Okay.

I am going to call the meeting to order.

It is eight to I'm I opted into military time per second there.

It is 6 37.

1837 works.

1837 works too.

637.

This is a meeting of the Charter Revision Commission.

I'm gonna ask if we could all stand for the Pledge of Allevance, please.

Commissioner Putnam, if you could lead us in the pledge, please allegations to the fly.

One nation under God.

Liberty.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Secretary, if you could do the roll call for us, please.

With pleasure.

Commissioner Britton.

Present.

Commissioner Sepran.

Present.

Commissioner Alameda is present.

Commissioner Armstrong.

Commissioner Hernandez.

Commissioner Jowdy.

Commissioner McCarry.

Present.

Commissioner Putnam.

Present.

And Commissioner Rivera.

We have a few.

It's present three conflicts tonight.

Thank you very much.

If there is no objection, I'm just going to keep the same format for the commissioners.

I know we didn't, it's not physically on the agenda, but we have done it for every meeting, but open it up for public speaking.

If that's sure there's no objection from the commission.

Okay.

So we will have public speaking.

Please address your comments to the commission on the matter before the commission, which is the final report for the Charter Revision Commission.

That being said, state your name and address so the mic picks you up.

And please keep your comments to uh three minutes.

So are there any members of the public that wish to address the commission?

Councilman Henry.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Michael Henry, Corn Castle Road.

Thank you to the Commission also for the amount of time that you guys put in and getting us to the final draft report here.

Probably just clarification on my part.

I thought I heard a note where we took the commission took 13 of the 14 recommendations.

I believe it's 12 of the 14 specified.

Okay.

And then I saw the number of the subsections in six paragraphs.

617 is now board of ed, right?

Because there was a removal of 6-2 for town clerk.

That's correct.

So that's a change in the sixth section, right?

Okay, that's it for me.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman.

Are there any other members of the public that wish to address the commission?

Yeah.

Sir, Chief.

Good evening.

Uh Jeff Harold, uh Foster Street here in Denver.

Uh, thank you very much for uh again uh allowing me to speak.

Um I'd also like to thank uh all of you uh for all the work that you have done.

Um it's it's been a uh a bit of a slog, but you've really pushed through it.

Um and I would also like to point out from uh citizens' perspective, um what's happening uh in a greater political scheme of things.

Everybody knows things are kind of harried, but this to me does illustrate and show how local government can work uh and can work uh in a way that gets things done when it has to be done in a certain time frame.

Uh and you know the bipartisanship, I think is it's evident.

I'm not saying it was perfect, I don't claim it to be perfect, but I think it's pretty good job.

I'd also like to ask that in your final report that perhaps some kind of an inclusion uh be done that perhaps a more formalized reviewing of the city charter in the future be included um in your report.

I don't know, at this I know it's every 10 years, you kind of have to look at it, but maybe every five years you might take a glance at it or something.

Something along those lines that kind of makes it a little more uh a little easier to have a plan ahead of time because this kind of came on us and we haven't done it in 19 years, whatever it was.

Um I'd like to see us avoid that in the future.

Um that that's the only comment I have to make regarding that.

I I again um I'd like to thank you all for the work you've done and for the way you've handled these meetings and allowing the public to speak, and I'm under three minutes, so I'll let you go.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chief.

Uh very well put.

Any other members of the public wish to address the commission?

John Miller, Coach Road.

I want to thank the commission for all their hard work.

Excuse me.

I was in the 0709.

I know what that was like being in there for that whole year, and what you guys did was amazing, but it was good work on all counts.

The only question I had was the four-year term.

That kind of like bothers me a little bit still, because I think after two years, people have a voice on whether they like the current administration or they don't like the current administration.

And by giving the mayor a four-year term in the administration, it takes away that voice.

And that was my biggest concern with that.

That's all I had to say, but thank you very much for all your hard work.

Appreciate it.

Um, any other members of the public wish to address the fusion.

Sorry.

You're not gonna like what I have to say.

None of you.

Okay.

It's time to speak truth to power.

Okay.

Now I'm gonna read a couple of things.

You could just just so the mic picks you up their your name and address just.

No, that's not a state statute, and it is only a request.

Are you a Danbury resident?

Yes, I am.

I hereby solemnly affirm on the penalty of the money.

