Confirmation of Appointments and Personnel Matters Committee - Regular Meeting

Welcome everyone to this meeting of the, city of Summerville's legislative matters committee of the city council. I'm your host, chair, JT Scott, Ward two counselor. This is May 5 at 06:07PM, pursuant to chapter two of the acts twenty twenty five. This meeting is being conducted via remote participation, and a recording will be posted shortly after the conclusion on the city of Somerville website. Madam clerk, if we could go ahead and take the role to establish This

is roll call. Councilor Davis? Here. Councilor Mbaugh? Present. Experience Councilor Yuncampin? Councilor Schrezo? Present. Councilor Scott? Present. With four counselors present and one absent, we have quorum.

Alright. Wonderful. I certainly would not mind taking up the agenda in order tonight, but I believe the administration has a request to take up one item out of order. Just to be clear, liaison radasi, that is the item about a secondhand ordinance. Is that correct?

Yes. That's correct.

Alright. Seeing no objection to that from my colleagues, let's go ahead and pick that one up. Now we'll take item two five one six eight six amending chapter eight, article three of the code of ordinances pertaining to secondhand dealer licenses. I believe you have an update from legal on this. Oh, hi. This is David Shapiro. I think you you're asking for an update on on legal. My update is very brief. I have reviewed the language, and I have approved it as to legality. That's my update.

Ah, great. Thank you. I understand it might have gotten to you late in the day. So, thank you for taking the time, assistance solicitor Shapiro, to give it a read through. Let's see. Sure. Analyst Salisbury, you have been, leading the drafting in this effort. Have you not?

That's correct, mister chair.

Alright. Would you like to talk us through where you feel it is right now? Because I know we'd we'd received some pointed feedback from at least one secondhand dealer in the city.

That's correct, mister chair, as well as some questions and feedback from members of this committee back in December when this was last taken up. I worked with the city clerk and our assistant city clerk for licensing and vital records to make some changes to the proposed amendment that are responsive to those questions. So I see that that is the version that is on the screen. In some, the changes that we made, were addressing questions from, I believe it was both yourself and councilor Ewen Campin, about whether a secondhand dealer would be required to request ID and produce a itemized receipt for items that they purchased at say an estate sale or a yard sale. We did clarify in let's see.

I believe it is subsection c of section eight six one, that before purchasing merchandise or accepting it for consignment, at their storefront or place of business. So therefore, removing the requirement that they might or removing the possibility that they might be required to ask for ID if they were to go out into the community and purchase things on their own for sale at their shop.

Can I stop you there? 861C, you say?

Yes. I believe so.

Alright. I don't see a storefront restriction there.

So that that would be in the handout that is attached to the agenda, not the item the not the document that is attached to the item. That is the original document.

Ah, alright. So we are looking at the, what we have on the screen is not the most recently updated one.

No. That is what is on the screen.

Am I in the wrong section, Brendon? Yeah. There we are

in the correct section.

Yep. Alright. I am looking at the wrong one. Thank you. Please continue.

Next in d, we did make some slight changes to clarify, precious item or sorry. Yes. I believe it was yes. I believe it was d. To clarify some precious the precious items category, specifically, you may note that I did remove the word donation from the first sentence of d because as was actually pointed out to me by our, assisting city clerk who is clerking this meeting this evening, it it would be unusual for a thief to donate a precious item to a secondhand dealer.

So we did separate out, into three categories, items that include precious metals such as gold, silver, or platinum, books, paintings, sculptures, or metalwork or or similar items that are marked with a unique identifier, and items that are identified with a serial number or engraving. We did include some examples such as, electronic devices or bicycles, which are purchased by the second hand dealer for $150 or more. The reason for this was as noted, there might be somebody who sells a VCR, which might be worth only $5, and the idea of treating that as a precious item might seem ridiculous to some. The sum total of a $150 we came to because that is roughly the average sale price of a used iPhone or bicycle. And of course, as we know, smartphones and bicycles are very high theft items.

And then lastly, we did clarify a bit about, the transaction records and receipts. There was, as you may recall previously, a requirement in there that receipts and transaction records be sent to the chief of police. In conversations with the police department, we felt that that was not an appropriate method for, enforcement and have kind of shifted to a strictly report based model where if somebody reports an issue, then, enforcement can take place. We are requiring that dealers retain receipts and transaction records for at least three years from the date of the transaction. And I am happy to answer any questions about those changes.

Sure. Well, I've got a few, but I see councilor Strezzo has has some questions. So councilor Strezzo, you have the floor first.

Thank you, mister chair. First and foremost, I remember this being discussed earlier, but can we give a quick brief historical summary on the prompting of the the tweaking of the ordinance, etcetera?

Certainly, counselor, through the chair. This came up, in, I believe it was September. A few counselors put forward an order requesting that the city clerk work to amend this ordinance to, essentially modernize it. There were some things in there that that had kind of fallen out of date. It was also a little bit unclear as to who was required to be licensed as a secondhand dealer.

So we did add some clarifying language in there. The vast majority of the red lines in here are to bring this ordinance in line with the style guide that the city clerk's office published a couple years back. Has been a couple years now, actually. So the the vast majority of these changes are not, in fact, really substantive and are are mostly style, but there were some some important clarifications in there.

Thank you. I'm happy to hop back in line, mister chair, if you wish. I just had a question, additional or two, but happy to get back in line.

Go right ahead. Nicole?

Alright. Well, thank you. And trying to figure out so we we wanna make sure that, right, if if if items are stolen, that there there is still, in some way, some kind of, like, ability that that still that hasn't been lost, that that can still be tracked in some ways if item are items are stolen and and pawned or or placed in in these shops. Because as I recall last year, huge I remember the conversation's huge emphasis of, like, modernizing it and and then the licensure. But can you go into details?

Any of that been changed? I see that there's a three year. Is that a statute of is that within the statute of limitations of filing stolen property or or or trying to find your your stolen property, etcetera? This is where I'm going with that?

Counselor, through you or through the chair to you, counselor, to answer your question. The three years was a a length of time that I had seen in other ordinances relating to, sort of similar things. It it doesn't have anything to do with the statute of limitations. It may coincidentally line up with it, but that was not something that we considered when setting that three year timeline. It's it's a relatively common length of time to require that businesses keep records.

And last question, if I may, mister chair. Where maybe I missed the start through, but where are power tools and and power tools are like, which are often stolen and pawned items and even electrical, like I'm sorry. Music musical equipment. Does that, like, plus or minus one fifty? So for instance, where power drills go come in on this.

Mister chair, through you yes. So those would fall under items that are actually, I don't know that power tools are typically engraved with the serial number, but they may be. That's a that's a good question. I actually don't know off the top of my head. But we do include, like, electronic devices or bicycles in there as kind of an indication that we're painting with a broad brush. And the intent is to capture high theft items. I would actually have to look and see if they are typically identified with a serial number. I expect that they would be, but I I would have to to double check that.

Mister chair, through you to mister Salisbury. Yeah. I would like to find out about that and and fact check that. That not fact check that, but get confirmation on that, including musical equipment as well. We're not just talking guitars, but, like, you know, amps, etcetera, stuff like that, which may or may not fall over, like, with the serial number. Sure. With a Roland amp, but with power drill, maybe or maybe not. Don't we wanna make sure we're doing the the least bit of harm if if people's equipment are still is stolen.

