►
From YouTube: 08-09-2023 Special Common Council
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
good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
August
9th
special
common
council
meeting,
this
is
a
special
meeting
of
common
Council.
So
there
is
no
public
comment
included.
We
of
course,
did
have
public
comment
at
last:
Wednesday's
regularly
scheduled
common
council
meeting
I'd
like
to
call
the
meeting
to
order
at
604,
and
let
colleagues
know
that
alderperson
Haynes
sharp
is
excused
tonight.
A
I
also
would
like
to
ask
for
a
reordering
of
our
agenda.
Tonight.
I
sent
this
to
Council
in
an
email
earlier,
so
that
the
member
filed
items
would
come
before
the
special
order
of
business.
So
that
means
that
what
you
may
see
as
5.1
on
the
agenda
will
come
as
item
2.1.
A
That
is
the
KPMG
resolution
item
5.2
will
be
2.2
appointments
to
the
planning
and
development
board
and
then
finally,
a
third
resolution
and
this
I
have
to
ask
Council
if
you
will
approve
adding
the
resolution
to
fund
an
executive
Search
firm
to
conduct
the
search
for
a
city
controller.
Is
everyone
in
agreement?
Is
anyone
not
in
agreement
with
adding
that
resolution
to
tonight's
agenda,
seeing
no
objections
that
resolution
to
fund
an
executive,
Search
firm
to
conduct
the
search
for
a
city
controller
will
be
2.3
on
the
agenda.
A
Okay,
why
don't
we
begin
then,
with
2.1
and
I
know
that
Rebecca
Evans
is
here
with
us
tonight
Rebecca?
Why
don't
you
join
us
and
Council
has
this
in
the
packet?
So
would
someone
and
I'm
not
sure
who
is
going
to
read
and
move
this
resolution
before
we
rob
Gerhart
will
read
the
resolution.
B
Yeah
and
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
the
Rob
cantelmo's
name
got
put
against.
This
is
a
member
file,
but
I
think
it
was
coming
out
of
pedc
or
instead
of
coming
to
pedc.
So
it
should
have
been
my
name
so
sorry
about
that.
B
Right,
let
me
actually
read
the
entire
resolution.
B
27Th
Conference
of
the
parties,
kpmj
International,
announced
the
launch
of
the
new
net
zero
Urban
program
and
its
mission
to
bridge
the
missing
middle
between
sustainable
technology,
technological
solutions
and
capital
through
technology
and
Partnerships,
and
whereas
in
2023,
FEMA
proposed
revised
flood
maps
for
Tompkins
County
and
are
expected
to
be
adopted
that
are
expected
to
be
adopted
in
the
next
12
to
18
months
and
whereas,
as
a
result
of
the
proposed
revised
flood
maps,
many
residential
and
Commercial
properties
are
in
the
high
risk,
flooding
Zone
as
defined
by
FEMA,
and
whereas
the
city
of
Ithaca
has
demonstrated
priority
in
identifying
flood
mitigation
strategies
as
as
exemplified
by
the
2022
FEMA
Grant
application
in
the
amount
of
12
million
dollars
and
whereas
strategy,
identification
and
deployment
positively
contribute
to
a
future
city
of
Ithaca,
climate
resilience
and
adaption
plan.
B
And
whereas
KPMG
International
has
offered
these
services
to
the
city
of
Ithaca
at
no
cost
to
the
city.
So,
therefore,
pro
bono
and
whereas
City
staff
believe
this
project
could
positively
influence
the
impacts
of
flooding
and
intend
to
work
with
KPMG
International
to
develop
a
scope
of
work.
That
may
include
visualization
of
flood
zones
simulation
of
peak
flood
levels,
approximation
of
receding,
time
for
Peak
flood
levels,
simulation
of
disruption
of
Emergency
Services
simulation
of
expected.
Evacuation
needs
in
the
event
of
a
flood
other
simulations
related
to
flooding,
as
dictated
by
planning
and
DPW
staff.
A
Is
there
a
second
Jorge?
Thank
you,
discussion
and
Rebecca
is
here
in
Rebecca.
Has
the
director
of
sustainability
has
also
provided
a
memo
that
gives
some
background
on
Urban
digital
twins?
Rebecca?
Do
you
want
to
start
actually
with
any
additional
comments?
Sure.
C
So
I
can
I
can
provide
some
context
as
to
how
this
relationship
started
with
KPMG
I
was
introduced
to
them
through
a
colleague
that
works
very
closely
with
United
Nations
conference
of
the
parties,
which
is
the
big
climate
change,
International
climate
change
conference
for
delegates
all
over
the
world
and
said
hey.
