[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:06]
>> I HEREBY CALL THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPECIAL MEETING OF PARKER TO ORDER, IT IS MAY 14TH, 2024, AND IT IS 7:01 P.M. AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK MR. OLSON, DO I HAVE A QUORUM.
>> YES, MADAM MAYOR, YOU HAVE A SUPER QUORUM.
>> NEXT, WE WILL DO THE PLEDGES.
I WILL ASK MISS LYNCH IF SHE WOULD DO THE AMERICAN PLEDGE AND MR. MCDUFF, IF YOU WOULD DO THE TEXAS PLEDGE.
>> NEXT, WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
[PUBLIC COMMENTS]
I HAVE A COMMENT CARD FROM LUCY ESTERBROOK.>> THIS IS THE LAST PLACE I WANTED TO BE EVER.
>> THAT'S THE FUNNIEST THING I'VE HEARD.
>> BUT SEVERAL OF YOU HAVE ENCOURAGED ME TO BE HERE.
AND SOME OF YOU ARE SMILING, AND THAT'S NICE BECAUSE PARKER'S A GREAT FRIENDLY CITY.
I'VE LIVED HERE IN A LONG TIME, AND I LOVE MY NEIGHBORS, BUT THOSE SMILES, THEY MAKE ME VERY SAD BECAUSE I LIVE AT 4407 CHURCH LANE.
EVEN THE NEWBIES HERE HAVE HEARD OF CHURCH LANE.
THE INFAMOUS WORST STREET IN PARKER.
NOT BECAUSE OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE, BUT BECAUSE OF THE CONDITION THAT THE STREET IS IN.
THERE ARE NO OTHER STREETS IN PARKER RATED AT 20.
WE ARE CURRENTLY FIXING DUBLIN, WHICH IS RATED ANYWHERE FROM A 30-60 DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU LIVE.
YES, DUBLIN GETS MORE TRAFFIC, HAS ACCIDENTS, BUT CHIEF PRICE HAS TOLD US THOSE ACCIDENTS ARE FROM PEOPLE EXCEEDING THE SPEED LIMIT ON THE S CURVE, NOT FROM THE CONDITION OF THE ROAD.
FRANKLY, YOU CAN NOT ONLY GO POSTED SPEEDS ON DUBLIN, YOU CAN SAFELY EXCEED THE POSTED SPEED, BUT NOT ON THE S CURVE.
I DRIVE A PRIUS. I BOUGHT IT NEW A FEW YEARS AGO.
PIECES AND PARTS ARE FALLING OFF OF IT.
A PIECE WAS DRAGGING OFF OF IT THE OTHER DAY, MAKING A TERRIBLE NOISE, POSSIBLY STARTING A FIRE.
I HAD TO CUT IT OFF WITH GARDEN LOPPERS.
A NEW PRIUS IS $35,000, NOT THE MOST EXPENSIVE CAR IN THE WORLD, NOT THE CHEAPEST.
BY THE TIME THAT ROAD GETS FIXED, I THINK I'M GOING TO HAVE TO BUY A NEW PRIUS BECAUSE OF THAT ROAD.
I WOULD ASK YOU BEFORE YOU ADDRESS THE DUBLINS OF THE WORLD, THE CURTIS LANE RATED FROM 40-90, GRAY LANE RATED 25, I'M NOT SURE WHY, I DRIVE IT FREQUENTLY, I DRIVE POSTED SPEED.
I'M TIRED OF LAUGHING ABOUT IT.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE IT GORGEOUS, JUST MAKE IT SO THAT IT'S NOT DESTROYING OUR CARS.
THANK YOU, FRIENDS, AND COUNCILMEMBERS AND MADAM MAYOR.
>> NOW, WE WILL MOVE TO THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEMS,
[1. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-791 CANVASSING THE ELECTION RETURNS AND DECLARATION OF RESULTS OF AN ELECTION HELD IN THE CITY OF PARKER, TEXAS ON MAY 4, 2024. ]
ITEM NUMBER 1, CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024-791, CANVASSING THE ELECTION RETURNS AND DECLARATION OF RESULTS OF AN ELECTION HELD IN THE CITY OF PARKER ON MAY 4TH, 2024.[00:05:11]
THE CANVAS RESULTS THAT I HAVE RECEIVED FROM BRUCE SHERBERT'S OFFICE IS FOR MAYOR LEE PUDDLE 310 VOTES.FOR COUNCIL MEMBER AT LARGE, CITY OF PARKER, I HAVE DON HEADLAND, 259 VOTES, BUDDY PILGRIM, 352 VOTES, RANDY KIRCHO,260 VOTES, AUBREY MARINO, 64 VOTES.
BASED ON THE CANVAS THAT I HAVE, MYSELF, AS WELL AS BUDDY PILGRIM AND RANDY KIRCHO ARE ELECTED.
AT THIS TIME, WE WILL NOW GO TO ADMINISTERING THE OATH OF OFFICE.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE A MOTION? MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT AND APPROVE THE CANVAS OF THE VOTES FOR THE 2024-791 CANVASSING THE ELECTION RETURNS AND DECLARATION OF RESULTS OF AN ELECTION HELD IN THE CITY OF PARKER ON MAY 4TH, 2024.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER NOLE AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER FETT TO APPROVE THE CANVAS OF THE ELECTION RETURNS AND DECLARATION OF THE RESULTS.
NOT HEARING ANY, I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
NOW, WE WILL GO TO ITEM NUMBER 2,
[2. ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE TO NEWLY/RE-ELECTED OFFICIALS. CITY SECRETARY – MAYOR MAYOR – COUNCILMEMBERS]
WHERE WE WILL ADMINISTER THE OATH OF OFFICE TO THE NEWLY ELECTED FOLKS.EVERYBODY KEPT THROWING STUFF AT ME, SO PACKET GOT A LITTLE MESSED UP.
