►
From YouTube: Rules Committee Meeting 1/22/2019
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
evening
everybody
welcome
to
the
Rules
Committee
meeting.
It's
Tuesday
January
22nd
2018,
it's
6:05
and
we're
going
to
get
the
meeting
started.
We
do
have
a
quorum,
alderman,
Rainey
and
alderman
fleming
are
absent
tonight,
but
I
think
ultimate
suffered
in
is
running
late
and
the
mayor
is
running
late,
but
we
have
a
quorum,
none
the
less.
So
the
first
item
on
our
agenda
is
citizen
comment:
we've
got
one
person
signed
up,
Bree,
Friedman,
Greg.
A
Did
he
leave
ok?
Ok,
ok,
we're
gonna,
we're
gonna
wait
for
for
Ray,
but
first
can
we
approve
the
minutes
of
the
regular
meeting
from
December
3rd?
Are
there
any
changes
or
Corrections
or
there's
a
second
any
changes
of
Corrections?
Okay,
that
everyone
in
favor
say
aye
any
opposed
okeydoke
now?
Well
now
we
will
rate
wait
for
Ray
here.
A
A
B
B
B
This
seems
to
be
a
never-ending
battle
between
truth,
justice
and
the
American
Way.
Who
said
that?
Thank
you,
you
are
all
very
nice
and
well-educated
people
here.
I
would
be
happy
to
meet
with
any
of
you
for
lunch
or
coffee
any
time,
nothing,
personal
and
we're
talking
about
business
and
how
to
resolve
issues
past
present
and
future.
If
you
have
not
addressed
the
issue
or
come
up
with
a
resolution,
then
the
issue
still
remains.
B
B
What
was
the
resolution
to
Claire
Kelly
suggestion
to
adopt
a
lobbying
ordinance?
How
is
filing
a
report
and
making
it
part
of
the
record
resolving
anything
I
thought?
That's
why
we're
here
unless
I
missed
something
it
looks
like
you
are
all,
except
for
dar
you're,
all
part
of
City
Council.
So
is
this
Rules
Committee?
Do
you
have
a
binding
decision
making
power,
or
does
it
still
have
to
go?
If
you
make
a
decision,
does
it
still
have
to
go
before
City
Council?
B
B
A
A
D
F
A
You
have
the
staff
report
on
this
and
recommended
action.
It
seems
to
me
that
we're
at
a
point
where
there
are
enough
questions
about
how
we
proceed,
that
a
substantive
review
of
our
rules
in
the
Code
of
Ethics
is
this
is
probably
time
to
do
that
and
in
consultation
with
Alderman
Braithwaite
who's
incoming
chair
of
rolls.
This
is
my
last
meeting
and
then
ultimately,
Braithwaite
takes
over.
The
suggestion
is
that
the
subcommittee
be
formed,
including
alder
Britt,
alderman
Braithwaite
and
myself.
E
So
not
to
overstate
the
obvious
but
yeah.
This
isn't
just
a
good
idea,
but
it's
something
that
we
need
to
do.
Clearly,
the
you
know,
I
think
the
Ethics
Board
was,
but
in
a
situation
you
know
that
was
not
fair
to
them.
I,
don't
know
how
old
the
ordinance
itself
is,
but
in
reviewing
it
and
looking
at
it
more
closely
in
conjunction
with
actual
complaints,
actual
disposition
in
the
actual
process,
and
then
the
processes
when
it
actually
gets
to
Council
for
consideration
it
just
simply
doesn't
work.
It
doesn't
serve
its
intended
purpose.
E
So
we
need
to
do
something
to
to
really
revisit
this
rewrite
it
and
bring
it
up
to
you
know,
create
up
to
current
standards.
I
think
the
suggestion
that
there
be
I
guess
like
with
our
term
I,
don't
remember
how
it's
referred
to
here.
The
two
tracks
is
important.
I
think
an
elected
official
is
in
a
very
different
circumstance
than
a
staff
member,
so
to
apply
these
same
rules
in
the
same
way,
doesn't
really
work
and
function
in
that
sense
either.
So
these
similar
types
of
committees,
I
think,
have
been
fairly
effective.
E
As
far
as
addressing
you
know,
the
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
the
nuisance
premises.
Things
of
that
nature,
so
I
think
this
would
give
us
a
good
opportunity
to
have
a
working
group
to
include
the
public
in
a
in
a
more
conversational
certain
situation,
and
you
know
I
think
our
speaker
today,
I
know
has
participated
in
some
of
those
other
committees
as
well.
So
I
just
think
it's
gonna
make
it
much
more
comfortable
to
have
the
conversations
and
and
get
something
that's
gonna
work
going
forward.
G
Why
I
would
echo
what
alderman
Wilson
just
said?
I
I
think
that
this
last
year
it's
become
pretty
apparent
to
us
that
our
ethics
code
really
needed
a
thorough
going-over
and
revision.
So
I
I
think
this
is
a
very
good
idea
to
form
a
subcommittee
so
that
it,
which
is
a
much
better
forum
for
working
out
all
of
these
issues
and
figuring
out
what
the
current
standard
is
elsewhere
and
how
those
things
how
that
would
work
in
evanston.