C
That's
where
we
thought
that
this
relationship
might
be
going,
but
after
hearing
a
lot
from
the
community
in
these
meetings
and
in
other
meetings
and
talking
with
DPW
staff
and
planning
staff,
you
know
it
became
more
and
more
apparent
that
flooding
is
really
a
top
of
mind
for
our
residents
and
the
risk
to
property
and
the
risk
of
gentrification
and
being
priced
out
of
homes
that
people
have
been
living
in
was
of
Paramount
importance.
So
we
thought
instead
of
trying
to
do
grid
modeling
or
you
know,
the
deployment
of
batteries
and
solar.
C
Perhaps
what
we
should
be
looking
at
is
trying
to
supplement
the
modeling
and
mitigation
strategies
that
DBW
planning
staff
are
already
exploring.
So
this
is
not
meant
to
replace
that
by
any
means,
but
it
is
meant
to
sort
of
add
additional
tools
to
our
tool
belt.
So
KPMG
has
partnered
with
a
private
entity
that
does
this
digital
twin
modeling.
C
They
Source
their
data
from
publicly
available
data
sources
that
are
available
around
the
world.
In
addition
to
the
FEMA
flood
maps,
they
could
produce
this
digital
twin
today,
without
our
permission,
because
that
all
of
this
information
is
publicly
available,
what
they
don't
have
is
information
about
emergency
services.
So,
for
example,
if
we
were
to
have
flooding
across
that
bridge
towards
Floral
Ave
and
ambulances
could
not
get
downtown
anymore.
What
are
we
going
to
do?
How
do
we
deal
with
that?
And
can
we
actually
simulate
ways
in
which
water
actually
behaves
when
it
does
flood?
C
So
you
can
right
now,
with
the
existing
FEMA
flood
maps,
you're,
not
able
to
say,
okay,
I
live
at
123,
Seneca,
Street
and
I
want
to
see
in
the
event
of
a
catastrophic
flood.
How
high
is
the
water
going
to
go
in
my
house
and
how
can
I
appropriately
prepare
for
that
event
by
you
know
dealing
with
the
mechanical
equipment
in
the
basement,
for
example,
and
this
would
allow
us
to
run
those
simulations
as
part
of
this
potential
agreement.
C
C
This
work
in
consultation
with
other
experts
that
are
already
in
our
community
for
things
like
battery
storage,
solar,
all
all
of
those
sorts
of
things
and
where
I
see
the
real
value
of
this
particular
digital,
twin
tool
and
I
promised
this
in
the
last
thing
I
say
is
it
allows
us
to
layer
data
sets
in
a
way
that
we
currently
are
not
able
to
do
and
create
a
twin
that
is
incredibly
Dynamic
and
an
incredibly
powerful
communication
tool
for
the
public
right
now.
The
tools
that
we
have
are
not
not
great
at
communicating
strategy.
C
We
have
very
sort
of
immature
twins
that
require
a
lot
of
explanation
as
to
what
you're
really
looking
at
this
would
essentially
be
a
Google,
Maps
street
view
of
the
city
that
allows
you
to
run
these
simulations
and
see
them
happen
in
real
time
and
see
how
humans
actually
could
interact
with
that.
So
it's
something
that
people
could
run
their
own
simulations
on,
potentially
depending
on
how
a
relationship
would
be
structured,
so
I'll
I'll,
stop
there.
I
I
know
that
there
are
lots
of
questions
so
happy
to
answer
any
of
them.
D
B
C
Us,
oh
sure,
right
so
that,
like
I
mentioned,
this
is
a
pilot
program
and
I've
been
in
conversations
with
KPMG
for
many
months
now
going
back
to
the
very
beginning
of
this
year
and
really
wanted
to
sort
of
vet
the
people
that
we
were
working
with
and
better
understand.
What's
in
it
for
them,
and
how
can
we
make
this
as
productive
for
the
city
as
possible
and
unfortunately,
because
of
that
we
lost
some
time
so
this
pilot
program,
the
funding,
runs
out
at
the
end
of
this
year.
C
A
Thank
you
that
timing
question.
Thank
you
for
asking
that
that's
very
helpful
other
comments
or
questions
Donna.
E
So
I
know
that
KPMG
is
in
the
business
of
making
lots
of
money.
So
what's
in
this,
for
them.
C
So,
as
I
mentioned,
this
is
a
pilot
program
of
their
new
net
zero
Urban
program.
What
they
hope
to
do
is
create
what
they're
providing
us
as
a
Consulting
service,
so
they
have
an
arm
that
is
specifically
focused
on
infrastructure
and
decarbonization,
and
I
believe
that
they're
trying
to
build
out
that
experience
and
provide
a
pilot
that
shows
real
value.
