Oh yeah.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Ladies and gentlemen, we appreciate we're gonna commence our meeting here in a moment.

Thank you.

Scog present.

Tingula Bills here.

Reynolds Rodriguez.

Here.

Griffin.

Here.

All present.

Counselors.

Uh I've done just a slight uh summary that I wanted to walk us through for a few minutes and talk about uh kind of the process.

It seems that the feedback that uh has been given is uh gonna be a shorter process than what uh we were looking at uh last week, and uh we appreciate uh staff's work on uh putting together a timeline of review and a timeline of uh possible steps so that uh we would get uh done by June 15th.

Uh feedback individually from counselors to myself uh that I've uh asked for over the last uh two or three days in separate uh calls and discussion, not a serial meeting.

Want to make that clear, uh just simply seeking out uh some direction and input uh would lead us that uh I don't see uh some of those things that we were uh brainstorming about to come forward.

So quick discussion overview, mayor.

As we discuss and think about uh a person, uh I just put down that it's got to be a person of character, demonstrated ability to speak in public to an audience, experience at a ministering meetings, able to be prepared ahead of the meetings, and a time set aside to coordinate with council members just from uh straight operation and what we've experienced, all of us here at the DIES, what we experienced during the weeks uh of council meetings, and what we experience uh in between.

And so uh obviously what we're looking for initially there was uh discussion that uh if we wanted to take what I call full-on application SOT that we would invite any and all applicants for the position to be able to apply.

Staff set up the packet for being able to do that.

The feedback I have gotten from uh council members is to not uh take that route.

It looks laborious.

It looks also uh difficult to discern uh folks who haven't been involved to uh to now make an application.

Had one uh email this morning and uh saying uh when can we apply?

And the first so we responded uh with uh do you know for sure you live inside the city limits of the city of Napa?

And uh and so suggested that they look at that, came back and said, Well, I think we're in the area of impact.

Is that correct?

Yes, and so my wife Carrie, she did uh as if it was uh somebody doing went out, and actually the City of Nampus site allows people to look in your zone where you live, and it'll tell you right off the uh get-go whether you're in the city limits or not in the city limits, and so it's just a quick uh so that was uh a little bit of review this morning with uh person who was inquiring that served as a good test case for us and uh also knowledgeable.

The other aspect is so what I'd like to do is keep going and then come back and just confirm uh our direction.

Council member select individuals with known experience and skills for the position.

So a council member then would be able to uh put forth somebody uh with the person's permission.

Also, we'd have verification of city of NAMPA residency.

Finally, uh the other process that was batted around last week was to uh put together uh a large committee, uh choose one to three people out of each district and have that committee do uh the discussion and work and then come back to council.

And then of course there would be hybrid or other options.

So that was discussion uh coming off of last week's meeting and input that came via council.

Um late, it seems the uh need to hear from council far as uh whether what what I'm hearing is council is saying it's council's responsibility to appoint uh in that process, it's council's job to vet, and it's council's job to then put forth uh individual that they believe hits the character issue and the ability to administer the oath of office.

Like to get some feedback on our direction, and uh if I can, I'm gonna put uh councilwoman Scug on the on the spot and come down the down the dais.

Any any thoughts on these initial ideas or comments of where we've been the last uh seven days.

Well, I am so thankful for all of you here and all of you here too tonight that um uh because I can see that you're concerned about what's going on in our city and what our next step will be, and um I have been praying that we would make a good decision for everybody and um for our city and for our staff and for the council members.

Um I have uh I'm open to um reviewing applications if that's what the council uh wishes.

Um I do see that that could be laborist, although I don't know that we would have as many as we may think.

Um I too would like to um see who comes forward and possibly make a decision that way.

If there's somebody that comes forward that fits our bill that we feel like, yes, this is the right person for the job, then hopefully we can go ahead with that and skip all the in-between stuff.

So I don't like the idea of a community committee because I think that would be difficult to get through when you have so many options, so many opinions, it's so difficult to make a decision.

So I guess that's my input.

That's that's great.

That's what we're that's what we're needing to make sure that we have clarity.

Thank you, President.

I'm definitely not in favor of doing an application process.

I think that we as a council can collectively come to a decision.

I think that if we all bring forward names that we see to be fit and we do a same process, we give every applicant, if you will, in that sense, the same opportunity to share information.

They can come before us, we can ask them questions, and then that way, just like we do with any other council decision that we make, everyone on this dais has the exact same information, and we make an informed decision based on the information that's provided to all of us.

So I would prefer that method and go forward that way before we open it up to applications.

Okay, councilman Reynolds.

Thank you, Council President.

Um, I'm also not in favor of taking applications.

Uh it seems like uh we've come to a place where there's a lot of opportunities out there that uh would never run for an election and all of a sudden they want to be mayor, and I don't understand that.

Um running for election, running for office is hard.

And um for those of you that haven't done that, I encourage you to try that.

It's it's uh something that everybody should experience.

Um I think that we need to make the best business decision for NAMPA uh and leave the politics out of it.

