Jul 22, 2025 City Council Special Meeting

[00:00:01]

WE'VE GOT A PLANNING AND ZONING TO GET GOING HERE. SO. GOOD AFTERNOON. IT'S 4 P.M. THIS IS A

[CALL TO ORDER]

[Consider/Discuss/Act on a Resolution of the City of McKinney, Texas Suspending the July 31, 2025 Effective Date of Oncor Electric Delivery Company’s Requested Rate Change to Permit the City Time to Study the Request and to Establish Reasonable Rates; Approving Cooperation with the Steering Committee of Cities Served by Oncor to Hire Legal and Consulting Services and to Negotiate with the Company and Direct Any Necessary Litigation and Appeals; Finding That the Meeting at Which This Resolution Is Passed Is Open to the Public as Required by Law; Requiring Notice of This Resolution to the Company and Legal Counsel for the Steering Committee]

TREVOR MENARD IS NOT HERE. THAT IS CORRECT. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MARK HOLLOWAY, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER MR. MINYARD COULD NOT BE HERE TODAY. HE IS TRAVELING BACK FROM AUSTIN, I BELIEVE. SO HE ASKED ME TO PRESENT THIS ITEM. THIS ITEM ALLOWS US TO SUSPEND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ENCORE'S PROPOSED RATE INCREASE. THEY FILED FOR A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT SYSTEM WIDE RATE HIKE, INCLUDING HIGHER RESIDENTIAL AND STREET LIGHTING RATES. THIS RESOLUTION DOESN'T TAKE A POSITION ON THEIR REQUEST. IT JUST GIVES US THE TIME WE NEED TO REVIEW THAT PROPERLY AND IN COORDINATION WITH OUR STEERING COMMITTEE OF CITIES THAT WORK WITH ENCORE, IT PRESERVES OUR ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE OR TAKE ACTION IF NEEDED. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM BY ME, JUST IF I MAY, JUST ADD SOME COLOR TO THAT. WE TYPICALLY DO THIS EVERY YEAR WHEN A RATE INCREASES REQUESTED THE CITIES GET TOGETHER. ASK FOR THESE RESOLUTIONS IN THEIR RESPECTIVE COMMUNITIES. BUYS THEM. SOME TIME THEY GO BACK, THEY NEGOTIATE WITH ENCORE. WE DO IT WITH OTHER UTILITIES TO BY THE WAY, SO YOU'LL SEE MORE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. AND THEN WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS ONCE AN AGREEMENT IS MADE, WE'LL BE BACK TO YOU WITH A RESOLUTION TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE IT. SO THAT'S KIND OF HOW THIS CADENCE WORKS. SO IS THIS KIND OF DONE ON PURPOSE BY ENCORE TO THE GIVE YOU A SUPER HIGH RATE BECAUSE THEY KNOW WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK. SOME SAY THAT THAT'S THE STRATEGY I DON'T KNOW. THEY WE DO TYPICALLY END UP SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION MARK. YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER IT. WE MAY NEED THE ORACLE TREVOR VINEYARD HERE TO DO IT. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IN THE PRESS AND THIS IS A LAYMAN'S COMMENT, THAT THE GRID IS GETTING A LOT OF ATTENTION, THAT AI DATA CENTERS ARE TAKING UP A LOT OF POWER THAT WE NEED TO MAKE THE GRID BETTER. IT ALSO SEEMS TO ME, AT LEAST BASED ON CITIZEN COMPLAINTS THAT I'M GETTING, THAT WE'RE SEEING MORE TRANSFORMERS BLOW AND MORE OUTAGES WITH ENCORE. BUT THAT MAY BE JUST ANECDOTAL. SO MY HOPE IS THAT THIS MEANINGFUL RATE INCREASE IS A RESULT OF THINGS THEY'RE DOING TO STRENGTHEN THE GRID. DO YOU HAVE ANY SENSE OF THAT, OR MUST WE WAIT FOR THE ORACLE? WELL, I THINK SOME OF THAT YOU COULD WAIT FOR THE ORACLE ON, BUT I DO THINK THAT THAT ENCORE IS TAKING SOME MEASURES. PART OF THIS IS CAPITAL TO INCREASE INCREASE THE RELIABILITY OF THE SYSTEM. CAN I SPEAK TO WHETHER I THINK THAT IS ACTUALLY EFFECTIVE OR NOT? PROBABLY NOT. BUT I DO KNOW THAT THAT PART OF THEIR RATE INCREASE ASK IS FOR BETTER CAPITAL OR MORE CAPITAL FOR THAT PURPOSE. AND AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE FROM THIS COUNCIL WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE A BLESSING OF THIS RATE INCREASE, BUT IT WOULD BE A MOVING ALONG OF THE ITEM INTO A NEGOTIATION WITH ENCORE, WITH THE OTHER CITIES ON THE STEERING COMMITTEE. THAT IS CORRECT. YOU'RE ACTUALLY SAYING THAT YOU ARE NOT PASSING ALONG THE INCREASE UNTIL WE TALK ABOUT IT. OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'M DONE. OTHER COMMENTS.