I've
had
extensive
conversations
with
them
about
how
if
they
intend
to
charge
hundreds
of
thousands
or
millions
of
dollars
for
a
service
like
this,
then
they're
not
going
to
get
anywhere
in.
C
C
Should
we
decide
to
extend
a
relationship
with
KPMG
Beyond
calendar
year,
2024
or
2023?
Excuse
me,
but
ultimately,
yes,
they're
trying
to
sell
this
service
as
a
consultancy.
F
And
Cynthia,
so
I'm,
trying
to
figure
out
I
I
was
gonna.
Ask
the
same
question:
what
what
are
the
benefits
for
them
and
and
how
and
after
you
just
talk
so
what
we're
gonna?
What
they'd
like
for
us
to
do
so
you
say
pro
bono
and
then
I
hear
something
about
course.
F
Is
it
either
or,
and
also
I'd
like
to
know
so
we're
gonna
be
pretty
much
the
example
of
what
they
can
use
to
make
money
in
other
communities
and,
and
that
is
contingent
on
how
well
it
works
here.
C
Yes,
and
no
it's
just
so.
Let
me
let
me
start
with
the
I
heard
three
questions.
No,
that's!
Okay!
That's!
Okay!
So
the
first
one
about
pro
bono
and
then
following
up
with
costs,
so
this
first
five
month
or
whatever
is
left
in
the
year
would
be
pro
bono.
We
would
be
able
to
keep
the
licenses
to
the
software
after
that,
but
the
Consulting
on
policy
infrastructure
that
would
no
longer
be
included.
So
if
we
wanted
to
continue
that,
then
we
would
have
to
pay
for
it.
G
C
A
Thank
you
Jorge
and
then
Cynthia
yeah.
H
Thank
you
for
the
debrief
Rebecca
I
know
that
it
in
past
conversations
and
and
meetings
with
Council
communication
and
articulation
of
what
degree
New
Deal
is
hoping
to
accomplish
for
communities
has
been
a
big
focal
point
for
us
and
it's
you
know
an
obstacle
for
any
municipality.
H
That's
trying
to
take
on
this
issue,
and
so
in
your
mind,
do
you
think
with
the
services
that
they
provide
here
and
the
issue
in
the
realm
of
like
accessibility
for
the
public
and
trying
to
understand
what
things
could
look
like
and
how
they
can
sort
of
engage
with
the
green
New,
Deal
and
understanding
it
from
like,
in
this
case,
the
perspective
of
like
flood
maps
and
whatnot?
Do
you
think
that
this
is
something
that's
worthwhile
in
terms
of
trying
to
better
engage
the
community
with
the
green
New
Deal.
C
The
green
New
Deal
is
a
whole
Maybe
in
terms
of
strategizing
on
flood
mitigation.
Definitely
I
I.
You
know,
I
believe
that
the
flood
maps
and
how
we
respond
to
that
is
definitely
part
of
sustainability,
but
this
I
would
not
consider
this
necessarily
a
green
New
Deal
program.
I
would
think
that
this
is
a
city
of
Ithaca
project
and
it
is
related
to
The
Greener
deal
I.
J
Thanks
Rebecca,
can
you
hear
me
it's
working?
Okay,
so
could
you
speak
to
what
level
of
experience
they
have
actually
working
on
flood
modeling?
You
said
that
they
were
coming
at
this
originally
from
a
infrastructure
approach
having
to
do
with
the
grid,
but
what
what
expertise
do
they
have
with
flood
modeling?
So.
C
The
modeling
itself
is
a
it's
a
computational
exercise:
it's
not
necessarily
how
to
mitigate
it.
So
it's
actually
the
partner
of
KPMG
augment
City
that
just
takes
data
and
runs
these
simulations,
and
it
would
ultimately
be
up
to
the
city
to
decide.
What
do
we
want
to
do
with
that
information?
Do
we
want
KPMG
to
advise
us
on
infrastructure
possibilities,
policy
possibilities?
Do
we
want
to
just
use
the
simulations
as
a
Communications
tool
and
I
think
all
of
that
is
is
up
for
discussion
at
this
point.
C
We
have
not
even
broached
a
contract
and
did
had
no
intention
of
doing
that
before
talking
to
council.
They
have
done
this
in
other
cities
around
the
world.
I,
don't
know
if
they've
done
it
in
the
U.S
I
know
that
they
had
started
working
with
New
York
City
and
have
done
some
in
Sweden
and
Norway
blood
modeling.
J
And
so
my
first
question
would
be
you
know,
oftentimes.
Obviously,
when
we
look
at
models,
we
attribute
a
high
level
of
accuracy
to
them.
This
model,
presumably,
would
rely
on
lidar
data.
We
did.
You
know
when
the
county
was
looking
at,
creating
a
lidar
map
to
map
our
to
create
sort
of
areas
that
might
have
Wetlands.
