Daniel, I said this found this in my public papers.

I don't have your email in every corner.

So you gave me that some time ago.

Okay.

And I realized I'd have done each back of paper.

Thanks.

All right.

Well, welcome everybody.

Happy new year.

Whatever you call me in order to get on the voting.

Yeah.

Okay.

Great.

Well, our first item of business is approving the minutes from December 18th.

To look and didn't see anything amiss.

Any other comments on that?

I thought much one can.

Thanks.

All right.

All those in favor of approving the minutes.

Okay.

I don't have any changes to pose.

Any changes for the agenda.

Okay, great.

Well, then we'll move on to reports and inquiries.

So I'll turn it over to the city attorney.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I think the only thing on my agenda for this morning is just to talk talk briefly.

So in the last couple of days, we did the um new board and commission uh member training.

Um some of you were there and participated in that.

Thank you for coming.

It was recorded.

If anybody feels like they want a refresher, um you can access that recording.

Um maybe let Jogie know if you are interested in that admission on this how that recording would be accessible.

We'll find out for sure.

Um there's kind of two stages to that um training.

One is for um all of you for for um new or uh existing members, um kind of an update from the mayor's perspective on the role of boards and commissions, and then some of the legal aspects from me.

Um and then there uh is also separately uh a Jody training, the the staff liaison to all of the boards and commissions.

Jody doesn't need training, but can educate the rest of us anyway.

Um so just the importance of making sure that the city staff um are doing everything that they can to support and uh make sure the divorce and commissions are running smoothly, um coordinating all of the things that lead out to us being here together today.

Um so we do that training annually.

Um it is uh important to kind of get things framed up right for the important work that all of you do.

The other thing that I wanted to mention just in terms of kind of inquiries to me.

Um I think you all know that part of this part of the agenda is to let you know if there were somewhat interesting conversations that people brought to me, um, wonderings um or sometimes maybe more involved ethics questions.

Um if it's the more involved um situation, I will cue that up for you more formally.

Um but sometimes it's helpful to also just talk about the conversations that people bring my direction, um a bit of a reminder from somebody who was a newer um border commission member.

Um and um we just needed to talk through um the part of the code that addresses sort of family or personal relationships that might cause questions of impartiality.

Um as you all know, oftentimes our conversations get focused on the conflict of interest from a financial perspective.

Um, but this was a just a bit of a reminder that sometimes the circumstances pop up where um because of a family relationship or some close personal connection, it's also important that border commission members um recuse themselves from those conversations and just talking through um examples and how you do it, what are the actual logistics of recusal so that everybody knows what's going on and nobody ends up embarrassed, doesn't become a public thing.

So um a good conversation to to have um a little bit of a reminder to me, um frankly, to just be paying a little closer attention to to that topic and make sure that um that I'm supporting and uh educating new boards and commission members on that topic uh as well.

So I think good conversation, good plan going forward.

Just wanted to share that we thank you.

So who was able to make it to the member training?

And helpful, uh, for me it was very helpful.

Uh, you know, I've attended one meeting prior to the training.

So uh you know, so it's good to get uh the mayor's perspective on how we can assist the city uh and then some of the more granular details that you talked about.

Um my background is human resources, so conflict of interest and things are uh you know, I mean that's one of the main things that attracted me to this board was uh it kind of aligns with uh what I do on the professional side of my interests, and so um I think the conflict of interest thing is uh was very um beneficial.

Um and one thing that we always talk about is you know that I always talk about is uh perception as reality.

Uh so even though there may not be an actual conflict of interest, there oftentimes could be a perceived conflict of interest where um even if you uh internally feel like you're able to act independently and not let those factors uh determine the outcome of the decision.

Um if I feel that way, but everyone else around me says there's no way you can act it, you know, independently of your feelings in the situation.

Um it could still skew the outcome of the decision because that everyone else may be making their decision based on that perception.

Uh, and I think it's it's important to go through that recusal process, and I thought that was really informative for my perspective.

Super okay.

Um well, the next item on our agenda would be the open comment period.

I don't think we have any commenters here today.

So I think we can go ahead and move on to unfinished business, and we have one item there, which is the review of the city code, chapter 216, which is kind of our main code that we deal with.

So just to recap uh in our last meeting, umber Hassinger suggested some changes to the um for the code that we might want to look at.

Um Member Nedlin did some work um between meetings to to prepare some potential language about the definition of a city agency.

Um so I'm I hope everybody had a chance to take a look at that.

Um, and I don't know if you all have it in front of you or the ability to do that.

I can probably try to put it in that between, but um linked in there, you can see we have some some suggested changes.

