►
From YouTube: Gov Hol CC 20210310 Special
Description
Hollister City Council Special Meeting March 10, 2021
A
C
E
E
E
D
E
F
F
Thank
you.
I
was
thinking
what
we
would
do
is
first
go
over
the
hollister
municipal
code
and
make
any
changes
to
that
or
discuss
the
changes,
agree
and
then
just
move
on,
and
then
the
next
item
I
would
like
to
have
us
go
over
would
be
the
proposed
ethics
and
conduct
to
be
added
in
and
then
the
third
would
be
the
rules,
policies
and
procedures
that
was
adopted
by
resolution.
F
F
F
Sorry,
city,
council
protocols
and
that'll
be
the
fourth
document,
because
I
think
that
some
of
this
may
actually
end
up
being
redundant,
but
there
were
changes
requested
to
be
made,
so
we
may
be
going
back
to
the
hollister
municipal
code
and
making
changes
as
we
go
through
the
other
documents.
But
if
we
go
through
the
through
it
as
it
is
now,
I
think
it'll
be
easier.
G
H
C
A
F
F
G
G
G
F
C
E
F
F
A
A
C
F
F
F
F
A
E
F
F
F
C
F
2.04.050
mayor
to
decide
questions
of
order.
The
mayor
or
mayor
pro
tempore
shall
decide
all
questions
of
order
at
city,
council
meetings
subject
to
appeal
to
the
city
council
and
all
such
appeals
shall
be
decided
by
a
majority
of
the
members
present
council
member
burns
suggested
that
we
change
the
language
to
be
consistent
or
remove
it
from
all
other
documents.
C
F
So
when
we
find
that
and
believe
me
we'll
come
across
that
we
can
decide,
because
I
think,
even
as
we
go
through
the
rules
and
procedures
and
all
the
other
documents
we're
going
to
end
up
coming
back
to
this
one
to
say:
oh
that's
this
section
and
then
we
can
probably
delete
the
other
one
and
keep
this
one
or
decide
at
that
time.
If
there's
something.
C
G
F
2.04.080
quorum,
a
majority
of
all
the
members
elected
to
the
city
council
shall
constitute
a
quorum
for
transaction
of
business
at
each
city,
council
meeting
less
than
a
majority
may
adjourn
from
time
to
time.
Council
member
burns
suggested
we
change
again
change
language
to
be
consistent
or
removed
from
all
other
documents.
So
if
I
look.
C
E
F
Yes,
it
states
the
starting
point
for
a
meeting
is
the
establishment
of
a
quorum?
A
quorum
is
defined
as
the
minimum
number
of
members
of
the
body
who
must
be
present
at
a
meeting
for
business
to
be
legally
transacted
the
default
rule
is
that
a
quorum
is
one
more
than
half
the
body.
For
example,
in
a
five-member
body,
a
quorum
is
three:
when
the
body
has
three
members
present,
it
can
legally
transact
business.
F
When
that
occurs,
the
body
loses
its
ability
to
transact
business
until
and
unless
a
quorum
is
reestablished.
The
default
rule
is
identified
above,
however,
gives
way
to
a
specific
rule
of
the
body
that
establishes
a
quorum.
For
example,
the
rules
of
a
particular
five-member
body
may
indicate
that
a
quorum
is
four
members
for
that
particular
body.
The
body
must
follow
the
rules
it
has
established
for
its
quorum.
In
the
absence
of
such
a
specific
rule,
the
quorum
is
one
more
than
half
the
members
of
the
body,
so
I
could
insert
that
section
here.
D
D
C
C
F
C
C
E
C
H
F
C
C
B
F
I
wanted
to
remove
in
the
following
order
because
it
had
a
specific
order
and
we
on
occasion
take
items
out
of
order,
so
I
wanted
to
just
remove
that
and
say
at
the
bottom.
The
following
items
approved
by
the
city
manager
may
be
placed
on
the
agenda
by
the
city
clerk
based.
I'm
sorry
on
item
submitted.
E
A
C
I
Can
I
just
add
that
typically,
a
call
to
order
is
a
request
that
the
member
who
is
speaking
redirect
their
comments
back
to
the
issue
being
covered
currently
by
the
council.
So
in
other
words,
a
council
member
would
have
other
opportunities
to
bring
up
other
issues,
but
if
they
wanted
to
talk
about
the
las
vegas
raiders.
I
Well,
I'm
sorry
no
offense,
mr
mr
perez,
if
anyone
other
than
mr
perez
council
member
perez
wishes
to
discuss
the
last
las
vegas
raiders,
a
call
to
order
would
be
to
to
interrupt
that
member
and
ask
them
to
come
back
to
the
item.
That's
actually
being
discussed
at
that
time,
as
opposed
to
another
item
on
the
agenda
or
something
that
they
want
placed
on
the
agenda.
That
sort
of
thing.
C
D
No,
no,
I
did
not
mean
to
strike
everything
else
out.
I'm
sorry!
I
guess
I
should
have
been
more
clear
about
that.
I
might
have
just
been
taking
a
note
or
something,
but
if
I
wanted
to
put
a
comment,
I
would
have
highlighted
it
and
put
a
comment
on
the
document,
so
I
probably
was
just
taking
note
of
that
for
myself,
but
I
in
no
way
meant
to
strike
out
the
rest
of
that.
That
was
confusing
to
me
too.
I'm
sorry.
I
should
have
been
more
clear.
Okay,.
F
Sure,
a
member
once
recognized
shall
not
be
interrupted
when
speaking,
unless
it
is
to
call
the
member
to
order
or
as
otherwise
provided
in
the
section,
if
a
member,
while
speaking,
is
called
to
order.
The
member
shall
see
speaking
until
the
question
of
order
is
determined
and
if,
in
order,
the
member
shall
be
permitted
to
proceed.
D
D
D
H
F
F
E
C
F
D
Mr
mayor,
if
I
can
good
sir
all
right,
I
was
questioning
if
this
was
correct,
so
it
says
a
motion
to
reconsider.
Any
action
taken
by
the
city
council
may
be
made
only
on
the
day
such
action
was
taken.
I
don't
think
that's
how
we
follow
it.
I
think
that
we
can
bring
it
back,
but
it
has
to
be
one
of
the
people
that
how
does
that
go?
