D AFTERNOON. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE DECEMBER 2nd, 2025 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TO ORDER. CITY CLERK BEN LANE, MAY WE PLEASE HAVE A ROLL CALL? >> Clerk Lane: THANK YOU, MAYOR. MAYOR LISA BOROWSKY. MAYOR BOROWSKY: PRESENT. CLERK BEN LANE: VICE MAYOR ADAM
KWASMAN. VICE MAYOR KWASMAN: PRESENT. CLERK BEN LANE: COUNCILMEMBERS JAN DUBAUSKAS. COUNCILMEMBER DUBAUSKAS. HERE. CLERK BEN LANE: BARRY GRAHAM. COUNCILMEMBER GRAHAM: HERE. CLERK BEN LANE: KATHY LITTLEFIELD. COUNCILMEMBER LITTLEFIELD: HERE. CLERK BEN LANE: MARYANN MCALLEN. COUNCILMEMBER MCALLEN: PRESENT. CLERK BEN LANE: SOLANGE WHITEHEAD. COUNCILMEMBER WHITEHEAD: HERE. CLERK BEN LANE: CITY MANAGER GREG CATON. GREG CATON: PRESENT. CLERK BEN LANE: INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY LUIS SANTAELLA. LUIS SANTAELLA: HERE. CLERK BEN LANE: CITY TREASURER
SONIA ANDREWS. SONIA ANDREWS: HERE. CLERK BEN LANE: ACTING CITY AUDITOR LAI CLUFF. LAI CLUFF: HERE. CLERK BEN LANE: AND THE CLERK IS PRESENT. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE HAVE SCOTTSDALE POLICE OFFICER, ERIC BOWELS AND CARL
SHOLACK AND SCOTTSDALE FIREFIGHTER, TIFFANY RITTERBUSH, AND JOHNNY GERSKRATCHI. IN ANY EVENT, IF ANYONE NEEDS
THEIR EXPERTISE OR ASSISTANCE, PLEASE LET A MEMBER OF OUR STAFF KNOW. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE BY THE WAY. FOR THE PL PL PL PLEDGE OF ALLEI WOULD LIKE TO CALL UPON COUNCOUNCILWOMAN SOLONGE WHITEHD
TO LEAD US IN THAT. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS: ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
>> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, AND FOR THE INVOCATION, COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD IS GOING TO LEAD US IN THAT. >> Councilmember Littlefield: THANK YOU, MAYOR. MAY GOD BLESS AND KEEP US ALL UNDER PROTECTION AND LOVE. I ASK FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE
WHILE WE PRAY EACH IN OUR OWN FASHION FOR THE SAFETY AND WELL-BEING OF US ALL DURING THIS HOLIDAY SEASON. AMEN. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. FOR THE PAY MAYOR'S REPORT THIS
EVENING, I WANT TO ADDRESS AN ISSUE THAT AFFECTS COMMUNITIES EVERYWHERE AND THAT IS THE ISSUE OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING. IT'S A GLOBAL PLAGUE IMPACTING MILLIONS OF PEOPLE EACH YEAR AND SADLY, TENS OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS ARE AMONG THEM. THE UNITED STATES RANKS AMONG THE WORST COUNTRIES FOR HUMAN
TRAFFICKING AND ARIZONA IS IN THE TOP 15 STATES WITH THE HIGHEST RATES PER CAPITA. THIS CRIME DOESN'T DISCRIMINATE. IT AFFECTS PEOPLE OF ALL AGES AND BACKGROUNDS, INCLUDING TEENAGERS AND CHILDREN. COMBATTING HUMAN TRAFFICKING
REQUIRES A UNITED EFFORT, SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, NONPROFITS, LAW ENFORCEMENT, BUSINESSES AND OF COURSE THE CITY ALL PLAY A ROLE IN PREVENTION, INTERVENTION AND DISMANTLING TRAFFICKING NETWORKS AND THAT'S WHY I WOULD
LIKE TO ISSUE THIS -- I HAVE ISSUED THIS PROCLAMATION THAT DECLARES HUMAN TRAFFICKING WILL NOT HAPPEN IN OUR CITY AND WE WILL DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO STOP IT.
ACCEPTING THE PROCLAMATION IS NOT IN OUR CITY WHICH IS A STATEWIDE COALITION OF CHURCHES, CIVIC LEADERS, COMMUNITY PARTNERS AND CONCERNED CITIZENS. HERE TO ACCEPT THE PROCLAMATION THAT I WILL READ IS BUSSE,
OBIAMMI AND NIECE JACKSON, ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF NOT IN OUR CITY. AND I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO READ THE PROCLAMATION. WHEREAS HUMAN TRAFFICKING IS A GLOBAL PLAGUE THAT IMPACTS MILLIONS OF PEOPLE EACH YEAR, INCLUDING TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
AMERICANS; AND WHEREAS THE UNITED STATES RANKS AS ONE OF THE WORST COUNTRIES GLOBALLY FOR HUMAN TRAFFICKING; AND WHEREAS ARIZONA RANKS IN THE TOP 15 STATES WITH THE HIGHEST RATES OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING PER CAPITAL; WHEREAS HUMAN TRAFFICKING IMPACTS PEOPLE ACROSS ALL
DEMOGRAPHICS AND AGES, INCLUDING OUR TEENAGERS AND CHILDREN; AND WHEREAS, THE BATTLE AGAINST HUMAN TRAFFICKING SUPPORTS EFFORTS IN SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, NONPROFITS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND BUSINESSES TO PREVENT HUMAN
TRAFFICKING, INTERVENING, DISRUPTING AND DISMANTLING HUMAN TRAFFICKING SYNDICATES. THEREFORE, I LISA BOROWSKY BY THE VIRTUE OF THE AUTHORITY VESTED IN ME AS MAYOR OF OUR FINE CITY OF SCOTTSDALE DO HEREBY PROCLAIM NOT IN OUR CITY AND URGE OUR RESIDENTS,
CHURCHES, SCHOOLS -- AND SCHOOLS TO WORK TOGETHER TO ELIMINATE TRAFFICKING FROM OUR COMMUNITY AND SUPPORT THE EFFORTS OF FRONT-LINE ORGANIZATIONS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THEIR BATTLE AGAINST HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND LET'S ALL TAKE A STAND. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TO
ACCEPT IT. [ APPLAUSE ] >> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. AS IS ALWAYS THE CASE, DURING TONIGHT'S MEETING, WE MAY -- THE
COUNCIL MAY MAKE A MOTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO OBTAIN LEGAL ADVICE ON ANY APPLICABLE ITEM ON THE AGENDA AND IF AUTHORIZED BY COUNCIL, THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE IMMEDIATELY HELD AND WILL NOT BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. THE PUBLIC MEETING WOULD RESUME
IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IN THAT EVENT. FIRST PUBLIC COMMENT IS RESERVED FOR SCOTTSDALE CITIZENS, BUSINESS OWNERS AND/OR PROPERTY OWNERS ON -- TO SPEAK ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS THAT ARE WITHIN THE COUNCIL'S
JURISDICTION. NO OFFICIAL COUNCIL ACTION CAN BE TAKEN ON THESE ITEMS, AND SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDIZED OR A NON-AGENDIZED ITEM, PLEASE LET THE CITY CLERK KNOW.
AND THIS EVENING, WE HAVE RECEIVED A REQUEST TO SPEAK FROM FIVE PEOPLE. FIRST WE START WITH STEVE SUTTON AND TAMMY BOSSY, AND VANESSA GOLDBERG AND LINDA MILHAVEN AND
YVONNE CAHILL. THANK YOU.
>> EVERYONE HEAR ME ALL RIGHT? STEVE SUTTON, ADDRESS ON RECORD. GOOD EVENING, HONORABLE LISA BOROWSKY AND OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS. THE PETITION TELLING THE CITY COUNCILS THAT THE RESIDENT DON'T WANT A PARKING GARAGE CORRAL,
BECAUSE IT'S DISRESPECTFUL TO THE MISSION PUSHES OUT THE FARM FARMER'S MARKET NOW HAS OVER 2100 SIGNATURES. IN LESS THAN FOUR WEEKS. AT LAST NIGHT'S COUNCIL MEET, I MADE A STATEMENT ABOUT MEMORIAL
PROCEDURES FOR ANY PERSON BEING CONSIDERED. AND COUNCILMAN KWASMAN LIKENED CHARLIE KIRK TO BILL COSBY. IN FACT, HE SAID THAT MY COMMENT WAS NOT JUST UNACCEPTABLE, BUT FUNDAMENTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.
COUNCILMAN KWASMAN ALSO SAID THE PERSON WHO WOULD BE MOST AGAINST PUBLIC FUNDING OF A CHARLIE KIRK MEMORIAL WOULD BE CHARLIE KIRK. I COMPLETELY AGREE THAT CHARLIE KIRK WOULD OPPOSE PUBLIC FUNDING. WHAT I DON'T AGREE WITH IS COUNCILMAN KWASMAN IMPLYING MY
COMMENT WAS A LIKENING OF CHARLIE KIRK'S CHARACTER TO BILL COSBY'S CHARACTER. I DID NOT DO THAT. WHAT MY STATEMENT ACTUALLY COMMUNICATED WAS THAT JUST BECAUSE THE ADMIRATION YOU FEEL TODAY CONVINCES YOU THAT YOU KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT A PERSON TO MEMORIALIZE THEM, IT'S WIDE TO
AVOID JUDGING SOMEONE A HERO WORTHY OF MEMORIALIZATION BEFORE SUFFICIENT TIME HAS ELAPSED FOR SOCIETY TO FULLY EVALUATE AND JUDGE WORTHINESS. PERHAPS I COULD HAVE BEEN MORE RHETORICALLY ELEGANT IF I HAD NOT BEEN SPEAKING EXTAKEN PAINOUSLY.
I DID NOT INTEND TO OFFEND ANYONE. I'M NOT GOING TO APOLOGIZE FOR MAKING COUNCILMAN KWASMAN ANGRY, BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE FOR A SECOND THAT COUNCILMAN KWASMAN THAT I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT I WAS COMMUNICATING. IN FACT, I BELIEVE ATTORNEY ADAM
KWASMAN ENGAGED IN WHAT IS KNOWN AS A COURT OF LAW AS THEATRICS AND IN POLITICS DEM GOINGARRY. HE INFLAMED THE ANGRY OF CHARLIE KIRK'S ADMIRERS TO MAKE ME A SYMBOL OF HATRED TO JUSTIFY A CHARLIE KIRK MEMORIAL.
I ALSO BELIEVE CHARLIE KIRK WOULD BE FIRST PERSON TO SAY HE WOULD NOT WANT SUCH DECEITFUL TACTICS USED TO SUPPORT A MEMORIAL. COUNCILMAN KWASMAN, WHAT YOU DID IS UNACCEPTABLE, FUNDAMENTALLY
UNACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR FROM A CITY COUNCILMEMBER. ATTEMPTED TO MANAGEMENT WILL BROOKS TO MAKE A STATEMENT OF JUDGMENT ON THE DIVISIVENESS OF THE BARRY GOLDWATER MEMORIAL IN
LIGHT OF THE VOTE AGAINST THE 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS.-SHAME ON YOU. SHAME ON YOU. [ SPEAKING LATIN ] >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, NEXT WE HAVE TAMMY BOSSE.
I HOPE I'M PRONOUNCING THAT CORRECTLY. >> YOU GOT IT PERFECT. THANK YOU. MAYOR AND COUNCIL, MY NAME IS TAMMY BOSSE AND I LIVE IN SOUTH SCOTTSDALE. MY ADDRESS IS ON FILE. AND I'M HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT
KEEPING SCOTTSDALE LIVABLE AND PROSPEROUS. I'M TALKING FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF A FORMER GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE AT A HIGH LEVEL, PLANNING THE FUTURE OF PHOENIX AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS AND AS A NONPROFIT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
WORKING VERY ALTRUISTICALLY FOR GREATER GOOD OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND AS A COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER FOR THOUSANDS OF HOURS, AND AS A BUSINESS OWNER WHOSE MISSION-DRIVEN BUSINESS FOCUS AND SOMEONE WHO REALLY CARES
JUST LIKE ALL OF YOU DO. AND I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR SERVICE AND EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO TO -- TO WORK FOR THE CITIZENS OF SCOTTSDALE AND TO PROTECT US ALL. AS WE REFLECT UPON THIS LAST YEAR, AND WE THINK ABOUT OUR NEXT YEAR, WE DID SOME GREAT
THINGS, AND WE ALSO DID SOME THINGS THAT I HOPE THAT WE WILL RETHINK ABOUT. TOMORROW IS THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE ADOPTION OF OUR SUSTAINABILITY PLAN. AFTER THOUSANDS OF HOURS OF HUNDREDS OF CITIZENS, STAFF,
COUNCIL, PEOPLE POURING THEIR HEART INTO IT, AT THEIR OWN PERSONAL EXPENSE TO DO SOMETHING GOOD FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY, FOR THE FUTURE GENERATIONS AND FOR OUR OWN LIVABILITY AND I WILL SAY FOR OUR ECONOMY.
THE FIRST HALF OF ECONOMY IS ECO. WE HAVE NO ECONOMY AND WE HAVE NO QUALITY OF LIFE IF WE DON'T PROTECT OUR ECOSYSTEM. AND I'M NOT SURE WHY PEOPLE CONTINUE TO THINK IT'S ONE OR
THE OTHER, BECAUSE WE ARE 100% DEPENDENT ON A STRONG ECOSYSTEM FOR OUR ECONOMY. THE PLAN, TO TALK ABOUT OUR ENERGY CHOICES WERE SMART BUSINESS DECISIONS AND CLEANER FOR OUR CITY, WATER TO CONTINUE OUR TRADITION OF BEING A GREAT
WATER SMART COMMUNITY, TO LOOK AT HOW DO WE USE OUR WASTE AND REDUCE THE EXPENSES TO OUR CITIZENS AND TO MAKE BETTER CHOICES IN USING OUR WASTE AND REDUCING OUR WASTE. TO LOOK AT OUR AIR QUALITY AND WE CAN'T SOLVE IT ALL, BUT AS A CITY WE CAN DO OUR PART.
IT HAD SOME ACTIONS THERE AND ALSO THE PAIN WE ALL FEEL EVERY SINGLE DAY WHEN THE HEAT IS SO EXTREME THAT IT IS MISERABLE AND LITERALLY I HAVE PEOPLE ASKING TO MOVE OUT BECAUSE OF THE HEAT, MOVE OUT OF THE CITY FROM A REAL ESTATE PERSPECTIVE.
SO I AM HOPING THAT AS YOU REFLECT OVER THE HOLIDAYS, YOU WILL THINK ABOUT YOUR SECOND ACTION AS COUNCIL IN JANUARY TO REPEAL THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN. IT WAS DISHEARTENING. THIS ROOM WAS FULL OF PEOPLE WOULD WANTED YOU -- WHO WANTED
YOU NOT TO DO THAT. SO I REALLY HOPE AS PEOPLE -- I KNOW YOU WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR SCOTTSDALE -- WILL SERIOUSLY REFLECT ON THAT AS YOU LOOK AT WHAT YOU WANT TO ACMISCH NEXT YEAR. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, TAMMY.
NEXT WE HAVE VANESSA GOLDBERG. >> THANK YOU. I'M VANESSA GOLDBERG, A LONG-TIME CITIZEN OF SCOTTSDALE. MY ADDRESS IS ON RECORD.
I TOO AM HERE TO SPEAK ON THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY OF THE SUSTAINABILITY ACT, WHICH WAS ADOPTED JUST TOMORROW A YEAR AGO. IN THE FACE OF INCREASING
ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS, THE PLAN ADDRESSES URGENT ISSUES FROM SECURING A RELIABLE SUPPLY OF WATER AND ENERGY TO MITIGATING WILDFIRES AND OTHER COSTLY EXTREME WEATHER DESTRUCTIONS. IN OTHER WORDS PROACTIVELY
PROTECTING OUR QUALITY OF LIFE AS CITIZENS ARE SUFFERING MORE AND MORE, SOME OF THEM ARE LEAVING, AND OUR TOURISM INDUSTRY IS SUFFERING AS WELL. THE PLAN WAS IN THE WORKS FOR
THREE YEARS, WITH SCIENTISTS, ANALYSTS, BUSINESSES, COUNCIL, STAFF, AND SCOTTSDALE CITIZENS LIKE MYSELF MAKING SURE THAT THE PLAN HAD INPUT FROM ALL THAT IT WOULD AFFECT. WHEN THE PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL
PASSED IT OVERWHELMINGLY, LAST DECEMBER 3rd, WE KNEW SCOTTSDALE'S VOICES HAD BEEN HEARD. THEN IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, JUST A FEW WEEKS LATER, THE VERY FUTURE OF THIS PLAN WAS PUT ON
THE NEW COUNCIL'S AGENDA. AS A RESULT, OVER 30 RESIDENTS OF DIFFERENT AGES AND PROFESSIONS, EXPERTS OF DIFFERENT FIELDS OFFERED PUBLIC
COMMENT AND ALL OF THEM PASSIONATELY IN SUPPORT OF THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN. I WILL ALWAYS REMEMBER THE BETRAYAL THAT THEN HAPPENED.
COUNCILMAN BARRY GRAHAM INVOKED A RARELY USED PROCEDURAL RULE TO PREVENT THE COUNCIL FROM EVEN DISCUSSING THE MERITS OF THE PLAN OR THE MANY ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF IT THAT THEY HAD JUST HEARD.
IN THE FIRST VOTE, FOUR OF THE SEVEN COUNCILMEMBERS KILLED THE PLAN. NOW, 11 MONTHS LATER, SCOTTSDALE STILL DOES NOT HAVE A SUSTAINABILITY PLAN. THE OFFICIAL ARGUMENT THAT MORE
CITIZENS INPUT IS NEEDED REVEALS ITSELF AS A SHAMEFUL SCAM, AS WE REMEMBER THE PROVEN DISRESPECT FOR THE CITIZENS' INPUT, BOTH LEADING TO AND LATER SUPPORTING
THE PLAN. NOW THEN, THIS ANNIVERSARY OF THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN'S ORIGINAL ADOPTION IS AN -- IS AN INVITATION TO THE FOUR COUNCILMEMBERS WHO FOR IDEAL
LOGICAL REASONS CHOSE TO IGNORE THE WILL OF THE CITIZENS, AN INVITATION TO RETHINK THEIR VOTE OR TO DEMONSTRATE TO THE VOTING PUBLIC THAT OTHER INTERESTS ARE MORE IMPORTANT TO THEM THAN
SECURING THE SUSTAINABLE FUTURE FOR OUR CITY AND ITS CITIZENS. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, VANESSA. FORMER COUNCILWOMAN LINDA MILHAVEN. >> GOOD EVENING.
I'M LINDA MILHAVEN, I LIVE ON BELGIAN TRAIL HERE IN SCOTTSDALE. TO THE COUNCILMEMBERS, I WANT TO THANK Y YOU FOR THE COMPROMISE U WORKED OUT WITH AXON. I THINK OUR COMMUNITY IS BETTER
FOR IT. I THINK DIVERSIFYING OUR ECONOMY, WE COULD HAVE ONLY HAD DREAMED OF HAVING A COMPANY LIKE AXON IN OUR COMMUNITY. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK TO GET TO THAT COMPROMISE. AND TO COUNCILMEMBERS GRAHAM AND
DUBAUSKAS, HOW LUCKY FOR YOU THAT YOU HAVE COUNCILMEMBERS TO DOT HARD WORK AND DO THE RIGHT THING IN THE COMMUNITY SO THAT YOU COULD VOTE NO AND NOT LOOK OF THE COMMUNITY. AND FOR YOU TO THEN GO OUT IN THE COMMUNITY AND COMPLETELY MISREPRESENT WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. YOU ACCUSE FOLKS OF DENYING
CITIZENS THEIR RIGHT TO A VOTE, IN FACT, YOU WERE THE ONES WHO DENIED CITIZENS THE RIGHT TO VOTE BY NOT PUTTING THE ELECTION UP SOONER TO MAKE AXON WAIT FOR TWO YEARS FOR A VOTE UNDER THE GUISE OF SAVING A FEW DOLLARS OR ABOUT TURNOUT RATES.
THOSE WERE RED HERRINGS. YOU WERE TRYING TO MAKE IT AN ELECTION ISSUE. YOU TOOK THE AWAY THE PEOPLE'S VOTE. YOU FORCED AXON TO GO TO THE LEGISLATURE. YOU CRITICIZED THE NEW DEAL ABOUT WATER, WELL, THE LEGISLATURE TOOK THE WATER RESTRAINTS AWAY SO WE COULDN'T BE COMPROMISED.
AND FINALLY, YOU MISREPRESENT SELF-CERTIFICATION DOES NOT MEAN THAT AXON WILL CERTIFY THEMSELVES. SELF-CERTIFICATION MEANS THE CITY AND AXON WILL HIRE A THIRD PARTY WHICH IS IN THE CITY'S BEST INTEREST AND WILL SAVE THE CITY MONEY AND MAKE IT MUCH MORE EFFICIENT. YOU HAVE NOT ONLY GOT IN THE WAY
OF THE PROJECT BUT YOU ALSO MISREPRESENT IT TO FOLKS. ON THE SECOND ISSUE TO CHANGING A ROUNDABOUT. I SEE TOMORROW MAG WILL CONSIDER SWAPPING THE GRANT MONEY OUT. I HOPE FOR ALL OF OUR SAKES THAT HAPPENS, HOWEVER, YOU CONTINUE TO MISREPRESENT THIS PROJECT,
MOST RECENTLY COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS SAID THAT THIS DOESN'T COST US ANY MORE MONEY BUT DEEP IN THE BUDGET BOOK, LAST YEAR THE BUDGET FOR THAT PROJECT WAS $29 MILLION AND THE BUDGET THAT YOU APPROVED, THAT PROJECT IS NOW $44 MILLION. AN INCREASE OF $15 MILLION. IF YOUR FRIENDS DON'T LIKE
ROUNDABOUTS AND YOU WANT TO GET RID OF ROUNDABOUTS BE HONEST IT WILL COST OUR CITIZENS $15 MILLION MORE EVEN IF WE GET THE GRANTS REASSIGNED. AND THEN FINALLY, SINCE FOLKS WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN, I HAVE A FEW MORE SECONDS. THERE'S NO NEED TO THROW THE
BABY OUT WITH THE BATH WATER. IF THERE WERE THINGS YOU DIDN'T LIKE ABOUT THE PLAN, COULD YOU HAVE REIS CONVENED. INSTEAD COUNCILMEMBER GRAHAM, YOUR MOUTH PIECE CALLS IT THE GREEN NEW DEAL. AND YET THE PLAN SAID NO
MANDATES AND NO PENALTIES. IT WAS RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND HAPPY HOLIDAYS. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, LINDA. NEXT WE HAVE YVONNE CAHILL. >> HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO EVERYONE.
MAYOR BOROWSKY AND CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS YVONNE CAHILL, MY ADDRESS IS ON RECORD. I JUST WANTED TO BRING SOMETHING TO YOUR ATTENTION. IT'S ALONG THE LINES AS FORMER COUNCILWOMAN JUST SPOKE OF, AND I WAS CLEANING OUT MY OFFICE AND
I CAME ACROSS THIS ARTICLE IN THE PROGRESS AND $44 MILLION SCOTTSDALE ROAD PROJECT CONTINUES AND I WAS, LIKE, $44 MILLION? WHAT HAPPENED? THAT -- THAT WAS NOT A $44 MILLION PROJECT.
SO THIS IS THE S.G.O.-5 SCOTTSDALE FROM JOMAX TO DIX DIXILETA DRIVE. I'M ASKING FUNDING OF THE TRANSPORTATION.
SGO-0 SCOTTSDALE ROAD FROM JOMAX TO DIXILETA DRIVE, THE EXPECTED COST. THE PROJECTED BUDGET WAS $29 MILLION IN THE 2024-25 CAPITAL BUDGET BUT IT COST $43.7 MILLION IN THE ADOPTED
25-26 BUDGET, AN INCREASE OF $14.5 MILLION. THE BUDGETED COST LAND INCREASE WENT FROM $54,000 TO 2,000,704 TO TURN IT INTO A SIGNALIZED
FROM THE ROUNDABOUT. THE BUDGETED CONSTRUCTION COSTS INCREASE FROM $21.5 MILLION TO $32.3 MILLION. THIS IS AN INCREASE OF $10.8 MILLION OR 50% INCREASE. AND THIS WAS ALL HIDDEN IN THE BUDGET. WE HEAR A LOT OF PEOPLE BRAGGING
ABOUT WE CANCELED THE ROUNDABOUT. WE CANCELED THE ROUNDABOUT WE DID THIS GREAT WORK BUT NOBODY TALKS ABOUT THE FACT THAT IT WAS GOING TO COST THE TAXPAYERS CLOSE TO 15 MERCHANDISE. $15 MILLION. SO THE EXPECTED PROJECT FUNDING
WITH $24.4 MILLION FROM THE ALECP PROJECT AND $6.8 MILLION FROM THE CITY'S .1% TRANSPORTATION TAX, NOW THE FUNDING REQUIRES $29.3 MILLION FROM THE ALCP, AND $12.5 MILLION FROM THE CITY'S .1% TAX.
I KNOW THAT MAG IS MEETING DECEMBER 3rd TO CONSIDER THE $29.3 MILLION FUNDING AND IF APPROVED THIS WILL REQUIRE A TRANSFER OF APPROVED FUNDING FROM OTHER CITY TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS. IF SO, HOW WILL THESE PROJECTS NOW BE FUNDED? AND WHAT OTHER PROJECTS WILL
THIS COST THE CITY IN HAVING TO DELAY? IF NOT APPROVED, WE HAVE A SHORTFALL ON SGO-5 AND HOW WILL THAT BE FUNDED? SO I FEEL THIS WAS DELIBERATELY HIDDEN. THERE WAS NO TRANSPARENCY ON
THIS. WE HEARD, LIKE I SAID, ABOUT THE BRAGGING OF THE PROJECT, BUT WE DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS GOING TO COST -- WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE CANCELLATION FEE OF 20% WAS GOING TO COST AND THE REDESIGN FEE AND THE LAND ACQUISITION. SO I HOPE THAT IN THE NEW YEAR
THE COUNCIL WILL BE MORE TRANSPARENT. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, YVONNE. AND THAT CONCLUDES THE NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT. AND THANK YOU TO ALL THE SPEAKERS. NEXT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE MEETING MINUTES APPROVALS, AN WE
ARE LOOKING TO APPROVE SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOB OCTOBER 6th, 2025 AND EXECUTIVE SESSION MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 6th, 2025, AND I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO DO THAT. >> Councilmember McAllen: SO MOVED. >> Councilmember Whitehead: SECOND. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL THOSE IN
FAVOR, PLEASE REGISTER YOUR VOTE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, NUMBER 1 THROUGH 15. AND LET'S SEE, PLEASE NOTE -- I
WILL ADD -- I WILL NOTE THAT SUM 13, THE OLD TOWN ADVERTISING, MARKETING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS SERVICES CONTRACT HAS BEEN MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA AS ITEM 15A. SO EXCLUDING 13, WE HAVE CONSENT
AGENDA ITEMS 1 THROUGH 12 AND 14 AND 15, BUT I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND REMOVE THE ITEM NUMBER 12 BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT AND I SEE SOME OTHER INDICATIONS TO SPEAK HERE.
NOW, WE HAVE 12 AND 15A AND ALSO I THINK THAT'S IT. COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD. >> Councilmember Littlefield: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ITEM NUMBER 14, REGARDING THE PLANS FOR WESTWORLD TO THE REGULAR AGENDA.
WE HAD A LOT OF INTEREST IN THAT BY OUR RESIDENTS. I THINK THEY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT. THNK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: MAYOR, THANK YOU. I'M JUST -- TWO BRIEF COMMENTS.
ITEM 10, I'M EXCITED FOR THE SCOTTSDALE ARABIAN HORSE SHOW FUNDING AND ITEM NUMBER 11, I SEE WE GOT THE AIRPORT DIRECTOR HERE BUT I'M EXCITED TO SEE SOME IMPROVEMENTS IN OUR AIRPORT,
INCLUDING THE -- THE AIRCRAFT AND VEHICLE ACCESS GATES. SO I'M NOT GOING TO CALL YOU UP HERE, BUT -- BUT -- WHICH I THINK THEY MIGHT APPRECIATE. THANK YOU, MAYOR. OH, AND I WILL MAKE A MOTION, IF
THERE'S NO MORE REQUESTS TO SPEAK, TO ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM 12 AND 13 AND 14. >> Mayor Borowsky: I WILL SECOND
THAT. >> Councilmember Graham: DID I GET EVERYTHING? >> Mayor Borowsky: OH, 15A IS MOVED OFF. SO YOU DO HAVE EVERYTHING. SO IT'S 12 AND 14. >> Councilmember Graham: OKAY. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 1 THROUGH 11, NUMBER 13 AND NUMBER 15. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. >> Clerk Lane: I APOLOGIZE,
NUMBER 13 WAS RENUMBERED TO 15A. >> Mayor Borowsky: THAT'S RIGHT. VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: CAN WE PLEASE HAVE NUMBER 12 PULLED? I WOULD LIKE TO -- THAT WAS PULLED ALREADY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ONE IS -- >> Mayor Borowsky: YEAH, I HAD THAT PULLED.
SO LET'S GO BACK TO THE NUMBER GAME. NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER. SO IT'S CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS NUMBER 1 THROUGH 11 AND 15. ALL RIGHT. SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE.
ALL RIGHT. TO LET'S TAKE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FIRST. AND THAT'S NUMBER 12, STARTING WITH NUMBER 12.
AND I SEE SARA HERE FROM OUR GOVERNMENT RELATIONS DEPARTMENT. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, MY NAME IS SARA SPARMAN, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF SCOTTSDALE. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
YOU MIGHT HAVE ON THE STATE LOBBYING CONTRACT THAT IS BEFORE YOU. THERE'S ACTUALLY THREE CONTRACTS. ONE FOR A ROUTINE 12-MONTH -- THIS WOULD BE AN ONGOING DAILY -- DAILY USE, PROBABLY NOT
THE BEST WORD, BUT RETAINED LOBBYING FIRM THAT WOULD PROVIDE SERVICES THROUGHOUT THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION AND THROUGHOUT THE INTERIM. WE ALSO HAVE TWO CONTRACTS THAT ARE ON THE AGENDA FOR YOUR APPROVAL, ONE WITH ARIZONA CAPITAL CONNECTIONS AND THE
OTHER ONE WITH AARONS AND MONTI. BOTH ARE PROJECT BASED AS NEEDED. SO SHOULD WE HAVE AN ISSUE THAT COMES UP DURING THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION THAT NEEDS IMMEDIATE ATTENTION AND PERHAPS A FEW MORE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT, WE WOULD HAVE THOSE CONTRACTS IN PLACE
AND BE READY TO ACTIVATE THEM AFTER NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CITY MANAGER. WITH THAT, I WOULD HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> Mayor Borowsky: I DON'T SEE ANY REQUESTS TO SPEAK, BUT CAN YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT
HISTORICALLY HOW THE INTERVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS WORKS? >> SO THIS WAS MY FIRST PROCESS WITH THE CITY OF SCOTTSDALE GOING THROUGH THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS. WE NOTIFIED THE PROCUREMENT OFFICE. I WORK WITH A CONTACT THERE.
WE DRAFT UP KIND OF WHAT OUR -- WHAT IS THE INTENT OF THE CONTRACT, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING FOR. WE BASE IT OFF OF SCOPE. THE SCOPE FOR THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT IS BASED OFF THEIR
METHOD OF APPROACH, EXPERIENCE, CONTACTS, BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, RELATIONSHIPS THAT THEY HAVE AT THE STATE LEGISLATURE, THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, STATE AGENCIES AND BEING ABLE TO LEVERAGE THOSE.
SO AFTER THE RFP IS DRAFTED, IT'S PUT ON OUR PROCUREMENT SYSTEM AND SENT OUT TO ANYBODY WHO IS A MEMBER OF THAT OR SIGNED UP TO RECEIVE THOSE NOTIFICATIONS. WE ARE ALSO ABLE TO SEND ADDITIONAL NOTIFICATIONS TO OTHER FIRMS, WHICH WE DID.
I BELIEVE THERE WERE TEN -- FIVE TO TEN OTHER FIRMS THAT WE SENT INDEPENDENT. AND THEN AN EVALUATION COMMITTEE, ONCE THE CLOSING DATA ARRIVES AN EVALUATION COMMITTEE IS ESTABLISHED. THIS EVALUATION COMMITTEE
CONSISTED OF THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER JEFF WALTHER. ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER, WILL BROOKS, OUR INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY LUIS SANTAELLA AND MYSELF.
WE INDEPENDENTLY GRADE THOSE SCORES -- WE SCORE THEM OFF THE METHOD OF APPROACH, REFERENCES, EXAMPLES. THEY PROVIDED REPORTING DOCUMENTS THAT THEY HAD USED, GAVE US EXAMPLES OF WHAT TYPE OF
REPORTING WE COULD EXPECT FROM EACH OF THOSE INDEPENDENT FIRMS. THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE THEN EVALUATES INDEPENDENTLY AND WE COME TOGETHER WITH PROCUREMENT ONCE AGAIN TO -- THEY LAY OUT THE SCORING AND KIND OF THE RANKING OF EACH OF THE FIRMS THAT APPLIED.
WE HAD 22 THAT HAD OPENED THROUGH THE SYSTEM AND THREE DID APPLY FOR THE RFP. >> Mayor Borowsky: AND QUESTION ABOUT THE CONTRACTS. I KNOW -- HOW LONG IN DURATION IS THE AARONS CONTRACT AND THE
KUTAK ROCK CONTRACT. >> EACH OF THE THREE ARE AN INITIAL ONE YEAR WITH FIVE YEARS' WORTH OF RENEWAL. I THINK I SAID THAT RIGHT. IT'S ONE YEAR AND FIVE YEARS IS MUTUALLY AGREED UPON RENEWAL.
>> Mayor Borowsky: KIND OF AN AUTOMATIC ALMOST? >> MUTUAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN BOTH PARTIES, THE CITY AND THE FIRM THEMSELVES. >> Mayor Borowsky: AND SO COUNCIL DOESN'T VOTE ON THAT? >> WE HAVE BROUGHT COUNCIL THE AARONS CONTRACT.
THAT DOES COME BACK ANNUALLY. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO I FOR ONE WAS NOT HAPPY OR NOT PLEASED AT ALL WITH OUR PERFORMANCE AT THE LEGISLATIVE -- THE STATE LEGISLATURE LAST TIME AROUND. I HAD HOPED THAT WHEN WE -- I KNEW THE ONE CONTRACT WAS UP FOR RENEWAL, I HAD HOPED THAT THE
COUNCIL WOULD BE INVOLVED IN SOME OF THAT DISCUSSION AND I SEE THAT IT'S -- IT'S ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA. SO I JUST -- I REALLY AM. AM CONCERNED ABOUT GOING DOWN THE SAME PATH. I KNOW BARRY.
I THINK HE DOES A GREAT JOB. I THINK LAST YEAR WAS NOT A GOOD RESULT WHATSOEVER AND THAT SURPRISES ME THAT WE ARE GOING IN THE SAME DIRECTION. SO I WILL HEAR FROM THE CITY MANAGER. >> City Mgr. Caton: THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I WILL MAYBE FOR CONTEXT FOR THE
BROADER AUDIENCE AND FOR CITY COUNCIL, WE REALLY TOOK A WHOLE NEW LOOK, UNDERSTANDING THAT FEEDBACK THAT WE HAD RECEIVED FROM CITY COUNCIL ON THE MOST RECENT SESSION. WE TOOK A WHOLE NEW LOOK AT OUR GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, AND AS YOU
KNOW, WE RECENTLY HAD PERSONNEL WITHIN THE SMALL OFFICE DEPART, LEAVE THE ORGANIZATION, AND WE ARE USING THOSE FUNDS TO ENHANCE OUR CONSULTING AND OUR OUTSIDE RESOURCES AND ISSUED THE REQUEST
FOR PROPOSAL AND WE HAVE A NEW FIRM. SO IT'S REALLY THE KUTAK ROCK AS REFERENCED, ENTIRELY NEW FIRM, AND THEN WE WANTED TO NOT ONLY -- AS MY COLLEAGUE, MS. SPARMAN ILLUSTRATED, NOT ONLY HAVE A BASELINE, DAY-TO-DAY
WATCHING OUT FOR EVERYTHING, BUT REALLY ADD ADDITIONAL RESOURCES AND THAT IS THE NEW ELEMENT. THAT IS WHERE WE CAN SAY THE TOP TWO TO THREE BILLS THAT ARE REALLY CONCERNING TO US, THAT ARE EMERGING THROUGH THE SESSION, AND ADD ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO THOSE FROM ADDITIONAL CONSULTANTS.
SO ADDING TO IT. SO WE'VE GOT A NEW FIRM WHO IS VERY WELL RECOGNIZED IN THE INDUSTRY. WE FEEL REALLY GOOD ABOUT THAT AND REALLY LOADING UP ON THAT OUTSIDE RESOURCES AND THEN SPECIFICALLY BEING LASER
FOCUSED, A COUPLE COME TO MIND DURING THE LAST SESSION THAT WE WOULD REALLY BE ABLE TO ADD MORE RESOURCES TO THAT. SO I BELIEVE OUR NEW APPROACH WILL ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM YOU, MAYOR AND OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS MOVING INTO THE NEXT SESSION. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION.
IT'S HELPFUL. QUESTION ABOUT THE BUDGET. WHAT TYPE OF BUDGET INCREASE IS THIS FOR OUR EXTERNAL LOBBYISTS? >> City Mgr. Caton: I CAN START OFF A LITTLE BIT. SO BECAUSE WE'RE -- THE CONTRACT
I BELIEVE IF MEMORY SERVES ME. IT'S APPROXIMATELY $30,000. >> YES, IT'S A $24,000 INCREASE IN RETAINER. >> City Mgr. Caton: SO WE HAVE THE RETAINER THAT'S INCREASED, I WOULD SAY A LITTLE BIT FROM WHAT WE HAVE
HISTORICALLY PAID. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ENTIRE FUNCTION, WE HAVE ELIMINATED OR NOT FILLED A DIRECTOR POSITION. SO WE HAVE THAT ADDITIONAL KIND OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY TO HELP REALLY BRING UP THAT CALIBER FOR THE CONSULTING SERVICES.
I MIGHT ALSO ADD FROM A I'M USED TO, AS MS. SPARMAN WENT THROUGH OUR PROCUREMENT CODE AND MAYBE THE TREASURER CAN SPEAK TO THIS BECAUSE IT'S UNDER HER CHAIN OF COMMAND.
WE HAVE A DISVERSE GROUP. AND I KNOW MY COLLEAGUE, THEY WANTED TO TAP INTO HIS EXPERTISE. HE WAS PART OF THE SELECTION PROCESS AND THEN WE BRING THAT FORWARD FOR CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. >> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. JUST ONE FINAL QUESTION ON THAT FRONT.
$24,000 INCREASE, IS THAT GLOBALLY, BETWEEN ALL THE CONTRACTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO APPLY OR APPROVE? >> SO THE $78,000 IS SOLELY FOR
KUTAK ROCK. AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE AARONS AND MONTI AND ARIZONA CAPITOL CONNECTIONS CONTRACT. IF A PROBLEM ARISES, WE WON'T
HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCUREMENT. IT WAS A LITTLE LIMITING TO BRING ON ADDITIONAL PRESOURCES BECAUSE OF OUR PROCUREMENT CODE. AND THIS GIVES US SOME FLEXIBILITY AND THOSE TERMS WOULD NEGOTIATED BETWEEN THE PARTY. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO THE $24,000 ONLY APPLIES TO THE
AARONS CONTRACT. >> City Mgr. Caton: MADAM MAYOR, I CAN JUMP IN. THE AARONS IS -- LET'S PUT THAT TO THE SIDE FOR THE MOMENT AND THAT'S REALLY AS NEEDED, KIND OF ON THE BENCH. NOW ON THE COURT, IF YOU WILL, THE ACTIVE ONE IS THE KUTAK ROCK. THAT MOVES TO THE $78,000.
SO THAT'S THE ADDITIONAL WHAT WE HAVE HISTORICALLY PAID THE PREVIOUS CONSULTANT THAT MOVES UP TO 78. AS WE LOOK TO THAT $24,000 INCREASE, I WOULD REMIND -- WE
HAVE A DIRECTOR POSITION THAT WE HAVE NOT FILLED AND SO WE HAVE THAT TO USE TO ENHANCE OUR OUTSIDE RESOURCES. >> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. SO I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT TELL ME WHERE THE $24,000 BUMP IS. WHERE IS THAT? >> SO THE -- FOR KUTAK ROCK IN
ADDITION TO -- THIS RFP WAS MUCH MORE ROBUST, I WOULD SAY THAT IN YEARS PAST. WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. SO THOSE WEEKLY REPORTS THAT YOU RECEIVED FROM US LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, THOSE WILL
BE -- WE'LL USE FOR WEEKLY TRACKING SYSTEM AND THERE WILL BE BOOTS ON THE GROUND. IT'S A MUCH ROBUST RFP. >> City Mgr. Caton: LET ME HELP. WE HAD ONE CONSULTANT LAST YEAR
AND THAT IS REPLACED BY KUTAK ROCK THAT. NEW CONSULTANT IS COSTING $24,000 MORE. WHAT WE HAVE WITH THE OTHER TWO ON THE SIDELINES THAT'S AS NEEDED AND THAT WOULD BE A NEGOTIATED AMOUNT IN ADDITION. SO THE 24 IS THE BASE AMOUNT, PREVIOUSLY CONSULTANT COMPARED
TO THE NEW CONSULTANT. >> Mayor Borowsky: I THOUGHT YOU SAID SOMETHING DIFFERENT EARLIER THAT WE HAD PAID THE CONSULTANT LAST YEAR THE SAME AMOUNT OF $78,000. MY APOLOGIES. COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I
APPRECIATE THIS DISCUSSION. SO I ALSO WAS DEEPLY DISAPPOINTED LAST YEAR AND THE YEAR BEFORE. I PERSONALLY GENERATED PROBABLY 500 EMAILS IN OPPOSITION -- ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO TO THE A.D.U. LAW, THE CASITA LAW AND
THIS IS A GREAT CONCERN TO MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS. LALAST YEAR, WE HAD A VERY SIMPE FIX, AND EVERY LEGISLATOR THAT I TALKED TO BACK THEN WAS WILLING TO SUPPORT IT. JUST OWNER OCCUPANCY.
