Closed Caption Log, Council Meeting, 03/07/02 (Part B)

Part A | Part B | Part C

Note: Since these log files are derived from the Closed Captions created during the Channel 6 live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. These Closed Caption logs are not official records of Council Meetings and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records or transcripts, please contact the City Clerk at (512) 974-2210.

MAYOR GARCIA: THIS SHOULD MAKE THE MEDIA ECSTATIC BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO LET ME SAY, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, I THINK YOU MAY HAVE BEEN THE ONE THAT HAD A QUESTION ON THIS ONE?

SLUSHER: THAT IS CORRECT, MAYOR. SO MS. TERRY, ARE YOU THEN SAYING THAT AS NOW PROPOSED THIS COMES UNDER S.O.S.?

MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY STAFF AND IT IS FULLY S.O.S. COMPLIANT. AND THERE HAS BEEN AN ACCOMMODATION REACHED WITH AT LEAST ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND I BELIEVE MS. GLASGO READY TO PRESENT THAT ACCOMMODATION. BUT THE ACCOMMODATION IS FULLY S.O.S. COMPLIANT.

SLUSHER: AND IT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE S.O.S. BECAUSE IT'S A NEW PROJECT UNDER THE NEW PROPOSAL.

YES, SIR.

SLUSHER: OKAY.

MAYOR GARCIA: WE HAVE FOUR PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. ALL OF THEM REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. AND I'LL READ THEIR NAMES. MIRIAMMUSTAVIER. IT SOUNDS FRENCH TO ME F I MISPRONOUNCED IT, EXCUSE ME. MR. W.M. WILLIAMS DONATING THE TIME TO DONNA DAY LA CRUZ. MS. DONNA DAY LA CRUZ IS IN FAVOR OF. AND MR. EDWARD SCHULTZ, NOT WISHING TO SPEAK, BUT REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. SO I THINK WE'RE READY TO PASS THIS ONE, SO UNLESS YOU JUST HAVE A EXULTION TO WANT — COMPULSION TO GET US TO VOTE AGAINST IT — MS. GLASGO?

MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, ALICE GLASGO. I JUST WANTED TO INDICATE THAT THE ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE PREPARED REFLECTS THE AGREEMENT REACHED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HERE TODAY, BUT IS MAINLY THE OAK HILL HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THE AGREEMENT IS IN SUPPORT OF THE COUNCIL'S MOTION ON FIRST READING, WHICH IS SINGLE-FAMILY 2, WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW DUPLEXES. WITH THAT ZONING THEY WOULD LIKE THE — THE ACCESS TO THAT STREET BE PROHIBITED AND THE APPLICANT WOULD PROCEED WITH SEEKING THE APPROPRIATE VARIANCES THAT WOULD BE HANDLED BY THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION THAT DOES NOT INVOLVE YOU OR THE ZONING ACTION. IT'S A SEPARATE ACTION. BUT THEY RECOGNIZE AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. BUT FOR ZONING PURPOSES, SINGLE-FAMILY 2, PROHIBITING ACCESS TO BREVY PASS. AND THAT WOULD BE PRETTY MUCH IT AND THE ORDINANCE HAS BEEN PASSED OUT TO YOU FOR REVIEW.

MAYOR GARCIA: THIS IS FOR SECOND AND THIRD READING.

THIS IS FOR SECOND AND THIRD READING.

MAYOR GARCIA: I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 17. MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

IS THE APPLICANT HERE, MS. GLASGO?

YES, SHE IS HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.

SLUSHER: COULD YOU COME UP JUST A SECOND? SO YOU AGREE WITH THE STAFF'S — THAT THIS WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH S.O.S.?

YES, IT IS, AND THE RESULTING IMPERVIOUS COVER WILL BE UNDER 12%.

SLUSHER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S ALL, MAYOR.

MAYOR GARCIA: FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS? THERE'S A MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

MAYOR GARCIA: OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO FOR SECOND AND THIRD READING. ITEM NUMBER 19, THE RESOLUTION BY TXDOT FOR CONSTITUENT'S 10% PARTICIPATION OF RIGHT AWAYS. AND MR. TOMMY EAT TON TALKED ABOUT THE BICYCLE RIGHT-OF-WAY ITEM — I MEAN BICYCLE AND SIDEWALKS. AND WE HAVE A RESOLUTION HERE THAT I THINK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, HAD ASKED FOR. WHICH IS NOW BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL FINDS THESE PROJECTS AS VITAL TO THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND RESPONDS TO THE NEED OF THE COMMUNITY AND HEARTILY ENDORSES THE FUNDING OF THE STATE OF TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ON MARCH 28TH. TOMMY, DO YOU REMEMBER WHICH INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH?

LUSHER: MAYOR, I CAN TELL YOU WHERE IT IS. THEY HAVE UNDER THE THIRD WHEREAS, ONE, TWO, THREE AT THE END OF EACH OF THESE THROW SENTENCES IT SAYS, AND WHERE APPROPRIATE INSTALL BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES. SO I WOULD THINK THE WAY WE COULD HANDLE IT WOULD BE TO USE THE SAME LANGUAGE AND AT THE END OF OUR RESOLUTION, WHICH IS WORDED A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, IT'S ONLY ONE PARAGRAPH — I THINK THAT IT'S ONE SENTENCE. THAT WE WOULD HAVE ANOTHER SENTENCE THAT SAYS THE CITY RECOMMENDS INSTALLATION OF BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES WHERE APPROPRIATE.

MAYOR GARCIA: IS THAT A MOTION?

SLUSHER: YES.

MAYOR GARCIA: MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. DISCUSSION?

SLUSHER: MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK MR. EATON FOR BRINGING THIS UP BECAUSE I KNOW PEOPLE COULD WALK ALONG THIS STRETCH OF ROAD ON THE FEEDER ROAD. AND IF THERE AREN'T WALKS THERE, THEN THEY EITHER HAVE TO WALK IN TALL GRASS OR POTENTIALLY TALL GRASS OR WORSE THAN THAT, COME OUT ON THE FEEDER ROAD ITSELF. SO THAT'S TRULY A PUBLIC SAFETY PROBLEM AND I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE TXDOT TO PUT IN THE SIDEWALKS AND BICYCLE FACILITIES.

MAYOR GARCIA: PARTICULARLY THAT AREA FROM THE LIVER TO HIGHWAY 71 IS ONE WHERE CITIZENS HAVE ASKED COUNCIL TO LOOK AT THE ISSUE OF SAFETY. SO I APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, YOUR INTEREST AND YOUR INITIATIVE ON THIS ONE. FURTHER DISCUSSION?

THOMAS: YES, IF YOU DON'T MIND, MAYOR. I JUST WANT TO COMMEND MR. EATON ALSO FOR THE GOOD WORK OF MAKING SURE THAT WE — WE SUPPORT TXDOT IN THE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN RIGHT-OF-WAY. THANK YOU.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU. FURTHER DISCUSSION? CITY MANAGER?

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR FOR COUNCIL THAT THE AMOUNT OF CONTRIBUTION BY THE CITY REMAINS THE SAME, BUT WHERE APPROPRIATE WE'LL MAKE SURE WE INCLUDE THAT IN FUTURE RESOLUTIONS THAT ARE BEING BROUGHT FORTH.

MAYOR GARCIA: ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO WITH COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER MAKING THE MOTION AND COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS SECONDING. ITEM NUMBER 44. CITY MANAGER? THIS IS THE ITEM THAT RELEASES THE ETJ.

I CHECKED — FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO AAPOLOGIZE OF NOT GETTING WITH Y'ALL AND BRIEFING YOU IN MORE DEPTH ON THIS. THESE TRACTS WE'RE RELEASING ARE AT THE END OF A VERY LONG CUL-DE-SAC, SO IT IS REALLY — THESE ARE REALLY SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS. I CHECKED WITH BEE CAVE DEVELOPMENT FOLKS AND, OF COURSE, I SAID THEIR INTENT IS TO ANNEX THIS AS SOON AS IT GETS RELEASED OR SHORTLY THEREAFTER. SO THEY HAVE 20% IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR SINGLE-FAMILY UNDER THEIR ZONING AND 20% FOR SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS UNDER THEIR SUBDIVISION STANDARDS. SO IT'S GOING TO BE 20 AND 20. IN THE EVENT THAT THIS IS SOMETHING OTHER THAN SINGLE-FAMILY, IT WOULD BE 40, BUT I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP I CAN SHOW YOU IT A LITTLE BETTER. THESE TRACTS ARE AT THE END OF A VERY LONG CUL-DE-SACS IN THE HOMESTEAD SUBDIVISION, SO THERE'S REALLY NO — NO REAL POTENTIAL FOR THEM TO BE REDEVELOPED AND CERTAINLY NOT TO BE REDEVELOPED AS ANYTHING OTHER THAN SINGLE-FAMILY. SO IT'S 20% IMPERVIOUS COVER UNDER THE BEE CAVE REGULATIONS.

SLUSHER: WHICH IS THE SAME AS S.O.S.?

THIS ZONING, YES.

SLUSHER: WHAT'S SOUTH OF THERE?

SOUTH OF THERE IS AUSTIN ETJ.

SLUSHER: BUT WHAT'S IN THERE? IT LOOKS PRETTY BLANK ON THAT MAP.

THAT'S THE BASE COVERAGE, SO IT'S PRETTY BLANK TO THE SOUTH OF THERE.

SLUSHER: OKAY.

MAYOR GARCIA: IS THERE A MOTION, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER? ANYBODY? ANY VOLUNTEERS TO MAKE A MOTION?

ALVAREZ: MOVE APPROVAL.

MAYOR GARCIA: MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IF FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

MAYOR GARCIA: OPPOSED NO? THE MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SIX TO ZERO TO ONE WITH THE MAYOR PRO TEM TEMPORARILY ABSENT. UNLESS THERE'S ANY AN TENTIONS. OKAY. LET ME ANNOUNCE A COUPLE OF THINGS. NUMBER ONE IS THAT THE MAYOR PRO TEM HAS BEEN WORKING ON ITEM 9-F AND G. AND SHE HAS REQUESTED THAT ACTION ON THESE ITEMS BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE 21ST OF MARCH. SO IF YOU'RE HERE FOR ITEMS 9-F AND G, WE PROBABLY CAN TAKE YOUR TESTIMONY TODAY, BUT I DON'T THINK THERE WILL BE ANY COUNCIL ACTION. SO LET ME SEE HOW MANY OF YOU ARE HERE ON ITEMS 9 AND 10. WE HAVE 12 SPEAKERS. MR. YANELLO, CAN YOU COME TO THE MIC, PLEASE? HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT WITH THE MAYOR PRO TEM?

THE MAYOR PRO TEM'S CONCERNS? I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THEM.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY. SHE —

I HEARD ONE CONCERN AND WE DRAFTED LANGUAGE THAT WOULD FIX THAT, AND IT APPARENTLY DIDN'T.

MAYOR GARCIA: IS SHE AVAILABLE? LET ME EXPLAIN THAT. THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS 9-F AND G. MR. SCOTT HANSON IS REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. MARY RUTH ALSHIRE WANTS ME TO READ THE FOLLOWING. PLEASE SUPPORT THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION REPRESENTED BY ANNE. THE POLICE MONITOR AND THE POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD AND POLICE RECORDS AND OVERSIGHT BOARD FOR POLICE OFFICERS. CHARLIE WILKINSON IS HERE, REGISTERED AGAINST. HE IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO I'LL RECOGNIZE HIM AT THAT TIME. MS. YANELLO IS HERE IN FAVOR OF AND REGISTERED TO SPEAK. MISTY LESUGARA, ARE YOU GOING TO SPEAK ON F AND G, OR JUST ON 9?

[ INAUDIBLE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: A, B, C AND D. OKAY. JIM WALKER SHEER TO SPEAK ON C. — IS HERE TO SPEAK ON C. AND ALSO ON F. AND HE DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT HE IS REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF F. MR. WILLIAM HAROLD IS HERE WISHING TO SPEAK AND ALSO WISHES TO DONATE TIME TO MR. SCOTT HANSON. AND I HAVE TO SAY THAT YOU CANNOT DO BOTH. YOU CAN EITHER DONATE YOUR TIME OR YOU CAN SPEAK. DONATE. SO YOU DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK. JENNIFER GALE IS REGISTERED WANTING TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 9. THERE YOU ARE, MAYOR PRO TEM. AND TOMMY EATON DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT HE WANTS TO READ THE FOLLOWING: OUR POLICE FORCE CANNOT BE EFFECTIVE IF IT DOES NOT HAVE THE RESPECT AND THE CONFIDENCE OF THE PEOPLE WHICH IT SHOULD BE PROTECTING AND SERVING. POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY, READ ACCOUNTABILITY, CAN HELP TO INSPIRE THE RESPECT AND CONFIDENCE, THIS RESPECT AND CONFIDENCE. FURTHERMORE, AUSTIN SHOULD NOT BECOME A REFUGE FOR THE FEW POLICE OFFICERS WHO WANT TO HIDE FROM PUBLIC SCRUTINY. AS LONG AS THE CITY OF AUSTIN ALLOWS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO MAINTAIN A SEPARATE, SECRET PERSONNEL FILE, WE ARE INVITING POLICE OFFICERS TO COME TO AUSTIN, MISUSE THEIR AUTHORITY AND HIDE BEHIND A VEIL OF SECRECY. PLEASE VOTE FOR POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY. MAYOR PRO TEM, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE MEM RAN DUMB — THE MEMO SENT AROUND TO ALL THE COUNCILMEMBERS. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT?

GOODMAN: WHAT I HAD, AND MS. YANELLO KNOWS ABOUT, THAT WE WERE WORKING ON LANGUAGE THAT MIGHT NOT COMPROMISE THE LABOR PROTECTION AND SOME ISSUES THAT I WOULD RATHER NOT CREATE A PRECEDENT FOR. AND WHAT I REALIZED AS I WAS PUTTING THE LANGUAGE DOWN AND WRITING IT ALL OUT IS THAT THERE WAS A VERY SIGNIFICANT LEGAL QUESTION THAT I HAD NOT GOTTEN AN ANSWER BACK ON, AND IT HAS TO DO WITH WORDING AND IT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE OR POSSIBILITY OF A DIFFERENCE IN WHAT KIND OF WORDING USED. AND SO SINCE WE HAVE UNTIL THE 21ST, THAT IS THE ABSOLUTE LAST DATE BECAUSE THE PRINTERS — TO GET THE FINAL LANGUAGE DOWN ON THE BALLOT, I HAD ASKED COUNCIL IF THEY WOULD BEAR WITH ME SINCE WE'RE NOT HAVING A MEETING NEXT WEEK TO TAKE FINAL ACTION OR TO WAIT AND LOOK AT MY LANGUAGE ON THAT THURSDAY. AND I HADN'T TOLD ANYBODY YET BECAUSE I WAS ONLY SITTING HERE TRYING TO WRITE IT UP HIRE.

MAYOR, I WISH I COULD KNOW THE CONCERN THAT WAS LEFT UNSTATED.

MAYOR GARCIA: WELL, THE COUNCIL — THE MAYOR PRO TEM HAS REQUESTED THAT SHE BE GIVEN TIME, AND TRADITIONALLY THE COUNCIL ALWAYS HAS GRANTED THOSE REQUESTS. SO WE WILL TAKE UP THE ITEM ON THE 21ST AFTER THE MAYOR PRO TEM DRAFTS THE LANGUAGE THAT SHE WANTS THE CITIZENS AND THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.

I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T EVEN TRY TO OPPOSE A POSTPONEMENT OF SOMETHING WHEN SOMEONE NEEDS MORE TIME, I JUST WISH I KNEW WHAT THE ISSUE WAS.

MAYOR GARCIA: WELL, YOU WILL HAVE TO —

THREE MINUTES?

MAYOR GARCIA: WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING THE ITEM TODAY, SO I WILL RECOGNIZE THE 21ST.

GOODMAN: MAYOR, IF NOBODY MIND, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF SPEAKERS. I WOULDN'T MIND HEARING, EVEN THOUGH I THINK THE ARGUMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE AND REMADE AND I THINK ALSO ALL THE ISSUES RELEVANT TO THIS HAVE BEEN MADE IN ONE DISCUSSION OR ANOTHER, SO THERE ARE NO SURPRISES COMING FROM ME EITHER, I DON'T THINK.

MAYOR GARCIA: YOU WANT TO HEAR THEM NOW?

GOODMAN: I WOULDN'T MIND HEARING.

MAYOR GARCIA: THE FIRST SPEAKER IS MR. SCOTT HANSON, WHO HAS ACTUALLY SIX MINUTES BECAUSE MR. WILLIAM HAROLD HAS DONATED THREE MINUTES TO HIM. MR. HANSON, WELCOME, SIR.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS. I WILL TRY AND BE RELATIVELY BRIEF BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE ADDRESS THE FULL PROPOSALS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE. AND UNTIL WE SEE THE FINAL LANGUAGE IT WILL BE HARD TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS. WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. BUT LET ME START BY SAYING THAT LAST YEAR JUST ABOUT A YEAR AGO TOMORROW IN FACT, ON MARCH EIGHTH OF LAST YEAR, MORE THAN 100 AUSTIN CITIZENS CAME AND ASKED FOR INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT OF THE AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT. AS YOU MAY RECALL, ACLU FELT AT THE TIME THAT WE HAD BEEN BASICALLY THE VICTIMS OF A BAIT AND SWITCH. THAT WE HAD GONE THROUGH THE POFG, POLICE OVERSIGHT FOCUS GROUP, WHICH IS RECOMMENDED. MORE OPEN RECORDS. AND THEN DURING THE MEET AND CONFER PROCESS, ALL OF THOSE PROVISIONS WERE STRIPPED OUT. WHAT WE HAVE BROUGHT TO YOU IS — ARE BASICALLY JUST A COUPLE OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE STRIPPED OUT OF THE AGREEMENT LAST YEAR. I WANT TO TALK FOR THE MOST PART HERE ABOUT THE INDEPENDENT MONITOR QUESTION. A NUMBER OF FOLKS HAVE SAID THE CRITICS OF THESE PROPOSALS THAT WE NEED TO GIVE TIME TO LET THE MET AND CONFER PROCESS WORK, LET THE SYSTEM WORK THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SET UP. BUT WHAT WE HAVE ASKED YOU TO DO IS NOT IMPLEMENT THESE CHARTER AMENDMENTS UNTIL AFTER THE CURRENT MEET AND CONFER PROCESS ENDS. WE'RE NOT SAYING IMPLEMENT IT TODAY AND VIOLATE THE MEET AND CONFER PROCESS, THROW THAT CONTRACT OUT THE WINDOW. WE'RE SAYING WAIT UNTIL THAT PROCESS IS OVER, WHEN IT WOULD TERMINATE ANYWAY, IT WOULD END, IT WOULD NOT EXIST AFTER THAT CONTRACT EXPIRES. AND AT THAT POINT ANY NEW SYSTEM WOULD HAVE THE NEW PROVISIONS THAT WE'VE ASKED YOU TO PUT IN THE CHARTER. SO IT'S NOT THE CASE, AS THE STATESMAN MISLEADINGLY SAID, THAT THESE AMENDMENTS WOULD KILL THE OVERSIGHT SYSTEM. AT NO TIME WOULD THE AMENDMENTS OVERLAP WITH THE CURRENT OVERSIGHT SYSTEM. THEY WOULD NOT BE IN EFFECT AT THE SAME TIME. IT HAS NO EFFECT ON THE SYSTEM THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE AT THE LAST MEET AND CONFER AGREEMENT. I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT, AND I WILL BE INTERESTED TO HEAR WHAT THE LEGAL CONCERNS ARE WITH THE PROPOSAL, BECAUSE THE CITY LEGAL DEPARTMENT LAST WEEK TOLD CITY COUNCIL THAT WHILE THEY DID HAVE CONCERNS THAT THE OPEN RECORDS PROVISION, WHICH I'LL SPEAK TO IN A MOMENT, THEY SAID THAT THERE WAS, QUOTE, NO LEGAL IMPEDIMENT TO IMPLEMENTING THE INDEPENDENT MONITOR, INDEPENDENT BOARD. AND SO IF CITY LEGAL HAS COME UP WITH NEW LEGAL IMPEDIMENTS THAT DIDN'T EXIST LAST WEEK OR THAT THEY WERE UNAWARE OF OR THAT SOMEONE HAS SHOWN THEM SINCE THEN, THEN WE REALLY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THAT WE HAD — WERE PROPOSING SOMETHING THAT WOULD WORK. I WANT TO MAKE SURE Y'ALL ARE AWARE THAT THE PUBLIC STRONGLY SUPPORTS CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT. I KNOW THAT Y'ALL SAW THAT LAST YEAR WHEN MORE THAN 100 PEOPLE SHOWED UP TO SPEAK. IF YOU'VE BEEN LOOKING AT YOUR E-MAIL RECENTLY, I KNOW ACLU HAS BEEN CC AGO ON OVER 100 E-MAILS TO CITY COUNCIL IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS IN SUPPORT OF THESE AMENDMENTS. THE LAST OPINION POLLING THAT I SAW ON THE MATTER STATED THAT 87% OF AUSTIN CITIZENS SUPPORT CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT OF THE AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT. SO THERE'S STRONG PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR THIS. AND I'M HOPING THAT Y'ALL WILL RESPECT THE FACT THAT THE PUBLIC HAS SEEN A PROBLEM, RECOGNIZED A PROBLEM, WOULD LIKE SOMETHING TO BE DONE. I ALSO THINK THAT PERHAPS THE MOST IMPORTANT HE WILL WANT TO ALL THIS — ELEMENT TO ALL THIS IS NOT THAT YOU, THE CITY COUNCIL, GET TO APPOINT THE BOARD INSTEAD OF THE CITY MANAGER. ALTHOUGH I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. I DO THINK THE COUNCILMEMBERS ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC THAN THE CITY MANAGER IS. BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS IT WOULD ACTUALLY ENSHINE THE POLICE MONITOR IN CONSTITUENT CHARTER, SO THAT EVEN THINK THE CIRCUMSTANCES AROUND THAT POSITION, THE DUTIES OF AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THAT POSITION COULD STILL BE HASHED OUT IN PART IN MEET AND CONFER, THE EXISTENCE OF THE POLICE MONITOR WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE RENEGOTIATED AND REAPPROVED EVERY THREE YEARS. ALREADY HERE IN THE LAST THREE DAYS YOU'VE HEARD THE POLICE ASSOCIATION IN A PRESS CONFERENCE SAYING, WELL, WE'RE JUST GOING TO — IF SUCH AND SUCH HAPPENS, THEN WE JUST WON'T HAVE POLICE OVERSIGHT ANY MORE. WELL, THAT'S THE KIND OF THREAT THAT CAN BE HELD OVER THE COUNCIL'S HEAD EVERY THREE YEARS DURING MEET AND CONFER. AND WHILE IT'S APPROPRIATE TO NEGOTIATE SOME ELEMENTS OF OVERSIGHT PERHAPS, I DO NOT BELIEVE IT'S APPROPRIATE TO ALLOW THE POLICE UNION VETO POWER OVER WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT. THAT SHOULD BE A CITY COUNCIL DECISION. LET'S SEE. THAT IS ABOUT ALL I HAD ON THE INDEPENDENT MONITOR. I DO UNDERSTAND THAT A LOT OF Y'ALL HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT AMENDMENT, MORE SO EVEN THAN THE OTHER ONES, BUT I WANT TO SAY THAT THERE'S BEEN JUST A WHOLE LOT OF DISINFORMATION PUT OUT ABOUT THIS THING. IT'S REALLY AN ABSURD AMOUNT. IT'S BEEN SAID OVER AND OVER THAT AUSTIN VOTERS MADE THIS DECISION TO CLOSE THESE RECORDS IN 1947 WHEN THEY VOTED TO GO INTO THE CIVIL SERVICE. WELL, THAT IS JUST AN ERRONEOUS HISTORICAL ACCOUNT, QUITE HONESTLY, YES, AUSTIN VOTERS APPROVED CIVIL SERVICE IN 1947 AND THEN IN 1973 THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE CREATED THE TEXAS OPEN RECORDS ACT AND OPENED UP RECORDS AT POLICE CIVIL SERVICE CITIES. [ BUZZER SOUNDS ] IN 1987 THE LEGISLATURE CLOSED THOSE RECORDS AT THE BEHEST OF CLEAT AND OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT UNIONS, BUT AUSTIN HAS NEVER VOTED TO CLOSE RECORDS. AUSTIN — THOSE RECORDS WERE CLOSED WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF AUSTIN VOTERS. THAT'S ALL I HAD. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FOR ANYONE.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. HANSON? THANK YOU, SIR. I ALREADY READ INTO THE RECORD THE STATEMENT BY MARY ALESHIRE. CHARLIE WILKINSON? AND FOLLOWING MR. WILKINSON IS AN DELLIAN KNOW. WELCOME, SIR.

