That's right. yours. >> Am I on? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Sometimes I need to shout over my Welcome back everybody. It's nice to see you all. Mr. Smith, you're welcome. Welcome you back. You
You know, you have a 4hour personal catchup session available to you. Think I mentioned it. You seem not interested, but if you want to think it over, doesn't involve drinks. All right. Before we begin today, I just want to confess to a rookie mistake as
chair at our last meeting. Uh right at the very end when there was little to go, I recognized one of our members, Mr. really for a um a motion that he made to present um a uh a group of suggestions
he wanted us to consider was a lot of them. I think in the spirit of collegiality is let's move forward but um and you had a hand out appreciate that but in the future uh if you've got a lot to say and a lot to do let's try to move it forward
in the meeting because I am going to try to end these meetings probably at 1:30 you all have lives to live and businesses and appointments out there so just going forward if you've got big stuff and there's plenty of time for all of that to be discussed so just wanted
to thank you with And um want to recognize anybody who's new here. I think William, you're the only one who's been away for a bit. So, welcome for that. Um we have a
forum here and if you all have had an opportunity to read the minutes of the last meeting and notice the written comments that we have, do I hear a motion to move the consent items? They're both in consent. >> Second. >> Moved and second. Thank you very much.
All in favor of uh moving the consent items say I >> and oppose. No. Thank you. All right. And we are um on to excuse me. Excuse me just a minute. I got to run out there.
Some time for public comment I think is a moment we have right at the moment. We have one speaker card here. Are there other We have a If you wish to speak and haven't filled out a card, please come forward. Do you have a comment? We have um Pardon me.
>> I have a comment. >> Okay. U first we have David West. Uh who's you like to come to the microphone, Mr. West? That's a microphone over here. Thank you. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. three minutes. We'll let you know at 30 seconds. Okay, thank you. >> Can you hear me? Okay, great. Um, I'm David West and uh you may recognize the West name because my wife was brutalized
by TPD in 2013. Um, and two of the officers uh uh were severely punished and one is still in the force. But that's not why I'm here. All of my other interactions with TPD
since that time have been very favorable. All right. So, I recently retired from IBM as a data scientist. And as a data scientist, I built statistical models to predict all sorts of things. Things like who would be violent during incarceration, uh who wouldn't show up for their court
hearing, all sorts of different things. To be effective, my model's code had to be very efficient. So what I'm here to talk to you about today is improving the efficiency of our local. What I would like to see overall is a consolidation
of the county and city governments into one government the way that was done in 1969 by Duval County with the consolidation of city of Jacksonville and Duval County or or even later than that the consolidation of Miami Dade into Miami Dade County and the
government of of the city of Miami. But barring that, how about if we combine Leyon County Sheriff's Office with TPD and put it under an elected sheriff rather than an appointed police chief,
that would improve our efficiency because you would not need as many highly paid, highlevel administrators, captains, lieutenants, chiefs, and things like that. By doing that, we reduce the tax burden on our population
by making the government that much more effective. So, it's not to get rid of TPD, it's to make policing more effective. Already, somebody can knock on my door from FHP, from FDLE, from the OIG, from TSA, from NSA, from
up to 10 or more agencies with sworn officers presenting a warrant at at my door. Well, let's cut it cut that down by one and just make it Leyon County Sheriff's Office and put them in charge of everything. That's what I'd like to see done. So,
thank you. There any others uh members of the public to be heard? Okay. Thank you. All right. We're going to move on to general business. Uh we have two items under general business. One is the uh consideration of agenda item A. I think you have that in your
packets which is uh the relationship between the county and municipal uh county and city ordinances that we've discussed just briefly. Um I think county staff Ken, are you going to handle this one for us? Thank you. >> Back again.
last meeting. I think all of us on the staff side, we each independently promised no more planned presentations from from our side, but truth be told, that was before you requested additional information. So, um, we we provided that information to you today in your
materials and we went back and forth. Um, how many slides should we prepare? But I I think we can just get through it with a quick overview. No slides. We're going to honor our commitment to no more plan presentations at least for another day. U so no formal presentation. I just
want to do a quick recap of the last meeting, highlight some of the information that the committee requested and it's in in your materials today. Uh but before we get started, just a reminder uh to set the table for
everybody so we're all on the same page. uh the board uh the county commission uh didn't set any parameters for this body. You're free to address and discuss whatever issues that you feel is important and appropriate uh for the county charter. Uh the county commission
did evaluate seven or eight or so issues potentially to ask you to look at. Ultimately, there was one and it's this issue again before you about whether county ordinances should supersede city ordinances in the
event of a conflict. And that's again the item we discussed at the last meeting and and back before you today. Um, understandably, when the county commission asks you to to look at this, um, they do so knowing that you're not experts in city and county
jurisdictional matters. Nobody expects you to be. Um, this is more of a philosophical question, philosophical issue before you. Um, some may see the the benefit in this, some may not, and that's fine. Um, but ultimately, we're we're looking for
direction from you. Um, you may not be interested. Um, you may think everything's fine the way it is. That's okay. The committee can accept the report, move on to other issues. U, you had that option before you today. You had that option at the last meeting. But again, you were seeking uh additional
time and additional information. So that's what we have brought back to you today. Um so at the last meeting talking about county ordinances and how they relate to municipal ordinances at at a very high level and some of the reasons why the committee might want to consider
a charter amendment for ordinances for county ordinances to supersede municipal in the event of a conflict or or differing regulatory standards. We talked about uh the benefits of regulatory uniformity countywide one standard. We talked about more friendly user friendly government people
understanding that you know what happens in my neighborhood the same requirements as what happens in your neighborhood especially with a county and one city where the jurisdictions can come in and out on the same streets. uh you could be on uh different parts of an intersection
and be in the city or the county or one block away and be in the city and the county and have different standards and regulatory requirements. We talked about the makeup of the other charter governments in Florida, the other charter counties and some of the provisions in those charters um and
where they specify how city and county ordinances relate to one another. But today I I want to be careful in my use of the term conflict. we we throw it around. Um it it implies that there's a dispute. And again, I want to tell you
that that that's not the case. Um always u there's always ample opportunity for there to be a dispute among local governments. Um but that's not how this came before you today. The the committee wasn't charged with settling a a dispute or solving an ongoing problem between
the city and the county. The board asked the committee to evaluate the philosophical question at hand. Should there a charter amendment be placed on the ballot providing county ordinances to supersede municipal ordinances? Um, again, in case there's differing requirements or conflict. Um, I think
it's important to remember that in your deliberations today. Um, that the this question didn't arise from a series of issues that the board is is looking to to you to resolve. Um, and in presenting the materials at the last
meeting, we staff, we tried to provide real world examples and recent examples, things that came to mind, things were practical that you can relate to, um, and where the city and county regulations differ a little bit. So, it's easier to to, you know, appreciate
some of the differences and how they impact our real world lives. Um, and and you you move away a little bit from the academic and see how it applies whether you live in the city or the county. And in some cases, those examples um you know, some cases they're very important issues. We talked about public safety
and first responders, but in other cases, like in your materials today, um they're not as critical. Uh there they may be more public interest or um but again, there's differences and you know, people value those differences as as they wish.
So, the last meeting following the the presentation and discussion, the committee sought additional time. As you know, we we were running late up against the 1:30 window um and asked staff to bring back additional information and examples on regulatory differences between the city and the county. We did
that today in your materials. Um these are issues we've just identified in the last few weeks in response to your request. Again, not issues that you know come before the county commission or the county commission's pointing to saying this is why we need a charter amendment.
Um these are examples um that we use four of them that we use because they're the differences that we know about today. They're are the known knowns. Um but we also know in the future that we're going to have regulatory disputes
that we can't anticipate. Um they may be with the city of Tallahassee. They may be with two other cities that aren't yet conceived uh that are going to be in Lyon County. We don't know yet. So in today's materials, we've got four examples of differing regulatory
requirements across four very distinct subject matters. Not going to spend a lot of time. It's a it's a quick read in your materials um because again it comes back to the philosophical question and and how you feel. >> Can I just interrupt to say page 10, 11,
and 12 you'll find those specifics in your agenda. >> Thank you. >> So four issues. We we covered the first at length at the last meeting. uh mostly in the presentation, I don't think we gave you a lot of written materials about the different standards for street renaming and how um the city and the
county had a unified process for naming, renaming, and uh sequential addressing um of of streets in our community. Why that's important in terms of mapping and first response um and finding things. We we've come a
long way in trying to get away from bifurcated segments with different street names along the same corridor uh and and avoid that confusion going forward. Uh about 18 months ago uh the city decided uh they wanted the ability
to uh do additional renamings. Um so we have separate processes now. New new street names come under the county process. an existing road that gets renamed within the city limits. The city controls different processes. Uh cities
renamed about nine roads or so in the last 18 months. In fact, last night at the commission meeting, uh city commission meeting, they've requested uh another street renaming. So, that'll come back at a at a future city commission. So, that that'll make 10.
Um, again, just an example to to help you appreciate some of the some of the subject areas and and the importance of some of these issues, timely emergency response, so forth. Second issue we cover in your materials. It's more in the public interest realm. Everyone
wants to know what's going on down the street from their house. Um, what's that sign doing up on that piece of property? Why did the lot get cleared? What's going there? Is it is it a Starbucks? you know, everyone wants to know what's what's happening. And so, one of the issues we covered in the materials um
was the the different types of development you see in the city and county, the different standards and the different notice requirements. Um so, it's natural that city and a a county with a a large uninccorporated rural
community has different development. County is going to have a lot of single family homes. City's going to have a lot of multif family development, more commercial. Everybody understands that. But when you look at the different u requirements, are there public hearings required for that new development uh of
you know 100 town homes? Um are there legal ads required to go in the newspaper? Uh posted on the website. But city and the county also do first class mail notices and and based on the type of development, the type of the level of
intensity. Um and we have different amounts. Uh some are 600 ft, some are 800 feet, some are 1,000 ft, but it's differing. And so if you live in proximity, if your neighborhood is in the city and right down the street, neighborhoods in the county, some might be getting notices, some might not,
depending on what that new development is in. Is it in the city or in the county? Again, just a public interest issue. We have different standards for how big the radius is that we're mailing out first class notices to inform people, hey, there's this new development coming in. Here's what it
is. Here's where you find more information. Here's when the meeting's going to be. Just pointing out the differences. Again, not a conflict, not something that's in dispute between the city and the county, just policy decisions that have been made at the,
you know, commissioners level that that um how they want to move forward on these. Another recent one came up in late 2024. The Humane Society of the United States was I'll I'll frame it as shopping uh
but they were advocating for a a model ordinance that would prohibit the retail sale of dogs, cats, and rabbits. And the intent was to um encourage pet adoptions and decrease the number of animals that
wind up in the animal shelter. you know, worthwhile cost. In advocating for this separately at the city and and the county commissions, uh the county commission took it up and ultimately adopted this ordinance prohibiting the retail sale. Uh this was in early 2025.
