[00:00:05]
[Community Informational Meeting on April 16, 2026.]
BUT WE ARE GOING TO RECORD THIS FROM THE BACK OF THE ROOM, AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO PUT IT ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE TOMORROW MORNING.SO ANYBODY THAT WAS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND TONIGHT COULD GO BACK AND WATCH THIS MEETING AND AND, OR IF YOU FORGOT WHAT YOU HEARD OR HAD ANOTHER QUESTION, YOU CAN GO BACK AND WATCH THE MEETING OR WELL, OR IF YOU RUN INTO SOMEBODY AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CITY CHARTER ELECTION YOU CAN REFER THEM TO THAT.
SO I'M GOING TO USE THE MICROPHONE SO IT GETS PICKED UP ON THE VIDEO.
I WANT THIS TO BE A REAL CASUAL MEETING. IF I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO MEET YOU.
MY NAME IS CHRIS BARKER. I'M THE CITY MANAGER HERE.
I HAVE BEEN THE CITY MANAGER FOR A LITTLE OVER A YEAR, BUT I'VE WORKED FOR THE CITY OF EULESS SINCE 1997, SO I'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME. AND WELCOME YOU HERE TO THE CITY HALL.
IF YOU'VE NEVER BEEN HERE. A LOT OF FAMILIAR FACES, BARNEY.
SOME PEOPLE I'VE KNOWN FOR A LONG TIME, PAT. SOME PEOPLE I'VE KNOWN FOR A LONG TIME, BUT ALSO GOT TO MEET A LOT OF PEOPLE WALKING IN THE DOOR THAT I'VE NOT HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF MEETING BEFORE. SO WELCOME. THIS IS YOUR CITY HALL AND ALWAYS WELCOME HERE.
AND THANK YOU FOR COMING TO THE MEETING AGAIN.
I WANT TO KEEP THE MEETING REAL CASUAL. MY INTENTION IS TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THE CITY CHARTER, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT SOME OF YOU, IF YOU PICKED IT UP, A VOTER CHARTER ELECTION VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE, THIS IS ALSO ONLINE. AND SO YOU CAN LOOK ONLINE, YOU CAN SHARE IT ONLINE, BUT THIS IS GOING TO BE THE BASIS FOR OUR CONVERSATION TONIGHT.
AND I'M HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS THAT ANYBODY HAS.
SO I PROBABLY AM GOING TO ASK YOU, UNLESS YOU'VE JUST GOT A PRESSING QUESTION ON AN ITEM.
WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS AT THE END. BUT IF WE'RE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING AND YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROPOSITION IS OR WHAT THE PURPOSE IS, JUST, I'D ASK YOU NOT TO BLURT IT OUT, BUT RAISE YOUR HAND AND I'LL CALL ON YOU.
AND WE CAN WE CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION RIGHT THEN.
SO I WANT THIS TO BE INTERACTIVE AND NOT JUST ME UP HERE PREACHING AT YOU GUYS.
SO WITH THAT, I'M READY TO GET STARTED. UNLESS ANYBODY HAS ANYTHING THEY WANT TO SAY BEFOREHAND.
YOU'RE JUST ADJUSTING YOUR GLASSES, RIGHT? YOU'RE YOU'RE NOT RAISING YOUR HAND. IT'S NOT AN AUCTION.
DON'T DON'T BE AFRAID TO RAISE YOUR HAND. YOU WON'T BUY ANYTHING.
KIM SUTTER, LET ME INTRODUCE HER REALLY QUICKLY.
SHE'S THERE. SHE IS IN THE BACK. SHE'S OUR CITY SECRETARY.
YOU MIGHT HAVE MET HER WHEN YOU WALKED IN. KIM HAS GOT ALL THIS INFORMATION AGAIN.
IT'S ONLINE, BUT WE'VE GOT COPIES. IF WE RUN OUT, SHE CAN GET YOU A COPY.
IF YOU DIDN'T GET SOMETHING, PLEASE GO SEE HER.
AND SHE CAN GET YOU A COPY. AND THEN I'M GOING TO DO MY BEST HERE.
I SAW OUR MAYOR PRO TEM TIM STENTIFORD IS IN THE BACK.
I SAW COUNCILMAN TYPEKIT PADDLE OVER HERE TO THE RIGHT.
COUNCILMAN PERRY BONHAM AND HIS WIFE LISA TO THE RIGHT.
AND DID I MISS ANYBODY ELSE ON COUNCIL? I DON'T THINK I DID.
JUST A LITTLE QUIRK OF CITY GOVERNMENT. WE'VE GOT THE COUNCIL HERE, THREE MEMBERS HERE TONIGHT.
KIM, THE CITY SECRETARY. CITY SECRETARY POSTED A NOTICE OF POSSIBLE QUORUM.
SO THE CITY COUNCIL CANNOT MEET IN A GROUP WITHOUT IT BEING POSTED.
SO WHEN WE'RE HAVING A COMMUNITY MEETING LIKE THIS AND WE TOLD ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WANTED TO, THEY COULD THEY SURELY COULD ATTEND. RIGHT. THIS IS A PUBLIC MEETING.
SO THAT'S WHAT THAT'S ABOUT. BACK IN THE BACK STANDING UP.
AND AGAIN, THEY CAN HELP YOU TONIGHT IF I CAN OR IF IF YOU THINK THEY'RE BETTER LOOKING THAN ME AND YOU'D RATHER TALK TO THEM, YOU CAN GO TO THEM AS WELL. WE HAVE OUR POLICE CHIEF ON THE BACK ROW THERE IN THE HAT, THE COWBOY HAT.
GARY LANDERS WITH 30. HOW MANY YEARS, GARY? 36.
BUT WHO'S COUNTING? RIGHT. SO I THINK YOU STARTED WHEN YOU WERE 18.
IS THAT RIGHT? IN THE JAIL. SO HE WASN'T IN JAIL.
HE HE WAS WORKING. YEAH. WELL, THAT FIRST DAY, BUT YEAH, YEAH.
CHANCE BENNETT IS OUR FIRE CHIEF. CHANCE NOT.
I MEAN, PRETTY CLOSE TO 35 YEARS, RIGHT? HOW MANY YEARS YOU GOT? 32.5. WHICH IS A LONG TIME TO BE IN THE FIRE BUSINESS.
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE. SO THOSE FOLKS ARE HERE AND THEY CAN HELP YOU.
YOU MAY HAVE A QUESTION. WHEN WE GET DONE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CITY CHARTER.
AND WHAT CAN YOU DO ABOUT IT? WELL, HE'S RIGHT BACK THERE. YOU CAN.
YOU CAN GO ASK HIM. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'LL BE VERY PRODUCTIVE FOR YOU, BUT YOU CAN.
[00:05:03]
SURE. YOU CAN SURE. GO ASK HIM. BUT NO, THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. AND AGAIN, I'M GOING TO START THE PRESENTATION.
BUT I WANT THIS TO BE INTERACTIVE. SO IF WE NEED TO SLOW DOWN OR IF YOU GET TIRED AND I NEED TO SPEED UP, JUST SIGNAL ME ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. IF SOMEBODY SAYS SLOW DOWN AND SOMEBODY SAYS, GARY SAYS, SPEED UP ALREADY. SHE ALREADY TOLD ME TO SPEED UP.
IF I GET MIXED SIGNALS, I'LL JUST PICK ONE AND GO FROM THERE.
SO WHY ARE WE HERE TONIGHT? WHAT IS THE CITY CHARTER? I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION, A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THE CITY CHARTER. WE HAVE A CITY CHARTER. WE HAVE A CODE OF ORDINANCES. THE CITY CHARTER REALLY IS JUST IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, A FOUNDATIONAL LEGAL DOCUMENT THAT PEOPLE THINK OF AS LIKE THE CONSTITUTION, IF YOU WILL, FOR LOCAL MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT. AND IT TALKS ABOUT WHAT OUR STRUCTURE IS GOING TO BE, WHAT POWERS THE CITY COUNCIL IS GOING TO HAVE, THE CITY IS GOING TO HAVE, AND EVEN DOWN TO WHAT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY IS IN ESSENCE.
AND I'M GOING TO PREACH HERE FOR JUST A LITTLE BIT. LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN TEXAS HAS LONG BEEN ABOUT LOCAL CONTROL, MEANING THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM, IN THIS COMMUNITY ARE LARGELY EMPOWERED TO DECIDE WHAT'S BEST FOR THEIR COMMUNITY.
AND WHAT WE MIGHT DECIDE IS BEST FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF LOCAL CONTROL. LOCAL CONTROL IS A LITTLE BIT UNDER ATTACK RIGHT NOW FROM A STATE LEVEL, AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT WHAT THE MEETING IS TONIGHT ABOUT, BUT THAT'S WHAT A CITY CHARTER IS.
SO WE CAN'T DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE STATE LAW.
THIS PIECE IS GOING TO BE REALLY INTERESTING IN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THE HISTORY OF THE CHARTER, BECAUSE WE'VE NOT UPDATED OUR CHARTER IN A NUMBER OF YEARS, AND I'M FIXING TO SHOW YOU THAT.
BUT WE HAVE PLACES WHERE OUR CHARTER IS INCONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW TODAY.
IT WASN'T WHEN IT WAS ADOPTED OR WE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ADOPT IT.