J
So
if
the
data
that
is
going
in
is
fuzzy
or
inaccurate
has
a
certain
margin
of
error,
and
then
models
are
built
on
an
erroneous
data
set,
it
can
give
you
simulations
that
are
not
realistic
and
they
could
go
either
way,
which
can
be
very
dangerous
in
either
giving
you
a
false
sense
of
security
or
a
false
sense
of
alarm,
and
so
the
first
question
that
I
would
ask
first
is:
where
is
the
data
coming
from
that?
These
simulations
are
going
to
be
based
on?
J
Do
we
have
an
accurate
data
set
and
I
would
be
hesitant
to
enter
into
any
agreement
or
or
Project
without
actually
Fielding
this
with
individuals
who
actually
do
flood
mitigation
and
flood
analysis
in
the
county
now,
and
this
would
have
been
something
that
would
be
appropriate
to
bring
forward
to
the
subject
matter,
experts
that
we
have
and
as
far
as
I
know,
I've
never
heard
of
this
before
so.
J
C
I
totally
agree
with
you
and
I
have
been
intentional
and
not
reaching
out
to
the
county
until
coming
to
council.
If
Council
will
were
to
approve
this,
the
not
immediate
Next
Step,
but
one
of
the
more
visible
immediate
next
steps
would
to
have
a
would
be
to
have
a
focus
group
with
KPMG,
the
county,
the
city,
the
town
and
various
stakeholders
to
refine
the
scope
here
in
Ithaca
and
tentatively.
C
If
this,
if
everything
goes
to
plan,
that
would
happen
as
soon
as
mid-september
and
that's
where
we
would
do
a
lot
of
that
fine-tuning
of
data
sources.
But
currently
the
sustainability
office
has
access
to
lidar
data
for
the
entire
city
through
project
at
Cornell's,
environmental,
environmental
service
lab.
Oh
no,
I'm,
totally
blanking
on
the.
J
I
mean,
since
we
do
have
a
pedc
meeting
coming
up.
We
have
an
opportunity
to
bring
this
back.
You
know
I
would
like
to
know
more
about
KPMG.
They
are
first
and
foremost
in
accounting
firm.
Secondly,
a
risk
management
firm.
They
are
looking
at
products
to
capitalize
on
risk
management
and
Analysis.
I.
Do
think
that
this
is
clearly
an
Avenue
for
profit
making
for
this
organization,
whether
or
not
we're
talking
about
the
modeling
or
the
information
that
is
being
fed,
that
they
will
utilize
in
for
their
products.
J
I
would
like
the
opportunity
to
do
a
bit
more
vetting
into
the
the
organization
than
their
experience
before
making
any
kind
of
agreement
or
commitment,
and
so
I
feel
like
having
a
commitment
by
council
is
perhaps
putting
the
cart
before
the
horse
before
going
out
to
our
local
experts
and
giving
that
opportunity
to
provide
feedback
before
Council
makes
a
decision.
I
think
it's
a
prudent
way
that
I
would
feel
comfortable
in
proceeding.
E
Given
the
tight
time
frame
that
you
described,
I
would
be
okay
with
moving
this
along
tonight.
If
the
majority
is
but
I
would
want
it
to
be
with
the
explicit
goal
of
helping
the
city
and
the
county
and
our
partners
and
so
forth,
and
if,
at
any
point
it
becomes
apparent
that
the
city
is
used,
City
staff
are
using
its
time
to
help
KPMG
develop
their
products.
E
Then
that's
time
to
pull
the
plug
I
think
if
we
can
take
advantage
of
a
free
service
to
the
benefit
of
the
city
and
our
you
know
our
sister
communities,
who
are
also
at
risk
of
flood.
It's
it's
fine
with
me,
given
that
caution.
L
Rebecca,
this
is
really
good
work
on
your
par
and
your
explanation
was
really
clear
and
I.
Really.
This
is
good
work
and
I.
I
agree
that
focusing
on
flood
mitigation
is
is
important
and
if
I
heard
you
correctly,
part
of
this
deal
is
they're
going
to
teach
our
staff
how
to
use
these
tools
right.
So
the
POS,
the
need
for
further
consultation
may
or
may
not
exist,
because
we
know
how
to
do
it.
Yeah.
C
It's
the
it's,
the
policy
and
infrastructure
Consulting
that
we
would
be
losing
at
the
end
of
the
year,
which,
if
that
is
of
value
to
the
city,
then
that's
a
decision
at
a
future
time
to
be
made.
But,
yes,
we
would
maintain
the
access
to
the
software
I
believe
they
have
estimated
four
to
five
licenses.