So
if
anyone
would
decides
not
to
serve
on
the
committee,
I'm
very
happy
to
take
their
place.
C
H
Good
evening
Michelle
Mason
cup
corporation
council,
my
suggestion
when
alderman
Fiske
and
I
were
discussing
this
subcommittee
with
to
not
have
the
current
Board
of
Ethics
members
debating
that
topic
and
how
things
would
move
through.
But
they
certainly
could
send
a
memo
of
suggestions
and
in
issues.
And
then
then
the
subcommittee
could
take
that
into
consideration.
E
E
My
life's,
not
better
yeah
I,
gets
to
further
amplify
that
my
part
of
that
I'm,
assuming
part
of
the
concern
would
be.
Is
you
have
an
active
operating
board
that
is
entertaining
matters
currently
sort
of
have
them
kind
of
advocating
for
changes,
while
they're
in
the
midst
of
handling,
something
I
think
would
put
them
in
a
yeah?
I
D
D
A
And
I
know
the
mayor:
the
mayor
is
here
now,
but
we
also
have
a
a
proposed
member
of
the
committee
who
is
not
present,
so
that's
Marc
Sheldon
a
former
chair.
So
my
suggestion
is
that
we
have
our
committee
meeting.
We
select
a
chair
at
that
time
and
then
bring
it
to
Council.
Is
that
appropriate
mr.
city
manager?
Certainly
okay?
A
E
When
this
I
guess
was
first
raised
as
an
issue
or
initially
raised
as
this
and
as
an
issue
quite
some
time
ago,
like
my
inclination
was
what's
the
big
deal
and
but
I
think
with
with
really
full
agendas
or
long
lists
of
speakers,
my
fear
is
that
allowing
this
to
happen
would
allow
even
a
you
know,
a
moderately
organized
group.
If
they,
if
they
get
you
know
round
up,
you
know
10
or
15
people,
then
they're
gonna
really
eliminate
other
speakers
opportunities
to
have
you
know
equal
time,
so
I
wouldn't
want
to
have
you
know.
E
20
people
show
up,
and
you
know
that
you
know
that
one
person
who
had
this
time
ceded
to
them
to
monopolize
the
entire
or
a
significant
portion
of
the
speaking
time
and
the
other
individuals
who
took
the
time
to
be
here
and
who
have
something
legitimate
stage.
The
counsel
to
be
kind
of
you
know,
pushed
out
of
that
opportunity.
So
my
inclination
is
to
I
change
my
mind,
so
I
think
we
should
not
allow
for
the
seating
of
time.
G
G
My
memory
is,
it
was
done
kind
of
as
a
courtesy
to
someone
who
had
a
particularly
more
time
it
had
had
for
someone
who
had
it
wanted
to
have
a
little
bit
more
opportunity,
but
it
was
very,
very
rare,
so
I
do
think
that
we
should.
We
should
have
a
rule
not
to
cede
time,
because
it
does
then
afford
everyone
the
same
opportunity
to
speak
as
anyone
else.
So
someone
who's,
maybe
not
familiar
with
the
parliamentary
rules,
has
the
same
opportunity
as
those
who
had
in
the
past
might
have
requested
to
have
their
time
seated.
G
So
you
know,
and
I
also
think
that
this
permits
it
makes
it
very
clear
to
everyone.
You
know
everyone
has
the
same
amount
of
time.
This
is
how
we
do
it
and
it's
not
going
to
be
a
facts
and
circumstances
test
for
the
chair,
so
I
think
sort
of
bright-line
rules
on
this
are
better
than
what
we
have
currently.
So
that's
that's
my
point.
I
would
also
say
I
think
we
do.
G
I
didn't
realize
that
until
I
started
doing
some
research
on
it
and
also
I
think
people
should
realize
that
when
they
write
to
us
and
send
them,
send
us
comments
before
a
meeting
or
even
during
a
meeting
if
they
hand
us
materials,
we
all
do
make
an
effort
to
read
that
and
so
I
I
want
people
understand
that
we
really
want
to
make
this
as
fair
as
possible
to
everyone.
Alderman.
J
J
J
I
think
the
mayor
does
an
excellent
job,
balancing
it
and
I
can't
think
of
one
time
looking
over
at
the
mayor
when
this
has
been
a
real
issue,
I
figure
when
the
topics
are
hot,
we're
always
going
to
have
more
residents,
and
my
only
concern
if
passing
this
creates
more
of
a
headache
than
we're
trying
to
solve
so
I
would
be
curious
to
hear
and
I'll
Google
see
if
I
can
find
it.
What
regular
parliamentary
procedures
are
on
situations
like
this
sorry.
A
I'm,
sorry
about
that
I
add
that,
as
as
chair
of
various
committees,
it's
it's
confusing
to
me
when
we
have
different
rules
for
for
different
committees
and
for
the
City,
Council
and
I.
Think
if
we
had
some
consistency,
that
would
be
very
helpful.
So
I
would
be
in
support
of
not
not
ceding
time
of
emeriti
and
then
Aldrin
was
okay.