AND SO IF WE HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT IN A LONG TIME, A LOT OF WHAT WE'RE CHANGING IN THE CHARTER TODAY IS WHAT I WOULD TELL YOU, IS A CLEAN UP TO MAKE THINGS CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW AND TO KEEP US FROM HAVING TO ALWAYS CHASE THE STATE LAW.
OUR LANGUAGE IS KIND OF EVERGREEN. IF THEY IF THEY CHANGE THAT, RULES FOR HOW CITY LIMITS ARE SET.
AND IT JUST NOW IS GOING TO SAY OUR CITY LIMITS ARE SET IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
AND SO THEN WE WOULD WE WOULD JUST BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THOSE CHANGES.
SO A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ON THE CHARTER IN ULYSSES.
ULYSSES ADOPTED THEIR CHARTER ON JULY 21ST OF 1962.
ANY OF YOU HERE, BARNEY, ARE YOU HERE FOR THAT VOTE? YOU'RE NOT. OKAY. JUST MAKING SURE NOBODY WAS HERE FOR THAT VOTE.
IF YOU KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ULYSSES HISTORY, THE CITY WAS INCORPORATED IN 1953.
AND YOU MIGHT ASK, WHY DID WE NOT ADOPT A CHARTER UNTIL 1962? AND THAT GETS INTO TEXAS LAW. AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU HAVE TO BE A CERTAIN SIZE TO BE A HOME RULE CITY AND TO HAVE A CHARTER.
AND SO WHEN WE WERE INCORPORATED IN 1953, WE WERE NOT LARGE ENOUGH TO DO THAT.
AND IT TOOK US ABOUT NINE YEARS TO GET TO THAT SIZE.
AND THEN WE ADOPTED A CHARTER AND BECAME A HOME RULE CITY.
THE REASON YOU WOULD WANT TO DO THAT AS A COMMUNITY IS BECAUSE A HOME RULE CITY, AGAIN, HAS MORE ABILITY TO, UNDER STATE LAW, ENACT LOCAL CONTROL. SO WHEN YOU REACH THAT SIZE, MOST CITIES WILL GO TO HOME RULE STATUS SO THAT THEY HAVE MORE CONTROL OVER THEIR THEIR LOCAL GOVERNMENT. SO WE ADOPTED THAT IN 1962, AND WE DID OUR FIRST AMENDMENT IN 1969.
AND THEN WE DID SOME AMENDMENTS IN 1973, AND WE DID SOME IN 1975, AND WE DID SOME IN 1991.
AND OUR LAST AMENDMENT WAS IN 1995. SO 31 YEARS AGO WAS THE LAST TIME WE TOUCHED THIS DOCUMENT.
STATE LAW WILL ALLOW A CITY TO CHANGE THEIR CHARTER NOT MORE OFTEN THAN EVERY TWO YEARS.
AND SO KIND OF AN INTENTION TO NOT HAVE KNEE JERK CHANGES.
AND WE'VE PUSHED TWO YEARS TO 31 YEARS. SO AGAIN, MANY OF THE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT ARE WHAT I WOULD CALL CLEANUP PROVISIONS. THAT, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, IN THE LAST 31 YEARS, THINGS HAVE JUST CHANGED.
[00:10:01]
LAWS HAVE CHANGED, REGULATIONS HAVE CHANGED. AND IN MANY CASES IN OUR CHARTER, THEY'RE INCONSISTENT.AND TO BE QUITE HONEST WITH YOU, WE DON'T WE OBVIOUSLY APPLY OR OR WORK WITH STATE LAW.
AND SO IT'S JUST INCONSISTENT TO LEAVE THAT A LOT OF THOSE ON ON THE BOOKS.
SO THAT'S KIND OF THE REASON THAT THAT WE'RE HERE IN DOING THAT.
ALL RIGHT. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, IF YOU FORGET SOMETHING I SAY TONIGHT OR AGAIN, IF SOMEBODY IS ASKING YOU SOME QUESTIONS OR YOU JUST WANT TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT EVERYTHING, THIS IS JUST A SCREENSHOT FROM THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
YOU CAN SEE THE RED BUTTONS THERE AT THE BOTTOM.
THE FIRST BUTTON ON THE LEFT, IS ELECTIONS. AND SO IF YOU JUST GO TO THE CITY'S WEBSITE AND CLICK THAT ELECTIONS BUTTON, YOU WOULD THEN GO TO OUR ELECTIONS PAGE AND YOU CAN SEE THE COMMUNITY INFORMATIONAL MEETING TOMORROW MORNING.
KIM WILL HELP US CHANGE THAT. AND WE'LL HAVE A LINK TO THIS VIDEO.
NORMALLY THIS TIME OF YEAR WE WOULD HAVE OUR CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS AS WELL.
BUT OUR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO ARE UP FOR ELECTION DID NOT DRAW A CONTESTED RACE.
SO THOSE GENERAL ELECTIONS HAVE BEEN CANCELED.
BUT WE WILL STILL HAVE THE SPECIAL ELECTION FOR THE CITY CHARTER ON MAY THE 2ND.
THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A RUMOR AROUND TOWN THAT WE'RE NOT HAVING ELECTIONS THIS YEAR.
IT'S JUST NOT FOR PEOPLE. IT'S FOR CHARTER PROPOSITIONS.
AND WE WOULD LIKE FOR THEM TO COME OUT AND EXPRESS THEIR OPINION ON PROPOSITIONS.
BEFORE I GO ANY FURTHER, I'M GOING TO TELL YOU ONE THING THAT BY STATE LAW WE HAVE TO DO AS CITY EMPLOYEES, THE CITY CAN EDUCATE FOLKS ON CHARTER PROPOSITIONS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO TONIGHT.
WHAT WE CANNOT DO IS ADVOCATE FOR PROPOSITION.
SO I CAN'T TELL YOU, HEY, VOTE FOR THIS ONE, BUT DON'T VOTE FOR THAT ONE OR THIS ONE'S GOOD OR THIS ONE'S BAD, OR YOU OUGHT TO VOTE FOR THIS ONE, OR YOU OUGHT TO VOTE FOR THEM ALL.
I CAN JUST TELL YOU WHAT THEY MEAN AND EXPLAIN TO YOU WHY THEY ARE THERE.
SO AGAIN, IF YOU THINK I'M NOT GOING AS FAR AS I SHOULD, OR I'M DOING THOSE THINGS ON PURPOSE, I'M JUST TRYING TO SIMPLY EDUCATE YOU ON WHAT THE PROVISIONS ARE.
I CANNOT ADVOCATE ANY, ANY INDIVIDUAL PROVISION.
SO IF YOU LOOK DOWN THERE AT THE BOTTOM, DO YOU SEE THAT BANNER THAT SAYS CHARTER AMENDMENT DOCUMENTS? THOSE ARE LARGELY THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU'RE HOLDING IN YOUR HAND, BUT I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THEM REAL QUICK. YOU HAVE RIGHT ABOVE THAT THE VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE THAT WE HAVE TONIGHT THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IN OUR TALK.
YOU HAVE THE ORDER CALLING THE SPECIAL ELECTION.
IF YOU CLICK ON THAT, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A COPY OF THE CITY ORDINANCE THAT THE COUNCIL PASSED THAT CALLED THIS ELECTION, AND IT HAS THE CHARTER PROVISIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THAT CITY ORDINANCE.
TO THE RIGHT OF THAT, YOU'LL SEE ONE THAT SAYS CHARTER AMENDMENT BALLOT PROPOSITIONS.
THAT DOCUMENT HAS THE BALLOT PROPOSITIONS EXACTLY AS THEY'RE GOING TO BE LISTED ON THE BALLOT.
AND THAT'S. COPY THAT DOCUMENT THAT KIM GAVE YOU IN THE BACK.
THE PRESENTATION I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU TONIGHT ACTUALLY HAS GOT TWO THINGS ON IT.
IT'S GOT THE BALLOT PROPOSITION LISTED AS IT WOULD BE ON THE DOCUMENT.
AND THEN IT'S GOT KIND OF, AGAIN, A COMMON SENSE EXPLANATION OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO THERE.
BUT IF YOU WANTED TO SEE THE PROPOSITIONS AS THEY WILL APPEAR ON THE BALLOT BEFORE VOTING DAY, YOU CAN CLICK ON THAT LINK. AND THEN THE LAST ONE THERE IS THE RED LINE OF THE HOME RULE WITH PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
THAT DOCUMENT GOES THROUGH EVERY AMENDMENT WE'RE PROPOSING IN THIS FASHION.
THERE'S THREE COLUMNS THERE. THE COLUMN ON YOUR LEFT IS THE CURRENT CHARTER LANGUAGE.
THAT'S HOW IT WOULD READ IF IT WAS PASSED. SO AGAIN, THE WAY I LOOK AT THIS, I TEND TO PAY MOST ATTENTION TO THAT CENTER COLUMN WHERE I CAN KIND OF QUICKLY SEE WHAT THE CHANGES ARE. BUT YOU GLANCE TO THE LEFT AND YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT SAID.
GLANCE TO THE RIGHT AND YOU CAN SEE THE FINAL, FINAL PIECE OF THAT.
AND AS I WAS TALKING, MR. EDDIE PRICE CAME IN COUNCILMAN EDDIE PRICE.
THANK YOU, SIR, FOR BEING HERE AS WELL. AND I SEE A POINT.
