That's fine.

Do you really?

Oh, that's also it has a bookmark in it, I will say.

Oh, red light.

Are we good?

Okay, we're gonna go ahead and call the meeting to order.

Um, yeah.

All right, I've asked uh council president Bills to open us in prayer and lead us in the pledge.

So if you would please standard, we give thanks for the day, and we give thanks that we can gather in peace and that we can uh not be experiencing turmoil.

We pray God that you'd grant wisdom and guidance in our discussion and deliberation this morning.

Thank you again for the blessings that you provide to the citizens of Napa in Jesus' name, amen.

I pledge allegiance to the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God with liberty and justice for all.

Right, the clerk will take roll call.

Scog.

Bills, here Reynolds, Rodriguez, Griffin.

All present.

All right.

Um I want to thank council and staff for being present this morning.

Your dedication commitment to working hard on behalf of the citizens and to make wise decisions.

Um we have an agenda before us.

I do have a slight proposal um to swap the swap one five and one four.

Um five is the the code of conduct, uh, which is a document that's been signed by councils for decades.

Um I'd like to put that in in front and then put one four behind that.

So if you have no objections to that, we'll just proceed in that form.

Um the first uh um legal counsel Preston is gonna take um the first hour.

That's what we're our kind of plans are for allowing an hour if if uh legal does not get through in an hour.

Because we do want you to ask questions and have this be interactive to the extent that you have questions on the record.

Uh whatever we don't get through this morning, we'll just carry over.

We've actually discussed um the value of having possibly a couple months or a few months worth of additional um items just as kind of a training refresher that legal can lead the workshop in.

But we'll go till about eight on item one, and then um chief of staff long is gonna take us through the middle two items for about 15 minutes, and then my hope is around 815-ish to then um go to the remaining two items and get through that.

So if um that sounds good, I'll turn it over to Preston.

Thank you, Mayor, and good morning, everybody.

And could I ask Mayor and Council, would you prefer that I go down to the podium to have more engagement?

Are you fine with me being up here?

Okay.

I will try to make it as engaging as one can for seven in the morning, reading a lot from state code.

So yes, the bar is very high or or low if you want to look at it as falling asleep.

Just get fired up and we're ready to go.

I love it.

Go team on three.

One, two, three, here we go.

So I'm gonna share my screen real quick.

Let me get to the meeting here.

That way we're all singing from the same hymnal as it were.

All right, no better way than start off with an inspiring quote from a founding father.

So this is from George Washington.

The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.

And so the purpose and scope of this morning is to talk about what is the established government here for the city.

So, yes, in the beginning, um, we had our founding fathers uh convene to establish a unique form of government, uh divided by separation of powers.

This may be a good civics refresher um from our days in middle school or high school, but you'll recall that there are three distinct branches.

There's a legislative branch, which uh most of you carry that uh responsibility, that they make the laws, the executive branch carries out those laws, and then a judicial branch to evaluate or like to think interpret those laws.

Um legislative branches you might remember, uh includes Congress at the federal level, the legislature, the state, and here the city council.

Um executive branch, obviously the president, the governor, and mayors responsible for implementing and administering the laws and policies that the legislative branch creates, and as well as managing the government operations.

Uh, the judicial branch, you have obviously the Supreme Court at the federal and state level.

At the local level, it gets a little diluted.

The one carryover I would say is my help is to help guide you interpreting laws that the state judicial branch might carry out when looking at how we conduct ourselves.

And why do we have three uh levels of government?

Um it really is for proper checks and balances.

Uh, it ensures a balanced government, it ensures accountability one to another, it prevents a concentration of power, and it encourages a collective body of work.

So this is our city, and this is a fresh photo.

Everybody looks wonderful here from about two weeks ago, and this is our government.

What you see here, two years ago, this would have been preposterous because the team on the right is the University of Indiana.

And if you're not familiar right now, they are a freight train in college football and well on their way to probably winning the national championship.

For all those hoosers listening right now, um, I wanted to highlight this because when I think of separation of powers, I think of everybody kind of doing their role working together.

And when everybody does their respective role in a commendable way, great things happen.

There's collaboration, there's energy, you're rowing in the same direction.

And one of their coach, Signetti, who is uh becoming quite a remarkable figure quickly, he preaches often DYJ, do your job, and the quarterback does his, the linemen do theirs, and they're proud to help each other in their respective roles, they're all vital and important, and so are yours.

So I'm gonna start.

Uh we talked earlier, we were teasing about carrying constitutional pamphlets.

Um, there's three main articles: Article 1, Article 2, Article 3.

Article 1 is the first one, talks about Congress or the legislative branch.

So I'm gonna start there about that role and responsibility and the powers that come with it.

Um I love uh you know the picture here summarizes what I visualize your going through.

You will wear a lot of hats, and I'm gonna talk to you about each of those hats that you wear at different times carrying out your role.

Um Title 50, chapter 7 is where your by you know, your constitution, so to speak, for being a legislator at the city level is at a high level, councils shall have such powers and duties as are now or may hereafter be provided under the general laws of the state of Idaho.

So, in other words, it's very expansive.

Right here's a screenshot.

This is a very valuable tool.

I wanted to show you this.

If you're not familiar with it, the Idol legislature has a very helpful resource.

Um, all the laws are online, and you can drill it down uh by title 50.

That's kind of where municipalities live.

That's our world primarily.

There's a chapter seven I've highlighted, and that's where you would go if you're ever curious about well, what are we able to do, what are we not able to do.

So I'm gonna walk through the various levels uh or different hats that you wear.

So bear with me.

I hope this is engaging and interesting to you, kind of knowing, like, okay, what did I sign up for, right?

Some of this may be old business old news to you.

There may be some things that pop out as I didn't know that.

And so I hope that this can be informative.

So you're putting right now, think of a legislative hat that you're wearing.

We're gonna be right there.

Um here is what you got.

You are allowed to adopt laws or ordinances to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.

This is called the police power.

This is the capital P police power.

You guys don't have the uniforms like our police officers here, but the police power in the legal sense is used for the ability to regulate, right?

And that's a very uh fundamental power that you have.

Annexation of territory.

You adopt a comprehensive plan, you adopt various land use ordinances.

So think of all the things that regulate our growth, zoning, conditional use permits, subdivisions, variances.

You not only establish the standards, you set the procedures and the fees.

Now we have a state law backdrop that kind of overarcs everything, and then we can have a tailored local ordinances.

Um, like you might be familiar at the federal level, you also have an override vote when it comes to if there is a mayoral veto of an ordinance, you may override that.

That's your prerogative.

That's what the state law allows you to do.

You're also allowed to call special council meetings.

You authorize and hold executive sessions by a two-thirds vote of council.

The legislative hat, uh there's there's more.

You determine what city services the city should provide.

Um there's nothing in state law.

Some people think you're obligated to uh provide water, uh what wastewater sewer.

In state law, it's uh it's up to you if you provide it.

We have chosen, obviously, to do that and provide that service.

You adopt ordinances and regulations uh that when it comes to public health, contagious diseases and quarantine laws.

And I I was not here in 2020, but there probably you probably had to exercise that at that time when it came to COVID 19.

Um you also have the ability to adopt what are called franchise ordinances.

This allows um utility providers to use our public right away, and the common ones are power, natural gas, water, cable providers, and you get to set the percentage of what their uh gross revenues they bring in that we get as the franchise fee or the right to use our right-aways.

You um you establish licensing and regulation of businesses and setting those fees.

Um we will soon be approaching the liquor license season.

I know Shar is thrilled about that.

It's a busy time for the clerk's office, is what I'm getting at.

Um we established that beer, wine, and liquor uh for the license fees.

You adopt various codes.

Um we have adopted certain building codes, residential codes, energy conservation, mechanical and fuel and gas.

And we choose what version.

Um of you are aware there's sometimes like a you know a 2018 residential code, and they give a new version like four years later.

We can choose the update or stay with our prior one.

So you really do set a tone for how the city is built out.

Um wrapping up the legislative hat.

You have the ability to vacate streets and public right-of-way.

Um, you can create urban renewal agencies and authorize how much revenue allocation comes from that.

And uh you can adopt new fees or approve if they are over five percent increase.

So that's the legislative hat that you wear.

Any questions at this point?

Yeah, Preston, thanks for the um start of this.

I guess the question I have, and you might get to this, is not to overly complicate things.

The these are uh expressed uh delegated powers given to the city level, but you also need to keep a close eye because at times the state will preempt.

Um can you maybe explain that concept of preemption when the state sometimes chooses to override in maybe a very particular narrow sense, yeah, the way in which we navigate some of these items.

Yeah, thank you, Mayor.

Um preemption is kind of a legal term of art where the state all of our powers really are derivative, meaning we come we take it from the state legislature, and they get it from the constitution.

So you can have this flow from the our Idaho constitution saying we can allow for a legislature, and then the legislature decides, well, we can create cities and we'll decide how much they get.

Um we're a Dillon's rule state, um, which you know, I'll say this.

I think unfortunately constrains some of the local powers as opposed to a home rule state.

Uh Kansas is a good example of one that gives a little more autonomy to the local governments.

So when the state level, they kind of decide they're kind of the gatekeeper.

Sometimes they say, hey, we're gonna preempt that you local governments cannot do something.

That field, that's ours.

And so they'll keep that close to the vest.

Um there's a few areas where they they preempted that.

I was just reading one the other day, and it's escaping my mind right now, and it was a good reminder.

What you're seeing here though, these are expressly granted to you.

This is the safe zone, you're you're fair to play in this sandbox.

There are some areas um one that comes to mind is with firearms.

We can regulate if they can be discharged.

We cannot regulate can you possess them or not?

Can you sh um uh you know things like that nature?

That is preempted by the state law saying, sorry, local governments, we're keeping that close to our best.

There's a quick follow-up.

We're also uh within the space that we have express powers, I think council is well aware from city to city.

We are allowed to customize and localize some of our ordinances in ways that might feel different.

Uh how long how late in the night can you play your music?

Um how many dogs can you have in your backyard without a kennel license, those sort of things.

Um sometimes that's perceived as we're being more restrictive than the state, which I I don't know if that's a good way to phrase it as much as the state is basically saying these cities figure all this stuff out.

Every city's gonna be a little bit different.

Is that is that maybe an appropriate way to kind of frame?

I mayor, I think it is.

Um when you we can make it this way, we can raise the standard, we can't lower the standard, right?

So there's protections in laws as you might imagine.

A lot of them are called due process rights.

That's kind of the procedural rights, and we're gonna hit on that later.

We can't go and relax those to the detriment of the public.

We can make more heightened standards.

That's right.

Good questions.

Any others.

So far, so good, it looks like.

All right, now we're gonna take off the legislative hat, put on the fiscal hat.

Um here are your express rights.

You prepare a budget that outlines your projected revenues and expenditures for the upcoming fiscal year.

I th I heard somebody say I don't know if it was you, mayor or Doug.

I like this way.

Think of the budget as almost like a contract with the public.

This is what we've agreed to spend and not do not exceed.

Now we can amend that, as you might know.

Um you approve appropriations, establishing the spending authority.

You approve the property tax levy for the upcoming fiscal year.

Um we you receive a monthly report on, and I didn't know some of this, I don't live in the finance role as much, obviously as Doug.

Uh you receive a monthly report on city finances from the city treasurer.

Um at least quarterly, you examine the treasurer's report, and I assume that's happening.

Um if not, this was news to me, and maybe we'll kick that in the gear.

Uh we provide audits and we build that into the budget.

I'm sure Doug's aware of this.

There's a line item every year for audits required by statute that we have to conduct.

