELY INAPPROPRIATE AND SHOULD RESULT IN A REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT.
AND IF YOU THINK THAT THAT'S HEAVY HANDED OR WHATEVER, IT WILL BE USED VERY INFREQUENTLY.
UH, WHEN NIXON DID IT, HE GOT FIRED.
UM, YOU HAVE TO DO IT WHEN IT'S APPROPRIATE AND THE POLITICAL PROCESS WILL ENSURE THAT.
SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO SEND THIS FORWARD TO COUNSEL WITH THE ADDITION TO SECTION 13 A THAT I HAVE AT THE BOTTOM OF MY SUGGESTION THAT SAYS, THIS PROVISION ALLOWS COUNCIL MEMBERS TO APPOINT AND REPLACE BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS AT WILL.
AND PERHAPS BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN COUNCIL CONSIDERS THIS, THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL PERHAPS RELENT IN THEIR, UH, FRANKLY, INCORRECT AND INAPPROPRIATE INTERPRETATION OF THE CHARTER LANGUAGE THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE.
MR. YANO, UH, MR. KINGSTON, THERE'S A JOKE THAT WHEREVER TWO ATTORNEYS ARE GATHERED, THERE ARE AT LEAST THREE CONFLICTING OPINIONS.
UH, AND MY OPINION CONFLICTS RATHER DIRECTLY WITH YOURS, BUT NEITHER MY OPINION NOR YOUR OPINION REALLY PREVAILS.
SO I WOULD ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, UH, WHETHER THE CHARTER CURRENTLY PROVIDES FOR BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS TO SERVE AT.
WELL, UH, BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, ARE APPOINTED BY COUNCIL TO SERVE A FULL TWO YEAR TERM.
UH, THEY'RE NOT APPOINTED AT WILL.
THEY MAY BE REMOVED, UM, BY THE ENTIRE COUNCIL BECAUSE IT IS THE ENTIRE
[01:05:01]
COUNCIL THAT APPOINTS EACH BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBER.UM, INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS NOMINATE, BUT THEN THOSE APPOINTMENTS ARE MADE BY THE FULL COUNCIL.
SO IT'S ONLY THE FULL COUNCIL, UM, THAT CAN REMOVE A BOARD OR COMMISSION MEMBER.
AND THE LANGUAGE IN THE CHARTER SAYS FOR ANY CAUSE DEEMED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, SUFFICIENT FOR REMOVAL IN THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC.
AND THEN WHOEVER'S BEING REMOVED HAS THE OPPORTUNITY, UM, TO REQUEST A PUBLIC HEARING.
AND IF THAT REQUEST IS MADE, THEN THE COUNCIL HOSTS A PUBLIC HEARING, UM, IN OPEN SESSION ON THAT REMOVAL.
AND AM I RIGHT THAT THE PROVISION REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF SUCCESSORS IS TO MIRROR THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, WHICH SO PROVIDES AS TO, UH, PUBLIC OFFICIALS? YES.
FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS THAT ARE QUASI-JUDICIAL, UM, THEY SERVE UNTIL THEY ARE REPLACED.
UH, WE CALLED IT THE HO THE HOLDOVER STATUTE.
UM, SO IF COUNCIL APPOINTS A BORDER COMMISSION MEMBER TO SERVE A TWO YEAR TERM, AND THAT TWO YEARS EXPIRES, BUT COUNSEL HAS NOT NAMED A SUCCESSOR FOR THAT POSITION, THAT PERSON CONTINUES TO SERVE UNTIL A SUCCESSOR IS NAMED.
AND THAT'S REQUIRED BY STATE LAW.
AND IS IT POSSIBLE FOR A SUCCESSOR TO BE APPOINTED WHEN THE ORIGINAL MEMBERS TWO YEAR TERM HAS NOT EXPIRED AND THE MEMBER HAS NOT RESIGNED OR BECOME DECEASED? NO.
THE ONLY WAY THAT COULD HAPPEN IS IF THE FULL COUNSEL DECIDES TO REMOVE SOMEONE FOR CAUSE.
QUITE FRANKLY, THAT JUST ELIDES AN ENTIRE SECTION OF THE CHARTER THAT'S, THAT FLIES IN THE FACE OF CON OF, UH, STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION AND IT'S JUST NOT WHAT THE THING SAYS.
UH, MR. STEIN, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. KINGSTON.
UH, SO IF A PERSON IS APPOINTED TO A BOARD OF COMMISSION AND, AND THEY START DOING THEIR OWN THING, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THAT PERSON APPOINTED THEM WANT, THE PERSON, THE, THE CITY COUNCIL PERSON CANNOT, YOU KNOW, TAKE 'EM OFF THE BOARD? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? UH, COMMISSIONER DEAN, I'M SAYING THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE CHARTER TODAY DOES IN FACT ALLOW THAT A COUNCIL MEMBER SHOULD BE ABLE TO SIMPLY SEND A NEW APPOINTMENT THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AND HAVE THEM QUALIFIED.
AND THEN ONCE THAT PERSON IS QUALIFIED AND THEN APPOINTED BY COUNCIL, WHICH THEY ALL ARE, THEN THAT WOULD SIMPLY BE AN AT WILL REPLACEMENT OF THAT PERSON.
BUT WHAT WE HAVE IS A SITUATION WHERE THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS MISREAD THIS PART OF THE CHARTER.
AND SO TO CORRECT THAT IF WE SIMPLY ADD A SIMPLE SENTENCE AT THE END OF THE SECTION, CLARIFYING THAT APPOINTMENTS ARE AT WILL, IT CLEARS UP THE PROBLEM.
SO BASICALLY, A, A COUNCIL MEMBER CANNOT JUST REMOVE A BOARD OR A COMMISSIONER TODAY.
I FIND THAT KIND OF PROBLEMATIC, YOU KNOW, UH, AND YOU UNDERSTAND WHY WHEN I TALK ABOUT MY, UH, AMENDMENT.
PHILLIP, I, I AGREE WITH YOUR READING, UH, OF THIS, AND I AGREE THAT THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH NOT BEING ABLE TO ENSURE THAT YOUR CONSTITUENCY IS REPRESENTED ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS BASED ON THE MOST RECENT ELECTION, JUST AS AN EXAMPLE.
UM, SO I, I SUPPORT YOUR READING OF THIS.
I, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE INTERPRETATION.
UM, I, I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THIS.
I THINK WE COULD WORDSMITH IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT, UH, I WILL BE MOVING TO INCLUDE MR. DE LA FUENTE AS ONE OF THE PROUD NON-ATTORNEYS ON THIS COMMISSION.
UM, I, I APPRECIATE, UH, MR. KINGSTON FOR BRINGING THIS TO OUR ATTENTION.
UM, I THINK YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED SOMETHING THAT WAS A PROBLEM AS RECENTLY AS THREE YEARS AGO.
UM, CAN YOU SPEAK TO KIND OF THE CONUNDRUM WE HAVE OF TO APPOINT SOMEBODY TO A CITY BOARD OR COMMISSION? YOU HAVE TO GET IT APPROVED BY COUNSEL, BUT TO REMOVE SOMEBODY, WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IS THAT A COUNCIL PERSON CAN DO IT UNILATERALLY.
[01:10:01]
OKAY.THE, THE SPEAK ON THAT, THE PROVISION OPERATES THE WAY IT'S SUPPOSED TO.
UM, I APPRECIATE THE CITY ATTORNEY TRYING TO MAKE A DISTINCTION, BUT THERE ISN'T ONE THERE.
A COUN COUNCIL MEMBERS DON'T GET TO PICK AND CHOOSE.
THEY GET TO, UH, NOMINATE SOMEONE TO BE APPOINTED, BUT THE FULL COUNCIL MUST APPOINT.
BUT IT'S SIMPLY A QUALIFICATION PROCESS THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE.
THEN IT COMES TO COUNCIL FOR A MAJORITY VOTE.
ONCE THAT MAJORITY VOTE HAPPENS, THAT IS AN AT WILL REPLACEMENT OF A BORDER COMMISSION MEMBER.
SO, IN THE SITUATION THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, WAS THAT ONE APPOINTEE WHO DIDN'T WANNA LEAVE? AND THE, UH, NORMALLY WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS THE OTHER APPOINTEES, UH, GO AHEAD AND RESIGN.
AND SO THE NEW COUNCIL PERSON CAN APPOINT THEIR PERSON TO THE, UH, COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE.
IN GENERAL, THE APPOINTEES STICK AROUND REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEY'RE ASKED TO DO.
UM, BECAUSE LARGELY THIS ONLY HAPPENS WHEN THERE'S A CHANGE IN THE COUNCIL MEMBER.
AND THAT FREQUENTLY HAPPENS WHEN THERE'S A CHANGE IN THE POLITICS OF THE DISTRICT.
SO YOU HAVE PEOPLE HOLDING OVER UNTIL OCTOBER WHO CLEARLY DON'T REFLECT THE CURRENT WILL OF THE VOTERS.
SO, IF A COUNCIL MEMBER, A COUNCILMAN, A COUNCILWOMAN HAS A PERSON THAT THEY DONE APPOINTED AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THEM AND, UH, THEY GET REELECTED THE COUNCILPERSON, SO THEY STUCK WITH THE SAME BOARD MEMBER, OR DO THEY GET A CHANCE TO RENEW THEIR BOARD WHEN THEY GET REELECTED? CURRENTLY, COMMISSIONER STEIN, THE, UM, CITY ATTORNEY'S INTERPRETATION IS THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER CAN APPOINT AGAIN UPON THE VACATION OF THE, THE OFFICE BY THE BORDER COMMISSION MEMBER, EITHER BECAUSE THEY MISSED TOO MANY MEETINGS OR BECAUSE THEY RESIGNED, UH, OR AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE TERM, UH, WHICH IS THE CON, CONCURRENT WITH THE CITY'S FISCAL YEAR ON OCTOBER 1ST.
MR. CHAIRMAN, MAY I ASK A QUESTION? UH, MR. SOLIS, BACK TO YOU.