K
Thank
thank
you
and
I'm.
Sorry.
It
was
a
few
minutes
late
tonight.
Two
things
one
I
think
our
thinking
on
seating
time
has
evolved
because
we
had
a
discussion
at
the
Rules
Committee.
You
know
maybe
a
year
ago
and
I
had
brought
it
up
onto
the
agenda
because
I
wasn't
sure
you
know
how
you
all
wanted
me
to
handle
people
that
were
coming
up
and
say
well.
K
I'm
gonna
cede
my
time
and
I
was
just
using
my
discretion
and
a
year
ago
that
was
the
direction
of
the
council
like
okay,
keep
using
your
discretion
and
make
a
decision
I'm
supportive.
If
the
the
Rules
Committee
wants
to
make
a
decision
and
say
hey,
you
know
what
we're
not
going
to
allow
ceding
time
what
I
would
put
out
there
to
the
public
is
on.
K
Is
you
know
eight
people
will
sign
up
and
it
you
know
that
night
I'll
say
everybody's
got
45
seconds
and
each
person
will
hit
a
different
point
and
it's
really
effective
right,
and
so
that's
what
I
would
suggest
to
people
if
they
feel
like
oh
something's,
being
taken
away
by
not
having
the
right
to
you
know
to
see
time
again.
It's
not
been
something.
That's
happened,
a
ton,
but
it
is
an
opportunity
to
be
abused.
K
You
know
if
somebody
wants,
if
a
group
particular
group
wants
to
do
that
so
I'm
supportive
of
that
and
then
I
think
chairman
Fisk
chairwoman
Fisk,
you
mentioned
about
number
number
eight
yeah
I'm
interested
in
talking
about
that
as
well
and
making
sure
we
have
some
rules
that
are
consistent
across
committees
and
the
council,
but
I
think
that's
a
different
item.
Right.
A
E
You
know
things
like
if,
for
example,
if
we're
entertaining
an
application,
the
applicant
isn't
a
public
speaker,
you
know
we're
expected
to
engage
with
them.
So
the
fact
that
they
talk
for
more
than
forty-five
seconds-
that's
not
a
thing
they're
the
applicants
so
they're.
You
know
they're
here
for
us
to
inquire
and
get
information.
That's
that's
the
reason
for
the
committee's.
So
if
we
can,
you
know
clinic
clarify
some
of
that.
So
you
know
partly
that
the
community
has
an
understanding
of
what
the
rules
are.
E
H
The
only
thing
I
could
find
is
commentary
from
other
communities
that
indicate
that
that
it's
against
public
policy
to
have
other
speakers
given
different
time
and
allowing
for
seeding
of
time
the
discussion
I
find
in
Oakland
in
various
communities,
but
I
can't
find
it
in
actual
rules
because
I
can't
control
off.
Okay.
Sorry
about
that.
A
Okay,
does
someone
want
to
make
a
motion.
K
E
We
should
I
think
we
should
tackle
the
committee
meetings.
Okay,.
A
E
F
A
A
D
Chair
members,
the
committee
on
page
17
of
617
of
your
packet
is
the
listing
of
the
remainder
of
the
committee
chair
rotations
of
the
Rules
Committee
has
discussed
for
the
911
emergency
telephone
system
board
the
housing
community
development
that
committee,
the
MWBE
committee
and
parking
a
transportation
committee.
So
if
this
is
with
your
liking,
we'll
move
forward
with
it
for
the
remainder
of
the
council
term.
D
E
E
A
D
D
And
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
the
the
count,
the
standing
committees
of
the
council
have
generally
used
the
rules
of
the
council
for
their
purposes.
However,
the
reality
is
that
there
is
some
conflicts.
For
example,
public
comment
being
45
minutes
I,
don't
think
it's
the
intention
that
the
standing
committees
have
45
minutes
of
public
comments,
so
I
think
the
question
before
you
is:
should
there
be
separate
rules
for
the
standing
committees?
G
I
would
say
that
we
should
have
a
statement
that
the
City
Council
rules
would
govern,
with
some
exceptions,
because
I
mean
the
committee's
really
are.
That
is
the
place
where
we
are
it's
designed
to
have
an
open
conversation
with
the
community
and
when
we
have
committees
that
still
meet
in
the
committee
rooms,
those
the
structure
of
the
room
itself
facilitates
that,
but
so
I
I
think.
G
H
It
that
is
an
accurate
summary
of
what
happened
essentially
the
the
question
when
we
had
to
answer
the
Attorney
General.
We
found
that
the
rules
are
silent
on
this
topic,
but
we
still
said
in
application.
This
is
how
it
works
and
we
responded
in
in
that
way,
but
this
is
my
suggestion
to
alderman
Fisk
that
we
address
this
with
the
Rules
Committee.
Well,.
H
The
issue
was
that
alderman
Fisk
had
said:
I
think
this
is
a
pure
December
meeting.
You
have
I
think
it
was
twenty
minutes.
It
was
a
shortened
period
of
time
because
she
wanted
to.
There
were
so
many
issues
on
the
agenda,
so
it
was
less
than
the
45
minutes
that
were
provided
under
the
city,
council
rules
and
I
think
as
chair.
