Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[PRELIMINARY OPEN MEETING]

[00:00:07]

YEAH. THERE WE GO.

I HEAR AUDIO NOW.

ALL RIGHT, I NOW DECLARE THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL IS CONVENED IN OPEN SESSION.

THAT ALL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMS AND MAYOR PRO TEM PRINCE AND RECORDING IN PROGRESS HERE. AND COUNCIL MEMBER HOLMER.

THE COUNCIL WILL NOW RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND THE WEST PARTY ROOM TO HOLD A CLOSED EXECUTIVE MEETING PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF VERNON'S TEXAS CODES ANNOTATED GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551, THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AUTHORITY CONTAINED IN SECTION 551.071, TO CONSULT WITH THE ATTORNEY TO RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE AND DISCUSS LITIGATION.

SECTION 551.087 TO DISCUSS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MATTERS AND SECTION 551.074 TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTERS.

THANK YOU.

SORRY ABOUT THE GAVEL.

I NOW DECLARE THAT THE PLANO CITY COUNCIL PRELIMINARY OPEN MEETING IS RECONVENED IN OPEN SESSION.

THAT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT.

OUR FIRST ITEM ON THE PRELIMINARY AGENDA IS CONSIDERATION AND ACTION RESULTING IN FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION.

ON PERSONNEL APPOINTMENT.

REAPPOINTMENT OF NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT BOARD MEMBER.

COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE.

MR. MAYOR, WE WOULD LIKE TO TABLE THIS UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, WHEN I HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH MR. KELLY. OKAY.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE THE APPOINTMENT UNTIL THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

SECOND. THANK YOU.

I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH.

ALL IN FAVOR OF TABLING, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

MOTION PASSES 8-0.

OR. NEXT ITEM.

ITEM TWO. PERSONNEL APPOINTMENTS.

TAX INCREMENT FINANCING.

REINVESTMENT ZONE NUMBER FIVE.

MEMBERS AND CHAIR.

COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE.

YOU ARE THE LIAISONS.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MAYOR.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

HORNE AND I HAVE SPOKEN TO APPLICANTS AND HAVE MADE DECISION WE'D LIKE TO APPOINT THE FOLLOWING.

OKAY. GARY BERLIN.

DOUG BINDER.

AL-BUKHARI MASOOD TED HONG.

JEANNIE CADENA.

AND DEBORAH FARBER.

AND THEN WE WILL FURTHER APPOINT DOCTOR GARY BERLIN AS CHAIR AND JEANNIE CADENA AS VICE CHAIR.

OKAY. DO YOU HAVE THAT, LISA? OKAY. DID YOU MAKE THAT MOTION? OKAY, YEAH, I MAKE THAT A MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH.

SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER HORNE.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

MOTION PASSES 8 TO 0.

OKAY. ITEM THREE.

HERITAGE PRESERVATION GRANT PROGRAM.

ADMINISTRATIVE COST FUNDING.

HELLO, MR. HILL.

IT'S ON, BUT THAT'S OKAY.

OKAY, I'LL TRY TO SPEAK LOUDLY.

IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S ON NOW.

WELL GOOD EVENING. I APPRECIATE YOU BEING AVAILABLE TO DISCUSS THIS WITH ME.

IF YOU REMEMBER, WE BROUGHT A DISCUSSION TO THE COMMISSION AT THE FEBRUARY 26TH MEETING.

GETTING SOME INITIAL DIRECTION FROM YOU ABOUT CHANGES TO THE PROGRAM RELATED TO OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING.

WE DISCUSSED THIS WITH THE HERITAGE COMMISSION AT THE MARCH 27TH MEETING AS WELL, AND WE HAVE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR YOU.

SO JUST A REMINDER, THERE'S $1 MILLION THAT'S ANTICIPATED TO BE ALLOCATED FOR FUNDS IN THIS UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR.

SO, THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE, NUMBER ONE, WE RECOMMEND THAT SOME FIXED ALLOCATIONS BE RETAINED.

AND THOSE ARE THE HERITAGE FARMSTEAD MUSEUM AND THE PLANO CONSERVANCY.

THOSE FUNDING AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN IN PLACE FOR MANY YEARS.

[00:05:03]

SO, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THOSE BE RETAINED AND SET ASIDE AS FIXED COSTS MOVING FORWARD.

THESE OPERATIONS ARE UNIQUE BECAUSE THEY'RE BOTH ON CITY OWNED PROPERTY.

AND TO DIFFERENTIATE THESE FROM OTHER FUNDS, THEY'LL STILL BE CALLED OPERATIONS MAINTENANCE.

AND THEN SECONDLY.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING CALLED PROJECT ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.

SO, THE REMAINING FUNDS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT PROJECTS AS WELL AS THE INDIRECT COST TO OPERATE THEM.

AND THOSE INDIRECT COSTS WERE ENTITLED PROJECT ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.

THESE WOULD BE OPEN TO ALL GRANTEES AND ELIGIBLE EXPENSES OR ITEMS SUCH AS SALARIES, UTILITIES, ET CETERA.

WE'RE RECOMMENDING A CAP OF 20% OF EACH INDIVIDUAL PROJECT FOR THOSE PROJECT ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS, AND WHEN THOSE ARE REQUESTED, THE GRANTEES MUST CLEARLY ARTICULATE THE VALUE AS IT PERTAINS TO SUPPORTING HERITAGE TOURISM PROJECTS.

SO, THESE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE BEFORE THE HERITAGE COMMISSION.

THEY WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THOSE.

WE DID HAVE SEVERAL GRANT RECIPIENTS IN ATTENDANCE AT THE MEETING.

AND THEN WE HAD ONE SPEAKER WHO WAS IN SUPPORT OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT EVENING.

