[00:01:26]
          >> MAYOR JONES: GOOD AFTERNOON, THE TIME IS 2:01. 
          MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> CLERK: 
          [DISCUSSION ONLY]
          MAYOR, WE HAVE QUORUM. >> MAYOR JONES: I LOOK FORWARD TO A GOOD PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION. AS ALWAYS WITH MY INTENT, IT IS TO MAKE THIS -- FRANKLY, ALL THAT WE DO, A CHANCE -- NAVIGATE THIS VERY CHALLENGING TIME, WE MINIMIZE RISK TO OUR COMMUNITY, RIGHT, AS I'VE SHARED WITH EACH OF YOU INDIVIDUALLY AND I'VE OUTLINED IN THE MOMENT IN THE MEMO WHAT THESE ENHANCEMENTS ARE DESIGNED TO DO. PART OF THE CHALLENGES I HAVE SHARED WITH MANY OF YOU IS THAT SOME OF THESE THINGS, I'VE TALKED TO YOU INDIVIDUALLY, I'VE ALSO SHARED IN SPEAKING WITH FORMER COUNCILMEMBERS, NONE OF THESE ACTUALLY ENHANCEMENTS ARE NEW IN PRACTICE. 
          MANY WERE EXPECTATIONS, AND ACTUALLY PRACTICE. SOME OF YOU WERE ALREADY DOING. UNFORTUNATELY, SOME OF THESE THINGS WERE NOT WRITTEN DOWN. SO WE ARE NOW IN THE PROCESS OF WRITING N THEM DOWN TO CLARIFY EXPECTATION AND TO MINIMIZE ANY CONFUSION. 
          I ALMOST ALSO FRANKLY NOT NAIVE TO BELIEVE THAT SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE -- SOME OF YOUR FEEDBACK I TRUST COMES FROM A GENUINE PLACE. 
          I UNDERSTAND PREVIOUSLY MAYORS HAVE USED THIS PROCESS TO THROTTLE IDEAS. I CAN FULLY APPRECIATE THAT. 
          I WOULD ASK, AS I HAVE DEMONSTRATED IN MY ACTIONS AND AS I'VE EXPLAINED THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THESE THINGS, THAT THESE ARE ALL, AGAIN, DESIGNED FOR US TO BE EFFICIENT WITH OUR TIME AND TO MINIMIZE LEGAL RISK TO OUR COMMUNITY. THESE ARE ALL ABOUT GOING FASTER AND WE DO THAT THAT WE CAN ALL HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE HAVE SAID THEY DID HAVE, IN FACT, BEEN DONE. 
          AS MENTIONED IN BOTH MEMOS, OUR CITY ATTORNEY HAS REPEATEDLY CONFIRMED THAT THESE ENHANCEMENTS ARE NOT IN CONFLICT WITH THE ORDINANCE AND A CHANGE TO THE ORDINANCE IS NOT REQUIRED. ANDY, WOULD YOU PLEASE REAFFIRM THAT NOW, THAT ALL THE ENHANCEMENTS ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 
          CURRENT ORDINANCE. >> SEGOVIA: THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          YES, YOU HAD ASKED WHETHER THE CHANGES YOU HAD MADE IN YOUR MEMO ARE LEGAL, AND I HAVE SAID THAT THEY ARE. AND IF I MAY, I'LL GIVE THE THREE MAIN REASONS -- OR THE THREE REASONS WHY I'M GIVING THAT OPINION. 
          ONE IS THE CHANGES ARE NOT CONTRADICTORY TO ANYTHING IN THE ORDINANCE, THEY ARE SUPPLEMENTAL. NUMBER TWO IS THE CCR ORDINANCE PRESUPPOSES A GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE AND ASSOCIATED COUNCIL COMMITTEES, WHICH THE MAYOR HAS THE AUTHORITY TO CREATE, MODIFY OR DISBAND, THAT'S REASON NUMBER TWO.  AND PROBABLY MOST IMPORTANTLY, WHEN IT COMES TO LEGAL RISK TO THE CITY, THERE'S REALLY NO EXTERNAL LEGAL RISK TO THE CITY, THEREFORE FROM MY VIEW, THIS IS A MATTER SOLELY WITHIN THE 
          COUNCIL'S PREROGATIVE. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK 
          [00:05:02]
          >> MAYOR JONES: LET ME ALSO JUST LAY FLAT. THERE'S SOME MISPERCEPTIONS IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE OF WHAT THIS DOES AND DOES NOT DO. WHAT THIS DOES DO IS ENSURE WE CAN ALL TRUST THAT THE CURRENT PROCESS IS ACTUALLY BEING ADHERED TO. 
          THE VERY FIRST CCR REQUEST THAT I RECEIVED FELL SHORT OF THE PROCESS. THE FIRST LINE OF THAT SAYS, I HAVE NOTIFIED THE CITY MANAGER. I ASKED THE CITY MANAGER IF THAT WAS THE CASE. 
          THE CITY MANAGER SAID THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, THAT MISTRUTH WAS THEN RESHARED IN A PUBLIC DOCUMENT. 
          IT WAS SHARED THROUGH A PRESS RELEASE. WE THEN HAD TO RETRACT THAT PRESS RELEASE BECAUSE THAT MISTRUTH WAS OUT THERE. 
          SO I THINK WE CAN ALL APPRECIATE THE IMPORTANCE OF WHEN SOMEBODY SAYS THEY HAVE DONE SOMETHING, THAT IS, IN FACT, A TRUE STATEMENT. 
          AND I THINK WE CAN SAVE OURSELVES SOME TIME AND SOME ENERGY AND SOME BRAIN CELLS BY DOING WHAT I HAD ASKED, WHICH IS HAVING THE CITY MANAGER QUICKLY INITIAL THAT THEY HAVE, IN FACT, BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE CCR. 
          AND THAT'S ALL THAT DOES. THAT DOES NOT STOP IT IN ANY WAY, WHAT IT DOES JUST GIVES ALL OF US COMFORT THAT WE HAVE NOW REVIEWED -- WHEN REVIEWING THAT DOCUMENT, WHERE IT SAYS I HAVE NOTIFIED THE CITY MANAGER, WE CAN HAVE TRUST THAT THAT PROCESS HAS ACTUALLY HAPPENED. WHAT IT DOES ALSO DO BY ALLOWING THE CITY MANAGER AN EARLIER NOTIFICATION OF THE CCR ITSELF IS ALLOW HIM AND HIS OFFICE TO IDENTIFY POTENTIAL LEGAL RISKS TO THE CITY. SOME MAY SAY, OH, WELL, YOU KNOW, OTHER LAWYERS MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT READ ON THAT. 
          UNDERSTOOD. HOWEVER, THERE IS ONE CITY ATTORNEY, THERE IS ONE ATTORNEY WHOSE CLIENT IS THE CITY. SO I THINK WE SERVE OURSELVES WELL BY AT LEAST GETTING THAT READ. AND, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, SAME WITH ERIK, WHEN HE IS ASKED TO NOTIFY -- BE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT HE'S BEEN NOTIFIED, HE HAS JUST 24 HOURS TO DO THAT, RIGHT? SIMILARLY, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WOULD HAVE SIMILARLY JUST 24 HOURS TO, AGAIN, INITIAL THAT THEY HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED OF THE CCR. 
          AND AT THAT POINT, IF THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS ANY LEGAL CONCERNS, THAT THEY WOULD -- IF -- YOU KNOW, NOTIFICATION, I'VE SEEN IT, THANK YOU. 
          IF THERE ARE, IN FACT, THOUGH, LEGAL CONCERNS THAT OUR CITY ATTORNEY HAS, HE HAS 96 HOURS, RIGHT, TO DOCUMENT THOSE IN WRITING. 
          AND I THINK WHAT THAT AFFORDS ALL OF US THEN -- AGAIN, THAT DOESN'T GIVE HIM ANY MORE POWER. THAT GIVES US BETTER AWARENESS OF POTENTIAL LEGAL RISKS TO OUR COMMUNITY. THAT DOESN'T GIVE ANY MORE POWER. LET ME REITERATE THAT. IT DOESN'T GIVE -- IN AUDIO] -- WHAT IT DOES IS GIVE US GREATER ASSURANCE, GREATER CONFIDENCE THAT WE ARE BEING THOROUGH AND ARE MINIMIZING ANY RISKS TO OUR COMMUNITY. WHAT IT DOES NOT DO -- LET ME ALSO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT -- THIS IN NO WAY ENHANCES THE POWER OF UNELECTED CIVIL SERVANTS. IT DOES NOT DO THAT. IT ASKS ERIK VERY -- AGAIN, WITHIN 24 HOURS, PLEASE, AGAIN, INITIAL SO WE CAN ALL HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THE THING YOU HAVE SAID IS TRUE ON PAPER IS, IN FACT, ON PAPER. WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO BE GUESSING IF SOMEBODY'S LYING ON A PIECE OF PAPER. OKAY? WHY WOULD WE NOT WANT THAT EASY CONFIRMATION I WOULD ASK MY COLLEAGUES? WHY WOULD WE NOT WANT THAT. WE CAN SAVE OWRSELVES SOME TIME. AGAIN, ASKING ANDY TO PROVIDE AN INITIAL LEGAL REVIEW, TO FLAG POTENTIAL LEGAL CONCERNS DOESN'T GIVE HIM ANY MORE POWER. 
          IT GIVES US MORE AWARENESS, AND IN THIS LEGAL ENVIRONMENT,ME IN THIS -- LET ME REITERATE THAT:  IN THIS LEGAL ENVIRONMENT, WE NEED TO MINIMIZE THE RISK TO OUR COMMUNITY. LEGAL CONCERN WITH SOMETHING, HE WILL PROVIDE THAT IN WRITING, IN WRITING FOR EVERYBODY'S CONSIDERATION, WITHIN 96 HOURS. 
          AND THEN AS YOU, AS ELECTED OFFICIALS REPRESENTING YOUR CONSTITUENTS, YOU CAN REVIEW THAT WRITTEN DOCUMENT THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS TO PROVIDE AND WEIGH IN AND DETERMINE IF YOU WOULD STILL LIKE TO SPONSOR THE CCR. AGAIN, IT DOESN'T STOP ANYTHING. WHAT IT DOES, THOUGH, IS ARM YOU WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. EACH OF THE CCR ALSO -- EXCUSE ME, THE LEGAL REVIEW, AGAIN, IT DOESN'T GET STOPPED IN ANY WAY, IT JUST GIVES YOU GREATEST AWARENESS OF WHAT'S GOING ON. WHAT I ALSO FOUND IN SPEAKING WITH SOME OF YOU, AND IN SPEAKING WITH FORMER CITY 
          [00:10:03]
COUNCILMEMBERS, MANY OF YOU ARE ACTUALLY TRYING ALREADY TO GET A LEGAL REVIEW, AND SO SOME OF YOUR OFFICES ARE DOING THE EXACT SAME THING, WHICH I THINK -- I FIND TO BE SOMEWHAT INEFFICIENT, WHICH IS WHY HAVING THAT LEGAL REVIEW EARLY ON BY ANDY GIVES YOU SOME -- CAN SAVE SOME TIME AND SOME RESOURCES THERE. NO ONE IN OUR COMMUNITY BENEFITS BY DELAYING AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE POTENTIAL LEGAL RISKS TO OUR COMMUNITY. I WILL SAY -- AND I APPRECIATE THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE ALREADY USED THE CURRENT PROCESS, AND I HAVE FOUND IN THE FEEDBACK THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO DELAY. THE 24-HOUR -- HAS THE 24-HOUR REQUEST FOR INITIAL FROM ANDY AND ERIK HAS BEEN MET, WITHIN MY UNDERSTANDING, WELL BEEN THAT TIME FRAME. I CAN EMPATHIZE WITH PREVIOUS EXPERIENCES WHERE THERE WAS A PURPOSEFUL DELAY. 
          THAT IS NOT MY INTENT, WHICH IS WHY TO ADDRESS THAT, I PUT THE 24-HOUR CLOCK ON THAT. ADDITIONALLY, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF LETTING FOLKS KNOW, OF COURSE, WHAT YOU ARE WORKING ON. 
          LET'S BE ALSO VERY CLEAR: THIS PROCESS IN NO WAY PREVENTS ANYBODY FROM ISSUING A PRESS RELEASE ABOUT THE CCR THAT THEY HAVE SUBMITTED. 
          YOU'RE STILL FREE TO DO THAT. OKAY? I AM ALSO THANKFUL, BASED ON THE FEEDBACK THAT I'VE RECEIVED, THAT THE PROCESS HAS, IN FACT, WORKED AS DESIGNED. A COUNCILMEMBER SHARED THAT A DRAFT CCR THAT THEY WANTED THE CITY MANAGER FOR AN INITIAL, IN THAT CONVERSATION IT WAS SHARED THAT WHAT WAS BEING REQUESTED IN THAT DRAFT CCR WAS ACTUALLY ALREADY GOING TO BE PART OF THE PROPOSED FY '26 BUDGET. 
          SO, AGAIN, THAT SAVES US TIME AND ENERGY, BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T NEED TO BE REVIEWED BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY IN PROGRESS. 
          ADDITIONALLY, DURING -- IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING A DRAFT CCR, IT WAS IDENTIFIED THAT IT COULD ACTUALLY BE HANDLED COMPLETELY OFFLINE. 
          AND THAT CCR, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM NOTIFICATION TO CITY MANAGER TO LEGAL REVIEW TO COMPLETION AND BEING ADDRESSED BY THE STAFF WAS COMPLETED IN ALL OF FOUR HOURS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOKED AT THE NUMBER OF CCRS THAT DIED ON THE VINE IN THE LAST -- IN THE LAST ADMINISTRATION, MY INTENT IS THAT WE REVIEW THESE THOROUGHLY, WE DO AS MUCH OF THE WORK EARLY ON SO THAT THEY DON'T DIE ON THE VINE, AND THAT WE GET THESE -- BUT WE ARE ONLY, AGAIN, LOOKING AT THOSE THINGS THAT ACTUALLY REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL TIME AND ENERGY. 
          OKAY. I'LL REITERATE AGAIN, THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS BEEN VERY CLEAR THAT NONE OF THIS IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYONE THAT HAS ALREADY WORKED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE ENHANCEMENTS. AND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THESE ARE ALL DESIGNED TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE DOING THE BEST WE CAN FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, BEING EFFICIENT WITH OUR TIME AND ALSO MINIMIZING LEGAL RISK TO OUR COMMUNITY. OKAY. 
          LET ME JUST SAY ONE MORE THING. IT HASN'T GOTTEN A LOT OF FEEDBACK, BUT I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF THIS. 
          YOU KNOW, TOMORROW, WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET. 
          AND AS WE KNOW, WE'RE GOING INTO A VERY DIFFICULT FISCAL ENVIRONMENT, AND SO MY REQUEST THAT, YOU KNOW, AS YOU'RE SUBMITTING YOUR CCRS, YOU DO, YOU KNOW, PUT A SENTENCE OR TWO ABOUT YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THIS ENHANCES OR MODIFIES A CORE SERVICE, I THINK, IS REALLY IMPORTANT. THAT IDEALLY IS ALL OF A 30, 45-SECOND EXERCISE, IT'S TO HELP US UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THE THINGS THAT WE UNDERSTAND TO BE CORE AS WE ARE ENTERING A DIFFICULT FISCAL ENVIRONMENT, HOW WE MIGHT CONSIDER THAT CCR AFFECTING OR MODIFYING A CORE SERVICE IN THE CONTEXT OF OUR VERY CONSTRAINED FISCAL ENVIRONMENT. 
          I KNOW SOME OF -- SOME OF YOU HAVE REITERATED YOUR DESIRE THAT WE FOCUS ENCORE, AND I THINK, AGAIN, ONE OR TWO SENTENCE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF WHETHER SOMETHING, IN FACT, HAS TO DO WITH A CORE SERVICE ONLY HELPS US DO THAT. OKAY? AND, OF COURSE, EVEN IF IT'S NOT A CORE SERVICE, THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT DOESN'T GET REVIEWED, IT'S JUST WE ARE -- WE'RE LEVEL SETTING ABOUT WHAT SOMETHING TOUCHES AND DOES NOT. OKAY. OKAY. 
          [00:15:09]
I'VE GOT A COUPLE FOLKS THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. 
          COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO, PLEASE. >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO THANK COUNCILWOMAN AD GAFF AND COUNCILMAN MARK WHYTE FOR SIGNING ON TO THE THREE SIGNATURE TO HAVE A CONSIDERATION ABOUT THE COUNCIL CONSIDERATION PROCESS. 
          WE KNOW THAT THESE ARE ONE OF THE MANY VEHICLES WE USE TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR OUR CONSTITUENCIES AND GOVERNING AND GOVERNANCE IS A TEAM SPORT. AND HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT THESE CHANGE IS OF VALUE TO THE RESIDENTS OF SAN ANTONIO AND TO THIS BODY. 