Jason?
Do
you
know.
I
A
motion
for
reconsideration
needs
to
be
made
during
the
same
meeting
as
the
original
motion
or
at
the
very
next
meeting.
If
it's
not
made,
at
least
by
the
very
next
meeting,
then
the
motion
is
out
of
order.
For
instance,
if
you
wanted
to
make
that
motion
two
or
three
meetings
later
it's
out
of
order.
A
C
C
C
D
C
D
I
You
know
I
apologize,
I'm
noticing
that
if
this
is
the
one
that
was
adopted,
the
version
of
rosenberg's
rules
of
order
that
I
use
has
is
either
older
or
newer
than
this
one,
because
this
one
does
specify
most
furry.
Consideration
has
to
be
made
at
that
same
meeting.
I
don't
see
where
it
has
the
additional
rule
that
it
can
be
made
at
the
subsequent
meeting.
E
I
C
B
B
D
I
C
D
C
H
D
E
G
C
A
C
Good
okay,
so
if
we're
good
with
that,
I
think
we
should
just
kind
of
say
we're
following
the
rosenberg
rules
and
we
should
really
all
take
the
time
to
really
understand
those
rules,
and
I
you
know
just
looking
at
the
rules
even
the
way
we
conduct
the
meeting
as
far
as
emotions
and
seconds
and
then
go
into
debate
is
something
different
than
what
we've
been
doing
so
we're
going
to
have
to
start
following
those
that
format
which
actually
makes
a
lot
more
sense.
Let's
think
about
it,.
A
F
F
A
D
Discussion
should
be
focused,
but
free
and
open
in
the
interest
of
time.
The
chair
may,
however,
limit
the
time
allotted
to
speakers,
including
members
of
the
body,
so
I
think
that
covers
exactly
what
you're
saying.
Okay,
that's
on
page
seven
of
the
agenda
packet,
rosenblood
rules,
65
of
your
packet.
C
C
Maybe
I
don't
even
put
that.
I
think
what
we
need
to
do,
though,
is
address.
Are
we
following
the
2011
or
is
there
a
newer
one
and
when
a
new
one
comes
out,
then
we
would
point
out
that
we're
following
the
newest
revision
correct
that
we're
all
in
agreement
to
follow
the
new
one
when
it
does
come
out.
F
I
Well,
an
abstention.
You
just
officially
note
that
you're
abstaining
and
then
it
doesn't
count
as
a
yes
or
a
no.
So
the
way
that
this
addresses
it
is
a
little
differently
where
you
literally,
you
won't
vote.
Yes
and
you
won't
vote
no,
and
you
won't
state
that
you're
abstaining
and
you
don't
recuse
yourself.
C
D
You
found
it
yeah,
it's
page,
five
in
the
rules
and
then
it's
packet,
page
63.
It
says,
vote
counting,
starts
to
become
complicated
when
members
vote
abstain
or
in
the
case
of
a
written
ballot,
cast
a
blank
or
unreadable
ballot.
Do
these
votes
count
and
if
so,
how
does
one
count
them?
The
starting
point
is
always
to
check
the
statues.
I
Yeah,
I
I
think
what
they
meant
to
say
is
the
starting
point
is
always
to
check
the
statutes
and
what
rules
the
local
government
has
adopted.
On
that,
it's
it's
my
vague
recollection.
By
the
way,
I
should
say
that
there
was
an
appellate
court
decision
on
this
exact
same
issue
sometime
in
the
last
five
or
six
months,
and
unfortunately
I
don't
remember
which
way
the
court
ruled
on
that.
D
D
One
way,
however,
if
the
rules
of
the
body
say
you
count
votes
of
those
present
and
voting,
then
you
treat
abstentions
a
different
way
and
if
the
rules
of
the
body
are
silent
on
the
subject,
then
the
general
rule
of
thumb
and
default
rule
is
that
you
count
all
the
votes
that
are
present
and
voting.
Do
you
want
to
clarify
that
mr
epperson.
C
It
is
a
little
confusing
yeah.
It's,
it
is
important.
I
know
in
the
past
there's
been
circumstances
where
people
had
abstained
because
they
didn't
want
their
vote
registered,
but
by
obscenity
they
knew
it
was
going
to
pass,
and
I
I
thought
that
was
kind
of
odd.
I
thought
you
know
if
you're
going
to
be
on
the
council,
you
should
be
voting
one
way
or
the
other
not
abstaining
to
the
public.
So
the
public
knows
your
vote.
Basically,
if
I.
D
It
closes
by
saying
like
if,
essentially,
if
you're
there
and
you're
present
and
voting
so
you're
counted
as
a
quorum,
then,
if
you're
going
to
vote
to
abstain,
then
you
really
can't
do
that
because
your
vote
is
a
vote.
So
a
silent
vote
essentially
is
a.
What
did
you
say
either
a
yes
or
no
vote?
I'm
sorry
no
or
no
vote
yeah
yeah.
So
you
can't
be
there
and
define
a
quorum,
but
then
not
vote
on
an
item.
So
you
would
have
to
essentially
vote.
C
C
I
know
in
the
past,
as
I
said,
I've
remember
seeing
a
few
times
where
people
would
abstain,
although
they
were
heavily
in
favor
of
it
before
and
then
abstain
from
the
vote,
rather
than
say
how
they
felt
about
it,
knowing
it
was
going
to
pass
anyway.
So
I
thought
that
was
kind
of
odd
and
something
we
probably
should
be
clarifying.
F
So
my
question
is:
is
in
that
same
section
it
says:
can
a
member
vote
absent
or
count
me
as
absent,
and
then
it
says
the
ruling
on
this
is
up
to
the
chair.
The
better
approach
is
for
the
chair
to
count
this
as
if
the
member
had
left
his
or
her
chair
and
is
actually
absent.
That
of
course
affects
the
quorum.
However,
the
chair
may
also
treat
this
as
a
vote
to
abstain,
particularly
if
the
person
does
not
actually
leave
the
diocese.