Alright. I appreciate that, counselor Strezzo. Is that it? Alright. So, it sounds like the request is to look into how to reference power tools. And, you know, the secondhand value of power tools, I think, is also a question in terms of the $150 threshold there. It's, I think it's something to just ask a few questions about. Councilor Mbah, I see you have a question.

Really quick, mister chair, and, musical equipment. Right. Right. Thank you.

Amps and guitar. Right. Got it. Councilor Mbah.

Thank you, mister Cheads, since I don't have much time. I just was curious about, like, you know, the kind of enforcement mechanism, you know, or incentive that will ensure that this updated, you know, licensing framework is is both effective and equitable? Like, what is that in that?

Mister chair, through you to councilor Mbathi, the enforcement mechanism is not something that we have changed in terms of licensing. That is something that that is is going to remain in place. If somebody makes a report that a secondhand dealer is operating without a license, then there will be an investigation. And there may be some enforcement such as a fine or or a requirement that they shut down their operation, until they obtain a license, but that's there's nothing new effectively there. And there's no difference between that that type of enforcement and the enforcement that we would see with our other licensed businesses throughout the city.

My understanding is we're not sending police officers out there to check the licenses of every secondhand dealer in the city. But if somebody does make a report, then they they may well show up to to make sure that there is a license for that operation.

Okay. And so that means so thank you, doctor. We had no. That makes sense. And and if I may just follow-up chairman Scott, I'm also just curious, you know, as to, you know, how might these changes, you know, kinda, like, affect, like, compliance rates among, say, existing dealers and new entrants to the market.

You know? It's like, how is that? You know, just to because now we are updating something. It's already, you know, like, folks that have already been in the market, and then there's, like also, like, the the ones that are probably gonna be getting in. I'm sure the ones that are getting in, they're just gonna get caught up. But the ones that this will be applying to them, like, how would that change in in requirement affect compliance rate?

Mister chair, through you, I I don't foresee that it will affect that. We did clarify a bit who is affected by this, but generally speaking, we expect to to rather, I should say, we don't have any predictions about changes in compliance, because there were questions about whether this was, impacting secondhand dealers if they were not taking in used goods for sale, and only accepted donations. We we saw fit to clarify that, but we can't speak to whether that will alter people's inclination to comply with the ordinance.

Thank you. Thank you, chairman Scott.

Thank you, councilor Mbaugh. You know, compliance with the ordinance is, I I think we're trying to make something that's, going to be possible to comply with. I think there may only be one actual actual licensed business in the city, and I know we've got a lot more secondhand stores than that. So, and in fact, I've gotten, a few constituent complaints about one of the stores in the area asking about about some of the procedures there, and it's tough when they're not operating with license right now. So, hopefully, we'll be able to move on this before too long.

My only question for analyst Salisbury here was, no. It says, went in, I believe, 61, yeah, which is, starting it's at the bottom of our screen right now. Secondhand dealer create a record of a transaction when they take possession of an item, such as a book, painting, sculpture, metalwork, or similar marked with a unique identifier, signature, or stamp by its creator, manufacturer, or owner. So, I mean, every every book has, like, a publisher's mark on it. Is that what we're referring to here?

Mister Chair, no. My understanding of this is that this would be similar to, for instance, an autographed copy of a book Okay. Or, you know, a a signed painting or sculpture or something like that. The intent is certainly not to as you may recall, earlier on in the ordinance, we did exempt, dealers who operate specifically and exclusively in the sale of books. So I don't read this as an intent to capture all books, but specifically those that are unique in the sense that I think that the the unique identifier itself helps to, indicate our intent there.

For instance, I have a assigned screenplay of Star Wars from George Lucas, and I'm pretty sure it might actually be the only one in existence. And I'd be very upset if it showed up in a secondhand dealer shop. So hopefully, this would prevent that from going missing if that were to happen.

I learn something new every day, Las Salisbury. And I guess I just wanna you know, this doesn't also, exempt, say, secondhand. We there's, like, a bunch of vinyl stores, in the neighborhood here. Some are exclusively vinyl. Some are vinyl and other things. Presumably, those, unless they are signed, like a signed album, you know, Michael Jackson signed a copy of Thriller, that those would also not be covered by this section regardless of whether or not it was a large collection of pieces that were bought in bulk for $200.

That's correct, mister chair. That would be covered under subsection c. We do require an itemized receipt for collections like that. However, in conversation with staff within the clerk's office, we came down to we're we're not we're choosing not to be explicitly clear about what itemized means. If somebody were to take in an entire mountain of t shirts, we certainly would not expect them to take several days to sort through and list a full description of each t shirt that they are taking in. We think that it is appropriate to leave that to the discretion of the business owner, and then if it if it causes problems in the future, we can revisit.

That sounds good. I know in my days, shopping the Garmin District, dollar and pound bins, I probably couldn't even give you an itemized receipt of what I purchased. Let's see. Councilor Ewan Campan, I see you popped on screen there. Do you have anything to contribute?

Just to note that I am here.

Alright. Happy to have you with us, sir. We will make sure that it gets, marked down for the record. Alright. Well, that sounds good. I've got my questions answered here. It sounds like there's a few outstanding questions, from counselor Strazo, so I'm happy to leave this in committee. Hopefully, we'll be able to, push it back out on May 19 because we've got some room, I believe, on that agenda. And in the meantime, I will also continue to circulate this around for public comment. For anybody who's tuning in, please, bring a copy of this by your favorite, secondhand and vintage dealer in the city and, make sure that they feel good about it and that, it's the kind of language that they can get behind in terms of complying and being registered part of the city.

Okay. Given that, let's go ahead and keep this item in committee for now, and we will return to the regular order of business. And I've lost my tabs. Alright. Returning to the regular order, that would take us back to item number one on our agenda.

That's 02/1946, amending chapter two, article three of the code of ordinances by adding a new section establishing the time and place of regular meetings at the city council. I know this is one that our chief administrative officer, Kimberly Wells, was very excited about. I don't believe she is with us tonight, but, analyst Salisbury, I believe she identified you to be the one to carry the torch on the side.

Mister chair, that is correct. I did write this, and I feel pretty confident in my ability to speak on it. As you noted, this is a change that is, derived from the new charter. The charter does require that the time and place of meetings be set by ordinance to make it a little bit more durable. Previously, it was set by the rules of the city council.

The proposal here is very simple. The the first portion of it, the first subsection is to simply codify the current practice of the city council. The interesting part for committee discussion, or not not to make any presumptions, of course, is that in 2028, we are recommending that the regular meetings of the city council be held on the fourth second and fourth Tuesday evenings beginning at 6PM, except when Tuesday falls on a holiday, in which case the meeting shall be held on the following Thursday evening at 6PM. We have a lot of reasons for this recommendation. I will note from the outset though perhaps one of the the less important ones of these, is that that note about a holiday would probably only roll around once every five years on the rare occasion that Veterans Day might fall on that day.

And so it it is our recommendation for for a variety of more substantive reasons. I'm happy to go through those, or I'm happy to take questions, whichever is your preference.

Alright. Tell you what. Let's go to councilor Strezo.