Uh there are exceptions in in the ordinance for uh breeding and and for pet adoption activities, but today the county prohibits the retail sale in the unincorporated area. We grandfathered in one existing business at the time that was still
selling rabbits. Um so if or when that business goes out, it's going to be completely prohibited in the unincorporated area. City opted not to adopt the model ordinance. Commissioner Limley's looking at me like like
big advocate of the animal shelter. I I remember uh so the city opted not to do that. So you have different standards in if you're in the city versus the county. Okay? Not weighing whether that's good or bad, just just different. Maybe people find that confusing. Maybe they
don't. Different standards. Um during the discussion at the last meeting, we talked a little bit about the fourth issue that's in your materials today. Um, also another example of not something that's come up in a very long time, not not a conflict,
not um, you know, not a controversial issue uh, that I'm aware of, but different um, hours of operation for bars in the city limits versus the county limits when you can and can't uh, sell alcohol on premises at a bar.
There's a 1 hour difference for the most part. There are some minor differences, but but basically uh, In the city, you can't sell between 2 am and 6 am. And in the county, it's 2 am and 7 a.m. Again, 1 hour difference. Not a big deal. The
county has some other limitations on Sundays, uh, and some exclusions, but again, not something that's been controversial. Just wanted to point out, hey, we got different standards. As we talked about in at the last meeting, looking at other charters and the
provisions, some counties do regulate countywide. um the the sale of alcohol. Um you we may even still have a couple of dry counties, I think, in in in the panhandle. Um so again, just wanted to highlight some of this information that
the committee requested. Um I know we're getting into the weeds with some of these issues. They're samples. They're they're designed to just help facilitate conversation, discussion among the committee. Ultimately, we'll we'll await your direction. um staff is here happy to answer any questions that you might
have, but I'm happy to turn it back over to the chair. >> Hey, thank you, Ken. Appreciate it your comments, especially that we're not here to solve current problems between the city and the county. These are long-term issues that will be if if adopted, they're in the charter for a long time
to come. So, um we're now open for discussion. As you see in your packets, there are basically four different options that are presented to you. We might come up with a fifth, but the four as you can see are just accept this and table a motion. We can also just request
additional additional material that Ken didn't think up overnight. Right. >> Absolutely. >> And then uh we can act we can direct the staff to provide an amendment uh language for all county ordinances prevailing. We can direct them to
specific county ordinances prevailing. uh we don't have to do anything at all. So, at this point, I'm going to open this up for conversation and discussion. Uh if you'll turn your card up like this so I can see when you're ready to speak or you wish to speak, that would be
great. Um all right, I see uh Ryan Ray like to comment on that. >> Hey, yeah. Um thanks for the great um update and the great uh presentation there. Um consolidation. uh a lot of blood has been spilled um over this
issue for many many years from our conversation last uh last meeting. I think that we're very far from a consensus on this. I think that the timing could not be worse. Um also I think you know specifically at this time it's clear that tensions are boiling
over. Mom and dad are fighting. Uh that's obvious and people expect us to look to have a longer view on this committee. So I would ask us to, you know, very carefully adopt a strategy of of doing no harm, right? Let's not get let's not get out on an island,
especially when we know in this community there's only one city. So it's not really as much of an administrative issue among multiple cities. When we attack city authority, we attack city authority itself. Um, and that has reverberations that could be um really
uh it could really lead to some um uh unintended consequences that are negative. Um, you're damaging political um uh participation for minorities in many cases. Home rule is under attack enough. Um, and I think we're very very far from anything. I think that um the
consensus issue, the the consensus position that I've seen from our last conversations is contained by option one. Um, and I would move option one. >> Um, just for a second, uh, Miss Ostein has a point of information on that. So,
uh, the board of county commissioners at its meeting two days ago, uh, did request that, uh, county commission staff bring back information about pros and cons for consolidation. But what I would say for this committee is that any
proposal for consolidation, the first step for that uh under the Florida Constitution would be an action by the Florida legislature in a special law. So that's not something that this body would need to worry about for the 2026 ballot.
>> For sure. Point. U nonetheless, I believe that our the position that I've seen the disposition of this board um is captured by option one. And so I'd move it for our consideration. And you've made the motion to move option one. We do have at least one other person who wishes to speak on that. I don't know if I've heard a
second. >> Get a second. >> Did I I don't know if I've heard a second. >> Second for discussion. Anybody? >> Not at that time. Not at this time perhaps. Thank you. >> Uh Barry had some comment. >> I think Daryl had his card up first.
>> I'm sorry Daryl. Please excuse me. Keep me going straight here on this. >> No problem. No problem. Madam, uh, for me, as I look at the information, as we talk about what would be our motion moving forward, I find it compelling
that 11 of the other 18 comparable charter counties in Florida already have that same existing language that there is a pre preeemption of the county holding the greater authority in
cases where that potentially occurs. But I I like though I think it was uh Mr. Ray who said that our decisions will have long-term implications for me when those situations or conflicts arise what happens next.
Is there then a move then does this committee as a part of its recommendation would move that when those situations occur that there is then subsequent legislation potentially that removes the challenge as it occurs.
We have correctly identified at the behest of this committee four particular circumstances where we see already existing where and those are ones I can imagine occur most frequently street naming and the like and the the challenge between
whether or not you go and get your beer in the city or the county after hours. But in other cases, because as I mentioned the last time, particularly when citizens may bear the brunt of any legal challenges that may occur, what
happens next? Where does a resolution occur so that that is not something that we frequently would have to would have to be um if if it's correct arbitrated a second time after it has risen to our
consciousness. So that would be my only question. and I see that it's done in 11 other counties and if we were to adopt it, where is then the resolution where that conflict doesn't occur again? >> Thank you, Mr. Jones. Uh just without objection, do you want to speak to this at all at this point or just have others
disc I mean what happens if this is adopted? Do you then go back to the county so an ordinance somehow enacts steps that would take place unless unless we already have it? So when that conflict comes up legally or statute that has not risen amongst these four
>> when it comes and it is resolved >> then what does does a county or the city then provide resolution so that they then are on the same page so that resolution that that conflict does not occur again >> right Ken do you want to speak to that or or we can
>> yeah chassity >> so committee member Jones in your scenario. I'm just want to make sure I understand your question. If uh this committee were to advance, um are you saying just a complete preeemption or just selective preeemptions?
>> Well, >> complete. >> If that's what we see in the other counties, then that's a complete preeemption. >> Okay. >> The opposite. >> It's right. The majority of counties um provide for uh municipal ordinances to prevail in certain certain situations.
All right then. Yes. >> Okay. So, so these would be just uh selective similar to the county's environmental standards. >> Correct. Yeah. So, so this is the same as what would happen the last time the
county adopted the minimum environmental standards. It's my understanding there was a a period of time uh during which uh there was evaluation of what those minimum environmental standards should be. uh and then ultimately those went into effect and so after that time uh
the city is now still entirely uh capable and able to adopt its own environmental standards as long as they exceed that floor that was established. Um so if you're talking about a scenario where it's a floor has been established
as opposed to a complete preeemption, that's an example of what's been done in the past and what I would envision would happen in the future. For other types of preeemptions, it would depend on the topic really uh and
what would be necessary to reconcile what currently exists in that area. Whether it's a a you know um something that's procedural in nature like street renaming for example um or whether it's something more substantive
um like in the land development area or something like that. I mean, it it's really going to depend. Um, but there would have to be a process of evaluation for what currently exists and what the county and ultimately the city hopefully can agree they want going forward.
I'll try a simple one. If you wanted one set of rules for bar hours, city and county, we could write a charter amendment probably in two sentences, and it would make very clear who has the authority to set the hours for bars and
the sale of alcohol in Leyon County and in the city limits that there wouldn't be much of a dispute. You get more substantive matters, more complex matters like land development. it it's a little harder but we we would
manage through it. We did it with the minimum environmental standards. Um but the charter amendment itself for again just an example the sale of alcohol would be two sentences and it would make clear who has the authority within the county jurisdiction to establish those
hours. >> So let me use a simple example. If Anita Favorvers has a barber shop and there's a city rule regarding the signage on that barberh shop and she's fined or a lean is placed against her, when she
then takes this issue and arbitrates it, I should not then two months later be set with the same fine because now that was come to this arbitration, where then is it then rewritten in statute such that there's no longer the dissimilarity?
