►
From YouTube: Hol CC 121321 Special
Description
Hollister City Council Special Meeting December 13, 2021
B
B
Take
extra
precautions
tonight
we've
had
a
few
staff
members
at
city
hall
that
have
tested
positive
for
covid,
so
we
want
to
make
sure
everybody
is
being
as
safe
as
possible.
I've
also
received
word
that
the
omicron
variant
is
now
in
santa
clara
county,
which
means
it
is
most
likely
here
in
san
benito
county.
B
E
F
G
B
D
D
I
think
I
may
have
skipped
a
line
that
I
take
this
obligation
freely.
Did
I
take
this
obligation
freely
without
any
mental
reservation,
without
any
mental
reservation
or
purpose
of
evasion
or
purpose
of
evasion,
and
that
I
will
and
that
I
will
well
and
faithfully
and
faithfully
discharge
the
duties
discharge,
the
duties
upon
which
I'm
about
to
enter
upon,
which
I'm
about
to
enter?
Congratulations.
D
B
B
B
D
G
B
Excellent,
thank
you
for
coming.
You
join
us
on
zoom
tonight,
mr
priest,
we're,
as
you
know,
we're
we
worked
earlier
in
the
year
on
some
new
rules
on
campaign
finance
and
we
feel
maybe
there
is
adjustments
that
need
to
be
needed.
I'm
sure
we
have
questions
from
the
council.
Maybe
we
can
start
with
any
questions
from
the
council
or
comments.
B
C
C
A
I'm
sorry
I'll
unmute
myself.
Thank
you,
mr
mayor
members
of
city
council.
First
of
all,
it's
an
honor
to
be
here
this
evening
to
to
address
council
member
burns
questions
specifically.
I
might
refer
that
to
mr
epperson.
I
I
did
not
draft
that
amendment.
I
think
that
may
have
come
from
the
city
attorney's
office,
and
perhaps
he
can
provide
some
clarification
because
I
I
agree
with
you.
I
did
not
see
a
chapter
2.05
in
the
current
code
either.
G
D
G
C
Thank
you,
and-
and
I
guess
then
the
other
question
I
have
is
in
reviewing
the
staff
report.
Really
it's
pretty
much
as
it
was
adopted,
with
the
exception
of
the
I
think
there
were
blue
strike,
throughs
and-
and
so
I
didn't
really
see
much
really
different
from
what
I
saw
there.
So
until
we
have
a
section
205,
there's
really
not
much
to
discuss.
As
far
as
I
can
tell
at
this
point.
Thank
you
and
that
concludes
my
questions
and
comments.
G
B
E
G
A
G
A
I
would
also
note
quickly
that
enforcement
of
a
council
conduct
policy
is
typically
done
through
political
means,
and
I
did
see
references
in
your
existing
policy
to
removal
from
appointed
committees
and
commissions
censure.
Those
are
typically
the
sanctions
imposed
for
violation
of
a
council
conduct
poly
policy.
It
is
possible
that
someone's
conduct
could
get
to
the
point
where
it
may
violate
some
other
state
law.
A
Disclosing
confidence's
question
that
you
know
under
the
brown
act,
there
would
be
an
independent
violation
there,
which
could
obviously
raise
the
sanction
quite
a
bit.
In
some
cases,
some
of
these
violations
can
be
prosecuted
criminally
and
civilly.
But
again,
I
think
you
have
to
take
each
situation
on
its
own
facts
again.
A
If
it's
an
egregious
situation,
that
would
be
something
that
perhaps
could
be
looked
at,
but
for
the
most
part,
when
somebody
is
out
of
order
not
perhaps
conforming
their
norms
exactly
to
the
council
conduct
policy
again,
typically,
removal
from
appointed
committees
is
the
most
extreme.
It
gets
it's
a
political
solution
as
opposed
to
a
strict
legal
solution.
E
E
A
Yeah,
as
I
mentioned
previously,
someone
not
conforming
themselves
to
the
council.
Conduct
policy
could
rise
to
such
an
extent
that
it
may
be
an
independent
violation
of
state
law.
