[ ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON AGENDA ITEMS (Three minutes per speaker. The City Council may adjust the time allotted per speaker.) The public may address the City Council on agenda items prior to any action taken. Although Council Members may provide brief responses, the City Council may not engage in a discussion with members of the public during the meeting. Please complete a Speaker's Card to address the City Council in-person. Please follow the instructions at the end of the agenda and wait for the Mayor/City Clerk to call on you to address the City Council virtually. Speakers providing in-person comments will be called first. Members of the public are encouraged to communicate with the City Council via email at adm@cypressca.org or by calling 714-229-6699.]

THE SUMMARY OF THE WORKSHOP ITEMS. THANK YOU. MAYOR. THANK YOU. FIRST UP IS OUR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON AGENDA ITEMS. THE PUBLIC MAY ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON AGENDA ITEMS PRIOR TO ANY ACTION TAKEN, ALTHOUGH COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY PROVIDE BRIEF RESPONSES, THE CITY COUNCIL MAY NOT ENGAGE IN A DISCUSSION WITH MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DURING THE MEETING.

[00:05:05]

PLEASE COMPLETE A SPEAKER'S CARD WHICH IS THERE AT THE BACK OF THE ROOM. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK IN PERSON, AND PLEASE FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS AT THE END OF THE AGENDA. IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL VIRTUALLY IN PERSON, SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED FIRST. I HAVE ONE SPEAKER CARD FOR AGENDA ITEMS. BOB YOUNGSMA. WELL, GOOD EVENING, BOB YOUNGSMA, RESIDENT OF CYPRESS. I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE QUESTIONING ABSTENTION. YOU KNOW, THAT'S DONE IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE STATE GOVERNMENT, THE CITY GOVERNMENTS EVERYWHERE. NORMALLY WHEN SOMEBODY QUESTIONS IT, THEY'RE NOT HAPPY ABOUT MAYBE A VOTE OR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED. THERE'S THAT NEEDS TO BE THERE MOST OF THE TIME. THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD IT, THROUGH ALL THE STUFF I'VE EVER DONE, AND YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IT MEANS YES, BUT YOU HAVE SOME DISBELIEFS IN WHAT'S IN THERE? SOME OF IT. SO YOU'RE LETTING THE PUBLIC AND EVERYBODY ELSE KNOW YOU'RE VOTING FOR IT, BECAUSE THE BETTER PART OF IT IS RIGHT. BUT YOU KNOW THAT THERE'S ITEMS YOU DON'T AGREE WITH. NOW, IF I'M WRONG, I'D LOVE TO KNOW IT, BUT I THINK THAT SEEMS TO BE YOU GUYS ARE WASTING TIME ON SOMETHING THAT'S DONE. LIKE I SAID, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, STATE GOVERNMENTS, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, EVEN PEOPLE THAT ARE IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF BUSINESSES THAT HAVE ASSOCIATIONS HAVE THE SAME ITEM SITTING IN THERE AND DOES THE EXACT SAME THING. SO I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S EVEN GETTING DISCUSSED, BUT THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER MEMBERS IN THE AUDIENCE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK? OKAY. MADAM CITY CLERK, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ONLINE? NO, MR. MAYOR, THERE ARE NO HANDS RAISED. OKAY, MOVING

[ CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed on the Consent Calendar are to be approved with one motion unless a Council Member requests separate action on a specific item. Council Members voting no or abstaining on a Consent Calendar item may do so without removing the item from the Consent Calendar.]

RIGHT ALONG TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR. COUNCIL MEMBER MINIKUS. THANK YOU. ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 14, THE WARRANT REGISTER INCLUDES ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFER 16711 IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,025.34 AS REIMBURSEMENT FOR MEDICAL COVERAGE I'M ENTITLED TO RECEIVE UNDER CALPERS ANNUITANT IN VOTING FOR ANY MOTION TO APPROVE THE WARRANT REGISTER. I'M NOT VOTING ON ELECTRIC FUND TRANSFER NUMBER 16711 FOR THE REASONS I'VE JUST DISCLOSED. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. ALL MATTERS LISTED ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE TO BE APPROVED WITH ONE MOTION. UNLESS A COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTS SEPARATE ACTION ON AN ITEM. COUNCIL MEMBERS VOTING NO OR ABSTAINING ON A CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM MAY DO SO WITHOUT REMOVING THE ITEM FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR. DO ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES WISH TO PULL AN ITEM, OR HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT ANY OF OUR CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS? OKAY, SEEING NONE, I MOVE TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS ONE. THROUGH 14. I'LL SECOND THAT SECOND. REMEMBER TO LOCK YOUR VOTES.

EVERYONE. THAT MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. MOVING FORWARD AT A RECORD PACE, ITEMS FROM CITY

[ ITEMS FROM CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS]

COUNCIL MEMBERS. ITEM NUMBER 15. CONSIDER UPDATING MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2-2.20 COUNCIL MEETINGS, VOTING, DISQUALIFICATION AND ABSTENTION. AGENDIZED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PETE OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YES, I PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE GOOD. I DID A LITTLE BIT OF HOMEWORK AFTER WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF ABSTAINED VOTES, WHICH I THOUGHT WERE SOMEWHAT UNIQUE, AND I KIND OF WENT BACK AND WANTED TO REALLY LOOK AT WHAT'S THE BEST PRACTICE THAT OTHER CITIES HAVE PUT INTO PLACE. WHAT'S THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER? ALTHOUGH WE DON'T REALLY FOLLOW THAT SUCCINCTLY, BUT WHAT ARE SOME OF THE SPECIFICS RELATED TO HOW OTHERS CONDUCT THEIR THEIR MEETINGS? AND IN DOING THAT, I ASKED THE CITY CLERK AND THE CITY MANAGER TO DO A BIT OF A SURVEY. AND THIS IS ONE OF THE ATTACHMENTS. AND THEY HAD 14 CITIES THAT RESPONDED. AND THERE'S A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT PEOPLE DO. YES, FOUR CITIES HAD IT WOULD COUNT AS ABSENT, ABSTAIN VOTE. I'LL JUST SAY IT THAT WAY IS RECORDED AS A YES VOTE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY APPROVAL. OKAY. AND DOING THAT AHEAD OF TIME AND THAT KIND OF MAKES

[00:10:01]