QUESTIONS? MR. HAUSER, DOVETAIL ON THOSE COMMENTS AND YOUR QUESTION. COUNCIL MEMBER STEERING COMMITTEE WILL LOOK AT THOSE KINDS OF QUESTIONS TO SEE ABOUT THE SUBSTANCE OF THE RATE INCREASE THAT MATTERS, MAKING UP THE COMPONENTS THAT ARE BEING ASKED FOR TO SEE WHETHER THEY ARE LEGITIMATE FOR THE SYSTEM, FOR THE FOR THE PAYERS. THAT'S THOSE QUESTIONS WILL BE ASKED.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? MARK. THANK YOU. WE DO NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANYONE? MR. LYNCH MOVES TO APPROVE THE ITEM. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. MR. FRANKLIN, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU. MR. LYNCH NEEDS TO HIT HIS BUTTON, BUT I'M NOT

[00:05:02]

[Consider/Discuss Single-Member and At-Large District Composition under the McKinney Home Rule Charter]

COUNCIL, WE DISCUSSED THIS A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. AS FAR AS BRINGING THIS BACK FOR PERHAPS MORE ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS AND THE WORK THAT WAS DONE BY YOUR COMMISSION WHEN YOU WERE HEAD OF THE COMMISSION, AND THEN THE COUNCIL WANTED TO BEGIN TO REVISIT WHETHER THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD CONSIDER A CHARTER AMENDMENT. WE HAVE THE PLEASURE TO HAVE MR. SEAQUIST BACK AGAIN. MR. SEAQUIST HAS WORKED WITH THE CITY OF MCKINNEY FOR SEVERAL YEARS, INCLUDING OUR LAST CENSUS. HIS FIRM HAS REPRESENTED THE CITY OF MCKINNEY FOR PROBABLY TWO CENSUSES BEFORE THAT, AND HE WAS FORTUNATE TO BE ABLE TO GET BACK FROM FLORIDA.

AND HE IS READY TO TALK ABOUT THESE ISSUES AND GO THROUGH HIS POWERPOINT AND HAPPY TO MAKE THIS AS Q&A AS YOU WOULD LIKE, BECAUSE IT LENDS ITSELF TO THOSE KINDS OF QUESTIONS. SO WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. SEAQUIST. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCIL. GOOD TO SEE EVERYBODY.

FOR SOME OF YOU WHO WENT THROUGH REDISTRICTING, REDISTRICTING WITH ME AT THE LAST CYCLE, SOME OF THIS WILL SOUND VERY FAMILIAR. I KNOW WE HAVE SOME WHO ARE ON REDISTRICTING COMMISSION OR WHO I GOT TO PRESENT TO AT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE, AND THEN I MET OUR NEW MEMBER AS WELL. SO GOOD TO SEE EVERYBODY. YOU KNOW, WE DID GO THROUGH THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE PROCESS. I GOT TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF A PRESENTATION ON POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE CONFIGURATION OF THE COUNCIL AS IT'S CURRENTLY CONFIGURED, AND MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THE OUTCOME OF THAT PROCESS WAS THAT THE REVIEW COMMITTEE WANTED TO FORWARD THIS ON FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION IN TERMS OF POTENTIALLY ADDING ADDITIONAL SEATS ON THE COUNCIL FOR YOU ALL, I'M HERE TODAY TO BASICALLY GIVE YOU SOME OF THE BACKGROUND. I KNOW MARK HAS KIND OF BROUGHT YOU UP TO SPEED ON THAT, BUT TO GIVE YOU SOME OF THE BACKGROUND ON WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE, WHAT SOME OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF IT MIGHT BE, AND THEN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MAY HAVE.

