[00:00:01]
ON THE CITY COUNCIL[1. CALL SESSION TO ORDER]
JOINT MEETING WITH THE HU ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR THURSDAY, APRIL 3RD, 2025 TO ORDER.TIME SENDING TEAM MESSAGE TEAM TEXAS WITH HIM.
CAN I CALL
[3. EXECUTIVE SESSION]
PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 5 5 1 7 1.CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY TO DELIBERATE AND SEEK LEGAL ADVICE REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF THE INTRA CORPORATE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS COMPLIANCE AND ACCESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
EXECUTIVE SESSION MEETINGS BEFORE WE GO BACK.
OH MINUTES BEFORE WE GO BACK, WHAT DOES THIS EVEN MEAN AND WHAT ARE WE ACTUALLY GONNA DO? BECAUSE NORMALLY MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE'RE SUPPOSED TO GIVE THE PUBLIC ENOUGH NOTICE WHERE THEY KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING AS THE MAYOR.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING.
IS THERE SOMETHING WE CAN GO BACK THERE FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION ON ATTORNEY? IT'S, UM, POSTED VERY BROADLY.
THE ONLY, UM, ISSUES THAT YOU CAN RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE ON ARE THE APPLICATION OF THE INTRA CORPORATE CURRENT CLIENT.
DOESN'T SAY FOR WHAT? SO IT'S JUST A BROAD LEGAL ADVICE WHAT THAT IS.
TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS COMPLIANCE.
I KNOW EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM HAS TAKEN THEIR TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS AT TRAINING, SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT IS ABOUT.
AND THEN ACCESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND EXECUTIVE SESSION MINUTES.
THERE'S ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINIONS ON THAT.
DO YOU SEE A REASON FOR US TO BE GOING BACK HERE BASED ON THE KNOWLEDGE YOU HAVE? IT WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE LEGAL.
CORPORATE ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE, UH, OPEN MEETINGS COMPLIANCE.
THE ATTORNEY FOR THE HEDC WANTS TO EXPAND ON THAT.
WHAT LEGAL ADVICE THE BOARDS ARE GONNA BOARD AND COUNCIL GONNA RECEIVE WON, RECEIVE THE TRAINING, BUT THE ACCESS TO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
THERE ARE ANY GENERAL OPINIONS FOR USING RECENT LEGAL ADVICE ON I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO HOLD OUR PART IN OPEN SESSION.
AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILOR PORTERFIELD.
SO WHAT IS THE OPEN PORTION? CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT BRIAN? UM, THE MAYOR'S MADE A MOTION TO JUST RECEIVE, UM, THE LEGAL ADVICE IN THE OPEN ON THIS ITEM FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.
I'M NOT GOOD WITH PROCEEDING LEGAL WOULD ADVICE THE OPEN.
I'D RATHER HEAR IT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND IF WE HAVE THINGS THAT WE WANNA TALK ABOUT AFTERWARD, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT.
COUNCIL THOMPSON AT 6 0 4 CAN, UH, BOARD MEMBER BRIAN THOMPSON AT 6 0 4.
CAN YOU RESTATE WHAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER THOMPSON, CAN YOU PLEASE LISTEN HER WITH THE VOTE THAT'S ON THE TABLE, PLEASE.
UM, GO AHEAD AND RESTATE, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO HEAR ITEM THREE ONE ON THE OPEN.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION TO CHENEY? SO I GUESS CAN, CAN YOU I GUESS GIVE US A LIKE, I GUESS BROAD OVERVIEW AS TO LIKE WHAT THE JOINT MEETING IS REGARDING, UH, THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? I WOULD DEFER TO ETC LEGAL ON THE PARTY EXECUTIVE SESSION.
SO THE INTER CORPORATE INTER, UH, ATTORNEY CLIENT ATTORNEY, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH WHEN TWO AFFILIATED COMPANIES WANT TO MEET TOGETHER TO HAVE
[00:05:01]
A ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION AND IT EX IT, IT EXPRESSES THE, THE REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY TO, TO HAVE THE ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE APPLY TO THOSE TYPES OF, OF BEHAVIORS OR, UH, UH, MEETINGS AS WELL AS THE, UM, THE WAY THAT, THAT THOSE, UH, PROCESSES CAN BE, UM, LOST.YOUR ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE CAN BE LOST IN, IN CONNECTION TO THOSE.
