►
From YouTube: Charter Review meeting 01 20 2022
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).
B
A
A
C
D
A
And
we
adhered
to
those
meetings
every
month
without
without
fail,
so
we
took
his
feet
back
kindly
and
I
said
that
I
would
bring
it
back
to
the
group,
and
so
I
am
doing
that,
but
unless
I'm
forgetting
something,
those
were
the
two
items
that
were
shared
by
the
member
of
the
public.
Who
came
when
the
opportunity
was
there
to
make
public
comments?
Does
anybody
have
any
recollection
other
than
those
two
items
from
our
member
of
the
public?
Who
was
there.
A
No
okay,
all
right!
Well
with
that.
I
think
we
have
performed
our
public
hearing
aspect
and
we
will
seriously
something
from
the
floor.
E
Yes,
ma'am,
I'm
looking
at
the
the
recommendations
that
we've
published
over
here.
We
picked
up
off
the
table
and
on
the
back
of
the
back
page,
it's
got
section
4-6-24
tax,
assessors
board
of
tax,
assessors,
what
we've
got
here?
E
E
Well,
I
I
don't
have
any
problem
with
that,
but
their
recommendation
was
not
a
motion.
So
if
you
want
to
do
away
with
the
motion
that
passed
well,
then
there's
a
way
to
do
that
and
I
don't
have
any
problem
with
whatever
the
decision
of
this
commission
is
to
change
or
not
change.
I
don't
have
any
problem
with
that,
but
I
do
have
a
problem.
Is
it
that
the
prop
that
the
motion
that
was
made
properly
made
and
seconded
and
passed
is
not
recorded?
E
A
Right,
I-
and
I
I
remember
that
I
also
remember
at
the
public
hearing
when
it
was
brought
up.
You
raised
the
issue
and
the
city
manager
spoke
to
that
and
said
that
he
believed
that
the
motion
that
was
put
forward
was
in
conflict
with
state
law,
and
my
recollection
and
after
review
of
the
of
the
recording
is
that
at
the
public
hearing
we
said
that
we
go
back
and
there
could
be
an
amended
motion
that
was
put
forward.
That
was
not
in
conflict
with
state
law,
and
that
is
where
I
believe
we
are
right
now.
E
Well,
I
think
you're
you're
correct
in
part
of
what
you're
saying
if
you,
but
we
did
have
further
conversation
with
the
city
manager.
City
attorney,
excuse
me
and
that
that
his
recommendation
that
he
said
that
the
the
the
wording
of
the
of
the
charter
before
us
that
gave
the
terms
of
six
years
was
actually
not
in
conflict.
E
So
the
three
years
would
not
be
in
conflict
either
and
that
and
that
we
could
go
forward
with
the
three
years
now.
I
know
I'm
having
to
to
quote
him
from
memory,
but
but
we,
but
we
discussed
that
very,
very
distinctly
that
that
even
the
three
years
was
not
was
not
in
a
conflict.
Just
like
the
six
years
was
not
in
conflict.
F
F
F
So
mr
russell
is
right
on
that,
because
we've
already
had
one
motion
approved
so
we'd
have
to
have
a
new
one
approved
by
this
commission,
but
that's
still
our
recommendation
to
leave
it
between
three
and
six
years.
So
the
council
has
that
flexibility
and
that's
in
accordance
with
state
law
they
might
want
to
appoint
somebody
for
three
years
might
want
to
appoint
others
for
six.
So
we
think
they
ought
to
have
that
flexibility
under
the
state
law.
E
Can
I
ask
you
a
question
first
sure?
Well,
the
first
thing
is
is
that
this
charter
was
instigated
back
in
the
70s,
and
evidently
six
years
has
not
been
in
conflict
with
the
state
law
up
until
today,
and
and
as
actually
the
six
years
is
not
in
conflict
with
state
law.
So
three
years
is
also
not
in
conflict
with
state
law.
So
the
and.
E
Otherwise,
why
do
we
need
to
have
a
charter
if
we're
going
to
let
everything
that's
done
be
by
the
charter,
I
mean
by
the
council
now,
if
we
do
it
in
the
council,
the
first
thing
is,
you
know
the
the
council,
we
vote
on
the
council
members
and
then
they're,
not
permanent,
and
but
a
an
appointed
tax
assessors
board
person
can
be
reappointed
forever
without
any
election.
So
we're
not
saying
that
they
can't
serve
forever.
A
Right,
thank
you
so
much.
Mr
russell,
so
we've
got
a
motion.
That's
been
approved
discussion
of
a
substitute
motion.