Um I think that I would like to see someone that would also like to run for office in 18 months, and so we have some continuity for our our staff, our employees, and um some continuity for the city as a whole.

I think that would um be really important.

And lastly, this is council's job.

It's not one of the fun jobs that we get to do, which I don't know, can't remember the last fun thing we really got to do.

But um we're put here by the citizens of NAMPA.

We need to make decisions for the citizens of NAMPA, not for what our personal interests are, and that's all I have to say right now.

Thanks.

Councilman Rodriguez.

Thank you.

Thank you for showing up.

I know you're very interested, and keep in mind we are too.

And we're ready, and we're gonna do this thing correctly.

I stick to the Idaho statute that says that if we stick within the council first for a decision.

And if that doesn't work or apply, then we go to, as I would say it, past council members or past mayors.

Individuals, I say that is because they know the role of council and mayor.

They understand the concepts and the objectives that we have to handle and take care of.

There's a lot that people don't understand that we actually do.

And it's tough for someone brand new to come in and run a $310 million budget.

And what matters most is where that money comes from and how it goes out and revenue and it's just a difficult situation.

We don't want, I sorry, I don't want someone that we have to train or I have to train to get up to par.

That's a difficult difficult situation.

Because it's an unfair advantage to those who want to run for mayor.

It's an unkind of an incumbent situation.

And I I would say that in order to be fair to all those who are going to run for mayor in 27, that they uh they don't have an edge.

But I gotta tell you, um, I want to get this thing over.

I want to get this thing done today if we could, and so we can move on.

Uh so let's let's just uh take a couple minutes, sit back, think about what we're gonna do today, and and I guarantee you just like uh Cowboy said one day, he said we'll get her done.

Councilman Griffin.

Thank you.

Uh I think what's been heavy on my mind is in trying not to speak on behalf of the deceased or those that have gone before us.

I really try and think what would Rick want us to do in this process and to fill the seat that he is no longer setting.

Uh and I think a lot of the things that councilman Bills outlined are are hitting those, somebody of character, somebody that is able to dive in and really do their research and think about what's best for the community.

Because this is a this is a a process where we need to factor in the city and how it operates and the staff, but we also need to consider the the constituents in the city that the staff in the city serves.

Uh it gets political, unfortunately, and it's going to be political because the mayor's role is political.

It's it's done by election by people in a lot of ways out of popularity, or those that are best fit to serve the job.

What I like to see from today is if we don't end up going one direction or the other, that we set some parameters and guidelines to be able to have a timeline for citizens.

I have had an overwhelming feeling of unknown because we haven't had a timeline.

So I at the last meeting, I implored council that we try to create an application and a process, if nothing else, a process, to be able to allow citizens, those seeking the position, as well as us as council members to keep within a box.

Uh we have a little bit of a draft here, and I think it says by June 15th, and I think that's a good good timeline, so people can have at least a deep breath and say this will be done by June 15th.

I'm for an application if an application comes forward.

I'm for selecting a member of the community that uh has been vetted by the constituencies because they've been elected before as well.

Uh I'm not in favor of an at-large committee because we're council members and we can be able to weigh our constituencies by calling them and saying, what do you think about this person?

What do you know about this person?

How can we uh make a decision that's best for the community at large?

I think if we open it up beyond that, there's a lot of opinions.

Too many chiefs, not enough Indians.

At this time, yeah, maybe maybe not.

At this time, I even just reading a memo that we received today.

I think we're going in a a good direction.

Somebody needs to understand how the city operates.

If you've never been at a council meeting, you don't know how it operates.

If you've never set a budget, whether for your organization or for the city, you don't understand that process either.

So there could be a lot of um a lot of training that needs to come prior to that.

I think either way, somebody's going to have to be trained for the role.

The only person or people that know the job are those that have been mayor or will be mayor.

Us as council members will never understand that fully because we serve as council members, not mayors.

So I want to give grace to whoever we end up selecting and give them the opportunity to learn the role and do it well.

If we set that as a threshold, nobody's ever going to be able to accomplish that.

So just a few of my preliminary thoughts, councilman Bills and uh happy the dialogue more.

Council uh we have options before us, and so to make sure we certainly have uh a potential one, two nominees that uh could be looked into, but prior to doing that, I wanted to give opportunity to um confirm direction.

Uh if I've heard the the comments from you in the last 10 minutes has been some ready to to move forward, some preferring uh a little slower process, but yet what I confirm is council wants to be involved in the selection and the voting of whoever's gonna uh be picked.

Seeing partial nods and need confirmation that that's that's where we're at.

We're not going out for applications.

Let's let's confirm that we're we're not doing a uh application process.

Uh councilman, if I could.

I'm not necessarily opposed to the application process.

I am opposed to us creating a committee of three members from each council district, and then we're trying to find 18 people.

Uh, if we won't end up going the application process, I don't think it'll be as laborious as we all believe it to be.

I think we'll get a dozen or two applicants.

There will be an initial review and vetting, and ultimately we can then confer who our top three picks are and then go into the interviews.