Oh, thank you, miss Chair. Wow. I'm I'm the first one to raise my hand. Right on. Okay. Yes. Yes. Mister Salisbury, I definitely do need, details of of a suggestion of Tuesday for some with kids, especially, you know, single parents with kids. The difference between Tuesdays and Thursdays is very much more complex. So to even get on board with the suggesting suggestion, I definitely hear more need to hear more of the reasoning.

And I do see that the time slot has potentially changed from seven to six, which I I want to hear as well from my colleagues about how that may or may not help our constituents be able to attend meetings and even those with kids, school age children, or little babies. So I'll start with the the first question of the the reasoning of suggestions for the Thursday to Tuesday.

And certainly, mister chair, through you to the counselor's question, there are really kind of two reasons for this. The first being staff considerations. Fundamentally, Thursday meetings are a little bit of a nightmare for staff. And there's a variety of reasons for that. One of them is logistics.

Generally speaking, there is a lot that goes into post meeting work. So following a Thursday evening meeting, could run quite significantly late, we do have our Fridays, which are a half day, and it is very difficult to get our normal work done as well as all the post meeting logistics done on Friday, especially given that we're going into a weekend and we generally would like to get all of the things done before the next business day. So a change to Tuesday would allow us to use Wednesday, which would allow us to space that out a little It also means fundamentally that that a lot of the items that are before the council could end up approved within the same week without actually having to wait over the weekend. Current practice right now is that items cannot go to the mayor until Monday, which then might take a significant amount of time, depending on the on the the item itself. Whereas, if we were to change to a Tuesday meeting, we'd be able to put these items before the mayor on Thursday and have them approved as soon as Friday.

There's also a lot to be said for the issue of staff morale. It is difficult, to say the least to work a twelve hour day, and then potentially be in a meeting starting at 7PM, until whenever your item gets taken up. And of course, you know, sometimes we do make the effort to take up items that have staff to speak on them out of order, but there's no guarantee that that the item would be taken up before the end of the workday. And while certainly a 6PM meeting on a Tuesday falls outside of normal working hours, it does grant about an hour and a half for people to breathe, go get dinner, take a break, kind of decompress a little bit before having to attend a city council meeting. I will also note on that note that moving some of our kind of heavier hitting city council city council committee meetings to Thursdays starting at 6PM would mean that staff would be able to attend those in working hours, and there are significantly more staff that tend to attend those meetings than attend the city council meetings or certainly more regularly.

And then sort of lastly, to your point with regards to the timing of the meeting, 6PM is of course the time when most of the city council's committees meet. So it's it's not really a significant change in terms of expectations for availability. It does, however, mean that city council meetings may not run as late or that there may be a little bit of extra time to get some additional business done during those city council meetings without the oppressive presence of 11PM rolling towards us. There's a few other sort of incidental things that are associated with some of these these points. For instance, I will note that, of course, on Thursdays, we do work at city hall until 07:30.

And a lot of the kind of key figures who are frequently in attendance at city council meetings, particularly the city clerk, That means that they have to sort of leave their team on their own for the half hour before closed, typically even, you know, maybe even an hour, maybe an hour and a half before then. And I will say for this for the city clerk's office, Thursdays tend to be an extremely busy day for us, particularly in the evenings. We get a lot of people coming in for marriages, and those are, a complex and impactful piece of paperwork that that typically requires the city clerk to come out and offer some clarity on those.

Mister chair, if I may, through you to legislative analyst. Salisbury, thank you for, for all of that insight. I will digest all that, and, I appreciate it.

Alright. Councilor Davis, I see you have your hand up. Why don't you take the next crack?

Thank you, mister chair. I appreciate it. And through you to analyst Salisbury, thank you, so much for for your work on putting this together. You know, the the baseline requirement that that that that is, you know, part of the the new charter requirement and also the, you know, the sort of thoughtful tweaks that particularly, you know, the the the change of the day. I I sign on to all of the rationale and reasoning that that Salisbury presented.

I think it all makes perfect sense. I am as as hopefully folks have noticed when in in my sort of, you know, planning out the city council meetings, I I try my absolute best to make it as as, you know, at least impactful as possible, but it's just it's not easy to do. And, you know, miss Salisbury laid out a a number of ways that this Tuesday meeting in the 06:00 time would, you know, would be somewhat less of a burden on on some of our city staff. And and and I think that, you know, that that is a very compelling argument. I'll also note as as an aside, and, you know, this is a a very, you know, secondary or even, you know, lower priority, but there's a lot of cool stuff that happens on Thursday nights around our city, fundraisers and events and things that we often can't go to.

And and I'd love to to show my face at some of those things. You know, Taste of the Ingrid City, the homeless coalition fundraiser that you know, just to name to name a few. So it'd be great to to be able to to to, you know, to show up to support those community partners that we have that are doing such important work in the city and and and, you know, have that have that night free. I mean, notwithstanding committee meetings that that that may be happy, but I think it gives us a little more flexibility. Certainly, a 06:00 committee meeting versus a 07:00 city council meeting feels like it it, you know, it it will give it would give us a little more flexibility as well.

So I think this is a great idea. I will I will confess that I I I was very hesitant at first in my my sort of initial maybe it just says the oldest councilor, you know, change. No. Change bad. But, you know, in hearing the arguments, in the conversations I've had since then, I think it's it's it's very well thought through, and I appreciate that.

And and I'm in support. That said, mister chair, it it is a it's a pretty big change. And, you know, while certainly have no nothing else that I, at least at this point, feel like I need to consider, although, obviously, I'll I'll hear my colleagues' thoughts. And if there's questions raised, I I I would value those. But it might be the kind of thing that we want the public to have an opportunity to weigh in on.

I you know, I don't know. I'm just throwing that out there. Like, it it because the change wouldn't happen until 2028, there's no, you know, there's no rush. If there's some if there's something that we're not thinking of, you know, it's the kind of thing it is a a a big fundamental change to the way the city council works and has worked for literally decades. So I wouldn't be I wouldn't oppose to keeping this in committee just just in case someone wants to tell us why we're all wrong.

I don't think that's gonna happen, but but if it were that said, like I said, I I I wouldn't object if someone made a motion to to move it forward. And I think it's a great idea, and and thanks again to Salisbury and to know all the folks in the clerk's office and and council staff that put time into all of these changes that are necessary to, to to bring us in line with the new charter. Thank you, mister chair.

Thank you, councilor Davis. Yeah. Boy, it seems like ten years ago when we started on this council, that might be a call to have a public hearing about it, but I'm glad you're not going that direction. Councilor Yuen Kim.

Thank you, mister chair, and just apologies. My my thoughts on this aren't quite as gathered because I I think I'm still in the the the apprehension phase. Like, I'm I'm I'm thinking through in real time the effect it would have on my life, which would be, you know, in theory, right, were I to be a city councilor in 2028, it would be significant, I I would say. I mean, I I'm thinking through the the two years that I spent as president. The two hours between the end of my regular work day and the city council meeting were really important for my planning.

That's when I met with the clerk to go through the details. That's when I would have a little bit of dinner with my family beforehand. That all said, if the meeting were another time, I would adjust my schedule. Right? I think, you know, I I came on to the council. As as counselor Davis said, this is the way things worked, and I have gotten very used to it. I it I've I've figured out how it can, you know, integrate into my life, and a change, I think, would be difficult. But I just can't come up with any arguments against what liaison Salisbury just went through. You know? I think those are really, really compelling reasons for this.

