►
From YouTube: Charter Review meeting 07 15 2021
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Good
afternoon,
everyone
I'm
going
to
ask
us
to
please
take
our
seats,
so
we
can
get
started
in
a
timely
fashion.
Everybody
can
get
back
to
equally
as
important
things
as
this
commission
meeting
thanks
everybody
for
being
here,
and
I
want
to
officially
welcome
us
to
the
july
meeting
of
the
charter
review
commission
we're
in
the
dead
center
of
summer
about
to
close
summer
up
shortly,
and
so
we've
got
important
work
to
do
in
these
next
few
months.
So
thank
you
for
being
here.
A
Thank
you
for
your
time,
your
timeliness
and
your
attention,
because
we've
got
some
committees
that
will
be
reporting
today.
I
hope
that
the
representatives
will
be
here,
but
I
don't
think
it's
any
need
for
us
to
wait.
I
think
we
can
go
ahead
with
the
business
as
printed
on
the
agenda.
So
with
that,
I
will
turn
it
over
for
roll
call.
B
Mike
baker,
tyson
begley
willie,
bellfield,
vivian,
creighton,
bishop
allison,
dow
james
elder
pace,
halter
norman
hartman,
ken
henson
dominic
perkins,
julio
portillo,
carmen
rice
ben
richardson,
oz,
roberts,
gwen
ruff,
alton,
russell
carter,
chandlemeyer
john
shinkle,
melvin,
tanner,
jr,
audrey
tillman.
Here
chris
whiteman,
bradley
williams,
christopher
woodruff,.
A
And
I
see
mrs
bishop
entering
as
well.
Did
anyone
else
not
hear
their
name
called?
A
The
first
thing
that
I
thought
was
important
and
timely
for
us
to
do
is
since
we
last
met,
we
have
lost
a
member
of
our
charter
review
commission,
and
that
is
mr
pete
robinson,
who
has
been
a
long
time,
community
servant
and
attorney,
and
just
wonderful
citizen
of
columbus
in
this
area
who
has
passed
away.
A
C
I
think
many
of
you
in
this
room
probably
knew
pete,
but
I
think
probably
everything
that's
taken
place
in
this
community
since
1985
when
he
was
elected
to
the
legislature.
C
He
had
come
to
maybe
one
meeting
and
his
last
meeting
was
he
was
in
the
hospital
and
he
listened
in
by
phone
because
it
was
so
important
to
him
and
he
had
hoped
to
get
out
of
the
hospital
and
hope
to
come
back,
because
he
thought
that
this
was
an
important
part
of
what
was
going
to
take
place
in
columbus
for
the
next
10
years
and
he
was
interested
in
helping
in
any
way
he
could
so
we're
going
to
miss
pete,
but
but
the
the
ideas
that
he
had
and
his
love
of
columbus
is
still
with.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
So
much
ken.
Thank
you
all
right,
so
you
all
have
received
yesterday.
I
believe
a
copy
of
the
minutes
for
the
june
meeting.
Has
everyone
had
a
chance
to
review
them,
and
if
so,
I
will
entertain
a
motion
to
approve.
If
there
are
no
corrections
or
additions
got
to
move
got.
Do
we
have
a
second
all
right?
Any
opposed
not.
A
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Just
a
quick
update
for
group
one
our
subcommittee
chair,
tyson
beckley,
can't
make
it
today,
unfortunately,
but
I
wanted
me
to
make
sure
everyone's
aware
of
the
updates
that
we
are
in
discussion
with
the
finance
group.
We've
pushed
that
meeting
supposed
to
be
this
week
to
next
week
and
we
do
have
some
draft
legal
language
that
we're
working
with
with
lucy
that
we're
working
on
so
for
our
existing
suggestions
and
we'll
be
reviewing
that
at
our
next
meeting
as
well.
A
E
Yes,
so
we
were
one
of
the
groups
that
went
last
month,
nothing
substantive.
Today,
we
will
be
working
on
one
action
item
as
pertains
to
looking
at
the
officers
and
the
auspices.
Currently
beyond
that.
We
have
two
actions
that
we
want
to
present
when
the
when
the
body
is
ready
for
that,
but
we
are
moving
and
making
progress.
A
A
Okay,
all
right:
well,
we
can
always
come
back
if
you'll
give
me
a
nod
and
let
me
know
whether
they
arrived
okay.
So
what
we're
going
to
do
today
is
what
we
did
last
month
after
the
updates
from
the
groups
who
are
not
presenting
we're
going
to
hear
from
groups
that
are
prepared
to
present
their
recommendations.
A
It
may
not
be
their
final
recommendations,
but
at
this
point
the
recommendations
that
they
do
have
it's,
in
my
opinion,
time
to
start
airing
those.
So
we
can
move
this
along
with
some
some
efficiency.
A
So
with
that
today
we
have
group
two
who
definitely
is
planning
to
present
in
group
four
who's
tentative
but
prepared,
attentive
but
prepared.
Okay,
love
it
all
right.
So
group
two!