C
F
While
the
city
council
is
in
session,
the
member
shall
preserve
order
and
decorum
and
a
member
shall
neither
by
conversation
or
otherwise
delay
or
interrupt
the
proceedings
or
the
peace
of
the
city
council,
nor
disturb
any
member,
while
speaking
or
refuse
to
obey
the
orders
of
the
city
council
or
its
presiding
officer,
except
as
otherwise
provided
in
this
chapter
and
then
b.
I
was
going
to
add.
F
C
Well,
shall
we
frank
I
I
want
to
make
sure
it's
clear,
but
I
think
in
the
past
we've
had
this
problem
and
I
don't
think
it's
one
of
those
things
where
it's
up
to
somebody
to
feel
like
well.
In
this
case,
I
decided
it
was
important
to
send
a
text.
I
think,
if
we're
going
to
be
texting
or
emailing,
that
should
be
public
record.
G
H
F
F
C
Yeah
no,
this
is,
I
meant
more
for
the
council
members
and
again,
this
is
just
as
far
as
conversations
going
back
and
forth.
If,
obviously,
if
the
staff
is
having
to
send
a
message,
that
probably
should
be
made
clear
to
the
public
too,
to
say
or
just
publicly
say,
inform
the
the
council
members
of
an
issue
with
any
of
the
conversations
or
information.
That's
still
needed.
B
Coordinating
things
like
upcoming
things
or
questions
from
staff
to
see,
if
we
can,
you
know,
there's
other
information
out
there
that
we
can
grab.
So
that's
why
we
kind
of
say
maybe
say
all
council
members,
because
I
mean
we
are
trying
to
coordinate
things
behind
the
scenes
without
having
to
get
up
or
speak
well
and.
B
C
F
Section
2.04.280:
this
is
an
addition
that
I
wanted
to
add
in
there
that
per
government
code
section
365164,
the
salary
of
council
members
may
be
increased
beyond
the
amount
provided
in
the
subdivision
by
an
ordinance
or
by
an
amendment
to
an
ordinance.
But
the
amount
of
the
increase
shall
not
exceed
an
amount
equal
to
five
percent
for
each
calendar
year
from
the
operating
date
of
the
last
adjustment
of
the
salary.
In
effect,
when
the
ordinance
or
amendment
is
enacted,
no
ordinance
shall
be
enacted
or
amended
to
provide
automatic
future
increases
in
salary.
B
C
I
remember
we
looked
back
at
this
at
one
time.
One
of
the
council
members
pointed
out
that
exactly
that
this
hadn't
been
raised
in
years,
and
I
think
there
was
a
section
in
the
state
code
that
pointed
out
that
those
increases
can
be
taken
place
every
year.
According
to
some
formula,
they
had
the
state
had
for
general
lost
cities,
correct
and
but
I
don't
think
it
means
that
we
should
make
up
for
lost
time.
F
D
J
G
Mayor
velasquez,
sir,
go
ahead,
sir.
Thank
you,
I'm
actually
fine
as
it
is.
I
don't
think
any
of
us
got
into
this
to
to
make
money,
and
I
did
have
a
question
that
since
I
sent
my
my
requested
revisions
for
consideration,
I
know
it
came
up
during
the
snip
bus
conversation
in
the
county
that
apparently
the
county
commissioners
get
some
sort
of
a
a
expense
fund.
G
I
don't
know
what
it
is
or
the
specifics
where
they're
allocated
x
amount
of
dollars
a
year
to
do
different
things
in
their
district
with,
and
I
don't
understand
it
clearly.
But
I
would
like
to
put
that
out
on
the
table
for
council
consideration
and
perhaps
yourself
or
one
of
the
previous
council
members
has
a
greater
understanding
of
that,
because
there
would
be
a
benefit
to
having
some
of
that-
and
I
know
other
councils
have
some
sort
of
a
fund
where
they
can
use
those
resources
for
things
in
their
districts.
C
C
That
might
be,
if
you
don't
want
a
user
for
training
or
something
using
your
district.
I
just
I
personally,
I
I
seems
kind
of
odd
to
me
to
use
government
money
to
enhance
things
for
not
for
you,
I
wouldn't
say
for
you,
so
I
don't
want
to
say
for
yourself
but
to
do
different
things
in
the
in
your
district.
I
think
sometimes
we
we're
so
passionate
about
things.
We
just
ended
up
using
our
own
money
instead
of
government
dollars.
C
B
Matter,
if
you
I
mean
to
add
to
that
topic,
I
mean
it
would
help
us
like
in
engineering
when
almost
every
year
we
get
requests
for
a
warrant
analysis
for
a
stop
sign.
That
would
help
us
make
that
a
little
bit
more
expedient,
but
that
could
be
the
ideas
that
you,
when
we
talk
about
the
budget,
that
there
is
a
certain
amount
and
maybe
define
what
can
be
used
for
that.
But
that's
I.
E
C
E
B
B
C
It
does
you
know,
I
think,
the
the
way
we've
handled
this
in
the
past
has
pretty
much
kept
us
out
of
trouble
yeah
and
I
I'm
yeah
as
far
as
dollars.
I
I
agree
with
mr
burns:
I'm
in
no
hurry
to
try
to
get
anything
more.
I
think
we
all
do
this
pretty
much
as
a
we
volunteer
our
time,
but
I
I
do
think
you
know.
Eventually
there
is
going
to
have
to
be
an
increase.
C
I
mean
we
do
know,
it
does
cost
all
of
us
dollars
to
be
involved,
and
I
think
there
was
one
council
member
that
was
a
couple
years
back.
That
was
pointing
out
that
he's
paying
the
city
to
be
a
council
member.
So
I
think
we
we
do
need
to
have
some
some
type
of
adjustment
yearly,
so
it
just
doesn't
get
so
out
of
whack
because
you
can
imagine
if
we
don't
change
something
now,
20
years
from
now,
it's
almost
going
to
be
a
joke
about
the
the
400
to
be
on
the
council.
F
G
G
My
the
the
motivating
factor
for
me
wasn't
snipped,
but
it
was
I
I
recall
there
was
a
moment
where
councilmember
perez
advocated
for
a
resident
in
his
district,
and
I
believe
it
was
to
get
a
a
ramp
put
up
a
development
or
a
physically
disabled
person,
and
he
needed
a
ramp
and-
and
so
he
was
he
was
able
to.