She
thought
she
had
discretion
to
do
so.
Okay,.
F
G
A
A
But
that's
going
to
that's
going
to
affect
how
we
what
business
we
can
accomplish
at
those
meetings,
so
I
saw
as
a
question
to
bring
to
this
committee
because
we
are
I
mean
we're
here
to
listen
to
the
public.
That
goes
without
saying,
but
we're
also
here
to
get
business
done.
So
how
do
we
manage
both
of
those
things
and
when
we
have
meetings
stacked
one
another
yeah.
H
It
basically
I
think
I
think
at
that
meeting
you
had
restricted
it
from
three
minutes
to
a
different
increment,
a
lower
increment
that
what
was
allowed
under
the
rules-
and
that
was
the
complaint
I
think
it
was
one
or
two
minutes
per
speaker,
even
though
it
didn't
amount
to
45
minutes
like
that.
Maybe
15
people
had
signed
up.
So
if
you
do
the
math,
it
was
less
than.
A
A
That
the
previous
Rules
Committee
meeting
I
think
we
were
well
over
an
hour
of
citizen
comment
and
but
then
we
didn't
have
a
meeting
after
I.
Don't
think
we
had
a
meeting
after
that,
I'm
not
positive
about
that,
but
it's
just
really
meeting
management
and
how
how
we
want
to
handle
it
and
I'm
leaving
it
up
to
up
to
all
of
you.
It
was
an
issue
that
I
hadn't
realized,
but
it
if
each
committee
had
its
own
set
of
rules
that
would
have
handled
that.
A
But
what
we
learned
was
that
the
council
rules
are
the
default
for
all
the
committee's
unless
the
committees
have
their
own
set
of
rules
so
I'm
open
to.
However,
however,
you
all
want
to
want
to
handle
it.
The
important
thing
is
just
to
bring
it
to
your
attention
that
this
is.
This
is
something
new
for
us
to
address.
C
First
of
all,
we
break
up
our
public
comment
in
in
sections
dependent.
We
let
the
public
speak
to
us
prior
to
each
issue.
Item,
as
opposed
to
one
great
big
block
of
time,
so
saying
that
we're
gonna
have
45
minutes
is
really
would
be
really
difficult
to
manage
and
I'd
hate,
I.
Think
I
think
we
want
to
not
create
a
false
expectation
among
the
members
of
the
public
that
there
is
going
to
be
45
minutes
and
that
they're
welcome
to
fill
it
up.
C
So
so
I
think
we
need
to
I
would
suggest
that
perhaps
this
new
ad
hoc
committee
could
craft
a
paragraph
or
two
that
addresses
a
citizen
participation
at
our
standing
committees
and
outline
sort
of
how
that
proceeds.
I
I'm
wondering
whether
we
could
suggest
that
we
citizens
get
two
minutes
at
their
comments
at
our
committee
meetings
as
a
way
of
kind
of
encouraging
the
conversation
to
move
along
I
just
throw
that
out
as
a
as
a
thought.
B
B
E
What
would
make
sense
to
me
is
to
have
some
sort
of
baseline
amount
of
time,
but
something
significantly
shorter,
like
I'm
pulling
a
number
out
of
the
air,
but
something
like
20
minutes,
but
to
give
the
chair
discretion
to
allow
for
more
of
that
now
part
of
the
rationale
to
that
would
be.
In
the
committee's.
We
will
often
allow
for
certain,
for
example,
multiple
presentations,
so
there
might
be
an
organized
group
opposed
to
a
building
or
whatever
it
might
be,
and
in
the
past
we've
allowed
them
to
make
presentations.
E
That's
part
of
the
you
know
working
process,
but
it's
outside
the
scope
of
quote
public
comment,
so
I
wouldn't
want
that
to
kind
of
get
pigeonholed
into
that
you
know
portion
but
at
the
same
time
I
think
we
need
to
leave
the
chairs
with
enough
room
to
if
the
circumstances
warrant
it
allow
for
more
public
comment.
If
there
is
something
that
you
know
requires,
you
know
greater
discussion,
but
to
set
that
baseline.
E
It's
something
smaller
again,
because
you
know
every
week
you
don't
want
a
couple,
people
coming
and
say:
okay,
there
are
five
of
us
here
we
get
to
talk
for
nine
minutes.
Each.
We
don't
want
to.
You
know
be
in
a
situation
like
that
I,
don't
it's
not
likely
to
happen,
but
it
wouldn't
be
fair
to
the
chair
and
the
committee.
If
that
were
to
happen,
so
I
think
I
think
it's
just
safer
to
have
clear-cut
rules
again.
A
H
I
guess
I
would
like
less
discussion
with
the
chair
at
the
standing
committees,
because
we're
gonna
get
a
lot
of
argument
from
from
people
on
both
sides.
So
I
anticipate
that
argument.
You
allowed
it
for
this,
but
you
didn't
expand
the
chair
discussion
at
this
issue
of
so
I
uniformity.
I
just
anticipate
that
argument.