And that season is just upon us, I think, right now.

Um you establish by ordinance the places you deposit your city funds, and where you invest those city funds.

All right, taking off the fiscal hat.

You're putting on, and this one, I don't know if I'd call it a hat, you're putting on the robes, as I like to say.

And so I'll use those corny references because I think they really stick, at least in my mind.

Um this picture here is of John Marshall.

Um Councilman Griffin will appreciate this.

Marbury vs.

Madison, he was the essential Supreme Court judge who uh created that the judicial branch is an equal uh uh branch of government.

So you're putting on those robes, and you will do that in quasi-judicial matters.

We're gonna talk on that a little more later.

So think of your reasons, CUPs, variances.

Um also when you are denying a license for retail sale of beer, wine, and liquor, which which could happen.

We had I think one happened last year.

Um that could come up again.

Those are times where you take off a hat, you put on a robe.

This is what I call you you're calling balls and strikes.

We'll hit more on that.

All right, take off those judicial uh robes, you're not putting on a hat, the appointment and removal hat.

And um we're we're right in that season with the new uh mayor coming in and boards uh being comprised right now.

This is important.

Um you confirm the mayor's appointments to and the removal from boards, commissions, and committees.

Um you confirm nominations or removals of appointed officers.

Um I'm an appointed officer, uh clerks, treasurer, chief of staff, senior director, uh development services, among others.

Um you're part of that removal process.

There is some language and code that the council can unanimously remove somebody, um, those those positions I just listed without mayor's approval.

It would have to be unanimous though.

Let's say there is a uh vacancy within the council, you have that ability to fill that.

Um you can also establish additional roles beyond clerk, treasurer, and attorney, and the city has already done that.

All right, now there's kind of the hat you put on, it's just kind of the miscellaneous hat, the catch-all.

And this is kind of rounding it out for council, your powers and responsibilities.

Um you select the council member to serve as president, um, which we did uh uh last city council.

There are vacancies, and there's kind of this hierarchy or order of vacancies.

And I'll try to walk through this.

Uh I don't see this happening, but it it's interesting to know how it works.

Um if the mayor and council present are both vacant, um, and there can't be a quorum established, the ranked elected official in order of mayor, council president, and senior member, and if I'm not mistaken, Councilman Rodriguez, that would be you, right?

Okay.

So it's almost, you know, uh, speaker of the house is technically third in line.

That's kind of your position right now.

Um if they keep if you know for whatever reason the numbers keep dwindling, you actually can uh resort to the governor to appoint certain positions.

I'm not aware of that ever happening, but it's already thought out in kit in the event it does.

Um you provide for the district sections, which we have already, that's your prerogative.

And if there is to be a runoff, um, which one did not happen, but if there won in were to happen in two years, that would be up to the council to orchestrate that and oversee it.

All right, a few more.

Um your miscellaneous hat powers.

Um you can establish permanent boards.

You set the compensation for mayor and city council members.

Um you designate an official city newspaper.

We have done that.

Um maybe this is a conversation for another time.

Sometimes you can be pigeon-holed into their publishing schedule, which can make things a little tricky if you have to do something on short notice.

So maybe it's something we revisit if we want to have a second one or another option.

If you wanted, you can uh call for a census if that is a point of interest at some point.

And if there's a local disaster, um council can allow.

Hey, do we want to keep a state of emergency after the initial seven days?

Uh mayor is the one who does that first seven days.

All right, bear with me.

Here we go.

We have uh surp uh disposal of surplus real property.

Uh a prominent one we just did was a Fort Idol Center, but any property that we own real property, the dirt.

There's a process that we go through.

And it by now I'm sure we all remember the standards.

We talked about it so many times.

Um again, mining leases, not a big issue.

Um we have a record retention schedule, something maybe of interest to SHAR's office with clerks.

It's very important.

How do you designate certain documents for permanent status, semi-permanent, temporary?

Um, and you decide if something needs to be something is so precious you need to transfer to the state archives.

It's very important.

And then what fee you want to impose on people who seek public record requests.

There's a lot of that I mentioned, there's a lot of responsibilities in Paris.

So I I think this might be the last slide.

Don't quote me on that.

Um if the pair, if the mayor's position is vacant, council present, you'll be responsible for nominating a person to fill that vacancy.

And then that's confirmed by the council.

If there's a temporary vacancy, let's say mayor's uh won the lottery and you went on a cruise to you know the Mediterranean for two weeks.

Uh yeah, oh, sorry.

Um more likely scenario would be like I God forbid some medical emergency occurred and I'm in a coma or something, I'm I'm not dead, still alive, but I'm I'm not able to discharge the duties of the mayor.

So I think that that's what the statute was contemplating in some sort of well, in either of those two scenarios uh probably yes, the mathematical probability is that as well.

Preston, not that we're trying to offer mayor, but out of curiosity, that person that they appoint, does it have to be a unanimous council approval?

And does that have to be a council member or can it be a citizen any citizen?

What it says here in code is it just must be confirmed by the council.

Um yeah, and so it doesn't give you it.

I wish it gave more clarity on it needs to be majority of the full council.

We don't have that benefit.

Welcome to laws.

They they think, oh, this makes total sense.

Well, let's drill it down.

What do you mean by that?

Um again, we haven't been in that position, but in order to run, you have to be a qualified elector.

And I'm gonna presume that that would be a qualification for everyone who's put on.

So yeah.

So this one's interesting.

Let's say there is that temporary absence in either of those, you know, scenarios.

Um the president of the council shall quote exercise the office of mayor uh during that time.

There's not a lot of guidance or case law on what it means, council president bills, what it means to exercise the office of mayor.

And I for fear that Janice McGeechin was a relative or a good friend, I don't mean to disparage the name, but it's a good example.

There was time when there was the mayor was sorry, the governor was out of state for a period of time, I think it was a day, and there was action taken during that.

Um there's no guidance here at the city level, right?

What those powers are.

Um in that event, just talk with me if you have questions, and we'll do it play by play.

And so in that event, just talk with me if you have questions, and we'll do it play by play.

But obviously, that you're, you know, there's an implied duty that you're to discharge it in good faith, right?

Any any responsibility.

And so it's a it's a little bit of a question mark what that means.

Just interesting.

Yeah.

That's right.

If it's in the interest of the public health, safety, well-being, right?

Um probably the most significant role in the mayor's absence for the council president, you know, is chairing council meetings, signing documents, and kind of overseeing the operations with employees in that absence period.

Um, I think best guidance, and this is from AIC, um, they would recommend, and I would concur during such absence.

Uh it's kind of like when you take medication, don't make any major life decisions when you're on that, right?

So during Mayor's absence, uh, make hiring, firing decisions, appointing uh vacant council positions and vetoes to the extent that can be avoided would be probably best practice.

And then obviously, whatever responsibilities the council president may uh be best for the council as you decide.

Let's go next slide.

All right.

Any questions?

We just rounded out on the council side, the legislative branch.

Anything that comes to mind.

Okay, we're gonna pivot now, you know, to the equivalent of Article 2 of our federal constitution uh to the mayor executive office.

Um again, these are mostly spelled out in code of for mayor supervising city employees, hiring or firing employees.

Um request documents and reports from the appointed officers, obviously you're to enforce the laws and policies passed by the council, so you kind of have this working dynamic between your two bodies.

Umforcement of any health or quarantine ordinances.

You, mayor are the one who declares an initial local disaster for an emergency, and that's up to seven days.

Council, you decide if it should continue beyond that period.

Now, AIC had this point.

Notice there's not a citation to it, it was in one of their resources.

Um they suggest Mayor, you could be ordering emergency holdbacks and spending uh at any time.

So, mayor, there is a little bit of a legislative hat you will wear from time to time.

Um you may veto ordinances, obviously that's subject to a council override.

Mayor, you may call special meetings to city council.

Uh, you preside over these council meetings and determine the order of business.

And it says here, quote, subject to such rules as a council may prescribe.

Uh usually prescribe would it mean writing, and so um if there's any policies that you want to adopt, bylaws, which we'll talk about later today, whatever it may be, big or small, um, you conduct business according to that.

If there are tie votes, or instances you will break those.

And I'm gonna talk more about scenarios of ties.

It's a very interesting topic.

And mayor is asked some very good questions in his uh short time here as we've gone over this.

Um, and you help formulate policy recommendations to the council.

I mentioned about tiebreaking.

Um very interesting.

Idol law does provide there's certain instances where there is a majority required.

And what's the inference from that?

If a majority is required, there can't be a tiebreaker, it has to be a majority.

Um there's many examples.

Here are a few notable ones where majority at least is required.

So tight, that's not that's a non-tiebreaker world.

So when you're confirming a nomination, you're you're out of tiebreaker world.

It has to be one half the council plus one vote.

If you're removing an appointment officer, again, that would be unanimous vote without a motion from the mayor.

Entering executive session, two-thirds, calling a special meeting, that requires a half plus one.

And if we extend a P and Z commissioner's uh term beyond two straight, that requires a majority, or if you remove a P and Z commissioner for cause, a majority vote.

No tiebreakers in those instances.

And there are more if you are curious, but for sake of time, I just put notable ones here.

So mayor, another hat you would wear is like council and appointment and removal hat.

Uh mayor is the individual who nominates who serves in appointed offices, subject to council's majority approval.

Again, mayor can remove the appointed officers, but it needs a majority of the full council.

Uh filling vacant council position, and it says quote must be confirmed by council.

Doesn't specify majority or full body.

An interesting one here, we're in that boards and commissions season right now.

Mayor appoints and removes members to such city boards and commissions as may be necessary or expedient to assist the mayor and council in carrying out your responsibilities.

The code then goes and says a word permanent.

So I thought that was interesting.

I'll pause here just for a little.

It appears that there can be kind of non-permanent boards if you see a need to create them.

If you decide to create permanent boards, which we have I think we have about seven or eight I want to say in our code.

The language in there is that appointments and removals of those board members shall be made by mayor with quote advice and approval of council.

And I'm like legislature can you do it?

Throw us a bone here.

What do you mean?

Is that majority what is approval?

I think the to the common law would default to probably a majority of the whole council and that would be my guidance just to err on the side of safety and a strong position.

All right so tossing off the appointment hat put on the miscellaneous hat mayor um you are to sign ordinances checks resolutions a lot of the uh paperwork you administer oaths uh you may perform marriage ceremonies so for everybody here this isn't mayor hogalboom is an option to officiate your wedding or renewal of vows yes powers and authority are conferred by the laws of state um or maybe conferred by the city council in other words what other powers would you like the mayor to have to be efficient in operation of the government so it gives you a little bit of uh tailoring if you will um how you want to do that you know mayor obviously is a ceremonial head uh you know what the old phrase you know cutting ribbons kissing babies all those good things right declaring the proclamations um and listening responding constituent issues or concerns as a typical role all right just to lighten the mood a little bit um I'll throw in a few memes because it is early in the morning um we do have and how are we on time we're going at a good clip I'd say uh before I jump into some kind of like specific land use issues any questions on the mayoral powers or rights yes Preston uh thank you I maybe um a follow up that when you went through the council section I'm just going through city ordinance yeah um there's this follow-up provision it's two two dash two so four twos in a row um and this it's it's titled uh continuity of government in event of disaster emergency so this is what I was ref referencing when I said we can be more specific me in a coma or something like that that um I was contemplating more kind of the not mean taking a vacation hey I'm gonna be out this council meeting council president kind of fills in for the meeting but it says in in events of an emergency or disaster if there is a vacancy in the office of the mayor only the council member having the greatest years of tenure as an elected official shall assume that office and then it goes on and has these other provisions.

