Charter Review Committee - Regular Meeting

Following is a regular meeting of the Odessa Charter Review Committee, June 22nd, 2026 at 4.11 PM.

Those present are Craig Stoker, James

I was just going to tell them we were going over the section four. And there was a couple of questions.

We were looking back at what we had done.

You want to start on 45 and talk about that? 50? Sure.

Yeah, question about the Signature clause getting a candidate on the ballot. We had discussed that 50 is out of line with election code.

There's an election code that says one half of 1%. But for some districts, that would only be 21 signatures. And so could we make it harder and leave it 50? Or would we have to go to the 21 or whatever?

Did we discuss that the election code doesn't require any signatures?

So the election code allows for a fee or signatures in lieu fee.

I don't know, is that just it? Did we say that again? Charter and who have filed a petition consistent with state law residing in the territory from which the office is elected, submitting the candidates.

Most local subdivisions do not require filing fee or petitions.

A lot of that's changed. I don't think we can... You don't see that much anymore. I'm kind of surprised it's still in there, but in general, they just have to meet the, I'm pulling up the statute now, they just have to meet the statutory requirements, residents for six months, qualified voter, that sort of stuff. Let's see here.

Secretary of State, it looks like they give us permission to if we want to.

Yeah. Okay, so the question is, do you all want to keep fees and petition signatures? In other words, essentially, if we want it, it has to be in the charter. Put it that way. If you want fees and a signature requirement, it has to be in the charter. or some cities just default as long as they meet the general requirements and the application for a place on the ballot. They just have to fill it in and swear to it. But the charter can contain a fee. I don't think we have a fee on this in our current charter. Okay, so here we go. It just has to authorize a fee, and we just need an ordinance.

I just found it. It says, for any petition required or authorized to be filed in connection with a candidate's application for a place on the ballot... And the minimum number of signatures that must appear on the petition is the greater of 25 or one half of 1%. So we may just have to change it to 25 or one half of 1%. That's what I had said. That's, where am I? I don't know where you're at. Section 143.005D. Yeah, so we could just change it to 25 or half of 1%.

It could be in there. If you go a little bit in B of that same section, it just says you just have to put it in the charter. That's all. You can only do it if it's in the charter. So you can track the statutory language or you can track the statutory language if you want the 25 or It comes down to whether we want the fee and the signature of learning.

You just want the petition? Just one. Well, then could it read that? Could it read, set forth in the city charter who has filed a petition consistent with state law and resides in the territory from which the office is elected?

There you go. Yeah, if we put a number in there.

My concern is in three years, does the election code change?

That's what I was about to say. We put a number in there and it changes it.

language at the end about edits that don't, what are those called?

Yeah, whether they're Scribner errors or whatever. Yeah, Scribner errors or that one. Or if a law changes. And I think we put that under... I was going to say, I thought we were adding language that if, shall not be construed to be . OK, now, where did we put that? I think it was at the very end.

I thought we were talking about general provisions if we get there.

I think maybe we hadn't gotten there yet. So basically, we need to add language about that. OK, so we'll add that under charter construction. Probably a B. I would say a B. Scribner and changes to be consistent with changes to the general laws, the Constitution or general laws of the system.

Are we just hesitating because we put a dollar amount in the charter?

No, but let's say we put 25 and then the election code changes to say, well, you know, you need 75. Yeah.

Because like our current one's not.

Because right now ours says 50, but state law says 25. Yeah, the 50, yeah. What mechanism can we add that just allows us to kind of keep this thing current without going too much?

I think you could do that under charter construction.

You could do that, or you could just pay – yeah, the problem is it gives us a choice, 25 or one-half. It doesn't say the greater of. oh yeah she is yes so you can just track statute basically in accordance with the have the minimum number of write-ins you can see the statuary provides that 25 or 1 half of 1% just just track this just basically say in accordance with the election code so basically the Charter authorizes and requires the minimum number of signatures that must appear on the petition It must be in a number that the courts will state off, or Texas Election Code. And if it's amended, it'll always go back to what that is. And if you've got the charter revision language, which you have in there anyways, that way we can always, if we have to, make the changes, but probably wouldn't have to use it. This would just be something just in case it changes.

Because, like, right now, if somebody really wanted to push it, could we even enforce the 15? No, because the law has changed. What's that?

That's what I'm doing.

No, you can do that. But if somebody challenged it, you couldn't.

So this one half of 1% is elected by all candidates for mayor. So are they talking? I'm confused. Is it talking about just the voters?