What
is
the
pleasure
of
the
of
the
commission?
I
recognize
you.
Yes,.
D
D
So
but
the
fact
that,
like
all
the
other
topics,
we
went
through
a
very
lengthy
vetting
process
of
those,
so
that
still
remains
my
concern.
I'm
not
sure
why
the
and
maybe
six
years
is
too
long,
but
maybe
maybe
it
is
I'm
not
arguing
that
point,
but
rather
than
go
to
three
without
the
topic
being
assigned
to
a
committee
for
proper
study,
I'm
more
comfortable
taking
the
city
managers,
I
mean
city
attorney's
recommendations.
G
G
E
The
state
law
says
what
the
city
attorney
says.
It
says,
but
so
the
the
charter
has
been
in
a
violation
all
these
times,
because
it
says
six
well,
if
we
put
it
to
three,
it
still
is
the
same
thing
as
what
the
law
says
about
three
or
three
to
six,
I
think,
is
what
the
state
law
says
according
to
city
attorney.
Well,
three
is
not
is
not
illegal.
E
Just
like
six
was
not
illegal,
so
I
I
think
we're
we're
trying
to
say
that
the
state
law
says
that
it
has
to
be
dependent
on
the
council
three
to
rs
three
to
six.
That's
not
what
it
says.
State
law
says
it
can
be
three
or
six
right
and
clifton.
Our
city
attorney
admitted
that
the
last
time
we
talked
about
this,
that
it
can
say
three,
even
though
the
state
law
says
three
to
six.
E
So
so
what
we're
talking
about
is
is
that
is
bringing
it
to
three
instead
of
six,
which
is
logical
because
there's
not
another
council
or
appointed
committee
that
is
compensated
like
the
taxes
office
is
that
has
more
than
three
years
except
the
the
economic
development
authority.
That's
five!
Nobody
has
six
in
the
state
in
the
whole
county,
except
the
tax
assessors
board,
so
we
need
to
bring
it
in
line
with
what
everybody
else
is
doing,
and
I
just
I
think
we
need
to
do
that.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
sir.
H
Yes,
to
follow
up
on
elton's
point,
I
think
the
point
that
he's
making
is
that
in
practice,
it
will
continue
to
be
officers
will
continue
to
be
installed
for
six
years.
My
question
would
be
if
this
was
committed
to
study,
how
what
would
that
look
like?
Would
we
have
to
reconvene
at
another
time
on
that
point,
because
we
have
until
may
correct.
A
H
A
Yes,
thank
you.
So
it's
been
moved
and
seconded
any
further
discussion.
Okay,
so
all
those
in
favor
of
the
motion
that
was
made-
please
say
I
beg
your
pardon.
A
A
B
A
What
we
propose
to
do
today,
because
there
there
is
no
further
business
at
this
particular
stage
in
our
meeting
other
than
to
approve
or
not
the
recommendations
that
were
voted
upon
by
this
group
and
then
discussed
at
both
of
the
public
hearings.
A
A
So
if
there's
discussion
or
questions
or
anything,
we've
gone
through
this
now
four
times,
but
if
there
is
question
or
any
clarity
needed
or
anything
by
any
commission
members,
then
please,
as
the
motions
are
being
made.
That
is
the
time
because
after
we
vote
we're
compiling
the
list-
and
we
will
be
turning
these
over
for
balloting
okay.
A
A
A
A
A
Is
there
a
motion
to
adopt
this
proposed
language?
Yes,
as
a
second
all
those
in
favor.
Please
say
I
any
opposed
all
right.
Thank
you.
Next
section:
zero,
three
appointment
of
recorders
and
recorders.
Po
tim.
You
see
the
language
that
was
approved
by
this
group
and
that
was
presented
at
the
public
hearings.
A
A
Second,
all
those
in
favor?
Please
say
I
any
opposed
okay,
thank
you.
Next
section,
5605
rules,
procedures
and
personnel.
You
see
the
language
as
proposed
that
was
approved
by
this
group
and
discussed
at
the
public
hearings.
Is
there
a
motion
to
adopt
this
language
here?
A
second
all,
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
any
opposed.
A
A
A
A
I
A
J
J
There
was
another
change
that
was
presented
and
was
approved
and
it
was
to
change
the
audit
time
limit
so
before
there
was
only
four
months
to
complete
the
audit,
which
was
inconsistent
with
our
requirements
and
also
may
not
be
enough
time
if
there
was
a
difficult
year,
and
so
we
were
changing
that
from
four
months
to
180
days
and
that
was
presented
a
couple
times
and
was
presented
the
last
meeting
and
was
approved
to
change
that
to
180
days.