So it it seems it's contemplating a temporary um like but I I don't know what the the history or the background I don't know what what year I guess I can look at the ordinance number on that.

But I've had some citizens ask because we have the council president appointment above that and then there's this continuity of government in the case of a mer disaster emergency.

So it seems to be contemplating that if I'm creating a vacancy by death or resignation you go through the process of your you're filling the vacancy and then there might be a situation in emergency of let's say I'm kidnapped or something like that.

The mayor's not dead hasn't resigned the mayor is not able to discharge the duties it seems like the city I'm just I'm trying to understand the uh the roles and responsibilities of council president as you kind of enumerated tied to that two two two two um provision of continuity government in event of disaster of emergency where it explicitly um identifies the person with most tenure on council.

Yeah if there is any conflict between two two two two in city code and Idaho code 5608 that's a matter that may need to be re reviewed.

Um but it it does underline another principle you hit on that cities often will finer tune something at state law has to the extent there is a conflict here that maybe want to revisit um okay, thank you.

I I just know it uh it's not something I sit around radiate all the time.

But when we when we're prepping for the last council meeting, obviously with the council president appointment, I just re-familiarize myself with that section.

So it was an interesting provision, and I know some some citizens have inquired about it, and I've said I this is kind of interesting.

I don't I don't know um the rationale at the time the city adopted this ordinance, what they were contemplating as far as the intent behind um sort of event of disaster or emergency as a different sort of thing from the mayor just you know being gone for a month because I'm going on vacation or something.

Um so it seems to contemplate it says they shall fill that office.

So I think it triggers a lot of other things.

Does that mean the council seats sort of temporarily vacated and there's no provision for filling a temporary vacation?

Um it has this domino effect, obviously it's an emergency or a state of disaster.

So I just let's pray that never happens.

But if something apocalyptic happens, it seems like the the needs of the city need to move forward, and so we're trying to think of plan A, plan B, plan C.

So we might need to revisit this uh possibly, Council.

Yeah.

Well, it's a good point you raised up.

My office, I've um we've been doing uh research to really try to get an all off the shelf one piece of paper for what you do in emergencies.

If I'm not here or something you can say, okay, what do we do?

And you kind of read it and it's on one page.

Um this is something I think will add to it to see, okay, that's go through that succession and make sure that's super clear.

So it's a great point.

Um just briefly, the the you mentioned the the mayor may issue a state of emergency call that only lasts seven days, it can be continued by council.

The benefits of the state of emergency, we don't need to enumerate all of them here, but I think the the primary one is generally are we allowed to forego some of the procurement requirements and state statute to discharge funds um for an emergency.

I know I'm kind of putting you on the spot, but I kind of that's well the question is well time.

We just looked into this, and it probably means I can share with you once it's a finished document, um, kind of that grab off the shelf, what does this mean?

But yes, some of those procurement requirements are relaxed.

You know, if there's a snowstorm and people's lives are on the line, we're not gonna go out for a public bid and wait for all the bids to come in and open it.

There's obviously an exception that the health takes precedence over formality, and there is some la relaxation on that for sure.

Um for emergency authorized spending, that's right.

Okay, and then nutshell.

There'll be more details in that memo that we'll probably get out.

Okay, thank you.

And then on a holdback, um, I know there's been a lot of interesting debate because interestingly, the president of the United States has that office has long been frustrated by the inability um to issue holdback uh language.

I think it's being debated, maybe it's going before the Supreme Court.

Um, meaning when Congress authorize the expenses related to programs of the if the if the president doesn't want that money to be spent on a certain program, um does does the president can they unilaterally kind of with a scalpel say, nope, I'm not, we're not going to hire and stand up the program that Congress is authorizing.

It's creating some tension.

But it seems like at the at the state level as well as at the city level, we're expressly given as a as a mayor the ability to do some holdbacks.

But I think when you see the governor do it, it's usually like a percent across the board.

It's not like taking a scalpel and saying you're picking and choosing.

But I think in a recent state of the state, there might be some agencies that are protected from that across the board and whatnot.

So that's only in the state where we have a mandate to balance the budget.

Um I think what would happen possibly just quick example scenarios that let's say state shared revenues plummeted and our revenue projections are not going to occur.

Um we we sort of did this, I think uh Mr.

Rasing can speak to it when I was chief of staff back when COVID first hit.

There was anxiety in that first quarter or two.

I think we we put a hold.

I think mayor uh cling we kind of held vacancies just temporarily just to kind of wait and see what was going to happen in the financial climate.

So um the spirit of that is not to circumvent the will of council when you're authorizing funds to be expensed to um to accomplish the things that you want in the budget, but there are these unique circumstances that arise where we might issue a memo, executive memorandum where we're holding back vacancies, et cetera.

You have any thoughts, briefly?

No, you're correct.

We we did it at that time.

We looked at our costs and tried to just hold the line and not do anything that would damage the city's finances and just to wait and see where the processes it was cautionary, but it turned out to be a good thing.

It was cautionary, but it turned out to be a good thing.

We ended up okay, but cautionary.

I only just want to point that out to say that if that ever goes forward, the spirit of it would be because there's some good reason why there needs to be some caution not to circumvent the will of counsel.

Um but I think that that's the tension at the federal level.

This does the executive, can they circumvent the will of the the spending authority?

So must must the executive um go higher the person you say in the budget you want the city to go higher, for example.

So anyhow, thanks.

You bet only comment I might make on that.

Um I went back to the slide that had that point.

I thought it was notable as I was looking through other manuals and legal research.

Um that principle at a local government city level appears that that power is kind of derived inherent in the executive position.

Um whereas at the state level, there's an express statute that says governor can do it.

And so the the power or authority here is kind of implied or derived.

Um to but to my knowledge was not a statute expressly stating it.

Um but I think it would fall under that inherent power, just as a clarification.

And as Mayor noted before, um if we aren't able to get through the remainder of the slides, I think that there could be maybe a series where we in the next coming month or two, we follow up and finish up some helpful training, and it'll allow some time in between to let different questions come up.

So I want to talk about um issues you might or questions that often might come up as you are in public hearings, and it's along the conflict of interest.

Uh, there's two sections of law that talk about it.

One is the ethics and government, um, another is under the land use act.

The land use act has a tighter uh stricter standard, so I'm gonna focus more on that.

Um what it says is that a you know council member or member of the board or an employee shall not participate in any proceeding or action when the member or his employer, business partner, business associate, or any person related to him by affinity or consanguinity, explain that within the second degree has an economic interest in the procedure or action.

All right, that's like a concrete sandwich, trying to piece through that.

What is that?

Uh in other words, it what I have here is a visual.

I think it's helpful.

If anybody falls within the the those four corners that's presenting or part of this an application before you, right, think often anything, more likely it's a quasi-judicial, those land use decisions.

Um that is a mandatory recusal.

Um you are not allowed to participate, quote, in any proceeding.

And you might be thinking, well, who's not included?

So I put this here, the third degree.

If the individual at question is one of those in the third degree, the law says you're okay.

And then you come to this tussle of okay, the law says X, but what would be ethical?

What would be the spirit of transparency to the public?

Um I'll I'll iterate this many times throughout here.

I am here as your resource.

My job is to help protect the city organization, which includes its elected officials from liability or from any action you might take being undone.

That's a risk.

And so if there's any question of, hey, I know somebody here can call me, email me, and I'm here to talk.

And let's do it in advance.

We can give you a really clear direction on that.

So as I noted, um, it's a narrow bias, it's limited to economic interests.

Um we'll get on ex parte communications.

Um, unlike that disclosure of an economic interest, you say, hey, well, I'm disclosing, so everybody knows, that does not cure the conflict.

It's a hard bar.

It's a shall not, it's a mandatory, you got to recuse yourself.

Um, and there's a lot of implication there.

And the term participate means in any part of the deliberation.

So you can't deliberate and then step off for the vote.

Um, best practice, and I've seen it here, and in my time of private practice, you just leave the room.

So that influence is just left the room, and it's strictly with those who have a neutral interest in the matter.

Um this is just the higher uh uh ethics standard.

I was I should say this higher level ethics standard.

Um it just talks about spouse or children.

Uh but the one we hit on earlier, if we follow that, we'll always be compliant with this other more generic one.

So as I mentioned, you know, help me help you.

If you've seen Jerry Merguire, right?

Um so talk to the city attorney in advance.

I just I can't emphasize that enough.

Um I'll be here to walk through it and help give you guidance so that you can participate to the full extent you uh can and and play it safe, protect due process, impartiality, and the transparency in the public eye.

There is a small area of law about bias.

Um, and again, I just want to touch on it.

There's not a really robust case law on it, but there is some.

And what it what it says is that if there is actual bias, it has to be shown instead of just it appears you're being biased.

Um the one case I could find is a it's a pretty prominent case from 2006 in Cowan, and it says that um, in other words, if the bias is like before a matter even comes forward, and you say, I will never vote for X type of item.

You've pretty much said, I don't care what the public record says, I'm not giving you a fair shake.

My decision is already pre-baked without any consideration for your due process.

That's what the law is trying to get at.

That's the bias we're we're protecting against.

And so the guiding legal principle, um, and that you'll hear me say this a lot.

Your decision when you put on the robes is take the four corners of that record, and that is strictly what you're evaluating.

Um I'll share a quick story.

Uh I had my line of practice in my career, I haven't been in court a lot.

I've been advising counsels and representing applicants.

But the few times I have been were in a trial, it was a criminal trial, and the blessed prosecutors, they totally botched on some of their evidence.

And this guy, our client, when he walked through the door, you knew he was guilty as the day is long.

I mean, this guy was you knew it.

However, the judge had to restrain themselves to the four corners of the facts, and the frustration on the judge's face.

Um, I'll never forget it.

She knew this person was so guilty, but the prosecutor's case, the record didn't have the rec the necessary information.

They didn't identify that person with their witness.

What I'm getting at is the judge had her exercise a lot of restraint, and to her credit, she said, you know, I move to dismiss, you know, she she granted our motion to dismiss the case.

But she knew that it was the prosecutor, the record didn't have the information.

So just remember that four corners of the record, even if it violates your conscience in some ways, they're entitled to due process up there.

All right, ex parte communication.

Um, this is for you, Lord of the Rings fans, you'll recognize these pictures.

Um think of it this way when it's a legislative action, we'll get on what that is.

An ex parte communication, meaning talking outside of the record, that is permitted.

That's fair game.

However, when it's quasi-judicial, engaging in ex parte communication is prohibited.

You got to pump the brakes on it.

That's a bad place to be at.

So, what is an ex parte communication?

Ex parte is just kind of a Latin term for meaning like outside.

Um, it's private communications outside the formal hearing, meaning the four corners that could influence the decision.

These are prohibited, highly discouraged, and why?

Because it can undermine fairness and impartiality.

And there's good Supreme Court precedence on this.

I'm remembering that Cowan case I've mentioned just a little ago.

That's a great case that emphasizes that decisions have to be based on the record, the four corners of what's before you.

So ex parte, those contacts, they're pro they're not, think of it this way, they're not prohibited, but if it does happen, you have to bring it into the record.

So it has to be fully disclosed.

Um, a good case of that was for uh historic preservation versus Boise.

The court said it wasn't enough to say something happened.

You had to identify who the individual was you spoke with, and you must describe what was said, because that would show this is influencing your decision on that day.

And again, the constitutional foundation here, due process requires that every party is afforded a fair opportunity, build the record, and that record informs your decision.

So again, if if there's been an ex parte communication, um, I think I what I would advise is you can talk to me about it, say, hey, I've talked with so-and-so, just remind me how do I need to handle this?