I don't think there is a time that we can hold our meetings that will be ideal for every member of the public, obviously. Like, I think there are members of the public that I've heard have made a really compelling case for our meeting should be during the day. I've heard lots of people say that that would be completely unacceptable for them. I mean, I think different constituents have different available times. So I don't think we're gonna get a 100% buy in no matter what we do.

I am a little bit apprehensive about this. I I will say that. I'm not you know, I I didn't come prepared really to vote on this because I'm I'm I'm still working through it. But I will say, like, I don't have any good arguments against what what Brendan just said. I mean, I think that those are, like, very legitimate arguments around that are that are based on kind of, like, inherent frustrations with moving Citi business forward and respecting the time of our staff in addition to the public.

So, you know, I I'm I'm leaning towards supporting this, but I will say, you know, as councilor Strezo raised, like, I have two young kids. It is not easy to prepare before a 6PM meeting all the time. I would make it work. I'm I'm sure that counselors will make it work, but it's it's a it's a challenge for everyone, and I would imagine particularly with with, people with young kids. Thank you, mister Cher.

Thank you. Thank you, councilor Young Campin. You know what? It I think do think it's an interesting thought. I also wouldn't mind getting our meeting started a little bit earlier, but, I know I tend to get up, quite early.

Not everybody does. No. I I think this is a useful thing to think about. You know, one thing that occurs to me is that, you know, when we're putting in agendas for meetings, you know, if an item is coming into the city council, it can't be put onto a a committee agenda until, you know, before it is actually accepted by the by the council and directed to that committee. So I wonder if having our meetings on Tuesday would mean that no item that came before the council on Tuesday could appear on an agenda before, the following Monday, which right now, I think the delay is to Tuesday.

Just putting it out there, I'm not sure about all the logistics of that, but, I wonder about if it if it abbreviates the amount of council, committee meetings that we're able to get in functionally between council meetings, because I know it's already a pretty compressed schedule. So it's just one thought I wanna throw out there. I saw, councilor Ewen Campan. You popped your hand up, and then I saw councilor Strezzo. You did yours. So councilor Ewen Campan, go for that.

Thank you, mister Scheher. Another issue that I neglected to raise, we currently don't allow committee meetings the day before a city council meeting, which is every other Wednesday, second and fourth. You know, I don't know if that that's not in law anywhere. Right? That's a function of clerk office capacity as I understand it. Taking Monday off the table would be really hard. You know, maybe this is the point you were just making, mister chair, but that that seems like a real issue to me. I wonder if the clerk's office could respond.

Yeah. I mean, it's not just taking Monday off the table, but it's also taking the Wednesday and Thursday following the council meeting off the table because we couldn't, publish an agenda. It would functionally shrink the meetings times between city council meetings to just the four days of the following week, I believe. And, know, Salisbury, on that point, do you have anything?

Mister chair, I I do to some extent. I think that the I I can appreciate the concern. I don't think that it is as significant. A real concern, but not as significant a concern, I think, as you're worried about. Currently, the the sort of buffer of the weekend certainly does provide some assistance in that regard.

But that does also introduce some issues when there are Monday holidays and things like that, which are frequent, of course. And so there are really already kind of these these obstacles that we are required to navigate around with regards to the open meeting law. So I I I don't think based on my conversations with the city clerk that this would cause the level of disruption that you're you're expressing concern about. You know, it's it's already relatively uncommon practice to have items come off the city council agenda in significant numbers and go directly onto a a committee agenda immediately following it. And so there's really not much of a change in that regard.

I do know that that's occasionally the case for legislative matters, when something is is of particular urgency. But there is no reason that I can think of why we would not be able to sorry. I'm just trying to to plot out the time in my head. Those meetings could certainly be held on a Friday. I I cannot think of any reason why posting the agenda on a Wednesday would prohibit those meetings from being held on a Friday evening.

Alright. Well, you'd have to ask staff how they feel about staffing Friday night meetings, I think, in terms of, staff morale.

Mister chair, that sounds like a party to me, quite frankly.

Thank you. Let's see. I saw oh, councilor Trezor, you brought your hand down. So unless you got something, I will go to councilor Davis. Councilor Davis.

Thank you, mister Chair, and it is on that direct point as well. Yeah. So it's it's a excellent point. I I as as mister Salisbury said, I I think the the net impact would be, you know, would only really relate to those somewhat less, typical scenarios where there's an item submitted in the into the city council on a Thursday, and then it goes on to a committee agenda the next week. I I would bet that if we looked at those data, it would be that would be pretty small percentage of the items that are in the in the council.

Certainly, with legislative matters, you know that that does tend to happen. We we we we slip those those, Tuesday ones in. But, you know, to take take this agenda itself, you know, the these the the these items have all been on here for a long time. So I I think that, you know, we certainly could still have committee meetings Wednesday, Thursday. I don't know.

I feel about Friday, but that hypothetically could happen. It could be a Friday day meeting as well if if there was a, you know, if there was a a a pressing need to to to get our minds together on something. And, you know, and then, yeah, you you would need to I think, you know, we'd we'd my my anticipation would be that that the, you know, the committees like well, we'd have to think about it. Right? Like, where does finance sit?

Where does legislative matters sit? Where does where does land use sit? I think in my head, I was thinking that that probably land use still sits on that Thursday on the well, land use would sit on the Thursday of of the council meeting because those those have to be advertised when there's public hearings, those have to be advertised well in advance, and so you'd sort of you'd know that. And then and then the finance and and legislative matters would have plenty of time to to post an agenda for the following week or something different. Right?

That's just sort of one, you know, off the top of my head kind of thought. So, you know, I it's it's definitely a factor that we should think about, but, you know, I'll note that it's I I think I I I would bet that a lot I don't like betting. I would guess that that a vast majority of items on on committee agendas have been sitting in that, in that box for, for for more than, more than a week, and that it wouldn't be a a significant impact. And as I said, if if there was something really, really pressing, well, we could sort it out, figure it out. We'll we'll we'll make it work, if if that's the the decision we decide to to make.

And I one thing I'll just also note to, if I may, mister chair, to, council you on Campus Point, also completely valid and and, you know, would would share some of those concerns. At least as it relates to to planning, I'll note that since I took the the presidency, I I at my request, we've moved those planning meetings to Wednesday. It's my opinion that that planning ahead of time is easier and less stressful for everyone. And then if something comes up between Wednesday and and the now you know, currently Thursday council meetings, we can we can text each other. We can sort it out.

But, you know, that that that those planning meetings happen ahead of time so that we're we know we can do it in a more sort of calm, you know, calm manner. So, hopefully, that would that would mitigate some some of that concern at least. While there certainly are lots of things that come up in time right before council meeting, for the most part, all y'all have been pretty good about letting me know stuff ahead of time because that's what I've asked. And I and I think going forward, you know, I would hope that, you know, for whoever holds this role in the future that that, you know, we we set that precedent because it just makes everyone's lives easier. And so, you know, I think that that, know, having to I guess, know, as I think about it, I guess, planning meeting would then be Monday.

And so you might have a little bit more because folks haven't thought about stuff over the weekend maybe, whereas now they're thinking about stuff on, you know, Tuesday, Wednesday, and let me know. But yeah. As councilor Campbell said, if that's the way it it went, we'll we'll we'll figure it out. We'll we'll shift the calendars. We'll sort it out. Thank you, mister chair.