It
was
just
missed
from
this
document.
A
C
A
H
H
H
J
I
I
A
A
A
Thank
you
section,
57501
sale
and
disposition
of
property.
You
see
the
language
as
proposed
and
agreed
upon
by
this
commission
and
discussed
at
the
public
hearings.
Is
there
a
motion
to
adopt
this
language?
A
A
A
A
We
discussed
those
and
we
decided
that
the
agreed
upon
language
we
would
propose
to
be
substituted
within
every
instance
of
the
charter
that
referred
to
notice,
so
that
was
agreed
upon.
We
brought
it
to
the
public
hearing,
it
was
discussed
and
I
have
confirmed
with
the
with
the
city
attorney's
office
that
once
we
agree
upon
and
vote
on
that
proposed
language,
we
can
then
vote
to
insert
in
a
blanket
way
all
those
provisions.
A
So
I
will
now
present
section
3
206
publication
of
ordinances
by
caption
only
publication
in
full.
You
see
the
proposed
language
that
was
agreed
upon
and
that
was
presented
to
the
public
hearing.
Is
there
a
motion
to
adopt
say
a
second
all,
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
any
opposed,
okay.
Secondly,
section
8,
507
methods
of
notification.
A
A
Is
there
a
second
all,
those
in
favor?
Please
say
I
any
opposed
in
the
following
section:
section:
1,
103,
section,
6,
201,
section
6,
400,
section
7401,
section,
7402,
section,
5
7501
are
all
provisions
that
those
na
those
that
knew
notice
language
would
be
inserted
into,
and
so
I
will
take
a
blanket
motion
to
accept
those
provisions
as
being
amended
by
the
ones
that
we
just
adopted.
A
A
F
We
go
back
to
8-100
for
just
a
minute,
yes
and
where
it
has
the
sheriff
in
that
paragraph
judge
richardson.
Will
you
help
us
out
here?
I
think
we
inadvertently
still
had
sheriff
of
consolidated
government
in
there
and
you're
right.
Wasn't
your
motion
to
put
in
muskogee
county
in
those
two
places.
K
A
And
let
me
also
say
just
as
a
point
of
clarity
that
again
in
this
final
version
that
we
were
working
from
it
was
presented,
and
we
did
approve
that
language,
and
that
was
the
language
that
was
moved
forward.
So
again,
it's
it's
a
just
a
clerical
misprint
in
the
version
that
we're
working
from
today,
but
that
sheriff
of
muskogee
county
language
was,
and
what
we
have
acted
on
previously.
A
So
was
that
a
motion
to
withdraw
yeah.
K
A
K
A
J
There
are
two
versions
of
seven
401.
I
think
the
correct
one
is
on
page.
J
A
J
J
A
J
I
A
A
A
A
L
Madam
chairman
and
I
may
be
waiting
in
the
water-
that's
too
deep
for
me.
I
really
want
a
question
for
clifton,
since
we
only
meet
every
10
years.
F
L
F
K
F
Allowed
the
council
to
create
tax
allocation
districts
and
that's
all
controlled
by
the
state
law.
The
conflict
of
interest
rule.
That's
in
that
statute
only
applies
to
elected
members
of
the
county
governing
authority,
our
council,
not
the
school
board
members
and,
of
course,
we've
gotten
an
opinion
from
the
attorney
general
to
that
effect.
Also,
okay,
but
yeah.
It
did
come
up
at
the
last
council
meeting,
but
this
body
doesn't
have
jurisdiction
over
that
general
state
law.
F
L
H
One
concern
in
mulling
over
this
that
comes
up
is
that
when
people
are
voting,
they're
not
going
to
be
able
to
reference
the
charter
while
they're
voting,
is
that
correct?
That's?
My
first
question
is
that
is
that
correct.
A
I
What
the
local
act
that
created
this
commission
provides
is
that
all
of
your
recommendations
will
be
forwarded
to
the
governing
account
authority
to
the
council,
and
what
I
would
suggest
is
that
your
recommendations
from
the
october
meeting,
as
well
as
our
updated
version
of
what
we've
been
through
today,
be
submitted
to
council.
We
will
use
this
version
from
today
to
actually
advise
the
election
superintendent
on
preparing
the
ballot.
I
A
H
That
would
be
great
sure,
and
the
concern
that
I
had
is
for
someone
that
seeing
what
was-
and
they
don't
have,
the
context
that
we
have,
they
may
think
that
we're
actually
protecting
some
other
officers
by
removing
detailed
names
and
just
putting
city
officers
there
without
having
that
context.