Um I can kind of summarize them quickly.

Um essentially just a couple of capitalization changes, so making common council mayor, ethical practices board, city agency capitalized um as official agencies, and then um more significantly um changing it.

Oh, great.

Yeah, that there.

So adding a definition of city agency, and um we have two potential definitions there to think about.

Um, and then later on changing the language to um collaborate with the human resources department rather than to cooperate, which is how it's currently written.

So uh I'll look forward to anybody that wants to talk.

I don't know if we want to start with the city agency definitions, that's maybe at least option A, option B question that we've got.

Okay, we need to pick one of these two.

Yeah, um Nick, do you want to give some background on the since you put those together?

Sure, it's own um I think the difference between the two are like for my perspective, one is a lot more specific than the other.

Um, I just I think the second one um it lists a lot more specific items.

Uh and I wasn't, I guess like the broadness of the definition I know was something that we were trying to uh rectify.

Um, but then like the more I thought about it, then the more I tried to incorporate terms.

Uh, you know, it's it's board, it's commission, it's committee.

Like, are we gonna say group?

Are we gonna like how many different terms are we gonna throw in there before we keep it generalized as city agency because I feel like the list could be very long.

Um so the second one lists a lot more individual specific things, I think, than the first one does.

And I think that's just kind of the the decision that we as a group would have to make is how broad we want to allow it to be, and or um or how specific and so that was that was the thinking between the two.

Um I do like detail.

Um, and I think the less interpretation is what we are going for, but um it also gets kind of redundant, I think, as you redo the definition sometimes.

Yeah, I bet I didn't have a ton of time that the Ethan.

So this is a whole new section, but it's not correct.

There's no definition of city agency right now.

Um, and I think that it was that would be nice to kind of clarify what that means, just because there's different states defines uh city agency.

Yeah, pretty much.

So it could be shattered for reference or if you don't want to change the language of it.

Yeah, and that's the one that I used as kind of a basis too, is yeah, is the one that you had provided previously.

Yeah, because you look at it and you say, what you know, what what is that?

You know, I've never heard of that.

I've been around government for 30 some years.

That one then never came by.

Like multi options.

I think I didn't find the second one with the greater detail, but it both seemed good.

Yeah, and I think the second one incorporates everything from uh the state referenced definition, um, just with a little elaboration from that.

Um I think just to make it a little more comprehensive, maybe and that was the only reason I did that, yeah.

Because the state one's already written.

Um, so then just throwing other options out there.

You know, the only reason I would suggest that is then if something becomes an issue, you may have a body of case law concerning that.

And any time you start monkeying around with a change, then that body of cases, let's say you know, maybe argue that, yeah, but Iris doesn't say this.

That's that's the only reason I say that what it may be simpler just to stay with what, you know, just reference what the state is.

I mean, you did a lot of work on this.

Yeah.

I wouldn't say it's a lot of work.

It was fun.

Yeah, yeah.

I think they're all good options and and ultimately, you know, obviously we're just taking a recommendation and it would be up to the council to decide.

Um, so we could get some context on kind of why we made that choice, and then we would get to decide whether that's the so I can read the the other definition that um we were kind of basing this on the city agency means any board commission, committee, trust, department, or office of city government, whether elected, appointed, or otherwise constituted, regardless of the sources of funding.

So it's it's pretty similar to the first one here.

Um just a little bit more compact, I guess.

Um my feelings are not hurt if we vote for the other one.

Yeah, I suppose I was leaning towards the first one just because it reads a little bit more streamlined to do.

Um but I think that I mean the meaning is essentially the same in both cases, right?

It's it's just kind of how we want to language it, if I can make that a verb.

Um like the first one.

Oh, the two look there.

Okay.

Oh, we agree with that.

Okay.

It it it it probably really doesn't need to be in there because you look at the state statutes as more, but yeah, related to their thing.

Yeah, that show why was it actually put in there in the first place?

There's not a direct color related but reading state statute than it defined terms of why it was just written up, it's probably part of a boilerplate saying that got code in there and we could you know buy it.

Well, yeah, we'll get around to that someday or whatnot.

Well, I think it I mean I from my perspective, I think it's good to add something, you know.

I most of the work we can do is proactive, and if we can clarify something up front before it becomes an issue, then I think that's a good recommendation to make.

If you want to find anything, you can actually go on Minnesota State Web and get a lot, you can get a lot of information relative to particular term injection term here to it.

You say what's this here?

What's this for?

You know, where did this come from kind of thing?

Sure.

And cities typically always develop always look to state thing and then they refine it down to what really fits for them rather than being a start from your mixed bag um from like different city agencies that's like some I would say were like Rochester's ones where they said city agency was never defined.