THANK YOU, SIR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL, CHARLIE WILKINSON WITH COMBINED LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATIONS OF TEXAS. AND I WOULD LIKE TO DEFEND SOME OF THE STATEMENTS THERE. FIRST, NOBODY SAID AT ANY PRESS CONFERENCE THAT THIS WEEK OR ANY OTHER TIME THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE POLICE OVERSIGHT. WE'RE THE ONES THAT NEGOTIATED POLICE OVERSIGHT INTO A CONTRACT, SO IF THERE'S GOING TO BE — THERE'S GOING TO BE POLICE OVERSIGHT. THAT IS NOT — WHO IT'S APPOINTED BY AND WHO THEY REPORT TO IS NOT SOMETHING WE CARE ABOUT AT ALL. WE ONLY CARE ABOUT TWO THINGS. ONE, WE CARE ABOUT THE SANCTITY OF THE CONTRACT. WE REPRESENT 13,000 MEMBERS AROUND THE STATE. WE HAVE 72 CIVIL SERVICE LOCAL UNIONS AND WE HAVE 40, OVER 40 COLLECTIVE BARGAINING CONTRACTS IN TEXAS. WE DO NOT WANT TO HAVE TO GO TO COURT TO DEFEND A LEGAL PRECEDENT SET BY A CHARTER PROVISION THAT SAYS YOU CAN OPEN A CONTRACT WITHOUT CONSULTING BOTH PARTIES. WE ARE PART OF THE REASON WHY YOU HAVE POLICE OVERSIGHT. OFFICERS WERE VERY APPREHENSIVE. THEY STILL WENT AND ATFIDE THE CONTRACT AND NEGOTIATED IN GOOD FAITH THIS ISSUE. SO IF YOU TAKE IT OUT OF THEIR HANDS WOULD BE WRONG AND IT ALSO VIOLATES THAT CONTRACT. AND, OF COURSE, EVERYONE HAS AN OPINION ABOUT THAT, BUT THAT'S THE OPINION OF THE ORGANIZATION THAT REPRESENTS THE OFFICERS. NOW, THE LEGISLATURE IS THE ONE THAT SET CIVIL SERVICE IN PLACE IN 47. VOTERS OF AUSTIN ALSO ADOPTED IT. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT VOTERS IN TEXAS AND LEGISLATURE DECIDED WHEN IN FORT WORTH, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU HAD OFFICERS PASSING OUT CAMPAIGN LITERATURE BECAUSE THEY WERE AFRAID OF BEING FIRED. DEPOLITICAL SIZING THIS PROCESS IS VERY IMPORTANT. AND WHAT YOU GET IN RETURN IN AUSTIN, TEXAS IS A HIGHLY EDUCATED, A VERY WELL-TRAINED POLICE DEPARTMENT IS WHAT YOUR GOAL STILL IS. BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN EXCEPTION TO THAT, THAT'S GOING TO BE ANYWHERE — AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT AS WELL. BUT OVERALL THE DEPOSITIVE LIT SIZING OF THIS PROCESS AND KEEPING OFFICERS AWAY FROM A POLITICAL POLICE DEPARTMENT IS A GOAL THAT WE SHARE. I THINK ALSO THAT ULTIMATELY YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT HOW IS THIS EFFORT HERE BEING PUSHED FORWARD? LET'S SAY THAT POLICE OFFICERS — I DON'T KNOW OF ANY MOVE LIKE THIS, BUT LET'S SAY POLICE OFFICERS WANTED TO TRY TO REMOVE THIS POLICE OVERSIGHT PROCESS. YOU WOULD IMMEDIATELY TELL THEM TO GO TO THE VOTERS AND GET THEIR — GET THE PETITION SIGNED AND THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED TO TELL THE ACLU AS WELL.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU, SIR. MS. AN DELLANO?

THOMAS: MAYOR, COULD I ASK A QUESTION.

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?

THOMAS: IT'S SOMETHING ABOUT THE CONTRACT, IT WOULD AFFECT THE CONTRACT?

YES, SIR.

THOMAS: COULD YOU KIND OF' ELABORATE ON THAT FOR ME?

I'M SPEAKING ON ADVICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL, WHO TELLS ME THAT ANY TIME THAT A CONTRACT IS TO BE RENEGOTIATED THAT BOTH PARTIES SHOULD BE PARTY TO THAT OPENING. AND THAT'S ALL. AND I DON'T THINK THAT ANYONE IN THE AUSTIN POLICE ASSOCIATION HAS EVER, THAT I KNOW OF, EVER INDICATED THEY WOULDN'T BE WILLING TO NEGOTIATE ON THIS ISSUE. THAT'S NOT — AND WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO OPENING ON THIS ISSUE. WE OPEN CONTRACTS EARLY IN ALL KINDS OF CITIES AROUND THE STATE. I DON'T BARGAIN CONTRACTS, BUT I DO KNOW WE DO THAT. OVER ECONOMIC ISSUES, OVER ALL KINDS OF ISSUES, EQUIPMENT, PERSONNEL, WHATEVER. WE OPEN CONTRACTS AND BARGAIN. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THE CITY NO LONGER HAS THAT RIGHT TO ARBITRARILY MAKE A SINGLE DECISION WITHOUT OPENING THE CONTRACT. SEE, THE SANCTITY OF THE CONTRACT IS JUST THIS: YOU SAID THIS IS WHAT YOU WANTED. NOW, THE POLITICS MAY HAVE CHANGED AND THE WINDS MAY HAVE BLOWN DIFFERENTLY, BUT YOU SAID COLLECTIVELY THIS IS WHAT YOU WANTED. WE NEGOTIATED IN GOOD FAITH AND WE SIGNED THE DEAL. THERE WERE TWO PARTIES TO THAT DEAL, AND THAT HAS NOT CHANGED. SO THE FACT THAT NOT EVERYONE'S HAPPY IS JUST SOMETHING YOU CAN TAKE UP AT THE NEXT CONTRACT. FRANKLY, NOT EVERYONE WAS HAPPY ON OUR SIDE EITHER. IT ONLY PASSED WITH 60%. SO 40% OF THE OFFICERS IN AUSTIN NOTED NO TO THAT CONTRACT.

THOMAS: NEW, SIR.

ALVAREZ: I HAVE A FOLLOW-UP. I GUESS YOU WERE TALKING IN TERMS OF THIS PARTICULAR ACTION GOING AGAINST THE MEET AND CONFER AGREEMENT, BUT ALL WE'RE REALLY ASKING IS FOR THE COUNCIL TO HAVE THE ABILITY OR WE WOULD BE PROPOSING TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THIS PARTICULAR ACTION, SO REALLY UNTIL THE COUNCIL — I GUESS FIRST OF ALL IT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE VOTERS. SECOND OF ALL, THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL. AND THAT I THINK IS WHEN YOU WOULD BE GOING AGAINST MEET AND CONFER, NOT NECESSARILY AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME WHEN WE'RE JUST TRYING TO COME TO TERMS WITH —

I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. THE ONLY THING I CAN SAY IN RESPONSE TO THAT IS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO STOP THE CRIME BEFORE IT HAPPENS. WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO FIGHT YOU AT THE POLLS. WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO SPEND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS EDUCATEDDING THE VOTERS ON AN ISSUE THAT NOBODY REALLY CARES ABOUT. WE JUST WANT YOU TO COME BACK TO THE TABLE AND NEGOTIATE ON THIS ISSUE. IF YOU FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT IT, WE'LL NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH LIKE THE WAY WE DID LAST TIME.

ALVAREZ: I THINK THERE'S STILL THAT OPPORTUNITY GIVEN THE COUNCIL HAS THAT GO AHEAD BY THE VOTERS, THEN YOU CAN STILL NEGOTIATE ON POLICE OVERSIGHT DURING THE NEXT MEET AND CONFER. AGAIN, THAT'S REALLY I GUESS THE IDEAL WAY TO COME UP WITH AND —

NO ONE IS IN OPPOSITION TO THAT AND LIKE I SAID, IT'S YOUR BUSINESS WHO THE POLICE MONITOR REPORTS TO AND HOW IT'S STRUCTURED. BUT YOU, THIS BODY AND YOUR REPRESENTATIVES, SAID IT WAS GOING TO BE THIS WAY. AND YOU NEGOTIATED IN GOOD FAITH WITH US AND WE SAID OKAY. AND WE TOOK A GREAT CHANCE. AND LIKE I SAID, NOT MANY — BARELY A A MAJORITY IN A SENSE WAS REALLY IN OVERWHELMING SUPPORT OF THAT. SO WE TOOK A CHANCE AND WE'RE ASKING THAT YOU STAY WITH US ON THIS ISSUE.

MAYOR GARCIA: MR. WILKINSON, COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ WAS NOT THROUGH WITH HIS STATEMENT. SO IF YOU COULD WAIT UNTIL HE FINISHES BEFORE YOU RESPOND.

I'M SORRY.

MAYOR GARCIA: ANNE DELLANO?

THANK YOU, COUNCIL. BASICALLY WHERE THE PUBLIC STANDS ON THIS IS VERY CLEAR. 87% OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS HAVE SAID THEY WANT REAL CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE POLICE LOBBY AND THE POLICE'S OWN INTERESTS ARE GOING TO OVERPOWER THAT RIGHT NOW. HE SAYS THAT THEY WILL NEGOTIATE THIS THING THE SAME WAY THEY DID LAST TIME, THE WAY WE DID IT LAST TIME. THE WAY THEY DID IT LAST TIME WAS TO MAKE A NON-INDEPENDENT PROCESS THAT IS A KNOT REAL CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT SYSTEM, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE AFRAID OF. THAT THEY WILL NEGOTIATE IT THE EXACT SAME WAY THEY DID IT LAST TIME. PLEASE, COUNCIL, PERPETUATE CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT. IF IT ENDS THE CONTRACT PROCESS, IT'S UP EVERY THREE YEARS. THE BARE EXISTENCE OF ANY SYSTEM IS UP AND YOUR CITY OFFICE THAT YOU'RE OPENING, SPENDING MONEY ON, HAVE PERSONNEL THERE, THEIR CONSISTENCY IS ALL AT STAKE EVERY THREE YEARS. AND I'M ASKING YOU — THE COMBINED LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATIONS OF TEXAS JUST SAID THEY HAVE NEVER THREATENED BEFORE THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE OVERSIGHT. BUT IN THE "AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN," MIKE SHEFFIELD SAID IF THEY KEEP THIS UP, THEY WON'T HAVE ANY OVERSIGHT AT ALL. SO THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE SAID WE WILL NOT HAVE ANY OVERSIGHT IF WE KEEP THIS UP, QUOTE, UNQUOTE. SO EVERY THREE YEARS, PLEASE, DON'T MAKE ALL OF OUR CITIZENS IN AUSTIN COME AGAIN AND TELL YOU THAT THEY WANT OVERSIGHT AGAIN EVERY THREE YEARS AND LIST THE REASONS WHY IT'S IMPORTANT, WHICH ONLY TAKES US INTO UGLY STORIES AND OF THINGS THAT HAPPEN IN OUR CITY. AS SCOTT HENSON SAID, THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT TOLD YOU LAST WEEK IN VERY CLEAR TERMS THEY USED THE WORD, QUOTE, NO LEGAL IMPEDIMENT, UNQUOTE, TO THE POLICE MONITOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS. NO LEGAL IMPEDIMENTS. AND LET ME REMIND YOU THAT A YEAR AGO TOMORROW, MARCH EIGHTH, CITY LEGAL TOLD YOU IF YOU WANT TO MAKE AN INDEPENDENT MONITOR, THERE'S ONLY ONE THING YOU CAN DO, CHARTER AMENDMENT. WE ARE FOLLOWING THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT'S ADVICE OF A YEAR AGO, AND NOW THAT WEEK AGO THEY SAID THERE'S NO LEGAL IMPEDIMENT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CONCERN IS OF COUNCIL NOW AND I WISH I DID, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE'S NO LEGAL IMPEDIMENT TO THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT AND I KNOW THAT IF THE COUNCIL WILL NOT LET THE AUSTIN VOTERS AT LEAST LOOK AT IT, WE WILL BE DEBATING THE VERY BARE EXISTENCE OF POLICE OVERSIGHT EVERY SINGLE THREE YEARS. WHEN I SAW MIKE SHEFFIELD'S STATEMENT IN THE PRESS RELEASE YESTERDAY THAT HE SAID THAT WE DON'T WANT A POLITICAL POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND I STEPPED BACK TO YOUR BREAKROOM AND I SEE SEVERAL POLICE LOBBYISTS BACK THERE AND I STEPPED INTO COUNCIL CHAMBERS FOR THE FIRST TIME ON THIS ISSUE YESTERDAY AND I SAW A LOT OF POLICE LOBBYISTS THERE. IT IS A POLITICAL PROCESS. PLEASE STOP THAT AND MAKE IT PERPETUAL FOR THE CITIZENS. PLEASE. MAYOR THANK YOU. MR. JIM WALKER DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK. AND HE IS REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF ITEM NUMBER F, WHICH IS THE POLICE MONITORING AND THE POLICE OVERSIGHT. JENNIFER GALE? JENNIFER GALE? WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER 9. ARE YOU SPEAKING ON THE POLICE MONITOR AND POLICE OVERSIGHT?

I CAN SPEAK ON A OR D?

MAYOR GARCIA: YOU'RE SPEAKING ON D.

I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON A, D, F AND G, PLEASE.

MAYOR GARCIA: WE'RE NOW ON F AND G.

NO LONGER ON A AND D?

MAYOR GARCIA: YOU CAN SPEAK ON ANY OF THE ITEMS YOU WANT TO. YOU ARE REGISTERED ON ITEM NUMBER 9.

IT'S GOING TO BE VERY BRIEF. I WON'T PUT YOU ON SLEEP. I WOULD LIKE TO APOLOGIZE TO MARK NATHAN, A KIND GENTLEMAN OF THE HOSPITALITY OF ANOTHER GENTLEMAN GAVE ME HIS NAME IN THE COUNCIL'S OFFICE. BRIEFLY, ON THE SEB SEB, THE NEED FOR TERM LIMITS WOULD BE A PROBLEM, WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM. ANYTHING LESS THAN 32 DISTRICTS MEANS THAT THE SAME PEOPLE WILL CONTINUE TO BE ELECTED AND THEY WILL BE WEALTHY, WELL CONNECTED OR FAMOUS. MOST PEOPLE DON'T FOLLOW THIS DESCRIPTION, MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR A MEMBER OF OUR COMMUNITY TO RUN FOR PUBLIC OFFICE, ANY LESS CREATES A BUSINESS COUNCIL FOR, OF AND BY THE PEOPLE OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITIES. CONCERNING D, THE AUSTIN FAIR ELECTIONS ACT IS ANYTHING BUT FAIR IN THE — IN THE GOOD LIGHT IT SAYS SOME FEAR THE THRESHOLDS ARE TOO LOW AND WOULD ALLOW SUCH MARGINAL CANDIDATES TO QUALIFY FOR CLEAN CAMPAIGNS AND OPPONENTS THEY EXPERIENCE WITH CAMPAIGN FINANCING INDICATES FRINGE CANDIDATES RARELY QUALIFY FOR PUBLIC FUNDING. RARELY QUALIFY FOR PUBLIC FUNDING. THINK OF IT THIS WAY. IT'S ONE THING TO SIGN A PETITION THAT COSTS YOU NOTHING. IT'S ANOTHER TO FORK OVER FIVE BUCKS WHEN YOU SIGN. AND IT'S HARDER STILL IF YOU REALIZE THAT A CANDIDATE THAT QUALIFIES IS GOING TO RECEIVE PUBLIC FUNDING. THAT'S ENOUGH TO SOBER UP ANY TAXPAYER. THAT WAS WRITTEN BY KEN MARTIN. WE HAVE GOT TO HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE TO THIS CAMPAIGN FINANCE IDEA THAT'S TO RECEIVE $16,000 ONE WOULD HAVE TO COLLECT FIVE DOLLARS FROM 500 PEOPLE TO RUN FOR COUNCIL OR MAYOR AND 1,000 DOLLARS AND FIVE DOLLARS FROM EACH OF THEM, ESM DURING A TIME OF ECONOMIC DOWNTURN WHEN PEOPLE CAN'T EVEN AFFORD FIVE DOLLARS. MORE SIGNATURES IS A GOOD IDEA, IS A GOOD OPTION. RETORE RICKLY, WOULDN'T YOU AGREE, COUNCILMEMBERS, DARYL SLUSHER, JACKIE GOODMAN AND BEVERLY GRIFFITH IF WE — THEN I WANT TO ADDRESS F. WE'VE ALREADY AGREED TO CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS OF A POLICE MONITOR AND POLICE OVERSIGHT FORCE. THIS CITY COUNCIL DECIDED TO NOT AGREE TO THAT. THERE BY NOT ALLOWING THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN TO HAVE OVERSIGHT OVER OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND ON G, IF WE DON'T KEEP A FILE FOR OUR POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD, HOW CAN WE THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN FULLY INVESTIGATE A TROUBLED OFFICER'S PAST TO AVOID OUR TOP ONGOING PROBLEMS THEY MAY HAVE WITH THE PUBLIC. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

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

GOODMAN: MAYOR?