Alright. No. Thank you, miss, council Davis. I I appreciate that. Yeah. I think there's I think there's some thought that we can put into this. I I don't think, I'm ready necessarily to move this out right now, but I really appreciate approaching the discussion on it. I think what I've what I'd like to do is to take take a little bit of time with pen and paper and try to figure out exactly, what this would mean for in terms of a potential, committee schedule and what this would do to our ability to schedule things. I I I do have a concern about how folks would feel about Friday night, city council committee meetings. But, you know what?

I I think it's worth considering and, taking a look at it. So I I I think I'm happy to do that in the interim between next meeting. Councilor Strezo, I see you got your hand raised.

I'm back. The interwebs is being not super great right now, so I missed some of the conversation, which is kind of a bummer. So I'll I'll have to follow-up. But I yeah. I I'm not ready to make a decision tonight.

Absolutely not. I agree with you, mister chair, that I think that we we need to sit and and get out that pencil and paper and see exactly what it would look like because, yeah, I wondered then, okay, as we're just about to also on this agenda have a rule change for submitting agenda items. What will that look like in in January 2028 deadline, etcetera, posting agendas for regular meetings? And then one additional question, and this, I suppose, is more rhetorical at this point, and although it is a different body entirely, with the school committee, which also meets at 07:00 at night. So are there plans or considerations from the school side of this to change?

And I know different different, employees in different bucket. However, is there talk and consideration of, school committee body doing the same get to 6PM over seven. So and I definitely, either way, want to hear from the public on this and what they thought. Would this make this easier for, say, instance, we have a citation or when, a member of rank goes up and their family comes. Is is 06:00 easier, or is it harder for some of their family members to be able to get to counsel to get a firefighter promotion or not?

Or is that 07:00 the sweet spot to where they can actually get through traffic to get to it? So those are considerations going forward that I I really want to think about before I would be able to make a decision on on where we go with this specific item before us.

Yeah. I think those are I think those are good good and interesting thoughts. Alright. Well, it sounds like we've all got a little bit to noodle on. I really appreciate the, work in bringing it forward.

I anticipate I'll probably have few conversations with our new chief administrative officer and probably with you too, mister president, who's trying to get my head around all this. So I I recommend keeping this in committee, and then we can come back to it again at a future meeting, hopefully, with a little bit more a little bit more thought, we can start asking our our constituents and friends about it because I'm sure that the number of those that watch these meetings regularly, we know who the regulars are. Alright. So let's go ahead and leave that in committee. Next up in our agenda, we have item number two.

That's two six zero three five four. The rule four, the rules of the city council be amended to update submission deadlines for agenda items consistent with the provisions of open meeting. This one I'm very excited about. Analyst Salisbury, I see the language appears on the screen here. Would you like to introduce us or, counselor Davis, would you like to be the one to introduce this since it's your item?

I think I I could take the one this one, mister chair, if it's okay with you, ambulance Salisbury. This was, put together at my request, so thank you, thank you, Brandon, for, for putting pen and paper, for me. Yeah. The you know, so as the item says, you know, the the this the intent here is to actually better align and more closely align our our rules and, in fact, our practices with the actual law. So I know it's a a really radical concept that we should just follow the laws that apply to our scheduling and posting of agendas and such.

But, you know, the this came about because so historically, you know, this council and the board of all of them and pre before this have, used the supplemental agenda. And just so for folks folks at home, you know, we publish an agenda on on Tuesdays. And then traditionally, any item that came in, you know, after after that agenda was sort of put together, and prior to, the publishing of a of a revised agenda on Thursday, went on what's called the supplemental agenda. If you look at it at the agenda, anything that's would start with the number 10, that that's that's that's the supplemental agenda. And the public doesn't see those until Thursday.

K. I'm stopping there. The public doesn't see those items until the day of the council meeting. That, in my opinion, is clearly contrary to the intent and probably the letter of the open meeting law, the requirement that we post an agenda forty eight hours ahead of the meeting time. So, you know, that asset to me is is is really a clear and and unambiguous and and, you know, something that we should, you know, do a better job of of of adhere adhering to.

Now there are some gray areas because the open meeting loss through a variety of of sort of sources of legal input, I won't bore all y'all with the, you know, the the the nuances there. But, you know, there there's some gray area. If if if it if the the presiding officer, could reasonably anticipate that an item would be discussed at the meeting, then, then it needs to be on the agenda. If the presiding officer could not reasonably anticipate, then it it it shouldn't be on the agenda. That kinda sounds funny because it's like, well, you y'all just gonna show up and start talking about things that aren't on the agenda?

Well, no. So it it you know, the the the wording of the of the language itself is is a bit it has an ambiguity, you know, in and of itself. What we've done in the past or what we've done sorry. In in the past almost well, going on a year now since since I took this position is is trying to be, you know, more closely aligned with the both the spirit and the letter of the open meeting law as my colleagues will will know, and anyone who all of our regular viewers will will recall. When when things are in that section 10, I will ask, you know, I will make a note of why is this, you know, why was this not anticipated?

Why did this come up? And, you know, and the the second prong of the requirement is is there some specific time consideration. Right? So there have been a whole host of items that have never made it to agendas or haven't made it to the agenda that week because, I have asked those questions and the and the answer has been, it can wait it can wait for the next, you know, for the next meeting. The other thing we've done is to push things to a committee where it would then be properly noticed.

And before any deliberation happens, it can be it can be, you know, it will be noticed to, to the public. But, the the intent of this is to is to really, you know, codify or or or not codify, but, you know, reflect in our actual rules, what we've been doing, more or less for the past, you know, past several months. It does and and we'll stick with the Thursday night meetings for now. If we decide to change that, we'll, you we'll we'll get out a calendar and figure out what the what the right dates and times are. But for now, whereas the current rules require something to be in by end end of the day Monday, this actually would extend that time till Tuesday morning.

If for those of you who can who can do math and and understand how a clock works or a calendar works, you'll you'll think, well, wait a minute. Tuesday at 07:00 would be forty eight hours. Why is it why has it been Monday? The reason is the clerk's office has to has to type the agenda. They have to push a lot of yeah. They do a lot of keystroking and and and compiling and and things to actually get. So, you know, the letter of the law says if something is submitted at at, you know, 06:59 on Tuesday, it need it it needs to go on the agenda. Practically speaking, that's impossible, of course. Right? Because that button's gonna get pushed, you know, not later than forty eight hours before before the meeting.

So, there's sort of a gray area that that is allowed for the practicality. We've we've shrunk that from our current rules, so it it now allows until, you know, effectively, you know, what what what Brendan finds in his in his inbox Tuesday morning when he when he rocks up to his desk is, you know, is is is good to go. And what isn't there is not unless it meets those requirements of being having been un unforeseen and or not reasonably anticipate reasonably foreseen. Can't remember that's foreseen or anticipated, but same concept. You know what I mean.

And has some some time sensitivity to it. So that's the crux of this. Like I said, it it is intended to to sort of have our rules reflect both the open meeting law requirements and what what we've actually been doing here for the last few months. Hopefully, it it I mean, you know, I hope this isn't controversial. I hope there's no significant concerns.