SO STARTING OFF WITH JUST KIND OF SOME BASIC INFORMATION, I KNOW YOU'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE CHARTER, BUT OF COURSE CURRENT CONFIGURATION OF THE COUNCIL, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. WE HAVE FOUR COMING FROM SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS AND THEN TWO AT LARGE MEMBERS. THE CHARTER SPECIFICALLY SETS OUT, AND THIS WILL BE A LITTLE BIT PERTINENT FOR THE DISCUSSION TODAY, THE ELECTION TIME FRAME, OBVIOUSLY, YOU GUYS, DUE TO THE RECENT CHARTER AMENDMENT, ARE NOW ON FOUR YEAR TERMS, BUT THAT ARE STAGGERED ON ODD ELECTION CYCLES. SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE, I GUESS, THE NEXT SET OF ELECTIONS COMING UP, 25 AND THEN 2729. OF COURSE, THE COUNCIL, THE CHARTER DOES REQUIRE YOU ALL TO ADJUST THE BOUNDARIES FOR THE SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS, AS FOR ANY TO COMPENSATE FOR ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN POPULATION. PRETTY STANDARD PROVISION. USUALLY WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IS REDISTRICTING TO REBALANCE POPULATION AT THE ISSUANCE OF THE DECENNIAL CENSUS, WHICH IS WHAT WE DID AS A GROUP BACK IN 2022. OF COURSE, YOU CAN ADJUST MID-CYCLE AS WELL. TYPICALLY, THOUGH, WE TEND TO WAIT FOR THE DECENNIAL CENSUS TO COME OUT. IF WE DO IT MID CYCLE, WE CAN USE BASICALLY DATA TO APPROXIMATE OR ESTIMATE POPULATION SHIFTS THAT MAY HAVE OCCURRED SINCE THE LAST CENSUS DATA. IT IS JUST THAT IT'S AN ESTIMATE. AND IF YOU DO IT MID-CYCLE, YOU OFTENTIMES JUST HAVE TO END UP REDOING IT AT THE CENSUS AGAIN. SO USUALLY WHEN WE'RE DOING POPULATION CHANGES OR REDISTRICTING FOR POPULATION CHANGE, WE'RE DOING THAT BASED ON THE CENSUS DATA, ALTHOUGH IT CAN BE DONE MID CYCLE AS WELL. I HAVE A COUPLE CITIES WHERE WE'RE DOING THAT BASICALLY WHERE THEY HAD A PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT. YOU HAVE A POPULATION BOOM IN ONE AREA AND IT JUST KIND OF THROWS EVERYTHING OFF OR GIVES DISPROPORTIONATE CONTROL OVER COUNCIL ETC. TO ONE PARTICULAR AREA. THAT MAY BE ONE CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE WE SEE CITIES WHO WANT TO REDISTRICT MID-CYCLE. OTHERWISE FOLKS USUALLY JUST WAIT FOR THE CENSUS TO COME OUT. THIS IS THE PRODUCT OF ALL OF OUR HARD WORK BACK IN 2022. THIS IS YOUR CURRENT DISTRICT MAPS WE WENT THROUGH AND LOOKED AT. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE WITH US, SEVERAL ITERATIONS OF THIS AND THIS IS ULTIMATELY WHAT WAS ADOPTED. THIS WAS OUR PLAN H, SO WE GOT THROUGH AT LEAST A THROUGH G BEFORE WE GOT TO THIS ONE. AND THIS IS WHERE WE ARE TODAY WITH

[00:10:05]