UM, BASICALLY WHAT THE, THE, THE RULES, UH, REQUIRE THAT IF YOU HAVE UH, MORE THAN ONE ENTITY, THOSE BECOME MORE THAN ONE CLIENT AND THEN THEY'RE TREATED FOR PURPOSES OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL, UH, UH, OR INTER CORPORATE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE AS HAVING TWO CLIENTS.
UM, THAT, SO DOTTIE FOR INSTANCE, AND I WOULD BE HAVING TO TREAT YOU BOTH AS INDEPENDENT CLIENTS THAT FOR PURPOSES OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS, BUT IT ALLOWS US AS A, UM, THE EQUIVALENT OF A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY AND THE PARENT COMPANY AND MEET TOGETHER IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND MAINTAIN AN ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE.
WHAT ARE WE MEETING ON? BECAUSE ON THE CITY COUNCIL SIDE WE HAVE TO SAY 5 5 1 0 7 1 REGARDING BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.
BUT HERE WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS WE JUST WANNA MEET TOGETHER TO GET SOME LEGAL OPINIONS.
BUT WE'RE, YOU CAN READ THE, THE ITEM IT SAYS RIGHT THERE YOU'RE READING 5 5 7 0 7 1 TO DELIBERATE AND SEEK LEGAL ADVISE REGARDING THE APPLICATION, THE CORPORATE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE MEETING ON MIKE.
SO CALL THE VOTE SO THAT WE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS IT? BUT THAT'S NOT, IT'S A LEGAL, UM, DOCTRINE THAT IS APPLICABLE TO MULTIPLE CORPORATIONS WHEN THEY ARE AFFILIATED WITH REGARDS TO HOW TO MAINTAIN OR HOW TO WAIVE THE ATTORNEY CLAIM PRIVILEGE.
I'M ASKING WHAT ARE WE GOING HAVE TO TALK ABOUT? YOU'LL FIND OUT WHEN GET AN EXECUTIVE.
SEE YOU JUST ANSWERED MY QUESTION WITH THE PUBLIC HAS TO KNOW WHAT, WE'RE GOING BACK AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS THE APPLICATION AND YOU'RE CORPORATE ATTORNEY, YOU'RE SAYING WE'RE GONNA FIND OUT ONCE WE GO BACK WHAT WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT.
NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT HE'S SAYING.
WHAT HE'S SAYING IS THAT, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AS WELL AS THE BOARD MAY HAVE QUESTIONS WITH REGARDS TO HOW THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT, INTER CORPORATE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE APPLIES.
AND THAT IS A DISCUSSION BY BETWEEN THE, THE CLIENT AND THEIR ATTORNEY, WHICH IS SUBJECT TO UM, CONFIDENTIALITY.
AND UH, I MEAN BEFORE I CAN DO THAT IN PUBLIC, UM, I WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A, UH, MAJORITY VOTE OF THE BOARD TO WAIVE THEIR ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE BEFORE THEY EVEN KNOW WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY.
WHICH IS VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE ANSWERS ARE TO THEIR QUESTIONS.
OTHERWISE I WOULD BE WAIVING THEIR ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE.
I GUESS I GOTTA GET BACK THERE LIKE RANDALL SAID AND FIND OUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TO KNOW WHETHER TO ASK.
ARE YOU RES RESCINDING YOUR MOTION OR ARE YOU CALLING IT TO THE OH NO, NO.
YOU ARE RESENDING IT OR NOT? NO.
'CAUSE I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING BACK TO FOR, SO I DON'T WANT OKAY.
WE'LL GO BACK IN EXECUTIVE SESSION WE'LL ASK THE MEMBERS, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, I GUESS WAIT OUT IN THE LOBBY SINCE THERE'S OTHER PUBLIC DISCUSSION TO BE HAD.