OH, MR. TOMPKINS SNUCK IN AND SAT ON THE BACK ROW.
SO NOW I AM GETTING CLOSE TO A QUORUM. SO I HAVE A QUORUM.
SO DON'T. WHEN THE MEETING'S OVER AND WE BREAK FOR COOKIES, DON'T GATHER ALL THE COUNCILMEN TOGETHER IN A CORNER AND ASK THEM A QUESTION THAT I'LL GET IN TROUBLE IF YOU DO THAT. SO MOVING ON, LET'S GO TO THE VOTER INFORMATION.
[00:15:02]
AND AGAIN, THERE'S NO GOOD WAY TO DO THIS. I'VE TRIED TO THINK OF A FUN AND ENTERTAINING WAY TO DO IT.THERE'S NO REALLY GOOD WAY TO DO IT. THEN JUST MARCH ON THROUGH THEM.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ASK.
I WILL SAY AFTERWARDS, AS LONG AS ANYBODY WANTS TO SAY, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO ASK IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY, JUST COME VISIT WITH ME AFTERWARDS. AND I'D BE HAPPY TO TO TRY TO ANSWER.
AND IF YOU MAY HAVE A QUESTION THAT COMES UP AFTER WE GO PAST AN ITEM, FEEL FREE TO RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY, A COUPLE ITEMS AGO, I JUST NOW THOUGHT OF A QUESTION I HAVE ON THAT.
WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT AS WELL. SO PROPOSITION A, WE'RE GOING TO START AT THE BEGINNING.
AND AGAIN THE TOP BOX THERE IS WHAT THE LANGUAGE ON THE BALLOT IS GOING TO SAY.
THE BOTTOM BOX IS KIND OF JUST A SUMMARY WE'VE PUT TOGETHER TO TRY TO HELP EXPLAIN THAT.
BUT PROPOSITION A IS GOING TO ASK YOU, SHALL THE US HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO PROVIDE NON-SUBSTANTIVE REORGANIZATION AND LANGUAGE REVISIONS AND TO PROVIDE CONSISTENT LANGUAGE REFERENCES FOR PURPOSES OF CLARITY AND GRAMMATICAL UNIFORMITY? LAWYERS WRITE THESE. THE SECRETARY OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE.
YES. KIM HAS TO APPROVE ALL OF THIS LANGUAGE BEFORE WE CAN CALL THE ELECTION AND PUT THE BALLOT OUT.
AND IT'S IT'S A VERY, I DON'T KNOW, FORMAL TECHNICAL WRITING TYPE PIECE.
SO THAT IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO SAY ON THE PROPOSITION.
WHAT WHAT DOES THAT REALLY MEAN? BASICALLY, WE WANT TO UPDATE THE CHARTER TO REORGANIZE SECTION AND MAKE SMALL CHANGES TO IMPROVE CLARITY AND CONSISTENCY THAT AREN'T GOING TO AFFECT THE MEANING OF THE CHARTER OR CHANGE ANYTHING THAT IT CAN DO. AND MY EXAMPLE OF THIS ONE WILL BE THAT VERY FIRST THING THAT WE JUST LOOKED AT A WHILE AGO.
AND AGAIN, THERE'S GOING TO BE A RED LINE CHANGE COPY ONLINE.
I'VE GOT A COPY UP HERE TOO FOR EVERY SINGLE PROPOSITION, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO DO THIS ON EVERYONE BECAUSE WE DON'T WE'LL BE HERE ALL NIGHT IF I DO THAT. BUT JUST BY WAY OF EXAMPLE, YOU CAN SEE THERE IN THE CENTER COLUMN AS AN EXAMPLE OF PROPOSITION A, WE'RE CHANGING THE WORD INCORPORATION TO CORPORATE EXISTENCE, CORPORATE EXISTENCE.
AND THAT JUST MEANS THE CITY LIMITS AS NOW ESTABLISHED.
WELL, AGAIN, THIS IS KIND OF LANGUAGE WRITTEN WHEN THEY ADOPTED THE CHARTER AND IT HASN'T CHANGED.
SO WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE ESTABLISHED TO EXISTING.
WE ARE NOT CHANGING THE CITY LIMITS OF EULESS.
WE'RE JUST SAYING, AS THE CITY LIMITS EXIST TODAY, AND IF YOU GO DOWN A LITTLE BIT TO THE BOTTOM, IT SAYS FOR PURPOSES OF THIS CHARTER, THE CITY OF EULESS SHALL BE REFERRED TO AS THE CITY.
THIS IS KIND OF A FUNNY ONE TO ME. ALL THROUGHOUT THIS CHARTER, IT JUST USES THE TERM CITY, THE CITY THIS, THE CITY THAT BACK AND FORTH. NOWHERE IN THE ORIGINAL CHARTER DOES IT SAY THAT THE WORD CITY IS DEFINED AS CITY OF EULESS.
ANY REASONABLE PERSON READING THE CITY OF EULESS CHARTER WOULD ASSUME THAT THE WORD CITY MEANS THE CITY OF EULESS, BUT IT DOESN'T FORMALLY SAY THAT. SO JUST A GOOD CLEAN UP FOR US TO JUST KIND OF HIT PEOPLE OVER THE HEAD WITH IT, THAT EVERY OCCURRENCE OF THE WORD CITY IN THIS DOCUMENT MEANS THE CITY OF EULESS AND NOT SOME OTHER CITY.
SO MOVING ON TO PROPOSITION B, CITY STREETS AND PUBLIC PROPERTY, WE'RE ASKING THAT THE PROPOSITION, IF PASSED, WOULD AMEND THE EULESS HOME RULE CHARTER TO INCLUDE PUBLIC PARKS AND RIGHTS OF WAY WITH THE LISTED TYPES OF PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE CITY HAS JURISDICTION AND CONTROL. SO IN THE CURRENT CHARTER, THERE'S A LIST OF PROPERTY TYPES THAT THE CITY HAS CONTROL OVER.
IT'S ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY THINK OF.
BUT WHAT IT SAYS IS PUBLIC AREAS. I WOULD TELL YOU THAT MOST OF US THINK A PUBLIC PARK IS A PUBLIC AREA, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY PUBLIC PARKS. SO AGAIN, THIS IS A CLARIFICATION LANGUAGE TO JUST SAY, WE DON'T WANT TO ARGUE WITH SOMEBODY IN THE FUTURE THAT THE CITY HAS CONTROL OVER PUBLIC PARKS OR PUBLIC AREAS. WE'RE JUST GOING TO NOT TAKE OUT THE WORD PUBLIC AREAS.
WE'RE JUST ADDING PUBLIC PARKS RIGHT IN THERE TO JUST REALLY CLARIFY IT.
AND THEN IT ALSO SAYS STREETS. AND WE ALL KNOW AND ASSUME THAT THE CITY TAKES CARE OF THE STREETS, THE PUBLIC STREETS, THERE ARE PRIVATE STREETS, BUT THE PUBLIC STREETS.
BUT WHAT IT DOESN'T SAY IS RIGHT OF WAY, AND IT'S SPLITTING HAIRS A LITTLE BIT, BUT A PUBLIC STREET EXISTS WITHIN A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OUTSIDE OF THE CURB. YOU'VE GOT ON MOST STREETS A SIDEWALK AND A FIRE HYDRANT AND A STOP SIGN, MAYBE YOUR WATER METER, THOSE KIND OF THINGS. 9.5FT BEHIND THE CURB ON EITHER SIDE OF THE CURB IS THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
OUR CHARTER SAYS WE HAVE CONTROL OVER THE STREETS.
IT REALLY, I WOULD TELL YOU, INTENDED THAT TO BE THE FULL STREET, THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
[00:20:04]
THESE ARE THE KIND OF THINGS THAT ARE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING OPERATIONALLY OF HOW WE DO ANYTHING DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING.IT'S JUST REALLY CLARIFIES TO FOLKS THAT WHAT THESE EXACT MEANINGS ARE.
I'M NOT TELLING YOU THAT PREVIOUS CHARTERS WERE WERE WRITTEN POORLY.
THEY'RE JUST OLD AND TERMS CHANGE AND THINGS CHANGE AND THINGS HAPPEN.
YES, MA'AM. MISS DOUGHERTY. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. NINE AND A HALF.
SO WHAT I WOULD TELL YOU, AND THIS IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT WITHOUT US STANDING OUT ON A ON A PARTICULAR STREET, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE THIS AS A GENERIC EXAMPLE, BUT THIS EXAMPLE IS THE CASE 99% OF THE TIME IN OUR CITY.
OKAY, WHEN YOU WENT OUT TO THE STREET AND YOU STOOD ON YOUR CURB, FOR INSTANCE, YOU'RE GETTING YOUR MAIL AND YOU'RE STANDING ON THE CURB, THE STREET AND THE CURB. AND PEOPLE JUST GENERALLY CALL THAT THE STREET.
IF YOU TURN AND FACE YOUR HOUSE AND WALK 9.5FT TOWARDS YOUR HOUSE, THAT'S THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
OKAY. THAT'S WHERE THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK IS. I REALIZE THAT NOT EVERYBODY HERE HAS A SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE, BUT THAT'S WHERE THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK WOULD BE. THAT'S ALSO WHERE THE CITY UTILITY LINES ARE.