You
know,
use
his
connection
to
get
that
done,
but
that's
not
always
the
case
where
those
connections
exist.
D
C
H
C
A
H
F
Yes,
so
this
is
the
proposed
code
of
ethics
and
conduct
that
I
was
thinking
if
we
were
going
to
insert
this
in
its
entirety
into
our
hollister
municipal
code.
I
would
like
to
do
it
right
as
as
the
beginning
prior
to
any
of
these
other
meetings
and
times
and
places
and
council
member
byrne
submitted
this,
and
the
only
changes
that
were
requested
on
item
number
12
mayor
velasquez
asked
for
no
personal
meetings
with
lobbyist
developers,
third
parties
or
other
entities
that
are
trying
to
influence
city
policy
or
obtain
project
approvals.
J
No,
you
cannot
keep
us
from
meeting
with
people
we
have
to
be
available.
We
are
elected
officials,
whether
they
are
a
lobbyist,
a
developer,
a
kindergarten
teacher.
They
come
to
us.
They
present
their
project
to
us.
We
don't
tell
them
if
we're
gonna
vote,
yes
or
no.
You
can't
expect
us
to
listen
at
a
meeting
and
have
it
all
dumped
on
us
if
that
night
we
will
be
here
till
three
o'clock
in
the
morning
and
I'm
gonna
honestly
tell
you
mayor
of
alaska's.
This
is
illegal.
You
can't
do
it.
C
J
We
can
be
transparent,
you
don't
you
choose
not
to
meet
with
people
to
find
out
what
they
want.
The
rest
of
us
choose.
I
I
I
don't
meet
with
every
developer
that
calls
me
or
every
lobbyist,
but
if
somebody
calls
me
and
says,
do
you
have
10
minutes
I'd
like
to
talk
to
you
about
something
on
the
agenda?
That's
coming
up,
I'm
going
to
meet
with
them,
because
I
want
to
hear
what
they
have
to
say.
C
I
think
it's
important
to
our
community,
I
I
you
know
for
too
many
years,
I've
seen
instances
of
meetings
behind
the
scenes
and
there's
been
several
instances
where
developers
have
or
certain
lobbies
have
met
with
certain
people
and
not
with
others
and
got
what
they
needed,
and
I
just
think
that's
something
the
public
needs
to
be
involved
with,
or
they
need
to
know
those
conversations
having
and
it.
You
know
if
a
major
project
is
happening
if
it
takes
more
than
one
hour
two
hours
or
three
hours.
C
J
Well-
and
I
agree
with
you,
if
you
know,
would
meet
with
these
when
they
call
you
meet
with
them,
I
met
with
I.
I
have
a
prime
example
christopher
ranch.
When
I
first
met
with
joe
giacoloni,
he
had
said
he
tried
to
get
a
hold
of
you
and
you
wouldn't
return
any
of
his
calls
so,
and
that
was
when
this
first,
this
project
first
came
up.
I
never
told
him
how
I
was
gonna
vote.
I
listened
to
what
they
said,
and
that
was
it.
J
You
know
if
we're
gonna
keep
this
out,
but
make
it
put
in.
Take
all
this
out
and
put
in
that
we
acknowledge
at
the
beginning
when
this,
if
something
like
this
happens,
we've
met
with
the
person
beforehand
and
talk
to
them
and
they
still
come
and
give
out
say
everything
that
they
say
in
a
meeting
because
it
does
get
out
to
the
public.
J
C
C
J
Are
my
feelings-
and
I
agree
with
you
and
like
I
said
when
they
call
you
and
ask
to
meet
with
you
meet
with
them?
Don't
ignore
them,
you
you
can't!
No,
it's
not
right!
You
can't
order
a
government
official
not
to
meet
with
people.
We
have
to
meet
with
people
all
the
time.
What
if
somebody
might
then
this
says
I
can't
be
with
anybody
in
my
district
because
they
might
have
something
that
they
want
to
talk
to
me
about
on
the
agenda.
So
I'm
not
available
to
a
constituent.
C
J
No,
no,
no,
no!
No!
I'm
talking
about
this
one
phrase
or
other
entities
that
are
trying
to
influence
city
policy
or
obtain
project
approvals.
What
if
somebody
in
my
district
has
a
great
interest
in
say
a
new
shopping
center
and
they
want
to
talk
to
me
about
it
court.
The
way
you
have
this
written,
I
can't
talk
to
them
about
it,
because
that
would
be
a
special
interest
or
entity.
J
C
C
D
Mr
mayor,
all
right,
thank
you.
I've
been
up
there
for
two
years
and
one
of
the
rules
say
that
we
have
to
disclose
every
time
we
had
a
conversation.
How
many
times
do
you
think
we've
seen
that
or
I've
seen
that
in
the
two
years
that
I've
been
there
right
before
we
have
a
meeting
with
these
lobbyists
special
interest
developers?
How
many
times
do
you
think
people
have
actually
just
closed?
Oh,
I
had
a
meeting
with
them.
I.
J
D
I'm
sorry
it's
my
turn.
Can
I
speak?
Oh
it's,
sir.
Thank
you
very
few
times
and
I've
been
up
there.
I've
been
on
the
other
side,
the
lobbyists
and
developers
do
in
fact
get
their
three
votes
and
they
give
information
to
other
council
members
or
members
that
are
voting,
and
they
just
they
don't
even
bother
to
reach
out
to
the
other
ones.
So
then
we're
blindsided
up
there.
You
know
all
of
a
sudden
there's
three
people
that
have
all
this
information
to
consider
and
we
haven't
even
had
the
chance
to
to
to
have
that.
D
I
think
it's
a
fair
thing
to
ask
to
have
if
they
would
like
they
can
send
us
all
some
type
of
electronic
correspondence.
They
can
send
us
all
the
information
ahead
of
time,
but
they
need
to
do
it
to
all
of
us.
It's
not
fair.
I've
been
on
the
flip
side
of
this.
It's
a
huge
problem.
I
think
that
we
can
put
some
language
to
address
the
councilwoman's
concerns
about
constituency.
I
think
that's
a
bit
of
an
exaggeration.
D
We
always
want
to
respond
to
our
constituents
and
they
don't
more
than
anything.