If
there
is
a
representative
of
group
two,
yes,
sir,
please
come
up.
F
Yes,
ma'am
we're
glad
to
be
here.
First
is
group
two
is
besides
me:
gwen
ruff,
willie,
bellfield,
dominic,
perkins
and
vivian
bishop
is
our
group
too,
and
we
have
been
working
hard.
We've
had
some
for
lack
of
a
better
way,
to
put
it
very
lively
discussions,
and
but
we've
all
been
able
to
come
up
with
some
things
that
we
think
we
need
to
present
to
to
the
full
commission.
F
Our
part
is
in
this
is:
is
article
3,
which
is
the
legislative
branch,
and
the
first
thing
that
we
had
is
a
section
3-100
which
is
really
and
truly
not
addressed
in
the
council,
part
itself
when
it
pertains
to
the
council.
So
one
of
our
and
our
one
of
our
very
strong
things
that
we
think
needs
to
come
to
the
full
commission
is
that
we
think
that
the
term
limits
should
be
in
full
discussion
right
now.
F
The
charter
does
not
include
any
language
for
term
limits,
so
our
recommendation
is
that
that
we
cross-reference
any
recommendation
as
far
as
redistricting
that
may
come
about,
but
that
we
say
that
that
we
change
the
charter,
that
to
any
counselor
who
is
elected
for
two
consecutive
four-year
terms
shall
not
be
eligible
to
be
elected
for
this
succeeding
term.
F
F
Yes,
yes,
okay,
we
in
fact
we
really
and
truly
never
did
vote
to
see
who
was
far
and
who
was
against.
We
just
by
consensus,
was
decided
and
figured
that
we
wanted
that
issue
to
come
to
the
full
commission
and.
A
F
That's
why
we're
all
here?
It
is
that's
true,
that's
right,
but
we
did.
We
do
have
a
a
good
group
and
everybody
is
very
set
and
we
we
did
a
lot
of
research
and
each
one
of
us
did
research
separately
to
see
that
that
we
were
getting
the
right
information
among
ourselves.
So
I'm
sure
that
that
information
will
come
forward
at
the
proper
time
when
it's
discussed
as
one
of
the
issues
that
we
think
should
be
considered
by
the
full
commission.
F
G
F
All
right,
the
next
one
is:
let's
see
we
just
thought
that
this
is
a
3-10
which
is
the
powers
of
council,
and
we
had
some
discussion
with
city
attorney
about
this
and
and
we
felt
like,
and
what
this
audience
ordinance
or
this
part
does
it
clarifies
what
the
council
may
or
may
not
do
by
ordinance,
create
change
or
alter,
and
all
we
wanted
to
put
in
there
was
that
we
should
have
to
add
in
there
process
for
public
notification,
and
it's
not
that's
not
something
that
we
thought
was
drastic
or
anything,
but
but
we
think
that
that
the
public
should
have
better
access
to
the
notification
than
maybe
it
was
exists
right
now
and
that's
that's
kind
of
a
situation,
that's
this
kind
of
might
fall
into
housekeeping,
but
but
we,
but
we
did
discuss
that
at
length.
F
Okay,
the
other
thing
that
we
got
to
was
was
down
here
on
3-205,
which
we
we
figured
was,
and
that's
a
big
word
for
me
qualification.
What
is
that
word
codification?
I
knew
I'd,
get
it
right.
F
Good
and
the
printing
of
ordinances-
and
we
thought
that
that
the
that
the
language
should
be
that
to
publish
an
ordinance
and
make
available
to
the
public
and
make
sure
that
we're
talking
about
on
any
so
maybe
not
social
media,
but
electronic
media
instead
of
just
worrying
worrying
about
just
the
newspaper,
and
that
also
could
be
a
housekeeping
situation.
But
we
thought
that
was
important
because
it's
it
does.
F
We
think
we
should
remove
the
part
that
says:
there's
a
limitation
of
of
publishing
in
only
one
newspaper
with
the
largest
circulation
and
that's.
We
thought
that
should
be
a
factor
in
there
that
it
should
be
electronically
and
also
there
is,
in
that
same
part,
there's
a
99
limitation
for
publishing
the
full
text.
F
And
our
suggestion
is
that
that
that
that
99
dollars
be
removed.
F
All
right,
we
really
didn't
come
up
with
a
conclusion
on
this
one,
but
but
the
charter
does
not
address
the
topic
of
ethics
and
a
conflict
of
interest
and
and
we're
not
we're
working
on
that.
We
just
hadn't
come
up
with
exactly
what
we
need
to
do.
We're
going
to
work
with
our
city
attorney
to
make
sure
that
we
get
that
right.
F
One
of
the
things
that
we
that
we
found
in
in
this
part
is
that
the
legislative
part
of
this
charter
deals
with
the
council.
The
council,
which
is
10
members,
does
not
deal
to
hardly
any
way
shape,
form
or
fashion
with
individual
counsel,
elected
members
or
elected
positions,
so
that
was
kind
of
what
we
thought
that
had
something
to
do
with
that
that
we
should
have
something
about
ethics.