I'LL STOP RIGHT THERE. I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

QUESTIONS FOR ERIC.

COUNCILMAN HAD.

OH, THANK YOU MARK.

SORRY I DID NOT HAVE A QUESTION, SO I WAS WAITING FOR DISCUSSION, BUT OKAY.

WELL, LET'S. SO, I GET MY GRAMMAR.

IT'S TIME. IT'S TIME.

GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU.

BUT ANYWAY, I LOOKED INTO THIS, AND I THINK THIS IS WHAT CITY MANAGER ISRAELSON WAS ALLUDING TO.

I SENT AN EMAIL TO TO STAFF ABOUT THIS BECAUSE AS YOU ALL MAY REMEMBER A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, WE HAD ANOTHER ISSUE.

I GUESS IT WAS A VERY SIMILAR ISSUE TO THIS ONE.

AND I LOOKED INTO OR RATHER ASKED THE STAFF TO LOOK INTO HOW MUCH HAVE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUES INCREASED OVER THE PAST 15 YEARS? AND THEN HOW MUCH HAS OUR CULTURAL ARTS AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUNDING INCREASED? AND IN FISCAL YEAR 2009 2010, HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUES WERE A LITTLE UNDER $4.1 MILLION.

IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, 2324 THEY'RE OVER $14 MILLION.

SO, THEY'VE MORE THAN TRIPLED IN THAT SAME 2009-2010 YEAR SUPPORT OF THE ARTS OR CULTURAL ARTS WAS $586,384. IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, IT'S A MILLION HISTORIC PRESERVATION WAS 501,000 AND CHANGE IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, IT'S 800,000.

AND OF COURSE, AS WE JUST HEARD FOR NEXT YEAR, PROPOSED FOR A MILLION.

BUT THE CITY IS ALLOWED TO GIVE UP TO 15%.

THE STAFF HAS CONFIRMED, OF HOTEL MOTEL TAX FUNDING EACH TO HERITAGE PRESERVATION AND CULTURAL ARTS GRANTS PROGRAMS. CURRENTLY THAT WOULD BE $2.1 MILLION FOR EACH OF THEM.

AND SO, I KNOW THERE ARE OTHER THINGS WE'RE USING HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE FOR.

BUT OBVIOUSLY, OVER THE PAST 15 YEARS, THE PERCENTAGE OF HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE THAT'S USED ON CULTURAL ARTS FUNDING AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUNDING HAS DECLINED AS A PERCENTAGE OF OUR OVERALL HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE.

AND I THINK THOSE ARE IMPORTANT CITY OBJECTIVES.

SO, IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET CYCLE, I'D LIKE TO SEE US LOOK AT GOING ABOVE $1 MILLION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND FOR CULTURAL ARTS.

AND JUST AS A REMINDER, I KNOW EVERYONE ON COUNCIL KNOWS THIS, BUT TO EVERYONE WATCHING, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ANYTHING THAT WOULD COME FROM A TAX ON PLANO RESIDENTS.

YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT PROPERTY TAX.

IT'S NOT SALES TAX. IT'S NOT BASED ON FEES.

THIS IS FROM HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX BASED ON HOTEL STAYS.

AND IT HAS TO BE USED FOR CERTAIN VERY NARROWLY DEFINED PURPOSES.

AND SO, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT OTHER THINGS THAT ARE ELIGIBLE USES COMPETING FOR THOSE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX FUNDS THOSE ARE ALSO GREAT GOALS.

BUT I JUST THINK MAYBE WE'VE LET CULTURAL ARTS AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION SLIP A LITTLE BIT.

AND I'D LOVE TO SEE US BOOST THAT UP IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET CYCLE AND GO ABOVE THAT $1 MILLION RECOMMENDATION.

AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP THIS IS KIND OF A SMALLER POINT, BUT I LIKE THE 20% CAP.

BUT AS WE JUST SAW IN THE LAST BUDGET CYCLE, WE HAD A SITUATION WHERE WE AS A COUNCIL MADE AN EXCEPTION BECAUSE WE HAD AN APPLICANT COME TO US, AND THEY HAD A GOOD REASON FOR US TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION.

SO, I'D LOVE TO SEE THAT BE A GUIDELINE RATHER THAN A HARD CAP.

YOU KNOW, SAY THAT WE WOULD JUST SAY WE DON'T THINK WE SHOULD GO ABOVE 20% BARRING, YOU KNOW, SOME UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE, BUT LEAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY IN THERE THAT THE COUNCIL COULD SAY THIS IS A CIRCUMSTANCE THAT QUALIFIES FOR GOING ABOVE 20% FOR PROJECT ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.

THOSE ARE THE TWO CHANGES I WOULD PROPOSE.

OKAY. CAN WE GET SOME JUST FOR COUNCIL'S APPRECIATION OF UNDERSTANDING

[00:10:09]

WHETHER OR NOT THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD FIT INTO THE PARAMETERS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.

HOW WOULD THIS AFFECT THE HOTEL, MOTEL TAX? WELL, MAYOR COUNCIL, I THINK WE CAN BRING BACK SOME INFORMATION IN A TIMELY MANNER THAT THAT PROVIDES SOME OF THAT ANALYSIS.

YOU KNOW, THE COUNCILMAN DID REACH OUT.

WE DID PROVIDE HIM SOME OF THAT INFORMATION, BUT WE'VE NOT DONE AN ANALYSIS ON WHAT THIS WOULD MEAN TO THE FUND IN GENERAL.

HE'S CORRECT IN THE GROWTH OF THE FUND.

HE'S CORRECT IN THE NUMBERS OF WHAT 15% WOULD LOOK LIKE.