SO, MR. KINGSTON, UH, UM, WERE THIS PROPOSAL TO BE SUCCESSFUL AND ULTIMATELY ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, WHAT WOULD THE PROCESS LOOK LIKE MOVING FORWARD? THE PROCESS FOR A NON FOR CAUSE REPLACEMENT WOULD SIMPLY BE THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD FORWARD A NEW NAME TO THE CITY SECRETARY FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OR COMMISSION.
THE SECRETARY WOULD PERFORM THE ADMINISTRATIVE TASK OF QUALIFYING THAT PERSON TO BE VOTED ON BY COUNCIL, AND THEN FORWARDING THE NAME TO COUNCIL FOR APPOINTMENT DURING THE REGULAR BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS THAT HAPPEN AT ALMOST EVERY MEETING OF COUNCIL.
UM, AND WERE THAT NAME, WERE IT TO BE MORE THAN ONE NAME? IT WOULD SIMPLY BE, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS AN ENTIRELY NEW SLATE PROPOSED BY A COUNCIL MEMBER.
YOU WOULD JUST SUBMIT ALL THOSE NAMES AT ONE TIME TO THE CITY SECRETARY.
I SUPPOSE YOU COULD COMMISSIONER SLIS, BUT I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE VERY UNLIKELY.
I THINK WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT WHAT I'M TRYING TO SOLVE FOR HERE IS A SITUATION OF HOLDOVERS FROM PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS AND TO REPLACE ROGUES.
UH, ONE FINAL THING, UM, AND THIS IS PERHAPS HELPFUL SIMPLY JUST FOR MY OWN KNOWLEDGE, BUT IT PERHAPS IS A, AN ADDITIONAL EXAMPLE PER, UH, HOPEFULLY TO, TO CONTINUE TO MAKE THE POINT.
UM, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, YEARS BACK WHEN THE CURRENT COUNCIL MEMBER FOR DISTRICT 14 CAME ON BOARD, UH, THAT INDIVIDUAL HAD TO DEAL FOR SOME TIME WITH HOLDOVERS FROM THE PREVIOUS LEGISLATORS APPOINTMENTS.
IS THAT THE SAME THING THAT YOU'RE REFERENCING WHEN IT COMES TO REDISTRICTING? OR IS THAT AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT EXAMPLE, YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THIS? THAT, THAT IS EXACTLY THE EXAMPLE I WAS REFERENCING.
I UNDERSTAND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS SOME INFORMATION TO ADD.
I JUST WANNA POINT OUT, WHILE THE COMMISSION'S HAVING THIS DISCUSSION THAT, YOU KNOW, THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ARE APPOINTED TO BE INDEPENDENT BODIES AT THE CITY, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO SERVE AUTONOMOUSLY FROM THE CITY COUNCIL.
AND I JUST, I JUST ASK THAT THE COMMISSION CONSIDER WHAT IT MIGHT DO TO THE INDEPENDENCE
[01:15:01]
OF THESE, THESE DIFFERENT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.IF AT ANY PLATE, AT ANY POINT IN TIME, ANY ONE OF THOSE MEMBERS CAN BE REPLACED BEFORE THE END OF THEIR TWO YEAR TERM THAT THEY SIGNED UP FOR, UM, BASED ON A COMMENT THAT THEY MAKE ON THE RECORD, BASED ON A VOTE THAT THEY TAKE.
UM, SO JUST SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND.
UH, AND MR. CHAIR, AS I SAID BEFORE, THAT IS NOT IN FACT, IN THE CHARTER, THAT IS A RULE THAT EXISTS IN CHAPTER 12, A, THE CITY'S ETHICS CODE, WHICH WAS ADOPTED IN 2014.
BEFORE THAT PERIOD OF TIME, THE CHARTER CLEARLY CONTEMPLATED THAT BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS WERE SERVED AT THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL.
MR. MAGOO, I, I THINK THE, THE CITY ATTORNEY BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT, BUT I THINK THIS IS, AMENDMENT IS A GOOD AMENDMENT, AND I THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD, AND I'LL BE SUPPORTING IT.
UM, I, I HAVE SOME HEARTBURN OVER THE USE OF THE TERM AT WILL.
UM, AND SO I, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE THIS LANGUAGE INSTEAD BECAUSE I THINK IT GETS TO YOUR POINT.
UM, I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO INCLUDE, UH, THE CITY COUNCIL MAY BY MAJORITY VOTE, REPLACE A BOARD OR COMMISSION MEMBER PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THEIR TWO YEAR TERM.
I SECOND, THE CITY COUNCIL MAY BY MAJORITY VOTE, REPLACE A BOARD OR COMMISSION MEMBER PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THEIR TWO YEAR TERM.
AND WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT MOTION DISCUSSION.
I MAY BE THE ONLY MEMBER OF THIS COMMISSION TO DO SO, BUT I AM GOING TO BE VOTING AGAINST THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
I THINK BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS COMMIT TO PROVIDE THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE, NOT JUST THEIR APPOINTING COUNCIL MEMBER, BUT THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE WITH THEIR BEST, HONEST ADVICE.
THE COUNCIL CAN ALWAYS DECLINE TO FOLLOW THAT ADVICE.
UH, BUT I THINK IF THEY ARE COMPROMISED IN PRESENTING THEIR BEST HONEST ADVICE, THEY ARE NOT SERVING, UH, THE ROLE THAT THEY WERE APPOINTED TO SERVE.
AND IN PARTICULAR, I DON'T THINK IT IS THE ROLE OF A BOARD OF COMMISSION MEMBER TO SMOOTH THE PATH OF THE COUNCIL MEMBER.
I HAVE AT TIMES CAST VOTES SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING THE PATH OF MY COUNCIL MEMBER ROUGHER THAN IT OTHERWISE WOULD BE, BECAUSE I THINK MY COUNCIL MEMBER IS ON THE WRONG PATH.
I WILL BE CHEERFULLY OVERRULED, BUT I WILL NOT BE STIFLED.
AND I THINK THIS IS A MECHANISM FOR STIFLING BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS, UH, WHEN THEY OFFER THAT, UH, HONEST OPINION CONTRARY TO THE INCLINATIONS OF THEIR APPOINTING COUNCIL MEMBERS.
SO, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
I JUST WANNA SAY I COMPLETELY RESPECT THAT, AND I BELIEVE THAT IS A CONCERN, AND THANK YOU FOR VOICING IT.
UM, MY ONLY CAVEAT TO IT IS I THINK IF THAT IS THE PRACTICE, THE COUNCIL IS GOING TO SEE THROUGH THAT REAL QUICKLY AND HOPEFULLY WOULD ADJUST, UM, AS AN ACCOUNTABILITY PURPOSE.
NOW, AGAIN, I MAY BE WRONG IN THAT, BUT I HOPE THAT'S THE WAY IT'S DEALT WITH, UM, IF THIS DOES GO FORWARD.
BUT I RESPECT YOUR POSITION TOTALLY.
MS. HUNT, COULD YOU REPEAT THE, THE VERBIAGE OF YOUR MOTION? IF I CAN READ MY CHICKEN SCRATCH MM-HMM.
THE CITY COUNCIL MAY BY MAJORITY VOTE REPLACE A BOARD OR COMMISSION MEMBER PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THEIR TWO YEAR TERM.
UH, COMMISSIONER HUNTER, I, I DO SEE A RISK IN THAT.
UM, 'CAUSE I COULD FORESEE A SITUATION WHERE THE COUNCIL OUTSIDE OF THE, THE DISTRICT OF THE PERSON WHO'S REPRESENTING THAT DISTRICT COULD VOTE BY MAJORITY TO REMOVE THAT PERSON, UH, BEYOND THE WILL OF THE CITY COUNCIL PERSON THAT THE COMMISSIONER IS REPRESENTING.
SO, I, I THINK THERE HAS TO BE A TWO STEP PROCESS THERE.
I THINK THAT THE TWO STEP PROCESS IS, I THINK IT WOULD HAVE TO BE INITIATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL PERSON.
AND THEN THE SECOND PART IS THE REPLACE BEING REPLACED BY THE MAJORITY.
I THINK THEN I WOULD PROCEED THIS SENTENCE WITH UPON DENOMINATION BY,
[01:20:01]
UH, THE COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, WHO APPOINTED THAT POSITION OR WHO, WHO, UM, WHOSE DISTRICT THE BOARD AND COMMISSIONER REPRESENTS.I TAKE THAT SO I'M NOT CLEAR ON WHAT JUST HAPPENED HERE.
IS, UM, ARE YOU WITHDRAWING THE MOTION? I'M JUST CHANGING IT TWO OR THREE TIMES, MR. CHAIR.
SO, UH, SO HAS, IS YOUR MOTION AS YOU MADE IT PREVIOUSLY, IS IT STILL STAND BEFORE WE HAVE A VOTE ON IT? OR ARE YOU NO, I, I APPRECIATE, UM, COMMISSIONER POINT AND IF HE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND MY MOTION, OR IF I MAY, ON THE FLOOR PROPOSE SOME LANGUAGE THAT ADDRESSES HIS POINT.
I, I THINK I UNDERSTAND, UH, THE SENTIMENT, AND WE CAN WORK ON THE LANGUAGE, MS. HUNT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS UPON INITIATION OF THE NOMINATING COUNCIL MEMBER, LIKE THEY WOULD INITIATE REMOVAL AND THEN IT WOULD BE VOTED ON BY A MAJORITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
AND YEAH, WE CAN TIGHTEN UP THAT LANGUAGE.
CAN I ASK, ASK A QUESTION OF MR. KINGSTON? THOUGHT I HAD A REQUEST.
MR. KING KINGSTON, WHAT, WHAT, TALKING ABOUT, ARE YOU SPECIFICALLY DEALING WITH AN OUTGOING COUNCIL MEMBER AND AN INCOMING COUNCIL MEMBER? NO.