          IF THERE'S MISUNDERSTANDING ON THE PRACTICES AND INTENT, THERE IS VALUE IN HAVING CONVERSATIONS AS A BODY OF HOW THIS MAY OR MAY NOT IMPACT OUR POLICY-MAKING PROCESS. NOW, WITH THAT BEING SAID, WITH THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES IN THE MEMO THAT WAS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL, WHAT WE KNOW IS THAT THE ADOPTED ORDINANCE FROM 2023 IS SOMETHING THAT WE DELIBERATED, DEBATED AND TOOK ACTION ON. 
          ONE OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD IN 2024 RATHER WAS THE RECOMMENDATION FOR CITY COUNCIL TO CHECK IN WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY, AND THAT RECOMMENDATION WAS REJECTED BY THE COUNCIL -- AUDIO] -- CHANGES; HOWEVER, IN TERMS OF TAKING ACTION ON AMENDING OR CHANGING AN ORDINANCE REQUIRES COUNCIL ACTION. AND, YEAH, I KIND OF -- NOT KIND OF. I CHALLENGE YOUR INTERPRETATION IN TERMS OF THE ABILITY TO CHANGE AN ORDINANCE WITHOUT COUNCIL ACTION. 
          I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'VE SHARED IS THAT IF IT DOES NOT CONTRADICT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE AND/OR IMPACT CITY SERVICES, IT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE UNILATERALLY. HOWEVER, I ARGUE THAT CCRS ARE THE VEHICLE IN WHICH WE DO IMPACT CITY SERVICES, RIGHT, AS LAID OUT -- AUDIO] -- FINANCIAL IMPACTS, LEGAL IMPACTS, SO, THEREFORE, BY PROXY, THIS MEMO DOES IMPACT THE OVERALL IMPACT TO THE ORDINANCE. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I DISAGREE. 
          IN 2024, ANDY, YOU ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CITY CHARTER,  THAT COUNCIL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO CHANGE THE PROCEDURES WITHIN THE GOVERNING PROCESS OF CITY COUNCIL. 
          DOES THAT STILL NOT STAND TODAY? >> SEGOVIA: THAT'S CORRECT, COUNCILWOMAN, WHICH IS WHY, AGAIN, MY LEGAL ANALYSIS IS THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE -- IT'S A FAMILY MATTER, AND THE FAMILY'S THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, AND NEITHER ERIK NOR I NOR THE CLERK BELONG TO THE FAMILY. 
          TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES, THAT'S STILL APPLICABLE, 
          COUNCILWOMAN. >> CASTILLO: OKAY. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I PREFER TO KEEP THE COUNCIL ADOPTED CCR PROCESS IN PLACE. 
          ANY PROPOSED CHANGES SHOULD BE DECIDED AND ADOPTED BY THIS BODY AND ORDINANCE BY FULL COUNCIL, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT OUR CONSTITUENCY RELIES ON. AND, AGAIN, I DO VALUE THE CLARIFICATION AND THE MAYOR WALKING US THROUGH HOW THIS IS INTENDED TO BE EFFICIENT AND STREAMLINE PROCESSES; HOWEVER, RIGHT, I VALUE YOUR LEADERSHIP, BUT, AGAIN, RIGHT, YOU HIGHLIGHTED PAST LEADERSHIP, AND I CAN'T THINK ABOUT THE CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP. 
          I NEED TO THINK ABOUT THE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE AS A WHOLE AND LONG TERM, RIGHT? WE CAN'T THINK ABOUT INDIVIDUALS, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE GOVERNING PROCESS AND STRUCTURE BEYOND OUR TENURE ON COUNCIL. THAT'S WHY I BELIEVE THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT IF WE DO HAVE DISCUSSION ON AMENDING THE EXISTING ORDINANCE THAT COUNCIL SHOULD DELIBERATE AND TAKE ACTION.  SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT WE KEEP THE COUNCIL-ADOPTED CCR IN PLACE AND ANY PROPOSED CHANGES SHOULD BE DECIDED AND ADOPTED INTO ORDINANCE BY FULL CITY COUNCIL, AGAIN WITH THE CURRENT GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE, THE PROCESS IS THAT STAFF PRESENTS THE REASONS FOR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OR DENIAL IN A PUBLIC MEETING, WHETHER COUNCILMEMBERS CAN ASK QUESTIONS AND PROVIDE MORE OF THAT INFORMATION. WHAT WE DO GET IS THAT LEGAL ANALYSIS FROM CITY STAFF WHETHER SOMETHING IS OR IS NOT PREEMPTED, BUT WE HAVE EXAMPLES IN WHICH GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS -- YEAR AFTER YEAR THAT IT'S A STATE ISSUE, IT'S TCEQ, IT'S OUTSIDE AND BEYOND P PURVIEW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, BUT THROUGH THE PERSISTENCE OF THE CCR PROCESS AND THROUGH THE GOVERNANCE PROCESS WITH COUNCIL COMMITTEES, WE'RE ABLE TO ENSURE THAT, ONE, THERE'S A FIRE EMERGENCY PLAN IN PLACE, AND TWO ENSURING THAT THOSE IRRESPONSIBLE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. THE ARGUMENT WAS THAT IT WAS PREEMPTED, IT WAS THE STATE'S RESPONSIBILITY, OUT OF THE HANDS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT. 
          I THINK THAT'S AN EXAMPLE, WHILE I UNDERSTAND INTENT, WHAT WE HEAR IS THAT THE POLICIES THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS RELY ON AND EXPECT US TO PUT FORWARD WE'RE OFTEN TOLD THEY'RE PREEMPTED AND THERE'S A LOT OF EXAMPLES I KNOW MY COLLEAGUES HAVE, BUT ULTIMATELY, THIS IS ABOUT ENSURING THAT WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THE ORDINANCE IN PLACE THAT WAS ADOPTED BY COUNCIL THAT CAN CONTINUE AND ALLOW US TO MEET THOSE NEEDS OF OUR CONSTITUENCIES, BECAUSE THAT'S THEIR EXPECTATIONS. 
          [00:20:02]
I VALUE THE EXPERTISE OF ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES, YOU ALL WERE DULY ELECTED, AND WITH THE CURRENT PROCESS, RIGHT, THE EXPECTATION IS THAT WE GET SUPPORT FROM FOUR COLLEAGUES TO MOVE SOMETHING FORWARD. 
          AND I THINK THAT MERITS MOVING THE PROCESS FORWARD AS ADOPTED BY COUNCIL. THANK YOU, MAYOR. COUNCILWOMAN -- ACTUALLY, LET ME GO BACK TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. ANDY, DOES YOUR LEGAL ADVICE CHANGE DEPENDING ON WHETHER YOU PROVIDE AN INITIAL LEGAL REVIEW BEFORE SOMETHING REACHES GOVERNANCE OR WHEN IT'S IN GOVERNANCE? 
          >> SEGOVIA: IT MIGHT CHANGE, MAYOR, DEPENDING ON ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR OBVIOUSLY CHANGES IN LAW OR IF A PROGRAM CHANGES IN TERMS OF WAYS TO MITIGATE RISK, SO IT CAN EVOLVE OVER TIME, YES. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: UNDERSTOOD. YES. AND THE BACK AND FORTH. 
          BUT IF YOU WERE PRESENTPRESENTED WITH THE SAME LEGAL ISSUE, NO CHANGES IN LAW, WHETHER YOU LOOKED AT IT BEFORE IT REACHED GOVERNANCE OR WHEN IT WAS IN THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, WOULD YOUR LEGAL READ OF IT CHANGE? HOW DOES SOMETHING -- LET ME. 
          >> SEGOVIA: IT SHOULDN'T CHANGE, UNLESS -- AGAIN, I GUESS, UNLESS ME OR SOMEBODY ON MY TEAM FRANKLY JUST MADE A MISTAKE ON IT, BUT, NO, 
          IT SHOULDN'T CHANGE. >> MAYOR JONES: RIGHT. SO THE EXAMPLE THAT COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO RAISED OF, WELL, INITIALLY, IT WAS RAISED AS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE PREEMPTED, DURING DISCUSSION, IT WAS IDENTIFIED THAT THERE WAS ACTUALLY A WAY TO GET TO YES, THAT PROCESS, AS OUTLINED IN THIS CCR ENHANCEMENT MEMO, THAT IS STILL AN OUTCOME THAT IS 
          POSSIBLE, CORRECT? >> SEGOVIA: YES, MAYOR, AGAIN, THE LEGAL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS COULD EVOLVE OVER TIME AS WE GET MORE INFORMATION OR AS THE PROGRAM OR INITIATIVE GETS MORE DISCUSSED. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: YEAH. AND DIESH THAT'S HELPFUL. 
          AND MAYBE JUST TO LEVEL SET FOR FOLKS, BECAUSE, AGAIN, MUCH OF MY -- MUCH OF MY INTENT WITH BRINGING THE LEGAL REVIEW SOONER IS BECAUSE WE ARE, IN FACT, IN A MUCH DIFFERENT LEGAL ENVIRONMENT THAN THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT WHEN THIS CCR, THE ORIGINAL -- THE 2023 CCR MEMO WAS WRITTEN. CAN YOU GIVE US YOUR ASSESSMENT, ANDY, OF THE CHANGES IN THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT THAT REQUIRE A MORE PRUDENT REVIEW OF 
          POTENTIAL LEGAL RISKS TO THE CITY? >> SEGOVIA: WELL, I MEAN, THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT HAS EVOLVED, AS YOU MENTIONED, MAYOR, NATIONWIDE, THERE'S A HIGHER AWARENESS MAKING SURE WE COMPLY WITH LAWS, PARTICULARLY FEDERAL LAW. TO YOUR POINT, WE JUST HAVE TO BE MORE CAUTIOUS IN TERMS OF WHAT WE LOOK, IN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DOCHT OUR ROLE IS TO GIVE THE ADVICE THE BEST WE CAN. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: SO JUST TO RECAP, ONE, THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT HAS CHANGED, IT'S MORE CHARGED. LEGAL RISKS ARE HIGHER. SECONDLY, YOUR LEGAL REVIEW OF SOMETHING AND WHETHER OR NOT IT MAY EVOLVE BASED ON ENGAGEMENT IS THE SAME, WHETHER YOUR LEGAL REVIEW IS BEFORE GOVERNANCE OR AFTER GOVERNANCE, THE BENEFIT OF THAT, THOUGH, IS THAT OTHERS THAT MAY POTENTIALLY CONSIDER SUPPORTING THAT CCR, NOW HAVE AT LEAST THE BENEFIT OF YOUR INITIAL ANALYSIS. HAVE I CAPTURED THAT 
          CORRECTLY? >> SEGOVIA: I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH WHAT YOU 
          SAID, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO, MAY I ASK DO YOU HAVE -- JUST TO CLARIFY WHERE THE CONTENTION IS, DO YOU HAVE -- WHAT IS THE CONCERN WITH HAVING CITY MANAGER WRITE, INITIAL TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT HE'S 
          BEEN NOTIFIED. >> 
          WITH CITY MANAGER MARK WHYTE. >> MAYOR JONES: WITH ERIK, HERE WE GO. WHAT IS THE RUB  WITH HAVING THE CITY MANAGER INITIAL IT SO WE CAN ALL HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THE STATEMENT "I HAVE NOTIFIED THE CITY MANAGER" IS, IN FACT, A TRUE ONE. 
          >> CASTILLO: WITH A COUNCIL-ADOPTED ORDINANCE IT DOES HAVE THAT WE NOTIFY THE CITY MANAGER. NOTIFICATION COULD MEAN TEXT, CALL AND/OR WITH SIGNATURE. WITH THE ADOPTED ORDINANCE, IT DOES INCLUDE NOTIFICATION TO THE CITY MANAGER. BUT, AGAIN, THAT'S 
          NOTIFICATION. >> MAYOR JONES: I UNDERSTAND THAT, AND THE EXAMPLE THAT I RAISED WITH COUNCILWOMAN ALDARETE GAVITO SUBMITTED THE FIRST CCR THAT SAYS I HAVE NOTIFIED THE CCR, I ASKED THE CITY MANAGER IF HE HAD SEEN IT AND HE HADN'T BEEN NOALTIFIED. NO FOATIFICATION IN ANY OF THE FORMS YOU JUST DESCRIBED WHICH IS WHY I THINK WE CAN SAVE OURSELVES SOME TIME AND ENERGY BY JUST HAVING HIM INITIAL IT SO THAT MEANS THAT WE HAVE -- THAT WE KNOW HE'S ABOUTUALLY BEEN NOTIFIED. 
          >> CASTILLO: WHAT I WOULD RESPOND TO THAT IS OUR CITY MANAGER'S RESPONSIBLE FOR AN ORGANIZATION WITH THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES, AND MICROMANAGING THE GOVERNANCE PROCESS IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK 
          [00:25:01]
OUR COLLEAGUES IN TERMS OF COUNCIL DELIBERATION, DISCUSSION AND COMMITTEE DEBATE IS HOW WE WORK THROUGH THAT PROCESS, RIGHT? IF SOMETHING'S NOT A GOOD IDEA, IT DIES, BUT ULTIMATELY, WE'RE ELECTED AS A POLICYMAKERS. ERIK, ANDY, Y'ALL ARE FACILITATORS OF THOSE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS AND/OR IDEAS. AND THAT'S THE RUB. 
          AND WITH THE CURRENT ADOPTED ORDINANCE, IT IS NOTIFICATION TO THE CITY MANAGER AND NOT NECESSARILY A SIGNATURE OF THE CITY MANAGER. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: SO NOTIFICATION, THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, RIGHT, IS THAT HE'S NOTIFIED. SO IF THE CURRENT ORDINANCE IS NOT ADHERED TO, REALLY, AGAIN, HIM JUST INITIALING THAT IS A WAY TO ENSURE WE CAN HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE IS ADHERED TO. 
          DO YOU HAVE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO ENSURE THAT EVERYBODY CAN HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THE CITY MANAGER HAS, IN FACT, 
          BEEN NOTIFIED? >> CASTILLO: ERIK, HOW WOULD YOU LIKE US TO GO ABOUT HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TO BE CONSIDERED FOUR S FOR SIGNATURES FROM OUR COLLEAGUES? 
          >> WALSH: HOWEVER Y'ALL WANT IT. REALLY, THIS IS AN INTERNAL PROCESS. AND THE MAYOR'S RIGHT, SHE ASKED ME THE QUESTION, THE ORDINANCE SAYS NOTIFICATION OF THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. 
          YOU ALL HAVE LIAISONS. I'M ALWAYS AVAILABLE. HOWEVER Y'ALL WANT TO DO 
          IT. >> CASTILLO: OKAY. AND WHAT I EMPHASIZE AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS KEEP L THE COUNCIL-ADOPTED CCR PROCESS IN PLACE. THANK YOU, MAYOR. . 
          >> MAYOR JONES: AND TO BE VERY CLEAR, THIS DOESN'T CHANGE THE NOTIFICATION. 
          WHAT THIS DOES IS MAKE SURE THAT THE NOTIFICATION, IN FACT, TAKES PLACE AND PEOPLE CAN HAVE CONFIDENCE WHEN THEY SIGN ON TO SOMETHING THAT THE NOTIFICATION HAS, IN FACT, OCCURRED. COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE? 
          >> WHYTE: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANT TO TELL A STORY THAT IS THE BACKGROUND FOR HOW WE GOT HERE TODAY. 
          TWO YEARS AGO I WAS ELECTED, MY VERY FIRST CCR I WORKED WITH COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ TO CREATE A FUND FOR CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION. WE FILED IT, WE TALKED ABOUT IT, TOO, COUNCILWOMAN, AS WELL AS WITH MARINA AS WELL. WAS ALL PROUD, RIGHT? FILED MY FIRST CCR AND THEN I REMEMBER SOMEBODY SAYING TO ME, GOOD LUCK EVER GETTING THAT HEARD. I SAID, WELL, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? AND THE PERSON SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, THESE THINGS GET F FILED AND THEY JUST STACK UP AND THEY DON'T GO ANYWHERE. I SAID, WELL, I'M GOING TO FIX THAT. AND I WENT AND FOUND THE CCR ORDINANCE THAT EXISTED AT THAT TIME AND I SAID, I'M GOING TO AMEND THIS TO MAKE SURE THE PROCESS WORKS. AND THEN I HAD SOMEBODY IN THIS VERY BUILDING SAY TO ME, MARK, ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO AMEND THE CCR PROCESS? BECAUSE I KNOW YOU AGREE WITH JALEN ON THIS ONE, BUT JALEN COMES UP WITH ALL SORTS OF CRAZY IDEAS AND ARE YOU SURE YOU REALLY WANT TO SEE THOSE MOVING FORWARD? AND I LOOKED AT THE PERSON AND FRANKLY, I COULDN'T BELIEVE IT. BECAUSE WHILE IT IS TRUE THAT COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ AND I ARE GOING TO DISAGREE ON A LOT, IF COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ CAN GET FOUR OTHER PEOPLE TO SIGN ON TO ONE OF HIS CCRS TO ADVANCE A POLICY INITIATIVE FOR DEBATE AMONGST COUNCIL, THEN HIS CCR GETS TO BE HEARD JUST AS MUCH AS MINE OR ANYBODY ELSE'S. 