The
example
I
was
given
earlier
perhaps
of
conduct
was
so
disruptive
to
the
meeting.
It
might
actually
be
sanctionable
under
another
state
law.
But
again,
if
it's
the
more
typical
situation
where
perhaps
someone
is
accused
of
not
debating
fairly
being
out
of
order,
something
of
that
nature,
the
solution
is
political.
A
Thank
you.
Eight
is
among
the
council,
and
the
decision
is
with
the
council.
It's
not.
It
is
a
political
solution
to
a
political
issue.
It
does
not
have
the
legality
of
say,
criminal,
civil,
fine
sanctions.
In
those
cases
there
would
be
some
due
process
issues
and
we
would
have
appeal
process
things
like
that,
but
again
of
absent,
egregious
conduct.
That
would
be
some
independent
violation
of
state
law.
Again,
violation
of
a
council
conduct
policy
is
typically
politically
dealt
with,
and
then
the
appeal
is
to
the
council
and
it
stays
with
the
council.
F
I
just
think
that
it
might
be
good
to
define
that
in
the
new
code,
because
it's
a
little
ambiguous
so
just
to
take
note
of
that,
when
we
do
define
what
those
sanctions
are,
we
can
point
out
where
that
where
they
can
be
found,
if
it's
in
chapter
2.05
or
where,
whatever
it
is
my
question
for
you,
mr
priest.
First
of
all,
thanks
thanks
for
being
here,
I'm
more
interested
in
the
campaign
finance
reform
portion.
F
What
are
some
of
the
most
basic
means
of
like
with
cities
of
what's
with
ours,
of
monitoring
that
like
can?
We
just
have
our
city
clerk
say
this
is
an
infraction,
and
it's
going
to
have
a
fine
of
this
much
and
then
bring
it
to
our
attention.
What
do
you
think?
What
are
some?
What
are
some
examples
that
you've
seen
in
other
cities
since
you're
from
more
familiar
with
this?
To
not
over
complicate
things.
A
A
It
would
be
a
question
of
ultimately
enforcing
it
and
cold
that
you
know
challenging
and
that
can
get
resource
intensive.
What
I've
seen
some
cities
do.
Is
you
know
again?
They
just
go
with
the
default
contribution
limit.
They
let
the
fppc
do
the
enforcement,
those
that
do
do
local
enforcement.
It's
a
relatively
new
phenomenon,
we're
seeing
because
of
ab571.
A
They
will
up.
You
know,
appoint
or
authorize
the
city
manager
to
hire
an
independent
outside
attorney,
who
can
investigate
and,
if
necessary,
file
legal
action
to
enforce
fines,
potentially
criminal
and
civil
injunctions,
but
that
tends
to
be
a
little,
but
it
definitely
finds
they
can
certainly
enforce.
But
again,
they'd
have
to
go
to
court
to
do
it.
If
somebody
decided
that
no,
I
did
not
violate
the
ordinance
and
it
ends
up
becoming
litigated.
A
A
Independent
expenditure
committees,
also
known
as
super
pacs,
are
an
interesting
creature
of
election
campaign,
finance
law,
your
ordinance
or
your
resolution
that
we're
talking
about
eventually
turning
into
an
ordinance
limits,
direct
campaign
contributions
to
250
dollars
per
source
per
election.
Those
are
direct
contributions
to
either
the
candidate
or
to
the
candidates
controlled
committee.
A
But
this
one
limitation
on
speech
is
okay
to
prevent
actual
or
the
appearance
of
pay-to-play
corruption,
and
that's
actually
right
out
of
the
supreme
court
decision.
So
again,
a
city
can
limit
direct
contributions
and
direct
contributions
mean
those
to
the
candidate
or
the
candidate
control
committee,
and
that's
written
that
way
in
your
ordinance.
A
Independent
expenditure
committees,
however,
are
not
the
candidate
and
they
are
not
the
candidates
control
committee.
By
definition,
they
are
independent
of
the
candidate.