That
might
be
a
concern.
I
H
Correct
now
under
city
officers,
police
and
fire
chief
would
be
considered
city
officers.
I
guess
what
I'm
trying
to
do
is
think
ahead
to
someone
that
does
not
go
back
and
read
the
charter
and
they
see
what's
what
was
printed
and
they're.
Thinking
that
we're
actually
trying
to
protect,
provide
some
more
protections
for
the
police
and
fire
chief
and
rather
than
voting
for
the
approval,
which
is
just
it's
just
typographical
right
that
they
actually
voted
down.
H
I
G
A
H
Yeah
well
when,
when
everyone
started
to
go
back
and
look
over
the
the
the
wording
to
see
if
any
things
were
missing,
I
queued
in
to
do
the
same
thing.
And
so
I
pulled
up
my
powerpoint,
and
I
think
this
is
this:
doesn't
capture
everything
that
we
had
in
that
powerpoint
presentation.
H
So
we
actually
intended
to
present
it
as
follows:
I'll
read
it
very
quickly,
subject
to
the
approval
of
six
members
of
the
council
to
appoint
and
remove
city
officers.
So
that's
just
those
first
two
words
that
are
in
the
underlying
section
then
go
back
to
such
as
the
police
and
fire
chief
and
such
other
officers.
H
Understood
and
this
just
so,
we
understand
the
the
language,
police
and
fire
chief
was
already
presented
10
years
ago,
so
we
were
just
restating.
What
was
presented
question
would
be.
Does
that
seem
like
a
problem
to
anyone
else?
Should
we
list
those
actual
officers
there?
How
many
officers
are
there
that
are
in
the
section
section.
F
And
commissioner
schenkel,
I
think,
was
involved
with
this.
Ten
years
ago,
we've
got
city
managers,
city
attorney,
chief
of
police,
for
our
chief
fire
and
ems
chief
and
warden
of
muskogee
county
prison.
So
those
five
are
the
list
and
you
can
repeat
that
whole
list
here,
but
it's
not
necessary.
We've
just
referred
to
that
defined
list.
H
For
for
the
purposes
of
the
charter,
it
would
be
redundant
for
the
purposes
of
those
who
are
voting.
Do
we
feel
like
that
would
be
redundant
or
should
we
include
it?
What's
the
question,
what's
the
pleasure.
J
I
I
like
the
language
as
is,
but
just
include
four
300
in
the
when
they
view
it,
so
they
have
the
context.
So
nothing
changes
in
four
three
hundred,
just
repeat
the
information,
and
we
can
keep
the
language,
as
is.
L
L
L
L
Election
right,
yeah,
okay,
all
right,
so
I
just
want
to
be
sure
we're
not
trumping
what
we
did
10
years
ago
when
we
gave
the
mayor
the
power
to
remove
any
of
the
city
officers,
we're
not
removing
that
power.
Correct,
correct,
okay,.
I
Subject
to
the
their
appeal
to
council
now,.
L
They
can
appeal
to
council
and
have
it
overturned,
but
the
mayor
doesn't
have
to
have
their
votes.
The
mayor
can
go
ahead
and
fire
anybody
it's
the
way.
We
changed
it
10
years
ago
and
that's
about
I've
gotten
confused
with
division,
heads
and
city
officers
with
the
writing
here.
So
as
long
clifton
is
your
and
lucy
you're
assuring
me
that
what
we
put
in
10
years
ago
audrey
remains
the
same
and.
A
A
A
We've
met
faithfully
every
month
in
public
to
great
detail
and
your
representation
of
your
your
who,
whomever
appointed
you
to
this
commission,
was
done
in
very
excellent
service,
and
I
appreciate
the
working
groups,
the
working
group
leaders,
every
member
of
the
con
of
the
commission,
clifton
and
lucy,
and
their
service
and
council
and
tamika,
of
course,
who
has
had
to
take
way
too
many
calls
from
me
great
team
effort
and
we've
done
our
part.
A
K
Just
want
to
make
sure
we
on
the
same
page,
the
original
charter
says
section:
4
200
is
just
the
qualifications
and
the
term
and
compensation
and
election
of
mayor
section,
4201,
section
15
deals
with
the
removal.
So
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
it's
not
4
200,
it's
4,
201.
K
F
F
Let
me
just
say
thank
you
again
for
all
the
commissioner
service.
Thank
you,
chair
tillman.
I
know
the
mayor
wanted
to
stop
by,
but
they've
got
a
budget
kickoff
going
and
on
behalf
of
the
mayor
and
city
manager
and
council.
Thank
all
y'all
for
your
service.