WE FAILED. I WONDERED HOW. AND NOW WE HAVE THREE CONTRACTS, THE TWO CONTRACTS LISTED, THE AARONS AND THE ARIZONA CAPITOL CONNECTIONS, THOSE HAVE ZERO DOLLARS? THOSE ARE BACK UP IF KUTAK
CANNOT DO THE WORK, IS THAT -- AM I UNDERSTANDING? >> City Mgr. Caton: YES, MA'AM. >> Mayor Borowsky: NOW WE'RE PUTTING IN THE HANDS OF KUTAK, OUR TOP PRIORITY WAS FIXING ADU AND WE DIDN'T GET IT DONE. SO TELL ME ABOUT KUTAK. I WENT TO THEIR WEBSITE.
HOW -- IS IT THEIR -- WHAT IS THEIR ABILITY TO PERFORM DIFFERENTLY, I GUESS? >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: I CAN ACTUALLY HAVE WORKED HAVING WORKED WITH MARK OSBORN. >> City Mgr. Caton: I WILL START OFF A LITTLE BIT AND THEN I LOOK TO MY COLLEAGUE TO ADD TO IT. THEY LOOK TO OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, TO YOUR LEGISLATIVE
AGENDA, WHICH I GOT A LITTLE PASSIONATE DISCUSSING LAST TIME BECAUSE IT'S SO IMPORTANT. IT'S -- THEY USE THAT TO GUIDE THEIR WORK DOWN AT THE CAPITOL. SO THAT'S THE INITIAL START AND I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE TOO, AND I MIGHT INTRODUCE A NEW CONCEPT WHERE WE HAVE, LET'S
SAY, A COUNCILMEMBER LIAISON THAT WORKS WITH STAFF, BECAUSE HAVING SEVEN OR SO IS NOT NECESSARILY A CONCERTEDDEST. CONCERTED EFFORT.AND THAT'S ONEN REFINE OUR PROCESS. YOU HAVE THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. WE DO PLAN TO COME BACK AT REGULAR MEETINGS THROUGH THE
SESSION TO SPEAK TO CITY COUNCIL, BUT IT MOVES BY THE HALF DAY, BY THE HOUR, BY THE WEEK. AND SO IF WE HAD AN INDIVIDUAL -- A COUNCILMEMBER OR A COMMITTEE -- I WON'T QUITE CALL IT A COMMITTEE, BUT YOU GET
MY POINT WHERE WE CAN GET SOME GUIDANCE ON THESE THINGS THAT COULD BE SOMETHING FOR MAYOR AND COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. SPECIFICALLY TO THE ELEMENT. HOW DO WE NOT REVISIT WHAT WE
DID LAST YEAR. I THINK IT'S THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA AND THEN SPEAKING TO THEIR EXPERTISE, I LOOK TO MY COLLEAGUE FOR THEIR EXPERIENCE. AND COUNCIL. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I
APPRECIATE. THE WEEKLY TRACKING REPORTS, THOSE ARE ACTUALLY GENERATED BY OUR CONSULTANT? >> City Mgr. Caton: THEY ARE BY US. >> Councilmember Whitehead: OH, MY US. >> City Mgr. Caton: AND LET ME ADD A LITTLE BIT THERE. THAT'S WHERE WE ARE REALLY LOOKING FOR ENHANCED COMMUNICATION FROM OUR CONSULTANT IN ENHANCED
DASHBOARDS, ENHANCED REPORTING, AND WE REALLY WANT TO TAKE THAT TO THE NEXT LEVEL AND WE WERE DOING THAT INTERNALLY AND SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROCESS, WHERE YOU WORK WITH THE LEAGUE. WE'RE WORKING WITH IT, BUT WE'RE
PAYING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT FOR THE OUTSIDE SUPPORT AND THEY NEED TO DELIVER ON THAT AND WE'RE REALLY TAKING THAT TO THE NEXT LEVEL FOR THE NEXT SESSION. >> Councilmember Whitehead: OKAY. THEN I'M SUPPORTIVE AND EXCITED TO SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME THINGS DONE. THANK YOU FOR BOTH OF YOU.
>> Mayor Borowsky: VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: I WANT TO TELL MY COLLEAGUES ABOUT DR. MARK OSBOURNE. THERE ARE LOBBYISTS AND THEN THERE ARE INSTITUTIONS AT THE LEJ, AND MARK IS ONE OF THOSE
PEOPLE. NOT ONLY HIS IS GENIAL NATURE AFFABLE AND CHARMING. I WATCHED HIM PERSONALLY RECEIVE A VAST AMOUNT OF BIPARTISAN SUPPORT IN MULTIPLE ITERATIONS AT ANY TIME AT THE LEGISLATURE.
HE TAKES A SCHOLARLY APPROACH TO EVERYTHING. HE'S ONE OF THE FEW LOBBYISTS OUT THERE WITH A Ph.D. BUT YOU WOULD NEVER KNOW IT. HE'S ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO IS JUST A HUMBLE MAN, WHO IS ON TOP OF HIS GAME. I WOULD HIRE HIM IN A SECOND AS MY LOBBYIST. THIS REALLY IS A LEVEL -- IT'S A
WONDERFUL LEVELING UP. BARRY AARONS IS AN INSTITUTION HERE AND HE'S GOING TO BE GREAT IN A PINCH ROLE WHEN WE NEED TO HIT TWO THINGS AT THE SAME TIME. AND I THINK THAT I JUST WANT TO COMMEND THE CITY MANAGER FOR AN
EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT CHOICE. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I AGREE WITH SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES THAT NOBODY KIND OF WANTS TO SAY IT, BUT I THINK IT
TOOK A LITTLE PRINCIPAL FROM MS. SPARMAN AND OUR CITY MANAGER TO CHANGE OUR VENDOR. WE HAD TO DO THAT. WE WEREN'T -- IT JUST DIDN'T FEEL LIKE WE WERE GETTING OUR VALUE OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS. I'M SITTING THERE WRITING EMAILS, BEGGING THE LEGISLATURE
TO -- DON'T DO THIS TO US, WHETHER IT'S THE ADUs AND WE KNOW THE BIG ONE -- THE BIG ONE. IT WAS A BIG LET DOWN. AND WE DON'T HAVE A DIRECTOR POSITION ANYMORE.
WE'RE HIRING THIRD PARTIES AND IT WOULD BE NICE TO GET THE REALTIME DASHBOARD, HOWEVER IT WANTS TO BE PRESENTED FROM THIS PARTICULAR VENDOR. THIS IS A ONE-YEAR CONTRACT. MS. SPARMAN, I HOPE THIS COMES BACK TO US EVERY YEAR. THIS WOULD BE MY EXPRESSED
DESIRE. LET'S NOT AUTO PILOT IT. LET'S JUST BRING IT BACK. THAT GIVES THE VENDOR A LITTLE BIT MORE INCENTIVE TO PERFORM, KNOWING THAT WE WILL LOOK AT IT. AND WE WILL TERMINATE THE RELATIONSHIP. I DON'T -- I DON'T KNOW -- I DON'T KNOW AS MUCH ABOUT THE
LOBBYING WORLD AS SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES. WHAT I DO KNOW IS THINGS NEEDED TO CHANGE. I DON'T HAVE SKIN IN THE GAME THAT THIS GUY IS GREAT. READING THE PACKET HERE, WE GOT A LOT OF APPLICANTS. THERE WAS A LOT OF INTEREST AND
WE -- AND WE TOOK METHODICAL TIME WHEN WE MADE OUR SELECTION OF KUTAK ROCK. WE TALKED ABOUT THIS, IT'S GOOD TO HAVE -- AS MUCH AS WE NEEDED TO CHANGE THIS, IT'S NICE TO HAVE MR. AARONS ON STANDBY
BECAUSE WE SAW THE ESCALATION, THE RAPID ESCALATION OF LOBBYING THAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN SOMETHING SORT OF INVADES THE LEGISLATURE WITH A -- WITH A -- WITH JUST SUCH A RAPIDITY AND SUCH
VELOCITY THAT IT CAN BE ALL CONSUMING. AND IF WE DON'T HAVE SOMEBODY STANDING BY THAT WE CAN DEPLOY, BECAUSE WE NEED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO ADVOCATE FOR OUR RESIDENTS, I THINK IT'S NICE TO HAVE THAT. I THINK PUTTING MORE INTO A
THIRD PARTY LIKE THIS AS OPPOSED TO INTERNALLY, I THINK IT'S STILL A NET SAVINGS. WE ARE STILL SAVINGS -- IF YOU ADD UP LAST YEAR WHAT WE SPENT WITH A THIRD PARTY, AND INTERNALLY. COMPARED TO YEAR, I THINK IT'S A NET REDUCTION.
SO I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE GET BETTER VALUE FOR THAT. PERFORMANCE METRICS, I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF LIKE MARKETING. LOBBYING TO ME IS LIKE MARKETING. IT'S LIKE -- IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I DIDN'T -- I NEVER WANTED TO DO IT BECAUSE IT'S
LIKE HOW DO YOU MEASURE SUCCESS? A LOT OF TIMES YOU JUST KNOW, BUT YOU CAN'T PROVE CAUSALITY. YOU KNOW WHEN PEOPLE AREN'T
DOING A GOOD JOB. I WILL WATCH THIS VENDOR VERY CLOSELY, SEEING HOW ENGAGED THAT MY COLLEAGUES FEEL AS THEY PERFORM THEIR WORK. YOU KNOW, I WISH I KNEW AS MUCH ABOUT THE VENDOR AS THE VICE
MAYOR, BUT I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE NEW PARTNERSHIP. AND I WOULD LIKE TO BRING THIS BACK ON ANNUAL BASIS. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: MY QUESTION IS, IS THE FOLLOWING,
THE REASON THAT YOU DID A THREE-YEAR CONTRACT BECAUSE YOU NEEDED -- YOU WANT TO FINISH THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION AND THEN WANT TO HIT AN ENTIRE LEGISLATIVE TWO-PART SESSION THE NEXT TIME? OR IS THERE A WAY WE CAN DO THIS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS TO BRING IT BACK? I KNOW THE -- THE AARONS CONTRACT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN
BE REVISITED, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THE KUTAK CONTRACT IS JUST A THREE YEAR -- IT'S A THREE-YEAR DEAL. BUT I UNDERSTAND IF THE REASONING WAS -- OH, AM I CORRECT -- >> IT'S AN INITIAL ONE-YEAR TERM
PLUS FOUR ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR EXTENSIONS. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: SO IT HAS A ONE YEAR BRING BACK MECHANISM IN THERE? >> YES. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: OKAY. THAT'S FINE. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER REQUESTS TO SPEAK. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? NO?
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT. >> Councilmember Graham: I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13555, PAYER. >> Councilmember Whitehead: SECOND. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE AFFIRMING, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE.
ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT PASSES. THERE YOU GO. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 14, THIS IS WESTWORLD AND WE HAVE -- IS IT JUDY DOYLE HERE TO SPEAK OR WILL IS GOING TO JOIN US?
WILL L AFTAL. >> City Mgr. Caton: MADAM MAYOR, WE BROUGHT THIS BEFORE CITY COUNCIL IN A WORKSHOP RECENTLY. IT WAS AT THE TAIL END OF A FAIRLY LENGTHY MEETING AND WE MIGHT HAVE GONE FAIRLY QUICKLY, BUT WE HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN THIS PROCESS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS
AND BRING THIS TO THE CULMINATION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. IT REALLY IS TIMELY AS WE BEGIN TO INITIATE OUR BUDGETARY PROCESS TO CONTINUE THE INFRASTRUCTURE ENHANCEMENTS FOR THE WESTWORLD FACILITY AND CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR ADDITIONAL
ENHANCEMENTS IN '26, 27 AND LOOK FORWARD FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ON THIS ITEM. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU FOR THAT REMINDER BEFORE. WE GET STARTED, I RECALL LAST TIME THIS IS NOT ABOUT OPERATIONAL ISSUES AND THIS IS ONLY ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE, RIGHT? >> CORRECT. >> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. SO THAT MIGHT HELP WITH SOME OF
THE QUESTIONS PENDING. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. PLEASE PROCEED. >> IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE WITH REGARD TO THE PRESENTATION? WE GAVE A PRESENTATION LAST TIME. >> Mayor Borowsky: OH, I DON'T BUT I SEE PEOPLE HAVE LIT UP THE BOARD. SO THEY DO. SO THIS WILL BE HELPFUL IF WE JUST JUMPED TO THE CHASE.
THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD. >> Councilmember Littlefield: THANK YOU, MAYOR, I PULLED THIS ITEM FOR A PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION BECAUSE WHEN IT FIRST STARTED, SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, DISCUSSING THE UPGRADES AND
CHANGES THAT ARE GOING TO BE GOING ON AT WESTWORLD, WE HAD A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF CITIZEN INQUIRELY AND CONCERN. THIS IS A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE AND PLACE FOR MANUFACTURE OUR CITIZENS AND HAS BEEN FOR MANY YEARS. AND THE MAYOR AND I BOTH WENT
OUT AND TALKED TO PEOPLE, VISITED WITH PEOPLE APPLICATIONENNED TO WHAT THEY -- PEOPLE, LISTENED TO WHAT THEY HAD TO SAY. AND I THINK THEY WOULD APPRECIATE, IF NOTHING ELSE, AN UPDATE ON WHAT'S GOING ON AND WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING AND WHAT WE CAN LOOK FORWARD TO AT WESTWORLD OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.
SO THIS IS BASICALLY FOR THE CITIZENS WHO EXPRESSED CONCERNS AND TO KEEP UPDATED. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT HAPPEN. >> WELL, WE ARE -- THROUGH THE MAYOR, COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF MEETING
WITH ALL OF OUR ANCHOR TENANTS ON A REGULAR BASIS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE FULFILLING THEIR NEEDS AND WE ARE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF UPGRADING A COUPLE OF OUR -- OUR CAPITAL ASSETS, ONE OF WHICH IS THE SOUND SYSTEM, WHICH WILL BE READY FOR THE
UPCOMING ARABIANS SHOW THIS COMING WINTER. AND ALSO WE ARE PURCHASING ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY STALLS TO HELP BOLSTER OUR CURRENT INVENTORY. SO THIS WILL MAKE THE FACILITY MUCH MORE APPLICABLE AND MUCH MORE SERVICEABLE TOWARDS OUR
CLIENTS. >> Mayor Borowsky: LET'S GO WITH THE OTHER QUESTIONS HERE. COUNCILWOMAN McALLEN. >> Councilmember McAllen: I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I WATCHED YOUR PRESENTATION TWICE NOW. I WENT TO THE TDC AND WATCHED YOUR PRESENTATION AT THE TDC AN IT HELPED ME TO FOCUS ON THINGS.
I APPRECIATE THE MAYOR SAYING THAT IT'S INFRASTRUCTURE AND NOT PROGRAMMING, THAT'S COMING IF FEBRUARY. I THOUGHT THE IMPROVES AND ITEMS HAD DEFINITELY BEEN HONED DOWN AND COMPLETELY TARGETED ON THE ITEMS THAT NEEDED TO BE FIXED MOST.
AND I APPRECIATED YOUR SUPPORT. >> I'M JOINED BY MR. SEAN BOSLEY
FROM KIMLEY-HORN WHO WORKED DILIGENTLY ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE MASTER PLAN THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. >> Councilmember Graham: SO CONTRACT THAT WE'RE APPROVING TODAY IS ABOUT $1 MILLION, BUT THAT'S GO FORWARD SPENDING FOR
THE STUDIES COMING UP? >> SORRY, I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTOOD THE QUESTION. >> Councilmember Graham: OKAY. WE'RE AWARDING -- THIS IS A MILLION DOLLARS CONTRACT AND WHAT IS IT FOR?
>> WE'RE -- WE -- THE MASTER PLAN IS A PLAN FOR THE FUTURE, FOR ASSETS FOR THE FUTURE. WE -- THERE'S NOTHING THAT'S BEEN COMMITTED TOWARDS IT AS OF YET, THE PLAN ITSELF. >> Councilmember Graham: OKAY. THANK YOU. I WILL PAUSE MY QUESTIONS FOR
THE MOMENT. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. >> Councilmember Whitehead: FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK YOU. I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT TIME AT NIGHT WE PUT YOU UP. I THINK IT WAS 9:00 AT NIGHT. SO YOU REALLY ENDURED A LONG MEETING, BUT WE DID ALREADY HAVE THIS PRESENTAION. FOR THE PUBLIC, WHAT DATE WAS THE PRESENTATION?
DOES ANYBODY REMEMBER? WILL, DO YOU REMEMBER THE NIGHT THAT YOU SPENT -- >> City Mgr. Caton: NOVEMBER 17th. >> Councilmember Whitehead: NOVEMBER 17th FOR THE PUBLIC BECAUSE WE DID HAVE THIS PRESENTATION. THIS IS INFRASTRUCTURE. ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS, THERE ARE
OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED. SO WITH THAT, I DON'T SEE ANY REASON TO BELABOR IT ANYMORE. I MOVE TO ADOPT ITEM 14, RESOLUTION NUMBER 13569, APPROVING THE WESTWORLD
INFRASTRUCTURE MASTER PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES CAPITAL PROJECT CONCEPTS AND POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO ACCESS, PARKING, DRAINAGE AND SHADE ALL OF OUR PRIORITIES. AND I'M SO GLAD WE GOT YOU IN
BEFORE 9:00 AT NIGHT TONIGHT. >> Councilmember McAllen: I AMIL SECOND TO THAT. >> Mayor Borowsky: WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR SECOND? OKAY. COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: THA% K YOU. I DID WANT TO ECHO SOME
QUESTIONS RELATED TO EXPENSE. SO THIS IS A MASTER PLAN THAT TALKS ABOUT MOVING THE DRIVEWAY. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ADDING SOME COVERED AREAS, SOME SHADED AREAS WHICH ARE ALL VERY, I THINK NEEDED AND DESIRABLE THINGS.
>> RIGHT. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: BUT HOW MUCH WOULD THIS COST US? >> WE DON'T KNOW YET. THIS IS A LONG-TERM PLAN. SO WHAT WE'RE LAYING DOWN HERE NOW IS THE -- THE DIRECTION OF
THE FACILITY, NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE AS FAR AS FUNDS ARE COME AND NOTHING HAS BEEN GOUT OWN FORECASTED OR ESTIMATES. THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS OF THE FUTURE OF THE VENUE. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: SO MY CONCERN HERE IS THAT A LOT OF TIMES WHAT I SEE HAPPENING IS THAT WE PUT THE CART BEFORE THE
HORSE, SO TO SPEAK, IN THAT WE DEVELOP A PLAN AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE THE EXPENDITURE FOR IT. AND THEN IT COMES TIME FOR THE EXPENDITURE AND WE SAY, OH, WELL, WE'RE SPENDING THE MONEY BECAUSE WE MADE THE PLAN. BUT WHEN WE MADE THE PLAN WE
DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS GOING TO COST US $20 MILLION. NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S COSTING US $20 MILLION. SO I'M A LITTLE BIT -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE FOLLOWING HERE IS APPROPRIATE, THAT WE HAVE THOUGHT THROUGH WHERE THE FUNDING IS GOING TO COME FROM, IS THIS 490 FUNDING?
IS THE -- YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE LONG-TERM PLAN HERE? I'M -- I'M INTERESTED IN THAT. >> I THINK IT WOULD COME YOU TO PIECE BY PIECE. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: WHIC H SOUNDS -- WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS SAYING SOUNDS BAD. I THINK THE CITY MANAGER IS NODDING. >> City Mgr. Caton: LET ME HELP OUT.
MADAM MAYOR AND COUNCILWOMAN DAWN, YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. I THINK THERE HAS BEEN A HISTORY OF SKIPPING A STEP. AND THE MASTER PLANS ARE REALLY GOOD FOR INCLUDING STAKEHOLDERS, LONG-TERM VISION OF EXPENSIVE CAPITAL AND SO HERE'S WHERE
WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD. AND QUITE FRANKLY, IT'S THE OPPOSITE OF A PIECEMEAL APPROACH. BECAUSE HOW DOES THIS INFRASTRUCTURE IMPACT THIS INFRASTRUCTURE AND IF WE COULD DO IT TODAY, WHAT WOULD THAT LARGE PICTURE LOOK LIKE? SO THAT'S THE MASTER PLAN PROCESS. QUITE FRANKLY, I INHERITED THIS
PROCESS. IT'S BEEN GOING ON, I BELIEVE, ABOUT TWOISH YEARS. SO THIS IS REALLY THE CULMINATION OF A LOT OF WORK. I THINK THE NEXT STEP FOR US, THAT WE HAVE MISSED HISTORICALLY, IS WE HAVE A SPECIFIC PROJECT AND WE HAVE GONE STRAIGHT TO BUDGET.
STRAIGHT TO FUNDING THAT. LET'S JUST SAY AN ENTRYWAY ROAD AND IT'S GOING TO BE $20 MILLION, WE PUT $20 MILLION IN THE BUDGET AND THAT'S WHAT WE THINK. AND IT COMES BACK AT $25 MILLION. WE GO, WELL, WE'RE OVER BUDGET THIS IS A FLAW SOMEWHERE. WHAT WE ARE INTRODUCING AS A NEW
STEP INTO THIS PROCESS, MASTER PLAN AND THEN FEASIBILITY, SCOPE, DESIGN, ALL OF THAT KIND OF, I'LL CALL IT PRELIMINARY TO THE NEXT STEP. AND SO LET'S JUST SAY DESIGN WOULD BE GOOD. AND YOU GET UP TO 30%, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
WE KNOW WHAT IT WILL COULD HAVE IT WILL COST $19 MILLION, APPROXIMATELY AND THEN WE PUT $19 MILLION IN THE BUDGET. BRING IT FORWARD FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND THEN WE WOULD ISSUE THE RFP, AND WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THOSE PROCESSES, GO THROUGH OUR PROCUREMENT. WE COULD USE SOME OTHER -- THAT
SIZEABLE DOLLARS AMOUNT WE WOULD DO A LARGE RFP FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION. BUT THAT -- BUT THAT STEP, WHERE DESIGN, SCOPE, FEASIBILITY, WE'RE REALLY ENHANCING THAT AND DOING THAT MORE REGULARLY. SO I THINK THAT WILL ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS AND ADDRESS SOME OF
THE CONCERNS THAT I'VE HEARD OVER THE LAST YEAR OR SO. KEEPING IN MIND TOO, ALL ALONG THE WAY, THAT PRIORITIES CAN SHIFT. SO WHAT THIS SETS OUT IS REALLY -- AND WE'VE HAD EXTENSIVE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE
CONSULTANT ABOUT THAT SHORT TERM, THAT MIDDLE TERM AND LONG TERM. AND THE LONG TERM IS ASPIRATIONAL. ASPIRATIONAL IN 20 OR 30 YEARS WHAT DO WE WANT FOR THIS FACILITY.
HOWEVER, HAVING THAT AS PART OF THE MASTER PLAN, HAD HELPS US ALIGN GRANT OPPORTUNITIES AND OTHER THINGS. SO THIS WHOLE MASTER PLAN IS CRITICAL FOR MOVING FORWARD AND CONSISTENCY WITH ALIGNING THE INFRASTRUCTURE AS IT ALIGNS WITH THE BUSINESS PLAN. THE BUSINESS PLAN WILL COME FORWARD TO YOU IN THE FIRST
QUARTER OF NEXT YEAR, AND WE NEED TO ALIGN THE INFRASTRUCTURE SO THAT IT ALIGNS WITH THE BUSINESS PLAN. BECAUSE LET'S JUST SAY IF WE WANT TO AS A BUSINESS PLAN SUPPORT MORE EQUESTRIAN, THEN WE NEED TO ENHANCE THE INFRASTRUCTURE AS IT RELATES TO THE BUSINESS PLAN. SO THOSE TWO HAVE TO GO HAND IN
HAND. AN I BELIEVE OUR NEW PATH ADDRESSS THAT. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: THAN K YOU. THAT'S HELPFUL. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: I JUST WANT TO BACK UP WHAT COUNCILMEMBER DUBAUSKAS SAID. I THINK EVERYBODY AT THIS DAIS WOULD SAY THE SAME THING.
HERE'S WHAT WE DON'T WANT, YOU GUYS GOT CAUGHT UP IN A LARGER BIG PICTURE CONVERSATION. WE DON'T WANT A SITUATION WHERE WE SUPPORT A PLAN, AND WE AGREE THAT THE VAGUENESS OF THE PLAN, RIGHT? AND THAT'S LARGE AND GRANDIOSE. AND THEN WHEN IT COMES BACK TO
SOMETHING THAT IS EXORBITANT SPENDING, WELL, YOU VOTED FOR THE PLAN. YOU ALREADY SUPPORTED THIS. YOU KNOW, WE'RE TAKING THAT AS GOSPEL. YOU SUPPORTED THIS TWO YEARS AGO, AND WE SAID WHOA, WHOA, WAIT A MINUTE. IT KIND OF PUTS US IN A PICKLE.
AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STEP OUT OF THE PICKLE, RIGHT? AND JUST -- AND JUST SAY, I WILL SUPPORT THIS -- I CAN SPEAK FOR MYSELF HERE. I WILL SUPPORT THIS PLAN, CAVEAT. ANY APPROPRIATION THAT TAKES TAXPAYER DOLLARS OR PAYING DOWN
DEBT OR ANY TYPE OF EXPENDITURE OF DEBT HAS TO BE REVIEWED AND THERE IS NO SACRED COW, INCLUDING THIS PLAN, RIGHT? SO WITH THAT CAVEAT, I WILL SUPPORT -- I WILL SUPPORT THIS. >> Mayor Borowsky: CITY MANAGER, YOU WANT TO CHIME IN AGAIN. >> City Mgr. Caton: VICE
MAYOR, I COULDN'T AGREE WITH YOU MORE. >> Mayor Borowsky: AND JUST BEFORE WE SWITCH GEARS ON THAT TOPIC. THIS REALLY IS NO DIFFERENT THAN EVERYTHING THAT YOU ESTABLISH AS A PROJECT AND BRING TO COUNCIL. JUST LIKE PARKS, JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, ALL INFRASTRUCTURE. SO THANK YOU.
I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT. COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD. >> Councilmember Littlefield: THANK YOU, MAYOR. MY GOODNESS, I DIDN'T REALIZE WHAT I WAS GOING TO BE BRINGING UP. I HAVE JUST BEEN HEARING FROM CITIZENS WHO ARE VERY INTERESTED IN WESTWORLD, AND ITS MOVEMENT FORWARD AND WHERE IT'S GOING AND
HOW IT'S GOING TO GET THIS AND WHAT IT'S GONNA COST, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. THEY WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE DESIGN, THE FEASIBILITY, WHAT THEY CAN EXPECT, THE COST, THE TIMING, WHEN IS THIS GONNA HAPPEN? WHAT IS OUR PLAN AT THIS MOMENT? THEY KNOW IT CAN CHANGE BECAUSE I HAVE TOLD THEM. AND THEY WANT TO KNOW WHERE WE
ARE AND WHERE ARE WE GOING TO BE GOING GOING FORWARD OVER THE NEXT YEAR. THAT'S REALLY WHAT I'M ASKING. IS THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS THAT THE CITIZENS WHO USE WESTWORLD AND WHO ARE INTERESTED IN KEEPING WESTWORLD TOP NOTCH, WHAT ARE THEIR QUESTIONS AND,
YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THEIR ANSWERS OR DO WE HAVE ANSWERS YET? I JUST WANT AN UPDATE ON THAT. THANK YOU. >> WELL, CERTAINLY WE WANT TO PROVIDE A FACILITY THAT SERVICES OUR CLIENTS, AND I PRESUME YOU'RE SPEAKING PRIMARILY ABOUT
OUR EQUESTRIAN CLIENTS, IS THAT NOT CORRECT? >> Councilmember Littlefield: YES. >> WE MEET WITH THEM REGULARLY TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS AND WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS. SPECIFICALLY, THE TWO FOREFRONT ISSUES WERE THE SOUND SYSTEM WHICH HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE FOR A
WHILE AND ALSO THE TEMPORARY BARNS WHICH WE HAVE ADDRESSED NOW THANK YOU TO COUNCIL AND YOUR EFFORTS TOWARDS HELPING US SOLVE THAT CHALLENGE. SO THOSE AND ANY OTHER CHALLENGES THAT MIGHT ARISE ARE -- ARE ISSUES THAT WE ARE WORKING COLLECTIVELY WITH THE
EQUESTRIAN PRODUCERS TO MAKE SURE THAT WESTWORLD IS THE BEST IT CAN BE, TO NOT ONLY THE PRODUCERS BUT ALSO THE GENERAL PUBLIC WHO COME TO EVENTS AND ALSO THE NON-EQUESTRIAN EVENT PRODUCERS AS WELL. >> Councilmember Littlefield: THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> Councilmember Littlefield: AND WE HAVE A LOT OF THOSE ALSO. >> EXCUSE ME? >> Councilmember Littlefield: WE HAVE A LOT OF THOSE ALSO,
NON-EQUESTRIAN EVENTS. >> HALF OF OUR PROGRAMMING IS EQUESTRIAN AND HALF OF IT IS NON-EQUESTRIAN. YEAH, WE HAVE A VERY DIVERSE REPERTOIRE. >> Councilmember Littlefield: THAT'S A GOOD THING. >> IT'S A VERY GOOD THING. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILMEMBER GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: I
WAS LOOKING AT MY NOTES THE WRONG ITEM, MR. LAFTIEL, YOU SAID HALF ARE EQUESTRIAN AND HALF ARE NON-EQUESTRIAN. WHAT IS THE REVENUE?
>> THE TOTAL REVENUE IS A LITTLE UNDER $8 MILLION A YEAR. I COULD GET IT FOR YOU. >> Councilmember Graham: I WILL BE INTERESTED IN THAT AS FAR AS I DO WANT TO SEE EBITDA. I DO WANT TO SEE, YOU KNOW, COMPARISONS. I DO WANT TO SEE KIND OF THOSE
REVENUE AS A PERCENTAGE. >> THE MEETING ON NOVEMBER 18th, WE HAD A LIST OF RATIOS THAT YOU ARE REQUESTING. WE ACTUALLY REVIEWED THAT MEETING AND WE WILL HAVE THE ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS. >> Councilmember Graham: YEAH, THOSE MORE RELATE TO --
DEFINITELY RELATE TO THE OPERATING SIDE OF IT. >> CORRECT. >> Councilmember Graham: THIS IS -- THE CAPITAL SIDE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND KIND OF LIKE WHAT THE VICE MAYOR WAS SAYING, YOU ADAPT A MASTER PLAN
AND THEY THINK IT'S A MORAL OBLIGATION, DE FACTO OBLIGATION. AND EVEN IF THEY COMPETE WITH OTHER CITYWIDE ISSUES LIKE PUBLIC SAFETY, PARKS INFRASTRUCTURE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THERE ARE SEVERAL MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS THAT IN THE DOCUMENT WILL CLEARLY COST TENS
OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF WHAT COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS WAS TALKING ABOUT, AT LEAST GETTING PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES KIND OF AS WE GO. GETTING THOSE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, TALKING
ABOUT NOT ONLY THE COST, BUT-AL. THE PLAN TALKS ABOUT CONCEPTUAL ORDER OF MAGNITUDE COST FOR DOZENS OF PROJECT WITH NO ESTIMATED PRICE TAG. SO JUST GETTING OUR ARMS AROUND
KIND OF FEASIBILITY STUDIES. THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT I WANTED -- OR COMMENTS I WANTED TO POSE NOW, BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK, MR. LAUFTEIL AND
KIMERLY HORN, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. >> Mayor Borowsky: I HAVE ONE FINAL QUESTION TO COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD ABOUT THE UPDATE ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT. HOW IS THE DRAINAGE PROJECT COMING? OR WHERE DO WE EXPECT THAT TO BE IN THE NEAR FUTURE? >> WELL, THE DRAINAGE IS BROKEN DOWN INTO THREE SEGMENTS.
THE FIRST SEGMENT WE WILL BE STARTING LATE SPRING. THE BEHEIA DRAINAGE COMPONENT, WE HOPE TO HAVE DONE BY LATE SUMMER OF THE NEXT YEAR. AND THEN SHORTLY AFTER THAT, THE WESTWORLD DRIVE DRAINAGE
COMPONENT OF THAT PROJECT WILL BE DONE. THAT'S TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR 2027. AND THEN THE INTERNAL CORE OF THE FACILITY WILL BE BROKEN DOWN INTO SEGMENTS AND THAT WILL BE HANDLED OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS. >> Mayor Borowsky: I THINK ALL EVENTS WILL R R REALLY APPRECIAE
THAT. >> YES, INDEED. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN, FOR COMING UP TO TALK TO US. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO -- OH, WE GOTTA MAKE A MOTION. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I MADE A MOTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: OH, YOU DID. THAT WAS A LONG TIME AGO. CAN YOU REPEAT IT? >> Councilmember Whitehead:
SURE. I MOVE TO -- I HAVE TO GET BACK OVER THERE NOW. I MOVE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 13569, APPROVING THE WESTWORLD INFRASTRUCTURE MASTER PLAN WHICH INCLUDES CAPITAL
PROJECT CONCEPTS AND POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO ACCESS AND PARKING, DRAINAGE AND SHADE. >> Councilmember Littlefield: SECOND. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE. OR IF YOU'RE OPPOSED.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MOVING ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA, WE HAVE TWO ITEMS THIS EVENING, ONE IS 15A, THAT WAS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM BEFORE THIS MEETING, AND THAT IS CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 13562 AND CONTRACT NUMBER 2025-192-COS WITH THE JAMES AGENCY FOR ADVERTISING, MARKETING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS
SERVICES FOR OLD TOWN SCOTTSDALE. AND I WILL LET YOU GO RIGHT AHEAD. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. SO TONIGHT, I'M HERE TO REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL FOR AN OLD TOWN MARKETING ADVERTISING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS CONTRACT WITH THE JAMES AGENCY. I HAVE A PRETTY BRIEF
PRESENTATION AND LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR QUESTIONS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT VER AMEEK JAMES, C.E.O. AND OWNER OF THE JAMES AGENCY IS HERE AS WELL SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HER. >> Mayor Borowsky: CAN I INTERRUPT YOU? AND OF COURSE YOU ARE RACHEL
SMETANA FROM THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICE. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THAT IS ME. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. >> JUST BRIEFLY, THESE ARE THE THINGS WE ARE GOING TO COVER HERE. A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY FROM 2016 TO NOW, WE HAVE CONTRACTED
WITH THE LOCAL MARKETING AGENCY CALLED HAPPY. PREVIOUSLY, WE WERE -- WE WERE WORKING OFF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY AND SO WE'VE
NEVER HAD OUR OWN SCOPE OF WORK FOR OLD TOWN, AS FAR AS MARKETING, ADVERTISING, OR PUBLIC ELSES GOES. SO IN 2022, JUST TO REMIND YOU, YOU MAY RECALL, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A NEW APPROPRIATION OF 5% OF THE DESTINATION MARKETING
FUNDS TO BE SHIFTED TO THE CITY TO BE USED FOR A LOCAL FOCUS. AND OVER THE YEARS, THE LIONS SHARE OF THAT HAS GONE TO OLD TOWN MARKETING IN YEARS PAST WE'VE ALSO DONE SOME WEBSITE WORK FOR WESTWORLD, THE STADIUM,
THE RAILROAD MARKS, SOME STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESSES FOR THOSE CITY ASSETS THAT ALSO ATTRACT LOCALS AND VISITORS TO OUR DESTINATION. SO IN SPRING OF 2025, WE WERE
HEARING FROM OUR OLD TOWN MERCHANTS THAT THEY DIDN'T FEEL ENGAGED WITH THE CITY AND OUR MARKETING PROCESS, THAT THEY WENWANTED TO SEE SOME THINGS DIFFERENT. SO WE EMPLOYED KEEN, A LOCAL AGENCY, TO DO A VERY QUICK
BUSINESS ENGAGEMENT STUDY AND THE RESULTS WERE HELPFUL FOR US, AND ILLUMINATING. I WILL GO INTO THOSE IN JUST ONE SECOND AND WHAT WE DID WAS USE THAT KEEN ENGAGEMENT STUDY TO
INFORM AN RFP PROCESS. SARAH SPARMAN EARLIER WITH THE STATE LEGISLATIVE EXPLAINED PROCESSED PRETTY WELL, IT WAS EXACTLY THE SAME. AND THEN WE -- THE RFP PROCESS FINISHED IN NOVEMBER.
THE JAMES AGENCY WAS THE WINNER OF THAT PROCESS. AND NOW WE ARE HERE FOR THIS AND THEN IN THE WINTER OF 2026, WE WILL BRING BACK A MARKETING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
SO THE KEEN STUDY REALLY INFORMED -- THEY WENT OUT AND SOLICITED A BUNCH OF FEEDBACK FROM ABOUT 150 STAKEHOLDERS IN OLD TOWN SCOTTSDALE. THEY HAD FOCUS GROUPS, VIRTUAL WORKSHOPS, AND CAME BACK WITH THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO WE FOLDED THESE RECOMMENDATIONS INTO THE RFP AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY A PART OF THE SCOPE OF WORK WHICH YOU'LL SEE HERE SHORTLY. SO EXPAND DATA COLLECTION, MORE TRANSPARENCY, MORE BUSINESS ENGAGEMENT, MORE COLLABORATION,
FOCUS ON OLD TOWN'S IDENTITY OR IDENTITIES, AND ALL THAT STUFF. SO WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO START THIS WORK WITH THE JAMES AGENCY. DURING THE RFP PROCESS, WE -- WE -- THE CRITERIA FOR JUDGING
EACH OF THE 11 PROPOSALS WE SAW WAS PRICE, EXPERIENCE, STRATEGY, AND THEN WE GOT TO SEE A PRESENTATION FROM THE TOP THREE CANDIDATES. AND WHAT WE LIKED MOST ABOUT THE JAMES AGENCY'S VERANIK IS LOCATED IN 85251, I THINK ON
64th AND THOMAS AND I REMEMBER YOU WERE EVEN CLOSER TO OLD TOWN AT YOUR LAST LOCATION RIGHT ON INDIAN SCHOOL AND HAYDEN ROAD. AND SO IT FELT LIKE THE JAMES AGENCY VERY MUCH HAD A PULSE ON WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OLD TOWN SCOTTSDALE.
THEY ARE A FULL SERVICE LOCAL AGENCY. THEY WORK WITH BRANDS THAT REALLY FIT WHERE WE WANT TO POSITION OLD TOWN, LIKE THE BILTMORE, THE PROCESS, THE VALLEY HO, THE FASHION SQUARE
AND M CULINARY, A LOT OF HOSPITALITY AND DESTINATION EXPERIENCE. AND WE REALLY LIKE THE IDEAS THEY PRESENTED DURING THEIR PROPOSAL AND DURING THEIR PRESENTATION TO ATTRACT LOCALS TO RE-DISCOVER OLD TOWN BECAUSE
OUR OLD TOWN MERCHANTS REALLY SAID WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS BRING THE LOCALS BACK. THAT WE -- THIS ISN'T MUCH DIFFERENT THAN THE HAPI CONTRACT WE HAD IN THE PAST.
IT REQUIRES MORE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT. IT -- WE ALWAYS HAD THE SIX TO EIGHT CAMPAIGNS. WE ALWAYS HAD THE WEBSITE DESIGN AND THE AUDIO VISUAL PRODUCTION BUT WE REALLY DIDN'T HAVE THE KPIs OR PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS. ANOTHER THING I REALLY LIKES
ABOUT THE JAMES AGENCY IS THEY HAVE A PUBLIC-FACING DASHBOARD THAT REALLY HELPS WITH TRANSPARENCY AND CLEARER KPIs AND INSIGHTS TO GUIDE FUTURE CAMPAIGNS. SO BASICALLY THIS IS OUR SCOPE OF WORK.
WE HAVE THE BUDGET FOR '25-26, WAS $1.3 MILLION. THAT WE ARE ABOUT HALFWAY THROUGH. THAT FISCAL YEAR AND WE'RE DEVELOPING A BUDGET FOR '26-27, OF COURSE. SO THAT IS SOMETHING WE ARE THINKING THROUGH NOW, BUT THE FIRST SIX MONTHS, I ANTICIPATE
BY THE END OF DECEMBER WE WILL HAVE SPENT ABOUT $300,000 OF THAT $1.3 MILLION. SO WE REALLY -- WHEN WE REALIZED WE WOULD GO THROUGH THE RFP PROCESS, WE ROLLED BACK THE WORK WE WERE DOING.
SO WE WILL HAVE A DECENT SIZED BUDGET TO START THE JAMES AGENCY WANTS TO START OUT AUDITING ALL WE HAVE DONE, DOING A LOT OF BEHAVIORAL DISCOVERY WITH THE -- THE LOCALS THAT WE HOPE TO ATTRACT HERE.
TALKING TO THE OLD TOWN MERCHANTS, DOING THOSE STAKEHOLDER -- STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS, AND SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO -- IF YOU SHOULD HAPPEN TO APPROVE THIS CONTRACT, WE LOOK FORWARD TO KICKING IT OFF VERY SOON.