GIVE A SUMMARY TO THE PUBLIC ON WHAT WE DISCUSSED WITHOUT VIOLATING ATTORNEY PLANT PRIVILEGE.
I THINK WE CAN, WE HEARD WE COULD DO THAT.
RIGHT? AS LONG AS YOU START OFF AS IT'S YOUR UNDERSTANDING.
BUT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION IF YOU RELEASE THE MEMO THAT WAS SENT FROM HYDE KELLY TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON MARCH 27TH, 2025 SECOND.
I DON'T THINK WE CAN EVEN VOTE ON THAT.
THAT'S NOT, WELL WE CAN VOTE ON IT.
UM, IT MAY NOT BE RELEASED 'CAUSE THE EDC MAY NOT LET IT RELEASE, BUT I THINK WE STILL HAVE RIGHT.
WE STILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO THE COUNCIL VOTE THAT WE WOULD LIKE IT RELEASED.
WE WE ONLY HAVE A THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA.
ALRIGHT, I'LL PUT IT ON THERE.
[4, ACTION RELATIVE TO EXECUTIVE SESSION]
THERE? YEAH.SO, UH, COULD, SO THAT I DON'T BREAK THE LAW, UM, IF I
[00:10:01]
WOULD ASK IF ANY OF OUR ATTORNEYS COULD SUMMARIZE FOR US WHAT IS PUBLICLY RELEASABLE, UH, THE GIST OF WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PUBLIC.I THINK THAT WOULD TAKE A VOTE OF THE EDC BOARD AND THE CITY COUNCIL TO ALLOW THE ATTORNEYS TO, UM, PRESENT A BRIEF SUMMARY AS YOU'VE GIVEN UP OUR CREDIT CLIENT.
BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
I DON'T WANNA RELEASE, I DON'T WANNA GIVE UP ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE, BUT I UNDERSTOOD THAT WE CAN SAY IT'S, HEY, IT'S ALREADY WE RELEASE.
SO, WELL, I MEAN IT IT'S KIND OF REDUNDANT, BUT IT WOULD BE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE INTER CORPORATE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE WAS EXPLAINED AND THEN QUESTIONS WERE ASKED AND THOSE QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED.
THERE WERE QUESTIONS RELATED TO OPEN MEETING COMPLIANCE.
THOSE QUESTIONS WERE ASKED AND UH, THOSE QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED.
AND THEN THERE WAS A DISCUSSION WITH REGARDS TO ACCESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND EXECUTIVE SESSION MINUTES.
THOSE QUESTIONS WERE ASKED AND LEGAL, UH, UH, ADVICE WAS ADMINISTERED AND HE SAVED THIS.
AND FOR CLARIFICATION, INTER CORPORATE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE MEANS WHEN BOTH GROUPS ARE MEETING TOGETHER IN EXECUTIVE SESSION UNDER A POSTED MEETING LIKE TODAY.
YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT FIVE ONE ALISON FOUR ONE.
[5.1. Discussion and possible action regarding amendments to the Bylaws of the Hutto Economic Development Type A and Type B Corporations. (Cheney Gamboa)]
POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO THE BYLAWS OF THE HUB OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TYPE A AND TYPE B CORPORATIONS.YEAH, I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THE CHANGE THAT IS DESIRED TO EXCLUDE MEMBERS AND MAKE A PROCESS.
THE PROCESS PRESENTED IS UNWORKABLE.
EDC MEETINGS ARE TYPICALLY HELD ON MONDAY NIGHTS.
THAT MEANS NOTICE GETS POSTED BY 6:00 PM FRIDAY BECAUSE THAT'S 72 HOURS.
NOTICE THE REQUIREMENT IS WRITTEN REQUEST AT LEAST 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE TO THE MEETING.
THERE'S NOBODY TO RECEIVE A WRITTEN REQUEST.
SO YOU CAN'T ASK SOMEBODY TO BRING A WRITTEN REQUEST 24 HOURS BEFORE A MEETING AND HAVE, AND THEN LEAVE THEM WITH ZERO OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO.