OR OTHER UTILITY LINES POWER, ELECTRIC WATER, SEWER, GAS, THOSE THINGS.
THAT IS WHERE YOUR MAILBOX IS. SO THAT IS WHERE YOUR CURB RETURN IS.
YOU MAINTAIN YOUR DRIVEWAY. BUT IF THE DRIVE RETURN GETS MESSED UP, THE CITY MAINTAINS THAT.
SO AGAIN, FROM OUR STANDPOINT, IT ALWAYS IS. IT'S PLATTED.
NOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, I'M TRYING NOT TO GET TOO TECHNICAL HERE.
A PROPERTY OWNER MAINTAINS THAT RIGHT OF WAY.
SO WE ALL MAINTAIN OUR GRASS OUT TO THE CURB.
BUT I THINK THE EASIEST DESIGNATION FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND IS YOU DON'T BE ON THE GRASS, YOU DON'T MAINTAIN THE IMPROVEMENTS IN A IN A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
SO MOST STANDARD CITY STREETS ARE 31FT, WHAT WE CALL 31FT BACK TO BACK.
SO THERE ARE 31FT OF PAVEMENT AND THEY HAVE A SIX INCH CURB ON THIS SIDE, AND THEY HAVE A SIX INCH CURB ON THIS SIDE, AND THEY SIT IN A 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY. SO 50 MINUS THE 31FT OF STREET, MINUS A HALF A FOOT OF CURB AND A HALF A FOOT OF CURB.
OVER HERE IS WHY THERE'S 9.5FT OF RIGHT OF WAY BEHIND THAT CURB.
SO THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE.
ALL RIGHT WE'RE MOVING ON. ITEM C IS PROPOSITION C IS SHOULD WE AMEND THE CHARTER TO PROVIDE THAT THE EXISTING BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY MAY ONLY BE ALTERED THROUGH ANNEXATION, DIS ANNEXATION AND BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT PROVISIONS PROVIDED WITHIN STATE LAW.
WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF CHANGING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF EULESS.
WE LIVE IN AN URBAN AREA. THERE'S NOWHERE TO CHANGE THEM TO.
I MEAN, WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WE CAN ANNEX OR ANNEX OR ANY OF THOSE KIND OF THINGS.
THE CURRENT CHARTER HAS LANGUAGE ON HOW TO CHANGE CITY LIMITS.
THAT'S INCONSISTENT WITH THE LAST 31 YEARS OF STATE LAW.
THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE EXAMPLES WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE OUR CHARTER CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE LAW, BUT NOBODY'S IF YOU REALLY LOOK AT THE CITY MAP, THERE'S NOTHING TO ANNEX.
WE'RE SURROUNDED, LANDLOCKED, IF YOU WILL, BY OTHER CITIES.
PROP D IS A CITY COUNCIL QUALIFICATIONS. AMENDING THE CHARTER TO PROVIDE THE MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH ARE AUTHORIZED BY STATE LAW. THAT'S PART OF THE PROPOSITION.
AND THEN REQUIRING THAT THE MINIMUM AGE TO RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL IS 21.
SO LET'S DEAL WITH THE FIRST PART OF THAT PROPOSITION.
I WOULD TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE INCONSISTENCIES.
THEY'RE MINOR, BUT INCONSISTENCIES IN OUR OLD CHARTER.
WE WON'T BE ANY DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER ANY OTHER CITY IN THE STATE.
THE SECOND PART OF THAT, ON THE AGE IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE SOME DISCRETION ON.
SO STATE LAW WOULD ALLOW THAT TO BE 18 TO 21.
[00:25:08]
TO BE ON CITY COUNCIL DOESN'T PRECLUDE YOUNGER FOLKS FROM BEING ON THE CITY COUNCIL.AND SO THAT'S THE THAT'S THE CHANGE THERE FROM 18 TO 21.
I THOUGHT IT WAS A QUESTION, BUT IT WAS JUST A STRETCH. YOU DEFINITELY LOOK OLDER THAN 18.
SO I DON'T THINK YOU'RE OPPOSED TO THAT. ALL RIGHT.
PROPOSITION E IS SHOULD WE AMEND THE HOME RULE CHARTER TO PROHIBIT MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM HOLDING ANY PUBLIC OFFICE THAT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER STATE LAW? THAT SOUNDS REALLY FANCY.
AND WE HAVE A PROVISION IN OUR CHARTER RIGHT NOW.
THE PROVISION IN OUR CHARTER IS UNCLEAR AND LEAVES ROOM FOR INTERPRETATION.
WHAT IT WOULD DO IS PROHIBIT THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM HOLDING ANY OTHER OFFICE EXCEPT FOR.
YOU COULD BE A NOTARY PUBLIC IF YOU WANTED TO WHILE YOU WERE ON COUNCIL, AND YOU COULD BE IN THE ARMED FORCES, OR YOU COULD BE IN A RESERVE OF THE ARMED FORCES AND STILL HOLD A COUNCIL POSITION.
AND YOU COULD BE A RETIRED MEMBER OF THE ARMED FORCES AND STILL HOLD A COUNCIL POSITION.
AS SILLY AS IT SOUNDS, THERE HAVE BEEN FOLKS NOT IN OUR COMMUNITY, BUT ACROSS THE STATE THAT HAVE MADE ISSUES THAT, WELL, MA'AM, YOU'RE NOT ELIGIBLE TO SERVE IN THE CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE YOU HOLD ANOTHER OFFICE. WELL, I DON'T HOLD AN OFFICE. WHAT IS THAT? WELL, YOU'RE A RETIRED NAVY CAPTAIN.
YES, I AM. SO AGAIN, THAT'S I THINK A REASONABLE PERSON WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THOSE PROHIBITIONS, THERE ARE NOT ANYTHING THAT ANYBODY WOULD CARE.
THERE'S NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST I GUESS IS WHAT I'M SAYING THERE. AND THEN IT WOULD ALSO SAY THAT NEITHER THE MAYOR OR COUNCIL MEMBER SHOULD HOLD ANY OTHER PUBLIC OFFICE PAID OR UNPAID. SO THAT'S A IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S UNPAID.
YOU SHOULDN'T HOLD ANY OTHER PUBLIC OFFICE PAID OR UNPAID.
SO IF A COUNCIL PERSON WERE TO HOLD ANOTHER OFFICE, THEY WOULD AUTOMATICALLY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW, VOID OR BE NO LONGER ON THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD NOT EVEN TAKE AN ACTION.
IT'S JUST CLEANING UP OUR CHARTER TO MEET WITH STATE LAW TO AVOID ANY QUESTION.
PROPOSITION F WOULD AMEND THE CHARTER TO DEFINE INCOMPETENCY AND OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT, FOR WHICH THE MAYOR OR ANY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER COULD BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE. SO OUR CURRENT CHARTER DOES ALLOW FOR REMOVAL OF THE MAYOR OR THE COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR INCOMPETENCY OR OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT, BUT IT DOESN'T DEFINE THOSE TERMS. AND SO THE ISSUE WOULD BE WHAT MIGHT BE INCOMPETENCY TO PAT MIGHT NOT BE INCOMPETENCY TO JOE OR WHAT MIGHT BE MISCONDUCT TO JOE MIGHT NOT BE MISCONDUCT TO PAT. SO BY DEFINING THOSE TERMS AND WE'RE NOT MAKING UP DEFINITIONS, WE'RE USING DEFINITIONS THAT ARE WIDELY ACCEPTED AND ACCEPTED IN STATE LAW.
IT JUST IF WE WERE TO EVER HAVE THAT ISSUE, IT WOULD NOT BE LEFT UP TO SOMEBODY'S INTERPRETATION.
IT WOULD BE LEFT UP TO A DEFINED TERM FOR INCOMPETENCY AND A DEFINED TERM FOR MISCONDUCT.
I DON'T HAVE THE LANGUAGE WITH ME TONIGHT, BUT IF YOU GO AND LOOK AT THAT RED LINE, IT THEN FURTHER GOES INTO DEFINE AND IT'LL SAY INCOMPETENCY IN THIS SENSE MEANS AND IT LISTS OUT WHAT THAT MEANS. AND IT'LL SAY MISCONDUCT IN THIS SENSE MEANS AND IT LISTS ALL THE THINGS THAT WOULD BE MISCONDUCT.
PROP G WOULD BE TO AMEND AND PROVIDE THAT THE VACANCIES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL FOR A REMAINING TERM, LESS THAN 12 MONTHS, COULD BE FILLED BY APPOINTMENT OR BY SPECIAL ELECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW, AND PROVIDE FOR THE PROCEDURES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO DO THAT APPOINTMENT.
SO THIS IS A VERY INTERESTING THING. IF A COUNCIL MEMBER WHO IS ELECTED FOR A TERM OR TO SOME REASON NEED TO VACATE THAT TERM, AS OUR CHARTER CURRENTLY READS, WE HOLD AN ELECTION TO FILL THAT TERM REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH TIME IS LEFT ON ON THAT TERM.
WHAT THIS PROPOSITION WOULD DO WOULD, WOULD BE TO LOOK AT THAT TERM.
AND THEY'RE ELECTED FOR A THREE YEAR TERM. AND IF YOU HAD 12 MONTHS OR LESS LEFT ON YOUR TERM, IT WOULD AUTHORIZE THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPOINT SOMEBODY TO SERVE THE REMAINDER OF THAT TERM.