BUT AS FAR AS THE IMPACT TO THE FUND OR WHAT IT MIGHT HAVE AS FAR AS A CASCADING EFFECT, WE'VE NOT PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION, NOR HAVE WE DONE THAT ANALYSIS, BUT WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT, BRING THAT BACK TO COUNCIL AND THEN LET YOU ALL MAKE A POLICY DECISION.

SO, IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO IT AND BRING IT BACK.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

JUST CLARIFICATION.

SO, ANTHONY, ARE YOU SAYING AT THIS POINT THAT INSTEAD OF USING OUR BUDGETS FROM, FROM GENERAL REVENUE OR, YOU KNOW, FROM PROPERTY TAX AND SALES TAX TO INSTEAD MOVE THE HERITAGE FUNDS AND GRANTS TO USE CITY AND I MEAN HOTEL TAX.

SO AS A CLARIFICATION, THEY'RE ALREADY FUNDED THROUGH HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX THROUGH THE HOTEL MOTEL TAX.

BUT WHAT I WAS SAYING IS THAT.

I. THE AMOUNT OF ANNUAL COLLECTIONS OF HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX IS GREATLY INCREASED, MORE THAN TRIPLED OVER THE PAST 15 YEARS, AND THE AMOUNTS THAT WE GIVE FOR CULTURAL ARTS AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION HAVEN'T KEPT PACE.

SO I TOTALLY AGREE.

IN FACT, THIS IS WHAT I WAS ANTICIPATING COMING INTO THE MEETING AND WHY I SAID I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT THIS DURING THE.

SO YOU WANT TO SORT OF RELATIVELY GROW WITH AS, AS, AS THE TAXES FOR HOTEL MOTEL GROWS, THEN THE HERITAGE REVENUE SHOULD GROW WITH IT IN RELATIVE TERMS. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY? EXACTLY.

SO AS AN ILLUSTRATION, BACK WHEN HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUES WERE A LITTLE OVER $4 MILLION, THAT 15% CAP WOULD HAVE WOULD HAVE REPRESENTED A LITTLE OVER $600,000. AND THE ACTUAL AMOUNTS DURING THAT YEAR WERE 586,000 FOR SUPPORT OF THE ARTS AND 501,000 FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

SO WE WERE VERY NEAR THAT CAP, NOT QUITE THERE, BUT WE WERE NEAR THAT CAP.

NOW WE'RE AT LESS THAN HALF OF THE CAP.

AND SO AS A AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE COLLECTED ANNUALLY, THE AMOUNT SPENT ON THESE GRANTS FOR CULTURAL ARTS AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION HAS SIGNIFICANTLY DECREASED OVER TIME, NOT IN DOLLAR TERMS, BUT IN IN TERMS OF THE PERCENTAGE OF HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE DEVOTED TO THESE USES.

AND SO I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT ELSE IS BEING SPENT ON, YOU KNOW, PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA DURING THE BUDGET CYCLE, SEE WHAT THE COMPETING USES ARE.

BUT I'D LOVE TO CHALLENGE US TO SEE IF WE CAN GO ABOVE THAT 1 MILLION AND, YOU KNOW, REALLY SUPPORT HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND CULTURAL ARTS.

IS EVERYBODY OKAY WITH PUTTING IT ON THE BUDGET? CONVERSATION. WE'LL BRING BACK THAT ANALYSIS.

THANK YOU. ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE PROJECT FUNDING.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I'M CHRISTINA DAY, THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING.

AND HERE TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF UPDATE ON THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE PROJECT.

SO THE CURRENT REGULATIONS WE HAVE ARE DATED BACK TO THE 1980S.

I FOUND A COPY OF OUR OLD DEVELOPMENT REGULATION BINDER TO KIND OF GIVE A LITTLE VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE ROOTS OF THE CURRENT ORDINANCES.

THEY'VE BEEN UPDATED REPEATEDLY.

WE DO TRY TO KEEP THEM UP TO DATE, BUT THOSE UPDATES OVER TIME REALLY DO HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE REGULATIONS.

IN JUST TRYING TO LOOK AT THEM IN A COMPREHENSIVE MANNER IS A BEST PRACTICE.

SO WE'RE LOOKING TO UPDATE THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO ALIGN WITH THE NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021 AND MAKE SURE THAT THE REGULATIONS ARE MEETING THE POLICY OBJECTIVES OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SO AGAIN, WE'VE DONE UPDATES THROUGH THE PAST, BUT WE'RE LOOKING TO MAKE THIS A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO SIMPLIFY THE POLICIES, ALIGN THEM WITH THE CURRENT MARKET, AND JUST MAKE IT MORE USER FRIENDLY, UP TO MODERN STANDARDS WHERE THE DOCUMENT, LANGUAGE AND GRAPHICS ARE ALL MORE HELPFUL TO INDIVIDUALS USING THE ORDINANCES.

[00:15:02]

SO, THE CONTRACT WE HAVE ON THIS IS WE CURRENTLY HAVE $500,000 THAT WERE SET ASIDE IN FISCAL YEAR 22-23. THIS PROJECT'S BEEN DELAYED SO THAT THE SAME DIVISION COULD ADDRESS SHORT TERM RENTALS.

SO THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON THAT FOR A SUBSTANTIAL PERIOD OF TIME.

BUT TRYING TO GET THIS NEXT PROJECT BOOTED UP AS WE ARE TRENDING TOWARD THE END OF THE SHORT TERM RENTAL PROJECT.

WE'RE LOOKING TO NEED ADDITIONAL FUNDS.

WHEN WE WENT OUT TO BID, WE FOUND THAT ADDITIONAL FUNDS WERE NEEDED TO SUPPORT A VERY HIGH LEVEL OF TRANSPARENCY THAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR IN THE OBJECTIVES FROM THE CONSULTANT.

AND ALSO, JUST LIKE MOST PROJECTS, INFLATIONARY CHANGES.