AS FAR AS ADDING MORE SEATS, AGAIN, SMALLER DISTRICTS, THE BENEFITS WE TALKED ABOUT FOR THOSE, THERE IS SOME ADDED ELECTION COST FOR THE CITY. IF YOU GOT TO RUN ELECTIONS FOR MORE PEOPLE, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE COST THERE. BUT FOR THE MOST PART, THE, THE COSTS ARE NOT THAT SUBSTANTIAL. AND OF COURSE, IF YOU MAINTAIN A HYBRID SYSTEM, YOU JUST INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SEATS. THEN YOU YOU GET YOUR CONSTITUENTS GET TO MAINTAIN BOTH THE LOCAL SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICT COUNCIL MEMBER AND AN AT LARGE AND AT LARGE SEATS THAT THEY CAN VOTE FOR AS WELL. THE DISCUSSIONS OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE, I THINK, FOCUSED ON NOT SO MUCH TRANSITIONING TO A FULL SINGLE MEMBER SYSTEM, BUT TO A HYBRID SYSTEM JUST MOVING FROM FOR SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS UP TO SIX. SO ADDING TWO MORE DISTRICTS TO ALLOCATE THAT POPULATION INTO SLIGHTLY SMALLER DISTRICTS. THE PART OF IT THAT WE DIDN'T REALLY GET INTO WITH THE CHARTER REVIEW STAGE, BECAUSE AT THAT POINT WE WERE JUST KIND OF LOOKING AT WHAT WAS TO BE INVESTIGATED FURTHER. THE LEGISLATURE THREW A LITTLE BIT OF A WRENCH IN THE GEARS BACK IN 2023, WHEN THEY ENACTED LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 21.006. THIS WAS IN RESPONSE TO A LAWSUIT THAT CAME OUT OF THE AUSTIN AREA. THE ARGUMENT WAS THAT ESSENTIALLY. IF THROUGH REDISTRICTING, IF A PARTICULAR CONSTITUENT GOT MOVED INTO SOMEBODY ELSE'S DISTRICT THROUGH THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS, THAT THEY WERE SOMEHOW DEPRIVED OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE BECAUSE THEY WERE BASICALLY WITHIN A DISTRICT FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER THEY DIDN'T VOTE FOR. OF COURSE, THE SAME IS TRUE FOR ANYONE WHO HAPPENS TO MOVE INTO THE DISTRICT. YOU JUST WAIT TILL THE NEXT ELECTION UNTIL YOU GET TO VOTE FOR YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER. THAT ARGUMENT FAILED IN COURT.

THEY LOST THAT LAWSUIT, BUT THE LEGISLATURE DID PASS THIS BILL, EFFECTIVELY PUTTING INTO PLACE THE RELIEF THEY WERE TRYING TO GET THROUGH THE LAWSUIT. AND SO BASICALLY, WHAT THIS SAYS IS ANYTIME YOU REDISTRICT AS A CITY WITH SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS, YOU HAVE TO UPON APPORTIONMENT, THE WHOLE COUNCIL HAS TO RUN, OR THE WHOLE GOVERNING BODY HAS TO RUN. AND IT WOULD MAKE SENSE.

[00:15:05]

THE LEGISLATURE DIDN'T DO THAT. THEY WROTE IT AS THE WHOLE GOVERNING BODY, WHICH WOULD TECHNICALLY INCLUDE THE AT LARGE SEATS AS WELL AS THE MAYOR. AND SO THE WAY IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, ANYTIME A CITY WITH SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS DOES A REAPPORTIONMENT OR REDISTRICTING, THE NEXT AVAILABLE ELECTION THAT ALLOWS TIME FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ELECTION LAW, YOU GOT TO RUN THE WHOLE GOVERNMENTAL BODY AGAIN. SO THERE WAS IT ALSO PROVIDES FOR A MEANS OF STAGGERING TERMS. IT ALLOWS THE COUNCIL TO ADOPT AN EQUITABLE PROCESS IN THE EVENT THAT YOU HAVE TO DO THAT TO STAGGER TERMS, BASICALLY TO GET EVERYBODY BACK ON TRACK.

THERE ARE SOME FACTORS THAT ESSENTIALLY THE LEGISLATURE HAS LAID OUT REMAINING TIME IN A PARTICULAR MEMBER'S TERM, WHETHER THERE WAS EVER A PREVIOUS SHORTENING, WHICH UNDER THIS THERE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN, BECAUSE THIS IS ONLY BEEN RECENTLY ADOPTED. WE HAVE I'VE SEEN IT A COUPLE WAYS. I'VE SEEN COUNCIL MEMBERS DRAW STRAWS. I HAVE SEEN AN AGREEMENT THAT THE HIGHEST VOTE GETTERS WOULD GET THE LONGER TERMS, YOU KNOW, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. SO IT REALLY LEAVES A LOT OF DISCRETION UP TO THE COUNCIL. IF YOU END UP IN A SITUATION WHERE YOU HAVE TO DO THAT. AS TO HOW EXACTLY TO STAGGER TERMS IN ORDER TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT.