I
think
it's
people
that
have
a
lot
of
money
to
make
or
to
lose,
based
on
the
decisions
that
we
make,
and
it's
been
a
bit
of
a
problem
here
for
quite
some
time.
So
I'm
completely
for
this.
I
think
we
need
to
keep
everything
open
and
transparent,
and
if
we
would
follow
the
rules
in
the
beginning,
we
would
disclose
that
we
had
those
conversations
we
wouldn't
have
to
consider
putting
this
there,
but
it
just
hasn't
been
a
very
common
practice.
G
B
G
G
Thank
you
and
does:
does
drc
make
a
recommendation
to
the
applicant
as
in
regards
to
what
they
need
to
do
to
be
within
the
rules
or
the
law?
And
I
don't
know
that
ganner
city
staff
support
would
be
the
appropriate
way
of
saying
it.
But
this
does
the
drc
make
a
recommendation
on
things
that
if
they
can
move
forward
or
not.
B
G
B
F
G
C
You,
sir,
I
really
really
like
the
idea
you
had
right
now
of
maybe
a
special
meeting
with
to
discuss
some
of
the
projects
or
different
things
that
way
the
public
knows
this
date.
We're
discussing
this
project
in
this
project
come
listen
in
and
they're
going
to
give
their
pitch
to
us.
What
they're
trying
to
do,
and
we
can
ask
questions
of
them.
I
I
really
do
like
that
idea.
C
I
think
it's
again
it
meets
what
we're
trying
to
do
be
more
open
to
the
public
transparent,
yet
giving
the
any
developers
the
opportunity
to
do
it
right.
So
I
like
that
idea,
I
I
would
really
be
in
favor
of
having
special
meetings,
maybe
once
or
every
other
month
for
developments
to
come
through.
So
we
can
have
those
type
of
discussions.
H
So,
what's
that
councilman
burns?
Are
you
suggesting
that
we
don't
also
or
are
not
allowed
to
visit
with
developers
individually?
Also
because
my
district,
I
cover
everything
I
don't
know,
so
I
don't
think
anyone
has
not
unless
anyone
else
has
industrial
in
their
area
too.
So
it's
like
it's
not
just
the
developers
for
the
houses
that
I
meet
with.
I
meet
with
everybody,
complaints,
parks,
departments,
talking
about
different
parks
and
stuff.
Just
for
me
personally,
it's
like
when
I
see
things
when
when
I
can
go
and
see
things
I
can.
H
H
D
If
I
may,
mr
mayor
sir,
thank
you
so
just
to
explain
the
reason
you
have
to
disclose
you
had
a
conversation
with
somebody
in
private
at
a
public
meeting
is
to
avoid
anybody
asking
those
questions.
So,
if
we've
had
those
conversations
with
people-
and
we
have
not
disclosed
those
at
meetings,
we're
already
violating
that.
So
I
think,
in
order
to
avoid
violating
that,
I
do
agree
with
the
suggestion
of
having
like
a
town
hall.
Maybe
we
can
start
off
every
other
month
like
on
a
saturday
or
something
because
it
just
hasn't
been
happening.
D
It
hasn't
been
happening
and
it
does
put
certain
people
over
an
advantage
or
disadvantage
when
we're
getting
presented,
that
information
on
the
diocese
or
when
they
feel
the
lobbyists
feel
that
they've
already
got
those
votes
locked
in
so
just
to
be
more
transparent
and
and
and
opening
to
the
public.
I
think
it's
a
really
good
idea
because
it
just
hasn't
been
happening
in
the
past.
Thank
you.
A
H
So
I
didn't
know
about
having
to
report
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting,
but
I
will
for
now
on.
I
have.
I
have
nothing
to
hide
about
anything
meeting
with
anybody,
but
I
just
it
gives
me
a
clearer
picture
of
of
what
I
what's
going
on
and
that's
why
I'm
in
support
for
of
having
the
account
all
the
projects
brought
before
the
council,
but
but
not
limited
to
that's
it
yeah.
A
C
I
think
it
sounds
like
most
of
us
are
in
favor
of
having
it
brought
before
the
council
in
a
discussion
in
the
meeting,
so
we're
all
hearing
it
at
the
same
time.
You
know
I
can
tell
you
you
know.
Over
the
years
I
have
had
situations
where
people
that
were
proposing
development
had
come
to
me
and
wanted
to
meet,
and
I
you
know
I
asked
a
few
questions
and
they
would
make
a
comment.
C
C
It
saves
you
time
because
you're
meeting
at
one
time
in
front
of
the
public,
instead
of
individually
with
different
developers,
to
have
these
discussions
and
again
it's
transparent,
it's
open
to
the
public.
The
public
will
know
we're
discussing
development
proposals
at
a
certain
meeting
and
it
get
more
people
involved
in
that
process.
So
I
like
the
idea
of
those
meetings.
I
think
this
item
here,
as
is
red
line
here.
C
The
all
discussions
shall
take
place
at
a
publicly
noticed
meeting
of
the
city
council
could
be
that
special
meeting,
and
I
think
it
really
will
help
us
in
the
end,
and
it
will
avoid
a
lot
of
that
discussion
of
people
having
meetings
behind
the
scenes
and
so
on.
So
I
just
think
it
helps
again
to
be
more
transparent.
D
C
Yeah-
and
I
think
this
here
it
says
no
personal
meetings
with
lobbyists,
developers,
third
parties
or
other
entities
does
not
mean
to
private
citizens.
I
think
we
we
all
have
to
do
that.
We
get
those
phone
calls,
I'm
sure
all
of
us
do
about
the
parks,
as
mr
president
or
different
issues
in
our
city.
We
always
want
to
be
able
to
do
that.
Just
talked
about
issues
that
basically
are
for
large-scale
developments
or
things
where
money
can
be
made
and
again
you
have
the
lobbyists
or
third
parties
trying
to
lobby
us.
For
that.
C
C
H
C
So
again,
I
I
think
this
does
cover
a
lot
of
that.
I,
I
think
the
idea
of
special
meetings
for
some
of
these
developments,
a
great
idea
and
something
probably
long
has
to
do.
We
should
have
done
that
long
ago.
It's
a
great
great
idea.
I
agree
with
mr
resendez
about
adding
with
the
private
or
our
constituents.
