►
From YouTube: Charter Review meeting 10 28 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
A
B
Mike
baker,
tyson
begley
willie,
bellfield,
vivian,
creighton,
bishop
allison,
dow
james
elder
pace,
halter
norman
hardman,
ken
henson,
dominique
perkins,
julio
portillo,
carmen
rice
ben
richardson,
oz,
roberts,
gwen
ruff,
alton,
russell
carter,
schondelmeyer
john
schenkel,
john
stacy,
melvin,
tanner,
jr,
audrey
tillman.
Here
chris
whiteman,
bradley
williams
and
christopher
woodruff.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
tamika
all
right.
Everyone
should
have
received
the
minutes
digitally
yesterday
via
email
and,
if
you've
seen
them
and
had
a
chance
to
review
them,
are
there
any
edits
or
changes
to
the
minutes?
C
A
A
A
The
next
item
is
during
last
month's
discussion
of
the
recommendations
and
I
forget
the
specific
working
group,
but
it
was
several
places
where
notification
was
mentioned
and,
and
you
know
would
do-
should
we
have
a
more
timely
or
more
relevant
way
of
noticing
people
under
several
entries
in
the
charter,
and
we
asked
the
city
attorney's
office
to
go
and
to
take
a
look
at
that
and
come
back
with
their
opinion.
A
D
E
F
All
right
good
afternoon,
I
think
it's
easier
just
to
go
through
this
with
everyone.
Looking
at
their
own
copy
of
the
document,
I
did
download
the
entire
charter
and
search
for
every
instance
where
notice
or
publication
was
required,
and
the
general
theory
behind
all
of
these
changes
you
will
see
in
the
individual
provisions
is
that,
where
it
was
not
already
explicit,
we
made
it
clear
that
any
of
these
notices
would
be
posted
on
the
city
website.
F
D
G
Madam
chair,
you
said
we
can
ask
questions,
sure,
okay,
this
particular
recommendation.
It
does
not
appear
and
I
don't
want
to
jump
ahead
to
meet
the
intent
of
the
group.
This
particular
one,
because
the
concern
that
we
had
was
the
dissemination
of
what's
considered
the
newspaper
in
our
community
and
you're,
saying
one
newspaper
and
to
piggyback
on
what
mr
henson
was
saying.
F
G
G
F
Thought
was
that
by
requiring
the
publication
on
the
website,
we
would
address
that
question.
Obviously
the
committee
can
make
whatever
changes
they
would
like
to
make
to
further
address
their
concerns,
but
we
thought
publishing
on
the
website
and
in
some
instances
even
the
publication
in
the
newspaper
has
to
tell
you
where,
on
the
website,
you
can
see
the
text
of
the
entire
ordinance.
G
F
Well,
one
thing
was:
we
also
heard
concerns
about
expenses,
and
so
we're
sort
of
trying
to
balance
that
and
by
saying
at
least
one
at
least
we
know
it
gets
in
a
newspaper,
but
if
it's
reasonable
and
available
more
can
be
used,
we
didn't
know
that
it
needed
to
be
a
requirement
for
the
whole
10
years.
But
again,
that's
your
call
and
I
don't
know
I
can
run
through
the
specific
notices
that
are
affected.
F
The
first
is
about
taxing
districts
in
section
1-103
and
the
creation
of
urban
service
districts
and
where
a
certain
time
frame,
like
7
days
or
14
days,
was
required
for
the
newspaper
publication.
I've
also
used
that
same
time
limit
for
the
publication
for
the
posting
on
the
website
of
the
consolidated
government.
F
F
What
we
are
proposing
is
again
that
the
ordinance
in
full
be
posted
on
the
consolidated
government
website
and
that
it
still
be
published
once
in
at
least
one
newspaper
of
general
circulation,
and
that
notice
will
not
have
the
whole
ordinance,
because
that
is
what
has
gotten
so
expensive,
but
just
the
title
of
the
ordinance,
the
caption
of
the
ordinance
and
then
it
will
also
contained
published
in
the
paper
a
reference
to
where
on
the
website,
the
or
the
full
text
of
the
ordinance
can
be
found.
F
F
F
Now,
on
section
6102,
there
has
always
been
a
requirement
that
the
proposed
redistricting
ordinance
that
the
districting
commission
does
every
10
years
after
the
census
which
we're
in
the
process
of
now.
That
has
to
be
published
in
its
entirety
in
a
newspaper
with
the
maps,
and
we
recommend
leaving
that,
because
that
is
such
a
critical
matter
of
public
interest.
And
it
will
also
be
on
the
website
as
well,
because
it
says
that
the
consideration
of
the
report
will
follow
the
formalities
for
all
other
ordinances,
which
will
put
it
on
the
website.
F
And
then
on
special
elections,
the
only
difference
in
that
6-201
is
that
ms
boren
requested
that
we
allow
it
to
be
on
the
muskogee
county
board
of
elections
website
instead
of
the
general
city
website,
because
she
can
more
quickly
post
information
there
and
other
than
that.
She
had
no
problems
with
the
changes
in
the
election
code
section
and
then
the
next
set
of
changes
has
to
do
with
publishing.
F
The
annual
operating
and
capital
budgets
in
section
7401
and
it
again
there
we
will
have
added
the
requirement
that
it
be
posted
on
the
website
of
the
consolidated
government
as
a
practical
matter.
It
already
is
each
year,
but
that's
now
in
the
charter
and
then
the
same
language
about
the
newspaper
of
general
circulation.
A
Just
for
as
a
recap,
there
were
several
instances
from
different
working
groups
where
notice
was
an
issue.
It
came
up
repeatedly,
so
we
kind
of
tabled
anything
with
respect
to
notice
so
that
the
city
attorney's
office
could
look
at
that
and
we
could
be
consistent
with
any
changes
that
were
going
to
take
place.
So
to
your
point,
lucy.
That
does
not
affect
anything.
We've
already
voted
on
and
I
don't
believe
we
actually
voted
on
the
provisions
that
required
notice,
because
we
were
waiting
for
this
report.
A
H
They
get
to
that.
We
we
have
heard
y'all's
concerns.
I
understand
where
ms
ruff
was
coming
from
and
we
want
to
cast
the
widest
net
possible
on
this
notice.
These
notice
provisions,
but,
like
the
judge,
says
you're
not
going
to
get
a
perfect
provision,
we're
trying
to
get
one.
That's
the
widest
net
and
sort
of
a
happy
compromise.