I ABSOLUTELY WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS GET THE PERSON THEY WANT IN THAT SEAT, PENDING THE APPROVAL OF COUNCIL AS A WHOLE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, THE LANGUAGE THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER HUNT, YES.
YOU KNOW, READ TO US OR CHANGE THIS.
IT SOUNDS GREAT THAT THE PERSON THAT APPOINTED THE COMMISSIONER OR THE BOARD MEMBER SHOULD INITIATE THE REMOVAL.
BUT THE PROBLEM IS, WE GOT SO MANY PEOPLE THAT'S REPRESENTING DISTRICTS THEY DON'T LIVE IN.
SO YOU GOT PEOPLE THAT CAN REMOVE PEOPLE FROM SEATS THAT THEY DON'T EVEN, THE PERSON DON'T EVEN LIVE IN THE DISTRICT THAT THEY REPRESENTING.
YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING? MR. STEIN? JUST TO CLARIFY.
UM, I, I BELIEVE THAT THE INTENT OF THIS WOULD BE THAT THE INITIATING COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO, UH, INITIATE REMOVAL OF A BORDER COMMISSIONER THAT THEY APPOINTED REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEY LIVE.
SO THEY, THEY WOULD OPERATE, FOR EXAMPLE, IF A COUNCIL MEMBER FROM DISTRICT FOUR, UM, WANTED TO REMOVE SOMEBODY FROM A BOARD AND COMMISSION, THEY WOULD REMOVE WHOEVER'S IN POSITION NUMBER FOUR ON THAT BOARD AND COMMISSION, REGARDLESS OF THEIR, WHERE THEY LIVE.
MS. CLAP, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, AND I THINK I KNOW THIS, ONCE THE TERM HAS EXPIRED IN OCTOBER, THERE, THERE'S NO WAY THAT A HOLDOVER APPOINTMENT COULD STAY IN THAT POSITION FROM THAT POINT ON.
UH, WELL,
UM, FOR NOT, FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT NEVER EXERCISE, QUASI-JUDICIAL AUTHORITY, UM, THEY ARE REMOVED BY OPERATION OF THE CITY'S TERM LIMITS FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT EVEN OCCASIONALLY REP, UH, USE QUASI-JUDICIAL AUTHORITY.
SO, FOR INSTANCE, THE FACT THAT THE PLAN COMMISSION, UH, RULES ON PLATS MEANS THAT WE'VE HAD PLAN COMMISSIONERS SERVE FOR 10 YEARS OR MORE AT A TIME WITHOUT BEING TERMED OUT.
UM, WHICH I THINK IS ALSO A BIG PROBLEM.
UH, SO IT, I, THAT'S A DIFFERENT PROBLEM THAN WHAT I'M TRYING TO SOLVE FOR.
BUT YES, THERE, THERE ARE HOLDOVER PROBLEMS IN THE CITY.
I THINK CURRENTLY WE HAVE FOUR PEOPLE WHO ARE WELL PAST THEIR SELL BY DATES.
MR. KINGSTON, WOULDN'T THAT COUNCILPERSON WHO COULD APPOINT THAT PERSON HAVE THE RIGHT TO REPLACE THE PERSON WHO WAS BY THEIR CELL OVER THEIR SELL BY DATE? UH, UNDER, UNDER WHAT I'M PROPOSING? YES.
I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO THEN INDICATE.
COMMISSIONER CLAPP, MR. MAGOO.
I HESITATED TO ASK, BUT THERE ARE SOME, UM, APPOINTMENTS THAT COUNCIL
[01:25:01]
MAKES THAT ARE NOT ONE FOR ONE WITH A COUNCIL DIS DISTRICT.HOW DOES THIS, HOW DOES WHATEVER THE PROPOSAL IS IMPACT THOSE INDIVIDUAL APPOINTEES? IT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
COMMISSIONER MCGOO, I THINK IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE APPOINTMENT OF THOSE, UH, POSITIONS.
IF IT'S, IF IT'S A POSITION THAT'S NOT TIED TO A COUNCIL DISTRICT, I DON'T THINK THIS PROVISION OF THE CHARTER APPLIES TO THOSE APPOINTMENT PROCESSES.
AND SO, FOR INSTANCE, IF THE MAYOR'S APPOINTING PEOPLE TO THE DALLAS HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD, THIS WOULDN'T AFFECT THAT IN ANY WAY.
AND DOES THE CITY ATTORNEY AGREE WITH THAT? UM, THIS WOULD BE OUR, OUR CHAPTER EIGHT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, AND OUR CHARTER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
SORRY, WHAT? THE, THIS PROVISION WOULD APPLY TO OUR CHAPTER EIGHT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND OUR CHARTER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
SO WOULD YOU TELL ME SPECIFICALLY WHAT THAT MEANS? I MEAN, THAT'S GONNA BE, UM, PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THEM.
I MEAN, LIKE, CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, LANDMARK COMMISSION, PARK BOARD, UM, ALL OF OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT ARE CREATED IN CHAPTER TWO OF THE CITY CODE.
THE SENIOR AFFAIRS COMMISSION, UH, THE YOUTH COMMISSION, UM, AND ALL THOSE YOU'VE LISTED SO FAR ARE ONE FOR ONE COUNCIL MEMBER AND ONE HAS APPOINTEE TO THOSE BOARDS.
OH, THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD IS SEVEN MEMBERS.
I DON'T KN I DON'T KNOW ALL OF OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT ARE LESS THAN 15.
AND DOES THIS, I KNOW WE, THIS, WOULD THIS APPLY TO OUR DFW BOARD AND DART BOARD AND DHA? NO.
BUT MR. CHAIR, I DO HAVE ONE COMMENT.
UM, THE LANGUAGE IN THE MOTION, AS THE MOTION STANDS, IS THAT A MAJORITY VOTE, UM, CAN REPLACE, OKAY.
SO MS. HUNT, YOU'RE SAYING, CAN REPLACE, SO IT WOULD BE REMOVING SOMEONE WHILE APPOINTING AN A REPLACEMENT MEMBER, LIKE ALL IN ONE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM.
BECAUSE IF NOT, IF IT'S NOT A REPLACEMENT, WHICH I GUESS, I GUESS, I THINK ACCORDING TO YOUR LANGUAGE, IT IS, IF IT'S NOT A REPLACEMENT, THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOME, SOME TEXAS CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES WITH OUR QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
IF IT'S NOT A REPLACEMENT, THERE WOULD BE ISSUES.
IF IT'S JUST TO REMOVE SOMEONE.
BUT NO, IT'S NOT JUST TO REMOVE SOMEONE.
I, I CHOSE THAT WORD VERY, VERY CAREFULLY IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MINUTES.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION PENDING THAT HAS A SECOND.
THIS WOULD DELETE CHAPTER THREE, SECTION 15, PROHIBITING CITY COUNCIL FROM INTERFERING WITH APPOINTMENTS OR SUBORDINATES OF CITY MANAGER.
MR. KINGSTON, UH, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
THIS, UH, SECTION, I'M, I'M A LITTLE BIT, UH, NOT AMUSED BY THE DESCRIPTION ON YOUR AGENDA.
UM, THIS SECTION DOESN'T PROHIBIT INTERFERENCE WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S SUBORDINATES.
IT PROHIBITS COMMUNICATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S SUBORDINATES.
A LITERAL READING OF THE CHARTER REQUIRES COUNCIL MEMBERS OR, UH, THEIR EMPLOYEES IN THE, UH, MAYOR COUNCIL, UH, STAFF OFFICES TO COMMUNICATE LITERALLY ONLY WITH THE CITY MANAGER, HIM OR HERSELF.
UM, AND NO ONE CAN BELIEVE THAT THIS IS IN THERE UNTIL THEY ACTUALLY READ THE, THE SECTION.
YOU CAN SIMPLY DELETE THIS SECTION, UH, WHICH IS THREE SECTION 15.
AND NOTHING BAD WILL HAPPEN IN PRACTICE.
NO ONE HAS EVER OBEYED THIS SECTION OF THE CHARTER.
LITERALLY, EVERYONE WHO'S EVER SERVED THE CITY OF DALLAS ON THE COUNCIL HAS FLAGRANTLY VIOLATED THIS CHARTER PROVISION THOUSANDS OF TIMES, UH, AND SHOULD HAVE.
AND AND FRANKLY, THE CITY MANAGER DOESN'T WANT THIS TO BE THE RULE EITHER.
LIKE, THIS IS A, A REALLY BAD IDEA.
YOU, YOU NEED TO HAVE THE ABILITY
[01:30:01]
TO COMMUNICATE UP AND DOWN THE ORGANIZATION IN ORDER TO GET IT TO RUN PROPERLY.UM, I MEAN, I CAN'T TELL YOU THE NUMBER OF COMMUNICATIONS THAT COUNCIL STAFF HAS TO MAKE WITH PEOPLE ALL OVER THIS 13,000 EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION EVERY DAY.
UM, AND IF, IF ALL THOSE WERE FUNNELED THROUGH A SINGLE PERSON OR ONE EMAIL ADDRESS, I THINK IT WOULD BE, UH, I DON'T KNOW.
IT, IT, IT, THERE CERTAINLY COUNSEL WOULD NO LONGER HAVE ANY INFLUENCE OVER THE OPERATION OF THE CITY.
MR. YOUNG, THIS TIME A SOFTBALL QUESTION.
UH, SO IF I'M ON THE CITY COUNCIL AND I'M AT A BUDGET TOWN HALL MEETING, AND SOMEBODY COMES UP TO ME AFTERWARDS AND SAYS, BY THE WAY, THERE'S A DEAD DOG IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD AT X STREET AND Y AVENUE IN YOUR DISTRICT, UH, WHAT I'M SUPPOSED TO SAY IS FINE.
I WILL CALL THE CITY MANAGER IN THE MORNING.
UH, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE UNSATISFYING TO THAT CONSTITUENT.
UH, CAN I GET A MOTION? I'M GOING TO MOVE, MOVE.
UH, I'M GOING TO MOVE TO DELETE FROM THE CHARTER CHAPTER THREE, SECTION 15.
ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A SECOND DISCUSSION.
SO, FOR CLARITY, MS. UH, COMMISSIONER HUNT, YOUR MOTION IS TO INCLUDE THE AMENDMENT DELETING THAT SECTION.
UM, IF THAT SECTION, UH, APPLIES TO COUNCIL OR ANY OF ITS COMMITTEE MEMBERS DICTATING OR ATTEMPT TO DICTATING ANY PER PERSON'S APPOINTMENT TO, OR REMOVAL FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT BY THE CITY MANAGER? I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.
THE SECOND PART OF THAT DOES TALK ABOUT ONLY, UH, REPORTING TO THE CITY MANAGER.
BUT THAT FIRST PART BOTHERS ME.
IF WE'RE GOING TO DELETE THAT AND SAY THAT THE COUNCIL SHOULD NOT, SHOULD THEN HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DICTATE MS. MS. CLAP.
I THINK ARE, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME AMENDMENT? AREN'T WE TALKING ABOUT SECTION 15? YEAH, WE ARE.
SO THE FIRST SENTENCE IS NOT WHAT WE'VE BEEN HAVING A CONVERSATION ON, IN MY OPINION.
FIRST SENTENCE IS TALKING ABOUT A PERSON'S APPOINTMENT OR REMOVAL FROM OFFICE EMPLOYMENT BY THE CITY MANAGER.
I, I ACTUALLY INTENDED TO INCLUDE THAT AS THE DELETION.
I THINK THAT'S ALSO A VERY BAD RULE.
UM, BUT IT IS ALSO COVERED COMPLETELY IN THE ETHICS CODE.
UM, ANY ATTEMPT TO UNDULY INFLUENCE ANY CITY EMPLOYEE IN THE OPERATION OF THEIR JOB IS A VIOLATION OF THE ETHICS CODE.
THAT LANGUAGE AT THE BEGINNING OF THAT SECTION WOULD PROHIBIT, FOR INSTANCE, COUNSEL FROM WEIGHING IN ON WHO THE NEW POLICE CHIEF IS, FOR INSTANCE.
AND I, I DON'T THINK I, I JUST THINK THIS WHOLE SECTION WAS WRITTEN BY PEOPLE WHO INTENDED FOR THE CITY GOVERNMENT TO BE, UM, OPERATED BY THE MANAGER WITH SOME MILD OVERSIGHT FROM CITIZENS COUNCIL APPOINTEES.
UM, ANY MORE DISCUSSION? UH, YES, MR. CHAIR? UH, JUST THINKING THROUGH THIS AND, AND NOT KNOWING THE HISTORY OF WHY THIS WAS INITIALLY INCORPORATED IN THE CHARTER.
I'M SURE SOMEONE SMARTER THAN ME AND A BODY SMARTER THAN ME, UH, CAME UP WITH THIS FOR A REASON.
AND I JUST WANT US TO BE CAUTIOUS OF SOME OF THE DOWNSTREAM IMPACTS THAT THIS COULD CAUSE.
I'M NOT SURE, UH, MR. KINGSTON SAID IN, IN PRACTICE AND TODAY, UH, COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, SPEAK TO THE SUBORDINATES OF THE CITY MANAGERS, BUT THAT COULD, UH, PRESENT A PROBLEM WHERE THE SUBORDINATES, UM, WILL BE IMPACTED BY HAVING MULTIPLE BOSSES OR HAVING TO PRIORITIZE THINGS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PERSON MAY WANT THEM TO DO AS WELL AS THE CITY MANAGER.
AND SO THAT COULD BE ADDITIONAL PRESSURE ON OUR, ON THE SUBORDINATES WORKING WITHIN THE CITY.
I JUST WANT EVERYBODY TO BE CONSCIOUS, CONSCIOUS THAT THAT MAY BE SOME, THERE MAY BE SOME DOWNSTREAM IMPACT JUST BY REMOVING THIS WITHOUT ANY FURTHER CONSIDERATION.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, UH, YOU COULD TALK
[01:35:01]
TO THOSE SUBORDINATES TODAY AND ASK THEM HOW MANY BOSSES THEY HAVE.SO WE HAVE THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR PENDING.
IF YOU, IF YOU'RE AN AYE, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
REQUIRE APPOINTEES TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS TO RESIDE IN THE COUNCIL DISTRICT OF THE NOMINATING COUNCIL MEMBER WHILE ALLOWING FOR A TWO THIRDS VOTE.
I WANTED TO PUT THIS IN BECAUSE WE HAVE TOO MANY, I THINK ACCORDING TO THE STATUS OF MR. ANDERSON, HOW MANY BOARD AND COMMISSIONERS DO WE HAVE? UM, SO UPON THE LAST CHECK THAT THE CITY SECRETARY PROVIDED ME, I COUNTED 279, UH, CURRENT POSITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN FILLED, UM, THAT WERE APPOINTED BY, OR NOMINATED BY A SINGLE, UM, UH, MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
AND OF THAT 279, 59 OF THEM, UH, RESIDED OUTSIDE OF THE DISTRICT, UM, THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, WHO APPOINTED THEM FROM IS FROM RIGHT.
AND, UH, MY OBJECTIVE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT EACH COMMUNITY OR EACH DISTRICT IS GETTING PROPER REPRESENTATION.
AND THERE'S SOME VISION IN THIS AMENDMENT WHERE IF A COUNCIL MEMBER CAN'T FIND THE PERSON TO SIT ON A BOARD OR COMMISSION, THEY CAN GO OUT OF THE DISTRICT.
BUT I WANT SOME CHECKS AND BALANCES IN PLACES BECAUSE AS OF TODAY, WE HAVE TOO MANY.
UH, I THINK ON THIS BOARD HERE, WE HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY RESIDE IN SEATS THAT, UH, THEY DON'T LIVE IN THE DISTRICT.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY DIFFERENT BOARDS, I DON'T KNOW THE BREAKDOWN, BUT, UH, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GETTING SOME, UH, I THINK THE WORD, THEY DON'T LIKE THE WORD EQUITY OR REPRESENTATION OR EQUALITY, BUT, UH, JUST LIKE THE OTHER AMENDMENT THAT WE JUST GOT THROUGH SCRAPPING ABOUT, ABOUT, WE NEED PEOPLE LIVING IN OUR DISTRICT, IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS THAT FEEL OUR PAINS AND OUR PRESSURE REPRESENTING THESE DISTRICTS.
INSTEAD OF PEOPLE THAT SAY, WORK FOR SOME IMPORTANT LAW FIRM OR SOME GREAT, YOU KNOW, BUSINESS OR WORK FOR SOME MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES THAT APPOINTED THE SEATS.
AND IF YOU LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY, YOU REPRESENT, YOU KNOW, THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY, YOU FEEL THERE A PAIN.
I DON'T NEED SOMEONE IN DISTRICT NINE REPRESENTING DISTRICT FOUR.
ALL RIGHT, MS. LEMASTER? UH, I, I SUPPORT THE INTENT OF THIS.
MY, I THINK TWO THIRDS IS A MIGHTY HIGH THRESHOLD, UH, SINCE A LOT OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING APPOINTED TO THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ARE, I'M SORRY, MA'AM.
UM, WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO CHANGING THIS TO A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COUNCIL AS OPPOSED TO A TWO THIRDS VOTE? NO.
I LIKE THE TWO THIRDS BECAUSE THE MAJORITY VOTE, UH, A COUNCIL MEMBER MIGHT, UH, JUST LIKE, IT'S HARD TO GET RID OF A, A PERSON THAT'S ALREADY ON THE BOARD OF COMMISSION AND THE TWO THIRD VOTE CAN REMOVE THEM.
SO WHY NOT LET THE TWO THIRD VOTE, YOU KNOW, APPOINT 'EM WELL, UH, IN MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING APPOINTED THAT THESE COMMISSIONS ARE NOT POLITICAL PEOPLE, AND THEY'D BE THRUST INTO THE POSITION OF TRYING TO LOBBY THE COUNCIL FOR VOTES.
I GUESS THE CO THE COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD TOO.
BUT I KNOW HOW HARD IT IS TO GET A TWO THIRDS VOTE OR A THREE QUARTERS VOTE.
BUT, UH, THAT JUST SEEMS HIGH TO ME.
I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S A HIGH THRESHOLD, MR. YOUNG, I SUPPORT WHOLEHEARTEDLY THE CONCEPT THAT BOARD COMMISSION APPOINTEES
[01:40:02]
SHOULD REFLECT THE NEEDS, CONCERNS, AND WISHES OF THE DISTRICTS FOR WHICH THEY'RE APPOINTED.UH, I'M NOT SURE I CAN CONCUR IN THE PREMISE THAT A PERSON WHO RESIDES OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT IS INCAPABLE OF DOING THAT.
UH, ON THE PLAN COMMISSION, WE HAD A RATHER JOCULAR TERM FOR THE THREE MUSKETEERS BEING THE PLAN COMMISSIONERS FROM DISTRICTS TWO 14 AND NINE.
AND FREQUENTLY THE HOLDERS OF THOSE SEATS, UH, CAME FROM ONE OF THE OTHER DISTRICTS THAN THE ONE THAT THEY WERE APPOINTED TO, AND IN MANY CASES LOOKED OUT VERY, VERY WELL AND ADMIRABLY FOR THE CONCERNS OF THEIR DISTRICTS.
ADDITIONALLY, THERE HAVE BEEN EXTENDED PERIODS OF TIME WHEN A SEAT WAS VACANT, AND ANOTHER COMMISSIONER HAS STEPPED IN AND BECOME THE DEFACTO TEMPORARY COMMISSIONER FOR THE DISTRICT.
UH, AND HAS SERVED IN THAT ROLE ADMIRABLY, AND IN MY OPINION, REPRESENTED THE DISTRICT AS WELL AS, UH, THE, A PERSON FROM THAT DISTRICT, UH, WOULD'VE DONE.
