[CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:02] >> GOOD EVENING. I AM CALLING THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE CITY OF PARKER TO ORDER. IT IS JUNE 3ND, 2025 AT 6:00 P.M. AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK MAYOR PRO TEM PILGRIM, DO I HAVE A QUORUM? >> YES, MA'AM. MADAM MAYOR, YOU DO HAVE A QUORUM. >> YES, YOU HAVE A QUORUM. >> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, [EXECUTIVE SESSION] WE WILL RECESS TO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY CONTAINED IN GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.074, PERSONNEL TO DELIBERATE THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYMENT, EVALUATION, REASSIGNMENT, DUTIES, DISCIPLINE, OR DISMISSAL OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE. GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.0711, CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY CONCERNING PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION. GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.0712, CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY ON A MATTER IN WHICH THE DUTY OF THE ATTORNEY TO THE GOVERNMENTAL BODY UNDER THE TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS, CLEARLY CONFLICTS WITH THIS CHAPTER, OPEN MEETINGS ACT. AT THIS TIME, IT IS 6:04, WE ARE IN RECESS. [NOISE] I HEREBY RECONVENE THE PARKER CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 3ND, [RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING.AT 7:00 PM.] 2025. IT IS 7:00. AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK COUNCIL IF THERE IS ANY DELIBERATION OR ACTION ON ANYTHING FROM THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. >> NO, MADAM MAYOR. >> NOT HEARING ANYTHING, WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I WILL ASK TED LANE TO PLEASE LEAD US IN THE AMERICAN PLEDGE AND DEBBIE CLATCHER, WILL YOU BE SO KIND AS TO LEAD US IN THE TEXAS PLEDGE. >> THANK YOU. NEXT, I WILL ASK, ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? I DON'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT CARDS. ANYBODY? NO PUBLIC COMMENTS. THEREFORE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO A COUPLE OF ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST. [ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST] I WANT TO NOTE THAT ON THE NATIONAL DRUG TAKE BACK, THE CITY OF PARKER POLICE COLLECTED 31 POUNDS OF UNUSED DRUGS. I FIND THAT TO BE AMAZING, ESPECIALLY AS THIS IS OUR FOURTH OR FIFTH TIME PARTICIPATING IN THIS. GREAT JOB. [INAUDIBLE], APPRECIATE IT. >> WE'RE JUST HAPPY TO SEE THE NUMBERS GOING DOWN. FIRST TIME IT WAS 290. >> GOOD LORD. THAT'S JUST AMAZING TO ME. I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF ANNOUNCEMENTS I'D LIKE TO MAKE, ESPECIALLY TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING US FROM HOME. WE DO UNDERSTAND YOUR SOUND PROBLEMS. WE ARE WORKING ON THE SOUND PROBLEMS WITH OUR VIRTUAL STREAMING AND HOPEFULLY THEY WILL BE FIXED BY THE TIME OF OUR NEXT MEETING. PLEASE BEAR WITH US. WE UNDERSTAND THERE'S A HUNG NOW. WE'RE DOING THE BEST WE CAN ON THAT. SECOND THING ON THE PACKETS. I APOLOGIZE TO COUNCIL. THE PACKETS WEREN'T AS COMPLETE AS THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN. YOU DIDN'T HAVE COVER SHEETS WITH SOME ITEMS. WE CHANGED OUR PROCEDURE AND PATTY WAS OUT. BETWEEN THOSE TWO THINGS, IT DIDN'T WORK OUT WELL. I APOLOGIZE. I WILL BE LEADING WHERE I CAN. IF THERE'S CONFUSION, WE WILL TRY OUR BEST TO CLEAR IT UP. BUT HOPEFULLY THIS WILL NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN, BUT I DO WANT TO LET YOU KNOW WE ARE AWARE OF IT AND WE DO APOLOGIZE FOR IT. [00:05:03] THANK GOD, PATTY IS BACK. PATTY, WE REALLY MISSED YOU. [LAUGHTER] LORD, HAVE MERCY. NEXT, WE HAVE A PRESENTATION BY THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB SO IF Y'ALL WILL COME UP TO THE PODIUM. DOES SOMEBODY HAVE A CAMERA? WE GOT TO HAVE DIGITAL. [LAUGHTER] YOU GOT. >> I GOT A LITTLE SHIELD. FIRST, I WANT TO SAY HI. >> HI. >> HELLO. >> HELLO. ON BEHALF OF PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB AND OUR PRESIDENT EMILY PLUMBER, AND OUR DEDICATED MEMBERS TONIGHT, WE WOULD LIKE TO GIVE BACK FOR OUR COMMUNITY. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU ALL. I ALWAYS THINK IT'S BETTER TO GIVE THAN TO RECEIVE SO TONIGHT'S GOING TO BE FUN AND THAT'S WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO. WHILE GIVING IS AT THE HEART OF PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB, WE RECOGNIZE THAT NONE OF THIS WOULD BE POSSIBLE WITHOUT THE GENEROSITY OF OUR MEMBERS AND DONORS. PARKER LEWIS CLUB IS A 501(C) FREE PHILANTHROPIC ORGANIZATION, SUPPORTED SOLELY THROUGH ITS MEMBERSHIPS AND INNOVATIONS. WE OFFER INFORMATIONAL PROGRAMS, CHARITABLE WORKING EVENTS, AND SOCIAL [INAUDIBLE]. WE'RE DEEPLY GRATEFUL TO ALL THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED THEIR TIME, EFFORT, AND TALENT TO MAKING IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO PAY [INAUDIBLE]. SO FAR, THIS YEAR, WE HAVE GIVEN JUST RECENTLY IN MAY, WE GAVE $6,000 IN ACADEMIC SCHOLARSHIPS AWARD IN THIS MAY. WE GAVE OUT TWO DIFFERENT BASED SCHOLARSHIPS, $3,000 A PIECE. WE GAVE $600 TO THE GIVING GARDENS SUPPORTING LOCAL SUSTAINABILITY NOURISHMENT. WE GAVE $250 DONATED TO [INAUDIBLE] SCHOOL PANTRY, $150 TO LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS IN APPRECIATION FOR THE PARTNERSHIP AND THE FACILITATION OF CANDIDATES NIGHT, $150 DONATION OF APPRECIATION TO VICTOR CHURCH FOR THEIR GENEROSITY IN PROVIDING THE VENUE FOR CANDIDATES NIGHT. TONIGHT, WE'RE HONORED TO CONTINUE GIVING TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND PARKS AND RECS. [BACKGROUND] I DO. WE HAVE A CHECK FOR $1365 TO THE PARKER POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR FIVE ARMORED SKIN VEST WITH PARKER CASES. THEN WE HAVE, MAKE SURE MY NUMBERS ARE CORRECT, [LAUGHTER] $724 TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR PRINTERS AND CHAIRS. THEN WE HAVE $600 TO THE PARKS AND RECS COMMISSION ALLOTTED FOR PARKER. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. THE CITY IS QUITE GRATEFUL AND APPRECIATIVE OF YOUR SUPPORT. >> THERE WERE MANY PEOPLE INVOLVED IN ALL OF THIS SO. IF YOU KNOW. >> [INAUDIBLE]. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >> NOW, WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER 1, WHICH IS CONSIDERATION, [1. CONSIDERATION, DISCUSSION, AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON THE CITY OF PARKER ACCEPTING DONATIONS FROM THE PARKER WOMEN’S CLUB FOR: $1365 FOR ARMORSKIN VESTS AND VEST CASES FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT; $724 FOR OFFICE PRINTER AND CHAIRS FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT; AND $600 FOR PARKS AND RECREATION’S PARKERFEST.] DISCUSSION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON THE CITY OF PARKER ACCEPTING DONATIONS FROM THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB FOR $1,365 FOR ARMORED SKIN VEST AND BEST CASES FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, $724 FOR THE OFFICE PRINTER AND CHAIRS FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND $600 FOR PARKS AND RECREATION PARKER FEST. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION. >> MADAM MAYOR, SO MOTIONED. >> IS THERE A SECOND TO ACCEPT THESE ITEMS INTO THE CITY? >> MADAM MAYOR, I'VE A SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER SHARPE AND A SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER HALBERT TO ACCEPT THE DONATIONS INTO THE CITY OF PARKER. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY, I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ACCEPTING THE DONATIONS, [00:10:03] PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 5-0. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK COUNCIL, BUT I'D ALSO AGAIN LIKE TO THANK THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB, THIS IS FANTASTIC, AND IT IS SUCH A HELP TO OUR CITY. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE LITTLE THINGS ARE THAT WE REALLY NEED AND WE CAN'T AFFORD, AND THIS HELPS. THANK YOU AND THANK YOU. I WILL MAKE SURE MR. SAVAGE GETS THOSE CHECKS. SECOND THING, AS I'M GOING TO, COUNCIL, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE UP ITEM NUMBER 5 TO GO ON IT NOW. [5. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2025- 848 ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR COUNCIL NOMINATIONS.] ITEM 5 IS CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-848, ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR COUNCIL NOMINATIONS. I BELIEVE, THERE IS A RESOLUTION IN YOUR PACKET SO WHAT YOU GOT. JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND ON THIS. A WHILE BACK, WE DID SOME APPOINTMENTS. COUNCIL AND OTHERS WERE NOT PLEASED WITH THE PROCESS WE FOLLOWED. WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSED IT AS A COUNCIL AND ASK CATHERINE TO PLEASE DRAW UP A RESOLUTION OF A GOOD PROCESS FOR US. CATHERINE HAS COME UP WITH RESOLUTION NUMBER 2025-848. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE RESOLUTION? MR. KERCHO. >> QUICK QUESTION. I KNOW THIS CERTAINLY LOOKS GOOD AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN TERMS OF APPOINTING TO COUNCIL. I ALSO KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THAT IT'S ONLY ONE OF SEVERAL OPTIONS. WHATEVER IS THAT, DOES THAT NEED TO BE WRITTEN ANY PLACE AS FAR AS WHAT COUNCIL REALLY HAS IN FRONT OF THEM AT A POINT IN TIME THAT THEY'RE GOING TO FILL A SEAT THAT THESE ARE THE VARIOUS OPTIONS TO GO ON, AND THIS IS A PROCEDURE IF THAT OPTION IS CHOSEN. >> CATHERINE, YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT, PLEASE? >> I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION. >> WELL, WE HAD SAID THAT ONE OF THE THINGS YOU COULD DO IS, BASICALLY WE COULD JUST ASK FOR A VOTE. YOU COULD GO AND SAY, HEY, WE WANT TO HAVE A VOTE, THAT ANOTHER OPTION. BUT THERE'S A FEW OPTIONS AND THIS WAS ONE OF THEM WHERE WE WERE JUST A POINT. YOU COULD ALSO GO AND SAY, WHAT'S THE PROCESS OF THE OTHERS? FROM THAT PROCESS, WE SAID, SINCE THERE'S ONLY ONE OPTION, SHOULD IT BE WRITTEN SOME PLACE IDENTIFY THAT WHEN YOU COME TO FILL A SEAT, THAT COUNCIL WILL DISCUSS ALL THOSE PARTICULAR OPTIONS, AND IF THIS ONE PARTICULAR OPTION IS CHOSEN, THEN WE HAVE ALREADY A PROCEDURE IN PLACE TO FOLLOW. >> I WANT TO SAY I HAVE NO PRIDE OF AUTHORSHIP ABOUT THIS. IT IDENTIFIES FOUR DIFFERENT TYPES OF APPOINTMENTS AND PROVIDES THREE DIFFERENT PROCEDURES FOR EACH ONE. ONE OF THE OPTIONS THAT YOU HAVE IN THIS IS WRITING SOMETHING INTO IT TO SAY, THAT BASICALLY THE COUNCIL CAN MAKE A DECISION, FOR EXAMPLE, TONIGHT AND SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO DEVIATE FROM THIS AND HAVE A DIFFERENT PROCEDURE THAT WE'RE SETTING OUT FOR THIS SPECIFIC APPOINTMENT THAT WE KNOW IS COMING UP. IS THAT GOING IN THE DIRECTION OF ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION? YES, THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO IT THAN ARE SET FORTH HERE AND THERE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE AS MUCH DETAIL ON THIS. IT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL. >> MR. PILGRIM. >> WELL, THE QUESTION I HAD AND I CAN'T FIND MY COPY ON HERE. I ACTUALLY PRINTED ONE TO HAVE A HARD COPY WITH ME WHEN I CAME AND I LEFT IT AT HOME IT APPEARS. I WAS TRYING TO REMEMBER ON HERE. IT SEEMS LIKE I DIDN'T SEE WHERE IT GAVE THE PROCEDURE. IF WE HAD MULTIPLE NOMINATIONS, WHICH I WOULD EXPECT WE WOULD SOMETIME, HOW WE GO HOW WE GO THROUGH THE VOTE ON THE MULTIPLE NOMINATIONS? IS THAT IN HERE AND I JUST MISSED IT? >> DO YOU MEAN MULTIPLE NOMINATIONS FOR ONE POSITION FOR ONE OPENING OR WHEN THERE ARE MULTIPLE OPENINGS? >> MULTIPLE NOMINATIONS FOR A SINGLE POSITION. IF WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE NOMINATED FOR A SINGLE POSITION, WE TAKE A VOTE ON THOSE. IF THERE ARE THREE PEOPLE, LET'S SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, AND ONE OF THEM GETS LESS VOTES THAN THE OTHER TWO, THEY OBVIOUSLY DROP OUT. IF THE OTHER TWO ARE TIED, THEN WE WOULD VOTE AGAIN, MAYBE, BUT IT DOESN'T SPECIFY WHAT PROCESS THAT IS. >> THIS IS WHAT'S INTENDED TO BE COVERED ANYWAY IN SECTION 2, [00:15:05] WHICH TRACKS THE WAY THAT THE MAYOR PRO TEM APPOINTMENT WAS JUST DONE TO SAY, YOU CAN NOMINATE AND THEN THERE'S DISCUSSION, AND THEN THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION WITH A NAME IN THE BLANK SO IT'S NOT REALLY THE VOTING OF WHO VOTES FOR THIS PERSON, WHO VOTES FOR THIS PERSON, BUT AFTER THERE'S DISCUSSION, IT THEN REVERTS TO MOVE APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION WITH THIS PERSON'S NAME IN THE BLANK AND THEN THIS IS DRAFTED TO REVERT TO TRADITIONAL ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER OR PROBABLY TRADITIONAL ALL PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE SO THAT THEN THE PERSON ONCE THAT'S SECONDED, SOMEBODY COULD MOVE TO AMEND IT BY CHANGING THAT NAME JUST TO MAKE IT AS COMPLICATED AS POSSIBLE. [LAUGHTER] >> I WAS JUST WONDERING WHY IF WE HAD THREE PEOPLE OR MULTIPLE PEOPLE NOMINATED, WHERE WE JUST DIDN'T VOTE ON THOSE, AND SOME MAY GET ONE VOTE, SOME MAY GET FIVE VOTES, SOME MAY GET NO VOTES, SOME MAY GET TWO. I DON'T KNOW, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'D DO THAT RATHER THAN HAVE SOMEBODY NOMINATE ONE OF THOSE PERSONS BECAUSE THE FIRST ONE TO NOMINATE A PERSON FOR A POSITION, IT'S GOING TO MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR SOMEBODY ELSE MAYBE TO SAY NOMINATE MIGHT NOT EVEN BE THE WORD. THE FIRST PERSON TO FILL IN THE BLANK ON THE RESOLUTION, WITH A SPECIFIC NAME, THEN WE'RE GOING TO BE VOTING ON JUST THAT ONE NAME AND NOT ANY OTHER NAME THAT SOMEBODY ELSE MIGHT WANT TO PUT IN THERE. I WOULD THINK WE NEED TO MODIFY IT WHERE WE SAY, WE CAN VOTE ON EACH OF THE NAMES THAT ARE IN NOMINATION. IF NOBODY WANTS TO VOTE FOR ONE OF THOSE NAMES, THAT'S FINE. >> I HAVE LIVED THIS EXPERIENCE AND WAS THE FIRST PERSON NOMINATED AND DID NOT GET IT, AND IT IS AWKWARD AS ON GET OUT SO I ACTUALLY LIKE YOUR SUGGESTION. >> YOU WOULD TAKE ALL THREE NAMES THAT WE'RE GOING FOR ONE POSITION AND THEN VOTE EACH PERSON? >> YEAH. VOTE ONE EACH OF THE THREE NAMES UNTIL YOU HAVE A WINNER. >> WELL, SUPPOSE YOU HAVE THREE NOMINATIONS, THREE DIFFERENT PEOPLE NOMINATED, THEN YOU ASK FOR A MOTION. NOW, SUPPOSE THERE ONLY IS A MOTION FOR ONE? >> I WOULD SAY WE'D HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVE THREE NOMINEES AND SOMEBODY MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TAKE A VOTE AMONG THESE THREE NOMINEES AND THEN ALL IN FAVOR OF NOMINEE 1, RAISE YOUR HAND; ALL IN FAVOR OF NOMINEE 2, RAISE YOUR HAND; ALL IN FAVOR OF NOMINEE 3, RAISE YOUR HAND. WHOEVER'S THE THIRD PLACE PERSON OBVIOUSLY DROPS OUT. >> IF ONE PERSON CLEARLY GETS MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE, THEN THAT'S GOING TO BE THE WINNER OR MAYBE WE NEED TO SAY, I'M THINKING THROUGH THERE'S GOT TO BE A MAJORITY. WE SHOULD HAVE A MAJORITY. THERE SHOULD BE THREE OUT OF FIVE PEOPLE OR THERE SHOULD BE THREE OUT OF FIVE THAT VOTE FOR IT. UNTIL SOMEBODY GETS THREE OUT OF FIVE. >> WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME IS THAT COUNSEL'S DESIRE IS FOR US TO SEND THIS BACK TO CATHERINE FOR AMENDMENT AND REVISE. >> WELL, I THINK WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT SOLELY THE MAYOR PRO TEM OR THE FINANCE DIRECTOR, WHERE YOU ALL ARE APPOINTING THOSE POSITIONS OF COUNSEL. DO YOU WANT TO APPLY THE SAME THING TO ALL THE DIFFERENT VARIETIES OR DO YOU WANT TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THOSE OTHER SECTIONS HERE? >> GO AHEAD. >> I WOULD THINK WE WOULD WANT TO USE A SIMILAR PROCESS FOR ALL OF THEM THAT WE VOTE ON EACH NAME. AS LONG AS WE'VE GOT TO HAVE ONE OF THE NAMES THAT EVENTUALLY GETS THE MAJORITY VOTE IT SEEMS LIKE. >> I'M NOT DISAGREEING WITH YOU. WHEN IT COMES TO THINGS THAT ARE TYPICALLY DONE AS A SLATE, WHERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE PEOPLE APPOINTED, FOR EXAMPLE, TO COMMISSIONS AT THE SAME TIME. THAT HAPPY TO WRITE IT, I THINK IT WILL BE A COMPLICATED PROCESS TO WRITE. IN MY OBSERVATION, YOU DON'T TYPICALLY HAVE A LOT MORE PEOPLE THAT HAVE APPLIED FOR THOSE PHYSICIANS THAN YOU HAVE PLACES FOR. MAYBE IT'S NOT NECESSARY TO DO IT ON THOSE. >> YEAH. THAT MAKES SENSE. I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. THE ONLY REASON I WAS THINKING ABOUT THE OTHER IS THE PERSON THAT I PERSONALLY MIGHT BE MY FIRST CHOICE. IF I WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT VOTED ON THAT PERSON ON THE FIRST ROUND AND THEY DROPPED OFF, I WOULD WANT THE ABILITY TO GET TO VOTE FOR THE SECOND PERSON OF MY CHOICE ON THE NEXT TIME AROUND. >> THE OTHER POINT I THINK WOULD BE MAY OR HAVE A VOTE THAT COMES UP TO A TIE. [00:20:04] YES OR NO. I THINK THAT'S UP FOR A DISCUSSION. SHOULD SHE OR SHOULDN'T SHE? >> JUST NOT THAT I DON'T VALUE THE MAYOR'S VOTE, BUT THAT PUTS US WITH AN EVEN NUMBER OF VOTES, WHICH INHERENTLY LEADS TO TIES AND DEADLOCKS. >> IT DEPENDS HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ALSO AT THE COUNCIL MEETING. >> I THINK THE WAY IT WORKS NOW IS SHE ONLY VOTES IN THE EVENT OF A TIE. IF YOU DROP IT DOWN, YOUR PROCESS DOWN AS THE MAYOR PRO TEM SUGGESTS, SO THAT YOU GET TO IT'S BETWEEN TWO AND YOU END UP WITH A TIE, THEN THAT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR IT TO JUST BE A TIE BREAK VOTE. NO PRESSURE OR ANYTHING. I UNDERSTAND I NEED TO TAKE THIS BACK AND REDRAFT BASED ON THIS CONVERSATION. >> THEN I JUST HAVE A POINT FOR CLARITY. I'VE HEARD IT SAID THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE NOT ADOPTED ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS, BUT IT IS REFLECTED IN THIS THAT'S HOW WE WOULD FOLLOW. >> THAT'S CORRECT. IT HASN'T BEEN ADOPTED. THE REASON THAT I USED THAT HERE IS TO AVOID HAVING TO WRITE OUT THE WHOLE PROCESS OF HOW DO YOU AMEND TO CHANGE THE POSITION. THIS WAS ONLY FOR THAT PURPOSE AND NOT A REPRESENTATION AS TO WHAT'S HAPPENING ELSEWHERE. >> YES. I HAD THAT SAME QUESTION. WE'RE GOING TO I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION TO RETURN THE RESOLUTION 2025-848 TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY FOR REVISION. >> I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION. >> DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION. WE'RE JUST GOING TO DO IT. WOW. THEN WE WILL GO TO THE SECOND ITEM, DISCUSSION, [2. DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION, AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON COUNCIL MEMBER RANDY KERCHO’S RESIGNATION FROM COUNCIL AND PROCEDURE FOR FILLING THAT POSITION.] CONSIDERATION, AND ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON COUNCIL MEMBER RANDY KERCHO'S RESIGNATION FROM COUNSEL AND THE PROCEDURE FOR FILLING THAT POSITION. MR. KERCHO, I WILL START WITH YOU. >> WELL, I HAVEN'T TENDERED MY RESIGNATION YET, BUT DIFFICULT SINCE WE DON'T HAVE IT ON THE FILE, BUT I WILL BE LEAVING THE CITY, PROBABLY THE 17TH, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, ASSUMING THAT WE HAVE THAT ONE, WOULD BE MY OFFICIAL LAST DAY AS A CITIZEN OF PARKER. TECHNICALLY, I GUESS I COULD ATTEND THAT MEETING FOR THE ENTIRETY IF COUNCIL ELECTS OR WISHES, OR THIS COULD BE MY FINAL MEETING UP TO THAT. DEFINITELY WOULDN'T GO BEYOND THE 17TH. >> WE WILL NEED YOU TO SUBMIT A FORMAL LETTER OF RESIGNATION AND THAT INDICATES YOUR LAST STAY. OKAY. >> YEAH. >> NOW, THE SECOND PART OF THAT IS THE PROCEDURE FOR FILLING THAT POSITION. IN THE PAST, WE HAVE HAD MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS AND MULTIPLE WAYS OF DOING IT. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WAS PARTICULARLY COMFORTABLE WITH THE WAY THE LAST TIME HAPPENED. I'M OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS, NOMINATIONS, MOTIONS ON HOW WE SHOULD GO FORWARD WITH FILLING A CITY COUNCIL POSITION. FIRST THING I WILL ASK IS, IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT WOULD LIKE US TO CALL AN ELECTION TO FILL MR. KERCHO'S SEAT? >> THAT TAKES THAT ONE OUT. SECOND THING IS, WE CAN THEN APPOINT. NOW, HOW WE APPOINT IS UP TO COUNSEL. WE CAN JUST PICK SOMEBODY OUT THERE AND SAID, HEY, YOU, YOU'RE GOING TO FILL THIS SEAT OR WE CAN ASK PEOPLE TO FILL OUT AN APPLICATION, GET THEM BACK TO US. WE WILL REVIEW THE APPLICATIONS, AND THEN SELECT SOMEONE. OR WE CAN TAKE THAT A STEP FURTHER AND GET THE APPLICATIONS AND DECIDE TO INTERVIEW ANYBODY THAT APPLIES. IF I'M MISSING SOMETHING, FEEL FREE TO THROW IT IN. >> I DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE TO SEE APPLICATIONS OUT TO THE COMMUNITY. WE NEED TO ENCOURAGE THE COMMUNITY TO PARTICIPATE AS MUCH AS WE CAN BECAUSE I THINK WE HAVE SOME GREAT CANDIDATES OUT THERE. IF APPLICATIONS COME IN, THEN WE CAN REVIEW FROM THERE. MAYBE IF WE HAVE SOME CONSENSUS WITH COUNSEL, MAYBE WE MIGHT HAVE TO GO ON TO INTERVIEW FROM THERE, BUT I KNOW WE HAVE A LOT OF QUALIFIED PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT HAVE A LOT TO OFFER. I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN IT TO THE PUBLIC. OUR RESIDENTS. >> MADAM MAYOR, I AGREE WITH THAT. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE MAKE THIS OPEN TO [00:25:02] THE PUBLIC FOR ANYBODY TO SHOW INTEREST IN FILLING OUT THE REMAINDER OF REPRESENTATIVE OR COUNCILMAN KERCHO'S TENURE HERE. LET US KNOW BY THE FRIDAY PRIOR TO OUR NEXT MEETING. THAT'S JUST MY SUGGESTION IF SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO PUSH IT FURTHER OUT THAN THAT, THAT'S FINE. BUT IF WE WANT TO ACT ON IT IN OUR NEXT MEETING TO SELECT WHO WOULD APPOINT HIM, I WOULD SAY, LET'S GET THE NAMES BY THE FRIDAY BEFORE OUR NEXT MEETING. THEN WE CAN LOOK OVER THEM AND WE CAN DECIDE IF WE WANT TO INTERVIEW THEM, CALL THEM UP INDIVIDUALLY, WHATEVER AND INTERVIEW THEM OR WHETHER WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THE 17TH FOR IT, OR WE MAY DECIDE ON THE 17TH, WE NEED MORE TIME. AT THAT POINT, WE NEED TO INTERVIEW THEM. >> WELL, I WAS THINKING WHEN I DID THIS FORM, THIS IS NOTHING MORE THAN JUST A ROUGH DRAFT OF SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD SEE MY THINKING ON I THINK WE NEED CERTAIN INFORMATION. I ALSO THINK WE NEED TO BE CLEAR WITH THE PUBLIC. IF THEY KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE INTERVIEWED, THAT MAY SET UP A CERTAIN EXPECTATION IN THEIR MINDS. I WANT TO BE VERY CAREFUL ON THAT. I WOULD ASK THAT TODAY IS THE THIRD, IF WE ASK FOR ALL THE APPLICATIONS TO BE IN TO US BY THE 17TH, THEN WE COULD REVIEW THE APPLICATIONS AFTER THE MEETING ON THE 17TH, THE CLOSING DAY, AND THEN WE COULD APPOINT SOMEONE ON OR ABOUT JULY 1ST, WHICH WE AND SEE THEM, MAYBE THAT DATE, WHICH WOULD BE THE NEXT MEETING AFTER THAT. I KNOW THAT'S MOVING FAST, BUT WE GOT A LOT OF BUSINESS TO TAKE CARE OF. MS. HALBERT, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU'RE READY. >> WELL, I HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY READING THE RESOLUTION FOR APPOINTMENTS, IF WE WENT WITH SECTION 4, WE WILL POST THE VACANCY ON THE WEBSITE AND APPLICATIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED BY THE CITY FOR A PERIOD OF NOT LESS THAN FIVE DAYS. CAN WE NOT JUST USE THIS SECTION, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVEN'T ADOPTED THE ENTIRE RESOLUTION, BUT USE THAT AS OUR MARCHING ORDERS FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? >> YES. IF THAT'S WHAT'S ARTICULATED ON THIS ITEM. >> WE WOULD POST THIS ON OUR WEBSITE. WE WOULD SEND OUT A E BLAST. HOPEFULLY THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ATTENDING TONIGHT OR WATCHING US. WE'LL HAVE THE INFORMATION. HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET OUT THE INFORMATION AS BEST WE COULD FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE INTERESTED. I THINK I'M GOING TO SPEAK FOR ALL OF US WHEN I SAY THERE ARE NO PRECONCEIVED IDEAS. THIS IS AN OPEN SEAT. >> THEN MADAM MAYOR, I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE HOW I NEED TO WEAR THIS. FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF AN EMINENT VACANCY, I SUGGEST WE USE FOR APPOINTMENTS OF NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS TO FILL UNEXPIRED TERMS. UPON NOTICE TO THE COUNCIL THAT A VACANCY WILL OCCUR, THE VACANCY WILL BE ANNOUNCED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE, AND APPLICATIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED BY THE CITY FOR A PERIOD OF NOT LESS THAN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS. COUNCIL MAY, BUT IS NOT REQUIRED TO INTERVIEW APPLICANTS FOR THE POSITION IN A POSTED MEETING. THE NATIONAL CALL FOR A MOTION WHEN THE ITEM IS REACHED. THE COUNCIL MAY MOVE APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION APPOINTING A NOMINATED INDIVIDUAL OR INDIVIDUALS, AND FURTHER PROCEEDINGS WILL BE CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. >> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER HALBERT. >> SECOND. A SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER HALBERT AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BODDIN. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> I DIDN'T RAISE MY HAND, BUT THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING MY INTENT. MADAM MAYOR, IS THE INTENT FOR THE INTERVIEWS TO BE PUBLIC OR ARE THOSE CLOSED? >> I'M SORRY? >> IS THE INTENT FOR THE INTERVIEWS TO BE PUBLIC OR ARE THOSE CLOSED THE INTERVIEWS? >> I'VE SEEN THEM DONE BOTH WAYS. THAT WOULD BE A COUNSEL CALL. >> MAYBE WE SHOULD WAIT AND SEE HOW MANY APPLICATIONS WE GET AND WE MIGHT NOT HAVE WENT TO WORRY ABOUT THAT SO WE'LL SEE. >> WE HAVEN'T DECIDED THAT WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY INTERVIEW. I CAN'T ANSWER THAT. MR. KERCHO. >> TO THAT POINT, I MEAN, I THINK COUNSEL NEEDS TO DETERMINE WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO INTERVIEW OR NOT. THEN MOTION BASICALLY SAYS TO ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FOR A PERIOD OF NOT LESS THAN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO COME UP WITH A TIME FRAME [00:30:02] OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FOR. >> AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT ALL APPLICATIONS BE IN 617, THAT'S TWO WEEKS. THEN WE GO FROM THERE. BUT WHAT'S EVERYBODY ELSE'S THOUGHT ON THAT, BUDDY EXCUSE ME. >> I AGREE WITH WHAT COUNCILMAN KERCHO WAS SAYING THAT WE NEED TO PUT A END DATE ON IT TOO. I WOULD PROBABLY PREFER AN END DATE EARLIER THAN THE 17TH, IF THAT'S THE DAY WE'RE GOING TO MEET. THAT'S WHY I MENTIONED THE 14TH EARLIER SO THAT MAYBE WE COULD PUT THAT OUT ON PUBLIC NOTICE SO THAT THE PUBLIC KNOWS, HERE'S THE SIX PEOPLE OR THE THREE PEOPLE OR THE TWO PEOPLE OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS WHO PUT THEIR NAMES IN OR ARE GOING TO BE CONSIDERED. >> MADAM MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO AMEND MY MOTION TO INCLUDE AN END DATE OF 614 FOR APPLICATIONS TO BE RECEIVED. >> THAT'S BASICALLY [OVERLAPPING]. >> FOURTEENTH IS SATURDAY. >> THIRTEEN INSTEAD. >> NO THE 14TH. >> 6/13 IS A FRIDAY. >> FRIDAY THE 13TH, YES. MS. HALBERT HAS AMENDED HER MOTION. MS. BOGDAN, DO YOU ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT? >> YES, I DO. >> AS YOUR SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MR. KERCHO. >> JUST FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF UNDERSTANDING HOW IT WOULD TAKE PLACE FROM WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING IS THAT APPLICATIONS WOULD COME IN BY END OF DAY ON THE 13TH. IT WOULD LIKELY GO OUT IN THE PACKET THEN, IS THAT CORRECT? GO OUT IN THE PACKET AND THEN IT WOULD COME TO COUNSEL ON THE 17TH THAT WOULD LEAVE COUNSEL BASICALLY DETERMINING ON THAT DAY IF THEY'RE GOING TO INTERVIEW OR NOT. IF THEY ARE GOING TO INTERVIEW, THEN BASICALLY THE DECISION OR NOMINATION WOULDN'T TAKE PLACE UNTIL THAT FIRST MEETING IN JULY. IS THAT HOW COUNSEL