SO FREESE AND NICHOLS HAS BEEN SELECTED BY THE PROJECT TEAM TO LEAD THE REWRITE BASED ON THEIR QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE THERE.

AS YOU'RE AWARE, VERY AWARE OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ALSO VERY QUALIFIED TO MANAGE THIS PROCESS.

THERE ARE TWO PRIMARY PHASES PROPOSED A DIAGNOSTIC REPORT THAT WOULD INCLUDE A GENERAL AUDIT OF OUR ZONING AND HOW IT ALIGNS WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL CONTENT DEVELOPMENT.

EDITS TO OUR CURRENT REGULATIONS AND THEN IMPLEMENTATION OF THOSE.

SO AS FAR AS PUBLIC OUTREACH, WE'RE LOOKING AT A DEDICATED STEERING COMMITTEE THAT WOULD WORK OVER 19 MONTHS, SEVEN MEETINGS WITH PNC.

AND THERE'S ALSO A JOINT WORKSHOP WITH PNC AND COUNCIL BUILT IN FOR A LOT OF PUBLIC INPUT.

WE'D BE COMING BACK TO YOU WITH A STEERING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS.

IF THIS PROJECT MOVES FORWARD.

IT WOULD ALSO REQUIRE BUDGET REQUESTS TO BE MADE THE NEXT TWO FISCAL YEARS.

SO WITH THAT, THIS IS THE PROJECT BUDGET AS IT STANDS, THE CONSULTANT CONTRACT LEGAL REVIEW, WHICH IS THROUGH A SEPARATE CONTRACT TECHNOLOGY IMPLEMENTATION THAT WE'RE FUNDING TO, AGAIN, MAKE IT MORE TRANSPARENT AND USER FRIENDLY AND THEN ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.

AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL.

AND SO WITH THAT, WE ARE REQUESTING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT.

IT IS AN ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THAT'S THE END OF MY UPDATE AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

THE CONSULTANTS ARE ALSO HERE.

THANK YOU. CHRISTINA.

ANY QUESTIONS? CHRISTINA. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE MAJORITY OF THE ADDITIONAL MONEY IS FOR THAT OUTREACH THING.

JUST MAKING SURE OUTREACH PIECE.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS STATED OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT THAT THAT'S REALLY WHAT THAT'S BASED FOR.

THE REWRITE ITSELF COULD LIKELY BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH THE MONEY THAT WE HAVE.

IT'S THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC OUTREACH THAT TAKES A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT AND REQUIRES ADDITIONAL FUNDING.

EXPLAIN THE STEERING COMMITTEE.

THE STEERING COMMITTEE WOULD BE APPOINTED, WE HOPE, WITH SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS, PEOPLE THAT ARE USING THE ORDINANCE TO GIVE US DIRECT FEEDBACK ON HOW THIS IS GOING TO IMPACT THEIR DAY TO DAY LIVES.

GOOD. OKAY. THANK YOU.

EVERYBODY GOOD? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

GREAT. THANK YOU. OKAY.

ITEM FIVE.

DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING RULES AND DECORUM.

POLICY FOR PUBLIC MEETINGS.

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.

WE HAVE SOME INFORMAL POLICY STATEMENT ON THE SIGN UP AND ON OUR GENERAL RULES, BUT WE HAVE NEVER ADOPTED A FORMAL POLICY.

AND SO, WE JUST WANTED TO VISIT THIS WITH YOU AND SEE IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT.

IF YOU DO WANT TO DO THAT, WE'LL BRING BACK A RESOLUTION BASED ON YOUR DIRECTION.

YES. I WANT SOMETHING IN WRITING BLACK AND WHITE, WHERE I CAN LOOK AT.

SO, WE SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE A POLICY STATEMENT TO LAY OUT THAT WE INTEND FOR OUR CHAMBERS TO BE A LIMITED PUBLIC FORUM, AND THAT WE'RE MEETING FOR THE DEFINED PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING THE CITY'S BUSINESS.

AND WE DO WELCOME PUBLIC INPUT RELATED TO THE LIMITED PURPOSE.

BUT WE ALSO WANT TO CONDUCT OURSELVES IN A BUSINESSLIKE MANNER AND RESPECTING THE CITIZENS TIME AND TAXPAYER RESOURCES AND REFLECT OUR EXCELLENCE BY CONDUCTING THE MEETINGS IN A RESPECTFUL AND PROFESSIONAL MANNER.

AND WE ALSO ASK THAT PEOPLE THAT PARTICIPATE IN OUR MEETINGS SHOW THE SAME LEVEL OF RESPECT AND DECORUM.

AND THEN WE'LL ADOPT THE RULES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DIRECTION.

THESE ARE VIEWPOINT NEUTRAL RULES THAT APPLY TO EVERYONE, REGARDLESS OF THE CONTENT OR VIEWPOINT OF THEIR MESSAGE.

AND IF PEOPLE ARE UNABLE TO ABIDE BY THE COUNCIL'S EXPECTATIONS FOR CONDUCTING THEMSELVES IN THE CHAMBERS, THEN WE

[00:20:01]

HAVE ALTERNATIVE WAYS FOR THEM TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU, WHICH IS BY EMAIL TO CITY COUNCIL@PLANO.GOV.

SO, HERE'S SOME OPTIONS THAT WE COULD INCORPORATE INTO A POLICY.

AND I DO THINK THAT YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT ABOUT SAYING THAT YOU DO WANT TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT REQUIRED BY LAW TO DO THAT FOR PUBLIC, JUST GENERAL COMMENTS.

AND ALSO, IT'S AN OPTION TO JUST TEMPORARILY SUSPEND WHILE AT DAVIS.