It's
a
different
situation
to
discuss
normal
city
issues.
G
Burns,
thank
you,
sir.
I'm
wondering
also
because
I
I
absolutely
understand-
and
I've
heard
both
council
members,
spencer
and
perez
and
and
and
perhaps
maybe
there
could
be
some
sort
of
a
compromise
where
I
know
I've
been
contacted
by
people
for
projects
that
are
not
in
my
district,
and
so
maybe
I
hear
council
member
president.
G
That
way,
I've
heard
your
concern
too,
as
well
as
the
vice
mayors,
where
people
will
come
to
council
and
they've
already
got
three
votes,
and
so
at
that
point
it
becomes
a
conversation,
and
so
I'm
just
looking
for
some
common
ground
here
that
maybe
we
could
go
that
direction.
I
can.
I
can
also
live
with
it
as
proposed.
C
B
C
H
When,
when
I
said
about
agreed
to
I
mean
so,
I
still
like
the
coming
together
as
a
full
council
but
being
able
to
meet
with
the
people
in
just
in
my
district.
That's
what
I
was
talking
about,
and
I'd
still
love
to
have
the
once
a
month
or
by
every
other
month,
coming
together
as
a
council
to
get
a
presentation
on
it.
G
C
So
I
can
agree,
I
I
think
councilman
burns
idea.
I
can
live
with
that.
I
can
say
I'm
not
going
to
meet
with
anyone,
because
I'm,
I
think
it's
all
your
districts,
but
I
think
if
it's
in
your
district
you're,
probably
having
that
first
understanding
what
is
going
to
be
talked
about,
I
can
live
with
that
and
then
present
it
to
the
full
council
at
a
special
meeting.
I
B
I
I
G
Maryville
last
chris,
jim
yeah
also
want
to
briefly
just
agree
with
our
city
clerk
that
I
think
that
this
document
should
absolutely
be
the
very
first
in
the
municipal
code,
because
I
believe
they
do
create
the
foundation
for
our
code
of
conduct
and
ethics.
And
so
I
would.
I
would
also
like
to
see
this
come
first.
F
F
Ask
for
clarification,
but
avoid
debate
and
argument
with
the
public.
Only
the
chair,
not
individual
members,
can
interrupt
a
speaker
during
a
presentation.
However,
a
member
can
ask
the
chair
for
a
point
of
order.
If
the
speaker
is
off
topic
or
exhibiting
behavior
or
language,
the
member
finds
disturbing
and
it
was
just
questioned.
How
can
we
enforce
this.
I
I
The
the
typical
answer
doesn't
always
satisfy
everyone,
because
typical
answer
is
whoever's
holding
the
gavel
that
is,
the
chair
has
the
right
to
to
gavel
someone
down
and
if
the
council
wants
to
overrule
that
on
on
a
motion
or
a
point
of
order
or
something
like
that
it
can.
However,
in
none
of
those
circumstances,
does
it
really
solve
the
problem
of
a
person
who
is
completely
disrupting
the
meeting
and
not
allowing
the
meeting
to
progress.
I
The
only
answer
that
has
ever
worked
for
anyone
across
the
state
of
california
is
for
it
to
be
voted
on
and
the
person
is
told
to
be
silent.
If
they're,
not
silent,
then
the
whether
it's
a
sheriff's
deputy
or
the
chief
of
police
or
anybody
else
forcibly
removes
the
person
which,
as
you
can
imagine,
can
happen
happens
more
often
when
it's
a
member
of
the
public,
it
happens
very,
very
seldom
when
it's
an
elected
member
and
I'm
guessing
that's
not.
For
obvious
reasons.
I
That's
a
last
result,
so
there
simply
is
no
good
answer
to
this.
It
requires
a
lot
of
good
faith
and
cooperation
on
the
members
of
of
of
the
board
or
the
council
or
the
committee,
whichever
the
case
happens
to
be
so.
Like
I
said,
I
get
asked
this
question
a
lot,
there's
no
great
answer
to
it,
and
sometimes
as
much
as
I
hate
to
say
this,
the
answer
is
that
we
suffer
through
it
in
one
way
or
another,
and
I
I
think
we've
seen
that
here
in
in
this
chamber
as
well.
I
C
Can
I
maybe
make
a
recommendation
for
counsel
here?
I
agree
everything
you're
saying
it's
a
little
difficult.
I
think.
Maybe
you
know.
Sometimes
we
all
get
emotional
and
sometimes
it
gets
heated,
but
I
think
if
we
can
all
agree
on
something
we
can
take
that
step
we
need
to
get
to,
and
maybe
the
answer
is
something
as
simple
as
after
the
third
time,
but
pointing
out
somebody's
out
of
order.
C
H
C
It's
a
council.
Well,
I
think
usually
what
happens
is
when
somebody's
out
of
word
I'll
point
it
out
and
they
keep
it
up.
I'll
say:
please
you're
you're
out
of
order
and
if
they
do
it
again,
you
know
again
I'll
point
out,
please
you
know
be
respectful
and
they
do
it
again
and
then
we'd
say:
okay,
we're
gonna,
have
a
five
minute
recess
and
just
whether
it's
through
a
council
person
or
through
a
member
of
the
public,
usually
time
calms
things
down,
yeah,
not
all
the
time,
but
it
does.
C
F
D
Mr
mayor,
if
I
can
closer
thank
you,
I
didn't
even
know
that
this
was
that
they
weren't
allowed
to
personally
attack
us
I'll,
be
honest
until
we
recently
talked
about
it
and
we
read
the
rules.
So
thank
you
for
that,
because
a
lot
of
that
was
going
on,
but
I
don't
know.
I
think
it
depends
on
on
what
the
the
violation
is
right.
If
somebody
is
out
right,
screaming
and
cussing
and
yelling
or
threatening
like
that
needs
to
be
objected
right
away.
D
D
C
C
There
are
all
kinds
of
issues
legally,
as
I
think
the
city
attorney
was
pointing
out,
and
I
don't
think
we
ever
want
to
get
to
a
situation
where
we're
trying
to
drag
somebody
out
of
a
meeting
a
lot
of
times
those
that
are
causing
the
disturbance
are
hoping.