I, LEE PUDDLE, DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE OF MAYOR OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, CITY OF PARKER, TEXAS, AND WILL, TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY, PRESERVE, PROTECT, AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION, AND THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THIS STATE, SO HELP ME GOD.
>> THANK YOU. CONGRATULATIONS.
>> NOW, I WILL ADMINISTER THE OATH OF OFFICE TO BUDDY PILGRIM.
>> I, BUDDY PILGRIM, DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, OF THE CITY OF PARKER, TEXAS, AND WILL, TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY, PRESERVE, PROTECT, AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THIS STATE, SO HELP ME GOD.
>> RANDY, YOU WILL TO RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
>> I, RANDY KIRCHO [PHONETIC], DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE OF COUNCILMAN OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, CITY OF PARKER, TEXAS, AND WILL, TO THE BEST MY ABILITY, PRESERVE, PROTECT, AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND OF THIS STATE, SO HELP ME GOD.
>> THANK YOU AND WELCOME TO BE ELECTED TO COUNCIL. HAVE A SEAT.
>> I THINK WE GOT A NEW NAME THING SOMEWHERE.
[00:10:19]
>> I WILL ASK THAT BOTH BUDDY AND RANDY, PLEASE SEE PATTY LATER ON.
THERE'S SOME MORE PAPERWORK THAT YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT.
NEXT, WE HAVE CONSIDERATION AND OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024-792,
[3. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NO. 2024-792, APPOINTING THE 2024-2025 MAYOR PRO TEM. ]
APPOINTING THE 2024-2025 MAYOR PRO TEM.>> MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE JIM REID [PHONETIC] FOR THE POSITION OF MAYOR PRO TEM.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY AMANDA NOE [PHONETIC] TO NOMINATE JIM REID TO CONTINUE SERVING AS OUR MAYOR PRO TEM.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY AMANDA AND A SECOND BY RANDY KIRCHO TO APPOINT JIM REID AS OUR MAYOR PRO TEM.
ONE QUESTION, MR. REID, ARE YOU WILLING TO CONTINUE SERVING IN THAT CAPACITY?
>> THANK YOU. THEN ANY DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY, THEN I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPOINTING JIM REID AS OUR MAYOR PRO TEM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
ANY CONSIDERATION AND OR APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 868,
[4. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 868 APPOINTING AN INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY. ]
APPOINTING AN INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY.AS MOST OF YOU, I THINK ARE AWARE, AMY STANFILL [PHONETIC] HAS RESIGNED, AND WE DO NEED TO HAVE A CITY ATTORNEY.
WE HAVE POSTED THE JOB BUT UNTIL WE GET OUR APPLICANTS AND INTERVIEW THEM, WE DO NEED AN ATTORNEY TO BE WITH US AND GUIDE US IN THE MEANTIME, SO I AM ASKING THAT YOU CONSIDER APPOINTING, I ALWAYS WANT TO SAY CLIFFORD, IT'S CLIFTON, KATHERINE CLIFTON, AS OUR CITY ATTORNEY.
SHE HAS SERVED AS OUR INTERIM IN THE PAST BEFORE WE HAD AMY AND SHE IS WILLING TO DO SO AT THIS TIME.
I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 868.
>> MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON ORDINANCE 868 TO APPOINT KATHERINE AS OUR INTERIM ATTORNEY.
>> I HAVE A MOTION FROM MAYOR PRO TEM REID APPOINTING KATHERINE CLIFTON AS OUR INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY.
>> MADAM MAYOR, I SECOND THE MOTION.
OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> I HAVE SOME DISCUSSION, MAYOR. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE PERSON WHO YOU'VE SUGGESTED THE NAME BE PUT IN NOMINATION.
I THINK I'D LIKE TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HER BEFORE I VOTE ON THE SELECTION.
SECOND, THE ONLY THING IN MY UNDERSTANDING THAT I HAVE ABOUT HER IS THAT HER [INAUDIBLE] IS IN EMPLOYMENT LAW, WHICH IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT NEED IN THE CITY.
I THINK WE HAVE OTHER ISSUES THAT ARE MORE PRESENT THAN EMPLOYMENT.
I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER HIRING A FIRM THAT CAN GIVE US A SELECTION OF ATTORNEYS TO CHOOSE FROM DEPENDING ON THE SPECIFIC NEED FOR WHICH WE HAVE AN ATTORNEY WHERE THERE'S EMPLOYMENT AND THERE'S CONTRACT LAW, WHETHER IT'S ENVIRONMENTAL LAW.
I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER SOME FIRM LIKE MESSER.
[INAUDIBLE] EMPLOYED BY EVEN THOUGH I'M NOT BENEFITING IN PART ON SOME THINGS.
MESSER IS A VERY GOOD CITY ATTORNEY FIRM AND THERE'S ONE AMONG MANY THAT WE MIGHT CONSIDER HERE AS WELL, BUT I WOULD RATHER SEE US TABLE THIS ACTION FOR TONIGHT THAN VOTE ON A PERSON NAME WE JUST LEARNED OF THIS EVENING AND DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION ABOUT.
>> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT AND I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT A FIRM THAT CAN DO LABOR LAW THAT CAN DO ALL THE SPECIFICS VERSUS JUST ONE NARROW DYNAMIC.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER PILGRIM, IS THAT A MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT?
[00:15:01]
>> I WOULD MAKE THAT AS A MOTION TOO.
>> I SECOND THAT, MADAM MAYOR.
THERE'S ALREADY A MOTION ON THE FLOOR WITH JIM AND A SECOND WITH ME.
>> I PROPOSE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO APPROVE TO BE INSTEAD A MOTION TO TABLE [INAUDIBLE] FOR NOW.
>> I HAVE TO CLEAR UP THE FIRST MOTION AND THEN WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENED.
