Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:05]

ALL

[ CALL TO ORDER: Council Chamber INVOCATION: City Attorney/Legal Counsel Jones PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Councilmember/Vice Chair Shaw ROLL CALL: Mayor/Director Beamish Mayor Pro Tem/Director Espinoza Councilmember/Director Gomez Councilmember/Chair Medrano Councilmember/Vice Chair Shaw]

RIGHT.

IT IS SIX 30.

SO THIS IS THE SHOW ON OUR CALL TO ORDER EITHER MEETING AT THE CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR SITE MEETING WITH THE LAGER HOUSING AUTHORITY, AUGUST 13TH BLANK.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT IT IS 6:30 PM AND THE END LOCATION WILL BE BY CITY ATTORNEY LEGAL COUNSEL THAT YOUR JONES FOLLOWED BY AFTER ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCIL MEMBER, THE MEMBER OF VICE CHAIR, AH, DEAR HEAVENLY FATHER PROBABLY BAUER HAS WE GATHER THIS EVENING.

WE DO THE IMPORTANT BUSINESS OF THE CITY OF ALHAMBRA.

WE LIVE AT DIFFICULT TIMES AND WE ASKED WITH GUIDANCE AND DIRECTION IN THESE DIFFICULT TIMES, AS WE BATTLE THE CHALLENGES OF FACING THE COVID VIRUS, THAT ALL THE CONSEQUENCES THERE TOO.

WE ASK YOU TO BLESS THOSE WHO SERVE OUR COMMUNITY, OUR PUBLIC SAFETY, OUR HEALTH PROVIDERS, THOSE WHO REACH OUT THESE DIFFICULT TIMES TO PROTECT US AND MAKE US SAFE.

WE ASK YOU TO BLESS THE CITY COUNCIL, TO SEE THE ACTS WITH WE'RE USING THEM JUST IN A SENSE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND DUTY TO ALL THE CITIZENS OF LAHABRA.

WE ASK FOR YOUR BLESSINGS AND YOUR GUIDANCE AND YOUR GRACE IN THESE DIFFICULT TIMES.

WE SAY THESE THINGS I BELIEVE, AND THEY WERE, THEY SAID, JESUS CHRIST.

AMEN.

AMEN.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

PLEASE JOIN ME IN A PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES.

READY BEGIN.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

THANK YOU, TIM.

HOLA CLERK, PLEASE CALL US COUNCIL MEMBER, VICE CHAIR, MEDRANO OR COUNT.

EXCUSE ME.

COUNCIL MEMBER, CHAIR, MAGENTO COUNCIL MEMBER, VICE CHAIR, SHOW COUNCIL.

THANK YOU.

COUNCIL MEMBER, DIRECTOR GOMEZ.

DEAR MAYOR PRO TEM DIRECTOR ESPINOSA HERE, MAYOR DIRECTOR.

BEAMISH HERE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ARE THERE ANY CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCED THAT ARE NO ONE ELSE'S THANK YOU.

AND THERE'S NO PROCLAMATIONS OR PRESENTATIONS AT THIS TIME, WE

[ PUBLIC COMMENTS: When addressing the City Council, please complete a Speaker’s Card before leaving the Council Chamber. This is the time for the public to address any item of interest to the public that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City NOT appearing on this Agenda. Speakers must limit their comments to three (3) minutes each. The total time period for public comment is 30 minutes. Per Government Code Section 54954.3(a), the City Council cannot take action or express a consensus of approval or disapproval on any public comments regarding matters which do not appear on the printed agenda. ]

WILL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENTS.

THIS IS THE TIME AND FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS ANY ITEM OF INTEREST TO THE PUBLIC THAT IS WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY, NOT APPEARING ON THIS AGENDA.

IF THE PUBLIC HAD READ ANYTHING OUTSIDE THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY NOW, I MEAN ON THE SUBJECT THAT THEY ARE SUBJECT TO IMMEDIATE DISCONNECTION FROM PUBLIC COMMENT SPEAKERS, I'M AT THEIR COMMENT.

THE THREE MINUTES EACH THE TOTAL TIME PERIOD FOR PUBLIC IS 30 MINUTES PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION FIVE OR NINE FIVE, 4.38 CITY COUNCIL CAN NOT TAKE ACTION OR FOR EXPRESS A CONSENSUS PRO OR DISAPPROVAL ON ANY ABOUT COMMENTS REGARDING MATTERS, WHICH DO NOT APPEAR ON THE PRINTED AGENDA.

BEFORE WE START, I JUST WANTED EVERYONE TO KNOW, ESPECIALLY IN THE PUBLIC THAT I WILL BE PULLING ITEM FOUR IS ON THAT CONSENT CALENDAR BECAUSE I FELT THAT NEEDS DISCUSSION.

I'M NOT COUNCIL AND NOT JUST BE PASSED ON A CONSENT CALENDAR.

SO IF ANYBODY HAS CONCERNS ABOUT THAT, WE'LL BE DISCUSSING THAT LENGTH.

OH, LAURIE, ANY COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC? YES, MAYOR.

WE HAD ONE.

THIS ONE IS FROM JENNIFER KASABIAN.

SHE SAYS, HELLO.

I AM A HUNDRED PERCENT AGAINST REZONING WESTRIDGE GOLF COURSE TO BUILD HOMES OR ANYTHING ELSE FOR THAT MATTER.

TWO REASONS WHY THE HEALTH OF OUR COMMUNITY MUST BE CONSIDERED.

MY CHILDREN ARE GROWING UP IN THIS CITY AND I DO NOT WANT POLLUTION FROM YEARS PAST POLLUTING OUR HEIRS AND CONTAMINATING THE SPACE IN WHICH WE LIVE.

THE OTHER REASON IS THAT LAHABRA HAS BEEN OVERBUILT ALREADY TOO MANY APARTMENTS AND CONDOS HAVE POPPED UP IN RECENT YEARS THAT HAVE MADE TRAFFIC EVEN MORE CONGESTED.

LET'S ALSO REMEMBER THAT HARBOR BOULEVARD IS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND RINGS AN EXCESS OF TRAFFIC ON THE DAILY IMPERIAL HIGHWAY TWO.