I PERSONALLY HAVE BEEN APPOINTED TO BOARDS AND COMMISSION SEVEN TIMES, AND TWO OF THOSE APPOINTMENTS WERE BY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WERE NOT, UH, MY COUNCIL MEMBER.
SO, UM, I THINK THE CHECK AND BALANCE IN THE PROCESS IS WHETHER THE VOTERS THINK THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER HAS ADEQUATELY APPOINTED SOMEONE WHO CAN LOOK OUT FOR THEIR DISTRICT RATHER THAN SOMEONE WHO IS A CRONY OR A CAMPAIGN DONOR OR SOMEBODY, UH, THAT, THAT DOES NOT LOOK OUT FOR THAT DISTRICT.
SO THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT.
MR. DE, I, I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER STEIN FOR BRINGING THIS AMENDMENT UP.
I THINK YOU AND I HAVE THE SAME VALUE SET WITH THIS.
I CAN TELL HOW MUCH YOU LOVE DISTRICT 14, OR SORRY, DISTRICT FOUR.
UM, I APOLOGIZE HOW MUCH YOU LOVE DISTRICT FOUR.
AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'VE SPOKEN HOW MUCH, YOU KNOW, WE BOTH LOVE OUR HOME DISTRICTS.
UM, I DON'T THINK I'VE MENTIONED THIS, BUT BEFORE, UH, BEFORE APPOINTMENTS CAME UP, UH, ANOTHER COUNCIL PERSON ACTUALLY OFFERED TO APPOINT ME TO THIS COMMISSION.
BUT I TOLD THEM, YOU KNOW WHAT, LET ME, LET ME TALK TO COUNCILMAN WEST FIRST AND ASK HIM IF HE'S CONSIDERED WHO HE WANTS TO APPOINT.
BECAUSE IT JUST FELT A LITTLE ODD TO ME THAT IF I WAS GONNA BE ON THIS COMMISSION, I WOULDN'T BE REPRESENTING DISTRICT ONE WHERE I LIVE.
UM, AND, AND WHERE MY FAMILY LIVES.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE CITY COUNCIL PEOPLE TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY IN TERMS OF REP OR APPOINTING PEOPLE WHENEVER POSSIBLE THAT LIVE IN THEIR HOME DISTRICTS.
I, I DO FIND IT A LITTLE BIT INTERESTING THAT IN OUR 14 ONE SYSTEM TO RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL, IT'S ABSOLUTELY MANDATORY THAT YOU LIVE IN YOUR DISTRICT.
AND THERE WAS A CASE BACK IN 2007, UH, WHERE, WHERE THERE WAS A HUGE KERFUFFLE OVER THAT OF SOMEBODY ACCIDENTALLY FILING IN AN INCORRECT DISTRICT.
UM, BUT FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, YOU CAN LIVE ANYWHERE IN THE CITY.
THAT BEING SAID, I DO TAKE TO HEART WHAT COMMISSIONER YOUNG HAS SAID, AND I HAVE LISTENED TO FOLKS TALK ABOUT HOW IT IS HARD TO FIND PEOPLE FOR THIS SERVICE.
IT OBVIOUSLY DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTS SOUTHERN SECTOR DISTRICTS LIKE THE ONES WE REPRESENT.
UM, BUT I'M NOT SURE THIS BELONGS IN THE CHARTER.
MY MIND ISN'T MADE UP YET, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHERE I AM RIGHT NOW.
YEAH, MR. CHAIR, UH, BASE ON'S EVERYONE'S, UH, FEEDBACK.
I, I, I LIKE TO SAY THAT'S VERY SAD COMMENTARY ON THE CITY OF DALLAS.
IF WE THINK THAT THERE'S PEOPLE WHO ARE RESIDING IN DISTRICTS, IT WAS 90,000 PLUS IN EACH DISTRICT, UH, MORE OR LESS THAT YOU CAN'T FIND ONE PERSON WITHIN YOUR DISTRICT TO REPRESENT YOUR INTERESTS ON THE COMMITTEE.
THAT'S VERY REFLECTIVE IN THAT WE LIVE IN THE CITY.
THAT DOESN'T DEMONSTRATE EQUITY.
IF WE'LL TAKE THAT POSITION AND THAT OUT OF THE 90,000 PEOPLE, YOU CAN'T FIND ONE.
I UNDERSTAND THERE MAY BE SPECIFIC BOARDS THAT HAVE A, A SKILLSET THAT'S MORE TECHNICAL IN NATURE, BUT I, I WILL BE SUPPORTING, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, STEIN'S, UH, AMENDMENT, UH, FOR THE REASON.
I, I DO THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO HAVE PEOPLE, UH, REPRESENTING COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS FROM, UH, THE DISTRICT AND, AND WHERE THEY LIVE.
AND IT ALSO PROVIDES A, A AVENUE
[01:45:01]
IN THOSE INSTANCES WHERE YOU CANNOT FIND SOMEONE, IF THERE'S SOMEBODY ELSE WHO IS BETTER POSITIONED, UM, FOR A BOARD POSITION OF, THERE'S A MECHANISM IN WHICH THAT CAN STILL HAPPEN.I'VE, I'VE, I'VE HEARD, UM, COMMISSIONER LAMA, UH, SUGGESTING LIKE, MAYBE TWO THIRDS IS TOO MUCH, BUT I DON'T SEE IF THERE'S A, A REAL DIFFERENCE OR DISTINCTION IF WE FALL BACK TO THE MAJORITY.
'CAUSE I, I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE SITUATION IS TODAY.
THE CITY ATTORNEY CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK THAT'S THE, THE PROCESS THAT THE MAJORITY VOTE OF THE, UH, OF THE COUNCIL HAS TO VOTE FOR THEIR COMMISSION OR BOARD MEMBERS' POSITION.
SO IT, IT REALLY JUST TAKES US BACK TO STATUS QUO.
UH, BUT FOR ALL THOSE REASONS, I, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO START BUILDING, UH, A COMPETENCY WITHIN THESE DISTRICTS AND WITHOUT SO, SO MUCH RELYING ON OTHER DISTRICTS FOR THEIR COMPETENCY, BECAUSE THAT JUST CONTINUES TO LEAVE A VOID IN THE VACANCY WITHIN THE DISTRICTS IN WHICH, UM, ACTUALLY MEET THAT, THAT COMPETENCY.
MS. CLAP, MR. CHAIRMAN, I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS THAT YOU JUST MADE, BUT I KEEP GOING BACK TO WHO MAKES THESE APPOINTMENTS.
IT'S THE COUNCIL PERSON, AND IT SEEMS TO ME IT'S THE COUNCIL PERSON THAT NEEDS TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE BY THEIR COMMUNITIES ON THE APPOINTMENTS THAT THEY MAKE.
I WOULD LIKE TO CONCUR WITH COMMISSIONER CLAP.
IT IS THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S RESPONSIBILITY.
THERE ARE THREE PEOPLE I KNOW ON THIS COMMISSION THAT LIVE IN OTHER DISTRICTS.
AND, UH, I HAVE WORKED FOR THE CITY AT LARGE FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.
AND MY RESIDING IN DISTRICT 12 AND REPRESENTING DISTRICT 11, I DO NOT SEE THAT AS A NEGATIVE.
I'VE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER, AND I UNDERSTAND VACANCIES ON THE BOARDS ARE, AND COMMISSIONS ARE A PROBLEM.
AND TO ME, THIS JUST SLOWS DOWN THAT, THAT PROCESS AND YOU END UP WITH MORE VACANCIES, WHICH SLOWS IT FURTHER DOWN AND GIVES MORE POWER TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE INSTEAD OF DISTRIBUTING IT BETWEEN 15 PEOPLE.
WELL, I APPRECIATE ALL Y'ALL'S COMMENTS, BUT I STILL THINK IT'S STACKING THE DECK AGAINST, UH, CERTAIN COMMUNITIES, BECAUSE SOMETIME PEOPLE FEEL LIKE THEY INDEBTED SOME OF THESE COUNCIL OF, UH, PEOPLE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S ALL GOING ON BEHIND THE DOORS OR BEHIND THE, YOU KNOW, UNDER THE TABLE.
BUT WE HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH PEOPLE REPRESENTING PEOPLE OUTTA DISTRICT.
NOW, I WAS LISTENING TO COMMISSIONER YOUNG SPEAK ABOUT A SITUATION THAT I WAS INVOLVED IN.
HE SPOKE ABOUT HOW THAT ONE, UH, PLAN COMMISSIONER THAT DIDN'T LIVE IN A CERTAIN DISTRICT WAS A, APPOINTED TO BE OVER DISTRICT THREE.
AND SHE LIVED IN DISTRICT EIGHT AND WENT AGAINST THE COMMUNITY TO SUPPORT A CHARTER SCHOOL THAT THE COMMUNITY DIDN'T WANT.
AND SHE WAS APPLAUDED BY THE, THE, UH, THE, UH, THE PLAN COMMISSIONER FOR DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB, BUT IT DIDN'T GIVE THAT COMMUNITY OR THAT DISTRICT PROPER REPRESENTATION BECAUSE SHE LIVED IN DISTRICT EIGHT AND PUT SOMETHING IN DISTRICT OR, OR LET SOME RESIDE IN DISTRICT THREE THAT THE COMMUNITY DIDN'T WANT.
AND IT'S STILL A HUGE HEADACHE.
THAT'S WHY I SAY PEOPLE NEED TO BE IN THE SEAT THAT LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY OR IN THE DISTRICT.
UH, I DIDN'T EXPECT FOR THIS BOARD TO GO ALONG WITH ME BECAUSE WE HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE, AS THEY ALREADY TESTIFIED TO THAT, REPRESENTING OTHER DISTRICTS THAN THE ONE THAT THEY SIT IN THE SEAT FOR.
SO IT'S KIND OF, TO ME, IT'S STACKING THE DECK AGAINST THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.
AND AS MR. YOUNG, SO STATED, UH, STATED A WHILE AGO, I STAND ON THAT.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEYS.