          THAT IS THE PROCESS, THAT IS OUR GOVERNMENT. THAT IS THE SYSTEM THAT WE LIVE UNDER. HE'S DULY ELECTED, JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE. 
          AND I BRING THAT UP TO SAY THAT THE INTEGRITY OF THIS PROCESS CANNOT BE TAKEN FOR GRANTED. AND SO WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THAT CONVERSATION IS WE MOVED FORWARD. AND I WANT TO THANK THE PEOPLE AROUND THIS TABLE THAT HELPED US AMEND THE PROCESS, RIGHT? THERE'S COUNCILMEMBERS HERE THAT WERE INVOLVED, EDWARD, RIC, COUNCILMAN MUNGIA AND COUNCILMEMBER GALVAN WERE STAFF MEMBERS, THEY HELPED ON IT AS WELL. 
          WE ALL GOT TOGETHER AND FIGURED OUT HOW DO WE WANT TO PROCEED AS A COUNCIL. I MET WITH MAYOR NIRENBERG, I MET WITH ANDY AND I MET WITH ERIK, AND WE WENT BACK AND FORTH ON WHAT THE PROCESS SHOULD LOOK LIKE. AND IT RESULTED IN A B SESSION JUST LIKE THIS WHERE WE SAT TOGETHER, WE TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT IDEAS, AND THEN THAT RESULTED IN GOING TO A SESSION AND A VOTE TO AMEND THIS ORDINANCE, THIS THING RIGHT HERE CONTROLS HOW WE OPERATE IN TERMS OF CCRS. 
          [00:30:04]
AND I WANT TO READ YOU THE VERY FIRST LINE OF THIS ORDINANCE. SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CITY CHARTER AUTHORIZE CITY COUNCIL, NOT MARC WHYTE, NOT THE MAYOR, NOT PHYLLIS,  NO, CITY COUNCIL TO DETERMINE ITS RULES OF P PROCEDURES IN ORDER OF BUSINESS. IT'S THE CITY CHARTER THAT PUTS THE DOMAIN OF ESTABLISHING RULES AND PROCEDURES AND ORDERS OF BUSINESS ON THIS BODY, NOT ON ONE PERSON. AND THAT'S THE REASON WE HAD TO HAVE THAT VOTE TWO YEARS AGO TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE. 
          THE NEXT PORTION TALKS ABOUT HOW IN 2003, RIGHT, THIS CITY COUNCIL CREATED THIS ORDINANCE TO SET FORTH T THE CCR POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. 
          IN 2007, CITY COUNCIL WANTED TO AMEND IT AGAIN, AND THEY DID. 
          AND THEN THIS BODY IN 2024 AMENDED IT FOR THE FINAL TIME, AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS HERE TODAY. AND, ANDY, YOU KNOW, YOU AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS, AND I'M NOT GOING TO GO BACK AND FORTH WITH YOU ON THE LEGAL OUT HERE, BUT I AGREE WITH THE COUNCILWOMAN THAT THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED BY THE MAYOR ABSOLUTELY CONFLICT WITH THIS ORDINANCE. AND THERE WAS JUST A DEBATE A SECOND AGO, THE MAYOR ASKED ABOUT WHETHER IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT IF THE LEGAL ANALYSIS OCCURRED BEFORE IT GOES TO GOVERNANCE OR AFTER IT GOES TO GOVERNANCE. 
          WELL, GUESS WHAT STATUTE SAYS? GUESS WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS? THE ORDINANCE SAYS THAT A LEGAL REVIEW CAN TAKE PLACE IF THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE FEELS IT'S NECESSARY. 
          SO AS OF RIGHT NOW, THE ORDINANCE SAYS THE LEGAL REVIEW TAKES PLACE AFTER THE CCR IS FILED AND IT GOES TO GOVERNANCE. THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED CHANGES WANT THE LEGAL REVIEW TO GO BEFORE, SO THE MAYOR'S CHANGES, THE PROPOSED CHANGES, VERY DEFINITELY CONFLICT WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. 
          AND TO CHANGE THIS ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE THE RULES THAT WE HAVE ALL AGREED TO LIVE BY, WE MUST GO TO AN A SESSION AND WE MUST HAVE A VOTE. 
          AND, GUYS, THIS IS NOT ABOUT US HERE NOW OR THIS MAYOR, THIS IS ABOUT FUTURE COUNCILMEMBERS, FUTURE MAYORS, WE HAVE TO HAVE RULES, WE HAVE TO HAVE PROCESS. WE HAVE TO FOLLOW WHAT IS IN THE ORDINANCE. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO BORE EVERYBODY WITH THE LAW, RIGHT, BUT THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT HAS BEEN REALLY, REALLY CLEAR ON HOW YOU INTERPRET ORDINANCES. YOU HAVE TO READ THEM ON THEIR FACE. 
          YOU CAN'T ADD LANGUAGE OR INTERPRETATION TO ORDINANCES UNLESS THEY'RE AMBIGUOUS, RIGHT? YOU CAN'T DO IT. AND TWO YEARS AGO, AND ERIK, YOU WERE IN THERE, AND, ANDY, YOU WERE IN THERE, TOO. 
          WE WENT BACK AND FORTH ON THIS CITY MANAGER NOTIFICATION, AND WE DECIDED TO JUST PUT IT IN THERE AS NOTIFYING. BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT, AS ERIK SAID, YOU GUYS CAN NOTIFY ME HOWEVER YOU WANT. 
          STOP ME IN THE HALL, SHOW IT TO ME, SEND ME AN E-MAIL, DO WHAT YOU WANT. THAT'S WHY IT SAYS "NOTIFY" AND IT DOESN'T SAY "WRITTEN NOTIFICATION SSM" TO THE CITY MANAGER. 
          NOW, IF THIS BODY THINKS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY MANAGER IS BEING NOTIFIED WITH SOME FORM OF WRITTEN NOTIFICATION, WHETHER IT'S HE'S INITIALING OR WE HAVE TO SEND HIM AN E-MAIL OR WHATEVER IT IS, LET'S CHANGE THE ORDINANCE, LET'S GO TO AN A SESSION AND LET'S CHANGE SECTION 1 HERE TO SAY "WRITTEN NOTIFICATION" IF THAT'S THE WILL OF THIS BODY. BUT IT IS THE WILL OF THIS BODY THAT CONTROLS, NO ONE PERSON. AS THE COUNCILWOMAN STATED, AND I WON'T -- WON'T GO TOO MUCH INTO IT, BUT THE CCR PROCESS, EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, RIGHT? WE ARE ALL IN OUR COMMUNITIES, IN OUR DISTRICTS EVERY SINGLE DAY HEARING PROBLEMS FROM THE RESIDENTS AND THEN 
          [00:35:02]
IT'S OUR JOB TO COME BACK HERE, WORK WITH OUR COLLEAGUES, FIND SOLUTIONS TO MAKE THEIR DAY-TO-DAY LIVES BETTER. THERE'S ONLY REALLY TWO METHODS FOR ALL OF US ON COUNCIL TO ADVANCE OUR POLICY IDEAS, RIGHT? IT'S, ONE, THROUGH THE THREE-SIGNATURE MEMO PROCESS, WHERE WE CAN GET WHAT WE WANT ON THE AGENDA, AND THEN THE SECOND IS THROUGH THIS CCR PROCESS, WHICH TAKES FIVE PEOPLE, RIGHT? ALMOST HALF THE COUNCIL HAS TO AGREE THAT A POLICY IDEA WARRANTS FURTHER DISCUSSION TO GET A CCR FILED. THE PREREQUISITES FOR FILING A CCR ARE VERY, VERY CLEAR IN THIS STATUTE. YOU HAVE TO HAVE FIVE SIGNATURES AND YOU HAVE TO NOTIFY THE CITY MANAGER. 
          THOSE ARE THE TWO PREREQUISITES, THE MEMO THAT THE MAYOR SENT EVERYBODY, RIGHT, THERE'S A SECTION ENTITLED "PREREQUISITES," THAT ADDS A LOT MORE THAN WHAT'S RIGHT HERE. IF THIS BODY WANTS TO ADOPT THESE OR ANYTHING ELSE, LET'S DO IT. BUT IT HAS TO BE DONE WITH A VOTE. ALL OF US HERE GET A SAY IN THAT. 
          AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE WITH THE COUNCIL-ADOPTED PROCESS AS IS. LET'S KEEP GOING BECAUSE IT'S WORKING VERY, VERY SUCCESSFULLY. AND, LOOK, IN SIX MONTHS, A YEAR, IF WE WANT TO COME BACK, LOOK AT THE PROCESS, MAKE IMPROVEMENTS, FIND MORE EFFICIENCIES, LET'S DO IT. LET'S HAVE A DEBATE AND THEN IF WE THINK WE WANT TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT, LET'S GO TO AN A SESSION, LET'S VOTE AND AMEND. THANK YOU, MAYOR. COUNCILMAN WHYTE IN THE INSTANCE YOU JUST LAID OUT, WHAT YOU SAID THE FOLKS HAVE TO TO NOTIFY THE CITY MANAGER,  WHEN THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, AS IT DIDN'T HAPPEN MOST RECENTLY, WHAT -- WHAT DO YOU PRO PROPOSE THERE? AGAIN, LET'S NOT FORGET -- I GET -- FOLKS ARE DEBATING, DEBATING, YOU KNOW, THEIR COMFORT WITH AN ENHANCEMENT, BUT WHEN SOMETHING ALREADY IS NOT HAPPENING THE WAY THAT IT IS INTENDED, SO YOU'RE SAYING, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO NOTIFY, THAT'S NOT HAPPENING. 
          THAT'S NOT HAPPENING. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WAS HAPPENING, MMM, 60% OF THE TIME,ISH, RIGHT? SO THERE WERE MANY TIMES THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE HAPPENING THAT WEREN'T HAPPENING. AND, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST CODIFYING -- HAVING -- HELPING FOLKS HAVE SOME COMFORT THAT WHAT'S SAID THAT WAS DONE WAS, IN FACT, DONE. SO HOW WOULD YOU HELP YOUR OTHER COLLEAGUES ENSURE THAT -- DO  YOU WANT TO CALL EVERYBODY AND LET THEM KNOW, HEY, CITY MANAGER WAS NOTIFIED. 
          HOW CAN WE VERY QUICKLY AND EFFICIENTLY UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY MANAGER WAS NOTIFIED ABOUT A DRAFT CCR, ANYTHING SIMPLER OR MORE TIMELY OR MORE TIMELY -- EFFICIENT IN THE TIME THAN WITH JUST A QUICK INITIAL. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY OPPOSED TO THE 
          INITIAL, PER SE? >> WHYTE: SURE. SO THANK YOU FOR USING THE WORD "CODIFYING,," BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE. IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE IT FROM NOTIFY TO WRITTEN NOTIFICATION, WE NEED TO CODIFY IT WITHIN THE STATUTE. 
          TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MAYOR -- NOT WRITTEN NOTIFICATION IT DOES HAVEN'T TO BE WRITTEN NOTIFICATION. 
          YOU CAN, IN FACT, LET HIM KNOW VERBALLY, AND THEN HE CAN INITIAL TO 
          ACKNOWLEDGE THAT HE HAS BEEN NOTIFIED. >> WHYTE: I EXPLAINED 
          THAT TO YOU AS WELL. >> MAYOR JONES: NO, I EXPLAINED THAT TO YOU. 
          GO AHEAD. >> WHYTE: THANK YOU. HIS WRITING TO ME WOULD BE HE RECEIVED NOTIFICATION AND IT WOULD BE IN WRITING TO TELL 
          US. >> MAYOR JONES: YEAH. >> WHYTE: THIS IS HOW I THINK WE COULD DO IT, MAYOR, THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY GET NOTIFICATION EVERY TIME A CCR'S FILED. SO IF ERIK SEES -- 
          >> MAYOR JONES: NO, THEY DON'T. >> WHYTE: WHAT DO YOU MEAN, IT'S -- 
          FILED. >> MAYOR JONES: WHEN IT'S FILED, YES, THAT'S 
          CORRECT. >> WHYTE: IT'S FILED, DEBBIE WILL THEN. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: YES, I'M FAMILIAR. >> WHYTE: TAKE IT IN GIVE EVERYBODY NOTICE THAT A NEW CCR HAS BEEN FILED LIKE SHE'S DONE FOR THE 
          LAST TWO YEARS. >> MAYOR JONES: YEP. >> WHYTE: ERIK AND ANDY WILL SEE IT, RIGHT? IF ERIK DIDN'T GET NOTIFIED, RIGHT, HE CAN VERY EASILY AT THAT POINT SAY, I NEVER RECEIVED NOTIFICATION AND THEN YOU KNOW WHAT? THEN YOU'RE RIGHT, MAYOR, THEN WE COULD SAY, THE PROCESS WASN'T FOLLOWED AND THEN MAYBE THE CCR SHOULD NOT PROCEED TO 
          [00:40:03]
GOVERNANCE. SO THAT WOULD BE ONE WAY TO HANDLE IT. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, THOUGH, IS -- AS I ELABORATED AND PROVIDED EXAMPLES WHERE THINGS THAT WERE GOING TO BECOME A CCR, IT WAS ACTUALLY IDENTIFIED IN THE PROCESS OF THE INITIAL NOTIFICATION TO ERIK THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO BE CCRS. 
          SO MY -- AGAIN, MY INTENT, THINGS THAT DON'T REQUIRE COUNCIL TIME AND ENERGY OR REVIEW -- BECAUSE, AGAIN, FOR ME, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THE OUTCOME, RIGHT? WHAT IS THE OUTCOME THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET FOR THE CONSTITUENT. AND IF THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL ACTION, AS SEVERAL EXAMPLES HAVE ALREADY SHOWN, THEN IT DOESN'T 
          NEED IT. >> WHYTE: MAYOR -- >> MAYOR JONES: THEN WHY EVEN GO THROUGH THE HASSLE OF THE OTHER STEPS WHEN YOU COULD CLEARLY 
          IDENTIFY THAT EARLY ON. >> WHYTE: SO I WOULD SAY, MAYOR, RESPECTFULLY, PERHAPS WATCH HOW THE SYSTEM PLAYS OUT FOR SIX MONTHS. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: YEAH. >> WHYTE: BE A PART OF IT BEFORE YOU WANT TO MAKE A CHANGE TO A SYSTEM THAT YOU HAVE BEEN -- WORKS AND THEN PERHAPS YOU CAN MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS, BECAUSE IT'S WORKED PRETTY WELL, I THINK, EVERYBODY AROUND THIS TABLE WOULD TELL 
          YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: WELL, I MEAN, RESPECTFULLY, COUNCILMAN WHYTE, THE FACT THAT 30-SOME-ODD CCRS DIED ON THE VINE SHOWS THERE MAY BE WAYS TO IMPROVE THEIR PROCESS. 
          >> WHYTE: YOU DON'T KNOW WHY THEY DIED ON THE VINE, MAYOR. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: EXCUSE ME. THANK YOU. 
          I THINK ALSO AS THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS ALREADY JUST DESCRIBED, THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT HAS CHANGED. SO I AM ALWAYS GOING TO TRY TO MINIMIZE THE LEGAL RISK TO OUR COMMUNITY. I WILL ALSO TAKE STEPS ALWAYS THAT PREVENT FRANKLY EMBARRASSING STEPS LIKE NEEDING TO RESCIND A PRESS RELEASE. 
          WE DON'T NEED TO DO THOSE THINGS, SO LET'S SAVE OURSELVES TIME AND ENERGY. I -- THIS IS -- YOU KNOW, WHY WOULD YOU NOT WANT AN EASY CONFIRMATION THAT HE'S BEEN NOTIFIED, WHY WOULD YOU NOT WANT AN EARLY LEGAL REVIEW THAT WILL KEEP THE COMMUNITY OUT OF RISK. 
          ON THE MERITS I AM STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND WHY THIS BENEFITS THE COMMUNITY, YOUR PUSHBACK ON THOSE VERY SIMPLE ENHANCEMENTS. 
          OKAY. WE'VE GOT -- OKAY. ALDARETE GAVITO, PLEASE, 
          COUNCILWOMAN. >> GAVITO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          I WANT TO ALSO THANK COUNCILWOMAN WHITE AND COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO IN YOUR PARTNERSHIP IN MAKING SURE OUR RESIDENTS' VOICES ARE HEARD IN CITY HALL. I WANT TO BE CLEAR, WE REPORT TO THE RESIDENTS. 