That
would
be
shared
between
the
city,
Cornell
faculty
for
educational
purposes
and
any
other
Community
Partners
that
the
city
would
like
to
prioritize
for
those
licenses.
Thank.
L
A
A
We'll
now
move
to
2.2,
this
is
appointments
to
the
planning
and
development
board.
Would
someone
like
to
move
this.
A
B
A
A
Do
you
have
a
comment?
Okay,
well,
I'll.
Just
finish
my
sentence.
We
I'll
just
remind
colleagues
and
the
public
that
we
did
have
a
search
team.
We
launched
a
search
for
controller,
an
offer
was
made
to
the
selected
candidate
and
the
offer
was
declined.
A
There
are
a
number
of
searches
at
the
moment
which
council
is
well
aware
of,
and
staff
do
not
have
the
bandwidth
to
work
on
all
of
these
searches,
and
that
has
resulted
in
us
looking
into
various
executive
search
firms
who
have
expertise
in
these
in
these
areas
so
Robert
it
sounds
like
you
wanted
to
move
this.
M
Yes,
thank
you
5.3
resolution
to
fund
an
executive
Search
firm
to
conduct
search
for
a
city
controller,
whereas
the
city
of
Ithaca
underwent
a
protracted
search
for
the
next
city
controller
and
whereas,
while
the
search
did
did
result
in
viable
candidates,
the
city
was
not
able
to
secure
a
candidate
to
fill
the
controller
position
and
whereas
due
to
the
need
for
dedicated
efforts
to
develop
a
robust
pool
of
candidates
which
requires
extensive
networking
and
strong
Connections
in
the
finance
world.
A
N
A
Jorge
seconds
I
will
add
that
Steve
has
had
opportunity
to
meet
over
the
phone
or
Zoom
with
representatives
from
Pro,
Nexus,
Shelly
and
I
have
met
with
Pro
Nexus
Representatives
a
couple
of
times
to
talk
about
this,
and
Steve
has
also
had
opportunity
to
speak
with
them.
Any
questions
or
comments.
Rob.
B
Sorry,
just
a
quick
question:
the
let's
see
one
two
third
resolve
refers
to
the
amount
paid
to
a
part-time
interim
controller
for
the
remainder
of
2023.
Can
someone
remind
me
when
that
will
start.
A
Pro
Nexus
individuals
indicated
they
would
they
feel
confident
they
can
identify
an
interim
within
a
matter
of
weeks.
Okay,
so
we
could
be
looking
at
an
interim
that
can
assist
Steve
for
the
remainder
of
2023
as
an
interim,
so
the
person
could
potentially
be
on
board
forth
three
or
four
months.
A
A
N
K
N
Very
competitive
and
I
will
not
give
up
so
just
one
in
the
second
to
the
last
result,
I
would
say
instead
of
controller,
just
if
you
could
change
that
to
staff.
In
case
we
find
that
we
could
find
something
a
little
bit
cheaper
to
help
us
out
for
a
period
of
time,
so
that
just
gives
us
some
flexibility.
So.
N
O
And
it
also
speaks
to
the
question
of
whether
the
that
person
will
actually
have
the
authority
of
the
controller
or
not
like
it's
an
important
issue
that
we
still
need
to
work
through.
If
that's
gonna,.
A
Okay,
we
anticipate
that
Ian
Coyle,
who
had
a
previous
commitment
but
will
be
able
to
join
us
between
7
and
7
15..
There
is
an
executive
session,
and
so
what
I
would
like
to
propose
is
that
we
move
the
executive
session
up
before
the
special
order
of
business
items.
A
We
will
be
adjourning
to
the
second
floor
conference.
Room
for
executive
session
do
anticipate
a
vote
at
the
end
of
that
executive
session.
So
could
I
have
a
motion
to
enter
into
executive
session
to
discuss
real
estate
transaction,
the
publicity
of
which
could
affect
the
value
thereof,
ducks
and
moves,
and
second
Robert,
all
those
in
favor
of
moving
to
Executive
session
and
that
passes
9-0.
Okay,
we
shall
return.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
We
are
out
of
executive
session,
Rob
gerhardt
moved
exiting
executive
session,
Tiffany
seconded
that
and
the
vote
was
9-0.
We
have
come
out
of
executive
session
and
now
have
a
resolution
for
Council
to
consider
and
vote
on.
Would
someone
like
to
read
the
resolution
Robert.
M
Authorize
addendum
to
agreement
for
relocation
and
sale
of
East
Hill
fire
station,
whereas
on
December
1st
2021,
the
city
of
Ithaca
common
Council,
authorized
the
execution
of
an
option
agreement
with
311
CA
Associates
LLC.