So
if
it's
two
minutes,
if
you
want
to
reduce
the
number
of
time
and
say
20
minutes
to
anticipate
10
speakers
per
Standing,
Committee
I
I
leave
that
up
to
you
like
I,.
H
A
K
Mom
always
supportive
of
you
having
some
structure
around
around
our
discussions,
including
the
committee,
so
I'm.
Supportive
of
that-
and
you
know
maybe
after
Alderman
win,
makes
her
comments.
Madam
chair
I,
for
me
it
would
be
before
we
make
a
decision.
I
think
really
helpful
to
hear
from
Rae
Freedman
and
frankly,
if
miss
Esther
or
anybody
else
out
there.
We
don't
have
too
many
people
here
tonight,
but
these
are
folks
that
regularly
come
here
and
if
they
do
have
something
to
share
I'd
like
to
hear
that
I
think
that
would
be
helpful
to
the
conversation.
A
G
I
know
as
I'm
thinking
about
it:
I
like
I,
like
Aldrin,
Ravel's,
suggestion
of
two
minutes
and
I
also
like
Aldrin
Wilson's,
suggestion
of
a
20-minute
time
time
limit
I,
think
I'm,
trying
to
think
quickly
about
the
operation
of
either
one
of
those
but
I.
Think
as
an
indication
to
the
public
that
that
this
is
a
committee
and
the
that
the
point
is
to
have
the
committee
deliberate
and
that
there
is
more
of
a
back
and
forth.
G
We
have
sometimes
with
the
people
who
come
to
a
committee
meeting,
so
you
know
I
do
think
having
it
be
and
I
agree
with
Miss
Mayton
Mason
cup,
that
if
we
have
it
in
the
discretion
of
the
chair,
I
think
we
have
to
have
once
again
a
little
bit
more
of
a
bright-line
rule,
because
unfortunately,
we'll
we'll
get
arguments
back
and
no
I
think.
The
point
is
to
be
very
clear
to
the
community.
As
alderman
Ravel
said,
we
don't
want
to
give
false
expectations,
but
also
to
be
fair
and
allow
the
council
opportunity
to
deliberate.
G
So
I
like
the
idea
of
urging
citizens
to
put
together
a
presentation
and
then
providing
a
rule
that
permits
that
that
presentation
to
happen
and
but
you
know,
I-
would
accept
for
this
standing
committees,
a
two-minute
rule
per
person
or
with
a
maximum
time
period,
which
is
essentially
what
we
did
with
the
council.
It's
three
minutes
per
person,
but
no
more
than
45
minutes
of
comment.
So
two
minutes
per
person,
but
no
more
than
20
minutes
of
public
comment.
So.
G
A
You
know,
but
if
there's
a
two
minute
limit
and
that's
written
in
I
mean
I
absolutely
agree.
I
like
the
I
like
the
rule
idea,
but
if
there's
a
2-minute
limit
and
folks
come
unless
we
have
something
in
there
at
the
discretion
of
the
chair
and
there
are
30
people
that
show
up.
That
means
that
20
people
don't
get
to
speak,
but.
G
It
would
operate.
Ok,
so
then
you'd
say
then
the
chair
has
the
opportunity
to
shorten
the
time
fairy
in
order
to
allow
everyone
to
speak
yeah,
but
I
agree
with
alderman
Wilson
that
we
should
shorten
the
time
period
in
order
to
for
us
to
get
to
the
work
of
the
committee,
but
I'm
sitting
here.
Thinking
about
all
the
Pandi
meetings
that
we've
had
where
we
have
that's,
where
we
have
73
speakers-
and
you
know,
if
there's
some
way
in
which
we
can
and
I
don't
want
to
cut
people
off.
G
E
Do
think
it's
important
to
you
know
to
clarify
my
point
about
the
discretion
its
these,
the
committees
or
subcommittees,
and
the
committees
are
supposed
to
be
more
on
long
lines
of
working
groups
and,
for
example,
I
counsel.
Public
speakers
come
up.
They
say
things
to
us.
You
know.
Unfortunately,
the
rules
are
such
that
we,
you
know,
give
them
stairs
back
and
we're
not
allowed
to
answer.
So.
That's
the
world
committee
shouldn't
be
like
that.
So
I
think
that's
a
change
in
the
rule
that
would
have
to
be.
E
You
know,
clarified
or
added
to
the
committee's,
so
that
if
a
speaker
raises
a
point
that
needs
to
get
talked
about
that
person
or
that
group
or
whatever
it
is,
can
be
brought
back
into
the
conversation
or
the
person
who's
making.
The
proposal
can
answer
the
question
to
clarify
so
that
we
do
have
the
ability
to
have
dialogue
with
the
people
who
show
up
because
I
don't
want
it
to
I,
don't
want
it
to
be
a
one-way
street.
E
I,
don't
want
a
bunch
of
people
to
come
and
talk,
and
then
you
know
the
committee
talks
amongst
themselves
and
we
don't
engage
the
people
who
are
here
to
work
with.
You
know
work
at
work
through
this
stuff
because
otherwise
we're
not
going
to
bring
people
together.
You
know
that's
how
you're
gonna
bring
people
to
consensus
on
things
is
is
including
them
in
the
conversation.