AND THEN HERE'S A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ONBOARDING PROCESS. WHAT WE WILL BE DOING IS DEVELOPING AN ANNUAL PLAN. WE'LL BE SHARING THAT WITH STAKE HOLD, THE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND OF COURSE COUNCIL AS WELL. WE PLAN TO TALK ABOUT IT A LOT. I THINK THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE
HAVE REALIZED OVER THE LAST SEVERAL ALMOST YEAR WORKING WITH THE MERCHANTS IS THAT WE HAVEN'T DONE A GOOD JOB OF COMMUNICATING WHAT WE ARE DOING. SO WE HOPE TO BE DOING A BETTER JOB OF THAT AND WE'LL HAVE THE STRUCTURE AND THE SUPPORT THROUGH THE JAMES AGENCY TO MOVE
FORWARD ON THAT AND WE REALLY ARE EXCITED TO GET CREATIVE AND HAVE SOME MORE ACTIVATIONS IN OLD TOWN WITH MARKETING. AND SO HERE IS THE REQUEST AND I LOOK FORWARD TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, AND AGAIN, VERANEEK
JAMES IS HERE AS WELL. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN McALLEN. >> Councilmember McAllen: THANK YOU, MAYOR THANK YOU, RACHEL, FOR THE PRESENTATION. I'M VERY EXCITED, JUST LIKE WITH OUR LAST PROCESS WHEN SARA CAME UP HERE, A NEW VENDOR. I THINK IT'S A GREAT THING. COUNCILMAN GRAHAM HAD ALSO MENTIONED THAT.
CHANGING THINGS UP CAN BE GOOD, AND IF WE'RE FINDING THAT WE HAD ISSUES IN OLD TOWN, WHICH THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS WITH SOME OF THE BUSINESSES, THIS IS THE PERFECT OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD THOSE RELATIONSHIPS AND WITH THE
JAMES AGENCY, WHICH HAS A FABULOUS REPUTATION. I'M VERY EXCITED THAT WE'RE USING THEM, ACTUALLY, BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE BRAND NAME RECOGNITION LOCALLY. AND LOCAL BUSINESSES SEEK THEM AND BEING A PART OF THAT AND THEM UNDERSTANDING WHAT
SCOTTSDALE IS, WHO WE ARE, AND WHO THE LOCALS ARE. THAT'S ONE THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, MAKING SURE THAT THE LOCALS ARE -- I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, EVERYONE WANTS TO COME TO SCOTTSDALE. WE'RE WORLDWIDE, RIGHT? YOU JUST HEARD GERD TALK ABOUT THAT LAST NIGHT. YOU KNOW, AWARDS FROM ALL OVER
THE WORLD COMING HERE TO SCOTTSDALE. BUT WE ALSO WANT TO REMEMBER OUR RESIDENTS AND SERVING THEM IS OUR BASE. SO I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS AND -- WELL, I WILL LET THE OTHER COUNCIL PEOPLE SPEAK, BUT I'M VERY EXCITED TO SUPPORT THIS.
>> Mayor Borowsky: BEFORE WE GO ON, I OVERLOOKED FRENCH TOM. HSON HAD A PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN I NOTE THAT BOB PEJMAN'S NAME WAS ALSO ADDED. SO FRENCH, WHY DON'T YOU GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR AND
CITY COUNCIL. I WAS ONE OF THE THOSE SMALL BUSINESS PEOPLE THAT COMPLAINED ABOUT THE PREVIOUS MARKETING COMPANY. THERE WAS NO TRANSPARENCY WITHIN THAT. WE TRIED TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM MANY TIMES AND IT ALWAYS SEEMED TO GET SHUT DOWN.
THE OLD TOWN AREA, WHICH GOOGLE A.I. SAID WAS ABOUT A SQUARE MILE. WITHIN THAT SQUARE MILE IS A GREAT DIVERSITY OF SMALL BUSINESSES. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE SMALL BUSINESSES ARE INDEPENDENT SMALL
BUSINESS PEOPLE, NOT CHAINS, NOT CORPORATIONS THAT TAKE THEIR MONEY OUT OF STATE. THIS IS KIND OF LIKE THE HEART OF WHAT SCOTTSDALE STARTED WITH. I MEAN, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A MAIN STREET AND A LOT OF THOSE SMALL BUSINESSES ARE ON MAIN STREET. THIS IS MAIN STREET, SCOTTSDALE.
WE GOT TO REALLY BUT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT TO DOING THIS AND I COMPLETELY APPLAUD THE CITY FOR WANTING TO MAKE A CHANGE AND HAVING A DIFFERENT COMPANY DOING IT AND SENDING OUT THE RFP. I SAW SOME OF THE STUFF THAT CAME OUT IN PAPERWORK AND A LOT
OF IT WAS REDACTED, WHICH KIND OF SURPRISED ME AND KIND OF DEPRESSED ME, LIKE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S NOT BEING SHOWN, BUT ONE OF THE GRAPHS THAT I SAW KIND OF THREW ME A LITTLE BIT WHERE IT LOOKED LIKE IN A BUSINESS SITUATION FOR MARKETING, IT
LOOKED LIKE SALARY AND PAYMENTS WERE LITERALLY 50% OF IT AND 40% OF IT WAS GONNA BE THE ACTUAL ADVERTISING. SO AS MYSELF AS A SMALL BUSINESSPERSON, I CAN'T POSSIBLY SPEND THAT KIND OF MONEY TO HAVE
MY ADVERTISING DONE. I'D LIKE TO SEE A WHOLE LOT MORE OF THAT MONEY GOING TOWARDS THE ACTUAL MARKETING, THE ACTUAL ADVERTISING. SO I KNOW THERE'S AN AWFUL LOT OF, YOU KNOW, MOVING PARTS WITHIN THAT. I WOULD SAY THAT YOU ARE
CRADLING THE HEART OF SCOTTSDALE, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, COMPLETE TRANSPARENCY, A LOT OF ENGAGEMENT. UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S A LOT OF UNIQUE SITUATIONS. I MEAN, I REPRESENT THE ARTS DISTRICT. I'M ON THE SCOTTSDALE GALLERY
ASSOCIATION BOARD. SO, YOU KNOW, MY HEART IS REALLY ARTS, BUT WITHIN THE ARTS THERE'S AN AWFUL LOT OF DIVERSITY TOO. YOU GO UP AND DOWN 5th AVENUE, THERE'S A LOT OF HAND CRAFTED OBJECTS THAT ARE HANDCRAFTED THAT AREN'T, QUOTE/UP QUOTE THE
FINE ARTS BUT THEY ARE ALL ART. THEY REALLY ARE. WE HAVE SOMETHING REALLY UNIQUE IN THE CITY OF SCOTTSDALE, THAT OTHER CITIES ASPIRE TO, AND I WOULD LIKE, YOU KNOW, TO SEE THIS MARKETING CONTRACT REALLY ENGAGE THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE
THERE AND NOT JUST THE LOCALS, NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, THE OUT-OF-TOWNERS BUT ALL OF THAT. LET'S PUT IT ALL TOGETHER AND MAKE THIS DOWNTOWN BE AN EXCITING MACE PLACE THAT ALL OFE CITY COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO GO ON
THURSDAY NIGHTS FOR ART WALK OR SATURDAY AFTERNOON TO WALK AROUND. SO I APPLAUD THAT WE'RE GOING IN THIS DIRECTION. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. BOB PEJMAN. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR BOROWSKY, COUNCILMEMBERS, THE NAME IS BOB PEJMAN.
ADDRESS IS ON THE RECORD. AND OLD TOWN NEEDS A LOT OF PEOPLE. WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO HAVE A FIRST-RATE AGENCY TAKE OVER THE MAMARKETING OF OLD TOWN. TO PUT THIS IN PERSPECTIVE, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS ONE
PARAGRAPH ON THE SECOND -- ACTUALLY, IT WAS THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF THE COUNCIL REPORT. IT SAYS, THE CONTRACTED WORK FOR THE PAST NINE YEARS DID NOT HAVE A SCOPE OF WORK SPECIFIC TO OLD TOWN SCOTTSDALE. NOW THAT'S PRETTY ALARMING, THE PAST NINE YEARS THIS WAS NO --
SO I'M SUPER HAPPY THAT OUR CITY MANAGER, WITH THE HELP OF JUDY DOYLE, THE SUPPORT OF THE COUNCIL, DECIDED TO PUT THIS OUT TO BID. BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, FOR NINE YEARS, I BEGGED THE PREVIOUS
CITY MANAGERS AND THE COUNCIL TO PUT IT OUT TO BID AND IT FELL ON DEAF EARS. WE ARE SUPER EXCITED ABOUT THIS. THIS IS A BIG DEAL. OLD TOWN IS A SPECIAL PLACE. IT HAS TO BE TARGETED, MARKETED STRATEGICALLY. AND THE RECENT KEEN SURVEY,
WHICH BY THE WAY WAS A GREAT SURVEY, SHOWS THAT THERE'S A GREAT DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE BUSINESSES AND THE TOURISM PLAN, AND THE MARKETING. AND, AGAIN, WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO HAVE THIS ADDRESSED TO HIRING A NEW AD AGENCY. NOW, I LOOKED AT THE PROPOSAL
THAT WAS ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA, OVER 20 PAGES WERE REDACTED UP UNTIL NOW AND I JUST REALIZED THAT YOU AS THE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE THE UNREDACTED INVESTIGATION. I STILL DON'T HAVE IT, THE PUBLIC DOESN'T HAVE IT, SO THIS WAS DONE LAST MINUTE. THE WAY THE CITY'S CONTRACT
READS, THE RFP AND THE PROPOSAL BASICALLY FORM THE CONTRACT. SO GIVEN THE REDACTIONS I CAN'T SAY HOW THE RFP REQUIREMENTS ARE REFLECTED IN THE PROPOSAL. AND, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE ITEMS
ARE HOW ARE WE GOING TO MARKET -- DO TARGETED MARKETING CAMPAIGNS. $1.3 MILLION IS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26. WE JUST FOUND OUT FROM RACHEL THAT ABOUT $1 MILLION IS LEFT OVER FOR THE SECOND HALF OF THE
FISCAL YEAR, BUT IT'S NOT REFLECTED IN THE CONTRACT. IT HAS TO BE REFLECTED THAT, YOU KNOW, ALMOST $1 MILLION WILL BE SPENT PRETTY MUCH DURING THE SEASON UP UNTIL JUNE. AND LET ME SEE, WHAT ELSE? WELL, HAVING TO DO WITH THE
ALLOCATION OF THE BUDGET, IT SEEMS THAT ABOUT 40% OF THE BUDGET IS SPENT ON ACTUAL ADDS OUT OF $1.3 MILLION THAT'S $520,000. SO I REALLY HOPE THAT WE CAN SQUEEZE MORE MARKETING ACTUAL MARKETING OUT OF THIS CONTRACT. AND IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS, FOR
SURE SOME OF THE LEG WORK IS DONE UP FRONT. SO, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE DONE ALL THE RESEARCH AND, YOU KNOW, ALL THE TEMPLATES AND ALL THE, YOU KNOW, MATERIAL AND ALL THAT. SO I'M HOPING THAT ESPECIALLY IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS, THAT PORTION GOES DOWN SO WE GET A
MUCH BIGGER ALLOCATION OF MARKETING. AND ONE LAST ITEM, IN THE RFP, IT HAS OLD TOWN BROKEN INTO NINE DISTRICTS. AND IN MY OPINION, THAT HAS TO BE CONVERTED INTO FOUR DISTRICT, HISTORIC OLD TOWN, ARTS
DISTRICT, FIFTH AVENUE, WATERFRONT AND THE ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT. THAT -- THAT REDUCES DILUTION OF MARKETING ON THE DISTRICTS AND ALSO FASHION SQUARE, I MEAN, THEY ARE ONE THE BEST PERFORMING MALLS IN THE U.S., AND THEY'RE SELF-PROMOTED. FRANKLY, WE SHOULD LEARN FROM
THEM HOW TO MARKET OLD TOWN. THANK YOU. SO THEY DON'T REALLY NEED OUR HELP. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES THE COMMENTS ON THIS 15A. COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. >> Councilmember Whitehead: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, RACHEL.
I AM ALSO ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT A NEW VENDOR. I THINK THAT IS AN EXCITING CHANGE AND OPPORTUNITY. YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT SOMETHING THAT I HAVE HEARD FROM QUITE A FEW RESIDENTS AND THIS WILL BE A CHALLENGE. AND IT'S A CHALLENGE FOR THIS
CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE MARKETING ALONE IS NOT GONNA HELP US -- HELP OUR SMALL BUSINESSES DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS AS WE HAVE SEEN THE HEAT RISING, OUR TOURISM GOES WAY DOWN IN THE SUMMER, BUT WHAT I'M HEARING IS A NEW TREND AND THAT'S THAT OUR
RESIDENTS ARE LEAVING FOR THE SUMMER. SO I'VE SPOKEN WITH MANY SMALL BUSINESSES WHO ARE SUFFERING BECAUSE OF THE HEAT. SO WE -- IT ISN'T JUST MARKETING, BUT THAT'S FOR ANOTHER DISCUSSION. IT WAS JUST INTERESTING TO HEAR OUR SPEAKERS, EVERY MEETING WE
HAVE SPEAKERS ABOUT THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN. SO WE REALLY HAVE TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM WITH THE SUMMER. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE REST OF THE YEAR. I WONDER IF -- ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO GET IS ACCURATE DATA.
SO I THINK MR. PEJMAN SAID THAT OLD TOWN NEEDS HELP AND I HEAR THAT A LOT FROM PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN -- UP BY ME OR FURTHER NORTH AND HAVEN'T BEEN TO OLD TOWN IN QUITE A FEW YEARS. SO I SPEND A LOT OF TIME DOWN
THERE, AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE IS SOME DATA ON CERTAINLY THIS SEASON, SATURDAY MORNING, GO DOWN TO OLD TOWN, 7 A.M. BY THE WATERFRONT AND THERE MUST BE A THOUSAND PEOPLE RUNNING AND THEN HAVING COFFEE AND PASTRIES AFTERWARDS.
I'M ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE. SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE NEED, FIRST OF ALL, FOR MARKETING IS TO LET THE RESIDENTS OF SCOTTSDALE KNOW WHAT'S REALLY HAPPENING IN OLD TOWN, WHICH IS QUITE A LOT. THIS PAST -- DURING THE CANAL
CONVERGENCE, THE CONCERT SERIES, I JUST NEED DATA OF HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE COMING TO THESE EVENTS, JUST FOR FALL ALONE WILL BE ASTONISHING. INTERESTINGLY, I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FIND A PARKING SPOT EVERY TIME, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT --
THAT'S THE MESSAGE. WE NEED A NEW MESSAGE THAT, YES, WE HAVE A NIGHT LIFE THAT'S MOSTLY IN THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT, BUT THERE IS A WHOLE LOT GOING ON AND OUR BOUTIQUES AND OUR NEW HOTELS COMING IN.
SO THAT'S A POSITIVE STORY IS THE FIRST THING I WANTED TO KIND OF GET OUT THERE. SECOND, I WANT TO COMMEND STAFF HAS DONE A FABULOUS JOB, EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE FOCUSES ON BRINGING PEOPLE FROM OUT OF STATE.
OUR STAFF HAS DONE AN INCREDIBLE JOB FOCUSING ON LOCAL MARKETING. SO WHO MAKES THE DECISION ON WHAT -- WHAT WE PAY TO CHANGE AND WHAT STAYS THE SAME? AND I WANT TO POINT OUT THE WEBSITE IS FABULOUS. THAT'S THE CITY -- I GUESS YOU
ALL DO THE WEBSITE INTERNALLY. WHO DOES THAT WEBSITE? IT'S FABULOUS? >> MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, WE DO DO SOME OF THE FRONT END ENTRY ON THE -- EVERYONE GO,
OLDTOWNSCOTTSDALEAZ.COM. WE DO SOME WORK INTERNALLY, BUT IT HAS BEEN HOSTED BY OUR PREVIOUS VENDOR. WE OWN IT AND SO WE WILL BE TRANSFERRING IT OVER TO THE JAMES AGENCY FOR THAT HELP AS WELL, FOR THAT BACK END HELP AND YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE IT'S ALWAYS FRESH.
WE DO THE CALENDAR, BUT THERE IS A LOT THAT GOES INTO MAKING SURE YOUR WEBSITE ALWAYS THE NUMBER ONE GOOGLE SEARCH WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING FOR OLD TOWN SCOTTSDALE. >> Councilmember Whitehead:
YEAH, SO WILL BE BACK END IS UP AND DOING UPDATES. BUT THE OTHER PART IS GOING TO STAY THE SAME. >> I THINK IT WILL STAY SAT SAME. IT'S A TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP. >> Councilmember Whitehead: NOT OWNERSHIP. >> A TRANSFER OF HOW WE MANAGE
THAT, YEAH. >> Councilmember Whitehead: OKAY. WHAT ELSE ARE YOU FORESEEING FOR CHANGES? WE ALSO HAVE MONTHLY GET TOGETHERS WITH BUSINESS -- WHAT DO YOU SEE AS BEING DIFFERENT WITH THIS CONTRACT?
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. I'M JUST EXCITED FOR A NEW CREATIVE VISION, RIGHT? WE HAD AN AGENCY WITH US FOR NINE YEARS AND AFTER NINE YEARS, WE'RE READY FOR SOMETHING NEW. I THINK THAT ONE THING THAT VERANEEK AN HER TEAM DID WHEN
THEY GAVE THE PRESENTATION IS REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE READY TO PIVOT. YOU KNOW, OLD TOWN SCOTTSDALE HAS A BIT OF A REPUTATION AS A NIGHTTIME PARTY SCENE, AND THAT'S FINE. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ROOM FOR ALL BUSINESSES, BUT ALSO TO ENHANCE OUR REPUTATION AND KIND OF
REDIRECT IT SO THAT IT'S ARTS AND CULTURE, SHOPPING, RESTAURANTS AND, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST KNOWN SO MUCH FOR -- FOR SPECIFICALLY THE NIGHT LIFE. THERE'S A TON DOWN HERE. I MEAN, WE WERE BUILT ON ARTS AND CULTURE AND SO WE REALLY
WANT TO BRING THAT BACK. WE'VE GOT LOVELY PUBLIC ART, MUSEUMS, ALL SORTS OF WONDERFUL THINGS TO SEE, IN ADDITION TO OUR ARTS DISTRICT AND -- AND GALLERIES AND SOME AMAZING RESTAURANTS AND SO I THINK IT'S JUST TIME TO PIVOT A BIT AND
START TALKING ABOUT THOSE THINGS TOO. >> Councilmember Whitehead: OKAY. I DEFINITELY SUPPORT THAT AND YOU HAVE DONE A FABULOUS JOB, SCOTTSDAZZLE AND ALL THE SCOTTSDALE ARTS PROGRAMS. I'M REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING THAT DATA AND SEEING SOME IDEAS ON HOW TO MAKE SURE THAT THE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE
WHO HAVEN'T BEEN TO OLD TOWN RECENTLY NOW KNOW TO SHOW UP. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: THAN K YOU, MADAM MAYOR. RACHEL, I THINK A NUMBER OF US
HAVE MENTIONED THAT YOU HAVE DONE SO MUCH WORK OVER THE L.A. SIX TO EIGHT MONTHS TO -- THE LAST SIX TO EIGHT MONTHS TO REEVALUATE AND TAKE A LOOK, A DIVE INTO WHERE WE ARE AT. WE HAD ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE FROM A VARIETY OF HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS AND FOLKS COME HERE,
BUT THEN ALSO I THINK IT WAS -- IT WAS ABSOLUTELY VALIDATED BY THE KEEN REPORT THAT THERE IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT NEEDS ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE CITY, CERTAINLY REQUESTED BY THE MERCHANTS GOING ON IN OLD TOWN.
SO I HAVE BEEN VERY ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE THE MARKETING IN OLD TOWN. 1.3 -- I HEARD 1.3, I HEARD $1.5 MILLION. THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY THAT COULD REALLY HAVE AN ENORMOUS IMPACT
ON THE OLD TOWN AREA. SO I WILL ECHO WHAT SOME OF THE COMMENTS HAVE BEEN SO FAR WHICH IS THAT I WAS SURPRISED IN THIS PRESENTATION TO SEE 40% OF THE
$1.3 MILLION WOULD GO TO ADVERTISING COSTS. SO THAT PENCILS OUT TO A LITTLE OVER -- YEAH, THAT'S ON PAGE 78 OF THE PRESENTATION. THAT PENCILS OUT TO A LITTLE OVER $500,000. FRANKLY, I THOUGHT OUT OF 1.3,
$1.5 MILLION, $1 MILLION WOULD BE SPENT ON ADVERTISING. THIS ISN'T A HUGE BUDGET. IT'S NOT A $20 MILLION BUDGET, RIGHT. THIS IS A SMALL BUDGET, AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE AN EXPECTATION TO BE KIND OF SCRAPPY WITH THAT BUDGET AND TO REALLY MAKE IT STRETCH AS FAR AS WE CAN.
SO I WAS REALLY DISAPPOINTED TO SEE THAT NUMBER. I THINK WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO OUR MERCHANTS TO DELIVER AS MUCH ADVERTISING AS POSSIBLE AND I JUST CAN'T -- I CAN'T GET ON BOARD WITH -- WITH A THIRD --
AROUND A THIRD OF THAT NUMBER BEING THE ACTUAL ADVERTISING BUDGET. AND SO FOR THAT REASON, I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO MOVE TO -- HOLD ON.
WE CHANGED THE LIGHT HERE. OH, SHOOT. I LOST MY SPOT. YEAH, I'M GOING TO MOVE TO NOT ADOPT RESOLUTION 13562 AND ASK
THE CITY TO GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD. I THINK THAT WE HAVE REALLY SMART PEOPLE WITHIN THE CITY. I THINK THE CITY COULD POTENTIALLY EVEN PICK THIS PROJECT UP AND RUN WITH IT AT A GREAT COST, IF WE HIRED ONE OR TWO PEOPLE THAT WERE GREAT AT MARKETING, THEN WE COULD SPEND
THE $1 MILLION. SO I THINK THAT THERE'S A MORE THAT WE COULD DO HERE AND MORE THAT WE COULD DELIVER TO OUR MERCHANT CHANS.S. I THINK OUR MERCHANTS ARE BEGGING FOR HELP HERE. AND SO I'LL MOVE TO VOTE NO ON
13562. >> Councilmember Graham: I WILL SECOND THAT. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. THERE'S A MOTION ON THE TABLE. I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AN ALTERNATE MOTION. AND I WILL SPEAK TO THE REASON WHY. I THINK THAT THIS IS A GREAT IDEA. THERE'S A DIFFERENT SUBSET OF
TALENTS AND EXPERTISE THAT COMES WITH A FIRM AND PEOPLE THAT ARE 100% DEDICATED TO PUBLIC RELATIONS AND MARKETING. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT YOUR DEPARTMENT SHOULD BE DEDICATED TO. I MEAN, I THOUGH YOU DO --
YOU'RE SPREAD VERY THIN. IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO HIRE A REALLY TOP-NOTCH CREATIVE TYPE IN YOUR BUDGET FOR YOUR DEPARTMENT, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA, BUT COLLABORATION, EXPERIENCE AND ALSO THE ASSETS THAT THEY HAVE, THE ABILITY TO
TAP INTO, IS -- IS UNREALISTIC TO PUT IN YOUR OFFICE, IN MY OPINION. I THINK OLD TOWN IS OUR TOP -- IT'S A TOP PRIORITY FOR ME, REVITALIZATION, TOP PRIORITY FOR MY ADMINISTRATION, AND FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS. SO I THINK WE CAN'T -- I DON'T
THINK WE SHOULD BE SHORT SIGHTED ABOUT IT, NOT THAT THE MOTION IS SHORT SIGHTED, BUT I DO THINK -- AND THIS WAS GOING TO BE MY PROPOSAL. I HAVE CONCERNS ON -- I HAVE A LIST, THREE PAGES OF QUESTIONS AND I THINK THERE'S 20 QUESTIONS
IN HERE. SO -- 21. SO I DEFINITELY HAD MY SHARE OF QUESTIONS THAT ARE PROBABLY NOT BEST SUITED FOR THE DAIS TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS. I AGREE, YOU KNOW, AND BOB PEJMAN SAID WITH THE AMOUNT OF MONEY BEING DEDICATED TO
ADVERTISING, I THINK THAT'S -- THAT DOESN'T PASS THE TEST OF BALANCE AND VALUE. AGAIN, NO OFFENSE, BECAUSE WE WERE NOT INVOLVED IN THE NEGOTIATION ON THIS. I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT THAT -- WHAT THAT INCLUDES AND I
DID READ THROUGH THE PRESENTATION AND I SEE WHAT YOU HAVE GIVEN TO US. WE HAVE AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE. INSTEAD OF A NO, I THINK WE SHOULD SHARPEN THE PENCIL AND GO
BACK TO LOOK AT THIS WITH A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL. I THINK COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS, IN FACT, I KNOW YOU'RE ON THAT SUBCOMMITTEE. AND MAYBE THAT WOULD BE A REALLY GOOD USE OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE'S
TIME, TALENT AND FOCUS. AND SO WITH THAT, I WOULD MAKE AN ALTERNATE MOTION TO NOT TABLE THIS ENTIRELY, BUT TAKE THIS ENTIRE PRESENTATION -- AND BY THE WAY, I THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT PRESENTATION. AND I KNOW IT'S A GREAT AGENCY. TAKE IT BACK TO THE TABLE, IF
YOU WILL, TO VET IT, FINE TUNE IT AND MAYBE COME BACK WITH A PRODUCT THAT WE CAN GET OUR HEADS AROUND AND HEARTS BEHIND. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: POINT OF ORDER. I WANT TO HE N KNOW THE DIFFEREE BETWEEN THE TWO ALTERNATE
MOTIONS. >> Mayor Borowsky: IT WASN'T A CONTINUANCE. MY MOTION IS TO POSTPONE -- REDIVERT TO GO BEFORE OUR SUBCOMMITTEE OF ECONOMIC -- OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE, AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COUNCIL. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I WILL SECOND THAT. >> Mayor Borowsky: THE CITY ATTORNEY WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING, IN CASE WE ARE BREAKING ANY RULES. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: HONORABLE MAYOR, WHATEVER THE CITY COUNCIL DOES IN THIS MATTER, THEY HAVE TO
FOLLOW THE PROCUREMENT CODE. AND COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS, I THINK HER MOTION WAS SAYING LET'S NOT AWARD A CONTRACT AND GO BACK AND DO AN -- A NEW PROCUREMENT PROCESS. I'M NOT TOTALLY SURE, MAYOR,
WHA YOUR -- I DON'T THINK THE PROCUREMENT CODE HAS CONTEMPLATED HAVING A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL. >> Councilmember Graham: RIGHT. RIGHT. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: REVIEW A MATTER. I BELIEVE THE MOST EFFECTIVE THING, AND ALSO WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE PROCUREMENT CODE FURTHER,
WOULD BE TO EITHER AWARD THE CONTRACT OR NOT AND START THE PROCESS AGAIN. WE COULD LOOK AT GETTING INPUT FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE, ET CETERA. BUT WE -- WE SHOULDN'T TRY TO INVENT A NEW PROCESS ON THE FLY. >> Mayor Borowsky: WELL, I -- I
JUST DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE, YOU KNOW, POSTPONING THIS INDEFINITELY OR SENDING IT OUT FOR, YOU KNOW, REBID. I DON'T -- I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE BEST USE. I'M SORRY TO HEAR THAT THE -- OUR ECONOMIC SUBCOMMITTEE -- OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE CAN'T TAKE A CLOSER
LOOK AT THIS. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO OPEN IT BACK UP FOR AN UPCOMING RFP. I KNOW YOU HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE IMPACT, WHATEVER
THE IMPACT WOULD BE FOR THE PROCUREMENT CODE. SO I GUESS WE COULD MOVE TO CONTINUE IT IF -- AND PUT IT ON -- >> Councilmember Whitehead: I WILL SECOND THAT. >> Mayor Borowsky: INSTEAD OF THROWING IT IN THE CAN AND STARTING OVER. BARSO WHY DON'T I DO AN ALTERNAE
MOTION TO POSTPONE CONSIDERABLE DEVELOPMENT AND THAT PUTS US ON HOLD FOR THE DECEMBER BUDGET. >> MAYOR, IF I MAY, I DO BELIEVE THE CONTRACT -- WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS IN THE PROPOSAL, WHICH IS THE PROJECTED -- HOW DO
YOU HAVE IT IN HERE? PROJECTED INVESTMENT. AND SO YOU WILL SEE THERE'S TEXT IN THERE THAT SAYS BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT TODAY, THE ACTUAL CONTRACT ITSELF REALLY SPEAKS TO
THEIR PRICING SHEET. AND SO THIS IS THEIR PROPOSAL. WE NEVER GOT TO NEGOTIATE THIS. THIS IS WHAT THEY SUBMITTED WITH TEN OTHER AGENCIES AND WHAT WE AGREED TO IS THEIR PRICE PER HOUR AND THE -- YOU KNOW, A COMMISSION ON THE MEDIA BUY.
WHAT WE HAVE BUDGETED RIGHT NOW IN MY DEPARTMENT IS A LITTLE CLOSER TO $600,000. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT COMPLETELY AMELIORATES THE CONCERN. BUT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE DO ASK A LOT OF THEM. THE CREATIVE WORK BEHIND
DESIGNING SIX TO EIGHT CAMPAIGNS, THE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT, THE PUBLIC RELATIONS. SO, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THESE THINGS THAT WE'RE ASKING OF THEM ARE SEPARATE FROM AN ACTUAL MEDIA BUY. SO THE MEDIA BUY -- AND WE
COULD -- WE'RE NOT REALLY -- THE -- THE CONTRACT DOESN'T CALL OUT A SPECIFIC PERCENTAGE ACCORDING TO THE PRICING PROPOSALS. SO WE'VE GOT A LITTLE FLEXIBILITY IN HERE TO FOLLOW YOUR DIRECTION AS WELL. SO JUST WANTED TO POINT THOSE
FEW THINGS OUT. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: THAT IS HELPFUL AND I DID NOTICE THE $170 AN HOUR FOR ALL THE VARIOUS PROFESSIONALS AND TASKS AND SO YOUR POINT IS THAT THIS IS A PAY AS YOU GO CONTRACT, AND YOU HAVE OVERSIGHT AND DIRECTION
POTENTIALLY. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> Mayor Borowsky: AS THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CONTRACT AND WOULD THERE BE ANY REASON WHY THEY COULDN'T INTERFACE WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE IF WE SO APPROVED THIS TONIGHT? BECAUSE I REALLY DON'T WANT TO PUT THIS ON HOLD FOR ANOTHER TWO
OR THREE OR FOUR MONTHS. I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE BEST IDEA. AND IF WE ARE ONLY IN IT FOR AS MUCH AS YOU'RE APPROVING, AND MAYBE YOUR DISCRETION WOULD BE TO ALLOCATE MORE TOWARDS
RESOURCES AND MARKETING THEN I WOULD SUPPORT IT THIS EVENING AND GO FORWARD AND KIND OF CHECK IN, I GUESS AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING TO SEE WHAT IMPROVEMENTS WE WOULD HAVE MADE. I KNOW THERE'S A CONTRACT. I GET IT PURSUANT TO THE RFP, BUT IT'S KIND OF A ROCK AND A
HARD PLACE, JUST BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW. >> MAYOR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I WOULD LOVE TO GET VERANEEK IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. SHE HAS A LOT OF AMAZING IDEAS. SHE'S INCREDIBLY ENERGETIC AND ARTICULATE AND SO WE WOULD
WELCOME THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND SPEAK MORE TO THIS CONTRACT AND TO THE WORK SHE'S GONNA DO AND A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS WHICH IS LARGELY WHAT WAS REDACTED FROM THE PROPOSAL, ATTACHED TO THE COUNCIL REPORT. IT'S ALL SUPER EXCITING.
I KNOW A LOT OF FOLKS IN TOWN KNOW THE JAMES AGENCY. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF FAITH THAT WE ARE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD IN A NEW DIRECTION THAT IS POSITIVELY IMPACTFUL. >> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. THANK YOU. JUST BE CLEAR, I'M WITHDRAWING MY MOTION TO CONTINUE, IT BUT I DO HAVE ONE FINAL QUESTION
BEFORE WE ADDRESS THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE TABLE. HOW DO YOU PROCEED THIS CONTRACT IF AWARDED INTERFACING WITH EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE BECAUSE THERE'S -- IT'S A LITTLE NERVE WRACKINWRACKING BRINGING AN ENTY
NEW PLAYER INTO THE ENVIRONMENT WHERE WE HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE FOCUSED ON -- SO MANY DIFFERENT GROUPS ON WHAT SHOULD BE MARKETING WHICH INCLUDES OLD TOWN. SO HOW DO YOU -- HOW WOULD YOU SEE THEM INTERFACING WITH EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE AND SCOTTSDALE ARTS? >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.
THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. WE ABSOLUTELY MOVE WHEN OUR PARTNERS COME TO THE TABLE AS MENTIONED EARLIER, EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE BRINGS PEOPLE TO THE DESTINATION, AND REALLY WHAT WE'RE FOCUSED ON AND REALLY WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE MERCHANTS IS THEY WANT THE LOCALS TO COME BACK.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THE STATISTIC IS ABOUT 80% OF THE PEOPLE THAT VISIT SCOTTSDALE GO TO OLD TOWN, BUT NOBODY IS MAKING IT FROM THE NORTH PAST KIERLAND. NOBODY IS COMING FROM SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN MESA AND GILBERT. SO WE'RE GOING TO BE FOCUSED ON
THAT, MAKING OLD TOWN EXCITING AND COOL AND A DESTINATION THAT APPEALS TO THE PEOPLE IN THE VALLEY, AND THAT'S REALLY THE DELINEATION BETWEEN OUR WORKING EXPERIENCE, AND SCOTTSDALE'S WORK. HOWEVER, I MEET MONTHLY WITH
EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE'S MARKETING TEAM. SO WE ARE NOT STEPPING ON EACH OTHER'S TOES OR WE'RE BEING EFFICIENT WITH THE FUNDS THAT WE HAVE THAT. SCOTTSDALE ARTS AS WELL, THEIR MARKETING TEAM IS VERY SMALL,
BUT WE ABSOLUTELY ROLL THEM INTO A LOT OF WHAT WE DO IN OLD TOWN. SO I THINK IT COULD BE A VERY COOPERATIVE EFFORT AND WE'RE VERY LUCKY HERE WITH THE CITY, WITH THE USE OF THE BED TAX FUNDS TO BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF TAKE THE LEAD ON A LOT
OF THAT. >> Mayor Borowsky: LAST QUESTION, WHAT WAS THE BUDGET FOR THE LAST VENDOR FOR THE YEAR? LAST FISCAL YEAR? >> YES THANK YOU. SO LAST FISCAL YEAR, THE BUDGET WAS $1,087,000. WE ONLY SPENT $816,000.
I GOT HERE LAST FALL, AND THEN BY SPRING IT WAS PRETTY OBVIOUS THAT WE NEEDED TO CHANGE. IT TOOK A WHILE FOR US TO -- TO MAKE THAT PIVOT. SO THE ACTUALS THAT WE SPENT WAS ABOUT $816,000 LAST YEAR AND I BELIEVE ABOUT HALF OF THAT WAS
FOR MARKETING PURCHASE. SO -- >> Mayor Borowsky: SO ABOUT HALF. SO YOU COULD OVERSEE THIS AND PERHAPS MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION. ALL RIGHT. I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS. I DO SEE THE CITY ATTORNEY WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, THERE'S STILL A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND I
BELIEVE HAS A SECOND. IF THE OFFER OF THE MOTION IS SO INCLINED, I WOULD ASK HER TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE CONTRACT VERSUS NOT ADOPT THE CONTRACT. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: I WILL MAKE THE MOTION IT DENY THE CONTRACT.
>> Councilmember Graham: I WILL ACCEPT THAT REVISION. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. I HAVE SOME MORE SPEAKERS ON THE BOARD. COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: THANK YOU, MAYOR. IT'S A GOOD CONVERSATION. I TEND TO -- THE REASON I SECONDED THE MOTION IS BECAUSE I TEND TO AGREE THAT THE OVERHEAD
IS JUST -- IT'S TOO MUCH. AND THE AMOUNT OF REDACTING, THE AMOUNT OF -- THE EXTENT AND THE VOLUME OF REDACTING TO ME WAS DISAPPOINTING BECAUSE I COULDN'T
GET TO WHAT -- WHAT THE PROPOSAL WAS, WHEN I WAS TRYING TO READ IT. S SOME SMETANA WHO WAS ON THE SELECTION COMMITTEE ON THIS PARTICULAR VENDOR. >> MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBER GRAHAM, THERE WERE FIVE MEMBERS THAT WERE VOTING MEMBERS, INCLUDING
ME, MICHELLE MYERS FROM EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE,
MARKETING, CAREERSTENHOSHAN. AND WE HAD ANGELICA CHPULO WHO WORKS WITH ME IN OLD TOWN AS AN ADVISOR, A NONVOTING MEMBER, AS WELL AS JUDY DOYLE. SO THEY COULD ASK QUESTIONS,
ASK -- PROVIDE INPUT, BUT THEY WERE NONVOTING MEMBERS. >> Councilmember Graham: SO WE -- EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE IS A VENDOR. WE HAD A VENDOR APPROVE VOTING ON THE APPROVAL OF ANOTHER VENDOR? >> MAYOR, COUNCILMAN GRAHAM, YES.
I MEAN, HER PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE SEEMED GERMANE. THIS IS A DIFFERENT KIND OF MARKETING. WE ARE MARKETING HERE IN THE VALLEY. IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THERE WAS ANY SORT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AND WE HAD ASKED, THERE WAS NO AGENCY SHE HAD WORKED FOR IN THE
PAST THAT HAD BID ON -- ON THIS RFP. >> Councilmember Graham: YEAH, I DON'T KNOW IF I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, BECAUSE, LIKE WHEN I HAVE MY CLIENTS AT MY JOB, YOU DON'T GO TO YOUR CLIENTS' OTHER VENDORS. YOU ALWAYS GO THROUGH YOUR CLIENT TOTCLIENT TO THE VENDOR O
SOMETHING. I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH PUSHING THEM TO INTERACT WITH EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE, A THIRD PARTY VENDOR, AND SCOTTSDALE ARTS WHICH IS A THIRD PARTY VENDOR. I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
CITY MANAGER, DO WE HAVE POLICIES ON THIS TYPE OF THIRD PARTY, THIRD PERIOD EXCHANGES? MAYBE WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT. >> City Mgr. Caton: MADAM MAYOR, AND MAYOR GRAHAM, I WOULD
DEFER TO OUR TREASURER. >> YES, MADAM MAYOR AND COUNCILMAN GRAHAM, I WILL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT AND MAKE SURE I GIVE YOU A COMPLETE ANSWER ON THAT. >> Councilmember Graham: YEAH, THAT RIGHT THERE ALONE MAKES ME UP COMFORTABLE. THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THE QUESTION ABOUT WHO WAS ON THE
SELECTION COMMITTEE. I AGREE WITH COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS ABOUT THE 40% -- ONLY 40% IS GUARANTEED TO REACH ACTUAL MEDIA PLACEMENTS. I WASN'T REALLY IMPRESSED WITH
DESCRIBING OLD TOWN IN NINE DISTINCT DISTRICTS. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT A MARKETING MG EXCERPTS BUT I LISTENED TO YOU AND EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE BUT I NEVER HEARD OF NINE DISTINCT DISTRICTS IN OLD TOWN. I JUST NEVER HEARD THAT.
YOU KNOW, COMMONLY WE HAVE FOUR TO FIVE. THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I THINK. MS. SMETANA, DO YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? >> I DON'T DISAGREE THAT WE HAVE SOME MAJOR DISTRICTS DOWN THERE AND THAT REALLY FASHION SQUARE DOESN'T NEED ANY OF OUR MARKETING DOLLARS AND THANK YOU,
FASHION SQUARE FOR BEING SO SUCCESSFUL. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE SPUR RIGHT HERE, THERE ARE KIND OF NINE SPOKES ON IT. SO IT WAS CONTEMPLATED BACK WHEN WE DID THIS BRANDING EXERCISE, WHETHER WE NEED IT OR NOT, WHETHER WE NEED TO WORK WITH THE
JAMES AGENCY TO THINK THROUGH THAT, IT'S -- IT'S BEEN AROUND SINCE WE'VE HAD THIS LOGO. >> Councilmember Graham: I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS. I THINK WE'VE HAD HAPI, OUR PRIOR VENDOR, WE HAD THEM SINCE 2016; IS THAT CORRECT.
>> THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, YES. 2016. >> Councilmember Graham: ABOUT NINE YEARS. >> YES. >> Councilmember Graham: I MEAN WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO. WE'RE TRYING TO REPOSITION OLD TOWN AS A YEAR-ROUND UPSCALE, CULTURAL RICH DESTINATION. WE ARE TRYING TO MOVE AWAY FROM
THE PARTY VIBE, THE BACHELORETTE VIBE TO SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE -- A LITTLE HIGHER SCALE. AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW -- THERE WERE THINGS IN THIS -- IN THIS PACKET THAT I DID AGREE WITH ABOUT WHO WE'RE TARGETING, THE
TIME TYPE OF AFFLUENT VISITOR AND CUSTOMER THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ATTRACT. I THINK THAT IF PEOPLE KNEW HOW MUCH TAX DOLLARS OVER THE YEARS, RECENT YEARS WE HAVE SPENT TO MARKET SCOTTSDALE AND HOW LITTLE
TAXPAYERS HAVE GOTTEN, NOT TO MENTION HOW WE HAVE SHIFTED PERCEPTIONS, THE PERCEPTIONS THAT WE HAVE DEVELOPED WITH THOSE TAX DOLLARS. I THINK THEY WOULD BE DISAPPOINTED. SO THOSE ARE MY REMARKS FOR THE
TIME BEING, BUT I SECONDED THE MOTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD. >> Councilmember Littlefield: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I HAVE TO ECHO JAN AND BARRY'S COMMENTS AND THE REASON IS, AS A
SMALL BUSINESS PERSON MYSELF, MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE RUN A SMALL BUSINESS FOR 40 YEARS AND WE KNOW HOW TIGHT MONEY CAN BE WHEN YOU'RE RUNNING A VERY TIGHT BUDGET, AND YOU'RE SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY ON THIS ADVERTISING
FOR THEIR BUSINESSES BUT WHAT, 60% ISN'T? YEAH, IT'S K NOT GOING TO THAT? THAT, TO ME, LOOKING AT THAT AS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, THAT'S A WASTE OF MONEY.