          AS COUNCILMEMBERS, WE DO NOT REPORT TO THE MAYOR. WE REPORT TO THE RESIDENTS OF OUR DISTRICTS AND WE REPORT TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY. AND THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE CCR IS A TOOL THAT WE USE TO GET THINGS DONE ON OUR RESIDENTS' BEHALF. 
          SO TO ME A UNILATERAL DECISION TO ALLOW UNELECTED CITY STAFF TO POTENTIALLY VETO SOME OF OUR IDEAS AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COMMUNITY, I AM GOING TO TAKE ISSUE WITH THAT. SO I DO WANT TO ALSO MAKE SURE THAT I'M ALSO CLEAR ON THIS ERIK, I PREFER TO KEEP THE COUNCIL-ADOPTED CCR IN PLACE. ANY PROPOSED CHANGES SHOULD BE DECIDED AND ADOPTED INTO ORDINANCE, AGAIN, BY A VOTE OF THE FULL CITY COUNCIL. 
          AS EXAM CASTILLO POINTED OUT, THIS IS A TEAM SPORT, YOU KNOW, AND SO WE NEED EACH OTHER. WE NEED EACH OTHER'S SUPPORT TO PUSH IDEAS THROUGH. YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE WERE ALSO HAVING IS MY LOOSE AND DANGEROUS DOG POLICY PROPOSAL. 
          YOU KNOW, I TOOK THAT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY INITIALLY AND ALSO WAS TOLD THAT IS A STATEWIDE ISSUE. AND WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF I JUST STOPPED THERE? MY TEAM DIDN'T JUST STOP THERE. WE DIDN'T TAKE NO FOR AN ANSWER, AND NOW WE HAVE A VERY EFFECTIVE LOOSE AND DANGEROUS DOG POLICY PROPOSAL THAT IS SOLVING REAL-LIFE CONCERNS FOR OUR RESIDENTS. SO THE CCR PROCESS IS THE COUNCIL TOOL, AND ONLY THE COUNCIL SHOULD DECIDE ON HOW IT IS. 
          IT IS NOT THE -- FOR ONE PERSON TO DO. THIS IS OUR TOOL TO GET THINGS DONE ON OUR RESIDENTS' BEHALF, AND WE'RE GOING TO KEEP IT 
          THAT WAY. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: WANT TO CORRECT YOUR STATEMENT, THOUGH, THERE IS NO UNILATERAL VETO IN THAT PROCESS. WHEN THEY SUBMIT IT -- WHEN IT'S SUBMITTED TO ERIK FOR NOTIFICATION, HE DOESN'T VETO. THERE'S NO VETO IN THIS ENTIRE PROCESS. WHEN IT GOES TO CITY ATTORNEY SEGOVIA, HE WILL, AGAIN, INITIAL THAT HE HAS SEEN IT, RIGHT, AND IF HE HAS A LEGAL CONCERN, HE'LL WRITE THAT AND PROVIDE THAT TO NOT ONLY THE SPONSOR, BUT FOR EVERYBODY'S EDIFICATION ABOUT THE POTENTIAL LEGAL RISKS. 
          THE DRAFT CCR STILL MOVES FORWARD. NO ONE VETOES ANYTHING, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE CLEAR ON THAT POINT. 
          >> GAVITO: I AM CLEAR ON THAT, BUT WITH THE LOOSE AND DANGEROUS DOG POLICY PROPOSAL, AGAIN, WE WERE TOLD, YOU KNOW, DOGS ARE PROPERTY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, IT'S A STATEWIDE ISSUE I COULD HAVE STOPPED THERE. 
          AND WE DIDN'T TAKE THAT FOR AN ANSWER. . 
          >> MAYOR JONES: UNDERSTOOD. AND IN THIS PROCESS, YOU COULD STILL ALSO TAKE 
          [00:45:03]
THAT FORWARD. AS I SHARED, ANDY COULD PROVIDE HIS INITIAL LEGAL ASSESSMENT AND WORK THROUGH SOME OF THE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS AS YOU RIGHTLY POINTED OUT, ALSO CONSIDER THERE. THIS DOESN'T ACTUALLY CHANGE THAT IN ANY FORM OR FASHION. ADDING A LEGAL REVIEW EARLY ONLY, AGAIN, GIVES THE ENTIRE COUNCIL THE BENEFIT OF THAT LEGAL ANALYSIS AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE. OKAY. 
          COUNCILWOMAN VIAGRAN? >> VIAGRAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          SO SOUND PUBLIC POLICY WILL ALWAYS ADVANCE IN DUE COURSE, AND AS IS CUSTOMARY WITH ANY NEW ADMINISTRATION, ADJUSTMENTS ARE MADE, NEW INITIATIVES ARE INTRODUCED. NATURALLY WITH ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE, THERE IS A PERIOD OF ADAPTATION, AND I VALUE THIS OPEN DIALOGUE THAT WE'RE HAVING, BUT I REALLY DO THINK THAT WE JUST NEED TO KIND OF STATE OUR POINTS AND KIND OF TRY AND COME TOGETHER. BECAUSE A KEY, WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD, WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD TOGETHER AND WE NEED TO FOCUS ON OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH EACH OTHER. I BELIEVE IT'S PRUDENT THAT ANY PROCESS PROPOSED CHANGES UNDERGO A THOROUGH LEGAL REVIEW, I TAKE MY ISSUES TO ANDY. 
          IF I ASK A CERTAIN QUESTION, WHATEVER RECOMMENDATION HE GIVES ME, I ADJUST AND MAKE FORWARD. THE OTHER THING THAT I DO IS I MAKE SURE I DISCUSS IT WITH THOSE I'M GETTING SIGNATURES FOR. 
          SOMETIMES I'LL GO TO ANDY MULTIPLE TIMES, AS WE MAKE CHANGES THROUGH THIS. SO I THINK IT'S EASY TO LET THE LEGAL TEAM LOOK OVER IT. IN TERMS OF DOES THE OPINION NEED TO COME OUT, IF I FIND OUT THAT SOMEONE'S GONE TO ANDY, I'M PRETTY MUCH GOOD WITH HOW WE MOVE FORWARD ON THIS. AND THERE'S JUST GOING TO BE ADJUSTMENTS AND WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO PIVOT. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THE MANAGER'S NOTIFICATION ON THE OFFICE. 
          WE COULD LOOK INTO IF IT'S JUST OUR LIAISON THAT WE TALK TO AND THEN BEFORE DEBBIE ISSUES IT OUT, WE -- WE MAKE SURE THAT ERIK HAS PUT HIS SIGNATURE ON IT, IF HE NEEDS TO GET A SIGNATURE. 
          BUT I THINK WORKING TOGETHER, WE CAN FIND A WAY TO GET THIS PROCESS DONE. I THINK THE MORE WE STREAMLINE, THE MORE WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK AND HAVE THE LONG DRAWN-OUT DEBATES THAT WE'VE HAD. WE'VE ALL HAD CCRS WHERE THIS HAS GONE THROUGH THE BETTER, AND SO THE OTHER THING IS, THIS -- THIS IS A PROCESS. 
          AND BENE WE NEED TO KIND OF LOOK AT IT TOGETHER AS A TEAM, BUT THESE CONVERSATIONS CAN HAPPEN IN TWO OR THREE OR FOUR, WE DO NOT NEED TO ALWAYS HAVE TO COME TO A B SESSION. AND THE OTHER THING THAT I THINK IS CRITICAL IS THAT WE GET TO COMMITTEE. 
          AND IN COMMITTEE, WE CAN DO A LOT OF WORK ALSO. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE GO THROUGH COMMITTEE AND AS WE GO THROUGH, YOU KNOW, THE CONVERSATION THAT WE CONTINUE TO UNDERSTAND THAT OUR RELATIONSHIPS AND HOW WE TALK TO EACH OTHER IS KEY. AND I THINK WE NEED TO DO MORE OF THAT. SO I'M PLEDGING NOW THAT I'M GOING TO DO MORE WHERE WE CAN INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER IN SMALLER GROUPS SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE'RE -- WHAT'S COMING FROM, BUT I THINK THESE ARE THINGS THAT I HAD ALREADY BEEN DOING, SO I'M OKAY WITH FORMALIZING IT. I'M ALSO, IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LARGER CONVERSATION, WE CAN HAVE A LARGER CONVERSATION ON THIS ISSUE, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO GO TO COMMITTEE FIRST BEFORE WE 
          DO. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE? YEAH, PLEASE, GO AHEAD. 
          >> I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. ONE THING I WANT TO UNDERSTAND IS WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IN OUTCOME IS BETWEEN THESE ENHANCEMENTS AND WHAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE BOOKS, AND THERE'S DISCUSSION OF THE INPUTS AND OUTPUTS OF THIS PROCESS. SO JUST A CLARIFYING QUESTION FOR ERIK AND ANDY, AND I -- WHEN I WAS A STAFFER AND THIS WAS HAPPENING, I DID EXPRESS CONCERN AT THAT TIME. ABOUT THE NOTIFICATION TO CITY MANAGER ONLY IN THE SENSE THAT IT'S COMPLETELY WIDE OPEN, SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW ERIK'S -- HOW WELL YOU REMEMBERED THINGS, RIGHT, BUT IT KIND OF LIKE WAS -- I COULD STOP YOU IN THE HALLWAY I COULD TELL YOU, IF I SEE YOU AT AN EVENT, I COULD TELL YOU. 
          IT'S SLIGHTLY INFORMAL IN THAT WAY, AND I UNDERSTAND WANTING TO HAVE THAT OPEN PROCESS, BUT -- SO QUESTION ON PROCESS FOR YOU TWO, IF I WANTED TO DO A CCR, YOU KNOW, JUST COMPLETELY OUT THERE, RIGHT, IF I WANTED A MANDATE THAT EVERY PRIVATE BUSINESS IN SAN ANTONIO HAVE UNIONS 
          [00:50:04]
OR -- WHICH SOME OF US PROBABLY WOULD WANT TO SIGN THAT, OR IF I -- YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE LEGAL LANDSCAPE THAT WE CURRENTLY EXIST IN TEXAS AND I SAID I WANT THE CITY'S METRO HEALTH'S DEPARTMENT TO RUN AN ABORTION CLINIC, I'M SURE BOTH OF YOU WOULD HAVE A COUPLE CONCERNS WITH THAT, BUT WALK ME THROUGH WHAT YOU WOULD DO IN THOSE TWO SITUATIONS AND WHAT I WOULD BE ABLE TO DO AFTER YOU HAVE REVIEWED THAT. 
          >> WALSH: WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO DO? I MEAN, LOOK AT ME, I MEAN, THIS IS A PROCESS THAT GOVERNS Y'ALL'S CONSIDERATION REQUESTS. 
          IT'S REALLY UP TO YOU. IT'S NOT -- EITHER WAY, RIGHT, IN EITHER SITUATION, IT IS THE BEGINNING OR THE INITIATING OF A CONCEPT, AN IDEA, PROPOSAL, A NEW ORDINANCE OR WHAT HAVE YOU. 
          IT'S THE INITIATING PART OF IT. I'M INDIFFERENT. 
          YOU ALL DECIDE HOW YOU WANT TO DO IT. I DON'T THINK ANY OTHER WAY -- I DON'T THINK ANY ONE WAY IS BETTER THAN THE OTHER, AND REALLY, IT COMES DOWN TO HOW YOU ALL WANT TO DO IT. THE NOTIFICATIONS IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN BY TEXT, THEY'VE BEEN AT MY MONTHLY MEETINGS, THEY'VE BEEN AT CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, THEY I'VE TAKEN ALL DIFFERENT FORMS. I'M INDIFFERENT TO THAT. IT IS -- AND I THINK THIS WAS PART OF THE B SESSION CONVERSATION THAT COUNCILMAN WHYTE TALKED ABOUT THAT OCCURRED TWO YEARS AGO, THE MANAGER'S JOB -- I HAVE A LOT OF RESPONSIBILITIES. 
          ONE OF THOSE THINGS IS NOT TO STOP CONCEPTS OR IDEAS FROM THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, BECAUSE THIS IS THE INITIATION PART. THE MAYOR MENTIONED THERE WAS COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ WAS CONSIDERING RESUBMITTING A CCR ON A TOPIC, HE CALLED ME, I TOLD HIM, I SAID, WELL, JUST SO YOU KNOW, IN TWO WEEKS IT'S GOING TO BE IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET. 
          SO THERE ARE SOME BENEFITS TO THAT, BUT AROUND NEW CONCEPTS OR NEW IDEAS, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO NOTIFY ME, YOU ALL DECIDE. 
          IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE TO ME. >> MAYOR JONES: AND JUST TO CLARIFY, COUNCILMAN, I AM ALSO AGNOSTIC AS TO THE NOTIFICATION. 
          I REALLY JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS, IN FACT, HAPPENED. 
          RIGHT? THAT'S ALL THAT THE INITIAL TO ME SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFIES, IS AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. 
          >> MUNGIA: AND ANDY, IF YOU WANT TO OPINE ON THE TWO SCENARIOS I LISTED. 
          >> SEGOVIA: I WOULD PROVIDE THAT LEGAL ADVICE DIRECTLY TO YOU, 
          COUNCILMAN, ON THAT REGARD. >> MAYOR JONES: WELL, TO BE CLEAR, YOU WRITE IT DOWN, RIGHT? YOU'D WRITE DOWN THAT LEGAL COUNSEL IN THE INSTANCE THAT -- SO INITIALING, SAY, YEP, I'VE SEEN IT. IF THERE'S A LEGAL CONCERN, YOU WOULD 
          IDENTIFY WHAT THAT IS SO THAT -- >> SEGOVIA: AS IT RELATES 
          TO CCR. >> MAYOR JONES: YES, SIR, THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. 
          >> SEGOVIA: I GUESS WHAT I WANT TO EMPHASIZE. >> MAYOR JONES: OH, 
          OKAY. >> SEGOVIA: IF ANY COUNCILMEMBER COMES TO ME WITH A QUESTION, I WOULD OBVIOUSLY ANSWER THE QUESTION TO THE LEGAL 
          ADVICE. >> MAYOR JONES: I THINK BECAUSE HIS QUESTION WAS TO THE CCR, I WANTED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT MUDGES. 
          >> MUNGIA: SO IF I WAS TO GIVE YOU A CCR METRO HEALTH HAS AN ABORTION CLINIC OR EVERY BUSINESS HAS TO HAVE A UNION, AND THAT IS CONTRARY TO FEDERAL LAW, YOU COULD PUT THAT IN WRITING, BUT WOULD I BE ABLE TO STILL PROCEED WITH SIGNATURES WITH THAT ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND GET THAT CCR TO 
          GOVERNANCE FOR DISCUSSION. >> SEGOVIA: I THINK UNDER THE MEMORANDUM THE MAYOR ISSUED, I WOULD INITIAL IT BUT I WOULD GIVE THE 
          WRITTEN ADVICE ON IT. >> MUNGIA: SO YOU'RE -- EVEN IF IT WAS AGAINST STATED AND FEDERAL LAW, THAT WOULD STILL MOVE FORWARD. 
          >> SEGOVIA: CORRECT. I WOULD INITIAL  AGAIN, JUST SAYING THAT I HAD 
          REVIEWED IT. >> MUNGIA: YES, IF WE WANT TO BAN THE FIRST AMENDMENT, THAT CAN STILL GO TO GOVERNANCE, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE IS GETTING AT IS, WHAT ROLE AND AUTHORITY DO YOU HAVE 
          TO STOP THAT? >> SEGOVIA: I HAVE NO ABILITY TO STOP IT. 
          >> WALSH: NONE, YEAH. >> MAYOR JONES: THIS TERM, UNILATERAL VETO IS INCORRECT. NOT SURE WHERE IT CAME FROM. 
          THERE'S NO VETO IN MY WAY. WHAT IT DOES IS TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE INFORMED EARLY ON OF ANY LEGAL RISKS, AT LEAST THOSE 
          THAT ARE UNDERSTOOD INITIALLY. >> MUNGIA: AND IF I CAN ASK YOU, MAYOR, SOMETHING REAL QUICK. AGAIN, THE -- AND I THINK PART OF THE CONFUSION POINT WAS THE WORD "COORDINATION WITH YOUR OFFICE," SO, AGAIN, IF I WANTED A CCR AND I WAS GOING TO GO 100% AGAINST YOU, A RESOLUTION TO GET RID OF THE MAYOR, YOU COULD NOT STOP THAT OR PREVENT THAT FROM GETTING SIGNATURES OR GOING TO GOVERNANCE TO ADDRESS 
          [00:55:02]
          THAT? >> MAYOR JONES: YEAH. SO THANK YOU FOR RAISING THAT. AS I UNDERSTAND, AGAIN, SOME OF THIS WAS EXPECTATIONS AND PRACTICE UNDER PREVIOUS FOLKS, BUT BECAUSE IT WASN'T NECESSARILY WRITTEN DOWN, THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT WAS ADHERED TO MASS MAS O MENOS, RIGHT? SO THE INTENT THERE, RIGHT, IS NOT TO -- THE ORIGINAL INTENT WAS NOT TO HAVE MY CHIEF OF STAFF IN ANY WAY SLOW IT DOWN, BUT JUST AS A HEAD'S UP. MY UNDERSTANDING, AGAIN, IT WAS UNDERSTOOD BY OTHERS AND IT WAS A PRACTICE TO PROVIDE THAT PROFESSIONAL COURTESY FROM THE SPONSORING COUNCILMEMBER TO THE MAYOR'S CHIEF OF STAFF, THAT, HEY, THIS IS COMING, AND THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL THAT THAT WAS INTENDED TO DO.  I WOULD AT THIS POINT STILL ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO RAISE THAT OR SHARE THAT WITH MY CHIEF OF STAFF. WE ARE COMMITTED TO EVERYBODY BEING SUCCESSFUL, AND THAT'S THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THAT. AGAIN, AT THIS POINT, IT IS AN ENCOURAGE. 