Okay,.
B
I'm
not
gonna
read
a
letter.
Thank
you.
Thank
your
mayor.
Haggerty
first
thing
I
want
to
say
is
mayor.
Haggerty
has
always
been
respectful
of
speakers
since
I've
been
coming
to
council
meetings
for
two
years
forty-five
minutes
of
time.
Mayor
Haggerty
has
always
divided
that,
where
we've
had
30
seconds
to
speak
or
45
seconds
to
speak,
of
course,
we're
not
going
to
get
her
comments
out
in
30
seconds
or
45
seconds,
but
mayor
Haggerty
has
juggled
the
time
for
I,
don't
know
how
many
people
more
than
45
people
for
a
hundred
people,
80
people.
B
Okay-
for
you
to
tell
me,
as
the
only
speaker
here
tonight
with
what
for
residents
out
here,
that
I
only
have
three
minutes
to
speak
when
you're
allowing
45
minutes.
That's
crazy!
Okay,
that's
an
insult
to
me.
Okay,
I!
Don't
care!
If
you
you
know,
you
allow
four
minutes.
Five
minutes.
Six
minutes
per
your
Ray.
You
only
have
three
minutes
to
speak.
B
Hopefully,
I
got
my
speech
out
within
three
minutes,
but
come
on
what
what
I'm
talking
I
mean
absolutely
correct
that
you
know
if
there's
50
people
or
80
people
to
speak
of
you
have
to
limit
the
time.
I
understand
that.
Okay,
if
there's
one
person
to
speak,
come
on
you're,
you
need
to
tell
me
that
I
only
have
three
minutes
to
speak
when
there's
45
minutes
allowed.
B
Okay,
my
point
is
what's
more
important
than
people
speaking
is
us
getting
responded
to
if
you
can
figure
out
a
way
that
we
can
get
some
kind
of
responses
and
answers
to
our
comments,
I
would
be
thrilled,
it
would
cut
out,
they
would
cut
out
most
of
your
aggravation
and
the
citizens.
Aggravation
I
don't
need
to
come
to
City
Council
meetings
every
week
and
committee
meetings
every
week
to
hear
Junaid,
wretzky
say
the
same
thing
every
week
answer
some
of
his
questions.
B
Some
of
his
comments
move
on
be
done
with
it
come
up
with
an
answer
for
an
Rainey
for
her.
She
had
ethics
violations.
I,
don't
know
anything
about
it.
Don't
have
a
comment
about
it.
She
may
had
ethics
violations.
What
is
the
resolution?
The
resolution
is
not
to
put
it
on
the
shelf
and
save
it
for
another
day
answer
the
allegation
then
be
done
with
it
and
a
story.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
B
That
but
there's
only
one
person
speaking
you
have
just
as
you
have
to
allow
what
you're
doing
is
you're
narrowing
it
down
for
to
make
it
more
convenient
for
all
of
you,
you're
not
making
it
convenient
for
the
residents
to
come
out
and
say
their
piece,
the
info
somebody
it
has
30
seconds
to
speak.
What
am
I
going
to
talk
about
for
30
seconds.
Thank
you
very
much
right.
The
important
part
is
that
were
we're
working
at
everybody
working
on
the
same
page,
to
get
something
accomplished
all
right.
So
thanks.
I
Good
evening,
madam
chair
members
of
the
council,
mayor
Haggerty,
intended
to
be
here
early
I,
was
at
a
northwestern
event.
Community
engagement
event,
I
wanted
to
one
chime
in
on
a
discussion
that
believed
if
we
were
still
on
it
and
I'm
hearing
things
about
citizen
comment
and
I
know
that
only
agenda
tonight
was
the
seating
of
time
to
folks
and
I.
Just
want
to
remind
council
members
of
a
particular
instance
and
I
think
mayor
Haggerty,
even
congratulate
or
Lau,
did
the
folks
who
did
this.
I
There
have
been
instances
where
folks
have
ceded
time
within
the
three
minute
limit
and
it's
actually
made
our
council
meetings
more
efficient
and
organized
if
there's
one
in
particular,
I
believe
it
was
either
Hurley,
Clarke
or
affordable
housing.
One
group
seated
all
over
their
time
that
they're
three
minutes
I
think
it
was
a
30-second
night
to
one
member.
I
The
one
member
read
the
statement
and
we
just
moved
on
I-
do
think
that
we
should
allow
folks
to
see
time
within
the
3
minute
limit
that
is
already
established
within
our
rules
of
water
to
ensure
that
we're
using
our
time
more
efficiently,
as
opposed
to
having
you
know,
a
group
of
folks
stand
up
in
transition,
mid
paragraph.
You
know,
while
reading
a
statement,
I
hope
the
council
will
take
that
into
consideration.
Also
to
mr.
I
Friedman's
point
the
clerk's
office
with
provided
the
resources
would
love
to
serve
in
the
role
as
Ombudsman
and
provide
answers
to
questions
for
folks.
There
are
questions
that
are
posed
here
at
public
comment.
We
can
we
take
them
down
in
the
minutes,
so
we
can
work
with
city
staff.
I.