is my question. Once something has been arbitrated and we've seen the preeemption executed, where then that's that's what I'm asking. What is the next step so that no one else has to sue for the same thing ever again? That's that's my question and that's that I think
that's the example I'm looking at. Do we then after that arbitration then decide that we make the change and provide the uniformity of policy cuz we don't know where the conflict occurs until it's potentially manifest. But after it's manifest, how do we resolve
it so it never happens again? That's my question. >> That's something that's left up to the boards then to decide if they want to amend the ordinances to to >> using using your example of a sign. If if if we were to have a charter amendment about the county sets all
standards for signs, just as an example, um we're talking about an existing sign. You you would have to have some grandfathering. We're not going to go make everybody change their signs overnight. But in the permitting of a new application for a business and a
sign, it would have to meet the new unified standard or countywide standard. >> Thank you. Good questions. Um Barry, I think you were up next. >> Yeah, thank you. I I appreciate the item and I appreciate the conversation
because I think you've brought to light a few very very important points here. um in particularly um um Miss Hostin, we can and correct me if I'm wrong here. We have the ability to set policy that might apply throughout the county,
including within the municipality, but we can't usurp the shall I say the the the uh the policing of that policy. In other words, we could say here here's the minimum. Let's take code enforcement for example, right? Right? So the city has a code
enforcement department, county has a code enforcement department. We could set standards for code enforcement that apply within the city, but we can't take over the city's code enforcement department through this process right here. Is that correct? >> That's correct. And something else to
keep in two two other things to really keep in mind that we haven't really talked about in terms of the current structure. um some county or every time the county adopts an ordinance it says whether or not it applies in the
incorporated area as well or just in the unincorporated area. So something to keep in mind is that a number of the county's ordinances currently only apply in the unincorporated area. Now that might be for a couple different reasons. one, it doesn't make sense in the city
to do whatever the county is adopting. Um, it might be that they know that the city already has an ordinance and they don't want to conflict with it or cause confusion. Um, some so it's kind of a mixed bag even in terms of what currently exists under
Florida um, code of laws. But the other thing too about this is just like um when the legislature adopts a new law that law is for the most part most of the time it's prospective only. For the
legislature to adopt a law that becomes retroactive and applies in the past they have to make special findings. It has to meet certain constitutional requirements and all of that stuff. So whatever were
to be put on the 2026 ballot that passed would be prospective only. So it's not like day one whatever was passed you create necessarily 50 different conflicts between county
code and city code. It would just be this progression over time of evaluating what currently exists in each area and then there would have to be determination of whether they wanted to make changes or not. So I just want to provide that for context too just to
give a little bit of additional information about how this would actually work in practice. >> Can I ask the EMA seems like a great example here? Um, this body when it last convened obviously said it would be great if we had we were at least playing uh we at
least had had the same sheet of music on both the city and the county side when it came to environmental standards. And my understanding is that the two entities then came together and agreed to a set of environmental standards and then those standards were adopted by both the city and the county pretty much
verbatim. Uh so that again same sheet of music you know I get it I work really well on analogies you know uh it's yeah we have two orchestras playing in the same room that is Lyon County right and we've got uh one conductor uh for the county we've got another conductor for
the city and if we have two different sets of music two different sheets of music and every time that this this you know orchestra over here isn't getting it the same as this orchestra over here we have to go to arbitration or deal with something like that that's just that makes for a terrible music
experience, doesn't it? So, but if we're both playing off the same sheets of music, even though there may be some slightly different interpretations by our our our, you know, uh um our orchestra leaders, uh it essentially it's going to sound well. So, I think
that's the frustration. I think the uh example that was given right at the outset of this discussion a a few meetings ago was you know an example of hey I'm in the city and I I have these certain sets of regulations but my neighbor who's in the county is abiding by a whole another set of regulations
when it comes to things like you know um development standards and things of that sort. How can we how can we unify that in some way that that works? But am I am I wrong or is the MA just a good example of of how we've done that in the past? Five stars.
>> I mean, it's always good when you just get a yes, right? Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. Now, I I'm not sure your uh cards went up when I wasn't looking whether it was Joey or Sllayton who spoke first, but Joey up next. Thank you.
So, um, to speak briefly, uh, back to the the motion from earlier, um, I definitely understand the the desire to give a certain amount of importance to home rule and when we're talking about, you know, we we've dealt with that over
the last so many years between between municipalities, counties, and the state. However, I do think it's entirely understandable that the county would want to have priority when it comes to something that if the city changed
something, it would then affect county residents outside of their control. For instance, we're talking about the roads. Um, you know, as it is now, we have a Sunray Road way out uh in the county. If
the city decided to change a city road to Sunray Road, that creates a problem for your first responders. Um, that creates a problem that we've had problems with that long since in the past. Um, we have roads within the city limits that have multiple names for
different sections of the road. We have roads within the city limits that have multiple sections of the same name road. You turn on to one section, you may not get to the next section. Those are problems for your first responders and they take seconds. And as you know, we
have uh a gentleman from the from the department that has stitches due to catching someone out of a building last night. Seconds matter. So I I definitely think there's a case for for some tailored changes.
Um, and as you're saying, the majority of other counties in our situation have basically gone the the route of option three, right? Where you're where you're making tailored changes, right? So with
that in mind, in the discussion with the county commissioners when they they opted to have this as as a priority for them, did they give any areas that were priorities or is what we're looking at what y'all best identified as the areas
that you of concern for for administration? >> I wouldn't even say that they're areas of concern necessarily. Again, some are very different than others, right? the the 1 hour in alcohol sales versus a first responder issue. Um,
this didn't arrive with the county commission because of some issues. These are just things we identified to show you different areas in the codes between the city and the county um that you might relate to that you might be interested in. Um, and some probably
more important than others in in the grand scheme of things. uh but but they're not because of some ongoing dispute or or issue or >> So So then if we did elect to go with option three, would it be solely left up
to us to decide what areas we want to go into or would we be within our right to ask you to prioritize areas that are of concern for you administratively >> or kind of does do the tailoring more specific county ordinances? Well, could be an option for
discussion. Okay. All right. Um, Sllayton, I think you're up next. Thank you, Joey. >> Thanks, Madam Chair. Um, and Barry, I really enjoyed your analogy there of the orchestra. Um, just a follow up to Mr. Morris's
comments when he was discussing with member Jones. Um, so when a amendment is to be proposed, what's the timeline of that? So, if you have conflicting um thoughts between the city and the county, is that something that just goes to the county and you create that two sentence concise amendment and then they
look at it, discuss and approve and it would just roll based on next county meeting whenever you know items arise. >> It it starts here. >> Okay. It it starts here. The draft charter amendment would come to you all
to look at. And again, some things are more complex than others. a two sentence one like alcohol sales pretty pretty easy. Um but you have the ability to manage, manipulate, amend, tweak tweak the language um make recommendations
back to the board. You'd have public hearings on it later in the summer um and get it to the supervisor election in time to put it on the ballot. So wouldn't be a secret. Obviously there there'd be plenty of notice, plenty of time uh go on the ballot, voters would
approve it or they wouldn't. Um there'd be an effective date probably a couple months out, maybe 60 days. Uh I think January 1 we did for the the EMA. Um >> Okay. And so at that point, if option two was proposed by someone,
theoretically, you guys would take that and come up with the list of conflicts and then we would discuss it here. Uh how that language would be amended. Option number two is the is the broad um everything all the county ordinances
supersede municipal ordinances. Option number three is where the committee might identify specific issues that come back. Got it. Okay. Thank you. >> Um thank you Slayton Bruce. >> Thank you. So, um, so I look at, sorry,
as I look at this, um, and I like option three, but where I'm stuck is how we would go about identifying the specific points of conflict or the specific areas that we want to highlight or focus on. So, I'm looking for guidance on what are some methods where even if we came back with um, option four where you would be
able to give us feasible um, ones that the are in the county's interest in. I'm thinking about people outside of the meeting and citizen input, there might be areas we're just not privy to at the moment. and what would be the best way of going about soliciting those so that we can make sure we're uh looking at the full menu of options there.
>> You want to take that one? >> Yeah, I guess I could. I There's really two ways to to approach it. Um again, there's there's conflicts and disputes and then there's differing ordinances. We're always going to have differing ordinances as different
bodies. and maybe 20 years ago, the city updated some ordinance, whereas we just updated it 5 minutes ago. Um, but I I think you you almost answer your own question. If if there's not something um of mind within this body, 21 people, if
there's not something pressing, if there's if if the information you've received uh doesn't cause you to react and or want you to, you know, do something about it, I think that's also the answer. um that maybe there's not a specific pressing issue if if you don't
have one. Um but again, it's a big body and and that's why we're all here. And >> it's important to note the board didn't advance this issue because there's a specific issue, just more so for you to consider and evaluate as a as a policy matter. >> But are you I mean I'm just curious your
question. If during public hearings, so we have language, we have a tailored proposal of some sort. If during public hearings the public comes up and says, "Well, hey, you all just completely didn't respond to this particular part, does anything happen after public
hearings that we change or we amend or do or once public hearings start?" Our work is kind of done in terms of crafting and drafting the language. Correct. >> The the language would come back before draft charter amendments would come back
um probably after New Year's. uh the public hearings wouldn't be until summer and that's the final stamp of approval and that's the language that would go on the ballot in November. >> So we're the funnel for getting information now from the public. You
know that's part of what our uh tentacles are out there in the community. >> Madam Chair, I just uh county attorney just nudged me a quick reminder that the that the committee's ultimate recommendations have to be approved by the board. I apologize. >> By the county commission.
>> Yes. Right. So, we don't get the last word. U Linda, are you you're done? Your >> My comments were along the same line as Joey and Bruce's in terms of how we determine what those what those areas may be because when I look at the other
counties, I mean, it's all over the place and and essentially for us it could be all over the place. And so we want to do something I think that's that's effective and that is appropriate for our county. And if our role then is
to listen to members of the public to determine what those areas are, then we've got to open some ears. I think >> that's right. Uh William Smith, I think you're up next. Curious >> if there were specific issues that
people Are there specific things y'all are interested in? Because there's not specific things and I don't just I don't know. I think that maybe it's best to just let it go. >> Right. Thank you. All right. We have several speakers over here. I think uh
Dr. Kesler and then Anita and then Max. And back to you, Ryan. >> I think Anita was ahead of me. and were you okay? I appreciate it cuz sometimes I'm looking here and the cards go up. So, thank you for keeping us honest. Miss Favors,
>> I just wanted to say that um I think there are some issues that are more important than others and the addressing issue concerns me that um we have different or similar addresses because it's a public safety issue and we have
seen we have experience to know that that could be a concern. So I would like to find some way to address that issue. I'm not sure that it rises to the level of a charter amendment, however, but can
this committee make recommendations outside of specific uh this should go on the ballot kind of thing? >> Chassity, do you know about I mean either one of you on that point? >> Uh sure. I mean, um, I would imagine
that both the county commission and the city commission are watching the activities of this committee and listening, uh, and to the extent concerns are raised and the committee expresses that it hopes that either one of those jurisdictions or both of them
address them without the need for um, a change in the charter, uh, they would have the discretion uh, to act on that or not. Thank you. Max, >> gentlemen, thank you. >> No problem. I'll get on the bus.