That,
if
exercise,
would
obligate
developer
to
convey
to
the
city
Parcels
located
at
403,
Elmwood,
Road
and
408
Dryden
road
to
be
used
for
the
construction
of
a
new
East
Hill
fire
station
and
to
purchase
the
existing
fire
station
located
at
309,
College
Avenue
and
whereas
on
February,
22nd,
2022.
M
The
city
and
developer
executed
the
agreement
and
whereas
on
May
26
2022,
the
iura,
with
authorization
of
common
Council,
accepted
transfer
of
the
309
College,
Avenue
site
and
assignment
of
the
agreement
for
the
purpose
of
furthering
the
contemplated
transaction
and
whereas
on
July
28
2022.
The
iura,
acting
as
lead
agency,
determined
that
the
property
transfers
will
result
in
no
significant
adverse
impacts
on
the
environment
and
whereas
on
July
2020
July,
28
2022.
M
M
The
iora
subject
to
review
by
the
City
attorney
is
further
authorized
and
requested
to
act
on
behalf
of
the
city
to
negotiate
any
such
terms
and
execute
all
such
further
documents,
including
without
limitation
and
escrow
agreement,
as
may
be
necessary
to
to
consummate
the
contemplated
transaction
in
accordance
with
the
city's
interests,
and
they
had
further
resolved
that
the
iura
shall
be
reimbursed
for
all
reasonable
costs
incurred.
In
acting
on
the
city's
behalf,
as
provided
in
this
resolution,
ISO
move.
H
F
Thank
you
for
your
work
on
this
Ari
and
Laura,
but
I
want
to
thank
you
Cynthia
for
helping
me
understand
it.
Your
questions
really
cleared
a
lot
for
me.
Thank
you.
A
A
We'll
now
move
to
item
three
on
the
agenda.
Do
you
have
an
announcement
yeah.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
This
is
a
continuation
of
a
discussion
that
was
begun
at
an
earlier
meeting.
A
So
we're
now
looking
at
common
Council
compensation
and
mayor
compensation.
A
Let
me
turn
this
over
to
Ari.
You
have
in
your
packet
a
chart
that
shows
a
number
of
municipalities,
compensation
on
both
city
manager
and
mayor
and
just
as
a
reminder,
it
was
at
last
Wednesday's
meeting
common
Council,
voted
on
the
city
manager
range
and
that
range
for
city
manager
was
approved
by
Council
as
160
000
to
185
000
dollars.
A
So
that
is
what
will
appear
in
the
recruitment
brochure
that
em
Coyle
is
working
on
finalizing.
So
tonight
we
will
be
discussing
and
you
will
be
making
some
decisions
on
Council
and
mayor
compensation,
and
you
do
have
in
your
packet
also
a
chart
that
makes
very
clear
what
the
duties
and
responsibilities
of
the
mayor
going
forward
in
the
new
form
of
of
government.
A
O
Sure,
thank
you,
Laura
I
think.
The
main
comment
from
me
is
just
a
reminder
of
the
procedural
setting
here.
So
this
is
a
local
law
which
is
required
to
amend
mayor
or
Council
salaries.
Each
time
the
city
in
at
least
in
recent
history
has
amended.
Those
they've
also
been
amended
in
the
same
local
law
together,
which
is
what
you
see
here,
and
because
it's
a
local
law
it
will
require
an
aging
process.
O
So
that
means
that
you,
if
council,
is
still
inclined,
you
can
decide
on
the
numbers
you
want
in
there
tonight
and
then
it
will
show
up
in
a
future
Council
agenda
packet
for
a
final
vote
on
those
numbers.
But
in
order
to
tell
us
what
numbers
to
put
in
there,
you
still
should
take
a
vote
tonight
that
this
won't
be
the
final
vote.
But
but
hopefully
it
would
be
the
last
time
that
you
debate
what
the
numbers
should
be
and
actually
said
one
some.
O
If
you
want
to
go
in
that
direction
and
it
is
not
subject
to
referendum
nor
a
permissive
referendum,
because
everybody's
terms
are
turning
over.
So
that's
the
basic
procedural
setting
in
terms
of
the
substance.
I'll
mostly
leave
that
to
you
just
note,
of
course,
that
on
the
one
hand,
there's
lots
of
inflation
as
referenced
to
the
local
law.
On
the
other
hand,
there's
a
major
diminution
in
the
duties
of
the
mayor
compared
to
current
duties,.
A
I
think,
as
Ari
was
just
noting
the
council
compensation
was
updated
in
2022.
Donna,
then
Tiffany.
E
I
think
her
hand
is
up
first
I'm
willing
to
open
the
discussion
by
proposing
that
the
salary
of
an
older
person
be
fourteen
thousand
two
hundred
dollars,
which
is
calculated
to
be
15
hours
a
week
at
the
current
living
wage
of
18.26,
and
then
I
would
propose
that
the
mayor
make
twice
that
so
28
4.