H
We
went
and
pulled
out
all
the
good
old
hardbound
volume
law
on
zoning,
on
elections
on
sale,
a
county
property,
and
they
all
have
this
language
in
in
there
about
publishing
the
newspaper
of
general
circulation
and
they
don't
define
what
that
is.
So
we
we're
just
using
that
language,
that's
in
the
state
law,
but
we
think
this
is
a
good
balance.
It
lets
you
put
it
on
the
city
website
where
anyone
can
log
in
and
see
it
and
the
newspaper
general
circulation.
H
H
I
I
think
my
concern
I
mean
I
agree
with
what
clifton
says
and
I
agree
what
judge
richardson
says.
I
think
the
issue
is:
what
are
we
going
to
do
in
five
years?
If
there
is
no
newspaper
of
general
publication
and
we're
requiring
something
by
statute
that
you
can't
do?
How
do
we
build
into
what
we're
doing
more
flexibility
for
council
to
change
that
somehow
or
if
the
newspapers
are
just
you
know,
perfunctory,
they
just
put
out
there
just
for
this
one
purpose
and
nobody's
out
there
looking
at
them.
I
I
So
I
guess
my
question
is:
why
can't
we
adopt
a
new
provision
that
says
that
council
can
change
in
this
charter?
That
council,
at
any
time,
can
change
these
notice
provisions
to
notify
people
in
ways
other
than
publishing
in
a
new
in
a
newspaper
because
they
may
not
be
published,
they
may
be
online,
and
that
may
be
the
only
way
you
look.
They
they
exist
or
you
may
have
one
paper:
that's
a
neighborhood
or
not
a
neighborhood,
a
paper
that
is
of
general
circulation
that
you
know
you've
got
less
than
500
people
that
take
it.
I
So
I
guess
what
I'm
suggesting
is:
could
there
be
a
way
that
we
add
a
provision
to
the
charter
that
says
the
council
can
change
these
notice
provisions
in
the
set
forth
in
the
charter,
or
can
we
make
these
changes
in
the
charter
subject
or
allow
council
in
the
future
to
provide
for
an
additional
means
of
notice?
Then
what
we're
requiring
them
right
now
to
do
this
for
10
years.
F
I
I
I
A
H
A
J
I
have
a
question
here
that
that
I
think
would
fit
into
what
he's
saying
is
that
you
know
there's
a
couple
places
in
here
and
one
is
when
is
under
the
the
boards,
commissioners
and
authorities
and
functions
which
is
4-600,
and
this
is
specifically
about
the
water
commissioners,
and
it
says
in
here
that
the
that
the
council
shall
be
authorized
to
redefine
the
manner
of
appointment,
membership
and
powers
and
duties
of
said
board
after
the
expiration
of
a
period
of
18
months
following
october
5th
1971,
the
council
shall
be
authorized
to
modify
change
or
repeal
any
of
these
provisions.
J
So
is
it
not
possible
to
put
that
in
something
like
that
in
in
each
one
of
these
places
that
there's
that
it
pertains
to
a
notice
and
that
way
that
the
council
would
have
the
ability
to
to
make
that
change
as
needed?
You
know,
and
it
would
be,
they
could
do
more
or
less,
and
it
would
be
up
to
the
council.
So
I'm
that's
just
a
suggestion
for
y'all
to
look
up
and
see
if
it's
legal
or
not
that's
when
we
got
you
clifton
so,
but
I
think
it
makes
sense.
J
A
So
anything,
that's
in
you
know
increasing
the
opportunity
for
more
people
to
receive
notice,
I
think
is
probably
where
we
should
stay
and
not
give
counsel
or
anybody
else
the
opportunity
to
limit
how
and
who
receives
notice.
That's
what
I'm
taking
from
the
discussions
last
time
and
from
today.
J
So
my
thinking
is,
we
need
to
give
the
council
an
out
that,
if
there's
no
newspaper
they
can
do
whatever
is
available,
because
if
there's
no
newspaper,
they
cannot
abide
by
the
camp
by
the
charter,
so
why
we
want
to
tell
them
today
that
we
know
maybe
five
years
from
now
that
you're
going
to
have
a
decision
to
make.
That
is
in
violation
of
what
the
charter
says.
D
J
I
don't,
I
don't
mean
we
need
to
limit
and
reduce
the
ability
for
the
notice,
but
we
need
to
give
them
the
option
where
they
will
be
other.
And
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
we
talked
about
in
our
committee
was
that
we
didn't.
We
didn't
exactly
back
off
from
it,
but
our
initial
thing
was
it
was
that
it
could
should
include
a
minority
newspaper
or
publication
and
maybe
even
social
media.
J
Well
I
mean
that
just
went
kind
of
went
by
the
wayside,
because
it
was
never
discussed
by
the
full
commission,
but
I
but
that's
got
to
be
something
to
be
considered
and
I
don't
think
we
need
to
to
limit,
and
I
just
think
we
need
to
give
the
council
the
ability
to
to
go
outside
of
newspaper
in
like
in
five
years,
because
I
agree,
you
know,
newspapers
less
and
less
every
day.
So
anyway,
okay.
K
Madam
chair,
yes,
our
group
group
5,
was
one
of
the
groups
that
had
concern
with
that
as
well.
It's
in
section
2,
6
201,
where
it
talks
about
that
as
well.
So
I
agree
that
we
just
need
to
have
more
options
after
the
newspaper.
Should
it
not
exist
be
able
to
get
information
out
to
the
public.
So
I
agree
with
some
kind
of
digital
component
as
well.
A
Okay,
so
where
we
are,
is
we're
working
to
see
if
we
can
put
some
language
in
that
people
could
agree
with.
That
would
speak
to
the
concerns
about
the
relevance
or
existence
of
the
newspaper
going
forward.
A
A
L
So
good
afternoon,
everyone
we
presented
similar
content
a
few
months
ago
at
a
high
level.
The
purpose
of
this
recommendation
is
to
provide
the
specific
language
around
the
recommendations
we
provided
earlier
I'll
move
quickly
to
the
first
couple
of
slides.
L
The
group
we've
mentioned
before
got
a
couple
of
the
cpa
myself,
the
cfo
chris
music,
guys
india
as
well,
and
we
got
an
attorney
on
the
board.
So
it's
a
good
mix
of
people
who
understand
budgeting
revenue
and
legal
language.
L
Just
a
summary
of
what
we
covered
was
article
1,
article
2,
mainly
around
the
creation
of
the
government,
the
powers
and
duties
and
a
lot
of
it
just
said
hey.