>> Going. >> Um, so when I when I first looked at this, I my initial instinct was I don't like anyone taking away my authority to
work in my space. whether it's county or city um rule and went to the issue of the home rule and uh but then I I reflected back on the staff's examples
and and I listened to what's going on as far as the dilemma of trying to identify issue by issue and to me it's not an issue by issue but I I think more like
uh Miss Favors has um suggested it there are areas such as safety and the example of the road naming is safety example of so is safety and I think there are areas
that would benefit from there being one entity having that ability to supersede how to get there. I don't have the answer, but I think that, you know, somewhere in between there there may be
a solution coming out, but I don't know if we're ready for that at this point in time. >> Yeah. Thank you. Um Sean, I guess you're up. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um
I have a question as it relates to this. I I I happen to agree with with William that, you know, we we shouldn't create a problem. We shouldn't try to fix something that that's not broken, but I do have a question just in thinking of the county having a way to um protect
itself from certain things. So, my question, talk, let's talk talk to us about annexation. Talk to us about the city's ability to annex the county out of existence.
Is there a process for dealing with annexations and should the county have um some say in how that works?
>> That's a good one. Anybody? So, so to some extent annexation is dictated by state law which both the city and the county are preempted from doing anything about. Uh, now there there is some some flexibility
uh in some areas um but not in others. So, if that was something that um this body wanted us to bring back information on, we could identify specifically those areas where we don't have any authority to do anything in a charter because state law already dictates what happens.
Um but there's flexibility in this area if um this body were interested in uh proposing some sort of a charter amendment to address annexation for for the area where there is some flexibility. I mean, it's a mixed bag.
>> Yeah. So, I Thank you, Madam Attorney. I So, I would ask that we can get some information about what the state has preempted uh as it relates to an municipal annexation and um how that cor how that um
correlates to the county's ability to have an impact on that. But when we think about issues that could have a conflict, the one of the first things that comes to my mind is annexation. So, uh, listening hearing what you're
saying, if at some point we have a motion later, we might be able to roll that into it in terms of wanting to know where the state preeemptions are or that's something we should handle separately. It's a good point. >> I'm just making a request for information. >> Okay.
>> Do I need a motion to do that? Yeah, you could do that. >> Make it clear. >> Okay. You want to make it madam chair as a as a >> whole thing and not piece it together. >> Yeah, let's do that. All right. >> If that's >> I'm I'm old so I'll forget. So I know you as chair to remember that that I I
would like that information. Thank you. >> It's guide dogs over here. Uh okay. You're making a motion. Do I hear a second on that motion to ask for more information on what the state is? >> Restate the motion. >> Can you restate the motion, please? Um, >> would you like me to resist?
>> No. You give me the opportunity to expand it. And I thought I better not. Okay. Um, I I I'd like to make a motion that we uh that we ask Madame Attorney and and appropriate folks uh to bring us back
information as it relates to annexations, any state preeemptions related to annexation, the city and county's ability and flexibility to to practice annexation and their and their their their correlation as it relates to
that >> to annexation. not everything that this >> I think I think to Williams point I think if we if we're going to look at this issue it's really the issues where there could be conflict
>> Mhm. right in areas where it's deline how you say that word delineated um who can do what that's we don't need to explore that but >> annexation comes to mind because it's
something that if the city can annex addresses that are in the county that could have a huge impact on on in a long-term basis on your on on you're governing and >> so that is a motion just on specifically
you know do I hear a second on that motion >> second >> max a second on that all in favor of uh requesting staff to give us more information specifically on state preeemption on annexation issues uh all in favor say I
>> and those opposed say no thank you very much motion carries uh Ryan my apologies I think I miss skipped over you I I'm not my mother I don't have eyes in the back of my head >> order yeah I just wanted agree. I just want to echo what the board members uh Smith and Pitman said. Um I think we're
going in a good direction. Um and uh you know there are other players in the room as well and our beautiful symphony orchestra. There is the state and there's a federal authority and they're very inquisitive uh to take it away from lower. So once we go down that road, I just think that I just caution us to be careful about that and I kind of like
the direction that we're adopting. So thank you. >> Thanks so much. Uh Barry, I think you're up next and then Bruce. >> Oh, Max. Um, we can do discussion on this if there's a second, but uh, and I don't mean to shut off discussion by making a motion. Um, so it sounds to me
like there's a consensus to accept the report. And I think earlier when there was when we were looking at option one, it was probably just because people wanted to make sure they had an opportunity to talk. And I think that that word in option one there, table is kind of a strong word. Um, I don't think it's any desire of this body to never
look at this power again and this authority of the county. And I think this has been a, you know, we've all learned something about the county has an ability to to look at city powers if we want to return to this. But I think for now, um, looking at one of the issues raised, um, by um, city manager,
uh, favors that, uh, we ought to look at the addressing issues. Um, so I'm I guess I'm suggesting making a motion, accepting the report, adding uh something for the addressing issue, and just everyone keeping in mind that we can always bring this back if there's any other issue that we want to look at
as this goes on. >> That's your motion. >> Wait, what's the motion? >> I motion to accept the report number one plus uh what um city manager favors brought up about the addressing issue. So having this addressing issue come
back and then also just knowing that if there's any other issue throughout the course of the charter review that we want to look at know that we're not tableabling this forever. >> We can always bring up other issues as they come up. >> I just have a question on on this. I
don't know what the formal procedure is. lousy banker. But >> uh >> is there another way to do the addressing issue rather than a charter amendment? That seems like we should be focusing on big picture issues and the street addressing to in my eyes seems like something we can solve in another
method. >> Okay, hold up for a second. Um I'd like to know if we have a motion on the floor. There are several people who still have their cards up to discuss. I don't know what. Uh, and so at this point, I'm not sure with Robert's rules
of order would say carry on with the rest of the those who have discussions or do I if I had a second on this. I mean, I don't want to cut off discussion of anything else that might be coming up at this point. I mean, it might be a motion you want to save for a little bit later
or not. Mr. I want to uh members of all who want to share al additional ideas and I also wanted to mention that I I do intend to bring up two other ideas at towards the end of the meeting as well and so >> so what I'm saying is I'm not sure what
your motion >> so there's a motion on table >> yeah so you have a motion and a second so I think the the current proper channel would be to have then discussion on that >> on that discussion on his discussion
Fair enough. All right. That sounds proper. >> And so discussion on this motion alone on his motion alone which is >> and to be clear the motion did not intend to impose the charter solution to this. Um Mr. Smith as you bring up uh if it can be resolved in some other way I
think that would be some of the analysis that staff would bring back. >> So clearly state your motion again and we will discuss the motion. >> Okay. So this is the motion is uh option four committee direction which includes accepting the report uh as well as city
manager favers recommendation about the addressing issue to have staff bring back information about the addressing issue uh and also we all can bring up these issues if any of them come up in the future as well. >> All right, we have a second on that although those who'd like to discuss it.
>> Yes. Um, >> I would, >> Madam Chair, I'm I'm maybe it's just me. I'm a little confused now. I heard Mr. Pitman ask for information to come back from staff and and it pertains to this issue right here. Does it not, Madam
Chair? >> Broadly. So, so if we're if if we're asking, which we passed, a motion to bring back information on this item, >> why are we going to pass this item right now rather than wait on that information to come back and then make a decision?
I'm confused, but maybe it's just me. But if we just which we we like I said, we just did. We passed the motion for further information. I think we should wait on that information before we have any other motions to deal with this particular issue. That's my two cents.
Thank you very much, >> Bruce. >> Yeah. So, u mine was a friendly amendment to add additional information request to that um to Max's motion and that would be to have someone from the city perhaps explain what how what
ramifications this might have for them in terms of their perspective of it. >> It's exciting. >> Do that. >> Uh it's a friendly amendment. >> Is that a friendly amendment? You accept that? Okay. Do we need a second on adding on to
>> Yes. >> Yeah, that's Joey. >> Joey, up next. >> So, I I think some of what the concern regarding this particular motion could probably somewhat be addressed by the direction the two of you would like to
to go in in how we're going to do this particular issue. Right. Are we going to do you want us to try to uh to make motions on specific areas in which we want preeminence given and then it all
be cobbled into one document and then we approve that approve that particular document. How do you want to do that? >> Well, ultimately we have to have one document. Am I correct? >> And so what is your advice on that? Because what I'm hearing is we're sort of now ripping it apart and taking a
piece of this on streets. We're going to get more information and maybe fire safety will be >> the intent of the motion also was actually just to to deal with the issue on the table and move on to other business. I was intend to relitigate. I I agree with the motion that we passed a moment ago. Madame Chair. Yes.
>> And because it's a it's a part of his motion is that we would accept the report and it was p if if it passes unanimously. Any one of us can then bring it back because now it because it's been accepted, we can then have a
motion to reconsider and bring this whole information back after we secure additional information by Robert's rules. >> Definitely. anyone who's in the affirmative. >> All right. I mean, so the main thing is we're we're still going to be able to
talk about a lot of these issues on down the road, >> but we can capture this particular piece if so desired. Um Barry, did you have a question on that? >> Just I don't think for the good of group, you know, the city and county codes are over a thousand pages each.
You know, there are a lot of issues out there. just talking about some very specific ones and I appreciate stat bring those forward because those are great examples. Um but but I you know it is is daunting when you take a look at that. I mean just the land development code portion which contains the addressing stuff for each one is over
800 pages. So um there's a lot there. Um, could I ask that we and again I'm always sensitive to creating more work for staff, but maybe just the table of contents for each one with a brief description of like what the section
does. So we just can for for our edification can see, you know, the breadth of this um and the fact that, you know, we've got um there's certainly going to be some stuff that the city has in their code just from a topic standpoint. not from a not not getting down in the weeds, but just from a topic
standpoint that that isn't covered in the county codes and vice versa. And then you're going to see start to see those areas of similarity. Um, you know, where where the county and the city both have policies on on a very similar issue, I think, or at least again at the broadest level. So, I mean, I'm
literally just mean the table of contents from each one and then just like a two-line description of, you know, this is what this section, you know, does. Uh and maybe that'll help guide this conversation as we move forward because we do still have >> 20 more meetings.