OR THE COUNCIL COULD CHOOSE NOT TO APPOINT SOMEBODY AND HAVE AN ELECTION.
IF IT'S MORE THAN 12 MONTHS, THERE'S NO CHOICE TO BE MADE.
YOU JUST HAVE AN ELECTION FOR IT. SO WHAT THIS REALLY DOES IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE HAVE TODAY,
[00:30:04]
IS CREATES A PROVISION THAT IF SOMEBODY WERE TO VACATE THEIR SEAT AND CANDIDLY, THIS COULD BE A VARIETY OF THINGS.SOMEBODY COULD PASS AWAY, SOMEBODY COULD MOVE OUT OF STATE, THEY COULD MOVE OUT OF TOWN.
THERE MIGHT BE A REASON THAT THEY HAVE TO VACATE THEIR SEAT. AND IT WAS LESS THAN 12 MONTHS.
THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO JUST APPOINT SOMEBODY FOR THAT REMAINDER OF THAT TERM.
THEN THERE WOULD BE A FULL ELECTION FOR THAT POSITION.
AGAIN, THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO IF THIS PASSES, NOT THAT THEY WILL.
KIM'S PROBABLY BETTER TO TALK ABOUT THIS THAN I AM, AND YOU CAN SEE HER AFTERWARDS. SHE CAN GIVE YOU ALL THE GORY DETAILS. BUT HOLDING ELECTION TAKES A LOT OF TIME AND CANDIDLY COST A LOT OF MONEY.
AND SO PART OF THIS PROVISION IS, IS IT A GOOD EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS TO GO THROUGH AN ENTIRE ELECTION PROCESS TO ELECT SOMEBODY TO SERVE ON CITY COUNCIL FOR 4 OR 5, SIX, EIGHT MONTHS AND THEN TURN AROUND AND HAVE AN ELECTION FOR THAT POSITION RIGHT AFTER THAT? SO THAT'S THE IDEA BEHIND THIS PIECE. AND THAT IS WHAT I WOULD TELL YOU A, WHAT I WOULD CALL A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO OUR CHARTER.
KIM, I'M GOING TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT. THIS CHANGES OVER TIME AND IT CHANGES.
ON HOW MANY ENTITIES, BUT ROUGHLY $40,000 FOR AN ELECTION.
THAT DOESN'T COUNT, OBVIOUSLY, STAFF TIME AND EVERYTHING THAT GOES INTO THAT.
BUT I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU KIND OF AN IDEA OF THE COST THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THEIR. PROPOSITION H A LOT OF WORDS HERE, BUT IT WOULD AMEND THE CHARTER TO PROVIDE FOR POWERS AND PROCEDURES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, WILL CLARIFY THE DUTIES OF THE MAYOR AND THE MAYOR PRO TEM REQUIRE THAT FIVE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL WOULD CONSTITUTE A QUORUM FOR THE TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS OUTLINED WHEN THE COUNCIL MEETINGS WOULD BE HELD, AND ALLOW THE COUNCIL TO DECLARE A VACANCY IF A COUNCIL MEMBER IS ABSENT FROM THREE CONSECUTIVE REGULAR MEETINGS.
IT WOULD AMEND THE MINIMUM PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, AND WOULD PROVIDE FOR THE CITY CHARTER TO BE MADE AVAILABLE IN ELECTRONIC FORMAT, ACCESSIBLE FROM THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
IT'S A LOT OF STUFF, SO I'M GOING TO GO BREAK IT DOWN REAL QUICK AND TRY TO MAKE IT SIMPLE.
OUR CURRENT CHARTER REQUIRES THE CHARTER TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC IN PAMPHLET FORM.
BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE IT IN ELECTRONIC FORMAT.
THE REALITY IS IT'S ALREADY IN ELECTRONIC FORMAT.
IT'S ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE. EACH OF YOU CAN GO HOME TONIGHT AND READ THE ENTIRE CHARTER, BUT WE'D LIKE TO AMEND THE CHARTER TO MAKE THE REQUIREMENT AN ELECTRONIC FORMAT INSTEAD OF REQUIRING US TO DO A PAMPHLET FORM. IF I GO THROUGH THESE KIND OF REAL QUICKLY CLARIFYING THE DUTIES OF THE MAYOR AND THE MAYOR PRO TEM, THEY'RE NOT ADDING ANY DUTIES OR SUBTRACTING ANY DUTIES.
IT REQUIRES FIVE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL TO CONSTITUTE A QUORUM FOR THE TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS.
THAT'S JUST SETTING A NUMBER CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW TO DEFINE A QUORUM.
IT WOULD OUTLINE WHEN COUNCIL MEETINGS WILL BE HELD.
OUR CURRENT CHARTER SAYS THE COUNCIL WILL MEET SHALL MEET TWICE EVERY MONTH.
WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS CHANGE THAT TO THE COUNCIL WILL MEET AS OFTEN AS THEY NEED TO FOR CITY BUSINESS, BECAUSE THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE HAVE HISTORICALLY DONE. THE CITY COUNCIL HISTORICALLY DOESN'T MEET TWICE IN THE MONTH OF DECEMBER BECAUSE THAT SECOND COUNCIL MEETING, WHICH WOULD BE THE FOURTH TUESDAY OF THE MONTH, TYPICALLY FALLS ON CHRISTMAS.
AND HISTORICALLY WE HAVE TAKEN THE MONTH OF JULY OFF.
AND I SAY TAKEN IT OFF. WE STILL COME TO WORK.
BUT THE COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE A COUNCIL MEETING IN THE MONTH OF JULY.
OCCASIONALLY WE HAVE TO. WE HAD TO LAST YEAR, IF YOU REMEMBER.
COUNCIL AND WE HAD TO CALL A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING.
OR IF WE HAVE A MEETING THAT WOULD FALL ON CHRISTMAS, WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO HAVE THAT.
BUT WE WON'T BE IN VIOLATION OF THE CHARTER SINCE IT'S KIND OF A SILLY THING.
SO WHAT WE ACTUALLY DO NOW IS WE HAVE A MEETING POSTED AND THEN WE CANCEL THE MEETING.
[00:35:03]
AND THAT'S HOW YOU STAY IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CHARTER, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A MEETING. SO THAT FROM MY STANDPOINT, THAT'S REALLY CLARIFYING IT. BUT THE OTHER THING THAT WE WOULD DO IN THIS METHOD IS AT THE FIRST OF THE YEAR, EITHER BY RESOLUTION OR BY ORDINANCE THAT THE COUNCIL PASSED AT AN OPEN MEETING IS WE WOULD DECLARE FOR THE NEXT 12 MONTHS WHAT THE MEETING DATES ARE.SO THERE'S NO INTENT HERE TO HIDE. WHEN WE'RE MEETING FROM ANYBODY.
THREE BUSINESS DAYS. IT USED TO BE A NUMBER OF HOURS.
NOW IT'S THREE BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
BUT WE WOULD PASS BY ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION, A CALENDAR OF ALL THE DAYS THAT WE INTENDED TO MEET, AND THOSE WOULD BE REGULAR MEETINGS. IF WE NEEDED OTHER MEETINGS, WE WOULD HAVE SPECIAL CALLED MEETINGS, AND THEY WOULD BE NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
QUESTION. I GOT TWO QUESTIONS, MR. ZIMMER. GO AHEAD.
AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR FOR SOME TIME, IT SAYS. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? LET ME SEE IF I CAN PULL THAT. THAT IS ARTICLE TWO.
SECTION SIX. I'LL JUST READ IT TO YOU IF I CAN FIND IT REAL QUICK.
I'LL BEAR WITH ME JUST A SECOND. THIS IS THIS IS A LITTLE LENGTHY.
SO THE CITY COUNCIL, THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE WOULD SAY THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL HOLD REGULAR MEETINGS AS NECESSARY TO CONDUCT THE BUSINESS OF THE CITY AT A TIME TO BE FIXED BY IT.
FOR SUCH REGULAR MEETINGS TO BE DESIGNATED BY ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION.
ALL MEETINGS SHALL BE PUBLICLY POSTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
BUT AGAIN, WE WANT YOU TO KNOW WHEN WE'RE MEETING.
AND WE'LL DO THAT ANNUALLY. WE ALREADY DO THAT, MR. ZIMMER. YOU'LL REMEMBER THAT WE'VE DONE THAT FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. PART OF THE ISSUE WITH THIS ACTUALLY GOES BACK TO A STATE LAW THAT'S INTENDED FOR A GOOD PURPOSE.
BUT SOMETIMES THINGS WITH A GOOD PURPOSE HAVE AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE.
THAT'S JUST WHAT WE DO. THAT'S THE THAT'S THE SCHEDULE.
NUMBER OF DAYS BETWEEN ACTIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS.
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AS A CITY EMPLOYEE AND THE CITY MANAGER, THAT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING WEIRD TO KEEP CITIZENS FROM KNOWING WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET. WHY WOULD YOU MOVE YOUR BUDGET MEETINGS TO A DIFFERENT DATE THAN YOU HAVE EVERY OTHER MEETING? AGAIN. NOT AT ALL WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO. WE HAVE TO MOVE THE DATES TO PI PI TWO TO COINCIDE WITH STATE LAW.
THAT'S WHEN WE STARTED ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION THAT LISTS ALL OF THOSE DATES OUT.