WHY WOULD I WANT TO DO THAT? I CAN'T SUPPORT THAT KIND OF AN OVERHEAD FIGURE FOR THIS. I DO SUPPORT DOING MARKETING FOR THE OLD TOWN AREA, AND I DO SUPPORT HAVING CONTRACTS TO DO THAT. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO SEE IF YOU COULD DO SOME RESEARCH AND FIND
SOME BETTER CONTRACTS, MAYBE RENEGOTIATE WITH THIS COMPANY A LITTLE BIT, AND SEE IF WE CAN'T COME UP WITH SOME BETTER TERMS AND DIVISION OF FUNDS. BECAUSE THAT REALLY JUST STRUCK ME AS A LOT -- YEAH, EXCESSIVE
FOR SMALL BUSINESSES TO COME UP WITH FOR THE OVERHEAD OF AN ADVERTISING COMPANY. SO THAT'S MY BIG CONCERN WITH IT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD. I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE CONTRACT DOESN'T HAVE THAT PERCENTAGE BREAKDOWN.
THE CONTRACT WE PAY PER HOUR, AND THAT THE CREATIVE WORK IS WORK, THE VIDEOS AND ALL THAT STUFF, IT -- ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT A DIRECT MEDIA SPEND, THERE -- YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST POST-IT
NOTES AND, OVERHEADS. SO I DON'T WANT TO BE DEFENSIVE ABOUT IT, IF THIS IS THE WAY IT GOES, BUT I DID WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE CONTRACT AND THE PROPOSAL ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. WE NEVER HAD ANY INPUT ON THE PROPOSAL. >> Councilmember Littlefield: THANK YOU. THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW.
>> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. >> Councilmember Whitehead: THANK YOU, MAYOR AND THANK YOU, RACHEL. YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS YEAR, WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF THROWING OUT WE WASTE A LOT OF MONEY THAT WAY. I AGREE, I HAVE CONCERNS. HONESTLY, I WAS CONCERNED INITIALLY ABOUT CHANGING THE
VENDOR, BECAUSE SCOTTSDALE, THE LAST THREE YEARS, HAVE BROKEN RECORDS AND MANY OF THOSE RECORDS WERE BROKEN RIGHT HERE IN OLD TOWN. SO WE'RE EXPERIENCING INCREDIBLE SUCCESSES AND MY THOUGHT INITIALLY WAS, YOU KNOW, WHY
BREAK SOMETHING THAT'S WORKING FINE? HOWEVER, IT WAS -- THIS PROCESS WAS INITIATED BY THE SMALL BUSINESSES, WAS IT NOT? ISN'TWASN'T THIS THE REQUEST OFE SMALL BUSINESSMEN?
>> INDEED, IT WAS THROUGH CONVERSATION WITH THE OLD TOWN MERCHANTS THAT WE EMBARKED ON THIS. I THINK THAT'S FAIR TO SAY. >> Councilmember Whitehead: AND THE OTHER THING, PERHAPS I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE I CAME TO THIS MEETING, LEARN ABOUT THIS CONTRACT. SO I'M NOT COMING HERE SURPRISED.
THERE'S NO SET AMOUNT THAT WE'RE COMMITTING IN THIS CONTRACT, LIKE WE DO WITH OTHER CONTRACTS. WE'RE APPROVING AN ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE AND THEN IT'S UP TO OUR STAFF, WHO HAVE BEEN
AMAZING. AGAIN, SCOTTSDAZZLE, ANYONE, TO DID HE SIDE WHERE WE NEED A LITTLE BOOST IN ORDER TO HELP THE VERY SMALL BUSINESSES THAT REQUESTED THIS. AND WE'VE SPENT HOW LONG PREPARING THIS? >> WE STARTED THIS IN AUGUST AND
FINISHED IN NOVEMBER. >> Councilmember Whitehead: AND HAVE YOU HAD -- HOW MANY MEETINGS HAVE YOU HAD OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, HOW MUCH INPUT WENT INTO THIS FROM THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY? >> THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, LARGELY, WE USED THE KEEN ENGAGEMENT STUDY AND WE ATTACHED
IT TO THE RFP AND SAID WE NEED YOU TO BE RESPONSIVE TO THIS. SO THAT WAS OUR -- OUR HOPE IN MAKING SURE THAT WE HAD A PROCESS THAT OUR OLD TOWN MERCHANTS FELT COMFORTABLE WITH. >> Councilmember Whitehead: AND OKAY. AND IF WE START FROM SCRATCH, WE HAVE TO -- WE'LL BASICALLY USE
THE SAME PROCESS. HOW MANY VENDORS APPLIED OR PUT IN APPLICATIONS FOR THIS CONTRACT? >> MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBER, 11. >> Councilmember Whitehead: 11. SO ARE WE GOING TO GET 11 DIFFERENT ONES? I'M NOT SURE WHERE WE ARE GOING WITH THIS. SO ANOTHER QUESTION IS ABOUT THE TAX DOLLARS. WELL, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT MISUSE OF TAX DOLLARS IN THIS -- TONIGHT MUST BE THE NIGHT THAT WE TALK ABOUT THAT. WE HAVE THE SECOND LOWEST TAXES IN THE VALLEY, AND I DON'T KNOW ANY CITY IN THE U.S. OF A. THAT HAS A BETTER QUALITY OF LIFE. SO I'D LIKE TO JUST POINT THAT
OUT. NOW, THE TAX DOLLARS FOR THIS COME FROM TOURISM. WHERE ARE THE DOLLARS COMING FROM? >> THEY ARE BED TAX TRANSIENT SALES TAX. >> Councilmember Whitehead: SO LET'S MAKE THAT PERFECTLY CLEAR FOR OUR RESIDENTS. THIS IS NOT YOUR TAX DOLLARS, THANKFULLY. IT'S THE VISITOR TAX DOLLARS
THAT ARE FUNDIN A QUALITY OF LIFE WE ALL GET TO ENJOY. NOW, I WILL SAY THAT I WAS SURPRISED ABOUT THE NINE DISTRICTS. I WAS SURPRISED ABOUT THE REDACTIONS. I WAS SURPRISED BY A FEW THINGS. AGAIN, I DID MY HOMEWORK. SO I DIDN'T COME HERE AND JUST,
YOU KNOW, NOT UNDERSTAND THE CONTRACT, BUT BECAUSE OF THAT CONFUSION, I'M PERFECTLY FINE CONTINUING IT, AND I THINK THIS WAS SOME CONFUSION FROM OUR CITY -- THE INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY. BUT I WOULD LIKE THE -- I WOULD
LIKE TO CONTINUE IT SO THAT WE CAN HAVE GOOD ANSWERS AND -- AND ANYONE IN OLD TOWN, ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC, ANY VISITOR FOR THAT MATTER, CAN REVIEW THE UNREDACTED CONTRACT. WOULD THAT BE PERMISSIBLE,
INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY? THE -- >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHEN -- HOW LONG THIS PARTICULAR CONTRACT CAN BE OPEN BEFORE THE AWARD PERIOD ENDS. >> Councilmember Whitehead: THANK YOU. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT YET.
WE'VE REACHED OUT TO THE PURCHASING DIRECTOR. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT FOR THE SAKE OF OLD TOWN, FOR THE SAKE OF A CONTRACT THAT THIS CITY HAS SPENT MONEY THROUGH THIS PROCESS, I AM WILLING TO MEET IN THE MONTH OF DECEMBER TO HOLD A
SPECIAL MEETING AFTER THE PUBLIC AND THIS CITY COUNCIL HAS TIME TO REVIEW THE CONTRACT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO REVIEW BEFORE WE GOT HERE, BECAUSE TO THROW IT OUT IS JUST A -- IS A WASTE OF TAX DOLLARS. AND IT UNDERMINES ALL THE
BUSINESSES THAT REQUESTED THIS AND ALL THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE EXCITED ABOUT A NEW VENDOR AND A NEW OPPORTUNITY TO, YOU KNOW, TO DO EVEN BETTER THAN WE HAVE FOR THE LAST THREE -- THREE YEARS IN OLD TOWN.
SO WHAT I WILL DO IS MOVE TO CONTINUE ITEM 15A, OLD TOWN SCOTTSDALE ADVERTISING, MARKETING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS SERVICES CONTRACT RESOLUTION NUMBER 13562 FOR ANOTHER TWO
WEEKS TO ALLOW TIME FOR FULL REVIEW OF AN UNREDACTED CONTRACT AND THEN HOLD A VIRTUAL MEETING TO VOTE ON THE ITEM. >> Councilmember McAllen: I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION.
>> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. SO WE HAVE AN ALTERNATE MOTION, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON. I WILL VOTE FOR THAT, HOWEVER, I DO WANT TO SPEAK TO MY VOTE BEFORE I CAST IT. A COUPLE OF THINGS WE HAVE LEARNED HERE TONIGHT.
WELL, I DO HAVE A QUESTION. THIS $1.325 MILLION WAS APPROVED. IT'S IN THE BUDGET. RIGHT? WE HAVE ALREADY APPROVED THIS MONEY. IS THAT -- AM I MISTAKEN THERE? >> YES, MAYOR, THAT'S TRUE. >> Mayor Borowsky: WE HAVEN'T APPROVED A VENDOR, BUT WE GET THAT, COUNCILMAN GRAHAM.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A BUDGET AMOUNT THAT'S BEEN APPROVED AND WE SELECTED A VENDOR AND WE'RE HERE TO APPROVE THAT. SO PUSHING THIS DOWN AND NOT HAVING A VENDOR, WHICH WE'VE HAD NOR NINE YEARS DOING THIS
OUTSOURCING, WE ARE BEING LEFT COMPLETELY UNCOVERED WITH THE OLD TOWN MARKETING, RIGHT? >> MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL -- >> Mayor Borowsky: BESIDES YOUR OFFICE, EXCUSE ME. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT. WE ACTUALLY DO -- SINCE WE USE THAT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, THAT AGREEMENT IS TECHNICALLY GOOD, I THINK UNTIL NEXT SEPTEMBER.
WE DO HAVE SOME MORE MONTHS ON THE LAST TIME WE DID A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT THAT DIDN'T INCLUDE ANY OF THIS SCOPING WORK. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO WITH THE PRIOR VENDOR IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >> YES, MA'AM. >> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. SO THEY ARE IN UNTIL SEPTEMBER.
>> MM-HMM. >> Mayor Borowsky: NO MATTER WHAT? >> NO. NO. THIS WOULD SUPERSEDE THAT, YES. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO WE'RE NOT SPENDING A -- WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING ANY MORE MONEY, BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE THIS APPROVED IN THE BUDGET. SO IT'S THE PRIOR VENDOR AND YOU HAVE TAKEN IT OUT OF YOUR OWN BUDGET TO FILL THE GAP IS WHAT I
HEARD YOU SAY, RIGHT? >> I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN BY SAYING IT OUT OF MY OWN BUDGET. >> Mayor Borowsky: I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU WEREN'T SPENDING UP TO $300,000 TO GET THROUGH DECEMBER. >> OH, I'M SORRY, NO, WE'VE ONLY SPENT ABOUT $300,000 ON OLD TOWN
MARKETING, ADVERTISING FROM JUNE UNTIL -- THAT'S MY ESTIMATE BY THE END OF SEPTEMBER. SO WE -- IT'S NOT BEEN THE ROBUST MARKETING AND ADVERTISING WHILE WE WAITED TO ONBOARD A NEW VENDOR. >> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. SO THIS IS AN APPROVE BUDGET
AMOUNT AND WE ARE NOW LOOKING AT THE VENDOR, WHO SEEMS VERY QUALIFIED. AND I'M SURE WE COULD GET THE INFORMATION THAT WE NEED. SO THEREFORE, I'M NOT -- I DON'T SUPPORT DENYING APPROVAL OF THIS. I WILL SUPPORT HAVING ANOTHER
SPECIAL MEETING TO COME BACK AND, YOU KNOW, ANSWER ANY -- GET SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED IN THE MEANTIME. BUT I'M NOT COMFORTABLE LEAVING OLD TOWN COMPLETELY, YOU KNOW, VENDORLESS AND I NO WE HAVE THE PRIOR VENDOR, SO MAYBE THAT'S
GOOD COVERAGE, BUT I'LL -- I'LL SUPPORT THE CONTINUANCE. WITH THAT, THERE'S A MOTION, AN ALTERNATE MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR -- >> Clerk Lane: MAYOR, I APOLOGIZE.
FOR THE ALTERNATE MOTION, THE VIRTUAL MEETING, WE NORMALELY NY ALLOW PUBLIC MEETING FOR OUR VIRTUAL MEETINGS OR CERTIFYING ELECTION EVENTUALS. SO WE HISTORICALLY HAVEN'T DONE PUBLIC COMMENT. SO IF IT'S OKAY, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IS THAT THE
COUNCILMEMBERS THAT COULD ATTEND A MEETING WILL HOLD IT HERE AND THEN THE COUNCILMEMBERS THAT CAN'T, WE CAN -- WE CAN PATCH THEM IN VIRTUALLY. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I GUESS BECAUSE I WAS ON COUNCIL DURING COVID, WE DID HAVE PUBLIC
COMMENT, BUT THAT'S FINE. >> Clerk Lane: OKAY. >> Mayor Borowsky: WILL YOUR SECOND GO FOR THAT? >> Councilmember McAllen: YES. >> Mayor Borowsky: WILL YOU CONSIDER A REVISION TO THIS BECAUSE I HEARD OUR CITY ATTORNEY SAY THEY ARE WAITING TO FIND OUT THE DEAD LINE THAT WE
WOULD HAVE. SO AT THE NEXT -- YOU KNOW, AT THE NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING DATE THAT WE WOULD REVISIT THIS BEFORE THE DEADLINE. >> Councilmember Whitehead: YES, I WOULD AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO ADD ONE WHO ARE THING THAT I'M REQUESTING THAT WAS UNCLEAR. SO, YOU KNOW THIS IDEA OF A HUGE
AMOUNT OF FUNDING OR PERCENTAGE OF THE DOLLARS GOING TO PEOPLE VERSUS MARKETING, I THINK THIS IS A PRETTY STAFF INTENSIVE WORK THAT -- THAT IS GOING TO BE PERFORMED. SO I THINK SOME EXPLANATION IS NEEDED THERE. I MEAN, IF I'M DONATING TO A
CHARITY TO SAVE WHATEVER RAIN FOREST AND 90% IS GOING TO A STAFF PERSON AND 10% IS GOING TO THE RAIN FOREST, I WOULD BE CONCERNED. SO I THINK THAT'S -- THAT IS THE SENTIMENT THAT WE'RE HEARING HERE. SO I THINK WHAT WE NEED IS A BETTER EXPLANATION OF WHAT THE
WORK IS AND HOW THE DOLLARS ARE BEING SPENT. AND SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THIS DISCOMFORT ABOUT A HUGE AMOUNT OF ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.
>> Mayor Borowsky: DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: THIS IS A GOOD DISCUSSION TO HAVE, AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONTRACT IS NOT THE -- YOU KNOW, IT'S $1 MILLION HERE AND $1 MILLION THERE AND PRETTY SOON YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT REAL MONEY, RIGHT. BUT THIS IS A GOOD CONVERSATION TO HAVE, BECAUSE IF WE -- IF --
THERE'S A REASON WHY THESE CONTRACTS GO IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL. AND PROCUREMENT GOES IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL. I WILL BE VERY CLEAR HERE. YOU KNOW, MY -- MY FRIEND COUNCILMEMBER WHITEHEAD AND I --
LIKE, UP HERE WE SPAR. OFF THE DAIS, WE ARE DEAR FRIENDS AND IT'S NICE TO HAVE THAT, BUT COUNCILMEMBER WHITEHEAD STATED THAT, YOU KNOW, STAFF WORKS VERY HARD ON THIS. I BELIEVE YOU THAT YOU WORKED REALLY HARD ON THIS. THERE'S NO CONTRACT THAT STAFF DOESN'T WORK REALLY HARD ON, AND
SO THE QUESTION IS, DO THE RESIDENTS EXPECT US TO BE A REMEMBERER STAMP? NO OFFENSE TO THE STAFF OR ARE WE PUT HERE TO ACT AS A BOARD OF DIRECTORS AS A CHECK ON -- ON PLENTY OF THINGS. WE TALK ABOUT WESTWORLD. WE TALK ABOUT GENERAL PLANS,
E'RE GOING TO HOLD THINGS UP. IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO CREATE EXPEDIENCY PROBLEMS TO PUT ANY CHECK ON ANYTHING. THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO CURB THE BRAKES AND PUMP THE BRAKES. WE HAVE THE COVERAGE. MY UNDERSTANDING WE HAVE
COVERAGE UNTIL NEXT SEPTEMBER, CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: WE HAVE COVERAGE UNTIL NEXT SEPTEMBER. THIS CONTRACT IS NOT WHAT WE WANT BECAUSE IT DOES NOT HAVE THE TYPE OF BALANCE OF EXPENDITURE TOWARD ADVERTISING, VERSUS PERSONNEL COSTS TO IT. IT WAS BROUGHT, WORKED HARD ON, I BELIEVE YOU, IT WAS PUT IN
FRONT OF THE COUNCIL, THIS IS NOT THE CONTRACT THAT WE WANT. WE'RE GONNA ACT AS A BOARD OF DIRECTORS HERE, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING TO VOTE NO ON THIS CONTRACT. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: THAN K YOU, MADAM MAYOR.
VERY WELL SAID, VICE MAYOR. IT'S OUR JOB TO LOOK OVER THINGS AND TAKE IT FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE AND ASK OURSELVES WHAT WOULD THE RESIDENTS ASK OF US. THE RESIDENTS ASK OF US TO BE VERY CAREFUL WITH THEIR DOLLARS. THERE WAS A STATEMENT MADE
TONIGHT THAT BED TAX DOLLARS AREN'T RESIDENTS' DOLLARS. THAT'S NOT TRUE. EVERY SINGLE DOLLARS THAT COMES IN AS REVENUE, WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR AND RELONGS TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF -- BELONGS TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSDALE. AND WE ARE OBLIGATED TO BE CAREFUL WITH THOSE DOLLARS.
I THINK IT'S OKAY IF IT TAKES A LITTLE MORE TIME TO GET THIS RIGHT. IT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT. SCOTTSDALE IS -- IS ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING AND DIFFERENT AND VIBRANT CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES. OLD TOWN IS OUR GEM. IT IS OUR OBLIGATION TO BE VERY
CAREFUL WITH THIS AND TO NOT TAKE IT LIGHTLY AND TO ASK FOR MORE. ASK FOR THE BEST THAT WE CAN POSSIBLY GET FOR OLD TOWN SCOTTSDALE, FOR OUR MERCHANTS, FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND FOR THE VALUE OF THEIR DOLLARS. AND SO THAT'S WHY I WILL NOT
SUPPORT THIS CONTINUANCE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US DO BETTER. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: I AGREE WITH COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS ON HER COMMENTS. I WAS KIND OF WRITING SOME NOTES HERE AND THINKING WHY OUR VENDORS SHOULDN'T REALLY TALK TO EACH OTHER WITHOUT US, WITHOUT
OUR EXPRESSED PERMISSION. A LOT OF CITIES HAVE THIS ISSUE -- OR THIS IS A VERY COMMON PROHIBITION FOR CITIES AND GOVERNMENTS. IF VENDORS, THIRD-PARTY VENDORS ARE TALKING WITH EACH OTHER AND APPROVING CONTRACTS, THERE IS A
RISK THAT ABOUT BID TAMPERING AND FAVORITISM FOR BIDS. THERE IS A RISK, IF ONE OF OUR VENDORS IS TALKING TO ANOTHER ONE, OR MAYBE WANT TO BID ON THAT, THAT MAY INFLUENCE THE COMPETITIVE BID PROCESS.
IT ALSO LOSES FROM A GOVERNMENT STANDPOINT, WE ALSO LOSE SOME OF OUR CONTROL. AND DO WE HAVE ANY LANGUAGE IN OUR -- IN THIS CONTRACT HOW -- WHETHER OR NOT EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE CAN SUBCONTRACT WITH JAMES AGENCY OR VICE VERSA? BECAUSE THAT WOULD DESTABILIZE,
I THINK, SOME OF THAT. SO, AGAIN, VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH OUR THIRD-PARTY VENDORS COORDINATING, ESPECIALLY WITHOUT -- OUTSIDE OF OUR SUPERVISION. I WANT TO PUT AN EMPHASIS ON THAT.
>> COUNCILMAN GRAHAM, MAY I CLARIFY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR. SO WE -- SO WE HAD A MARKETING PERSON FROM EXPERIENCE SCOTTSDALE UNDER OUR CONTROL THROUGH THE PURCHASING PROCESS EVALUATE THE PROPOSALS, THEY DIDN'T COORDINATE AND THEY
WEREN'T PART OF THE CONTRACT DEVELOPMENT. >> Councilmember Graham: DID YOU -- >> IS THIS A NUANCE IN THERE OR ARE YOU -- >> Councilmember Graham: THEY ARE A VOTING MEMBER. THEY ARE PICKING -- THEY ARE RECOMMENDING WHO WE PICK AS A VENDOR. DID YOU ASK EXPERIENCE
SCOTTSDALE IF THEY EVER SUBCONTRACTED WITH JAMES AGENCY. >> WE DID ASK FOR ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT, BUT THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. >> Councilmember Graham: I ALSO FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE THAT BED TAXES ARE NOT OUR TAX
DOLLARS. I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS. I STAYED AT HOY HOTELS IN SCOTTSDALE. THOSE ARE OUR TAX DOLLARS AND WE UP HERE AND OUR CITY STAFF ARE
RESPONSIBLE FOR THEM. YOU CAN'T JUST WALL OFF TAX DOLLARS BECAUSE YOU THINK THE SOURCE DOESN'T FIT THE BILL. IF WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR SPENDING THOSE, THOSE ARE OUR TAX DOLLARS. I HAVE HEARD THAT A FEW TIMES AND IT JUST -- I FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE WITH IT.
I WOULD ALSO TAKE EXCEPTION TO THE COMMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, HEY, TOURISM IS UP AND DOLLARS ARE LOW. SO EVERYTHING IS GOOD. DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING. OUR STRENGTHS IN SCOTTSDALE DID NOT HAPPEN BY ACCIDENT AND THEY
CAN ERODE FAST, VERY QUICKLY IF WE LOSE DISCIPLINE AND THING HIN CAREEN OUT OF CONTROL. IN A SINGLE SEASON YOU CAN HAVE A DETERIORATION IN YOUR BRAND. TAXPAYERS -- I DON'T KNOW IF
TAXPAYERS KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY OF THEIR TAX DOLLARS, YES, IT'S TAX DOLLARS THAT HAVE BEEN SPENT TO PUMP UP THE PARTY VIBE OF SCOTTSDALE. THIS HE THEY WOULD BE VERY DISA. AND WE NEED TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THAT.
VERY SERIOUS LOOK AT THAT. SO JUST BECAUSE TOURISM IS RECORD BREAKING AND TAXES ARE LOW DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CAN'T -- WE SHOULDN'T STAY ON TOP. WE SHOULD NOT KEEP A LASER FOCUS ON WHAT ACTUALLY GOT US HERE, WHICH IS A LASER FOCUS ON
UPSCALE, YEAR ROUND VISITORS INSTEAD OF VOLUME DRIVEN SPRING BREAK CROWDS, PROTECTING OLD TOWN'S AUTHENTIC CHARACTER INSTEAD OF LETTING IT DRIFT INTO GENERIC NIGHT LIFE AND KEEPING THE BED TAX MONEY LASER FOCUSED ON DESTINATION MARKETING THAT
BENEFITS THE WHOLE CITY, NOT JUST ONE LATE NIGHT SECTION. SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS ABOUT WHY I WILL BE OPPOSING THE ALTERNATE MOTION. THANK YOU.
>> Mayor Borowsky: I'M GOING TO CALL THE QUESTION. SO WE HAVE AN ALTERNATE MOTION ON THE TABLE. EXCEPT FOR COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD IS GOING TO MODIFY IT, ACCORDING TO THE DISCUSSION. >> Councilmember Whitehead: YES, I WOULD LIKE TO MODIFY AND PROTECTING RESIDENT TAX DOLLARS
IS EXACTLY WHY I'M NOT THROWING OUT EIGHT MONTHS OF WORK. AND I'M REQUESTING -- I'M ASKING MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES TO FIX THAT WHICH WE HAVE SPENT OF YOUR TAX DOLLARS GENERATING AND THERE'S BEEN SOME VERY GOOD QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS CONTRACT,
AND I WOULD LIKE ANSWERS AND IT IS -- >> Mayor Borowsky: POINT OF% ORDER. IF YOU WOULD STICK TO THE úMOTION. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND MY MOTION TO CONTINUE ITEM 15A OLD TOWN SCOTTSDALE ADVERTISING,
MARKETING AND PUBLIC RELATIONS SERVICES CONTRACT UNTIL A DATE DETERMINED BY STAFF THAT MEETS OUR CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENT SO THAT THIS COUNCIL HAS THE OPPORTUNITY UP OR DOWN IT BUT
WITH COMPLETE INFORMATION. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> Councilmember McAllen: I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: WITH THAT, WE CAN VOTE ON THE MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT REQUIRED MEETING TIME, WHEN WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THE DEADLINE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION FAILS. SO AS A RESULT, WE'LL VOTE ON THE DENIAL OF THE MOTION. >> Councilmember Graham: POINT OF ORDER.
CAN -- MAY I ASK COUNCILMEMBER DUBAUSKAS TO RESTATE YOUR MOTION? I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS ANY CLARIFY -- CLARIFICATIONS YOU WANTED TO MAKE. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: THE CITY ATTORNEY ASKED ME TO CLARIFY THAT WE WOULD -- THE
MOTION WOULD BE TO REJECT RESOLUTION 13562; IS THAT CORRECT? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: MAYOR AN MEMBERS OF >> Councilmember Dubauskas: DENY OKAY WE WILL DENY 13562. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR
VOTE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THAT WAS A VERY LONG AND LIVELY CONVERSATION AND HOPEFULLY YOU CAN GET BACK ON TRACK WITH THAT. >> THANK YOU.
>> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY MOVING RIGHT ALONG. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES OF COUNCIL PROCEDURE. BEFORE WE GO TO THE DISCUSSION BY -- FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL UP THE PUBLIC -- OR THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM NUMBER 16, STARTING
WEEKEND STEVE SUTTON, FOLLOWED BY RAOUL ZUBIA AND THEN MARK LENTZ, CHRISTOPHER AJALUTI AND MINDA MILHAVEN AND THEN LASTLY,
BUT NEVER LAST YVONNE CAHILL. GO AHEAD, STEVE. >> OKAY IS IT WAY WITH THE COUNCILMEMBERS MISSING? >> Mayor Borowsky: WE HAVE A QUORUM. WE WON'T STOP THE MEETING.
>> MAYOR BOROWSKY, I HAVE TO TELL YOU THE PROPOSED RULES AND THE PUBLIC STATEMENTS I HAVE SEEN DEFENDING THEM, ARE MY FIRST CLOSE-UP LOOK AT A RHETORICAL POLITICAL SUICIDE VEST. ONE COUNCILMEMBER HAS CONSTRUCTED THAT COULD BLOW UP
THE ENTIRE COUNCIL. I JUST MARVEL AT THE REDUNDANCY OF RHETORICAL DETONATORS I KEEP SEEING INSTALLED WITH EACH PASSING DAY. RHETORICAL DETONATORS LIKE THE STATEMENTS BY ADAM KWASMAN THAT
OBJECTIONS TO THE NEW RULES ARE, QUOTE, ENTIRELY POLITICAL AND, QUOTE, THE UTILIZATION OF NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS ARE BY THE SAME THREE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE BEEN DISTURBING THE FLOW OF THE MEETING AND THEY ARE DOING IT PURPOSEFULLY FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES, END QUOTE.
COUNCILMAN KWASMAN, THOSE ARE NOT TRUTHFUL STATEMENTS. THESE NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS ARE MENTIONED DURING THAT PERIOD OF THE MEETING FLOW BETWEEN THE MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF A POSSIBLE EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES. YOU KNOW THE PART OF THE MEETING THAT'S CALLED PUBLIC COMMENT.
IN REGARD TO YOUR CLAIM THAT OBJECTIONS ARE, QUOTE, ENTIRELY POLITICAL, END QUOTE, I SUSPECT THE TRIAL ATTORNEY WOULD PROBABLY SAY, OBJECTION, THERE ARE NO FACTS IN EVIDENCE. I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT I HAVE WATCHED LAW & ORDER ON TELEVISION. I'M GOING TO AGAIN SAY AND I
HAVE SAID THIS COUNTLESS TIMES TO OTHER PEOPLE, I'M NOT A POLITICIAN. I WILL NEVER BE A CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE. AND I DON'T WANT TO SERVE ON ANY CITY COMMISSION OR BOARD. COUNCILMAN KWASMAN CLAIMS THAT THE NEW RULES ARE QUOTE, STREAMLINE COUNSELING MEETINGS
WHILE DILL PRESERVING RESIDENTS' FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, END QUOTE. COUNCILMAN KWASMAN, THIS IS WHERE I KNOW YOU ARE DELIBERATELY NOT TELLING THE TRUTH. IN FACT, I THINK YOU ARE DELIBERATELY LYING TO MANIPULATE SCOTTSDALE RESIDENTS INTO THINKING YOU ARE PROTECTING THEM AND THEIR CITY COUNCIL FROM THE
QUOTE, SAME THREE INDIVIDUALS. FOR THOSE SCOTTSDALIANS WHO DON'T ALREADY KNOW, BE AWARE THAT COUNCILMAN KWASMAN IS ALSO ADAM KWASMAN ESQUIRE ATTORNEY AT LAW AND AS SUCH IS WELL EDUCATED ABOUT THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. WHICH IS WHY I KNOW HE KNOWS --
I KNOW HE KNOWS THERE'S NOT A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SPEAK AT THESE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. MAYORMAYOR BOROWSKY AND COUNCILMEMBERS, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING I WANT FROM YOU IS YOU DON'T BUILD AN
UNNECESSARY $20 M $20 MILLION E AND ARMS HISTORIC'LL OLD TOWN MERCHANTS AND THE AMBIENCE. THE OTHER THINGS I WANT -- POLITICAL THINGS I WANT FROM YOU ARE NOT TO TAMPER WITH PUBLIC
COMMENT, WITH RESTRICTIONS OR PETITION RESTRICTIONS AND NOT TO LOSE THE CITY TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND TO STOP CREATING MORE POLITICAL TURMOIL THAN HAS EVER BEEN SEEN BEFORE IN SCOTTSDALE HISTORY.
>> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, STEVE RAOUL ZUBIA. >> Councilman >> Councilmember Graham: POINT OF ORDER. WAS THERE A PUBLIC COMMENT? >> Mayor Borowsky: NO, IT'S AT THE -- >> Councilmember Graham: WELL, THERE'S AN ORDER IN THE RULES OF PROCEDURE. I WAS WONDERING IF THE STAFF HAD
A PRESENTATION. >> Mayor Borowsky: WE'LL HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY SPEAK TO THAT BECAUSE I HAVE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY CLERK BEN LANE AND I ACTUALLY DISCUSSED THIS EARLIER, AND WE ACTUALLY MADE A REQUEST THAT THE
PUBLIC COMMENT BE DONE FIRST. >> Councilmember Graham: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: YOU'RE WELCOME, SIR. >> Mayor Borowsky: EXCUSE ME, LUIS, WILL YOU PLEASE ADDRESS THE POINT OF ORDER THAT HE HAD, WHICH IS THE ORDER OF WHICH ACTIONS CAN BE TAKEN?
THAT'S AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR IS IT NOT. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THAT'S CORRECT. THE MAYOR DOES HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO CHANGE THE AGENDA. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. SO I'LL PROCEED WITH RAOUL ZUBIA. >> THANK YOU, EVERYONE. MY NAME IS RAOUL ZUBIA, SCOTTSDALE -- SOUTH SCOTTSDALE
RESIDENT, ADDRESS IS ON FILE. AND AS YOU KNOW, THE STRENGTH OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMES FROM THE TRUST RESIDENTS PLACE IN THE PROCESS. KNOWING OUR VOICES MATTER, AND THAT THE CITY WELCOMES PARTICIPATION. AND THAT'S WHY I THINK THESE SUGGESTED RULES CONCERN ME. I UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE TO
IMPROVE EFFICIENCY BUT CUTTING PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THREE MINUTES TO TWO, AND PUSHING THE ONLY OPEN COMMENT PERIOD TO THE VERY END OF THE MEETING MAKES IT EXTREMELY DIFFICULT FOR WORKING RESIDENTS AND FAMILIES TO PARTICIPATE. PUBLIC INPUT SHOULD NOT BE -- SHOULDN'T LAND AT THE POINT IN
THE MEETING WHEN MOST PEOPLE CAN'T REASONABLY STAY. ALSO, THE NEW PETITION REQUIREMENTS ADD UNNECESSARY BARRIERS AND PETITION GIVES RESIDENTS SIMPLE WAY TO RAISE CONCERNS, EXTRA HURDLES ONLY DISCOURAGE ENGAGEMENT AT A TIME
WHEN WE SHOULD OPEN MORE DOORS AND NOT CLOSE THEM. I DON'T BELIEVE THE INTENT WAS TO SILENCE THE PUBLIC BUT THESE CHANGES WOULD LIMIT PARTICIPATION, REDUCE FLEXIBILITY AND CREATE MORE DISTANCE BETWEEN RESIDENTS AND COUNCIL. YOU CAN UPDATE THE RULES WITHOUT SHRINKING THE PUBLIC'S VOICE AND
YOU CAN IMPROVE EFFICIENCY WITHOUT SACRIFICING TRANSPARENCY. FOR THESE REASONS, I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THESE AMENDMENTS AND CONTINUE WORKING TOWARDS RULES THAT KEEP SCOTTSDALE OPEN, ACCESSIBLE, AND RESPONSIBLE TO THE PEOPLE YOU SERVE. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU,
RAUL. MARK RENTZ. >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR,
COUNCILMEMBERS AND STAFF. MY NAME IS MARK RENTZ AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING MYSELF. ONE NEED LOOK NO FURTHER THAN HOW THIS AGENDA ITEM 16 IS LAID OUT IN YOUR AGENDA TO REALIZE
THERE HAS NOT BEEN A LOT OF CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO THE IMPACTS ON THE GENERAL PUBLIC OF SCOTTSDALE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT RULES OF COUNCIL PROCEDURE ARE, AND THERE'S NO DISCUSSION OF RULES
OF COUNCIL PROCEDURE WITH REGARDS TO WHAT'S -- WHAT'S IN THE PROPOSAL. I DON'T EXPECT A LONG STATEMENT, BUT THERE'S MORE DESCRIPTION IN ALMOST EVERY OTHER ITEM THAT'S HERE THAT WOULD ALERT THOSE WHO MAY HAVE AN INTEREST THAT THEY MAY WANT TO COME BEFORE YOU.
THAT BEING SAID, THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE HAVE MAJOR IMPACT -- IMPACTS ON THE FUTURE GOVERNANCE OF THE CITY OF SCOTTSDALE. OVER TIME, THESE PROPOSED CHANGES COULD SIGNIFICANTLY
AFFECT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS OF SCOTTSDALE. DEMOCRACY ENCOURAGES DELIBERATION, INSISTING THAT WE TAKE TIME NECESSARY TO
UNDERSTAND AND ACCOMMODATE OUR COMMON VALUES. LAST NIGHT I LISTENED TO YOUR MEETING HERE AND YOUR DISCUSSION ON MEMORIALS.
I WAS IMPRESSED, NOT SO MUCH THAT I AGREED -- AND I PROBABLY WOULD NEVER AGREE WITH YOU WILL ATHE COMMENTS MADE BUT THE FACT THAT THE COUNCILMEMBERS WERE CHANGING IDEAS, WERE EXCHANGING OPINIONS AND WERE EXCHANGING
POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES TO CONSIDER. I THOUGHT THAT WAS A VERY PRODUCTIVE WORK STUDY SESSION. THE REASON I BRING THAT UP IS THAT LEADS TO MY THREE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. MY FIRST RECOMMENDATION IS THAT
YOU OLD IN ABEYANCE ANY VOTE ON AN AGENDA ITEM 16 AND DIRECT STAFF TO PUT TOGETHER A WORK STUDY SESSION. THIS MATTER HAS NO URGENCY. THERE'S NO EMERGENCY REQUIRING IMMEDIATE ACTION.
IT WOULD -- MY PROPOSAL WOULD ALLOW SUFFICIENT TIME FOR THE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS TO INTERACT AS WELL AS STAFF, INTERACT WITH INTERESTS MEMBERS OF THE SCOTTSDALE CITIZENRY. FURTHERMORE, THERE'S A GREATER
LIKELIHOOD THAT FOR CONSENSUS AS A RESULT OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. MY SECOND RECOMMENDATION IS THAT IF YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO HOLD THIS IN ABEYANCE, THAT YOU VOTE ON THE RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS
INDIVIDUALLY AS A POS OPPOSED TA BUNDLE OF AMENDMENTS. IT'S TOO COMPLICATED FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND, SOMETHING THAT CENTS SUCH A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THEM. LET'S TAKE THE TIME, GET THE INPUT AND MAKE SURE OUR CITIZENRY UNDERSTANDS WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, MARK. CHRISTOPHER AJULUNI. IS THAT RIGHT? >> THAT'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. >> Mayor Borowsky: JUST LIKE IT'S SPELLED. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH, MADAM MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL
AND STAFF. MY NAME IS CHRISTOPHER AJULONI, AND I'M HERE TONIGHT AS A SCOTTSDALE HOMEOWNER AND I ALSO FOUNDED A NONPROFIT IN SCOTTSDALE. I WANTED TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS PROPOSAL. I'M SAD I'M GOING FIRST BUT I WANT TO SHARE MY OWN PERSPECTIVE.
FROM THE DOCUMENT AS WRITTEN, THIS RESOLUTION WOULD CUT PUBLIC COMMENT FROM TWO OPPORTUNITIES TO ONE. IT WOULD MOVE COMMENTS TO THE VERY END OF THE MEETING. IT WOULD REDUCE SPEAKING TIME FROM THREE MINUTES TO TWO AND IT WOULD BAN THE USE OF CITY A.V.
EQUIPMENT FOR THE CITIZENRY, AND IT WOULD REQUIRE TWO WEEKS OF CENTS FOR CITIZEN PETITIONS WHICH MAKES IT HARD TO RAISE URGENT ISSUES. I ACTUALLY HEARD ABOUT THIS VERY RESOLUTION LESS THAN WOULD WEEKS AGO MYSELF. SO THAT JUST SORT OF ILLUSTRATES THE PROBLEM. EVEN TONIGHT, WE'VE HAD
LAST-MINUTE ADDITIONS, REDACTIONS AND UPDATES TO THE AGENDA AND THAT'S NORMAL IN CITY GOVERNMENT AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHY FLEXIBILITY IN CITY COST
GOVERNMENT. A LOT OF BUSINESS OWNERS HERE, OVER THE YEARS HAVE SUGGESTED IDEAS LIKE TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SEE MORE FOOT TRAFFIC AND MORE LIFE IN THE AREA. THAT'S AN ISSUE WITH A WIDE RANGE OF OPINIONS AND THAT'S THE POINT. WE SHOULDN'T LIMIT THE NUMBER OF VOICES ABLE TO WEIGH IN ON THE
FUTURE OF THE CITY. SO TO ME OF US, THIS RESOLUTION FEELS LIKE A STEP TOWARDS LESS DIALOGUE BETWEEN RESIDENTS AND THE COUNCIL. AND AT A TIME WHEN PEOPLE HERE AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY FEEL ANXIOUS ABOUT THE FUTURE, I THINK SCOTTSDALE SHOULD BE EXPLORING WAYS TO EXPAND CIVIC PARTICIPATION, NOT NARROW IT.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT A LOT OF SCOTTSDALE RESIDENTS WOULD AGREE WITH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, CHRISTOPHER. LINDA -- FORMER COUNCILWOMAN LINDA MILHAVEN. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR, LINDA
MAYOR, I LIVE ON BELL BEGAN TRAIL HERE IN SCOTTSDALE. THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO PUBLIC COMMENT HERE WILL CREATE LIMITS AND BARRIERS TO RESIDENTS ENGAGING WITH THEIR LOCAL GOVERNMENT. IN MY 12 YEARS IN CITY COUNCIL, WE DID EVERYTHING WE COULD TO ENCOURAGE CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT,
NOT NO DISCOURAGE IT, AS IS BEING SUGGESTED HERE. IT SEEMS IN PRIOR COUNCIL MEETINGS, COUNCILMEMBER GRAHAM AND KWASMAN HAVE TRIED TO SILENCE FOLKS WOULD DISAGREE WITH THEM BY USING RULES OF PROCEDURE AND CALLS FOR ORDER,
HOWEVER, THE RULES OF PROCEDURE HAVE NOT ALLOWED THEM TO SILENCE THOSE WHO OPPOSE THEM AND NOW IT SEEMS THEY WANT TO CHANGE THE RULES OF PROCEDURE TO DO EXACTLY THAT. WHEN I WAS ON CITY COUNCIL, ONE OF THE MOST FREUENT QUESTIONS I WAS ASKED WAS HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH THE HARSH CRITICISM THAT YOU GET FROM RESIDENTS IN OUR COMMUNITY?