>> Well, we have six more meetings and >> Yeah. Um so, you know, we still have a lot of meetings to discuss this and I think the from what I'm hearing from the group, everyone wants to continue the conversation. You don't want to close the door on it just yet. Am I right? Um, so I don't know if that becomes part
of the motion to include this request for further information of various kinds. >> Yeah, I think that's a that's a I would consider that a friendly amendment if the group has no issue with that. >> Considering it as a friendly amendment or is this um
just information favors, >> can we ask of staff? That sounds like a horrendous task to me. I'm not sure if it is or not, but it sounds like you're asking for two months worth of work. >> No, I'm not asking for us to compare side by side both codes. I'm literally
just saying the topics. And if that is too much, I'm looking at you guys right now. So, if you go, "Holy cow, that is and Vince, if that is you're like that is a yman's effort, then >> wow, Barry." >> No, let me make sure I'm on. Am I on guys? Can you hear me? I um Good
morning, everybody. I was u trying afternoon. you know, I was trying to see how long I could stay quiet and for the record, I beat my previous record by 35 minutes uh in a meeting. So, but no, Barry, um I just don't know if it's going to get you what you want. You know what I mean? The beauty of of being a
staff person is so we don't know coming into it. It's sort of a temperature check, too. So, this this group could feel like again at a very high level from a whole rural standpoint, we don't have any interest in talking about much of any of this, you know, stuff. And then we try to give you some examples
which sort of illuminate, hey, this is how broad these are. There are examples that could kind of, you know, show up in a lot of the different sections of the ordinances and that sort of thing. And please know too that if we had burning issues, we'd bring them to you. I mean, those would have those would have led the issues for you. So again, it's a bit
of a temperature check uh with you all. And you do have the rest of your time to hear from the public to get information back on annexation, on some of these public safety issues. And then you know with that that might you know inform you uh as to whether you wish to pursue a charter amendment on any of those
specific issues. So again we're happy to bring back more information on anything specifically that that might interest uh you all. So anyway >> u William did you should speak to the amendment the motion as >> I'm just trying to figure out what what what is the motion? What are the
motions? And then I'd be interested in my question again about is there another way to address the street sign issue. It seems like that should be we should be focusing on bigger issues than street signs. No, no, no, no offense to the firefighters. I'm sure next week you won't be able to make it to my house.
True. >> So, so the street renaming is codified and it's codified in the county code and it's codified in the city code. Uh, and up until recently,
uh, they were the same. and the city exercised its ability and authority to change its code and because of the current charter provision which provides for preeemption by a municipal or into a
conflict that is where where we are. So the only other option is the city could again amend its code uh so that it's consistent with the county code and there wouldn't be any conflict. But that
is a complete policy decision by the city commission and that is the only other way to address that issue. Uh and they are the only body >> that can make that decision >> other than the charter amendment. >> Other than a charter amendment, right? >> Mhm. >> Or vice versa.
>> Please Slayton, do you have a comment? >> Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh that just brought up a good point in my opinion. um you know if the the city goes on and just makes these changes every once in a while and we just set aside and do proposed charter amendments to specific ordinances then it could
just lead to a rotation of the city issuing other ordinances and we have to come back to a charter amendment to keep addressing ones that are in conflict when new ones arise. So that's why I think um you know it's worth thinking
about should everyone in our community be under the same government um of number two and just knowing that the county will have uh superiority because I think if we just do these proposed charter amendments of specific issues we could have a situation in which the city
amends it on their own and then we don't talk about it for eight years and we have to go back and just chase our tail around. So just a thought. So that's a thought, not a substitute motion of any sort. Okay. If there's not any further discussion on
Oh, Miss Favors, did you have another comment? Cards up. >> That's okay. >> I did. I know what I wanted to ask. When I'm I'm moving kind of forward. When our
report is finalized, I think will whatever is submitted on the ballot go as a complete report or as individual amendments for the public to vote on because I'm thinking
depending on how much we have and how complex it is that could be pretty complex. If we're doing it on a amendment by amendment basis that will make a difference. It has to be amendment by amendment. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. And
>> approved by the board, of course, >> and approved by the board in single subject and all kinds of other things that we have to uh abide by. >> All right. Then without further ado, um Mr. Hurley's amendment or proposal was
for option four. Uh it was seconded by um Mr. Davis. All those in favor >> uh signify by saying I. That's open. Go ahead. >> All oppose say no. Motion carries. Thank you very much.
>> All right. >> Okay. >> Uh Mr. Hurley, another motion coming up. >> Um so point of order we doing. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, um I'm concerned um with the
item that I brought up at the last meeting that its place be preserved as the next item that would be coming and that's dealing with the uh ethics and the um inspector general
>> inspector general issue. >> Get into that section. >> Yeah. Yeah. That is part part two of >> our deliberation. Next item on your agenda. We're going to we're going to get into all of those issues. We're going to have this again the committee. We're going to identify all the issues. The committee can ask questions about
them. You'll vote on them. You'll decide what comes back as agenda items and then it'll it'll go from there. But we're getting ready to go into that process. >> Okay. >> All right. Okay. No further discussion on counties projects. Okay. We're good to
go. Um, >> so, uh, there's been some issues going on that have, uh, not necessarily gotten the public attention yet, um, between, uh, our public safety partners, and there's been conversations with county
leaders and, uh, some of our leaders in the sheriff's department, um, to look at and have a conversation about the consolidation of law enforcement in our community. This is a conversation that's been happening over a number of years and um rarely have we ever focused um on
uh the question of law enforcement consolidation and I want to be clear with you all that I I don't come to this with any um determined mind about uh what is the best resolution to that question. Um the conversations that we've had with the sheriff's office have
been about uh having them come before this body and answering three questions. The first question is what are the current disadvantages of the the two departments being separate? What are some of the issues that come up? The second question is how would
consolidation of the departments solve those issues? And then the third question would be what are the challenges about consolidation of law enforcement moving forward that would need to be addressed. And so the motion would be to invite the Lyon County
Sheriff's Office and under Sheriff Ron Cave to present a five to eight page report um answering those questions before this body and then we would hear uh his comments. We could ask him questions and
uh go from there. >> So the motion is to request more information on consolidation of the law enforcement agencies >> inviting the sheriff's office to present before this morning. Do >> I have a second for that motion? I I' I'd like to ask the just a friendly
amendment to not put a page number in there. >> Sure. >> Why not? >> And >> and I haven't heard a second. Is there a second question? >> Can I? >> Sure. Absolutely. >> So, when we're talking about a
consolidation, like there could be a huge fiscal impact. Um, so we've been talking about a lot of things but not about the fiscal impact. So if we're going to have them come and answer questions, we would need to like kind of talk about, you know, possible fiscal
constraints like their operating budget, what is the city operating budget and what would it cost to do a consolidation and if that budget is even available for us to do it. Because if we put a hypothetical out there, if we put something to the ballot and it passes,
but there isn't fiscal support to support it, we're gonna be have a bigger problem. >> Thank you. >> Question, >> Bruce. >> Yeah, I just wanted to clarify with Madam Attorney. I thought the advice was that um consolidation was not within our purview because that's something that
would be handled at the state level. So um consolidation of a particular power or service requires one process. If you're talking about a complete consolidation like Duval and
Jacksonville and Miami Dade that has its a separate process that's an entire consolidation of two governments into one. So that's what I was referring to earlier. >> Correct. Thank you. >> I did not hear a second on this motion. >> I'll second for discussion. Okay, I
heard a second on this motion. Is there further discussion on it? >> I I'm up to Go ahead, >> Miss Favors. >> Um I I really wanted to ask uh Max his thinking on this matter as it relates to inviting the sheriff because I think we
probably ought to invite the police chief as well. >> Absolutely. Um, and the the discussion I'm assuming you you kind of referred Well, let me say two things. You started off by saying that
um we haven't talked much about that and probably in your lifetime we haven't but in my No, it's been talked about. Good grief. We have talked about it I don't know how many times. Look at Henry Lewis shaking his head. I think he's
Yeah. So, um, we have talked about it quite a bit, uh, over the years, but I wanted to make that clear. But where are we going with it? Tell me what your thought process is just to get that in front of the committee for further consideration.
>> So, there's been some jurisdictional um, questions that have been raised uh, lately. um as it far as um how calls are being routed with dispatch and the watch commanders and some of some of the jurisdictional questions occurs there
and um I don't uh although uh as chair said earlier that does sound very exciting to bring uh the TYI police department here um I I don't I don't have an issue with that and if that's something that's important to >> Linda did you have a comment on this
motion? I I do and it's along the same lines of um misfavors. What specifically would you ask the sheriff to address? Because there are some um some employment issues that come to play. I believe the city has a union this the
sheriff does not u those kind of things. Are you talking are you going to get into those kind of issues or is it more generally? Uh I I I think when we ask him to come that we need to be specific in terms of the information we're asking
him to bring. >> Um committee member Robert Robertson brought up a great point about uh finances. I think that should absolutely be included and that's one of the benefits that people who advocate for law enforcement consolidation have raised is about the cost savings there
and that's really what I think we'd all like more information about. Um the charter review committee only happens every 8 years. Obviously this is kind of the forum for these kind of existential discussions about uh government and where the roles of our various agencies
are. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh Joey, >> just for a point of information, um I'm sure the the the the locals for those gentlemen and and and women will will be glad to come and share their perspective
on the issue. Um but just as a point of information, both of them now have bargaining units under under PPA. >> Right. >> All right. Without further ado, we do have quite a lot more to discuss today and we are going to adjourn at 1:30 as promised. So, uh I'd like to go ahead
and take a vote on the motion. Sean, don't look at me. Okay. What do you what to say, please? >> Um, yes, big issue talked about for a long time.
The only thing I'm interested in as it relates to consolidation is is there cost savings for constituents? And I think that's the most valuable information we could get is is there
if we did things differently, would it save people money? Because especially in this time where affordability is everything. I mean, that's all we're talking about in the tribunals that are making changes that have the opportunity to make change. And so I'd like to see
that. I'd like to try to see things that keep the politics out of it and just deal with are there savings to constituents in this time where affordability is everything. >> Yeah.