Similar to council members before having gone through the same process, applying, reviewing, filtering down, having a finalist panel, and then really going into it with the finalist panel if we go that route.

I'm not saying that necessarily that's what we have to do today.

Uh I would like to discuss names today personally, and if we can find consensus or at least a majority, I would like to see a vote happen if we're able.

Uh if if the cream rises to the top, as a good councilwoman has said before.

So in Reynolds, Council President.

Um I think it's important that we follow the same um process as we go through this with each candidate, um, whether you know that's submitting written documentation.

And then also I think that this candidates, whoever they are, should should be able to stand for questions from the council.

I think that's important.

There's a lot of things in my mind that I would want to ask a candidate uh in front of this body.

And um so I would if the names are submitted and we do that.

I just ask that we follow the same process out of fairness for each candidate.

I would agree with councilman Reynolds on that, and then also I would also like to discuss names as I communicated this weekend to bring names forward for anyone that wants to to bring any new names forward, but again, we need to follow the same process for everyone.

So if there's new names to bring forward, absolutely let's get them.

Let's get them and start discussing it.

I'm pausing because I'm making notes, so bear with the so right now to be clear, we have two.

We have former mayor Debbie Clean, and then we have Chief of Staff Clay Long.

Do you want to open it up for discussion or discussion as far as bringing other names forward, just so that we can have a list of who who we're working with here.

I want to see a nod, council on those two names.

On on starting to put names out and discussing people.

Yeah.

Yes, please.

All right.

I just don't want to be ahead of somebody.

So let's uh we'll do that.

And uh folks, uh while you're listening, etc.

This is public hearing, obviously public meeting.

Um I would appreciate that out of respect for whatever name you may hear, there's not uh clapping, there's not booing, uh, etc.

I think respectful for this meeting that uh again you're here because we need to be in the public, and uh the discussion is for council at this point in time, so I appreciate that very much.

So councilwoman Scog.

Yes.

If you'd like, is there is there a name or names or people that you're thinking from that council members need to uh yes, I would like I would like to bring uh Darl Bruner's name forward do you know whether Mr.

Bruner is uh open?

Yes, okay.

We have a we have a letter form here that says he's interested.

Thank you for the reminder.

So counsel in in on the bench was a email uh response to the question that was placed here.

Any anybody else?

Um no.

Okay.

Thank you.

I don't need to bring any more any more names forward at this time.

Confirming the two names before or and with Darl Bruner in there as well.

I'm I'm fine with those names for now.

But I'm confirming that you want to leave Clay Long on the list and Debbie Kling.

That is correct.

Okay.

We haven't been able to have them go through the same process as everyone else, so I want to make sure they have the opportunity.

Clarify for me the same process.

Just if we bring them forward and we discuss them, we didn't really have an opportunity to fully discuss them or ask questions.

So we talked about possibly uh bringing candidates forward and then allowing council to ask discussion or ask questions.

So I just want to make sure that we give everyone the same process.

Thank you for the clarification.

Councilman Reynolds.

Council President, um I um I have to stick with uh what uh overwhelming overwhelmingly I've heard from the community, and that's uh Mayor Kling, and then my second would be Clay Long.

I would like them both to be on the list as well.

And uh just to clarify process, um after we discussed names and bring them up today, then would we schedule a time to bring those candidates forward and talk to them?

That's what we're gonna make a decision on, and if so, if we're gonna follow that pathway uh versus taking it by motion of approval, um two alternatives I think before us.

One is there'd be a motion uh to appoint um, and there's also a motion to have uh each person that we're wanting to talk to come before council and uh allow opening remarks and counsel to ask questions, etc.

So there's a couple of pathways.

Some are wanting one direction, possibly others the second direction.

I see that as the two alternatives right now.

So thank you.

Councilman Rodriguez.

Um regarding Debbie Kling.

I have worked with her for eight years.

I don't know that any conversation will change my vote.

I have worked with Clay.

And not as much, though.

So I know him as well.

Um course to follow the procedure, and we that would be okay with me to interview them.

Um the other one, Mr.

Bruner.

He has been a council member.

I've had the honor to serve with him.

And I have reached out to several, but they first thought I was crazy.

And uh because putting in a your name and a hat with no procedure is difficult to understand.

One name that I did consider is our senator for District 12, and that's Ben Adams.

And I don't know whether he'll accept this invitation or not, but I did want to mention his name.

So if I understand correct, Councilman Rodriguez, uh, you're not okay with uh Debbie Kling's name being on the list.

I believe it was okay with Clay Long and you're okay with Darl Bruner.

Yes, and also Ben Adams if he accepts the invitation.

Yes.

Additional are you wanting Griffin?

Are you wanting additional names?

Are we also discussing the names that have been proposed at this time?

If if there's a need for additional or known additional to be added, then we need to add them, and then we'll we'll do a little topic uh discussion.

I I don't have an additional name.

Okay.

Uh, but I do have opinions of the names that have been listed.

So when that time comes.

You'll start us off, we'll come the other direction on the on the diocese.

Okay.