AND I HAD TWO ANSWERS TO THAT QUESTION. ONE IS AS AN ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU DO, WHAT YOU SAY, AND THE DECISIONS YOU MAKE. AND IF YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO STAND UP AND BEING ACCOUNTABLE, THEN YOU SHOULD NOT BE IN THAT CHAIR. AND SECOND, I REJOICE IN THE FACT THAT I LIVE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESIDENTS CAN
COME DOWN AND SPEAK TO THEIR GOVERNMENT FRANKLY, TO SAY WHAT THEY LIKE AND THEY DON'T LIKE, WITHOUT FEAR OF RETRIBUTION. AND I CELEBRATE THAT EVERY DAY WITH EVERY CRITICISM I RECEIVED AS A COUNCILMEMBER. SO PLEASE, DO NOT LIMIT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THIS VERY IMPORTANT PUBLIC PROCESS.
AS AN ASIDE, SOME HAVE SUGGESTED IF YOU WANT THE MEETING TO RUN MORE EFFICIENTLY AND MORE SMOOTHLY, YOU SHOULD LIMIT COUNCIL COMMENTS. I WOULD NOT SUPPORT THAT EITHER. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, LINDA.
YVONNE CAHILL. >> MAYOR BOROWSKY, YVONNE CAHILL, I JUST WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS BECAUSE IT'S VERY CONCERNING TO ME. THE FIRST AMENDMENT, AS YOU KNOW, PROTECTS PUBLIC COMMENT IN
A LIMITED PUBLIC FORM AND ANY RESTRICTIONS MUST BE REASONABLE, CANNOT BE USED TO SILENCE PEOPLE THAT YOU DISAGREE WITH. SO THE REASON IT'S IMPORTANT IS DECISIONS ACTUALLY REFLECT THE COMMUNITY NEEDS.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CHOICES ON ZONING, POLICING, TRANSPORTATION, PARKS, HOUSING, TAXES, DIRECTLY AFFECT PEOPLE'S LIVES. WHEN RESIDENTS SPEAK, LEADERS GAIN REAL WORLD INSIGHT INSTEAD OF RELYING SOLELY ON REPORTS OR ASSUMPTIONS.
AND ONE OF THE EXAMPLES OF THIS THAT WE HAD LAST YEAR WAS THE 68th STREET PROJECT WHERE I THINK A LOT OF COUNCILMEMBERS ACTUALLY WENT DOWN AND LOOKED AT THE PROJECT AND ONCE THEY DID, THEY REALIZED WHAT THE REAL IMPLICATIONS WERE AND WHY THE RESIDENTS NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO
HAVE A SIDEWALK TO WALK ON. THE OTHER REASON IS BETTER SOLUTIONS COME FROM DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES. RESIDENTS OFTEN KNOW DETAILS OFFICIALS DON'T KNOW, HOW TRAFFIC REALLY FLOWS ON A PARTICULAR STREET, HOW POLICY
AFFECTS SMALL BUSINESS, OR WHERE SERVICES ARE LACKING. DIVERSE INPUT LEADS TO MORE EFFECTIVE AND EQUITABLE POLICIES. INCREASE TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY. WHEN PEOPLE SEE COMMENTS BEING HEARD AND INFLUENCING OUTCOMES THEY ARE MORE LIKELY TO TRUST
GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS. TRANSPARENCY IMPROVES WHEN RESIDENTS ARE PART OF THE CONVERSATION RATHER THAN A SPECTATOR. IT HOLDS LEADERS ACCOUNTABLE. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REMINDS ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT THEY WORK FOR THE COMMUNITY.
IT DISCOURAGED DECISIONS BEING MADE FOR SPECIFIC SPECIAL INTERESTS TO GAIN POLITICAL POINTS OR POLITICAL CONVENIENCE BY BRINGING SCRUTINY INTO THE OPEN. STRENGTHS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND CIVIC PRIDE.
WHEN RESIDENTS FEEL THEY HAVE A VOICE, THEY ARE MORE LIKELY TO STAY INVOLVED AND VOTING, VOLUNTEERING FOR THE CITY AND COLLABORATION AND LOCAL INITIATIVE. ACTIVE CIVIC LIFE LEADS NO STRONGER AND MORE CONNECTED NEIGHBORHOODS. IT HELPS IDENTIFY PROBLEMS EARLY.
COMMUNITIES OFTEN SPOT ISSUES ON PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS, WHICH I WILL REMIND YOU THAT I HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR AN UPDATE ON THE NAOS BROCHURE SINCE LAST FEBRUARY AND WE STILL DON'T HAVE ONE.
SO IN CORRELATION TO THE JAMES GROUP, I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THE CITY CAN DO A GOOD JOB AT GETTING MARKETING DONE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T EVEN GET AN NAOS BROCHURE UPDATED. ANYWAY, IT SUPPORTS FAIRNESS AND INCLUSION AND I REALLY RESENT
THE FACT THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO RESTRICT THE PUBLIC FROM USING THE A/V EQUIPMENT. BECAUSE IT MAY HAVE THE CITY'S NAME ON IT, BUT THE RESIDENT TAXPAYERS PAID FOR IT AND WE HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO USE THE FACILITIES AND THE EQUIPMENT.
THANK YOU. I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, YVONNE. ALL RIGHT. THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. AND NOW WE ARE GOING TO HEAR A
PRESENTATION. WHO WANTS TO DO IT? ARE YOU FLIPPING A COIN? >> Clerk Lane: I'M WAITING FOR THE PRESENTATION TO COME UP, GOOD. START. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: WE'RE GOING TO TAKE
TURNS. >> Clerk Lane: IT'S ALL SCRIPTED, I PROMISE. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, MY NAME IS BEN LANE, I'M THE CITY CLERK AND TONIGHT, THE CITY ATTORNEY LUIS SSANTEIA AND I WILL BE REVIEWING THE CHANGES TO THE COUNCIL
PROCEDURE. THE RULES OF COUNCIL PROCEDURE GOVERN HOW COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE RUN AND RELATED PROCESSES. WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS EACH MAJOR CHANGE INDIVIDUALLY AND SEE IN THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO MAKE CHANGES AT THAT SECTION. AT THE END OF THE COMPLETED ITEM IF THE COUNCIL WISHES TO ACT ON
THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION, THOSE CHANGES CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO THE OVERALL MOTION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT OUR LOCAL. THIS WAS FIRST ADOPTED ON
SEPTEMBER 20th, BY RESOLUTION, AND THEY WERE MODELED BY THE CITY PHOENIX'S COUNCIL RULES. SINCE THAT TIME, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN AMENDED SINCE THAT STAFF -T
SLIDE, PLEASE. THE RULE WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES INVOLVESSED THE PRESIDING OFFICER. AND FORRIZE OF REFERENCE WHEN A RULE IS DISPLAYED INTO ITS ENTIRETY, NEW TEXT IS IN GREEN
FONT AND SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE STRUCK IS IN GREEN AND STRUCK THROUGH. THE RECOMMENDED CHANGE IS TO ADD THE IMMEDIATE PAST VICE MAYOR IN TERMS OF SUCCESSION. THIS CHANGE IS BEING PROPOSED AS STAFF HAS WORKED WITH THE IMMEDIATE PAST VICE MAYOR SUCH
AS BOARD AND COMMISSIONS AND THE IMMEDIATE VICE MAYOR HAS FAMILFAMILIARITIES WITH THESE PROCESSES. I WILL SEE IF THE COUNCIL IS COMFORTABLE WITH THIS CHANGE OR WOULD LIKE TO MODIFIED IT IN ANY CERTAIN WAY.
>> Mayor Borowsky: I DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE TAKING IT THIS WAY BUT I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BEFORE WE START GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS. COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. >> Councilmember Whitehead: YEAH, I THINK I WOULD RATHER GO THROUGH ALL THE CHANGES AND THEN POSE MY QUESTIONS AT THE END. I'M NOT SURE HOW MY COLLEAGUES
FEEL ABOUT THAT. >> Mayor Borowsky: WAS THAT YOUR -- DID YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION? >> Councilmember Whitehead: I HAVE COMMENTS, BUT NOT ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN McALLEN.
ME, I WILL START, I GUESS. FIRST OF ALL, THERE'S BEEN A LOT -- WE JUST RECEIVED SO MUCH COMMENTS -- COME COMMENTS ON THIS AND INQUIRIES AND CONCERNS. BIG, BIG, UPROAR. SO MY FIRST QUESTION IS: OUTSIDE OF THE ARTICLE THAT I READ THAT IT WAS AT THE
DIRECTION OF THE CITY CLERK AND THE CITY ATTORNEY, WITH THE INPUT OF VICE MAYOR KWASMAN, I THINK THAT WAS REPORTED, WHAT -- WHAT SPAWNED THIS IDEA? THE IDEA BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT IN HERE THAT YOU JUST THINK, OKAY, INTERESTING.
WAS IT REALLY THE CITY CLERK, BEN LANE AND CITY ATTORNEY LUIS SANTAELLA AND WHAT POINT DID VICE MAYOR KWASMAN PLAY IN THIS ALL? I REALLY -- WELL, NO, I HAVE BEEN ASKED THIS QUESTION A LOT AND I THINK WE OWE THE PUBLIC AN ANSWER. >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: WHY DON'T I ADDRESS THAT QUESTION. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, WE SENT VARIOUS COMMUNICATIONS OUT TO THE COUNCIL ASKING IF THEY HAD INPUT ON THE RULES. AND AS MR. LANE STATED, WE LIKE TO ADDRESS POTENTIAL RULE CHANGES WITH EACH NEW COUNCIL.
THAT DIDN'T REALLY HAPPEN WITH THIS NEW COUNCIL OTHER THAN A CHANGE RELATED TO TEXTING FROM THE DAIS. SO THIS WAS AN OPPORTUNITY. AND WE HAVE BEEN TALKING AT IT FOR A LONG TIME, ABOUT BRINGING POTENTIAL CHANGES FORWARD. SO WE SOLICITED INPUT FROM COUNCILMEMBERS, STAFF, WE SENT
OUT NOTICES TO Y'ALL, AND BASED ON THAT INPUT IS WHAT WE ARE BRINGING FORWARD TODAY. SOME OF IT IS OUR INPUT AND SOME OF IT IS INDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBER'S INPUT. WE DON'T WANT TO DISCLOSE WHO MADE WHAT SUGGESTIONS. AND WE'RE HAPPY -- AND IF YOU
WANT TO JUMP TOP IT, WE CAN JUMP TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION RIGHT NOW IF YOU WANT TO TAKE IT OUT OF ORDER. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: MADAM MAYOR, I CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: I STILL HAVE THE FLOOR, THOUGH. SO YOU ARE NEXT SO IF YOU DON'T MIND HOLDING YOUR THOUGHTS. AND I DID TOO HAVE INPUT AND MY
INPUT WAS WE'VE BEEN ARGUABLY, IF NOT FACTUALLY, VIOLATING OPEN MEETING LAW WITH THE POLLING THAT IS DONE WITH THE -- WITH THE COUNCIL AGENDIZING ITEMS. SO I -- I BROUGHT THAT UP QUITE SOMETIME AGO.
SO I'VE HAD INPUT TOO. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: AND THAT'S BEING REMOVED. WE DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE IT'S A VIOLATION. IT'S ON THE FENCE. BUT WE ARE REMOVING THAT FROM THE COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURES, AS PART OF THIS PROPOSING. >> Mayor Borowsky: IN THIS PROPOSAL.
BUT AREN'T WE UNDER INVESTIGATION BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE FOR THIS ISSUE? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: WE ARE AND WE ARE RESPONDING TO IT AND WE LOOKED INTO IT AND WE HAVE A RESPONSE THAT WE ARE PROVIDING AND WE WILL PROVIDE IT TO THE PUBLIC, ONCE WE RESPOND TO THE A.J.'S OFFICE.
ITS NOT AS CLEAR CUT. IF YOU WOULD LIKE LEGAL ADVICE. >> Mayor Borowsky: I DON'T WANT LEGAL ADVICE BECAUSE WE WILL SOON HEAR IS THE OUTCOME IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I DON'T NEED LEGAL ADVICE ON THAT ONE. VIVICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: THANK
YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I KNOW THIS IS GETTING A LOT OF PRESS AND NEWS COVERAGE AND CAUSING A LARGE STIR. SO I MADE A HUGE MISTAKE IN ADMITTING TO THE NEWS THAT I PARTICIPATED IN INPUT AND I'M HERE TO SAY, I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE!
OKAY? THE -- THIS -- THE CHARTER OFFICERS ASKED ALL OF US WHAT WE THOUGHT ABOUT THE RULES. THEY ASKED US EARLY ON. I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT THE GOAL THAT -- AT LEAST IT WAS
PRESENTED TO ME, BY THE CHARTER OFFICERS, WAS HEY, IF THERE'S A SUITE OF RULE CHANGES LET'S BRING 'EM ALL IN TOGETHER, LET'S HAVE A BIG CONVERSATION. THE POINT WAS NOT TO SUBVERT DEMOCRACY OR ANY NONSENSE LIKE
THAT. WE'RE GOING TO GO ONE BY ONE. WE WANT TO GET AS MUCH INPUT AS POSSIBLE FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, AND I DON'T WANT TO PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH BUT I'M ASSUMING THIS IS WHAT YOU WANT. YOU WANT TO GO ONE BY ONE AND GET AS MUCH INPUT FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL AND WITH THAT YOU
WANT AS MUCH BUY-IN FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL IT'S POSSIBLE FOR ANY RULE CHANGES. I'M FOR -- I'M 100% FOR ANONYMITY IN ANY VOTE. I HAVE A PREFERENCE ON CERTAIN THINGS.
I HAD NO INPUT ON HALF THE THINGS. I FEEL LIKE I HAVE TO DEFEND MYSELF, BASED ON -- BASED ON THE TREPIDATIONS OF OTHERS. I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR. IT'S A RULE PACKETS CHANGE. IT HAPPENS IN EVERY LEGISLATIVE
BODY, AT THE CITY, STATE AND LOCAL BODIES. SOME OF THE CHARTER OFFICERS WENT TO EVERYBODY, ASKED THEM WHAT THEY THOUGHT. SOME PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON ONE THING AND SOME PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON OTHER THINGS. WE WILL ALL WORK TOGETHER AND TRY TO FIND CONSENSUS ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS. NO MORE, NO LESS.
>> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, VICE PAYER. COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: SO YOU WEREN'T THE MASTER MIND BEHIND THIS? >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: NO, COUNCILMEMBER. >> Councilmember Graham: I
TAKE A MOMENT OF LEVITY. IF I READ THE HEADLINE THAT THEY WOULD TAKE MY PUBLIC COMMENT AWAY, OR DIMINISH THAT, I WOULD BE VERY UPSET THAT THEY WOULD REDUCE IT FROM THREE MINUTES TO TWO MINUTES, FOR EXAMPLE.
AND SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S SERIOUS. AND PEOPLE -- RESIDENTS -- I MEAN, WE SEE THE EMAILS WE GET ALL THE TIME. RESIDENTS ALREADY TELL US THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE -- ESPECIALLY ON SOME MAJOR DECISIONS AND ACROSS THE PAST, THEY TELL US THAT THEY
DON'T FEEL RESPECTED BY MANY OF THE DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY COUNCIL. THE -- SO WE MEET REGULARLY WITH THE CHARTER OFFICERS. WE'RE SUPPOSED TO. YOU SHOULD BE MEETING REGULARLY
WITH YOUR CHARTER OFFICERS. AND WE HAVE AN INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY WHO HAS BEEN WITH THE CITY FOR TWO DECADES? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: ALMOST 25 YEARS. >> Councilmember Graham: HAVE WE CELEBRATED YOU YET? THAT MILESTONE?
YOUR MIC IS NOT ON. OKAY. OKAY. 25 YEARS. SO IN THAT 25 YEARS, YOU'VE OBSERVED -- YOU'VE MADE OBSERVATIONS ABOUT TWEAKS THAT YOU -- THAT YOU THOUGHT ABOUT
FOR RULES OF PROCED PROCEDURE AO HAS CITY CLERK BEN LANE, IN THE FOUR OR FIVE YEARS THAT YOU HAVE BEEN HERE. I THINK YOU BOTH KNOW THAT THE PACKAGE OF -- THE PACKAGE OF -- THE PACKAGE OF REVISIONS AREN'T
GOING TO PASS, YOU KNOW, EXACTLY AS THEY ARE. I THINK JUST THE FEELING AND. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: AND MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, ONE THE REASONS WE PUT IT AS A REGULAR ITEM.
WE KNEW THERE WAS DIVISION AMONGST OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS. THESE ARE OPTIONS. ULTIMATELY THE COUNCIL HAS THE FULL SAY ON WHAT TO PASS OR WHAT NOT TO PASS. AND I THINK IF WE -- WE COULD DO OUR PRESENTATION, THERE'S SOME HELPFUL INFORMATION, ESPECIALLY ABOUT THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WOULD INFORM THE COUNCIL'S
DECISION AND THE PUBLIC'S DECISION. >> Councilmember Graham: WIRE YOU'RE GOING TO DO A PRESENTATION. >> Councilmember Whitehead: IN YOU STOP TALKING. >> Councilmember Graham: IF WE SHUT UP -- AND THAT MEANS ME. SO I WILL WRAP IT UP.
IN CONCLUSION, THE MEDIA, THEY WANT THE CLICKS AND HEADLINES. WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING LIKE THIS, IT'S SO -- IT'S SO TEMPTING, HOW GOOD -- THE HEADLINE WRITES ITSELF. I DON'T BLAME THEM. I WOULD DO THE SAME EXACT THING, BUT WE ARE NOT HERE TO TAKE AWAY
PUBLIC COMMENT WHATSOEVER OR STOP HEARING VOICES. I WILL WRAP UP THESE COMMENTS FOR THE TIME BEING. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I WANT TO MAKE A RESPONSE AND QUESTION FOR OUR INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY. I MEAN WE HAVE SET SOME RECORDS HERE THIS YEAR. CERTAINLY IN THE NUMBER OF
INVESTIGATIONS BY THE A.G.'S OFFICE FOR OPEN MEETING LAW VIOLATIONS. BUT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE SPOKEN WITH SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO COMPLAINED ABOUT THE OPEN MEETING VIOLATIONS. WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR WAS THE TRANSPARENCY. SO THE COUNCIL WAS POLLING --
AND THIS IS JUST SOMETHING FOR CONSIDERATION. THE CITY CLERK HAS DONE, AS FAR AS I KNOW FOR MANY YEARS, WOULD POLL COUNCIL AND IF FOUR OR MORE COUNCILMEMBERS WANTED AN AGENDA ITEM, THAT'S HOW IT WOULD APPEAR ON THE AGENDA.
AND WHAT THE PUBLIC WAS LOOKING FOR WAS TRANSPARENCY, HOW DID THE COUNCIL VOTE AND THAT WAS NOT BEING DISCLOSED. AND I WANTED IT TO POINT OUT
THAT THE MAYOR HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO -- HE OR HER COULD ALSO AGENDIZED AN ITEM. THAT HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT THREATENED. THE NEW PROCESS, I THINK GOES THE STEP THE WRONG DIRECTION. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT MEETING VIOLATING OPEN MEETING LAWS BUT NOW I THINK
IT'S UNCLEAR TO ANY OF US HOW IT'S BEING DONE. WHAT -- THE PUBLIC IS LOOKING FR IS WHERE DOES THIS COUNCIL STAND WHEN WE HAVE TO DO SOME NECESSARY POLLING TO DECIDE ON AGENDA ITEMS. I WANT TO POINT THAT OUT. THAT THAT IS WHAT THE PUBLIC IS
LOOKING FOR, TRANSPARENCY AND THAT IS WHAT SEEMS TO BE DENIED. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: OUR INTENT IS NOT TO DO POLLING WITH THE COUNCIL NOW OR IN THE FUTURE. THAT'S OUR PROPOSAL TO PREVENT ANY AMBIGUITY IN THESE RULES IS
NOT TO HAVE POLLING. SO JUST LIKE NOW, THE MAYOR OR MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL CAN HAVE AN ITEM ADDED FOR THE COUNCIL TO VOTE ON, TO BE AGENDIZED AT A LATER DATE. THAT PROVIDES THE TRANSPARENCY, I THINK, YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. >> Councilmember Whitehead: OKAY.
SO THIS WAS -- THIS PROCESS LEFT A LOT OF -- LACKED TRANSPARENCY. SO, YES, IF WE HAVE AN ITEM THAT EVERY -- THAT I LIKE PUTTING IT ON THE AGENDA FOR A PUBLIC VOTE
SO THE PUBLIC CAN SEE AYE OR NAY HOW EACH OF OUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS VOTES. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. BACK TO A COMMENT YOU MADE, LUIS, OUR CITY ATTORNEY, YOU
DON'T WANT TO TELL THE PUBLIC WHO SUPPORTED WHICH RULE CHANGE BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO OVERLY POLITICIZE IT, I THINK YOU SAID. SO I THINK THAT'S A REALLY BAD IDEA. I THINK THE GENERAL PUBLIC SHOULD KNOW WHO BROUGHT THESE RULE CHANGES FORWARD.
I'VE ALREADY DISCLOSED OPENLY THE ONE THAT I HAD INPUT ON AND I THINK WE SHOULD DISCLOSE THAT AND MAYBE THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO WAIVE THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE BUT I DON'T THINK IT EXISTS WHEN EACH ONE OF US TALKED TO YOU. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT
THE CASE, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE EXISTS WHEN SOMEONE IS SEEKING LEGAL ADVICE. AND TRYING TO GAUGE IF A PARTICULAR COUNCILMEMBER APPROACHED ME, WHETHER THEY WERE SEEKING LEGAL ADVICE, ALSO AS AN
ATTORNEY I HAVE A DUTY OF CONFIDENTIALITY. I DON'T THINK I PERSONALLY CAN DISCLOSE WITHOUT A VOTE OF THE COUNCIL WAIVING THE PRIVILEGE AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE AT A LATER MEETING BECAUSE IT'S NOT AGENDIZED FOR TONIGHT, WHAT
INDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBERS ASKED ME TO DO. AND I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL IF YOU ACTUALLY LET US DO OUR PRESENTATION AND GO THROUGH THE SLIDES, AND VOTE DOWN WHAT YOU DON'T LIKE.
ADOPT WHAT YOU LIKE. BUT GO FROM THERE. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESPONSE, HOWEVER, YOU SAID YOU SENT EMAILS OUT TO ALL OF US FOR INPUT. HOLD ON. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: AND THEY WERE LABELED ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, MA'AM.
>> Mayor Borowsky: BUT THAT WOULD NOT BE LEGAL ADVICE IF THEY ARE RESPONDING ON THEIR POLICY POSITION. I COMPLETELY TAKE EXCEPTION NO WHAT YOU JUST SAID. WE WILL LOOK INTO THIS BECAUSE THAT WOULD NOT BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE WHATSOEVER. >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: B MA'AM, IT WAS MY BAR LICENSE ON THE LINE. IT'S LABELED ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE THEY WERE LABELED AS SUCH. IF INDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBERS WANT IT DISCLOSE WHAT THEY PROVIDED INPUTTER OR YOU WANT TO HAVE THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE
WAIVE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, WE CAN DO THAT, BUT IT JUST HAS TO BE AT A DIFFERENT MEETING. >> Mayor Borowsky: AND LUIS, MAKE NO MISTAKE, I'M NOT CHALLENGING, HOWEVER, JUST BECAUSE YOU LABEL SOMETHING ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, IF YOU ARE ASKING FOR POLICY DIRECTION, I THINK THOSE ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS. SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE THIS
CONVERSATION ANY FURTHER. I DO THINK WE SHOULD LOOK INTO THAT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS A BREACH OF TRANSPARENCY ENTIRELY. THIS IS A POLICY DISCUSSION. YOU ASKED FOR POLICY INPUT AND DIRECTION, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE AN ATTORNEY.
SO I HAVE MAJOR CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. AND I THRUS TRUST YOUR JUDGMENT. IT'S NOT ABOUT THAT. IF THAT'S A STANDARD PROCEDURE -- IF WHAT YOU JUST SAID IS STANDARD PROCEDURE. SO I'M HAPPY TO PROCEED.
I KNOW THERE'S TWO MORE COMMENTS. MAYBE THIS DOES NEED TO BE LOOKED AT CLOSER, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. I -- I FEEL LIKE IT SHOULD BE. AND BECAUSE THE GENERAL PUBLIC HAS INQUIRED PERSISTENTLY ABOUT WHAT WAS AT THE BASE OF THIS,
AND WHO HAS BROUGHT THIS FORWARD. AND I HAVE DISCLOSED WHAT I HAD CONTRIBUTED TO, ADAM -- COUNCILMAN, VICE MAYOR KWASMAN DIDN'T GO SPECIFIC, BUT I THINK TRANSPARENCY IS COMPLETELY LACKING IN THIS DISCUSSION. SO SOMEONE SUGGESTED DOING A WORK STUDY SESSION.
MAYBE THAT GIVES US TIME TO IRON THIS OUT. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A PLAUSIBLE IDEA. I DIDN'T REALIZE WE WERE GOING TO GO THROUGH THESE ONE AT A TIME. I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE BUT MAYBE IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE TO TWEAK THEM AS WE GO IN A WORK
STUDY SESSION. ANYONE INCLINED TO BRING THIS BACK FOR A WORK STUDY SESSION? >> Councilmember Dubauskas: NO. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: LET' S JUST DO IT. >> Mayor Borowsky: EXCEPT WE DON'T KNOW WHO'S PROVIDED POLICY INPUT BEFORE THIS MEETING.
SO NO WITH STANDING, I HEAR THAT WE DON'T HAVE CONSENSUS FOR THAT AND I WILL TURN IT OVER TO COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: TWO OF MY COLLEAGUES MENTIONED AN A.G. INQUIRY, AND ONE OF THEM ASKED YOU A QUESTION ABOUT THAT, WHICH YOU ANSWERED.
WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE PERSON THAT MADE THE COMPLAINT WITH THE A.G.? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: COUNCILMAN GRAHAM, I THINK THIS IS A BIT OFF TOPIC, AND THERE'S ACTUALLY FOUR SEPARATE COMPLAINTS. SO THERE'S FOUR -- I THINK THERE'S FOUR DIFFERENT
COMPLAINANTS. >> Councilmember Graham: CAN YOU NAME THEM. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: I WOULD PREFER NOT TO AT THIS POINT. >> Councilmember Graham: EVEN THOSE TWO MEMBERS AND YOU ANSWERED ONE QUESTION ABOUT THEM. >> Mayor Borowsky: POINT OF ORDER. THIS IS NOT AGENDIZED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL INVESTIGATION. I THINK WE CAN BRING THAT BACK, THOUGH, IN THE FUTURE, AS SOON AS WE HAVE THE RESULTS, RIGHT? >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: I MEAN IT IS PUBLIC INFORMATION, IT'S JUST NOT AGENDIZED TO DISCUSS AND I'D BE HAPPY TO -- AND I THINK HAVE PROVIDED THE ACTUAL COMPLAINTS TO THE COUNCIL. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE THEM TOMORROW. >> Councilmember Graham: TWO COLLEAGUES BROUGHT IT UP AND YOU ANSWERED A QUESTION ABOUT IT, I THOUGHT ONE MORE QUESTION, YOU
COULD ANSWER ONE MORE QUESTION. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: I THINK -- AND LIKE I SAID HERE, I'M TRYING NOT TO GET FAR AFIELD. I'M JUST TRYING TO DO MY JOB AND TRYING TO GET A PRESENTATION DONE AND -- AND OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS HERE.
AND YOU KNOW, MAYBE I SHOULDN'T HAVE ANSWERED THOSE QUESTIONS. I THINK THE -- THE -- YOUR COLLEAGUES ARE ANSWERING IN THE CONTEXT THAT WELL, WE HAVE THESE RULES THAT HAVE CREATED SOME OPEN MEETING LAW VIOLATIONS.
SO -- >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMANN McALLEN. >> Councilmember McAllen: WITH THIS, I AM GOING TO ASK TO HAVE THIS MOVED TO A WORK STUDY. SO A MOTION THAT WE MOVE THIS TO A WORK STUDY WHERE YOU CAN DO YOUR PRESENTATION FULLY, WITHOUT US INTERRUPTING, AND THEN WE CAN
MAKE DECISIONS THEN. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I SECOND THE MOTION AND I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO EXCLUDE ANY CHANGES IN THE WORK STUDY
SESSION, ALL OF THE ITEMS INCLUDED IN TONIGHT'S AGENDA ITEM WITH THE EXCLUSION OF ANY CHANGES TO THE NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ALLOWING SOME LEGAL GUIDANCE PERTAINING TO THE USE
OF THE CITY'S AUDIO AND VISUAL EQUIPMENT FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF PREVENTING THE CITY FROM VIOLATING COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. >> Councilmember McAllen: ACCEPT ABLE. >> Councilmember Whitehead: AND I DO WANT TO SAY OVERWHELMINGLY WE HAD -- I HAVE
NEVER SEEN REALLY SO MANY EMAILS OPPOSING THIS -- THE CHANGES TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. SO I HOPE THAT I CAN GET SUPPORT FOR THAT. AND I DO THINK WE NEED A WORK STUDY SESSION TO DIVE DEEP INTO THIS WITHOUT MAKING IT POLITICAL. AND THAT'S WHAT WORK STUDY SESSIONS DO.
AND THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENT ON YESTERDAY'S WORK STUDY SESSION. >> Mayor Borowsky: VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO CERTAIN PEOPLE ON THIS -- ON THIS DAIS, THIS IS EXACTLY THE PROBLEM EVERYBODY HAS -- THERE'S ACCUSATIONS OF
SINISTER UNDERPINNINGS, OF ATTEMPTS TO TRY TO INFLUENCE CHARTER OFFICERS, WE WANT TO HEAR IT ALL AT ONCE AND THEN -- THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE NONPOLITICAL, APOLITICAL, AND THIS ENTIRE PROCESS IS JUST DONE
IN AN OPEN FORUM RULE CHANGE, TAKEN ONE BY ONE. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ANY MORE COMPLICATED THAN THIS. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE WHO'S BEHIND WHAT? YOU KNOW WHAT, I WILL TELL YOU EXACTLY HOW -- THE BIG QUESTION IS, LET'S BE HONEST, THE BIG QUESTION IS WHAT DID KWASMAN DO.
THAT'S WHAT I GET CALLED THREE TIMES TODAY BY THE NEWS AND THE ANTI-SEMITIC COMMENTS ON THE NEWS CLIPPINGS I HAVE SENT TO JOE LEDUC ON THIS BECAUSE I GOT SCARED. STOP WITH THE POLITICS. LET'S GO ONE BY ONE. THIS WILL MAKE IT SUPER EASY.
WE CAN TELL THE -- THE -- THE CITY ATTORNEY WHAT WE THINK ABOUT A CERTAIN ISSUE AND THEN WE GO TO THE NEXT ONE. TELL HIM WHAT WE THINK ABOUT THE ISSUE AND GO TO THE NEXT ONE. IT SOMEONE DOESN'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT IT, GUESS WHAT, THEY SHUT UP AND THEY DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ANY MORE
COMPLICATED THAN THAT. VERY SIMPLE, ONE BY ONE, TELL THE MEMBERS OF THE DAIS CAN TELL YOU WHAT YOU THINK, OR IF THEY DON'T TALK, PEOPLE CAN MAKE ASSUMPTIONS OR ASK ANY QUESTIONS THAT THEY WANT AND THEY KNOW WHERE TO FIND US. AND FINALLY WE VOTE ON ONE BY
ONE, NO BIG DEAL. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. WHERE ARE WE? YOU HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. >> Councilmember Littlefield: TO CREATE A WORK STUDY.
TONIGHT OR ANOTHER DAY? >> Mayor Borowsky: LET'S TAKE A VOTE ON THAT. LET'S VOTE.
WOW. I THOUGHT WE HAD COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD GOING THAT DIRECTION. EITHER WAY, LET'S GET STARTED. YOU HAVE THE STAGE. THE NEWS HAS BEEN HERE ALL NIGHT. THAT'S -- THAT WOULD BE A
BUMMER. >> Clerk Lane: SO BACK TO THE PRESENTATION S. THERE ANY COUNCIL FEEDBACK ON THIS ITEM? >> Mayor Borowsky: LOTS. COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. >>Councilmember Whitehead: I JUST DON'T SEE THE PURPOSE OF THE CHANGE.
I MEAN, FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW, VICE MAYOR IS NOT A TITLE THAT YOU EARN. IT JUST ROTATES. WE ALL DO IT. EVERYBODY IS QUALIFIED. BEEN FINE. SO I DON'T SEE THE PURPOSE OF
THE CHANGE. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILMAN GRAHAM? >> Councilmember Graham: I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS. I MEAN IT'S ARBITRARY. AND I THINK THAT -- IF I READ BETWEEN THE -- IF I READ THE TEA LEAVES A LITTLE BIT, WHAT
HAPPENS IS THAT THIS PUTS STAFF AT AN AWKWARD PLACE WHEN IT'S NOT STATED AND STAFF CAN'T GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO SAY YOU'RE PUTTING ME IN AN AWKWARD PLACE. THEY DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT. SO I HAVE NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT THIS.
NOT SOMETHING THAT I DWELLED ON. I THINK IT'S COMING FROM SOMEWHERE SINCERE AND SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, JUST SO YOU KNOW, IT'S ACTUALLY BEEN THE PRACTICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR A WHILE TO FOLLOW IT JUST --
WITH THE IMMEDIATE VICE MAYOR STEPPING IN. SO THAT'S WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO. >> Councilmember Graham: IT WASN'T WRITTEN DOWN. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: NO, IT WASN'T WRITTEN DOWN. >> Councilmember Graham: SO IT WAS SUBJECT TO DEBATE.
SO I WILL MOVE TO ACCEPT THIS CHANGE. >> Mayor Borowsky: SECOND. >> Councilmember Graham: I WILL MOVE TO AMEND 2.3. >> Mayor Borowsky: CAN WE CALL THE QUESTION? ALL RIGHT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
AND I VOTED YES BECAUSE IT IS THE PRACTICE AND SO IT DOESN'T -- IT'S A NONSTARTER. ALL RIGHT. MOVING RIGHT ALONG. >> Clerk Lane: LUIS HAS THE NEXT ONE. >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: RULE 5.4 HAS TO DO WITH COUNCIL MEETINGS AND THE SPECIAL MEETINGS, THE MAYOR HAS AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO CALL SPECIAL MEETINGS IN THE CHARTER. AND THIS DOES NOT SEEK TO TAKE AWAY THE MAYOR'S AUTHORITY AS TO
SPECIAL MEETINGS, BUT THERE WAS INPUT FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL THAT WANTED THE COUNCIL BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR CANCELING OR CALLING OTHER TYPES OF MEETINGS. AND THAT'S THE INTENT OF THIS RULE CHANGE. IT DOES ALSO ENSHRINE THIS PARTICULAR CHARTER PROVISION AT
THE VERY BOTTOM, WHERE YOU SEE IN GREEN THAT A SPECIAL MEETING CAN BE CALLED BY THE MAYOR OR FOUR MEMBERS THE COUNCIL. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD. >> Councilmember Littlefield:
I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T REALIZE I STILL HAD MY SPEAKING THING ON. I'M FINE WITH THIS. I THINK IT MAKES SENSE. IT'S A PATH FORWARD. >> Mayor Borowsky: IS THAT A MOTION? >> Councilmember Littlefield: >> Councilmember Graham: IS THAT A MOTION. >> Councilmember Littlefield: NO, IT'S A COMMENT.
>> Councilmember Graham: YOU CAN MOVE. >> Councilmember Littlefield: I MOVE THAT WE MOVE COUNCIL 5. >> Mayor Borowsky: IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM. WHAT IS THE BASIS OR THE LOGIC BEHIND REMOVING MAYOR AS HAVING THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THE TIME,
DATES AND LOCATIONS ALBEIT AS IT WAS A GIVEN TO -- IT'S NEVER HAPPENED BUT IT'S A GIVEN TO BE SENSITIVE TO THE SCHEDULES AND AVAILABILITY OF THE QUORUM AT A MINIMUM, BUT CAN YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: MAYOR, MEMBERS OF
THE COUNCIL, ALL I CAN SAY IT WAS SUGGESTIONS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BODY, THAT WISHED TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES. I ANTICIPATE PERHAPS IT WAS IN RESPONSE TO VARIOUS THINGS THAT OCCURRED THIS YEAR BUT I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFIC LOGIC.
>> Mayor Borowsky: VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I WAS ONE THE PEOPLE WHO SUPPORTED THIS MOTION -- WHO SUPPORTED THIS RULE CHANGE. IF THERE WERE AN EMERGENCY OF THE -- OF A FIRE SITUATION THAT HAPPENED HERE, AND THE MAYOR WAS
UNAVAILABLE, WE COULDN'T CALL A SPECIAL SESSION. WE DIDN'T -- THERE WASN'T A MECHANISM TO CALL A COMMERCIAL SESSION. SPECIAL SESSION. I DON'T THINK THIS WOULD BE USED EXCEPT IN EMERGENCY PURPOSES. I WANT TO GIVE -- THIS IS A COUNCIL DRIVEN SYSTEM, JUST GIVE
THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL THE ABILITY TO CALL A SPECIAL SESSION, JUST -- JUST -- IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE ABILITY OF A SPECIAL SESSION TO BE CALLED AT ANY GIVEN TIME. IT'S JUST A -- IT'S JUST A BACKUP MECHANISM AS OPPOSED TO FUMBLING AROUND WHEN THERE
ACTUALLY IS AN EMERGENCY AT STAKE. >> Mayor Borowsky: QUESTION, THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS SAYS, THOUGH. [ OFF MICROPHONE COMMENT ] >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 2, SPECIAL MEETINGS
MAY BE CALLED BY THE MAYOR OR FOUR MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. >> Mayor Borowsky: I UNDERSTAND, TAT BUT WHAT YOU JUST SAID ISN'T WHAT 5.4 SAYS. WHAT WERE YOU TALKING ABOUT? >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: TALKING ABOUT THE SPECIFIC RULE CHANGE THAT SAYS THAT'S RIGHT HERE IN
5.7. >> Mayor Borowsky: WELL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 5.4, I BELIEVE. B>> Councilmember Graham: BOTH. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: 5 ABO 5.4 AND 5.7 E DIFFERENT RULES.
5.7 STRIKES SPECIAL MEETINGS AND REQUIRES THAT IT BE THE COUNCIL THAT CALLS EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, WORK STUDY SESSIONS OR ANY OTHER NON-ALLEGHENYLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE COUNCIL, RIGHT? IT WOULD CHANGE THE MAYOR'S AUTHORITY TO LIMIT IT TO SPECIAL MEETINGS ONLY. ALL OTHER MEETINGS HAD -- WOULD HAVE TO BE CALLED BY A MAJORITY
OF THE COUNCIL OR CANCELED. SO RIGHT NOW, THE MAYOR CAN UNILATERALLY CANCEL A MEETING. AND THIS WOULD CHANGE THAT. >> Mayor Borowsky: AND HOW PRAY TELL WOULD A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL DECIDE TO DO THAT? WITHOUT VIOLATING OPEN MEETING LAW? >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: THEY CAN DO IT AT A MEETING. IT WOULD BE -- AS A GENERAL RULE, THE MEETINGS ARE SCHEDULED IN -- FOR THE YEAR. WE KNOW WHEN THE REGULAR MEETINGS ARE. AND AT ONE OF THOSE MEETINGS,
THEY COULD CANCEL A FUTURE MEETING, THEY COULD CALL A FUTURE MEETING. THIS DOES NOT ELIMINATE THE MAYOR'S ABILITY TO CALL SPECIAL MEETINGS. GENERALLY AS A MATTER OF COURSE, THE TYPES OF MEETINGS WE HAVE ARE THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS SET ON THE SCHEDULE. IT'S RARE FOR OTHER MEETINGS TO
BE CALLED. SO IT DOESN'T TOTALLY INFRINGE ON THE MAYOR'S AUTHORITY BECAUSE YOU CAN STILL CALL SPECIAL MEETINGS WHENEVER YOU WANT. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO JUST SO I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS, THE -- YOU AGREE IN ORDER FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL TO
CANCEL OR SCHEDULE A -- OR CHANGE THE TIME, DATE, LOCATION, OF A FUTURE MEETING, THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE AT A -- AT A REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THAT WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION AND THE BEST PRACTICE. YES.
>> Mayor Borowsky: THAT WAS RATHER EQUIVOCAL. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THE INTERESTING THING IS POLLING IS NOT UNNECESSARILY LAWFUL. THERE'S ATTORNEY GENERALS OPINIONS ON IT.