>> If we can do that, I'm all in for for seeing how that could change people lives and make their life easier. I know the county I know county leadership is working on something based
on a on on a vote the other day. And since the county commission actually has the last say in this, it might be worth seeing what the county comes back with. Are So let me let me
end by asking a question. the work that you're doing based on whatever the vote was was on the county commission the other day. Will it bring back what I'm articulating? Will it bring back cost savings
um whether consolidation or the chain merging uh um departments or or all those kind of things. Will it are you evaluating that and and and will and whether or not there'll be cost ch cost savings within your Okay, sure. The the the answer is
it depends. I mean, we're going to bring back an item for the board. We always start at a very high level. Are you interested in this? Here's the big picture. Here's the process. Here's what would be involved. That sort of thing. And so, the first item will be very high level. And then the board will tell us, no, we're interested in going the next step. Now, let's evaluate structure and
cost savings and organization and that sort of thing. We have to see the first the first uh item again will be very high level and then we'll seek direction from the board. Um, Anita knows this as well. Baby steps see, you know, to seek direction from the board. Do they wish to go further in the analysis?
>> Okay. I I bring that up because I don't want to duplicate. >> I don't want to I I mean I I think if they're doing some work that we that will be valuable to us in our consideration, I think we ought to let them do the work and then let's take a
look at it. Um, I'm all for people coming in, but I think we ought to know where we're going before we ask people to to to come in. And And I don't know. I' I'd like to know what we want from them. And And for me, it's all about, hey, does it save people does it save
people money? Does it give them more money to work with in trying to afford uh all the things that it takes to to to raise a family and and um and live in this environment? Also in tandem with that, does it also
increase efficiency? Do call response times do they improve under consolidation compared to being two separate units? That's um and and the management of those resources to make certain that we are optimizing public safety as well. Not finan fiscally, but
also optimizing public safety uh is the second consideration perhaps equally important. Okay. Do you want to comment more? >> Yeah, just real quick. I know we keep talking about like cost savings, but I
do think it's important when you're looking at consolidations to look at like the change management costs, like the cost that it will cost you to consolidate upfront because it could be 20 years on a return on investment. So I think if we're gathering information
like we need to understand how much it would cost upfront to make that type of consolidation. >> William, you heard return on investment. So >> I would just that's probably where I'm going. I'd be
interested. Anita and Dr. Lewis, you guys have been around the block before on this and what happened in previous times and what was kind of the thought process or the reason for not doing it. I don't really interested in reinventing a wheel if it's somebody's already been through it.
>> Right. And I think a lot a lot has changed in since the last time we had the discussion. For example, I'm pretty sure that the sheriff's office did not have a union the last time this was discussed. So, uh that was a big deal uh in terms of having a unionized force and
a non-unionized force. Uh I'm trying to think of other issues. There were there were a lot of um citizen comments about feeling that there was there were advantages to having an elected sheriff and an
appointed police chief and I think some of those probably ought to ought to be um considered and looked at. Uh I can't think of anything else. Can you Dr. Lewis? >> We didn't have a consolidated uh dispatch department at that time. we
didn't have consolid hopefully it has I don't know if that's the case or not but certainly that was one of the issues Sean mentioned the politics of it and that's probably the most critical issue in this whole discussion is how do you keep the politics out and make sure the people
are served better at a at a lower cost in that regard. So that's a difficult uh thing to weigh in that regard. But certainly those are some of the issues that were talked about as well back as 1987.
>> Oh, I still have shoes as they say. Uh first cher did on this topic or >> no it's not on this topic but I mean I can make madam chair I I want to thank you first of all for your leadership and starting on time and ending on time. I think we should as a committee take in
consideration, I know our bylaws address it, that perhaps we may want to limit discussion on items because I mean we spent an hour at one meeting on item number four. We spent another hour today and I mean no offense to Mr. Turley. I mean he's presented some items before
which were several. He has some more today. Mr. Jones mentioned one that he was interested in. I mean either we need to one limit discussion uh think about either extending the time or having additional meetings and I just don't think I mean we had people come up uh
doc Dr. Kesler mentioned some uh that we have presented food insecurity people are here by I just don't think that we're going to have enough time with the scheduled meetings if we're spending an hour on each topic. It's just not it's not going to be enough time. So I mean I think we should consider either like I
said limiting the discussion on an item, having additional meetings or extending the time on the meeting. So just a topic for discussion that's all. >> Thank you very much. I think we have um I hear you. Um I think we have two more
comments on this particular amendment. We are going to have um more of a discussion from our staff on what the procedure is going forward. You all will have plenty of time in the next six meetings to bring up your ideas that come to you and there's a process that we're going to be explaining pretty
shortly. I would like to go ahead and dispense with this particular motion unless there's um and I don't think we're going to get through all of part two today anyway at this point. So, um Miss Miss Edwards, did you have a >> quick question that relates to this
motion? Is there a way to get the information that we've just talked about that we really want other than >> having the sheriff come in or the chief come in or whatever? Uh, can we even wait for the county's information to see
what that gives us and then decide if we need to do something else? >> How does the maker of the motion feel about that? >> Um, I think that they're expecting uh to be able to present before this committee and I I I would like to be able to give them the chance to do that. Um
>> Oh, you do think they are expecting it? >> Okay. >> How do you know that? I've we've had conversations with the sheriff's department about it. >> All right, then. We'll go ahead. >> We're going to take a vote on the motion, which is to move forward with
Oh, God, I'm so lost. Now, option four. Um, not option four, excuse me, but to invite the sheriff and the police chief both and to speak to us with special emphasis on cost and effectiveness and so forth at some future meeting. Don't have time for that. It's been made and
seconded. All in favor of that motion, please signify by saying yes. >> Yes. >> And those who opposed no. >> No. >> No. >> No. >> We need a roll call on this, please. >> Nikki. >> All right. When I call your name, please
indicate yay or nay for your vote. >> Davis Joey, >> yes. >> Linda Bon Edwards, >> no. >> Liz Ellis, >> yes. >> Anita R. Favors, >> no. Max Hurley.
>> Hi. >> I'm sorry. >> Hi. >> Daryl Jones. >> No. >> Howard Kesler? >> No. >> Henry Lewis. >> No. >> Sllayton Murray.
>> No. >> Heidi Alway. >> No. >> Shawn Pitman. >> No. >> Ryan Ray. >> No. Shamar Robin Robersonson. >> No. >> William Smith,
>> no. >> Bruce Strobble, >> yes. >> Jared Terry, >> no. >> Katrina Tugerson, >> no. >> Barry Wilcox, >> yes.
>> Chanty Haynes, are you here? >> And Chair Lley, >> no. Motion fails. What is the motion fails? >> All right, we're going to move we're going to move right into uh part two. >> Okay. Well, hold on. There's been a point of border. Um so, uh can you give
me an idea of uh the motion that we just voted on was to have the sheriff's office present before this board. Uh in addition, there was a friendly amendment. I'll remind you all um to invite the Taly Police Department and their leadership here. Where does that leave the motion that was just made? Where does that leave us as far as being
able to discuss these issues further? >> By a simple majority vote >> as put forth. >> So nothing we didn't nothing has happened to take anything off the table just now. >> Right. I think on down the road we have many more meetings and we're going to be going around. There might be some connections at some point on down the
road. So >> and so just so I understand the temperature of this board. Um what what is specific about that that that uh is not desired about the convers is there is there a desire for a conversation or is it the approach of that? I >> I don't know if that's even an
appropriate question right now. I truly would like to move on with our with our meeting. >> Uh we're going to have a lot of all of us are going to have a lot of time to talk in the next several next six meetings. So the temperature gauge I don't even know if anyone has an answer. Madam chair, point of order, can we
announce those results, you know, for the record? >> I know we have the clerk here was >> the vote was >> What was the vote count? >> Something like Daniel, do you have the count? >> Thank you. >> 14 to six.
>> 14. No, six. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks very much. Okay. Um >> well, we go Yeah, we can go straight uh to Nikki on the process. I was just going to let you all know. You'll all be very happy to know that again, we've got a very structured way that we're about to go into this next section. And just
to tell you in advance, this next section will carry on to your future meetings until you all are done providing whatever direction you want. But through this, you all will be able to propose potential charter amendments again that you'd like more information to come back. The rest of you will be able to ask questions of the proposers
so you're clear on what you going to vote on before you vote on it. Um and uh and again of course uh to be able to raise issues that you'd like to be put up on the board for consideration. With that, Nikki, you want to give us the overview? >> Sure. Um as Vince and the chair mentioned, uh we're at the point now
where you will begin proposing issues that you may want to consider as potential charter amendments. As you'll recall, uh there were proposals quickly introduced at your last meeting. So some members may not be aware of what they voted on due to limited time and explanation of the issues. With that in
mind, I want to briefly explain our two-step process the for the committee's proposal of ideas to be facilitated by your chair to ensure that everybody has the same information to make informed decisions. First, we will go around the table for any member to propose a broad
idea. No detailed explanation or discussion at that point, just broad concepts. All proposals will be outlined on the screen. As you can see, those issues introduced at your last meeting are already on the screen, which will uh also vet through that process today. But
to begin, the chair will will recognize members with their cars cards turned to propose an idea. As a reminder, it's completely fine if you don't have a proposal today. There will be more opportunities at future uh meetings to to bring ideas forward and follow the
same process. After we've collected ideas, we'll go back around another time for each proposer to take a couple minutes to explain what the proposal is and the perceived need it's seeking to address. At that point, committee members can ask questions to fully understand what's being proposed and
most importantly, what you're voting for or against. After discussion, if there's interest, the committee can vote to have additional analysis brought back at a future meeting. If the committee doesn't get through the full list today, that's okay. you will simply pick up where you left off at your next meeting. Uh, you
know, recognizing that while you have ample time, it's not unlimited time. So, just as a closing note and a reminder, this process simply serves to help you uh ensure that you're making informed you you have informed decision-m and to help you know the list to those issues
of broad appeal, as in proposals you believe have a realistic chance of being supported by the board of county commissioners and ultimately by voters. So with that, I'd like to hand it back to the chair to get your process started. >> All right. So the chair is happy to do that. I assume all of you are as OCD as
I am. No. Anybody? And so we are going to close at 1:30. We're not going to begin to get through the topics that I think we have in mind today. But um the direction of the commission do I hear I mean it's fully time to start around the
room if we want to. Uh or you can put up a card and whoever's card goes up first will listen to that first decision. As you said, we'll be going around a couple of times. So >> you vote on >> um but we don't necessarily to follow this.