MAYOR GARCIA: ITEM 2 — WHERE'S MARTIN? ITEM 2 IS ONE THAT'S RELATED TO ITEM 17, SO WE ALREADY DID ITEM 17. WE DID NOT NEED TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE DON'T HAVE ANY PRIVATE CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY ITEMS UNLESS THE COUNCIL THINKS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE MORE CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY WITH REGARD TO ITEMS 8 AND 9. I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED EVERYTHING OUT HERE, SO I DON'T THINK I'M GOING TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ANY PRIVATE CONSULTATION ON THE ITEMS THAT WE'VE ALREADY STARTED DISCUSSING IN OPEN SESSION. HEARING NONE, WE WILL — WE ALREADY DID ITEM 4, WHICH IS THE EVALUATION OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK AROUND WE DID ITEM 49 — WE DID ITEM 49? YEAH. SO THE COUNCIL WILL NOW GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. WELCOME BACK HERE — I PROBABLY WILL COME BACK HERE BY MYSELF AT 5:30 TO INTRODUCE MUSIC AND WE WILL HAVE PROCLAMATIONS AND COUNCIL WILL HAVE DINNER AND WE'LL COME BACK TO FINISH THE AGENDA. HOPEFULLY ITEMS 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 AND 13.

GOODMAN: MAYOR, BEFORE WE GO...

MAYOR GARCIA: MAYOR PRO TEM?

GOODMAN: WHEN WE COME BACK, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE ANY MORE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL BE RELEVANT ANY MORE. THE PEOPLE I WANTED TO TALK TO HAVE ALREADY SPLIT. BUT WHEN WE COME BACK AND ARE STILL TALKING ABOUT CHARTER AMENDMENT ISSUES, I WOULD — IF YOU WOULD ALLOW ME, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO SAY FOR STAFF EDIFICATION AND FOR ANYONE ANYONE SAYING THEIR ACLU OR ANY OF THE MANY POLICE LOBBYISTS, WHICH I HAVEN'T SEEN, SO I GUESS THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO ME YET, BUT THERE ARE SOME ISSUES. AND WHEN I SAID WHAT I SAID ABOUT MY LANGUAGE, I DON'T THINK I WAS LISTENED TO CAREFULLY AND I WANTED TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR. CITY LEGAL IS NOT REALLY INVOLVED AT THIS MOMENT IN MY — IN THE LANGUAGE I WAS PROPOSING TO SHOW TO Y'ALL. AND SO THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY A MISHEARD. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WILL HEAR THAT NOW, BUT THAT'S WHO I WAS TALKING TO. AND MY OTHER PLEA, AS LONG AS YOU WILL LET ME TALK, IS I WILL GET AHOLD OF MS. DELLANO AND I WILL GET HOLD OF WHOEVER APD AND CLEAT FOLKS ARE. AND DON'T WORRY, I WILL CALL YOU, BUT PLEASE DON'T WORRY ABOUT CALLING ME. I WILL CALL YOU.

MAYOR GARCIA: SO THE MAYOR PRO TEM WILL CALL YOU. DO NOT CALL HER. [ LAUGHTER ]. WE'RE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

FOR THE U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT WITH SUCH DIVERSE COUNTRIES AS NEPAL, PAKISTAN, INDIAN, YEMEN, SYRIA AND KUWAIT. THE TOUR BROUGHT HIM MUCH PRAISE BY CRITICS AND PUBLIC ALIKE. TUCKER PERFORMS CONCERTS FREQUENTLY DESCRIBE AS INTENSE, HEARTFELT, AND AND I SEE MAIING. HE IS A POLISH ADD AND VERSATILE MUSICIAN. PLEASES JOIN ME IN WELCOMING TUCKER LIVINGSTON. [ APPLAUSE ] ARE YOU GOING TO PLAY FOR US?

MAYOR GARCIA: WELL, YOU CAN ALSO TELL PEOPLE WHERE YOU ARE GOING TO BE PERFORMING.

I WILL ALSO BE PURCHASING MARCH 26TH, AT SAXON PUB IF YOU WANT TO COME ON OUT, AND ALSO BE PLAYING LIVE ON KGSR WITH STRIPPINGS ATTACHED HOSTED BY KEVIN CONNOR FROM THE MORNING FROM 7:00 TO 9:00. ALSO AT 503 COFFEE BAR I PLAY EVERY THURSDAY. HERE'S A SONG THAT ACTUALLY IN INDIA AT 5:30 IT'S TEA TIME, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HAS ANY BEARING HERE. ALSO TODAY IS TOWNS VAN ZANDT'S BIRTHDAY. I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT MAYBE THIS IS A SONG HE MIGHT HAVE APPRECIATED. IT'S A SAD LOVE SONG THAT I WROTE IN SIERRA WHEN I WAS ON — SYRIA WHEN I WAS ON TOUR THERE. IT'S CALLED CITY OF GOLD. ((music) SINGING (music)(music)) [ APPLAUSE ]

THANK YOU.

MAYOR GARCIA: READ THE PROCLAMATION. IT STARTS UP HERE.

PROCLAMATION, BE IT KNOWN THAT WHEREAS THE LOCAL MUSIC COMMUNITY MAKES MANY CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT OF AUSTIN'S SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY; AND WHEREAS THE DEDICATED EFFORTS OF ARTISTS FURTHER AUSTIN'S STATUS AS THE LIVE MUSIC CAPITAL OF THE WORLD; NOW, THEREFORE, I, GUS.

GARCIA: I CAN'T, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, — GUS GARCIA, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, DO HERE BY PROCLAIM MARCH 7TH, 2002 AS TUCKER LIVINGSTON DAY IN AUSTIN. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: PRESENT THIS TO MR. LIVINGSTON.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ACTUALLY HAVE A PROCLAMATION FOR — YOU HAVE TO HELP ME, SHAVON TO PRONOUNCE YOUR LAST NAME.

SPIRETZ.

WHEREAS, BE IT KNOWN THAT'S WRAP AS SHE IS A FIFTH GRADER AT THE BARENOFF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, WHO LIKES ROLLER BLADING, PLAYING SOCCER, HELPING HER MOM — HEY, THAT'S GOOD, ISN'T IT? AND PLAYING MINI GOLF, AND WHEREAS SHE LIKE THE REST OF HER FAMILY IS A PROLIFIC WRITER AND AUTHORED HER ESSAY TO HELP MAYOR GARCIA WITH HIS CORRESPONDENCE OR PERHAPS TO HER SECRETARY, WHEREAS CHER ENTHUSIASM FOR SO MANY SPORTS AND ACTIVITIES, HER ABILITY TO EXPRESS HERSELF WELL AND HER LOVE FOR AUSTIN'S PEOPLE AND PLACES QUALIFY HER IN MANY WAYS TO BE A CITY LEADER. YOU HEAR THAT? CITY LEADER! NOW THEREFORE I GUS GARCIA, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HERE BY PROCLAIM SHAVIA SPIRITZ AS MAYOR FOR A DAY IN AUSTIN. [ APPLAUSE ] THAT'S TO YOU, DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING?

UM, I AM — I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU, MAYOR GARCIA, FOR LETTING ME COME AND HELP YOU AND THINGS AND IT WAS A REALLY — I'VE HAD A REALLY GOOD EXPERIENCE FROM IT. SO MAYBE ONE DAY I CAN GROW UP TO A MAYOR.

MAYOR GARCIA: OR BETTER.

OR BETTER. [ LAUGHTER ]. [ APPLAUSE ].

THE PARENTS ARE HERE, IF YOU COULD STAND. THE GRANDPARENTS ARE HERE FROM SCOTLAND, IF THEY COULD STAND. [ APPLAUSE ] AND THE TEACHER AND HER HUSBAND ARE HERE, IF YOU COULD STAND. [ APPLAUSE ]

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE. AND HER FRIEND. YOU WANT TO INTRODUCE YOUR FRIEND. [ LAUGHTER ].

THIS IS MY BEST FRIEND ALLY, SHE'S BEEN MY FRIEND SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, SO — SO I THINK WE WILL BE BEST FRIENDS FOR A LONG TIME.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ]

WE ARE GOING TO PRESENT SOME OTHER PROCLAMATIONS. AND YOU MET COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, I'M GOING TO ASK HIM TO PRESENT THE TIME WARNER CABLE AND AUSTIN PARKS FOUNDATION, MOVIES IN THE PARK AT REPUBLIC SQUARE, COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.

WYNN: THANKS TO BOTH MAYORS. THANKS. AS OPPOSED TO READING THE LENGTHY PROCLAMATION, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST DESCRIBE WHAT WE ARE DOING TODAY. THANKS TO A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY OF AUSTIN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, COME ON UP, AND AUSTIN PARKS FOUNDATION AND THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE, TO REVITALIZE THE DOWNTOWN PARKS THROUGH PROGRAMMING AND PLANNING EFFORTS, ACTUALLY BRINGING PEOPLE TO OUR PARKS, A NEW AND DIFFERENT IDEA, FREE TIME WARNER CABLE AND AUSTIN PARKS FOUNDATION MOVIES IN THE PUBLIC AT — IN THE PARK AT REPUBLIC SQUARE WILL KICK-OFF NEXT TUESDAY, MARCH 19TH AT 8:00 P.M. FOR A SERIES OF FOUR MOVIES THROUGH THE SPRING ON TUESDAY NIGHTS. THERE'S GOING TO BE A FREE OUTDOOR SHOWING, BRINGING PEOPLE BACK DOWN TO REPUBLIC SQUARE AND HELPING TO KICKOFF AND ANNOUNCE A GREAT REVITALIZATION AND RESTORATION, LANDSCAPE PROJECT OF THE SQUARE. I WOULD LIKE TO CONGRATULATE AND THANK THE PARTIES THAT MADE THIS HAPPEN. THE AUSTIN PARKS FOUNDATION, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DOWNTOWN AUSTIN ALLIANCE, BEVERLY SILAS BOARD CHAIR, HEAS SIGH OLIVERES, OUR DIRECTOR WHO COULDN'T BE WITH US TONIGHT, TIME WARNER CABLE, LYDIA, ALAMO DRAFT HOUSE, TIM LEAGUE, OWNER AND AUSTIN ENERGY, ROGER DUNCAN THE VICE-PRESIDENT FOR GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, ENERGY, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES, HELP ME THANK ALL OF THESE FOLKS. WE WILL ASK TIM TO — TEDD TO SAY A FEW WORDS. [ APPLAUSE ]

COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, JUST THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE AT THE FOUNDATION WANT TO THANK ALL OF OUR PARTNERS WITHOUT WHOM THESE MOVIES WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE. AND PARTICULARLY THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, WHICH IS OUR PARTNER IN EVERY SINGLE PROJECT THAT WE DO. I THINK LYDIA FROM TIME WARNER WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SAY A FEW THINGS, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, SID. GOOD AFTERNOON. AUSTIN IS A BEAUTIFUL CITY. AND THE PARKS — OUR PARKS ARE OUR SOUL. I — I AM VERY, VERY PROUD THAT TIME WARNER HAS PARTNERED WITH — WITH THE AUSTIN PARKS FOUNDATION, THE DOWNTOWN ALLIANCE AND THE ALAMO DRAFT HOUSE TO BRING MOVIES IN THE PARK TO CENTRAL AUSTIN. AND TO PROMOTE OUR BEAUTIFUL CITY AND OUR PARKS. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE VERY GOOD CLASSIC MOVIES IN THE PARK AND ALSO WE ARE GOING TO HAVE ENTERTAINMENT FOR THE CHILDREN. SO WE INVITE ALL OF OUR FAMILIES IN AUSTIN TO JOIN US FOR FREE FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT. WE WILL HAVE ACTIVITIES AND FUN GAMES FOR THE KIDS. AND WE WILL ASK, ALSO, FOR OUR MAYOR, GUS GARCIA AND THE COUNCILMEMBERS, TO JOIN US AT OUR OPENING ON MARCH 19TH. AND WE HAVE LEFT FOR YOU A LITTLE TREAT, SOME POPCORN AND A TICKET. EVEN THOUGH IT'S FREE, SO THAT YOU CAN — YOU CAN JOIN US. AND EVERYONE IS WELCOME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ]

OUR MAYOR WILL NOW PRESENT PROCLAMATIONS TO EACH OF OUR RECIPIENTS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

BE SURE TO GET THE RIGHT ONE [ LAUGHTER ].

I'M SORRY, OF COURSE, THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THIS IS I FORGOT TO MENTION WHEN MOVIES, MARCH 19TH WILL BE RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, 26TH WILLIE WONKA AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY, APRIL SECOND REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE. THE 9TH VIVA LAS VEGAS. WE ARE TOLD MAYOR GARCIA WILL COME DRESSED AS ELVIS. PLEASE JOIN US TUESDAY, MARCH 19TH.

WINTER NOT GOING TO HAVE CROCODILE DUNDEE.

MAYOR GARCIA: MAYOR, IF YOU WANT TO, I WILL HOLD THE POPCORN FOR YOU AND IN MARCH WE HONOR PEOPLE WHO BUY THINGS FOR THE CITY. IT'S CALLED PURCHASING MONTH. AND THE MAYOR IS GOING TO READ A PROCLAMATION. AND PRESENT IT TO MS. BEFORE YOU...............O IS HERE. MAYOR?

BRUBAKER WHO IS HERE.

BE IT KNOWN THAT WHEREAS —

MAYOR GARCIA: NAPM?

NAPA.

IS ONE OF 180 ALLEVIATES OF THE INSTITUTE OF SUPPLY MANAGEMENT. FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PURCHASING MANAGEMENT AND WHEREAS THIS — THIS 9TH ANNUAL PURCHASING MONTH FOCUSES ON EXPANDING AWARENESS OF THE PURCHASING AND MATERIAL MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONS — PROFESSIONALS ROLE AMONG BUSINESS AND CORPORATE LEADERS. GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, ACT EMIA, THE GENERAL PUBLIC, ALSO PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY TO EDUCATE STUDENTS AND OTHERS ABOUT CAREER OPPORTUNITIES IN PURCHASING. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GUS GARCIA, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HERE BY PROCLAIM MARCH 2002 AS PURCHASING MONTH IN AUSTIN. [ APPLAUSE ]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU READ THAT BEAUTIFULLY. THAT WAS VERY, VERY GOOD.

MAYOR GARCIA: YES, AS ALL OF YOU KNOW, WE IN THE CITY BUY A LOT OF THINGS, WE NEED PROFESSIONALS LIKE MS. BRUBAKER TO MAKE SURE THAT WE BUY THE RIGHT THING AT THE RIGHT PRICE FOR OUR CITY. SUE, DO YOU WANT TO SAY A FEW WORDS.

I WANT TO SAY WE NEED TO RECRUIT THIS YOUNG LADY INTO OUR PROFESSION BEFORE YOU GET HERE. THANK YOU.

MAYOR GARCIA: THEY —

WE APPRECIATE YOU MORE.

THEY PAY BETTER THAN THEY DO THE CITY COUNCIL.

WE DO, AND WE APPRECIATE YOU MORE.

MAYOR GARCIA: THIS ONE IS — AND THIS NEXT PROCLAMATION THAT THE MAYOR WILL NEED IS ABOUT MENTAL RETARDATION AWARENESS MONTH. A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF OUR ACTIVITIES. OKAY?

PROCLAMATION —

SOMEBODY HERE TO —

OKAY. PROCLAMATION. BE IT KNOWN THAT WHEREAS PEOPLE WITH MENTAL RETARDATION COMPROMISE ONE OF OUR LARGEST DISABILITY GROUPS, WITH MORE THAN 22,000 PERSONS WITH MENTAL RETARDATION IN TRAVIS COUNTY AND WHEREAS THE ARC OF THE CAPITAL AREA USES MARCH EACH YEAR TO HELP THE COMMUNITY LEARN ABOUT ISSUES AFFECTING PEOPLE WITH MENTAL RETARDATION AND THEIR FAMILIES. AND TO CELEBRATE THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF PEOPLE WITH MENTAL RETARDATION AND WHEREAS THE ARC OF THE CAPITAL AREA IN ITS EFFORTS TO ENABLE PERSONS OF MENTAL RETARDATION AND RELATED DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES TO ACHIEVE THEIR FULLEST POTENTIAL, SPONSORS A PROGRAM TO PAIR THEIR CLIENTS WITH A VOLUNTEER BUDDY. NOW, THEREFORE, I GUS GARCIA, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HERE BY PROCLAIM MARCH 2002 AS MENTAL RETARDATION AWARENESS MONTH IN AUSTIN. [ APPLAUSE ]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU. LET ME STEP RIGHT OVER HERE. THE ARC OF THE CAPITAL AREA — APPRECIATES THE — THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING ABOUT AWARENESS ABOUT MENTAL RETARDATION TO THE COMMUNITY. WE USE THIS MONTH TO REALLY ENLIST MORE COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR THE — FOR OUR MISSIONS AND VALUES. THE ARC OF THE CAPITAL AREA ENVISIONS A FUTURE IN WHICH PEPPERS WITH DISABILITIES, THEIR FAMILIES AND CAREGIVERS CAN HAVE THE OPPORTUNITIES TO PURSUE FULL AND PRODUCTIVE LIVES AS OTHER PEOPLE. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: AND IN CLOSING, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU FOR BRINGING THE MAYOR HERE. AND I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE MAYOR FOR COMING. AND LET THIS NOT BE THE LAST TIME THAT YOU COME TO VISIT WITH US. OKAY? THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ] DO YOU WANT TO TAKE A PICTURE? YEAH, OVER HERE.

(NO AUDIO)

[ (music) MUSIC PLAYING (music)(music) ]

MAYOR GARCIA: AS SOON AS WE HAVE A QUORUM OF THE COUNCIL IN THE CHAMBERS, WHICH WILL BE MOMENTARILY, WE WILL GO INTO THE 6:00 O'CLOCK TIME CERTAIN PUBLIC HEARINGS. AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. NO, WE DON'T. SO WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH THAT ITEM EXPEDITIOUSLY.

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, WE NOW HAVE THREE COUNCILMEMBERS, YOU MAKEc FOUR. OKAY. WE HAVE A QUORUM OF THE COUNCIL IN THE CHAMBERS, AND I'M CALLING THE MEETING, THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR MARCH THE SEVENTH BACK TO ORDER. AND WE'RE TAKING UP FIRST TIME CERTAIN ITEM AT SIX P.M., PUBLIC HEARINGS. THE FIRST ONE WAS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE FULL PURPOSE ANNEXATION OF THE FOLLOWING AREAS. WOODS OF CENTURY PARK, APPROXIMATELY 51 ACRES LOCATED IN TRAVIS COUNTY APPROXIMATELY FOUR-10TH OF A MILE EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF BURNET ROAD AND CENTURY BARK BOULEVARD.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL, MY NAME IS VIRGINIA COLLIER. THISc IS THE SECOND OF TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE FULL PURPOSE ANNEXATION OF THIS AREA. COUNCIL IS SCHEDULED TO TAKE ACTION APRIL 4TH. SO WHAT THE CENTURY PARK IS CURRENTLY IN THE CITY FOR LIMITED PURPOSE JURISDICTION. IT'S ADJACENT TO THE FULL PURPOSE ON THREE SIDES. THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA CURRENTLY HAS NO RESIDENTS. THE PROPERTY OWNERS REQUESTED THIS ANNEXATION. AND SERVICE PLANS FOR THIS ANNEXATION AREA ARE LOCATED ACROSS THE ROOM. BHAIFKLY THE CITY IS GOING TO TAKE OVER SERVICES THAT ARE CURRENTLY PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ENHANCED SERVICES.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY. QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS OF STAFF? WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

MAYOR GARCIA: OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF FIVE TO — SIX TO ONE WITH COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ TEMPORARILY OUT. THE NEXT ONE IS BRANDT'S CROSSING, APPROXIMATELY 135 ACRES LOCATED IN SOUTH CENTRAL TRAVIS COUNTY ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF BRANDT ROAD AND EAST SLAUGHTER LANE.

THIS INTERSECTION AREA IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. THE PROPOSED SMART HOUSING SITE, THE PROPERTY OWNER SAYS THE PROPOSED SMART HOUSING SITE REQUESTED ANNEXATION. AGAIN, ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING IS TO DISCUSS THE SERVICE PLAN, WHICH COPIES ARE ACROSS THE ROOM. AND THE CITY WILL TAKE OVER THE SERVICES CURRENTLY PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ENHANCED SERVICES.

MAYOR GARCIA: QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? AGAIN, THERE'S NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

MAYOR GARCIA: OPPOSED NO? MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SIX TO ONE, WITH COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ TEMPORARILY ABSENT. DECKER LAKE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY FIVE ACRES LOCATED AT TRAVIS COUNTY ALONG DECKER LAKE ROAD EAST OF BLUFF — BLUE BLUFF ROAD.

THIS IS THE SOUTH 50 FOOT OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF DECKER LAKE ROAD. THE NORTH 50 FOOT OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WAS DONE BACK IN 1958 AND TRAVIS COUNTY ASKED THAT WE ANNEX THAT AREA TO PROVIDE — TO CLARIFY JURISDICTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY. SERVICE PLANS ARE ACROSS THE ROOM AND THE CITY WILL TAKE OVER SERVICES CURRENTLY PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY.

MAYOR GARCIA: QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? AGAIN, THERE'S NOBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO I'LL I'LL SLAIN INTRAEUN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE? OPPOSED NO? MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF FIVE — SIX TO ZERO TO ONE, WITH COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

MAYOR GARCIA: WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE ANY ACTION ON ANY OF THIS. WHEN DOES THIS COME UP FOR ACTION?

IT WILL BE BACK ON APRIL 4TH.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY. FOR ACTION, RIGHT?

