City Council - Regular Meeting

How are you, sir?

Doing good. How are you, sir? Okay, today is June 16th, 2026. It is 5 p.m. We're going to go ahead and start our city council workshop meeting. So we're going to go ahead and start out by hearing of the residents. Do we have any residents here wishing to speak? No? All right, well, moving on. We'll go ahead and open it up to the workshop. Okay. And we only have one item for the workshop today, and it might be pretty lengthy, but we'll go ahead and kick it off with Councilmember Westbrook.

Good evening, Mayor and City Councilmembers. Before I begin, I want to be clear that this discussion is not about any individual assignment. It is about ensuring that our current Code of Ethics, ordinances, and council procedures reflect the expectations and priorities of today's council. Our existing rules provide important guidance, but some provisions may no longer fully address how council wishes to make, review, and adjust board committees and commission assignments. Seniority, continuity, qualifications, workload, and member interests may be and are appropriate considerations, but council should determine how those factors are balanced. The purpose of this presentation is to consider whether our current governing documents should be updated to establish a more transparent, fair, and repeatable assignment process that reflects the collective direction of council and strengthens public confidence. The purpose of this presentation is considered more whether our current procedures should be amended and are documented to establish a more transparent fair. I've already, I reread a paragraph, sorry. That's it, Mayor. Good job.

Okay, well, we'll go ahead and Cherie, would you like, is there something you'd like to say?