AT THIS TIME, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR THAT WAS MAYOR PRO TEM REID AND COUNCIL MEMBER NOE TO ACCEPT MS. CLIFTON AS THE INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY UNDER ORDINANCE NUMBER 868.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> IF NOT, I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
>> RANDY, JIM, AND AMANDA RAISED THEIR HANDS JUST SO YOU KNOW.
>> MADAM MAYOR, WE STILL HAVE COMMENTS ON THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
>> YEAH, I AGREE WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT BUDDY SAID AS FAR AS POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT OTHER POTENTIAL CANDIDATES, NOT THAT KATHA'LEENE COULD BE EXACTLY THE ONE THAT WE NEED.
BUT AS WE LOOK AT THE COUNCIL AND CURRENT NEEDS, I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT MUNICIPAL LAW IS GOOD, BUT MAYBE A SPECIALTY OF EMPLOYMENT LAW ISN'T NECESSARILY OUR MOST PRESSING NEED AT THIS POINT.
HOWEVER, I DO THINK THAT POTENTIALLY WE DO NEED INTERIM LAWYER ON STAFF WHILE WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOMEBODY.
I WOULD PUSH TO BASICALLY SAY APPROVE KATHA'LEENE FOR THE FACT THAT SHE'S HERE, SHE KNOWS THE CITY.
CERTAINLY, I BELIEVE SHE CAN HELP US.
IN THE MEANTIME, I'D LIKE TO HAVE A MEETING SCHEDULED WITHIN MAY SO THE COUNCIL CAN MEET AND UNDERSTAND WHAT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES ARE OUT THERE.
LOOK AT SOME THINGS AND COME TO A CONCLUSION.
>> I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN KERCHO, KATHA'LEENE HAS BEEN ON STAFF AND HELPED US IN THE PAST.
I AGREE FULLY WITH COUNCILMAN PILGRIM AND WAS, SECONDED BY COUNSEL IN FACT THAT WE DO NEED TO LOOK FOR SOMEBODY THAT MEETS OUR EXACT NEEDS.
OF COURSE, COUNCILMAN KERCHO SAID THE SAME THING, BUT I DO BELIEVE ALSO STRONGLY THAT WE NEED TO HAVE SOMEONE IN THAT INTERIM TIME FRAME.
THE IDEA LONG TERM IS TO HAVE ONE THAT MEETS THE EXACT NEED.
BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE AND GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS BEFORE, THIS TOOK A NUMBER OF MONTHS FOR US TO GO THROUGH.
I DON'T WANT TO BE IN A VOID FOR A NUMBER OF MONTHS WITHOUT ANY ATTORNEY TO HOLD AND HANDLE SOME OF THE DETAILS OF OUR MEETINGS AS WE GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO ECHO SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT MR. REID OR COUNCIL MEMBER REID MENTIONED, BUT I ALSO AGREE WITH COUNSEL MEMBER PILGRIM'S DESIRE TO SEEK THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE LAWYER TO MEET WHAT HE HAS STATED.
BUT TO COUNCIL MEMBER REID'S POINT, WE HAVE A NEED FOR AN INTERIM ATTORNEY, AND I THINK THAT THIS INTERIM ATTORNEY ROLE IS REALLY PRETTY CRITICAL DURING THIS TIME TO HAVE COUNSEL ON HAND.
I WOULD ALSO AGREE THAT I THINK AS AN INTERIM ATTORNEY, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE KATHA'LEENE, SINCE SHE DOES ALREADY HAVE AN EXISTING CONTRACT WITH THE CITY THAT CAN BE EXTENDED IN TERMS OF A SHORT TIME SOLUTION.
>> A COUPLE OF REASONS THAT I SPOKE OF.
I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST KATHA'LEENE.
I DON'T KNOW HER. THAT'S PROBABLY THE BIGGEST REASON.
>> SORRY. I CERTAINLY HAVE NOTHING AGAINST KATHA'LEENE. NEVER MET HER.
DON'T KNOW HER. I GUESS THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I'M OPPOSED TO CASTING THIS VOTE IN FAVOR OF HER.
I'M NOT USED TO VOTING FOR PEOPLE WHOM I'VE NEVER KNOWN AND NEVER SEEN A RESUME ON AND KNOW NOTHING ABOUT.
THE FACT THAT I DON'T KNOW IS ONE OF THE REASONS, BUT THE OTHER REASON IS PROCESS.
ONE OF THE THINGS I'M CONCERNED ABOUT AND THAT I WANT TO TRY TO HELP IMPROVE IS THE PROCESSES THAT WE USE ON CITY COUNCIL, AND TO HAVE A POSITION AS IMPORTANT AS THIS, AS MUCH AS WE NEED IT, I AGREE THAT WE NEED ONE, WE COULD HAVE A NEED THAT COULD COME UP TOMORROW.
IF WE HAVE ONE THAT COMES UP TOMORROW, THEN WE MAY HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHAT LAW FIRM TO HIRE IF WE HAVE A NEED THAT COMES UP TOMORROW.
BUT THE PROCESS IS THAT WE'VE BEEN FOLLOWING WHERE THINGS LIKE THIS COME UP AND WE VOTE ON THEM RIGHT AWAY, IN MY OPINION, ARE NOT THE RIGHT PROCESSES BY WHICH A CITY SHOULD OPERATE.
AT A BARE MINIMUM, WE SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED AHEAD OF TIME A FULL RESUME ON THIS PERSON, SOME HISTORY, WHAT SHE'S DONE BEFORE.
[00:20:01]
THAT WOULDN'T MATTER WHO WAS GOING TO FILL THE SPOT.I'M CONCERNED THAT IF WE FILL IT NOW, IT WILL ENABLE US TO GO EVEN LONGER BEFORE WE FILL IT WITH THE RIGHT PERSON OR THE RIGHT FIRM ON A MORE PERMANENT BASIS, WHERE IF WE KEEP THE NEED BEFORE US, WE'LL DO TAKE A MORE URGENT APPROACH TO FINDING THE RIGHT CANDIDATE AND NOT LET THIS DRAG ON FOR MONTHS BECAUSE IT SHOULDN'T TAKE MONTHS.
IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, WE DON'T TAKE MONTHS TO FIND THE RIGHT COUNSEL WHEN WE HAVE A LEGAL NEED.
WE CAN DO THAT PRETTY QUICKLY.
I'M OPPOSED TO THE PROCESS MORE SO THAN TO THE PERSON.
MY ONLY OPPOSITION TO THE PERSON IS THAT I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT HER OTHER THAN WHAT I'VE HEARD HERE IN THE LAST FEW MINUTES.
I REALLY ENCOURAGE US TO LEAVE THIS POSITION OPEN RIGHT NOW, AND LET'S FIRST, MAKE A DECISION WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO HIRE A PERSON OR A FIRM AND THEN PURSUE THAT DECISION.
>> I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE DETERMINE IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A FIRM OR A PERSON BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT LABOR LAW.
YOU'VE GOT SO MANY DIFFERENT LEGAL REALITIES OF IT.
IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE THAT ONE PERSON CAN DO IT AT THE END OF THE DAY IN MY HUMBLE OPINION.
>> ARE Y'ALL AWARE THAT WE CANNOT HAVE CERTAIN MEETINGS WITHOUT A CITY ATTORNEY?
>> WHAT MEETINGS CAN WE NOT HAVE WITHOUT A CITY ATTORNEY?
>> WE CAN'T HAVE ANY EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, AND WE REALLY SHOULDN'T HAVE A COUNCIL MEETING WITHOUT A CITY ATTORNEY.
>> THEN WHY ARE WE? [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M JUST SAYING WE SHOULDN'T.
SHE'S SITTING OUT IN THE AUDIENCE, AND SHE AGREED TO BE HERE FOR THIS MEETING SO THAT IT COULD OCCUR.
NOW, SHE CAN BE AN INTERIM FOR ONE MEETING, SHE CAN BE AN INTERIM UNTIL WE SAY DIFFERENT.
>> OTHER THAN THIS MEETING, WHICH IS ALREADY PROCEEDING WITHOUT ONE, APPARENTLY, THERE'S NOT A REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE COUNSEL FOR A REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING, YOU'RE SAYING IT'S ONLY A REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE IT FOR CLOSED SESSION.
IF WE DON'T HAVE A CLOSED SESSION ON THE AGENDA RIGHT NOW OR AN ITEM THAT NEEDS TO GO TO CLOSED SESSION, I WOULD STILL PROPOSE THAT WE TAKE A STEP BACK AND WAIT JUST A LITTLE BIT UNLESS YOU HAVE ANOTHER SPECIFIC PENDING NEED RIGHT NOW.
WE'VE HAD A NEED OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS FOR RESPONSE TO THIS TRO, AND IT APPEARS THAT YOU PERSONALLY GAVE THE ASSIGNMENT TO ART RODRIGUEZ TO FILL THAT NEED.
IN SOME WAYS, OUR NEEDS WERE TAKEN CARE OF WITHOUT AN ACTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
>> I PERSONALLY TALKED WITH ART RODRIGUEZ'S PARTNER TODAY WHO REPRESENTS US.
>> IT GETS VERY, VERY COMPLICATED.
BUT [LAUGHTER] I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW DO Y'ALL WANT TO MOVE FORWARD? I'M OKAY WITH WHATEVER YOUR DECISION IS.
WE JUST NEED TO KNOW HOW YOU'LL WANT TO.
THERE IS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THE MOTION WAS TO BRING KATHA'LEENE ON AS A TEMPORARY COUNSEL SO THAT WE COULD FUNCTION IN FULL AS A CITY COUNCIL, AND THERE ARE A LOT OF ITEMS ON THE TABLE, SO THAT WAS THE MOTION TO GET THAT DONE.
BUT I WAS AGREEING IN MY COMMENTS THAT WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AND NEED TO BE LOOKING VERY EARNESTLY FOR SOMEONE, BUT I THINK THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THAT INTERIM TO COVER OUR NEEDS FOR THE CURRENT TIME FROM BEING.
>> MADAM MAYOR, ARE WE STILL IN DISCUSSION?
>> WE'RE IN DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION.
>> IF ART IS OUR ATTORNEY, HIS PARTNER'S ATTORNEY AND I TALKED TO HIM TODAY? HOW DO WE NOT HAVE LEGAL COUNSEL? I'M MISSING SOMETHING HERE.
>> I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF I CAN EXPLAIN IT.
WE DO NOT HAVE COUNSEL THAT IS SITTING HERE WITH US TONIGHT IF SOMETHING CAME UP.
COULD WE STOP THE MEETING AND CALL MR. RODRIGUEZ'S OFFICE? PROBABLY. DO WE HAVE A CONTRACT WITH MR. RODRIGUEZ'S OFFICE? YES.
[00:25:07]
>> I SAID MADAM MAYOR IS THE LEADER YOU TELL ME.
>> IS THE CONTRACT WITH MR. RODRIGUEZ'S FIRM LIMITING HIM OR THAT FIRM ONLY TWO THINGS RELATED TO THE SEWER TREATMENT PLANT PERMIT AND THE MUD PERMIT? IS IT LIMITED TO THAT AND NOTHING ELSE?
>> I WOULD HAVE TO REVIEW THE AGREEMENT AND I DO NOT HAVE IT WITH ME.
>> I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO REVIEW THAT, SEE IF IT COVERS OTHER THINGS.
IF IT DOESN'T, I WOULD AMEND THIS MOTION TO SAY INSTEAD OF HIRING HER, I WOULD SAY THAT WE SHOULD AMEND WHATEVER RETENTION AGREEMENT WE HAVE WITH MESSER TO COVER ALL OF THE NEEDS OF THE CITY ON A TEMPORARY BASIS WHILE WE CONSIDER THAT.