I WAS NOW NOT ABLE TO ANSWER THE EMAIL ON SUNDAY.
MOST OF THEM IT SAYS WRITTEN, IT SAYS WRITTEN
THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT WORKING ON IT'S 6:00 PM ON SUNDAY.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR, I'VE EMAILED STAFF ON THE WEEKENDS AND THEY'VE GOTTEN BACK TO ME.
STAFF BE EXPECTING THEM TO REPLY ON SUNDAY NIGHT.
YEAH, I I DON'T CONTACT STAFF AT ALL.
I CONTACT THE CITY MANAGER 'CAUSE I DON'T WANNA VIOLATE THE CHARTER BY DIRECTING OR ANYTHING WHEN IT COMES TO THE STAFF.
BUT IF THE EXPECTATION IS STAFF'S GONNA BE AVAILABLE AND BECK CAN CALL ON SUNDAYS, THAT'S UNWORKABLE FOR ME.
AND, AND ON TOP OF THAT, YOU'RE GIVEN SOMEBODY THEN 48 HOURS NOTICE THAT THEY HAVE TO REPLY WHERE THE MEETING ITSELF IS 72 HOURS NOTICE.
I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU WOULDN'T JUST MAKE IT POTENTIALLY THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.
IT ACTUALLY SAYS ONE, ONE BUSINESS DAY IN ADVANCE.
YEAH, BUT YOU DON'T, WELL THEN THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE THERE'S ZERO BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE WHEN IT'S POSTED TO THE END OF THE DAY FRIDAY.
SO MY QUESTION IS, YOU CAN'T GET IT POSTED.
MY QUESTION IS WHY, AND, AND I'M JUST ASKING THIS, WHY DOES THE BOARD FEEL IT'S NECESSARY FOR, FOR A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL TO GIVE WRITTEN NOTICE AHEAD OF TIME? WHAT WOULD BE THE PROBLEM WITH A COUNCIL MEMBER COMING TO THE MEETING AND THEN SAYING, I WOULD LIKE TO GO INTO A JURY EXECUTIVE SESSION AND HERE'S MY REASONS WHY.
AND THEN YOU MAKE A DETERMINATION.
BECAUSE FROM WHAT I HEARD IS THAT THERE, THE REASONS THAT WE MAY BE EXCLUDED IS BECAUSE WHAT DID THE STATE LAW SAY? THE STATE LAW SAYS THAT YOU CAN ALLOW PEOPLE OR DISALLOW PEOPLE BASED ON THE NECESSITY OF THEM BEING IN THERE.
SO YOU COULD DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S NECESSARY FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER TO GO IN THERE.
I MEAN, I, I JUST, I I GUESS I DIDN'T SEE THE BENEFIT OF, OF US SUBMITTING A, A THING 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE WHEN WE COULD JUST COME AND SAY IF IT'S STATING THE SPECIFIC ITEM OF INTEREST.
UM, IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, MY THOUGHT WAS, OKAY, WELL IF, IF THE BOARD NEEDS TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS IF THE, IF THIS PERSON'S GONNA COME IN OR NOT COME IN AND WHAT IS IT THE EXACT ITEM ON THE EXECUTIVE SESSION LIST THAT THEY WANT TO, UH, BE IN THE MEETING FOR SO THAT THEN WE CAN COMMUNICATE ABOUT THERE'S THIS NDA YOU NEED TO SIGN OR THIS IS, YOU KNOW, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
SO THAT THAT COMMUNICATION IS MORE STREAMLINED AND NOT THINGS GOING, LEAVING EXECUTIVE SESSION AFTER THE FACT.
SO I WON'T BE VOTING TO EXCLUDE COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM ANYTHING YOU GUYS DO BECAUSE YOU ALL USE A BUILDING FUNDED BY THE CITY TAXPAYERS.
YOU USE FIVE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE FUNDED BY THE CITY TAXPAYERS.