BUT I THINK FROM WHAT YOU'VE TOLD ME, AS WE'VE WORKED OVERTIME ON THIS, THAT YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND HAVE COMMENTS DO YOU WANT TO PROVIDE ANY FURTHER DIRECTION ON THAT ABOUT HOW YOU WANT TO GO ABOUT THAT? YEAH, I WOULD SAY AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE OF THE CONFINED, YOU KNOW, THE SPACE THAT WE HAVE HERE AND THE LIMITED RESOURCES UNLIKE WE HAVE AT THANK YOU.

UNLIKE WE HAVE AT MUNICIPAL CENTER THAT TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THE GENERAL COMMENTS BUT HAVE IT VIA ZOOM, WHICH EVERYBODY HAS ACCESS TO AND STILL ALLOW THEM TO, TO SPEAK.

IT WOULD BE, I THINK PROBABLY EVEN MORE LIKELY WE GET MORE COMMENTS BECAUSE PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO DO IT FROM THE COMFORT OF THEIR HOME, RATHER THAN SIT HERE AND WAIT TILL THE END OF A MEETING. SO THAT'S WHAT I'D RECOMMEND FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.

I LIKE TO SEE THAT AS A POTENTIAL FOR EVEN BEYOND THE TIME THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY IN DAVIS LIBRARY.

AND COME UP WITH SOME TYPE OF STRUCTURE IN WHICH THAT COULD BE THE TYPE OF PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE WOULD ALLOW.

I THINK BY DOING THIS, THE LIBRARY HERE FOR, FOR THE TIME THAT WE'RE HERE WILL GIVE US A GOOD IDEA OF HOW EFFECTIVE IT IS.

AND THEN MAYBE A MONTH BEFORE WE HEAD BACK TO CITY HALL, WE CAN REVISIT THIS AND SEE IF NOT, THIS WASN'T AN IDEA THAT WE WOULD EITHER DO PERMANENTLY OR GO BACK TO WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING.

OKAY. COUNCIL, WE SEEM TO GET A LOT OF COMMENTS REGULARLY NOW THAT REALLY AREN'T WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW OF THE CITY BUSINESS AND THINGS THAT YOU CAN.

ACTUALLY, DO SOMETHING ABOUT BECAUSE WE GET THINGS ABOUT GEOPOLITICAL SCHOOL DISTRICT AND OTHER FORMS. SO, YOU COULD IF YOU WANT TO LIMIT COMMENTS TO CITY BUSINESS, THAT IS WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW.

AND WE CAN REFER SPEAKERS WITH OTHER ITEMS THAT DON'T AFFECT YOU TO THE LOCAL STATE OR US REPRESENTATIVES OR AGENCIES THAT CAN ASSIST WITH THEIR ISSUES OF CONCERN.

DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT? I WOULD LOVE TO DO THAT.

IT JUST WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN HELP, HELP THEM KIND OF GET EDUCATED THAT THAT'S REALLY ALL THAT WE'RE REALLY ALLOWED TO HEAR IT THAT WE CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT.

BUT I THINK IT'LL TAKE A WHILE BEFORE I THINK COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST WILL BE DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH CITY BUSINESS. SO, WE'LL JUST HAVE TO CONTINUE TO, TO HELP EDUCATE THEM ALONG THE WAY.

I ALSO AGREE, I ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE IS PUBLIC COMMENTS MADE SPECIFICALLY ON AGENDA ITEMS. SO, WHETHER OR NOT THAT SHOULD BE RESTRICTED.

SO, I PERSONALLY BELIEVE THAT IF THERE IS NO RELATION OR VERY FAR RELATIONSHIP TO WHAT IS ON THE AGENDA ITEM, WHEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT IS MADE THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME TYPE OF RESTRICTION ON HOW MUCH TIME THEY CAN TAKE AND, YOU KNOW, AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO MAKE THOSE COMMENTS DURING THE TIME OF THOSE AGENDA ITEMS. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I ALSO SUPPORT DOING THIS.

I THINK EVERYTHING ON THIS SLIDE.

YOU KNOW OTHER THAN THE FIRST BULLET POINT, WHICH I THINK WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT, ASIDE FROM THAT FIRST BULLET POINT, I WOULD SUPPORT EVERYTHING ON HERE.

ON THE PROHIBIT SLASH LIMIT SIGNS.

HISTORICALLY, I THINK WE'VE ALLOWED PEOPLE TO COME IN WITH KIND OF SMALL, YOU KNOW, SIGNS WHO ARE SITTING, SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE THAT MIGHT SAY SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, LIKE NEXT MEETING, WE MIGHT HAVE HOMES, NOT HOTELS ON ONE SIDE, PROPERTY RIGHTS ON THE OTHER.

YOU KNOW, WE'VE HISTORICALLY ALLOWED THAT.

I WOULDN'T WANT TO BAN THAT.

YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS IT'S A SMALL SIGN THAT'S NOT BLOCKING ANYBODY ELSE'S VIEW.

BUT ASIDE FROM THAT FIRST BULLET POINT AND THAT LITTLE CAVEAT, I THINK, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THIS LOOKS GOOD SO THAT WE CAN STAY FOCUSED ON CITY BUSINESS AND HAVE DECORUM AT MEETINGS.

I'M SUPPORTIVE OF ALL THE BULLET POINTS ON THIS SLIDE.

[00:25:04]

COUNCIL MEMBER HOLMER THE RIGHT ONE.

OKAY. THERE. YOU GOOD? OKAY. I'M ALSO SUPPORTIVE.

AND I ALSO JUST WANT TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT WE'RE ACCESSIBLE BY EMAIL AND AVAILABLE TO MEET IN PERSON.

AND WHEN SOMEONE DOES COME TO PUBLIC COMMENTS, WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO RESPOND.