>> No, these this is just the beginning of the list. Again, as you started last time, this is the beginning of the list. You all will then once we have a complete list, you all will vote individually once you understand everything and all the details. will vote individually on whether you want an agenda item, whether you wanted to proceed to the next step in the process. That's all
>> you can see officer of inspector general select or terminate the county administrator, county commission compensation and so forth. So, we can speak to those or we can go around first. >> I think Bruce Stu, you're you're up. >> Yes. Thank you. Um I'd like to propose a
charter amendment addressing um prioritization of food security in Leyon County. >> Of what? >> Food security. >> Food security. Uhhuh. >> Second. >> No seconds. Okay. So, is there no
motion? We're just saying, >> well, I'm mean, what is the best practice on this? Now, just reiterate that we're going to take the opportunity for each person to just propose broad concepts recognizing people may have similar ideas. >> We want to go around the table to
provide that opportunity to >> So, no. So, no vote, no motions at this time. just uh >> we'll go through one more time once you get them all up there. We'll go through and do the votes. >> Okay. And I don't give a overview at the moment. That would come. Got it. That's it. >> All right. We're all learning the process a little bit. Okay. Food insec
food insecurity. Correct. >> Or security. Yeah. >> Whether people on do I mean we can't just go around 1 2 3 4 5 or if there are other people who wish to speak. No. Madam chair, will we do this at every
meeting >> as we work through the part? Go ahead. >> Uh yes, as we work through the list. >> Excuse me. You you clarify that. >> Sure. So uh we already have a running list going at every meeting. You'll have the opportunity to add to the list uh
and also have that opportunity as we work through it as time allows to explain your proposal, then take questions for further understanding. >> Got it. Thank you. >> Uh I mean so uh we can start with the first one for additional explanation.
>> Yes. >> Okay. That's Yeah. All right. Thank you. >> He's up right now. >> Yeah. >> This is doc uh Dr. Kesler. >> Uh Dr. Kesler. Uh would you take a few
minutes to explain your uh your proposal of the establishment of the office of inspector general for the committee? Thank you. >> I try to I think two minutes or so should do it. Um so this proposal is is to improve both the models that we have
in in William County, the city uh Tallahassee office of the inspector general and also Tallahassy's independent ethics board. and um and to uh it's meant to address some of the deficiencies in structure and uh to uh
be in compliance more compliance with the published guidelines of the association of inspectors general. So uh the establishment of the uh of this office and being independent is is is
critical and vital uh to this whole item. Uh uh there are several methods that um I don't I think I may have passed on to um staff. Uh those are just
suggestions of of methods. Uh I'm not proposing any specific method. uh but the um uh the independence uh is is critical and to avoid conflicts
uh which uh may arise uh is to is is the is the emphasis of this item. Um uh the um in the um the principles of standard for office
and inspector general and I think that was sent out um by staff. Um these uh the present situation has uh scope in te
in Tallahassee uh ethics code restricted uh the and I I refer to them because they have uh that that um system going for them. But the mission of the proposed Leyon
County Office of the Inspector General uh is to remove conflict and this uh should encompass the prevention and the detection of fraud, waste, abuse, uh efficient and effective
use of public resources and promotion of public inter integrity. This would include in ensuring compliance with the Lyon County Ethics Code, taking that role out from under uh the county administrator uh uh just to avoid
conflict. Uh uh the um the other issue uh that is wrapped up in this is uh legal counsel and providing for separate legal counsel
for the um office of the inspector general. Uh and when I bring up the uh conflict of uh potential conflict with the uh county administrator, uh
that is uh if if uh if the administrator is uh is hiring or uh involved with the oversight of the uh job of the inspector general, uh the independence uh becomes
questioned and That's this is really to avoid that conflict. Um, but I want to say that, you know, on on charter committee when I was in Wakulla County, I mean, uh, we all have our
heroes and and, uh, and and Vince is a big hero of mine and the reason I fought for Charter Committee, you know, was the reason I fought so hard for Charter Committee, uh, at the
beginning, not knowing totally about it until I got really deep in the weeds was that I said if Vince thinks this is a good idea, it has to be a good idea. So, uh, you know, I have all the respect in the world for you. >> Well, that was a sales point, I must say.
>> Yeah. Well, you delivered it perfectly just the way I've >> I'm reading your notes. Um so uh uh I I think that also the u we we need to uh create a a set term for the office uh
requiring a supermajority vote for termination of cause uh so it's not something that uh gets tossed around like a political football. I think it also has to be expanded into the uh office of the uh blueprint uh agency
board uh and its staff who are listed on the Lyon County payroll. So um uh I uh there's more but that's that's it in a nutshell. Now uh will be the opportunity if any
committee members have questions or want additional information uh we can uh you can direct those to the proposer. >> Uh Dr. Robersonson. >> Um in terms of office of the inspector general, do we know how many other charter counties have that governance
structure with the OIG office? >> Yeah, we do. uh staff has that right >> and it would be included in the analysis uh to be brought back as voted by as directed by the committee >> say three South Florida counties Dade
Broward Palm Beach um Duval has it I believe St. John's has it. So there's >> if there are I'm sorry I do. >> Are there any organization are there any office of inspector generals that are independent
of a government entity in Florida? >> They're uh they're independent similar to to the way um Dr. Kustler described, but but obviously they're under the the they're within the structure of the government of the county government. And
I I didn't know if your question had to do with whether there was another level of government that also had that purview. >> Yeah. Well, there well if they're under that means that they're still reporting to. Is that correct? The county who the government agency that they're under. It's generally the county commission and
inspector general generally would be to the county commission, but they wouldn't report to the county administrator or to the county attorney. >> Okay. Thank you. And uh just a moment to recognize just as he took a bite of sandwich, Commissioner Biller's been there for a while.
Thank you for being here. >> If there are no other questions, I had a >> had one. >> Sorry. Right. So obviously I think what you're attempting what's contemplated here is basically um the city has such an arrangement expanding that to the operations of the county and blueprint
>> and even improving upon it >> right and then I guess just in broad terms I would you know be remiss if I didn't ask how do would you imagine I know we can get more into the details but how would you imagine that interacting with the current existing city's um role >> so I I don't look at any any conflict
there at all. Yeah, sure. >> Um, so I have a question if there's no others. Um, so this would be complete completely setting up a whole new agency of government. It would be separate and apart from the I mean a whole new office, a whole
new staff, an individual, an office, a staff of salaries. So I would I would tempt to go off right now by saying that uh this is not going to replace what we currently have. Um not >> that that will exist. The
um that to be clear this is not a a this inspector general is is not enforcing we are not enforcing any anything. It's it's um it's investigative >> moving forward. >> It would be the information would be
brought to the board. Uh uh if uh appropriate, it would be uh put to the community, but in or it would be turned over to other entities which might enforce, but the inspector general uh
would not be doing anything different as far as enforcement right now. >> Okay. Thank you. William Smith, do you had a question or a comment? >> I'm just be I comment for Mayor Ken or Chassity, but what is the current setup now? Uh currently the county attorney only
has jurisdiction in the code of ethics to investigate allegations uh of like people who are lobbying who haven't um they've they've committed some misconduct under the lobbying portion of
the code of ethics. Like they they are lobbying but uh didn't pay the the fee, they didn't register, that sort of thing. That's currently the only jurisdiction um that the county attorney's office has in the code of ethics. >> And the code of ethics is very elaborate at at the county. Um and other sections
are generally enforced by the HR director uh independent of me too. So they go many of them go directly to the HR director to be investigated uh by our um uh staff person um title Genevieve.
No. >> Yeah, I can't. So, we have a dedicated staff person that that that conducts those investigations. >> Yes. >> Well, and and also citizens can bring things to the state ethics board about county commissioners all day long.
So, that's another >> Okay. Thank you. Oh, we're just moving around though. So, uh if there's no more questions, uh we can take a vote. >> Max. >> Max. Yeah. Do you have a question on >> a vote? a vote on whether to to go
forward with the establishment or this this discussion >> get more information. >> The distinction being that um when committee member Stubel wrote it up, he was just sort of mentioning it and he's actually making a a motion or where we're approving what what are we voting to bring it back to a public hearing. >> Go ahead. Go ahead.
>> No, it's to bring analysis back on this item for you to prompt you to then make a decision >> so that so our whole board can discuss. >> I move acceptance. You move I'm sorry I didn't >> I move acceptance for the for agenda item created of agenda item one policy
information relative to the establishment of an office of inspector >> that's been made and seconded to add establishment of an office of inspector general to our conversation moving forward >> discussion >> thank you yeah just a quick point just
financial impacts of that establish that office and what that looks like is something I'd really like to see I assume that's going to come with the information but just want to make sure that's clear thank Thank you. Yeah. >> Okay. All those in favor of adding item one to our list of uh issues coming up, please say so by signifying yes.
>> Yes. >> And those opposed, no. Motion passes. All right. Uh up next, we have the voting threshold to select or terminate the county administrator uh by member Hurley. Uh just a heads up, this was one of the matters provided in the handout
last week uh but was not discussed. So, we want to provide the opportunity for Max to uh provide some more context to the committee for you to make a decision. >> So, these these items remaining today, um I'd like I want to make sure that everyone has a chance to bring up the their ideas as well. It's not lost on me
that my name is on there quite a bit. Um what do we have to I guess is my question. Do we have do I have to do that right now or can we can I allow other members to mention their ideas? >> We could we already did it already. >> We already went around the table once for ideas. >> Anyone has any other idea that they want to mention? We said that we will come
back and bring it at subsequent meetings because people may not have been prepared to provide those options now. >> So may I mention a new idea other than those >> beyond the ones you already had? >> Yes sir. >> Okay. >> Um so seeing no objection to that. Um
>> this is not a campaign platform right like a >> um so we saw uh a discussion recently around uh city real estate. >> Sorry. Sorry. Excuse me. I would want to stay make sure we stay in order. You can do that, but not at this time. At this
time, we're we're in the section of the agenda where you get to explain the one that that's up here now where and so that the committee can decide whether they want to vote on it or not. And again, throughout this entire process, every meeting, you guys will be able to continue to add and including today if we have time. But um
>> well, I wasn't um I was anticipating having staff bring that that back. >> Bring it back if it's voted on. if it's voted. Okay. >> So, we have to see if there's yeah a filling in among this committee to bring back more information on this topic. >> Okay.