They
do
not
take
their
direction
from
the
candidate
or
the
candidates
controlled
committee.
They
are
you
know
outside
of
that
sphere
or
hate
it.
The
u.s
supreme
court
and
citizens,
united
vs
federal
election
commission
11
years
ago,
ruled
that
independent
expenditure
committees
are
not
subject
to
campaign
contributions.
A
So
while
your
ordinance
could
continue
to
limit
direct
contributions
to
250
per
source
per
election,
your
ordinance
may
not
constitutionally
impose
such
a
limit
on
an
independent
expenditure
committee.
They're
called
super
pacs.
For
a
reason,
this
is
their
super.
Their
super
authority
under
citizens
united,
is
that
they
can
accept
unlimited
contributions
and
they
can
spend
unlimited
expenditures
and
subject
to
reporting
and
disclosure.
F
It
does
thank
you
so
much,
and
then
what
would
be
like
an
infraction
of
that
law?
What
would
be
one
example
of
somebody
crossing
the
line
in
an
independent
expenditure
committee,
a
candidate
like
communicating
with
independent
expenditure
committee
or
coordinating
with
them,
would
that
be
considered
an
infraction
that.
A
Would
be
a
violation?
Well,
the
way
the
state
law
is
written
is
that
independent
expenditure
committee,
by
definition,
is
one
that
is
not
coordinating
with
the
candidate
and
coordination
is
a
term
of
art
used
in
the
law,
meaning
the
candidate
and
the
independent
expenditure
committee
are
talking
and
they're
applying
strategy.
B
B
B
I
think
we
all
understood
that
that
could
be
a
difficult
thing
if
you're
trying
to
issue
penalties
and
other
issues
other
ways
to
penalize
different
groups.
But
let
me
ask
you
a
couple
of
things
and
without
going
to
the
point
of
fppc,
we
talked
about
that's
4
900
the
limit
there.
If
we
have
a
set
limit
as
we
set
the
250,
smaller
communities
or
other
communities
are
doing
this
now
that
could
be
enforced,
probably
not
as
far
as
or
probably
could.
B
If
you
wanted
to
push
to
the
point
of
court,
but
it's
more
of
a
symbolism.
It's
hey.
Look!
Here's
our
limits.
If
you're
going
to
violate
those
limits,
then
we
can
issue
a
notice
of
violation.
We
can
issue
a
notice
of
violation.
Basically
saying
candidate
x
has
violated
the
the
rules
that
can
be
done
at
the
city
level
correct.
I
don't.
A
Now
one
thing
I
would
be
careful
about,
however,
mr
mayor
is,
if
you
issue
that
notice
of
violation
you
may
have
a
candidate
that
wants
some
way
to
remedy
or
clear
their
name
of
that
notice
of
violation,
which
means
we
would
still
have
to
provide
some
sort
of
appeal
remedy,
whether
administrative
or
anything
else,
perhaps
in
court.
I
would
be
concerned
about
just
publicizing,
because
the
city
believes
that
perhaps
the
ordinance
was
violated
right.
So
I'm
sorry,
maybe
there's
a
caveat
to
that.
I
should
have
said
that
earlier
yeah.
A
B
A
A
So
it
draws
this
very
interesting
distinction
between
a
sitting
appointed
official
and
a
sitting
elected
official,
and
so
contributions
do
not
force
recusal
and
by
by
logic,
application
of
logic.
Here
I
don't
think
that
taking
an
excessive
campaign
contribution
would
force
a
re.
They
just
do
not
count
in
forcing
a
recusal
again.
There
may
be
other
remedies
to
you
know,
address
the
you
know
the
excessive
contribution,
but
not
a
refusal.
B
A
Yes,
it
can
be
yes,
it
can
be
that
the
is
you
know,
how
do
you
value
an
in-kind
contribution
and
I've
I've
seen
fppc
opinions
where
that
ends
up
getting
litigated
and
you
actually
end
up
having
witnesses,
and
sometimes
experts
saying
oh
yeah.