And that's what I was saying. That's what I would want to change it to the mayoral.

Okay.

Because when we put last municipal election, if it was like District 4 and 5, you could say, oh, I only need 20. Yeah. But the way I thought it read was whatever seat you're running for.

So you wanting to run for District 4 would be one half of 1% of the last District 4 election.

Well, this just says the last municipal election, the one we have right now.

Right. But the way that the election code reads. Yeah, yeah. It'd be the last one or whatever. Is that what you're talking about?

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. I just don't understand it. And it is elected by all candidates for mayor in the most recent mayoral general election.

Because I thought... I thought the way it read was it shifted depending on the office.

Because you can't...

Because if you did that, then it would be 150 signatures for District 4.

Well, it says one half to one percent of the total vote received in the territory from which office is elected by all candidates for mayor in the most recent election.

Oh, so it says for mayor.

So then you would have to look at how many people in District 4 voted for the mayor.

Oh, my God.

Well, I mean, they would do that. That's the elections office. Yeah, the election office would have that.

Yeah, but that's not, that doesn't say.

That's tricky.

One hour, dude, that's a bunch of.

It looks like if it was a filing fee, we could just set any amount we wanted. If you get petitioned, then they set a petition amount. So we could charge a $10,000 filing fee if we wanted to, but if we

I would think the city secretary's office would say go pay, go pay billing and collections.

We give them an account number where to put the right city, go the general fund more than likely.

Yeah. general fund that just place that election were paid out of.

When I was at CPS, they paid people a bonus. But if you didn't stay for the year, you had to pay it back. Well, some people put in a year and they tried to write a check back and say was like, Oh, well, we don't know where to put the money. They didn't think of the provision of where to take the money back to you.

All right, I got it. What do we have we need to talk about?

Do we have any today topics we want to... Well, I think that hit everything from... Look at... What were some big changes? The biggest one I had was our number on recall. Pro Tems, we talked about Pro Tems. We didn't look at the difference in the mayoral powers and the city manager powers and change Norma not making her have to live in the city limits.

Are we going to make her at least be emergency available? I think that's through her contract.

I think that contract handles that. Perfect.

So instead of all this he-she business, why don't you just put they? We're going to start doing that. We'll clean that up. Get us some.

Yeah, we're using titles. Or titles, for goodness sakes. Titles, yeah.

Official bone for appointive officers. Yeah, some of them do have issues. Some just they eat.

All right. Well, I'm getting kind of close, y'all.

So we are not going to, I guess that'll be a contract thing to require a city manager to live in the city?

I think it should. For instance, it's not a problem for me. I live in the city, right? Right. My contract requires that I live in the city. So think of a scenario like this. Okay, let's say, what if... Well, a good example would have been like Cindy Muncy. Let's say Cindy Muncy, she was the assistant, everybody, whatever, and then the council says, all right, Cindy, we're going to appoint you to the city manager position. Well, I mean, she lived in the ETJ. She didn't live in the city. Are you going to make her up and sell her house? She's got paid off, or is that a 2% interest rate? But all that being said, the council's in the driver's seat always and forever with the contract. that would be and I don't know if I can explain that to the average citizen when they look at it but but your contract can handle that same with James same with your judges I mean because I struck language for the municipal judge that basically implies well it doesn't apply that means that he has to also live inside the city limits so right now on your charter norma has to live there and judge rodriguez has to live in there i don't and who does james doesn't what's that you don't have to live in the city and i don't have to live in the city oh yeah yeah but by charter by charter but norma doesn't judge rodriguez has to live in the city right right it doesn't make sense so the more you make the

Unless you make the more requirements they put on you. Well, almost.

Did those possessions exist when the charter was written? To be honest with you, when the charter was written, probably the city secretary had a clerk function, which is like the CFO of the city. So maybe they wanted to be able to find the clerk if they were stealing money or something. But I really don't know why. Because the charter is completely silent on the city manager and on the city attorney.

Yeah, 1927. I mean, I was walking about a city that is a ghost town because the Mississippi River moved by two miles. And so it was a harbor and the city just disappeared because it was COVID 1910. Two miles away was a big deal.

Now it's like nothing. Sometimes they do these, they already know when they wrote this, they already know who they want to be in that position, so they do it that way.

Oh, that's so true. So in 1927, the city manager or who they wanted to be the city manager may have lived in Gold Coast. North of town. And they kept it out. They just said, well, let's just not include that.

Yeah. Same with the city attorney. They didn't say a word. Who knows?