I URGE YOU TO KEEP THE GOLF COURSE AS OPEN-SPACE OUR HEALTH SAFETY MATTERS.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY MORE THAT'S THE ONLY ONE I RECEIVED, THE OTHER THREE I RECEIVED IS FOR THE ITEM THAT WAS REMOVED FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

OKAY.

OKAY.

AND WE CAN READ THOSE AT THAT TIME THEN.

ALL RIGHT.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO COUNCIL THIS TIME? MR. MAYOR? I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REMIND CALLERS ON THE LINE IF THEY WISH TO SPEAK, TO PRESS STAR NINE ON THEIR HEADSET TO RAISE THEIR HAND AND WE CAN RELEASE THEM TO SPEAK.

UM, AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE DO HAVE HOLLER AND I WILL

[00:05:01]

RELEASE HIM NOW.

THANK YOU.

IS THE CALLER ON THE LINE? OKAY.

HE IS ONE SECOND.

IT'S JUST A LITTLE DELAYED.

OKAY.

HI MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS ART AND ARMY.

I CALLED HIM LAST, UH, LAST COUNCIL MEETING REGARDING, UH, I'D LIKE THE CITY TO, TO THINK ABOUT, UH, ALLOWING SAFE AND SANE FIREWORKS.

SO I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT COMMENT.

UM, I'M HOPING THAT YOU GUYS WILL HAVE A DISCUSSION ON ALLOWING IT.

UH, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE ALLOWANCE OF A SAFE, SINCE SANE FIREWORKS WOULD GIVE THE CITY AN OPPORTUNITY AT GENERATING SOME ADDITIONAL REVENUE, AS WELL AS ALLOWING OUR NONPROFITS, SUCH AS CHILDREN'S SPORTS TEAMS, A CHANCE TO OPERATE A STAND WHERE THEY CAN BRING IN FUNDS FOR THEIR PROGRAMS, WITH THE CHANGES IN CDC, GUIDELINES OF HOW LARGE GATHERINGS CAN BE IN THE FUTURE.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL EVER HAVE ANOTHER LITTLE HOPPER FIREWORKS SHOW AT THE LOBBY FOOTBALL STADIUM OR AT THE COMMUNITY PARK, ALLOWING SAFE AND SANE FIREWORKS.

WE'LL GIVE THE FAMILIES THE ABILITY TO HAVE CELEBRATIONS AT HOME WHILE GIVING THEIR CHILDREN.

SO THE COMMUNITY, THE ABILITY TO ENJOY YOUR FIREWORKS IN SMALL GROUP SETTINGS, I'D LIKE TO COUNCIL TO TAKE THIS UP AND HOPEFULLY HAVE A DISCUSSION ON IT.

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING FOR ME.

AND I HOPE THAT YOU'LL TAKE THESE COMMENTS TO HEART AND HAVE A DISCUSSION OR PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA IN THE FUTURE.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, ART.

I APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT.

BRIANNA, DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE? YES.

MR. MAYOR, WE DO HAVE ANOTHER PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK.

I WILL GO AHEAD AND UNMUTE THE PERSON NOW.

OKAY.

THERE'S A SLIGHT DELAY, LIKE I SAID, SO JUST GIVE IT ONE.

I CAN'T.

OKAY.

SO BRIANNA, HOW DO THEY KNOW WHEN THEY'RE ON WITH IT'LL INDICATE TO THEM ON THEIR LINE THAT THEY'VE BEEN ON MUTED AND THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE JUST RECEIVED THE NOTIFICATION.

HELLO? OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

HELLO? HELLO.

YOU'RE ON.

OH, THANK YOU.

HI.

HELLO TO ALL CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS CHRISTINE COOK AND UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY AS THE LAHABRA BUSINESS OWNER, I WAS OFFENDED BY THE LETTER I RECEIVED FROM RANCHO LA HARBOR HOMES.

LAST WEEK ON FRIDAY, I FEEL THAT THE LEATHER IS NOT TRUTHFUL AND THAT MANY PEOPLE IN LAHABRA.

I THINK THAT THE WEST RIDGE GOLF CLUB REZONING AND CLOSURE IS A DONE DEAL WHILE IT IS NOT.

UM, I'M JUST ASKING THAT CITY COUNCIL LISTEN TO THE LAHABRA RESIDENTS ABOUT THE ISSUE AND ALLOW THE REZONING TO BE VOTED ON BY THE CITIZENS DURING THE ELECTION TIME.

I REALLY THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

KEEP HEALTHY AND STAY.

COOL.

THANK YOU.

THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU, CHRISTINE.

ANYONE ELSE? BRIANNA, MR. MAYOR, THERE ARE NO OTHER CALLERS ON THE LINE WISHING TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME.

OKAY.

LET'S GIVE HIM ANOTHER 15 SECONDS OR SO TO THINK ABOUT IT.

CAN YOU STILL KNOW AMBER MAYOR? IT'S BEEN 15 SECONDS.

OH, ACTUALLY WE DO WE, MR. MAYOR.

I'M SORRY.

WE JUST HAD SOMEBODY RAISE THEIR HAND TO SPEAK.

OKAY, GREAT.

GREAT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THEY SHOULD BE UNMUTED.

NOW GO AHEAD AND CALL HER.

HI, THIS IS MARIBEL LOPEZ CALLING.

OKAY.

HI.

THANKS FOR CALLING IN.

I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME TO CALL FOR, WITH THE ITEM NUMBER FOUR.

NO.

WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS WHEN WE CLOSED OUT THE COMMENTS, AS I MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING, PULL THAT ITEM OFF THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

SO THAT WAY WE'LL GET INTO THE REPORT AND WE'LL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND COUNSEL THEN KIND OF DISCUSSION AND TAKE ACTION ON IT OR THE OTHER.

OH, HOLD ON A COUPLE MORE MINUTES.

ALL RIGHT.

THANKS.

I'LL TALK TO YOU.

THANK YOU.

[00:10:01]

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE? BRAN? UH, NO MAYOR.