WE CAN JUST HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY SO YOU ACTUALLY CAN ENGAGE IN A CONVERSATION WITH US IF YOU SO WISH OUTSIDE OF THIS FORUM.

SO, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE AS WELL.

COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS. THANK YOU. I'M ALSO GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE, EXCEPT FOR THE FIRST BULLET.

AS COUNCILWOMAN RICARDELLI POINTED OUT AS WELL AS I AGREE WITH EIGHT AND A HALF BY 11 SIGNS, I DON'T THINK THAT'S DISRUPTIVE.

OKAY. SO SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DO FOR THE AUDIENCE RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S CORRECT. SIZE.

YEAH. CORRECT. SO, MAYOR, COUNCIL, THE OTHER ASPECT OF BANNERS AND PROPS.

ARE YOU OKAY WITH BANNING BANNERS AND PROPS BUT REMOVING THE SIGN PIECE OF IT FOR, FOR THAT DEFINED PIECE THAT WE ARE ALREADY, I THINK WE ALREADY HAVE.

COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH THANK YOU MAYOR.

YEAH. GREAT POINT.

THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY. AGAIN, I THINK A SMALL SIGN IS BASICALLY IT'S AN EXPRESSION OF FREE SPEECH.

YOU KNOW, YOU'RE PROMOTING YOUR OPINION, AND IT USUALLY IS MORE CONFINED TO WHEN WE REALLY HAVE A.

WIDE, WIDE INTEREST AGENDA ITEM THERE, SO I WOULDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT.

I DO STILL. I'M STILL IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.

AS I STATED, BEING ON ZOOM, NOT BANNED, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, OR PROHIBITED ENTIRELY.

AND I THINK AS A DEPUTY MAYOR HAD MENTIONED THAT EVEN WE WANT TO LOOK AT THAT MOVING FORWARD.

THE MAYOR MADE A GOOD POINT IS LET'S SEE HOW IT GOES HERE, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A GOOD TRIAL PERIOD, FIVE, SIX MONTHS AND THEN BRING IT UP.

AND WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AT THAT TIME BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW.

PUTTING TOGETHER FIRM AND WRITTEN RULES OF CONDUCT THAT WE REALLY KIND OF HADN'T HAD BEFORE.

WE'VE KIND OF TRIED TO, HAD TO, I GUESS IMPLEMENT THINGS AS THINGS CAME UP THAT WE, WE HAVEN'T HAD HIT US BEFORE.

SO NOW WE HAVE IT BLACK AND WHITE.

IT MAKES IT EASIER FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, FOR US TO WORK WITH.

SO. SO YEAH, I'M REALLY GOOD YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH EVERYTHING.

IT'S LIKE, EXCEPT INSTEAD OF PROHIBITING JUST TO MOVE IT TO AN ELECTRONIC FORMAT.

OKAY. AND I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING WE HAVE HERE.

I DO LIKE SPECIFICALLY HAVING THE SIGNS LIMITED TO EIGHT AND A HALF BY 11.

ONE OF THE ISSUES, THOUGH I DO HAVE IS WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING BEING SOLELY DONE THROUGH ZOOM, AND BECAUSE WE DO HAVE SOME THAT ARE TECHNICALLY SOME OF OUR CITIZENS ARE TECHNICALLY CHALLENGED.

SO, I'D LIKE TO SEE IF THERE IS A WAY THAT WE CAN HAVE A SEPARATE AREA WITHIN THE DAVIS LIBRARY.

I'M NOT SURE WHERE, BUT IT'D BE SOMETHING TO THINK OUT LOGISTICALLY DOWN THE LINE IF SOMEONE WANTS TO AGAIN APPEAR IN A PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT WE HAVEN'T ISOLATED IN ANOTHER PART OF THE BUILDING AND MAKE IT EASY FOR THEM TO AT LEAST PROVIDE THAT COMMENT, I HATE TO BE ABLE TO LIMIT THEM JUST BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE ZOOM OR TEAMS OR WHATEVER ELSE IS BEING USED.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE MAJORITY.

IT SOUNDS LIKE THE MAJORITY WANT TO DO ZOOM.

CORRECT. OKAY.

THAT'S TRUE. SO, YOU'VE GOT SOME GUIDANCE THERE.

YES. WE CAN WE HAVE ANOTHER SLIDE.

OH. DO YOU WANT TO? THESE ARE SOME OTHER SUGGESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP OVER TIME LIMIT COMMENTS TO PLANO RESIDENTS OR, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO MANAGE OWN WORK.

BUSINESSES IN PLANO.

JUST FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE MUCH WIDER ARRAY OF PEOPLE THAT COME JUST WITH AGENDA ITEMS PROHIBITING THE PERSONAL ATTACKS AND INSULTS IF THEY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE POLICY ISSUES OR OFFICIAL CITY BUSINESS.

WHICH I THINK IS TAKEN CARE OF JUST BY THE FACT THAT YOU'RE LIMITED TO CITY BUSINESS AND REQUIRE THAT COMMENTS ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AS A WHOLE AND PROHIBIT OFFENSIVE, VULGAR, PROFANE, INTIMIDATING, THREATENING TYPE OF REMARKS, PERIOD, OR IN THE EVENT THAT THEY DISRUPT COUNCIL MEETINGS.

WELL, I WOULD AGREE WITH ALL OF THEM, BUT IF THEY'RE INDEFENSIBLE, THEN THAT WOULD BE A PROBLEM FOR THE CITY.

SO, IF IN FACT.

ONE OF THOSE ITEMS WOULD VIOLATE A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT, THEN I'D BE CONCERNED ABOUT APPLYING THOSE TO AN ORDINANCE SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED FROM YOU TO GIVE US FEEDBACK ON WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ALLOWABLE OR UNALLOWABLE TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

[00:30:05]

YEAH. WELL, WE COULD START WITH THE FIRST SLIDE AND ALSO THINGS THAT CAUSE DISRUPTION TO THE MEETINGS.