H
H
F
Right:
okay,
thank
you
all
right.
The
next
one
that
we
thought
was
pretty
important
is
3-301,
which
is
investigations
to
be
public
right
now.
The
charter
reads
that
all
inquiries
and
investigations
conducted
by
the
council
shall
be
open
to
the
public,
except
when,
in
the
open
opinion
of
the
council
executive
sessions
are
required.
F
So
we
thought
that
that
to
be
transparent
and
and
open
that
we
should
remove
the
opinion
of
the
council,
so
it
wouldn't
be
so
the
general
public
would
know
what
is
the
issue
and
why
it's
being
moved
to
executive.
F
Session,
that's
we
just
thought
that
was
a
kind
of
a
transparency
thing
that
should
be
in
there.
So
we
recommend
that.
H
I
H
F
I
think
the
way
we
got
to
that
was
that,
like,
if
the
council
is
in,
is
in
regular
session
and
all
of
a
sudden
or
whatever,
not
all
of
a
sudden,
but
they
just
decide.
We
want
to
go
in
executive
session
and
they
don't
explain
what
the
issue
may
be.
We
just
think
that
the
issue
should
be
made
public,
not
the
details
of
just
the
issue
of
personnel
or
whatever,
and
we
you
know,
but
we
just
think
it
should
be.
F
That's
that's
the
only
reason
we
thought
that
would
be
important
all
right
now,
the
the
last
thing
that
we
thought
was-
and
this
is
another
one
of
those
things
that
we
had
very
lively
discussion
about
and-
and
we
did
not
all
agree,
but
we
did
agree
that
it
should
be
discussed
and
should
be
handled
by
the
full
commission
is
and
we're
not
exactly
sure
when
it
happened.
But
at
some
point
well
at
the
beginning
of
a
consolidated
government,
council
and
mayor
were
partisan
officials.
F
They
they
were
party
or
whatever,
and
then
at
some
point
we
became.
We
voted.
I
guess
through
the
charter
or
something
where
the
the
council
and
the
mayor
are
nonpartisan,
so
we
this
is
another
one,
that
this
is
three
dash.
I
guess
it's
in
3-301,
no,
it's
not
because
it's
not
in
there
at
all.
F
I
don't
think
so
we,
but
we
we
thought
that
that
the
mayor
and
the
council
of
the
council
is
who
we
are
dealing
with,
that
the
council
members
should
declare
themselves
a
party
and
not
be
nonpartisan
anymore.
Now,
that's
another
one
that
we
did
not
agree
with
all
of
us,
but
but
it
was
a
consensus
of
our
group
that
we
bring
it
to
the
full
commission
for
consideration.
B
A
Is
section
six
within
the
responsibility
of
working
group?
Two
group:
five:
okay,.
A
F
J
A
B
F
A
A
Was
not
considering
the
same
recommendation,
but
now
you're
completely
in
order.
F
In
georgia,
yes,
the
governor
governor,
has
term
limits
and
and
there's
also
some
some
some
cities
and
counties
that
have
term
limits.
I
don't
have
those
notes,
but
we
did
do
some
research
on
that
to
find
that
there
were
some
that
had
term
limits.
F
There's
some
that
even
had
term
have
term
limits
for
some
elect
some
appointed
positions
like
city
manager,
not
sheriff,
but
city
manager,
police,
chief
fire
chief,
but
but
we
did,
we
did
find
some.
There
was
some.
C
C
H
Yeah,
I
just
you.
J
H
H
H
C
C
The
the
the
cap
I
just
had
to
buy
an
obituary
and
the
the
local
cost
was
I'm
going
to
be
close
on
my
numbers,
maybe
900,
but
to
publish
it
in
the
ajc
was
only
1800.
It's
only
twice
as
much.
F
The
way
we
the
way,
we
read
that
and
we
could
be
an
error
here,
but
but
we
think
that
that
means
that
that
the
the
99
is
is
if
somebody
wants
a
copy
of
what
we're
saying
that
that,
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
gwen
help
me
here
that
we
just
think
that
that
that
the
text
should
be
available
by
the
cleric
on
site
on
the
website
or
or
electronically.
If
somebody
wants
a
copy
of
an
audience.
D
H
I
And-
and
that
was
one
of
the
things
we
looked
at
was
the
cost
of
it
may
be
antiquated
and
no
longer
relevant
and
with
all
due
respect
to
the
ledger,
that
distribution
is
not
what
it
used
to
be,
and
we
felt
that
in
the
interest
of
being
transparent
and
getting
information
out,
we
needed
to
look
at
other
platforms,
okay,
to
ensure
that
we
are
communicating
with
our
constituents
and
we
did
not
want
that
to
be
limited
by
a
99
fee.
If
that
was
no
longer
relevant.
D
H
I
H
If,
if
the
committee
wants,
the
commission
or
committee
can
recommend
that
you
put
it
in
at
least
one
print
media
outlet
and
an
electronic
outlet
in
the
discretion
of
the
clerk
of
council,
so
there's
a
lot
of
ways
you
can
do
it
without
a
cap.