As I said, it does actually give us a little more time in the rule to to submit things and have them be, you know, validly, you know, appropriate for for for the agenda for that week and and lessens the likelihood of someone making a claim that we're somehow violating no amount. And we'll try to avoid that as much as we can. That's, that's my long winded explanation, mister chair. Thank you for your indulgence.

No. Thank you, councilor Davis. I did just have one question for you. So it it references that, items submitted by a member, appearing if been by Tuesday by 08:30. Any item submitted by a nonmember shall only appear on the agenda if it is in the hands of city clerk by the close of business four days before the meeting, which is Friday, by 12:30PM. I would presume that would cover public comment or a public, petition.

Yeah. And I think I I might defer to to analyst Salzberg on this. My understanding is that there's you know, oftentimes when when things are submitted, there's a bit more, you know, back end office work that that that is required to to verify, etcetera. But, Brendan, if you wanna add any color to that, I I through you, mister chair, I'd I'd defer to mister Salisbury.

Mister chair, through you, or to you rather, as you were the one who asked the question, councilor Davis is correct. There there are some additional logistics that go on with regard to, approval processes and things like that for items that come in, either from members of the public or from members of staff. So this would apply notably to items submitted by staff as well. So we are not, unfairly burdening only the council or only members of the public. We are applying this to everyone equally.

There are, of course, as as councilor Davis alluded to, some gray areas and some nuance. Certainly, if somebody has a license that only got approved, you know you know, on Friday morning, and they are unable to put it or or a public event for instance. If if, you know, that gets approved Friday morning, doesn't make it onto the agenda, but the event is the Friday after the city council meeting, there could be some flex there to make sure that it does appear on the regular agenda, or if absolutely necessary to appear on the supplemental agenda if it was, you know, not reasonably anticipated, and, does naturally have that time sensitive component to it. So we're not going to be preventing people from holding their block parties or anything like that by this change. There is obviously going to be a component of, you know, things happen.

Bureaucracy being what it is, as important as it is, does occasionally move slowly in a way that frustrates people. And we want to be cognizant of that and make sure that we are not disenfranchising any of our residents.

Absolutely. I appreciate that. And you you got ahead of my other question was that while we have certainly had some legislative liaisons that considered themselves the twelfth councilor, city staff are not actually members of the body. So, so this would also apply to, items that are submitted, for example, by the mayor for consideration or, by city staff for consideration. Yes?

That is correct, mister chair. Yes.

Alright. Well, I feel good about this. I appreciate the explanation, councilor Davis, and I'm I'm comfortable moving forward with this because as you said, it's basically codifying what you're currently doing. Are there any other, any any more discussion from members? I personally am, prepared to entertain a motion to to approve.

So moved.

Alright. Councilor Davis, you have to move to approve your own item. Alright. Well, looking for any discussion on that item or on that motion. Seeing no discussion on that motion, let's lay that item on the table to recommend approval in a single vote at the end of the meeting. Wonderful. I love getting one out of the box. See, item number three has already been taken up, so that brings us in the order of business to item number four, which is, item two five one six eight six, amending chapter eight, article three of the code of ordinances. Oh, no. That was the secondhand dealer license one.

And the item three was, actually so item three was the order to work with. That's 251439. So, we could probably mark that work complete since the city clerk has in fact been working with. So let's mark number three work complete. And we'll leave

Chair Scott, excuse me, just quickly. That was referred for recommendation, so we do need to give it a disposition. So if we could place it on file.

Okay. We can place that on file then. Thank you. Place that on file. We will keep the the ordinance, that's item number four, in committee. We already got that disposition, which brings us to item twenty five one seven six two, that the code of ordinances be amended to prohibit the use of taxpayer funds for self promotion. Is a fun one. Councilor Davis, was this yours, or was this, counselor, counselor Wilson's? Oh, it was the it was the two of you joined at the 2025. So,

counselor Davis Miss Shure, thank you. This is an ordinance that I've had, kicking around in my brain for a number of years. And and, you know, chalk it up to finally got finally getting off my butt and and asking analyst the Salisbury to to help me out with to put something together. And and it it I I think it's it's worth noting that another piece of that that sort of motivation was, at the time then, the the incoming mayor, having had that conversation with him and him saying, I completely agree. Do do you wanna put it in together with me?

And I said, well, I think that would be great. You know, to because, as with well, mister Chad, as with just about all of our ordinances, if if the mayor doesn't wanna doesn't wanna do it, then we have a hard time making it happen. And so I I I'm I was happy that that then councilor Wilson was, it was in agreement on on the concept. There may be some gray area around the edges as we get down this that that that I will, look forward to exploring with our current mayor. But but for the most part, you know, I I think the the fundamental principle here is I just got sick of seeing mayor's names plastered all over everything.

And and, you know, all throughout the year and, gosh, gee, especially on those odd numbered years, it just seemed like mayor's names cropped up. So I can't figure out why it was on those particular odd numbered years that mayor's names just seem to seem to be in front of me all the time on on on city communications and Citi printed signs and banners and everything else. And I guess I guess that just kinda, you know, got got stuck under my saddle, if you will. So so the the intent here is to is to put an end to that, to to to, you know, make it to ordain that none of us, the mayor included, will will effectively have, you know, have the ability to to use city resources for the sort of personal what what, you know, the intent is, what what is sort of this sort of personal promotion. You know, if you think about, you know, the former banner that used to be for for, you know, for for the Greek festival, mayor Kurt Atone.

Big letters right underneath it. You know, press releases that said the office of mayor so and so would say blah blah blah. You know? We just we we know it's the city of Somerville. Right? It's the city. It's the taxpayers who are presenting these things at the end of the day. So that's the intent here. Hopefully, pretty straightforward. I'm sure folks could poke holes and and things that I and I I I sheepishly I I see Lia's unreadazy with her hand raised. I hope I hope it's something in agreement. But if we've missed something here, then then, I'll be happy to hear that info as well. But that's the idea, mister chair, and and thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain it.

Alright. Well, let's see here. Liaison Radasi, you had an update from, the comms department or from other city staff?

Through the chair. Thank you. I am not disagreeing with through you to anything that councilor Davis said. Account, then councilor Wilson did, co sponsor this, and is very much on board with this. I'm just hoping on behalf of the administration that we can have maybe another meeting just to touch base with comms and maybe have some offline conversations with councilor Davis as the sponsor to make sure that we're not inadvertently, looping in something and and making sure that we're just creating the best legislation possible, without any inadvertent, consequences. But yeah. Thank you.

Alright. Well, I mean, this, so council Davis, this ordinance has been in, now for six months. It has been before the city council. Guess I'm curious as to, how you would like to proceed. I know our comms department is massive and has frequently been, let's say, one of the one of the primary organs of this kind of communication. What what would be your intention here, sir?

Thank you for asking, mister chair. And through you, Talia Zanrudasi, thank you. I I well, I think the fact that it's been in here, sitting here for six months is you know, could could could go both ways, but I I think the fact that I don't when when I'm when I'm coming down Beach Street off of Mass Ave to get back to my house on Highland, I I now see, you know, drive slow, save lives instead of a mayor's name plastered under the sign that says welcome to city of Somerville. So, you know, the Mills Wilson administration is already very clearly, in my opinion, complying with the spirit of of this ordinance in in many ways. And if if Comms has some questions or because I I mentioned in my initial statement, there is some gray area.