That's where I'll help you say, okay, when the record, when the meeting opens, you're going to disclose that and the general nature of what you discussed.

Okay.

So what happens if you fail to disclose it?

All right.

And then it comes out, or there's allegations that there were communications.

That's where you get case law.

That's where people say my rights have been infringed, and there's so much on the line that I actually need to go to court to uh vindicate myself.

Um there's two good cases.

Cowan is one of them in e-cred that hit on this point.

Um that there was improper ex parte contact.

Um again, it undermines the impartiality of your decision making.

And so um I I think this is a really helpful time to talk about this matter.

What if there is a note uh passed between council members or a text or some other written communication of some sort uh during a hearing?

If it pertains to a quasi-judicial manner, remember those are the ones where you have the robes on, it's like usually a land use decision, right?

Um it could be considered an improper private deliberation outside the public record.

Who else there could have heard and known the content of it?

That's what that's the that's the concern.

So the best practice here is to disclose the act to ensure transparency.

Failure to do so could embolden an applicant to feel that their due process rights were infringed upon.

What if there was a note or text or some other communication from a member of the public?

Um if it was a party that is before you, or somebody that's discussing the substance of that application, that is probably a clear ex parte communication.

Again, we need to disclose that.

That's the remedy.

You can cure it.

It's not like it's a nuclear thing that blows up the whole thing.

Cure it.

Talk with me in advance, we'll just uh get it disclosed and allow that matter to continue forward.

It's better to nip it in the bud up front than try to hope that it doesn't become an issue, because you know it will come up and bite us in the rear end.

All right, another thing, another question that comes up about uh viewing the site.

The case law on this is somewhat scattered, but the principle is still the same.

Your decision should be what is in the record.

And so if you want to do a site visit, um, in theory, and I've seen this in cases, you can take the whole council there and notify the public that you're gonna be there to consider the site.

That's that's what you would have to do.

And so the rule really is it guards against unauthorized views, um, just to make sure the decision is in the four corners of the meeting.

And so you need to confine your decision to that.

If there's no notice that you're gonna go see the property, that's problematic.

If it's if there's a very strong desire to see it, then talk with me and we'll figure out how we could orchestrate that.

Usually, though, the applicant is going to present photos of the site.

They're gonna talk to you and show you what it is, and you can ask questions or poll up on a visual.

And so you can hopefully satisfy your curiosity or or your um your desire to by asking them to give you information and even staff in advance.

Um, you know, best practice uh think through the question, you know, did I go see this site?

I'm not talking about on your commute the work, you happen to pass it, but if there's an intentional deviation to go see it, um, give me a call, let's talk about it, see if there's any curing that we would need to do.

That's the principle.

All right, quorums.

This one's pretty straightforward.

Um we have six members of the body, um, we would need four if two were absent.

But what happens if you start recusing because of valid reasons?

The quorum stays intact.

If you started with the quorum, but then some of you fall off for whatever reason, the quorum stays intact.

All right, this other one, transcriberable record.

Uh this is where we think IT and clerk's office a lot.

By law, we are required to have a transcribable verbatim record.

Um, prior to joining the city, uh, when I represented applicants, uh there were times we'd have to request that and we would challenge it on judicial review.

And yes, we'd have to go through and listen to it all.

And if there was any gaps where the microphone was fuzzed, couldn't hear anybody, lost connection.

Guess what?

That's an incomplete record, and that was grounds that just to potentially challenge it.

And so, thanks to our good IT and clerk's office, they're always checking.

I think you even have a redundancy recording it even right now, see right here.

Yes.

Yeah, very good.

So we got that in spades right here, but that's why we have you speaking to the microphone.

And if somebody here isn't speaking, uh, mayor, whoever's presiding, make sure that they're audible.

All right, changing the agenda.

I think you're all pretty familiar with this.

It can be amended.

Um best you know, advice is err on the side of label it an action item because you don't all you don't have to take action on it.

But if you decide, oh, we want to, if it wasn't noticed as an action item, tough luck.

Um the public was not on notice, you'd be voting on it.

And so we have an agenda prep review, we go over this, we try to nip these in the bud.

Okay.

This would probably be a good one to got a few more here, and mayor, um, I'll defer to you on what time frame.

Um probably have, I'm guessing, another 15 minutes of discussion.

We can pause and pick it up later or try to run through what we got here.

Is this uh is this a good logical break or maybe push through this slide or a couple more or well one of um one of them will pertain there's there what's we have um we have public testimony and I believe executive session is questions that come up a lot.

I think those are the main two that we're rounding out at the end.

Um we got a cover, yeah.

I think we'll we'll well maybe just yeah, I think next agenda items um we can just push through.

I just want to make sure there's uh ample time for questions.

Does council have any questions?

If there's questions and there's important time to stop and answer some of those questions, then I'm seeing we're good, so let's try to try to push through.

I know we start a little bit late, but we we'll maybe try to do a hard hard stop at 8 10.

Okay, we'll push for that.

All right, um we if there's any agenda amending uh Clark uh the clerk's office and I we work together on that, and there's certain thresholds of what you need to uh uh um different agenda notice you need to give.

So a public testimony often it feels like this, right?

Not saying all of it is always pitch uh pitchforks and torches.

Um but there is a due process to the public uh and especially the applicant.

The the standard is that they need a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner to give their testimony.

Two minutes has been held to be not enough.

Three minutes is pretty general across the board and defensible, and as a kind of a guiding principle, the presiding officer, I use this term uh mode and manner.

I remember being in a packed room in like June or July of COVID, right at the height of all the political upheaval during social distancing, and there were standing room only, and the poor uh board commissioner was wondering what she could do.

And I said, You control the mode and manner.

If you want them to disperse, that is up to you.

So that is the prerogative of that position to keep order among the meeting.

Okay, we're this now.

We're getting into some of the executive session matters.

Um executive session really is a great opportunity for any city.

It it think of it this way the legislature says everything needs to be done in the public, but we recognize there's times when it's in the best interest of your uh constituents of your agency that you need to be in private to discuss.

Um a great benefit is to talk about legal matters in particular.

That's called an attorney client privilege.

The privilege is yours.

You, the city are the client.

Um my job is to keep confidence at everything I discuss with you.

It is your privilege to preserve and protect.

And I admonish uh you and all the city members that I give legal advice to to protect it.

So an executive session.

Uh typically we go into it with two-thirds vote uh of approval.

You can't hold a meeting just to have executive session, it's a 24-hour agenda notice.

Um, and like I said before, the the backdrop of the open meeting law, and I have it underlined here in blue.

The legislature says here's the default.

Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of this state that the formation of public policy is public business and shall not be conducted in secret.

That's a very clear standard for all governments.

Okay.

That said, even with that strong backdrop, they have authorized cities to go into executive session and and counties as well.

So what can be how do we approach that in a way that's legally compliant and responsible?

I think it's important to dive into what is the definition of executive session.

So this is probably what we'll end, Mayor.

Um here's a standard.

What bear with me as we walk through this.

First, no executive session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision.

Words matter in statutes.

So, what is an executive session?

That is defined as any meeting or part of a meeting of a governing body that is closed to any persons for deliberation on certain matters.

Now the term deliberation and decision you'll see are boxed here.

That's because they are defined.

So then you go down to what are those definitions.

So deliberation.

But it doesn't include informal and prompter discussions of a general nature that do not specifically relate to a matter then pending before the public agency for decision.

All right, welcome to the legal world of interpreting laws.

There's a lot here.

It's like stirring concrete with your eyelashes.

You're trying to get through this.

Oh man, this let me try to unpack it.

So a decision in the open meetings law.

It has a sp specific definition, not the common one that you and I might think is a defin a decision.

It has its own.

And it says that it's any determination, action, or vote, or final disposition upon a motion, proposal resolution, or measure on which a vote of the governing body is required.

So we have a lot of decisions that you make here publicly.

Think of the quasi-judicial matters that you make.

That is a final decision that requires a vote.

So obviously, we're not going to conduct our public meeting in a private setting.

We're going to have that full deliberation out here.

The record will reflect everything.

However, Idaho state law on open meetings is it makes it clear that deliberations and decisions that are not of a final nature can be discussed in executive session, but you still have to come under one of those, as you might recall, the categories.

So it's very narrowly tailored.

And we are um we are obligated by law to keep it narrowly tailored.

And the dep, but I think this definition is very helpful to walk through with the body here.

We're at 805 right now.

Um let's see if there had much more.

Councilman bills.

Yes.

So Preston is this slide here.

Is that language directly out of our code, idle code?

This is directly out of Idaho State Code.

Do you have that number?

Uh is it?

74-206.

74 and then the definitions are in 74201, I believe.

This is cut and paste screenshot from the code.

Yeah, you you've done a summary deal here.

That's right.

Yeah.

If you want to see the full uh it would be helpful, I think if you don't mind at some point to send that summary to council and mayor.

Yeah, and I can even have the whole slide deck available if you want as a kind of a reference at times if that's helpful.

I just think uh it'll be a good reminder for us.

Yeah.

The way you've condemned rather than trying to read the whole, but this is the meat that can continue to remind us where we're supposed to be at.

So yeah, and I won't be the first, you know, or the last to say that you know, laws sometimes are not straightforward.

I use the analogy, it's stirring concrete through eyelashes, right?

Um Councilman Griffin under appreciates that point, I'm sure.

Uh, but if you just kind of break it down into chunks, kind of see how they cross, reference each other.

You can start to uh piece together a tapestry of what is permitted.

And we will always be within that parameter.

Um we're always gonna act in good faith with any of these laws.

Um our understanding can be refined, enhanced, and that's why we have these helpful trainings and and research.

So again, I'll stand for any other questions.

There is one section here about reason statements.

Um maybe I'll do that, Mayor, if you're okay at at another time.

I think that's another one that give adequate attention, not rushed through.

Okay.

Okay.

Preston, that two-thirds vote to break into executive session.

Is that council vote or council and mayor vote?

That's council vote.

Yeah.

That's one of those legislative uh powers that you wear.

All right, that's a council decision.

Yeah.

Any other questions from council?

Okay, I thank you, Preston, for pushing through this.

I think um one suggestion I would have is once we work our way through this is to compile the slide deck into my recommendation in our office, some kind of obligatory office.

We'll we'll compile this maybe in a small binder or whatnot with other maybe even printing out.

I was contemplating not all of um Title 50 on city, but um maybe some of these relevant sections on an exec session, just do a straight printout of the whole statute and just have sort of a binder kind of cheat sheet um that you can uh keep in uh on you and use in the future.

So thank you, Preston.

Welcome.

We're going to uh we're gonna push through if council's okay.

Um trying to make up some time a little bit here, as the pilots say on the airlines sometimes.

We're trying to make up time.

We're gonna push through, not do a break.

Um chief of staff, Clay Long's gonna bring us through an update on intern e internal, not eternal operations.

Uh uh.

Uh internal operations and uh as well as uh there's there's some brief discussion that we need uh to have about boards and commissions this morning.

So thanks, uh Chief of Staff Clay.

Um the floor is yours.

All right, well, good morning.

Thank you.

I'll wait for that to load and make sure we're good.

Well, that is you should have the city Bible.

Um, and I encourage you to look through it.

Uh this has a a great opportunity to high-level know what the departments and divisions are doing, how they do it, um, as well as the the budget side of things.

So I'm not going to go into detail on those, but uh I did think it'd be helpful to give some context to organizational and operational and function um versus structure.