RIGHT.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AT THIS TIME I'M BRINGING UP ITEMS 10 — NO, 11, 12 AND 13. I'M GOING TO BRING THEM UP TOGETHER. AND IF THE STAFF IS READY TO MAKE A PRESENTATION OF THIS ONE, ITEM 11 IS TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING NEGOTIATION AND RESOLUTION OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO THREE FIRMS AND THIS WAS A CHANGE OF TWO MILLION DOLLARS. AND ITEM NUMBER 12 IS AMEND AN ORDINANCE, CAPITAL BUDGET. THIS CAPITAL BUDGET AMENDMENT WOULD TRANSFER 28.8 MILLION DOLLARS OF APPROPRIATIONS BETWEEN CAPITAL PROJECT GROUPS, INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FIRE PRODUCTION AND DECREASING APPROPRIATION FOR NON-PLANT ASSETS AND CUSTOMER CARE, BUILDING AND MEETERRING FOR A NET IMPACT OF ZERO. SO WE'RE TAKING OUT ONE AND PUTTING IN ANOTHER. ITEM 13 IS TO APPROVE AUTHORIZATION AND EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT WITH CIKTS OF AUSTIN, TEXAS WITH A CONSTRUCTION OF THE UNITS AT SAND HILL ENERGY CENTER IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED 51 MILLION,465 DOLLARS — 51,465,000 DOLLARS. AND THE GENERAL MANAGER OF THE AUSTIN ENERGY IS HERE. WELCOME.

MAYOR, IF I COULD FOCUS ON ITEM NUMBER 13, UNLESS YOU HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ON NUMBER 11.

MAYOR GARCIA: GO AHEAD ON 13.

THIS IS THE SECOND PHASE OF SAND HILL. THE FIRST PHASE WAS TO BUILD THE PEAKING UNITS, WHICH WE HAVE BUILT. THIS ASPECT OF IT IS FOR A BASE LOAD UNIT. AT THIS STAGE IT BRINGS 300 MEGAWATTS OF POWER TO THE SYSTEM THAT WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE. THE — WE RELEASED BIDS ON THIS. WE DID GET TWO BIDS. WE HAVE HAD OUR CONSULTING ENGINEER HELP US IN THE EVALUATION OF THESE BIDS AS LATE AS TODAY, HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THEM. THEY HAVE SENT ME A LETTER SUPPORTING THEIR ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATIONS AS WE MOVE AHEAD WITH THIS PROJECT. AND I WOULD — AND I WOULD URGE YOU TO DO SO.

MAYOR GARCIA: QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF ON ITEM NUMBER 11, 12 OR 13? ITEMS 11, 12 OR 13? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE. SLUSH LUSH MOVE APPROVAL.

MAYOR GARCIA: MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. AND I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU IN JUST A MINUTE. SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER, T. PAUL ROBBINS.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY, FIR.

HI. GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. MY NAME IS PAUL ROBBINS. I'M AN ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSUMER ACTIVIST. FOR THE RECORD, DO I HAVE NINE MINUTES? WELL, THERE'S THREE ITEMS. THREE TIMES THREE IS NINE.

MAYOR GARCIA: WELL, YOU KNOW, USE AS MUCH TIME ASc YOU NEED, BUT DON'T GO BEYOND NINE MINUTES, OKAY?

THANK YOU, SIR. I AM INTERESTED IN THIS BECAUSE IT RELATES TO THE CITY CHARTER. IT'S KIND OF INTERESTING THAT WHILE YOU ALL ARE DELIBERATING ON THE CHARTER, THERE'S AN IRONY HERE THAT WHAT YOU'RE DOING VIOLATES THE SPIRIT OF THE CITY CHARTER. AS ALL OF YOU KNOW, THERE IS A PROVISION IN THE CHARTER THAT SAYS THAT VOTERS WILL APPROVE ALL REVENUE BONDS FOR ELECTRIC SYSTEMS AND WATER AND WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS. AND PRIOR TO 1996 ALL OUR POWER PLANTS WERE FUNDED BY REVENUE BONDS. IN 1996, AS FOUR OF YOU KNOW, THE CITY — I THINK IT WAS DECEMBER 10TH, 1996, THE DAY THAT WILL LIVE IN INFAMILIAR MY, THERE WAS A VOTE BY THE COUNCIL TO LOWER COSTS, BUT KEEP RATES THE SAME AND TAKE APPROXIMATELY 100 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR AND PUT IT INTO WHAT'S CALLED A DEBT DEFEES SANS FUND. AND OVER A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS, THIS COUPLE LA ACTIVE 500 MILLION DOLLARS WOULD BUY-DOWN THE DEBT AND MAKE OUR BILLS MORE COST COMPETITIVE WITH OTHER UTILITIES. AND THIS DID HAVE SOME MERIT, BUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING INSTEAD IS YOU'RE TAKING MONEY FROM A DEBT DEFEE SANS FUND AND YOU'RE BUYING NEW PAIR PLANTS AND YOU'RE ABLE TO BYPASS VOTER APPROVAL. THE LAST TIME WE CHECKED WE HAD ABOUT 200 MILLION DOLLARS IN THE DEBT DEFEASANCE FUND. AND WE STILL CONTINUE TO COLLECT EVEN THOUGH THIS WAS TO BE FOR A FIVE-YEARR PERIOD. THIS IS TO MY KNOWLEDGE WHEN I CHECKED LAST, ABOUT ONE OUT OF EVERY SIX OR ONE OUT OF EVERY EIGHT DOLLARS THAT WE PAID WAS GOING INTO THIS FUND. DEBT DEFEASANCE IS ONE TERM FOR IT. OTHER PEOPLE WOULD BE LESS KIND AND CALL IT A SLUSH FUND. BUT THAT'S — IT IS BEING USED IN A WAY THAT BYPASSES VOTER APPROVAL. NOW, BUYING CASH MAY BE A GOOD IDEA, BUT I MIGHT REMIND YOU THAT THE WAY YOU DID THIS WAS, WELL, IN SOME WAYS ILLEGAL IN THAT IF YOU WANTED TO DO THIS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE THROUGH A FORMAL RATE CASE. AND SOME — AT SOME POINT YOU MAY BE VULNERABLE TO A CONTEST OF OUR RATES BECAUSE OF IT. BUT GETTING BACK TO THIS ISSUE, THERE ARE A LOT OF GOOD REASONS FOR VOTERS TO APPROVE REVENUE BONDS. OUR ELECTRIC UTILITY HAS HAD A FEW PROBLEMS IN THE PAST THAT REQUIRE VOTER SCRUTINY. THE NEW MISPLACING OF MONEY IN CERTAIN FUNDS WHERE THEY CAN'T FIND THEM, HOLLY STREET POWER PLANT. SOMETIMES THEY'VE BEEN OPPOSED TO ENERGY CONSERVATION. NOT ALL TIMES, BUT SOME. AND YOU KNOW, IF I HAD A CHOICE TO APPROVE THIS PLANT AS A VOTER, I VERY WELL MIGHT, BUT I WOULD WANT TO ASK THE UTILITY SOME QUESTIONS AS TO WHY. WHY AREN'T WE PURSUING MORE CO-GENERATION, WHICH WOULD MAKE BUSINESSES MORE EFFICIENT. WHY AREN'T WE PURSUING MORE CONSERVATION, WHICH WOULD BE LESS COST THAN YOUR POWER PLANT? DO WE HAVE LONG-TERM GAS CONTRACTS SO THE NEXT TIME THERE'S PRICE GOUGING BY THE GAS INDUSTRY AS THERE WAS ONLY ABOUT A YEAR AGO, WE WOULDN'T BE VULNERABLE. WHAT ABOUT ALTERNATIVE ENERGY? WHY AREN'T WE DOING MORE OF IT? I WOULD WANT TO RAISE THESE QUESTIONS, I WOULD WANT TO GET ANSWERS. BUT OTHER THAN STANDING ON THIS PODIUM HERE, I DON'T HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. I USED TO PRIOR TO 1996. I WANT MY VOTE BACK, COUNCIL. THE VOTERS DID NOT RELINQUISH THEIR RIGHT TO HAVE INPUT. IF YOU WANT TO ASK THEM TO CHANGE THE CHARTER TO ALLOW YOU TO DO THIS, THIS IS THE TIME TO DO IT. YOU'RE DEBATING THIS FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEK AS YOU HAVE FOR THE LAST FEW WEEKS. THIS IS THE TIME. PLACE THE ITEM ON THE BALLOT AND SEE IF IT'S APPROVED. I DON'T THINK IT WILL BE. I DON'T KNOW TOO MANY PEOPLE THAT DON'T WANT TO HAVE A SAY IN THEIR FUTURE. THANK YOU, COUNCIL. YOU CAN HAVE MY THREE MINUTES, GUS.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. ROBBINS. WE HAD A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER — OKAY. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

SLUSHER: OKAY. MR. GARZA, SO HOW ARE WE PAYING FOR THIS PLANT?

WE'RE PAYING CASH FOR THIS PLANT.

SLUSHER: SO WE'RE PAYING CASH. THAT'S WHY WE DON'T HAVE TO GO TO THE VOTERS BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN WE'RE GOING INTO DEBT. THE UTILITY IS SO FINANCIALLY SUCCESSFUL BASED ON THE STARTING WITH THE 1996 STRATEGIC PLAN THAT WAS PASSED THAT IT'S NOW SO SUCCESSFUL AND SO PROFITABLE THAT WE CAN BUY GENERATING FACILITIES IN CASH WITHOUT GOING INTO DEBT.

THAT WAS PART OF THE PLAN. KNOWING THAT THEORETICALLY THE DID HE REGULAR WAS COMING AND THE CHEAPEST WAY TO PRODUCE POWER IS TO MAKE SURE IT'S DEBT FREE.

SLUSHER: THANK YOU.

MAYOR GARCIA: FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

WYNN: MR. GARZA, TALK TO ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE LOCATION OF THE PLANT AND PARTICULARLY IN WHAT WE ANTICIPATE TO BE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR SH130?

I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE — ON WITH THAT ASPECT OF IT. ANDY WILL TRY TO ANSWER IT.

WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANYTHING WITH THE SH130 PROJECT THAT WOULD BE OBSTRUCTIVE TO US OR US TO THEM.

WYNN: HOW CLOSE IS IT?

I'M NOT REALLY SURE OF THE EXACT LENGTH BETWEEN THE TWO, BUT WE CAN GET YOU THAT INFORMATION.

WYNN: I THINK IT'S RATHER CLOSE, AND IT'S A LITTLE DISTURBING THAT YOU'RE NOT AWARE OF THE PLANNED ROUTE BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING OF PARTICULARLY HOW IT CROSSES THE COLORADO RIGHT THERE IS THERE CAN BE SOME DRAMATIC IMPLICATIONS. AND SO FAR AS THE LAND USE AND THE COST TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS THERE. AND SO I'M — IT CONCERNS ME THAT WE'RE NOT AWARE OF, ONE, THE LOCATION OF SH130. IT'S QUITE CLOSE. IT'S CLEARLY WITHIN 2,000 FEET, PROBABLY LESS THAN THAT. PROBABLY 700 FEET. AND WHAT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT DO, ONE, IS INVESTING 50 MILLION DOLLARS WITHOUT KNOWING THAT, BUT THEN TWO, WHAT IT MAY DO TO THE — JUST THE GENERAL LOGISTICS OF OPERATING OF A POWER PLANT.

IF IT IS THAT CLOSE, I WASN'T AWARE OF THAT.

COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, I WILL CHECK THAT OUT IMMEDIATELY AND GET BACK THAT INFORMATION TO YOU. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE STATE WOULD BUILD A MAJOR HIGHWAY IMMEDIATELY RIGHT NEXT TO THE PLANT. ONE OF THE INVENTORIES THAT THEY GO THROUGH IS THEY WILL ASSESS EVERY MAJOR DEVELOPMENT THAT IS IN THE PROPOSED ROUTE THAT THEY'RE CONSIDERING. AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE ONE OF THE CRITERIA IS THEY'LL STAY AWAY FROM A PUBLIC FACILITY OF THIS MAGNA TIEWD.

WYNN: BUT I GUESS MY HESITATION HERE IS THEY MAY ARGUE THAT THEY HAVE LONG PLANNED SH130 BEFORE WEEAMED OF BUILDING A POWER PLANT AT THAT LOCATION. AND BECAUSE OF THE CURVATURE OF THE RIVER AT THAT EXACT LOCATION WHERE THEY'RE TRYING TO CROSS, IF IT FOS FORCES THEIR HAND AND THAT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE RIVER CROSSING IS, YOU KNOW, 30 MILLION DOLLARS MORE EXPENSIVE TO BE 500 FEET TO THE WEST, THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO PUSH IT TO THE EAST. AND I WOULD — I'M AMAZED THAT WE AREN'T, YOU KNOW, AT THAT TABLE LIKE SO MANY, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE LANDOWNERS THAT WE'VE SEEN COME BEFORE THIS DAIS ARE, AND THOSE GUYS ARE PRETTY SAVVY AND THEY'RE PRETTY AWARE — VERY AWARE OF WHAT A FEW HUNDRED FEET EAST OR WEST CAN MEAN IN TERMS OF THE VALUE OF THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY, AND I WOULD THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT WE WOULD VALUE — AUSTIN ENERGY WOULD VALUE ITS PROPERTY WITH THE SAME REGARD. AND PARTICULARLY RECOGNIZING THAT THIS IS, YOU KNOW, A VERY LARGE INVESTMENT ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY. I'M DISAPPOINTMENTED THAT WE'RE NOT AT THE TABLE.

MAYOR GARCIA: IF YOU COULD CHECK THAT OUT, MR. GARZA, AND REPORT TO COUNCIL BY MEMORANDUM SO THAT WE KNOW EXACTLY HOW — WHAT IS SPECIFICALLY IN OUR PLANS FOR THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT OF SH130. MAYOR PRO TEM?

GOODMAN: MAYOR, THIS IS JUST A BRIEF HISTORICAL NOTE. THE ISSUE THAT MR. ROBBINS RAISED WITH US WAS A VERY LEGITIMATE ONE IN THAT IN '96 WHEN WE TOOK THIS NEW FINANCIAL POLICY INTO THE UTILITY AND OPERATIONS WAS A VASTLY DIFFERENT APPROACH THAN WE'VE EVER HAD BEFORE. AND IN FACT, MANY TIMES WHEN SOMETHING WAS CONTEMPLATED, THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE CHAMBERS THAT COUNCIL HAD THEN. IN '96 WITH THE LEGISLATION BOTH PROPOSED AND IN PLACE FOR REREGULATION OF THE ELECTRIC UTILITIES, IT DIDN'T SEEM TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO PEOPLE HERE THAT IT ONCE DID. AND THERE WAS NOT A ROOMFUL OF PEOPLE IN OPPOSITION, WHICH I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE. I DON'T THINK I VOTED FOR IT ANYWAY, BUT IT IS A VERY DIFFERENT THING AND THERE'S A VERY DIFFERENTc KIND OF UTILITY WE SEE NOW, AND I THINK IT'S SOMETIMES GOOD FOR US TO REMEMBER HOW SHORT A TIME IT HAS BEEN SINCE THE CHANGES IN BOTH FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATION HAVE CHANGED THE PERSONALITY AND THE GOALS AND THE OPERATIONS OF THE UTILITY.

MAYOR GARCIA: FURTHER QUESTIONS? THIS MOTION — IS THE MOTION SECKED ON ITEMS 11, 12 AND 13. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE? OPPOSED NAY. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO. THAT GETS US BACK TO CHARTER AMENDMENTS. AND WE HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ON ITEM NUMBER 9-A THROUGH D. THOSE ARE LAST SPEAKERS THAT WE HAVE SIGNED UP ON THIS ITEM, SO COUNCIL, WE HAVE — WE RECESSED — WE RECESSED THE DISCUSSION ON ITEM NUMBER F AND G BECAUSE THAT WOULD NOT BE ACTED ON TONIGHT, SO WE ALSO RECESSED THE DISCUSSION ON ITEM NUMBER 8 AND WE CAN START IT WITH A MOTION TO DO A CHANGE, A MANNER IN WHICH WE ELECT THE COUNCILMEMBERS AT LARGE TO A MIXED SYSTEM THAT WOULD HAVE EIGHT DISTRICTS, TWO AT LARGE AND ONE MAYOR ALSOc AT LARGE. THAT MOTION IS STILL ON THE TABLE. IT WAS AN ATTEMPT TO AMEND IT BY PUTTING THE PROCESS FOR TRANSITIONING FROM THE CURRENT SYSTEM TO WHAT WE HAVE. AND AS WE WERE APPROACHING THE TIME WHEN WE HAD TO LEAVE THIS ITEM, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, YOU HAD THE FLOOR AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ADOPTING A PLAN THAT WOULD KEEP OUR THREE-YEAR PROGRAM — OUR THREE-YEAR TERMS, I'M SORRY. AND MR. STEINER EXPLAINED HOW THAT COULD BE DONE IN THE 02 ELECTIONS AND THE 03 ELECTIONS SO WE COULD DO IT. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE?

SLUSHER: NO. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS, NOT ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE. YEAH, I HAD — I'VE BEEN A PRETTY STRONG PROCEED PROCEED PENITENTIARY OF THE MIXED SYSTEM BECAUSE I THINK THAT I THINK THAT ONE THING WE'VE SEEN HERE IS THAT THE CURRENT SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE HAS DONE PRETTY WELL AT ENSURING MINORITY REPRESENTATION ON THE COUNCIL. AND THERE'S SOME IRONY THERE BECAUSE FOR YEARS I WAS GOING BACK ABOUT 20 OR 30 YEARS. THE BEGINNING OF THE PUSH FOR SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT DISTRICTS CAME BECAUSE OF THE NEED FOR RACIAL OR MINORITY REPRESENTATION ON THE COUNCIL, WHEREAS NOW THIS SYSTEM HAS WORKED TO DO THAT AND NOW WE HAVE AN HISPANIC MAYOR, WE HAVE AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN COUNTY JUDGE, AN HISPANIC STATE SENATOR. THE LAST TWO HAVE SERVED FOR MANY YEARS, ESPECIALLY THE SENATOR. AND THAT SYSTEM HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN THAT WAY, BUT I ALSO HEAR THE ARGUMENTS FOR GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATION. AND SO I THINK THAT THE BEST BALANCE OF THAT IS TO DO A MIXED SYSTEM. ANOTHER PART, I KNOW THAT WE TALKED TO A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY, AND MOST OF THE FOLKS I TALKED TO THERE ARE EITHER FOR THE CURRENT SYSTEM OR FOR THE MIXED SYSTEM. AND I THINK THE — ONE REASON FOR THAT OR ONE THING WE'VE SEEN ANYWAY THIS THIS CITY IS THAT WE'VE HAD A LOT OF SUCCESS IN ACHIEVING ONE OF THE GOALS OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS PROOVMENT, WHICH WAS THAT NO ONE WOULD BE LIMITED ON WHERE THEY CAN LIVE BASED ON THEIR RACE. AND YOU CAN LOOK AT THE MAPS THAT WE'VE BEEN PROVIDING AND SEE HOW MUCH PROGRESS AUSTIN HOOS MADE ON THAT. AND I THINK THAT THAT ARGUES AGAINST A STRAIGHT SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS SYSTEM, BUT A MIXED SYSTEM I THINK THEN ADDRESSES THEc GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ARGUMENT AND STILL ALLOWS PEOPLE TO HAVE MORE THAN JUST A MAYOR REPRESENTING A CITYWIDE, SO YOU WILL HAVE COUNCILMEMBERS THAT REPRESENT THE WHOLE CITY. SO ONCE I CONCLUDED THAT, THEN I LOOKED AT A NUMBER OF SCENARIOS GOING DOWN TO AS FEW AS FOUR DISTRICTS AND I LOOKED SERIOUSLY AT — I LOOKED AT ALL OF THEM SERIOUSLY, BUT IN PARTICULAR I WAS THINKING ONE TIME 6-4-1 WOULD BE SIX DISTRICTS, FOUR AT LARGE AND THE MAYOR. BUT THAT GOT THE DISTRICT, THEY WERE DOWN TO WHERE THERE WAS NO DISTRICT WITH A PLURALITY EVEN OF AFRICAN-AMERICANS IN IT. AND I THINK THAT WOULD — EVEN THOUGH THE WAY WE'VE SEEN IN PRECINCT 1 IN THE COUNTY THAT AFRICAN-AMERICANS HAS BEEN ELECTED TO THAT DISTRICT OVER AND OVER SINCE I THINK THE '70'S. SO IT COULD HAPPEN THAT — THAT WOULD BE THE SAME RESULT IN THIS DISTRICT, BUT THAT MIGHT NOT PASS MUSTER NUMERICALLY WITH THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. SO THEN I STARTED LOOKING AT SEVEN AND EIGHT. AND I THINK I'VE DECIDED THAT EIGHT IS THE BEST ONE THAT WE CAN COME UP WITH. I WOULD PREFER — I WOULD PERSONALLY PREFER MORE AT LARGE COUNCILMEMBERS, BUT — I WOULD PREFER IT IF WE COULD GET IT DOWN TO A LOWER NUMBER FOR THE WHOLE COUNCIL BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE GOING TO MEET ALL THESE NEEDS, ENSURE THERE BE A STRONG AFRICAN-AMERICAN DISTRICT, HOPEFULLY TWO HISPANIC MAJORITY DISTRICTS THAT MEET THE GEOGRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION FOR EVERYONE AND HAVE AT LARGE MEMBERS AND I THINK THE BEST THING IS THE 8-2-1 DISTRICT, TWO AT LARGE AND THE MAYOR. SO I'M GOING TO BE VOTING FOR THIS BECAUSE AFTER A LONG STUDY OF IT, I'VE CONCLUDED THAT THAT'S THE BEST ONE. I DON'T THINK IT'S PERFECT. WE KNOW THAT NO FORM OF GOVERNMENT IS PERFECT, BUT THERE ARE SOME THAT HAVE A LOT LESS PROBLEMS THAN OTHERS. AND SO I'LL BE VOTING FOR THIS AND TO PUT THIS ON THE BALLOT AND LET THE VOTERS DECIDE.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER. MAYOR PRO TEM?