This
is
consistent
with
what
the
state
sets
or
defines
so
most
of
our
time
wasn't
article
7
the
revenue
and
financial
administration
section
with
it.
We
came
up
with
five
suggested
changes
for
the
ballot,
as
well
as
two
other
suggested
changes.
We
think
city
council
should
take
on
two
other
changes.
We
think
city
council
should
address
with
the
state.
L
The
article
seven
of
the
revenue
financial
administration
is
broken
up
into
different
sections.
We'll
highlight
those
as
we
go
through
the
recommendations.
The
first
one
is
really
around
the
world
hospital
purposes.
L
Right
now,
the
the
millage
for
the
medical
millage
is
really
focused
on
hospital
purposes,
which
is
old.
Language
refers
to
a
city
hospital,
and
so
it's
just
out
of
date,
and
so
what
we
propose
is
to
replace
that
with
public
health
care
purposes
and
that
can
be
defined
by
city
council,
and
so
this
does
does
give
city
council
a
little
bit
more
options
of
where
they
can
allocate
this
money.
L
L
L
Right
now
you
do
have
monthly,
you
know,
budget
to
actuals,
but
monthly
really
isn't
sufficient
for
making
long-term
decisions.
And
when
you
look
at
the
timing,
when
the
budget
is
passed,
you
don't
have
the
last
year's
actuals
completed
yet
to
compare
that
to
the
budget,
and
so
it
really
is
difficult
to
compare
the
past
three
years.
L
What
did
we
say
we
were
going
to
spend
and
what
did
we
actually
spend-
and
I
know
from
my
business
experience
that
is
like
the
most
fundamental
financial
reporting
is:
what
did
you
say
you
were
going
to
spend
and
what
did
you
spend
and
so
all
we're
saying
is?
We
should
show
that
for
the
past
three
years
the
show
has
so
there
is
no
ambiguity
of
the
current
year,
but
we
can
see
what
was
the
actual
versus
the
budget
for
three
years,
and
so
I
think
this
is
good
financial
practice.
A
E
L
L
A
L
Yeah,
I
it
seems
straightforward
to
me
because
I
know
like
I-
I
can
build
this
in
excel
for
our
own
business.
With
a
couple
of
hours
I
mean
there
could
be
a
report
tweak,
but
I
I
can't
imagine
any
kind
of
accounting
budgeting
software
that
won't
allow
you
to
do
this
like
there
may
be
a
report
tweak
I'm
not
arguing
that,
but
the
data
should
be
there.
C
L
We
didn't
specify
that
there
is
some
flexibility.
So
if
you
know
if,
for
some
reason,
the
it's
just
too
much
data
to
fit
one
page
and
they
can
say
hey,
we
can
do
this
at
the
high
level,
but
not
the
detailed.
We
didn't
specify
that
because
I
know
there
is
right.
L
C
I
I
guess
I'm
just
trying
to
okay,
because
working
and
working
in
the
city
and
mrs
bishop
can
help
me
out
this
too.
The
city
actually
do
your
own
individual
budget.
Then
you
submit
it
to
the
city
manager's
office.
Okay,
in
the
meantime,
they
do
give
you
what
you
say
what
you
spent
in
fiscal
year.
You
know
previous
year
and
I
think
they
go.
I
thought
it
gave
us
two
years.
L
C
M
L
C
I
I'm
just
trying
to
I
know
when
we
go
through
budget
process
that
we
have
a
way
of
doing
it,
and
I
just
I
couldn't
formulate
how
y'all
how
this
would
change
you.
So
that's
why
I'm
just
maybe
I
just
abstained
from
the
voting,
because
I
I
I
like
to
see
exactly
you
know
with
the
past
city
budgets
because,
like
you
said
fiscal
year,
they
go
from
july
to
june
30th.
L
C
L
L
C
I
got
you,
I
guess
I'm
just
saying
that
the
city
is
based
on
zero-based
budgeting
each
department.
You
don't
get
a
chance
to
take
your
savings
over.
It
goes
to
the
general
fund
or
they
have
to
take
from
the
general
fund.
If
you
went
over
and
to
help
you
balance
your
budget,
so
I'd
like
to
say
I'm
a
little
confused,
but
I
just.
L
So
right,
so
that's
why
we
wanted
to
use
the
adopted
budget
instead,
the
because
we
just
said
hey
what
was
at
the
end
of
the
year.
What
was
this
because
of
zero-based
budgeting
right,
there's
not
going
to
be
over
under.
I
think,
if
you're
focused
on
the
adopted
of
what
was
the
original
budget
before
anything
was
changed,
then
you
can
see
whether
you
were
over
under
your
original
forecast.
C
L
Lucy
brought
this
up.
I
think
when
she
brought
this
one
up
so
originally
it
said
that
the
audit
must
be
completed
in
four
months
of
the
fiscal
end
date,
and
I
I
know
from
personal
experience
and
cfo
most
years
that
works.
The
exception
is
when
you
do
change
auditors,
it
can
take
longer
and
really
four
months
was
less
time
than
that
was
required
by
state
law
or
lenders,
and
so
by
changing
it
to
180
days.
We
are
more
consistent
with
state
law,
as
well
as
making
sure
that
there's
not
some
potential
issue.
L
F
My
understanding
is
that
we
actually
cannot
comply
with
the
state
law
and
have
our
audit
until
we
have
the
contributing
information
from
the
constituent
units.
So
it's
to
the
constituent
units
benefit
for
us
to
take
the
maximum
legal
time,
because
it
gives
you
more
time
to
get
your
audit
to
us.
Also,
the
180
days
is
what
all
the
bond
reporting
agencies
requires.
I
know
you're
aware,
so
I
don't
think
it's
good
to
have
an
unreasonably
short
deadline
like
four
months
that
we
as
a
practical
matter
know.
None
of
us
can
meet.
F
L
L
So
this
next
one
is
the
one
we've
received
the
most
feedback
about,
so
I
do
want
to
provide
some
additional
contacts,
so
we
did
suggest
an
audit
committee
within
city
council.
This
is
considered
best
practice.
I've
seen
it
in
in
my
workplace
as
well
as
you
know,
non-profit
boards
that
I've
been
on,
and
so
when
we
say
our
community
audit
committee,
this
is
not
an
investigative
committee
they're
not
doing
some
personal
audit.