BUT OBVIOUSLY IT IS A SIGNIFICANTLY DISRUPTIVE REQUIREMENT THAT'S BEEN PUT IN PLACE. AND, YOU KNOW, THE THING TO NOTE ABOUT IT IS WE'RE HERE TALKING ABOUT THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE CHARTER. BUT THE REAL IMPACT OF THIS IS THAT WHETHER YOU CHANGE YOUR CHARTER OR NOT, IF IN FACT YOU ARE WHEN THE 2030 CENSUS DATA ROLLS AROUND IN 2031, IF YOU'RE OUT OF BALANCE AND YOU HAVE TO REDISTRICT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THIS EITHER WAY. ALL THE CITIES, THE SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS ARE. AND SO WHAT THIS SORT OF FORECASTS STATEWIDE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, A LARGE PROPORTION OF CITIES THESE DAYS OBVIOUSLY HAVE SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS, AND MOST OF THEM ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REDISTRICT WHEN THE CENSUS COMES OUT. THERE'S ALWAYS A SLIM CHANCE THAT WHEN THE CENSUS COMES OUT, POPULATION HAS GROWN AND IT'S EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED ENOUGH MANNER THAT YOU'RE IN BALANCE AND YOU DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO ANYTHING, AND THEN YOU GET LUCKY. BUT THAT'S USUALLY THE EXCEPTION, NOT THE RULE. AND SO WHAT IS BASICALLY FORECAST BY THIS IS A COMING STORM COME 2031, WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE KIND OF ELECTORAL CHAOS ACROSS THE STATE, FRANKLY, BECAUSE OF THAT, WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN ONE ATTEMPT TO AT LEAST CLEAN THIS UP. IF NOT, FIX THE PROBLEM. THE LAST SESSION, THERE WAS A BILL PROPOSED. I HAVE A SLIDE ON IT. WHICH WAS HOUSE BILL 5431. THIS WAS FILED IN THE LAST SESSION. IT ACTUALLY NEVER MADE IT OUT OF COMMITTEE, BUT IT WOULD HAVE AT LEAST CORRECTED THIS ISSUE AS IT RELATES TO AT LARGE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. SO YOU'D STILL BE RUNNING YOUR SINGLE MEMBER SEATS, BUT THE AT LARGE SEAT OFFICES WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE RERUN. THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, BECAUSE EVEN IF YOU ACCEPT SORT OF THE UNDERLYING LOGIC OF WHY THIS RUN, NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS MAKE SENSE AFTER APPORTIONMENT OR RUN, THE COUNCIL MAKES SENSE AFTER APPORTIONMENT. IT WOULDN'T MATTER FOR AT LARGE IN THE MAYOR, BECAUSE EVERYBODY GETS TO VOTE FOR THOSE SEATS ANYWAY. SO THIS IS A PRETTY REASONABLE FIX. LIKE I SAID, IT DIDN'T GET OUT OF COMMITTEE THIS TIME AROUND. I'M ONLY COMING OVER HERE SO I DON'T HAVE TO INTERRUPT THE MAYOR. PERFECT. BUT I WOULD EXPECT, GIVEN THE KIND OF COMING STORM THAT I TALKED ABOUT, WE'VE GOT TWO MORE LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS BEFORE THE DECENNIAL CENSUS IS GOING TO COME OUT. I WOULD EXPECT THIS OR SOMETHING LIKE IT TO GET THROUGH IN THAT TIME FRAME. I THINK THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE JUST SO DISRUPTIVE THAT THE POLITICAL WILL WILL BUILD BEHIND THIS. YOU KNOW, THAT'S TRYING TO READ THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE COULD BE A BIT OF A DANGEROUS PROPOSITION, BUT I WOULD EXPECT SOME SORT OF FIX. NOW, OBVIOUSLY, EVEN THE FIX THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING HERE DOESN'T TOTALLY SOLVE THE DISRUPTION BECAUSE THIS IS ONLY FIXING AT LARGE SEATS. YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO RUN SINGLE MEMBER. SO THIS IS BETTER. IT'S STILL PROBLEMATIC IN TERMS OF DISRUPTING CITY GOVERNMENT. AND I'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS EXTENSIVELY SINCE, YOU KNOW, WE SAW THE BILL AND SAW THIS BILL. I MEAN, WE THINK THAT THIS WILL BE PUT BACK ON, YOU KNOW, IN FRONT OF THE LEGISLATURE. THEY MAY EVEN LOOK AT THAT BIGGER PROBLEM IN 2030, WHICH CAN BE FIXED A NUMBER OF WAYS, TOO, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO AFFECT ALL THE CITIES THAT HAVE DISTRICTS ACROSS THE STATE. AND WHAT PERCENT WOULD YOU SAY THAT IS? IT'S I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT IT