GOODMAN: I'LL BE SUPPORTING IT TOO, MAYOR, ALTHOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO AT THIS TIME MAKE VERY CLEAR OR FIND OUT FOR MYSELF EXACTLY WHAT IS PROPOSED IN THIS MOTION, SOLELY THE NUMBERS AND NOT A REFERENCE TO THE MAPS OF THE PLACE THAT YOU CHECK OFF OR THE TRANSITION?

MAYOR GARCIA: THE MOTION AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW IS JUST TO PROPOSE TO THE VOTERS THE ADOPTION OF AN 8-2-1 PLAN. WE HAD TALKED ABOUT AMENDING THIS MOTION TO INCLUDE A TRANSITION WHICH WOULD BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE PROPOSAL TO DOc THIS. MR. STEINER? CAN YOU GIVE THAT MIC SOME VOLUME?

I THINK IT'S WORKING. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ISSUES THAT WILL HAVE TO BE DECIDED ALONG WITH THE NUMBER OF SINGLE MEMBER AND AT LARGE DISTRICTS. THOSE CAN EITHER BE INCLUDED IN ONE MOTION OR DONE IN A SERIES OF SEPARATE MOTIONS. BUT ONCE YOU'VE SETTLED ON A BASIC NUMBER OF DISTRICTS AND AT LARGE SEATS, THEN WE HAVE, OH, A DOZEN OR SO OTHER ISSUES THAT FALL OUT FROM THAT THAT WE'LL HAVE TO — I'LL HAVE TO ASK COUNCIL ABOUT.

SLUSHER: MAYOR?

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

SLUSHER: BELIEVE IT OR NOT, I DID SKIP ONE THING. I KNOW THIS IS SEPARATE AND WE'RE GOING TO DEAL WITH IT, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO DRAW THE MAP BEFORE THE ELECTION. AND WE CAN DEBATE ABOUT THAT IN ONE OF THE OTHER ITEMS, BUT AT THIS POINT I DON'T CONSIDER THE MAP THAT'S BEEN GIVEN TO US TO BE THE FINAL VERSION. IT SAYS PROTOTYPE ON IT, AND THAT'S THE WAY I CONSIDER IT. SO I WOULD CONSIDER THAT TO BE A SEPARATE ITEM THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK ON AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHEN WE DECIDE TO PUT OUT THE MAP. BUT I THINK THAT — MR. STEINER, I THINK I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY, IF WE'RE GOING TO BEGIN IMPLEMENTING THE SYSTEM IN 2003, THEN WE NEED TO HAVE THIS MAP BY — TO THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BY AUGUST?

YES, SIR.

SLUSHER: OKAY. SO THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE IT DONE BY AUGUST ANYWAY. SO I WOULD THINK THAT WE SHOULD TRY TO GET IT DONE BY MAY, BUT I'M OPEN TO DISCUSSION ON THAT.

MAYOR GARCIA: ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT PUTTING THIS — THE MAP ALSO AS PART OF THE —

LUSHER: NO, I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD BEFORE I VOTED AND THEN GO ON THAT.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY. WERE THERE ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND SECONDED BY ME?

ALVAREZ: MAYOR?

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

ALVAREZ: I GUESS WE'RE GETTING READY TO VOTE. THIS IS AN EXCITING MOMENT. BUT I'LL FINALLY JUST GIVE — I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE 8-2-1, EIGHT DISTRICTS, TWO AT LARGE AND PLUS THE MAYOR. MY PERSONAL PREF FENCE WAS A — PREFERENCE WAS A STRAIGHT AT LARGE SYSTEM OR EVEN A 9-3 BUN WOULD BE, BUT IN ORDER TO DRAW DISTRICTS THAT HAVE AS MUCH REPRESENTATION FROM THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN AND LATINO COMMUNITIES, TO ENSURE AS MUCH REPRESENTATION AS POSSIBLE, AND I THINK UNDER THE EIGHT-DISTRICT SYSTEM CAN STILL ACCOMPLISH THAT TO A GREAT DEGREE, SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK BECAUSE IT'S ONLY THREE AT LARGE COMPARED TO EIGHT DISTRICTS, I THINK IT DOESN'T — STILL I THINK WE RESPECT THE INDEGREE RATY OF HAVING SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS IN THAT THE DISTRICTS ACTUALLY PREDOMINATE AND WE'RE NOT COMPLETELY WATERING DOWN THE DISTRICT SYSTEM BY HAVING AN EXCESSIVE NUMBER OF AT LARGE. BUT I THINK THIS GIVES PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY SOME COMFORT IN THAT THEY CAN GO TO MORE THAN JUST THEIR DISTRICT REP. THEY CAN GO TO THREE OTHER INDIVIDUALS, SO FOUR INDIVIDUALS ON THE COUNCIL, THAT'S A TOTAL OF 11 FOLKS, SO THAT'S BEEN ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS WE'VE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY IS THAT THEY DON'T JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO GO TO ONE PERSON, PLUS THE MAYOR. AND THIS GIVES THAT OPTION WHERE THEY HAVE THOSE TWO INDIVIDUALS, PLUS TWO MORE AT LARGE, SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IT WILL BE BENEFICIAL OVERALL AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD COMPROMISE IN TERMS OF THE DISCUSSIONS WE'VE BEEN HAVING HERE. SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

SLUSHER: I HAVE A PROCEDURAL QUESTION. SO THIS — THIS MOTION WOULD PUT AN 8-2-1 ON THE BALLOT, BUT WE STILL HAVE A NUMBER OF OTHER ISSUES TO GO THROUGH RELATED TO THAT. BUT I THINK — BUT ON THE OTHER HAND ALL THESE ARE GOING TO GO ON THE BALLOT AS ONE BALLOT ITEM, SO THEN BY THIS PARTICULAR VOTE DOESN'T — DOES IT PUT IT ON THE BALLOT OR NOT OR IS IT NOT ON THE BALLOT UNTIL WE COMPLETE ALL THE VOTES, INCLUDING THE IMPLEMENTATION AND THE — HOW WE'RE GOING TO HANDLE THE MAPS AND A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS?

MAYOR GARCIA: I THINK THAT WHEN MR. STEINER SAID IS THAT THEYAVE ABOUT A DOZEN ITEMS, AND SOME OF THOSE WE CAN HANDLE BY ORDINANCE AND SOME WILL HAVE ON TO GO ON THE BALLOT, IS THAT CORRECT?

I THINK MOST OF THINGS ARE THINGS I WILL FLEED TO KNOW TO DRAFT THE PROVISION BEFORE I DRAFT THE CHARTER AMENDMENT.

SLUSHER: WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND THEN, AND I'M GLAD WE'RE DOING THIS NOW INSTEAD OF ON THE 21ST, SO WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IS THAT WE PASS WHAT WE WANT TONIGHT, I GO THROUGH THE WHOLE THING HOPEFULLY, AND PASS THAT ALL ON FIRST READING, LET MR. STEINER DRAFT IT AND BRING IT BACK TO US ON THE 21ST, THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING AND PASS THAT WHOLE THING THEN. DO YOU OBJECT TO THAT?

NO.

SLUSHER: WELL, I'M PROPOSING THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

MAYOR GARCIA: AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WE WOULD NOT VOTE ON THIS TODAY?

SLUSHER: NO, THAT WE WOULD VOTE ON FIRST READING, BUT I CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS TO PUT TOGETHER AND CODIFY OR WHATEVER THE LEGAL TERM IS AND I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO BE ON THE BALLOT AND BE APPROVED AS OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT. SO I WOULD THINK THAT WE WOULD NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT THAT AND GO AHEAD AND PASS WHAT WE INTEND TO BE ON THE BALLOT TONIGHT, BUT LET HIM GO AND PUT THAT INTO THE EXACT LANGUAGE, LET US LOOK IT OVER, ALLOW ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO HAVE A LOOK AT IT, AND THEN WE'LL VOTE ON THE 21ST. I DON'T ENVISION COMING BACK DURING THAT TIME OR DURING THAT TIME GOING, WELL, LET ME TRY 6-4-IS AGAIN OR 6-6-1, THAT KIND OF THING.

MAYOR GARCIA: IS THIS AN ORDINANCE THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TONIGHT?

WELL, THE ELECTION WILL BE CALLED BY AN ORDINANCE. SO WHEN YOU CALL THE ELECTION, AN ORDINANCE WILL BE HOPEFULLY — I WON'T GET ENOUGH INFORMATION TO PUT TOGETHER AN ORDINANCE FOR YOU. THE ORDINANCE WILL START OUT CALLING THE COUNCIL ELECTION AND HAVING ALL THE USUAL THINGS IN IT FOR AN ELECTION COORDINATE. THEN IT WILL SAY THAT THERE WILL BE A CHARTER AMENDMENT ELECTION. AND THEN IT WILL LAY OUT THE WORDS THAT WILL APPEAR ON THE BALLOT FOR EACH OF THE PROPOSITIONS, HOWEVER MANY YOU ULTIMATELY DECIDE ON. THEN IT WILL GO BACK AND RESITE THROUGH THE PROPOSITION IF, LET'S SAY, THE PROPOSITION 1 IS THE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT PROPOSITION.

MIXED SYSTEM.

IT WILL SAY IF PROPOSITION 1 PASSES, THEN THE CHARTER IS AMENDED LIKE THIS. AND THEN I WILL SAY ARTICLE 1 — ARTICLE 2, SECTION 1 IS AMENDED LIKE THIS AND I'LL LAY OUT ALL THE CHANGES THAT HAVE TO BE MADE THERE. TO ACCOMPLISH THE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS I THINK THAT LAYING OUT ALL OF THE CHANGES, ALL THE PLACES I HAVE TO TOUCH IN THE CHARTER TO DO THAT, ALL THE PLACES I HAVE TO TOUCH THE CHARTER TO DO THAT WILL PROBABLY RUN UNTIL A SEVEN OR EIGHT-PAGE PROVISION. AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THERE ARE A BUNCH OF OTHER ISSUES. YOU CAN'T JUST SAY WE'RE GOING TO 8-2. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PLACES ON THE CHARTER WHERE IT REFERS TO THINGS THAT DEPEND ON THERE BEING A SEVEN-MEMBER COUNCIL. SO WE WILL HAVE TO ALTER ALL THOSE TO FIT. AND SOME OF THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I WOULDN'T WANT TO TAKE THE LIBERTY OF MAKING A DECISION, I WOULD WANT YOU TO TELL ME WHAT YOU WANTED TODAY. SO WE KIND OF NEED TO RUN THROUGH AND SEE WHERE THE COUNCIL IS.

SLUSHER: THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE PASSED ON THE CITY CHARTER, LIKE CAMPAIGN FINANCE THAT WAS PASSED ON INITIAL REFERENDUM THAT DON'T ADDRESS EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THE CHARTER ABOUT CAMPAIGN FINANCE, SO YOU END UP WITH EITHER — YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE OVERLAPPING BECAUSE YOU DID AWAY WITH THE OTHER ORDINANCE WHICH HADc THINGS, BUT THAT DOESN'T ADDRESS THAT THEY ARE STILL HANGING OUT THERE. I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE US AS A COUNCIL AND THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

ULTIMATELY THE MAYOR'S QUESTIOi, YES, THE ORDINANCE — THERE WILL BE AN ORDINANCE THAT CALLS THE ELECTION AND THE ORDINANCE WILL LAY OUT ALL THE PROPOSITION AND WHAT ALL OF THE PROPOSITIONS MEAN IF THEY PASS WITH RESPECT TO THE EXACT WORDS THAT WILL BE CHANGED IN THE CHARTER. AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL LEAVE HERE TONIGHT KNOWING ENOUGH TO DRAFT THAT FOR YOU.

SLUSHER: MAYOR, I WOULD SAY WE CAN ACCOMPLISH WHAT I WANT TO DO IT SEEMS LIKE ONE OF TWO WAYS. ONE, IF THIS IS AN ORDINANCE WE WANT TO CALL IT, WE'RE PASSING AN ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING OR WE CAN SAY WE'RE DEVELOPING THE INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AS TO WHAT THE DRAFT TO PUT ON THE BALLOT AND FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY TO BRING THAT BACK TO US ON THE 21ST.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY. HAVE YOU GOT THAT?

YES, SIR.

MAYOR GARCIA: SO WE CAN VOTE ON IT?

YES, SIR.

MAYOR GARCIA: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE INDICATE BY SAYING AYE.

AYE.

MAYOR GARCIA: ON OPPOSED NO.

GRIFFITH: NO.

MAYOR GARCIA: MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF 6-1, WITH COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH VOTING NAY. WHAT DO WE DO NEXT?

SLUSHER: MAYOR, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO KEEP THE TERMS AT THREE YEARS.

MAYOR GARCIA: DO WE NEED TO DO THAT? THAT'S ALREADY THERE. IF WE DON'T MAKE A MOTION TO HOING CHAEUNG IT — SLUSH SHUSH THAT'S TRUE. —

SLUSHER: THAT'S TRUE.

I DON'T THINKKNOW WHAT THE COUNCIL WANTS.

MAYOR GARCIA: WE DON'T WANT TO CHANGE WHAT'S THERE.

IF THE COUNCIL DOESN'T WANT TO CHANGE IT —

MAYOR GARCIA: WE DON'T HAVE ANY ACTION ON CHANGING.

SLUSHER: NOBODY WANTS TO GO FOR THE LONGER TERMS?

MAYOR GARCIA: OF THE DOZEN OR SO ITEMS, WHICH ONES DO WE HAVE TO TAKE ACTION ON TONIGHT?

ALL RIGHT. LET'S SEE. WELL, HOW DO YOU WANT TO GET — HOW DO YOU WANT TO HANDLE THE TRANSITION? DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE THAT TO AN ORDINANCE OR DO YOU WANT TO SET IS THAT IN THE CHARTER? AND WHEREVER THE EASEL WAS —

MAYOR GARCIA: I WOULD SAY IF WE CAN DO IT BY ORDINANCE, IT'S BETTER BECAUSE IT'S A ONE-TIME DEAL.

OKAY. THEN WHAT I WOULD WRITE INTO THE CHARTER WOULD BE THAT THE COUNCIL WILL BYc ORDINANCE ORDINANCE PROVIDE FOR THE NECESSARY TRANSITION WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE SHORTENING OF COUNCIL TERMS IF NECESSARY OR THE DRAWING OF LOTS BY A NEWLY ELECTED MEMBERS TO GET A STAGGERING BILLING.

MAYOR GARCIA: WHAT YOU EXPLAINED ON THAT BOARD IS AT LEAST HOW IT CAN BE DONE. SLUSHc ARE WE POSTED TO PASS AN ORDINANCE LIKE THAT TONIGHT?

NO, SIR. WELL, NOT REALLY. SO I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO DRAFT UP AN ORDINANCE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER AND THEN PRESENT THAT ORDINANCE TO YOU. AND THAT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE DONE BY THE 21ST. YOU COULD TAKE A LITTLE MORE TIME ON DECIDING THAT AS LONG AS IT WAS DONE REASONABLY SOON.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY.

MAYOR GARCIA: WHAT ELSE?

SO WE'RE GOING TO STICK WITH THREE-YEAR TERMS, WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE FOR A TRANSITION MECHANISM BY ORDINANCE. HOW DO YOU WANT TO HAVE REDISTRICTING DONE? DO YOU WANT TO RETAIN THAT AS A COUNCIL FUNCTION OR DO YOU WANT TO CREATE A BODY THAT DOESc IT?

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?

THOMAS: I SAY COUNCIL.

IF YOU WANT TO RETAIN IT WITH THE COUNCIL, THEN WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT IT IN THE CHARTER BECAUSE YOU WOULD BE CERTAINLY FREE TO AT ANY TIME BY ORDINANCE CREATE AN ADVISORY BODY IF YOU WANTED AN ADVISORY BODY, BUT — BECAUSE IF COUNCIL IS GOING TO RETAIN THE AUTHORITY TO REDIRECT, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING OTHER THAN COUNCIL WILL FROM TIME TO TIME —

MAYOR GARCIA: MY STANCE IS THAT THE COUNCIL WANTS TO RETAIN THAT AUTHORITY. UNLESS I'M WRONG, YOU ALL CAN CALL — DISAGREE WITH WHAT I'VE SAID. SLUSH SLUR MAYOR? —

SLUSHER: MAYOR? I HAD ASKED EARLIER BECAUSE WE HAD A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION BEFORE THIS WAS PASSED OFF FOR THE COUNCIL TO GIVE US THE MAP DRAWN ALREADY TO AN INDEPENDENT COMMISSION APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL, AND THEN THAT COMMISSION WOULD HAVE THE FINAL AUTHORITY AND WOULDN'T EVEN COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL, SO ANOTHER ELECTED BODY WOULD DRAW THESE LINES WITHOUT FINAL APPROVAL BY THE ELECTED BODY. AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S EVER OCCURRED TO ANYONE. I ASKED AT THAT TIME, THAT WASc ABOUT A MONTH AGO, IF ANYBODY COULD TELL ME ANYWHERE THAT'S EVER TAKEN PLACE, ANY LEGISLATIVE BODY HAD EVER DONE THAT, AND I STILL HADN'T HEARD AN EXAMPLE OF THAT. SO I DON'T THINK WE OUGHT TO BE THE PIONEERS IN THAT, SO I'M IN FAVOR OF US KEEPING THAT AUTHORITY. IF WE DECIDE TO APPOINT A COMMISSION TO DO IT PRETTY QUICKLY, LIKE MR. STEINER SAID, WE HAVE THAT AUTHORITY, BUT THE FINAL AUTHORITY SHOULD LAY HERE WITH THE ELECTED OFFICIALS.

SO WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE THAT IN THE CHARTER BECAUSE YOU ALWAYS HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO APPOINT.

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

WYNN: HOWEVER, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT FOR THE ELECTION THAT THE VOTERS UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT WILL BE. SO WHETHER IT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE — WHETHER THEY CALL THE ELECTION OR NOT, WE THINK WE AS A COUNCIL SHOULD DECLARE WHAT THE PROCESS WILL BE AND EVEN GIVE OURSELVES THE APPROPRIATE DEAD LEAN. AND THAT IS THE VOTERS SHOULD KNOW THAT IF THE VOTES — IF THE DOWN R. COUNCIL DECIDES TO DO THIS, THEN THE COUNCIL APPOINTS A SEVEN-MEMBER ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT WILL STUDY THE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT PART OF THE SYSTEM, TO ADVISE THE COUNCIL AND THAT THE COUNCIL WILL VOTE ON THE MAP NO LATER THAN AUGUST 1ST OF 2000 — OR JUST EXPLAIN WHAT WILL BE THE GENERAL MAKEUP OF THE ADVISORY BODY WHEN THAT DECISION WILL BE MADE AND THE FACT THAT IT WILL BE MADE BY THE COUNCIL. I THINK THAT SHOULD BE PART OF THE UNDERSTANDING WITH BOTH OF THOSE IN MAY. THAT SEEMS TO BE IN THE ORDINANCE.

SLUSHER: I'LL YIELD TO THE MAYOR PRO TEM.

GOODMAN: THANKS. I JUST WANTED TO PUT MY TWO CENTS IN ON HOW I THINK THE MAP SHOULD COME TO THEIR FINAL DELINEATIONS, AND THAT IS THAT WE HAVE THIS ADVISORY BODY, AND I THINK WE SHOULD SO THAT WE CAN GIVE IT UP TO SOME TIME FOR INPUT, PURE INPUT AND BRAINSTORMING, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT I HAVEN'T SEEN LATELY IN REDISTRICTING IS GOOD COVERAGE OF THE VARIOUS CONVERSATIONS IN GROUPS THAT WORK ON IT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE GOOD COVERAGE OF THE MAP ITSELF AND GOOD DETAIL SO THAT EVEN IF IT'S PUBLISHED IN THE STATESMAN THERE WILL BE STREET NAMES ON ALLc THE LITTLE LINES AND PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO TELL WHERE THEY ARE BY LOOKING AT THOSE MAPS AND THEY'LL BE ABLE TO TELL IF THE PRECINCTS ARE SPLIT OR IF MAYBE SOME OBVIOUS LINES FOR INCLUSION IN ONE DISTRICT NEED TO BE MASSAGED OR CHANGED. ALL OF THOSE LITTLE DETAILS. EVEN IF WE USE THESE — OBVIOUSLY KIND OF GENERICALLY DRAWN DISTRICTS AS A KICKOFF POINT, THERE WILL HAVE TO BE SOME FINE TUNING FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE INPUT IN AND THEN ULTIMATELY, HOPEFULLY BE REASSURED BY. SO WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE A WHOLE LOT MORE COVERAGE IN MY OPINION. AND JUST MAKE SURE THAT CHANNEL SIX CAN TELEVISE AT ALL POSSIBLE TIMES ANYTHING THAT'S EVER DISCUSSED OR BRAIN STORMED ABOUT THESE MAPS.