This
was
worth
you
know,
ten
thousand
dollars
of
service
or
ten
thousand
dollars
of
value,
because
you
know
a
state
case
you're
dealing
with
you
know
higher
margins
of
numbers
there
you
would
have
the
same
factual
issue.
A
B
A
A
I
I
think
very
likely
would
not
be
in
a
position
to
really
analyze
and
investigate
this
one.
Possibly
I
mean
if
we
got
some
sort
of
an
outside
attorney
investigator,
who
has
experience
with
this
that's
possible,
but
that
that
becomes
a
very
tricky
factual
issue?
Was
there
coordination
who
knew
what
who
was
talking
to
who
etc?.
B
B
B
A
And
again,
I'm
just
getting
a
little
terminological
here.
We're
talking
about
pacs
and
super
pacs.
Super
pac
is
the
name
that
they
gave
to
independent
expenditure
committees.
A
pack
can
be
any
political
action
committee.
I
mean
a
candidate
control
committee
is
a
pac
of
some
sort,
so
I
tend
to
use
the
term
super
pac
to
talk
about
the
independent
expenditure
committees.
A
If,
if
a
super
pac
is
donating
money
directly
to
the
candidate,
it's
subject
to
that
contribution
limit.
On
the
other
hand,
if
the
super
pac
is
simply
collecting
contributions
and
expending
that
money
for
the
benefit
of
the
candidates
without
any
direction
from
the
candidate
or
otherwise
that's
considered
free
speech,
we,
the
super
pac,
feel
that
we
want
to
support
this
one
candidate,
and
they
can
do
that
and
they
can
accept
contributions
without
limit.
They
can
make
expenditures
without
women.
B
B
A
Super
pacs
are
required
in
their
mailers
advertising
to
disclose
their
top
contributors
now
under
state
law.
Top
contributors
are
defined
as
those
that
contribute
more
than
50
000
to
the
super
pac.
So
if
you're
dealing
with
a
very
large
one,
you
know
there
may
be
a
very
long
list
of
I'm.
So
sorry
give
me
a
second.
There
could
be
a
very
long
list
of
top
contributors
as
defined
by
state
law.
A
B
A
Or
from
a
single
source
from
a
single
funder,
they
have
to
disclose
that
it's
like
committee,
major
funding
by
and
you've
heard
these
on.
You
know
video
and
you
know
radio
advertisements
before
but
again
the
contributor
has
to
have
contributed,
50,
000
or
more.
It's,
not
a
50
000
aggregate
with
the
top
ten
or
something
it's
it's
very
specific
to
those
large
contributors.
B
A
I
have
not
with
with
I
think
one
exception.
I
think
it
was
santa
cruz,
but
again
we
could
certainly
look
into
that.
We
can
see
whether
there
is
authority
to
do
that
or
not
I
I
don't
you
know
mean
to
be
flipped
by
saying
this,
but
you
know
just
because
one
city
is
doing
it.
It
doesn't
necessarily
mean
it's.
The
one
size
fits
all
for
everyone
else.
Santa
cruz
is
a
charter
city.
A
B
B
A
You
know,
contributions
are
considered
a
free
speech
right
and
a
numerical
limit
has
been
determined
as
valid
a
valid
limit
on
free
speech
to
prohibit.
You
know
an
appearance
that
you
know
I
paid
so
much
money
to
this
candidate
that
it
looks
like
you
know
that
I
bought
the
candidate
basically
but
requiring
a
candidate
to
or
allow
account
of
being
able
to
go
and
get
many
different,
250
contributions
both
within
and
without
the
city.
B
B
A
A
I
I
well
for
that.
You
know
again,
I
would
have
to
go
back
and
look
at
the
specific
reg
specifically
on
phone
calls.
I
know
in
print
mails
in
electronic
mail.
There
are
disclosures
that
have
to
go
in
there
to
talk
about
the
top
funders.
My
let
me
let
me
just
refine
my
prior
remark.
I
believe
that
there
is
that
similar
blurb
on
a
phone
call.
I
would.