[00:20:03]

YEAH. SO WHICH IS A WHOLE NOTHER QUESTION WE ASKED AT YOUR COMMISSION HOW THEY CONTINUE TO DO THAT. YEAH. THEY HAVEN'T BEEN CHALLENGED. HOWEVER, WHAT HE'S GOING TO GO THROUGH ON SOME OF HIS OTHER SLIDES WILL GIVE YOU SOME INSIGHT AS TO WHETHER THEY MIGHT BE OKAY. IT'S JUST A VERY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE TO HAVE NO SINGLE MEMBERS AND 240,000 PEOPLE. AND YOU KNOW THAT THEY HAVE A VERY DIVERSE POPULATION LIKE WE DO. SAME STREET. CORRECT. SO IN TERMS OF WHAT THAT MEANS FOR. FOR A CHARTER ELECTION, AGAIN, TO CHANGE THE CONFIGURATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OBVIOUSLY, SINCE IT'S SET OUT IN THE CHARTER, REQUIRES A CHARTER AMENDMENT ELECTION.

THE COUNCIL, OF COURSE, CALLS, PASSES AN ORDINANCE ORDERING AN ELECTION ON ANY CHARTER AMENDMENTS, AS YOU'VE JUST DONE FOR THE FIRST UNIFORM ELECTION AFTER THE ORDER, 30 DAYS AFTER THE. IT'S GOT TO BE AT LEAST 30 DAYS FROM THE ORDINANCE CALLING THE ELECTION. AND OF COURSE, PERTINENT HERE HAS GOT TO BE TWO YEARS AFTER THE LAST LAST CHARTER ELECTION. AND SO SINCE YOU GUYS HAVE JUST HAD ONE LAST YEAR, THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY YOU COULD DO IT WOULD BE 26. THE NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION, THOUGH, IS 27. AND SO MARK AND I HAVE TALKED TO THE EXTENT, YOU KNOW, WE WERE GOING TO LOOK OR THE CITY WAS INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT CHARTER AMENDMENT TO ACTUALLY CHANGE THE CONFIGURATION OF THE COUNCIL. IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO PUSH THAT BACK UNTIL WE SEE WHAT THE LEGISLATURE IS GOING TO DO. OR ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE IS YOU CAN ALWAYS CALL THE CHARTER ELECTION, BUT HAVE IT GO INTO EFFECT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF THE 2030 CENSUS SO THAT IT TIES IN. IT'S A FUTURE EFFECT, BUT IT'S YEAH, I AGREE.