I'll help you go off.

I gave my name last time.

Okay.

Now either we abide by laws and rules, rules meaning the city charter, or we have chaos and government by fiat.

That's what's happening here.

Now I'm going to prove that the last meeting on 27 was in violation of state statutes.

Under Cadena General Statute, Section 1-225G.

When calculating the 24-hour window for notice, Saturdays, Sundays, legal holidays, and days the municipal clerk's office is closed.

Do not in bold count toward the required time frame.

The notice for the conference meeting was given Thursday after 8 p.m.

But I'm going to be generous and just make it 8.

From 8 to 12 on Thursday is 4 hours.

From 12 midnight to 12 noon is 12 hours.

So let's add so that's 16 hours.

The hearing was called for 6 p.m.

16 and 6 is 22.

Everything that came from that meeting, which was illegal, this cannot continue either.

And I just wrote this today, so if I ramble a little bit, please bear with me.

This was the first draft.

And even Thomas Jefferson didn't write the declaration on the first draft.

Now at a special meeting on 723, Mr.

Mortality was the only one present and answered questions on counsel to the revision commission only.

Is this in the Connecticut practice book where we can go back and forth?

No.

Okay.

And I have the forms right here.

Three pages.

Let me go the first page.

Okay.

This is for attorney grievance procedures in Connecticut.

Judicial reform.

And all of you lawyers maybe have a case in that judicial court.

Next.

Mr.

Casagrande answered questions, but this commission, he's only the counsel to the city council.

This man over here, Mr.

Motorelli, is your counsel.

You can't have both.

I'm sorry.

Next.

On 721, the committee of the whole metal chambers.

Mr.

Alvis threatened me to be careful.

And he wasn't saying watch it going.

So I'm just going to ask you to keep your comments pointed to the final draft report.

Well, I want this on tape.

So I can't say I'm making it.

I understand they may be your wish, but I'm going to ask you for decorum purposes and for this meeting to please keep your comments directed towards the commission for the final draft.

At the first town hall meeting, which Mr.

Alves chaired, he had people sign in.

That is patently illegal.

Is that related to the final draft report?

Yes.

Now, Mr.

Britton, you list your mailing and office address as 161 Main Street.

That's the Democratic Town Hall.

You have a mailing address for your personal mail at Town Hall headquarters.

I I gave you a couple freebies, sir.

But please keep your comments directed toward these final draft and substantive remarks related to the commission's order.

Well, as you're part of this, I'm directing it to you.

That I am not on the agenda.

Okay.

Okay.

Let's see.

Nobody is special.

And if I have to give an address, then Mr.

Hisham Rushidat has to give a legal address.

And not I'm giving you one more.

Okay, fine.

Because you have exceeded your three minutes, but I'm giving you one more.

Thank you very much.

By the way, that's only a convention and not a rule.

It was a dot, it's a rule of this body.

Was it confirmed by the city council?

No.

This is the Charter Revision Commission, sir.

I know what it is.

I'm not stupid and I know how to read.

Three pages, you have to have six copies, and I'm not afraid to let some people have it.

That's all I'm gonna say.

And again, I'm here under trepidation because I have a target on my back by the mayor.

And I hope the video in the hallways picks you up.

Because he came out of the meeting and cornered me with his bodyguard, and that woman over there accused me of threatening people.

All right, Mr.

Chairman, I'm calling this as an end.

We are off the charter.

We have You're not the chairman.

I am calling it as an end, sir.

I'm done with you.

Okay.

You're going off on a tangent that has nothing to do with this.

Right.

Thank you.

And all of you that don't make a threat.

I'm not making a threat.

You did before.

No, I didn't.

Good.

Thank you, Commissioner.

You should be ashamed of yourselves.

Okay.

Motion to close public speaking.

Second.

All those in favor.

Aye.

Any opposed.

Public speaking has been closed.

Uh thank you again to my commissioners for all of your hard work that you have done.

We are going to uh go over the roadmap for tonight.

Uh we have reached the end of our um charge for this commission.

We have gone through the charter line by line, uh, word by word, and did a very substantive draft report to the council.

The council met jointly with us and presented those recommendations.

We went over those recommendations.

Um so tonight we are just going to button up the final report, um, discuss that and hopefully approve that and get it to the city council where where they will review the final report and determine what changes um that we recommend they are going to put forward to the voters.