BEAMISH OKAY.

THEN I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND

[ CONSENT CALENDAR: All matters on Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion unless a Councilmember or member of the audience requests separate action or removal of an item. Removed items will be considered following the Consent Calendar portion of this agenda. Members of the audience will have the opportunity to address Council on removed items at that time. Speakers must limit their comments to three (3) minutes each. CITY COUNCIL PROCEDURAL WAIVER: Waive reading in full of resolutions and ordinances and approval and adoption of same by reading title only.]

WE WILL GO TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR MATTERS ON THE CALENDAR, CONSIDERED THE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION, UNLESS ACCOUNT NETWORK OR MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE REQUEST REDACTION OR MOVE OF AN ITEM REMOVED DIET WILL BE CONSIDERED FOLLOWING A CONSENT CALENDAR PORTION OF THIS AGENDA.

THE MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COUNCIL ON ANY REMOVED HYMNS AT THAT TIME, BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONE THAT THE PUNCH, THE THREE THAT EACH THE CONSENT CALENDAR APPEARS ON.

PAGE THREE THROUGH FOUR ON ITS AGENDA, ABS ONE THROUGH EIGHT, SAYS STAFF TO REMOVE ITEMS. MR. MAYOR, THIS IS CITY MANAGER.

SADRO NO, BUT I WOULD REMIND THE PUBLIC.

IF YOU ARE ON HOLD TO COMMENT, IF YOU COULD PLEASE MUTE YOUR TELEVISIONS OR IF YOU'RE ALSO WATCHING ON THE INTERNET TO MUTE YOUR, UM, YOUR, YOUR CHANNELS SO YOU DON'T GET FEEDBACK, BUT THAT'S ALL.

THANK YOU.

AND THEN THE COUNCIL, AS I MENTIONED, I WILL LIKE TO POOL, UH, ITEMS FOR, FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ANY OTHER ITEMS, COUNCIL LIKE BULL HIT AND THEN ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE, THEY DIDN'T WANT TO PULL SOMETHING OTHER THAN ITEM FOUR, WHICH HAS BEEN PULLED.

UH, OKAY.

THEN I GUESS THERE'S NONE.

SO I WILL CALL FOR ACTION.

MAY I HAVE A MOTION, MR. MAYOR JAMES GOMEZ.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM FOUR, WHICH HAS BEEN PULLED I'LL SECOND THAT, WELL, THE COUNCIL PLEASES THE FLOOR COUNCIL MEMBER MADRANO YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER MADRANO YES.

YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER SHAW.

YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER MADRANO YES.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.

THEY'RE GOOD.

NOW THIS TIME IT'S A MEMBER COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ MAYOR PRO TEM ESPINOSA MAYOR BEAMISH YES.

MOTION PASSED FIVE ZERO.

THANK YOU.

SO WE'LL NOW GO TO

[4. REVIEW, APPROVAL, AND ADOPTION OF GOVERNING BODY PUBLIC MEETING POLICY That City Council review, approve, and adopt the Governing Body Public Meeting Policy (formerly known as Council/Agency Meeting Policy).]

[ CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS REMOVED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION:]

A ITEM FOUR, WHICH IS REVIEW APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF GOVERNED NAMED BODY PUBLIC POLICY CITY COUNCIL.

UH, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.

SO IS THERE A STAFF REPORT? YES.

MAYOR THE SLURRY CITY CLERK, THE CURRENT COUNCIL AGENCY MEETING POLICY WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 20TH, THE YEAR 2000 DUE TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEW AGENDA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, ELECTRONIC RECORDING METHODS AND OTHER CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE OVER THE YEARS REGARDING HOW THE CITY'S PUBLIC MEETINGS ARE CONDUCTED.

STAFF HAS REVIEWED AND UPDATED THE EXISTING 20 YEAR OLD POLICY FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION.

SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT WE ARE CHANGING IS THE ORDER OF BUSINESS ON THE PUBLIC AGENDA.

FOR EXAMPLE, CLOSED SESSION USED TO BE FIRST YEARS AGO OR LAST YEARS AGO NOW IT'S FIRST.

AND, UM, SO WE NEEDED TO MAKE THAT CHANGE.

UM, AND WE UPDATED THE DAYS OF CITY COUNCILS ELECTRONICALLY RECORDED MEETINGS WILL BE REPLAYED ON LOCAL CABLE CHANNEL THREE AND UPDATED THE TYPES OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA DEVICES FORMAT THAT THE PUBLIC MEETINGS WILL BE RECORDED IN SUCH AS WE DON'T USE VHS TAPES ANYMORE.

AND WE, WE RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNTY COUNCIL REVIEW APPROVE AND ADOPT THE GOVERNING BODY PUBLIC MEETING POLICY, FORMERLY KNOWN AS COUNCIL AGENCY MEETING POLICY, MR. MAYOR, THIS IS BAD ROAD.

THERE WERE TWO, A COUPLE OF OTHER UPDATES THAT WE MADE TO THIS PROPOSED POLICY FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION.

UM, MOST NOTABLY, UH, WE RECOMMEND, UH, UH, THREE ITEMS ACTUALLY THAT IF COUNCIL WERE TO ADOPT THE POLICY TONIGHT, THAT IT WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO ALL THE CITY'S COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES, SO THAT THERE'S CONSISTENCY ACROSS ALL OF THE MEETINGS THAT ARE HELD BY DIFFERENT CITY COMMISSIONS OR THE CITY COUNCIL.

UH, FIRST OFF, SECONDLY, WE RECOMMEND ESTABLISHING A TIME FRAME FOR PUBLIC MEETINGS TO GO TO, UH, BEING 10:30 PM, UH, WITH THE FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW THE COUNCIL OR A COMMISSION TO EXTEND BEYOND 10 30,

[00:15:01]

IF THEY NEEDED TO FINISH A BUSINESS, THAT'S ON THE AGENDA THAT IS NOT YET FINISHED AT THAT TIME.