Think
3-1-1
does
a
pretty
good
job
of
answering
questions,
so
we
can
work
with
city
staff
or
whatever
department
to
ensure
that
those
questions
are
answered.
If
that
is
something
the
council
wishes
to
do
and
provide
the
resources
for.
I
Lastly,
I
want
to
I,
don't
know
we
are
in
the
agenda,
but
there
is
a
discussion
of
appointing
a
committee
to
review
the
council
rules
and
the
board
of
ethics
and
their
jurisdiction.
I
believe
I
think
that's
the
what
was
on
the
agenda
and
I
would
love
to
offer
my
services
to
serve
on
the
committee
to
review
the
council
rules.
It's
something
that,
as
City
Clerk
I
spend
a
lot
of
time.
I
L
The
consent
of
time
has
been
something
that
has
been
done
since
I
moved
here
in
Evanston
under
Mayor
Borden
time
was
conceded
to
people.
If
someone
else
can
save
my
time
so
that
person
can
speak
I'm
the
mayor
Tisdale
the
same
thing
under
Robert
rules
of
order
and
stuff,
then
you
have
a
practice
that
was
carried
on.
That
kind
of
became
in
policy
and
stuff.
I
know
it's
hard
to
do.
L
45
minutes
in
time
in
talking
before
the
council,
but
like
out
of
the
Wilson
had
stated,
and
when
I've
been
to
lot
of
the
committees
and
when
I
served
as
a
members
of
some
committees.
Here
we
did
do
a
back
and
forth
with
the
community
to
understand
what
they
was
asking,
what
they
was
won't
and
what
we
needed
to
do
and
stuff
before
we
sent
our
answers
and
results
to
you.
One
of
those
committees
was
the
CDBG
Committee,
which
was
important
to
hear
from
the
community
as
what
they
see.
L
L
They
have
more
input,
not
just
the
input
from
the
people
up
there,
but
input
from
the
community
because
they
are
deciding
to
to
you
to
tell
you.
This
is
what
the
community
needs
and
then
they
can
say.
Well,
we
heard
from
the
community.
They
was
at
the
meeting.
They
suggested
this,
so
we
talked
about
it,
and
this
is
what
you
thought
it's
kind
of
hard
to
spend.
You
have
so
many
people,
and
lately
it
has
been
I,
don't
like
figuring
out.
Okay,
you
only
got
two
minutes.
L
You
only
got
one
minute
and
so
and
when
to
come
and
see
how
many
people
within
the
room,
usually
I,
don't
speak
and
because
in
one
minute
2
seconds
and
stuff
I'm
not
gonna
get
everything.
Now
so
I
don't
speak,
so
it
need
to
be
and
I
know.
We
talk
about
time
and
we
need
to
go
home
and
we
want
to
go
home.
L
That
is
not
how
things
will
with
me
with
meetings
of
done
and
stuff,
and
that
should
be
something
that
we
need
to
have
them
to
hear
to
hear
the
rest
of
the
discussion.
It's
not
like
sometime.
You
do
after
human
service
meeting
where
you
have
the
topic
and
then
the
person
speak
that
the
council
doesn't
do
that.
We
speak
first
and
then
you
speak
after
us
and
debate
it
and
the
people
leaves
in
everything.
That
is
something
you
might
want
to
encourage
them.
L
You
have
yours
to
say
but
stay
for
the
debate,
because
usually,
if
it's
something
that
at
the
next
meeting
you're
going
to
vote
on
that
action,
then
you
might
hear
something
that
come
back
and
say
something
that
the
next
actor
beginning
to
change
their
mind.
But
if
they
come
and
speak
and
read
and
do
not
hear
you,
they
don't
get
their
answers.
L
L
I'm,
sorry,
you
know
it's
it's
better,
but
that's
something
you
might
want
to
share
with
them
and
in
terms
of
educating
and
say
it's
not
like
in
the
committee
where
you
might
speak
after
the
committee
goes
talk
about
this
and
then
you
say
something
and
then
the
committee
can
address
what
you
said
and
incorporate
it.
You
don't
do
that,
but
it
is
it's
just
what
it
is
and
when
you
do
in
your
discussion
and
stuff
and
if
a
question
was
raised
during
that
discussion
on
an
item
that
you
are
debating.
L
Lately
I've
been
going
home
to
beacon,
sorry,
I'm,
tired
I
have
that
answer,
and
then
I
know
where
to
go
and
research
if
I
have
other
comments,
but
juggling
time
for
people
to
stand
in
speak
is
going
to
be
hard
for
the
council
as
something
you're
going
to
have
to
work
with
either
I
increased
the
out
from
45
give
them
an
hour.
Yes,
you
want
to
leave
but
think
about
this.
Most
people
that
come
if
they
get
up
at
6
o'clock,
go
to
work
and
then
come
here
to
be
here
at
8.
L
D
F
Madam
chair
and
mr.
mayor
and
aldermen
and
mr.
manager,
thank
you
for
your
service
Dan
coin
from
the
Ninth
Ward
and
on
Facebook
live.
Some
questions
are
popping
up
and
one
in
particular
might
help
to
clarify.