AS LONG AS YOU DON'T INFORM PEOPLE OF THE POLLING RESULTS, IT'S NOT UNLAWFUL FOR A STAFF MEMBER TO POLL THE COUNSEL SATELLITE FOR SOMETHING. SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY UNLAW FULL FOR A -- THE COUNCIL TO BE POLLED ABOUT CANCELING A MEETING, LET'S SAY. IT'S JUST NOT A GREAT PRACTICE.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE COUNCIL IS VERY INTERESTED IN TRANSPARENCY. SO THAT'S WHY WE WANT TO MOVE AWAY FROM POLLING AND GET OUT OF THAT PRACTICE AND HAVE THINGS DONE AT MEETINGS. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO HOW LONG HAS THE MAYOR HAD THE
AUTHORITY -- THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROVIDED WITHOUT THE REDACTION THERE OR STRIKEOUT? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: SINCE AT LEAST 2011, WHEN THESE RULES WERE ADOPTED, I BELIEVE. >> Mayor Borowsky: SINCE INCEPTION BUT FOR SOME REASON, THE UNNAMED COLLEAGUES THINK THAT THERE'S SUCH A RISK THAT I
POSE TO THIS RULE THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE COUNCIL RULES THAT THEY WANT TO ELIMINATE THE MAYOR'S ABILITY TO DO THAT? WELL, I'M GOING TO BE OPPOSING THIS. >> Councilmember Whitehead: MAYOR, MAY HAVE THE FLOOR? >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN
WHITEHEAD. >> Councilmember Whitehead: YEAH. I MOVE TO DENY THE CHANGES TO ITEM 5.4. >> Councilmember McAllen: I WILL SECOND THAT. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. COUNCILWOMAN McALLEN, YOU, I
GUESS, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT. >> Councilmember McAllen: I WAS GOING TO MAKE THE SAME MOTION. SO I SECOND IT. I DON'T THINK THERE'S A NEED FOR THE CHANGE, ESPECIALLY IF WE ARE LOOKING AT A TIME WHERE WE MAY BE LOOKING AT AN A.G. INVESTIGATION TO DO THE SAME
THING WE'RE GETTING IN TROUBLE FOR. THAT MAKES NO SENSE TO ME. SO I DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE -- OF DENYING THIS, PLEASE INDICATE
YOUR VOTE. I GUESS WE KNOW WHO SUGGESTED IT. ALL RIGHT. MOVING RIGHT ALONG. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: I BELIEVE THERE WAS ANOTHER MOTION ON THE FLOOR. >> Councilmember Graham:
REMAINING MOTION? >> Mayor Borowsky: CAN YOU REPEAT IT PLEASE? >> Councilmember Graham: JUST TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. YEAH, 5.4 AND 5.7. >> Mayor Borowsky: WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT 5.7, SHALL WE? WE DIDN'T GET INTO MUCH DETAIL ABOUT THAT. I WOULD RATHER TALK ABOUT THAT.
SO CAN YOU -- WILL YOU PLEAD AAMENDYOUR MOTION TO 5.4. I WILL THOUGHT WE WERE TAKING IT ONE ITEM AT A TIME. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: OUR INTENT WAS ONE SLIDE AT A TIME BUT WE CAN DO IT
HOWEVER THE COUNCIL PREFERS. >> Councilmember Graham: CAN WE -- I THINK -- MAYBE WE CAN HAVE A LITTLE MORE DISCUSSION BUT I WILL JUST KEEP MY MOTION AS IS. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: SO MAYOR, MEMBERS
THE COUNCIL, 5.7, WE DID TOUCH ON IT A BIT EARLIER. >> Councilmember Graham: THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING. >> Counc >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: AND IT CLARIFIES THE SPECIAL MEETINGS, THE MAYOR HAS THE AUTHORITY OR FOUR MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL CAN CALL. THAT'S WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS. THAT'S WHAT IS BEING PRESERVED.
IT -- 5.7 LEADS INTO 5.4. SO 5.4 SAYS WHO CAN CALL A MEETING, RIGHT, OR CANCEL A MEETING AND 5.7 JUST SPECIFIES THE TYPES OF THE MEETINGS. SO THEY ARE INTERRELATED.
>> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. WELL, I GUESS THERE'S NO POINT IN TALKING ABOUT THIS ANYMORE. COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I HAVE A QUESTION. VICE MAYOR KWASMAN MENTIONED THAT THIS IS IN AN EMERGENCY IF THE MAYOR IS NOT AVAILABLE. DOESN'T THE VICE MAYOR FILL THAT
ROLE? SO THERE'S NO NEED FOR THIS IF THERE'S AN EMERGENCY, THERE'S -- [ OFF MICROPHONE COMMENT ] >> Councilmember Whitehead: IS THAT CORRECT WHOEVER IS SERVING AS THE VICE MAYOR -- >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: IT'S IN THE ABSENCE OF THE MAYOR, THE VICE MAYOR
ASSUMES THE DUTIES OF THE MAYOR AND THAT WOULD MEAN THAT THE MAYOR COULD EXERCISE THE MAYOR'S SPECIAL MEETING AUTHORITY THE CHARTER. IT DOESN'T ADDRESS ANY MEETING CANCELLATION OR OTHER STUFF. >> Councilmember Whitehead: THEY DON'T SOLVE A PROBLEM BUT
THEY DO CHANGE AND REDUCE THE AUTHORITY OF THE MAYOR AND I -- I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT A MAYOR HAS A DIFFERENT ROLE THAN THE SIX CITY COUNCILMEMBERS, AND THAT THE MAYOR'S ROLE HAS BEEN
THE SAME AS WAS POINTED OUT. I SEE NO REASON -- WE'RE NOT SOLVING A PROBLEM. I SEE NO REASON TO MAKE THESE CHANGES. I SEE NO PUBLIC BENEFIT. AND I DO WONDER ABOUT WHY -- WHY THIS COUNCIL WOULD SUPPORT MAKING CHANGES WHEN THIS THE SYSTEM HAS BEEN WORKING GREAT.
THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO OPPOSE THIS. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. I DON'T SEE ANY MORE COMMENTS. SO WITH THAT, WE'LL VOTE ON COUNCILMAN GRAHAM'S MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED,
PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE. GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: SO WE'RE ON THE NEXT SLIDE. >> Clerk Lane: MAYOR, AND
MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL THIS NEXT RULE CHANGE REFERS TO THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS. THE RULE CHANGE PROVIDES CLARIFICATION ON THE INVOCATION TO NOTE THAT IT IS THE COUNCILMEMBER OR DESIGNEE. THIS WAS BASED ON PAST COUNCIL DIRECTION THAT WAS PROVIDED WHEN
INVOCATIONS WERE RE-INSTATED BY THIS COUNCIL. IT ALSO CLARIFIES THE MAYOR'S REPORT AND FORMALLY ADDS ADDED ITEMS AND WORK STUDY ITEMS TO THE LIST OF ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. IN THE -- THE ADDED ITEMS IS REQUIRED WHEN AN ITEM IS ADDED
TO THE AGENDA WITH LESS THAN TEN DAYS' NOTICE. AND WORK STUDY HAS ALWAYS BEEN AT THE END OF THE MEETINGS, BUT THIS JUST FORMALLY ADDS THOSE TWO THINGS. THE LAST MAJOR CHANGE ELIMINATES THE FIRST NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND LUIS WILL BE DISCUSSING THAT CHANGE LATER AS
PART OF THE OVERALL NON-AGENDIZED COMMENTS SLIDE. BUT THE REST OF THE CHANGES ARE MORE CLARIFICATION BASED. THANK YOU.
>> Mayor Borowsky: IT'S OKAY. I WILL CALL ON YOU COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. I THINK YOU PUSHED YOUR BUTTON FIRST. >> Councilmember Whitehead: SO CLEARLY WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE -- EXCUSE ME? OKAY. SO LET'S -- OKAY. SO YOU HAVE REMOVED THE CHANGE
TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. SO I'M STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THE -- THE INVOCATION IS BY THE INDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBERS OR THEIR DESIGNEE, BUT THAT'S HOW WE'RE DOING IT NOW. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: WE'RE TRYING TO CODIFY THAT BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT JUST SAYS INVOCATION, RIGHT? SO THAT COULD MEAN ANYTHING. THE COUNCIL DECIDED ON A POLICY TO AVOID ANY POSSIBLE ENTANGLEMENTS REGARDING FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND STATE
ESTABLISHED RELIGION THAT IT'S THE COUNCILMEMBER DOING THE INVOCATION OR THEIR SELECTION. SO IT TAKES IT -- IT'S NOT THE CITY DOING IT. SO THAT WAS JUST TO CODIFY IT SO THERE'S NO MISUNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S THE INDIVIDUAL
COUNCILMEMBER'S RESPONSIBILITY OR THEIR DESIGNEE. THAT'S THAT CHANGE. THE MAYOR'S REPORT IS TO CLARIFY WHAT IT IS. I BELIEVE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THE INTENT THAT THE MAYOR'S REPORT BE FOR INFORMATION ONLY, FOR THE MAYOR TO GIVE REPORTS LIKE SHE DID TONIGHT AND IT'S NOT MEANT AS A BACK AND FORTH WITH THE
COUNCIL. THE ADDED ITEMS IS WE HAVE BEEN PUTTING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, ADDED COUNCIL ITEMS. THEY ACTUALLY FORMALLY HAD A PLACE. WE HAVE JUST BEEN PUTTING THEM ON THERE. SO IT SAYS THEY ARE NOW AT THIS POINT IN THE AGENDA. AND THEN FINALLY OUR PRACTICE
HAS BEEN TO PUT WORK STUDY SESSIONS AT THE END AND WE ARE JUST CODIFYING IT. WE'RE JUST PUTTING THESE RULES. THE -- THE -- AND ON THIS RULE -- AND I CAN ADDRESS -- PERHAP IT'S WOULD BE HELP TULLFO
ADDRESS THE PUBLIC COMMENT NOW. THERE'S TWO PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS. THE MAYOR, AT HER DISCRETION HAS COMBINED THEM INTO ONE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. SO BETWEEN THE TWO COMMENT PERIODS RIGHT NOW, THERE ARE A TOTAL OF TEN SPEAKERS ALLOWED FOR A TOTAL OF THREE MINUTES
EACH. SO 30 MINUTES. IF THE -- AT THE MAYOR'S DRESS, SHE COULD HAVE HAD TWO PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS FIVE AT THE BEGINNING AND FIVE AT THE END, THREE MINUTES EACH. SANT15 MINUTES.
SO WE ARE PLANNING TO HAVE NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE END OF THE MEETING AND NOT THE BEGINNING. THERE'S IMPORTANT INFORMATION TO DISCLOSE. ONE THE THINGS WE ARE PROPOSING IS TO ADD PUBLIC COMMENT TO ADDED ITEMS, RIGHT IN THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT
ALLOWED BECAUSE THEY'RE -- I'M SORRY, MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS. RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT ALLOWED. SO WE'RE PROPOSING THREE SPEAKERS AT THREE MINUTES EACH. THE MATH ACTUALLY COMES OUT EVEN WITH THE REDUCED TWO MINUTES AND THE EIGHT SPEAKERS VERSUS TEN,
COMES TO FIVE MINUTES LESS OF TOTAL PUBLIC COMMENT AT A MEETING. THIS COUNCIL IS FREE TO REJECT THE TWO MINUTES. THEY CAN DO THREE MINUTES. THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THE COUNCIL CHOOSES. THERE IS NO INTENT HERE TO LIMIT FREE SPEECH. AND LET ME TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO HERE. AND WHAT SOME OTHER CITIES ARE DOING. WE SURVEYED NINE OF OUR PEER CITIES. SIX OF THOSE CITIES HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT, OR NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE END OF THE MEETING. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HAS
NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE END OF MEETING. THE PARADISE VALLEY HAS NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT AT WHAT HAPPENED WITH NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT? IT SETS THE TENURE FOR THE ENTIRE MEETING, RIGHT? AND WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD THEIR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA FOR AT
LEAST TEN DAYS. UNLIKE MOST CITIES WE PROVIDE TEN DAYS NOTICE OF MOST OF OUR ITEMS. WE GENERALLY DON'T JUST STRICTLY FOLLOW THE 24-HOUR PERIOD. WE GIVE A LOT OF ADVANCED NOTICE. PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR THEIR ITEMS FOR TEN DAYS OR MORE
HAVE TO WAIT WHILE PEOPLE COME AND DO THE NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT, SPUR OF THE MOMENT, RIGHT? AND TYPICALLY, IF I'M ON A NONPROFIT, I'M PART OF A CLUB, PART OF AN ASSOCIATION, YOU DO NEW BUSINESS AT THE END, RIGHT? AND NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC IS
BASICALLY NEW BUSINESS BUT IT'S GETTING PRIORITY OVER STUFF THAT'S BEING -- HAS BEEN AGENDIZED FOR A LONG TIME. AND BACK IN AUGUST -- BECAUSE I WAS CONCERNED WITH HOW THINGS WERE GOING WITH THE CIVILITY OF
PUBLIC COMMENT AND STUFF LIKE THAT. I WROTE A MEMO TO THE PUBLIC AND SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE READ IT IN THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, REGARDING CIVILITY, HOPING TO SEE MORE CIVILITY. AND ONE THE THINGS THAT I CAME TO THE CONCLUSION OF, IF WE TONE
IT DOWN AND LET PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY HAVE THEIR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TALK FIRST SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT THROUGH THAT, IT MIGHT IMPROVE CIVILITY. THAT'S ONE THE REASONS, IN MY PERSON -- THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION, I THINK SECOND PUBLIC COMMENT SHOULD GO AS NEW BUSINESS TOWARDS THE END.
WHETHER THE COUNCIL WANTS TEN PEOPLE TO SPEAK, THREE MINUTES THAT'S FINE. THOSE WERE JUST STARTING POINTS, RIGHT? BUT I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE NET RESULT WITH THE NEW PUBLIC COMMENT WE WERE SUGGESTING, WOULD HAVE REDUCED TOTAL PUBLIC COMMENT BY FIVE MINUTES. AND WE HAVE ALL SAT THROUGH
THESE DIFFERENT MEETINGS. THERE'S NO INTENT TO DEPRIVE ANYONE FROM PUBLIC COMMENT. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO IMPROVE CIVILITY. BUT I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT OUR PEER CITIES ARE DOING SIX OUT OF NINE, NON-AGENDIZED
PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE W END, WHT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DOES AND P.V. SCHOOL DISTRICT. AND IN TERMS THE AUDIO VISUAL EQUIPMENT. WE SURVEYED AS MANY CITIES AS WE COULD. NOT A SINGLE CITY THAT WE COULD FIND LETS THE PUBLIC USE THEIR AUDIO VISUAL EQUIPMENT.
AND WHY IS THAT? WELL, WE HAVE A CABLE LICENSE, RIGHT? WE HAVE FCC STUFF WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT. WE HAVE RIGHT STUFF WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT. WE HAVE OBSCENITY, OUR STAFF DOES NOT HAVE TIME TO REVIEW THESE VIDEOS. WE GET THEM AT THE LAST MINUTE.
THERE'S BEEN TIMES WHEN PEOPLE ARE PUTTING THOSE VIDEOS ON AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT IS ON THERE. IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME UNTIL SOMETHING INAPPROPRIATE IS THERE. IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN YELL FIRE IN A CROWDED THEATER.
SO NO ONE IS TRYING TO LIMIT ANYONE'S SPEECH. YOU CAN STILL USE THE ELMO. WE JUST DON'T WANT OUR STAFF PUT IN THIS AWKWARD POSITION WHERE THEY'RE FORCED TO PLAY SOMETHING THAT TURNS OUT TO BE GOD KNOWS WHAT. >> Councilmember Whitehead: SO I STILL HAVE THE FLOOR. YOU KNOW, I WANT TO STATE VERY
CLEARLY THAT WE DID NOT BECOME A WORLD-CLASS CITY WITH SIMPLY BETTER SERVICE BY LOOKING TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR ADVICE ON HOW TO RUN A MEETING. SO I APPRECIATE -- I APPRECIATE YOUR LEGAL INPUT AND YOU -- AND
THE FACT THAT YOU DO REPRESENT THIS COUNSEL, BUT I STRONGLY OPPOSE ANY CHANGES TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. AND LORD KNOWS THE PEOPLE THAT COME AND SPEAK SOMETIMES THEY
AREN'T SO NICE, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, IF YOU GET PAST THAT, STICKS AND STONES MAY BREAK YOUR BONES BUT NAMES AND FACES DON'T, YOU ACTUALLY HEAR THINGS AN YOU LEARN THINGS ABOUT THIS COMMUNITY YOU WOULDN'T OTHERWISE KNOW. IT'S A BIG CITY.
AND WE'RE DOING OUR BEST JOB TO RUN IT, BUT WE NEED THE INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC AND MAKING PEOPLE WAIT UNTIL 10:00 AT NIGHT TO SPEAK FOR THREE MINUTES IS -- IS -- OR TWO MINUTES IS SILLY. SO I STRONGLY OPPOSE ANY CHANGES
TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. WE WERE -- IT'S ALWAYS NICE TO SEE OUR COMMUNITY COME TOGETHER ON AN ISSUE. BOY, DID WE COME TOGETHER ON THAT! LET OUR RESIDENTS COME IN. IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE TENOR OF
THE MEETING AND THE MAYOR HAS DONE A GOOD JOB. SHE ALLOWS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WANT TO SPEAK IN THE NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT, TO SPEAK AT THE BEGINNING THAT MAKES TOTAL SENSE. IF SOMEONE COMES IN LATE, THEY GET THAT OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AGAIN. MAYBE THEY WORKED LATE.
AND I WANT TO SAY I LIKE THE IDEA OF ADDING PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD TO THE MAYOR, COUNCIL ITEMS. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. BUT YOU DON'T -- DEMOCRACY, THE
SUCCESS OF THE CITY IS NOT A MATH EQUATION. WE HAVE SUCCEEDED -- OUR GREATEST ACHIEVEMENTS IS BECAUSE THE PUBLIC CAME TO US WITH AN IDEA. THE CITY COUNCIL IS ELECTED ALL THE WAY UNTIL THIS ONE, HAVE LISTENED TO THE RESIDENTS AND
DELIVERED ON THE BEST OF THOSE IDEAS. SO I JUST -- YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE WHAT EXACTLY THIS -- WE WERE GOING THROUGH ITEMS TO VOTE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ON THE SCREEN -- SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENT, THE ITEM THAT WE CAN VOTE
HOPEFULLY DOWN AND JUST PROTECT THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO SHOW UP AT 5:00, SPEAK FOR THREE MINUTES, THAT ISN'T A WHOLE LOT, AND -- AND THAT WE CAN TAKE THAT AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT AGENDIZED ITEMS. I WOULD LIKE TO SPY T SEE THAT N
THE SCREEN, SINCE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING. LET'S PUT IT UP. >> Clerk Lane: CAN YOU GO TO SLIDE 8, PLEASE. >> Mayor Borowsky: POINT OF THE ORDER. I WOULD LIKE TO THAT I THESE IN ORDER AND NOT JUMP BACK AND FORTH. I THINK THAT'S GOING TO ELONGATE THIS PROCESS. >> Councilmember Whitehead: THAT'S FINE.
SORRY BACK TO THESE. I GUESS I SEE NO ISSUE WITH -- WITH THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN. IT BOTHERS ME, THE EIGHT IS REMOVED SO YOU'RE NOT CHANGING PUBLIC COMMENT IN THIS -- IN THIS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE. >> Interim City Atty. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: YES, WE ARE.
THAT'S WHY I WENT ON MY SPEECH ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENT BECAUSE OF NUCNUMBER EIGHT, IT REMOVES IT M THE FRONT AND PUTS IT ON THE BACK END. >> Councilmember Whitehead: SO I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO READ THE EMAILS WE HAVE RECEIVED FROM SUCH A BROAD GROUP OF PEOPLE AND
I VOTE TO DENY THE CHANGES RECOMMENDED BY COUNCIL FOR RULE NUMBER 6. >> Mayor Borowsky: VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. AGAIN, I WILL PREFACE THAT COUNCILMEMBER WHITEHEAD AND I ARE DEAR FRIENDS IN THE -- IN --
WHEN THE CAMERAS ARE CLOSED AND WE LEAVE THE DAIS. BUT I'M GOING TO EYE ROLL TO HER COMMENTS. AND I WILL TELL YOU WHY. YOU COULD TELL WHO IS RUNNING FOR OFFICE WHEN -- THE WAY MAKE THESE DRAMATIC STATEMENTS ABOUT DEMOCRACY AND YOU SAY WE WEREN'T THIS GLORIOUS CITY BY LISTENING
TO OTHERS. MR. SANTAELLA, WHAT DID WE BASE OUR RULES ON, YOU MENTIONED IT EARLIER. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: CITY OF PHOENIX. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: EVERYTHIN G THAT MAKES IF SPECIAL IS THE CITY OF PHOENIX. DOES THE CITY OF PHOENIX HAVE
TWO PUBLIC COMMENTS OR ONE AT THE END. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: JUST ONE. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: AND DO THEY HAVE AN A.V. WHEN THEY SPEAK OUT? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THEY DIDN'T RESPOND BUT ALL THE CITIES THAT RESPONDED SAID NO, THEY DON'T INVOLVE A.V.
>> Vice Mayor Kwasman: I CAN TELL THEY DON'T. HOW ABOUT THIS ONE, WE DON'T SUBVERT DEMOCRACY, AND WE FOLLOW BEST PRACTICES OF OUR NEIGHBORS. THAT'S HOW MARKET WORKS. LET'S LOOK AT THE MARKET OF DEMOCRACY AND FOLLOW THE BEST PRACTICES. HERE'S THE OTHER THING,
MR. SANTAELLA, HOW MANY TIMES IN THE LAST -- HOW MANY MEETINGS IN A ROW DID WE NOT HAVE A SECOND PERIOD OF PUBLIC COMMENT? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THEY HAVE ALL BEEN
COMBINED. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THE MAYOR ALL MOVED IT TO THE FRONT. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THAT'S CORRECT. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: HOW MANY TIMES INTO A ROW ABOUT SHE DO THAT? THE ANSWER IS EVERY TIME. NOW I WOULD THINK THAT CONGRESSMAN -- CONGRESSMAN? COUNCILMEMBER WHITEHEAD WOULD THINK -- WOULD SAY THE
FOLLOWING, THAT IS A HORRIBLE AFFRONT TO DEMOCRACY. HOW DARE WE HAVE NOT TWO PERIODS OF PUBLIC COMMENT HERE WHEN THEY ARE MOVED TO ONE SECTION. SO I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO POSIT THAT MOVING IT TO ONE SECTION DOESN'T SUBVERT
DEMOCRACY BECAUSE THE MAYOR HAS BEEN DOING THIS SINCE PRETTY MUCH WE HAVE BEEN HERE. SO, AGAIN, WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS ONE -- BY THE WAY I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THE INVOCATION BEFORE THE PLEDGE. WE SHOULD HAVE GOD, COUNTRY AND THEN BUSINESS, INSTEAD OF
COUNTRY, GOD, BUSINESS. THAT'S JUST PERSONAL ISSUE, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE PART OF THIS RULE CHANGE. BUT SECONDLY, THE MAYOR'S OFFICE IS FINE. INVOCATION IS FINE. WE'RE ADDING -- WE'RE ADDING THE ABILITY TO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON MORE ITEMS WHICH IS
INCREASING DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRATIC SPEECH AND WE'RE MOVING -- AND THEN WE ARE COMPLYING WITH ALL THE OTHER MAJOR CITIES IN PUTTING IT AT THE END. AND, AGAIN, I THINK THE -- I THINK YOUR MEMO IS EXCELLENT LUIS, I THINK MR. CITY ATTORNEY.
I THINK YOUR MEMO TALKS ABOUT THE REAL REASON WHY WE WANT TO DO THIS, AND THAT IS WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE MEETINGS FLOW. AND LISTEN, AGAIN, I -- BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THE FOLLOWING. I ALWAYS WANT TO BE VERY TRANSPARENT IN HOW I THINK ABOUT ANY OF THESE ISSUES, BUT I'LL
AGREE WITH -- IF THE MAJORITY WANTS TO KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS, I'M FINE WITH THAT TOO. I JUST THINK THAT THERE'S -- THAT THERE'S LOGIC IN EVERYTHING THAT YOU SAID AND THAT'S WHY I AGREED WITH IT WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT UP TO ME. THANKS. >> Mayor Borowsky: I'M JUST GOING TO INTERJECT. SO THIS WAS ONE OF THE EASIER ONES IN MY OPINION.
I WONDER IF WE CAN KEEP OUR COMMENTS A LOT MORE CONCISE. IT'S REALLY GETTING LATE. WE HAVE 15 MORE RULE CHANGES TO GO. SO WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO EVERYONE'S PASSION, IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE CANNOT ENGAGE IN,
YOU KNOW, A SERMON, IF YOU WILL. ARE WE READY TO VOTE ON THIS? >> Councilmember Graham: WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SPEAK. >> Mayor Borowsky: I REALIZE THAT, WITHOUT CALLING THE QUESTION, WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO DO. COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD. >> Councilmember Littlefield: OH, I'M SORRY.
>> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. >> Councilmember Littlefield: YOU'RE WELCOME. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMANN McALLEN. >> Councilmember McAllen: I'M ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO MOVING PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE END OF THE MEETING. WE ARE NOT PHOENIX. WE ARE SCOTTSDALE AND WE ANSWER
TO OUR RESIDENTS, NOT PHOENIX. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: FOR EXPEDIENCELIY IS, I WILL DOCTOR.
THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: PEOPLE HAVE BROUGHT UP THE A.V. EQUIPMENT. IS THAT PART OF WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: IT IS A SLIDE DOWN THE ROAD, YES.
NOT THIS ONE, NO. >> Councilmember Graham: OKAY. SO THE -- RIGHT NOW WE DO -- I GUESS I'M KIND OF JUST LISTENING AND KEEPING AN OPEN MIND FOR MY COLLEAGUES AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE TWO PUBLIC COMMENT MEETINGS
THAT WE -- I HAVEN'T REALIZED WE HAVE BEEN DOING ONE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR; IS THAT CORRECT, FOR MOST OF THE YEAR? >> Clerk Lane: FOR THE MOST OF THE YEAR. >> Councilmember Graham: I
GUESS THAT KIND OF MAKES SENSE. I NEVER REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT IT TOO HARD. CITY ATTORNEY, YOU SAID MOST ENTITIES WHEN THEY BRING UP NEW BUSINESS, NONPROFITS AND SUCH AND OTHER GOVERNMENTS, THEY DO IT AT THE END OF THE MEETINGS.
>> Interim City Atty. Santaella: YES, I BELIEVE THAT'S THE MOST COMMON PRACTICE BECAUSE WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT, IT'S NEW BUSINESS, BECAUSE IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA WHERE BASICALLY THE PEOPLE THAT ARE NON-AGENDIZED ARE GETTING PRIORITY OVER THE PEOPLE THAT ARE -- HAVE AGENDIZED ITEMS THE
WAY WE'RE DOING IT NOW. >> Councilmember Graham: SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT BY -- WE PUT SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA, TEN DAYS IN ADVANCE AND SOMEBODY SEES IT AND THEY WANT TO SPEAK ON IT, AND EVERYBODY IS GOING TO KEEP THE ABILITY TO SPEAK ON EVERY AGENDA. >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT AND WE DID NOT SUGGEST ANY CHANGES TO THAT, OTHER THAN TO CLARIFY THAT THEY HAD TO SPEAK ON THE ACTUAL AGENDA ITEM. >> Councilmember Graham: AND THIS RIGHT HERE, IT SAYS WE'RE ELIMINATING NUMBER EIGHT BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE
PUTTING IT ALL TO THE END; IS THAT CORRECT? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: IT'S A HYBRID. BETWEEN THE TWO PERIODS THEY WERE TWO SPEAKERS WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING WAS EIGHT FOR ONE SINGLE PERIOD BUT THAT CAN BE ADJUSTED BY THE COUNCIL AS IT SEES FIT. >> Councilmember Graham: RIGHT NOW IS IT FIVE AT THE BEGINNING AND FIVE AT THE END?
>> Interim City Atty. Santaella: YES. >> Councilmember Graham: IF WE PUT IT IN THE END AND ADOPT HOW MOST OF OUR PEER CITIES DO IT, INCLUDING THE SUPERVISORS AND EVERYBODY ELSE, DOES THE LEGISLATURE -- ARE THERE SUBCOMMITTEES DO THEY HAVE OF PUBLIC COMMENT WHATSOEVER? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: NO, THEY DON'T HAVE
THE SAME TYPE OF RULES THAT WE DO. AND YOU COULD HAVE A SINGLE COMMENT PERIOD AND HAVE TEN. DIFFERENT CITIES HAVE DIFFERENT LIMITS. >> Councilmember Graham: ARE WE LEGALLY OBLIGATED TO HAVE YOC
COMMENT? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: ACTUALLY NO, YOU ARE LEGALLY OBLIGATED TO HAVE THE PUBLIC ATTEND THE MEETING BUT THERE'S NO LEGAL REQUIREMENT THAT MEMBERS THE PUBLIC BE ABLE TO SPEAK. AND AS YOU HAVE PROBABLY SEEN IN THE PRESS, FOUNTAIN HILLS VOTED THAT WAY AND THAT'S CAUSING
SOME -- >> Councilmember Graham: SO FOUNTAIN HILLS ELIMINATED PUBLIC COMMENT? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THEY ARE NOT ALLOWING PUBLIC COMMENT IN TERMS OF NON-AGENDIZED. >> Councilmember Graham: SEE, I THINK PUBLIC COMMENT IS CRUCIAL. I THINK IT'S CRUCIAL FOR RESPECTING PEOPLE'S WISHES
BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES WE GET PEOPLE -- YEAH, WE GET TOUGH CRITICISM BUT WE NEED TO FACE IT. I MEAN, READ SULLIVAN vs. "NEW YORK TIMES." NOT ONLY IS SPEAKING TO YOUR
ELECTED OFFICIALS SUPPOSED TO BE UNCOMFORTABLE, BUT IT SHOULD BE VERY UNCOMFORTABLE AT TIMES. AND EVERYBODY UP HERE HAS HAD VERY CRITICAL COMMENTS POINTED
AT THEM. AND SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S PROTECTED IF WE KEEP THE PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE END. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: ABSOLUTELY. IT'S STRICTLY A LOD LOGISTICAL E AND HOW MUCH TIME THE COUNCIL THINKS SHOULD BE DONE. AS VICE MAYOR KWASMAN POINTED
OUT, PEOPLE APPLYING FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS FOR A TWO-YEAR JOB ONLY HAVE TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK YESTERDAY VERSUS THREE MINUTES NOR NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT. SO MY POINT ON THAT IS THAT THE COUNCIL HAS BROAD DISCRETION IN
DETERMINING HOW MUCH SPEECH IS ALLOWED IN TERMS OF TIME LIMITS. APPLICANTS ARE GIVEN MORE TIME, FOR EXAMPLE. >> Councilmember Graham: YEAH, THEY ARE GIVEN MORE TIME. WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SUBJECTED TO -- WE HEAR FROM PEOPLE THAT
WANT TO TALK ABOUT THEY WANT -- THEY GOT A STOP SIGN OR THEY GOT A -- YOU KNOW, A CRUMBLING SIDEWALK OR WHATEVER IT IS, AND WE NEED TO HEAR THAT AND WE'VE -- WE EVEN HEAR A LOT OF GOOD FROM TIME TO TIME, WHEN
PEOPLE TELL US THINGS. BUT PUBLIC COMMENT IS SACRED FOR PEOPLE IF THEY FEEL THEY NEED TO EVEN SPEAK VERY CRITICALLY TOWARDS US. SO WE WILL PROTECT PUBLIC COMMENT; IS THAT RIGHT? >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: ABSOLUTE THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. IN AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU CAN HAVE A BACK AND FORTH DISCUSSION WITH THE PEOPLE, BECAUSE IT'S AGENDIZED. YOU CAN'T DO THAT FOR NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT. THERE'S ONLY THREE THINGS YOU CAN DO. RESPOND TO CRITICISM, ASK THAT
IT BE AGENDIZED FOR A LATER DATE OR INVESTIGATE IT. THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS WOULD BE DEALING WITH PUBLIC COMMENT THROUGH AGENDIZED ITEMS, SCHEDULING IT SO YOU CAN HAVE A FULL BACK AND FORTH DISCUSSION, RIGHT? NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT IS,
IN MY VIEW, INTENDED FOR THE PERSON THAT WANTS TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION POTHOLES AT SOME INTERSECTION OR ABOUT SOME HAZARD OR SOMETHING THE CITY IS DOING WRONG, AND THEN IT -- AND THEN THE COUNCIL WOULD AGENDIZE THAT AT A LATER DATE TO FULLY
DISCUSS. >> Councilmember Graham: I WANT TO RESPECT OUR STAFF PROFESSIONALS AND I HEAR YOU AS FAR AS THE -- AS FAR AS THE MERITS OF YOUR ARGUMENT ABOUT -- ABOUT HOLDING A MEETING, KEEPING IT ON SCHEDULE -- OR SAY IN ORDER AND, YOU KNOW, FOR THE ITEMS THAT ARE AGENDIZED TO HAVE
THOSE FIRST. BUT I DO WANT -- I WANT -- I WANT TO EXPAND PUBLIC COMMENT SO WHEN WE GET THERE. RIGHT NOW IT'S FIVE AND FIVE, RIGHT? I WOULD LIKE TO EVEN AT THE END HAVE IT -- EXPAND IT TO 11 OR 12 SLOTS AT THE END OF THE MEETING.
I WOULD LIKE TO EXPAND PUBLIC COMMENT. AND I HAVE NO -- AND I HAVE NO -- AND I'M VERY OPPOSED TO REDUCING PUBLIC COMMENT TIME FROM THREE MINUTES TO TWO MINUTES. I KNOW WE'RE NOT ON THAT COMMENT EITHER YET. SO I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO
ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. I WILL MAKE A SMALL MODIFICATION TO THIS, BECAUSE THIS KIND OF -- NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE AGENDA. AND SO THERE'S -- IN SECTION 6.2, THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY AT HIS OR HER
DISCRETION OR SHALL UPON THE MAJORITY VOTE -- >> Councilmember McAllen: POINT OF ORDER. 6.2 ISN'T ON THE SLIDE. WE'RE DOING SLIDE BY SLIDE, IS;S THAT CORRECT? >> Councilmember Graham: A POINT OF ORDER IS CALLED. I THOUGHT I COULD MAKE A -- A
SMALL ADJUSTMENT TO MY MOTION. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THE COUNCIL IS FREE TO MAKE ANY MOTIONS IT SEES FIT REGARDING THESE RULES. THESE ARE THE PARTICULAR RULES THAT WE WERE DISCUSSING, BUT IT DOESN'T PROHIBIT COUNCILMEMBERS FROM TRYING TO MODIFY ANYTHING,
BECAUSE IT'S -- IT'S PROPERLY AGENDIZED. >> Councilme >> Councilmember McAllen: BUT WE DON'T SEE 6.2, IT'S NOT ON THIS SLIDE. WE AGREED ORIGINALLY TO GO SLIDE BY SLIDE. >> Councilmember Graham: IT'S IN YOUR PACKET BEFORE YOU. >> Councilmember McAllen: I
UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT WE SAID EARLIER AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, IT WAS SLIDE BY SLIDE, DOES WE NOT AGREE ON THAT. >> Councilmember Graham: I'M NOT PULLING ANOTHER SLIDE TO THIS SLIDE. I'M STAYING SLIDE BY SLIDE. >> Mayor Borowsky: CAN YOU RESTATE YOUR MOTION. >> Councilmember Graham: SO
IT'S TO ACCEPT THIS CHANGE AND TO MODIFY 6.2, THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY AT HIS OR HER DRESS OR SHALL UPON THE MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COUNSEL CHANGE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA AND JUST TO STRIKE THROUGH MAY AT HIS OR HER DRESS.
SDISCRETION. TO CHANGE THE MAJOR -- CHANGE THE ORDER AND I THINK THAT KIND OF -- WHAT THAT KIND OF DOES IS IT GIVES PREDICTABILITY TO THE PROCESS. AND IT KIND OF LOCKS IN THE AGENDA.
>> Councilmember Dubauskas: SECO ND. >> Councilmember Graham: AND I WILL FINISH EXPLAINING MY VOTE AND MOTION. WE CAN'T START A MEETING WITHOUT FOUR PEOPLE. WE CAN'T END A MEETING. WE ALWAYS -- WE ALWAYS TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE TO END A MEETING WITH FOUR PEOPLE. SO THIS WOULD JUST SORT OF LOCK
IN THE ORDER AND THEN ANY CHANGES THAT WOULD HAPPEN WOULD OBVIOUSLY -- ANYTHING REASONABLE WE WOULD JUST SUPPORT THAT AND MOVE ON. SO THAT'S MY MOTION. I HAVE A SECOND. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO I DO HAVE I APPOINT OF ORDER ABOUT THAT.
THIS WAS NOT AGENDIZED, THE CHANGE TO RULE 6.2, WAS IT? AND WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THERE TO DISCUSS IT YET BECAUSE THIS IS -- THIS IS COUNCILMAN GRAHAM'S UNILATERAL CHANGE WITH
COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS SECONDING IT. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: GIVE ME ONE SECOND. LET ME LOOK AT THE AGENDA LANGUAGE. SO MAYOR AND MEMBERED OF COUNCIL, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
TO THE RULES OF COUNCIL PROCEDURE AND IT REQUESTS AMENDING THE 2025 RULES OF COUNCIL PROCEDURE AND THEN THIS WAS AN EXHIBIT ATTACHED TO THE RESOLUTION. I -- I THINK THE AGENDA ITEM IS SO BROAD THAT THE COUNCIL COULD AMEND ANY PORTION OF THESE RULES.
THEY WEREN'T PART OF OUR ANTICIPATES RULES CHANGE PACT. -- PACKET.
>> Mayor Borowsky: WE ALREADYúH, VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Councilmember Whitehead: IT'S PRETTY CLEAR HOW DID WE GET THE OPEN MEETING VIOLATION COMPLAINTS. CLEARLY THERE'S SOME THOUGHTS ON HOW TO FURTHER UNDERMINE THE AUTHORITY OF THE MAYOR PRIOR TO THIS MEETING.
SOME OF US WERE NOT PRIVY TO THAT AND NEITHER WAS THE PUBLIC. SO I DEFINITELY DON'T SUPPORT THIS. BUT I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE CAN SIT UP HERE AND SAY WE SUPPORT PUBLIC COMMENT BUT BY PUTTING IT AT THE END OF THE MEETING, WE ARE CLEARLY TELLING
A VERY EDUCATED PUBLIC WE DON'T WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU. LAST NIGHT, WE HAD FOUR SPEAKERS TALK ABOUT THE REPEAL OF THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN WITHOUT A COUNCIL DISCUSSION, WITHOUT TEN-DAY NOTICE AND CLEARLY DONE
BY COUNCIL BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, THE DECISION WAS MADE. DO WE EXPECT THAT THOSE TWO HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS SHOULD BE SITTING IN THIS AUDIENCE UNTIL 10:00 TONIGHT AND SO THAT THEY COULD SAY THAT THEY OPPOSE WHAT
COUNCILMAN GRAHAM DID IN JANUARY? NO. THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE SURE THOSE HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS AND THEIR PARENTS NEVER ARE ALLOWED TO COME TO THIS COUNCIL AGAIN AND OPPOSE SOMETHING THAT THIS CURRENT COUNCIL HAS DONE.
AND I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE SUCCESSES. AND I WANT TO SPEAK TO MY FRIEND VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. I HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT FOR SEVEN YEARS. THERE IS NOTHING THAT WE ARE -- WE ARE NOT ELECTED TO DO
ANYTHING TO GET REELECTED. WE ARE ELECTED TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE CITIZENS OF SCOTTSDALE. AND PUBLIC COMMENT IS LIMITED TO THE CITIZENS OF SCOTTSDALE. AND WE SHOULD BE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MAKE IT
EASY, COMFORTABLE, AND HAVE OPEN DOORS AND LET ME JUST GO THROUGH SOME OF THE SUCCESSES OF PUBLIC COMMENT. WE FOUND OUT THAT A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE WAS BEING USED AS A SPORTS FACILITY. WE FOUND OUT THAT THERE WAS A
SIDEWALK SEGMENT MISSING AND OUR STAFF GRACIOUSLY ADMITTED THEY DIDN'T KNOW IT. IT WAS ENDANGERING HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE IN THE AREA, AND WE HAVE SINCE FIXED THAT PROBLEM. SO NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT ISN'T A NEW ITEM.
IT'S AN ITEM THAT DOESN'T WARRANT AN AGENDA ITEM LIKE A DIFFICULT ZONING CASE. IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT THE PUBLIC COMES AND SPENDS THREE MINUTES TO AEFFOR ALERT THE COU, HEY DID YOU KNOW THIS IS A PROBLEM?
OR DID YOU KNOW WE REALLY HAD A GOOD EXPERIENCE WITH ONE OF YOUR STAFF MEMBERS. IT'S A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE -- FOR THIS COUNCIL TO HEAR DIRECTLY FROM THE 240,000 PEOPLE WE REPRESENT. SO ANY COUNCIL COLLEAGUE CAN SIT UP HERE AND SAY THAT THEY SUPPORT PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEY
WANT TO ADD 10 OR 12 OPPORTUNITIES TO SPEAK AT THE END OF A 10:00 MEETING, BUT THAT IS NOT TRUE. IF WE WANT TO EXPAND PUBLIC COMMENT, LET'S DO JUST THAT. LET'S ADD THOSE TEN SPOTS AT THE BEGINNING AND I WANT TO TALK ABOUT FLEXIBILITY TOO.
THE MAYOR HAS DONE A GREAT JOB WITH THE FLEXIBILITY. WHEN SOMEONE COMES IN LATE, IN A MEETING AND THEY STILL WANT TO DO PUBLIC COMMENT, WE DO IT AT THE END. WE ARE NOT RIGID. SO I REALLY OPPOSE THE ALTERNATE MOTION. I HOPE THAT MY COUNCIL
COLLEAGUES WILL JUST ONCE SAY, WE'RE GONNA DO THIS BECAUSE WE HEARD FROM HUNDREDS OF RESIDENTS. WE'RE GOING TO SUPPORT PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S EASIEST FOR OUR RESIDENTS. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT.
WELL, WE'RE NOT GETTING VERY FAR VERY FAST. BUT SPEAKING TO COUNCILMAN GRAHAM'S INSISTENCE ON LIMITING THE CHAIR'S ABILITY AS MUCH AS HE POSSIBLY CAN THINK OF, IT'S IMPORTANT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE BEEN -- I
KNOW YOU HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF A BOARD, COUNCILMAN GRAHAM, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE CHAIR DOES HAVE FLEXIBILITY TO DO THINGS DURING THE MEETING BECAUSE NOBODY ELSE UP HERE WOULD, BECAUSE I RUN THE MEETING.