They didn't say a word. Sometimes you've got no rhyme or reason for any of it. Yeah.

So they fit the language to what they were already planning on doing. Probably, yeah.

So the municipal court was, go ahead, sir. No, that was almost my question. Oh, 68. D, I know we have some conversation about that.

So what this language would do is put, right now, And maybe it's by ordinance that the municipal clerk basically is under the city manager.

Again, I know we had some conversation about it.

Yeah, so what this does is say, well, no, this is going to put it under the court so that there is a definitive separation of executive and judicial power. Because right now, and I asked James, I said, is there any, do you see any ethical or... legal reason why the municipal court shouldn't be under the judge I don't think there's a legal reason I don't think there's really an ethical reason it just seems strange to me that in a city this big with as much activity in the court that we have that in my mind there probably there should be a separation between the executive branch and the judicial branch I think the origin of why you see that is because it's up to the city being who is the

the city manager, to ensure and make certain that the court is supplied with a qualified court clerk. And I think that's what the whole idea was, is if the court comes in, does their functions, they need to be supplied or provided with a court clerk. And the city, whoever the chief administrative officer who hires all the city employees is the best person to make certain that the court has at their disposal

qualified municipal court clerk and i think that's where and i think we could do it this way still because you know we say okay judge rodriguez he calls and says i need a new court clerk this one resigned okay well then by charter i have to supply that so i'll work with hr uh practically i would have to work with hr to advertise and funded and funded and then supervised by the court

That's right. Agree. Let the courts run the court. Did we decide on the nepotism clause that that is just... Is that coming straight out of state law there, James?

Yeah. I'm trying to pull it up.

But that that's only pertaining to our appointments?

It could be appointments, but there is some nepotism there. happened here to me but I have had situations where nepotism is not clearly defined in the Charter and you start getting pressure from council members to hire their nephew to be on whatever on the parks department or whatever. And then it's like, you know, that guy, I hate to tell you this, sir, but your nephew is a bum. You know what I mean?

So that's always an awkward conversation you have to have with council members.

So the state law has an opportunity. Does it matter the size of the city? Because with school districts, the nepotism laws are actually different for smaller schools than they are for bigger school districts. I don't know if it's the same for cities or not. Even at the height of a small town? Yeah, it really does. So in small school districts.

And it's state level too, for instance. It's not unusual in athletic departments at state institutions for fathers and sons to be working together. You always saw it in football, right? State university, they hire a football coach, and then there's an assistant coach down the line that's the son. Yeah.

So, yeah, you're right.

Well, I mean, as long as we're covered.

Yeah, the statute falls back on the same, it's under 573 of the government code. So, basically, right here, degrees of relationship, 573.002, the statute applies to the third degree by consanguinity, and second degree by affinity. And that's tracking there. Yeah. So, yeah, I mean.

What was that under? You said 573.002? Yeah. Of what? Of local government code?

Yeah, Texas government code.

Texas government code.

Yeah, it's all in there. And there's only an exception. It's a little bit looser for district court judges and clerks and stuff. It wouldn't apply to us. But all the nepotism stuff is set by state law, and it's in Chapter 573. Now, the only thing that we are doing is defining the role. In other words, we're saying appointed to any office position or clerkship.

Was there a difference between appointed and hired?

I think appointed and hired would be the same. Is that the same thing? Yeah.

Okay.

Again, as long as we're covered.

Yeah, and the statute will utilize the word position and includes an office clerkship employment or duty. Okay. And so it actually goes a little bit more and specifically includes employment. duty so in fact if you could argue that statutes a little bit more I mean it's even appointing them to a duty whatever that could be you can even that could be like temporary things like anything that can be considered you know To me, a duty would be more like some type of a temporary service. But I think we catch everything by any office, position, or clerkship, or other service of the city. I think they were actually definitely, it looks like they were guiding by probably the predecessor statute when they were writing some of this language. So I actually think it's pretty much tracks. I mean, my take on it is if we already got state law on it, let's just make certain that we kind of track what state law says, and I think it kind of does. It literally calls out employment, but I think we got position. But, you know, it's interesting. You got position utilized in the charter, and then the statute defines position. So you could say... position includes office, clerkship, employment, or duty. So I think that's probably enough for what we have here. It may be, it may fall under, we're going to be making so many changes, we can, you know, if it's not a significant change, just don't add it. You know, it's good as it is.

Yeah, I agree. Bond, is that what I'm used to? D&O insurance?