I THINK THE FACT THAT RIGHT NOW, IF WE'RE AGREEING THAT ZOOM IS, IS AN OPTION, MAYBE SOME OF THESE OTHER RESTRICTIONS COULD WAIT BECAUSE, I MEAN, ZOOM ITSELF IS PRETTY CONTAINED BY ITSELF.

SO, WE MAY COME BACK, YOU KNOW, IN A FEW MONTHS AND DECIDE, REEVALUATE WHAT ELSE WE NEED TO PUT IN PLACE.

I'M REALLY OKAY WITH THAT.

OKAY. AND THIS IS JUST SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE WILL BE USING FOR ENFORCING YOUR RULES, WHICH IS CALLING. THIS IS STUFF WE ALREADY DO BUT CALL A POINT OF ORDER ISSUE A VERBAL WARNING.

IF A SPEAKER DOES NOT CEASE, THE VIOLATION WILL FORFEIT THE REMAINDER OF THE TIME.

WE WILL CUT THE MIC OR CUT THE CAMERA FOR ZOOM.

PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE OPTION FOR COMMENTS, WHICH IS EMAILS, AND THE NEXT TWO DON'T REALLY APPLY IF WE'RE DOING BY ZOOM, SO I THINK WE'LL BE FINE.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL. ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO, TO REITERATE WAS THAT THE CUTTING THE MIC THREE MINUTES YOU KNOW, IN CONSULTATION WITH SOME OF OUR ADVISORS OR WHATEVER THAT TIME FRAME IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT EVERYBODY HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME REGARDLESS OF CONTENT, THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME.

AND WHAT WE'D LIKE TO START MOVING TO IS AN ELEMENT OF, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT WE PASSIONATELY AGREE WITH OR SOMEBODY THAT WE GREATLY RESPECT, OR SOMEBODY THAT HAS THE MOST URGENT ISSUE, THAT THREE MINUTES IS 3 MINUTES OR 2 MINUTES OR TWO MINUTES, AND THAT THE MICROPHONES OR THE ZOOM GETS CUT AT THAT TIME, SO THAT WE'RE APPLYING THAT EQUALLY TO EVERYBODY THAT IS THAT IS SPEAKING.

I KNOW THAT THAT'S KIND OF A HARD LINE, BUT IT'S A FAIR LINE AND IF APPLIED EQUALLY, GIVES US GREATER ABILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE APPLYING THAT FAIRLY AND EQUALLY TO EVERYBODY THAT COMES IN FRONT OF, OF COUNCIL.

AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE'D LIKE TO DO IS, IS HAVE THE, HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GO AHEAD AND STOP THE STOP THE, THE PRESENTATION AT THAT THREE MINUTES, NO MATTER WHAT, THAT ONCE THE THREE MINUTES IS DONE AND THAT TIME TIMER GOES OFF, EVEN IF THEY'RE TRYING TO WRAP IT UP, WE CUT THAT, CUT THAT THAT PRESENTATION AT THAT MOMENT BECAUSE WE THINK THAT THAT'S FAIR AND THAT'S EQUAL AND PEOPLE CAN ADJUST TO IT.

WE'VE WE'VE BEEN VERY ACCOMMODATING.

AND I THINK THAT THE, THE ISSUE WITH ACCOMMODATING IS WHERE DO YOU STOP.

AND IT BECOMES A HARDER CHALLENGE AS YOU GO FORWARD IS IT'S NOT TRULY THREE MINUTES.

IT'S ACTUALLY THREE MINUTES PLUS WHATEVER TIME.

SO IT'S THAT CUTTING THE TIME IS AN IMPORTANT FEATURE THAT CAN BE DONE ADMINISTRATIVELY.

IT CAN BE DONE BY STAFF.

BUT WE WOULD NEED THAT DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL IF YOU WERE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT DIRECTION.

YEAH. MARK, I THINK THAT'S GREAT.

THE ONLY TWO CAVEATS I'D PUT IN THERE IS, NUMBER ONE, AS I'M SURE WE DO, IS WE MAKE THAT ANNOUNCEMENT AT THE BEGINNING, SO PEOPLE AREN'T SURPRISED.

AND NUMBER TWO, LISA KEEPS DOING THE GREAT JOB, THE 20S 30S WHATEVER WE DO AHEAD OF TIME TO SAY 20S THAT THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

AND THEN ALSO, IT'S NOT JUST THREE MINUTES.

IT'S SOMETIMES, DEPENDING ON HOW MANY PEOPLE WE HAVE, THE MAYOR MIGHT MAKE IT TWO MINUTES.

SO, BUT WHATEVER THE TIME FRAME IS.

SO, I THINK THAT'S GREAT.

I'M IN AGREEMENT ON THAT. SHELBY I WAS GOING TO TOUCH ON THAT AS WELL.

THANK YOU. THAT SOMETIMES WHEN WE HAVE A LOT OF SPEAKERS, WE TRIM THE TIME TO TWO MINUTES OR 90S.

A LOT OF PEOPLE COME TIMING WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY FOR THREE MINUTES, AND WE CATCH THEM A LITTLE BIT OFF GUARD WHEN WE SHORTEN IT.

I WOULD ADVISE GIVING A LITTLE BIT OF GRACE WHEN WE CUT THE TIME TO TWO MINUTES, OR SOME LESSER TIME THAN THREE MINUTES BECAUSE THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ADJUST THAT WELL ON THE FLY. I THINK THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICATION OF GRACE IS THE HARD PIECE.

