Appointments Committee - Regular Meeting

All right, let's call to order the June 26, 2026 meeting of the Operations, Operational Strategy and Administrative Committee. Why don't we start with our roll call, clerk?

Chair Ibsen?

Here.

Committee Member Bushnell? Addison? Committee Member Scott? Here. Committee Member Walker? Here.

All right, welcome. We only have one study topic today, and that's just discussing the role of the deputy mayor and the code and other potential ideas. So with that, why don't we start with Ben? After we approve the minutes, is there a vote? Second. Second. Any corrections? Seeing none, all those in favor of approving the minutes, say aye. Aye. Those say no. Minutes are approved. Now I'm done.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, OSAC, for having me here today. A very brief presentation on the limited guidelines and language that exists in code, charter, and at the Washington state level regarding the deputy mayor role and responsibilities. And then really, we'll just turn it over to a conversation for OSAC to kind of determine what you'd like to see discussed in context of those limited guidelines that are available. So the duties and expectations of the deputy mayor are primarily defined by the absence of the mayor rather than specifically looking at the deputy mayor role and defining it explicitly. So there are guidelines in the Tacoma city charter, the Tacoma municipal code, the council rules and procedures also have mentioned of the deputy mayor. And then there is state law, RCW section 35 deals with the city manager council form of government and has very limited language there about the role of the mayor and then therefore the deputy mayor. So in the charter, you see the major duties of the mayor, presiding officer, voting member of the council, officialized for ceremonial purposes and declarations of emergency. They're authorized to sign and authenticate ordinances and laws and have appointed powers, duties, and authorities conferred by law, ordinance, or charter. And so then if you look at TMC 1.18.030, additional language there saying that you'll, as mayor, devote sufficient time to perform the duties during regular and normal practical hours. So very high-level guideline there of the mayor, again, not the deputy mayor. Then if we look at the city charter, there's no explicit mention of the deputy mayor. Looking at the municipal code, the office of deputy mayor was created in 1.18.010 as a member of the council, elected by the council at the first meeting after the office becomes vacant and soon thereafter it's tractable. And then the deputy mayor, the powers and duties, They're the same as provided by these prior laws we've talked about for the mayor, but shall only be exercised by the deputy mayor in the absence or disability of the mayor. And then finally, looking at the city council rules of procedure, the presiding officer duties talks about the mayor, again, presiding officer at all meetings and in mayor's absence, the deputy mayor shall fulfill this role. Again, mentioning the annual election If both the mayor and the deputy mayor are absent, then somebody else is voted to preside until the mayor or deputy mayor returns. And then council may select a council member to serve as a providing officer when the mayor or deputy mayor are only attending remotely and not physically present. So that comes from your rules. Again, additional Guidance here for the presiding officer, and we've looked at this pretty extensively in our last few conversations about the council rules overall, about preserving that order, and it will be updated to not say decorum based on the updates that you are recommending. To observe, of course, the rules, decide the questioners, really just kind of run the meeting. So just additional context there about the role of mayor and presiding officer, and therefore deputy mayor when the mayor is not available. I did not include the Washington state law explicitly in there, but it's very similar to the chartered code, so it does not add any additional information. So that is the limited high-level guidance that is given for the role of deputy mayor. You see there's very little actually explicitly about the deputy mayor. It's mostly about the role of the mayor. And then that kind of high-level definition of when the mayor is absent or, I don't think And so then the question is, what additional definition is needed for the role of deputy mayor? And would there maybe be roles or duties when the mayor is present that are defined? Is there a need for a greater definition of absence or emergency? And is there anything else that this committee would like to address?

Well, I appreciate the presentation there, Ben. Just to give some context for what prompted this topic from my conversations. This is something I see as a product of a couple of things. One is just the growing, I think, positive culture change that we've seen with the city council over the last 15 years. Because, kind of dating myself, back when I was first on the city council, this was 2012, there were very different expectations and norms for being a council. It was much more akin to like a non-profit board where you basically just affirm, it was much more staff driven. There were far fewer expectations of being policy makers. It was a part-time sort of nonprofit board expectation, right? And then fast forward almost 15 years and now we have policy staff. We're talking next Tuesday about What does staffing look like for us to have more engaged policymaking capabilities, greater media and communication and engagement capabilities? There's been a heightened expectation for members of the council to fulfill those roles as more legislators versus just collectively being a board that oversees staff decisions, right? So that's a very... I think a positive culture change, but something that our code hasn't necessarily kept up with, and that's part of our staffing decisions. The other thing, too, which is more ambiguous, but just something that I think really rates discussion, is the fact that our form of government is not really pure. Like, we are not really a pure city manager system. I'd say we're kind of a weird hybrid, right? Because we are a city manager system. We do collectively hire and oversee and work with the executive staff in doing so. But unlike most city manager systems, the mayor is separately elected. I'm paid and I'm staffed like I'm full-time, basically, though we all know council has very extensive responsibilities beyond just part-time, right? There are co-differences between mayor and councils. And so generally the expectation, despite what our form of government and our system suggests, is the mayor serves as more than just a parliamentarian. But, you know, something works to set the agenda, have that community relations aspect. And that's why I'm staffed differently, right? And so what brought this discussion is bridging those two things is, should there be more intention behind the office of deputy mayor? Should it, because right now, as it's been functioning, as has been laid out in this presentation, is it's more like when I'm not there or someone who's just a floor leader making motions, cutting ribbons, purely just that parliamentarian role. I've been working with Joe in a little bit more than this. Like every week I have a policy check-in with my staff. We talk about advancing key agenda items, council strategy, those things, you know, I always have Joe there, for example, just as my deputy. But really, the question is, is there merit in having a discussion about should it be more of a map? In recognition of the fact that we're kind of in this in-between space with our form of government, with just the community's expectations of the office of mayor, should the deputy mayor have more of a role than just floor leader and parliamentarian, but also like The best example I can think of is there's a city manager and then there's Allison, right? Like there's a deputy city attorney who has a key portfolio and key responsibilities overseeing departments. Or in the case of like a CEO, there are vice presidents who handle sales or customer service or HR or whatever, right? And that's contrary to what we expected because Historically, deputy mayor is just kind of participation trophy, like you just kind of wait your turn and based on seniority and you get it or whatnot. The expectation is that everyone gets their turn once per year versus a more established role with real expectations and responsibilities. And as our governing culture matures and becomes more professional, might this be something that we can consider? So that's just a general question to pose in light of all the other questions we're talking about with staffing and everything else, but more scenario study and I welcome your perspectives. Any thoughts?

My initial thought is when I served as deputy mayor, I did feel like there was an additional body of work, that it wasn't just symbolic, that there was quite a bit more to your point of, you know, meeting with the mayor. I liked the idea of it. I think it's complicated if you tie it to the mayor. Right now, you and Joe get along really well, you have similar values, that works. If you were to have a deputy mayor that didn't, it would be hard to write in a charter that the deputy mayor is supporting the mayor's policy or required to work together, right? Because we're each independently elected. So I think I could see it being complicated at certain points. So I'm not sure how we write it in a way that's helpful in sort of elevating the position a little bit. And our pay structure does indicate that it isn't. more of a job than a council member or recognizes that, I guess. So I'm struggling to suggest a framework that would make sense in our current form of government, I guess.

Yeah, Megan?

Kind of similar along that line. I think it's because just for clarity for whoever's in the role, the council, the community staff, even like just having it clearly defined might be helpful. So people know what to expect. Cause I think that's usually half the battle is just people understanding what to expect from whatever role it is that anybody is in. But I, yeah, I'm not sure what the, how to define those like what um i would definitely probably need to take more time to just kind of think about it i haven't been in the role of deputy mayor and so i don't have like a working understanding of what the what those like roles and duties would look like if they were put into code or if it's just like you know, some additional rules that we outlined in some way, whether like, I don't know if it needs to be in a charter, it's just in our council rules or whatever it may be. But yeah, so I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's always helpful to have a clear definition that, because even if you're like, oh, you know, like from what I'm looking at, it looks like I'm just going to fill in when the mayor is not there. And then you're in that role and it's like, you know, these added meetings and you're this and this and so on. And so I know that things like it might look different from year to year, like, like when Mayor Woodards was, you know, doing a lot more with like, NLC, I'm sure, you know, and she was maybe out of town more, like, I think you were there during that time, you probably had to step in a lot more than maybe, you you know, in other years when she wasn't or with a different mayor who's not involved in like an outside organization. So I'm not, but I think like having a good definition, that's not just kind of, you know, when the mayor's not there, you show up. Like, I think that's helpful.

I think also how that translates into what's in it for the deputy mayor too, right? Because if there is heightened expectation, but you're still frankly paid and staffed like you're a council member, right? Then there's less incentive and there's less reflective value, right? So I would imagine if there was a greater codification of, you know, these are more serious expectations of an office of deputy mayor, then, I mean, there already is a little bit of a pay bump, but something that's perhaps more reflective of, you know, the additional work or responsibilities, and also if we're talking staffing, you know, should the deputy mayor also have their own policy person, for example, or their own scheduler, right? I mean, I think that's something that definitely raises consideration. I think it all just works backwards to what the highest and best role of a mayor is, too. That's also... Again, very open to interpretation just because of the weird hybrid nature of our form of government. But the best that I can say, just having been in the job for half a year and just conversations that preceded that, is I'm not an executive, right? I don't directly hire and control the staff. But at the same time, I do regularly interact with executive staff, for example. And in terms of setting the agenda and massaging those key relationships in the city. If there is something to the office in doing that, the bulk of my time is primarily spent nurturing key relationships with both elected as well as informal community leaders, for example, and also just taking active steps towards key signature issues. If I'm thinking about the role of the deputy mayor, it would be having a consensus with that one person in particular about what are the key signature issues for this year in conjunction with the council and bringing up my capacity to focus on my highest and best. So, for example, that might mean if I'm taking a more active role with, because I know you're the sound transit leader, for example, but years down the road, that's not the case and it's something that I want to do more of, then maybe helping me out with that key role as sort of my envoy, for example, or helping with AWC or other regional obligations to create my calendar to focus more on the relational aspect. Basically, kind of another... Another copy of those priorities, right? I mean, just for doubling that efficiency, that's for my address, for example. But certainly being reflective of compensation, staffing, support, and also just adding to the prestige of the office is more than just a title, but something reflecting the real work that you're putting in, to your point, Christina. There's another question too, just to pose. I mean, is this, if we do acknowledge that we are expecting more of the deputy mayor, I mean, regardless of whether or not we pursue this, I mean, we know the deputy mayor does more, right? If we were to explore like recognizing that and modifying the office, is the notion of the deputy mayor or something that we just take turns doing once a year where everyone gets their staff at it versus something that's, like for example, we don't approach town transit that way. We don't approach it and say, okay, well, Christina had a term this year to represent Sound Transit. It's going to be a concern. Like, we don't play hopscotch with really important regional appointments like Sound Transit or Pierce Transit or AWC, right? I mean, generally, we have specialists who really are experts in certain fields, really have a passion for that particular niche, and then that's kind of your specialization, and you grow within that, right? Yeah. Do you think there's merit in exploring having that same attitude towards deputy mayor versus just the everyone gets a turn on myself?

I mean, I think with that, like, there's nothing like that's specifically said. I know it says that we, at the beginning of each year, we elect the the deputy mayor, um, but there's nothing saying that you couldn't elect the same person each time. Right.

Um, okay.

And I guess, um, I mean, I, I think we don't necessarily want to tie ourselves into saying like, this role is going to be like, if you, if you are made deputy mayor, your deputy mayor, tell your terms up, um, just because that could either work out really well or work out poorly. And so I guess right now, because at this point, essentially, is it just like, you know, the mayor kind of pitches who it is to the council. The council can either say yay or nay from there. So I don't know if maybe there is maybe a more involved process of like, engaging like who that should be from like i like i'm not really sure i i feel like it's a little it can get a little tricky like to say like this is a two-year thing or it's uh i'm not sure if it all came out yeah that was good because it made me think about what i was gonna because my first reaction is no

Because I think there's value in the deputy mayor having been here a little bit before they're appointed deputy mayor. And like, it's a bit of a seniority piece. And I think there's value in that because the role does guide a lot of new council members at the process. And, you know, even just like Robert's rules at the meetings, right? You are an expert at that by the time you get to being deputy mayor. I would be okay with a two-year term because I do see your point of the consistency and a year goes really fast and you get good at it and you're done with it. So I can see that, but I do think if we were going to put more, right, none of this is in here. We just have a culture of rotating it, right? There's nothing that says, to your point, that we couldn't do this right now, appoint someone multiple years in a row. So having something... either culturally or in charter that says it's a two-year position, I think there could be some value in that if it also says that you can't do it your first year. Yeah. Because I think that that, there's real value in learning some things before you become that.

You know, I agree that there's a good balance there, that making it something like a wait your turn, nothing but seniority is one thing versus... hey, you should have some experience before you have some experience. You shouldn't be a freshman and be the deputy mayor. There is something to be said for that certain way. So you think there's value in a more than one-year appointment, like treating it like our regional board, for example?

I'd be open to it.

At its best, what do you think the deputy mayor could do just as a role? If you were to imagine something more fleshed out, like the role at its most useful. If there was something you could imagine what that would look like.

I might need to simmer on that one.

Okay, I have a question. What information or questions would we have that could help you answer that question in a traditional conversation? stepping back from what the answer might be, but what questions do you have about what that answer could mean? Like, Councilmember Scott, how can a deputy mayor, do you need to know more of what those other duties are assigned that might be kind of invisible to see if they should be highlighted? Other models and other organizations, Mayor gave some examples of a deputy city manager or a vice president, like What questions or additional information might be helpful to inform you?

Yeah, I mean, I think it would definitely be good to know, like, you know, I see the parts of the deputy mayor role that are visible in a sense. So like when you're not here and Joe feels it or, you know, like I know that there are meetings that he attends alongside you and things like that. might be plenty of other things that i have no idea are happening behind the scenes so it's hard for me to like are there are there like outside boards where uh you know the seat is supposed to go to the mayor but there's something in the bylaws that says or it could be the deputy mayor and like you know and so like is it so yeah i think having a good understanding of like all the all the ways in which a deputy mayor could show up, kind of like what the suite of things are. And maybe based on either the person or what's going on in the year, maybe not all of those things are happening. I guess just like that would be a good understanding. And yeah, I mean, I know in like some places, like when there is a strong mayor, like the, you know, there's like the deputy mayor or the council chair rather, like things like that. And so I don't know if there's, yeah, I guess I just don't know what, enough about what the deputy mayor role looks like outside of what I've seen here to see like, is this the most effective way of doing it? Is it a better way of doing it than other people are doing it? Like, so yeah, I don't, or is it, is it just fine as is? I'm not sure about all that.

And not to put words in Joe's mouth, but one thing he did daylight, which now is just coming back to me, is do we even have to call it deputy mayor at all, right? I mean, to your point about council presidents, that's the thing. Usually in strong mayor systems, but there's nothing prohibiting us from not just titling something differently, but I mean, the titles do evoke certain thoughts, right, one way or another. I mean, a council president is, you know,

a different position maybe more in that parliamentary role or other responsibilities versus something that's more affixed to the office of mayor and my own priorities and that's another question too what i hear you describing mayor feels very different it feels like you're looking for somebody to support your work and your priorities you feel more like a chief of staff role because you talk about like cleaning up your time for more important things Um, that to me feel different than the role of a, of a deputy mayor. And I think if we were going to create another position within the council or a different position within council, whether you call it deputy mayor leadership in some other way and elevate that position, that is more of an independent office of the deputy mayor with their own policy agenda.

Yeah.

And so I'm struggling to marry the two that the discussion is elevating the deputy mayor and also providing more support to the mayor because I don't think that those are necessarily, I don't know how we make that happen.

I think the best parallel I can think of when I think about that very good question is sort of like the relationship between a speaker of the House and the majority leader, right? There is still like a leadership relationship there. There's something selected by the caucus, but it's also in a way the mayor in our system is sort of like a House speaker, right? Because even though I'm elected as the mayor by the general voters, there's still a great deal of consensus when it comes to, I mean, it's not just my priorities, right? I mean, I take temperature of eight other people as well as 230,000 people, but that would inform my security, right? And so there's the freeing up component, but there's also the prestige of just serving in a senior leadership role that's more recognized by the council.

That's, you know, different ways to slice it, but that's also another way of looking at it.

So it sounds like there's a lot of unknown unknowns, right, that just need a little bit more stewing and thinking. Is that what I'm hearing?

Yes, and I think maybe clarification of the problem we're trying to solve. Because I think some of it we're attempting to solve with the other staffing conversation. Yeah. Because I agree, certainly, more staffing when you're in the deputy mayor role would have been helpful. The number of speaking engagements escalated significantly. The number of quotes my policy analyst was writing that year were more when I had the deputy mayor title. So certainly, like, the policy analyst that draws a straw on the deputy mayor works a lot more hours on that person. But that feels like a staffing conversation, not a policy or municipal code change in my mind. So I think we need to define the problem a little bit more, because I think maybe we're trying to solve two problems, which is fine, but let's talk about them in two different ways.

No, I think that makes sense, though. And, you know, I think there's, yeah, I think the thing is that the stuff we're talking about definitely overlaps, but I do think that there might be a lot of this is kind of like can be helped, enhanced, solved through how we look at our staffing. Because, yeah, I think, yeah, I'll leave it at that for now.

Okay, cool. So maybe we can put this back in the meeting pipeline and noodle more on not just problems, but also potential, especially after we've got the staffing conversation on Tuesday.

I think so.

Cool. Mayor Beck suggests early on in OSAC, we did what we called initiative summaries, right, where we brought up a problem statement and outcomes that would say if it were successful or not. So maybe we can put a draft together for the deputy mayor initiative conversation here. What is the problem statement? So I could take that action item and put it with you to see if it works. kind of capture what you're thinking so that we have a problem-saving and targeted outcomes and address or discuss next is that the problem-saving and targeted outcomes and go ahead and investigate those and work towards a solution.

Yeah, sure. And obviously getting the feedback of the current deputy mayor would be really important for that too. Absolutely. He's representing the city up north in a different capacity, but I'll visit within and the staff should as well. We can put this back in the pipeline later in the summer and just take a look after we mature other conversations too. How's that sound? Anything else on the topic that we need to consider that I haven't brought up?

Well, one of the questions is the definition of absence, disability, or emergency. And I feel like we didn't talk about that at all. Is there something you were thinking in that phase?

I think that's just a code.

Code language. I'm not the expert here, but I've heard that in the past. So like if the mayor isn't at the meeting, is that an absence? If the mayor isn't in the state, isn't in the country, like what becomes an absence where then the deputy mayor has the power of the mayor? Is it, well, he's not in TMV today, so I can be the mayor, or is it, no, he's somehow physically unreachable for a certain period of time, and that can cause, has caused questions in the past. What is an absence that allows the power of transfer to the mayor?

Okay. Thank you. That's helpful. And I do think, because we sometimes get those emails that say the mayor is out, and I know when I was deputy mayor, we only did those when it was out of the country. Because she was always reachable when she was in country, but, um, yeah, a better definition is probably a great idea. And that was sort of thinking ahead to emergency press conferences or things like that, that might come up. Like 99% of the things that happen, no big deal to figure them out.

But yeah. This is just my two cents. I mean, subject to three other people bringing their ideas, problem statements, or whatever, but the more I listen to my colleagues here, I would say, I don't want to say problem, more just areas for further exploration, is in general, there's a lot of ambiguity. I mean, we have a lot of ambiguity with our hybrid form of government anyway. People think I was wrong there, right? People in the community just because they vote for the mayor, they think that rightly or wrongly, what are you gonna do about this, right? Like that's just, and Victoria had the same issue as Mayor of the Border. It's just a cultural norm in the city, right? And so we have a lot of ambiguity there about who's actually in charge. And for these very practical and nuanced questions about like who is the mayor, who has the authority to make decisions for states of emergency, if I'm out of state, if I'm out of country, traveling, There are just some really practical areas of ambiguity. I would say that that's the professional innovation question. I think it's less that there's something wrong so much as I think there's a real opportunity where you have a role that is defined very briefly in the code for a fairly experienced member of the council. And could there be an opportunity for a greater sense of direction and purpose with the mayor working with the senior aligned person to provide even greater clarity on the direction of the council, the direction of the city, right? As well as doing the in multiple places at once type of dance, right? So could there just be greater efficiency, organization and certainty for the organization and for the community? That's my open question. and also just recognizing the effort of being the deputy mayor in terms of pay staffing for other areas a nice department spot who knows all of the parking spots at the city of diploma are great oh yeah i wouldn't know diplomatist parking money in this story oh yeah that's not the people who block my spot we work on the site yeah yeah but um no i mean i think it's again i think um the thing that

I always come back to with a lot of things when it comes to just roles, responsibilities, that, you know, where we can be clear, we should be. And so I think even, again, even if this is not, and I don't know where else it would be if it wasn't the charter. There's a few different places where it shows up. Um, so I don't know if it just goes in the code or if it just goes through that rules and procedures, but, um, but making it clear as you like kind of demystifying for not only people who will eventually be in that role. But for the community as well. And I was like, so whatever these things are that we are doing, I think it's helpful to make sure that we just have a little bit of a clearer outline since there isn't much information in there. And I do think, I'm glad that you brought this back up because I think it is important to make sure that we look at what, you know, I think what does it mean? What does absence mean? What does disability mean? What's an emergency? You know, and just making sure that You know, there's always going to be moments where we're like, oh, okay, well, we can do it this way. But I think understanding what those rules are, because, you know, I mean, like you might get somebody who's like, now that I see exactly what the deputy mayor does, you know, I don't want to be that person. Like, you can pick somebody else, you already, like, whatever, but like. So, but I think it's, but I think it also just helps prepare people, especially like, you know, we come in as council members and we might know a lot about a couple of things, but governance as, as it is, it might be new to us. Policymaking might be new. Robert's rules might be new. Like, so I think it's just one of those things that like, it's good to have an understanding of it. So as you are working or, you know, if it's like you can't be, you know, that first year, but you can be thinking about what that looks like and you can be seeing the role and have a better understanding of what it entails so that you yourself can be prepared for if you get to that point where you were named deputy mayor at some point and just have a better understanding going in. Because I think that just sets people up better for getting the job done. For sure.

I guess one thing I would say as a problem, this is a much larger question, is Just as an organizational culture, we're very averse to formal processes for a lot of things. Like we tend to rely a lot on informal understandings and frankly personalities, which can often lead to a kind of case-by-case situational decision-making based on just two S5Os or based on different rules for different people. I mean, how many city council appointment processes have we had, right? You know, it goes through this committee. No, it goes through that committee. It goes this way. It goes that way. And we just kind of tend to change the rules situationally based on who's there. And that's, besides being, I'm sure, pretty frustrating for staff members of the council. I'm sure it would just be well-read for members of the public as well for just having clear expectations. We've seen this with walk-ons to the council and just, you know, what our general processes are. And that's been one pretty consistent observation, which I've seen some improvements in over the last 15 years, but also just in general is, we do have some processes for some things, but for a lot of things, especially really important key high stakes emotional decisions, a lot of it just tends to be ad hoc. We just kind of make it up as we go. So anything we can do to change that social norm, I think is just beneficial for the city organization or cultural.

Yeah. And I think with that, like, um, I think any should be allowed a bit of flexibility. And so, you know, because just to acknowledge the fact that like, sometimes, you know, things do come up last minute. Sometimes you're like, you know, I was thinking about it this way and then, for whatever reason today, maybe it was constituent input, maybe it was just my own personal education on the topic or whatever, but I'm like, ooh, you know what, actually, there's so, I think in that case, like, I know we're a little off topic with talking about, like, walking things on, but, like, for things like that, like, I would, I, I wouldn't want to say that, no, you can't do that. But I think more looking at like, what is the preferred method? Like, this is what's expected 99 out of 100 times. And like, but it still leaves room for that opportunity of like, well, this thing did just come to me. This like, because I think some of that, is based, some of that process gets kind of muddied because there's not a lot of structure around it. And then some of it is also like on the council member end of things of like poor communication. And that poor communication could be unintentional because again, it just came up and I'm trying to talk to people as it's come up, or it could be a part of somebody's like political strategy. And I don't want to, again, because we are independently elected, I don't want to stop people from having that ability. I think it's more about kind of encouraging a culture of communication early and often. Sure.

Good questions overall.

I just wanted to say, I have not experienced a lack of process in my experience, so I would love to hear more specifics about the problem there. Not necessarily right now, but I'm surprised by that.

Sure. I mean, just general observations. And I mean, this is also just over the course of a couple of terms and into now, right? It's more of a long-term observation. And it's not for lack of, it's not for an absence of process, but it's more that there are things that there just tend to be differences in rules situationally versus one consistent thing you can rely on, right? The classic example, at least that I've observed over that period of time, would be like city council appointments for a vacancy, right? So someone leaves or resigns or, you know, there's someone's deceased, for example, in a number of different causes. And I mean, outside of looking at it as well as being in the organization, I've seen like multiple kinds of ways of how is the appointment process run? How is the community engaged? How are finalists selected? We've seen this with the city manager hiring process. I mean, there's just been a lack of certainty for how decisions are made and also a lack of consistency articulated between those different methods. It's not that there isn't a process, it's that there isn't predictability or consistency in the process for some key things. And when a lot of the real rules for how things actually happen are not written down, but are just, yeah, we'll figure it out, what that tends to mean is that it really shrinks the amount of people who functionally have the control over how the process works. And that tends to freeze people out, or at least it leads to people feeling frozen out. Versus, I definitely see Janika's point too, about you don't want to be too rigid. You do want to allow for chaos, for adaptability, for things to come up. But I feel like if you at least have some baseline expectations for this is, you know, you can see it a million miles away, this is what we're going to do when this happens, then you can at least have that opportunity to communicate and say, hey, based on what's going on, we'll have this change. It's more just that. It's more that there is not the greatest consistency or predictability, and so that tends to shrink the amount of real decision-making in practice.

So I think this helps inform that initiative summary that we're doing with the deputy mayor and figuring out kind of what that, I think, Sometimes you've got such a suite of things that might be available and the issues that might be kind of on the table there. So I just want to make sure that I'm capturing this correctly with the next steps that I will work with Mayor, Deputy Mayor on an initiative summary that kind of captures these problem statements, including some preliminary research on similar or parallel roles, some of the less visible duties of the current Deputy Mayor, and maybe some of these more procedural things that might fall into that can be provided, and bring that back for a notes act discussion at some point to be determined. Does that sound like this?

correct next steps there thank you i think that's just an action item we wouldn't make a motion for that yeah if it's more more on it and especially after we have the staffing conversation just imagine what makes the most okay anything else okay all right well with that um is there any public comment the requested speaker and public comment or items on the agenda please sign up in the front of the room if you have not done so already

If you are speaking virtually, please press the raise hand button near the bottom of your Zoom window or star nine on your phone. Your name or the last four digits of your phone number will be called out when it is your turn to speak. We have no individuals in the room tied up with you, and it looks like no individuals online either.

Okay. So going once, going twice. All right. The comment is closed. Anything we can do to work?

I don't think that's what we just discussed, and that is it. Okay. Is there a motion to adjourn?

I move to adjourn. Second.

Move to second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. We'll say no. We are adjourned.