So that's the roadmap for tonight.

So before we get to the final report, um, I'm gonna just defer to attorney Mordoletti just to confirm the procedure here, what what our charges tonight and what we can cannot do that type of thing.

Sure.

Through the chair.

Um I also want to thank this commission for its tremendous effort and time on this matter.

Um so right now, what's before us is uh the charter um with the recommendations of the city council uh incorporated that we accepted uh as a body.

So um what I think might be appropriate is to go through this document to make sure that we're all on the same page.

We will have a final report coming out of this meeting.

That report uh is filed with the town clerk's office, um, and it is sent to the council for them to review.

Uh and their review is uh handled under the statutory procedure that's set forth in general statute 7 uh 191.

So uh right now our uh what this body may decide to do is is to uh is to approve this final charter amendment, uh which is a final report, and then we pass this with a resolution off to the city council.

Um so there are um we incorporated the our office incorporated the recommendations that were made.

Um you'll see them in this existing uh charter version.

Uh we have red line edits.

So I think maybe Mr.

Chairman, it's best if you go through with each recommendation one by one, uh, and then we can look at the at the charter language and see that it aligns.

Um and and should there be any final um uh amendments to those recommendations tonight, you know, our office will make those changes and uh we'll have them done.

Um so certainly uh identify whatever you think um maybe isn't in line with the recommendations, but uh do you think we have everything covered pretty effectively?

Um so my understanding, thank you, attorney Bordeletti.

My understanding is we had 14 recommendations from the council.

Um we had approved 12 of those 14.

And uh so the first one would be the preamble language.

So I will ask the team here to turn to your the first page of the charter, the first paragraph.

Um we have language in there now that says we believe in strong political leadership in a representative council and in the right of every citizen, resident, and taxpayer to have an equal opportunity to be part of the decision making process.

Um any objection to that?

I think that sums up our recommendation.

Okay, uh please the chair if I just want to also comment as we go through this document.

Um we had a prior agreement uh on this on this commission to have corporation council make any sort of grammatical edits along the way.

Um so um, so I'm not gonna actually unless you want me to, I'm not gonna point out every time we made uh a slight grammatical edit.

Um but I will just say as an example, uh we put a comma after uh after resident and before the board again taxpayer, just for transparency purposes.

Um, so that there's been some grammatic rights made throughout this document.

I'm not gonna belabor this commission by identifying them all, but but those were made consistent with the prior direction of this commission.

I'm not a big fan of the Oxford comma.

I'm old school, we didn't have it back then.

I'm just telling you.

Very very well.

Thank you.

Uh for the three things.

Um okay.

Um and I do appreciate that proof proofreading is a very uh undervalued um skill.

So I do appreciate that.

Okay.

Um that being said, move on to the next recommendation that was accepted.

Um this was the recommendation by the council to change when there's a situation where the city council confirms to change that language from appointed to nominated.

So I know that language is mostly in chapter two, I believe.

So if we can flip our books to four, two four in you.

So we've seen there there are some changes to the word appointed.

Any objection to those changes, I think it matches up pretty well across the board.

Okay.

Um moving on to the next recommendation that was accepted, that would be number four.

Um, which is also included actually the fourth recommendation is also included in that section, it's appointed language, um, and that is reflected.

I'm looking at it on two-four.

So recommendation two and four are in the charter now.

Three of stats.

Um I if I may please I'm reflecting back on the document that was distributed to us on Monday.

And there's some highlighted nominated that did not make it into this final draft.

So I think the yeah, so the highlights I believe were the recommended change.

The recommended changes, but when we further clarified it, it was that the word nominate wouldn't be like an on-mass total like control F replaced appointed with nominated.

It would it was only applicable to the positions where there's a confirmation, because that's where you would have a true nomination and confirmation.

Some positions are direct appointment, which is where the language stated she'll be appointed.

So I think you're looking at two four.

Correct.

Um two members shall be appointed.

I don't know how to explain it.

No, I I understand what you're saying, but isn't what we agreed to accept what was highlighted and presented to us.

So through the chair, please at the um the motion um was for a change from appointed to nominated.