YOU'RE USING SALES TAX MONEY THAT'S COLLECTED, TAXPAYERS ARE PAYING, COLLECTED BY THE CITY AND THEN GIVEN YOU ALL, UM, YOU ALL ARE, UM,
[00:15:01]
BUILDING A ROAD FUNDED BY THE CITY TAXPAYERS.AND SO I THINK EVERYTHING YOU DO IS A NECESSITY.
SOME CITIES HAVE A COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT EDC FUNDED BY PRIVATE, NOT INVOLVED WITH CITY TAX DOLLARS.
AND SO FOR ME PERSONALLY, AS LONG AS WE HAVE TO APPROVE EVERY AGREEMENT YOU'RE IN, EVERY EXPENDITURE YOU MAKE AND YOUR BUDGETS, THEN I THINK IT'S A NECESSITY FOR US TO BE IN, UM, TO LOOK AT EVERYTHING.
AND IF YOU'RE AFRAID TO HAVE US BACK THERE, ALL THAT DOES IS MAKE ME BECOME EXTREMELY CONCERNED THAT THE EDC IS TRYING TO PASS RULES TO EXCLUDE PEOPLE.
IF YOU DON'T LIKE ME, I'D SUGGEST GETTING OVER IT.
SO CAN I RESPOND TO THAT? SURE.
UM, THIS ISN'T ABOUT LIKING SOMEONE OR NOT LIKING SOMEONE.
THIS IS ABOUT BEING A COMMENTARY.
AND WHEN WE HAVE PEOPLE COME INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND THEN LEAVE AND THEN TALK QUASI TALK ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THOSE EXECUTIVE SESSIONS AS A FIDUCIARY ON THE BOARD, WHICH I READ A STATEMENT, PRETTY LONG STATEMENT EXPLAINING THAT AT OUR LAST MEETING, UM, WE WOULD BE REMISS IF WE OR, OR COMPLICIT IF WE DIDN'T TRY TO PUT SOME BUMPERS AROUND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN CITY COUNCIL COMES INTO OUR EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.
I'M NOT SAYING WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THESE SPECIFIC RULES THAT WERE SUGGESTED, BUT WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT WE NEED SOME WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR INFORMATION STAYS CONFIDENTIAL.
BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, I DON'T WANNA BE PROSECUTED AS A FIDUCIARY WHEN INFORMATION GETS RELEASED BEFORE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE RELEASED.
ALL RIGHT, SO I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA READ SOMETHING.
THE LAST TIME WE HAD A JOINT MEETING, WE HAD THE EXECUTIVE SESSION AND SOMEONE COMMENTED PUBLICLY THAT WE'RE AT A CROSSROADS TALKING ABOUT THE MEETING WE'RE IN BECAUSE OF POOR DECISIONS MADE BY THIS CITY LEADER YEARS AGO.
AND THEY GO ON TO TALK ABOUT EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS. SO IF THE CONCERN IS ON THE COUNCIL SIDE, THERE'S ALSO MESSAGING BEING PUT OUT BY BOARD MEMBERS ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON.
SO I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS, IS HONE THINGS DOWN.
UM, UNDERSTAND THAT NOT EVERYBODY'S GONNA AGREE ON THINGS AND STOP CALLING PEOPLE IN PURSE BECAUSE THEY DISAGREE WITH YOU.
BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU GUYS ARE USING TAXPAYER FUNDED STUFF AND YOU'RE TRYING TO EXCLUDE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE THE WATCHDOGS OF THE TAXPAYER MONEY BECAUSE YOU'RE UPSET BECAUSE SOMEONE SAID SOMETHING YOU DIDN'T LIKE OUTSIDE.
IF YOU DON'T LIKE SOMETHING, THEN I THINK THERE'S A PATH.
YOU GO, YOU GO TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, YOU GO TO THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, YOU CAN GO TO THE ETHICS COMMISSION, BUT TO START MAKING A BUNCH OF RULES.
AND THEN YOU SAY IT'S NOT ABOUT LIKING IT OR NOT LIKING SOMEBODY.
I MEAN THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE WERE, THERE'S COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE PUBLICLY ABOUT ME PERSONALLY, UM, THAT I HAVE ISSUE WITH.