Um some of the I would say a lot of the metro ones that I looked like had a had a different definition for like what a city agency or even like organization and they got a little more granular some of those.

Um and then I would say that more uh sparsely populated towns.

Um didn't break down any type of definition, you know, where it was like it felt a lot more irrelevant based on probably the quantity of organizations they have within their cities, city uh structure.

That makes sense.

Well, I think we're probably getting close to so I I guess we would want a motion probably to um recommend these changes with one or the other definition of city agency.

And I just want to before I forget, um we also caught that in the change to the 11 with the last change and everything's full of that.

Um we just ended up with a typo as written here, so it should be human resources total department.

Um so we'll want to include that change, I think, in our motion to forward it on understood.

So I was just gonna say, so it sounds like we have some difference of opinion on which one so I guess I would make a motion that we take a poll of deciding between the two or three, I guess, and then after the poll we take a vote.

Um that's granular.

I don't know how else to do it.

Yeah, no, I mean that that seems briefly.

I mean, that's just the three options are the the state definition and then the first and second options that are in the draft here.

So I think to just do an informal poll, it doesn't have to be an official motion for that, but um who would favor taking the state definition?

Do we have that one available?

Um we don't unless I can share my screen there.

Because it could come up with the polls, sure.

Yeah, yeah.

Let me read that one.

I'll read the state one again.

So city agency means any board commission, committee, trust, department, or office of city government, whether elected, appointed, or otherwise constituted, regardless of its source of funding.

So it's a little bit shorter than the first option here.

Um pretty similar.

I think the only things I'm noticing is this one mentions permanent or temporary, and um kind of enumerate some ways it could be established rather than just um well, I guess the person that um I would move the first option.

Okay, um sure.

So who would favor the second option?

No second, okay.

Oh, sorry, is that as an official?

Well, I guess so.

Maybe that's okay.

We have this motion.

No, I'm sorry.

We've kind of already done that.

I think we were just doing a kind of a straw poll there or so.

Um, but that sounds like it's a motion to take this line.

Sure, that's that's fine.

So we have a motion, do we have a second to that motion?

So I'm sorry.

Yep.

Or chance motion to poll.

Did we did complete the polling?

No, we did not complete the polling, but we also didn't accept that motion.

Okay.

We didn't have a second on that.

I just jumped into it.

Sorry, so um, but now we have Paul's motion to take the state definition seconded by Gloria.

Sorry, Jim.

Making it complicated.

Okay.

Um okay, and discussion on that option.

I think it's a to me, it's a fair option.

So any other um discussion over that or otherwise I'll call for a vote on that.

But call for a vote on his motion.

Yes.

Just because that's the that's the one that has a second at the moment.

Right.

Oh yeah, I'll call the motion.

All those in favor of taking the let's see, uh approving forwarding the recommended changes to the council with the fix of human resources department and the state definition of city agency.

All those in favor of that.

Two opposition.

Okay.

All right.

I think that that carries then.

Um yeah, and thanks, Nick, for your work has helped a needs and different means that I think.

So just one little footnote.

Sure.

And I should look at where it didn't.

I opened the book and started looking at the thing.

There are some communities up in the Metro area that uh use that uh term in terms of drafting how they organizing or managing a particular situation is what they and when you read the dialogue, it's not you don't never know what they really were thinking, what they were doing.

Um just that we had to deal with more.

And this was a convenient little tool for them to expand or at least try on it or whatever.

So they put it out there, see how it does.

Great.

Um, well, let's move on.

Our last item here is just the annual reports uh for 2025 for that year.

So hopefully everybody had a chance to take a look at that.

Um this is kind of our main document that goes to new the council every year.

Um, usually the chair prepares it.

And it's honestly pretty similar from year to year.

Um, they tried to kind of update the forward as much as possible and mostly talk about any specific issues that we dealt with this year and then the complaints that we addressed.

So there's a section here talking about kind of the three main issues that we dealt with with a handful of complaints around each.

Um, and then um yeah, sort of uh I guess we didn't take any major um actions or improvements or other recommendations this year.

So I like to raise an item that not really talking about like I think it looks at particular issue, it relates to terms the person comes on this committee type of thing.

And let's say that you date started in February or whatever, and then we don't have a bunch of meetings, and but their time on the board is clicking along, sir, but they're not getting any you're not getting an opportunity to deal with a lot of issues type of situation.

So we're having that so here we have this movement like this, but this part is moving like mid.

Now there were person's on for three years, let's say the uh for lack of a quorum and like a meter type of thing.