L
They
are
working
with
the
internal
auditor
and
they
are
working
with
the
audit
committee,
and
so
we
did
want
this
to
be
more
advisory
in
nature,
and
so
that
they're
not
like,
I
said,
they're,
not
doing
some
kind
of
additional
investigation,
but
they
are
more
advisory,
so
the
internal
auditor
can
use
them
as
a
resource.
The
external
auditor
can
communicate
with
them
directly
if
needed,
and
so
I
have
seen
the
benefit
in
my
personal
job.
L
The
audit
committee
adds
a
lot
of
value.
I'm
able
to
go
to
the
audit
committee
easier
than
going
out
to
the
entire
board,
which
is
helpful.
If
we
have
discussions.
For
example,
do
we
want
to
change
external
auditor
they're
a
great
sounding
board
for
red?
It
also
provides
oversight
over
myself.
I
know
that
our
board's
audit
committee
has
a
direct
conversation
with
our
external
auditor
about
my
job
performance,
and
so
it
does
provide
more
transparency
into
how
I'm
performing
I
I
know
on
non-profit
boards.
L
It
provides
for
those,
you
know,
there's
kind
of
transparency
provides
it
and
it
also
gets
people
more
engaged,
and
so,
with
that
context
we
did
provide
a
new
language
that
said
biannually.
There
would
be
two
city
councillors
and
three
external
members
to
service
the
audit
committee.
L
A
E
L
I
have
not
heard
his
feedback
on
it.
I
have
heard
from
finance
and
the
mayor
that
you
know
could
this
create.
You
know
additional
work.
I
tried
to
make
this
advisory
as
possible,
so
there's
no.
There
should
be
no
conflicts.
There
shouldn't
be
any
kind
of
you
know
overlapping
responsibilities
between
the
internal
auditor.
L
I
do
not
know
the
answer
to
that
question.
I
know
that,
like
I
said
it
does
provide
additional
oversight
into
the
participants,
so,
for
example,
in
my
job
there
is
that
point
where
I'm
they're
having
a
meeting
to
discuss
me
right
right
right,
and
so
I
know
that
can
provide
some
angst,
but
I
know
that
that
is
best
practice
and
I
think
that's
part
of
the
reason
why
you
see
the
government
finance
officers
association
endorsing
this,
because
it
is
best
practice.
Even
if
it
can,
you
know,
provide
little
inks
there.
E
N
Now,
if
the
city
of
the
city
and
I'm
not
sure
what
you
mean
by
the
city,
if
they
want
to
fight
it
me
on,
my
question
would
be
why-
and
my
other
question
would
be,
is
that
our
purpose
to
bring
about
a
change
that
the
city
has
to
approve.
E
N
N
Right
from
from
my
perspective,
it
is
because
we
heard
it
numerous
times
from
our
external
auditors
on
council
and
we've
heard
it
numerous
times
from
our
internal
articles
is
there
advisory
person,
we
could
go
to
a
group
that
we
could
go
to.
So
that's
what
was
driving
this.
You
know
there's
going
to
be
people
inside
the
city
who
may
or
may
not
like
it
right,
certainly,
but
now
we
did
not
go
to
all
those
people
and
say.
N
And
mr
shinka
was
here,
and
we
took
a
lot
of
feedback
from
mr
schinkel-
he
made
some
quit
had
some
questions
about
the
privacy
rules.
We
had
the
first
time
we
brought
it
and
we
threw
all
those
out
and
just
made
it
subject
to
the
open
meeting
laws,
except
when
state
law
provides
for
executive
session
and
then
we
reconstructed
the
membership
to
include
two
members
of
council
council
appoints
an
outside
member,
and
the
mayor
appoints
two
outside
members
to
get
to
five
really
just
from
a
quorum
standpoint.
E
N
Here
and
one
quick
question,
I
know
ms
ruff
had
a
question
about
the
audit
timeline.
I
believe
really
that's
a
practical
matter
and
it
really
came
home
this
last
time
when
the
pandemic
hit.
N
You
know
part
part
of
the
times
the
tower
which
was
shut
down
or
restricted
asset
access
to
who
could
get
in
who
could
get
out.
It
put
everything
in
a
bind
and
it
just
turned
out
the
four
months
really
didn't
work,
and
two
years
ago
we
had
a
new
audit
firm
come
in
because
of
some
unfortunate
circumstances.
N
It
took
them
quite
a
while
to
get
up
to
speed
on
what
had
been
done
for
the
past
10
years
and
just
combining
all
those
things.
The
four
months
just
didn't
work
it
just
from
a
practical
matter.
It
took
it's
going
to
take
a
little
more
time
than
that
in
those
particular
situations
and
state
law.
It
brings
it
in
conformity
with
state
law
at
six
months.
So
that
was
some
of
the
reasons
behind
the
behind
that
particular
change.
G
O
O
H
L
L
L
L
And
we
did
hear
feedback
from
the
city
that
this
would
be
helpful
just
to
kind
of
clean
up
those
little
pieces
of
land
that
they
don't
need.
L
L
The
main
difference
is
paving
and
we
understood
that
difference
historically,
because
the
road
density
historically
was
a
lot
higher
in
district
1
versus
district
2.,
but
now
they're
pretty
similar.
So
is
there
a
reason
to
keep
those
districts
separate
when,
if
you
start
making
the
paving
miller
similar,
there
are
no
differences
in
millages.
A
O
L
That's
absolutely
correct:
these
are
not
going
to
go
in
the
ballots.
I
don't
think
it
would
be
appropriate
to
put
on
the
ballot.
You
know
a
formal
definition
of
the
districts,
but
these
are
things
we
thought
would
be
helpful
and
we
hope
city
council
takes
for
consideration.
L
So
I
don't
know
if
there's
any
feedback
in
the
district
recommendation,
the
other
recommendation
we
had
was
do
an
overall
analysis
of
the
efficiency
of
the
tax
structure
and
utilities.
We
saw
some
some
areas
that
we
felt
like
may
be
better
serviced
by
utility.
They
can
better
keep
up
with
the
expenses
without
tying
it
to
the
budget,
and
there
were
times
we
thought.
L
The
current
tax
structure
may
not
be
sustainable
again,
not
appropriate
to
address
that
in
the
charter,
but
we
thought
it'd
be
helpful
to
do
some
analysis
from
a
third
party
to
see,
if
there's
any
suggestions
for
how
to
tackle
it.
These
are
things
we
we
thought
we
would
get
in
and
tackle
it,
and
we
said
well.
This
is
this
is
not
what
charter
view
should
be
doing,
and
you
would
need
a
third
party
to
really
dig
into
the
details.