B
B
A
You
know
they're
they're
with
any
of
those
top
contributors,
there's
also
websites
on
the
secretary
of
state's
website
that
have
those
disclosures
things
like
that
as
well.
So
again,
there's
a
series
of
disclosure
requirements
and
there
some
in
the
advertising,
some
just
have
to
have
a
very
basic
statement
and
then
refer
you
to
the
website
or
something
like
that.
Where
there's
more
detailed
information.
B
Right
looking
forward
to
getting
that
information,
as
you
get
that-
and
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
handle
this-
I
have
a
question
about
lobbyists
within
our
own
community.
If
this
would
be
probably
a
separate
issue,
but
maybe
you
would
know
the
answer
to
it,
is
it
possible
to
restrict
lobbying
to
the
city
from
an
exiting
council
member
for
a
certain
term
like
four
years?
Is
that
something
that
can
be
done,
that.
B
C
C
Okay
and
typically
it's
either
going
to
be
a
misdemeanor
or
an
infraction,
and
and
typically
there
are
different
triggers.
That
would
make
it
one
versus
the
other,
but
if
it
were
a
misdemeanor,
it
would
typically
be
sent
to
the
local
district
attorney
and
the
the
d.a
could
then
either
choose
to
pursue
it
or
defer
it
back
to
the
city
attorney.
Am
I
correct.
C
C
Having
said
that,
I
understand
this
creates
a
bit
of
a
quandary
if
it's
something
particularly
if
it
involves
one
of
the
seated
council
members
or
somebody
running
for
council
to
put
that
onus
and
burden
on
the
city
attorney
or
the
city
clerk
or
the
city
manager,
since
all
three
of
those
people
actually
work
for
this
city
council.
Having
said
that,
what
I
would
like
to
do
is
suggest
a
council
for
consideration
that
we
absolutely
hire
a
independent
hearing
officer.
C
G
C
Okay,
so
whatever
the
whatever
the
law
requires,
is
where
I'd
like
to
see
that
head
and
so
then,
in
the
event
that
there
was
an
alleged
violation,
it
could
be
referred
to
the
hearing
officer
and
there
would
be
a
clearly
defined
due
process
and
that
hearing
officer
then
as
a
as
an
attorney,
could
either
choose
to
investigate
it.
But
often
attorneys
have
private
investigators
that
work
for
them.
C
C
A
Bringing
this
to
an
outside
investigating
attorney
that
that
would
be
our
recommendation
as
well,
because,
as
you
noted
there
is,
it
puts
the
city
clerk's
office,
the
city
attorney's
office,
in
an
awkward
position
to
enforce
and
putting
that
out
to
an
independent
investigating
attorney
who
can
take
proper
enforcement
action
definitely
helps
there
to
avoid.
You
know
again
awkward
conflicted
situations
getting
to
your
question
about.
A
Could
we
enforce
these
other
things?
I
I
think
the
concern
is.
If
you
are
adopting
different
campaign
contribution,
different
independent
expenditure
committee,
different
disclosure
requirements,
then
what
the
state
does
you're
going
to
be
enforcing
that
on
your
own.
I
don't
believe
that
the
fppc
is
going
to
necessarily
enforce
a
local
independent
expenditure.
Commission
regulation-
that's
different
than
state
law
if
they
violated
state
law.
If
you
had
a
super
pac
that
put
out
an
advertisement
that
didn't
have
its
top
contributors
on
there,
that's
an
independent
violation
of
state
law.
A
C
You
pick
a
million
dollars
or
do
you
find
somewhere
in
between
you
know,
you
hope
you
don't
have
to
have
it,
but
then
you
don't
have
to
chase
it.
If
you
need
it,
and
you
know
whether
it
be
the
mayor,
the
vice
mayor,
the
mayor
and
the
vice
mayor,
you
know,
review
these
things
and
come
up
to
some
decision,
whether
they
weren't
investigation
or
not.
C
I
think
we
can
clearly
define
that
process
and
I
think
we're
going
to
learn
by
our
experience,
we'll
make
some
missteps
and
then
we
can
come
back
and
adapt
and
adjust
the
ordinance
I
presume.