SO THIS -- THIS IS A BLATANT AND ABSURD -- I MEAN, COMPLETELY ABSURD OFFER OR PERSISTENCE TO DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO -- I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO, HONESTLY, BECAUSE
AS THE INDIVIDUAL RUNNING THE MEETING, IT'S CRITICAL TO -- OR WHOMEVER WOULD BE RUNNING THE MEETING, IT IS CRITICAL TO THE PROCESS TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY WHEN NEED BE AND AS A RESULT I'LL
VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE THAT AND OPPOSE BOTH OF THE ONES THAT ARE ON THE TABLE. COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD. >> Councilmember Littlefield: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAYOR. I JUST HAD KIND OF A STRANGE QUESTION THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK OUR ATTORNEY.
YOU KNOW ME, I LIKE STRANGE QUESTIONS. IF WE HAVE THIS INVOCATION BY INDIVIDUAL COUNCILMEMBERS OR THEIR DESIGNEE, WHAT IF A COUNCILMEMBER DOES NOT WISH TO DO THAT? EITHER GIVE IT HIMSELF OR
DESIGNATE SOMEONE? THEN THEY PASS ON THAT? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THEY CAN ABSOLUTELY PASS ON IT. >> Councilmember Littlefield: DOES THAT NEED TO BE A PART OF THIS, WRITTEN INTO THE THING? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: WELL, I THINK IT'S IMPLIED THAT THEY CAN PASS ON IT.
THE PROBLEM LEAVING IT AS INVOCATION ONLY, THAT IMPLIES THE CITY ITSELF IS GIVING AN INVOCATION. SO THIS IS JUST TO PUT US IN A BETTER POSITION. THAT'S WHY IT'S TO CLARIFY WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING. >> Councilmember Littlefield: I JUST DON'T WANT TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT MIGHT INFRINGE ON
SOMEONE'S PERSONAL RELIGIOUS RIGHTS. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: NO, UNDERSTANDABLE. AND EACH COUNCILMEMBER IS -- IS FREE TO CALL WHATEVER SPIRITUAL PERSON OR NONSPIRITUAL. THEY COULD HAVE AN ATHEIST IF THEY WANT TO DO ON THE
INVOCATION. >> Councilmember Littlefield: THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: THE MAYOR OR ANYBODY RUNNING THE MEETING WOULD JUST SAY WITHOUT OBJECTION, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ITEM NUMBER FOUR TO FIVE AND THAT'S IT. IT SOLVES -- THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL. IT'S NOT HURTING ANYBODY'S POWER
IN ANY WAY, TRAIN OR FORM. YOU JUST SAY WITHOUT OBJECTION BEFOREHAND AND IT JUST RESPECTS THE ENTIRE CHAIR -- THE ENTIRE DAIS. AND THAT'S IT. >> Mayor Borowsky: AND POTENTIALLY WASTES A LOT OF TIME BUT NO PROBLEM -- NO POINT IN ARGUING THAT. SO WITH THAT, THERE'S NO MORE
DISCUSSION AND LET'S TAKE A VOTE ON THIS -- THE ALTERNATE MOTION, YES. YES.
OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. >> Clerk Lane: NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THE NEXT SET OF RULE CHANGES,
RELATE TO HOW MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS ARE ADDED TO THE AGENDA. THE FIRST CHANGE THAT YOU CAN SEE ON THE THIRD LINE, IT INCREASES THE -- THE TIME PERIOD TO NOTIFY THE CITY CLERK OF A REQUESTED -- TO ADD AN ITEM TO
THE AGENDA FROM TWO B BUSINESS DAYS TO THREE DAYS AND THIS HELPS IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO GET AGENDAS OUT. SO THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO GET AN AGENDA OUT ON A THURSDAY AFTERNOON OR A FRIDAY MORNING RATHER THAN A FRIDAY AFTERNOON. SO THAT WOULD HELP GREATLY. THE SECOND CHANGE, WHICH YOU CAN
SEE KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SCREEN, BASICALLY, THIS JUST -- RIGHT NOW IT JUST HAS TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER AND OFTENTIMES, THERE'S OTHER CHARTER OFFICERS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN MATTERS. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF IT WAS AN ELECTION-RELATED MATTER, WOULD YOU DIRECT THE CITY CLERK.
IF IT WAS A BUDGET-RELATED MATTER, WOULD YOU WANT TO DIRECT THE TREASURER. IT ALLOWS THE FLEXIBILITY TO DIRECT THE APPROPRIATE CHARTER OFFICER. AND THEN THE FINAL TWO CHANGES, BASICALLY FOR MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS BECAUSE OF THE WAY THEY'RE AGENDIZED, THIS FORMALIZED THAT
EACH COUNCILMEMBER WILL HAVE ONE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM AND THEN A VOTE WILL BE TAKEN. BECAUSE IT'S NOT AGENDIZED FOR AN IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION. AND THE FINAL CHANGE AND LUIS ALLUDED TO THIS EARLIER, AND THIS WAS A REQUEST BY A
COUNCILMEMBER, WAS TO ADD NINE MINUTES FOR A MAXIMUM OF THREE SPEAKERS TO ALLOW FOR PUBLIC COMMENT DURING MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS. SO -- SO THAT IS AN AREA WHERE WE'RE ADDING PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE OVERALL AGENDA.
THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: OUR SPEAKER BOARD IS NOT UP. SO I DON'T KNOW WHO WANTS TO TALK ABOUT THIS YET. COUNCILWOMAN McALLEN.
>> Councilmember McAllen: CITY CLERK BEN LANE, ARE YOU SAYING AFTER EVERY ITEM ONLY ONE COUNCIL -- THE COUNCILMEMBER CAN SPEAK ONE TIME? >> Clerk Lane: NO, THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN McALLEN. TO CLARIFY, THIS IS MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS. AND SO -- SO, FOR EXAMPLE, WE
HAVE A MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEM FROM COUNCILMEMBER GRAHAM. THE IDEA WOULD BE UNDER MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS THAT EACH COUNCILMEMBER WOULD HAVE ONE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND THEN A VOTE WOULD BE TAKEN. RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE DEBATE ON THESE ITEMS, AND
IT'S NOT REALLY AGENDIZED FOR THAT TYPE OF DISCUSSION. BECAUSE THE IDEA IS YOUR OPTIONS ON MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS ARE LIMITED WHERE YOU ARE ASKING THE ITEM TO EITHER BE AGENDIZED, YOU ARE ASKING FOR A WRITTEN REPORT
OR YOU ARE TAKING NO ACTION. IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE FULL-BLOWN DISCUSSION. >> Councilmember McAllen: OKAY. >> Clerk Lane: BUT THAT ONLY APPLIES TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS. >> Councilmember McAllen: OKAY.
THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: IF I -- SO YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE ME SUBMIT IT THREE DAYS INSTEAD OF TWO DAYS IN ADVANCE, IF I WANT TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA AND THAT'S TO AVOID THE WHOLE WEEKEND THING? NOT JUST ME, BUT ALL OF US.
>> Clerk Lane: YES. SO WE HAVE GOTTEN STUFF ON FRIDAYS AND WE ARE DOING LATE ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS. >> Councilmember Graham: I THINK THAT'S REASONNAGE FOR OURR STAFF. AND THE RESPONSIBLE CHARTER. WE'RE LITERALLY ADDING THE
LANGUAGE THAT WE ALL UNDERSTAND. THAT'S THE SECOND TWO GREEN LINES AND THEN NUMBER THREE -- NO, AFTER NUMBER THREE, EACH COUNCILMEMBER SHALL HAVE ONE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THEIR VOTE. I LIKE THAT BECAUSE IT -- WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE DEBATING THOSE ITEMS. AND SO EVERYBODY GETS A CHANCE
TO SPEAK ONCE AND THAT TAKES THE AWKWARDNESS AWAY FROM CITY STAFF HAVING TO INTERVENE, PARTICULARLY THE CITY ATTORNEY TO HAVE TO INTERVENE AND TELL US THAT WE'RE OUT OF ORDER AND THAT WE SHOULD BE SUBDUING OUR DIALOGUE. SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT
THIS. >> Councilmember Whitehead: SECOND. >> Mayor Borowsky: DO YOU STILL WISH TO SPEAK, VICE MAYOR? COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS? >> Councilmember Dubauskas: THAN K YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I LIKE THIS IDEA OF ADDING PUBLIC COMMENT TO THIS SECTION. IT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE HAD
BEFORE. IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT EVEN OCCURRED TO ME, BUT I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE PUBLIC TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SWAY -- >> Councilmember Graham: THERE'S TO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: WE PUT IT IN, THREE MINUTES. THREE TIMES THREE.
SO WE WILL ADD NINE MINUTES OF PUBLIC COMMENT HERE AND I THINK IT'S -- IT'S GREAT FOR THE PUBLIC TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SWAY WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING SHOULD BE AGENDIZED AND HOW WE THINK ABOUT IT. I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR ADDING THAT IN. >> Councilmember Graham: OH, COUNCILWOMAN -- SORRY, MAYOR, I
DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE TO ITS FULL ENTIRETY, THIS IS ADDITION TO PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. SO I STAND BY MY MOTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF REVISIONS
TO 6.11? >> Councilmember Graham: SORRY.
SORRY ABOUT THAT.
>> Clerk Lane: NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: AL THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT WE TOUCHED ON EARLIER, THIS IS A POLLING RULE. WE ARE REMOVING POLLING BECAUSE, WELL, TECHNICALLY, IT'S NOT ILLEGAL HOW IT'S DONE. IT'S NOT THE BEST PRACTICE AND WE DON'T WANT TO DO POLLING
ANYMORE. SO THIS IS REMOVING THE -- THE SECTION AND THEN RESERVING IT AND IT COULD BE USED AT A LATER DATE FOR SOME OTHER RULE THAT THE COUNCIL MIGHT WANT TO ADOPT. >> Mayor Borowsky: I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REVISION
AND ELIMINATION OF THE PRACTICE THAT WE HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN, OF POLLING FOR MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, TO MAKE A DETERMINATION ABOUT ADDING AN AGENDA ITEM. >> Councilmember Graham: SECOND. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: HOW LONG
HAVE WE POLLED BEFORE THIS -- WE HAVE POLLED SINCE 2011? >> Clerk Lane: I BELIEVE SO, VICE MAYOR. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: I WANT TO MAKE SURE SO THAT PEOPLE DON'T POLITICIZE ANYTHING HERE, EVERYBODY WAS FINE WITH THIS
PRACTICE UNTIL -- UNTIL 20 MINUTES AGO. SO I KNOW WE'RE GETTING RID OF IT. I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT IDEA. I THINK WE SHOULD CHALLENGE THIS AND THINK THAT POLLING WAS AN ACCEPTED PRACTICE FOR THE LAST DECADE SEEMS TO HAVE -- OR 15
YEARS DERK C, DECADE AND A HALF. AND NOBODY HAD AN ISSUE AND NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S THE BIGGEST ISSUE IN THE WORLD. AND I THINK THIS IS ALL FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES. SO I WILL SUPPORT -- I WILL SUPPORT REMOVAL OF THIS RULE BECAUSE OF THE -- BECAUSE OF THE SUPPORT ON THE DAIS, BUT I JUST
WANT TO REMIND MEMBERS THAT WE'RE CHANGING RULES FOR REASONS. AND -- AND WE'VE HAD -- WE HAVE A HUGE PRECEDENT ON THIS ONE. AND THERE WAS NO NEED TO GET RID OF IT.
>> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: I WAS READY TO SPEAK ON THE NEXT ITEM, THE NEXT SLIDE. >> Mayor Borowsky: JUST FOR THE RECORD, VICE MAYOR, I HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT SINCE I TOOK OFFICE. I THINK IT'S COMPLETELY AN OPEN -- DE FACTO VIOLATION
BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T TEND TO PUT THINGS ON THE AGENDA THAT THEY DON'T SUPPORT. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: RESPECT YOUR OPINION. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MODIFICATIONS TO 6.12, PLEASE
INDICATE YOUR SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION. OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
SO THIS IS THE ONE WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT EXTENSIVELY AND THIS IS THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT. AND THE PROPOSAL, AS YOU CAN SEE AND AS WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, MOVES THE NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE END OF THE
MEETING VERSUS THE FRONT. IT REDUCES THE SPEAKERS FROM 10 TO 8. REDUCES THE SPEAKING TIME FROM 3 MINUTES TO 2 MINUTES AND IT ALSO CLARIFIES THAT FOR AGENDAIZED PUBLIC COMMENT, ON CONSENT, REGULAR, AND MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS, SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO
DISCUSSING SPECIFIC ITEMS. WE'VE SEEN IN RECENT MEMORY PEOPLE COMING UP FOR AGENDIZED ITEMS AND THEY START TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE AND THAT'S -- THAT'S NOT PERMITTED UNDER THE OPEN MEETING LAW. SO THAT'S TO -- THE INTENT IS TO TIGHTEN UP THE RULES THERE.
AND THE BOTTOM IS THE A.V. EQUIPMENT. IT DOES NOT APPLY TO THE ELMO. CITIZENS COULD STILL USE THE ELMO AT THE VARIOUS SPEAKING PODIUMS. THIS, AS WE TALKED EARLIER, I PROBABLY DON'T NEED TO GO INTO
IT AD. [ IAD NAUSEAM, COPYRIGHT, ANDFC, WERE THE REASONS WHY WE WERE NOT PROPOSING TO USE OUR STAFF OR EQUIPMENT TORE PLAYING VIDEOS. ANY OF THESE THINGS THE COUNCIL
CAN CERTAINLY GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION IF IT SEES FIT AND AS WE TALKED EARLIER, SIX OF THE NINE PEER CITIES THAT WE SURVEYED DO PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE END, AND WE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THE OTHER AND WE TALKED ABOUT NEW BUSINESS. I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME
COUNCILMEMBERS DISAGREE WITH THAT CATEGORIZATION. BUT UNLESS YOU WANT ME TO, I WON'T GO OVER ALL THE OTHER POINTS I HAVE ALREADY GONE OVER. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: THANK YOU, PAYER.
MAYOR. I THINK THIS IS THE BIG KAHUNA, AS FAR AS WHAT' L WHAT A LOT OFE HEADLINES WERE ABOUT, AND I THINK IT MIGHT BE A LET DOWN FOR PEOPLE THAT WE ARE BRACING FOR A
REDUCTION IN PUBLIC PARTICIPATION BECAUSE I MEAN AS I STATED EARLIER, I OPPOSE REDUCTION OF THE NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THREE MINUTES TO TWO MINUTES. THE SECOND BULLET IS FINE.
TOTAL NUMBER OF SPEAKERS FOR NON-AGENDIZED REDUCED FROM 10 SPEAKERS EIGHT SPEAKS. I WOULD LIKE TO GO TO A REDUCTION OF 12 SPEAKERS. CLARIFIES FOR AGENDIZED REGULAR AND MAYOR COUNCIL ITEMS PEOPLE ARE LIMITED TO -- THAT'S JUST
CODIFYING WHAT WAS STATE LAW. AND A./V. EQUIPMENT MAY NOT BE UTILIZED BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC; OVERHEAD CAMERA WOULD REMAIN AVAILABLE. I -- I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT PEOPLE LOSING THE ELMO BECAUSE THE ELMO -- WE'RE CALLING IT OVERHEAD CAMERA, YOU BRING IN A
PIECE OF PAPER, YOU BRING IN ANY SORT OF CONTENT THAT YOU WANT TO DISPLAY, A LOT OF PEOPLE PUT THEIR CELL PHONE AND ZOOM IN ON IT. AND A LOT OF TIMES WHEN YOU ARE GIVING PUBLIC COMMENT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE GIVING
CRITICAL PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU WANT MATERIALS TO GO WITH THAT. SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CONTINUE TO PROTECT PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO USE THE ELMO MACHINE. THE A/V EQUIPMENT AND JUST TO REITERATE, YOU ARE NOT AWARE OF
ANY OTHER GOVERNING BODIES THAT A/V EQUIPMENT. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: WE'RE NOT AWARE OF A SINGLE ONE. WE CAN'T HEAR -- >> Councilmember Graham: SO WE WERE THE EXTREME OUTLIER ON THAT ONE. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: WE BELIEVE SO. >> Councilmember Graham: IT'S PLACING A BIG BURDEN ON CITY
STAFF IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THAT. AND I THINK THAT FOR THIS ONE, I WILL RESPECT STAFF. AND SO, YEAH, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THIS, DELETING THE FIRST BULLET, MODIFYING THE SECOND ONE TO PUBLIC COMMENT
INCREASED FROM TEN SPEAKERS TO 12, AND -- I'M SORRY? AND THAT'S MY MOTION. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: THRE E MINUTES. >> Councilmember Graham: I DELETED THE FIRST ONE ENTIRELY. SO THERE'S NO CHANGE TO THREE MINUTES VERSUS TWO MINUTES BECAUSE I WANT TO KEEP IT THREE
MINUTES. I WANT EACH SPEAKER -- I WANT TO PROTECT THE AMOUNT OF TIME. SO WE WILL STRIKE THAT THROUGH, INCREASE TOTAL NUMBER OF SPEAKERS NOR NON-AGENDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT, INCREASE FROM 10 SPEAKERS TO 12. AND PASS IT -- PASS IT IN THAT FASHION.
THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN McALLEN. >> Councilmember McAllen: THANK YOU, MAYOR. OKAY. SO HERE I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU, CITY ATTORNEY SANTAELLA. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: SECO ND. >> Councilmember McAllen: CURREN TLY PEOPLE WHO WANT TO USE A/V
EQUIPMENT, DON'T SHOW IT TO YOU AHEAD OF TIME, THEY JUST BRING IT. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THAT'S CORRECT WILL. >> Councilmember McAllen: DO PEOPLE WHO BRING STUFF FOR THE ELMO, DO THEY SHOW IT AHEAD OF TIME. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THEY JUST BRING IT. >> Councilmember McAllen: SO THE SAM THING COULD HAPPEN ON THE
ELMO AS THE A/V. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: HOWEVER BUT WE DON'T HAVE A COPYRIGHTED -- BUT THEY ARE NOT BEING AIDED OR ASSISTED BY US. >> Councilmember McAllen: WELL, TECHNICALLY, IT'S TURNED ON BY STAFF.
I WOULD NOT LIKE TO LIMIT THE USE OF A/V EQUIPMENT. COULD WE CHANGE IT TO POSSIBLY BE THAT THEY HAND IT IN THREE DAYS AHEAD OF TIME, THE WAY STAFF HAS TO HAND IN -- IF WE WANT TO CHANGE SOMETHING TO YOU, WE HAVE TO DO THREE DAYS WHY
CAN'T WE ASK CITIZENS IF YOU WISH TO USE A/V EQUIPMENT, YOU HAVE TO DO IT PRIOR, THE FRIDAY PRIOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS OR 48 HOURS OR WHATEVER. THAT WAY PEOPLE -- YOU COULD SCREEN IT. I KNOW THAT IS WORK INTENSIVE,
BUT IT STILL ALLOWS CITIZENS THE RIGHT TO USE THE A/V EQUIPMENT THAT WE HAVE BEEN LETTING THEM USE FOR DECADES. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE NEED TO STOP IT NOW. BASICALLY, I'M -- I'M COMPLETELY OPPOSED TO STILL MOVING IT BACK
AT THE END OF THE MEETING, BUT WE ALREADY VOTED ON THAT. THE OTHER THING IS NON-AGENDIZED -- YEAH. THE 12 SPEAKERS IS FINE.
I WOULD -- I THINK WE SHOULDN'T LIMIT IT. IF PEOPLE WANT TO TALK, WITH HE SHOULD LISTEN TO THEM. WE SHOULDN'T LISTEN TO THEM AT ALL. I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THE A/V EQUIPMENT SO YOU GUYS ON THE DAIS, PLEASE SUPPORT THE CITIZENS COULD STILL USE A/V EQUIPMENT, THEY JUST HAVE TO
HAND IT IN THE FRIDAY PRIOR OR 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THE -- IT'S SOMETHING YOU COULD CHOOSE TO DO. THE ISSUE IS GOING TO BE ALLEGATIONS OF CENSORSHIP WHEN
WE SAY IT'S COPYRIGHTED OR WE SAY IT'S OBSCENE, AND IT PUTS -- BOTH SITUATIONS PUT STAFF IN A VERY BAD POSITION, EITHER AS THE CENSORS OR NOT KNOWING WHAT WE'RE PLAYING. WITH THE ELMO, WE'RE NOT PUTTING
IT ON THE ELMO MACHINE. WE'RE NOT PLAYING IT ON FCC REGULATED CABLE STATION. >> Councilmember McAllen: SO WHY IF WE ALLOWED A/V FOR DECADES WHY IS THIS NOW AN ISSUE. >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: I DON'T KNOW THAT WE ALLOWED IT TORE DECADES. JUST BECAUSE WE ALLOWED SOMETHING FOR A LONG TIME DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN IT'S THE BEV BEST THING TO DO. AND THESE ARE MODIFIED CONCERNS OF COPYRIGHTED MATERIALS,
OBSCENITY, YOU KNOW. WE DON'T -- WE LITERALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE PUTTING ON THERE AND WE ARE SUBJECTING THE PEOPLE LIKE JORDAN UP THERE TO -- TO -- TO THAT KIND OF INTERACTION. IN TERMS FIRST AMENDMENT, PEOPLE CERTAINLY HAVE A RIGHT TO SPEAK WHATEVER THEY WANT.
THEY DON'T HAVE UNFETTERED ABILITY -- JUST LIKE WE PROHIBIT PEOPLE FROM USING OUR EQUIPMENT TO INFLUENCE AN ELECTION, WHAT IS NEXT? WE'RE GOING TO START JUST HAVING ELECTION COMMERCIALS? I MEAN SOME OF IT IS MY -- MY LEGAL GUIDANCE, SOME OF IT IS A
LITTLE BIT OF MY PERSONAL OPINION, I WILL ADMIT. BUT THE IDEA IS TO PROTECT THE STAFF AND THE CITY FROM THESE'SES. THESE'SES. NOW IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT, WE CAN DO IT, BUT WE WILL BE IN A
WBAD POSITION UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT. >> Councilmember McAllen: I DISAGREE. I THINK THE SAME SITUATION STILL OCCURS IF THEY ARE USING ON THE ELMO. IF SOMETHING PUTS SOMETHING ON THE ELMO, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO? ARE YOU GOING TO CENSOR IT OR MOVE IT.
I THINK WE SHOULD ALLOW A/V EQUIPMENT.
>> Mayor Borowsky: THE CITY MANAGER. >> City Mgr. Caton: I WAS GOING TO PART MY COLLEAGUES ON THIS ITEM. AND ADD A LITTLE BIT OF NUANCE TO THE LEGAL PERSPECTIVE. I HAVE SEEN, EVEN IN THIS ROOM, WHERE UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVE HAD TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. AND THIS IS A PERCEPTION THEN THAT WE'RE NOT IN FAVOR OF WHAT
IS BEING PLAYED. AND SOMEHOW THERE IS SOME SUSPICION THAT THE AUDIO DIFFICULTIES ARE ON PURPOSE, AND THAT WE'RE NOT SUPPORTING THE SPEAKERS. AND SO I DO SEE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE OVERHEAD, BECAUSE IT'S SELF-CONTROL.
THEY ARE CONTROLLING THAT. IF WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE, PLAYING THE A/V, THERE HAVE BEEN -- I HAVE SEEN IN THIS ROOM, SOME COMPLICATIONS, NOT ON PURPOSE. DOES IT -- DID WE CUT IT TOO SHORT? WAS IT TOO LOUD?
WAS IT THIS OR THAT AND IT CAN BE PERCEIVED AS FOR OR AGAINST A PARTICULAR ITEM. I HAVE SEEN THIS TAKEN TO THE NEXT LEVEL OF VIDEOS AND I WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT FROM A PROFESSIONAL PERSPECTIVE MY
COLLEAGUES' DISCUSSION HERE. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I JUST WANT TO COMMENT, AGAIN, THAT THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS -- AS STATED BY MY COLLEAGUE, TO ALLOW MORE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO EVERY TWO WEEKS
WANT TO SPEND THEIR ENTIRE EVENING HERE AT CITY HALL LISTENING TO ZONING CASES AND OTHER CITY BUSINESS, IN ORDER TO SIMPLY TELL US THAT A TREE NEEDS TO BE TRIMMED ON PUBLIC PROPERTY NEAR THEIR HOMES. WE HAVE, TONIGHT, ELIMINATED THE
ABILITY FOR MOST PEOPLE IN THE CITY OF SCOTTSDALE TO COME TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND SPEAK TO US. AND WHETHER OR NOT WE MAKE IT 12 SPEAKERS OR 15 SPEAKERS IS IRRELEVANT. MOST PEOPLE CANNOT WAIT, CERTAINLY NOT THOSE HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS AND CERTAINLY NOT MANY OF
OUR SENIOR CITIZENS CAN SIT IN UNCOMFORTABLE CHAIRS AS MUCH AS WE TRY AND WAIT TO SPEAK AT THE END. I WOULD LIKE TO SOLVE PROBLEMS ON THE A/V EQUIPMENT. SO I WOULD LIKE YOUR GUIDANCE ON THAT. INCREASINGLY, THIS IS A DIGITAL
WORLD AND SO, AGAIN, WE KEEP LOOKING TO CITIES THAT ARE FAR FROM SCOTTSDALE FOR GUIDANCE AND THAT IS JUST SOMETHING THAT IN THE 30 YEARS I HAVE LIVED IN SCOTTSDALE, SCOTTSDALE HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE LEADER.
I'VE HAD SO MANY RESIDENTS SAY, WHEN SCOTTSDALE ACTS, EVERYBODY WATCHES, EVERYBODY FOLLOWS. BUT NOW, WE'RE DOING THE OPPOSITE. SO ON THE A/V EQUIPMENT, E EQUIS
MAKING RESIDENTS LAST, ARE WE -- ARE THERE WAYS -- I ALSO WORRY ABOUT THE LIABILITY, BUT ARE THERE WAYS FOR THE CITY -- IS THERE A TIME FRAME THAT WOULD WORK THAT AN APPROPRIATE VIDEO THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY FCC ISSUES
COULD BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED? I JUST HATE TO LIMIT THAT BECAUSE WE -- YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S RELATIVELY NEW IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS OF HOW PEOPLE COMMUNICATE. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THERE ARE TIME FRAMES THAT WOULD WORK BUT IT
DOESN'T GET OVER THE CENSORSHIP ISSUE. AND WE WOULD HAVE TO ACCEPT THE RISK OF BEING SUED FOR VIOLATING SOMEONE'S FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. THAT MAY OR MAY NOT EVER HAPPEN BUT THAT'S THE RISK. >> Councilmember Whitehead: OKAY, WELL, I ABSOLUTELY OPPOSE ALL OF THESE CHANGES.
YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE BECAME A WORLD-CLASS CITY BECAUSE WE LISTENED TO OUR RESIDENTS AND WE ACTED ON IT. NOT EVERY IDEA IS A GOOD IDEA AND NOT EVERYBODY EXPLAINS THEIR IDEA IN A WAY THAT WE LIKE, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY THIS IS A CITY THAT HAS BEEN DRIVEN BY
RESIDENT PRIORITIES AND PUTTING THEM LAST AND ALL OF THIS MUCKING AROUND IS SIMPLY AN EFFORT TO SHUT DOWN PEOPLE THAT OPPOSE SOME OF THE ACTIONS OF THIS COUNCIL. SO I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE MOTION ON THE TABLE. >> Mayor Borowsky: I'M GOING TO BE SUPER QUICK IN HOPES OF ENCOURAGING THAT BECAUSE WE'VE
GOT 20 MORE ITEMS TO GO. I WILL OPPOSE THIS BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE PUSHING THE NON-AGEDIZED PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE END. AND I THINK THEY WOULD STILL BE SITTING HERE WAITING FOR US AND THEY WOULD STILLING WAITING FOR
THEIR THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK AND I THINK IT'S UNFAIR AND IT ATTEMPTS TO QUIET OR DISCOURAGE CITIZEN INPUT AND I'M NOT FOR THAT. AND I'M ABSOLUTELY NOT FOR LIMITING A/V EQUIPMENT THAT HAS BEEN UTILIZED.
YVONNE CAHILL, THE SPEAKER PUT IT VERY ELOQUENTLY, THESE ARE THE CITY'S RESOURCES. THESE ARE -- OUR RESOURCES ARE THE CITIZENS RESOURCES AND IF WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO LET THEM USE THEM, WE SHOULD AND MUST.
SO I'M GOING TO POSE THAT THERE'S NO MORE SPEAKS, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE ON COUNCILMAN
GRAHAM'S MOTION. >> Clerk Lane: NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THE NEXT AREA WE'RE PROPOSED
CHANGES RELATE TO CITIZEN PETITIONS. THE CHANGES INCLUDE HAVING THE PETITION SUBMITTED 14 DAYS IN ADVANCE. DOING THIS THIS EARLY, WE COULD
DO SOME RESEARCH, WE COULD DETERMINE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SIGNATURES AND THE NUMBER OF SIGNATURES SUBMITTED BY SCOTTSDALE RESIDENTS AND PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO THE COUNCIL. THE OTHER BENEFIT OF THE EARLY TURN IN DATE IS IT ALLOWS US TO SEND IT TO THE COUNCIL WELL IN ADVANCE THE MEETING TO ALLOW THE COUNCIL TO LOOK AT THE PETITION,
CONSIDER IT, AND THEN LATER VOTE ON IT. THE OTHER BIG BENEFIT IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL ONE WHERE WE WOULD ONLY PRINT OUT THESE PETITIONS WHICH ARE SOMETIMES HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF PAGES, WE WOULD ONLY PRINT THEM OUT AS REQUESTED BY THE COUNCILMEMBERS.
SO THAT'S -- THAT'S ONE CHANGE. THE OTHER CHANGE RELATES TO MORE FORMAT AND SOME OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. SO REQUESTING THAT THE PETITIONS BE PRINTED ON 8 AND A HALF BY 11 PAPER, MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO COPY. WE HAVE DONE PETITIONS IN THE
PAST AND I BROUGHT A LITTLE VISUAL AID BECAUSE I THOUGHT THIS WAS GOING TO BE DRY. WE GOT PETITIONS IN THE PAST LIKE TON THIS SIDE, S ON CARD STOCK AND IT'S HARD TO MAKE COPIES OF THAT.
WE ALSO ASKED THAT IT BE TURNED IN AT THE SAME TIME. IN THE PAST, WE HAVE GOTTEN A STACK OF PETITIONS AND THEN 30 MINUTES LATER, WE HAVE GOTTEN ANOTHER STACK AND IT MAKES IT VERY, VERY DIFFICULT. WE'RE ASKING FOR A SINGLE TURN-IN TIME. AND, AGAIN, THE EARLY 14 DAY
TURN-IN TIME YOU WOULD ALLOW US TO DO SOME ANALYSIS OF THE PETITION. THE FINAL MAJOR CHANGE IS FORMALIZING THE ACTION THAT COUNCIL IS TAKING ON PETITIONS. IT'S NO OUR RULES. IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO THE ACTIONS
UNDER MAYOR AN COUNCIL ITEMS WHICH IS AGENDIZE THE MATTER FOR FURTHER CUSHION, HAVE THE RESPONSIBLE CHARTER OFFICER PROVIDE A REPORT OR TAKE NO ACTION ON THE PETITION. AND SO IT JUST FORMALIZES THAT ACTION.
THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN McALLEN. NASIRIYAH ON THIS ACTUAL -- AND THIS IS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT I DID BRING UP AND HOWEVER 14 DAYS IS WAY TOO LONG. I WOULD EVEN SUGGEST SOMEWHERE
BETWEEN 24 AND 48 HOURS IS WHAT MY THOUGHT WAS. I -- THE AREA WHERE IT SAYS TURNED IN AT THE SAME TIME, I BELIEVE -- AND YOU COULD CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, CITY CLERK, THAT'S REFERRING TO LIKE A GROUP
OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE SAME TYPE OF PETITIONS THAT ARE COMBINED TO ONE IF THEY ARE WORKING IN TANDEM, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> Clerk Lane: THAT'S CORRECT. >> Councilmember McAllen: I DOESN'T WANT TO INTERPRET IT IN MY OWN WAY AND THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH CHANGING THE TIME FRAME.
I MEAN, I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. I DON'T THINK THAT PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAND IT IN TWO MINUTES BEFORE THE MEETING BECAUSE IT DOESN'T ALLOW CITY COUNCIL TIME TO LOOK AT IT. IT DOESN'T ALLOW TO AUTHENTICATE
WHETHER THEY'RE CITY RESIDENTS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. I AGREE WITH THIS OTHER THAN THE TIME FRAME OF THE 14 DAYS. I THINK 48 HOURS OR THE FRIDAY PRIOR TO A COUNCIL MEETING IS ACCEPTABLE. THAT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 48 HOURS. SO WITH THAT, I WOULD MOVE THAT
WE ACCEPT COUNCIL RULE 8 WITH THE AMENDMENT OF 48 -- OR THE FRIDAY PRIOR TO THE COUNCIL MEETING. >> Clerk Lane: COULD YOU SAY MAYBE TWO BUSINESS DAYS BECAUSE
OF A MONDAY COUNCIL MEETING. >> Councilmember McAllen: SO TWO BUSINESS DAYS. >> Clerk Lane: AND I WANT TO CLARIFY, I'M NOT POSITIVE WE CAN DO AN ANALYSIS OF THE PETITION IN TWO BUSINESS DAYS. SO THAT MIGHT HAVE TO COME AFTER THE FACT. >> Councilmember McAllen: WELL, TWO BUSINESS DAYS IS A LOT
BETTER THAN FIVE MINUTES PRIOR TO THE MEETING. >> Clerk Lane: IT IS BUT WE'RE NOT DOING ANY TYPE ANA OF ANALY. >> Councilmember McAllen: BUT I CAN LOOK THROUGH THE PETITIONS. IF WE RECEIVE THEM AND YOU SEND THEM STRAIGHT TO US, 48 HOURS
PRIOR TO, OR TWO BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR, WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THEM. WE'RE LOOKING AT THEM TO SEE WHAT IT'S EVEN ABOUT. YOU'RE LOOKING AT THEM FOR DIFFERENT CONTENT FOR IF THE RESIDENT OR NONRESIDENT. THAT'S MY MOTION. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I'M GOING TO SPEAK THAT.
WE'RE NOT COUNTING PETITION SIGNATURES. FIVE PEOPLE IN THIS CITY MIGHT HAVE A PETITION THAT'S VERY VALID AND WE DON'T MAKE A DECISION. WE SIMPLY DIRECT STAFF TO THEN FURTHER INVESTIGATE OR -- OR
MAKE AN AGENDA ITEM. I AGREE WE CAN'T HAVE THESE PETITIONS BEING TURNED IN THE SAME DAY BUT I LIKE THE TWO BUSINESS DAYS AND THAT -- ENGANDGENERALLY, THEY SPEAK. IT'S A SCOTTSDALE ISSUE.
IF THEY ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S NOT A SCOTTSDALE ISSUE, THEN THE MAYOR GENERALLY WILL STOP THAT AS A PUBLIC COMMENT. SO I SUPPORT THAT AND WANT TO TALK ABOUT JUST TWO QUICKLY PETITIONS. THAT'S HOW WE GOT THE PICKLEBALL
COURTS MOVING FORWARD AT PIMA. PIMA PARK. I WILL END IT THERE. SO PETITIONS HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY VALUABLE. OF COURSE. THERE'S THE FAMOUS DOG PARK SIGN CHANGES AS WELL. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU. I WILL SKIP AHEAD TO COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: THANK YOU, MAYOR.
I WAS GOING TO ASK COUNCILMEMBER MCALLEN IF THEY WOULD POD -- MOY A FRIENDLY MOMENT. THE ONE PROVISION IS TURNED IT AT THE SAME TIME. I UNDERSTAND THAT WE DON'T WANT TO KEEP -- YOU KNOW, OVER AND
OVER, BUT MAYBE THEY COULD MAKE ONE ADDITIONAL SUBMISSION BUT THE SECOND ONE -- BUT ALL OF THEM HAVE TO BE IN BY THE TIME PERIOD THAT -- THAT COUNCILMEMBER MCALLEN DID,
BECAUSE SOMETIMES PEOPLE, LIKE, THEY PUT A PETITION IN. IT'S LIKE A WEEK IN ADVANCE AND THEN THEY GET MORE SIGNATURES UP UNTIL THE FRIDAY BEFORE. >> Councilmember McAllen: I THINK IF WE INCLUDE THE DEADLINE, THE -- THE TWO BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR, THEN THEY WOULD BE TURNED IN AT THE SAME TIME.
I THINK IT'S A PROBLEM THAT DOESN'T NEED SOLVING. >> Councilmember Graham: BUT I'M SAYING IF THEY TURN IT IN TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE MEETING, THEY CAN'T ADD ANY TO THAT. >> Councilmember McAllen: I GET WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. SO I WILL JUST STRIKE THAT THEN. >> Councilmember Whitehead:
NO. >> Councilmember Graham: WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE ENDLESS SUBMISSIONS. TURNETURNED IN AT THE SAME TIMEH ONE ADDITIONAL.
IF THEY SUBMIT IT TWO WEEKS IN ADVANCE, THEY CAN'T ADD ANYTHING TO IT. YOU SEE, THEY ARE CUT OFF FROM THAT BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME TIME. SO I'M GIVING THE CHANCE TO DO ONE SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMISSION. >> Councilmember McAllen: WHY JUST ONE?
SORRY. COUNCILMAN GRAHAM, I WILL LET YOU MAKE THAT AMENDMENT. YOU CAN MAKE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION THEN. >> Councilmember Graham: I WILL MAKE AN ALTERNATE MOTION. WHAT WAS YOUR TIME FRAME? >> Councilmember McAllen: TWO BUSINESS DAYS. >> Councilmember Graham: PROPOSED CHANGES MUST BE SUBMITTED TWO BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE REQUESTED COUNCIL
MEETING, PRINTED ON LEGAL PAPER, AND TURNED IN -- >> Councilmember Dubauskas: ALL MUST BE TURNED IN -- >> Councilmember Graham: WE DON'T -- >> Councilmember Dubauskas: WHEN
YOU SAY AT THE SAME TIME, AT THE SAME TIME. ALL MUST BE TURNED WITHIN 48 HOURS TWO BUSINESS DAYS. >> Councilmember Graham: BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO DO MULTIPLE. BECAUSE THAT'S A BURDEN -- CAN I SAY TURNED IN AT THE SAME TIME WITH UP ONE SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMISSION BEFORE THE DEADLINE?
OKAY. >> Councilmember McAllen: COUNCI LMAN GRAHAM, YOU SAID ON LEGAL PAPER. LEGAL PAPER IS NOT 8 AND A HALF BY 11. YOU NEED TO USE 8 AND A HALF BY 11. YOU SAID LEGAL PAPER. LEGAL PAPER IS 17 INCHES OR
12 INCHES. >> Councilmember Graham: DO I MEAN LETTER? >> Councilmember Littlefield: LETTER. >> Councilmember Graham: 8 AND A HALF BY 11 PAPER, CITY STAFF TO DETERMINE NUMBER OF PETITIONS SUBMITTED BY
SCOTTSDALE RESIDENTS. SUBMITTED AND NOT SUBMITTED BY SCOTTSDALE RESIDENTS. NO, NO, NUMBER OF PETITIONS BY SCOTTSDALE RESIDENTS AND NONRESIDENTS AND THEN FORMALIZES ACTS THAT THE COUNCIL CAN TAKE. SO THAT'S MY ALTERNATE MOTION,
IF I CAN GET A SECOND FROM A COLLEAGUE. >> Councilmember Littlefield: SECOND. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: SECOND. I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO MY SECOND. >> Mayor Borowsky: SOMEONE SECONDED IT. COUNCILWOMAN LITTLE FIELD. >> Councilmember Littlefield: I GIVE UP MY SPEAKING ABILITY TO MY COLLEAGUE. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: THANK
YOU. YOU ARE VERY SWEET. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO SAY ON THIS ISSUE, I -- I DON'T KNOW WHO BROUGHT THIS IN FRONT OF THE -- IN FRONT OF THE -- THE CITY CHARTER OFFICERS OR STAFF, BUT -- BUT SOUNDS FINE.
IT SOUNDS REASONABLE TO ME. THE 14 DAYS WAS -- IT'S EGREGIOUS. IT WAS NOT RIGHT. BUT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS PART OF MY -- PART OF MY WORLD.
>> Mayor Borowsky: I THINK EVERYONE SPOKE. I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS BECAUSE I THINK ADDING HURDLES TO PUBLIC INPUT IS A BAD IDEA. SO WITH THAT, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY MORE SPEAKERS. LET'S TAKE A VOTE ON THE
ALTERNATE. >> Mayor Borowsky: WELL, CURRENTLY, THER IT'S FIVE MINUTS BEFORE HAND. I'LLSTICK WITH MY COMMENT, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. >> Clerk Lane: NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THIS NEXT CHANGE IS A CHANGE TO RULE 10.6. IT -- IT REALLY IS JUST -- IT'S A BACKUP MECHANISM THAT WE DON'T HAVE IN PLACE. AND IT JUST BASICALLY SAYS IF
OUR QUEUING EQUIPMENT FAILS, IF OUR -- THAT BASICALLY THE PRESIDING OFFICER SHALL CALL ON THE VICE MAYOR AND THEN EACH COUNCILMEMBER BY SENIORITY FOR REMARKS. AND THIS JUST ALLOWS US IF WE'RE NOT MEETING IN THE KIVA, JUST KIND OF FORMALIZES A BACKUP
PROCESS OR IF THE EQUIPMENT FAILS. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: DO YOU NEED TO SPEAK TO THIS? >> Councilmember Whitehead: I MOVE TO ADAPT COUNCIL RULE NUMBER 10, DEBATE AND DECORUM. >> Councilmember Littlefield: SECOND IT. >> Mayor Borowsky: WOULD YOU
LIKE TO SPEAK, COUNCILWOMAN LITTLEFIELD? >> Councilmember Littlefield: NOPE. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED? >> Councilmember Littlefield: BLINK. COME ON. I THINK OUR BUT BUTTONS ARE GEG
TIRED. >> Clerk Lane: NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THIS IS, AGAIN, IT'S JUST -- THE CALL THE QUESTION, IT'S IN RULE 11.20, IT DOES SAY TO CALL
CALL THE QUESTION DOESN'T REQUIRE A SECOND. IT SAYS ALL MOTIONS EXCEPT A MOTION TO ALL THE QUESTION REQUIRES A SECOND. IT'S JUST CLEANING UP THAT RULE TO MATCH RULE 11.20. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN WHITEHEAD. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I
>> Councilmember McAllen: SECOND >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED? >> Councilmember Graham: CAN I JUST ASK -- NEVER MIND.