We had a at the at the joint conference, uh, as I recall, and the chairman can correct me on this, but as I recall, there was discussion that um that uh that the car bow to that uh universal change or was in situations where there's no council confirmation um because you wouldn't the uh the appointment you know only comes into effect.

The poll and the nomination designation only comes into effect when there's an actual confirmation.

So there's no confirmation of uh of any members of the reapportionment advisory commission.

So that's why it's a fair, it's a fair observation, but since there's no confirmation on the council in two-one of these members, we don't make that change.

Um we don't make that change here, and you'll see that in other parts of the chart.

I see.

Yeah.

Well, just to clarify, if I recall correctly, I think that the exact words were we can't use a control find and substitute appointed for nominated.

Remember, we talked about that.

That has to be the context.

Like I forget who had said it.

I think you would said it, didn't you?

That we can't we can't just do every word says number we replace it in word.

Yeah, I wasn't the one that said it, but I think that's a good question.

I remember somebody said it.

Yeah, to the chair, I believe.

Well, no, I wasn't smart enough to say it, so because what are you guys saying?

I believe there was council discussion on that at that point.

Um doing the joint conference.

Okay.

But I do remember that was my takeaway that it wasn't just a word-for-word replacement, it had to be the contextual aspects of it.

Okay.

Is that and so we believe that these changes in this final draft are reflective of what we agreed to?

Correct.

On Monday, thank you.

Oh, actually, it's another two fours the reappointment and so forth.

That's why it kicks in.

That makes sense then.

At least now I understand.

Any other questions on that particular recommendation?

Okay.

We will continue marching on.

The next recommendation that we accepted was number, we'll call it number five, which was uh we didn't do the staggered, did we?

We're sorry.

Yeah, because that one we rejected that one, so we oh sorry, got it.

I apologize for that.

He didn't talk about it.

Um, so the fifth one.

Oh, yeah, I'm sorry.

So I meant do we want to go through the whole charter on the appointed nominate?

I think we identified it relative to two before, but do you want to go through it for all other applicable?

I will I will defer to Commissioner Almeida if I mean you you did you uh feel more comfortable if we go through every one?

Okay, uh I'm only offering it as no, thank you.

I think I think I think you've answered my question.

Thank you.

Very well.

Um, so the next recommendation was the oath of office section.

So that is what is now marked as two-eight.

I'm sorry, two-nine.

So the new language in here uh where we have the discussion, which would allow the choice by the oath taker to either take it, so help you God or under penalties of perjury.

So now the language in there says according to law, so help you God, or under penalties of perjury.

So you can you can choose.

I have a question regarding the why is it new section two eight?

It's two eight is the town clerk.

It was so when the recommendations came back to us, we had a red line in there that had a new section, which then changed the numbering of the whole document.

But now since we've decided to take the the town clerk out.

Okay, so this was done before we did anything, that's why it says new and old.

Correct.

Okay, yeah, I'm sorry.

Formatting.

That makes sense.

Okay, it's past tense already.

Yep.

But we're looking at it in present tense.

Okay, that's what's throwing me off on a couple of these.

Sorry.

Any objections or questions on that language?

A pretty straightforward change.

Okay.

Next we have um the quorum language.

So that was in there.

Quorum is section three-six of our packets here.

Um we had agreed to take out the word elected.

So now the one which says a majority of the city council members shall constitute a quorum, which would include the um point that was made that you might have some council members that were appointed and not technically elected.

So it just includes all the sitting members of the city council.

Any questions, comments on that one?

Okay.

Um next one was the blanket recommendation that whenever the charter references state statutes, they're referred to as general statutes, which is the legal name.

So I guess I will just defer the question to attorney Mortaletti.

Did that change make it throughout?

Uh yes, that change made it throughout.

I will uh as an example, if you look at section three-10, uh, we make a reference to general statutes instead of Connecticut state statutes.

Okay.

Um so we did make that change throughout the document.

Perfect.

Any questions on that?

Oh, why are some in blue?

Oh, the blue is um, those are hyperlink.

Uh if you actually look at the like an electronic version of this document, it's on it's a hyperlink.

Um to be actually to actually make it the to actually not technically change it.

We had to keep it as is because that otherwise we'd be removing the hyperlink and adding in regular text.

So if you want to be extremely technical, I'd say we have to leave it as is the answer question.

Commissioner Farda.

Curiosity.