Uh I think there's already somewhat shared, but we'll still give him opportunity.

Thank you.

Um I think we made somewhat clear the direction that we would like to see this process go last Wednesday.

I would not like to bring Debbie Kling's name forward.

Uh I am interested in discussing Clay Long further if that's the direction we go.

In regard to Darl Bruner, uh, in our our email and our memo that likely is well is now public record.

Uh it discusses discussions.

I have had discussions with the good former council member, and I think he has been elected, has served the community, serves well in the community currently in his uh employment role, has stayed frequently involved, both inside council as well as the Napa Development Corporation and his own luncheon groups in which he still engages with citizens throughout the process.

As you all will remember, within the last five years, we have become districted, and that ultimately caused Councilman Bruner to have to vacate his seat because of the end of his term.

If I I am of the opinion that if that wouldn't have happened, he'd still be here serving with us today because he has a servant's heart and has always desired to serve and serve well, not in the limelight, but as a behind-the-scenes worker for the people.

So I would very strongly support that name being brought forward for the next 18 months.

Somebody that knows the community, not somebody that has to be reworked or reintegrated into the community.

We need somebody that has stayed active and involved.

We need somebody that understands the process, at least on the council level, and then they'll adapt and learn because we've got great staff.

One of the pieces that stands out to me in this letter, and I'm gonna quote it.

I have full confidence in our chief of staff, our marketing director, our clerk, our finance director, department heads, and employees, employees to not only continue but build upon what they are already accomplishing.

That's what we need from a interim mayor and a mayor to serve the 18 months, somebody that's gonna allow staff to do their jobs, but also serve the community and the wills of the community.

So I would strongly support that Darl Brunner uh name be continued.

And I think Ben Adams is a good choice as well.

Uh he serves well in the legislature.

I think there's potential cloudiness between the two roles, and that's why I ultimately would lean back in the Darl Bruner.

He understands the city operations and what's going on here.

So those are my initial thoughts.

Councilman Reynolds.

Council President Um Thank you.

So this is a very, very hard decision.

We have to have someone that can move this city forward and not damage the city because we we would not have any way to get rid of them.

Uh so that's something to be considered.

Um as far as Darl goes, you know, this is a tough situation because these people are friends.

Uh I serve with have Darl, and I so still serve with Darl on NDC.

Darrell's a good individual.

He's a great individual in the city of NAMPA.

Um, do I think that this is the best choice we have?

Sorry, Darrell, but I don't.

And um I I think that uh is concerning to me that he states in here uh that he could work 45 hours a week on average, and he would expect a reduced salary rate as I see this as lacking sufficient hours to get the job fully accomplished.

Um I understand that position, Darl, um, because of where you're at with your retired, and I don't blame you.

Uh but uh I this the mayor in this city, we're the third largest city in Idaho.

It's very much a full-time job, and there's a lot that goes into it.

Uh it's 24-7 and um 365, it seems like it never ends.

So um, with that being said, no hard feelings, Darl.

It's I just don't feel like that's the best choice for the city going forward.

Um who else did we have on the list?

Uh Ben Adams.

Um Ben is also a friend.

His dad used to be my pastor.

Um I like Ben.

Um, I don't feel like Ben has the depth of experience um for this role.

Uh the Senate's much different than what the city government is, and um so uh no disrespect, Ben.

That's just the way I feel about that.

I would support uh having a discussion with all of these individuals if we could bring them up and ask them questions.

Uh I think that um obviously I've said this before, Mayor Kling has the most experience, and um she knows how to run this city, and um I feel like uh Clay Long also, although I did not support him in the last vote, um uh my understanding is that he is is uh relocating, and that was my one hang up about not living in the city.

And uh he does know how the city operations are and how the city runs.

He understands our budget and our employees.

I would not be excited to lose him as chief of staff because he's done a fantastic job in that role, but uh he would be much better suited as a mayor um than the rest of the candidates um with the exception of Mayor Kling.

So those are my thoughts.

Uh thank you.

Thank you, Councilman Reynolds.

Uh Councilwoman James.

Thank you.

Thank you, President.

I'm actually I have to say I'm a little bit taken back by some of the comments just because as a legislative branch of the city, it's our responsibility to make informed decisions based off of facts and not based off of emotion, and to me it feels political, and I don't like that because this has to be factually based.

And so when I'm hearing that certain council members don't want to bring certain names forward and not give them the due process, that frustrates me.

Um I will say that I not personal conversations that I've had with people, but I've had a hundred and four people reach out either online, emails, or phone calls, and I took all that data, I took their recommendations, I took it all into account.

Mayor Kling, out of those 104 that reached out to me personally, it it was 66 percent in favor of, and Clay Long was 18 percent, and all others combined were 16 percent.

So to me, I feel as though we need to do our due diligence and allow everybody to speak, allow us to ask questions, and I don't want to weigh in on anybody's names because I haven't heard what they have to say, and I haven't been able to have the opportunity to ask them hard questions.

So I'm interested in keeping all four of them here.