SENSE. AND THEN THE OTHER I GUESS TEN WERE IT COUNTS AS A NO. OKAY. AND, AND THERE WERE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT THEY, THEY PROVIDED US IN THAT CASE IS ROSENBERG'S RULES OF ORDER, ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS. YOU KNOW, SHOULD ONLY OCCUR IF A CONFLICT EXISTS. ET CETERA. SO, SO WITH THAT, AFTER I GOT THAT INFORMATION AND I LOOKED AT KIND OF WHAT THE I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CALL IT STATE OR WHATEVER, IT SEEMED LIKE OUR MUNICIPAL CODE IS A BIT DATED. I'LL JUST SAY IT THAT WAY. IT WAS PUT INTO PLACE IN 1965, AND I WAS PLEASED, HONESTLY, THAT WE FOUND MINUTES FROM 1965. SO KUDOS TO OUR OUR CLERK ON THAT ONE. AND, AND IT LED ME TO KIND OF THINK ABOUT, WELL, WHAT IF WHAT WOULD I PROPOSE IF IT WAS TO BE SOMETHING DIFFERENT? OKAY. AND SO IN THE CITY COUNCIL REPORT, I HAD PUT FIVE DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION. AND THERE MAY BE OTHERS AND I'D APPRECIATE INPUT. ONE IS NO CHANGE. WE STAY WITH WHERE WE ARE TODAY. THE SECOND IS TO FOLLOW THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS AND DO NOT COUNT ABSTENTIONS AS AFFIRMATIVE VOTES. THE NEXT ONE IS NUMBER THREE IS TO PROHIBIT ABSTENTIONS UNLESS A COUNCIL MEMBER HAS ESTABLISHED A LEGAL JUSTIFICATION FOR ABSTAINING, AND THEN NUMBER FOUR IS PROHIBIT ABSTENTIONS UNLESS A COUNCIL MEMBER HAS ESTABLISHED A LEGAL JUSTIFICATION. THIS OPTION IS BASICALLY THE SAME, BUT I THINK WHAT IT IS THEY CAN STILL VOTE AND ABSTAIN, BUT IT'S NOT RECOMMENDED. I'LL SAY IT THAT WAY. THE RECOMMENDATION IS REALLY YOU GET LEGAL, LEGAL CONCURRENCE. AND THEN NUMBER FIVE WAS SAYING, HEY, IS THERE ANOTHER IDEA THAT WE HAVE OUT THERE? SO I'D APPRECIATE INPUT. MY RECOMMENDATION IS FOR A LOT OF THINGS WE DO KIND OF LOOK TO THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS, THE ORDER IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY DO. AND IT'S A VERY CONSISTENT PRACTICE AMONGST LEGAL AND GOVERNMENT FACILITIES. AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND NUMBER TWO. AND WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS WE WOULD DO AN UPDATED ORDINANCE THAT WE WOULD JUST UPDATE IT JUST FOR THAT. AND IT'D JUST BE IT DOESN'T NOT MEAN YOU CANNOT ABSTAIN IT. I'M NOT SAYING YOU CANNOT ABSTAIN. YOU CAN ABSTAIN IF YOU TALK WITH A LEGAL AND YOU YOU HAVE CONFIRMATION WITH OUR ATTORNEY AND THEY SAY, YEAH, YOU HAVE A CONFLICT AND YES, YOU ABSTAIN. BUT IF YOU DON'T DO THAT, THEN IT FOLLOWS THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, WHICH MEANS IF SOMEBODY CHOOSES TO ABSTAIN WITHOUT THAT LEGAL CONCURRENCE, THEN IT BASICALLY COUNTS AS A I'LL SAY A NO A NO VOTE. I'LL CALL IT A NO VOTE, NOT EVEN A NO NO VOTE. NOW, THE REASON I LIKE THIS IS BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE CONSISTENTLY HEAR FROM OUR RESIDENTS AND PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM IS WE LIKE HAVING THE OPEN TRANSPARENCY, THE DISCUSSION, ETC. AND IN THE CASE THAT I'M DESCRIBING IS I THINK IT WOULD LEAD TO THAT. IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE HAD A TWO, TWO, ONE AND THE ONE BEING ABSTAIN AND NOT COUNTED, IT WOULD OPEN UP A DISCUSSION. IT WOULDN'T JUST SAY, HEY, THAT THING GOES AWAY. IT COULD OPEN UP A DISCUSSION AND A DIALOG THAT SAYS, OKAY, I WANT IT. YOU DON'T WHAT WHAT'S HOW DO WE GET THIS OVER THE LINE? AND THERE MAY BE SOME SLIGHT MODIFICATIONS THAT CAN BE MADE LIKE AN ALTERNATE MOTION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT COULD BE MADE, THAT MIGHT MAKE MORE PARTIES HAPPY IN BRINGING IT TO WHATEVER THE AFFIRMATIVE IS. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT IN TRANSPARENCY, LOOKING OUT AT THE AUDIENCE HERE IS, IS PEOPLE LIKE TO SEE THE DISCUSSION, HOW IT GOES, WHAT ARE THE THOUGHT PROCESSES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO I DON'T THINK IT'S UNREASONABLE FOR SOMEONE TO ABSTAIN IF THEY HAVE A CONFLICT.

THAT'S ABSOLUTELY I WOULD EXPECT THEY WOULD DO THAT, BUT I'M JUST ASKING IT TO BE FOLLOWED WITH THE PROCESS OF TALKING TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND BEING ABSTAINED SO AND NOT COUNTED AS A VOTE. SO THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION, BUT I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT UP TO ANY ANY THOUGHTS ANYBODY HAS. MAYOR, I HAVE JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. I AS FAR AS ASKING THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THE APPROPRIATENESS OF AN ABSTENTION. WOULD I SUSPECT, THOSE PARTICULAR CITIES THAT HAVE THAT LANGUAGE IN THEIR MUNICIPAL CODE ARE TRYING TO GET TO? IS THAT TO THE EXTENT THEY COUNT ABSTENTIONS AS A YES VOTE, THEY DO SO FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSURING THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE ARE ABSTENTIONS DUE TO CONFLICT ISSUES, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE ITEMS

[00:15:02]

PASSED SO THAT THE VOTE ACTUALLY COUNTS SHORT OF JUST CONFIRMING WHETHER THERE'S A CONFLICT. AND IN THE CONTEXT OF A CODE THAT REQUIRES AN ABSTENTION TO BE VOTED TO COUNT AS A YES, I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW ADDING THOSE TWO COMPONENTS OF ASKING THE CITY. NOT THAT I'M TRYING TO AVOID ANY OBLIGATION, BUT ASKING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO OPINE ON THE ABSTENTION AND ALSO FOLLOW ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. I THINK MY THOUGHT REGARDING THAT WAS, I'M UNCERTAIN IF I HAVE A CONFLICT. SO I WILL COME TO YOU AND SAY, HEY, I ACTUALLY VISITED THIS FACILITY, RIGHT? AND I DID THIS. I HAD A TOUR. WE'RE NOW VOTING ON A DECISION FOR THAT. DO I, MR. ATTORNEY? DO I HAVE A CONFLICT THAT I NEED TO PULL AND JUST BASICALLY ABSTAIN FROM THE VOTE AND THAT OBVIOUSLY I DEAL WITH THOSE KIND OF QUESTIONS ALL THE TIME, BUT THEY DON'T NECESSARILY UNLESS WE DON'T HAVE A QUORUM PER SE OR IT DOESN'T REALLY CREATE A VOTING PROBLEM.

IT'S MORE OF JUST FOR YOUR OWN PROTECTION, WHETHER YOU SHOULD ABSTAIN TO AVOID ANY VIOLATION OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST RULE. RIGHT? AND THEN YOU'D BE ADVISING THEM TO RECUSE. AND AT THAT POINT, I GENERALLY ADVISE THAT A COUNCIL MEMBER RECUSE THEMSELVES AS OPPOSED TO ABSTAIN. YEAH. AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT, IS SAYING I DON'T SEE IN SITUATIONS WHERE, YOU KNOW, A PERSON WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, HEY, AND THE EXAMPLE THAT I JUST SHARED IS, IS KIND OF SAYING, HEY, I THINK I'VE GOT A CONFLICT. AND YOU MAY SAY, HEY, I DON'T I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE IT AS A CONFLICT, POTENTIALLY. OKAY. DID YOU MAKE A DECISION FOR THIS, THIS AND THIS? AND THEN HE MAY HE OR SHE MAY SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN TO THIS FACILITY, I DON'T HAVE A CONFLICT AND I'M GOING TO VOTE YES. RIGHT. AND THAT'S OKAY. TO SO YEAH, I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM EVERYBODY. I WANT TO CLARIFY WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING, BECAUSE ON THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER SUGGESTION, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT ONE IS JUST YOU CAN VOTE YES. YOU CAN VOTE NO, YOU CAN ABSTAIN. BUT YOU'RE TALKING WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GETTING PERMISSION FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY. TO ME, THAT'S A DIFFERENT THING THAN ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. THAT'S LIKE SAYING YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO ABSTAIN IF THE CITY ATTORNEY GIVES YOU PERMISSION TO DO SO. AND SO I READ THAT THAT SITUATION IS MORE DISQUALIFICATION. AND SO I GUESS I WANT TO CLARIFY, ARE YOU PROPOSING THAT YOU CAN ONLY ABSTAIN FROM A VOTE IF YOU'RE LEGALLY DISQUALIFIED FROM VOTING ON THE MATTER? OR DO YOU THINK PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO VOTE YES, NO, OR ABSTAIN, REGARDLESS OF ANY LEGAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST? GOOD QUESTION. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT, ESPECIALLY IN A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE A22, RIGHT, THAT IF SOMEBODY IS GOING TO ABSTAIN, THAT THEY DO SO IN A MANNER OF I REALLY WANT TO SAY YES, BUT I DON'T WANT TO SAY YES OPENLY. RIGHT. AND I THINK AN ABSTAIN IN THAT TYPE OF SITUATION IS PROBABLY FROM A RESIDENT STANDPOINT, I WOULD SURE SAY, I NEED YOU, I WANT YOU TO VOTE AND I WANT YOU TO VOTE WHATEVER YOUR POSITION IS. AND IF YOUR POSITION IS YES, VOTE YES. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. DON'T VOTE TO ABSTAIN BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE A CONFLICT WITH A RESIDENT OR SOMETHING, BECAUSE IT MAY BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. SO I'M JUST SAYING IS, IS AS A AS A CITY COUNCIL WERE ELECTED, OKAY, WE'RE ELECTED TO MAKE DECISIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY HERE. AND EVERY VOTE COUNTS. SO YEAH, I WOULD SAY YOU ONLY ABSTAIN IF YOU REALLY HAVE A LEGAL REASON TO ABSTAIN, THAT THAT WOULD BE MY PERSPECTIVE. SO IF I MAY, I THINK THE MAYOR ACTUALLY CLARIFIED THE PART OF THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE THAT AND I'LL CREDIT YOUR CITY MANAGER WHO IDENTIFIED THIS ISSUE.

THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ABSTENTION, JUST ABSTAINING FROM A VOTE BECAUSE YOU CHOOSE NOT TO VOTE VERSUS BEING DISQUALIFIED. WHERE? RIGHT. OFTENTIMES IF IT'S A DISCUSSION ITEM, YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO LEAVE AND GET OFF THE DAIS AND LEAVE THE ROOM BECAUSE YOU HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

I SUSPECT THAT ISSUE IS ALREADY COVERED BY DISCUSSIONS THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IS ACTUALLY GETTING TO THE ISSUE OF ABSTENTIONS. THE ISSUE OF ABSTENTION, I THINK, DEPENDS ON AND THIS IS A POLICY QUESTION FOR THE COUNCIL. DO YOU WANT TO

[00:20:03]

JUST ALLOW A COUNCIL MEMBER TO ABSTAIN ON AN ITEM WITHOUT REASON? WELL, AND AGAIN, I'M GOING TO I WOULD APPRECIATE SOME INPUT ON THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS. BUT AS I UNDERSTAND IT, I'M GOING TO I THINK I'M GOING TO HOPEFULLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, AS I UNDERSTAND IT IS IF YOU HAVE A YES. YES. ABSTAIN. NO, NO, IT'S 2 TO 2 AND THE ABSTAIN IS NOT COUNTING. THAT'S HOW I SEE IT PASS. AND SO THAT'S HOW I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE DO IT IF THE ABSTAIN DOESN'T COUNT TOWARD A VOTE. SO YOU HAVEN'T GARNERED A MAJORITY TO PASS. TRUE. TRUE DOESN'T MEAN THAT A MOTION CAN'T CHANGE. I'M JUST SAYING IS IT DOESN'T COUNT THAT I THINK THAT'S ULTIMATELY WHERE I'M GETTING TO. BUT COUNCIL MEMBERS COULD STILL ABSTAIN. ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. ABSOLUTELY.

SORRY. COUNCIL MEMBER MINIKUS. WELL, THIS HAS BEEN A LOT. I THINK ABSTENTIONS SHOULD BE ALLOWED IF THERE'S A LEGAL CONFLICT, MORAL OR ETHICAL CONFLICT. RIGHT. THAT'S THAT'S PRETTY STANDARD, RIGHT. BUT I THINK WHAT EVERYONE IS HERE SAYING IS THAT A YES VOTE MEANS YES, A NO VOTE MEANS NO. AND AN ABSTENTION IS ONLY USED WHEN THERE'S A CONFLICT OR A ETHICAL OR MORAL CONFLICT. SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DRIVING TO. RIGHT. IT'S JUST A YES IS A YES AND NO IS A NO. AN ABSTENTION IS JUST COUNTS AS AN ABSTENTION. IT DOESN'T COUNT AS A VOTE AT ALL.

CORRECT. WITH ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER ESSENTIALLY, SAY IS IT COUNTS NEITHER AS A YES OR A NO.

SO IT'S AS IF THE VOTE IS EXCLUDED. AND THERE'S ONLY, LET'S SAY, ONE PERSON ABSTAIN.

THERE'S ONLY FOUR MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL VOTING ON AN ITEM. YES. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARITY. I WASN'T SAYING SOMEBODY COULDN'T ABSTAIN. THEY CAN ABSTAIN OKAY. I'M JUST SAYING IS I IF YOU DO AN ABSTAIN IT DOESN'T COUNT TOWARD A YES VOTE OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE. THAT'S FINE. THAT'S JUST BASIC, ROBERT. YES, SIR. THAT I THINK YOU'RE ADVOCATING FOR. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER CHANG, THAT ACTUALLY SOUNDS LIKE SCOTT. YOU'RE ADVOCATING FOR SOMETHING ELSE KIND OF GOING A LITTLE BIT FURTHER THAN WHAT BONNIE IS PROPOSING, THAT YOU ONLY ABSTAIN IN WHEN THERE'S A LEGAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR ETHICAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST. WOULD THAT BE MORE SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU MENTIONED WHEN IT COMES TO ONLY ABSTAINING, WHEN THERE'S A WITH YOUR PERMISSION OR. YEAH, LET ME GIVE ONE EXAMPLE. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, WHEN I MEET COUNCIL MEMBERS AND YOU GET ON THE CITY COUNCIL, I SIT WITH YOU TO TALK ABOUT CONFLICTS AND BROWN ACT AND ALL THE FUN STUFF. I ENJOY THE ONE, THE ONE ISSUE, THE ONE THING I ALWAYS SAY IS LEGAL CONFLICT IS THE FLOOR. YOU CANNOT PARTICIPATE IF YOU HAVE A CONFLICT, BUT SOMETIMES IT JUST DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT BECAUSE THE PERCEPTION, WHATEVER THINGS THAT I DON'T DEAL WITH, YOU KNOW, YOU MAY THINK YOU WANT TO TAKE SORT OF A MORE CAUTIOUS APPROACH. SO IF YOU ASK ME FOR MY OPINION, I MAY SAY NO, THERE'S NO LEGAL CONFLICT. YOU'RE YOU'RE FREE TO VOTE. BUT IN YOUR HEART OF HEARTS, YOU FEEL THAT THERE IS JUST A LEVEL OF DISCOMFORT WITH PARTICIPATING IN THE VOTE. SO IN THAT CASE, ASKING THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULD NOT REALLY AID IN THE PROCESS. AND I THINK I HEARD COUNCIL MEMBER MINNICK IS SAYING IF IT'S A LEGAL CONFLICT OR A MORAL OR ETHICAL, YOU KNOW, I DON'T PRACTICE IN MORAL ADVICE.

I'M A MORAL PERSON, BUT I DON'T PRACTICE IN MORAL ADVICE SO THAT I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU THAT PIECE OF ADVICE. YES. SO FOR CLARITY AND ULTIMATELY, I HEARD COUNCIL MEMBER MINIKUS WHAT YOU SAID. I'M, I'M SAYING IT MORE TOWARD I THINK WHAT THEIR CITY ATTORNEY IS SAYING IS SOMEBODY MAY CHOOSE TO ABSTAIN BECAUSE THEY DON'T. I'LL SAY IT THIS WAY, BUT THIS MAY NOT BE THE REASON THEY DON'T WANT TO TAKE A POSITION ON A PARTICULAR ISSUE, WHATEVER THAT ISSUE IS.

OKAY. BUT THEY WANT TO ABSTAIN IN MY IN MY THOUGHT. IF THEY DO THAT, THEY'RE NOT ASSUMING THAT IT'S GOING TO COUNT TOWARD A YES. THEY KNOW THAT THEY'RE PULLING THEMSELVES OUT OF THE VOTE. OKAY, THAT'S THAT'S HOW I SEE WHAT WHAT MY ORIGINAL THOUGHT WAS ON THE RECOMMENDATION. I THINK WE'RE ALL SAYING THE SAME THING JUST IN DIFFERENT WAYS. AND THAT BASICALLY IS REVERTING TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. YEAH. I'D HAVE ANY. SO I HAVE ONE. SO ONE SUGGESTION I WOULD MAKE ON THIS. SO I'M LOOKING AT OUR ORDINANCE 265, THE ORDINANCE WHERE I GUESS THIS WAS INITIALLY ENACTED MANY, MANY YEARS AGO. AND SO PERSONALLY, I THINK IT'S FINE TO HAVE YES, NO AND ABSTENTIONS. AND I UNDERSTAND WHY AN ABSTENTION WOULDN'T COUNT AS A YES. AND SO I THINK IF WE WANTED TO CHANGE SECTION 23 TO REFLECT THAT IN SOME WAY, I

[00:25:02]