I think it's a little nuance. So I would be absolutely thrilled to have that conversation, and I think I I I I appreciate and respect the the request to sort of try our best to make sure we're on the same page. We we might not be. There still might be some gray area we fight about, but that's okay. We're different branches of the government, and that's alright. But but by all means, mister Choi, I have no problem, keeping this one in committee if there's a if there's a good conversation to have to make sure that we, we all are aligned. That no problem from my end.

Alright. Well, then, I guess I would hope that those conversations can be arranged by IGA in the intervening few weeks and that, hopefully, we'll have the opportunity to move on this soon. Counselor Strazo, I see your hand. You're recognized.

Oh, thank you. Thank you, mister Chair. Yeah. I think if we're going to keep it in committee and because, right, I get that there's a a list of some things. So and, yeah, we don't need 8,000 tote bags with mayor's names on.

I think we can be in agreement with that. But I am I would like, through you, mister chair, to liaison Modesi, if if we could have, like, a longer list of of just other items, how it how it could be how how it could be impacted. I don't have a problem with this ordinance, but I to her point as well, I I wanna see exactly how extensive it can get. And what exactly does social media mean? Does that mean that I'm posing this idea, just out loud thinking, but does that does that mean any Instagram page? Does it mean a video? What how how deep do we go with this? I I want just wanna know that too. Thank you.

Alright. Sounds good. Councilor Davis, before we put this to bed, do you have a response?

Yeah. Just just briefly, mister chair, and and through you to to councilor Schrezzo, thank you. To to another excellent point. As I said, I anticipate there's gonna be there's no way to be perfectly clear on all of this. Right? So my my goal and my objective is not to have a a perfectly fine line. I think all of these questions are are are great. I mean, they've kind of things we should think about. And without question, even if we to to whatever extent we do come to, you know, as clear as possible in agreement, there's still gonna be some cup some stuff that that clearly is in violation, and that's okay. Right?

The the idea here is not isn't a gotcha. It's a you know? And and I have if you know, I have sent the mayor many many pictures by text over the past few months. I'm like, hey. Here's look look at this one. Look at this one. And it's okay. I get it. We've got decades of inertia on these things, and it's gonna pop off, and that's pop up, and that's totally cool. Right?

We're just we're trying to to get to a better place overall, and none of this is intended to be, you know, anything I said, any kind of a gotcha or anything like that. So, you know, for the public's expectation, for evidence and condition, I completely anticipate that, you know, if and when we do pass this ordinance, there will still be effectively violations that that happen, and that's okay. Right? We're we're that that those will be learning experiences. Those will be, you know, opportunities to clarify everyone's intent, and and nothing more nothing beyond that. Obviously, hypothetically, there could be a different scenario, but but it's certainly in this administration. I I don't anticipate that being the case. And so I look forward to to having any conversations we we can and need to and and then get this in place, mister chairman.

Alright. Last bite of the apple, councilor Strezo.

Last bite. Thank you. So I agreed. I threw you to counselor Davis. Yeah. I I I hear I hear your points. And, you know, like I said, I don't I don't disagree. I think it's also I think it's also really thoughtful to if we do have, like, 30,000 water bottles with mayor blah blah blah, that's wasteful if that's if we have one mayor who's no longer mayor, what do we do with 30,000 water bottles with mayor blah blah blah? But I do think I do like the idea of when we enter Summerville, mayor blah blah blah welcomes you or there are the mayor's name on our entrance to welcome to Summerville. That is one case.

Right? I think it could be useful for visitor visitors. There's a purpose behind that. But right. Like, some of the smaller stuff where press releases go, yeah, we don't need 30,000 press releases necessarily saying, mayor Wilson says this, mayor Wilson says that. I don't know. I'll leave that to the comms professionals to figure out what that means. But, yeah, I want a little bit more detail on this as as we go along. Thanks a lot.

Alright. So I I will keep this one in committee. I will encourage, IGA to broker discussions with, both councilor and councilor Davis in the in the intervening two weeks. Is that something you can do with liaison?

Mister Jerry, yes. I think that is something I can do.

Alright. Thank you. I'm reminded of several conversations I need to have with comms. Maybe we'll put this on the list. Alright.

So let's keep this one in committee. And then that brings us to the final item before us this evening that this council amended rule 24 by requiring a majority vote of the council before a councilor can be removed from a committee. This is a legacy councilor Burnley order, which was intended, I suppose, to provide some check on the leader of the city council's ability to reassign committees at their discretion. So we have it before us. It it was still sitting in committee.

As it turns out, this circumstance didn't come up where, where it was felt to be necessary. I suppose we have the the current sitting president here. Do you have any thoughts about this before we, choose a disposition for it, councilor Davis?

Happy to share, my views, mister chair, since since you asked. You know, I my my immediate thought is that this would create some significant hurdles just sort of the day to day practicality. At times, there there are several times, several if not many times throughout the year where especially on our our committees with three folks, you know, where a counselor too is away or there's a a really you know, specific item that that one counselor, you know, had submitted, and that counselor's not on the committee. And one of the committee members is away, and so the other request will come to me to to replace that that counselor on the committee for for the purpose of just that evening. You know, obviously, just to meet quorum, sometimes we have to we have to go to the go to the bullpen.

And that I don't know practically how how that would work with with his ordinance at all. I I do understand, and and I wanna, you know, honor and respect what I what I assume is the the intent. You know, it's a it's a pretty significant power that the president of the city council has to, you know, to replace and remove folks from committee, as they wish. Now there is, of course, a check on on there because the that there's a process for removing the president. But I I'm not aware of as as you noted, I think, you know, miss Chen, at the end that the scenario didn't come up.

I'm not aware of there being, and maybe there maybe there has been, I guess, as as I'm saying this out loud, was gonna maybe I just wasn't aware of it and that things could have happened. But, you know, I I would hope that anyone sitting in in the presidency would would have, you know, the the the enough respect for for their their colleagues that they wouldn't, you know, willy nilly, you know, remove or replace folks on on committees. To me, that's just a it's a fundamental obligation requirement of the job, And and it's not I I a respect for their colleagues. It's really a respect for the for the voters. Right?

The voters, our constituents put all of us in these offices, and I think it, I think the president needs to respect that and, and and, you know, undertake the committee assignments, with that very much in mind. And so in my opinion, that that is all the check I need at least, to make sure I'm trying to do this as fairly as as I'm able to. And I I, you know, I I suspect that that that's that's the case with with others who have held this held this role as well. So I don't see a need for this. I do see I do have concerns, as I mentioned, that if it were if we're put into place, I think it would it would be an undue burden on on our ability to to do the city's business.

And so, you know, my my preference would be to whatever disposition is necessary to to to not, move forward with this change, mister chair.

Alright. Well, we certainly could place the item on file, but I will go to councilors Ewenkampen and then Estraso, and then I'll provide my thoughts as well. Councilor Ewenkampen?

Thank you, mister Scheer. You know, ultimately, I I'm I'm also in support of placing this on file. I concur with what counselor Davis just said. I think I really understand the motivation here. You know, you look we often hear descriptions of how state house leadership works, where if you vote the wrong way, leadership will strip you from a committee chairmanship and cut your salary in half by doing so, and I don't think that's good.