SO WE WOULD DO THAT HERE. MR. ZIMMER, FOR INSTANCE, IN AUGUST, WE'RE GOING TO MEET THREE TIMES AND POSSIBLY FOUR, DEPENDING ON HOW THE TAX RATE IS DONE. WE'VE NOT TRADITIONALLY HAD TO HAVE THAT FOURTH MEETING, BUT WE HAVE TO PLAN FOR THAT. SO WE WANT THE FLEXIBILITY TO SAY EARLY ON, THESE ARE THE FOUR MEETING DATES IN AUGUST.
AND WE'RE GOING TO MEET MORE THAN TWICE IN AUGUST.
BUT WE'RE GOING TO TURN RIGHT AROUND IN SEPTEMBER AND MEET TWICE TO.
WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT GOING TO SAY WE MET FOUR TIMES IN AUGUST, SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO MEET IN SEPTEMBER. BUT IT JUST HELPS US TO BE FLEXIBLE AND DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE'RE, I GUESS, IN MY MIND, MAKES IT LOOK LIKE WE'RE NOT PLAYING GAMES WITH MEETING DATES TO MEET STATE LAW.
I HAD ANOTHER QUESTION BACK OVER HERE. SAME QUESTION. OKAY. VERY GOOD. ANYBODY ELSE ON ANY OF THOSE? LET ME SEE IF I COVERED ALL THOSE OF THE. ALLOW THE COUNCIL TO DECLARE A VACANCY IF A COUNCIL MEMBER IS ABSENT FROM THREE CONSECUTIVE REGULAR MEETINGS.
WE'RE JUST CLARIFYING THAT THERE'S SOME LANGUAGE LIKE THAT IN THE CHARTER RIGHT NOW.
[00:40:03]
SO COUNCIL MEMBER CANNOT BE ABSENT FROM THREE CONSECUTIVE REGULAR MEETINGS UNLESS BEFORE THOSE ABSENCES.THEY HAVE COME TO THE COUNCIL AND ASKED FOR A LEAVE OF ABSENCE FOR A REASON.
THAT MOST COMMON OF THOSE THAT WE'VE HAD HAS BEEN LIKE A MEDICAL ISSUE.
THEY COME TO THE COUNCIL BEFORE THAT AND SAY, COUNCIL, I'LL BE OUT THESE MEETINGS.
AND IF SOMEBODY JUST QUIT COMING THEY CAN'T INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE CITY.
BECAUSE IF THEY MISS THREE CONSECUTIVE MEETINGS WITHOUT A COUNCIL EXCUSED ABSENCE, IF YOU WILL, THEN THEY CAN BE REMOVED REMOVED FROM THE COUNCIL.
NOT SOMETHING WE'VE EVER HAD TO DEAL WITH, OTHER THAN WE HAVE HAD SITUATIONS WHERE A COUNCIL MEMBER CAME AND ASKED FOR A LEAVE OF ABSENCE AGAIN, TYPICALLY AS IT RELATES TO A MEDICAL PROCEDURE.
ALL RIGHT. PROPOSITION. I WOULD AMEND THE CHARTER TO PROVIDE FOR THE CREATION AND APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, PARKS AND LEISURE SERVICES BOARD, LIBRARY BOARD AND TO DELETE ARTICLE X, SECTIONS ONE AND TWO, AND THE OTHER ARTICLES CONTAINING SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCH BOARDS.
THIS SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE GETTING RID OF A BUNCH OF PARKS, BOARDS AND LIBRARY BOARDS. WE ARE NOT. THE CURRENT CHARTER HAS THESE IN A WEIRD PLACE, AND TALKS ABOUT EACH BOARD IN A MANNER INCONSISTENT WITH REALLY HOW.
IF YOU'VE BEEN ON ANY OF THESE BOARDS, BARNEY'S BEEN ON SOME OF THESE GROUPS.
I MEAN, SO WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE WOULD THIS IS JUST A REORGANIZATION.
IT'S PULLING THE LANGUAGE THAT TALKS ABOUT THESE AND PUTTING THEM IN A DIFFERENT SPOT.
THAT MAKES MORE SENSE. THE BOARDS ARE NOT GOING AWAY.
THE CREATION OF THE BOARDS IS NOT CHANGING. THE BOARD MEMBERS ARE NOT CHANGING.
DAVE BROWN WAS DOWN HERE A SECOND AGO. DID HE SNEAK OUT? HE'S ON ONE OF OUR BOARDS. WE'RE NOT KICKING ANYBODY OFF.
THIS IS A ONE OF THOSE THAT FALLS UNDER A REORGANIZATION AND MOVING THAT LANGUAGE INTO OTHER PLACES.
WHEN THE CHARTER WAS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED IN 1962, THEY NEEDED TO CREATE THESE BOARDS BY CHARTER.
THAT SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA, IF YOU ASK ME. WE OUGHT TO HOLD ELECTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW AND TO DELETE INCONSISTENT PROVISIONS REGARDING RECOUNTS AND THE DRAWING OF LOTS AND CANDIDATE APPLICATION FORM. SO YOU CAN JUST TELL BY THIS LANGUAGE THAT THIS IS OLDER LANGUAGE.
AND ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS MAKE OUR CHARTER FULLY FOLLOW STATE LAW.
LAW AS IT REMOVES OUTDATED AND CONFLICTING PROVISIONS.
SO THERE'S NOT A OPPORTUNITY THAT WE'RE GOING TO DRAW LOTS ANYMORE.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE AN ELECTION. PROPOSITION K WOULD AMEND THE HOME RULE CHARTER TO ALLOW FOR THE ENGAGEMENT OF THE CITY MANAGER. AND I TOLD YOU, I CAN'T ADVOCATE, BUT I LIKE TO BE ENGAGED.
SO I YOU KNOW, THIS WOULD ALLOW FOR THE ENGAGEMENT OF A CITY MANAGER PURSUANT TO AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH IS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW. IT MAY INCLUDE A RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT, AND IT SHALL INCLUDE THE DUTIES OF THE CITY MANAGER AND DELETE ALL CONFLICTING PROVISIONS.
SO IN OUR CURRENT CHARTER, IT JUST TALKS ABOUT THE CITY SHALL APPOINT A CITY MANAGER.
IT DOESN'T GO BEYOND THAT AS FAR AS WHAT IS THE COMMON PRACTICE AND HAS BEEN, AT LEAST FOR THE 30 YEARS I'VE BEEN AROUND, WHICH THE CITY MANAGER HAS A CONTRACT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES AND AWARDS.
AND SO THIS PROVIDES SPECIFICALLY THAT THEY WOULD APPOINT THE CITY MANAGER WITH THE CURRENT, WHICH WHAT THE CURRENT CHARTER SAYS, BUT IT WOULD PROVIDE FOR A PROPOSITION THAT RECOGNIZES THE CITY MANAGER WOULD BE ENGAGED PURSUANT TO AN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, AND THAT THAT EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT CAN CONTAIN ANY NUMBER OF PROVISIONS, THAT THE SOCIAL PROVISIONS CAN'T BE INCONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW.
AND IF YOU DON'T ALREADY KNOW THIS, EVERYTHING THE CITY DOES IS PUBLIC RECORDS.
AND IF YOU WANT TO GO SEE MY CURRENT CONTRACT, YOU CAN DO AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST AND YOU CAN LOOK AT MY CURRENT CONTRACT. SO WE DON'T DO ANYTHING THAT IS, YOU KNOW, IN THE DARK OR NOT TRANSPARENT.
AND IT GIVES THE COUNCIL THEN THE ABILITY FORMALLY TO TAKE THAT EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT AND PUT INTO THE AGREEMENT ANYTHING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO THAT THEY CAN GET ME TO AGREE ON AS WELL, THAT IS NOT VIOLATING THE STATE LAW.
SO. PROPOSITION J IS KIND OF THE SAME PIECE THERE AS IT RELATES TO THE CITY SECRETARY.
[00:45:08]
AGREEMENT. AGAIN, THAT'S NOT IN CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW.AND IT OUTLINES THE DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY, CITY SECRETARY.
AGAIN, THESE ARE WHAT THE PRACTICES ARE TODAY.
SO THERE'S NO REAL CHANGE TO THAT. IT'S JUST PUTTING THAT LANGUAGE INTO THE CHARTER.
ONE THING THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OF A CHANGE IS WE WOULD ADD AN ARTICLE HERE THAT WOULD AMEND THE CHARTER TO PROVIDE FOR THE APPOINTMENT AND DUTIES OF ATTORNEYS TO REPRESENT THE CITY. WELL, WE HAVE A CITY ATTORNEY. HE'S NOT.
IT'S ACTUALLY A LAW FIRM. THEY ARE NOT A EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY IN THE SENSE THAT I AM.
THEY'RE AN OUTSIDE LAW FIRM THAT WE CONTRACT WITH TO BE THE CITY ATTORNEY.
THAT USUALLY IS ALONG THE LINES OF HOW BIG A CITY IS.
SO IF YOU WENT TO THE CITY OF FORT WORTH, THEY'VE GOT MORE THAN ONE CITY ATTORNEY THAT'S ON STAFF.
OUR CURRENT CHARTER DOESN'T ADDRESS THIS IN ANY WAY.
SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE CHARTER SPECIFIES THAT WE WILL EMPLOY A CITY ATTORNEY.