L
We've
got
two
other
suggestions
that
aren't
just
from
the
city
council.
They
would
involve
the
state.
One
is
to
require
the
tax
commissioner
to
collect
any
property
fees
with
the
property
taxes,
and
so
right
now
you
know
if
you
don't
clean
your
yard
and
they
add
a
fee.
It's
not
the
same
class
as
your
property
taxes,
it's
not
the
same
priority,
and
so
what
happens
is
that
someone
can
have
a
cleaning
fee
on
their
property
and
it
doesn't
get
paid
until
the
property
is
eventually
sold.
It
can
help.
L
You
can
sit
there
with
a
fee
on
it
for
several
years
and
it's
not
collected,
and
so
what
you
end
up
with
are
abandoned
properties
that
the
owner
they
may
be
here.
They
may
be
somewhere
else
and
they're,
paying
a
small
amount
of
property
taxes
per
year
to
keep
the
property
and
just
letting
it
fall
apart.
L
What
you
see
in
alabama
is
that
the
county
revenue,
commissioner,
has
the
authority
and
responsibility
to
put
those
fees
on
the
property
taxes
each
year,
so
several
benefits
of
that
one
as
the
the
city
collects
money
faster
right.
So
if
there's
a
fee
on
there,
they're
not
waiting
to
the
property
sold
they're,
getting
it
within
12
months
at
the
next
property
tax
due
date.
The
other
advantage
is,
if
you
do
have
someone
from
out
of
town
and
they're,
not
maintaining
it
all
of
a
sudden,
if
there's
a
two
thousand
dollar
cleaning
fee.
L
Was
not
the
taxes
and
fees
were
not
paid
on
it,
going
to
the
process
to
allow
someone
else
to
buy
that
at
auction
for
the
taxes,
and
then
you
get
someone
who
is
interested
in
taking
care
of
it
again.
This
is
what
alabama
does
and
so
it,
but
this
would
involve
help
from
the
state
to
pass
this
as
well.
L
E
L
F
L
Okay,
so
it
so
that
ballot
measure
will
will
work
with
you
to
make
sure
that,
like
I
said,
we
don't
want
to
lose
it
in
case
it
doesn't
go
through,
but
also
we'll
work
to
figure
out
the
time
and
go
it
doesn't
need
to
be
on
the
ballot.
Can
we
take
it
off
later,
so
we'll
we'll
work
with
you
to
make
sure
that
we're.
L
And
so
in
summary,
so
we've
got
replace
the
hospital
services
with
health
care
services.
Updating
the
budget
report
to
include
the
past
three
years
of
budget
versus
actuals
update
the
audit
deadline,
but
I
know
we
are
holding
off
on
that.
So
we
get
some
feedback.
A
A
A
A
A
Now
I
know
we've
got
some
information,
we're
hoping
to
come
back,
but
I
really
want
to
see
us
resolve
all
recommendations
for
the
yale
for
the
nay
today,
so
that
this
can
be
our
last
meeting
of
this
type
so
to
just
working
group
number
one
want
to
postpone
the
voting
on
this
until
we
can
get
that
answer.
Or
do
you
want
to
move
forward
with
what
we
have?
What's
your
pleasure
working
group
number
one.
L
I
was
just
going
to
ask:
would
you
mind
if
we
if
it
does
get
approved
and
you
do
get
feedback?
If
we
promise
to
say
hey,
we
need
to
revisit
this?
Does
that
work
yeah.
A
A
A
A
A
A
Okay?
So
congratulations
group
number
one
you
came
through
with
flying
colors
and
we
are
noting
here
the
suggestions
that
you
want
to
move
forward
so
that
we
can
get
them
to
the
appropriate
body.
Thank
you
all
right.
Are
we
ready
to
hear
the
update
from
our
city
attorney's
office,
we're
baited
breath
over
here.
F
A
A
I
got
it
got
it
feedback
on
that
addition,
which
would
be,
in
addition
to
what's
been
suggested
here,
correct.
F
And
then
the
second
part
is,
we
think
it
would
probably
be
a
good
idea.
Each
time
we
mention
a
publication
in
a
newspaper
of
general
circulation
to
say
that
it's
published
digitally
or
in
print
in
at
least
one
newspaper
of
general
circulation.
So
that
way,
if
there's
certain
days
and
newspapers
only
online,
that
can
count.
A
K
So,
madam
chance,
my
question
is
so
in
section
6201
the
special
elections
in
our
group:
five,
where
it
says
newspaper,
will
you
automatically
add
in
digital
to
that
as
well
or
do
we
need
to
go
in
and
make
that
substitution.
I
A
A
G
G
The
communication
world
is
totally
changing
and
I
hear
what
is
considered
okay
at
the
state
level,
which
is
general
publication
of
newspapers,
but
I
think
this
is
an
opportunity
for
us
to
lean
forward
and
think
outside
the
box
and
just
say
not
necessarily
within
the
next
five
years,
but
within
the
next
three
years.
What
is
that
mechanism
that
we
need
to
look
at
as
a
city
to
make
sure
we
are
clearly
communicating
with
our
constituents
and,
if
covet,
didn't,
teach
us
anything.
G
G
G
I'm
thinking
less
than
two
how
things
are
changing
and
we
just
need
to
keep
an
open
mind
on
the
best
way
that
we
can
communicate
and
be
effective.
G
G
Unfortunately,
I
think
that's
a
generational
thing,
because
right
now
I
think
electronic
platforms
has
become
so
commonplace
and
not
necessarily
hardcopy,
and
so
whatever
that
looks
like
that's,
not
a
hardship
on
the
city,
because
right
now
we
rely
on
the
website,
but
driving
people
to
a
website
has
I
found
to
be
problematic.
G
Most
people
will
just
use
kind
of
an
electronic
subscription
to
get
updates
and
I
don't
think
the
city
right
now
is
resourced
to
be
able
to
do
that.
So
I
don't
want
to
recommend
something
that
we
don't
have
to
bandwidth
to
do,
but
I
think
we
need
to
think
about
how
can
we
keep
up
with
technology
for
our
community.
J
J
I
I
think
that
that,
on
this
proposal
answers
the
question
as
best
we
can
for
for
this
particular
year
and
for
this
particular
time
and
that
we're
working
the
it
gives
the
council
I
mean
it,
gives
the
council
the
opportunity
and
the
option
to
do
what
is
necessary
to
get
the
word
out
and
get
the
publications
or
whatever
it
is,
whatever
the
notice
is
required
and
to
be
done,
they
can
get
it
done,
and
so
I
think
that's
what
we
need
to
do.