F
I
think
we
we,
I
think
we
said
that
that
an
electronic
version
would
be
with
what
kind
of
we
thought
would
be
prudent
to
make
sure
that
it's
available
to
everybody
that
wants
it.
I
mean.
That's
really
our
main
concern.
J
F
Well
I'll
make
the
two
main
things
that
we
thought
that
were
that
the
commission
needs
to
see
and
do
almost
as
soon
as
we
can
is
a
discussion
about
term
limits
and
going
to
partisan.
Now
we
like,
I
said
we
didn't
all
agree
with
those
two
things,
but
we
thought
they
should
be
considered
by
the
by
the
full
charter.
Commission.
A
No,
I
agree,
and
this
is
the
place
to
have
that
discussion
if
people
have
questions
that
they
just
want
to
give
input
if
they're
vehemently
posed
or
vehemently
in
support
of
this
is
the
time
to
air
that.
F
A
A
We
are,
we
are
tabulating,
I
think
I
explained
this
last
week.
I
don't
think
you
were
able
to
be
here,
but
the
commission
isn't
voting
on
what
to
move
forward
for
the
public
election.
The
working
groups
are
coming
to
the
full
commission
and
giving
their
recommendations
as
to
what
they
think
should
be
on
that
public
election.
A
Our
you
know,
ask
our
questions
and
to
help
these
working
groups
to
clarify,
get
clearer
edit,
add
subtract
to
their
recommendations,
so
that
they'll
be
ready
for
the
final
recommendations
that
we
will
be
offering
as
an
entire
commission
understood.
Is
there
any
confusion
about
that?
So
so
group
number
one
that
presented
last
time.
They
had
several
recommendations
and
a
couple
of
things
that
they
needed
to
go
back
and
tick
and
tie
for
the
final
recommendations,
but
we
had
input.
We
had
questions,
we
had
discussion
about
what
they
put
forward
last
month.
A
They
went
back
and
I'm
sure
that
they're
probably
looking
at
that
fine-tuning
it
based
on
the
input
or
not,
and
they
will
come
back
and
be
asked
at
some
point.
Is
this
your
final
list
of
recommendations
and
at
that
point,
hopefully,
the
entire
commission
has
had
the
opportunity
to
give
input
on
every
single
recommendation
from
every
working
group
and
and
that's
why
to
beat
a
bit
dead
horse
yeah,
I'm
beginning
to
employ
people
about
the
seriousness
of
our
membership
as
commission
members.
A
If
this
group
doesn't
give
their
input
on
those
recommendations,
then
that
won't
be
obtained
before
it
goes
to
the
public.
So
it's
very
important
that
we
be
here
be
present,
be
on
time,
give
our
input,
even
if
our
input
is.
I
think
it's
perfect,
as
is
that's
exactly
why
we
sit
here
in
these
seats
for
the
input
one.
F
Of
the
things
that
that
that
we
wanted
to
be
sure
that
everybody
understood,
for
example,
on
our
recommendation
from
our
group
on
term
limits,
our
recommendation
was
term
limits
and
first
and
be
sure
that
we
cross
reference
to
make
sure
everything
is
clear
after
we
have
a
redistricting
situation
whenever
that's
going
to
happen.
But
I
think
there
is
a
committee
working
on
that.
So
that
should
be
a
part
of
it,
but
also
we
our.
F
What
we
came
up
with
was
that
any
counselor
who
was
elected
for
two
consecutive
four-year
terms
shall
not
be
eligible
to
be
selected
for
the
elected
for
the
succeeding
term.
So
obviously
it
could
be
three
four-year
terms
or
one
whatever
that's,
but
so
that's
why
we
figure
that
it
needs
to
be
brought
up
today.
F
So
anybody
can
be
thinking
about
it
and,
if
there's
a
difference
of
opinion
of
what
a
what
the
term
should
be
or
how
many
terms
within
that
should
be
done
by
the
full
commission
by
discussion
in
the
same
way
with
the
with
the
partisan.
Both
of
those
are
pretty
pretty
drastic
to
some
extent,
but
we
think
that
it
needed
to
be
brought
forth
so
well.
A
F
We
had
a
lot
of
discussions
about
that.
We
spent
we
spent
a
lot
of
time,
and
we
also
did
some
research
on
other
cities
and
counties
that
that
were
and
were
not
partisan,
and
we
found
more
that
are
partisan
that
are
than
are
not,
but,
of
course,
that
does
not
affect
the
way
and
the
direction
that
we
need
to
go.
We
need
to
go
what's
best
for
columbus,
georgia
and
right
so
well,
right.
A
So
I'm
going
to
open
up
the
floor
for
any
initial
comments
or
questions
input
as
to
that
particular
term
limit
or
nonpartisan
for
the
council
members
and
the
elect
the
mayor.
Yes,.
D
I
had
thank
you
so
much
for
your
presentation.
I
did
have
a
couple
things.
One
was
just
a
suggestion
about
the
the:
not
the
dollar
amount,
removing
the
dollar
amount
99.