I'm happy to hear what they have to say and ask them questions, but I just want to remind council that this can be an opportunity for us to be unified if we take the politics and the emotion out of it and we allow ourselves to come together and work together for the betterment of the city.

So if I'm truly voting on what people have told me as citizens of NAMPA, Mayor Clean would be a resounding 66% in favor of.

So just want to put that on the record.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Scogg.

Thank you.

I think I have different constituents.

Even though I do love her dearly, and I'm not saying she did a bad job.

I just know that people are ready to move forward.

And so we already voted on Mayor Kling, and so I feel like she did get uh a fair uh opportunity, as well as Clay.

And um, Clay is an awesome uh chief of staff, and I'm so grateful we have him.

And I think he's in a good spot right there.

Um I really um highly respect Darrell.

He's uh a great example of a man of integrity, and um I think that he is definitely one that we should move forward um for uh interview if that's what we plan to do.

And I also want to say that Ben Adams is also one of my top um people as well.

I I think Ben is somebody that has a forward thinking idea.

He um has expressed um that he really has appreciated um our mayor uh Rick Hogebaum, and he would want to continue with the areas that Rick began, and I think that's a real plus.

Um he has a great role in the Senate.

He's popular there, and he served has served on JFAC, and he knows how to run a large budget.

Um it doesn't have to always be doing the same thing all the time.

Sometimes we gotta move forward and not keep looking back.

Um so my uh question from here is um can we set up a time to do these interviews and not string it out too long?

I know we have June 15th down here on the calendar, and I think that's an awesome thing to uh do.

But I was I'm and what I mean by I don't want to string it out too long.

I do want us to interview.

I do want us to take the time to get to know what each person has to offer, but I also um know that um for our citizens and for our dear councilman bills, we need to um move this a little bit um forward, have a timeline so that our citizens know that we are working on this.

Okay, council president.

Can we hear some of your thoughts well uh so I'll go in reverse order.

I don't know Ben Adams.

Uh I hear good things, but I've not sure that I've uh other than possible handshake somewhere along the way.

I I don't know him, I don't know the background, I don't know uh that situation, so I don't want to uh comment uh one way or another there.

I I do believe that uh who we select uh should have some semblance of experience and knowledge of city operation, and I believe to bring somebody in totally new uh will deal with a lot of uh excess uh training and guidance when we have people who are familiar with the process and our regular day-to-day side of things.

I think it's important that uh we have uh probably some follow-up discussion or questions to be able to uh ask.

We can certainly vote uh because the majority of council here or all council members know at least three individuals that are on the list at the present time.

Nobody's brought up any additional other than uh Ben Adams.

Uh so therefore uh it's back to uh two previous and and one new at this stage.

Uh the question mark is is whether to uh rather than we we could take a vote, we could start votes, but it seemed the comments were to have the opportunity to ask candidates and those uh that we want to have uh to answer questions or further discussion.

And uh that was brought up by at least uh two, three of you.

And uh so that would be reasonable.

We could do that uh if council is willing, we could possibly get that set up for Wednesday following our budget workshop presentation, and that would be at nine o'clock in the morning.

Uh, we could invite uh the three individuals to be available if they so chose.

If they choose not to, then that's their prerogatory, it's not a requirement that they have to be uh before us for us to make a decision.

Um but it if that's council's desire, then we can discuss that a little bit.

I'm seeing councilman Reynolds, you have a comment.

Council President, um I'd like to make a motion that we set this up for uh interviews uh with uh the candidates brought before us today.

Um at a date certain.

I think uh before we keep going, uh I'd need clarification that Clay is not available this week.

Is that correct?

Mayor, he did he is on a pre-planned um vacation right now.

Um he'll be available this evening to check work phones, but that's my understanding he's out for the week uh that pre-arranged trip.

Okay.

So another option would be uh starting it to we could go, you know, next Monday.

Uh if counselors feel they have a time, or we would postpone two weeks to our next count regularly scheduled council meeting.

Um or tag on to a uh another budget workshop a week from this Wednesday.

So little feedback on timing and and desire what you'd like to do.

Council President, uh I'm fine with moving it to the works after the workshop next Wednesday or um Monday, either one be fine.

Council President, yes, Wednesdays are very difficult for me to meet after the budget.

Yeah, so uh Mondays is better.

Um yeah, that's fine.

President, I personally would prefer to do it early morning so that we can spend as much time as we need with them so we're not up against another meeting that might take place.

I know it's not for this next Monday, but I would prefer to do like a Monday at seven, so that gives us a couple hours if needed, and they can all come, and then we can take whatever time we need with each of them council president.

And I'd be in favor of doing it as soon as like as next, like this coming Monday.

A week from today.

That is correct.

Your preference is uh 7 a.m.

Councilman Griffin.

I just am thinking out loud here.

I I hear that we want to have interviews of all the candidates that have been discussed.

I personally have their phone numbers.

I understand maybe the optics of having a public interview process, but I don't think we fleshed out how this would look or how this would operate.

Do we give 20 minutes to each candidate where we grill them, or is it a panel discussion where it's open-ended to all four of them?