AND SO IT'S NOT LIKE YOU CAN'T HAVE AN ELECTION SOON, BUT YOU COULD ACTUALLY MAKE IT EFFECTIVE AT THE CENSUS IS WHAT I'M REPEATING. WHAT HE SAID, THE LAST BULLET I WROTE ON THIS POWERPOINT FOR GUNNAR AS WELL. IF THERE'S A IF YOU IF THE COUNCIL HAS A DESIRE TO WAIT, SEE WHAT HAPPENS LEGISLATIVELY. YOU ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A CHARTER ELECTION FOR OTHER ITEMS THAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE IN BETWEEN. AND SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT YOU COULD HAVE IF YOU WANT TO CONSIDER OTHER PROPOSITIONS, YOU COULD DO IT SOONER, AND THEN YOU COULD SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN 27 AND DO THE COUNCIL. EXCUSE ME, THE DISTRICT QUESTIONS FOR LATER. AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO IN THAT LAST BULLET. AND OF COURSE, AS PART OF THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF WAYS, I MEAN, YOU COULD ADD, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT MARK HAD RAISED AND IS IN THE POWERPOINT HERE IS, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN ALSO BY PROPOSITION, JUST THE STAGGERING OF TERMS SO THAT THEY LINE UP FOR WHEN THE CENSUS COMES OUT. IT'S REALLY JUST A QUESTION OF DO YOU WANT TO MAINTAIN THE STAGGERED, YOU KNOW, THE STAGGERING, OR DO YOU WANT TO TRY TO TARGET THEM ALL TO WHERE THEY RUN, TO WHERE THEY TIME NATURALLY WITH THE ISSUANCE OF THE CENSUS, WHEN AT LEAST UNDER THIS CURRENT LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO RUN IN SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS ANYWAY. THE LITTLE BIT OF A TRICKY PART FOR YOU GUYS, SINCE YOU'RE ON A FOUR YEAR TERM BASIS, EVEN IF YOU SAID EVERYBODY TO RUN IN 32, WHICH IS WHEN WE WOULD HAVE THE CENSUS DATA AND HAVE REDISTRICTED, THEN YOU HAVE ELECTIONS 32, 36, 40, BUT THEN THE NEXT CENSUS IS GOING TO COME OUT 42 AND SO YOU'RE KIND OF BACK IN THE SAME

[00:25:02]

NEVER AGAIN. NEVER AGAIN. NO. YEAH, I THINK WE OBVIOUSLY WE MISSED OUR WINDOW AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS 2 OR 3 YEARS AGO. WE COULD HAVE MADE SOME CHANGES BEFORE THIS BIT OF MESS. BUT WE'RE WE'RE WAY DOWN THE ROAD AND I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THAT DECISION RIGHT NOW WITHOUT HAVING, YOU KNOW, A FULL UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE WE'RE GOING ON THE STATE LEVEL. SO I'M OKAY WAITING IT OUT. I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE. YEAH, I AGREE TO. OKAY. WELL, I'LL TELL YOU, I THINK THAT MAYBE CUTS ABOUT THE REST OF MY PRESENTATION SHORT. I'M HAPPY TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE ACTUAL MECHANICS OF REDISTRICTING, BUT I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO WAIT, I MAY JUST SAVE THAT FOR WHEN I GET TO COME BACK AND TALK TO YOU GUYS IN 27. THANK YOU. I'LL JUST MAKE ONE OTHER COMMENT. AS I LOOK AT OUR DISTRICT MAPS, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WITH THE WITH THE APPROVALS THAT WE'VE DONE WITH RESPECT TO COVINA RANCH, IS THAT THE ONE AND THEN AND THEN HONEY CREEK, I MEAN IT'S DISTRICTS ONE AND FOUR THAT ARE PROBABLY ON TRACK TO GET THE MEANING. I GUESS MY POINT IS THOSE TWO, THOSE TWO ARE ON TRACK TO GET MEANINGFUL GROWTH. MY DISTRICT IS REALLY NOT BECAUSE WE'RE KIND OF BUILT OUT. SO CHANCES OF US NEEDING TO REDISTRICT IN 2031 ARE ABOUT 100% THE WAY I LOOK AT IT. AND SO AND I'M HAPPY TO RECONSIDER THIS WHEN THE LEGISLATURE CLEANS

[00:30:03]

ANYONE ELSE? GUNNAR, COULD WE GET A COPY OF YOUR PRESENTATION? ABSOLUTELY. IS THERE A WAY TO DO THAT? OKAY. IT WASN'T IN OUR PACKET. WE DIDN'T HAVE IT. SO IF WE COULD, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

ANYONE ELSE AND I APOLOGIZE. THAT WAS MY FAULT. I WAS MY HASTE TO GET BACK FROM FLORIDA.

I ONLY GOT IT OUT THIS MORNING, SO I APOLOGIZE. NO PROBLEM, NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. GOOD TO SEE YOU EVERYBODY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GLAD YOU MADE IT BACK SAFELY. THANKS VERY MUCH. GOOD TO SEE YOU. OKAY. NEXT ITEM WILL BE COUNCIL LIAISON UPDATES. I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANYTHING SINCE LAST WEEK, MR. MAYOR. NONE. VERY GOOD. MR. HAUSER, DO WE HAVE EXECUTIVE

[EXECUTIVE SESSION]

[ACTION ON EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS]

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. WE ARE AD

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.