I
agree.
It
is
antiquated,
perhaps
because
everyone
will
be
concerned
about
dollar
spent
right.
So
perhaps
maybe
language
could
be
considered
to
say
something
of
the
effect
of
I
don't
know,
define
the
most
competitive
market
price
or
the
then
market
rate
for
electronic
or
for
publication
right.
You
just
want
something.
D
That's
going
to
help
anytime,
you
open
the
floodgates
to
say
it
can
be
anything
in
the
world.
People
are
going
to
be
upset
because
there's
a
there's,
no
monitoring.
So
if
you
could
say
maybe
something
to
deal
with
market
rate
or
competitive
market
rate,
maybe
that
could
help
provide
a
move
through
time
be
more
timeless.
D
Yes,
with
respect
to
the
partisan
nonpartisan,
I
would
be
curious
if
you'll
have
it
available.
What
was
some
of
the
data,
the
information
that
you
all
signed,
that
y'all
found
what
were
the
who
are
the
counties?
J
E
E
So
when
we
get
to
the
point
that
we're
going
to
present
these
are
these
recommendations
from
the
entire
body.
Are
we
going
to
have
them
on
the
agenda
to
discuss
and
give
kind
of
parting
or
final
recommendations
from
everyone
around
the
group
or
kind
of?
What's
your
vision
for
checking
off,
which
ones
we
want
to
send
forward.
A
Right
well
after
getting
some
clarity
from
the
city
attorney's
office,
because
my
recollection,
which
was
inaccurate,
was
that
the
last
charter
review
we
voted,
but
apparently
we
did
not.
So
what
I
envision
is
once
we
get
to
the
point
which
hopefully
will
be
in
the
next
couple
months.
A
A
We'll
get
consensus
without
voting
that
these
are
the
ones
that
should
move
forward
to
the
to
the
final
stage,
which
is
the
public
hearing.
F
Can
I
ask
a
question
that
I
I'm
not
I'm
I'm
following
what
you're
saying,
but
now
listen
ten
years
ago
was
a
long
time
ago.
So,
and
but
I
if
I
I
thought
that
we
voted
the
whole
commission
voted
on
each
issue
on
whether
we
were
going
to
take
it
to
to
the
ballot.
I.
A
F
F
That's
what
we're
for,
and
I
I
don't
remember-
and
I
don't
know
where
we
got
that
charge,
but
I
but
but
the
reason
we
exist
is
to
decide
what's
going
to
go
on
the
ballot,
and
so
we
have
to
vote
on
what
goes
on
the
ballot,
and
I
think-
and
I
remember
that
we
did
each
one
of
those
things,
because
don't
don't
you
remember
that
we
did
something
and
we
had
to
come
back
in
session
after
we
were
finished
because
of
something
issue
that
somebody
didn't
like
or
something.
A
Took
it
off,
but
you
know.
H
J
H
Then,
after
your
official
two
public
meetings,
then
I
would
suggest
you
know
a
formal
commission
vote
on
each
recommendation
that
you're
going
to
send
to
the
clerk
to
go
on
the
ballot.
And
I
I
understand
the
charter
review.
Commission
language
may
be
silent
about
about
taking
a
vote
before
each
item
is
sent
to
the
clerk.
But
you
know.
F
I
thought
we
also
I'm
going
by
my
memory
now,
but
I
thought
that
we
that
when
we
went
to
the
public
hearings,
we
had
already
decided
what
our
suggestions
were
to
go
on
the
ballot.
I
I
don't
think
it
was
after
the
public
hearings.
Public
hearings
was
to
inform
the
public
of
what
what
we
did
and
why
and
why
they
were
on
the
ballot.
H
Well,
that's
why
I
said
you
can
take
a
vote.
You
want
to
call
it
a
preliminary
vote
before
you
go
to
the
public
meetings.
Something
may
be
brought
up
at
the
two
meetings
that
you
want
to
add
and
you
come
back
and
take
an
official
vote
on
everything.
So
I
would.
I
would
do
that
for
the
record
just
to
be
clear.
H
C
F
A
A
So
I'm
in
favor
of
that
prior
to
it
as
to
the
final
recommendations
that
we
make
to
go
to
the
public
hearing,
I'm
in
favor
of
that
do
we
need
to
vote
on
that
we've
got
a
quorum.
H
A
F
Just
just
for
clarity,
I
will
make
sure
that
we
have
more
information
about
who
who
is
partisan
and
nonpartisan
and
who
does
and
does
not
have
term
limits,
is
a
little
cleanup
on
our
two
big
proposals.
If
that's
okay,.
A
E
J
E
Just
as
a
follow-up
question,
yes,
I
do
as
a
as
a
yeah.
No,
yes!
As
a
as
a
request
from
the
floor,
can
you
get
that
the
summary
of
both
sides
to
us
prior
to
the
meeting
that
way,
we
can
form
some
objections
that
may
be
different
to
the
ones
that
are
already
formally
formulated.