Based
on
our
experience,
I
mean
we've
kind
of
found
that
that
was
a
challenge
with
the
cannabis
ordinance
and
what
the
cannabis
ordinance
looked
like
several
years
ago
versus
what
it
should
look
like.
C
A
B
A
Maybe
give
some
options
about
what
if
the
investigation
ceases
at
the
investigation
and
payment
is
made
or
disclosures
made,
compliance
is
brought
or
what
might
be.
You
know
an
additional
cost
if
it
gets
pursued
in
the
court
or
some
sort
of
an
administrative
process.
So
I
can
certainly
bring
that
back
to
the
council.
D
D
So
definitely
the
policy
needs
a
lot
of
work.
Obviously,
there
are
sections
that
are
referenced
that
are
not
anywhere
and
those
need
to
be
addressed
and
we
may
need
to
see
what
actually
is
included
in
that.
But
in
addition
to
that,
it
speaks
to
two
things,
so
campaign
reform
and
actually
the
behavior
of
the
council.
D
Also
when
city
council
members
or
mayor
potentially
violates
fppc
rules
and
regulations
or
when
staff
has
misconduct
in
relation
to
election
and,
of
course,
the
mention
of
due
process.
So,
even
though
people
do
reference
the
law,
it
is
completely
ignored
and
then
potential
sanctions
may
be
applied,
and
what
does
that
look
like
in
terms
of
the
liability
for
the
city
of
hollister
and
implications?
If
you
can
touch
on
those,
please.
A
Okay,
well,
you
know
I,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
if,
if
a
council
member
is
accused
of
misconduct
in
conducting
council
meetings,
things
like
that,
then
typically,
the
solution
is
some
sort
of
a
reprimand:
censure
removal
from
appointed
committees,
things
like
that
misconduct
in
elections.
I
I'm
not
quite
sure
what
you
mean
by
that.
If
somebody
has
violated
the
elections
code
in
some
way,
there
are
violations
of
the
elections
code
that
are
misdemeanors.
A
You
know
falsifying
initiative,
petitions
you
know
things
like
that.
There
there's
a
number
of
them
they're,
pretty
serious
again,
not
knowing
the
nature
of
the
misconduct
that
you're
talking
about
it's
a
little
hard
to
judge
you
know,
elections
can
be
rough
and
tumble.
Sometimes
you
know
what
what
might
be
seen
as
misconduct
is
just
part
of
the
rough
and
tumble
of
politics,
and
sometimes
it
truly
is
something
that
rises
to
a
level
that
may
require
legal
investigation
and
possible
enforcement.
A
If
the
city
council
violates
an
established
fppc
regulation,
something
that's
codified
in
state
law
or
state
regulation,
for
example,
conflict
of
interest
government
code
1090,
where
you're
not
supposed
to
be
interested
in
contracts
with
the
city,
to
a
certain
extent,
those
things
have
their
own
sanctions
in
state
law
that
can
be
pursued
and,
for
example,
a
conflict
of
interest
in
a
decision
or
government
code.
1090,
that's
separate
from
campaign
finance
reform.
That's
something
that
there's
a
violation.
The
fppc
will
in
fact
investigate
and
possibly
enforce,
depending
upon
the
facts.
A
D
A
Well,
I
I
don't
know
of
any
situation
like
that.
I
mean
I
mean
if,
if
the
elections
code
is
not
followed,
there
are,
you
know,
remedies
in
the
elections
code,
for
example,
if
you
know
an
election
is,
you
know,
say
a
ballot
measure
written
incorrectly
under
the
elections
code
or
something
like
that.
There
are
remedies
where
you
can
go
to
a
court.
Get
that
corrected.
D
A
A
I
strongly
advise
clients
not
to
have
the
city
attorney
or
the
city
clerk
engaged,
particularly
in
cru
functions
that
just
puts
everybody
in
a
difficult
awkward
adversarial
position
if
an
outside
investigator
is
retained
and
finds
that
there
are
very
serious
violations
that
could
be
referred
to.