SLUSHER: MAYOR? WERE YOU TALKING ABOUT GOOD COVERAGE OF THE MEDIA?

NO, OUR MEDIA.

SLUSHER: IT COULD HAPPEN, I GUESS. ARE WE GOING TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO — GOING ABOUT THAT DEADLINE THAT'S GOING TO BE? THE BIG QUESTION IS ARE WE GOING TO TRY TO DO THE MAPS BEFORE THE ELECTION OR NOT? I CAN SEE THAT BOTH WAYS, THE VOTERS — I THINK A LOT OF VOTERS WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT DISTRICT THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN, LIKE COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH SAID EARLIER. ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S NOT SOMETHING TO BE DOING, HEADING UP TO THE ELECTION. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO — I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO SET A DEADLINE FOR US TO GET THEM DRAWNc WHERE IT'S NOT LIKE A WEEK BEFORE THE ELECTION, BEFORE THE MAY ELECTION EITHER, BUT COULD BE DURING THAT TIME. BUT, I MEAN, I'M OPEN TO DISCUSSION ON THIS. THAT MIGHT BE TOO AMBITIOUS.

WYNN: MAYOR?

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

WYNN: I BELIEVE I'VE HEARD MR. STEINER MENTION IN THE PAST THAT SORT OF THE THE PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUE OR PROBLEM WITH DRAWING THE MAPS PRIOR TO THE VOTES SO OUR VOTERS VOTE ON A VERY SPECIFIC MAP IN MAY, WE THEN TURN AROUND APPEARED A CITY AND ONLY AFTER THE VOTE CAN WE THEN EVEN PRESENT IT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. AND THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WILL DO A NON-POLITICAL, VERY OBJECTIVE, VERY SPECIFIC DEMOGRAPHIC PARAMETERS, AND I HAVE TO PRESUME AS QUIEK LIKELY AS NOT, IF THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE MAPS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RULING COMES DOWN AND CHANGES THE MAPS. IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN WE HAVE VOTERS VOTE ON SOMETHING, YET THE BUREAUCRACY CHANGES IT ANYWAY...

I THINK THE PROCEDURAL WAY THAT IT WOULD WORK IF YOU WANTED TO ADOPT THE — A DISTRICTING — IT WOULDN'T BE A REDISTRICTING BECAUSE IT WILL BE THE FIRST TIME YOU WILL BE DOING IT. IF YOU WANT TO ADOPT A DISTRICTING BEFORE THE ELECTION, THE WAY THAT I WOULD ADVISE YOU TO DO THAT PROCEDURALLY WOULD BE THAT YOU WOULD ENACT AN ORDINANCE DIVIDING THE CITY INTO THESE ELECTORAL DISTRICTS, EIGHT ELECTORAL DISTRICTS, AND THAT ORDINANCE WOULD HAVE AS ITS EFFECTIVE DATE THE DATE ON WHICH THE CHARTER AMENDMENT BECAME EFFECTIVE SO THAT YOU WOULD ALREADY ENACT AS AN ORDINANCE, BUT IT WOULD BECOME EFFECTIVE WHEN THE — WHEN THE CHARTER WAS CHANGED SO THAT THEY WOULD SIMULTANEOUSLY COME INTO EXISTENCE. REMEMBER, THE VOTERS WILL NOT BE VOTING ON THE MAP ITSELF. THE VOTERS WILL BE VOTING ON GOING TO AN 8-2 SYSTEM, AN 8-2-1 SYSTEM. AND YOUR MAP WOULD BE DRAWN BY ORDINANCE AND YOU WOULD PRESUMABLY BE TELLING THE VOTERS THAT THIS WOULD BE THE ONE THAT WE WOULD STICK WITH IF THE 8-2-1 SYSTEM IS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS. NOW, WHEN THAT GOES TO JUSTICE, THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, JUSTICE WILL LOOK AT THE TWO ISSUES WAY SEPARATELY. THEY WILL SEE THE CHARTER AMENDMENT CREATING AN 8-2-1 SYSTEM AS THE ENABLING LEGISLATION FOR THE ORDINANCE THAT DIVIDES THE CITY INTO THOSE EIGHT POSSIBLE DISTRICTS. SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THEY COULD SAY WE'RE OKAY WITH AN 8-2-1 SYSTEM FOR AUSTIN AND WE PRECLEAR THAT, BUT WE DON'T LIKE THIS MAP, SO WE DON'T PRECLEAR THE MAP. MY GUESS IS THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT IT'S A POSSIBILITY. NOW, IF THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE MAP, THEY WOULD NOT REDRAW IT. THEY HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO CHANGE WHAT YOU DO, THEY ONLY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SAY YES OR NO TO IT. SO IF THEY DIDN'T LIKE YOUR MAP, THEY WOULD JUST TURN DOWN THE MAP AND THEN IT WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR YOU TO DRAW A NEW ONE AS IT WILL BE, OF COURSE, NECESSARY FROM TIME TO TIME FOR COUNCIL TO CHANGE THE MAP BECAUSE OVER TIME THE CENSUS DATA WILL CHANGE AND EVERY 10 YEARS WE'LL GET A NEW CENSUS AND SO WE'LL HAVE TO BE CONTINUING REDISTRICTING FROM TIME TO TIME. THE ANSWER TO YOU — I THINK WHAT YOUR QUESTION WAS, IF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT PRECLEARS THE CHANGE, BUT DOESN'T PRECLEAR THE MAP, THEN WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THAT IT WILL COME BACK TO COUNCIL'S LAP AND YOU WILL NECESSARILY HAVE TO DRAW ANOTHER MAP UNTIL ONEc ACHIEVES PRECLEARANCE.

YNN: AND ADD ON TO THAT — I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE ADVISORY ROUTE ON THIS, BUT REALISTICALLY, FOR US TO APPOINT, SAY, A SEVEN-MEMBER ADVISORY PANEL IS GOING TO BE TWO MEETINGS FROM NOW, FOR THEM TO THEN CALL THEIR FIRST MEETING AND MEET IS GOING TO BE A MONTH FROM NOW AND THAT'S GOING TO BE TWO AND A HALF WEEKS BEFORE THE ELECTION, AND THERE — IN FACT, WE CANCELLED THE COUNCIL MEETING RIGHT BEFORE THE ELECTION, AND SO THERE MAY NOT EVEN BE A COUNCIL MEETING FOR US TO APPROVE IT BEFORE THE ELECTION ANYWAY. I JUST REALISTICALLY DON'T SEE IT HAPPENING BEFORE THE ELECTION. I COULD SEE IT BEING VERY SPECIFIC WITH THE VOTERS AS TO WHAT WE WILL DO IF IT PASSES. THAT IS, A SEVEN-MEMBER ADVISORY BOARD, THEIR FIRST MEETING IS, YOU KNOW, MAY 12TH AND THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, 40 DAYS TO REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL HAS TWO MEETINGS IN JULY TO APPROVE THE PLAN OR AMEND IT BEFORE AUGUST 1ST SUBMISSION.

MAYOR GARCIA: MAYOR PRO TEM?

GOODMAN: WHAT I HAD ORIGINALLY THOUGHT WHEN I SAW THESE MAPS THAT ARE LABELED PROTOTYPES THAT ARE NOT IN ANY KIND OF DETAIL AS ALL FOR US TO BE ABLE TO SEE, IF THESE WERE GOING TO GO WITH THE BALLOT ITEM, THEY WOULD BE SORT OF SEMI OFFICIALLY THAT THIS WOULD BE THE CONCEPTUAL MAP THAT YOU KICK OFF FROM AND OBVIOUSLY THE DISTRICTS HAVE BEEN DECIDE DWOOEUDED INTO THE NUMBER AND THERE ARE SOME LOGIC INVOLVED IN HOW THESE LINES ARE DRAWN. BUT THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO DETAIL IN THESE MAPS TO GIVE EVEN US A CLEAR IDEA OF WHAT PRECINCTS OR WHAT STREETS OR WHAT NEIGHBORHOODS ARE IN ANY OF THESE DISTRICTS OTHER THAN IN THE CENTER YOU CAN KIND OF TELL. BUT WE EITHER NEED — IF WE WANT TO DO IT BY DETAILED ACCEPTANCE ALONG WITH THE ITEM, THEN I THINK WE'VE GOT TO HAVE MAPS THAT SHOW YOU MORE DETAIL AND THAT THESE ARE TOO CONCEPTUAL TO BE PASSED IN THAT WAY. SO I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO DO IT KIND OF CONCEPTUALLY WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT AFTERWARDS, WHICH IS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT, NOT BEFORE THE ELECTION, BUT AFTER THE ELECTION, COME BACK AND FIND OUT WHAT THESE LITTLE LINES ACTUALLY DO, WHETHER ANY PRECINCTS OR NEIGHBORHOODS ARE ON SORT OF INTERSECTIONS OR SPLIT FROM AN AREA BECAUSE THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE KIND OF GEOGRAPHICAL THAT THEY NORMALLY ARE LINKED WITH. SO YOU THINK THAT'S TOO SYMBOLIC TO BE ABLE TO SEND THE MAPS THIS CONCEPTUAL KNOWING THIS IS WHERE WE KICK OFF FROM AND THAT BASICALLY THIS IS ABOUT HOW THE DISTRICTS WILL LOOK, BUT THE DETAILS OF THE BOUNDARIES ARE NOT YET — OR THAT THEY COULD BE TWEAKED.

I MIGHT MENTION THAT, OF COURSE, THE MAPS THAT RYAN PRODUCED ARE NECESSARILY SMALL BECAUSE WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO FIT THEM IN YOUR BACKUP PACKET. WE CAN BLOW THESE UP AS LARGE AS YOU WOULD LIKE AND SHOW YOU EXACTLY WHAT THE STREET, THE BOUNDARIES CONSIST OF. I BELIEVE YOU BASED THESE ON ENO, MA'AM RATION DISTRICTS. AND ENM RATION DISTRICTS PROBABLY DON'T PASS COUNTY PRECINCT LINES SINCE. BUT THESE CAN BE BLOWN UP AND EXTREMELY ELABORATE DETAIL TO SHOW YOU EXACTLY WHERE ALL THESE LINES ARE. IF COUNCIL — COUNCILMEMBER WYNN MAKES A VERY GOOD POINT THAT AT THIS POINT AN ADVISORY BODY WOULD PROBABLY THROW A TIMING — A GREAT TIMING DIFFICULTY INTO GETTING PROTOTYPE DISTRICTS DRAWN. IF COUNCIL WERE INTERESTED IN DRAWING DISTRICTS BEFORE IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS, PROBABLY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO DO THAT. BUT CERTAINLY I BELIEVE — RYAN CAN TELL YOU, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT COULD QUICKLY PRODUCE MAPS BASED ON WHETHER IT CONCERNS — ON WHATEVER CONCERNS COUNCIL WANTED AND SHOW YOU WHAT VARIOUS SCENARIOS WILL LOOK LIKE.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WE CAN NOW CONCENTRATE ON SIMPLY THE EIGHT-DISTRICT SCENARIO AND GIVE IT OUR FULL ATTENTION. AND AGAIN, WE CAN DRAW THIS IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT WAYS AND WE CAN MAKE A MUCH MORE DETAILED REPRESENTATION, WHICH I FULLY DISAGREEc WITH. AND SO I THINK THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO AND WE CAN TURN THATc AROUND BECAUSE WEc HAVE CREATED ALL THESE SCENARIOS, BUT IF WE CAN CONCENTRATE ON THE EIGHT-MEMBER, I THINK WE CAN GET INTO IT ON A LEVEL OF DETAIL MUCH DEEPER THAN WE'VE GOT BEFORE US RIGHT NOW.

GOODMAN: THAT WOULD BE REALLY GOOD — I'M SORRY, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE THE ONES WHO CAN'T TELL AND THEY'RE THE ONES WHO HAVE BEEN SAYING, WELL, WHO'S WHERE?

SLUSHER: EVERYBODY IS GOING TO BE SAYING THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND TRY TO DO IT OURSELVES. WE CANc ALWAYS SAY, WELL, OKAY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO — WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT, BUT JUST, FOR INSTANCE, I'M WORRIED THAT IF WE SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO GO IN WITHOUT THE MAP, THIS IS JUST A PROAT TOY TYPE. IF THIS IS GOING TO BE THE MAP THAT EVERYBODY IS LOOKING AT, SO THEN IF IT'Sc CHANGED AND VOTERS PASS IT, PASSES THE 8-2-1 PLAN AND THEN THE COUNCIL COMES BACK BACK AND WHOEVER MIGHT BE HERE AT THAT TIME AND DOES A DIFFERENT MAP, THEN PEOPLE WILL SAY WAIT A MINUTE, YOU TOLD US ONE THING, NOW YOU'RE GIVING US SOMETHING ELSE. I'D BE REAL CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. I THINK MR. ROBINSON MAKES A GOOD POINT THAT NOW YOU CAN CONCENTRATE ON DOING THE EIGHT, WE CAN GIVE HIM WHAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT. I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO APPOINT AN ADVISORY GROUP AND I THINK COUNCILMEMBER WYNN IS PROBABLY RIGHT, WE DON'T HAVE THAT LUXURY AT THIS POINT BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE TO WAIT TWO WEEKS JUST TO APPOINT THEM. SO I WOULD LIKE — THE FINAL RESPONSIBILITY IS GOING TO LIE HERE. WE'VE ALREADY SAID THAT. I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND GET IT DONE. I'M SURE WE'LL GET A LOT OF THE PUBLIC'S PARTICIPATION ON THAT. I'M NOT TOO WORRIED ABOUT THAT. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO GET IT DGE SO THAT WEc CAN HAVE IT IN FRONT OF THE VOTERS AT LEAST IN EARLY APRIL, IF NOT BEFORE, SO THAT THEY'LL KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND LIKE MR. STEINER SAYS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AS FAR AS THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT WHETHER WE DO IT NOW OR LATER BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE IT, THEY'RE GOING TO SEND IT BACK TO US, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO REDRAW IT FOR US.

[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE]

: AND THEY INTERPOSE AN OBJECTION TO 8-2-1 THEN WE WOULD BE A SEVEN MEMBER AT LARGE COUNCIL.

SLUSHER: BACK TO THE STATUS YOUR.

BACK TO THE DRAWING — STATUS QUO. A LITTLE BIT OF AN INTEGRAL QUESTIONS. IF PRESUMABLY ONE OF THE OTHER ITEMS, WELL, SINCE WE CAN ONLY AMEND THE CHARTER EVERY TWO YEARS, UNDER STATE LAW, WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL WE COULD AMEND THE CHARTER AGAIN TO TAKE ANOTHER SHOT AT IT.

SLUSHER: SO WE WOULD HAVE AN AT LARGE SYSTEM LIKE WE HAVE NOW.

RIGHT. IF THEY INTERPOSE AN OBJECTION, WE CANNOT ENFORCE THE CHANGE.

SLUSHER: OKAY. THAT WOULD BE — LET'S SEE, TURNED IT IN IN AUGUST, TWO SIX DAY PERIODS, THE FIRST SIX DAYS WOULD BE OCTOBER, DECEMBER, SO BY THE END OF THIS YEAR, THEY WILL — WE WOULD KNOW WHETHER WE WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THE SYSTEM AND THEN THE — THEN THE SYSTEM, WHAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS BEGINNING TO IMPLEMENT IT WITH THE MAY ELECTION OF 2003.

AND THEN TO IMPLEMENT IT — THE MAY ELECTION OF 2003 REALLY BEGINS ON FEBRUARY 17TH, OF 2003. WHEN THE FILING PERIOD OPENS, THAT'S WHY I WAS SAYING THAT WE NEED TO SET IT IN AUGUST BECAUSE THE WAY YOU HAVE JUST EXPLAINED THEN WE WILL PROBABLY, IF — IF ALL GOES WELL, WE WILL GET PRECLEARANCE IN JANUARY SOMETIME. WHICH WOULD GIVE US A LITTLE BIT OF LEAD TIME FOR PEOPLE TO DECIDE WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO AS FAR AS RUNNING FOR SEATS.

SLUSHER: I THOUGHT YOU SAID THEY HAD TO DIED AFTER TWO 60 DAY PERIODS.

THEY HAVE TWO 60 DAYS PERIODS. THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK FOR MORE INFORMATION. SO COUNTING BACK FROM — FROM FEBRUARY 17TH OF 2003 — COUNTING BACK FROM FEBRUARY 17TH OF 2003, 120 DAYS, WHICH IS THE TWO 60 DAY PERIODS PUTS YOU IN MID OCTOBER OF 2002. THE REASON I BACKED THAT UP TO THE END OF AUGUST WAS TO ALLOW A FEW WEEKS FOR THEM TO ASK FOR MORE INFORMATION, FOR US TO GATHER IT. TO ALLOW FOR A FEW WEEKS FOR UNFORESEEN SNAFUS WHICH ALMOST ALWAYS HAPPEN IN ANY PROCESS, BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO TIME IT RIGHT DOWN TO THE RAZOR'S EDGE.

SLUSHER: RIGHT, I UNDERSTAND.

THAT LEAVES US SIX WEEKS OF PLAY. HOPEFULLY IF ALL WENT WELL WE WOULD FOUND OUT IN JANUARY OR IMPLEMENT IT IN FEBRUARY.

SLUSHER: THAT MEANS REALLY WE SHOULD — I WOULD WANT TO GET IT DONE BEFORE — RIGHT AT FEBRUARY 17TH. I THINK THAT WOULD BE FAIR TO ANYONE THAT MIGHT WANT TO RUN FOR THE COUNCIL. IT SEEMS LIKE I GOT TO THINK THAT THROUGH, BUT I THINK WE MIGHT BE GETTING GETTING INTO A PROTECT INCUMBENTS SITUATION THERE IF NOBODY KNEW WHAT TO DO UNTIL FEBRUARY 17TH.

IT WOULD CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, I'M A GUY WHO SHOWS UP AT THE AIRPORT THREE HOURS AHEAD OF TIME. BUT IF — [ LAUGHTER ] — IF — YEAH, I WOULD — I WOULD REALLY LOVE TO GET THIS OFF TO THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BEFORE AUGUST, IF AT ALL DOABLE.

SLUSHER: BEFORE AUGUST.

I MEAN, BEFORE — THE SOONER WE GET IT MAILED OFF TO THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, THE HAPPIER I'LL BE.

SLUSHER: OKAY.

ALVAREZ: MAYOR?

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

ALVAREZ: I THINK THAT I WANT TO ECHO COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER'S PROPOSAL TO TRY TO GET THIS DONE BEFORE THE ELECTION, I THINK THERE ARE GOING TO BE A LOT OF QUESTIONS BEFORE THE ELECTIONS. I THINK THE SOONER WE CAN COME TO AGREEMENT THE BETTER. THAT WAY IF IT PASSES, JUST RIGHT AFTER THE ELECTION, THEN WE CAN FORWARD IT ALONG FOR THAT ANALYSIS TO OCCUR AS OPPOSED TO WAITING UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION, GOING THROUGH A MONTH OR TWO PROCESS OF — OF DECIDING — DRAWING LINES AND THEN SENDING IT OFF. BECAUSE — BECAUSE TECHNICALLY PEOPLE, THE ELECTION CYCLE FOR COUNCIL SEAT IS SIX MONTHS, TECHNICALLY PEOPLE IN NOVEMBER COULD START — YOU KNOW, THE CAMPAIGNING PROCESS. SO TO ME IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE SOONER WE CAN GET THIS DONE, THE BETTER. AND WE HAVE SOME — YOU KNOW, SOME GOOD LEG WORK THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. HOPEFULLY BY MID APRIL WE CAN COME TO SOME KIND OF AN AGREEMENT. SO I WOULD SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD AS COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER SUGGESTS.

MAYOR GARCIA: . MAYOR PRO TEM?

GOODMAN: I THINK WE HAVE GONE WAY, WAY OVER TOO LONG ON THIS PARTICULAR CONVERSATION. I THINK EVERYBODY IS — OR AT LEAST THE MAJORITY OPINION WAS APPARENT. WHY DON'T WE CUT TO THE CHASE AND SAY HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE FOR A BIG MAP THAT'S IDENTIFIABLE BY STREET, BY PRECINCT, BY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND/OR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN OVERLAY SO THAT PEOPLE CAN SEE WHETHER THEY THINK ANYTHING IS SPLIT THAT SHOULD LOGICALLY BE TOGETHER AND WHETHER THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MASSAGE ANY OF THOSE — ANY OF THOSE LINES THAT DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN DISTRICTS?

TO —

GOODMAN: AND THEN BEFORE YOU ANSWER THAT, TOO, COULD WE GET IT ON THE WEBSITE AFTER WE GET IT PHYSICALLY TOGETHER.