You've
asked
some
darn
good
questions
and
done
a
good
job
during
the
pandemic.
A
We've
got
one
other
item
of
business.
The
october
minute
meeting
minutes
went
out
this
afternoon
for
the
october
meeting
and
you
know
we
didn't
meet
in
november
because
we
had
the
public
hearings.
Is
there
a
motion
to
accept
the
october
minutes
of
the
commission
for
a
second
all,
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
any
opposed.
A
Yes,
I
see,
we've
got
somebody
at
the
mic.
Who
is
not
a
commission
member,
but
I
welcome
you
to
them.
B
I
want
to
thank
all
of
y'all
for
the
work
that
you
put
into
this.
I've
been
coming
to
charter
review
commission
meetings
ever
since
1970,
and
this
time
I
would
say-
and
I
guess
I
can
blame
it
on
the
pandemic.
But
this
is
the
worst
one
as
far
as
communication,
there's
nothing
that
you
could
do
about.
Like
you
said,
the
landscape
for
notification
has
changed
and
I
have
been
calling
the
clerk
of
council
to
get
the
information
because
it
is.
B
B
We
had
good
times
at
charter
review,
commission
meetings
and
I'm
just
a
little
upset,
because
there
are
people
who
columbus
has
lost
its
soul
and
it's
basically
lack
of
communication,
and
this
thing
is
really
going
to
hurt
skill
because
people
are
going
to
the
other
side,
and
I
can
understand
that
now,
but
we
should
have
had
more
communication.
As
far
as
the
public
hearings-
and
I
am
going
to
get
to
find
out
who
was
in
those
public
hearings
because
we
tried-
we
tried
very
hard
to
see
where
could
we
meet
it?
B
We
just
want
to
make
contributions
of
some
things
because
things
have
changed
in
this
city
and
it
would
not
have
necessarily
changed
the
charter,
but
we
definitely
wouldn't
want
to
go
along
with
that
last
paragraph
that
y'all
gave
to
share
because
it
was
going
to
do
a
conflict
of
interest
between
the
sheriff
and
the
police.
Let
that
sheriff
office
stay
the
way
that
it
is,
and
there
are
some
other
things
I
read
through
this,
and
I
like
it.
I
really
like
it.
B
I
just
think
counseling
with
the
money
that's
going
to
be
coming
through
this
city
council
needs
to
meet
every
week.
Now
the
mayor
is
the
one
who
we
basically
depend
upon
to
do
things,
but
we
like
him.
B
Well,
we
usually
like
our
mayors
anyway,
this
city
looks
like
it's
ran
by
city
manager
and
we
and
with
the
money
that's
going
to
come
in
here
we
need
council
meetings
and
they
all
can
meet
because
most
of
them
are
retired
or
the
other
ones
who
are
veterans
they
are
retired
veterans
are
out
with
a
medical
discharge
because
of
failure
to
adjust,
but
we
needed
me
a
month
weekly
meetings
and
we
were
going
to
discuss
all
of
that
and
it's
a
group
of
us
and
I'm
going
to
take
some
recommendations,
I'm
going
to
let
them
read
this
most
of
this
stuff.
B
We
like
we
just
don't
like
what
you
got
on
share
and
some
other
thing,
and
we
got
and
the
stuff
that
you
omitted
like
the
meetings,
public
agendas,
that
sort
of
thing
and
we're
going
to
find
out.
Why
is
it
that
tamika
couldn't
get
us
the
communication
that
we
need
right?
You
know
because
we
can
get
removal
of
a
clerk,
because
this
is
the
people's
charter
and
we
appreciate
the
15
not
for
15
people.
B
This
is
for
the
citizens
of
columbus,
georgia
and
all
of
us
as
much
as
possible
could
have
should
have
been
heard
and
we
were
not-
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
what
don't
pass
is
going
to
pass
whether
we
have
to
go
to
the
polls
and
make
sure
the
entire
charter
fails.
We'll
do
that,
but
I
love
you
all
and
the
reason
why
you
had
a
problem
last
time
remember:
it
was
about
city
manager,
but
you
you're
right.
They
did
a
real
good
job.
Last
time
you
was
on
there
too,
but
we
had.
A
So
we
we
hate
that
there
are
people
who
who
did
not
see
or
hear
about
it,
but
I
can
assure
you
that
it
was
no
no
intention
of
this
commission
of
me
as
chair
or
anybody
that
worked
with
me
in
the
city.
So
on
that
note,
I
thank
you
for
your
service
and
see
you
may
be
in
10
years
all
right.
Thank
you.
So
much.