          >> MUNGIA: AND, ANDY, ANOTHER QUESTION, SO I CAN GET YOUR FEEDBACK ON THAT ALSO, THE MAYOR KPT CANNOT STOP A CCR HERSELF, CORRECT? 
          >> SEGOVIA: THAT'S CORRECT, IF I READ THE ORDINANCE AND THE MEMO 
          TOGETHER, YES, THAT'S CORRECT, COUNCILMEMBER. >> MUNGIA: OKAY. 
          AND IF THERE WERE TO BE FURTHER ENHANCEMENTS, THAT COULD STILL NOT BE 
          CORRECT? >> SEGOVIA: I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, YOU MEAN 
          FURTHER ENHANCEMENTS IN -- >> MUNGIA: WELL, IF IT'S THE CURRENT MAYOR OR ANY FUTURE MAYOR, IF THEY WERE TO DO SOME ENHANCEMENTS TO THIS PROCESS, COULD THERE BE ANYTHING FOR THE MAYOR TO 
          UNILATERALLY STOP A CCR FROM PROGRESSING? >> SEGOVIA: I GUESS MY ANSWER TO THAT WOULD BE IT WOULD DEPEND ON HOW THIS COUNCIL DECIDES HOW 
          THEY WANT TO DO THAT. >> MUNGIA: THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: SW 
          COUNCILWOMAN SPEARS? >> SPEARS: THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          I KNOW I AM -- I'M NEW TO THIS ENTIRE PROCESS, BUT MY CONCERNS LIE WITH THE SPEEDINESS OF GETTING OUT OUR CCRS FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS. 
          I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE FOUR-DAY TURNAROUND WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. I FEEL LIKE THAT COULD POTENTIALLY DELAY THINGS GETTING THROUGH ON MY END AND REPRESENTING MY CONSTITUENTS, BUT I ALSO WANTED TO ASK YOU, ANDY, SO TO YOUR POINT, I DO UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO. I'M CONCERNED THAT SHOULD ANOTHER MAYOR COME IN THAT DOESN'T HAVE THAT SAME INTENT USE THIS AS A WEAPON IN SOME WAY LATER ON, IF WE DO CHANGE THIS ORDINANCE. 
          AND THEN FURTHER ON TOP OF THAT, IF WE ARE COORDINATING WITH THE MAYOR'S OFFICE IN ANY WAY, DID YOU -- DID YOU CONSIDER AT ALL IF THIS WOULD CREATE A WALKING QUORUM AT THAT POINT, HAVE YOU EVER CONSIDERED THAT, ANDY. COUNCILWOMAN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'VE SEEN THE LATEST VERSION OF THE MEMO, WHICH REMOVES THE REQUEST FOR COORDINATION WITH MY OFFICE. AT THIS POINT IT'S 
          ENCOURAGED IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WANT TO DO. >> SPEARS: I UNDERSTAND. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: I WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT PART. 
          >> SPEARS: I DO. IN ANY EVENT, IF WE WANTED TO TAKE THAT AND COORDINATE WITH HER OFFICE, WOULD THAT NOT CREATE A WALKING QUORUM. 
          >> SEGOVIA: IF IT'S A DISCUSSION WITH THE MAYOR'S CHIEF OF STAFF, IT PROBABLY DOESN'T CREATE A WALKING QUORUM ISSUE. 
          >> SPEARS: IT DOES NOT? >> SEGOVIA: NO. >> SPEARS: THANK YOU FOR THAT. I THINK I FEEL I DO UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT OF WHY YOU'RE TRYING TO DO THIS, I FEEL LIKE I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO EXPERIENCE THE PROCESS AS IT STANDS TODAY, THE CCR PROCESS, BUT AS WE MOVE ALONG AND WE SEE A DESIRE TO MAKE ANY CHANGES, THAT WE COULD VOTE ON THIS AS A COUNCIL. AGAIN, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT AND THE NATURE OF THE REASONING BEHIND THIS. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT POTENTIAL FUTURE LEADERSHIP, THOUGH, USING IT IN A WAY THAT ISN'T 
          WITH THAT INTENT, SO -- >> MAYOR JONES: CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT. 
          I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN? >> SPEARS: WELL, IF SOMEONE COMES BEHIND YOU AND CAN USE SOME OF THESE AS A WAY. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: SOME OF WHAT, I'M SORRY. >> SPEARS: THESE 
          NOTIFICATION. >> MAYOR JONES: OKAY. >> SPEARS: AND PROCESS TO 
          SLOW DOWN CCRS OR STOP THEM IN SOME FASHION. >> MAYOR JONES: YEAH, 
          COUNCILWOMAN -- >> SPEARS: EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM EXCLUDED, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT OF ANYONE IN THIS ROOM. COUNCILWOMAN, THE REQUIREMENT FOR NOTIFICATION TO THE CITY MANAGER IS ALREADY IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. THE ONLY THING THAT I HAVE ASKED FOR IS, AGAIN, 
          [01:00:01]
BECAUSE A PREVIOUS CCR WAS SUBMITTED, THEY SAID THEY NOTIFIED THE CITY MANAGER, THAT WAS A LIE -- RESCIND A PRESS RELEASE, RIGHT, AND SO THE ONLY THING I'M LOOKING FOR, I'M NOT SAYING YOU MUST TALK TO ONLY TO CITY MANAGER ON MONDAY AND NOTIFY THEM IN WRITING AND ALL -- THAT'S NOT THE CASE IN ANY WAY. 
          YOU ARE FREE TO NOTIFY THE CITY MANAGER HOWEVER YOU'D LIKE TO IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. I'M JUST ASKING FOR, HEY, GIVE US CONFIRMATION THAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENED. 
          SO AN INITIAL IS ALL THAT THAT THAT IS. I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT CAN BE WEAPONIZED. MOREOVER, THE EARLIER LEGAL REVIEW, AGAIN, JUST GIVES EVERYBODY COMFORT IN AT LEAST WHAT IS THE INITIAL READING TO MINIMIZE DUPLICATIVE LEGAL REVIEWS THAT I UNDERSTAND IS ALREADY HAPPENING IN SOME OFFICES. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEEDBACK. >> SPEARS: THANK YOU. 
          COUNCILMAN GALVAN? >> GALVAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          I THINK IT'S THE QUESTION THAT I'VE BEEN HEARING FROM COUNCILMEMBERS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN, WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN. I WANT TO ASK KIND OF MORE POINT BLANK, IF COUNCILMEMBERS -- SAY THIS PROCESS IS APPROVED AND WE GO FORWARD WITH THE NEW WAY OF GOING WITH THE CCRS AND THE NOTIFICATIONS, THE CONFIRMATION OF NOTIFICATION IS NOT MET, AND I WOULD STILL SUBMIT THE CCR TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN? THE PREREQUISITES ARE NOT MET FOR THE CCR PROCESS, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE 
          CCR? >> MAYOR JONES: WELL, I MEAN, THAT ONE TO YOUR POINT, THE ONE THAT I DESCRIBED, WAS OUT OF ALIGNMENT WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE AND WE ONLY CAUGHT THAT BECAUSE I ASKED. 
          SO THAT, IN MY MIND, WAS NOT A VALID CCR. THAT'S WHY IT WAS PULLED BACK. BUT, AGAIN, THAT'S JUST -- THAT'S JUST THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. THAT'S NO CHANGES TO WHAT I'VE HAD. 
          I JUST -- I ASKED THE QUESTION, ERIK SAID, NOPE, NO IDEA. 
          NEVER RAN IT BY ME. NO NOTIFICATION TO MY OFFICE. 
          SO, AGAIN, IN -- AND A PRESS RELEASE WAS ISSUED, SO GIVEN THAT MANY PRESS RELEASES ARE ISSUED AFTER THESE -- AFTER THESE ARE SUBMITTED, AGAIN, I THINK WE ALL DESERVE JUST SO SOLACE AND COMFORT THAT THE NOTIFICATION HAS, IN 
          FACT, TAKEN PLACE. >> GALVAN: NO, THAT'S HELPFUL. 
          I GUESS MY QUESTION IS. >> MAYOR JONES: WHAT WE JUST DID RIGHT HERE IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DON'T HAVE SOME ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT IT'S HAPPENED. WE HAVE TO GUESS. AND WE SHOULDN'T SPEND ANY TIME OR ENERGY GUESSING THAT SOMEBODY HAS DONE THE THING THEY 
          DID. >> GALVAN: GET THE NOTIFICATIONS BACK AND THEN COME BACK AROUND TO GET THE CCR ON THE AGENDA AT THE GOVERNANCE. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: YEAH. >> GALVAN: JUST MAKING SURE. 
          I MEAN, THAT. >> MAYOR JONES: WHAT THAT -- IF I MAY, JUST IN 
          THAT POINT. >> GALVAN: YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: THE -- WITH THE ENHANCEMENT, RIGHT, WITH THE CITY MANAGER INITIALING THAT, IT WOULD ACTUALLY NEVER GET TO ANDY, RIGHT, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THAT SIGNATURE YET FROM ERIK, WHICH YOU WILL HAVE IN 24 HOURS, BUT THAT, AGAIN, GIVES EVERYBODY SOLACE THAT THE CURRENT STEPS AND REQUIREMENTS ARE ACTUALLY BEING ADHERED TO. 
          SO BY HAVING THAT INITIAL EARLY ON, WE ADHERE TO THE PROCESS. 
          >> GALVAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'M TRYING TO SEE WHERE THIS QUESTION WILL GO TO. AYE M GOING TO ASK THE QUESTION, IT CAN BE TO THE CITY CLERK, MAYOR OR ANDY. 
          GENERALLY FOR CHAIRS AND COMMITTEES, I NOVEMBER GKNOW GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE IS DIFFERENCE, BUT THE COMMITTEES ALL HAVE DISCRETION TO AGENDA SOMETHING OR NOT, CORRECT? 
          AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHICH WAY I'M GOING ON THIS. >> SEGOVIA: IN THE PREVIOUS CHARGE TO COMMITTEES, YES, THAT'S CORRECT, COUNCILMAN. 
          >> GALVAN: OKAY. AND WHEN YOU SAY PREVIOUS CHARGES, YOU'RE SAYING 
          CURRENT ONES AREN'T IN PLACE YET OR BECAUSE. >> SEGOVIA: THE MAYOR HAS 
          NOT -- >> GALVAN: OH, YEAH, YEAH. 
          SO I GUESS MY THOUGHT ON THIS CURRENTLY IS THAT THE MAYOR'S EXERCISING THEIR ABILITY TO AG EXPW AGENDIZE ITEMS AS CHAIR OF THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, CORRECT, AGENDIZE CCRS, CORRECT? AND THEN, ANDY, I HEARD SOMETHING, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEARD IT CORRECTLY, WHEN MY COLLEAGUE FROM DISTRICT FOUR MENTIONED IF A NEW MAYOR WANTED TO CHANGE THIS PROCESS, OR THE PREREQUISITES, COULD THEY DO SO WITH A MEMO? I BELIEVE YOUR ANSWER WAS IF COUNCIL DECIDES OR 
          AGREES, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE -- >> SEGOVIA: THANK YOU FOR 
          LETTING ME CLARIFY THE QUESTION. >> GALVAN: YEAH, YEAH. 
          >> SEGOVIA: AS LONG AS IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE ORDINANCE -- IT DOES NOT DIRECTLY CONFLICT WITH THE ORDINANCE AND AS LONG AS THE COUNCIL, AGAIN, HAS POINTED OUT BY COUNCILMAN WHYTE HAS THE ABILITY TO DETERMINE 
          [01:05:01]
THEIR OWN RULES AND PROCEDURES, THEY CAN DO THAT BY ORDINANCE, THEY CAN DO THAT -- THEY CAN DO THAT IN A VARIETY OF WAYS, BUT, AGAIN, IT'S UP 
          TO COUNCIL. >> GALVAN: JUST MAKING SURE I UNDERSTAND, IT CAN BE DONE IN DIFFERENT FORMS THAN JUST AN ORDINANCE. 
          IT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL TO DECIDE WHAT THAT PROCEDURE IS? OKAY. THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS AT THE MOMENT. 
          I'LL COME BACK AROUND IN THE SECOND ROUND. LISTEN TO THE 
          CONVERSATION A BIT MORE. >> MAYOR JONES: DO YOU HAVE -- DID YOU SIGN IN, 
          COUNCILWOMAN? >> GOTTEN OTHERS, BUT -- GO AHEAD, COUNCILWOMAN. RIGHT NOW -- WELL, ACTUAL LU, I'VE GOT COUNCILWOMAN KAUR. ARE THERE OTHERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN THE FIRST ROUND? OKAY. 
          COUNCILWOMAN KAUR, PLEASE. >> KAUR: THANK YOU ALL TO MY COUNCIL COLLEAGUES WHO BROUGHT THIS FORWARD. I THINK THIS IS GREAT HAVING DISCUSSION. 
          DISCUSSIONS, IF YOU ASK ANYBODY WHAT THEY LOVE ABOUT THE SPURS THE MOST, THEY'RE THE HARDEST TEAM TO HATE. AND THE REASON WHY THEY'RE THE HARDEST TEAM TO HATE IS BECAUSE WE'RE ABOUT TEAMWORK, AND THAT THEY REALLY BELIEVE IN WORKING -- WE HAD A SIGNIFICANT LEADER ON THIS FIRST TEAM A FEW YEARS AGO, WENT OFF TO FOR RAN TO AND WON HIS SHIP BUT HE WASN'T A GOOD FIT FOR OUR TEAM BECAUSE HE WASN'T ABOUT TEAMWORK. SO I THINK WHAT OUR COMMUNITY WANTS FROM US IS JUST TO WORK TOGETHER AS A TEAM TO FIGURE OUT WHAT OUR POLICY MAKING PROCESS IS GOING TO BE THAT WORKS FOR EVERYONE. AND SO WITH THAT, I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH ACTUAL REQUESTS OF WHAT THE PROCESS IS INCLUDED IN THE MAYOR'S MEMO. OUR OFFICE, WHEN WE DO POLICY MAKING, WE'RE ALWAYS FOCUSED ON -- WE ACTUALLY GET OUR IDEAS FROM THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THE GROUND OR THINGS THAT WE'RE SEEING FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS, AND WE GENERALLY WORK VERY HAND-IN-HAND WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS DATA AND NEED FOR IT, THAT THERE IS POTENTIAL FUNDING, IF THAT'S A DECISION THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE. 
          AND WE'LL OFTEN, IF IT IS A LEGAL ISSUE, WE WILL CALL ANDY AS WELL. 
          WHEN WE WERE WORKING ON THE MEMO THAT WOULD NEED TO BE SIGNED BETWEEN SAWS, CITY AND CPS FOR OUR INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES, WE MADE SURE THAT THERE WAS ACCOUNT BILITYD ACCOUNTABILITY METRIC IN THAT MEMO TO SIDE, AND THAT WAS LEGAL HELP THAT ANDY'S TEAM PROVIDED. 
          WE GENERALLY GO THROUGH THESE MEASURES. I THINK THESE CAME UP BECAUSE IN AN INSTANT THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. WHEN YOU'RE IN A CLASSROOM AND YOU HAVE A SET OF NORMS AND THE NORMS DON'T GET FULFILLED, YOU CAN EITHER CHANGE THE PROCESS TO ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY OR WE CAN RESET ON THOSE NORMS. SO I THINK WHAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO IS WORK TOGETHER AS A TEAM TO RESET ON THE NORMS THAT WE WANT TO ALWAYS HOLD EACH OTHER TO. AND WHETHER THAT MEANS A SIGNATURE IS NECESSARY OR NOT, I'M TOTALLY OPEN FOR IF WE FEEL THAT IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY METRIC WE NEED, WHERE WE CAN SAY, YES, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERY SINGLE CCR THAT WE PUT FORWARD FROM NOW ON DOES GET THE CITY MANAGER'S LOOK ON IT. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN WE PUT POLICY FORWARD THAT WE DON'T NETANYAHULY NECESSARILY AGREE ON. WE WORKED REALLY HARD ON THIS PUBLIC PIECE AUDIT THAT WE WANTED TO DO FROM AN EXTERNAL CONSULTANT, I TOLD ERIK, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO LOVE THIS ONE, BUT THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR OUR COMMUNITY.  AND HE DIDN'T STOP IT BECAUSE AS YOU SAID, IT'S -- HIS JOB IS NOT TO PREVENT US FROM POLICY MAKING, BUT IT'S STILL THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS TELL HIM, LIKE THIS IS WHY WE'RE DOING IT. THIS IS WHAT OUR COMMUNITY WANTS TO SEE. 