UM, AND THEN IF BUSINESS IS NOT FINISHED AND IT GETS LATER IN THE EVENING, THAT GIVES THE GOVERNING BOARD, WHETHER IT'S A COUNCIL OR COMMISSION, THE ABILITY TO CONTINUE THE MEETING TO A ANOTHER DAY.

AND THEN FINALLY, UM, AND ALSO ESTABLISH CONSISTENCY ACROSS THE PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT CAN BE PROVIDED ON DIFFERENT AGENDA ITEMS. CURRENTLY, THERE IS A THREE MINUTE PER INDIVIDUAL LIMIT ON THE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC COMMENT TIME PROVIDED FOR MOST ALL OF THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, WHETHER IT'S THE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS OR AN ISSUE REGARDING CONSENT CALENDAR OR CONSIDERATION CALENDAR.

AND, UH, WHEN REVIEWING THIS POLICY, UH, WE FOUND THAT THERE IS NO LIMIT ON THE AMOUNT OF TIME, UH, INDIVIDUALS GET FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

UM, AND WE'RE RECOMMENDING IN, UH, UM, IN ORDER TO KEEP IT CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT THE, UH, THROUGHOUT THE DIFFERENT AGENDA ITEMS ON THE MEETING THAT WE ESTABLISH AT THREE THAT LIMIT, UH, AS ALL, UH, FOR INDIVIDUALS COMMENTING DURING PUBLIC COMMENTS.

HOWEVER, THE DIFFERENCE IS FOR OTHER ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, THERE IS AN OVERALL LIMIT ON, UH, SPEAKERS OF 30 MINUTES, WHETHER IT BE FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS OR, UM, CONSENT ITEMS OR CONSIDERATION ITEMS, HOWEVER, FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS, WE RECOMMEND NOT ESTABLISHING ANY LIMIT ON THE AMOUNT OF TIME PROVIDED FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WOULD ALLOW, UM, ALL PUBLIC COMMENTS TO BE HEARD FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

ALL RIGHT, THEN, UH, I GUESS IT'S COUNCIL QUESTIONS.

I HAVE ONE QUESTION RIGHT OFF, BUT I WAS LOOKING, THE CONSENT IS CONSIDERED ROUTINE CONSIDERATION IS BASICALLY IT'S A BUSINESS FOR CONSIDERATION.

YOU CALL IT A BENEFIT AGENDA, BUT WHEN YOU GET THE PUBLIC HEARING, DID STAFF TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT IN PUBLIC HEARINGS, TYPICALLY THERE'S A SPECIAL NOTICE GIVEN TO ME IN THE HIERARCHY OF THE AGENDA ITEMS, PUBLIC HEARING WOULD TEND TO STAND OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE CONSENT OR THE CONSIDERATION AREA.

SO IS THAT PART OF YOUR ANALYSIS AS FAR AS ESTABLISHING A TIMEFRAME OR A TIME LIMIT? YEAH, WE, WE USE THREE MINUTES BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE COUNCIL HAD PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED FOR OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS DURING THE AGENDA.

HOWEVER, IT'S, THAT'S, COUNCIL'S DISCRETION ON WHERE YOU'D LIKE TO ESTABLISH THAT LIMIT.

WE DIDN'T PRESUME TO ADD TIME, BUT WE JUST, WE, WE ESTABLISHED IT TO BE THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME PROVIDED FOR THE OTHER SECTIONS OF THE AGENDA.

UM, I PROBABLY SHOULD.

OKAY.

PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE NOT THE SAME AS ANY OTHER ITEM ON YOUR AGENDA.

IT IS CONSIDERED A DUE PROCESS HEARING AND INVOLVES PROPERTY RIGHTS.

AND SO THE LEGAL STANDARD IS DIFFERENT IN THAT THE COURTS LOOK TO THE PROCESS TO A WAY THAT BALANCES THE FAIR OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO MAKE COMMENTS AND IT'S PUBLIC DURING PROCESS, WE CAN ESTABLISH BY WAY OF GUIDELINES, FOR EXAMPLE, A THREE MINUTE RULE.

BUT IF THE NATURE OF THE COMPLEXITY OF THE ISSUE OR THE NATURE OF THE COMMENTS BY THE INDIVIDUAL ARE OFFERING NOT REDUNDANT, BUT NEW COMMENTS THAT FURTHER EDUCATE AND ENLIGHTEN THE COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL MUST MAINTAIN SOME LEVEL OF FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW THOSE FRIDGES TO CONTINUE TO COMMENT.

YOU CAN NOT IN A PUBLIC HEARING FORMAT, SIMPLY HAVE A HARD RULE THAT WOULD THREE MINUTES IS UP, BUT YOU CUT A PERSON OFF BECAUSE YOU MAY BE DENIED THEM THEIR DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.

IF THEY HAVE NOT BEEN GRANTED A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES, UH, CITIES THAT HAVE LIMITS LIKE THIS CLEARLY HAVE EXERCISED BY TO THE MAYOR OR THE COUNCIL, SOME FLEXIBILITY SO THAT IF SOMEBODY IS NOT BEING REDUNDANT, BUT RATHER OFFERING MORE INSIDER INFORMATION THAT THEY ALLOW THEM TO GO BEYOND THAT IN ADDITION, SUBSIDIES DO ALLOW IT A SITUATION WHERE THERE ARE LARGE PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS TO COME TOGETHER AND GIVE THAT GROUP PERHAPS A 15 OR 20 MINUTE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS AS A MATTER OF FLEXIBILITY, SO THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO ADDRESS IN WHETHER THERE'S A MORE COMPLEX TYPE OF MATTER, ALL THOSE VARIOUS ISSUES THAT ARE OUT THERE.

SO PUBLIC CARRIERS ARE UNIQUE.

AND AS LONG AS THE COUNCIL DOES MAINTAIN ITS ABILITY TO BE FLEXIBLE TO THREE MINUTE RULE IS FINE, BUT YOU HAVE TO BE FLEXIBLE.

AND THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.

THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED BY THE COUNCIL DURING THIS PROCESS.

THANK YOU.