TO REPLICATE THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION THAT WE'VE GOT, IN — AND TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THOSE SETS OF DATA THAT YOU MENTION THE, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND REALLY A DETAILED MAP WOULD ONLY TAKE I THINK A COUPLE OF DAYS. I WILL ALSO LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO POSSIBLY BEGIN SPIN OUT SOME MORE SPECIFIC EIGHT MEMBER SCENARIOS. NOT THAT THEY WOULD BE HUGELY DIFFERENT. BUT I THINK THAT WE COULD DO SOME BETTER MAXIMUMIZATION, BUT BECAUSE THESE WERE PRODUCED USING G.I.S., THE KIND OF MAP THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IT IMMINENTLY DOABLE, WOULD NOT TAKE US VERY LONG.

GOODMAN: THANKS, MAYOR.

MAYOR GARCIA: ........................—

OKAY. THE NEXT THING THAT I NEED TO KNOW IS UNDER THE CURRENT CHARTER, WITH A SEVEN MEMBER COUNCIL, A QUORUM IS FOUR. AND IT ALSO TAKES A MINIMUM OF FOUR VOTES TO DO ANYTHING. REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT. YOU ARE GOING TO AN 11 MEMBER SYSTEM. SO PRESUMABLY YOU WOULD WANT A QUORUM TO BE SIX? AND WOULD — AND WOULD YOU PREFER THAT WE RETAIN THE SIMILAR VOTE REQUIREMENT THAT IT TAKES — THAT REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT IT TAKES AT LEAST SIX TO TAKE ACTION?

MAYOR GARCIA: I WOULD.

OKAY.

SLUSHER: ME, TOO.

THOMAS: ME, TOO.

ALL RIGHT.

SLUSHER: WHAT ABOUT A VALID PETITION? [ LAUGHTER ].

WELL, THAT'S A MATTER OF STATE LAW, WE WILL JUST TAKE A 75% OF WHATEVER THE SIZE OF THE BODY IS.

MAYOR GARCIA: THAT WOULD BE ABOUT 8.

YEAH. I CAN'T DO THE MATH THAT QUICK. RONNIE CAN. WHATEVER —

SLUSHER: I BET THE MAYOR IS RIGHT. [ LAUGHTER ]. THE —

THE — UNDER THE — THE CURRENT CHARTER, TO PASS SOMETHING BY EMERGENCY VOTE, TAKES A VOTE OF 5 COUNCILMEMBERS. AND — WHICH WOULD BE TWO-THIRDS, IT'S THE CLOSEST NUMBER TO TWO-THIRDS OF SEVEN. SO WOULD YOU WANT ME JUST TO TAKE TWO-THIRDS OF 11 AND DO WHATEVER NUMBER THAT WORKS OUT TO BE?

MAYOR GARCIA: THAT WOULD WORK FINE.

SLUSHER: I THINK THAT MIGHT BE 3/4THS.

MAYOR GARCIA: NO, FIVE IS TWO-THIRDS.

SLUSHER: BACK TO THE VALID PETITION, THAT'S 3/4THS?

SLUSHER: THEN I GET THAT AS 9 BECAUSE IT'S 8.25.

MAYOR GARCIA: 9, YES, I MISSED IT, SORRY COUNCILMEMBER.

SLUSHER: I HAD FAITH IN YOU, BUT I WENT AHEAD AND DID A CALCULATOR ANYWAY.

MAYOR GARCIA: YOU HAVE A CALCULATOR THERE.

SLUSHER: YEAH, I DO.

MAYOR GARCIA: THAT'S NOT FAIR TO PULL THAT ON THE MAYOR.

SLUSHER: YOU GOT ONE, TOO. [ LAUGHTER ]

IN ORDER TO AMEND —

MAYOR GARCIA: I DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE IT.

IN ORDER TO AMEND A CITIZEN INITIATIVE ORDINANCE LIKE S.O.S., THE CHARTER REQUIRES A VOTE OF 6 COUNCILMEMBERS. SO I PRESUME THAT YOU WILL WANT IT TO BE NINE?

SLUSHER: IN ORDER TO WHAT —

THE CHARTER PROVIDES THAT THE COUNCIL MAY AMEND A CITIZEN INITIATIVE ORDINANCE. THE ONLY ONE THAT WE HAVE ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW IS S.O.S. SO IN ORDER TO AMEND S.O.S., IT REQUIRES UNDER THE CURRENT CHARTER SIX — SIX VOTES OF THE COUNCIL. SO WHEREVER IT SAYS SIX, DO YOU WANT ME TO SAY NINE?

SLUSHER: YES, I WOULD.

OKAY. WHENEVER IT SAYS —

SLUSHER: 3/4THS AGAIN. S.O.S. SAID SIX SPECIFICALLY. NOT 3/4THS, IT SAYS SIX.

SIX IS THE CLOSEST NUMBER TO 3/4THS.

SLUSHER: I GUESS THAT NINE WOULD BE EQUIVALENT — THAT WOULD BE THE CLOSEST NUMBER —

RIGHT.

SLUSHER: OKAY.

AND, 5, WHERE IT — LIKE FOR THE EMERGENCY ORDINANCE IT REQUIRES FIVE VOTES, WHICH IS THE CLOSEST NUMBER TO 2/3RDS. WHERE IT SAYS FIVE, WOULD YOU WANT ME TO SAY — THAT CAN'T BE RIGHT.

MAYOR GARCIA: SEVEN?

WHERE IT SAYS FIVE — NO EIGHT. IT WOULD BE SEVEN PLUS A FRACTION. SO IT WOULD BE EIGHT.

TWO-THIRDS —

THE CHARTER REQUIRES FIVE VOTES, WOULD YOU LIKE 8, WHERE IT REQUIRES SIX VOTES WOULD YOU LIKE NINE I GUESS IS MY QUESTION.

SLUSHER: THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE FIGURES, WITH THE PERCENTAGES.

IF EVERYBODY IS OKAY WITH THAT. THEN RECALL. RIGHT NOW RECALL REQUIRES A PETITION WITH 10% OF THE QUALIFIED VOTERS IN THE CITY AS TO THE DISTRICT OFFICERS, WOULD YOU LIKE IT TO BE 10% OF THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE DISTRICT? AND AS TO THE AT LARGE, RETAIN 10% OF THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE CITY? THE WAY I WOULD WRITE THAT WOULD BE IN ORDER TO DO A RECALL YOU WOULD — IT WOULD REQUIRE AT LEAST 10% OF THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE TERRITORY FROM WHICH THE OFFICES ARE ELECTED.

MAYOR GARCIA: THAT'S WHAT THEY DID IN GEORGETOWN.

SLUSHER: SURE IS.

OKAY WITH THAT. I WILL DRAFT IT THAT WAY, THEN.

SLUSHER: NOBODY WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION TO RAISE THAT [ LAUGHTER ].

OF COURSE THE RECALL ELECTION WOULD ONLY BE HELL IN THE TERRITORY FROM WHICH THE COUNCIL IS ELECTED. I THINK THAT GETS US THROUGH MOST OF THE ISSUES THAT I CAN THINK OF. OH, THERE'S ONE OTHER. WITH RESPECT TO THE — TO THE TRANSITION, I WILL — I WILL GIVE YOU THE AUTHORITY TO CREATE A TRANSITION. PERHAPS IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO PROVIDE THAT THE TRANSITION CAN INCLUDE AN EXCEPTION FROM THE TERM LIMITS PROVISION IF ONE REMAINS. FOR PEOPLE WHO GET A SHORT-TERM, IF SOMEBODY ENDS UP, FOR EXAMPLE, GETTING A TWO YEAR TERM OR A ONE YEAR TERM BECAUSE OF TRANSITION PROVISION, WE MIGHT WANT TO GIVE THEM A — AN EXCEPTION FROM TERM LIMITS FOR THAT SHORT-TERM. SO IN OTHER WORDS THE TERM LIMITS WOULD ONLY KICK IN FOR FULL TERMS. AND WE COULD — I COULD PROVIDE THAT THE COUNCIL HAVE THAT AUTHORITY BY ORDINANCE IN THE TRANSITION PROVISION.

SLUSHER: MAYOR?

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER?

SLUSHER: ON THE TRANSITION, I WOULD THINK LIKE THE MAP WE SHOULD DO BEFORE THE ELECTION AND I WOULD THINK WE COULD DO THAT EVEN BEFORE THE MAP. SO COULD YOU WORD THAT IN SUCH A WAY IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION FROM THE COUNCIL, THAT — THAT THE TRANSITION WILL BE DONE BY AN ORDINANCE PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL BEFORE THE DATE OF THIS ELECTION.

UM ... WELL, I CAN — I CAN GET AN ORDINANCE TO YOU THAT DO ALL THOSE THINGS IN THAT TAME FRAME.

SLUSHER: I'M WONDERING IF THAT NEEDS TO BE SPECIFIED IN THE CHARTER —

IT WOULDN'T BE EFFECTIVE BECAUSE THE CHARTER PROVISION WON'T GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION.

SLUSHER: BUT WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT, THAT IT WILL BE WHAT WE PASSED —

WILL BE IN EFFECT BEFORE THE FIRST ELECTION UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM.

SLUSHER: WHAT I AM TRYING TO GET HERE IS THAT THIS COUNCIL WOULD PASS THE TRANSITION PLAN SO THAT THE VOTERS WILL KNOW WHAT THE TRANSITION PLAN IS GOING TO BE AND THAT THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY GOING BACK ON THAT TRANSITION PLAN AFTER THE ELECTION, AFTER ITS PASSED. JUST LIKE I WANTED TO DO WITH THE MAP.

I COULD PROVIDE THAT A TRANSITION PLAN THAT'S IN EFFECT ON THE DATE THAT THE CHARTER IS ADOPTED —

SLUSHER: THERE YOU GO.

OKAY. MAY NOT BE AMENDED. BUT YOU MIGHT WANT TO PUT AN OUT IN THERE, UNLESS IT WERE NECESSARY TO DO SO BECAUSE OF LITIGATION OR A — OR A JUSTICE DEPARTMENT FAILURE TO GET JUSTICE DEPARTMENT PRECLEARANCE, DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ARE BEYOND YOUR CONTROL.

SLUSHER: THAT'S PRUDENT.

I THINK I CAN WRITE THAT IN.

WYNN: SEEMS TO ME IF IT'S AN ORDINANCE IT TAKES FOUR VOTES, WE MIGHT RUN OUT OF COUNCIL MEETINGS BEFORE THE ELECTION, SO WE WILL HAVE ALREADY BEEN IN DEFAULT PRIOR TO THE VOTE.

SLUSHER: I DON'T SEE WHY WE COMPLAINT PASS THAT NEXT MEETING. I MEAN, FIVE OR SIX, FOUR OR FIVE MEETINGS BEFORE THE ELECTION. WE JUST CAN'T — I CAN GO INTO IT TONIGHT, BUT IT'S AN ORDINANCE, SO — WE ARE NOT POSTED FOR IT — IF WE ARE GOING TO DO IT BY ORDINANCE, WE CAN'T DO IT TONIGHT. IF WE ARE GOING TO PUT IT IN THE CITY CHARTER, WHICH WE DECIDE TO DO IT THE OTHER WAY, WE COULD DO IT TONIGHT IF WE DO IT BY THE CITY CHARTER, RIGHT?

SINCE THIS IS ALL RELATED TO GOING TO SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS I THINK YOU CAN DISCUSS IT'S, BUT OBVIOUSLY I CAN'T DRAFT IT RIGHT NOW. [ LAUGHTER ].

SLUSHER: OH, REALLY?

MAYOR GARCIA: WHAT ELSE?

THAT SHOULD GIVE ME ENOUGH ENOUGH TO WRITE THE SINGLE-MEMBER PART OF THE —

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY.

SLUSHER: WE TALKED ABOUT THE REDISTRICTING OR WHETHER WE SHOULD REDISTRICT OR NOT?

WELL, YOU TOLD ME THAT THAT WOULD BE LEFT UP TO COUNCIL, SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I NEED TO PUT IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE —

SLUSHER: I'M TALKING ABOUT THE LEGISLATURE EVERY 10 YEARS —

YOU ARE RIGHT. IF I DON'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT IT, THEN WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS EVERY TEN YEARS YOU WILL — WELL, PRESUMABLY EVERY 10 YEARS YOU WILL DRAW NEW LINES AND YOU WILL JUST SORT OF COUNT ON THOSE LINES NOT BEING SO DRASTICALLY CHANGED THAT IT'S — THAT WHEN THE NEW ELECTION COMES UP, DISTRICT 1 IS MORE OR LESS STILL DISTRICT 1, DISTRICT 2 IS STILL MORE OR LESS DISTRICT 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, I COULD PUT IN A PROVISION THAT SAYS EVERY 10 YEARS YOU START OVER AND EVERY 10 YEARS THE WHOLE COUNCIL IS ELECTED AT THE FIRST ELECTION AFTER THE REDISTRICTING AND THEN YOU STAGGER THE TERMS AFTER THAT. OR I COULD EVEN PROVIDE THAT THERE WAS SUCH A THING AS A MAJOR REDISTRICTING AND A MINOR REDISTRICTING WHERE'S A MAJOR REDISTRICTING WAS ONE WHERE THE LINES WERE REALLY SORT OF UNRECOGNIZABLE, A MINOR REDISTRICTING WAS ONE WHERE THEY JUST SORT OF MOVED A LITTLE BIT. BUT THE — PROBABLY THE EASIEST THING TO DO IS JUST TO BE SILENT ON IT AND LET IT WORK ITSELF OUT.

BUT IF WE ARE SILENT ON IT, THEN THOSE DISTRICTS JUST STAY IN PLACE UNTIL — PERMANENTLY.

UNTIL YOU CHANGE THEM.

SLUSHER: SO — YOU.

BUT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS THE ONLY — THE REAL DIFFERENCE WOULD BE THAT EVERY 10 YEARS WHEN YOU DO A REDISTRICTING YOU WILL PROBABLY WANT TO KEEP MORE OR LESS THE SAME CONFIGURATION AS OPPOSED TO JUST STARTING FROM A BLANK MAP.

SLUSHER: WELL, THAT'S A — COULD YOU DRAFT UP ONE THAT'S — I WILL WAIT UNTIL YOU GET THROUGH TALKING — DO YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? OKAY. WE VICE-PRESIDENT TALKED ABOUT THIS ONE VERY MUCH. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU DRAFT UP, SEEMS LIKE JUST A FEW SENTENCES, THAT WE WILL CHANGE EVERY 10 YEARS AND THEN IF WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, THEN WE CANNOT PASS THAT AND REMAIN SILENT ON IT. I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A LITTLE DISCUSSION ON THAT —

I CAN SHOW YOU WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE EITHER WAY.

SLUSHER: I KNOW IT CAN BE SORT OF A TAWDRY SPECTACLE, AS WE HAVE SEEN. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND IT BOTHERS ME TO JUST LEAVE — WE ARE GOING TO DRAW THE DISTRICTS NOW AND THOSE WOULD BE JUST IN PLACE FOREVER AND UNLESS — MAYBE — I CAN SEE THAT MAYBE PEOPLE WILL START SAYING THESE DISTRICTS AREN'T FAIR ANYMORE, THESE DISTRICTS DON'T REFLECT THE CURRENT STATE OF AUSTIN.

I CAN SHOW YOU A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS OF DOING THAT.

WE CAN LEAVE THAT OPEN UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON THAT AT THE NEXT MEETING.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY. SO ARE WE READY? DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH STUFF?

I HAVE ENOUGH TO GO ON.

MAYOR GARCIA: WE ARE GOING TO POST THIS ITEM INCIDENTALLY FOR ACTION, I THINK WE ARE — I'M GOING TO PROPOSE THAT WE NOT HAVE A WORK SESSION ON THE 20TH AND INSTEAD HAVE AN ACTION SESSION, SO WE HAVE IT ON THE 20TH AND THEN THE 21ST, SO THAT WE HAVE TO DO SOME — SOME POLISHING UP, WE CAN HAVE THAT EXTRA DAY.

THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.

MAYOR GARCIA: WITHOUT OBJECTION FROM THE COUNCIL — OKAY. THERE IS — ITEM NO. 9, WHICH HAS SEVERAL PROVISIONS AND — LET ME SEE IF I CAN FIND MY AGENDA. A LITTLE BIT LONG. HERE I GOT IT. THANK YOU. THE FIRST ITEM IS — THESE ARE ITEMS THAT WERE CONSIDERED AND RECOMMENDED BY THE CHARTER REVISION COMMISSION. THE FIRST ITEM IS THE REPEAL OF TERM LIMITS FOR THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL, ARTICLE 2, SEX 2 [SIC]. DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THAT? — ARTICLE 2, SECTION 2 [SIC], DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THAT? THE COMMISSION, IS RECOMMENDING THE REPEAL OF THAT ITEM OR THAT WE PUT IT ON THE BALLOT?

YES, MAYOR, GARCIA THAT'S CORRECT.

MAYOR GARCIA: THAT WE PUT IT ON THE BALLOT?

RIGHT.

MAYOR GARCIA: CORRECT? IS THERE —

GOODMAN: MAYOR, I DON'T BELIEVE IN IT AS A WAY TO RUN A GOVERNMENT AND SO WHEN I PUT IT ON BEFORE I DID NOT BELIEVE IN IT EITHER AND SINCE IT DOESN'T AFFECT ME ANYMORE AND I DON'T WANT IT TO AFFECT ANYBODY WHO COMES AFTER ME EITHER, I MAKE A MOTION WE PUT THAT ON THE BALLOT FOR VOTERS TO CHOOSE.

GRIFFITH: SECOND.

MAYOR GARCIA: MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. DISCUSSION?

WYNN: MAYOR?

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

WYNN: SEEMS TO ME —

MAYOR GARCIA: LET ME SAY WE HAVE SPEAKERS ON THIS.

WYNN: PERHAPS WE SHOULD HEAR FROM THE SPEAKERS BEFORE WE —

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY. MR. FRED LEWIS? MS. — MISTY LEZAVARGA. NOT HERE, I WILL READ HER STATEMENT. MR. RICKY BIRD. MR. JIM WALKER, I DON'T SEE MR. WALKER HERE. HE DIDN'T LEAVE ME A NOTE. MR. PETER ODONAHUE, IS HE HERE? OKAY. FRED, WITH HIM, SIR.

ACTUALLY, I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT 9C AND 9D, THAT'S OKAY.

MAYOR GARCIA: WE ARE CONSIDERING THE WHOLE 9. WE WILL GET THERE QUICKLY.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL, IT'S GOTTEN LATE. I HAVE THREE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO SAY. ONE IS I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU DECIDE EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING TO BE ON THE BALLOT TONIGHT. THE ELECTION ACTUALLY IS GOING TO BEGIN AROUND MID APRIL. BECAUSE WE DON'T VOTE ON JUST MAY 4TH, WE VOTE STARTING ALMOST THREE WEEKS BEFORE THE ELECTION. AND EVEN IF YOU PUT IT ON AT THE NEXT POSSIBLE CHANCE AND DECIDE EVERYTHING AND DECIDE THE LANGUAGE MARCH 21ST, THAT'S LESS THAN A MONTH BEFORE THE ELECTION. SO I THINK WE HAVE RUN OUT OF TIME AND I HOPE THAT YOU MAKE ALL OF YOUR DECISIONS TONIGHT BECAUSE I THINK LESS THAN A MONTH TO HAVE AN ELECTION WITH ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE IS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT ENOUGH. SECOND, ON THE ISSUE OF REPEALING THE CHARTER SECTION ON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS OF $100 LIMITS, I WOULD LIKE THE PUBLIC TO KNOW WHAT Y'ALL KNOW, WHICH IS THE BASIS FOR THE DECISION OF THE CHARTER REVISION COMMISSION WAS A FIVE TO 10 MINUTE DISCUSSION BY AN ETHICS COMMISSION MEMBER TO REPEAL IT. THERE WAS NO STUDY BY THE COMMISSION. THEY HAD A REPRESENTATION FROM ONE OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION MEMBERS THAT THE ETHICS COMMISSION WANTED TO REPEAL THE CHARTER AMENDMENT. AS YOU KNOW FROM A LETTER YOU GOT, THE ETHICS COMMISSION MADE NO SUCH STATEMENT. IN FACT THEY SAID THEY DID NOT WISH IT TO BE REPEALED, WISHED IT TO BE NO ALTERNATIVES. THERE'S BEEN NO STUDY OF THAT. THE BASIS UPON WHICH THE RECOMMENDATION WAS MADE, WHICH CAME OUT OF, I BELIEVE, 3, 2, 1, WAS MADE ON MISINFORMATION. LAST, THE ISSUE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE LIMITS SHOULD BE RAISED OR NOT RAISED THAT'S NEVER BEEN STUDIED, ALTHOUGH YOU HAVE AN ETHICS COMMISSION THAT'S HAD — THAT'S HAD SINCE 1997 TO STUDY IT, HAS MADE NO SUCH STUDY. NEITHER THE CHARTER REVISION COMMISSIONS MADE ANY SUCH STUDY NOR HAD ANY SIGNIFICANT DISCUSSION REGARDING IT. AND LASTLY, FRANKLY, YOU HAVEN'T POSTED IT ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT. THERE'S CONSIDERATION REGARDING THE CHARTER REVISION COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH DO NOT INCLUDE RAISING LIMITS. THERE IS AMENDMENTS THAT THEY REJECTED, WHICH DO NOT INCLUDE RAISING LIMITS. APPEARED THERE'S 10 REGARDING RESIGN TO RUN PROVISIONS. SO YOU HAVE IN MY VIEW NOT POSTED OR HELD ANY DISCUSSION REGARDING RAISING THE LIMITS. AND I WOULD SUGGEST YOU NOT DO THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

MAYOR GARCIA: QUESTIONS FOR MR. LEWIS? THANK YOU, MR. LEWIS. [INAUDIBLE] LEFT THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT, WHICH I WILL READ INTO THE RECORD: MY CONCERNS ARE CENTERED ON APPROPRIATE DELIBERATION AND CITIZEN INPUT AND STRENGTHENING OUR DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. ALSO, I'M CONCERNED WITH HOW THIS — THESE ITEMS OVERLY COMPLICATE AND CONFUSE VOTERS IN REGARD TO CAMPAIGN FINANCE FORM. THE [INAUDIBLE] WAS DELIBERATED AT LENGTHS AND COUNCILMEMBERS WERE INVITED TO THIS PROCESS. LIKE TONY BLAIR WOULD SAY PRO-SESS. IT WOULD BE UNFAIR AND SHORT SIGHTED TO HAVE POORLY THOUGHT OUT ALTERNATIVES ON THE BALLOT THAT WOULD ONLY MUDDY THE WATERS. I AM SPEAKING AS A MEMBER OF INDEPENDENT TEXANSND AND AS A PETITIONER WHO WORKED HARD TO GET SIGNATURES FOR THE AUSTIN FAIR LEAK. I AM IN FAVOR OF 9B AND D. I'M AGAINST 9A AND C. I THINK MANY AUSTINITES ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH ME. THAT'S THE STATEMENT. AND THEN MR. RICKY BIRD.