So kind of where uh building on uh as as Preston went through the roles and function on that legislative side versus the executive side, um, and then give some uh information on who best to go to for things that we can help council with, uh, and then some discussion on boards and commissions, as was mentioned.

So there's about 35 departments and divisions within the city.

Um so we've got uh several departments and then divisions within those.

Um when you look at the budget book, um, you'll see those kind of broken into some operational function areas, and then you'll also see that organizational structure.

Um thing I I did want to just highlight is as we go through the budget workshop process, um, each you'll have an opportunity to hear from each of our divisions and departments on what they've accomplished, what goals they worked on, um, maybe challenges they had, as well as what uh you could anticipate for requests in the budget process.

Uh one thing we were gonna ask is if you have ideas uh for the budget for those divisions and departments that you would bring those forward during the workshop setting, um and that'll give time for those divisions and departments to do some investigation as well as for the mayor to to review and identify if that'll be part of the the proposed budget that that comes to council from from the mayor.

I mentioned it's broken into some operational functions.

So these are the I would say big five, um, but this is not the organizational structure.

Um and and you'll see the differences.

So when we look and categorize those different areas, this still has the Ford Idaho Center, and that is because this is taken directly out of the budget book.

Um so I didn't want to create something different and then cause more confusion.

But we have our internal services, um, and those are really those components of the city that provide the operations uh for internal pieces.

Uh finance legal, utility billing, clerk's office, our workforce development and HR, and information technology.

Um then you have some of the broader areas, public safety, the community enrichment, development services, and public works.

Those combined in total um make up about 35 different divisions and departments.

What's not listed on there as a separate one is mayor's office, um, but that's more of the organizational structure as opposed to function.

So looking at the organizational chart, um, you'll see that this really is the how we function as uh from a hierarchy or our structure within within the organization.

In total, we have 811 employees, 650 full-time, and 161 part-time.

Um this is current filled.

So this number varies.

It's not the cap of what councils approve for FTP.

Um, and then part-time, obviously, depending on the season, it's higher during the summer for our parks team, um, and especially for the maintenance side of things on the in our parks.

But I did want to highlight mayor's office specifically, probably one of the groups that that you work most with.

Um Amy Bowman, our communications director.

Uh Kim Gardner.

Oh, she moved to my seat.

Perfect.

Executive assistant.

Uh Josh uh Borden is our citizen support coordinator.

Um the reason I point these out is it it could give you some help on who to go to for what.

highlight mayor's office specifically probably one of the groups that that you work most with um Amy Bowman our communications director uh Kim Gardner oh she moved to my seat perfect executive assistant uh josh uh bordon is our citizen support coordinator um and the reason I point these out is it it could give you some help on who to go to for what um so we've kind of tried to do some high level things council related topics um really with with the mayor and and there's a good opportunity during those monthly meetings that go on and have conversation um department requests if it has to do with the budget side of things uh we're gonna ask that it flow through obviously it'll be conversation and discussion with those department and directors but our number one goal is to make sure that that the mayor's office has the information to be able to provide additional context uh and and keep the mayor informed if it's operational inquiries um how do we do something why is something um more request uh I'll happy happy to facilitate that as well but if it's an inquiry to a department and we have as you know um and I would even say for for our newest councilwoman um we have a very dedicated and intelligent leadership team within the city uh and and all of our staff um there's no point in trying to be a content expert in everything because we have content experts in their areas um so don't expect me to try and give you an answer for things it's definitely gonna be my intent that we bring in that content expert but at the same time just a request for CC to let us know um so we can kind of track those as well for council events you'll get a lot of invites uh from uh Kim on hey there's a ribbon cutting going on or we have council meetings or we have uh workshops or or whatever the the item is that is your point person for all of those related things um as well as if you have a general inquiry need help I apologize even this morning we probably should have reminded the badge access is just on the back side we don't have badge access on the front so if you're here before much before seven uh for workshops we'll want to go the back side um but anyway just want to provide this uh I'm happy to answer any questions if you have on this um I'll pause for a second or if there mayor if there's anything you want to add there we go no thanks thanks chief I I think I think we're good then we shall move right into boards and commissions um there are many many many many boards and commissions that the city has uh we also have a lot of advisory groups that that are stood up um and this is both internal and external we have our commissions and boards that are owned quote unquote by the city and then we also have boards that that individuals sit on that are outside of the city purview so BRT or compass etc but there's some significant differences and kind of uh piggybacking off of what the attorney talked about when we look at the requirements for appointments for the positions on those boards and commissions that does come to the council for approval the the direction of the mayor as far as those uh council liaisons positions but there's a couple uh specialties which I'll I'll talk about um NDC being one of them as a voting member of that corporation that's a formal process because they are a voting member as that appointment happens um so that is something that comes forward to council um we have a couple items we want to discuss this morning and get some feedback from you as council um so I will give one quick pause before we move into that if there's any questions on the liaison and voting member differences.

All right so the first one we have a venue management commission the venue management is charged with venues uh and the priority or the the primary focus of that has been um the Fort Idaho Center and so uh in conversation with um the chair of the commission as well as internal recognizing that the city no longer has the Fort Idaho Center um there's really question on should we continue this commission or should we dissolve it and I'll preface that with during the um conveyance to the College of Western Idaho it was identified in the contract and agreement that there would be a joint uh committee between the institution and the city um for guidance and direction on the Fort Idaho Center comprised of two council members and the mayor from the city side um so it's not that there's losing uh involvement and engagement it's just whether or not the city should have a standalone venue management commission so I'll pause that councilman bills so um my thoughts would be that uh we just uh create the uh required committee between on the Fort Idaho Center and I think from there we ought to uh dispense with the current venue management and develop a civic center oversight commission type deal or committee that then's focus on helping to guide us on the civic center from both improvements as well as shows and that type of what you know the activity on that asset seems like it'd still be good to have community involvement on the civic center.

And I think from there we ought to uh dispense with the current venue management and develop a civic center oversight commission type deal or committee that then focus on helping to guide us on the civic center from both improvements as well as shows and that type of what you know the activity on that asset.

Seems like it'd still be good to have community involvement on the civic center.

Otherwise, I think it falls back on mayor's office or council.

So as far as what's going on with that piece of property.

But that you know, whether we well, it seems like if you're gonna have shows and operations and deal with the management company, whoever that might be, seems like there needs to be some public input or involvement.

And we typically, when we do go out to RFP for the venue management and even the food and beverage management, that is a committee that comes together to go through that process and select it.

Um I think one of the challenges um, or even and and maybe uh Councilman Rodriguez would like to speak to this.

He he is the staff liaison to the venue management commission.

Um from a facility maintenance and upgrade perspective, I think that's definitely where that value could come into.

Um from an operational of the shows, um, it's really the discretion of the venue management as far as of what they bring in based on what they feel revenue can come in at.

So um we can work on something to update this and maybe clarify that it's no longer Fort Idaho Center, but the Civic Center.

Um, and then currently it does talk about advise the mayor and council in regards to the operation maintenance and improvements of the Ford Ido Center, so we could change that to the Civic Center.

Yeah, I think so.

I I still think uh community members should be involved for uh giving uh advice or help on direction to the management company that's hired to manage the facility, whether internally it is or you know, a contract set up.

So the standpoint of what shows do come, uh there's you know you could load it and uh I think make a lot of good money.

It may run afoul with community standards, and so I think we have to still have uh some oversight there and to what community standards are for what shows are coming.

Okay.

Yes, uh councilman.

Um the thing I I'm can I'm considering and and and I do like Councilman Bills' direction on this.

I think uh if we are going to continue with the venue management uh uh throughout the whole city, not just the this the civic center, maybe we should have some uh some constituents involved in in in direction.

And I don't know exactly how far the the direction will be for the civic center because I don't know whether we've really kind of figured out whether out of joint district is gonna help with this or not.

Uh or whether the the city's gonna bank it, I guess if you will support it.

So I think those are the questions that we need to figure out.

But um there's a lot of venues that are going on in the city of Napa, and I don't know whether you want to expand the venue management throughout the whole city or just the civic center.

Either way, I think it would be a great idea to continue with that kind of smaller scale, maybe.

I don't think we need 15 people on the venue management for the civic center.

If you change the direction, uh mayor.

Yeah, um councilman's I'm um I'm trying to get up to speed on some of the items.

I think the the comments are well received.

Uh can you clarify IH2C that's not in our code, but I hear that there is, and this might fall under what Preston said earlier.

Sometimes the mayor may stand up sort of an ad hoc committee that doesn't go through a formal ordinance process, but um from my understanding that there is some sort of formal or informal citizen group advising on the Hispanic Community Center, is that correct?

That is correct.

We have an advisory commission.

An advisory commission.

I don't know if we formally adopted it in uh ordinance, Preston.

Are you familiar with that?

I'm not I'm not, I'll look it up though.

Okay, so I don't want to muddy the waters.

I'm I want to be kind of maybe consistent.

And what I'm hearing is we're standing up, obviously the CWA FIC with two council members that will need to be um sort of appointed to that as well as the mayor.

We have this this commission on um this committee regarding the Hispanic Community Center, and then at least the Civic Center under discussion, and then I've I've had a lot of citizens say they find it interesting.

And then I've I've had a lot of citizens say they find it interesting.

We have a golf advisory commission, which is very confined to just the golf courses, but we don't have a citizen citizen advisory commission when it comes to rec center parks, parks and rec program, which more broadly uh involves the community.

And I'm not necessarily here suggesting we need to stand up a parks and rec uh citizen advisory commission to give feedback on operations under our parks and rec programs, which is amazing, and and literally involves thousands of people in our community.

Um but I've been asked that question.

You have a golf advisory, but you don't have one on the broader parks and rec or rec center and the programmatic stuff.

Um maybe not this morning, maybe not this morning, but what I'm hearing from the collective feedback.

What I would like, if it's okay with councils to maybe come back and maybe discuss a little bit internally with with staff with chief um in and if you have feedback or input on maybe thoughts on this, and maybe you have some quick thoughts right now this morning, but I I don't want to try to preempt and close discussion.

I I want to respect the need to probably talk about this some more regarding venues and the different commissions we have related to different venues.

Uh Councilman uh Reynolds.

I think that um H2C advisory commission standalone the way it is.

That's fine.

Okay.

Um I think with the venue management, it would just be a title change uh for civic center, and it would be an advisory commission.

I feel like it needs to be there to be able to talk to the auditorium district and be a go-between for the district as they move forward with the maintenance and the needs and improvements for the civic center.

So I think that would however that looks for a number of people.

Downsize probably, but it still had constituents on it.

And mayor, we do have found we do have a NAMPA Civic Center Auxiliary Commission already in our code that does coordinate with uh it says liaison between the mayor, council, civic center management, and current members in good standing in the Nampus Civic Center auxiliary.

Um was that uh sorry, Priston, was that what became the venue management as far as in the formal distinction, or is there is that formally distinct of the that is distinct, yeah.

Okay, so I think it might it was uh it's probably I think we might have what I call a couple zombie commissions that aren't actually operative and we didn't strike the ordinance language.

I think there might be one more.

I think there's like a blue ribbon committee or something that's formally structured of we have a few community relations commission.

Yeah, there's a formal community relations commission.

Uh so this actually underscores, I think all the more reason why I think we probably need to do some cleanup and review all of our ordinances because I'm aware of some what I call zombie ordinances where things fell off.

It was no longer the will of the mayor and council for them, but they didn't strike it out of ordinance, maybe to keep it alive for the future to resuscitate, and you had the formal structure there.

Um, but if I am hearing from council input, is is it the preference of the council to at least have uh citizens advising on the civic center some capacity?

I I not maybe a formal vote, Preston.

How would you advise?