THANKS FOR THAT DECK, BUT THAT'S NOT THAT, THAT THING, THAT'S THE POINT I WAS

[00:20:01]

MAKING AS THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE KIND OF A HEARING SEPARATE AND APART CONSENT OR CONSIDERATIONS THE SET FORTH BY DICK RIGHT THERE.

SO THAT WAS THE TWO QUESTIONS, NO ACTUAL JUST MR. EMERGENCY OR AWARE UNDER THE LEGAL STANDARD, YOU ASSUME A QUAYSIDE JUDICIAL ROLE, AS OPPOSED TO AN ELECTED OFFICIAL WHEN YOU ARE CONDUCTING A PUBLIC HEARING.

RIGHT.

RIGHT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

THANK YOU.

THAT WAS A GOOD MEMORY TO THAT END.

UM, WE, IN THE POLICY ITSELF, THERE'S LANGUAGE THAT ALLOWS THE COUNCIL OR THE CHAIR OF A COMMITTEE, THE FLEXIBILITY TO, UM, UH, ADDRESS THAT THREE MINUTE RULE AS THEY SEE FIT THE, SO WE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT THE FMD ATTORNEY'S ADVICE WITH WRAPPING THIS POLICY, RIGHT? WELL, IT LOOKS TO ME THAT 10 30 IS A GOAL, SO TO SPEAK, BUT BY CONSENSUS ACCOUNT COULD GO TO MIDNIGHT OR WHATEVER TIME YOU FEEL THAT THEY WANT TO MEET OR ARE UP TO IT.

AND THE SAME THING WITH THE SPEAKING TIME BY CONSENSUS OF THE MEETING, I SUPPOSE, COUNCIL COULD INCREASE OR DECREASE THE SPEED LIMIT DEPENDING ON, OR NOT THE SPEED LIMIT, BUT THE TIME PERIOD OR THREE MINUTE OR 10 MINUTES OR WHATEVER IT IS.

SO I THINK THAT FLOP, THOSE ARE THESE THERE, AND AGAIN, AND THERE'S NO TIME LIMITS.

THERE'S 200 SPEAKERS.

WE TAKE THE TIME TO HEAR ALL 200 ACRES.

CORRECT.

OKAY.

THANKS.

SOMEONE HAD A FIRST STEP.

YEAH, I HAVE, I HAVE A QUESTION.

UH, DICK ARE, UH, OR ANYBODY WHO'S GOING TO ANSWER IT.

I HAVE BEEN ON THE COUNCIL QUITE A LONG TIME AND, AND THE ONLY TIME I RECALL WERE THE, UH, PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS REALLY WENT EXTREMELY LONG AND PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO COME UP BACK AND FORTH WITH THE COSTCO HEARING.

BUT DO YOU KNOW ANYWHERE WHERE RESIDENTS TRY TO MAYBE FILIBUSTER OR ARE, OR DID ANYTHING ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE WHERE THEY TRY TO JUST CARRY THE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AND ON AND ON BEYOND REALLY THE SCOPE OF WHAT THEY WANTED TO EXPRESS THE CONCERNS REGARDING THE PROJECT? UNFORTUNATELY IN LA HARBOR, THE ANSWER IS NO, WE'VE NOT HAD THAT SITUATION.

I HAVE HAD THAT SITUATION IN OTHER COMMUNITIES WHERE A GROUP SUCH AS A CONSERVANCY OR OTHER SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, UH, ATTEMPTED TO AN EFFECT.

SPEAKING KEEPS SPEAKING, UH, ALMOST LIKE A FILIBUSTER AND THEN PASSING THEIR TIME ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER.

IF IT WAS ONE CONTINUOUS, UH, PRESENTATION AND THE CHAIR HAD THE ABILITY TO CUT THEM OFF AND DID SO, AND THAT WAS LAWFULLY APPROPRIATE.

SO YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY AS A COUNCIL TO LIMIT COMMENTS IF THEY BECOME REDUNDANT, BUT THAT IS ALWAYS A RISK.

YOU TAKE TAKING THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS.

IF THEY BECOME REDUNDANT OR THEY SIMPLY APPEAR TO BE CONDUCTING WHAT AMOUNTS TO A FILIBUSTER WOULD SHARE.

THE BODY CLEARLY HAS THE ABILITY TO CUT THEM OFF THAT'S LEGALLY APPROPRIATE.

SO EVEN EVEN A MR. ATTORNEY.

SO EVEN WITHOUT THE LIMIT, THE CHAIRMAN DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO, OR THE MAYOR DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO CUT THE MOB THAT THEY'RE JUST, YOU KNOW, BEING REDUNDANT AND, AND, YOU KNOW, KIND OF SO-CALLED, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING SIMILAR FILIBUSTERING GOING ON, MAYOR, THE MAYOR HAS THAT AUTHORITY.

AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, PROCEDURALLY AMERICA EXERCISE THAT AUTHORITY, THE COUNCIL DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO OVERRIDE THE MAYOR, UH, BY A MAJORITY VOTE IF THEY STILL DIRECTED THAT.

BUT AGAIN, THE MAYOR DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO CUT THEM OFF.

OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

ANYTHING ELSE, JIM? UH, NO.

THANK YOU, MR. BEAR.

OKAY.

THEN TO FOLLOW UP DECK WITH WHAT JIM JUST BROUGHT UP.

CAUSE I, I SAW THIS POLICY, I SPENT THE LAST DAY RESEARCH INTO WHAT OTHER CITIES DO AND THEIR LEGAL ISSUES WITH REGARD TO THIS ROTTING MEETING AND WHAT I GATHERED FROM MY READING.

AND YOU CAN TELL ME IF THIS IS CORRECT OR NOT, BUT IF THE PERSON STARTED FILIBUSTER, THEY'RE ESSENTIALLY STOPPING THE BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL.

AND ESSENTIALLY YOU COULD SAY THAT'S DISRUPTING THE BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL AND THAT THE BASIS FOR STOP.

AND THAT SPEAKER FROM SPEAKING, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

IS THERE THERE LIBRARY NEW INFORMATION, BUT SIMPLY THEY'RE SPEAKING TO US WITH OFFERING NEW INFORMATION OR HELPING TO EDUCATE THE COUNCIL ON THE BATTERY SO YOU CAN CUT THEM OFF AND THAT IS TOTALLY APPROPRIATE.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE ASK QUESTION.