E
I'd
also
like
us
to
keep
in
mind
that
older
persons
are
eligible
to
have
80
percent
of
their
medical
insurance
paid
by
the
city,
which
can
be
very
expensive
to
the
city.
So
that
is
something
that
we
need
to
keep
in
mind
that
is
available
to
some
older
persons
who
elect
particularly
the
family
coverage,
is
quite
expensive
to
the
city
and
I
think
we
should
know
what
those
numbers
are
so
I'm
putting
out
14
200
for
Alder
person,
28
400
for
mayor.
P
Tiffany
I
do
agree
that
the
mayor's
salary
should
be
reflective
of
the
older
person.
Salary
I
also
do
agree
that
you
know
all
people,
including
members
of
council,
deserve
to
be
paid
a
living
wage
for
the
work
that
they
do.
However,
I
am
of
the
belief
that
a
fully
engaged
older
person
who
puts
in
the
care
and
energy
that
Ithaca
deserves
from
its
elected
officials
is
easily
working
20
hours
a
week,
a
part-time
job
at
minimum
I
mean
how
can
we
elect
a
council
that
truly
affects
our
community?
P
If
only
those
privileged
enough
to
afford
it
can
run
it's
either
that
or
we
have
council
members
working,
multiple
jobs
just
to
live
in
the
city,
unable
to
dedicate
even
part-time
hours.
So
the
critical
work
that
we
do
here,
we
must
be
making
Civic
engagement
accessible
to
all
people,
especially
those
who
are
traditionally
disenfranchised
and
underrepresented.
There
are
weeks
where
we
have
hundreds
of
pages
of
documents
to
carefully
read
multiple
hours
of
daily
meetings,
as
well
as
many
other
commitments
we've
made
to
our
constituents.
P
P
I
want
to
hear
other
people's
suggestions
on
that
I.
Think
personally,
I
I
think
that
we
should
settle,
or
at
least
come
to
some
sort
of
consensus
on
older
person
before
deciding
on
mayor,
because
I
think
they
should
be
kind
of
reflective
of
each
other.
H
Yeah
I
will
second
that,
as
Tiffany
points
out
I'm
one
of
those
people
who
have
to
work
multiple
jobs
to
stay
afloat
for
six
months
after
I
graduated
in
2022,
common
Council
was
my
only
source
of
income
and
I
was
on
a
strictly
ramen
noodle
diet
for
about
six
months
heavily.
Relying
on
my
partner
to
help
stay
afloat
and
Donna
makes
a
great
point
about
health
insurance.
It's
one
of
our
best
perks.
H
I
couldn't
afford
the
health
insurance
of
the
city
of
Ithaca
at
the
time
before
I
got
my
before
I
got
my
job.
My
second
job
at
insomnia
now
I
have
three
and
I
think
that's
you
know,
I'm
a
I'm,
a
hard
worker
and
I'm.
H
You
know
I
try
my
best
to
sort
of
Juggle
all
those
plates,
but
I,
don't
think
it
should
be
reasonable
to
have
that
standard
on
all
alter
people-
and
you
know,
especially
reflecting
the
cost
of
living
continuing
to
rise,
especially
so
I
think
this
is
especially
important
for
folks
in
college
town
which,
as
we
all
you
know,
voted
on
these
Maps.
We
wanted
to
ensure
student.
You
know
representation,
and
you
know
that
folks,
who
you
know
came
from
younger
traditionally
marginalized
backgrounds
had
the
opportunity
to
run
as
it
stands
right
now.
H
I
I,
don't
think
that
would
be
feasible
with
anything
less
in
1826
at
20
an
hour
for
older
people.
You
know
and
I
hope
we
can
go
from
there.
So
I'm
going
to
be
supporting
that
suggestion
put
out
by
alter
person
Kumar.
L
This
is
really
interesting,
because
past
councils
have
resisted,
raising
the
stipend
and
I
was
always
the
biggest
proponent
of
raising
it
I'm
still
a
proponent
of
raising.
It
I
actually
kept
track
of
my
hours
for
the
first
three
months
of
this
year
and
I
looked
at
it
today
and
added
it
up,
and
it
was
about
16
hours
a
week,
and
that
does
not
include
that
was
January
February
March.
L
That
does
not
include
budget
time
which
the
hours
are
longer
and
it
did
not
include
all
these
special
meetings
that
we're
having
recently
but.
L
The
number
you
suggested
Tiffany
is
about
a
50
raise
in
one
year
and
I.
Think
that's
too
much
so
I
would
suggest
fifteen
thousand
a
year.
That's
my
suggestion.