>> So, under the Leyon County Charter, it specifies the process for hiring and firing the county administrator and the county attorney. Um, they were done in separate phases as I recall. Uh, which was first, the county administrator or
the Okay, so was that like 2002? I think you're pretty close. Yeah. >> Yeah. And so in 2002, we changed it. You used to require four votes. They added it to five and further complicating it, y'all. Um you need five the first time and then it
comes back in two weeks. So let's say you're a county commissioner. And so in order to uh hire fire the county administrator, you need five votes the first time. it begins the process, comes back and at the next meeting and they
need four votes and uh I observed that that is very different than the charters that I am familiar with and used to and looking at history we can see how and when those decisions happened and that is not obviously the the process at
the city and I wanted to see the temperature of this body for how they feel about that. Um I'm not suggesting changing the provision that the county administrator had raised about the Saturday night massacre uh concept which requires the second vote, right? Because it's not just the five votes to four.
It's also that there's two separate votes that occur. One, the first to initiate the process, the second the final process. I'm suggesting that we keep both of those at four, changing the first vote from five to four, which really just undoes the change of the 2002ish
uh charter revision uh in the first place. Oh, Sllayton, you have a question. >> Thanks, Madam Chair. Um, to quote um Dr. Kesler earlier, I think this is a very important position. He quoted on um his inspector general position, but to threaten this to be political football,
I think would be not in good interest for the community. So, I think having the 54 as it's currently uh structured is what I think we should continue to do as a as a charter review. Thank you. >> Thank you. Are there other comments? Um, do I hear a motion to Am I Am I I'm
sorry, Darl. >> Yeah. >> For me, just this past Tuesday, uh, the school board, this uh has uh permitted us to explore conversations
relative to an appointed versus an elected superintendent. Uh, my colleagues agreed with me on that. One of the issues that is often times the rub where you have appointed superintendent
is that a simple majority can displace a superintendent and upset governance. I believe that a higher threshold as as demonstrated in our current conversation relative to the county
administrator means that it does not occur arbitrarily. But there there is a greater majority than a simple majority making that decision particularly for a position that is so critically important. It then makes means that it's
not as capricious. There has to be clearly some majority voice, right? There in lies often times the the criticism of appointed superintendent because it can occur. We look only at Gain Ela County where they're on like
their fifth superintendent in the last seven years, right? Because it is so feckless, right? And so here now we've I just think for us to make that change particularly for our own local government I just don't think it's in
our best interest and and that sons the current the current office holder when that time would come that we would make need to make that decision it would need to rise to a higher threshold of uni and a uni unonyimity of the board to make that type of change.
>> Thank you Mr. Vice Chairman. Yes, Madam Chair. I I just like some historical context. Well, couple of things. One, historical context as to why that was done in the first place. Uh and then second, I mean, I could, you know, don't
have a preference either way, but if we if we have that same threshold for the county administrator, why shouldn't we have it for the county attorney? I mean, both are appointed by the county commission. I just I'm just saying I think if we have it for one, we should have it for the other, I guess, is my
point. First is the context. Second is why shouldn't they both be the same? >> Yeah. I was just asking Chassity. She enjoys such broad support she doesn't even know what her contract says that that Yeah. So, but again, if it is something that that the committee wishes for us to bring back as an agenda item,
of course, we would have all that. I think as some of the committee members have underscored when the um when the charter uh amendment was advanced last time, Nikki, what was this one >> the year? >> Sorry, >> 10. It was the 910 one. So, um yeah, it
was it was a what was considered a best practice. I don't know if you all know this, but the average tenure for a county administrator in in the state of Florida is about 3 years. Uh and again so it's one of those things that um uh that it was again done in the interest
of of maintaining that kind of stability and that sort of thing. So um again but again if it's if it's uh if it advances beyond this of course we'd be happy to bring back a lot more information. >> So uh just we have five minutes until we're going to adjourn and I have asked
um Miss Williams uh who who missed the public comment. Are you >> okay? you want to >> another time. Okay. Um, so obviously we're not going to get around all of these. If you have other points on this particular one on the county
administrator, please say so and then we're going to have a roll call vote on that. >> Madam chair, >> I sorry. >> Uh, along those lines, I know you said we have five minutes. >> Yes, we do. you know, as I as I mentioned earlier, I mean, can we have, you know, again, just a recommendation,
perhaps we have should add some meetings at night so we could have more public input or extending the time. I mean, I understand our bylaws say that we end at 1:30, but we also can extend that time beyond 1:30 if we so desire. uh but by a
vote of this committee. I just I think all of us take this very important and we don't want to uh have our discussions limited nor do we want to limit the citizens input. So I just bring that to our attention again about adding time to
the meetings having night meetings whatever we need to do but there's no way in the world that we're going to continue to finish all of these seven items um in the time that we have left. I I bring that to your attention again. >> Is that a motion to extend meeting time? Oh. Uh, I see. I was >> Yeah.
>> So, by excuse me, so by a simple majority vote, we can extend the meeting at any time. >> Madam Chair, I move that we extend the meeting today to to 2:00. >> Second. >> All right. Motion's been made and
seconded to extend today's meeting till another 35 minutes until 2:00. >> Do I hear um all those in favor say I? >> I. >> I. >> Those opposed? No. You heard of it. >> Okay. >> Okay. Back to back to Miss Favors and
then to >> um I just wanted to point out that >> uh I think there's some value in having two votes as it relates to the uh selection or or termination of the county administrator. But I would like
to hear um what brought the amendment forward in the first place. some of the historical information uh related to that two. One thing that I'm pretty sure is part of the process um the five and then the
five again is that is that the way it's written partially has to do with giving the public a chance to understand what's going on and to make some comments. So transparency is a big issue by requiring two votes on that whole process.
>> Thank you. Thanks comment. >> And so for some context, she she spent her whole career living and dying on any Wednesday night with three out of five votes. >> No, I didn't. >> No, she offers, >> but but but I but by that I mean by by
of course but but I mean that she would have been at risk of that that was the rules that she was operating under in the system that she was in. Um there this idea of having two separate votes is a very different system than than the city. And I agree that I have no interest in changing the two vote part of it. >> Clarification.
>> Pardon me. >> The process for the for the both of you is is it a different process for for each or are they the same? >> It's the same. >> I think they're the same. >> So they're both five and then four. >> Yeah. >> The pro there's a two-step process. I
think I just don't remember the votes. >> The vote is different for the county attorney. I mean look now. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I understand the the the validity of having an extra vote to to to make this
process go along. I I get that. But definitely mirroring the two. I think it whether it's this this committee or future committee, some somebody needs to deal with that. They do need to mirror. >> If I may y'all, we have this book right here. It's on page four of the first attachment. It's under section 2.3
executive branch section one county administrator. It says the county administrator shall be appointed by an affirmative vote of a majority plus one of the entire membership of the board of county commissioners and they'll serve at the pleasure until such a time as the
county administrator shall be removed by a vote for removal of a majority plus one of the entire membership of the board and then it specifies the second meeting. So, I think the better we could actually look at the words on it, the better. It's on page four, and it
specifies the two-step process from 5 to 4. >> Thank you, Bruce. >> Yeah, >> you had a comment. >> Point of point of information just for everybody. I just looked it up. Mine isn't in the charter. Mine isn't addressed in the charter. It's an ordinance, so it is codified. uh and uh
it's under section 2-132 uh appointment parenthet or semicolon removal. The county attorney shall be appointed by an affirmative vote of a majority plus one of the entire membership of the board of county commissioners. The county attorney shall be removed by a vote for removal of a majority plus one of the entire
membership of the board voting during the first regularly scheduled meeting occurring after a meeting of the board at which a motion expressed in the intent of the board to remove the county attorney was adopted by majority vote of those present and voting. But Mr. Speaker, what she says is only a majority the second time only for the second time for the county and this the
county administrator. >> Bruce, you had a com order >> in the order. >> Um it's referring to our process of review. Yes. >> That we go by um being that it's not in our bylaws that we would consider going by member as opposed to by issues so that no one could stack the deck and
have 20 issues on there and we never get to hear anything else. So I don't know where that goes in or where we would introduce that but like that considered. >> Well, we can certainly discuss that. I do. >> So uh right now I would like to have a roll call vote on this item and that for
today on the selecting or the threshold for selecting or terminating a county administrator um is there was a point of order. It's 1:30. >> It's 1:30 for us to adjourn, Madam Chair. >> Yeah.
>> Just saying. Well, this is going to keep you. >> Well, a while ago, you were tired of ago was like four hours voted down, but it's 1:30. I just wanted to bring that to your attention. >> Make a motion to adjurnn. >> Thank you. With my discretion, we're going to we're going to take a roll call
vote right now. >> There's a motion on the floor. I think >> Joey Davis of information, >> but we're voting on whether to go forward with >> Madam Chair, there was just a motion to adjourn and there was a second. Sorry,
>> there was just a motion to adjurnn and there was a second. >> I'm not sure she recognized >> I didn't hear the motion to adjurnn. I'm sorry. >> So, the vote on the floor is whether to bring back analysis on the voting threshold to select or terminate the county administrator. And I will start
with Joey Davis. >> Uh, yes. >> Linda Bod Edwards. >> No. >> Liz Ellis. >> No. >> Any favors? No >> turn >> Max Hurley.
>> I turn >> Daryl Jones. >> No >> Howard Kesler. >> No. >> Henry Lewis. >> No. >> Slayton Murray. >> No. >> Heidi Otwe. >> No. >> Sean Pitman.
>> No. >> Ryan Ray. >> No. >> Shamro Robersonson. >> No. >> William Smith. >> No. Bruce Strobble. >> No. >> Jarrett Terry.
>> Jared Terry. Yes. >> Apologies. Katrina Tugerson. >> No. >> Barry Wilcox. >> No. >> Chanty Haynes, vice chair. >> No. >> And Sher Lley.
>> No. >> The motion fails. Motion fails. Uh madam chair can we again in the future can we just have those numbers you know >> please yeah 17 to three >> 17 to3 thank you all right team we're
going to meet again in at two weeks and thank you very much for your attention and great conversation appreciate it meeting adjourned