That's
exactly
what
will
happen,
which
makes
it
worse
and
we've
seen
that
happen
at
one
of
the
supervisors
meeting
and
we
we
don't
want
to
get
into
that
situation.
A
H
C
H
C
Obviously
it's
easier
to
handle
than
it
was
when
people
are
there
at
the
podium,
but
I
understand
what
you're
saying
so
they
would
continue
their
their
allotted.
Time
is
your
point,
and
if
they
continue,
then
we
could
just
cut
them
from
that
point:
cut
them
off
and
move
to
the
next
speaker,
because
the
council's
all
right
with
that
mayor.
G
Although
the
council
chambers
are
quite
small,
that
I
like
the
idea
of
you
calling
for
recess,
because
if
there's
no
audience,
then
that
helps
solve
the
problem
and
turning
the
microphone
off
often
can
help
a
little
bit.
I
suspect,
but
I
would
like
to
see
them
forfeit
their
their
right
to
continue
at
that
point.
If
they're,
if
they're,
that
blatant
and
disrespectful
or
menacing,
I
I
think
there
has
to
be
a
real
consequence.
C
D
C
I
think
the
key
to
all
this
for
all
of
us
is
that
we
all
agree
to
this,
because
when
it's
happening
that
night,
it
might
be
somebody
that's
in
favor
of
you
and
against
the
other.
Well,
the
next
medium
might
be
the
other
way
around,
and
that's
why,
whether
they're
there
to
support
you
or
not.
It
should
be
the
same
for
everyone.
H
C
We
can
all
be
in
a
room
together
talking
about
the
weather
or
different
things,
but
we
cannot
talk
about
city,
business
and
usually
what
will
happen
is
somebody
will
go
to
the
restroom
or
different
areas
and
go
go
different
directions?
Some
people
will
stay
at
the
at
their
chair,
so
we
don't.
We
don't
all
want
to
go
off
on
a
huddle
because
you're
right.
That
would
probably
look
not
look
good,
okay
public,
but
we
can
just
take
the
recess
and
the
microphones
off
and
we
go
from
there.
H
H
Take
it
from
me
from
a
bit
of
being
able
to
compose
you,
take
a
break
compose
yourself
and
address
the
issue
again,
because
we
do
lose
our
emotions
sometime
and
which
just
just
means
that
we're
human
and
but
you
know
the
issue
or
the
topic
still
needs
to
be
addressed
forfeiting
the
the
time.
I
I
I
so
if
we're
gonna,
if
they're
gonna
forfeit
their
time,
how
many
point
of
orders
do
they
get.
C
I
think
at
that
point,
that's
when
we're
talking
about
the
three.
Usually
again
when
this
happens
is
I'll
point
out.
You
know
point
of
order,
please
be
respectful
and
all
the
different
things
and
if
it
continues
I'll
warn
them
again,
hey
look
at
this
point.
We
talked
about
this
so
on
there's
kids,
watching
on
on
video
there's
all
these
things
happening.
Please
be
respectful.
You
know
we're
here
to
listen
to
you.
Then
it
happens
again.
It's
just
time
to
pull
the
plug.
C
H
C
On
these,
it's
not
the
emotion,
the
emotional
error
we
all
have
emotions
it's
when
somebody
is
verbally
abusing
somebody,
yeah
or
cussing
out
or
pointing
to
somebody
saying
you're,
a
crook
or
you're
this
you're
that
then
we
say:
okay,
stop!
You
know
several
years
ago,
that's
what
we
used
to
do
and
then
there
were
some
changes
and
that
we
didn't
get
the
majority
to
agree
to
that,
and
I
think
that
that
did
create
more
problems.
So
it's
not
stopping
something
because
they're
being
emotional,
it's
when
somebody's
being
verbally
abusive.
H
C
Again,
it
depends
on
the
level
so
again,
if
somebody's
screaming
out
making
threats
and
cussing,
I
think
that's
a
situation
where
it
stops
instantly
and
again,
very
rare.
Does
it
happen
in
that
way?
Usually
after
the
first
hey,
let's
be
civilized
or
let's
have
a
conversation
that
usually
stops
it,
but
on
the
rare
occasion
there
have
been
people
that
have
gone
out
with
an
outburst
of
just
right
away,
calling
somebody
a
crook
or
saying
you
know
using
language.
That's
just
inappropriate,
and
I
think
when
that
happens,
we
can
just
stop
it
right.
There.
C
C
I
And
typically,
if
it,
if
it's
to
the
point
where
we
need
to
call
a
recess,
and
everyone
needs
to
break
for
a
certain
number
of
minutes
when
we
come
back,
if
that
person
is
going
to
be
if
their
opportunity
to
complete
their
portion
of
the
public
comment
time
that
they
would
originally
be
allotted
is
going
to
be
denied
there'd,
be
certain
findings.
That
would
be
stated
in
the
record
as
to
that
effect.
G
Okay,
go
ahead
thanks.
I've
heard
what
the
council
member
perez
has
said,
and
I've
asked
our
city
attorney
as
well.
Perhaps
a
a
compromised
position
would
be
that
they
would
be.
They
would
forfeit
their
time
subject
to
when
council
reconvenes,
any
council
member
could
make
a
motion,
and
if
it
was
second
and
a
vote
occurred,
let
them
finish,
I'm
just
throwing
that
out
there,
I'm
absolutely
fine
with
giving
them
the
boot.
C
G
C
I
think
what
happens
here
is,
if
you
have
a
person
that
is
just
intent
on
making
a
scene
they're
going
to
continue
more
often
than
not
a
break,
we
can
come
back
and
that
person
would
be
there
much
more
calm
and
we
can
continue
and
let
them
finish,
but
if
their
intent
is
just
to
scream
and
yell
and
make
accusations.
I
think
at
that
point
we
just
we
move
on
mr.
D
America
mate,
sir.
Thank
you.
I
I
like
how
council
member
perez
stated
it
three
minutes
of
hell
like
it
shouldn't
feel
like
that,
because
we
we're
volunteering
our
time
to
to
benefit
our
community
to
help
our
community,
but
sometimes
it
has
felt
like
that
when
people
personally
attack,
you
like
they'll,
bring
up
things
in
your
past
that
have
no
relevance
or
shouldn't
be
brought
up
at
the
podium
that
type
of
thing
or
they're,
making
personal
accusations
towards
you
and
stuff.