Bond, bond, bond, bond, bond. Number 77, the official bond for point of officers.

You were going to check on that for state law compliance there, James.

Yeah, yeah, it is very like E&O. You're talking about like the E&O.

We've got directors and officers, E&O.

Yeah, yeah, it's very similar. I mean, it's, yeah, it's for the same purpose. It's just a... And we have that? I don't know that we're doing that. I mean, a lot of, I don't know if we're, paying for or requiring bonds of some of our city offices right to require right now but had the right to require official bond from all you'll see them a lot in uh city managers but the city pays for the premium but the problem is the bond i think they're still issuing them but you know it's sort of like it's very archaic where you're bonds are being replaced by insurance policies. I haven't seen one in a long time. I've seen it in contracts and I've seen city managers get them in the cities, but actually the city and obtains it and pays the premium. I mean, they do it all. So it's not like the...

So as a council member, because that's always a big thing joining a board, I want D&O insurance. So as a council member, what's my protection from getting sued?

Oh, yeah, for you, you've got already state law protections just as a member of city council and elective office just through our insurance coverage would cover any action. So you've got official immunity. just because you have governmental immunity for the government. You have official immunity, as does city manager. You have official immunity that covers your actions as an elected official. So if you get up there and you vote on something and they name you as a defendant, which I've seen happen, you have official immunity for those actions. Same with the city secretary. You have immunity when you're performing your actual functions. I'm a little bit different because I have attorney immunity, but you guys have official immunity to the extent that you're doing anything that's part of your capacity as a physician.

Not contractual protection as well. Probably to you and probably to you.

Most of our coverage, for example, if you get named as a lawsuit and you get named, insurance coverage would also... kick in to provide coverage just because everything you'd be getting sued for your actions based on being a city council person. And that's where I've actually had lawsuits where the opposing council tried to depose all the council members. We would know not so fast. We could do that. Yeah. And we would press on the official immunity question because, see, they would name the city. And then they name all the council members, which is BS because you're just trying – it's just an intimidation tactic. Yeah, it's an intimidation tactic and all the council members get – so you're basically – you're just – you're double dipping. So we would actually force a hearing. Your name of the city, you've already got your defendant to actually name the individual council members. They're doing it twice. And it's because they think they can depose you. They're trying to get council members or mayors on deposition, not before we will fight that out in a hearing. And a lot of times that immunity question is the official immunity question would be enough of a defense on that. So I don't think there's no issue here. And so I think they're – right now I think it's just – This charter gives the council the authority to come in and require a bond if it decides to do so. I don't really know how much it happens anymore. In fact, one city that was doing it, but it was so formulaic and so routine, nobody paid attention to it. It was just like something the city paid for every year, and there was an application, they sent it in, and they had a bond. It was never an issue, and nobody paid attention to it.

a little less for recalls. Make it 30% instead of 50%. For a recall, it requires 50%.

The only thing in there that was flagged on mine was that the state allows us to go to 250

But that will never be passed. That was the hospital election that they got slaughtered on just because nobody could explain it.

Which number are you on, sir?

74A, where the state allows us to have $250 per $100. Ours is capped at $2. And we're at $0.47. I'll say whatever you think. We're nowhere near ever going to be at 250 because you can only go, what, 3% a year, so it'll be 10,000 years.

We won't be able to meet up with cities that are at 62 cents. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, we'll never get there.

No point in touching that. The medical center went to that trying to get to 75 cents over 15 cents, and they lost the narrative and lost the election.

Occupation tax on those cities, too. Yeah, that was one I had.

It was kind of questionable. Which one are you on now?

Occupation tax in 83. Cities shall have the power to levy and collect taxes upon all trades, professions, or other business. I don't know about that. You're right, because I don't think we can do a lot of the trades. A lot of those are exempt from sales tax anyway. You can't tax.

And what's a calling? Is that talking like a preacher? Because that's the only person I've found that ever used the term calling. Auctioneer? We'll do a check on that. All trade professions.

Who works in the abattoirs? Yeah. What were our...

I'll just say the only person I've ever heard say they had a calling was a preacher. Oh, my gosh. I have a public sector calling. Oh, yeah. This probably goes back to when cities could

There was something on mine flagged that payable only in current money, which would disallow payment by credit card. But who pays taxes?

They don't pay us ad valorem taxes.

In 1927, they rolled in and paid the clerk. Yeah. So tax bills may have been sent out by the city at that time.

Is that a concern of ours?

I mean, some of that we do. The fees, the fines, the penalties, but not license tax or occupational tax.