COUNCILMAN. SO, I RESPECT THAT AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE COULD POSSIBLY CONSIDER IS ANNOUNCING THE TIME, AND THEN MAYBE EVEN TAKING A FIVE-MINUTE RECESS TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO RECONFIGURE THEIR TALKING POINTS.

I WOULD RATHER DO THAT AND THEN HAVE THAT HARD CUT OFF, BECAUSE THEN AGAIN, APPLIED EQUALLY.

AND WE'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT WHAT GRACE LOOKS LIKE TO ONE PERSON VERSUS THE OTHER.

SO, FOR US, I THINK HAVING THAT AND HAVING THAT ADMINISTRATIVE ABILITY IS JUST THE FAIREST AND MOST EQUITABLE WAY OF GOING ABOUT THAT.

BUT THAT THAT WOULD STILL BE MY RECOMMENDATION.

JULIE, I AGREE WITH THAT.

I ALSO JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT OFTENTIMES AFTER A SPEAKER COMES THE FOLLOWING DAY OR EVENING, WE WILL RECEIVE THEIR NOTES IN AN EMAIL SO THAT WE'RE ABLE TO READ OVER THEM AGAIN.

SO, IF FOR SOME REASON WE DID MISS THE VERY END OR THEY DIDN'T GET ALL OF THEIR POINTS IN, IT IS A WAY THAT WE'RE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, REFLECT BACK ON THEM AND GET ANYTHING THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE HAD TO CUT OFF AT THE END.

[00:35:03]

ANTHONY. THANK YOU. MAYOR.

JUST A QUICK PRACTICAL SUGGESTION TOWARD COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMS. POINT ABOUT CUTTING DOWN THE TIME AND PEOPLE TRYING TO ADJUST THEIR COMMENTS.

IT MAY BE HELPFUL TO ADD A ONE-MINUTE WARNING TO OUR REPERTOIRE THAT I THINK CURRENTLY INCLUDES THE 22ND, MAYBE A 32ND.

I CAN'T REMEMBER WARNING, BUT IF PEOPLE KNEW THEY'VE GOT ONE MINUTE LEFT, THEN YOU KNOW IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON TO THEIR SUMMING UP COMMENTS.

WELL, MISS HENDERSON IS VERY TALENTED AND SO I WOULD, I'M SORRY TO ADD, TO ASK, I WOULD ASK LISA IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO ADD A ONE MINUTE IN ADDITION TO THE 32ND. AND IT COULD BE CHALLENGING BECAUSE I'M DOING MULTIPLE THINGS AND ON ZOOM IT DOES TAKE A LITTLE BIT LONGER TO GET SOMEONE SHUT OFF, BUT WE HAVE SWITCHED TO THE 4 P.M.

CUT OFF. SO, WE KNOW AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING HOW MANY SPEAKERS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE.

SO, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, IT'S EVERYONE'S GOING TO HAVE TWO MINUTES AND THEY HAVE THE LENGTH OF THE MEETING TO ADJUST THEIR COMMENTS.

SO THAT MAY BE A SOLUTION.

SO, IF THAT'S ADMINISTRATIVELY CHALLENGING, I THINK YOU ALREADY HAVE SO MANY IRONS IN THE FIRE DURING PUBLIC COMMENTS.

I DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT HARDER THAN IT NEEDS TO BE, SO I'LL WITHDRAW THAT SUGGESTION.

THANK YOU.

AND WELL, COUNCIL, I NEEDED TO.

I'M SENSING CONSENSUS AROUND THAT FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE PERSPECTIVE.

OKAY, JUST ONE QUICK COMMENT.

MOST OF US HAVE CAMPAIGNED BEFORE, HAVE BEEN IN SITUATIONS WHERE WE'RE OUT OF FORM AND WE HAVE TIMED ALLOTTED AMOUNT OF TIME.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING TECHNICAL, WE CAN USE.

THAT IS A CLOCK TO KEEP LISA FROM HAVING TO, YOU KNOW, WHERE YOU CAN JUST YOU CAN SEE YOUR TIME.

I PERSONALLY FIND THAT VERY HELPFUL.

AND THAT WOULD BE A FAIR WAY TO TREAT EVERYONE.

IT IS ON THE PODIUM IN THE CHAMBER.

IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFERENT WHEN WE GET BACK IN THE CHAMBER.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A NEW SYSTEM, WHICH I BELIEVE I COULD BE OFF GUARD, BUT IT'S LIKE, CAN BE ON THE BIG SCREEN.

SO, LISA, I THINK IF ON ZOOM, WOULDN'T IT BE POSSIBLE TO PUT A CLOCK RIGHT NEXT TO THE PERSON'S FACE? YOU KNOW, HAVING TWO SCREENS, WE CAN LOOK INTO IT.

YEAH. YOU KNOW, THE JUDGES DO THAT TO US ALL THE TIME.

THEY HAVE THIS WHOLE SCREEN UP WITH THE ZOOM ON, THE ZOOM WITH THE CLOCK RIGHT NEXT TO IT TO US, SO THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T GO OVER OUR TIME SO THAT WE'LL LOOK INTO THAT TECHNOLOGY. BUT THANK YOU, COUNCIL, FOR THE CONSENSUS AROUND THE SUPPORT FOR DOING THAT.

I THINK THAT THAT WILL MAKE IT MORE CONSISTENT AND LIKE I SAID, FAIRER TO EVERYBODY.

SO, THANK YOU FOR THAT.

NEXT ITEM.

ITEM SIX.

CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDAS.

ANY ITEM COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE.

MAYOR I'D LIKE TO REMOVE FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEM B.

OKAY. AND COUNCIL ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION ON FUTURE AGENDAS.

ACTION. ALL RIGHT.

WE'LL TAKE A 30-MINUTE BREAK AND RESUME THE REGULAR MEETING AT SEVEN.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.