A
And
tamika
can
assist
for
sure
once
you
get
it
in
a
document,
that'd
be
good.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
all
right,
so
that
was
group
two
group,
four
anybody
from
group.
Yes,.
A
K
Group
four,
which
consists
of
allison,
dow
who's,
our
chairperson
carter,
shonda
meyer,
pastor,
jim
elder
and
mr
john
stacy,
and
myself
ben
richardson,
we're
looking
at
article
five
and
we're
also
looking
at
article
eight
and
pretty
much.
Our
key
point
for
analysis
was
statutory
language
because
we
know
under
georgia
law
with
the
supremacy
clause
georgia
law
is
going
to
control.
K
Of
course,
the
federal
law
comes
in,
federal
law
will
be
first,
but
georgia
law
will
control
the
local
city
ordinances.
So,
basically,
what
we
wanted
to
do
was
make
sure
we
were
in
compliance
with
basically
the
state,
the
state
of
georgia.
So
the
first
two
recommendations
we
had
and
I
should
have
stayed
over
there.
I
apologize,
but.
K
As
you
can
see
on
section
542
right
here,
this
works
okay,
great,
as
you
can
see
in
section
542
jurisdiction.
We
basically
checked
with
the
state
law
and
we
found
that
the
charter's
not
in
compliance,
so
we
want
our
proposed
language
change.
Is
that,
as
you
can
see
in
subsection
one,
it
says
the
property
and
dispute
does
not
exceed
the
sum
of
five
thousand
dollars.
So
basically
we
want
to
change
that
to
the
statutory
amounts
as
designated
by
the
state
of
georgia,
because
the
state
of
georgia
they
change
their
amounts,
sometimes.
K
The
second
change
we
talked
to
the
sheriff
and,
as
you
can
see
in
section
8
100,
it
says
the
sheriff
of
muscovy
county
in
office
on
october,
5th,
1971
and
his
or
her
successors
in
office
should
be
the
sheriff
of
the
consolidated
government.
That's
kind
of
doesn't
make
sense,
that's
a
dichotomy!
So
that's
why
we
want
to
change
that
state,
the
sheriff
of
muscari
county,
which
is
the
same
thing
in
the
first
part
of
the
sentence.
K
So
that's
our
second
proposed
change.
Any
questions
all
right,
so
those
are
two
proposed
changes,
madam
chairperson,
for.
K
K
Okay,
it
says
in
red,
so
you
have
to
I
apologize
because
we
don't
have
a
colored
primer.
So
maybe
we
have
the
city
to
get
some
money.
We
can
get
a
cold
front,
but
section
5603
when
it
comes
to
recorders,
court,
judges,
all
right,
there's
no
removal
process,
there's
no
removable
mechanism.
Okay,
now
we
talked
with
clifton
and
lucy
and
they
basically
said
well
under
the
judicial
qualification
qualifications.
K
Commission,
judging
will
be
under
that
scenario,
but
we
want
the
charter
to
explicitly
say
that
so
we
created
subsection
b,
which
says
any
recorder
or
recorders
pro
tem,
which
bases
an
associate
judge
record
score.
Judge
may
be
removed
by
the
council
of
the
consolidated
government
for
any
of
the
reasons
set
forth
in
ocga,
which
basically
means
the
official
code
of
georgia
annotated,
section,
36,
32,
2.1,
subsection,
b,
subsection
one.
Maybe
a
lawyer
wrote
that.
J
K
A
So
judge
richardson,
yes,
so
this
was
already
inherent
in
here.
If
I'm
understanding
correct
like
this
would
be
the
process
by
which
they'd
be
removed,
we're
just
making
it
explicit.
K
K
Exactly
so
that
way,
you
don't
have
to
go
searching
for
it,
and
you
say
it's
not
in
the
charter.
Where
do
we
look?
We
can
say:
okay,
it's
right
here
in
the
charter.
It's
classical
state
law.
We
thought
it'd
be
easier,
got
it
any
other
way
right
all
right
and
then
the
last
thing
was
clifton
lewis
helped
us
with
was
section
5604,
which
was
the
term
and
qualifications.
K
K
So
that's
why
we
had
to
change
that
part
and
we're
going
to
change
section
5
603,
to
make
it
more
in
compliance.
So
basically
we
added
the
language,
as
you
see
underlying
says,
unless
such
recorder
or
recorder
pro
tem
is
removed
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
section
5603b.
Above
so
it's
not
like
a
rule.
Man.
H
And
that
language,
in
both
those
paragraphs
that
ben
judge
richardson
is
proposing,
is
consistent
with
the
state
law
is
taken
right
out
of
the
state
law
that
deals
with
municipal
courts.
They
call
them
mayor's
courts
in
some
counties,
recorders
court.
We
call
it
here
in
columbus,
but
it'll
track
that
state
law
and
there
won't
be
any
doubt
if
that
procedure
is
needed.
It'll
be
spelled
out
how
it's
supposed
to
work.
There
are
certain
grounds
that
have
to
be
laid
out
and
a
notice
in
a
hearing.
K
K
One
all
right,
article
eight
deals
with
general
provisions
and
again
statutory
language.