Okay, very well.

Uh next recommendation was the cleanup language to section 3-13 where it was recommended that we just do some grammatical changes for the committee's paragraph to just make it read a little bit better and to include um committees of the whole into that.

So now the language says all committees of the city council shall be ad hoc committees, standing committees, or committees of the whole standing committee shall be established and rescinded by resolution.

Any objections to that language?

I think it cleans it up.

Is that the only place through the chair?

Is that the only place where this is listed as such?

So I said one more time.

Is this the only place where committees are listed in outline?

It doesn't reference playing and you can change throughout, does it?

Um I did not see any other need for that.

I don't think so.

We just want to make sure that you know, since we're cleaning it up, we clean it up uh I did not I did not see any other spot for that.

Any other questions on that one?

Okay.

Uh next recommendation is the uh section four-one on the acceptance of gifts on behalf of the city.

So the recommendation was to re uh to leave in the document the um requirement that the mayor reports the acceptance of a gift on behalf of the city to the city council.

Um so you'll you'll see that the language is not actually redlined because it's already in the charter, so we just put that back in.

So it still says now the mayor shall report the acceptance of each such donation, gift bequest, or device to the city council at its next regularly scheduled meeting.

So the recommendation was to leave that in there, so that's why it's not red line.

Any questions on that one?

But there's a missing ox for comma.

After the word request.

After the word request.

I'm gonna remember that one.

Didn't uh what is it?

Grammar rock, didn't they do a whole little video on the Oxford comma?

Um school house rocket.

Schoolhouse rocket grammar offered is the specific.

All right.

Um next recommendation that was accepted was the recommendation that town clerk remain an elected position.

So my my question to council on that one is for our purposes in this report.

What practically happened was our recommended language got taken out, so now it's defaulting back to the charter language as it sat before the commission started with the change that it's a four-year term.

That's my understanding, yes.

Okay.

So that would be so that was the old two.

It's previously too.

Yeah, sorry.

So this new document is correct.

There we go.

And it reports the four-year and the other sections where it's listed.

Yep.

Uh section two-eight, the town clerk.

Um the the original paragraph which laid out the duties of the town clerk is all the original language in the charter.

So that didn't get touched where you see a change for town clerk, and I believe it's the only change was two-two.

Yeah, yep, two-two, which now shows that you have to make sure it's a term of four years.

Yep, it's uh subsection.

Okay.

Yep, the town clerk who shall serve a term of four years.

So that is back to how it originally was in the charter with the change to four years.

But any questions on that or comments?

No.

Okay.

Excellent.

Um, okay, the next recommendation was on section six-feight.

It might be now that and then now might be six-sevented after the formatting changes, but that's the board of ed section.

So here we had the discussion that's six-seventeen.

Now it's a big it's a whole it's all red because it's a brand new section.

Um the change in there consisting of 11 electors as set forth in this charter.

So now we can we confirmed the residency part of it.

And the other changes we made here.

So we added that solely for purposes of auditing, budgeting, and financial reporting to make it a little more pointed that that's what the access is for.

Um we kept the shallow language in there, and then we short up the data privacy language.

Um added that last sentence there on the fourth paragraph, I believe, to ensure the protection of student privacy data and student educational records.

And then we also shorted up in the following paragraph where we talk about the yearly uh financial report, where at the very end we added subject to the limitations as set forth in this section regarding student privacy data and excuse me, education records.

So no, thank you, Commissioner.

Oh, yeah.

Can we pass that down first?

Okay, that's true.

Oh do we have any questions on that section?

Can you give us an extra like 30 seconds?

Yeah, please.

That way we know we do just there's 17 of the resolution.

We're not impairing the statutory authority to the board of edge.

It's perfect.

It's just it's pretty far back.

It's we're all it's now it's six seventeen on this page.

Yeah, okay.

Yeah, we're gonna say that's what they wanted.

I think it quells everybody's fears out the year, which is good chair if I may, just to add some context on this section 617.

So some of the additional language, first off, this entire uh section is redlined because really this whole section is new.

Um, in the last version that was before you, we only redlined the the latest language editions, but technically you have to show all red lines, which is the entire section.

So in case you're wondering why everything's now underlined, that's why.

Um, but I just want to also clarify that you will see referenced in at a couple points in this section.