UM, HOW WOULD THIS AFFECT THE, SO-CALLED QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARDS, UH, BOTH IN APPOINTMENTS AND IN BEING ABLE TO FILL THE POSITIONS WHERE ALL THE, THERE'S SO MANY REQUIREMENTS FOR WHAT THE, THAT, WHAT THEY DO FOR A LIVING TO, TO BE ON THOSE COMMISSIONS.
UM, I DON'T SEE THIS AFFECTING QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ANY DIFFERENTLY THAN IT WOULD AFFECT OUR ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
IT, I, I THINK IT WOULD BE THE SAME PROCESS FOR BOTH, UH, MR. FRANKLIN, UH, JUST ONE MORE COMMENT, JUST TO KIND OF, FOR, FOR A POINT OF CLARITY.
WHAT COMMISSIONER STEIN IS RECOMMENDING IS NOT A PROHIBITION OF SOMEONE
[01:50:01]
FROM A DIS DIFFERENT DISTRICT SERVING ON A COMMITTEE OR COMMISSIONER OR BOARD, AND ANOTHER DISTRICT IS, AND FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, IT'S, IT IS FORCING THE PRIORITY, UH, FOR SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY LIVES IN THE DISTRICT, TO SERVE THAT DISTRICT, TO SERVE THAT DISTRICT.AND IF NOT, THEN THERE IS A MECHANISM FOR WHICH SOMEONE OUTSIDE OF THAT, THAT THAT DISTRICT CAN SERVE ON THAT BOARD OR COMMITTEE.
MR. DE LA PUENTE, I HAVE A QUESTION EITHER FOR COMMISSIONER STEIN OR STAFF TO CLARIFY.
UH, SINCE APPOINTEES WITHIN THE DISTRICT WOULD ONLY REQUIRE A MAJORITY VOTE AND APPOINTEES OUTSIDE OF THE DISTRICT WOULD REQUIRE A TWO THIRDS VOTE, WOULD THAT REQUIRE THE TWO VOTES TO BE HELD SEPARATELY? SO, IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, YOU'RE ASKING, UM, WHEN, WHEN THE NOMINATIONS ARE CONSIDERED AT A CITY COUNCIL MEETING, UM, AND THERE'S A SLATE OF CANDIDATES, UM, WHERE THEY HAVE TO TAKE FIRST THE SLATE THAT LIVES WITHIN THEIR DISTRICT AND THEN SECOND, SECOND THE SLATE THAT'S OUTSIDE THEIR DISTRICT.
I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.
I'M GONNA THROW THAT TO CITY ATTORNEYS.
YEAH, I MEAN, I WANNA SAY YES.
THAT'S HOW I SEE IT HAPPENING.
UH, RIGHT NOW, OUR, THE CITY SECRETARY, UM, PRETTY MUCH FOR EVERY COUNCIL MEETING, WE HAVE AN ITEM WHERE IT'S, UM, APPOINTMENTS OF BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS.
AND WHAT THE CITY SECRETARY DOES IS, YOU KNOW, SHE INCLUDES IN THE AGENDA PACKET, THE NAMES OF THE NOMINEES, AND I THINK THE NOMINATING COUNCIL MEMBER, AND YOU KNOW WHAT BOARD OR COMMISSION THEY'RE BEING NOMINATED TO? UH, SHE DOESN'T, NO, SHE DOES READ IN EVERY NAME, UM, AT THE PUBLIC MEETING AND WHAT BOARD THEY'RE BEING NOMINATED FOR.
AND THE COUNCIL TAKES THEM UP ALL AT ONCE, UM, UNLESS A COUNCIL MEMBER MAKES A MOTION TO TAKE ONE SEPARATELY.
SO I SEE THIS BEING, AS, YOU KNOW, ALL THE ONES THAT NEED A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE, THEY WOULD BE TAKEN UP.
AND THEN ALL OF THE ONES THAT NEED A TWO THIRDS VOTE, THOSE WOULD BE TAKEN UP SEPARATELY.
UM, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE TIME THESE BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS ARE APPROVED, UM, BY THE FULL COUNSEL UNANIMOUSLY.
UH, CAN WE GET A MOTION? CAN, CAN SO MOVED.
MR. SICE, DID YOU, UH, MAKE A MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT'S CORRECT.
TO INCLUDE? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT, MR. CHAIR.
I AM, UH, I'M ONE OF THE THREE COMMISSION MEMBERS WHO LIVES RIGHT AT THE EDGE OF THE DISTRICT THAT I'M CURRENTLY REPRESENTING.
DISTRICT TWO, I LIVE IN DISTRICT 14.
UH, THAT SAID, I HAVE REPRESENTED AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL FOR MANY, MANY YEARS IN THE PAST, MUCH OF DISTRICT TWO, AND RESIDED IN DISTRICT TWO.
UM, ESSENTIALLY FOR THE ENTIRETY OF MY TIME LIVING IN DALLAS.
UM, WHEN I WAS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AT THE SCHOOL BOARD LEVEL, I ALSO WAS TASKED WITH HAVING TO FIND PEOPLE, UH, TO SERVE ON, UH, COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS.
AND I HAD TO WORK EXTREMELY HARD TO FIND PEOPLE IN THE DISTRICT THAT I REPRESENTED IN DALLAS, ID THAT WAS DISTRICT EIGHT, WHICH AGAIN, OVERLAPPED QUITE A BIT WITH DISTRICT TWO, AND IT WAS PAINSTAKING WORK TO GO FIND THOSE INDIVIDUALS.
UH, BUT I'M PROUD TO NOTE THAT IN NEARLY ALL OF THOSE CASES, I THINK PROBABLY 99% OF MY APPOINTMENTS CAME FROM WITHIN DISTRICT EIGHT.
I WANNA REFLECT BACK A LITTLE WHILE EARLIER WHEN I MADE THE COMMENTS I MADE IN SUPPORT OF COMMISSIONER MAGOOS AMENDMENT, UM, TO PLACE SOMETHING IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE CHARTER THAT WOULD INDUCE ACTIONS, EVEN IF THOSE ACTIONS ARE THINGS THAT WE THINK WOULD MANIFEST.
REGARDLESS, UH, I'M REFLECTING BACK ON THAT BECAUSE I SHARE THE SAME SENTIMENTS NOW IN SUPPORT OF COMMISSIONER STEIN'S AMENDMENT, I DO APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN'S, UH, CLARIFICATION THAT THERE IS STILL, UH, AN ABILITY FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO APPOINT THE INDIVIDUAL THAT THEY WOULD LIKE, DESPITE THAT INDIVIDUAL NOT LIVING IN THE DISTRICT.
THERE IS A WAY I, I WOULD ASSUME, TO MAKE THAT A VERY SIMPLE PROCESS, WHICH IS JUST AS COMMISSIONER DELA FUENTE, I BELIEVE, JUST, UH, NOTED WOULD OR PER PERHAPS, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN NOTED WOULD, COULD BE DONE, WHICH WOULD JUST BE TWO SEPARATE VOTES VERSUS ONE FULL
[01:55:01]
SLATE VOTE.BUT THE REASON WHY I, I THINK THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT THING, AND TO GO BACK TO WHAT I SAID EARLIER WITH COMMISSIONER MAGOO, IT, IT'S, I THINK THE CHARTER HAS AN OPPORTUNITY, UH, ALWAYS TO INDUCE THE WAY THAT THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE CITY WORKS TO NUDGE INDIVIDUALS TO OPERATE A PARTICULAR WAY.
WE TALKED QUITE A BIT EARLIER IN THE, UM, IN OUR PROCEEDINGS, UH, AND PREVIOUS MONTHS ABOUT WHETHER WE SHOULD MOVE ELECTIONS TO NOVEMBER TO TRY TO INDUCE MORE VOTING.
ONE OF THE BIGGEST REASONS WHY I BELIEVE AND WILL CONTINUE TO BELIEVE WE HAVE A HARD TIME VOTING IS BECAUSE WE THAT ARE RUNNING FOR OFFICE.
AND ONCE WE ARE ELECTED, WE THAT SERVE IN OFFICE DON'T DO EVERYTHING WE COULD DO TO TRY TO ENGAGE THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITIES THAT WE SERVE IN, AND THAT WE RUN TO SERVE IN.
AND IF THE CHARTER, IN ANY FORM OR FASHION CAN HELP THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE BEEN ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE TO SERVE, TO CONTINUE TO ENGAGE THE PEOPLE THAT WERE, THAT ELECTED THEM TO SERVE IN THEIR DISTRICT, UH, WE SHOULD TRY TO DO THAT.
THAT'S HOW I THINK ABOUT THE CHARTER, UH, AT LEAST IN THIS CASE.
AND IN THE CASE, UH, OF COMMISSIONER MAGOOS AMENDMENT EARLIER, I'LL BE SUPPORTING IT AGAIN AS SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT CURRENTLY LIVE IN DISTRICT TWO AND IS HONORED TO SERVE, BUT ABSOLUTELY WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PASS THE OPPORTUNITY TO SOMEONE, UH, IN THE DISTRICT, UH, THAT I'M REPRESENTING AT THE MOMENT MOVING FORWARD.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO INCLUDE THIS AMENDMENT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION TO WAIT WHAT NOW? OH, YEAH.
AND RAISE YOUR HAND PLEASE ON THE, ON, ON THE VOTE.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO INCLUDE, SAY AYE.
ALRIGHT, THE MOTION IS, I'M SORRY.
MS. BERNARDINO, I DIDN'T SEE THAT YOU WERE ON LINE.
WHAT, HOW DO YOU VOTE? WHAT IN FAVOR? IN FAVOR.
SO THE, UH, TIE, THE MOTION DOESN'T CARRY.
THIS WOULD CHANGE WORDING IN THE CHARTER TO BE MORE INCLUSIVE USING THE WORD RESIDENT OR PEOPLE IN PLACE OF CITIZEN.
ONE SUBMITTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER JESSE MORENO.
UM, I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR TO A MOTION AND DISCUSSION.
IF, UM, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO HEAR, BUT IF NO ONE HAS MADE THE MOTION, THEN I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO INCLUDE THIS LANGUAGE.
IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION TO INCLUDE? THERE'S A SECOND FOR MR. CAMPBELL DISCUSSION.
UH, I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THESE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH MAKING OUR CITY CHARTER MORE INCLUSIVE BEYOND, UH, QUALIFIED TAX PAYING CITIZENS, REGISTERED VOTERS.
UM, AND ALL THESE INSTANCES WHERE WE SEE THIS IN THE CHARTER, IT'S, IT'S AN AREA THAT, GIVEN MY OWN PERSONAL HISTORY, GIVEN THE DISTRICT, I REPRESENT THESE, THESE INSTANCES IN THE CHARTER.
UM, DON'T SIT 100% RIGHT WITH ME.
THAT BEING SAID, I THINK THERE ARE AREAS IN THE CHARTER WHERE CHANGING TO THE WORD PEOPLE OR, OR PERSONS AS OPPOSED TO RESIDENTS, UH, OR AS OPPOSED TO RE UH, CITIZENS MAKES SENSE.
SO, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT AGENDA ITEM, UH, JAY, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS PROVIDED US OPEN MEETINGS, UH, EXCEPT, UH, SPEAKERS AND INDEPENDENT AUDIT ARE AREAS WHERE THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS RECOMMENDED PEOPLE.
ALL OTHER AREAS, THEY'VE RECOMMENDED RESIDENTS IN HERE.
UM, AND A LOT OF THESE MAKE SENSE TO ME, FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT, UM, WHERE FIRE RESCUE HAS TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY MEASURES TO PROTECT THE CITY AND THE PROPERTY OF ITS NOW RESIDENTS AS OPPOSED TO CITIZENS FROM DESTRUCTION BY FIRE, UH, OR CONFLAGRATION.
I THINK WE CAN ALL PROBABLY AGREE THAT IT WOULD BE A WASTE OF DALLAS FIRE'S TIME TO ASK FOR PEOPLE CITIZENSHIP STATUS AS THEIR HOUSE IS BURNING DOWN.
SO I THINK THAT'S AN AREA WE'RE CHANGING.
THE RESIDENT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
UM, BUT I DO THINK OTHERS BROUGHT, HAVE PREVIOUSLY BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT WE HAD A SIMILAR BALLOT
[02:00:01]
MEASURE, TWO BALLOT MEASURES GO TO THE PUBLIC IN 2021, AND THEY FAILED PRETTY MISERABLY BY AROUND 40 POINTS.AND SO THE WAY AMENDMENT OR AGENDA ITEM J AMENDMENT ONE IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN THE WAY IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN.
I WOULD BE PROUD TO PUT MY NAME ON IT, AND I WOULD BE PROUD TO TELL THE PUBLIC I SUPPORT THIS.
THAT BEING SAID, I DON'T THINK THE PUBLIC IS GONNA GO FOR IT THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN AND THE WAY WE HAVE DISCUSSED SOME OF THESE ISSUES, IT'S VERY PERSONALLY DISAPPOINTING FOR ME.
BUT I THINK I NEED TO ACCEPT REALITY ON THIS.
SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND AGENDA ITEM J IN TWO SPECIFIC AREAS, SPECIFICALLY SECTION ONE, ORGANIZATION OF CIVIL SERVICE, AND, UH, SECTION 10 CITIZENS GIVEN PREFERENCE IN LETTING OF CONTRACTS WHERE IT CURRENTLY SITS QUALIFIED TAX PAYING CITIZENS IN CIVIL SERVICE AND CITIZENS IN, UH, LETTING OF CONTRACTS.
THE CURRENT LANGUAGE SAYS RESIDENCE.
AND I THINK A POTENTIAL NEW STANDARD COULD BE IN THESE AREAS WHERE IT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A PRIVILEGE THAN A RIGHT TO SERVE ON A BOARD OF COMMISSION OR BORDER COMMISSION.
MAYBE LANGUAGE ALONG THE LINES OF QUOTE, CITIZENS AND AUTHORIZED RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES WHO ARE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS COULD BE, OR UN UH, END QUOTE AT RESIDENTS OF DALLAS YES.
CITIZENS AND AUTHORIZED RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES WHO ARE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS.
AND SO THE, AGAIN, THE PROBLEM, I'M TRYING TO SOLVE IT A POLITICAL PROBLEM.
IT'S NOT A POLICY PROBLEM, IT'S NOT A LEGAL PROBLEM.
IT'S JUST ADMITTING THAT I THINK WHERE THE MEDIAN VOTER IN DALLAS IS RIGHT NOW IS ONE THAT VIEWS CITIZENS AND AUTHORIZED RESIDENTS AS WORTHY OF SERVICE ON CIVIL SERVICE AND IN PREFERENCE OF LETTING OF CONTRACTS.
UM, JUST TO CLARIFY MY UNDERSTANDING, UH, AN AUTHORIZED RESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WOULD BE A NON-CITIZEN WHO HAS LEGAL AND LAWFUL PROTECTIONS AND ENTRY IN THIS COUNTRY.
SO THINK OF A GREEN CARD HOLDER, THINK OF SOMEBODY WITH A WORK VISA.
THINK OF SOMEBODY WITH DACA PROTECTIONS.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST, BUT I THINK THOSE ARE THE THREE MOST OBVIOUS EXAMPLES.
UH, I THINK THIS WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO EXTEND FRANCHISE OF SERVICE FOR OUR CITY.
BUT AGAIN, AS WE'RE LOOKING AT A LOT OF THESE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT TEND TO BE 15 MEMBERS OR SO, I THINK THE AVERAGE VOTER IN OUR CITY WANTS A SLIGHTLY HIGHER STANDARD.
UM, I GO BACK TO THE MEETING THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY WHERE COMMISSIONER STE SAID SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF, YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN'T SERVE ON A JURY, WHY SHOULD YOU SERVE ON THIS BORDER COMMISSION? IT'S NOT THE STANDARD I WOULD HOLD, BUT SOMEBODY ELSE SAID, AND I THINK IT MIGHT'VE BEEN COMMISSIONER CAMPBELL, OF IF YOU CAN WORK FOR THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, MAYBE YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO SERVE ON THE PARKS BOARD.
AND I THINK THAT IS A VERY CLEAR STANDARD THAT I THINK WE CAN SELL TO THE PUBLIC.
UM, SO I WOULD, I WOULD MAKE TO MAKE, I, I WOULD MOVE TO MAKE THAT MOTION AND, AND LOOK FOR A SECOND.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT.
UH, DISCUSSION, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, MR. CHAIR, IS THIS AN AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION? YES.
IJ WELL, I JUST WANNA POINT OUT THAT, UM, SECTION ONE ORGANIZATION OF CIVIL SERVICE THAT IS A CHANGE THAT THIS BODY HAS ALREADY RECOMMENDED FOR INCLUSION IN A PREVIOUS ITEM.
NOW, THAT WOULD ALSO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE OTHER ITEM THAT YOU, THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
SO THERE WAS AN ITEM A FEW, UH, MEETINGS AGO WITH BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS IN THE CITY.
UH, AM I, AM I MAKING A MOTION TO EXCLUDE, OR AM I MAKING A MOTION TO AMEND THE LANGUAGE? WELL, I, I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS, THIS IS CLARIFYING THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE REFERRING TO IN HERE WITH CIVIL SERVICE WAS, UM, ALREADY LANGUAGE THAT THAT WAS APPROVED BY THIS BODY IN THE, IN A PREVIOUS, UM, UH, PREVIOUS ITEM.
SO IN THIS CASE, IF YOU WERE TO REMOVE IT FROM, UH, THE CIVIL SERVICE SECTION, YOU WOULD ALSO BE REMOVING IT FROM, UM, THAT, THAT LAST ITEM, SO THAT, SO SERVICE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, THE ITEM THAT YOU CONSIDERED A FEW, FEW MEETINGS AGO WOULD NO LONGER INCLUDE THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, BUT IT MAY, IT WOULD STILL INCLUDE THE OTHER BOARDS IN THE CHARTER.
WHY, WHY IS IT ON AGENDA ITEM J? WELL, I HAD INCLUDED
[02:05:01]
THAT WITH A FOOTNOTE, UM, JUST TO SHOW YOU THAT THAT'S ANOTHER PLACE WHERE RESIDENTS, UM, WOULD BE THE LANGUAGE INSTEAD OF QUALIFIED TAX PAYING CITIZENS.UM, I HAD INCLUDED A FOOTNOTE THAT THIS EDIT WAS APPROVED FOR INCLUSION BY THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 6TH.
IF IT IS ALLOWABLE, I WOULD CONTINUE WITH MY MOTION.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE.
MR. CHAIR, THAT WAS AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION THAT WAS A VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION.
SO NOW WE'LL HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE MAIN MOTION FOR A VOTE.
SO IT'LL BE TO APPROVE THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED BY, UH, MR. DE LA FTE'S AMENDMENT.
WE NEED, WE NEED A MOTION FOR THAT.
SO ALREADY, OR IS IT PENDING MOTION? THERE'S PENDING, YES, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
SO ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT SAY AYE.
RAISE YOUR HANDS AGAIN, PLEASE, MR. SOLIS.
AGENDA ITEM K, AMEND THE VOTE.
REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL TO MODIFY THE REDISTRICTING COMMISSION'S REC RECOMMENDED, UH, DISTRICTING PLAN FROM A THREE FOURTH MAJORITY VOTE TO A TWO THIRDS MAJORITY VOTE.
AND CHAPTER FOUR, SECTION FIVE B SIX AMENDMENT 93, SUBMITTED BY COMMISSIONER CAMPBELL.
UH, AFTER SPEAKING WITH SOME PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY AND, AND, UH, REPRESENTATIVE
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO EXCLUDE, UH, AGENDA ITEM K.
THIS WOULD AMEND CHAPTER, UH, FOUR SECTION FIVE TO ADD ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SERVING ON THE REDISTRICTING COMMISSION AMENDMENT 1 25.