And then we talk about not having politics involved based off of some answers.

I I will strongly have an opinion if something is political or not.

That's why we were elected here.

So I think to state that this isn't a political process, we have to be mindful of those that put us in these seats through this process.

So I if we can add some more guardrails, I would like to potentially inquire on that.

One thing that I would like to note, um, I and I would also ask that one of those names be removed because they were removed last Wednesday, and I think going back through that process is not necessary.

And then I heard at least three in support of one name, and so I'd like even to consider discussing that further today to see if we have at least a majority, because this is the closest we've gotten to this uh discussion, and it's a name for me.

Darl Brunner's been a name for me that has come to mind multiple times.

Why I don't think it was pursued early on is because it takes a willing heart and somebody that wants to serve to their fullest capacity.

He stated 45 hours.

I think that's more than sufficient for somebody of a 40-hour workweek full-time job.

Uh so there's just I I think we can navigate this in a way where I think we need guardrails if we're going to do an interview process.

I think one of those individuals needs to be removed from that interview process because that's already been solidified.

If we do go, uh Monday mornings are fine with me, but I think we have a name presented before us that we all know and should discuss further, the maybe find consensus today.

Council President.

I just want to follow up clip to clarify.

When I mean not political, political is in what you just did as far as trying to remove a candidate prior to going through the process, the same processes we're putting everyone else through.

I don't mean that we can't discuss political things with them.

I just mean the process itself needs to stay the same across the board and not become political.

That's what I mean by that, if that makes sense.

Councilman Rills.

The matter in hand is uh figuring out a date and voting for that date and time.

Uh there was a motion and a second on that.

Um then uh I I would encourage us to have enough time to discuss each candidate thoroughly so that we don't be rushed.

This isn't uh five-minute decision.

This is a this, you know, if this discussion takes four hours, then so be it.

Uh, this is a big deal.

So I would encourage us to carve that time out, and then we can move forward after we get through that process.

So council president.

Yes, sir.

Councilman Rodriguez.

Here's the bottom line, folks.

Um I'd like to see from this council vote on each person whether they want them to come back or not.

That would want to live down to maybe two or three.

So that would clarify.

I I I do believe, honestly, folks, that uh clay should not be returned, and neither should Clay.

And so that's where I'm at.

Council President.

Yes, sir.

Here's a follow-up to Councilman Rodriguez's suggestion.

Um, I I don't know if I want them or not until I talk to him and have an interview process.

Uh, you know, so I don't uh I don't want to vote on whether they come back or not.

I I think that we should ask all of them the same questions.

Uh it's transparent, it's clear, it's a fair process.

And uh and then I can make a decision for myself based on what the answers may be.

So that's where I stand.

Council President.

Councilman Griffin.

Just to follow up on that comment.

I think we've had at least one candidate that we've had the opportunity to know the direction and vision that that individual would like to go, and that was ultimately voted no last Wednesday.

I would concur with Councilman Rodriguez that it might be wise to whittle this down because we've received a lot of inquiries.

I personally have in phone calls and stops in Walmart grocery stores of a multitude of names.

So if we really want to create a fair process, I have 15 additional names that I could add right now if we want to give them all the same due process.

It feels political to me that we are pushing one name that's already been clearly decided not to move forward.

So I know there's a motion at hand to schedule interviews, so maybe we should just go through the that vote first, but I don't think I would like to set it up or vote in favor of setting up interviews as they're currently stated.

President Bills.

Yes.

Councilman.

My question is for those that want to remove Mayor Kling from this process.

Have either of you guys reached out to the staff to find out what they were wanting in this process?

Councilman Bills.

Are you okay for answering?

Yeah, I asked a question.

Councilman Griffin.

I have.

And it's a mixed pot.

Now I don't want to publicly disclose any staff's name, and I will not.

Same.

But it is not a matter of this is overwhelmingly one direction or the other.

And if we are going to keep the vote to council, I'm not going to do straw poll and create more division within the city.

At the department head level, from what I have heard and the discussions that I have had.

Clay Long is a very viable option.

Mayor Kling served faithfully and well for eight years, and it's time to turn the page and move on to the next chapter.

I don't mean to be divisive.

I mean to give direction on the definitiveness of where I stand in that discussion.

Council President.

I have not.

I have not searched employees.

That is to me a big no.

I don't have to have someone else tell me what I already know.

Council President.

Yes.

Councilwoman.

In an effort to not offend anyone on the council because I really love all of you.

I will remind you, and I mean that seriously.

I will remind you though that a couple of weeks ago, um, two of the members here were not interested in having interviews or an application.

Um because they were wanting to push two uh two options, one being Debbie Klein and the other one being Clay, and that was the only agenda that they wanted.

So I will I and that did not work because or that did not go through because there were not the votes there for either one of them.

So to keep pushing that we need to include them again and um change our minds about how we want to do this, um, is not gonna get us anywhere.

And this conversation can go round and round and round and round.

And so um I would like to ask um if I can make a motion.

We have one on the table.

We can't do that.