THINK THAT'S REASONABLE. THE ONE THING I ALSO THINK WE SHOULD CHANGE IF WE'RE TRYING TO, TO PROMOTE MORE DISCUSSION OR UNDERSTAND COUNCIL MEMBERS POSITIONS, IS THERE'S A SECTION G OR SEX EIGHT G ABOUT MOTIONS TO RECONSIDER. AND SO IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE RULES SUCH THAT AN ABSTENTION DOESN'T COUNT AS A YES, I DO THINK WE SHOULD CHANGE THE RECONSIDERATION RULE SO THAT THE PERSON ABSTAINING, IF THEY WANTED TO, COULD MOVE TO RE RECONSIDER THEIR VOTE AT THE SAME MEETING. CURRENTLY, OUR CODE ALLOWS SOMEONE WHO VOTED IN FAVOR OF A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THEIR VOTE DURING THE SAME MEETING. I THINK IT WOULD MAKE SENSE IF WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID BREAK A DEADLOCK, TO ALLOW A COUNCIL MEMBER WHO ABSTAINED TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER BOTH PRACTICALLY, BUT ALSO BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING OF OUR CURRENT AGENDA POLICY IS THAT EVEN IF WE DIDN'T ALLOW THAT, TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS COULD JUST MAKE THE MOTION AGAIN AT THE NEXT MEETING. AND SO, IN MY OPINION, WE MIGHT AS WELL JUST HAVE THAT DISCUSSION DURING THE MEETING WHERE IT'S BEING VOTED ON AND DISCUSSED, INSTEAD OF WAITING TWO WEEKS AND SAYING, OH, IT WAS TWO TWO WITH AN ABSTENTION, I'M GOING TO MOVE TO PUT IT ON THE CALENDAR NEXT TWO WEEKS FROM NOW, AND WE'LL VOTE AGAIN AND SEE IF THE ABSTENTION CHANGES. I JUST THINK IT WOULD BE PRACTICAL TO ALTER THAT. I AGREE WITH THAT. THE ONLY THING I WOULD I WOULD OFFER IS IF A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT VOTED TO ABSTAIN ORIGINALLY, IF THEY NEED MORE TIME TO INVESTIGATE SOMETHING OR JUST DELVE INTO IT A LITTLE BIT MORE INSTEAD OF MAKING A DECISION RIGHT THEN AND THERE, ALMOST LIKE FORCING THEM TO GIVE THAT PERSON, THAT COUNCIL MEMBER THE OPTION TO SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, I NEED TO LOOK AT THIS MORE BEFORE I VOTE. SO WHAT IF WE COULD BRING THIS BACK UP AT OUR AT OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, AND THEN WE CAN REVOTE IT AGAIN AS WELL? OKAY. THANK YOU. AND SO CAN I ASK OUR CITY STAFF THEN. IS THAT WORKABLE? THE SITUATION WHERE THE ABSTAINING COUNCIL MEMBER. WE CAN CHANGE OUR CODES TO BE A STANDING COUNCIL MEMBER COULD CONCEIVABLY SAY DURING THE MEETING, YOU KNOW WHAT, I WANT TO RECONSIDER THIS RIGHT NOW. OR AS COUNCIL MEMBER SUGGESTED. YOU KNOW WHAT? I JUST WANT A LITTLE MORE TIME TO THINK OF THIS, AND I'D LIKE US TO RECONSIDER THIS AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. IS THAT CAN WE TWEAK SECTION EIGHT G TO REFLECT THAT, OR DOES THAT POSE ANY PROBLEM THAT I'M NOT SEEING? WELL, WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE YOU IS DISCUSSION ABOUT VOTING, DISQUALIFICATION AND ABSTENTION, BUT THIS IS SIMPLY A DISCUSSION ITEM. WHAT YOU CAN DO IS INCLUDE OTHER COMPONENTS, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE BROUGHT BACK BY STAFF WITH A PROPOSED ORDINANCE. SO AS FAR AS THE SCOPE UNDER THE BROWN ACT, I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE. THE QUESTION IS. I KNOW THERE ARE PARTICULAR RULES ON RECONSIDERATION, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, IF IT'S A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, YOU KNOW, ONCE THE ITEM ENDS, THERE ARE RULES. YOU CAN'T REVISIT THAT. THERE ARE CERTAIN RECONSIDERATION RULES THAT I MAY NEED TO JUST DELVE INTO. SO I THINK THERE'S AN IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE TOO, BETWEEN RECONSIDERATION A VOTE THAT IS DECIDED. SO SOMETHING PASSES THREE TWO AND A MOTION NOT PASSING, AND A SUBSEQUENT MOTION BEING MADE WHILE THE ITEM IS STILL DEBATED. AND THOSE ARE VERY, VERY DIFFERENT THINGS, RIGHT? THAT TECHNICALLY IS NOT CALLED THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. IT'S LIKE POTENTIALLY, POTENTIALLY A SUBSTITUTE MOTION OR A REQUESTED AMENDMENT TO A MOTION. BUT CERTAINLY I'M HAPPY TO LOOK INTO WHETHER THERE ARE ANY POTENTIAL ISSUES WITH COUNTING ABSTENTIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING THE PERSON ABSTAINING TO MAKE THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. I BELIEVE THERE ARE NO PROHIBITIONS, BUT JUST MAY NEED TO LOOK INTO THAT. AND SECTION G IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE, IT SPECIFICALLY REFERS TO A PREVAILING SIDE. SO NOT A FAILED MOTION. I DON'T THINK. I DON'T KNOW ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER WELL ENOUGH TO SAY THIS CONFIDENCE MAYBE FRED DOES. IF A MOTION IS MADE AND IT DOESN'T PASS BECAUSE IT'S A221, CAN THE SAME MOTION BE MADE AGAIN? SO WHEN AN ITEM IS COMPLETED IN THE DISCUSSION AND YOU'VE MOVED OVER

[00:30:06]

TO THE NEXT ITEM OR YOU'RE ABOUT TO, SOMEBODY CAN MAKE A THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO MAKE A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. AND YOUR RULES ARE CONSISTENT WITH ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER BECAUSE IT SAYS A MOTION TO RECONSIDER MAY BE MADE ONLY ON THE DAY SUCH ACTION WAS TAKEN. SO IF YOU COME BACK AT OUR NEXT MEETING AND YOU SAY, I WANT TO MOVE TO RECONSIDER WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, TWO WEEKS AGO, THAT'S TOO LATE. BUT THE CONCEPT IS IT ACTUALLY IS AFTER THE VOTE IS TAKEN AND THE ITEM IS CONCLUDED. SO I THINK THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, PETE, BUT. ANY OTHER MOTION IS REALLY A MOTION TO A SUBSTITUTE MOTION OR AMENDMENT OR. WE'RE HAVING MIKE POWER ISSUES FOR ME. OKAY. THERE WE GO. SO, MR. MAYOR, I THINK IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION OR YOUR SCENARIO IS THERE IS A MOTION MADE AND IT'S A TWO, TWO, ONE VOTE, NOTHING HAPPENS. CAN THE PERSON WHO ABSTAINED SAY, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION AGAIN AND VOTE ON IT OR RE RECONSIDER? YEAH, I, I THINK IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO GIVE THAT PERSON THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, I'M ACTUALLY 52% THIS WAY, 48% THIS WAY. I'D LIKE TO JUST RECONSIDER THIS RIGHT NOW. AND AS I THINK ABOUT IT, SO LONG AS THE OTHER RECONSIDERATION RULES ARE KEPT IN PLACE, I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. YEAH, I DON'T EVEN THINK WE NEED TO CHANGE THE MUNI CODE TO DO THAT. BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS SECTION G TALKS ABOUT A VOTE THAT HAS A PREVAILING SIDE. RIGHT. BUT IF YOU'RE BUT IF YOU'RE THE ABSTENTION, YOU'RE NOT ON A THERE'S NO PREVAILING SIDE. RIGHT. WELL THERE IS NO PREVAILING SIDE IN TWO, TWO, ONE. RIGHT. SO PERHAPS A CLARIFICATION WHEN WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT TOPIC, IF IT FAILS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T GET THE MAJORITY VOTE AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT. BUT WHAT I'M HEARING THE MAYOR SUGGEST IS THAT SOMEONE MAY HAVE A CHANGE OF HEART AFTER IT FAILS. AND THAT THERE ISN'T ANOTHER SUBSEQUENT MOTION MADE THAT SUCCESSFULLY GARNERS THREE VOTES. YEAH, BASICALLY, I'M ENVISIONING A SCENARIO WHERE SO CONTRARY TO WHAT SOME PEOPLE ASSUME, SOMETIMES AT LEAST.

SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, I DON'T KNOW HOW A LOT OF THESE VOTES ARE GOING TO COME OUT. WE PUSH THE BUTTONS, THEY COME UP. I'M IMAGINING A SITUATION WHERE IT'S TWO YES, TWO NO'S, ONE ABSTENTION AND MAYBE THE PERSON ABSTAINING JUST THOUGHT, YOU KNOW WHAT? I JUST I WANT TO STAY OUT OF THIS FOR WHATEVER REASON. BUT THEN THEY, THEY REALIZE THEY'RE THE TIEBREAKER ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. AND THEY SAY, OKAY, IF THAT'S THE CASE, I'LL PICK A SIDE. HERE WE GO. AND SO I'D LIKE TO ALLOW FOR THAT OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEONE WHO ABSTAINS. BUT THAT WAS JUST MY THOUGHT. AND I SEE I HAVE THREE OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. SO COUNCIL MEMBER PETE. YEAH. WHAT WHAT I DON'T WANT TO GET TO AND THIS IS MAYBE A LEGAL THING, IS I DON'T WANT TO GET TO A POINT WHERE, WELL, I WANT TO SEE HOW THE OTHER ONES DO, AND THEN I'M GOING TO CHANGE MY VOTE. I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. OKAY. BUT I COULD SEE THAT BEING THE CARD PLAYED, I WOULD HOPE IT WOULDN'T BE, BUT I COULD SEE THAT BEING A CARD PLAY TO SAYING, OH, SHOOT, IT DIDN'T PASS. OKAY, I WANT TO RECONSIDER BECAUSE I WANT TO DO THIS. SO I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE LEGALITIES OF I'M GOING TO CHANGE MY VOTE BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO PASS, BUT IT DIDN'T. SO THEREFORE I'M GOING TO PUT MY $0.02 IN. NOW, THAT SAID, WE HAVE HAD IN A COUPLE OF CASES AND MAYBE I'M WRONG. IT WASN'T AN ABSTAIN VOTE, BUT IT ONCE OR TWICE I BELIEVE WE'VE HAD WHERE THIS CAN HAPPEN. RIGHT. YOU PUSH THE WRONG BUTTON AND YOU'RE LIKE WHOA, WHOA, WHOA. I DIDN'T MEAN TO DO THAT, RIGHT? I MEANT TO DO THIS. THAT THAT IS NOT WHAT I'M THINKING ABOUT HERE. WHAT I WOULD BE HOPEFUL IN THE SITUATION TO WAY I SEE IT WORKING IS I WOULD HOPE IT WOULDN'T JUST DIE. I WOULD HOPE IT WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, BONNIE? YOU REQUESTED THIS. BUT IF YOU PUT IT DOWN FROM 2 TO 1, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE IT IS, BUT 2 TO 1, I THINK WE CAN PROBABLY GET EVERYBODY ON BOARD. RIGHT. LET'S LET'S THINK ABOUT WHAT THE PROS AND CONS ARE. THA. AND IT WOULD LEAD TO A DISCUSSION THAT MIGHT BECOME MORE OF A50 IN THE END AND A COMPROMISE. SO I JUST DON'T WANT TO PLAY ANY GAMES WITH THE VOTING. AND AGAIN, IT'S UNLIKELY IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. BUT YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT. AND ONE SECOND I'LL GET TO YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. MY FEAR IS THAT NOW IT WOULD JUST DIE BECAUSE ONCE THE VOTE WOULD BE TAKEN, IT'S WE'RE DONE. AND MAYBE WE COULD HAVE WORKED OUT THE FIVE ZERO, BUT WE'LL WE'LL NEVER KNOW BECAUSE WE MADE THE MOTION AND THAT WAS THAT. BUT SO THAT'S WHY. YEAH.

YEAH. MAYOR PRO TEM MEDRANO SURE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS CONVERSATION. I, I, I'M

[00:35:08]

GRATEFUL THAT WE'RE HAVING IT. BUT ONE THING I WANT TO DO IS I WANT TO ASK THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, CITY CLERK AND CITY MANAGER. WHAT DO YOU THINK, BASED UPON THESE OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATIONS, THESE FIVE, WHAT'S GOING THROUGH YOUR MIND? I'D LIKE TO HEAR YOUR VIEWPOINTS. I GUESS I'LL START. YOU KNOW, I ALWAYS LIKE BEING ABLE TO DRAW ON PRECEDENT AND HISTORICAL PRACTICES, AND I KNOW HOW TO DO THAT WITH ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER OR ROSENBERG'S RULES OF ORDER. SO I THINK THERE'S A CLEAR BODY OF LAW THAT ADDRESSES ALL OF THAT. THAT'S AS FAR AS ABSTENTIONS ON THE RECONSIDERATION. I DON'T REALLY HAVE AN OPINION, A LEGAL OPINION ABOUT THAT. I THINK THE ONE THING I WOULD SUGGEST IS PERHAPS PUTTING THAT CLARIFICATION IN YOUR CODE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR THAT IF YOU ABSTAIN, ABSTAIN, YOU HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. SO THAT THAT'S MY OPINION. AND IF YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE OR DON'T HAVE A STRONG OPINION, THAT'S OKAY. I KNOW THIS IS A LITTLE UNORTHODOX. I JUST WOULD SAY I REACHED OUT TO MY FELLOW CLERKS AT OTHER CITIES TO FIND OUT WHAT OTHER CITIES WERE DOING, AND JUST THE MAJORITY THAT I SPOKE TO DID SAY THEY WERE EITHER FOLLOWING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDERS OR ROSENBERG'S RULES OF ORDERS BECAUSE, AS FRED MENTIONED, IT'S, YOU KNOW, CLEARLY LAID OUT. IT'S A STANDARDIZED FORMAT AND IT KIND OF ANSWERS ALL OF THE WHAT IFS OUT THERE. SO THAT THAT WOULD JUST BE, YOU KNOW, MY THOUGHT ON THE PROCESS. YEAH, I'D ECHO THE SAME THING. ROBERTS AND ROSENBERG'S ARE PROBABLY IN PRACTICE IN 80 PLUS PERCENT OF CALIFORNIA CITIES. SO YOU COULD SORT OF BLINDFOLD SOMEONE AND DROP THEM IN ANYWHERE. AND THEY UNDERSTAND HOW THE MEETING FUNCTIONS. OUR MUNICIPAL CODE ACTUALLY SAYS THAT THE CITY FOLLOWS ROBERT'S RULES, UNLESS THERE IS AN EXCEPTION. HOW ABSTENTIONS ARE COUNTED IS THE ONLY ABSTENTION EXCEPTION I'VE BEEN ABLE TO FIND IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE, AND I THINK AS, AS IS OFTEN THE CASE UP HERE WHEN IT COMES TO THE RECONSIDERATION ITEM, WE WORRY AND STAFF IS CERTAINLY GUILTY OF THIS ABOUT THE 1 IN 1000 INSTANCES TOO OFTEN IF THE COUNCIL IS COMFORTABLE WITH SOMEONE REPEATING A MOTION SO THAT IT COULD BE VOTED ON A SECOND TIME, THAT'S NOT A RECONSIDERATION OF MUNICIPAL AND MUNICIPAL CODE WOULDN'T APPLY TO THAT. BUT WHERE WE DO HAVE RULES OR OPPORTUNITIES TO BE CLEARER IN HOW WE APPLY THEM, MAKING SURE IT'S WRITTEN DOWN SOMEWHERE IS ALSO A GOOD IDEA. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER CHANG, DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING MORE ON IT? DO YOU HAVE A VIEW OR YOU JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. YEAH. I'M ACTUALLY AFTER LISTENING TO THIS, I'M. I'M ACTUALLY IN FAVOR OF THE MOST STRICT USE OF ABSTAINING. SO WE ONLY USE IT EITHER WITH THE WHATEVER'S MORE STRICT, EITHER CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S APPROVAL. WHICH ONE WOULD BE MORE STRICT? THEY SHOULD BE THE SAME. OKAY, SO IF I'M DOING MY JOB RIGHT, I THINK IF WE GO WITH THE MOST STRICT INTERPRETATION, THAT WOULD KIND OF MAKE THE MAYOR'S SCENARIO A MOOT POINT, WHERE YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GO BACK ON YOUR ABSTENTION, BECAUSE YOU SHOULD ONLY BE ABSTAINING IN THAT VERY, VERY SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCE, YOU KNOW, AND SO I, I WOULD ACTUALLY VOTE, I WOULD ACTUALLY WANT US TO GO, YOU KNOW, REDUCE THE USE OF ABSTENTIONS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND TO ADD A LITTLE COLOR TO THAT COUNCIL MEMBER, WHEN YOU HAVE A LEGAL CONFLICT AND YOU HAVE TO RECUSE YOURSELF, YOU LEAVE THE DAIS PRIOR TO THE STAFF PRESENTATION. YOU DON'T PARTICIPATE IN THE DEBATE. IT'S VERY DIFFERENT THAN AN ABSTENTION WHERE YOU WOULD RECEIVE THE PRESENTATION. YOU COULD ENGAGE IN DEBATE AND EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION AND IDEAS WITH OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND THEN JUST NOT PRESS A YES OR GREEN BUTTON. YEAH, YEAH. IT'S IMPORTANT TO I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT. IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP THAT DISTINCTION. AS I HAD SAID, ABSTENTION VERSUS DISQUALIFICATION.