So.
My
my
question
to
you,
madam
mayor.
A
J
L
L
But
I
do
think
our
elected
officials
have
much
more
flexibility
now,
it'll
be
easier
for
them
to
share
that
information,
and
I
think
our
current
elected
officials
have
done
a
great
job
of
making
information
more
available
already,
and
so
I
think
this
will
give
them
the
they'll
make
it
easier
for
them
to
do
that
going
forward.
So
is.
L
A
Great
thank
you.
It's
been
moved
in.
Second,
all
those
in
favor
accepting
the
recommendations
for
notification,
language
that
will
go
throughout
every
provision
in
the
charter
that
references
notification,
please,
if
you're
in
favor,
please
say
I
any
opposed
one
for
the
record.
Thank
you
all
right
so
that
passes.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Thank
you
working
group
one.
We
were
extremely
efficient
today
and
brings
us
to
the
point
that
we
all
are
at,
which
is
what
is
the
next
step
so
because
of
the
great
work
you
all
have
done.
The
next
step
in
the
process
is
to
move
forward
with
the
recommendations
as
voted
upon
and
yes,
sir,
did
I
miss
something?
No.
J
Ma'am
you
didn't,
I
do
have
a
kind
of
one.
I
guess
it's
a
proposal,
even
though
it's
not
part
of
the
committee
that
I
serve
on,
but
I
have
tried
to
reach
out
to
people
that
the
committee
does
address
it
and
have
had
some
feedback,
and
I
have
talked
to
one
member
today
and
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
for
us
to
think
about,
and
I
don't
I
don't
reason
I'm
doing
this.
J
A
J
J
What
this
is
under
chapter
four
and
it
starts
off
with
boards
commissions,
authorities,
functions
and
it
goes
to
sub
chapter
a
which
is
departmental,
and
then
it
refers
goes
to
subtractor
c,
which
is
none
department.
None
departmental
and
my
concern
is,
is
the
departmental
boards.
J
There
are
there's
nothing
listed
on
any
of
these,
whether
it
be
water,
commission,
board
of
health,
family
and
children,
services,
personnel,
review
board,
none
of
those
have
a
a
term
for
the
board
members,
but
when
you
get
to
none
departmentals,
which
is
the
housing
authority,
industrial
import,
development,
commission,
tax,
assessors
board
airport
commission
and
the
building
authority,
there
is
it's
kind
of
if
ands
and
buts
out
there
there's
nothing
specific,
but
on
the
industrial
and
port
development
commission,
it
does
say,
require
seven
members
who
appointed
by
the
council
and
they
shall
serve
for
a
term
of
five
years
and
they,
but
then
over
here
under
tax
assessors
board,
they
are
appointed
by
the
council,
five
members
for
six
staggered
years,
six,
six
years
as
a
term.
J
So
what
I
would
like
to
propose
is
that
we
visit
the
the
tax
assessors
board
as
far
as
their
term,
to
make
that
term
be
three
years.
They'll
hang
out
anything
to
do
with
whether
they
can
or
cannot
be
reappointed.
It
just
six
years
is
a
long
time
for
a
person
to
serve
in
a
position
on
any
board.
That's
in
this
county,
so
I'd
like
foot
to
be
for
us
to
consider
a
three-year
term
for
the
board
of
tax.
J
Assessors,
I
have
talked
to
this
was
brought
to
my
attention
by
several
council
members
and-
and
I
thought
it
would
be
brought
up
before
and-
and
I
didn't
want
to
do
it
without
talking
to
some
of
the
members
of
the
committee
that
that
is
charged
with
this
particular
section.
E
J
Yes,
well,
some
not
a
whole
song
and-
and
I
was
talking
to
a
miss
tanner
and
he
said
that
he
had
no
problem
with
me,
bringing
it
up.
A
A
A
A
That
is
your
motion.
Okay,
there's
a
motion
on
the
floor.
You
heard
there's
a
second
all
right,
all
those
in
favor
of
this
recommendation.
Please
say:
aye.
A
O
O
I
don't
know
if
I
would
call
it
an
issue,
but
just
we're
kind
of
in
in
a
unique
situation
and
miss
chef
doll
feel
free
to
interrupt
me.
If
I
get
anything
wrong
about
what
I'm.
O
What
I'm
about
to
bring
up,
but
section
6-102
of
the
city
charter
in
part,
requires
that
six
months
after
the
federal
population
census
is
released,
it
has
a
set
of
requirements
which
I
won't
read
all
the
way
through,
but
it
appears
as
though,
at
least
from
the
the
conversation
that
we
had
earlier
that
because
of
a
new
state
law
that
was
passed
in
our
current
city
charter,
that
it's
creating
a
little
bit
of
a
issue
in
terms
of
timing
with
requirements
for
our
current
districting
commission.
O
O
A
A
F
Paragraph
five,
such
redistricting
ordinance
shall
not
apply
to
any
primary
or
regular
or
special
election
held
within
six
months
after
it's
becoming
effective
and
because
of
the
delay
in
the
census
this
year,
as
well
as
changes
in
state
law.
As
to
when
primaries
are
it's
looking
like
that
deadline
is
not
going
to
be
attainable,
so
we
will
have
to
use
the
current
districts
again
in
the
may
primary
unless
that
primary
is
delayed
by
the
general
assembly
to
june,
which
has
been
requested,
but
it's
not
very
likely
that
they
will
do
that.
I've
heard
that.
E
F
That's
the
issue
and
the
question
is
whether
we
go
ahead
and
try
to
fix
that
for
10
years
from
now
put
it
to
the
voters
for
whether
we
sort
of
see
what
happens,
and
I,
of
course
a
lot
can
change
in
state
law
in
the
next
10
years,
and
ms
boren
was
talking
this
morning
about
how
you
know.
We've
never
really
been
in
this
exact
bind
before
it
was
sort
of
a
combination
of
circumstances
that
made
the
six
months
not
workable.
O
A
So
and
I'm
not
either
I'm
going
to
turn
to
our
procedural
expert.
So
so
my
understanding
originally
was
that
we
put
forth
all
the
recommendations
when
we
feel
that
this
is
it,
everybody
has
had
their
say,
and
every
group
has
given
their
input.
We
vote
on
those,
and
then
we
take
that
forward
for
the
public
vote
or
the
public
input
the
public
session.