Well, I was going to run through a brief presentation to explain the difference between members and liaisons and what we currently do and where you currently sit. as far as the boards and committees are concerned. Absolutely. Okay. So the hope is that we'll build a transparent, consistent assignment policy moving forward. So the difference between a member and a liaison. So as a member, you're expected to actively participate in discussions. Your attendance is required, and most times you have some sort of voting rights. As a liaison, you're there to facilitate communication between the board, committee, commission, and council, to act as a spokesman for council only when directed by council. Attendance is encouraged but not required. Attendance in any board retreat is discouraged. You should not attend closed sessions. Identify procedural or structural issues relating to the effective functioning of the board committee or commission, and you have no voting rights. So we have a few that are kind of oddities when it comes to our boards, committees, and commissions. The first one being the Animal Services Advisory Committee. This one is different because you as the council do not appoint anybody to this particular board. It's actually run through the law enforcement. They have statutory requirements for membership. We had one council member appointed as a member, and that was Allison Hayward. So no liaisons are permitted. And she was appointed because one of the statutory requirements for memberships allows for an official of the city. The Church Senior Center Advisory Board, I don't really know what y'all want to do with this one because it's so relatively new underneath the umbrella for council. So I don't know if you just want to allow it to continue as it has been. And they have created their own board. They don't go through any kind of an interview committee through the city. We do have two liaisons and one liaison alternate. And then we have the Shirts Housing Authority. The mayor actually appoints the board members. Historic records show resolutions were created and passed. The current process shows the appointments are not brought forward to council at all. And there's one liaison. So these are the current things that we have. The audit committee, the mayor and two liaisons. CVLGC is the ex-officio and one alternate. The Hal Baldwin Scholarship Committee has two members. The interview committee has three members. And by members, I mean members of council. Investment committee members are three. Main Street is four. And SSLGC is one. And then we have the boards that are actually appointed through the interview committee process. So we have the Board of Adjustments, which is currently the mayor. We have Building and Standards Commission, which is vacant. We have SEAC, which is vacant. EDC, which is now vacant. Historical Preservation Committee, which is Council Member Guerrero with Council Member Westbrook as an alternate. Library Advisory Board is Ms. Watson. Parks and Rec. Davis, Planning and Zoning, Westbrook, TURS is the Mayor, Davis and Macaluso, and TSAC is Davis. Animal Services Advisory Board, as I mentioned a while ago, is vacant. The Audit Committee has the Mayor and Ms. Watson in one vacancy. CVLGC is the ex-officio is Ms. Watson. The alternate is Mr. Westbrook. The Hal Baldwin Scholarship Committee Macaluso and Guerrero. The interview committee is Davis, Macaluso and one vacancy. The investment committee has the Mayor Guerrero and one vacancy. Main Street has the Mayor Davis and two vacancies. So currently on the SSLGC, we have Westbrook, Shirts Housing Authority Davis, and the Senior Center Advisory Board, the Mayor, Ms. Watson and one vacancy. And then I just laid them out so you can see on this particular screen by mayor or council by name who has which boards. It just makes it a little bit easier to see. So originally we had Ordinance 22M29, which has been superseded twice now, and the rules for liaison assignments has fallen off, and so we're hoping to put those back in. And then... Dr. Sheridan, embassies don't currently have any assignments, being the newest members of our board. Again, here's another member versus liaison assignments. So the principles when you're thinking about the assignments are transparency. How are the assignments made? Whether or not it's fair. Do all council members have been given a meaningful opportunity to express interest? Is there continuity? And does that particular board benefit from institutional knowledge? The rotation, are members given a reasonable opportunity to serve in different areas over time? Qualifications and interest, does the assignment consider experience, expertise, and a willingness to serve? And does it need to have specific expertise in order to serve? Workload balance, are the high demand assignments proportionately dispersed? And public trust, are the assignments done in a manner to avoid unnecessary concentration of influence? So the important factors being seniority, it brings institutional knowledge, continuity, historical perspective, and network depth. Rotation and continuity brings balance between continuity and opportunity. A request to continue in continuity is important. The request to rotate to new assignment annually. Provide newer members with meaningful committee experience. Long-term service on the same assignment should be reviewed periodically. High impact assignments should not remain indefinitely concentrated among the same members unless council determines continuity is necessary. Further items for consideration. This is the way it was written originally in 22M28. Following the November election cycle, the city secretary provides council with a list of all member liaison alternate and vacancy positions. Each council member submits a preference, identifying their preferred assignments, relevant experience or qualifications, current workload, interest, and continuing rotating off the current assignments. In my time in the city secretary's office, we've never actually provided a form for your preferences. It was just more like a round robin around the council. Mayor, city secretary, or designated council prepares a proposed slate using adopted criteria. And then the other items that you might want to think about going forward is whether or not the criteria should include seniority, workload balance, experience, subject matter knowledge, continuity, member interest, avoiding concentration of influence, statutory requirements, and opportunities for rotation. The chair, member, liaison, and alternate roles are identified separately. The proposed slate is placed on the council agenda for discussion, action, and mid-year changes are placed on an agenda and approved by council. So these were the areas where I found this information. So they are in Ordinance 18-M06, which is the Council Code of Ethics. Again, Ordinance 22-M29, which I referenced a moment ago. And then the Council Rules and Procedures does talk about the creation of committees, boards, and commissions in 26-M28. It just does not identify your responsibilities or roles as liaisons. So these are all the boards that go through the interview committee. And we do these three times a year. And then the liaisons. And then these are members that are appointed by the mayoral council, but they do not go through the interview board. OK. Sorry. So now we're asking for your recommendations on a process forward, how you would like to address the current way that it's being done, any changes that you would like to make. And I will go back and I will draft an amendment to our council rules of conduct and procedure and bring them back to you via ordinance for approval based on whatever you tell me this evening.

Okay, thank you. I'll open it up for discussion to try and grab some ideas on how to proceed from council.

So, Mayor, I think this probably actually started when I first came on the city council. I essentially was defaulted into what Scaglioli had, Scagliola, the previous council member had. That's essentially what I got. I didn't have a choice. I really didn't have a say-so because by the time When we did choose, everything got to me. It was essentially got what I essentially received what Skaggs had. And then, of course, Council Member Hayward had what she had. Everybody senior than me had wanted what they had, kept what they had, didn't want to give anything up. And so by default, I only received what the previous council member had. I thought there should be a better way of doing it. That's essentially it. I asked city secretary's office how, is there anything written down? Yes, the city code of conduct, city code of ethics, and then of course the ordinance. But I think that was, except what was in those two documents, that's all that we got. And then she said, if there are to be any changes, it's up to council. I think with so many new members, everybody except for two are in their first term. And so I just thought it'd be a great opportunity for the entire council to discuss it moving forward. I can throw out what I thought in my mind, but I don't know.

Yeah, I mean, I think if you can let us know what your thought process is going forward and some of the other council members can do the same and then maybe we can come up with a good selection process.