9A THROUGH D.

MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, I — I LISTED 9A THROUGH D BECAUSE I WASN'T SURE WHAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE FORMAT TO SPEAK TO. YOU COULD SPEAK I THINK THE THREE MINUTES TO ANY OF THESE ITEMS. REPEAL OF TERM LIMITS FOR MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I'M SORRY, I DISAGREE WITH THE ANALYSIS THAT YOU CAN CLEAN UP YOUR GOVERNMENT BY LIMITING YOUR EXPERIENCED HELP AS WELL AS YOUR GOOD HELP. SEEMS TO ME THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN, IF THEY ARE GIVEN A DECENT COVERAGE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, HAVE PROVEN THEMSELVES FULLY COMPETENT TO DETERMINE WHO TO REMOVE AND WHO NOT TO REMOVE AND NOT BE DEPENDENT ON AN ARTIFICIAL ITEM THAT WAS DELIVERED DURING THE TIMES OF ROSS PEROT'S RISE TO POWER. WE AND YOU WILL SEE HOW LONG THAT LASTED. ARTIFICIAL THINGS DO NOT PROTECT DEMOCRACY. VOTERS PROTECT DEMOCRACY, THE WAY THEY ACT THE WAY THEY CARRY OUT THEIR DEMOCRACY OR DOESN'T. LOWERING THE PERCENTAGE OF QUALIFIED VOTER SIGNATURES REQUIRED ON PETITION TO INITIATE AN ORDINANCE, WE DECIDED AS A WHOLE THAT WE WANTED 5% TO BE ABLE TO INITIATE ORDINANCES OR REPEAL THEM. THIS IS QUALIFIED VOTERS. THERE WERE THOSE THAT SUGGESTED TO US THAT WE SHOULD TAKE 10% OF THE VOTERS THAT PARTICIPATED IN THE LAST CITY ELECTION. MY ANSWER TO THAT WAS THAT WOULD RAISE THE POSSIBLY OF HAVING LESS THAN 1% OF THE POPULATION DETERMINE WHAT GETS ON THE BALLOT. I JUST COULDN'T GO FOR THAT. REPEAL THE CHARTER SECTION REGARDING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES. YOU HEARD THAT THE LADY THAT WAS A CHAIR OF THE E.R.C. APPARENTLY SPOKE, OF THE INTENT OF THE COMMITTEE, THAT WOULDN'T HAVE CHANGED MY VOTE. ARTICLE 3, SECTION 8 IS A WELL INTENTIONED LAW. IT WAS CRAFTED WITH SOME CARE, IT WAS CARRIED OUT WITH A GREAT DEAL OF EFFORT. I APPRECIATE ALL OF THAT. HOWEVER, IT HASN'T WORKED PROPERLY. AS ITS PRESENTLY CONSTITUTED, IT HAS DRIVEN DOWN THE AMOUNT OF VOTER PARTICIPATION RATHER THAN GIVEN RISE TO IT. THAT'S WHAT THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF REFORM IS SUPPOSED TO DO. $100 LIMITS SOUND GOOD, EXCEPT WHEN THEY DRIVE OUT PARTICIPATION IN THE PROCESS. THAT'S WHAT THIS LAW HAS THE — UNFORTUNATE TENDENCY OF DOING. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DOES NOT PLACE AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE CITIZEN ANIATED FAIR ELECTIONS ACT OF MAY 4, 2002 BALLOT. YES, LET'S VOTE ON IT BY ALL MEANS. I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FRAMED AS A SUPER ORDINANCE. RATHER THAN A CHARTER ELECTION ITEM. I THINK IT MAY BE OVERBROAD IN WHAT IT'S TRYING TO DO, BUT I THINK IT'S AN IDEA THAT WE NEED TO DEBATE. AND THINK ABOUT. THERE'S MORE AT LARGE HERE THAN JUST DOLLAR AMOUNTS. THERE'S ALSO PARTICIPATION. [BUZZER SOUNDING]. THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN THAT ARE EARNING LESS THAN 5 FIGURE INCOMES, THEY HAVE IDEAS, THEY WANT TO PARTICIPATE, TOO. I THINK THEY DESERVE THAT CHANCE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU, MR. BIRD. JIM WALKER IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEM C, BUT DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK I'M SORRY. HE'S REGISTERED AGAINST ITEM C. MR. PETER O DONAHUE. WELCOME, SIR.

MY NAME IS PETER O DONAHUE, WITH INDEPENDENT TEXANS, A GRASS ROOT ORGANIZATION FOR POLITICAL REFORM. AND I'M HERE TO STATE OUR OPINION AGAINST 9A WHICH IS A REPEAL OF TERM LIMITS. THIS COUNCIL PLACED IT ON THE BALLOT, IT WAS PASSED BY THE CITIZENS. AND THE KEY THING IS THAT IT'S A VERY FAIR LAW WITH REGARD TO TERM LIMITS. IT NOT ONLY PROVIDES THE MEANS FOR SETTING A LIMIT TO THE NUMBER OF TERMS, BUT IT ALSO PROVIDES A MEANS FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO EXTEND THEIR TIME BY GOING TO THE CITIZENS, BY DEMONSTRATING THEIR POPULAR SUPPORT WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AND GETTING SIGNATURES. I THINK THE — THE EFFECTS OF WHAT HAPPENED A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO IN CALIFORNIA PROVED THAT TERM LIMITS ARE POPULAR AND I THINK THAT TERM LIMITS SHOULD NOT BE REPEALED. IF YOU ARE LOOKING TO EFFECT A CHANGE ON TERM LIMITS, THERE ARE THE OTHER LOOP HOLES THAT YOU COULD LOOK AT TO EFFECT. WITH REGARD TO 9D, THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DOES NOT PLACE AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE AUSTIN FAIR ELECTIONS ACT, I WOULD FULLY AGREE WITH THIS. THE REFORM, WHAT'S CLEAR FROM THIS IS THAT REFORM IS NEEDED, CAMPAIGN FINANCE. PEOPLE LIKE ME, AND MY ORGANIZATION, ACTUALLY WENT OUT AND COLLECTED SIGNATURES, 28,000 TO SUPPORT THE AUSTIN FAIR ELECTIONS ACT. SO CLEARLY THERE'S A LOT OF COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR IT. AN ALTERNATIVE AT THIS POINT WOULD — WOULD POTENTIALLY PROVIDE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, YET IT WOULD MORE — MORE IMPORTANTLY, IT WILL CREATE CONFUSION. WHEN YOU PUT TWO — TWO COMPETING INITIATIVES ON A SINGLE BALLOT, CITIZENS HAVE TO QUESTION WHICH ONE ARE THEY LOOKING AT, WHICH ONE HAVE THEY HEARD ABOUT, WHICH ONE DID THEY SIGN FOR AND SUPPORT DURING THE PETITION GUIDE. SO I DEFINITELY ASKED YOU TO TAKE THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION AND NOT PUT AN ALTERNATIVE ON TO THE BALLOT TO ELIMINATE THE CONFUSION WHEN A VOTER GOES IN AND TRIES TO PUT DOWN THEIR HONEST OPINION AND THEIR VOTE. THANK YOU.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU, MR. DONAHUE. THAT'S ALL OF THE SPEAKERS THAT WE HAVE, COUNCIL. WE ARE BACK TO ITEM 9A. REPEAL OF TERM LIMITS FOR MAYOR AND COUNCIL. DID I — DID I HEAR A MOTION FROM YOU MAYOR PRO TEM?

GOODMAN: YES, YOU DID. AND IF I MIGHT MAKE ONE QUICK COMMENT.

MAYOR GARCIA: WAS THERE A SECOND?

GOODMAN: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

MAYOR GARCIA: MAYOR PRO TEM.

GOODMAN: RELATIVE TO THE YOUNG MAN WHO JUST SPOKE, I'M ACTUALLY VERY HAPPY TO SEE SOME YOUNG PEOPLE IN ACTIVIST ROLES, THAT'S BEEN NOT VERY EVIDENT LATELY. BUT, TOO, HOWEVER, THOUGH HAVING BEEN IN THIS A WHILE I THINK I UNDERSTAND MY PLACE AND MY RESPONSIBLE AS A VOTER, I'M NOT LOOKING FOR A LOOPHOLE, I'M LOOKING FOR MY RIGHT TO VOTE.

MAYOR GARCIA: DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM?

WYNN: MAYOR?

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

WYNN: WHAT'S INTERESTING IS THE 1994 ELECTION ALSO WHEN WE HAD OUR LAST SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT ELECTION, WHEN WE ALSO HAD TERM LIMITS ON THE BALLOT. THE SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICT ELECTION WAS RELATIVELY CLOSE, SINGLE-MEMBER DISTRICTS ALMOST PASSED WITHOUT [INAUDIBLE] TERM LIMITS OVERWHELMINGLY WERE APPROVED. SINCE THEN WE HAVE GONE — THE REASON BEHIND THAT, I THINK IS OBVIOUS. FOLKS ARE ON THE CITY AND — AROUND THE CITY AND AROUND THE COUNTRY, EVEN, JUST SEE THE INHERENT ADVANTAGE OF BEING AN INCUMBENT. JUST THE NAME RECOGNITION, PUBLICITY, WHATEVER. IT'S NOT EASY ON A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD TO DEFEAT AN INCUMBENT. SO THE VAST MAJORITY OF AUSTIN VOTERS IN 1994 SAID WE SHOULD HAVE TERM LIMITS BECAUSE IT'S — BECAUSE WE SHOULD HAVE SOME TURNOVER. SINCE THEM, WE HAVE GONE — WE HAVE MADE IT EVEN WORSE WITH THE 1997 $100 LIMITATION ON CONTRIBUTIONS, MAKES IT VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR SOMEBODY TO CHALLENGE AN INCUMBENTS. AS LONG AS WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THE $100 CONTRIBUTION LIMITS, AT LEAST FOR FOLKS TRYING TO RUN AN AT LARGE ELECTION, OVER 277 SQUARE MILE, REACHING OVER 400,000 REGISTERED VOTERS, I CAN'T SUPPORT REPEALING THE TERM LIMITS. BUT I SAID IN A MEMO TO YOU ALL LAST MONTH, IF WE CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO GIVE CHALLENGERS A FIGHTING CHANCE TO TAKE ON INCUMBENTS, THEN I BECOME MORE COMFORTABLE WITH TALKING ABOUT REPEALING TERM LIMITS. I DO SEE A SCENARIO WHERE THE — BECAUSE OF THE CONTROVERSY AROUND IT AND SOME — SOME ISSUES RAISED BY OTHERS ABOUT IT, I SEE A SCENARIO WHERE THE AUSTIN — AUSTIN FAIR ELECTIONS ACT DOESN'T PASS AT THE BALLOT IN MAY. AND SO WE ARE RIGHT BACK WHERE WE ARE NOW. AND WE CAN'T EVEN AMEND OUR CHARTER FOR TWO YEARS AND SO AT A TIME WHEN THE REST OF THE COUNTRY, EVEN THE U.S. CONGRESS FOR CRYING OUT LOUD IS TALKING ABOUT AND APPROVING TRUE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, AUSTIN, TEXAS COULD VERY EASILY IN MAY OF 2002 NOT PLAY THAT GAME AND BE LEFT OUT IN THE COLD AND HAVE NO CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, HAVE A — CONTINUE TO HAVE STIFLING SET OF CAMPAIGN STRUCTURES THAT MAKE IT VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR A CHALLENGER TO TAKE ON AN INCUMBENT. AS LONG AS WE HAVE THAT UNLET ME OF A PLAYING FIELD, I CAN'T BE SUPPORTIVE OF — OF REPEALING TERM LIMITS. I THINK A LOT OF VOTERS ARE GOING TO RECOGNIZE THAT, TOO. SO I WON'T BE VOTING TO — TO PUT — FOR REPEALING THE TERM LIMITS ON THE BALLOT.

MAYOR GARCIA: LET ME ASK MR. STEINER. TONIGHT'S VOTES ARE NOT ORDINANCES, THIS IS JUST THE DIRECTION TO WRITE THE LANGUAGE FOR THEM, CORRECT? THEN WE WILL HAVE AN ORDINANCE TO PUT THEM ON THE BALLOT?

IF THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL CHOOSES BECAUSE WE DON'T REALLY HAVE — A DRAFT YET THAT REFLECTS WHAT YOU DECIDE TONIGHT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE NEVER DECIDED IT BEFORE. SO THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD WAY TO LOOK AT IT.

MAYOR GARCIA: FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM?

ALVAREZ: MAYOR?

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

ALVAREZ: THANKS, MAYOR. THIS — ON THE SUBJECT OF REPEALING THE TERM LIMITS, I PERSONALLY AM NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THAT. AND I THINK THAT I HAVE — THAT I TALKED TO SOME FOLKS ABOUT MY INTERESTS IN MAYBE EXTENDING IT FOR A THIRD TIME. THEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT NINE YEARS, WHICH IS A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME FOR SOMEONE TO SERVE. I THINK STATISTICS, THAT COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER PRESENTED LAST TIME SHOWED THAT THERE WEREN'T TOO MANY FOLKS THAT SERVED MUCH BEYOND THE NINE YEAR PERIOD. SO — SO I WOULD SUPPORT MAYBE EXTENDING THE NUMBER OF TERMS THAT SOMEBODY COULD SERVE TO THREE, BUT I DON'T THINK — I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE SAYING AT THIS POINT THAT WE WILL JUST GET RID OF TERM LIMITS ALTOGETHER SINCE THIS AGAIN WAS A VOTER PASSED — INITIATIVE. THANKS.

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

GRIFFITH: WELL, I THINK I WILL JUST KEEP ON LISTENING AND LEARNING FOR A WHILE. THESE COMMENTS ARE VERY INTERESTING. [ LAUGHTER ]. VERY INFORMATIVE.

MAYOR GARCIA: ANY OTHER —

SLUSHER: COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?

THOMAS: I ALWAYS YIELD TO THE SENIORITY, GO AHEAD.

SLUSHER: WELL, THANK YOU, SIR. I WILL SEE IF I CAN KEEP THE LEARNING PROCESS GOING HERE. YEAH, I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. I'M AFFECTED BY THE CURRENT TERM LIMIT LAW. AND I'M COMPLYING FULLY WITH IT. I'M NOT GOING TO — I'M NOT LOOKING FOR ANY LOOP HOLES. AS A MATTER OF FACT THERE IS ONE THERE THAT I HAVE SAID PUBLICLY A NUMBER OF TIMES THAT I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF AND WILL NOT ATTEMPT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF. AND SO WE ARE COMPLYING COMPLETELY, I'M COMPLYING COMPLETELY WITH THE TERM LIMIT PROVISION. I DON'T THINK IF IT IS PASSED — I MEAN EXCUSE ME, IF IT'S REPEALED I DOUBT THAT I WILL EVER BE AFFECTED BY THAT. NEVER SAY NEVER, BUT I DOUBT THAT SERIOUSLY. SO I THINK — SO I THINK JUST — ON WHAT I THINK IS THE BEST PUBLIC POLICY. I THINK WE SHOULD AT LEAST GIVE THE VOTERS THE CHANCE TO VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO REPEAL IT. IF THEY DON'T REPEAL IT, I THINK IT'S PRETTY FIRMLY IN PLACE. BUT I BELIEVE THE WHOLE ATMOSPHERE IN THE COUNTRY IS CAN I HAVE NOW THAT WAS IN 1994. THAT WAS PART OF THE CONTRACT WITH AMERICA WHEN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY CAPTURED THE CONGRESS, THE MAJORITY TOOK — TOOK OVER THE MAJORITY IN BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS, THAT WAS A BIG PART OF THEIR PLATFORM WAS TERM LIMITS. AND THEN ONCE THEY GOT IN THERE AND HAD A MAJORITY, WELL, THAT SORT OF JUST DRIFTED AWAY. WE DON'T HAVE TERM LIMITS PASSED BY THE CONGRESS. WE DON'T HAVE NATIONAL TERM LIMITS, EXCEPT ON THE PRESIDENT AND THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE A LONG TIME. HERE IN AUSTIN, LOCALLY, I — THIS PROBABLY IS THE ISSUE THAT I HAVE HEARD THE MOST ABOUT, WELL, THERE'S OBVIOUS REASON WHY BECAUSE I'VE BEEN OUT THERE TALKING TO HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS, REALLY, OF PEOPLE. AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT A LOT OF THEM DON'T EVEN REALIZE THAT AUSTIN HAS TERM LIMITS. I WOULD SAY FRANKLY ABOUT 90% OR MORE OF THE FOLKS THAT I TALK TO, I THINK PROBABLY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH AND MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN WILL BACK THAT UP, THAT'S BECAUSE — I THINK IT'S BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN SUCH A LONG LAG. PASSED IN '94 BUT DIDN'T GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL '96, THEN ONE HAD TO SERVE TWO TERMS AFTER THAT BECAUSE IT WASN'T RETROACTIVE, SO HERE WE ARE EIGHT YEARS LATER BEFORE IT TAKES EFFECT. SO I THINK THAT'S ONE REASON A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE — GOING BACK TO THE WHOLE ATMOSPHERE NATIONALLY AND EVEN HERE IN TEXAS. FOR INSTANCE, BOB LANIER, A FORMER MAYOR OF HOUSTON, I NOW IN FAVOR OF — I MEAN AGAINST TERM LIMITS, USED TO BE IN FAVOR OF THEM. SO I WOULD SAY LET'S GIVE THE FOLKS A CHANCE VOTE AGAIN ON IT LIKE OUR CHARTER REVISION COMMISSION RECOMMENDED. THE ISSUE OF — WITH THE $100 LIMIT STILL IN PLACE, I THINK THAT'S A DECENT POINT AND WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT — THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE IN A MINUTE. THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD SAY ABOUT — ABOUT IT RIGHT NOW IS THAT CONGRESS IS PASSING, IT LOOKS LIKE CONGRESS IS GOING TO INSTITUTE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM THIS YEAR. LOOKS LIKE THE PRESIDENT IS POSSIBLY GOING TO SIGN IT. BUT — BUT CONGRESS IS A ELECTED BODY. — IS A LEGISLATED BODY, THEY ARE INSTITUTING CAMPAIGN FINANCE THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE BODY THROUGH THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED. THEY ARE NOT PUTTING IT ON AS A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. THAT'S THE EQUIVALENT OF WHAT WE HAVE IS CAMPAIGN FINANCE PROVISIONS IN THE CITY CHARTER. I THINK THAT SHOULD BE DONE BY AN ORDINANCE AND ANY WAY WE DO IT, WE ARE GOING TO GET CRITICIZED BY SOMEBODY, SO WE WILL GET CRITICIZED FOR — FOR IF WE DO IT BY AN ORANCE. ON THE OTHER HAND WE MAY NOT GET TO THAT POINT BECAUSE WE ARE PUTTING THE ONE ON THAT IS INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM THROUGH THE SIGNATURE DRIVE OF THE GROUP THAT — REPRESENTED, THAT SPOKE EARLIER TONIGHT, THAT'S GOING ON BECAUSE IT GOT ENOUGH SIGNATURES TO GET ON THE BALLOT. WE ARE GOING TO PUT THAT ON. WE ARE NOT GOING TO PUT ON ALTERNATIVE I TALKED ABOUT THAT ONE TIME. DECIDED NOT TO DO IT AFTER HEARING FROM, YOU KNOW, FOLKS FROM THE COMMUNITY. SO PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DECIDE THAT. I THINK IF THAT DOESN'T PASS WE SHOULD COME BACK AND DO AN ORDINANCE AS A COUNCIL, WE SHOULDN'T GO BACK TO OUR OLD SYSTEM. WE WILL GO BACK TO THE TERM LIMIT FOR VISION, I'M GOING TO BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF PUTTING A REPEAL ON THE BALLOT.

Continue to Part C