Those are all need to be reviewed, basically. compliance with state law.

Seems like there's just a couple of really surviving occupation, what counts as occupation taxes nowadays. There used to be a lot more of them, but Texas Comptroller recognizing the well servicing tax, the occupation tax is levied on a person to perform certain services associated with oil and gas wells. 2.42% of the gross amount of the charge from service, less reasonable well head value. And the other is coin operated machines. That's Texas Comptroller has that one as well as a common tax. Would you consider an occupation tax? Most of them will pretty much disappear until the state's not remaining. or the state either regulates solely, or the state's not collecting those taxes. See, even they got rid of ours for the attorneys. We used to have an occupation tax, and they got rid of ours. And so they just charge us state bar dues, but we used to have to pay. It used to be like $365 a year is what we would have to pay with our bar dues. They stopped about six, eight years ago. It's eliminated the whole thing.

But are we collecting any of those? We may know. We may be. I don't know. Actually, we were just recently talking with an oil and gas attorney about making sure that we're getting everything possible. So we may just want to ignore it and just leave that section alone because it may apply.

Yeah. Yeah, right here it says to the fullest extent. carried on to the full super middle of general law state of texas so they kind of pulled one of ours you know basically they thought hey the incentive is viable so they just one thing i've seen with the the recall stuff is exactly what y'all are bringing down is bringing down the number of what you would need to to submit a petition. Because it's harder than you think. It's really difficult. I've had a few attempts in a few of my cities and they just could not the average people that were doing it just could not figure out the number requirement. We would go through and the city secretary would You got it wrong again. You got it wrong again. You didn't get your numbers. They're not qualified voters. They're not residents of the city. They just could never get it. And that's even after we lowered the number. We went down from, I think it was a 25%. It was like, yeah, they didn't get 10%. They went down to a real low number, like 10%. And they still couldn't get recalls passed because they just couldn't get the numbers. I mean, they would get the total votes from the county, and so they had an idea how to calculate the 10%, but they still just couldn't get it. They'd get the total number, and then half the voters would be out-of-city residents. They wouldn't know, because the city secretary checked it all. Sure. They'd have the address, and they're like, no, no, no. And we'd go through there, and they'd check the number, and maybe get 4% or 5%. So even when they lowered the numbers, they were still not able to get that. They still weren't able to get it.

That's what I'm saying. We buy some goodwill with this and don't necessarily.

If you just change it from 20 to 30, it's like, oh, look at that. 50% to 30% or whatever number you want. And strike 7,500. Let's do up that.

and update the petition with the voter registration number or add or update strike precinct number.

Is that voter registration number for a birthday?

Correct.

D-O-B.

Yeah, that puts it in line with the election code. And are we striking indelible pencil?

I don't think so. What's that?

We're striking indelible pencil.

If we're going to change it, we might as well strike it out of Google to see what it is.

Add definitions and put that in there. I would say just strike it.

Because you can't, especially with, well, you know, there's people now that are going to push the, yeah.

You?

No, not me. Watchdogs that are all on the internet. I can see them going and buying those pencils and challenging it. No, it's not. Let's just strike that out.

I don't want to verify that. You want to strike out indelible? Indelible pencil. Just make it signed in ink. Yeah. So that we don't have to verify if it's the right kind of pencil. Yeah, nowadays it's actually more difficult than it was back then. By the time you run copies, it's hard to tell what something is written in. I can print out a copy that looks like pencil and it ain't pencil. Even the... Even things signed in blue ink is bad enough that you have a hard enough time telling whether you even got an original document or not.

So I was going to say, my father, he used a felt tip blue pen.

Yeah, those felt tips. Yeah, those are nice because I had a real heavy gel pen when I need it. And I always made certain a sign and the ink would come through. Because they would argue. They said they were like rubbing it or they'd look at it. I said, look at the back. And you'd see the ink bleeding through. I'd go, there you go. Okay, there you go. But if you get those felt tips, they're heavy. That felt tip's almost obnoxious, bud. You don't make a mistake. I've seen people sign those with those little small sharpies. The blue ink, the little fine tip sharpies. I've done that.

That was my only thing. And then on the initiative and referendum, were we pulling that down to 30%?

I like it. All right. 30% of the last mayoral, whatever it is.

Right. And 30% qualified with.

Yeah, make sure 30% of the last mayoral election or whatever.

and delete the pencil again on B.

Do we need to, that is one thing in E, do we need to worry about the number of days or whatever?