Based upon seniority on the city council, everybody gets their first two. They can keep their first two indefinitely as long as they want it. But I don't want, by the time you get down here, whether you're new or not, just to get everything that's left over, right? You may not get what you want. There may be some specialties down here that may warrant them to be on another... board counselor committee, that's it. So seniority counts, you get your first two as long as you want. But after that, everything else is shared. That's how I always see it in my mind plan.

Sherry, are there any positions that the mayor has to serve on because that's the way it's written or called? Okay. All right, so with that said, is there any way we can get that slide up of where everybody's currently at? And so that way it gives us a good starting point to see if anybody wants to proceed any other committees or change committees.

So Mayor, I think during the workshop, we're discussing, correct me if I'm wrong, we're just discussing the process.

Right, right, that's correct. But so, because one of the things that I was looking at is if we can do like, one of my thought process was trying to come up with like a tier program. Like Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3. Tier 1 meaning that it's going to require some commitment from you to be able to be part of that committee. And it goes to show that you're also going to commit to be able to attend those meetings that need to be attended. So that way you can keep council informed. And then we'll move to tier two. And then tier three being those committees where you're just kind of like a liaison, if you will. It doesn't really require much, but you still want to be somewhat connected and be able to provide whatever guidance is needed. It was kind of my thought process because that way no one individual will be like overwhelmed, if you will. And so for me, it would be up to us to determine what Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 would look like. Definitely things like CVLGC, SSLGVC, and TIRS. And the audit committees, those things require a little bit more time. And then whatever other committees we see fit, that will do the same. So those are just my thoughts. Mr. Sheridan?

Mayor, I do have a couple of questions. And maybe before we go there, I saw a couple of committees that for in questions such as the Main Street Committee. I've seen that's been pretty inactive. I looked in the website, there's no meeting minutes or agenda on that for, I don't think there's any posted on there. And then secondly, the Senior Center Advisory Board, don't they fall under the Parks and Rec Board?

They have their own board from what I understand and it's based on members of the actual Senior Center.

Okay, but I know Parks and Rec Board governs the senior center though, right? Yes. Okay, I understand. And then for adjustment wise, I was thinking maybe we can add finance and budget committee if that's up. possibility so that's just my thoughts that's all but i don't think that audit committee covers financial and budgeted though from what i read and i could be wrong but from the from what i read yeah just if we can let our city managers uh give us some insight on that to see what we're so there is an investment committee and then there's the audit committee

And then typically the way the city has approached the budget is that it includes the entire council through retreats, et cetera. If it's the council's will, we could create that. It would just be a little bit. I mean, you could do a finance and budget committee, essentially. But I guess maybe.

My thought was just put together a finance budget committee and allow the citizens some input into how our budget finance is governed and maybe provide some input, just like our other committees.

Mr. Mayor, if I may, we have that. As part of our budget process, the staff develops an initial budget. Then we have a pre-budget retreat. That's an actual meeting that's open to the public. We advertise that at the pre-budget cycle. Residents have an opportunity to attend it, and there's a hearing of residents where they can speak up. And then we have our follow-up budget meetings after that, which every one of them is a public open meeting.

Understood. And I was just looking for maybe some type of formal, you know, and that's just my point, you know, as a, you know, to get the residents involved in that process more directly than, you know, part of our pre-budget. So just a thought.

Yeah, I tend to agree with Mayor Pro Tem Davis on this. We do have budget retreats. Those are open to our residents. Anybody can attend because at the end of the day, we're 46, 48,000 residents. And just to have like two or three show up to speak on behalf of 46 or 48,000 residents. I don't think we would be doing any justice as far as that goes as well. I feel like everybody should have a say and that's why it's opened up to the residents. My thoughts?

No, I'm good, thank you.

Mayor Pro Tem Davis, you have the longest tenure here. Any suggestions, any recommendations?