DISQUALIFICATION. THERE'S NO OPTION. ABSTENTION. YOU GENERALLY HAVE AN OPTION. AND I WAS ACTUALLY READING ABOUT THIS THE OTHER DAY. THERE ARE A LOT OF SCENARIOS BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF ATTENTION GIVEN CITIES ARE ARE REQUESTED TO TAKE A POSITION ON NATIONAL OR

[00:40:01]

INTERNATIONAL ISSUES, AND SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE FELT UNCOMFORTABLE. AND SO THERE'S GOOD REASON TO NOT NECESSARILY WANT TO VOTE. AND THAT'S ABSTENTION. SO I'M GLAD YOUR CITY MANAGER EMPHASIZED THAT. YEAH, THAT'S ACTUALLY WHAT I WAS GOING TO MENTION IS IT HASN'T HAPPENED MUCH HERE IN THE PAST FEW YEARS, BUT IN SOME CITIES, THERE'S A LOT OF WE WANT YOU TO PASS THIS RESOLUTION ON THIS WAR IN A FAR OFF COUNTRY. AND MY PERSONAL VIEW IS THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN. I JUST I WANT TO KEEP THE FOCUS ON LOCAL ISSUES. SO THAT'S THE MAIN REASON THAT I'VE SEEN IT COME UP. I THINK IN SOME CITIES, PARTICULARLY WITH YOUR CURRENT AGENDA, HOUSING POLICY, THAT LETS TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, ADD CLOSE TO ANYTHING TO THE COUNCIL AGENDA. YOU WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING AS CITY BUSINESS FOCUSED AS THE BUDGET OR A CONTRACT OR A PARKS PROJECT.

WELL, I THINK MAYBE I'LL JUST MAKE A MOTION AND SEE HOW IT GOES. SO IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE REQUESTING DIRECTION TO COME BACK TO US, PERHAPS WITH A CHANGE TO AN ORDINANCE. AND SO I'D SUGGEST THAT WE FOLLOW ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER PLUS CLARIFY THE OPPORTUNITY FOR RECONSIDERATION BY AN ABSTENTION. I THINK THAT SEEMED TO BE WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY SUGGESTED IN TERMS OF IT MAKE SENSE TO FOLLOW AN EXISTING BODY OF WORK, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO CLARIFY HOW YOU TREAT THIS SITUATION. I JUST IN EXISTING LAW, YOU DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A RIGHT TO RECONSIDER, TO ASK FOR RECONSIDERATION IF YOU ABSTAIN. SO IF THAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE COUNCIL, MY SUGGESTION WAS TO ACTUALLY PUT IT IN YOUR CODE. YEAH. SO THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION. BUT SO THAT'S IS THAT A DO YOU NEED A MOTION AND A VOTE FROM US OR TO DIRECT STAFF TO, TO BRING IT BACK. YEAH. AND I THINK I NEED A LITTLE MORE CLARITY ON THE RECONSIDERATION PORTION OF IT. SO. MR. MAYOR, DO YOU WOULD IF A VOTE WERE IT PASSED THREE THREE YES VOTES, ONE NO VOTE, ONE ABSTENTION. COULD THE PERSON WHO ABSTAINED ASKED TO RECONSIDER IT? YEAH, I CONTEMPLATED THAT, BUT SURE, MY WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT? WELL, I DON'T THINK THERE WOULD BE A POINT, BUT I, I MEAN, IF YOU WANT TO WRITE IT SO THAT IT'S ONLY AN ABSTENTION CAN RECONSIDER IT FOR A TIE SO THAT THAT'S WHERE WE GET INTO THAT'S NOT RECONSIDERATION. AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M I'M STUCK. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A MOTION THAT FAILED BECAUSE IT WAS A221 IS THE IDEA THAT YOU THAT'S PART OF YOUR MOTION THAT THE PERSON WHO ABSTAINED FROM THAT COULD THEN MAKE THAT IDENTICAL MOTION AGAIN AND ASK FOR IT TO BE VOTED ON A SECOND TIME. YEAH. OKAY.

AND BECAUSE OTHERWISE BECAUSE THAT COULD JUST BE DONE AT THE NEXT MEETING. IT WOULD BE TWO MEETINGS AWAY. BUT SURE. YEAH. OKAY. AND THEN IF, IF IT PASSED, YOU'RE FINE. IF SOMEBODY ELSE ABSTAINED AND IT I'M JUST SORT OF PLAYING THIS ALL THE WAY OUT I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED A RULE OR FRED, HOW WOULD WE WRITE A RULE ABOUT SOMEONE WHO ABSTAINED FROM VOTING ON A MOTION, MAKING THE IDENTICAL MOTION AGAIN, OR CAN THEY ALREADY DO THAT? WELL, CAN I SUGGEST JUST A SECTION G WE HAVE. RIGHT. IT SAYS THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION CAN BE MADE BY ONE OF THE PREVAILING SIDE. I WOULD THINK WE COULD ADD IN ONE OF THE PREVAILING SIDE, OR A COUNCIL MEMBER WHO ABSTAINED IN A TWO, TWO, ONE VOTE. RIGHT. THAT'S HOW I UNDERSTAND THE REQUEST. NO, SIR. I'M NOT. I'M SORRY FOR HOW DIFFICULT THIS IS PROVING. SO WE HAVE A WE HAVE A TWO, TWO, ONE AND THEN THERE'S A SECOND MOTION THAT'S NOT THE SAME ONE AS THE FIRST ONE. I THE EXAMPLE I ALWAYS USE IS STAFF RECOMMENDS YOU PAINT CITY HALL PINK AND IT TIES UP TWO TWO, ONE. A COUNCIL MEMBER THEN SAYS I WANT TO PAINT CITY HALL BLUE AND THAT IS GOING TO PASS. I'M NOT SURE HOW WE RECONCILE RECONSIDERATION WITH SOMEONE SAYING NO. I WANT TO MAKE THE MOTION TO PAINT IT PINK AGAIN. I SEE WHY YOU'RE HUNG UP. I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ASKING, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING, WHICH IS A NORMAL PROCESS, IS A MOTION FAILS ON A TWO, TWO, ONE VOTE. A COUNCIL MEMBER, WHETHER YOU ABSTAIN OR DIDN'T, ABSTAINED OR VOTED IN. EITHER WAY, YOU COULD ALWAYS SAY, YOU KNOW, THAT FAILED. SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION. SO

[00:45:02]

TECHNICALLY THE ITEM IS DONE AND YOU MOVE ON TO THE NEXT. BUT THE RULES ARE OPEN TO SOMEONE SAYING, WELL, IT DIDN'T PASS. SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION. YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE TO CHANGE THE RULES FOR THAT. YEAH, FOR AN ALTERNATIVE, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT. BUT FOR THE SAME MOTION, WE WOULD NEED TO CHANGE THE RULE. RIGHT. AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'M SUGGESTING. IF IT'S THE SAME MOTION AND YOU'VE NOW MOVED ON. SO LIKE NOW IT WAS ITEM B, YOU'RE NOW ON ITEM G OR SOMETHING. YOU'D HAVE TO SAY I ACTUALLY, MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER MY VOTE ON THE PRIOR ITEM. SO YOU'RE SORT OF BRINGING IT BACK LIVE, BUT WHILE THE ITEM IS LIVE, I THINK I'M GETTING TO YOUR CITY MANAGER'S POINT. YOU COULD SAY, WELL, THAT FAILED. I'D LIKE TO MAKE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION IN THE HOPES THAT IT WILL PASS AND THAT YOU CAN DO ANYWAY, RIGHT? YEAH, YOU CAN DO ANYWAY THAT YOU DON'T NEED A RULE FOR.

BUT WHAT I'M SAYING, IF YOU'VE NOW MOVED ON TO ANOTHER ITEM TO BRING IT BACK LIVE, YOU NEED THAT CLARIFICATION. AND THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTOOD. YOU REQUESTING MAYOR. YEAH. OKAY.

YOU CAN YOU KNOW WHAT TO WRITE? I THINK SO, OKAY, SO THAT WAS MY MOTION ANYWAY. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S THE CITY ATTORNEY UNDERSTANDS THAT WE NEED A MOTION. OR IS IT JUST AN INSTRUCTION? AND. YEAH, LET'S HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DIRECT STAFF AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO COME BACK WITH THIS. WE'LL GET TO SEE IT AND DISCUSS IT NEXT TIME. BUT AT LEAST NOW WE'LL HAVE IT ON PAPER IN FRONT OF US. THE HEAVY LIFT. ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP IS NO VOTE ON THAT MOTION. YEAH. OH, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE. ALL RIGHT, BE SURE TO LOCK IN YOUR VOTES. THAT MOTION CARRIES WITH FOUR YES VOTES AND ONE ABSTENTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHENG. CAN YOU DO THAT? AND OUR GOAL WILL BE TO BRING THAT BACK ON APRIL 28TH. YEAH. NEXT UP IS

[ ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (Three minutes per speaker. The City Council may adjust the time allotted per speaker.) The public may address the City Council on any item within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council. Although Council Members may provide brief responses, the City Council may not discuss nor take action on items that are not on the agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card to address the City Council in-person. Members of the public are encouraged to communicate with the City Council via email at adm@cypressca.org or by calling 714-229-6699.]