>> THERE ARE OTHER THINGS TO CONSIDER AS WELL.
>> I'M HAVING DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW I'M NOT PUTTING AN AMENDMENT IN PLACE, BUT THE OTHER OPTION I WOULD CONSIDER IS IF WE WERE TO HIRE KATHERINE, I WOULD ONLY DO IT UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, AND HOPEFULLY WE WOULD MAKE SOME PROGRESS IN THE MEANTIME ON FINDING SOMEBODY ELSE.
WHAT I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH IS JUST HIRING SOMEBODY FOR AN UNDETERMINED PERIOD OF TIME THAT WE'VE ALREADY SAID MAY TAKE MONTHS TO FIND SOMEBODY AS A REPLACEMENT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT ALLOWS US TO TAKE MONTHS AND MAY TAKE LONGER THAN WE NEED.
IF IT'S AN URGENT AND IMPORTANT NEED, AND I AGREE IT'S AN IMPORTANT NEED, I WOULD RATHER NOT FILL IT IN A WAY THAT ALLOWS US TO TAKE LONGER THAN WE MIGHT OTHERWISE TAKE.
I WOULD EITHER DO IT FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME OR BETTER YET.
I WOULD JUST AMEND THE RETENTION AGREEMENT WE HAVE WITH MESSER TO COVER WHATEVER NEEDS WE HAVE, AND THEY CAN COME TO THE NEXT MEETING.
>> I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WE WANT TO DO THE DUE DILIGENCE TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
HOWEVER, WHAT I'M WRESTLING WITH A LITTLE BIT IS AT LEAST MY UNDERSTANDING, I HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH ALL THE AGREEMENTS, BUT EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE WORKED WITH MR. RODRIGUEZ DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH COUNCIL MEETINGS THAT WERE ONGOING COUNCIL MEETINGS EVERY TIME.
HE'S NEVER SAT UP HERE EVER TO HELP FOR PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE, WHAT'S GOING ON, HOW THE MOTION SHOULD GO, WHETHER WE'RE BREACHING SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION OR NOT GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND ALL THOSE THINGS.
HAVING AN ATTORNEY UP HERE TO HELP US STAY OUT OF TROUBLE, IF YOU WILL, IS VERY IMPORTANT.
TO MAYBE GO ON ANOTHER VEIN FOR WHAT COUNCILMAN PILGRIM IS SAYING IS THAT THE OTHER CHALLENGE THAT I SEE IS TO HAVE SOMEBODY JUST FOR ONE COUNCIL MEETING AND THEN HAVE ANOTHER PERSON FOR ANOTHER COUNCIL MEETING.
I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO RETAIN ANYBODY ON A ONE MEETING TO ONE MEETING.
I KNOW IF I WAS A LAWYER AND I WAS LOOKING, I PROBABLY WOULD NOT WANT TO DO THAT.
MY POINT WOULD BE THAT YES, WE CAN BE VERY DILIGENT IN WHAT WE DO, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE CAN HAVE SOMEBODY WITH I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS AND YOU DO NOT KNOW KATHERINE.
I UNDERSTAND. BUT THE REST OF US HAVE WORKED WITH HER IN THE PAST.
I THOUGHT SHE DID A GREAT JOB GETTING US THROUGH THE THINGS THAT WE HAD TO GET THROUGH, AND I'M COMFORTABLE WITH HAVING HER ON, NOT PERMANENTLY, OF COURSE, WE WANT TO HAVE A PERMANENT COUNSEL, AND I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE A PERSON PERSONALLY, BUT WE NEED TO DISCUSS ALL THOSE THINGS, AND THAT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME DISCUSSION TO GO THROUGH THOSE DISCUSSIONS TO UNDERSTAND EVERYBODY AND GET EVERYBODY'S PERSPECTIVE.
I'M VERY WILLING TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS, BUT I THINK IN THE INTERIM TIME FRAME, WE NEED TO HAVE SOMEBODY TO SUPPORT US IN THE CASE, WE GET INTO SOME LEGAL SITUATIONS IN MEETINGS WHILE WE'RE GOING THROUGH, WHETHER IT BE EXECUTIVE SESSION OR OUT HERE WHEN WE'RE TALKING THROUGH THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS CLEAN.
>> I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE DIDN'T GET ANY INFORMATION ABOUT THIS AHEAD OF TIME.
NOT A RESUME, NOT NOTICE, NOT ANYTHING.
APPARENTLY, SOME MUST HAVE KNOWN SOMEBODY ABOUT WHO IT WAS GOING TO BE, BUT.
>> BUT IN ANY EVENT, I UNDERSTAND THE NEEDS THAT MIGHT COME UP.
I STILL THINK THAT NEED WOULD BE BETTER FILLED RATHER THAN A PERSON FOR ONE MEETING BECAUSE I AGREE THAT'S NOT THE IDEAL SITUATION.
I SAID THAT'S THE SECOND OPTION I WOULD CHOOSE.
THE FIRST OPTION WOULD BE JUST GO AHEAD AND EXTEND THE RETENTION AGREEMENT FOR MESSER TO INCLUDE GENERAL COUNSEL FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS, AND THEY HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPERIENCED IN MUNICIPAL LAW AND CAN SEND SOMEONE TO SIT WITH US AT THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING WITHOUT ANY PROBLEM.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT ART. I UNDERSTAND ART'S NOT THE GUY FOR THIS.