Uh the term um student education records.

Uh that's a defined term under FERCO.

Um, so you know, we wanted to include that for additional uh assurances to the board of ed that were cognizant of limitations with respect to that information uh in the FERPA context.

So you'll see that in the uh see that a couple times in this section.

Um so again, we did we did that uh as new language just further to further emphasize that the city is not looking to take any steps that would infringe on the statute uh or clash with the board of ed's rights under those statutes.

So I just want to make that point of clarification for everybody.

Appreciate that, counselor.

Uh-huh.

A couple of quick questions.

We took out research the word receipts was taken out uh second to last paragraph, maybe second sentence, and was the reason why receipts was taken out.

I believe that was I think it was repetitive because I think it was repetitive language.

That might um that might have been the reason.

Um I will also say that some of this language is removed at the um uh at the redlining of the board of eds attorney.

Okay.

Um I I don't recall right now which terms were, but some of these individual terms it might have been receipts.

Uh uh, I think we're removed by uh by the board's attorney.

Um and then the second paragraph or three, it's a purchasing why was that removed?

That was removed because the uh Board of Education's on they have their own purchasing um software procedure and and software.

And that's uh there's a it's a carve out in the charter too that the board of ed does that on their own.

Okay.

I believe that's also a statutory protection for them too.

Okay.

If I may for consistency, right?

The change that was agreed to to change um references to the general statutes.

Um in some instances we um redlined out the word connected ahead of general statutes, um, and in this section we left that in.

So for consistency, we just may want to read through again to make sure that I don't know which one is correct if if it needs to reference Connecticut general statutes or just general statutes.

There's some inconsistency great touch.

I mean, I'll just as just as a point of clarification through the chair.

So I mean the general statutes uh and the connect general statutes are the same.

Um I do understand that the the the recommendation was to make use the word general statutes, so we can we can strike Connecticut out of 617.

Perfect.

Um any other questions or comments on this section.

Okay.

That we'll take care of these two recommendations for 618.

Um second to last one from the bottom.

We rejected.

Um so we don't need to go into that one.

Um and the final recommendation which we accepted was putting section eight two back into the charter.

So if you scan forward to eight two, you'll see that the language is not red anymore.

It's black because that's the current language of the charter, so there's no changes, we put that back in.

And that's uh the present employees to retain positions um section.

So that takes care of all of the recommendations that we talked about the other night.

Um are there any other general questions?

Because we have reached the end of um our review.

The meet the meat of our discussion was was the other night.

So tonight we're just making sure that everything we talked about is actually in the document.

So are there any other general questions?

Yeah, commissioner.

Um just to get back on your point with elected on eight three section B.

It's elected, nominated, or appointed.

Is that supposed to be all three?

Yep, subsection B.

Um is that one of those instances where we're it's needed as both.

Just covering everything, yeah.

Yeah, I think so because it encompasses all three forms of becoming the city officer.

Okay.

Oh, I'll default for the but instead of replacing the word appointed, we added the word nominated.

That's my uh you made a great point.

That's why I want to make sure it's consistent with what you would say about that.

All right, well, I see I do see the point.

So, yeah, I mean, so since it was a replacement recommendation, okay.

And actually, yeah, I mean, we would be we would be removing nominated individuals from the conflicts of interest provision.

Um yeah, to be the recommendation was a replacement, not uh not an addition, so of the nomination appointment language.

So you know what?

Um we can remove we can remove that from eight-three.

Uh we're removing the word appointed and replacing it with nominated.

But I think no, because there's no count, there's no confirmation um by the council under section eight three.

This is the complex of ethics, a conflicts of interest section.

So since this is just about it's just reciting what the complex of interest obligations are for uh for elected and appointed city officers or employees.

So since there's no confirmation qualifier to this, we we wouldn't really be making it.

Yeah, okay.

So I will I will remove nominated uh from A3A B C and D.

Okay.

Okay, as long as you're comfortable with it.

Okay.

Any other general questions before we vote on the final report?

Uh please I may um again, just a couple um typographical um corrections that were necessary.

Um the uh town clerk was subsection F.

Um, so I that was a type of fire bird, so I put F back in.

Um that's that's just uh that's a typographical mistake.

That's that's perfectly legitimate as a revision.