OUR SECOND ORAL COMMUNICATIONS PERIOD. I HAVE ONE SPEAKER CARD FROM MEGAN MARTINEZ KING. SHE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY BOB YOUNGSMA. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE WOMEN'S CLUB OF CYPRESS, AND I AM OFFICIALLY IN PERSON, MAKING SURE THAT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE INVITED TO OUR TEA ON APRIL 12TH. IT'S OUR BIGGEST FUNDRAISER, AND IT. THE THEME THIS YEAR IS THE LET IT BE TEA. WE'RE ACTUALLY HAVING A LIVE BEATLES COVER BAND, NOT THE ACTUAL BEATLES, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE GREAT AND I KNOW MAYOR BURKE IS COMING. COUNCIL MEMBER MINIKUS IS COMING AS THEY HAVE IN YEARS PAST. COUNCIL MEMBER PETE DOESN'T HAVE A CHOICE, BUT I JUST WANTED FOR THE NEW FACES. I WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. WE ARE FRIENDLY. WE DON'T, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T BITE. USUALLY. IT'S A GREAT TIME. THE LOVELY AND TALENTED MARY ELLEN YORK IS GOING TO BE THE MASTER OF CEREMONIES. WE HAVE BASKET RAFFLES, SILENT AUCTION. WE HAVE A DOOR KEY PRIZE WHERE YOU MIGHT WIN $250. IT'S LIKE I SAID, THE APRIL 12TH, 11 TO 3, RIGHT IN THE COMMUNITY CENTER. IT'S GOING TO BE A GREAT TIME. SO IT'S OUR BIGGEST FUNDRAISER. WE IT FUNDS A LOT OF OUR SCHOLARSHIPS AND A LOT OF OUR PROGRAMS THAT WE DO. A LOT OF OUR PROJECTS, SUCH AS CHAMPION BASEBALL, THAT JUST STARTED UP AGAIN, A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE DO. SO I HOPE IF YOU NEED TICKETS, BONNIE'S THE GAL TO SEE COUNCIL MEMBER PETE. AND IF ANYBODY'S WATCHING GINGER, I KNOW YOU'RE OUT THERE SOMEWHERE AND YOU HAVE FRIENDS THAT WANT TO COME. IT IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. SO LOOK US UP ON THE ONLINE AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. I'LL BE THERE. BOB YOUNGSMA FOLLOWED BY BROOKE NAVARETTE. WELL, GOOD EVENING, BOB D'ANGELO, RESIDENT OF CYPRESS. BEFORE I START, I WANT TO ASK EVERYBODY WHEN OUR POLICE CHIEF BRINGS UP THE DEATH OF A POLICE OFFICER, WE GIVE HIM A MOMENT OF SILENCE, BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE'VE REALLY SKIPPING ON THAT SINCE WE KNOW THAT'S WHY HE'S STILL STAYING HERE. KIND OF IMPORTANT TO TAKE CARE OF OUR POLICE OFFICERS. BUT ALSO, I WANT TO BRING UP SOME PEOPLE, COME UP HERE AND SPEAK, AND I TRY TO DO AS MUCH AS I CAN ABOUT KNOWING WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. BUT I KNOW I HEAR PEOPLE COMING UP SOMETIMES AND I REALLY DON'T. AND THAT'S OKAY TOO. AND WE'RE ALL ALLOWED TO SPEAK AND WE'RE ALL ALLOWED TO BE WRONG AND RIGHT, YOU KNOW? AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SUPPOSED TO TALK. BUT SOME THINGS THAT I NOTICED, I GOT TO READ THE EVENT NEWS, I GUESS I BECAME A PUBLIC CELEBRITY BECAUSE IT'S A PRETTY GOOD PAGE ON ME. AND IT WAS PRETTY MUCH RIGHT ON SPOT ON. I KNOW THAT

[00:50:05]

WE'RE GOING TO TELL ME THAT WE MAKE MATT THE MAYOR, YOU KNOW, PRO TEM. WELL, HOW DOES THAT WORK? DOES HE KNOW THAT INFORMATION EVERY DAY THAT'S GOING ON? I MEAN, DOES HE HE DOESN'T. YOU KNOW, IF AN EMERGENCY COMES UP, I'M TELLING YOU AGAIN, SOMETHING GOES WRONG.

GOD HELP US IF IT HAPPENS. WE DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN. BUT THIS CITY CAN BE IN A LOT OF TROUBLE. EVEN THOUGH EVERYBODY SITS THERE AND SAY, WE'RE IN THE GREATEST SHAPE IN THE WORLD.

YEAH, WE GOT A LOT OF MONEY IN THE BANK. BANK WASN'T MADE BECAUSE OUR MANAGER, THE BANK WAS MADE BECAUSE OF OTHER ISSUES THAT WERE ALREADY IN THE GAME. HE DIDN'T START ALL THOSE BUSINESSES OUT THERE THAT EVERYBODY TALKS ABOUT. GO OUT AND LOOK AT ALL THOSE BUILDINGS OUT THERE THAT WERE HERE WAY BEFORE HE CAME HERE. AND I'VE HEARD FROM MANY, MANY TIMES I GOT RESIDENTS THAT HAVE SAID HE'S BEEN RUDE, AND I KNOW FOR A FACT, BECAUSE HE'S BEEN RUDE TO ME, I'VE WATCHED HIM BE RUDE TO A COUNCIL MEMBER AND NOT ANYBODY HAS DONE ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE OUT OF LINE POSITIONS. WHEN HE DOES THAT, IT'S YOUR JOB TO CONTROL HIM. HE WORKS FOR YOU.

YOU DON'T WORK FOR HIM. I THINK HE COST TOO MUCH FOR THE CITY. I THINK WE CAN HIRE A PRO TEMP AND A MANAGER FOR THE SAME. WE PAY FOR HIM AND ANYBODY THAT GETS TO REDO A CONTRACT THE COUNCIL DID APPROVE, THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SHOT. YOU KNOW, HE GETS A FULL YEAR OF PAY IF YOU DECIDE TO GET RID OF HIM. REALLY NOBODY GETS THAT. AND IT'S UNREAL. I MEAN, I SAW THAT AND I COULDN'T BELIEVE HE CAME IN AND GOT HIS CONTRACT EXTENDED BEFORE IT WAS EVER DUE. YOU GAVE HIM A RAISE. YOU GAVE HIM A RIGHTS FOR A LOT OF STUFF, AND WE EVEN GET TO PAY TO SEND HIM TO THE GIRLS, THE WOMEN'S CLUB. YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S WRONG. IF HE WORKS FOR THE CITY, HE WORKS FOR THE CITY. IF WE NEED INFORMATION FROM THE WOMEN'S CLUB, THEY'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO GIVE IT TO US. AND IF THEY WANT TO GIVE REPRESENTATION, THEY CAN COME ON IN HERE EVERY NIGHT, EVERY TIME THERE'S A MEETING AND TELL US WHAT THEY'D LIKE US TO KNOW. AND WE DO HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT'S IN THAT CLUB. SO, YOU KNOW, SHE'S MORE THAN HAPPY TO TELL US ANYTHING THAT'S COMING UP. SO I REALLY THINK YOU NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON. WE CAN'T BE RUDE TO OUR RESIDENTS.

WE CAN'T BE RUDE TO OUR EMPLOYEES, AND WE CAN'T BE RUDE TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND I KNOW HE'S DONE THAT, AND WE NEED TO LOOK AT IT. THANK YOU. BROOKE NAVARRETTE, FOLLOWED BY ROBERT WINTER. HI. MY NAME IS BROOKE NAVARRETTE AND I'M A RESIDENT OF CYPRESS. I'M. GOOD EVENING, HONORABLE COUNCIL. I'M I'M HERE TONIGHT ON SOMETHING A LITTLE DIFFERENT. I'M JUST SIMPLY HERE TO THANK MAYOR PRO TEM MEDRANO. I TOOK A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF HIS TIME AT TWO OF HIS CHATS, AND I THINK I MADE HIM LATE FOR A MEETING ON ONE OF THEM. SO I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU FOR PUTTING UP WITH ME AND THE OTHER RESIDENTS THAT SHOWED UP TO SPEAK. AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE CITY MANAGER, I GUESS THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE PERSON TO ASK. IF SOMEWHERE IN THE CITY WEBSITE, WE CAN PUT SOMETHING THAT HAS THESE COUNCIL CHATS, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM, THAT THEY ANNOUNCE, LIKE TOWARDS THE END OF THE COUNCIL MEETING. SO OTHER RESIDENTS JUST HAVE ONE PLACE TO GO. THEY CAN GO ON THE CITY WEBSITE AND SEE WHEN THE NEXT ONES ARE UPCOMING, BECAUSE I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T TUNE IN OR LISTEN TO THE COUNCIL MEETINGS AND THEY MIGHT NOT BE AWARE OF THOSE. SO MAYBE THAT'S LIKE A STANDARD PLACE THEY CAN GO. AND THEN I WOULD ALSO RECOMMEND AND DON'T TAKE MY LANGUAGE I'M NOT GOOD. BUT SOMEHOW WORDSMITH AND LET RESIDENTS KNOW THAT THEY CAN TALK TO ANY COUNCIL MEMBER, NOT JUST THEIR DISTRICT COUNCIL MEMBER. BECAUSE I DON'T LIVE IN LEO'S DISTRICT. HE DID TALK TO ME BECAUSE THEY REPRESENT ALL.