We
were
looking
at,
we
talked
to
most
of
the
county
officers
and
most
of
them
were
pretty
satisfied
with
the
charter.
We're
still
waiting
to
talk
to
the
coroner
and
john
stacy
is
handling
that
for
us,
but
he
said
just
on
his
face.
He
doesn't
see
anything.
K
We
did
discuss
other
issues
that
maybe
that
can
improve
the
office,
but
we
we
don't
necessarily
go
to
the
charter
for
that,
for
example
like
a
medical
examiner
or
something
like
that,
all
right,
the
only
thing
we
have
left
is
chapter
three,
which
is
pensions
and
personnel
and
miss
carter,
schondelmeyer
she's
going
to
be
handling
that
part
and
that's
the
last
part
we're
waiting
on
in
terms
of
whether
we
want
to
make
recommendations
or
not
so,
but
for
the
most
part,
we've
gone
through
both
articles
and,
like
I
said
that
would
be
the
last
remaining
section.
A
K
I
don't
think
so.
We
we
will
need
clifton
lucy
for
one
other
thing.
The
purpose
of
record
score
just
gonna,
be
something
short
in
general.
We're
still
talking
about
that
among
the
group,
but
we'll
get
that
to
you
probably
next
week,
so
that
that
might
be
that
in
the
pension
right.
The
last
thing
I
don't
see
a
problem
with
that.
K
K
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
So
much
group
four,
all
right,
so
we're
making
progress
here,
we're
making
progress
here.
I
what
I
would
like
to
do,
but
I
will
certainly
entertain
any
comments
on
it-
is
to
have
some
review
from
some
of
the
working
groups
who
made
presentations
for
recommendations
then
went
back
to
do
some
additional
work
so
that
next
month
we
can
circle
back
with
some
of
those.
I
know
group
two.
Is
it
group
two,
mr
hartman?
A
Okay,
who
feels
comfortable
that
they
can
come
back
next
month
with
perhaps
their
final
recommendations,
not
for
discussion
by
the
entire
group,
but
just
this
is
what
we
plan
to
so
group
group
number.
Two
group
number
five
group
number
four
okay,
so
that
will
be
the
ones
making
recommendations
next
month
and
we'll
have
group
number
one
and
group
number
three
to
just
give
updates
hoping
that
in
september
they
will
be
prepared
for
their
final.
If
that's
what
we
do,
then
we
could
set
tentatively
for
october
to
have
our
mega
meeting
where
we
go
through.
A
F
My
only
question
I
just
want
to
make
sure
so
you
want
group
two
to
make
our
final
recommendations
and
with
any
additions
or
subtractions
of
whatever
we've
come
up
with
from
today
and
we'll
we'll
we'll
we
have
discussion
of
of
our
presentation
and
our
final
things
on
the
next
month,
or
will
we
wait
until
the
next
until
september?
I'm
asking.
A
F
I'm
I'm
personally
and
would
like
to
say
we
did
have
a
lot
of
discussion
about
those
two
issues
that
we
presented,
but
we,
those
two
things
are,
are
really
big
big
issues,
and
I
would
like
to
suggest
that
maybe
we
have
more
than
one
month
for
a
continued
discussion
on
on
those
two
things,
because
those
are
pretty
pretty
big
and
pretty
drastic
and
for
some
reason
both
of
those
were
done.
F
I
think
the
non-partisan
was
like
20
years
ago
when
that
came
in
maybe
at
least
I
know
at
least
20
years
ago,
and
then
the
the
the
term
limits
has
never
come
up
that
I
know
of
so.
I
just
think
those
are
pretty
pretty
important
and
I'd
hate
to
not
to
rush
through
it
and
not.
Have
everybody
have
the
opportunity
to
voice
some
concerns
of
propos?
You
know
whatever
they're
for
against
them
on
those
two
issues.
F
A
It
don't
make
me,
grab
the
gavel
up
here,
alton
and
and-
and
let
me
suggest
especially
for
the
groups
that
there
was
you
know
some
provocative
thought
and
discussion
about
some
of
the
items
that,
as
you
present,
those
that
you
be
prepared
to
talk
about
those
arguments
and
that
people
that
have
strong
or
passionate
arguments
one
way
or
the
other
on
some
of
these
recommendations
that
we'd
be
able
to
hear
those.
Because
for
some
of
us
you
know
who
may
not
have
thought
about
some
of
these
potential
changes.
It's
it's
helpful,
it's
educational!
I
H
A
H
Let
me
let
me
say
one
other
thing,
madam
chair
judge,
richardson,
of
course,
being
a
lawyer
and
judge
has
knows
that
these
things
have
to
be
meticulously
set
down
on
paper.
But
I
would
encourage
every
group
to
have
any
proposed
changes
on
paper
in
a
paragraph
like
judge,
did
it
with
the
current
language
and
then
a
fair
new
paragraph
with
the
proposed
language
underlying,
so
everybody
can
see
it
and.
H
A
A
G
Okay,
so
in
section
six
in
paragraph
one,
the
first
sentence
we
met
with
nancy
bourne
came
in
our
group
and
she
kind
of
assisted
with
some
of
the
special
elections.
Things
and
one
of
the
things
that
she
said
is.
If
we
could
change
that
first
sentence,
the
the
warding
two,
the
regular
election
of
consolidated
government,
shall
be
held
on
the
date
officially
specified
by
state
law
for
nonpartisan
office
in
each
even
numbered
years.
G
In
other
words,
she
took
that
from
the
state
board
of
elections,
just
kind
of
helping
us
mirror
exactly
the
wording.
They
have
it's
just
a
little
bit
more
polished,
and
that
was
her
recommendation
on
that
and
then
also
in
section
6
100,
paragraph
2,
the
mayor
and
counselors
at
large
shall
be
residents
of
the
consolidated
government.
It
was
our
recommendation
that
we
changed
from
consolidated
government
to
muskogee
county.
G
Just
it's
just
a
wording
thing
and
on
section
6
200,
you
were
recommending
to
research
the
partisan
issue
we
did
have
a
member
of
our
group
that
did
research,
it's
multiple
towns
and
areas
all
throughout
georgia
and
has
that
data.
So
perhaps
we
should
consolidate
with
group
200
and
get
that
information
and
it
would
kind
of
streamline
everything
so.
E
G
Let's
see
also
in
further
down
in
paragraph
section,
6
201,
it's
a
recommendation
to
change
that
45
days
to
90,
because
the
state
law,
the
way
it's
written,
is
90
days,
and
I
think
the
45
is
an
outdated
issue
and
then
the
other
thing.
The
last
thing
in
section
6
that
we
talked
about
is
the
publication.
G
G
Option
updated
in
the
in
the
charter
and
the
final
thing
is
in
appendix
2
7
the
600
fee,
for
you
know
non-compliance
in
a
race.
The
in
the
campaign
it
came
to.
The
group
was
just
unanimous
that
we
seem
like
we
feel
like.
We
need
to
put
a
little
more
teeth
in
that.
G
I
don't
know
what
that
looks
like
as
far
as
if
someone
is
not
compliant
with
reporting
on
finances,
for
instance,
just
paying
600
be
able
to
join
another
campaign
in
a
new
race
because
they
paid
the
600,
but
the
finances
have
still
not
been
disclosed
just
looking
at
how
we
could
address
that.
I
don't
know
if
that
would
be.
Maybe
the
whole
committee
review
that
we
need
to
you
know
up
that
price
or
what
the
options
are
on
that,
but
just
kind
of
putting
some
teeth
in
that
and
making
that
a
little
more
firm.
G
G
A
G
That
has
not
been
come
that
did
not
come
up
as
far
as
us
specifying
that,
but
I.
G
A
I
mean
we
could
it'd
be
nice
to
have
a
recommendation
to
work
from.
If
600
is
too
little,
then
you
know,
we
think
a
thousand
and
this
group
can
give
you
ben
the
benefit
of
their
input
as
to
whether
that's
too
high
too
low
or
what
have
you,
but
I
I
think
it
proper
for
the
working
group
to
come
with
a
recommendation
so.
G
Yeah
so
I
I
would
like
to
join
with
group
two
and
have
that
data
on
the
partisan
nonpartisan
race
and
who
is
doing
kind
of
what
and
that's
taking
a
look
and
just
kind
of
examine
what
that
looks
like
and
just
kind
of
go
from
there.
A
Yeah,
very
good,
all
right
so
by
next
month.
I
think
you
all
are
down
for
next
month.
You
can
firm
those
items
up
very
good
anything
else.
Anybody
that
I
omitted
for
reporting
on
the
working
groups,
if
not
just
in
terms
of
housekeeping
items
again,
I
just
want
to
encourage
everybody
to
be
here.
This
is
every
single
one
of
us
was
appointed
for
a
reason,
because
our
voice
is
important
and
when
we're
not
here,
then
our
voice
isn't
heard.
A
If
there
are
people
you
know,
aren't
participating
or
have
extraneous
circumstances,
or
we
just
haven't
seen
them
I'd
like
to
know
that,
because
you
know
I
need
to
reach
out
to
them
and
if
not
to
the
counselor,
that
appointed
them,
because
we
we
have
to
have
representation
per
the
charter,
so
the
meetings
are
standing
meetings.
We've
we've
never
not
been
the
third
thursday
and
we
will
remain
the
third
thursday.
So
the
meetings
don't
move
around.
I
I
hope
that
we
can.
A
I
expect
that
we
can
make
arrangements
to
be
here
every
month,
as
we
have
this
really
really
important
discussion
on
behalf
of
the
entire
citizenship
in
the
consolidated
government.
So
with
that,
I'm
always
reachable.
I
want
to
hear
if
there
are
any
issues.
I
appreciate
the
invitations
to
the
working
groups.
I
try
to
make
the
ones
that
I
can
but
we're
doing
very
important
work.
You
all
very
important
work
that
will
last
for
the
next
10
years.