[00:30:03]
I WOULDN'T WANT ART HERE FOR THAT PARTICULAR ROLE, BUT MESSER IS A VERY EXPERIENCED LAW FIRM IN HANDLING MUNICIPAL LAW, AND I WOULD RATHER DEPEND UPON THEM UNTIL WE MAKE A DECISION.>> FOR ME, I THINK THAT ACTUALLY, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S ALMOST THE SAME AND MAYBE EVEN MORE GRAVE SITUATION IN THAT ALTHOUGH MESSER IS A BIG FIRM, AND I'VE WORKED WITH A LOT OF BIG FIRMS IN MY DAYTIME BUSINESS.
YOU CAN GET SOMEONE FROM A FIRM THAT IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM ANOTHER PERSON THAT'S FROM A FIRM.
SINCE WE KNOW ART, THE PERSON THAT WOULD COME FROM MESSER, I HAVE NEVER SEEN OR NO ONE ON COUNSEL HAS EVER WORKED WITH AT ALL.
THEY WOULD COME IN TOTALLY BLIND TO ANYTHING, WOULDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE OPERATIONS OF THE CITY, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE EXPERTS AND MUNICIPALITIES, BUT THEY WON'T KNOW ANY OF THE DETAILS.
MY COMFORT LEVEL AND WHEN I SAW KATHERINE I REALIZED, I KNOW HER FROM BEFORE.
THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT SHE SHOULD HAVE GOT SOME FORWARD INFORMATION ON, BUT IN MY OPINION, I'M MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE HAVING HER HERE BECAUSE SHE UNDERSTANDS THE INNER WORKINGS OF THE CITY, WHEREAS IF YOU GET MESSER TO COME IN, FROM A FIRM THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHO YOU'RE GOING TO GET ASSIGNED.
YOU MIGHT GET A DIFFERENT PERSON ASSIGNED EACH TIME YOU HAVE A MEETING AND EACH PERSON, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO EDUCATE THEM ON WHAT THE ITEMS ARE.
IN MY OPINION, I THINK THIS IS AN EASY DECISION.
>> I AGREE WITH WHAT COUNCILMAN REID SAID, BUT FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF RESUME, AS WELL AS, LIKE, A CONTRACT, I PERSONALLY ASKED THE CITY FOR THE RESUME AND CONTRACT PRIOR TO THE MEETING AND GOT SOME INFORMATION.
I DO AGREE WITH YOU, BUDDY THAT IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SENT TO EVERYBODY IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO TRY TO GET INFORMATION FOR STUFF THAT'S GOING TO BE AT THE COUNCIL MEETING AHEAD OF TIME.
I AGREE FROM COUNCILMAN OR PRO TEM REID'S PHYSICIAN THAT WELL, EVEN BEFORE THAT, WE DON'T HAVE THE CONTRACT RIGHT NOW WITH MESSER, SO IT CAN'T EVEN REALLY MAKE A MOTION WHAT TO DO WITH IT BECAUSE WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT IT SAYS.
FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, I DON'T THINK THIS COUNSEL CAN MAKE A MOTION TO REALLY AMEND SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T HAVE IN FRONT OF US AND DON'T KNOW. I ALSO AGREE WITH THAT.
IF WE DID THAT AND HAD IT IN FRONT OF US, IF YOU DON'T, I WOULD AGREE THAT IF THEY ASSIGNED SOMEONE BETTER HAVE A BIRD IN HAND, RIGHT? [LAUGHTER] KATHERINE PERSPECTIVE WE KNOW THAT.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO AGAIN, JUST GO BACK AND SAY IF WE WAITED UNTIL THE JUNE 4 MEETING, WHICH IS THE NEXT SCHEDULE MEETINGS, WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY PROGRESS ON THAT EITHER BECAUSE THE NEXT TIME WE CAN NEED TO EVEN TALK ABOUT SOMETHING COULD BE JUNE 4TH.
THAT'S WHAT I'M ALSO AGAINST THAT WE SHOULD MAKE EVERY EFFORT EVEN AT THIS PARTICULAR MEETING TONIGHT TO MAKE AN ADDITIONAL MEETING DURING MAY TO DISCUSS THAT MAKE PROGRESS.
BUT CERTAINLY IN THE MEANTIME WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF DURING.
>> I AGREE WITH THAT THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A MEETING IN THE INTERIM PERIOD IN MAY.
WE SHOULD TRY TO FIND SOME TIME TO DO THAT SO THAT WE CAN WORK MORE ON THIS ISSUE.
YOU MENTIONED RIGHTFULLY SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE MESSER CONTRACT IN FRONT OF US.
WHAT I SAID WAS, WE SHOULD AMEND IT IF IT DOESN'T ALREADY INCLUDE GENERAL SERVICES AS GENERAL COUNSEL TO AMEND IT TO INCLUDE THAT.
I DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THE CONTRACT IN FRONT OF ME TO SPECIFY HOW WE NEED TO AMEND THE CONTRACT.
BUT I WOULD ALSO SAY IN THAT REGARD, WE DON'T HAVE THE EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT FOR KATHERINE IN FRONT OF US EITHER.
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT CONTRACT WE'RE SIGNING WITH HER BECAUSE I WASN'T GIVEN A COPY OF ONE.
YOU'RE ASKING US TO APPROVE A RETENTION AGREEMENT, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE.
>> LUKE, CAN YOU COMMENT ON THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT WE HAVE WITH ART AND HIS PARTNER THAT I TALKED TO TODAY THAT WE TALKED ABOUT?
>> WELL, ART AND BRAD ARE DOWN IN AUSTIN.
WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH ANYONE UP HERE WHO IN NORTH TEXAS AREA, THAT WOULD BE HANDLING BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE OFFICES, I BELIEVE IN ABILENE.
>> THEY HAVE OFFICES IN DALLAS, IN FRISCO.
>> NO, I'M ASKING THE SCOPE OF WORK.
>> IT WAS ONLY BASED ON WHAT COUNSEL HAS DEEMED APPROPRIATE FOR THEM TO HANDLE.
>> THEN KATHERINE, SHE HAS AN OPEN CONTRACT WITH US THAT WAS EXECUTED LAST YEAR.