AND I THINK THAT THERE'S, UH, WHEN YOU'RE BEING ACCUSED OF THINGS, MAYBE THAT SHOULD GO TO ALSO TO ETHICS, RIGHT? I MEAN, IF THERE'S A, YOU KNOW,
THIS IS NOT ABOUT LIKING OR NOT LIKING SOMEONE.
THIS IS ABOUT A JOB THAT I'M TRYING TO DO OR THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AS A BOARD, AS VOLUNTEERS FOR THIS CITY AND TO BE A GOOD FIDUCIARY.
AND I, LIKE I SAID, PRETTY LONG THING THAT I READ AND I DID MENTION FIVE AREAS IN OUR BYLAWS WHERE CITY COUNCIL HAS OVERSIGHT.
I'M NOT SITTING HERE ASKING TO NOT HAVE OVERSIGHT.
THAT IS NOT WHAT I'M ASKING AT ALL.
UM, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT OUR, THAT'S NOT WHAT OUR BOARD VOTED FOR.
ARE YOU ASKING FOR THIS OVER THIS CHANGE OR IS HE
CAN I ASK A, A QUESTION JUST TO CLARIFY SOME OF WHAT YOU'RE SHARING HERE.
SO CURRENTLY THE BOARD DOES HAVE A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER SITTING ON THE BOARD.
SO IN YOUR MIND KIND OF WHERE DOES THE OVERSIGHT LINE, WHERE IS THAT DRAWN? IS IT HAVING TWO MEMBERS? IS THAT LIKE, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND LIKE YOU HAVE REPRESENTATION ON THE BOARD ITSELF.
SO FIVE SECTIONS OF WHAT, WHAT IS CAUSING YOU TO FEEL LIKE
AND WE CLEARLY HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS.
JUST LIKE ME AND COUNCILOR CLARK HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, ME AND PORTERFIELD HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS.
AND SO I THINK ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO COME IN AND SEE WHAT'S GOING ON HAS THE RIGHT, IF THE LIBRARY BOARD ALL OF A SUDDEN SAYS, HEY, YOU DON'T LIKE READING, AND SO THEREFORE WE REALLY DON'T THINK YOU OUGHT TO BE HERE LISTENING ON THIS AND WE'RE NOT ALLOW YOU TO BE HERE.
I CAN TELL YOU I THINK WE NEED, NEED NEW LIBRARY BOARD MEMBERS.
IF I DON'T LIKE READING AND THE PATH THEY'RE GOING DOWN, THEN AN ELECTED PERSON OUGHT TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOICE THAT DISPATCHER BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE THERE FOR.
OTHERWISE YOU'RE NOW YOU'RE ASKING PEOPLE TO COME UP AND GO, MOTHER, MAY I COME IN AND SIT IN YOUR MEETING? NO, BECAUSE YOU DON'T AGREE WITH WHAT WE'RE ABOUT TO DO.
SO YOU CAN'T COME IN AND IF THAT'S WHAT YOU GUYS WANT, WE NEED TO PUBLICLY SAY THAT TO PEOPLE AND
[00:20:01]
LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE THAT.BECAUSE ULTIMATELY IT'S THEIR MONEY THAT'S BEING PUT TO USE, IT'S THEIR STAFF TIME.
AND YOU KNOW, THE CITY COUNCIL COULD SAY, HIRE YOUR OWN STAFF AND GO FIND YOUR OWN BUILDING BECAUSE SOME EDCS DO THAT.
IF YOU WANNA BE COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT, THERE'S A PATHWAY TO THAT.
YEAH, I WOULD JUST BE CURIOUS AND I JUST WANNA MENTION THAT THE STATE LAWS FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS ALLOW UP TO FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO SIT ON THE BOARD.
SO IF THERE WAS, UH, A BYLAW AMENDMENT THAT IT WAS UP TO FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, THAT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW.
SO MAYBE YOU DON'T WANT THE FULL COUNCIL SITTING IN ON YOUR EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, BUT TO ALLOW AT LEAST UP TO FOUR WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW.