UM, THIS RELATES, OKAY, YOU HEARD FROM REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL CIA AT OUR MARCH 4TH MEETING, AND COMMISSIONER CAMPBELL MADE A PROCEDURAL MOTION ADDING THIS ITEM TO OUR AGENDA.
UH, IT RELATES TO REDISTRICTING PROCESS AS WELL AS COMMISSIONER CAMPBELL.
I'M SORRY I'M BUTCHERING THIS, BUT I'LL JUST LET YOU TELL US ABOUT IT.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS, UH, WE WERE LOOKING FOR SOME REFORM TO THE, UH, RESISTING PROCESS THAT MADE IT MORE EFFICIENT, MORE FAIR, MORE TRANSPARENT.
UH, WE BOUNCED AROUND A FEW IDEAS, WHICH IS WHY I JUST KILLED MY OWN ONE ON AGENDA ITEM K.
AND AFTER SPEAKING WITH MR. AN, UH, WITH REPRESENTATIVE CIA, WE LANDED ON THIS, I THINK, VERY SMART IDEA OF ADDING LANGUAGE THAT LIMITS THE ELIGIBLE, THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, WHO CAN SERVE.
I CAN RUN THROUGH THESE IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT IT'S PRETTY SELF-EXPLANATORY.
WHAT THIS IS SUPPOSED TO DO IS, IS, IS SUPPOSED TO CUT DOWN ON UN UNETHICAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.
UM, AND AGAIN, UH, I CAN GO THROUGH THESE IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT I'M, I'M OPEN TO HEARING ANY SUGGESTIONS.
I, MR. YOUNG, A QUESTION FOR MS. MORRISON.
UH, WOULD YOU PLEASE SUMMARIZE FOR THE COMMISSION THE, UH, DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD, UH, BY EMAIL ABOUT, UH, SOME TECHNICAL LANGUAGE REVISIONS TO PARAGRAPH F? CERTAINLY.
UH, SO SINCE THIS WAS SENT OUT TO YOU, I THINK YESTERDAY, UM, I DID MAKE AN EDIT ON PAGE 16 OF YOUR HANDOUT.
UM, PARAGRAPH FI ADDED, UM, THE LANGUAGE AND PARENTHESES.
THIS PARAGRAPH DOES NOT APPLY TO NON NEGOTIATED FORM CONTRACTS, UH, FOR GENERAL CITY SERVICES OR BENEFITS IF THE CITY SERVICES OR BENEFITS ARE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PERSON OR SPOUSE ON THE SAME TERMS THAT THEY'RE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
UM, COMMISSIONER YOUNG HAD POINTED THIS OUT TO ME THAT WE DON'T WANNA EXCLUDE SOMEONE WHO HAS A, SAY A
[02:10:01]
CONTRACT WITH DALLAS WATER UTILITIES FOR THEIR WATER BILL.SO, AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER YOUNG FOR POINTING THAT OUT TO ME.
IT WAS A GOOD, A GOOD ADDITION.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
CAN I ASK THE, UH, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ONE MORE THING TOO? SAY FOR EXAMPLE, YOU WORK FOR A NONPROFIT, I WONDER WHO DOES, AND, UH, THEY WOULD RECEIVE A GRANT FROM THE CITY OF DALLAS, SAY IT'S UNITED WAY GRANT FOR, I DON'T KNOW, DENTAL ASSISTANCE OR SOMETHING FOR THE ELDERLY.
COULD, UH, SOMEONE THAT WORKS FOR UNITED WAY THAT'S A RECIPIENT OF THAT GRANT BE INELIGIBLE BASED ON THIS CRITERIA? I THINK THE ANSWER IS NO, BUT I HOPE THE ANSWER IS NO.
'CAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO EXCLUDE THOSE TYPES OF FOLKS.
I ALSO THINK THE ANSWER IS NO.
I'M NOT SEEING A PARAGRAPH LISTED HERE THAT WOULD APPLY TO THAT TYPE OF SITUATION.
THAT BEING SAID, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD, WE WOULD LOOK AT THOSE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, UM, WITH THE HELP OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE.
SO WHAT HAPPENS TO THE, UH, TWO THIRDS AND THREE QUARTER THAT OF THE VOTES THAT IT TAKES FOR THE COUNCIL TO OVERTURN? DID THE ONE THAT WE, THAT YOU WITHDREW, UH, ITEM K EXCLUDED, YOU EXCLUDED THAT, BUT DOES THAT MEAN THAT, SO IT WILL STAY AT THREE QUARTERS AS IT IS NOW? YES, IT WOULD REMAIN THREE QUARTERS.
UH, IF, IF YOU KNOW REPRESENTATIVE CIA, HE'S, IS HE IN FAVOR OF THIS? ABSOLUTELY.
WE WORKED TOGETHER HAND IN HAND WORKING ON A LANGUAGE, UH, WITH COMMISSIONER HUNT AS WELL.
CAN I GET A MOTION OR YOU GOT A QUESTION OR COMMENT? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO INCLUDE.
OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING IS NEXT WEEK, THURSDAY, APRIL 11TH AT 6:30 PM UH, THIS IS INTENDED TO BE OUR FINAL MEETING, BARRING ANYTHING UNFORESEEN.
UH, WE WILL REVIEW THE FINAL LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE INCLUDED DURING THIS PROCESS AND TAKE A FINAL VOTE ON THE COMMISSION'S REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL, WHICH ASSUMING WE MEET ALL THOSE GOALS, UH, I WILL MAKE ON MAR, UH, MAY 1ST.
UM, AND YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY WELCOME TO ATTEND AND, UH, AND GIVE US ANY ASSISTANCE YOU WANT ON THAT TO HELP ME GET READY FOR IT.
YES, MR. CHAIR, EARLIER IT WAS DISCUSSED THAT PREVIOUS COMMISSIONS HAVE MADE SUGGESTIONS OUTSIDE THE REALM OF THE SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEING SENT TO COUNCIL.
WILL WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT AT OUR NEXT MEETING? OR, OR WHEN DO YOU ENVISION THAT HAPPENING? THAT CONVERSATION HAPPENING? COMMISSIONER HUN? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO THE CHARTER? NO, NO.
IT WAS REALLY, UH, THE IDEA OF A LETTER THAT WOULD BE SENT TO COUNCIL ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE COMMISSION, RECOMMENDING SOME ITEMS THAT AREN'T SPECIFICALLY AMENDMENTS THAT WE VOTED ON THAT ARE TANGENTIAL TO THEM OR THAT WE THINK ARE GOOD IDEAS.
AND I THINK COMMISSIONER YOUNG, UH, INDICATED THAT THAT HAD BEEN DONE PREVIOUSLY.
I I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IF IT, IF WE NEED IT ON THE AGENDA AS AN ITEM FOR DISCUSSION THAT IT'S ON THE AGENDA, UH, FOR, FOR NEXT WEEK.
I WASN'T SURE IF THAT'S HOW WE WERE MOVING FORWARD.
YEAH, THAT CAN GO ON THE AGENDA.
WE'LL GET WITH THE CHAIR, UM, TO SEE HOW BEST TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AT OUR NEXT MEETING, UM, IF THE CHAIR AGREES THAT, YEAH, I AGREE.
UM, ALSO, UM, IF YOU DON'T MIND ME INTERJECTING, MR. CHAIR.
UM, I ALSO ANTICIPATE FOR US TO REVISIT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL LANGUAGE, UH, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THAT LANGUAGE BASED ON THE CONVERSATION, UH, THAT WE HAD A NUMBER OF MEETINGS AGO ABOUT, UM, THE FOR CAUSE LANGUAGE AND REALLY JUST GETTING ALL THE LANGUAGE NAILED DOWN FOR THAT ITEM.
IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THIS BODY MADE A MOTION TO INCLUDE WITH THE LANGUAGE SPECIFICALLY TO COME BACK FOR YOUR REVIEW.
UH, SO WE'LL, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AT THE NEXT MEETING AS WELL TO BE THEN INCLUDED IN YOUR FINAL REPORT.
UH, WITH NO FURTHER ITEMS TO DISCUSS, MR. I'M SORRY, MR. UH, QUESTION FOR MR. ANDERSON AND OR MS. MORRISON, WILL WE HAVE IN ADVANCE OF THE NEXT MEETING A COMPILATION OF THE CHARTER AMENDMENT LANGUAGE THAT WE HAVE VOTED TO INCLUDE? YES, YOU WILL.
MY GOAL IS TO HAVE THAT THROUGH THE REVIEW PROCESS
[02:15:02]
AND TO HAVE THAT EMAILED OUT TO YOU.I HOPE, HOPE, HOPE BY NOON ON MONDAY.
UM, SO IF IT'S, IF IT'S NOT THERE, PLEASE BE PATIENT.
UM, WORST CASE SCENARIO, I'M HOPING END OF BUSINESS MONDAY, BUT I'M SHOOTING FOR, FOR NOON ON MONDAY.
SO YOU HAVE, UM, SEVERAL DAYS, UH, TO REVIEW EVERYTHING, MR. DE LA FUENTE.
UH, WOULD IT ALSO BE POSSIBLE TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW MANY BALLOT MEASURES WE'RE SENDING TO COUNSEL? IF WE CAN GET THE FINAL REPORT, UM, DRAFTED, REVIEWED, AND FINALIZED, AND WE HAVE TIME TO LOOK AT BALLOT LANGUAGE? WE WILL, WE WILL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.
UM, YEAH, WE'LL DO OUR BEST, UM, TO AT LEAST HAVE THE NUMBER OF BALLOTS.
UM, WE THINK THIS WOULD BE MOVING FORWARD.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A VERY SPECIFIC WAY THAT BALLOT LANGUAGE HAS TO BE PREPARED.
UM, AND WE JUST, WE HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO LOOK INTO THAT QUITE YET.
ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE ADJOURN? OKAY.
UH, WITH NO, NO FURTHER ITEMS TO DISCUSS, THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION IS CONCLUDED AT 8:51 PM THANK YOU ALL.