So
if
we
don't
consider
this
today,
because
it's
just-
we
don't
know
enough,
we.
E
F
Right,
I
think
the
committee
would
have
to
be
willing
to
delay
the
start
of
the
public
hearings
to
consider
the
additional
proposal
at
this
point
if
they
were
going
to-
and
I
also
will
mention
that-
should
this
appear
to
be
a
problem-
that's
going
to
continue
into
the
future.
It
is
also
possible
to
get
the
charter
amended
by
local
legislation
in
between
the
10
years,
so
that
would
be
an
option.
A
Okay,
well
that
kind
of
dovetails
into
the
next
item
on
the
agenda.
We
can
talk
about
that,
so
my
suggestion
was
going
to
be,
I
believe
in
and
kind
of
hoping.
We
would
conclude
with
today
that
we
can
move
forward
next
month
and
do
the
public
hearings
for
lack
of
a
better
word.
Is
that
what
we're
calling
them
public
hearings,
yeah
public
hearings?
A
However,
I
mean
I,
I
don't
want
to
be
so
hasty
if
there
are
significant
and
meaningful
things
that
just
came
up
that
we
need
to
consider
in
the
form
of
a
recommendation.
I'm
not
hearing
enough
right
now
to
know
that
it's
a
recommendation
that
we
can
bring
to
a
vote
today.
A
Maybe
I'm
mishearing,
but
I'm
I'm
not
hearing
that
yeah.
So
we
can
either
proceed
with
what's
been
recommended
so
far
and
set
dates
today
for
the
public
hearings
and
move
move
this
along-
or
we
can
say,
we've
got
one
more
month
for
for
this
particular
issue
or
any
other
thing
that
may
come
up
conclude
everything
in
november
and
have
the
public
hearings
in
december.
A
My
suggestion
was
going
to
be
whenever
we
do
the
public
hearings
to
do
it
on
the
date,
the
third
thursday
in
the
month
that
we're
already
accustomed
to
being
here
at
hold
one
earlier
in
the
day
and
one
later,
like
after
hours,
six-ish
seven-ish
to
give
people
opportunity
to
make
either
of
them.
It's
just
gonna
be
my
suggestion,
but
what's
the
will
of
the
committee?
A
J
J
I
think
if
we
wait
until
december,
we
are
doing
away
with
that
idea
completely
because
people
december
is
not
a
good
month
for
folks
to
do
much
else,
but
work
and
get
ready
for
christmas
and
we're
going
to
have
to
have
a
hard
time
with
christmas,
because
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
have
anything
to
buy
but
anyway,
but
so
I
I
think
we
need
to
move
forward
and
do
our
public
hearings
is
as
quickly
as
possible
within
reason,
but
I
I
don't
think
we
need
to
wait
till
december.
K
A
But
that's
our
decision,
whether
we
will
or
where
we
won't
it's
up
to
us
and
we
we
are
well
within
the
deadline
that
we
have
to
deliver
this
to
the
mayor's
office.
I'm
just
trying
to
keep
us
moved
along
and
be
efficient,
mr
perkins.
What
what
are
your
thoughts
about
that?
Just,
I
think.
O
My
thought
is,
is
what
the
the
obviously
the
work
that
we're
doing
on
the
charter.
Commission
is
extremely
important,
and
I
think
the
work
that
is
is
done
by
the
districting
commission
is
also
extremely
important,
so
going
forward
if
we
have
the
opportunity
to
address
any
sort
of
conflicts
or
issues
now
that
we
should
take
the
opportunity
to
address
any
potential
issues
now
or
at
least
take
the
time
to
discuss
it.
O
So
I
and
I'm
sorry
for
bringing
this
up,
but
I
found
out
about
this
today,
so
if
we
can
take
a
little
extra
time
to
discuss
it
and
then
moving
forward,
at
least
for
me
november
and
december
generally,
are
just
like
not
good
times,
so
I
don't
think
we're
much
better
off
in
december
than
we
are
in
november.
Vice
versa.
So
because
it's
just
the
holiday
season
so.
A
Is
there
a
motion
to
either
proceed
on
the
schedule
that
we
were
going
to
have
with
public
hearings
next
month
or
is
there
a
motion
to
wait?
An
additional
month
gather
some
information
with
respect
to
what
might
be
a
potential
recommendation
coming
out
of
the
that
section,
section
six
and
kind
of
move
back
a
month.
Yes,.
O
I'm
not
at
least
just
from
the
very
short
amount
of
time
I've
looked
at
this,
it
doesn't
seem
like
it
would
take
us
a
month
to
figure
something
out.
Is
it
possible
could
could
we
possibly
shorten
the
the
timeline
like
maybe
have
another?
O
A
L
L
F
It
would
be
resolved
having
the
general
assembly
pass,
a
local
act
that
basically
made
our
procedures
governed
by
the
state
law
or
took
certain
provisions
out.
You
can
do
charter
amendments
in
the
interim
time
period
that
between
the
10
years
of
the
charter
review
commission.
E
A
A
A
Should
we
do
it
or
not?
I
I
just
I
don't
know
enough
about
the
issue
just
having
heard
it
to
to
advise
to
give
an
educated
opinion.
Yes,
sir,.
M
Madam
chair
I'd
just
like
to
have
a
clarification
of
exactly
what
mr
president
is
asking
us
to
do.
M
We've
talked
about
a
situation
that
the
city
council
has
advised
us
that's
already
under
advisement
by
state
legislation.
They
have
to
vote
on
this
on
exactly
what
they're
going
to
do
as
far
as
the
redistricting.
So
what
exactly
I?
I
need
clarification
of
exactly
what
has
been
asked
of
this
community
to
do.
O
This
came
up
in,
as
I
said
earlier,
this
came
up
in
the
districting
commission
that
we
had
this
morning
at
11
o'clock,
so
there
there's
not
been
enough
time
to
even
discuss
it
to
discuss
it
at
all.
I
just
know
from
our
conversation
that
we
had
in
the
district
and
commission
that
part
of
the
hang
up
and
part
of
the
discussion
we
had
and
that
we
discussed
that
length
in
our
meeting
today.
O
This
is
kind
of
a
specific
issue,
specific
circumstance
and
several
things
coming
together
that
I
think
have
caused
this,
and
so
I'm
saying,
if
we
have
the
opportunity
to
address
it,
we
can
the
question
I
will
ask
which
may
help
is
michelle
in
your
opinion.
O
F
And
just
to
speak,
maybe
give
a
little
feel
for
what
we
would
be
doing.