BUT CAN THE BOARD THAT CORRECT IN THE EDCS CURRENT BYLAWS ON THE BOARD YEAH.
TO SET ON BOARD? THEY WOULD HAVE, IT WAS, IT WAS ONE THEY COULD LIMIT, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO ARTICULATE ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID AND WE WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE IT FOR SOME REASON.
IF SOME REASON THAT COUNCIL MEMBER COMES IN, WANTS TO ATTEND EXECUTIVE SESSION, LET'S SAY THE COUNCIL MEMBER HAS A, A REASON THAT, UM, THEY HAVEN'T THEIR OWN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND THEY THEY WANT TO GAIN SOME INFORMATION, THAT PERSON SHOULD BE EXCLUDED.
IT'S NOT THAT THAT EVER HAPPENED.
BUT THAT WOULD BE A, ARE YOU TALKING ATTENDANCE AND EXECUTIVE SESSION OR A MEMBERSHIP ON THE BOARD ATTENDANCE AND THE EXECUTIVE SESSION COUNCIL MEMBER COMING AND REQUESTING, I THOUGHT YOU SAID THE, THE STATE LAW SAID ONE APPLIES AS WELL.
SOMETIMES THE LEGAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST BECAUSE YOU HAVE SOME INTEREST IN YOU HAVE TO, TO, UH, EXCUSE YOURSELF TO SEND ME YOU TO AS A COUNCIL MEMBER.
SO THE, THE STATE LAW THAT YOU REFERENCED THAT SAYS UP TO FOUR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN BE BOARD MEMBERS, CORRECT? CORRECT.
CAN, CAN A, CAN A BOARD LIMIT IT LESS THAN THAT? YES.
AND THAT DOESN'T CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW.
SO IF YOU COULD SAY WE ONLY WANNA HAVE TWO TWO MEMBERS MAX TWO AS COUNCIL MEMBERS.
WELL, THAT THE BYLAWS, THEY HAVE TO ARTICULATE A REASON WHY, BUT THAT'S IN THE BYLAWS.
BUT THE COUNCIL WOULD'VE TO VOTE TO APPROVE THAT.
BUT YOU CAN'T SAY THE BOARD IS GETTING THAT TO THE COUNCIL COULD SAY YOU'RE TAKING FOUR AND SO YOU'RE GONNA TAKE FOUR.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT BOARD POSITIONS OR ACCESS TO EXACTLY.
SO THE BYLAWS, THE BYLAWS SHOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, UP TO FOUR HOWEVER, AND ARTICULATE THE EXCEPTIONS WHERE ONE OF THOSE FOUR COULD BE EXCLUDED IF THEY MET THAT CRITERIA.
BUT WHAT IF THEY SAID, WE ONLY WANT TWO, WE ONLY WANT TWO MAX.
WE DON'T WANT ANY MORE COUNCIL MEMBERS ON HERE.
CAN THEY DO THAT? WE HAVE TO PROVE THAT YOUR PERMISSION.
BUT THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL, IF COUNCIL PROVES THAT AND THE BOARD SAYS WE WANT, THAT'S THE CURRENT BYLAWS.
NOW UNDERSTAND IF THAT'S A CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW AND IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S NOT.
AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO GIVE A REASON WHY.
THEY JUST SAY, WE DON'T ONLY WANT TWO.
AND THEN IF COUNCIL AGREES THEY GET TWO AND THERE'S NO, OKAY.
WELL AND THE ONLY REASON I MADE THESE SUGGESTIONS IS BECAUSE I HAVE 14 DOCUMENTED INSTANCES WHERE I FEEL THAT DEARY IS BROKEN IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
WE'RE NOT POSTED TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
I HOPE I HAVEN'T DEMONIZED ANY OF YOU ALL OR SHOWING MY PRIVILEGE, BUT I ASK QUESTIONS AND I'LL CLARIFY.
I DON'T EMAIL STAFF ON SUNDAYS.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLARIFY THAT BEFORE THAT OUT.
UH, THIS IS 6 59 NEXT CITY COUNCIL 59, THE HEAD OF ECONOMIC DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT.