[00:00:06]
IS TUESDAY, JANUARY 4TH YEAR. 2022 BELIEVE IT OR NOT, WE'RE IN 2 22, NORTH TENNESSEE STREET,
[PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS]
GREAT CITY OF MCKINNEY. FIRST ORDER BUSINESSES. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS I DO[DISCUSS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEMS for the City Council Regular Meeting to be held on Tuesday, January 4, 2022 at 6:00 p.m. ]
NOT SHOW ANY MOVING ON TO WORK DISCUSSION. DISCUSSION OF REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEMS PRESENTED A MONTH REGULAR AGENDA. THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS WITH STAFF. SEEING NONE. MOVED TO 211180 CONSIDER DISCUSS THE PETITION FOR LOCAL OPTION LIQUOR ELECTION DIRECTION[Consider/Discuss the Petition for a Local Option Liquor Election and Direction on Petition Review Methods]
ON PETITION REVIEW METHODS. THEY DON'T WANT TO HANG AROUND FOR THE EXCITING STUFF. CANCEL MARY FULLER. I'M IN FRUSTRATION. CITY SECRETARY. THIS PRESENTATION IS TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE TO YOU AS WELL AS THE GENTLEMAN GENERAL PUBLIC IN REGARDS TO THE PETITION FOR A LOCAL OPTION ELECTION TO ALLOW FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN THE CITY. AND AS YOU ALL MIGHT BE AWARE OF, THERE'S CURRENTLY A PETITION IN CIRCULATION, UH, TO GATHER SIGNATURES FOR FROM VOTERS OF THE CITY TO LEGALIZE THE SALE OF ALL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR OFF PREMISE.CONSUMPTION ONLY. LET ME GO BACK TO THIS PARTICULAR PETITION. IT'S A DOCUMENT THAT IS OFFICIALLY ISSUED BY THE CITY OF MCKINNEY. THERE ARE CURRENTLY 6000 OF THESE PAGES. BETTER IN DISTRIBUTION. THEY OCCUR ON A LEGAL SIZED PAGE AND THEY MAY BE IN A VARIETY OF COLORS. THEY MIGHT BE YELLOW LIKE YOU SEE BLUE GREEN, BUT THEY DO HAVE TO HAVE THIS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE, AND THEY ALSO HAVE THE CITY SEAL ON THAT DOCUMENT. JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PETITION AND SOME OF THE PROCEDURE. UM THE PETITIONERS WHO ARE COLLECTING THE SIGNATURES ARE REQUIRED TOGETHER OVER 21,000 SIGNATURES FROM REGISTERED VOTERS. A PROPER PETITION THAT GETS SUBMITTED TO US AND IT'S PROPERLY VALIDATED WOULD TRIGGER AN ELECTION TO ALLOW OR TO DECIDE WHETHER THE SELL OF ALL TYPES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES WILL BE ALLOWED. IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT RIGHT NOW , THE SALE OF BEER AND WINE IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN THE CITY, BUT IT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR LIQUORS. SO IF THIS WAS, YOU KNOW, TO TRIGGER SUBSEQUENT ELECTION, AND VOTERS APPROVE THAT. THAT WOULD ACTIVATE THE ALLOWANCE OF SUCH SALES. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE CITY OF MCKINNEY HAS ISSUED THIS PETITION BASED ON THE REQUESTERS MEETING THE STATE REQUIREMENTS WE WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THAT PETITION AND ALSO ADMINISTERING THE ELECTION. THE CITY IS NOT INVOLVED WITH THE DISTRIBUTION AS FAR AS CIRCULATING AND GATHERING SIGNATURES INTO THE CITY DOESN'T TAKE A POSITION FOR AGAINST THIS MEASURE. SOME OF THE LAWS THAT GOVERN THESE ACTIONS IN TERMS OF THE LEGALIZATION OF ALCOHOLIC SALES IN THE STATE THAT'S ALWAYS DETERMINED BY VOTERS AS ESTABLISHED BY THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE. THE ELECTION CODE FIBER. ONE UM, GIVES US OUR GUIDELINES FOR ADMINISTERING THE PETITION AND ELECTIONS. THIS IS WHAT WE'LL BE COVERING TODAY IN TERMS OF PROCEDURE, AS WELL AS THE ALCOHOLIC CO CHAPTER, 2 51. WHICH DETERMINES OR KIND OF PRESCRIBES THE IMPACT OF WHAT SUCH AN ELECTION WITH DUE BEFORE THE CITY SOME OF THE IMPORTANT DATES AS A PART OF THIS PROCESS . THE PETITION WAS OFFICIALLY ISSUED ON NOVEMBER 17TH. THE PETITIONERS HAVE 60 DAYS TO RETURN THE PETITION. THE 60TH DAY OCCURS ON JANUARY 17TH, WHICH IS A HOLIDAY, MARTIN LUTHER KING HOLIDAY. SO BY STATE LAW, THEY'RE ALLOWED THAT ONE ADDITIONAL DAY SO THEY'RE ALLOWED TO TURN THIS PETITION IN AS LATE AS JANUARY, 18TH. I'M AT THIS TIME. WE'VE DETERMINED THAT THE CITY FROM THE TIME THAT THE PETITION IS ISSUED, WE WILL HAVE 30 DAYS MINIMUM TO REVIEW THIS PETITION. BUT WE ARE REQUIRED TO PRESENT THIS ON AT THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING THAT OCCURS ON OR AFTER THE 30TH DAY. FOLLOWING THAT SUBMITTAL HIT, THAT'S A LOT OF MOUTHFUL WILL KIND OF LOOK AT THE TIMELINE OF WHAT THOSE DATES MEAN. AND THEN FROM THERE, THE ELECTION RESULTS WILL BE DECLARED AND ONCE THE REQUIRED BODY NEEDS TO CANVASS THOSE RESULTS. IF AN ELECTION PASSES THIS MEASURE THAT WE'RE GOING TO EFFECT AT THE TIME THIS CANDIDATES OCCURS. OKAY SO KIND OF BACKING UP WITH THAT CONFUSING LITTLE COMMENT ABOUT WHEN THE ELECTION OR WHEN THE REVIEW OF THIS PETITION WOULD OCCUR. UM RIGHT NOW, UM, THE DEADLINE TO CALL AN ELECTION FOR THE MAI MAI GENERAL ELECTION IS FEBRUARY 18TH. SO THE DEADLINE FOR THIS PETITION TO BE RETURNED
[00:05:02]
TO THE CITY IN ORDER FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO CALL THAT ELECTION WILL BE FRIDAY. JANUARY 14TH. OKAY? ANY DATE AFTER THAT . THAT WILL REQUIRE THIS ELECTION PETITION TO BE REVIEWED ON MAY 8TH MARCH 1ST, WHICH IS AFTER THE DEADLINE TO CALL AN ELECTION SO THAT WOULD PUSH IT TO THE NOVEMBER ELECTION. AGAIN THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED SIGNATURES IS 21,847. THAT'S DETERMINED BY 35% OF THE MCKINNEY VOTERS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE 2000 AND 18 OR MOST RECENT GOVERNMENT STORY ELECTION, AT WHICH TIME SOME 66,000 FOLKS VOTED. AND AGAIN THERE ARE 6000 PAGES IN CIRCULATION. THE CODE ALLOWS FOR SOME 10,000 PAGES TO BE ISSUED.IF THE REQUESTER SO CHOOSES TO MAKE THAT REQUEST. SO THEY'LL HAVE ADAMANT. OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS TO CAPTURE THE SIGNATURES THAT ARE NEEDED. IN ORDER TO BE VALID WITH SIGNING THE PETITION. THE SIGNERS MUST BE REGISTERED VOTERS OF THE CITY ON OR BEFORE THE DAY THE CITY ISSUED THE PETITION. SO IF THEY ARE NOT REGISTERED OR WERE NOT REGISTERED TO VOTE ON OR BEFORE NOVEMBER 17TH. WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO COUNT THEM TOWARDS THE PETITION. A NUMBER. THEY ARE ALSO REQUIRED TO HAVE SPECIFIC INFORMATION. AS YOU SEE, LISTED ON THAT PETITION THAT HAS TO BE ON THERE, THE ONLY THING THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE ACTUAL SIGNER TO SIGN IS THEIR NAME. SO OTHER INFORMATION COULD BE WRITTEN BY SOMEONE ELSE, BUT THEIR SIGNATURE MUST BE IN THEIR OWN HANDWRITING. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT A SIGNER CAN WITHDRAW THEIR NAME FROM THE PETITION. IF FOR ANY REASON THEY CHOOSE TO REMOVE THEIR NAME, AND THEY DON'T WANT TO BE INCLUDED.
THEY HAVE TWO OPTIONS. THEY CAN BELIEVE THEIR NAME FROM THAT SIGNATURE PETITION PAGE, WHERE THEY CAN SUBMIT AN AFFIDAVIT TO THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE REQUESTING TO BE REMOVED. IN THOSE CASES, IT WOULD BE AS IF THAT PERSON EVER SIGNED THE PETITION, AND THEY DO HAVE TO DO THIS BEFORE THE PETITION IS RETURNED TO US SO THEY CAN'T COME IN AFTER THE FACT AND SAY I CHANGED MY MAMA. OKAY, EVERYONE TALK A LITTLE BIT. ABOUT THE VERIFICATION PROCESS. WHAT? WE'RE WHAT OUR GOALS ARE TO ACCOMPLISH, AND WE WERE TRYING TO GET DONE HERE. SO THROUGH THIS PROCEDURE, WE WILL FIRST NEED TO CONFIRM THE COMMENT CONTENTS OF THAT. DOCUMENT THAT IS RETURNED TO US SO THAT IN ITSELF WOULD BE FAIRLY TEDIOUS AS WE SORT THROUGH AN INVENTORY SOME 6000 OR POSSIBLY MORE PAGES TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE HAVE AND COMMUNICATE WITH THE PETITIONER GROUP. YOU KNOW THAT THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH STRIKING NAMES OR COUNTY NAMES. WE WERE UTILIZED A OFFICIAL VOTER REGISTRATION ROSTER THAT'S PROVIDED BY THE VOTER REGISTRAR AS WELL AS THE ONLINE SEARCH TOOL TO VALIDATE THE INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO US. THESE ARE BOTH TOOLS THAT ARE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE, SO IT'S KIND OF INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING THAT SECRET. WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING THAT CAN'T BE CHECKED AND DOUBLE CHECKED BY FOLKS IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC. WE WERE FROM THEIR LOCATED ENTIRELY THE MATCHING ENTRIES AND TABULATE THOSE AND CREATED REPORT THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THAT. A HANDWRITTEN DOCUMENT TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE CONCISE AND SUMMARIZE WHAT OUR FINDINGS ARE. UH JUST A LITTLE BIT OF, I GUESS. A CAVEAT . UM, THIS IS THIS IS A SIGNIFICANTLY LARGE PETITION IS LARGER THAN THE PREVIOUS ONE THAT WE DID A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. UM THIS LISTENING THAT YOU SEE HERE IS NOT NECESSARILY A WORLD RECORDS OF TEXAS PETITIONS WITH JUST AN IDEA OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE CIRCULATED RECENTLY. SO THIS IS BIGGER THAN QUITE A FEW. UM AND THIS IS A MANUAL PROCESS, SO WE'RE JUST WANT TO JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE WILL BE SEVERAL CITY STAFF WHO ARE PART OF THIS, WE HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN IN CONSULTATION WITH OUR CITY SECRETARY FROM THE CITY OF FAIRVIEW. SHE'S ACTUALLY HERE TODAY AND WE'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF HER INSIDE AND EXPERIENCE AS SHE IS, UM, YOU KNOW, DON'T KNOW LOCAL OPTION ELECTION VERY RECENTLY AS WELL.
AND THE MAIN THING THAT WE WANT TO REALLY TAKE AWAY FROM TODAY IS WE HAVE TWO OPTIONS THAT ARE ALLOWED BY THE STATE AND HOW WE MOVE FORWARD WITH VALIDATING THIS PETITION. ONE OF THOSE OPTIONS IS JUST STATISTICAL SAMPLING. WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO AT LEAST 25% OF THE TOTAL SIGNATURES THAT APPEAR ON THE PETITION, SO THAT NUMBER IS GOING TO DEPEND ON HOW MANY THEY TURNED BACK, AND WE WILL DETERMINE WHAT THAT MINIMUM NUMBER IS, AND THEN WE WOULD DETERMINE A SAMPLING METHOD. AND FROM THERE BASED ON JUST A PORTION OF THOSE SIGNATURES DETERMINE IF WE FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE VALIDITY OF THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT. OUR OTHER. OPTION IS TO JUST SIMPLY VERIFY ALL SIGNATURES. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S KEY TO THAT IS THAT A
[00:10:01]
CITIZEN IF WE CHOOSE TO DO THE 25% SAMPLING MAY REQUEST THAT WE DO THE PETITION IN HIS TIRED NOW THAT CITIZEN WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING REASONABLE COST THAT WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT PROCESS. IN BOTH OPTIONS AGAIN. THIS IS REALLY JUST GONNA DEPEND ON HOW MANY SIGNATURES ARE RETURNED, SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND THAT WHILE WE'RE LOOKING AT MEETING 21,000 TO MOVE FORWARD WE MIGHT GET SUBMITTAL OF 70,000 . WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER IS. YOU KNOW, WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, OUR STAFF. OUR CONCLUSIONS ARE IT'S BEST. WE'RE BEST SUITED TO JUST MOVE FORWARD . FULLY VERIFYING THIS PETITION . WE HAVE ADEQUATE TIME. WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE NUMBER OF STAFF THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE TO DO THIS AND OUR EXPERTISE TO DO IT. AND ULTIMATELY, THE MOST EFFICIENT USE OF OUR RESOURCES. YOU KNOW, WE COULD GET STARTED.HALFWAY DOWN THE ROAD, AND THEN WE GET THAT REQUEST TO DO IT ANYWAY. THIRDLY SECONDLY, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WORK WITH OTHER CITIES DO AND THIS IS WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST AND CITY OF MCKINNEY AS WELL. AND THAT REALLY JUST SUPPORT THE CONFIDENCE IN THE RESULTS AND OUR FINDINGS IF WE JUST GO AHEAD AND VERIFY THAT, YES, WE ARE 100% CONFIDENT THAT ALL SIGNATURES HAVE BEEN GATHERED. THAT'S ALL THE INFORMATION THAT I HAVE IN MY PRESENTATION. I HOPE THAT IT'S BEEN A INSIGHTFUL , BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M ABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. HAVE OF QUESTION. I MISSED SOMETHING. YOU WERE SAYING THAT IF WE GOT IT DONE BY JANUARY, 14TH, WHICH IS PRIOR TO THE PETITION BEING DO WE COULD GET IT ON THE MALE ACTION. BUT IF IT WERE AFTER THAT IT WOULD BE NOVEMBER. YES, SIR. IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT THEY TURNED THE PETITION IN PREMATURELY? WAS SUFFICIENT SIGNATURES THAT WE COULD ACT ON THE 14TH. IF THEY WERE ABLE TO GET IT INTO TIME AFTER TOP OF MY HEAD. THE CALCULATION IS THAT THIS INFORMATION MUST BE PRESENTED AT THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING THAT OCCURS ON OR AFTER THE 30TH DAY FOLLOWING THE SUBMITTAL, SO I'LL APOLOGIZE . IT'S NOT. I CAN EASILY CALCULATE WHAT SPECIFIC A CALENDAR DATE, BUT IT TECHNICALLY, THEORETICALLY, YES.
THE SOONER THEY TURNED IT IN, AND THE SOONER WE PRESENTED FOR ACTION. CORRECT. CORRECT WHAT 15. FEBRUARY 18TH IS THE LAST DAY TO CALL AN ELECTION FOR MAY . OKAY SO WE HEAR MET. SO IF YOU'VE GOT TIME, OKAY? YES EMPRESS. UM BECAUSE TO ME, IT SEEMED I'D BE HOLDING OFF.
SAYING ALL SIGNATURES UNTIL I KNEW HOW MANY SIGNATURES IF THEY CAME BACK WITH THE PETITION WITH 50,000 SIGNATURES. 25% WOULD REPRESENT HALF OF MORE THAN HALF OF WHAT WAS REQUIRED ACTUALLY TO VERIFY SO BUT I UNDERSTAND AND MARK. THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR YOU. LET'S ASSUME THAT WE GOT THE PETITION IN BY THE 14TH AND WE WERE DOING THE 25% SAMPLING. UM AND RIGHT BEFORE THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, FEBRUARY, 11TH OR 12. SOMEBODY CAME IN AND SAID, I WANT A FOR AUDIT OF THE SIGNATURES. WOULD WE? BUT WE HAVE COMPLETED THE 25. WOULD WE BE ABLE TO STILL CALL THE ELECTION AND THEN THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO YES. I MEAN, THE CODE DOESN'T REALLY SAY WHEN A PERSON HAS TO REQUEST THE FULL COUNT. THAT'S WHY THAT'S KIND OF AN OPEN QUESTION. I THINK THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD BE ABLE TO CALL THE ELECTION. AND THE PERSON WHO REQUESTED IT WOULD HAVE TO FILE AN ELECTION CHALLENGE AND WANTED TO MAKE SURE. ON THE QUESTION THAT YOU ASKED ABOUT SUBMITTING AND DOING A SAMPLING. JUST AS AN EXAMPLE IF THE PETITION GROUP SUBMITTED PRECISELY THE NUMBER THAT'S REQUIRED, AND WE DID A SAMPLING. 100% OF THOSE ENTRIES WOULD HAVE TO BE VALID FOR.
THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING FOR ME IF IT WAS CLOSE TO 21,847. WE NEED TO ALL OF THEM IF IT WAS SOME CONSIDERABLE MARGIN ABOVE, I THINK A SAMPLING MIGHT MIGHT BE FINE, AT LEAST FOR ME. THE COSTS OF A FULL SAMPLE FROM THE REQUESTERS. FAIRLY STEEP. I THINK WHAT YOU SAY 4 TO 500.
HOURS FOUR OR 500 HOURS THAT IF THAT REQUEST CAME IN FOR US TO DO THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO THIS. SO THAT'S ON TOP OF THE PROCESS THAT WE'D ALREADY STARTED. BASICALLY WE CAN SPEND MONEY WE CAN SPEND ABOUT 120 HOURS WORTH OF TIME. VERSUS. 455 100, EXCEPT IT'S NOT DEPENDENT ON US MAYOR FULLER. IF WE DO GET THAT CITIZENS, BUT THEN THEY PAY IT. THEY DON'T SAYING OUR COST WOULD BE 120 HOURS. 20 SAMPLING ROUGHLY. YES EXCEPT YEAH, I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S A LINEAR
[00:15:03]
RELATIONSHIP, AND I WOULD CAUTION ON THAT. THIS IS THE SAMPLING ITSELF. ONCE YOU DO IT , AND YOU SET IT UP. IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. BUT SETTING UP THE SAMPLING WAS 6000 PAGES.SOME PAGES MAY ONLY HAVE FOUR SIGNATURES. SOME PAGES WILL BE FULL. HOW YOU RANDOMLY, YOU HAVE TO RANDOMLY SAMPLE AND HOW YOU SET UP THE RANDOMIZATION WITH SHEETS OF INDIVIDUAL SHEETS OF PAPER. IT MIGHT, IT MIGHT TAKE EXACTLY AND AT THAT POINT OUR THOUGHT WAS WHAT HAPPENS IN A SCENARIO WHERE UM WHERE 100 SIGNATURES SHORT ON A SAMPLING. WE SAMPLE WE SAY YOU KNOW WHAT? BASED ON THE SAMPLING RANDOMLY SAMPLED 100 SIGNATURES SHORT SOMEBODY'S GOING TO SAY, WELL, WHAT CAN YOU JUST COUNT THE WHOLE THING? AND OUR THOUGHT WAS, LET'S JUST COUNT THEM ACCOUNTABLE. WE DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SCENARIO WITH 50 OR 1000 SIGNATURES. IF WE DID HAVE 40,000 SIGNATURES, AND WE'RE DOING 100% CAN WE STOP AFTER WE GET 22,000? YES ABSOLUTELY. AND THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT. THAT WOULD KIND OF BE. OUR GOAL IS CONTINUE TO TRACK THOSE ENTRIES UNTIL WE'VE REACHED THAT MAGIC NUMBER IF YOU WILL. TO THE CURRENT STATE OF WHAT WE HAVE OUT THERE AND A NUMBER OF PAGES AND THE STAFFING. I THINK BETTER COURSES . OUR RECOMMENDATION TO DO THE WHOLE CAMP. ALRIGHT, YEAH. IF IT WAS DIGITAL. TAKES A LOT OF THE POTENTIAL CHALLENGES. ANYONE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT JUST FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND 100% BUILT STOP IF THEY ONCE THEY GET PAST THE NUMBER NOBODY CAN ARGUE WITH THAT. THAT'S THE CONSENSUS UNLESS SOMEONE SAYS DIFFERENTLY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. VERIFYING 100. YES, SIR.
THANK YOU. THE NUMBERS. Q THEY CANCEL LIAISON UPDATES. OH, SURE. NO, NO. WE WILL MOVE TO
[EXECUTIVE SESSION]
EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 55171 CONSULTATIONS WITH ATTORNEY IN ANY WORK SESSION. SPECIAL SESSION. REGULAR SESSION AGENDA ITEM REQUIRING CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT ADVICE NECESSITATED BY THE DELIBERATION AND DISCUSSION OF SAID ITEMS. SECTION 55171 PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION, SCHWAB BUILDING COMPANY TD AND K A. SCHWAB STEEL SERVICES, LTV VERSUS CITY OF MCKINNEY, 429TH. DISTRICT COURT . COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS CASE 42901286202. ONE SECTION 55172 DELIBERATIONS ABOUT REAL PROPERTY MUNICIPAL FACILITIES SECTION 55174. PERSONNEL MATTERS . CITY MANAGER ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND SECTION 55187 DELIBERATIONS REGARDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MATTERS. BREWERY AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THE ACTION ON ONE ITEM WE ARE I MAY HAVE TO WE'RE.[ACTION ON EXECUTIVE SESSION]
I THINK THERE'S TWO MOTIONS. MR MAYOR. IF I MAY. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVED THE SETTLEMENT AND THE CASE PENDING IN THE FOUR 29TH DISTRICT COURT UNDER CALLS NUMBER 42901. 286-20 AS PRESENTED IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. FOR A SECOND, ALL RIGHT? ALL IN FAVOR. OPPOSED. RIGHT? AND SECOND MOTION. MOVE THAT WE APPROVED THE AMENDED IN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT REGARDING OUR CITY MANAGER AS DISCUSSED IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. SECOND ALL IN FAVOR, HIGH POST. RIGHT MOTION TO ADJOURN. ON FAVOR. SECOND YOU STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT'S THAT?* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.