          ALL OF THAT TO BE SAID, I THINK WE JUST NEED TO COME TOGETHER AND RESET ON THE NORMS THAT WE WANT TO HOLD OURSELVES TO. AND THE ONE THING THAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT THAT ACTUALLY CAME UP THAT I HADN'T THOUGHT ABOUT BEFORE, THANKFULLY, BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE TO TERM OUT, BUT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOMEONE TERMS OUT? LIKE WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE THAT IN THE ORDINANCE. I THINK WE SHOULD ADD SOMETHING FOR THAT, JUST TO DECIDE IF THE LEADING COUNCILPERSON IS NO LONGER ON THE DAIS, DO WE KEEP THEIRS GOING? THIS ACTUALLY HAPPENED WHEN I CAME ON BECAUSE THE COUNCILMEMBER BEFORE HE HAD STARTED AN UPDATE TO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE, THAT WAS ALREADY UNDERWAY, SO THEY KEPT THAT PROCESS GOING. SO MAYBE THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING THAT CAN ADD TO IT FOR COUNCILMEMBERS THAT HAVE TERMED OUT. I DON'T KNOW, THERE ARE SOME THAT WERE PUT FORWARD RIGHT BEFORE FOLKS LEFT EARLIER THIS SPRING THAT I UNDERSTAND SINCE WE'RE REFILING, WE MAY NOT, I GUESS, RECONSIDER THOSE, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO ADD. 
          IN ADDITION, THERE'S JUST ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION THAT I LAD HAD FROM 
          [01:10:04]
THE MEMO MAYOR, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO ANSWER IT NOW,  BUT IT'S JUST ABOUT THE FINANCIAL IMPACT. THAT ONE IS TRICKY. 
          IF WE DON'T HAVE FINANCES FOR SOMETHING, WE CAN PUT TOGETHER A CCR, BUT SOMETIMES IT ALLOWS US TO HELP BUDGET IT MOVING FORWARD. 
          SO, THAT COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ -- HE DID IT BEFORE MY TIME BUT NOW IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ACTUALLY FUND IN OUR BUDGET, HAS BEEN REALLY HELPFUL. I THINK WE NEED TO PUT MORE MONEY IN OUR BUDGET FOR THAT, ERIK. BUT THAT IS AN EXAMPLE OF ONE THAT DID NOT ACTUALLY HAVE FUNDING TIED TO IT THAT WE WERE ABLE TO FUND LATER ON AND IT HELPED MAKE AN IMPACT THAT THE POLICY HAD ALREADY GONE THROUGH AND WE LOCATED FUNDING. ALL OF THAT TO SAY, I THINK THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO REDISCUSS AND SHARE NORMS ABOUT WHAT'S POSSIBLE. 
          COUNCILWOMAN SPEARS MENTIONED SHE IS GETTING USED TO THIS CCR PROCESS. 
          IT TOOK ME SEVEN MONTHS BEFORE I FILED MY FIRST CCR. THE FIRST ONE I DID WAS IN COMBINATION WITH COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE BUT HE DID MOST OF THE HEAVY LIFTING ON THAT ONE BECAUSE I WAS STILL LEARNING. IT WOULD BE GREAT, MAYBE WE GO STRAIGHT TO AN A SESSION AND HAVE A DISCUSSION ON IT RIGHT AFTER BUDGET, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE PRETTY HECTIC DURING BUDGET, BUT GIVE US A COUPLE OF MONTHS FOR THE NEW FOLKS TO GET UNDERWAY AND LETS DO AN A SESSION AND TALK ABOUT HOW DO WE MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT HAVING TO GO BACK AND RECHECK. I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU. WE WANT TO -- WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HOLD OURSELVES TO A HIGH STANDARD EVEN IN POLICYMAKING PROCESS. 
          I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE CHANGES, I JUST AGREE WITH LET'S COME TOGETHER AND SHOW THE COMMUNITY THAT WE'RE A TEAM. WE'RE 11 PEOPLE THAT WANT TO COLLABORATE AND FIND THE RIGHT PROCESS TO DO POLICYMAKING. THANKS, MAYOR. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILMAN MUNGIA. >> MUNGIA: YOU BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT ABOUT THE STR. AFTER YOUR PREDECESSOR LEFT, THAT WAS NOT MOVING ANYWHERE, BUT MY PREDECESSOR BROUGHT THAT FORWARD AT HER COMMITTEE. THAT WAS SOMETHING SHE TOOK UPON HERSELF TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON. I THINK IT DOES MERIT DISCUSSION ABOUT RETURNING COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CCRS AND SPONSORSHIP. 
          I THINK ALSO ANOTHER POINT THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL -- I KNOW COUNCILMAN WHYTE RAISED SOME LEGAL ISSUES AND I THINK THERE MIGHT BE SOME HESITATION AND SOME ANSWERS, GIVEN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION THAT IT COULD ALSO WARRANT A FUTURE OF EXECUTIVE SESSION, SINCE IT IS PERTAINING TO A LOT OF LEGAL ISSUES OR LEGAL MATTERS HERE. I THINK THAT COULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR ALL OF US ALSO FOR THIS DISCUSSION. THANK YOU. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: THANKS. THE MOVE TO HAVE FOLKS RESUBMIT CCRS THAT DID NOT GET ACROSS THE FINISH LINE IS REALLY IN LINE WITH EVERY OTHER LEGISLATIVE BODY:  STATE, FEDERAL, ET CETERA. I THINK WHAT IT ALSO DOES IS GIVE DUE RESPECT TO THE FOLKS THAT HAVE BEEN NEWLY ELECTED, TO ENSURE THAT THERE REMAINS SUFFICIENT SUPPORT FOR THAT. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S WHY THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR ME OUT OF, AGAIN, RESPECT FOR THE CONSTITUENTS 
          WHO JUST VOTED IN A NEW MEMBER. >> 
          >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILWOMAN MEZA GONZALEZ. >> GONZALEZ: THANK YOU. 
          THE REFILING, IS THAT STATED ANYWHERE? HAS THAT BEEN SENT OUT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM? OR HOW HAS THAT BEEN DISCUSSED? 
          >> MAYOR JONES: IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED IN BOTH OF THE MEMOS THAT WENT OUT. 
          >> GONZALEZ: THIS ONE THAT YOU JUST SENT? OKAY. 
          AND I GUESS CAN I GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THE 2024 ORDINANCE SAYS THAT ONCE THE CCR'S IN GOVERNANCE IS WHEN, IF NECESSARY -- SUBMIT THE CCR FOR FINANCIAL LEGAL, APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT REVIEW. THE CURRENT MEMO SAYS THAT LEGAL PROCESS WILL BE AHEAD OF 
          IT BEING AGENDIZED IN GOVERNANCE? >> MAYOR JONES: YOU CAN DO BOTH. THAT'S RIGHT. ANDY, CITY ATTORNEY, SAID THAT 
          [01:15:03]
IS NOT HAVING AN EARLY LEGAL REVIEW IS NOT OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. 
          >> GONZALEZ: SO IF WE CAN DO BOTH, WHAT ARE WE CHANGING? WHAT'S THE DIFFERENT OUTCOME? 
          >> SEGOVIA: COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN COME TO ME AT ANY POINT IN TIME AND ASK FOR LEGAL ADVICE. 
          ANY POINT IN TIME YOU CAN COME TO ME AND ASK FOR LEGAL ADVICE. 
          >> GONZALEZ: AND THE STATEMENT WHICH OUTLINES HOW THE PROPOSED CCR CREATES OR IMPROVES A CORE SERVICE FOR THE CITY, THAT'S A NEW STATEMENT THAT -- 
          >> MAYOR JONES: THAT'S A 30-SECOND EXERCISE. I THINK YOU WERE AT THE MEETING WHERE FOLKS HAVE SAID, HEY, WE NEED TO FOCUS ON CORE. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. 
          I THINK WE ALSO -- SO HAVING FOLKS SAY THIS IS RELATED TO A CORE SERVICE OR IT'S NOT RELATED TO A CORE SERVICE. EVEN IF IT'S NOT, HELP US UNDERSTAND, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S RELATED TO A CORE SERVICE. I THINK WE WOULD WANT TO KNOW THAT IN TERMS OF ANY FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS OR HOW THAT MAY EVEN BE PRIORITIZED WHEN IT GETS TO GOVERNANCE. 
          I THINK, AGAIN, THAT ALSO HELPS US UNDERSTAND HOW MANY OF THESE ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO WITH CORE. 
          LET ME JUST SAY WHEN I LOOKED AT ALL THE CCRS THAT DIED ON THE VINE, THERE WERE VARYING LEVELS OF RELATION TO CORE, LET'S JUST SAY. HOWEVER, THEY TAKE TIME AND ENERGY AND SO AND ESPECIALLY IN THIS FISCAL ENVIRONMENT AND ENSURING WE'RE LOOKING AT THOSE THINGS THAT ONLY REQUIRE COUNCIL MEMBER TIME AND ATTENTION, I THINK THAT BEST SERVES US AND ALLOWS US EVEN MORE TIME AND ENERGY TO SERVE ON THOSE THINGS THAT ONLY REQUIRE OUR ATTENTION. EVEN IF IT'S NOT RELATED -- AS I SHARE IN THE MEMO, EVEN IF IT'S NOT A CORE SERVICE, IT CAN STILL MOVE FORWARD. MANY OF THE THINGS THAT DIED ON 
          THE VINE ARE NOT RELATED TO CORE SERVICES. >> GONZALEZ: SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE CHANGES. AND SO IF WE CAN TALK TO THE CITY ATTORNEY WHENEVER AND WE 
          CAN PROVIDE A STATEMENT OR NOT, THEN WHAT ARE WE CHANGING? >> MAYOR JONES: NOTIFYING THE CITY MANAGER WAS NOT HAPPENING ALL THE TIME. THAT IS THE VERY FIRST LINE IN YOUR CCR SUBMISSION. I WOULD LIKE COMFORT -- AND I THINK OTHERS WOULD LIKE COMFORT AS WELL -- THAT THAT STEP IS ACTUALLY TAKING PLACE. SO HAVING THE CITY MANAGER JUST INITIAL IT THAT THEY'VE BEEN NOTIFIED, ONE. TWO, GIVEN THE CHANGES IN THIS LEGAL ENVIRONMENT, WE ARE ALL WELL SERVED BY UNDERSTANDING AND GETTING AN INITIAL READ FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY WHAT THE LEGAL RISKS MAY OR MAY NOT BE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT DRAFT CCR. I THINK THAT ALSO HELPS THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS WHOSE SIGNATURE MAY BE REQUESTED AS PART OF THAT, GIVES THEM MORE UNDERSTANDING OF IF THERE IS SOMETHING, A LEGAL ISSUE RELATED TO THAT, THEY NOW KNOW EARLIER THAN WHEN THEY SIGNED ON TO IT. IN CASE THEY WANT TO HAVE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SPONSOR TO DETERMINE IF THAT DRAFT CCR ACTUALLY CAPTURES WHAT THEY THINK IT DOES. BUT I THINK A LEGAL READ FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY EARLY IN THE PROCESS ONLY HELPS MINIMIZE RISK TO THE CITY. THAT'S WHAT THAT DOES. 
          YEAH, YOU KNOW, HELP US UNDERSTAND IS THIS RELATED TO A CORE SERVICE OR NOT. 
          ONE OR TWO SENTENCES. >> GONZALEZ: CAN SOMEONE WALK ME THROUGH THE HORSE-DRAWN CARRIAGES CCR PROCESS? I WASN'T HERE FOR THAT. IF WE WERE TO PUT A TIMELINE ON WHAT HAPPENED IN THE OLD WAY. IN 2024, LET'S GO BACK. WHAT WAS THAT LIKE VERSUS HOW 
          IT WOULD BE NOW? >> WALSH: THAT INITIATED PRIOR TO THE 2024 AND IT GOT FILED AND THERE WAS A REQUEST TO DELAY MOVING THAT CCR FORWARD BY THE SPONSORING COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND FROM WHAT I RECALL, THAT WAS A REQUEST MADE TO THE MAYOR AT THE TIME TO NOT BRING IT IN A TIMELY MANNER. THAT'S WHAT I REMEMBER AS BEING 
          SIGNIFICANT ABOUT THAT ONE. >> GONZALEZ: AND SO IF THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP 
          NOW -- >> WALSH: I'M SORRY. >> GONZALEZ: NO, GO AHEAD. 
          >> WALSH: THE CURRENT ORDINANCE HAS TIMELINES ASSOCIATED BY WHICH THEY'VE GOT 
          [01:20:07]
TO THOSE CCRS HAVE TO MOVE TO GOVERNANCE TO BE AGENDIZED AND DISCUSSED. 
          >> GONZALEZ: OKAY. WELL, I THINK I DO BELIEVE THAT IN AGREEMENT WITH A LOT OF FOLKS HERE THAT I THINK ANY SORT OF CHANGES THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING, I THINK THEY SHOULD BE DISCUSSED AND DISCUSSED AND APPROVED BY FULL COUNCIL. 
          I THINK THAT'S BASED ON WHAT WE'VE DONE IN 2003, 2007, WHAT HAPPENED IN 2024. 
          I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE THAT AND HAVE FULL COUNCIL DISCUSSION WHENEVER WE WANT TO 
          CHANGE SOMETHING LIKE THIS. >> MAYOR JONES: ON THE MERITS OF THE ISSUE, THOUGH, IS THERE AN ISSUE WITH HAVING ERIK INITIAL IT TO ACKNOWLEDGE ACTUAL NOTIFICATIONS SO WE CAN HAVE COMFORT IN THAT? IS THERE AN ISSUE ON THE MERIT OF THAT? 
          >> GONZALEZ: THERE MIGHT BE AN ISSUE ON THE NOTIFICATION IN GENERAL, RIGHT? 
          >> MAYOR JONES: HOLD ON. >> GONZALEZ: IT COULD CHANGE THE NOTIFICATION. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: ASKING WE SIGN OFF, THE MANAGER SIGN OFF SPECIFIC NOTIFICATION, RIGHT? 
          >> MAYOR JONES: NO, LET'S BE CLEAR. >> GONZALEZ: PLEASE. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: SO NOTIFICATION TO THE CITY MANAGER MUST TAKE PLACE. 
          AND IF IT MUST TAKE PLACE, WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW -- AND I THINK OTHERS HAVE EXPRESSED TO ME THEY ALSO WOULD APPRECIATE -- KNOWING IT HAS IN FACT TAKEN PLACE. 
          SO ALL THAT -- AGAIN, THERE'S NO CHANGE TO HOW YOU CHOOSE TO NOTIFY THE CITY MANAGER, BUT I THINK WE DO NEED TO KNOW THAT THAT STEP HAS ACTUALLY TAKEN PLACE CURRENTLY. 
          THERE IS NO WAY TO VERIFY THAT. UNLESS YOU LITERALLY CALL HIM. 
          AND WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO WASTE THAT TIME OR ENERGY. THAT'S WHAT THE INITIAL DOES. 
          >> GONZALEZ: SO THE CHANGE IS HOW HE NOTIFIES US? >> MAYOR JONES: HOW HE 
          ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE'S ACTUALLY BEEN NOTIFIED. >> GONZALEZ: OKAY. 
          AND WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING THAT A CHANGE TO THE ORDINANCE? >> MAYOR JONES: HOW DO YOU HELP -- WHAT THAT DOES IS HELP US UNDERSTAND THAT THAT STEP HAS ACTUALLY TAKEN PLACE, YEAH. I MEAN, OTHERWISE DO WE CALL HIM EVERY SINGLE TIME. 
          HEY, ERIK, DID YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THAT THING? THEY SAID YOU DID. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF YOU DID. CAN YOU TELL ME IF YOU DID? THAT SEEMS LIKE A HUGE WASTE OF TIME. SO A SIGNATURE SAYING, THANKS, ERIK. 
          NOW WE ALL KNOW. THAT'S ALL THAT THAT DOES. DO YOU ALSO HAVE, ON THE MERITS OF AN EARLY LEGAL REVIEW, DO YOU HAVE ISSUES WITH THE MERITS OF AN EARLIER LEGAL REVIEW? 
          >> GONZALEZ: I THINK THE MAIN POINT THAT I WANT TO GET ACROSS IS ANY SORT OF CHANGES OR DISCUSSION WE HAVE ABOUT THE CCR PROCESS SHOULD BE DONE BY THE FULL COUNCIL. 
          THAT'S REALLY MY ONLY POINT. >> MAYOR JONES: SO ON THE MERITS, THOUGH, OF AN EARLIER LEGAL REVIEW, THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH THAT. DO YOU SEE THAT THERE WOULD BE BENEFIT TO AN EARLIER LEGAL REVIEW IN LIGHT OF THIS LEGAL ENVIRONMENT? 
          >> GONZALEZ: I THINK LEGAL REVIEW -- I MEAN, I THINK ALL OF US WANT TO AVOID ANY LEGAL RISK TO OUR COMMUNITY. EVERY ONE OF US. I CAN SAY THAT FOR MYSELF, 
          RIGHT? >> MAYOR JONES: YEAH. >> GONZALEZ: ANY TIME I SEND AN E-MAIL, THAT'S AN OPEN RECORD. WE'RE ALWAYS CONSIDERING THE LEGAL RISK TO THIS COMMUNITY. SO THAT'S -- FOR ME IT'S UNDERSTOOD BEFORE I TAKE ANY 
          ACTION. AND I THINK THAT PROCESS -- >> MAYOR JONES: THAT'S THE 
          ISSUE THOUGH. >> GONZALEZ: I THINK THE ISSUE -- 
          >> MAYOR JONES: THAT'S THE ISSUE THOUGH. IT WASN'T HAPPENING. 
          IT WAS AD HOC. A CHALLENGE AS WELL, THOUGH, IS THAT -- AGAIN, THIS IS NOT MEANT IN ANY WAY TO DELAY ANYTHING BUT HAVE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS LOOKED AT IT. HERE IS A WRITTEN EXPLANATION OF THEIR LEGAL CONCERNS AS THEY SEE IT. YOU COUNCIL MEMBERS, IF YOU WOULD STILL LIKE TO SIGN ON TO IT TO SPONSOR IT, DO SO. DO SO FULLY INFORMED BY WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS PROVIDED IN THEIR ASSESSMENT. THAT'S ALL THAT THAT DOES. THAT'S ALL THAT THAT DOES. 
          COUNCILWOMAN, YOU STILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES. COUNCILMEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO. 
          >> GAVITO: THANK YOU. I DO WANT TO TALK QUICKLY ABOUT THE REFILING OF THE EXISTING 
          [01:25:02]
CCRS. WHAT DO YOU MEAN IN YOUR PAST MEMO YOU SAID ALL CCRS NOT ACTIONED IN THE PREVIOUS TERM NEED TO BE REFILED. WHAT DOES "ACTIONED" MEAN? 
          >> MAYOR JONES: IF IT DIDN'T GET ACROSS THE FINISH LINE. >> GAVITO: SO IF IT WENT 
          THROUGH GOVERNANCE? >> MAYOR JONES: CORRECT. IF IT DID NOT COMPLETE FULL ACTION FULLY THROUGH THAT PROCESS, THEN I THINK IT DOES NEED TO BE RESUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION GIVEN THERE'S SEVERAL NEW MEMBERS ON THIS COMMITTEE. 
          >> GAVITO: SOMETIMES CCRS TAKE MONTHS TO FINISH, TO CROSS THE FINISH LINE. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: OH, I'M VERY FAMILIAR. THAT'S WHY SO MANY DIED ON THE 
          VINE. >> GAVITO: SO YOU'RE SAYING IF THEY WERE ALMOST DONE, 90% 
          DONE, THEY NEED J TO BE REFILED? >> MAYOR JONES: THOSE IN LINE, COUNCILWOMAN, WITH EVERY SINGLE LEGISLATIVE BODY, THOSE ONES THAT DIDN'T CROSS THE FINISH LINE NEED TO BE 
          RESUBMITTED. >> GAVITO: I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE I DO UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE SAYING RESPECT FOR THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS. 
          BUT I ALSO THINK IT'S FOR INSTANCE, I HAD THE CLUSTER MAILBOX CCR THAT IMPACTS ALL OF OUR DISTRICTS. 
          IT WENT THROUGH GOVERNANCE. IT WENT THROUGH PUBLIC SAFETY. THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO PRESENT BACK IN AUGUST TO PUBLIC SAFETY. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN WAITING ON FOR MONTHS. SO TO ME THAT'S A HUGE AMOUNT OF WASTE, A HUGE AMOUNT OF BUREAUCRACY FOR US TO DELIVER FOR OUR RESIDENTS. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: I CANNOT SPEAK TO HOW THE FORMER ADMINISTRATION HANDLED THOSE. 
          MY INTENT, AS EVERYONE ELSE'S, IS TO ACTION THESE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. 
          ONCE THOSE ARE RESUBMITTED, WE CAN DO THAT. >> GAVITO: ANDY, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT STATES ABOUT REFILING OUR EXISTING CCRS? AGAIN, THIS IS WORK OF CITY STAFF. THIS IS THE WORK OF US. THIS IS THE WORK OF OUR TEAMS TO AGAIN RESPOND TO A RESIDENT REQUEST. FOR AWARENESS FOR EVERYBODY, FOR CLUSTER MAILBOXES, CLUSTER MAILBOXES KEEP GETTING BROKEN INTO. 
          THAT TURNS INTO IDENTITY THEFT FOR RESIDENTS. THIS IS A FEDERAL PROBLEM BUT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WHAT WE CAN AT THE LOCAL LEVEL TO ADDRESS CONCERNS FOR OUR RESIDENTS. 
          SO THAT IS A CONCERN FOR ALL OF THAT WORK TO BE WIPED AWAY. I DON'T HAVE THE TIMELINE IN FRONT OF ME. I BELIEVE I FILED THAT CCR LAST NOVEMBER. 
          IT WENT TO GOVERNANCE IN JANUARY. IT WENT TO PUBLIC SAFETY IN MARCH. I MIGHT BE OFF ON THOSE TIMELINES. 
          ALL OF THAT WORK HAPPENED. AND I THINK OUT OF RESPECT FOR US WHO WERE SERVING AS PUBLIC SERVANTS TO SOLVE A RESIDENT REQUEST, I SEE THAT AS DISRESPECTFUL TO WIPE IT AWAY. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILMAN WHYTE. >> WHYTE: YEAH, I COMPLETELY AGREE. IT'S DISRESPECTFUL TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WERE HERE BEFORE, THAT WERE VALID AND EXISTING COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WORKED WITH THEIR TEAMS, REVIEWED A CCR, DECIDED IT WAS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE PUT FORTH. 
          AND SO TO THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN SAY, WELL, YOU DON'T MATTER NOW JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE DONE ISN'T RIGHT. AND, IN FACT, WE DISCUSSED THIS WITH MAYOR NIRENBERG TWO YEARS AGO AND THE MAYOR'S POSITION AT THAT POINT WAS THAT WE AS COUNCIL MEMBERS BUILD OFF OF ONE ANOTHER. AND SO WE SPECIFICALLY DID NOT PUT ANYTHING IN THE ORDINANCE REGARDING CCRS EXPIRING ONCE THE COUNCIL MEMBER IS GONE. WE LEFT IT SILENT. 
          SO THEREFORE THE ORDINANCE CONTROLS AND THE ORDINANCE JUST SAYS AFTER A CCR IS FILED, HERE'S WHAT HAPPENS. SO I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY ALL OF A SUDDEN A CCR SHOULD BE EXPIRED. AND THE COUNCILWOMAN MAKES A GREAT POINT. 
          THE TAXPAYER MONEY THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SPENT DEVELOPING THE CCR, HAVING IT HEARD BY MULTIPLE COMMITTEES, TO ALL OF A SUDDEN THROW THAT AWAY AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AGAIN ISN'T RIGHT. AND I WOULD ASK THE QUESTION -- MAYOR, YOU MENTIONED IS IT DISRESPECTFUL TO THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS? ARE THERE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS HERE THAT WILL FEEL DISRESPECTED IF WE HAVE TO CONTINUE WORKING ON A CCR THAT BEGAN WITH A PREVIOUS COUNCIL? I HAVEN'T HEARD THAT FROM ANY OF THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS. 
          SO IF THAT IS AN ISSUE FOR THE NEW COUNCIL, I HAVEN'T HEARD IT. 
          I WOULD SAY, AGAIN -- AND I THINK WE HAVE CONSENSUS HERE THAT FOR ANY AMENDMENT OR CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE, WE'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH A VOTE. BUT I HAD A LAWYER FRIEND TELL ME THE OTHER DAY HOW SCARY IT WOULD BE IF, QUOTE, ENHANCEMENTS TO AN ORDINANCE 
          [01:30:07]
COULD BE DONE BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY ATTORNEY? IF JUST THOSE TWO PEOPLE COULD DECIDE TO ENHANCE ORDINANCES, WHERE WOULD THAT END? I MEAN, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE DISCONNECTION ORDINANCE? THE DANGEROUS DOG ORDINANCE? ALL OF THESE THINGS COULD JUST BE CHANGED. OR ARE YOU SAYING JUST THIS ORDINANCE CAN BE ENHANCED BECAUSE IT'S A, QUOTE, FAMILY ORDINANCE. I MEAN, AGAIN, ORDINANCES ALL NEED TO BE LOOKED AT AS THE SAME. THEY'RE ALL CITY LAW. 
          I MEAN, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, IF WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A VOTE, WE COULD HAVE A MEMO THAT COMES DOWN THAT SAYS BEFORE YOU FILE A CCR, YOU HAVE TO STAND ON CITY HALL STEPS AND DO A LITTLE DANCE AND THEN YOU CAN GO FILE YOUR CCR. WHAT IS TO STOP A MEMO COMING OUT FROM SAYING THAT? IT WOULDN'T CONFLICT WITH ANYTHING THAT'S IN HERE. 
          IT JUST DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT IN THE LAW. AND I'M HAPPY, AGAIN, THAT WE HAVE A CONSENSUS HERE THAT SAYS WE HAVE TO HAVE A NEW VOTE IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE WAY WE DO THE CCR PROCESS. SO LET ME ASK YOU, ANDY, CAN WE, BASED ON THIS DISCUSSION HERE, DIRECT CITY STAFF TO, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS AMEND THE ORDINANCE TO SAY THAT ANY CHANGES OR SUPPLEMENTS TO THE ORDINANCE HAVE TO BE DONE BY A COUNCIL VOTE. 
          IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO AND THEN VOTE UPON AT AN A SESSION? 
          >> SEGOVIA: I'LL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, BUT BEFORE I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I NEED TO VERY CLEARLY CLARIFY SOMETHING YOU SAID. YOU SAID CAN THE MAYOR AND THE CITY ATTORNEY. I DID NOT OFFER ANY MEMO TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          NEVER HAVE, NEVER WILL, UNLESS IT'S LEGAL ADVICE I GIVE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          I WAS NOT AUTHOR TO THAT MEMO, COUNCILMAN. >> WHYTE: AND I'M GLAD YOU CLARIFIED THAT. I DIDN'T MEAN THAT AS A DIRECT COMING AT YOU. 
          BUT WHAT THE MAYOR IS DOING IS SAYING, WELL, ANDY SAYS THAT THIS IS OKAY. 
          SO, AGAIN, THE MAYOR COULD ISSUE -- A FUTURE MAYOR COULD SAY YOU WANT TO FILE A CCR? YOU DO A LITTLE DANCE ON CITY HALL STEPS AND THEN IF THE CITY ATTORNEY SAID, WELL, MAYOR, YEAH. YOU CAN DO THAT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T CONFLICT, THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THAT WOULD BE WHAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN. OF COURSE, THAT WOULD BE 
          RIDICULOUS. BUT, AGAIN -- >> SEGOVIA: YOUR QUESTION: CAN THIS COUNCIL AMEND THIS ORDINANCE TO ADD WHATEVER THEY WANT? INCLUDING DANCING AT CITY COUNCIL. IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO DO 
          THAT, THEY HAVE EVERY ABILITY TO DO THAT . >> WHYTE: AGAIN, WITH CONSENSUS HERE OR BY A THREE-SIGNATURE MEMO, WE COULD GET ON THE AGENDA AT AN A SESSION, AN AMENDED ORDINANCE THAT SAYS ANY CHANGES TO THIS CCR ORDINANCE OR ANY 
          SUPPLEMENTS CAN ONLY BE DONE THROUGH A COUNCIL VOTE. >> SEGOVIA: THAT'S CORRECT. 
          >> WHYTE: THANK YOU. >> MAYOR JONES: I WANT TO CLARIFY. 
          WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE EXPIRED CCRS, HOW FAR BACK WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO? CCRS SUBMITTED EARLY 2000S? HOW FAR WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO? 
          >> WHYTE: THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION AND I'M GLAD THAT YOU ASKED IT. 
          AND I THINK THAT THIS COUNCIL SHOULD HAVE A DISCUSSION. BECAUSE I HEARD A SUGGESTION THAT SAID IF THE AUTHOR OF THE CCR IS STILL HERE, THEN IT SHOULD CONTINUE. 
          SO IF THE AUTHOR WASN'T STILL HERE, THEN MAYBE IT DOESN'T. I'VE ALSO HEARD A SUGGESTION THAT IF THE CCR IS FILED BUT HASN'T GONE TO GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE YET, MAYBE THOSE GO AWAY. BUT IF IT'S GONE TO GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE AND GOVERNANCE HAS TAKEN AN ACTION, THEN THOSE SHOULD STAY AND GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. 
          THAT IS SOMETHING, MAYOR, THAT I THINK THIS BODY TOGETHER NEEDS TO DISCUSS AND COME TO A 
          CONSENSUS ON. >> MAYOR JONES: APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK. 
          COUNCILWOMAN CASTILLO, PLEASE. >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          ERIK, I'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT YOU'RE HEARING FROM COUNCIL IN DISCUSSION. 
          >> WALSH: WELL, I'M GENERALLY HEARING THAT MOST OF THE FEEDBACK IS AROUND IF THERE ARE ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PROCESS OR LANGUAGE THAT THE COUNCILMAN WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT. 
          [01:35:06]
          >> MAYOR JONES: ERIK, CAN I STOP YOU, JUST BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOUR COMMENTS, WHATEVER THEY ARE, ARE REFLECTIVE OF EVERYBODY'S. IS THAT OKAY? 
          >> WALSH: IT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL BUT SHE ASKED THE QUESTION. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: ONE MORE PERSON TO SPEAK. >> CASTILLO: I WOULD LIKE TO 
          HEAR ERIK'S RECAP AND HE CAN FOLLOW UP IF NECESSARY. >> WALSH: THAT ANY CHANGES TO THE PROCESS BE INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE. THAT WAS ORIGINALLY -- THAT IS IN PLACE RIGHT NOW. REGARDLESS, IF IT IS THE TYPE OF NOTIFICATION TO THE MANAGER'S OFFICE OR ANY POTENTIAL FUTURE CHANGES, THAT THAT BE INCLUDED IN THE 
          ORDINANCE IS WHAT I'M GENERALLY HEARING. >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, ERIK. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: ERIK, DID YOU HEAR ANDY SAY THAT ALL THESE ENHANCEMENTS REPORTING BACK WHAT I'M HEARING HERE. OBVIOUSLY, I THINK THE COUNCIL'S WEIGHING IN ON BEING INVOLVED IN A LARGER CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW YOU ALL DO YOUR BUSINESS. SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING TODAY. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILMAN GALVAN. >> GALVAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          A SIMILAR QUESTION TO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO WAS ASKING. 
          I WANT TO GET CLARIFICATION FOR THIS MEETING. I KNOW IT'S A CONVERSATION. 
          WHAT IS THE END GOAL? IS IT GOING TO A VOTE? WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS? 
          ARE YOU JUST TAKING FEEDBACK? >> MAYOR JONES: THIS IS A DISCUSSION ONLY. 
          BRIEFING. THERE'S NO ACTION BEING TAKEN TODAY. 
          >> GALVAN: AND, MAYOR, I GUESS IF WE HEAR THE MAJORITY OF THE BODY IS WANTING TO STAY WITH THE CURRENT PROCESS OR FURTHER DISCUSS THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE CHANGES 
          YOU PROPOSE, WHAT WOULD BE YOUR NEXT STEPS, I GUESS? >> MAYOR JONES: I WOULD TAKE THAT UNDER ADVISEMENT AS WELL AS WHAT OUR CITY ATTORNEY HAS SAID. 
          THESE ARE ALL IN LINE WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. I CAN FULLY APPRECIATE MUCH OF THE FEEDBACK. SOME OF THE FEEDBACK HAS BEEN WHAT HAS HAPPENED UNDER A PREVIOUS MAYOR. I AM NOT RON NIRENBERG. I AM NOT SLOW ROLLING THESE THINGS. THAT IS NOT THE INTENT. THIS IS A DIFFERENT POINT IN TIME THAN WE WERE. AND LET ME JUST RECAP AGAIN THE VERY SIMPLE ENHANCEMENTS. 