PROPOSITION N WOULD CHANGE THE HOME RULE CHARTER TO DISCUSS THE APPOINTMENT OF A MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE APPOINTMENT OF A MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK BY THE CITY MANAGER, AND TO DELETE PROCESSES FOR FILLING VACANCIES THAT ARE IN CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW.
OUR CURRENT CHARTER SAYS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL.
THEY HIRE AND FIRE THE CITY MANAGER. THEY HIRE AND FIRE THE CITY SECRETARY, THEY HIRE AND FIRE THE CITY ATTORNEY, AND THEY HIRE AND FIRE THE CITY MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE.
OUR CHARTER USES LANGUAGE SAYING THE COURT CLERK.
AND BY OUR CHARTER, ALL THE EMPLOYEES THAT I JUST DIDN'T MENTION, THOSE FOUR EMPLOYEES ARE HIRED AND FIRED BY THE CITY MANAGER, NOT THE CITY COUNCIL. IN FACT, THE CITY COUNCIL IS SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED FROM INFLUENCING THAT PIECE.
SO THE CLARIFICATION HERE IS WE WANT TO CLARIFY THE CITY COUNCIL IS HIRING AND FIRING THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW, BUT NOT THE MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK. CLARIFYING THAT THE MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK IS HIRED AND FIRED BY THE CITY MANAGER AS THE OTHER CITY EMPLOYEES ARE.
PROPOSITION O WOULD AMEND THE CHARTER TO PROVIDE THAT BUDGET, ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT PROCESS AND ANNUAL AUDIT PROCESSES COMPLY WITH STATE LAW BY DELETING INCONSISTENT REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLICATION.
PUBLIC HEARINGS. APPROVAL. AND PROVIDE THAT THE BUDGET SHOULD BE A PUBLIC RECORD AND PROHIBIT EXPENDITURES THAT EXCEED PROPOSED REVENUE, PLUS CASH ON HAND, AND PROVIDE THE ADOPTED BUDGET BE PUBLISHED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
YOU SAW A LOT OF STUFF SAID DO THIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
WE ALREADY DO EVERYTHING THAT'S ON HERE. IT'S JUST THAT THE CHARTER DOESN'T REQUIRE US TO DO IT.
THE PRACTICE, THE PRACTICAL MATTER, IS WE ADOPT A BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
WE COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLICATION, PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL.
THE ADOPTED BUDGET IS AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
ALL OF THESE THINGS OCCUR. OUR CHARTER JUST HAS OLD LANGUAGE THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE.
THAT WE ALREADY PERFORM. PROP B IS ON BONDS AND INDEBTEDNESS.
IT WOULD CHANGE THE CHARTER TO AMEND TO PROVIDE THAT THE CITY MAY ISSUE BONDS OR INDEBTEDNESS AS ALLOWED BY STATE LAW, AND PROVIDE THE BONDS OR INDEBTEDNESS, BE APPROVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW AND TO DELETE INCONSISTENT PROVISIONS.
[00:50:04]
BUT THEY JUST DON'T MATCH THE CURRENT STATE LAW.WHEN WE ISSUE BONDS AND INDEBTEDNESS, WE DO IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
AGAIN, MEETING THE PRACTICE THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING, JUST CHANGING THE CHARTER LANGUAGE.
I SAW SOMEWHERE I MAY HAVE BEEN ON SOCIAL MEDIA TODAY THAT SOMEBODY HAD READ THIS AND QUESTIONED THAT IT WAS THE CITY GOING TO LOSE ITS ABILITY TO ISSUE BONDS, OR WERE THEY TRYING TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT? AGAIN, NONE OF THAT'S THE CASE.
BUT WE'RE JUST CHANGING THE OLD CHARTER LANGUAGE TO MATCH THE STATE LAW.
PROP Q IS ON FRANCHISES AND PUBLIC UTILITIES, AND IT WOULD REVISE REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL OF FRANCHISES AND ADOPT SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR THE UTILIZATION OF RIGHT OF WAY BY PUBLIC UTILITIES.
AND IT WOULD ALLOW, AGAIN, YOU'LL SEE THIS LANGUAGE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, BUT IT'S IN ANOTHER PLACE, THE CITY TO CONTROL THE USE OF STREETS, HIGHWAYS, SIDEWALKS, ALLEYS, PARKS, PUBLIC SQUARES AND PUBLIC PLACES.
SO AGAIN, THESE JUST UPDATE RULES FOR UTILITY FRANCHISES.
NOTHING DIFFERENT CHANGING HERE OTHER THAN GOING BACK TO THE UTILITY FRANCHISES.
EVERY ORDINANCE IN THE CITY OF EULESS CURRENTLY IS READ ONCE AND AS LONG AS IT'S APPROVED AT A PUBLIC MEETING BY AT LEAST FIVE VOTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL, IT GOES INTO LAW.
IT DOESN'T. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE READ TWICE. FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS.
AND IF YOU THINK ABOUT FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS, THINK ABOUT TRASH RECYCLING.
THOSE ARE THE MAIN TWO USED TO BE TELECOM AND GAS AND ELECTRICITY.
BUT THE LAWS CHANGED AND THINGS HAVE BEEN DEREGULATED.
AND THEY HAVE WHAT THEY'RE CALLED STATEWIDE FRANCHISES NOW.
SO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS DON'T ISSUE THOSE FRANCHISE THE STATE ISSUES THOSE.
SO FOR US, IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO REPUBLIC SERVICES AND OUR TRASH TRASH PROVIDER AND OUR CURRENT RECYCLING PROVIDER, WHEN WE GRANT THEM A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, WHICH WE DO ABOUT EVERY FIVE YEARS.
AND THAT'S JUST A FANCY WAY OF SAYING GRANT THEM A CONTRACT TO PICK UP THE TRASH IN THE CITY.
THE OLD LANGUAGE REQUIRES US TO READ THAT LANGUAGE AT A COUNCIL MEETING, TO WAIT 30 DAYS TO READ THAT LANGUAGE AT A SECOND COUNCIL MEETING, TO WAIT 30 DAYS, AND THEN TO ENACT THE ORDINANCE.
WHAT WE'RE ASKING IN THIS PROVISION IS YOU TO ALLOW US TO APPROVE A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT ORDINANCE IN THE SAME WAY WE APPROVE EVERY OTHER SINGLE ORDINANCE IN THE CITY, WHICH IS BRING IT TO CITY COUNCIL, AND IT CAN HAPPEN IN ONE READING IF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES THAT.
WHAT THAT DOES FOR US IS IMAGINE DOING SOMETHING THAT YOU DO AT WORK ALMOST ON A DAILY BASIS.
BUT ONE LITTLE SUBSET OF THAT, A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT ORDINANCE HAS THIS DIFFERENT APPROVAL PROCEDURE, AND YOU DO THAT ABOUT EVERY FIVE YEARS. IT JUST SETS YOU UP TO MAKE SOME SORT OF MISTAKE IN THERE WITHOUT GETTING THOSE DONE.
THE PUBLIC IS USED TO COMING TO PARTICIPATE IN A MEETING.
HEARING THE DISCUSSION. HEARING A VOTE. IF THE VOTE PASSES, THE ORDINANCE PASSES.
IF THE VOTE DOESN'T PASS, THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T PASS.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO THERE WITH FRANCHISE AND PUBLIC UTILITIES. PROPOSITION R IS AMENDING TO REVISE THE LIMITATIONS ON OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES FROM HAVING A PERSONAL INTEREST IN CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY, AND PROHIBIT THE PURCHASE OR SALE TO THE CITY OF PROPERTY, GOODS OR SERVICES BY OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY, EXCEPT FOR SPECIFIC LISTED PURPOSES.
AND WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS REVISING RULES LIMITING CITY OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES FROM HAVING PERSONAL FINANCIAL INTEREST IN CITY CONTRACTS, WITH LIMITED EXCEPTIONS. WE DON'T HAVE WE DON'T ALLOW CITY EMPLOYEES TO HAVE INTEREST IN CITY FINANCIAL CONTRACTS.
LET'S SAY THAT WE HAVE A CITY EMPLOYEE WHO OWNS A HOME, AND THE CITY IS PUTTING IN A NEW WATER LINE, AND THE WATER LINES RUNNING DOWN BETWEEN SOME HOUSES AND THE CITY IS HAVING TO GO IN AND BUY AN EASEMENT FROM HOMEOWNERS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE EASEMENT, ALL THE WAY THROUGH TOWN TO PUT IN THIS NEW WATER LINE.
AND WE GET TO THE CITY EMPLOYEES HOME. AND BY OUR CURRENT CHARTER, WE CAN'T BUY THE EASEMENT FROM THE WATER LINE FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY CAN'T HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE CITY CONTRACT. WELL, THERE'S NO FOUL PLAY THERE.
[00:55:05]
COULDN'T BUY AN EASEMENT, BECAUSE IT HAPPENED TO BE ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY OWNED BY BUY.SO WHEN WE SAY LIMITED EXCEPTIONS, THAT'S THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THESE ARE THOSE ARE THE KIND OF EXCEPTIONS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR THERE.
AND IT RELATES BOTH TO EMPLOYEES. AND WHEN WE SAY OFFICERS, IT'S THE CITY COUNCIL.