Under referendum or under initiative?

Yeah, I'm looking at referendum. He says within 10 days after filing the referendum, the district secretary, so I should tell you whether, I guess.

Are referendum and initiatives silent under state law?

I'm just, I just want y'all can look at that. And I just don't know if 10 days is unrealistic or whatever. 10 days.

I don't have enough time for you to do that. To be honest with you. If you were to go under a referendum, within 10 days after filing, the secretary shall ascertain I mean, it'd be smaller enough. Is that enough time?

No.

I would say. Nope. All right, we'll look at that.

We're reducing it on letter C, too, for the referendum to 30%.

So you really can't do that in two weeks?

10 days? They don't even say business days.

Okay, you really can't do that in 10 days? Nope. I don't know how it's done though.

Trying to figure out what the names are written on the papers.

It's very time consuming. I think the code uses reasonable time with the petitions, if I remember correctly.

Reasonable? Reasonable time.

But that doesn't really define anything.

That means it takes as long as it takes you. Yeah. You know?

Yeah.

There used to be a comedian who obviously was canceled, good to know. You will never hear of her ever again. But she had an airline bit, and that was her thing. She said, the flight time is when we get there, we get there. Sure. This flight is non-smoking, but it is not our fault if the white folks on the ground find out about it.

It's interesting when you go to 94, it says promptly after the adoption of the charter, it shall be the duty of the city council to appoint the city secretary chief of police. So I guess at one time, you know who's in charge?

Back in the day.

Back in the day. All right.

Well, because doesn't that original language?

Something changed.

Oh. Anyway. Not appoint the city secretary as chief of police. Oh, I have a question.

Oh, go ahead. Oh, sorry. No, no, go ahead.

But you wouldn't change any of this because this 90 through that, that's like their letter. That's like their original.

The way it was started.

Yeah. So it would almost be like we, this committee, would write our letter that would be stapled on the back.

Back in it, perhaps.

Which would be fun because I'm named after his son.

There you go.

I just wondered on the number 90 qualified voters, second to the last sentence, a voter who resides in the corporate city limits and has resided for six months prior to the election. I thought that was interesting.

Qualified voters. I think that makes, you know, that's what we're defining.

But six months?

That's what it is for most elections.

But as a voter, I don't check that.

But as a qualified voter is used throughout this document, that probably does need to be adjusted.

Yeah, because when I get my petitions and I certify it, I don't look to see how long you've been on this trip.

Okay, never mind.

In my mind, the only person who should have to be here for, who should have to have been a, yeah, a bona fide official. Yeah, that's what I was going to say. So we may look at that, Norma. That's a good point. Look at that.

Just like, what?

To adjust that definition.

Just, I would think, removed for six months prior to the election.

But again, are these 90 through... These are general provisions.

I think they can be amended, but... Would that go back and change the... Well, they can because 93 was adopted in 97.

This charter may be amended at any time. So why? Interesting.

All right, qualifications. It's under Chapter 11, Election Code. Qualified voter is defined. 11.002. In this code, qualified voter means a person who is 18 years old or older U.S. citizen has not been determined by court to be, you know, mentally incapacitated or partially mentally incapacitated, not been convicted of a felony, fully discharged, been pardoned, is a resident of the state and is a registered voter. Purpose of subjection in person is not considered to have been finally convicted. I would just say we just go with, you know, the qualified voter is... by the Texas law, election code, or however you want to say it. I mean, the statute already defined to a qualified voter arrest. Election code. 11.002. It's long, but it has a list. But a qualified voter arrest provided in this charter shall be the same as defined by the Texas election code, no matter what the election code is. Not likely to change anytime soon, but.

We can do that and then just make sure in the

months in there yes six months comes in under 141 as a place on the ballot candidate oh that's by state law too yeah so so it doesn't matter what okay the residency of six months is added if you want to be a candidate oh okay well that's a qualified voter i actually just think we just default whatever state law says it is yeah so if we're amending that 90

I mean, I guess we wouldn't need to change that 94B because the charter's already been adopted.

It's unnecessary at this point, but... Do you strike unnecessary language, or do you leave it there for historical purposes? I think you would leave it for historical purposes, but again...

would we create an Article 11 and just title it New General Provisions? New, new. 21st Century Provisions. I don't know. I don't know how you'd handle that. Because I agree. I wouldn't want to strike that just for the context and the... Just another spot on the ballot just to... Yeah, that's what I'm saying.

But again, as an inhabitant, reholder, or taxpayer.

Reholder.