I'm an advocate of if it's not broken, don't fix it. I'm not quite sure anything's broken. I do understand the concern about seniority and taking over what a former member had. But seniority, for all intents and purposes, changes every election cycle. You know, we've got... a brand new member now down at the far end who's brand new. And other folks have now moved up in the order. We have been relatively civil about board membership and liaison. And I think there are two different swim lanes. There's a big difference between being a member of a board or commission where it takes active participation, uh, and you have a potential vote versus just being a liaison and hanging out from time to time with, uh, one of our other boards and, and acting as a, uh, you know, the only reason we really pushed the liaison portion was so that we had a better feel for what was going on on some of those commissions instead of all of a sudden having it pop up at a city council meeting. It gives an opportunity for a council member to come back and say, by the way, have you heard that, you know, the biggest concern the last three meetings at the parks board has been the soccer complex instead of getting blindsided by it. Every other time that I've been on council, it's been relatively civil. I mean, every time someone's talked about an open position or wanting a position, we've gone back and said, Here's what I'm on. I have no problem doing them. If you really want it, you can have it. You know, me in particular, I'm really interested in SSLGC and things like CCMA. I don't have the time to attend those meetings. I work full-time Monday through Friday. I don't really have the time to be able to go out to Seguin for an SSLGC meeting during the day with my schedule. So, I mean, there's boards and commissions that I'd be interested on. I just can't do it. I mean, if we want to change it, change it. But I'm not quite sure that no matter what we change, it's going to make everybody happy. And like I said, in the past, we've been relatively civil. I can remember a couple occasions where a member of council has said, I would like to be on this board or commission, and it was given up. I mean, I used to be on the audit committee back in the day. I had no problem giving it up. So, I mean... I'll defer to the rest of the council.

Michelle.

I think I would like the opportunity for the rotation because when I was placed in, it was, you know, Whitaker's and then it was just, I defaulted to hers. And then I have tried multiple times to take on other committees, but apparently they weren't, you know, ready to give up. So I'm all for getting some opportunity and rotation for other first two priorities would be amazing, you know, and then maybe the last two, we can flip flop back and forth because there's tons of other options that are available, but it gives everybody a little more diversity into the city too.

Well, is anybody open to any of the, we have vacancies currently, do we not? Anybody interested in any of those vacancies?

Can I ask a quick question? So my list is quite lengthy from, do I automatically assume, is that the assumption that I automatically assume all of Hayward's or are these now vacant?

Yes, the way things are currently written, you would assume those duties. Okay. And that's why we're here. Council Member Watson, you have another question?

Okay.

All right. So can you put up those committees that are vacant, please? Yes.

So I guess it starts here. All these with this beach chair. So we have a Building and Standards, SEAC, EDC, Animal Services Advisory Board, Audit Committee, Interview Committee, Investment Committee, two Main Street Committees, and the Senior Center Advisory Board.

Mayor, I would like the EDC. You would like the EDC? I would like the EDC and any other assignment that you want to give me. I'm open. Primarily, I would like the EDC. But any other, I would be open.

Okay, and Councilmember Westbrook, are there any specific committees that you're looking at that you would like to participate and be a part of?

No, Mayor, as a matter of fact, it's, no. The SSLGC, this... the city council kind of allowed me to serve out the rest of Tim Brown's tenure. So I'm on there until 2028. And like Councilman Davis said, it does take a considerable amount of time. I have limited bandwidth, so there's nothing else other than SSLGC I'm interested in. However, After all the liaisons and committee members, all the committees have been members and everything's been taken care of, should there's something that fall on my plate, I will certainly do my fair share. I don't think any one member should have eight, seven, or six, and the rest of us only have one, two, or three. So I'll do my fair share, but SSLGC does take up a considerable amount of my time.

If I could interrupt for just a moment. The purpose of this evening is to talk about the process, not to actually do the assignments, because we would need to do that as an action item at council. Right.

No, that's correct. And that's kind of what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to figure out the best way to be able to select. Is there... Do what? Well, I don't know that we want to do a sign-up sheet, but I mean, would it start out with if anybody, can we look to see if anybody wants to change any of their, any of the positions that they currently have oversight and if the answer is no and they hang on to whatever they want, starting with the senior members?

So I think the first process is we're going to go seniority first, right? Is anybody disagreement with seniority, starting with seniority on the council? Okay, so that's how you're going to start. Theoretically, we would start choosing. I think the next step is does the senior member get everything he or she wants, or is it limited to whatever number? And then we go down. That's how it goes down to just by default, just by chance. The junior member on this council gets what he gets after everybody else, senior member, has chosen.