ALRIGHT.

NO, MR. MAYOR, I ASSUME WE'RE, UH, WE'RE GOING TO DELIBERATE THIS AMONGST OURSELVES.

THAT'S WHERE I CAN HEAR THE PUBLIC TESTIFY, CORRECT? YEAH.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THROWS TIM.

NO, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS MR. MAYOR THEN.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

[00:25:01]

THEN I WOULD INVITE THE PUBLIC TO THE BUY AND THE, PLEASE GIVE YOUR NAME AND WE'LL LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT THERE MAY BE.

AND THEN COUNCIL WILL, UH, CAN TAKE ACTION.

SO LORI, WE HAVE ANYTHING NEITHER OF US, IF YOU NEED TO READ TO US.

YES, I HAVE THREE EMAILS TO HER FROM THE SAME PERSON, BUT TWO LITTLE DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE SAME SUBJECT.

THE FIRST ONE IS FROM JOE FAUST AND HE SAYS, DEAR COUNCIL PERSONS, I BELIEVE THERE IS A SERIOUS ERROR IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED NEW PUBLIC MEETING POLICY ITEM FOUR ON THE AUGUST 17TH, 2020 COUNCIL AGENDA.

THE STAFF REPORT INDICATES A RED LINE COPY OF THE CURRENT PUBLIC MEETING POLICIES INCLUDED AS ATTACHMENT ONE AND THE PROPOSED NEW POLICIES INCLUDED AS ATTACHMENT TO IN REALITY, BOTH ATTACHMENTS ONE AND TWO ARE THE NEW POLICY, NO RED LINE OF THE CURRENT POLICY ATTACHED.

THIS IS A, THIS IS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE AFTER READING BOTH ATTACHMENTS, I THOUGHT, IN FACT, NOT THE CASE AT ALL.

THERE'S A MAJOR CHANGE OF LIMITING PUBLIC TESTIMONY TO THREE MINUTES PER PERSON, WHEREAS NO SUCH TIME LIMIT CURRENTLY EXISTS IN THE COUNCIL AGENCY POLICY.

I DO NOT SUPPORT THE PROPOSED TIME LIMIT ON PUBLIC TESTIMONY AT PUBLIC HEARINGS.

NOW I WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT REGARDING THE RED LINE COPY, WE HAVE A NEW AGENDA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND WE DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WHEN WE UPLOADED A WORD VERSION WITH RED LINE OR TRACK CHANGES, THAT THE SYSTEM AUTOMATICALLY CONVERTS WORD, WE KNOW IT CONVERTS THEM TO PDF, BUT IT BASICALLY CLEANED IT UP TO LOOK LIKE IT WAS A FINAL.

SO THIS MORNING I CONVERTED IT TO RED LINE TO THE PDF AND I UPLOADED THE PDF.

SO IT HAS BEEN VISIBLE ALL DAY FOR THE PUBLIC.

SO THERE IS A RED LINE ON THE SYSTEM.

NOW THE SECOND COMMENT.

YEAH.

THAT'S, I'M GLAD HE PLANTED THAT OUT.

CAUSE I NOTICED THAT I THOUGHT IT WAS THE RED LINE I EVER SEEN.

YEAH, IT WAS VERY ODD.

YEAH.

WE FIGURED IT OUT THIS MORNING.

UM, THE SECOND ONE IS ALSO FROM MR. JOE FAUST.

HE SAYS, I AM SERIOUSLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HELD ON HIGHLY SENSITIVE ISSUES.

DURING THE CURRENT PANDEMIC, CALIFORNIA, STAY AT HOME GUIDELINES, PRECLUDE LARGE PUBLIC GATHERINGS.

AND I AM OBSERVING THIS GUIDE COMPLETELY.

I REALIZED GOVERNOR NEWSOME MADE SOME ADJUSTMENTS TO THE STATE'S BROWN ACT, ET CETERA.

IN THIS REGARD, NEVERTHELESS, THERE REMAINS WIDESPREAD DIFFERENCES OF OPINION, WHETHER AN ALL ELECTRONIC MEETINGS SUCH AS ZOOM CAN PROVIDE FOR ADEQUATE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT, PARTICULARLY ON AN ISSUE OF SENSITIVE AS RANCHO LA HABRA IN OUR COMMUNITY.

THIS PROPOSAL HAS FILLED THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS BEFORE AND EXCEPT FOR THE PANDEMIC IS EXPECTED TO DO SO.

AGAIN, NO PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ANY HIGHLY SENSITIVE MATTERS SHOULD BE ATTEMPTED BEFORE THE STATE HOME RESTRICTION IS LIFTED OR AT LEAST REDUCED TO A MANAGEABLE LEVEL.

I AM PREPARING MY RESPONSE TO POSSIBLE RANCHO LA HARBOR, PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND WISH TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL FACE TO FACE IN A CONVENTIONAL PUBLIC MEETING ENVIRONMENT TO ENSURE MY POINT COMES ACROSS.

HOWEVER, UNDER THE CURRENT STATE HOME CONDITION, I WILL NOT FEEL SAFE IN ATTENDING ANY SUCH MEETING IN ZOOM DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY ADEQUATE ALTERNATIVE JOE FAUST.

WHEN I HAVE ONE MORE FROM MS. CHRISTINE COOK, SHE SAYS, HELLO, LAHABRA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I WOULD LIKE TO STATE THAT CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM FOUR WAS SNEAKY AND SPEAKS VOLUMES ABOUT YOUR OPINIONS AND ALLOWING YOU LOB OR RESONANCE TO SPEAK.

IT'S OBVIOUS THE RANCHO LA BREAD DEBATE WILL SOON WILL BE SOON AND YOU ARE ATTEMPTING TO SILENCE LAVA RESIDENTS.

PLEASE ALLOW PEOPLE TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS.

AND THAT'S IT.

GREAT.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL GO TO ANYBODY THAT IS ON THE PHONE AND WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.

THIS IS BRIANNA.