Um when we did a prior version, since we're showing the recommendations, I the prior charter said eight o'clock as the council meetings.

We switched it to seven, so uh I just we're gonna start at eight o'clock because again, we have to be accurate and showing what was edited.

Where are we?

This is I'm sorry, this is under three-2.

So I made that slight um uh reinsertion of language.

It's not a substantive amendment, it's just uh clarifying that the edit was made.

Um because what was before you last time was uh was a report that just showed our last version of our line.

So I think it's important for us to show what was edited along the way.

Um then uh I think those are my only other points at this time unless uh unless the commission has any other one we'll go one more round.

Any questions?

Um for me.

Oh okay.

Thank you.

I was just looking at pay attention.

There you go.

Love it, love it.

All right.

Um, so that being said is uh I will now entertain a motion to approve the final report of the Charter Revision Commission as amended.

So that'll include the technical changes that we talked about tonight.

So moved.

Second.

Is there any discussion on the motion?

Any discussion on the motion?

Any discussion on the motion.

I will now try your minds.

It's it's the moment, moment, moment of truth.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

One abstention.

Commissioner Jowie.

Uh so noted.

Um the motion carries.

We did it.

So good job.

Congratulations.

So dinner.

We're gonna we're gonna we might just keep showing up at a habit.

Right.

But um move on to uh the next part in the uh those agenda you know, I just like I said the other night, just thank you to all of you for your your hard work to our council.

It was a very, very long summer, so we get our summer back, at least for the time being, unless we get called back.

Um but um pretty much I want to do want to thank the members of the public.

Um you guys, Mr.

Henry, and so forth.

You guys have been here almost every meeting.

You've sat through, you've gave some really good insight.

And I want to thank you for your time and commitment.

That wasn't easy for you, also.

And I thank you both for all.

I just wanted to point that out.

That was on purpose for you, Chief.

I know.

Um, but I do want to thank you guys.

You know, you had some great input, and we we did listen to all of it, and I want to thank you for your dedication and and time you actually have put in and gave us uh for this.

Thank you.

And thank you to all of you.

It wasn't easy, but we got through it, and I think we uh we think we quelled a lot of the fears that we were rushing this and it was put together fast.

It didn't seem that I mean, you know, three months later we went through every single line, every single Oxford, comma.

And we changed it and made good changes, I think.

We do too.

I did too.

So that's all I had.

I'll go around the table if anybody has anything they want to say.

No pressure, not obligated to, but um, I do want to since you're gonna be able to do that.

I feel the same way Mike says it all.

And we did a great job, I feel that's that like a lot to be proud of.

Yeah, first time in almost 20 years.

So let's hope uh gets to the voters.

But um, okay.

Uh seeing no other comments, sir.

Oh, quick question.

The resolution that was here, that's not our resolution.

This was just here for reference.

So that's gonna go to the council.

This was just for our edification.

Okay, just want to make sure that wasn't important.

What we approved was the actual red line final report.

So that's uh just so we know next steps.

Um we'll stamp it in with the town clerk uh tomorrow.

And then it'll get your your job or is that his shop is sure it's stamped?

I will I will stamp it.

I will make sure that it is and it'll be on the agenda.

It should be.

We're gonna, I mean, it's we we will do our job, and that's transmitted whenever it gets to the council, they'll do it in august.

And whenever it gets to the council, they'll do it.

Presumably, but it's really it's up to the council when they want to take it up.

So we will transmit it.

We'll do our job, which is get it stamped in and then uh balls in their court from here to the end of uh the step.

Go ahead.

Just to clarify on that question.

So the appointing authority under the statute, the appointing authority after receiving the report, um, you know, has to hold a meeting on it.

And the statute says not later than 15 days after getting the final report.

So there's a there's a statutory time window, not later than 15.

Um so yeah, it would go to the council and they would they would you know certainly have a have a discussion on it either on the August meeting or a special meeting they would have to have.

If they don't do it for this upcoming meeting, they'll need a special meeting that's on the 15 days.

So they have their so they have a 15 day clock basically from when we get it to them up to fifty up to 15 days.

Okay, so I'll make sure that it's gonna be August.

Makes sense.

Okay.

Any parting words before we adjourn?

Yay.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh is there a motion to adjourn?

So moved.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

We are adjourned at seven twenty three.