Councilman Bills.

Yes.

I don't know if that was if I'm in that equation or not.

So I just want to clarify I'm I was not not in favor of of doing applications with candidates that council brought forward.

I was not in favor of making it a part of the public just yet until we exhausted our efforts here at the bench.

And so I wanted to make sure that we had time with the candidates at that time.

It was only two, but I'm very open to the four that we have here, and I'm willing to do the application process through the council at this time.

Just wanted to make sure that was clear.

We have clarifications.

We have a motion and and a second on the table.

Is it further discussed?

I I need the clerk, if you can give us a little bit of readback on the motion and second.

Council President, the motion basically was just to set up interviews with a date certain.

Thank you.

Councilman Reynolds.

I just wanted to respond to that.

Uh Councilman Scogg's comment real quick.

Uh, I didn't like I said, I don't know, like Councilwoman Jangular said, I don't know who who you're talking about, the two in that group.

But for me, we did not ask for a vote.

I very clearly stated on the record that I did not want to vote that day.

And uh we did, I did want to have some kind of questions asked to the candidates, um, which is this process.

I think it's is a good process.

Opening up the outside applications is very laborious.

And um the but the council taking names is is fine with that.

So let me clarify uh council.

Uh I'm the one who uh pushed for the votes.

I'm the one who made the motion.

And uh if you recall I briefly uh tried to communicate uh to council that uh the uh continued phone calls, emails, uh were very arm twisting and got to the point where I was no longer a pleasant individual to be around.

And therefore, I uh made calls to the clerk's office and to legal counsel to say how do we uh take a couple of votes and know where things are at?

And that was the purpose of last Wednesday.

It wasn't necessarily to put those individuals out.

It was to try to create a communication to the public.

Um you don't need to keep calling me.

I will know what the public sentiment is, and uh that that was the push for last Wednesday.

It helped also serve though to get council thinking about the process, and it's got us to this point a few days later as to the process and what we want to do.

So right now it's set up interviews with dates certain.

Four individuals were named.

Again, I don't know Ben Adams.

I haven't seen Ben Adams at a council meeting.

Say again.

Well, that's great, because now that we're in the need of the hour.

So respectfully, uh Darl Bruner, Debbie Kling, Clay Long have experience with city business.

It's just I don't have his experience in the legislature.

I wouldn't be expected to be appointed to that seat out of the gate with no experience.

So my personal opinion is if we're gonna do interviews, I would do it with the three and or the two.

And so based on the comments I've heard tonight, I could see two interviews with Bruner and Long out of deference for two council members who want to have interviews with Kling.

It's possible.

So I I hate to I hate to belabor something and only make it feel uh worse and uh create more tension.

And so I think it's important to recognize uh where we're where we're at, where we can be at.

I I uh in all seriousness have spent hours and hours the last uh several days uh communicating and trying to lead this council and direction.

And so if there's a desire for interviews, uh we could we can do that.

Um but I again uh I list the motion and the uh and the second, I believe, listed all four individuals.

No just to have interviews and council president, there were no names listed.

No names listed.

Okay.

So we're gonna vote on the uh on the motion and uh to set up interviews.

Uh date certain would be uh next Monday at four o'clock.

I I know you want 7 a.m.

Um the 7 a.m.'s okay.

Uh I mean council, if you want 7 a.m.

we can do 7 a.m.

Monday morning.

Council president.

Yes.

For me personally, I don't care the time, but I I likely won't be supporting the motion.

7 a.m.

or 4 p.m.

I think it comes to the same conclusion for me.

Call for the vote.

You asked for 7 a.m.

is that right?

Yes, please.

Okay, let's let's I would clarify that in my motion, Council President, it uh date certain of the Monday the 27th at 7 a.m.

And who made the second okay?

Uh clerk will call the roll.

Scog.

Oh Bills.

Uh yes.

Rodriguez.

No.

Griffin.

No.

Jingula.

Yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Motion fails.

Council President.

Yes.

I have a motion.

And I might need some language from the clerk.

Yes.

Go ahead.

Council President, I move that we appoint Darl Bruner to be the interim mayor for the city of Napa.

And I don't know what additional information you need, but that's going to be my motion.

So the discussion of council has been uh option to to take a vote.

It seemed our discussion went towards providing interviews and the desire to have interviews.

Um now the request for a vote.

Um I'm just clarifying the motion.

Sorry.

Is there a second to that motion?

I'll think of that.

We have a motion and a second discussion then Council President.

I don't know how we can vote on something when we haven't had any information in front of us.

That's I think we can't speak in, we can't make decisions in hypotheticals.

We don't know, we haven't been able to ask questions, directions.

I know Darrell as a as a person, I I have great respect for Darl, but I would need to weigh in a lot of things to make a decision like that.

Council President.

Yes, Councilman Griffin.

Just uh debate in support of the motion that I made to all serve this city well for seven years.

I personally sat in council meetings where he made votes that distinguished himself and the direction that he would like to see the city in those seven years.

He's a man of faith.

He's outlined priorities within this letter that we all have received.