          YOU GOT TO LET ERIK KNOW. GREAT. HAVE ERIK JUST INITIAL THE DOCUMENT SO WE ALL KNOW. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO CALL HIM AND ENSURE THAT STEP HAS ACTUALLY TAKEN PLACE. AN EARLIER LEGAL REVIEW BY THE ATTORNEY TO ENSURE THAT EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO SIGN ON TO THAT HAS THE FULL BENEFIT OF THEIR INITIAL LEGAL REVIEW. GREAT. WE'RE ENTERING INTO A DIFFICULT FISCAL ENVIRONMENT. HELP US UNDERSTAND IF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IN YOUR CCR HAS TO DO WITH A CORE SERVICE, THAT'S IT. THESE, I THINK, ARE SIMPLE ASKS 
          AND TOTALLY IN LINE WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. >> GALVAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR FOR ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS. ON THE PIECE ABOUT THE MERITS OF THE CHANGES, I'M INTERESTED TO LOOK MORE INTO THE PIECES ABOUT THE RESOLUTIONS COMPARED TO BUDGETARY ASKS AND SEE WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE IN TERMS OF HOW THEY GO THROUGH THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE. 
          I THINK THE RESOLUTION WOULD BE FASTER ON CERTAIN CCRS THAT RELATE TO STREET RENAMING, OTHER PIECES LIKE THAT THAT AREN'T AS A HEAVY LOAD FOR THE CITY TO TAKE ON. 
          IF THERE'S A WAY FOR US TO MAKE THAT FASTER, THAT'S APPRECIATE. 
          BUT CURRENTLY I'M UNCOMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD WITH ALL THESE NEW CHANGES. 
          COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND A VOTE SIMILAR TO THE ORDINANCE BEFORE, I STILL SEE THE VALUE IN COORDINATING WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. I THINK MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE DONE THAT WITH THEIR CCRS BEFORE. I THINK THAT'S ALWAYS HELPFUL AND MAKES IT GO A BIT EASIER, FOR THE MOST PART. AND I THINK BUT I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR I THINK THAT IS A CHOICE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBER AND IT SHOULD BE. 
          LESS SO ON THE PARTICULAR MEMO ITSELF BUT EVEN ON THE ORDINANCE OF THE PAST, I THINK IT'S JUST -- IT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE TO TALK WITH CITY MANAGEMENT BUT I DON'T WANT TO REQUIRE MY COLLEAGUES TO DO SO. IS IT MORE EFFECTIVE TO DO? SURE. IS IT MORE EFFECTIVE TO LET OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS KNOW THAT AREN'T SIGNING ON? ABSOLUTELY. BUT I THINK IT'S UP TO THEM TO DO THAT PIECE AND IF THEY DON'T, IT'S UP TO THE CHAIR. IF YOU FEEL AS THE CHAIR, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT THOSE ARE SOME THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE DONE, THAT'S UP TO YOU, PERSONALLY, AS THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMITTEE. 
          BUT I WOULD BE PERSONALLY UNCOMFORTABLE AGREEING ON THESE PIECES RIGHT NOW. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: CAN YOU CLARIFY THE NOTIFICATION? I WANT TO MAKE SURE I 
          UNDERSTOOD THAT LAST PART. >> GALVAN: I'M CURRENTLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE CHANGES 
          [01:40:01]
BUT I SEE THE VALUE IN COORDINATING WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND CITY MANAGEMENT BUT I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO SO. 
          WE'LL GET THOSE PRESENTATIONS ABOUT WHAT'S POSSIBLE, NOT WHAT'S POSSIBLE. 
          I UNDERSTAND YOUR PIECE ABOUT DOES IT TAKE MORE TIME TO DO SO? ABSOLUTELY. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT SHOULD BE A REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL 
          MEMBERS CURRENTLY. YEAH. >> MAYOR JONES: AND TO BE CLEAR, I NEVER SAID COORDINATE WITH THE CITY MANAGER. THIS IS LITERALLY JUST DOING THE CURRENT PROCESS BUT LETTING EVERYBODY KNOW THAT IT'S ACTUALLY BEING DONE SO THE NOTIFICATION THAT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE SAYS NEEDS TO BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY MANAGER, NO CHANGE THERE. IT WOULD BE JUST LITERALLY INITIALING IT SO THE REST OF US KNOW THAT THAT IS ACTUALLY TAKEN PLACE. SO THERE'S NO COORDINATION. 
          THERE'S ALSO -- IT'S NOT A COORDINATION WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY. 
          IT'S JUST AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THEY'VE SEEN IT AND THAT, FRANKLY, IF THERE'S ANYTHING PATENTLY ILLEGAL, I THINK WE WOULD ALL BENEFIT FROM AN AWARENESS OF THAT AS EARLY AS 
          POSSIBLE, GIVEN, AGAIN, THIS LEGAL ENVIRONMENT. >> GALVAN: THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE DISCUSSION. 
          ONE MORE? OKAY. COUNCILMAN, PLEASE. 
          >> ANGUIANO: I'M ONLY HERE FOR TWO MONTHS. I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. SO JUST HEARING WHAT EVERYBODY'S BEEN SAYING, I THINK THAT IT'S JUST A LOT. BUT LET ME JUST START WITH -- OKAY. 
          I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. SO IF A CCR HAS CHANGES ALONG THE PROCESS, WILL NEW 
          SIGNATURES NEED TO BE COLLECTED ALONG THAT PROCESS? >> MAYOR JONES: IF A CCR FROM THE LAST ADMINISTRATION DID NOT GET ACROSS THE FINISH LINE, THEN THAT WOULD NEED TO BE 
          RESUBMITTED. CORRECT. >> ANGUIANO: OKAY. 
          SO UNDER THIS NEW ONE -- AND LET'S SAY WE'RE FOLLOWING THE GUIDELINES BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SOME MORE CHANGES TO THE CCR, CAN WE MAKE CHANGES TO THAT CCR AND WILL WE STILL NEED NEW 
          SIGNATURES FOR THAT CCR? >> MAYOR JONES: THERE'S NO CHANGE TO THE CCR PROCESS IF IT'S A NEW CCR. IT JUST GOES THROUGH THE REGULAR PROCESS. 
          THE DISCUSSION HERE WAS ABOUT THOSE THAT WERE CCRS IN THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION THAT DID NOT SEEK COMPLETION. THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE RESUBMITTED SO THAT THIS COUNCIL HAS THE FULL WEIGHT AND OPINION OF THIS COUNCIL, NOT THE PREVIOUS ONE. 
          >> ANGUIANO: OKAY. IN TERMS OF THIS COUNCIL, IF A CCR IS FILED, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SIGNATURES. NOW IF WE WANT TO MAKE MORE CHANGES -- AGAIN, MY QUESTION 
          IS WILL NEW SIGNATURES BE REQUIRED? >> WALSH: MAYOR, I'LL TAKE A STAB AT ANSWERING THAT. TYPICALLY WHAT HAPPENS, AS THE POLICY ISSUE IS GOING THROUGH THE COMMITTEE, THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE PROCESS, THERE COULD BE ADJUSTMENTS TO IT. 
          BUT IT DOES NOT REQUIRE RE-SIGNATURE BECAUSE IT'S IN THE PROCESS OF COMMITTEE REVIEW OR STAFF REVIEW OR POLICY DEBATE. AND SOMETIMES THEY EBB AND FLOW, DEPENDING ON THE CONVERSATION. BUT IT DOESN'T REQUIRE A RESET 
          OF SIGNATURES TO KEEP UP WITH THAT. >> ANGUIANO: OKAY. 
          COOL. SO THAT CLARIFIES MY FIRST PART. 
          AND I KNOW THAT THIS IS A BRIEFING SO THERE'S NO ACTION THAT'S GOING TO BE TAKEN. 
          BUT WITH THESE NEW ENHANCEMENTS, ARE THEY JUST GOING TO HAPPEN REGARDLESS? I KNOW IT'S ALL FEEDBACK. SO ARE WE -- IF WE WALK OUT OF THIS ROOM, ARE WE EXPECTED TO FOLLOW THE NEW ENHANCEMENTS? BECAUSE MY OFFICE HAS ALREADY BEEN DOING THAT JUST TO PREPARE. AND I THINK IT'S GREAT TO ASK US, PERSONALLY IF I FILED A CCR, I WANT TO KNOW IF I'M BEING SUED. SO I THINK WE'RE ALL DOING OUR PART WITH MAKING SURE THAT ASPECT IS TAKEN W CARE OF. YEAH, GOING BACK TO NEXT STEPS, WHEN WE WALK OUT OF THIS ROOM, WHICH PROCESS ARE WE FOLLOWING WITH THE CCRS? 
          >> MAYOR JONES: I APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK HERE AND I'LL TAKE IT UNDER ADVISEMENT. 
          THANKS. >> ANGUIANO: YEAH, I GUESS ALL I CAN SAY IS I'M MUCH OF AN OUTSIDER COMING INTO THIS PROCESS. I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT WE'RE HAVING THIS POLICY CONVERSATION. I THINK MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT WHEN YOU ASK MOST OF OUR RESIDENTS THE CCR PROCESS DOESN'T REALLY IMPACT THEIR LIVES THAT OFTEN UNTIL IT DOES. THIS CAN BE WHETHER IT'S A HOUSING POLICY TO HELP TENANTS OR A SUGGESTION I HAVE -- AND, AGAIN, IT MIGHT BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO MOVE THIS TO AN A 
          [01:45:02]
SESSION, HAVE THE FULL COUNCIL DECIDE ON THIS. BUT MY ONLY ISSUE IS, LIKE, WHEN OUR CONSTITUENTS READ CCRS, THEY KIND OF DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS OF THAT AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER MAKING IT SOMETHING FOR ACCESSIBLE, LIKE A POLICY REQUEST OR SOMETHING, JUST SO THAT WE JUST HAVE FULL TRANSPARENCY WITH OUR W CONSTITUENTS AS WELL. BUT I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY FEEDBACK THAT I HAVE. 
          I THINK I'D RATHER STICK TO THE ONE THAT WE HAVE NOW. BECAUSE IF THE COUNCIL THINKS THAT WE AS A BODY, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT COMES TO CCRS, THIS IS OUR COUNCIL TOOL, THEN IT SHOULD BE WITHIN OUR RIGHT AS A COUNCIL TO JUST KIND OF DECIDE THAT AND FIGURE OUT WHAT WE WANT TO DO. BECAUSE WE HAVE BUDGET. WE HAVE PROJECT MARVEL, WE HAVE BIGGER ISSUES WE NEED TO HANDLE. I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE THIS FORWARD, VOTE ON IT, AND LET'S MOVE ON. THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: COUNCILWOMAN KAUR. >> KAUR: THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          I JUST WANTED TO ASK A QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION. I KNOW THE MAYOR'S ALREADY SAID WE HAVE TO REFILE FOR THIS LAST ONE. IF THAT WAS SOMETHING WE WANTED TO TAKE UP, COULD WE ADD THAT TO THE ORDINANCE FOR FOUR YEARS FROM NOW? 
          >> SEGOVIA: YES. YES, COUNCILWOMAN. THE ANSWER IS YES. 
          >> KAUR: I DO THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD. I KNOW THAT YOU'VE ALREADY -- THE MAYOR HAS ALREADY MADE THE DECISION. I THINK WE SHOULD DISCUSS THAT BECAUSE THERE'S POLICY -- I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD CONVERSATION TO HAVE BECAUSE MAYBE IT'S IF YOU WERE STILL ON THE DAIS, YOUR POLICY MOVES FORWARD. 
          IF YOU WERE THE SIGNER OR ONE OF THE SIGNERS. IF NO LONGER, MAYBE THOSE KIND OF SUNSET, SIMILAR TO THE PROCESS. I TOTALLY HEAR THE ARGUMENT SIMILAR TO OTHER LEGISLATIVE BODIES. BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS WE DON'T HAVE A SET TIME-FRAME IN WHICH WE ARE LEGISLATING. WE'RE FULL-TIME. 
          WE ARE CONSTANTLY EVOLVING AND CONSTANTLY MAKING POLICY AND SOMETIMES A POLICY AUDIO] AFFECTING BUDGET FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO LIKE OUR STATE DOES, WHERE IT'S EVERY TWO YEARS AND TWO YEARS DOWN THE LINE IT MIGHT BE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. EVEN THOUGH OFTEN POLICIES DO RESURFACE. 
          I DO THINK SINCE WE ARE CONSTANTLY MAKING POLICY, WE DON'T HAVE A SET SIX-MONTH PERIOD FOR CCRS BUT IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. I ACTUALLY THINK IT MAKES US MORE NIMBLE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO BE. BECAUSE A LOT OF THE CHALLENGE WE SEE AT THE STATE IS THEY'RE HAVING TO REDO EVERYTHING THAT THEY DID. 
          SOME OF THOSE LAWS THAT GOT BASICALLY VETOED AT THE END BY THE GOVERNOR, THEY HAVE TO START ALL OVER AGAIN. I KNOW THE DANGEROUS DOG ONE WAS ONE. 
          THERE WERE SEVERAL THE GOVERNOR VETOED AND I THINK THAT IS HARD. 
          I THINK US BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON POLICY AT ALL TIMES IS A GOOD FLEXIBILITY THAT WE SHOULD MAINTAIN. BUT OF COURSE AND THE ONLY OTHER THING I WANTED TO MENTION WAS JUST AS SOME OF THE CONVERSATION THAT HAS COME UP AROUND WHAT THE PROPER NOTIFICATION PROCESS IS, IF WE DO DECIDE -- YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE WAYS WE COULD DO THIS IN AN EFFICIENT WAY IS DOCUSIGN SO WE COULD GET A MEMBERSHIP FOR DOCUSIGN. IT'S A PAIN WHEN YOU'RE SIGNING CCRS, ARE YOU AT CITY HALL? CAN I BRING IT TO YOU? AND THEN I HAVE TO TAKE THE SAME DOCUMENT AND BRING IT. 
          OFTEN AT B SESSION WE'RE PASSING CCRS. SO IF WE DID DECIDE, AT THE END OF OUR DISCUSSION THAT WE WANT ANDY AND ERIK TO SIGN OFF AT THE SAME TIME, WE COULD SEND A DOCUSIGN OUT AND EVERYBODY COULD DO IT AT THE SAME TIME AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO WAIT TWO DAYS. THAT'S MY PITCH IF WE DECIDE. LET'S GET AN ENTERPRISE VERSION OF THAT. CRAIG IS GOING TO HATE ME FOR THAT BUT THERE ARE WAYS TO MAKE 
          IT EFFICIENT. >> MAYOR JONES: TO CLARIFY, THE INITIAL COULD HAVE BEEN 
          HARD WITH AN ACTUAL PEN OR E-SIGNATURE. >> KAUR: BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE ENTERPRISE VERSION, YOU HAVE TO WAIT FOR ONE PERSON TO SEND IT BACK TO YOU AND YOU HAVE TO SEND IT TO THE OTHER PERSON, VERSUS AT THE SAME TIME. 
          >> MAYOR JONES: I WANT TO JUST CLARIFY, THOUGH, IT DIDN'T HAVE TO BE LIKE A HARD SIGNATURE. OKAY. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. 
          >> KAUR: THANKS, MAYOR. >> MAYOR JONES: WELL, THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS. 
          WE'VE DONE TWO ROUNDS AND WE WILL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. 
          AGAIN, THE INTENT HERE WAS ALWAYS TO DO A COUPLE OF THINGS, RIGHT? 
          [01:50:01]
BE EFFICIENT WITH OUR TIME, FOCUS ONLY ON THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON AS A COUNCIL. MINIMIZE RISK TO IT. IN TERMS OF ASKING ERIK TO INITIAL IT, AN EARLY LEGAL REVIEW, AND THEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S CORE. I THINK THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT ARE NOT HEAVY LIFTS IN ANY WAY. I THINK THE -- LOOK, I GET IT. THE SCAR TISSUE FROM PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS THAT TRIED TO THROTTLE YOUR STUFF, I GET IT. I AM NOT THAT PERSON AND EACH OF THESE THINGS IS DESIGNED TO MOVE FASTER AND MINIMIZE LEGAL RISK TO OUR COMMUNITY. 
          [EXECUTIVE SESSION]
THE TIME IS NOW 3:50 P.M. ON AUGUST 13. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WILL NOW MEET IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSULT WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 551.071 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE AND TO DELIBERATE OR DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.087. 
          PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, LEASE OR VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.072. 
          AND LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO LITIGATION INVOLVING THE CITY, EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ALL PURSUANT TO 551.071. 
          THE TIME IS NOW 4:25 P.M. ON AUGUST 13, 2025. NO OFFICIAL ACTION WAS TAKEN IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE MEETING IS NOW ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.