There's five or six sessions that didn't it didn't get to, you know, but his meter is still running, so we get the idea was he gets a turnovers of the old boy game, don't get in and on it.

But the notion is you're gonna that person is going to see in not enough situations to really be able to be a meaningful contributor.

Yeah, you know, you literally have to fall in the grass a couple of times, yes, sir, get a sense of it.

Um I don't have an suggestive answer, but I think it's something that we could look at because you know, we you look at past agendas and in the past that you know we've had turnover and people in um personally I guess I meeting free group something, I don't know, but I uh I felt that when I manage communities that they need to be updated if you have a group of people that are gonna make some decision, they must have as much information to be that positive type situate, and if they're not exposed to that, then it's difficult, you know.

Sure.

Yeah, so if I can just summarize you're you know, we have a three-year term everyone who wants to go up to six years, but often we don't meet every every month or something, so you could potentially complete a term without really seeing many issues, and maybe we should think about whether that's still the best structure, or is it better to um yeah?

I think I mean that could be a reasonable discussion for a future meeting, probably.

Um how could we possibly and even bombs it off the council and says, hey, you know, this is what you know, we know what the tent was to set particular terms.

Yeah, right.

But if the council person is elected for one four-year hitch, they're exposed to a lot of stuff all the time during that four-year period.

Right.

We're not exposed to the group is not exposed to a lot of stuff unless there's something really dramatic that comes.

Yeah, okay.

Um there could be bank for me.

Yeah, that's a good thing.

That means things are running hardly.

They come and bring an ethical complaint, so we have something to do.

Yeah, it's about we don't want everybody to be totally fresh.

Yeah, like some experience is good, but that's what I think.

Yeah, what I'm saying though is that perhaps where that person's term is up or at a particular point, whatever, and it's gonna go by type of thing.

In my mind, it has always been a good thing.

And that's why I always ask that question.

That's the same thing that my mind meetings should last no more than an hour because some people just like a talk and that doesn't make any sense.

There's nothing before us.

Makes no sense for us to do something so that somebody can get some practice discussing ethics.

I mean, if it's not expensive.

No, I mean I think the idea is more is that does the term make sense?

I'm getting that is the three-year term the right term.

So uh yeah, maybe just an observation because we have an example at the table and hear us of um there is always the option of you take a year off and you come back and continue continue the journey.

Yeah, um, if you feel like either want more experience, uh more action, uh just stretched over a long period of time.

Um I think I understand what the intent is, but there is certainly that option for people to re-up after a year away.

So I'd say for now since we're talking about the report, um, it connects a little bit just because we do show everybody's term in the forward, so that's it's kind of good to see how everybody's clock is ticking.

But um, are there any did anybody have any changes to the report or identify any issues that anything that looked incorrect?

Um otherwise I think our action is just to accept the reporting.

Yeah, did you have something Mr.

City for you?

Just an observation.

There was um from the training the last couple of days.

I yeah, um it's just a little interesting from either the mayor's office or from the council's perspective.

Um they of course want to hear from the boards and commissions and have have your work inform theirs.

Um and sometimes they lose track of how we are actually communicating to them.

Uh you may have heard heard the mayor indicate that we don't get many many reports.

Um I I think they are actually going to they do go to the council, they go on consent, of course, and we've been very deliberate to make sure that annual reports get done and go to the council.

Um so um just wanted to provide that additional context that this group has has done the annual report, other boards and commissions um do that as well, and it goes to council.

Usually it's not necessarily a point of discussion for for the council, but they are getting those updates annual reports, um, etc.

Yeah, that's good to clarify.

And I assume if they if they did have something that was interesting to them, they could always pull it from the consent in it.

Absolutely for something, so it's have that option, but I do, and again, that kind of falls into things that you know if they receive the report and read and agree then stays in consent, and that's generally a good thing.

Things are kind of ticking like so really complaining this year or last year.

That was last year, I believe.

Yeah, this year was kind of uh the RPD issue, the uh travel allocation issue, and then right now, but in my old meeting logs in your call.

Okay, we have a motion to approve the report and pass it along, second, second.

All right, any additional discussion?

Yes, that I thought it was very going on.

Oh, thank you.

Most of it was in the past, but I did my best to update it and great, all right.

All those in favor?

I'm closed, I think.

Sounds like that's unanimous.

Great, all right.

Um, I think that was our last item in business.

So uh now go ahead and adjourn.

Just a reminder our next meeting would be the February 19th.

Thanks.

Um, same time, same place.

And if we have no agenda items, we will uh reach out to let you know.

Thanks everybody.

All right, thanks all.

Thank you.

Oh, really?