WANTS IT TO GO? >> I CAN SAY THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. I'LL TELL YOU WHY. IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE LAST DAY IS THE 13TH, THAT MEANS IT'S TILL FIVE O'CLOCK THE 13TH. WE'D LIKE TO GET THE PACKETS OUT ON TWO O'CLOCK, THREE O'CLOCK ON FRIDAY. THEREFORE, EITHER WE CLOSE THE APPLICATIONS OFF EARLIER SO WE CAN GET THEM IN THE PACKET OR WE'D SEND THEM OUT BY A SEPARATE PACKET ON FRIDAY LATE OR SATURDAY. >> WHAT TIME DO YOU NEED? LET'S ASK YOU THAT. >> IF THEY COME IN ABOUT FIVE O'CLOCK ON FRIDAY, PROBABLY WE NEED TO PUT THEM TOGETHER ON MONDAY AND GET THE PACKET TO COUNSEL BECAUSE OTHERWISE, I'M ASKING STAFF TO WORK OVERTIME. MY STAFF OVER THERE WHO MAY NOT WANT TO DO THAT. GO AHEAD. >> YOU ALL HAVE GOT TO PUT THIS OUT, SO IT'S GOT TO WORK FOR YOU. WOULD WE BE BETTER OFF MAKING THEM DO ON THE 12TH INSTEAD SO THAT YOU'VE GOT THE TIME TO SEND THEM OUT WITH A PACKETS SO THAT YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO DO EXTRA WORK OR SEND OUT TWO PACKETS? >> IN A WAY, I THINK IT'S BETTER THAT THEY ARE SEPARATE PACKETS BECAUSE IT'S CLEAR THIS IS THE PACKET FOR THE MEETING. THIS IS THE PACKET WITH THE APPLICATIONS IN IT. FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, I THINK THAT'S A BETTER SITUATION. >> THEN WE WOULD HOLD ALL APPLICATIONS UNTIL THE SECOND PACKET. >> WE WOULD GET THAT OUT. WE GET IN ALL THE APPLICATIONS BY FIVE O'CLOCK ON FRIDAY, BASICALLY, PATTY IS AGREEABLE, WE'LL GET THEM OUT FRIDAY OR SATURDAY. OTHERWISE, IT'LL BE FIRST THING MONDAY MORNING. >> HOPEFULLY, PATTY, WE DON'T HAVE LIKE 13 PEOPLE SHOW UP ON FRIDAY THE 13TH AND PROCRASTINATE. >> JUST DON'T GO OUT FOR SIX WEEKS AGAIN, DARLA. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT AS WELL. IF THEY COME IN ON THE 13TH AND IT GOES OUT AS A SEPARATE PACKET. IS THAT SEPARATE PACKET A PUBLIC PACKET THEN? >> A WHAT? >> A PUBLIC PACKET. >> IT WOULD BE A SEPARATE PACKET. YES. >> THE PUBLIC COULD LOOK AT BASICALLY, THEY'RE GOING TO SEE THAT SAME AS THEY GO IN AND LOOK AND SAY, OKAY, WHAT'S THE AGENDA FOR THE JUNE 17 MEETING, THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE THAT THERE'S A PACKET OUT THERE WITH ALSO APPLICATIONS. >> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT WE CAN SEND OUT A COUNSEL PACKET THAT HAS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION JUST FOR COUNSEL. THIS WOULD BE THAT PACKET, AND IT WOULD NOT BE PUBLISHED ON THE WEBSITE FOR [00:35:04] THOSE PEOPLE TO BE DISCLOSED. GO AHEAD, MS. HALBERT. >> NO. >> I WONDER WHY WE WOULDN'T DISCLOSE THEM. I WOULD LEAN MORE TOWARDS DISCLOSING WHO HAS PUT THEIR NAME IN AND IS INTERESTED IN RING. JUST LIKE WHEN YOU RUN FOR AN ELECTION. YOU CAN'T RUN FOR AN ELECTION AND NOT TELL SOMEBODY YOU'RE RUNNING FOR AN ELECTION. I WOULD THINK PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW, WHICH IS WHY I EVEN SUGGEST MOVING IT UP TO THE 12 SO THAT IT GOES OUT WITH THE SAME LEGAL AMOUNT OF NOTICE THAT EVERYTHING ELSE GOES OUT WITH. ITS NAMES WE'RE GOING TO CONSIDER EVEN THOUGH NOT VOTE ON AT THAT NEXT MEETING. >> WELL, CAN'T WE DO THE AGENDA ITEM THAT SAYS CONSIDER APPLICANTS AND THAT WAY IT'S ALREADY POSTED THAT THIS IS COMING. IT'S THE WHO THAT WOULD BE FOLLOWED. >> I BELIEVE, AND OUR CITY SECRETARY CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I BELIEVE THAT SHE HAS THE ABILITY TO AMEND THE PACKET SO THAT WHAT'S SEEN ONLINE INCLUDES THAT EVEN IF IT'S ADDED ON MONDAY. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> RIGHT. YOU COULD ADD THE DOCUMENTS TO THE PACKET. >> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION [INAUDIBLE] THE NAMES [INAUDIBLE] APPLICATION INFORMATION [INAUDIBLE] JUST SO PEOPLE WOULD HAVE A LIST OF THE NAMES NOT ALL THEIR OTHER INFORMATION. NOW LATER, WE CAN ADD THE APPLICATION INFORMATION [INAUDIBLE] JUST TO GIVE COUNCIL A LITTLE HEADS UP AND THEN YOU-ALL [INAUDIBLE] >> THAT WAS JUST MY QUESTION, IF YOU CAN UPDATE IT SO THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE WITHIN THE SAME PACKET, AND I THINK THAT YOU'VE DONE THAT BEFORE. >> YES. [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] >> MY CONCERN IS NOT WITH THE NAMES GOING OUT, IT'S WITH ALL THE INFORMATION GOING OUT. SOME PEOPLE MAY BE A LITTLE SENSITIVE ABOUT THAT. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> TO BE QUITE HONEST, IF YOU'RE CONSIDERING BEING APPOINTED TO COUNCIL, YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR INFORMATION IS OUT THERE AND THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO THAT INFORMATION. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> WOULD IT BE CONSISTENT JUST TO HAVE THEM FILL OUT THE SAME APPLICATION A CANDIDATE WOULD? >> I DON'T THINK IT HAS THE SAME INFORMATION. WE COULD CERTAINLY HAVE SOMEBODY FILL THAT ONE OUT AND ALSO INCLUDE A SHEET OR SOMETHING THAT TELLS WHY DO YOU WANT TO BE APPOINTED, BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF THE CANDIDATE TO RUN FOR OFFICE, DOES IT HAVE ON THERE ANYTHING ABOUT WHY DO YOU WANT TO RUN? >> I THINK THAT'S A FINE APPENDIX OR AN ATTACHMENT. I JUST THINK IN TERMS OF PUBLICLY DISCLOSABLE INFORMATION IF IT WERE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OTHER SEMI PRIVATE INFORMATION TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY, WE COULD USE THE APPLICATION AS THE BASIS OF THEIR SUBMISSION AND THEN USE THE ATTACHMENT AS A MEANS TO COMMUNICATE BOTH WITH US IN THE PUBLIC WHAT THIS PERSON IS RUNNING FOR, OR BEING NOMINATED FOR. >> IT'S WHATEVER COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO DO. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, AND WE NEED TO DEAL WITH THAT MOTION BEFORE WE GO TO ANY OTHER MOTIONS. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER HALBERT WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER BOGDAN THAT THE APPOINTMENT OF A VACANCY IS PUBLISHED ON THE WEBSITE. I DIDN'T WRITE DOWN EVERY WORD, BUT BASICALLY IT FOLLOWS THE NOMINATION PROCEDURE. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? THEN I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE ON THAT MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED. >> I OPPOSED BECAUSE I THOUGHT WE DISCUSSED A NUMBER OF THINGS WE WANTED TO AMEND THE MOTION BY, [00:40:03] SO IF WE ADOPT THAT MOTION WE CAN'T AMEND IT ANYMORE. THAT'S WHY I'M OPPOSING. >> I'D INCLUDED THE AMENDMENTS. >> SHE AGREED TO THE AMENDMENT. >> NO. WE JUST SAID THAT IT FOLLOWED SECTION 4, WHICH IT DOESN'T. >> BUT WE HAD DISCUSSION OF THE AMENDMENTS. SHE ASKED US SPECIFICALLY IF WE AGREED TO THE AMENDMENTS WITH THE DATES BEING ADDED. >> BUT THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WAS AMENDED. WE DIDN'T COVER THE FORM BEING USED. WE DIDN'T COVER SOME OF THE OTHER PROCESS ISSUES. WOULD THE CITY SECRETARY HAVE TO BE INCLUDED IN THAT? >> DOES COUNCIL WISH TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE USE THE CANDIDATES APPLICATION AS OUR APPLICATION FOR AN APPOINTMENT, OR DO WE USE ANOTHER FORM? WHAT IS IT THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE? >> I THINK WE SAID THAT THE APPLICATION FOR POSITION DOESN'T REALLY ASK WHY HE WANTED TO RUN, WHICH I THINK WOULD BE IMPORTANT. I THINK PART OF WHAT YOU'VE WRITTEN ON HERE IS GOOD, AND MAYBE THIS FORM IS GOOD. >> I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO AMENDING THIS. THIS WAS JUST A ROUGH DRAFT THAT I THREW TOGETHER. WE COULD CERTAINLY ATTACH IT TO THE CANDIDATE APPLICATION, IF THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL WANTS. JUST TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. >> MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD MOVE THAT WE ADOPT THE APPLICATION THAT A PERSON WOULD USE IF THEY'RE WANTING TO RUN FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE, FOR COUNCIL, AND ADD TO THAT THE ADDITIONAL POINTS THAT YOU HAVE ON THE FORM. >> IS THERE A SECOND? >> MADAM MAYOR, I SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM PILGRIM, AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER SHARPE TO USE THE APPLICATION THAT PERSONS RUNNING FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE USE, WITH ATTACHING THE APPLICATION FOR COUNCIL MEMBER APPOINTMENT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THEN I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 5-0. WE HAVE A PROCEDURE. HOPEFULLY IT WILL WORK WELL. ITEM NUMBER 3. [3. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2025- 847 APPOINTING TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS TO THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE FOR 2025-2026.] CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2025-847, APPOINTING TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS TO THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE FOR '25/'26. COUNCIL, IF YOU WILL BEAR WITH ME, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN EXPLANATION ON THIS. OUR INVESTMENT COMMITTEE, WHICH DEALS WITH SIGNING CHECKS FOR THE CITY AS WELL AS INVESTING OUR INVESTMENTS INTO CDRS, AND BONDS, AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, THOSE ARE ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS. WHEN COUNCILMEMBER JIM REID LEFT IN MARCH, I THINK IT WAS, BUDDY PILGRIM TOOK HIS PLACE AND HAS BEEN FULFILLING THAT ROLE, BUT HE HADN'T EVEN BEEN ON THERE A QUARTER. THE OTHER PERSON IS RANDY KERCHO. MR. KERCHO HAS SHARED WITH ME HE IS NOT SEEKING REAPPOINTMENT BECAUSE HE WILL NOT BE WITH US. I WANTED TO SHARE THAT WITH YOU SO YOU KNEW WHAT HAD HAPPENED AND WHERE WE ARE. THE OTHER THING THAT'S IMPORTANT IS WHOEVER IS ON THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE MUST TAKE THE 10 HOUR PFI, PUBLIC FINANCE COURSE, EVERY TWO YEARS. YOU HAVE TO BE AGREEABLE TO TAKE THAT COURSE. IT IS BOTH ONLINE AND IN PERSON. GRANT, IS THERE A TIMEFRAME IN WHICH YOU HAVE TO TAKE THAT? >> IN YOUR FIRST 12 MONTHS OF BEING IN THAT POSITION. >> BECAUSE I THINK YOU'RE SIGNED UP FOR IT, BUT YOU HADN'T TAKEN IT. ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE? [00:45:08] >> MADAM MAYOR, I'D BE WILLING TO PUT MY NAME AND NOMINATION TO CONTINUE SERVING ON THAT SAME COMMITTEE, AND I WOULD INVITE ANYONE ELSE ON THE COUNCIL WHO HAS ANY FINANCIAL BACKGROUND AT ALL TO JOIN ME IN THAT CAPACITY. >> WE HAVE A NOMINATION OF MR. PILGRIM. MS. HALBERT? >> I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE DARREL SHARPE. >> ARE VINDICTIVE NOMINATIONS ALSO ACCEPTED? [LAUGHTER] >> NO. [LAUGHTER] SORRY ABOUT THAT. LET ME ASK YOU THIS. ARE YOU WILLING TO TAKE THE PUBLIC FINANCE COURSE? >> YES. >> TYPICALLY, THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE MEETS AT THE CALL OF MR. SAVAGE, WHO IS OUR CHAIR. GENERALLY, WE MEET ON A WEDNESDAY MORNING ABOUT 9:00, 09:30, AND IT'S QUARTERLY. DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT BEING A PROBLEM? >> WITH SUFFICIENT NOTICE, GENERALLY ABOUT TWO WEEKS, NO. >> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT IS INTERESTED IN MAKING A NOMINATION? NOT HEARING ANY, THEN I WILL CALL FOR A MOTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPOINT DARREL SHARPE AND BUDDY PILGRIM, AS TO OUR RESOLUTION 2025-847, APPOINTING OUR TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS TO THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE FOR 2025/2026. >> IS THERE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER BOGDAN, AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KERCHO TO APPOINT BUDDY PILGRIM AND DARREL SHARPE TO THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE FOR THE '25/'26 YEAR. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION AT ALL? NOT HEARING ANY, I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 5-0. THANK YOU-ALL. NOW WE WILL GO TO ITEM NUMBER 4. [4. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON DISCONTINUING THE ENGINEERING RFQ REVIEW.] CONSIDERATION AND ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON DISCONTINUING THE ENGINEERING RFQ REVIEW. MYSELF, GARY, AND SEVERAL OF US WILL BE HAPPY TO SPEAK TO THIS. A WHILE BACK, THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL WANTED TO GO OUT FOR BIDS FOR ENGINEERS TO HANDLE OUR WORK IF OUR CURRENT CITY ENGINEER COULD NOT HANDLE IT. THEY WANTED TO KEEP A LIST AVAILABLE OF PEOPLE TO COME IN AND BE ABLE TO DO THAT. AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE DID GET 29 APPLICANTS AND IT'S NOT DONE, BOTTOM LINE. THE ENGINEERING REVIEW IS NOT DONE. THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS WHY IT'S NOT DONE, BUT IT'S NOT DONE. THE OTHER THING THAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT IS THE MUNICIPAL ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ENGINEERING DONE IN THE CITY, AS LONG AS HE IS YOUR MUNICIPAL ENGINEER, HE HAS TO SIGN OFF ON IT, PUT HIS ENGINEERING STAMP ON. THEREFORE, IT MAKES SENSE FOR HIM TO BRING FORTH PEOPLE TO DO ANY WORK HE CAN'T DO BECAUSE HE STILL HAS TO SUPERVISE THAT WORK. THE RFQS THAT WENT OUT AT THE TIME WERE WEIRD AND THAT WAS PART OF THE PROBLEM. THEY HAD QUESTIONS ON WHAT'S YOUR ENGINEERING PHILOSOPHY. IT WASN'T LIKE CAN YOU BUILD A BRIDGE? WE JUST FEEL AT THIS TIME IT'S BETTER TO SCRAP IT. GARY, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT? >> I THINK THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS A LITTLE BIT OFF, OR MISUNDERSTOOD, BY WHAT WAS BEING ASKED OR WHAT WAS BEING SOUGHT. YOU CAN'T COMPETITIVELY BID FOR ENGINEERING. [00:50:03] IT'S PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. IF THE INTENT WAS TO TRY TO FIND COMPETITIVE PRICING, THAT'S NOT GOING TO EVEN BE IN THOSE DOCUMENTS, SO I DON'T SEE A POINT IN DOING ANY OF IT, TO BE HONEST. >> I CAN SEE A VALUE IN TRYING TO AGGREGATE BUSINESS AND GETTING, SAY, CONSOLIDATED BIDS ON A SERIES OF PROJECTS, WHICH SEEMS TO BE, FROM WHAT YOU SAY, ABSENT IN THIS. WOULD THERE BE VALUE IN REFORMULATING THE RFQ AS SOME FORM OF LARGER DOCKET OF WORK THAT'S MORE CONCRETE, HAS MORE TANGIBLE OUTCOMES, OR IS IT UNWORKABLE? >> I DON'T KNOW IF THERE COULD BE BECAUSE OUR ENGINEER THAT WE HAVE TODAY IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERYTHING. IF WE HAVE AN ISSUE THAT HE CAN'T RESOLVE, IT'S ULTIMATELY HIS TASK TO FIND SOMEONE THAT CAN HELP US WITH THAT. >> I DON'T TAKE ISSUE WITH THAT. I'M JUST ASKING WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD GET PREFERENTIAL PRICING IF WE WERE ABLE TO STACK PROJECTS UPON OTHER PROJECTS, SUCH THAT AN ENGINEERING FIRM WOULD BE CONSISTENTLY ENGAGED. >> MAYBE. >> MS. HALBERT. >> IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE MAYOR AND GARY, IT REALLY SOUNDS LIKE IF OUR CURRENT ENGINEERING FIRM CAN'T HANDLE THE LOAD, THEY WERE THE ONES THAT SHOULD HAVE GONE OUT FOR THIS RFQ TO GET THE WORK DONE FOR US, NOT US GOING OUT AND TELLING THEM. >> IT WOULD SEEM, BASED ON WHAT I UNDERSTAND OF THE LAW, THAT THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE, THAT THEY SHOULD BE THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY TO BRING FORTH TO US, WE CAN'T DO THIS, BUT WE'VE GOT THESE THREE DIFFERENT GROUPS, WHICH ONE DO YOU WANT US TO USE? CATHERINE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD TO THAT? GARY? >> I'M DONE. UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTION. >> I'M CONFUSED. AM I UNDERSTANDING THIS RIGHT? THAT WE PUT A REQUEST FOR BID ON SPECIFIC PROJECTS, OR THESE ARE JUST PRETEND PROJECTS. >> THESE ARE ANCILLARY SERVICES IN CASE A PROJECT COMES UP. >> BUT WE ALREADY HAVE A FULLY COMPETENT COMPANY THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH, AND THAT WE'VE HIRED, AND THEY ARE OUR CITY ENGINEER. IS IT BACKUP? >> MAYOR PRO TEM PILGRIM. >> WHAT WE PUT OUT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WASN'T A REQUEST FOR BIDS. IT WAS A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS. ENGINEERING FIRMS WERE TO SUBMIT THEIR QUALIFICATIONS IF THEY WANTED TO BE CONSIDERED TO BE HIRED TO DO ENGINEERING WORK FOR A CITY. I AGREE, UNLESS WE'RE READY TO GET RID OF BURKHOFF AND HIRE ANOTHER ENGINEERING FIRM, I DON'T SEE ANY NEED IN US SPENDING TIME REVIEWING 29 SETS OF QUALIFICATIONS FROM OTHER ENGINEERING FIRMS IF WE DON'T SEE AN IMMINENT NEED TO GET RID OF THE ONE THAT WE HAVE. >> WERE THESE NEW COMPANIES TOLD THAT WE WERE LOOKING TO REPLACE? >> I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE BID. IT HAS BEEN SO LONG. I DON'T THINK SO. I THINK THEY WERE TOLD THAT IF OUR MUNICIPAL ENGINEER COULD NOT HANDLE, THEN THEY MIGHT BE IN LINE FOR THE JOB. >> SORRY. GO AHEAD. WHAT WAS THE THINKING BEHIND GETTING 29 RESPONDENTS? >> THAT'S JUST THE NUMBER THAT CAME IN. >> IT WAS AN OPEN. >> IT WAS AN OPEN BID THAT WAS PUBLISHED, AND WE GOT 29 RESPONSES. THEY SAT FOR QUITE A WHILE WITH NOBODY DOING ANYTHING, AND THEN THEY STARTED REVIEWING THEM, AND IT WAS VERY COMPLICATED BECAUSE THE BID WAS UNUSUAL. THE RECOMMENDATION FROM COUNCIL AT THE TIME, WHEN WE ASKED ABOUT DISCONTINUING THE PROCESS, THAT COUNCIL DIDN'T WISH TO FOR WHATEVER REASONS. GO AHEAD. >> IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS RIGHT, WE'VE GOT AN OPEN REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS THAT'S OUT THERE RIGHT NOW THAT'S BEEN OUT THERE FOR HOW LONG? OVER A YEAR, TWO YEARS? >> ABOUT TWO YEARS. >> OVER TWO YEARS. >> I THINK IT EVEN MAKES OUR CITY LOOK BAD. BASICALLY FILL OUT A JOB APPLICATION IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME WORK HERE SOME DAY. [00:55:05] WE DON'T HAVE ANY POSITIONS OPENED. >> IF WE DISCONTINUE THIS, I WOULD CERTAINLY WANT TO SEND EACH OF THE COMPANIES THAT APPLIED A LETTER, AND/OR SEND ALL THEIR APPLICATIONS ON OVER TO BURKHOFF SO THAT BURKHOFF HAS THEM SHOULD THE SITUATION EVER COME UP WHERE THEY NEED TO HAVE A SECONDARY FIRM INVOLVED. >> MADAM MAYOR, SINCE THREE OF US ARE NEW AND HAD NO BACKGROUND ON THIS, IF FUTURE AGENDA PARKER COULD INCLUDE JUST EVEN A SUMMARY OR WHAT THE PROPOSAL WAS SO WE COULD ASK BETTER QUESTIONS? >> I APOLOGIZE. THIS HAPPENED BECAUSE WHEN PATTY WAS OUT AND WE CHANGED THE PROCEDURE, I THOUGHT EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD THE CHANGE AND APPARENTLY NOBODY UNDERSTOOD THE CHANGE. BUT IN THE FUTURE, YOU WILL HAVE A COVER SHEET ON EVERY ITEM THAT IS IN THE PARKER, AND I APOLOGIZE BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T MISS ONE. >> THAT'S RIGHT. WE JUST DON'T WANT TO CREATE EXTRA HEADACHES FOR EVERYONE. >> WELL, I WANT YOU-ALL TO HAVE ALL THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED. IT'S REAL HARD WHEN ALL YOU GET IS AN AGENDA ITEM AND NOTHING ELSE. I RECOGNIZE THAT. >> I FEEL SLIGHTLY INDICTED BY COLLEEN'S COMMENT. [LAUGHTER] BUT, ONE LAST QUESTION. ARE WE JUST TALKING ABOUT CLOSING THE RFQ? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT SCRAPPING THE RESPONSES? >> GREAT QUESTION. I THINK THE RFQ IS CLOSED. I THINK IT'S BEEN CLOSED FOR OVER A YEAR. AT THIS POINT, I DON'T KNOW IF SCRAPPING THE RESPONSES IS APPROPRIATE. IT WOULD BE TURNING THE RESPONSES OVER TO OUR MUNICIPAL ENGINEER SO THAT HE WOULD HAVE THOSE SHOULD THE NEED ARISE. >> I KNOW I DIDN'T SIGN UP FOR THREE MINUTES. I HAVE A COMMENT. >> YOU HAVE TO COME UP TO THE PODIUM. >> I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK ON WHAT YOU GUYS WERE TALKING ABOUT. I'VE SEEN A LOT OF THIS. I'M ALSO A CERTIFIED PUBLIC MANAGER, BUT ALSO I'M A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AS WELL. SO I DID A LOT OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT IN MY CITY. SO WHENEVER YOU DO RFP'S, REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, THAT'S ON PROJECT, SO YOU'RE REQUESTING, WE'RE BUILDING A BRIDGE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, SPECS ARE OUT THERE. TYPICALLY, YOU POST IT ON YOUR CITY WEBSITE AND IT'S A NOTICE TO PUBLIC NOTICE ON BIDS. THEN WITHIN THAT, THAT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. ANYONE CAN SEE OUR BID DOCUMENTS, OUR SPECIFICATIONS, OR PLANS. RFP REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS IS, HERE'S OUR PROJECT. EVERYONE SUBMIT A SEALED BID TO US. WE WILL OPEN THAT AT X DATE HERE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS FOR ANYONE TO COME SIT IN AND VIEW, AND WE WILL OPEN THOSE UP FROM THE PUBLIC TO HELP OUT AND RECORD THAT. RFQS, REQUESTS FOR QUALIFICATIONS, IT'S GENERALLY LIKE IT'S ON THE SAME THING, CITY WEBSITE, NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC. WE'RE LOOKING FOR AN ENGINEER OR WHATEVER THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IS THAT WE CAN'T GET PRICING FROM. THERE'S MANY OF THEM LIKE CPAS, ARCHITECTS, MANY. WHAT WE REQUEST IS, WE PUT OUT A DOCUMENT, AGAIN, IT'S LIKE BID SPECIFICATIONS. IT'S ALONG THE LINES OF WHERE THE CITY OF PARKER, HERE'S WHO WE ARE, OUR CORE VALUES, OUR MISSION AND GOALS. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A RANKING SYSTEM, HOW WE'RE GOING TO RANK YOU AS AN ENGINEER. WE WANT TO SEE YOUR BACKGROUND, WE WANT TO SEE PREVIOUS PROJECTS, WE WANT REFERENCES, AND WE WILL GET THIS BINDER IN HAND, AGAIN, AT A CERTAIN DATE THAT WE ADVERTISE, AND WE OPEN THAT UP FOR THE PUBLIC. COUNCIL WILL SIT IN HERE AND WE'LL HAVE A GRADING COMMISSION ON REFERENCES, PREVIOUS PROJECTS, AND WE'LL HAVE A SCORE. ACCORDING TO THOSE SCORES, IT'S WHO WE'LL PICK TYPICALLY. >> THANK YOU. MS. NELSON, IF I'M LETTING HIM COME UP, COME ON UP >> COULD WE GET AN EXPLANATION OF WHO HE WAS? I KNOW HE CAME ALONG AND SHOOK HANDS AND INTRODUCED HIMSELF EARLY, BUT I NEVER KNEW WHO HE WAS. >> OKAY. >> I CALLED PAT LAST WEEK. I SAW THERE WAS AN OPENING FOR A CITY ADMINISTRATOR, SO I PUT IN AN APPLICATION. I DIDN'T FIND THE AGENDA BUT SHE TOLD ME THAT THERE WOULD BE DISCUSSIONS TONIGHT, SO I WANTED TO COME BY. >> WHAT IS YOUR NAME? >> WHAT'S YOUR NAME? >> I'M LAWRENCE KATRONI. >> DO WE NEED HIS ADDRESS? >> YEAH. 3108 BRETON DRIVE, PLANO, TEXAS. [01:00:03] I JUST MOVED UP AND I'VE BEEN HERE FOR A MONTH NOW. I'M A MANAGER IN FORT BRANSON. JUST CAME UP FOR FAMILY REASONS. >> THANK YOU. >> 152 TEMPLE ROAD. I SEEM TO RECALL SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS FROM TWO YEARS AGO, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT A LOT HAS PASSED IN THE LAST TWO YEARS. I JUST WANTED TO ADD A FEW CONTEXTUAL COMMENTS FROM TWO YEARS AGO. FOR CONTEXT, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION AT THE TIME. CATHERINE, MAYOR, MAY NOT RECALL SOME OF THIS. THERE'S BEEN ONGOING DISCUSSION OVER THE YEARS OF WHEN WE'VE BEEN SHORT CITY STAFF WITH CITY RESOURCES. YOU'LL RECALL THAT, MAYOR, THAT FROM TIME TO TIME, WE'LL SAY THINGS LIKE, WELL, DO WE NEED A FULL TIME CITY ATTORNEY OR SHOULD WE JUST HIRE A LEGAL FIRM AND THEY'LL JUST PROVIDE RESOURCES AVAILABLE. THEY'LL DEDICATE CATHERINE TO COME THIS WEEK AND MARTIN TO COME NEXT WEEK OR WHATEVER ELSE. MANY OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS HAVE COME UP EVERY TIME WE'VE TALKED ABOUT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OF SOME TYPE. OUR ENGINEERING STAFF, OUR CITY ENGINEER DOESN'T HAVE THE CAPABILITY OR CAPACITY OR THE FIRM THAT WE ENGAGE DOESN'T HAVE THE CAPABILITY OR CAPACITY, SO I THINK IT WAS PART OF AN OVERALL CONFUSION OF DIRECTION. WHICH WAY DO WE WANT TO GO? NO ONE CLEARLY ARTICULATED, AS BUDDY JUST DID. ARE WE LETTING THE CITY ENGAGE A FIRM, AND I THINK COLLEEN YOU MADE THE POINT IF THAT WE ENGAGE A FIRM AND WHETHER IT'S A LAW FIRM OR AN ENGINEERING FIRM OR AN ACCOUNTING FIRM, AND THEY COME UP SHORT WITH RESOURCES. IT'S THEIR JOB TO GO FIND PEOPLE. WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT. THE WHOLE LAWSUIT HIRING A FIRM WAS SO THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE TO GET INTO THE PEOPLE MANAGEMENT ON RFQ PROCESS. I THINK THINGS GOT A LITTLE DISCOMBOBULATED IN THE COURSE OF THAT EXECUTION. DOES THAT HELP? >> YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. >> IN FAIRNESS, MS. LYNCH, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD? COUNCIL, WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE? OH, MISS HALBERT? >> MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE TO DISCONTINUE THE ENGINEERING RFQ REVIEW AND REACH OUT TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS OR THOSE ORGANIZATIONS THAT SUBMITTED RESPONSES AND LET THEM KNOW THAT WE HAVE CLOSED THE PROCESS AND WE WILL FORWARD THOSE NAMES ONTO OUR ENGINEERING FIRM. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER HALBERT. IS THERE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND THAT, MADAM MAYOR. >> EXCUSE ME, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY, WE HAVE A MOTION FROM MISS HALBERT TO CLOSE THE RFQ PROCESS AND ALLOW OUR ENGINEERING FIRM TO HANDLE IT FROM THERE. WE HAVE A SECOND FROM MAYOR PRO TEM PILGRIM. NOT HEARING ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, THEN I WILL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES 5-0. I AGREE THAT WE WILL GET A LETTER OUT TO THE 29 COMPANIES THAT DID APPLY AND LET THEM KNOW BECAUSE THEY DID PUT WORK INTO THIS TO THE PROCESS? WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT NUMBER 5, SO WE WILL GO TO NUMBER 6, [6. CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2025- 849, MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.] CONSIDERATION AND/OR ANY APPROPRIATE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2020-849, MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. IN YOUR PACKET, COUNCIL, YOU SHOULD HAVE HAD AN APPLICATION FROM MISS MS. SUSAN MEDRANO APPLYING TO BE APPOINTED TO AN OPEN POSITION ALTERNATE 2 ON ZBA, ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY, IS THERE A MOTION? >> MADAM MAYOR, I MOTION THAT WE VOTE ON SUSAN'S APPLICATION TO ACCEPT HER. >> IS THERE A SECOND? >> A SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER DARRYL SHARPE AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER BOGDAN, TO APPOINT SUSAN MEDRANO TO THE ALTERNATE TWO POSITION ON ZBA. [01:05:08] ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION AT ALL? NOT HEARING ANY, I'LL CALL FOR YOUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES 5-0. PATTY, WOULD YOU PLEASE LET MISS MEDRANO KNOW THAT SHE HAS BEEN APPOINTED. NEXT, WE'RE GOING TO GO TO UPDATES, [UPDATES] OUR FAVORITE PART OF THE AGENDA. FIRST THING IS 2551. GARY, YOU WANT TO GIVE US AN UPDATE? >> HARPER BROTHERS HAS MOVED BACK AGAIN A BUNCH OF EQUIPMENT ON 2551 AND A LOT OF MATERIALS TO CONTINUE THAT PROJECT. THEY HAVE SAT STAGNANT FOR A PRETTY WHILE AND THEY'RE RAMPING UP TO GET MOVED ON THAT AGAIN. THEY'RE WAY BEHIND. >> THEY ARE WAY BEHIND. ARE THEY TAKING BETTER CARE OF PEOPLE GETTING THROUGH, BETTER CARE OF THE ROAD? >> NO. >> NO [LAUGHTER]. >> I HAVE CALL ALL THE TIME. >> CAN I ASK A QUESTION THERE. >> PARDON. >> CAN I ASK A QUESTION? >> CERTAINLY. >> GARY, FROM A PERSPECTIVE, A COUPLE OF THINGS, ONE, ARE THEY HAVING THE MEETINGS OR NOT HAVING MEETINGS RIGHT NOW? NO RIGHT NOW. >> I'M GOING TO ASSUME THAT THEY'RE GOING TO START THOSE SINCE THEY'RE BACK ENGAGED IN THIS PROJECT AGAIN. >> DO YOU KNOW PROGRESS? I KNOW YOU SAID THEY'RE GOING TO GET GOING AGAIN. DO YOU KNOW WHICH DIRECTION THEY'RE GOING TO GO? THEY'RE GOING TO WORK FROM BOTH ENDS OR ANY IDEA OF WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING? >> I'M SCARED, BUT I'LL GET AN ANSWER ON THAT BY THE NEXT MEETING. >> OKAY. SAME GOES FOR WHAT THEIR NEXT STEP IS. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS? MR. PILGRIM, YOU WANT TO ADVISE US ON TCEQ BOTH ON THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PERMIT AND ON THE MUD? >> I'LL GIVE YOU A QUICK UPDATE. THERE'S NOTHING NEW ON THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PERMIT. WE'RE WAITING ON THE JUDGE TO SET A HEARING DATE ON THAT. ON THE MUD APPLICATION, YOU MIGHT REMEMBER AT THE LAST MEETING I REPORTED THAT ON MAY THE 22ND, TCQ COMMISSIONERS IN AUSTIN MET AND THEY UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A MOTION TO REFER THE APPLICATION, THE SO-CALLED JOINDER APPLICATION OF RESTORE THE GRASSLANDS TO SOA COURT FOR A HEARING. THERE WERE 53 NEW PEOPLE, NEW PROTESTANTS THAT WERE ADDED TO THE LIST OF AFFECTED PERSONS. THERE'S A LIST OF, I DON'T KNOW, IT'S PROBABLY ANOTHER 50 PEOPLE ON TOP OF THAT THAT HAD MADE REQUESTS TO BE CONSIDERED AFFECTED PERSONS WHO WERE NOT CHOSEN TO BE AFFECTED PERSONS BY TCEQ. IT'S GOING TO TAKE 30-60 DAYS FOR THE SOA COURT TO ACCEPT AN ASSIGNMENT ON THAT FOR IT TO BE ASSIGNED TO A JUDGE, AND THEN FOR THE JUDGE TO HOLD HER FIRST HEARING OR HIS FIRST HEARING. THE DATE THAT THE FIRST HEARING IS HELD, ANY PERSON WHO IS INTERESTED IN BECOMING AN AFFECTED PARTY, EVEN IF THEY WERE NOT ONE OF THE 53 THAT WERE LISTED BY TCEQ, CAN ATTEND THE FIRST SOA HEARING AND MAKE THEIR CASE DIRECTLY TO THE JUDGE, AND THE JUDGE HAS THE FINAL SAY AS TO WHO BECOMES UNAFFECTED PARTY. THEN AFTER THAT, IT'LL MOVE FORWARD THROUGH SOA'S NORMAL COURT PROCEDURE. >> ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? NEXT, WE HAVE LEWIS LANE. COUNCIL, DO YOU WANT TO GIVE US AN UPDATE ON LEWIS LANE? >> I THINK THERE'S PROGRESS IN COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE CITY PARKER AND THE CITY OF LUCAS. >> YOU CAN ASK IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> I'M RIGHT COMING TO THAT. MR. SHARPE, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >> DO WE HAVE AN UPDATE FOR SAY, TEMPORARY PATCHING THAT WE CAN SHARE WITH CITIZENS AT THIS TIME? >> I BELIEVE WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DO SOME PATCHING ON LEWIS LANE ON THE POTHOLES. GARY, WHEN DO YOU THINK THAT WILL BE DONE? >> I'LL TRY TO DO IT BY THE END OF THE WEEK. >> THANK YOU. >> FAST ACTING. >> IT'S A BIG ISSUE. [01:10:01] I UNDERSTAND THAT. WE HAVE SOME OTHER IMPORTANT STUFF TO HANDLE, BUT I'LL TRY TO GET IT BY THE END OF THE WEEK. >> FOR ANYBODY WATCHING FROM HOME OR IN MAYBE AUDIENCE TODAY, PATCHING IS NOT THE PERMANENT SOLUTION, WE'RE PURSUING A PERMANENT SOLUTION. AS COUNCIL INDICATED, WE'RE WORKING TOWARDS A LONG-TERM SOLUTION WHERE THE ROAD CAN BE REBUILT/RESTORED IN A MORE PERMANENT FASHION, BUT UNTIL WE GET THERE, THE ROAD NEEDS TO BE DRIVABLE AND SAFE. TO THAT END, WE'RE TAKING ACTION. >> I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT LEWIS LANE IS OUR HIGHEST PRIORITY, AND WE ARE TRYING TO WORK ON THIS TO GET IT DONE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, BUT IT HAS TO BE GETTING IT DONE RIGHT WHERE IT'S NOT JUST THE SAME OLD THING, SAME OLD THING, SAME OLD THING. IT HAS GOT TO BE DONE RIGHT. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON LEWIS. >> ONLY THAT MY COMMITMENT IS EITHER, I'M GOING TO BUY A HALF TRACK TO DRIVE DOWN OR WE'LL GET THIS FIXED. >> WELL, I KEEP TELLING ONE RESIDENT OVER THERE THAT I'M GOING TO BUY HIM A HORSE, SO HE DOESN'T HAVE TO DRIVE HIS CAR ON THAT ROAD. IT IS SO BAD. ON POST OFFICE ZIP CODE, MISS LYNCH BACK THERE STARTED THIS FOR US AND SHE HAS DECLINED TO CONTINUE. SHE'S NODDING HER HEAD. >> I HAVE DECLINED BECAUSE. >> COME ON UP HERE, TERRY. >> THE ONLY REASON I DECLINE IS BECAUSE IN THE DISCUSSIONS THAT I HAVE HAD WITH PEOPLE ABOUT THE ZIP CODE ISSUE, THERE IS SOME WORK BEING DONE ON THAT WITHIN THE LEGISLATURE, BUT IT REQUIRES SOMEBODY WITH A CITY ADDRESS, EMAIL ADDRESS. WE WON'T COMMUNICATE WITH SOMEBODY WITHOUT A CITY EMAIL ADDRESS. IT'S GOT TO BE SOMEBODY EITHER STAFF OR COUNCIL TO HANDLE THAT PROCESS. >> WE CAN WORK THAT OUT. IF WE WOULD CONTINUE WITH THIS PROCESS, WE WILL WORK THAT OUT. >> I THINK I SENT YOU THE INFORMATION THAT WAS LAST RECEIVED? >> YOU DID. >> YOU WANT TO SEND THAT BACK TO MY PERSONAL EMAIL. >> IF I CAN. >> WE'LL SEE WHAT'S GOING ON WITH IT WITH YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS. >> SURE. >> THAT'S FINE. THAT WORKS. >> I'LL GET YOU TO SEND IT, I'LL SEND IT. >> GO AHEAD. >> MADAM MAYOR, IF NO ELSE ON COUNCIL HAS A BURNING DESIRE TO WORK ON POST OFFICE ISSUES, I'D BE HAPPY TO WORK WITH TERRY ON THIS. I'M SORRY. I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE OVER THE COUNCIL PART OF WORKING ON THIS. >> THAT'D BE GREAT. PLEASE SEND IT TO COLLEEN AND WE CAN COMMUNICATE WITH HER. THAT'S GOOD, THANK YOU. >> MR. LAGNER WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY. [LAUGHTER] MR. LAGNER HE'S NO LONGER WITH US [INAUDIBLE] HIS PASSIONATE BUSINESS. >> WELL, YOU MADE A GREAT START AND I DIDN'T WANT IT JUST TO GET DROPPED INTO NOTHING. I APPRECIATE IT. I APPRECIATE COLLEEN STEPPING UP. THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL. ON THE NEWSLETTER, IT IS A WORK IN PROCESS. I WILL BE BRINGING A REVISED RESOLUTION TO COUNCIL FOR SOME AMENDMENTS TO THE CURRENT RESOLUTION. THE CURRENT RESOLUTION CALLS FOR THE NEWSLETTER TO COME OUT QUARTERLY. IT CALLS FOR IT TO HAVE CERTAIN CITING INFORMATION AND IT'S GOT SOME VERY STRICT REQUIREMENTS. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A ELECTRONIC NEWSLETTER THAT COMES OUT AS IT'S NEEDED. IT MAY BE IT'S ONLY NEEDED QUARTERLY, BUT THEN AGAIN, IT MAY COME OUT EVERY MONTH IF WE'VE GOT A LOT OF STUFF GOING ON THAT WE WANT TO COMMUNICATE WITH OUR RESIDENTS, AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO OPEN IT UP TO WHERE OUR RESIDENTS IF THEY HAVE INFORMATION THEY WANT TO SHARE WITH THE WORLD, THAT THEY COULD SUBMIT ARTICLES TO PUT INTO THE NEWSLETTER. I'M WORKING ON GETTING THAT DONE, SO THAT'S MY UPDATE ON THAT. UNDERSTAND SOME OF YOU DID NOT GET THE NEWSLETTER WE DID PUT OUT AND WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT WHY THAT HAPPENED AND A BETTER WAY OF DOING AN ELECTRONIC NEWSLETTER. WE'LL GET THERE, JUST IT TAKES A WHILE, ESPECIALLY WITH PATTY OUT. GARY, THE NEXT ONE IS YOURS, THE DUBLIN CREEK WATER LINES. >> BETSY SOUTH, THE WATER LINES ARE DONE. [01:15:05] THERE'S STILL SOME MINOR WORK TO BE DONE DOWN THERE. THERE'S AN IRRIGATION LINE THAT HAS BEEN DISCOVERED TO BE DAMAGED THAT WE'RE TRYING TO WORK OUT WITH BILL FIXED TO GET THAT TAKEN CARE OF. I THINK THEY'RE ALL MY HONEST MOVE THAT GO BACK AND REMOVE TILE STACKS, AND THERE'S STILL A LITTLE BIT OF WORK TO DO, BUT ALL THAT NEW WATER LINE IS IN SERVICE TODAY. >> MR. KERCHO. >> THE QUESTION, DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO BE CONFUSED. I THINK WE HAD THREE PHASES WITHIN THE WATER LINE. DUBLIN CREEK WAS PHASE 3, IT'S ACTUALLY PHASE 2 WHICH IS WHAT WE APPROVED IS ACTUALLY JUST FROM DUBLIN CREEK TO PARKER ROAD, IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT WAS THE PHASE THAT WAS APPROVED IN DUBLIN CREEK IS PHASE 3, IF COUNCIL APPROVES THAT IN THE FUTURE. >> WE JUST APPROVED PHASE 2. >> I'M JUST SAYING HERE WE'RE CALLING IT DUBLIN CREEK WATER LINE NOT DUBLIN CREEK. IT'S THE NORTHERN PORTION OF DUBLIN. THEN WHAT IS THE FINE LINE OF NORTHERN PORTION? >> THE NORTHER PORTION, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN STARTED ON THAT JUST YET. I'M TRYING TO MAKE THEM FINISH UP THAT FIRST PHASE BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE SECOND PHASE. AS SOON AS WE GET THAT FIRST PHASE COMPLETED 100%, THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE SECOND PHASE. WE'RE NOT MOVING UNTIL THEY FINISH THAT FIRST PHASE. >> BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE PART OF IT WAS THEY DIDN'T WANT TO MOVE THE HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR SOMETHING AWAY, BUT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO START ANYTHING? >> >> WE'RE WAITING ON PRICES AND GIVING US THAT PRICE BREAK. IF THEY HAVE TAKEN TOO LONG ON THIS FIRST PHASE AND IT COST IT MORE MONEY, THEY'RE GOING TO GET THAT COST IN THERE. >> THANK YOU. >> THE OTHER THING I WILL NOTE, GARY, IS I WILL ASK THAT YOU PLEASE KEEP ON TOP OF THESE PEOPLE ABOUT FLAGGERS, CONES, MARKERS BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ON PEOPLE TRYING TO USE DUBLIN ROAD, AND THEY COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHICH LANE WAS AVAILABLE TO THEM. >> IT WAS A MESS AND WE'RE GOING TO DO BETTER ON THE NEXT PHASE OF IT. WE TALKED TO THEM ALREADY ABOUT THAT. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE WATER LINES? >> I GUESS I DO HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION. ARE WE COORDINATING AT ALL WITH PEOPLE THAT ARE PUTTING IN POOLS BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY HAD A COUPLE OF POOLS BEING PUT IN AND THEY WOULD BLOCK THE STREET, AND SO I JUST DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE ANY WAY OF LETTING THEM KNOW YOU CAN'T DO THAT WHILE WE'RE PUTTING IN A WATER LINE? >> NO. IF THEY'LL GET AHOLD OF ME, I'LL GIVE THEM ACCESS. THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. THE CONTRACTOR'S BEEN PRETTY GOOD ABOUT DOING WHAT HE HAS TO DO OR PROVIDING ACCESS, KEEPING IT ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE. IN THOSE SITUATIONS, IF THEY CAN TELL ME IF THEY HAVE A PROBLEM, I'LL GET THEM ACCESS TO THE [INAUDIBLE]. >> ANYTHING ELSE ON THE WATER LINES? GOING TO THE PERSONNEL MANUAL. WE HAVE A SUGGESTION FROM SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WE CHANGE THE WAY WE ARE ADDRESSING THE PERSONNEL MANUAL. INSTEAD OF REVIEWING IT IN A WORKSHOP LINE BY LINE BY LINE, THAT EACH ONE OF US READ THE PROPOSED PERSONNEL MANUAL, WRITE DOWN ON A LITTLE NOTE PAD OR WHATEVER YOUR EDITS, YOUR CORRECTIONS, YOUR REVISIONS, SEND THOSE TO CATHERINE. CATHERINE WILL,ONE, UPDATE THE PROPOSED PERSONNEL MANUAL TO ANY NEW LAW CHANGES, AND THEN SHE WILL LOOK AT ALL OF OUR EDITS, AND WE WILL COME BACK AND HAVE A WORKSHOP AT THAT POINT AND GO OVER THE EDITS TO THE PERSONNEL MANUAL. IS EVERYBODY AGREEABLE WITH CHANGING TO THAT? >> I'M VERY AGREEABLE TO DOING IT GENERALLY IN THAT WAY. THE ONLY THING I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST IS SEND US A WORD DOC, SEND US AN EDITABLE DOC SO THAT WE CAN RED-LINE OUR CHANGES RATHER THAN HAVING A HAND WRITE THEM IN. >> CATHERINE, WILL YOU DO THAT? >> OR AT LEAST MAKE COMMENTS SO THAT WE CAN TRACK THAT I'M PROPOSING THIS, BUT PATTY'S PROPOSING THAT. >> I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN EDIT THE SAME DOCUMENT, CAN WE? I THINK WE HAVE TO EDIT DIFFERENT COPIES OF THE SAME DOCUMENT, SO IT DOESN'T CONSTITUTE WALK IN QUORUM, BUT I THINK REDLINING AS OPPOSED TO TWO COMMENTS IS THE STANDARD WAY OF LEGAL INTERCHANGE IN THE WORD DOCUMENT. >> YES, YOU'RE RIGHT. >> EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT? ANYBODY WANT TO GO BACK TO THE LINE BY LINE BY LINE? [01:20:04] [LAUGHTER] >> NO WAY. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER SHARPE SAID. ARE YOU SAYING THAT WE CAN'T DO RED LINES BECAUSE IT WOULD BECOME A WALKING QUORUM? >> NO. YOU CAN'T HAVE A COMMON DOCUMENT WITH RED LINES. YOU HAVE TO HAVE INDIVIDUAL DOCUMENTS. RED LINING IS GOOD BECAUSE IT ALLOWS THE DOCUMENT AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT OR REJECT CHANGES? >> SORRY. I DIDN'T HEAR THAT PART. >> BASICALLY, CATHERINE WILL GET SIX DOCUMENTS THAT SAY SHARPE RED LINED, BOGDAN RED LINED? >> YEAH. >> ANYTHING ELSE ON THE PERSONNEL MANUAL? COMP PLAN. THE COMP PLAN FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH IT, THIS HAS BEEN A LIFETIME SITUATION, I SWEAR TO GOD. WE'RE WORKING ON IT FOREVER. IT WENT TO A COMMITTEE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER KERCHO HEADED. THEY FINISHED THEIR WORK AND SENT IT TO P&Z. P&Z WENT OVER IT, REVIEWED IT, HELD A PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN THEY SENT IT BACK TO COUNCIL WITH THEIR EDITS OR SUGGESTIONS. THAT'S WHERE IT IS NOW. IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT WE REVIEW THE COMP PLAN WITH P&Z. OTHER PEOPLE HAVE ASKED, WHY? IT'S ALREADY BEEN TO P&Z. P&Z HAS FINISHED IT. WHAT'S LEFT IS COUNCIL NEEDS TO REVIEW THE DOCUMENT, COUNCIL NEEDS TO THEN HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN COUNCIL NEEDS TO VOTE ON THE DOCUMENT. IS THERE ANYBODY ON COUNCIL THAT WANTS OR FEELS THE NEED TO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING WITH P&Z? >> I HAVE A QUESTION. COUNCIL DID THEIR THING WENT TO P&Z, THEY DID THEIR THING, DID THEY MAKE ANY CHANGES LIKE HOW ARE WE GOING TO BE ALERTED TO THE CHANGES ANY P&Z HAS MADE? >> RED LINED? >> THEY'RE, I GUESS IT'S CALLED RED LINE. THE THEY'VE GOT LITTLE COMMENTS OUT TO THE SIDE, AND THEN THEY SENT A PIECE OF PAPER, LIKE TERRY LYNCH MADE A COMMENT, AND THEY SENT HER ENTIRE COMMENTS ATTACHED TO FOR COUNCIL TO REVIEW, AND I THINK YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE THAT THAT DID. BUT ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED TO GET CLARIFICATION ON HOW COUNCIL WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE COMP PLAN BECAUSE WE'RE NOT THAT FAR FROM COMPLETING IT, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, WHICH WOULD BE A WONDERFUL THING BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS SINCE 2016, MAYBE. IT'S TIME. NOT HEARING ANYTHING, WE WILL GO TO THAT METHOD ON THE COMP PLAN. I WILL ANNOUNCE FOR THE RECORD THAT ANY DONATIONS OTHER [Acceptance of donations for Police, Fire, and City Staff for the record: (each item valued at between $0-$1000 per Resolution No. 2024-801.] THAN WHAT THE PARKER WOMEN'S CLUB GRACIOUSLY DONATED TO US THIS EVENING, OTHER DONATIONS WILL BE ON THE FUTURE AGENDA. THANK GOD, PATTY'S BACK SO SHE CAN LIST THEM ALL AND WE WILL GET THAT. IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE NOT GRATEFUL FOR THEM, WE JUST HAVEN'T HAD ALL THE INFORMATION WE NEEDED TO PUT THEM ON THE AGENDA, WE WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT. NEXT, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, [FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS] DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS THEY WOULD LIKE NOTED AT THIS TIME? >> I WOULD LIKE TO GET SOME INFORMATION WE HAD POSSIBLE. I HAD REQUESTED MAYBE HAVING SOME KIND OF COUNCIL RETREAT WHERE WE CAN GET COUNCIL TOGETHER TO TALK ABOUT SOME GOALS AND PLANNING. >> WELL, LEADING RIGHT INTO THAT, YOU SET IT UP BEAUTIFULLY. GO AHEAD. I WAS GOING TO OFFER A WORKSHOP ON JUNE 10TH. THAT'S AN OPEN TUESDAY EVENING, AND I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF PEOPLE ARE NEEDING TO WORKSHOPPED OUT OR IF Y'ALL WANT TO GO FORWARD WITH A WORKSHOP AT THAT DATE. WE HAVE SEVERAL WORKSHOPS THAT ARE LINED UP. WE HAVE ONE ON THE COUNCIL SETTING OUR GOALS FOR THE CITY. WE HAVE ONE ON THE MINUTES, AGENDAS, PACKETS, AND PROCEDURES. WE HAVE ONE ON ETHICS AND QUORUMS. WE HAVE ONE ON OPEN MEETINGS ACT AND PUBLIC RECORDS, [01:25:02] AND WE HAVE SOME OTHERS. THOSE ARE JUST THE ONES I LISTED. COUNCIL, TELL ME WHAT YOUR DRUTHERS ARE. >> MADAM MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT WORKSHOP DATE. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A SCHEDULE FOR THAT PERIOD IS THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'VE SAID WE NEED TO HAVE ON THE RESPONSIBILITY FUNCTIONS OF THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL AND HOW WE WORK TOGETHER SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THOSE IN ORDER SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD ON HIRING A CITY ADMINISTRATOR, WHO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORTS TO, WHAT THE ACCOUNTABILITY IS, WHAT THE MAYOR'S ROLE IS, WHAT CITY COUNCIL'S ROLE IS. I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT TOPICS THAT WE CAN DISCUSS AND IS ONE THAT WE NEED TO SETTLE UP ON BEFORE WE HIRE A CITY ADMINISTRATOR. >> MADAM MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO ACTUALLY PIGGYBACK ON THAT. COUNCIL-MEMBER PILGRIM ACTUALLY HAD BROUGHT UP SOMETHING ABOUT A PRIOR CITY ADMINISTRATOR APPLICANT THAT MIGHT COULD HELP US NAVIGATE WHAT WE EXPECT THAT ROLE TO BE IN THE REPORTING STRUCTURE, BASICALLY WHAT HE JUST SAID, BUT TO BRING IN SOMEONE ELSE, AND I FEEL LIKE WE NEED A FACILITATOR FOR THIS CONVERSATION. >> DO YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION FOR A FACILITATOR? OTHERWISE, THAT'S MIGHT HANG IT UP BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN GET ONE IN A WEEK. >> I COULD. >> WHAT DOES THE REST OF COUNCIL FEEL ABOUT THAT? >> I AGREE WITH IT AS BEING THE MOST PRESSING ISSUE THAT WE CAN DO A WORKSHOP ON AT THIS TIME. >> DO YOU FEEL WE NEED A FACILITATOR? >> I THINK SOMEONE KNOWLEDGEABLE WITH DIRECT EXPERIENCE IN THE ROLE WILL BE HELPFUL TO HELP BRING SHAPE OF THE DISCUSSION. >> WE COULD FIND SOMEONE THAT COULD DO THAT FOR US. >> RANDY, YOU STILL GET A VOTE. >> MAYOR, I THINK IT CERTAINLY WOULDN'T HURT. I THINK CATHERINE OR SHE WANTED TO TAKE THE ROLE OF FACILITATOR, I THINK SHE COULD SERVE AS FACILITATOR. SHE CERTAINLY KNOWS THE RULES OUT THERE, HAS BEEN INVOLVED WITH OTHER CITIES THAT HAD DIFFERENT FORMS OF GOVERNMENT, CITY ADMINISTRATORS, ETC, JUST MATTER IF SHE WANTS TO ACCEPT THAT KIND OF ROLE TO ME OR NOT, AND SHE KNOWS OUR CITY, SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE BETTER THAN A OUTSIDE FACILITATOR, BUT CATHERINE WOULD HAVE TO PONY UP TO SAY, YES, SHE WOULD WANT TO DO THAT. >> CATHERINE, WOULD YOU BE WILLING? >> I'M WILLING TO DO IT. I CAN ALSO SEE THE BENEFIT FROM WHAT THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE SAID TO HAVING SOMEONE WHO HAS MORE EXPERIENCE SPECIFICALLY FROM A TYPE A IF YOU CAN FIND THAT. I'M HAPPY TO DO IT IF YOU'RE UNABLE TO FIND SOMEBODY WITH THAT EXPERIENCE. >> YOU SAY IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO ALLOW THE MAYOR TO BE A PART OF THE CONVERSATION AND NOT JUST BE THE ONE DIRECTING THE CONVERSATION? >> YEAH. >> ARE WE STILL TAKING FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? >> I'M SORRY. >> ARE WE STILL TAKING FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ON OUR SOCIAL MEDIA, ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION POLICY PROCESS. WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE SOCIAL MEDIA, THAT'S A PRETTY QUICK CONVERSATION, BUT I DO THINK THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO ADVERTISE THINGS LIKE THE DRUG TAKE BACK, PARKER FEST, THE OPENINGS FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS IN A MORE ROBUST WAY. >> I'D AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK WE SHOULD ALSO ADD IT AS AN ADDITIONAL CHANNEL FOR ANNOUNCEMENTS, SUCH AS ROAD CLOSURES, WATER SHUT-OFFS, THINGS LIKE THAT. THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO DON'T GET REACHED BY TRADITIONAL CHANNELS. >> JUST SO COUNCIL IS AWARE, SOME OF THAT GOES TO HAVING THE STAFF TO DO IT. THAT NEEDS TO BE A PART OF THAT CONVERSATION BECAUSE IF WE HAVE STAFF, WE HAVE TO HAVE A PLACE TO PUT THEM. THAT'S AN ISSUE. BUT YEAH, WE CAN CERTAINLY DISCUSS THAT. ANYTHING ELSE? THEN WE ARE ADJOURNED. I CAN'T EVEN SEE MY WATCH. 8:35. 8:30? 8:31. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.