So are we good with... Are we good with doing the senior member and then maybe taking all these committees and identifying which ones would be tier one, tier two, tier three, and then allowing either one or two selections all the way down in each one of those tiers as they go all the way down?

Based on seniority.

Based on seniority, yes, sir. Now, with that said, know that we're, like Mayor Pro Tem Davis was saying, we're fixing to have, what, like three people running here pretty soon as well.

Well, much to his point, he is correct. I do agree with him. But here's the deal. We are too big to be small and we're too small to be big. And just relying on the goodwill and good faith and kumbaya attitude of every council member to get it done, I think we should be more professional than that. However we're going to do it, write it down, codify it, give the city secretary office clear direction, clarification about how it's done, write it down and move on. But we can't be going, oh, we're just going to, the goodwill, I just don't think that's appropriate.

No, and 100% in agreement. Is everybody good with doing seniority and then taking these committees and putting them in the different tiers and then you select by seniority going down?

Mayor, I'm good with that. The other point that I want to make is that making sure that it's balanced across the board. And that is kind of primarily my concern is to make sure we're balanced across the board.

Yeah.

Yeah, I don't have a problem with that. I agree with that. The only thing is when we are selecting, if we can get like a list of each one, the times that they meet for their meetings, place, if we can get that information, that would be highly beneficial because like Mayor Davis stated, He works full-time, I work full-time, most of all of us work full-time, and if we can't make the meeting during the day, why select it? It's not gonna be beneficial. So if we can get a list of each one of them, the times, places where they meet, that would be effective.

Council Member McAloosa?

you have anything you'd like to add i don't know i kind of have mixed feelings on it it was you know councilman westbrook and i came in at the same time we kind of really didn't get any choice of of any assignments we were just kind of given what we were given and um i'm not sure if that's the best way to do it because i think you're going to You're not going to take advantage of any opportunity where somebody does have expertise in the subject or does have a big interest in something and they would be the best fit for that committee. So I think there's a opportunity to fix it. I just, I really don't know what that answer is. I think starting with seniority is a good start, but I don't know if, If just given whoever's senior your choice, you get anything and everything you want, that's not the right way to do it either. Because then, just like Councilman Westbrook said, it's just going to work down just kind of how it was. You just get whatever is left for the newest member. So I think finding a combination where there's some reward for the seniority while at the same time giving some of the new members an opportunity to participate with something that they'd be a good fit in. you know, finding that balance would be great. I just don't know what that answer is.

Is there anything anybody, any other council member would like to add?

Sure. I agree with council member Guerrero that I think definitely if we had some sort of guidance on, you know, how many meetings per month, what the time commitment is. Cause as many of you have said, I've worked full time as well. So, um, you know, I need to make sure that whatever I'm committing to, I can handle and cause I want to give it everything I've got. So I think that would be very helpful. And, um, I think the tier would be very helpful. And, um, you know, maybe like what was suggested before, if, if we do by seniority, you know, you get two picks and then it goes down. You're not, you don't get to pick all five at once that you want. Um, you know, you can get just, or maybe just one pick at a time, depending on what's out there. So I think, you know,

Yeah, so I don't know. So looking at all these committees with the council members that are here, which ones do y'all feel would be tier ones as far as time commitment?

Mr. Mayor, if I'd offer, I think I don't know if I see a tier one, tier two, and tier three. What I see is, again, the way the city secretary's office is presented, you've got memberships on certain ones where attendance is viewed as mandatory because you're potentially a voting person versus being the liaison to a board or commission. Those are the two boundaries that are out there. One, you know, like I go to TSAC or I'm the liaison to TSAC. The reality of it is TSAC meets kind of inconsistently. They have a schedule, but if there's nothing for them to look at, they cancel the meeting. Sometimes when they have a meeting, it's one item. And to be honest with you, if it's one small minor item, because a neighborhood wants a speed bump. I probably don't go to that particular meeting because looking at the agenda, they're going to brief everybody that's there, that there's a process for a speed hump and we've got to do a traffic analysis and traffic counts and look at the math and all that kind of stuff. So to me, the difference is whether you're a liaison attending council or attending commission meetings or board meetings that you're looking at their agenda and figuring out, should I be there? For example, I'm liaison to the parks board and do I go to every one of them? No, but when they were having certain discussions about management of the soccer complex, I was there. And that's stuff that we know is going to come back to council. So to me, the delineation is between whether you're a liaison to the board, to a board or commission, that's a standalone board and commission, that it's those members that are voting on and doing all their stuff, and you're just there to listen and take notes or present something back from council, or whether or not you're an active participant. For example, the TERS. I'm on the TERS, too. I attend every one of those meetings. It's a voting position. It takes a lot more time. Those meetings, when they're scheduled, they do occur because they involve the obligation of funds and things like that. So that to me, that's the delineation of whether or not you're an active member of a board versus you're just a liaison to some other standalone unit.