I know him both personally and professionally.

I can speak to that.

I believe all of us know him professionally as a council member because everyone but councilwoman Scogg and I sat with him and took votes with him as a council.

I think for this time and for the situation that the city is currently in, Darl will bring this council together.

That's my prayer, this council together and the community together.

He has served as an elected councilman for two terms.

He has continued serving as an active citizen beyond that time.

His leadership style has been outlined, his objectives have been solid, and he's going to be one that I believe will take us through this next 18 months without any political motivation, without any sort of dabbling into the politics because he just wants to do a good job for the city with his public servants' heart.

And that's what we need, in my opinion, now more than continuing this potentially laborious and divisive process.

Council President.

Yes, Councilman Reynolds.

Uh in the interest of time, um, keep this short, but uh I echo Councilwoman Jangula's comments.

We had discussion, uh seemed like a consensus to move forward with uh interview process.

Um I I can't we have no information that we were given this piece of paper um right before we started this meeting about uh Darl and I know Darl, and but uh uh that it's not a clear and transparent process.

Um it's uh very concerning to me that we would go down this road without having some open discussion with the rest of the candidates.

Further discussion.

President Bills?

Yes.

I look forward to hearing from former councilman Darl Bruner during our interview process when we interview all candidates and get all the information in front of us.

So my thought is candidate-wise, we would uh shorten the list down uh to Clay Long and Darrell Bruner.

Uh you might be thinking about that.

I think uh as far as having uh interview uh from the standpoint of uh it's been made pretty clear tonight or today, and uh by uh to that uh Debbie Kling is not gonna get the votes to uh uh move forward, so to do an interview and go through that process.

I know there's two council members who uh sincerely would like that.

I don't know that it will produce anything.

Um I'm making making my comments and uh I think I think it uh is wise to do the interview process.

I realize the motion is to move forward.

Um Councilman.

Clerk recall the real I think it's it's pretty evident that we're not going to all get to the same conclusion on that.

Oh I think it's it's pretty evident that we're not going to all get to the same conclusion on that, but out of respect for all of us as council and those of us who support constituents in this community, I think that we should all have the opportunity to have whoever we feel and we've heard from our constituents to bring forward, we should have the opportunity to do so and take the politics out of it and allow at least allow for all of who we all feel and have been heard want to bring forward.

I think that we should be able to do that, and I wouldn't support just narrowing it down, then that then that takes the vote out of people's positions here where we're voted by the people to represent council president last comment, maybe call for the vote.

We got another meeting that needs to be underway.

Thank you.

I think just based off of the discussion that we've had here today, the process of the interviews, even whittling down who we will interview will become very political and might become uh more divisive than intended because we can't even solidify who we would like.

I think there is working consensus that we have a potential candidate who's willing to serve now and serve well to end this process for ourselves and for the community to have direct vision and understanding of what is going to occur tomorrow morning.

I think would be a benefit for for all involved clerk will call the roll.

Gog.

Wait, can you clarify which one I'm convinced?

The motion was to appoint Darrell Bruner for interim mayor of Manson.

Yes.

No.

Bills.

No.

Reynolds.

No.

Rodriguez.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Motion fails.

So I make a motion that we have a meeting at uh 7 a.m.

date certain uh week from this date.

And we interview uh Clay Long and we interview Darl Bruner.

Councilman Bills.

Yes.

I think if we're going to do interviews, that we need to include uh all the list of names that um we wanted to perhaps with the exception of Debbie Kling, because we have already stated that that's um she's not going to be able to get the votes.

Um but I do think that we should allow Ben Adams to come and interview as well.

Um rather than um just Darl and Clay Long because I don't think that it's gonna change anybody's opinion to interview Clay and Darrell again.

Um it's it's just belaboring the um the vote, and so if we're going to do that, I would like to add Ben's name to it.

The motion is as stated.

Council President, I would second your motion.

Council President for confirmation Monday at seven or Wednesday at seven.

A week from today is Wednesday.

Or a week from today's Monday, I apologize.

That's my bad.

When we have meetings five days a week, it throws me off.

I I'm excited when the young man, I'm right there.

Gets mixed up occasionally while I'm there.

Hey, I'm not feeling too bad.

Call for the vote.

What was the motion?

The motion is is that we interview two candidates next Monday at 7 a.m.

President.

I don't I wouldn't support that.

I I think that we're gonna take the vote I don't appreciate my voice getting thrown out of this, to be honest.

I have citizens that I sorry to get emotional, it's a very frustrating process.

I have citizens that I represent too.

So I think that the that this process needs to allow for all of us to have equal opportunity to bring names forward.

I'm not here to change anybody's vote, and I probably won't, but I'm not okay.

Okay, going through a process and not allowing everyone equal opportunity.

Good enough.

I'll withdraw the I'll withdraw the motion.

And uh the meeting is adjourned.

Do you need a motion to adjourn, Council President?

I think we probably do.

We do need a motion.

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Or do you need a roll call on the no?

Okay.

Nothing.

So we're gonna take uh