D
So
I
think
we
need
to
just
keep
it
professional
and
to
the
topic
at
hand,
something
that
the
council
is,
can
policies
that
we
can
make
or
decisions
we
can
make,
but
it
shouldn't
be
feeling
like
they're
personally
attacking
you
or
they're,
making
a
political
statement.
It
shouldn't
really
feel
like
that
and
if
they
want
to,
they
can
do
that.
They
can
talk
to
you
at
other
times,
but
not
during
a
council
meeting.
It's
very
disruptive,
and
it
is
it's
very
uncomfortable
and
it
does
feel
like
that
and
it
shouldn't
really.
F
The
requested
change
was
council
members
who,
intentionally
and
repeatedly
do
not
follow
proper
conduct,
may
be
reprimanded
or
formally
censured
by
the
council,
lu
seniority
or
committee
assignments,
both
within
the
city
of
hollister
and
with
the
intergovernmental
agencies
or
other
privileges
afforded
by
the
council.
Serious
infractions
of
the
code
of
ethics
or
code
of
conduct
could
lead
to
other
sanctions,
and
I
think
we
council,
member
resendez,
just
wanted
to
have
it
be
period.
D
It
I
think
the
language
was
a
little
ambiguous.
It
goes
on
to
say,
as
deemed
appropriate
by
the
council
like
what
does
that
mean?
Legally,
mr
epperson,
it's
just
what
are
they
gonna?
Do
you
know
what
I
mean?
I
think
that,
legally
all
we
really
can
do
as
a
council
is
censure
somebody,
but
it
just
seemed
a
little
ambiguous
to
put
as
deemed
appropriate
by
the
council.
I
D
E
C
I
think
it
the
situation
is
basically
to
us
council
members.
If
we
lose
control.
What
are
we
willing
to
do
as
council
members
to
make
sure
we?
We
gain
back
control
instead
of
a
situation
that
escalates
what
what
remedies
do
we
have
and
that
we
agree
on
that
we're
going
to
follow
through
and
not
just
allow
it
to
continue,
because
we
were
in
favor
of
one
thing
or
maybe
we're
against
something.
C
It's
the
that
professionalism
in
public,
especially
it's
critically
important,
because
once
we
lose
that
we've
lost
our
our
citizens
and
we
we
start
to
see
an
increase
of
people
coming
in
and
attacking
also.
So
I
think
it's
something
that
we
have
to
hold
ourselves
to
a
standard,
and
I
don't
know
if
we're
all
willing
to
follow
some
sort
of
sanctioning
procedures.
If
we
don't.
But
it's
it's
something
that
I
think
we
have
to
agree
on
and
not
just
make
exceptions
for
it.
C
E
H
H
G
F
G
F
D
D
D
G
I'm
I'm
fine
mayor
was
striking
that
paragraph.
I
would
like
to
see
the
and
I
don't
know
how
to
how
to
if
we
remove
that
first
paragraph,
I
think
the
second
paragraph
needs
to
be
rewritten,
because
I
do
think
it's
important
symbolically
and
then
also
practically
that
each
council,
member
and
and
I'd
also
add.
G
D
Agree
with
you
on
that,
if
I
can
mr
mayor,
I
would
just
suggest
then
mr
councilmember
burns
that
we
take
out
for
this
reason,
comma,
we
could
just
put
this
document
shall
be
included
and
I'll
just
start
there,
maybe,
and
that
makes
a
little
bit
more
sense.
It
reads
easy
if
we
were
to
take
out
that
previous
paragraph.
H
C
F
A
F
F
A
F
F
E
F
E
F
F
The
city
manager
determines
which
items
are
placed
on
the
agenda
and
the
timing
for
scheduling
such
items.
Any
member
of
the
city,
council,
the
city
attorney
or
the
city
clerk
may
request
to
have
an
item
placed
on
the
agenda
and
I
believe
there
was
a
question
on
what
the
procedure
of
that
is.
How
does
a
council
member
ask
or
get
an
item
placed
on
the
agenda.
C
How
well
they've
been
working
together
with
all
of
us,
and
I
think,
having
those
conversations
at
our
meetings
about
items
seems
to
flow
much
better,
because
then
we're
all
on
board
and
we're
expecting
it
to
come
through
at
a
future
meeting,
rather
than
just
something
that
pops
up-
and
none
of
us
are
familiar
with.
It.
F
C
A
A
F
D
I
don't
want
to
get
into
all
of
it,
but
this
is,
I
don't
know
if
everybody's
had
a
chance
to
review
it,
some
of
it
doesn't
even
align
with
what
we
actually
do
like
we
have
an
elected
mayor
versus
an
appointed
mayor,
there's
things
that
don't
even
make
sense
in
it.
So
I'm
wondering
why
this
document's
in
there,
I
don't
want
to
go
through
all
my
notes
and
waste
your
guys's
time
on
it
like
we
have
been
I'm
sorry,
but
I'm
wondering
if
we
could
just
scratch
this
whole
document.
D
E
F
F
F
F
A
D
F
F
D
D
H
F
F
H
And,
and
and
either
way
it
says,
I
think
it
said
or
but
either
way
the
if,
if
anything
does
pop
up
I'd
like
for
us
to
follow
those
protocols.
If
it's
just
audio,
that's
fine,
then
let's
follow
that,
but
I
do
have
talks
to.
I
talk
to
a
lot
of
people,
but
you
know
it
is
a
concern
for
the
citizens
that
they'd
like
to
see
us,
and
so
you
know
it's
I'm.
C
F
H
Speaking
of
shot
is,
is
this:
is
this
a
time
for
me
to
to
congratulate
how
the
those
vaccinations
drives
are
going
they're
really
awesome?
It's
last
week
doing
there
was
700
people
that
got
shots
and
it
was
very
orderly.
It
was
very
quick
to
get
700
shots
done,
there's
always
discrepancies
about
leftover
stuff,
but
as
far
as
the
process,
I
think
they're
doing
a
great
job
out
there.
You
know
I
just
wanted
to
get.
Let
them
know
that
that's
it.