So based on getting everybody's feedback and the discussions that we've been having, sounds to me like we're better off just... Kind of going by seniority and limiting things, the decisions to like two at a time, going all the way down. Only because, as stated, we do have some council members that do work full time that don't have the privilege that others do to be able to go to meetings and those kind of things during the day. So it'll allow them to select other committees that they can be a part of that they will be able to participate. So if y'all are good with that and maybe we can give Cherie the guidance to be able to proceed with just laying everything out and then with a selection of two at a time going all the way down to kind of shake things up a little bit and give people the freedom to participate in other committees.

I agree with that. Yeah, Senora gets first pick. They get to pick maybe a board member or a liaison or any choice of their two. I can concur with that and then just go all the way down. Everybody's picking two.

All the council members, are you all good with that?

Yes, I still think it would be helpful to have a list. Yes, no, for sure.

And we'll have a list and they'll lay out as far as like time, commitment, when they're meeting. So that way when you do select, you know what you're getting into. So most definitely. Okay.

So Mayor, can I ask a question? So to Councilman Westbrook's concern, on a going forward basis, if you do this now, when do you repeat this process? Is it annually? Is it after each election? On a go forward basis, give Shuri direction on how we move.

Yeah, I would recommend that you do it after the general election, possibly early December. And that way you've gone through the November election and any possible runoff. If there happens to be a mid-year because somebody resigns, like what happened to Ms. Deeds and also to Council Member Sheridan, then maybe they just pick up those assignments until the next actual go-round, which is what they were doing.

So is this something that we want to do annually based on that time frame, or is this something we want to do every other year?

May I suggest that we do it, I don't think annually would be ideal, maybe every three years of some sort, regardless of what election cycle you're in. Every three years, if we do it this year, guess what? The next three years, we reevaluate. So the new elected would take over the current assignments instead of doing it annually.

Three years seems too long to me, Mayor. That's just, three years is, that just seems a little too long. Annual may be too short, but you still should have some opportunity in your first term to be on more than just whatever you picked your first time going forward.

Yeah, my only problem with having it annually is that I feel like one is too soon because the minute you're starting to learn the process, you're already looking at possibly moving. And there are some committees that it's important that you carry that continuity and not just change all the time. So are we up for every other year?

Okay. Yeah, that'll be good.

Sorry, you want to do it how often? Every three years? Every two years. Every two years.

How would that work?

And any new vacancy filled by a new council member, they will just absorb those until the next? In the meantime. Okay.

So every two years, would it be a complete reset? So go through all of them and do this process every two years. So it would be a complete reset.

It would be. And it would give council members an opportunity to serve on another committee if they choose to do so. If you're a senior member and you want to hang on to what you have, then you can hang on to what you have.

And December is okay for that? Every two years in December?

Yeah. I think there should be a statement that doesn't preclude council members from exchanging should they see fit. Like, hey, I'm just tired of committee X. And I go to council member B, A, B, or C, and just say, hey, you know what? This is just not working out. Maybe there's a conflict. Maybe there's a disagreement. Maybe there's just personality dispute. Maybe it's better.

You may just not be a good fit for that particular board. Yeah, I don't see why we couldn't write that in.

Yeah, it could be that. It could be that or you can just have something that kind of changed the course of your life and you need to commit time more at home or something like that and then that requires a change and then I don't see why we should not be able to permit something like that.

Okay, I will work on that language. And send you the list.

Well, if there are no other questions, we'll go ahead and adjourn this workshop at 5.41.