WE DO HAVE ONE CALLER ON THE LINE WISHING TO SPEAK.

I'LL GO AHEAD AND UNMUTE THE COLOR NOW.

GREAT, THANKS, BYE.

LIKE I SAID, THERE IS A SLIGHT DELAY.

UM, SO JUST GIVE IT A COUPLE SECONDS.

OKAY, CALLER, GO AHEAD.

THIS JIM LEAVES, UH, I LIVE AT 2140 SOUTH FEDERAL COURT.

UM, CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY.

MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I WAS CONCERNED TO SEE, TO SEE A CHANGE IN THE CITY'S MEETING POLICY AND THE CONSENT CALENDAR FROM THE NIGHT'S MEETING.

I THINK THE TIMING IS PARTICULARLY ILL-ADVISED GIVEN THE PENDING PUBLIC HEARING ON RANCHO LAHABRA IN PAST COUNCIL MEETINGS.

YOU HAVE REPEATEDLY STATED THAT INTERESTED PARTIES WOULD HAVE ALL THE TIME THEY NEEDED TO ADDRESS ISSUES AT A SCHEDULED HEARING.

THIS IS A MESSAGE I CONVEYED TO THE MEMBERS OF OUR COALITION.

REMEMBER YOU EVEN USED COSTCO HEARING AS EXAMPLE OF HOW YOU ALLOWED CITIZENS COMMENTS.

NOW I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT YOU GO THAT LATE.

UH, BUT GIVEN THE CURRENT POLICY, THE CHAIR ALWAYS HAS THE DISCRETION TO HAVE THE MEETING CONTINUED TO A SUBSEQUENT DAY.

THE CAREER POP,

[00:30:01]

THE CURRENT CURRENT MEETING POLICY HAS BEEN IN EFFECT FOR 20 YEARS.

AND WE WOULD AGREE WITH YOU THAT SOMEHOW KEEPING ISSUES NEED TO BE ADDRESSED THE STANDARDIZATIONS FOR ALL GOVERNING BODIES, ET CETERA.

BUT I DON'T SEE ANY URGENCY TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW.

CERTAINLY THERE'S NOTHING IN THE NEW POLICY THAT WON'T WAIT UNTIL THE FIRST OF THE YEAR.

I DO BELIEVE THAT COUNCIL SHOULD GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO ENCOURAGE PARTICIPATION OF CITIZENS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND NOT GIVE THE APPEARANCE OF MUFFLING SYSTEM VOICES BY PUTTING A LAST MINUTE CONSTRAINTS INTO A LONG STANDING POLICY RIGHT BEFORE A BIG HEARING.

AND I ALSO AGREE WITH THE EARLIEST COMMENT EARLIER COMMENTS ON DUE PROCESS RIGHTS, I'M REQUESTING THE CAPITOL, PLEASE RECONSIDER CHANGING THE CITY MEETING POLICY UNTIL AFTER ARGUMENTATIVELY THE MOST IMPORTANT PUBLIC HEARING, THE CITY'S HISTORY.

IT WOULD BE INFINITELY BETTER TO SCHEDULE A CHANGE AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING AND AFTER THE ELECTION OF NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THANK YOU.

THANKS JEN.

YES.

MR. MAY HAVE ANOTHER CALLER IN LINE.

I BELIEVE THIS IS MARIBEL LOPEZ FROM EARLIER ONE SECOND MARIBEL.

OKAY.

OKAY, GO AHEAD.

MS. LOPEZ.

HELLO, UM, COUNCIL MEMBERS, MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR T I'M LISTENING TO THE, OUR COMMENTS.

UM, AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALL BEEN WAITING A LONG TIME TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK IN THIS PUBLIC HEARING.

AND REALLY, TO BE HONEST, I KIND OF THINK THAT MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO BE STANDING UP FOR A VERY LONG TIME.

I THINK PEOPLE WILL TALK FOR ABOUT FIVE MINUTES OR LESS, BUT IT'S JUST THAT DURING ALL THE OTHER COUNCIL MEETINGS WE'VE ATTENDED, WE'VE ALWAYS HAD TO DEAL WITH RUSHING OUR WORDS TO FIT INTO THREE MINUTE TIMELINE.

SO WE WERE REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO BEING ABLE TO SPEAK FREELY AT A PUBLIC HEARING WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS.

AND, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE WERE TOLD MANY TIMES BEFORE THAT WE WOULD HAVE THIS TIME.

SO I'M JUST ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER NOT IMPLEMENTING THIS NEW CHANGE AT THIS VERY CRITICAL TIME.

MAYBE PERHAPS SOMETHING TO REVISIT IN THE NEW YEAR.

AND JUST ANOTHER COMMENT WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT LIKE, IF A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE, UM, AT A PUBLIC HEARING SAYING THE SAME MESSAGE.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY BECAUSE LIKE, WHAT IF, WHAT IF THERE WERE 200 PEOPLE THAT ALL HAD THE SAME CONCERNS? THEY ALL HAD A CONCERN WITH TRAFFIC.

SO YES, THAT'S GOING TO BE A REDUNDANT MESSAGE FOR YOU TO HEAR, BUT IT SHOWS YOU THAT THERE ARE VERY, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAME ISSUE.

SO I FEEL THAT THAT IS VALUABLE FEEDBACK, EVEN THOUGH PEOPLE ARE SAYING THE SAME THING AND I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU NOT CUT THOSE PEOPLE OFF, OR JUST SAY, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TRAFFIC DON'T SPEAK ANYMORE.

I WOULD HOPE THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE THE CASE BECAUSE I THINK EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE A CHANCE TO SAY WHAT THEY FEEL.

AND, AND IF IT'S THE SAME MESSAGE THAT JUST TELLS YOU THAT THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR EVERYBODY.

THANK YOU.

I AGREE.

THANK YOU.

THANKS.

ANYTHING ELSE? MARIBEL.

OKAY.

BRIANNA, NO, MR. MAYOR, THERE ARE NO OTHER CALLERS ON THE LINE.