You know, I I don't think that power should be centralized in such a way that it can be, you know, used to, just kind of control the behavior of other legislators. But I I don't think that is really in play here. You know, maybe this is biased from my experience, but my experience in the presidency was how do I put it? It was often, like, hard to find people who had the capacity to fill all the various committee seats. It was very rarely an issue of, you know, trying to bully someone off a committee.

That never happened. It was much more kind of begging people to please serve on a committee because we need you know, these are these are jobs that need to get done, and we all have a a ton of work, and we all have a lot of responsibilities already. So just in reality, you know, I'm I'm not super concerned about that. And and as counselor Davis said, I just I I think there's already a really good check on the presidency, which is that we have they have to get reelected every single term. Yeah.

And I I just I think that, functionally, what this would mean is that even if there were a way to kind of wordsmith it so that it was just to avoid kind of vindictive removal from a committee unilaterally. I just think that it would mean that no one could ever be taken off a committee. I think that's what the functional you know, just knowing how the legislative process works, and I think that's how it would actually play out, and I'd be quite concerned about that. Just knowing that there there certainly could be plenty of reasons why why it might need to happen for totally whatever the opposite of untoward reasons is. Toward reasons. So for all that, I I respect where this is coming from, but I I don't I wouldn't support it. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you, councilor Yuncanfan. Councilor Schwezek.

Thank you, mister chair. I agreed with my colleagues. I will not support this. I think that I hear what, counselor Davis said, and that makes total sense. So I would I will not move to place it on file because I wanna hear what you have to say, mister chair, but, I definitely want it to be placed on file, or to move it or whatever at a later date. Or not later date, but later minute after you're done speaking and hearing from you from us or from we get to hear from you. Thank you.

Thank you, councilor Trezo. So I appreciate councilor Ewencamp and bringing up the speaker of Mass State House because that is, of course, the preeminent example. Certainly, no president would ever excuse abuse their executive authority. Right? Either Mariano Rivera, current speaker of the state house, or Seldomosse, previous speaker who was convicted of conspiracy and fraud, nor Tom Fennerin, the previous speaker, convicted of obstruction of justice, nor, Charlie Flaherty, the previous speaker before that, who was also convicted this time of tax evasion.

I'm sure none of them would ever use their executive authority. But I guess my point is that norms are not a guarantee of good behavior. And for many an hour sitting at the knee of councilor Bill White, I heard I heard tell of many shenanigans related to committee assignments that at the time were considered the norm. So I can appreciate the, I can I can appreciate the urge here? And I guess my ultimate, take on it is that any action of the president can be challenged, by the members and can be, overturned, by by a vote of the members.

Although I'm not certain that a president I'm not certain we have a provision for, removal of a president. Councilor Davis, did you you said there was a provision for that. I I couldn't find that in the rules of city council. Could you remind me?

No. Miss miss chair, I I I think I probably didn't articulate that as I intended. I I I I was referring to the fact that it's a one year term. And and you know, if someone wanted to continue on, then they did to get they did have the votes.

Ah, well, we would certainly not want to extend the term of the executive. That would remove them farther from accountability. Wait. Sorry. What were we talking about? Oh, right. Okay. So I you know what? I'm inclined given that it is a given that it is a one year term and given that there is a lot of shuffling of committees, that does happen for very legitimate, logistical reasons. I'm also inclined to put this item on file, but appreciate that we've had a conversation about the importance of adhering to norms and the expectations that we have of how the council will conduct itself, including the president of said council.

So with that said, we'll go ahead and mark that item placed on file. Madam clerk, I believe that's correct disposition for it.

Correct. We can do that.

And then, all the rest of our items have had dispositions assigned to them or have been laid on the table for a vote at the conclusion of the meeting. Correct?

Correct. I can run through that if you'd like before we adjourn. Sure. If I may.

Counselor Strazo.

Thank you. I'm I'm, manually raising my hand today. I'm not Gotcha. I know. And and I know we're done. But quick procedural question. I forgot to raise the point. I know that we we we placed one of the items from we moved for approval. The rules change of the city council norms. I'm fine with that, but I did forget to bring up a quick point.

Logistics. Can we quickly are are we able procedurally to bring it forward quickly? I don't have any problem with passing the rules. I wanna make that clear, but there was a point that I feel like if this is the moment to discuss it before it gets back to regular counsel. So I wanna I wanna take this quick moment to discuss it. What procedurally how can we proceed procedurally bring that

back forth before we vote on it?

Right now, it's simply been laid on the table, so we can simply pick that item back up off the table to hear your, considerations before we, take it up for a vote. So Right. I believe you're referring to item number.

Also, city yeah.

There there were a few of those. I just wanna make sure we get the right one.

You're right. The the general, you're right. The I think it it should be deadline.

Correct. Correct.

Okay. Item number 2, that's 260354. We'll pick that item off off the table. What is your, what's your consideration? What's your deliberation?

Thank you. Really quick. Thank you. Oh, okay. We talk about council members needing to be on screen if we're virtual. However, should we make a adjustment? There's a Vincent citing locale. Should we make an adjustment? Because I don't think it's mentioned in this in the rules that if, say for instance, a counselor cannot. So I'm having like Wi Fi issues tonight. I can't be on screen, but I could still be present verbally. Should that be considered? Okay. No. You say, or video is not reasonably correctable. It would clearly it would definitely be heard. Okay. So being heard. I'm sorry. I'm going into row five, and I know we're talking about this, but I was wondering if if this is worthy taking up.

Okay. You know what? Forget it. Nope. Forget it.

Okay. Alright. Yeah. I was gonna say it's rule five. We can we can certainly visit rule five another day.

I was just I was just gonna say we we thought about that exact thing, and I raised it. And I I I that's why we wrote it the way we did. So it's a Yep. Thank excellent point, and we covered it.

Thank you. Yep. Yep. Got it. Thank you. Alright. We're done.

Alright. Then, madam clerk, if you would like to run through dispositions of items, including the ones still remaining to be voted on.

So we have agenda items three and six placed on file. We have agenda items one, four, and five kept in committee, and that leaves us with agenda item two laid on the table for approval.

Well, then let's pick up item number two and a motion to adjourn, and we can take those votes, simultaneously here.

Okay. So motion to approve agenda item two and on adjournment. Councilor Davis?

Yes.

Councilor Mbaugh? Councilor Ewencampin?

Yes.

Councilor Schrozo? Yes. Councilor Scott?

Yes. And we actually adjourn, before we before we tabulate that and, call for adjournment, I just wanna say, councilor Mbod did have to leave a little bit early for this to attend his eldest child's performance at the high school, so we appreciate his attendance at start. Also want to say at our next meeting, May 19, it had been the intention to bring up the rental registry. And after conversation conversation with members. I believe we will continue to intend to bring that item before us.

I have heard from city staff that they intend to return with amended surveillance technology annual report based on the suggestions of this committee and a an amended impact report for Crime Tracer. So I do anticipate those also being on our agenda. If you have other items that you'd like to make sure get onto that agenda, but we only have a few meetings between now and the start of budget season, please do reach out to the chair, and I'll be happy to work with scheduling those. So with that comment made, the results of that roll call vote, madam clerk?

That item is approved, and we are adjourned.

Alright. Thank you very much, everybody. Have a good evening.