IMAGINE THE SAME SCENARIO WHERE WE'RE WIDENING THE STREET OR SOMETHING, AND WE'RE GOING BY COUNCILMAN HOUSE, AND WE'RE BUYING THREE FEET OF ADDITIONAL RIGHT AWAY FROM EVERYBODY THERE SO WE CAN DO THE STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
PROPOSITION S IS SOMEWHAT RELATED TO THAT. IT'S AN AMENDMENT TO EXCLUDE PREVIOUSLY EMPLOYED OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES FROM THE NEPOTISM PROHIBITION IN A MANNER SIMILAR TO STATE LAW. SO WE HAVE A NEPOTISM PROVISION IN THE CITY OF EULESS THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW.
IT'S MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN STATE LAW. AND SO WE WANT TO UPDATE THAT TO MATCH THE STATE LAW.
AND WHAT IT WOULD REALLY DO IS ALLOW CONTINUED EMPLOYMENT FOR CERTAIN PREVIOUSLY HIRED EMPLOYEES.
MAYBE THEY'RE A LIFEGUARD AT THE CITY POOL, AND YOU DECIDE YOU WOULD LIKE TO RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL, AND YOU RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL AND YOU'RE ELECTED.
WELL, THAT SPOUSE OR CHILD, AS THE CURRENT LAW IS, HAS TO RESIGN THEIR POSITION FROM THE CITY.
THEY CAN'T QUIT AND THEN BE REHIRED. NOR COULD THEY BE HIRED AFTER YOU BECAME ELECTED.
OKAY. BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE IMPROPER. BUT YOU COULD HAVE SOMEBODY THAT HAD WORKED FOR THE CITY FOR, I DON'T KNOW, LET'S SAY THEY WORKED HERE FOR 15 YEARS, AND THEY THOUGHT THEY'D GET ANOTHER 4 OR 5 YEARS IN AND RETIRE FROM MRS. AND THEY HAVE A SPOUSE OR PARENT OR SOMEBODY THAT RUNS FOR COUNCIL AND, AND GETS ELECTED, AND THEN THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO RESIGN THAT POSITION.
IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM TO BE THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF A NEPOTISM LAW.
THE SPIRIT AND INTENT TO MYSELF OF NEPOTISM LAW IS TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM GETTING JOBS THAT THEY SHOULDN'T GET BECAUSE THEY'RE RELATED TO SOMEBODY, NOT FOR A JOB THAT THEY ALREADY HAD BEFORE THAT PERSON WAS ELECTED.
IT'S RELATED IN CERTAIN DEGREES OF CONSANGUINITY AND INFINITY.
SO BY BLOOD OR MARRIAGE IN DIFFERENT DEGREES, YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO PRECLUDE SOMEBODY FROM RUNNING FOR COUNCIL BECAUSE THEY HAPPEN TO HAVE A RELATIVE THAT FELL INTO THAT, THAT WORKED SOMEHOW FOR THE CITY.
PROP T WOULD AMEND THE CHARTER TO REMOVE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS RELATING TO PURCHASE PROCEDURES, MECHANIC MATERIAL AND LABOR LIENS, BONDS OF CONTRACTORS, CONDEMNATION OF DANGEROUS STRUCTURES, BUILDING PERMITS, POOLS, PONDS, LAKES, INSTEAD TO BE GOVERNED BY STATE LAW.
SINCE THAT TIME, THE STATE HAS COME IN AND SAID, WE DON'T REALLY CARE HOW YOU WANT TO DO THEM.
THIS IS HOW YOU HAVE TO DO THEM BY STATE LAW.
WE'RE NOT ADDING ANYTHING. WE'RE NOT TAKING AWAY ANYTHING.
AND THAT'S IT. I SAY, THAT'S IT. EVERYBODY GOT ABOUT HALF THE PEOPLE ARE ASLEEP.
07:00. THAT'S ONE HOUR RIGHT THERE FOR 20 PROPOSITIONS.
THE POLICE CHIEF SAYS, WRAP IT UP. MAYOR PRO TEM SAYS VAMP A LITTLE BIT.
HE SAYS THERE'S NO I KNOW I RAN THROUGH THAT A LOT, AND I KNOW I TRIED TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW, A COUPLE OF THINGS. I WOULD TELL YOU AGAIN, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, LET'S ANSWER THEM.
IF YOU THINK OF A QUESTION YOU CAN CALL, I'D BE HAPPY TO TALK TO YOU.
THAT INFORMATION IS ON THAT CITY WEBSITE. IN FACT, LAWRENCE, ARE YOU CAN YOU PULL UP CITY WEBSITE REAL QUICK? WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. BUT LET ME JUST SHOW YOU REAL QUICK SO EVERYBODY KNOWS.
DEPENDING ON IF LAWRENCE CAN PULL IT UP OR NOT, WE'RE GOING TO SEE.
HERE WE GO. SO THERE'S THE CITY'S WEBSITE EULESS TX.GOV.
AND RIGHT THERE ON THE MAIN PAGE, IF YOU CLICK THE ACTION BUTTON, CLICK THAT LAWRENCE IS GOING TO TAKE YOU TO THAT ELECTIONS THAT I SHOWED YOU. AND THEN ALL THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT THERE. BUT SPECIFICALLY CLICK ON THAT RED LINE HOME RULE PROPOSED WITH AMENDMENTS RIGHT THERE, THAT ONE RIGHT THERE. SO THAT WOULD GIVE YOU A DOCUMENT THAT IS 78 PAGES LONG THAT GOES THROUGH EACH OF THESE.
[01:00:05]
AND IF YOU READ THOSE BALLOT PROPOSITIONS, I SKIPPED OVER THIS PART TONIGHT, BUT EVERY ONE OF THEM SAID AMEND ARTICLE ONE, SECTION SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, OR WHAT HAVE YOU. IF YOU TAKE THAT, THAT'S LIKE THE ADDRESS.YOU CAN GO RIGHT HERE AND YOU'LL SEE ARTICLE ONE AND THAT FIRST SECTION, SECTION ONE, SECOND SECTION, SECTION TWO. SO IF THERE'S A BALLOT PROPOSITION THAT YOU SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? I UNDERSTAND ALL OF THESE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS ONE ON ARTICLE ONE, SECTION THREE.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO READ ALL 78 PAGES. SCROLL DOWN TO ARTICLE TEN.
SECTION THREE. READ THE LANGUAGE FOR YOURSELF.
AGAIN, THREE COLUMNS. THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN, THE CHANGE THAT WE'RE WANTING TO MAKE IN RED, AND THEN THE WAY IT WOULD READ AFTER THE CHANGE WAS ADOPTED THERE IN THE FAR COLUMN.
SO I THINK THAT'S A REALLY GOOD TOOL. IF YOU'VE GOT A QUESTION ON ANY OF THESE.
NOW AGAIN, IF YOU READ THAT AND YOU STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND OR YOU HAVE A QUESTION, CALL US.
BUT WE CAN'T ADVOCATE OR TELL YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU SHOULD VOTE FOR THAT.
YOU SHOULDN'T VOTE FOR THAT, THAT KIND OF THING. ALL RIGHT.
ANY QUESTIONS COULD NOT HAVE POSSIBLY DONE A GOOD ENOUGH JOB FOR THERE TO BE NO QUESTIONS.
RIGHT, MR. BYNUM? THAT'S A THUMBS UP. THAT'S NOT A QUESTION.
I WILL TELL YOU THAT WHEN PEOPLE TEXT ME, I'M AN AGGIE.
GOT IT, I APPRECIATE IT. I WANT YOU TO KNOW, MY KIDS TOLD ME THAT THAT IS DISMISSIVE.
LIKE, YEAH, WHATEVER, YOU KNOW? AND SO I'M AFRAID THAT I'VE BEEN DISMISSIVE TO PEOPLE WHEN I'M JUST TRYING TO SAY, I GOT A GIG. THAT'S AWESOME. SO YOU DID, WERE YOU BEING DISMISSIVE OR WERE YOU SAYING YOU GOT IT? OH GREAT JOB. OKAY. YEAH. GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WE'VE GOT SOME TEA, LEMONADE. SOMEBODY STEVEN'S GOING TO RUN OUT THERE AND ACTUALLY PUT SOME ICE IN THE ICE BUCKET AND SOME LIGHT COOKIES, STACKS, THAT KIND OF THING.
PLEASE HANG AROUND. HELP YOURSELF. WE WILL STAY HERE.
WE'VE GOT SOME STAFF HERE THAT CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS, HOPEFULLY ON CHARTER.
BUT ALSO, AGAIN, I JOKED ABOUT IT. WE HAVE THE POLICE CHIEF AND THE FIRE CHIEF HERE.
AND THE CITY SECRETARY. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT SOMETHING UNRELATED TO THE CHARTER, SOME SORT OF CITY QUESTION HOW COME EVERYBODY'S SPEEDS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT DOESN'T PULL ANYBODY OVER? THERE'S THE POLICE CHIEF'S LEAVING OUT THE DOOR RIGHT NOW.
THERE HE GOES. YEAH. NOW WE'RE HERE TO HELP YOU ALL, AND WE'LL STAY AROUND AS LONG AS WE CAN.
AGAIN, I JUST THANK YOU GUYS FOR COMING AND FOR SHOWING INTEREST.
I MEAN, AT LEAST YOU CARE IS MY DEAL. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.