I gather guidance this morning from the it's a discussion item, so yeah.

Um these commissions, if you're making it uh permanent or non-permanent, is with advice and consent of the council.

Um and again, if it I understand, I think uh Clay pointed out a good distinction.

There's kind of a non-voting lane where it's just a liaison, just checking in versus like a formal position with a voting power.

Okay.

I will agendize in the future.

I I think there's enough guidance on here to bring to council um maybe what we do is we talk to V Management.

They have a meeting this afternoon.

Um we transferred those members if they're interested into the Civic Center Auxiliary Commission.

I need to refamiliarize myself with that ordinance and the structure of it.

Um so that might be clean and um I think we're good on that.

And then we will have to appoint.

Um, I know I'm jumping ahead a little bit, but if if members are interested in some commissions, I think we're directing people to indicate that to um Kim is gonna is gather all that input.

I know some have um communicated to me kind of preferences, what's on your wish list or things that you do not want to be on.

So we will um get through that.

But animal advisory, uh, the animal advisory uh clay, would you like to cover that?

Um this is something that came probably mid-summer last year uh when we were working through the animal shelter pieces.

Um there was a discussion about standing up an advisory council for the animal side of things.

We do have draft uh language for that if if it's something we want to move forward on.

Um as you know, we do have a new animal shelter provider through the county.

Uh moving forward, that contract is with the county directly, not with the city as the previous one had been that we were uh um a customer of West Valley.

Um so this is an opportunity if there's the the will or desire of the council to bring this forward for um consideration.

When do we uh clip the strings with the current uh property that we've been paying?

Uh they had sent out information that it would be the end of February.

I believe they're in conversations right now with the new provider and the county for them to come to some level of agreement of when that is.

The new provider was shooting for an April date to have time to get things set up.

But unless Captain Scoglin knows any more on that, um I think it's still the end of this month, uh the end of February.

Just uh uh mayor and council, Eric Scoglen from the police department.

Um we actually have another meeting tomorrow, so they are working through as the chief of staff explained, uh finalizing a date.

It's either February 1st, which is what West Valley had requested, or April 1st, which is what the uh Copper Cool Haven, which is the new provider um has requested.

It's they had a pretty good meeting last week.

Um it'll probably I'm gonna I'm gonna assume it might get pushed further than February 1st, but that that would be the earliest Mayor Hogebone.

Yes, Councilman.

Uh yes, I I think this is uh an excellent advisory council.

And uh I've been receiving a lot of phone calls about this, and I've been pretty involved with the animal uh folks here in town.

So unless the council wants to if you want to go through with it, uh keep me in mind.

I I wouldn't I would really enjoy being on this coun uh council.

If not, then of course you you have the ability to choose.

Okay.

Um thank you, councilman.

I think I'm hearing enough, and and my preference would that to bring this before council for your consideration in a formal structure.

I think the the amount of money that we are spending and will continue to spend on animal control, and a lot of that is tied to our ordinance that you you own in your legislative paths.

Um there's actually some fairly robust language pertaining to animal control.

Um some of that language may need to be revised.

I what I envision is an animal advisory council would help um make recommendations to the council um again in an advisory capacity um on maybe best practices and and changes, and then advise on whether or not the I would uh very much, of course, we would continue to lean heavily on Scoglin and his input captain um from an animal um control standpoint with the city's relationship on the operational level.

But there's a there's a wide broad host of services or potential services that may be issued within that contract that I think have significant community interests, whether it's low-cost spayed neuter or no cost bay neuter or a lot of those concerns, and I think that this is a this is a big big issue.

There's a lot of pets at our city, uh a lot of domestic pets.

Um lots there's a lot of strong emotions on this, and and and maybe we stand this.

I don't envision this advisory council being a council that's meeting every month and spending you know, um month, maybe a quarterly meeting where they're advising, and just like when we do updates on our code, that they can maybe do an audit of our code, make some recommendations and also make some recommendations when it comes to that uh management relationship.

Can you clarify um Clay if the relationship with Copper Quail are we answering into a month by month or a one-year um or a multi-year arrangement?

And maybe this isn't the time or place for that input.

I'm just the the RFP was for services on an annual basis.

So depending on what the county decides to do, it could be a one-year or whatever their comfort level is.

Okay.

Um, but the contract would be with them from the county, and then we would pay for services through the yeah.

So we're gonna be a party to a contract that we have no say yet, if I'm understanding.

The we'll be a um there'll be a provider to us.

Uh both Captain Scoglen and I were on the RFP process and have been part of the discussions.

The contract still hasn't been completely finalized, um, but essentially it was taking what the expectation and what was being done is with enhancements, mind you, um, of data and making sure that the animals are clearly tagged of where they came from from a city resident or not.

Um the level of services and expectations were all things that that we were part of for that discussion and that process, but the contract itself will be between the county and the provider.

Yes, and the county um I'm sorry, I was following up uh follow up by bills and the council member is so the county is billing the city and the the the agreement and what was provided in the RFP was based on the dollar value that was already identified.

Um it was very clear that that was that was the cap of what they could put in.

They have um proposal and and goal of of raising funds other ways and as as the mayor indicated, identifying ways to help reduce some of those uh that are coming into the animal shelter.

Um, but that was the dollar value that that was placed in there.

So do we know what right now what is being expected of NAMPA to pay for the the current budgeted amount?

Which is three or four I believe it's about 458,000 a year.

458.

Okay, because the bill that we saw yesterday was 40,000 plus for the one month.

So 458.

So I'd like to do that.

485 might be slightly higher, but it was about 40,000 but 458.

So it could be there between there and 483,000.

I don't remember off exactly the top of my head, but it's in the middle of the year.

No, I understand.

I'm just trying I thought the amount was a little less per month, so that's why yes, last night it the 40 stuck out at me.

So I'm sorry, you know what?

Um we'll get into this as it goes.

You got Victor with the question.

I will I will add, I think we need to have a staff um agency, kind of an update on this, formalized on a future agenda.

And I know there's still still some moving pieces, including a meeting that you're going to tomorrow, I think, right?

Then right.

So once uh once things get a little more fun formalized in that transition, then I will prepare a report for you.

Okay, thank you.

And we'll bring that, we'll bring that back.

Councilman Rodriguez.

Um, I I think you and Councilman Bills already took care of what I was going at is the financial side of what we're having to do with this now.

So yeah, as long as we get a copy of the contract and uh the finances, I'm I'm good.

Thank you.

Okay, okay.

Okay, very good.

All right.

Um the last thing I had.

I've already talked on this, so we'll just go through is just the next step ask, and mayor already indicated this.

If you have a preference or a request for a border commission that you'd like to be a staff liaison or representative on, to just uh email that to Kim, and that way we can we can compile all that thanks, Clay.

Appreciate it.

Yeah.

I'd appreciate being an appointed uh council president or so when that comes up, yeah.

I'm in the room.

All right, appreciate the two hands behind your back.

Long the ankles being tied, yes.

Um at this at this stage.

I um as I suggested at the beginning, I would like to go through the just the uh reaffirm.

This is a reaffirmation as I understand pressing to speak to I I made reference that this was this occurred in the summer, but there's something I don't know if there was a technical yeah, and I'll hit on that.

Uh and some of you are more familiar with this document than I am.

As I understand, it's one that's been reaffirmed annually or some regular basis.

And this summer um it was signed, as I understand, with just kind of one off signatures rather than a formal governmental act.

And so to make it more formalized and official, um, like you would do with the proclamation or resolution.

We're bringing it here as an agendized item to then be approved.

Okay.

That's why it's it's brought before us.

If you've had hopefully you've had an opportunity to review this, I remember signing this as a council member, and I think I think it's but I don't know how far back this goes.

I think council is unanimously saying this for decades.

Umce it's signed, we usually display it somewhere in the council chambers or the lobby.

Yeah.

Um it'll be back there somewhere.

So um any questions or a motion that's the bylaws deal.

This is this is the code of conduct.

Code of conduct.

Mayor, I have a comment.

Yes.

Um this is out of order.

Okay.

Um for myself, I uh I am not comfortable on at this point.

I think I'll be a no vote until we have some bylaws to back it up.

And the reason is we found out this past year that uh it was just a piece of paper on the wall with no enforceability.

And so we don't see the point of signing a document without something to enforce it.

Okay.

Any other council comment?

Okay.

Can we jump to one four then, Mayor?

Yes.

Get it done so we can finish that one five.

Okay.

We'll we'll we'll move the order or move the order back.

That's okay.

And again, this was loosely binding.

Um we as we go to one four, um maintain the proper order.

Thanks for your feedback on that.

Preston has done a lot of work compiling feedback, and I know that this process started weeks ago, and so this has been a um a process.

It's included input from a lot of council members as well as myself on the language that's included right now in its current form before you.

I I will say that uh a lot of cities, just on my own research, it's it's not uncommon to find cities with a lot of legislative bodies have rules of decorum in a self-governing sense that doesn't necessarily take the form of their statute, which is clear violation of law, and then there's even in our state legislature, there's rules of decorum.

I don't know if you're allowed to eat Cheetos or not from the floor, things like that are debated, like do's and don'ts of appropriate behavior, and and you're subject to potential disciplinary action from the chair.

And I know that could feel sort of authoritarian, but the intent is to maintain a sense of decorum and etiquette, and so you have rules for legislative bodies as well as Congress at the U.S.

level, there's lots of rules there.

Um whether it's the will of this body to arrive at um some set of consensus on on what's enumerated here is is open for discussion this morning.

Um I will say that I I do believe that there are certain elements in here that are super important.

Umfidentiality and executive session is an important one.

There are some states where you have a duty to maintain confidentiality.

Idaho does not have that legal mandate, so it's not against the law necessarily, but it it it definitely um creates uh tension and and and awkwardness if we cannot trust the the whole reason you have executive session is to be able to retreat um in as a body and to have those discussions, not for those to be publicly disseminated.

So that's one example among others that I think are addressed in this.

So Preston, would you like to?

And I know we're we'll push through on this, kind of take it top to bottom.

Is that okay with council to kind of do a quick fly through on the relevant sections on here?

Yeah, yeah.

Mayor.

I just for the sake of time.

I know we're nearing nine o'clock.

Uh if we could, I think all of us have reviewed this.

Can we jump straight into the discussion of it?

I agree with that.

Because I think just the review of it will take 15 minutes, and we're gonna need to.

I'm good with that because I I don't want to unnecessarily review stuff if you're already ready.

So you go go you can go ahead.

You want to would you like to start Sebastian Griffin with I think if I could just make one quick insertion and then let you guys run with it?

Um, since sending this out on Monday, I believe Monday afternoon.

There are some cleanup items and some have reached out.

Thank you for that.

Mainly it's just a few grammatical things, um, such as the nature of drafting.

So I have flagged those.

Um, I have my staff here, Kirsten, to help take notes as we discussed today.

So with that, turn over to Councilman Griffin.

Uh other than what I had previously emailed, and it was just grammatical changes more than anything after another pass through.

Uh section 107, the meeting attendance in advance notice of absence.

Just a comment.

I agree that we should all be giving advanced notice if we're not going to be attending, so the mayor and staff can prepare either for remote participation or for um giving a heads up to the speakers so they're not caught off guard.

I think we had one occasion where it was uh a surprise.

The only change I would have is in subsection C changing the word unexcused to unnotified.

I don't think we need to be excused to be gone, but we should give notice.

So that was the only piece there.

Remote participation 108.

I had emailed Preston my recommendation.

Uh there was a change only with and then it was uh removed.

I don't know what we ended up with the permanent language.

My recommendation would be everything past teleconference be deleted.