OKAY, WELL LET'S GIVE HIM 15 SECONDS OR SO SEE IF ANYBODY DECIDES THEY WANT TO TALK TO US.

IT'S BEEN 15 SECONDS.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

THEN LET'S SEE WHERE I'M AT HERE.

WELL, I WILL CALL COUNSEL DISCUSSION AND ACTION.

I'M GOING TO START THE CON BECAUSE I SPENT THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS KIND OF RESEARCHING THIS.

AS I MENTIONED TO THE XO, I, I LIKED THE POLICY EXCEPT FOR A COUPLE OF POINTS ON THAT.

I THINK THE 10 30 TIME FRAME AS GOOD TO END THE MEETING, REALIZING THAT WE, AS A CONSENSUS CAN RUN UP LONGER THAN WE WANT.

UM, OBVIOUSLY IF WE HAVE A BIG PUBLIC HEARING, WE CAN MULTIPLE DAY KINDS OF THING.

I'M NOT SURE.

I THINK IT WAS ON THE COUNCIL FOR WHEN COSTCO WAS BEING HEARD, BUT I WAS A TREMENDOUS, THE PLAN.

THINK OF SHANNON, MY MEETING WITH THE ONE IN THE MORNING.

I DON'T GET VERY PRODUCTIVE TO DO THAT OR DECISIONS WITH FIRE.

AND I KNOW THAT CITY COUNCIL WENT UP IN THE MORNING.

I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT THAT'S A BIT MUCH FOR NOT ONLY THE COUNCIL,

[00:35:01]

BUT THE PUBLIC THAT NEEDS TO SIT THROUGH THAT.

THE ISSUE THAT I HAD AND KIND OF THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS BROUGHT THIS UP IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.

AND WE, AND I QUIZ, UH, DICK, OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND DEAN ABOUT THE HOT RP, A MEETING FIVE PUBLIC HEARINGS.

THEY REALLY IS A PROCESS ISSUE.

SO I WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME.

I JUST DON'T SUPPORT THREE MINUTES PER INDIVIDUAL BECAUSE PEOPLE, AS WE KNOW, GET A LITTLE BIT HURRY, UH, WHEN WE HAVE A BIG PROJECT, PEOPLE WANT TO GIVE THEIR THOUGHTS.

SO I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM IF WE, AS A CONSENSUS, WANT TO CHANGE THAT TO SIX MINUTES PER INDIVIDUAL, DOUBLE THE TIME, THEN WHAT YOU HAVEN'T HAD OTHER MEETINGS.

AND OF COURSE ALL SPEAKERS WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

AND THEN CAUSE THAT TIME WILL GO UNTIL WE DO THE LAST SPEAKER.

SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES.

AND THAT THE OTHER ISSUE THAT I HAD IS THE APPLICANT BECAUSE OF THEIR POSITION, UH, THEY GENERALLY HAVE TIME TO SPEAK.

AND SO I'M DOING SOME RESEARCH ABOUT, I WAS THINKING, OKAY, THE APPLICANT CAN PRESENTATION OF SAY 15 MINUTES.

AND I THINK IN THIS POLICY, IT HASN'T BEEN THE 15TH.

I WAS THINKING, WELL, THAT'S GREAT.

BUT THE OPPONENTS, UH, UM, THEY HAVE A FORM OF REPRESENTATIVE, YOU KNOW, COULD THEY GET MORE TIME AND NOT BE AN INDIVIDUAL SPEAKER? SO I HAPPENED TO FIND THE PALO ALTO AT A SITUATION OF WHAT THEY DO, IF THERE'S FIVE OR MORE PEOPLE AND THEY'RE REPRESENTED BY A SPEAKER, THEY ALLOW THAT SPEAKER 10 TO IN THIS CASE, I WOULD DO 15 THAT'S BECAUSE I WOULD WANT THE GROUP TO HAVE THE BENEFIT OF HAVING THAT REPRESENT SPEAKER SPEAK FOR 15 MINUTES, UH, WITH REGARDS TO WHATEVER BOOK APPLICANT SAYS AND ALSO UNDERSTANDING THAT ALL INDIVIDUALLY, BUT WOULDN'T HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY.

SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT HOW'S MEETINGS GO, OH, THE OPPONENTS WILL HAVE PLENTY OF PLENTY OF TIME.

THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS.

NOT I'M OPEN TO KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS WITH REGARDS TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I DON'T THINK JUST TO BE ABLE TO ENTER A MEETING THAT I LIKE TO SEE, IT'S KIND OF THE TIMELINE THAT IT'S, THAT'S THE CONSENSUS.

SO, UH, THERE YOU HAVE IT, SO YEAH.

MR. MAYOR, CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY, GOOD.

UH, YEAH.

AND, UH, I, I DO, I DO LIKE WHAT YOU HAD TO SAY AS FAR AS THAT, UH, IN ALL DUE RESPECT TO WHAT YOU HAD TO SAY.

I THINK THOSE ARE GREAT IDEAS.

UM, I THINK, UH, MORE IMPORTANTLY, I THINK BECAUSE WE'VE HAD IT A CERTAIN WAY FOR SO LONG AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ARE EXPECTING A, UH, A, A CERTAIN MEETING, UH, TO OCCUR, UH, OR AT LEAST IF FORMAT OF A MEETING TO OCCUR IN THE, OF COURSE THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM IS RANGEL ABRA, AS WE ALL KNOW.

AND, UH, THAT'S PROBABLY GONNA COME BEFORE US, UH, WITHIN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS IF THAT, UH, BUT IN THAT INTEREST, UH, AND I WAS NOT PART OF THE COUNCIL, OBVIOUSLY WHEN, UH, WHEN COSTCO WAS DECIDED, UM, I WAS PROBABLY WORKING A GRAVEYARD SHIFT, UH, AS A BEAT COP, UM, BACK AROUND THAT TIME.

BUT REGARDLESS, I THINK IN, IN THE, UH, IN THE BETTER INTEREST OF, OF THE CITY OF , I THINK WE SHOULD TABLE THIS AND PROBABLY, UH, UH, DO THIS SOME OTHER TIME AFTER WE LISTEN TO THE RANCHO