The
district
attorney
could
be
referred
to
the
fppc
if
it's
something
besides
just
the
contribution
limits
or
the
disclosures
local,
your
local
ordinance.
A
B
C
Thank
you.
I
would
like
to
also
see
a
fine
portion
built
into
the
ordinance,
whether
it
be
100,
250
and
500.
You
pick
whatever
those
numbers
are
consistent
with
the
government
code.
I
I
do
believe
the
government
code
defines
those
and
and
because
we
are
a
general
law
city.
I
think
we
would
be
obligated
to
follow
that
direction,
and
then
I
guess
I
do
have
one
small
question
as
well.
C
A
F
Representation
of
private
interest,
I
think
it
talks
a
little
bit
about
that
and
that
would
be
a
good
place
to
require
the
disclosure
of
of
any
donations
any
time
I
mean
it's
assumed
that
we're
supposed
to
have
disclosing
the
talks.
I
think
we
addressed
that
and
then
the
amount
that
was
donated
throughout
the
entire
term
of
the
council
person,
if
that's
okay
with
the
council.
F
B
E
Vice
mayor,
so
thank
you
throw
me
off
the
so
what's
the
the
250
campaign
contribution
limit,
so
how
does
do
any
other
cities
I'm
going
to
try
to
board
this
right?
Forgive
my
layman
terms,
so
when
how
does
that
affect
a
person
that
loans
themselves
50
000
compared
to
someone
I
mean,
is
there
limits
on
what
you
can
loan
yourself.
E
A
A
We
got
into
a
lot
of
this
discussion
with
citizens
united,
that
decision
we're
talking
about
independent
expenditure
committees
and
all
that-
and
you
know
the
court
went
into
a
pretty
big
discussion
about
how
you
know
again.
Direct
contributions
are
really
the
concern
contributions
of
one's
own
money.
A
F
A
comment,
mr
mayor:
go
ahead,
sir,
thank
you.
So,
as
the
mayor
alluded
to
earlier
that
this
is
a
major
push
for
finding
campaign
finance
reform
happening
because
of
all
the
issues
that
have
been
going
on.
Some
of
the
things
that
are
are
positives
is
that
it
creates
greater
racial
and
class
diversity
among
donors,
increase
number
of
low
dollar
donors
and
constituent
participation
more.
F
You
have
more
quality
time
with
the
average
constituents
and
better
policies
come
out
as
a
result,
not
many
politicians
that
I
know
of
are
self-funding
their
campaigns
or
do
self-fund
their
campaign.
If
they
did,
I
would
see
that
they've
got
a
vested
interest
in
what
they're
doing.
I
would
see
it
as
a
as
a
plus
that
they're
actually
taking
their
own
money,
and
I
know
that
somebody
sitting
up
there
now
did
in
fact
do
that,
because
they
really
care
about
it,
but
most
people
don't
do
that
and
this
that's.
F
Why
we're
addressing
the
problem,
because
it
has
been
a
problem
where
people
are
hand-picked
to
be
up
there
to
represent
special
interests
and
in
and
it
becomes
a
conflict
of
financial
interest.
So
that's
why
we're
talking
about
it
and
I
just
wanted
to
to
end
on
that
note.
I'm
very
excited
and
very
pleased
with
the
policy
that
my
colleagues
have
came
up
with,
and
I
thank
you
all.
B
B
Thank
you
well
tonight
was
just
a
discussion,
so
there's
no
voting
on
any
of
these
issues.
So
I
want
to
thank
everyone,
mr
priest,
for
being
here
tonight
and
answering
many
of
these
questions.
We
all
had
concerns
about
and
everyone
else
that
participated
tonight
with
their
comments
and
questions.
So
thank
you
very
much
to
everyone.
They're,
not
again,
I'm
going
to
stress
covet.
Please
protect
yourselves
out
there.
It
is
spreading
rapidly
throughout
the
state,
our
community
and
the
country.
So
please
take
care
everyone.