That being said, I believe that we have a means for those of us that need to to pre uh remotely participate.

That was a means that we've had since COVID.

It continues.

I don't believe that council's participation should be something that should be decided to get approval or not.

Um by a presiding officer by a mayor.

I think we limit our authority when we do that.

I were recommend the deletion of B all the way through, because there shouldn't need to be a request of participation.

You should just notify and then uh have those accommodations provided.

And then 204.

Uh the only change that I had in subsection A, there's a shall, you shall report such concerns.

Um I don't want to be bound to shall.

I think it should be a should.

And I think we should allow the spirit of the law, in my opinion, to govern what we should be reporting because I think any time that there's a violation, we're going to get bogged down uh with a lot of headaches, but everything else looks good to me.

Councilman Griffin, that last one, what was that number?

204 duty to report violations on page, I don't have page.

A.

And it's line three, the second letter or second word in line three.

Information shall report such concerns.

The binding shall, I think should be changed to a recommended should.

Okay.

I think I'd I would add that instead of report, it would be shall advise.

Should it should report shall advise?

Is that what you're saying?

Councilman Bills.

Either or.

It should advise is fine.

Okay.

And then maybe duty to report should be process of reported violation or something.

Because I I think it it does soften a little bit, but I I do appreciate councilman um sharing that uh it is a should.

Um, but but it does have it's it says duty in the shall.

So clearly that there is this binding of of the the conscience and sort of a self-enforcing sense to report.

Um and then all the other items.

Um spoke very quickly.

Um hopefully everyone followed through with notes on all the other items that he shared.

So I just say uh kind of open it from there.

I appreciate uh your input.

Um other comments or thoughts or responses to the recommendations.

Yes.

Um regarding the what's what is text or received or sent.

Um I don't have a problem with with the community having uh uh or let's say my my text is which I I will not do.

But what one exception to the rule is is is this we're here for five or six hours.

And uh based on the attitude of politicians and elected officials by some uh of our constituents, that I tend to be very careful when it comes to my family and my property.

So uh I will uh so often I will however often I can will monitor my home from here and my family.

And I may text Delcy and make sure that everything's okay.

If the city or if if the constituents file a record request, sure I don't have a problem giving that to them, but I do have a problem with giving my home address, even though it's way out there, it's out there.

Everybody knows where I live anyway.

But just for some of those that I am concerned, and and and I will be uh checking the security of my family.

And so uh I just want you to know that on the record.

Sure, sure.

I think councilman is you bring up an important uh point.

I I will reserve the right.

Um all of us probably to some degree may get text from spouses or loved ones or our kids uh about certain issues.

I think the the concern I would refer back to legal counsel is if we're in a quasi-judicial matter and there is correspondence with individuals.

There's it's it's it's not a it's not illegal to receive that correspondence.

You you I would say maybe legal can say you have an a duty to notify and put on the record any information that's being communicated to you, because the information that we're processing, we're we're all in it together.

So in a public hearing or in a quasi-judicial matter, we're supposed to be processing information as a collective body based on what's placed on the record.

So I'd say the deep not to necessarily encourage um texting with constituents.

Um otherwise, I think I my main concern is to limit legal liability or to have uh decisions of this body questioned by applicants and then have to go through a cure process and incur liability upon the city.

So I don't think it would necessarily apply to that.

However, if if we look distracted on a very important matter when someone is testifying from the bench or proposing an exhibit, and we're we're you know clearly texting on our phone, um, it does call into question those things, and those those would be subject uh because we're on the clock, as it were, and uh the the they don't know what we're doing.

And so if a public records request comes in, um I I would again defer to legal if those requests come in.

It's just I think there's a duty to notify you that you're subject to that public records request that may come in.

The scribbling on notes and passing stuff, again, we do not want to give the impression that there is deliberation occurring sort of in secret among members, amongst ourselves.

This is where things are very different from the legislation, uh the uh the legislature, you go to the legislature on the floor, you might think they're being rude, and they're not.

It's just their decorum and in some ways are far more strict than us in some regards, and in other areas, they're on the phone literally right up to a floor vote.

They're literally calling and talking to one another, um, talking to constituents, lobbyists, people on the floor right before they go into a vote.

So they are even when people have the floor and are talking, other people are on the phone, and it looks like it's rude, but that's that's kind of the custom because they're a large uh legislative body, and so um, but for us, I just caution us.

I appreciate Councilman Rodriguez's comments.

Yes, legal.

And Mary, I'll just add on to that uh add another clarification in the legislature sense, they're passing general laws for the whole state.

It's not a quasi-judicial matter for one applicant, hence their ability to have our favorite word ex parte communication.

Here, when you have a public hearing item, quasi-judicial, think of this as the proverbial table out here.

Everything needs to be thrown on that table that's in consideration.

And as I said before, if somebody does talk to you about it, what's the remedy?

You disclose it.

You disclose who it was and the general nature of it.

That way people are aware of what went into that decision.

Um so that is an ex parte issue, and the remedy is is clear, and we'll I'll continue to just coach and reiterate that.

Sounds good.

Um to Councilman Griffin's points earlier, just briefly on the unnoticed as opposed to unexcused.

I I appreciate that input and feedback.

Um, noticing that um I I don't I don't have the power to excuse you or to bind you in attendance.

However, the law uh you are subject to the law, and I think Preston did does a good job in referencing certain code section here with that importance of three successive, I believe, um, I'm scattering around.

This rarely becomes an issue, and and maybe Preston can speak to this more another time, but I think it happened up in North Bonner's school district um last year or two years ago.

There's certain members on the school trustee board who were refusing to gather to prevent a quorum, and it was preempting and and freezing the ability of the school district to do business.

And at that point, I think the sheriff was dispatched because they were at that point subject to um, you know, I guess it's it's I think called malfeasance um in the law.

So there's dereliction and malfeasance because there was not an excusable reason that they notified, like if someone's getting like cancer treatment on chemo.

So I think what would be relevant to the disclosure of that is it's understood this person's not trying to preempt a quorum, this person's legitimately sick and absent, they would not be probably subject to the penalties of the law.

But if someone is in good health and they're just choosing to be uh, you know uh try to prevent, then they're there may be subject to the law.

Unfortunately, that I've never seen that here in the city of Niampa, and hopefully that never happens.

But I think I think that that's a distinction that matters most.

Is as to remote participation.

Um the law only requires one anchor person to be physically present, and everyone else may participate remotely.

The the state law uh allows for that provision.

Um that being said, I I appreciate sort of the spirit of what Sebastian uh councilman Griffin shared with you just notify and we make the accommodations.

I'll just be honest, just briefly on the record.

The thing that gives me the most anxiety is if you are remote participating on a quasi-judicial matter or a public hearing item.

If I do not, if we do not know the applicant knows that we have your undivided attention in the remote context, that's where I I'm concerned.

And looking at other cities, they sometimes make that distinction where remote participation may occur.

It's an entitlement up until a quasi-judicial.

Um I think there's language here that says you shall be on video, and then we soften that in this version that says I think it's should be on video.

Um I I would recommend that that should be a shall for quasi, I would say at least quasi-judicial and public hearing items.

I know that's a very nuanced um, I would say sh should maybe for other items, but I would either, you know, my my preference is to not allow it period to either hear you or not for quasi-judicial public hearing items, or if you are remote, you have we have to see the video feed, and the applicant needs to know that your undivided attention is being given to the meeting, especially with the presentation of exhibits that might be presented by the applicant, which you have an obligation and a duty to uh process.

So that would be kind of my my feedback and response.

Uh otherwise, I feel if if councilman Griffin's okay with those amendments, they need to be redrafted and brought before this body for formal adoption.

But if in good faith, um council's okay with that, but again, any additional council contributions or comments or responses.

Yeah, councilman.

So section 108 for remote participation.

Um my comments are like uh if you work that out for the permission or excuse for the card with the your camera.

That way I would be okay with that language.

Uh executive session is a no-girl from the meeting vote and it should be what happened and the slow walls happen.

Okay.

And then um but I think it should be um, not uh common practice, it should be an exception to participation.

Shouldn't be common via currents for the meeting.

I think person had some language.

Um I would be comfortable with that, you know, at the legislature, you can't uh me at all.

If you're gone, you're gone, and you need to be gone and be gone.

I mean on vacation and call in here.

Very good.

Yeah, thank you, Councilman Reynolds.

Um I just wanted to touch um on what uh councilman Dale or uh Reynolds just said.

Um the problem that you have when you're um giving a notice ahead of time, and I don't expect this to happen with our current mayor, but if I let the mayor know that I'm gonna be gone in two weeks, then they have the opportunity to adjust the agenda so that they get what they want according to the votes that they know will be coming.

And so I have a problem with that, although I do think as a courteous um as courtesy that we should let you know within a few days.

But um, if if I'm required to let you know before the agenda is set, or even after the agenda is set and the agenda can be changed, then I think that that's um that gives me a problem.

Also, I wanted to say that um as section 204 is just absolutely unknown to me.

I'm not gonna be a tattletale on my fellow council members.

Um I think that that's something that um yeah, that's just and then my other um concern is on page uh or section 102 is um if I accidentally call the mayor, uh Rick, am I in ethical violation?

If I accidentally say somebody's name or um and I don't call them according to what this says I have to call them, am I an ethical violation and and who gets to decide, you know, what what happens to me and how does this um and I I'm just not inclined to vote for this as it is.

I just I'm not okay.

Good feedback, thank you.

Point of clarity.

So section 204, you said nothing in 204, is that correct?

Um yeah, 204.

Okay.

So I think, Mayor, if you don't mind, I think um part of the reason for 204, it's it's more of an accountability piece where we as a as a body are to be self-governing, and this doesn't necessarily mean that we're tattling on one another, but if there is a violation, we have an ethical duty as we sit in the seat we're appointed here, we're we're elected to be here.

It's our ethical responsibility to ensure that we are abiding by the law, and if we are aware of something that's unlawful, we should be held responsible to that.

So I I think there is element here that we should keep that.

You sound uh councilwoman, you sound similar.

I think the should language to what was shared by councilman Griffin.

Um it would be great if if the six can reach uh unified consensus.

I I I realize that you know you might have uh clearly you all have your own conscience and convictions, and I appreciate kind of the spirit of being candid and saying what what is it within here rather than just saying wholesale rejection.

I think on the notification, if you were to be gone, say council member um Scog just for just the logistical purposes of knowing that you are gonna be gone so that we can look for you and remote you in.

I it's it's really the accommodation on the remote.

Um I think maybe that language could be within 24 to 48 hours.

Not that we would not let's say you wake up sick that day.

I mean, clearly the the way this is written, I think that we we should have some flexibility.

You might you don't you didn't notify you're gonna be absent because either you're gonna wake up sick and you're sick, and it's like, do we have a duty to accommodate you?

I'd say, of course we're gonna accommodate you.

It's like mayor, I'm sick, I'm gonna can I remote in um or I've been exposed.

If you're you know during the COVID time, I I need I'm under quarantine.

Um so maybe on on on that issue as far as the time in which you're notifying, and I appreciate you not thinking agenda will be adjusted based on someone's absence, but I understand the the concern that council member might have on that.

Um I would just say we'll circle back on on that one as to uh 204.

Mayor on that one though.

I think one thing to remember is that even not necessarily um public hearing items, but council has the authority at the bench even in the moment to adjust and and make an amendment to the agenda.

Correct.

And so knowing that it can be that that kind that's like a moot point because it's it's something we could literally do right in the exact moment, knowing somebody's not here.

So that that it that is true.

Um I we're up against the nine.