SHE WOULD BE ABLE TO FILL IN AT TIMES, IF NEED BE.
>> WHAT IS WHEN WE DO WITH A LARGE FIRM?
I PUT TOGETHER THE TWO LARGEST 501 TRUSTS OF THE UNITED STATES.
I USE BAKER MCKENZIE UNDER 770,146 AS OUR LABOR COUNSEL.
THEN I HIRED THE GUY WHO WROTE 501 C9 FROM THE OFFICE CHIEF COUNSEL OF THE IRS ACADEMY DAVIS ROSEN AND YOU GOT A SMORGA BOARD OF ATTORNEYS TO GO INTERVIEW AND SAY,
[00:35:03]
YES, YES, NO, NO, YES.>> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
I WILL ASK MAYOR PRO TEM REID, DO YOU WISH TO CONTINUE WITH YOUR MOTION?
>> I WILL ASK MS. NOE DO YOU WISH TO CONTINUE WITH YOUR SECOND OF THE MOTION?
>> YES, MADAM MAYOR. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPOINT KATHERINE CLIFTON AS OUR INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY. MR. KERCHO.
>> I ONLY HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE DEPENDING ON MY VOTE, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A MEETING IN MAY, YES OR NO?
>> I DON'T KNOW. I SENT OUT TO SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS AND REQUESTS FOR THEIR DATES THAT THEY ARE AVAILABLE, AND I HAVE YET TO RECEIVE A RESPONSE.
>> THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL IF PEOPLE WOULD TELL ME WHEN AND IF THEY CAN BE AVAILABLE BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO SCHEDULE A MEETING IF I DON'T KNOW WHEN IS, I WAS LOOKING AT NEXT TUESDAY FOR A MEETING. BUT LIKE I SAID [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M NOT AVAILABLE, BUT I'LL MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE.
DO YOU WANT TO DO NEXT TUESDAY?
>> IS THAT THE 28TH? BECAUSE MY SON'S GRADUATION IS THE 28TH, I WANT TO BE SURE.
>> ARE YOU AVAILABLE IN DAYTIME OR EVENING?
>> THAT COULD BE AVAILABLE BOTH. I WOULD ASSUME WE DO IT IN THE EVENING, I WOULD PREFER THAT.
>> I JUST THINK IT'S MORE FAIR TO THE CITIZENS TO DO IT IN THE EVENING.
>> I SAID I THINK IT'S MORE FAIR TO THE CITIZENS TO DO IT IN THE EVENING.
>> I THINK THIS WOULD BE HANDLED UNDER EXECUTIVE SESSION, IF WE WERE GOING TO DO THAT.
I'D HAVE TO ASK KATHERINE THAT IF WE DON'T HAVE AN ATTORNEY.
>> I BELIEVE WE'D HAVE TO DO THIS UNDER EXECUTIVE SESSION.
>> ARE YOU SAYING ALL OF OUR DISCUSSIONS REGARDING [OVERLAPPING] WHETHER OR NOT TO HIRE A FIRM WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE UNDER EXECUTIVE SESSION?
>> DISCUSSIONS WOULD BE HAD IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND THEN ONCE DONE, COUNCIL COULD COME OUT AND MAKE A MOTION, DIRECT STAFF, DO WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE DONE AT THAT POINT.
>> IT'S NOT REALLY A, QUOTE, PERSONNEL DECISION.
WE'RE JUST TALKING BROADLY ABOUT WHAT FIRMS TO LOOK AT.
NOW IT'S NOT REALLY A TRUE PERSONNEL LIKE SOMEONE ON STAFF, WHICH I THINK WOULD BE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.
>> THIS IS A CITY OFFICIAL THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, LIKE AN ACTUAL POSITION THAT'S APPOINTED BY COUNCIL.
IT TAKES A SUPERMAJORITY TO TERMINATE.
I BELIEVE IT TAKES A SUPERMAJORITY TO HIRE TWO.
I'D HAVE TO DOUBLE-CHECK ON THAT.
IT'S A OFFICER POSITION FOR THE CITY.
>> BUT IT'S ENTERING A CONTRACT POTENTIALLY WITH SOMEONE OR RESPECTING SOMEONE ON AN INTERIM BASIS.
I DON'T THINK THIS IS A DISCUSSION AS TO WHO TO HIRE IMMEDIATELY.
>> HOW ARE WE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION NOT IN CLOSED SESSION? [OVERLAPPING] THEY HAPPEN IN CLOSED SESSION.
>> WE'RE LIKE ON THE BORDER LINE OF NEEDING TO GO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
>> WE'RE JUST DISCUSSING CONCEPTS RIGHT NOW.
>> RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
LET'S DEAL WITH THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR.
WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE OFF OF WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA.
AT THIS TIME, I AM GOING TO CALL FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPOINTING KATHERINE AS OUR INTERIM ATTORNEY, ORDINANCE NUMBER 868, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
KATHERINE, WOULD YOU PLEASE COME UP HERE [LAUGHTER] AND SIT.
[00:40:04]
>> CAN I GET A CLARIFICATION? ON THE 21ST, WHAT'S THE EARLIEST THAT YOU OFTEN MEET, 6:00? IS THAT WORK OR 5:00?
>> I THINK 6:00 WOULD BE GREAT.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT [OVERLAPPING] THAT IF WE MEET ON THE 21ST, THIS ROOM HAS EARLY VOTING GOING ON, IT WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE, AND THERE IS NO OTHER ROOM IN THE CITY THAT HAS THE LIVE STREAMING.
THAT WILL BE A LIMITING FACTOR.
JUST I WANT EVERYBODY TO KNOW THAT.
I PERSONALLY DON'T LIKE US MEETING [OVERLAPPING]
>> I THINK WE'VE DONE MEETINGS IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BEFORE. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WE HAVE HAD MEETINGS IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
I WOULD HAVE TO ASK MR. CHIEF SHEFF WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE TRAINING THAT NIGHT OR IF IT'S AVAILABLE.
BUT EVEN IF IT IS AVAILABLE, I WOULD WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE NO LIVE STREAMING.
>> WE CAN MAKE [INAUDIBLE] AVAILABLE WHENEVER COUNCIL WANTS. [INAUDIBLE].
>> FOR ME, I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT WE NEED TO GO THROUGH.
I DO NOT LIKE THAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO HAVE IT RECORDED, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO GO FORWARD WITH IT, BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S AVAILABLE AND WE CAN DO IT, SO I THINK WE SHOULD BOOK IT.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO GET KATHERINE'S OPINION NOW THAT SHE'S SITTING UP HERE AS TO WHETHER IT NEEDS TO BE AN EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING OR NOT?
>> I THINK, BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD, WHICH THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATION UP HERE AND NOT A SPECIFIC POSTING ITEM.
MY THOUGHT IS THAT YOU PROBABLY NEED THE EXECUTIVE SESSION TO ADVISE YOU OF THE LEGAL ISSUES SURROUNDING IT, AND THEN YOU CAN COME OUT AND HAVE THE BROADER DISCUSSION IN OPEN SESSION.
>> DOES IT NEED TO LEGALLY BE LIVE STREAMED?
>> I WOULD HAVE TO REVIEW THAT.
IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I WORKED FOR A MUNICIPALITY AND HAD TO REVIEW ALL OF THAT.
>> POINT WELL TAKEN AND UNDERSTOOD.
>> AT THIS TIME, WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER 5, WHICH IS RECOGNIZING.
[5. PRESENTATION RECOGNIZING FORMER COUNCILMEMBER(S).]
>> I'M HAPPY TO MOVE FOR YOU, AS ALWAYS.
>> NO, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO BELIEVE THIS DAY WOULD EVER COME.
YOU HAVE BEEN SO WONDERFUL TO THE CITY OF PARKER.
WHENEVER WE HAVE CALLED YOU FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS, YOU'VE BEEN THERE, AND YOU'VE BEEN THERE WITH A SMILE ON YOUR FACE, WHEN WE CALL DESPERATE, SAY, HEY, WE REALLY NEED, YOU'VE BEEN THERE, AND WE SO APPRECIATE THAT.
WHILE WE ALWAYS HAVEN'T AGREED, YOU HAVE OPENED OUR MINDS TO A LOT OF NEW AND DIFFERENT THINGS, AND WE WILL ALWAYS APPRECIATE THAT AND APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE TO THE CITY.
LET ME MAKE SURE I DIDN'T BROKE THIS.
IN RECOGNITION OF YOUR SERVICE TO THE CITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT YOU WITH THIS PLAQUE AND [INAUDIBLE] SAY ANY WORD.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.
MOST OF YOU KNOW ME, I'M NOT MUCH OF FOR WORDS, [LAUGHTER] BUT I DO WANT TO SAY A FEW WORDS.
FIRST, A BIG THANKS TO ALL THE RESIDENTS OF PARKER FOR PUTTING YOUR FAITH IN ME FOR ALLOWING ME TO SERVE AS YOUR REPRESENTATIVE ON COUNCIL.
I HAVE ALWAYS TRIED TO CONSIDER BOTH THE CITY AND THE RESIDENTS AS I CONTEMPLATE THE ISSUES.
IT ISN'T AN EASY JOB UP HERE, AS WE'VE JUST SEEN.
IT GETS TO BE CHALLENGING SOMETIMES.
BUT EVERYBODY ON THIS DAY IS HERE,
[00:45:01]
I CAN TELL YOU HAS A LOVE FOR OUR CITY AND WE ALL WANT TO SEE OUR CITY SUCCEED.I THANK OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, THROUGH THE YEARS HAVE BEEN GREAT.
PARTICULARLY THIS YEAR, I FEEL SO CLOSE TO THE ONES.
I'M REALLY GOING TO MISS THIS YEAR'S GROUP.
IT'S BEEN A GOOD YEAR. TO OUR CITY STAFF, LUKE, KENNY, CHIEF SHEFF, GARY, AND ALL OF THE STAFF.
REALLY, AGAIN, PEOPLE TRULY PUT THEIR HEART IN THE CITY, AND IT SHOWS WE HAVE THINGS WE'RE WORKING ON.
I'VE SEEN SOME GOOD PROGRESS OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.
I'M REALLY SORRY TO SEE THAT OUR CITY ATTORNEY DECIDED TO LEAVE BECAUSE I SAW SOME GREAT IMPROVEMENT WITH HOW THINGS WERE MOVING AS SHE WAS HERE, AND I HOPE TO CONTINUE TO SEE SOME OF THAT GREAT IMPROVEMENT.
MOST PEOPLE KNOW ME. I'M NOT GOING AWAY.
I WILL STILL BE AROUND, BUT NOT UP THERE, [APPLAUSE] AND I WILL KEEP IN TOUCH, AND I HOPE THAT YOU ALL WILL KEEP IN TOUCH AS WELL.
>> WE'LL HAVE CAKE. WE GOT TO GET THE CAKE AND PLATES AND EVERYTHING.
>> WE HAVE CAKE, SO WE'LL BRING THAT OUT HERE IN JUST A MINUTE.
>> AT THIS TIME, WE WILL ADJOURN INTO OUR RECEPTION, AND WE WILL HAVE SOME GOODIES OVER HERE.
WE ALSO SHOULD HAVE THE PICK THEM UP TRUCK, OUR NEWEST POLICE VEHICLE SHOULD BE PARKED OUT FRONT OF THE BUILDING SO EVERYBODY CAN SEE IT.
>> WHERE'S THE KEY? [INAUDIBLE]. [OVERLAPPING] I KNOW.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.