If
the
discussion,
if
we
heard
correctly,
the
question
is
40
minutes
public
speaking
time
for
City
Council,
but
maybe
20
minutes
is
the
discussion
about
other
committees
for
public
comment.
That's
one
clarification.
F
People
weren't
sure
if
you
meant
both
or
or
one
or
the
other,
and
the
other
question
that
seems
to
be
popping
up
is
what
people
were
hearing
was
the
possibility
that
certain
citizen
groups
could
possibly
speak
and
present
beyond
the
public
comment
and
the
community
was
wondering
what
that
process
would
be
to
allow
a
group
of
community
folks
to
organize
and
speak
outside
of
public
comment,
perhaps
on
the
agenda.
What
would
that
process
be.
A
E
D
E
Right
so
just
yeah,
so
it's
it's
it's
a
fairly
finite
number
and
the
presentation
point
was
it's
really
more
applicable
to
those
committees?
So,
for
example,
if
there's
a
development
proposal-
and
there
is
I-
think
maybe
it
was
Albion
or
one
of
the
one
of
the
projects-
there
was
a
like
a
life,
a
better
term.
A
counterproposal
worked
presentation,
so
at
the
chairs,
discretion
to
you
know
allow
the
charity.
You
know,
allow
people
to
kind
of
put
together
information.
E
If
there's
some
sort
of
you
know
coherent
point
or
you
know
zoning
issue
or
something
it's
a
little
more
complex
that
doesn't
lend
itself
to.
You
know
a
three
minute
public
comment
that
that
information
could
be
presented
in
an
organized
fashion.
So
it's
it's
I,
guess
it's
probably
somewhat
case-by-case,
but
that
kind
of
thing.
If
it's,
if
it's
part
of
the
discussion
you
shouldn't
take
away
from
the
public
comment,
that's
kind
of
what
I'm
saying
is.
E
E
A
K
I
just
wanted
to
comment
on
the
the
point
about
citizen
groups
or
other
people
wanting
to
have
set
aside
time.
I've
been
since
I've
been
mayor,
I've
been
approached
by
groups
and
say,
hey
mayor:
can
we
get
10
minutes
or
15
minutes
to
speak
at
the
City
Council
meeting,
and
then
we
won't
take
up
so
much
of
the
the
public
comment
time?
K
You
know
before
it
comes
up
to
the
City
Council,
so
you
know
I've
told
people
hey,
you
know,
there's
public
comment,
you
can
come
up
and
you
can
make
a
statement
or
trying
to
persuade
the
council
on
on
certain
aspects
of
the
project,
and
so
that's
that's
the
way
I've
thought
about
that.
So
that
was
to
Mister
coins.
Last
question.
C
Think
I'm,
echoing
what
alderman
Wilson
saying
and
basically,
if
I
think
about
myself
as
being
the
committee
chair,
if
the
group-
and
this
is
truly
just
the
standing
committees-
never
not
talking
about
Council
now,
if
a
group
did
want
to
make
an
organized
presentation
that
they
would
have,
you
know,
contact
me
or
whoever
the
chair
might
be
well
in
advance,
sometimes
not
like
it.
You
know
ten
minutes
to
six
or
something
so
that
we
have
an
opportunity
to
think
through
the
flow
of
the
meeting.
So
you
know
basically
getting
advanced
up
consultation
about.
G
And
I
I
agree
with
that,
and
you
know
at
planning
and
development.
There
is
a
natural
group
of
it
with
respect
to
projects,
because
with
every
project
there
is
actually
a
group
of
legal
objectors
who
live
within
a
certain
distance,
and
they
have
a
particular
legal
standing
on
that
issue
so
that
that
group
tends
to
have
an
actual
organization
and
over
time
at
least
when
I've
been
chair
and
I
think
other
times.
D
Madam
chair
members,
the
committee
I
think
we've
heard
a
lot
of
good
ideas.
I
guess
I'd
like
to
propose
that
the
corporation
council
and
I
be
tasked
to
perhaps
come
up
with
some
draft
language
and
just
come
back
to
your
next
community
meeting
with
that.
Based
on
the
discussion
is
this
evening.
That's
that's.
A
D
I'm
chair
just
to
refresh
the
committee's
memory
on
schedule,
so
hard
February
4th.
We
would
have
a
regularly
scheduled
Human
Services
Committee
meeting
your
current
schedule
for
rules
is
every
other
month,
so
it
would
be
coming
up
then,
and
in
addition,
the
council
has
already
indicated
their
desire
to
meet
on
February
4th
to
discuss
about
affordable
housing
issues.
Okay,
so
either
we
would
have
Human
Services,
followed
by
rules
followed
by
the
council
or
some
other
schedule.
A
D
So
so
so,
I'm
sure
that
what
we'll
do
for
the
4th
is
have
Human
Services
at
6:00,
followed
by
the
council
on
the
affordable
housing
discussion
and
then
we'll
just
plan
your
next
meeting
in
April
to
come
back
with
the
items
discussed
tonight,
and
that
would
also
be
the
report
of
the
Ethics
Board.
They
I
think
subcommittee.
That
was
playing
its
night.