Remarks by Amanda Rodriguez
219 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 6 of 9
- Play at 3:35:50
“Correct. I'm just saying like the informal, I'm not used to that in parliamentary procedure. Normally, that's done through opening it up, so I guess I'm just trying to understand. We're having a discussion. That's a great way to phrase it, Mayor, but I guess I'm just used to a different way to address something like that. We're having a discussion.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:36:36
“I'd like to answer too. Go ahead. You know, Mayor, we just spent like two hours talking about rates and how they're gonna impact our people. And I don't think once there was consideration on postponement, citing how those potential rate increases were going to affect our people. We approached it, many of us, because it is a difficult conversation. And so I just wonder if the very people we are intending to push this back for are in this room right now. And that gives me pause because there are many people that I imagine for our rate increases that would have probably liked to be able to bend…”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:41:41
“I want to be clear. I was interested in having a larger discussion about the item before us. But again, the parliamentary rules I'm familiar with do not allow a straw poll the way we're doing. And that's why it's bothersome to me. It feels as if it is a violation of parliamentary procedure to be doing this informal straw poll That's what I'm saying. I would love to talk about the overall issue if you had a potential proposal, but there's been no motion made.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 3:42:23
“Yes, but you're asking for a potential for a postponement. That is a typical motion. It's different when we're kind of gauging general direction on an item, but we're talking about something that is affecting the actual effective date of an item. That is a substantive change.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:03:32
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:04:20
“Right. And we've already said that sprawl is what quite costly to rate payers currently. Am I correct?”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:04:29
“Okay. So there is impact, right? Okay. I just wanted to make very clear that all of this is really, um, a frustrating conversation because it is quite literally just a circle and there is still impact. Any new growth is costing people money. It's costing us as a city money and services. It's costing rate payers should the infrastructure need to be upgraded. It is costing somebody something. And I just cannot sit here and let it be phrased as if it's saving money for somebody. Our people are still impacted. Our city is still impacted. It's not a no impact conversation. I just want to get that…”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:07:46
“And if I may respond, I hear that. I'll be honest that when I suggested that, I was ready to do action there and then, because to your point, It feels sequential. I get that. But the issue though, is, is the conversation around credits and rebates has to be approached, not in a first or second reading discussion. That is a haphazard way to approach policy because we also have to understand how credits and rebates impact general fund. And so I hear you while that might have been desirable and preferable. Yes. but this is still something that we very much can do, and I believe you were one of…”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:12:52
“Yeah, we need a second. Go ahead. No, I'm not giving a second.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:13:08
“OK, so I'll continue with the question I had. I just wanted to make sure.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:13:15
“I didn't see anything submitted on the message board. do you have what the figures are, what this translates to in actual dollar amounts? I mean, this is, again, I hear you on the smaller construction, as a person with family in construction, hear you, feel it. But I just feel like without an actual depiction on impact of what you're proposing, it feels haphazard without that. I'm just, do you have more information that we could see, that the public could see, so I can make a comprehensive decision?”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:14:12
“Well, and it's like my follow-up question would also be you're citing a smaller construction company. Are they in the field? First phase, the second phase, the third phase.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:14:50
“Right. I guess what I'm trying to ask, though, Matthew, to better understand your intent is if these smaller companies that you're talking about, where in your motion and in your proposal it's speaking to them specifically and not the big developers that you first cited? Like, I'm just not seeing that. Sure.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:15:17
“Well, I'm purely asking because you're citing for the intent of your motion.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:15:22
“So to understand the intent of your motion, I'm trying to ask how you're fulfilling that via your motion and where that's reflected in the policy itself.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:15:43
“Oh, yeah. So it's not tailored specifically to the small builders. You're saying it's in general.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:15:49
“It's for all in your motion in your, I guess, in rationale you provided and really focused on the small builders. Right. Which I, I agree that I can understand that. I'm just not seeing that particular focus being reflected in your motion. Because it's all inclusive, it sounds like.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:17:32
“We don't even know what we just voted on.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:17:45
“That's, that's crazy. I'm killing myself doing this.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:18:32
“I motion to set an effective date at November one, 2026.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:18:49
“The original motion was October one. So I think that's a little bit problematic because we, and that's what I'm trying to, and that's why I'm bringing up the motion because to mayor's point, The entire discussion, the first motion was to accept as is, which was the October 1 effective date. That motion that we just passed is in direct conflict. So... Well, it's amending.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:23:10
“I just wish we could have that up there.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:24:57
“We have the extra three months, but we don't have staff a question. You bet. We are also paying, should we decide to vote this down this hypothetical scenario, we will restart this process all over again, which costs us money in consulting fees. Am I correct?”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:25:16
“Cost us money in staff time. Am I correct?”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026
- Play at 4:25:19
“So delaying this decision costs us more money.”
City Council · Sep 1, 2026