I HAVE A QUESTION. >> Clerk Lane: NEXT SLIDE, COUNCIL RULE 15, WHAT THIS DOES IS IT RELATES A REPORT THAT IS
REQUIRED BY THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. THIS REPORT IS KIND OF COVERED IN OTHER AREAS. RIGHT NOW, THIS INFORMATION AT TIMES IS NOTED IN THE MAYOR'S STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS, POSSIBLY THE MAYOR'S REPORT AT
COUNCIL MEETINGS OR OTHER METHODS. IT ELIMINATES THE FORMAL REQUIREMENT FOR THE MAYOR'S OFFICE TO PROVIDE THIS REPORT. >> Mayor Borowsky: I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CHANGES TO COUNCIL RULE 15. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: MADAM MAYOR. >> Mayor Borowsky: I MADE MY MOTION AND THEN YOU HIT THE
BUTTON. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: JUST OUT OF DEFERENCE TO YOUR OFFICE. DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MENTION THAT YOU SHOULD GIVE A STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS? DO YOU WANT THAT AS PART OF THE RULES? I MEAN, I THINK THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD BE AMENABLE TO THAT.
>> Mayor Borowsky: I BELIEVE IT'S IN THE CHARTER. >> Councilmember Graham: NICE TRY. >> Councilmember Whitehead: SECOND. >> Councilmember Graham: LET'S VOTE. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED, PLEASE
INDICATE YOUR VOTE. >> Clerk Lane: SO THE NEXT CHANGE RELATES TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. THE PROPOSED CHANGES HERE IS RIGHT NOW, THE APPOINTED PROCESS IS NONE AT A SPECIAL MEETING. IT MOVES THE NOMINATION PROCESS
WHICH RIGHT NOW IS UNDER MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS IT MOVES IT TO A SPECIAL MEETING TO MAKE THEM SYNC UP BETTER. AND THEN IT CLARIFIES THAT IF THE VICE MAYOR IS UNAVAILABLE, THE MEET PAST MAYOR WOULD HANDLE THE MEETING PROCESS FOR NOMINATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS.
AND THEN THIS CODIFIES SOMETHING THE COUNCIL IS DOING RIGHT NOW AND BASICALLY FOR APPOINTMENTS IF THE NUMBER -- THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF CANDIDATES ARE -- ARE AVAILABLE, THE COUNCIL CAN APPOINT THREE AFFIRMTION OR ACCLAMATION RATHER THAN DOING
INDIVIDUAL VOTES. THE LAST ITEM, AND I APOLOGIZE, I KNOW IT'S LATE, BUT THIS DID HAPPEN AT A MEETING, AND WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. SO WE DEVELOPED THIS RULE. BASICALLY, WHEN THERE'S A 3-2-2 VOTE. IT REQUIRES TO BE APPOINTED TO
BE A BOARD, IT REQUIRES FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES AND SO WHEN THERE'S A 3-2-2 VOTE, NO ONE HAS BEEN APPOINTED. SO WHAT THIS RULE PROVIDES IT SAYS THAT TWO PEOPLE THAT EACH GOT TWO VOTES THEY ESSENTIALLY WOULD GO TO A RUNOFF AND WHICH
EVER OF THOSE TWO GOT AT LEAST FOUR VOTES, THEY WOULD THEN GO BACK TO THE INDIVIDUAL WHO HAD THREE VOTES AND THE COUNCIL WOULD DECIDE BETWEEN THOSE TWO INDIVIDUALS. >> Councilmember Graham: FINE. >> Clerk Lane: I HOPE THAT MADE SENSE. IT'S PROBABLY BETTER TO DO EARLIER IN THE NIGHT.
SORRY ABOUT THAT. [ LAUGHTER ] >> Councilman Waring: COUNCILMEM BER GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT ONE WAS A SPECIAL MEETING AND ONE WAS NOT A SPECIAL MEETING. SO I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE MAKING
THAT CONSISTENT. VICE MAYOR UNAVAILABLE, WE HAVE THIS THIS YEAR AT ONE POINT. I FISH WE HAD A DIFFERENT ADJECTIVE, THE MINIMUM, BECAUSE
THERE COULD BE ONE PERSON AND TWO OPENINGS. THERE COULD BE, YOU KNOW, TWO PEOPLE FOR TWO OPENINGS. SO -- BUT I THINK WE KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN. SO I'M NOT GOING TO WORRY ABOUT IT. AND VOLTING VOTING RESULTS IN .
I LOOK AT THAT NUMBER AND I WONDER IF THERE'S OTHER SCENARIOS WE HAVEN'T CONSIDERED BUT IN THIS CASE, THE TWO THAT GET TWO GO INTO A RUNOFF AND THEY SORT OF LIKE -- LIKE A -- I GUESS LIKE A -- LITERALLY LIKE A COLLEGE BASKETBALL BRACKET AND -- LOOK A WILD CARD IN BASEBALL AND THEN THEY FACE OFF
AGAINST THE BERN PERSON THAT TH. SO I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THESE. >> Councilmember Littlefield: SECOND. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE.
>> Councilmember Graham: ONE OTHER. NEVER MIND. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: MAYOR, THIS IS COUNCIL RULE 17. IT'S A NEW RULE. IT GOVERNED THE PROTOCOL FOR SPEAKING AT EVENTS.
STAFF KIND OF HAS PROCEDURES THAT THEY UTILIZE IN TERMS OF THE SPEAKING ORDER, BUT THIS WOULD FORMALIZE IT. SO IT ACTUALLY APPLIES YOU TO ALL. SO BASICALLY THE FIRST RULE IF THE MAYOR IS INVITED TO AN
EVENT, AND IS UNABLE TO ATTEND AND THE INVITING PERSON WANTS SOMETHING BECAUSE THE MAYOR'S INAVAILABILITY. THEN THE MAYOR'S OFFICE WOULD EXTEND THE INVITATION TO THE VICE MAYOR AND IF THE VICE MAYOR IS NOT AVAILABLE, THEN BY ORDER
OF SENIORITY. IT CREATES A PROCESS ABOUT WHO GETS EVENTS. MAYOR FIRST, VICE MAYOR SECOND, THEN SENIORITY IN TERMS OF AVAILABILITY. RIGHT NOW THERE'S NOT REALLY A PROCESS WHERE IF THE MAYOR IS
NOT AVAILABLE, IT'S NOT REALLY DEFINED WHO IT GOES TO NEXT. THIS WOULD DO THAT. THE SECOND PART HAS TO DO WITH THE -- THE MORE IMPORTANT PORTION OF THIS CHANGE HAS TO DO WITH SPEAKING AT EVENTS. IT CAN BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR STAFF SOMETIMES IF THEY ARE
FACED -- IF THERE ARE MULTIPLE COUNCILMEMBERS THERE. THEY DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW WHO CAN SPEAK BUT FOR PERHAPS THE FLOW OF THE EVENT, IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE FOR -- TO HAVE EVERYONE SPEAK. OBVIOUSLY THE MAYOR WOULD SPEAK ON BEHALF OF CITY.
IF THE MAYOR IS ABSE ABSENT, ITD BE THE VICE MAYOR AND IF NEITHER OF THEM ARE AVAILABLE, THEN THE VICE MAYOR WOULD DESIGNATE A COUNCILMEMBER TO SPEAK. AND THEN IF THE VICE MAYOR FAILED TO DESIGNATE BECAUSE PERHAPS THEY WEREN'T THERE, THEN THE SENIORITY WOULD APPLY.
>> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILMEMBER GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: I LIKE THE FIRST ONE, INVITED, CAN'T ATTEND SENIORITY. 17.2, I WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THAT. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S -- THIS' A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR. IT SAYS IN THE EVENT, PERIOD,
BOTH THE MAYOR AND THE VICE MAYOR ARE NOT AVAILABLE, PERIODE WITH A LOWERCASE. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: THAT'S THE SLIDE. >> Councilmember Graham: NEXT THE MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR ARE NOT AVAILABLE, I WOULD JUST SAY THEN
THE COUNCILMEMBER WITH THE MOST SENIORITY SHOULD SPEAK ON BEHALF -- NOTHING -- HERE'S THE PROBLEM WITH THE WAY -- THE VICE MAYOR SHALL DESIGNATE A COUNCILMEMBER TO SPEAK. BUT WE HAVE ALREADY ESTABLISHED THAT THE VICE MAYOR ISN'T AVAILABLE. AND SO YOU ARE PUTTING A BURDEN ON -- YOU ARE PUTTING A REALLY
LARGE BURDEN ON CITY STAFF TO SAY, WELL, I'VE GOT SOLANGE WHITEHEAD WHO IS THE MOST SENIOR HERE BUT I GOTTA GO HUNT DOWN ADAM KWASMAN TO SEE WHO HE WOULD HAVE WANTS BUT I CAN'T GET AHOLD OF HIM.
I THINK THAT PUTS A BURDEN TO CHASE YOUR TAIL AROUND. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I SECOND THAT. IT'S ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO END WITH AN AGREEMENT WITH MY COLLEAGUE COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: WAS MY MOTION CLEAR ENOUGH.
>> Interim City Atty. Santaella: I BELIEVE SO, AND THE MODIFICATION IS MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND SENIOR MEMBER. >> Councilmember Graham: YEAH, BECAUSE OF THE REASONS. YEAH, THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK? >> Councilmember McAllen: MAYOR THANK YOU. I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH BARRY
ALSO. >> Councilmember Graham: WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY ACTUALLY? >> Councilmember McAllen: I DO. 17.1 AND 17.2 ARE REALLY THE SAME THING. WE DON'T NEED 17.2. WE NEED 17.1. >> Councilmember Graham: THEY ARE NOT. >> Councilmember McAllen: THEY KIND OF ARE.
BUT I AGREE WITH HIM THAT IT CAN BE -- HERE'S THE REASON WHY IT SHOULDN'T BE THE VICE MAYOR APPOINTS BECAUSE THEY COULD APPOINT THE SAME PERSON OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND DENY SOMEONE THE RIGHT TO SPEAK AND THAT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE. WHAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IS THE MOST SENIOR PERSON. SO I AGREE WITH YOU.
>> Mayor Borowsky: IT LOOKS HIKE WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE'RE READY TO VOTE. PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE.
>> Councilmember Littlefield: WHY, SO MUCH FUN I JUST DON'T WANT TO STOP. >> Clerk Lan.>> Interim City At. Santaella: THIS IS THE VERY LAST SLIDE AND THE END OF THIS, OTHER THAN WE'LL BE ASKING YOU TO DO A MOTION TO ADOPT THE
RESOLUTION AS PREVIOUSLY MODIFIED. THE IDEA BEHIND THIS IS THE CHARTER CALLS FOR THE VICE MAYOR TO TAKE OVER AS MAYOR IF THE MAYOR IS OTHERWISE UNAVAILABLE. IT JUST SETS A FRAMEWORK FOR
THAT. AND IT'S THE MAYOR BEING ABSENT OR OTHERWISE UNAVAILABLE FROM THE CITY FOR 72 HOURS, WOULD JUST REQUIRE A NOTIFICATION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE CHARTER OFFICERS. SOME PEOPLE HAVE SUGGESTED THAT
IT SHOULDN'T BE THE COUNCIL, IT SHOULD BE THE CITY CLERK OR JUST THE VICE MAYOR, BUT THAT'S THE PROPOSAL WE HAVE FOR DISCUSSION AND IT'S KIND OF A RISK MANAGEMENT, I GUESS, TYPE OF THING, WITH JUST LINE OF SUCCESSIONS IN CASE SOMETHING REALLY BAD HAPPENED AND THE
MAYOR WAS OUT OF TOWN OR NOT AVAILABLE FOR WHATEVER REASON. >> Mayor Borowsky: VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: THIS IS THE LAST -- THIS IS THE LAST ITEM. SO I JUST WANT TO WISH EVERYBODY MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A VERY HAPPY
HANUKKAH AND HAVE A BEAUTIFUL NEW YEAR. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: YOU'RE OUT OF ORDER! OFF TOPIC. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: THAT'S LAST ONE. >> Councilmember Littlefield: I WILL SECOND THAT. >> Councilmember Graham: YEAH. SO IN THIS ONE RIGHT HERE THERE
IS AN ERROR. I WILL START WITH THE SECOND ITEM, IF THE MAYOR IS GOING TO BE COB SENT FROM THE CITY FOR MORE THAN 72 HOURS, OR OTHERWISE UNAVAILABLE, IT SHOULD BE A COMMA, THE I MAKER SHALL NOTIFY
THE CITY COUNCIL AND CHARTER OFFICERS OF THE MAYOR'S UNAVAILABILITY. I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT COMMA AND THEN I MAY HAVE SOME MORE
QUESTIONS AFTER. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: COUNCILWOMAN McALLEN. >> Councilmember McAllen: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I DON'T THINK THAT THE MAYOR SHOULD HAVE TO HUNT DOWN EVERY SINGLE PERSON. IT SHOULD BE ONE PERSON, EITHER THE CITY CLERK OR THE CITY MANAGER. IT SHOULD BE ONE PERSON. I WOULD SAY THE CITY CLERK, ONLY
BECAUSE THE CITY CLERK IS WHO IS ORDERING MEETINGS, THINGS OF THAT -- ORGANIZING THINGS THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION BUT I DON'T THINK THE MAYOR SHOULD HAVE TO INFORM EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHERE SHE'S GOING AND WHAT SHE'S DOING. >> Mayor Borowsky: I DON'T THINK THE MAYOR SHOULD HAVE TO INFORM ANYONE IF SHE'S OUT OF TOWN FOR 72 HOURS.
WE HAVE TWO MONTHS OFF IN THE SUMMER. HOW -- HOW DO YOU CONTEMPLATE THAT WORKING, LUIS? I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WAS YOUR IDEA OR NOT. BUT AS YOU SAID, THE CHARTER ALREADY SPEAKS TO THE UNAVAILABILITY OF THE MAYOR, AND WHICH YOU SHOULD BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY OF.
SO ABSENT FROM THE CITY, THAT'S PRETTY BROAD. IF I'M IN FLAGSTAFF, DO I NEED TO LET YOU KNOW? SEDONA FOR 72 HOURS? THAT'S -- SHOULD I GET AN ANKLE BRACELET NEXT AND, YOU KNOW, AN
AIR TAG SO EVERYONE KNOWS MY WHEREABOUTS. THE ABSURDITY OF THIS IS UPSET FOR THE RECORD. PLEASE EXPLAIN. HAS THIS BEEN A PROBLEM? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: SO MAYOR, THIS WAS NOT MY IDEA. >> Mayor Borowsky: I GUESSED THAT. >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: AS WE DISCUSSED EARLIER, UNFORTUNATELY, I WON'T -- IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION AS A RISK MANAGEMENT. WHAT IF THERE'S A DISASTER, WE NEED TO HAVE A LINE OF SUCCESSION. >> Mayor Borowsky: WE DO. >> Interim City Atty.
Santaella: WHETHER IT NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED OR NOT, THAT'S A POLICY DECISION ON BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL. >> Mayor Borowsky: ISN'T IT IN THE CHARTER? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: I THINK THE CHARTER JUST SAYS THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF THE MAYOR'S UNAVAILABILITY, THE VICE MAYOR TAKES OVER. IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY TIME FRAMES. IT DOESN'T SAY --
>> Interim City Atty. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO IT IS IN THE CHARTER. YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION.
THEY LIKE ME ENOUGH TO WANT TO KNOW MY WHEREABOUTS ALL THE TIME. SO THAT'S A PLUS. COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: THAN K YOU. IN ANY WORKPLACE THAT I'VE EVER BEEN, I'VE ALWAYS BEEN REQUIRED TO -- TO LET MY -- MY COLLEAGUES
KNOW IF I'M GOING TO BE OUT OF TOWN. SO I DO THAT AS A PRACTICE HERE AND I LET THE MAYOR KNOW IF I WON'T BE IN TOWN. I THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE REQUEST. IT ALSO PREVENTS GOD FORBID WE WOULD HAVE ANOTHER ACCIDENT AT
THE AIRPORT AND CITY MANAGER IS CALLING AROUND FRANTICALLY, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DIRECTLY JUST CALL THE VICE MAYOR AND BE ABLE TO HANDLE ANY SORT OF SITUATION IN A PROFESSIONAL AND QUICK MANNER. ALSO, YOU KNOW, IF -- IF THE
MAYOR DOES HAPPEN TO BE OUT OF STATE, THEN WE COULD, YOU KNOW, WHO IS GOING TO BE AVAILABLE TO COME TO MANAGE THE SITUATION. SO I ACTUALLY THINK THAT WHAT'S REASONABLE AND WHAT I -- THE STANDARD THAT I HOLD MYSELF TO IS IF I'M GOING TO BE OUT OF THE
STATE FOR 24 HOURS, I WILL LET THE SECRETARY KNOW. SO I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO DO THAT. SO I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT 18.1 WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS, THAT IF THE MAYOR IS GOING TO BE ABSENT FROM THE
STATE FOR MORE THAN 24 HOURS, THE MAYOR WILL NOTIFY THE CITY CLERK. >> Mayor Borowsky: VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: I WOULD
LIKE TO MAKE AN ALTERNATE TO 72 HOURS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT HER DAUGHTER IS OUT OF STATE FOR SCHOOL. SO IF SHE'S GOT TO RUN OUT FOR 24 HOURS OR 48 HOURS, AND COME BACK, AND SHE'S -- AND SHE'S BACK THAT'S FINE. BUT I -- I THINK THE 72 HOURS IS FINE. I DEFINITELY -- I AGREE WITH THE
OUT OF STATE ISSUE. SHOOTING AN EMAIL TO THE CITY CLERK, I DON'T THINK IT'S A -- I THINK ANY EXECUTIVE OF -- MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS TO DO THIS. AS SOON AS THEY LEAVE THE STATE, ACTUALLY, WHEN THE GOVERNOR -- THE GOVERNOR DOES NOT HAVE AN ANKLE BRACELET ON HER.
OKAY? BUT AS SOON AS SHE LEAVES THE STATE, SHE'S GOT TO NOTIFY THE SECRETARY OF STATE THAT SHE'S GOING OUT OF STATE. A SIMPLE EMAIL THAT'S SAYING, HEY, I WILL BE -- I WILL BE OUT FOR MORE THAN 24 HOURS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA. THIS IS NOT A QUICK TRIP TO
SEDONA BUT IF YOU ARE GOING ON A CRUISE FOR THE SUMMER WHICH GOD WILLING YOU ARE ABLE TO DO IT. I HAVE TOO MANY CHILDREN TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. GOD WILLING IF THE MAYOR IS GOING ON A CRUISE, SOMEBODY SHOULD BE NOTIFIED JUST IN CASE SO WE'RE NOT SCRAMBLING AND TRYING TO FIND WHERE THE HECK
THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE CITY IS. I DON'T THINK THAT'S UNREASONABLE. IT'S A RULE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO -- THE MECHANISM IS NOT A -- THE MECHANISM IS -- IT'S -- ALL THIS IS DOING IS ADDING A MECHANISM TO WHAT'S ALREADY IN THE CHARTER. THE CHARTER HAS NO MECHANISM
WITHIN IT. SO MY ALTERNATE MOTION IS TO -- COULD I DO AN ALTERNATE MOTION TO COUNCILMEMBER DUBAUSKAS' MOTION IS OUT OF STATE FOR MORE THAN 72 HOURS.
AND -- AND OTHERWISE UNAVAILABLE. I THINK IT SHOULD BE AND/OR WHEN IT COMES TO -- >> Councilmember Graham: OR. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: OR UNAVAILABLE FOR 72 HOURS.
>> Mayor Borowsky: EXCUSE ME, THAT WAS AN ALTERNATE MOTION. DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? >> Councilmember Graham: WELL, I WAS GOING TO SECOND -- I WAS GOING TO SPEAK TO JAN'S BUT I WAS GOING TO MODIFY IT. YOU CAN'T MAKE AN ALTERNATE MOTION, BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T HAVE A SECOND YET.
SO YOU ARE WITHDRAWING YOUR ATTEMPTED -- >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: I'M WITHDRAWING IT. >> Councilmember Littlefield: I WILL SECOND JAN'S. THEN LEGALLY YOU CAN DO SOMETHING. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: 24 HOURS AND THERE'S NO EMERGENCIES. [ OFF MICROPHONE COMMENTS ] >> Councilmember Graham: SO IF I HAVE THE FLOOR FROM THE
MAYOR. >> Mayor Borowsky: YOU HAD THE FLOOR. >> Councilmember Graham: OKAY. THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO COUNCILMEMBER DUBAUSKAS MADE A MOTION IF THE MAYOR IS GOING TO BE ABSENT FROM THE STATE FOR 24 HOURS AND THAT WAS SECONDED. >> Councilmember Littlefield:
JUST SO YOU CAN TALK. >> Councilmember Graham: YEAH. SO WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS I OPPOSED IT. I DON'T SUPPORT IT. HOWEVER, I REFLECT ON THIS AND TWO THINGS COME TO MIND. NUMBER ONE, EVERY ORGANIZATION EVERYWHERE HAS THIS POLICY.
AND NUMBER TWO, THE REASON I THINK THAT I'M PERSUADED TO SUPPORT THE FIRST -- THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS THAT THE CHARTER SAYS WHEN THE MAYOR IS UNAVAILABLE THAT IT GOES TO THE VICE MAYOR. THAT PUTS A SIGNIFICANT -- A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF PRESSURE ON
OUR CITY STAFF TO MAKE THE CALL WHEN THE MAYOR IS UNAVAILABLE IF SHE IS NOT REACHABLE. THAT PUTS THEM -- BECAUSE THEN IF SHE WAS AVAILABLE AND THERE WAS A DISCONNECTION, AND THEN THE -- A CITY -- WE LITERALLY
THAT THE VICE MAYOR IS ENJOINED WITH THE POWERS OF THE MAYOR. I DON'T WANT TO PUT THAT BURDEN ON CITY STAFF AND SO I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR THE SAKE OF OUR CITY STAFFERS. THANK YOU. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO, FIRST, VICE MAYOR, I AM NOT CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AS YOU MUST KNOW. I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, THE CITY MANAGER SERVES AS THE C.E.O. OF THE ORGANIZATION. SO HOW MISLEADING IS THAT? SECOND, TO COUNCILWOMAN DUBAUSKAS, SINCE YOU HAVE DONE THIS AT EVERY PLACE OF
EMPLOYMENT, I WOULD SUGGEST AN AMENDED MOTION THAT WE ALL BE SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION BECAUSE YOU'VE ALREADY GIVEN CLEAR DIRECTION THAT WE ARE ALL EQUAL. THIS IS SOMETHING YOU'RE VERY HELLBENT ON SHOWING, WE'RE ALL
EQUAL, SO WHY WOULD I BE THE ONLY PERSON WHEN WE HAVE A CITY CHARTER THAT'S -- IF YOU WILL LET ME FINISH, I LET YOU FINISH. WE HAVE A CITY CHARTER THAT SPEAKS TO THE HIERARCHY OF MY UNAVAILABILITY. SO PUTTING A 24-HOUR RESTRICTION
ON ME TO LET THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CHARTER OFFICERS KNOW THAT I'M ABSENT FROM THE CITY, I MEAN THAT'S THE MOST ABSURD THING I'VE EVER HEARD. SO SINCE YOU LET YOUR SECRETARY KNOW, SURE, I LET MY STAFF KNOW
WHEN I'M OUT OF TOWN TOO. SO WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE? AND WHATEVER YOU ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH, SINCE WE'RE ALL EQUAL, I THINK WE SHOULD ALL BE SUBJECT TO. SO THAT'S MY AMENDED MOTION.
>> Councilmember Whitehead: SECOND. NO, ACTUALLY, I DON'T WANT TO SECOND IT. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN ALTERNATE MOTION BUT I DON'T THINK I CAN. >> Councilmember Graham: YOU CAN IF IT'S NOT SECONDED. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I WOULD LIKE TO -- I DO WANT TO-ME
REJECT COUNCIL RULE 18, THE CITY CHARTER COVERS THIS AND I THINK IT'S A PRETTY BIG DIFFERENCE TO HAVE WHAT EACH OF US DO, JUST BECAUSE IT'S OUR GOOD HUMAN NATURE IS NOTIFY MARILE, IF WE
ARE GOING TO BE OUT OF TOWN AND THAT'S DIFFERENT CALLING EACH CHARTER OFFICER, OR COUNCILMEMBER, ONLY IF YOU ARE THE MAYOR. THIS IS A COMEDY OF ERRORS. I'M EMBARRASSED BY THIS COUNCIL.
CAN WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE NEVER HAD A PROBLEM AND THE MAYOR IS VERY RESPONSIBLE, AS EVERY PAST MAYOR HAS BEEN ON THIS AND WE DO HAVE A CITY CHARTER TO DESIGNATE THE ORDER IF THE MAYOR IS UNAVAILABLE. SO PLEASE JOIN ME, COUNCIL, VICE
MAYOR, SAID HE LIKES TO SEE UNANIMOUS VOTES AND REJECT COUNCIL RULE 18. >> Councilmember McAllen: I WILL SECOND YOUR MOTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, I GUESS MINE DIDN'T RECEIVE A SECOND YET.
SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE. >> Councilmember Whitehead: TO REJECT COUNCIL RULE 18.
>> Mayor Borowsky: OH, MINE IS A YES. I GOT TO CHANGE THAT. THANKS A LOT, ADAM. NO, GO RIGHT AHEAD. SO WE'VE GOT ANOTHER -- THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, I'M GOING TO -- I HAVE -- >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: WE JUST WANT TO MODIFY IT. HOLD ON. THIS IS --
>> Mayor Borowsky: LISTEN, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO AMEND YOUR MOTION, PLEASE DO SO. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: I DON'T HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. MINE WAS NOT SECONDED. [ OFF MICROPHONE COMMENT ] >> Councilmember Dubauskas: I'M HAPPY TO AMEND MY MOTION TO SAY
THAT IF COUNCIL WILL BE ABSENT FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA FOR MORE THAN 24 HOURS -- >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: 72 HOURS. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: COUN CIL AND MAYOR, WILL BE ABSENT FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA FOR MORE THAN 24 HOURS OR OTHERWISE
UNAVAILABLE, COUNCIL SHALL NOTIFY -- AND I WILL SAY CHARTER OFFICERS BECAUSE IF WE EMAIL ALL EACH OTHER, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OPENING MEETING VIOLATION. MAYOR AND COUNCIL WILL NOTIFY
THE CITY CLERK OF THE UNAVAILABILITY OR THE ABSENCE. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: IS THAT THE ORIGINAL MOTION OR ALTERNATE. >> Councilmember Graham: IT'S AN AMENDED MOTION. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: MM-H MM. >> Councilmember Littlefield: I WILL SUPPORT THE AMENDED
MOTION. BAG >> Councilmember Graham: LET'S VOTE. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: CALL THE QUESTION. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: THAT'S THE ORIGINAL MOTION? >> Councilmember Dubauskas: I
AMENDED THE ORIGINAL MOTION. >> Councilmember Graham: YOU CAN'T CALL AN ALTERNATE MOTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: HE'S DOING A FRIENDLY EVENT. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: RIGHT BUT I HAVE TO BE CALLED ON. >> Mayor Borowsky: OKAY. VICE MAYOR KWASMAN. >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: SO AGAIN,
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS -- THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT -- THAT WAS NOT -- THERE'S NO ILLICIT SCHEMING. THIS IS SOMETHING I THOUGHT ABOUT, AS SOON AS I CAME IN AND LOOKED AT THE RULES AND I WAS LIKE, OH, RULE CHANGES THAT WE COULD MAKE TO MAKE BETTER.
ALL WE WANTED TO DO -- THIS IS THE MOST INNOCUOUS THING IN THE WORLD. YOU'RE GOING OUT OF TOWN, NOTIFY THE CLERK. I WAS IN GREER WHEN I WAS AT ONE THE MEETINGS AND I SAID I'M GOING TO BE -- I NEED THE --
WHAT'S IT CALLED SET UP? THE HYPERTHANK. >> Mayor Borowsky: ARE YOU GOING TO -- >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: BEFORE ANYONE CASTS ASPERSIONS ON WHAT THIS IS, I THINK IT'S VERY CLEAR OF WHAT THIS IS. YOU'RE GOING OUT OF TOWN, JUST MAKE SURE THEY CALL IT SO THAT
THERE'S NOT AP AN EMERGENCY. I'M SORRY, I WILL BE THE MOTHER ON HERE. IF YOU ARE GOING OUT OF TOWN AND IF YOU ARE GOING OUT OF TOWN AND WE DON'T KNOW WHERE TO FIND YOU AND GOD FORBID THERE'S AN EMERGENCY AND YOU'RE AVAILABLE, THEN THAT'S FINE. IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE RIGHT
BACK, YOU NEED TO CALL A SPECIAL MEETING. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE MAYOR IS THE ONE WHO CALLS THE SPECIAL MEETINGS, RIGHT? THE MAYOR CALLS A SPECIAL MEETING, AN EMERGENCY MEETING SO PROBABLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW WHO HAS THE POWER TO CALL THE EMERGENCY MEETING SO THAT THE MEETING IS IN ORDER.
I BELIEVE I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS WHEN THE PLANE CRASH TO OCCURREN SCOTTSDALE. THAT'S WHEN I WAS LIKE, OH, LET'S DO THESE RULE CHANGES. THIS COULD BE GOOD. SO IF YOU DON'T WANT TO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT THIS WAS MY -- THIS WAS DONE IN ABSOLUTELY GOOD FAITH, THEN IT'S YOUR CHOICE,
BUT I DEFINITELY DIDN'T WANT THE CITY -- I WANT IT TO BE THE STATE. SO I WOULD LIKE TO MODIFY IT TO 72 HOURS. ARIGHT? AND THE STATE AND 72 HOURS. 48, FINE. WE'LL SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE. I WOULD LIKE TO -- WHAT WAS
THAT? I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO AMEND THAT SAYS IT'S 48 HOURS -- 48 HOURS OR OTHERWISE -- >> Councilmember Graham: YOU DON'T MOVE TO DO THAT. YOU JUST ASK HER.
>> Vice Mayor Kwasman: WOULD YOU CONSIDER AMENDING TO 48 HOURS INSTEAD OF -- INSTEAD OF 24 HOURS? CAN WE GET UNANIMITY IF WE GET >> Councilmember Dubauskas: THAT 'S GOOD. ARE YOU GOOD WITH THAT MY SECOND
LADY OVER HERE. >> Councilmember Graham: SECOND LADY? [ OFF MICROPHONE COMMENTS ] >> Mayor Borowsky: SO CLARIFY THE MOTION, ALL COUNCILMEMBERS AND MAYOR WILL NOTIFY THE CLERK
IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABSENT OR IS IT OUT OF TOWN? >> Vice Mayor Kwasman: OUT OF STATE. >> Mayor Borowsky: OUT OF STATE FOR 48 HOURS. >> OR OTHERWISE NOT AVAILABLE. >> Mayor Borowsky: PLEASE
INDICATE YOUR VOTE. THAT CONCLUDES OUR BUSINESS FOR TODAY. THANK GOODNESS.
>> Councilmember Graham: NOT >> Mayor Borowsky: OH, THERE'S STILL ONE MORE. ANYONE WANT TO COME UP AND HAVE -- TRY IT ON FOR SIZE, PUBLIC COMMENT?
RECEIPT OF CITIZEN PETITIONS. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY CITIZEN PETITIONS, CORRECT? SO I WILL MOVE RIGHT ON. AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCILMAN GRAHAM, ITEM NUMBER 18 IS TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO
AGENDIZE FOR A FUTURE COUNCIL WORK SESSION, AGENDIZE, PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION UPDATES TO THE SCOTTSDALE TOURISM AND EVENTS STRATEGIC PLAN. YOU CAN DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER OR RESPONSIBLE CHARTER OFFICERS TO AGENDIZE THE ITEM FOR A
FUTURE MEETING, DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER OR RESPONSIBLE CHARTER OFFICER TO INVESTIGATE THE MATTER OR TAKE NO ACTION. ANYONE HAVE A MOTION? >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: MAYOR, SOREE TO INTERRUPT. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE ITEM WE JUST GOT DONE WITH. WE NEED A NORMAL MOTION ADOPTING
THE RESOLUTION AS AMENDED BY THE COUNCIL. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL THE ITEMS? OKAY. >> Interim City Atty. Santaella: WE DON'T NEED -- WE JUST NEED ADOPT THE RESOLUTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: A GLOBAL ONE. >> Councilmember Graham: I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT
RESOLUTION 13568. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: SECO ND. >> Councilmember Graham: AS I AMENDED. >> Mayor Borowsky: JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, THAT'S ALL OF THE RULES. >> Councilmember Whitehead: I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO KEEP RESIDENTS OF SCOTTSDALE FIRST NOT LAST AND TO REJECT THE -- I
CAN MAKE AN ALTERNATE -- I'M MAKING AN ALTERNATE MOTION. I MAKE AN ALTERNATE MOTION TO KEEP THE RESIDENTS OF SCOTTSDALE FIRST, NOT LAST, AND BY REJECTING -- CAN YOU PUT THE
RESOLUTION NUMBER ON FOR ME. >> Clerk Lane: IT'S 13568. >> Councilmember Whitehead: OKAY, IT IS 10 P.M. AND I AM MAKING AN ALTERNATE MOTION TO KEEP THE RESIDENTS OF SCOTTSDALE
FIRST, AND NOT LAST BY PROTECTING PUBLIC COMMENT IN THE CITY HALL CHAMBERS BY REJECTING ITEM -- ORDINANCE NUMBER 13568. >> Councilmember McAllen: I WILL
SECOND YOUR MOTION. >> Councilmember Whitehead: RESOLUTION. IT WOULD BE NICE IF IT WAS ON THE SCREEN. WE HAD A LOT OF THINGS ON THE SCREEN. WE DON'T HAVE -- WE CAN'T PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN? >> Mayor Borowsky: SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> Councilmember Whitehead: WE HAVE AN ALTERNATE MOTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALTERNATE, EXCUSE ME. >> Councilmember Whitehead:
WE SPENT HOW MANY EVER HOURS, PUBLIC COMMENT THAT PUT RESIDENTS LAST AND WILL MAKE IT SO MOST RESIDENTS CANNOT PARTICIPATE AT CITY MEETINGS AND PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS. >> Mayor Borowsky: MOTION AND A SECOND. COUNCILMAN GRAHAM?
DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? THAT WAS FROM BEFORE. >> Councilmember Graham: I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON MY MOTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: LET'S SEAL WITH THE ALTERNATE MOTION, PLEASE, FIRST. SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS.
I'M SUPPORTING THE DENIAL OF THE ENTIRE THING BECAUSE THERE WERE TOO MANY THINGS WRONG WITH IT. SO LUMPED ALL TOGETHER, I'M FORCED TO SAY NO. AND PRIMARILY DUE TO THE RIDICULOUS ITEM WE JUST TALKED ABOUT.
AND THEN THE LIMITATION ON PUBLIC SPEECH HERE AT CITY HALL. SO I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS AND WILL AT ALTERNATE MOTION IS LIVE.
LET'S TAKE A VOTE. OKAY. WE WILL VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION, WHICH WAS TO ADOPT ALL THE CHANGES. >> Councilmember Graham: MAYOR. >> Mayor Borowsky: SURE. COUNCILMAN GRAHAM. >> Councilmember Graham: I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MY COLLEAGUES
TO SUPPORT MY MOTION, TO APPROVE 13658 -- 568 -- >> Clerk Lane: 568. >> Councilmember Graham: THIS WOULD EXPAND PUBLIC COMMENT DRAMATICALLY. IT WOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF
EXPANDING PUBLIC COMMENT TO CITIZENS PETITION, NEVER BEFORE HAS HAPPENED IN OUR CITY. THIS WOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF PERFORMING NECESSARY LONG OVERDUE HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS TO OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE. THIS WOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF RESPECTING THE FEEDBACK OF OUR
CHARTER OFFICERS AND THIS WOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF RESPECTING OUR RESIDENTS WOULD ATTEND OUR MEETINGS. THANK YOU. >> Councilmember Dubauskas: SECO ND. >> Mayor Borowsky: SO I WOULD -- I DON'T SEE ANY SPEAKERS.
I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO COUNCILMAN GRAHAM'S MOTION. JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY IT DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE. WE JUST SAT HERE FOR SEVERAL HOURS AND THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE WERE NOT FURTHERING PUBLIC
INPUT AT CITY HALL. THERE WERE SIGNIFICANT LIMITATIONS PUT ON INPUT OF RESIDENTS AT CITY HALL, INCLUDING WE WOULD HAVE BEEN HAVING PUBLIC COMMENT NOW AT 10:00 AT NIGHT, AND I'M CERTAIN STEVE SUTTON WOULD HAVE BEEN THE ONLY ONE HERE.
SO JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY IT DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE AND WITH THAT, LET'S TAKE A VOTE.
ALL RIGHT ALL THOSE OF IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE. ALL RIGHT, WELL, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THAT'S --
>> Councilmember McAllen: NOW NUMBER 18. >> Mayor Borowsky: GO TO WHAT? 18? THERE'S 18? OH, GOD, I SHOULD HAVE LET YOU KNOW I WAS UNAVAILABLE 24 HOURS AGO.
OH, NOW WE'RE ON 18, I GOT IT BECAUSE WE BOUNCED BACK TO THAT. GO AHEAD, COUNCILMAN GRAHAM, DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION ON YOUR AGENDA ITEM? >> Councilmember Graham: THANK YOU, MAYOR. YES, THIS IS AGENDIZED PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION ON UPDATES TO THE SCOTTSDALE TOURISM AND EVENTS STRATEGIC PLAN FOR A
FUTURE CITY COUNCIL WORK STUDY SESSION. I KINDLY AND HUMBLY REQUEST MY COLLEAGUES TO JOIN ME IN SCHEDULING A WORK STUDY TO DISCUSS OUR SCOTTSDALE TOURISM AND EVENTS STRATEGIC PLAN. AND IF I JUST MAY ADD, ONE THE
GREAT JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE NEED TO AGENDIZE A WORK STUDY FOR FOR THIS DOCUMENT IS THAT THE RECENT CITY COMMISSIONED KEEN STUDY REVEALED A LARGE DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE CITY'S TOURISM PLAN AND THE INPUT FROM THE OLD TOWN BUSINESSES AND ITS STAKEHOLDERS.
I THINK THIS WOULD BE A VERY PRODUCTIVE WORK STUDY AND I THINK IT WOULD -- IT MIGHT EVEN -- YOU MIGHT EVEN CONSIDER IT LONG OVERDUE. SO IF YOU WILL INDULGE ME, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO AGENDIZE THE ITEM FOR FUTURE MEETING. THANK YOU.
>> Councilmember Dubauskas: SECO ND. >> Mayor Borowsky: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF COUNCILWOMAN McALLEN? >> Cit >> Councilmember McAllen: WAS THERE A SECOND? >> Mayor Borowsky: YES, THERE WAS. >> Councilmember McAllen: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WOULD SUGGEST, COUNCILMAN
GRAHAM, THAT -- OR MAYBE TO THE CITY MANAGER, THAT IF THIS IS AGENDIZED, IT BE AGENDIZED AFTER WE FIGURE OUT HOW TO DEAL WITH THE SITUATION THAT OCCURRED TONIGHT THAT NOW THERE'S NO MARKETING PLAN. I MEAN, THERE ARE TWO THINGS
THAT KIND OF HAVE TO GO TOGETHER. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> Councilmember Graham: IN FACT, THAT WAS ACTUALLY PART OF THE PROBLEM. AND WE'RE APPARENTLY NOT HAVE A LOT OF DEBATE HERE, BUT IT'S PUTTING A TOURISM -- IT'S TALKING ABOUT A STRATEGY THAT OUR VENDORS DESPERATELY WANT TO
HEAR FROM US, IS OUR PLAN. >> Councilmember McAllen: RIGHT, BUT ALL I'M SAYING IS EARLIER TODAY, THEY HAD SAID THEY NEEDED TO KNOW WHEN THE OPEN DATE FOR THE RFP WAS. SO IF THEY HAVE TO GO BACK TO SOME OF THOSE OTHER VENDORS, THERE MAY -- IT MAY HAVE A DATE
NEGOTIATASSOCIATED WITH IT. WE MAY WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT. >> Councilmember Whitehead: WHEN IT WAS IT ADOPTED.
AND WHAT IS THE PROCESS OF IT GETTING ADOPTED. >> City Mgr. Caton: MADAM MAYOR THIS SOUNDS LIKE DEBATE. WE'RE NOT PREPARED -- >> Mayor Borowsky: SHE HAD A QUESTION FOR YOU, BUT, YOU KNOW -- >> Councilmember Whitehead: I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND -- >> Mayor Borowsky: LET'S CALL THE QUESTION. >> Councilmember Whitehead: OKAY. CALL THE QUESTION. >> Mayor Borowsky: PLEASE
INDICATE YOUR VOTE. OKAY. NOW I'M POSITIVE WE'RE DONE. SO MOTION TO ADJOURN. I MOVE TO ADJOURN. >> Councilmember Graham: SECOND. >> Mayor Borowsky: THANK YOU, EVERYONE WHO SAT THROUGH THIS TONIGHT.
WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE YOU.