Are we okay with extending to 915 at the very latest as a hard stop?

Okay, I see head nodes.

Okay.

Um councilman Bills.

Okay, so 204.

I would suggest if it hasn't already that it would be more of process to report, not duty to report.

Um and I like the idea of get rid of shall and say may.

So it's not an obligation.

It's just if you are gonna report here here's the process.

Here's the process type of deal.

And uh on that item, I wanted to make sure that then now over to um 109 D.

If that we it says all discussions and decisions in executive session that we struck out and decisions.

There are no decisions.

I just want to make sure that was taken out.

Um I think uh if there's some language aspects in here that goes along with the idea of courtesy as opposed to shalls and must may help temper a little bit.

It it's uh it's just well to that there's a joint uh acknowledgement of responsibilities and how we're trying to guide our uh association and treatment of one another in my mind.

So if that helps in terms of kind of the revision part, or as we go.

Yeah, yes, and I don't know if that helps.

That does help.

I appreciate that because I I feel like we're we're putting laws on us, or we're trying to be each other's bosses or um whatever.

I also would like to see something on here where this sunsets at the end of a year or at the end of two years election year, because once we vote on this, if this is put in law, you know, it's it or if this is made into an ordinance.

This is something that is wonderful if you have a good mayor and a good council.

It's also something that could be detrimental if you don't and very much manipulated.

And so I would like to see that this um be sunset after, and that you know that I'll leave that to the discretion.

But after if we do vote this in, that it would be um either a year or two years.

Clarification, mayor.

We could have language in that just says this this shall be reaffirmed uh you know, first or second council meeting of each year, or uh the change the second year or something that way I wanted to respond quickly to something else prior, just so I don't lose the thought as far as the how we uh address one another, councilwoman Scog.

Um I think what we're saying is this is the expected decorum.

There's not necessarily a punishment per se.

Um I've noticed kind of the decorum again at the legislature and uh in a legislative committee.

If someone forgets to go through the chair, for example, the chair, I know it's awkward for the chair, chair has to kindly remind someone, please address the chair first and whatnot.

And it's just that kindly reminder.

If now the person subsequently just decides to repeat it, we just disregard it's a show of disrespect.

The chair has the discretion of saying, you know what, you're gonna be kind of sidelined.

So that's not intended to be a threat, notorium threat to try to exclude someone, but we need to have ordered decorum.

So really this is just to provide teeth that if we're speaking to each other in a disrespectful tone and choosing to intentionally kind of rib one another by not using formal titles that I may say, can we please address each other with the formal titles?

And if someone shows continued disregard, that could potentially escalate.

Um I I think I think the potential force would be really if the intent not the mistake and then oh, sorry, it slipped, um, but repeated disregard where you're showing sort of contempt and and disrespect that um we would would be able to call that council member in order, if that makes sense.

Mayor, I appreciate that.

I would like to see something in that form worded in this, then rather than you shall not or you shall do this and shall do not do that.

So I do agree that um removing those um shalls and must or whatever um all throughout here that it would make it um a little less diplomatic because I'm all about decorum and I'm willing to sign on I agree on executive order 100%.

Um I just don't think that forcing it down on people is on us is proper.

Gotcha, thank you.

We had on the left side I I just was going to concur on the effective date changing it that it renew should should be renewed every after every election cycle, similar to our code of conduct, it should be signed after every new council.

Doesn't require us to sign, it doesn't require them to be bound.

But if changes or amendments need to be made, then so be it.

I would agree with that.

I'm hearing just for the record, councilman Jingela agreed with what was shared by Griffin.

I think the only question I have on that, and I want to respect the 915 hard stop, is um if we're adopting by ordinance, I I would defer to legal, and maybe this isn't the time or place right now to tease out, but to come back to you whether you put a sunset date on the the need for re-ratification by council for it to remain effective beyond an election cycle.

Um but I think the intent here was to codify in our ordinance that this is it.

So when you get elected, you're sort of inheriting this.

You're being elected into this environment.

You still reserve the right.

I think this would be helpful.

Maybe there's two ways of looking at this, and I think Sebastian, uh Councilman Griffin, sorry.

Uh we're gonna get the police griffin, I think, picked up on this.

You know, is as much as you're binding this into the future, it is subject to change if it has a uh a two-thirds a majority threshold.

And I'll just say out at out of the outset, in order to uh adopt this out of out of the gate, we need four out of six council members, certain that way, a majority of council.

And then it could be subject to further revision, uh potentially with a sunset date, but we can maybe bring a couple versions before council as a follow-up.

Um, but I heard you kind of agree.

I think councilwoman Jangulin.

I know Reynolds, Councilman Reynolds uh uh has the floor next.

So uh real quick, um just wanted to comment about the um timely notice for meetings in response to councilman.

Um I think uh 24 hour notice somewhere in there would be appropriate and and one of the reasons why would be uh the mayor is is his meeting, and if he if we have three or four of us would all sudden tell him we're not gonna be here because we're sick or whatever, and he can't have a meeting.

He can't have a meeting.

So I think it's important that we have that language in there.

And then I'm fine with 24 hours.

Um probably too close.

Yes.

Um and then uh the uh as far as the decorum.

You know, it's we we all uh from time to time call each other by first name or last name or whatever.

But the decorum that the public sees from this dais has got to be uh exaggerated so that they see that we have respect for one another, and then they'll echo that if we don't have that, we lose it from the public side and becomes a problem.

So and then as far as the uh the sunsetting, I don't particularly like that.

I guess I'd have to see some language on it because to me, if you have an election cycle, and you elect it can be a double-edged sword here.

Uh we say we get uh really bad counsel at the and there's the rules are not in place, and they come in here and they go, Well, we're gonna vote on this again.

No, we don't want this.

There's no enforceability, there's nothing, and there's no rules.

It uh becomes a wild west again.

So I feel like this needs to stay in place.

Um and maybe not on an election cycle for a decision because you could potentially have three new council members for election cycle.

Um not have any really important thing.

Mayor.

Okay, thank you.

I just want to make a comment.

So the in the resolution it says but explicitly here that the purpose of the bylaws is establishing the integrity, the honesty, addressing conflicts of interest, and it goes through and it tells us that this is basically binding council to making sure that we are being good stewards of public trust and responsibility.

And so I we have to that that is the purpose of what this is, and I think it is important that council when it does change that those council members have the opportunity to have a voice of what that looks like as a new elected official.

So I would prefer to have it stay with the election cycle.

Uh you mean after the election cycle.

Correct.

Not in September or October, but in January.

Mayor, if I could, I think you what you articulated is where my mind is at.

There is amendment language in here.

It can be amended, it could be amended with a majority, something along those lines.

Even if we have three turnedover seats, you still need a fourth.

And so I think there's got to be cross consensus uh every time there's a new batch of council members.

So I'm fine with the speaking through fine with the language and the effective date until amended or appealed, repealed.

I think just specifying amended with a majority vote, something along those lines.

Or to be reviewed after something that just puts notice on all because for me, I didn't know the code of conduct existed because I hadn't signed it until this summer.

So win a year and a half without me even knowing about it.

So maybe having language should be reviewed after each election and may be amended by a majority vote.

And it currently has language for two-thirds majority for amending, so that's in place.

And sounds like there's consensus on maybe an annual reaffirmation, you know, uh revisiting it, something like that.

We could I could put something like that in there.

It's always a good reminder, similar to the presentation we got today of what are our roles, what are we bound to, what do we expect of each other.

Yeah.

So council, it sounds like we're I I sense there.

This has been helpful constructive feedback.

I think um we're getting close.

We're getting close to drafting something.

I do appreciate Councilman Scott making clear your affirmative support for say the executive session provision, and and then there's certain aspects that are like, hey, I think this should be adjusted a little bit.

I I do want to note that we are um sort of uh well requesting in here to reinforce the executive session part to ask council to sign um looking at this.

This is 202D uh each year after taking off uh confidentiality and non-disclosure acknowledgement in form adopted by resolution of the council maintained by the city clerk.

So that adds more teeth to the executive session, even though the state of Iowa doesn't make it against the law.

We are saying we are binding ourselves to kind of a duty of confidentiality in executive session, which is important, and then there's provisions on there when it may then proceed.

The discussion has become public, it's released now.

You may go, of course, if any council member feels that there's a violation in executive session, we're not saying you're muzzled from disclosing that if if a you know some sort of law has been broken.

But um I I do think that that's important.

Then there was one other part really quickly after the I think the hearing procedure is is helpful as as President enumerated that.

After the, I think the hearing procedure is is helpful as Preston enumerated that.

However, there are strictly stricter penalties if you file the report knowing it to be false.

And we have language in there that you shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Um I thought that that language was was too strong.

That's my opinion.

I don't know what this body thinks.

I um I said potentially an infraction.

A misdemeanor can tie it up to lots of other legal uh, but but what we're trying to say in that is if you knowingly, and that bar is really high to say that you knowingly were lying and and filing up for reporting at someone.

So this is really intended to be like don't perjure.

Don't don't like so you need to have strict penalties on perjury to maintain the credibility of the body.

So I I was suggesting infraction instead of misdemeanor on the consequences of that.

But the president and mayor, if I might add it'd probably be a lot simpler to just keep it as a violation of the bylaws itself rather than try to rope in some sort of outside to court procedure.

So and where I know we're all hit out the door, just so I get some clarity because we do have input from six, seven directions.

I'm trying to get consensus.

I'll just run through my notes really quick.

What I heard.

Should we stop you if you don't agree with something?

I'll because the I'll defer to Mayor.

Proceed.

What I have here were items I kind of heard consensus tell me otherwise.

Um we have a reaffirmation annually, soften language to should, especially in addressing one another, how we do that encouragement instead of shalls.

And then scrolling down to section 107, changing advance uh inability to attend to 24 hours as a courtesy, not 48.

And then further down in 108.

There was some proposals from Councilman Griffin about removing of language.

I didn't hear any other comments on that.

Do you want me to reflect those for the next draft?

This would be about getting permission for participating via the L T.

Sure.

And I do agree with Councilman Reynolds that we don't want all five, like just five of you repeatedly consistently being absent.

So if we don't want to runaway train, but we you know I think that was the intent.

If it gets to that point, we need some mechanism to address that.

But um, but but but will you include the quasi-judicial or public hearing item that the camera is a must?

That that's my proposed language.

Okay.

Um let me get to that in just like so just be clear on section A and B.

Um there was uh uh suggestion from Councilman Griffin to remove most of that language.

Is that the consensus?

Just to be or is that for further discussion?

Maybe further discussion.

I think maybe we did it to just notify and then put the same 24 hour in there.

That's B here, yeah.

108 A and B.

It talks about getting you know permission or the acknowledgement that they'll be appearing remotely.

Um and B is a 48-hour notice for appearing uh remotely.

Okay, and then for C, what I'd recommend to make it a little cleaner and easier is just state for public hearing action items, because sometimes you get an application that has quasi-judicial and legislative mixed into it, annexation and zoning.

Okay.

Um and then uh 204, where I heard consensus was softening the shall report.

I heard uh should um or may report.

I I'll put one of those in unless there's a consensus may report or should report may report and procedure of reporting violations process.

The title of it would change the process.

Okay but once a report is filed, it triggers that process.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah.

So I think may rather than should, because should encourages it.

May is it's at your discretion.

Semantics.

And I'll just defer to the we can have both words brought forward.

I mean, all of this will still have to be formally ratified.

Okay, those are the notes I had.

Okay.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

With that, we are over the hard stop.

So I um a motion to adjourn.

All right.

Thank you so much.

All in favor.

Sorry.