SO THAT'S JUST A THOUGHT. AND THANK YOU AGAIN. AND TO THE LAST RESIDENT THAT SPOKE ABOUT HIRING AN ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, I I'M JUST GOING TO SAY SOMETHING SHORT. NOT ALL IS THAT IT SEEMS WITH OTHER CITIES. I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A NEIGHBORING CITY THAT HAS A CITY MANAGER, AN ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, AND A DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, AND THEY HAVE SIGNIFICANT ISSUES. AND THEIR CITY MANAGER AND ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER ARE LEAVING. THAT'S KIND OF BEEN MADE PUBLIC, BUT IT WILL OFFICIALLY BE OUT APRIL 1ST. YOU CAN HIRE AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU WANT AND PAY THEM WHAT YOU WANT, BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT PEOPLE, YOU WON'T GET THE RIGHT OUTCOME. SO THAT'S JUST ANOTHER LINE OF THINKING. BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND GOOD NIGHT. NEXT UP, ROBERT WINTER. THANK YOU. SO MY FIRST CITY COUNCIL MEETING THAT I ATTENDED HERE, I THINK IT WAS TWO MEETINGS AGO WHERE WHERE I FIRST WITNESSED THE ABSTENTION COUNTING AS A YES VOTE. AND I LEFT KIND OF SHAKING MY HEAD. I THOUGHT, WHAT UNIVERSE IS THIS, RIGHT? IT DIDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME. SO

[00:55:01]

THE DISCUSSION HERE IS GOOD. I THINK THE DISCUSSION ABOUT HAVING THE VOTE FIRST, BEING ABLE TO ABSTAIN IS A GOOD THING BECAUSE THERE ARE CONFLICTS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. BUT I THINK YOU ALL ARE MAKING IT TOO COMPLICATED. THERE ARE FIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS HERE. IF SOMEONE ABSTAINS, THEY HAVE THE SAME INFORMATION. THEY COME INTO THE MEETING WITH THE SAME INFORMATION THAT THE OTHER FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS CAME IN WITH. SO HAVING THEM RECONSIDER, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY SHOULD RECONSIDER AT THAT POINT. THE REASON THEY'RE ABSTAINING TO KIND OF LEAN MORE TO THE MORE STRICT SIDE OF THINGS IS BECAUSE THERE'S A PERCEIVED CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR A LEGAL CONFLICT, CONFLICT OF INTEREST, OR A MORAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND THAT'S FINE. BUT DURING THAT DISCUSSION THAT CAN'T JUST TURN INTO, WELL, I'M GOING TO LEAN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER AS FAR AS AS FAR AS VOTING FOR AN ABSTENTION AND WHETHER THEY CAN JUST DO THAT TO VOTE YES OR VOTE NO. I THINK THAT NOW THAT WE'RE DISTRICT DISTRICTED, THAT THEY'RE ACCOUNTABLE TO THEIR DISTRICT, SO THAT PROBLEM WILL SOLVE ITSELF. IF SOMEBODY IS CONSTANTLY ABSTAINING BECAUSE THEY JUST DON'T KNOW, OR IF THEY'RE USING IT INCORRECTLY, THAT PROBLEM WILL SOLVE ITSELF. THAT'S ALL. THANKS. HEY, NOBODY ELSE WISHES TO ADDRESS THE

[ COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS FROM CITY-AFFILIATED BOARDS AND COMMITTEES AND REMARKS Since the February 24 City Council meeting, the following regular meetings have occurred: Joint Forces Training Base Regional Military Affairs Committee - February 25 Economic Development Ad Hoc Subcommittee - February 25 Orange County Sanitation District - February 26 League of California Cities Orange County Division - March 13 Orange County Mosquito and Vector Control District - March 20]

COUNCIL. WE'LL MOVE ON TO COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS FROM THE CITY AFFILIATED BOARDS AND COMMITTEES, AND REMARKS. COUNCIL MEMBER PETE, WILL YOU START US OFF, PLEASE? YES, I WILL, THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN A BUSY TWO WEEKS, ACTUALLY. I ATTENDED A ASSEMBLYWOMAN QUIRK-SILVA AS ELECTED WOMEN ROUND TABLE. THERE WERE ABOUT 1520 OF US THAT GOT TOGETHER AND SHE SHE DID A NICE JOB OF KIND OF SHARING HER EXPERIENCE AND SOME RECOMMENDATIONS, ESPECIALLY FOR THE NEWLY ELECTED. SO IT WAS A IT WAS A GOOD NETWORKING. I ATTENDED THE MATT WARD EXPLORER FUNDRAISER. VERY WELL DONE, SUPPORTED BY PO AND ON ALL OF OUR POLICE AND MANY OTHER POLICE DEPARTMENTS REALLY SUPPORTING THE EXPLORER PROGRAM IN HONOR OF MATT WARD. SO IT WAS FUN AND WE GOT A FUN GIFT AS A RESULT. WE PAID FOR IT. BUT NICE GIFT. OCFA OPEN HOUSE FUND. GREAT DAY, VERY WELL ATTENDED SO THEY HAD LOTS OF FUN THERE AND THEY COULD NOT JUST FYI, THEY COULD NOT BRING IN THEIR NEW HELICOPTER BECAUSE QUITE HONESTLY, IT'S TOO LARGE AND IT IS TOO MUCH POWER AND WOULD CAUSE DAMAGE TO BUILDINGS IN THE AREA. SO WE'LL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT ANOTHER WAY TO BE ABLE TO GO SEE IT. CYPRESS COLLEGE AMERICANA. CONGRATULATIONS TO ROB JOHNSON.

VERY NICE, VERY NICE AWARD. HE AND HIS FAMILY ALL WERE THERE. SO IT WAS A VERY WELL ATTENDED EVENT. BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB, CENTRAL, ORANGE COAST HAD A I'LL CALL IT AN EXCELLENCE OF WOMEN AND IT WAS VERY WELL ATTENDED AND IT WAS HAD SOME VERY INSPIRING YOUTH THAT CAME IN AND SPOKE ABOUT HOW THEIR LIFE CHANGED AS A RESULT OF THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB AND THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE DOING TODAY. SO IT WAS JUST REALLY INSPIRED. WE HAD AN AD HOC MEETING FOR THE GETTING PREP FOR THE COMMUNITY FESTIVAL DISCUSSION. WE HAD A TOUR AND VISIT OF AMAZON. SO MY FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBER. LEO MEDRANO AND OUR CITY MANAGER AND A FEW OTHERS. SO IT WAS A FUN DAY TO GO SEE WHAT AMAZON DOES LOCALLY. SO WE NOW KNOW WHAT NUMBER TO LOOK FOR ON THE PACKAGE. AND WE KNOW WHERE IT CAME FROM. SO IT'S AMAZING. I ATTENDED A OC SAN SPECIAL MEETING THAT THEY HAD ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN OF WHERE THEY'RE GOING, ATTENDED AN EAGLE SCOUT COURT OF HONOR CEREMONY. THERE WERE CONGRATULATIONS TO THE FIVE. I THINK THERE'S ALL SENIORS IN HIGH SCHOOL THAT ACHIEVED THEIR EAGLE SCOUT AND VERY WELL ATTENDED. IT WAS THIS WAS SOMETHING PUT ON BY THEIR PARENTS AND SUPPORTED BY LA PALMA, BUENA PARK AND CYPRESS.

AND I'M HOPING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE TWO CYPRESS YOUNG MEN COME INTO ONE OF OUR COUNCIL MEETINGS BEFORE THEY DEPART TO COLLEGE, AND EVERYTHING TO HONOR THEM ON THEIR EAGLE SCOUT. AND THEN I ALSO ATTENDED THE PARKS AND REC COMMISSION MEETING, AND IT WAS GOOD TO KIND OF HEAR THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE AD HOC THAT IS WORKING WITH THE COMMISSION. I DO HAVE JUST A GENERAL COMMENT THAT I THINK THERE'S STILL WAYS THAT CAN BE DONE BY DIRECTING THE COMMISSION TO DO STUFF WITHOUT THE AD HOC, BUT THAT'S LET'S SEE WHERE IT GOES OUT. SO ANYWAY, AND THAT CONCLUDES MY

[01:00:04]