If
we
decided
to
look
into
this,
there
could
be
a
very
simple
provision
of
just
simply
striking
the
six
months
without
putting
anything
else
in
it.
F
I'm
not
sure
that
people
who
want
to
be
able
to
rely
on
knowing
what
district
they're
running
in
would
necessarily
like
that,
or
we
can
look
at
the
whole
section
and
whether
it
makes
sense
in
light
of
all
the
new
state
requirements
as
to
what
you
do
when
there's
a
districting,
it
could
be
very
simple
or
very
complex
is
my
short
answer.
That's
probably
not
helpful,
but
the
committee
could
take
one
of
two
different
approaches
to
it.
If
they
wanted
to
address
it.
A
Right-
and
this
came
up
in
this,
mr
roberts,
in
the
section
that
you
all
did
where
were
commissioner
bourne-
was
very
active
in
the
review
of
this,
and
none
of
this
came
up.
That's
great,
okay,
all
right!
Well,
listen!
We
need
to
to
make
a
determination
about
where
we
are.
Thank
you.
O
I
would
say
if,
if
the
elections
director
miss
born,
feels
pretty
confident
that
this
won't
become
an
issue
again,
I
would
feel
comfortable
with
us
just
I'm
just
moving
on
so
I'll,
be
comfortable
with
that.
A
O
Yeah,
no
I'm
I
mean
as
a
I
was.
I
asked
miss
miss
chef
doll
earlier
if
she
felt
like
this
was
a
just
specific
to
this
year
and
some
of
the
different
things
that
are
going
on
and
those
types
of
things.
I
think,
if,
if
I
heard
you
correctly,
miss
born
feels
like
this
is
something
that
would
be
very
unlikely
to
be
an
issue
again.
A
Okay,
so
you're
you're
withdrawing
the
request.
Okay,
all
right!
Thank
you,
so
that
takes
us
back
to
where
we
were
before,
where,
if
all
the
working
groups
have
put
their
recommendations
for
we've
voted
on
every
working
group
recommendation
that
has
been
brought
so
according
to
our
process.
The
next
step
is
to
have
public
hearings.
We
must
have
two,
it
doesn't
say
anything
I
checked
with
legal.
It
doesn't
say
that
they
have
to
be
on
different
days.
It
can
be
on
the
same
day.
A
It
can't
be
at
the
same
time
have
one
in
this
room
and
one
in
the
other.
So
my
recommendation-
and
it's
just
a
recommendation-
is
to
use
that
third
thursday
time
that
we
have
maybe
one
around
lunchtime
and
the
other
after
work,
but
on
the
same
day
we
don't
all
have
to
be
at
both.
However,
there
needs
to
be
a
representative
from
each
working
group
that
has
a
recommendation
forward
to
be
there
to
answer
questions
that
the
public
may
have
and
by
the
public
I
mean
there
may
be
one
person
there
might
be
40..
A
A
F
A
A
J
My
observation
is
that
we
and
what
I'm
thinking
is
that
that
the
public
hearings
should
be
after
work,
both
of
them
having
them
in
the
daytime.
At
lunchtime,
people
are
not
as
inclined
to
to
to
show
up
and
have,
as
many
people
show
up,
and
I
think
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
have
access
to
everybody
that
wants
to
be
there
and
have
them
in
the
afternoon
or
or
after
after
work.
J
I
mean
you
know,
maybe
as
early
as
six
o'clock,
even
and
and
I
just
think
that
would
be
more
productive
and
I'm
not
saying
we
need
to
make
that
motion,
but
I
mean,
but
I
just
think
it's
important,
that
we
make
it
available
to
as
many
people
as
possible
and
some
people
that
work,
and
they
only
have
a
an
hour
for
lunch
well
and
they're.
J
A
I
think
that's
absolutely
true
for
some
people,
but
I
also
think
there's
a
population
that
maybe
for
child
care
reasons
or
any
other
things
that,
during
the
day
is,
is
better
for
them
and
a
month
to
notice
about
a
date.
That's
in
the
afternoon.
I
think
most
people
would
not
have
that
much
difficulty
getting
there.
But
again,
that's
just
my
opinion.
L
A
Okay,
so
that
we
do
it
okay
and
I
think
two
o'clock-
and
what
do
you
think
tamika,
six
or
seven
six,
two
o'clock
and
six
o'clock,
all
right,
that's
the
motion.
Is
there
a
second
all
right,
all
those
in
favor
of
the
motion?
Please
say
I
any
opposed
all
right.
Thank
you.
So
we
will
move
forward
next
month
and
we
will
have
that's
not
thanksgiving.
Is
it
the
third
thursday
sounds
thanksgiving-ish
to
me?
A
Oh
okay,
all
right
good!
So
it's
not
thanksgiving
all
right,
so
I
will
be
in
contact
with
the
working
group
leaders
to
see
who
from
their
group
will
be
here
for
either
or
both
of
the
meetings
to
talk
through
the
recommendations.
Other
than
that,
I
thank
you
for
that.
We're
moving
on
to
the
next
stage
now
any
questions
about
anything
that
we've
discussed
today
relative
to
the
to
the
public
hearings.
A
Anything
of
that
that
we
are
all
invited
and
encouraged
to
come
to
the
public
hearings,
but
what
we
must
have
is
someone
who's
willing
to
walk
through
the
recommendations
for
each
working
group,
so
we've
got
to
have
representation
from
them,
but
we
all
mean
this
is
our
work.
This
is
what
we
voted
to
put
forward.
So
I
encourage
everybody
if
you
can
to
be
here,
to
answer
any
questions
or
hear
from
the
public
again
the
whole
reason
we're
having
the
hearings,
if
there's
a
groundswell
of
opposition
to
something
we
I
have
put
before
the
public.
A
F
Chairman
matt
ask
a
housekeeping
question.
Yes,
I
think
for
the
public,
we
need
a
way
to
get
a
document
that
combines
each
group's
separate
recommendations
into
one
document
and
also
scatters
the
notice
provisions
through
because
they're
somewhere,
what
was
written
before
may
not
be
consistent
with
a
new
notice
provision.
So
I
don't
know.
A
Okay,
we
can
work
on
that.
I
can
get
with
tamika
on
that
and
we
will
for
those
of
you
who
have
the
notice
provisions
that
are
outlined
in
here,
we'll
just
put
them
back
in
your
working
group.
Recommendations
like
you
brought
them
up
the
first
time
and
just
make
it
part
of
that
group's
recommendation.