I
J
I
would
like
to
ask
Steve
what
would
the
additional
benefits
percentage
be
that
we
should
apply
towards
Council
people?
G
L
H
Yeah
I
agree,
I,
think
one
of
I
think
our
our
health
care
benefits
are
phenomenal
in
the
city
and,
in
fact,
because
of
the
changes
in
Medicaid
and
whatnot
I'm,
probably
going
and
my
personal
employment
I'm
probably
going
to
be
moving
on
to
you,
know
the
city
health
insurance
pretty
soon,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
you
can't
pay
rent
with
your
health
care
card
and
and
that's
something
that
I'm
thinking
about,
and
you
know
as
housing
costs
increase.
H
As
you
know,
we're
dealing
with
electricity
costs
going
up
and
whatnot
I
think
we
see
we've
also
seen
in
the
past
that
it's
been
difficult
to
to
retain
City
staff.
H
Despite
the
fact
that
we
have
a
stellar,
you
know
benefits,
package
and
whatnot,
and
so
I
I
don't
want
to
take
a
shot
at
that
I
think
that's
a
great
package,
but
I
think
we
need
to
look
at.
You
know
the
financial
reality
of
serving
on
Council
and
making
it
as
accessible
for
working
class
folks
and
poor
Focus
as
possible.
E
I,
don't
think
that
being
an
older
person
is
intended
to
be
a
a
job
and
then,
if
you're
thinking
that
people
should
work
20
hours
a
week,
then
people
who
do
have
full-time
jobs
would
be
excluded.
So
we
have
to
split
that
difference.
Somehow
I.
My
point
about
the
benefits
is
that
a
lot
of
people
do
not
elect
the
benefits
and
don't
get
the
cash
equivalent.
So
people
who
do
elect
the
benefits
are
effectively
getting
paid
more
than
people
who
don't
and
I
find
that
unfair.
P
Well,
I
just
wanted
to
quickly
know
I.
Think
in
my
observation
like,
even
though
there
are
council
members
who
do
work
less
than
20
hours,
and
you
know
at
times
it
does.
You
know
ebb
and
flow
the
amount
of
work
that
we
do.
I
think
you
know
there
definitely
are
council
members
that
regularly
work
over
20
hours
a
week.
P
You
know
and
and
I
think
that's
extremely
important
to
remember
in
terms
of
splitting
the
difference.
Thank.
I
F
F
We
are
not
going
to
get
people
who
we
want
to
see
on
this
Council
if
they
can't
actually
maybe
use
this
as
a
part-time
job,
with
those
great
benefits,
so
I'm
I'm
really
encouraged
to
at
a
time
there
were
people
on
this
Council
who
could
afford
and
I
work
more
than
15
hours
and
I,
don't
know
how
others
do
less,
but
I
do
and
and
maybe
because
I
I'm
on
a
lot
more
councils
and
but
anyway,
what
I'm?
B
So
let
me
start
with
since
we're
calculating
this
by
hours,
that
we
I
think
that
we
at
a
minimum
should
be
looking
at
what
the
minute,
oh,
what
the
affordable
or
living
wage
is
in
the
county,
and
we
should
make
sure
that
that
is
reflected
every
time.
We
look
at
salaries,
so
if
that's
on
a
year
by
year
basis
or
every
other
year,
whatever
the
that
should
be
I
for
one
there
are.
B
Now
there
are
variables
in
that,
and
some
of
those
variables
are
I,
do
have
a
very
demanding
full-time
job,
so
I
have
to
be
very
efficient
with
my
time
and
I
do
that
I
had
you
know
just
as
many
I
don't
now
chairing
a
committee,
but
I
had
just
as
many
liaison
appointments
as
anyone,
but
I
managed
my
time
in
a
way,
and
maybe
you,
along
with
My
Philosophy,
that
there
are
some
things
we
do
and
some
things
we
shouldn't
be
getting
ourselves
into
so
I
I
do
have
a
little
challenge
for
anyone
who
thinks
that,
just
because
they're
working
more
hours
they
get
to
be
paid
for
more
hours,
I
think
we
all
make
a
choice
about
how
many
hours
we're
not
paid
by
the
hour
we're
using
an
hourly
calculation
and
I
think
we
need
to
be
mindful
of
that,
as
we
ask
the
taxpayers
to
pay
for
our
time
and
our
efforts
now.
B
B
B
B
Do
we
think
that
means
twice
the
time
or
are
we
just
elevating
their
pay
for
their
expertise
or
or
around
leading
us
as
a
as
the
chief
legislator,
because
I
think,
if
you're
doubling
the
time
then
we
have,
then
we
have
a
challenge,
but
I
don't
think
we
are
doubling
the
time
and
that's
the
point.
So
the
point
is
I.
Think
double
the
salary
may
not
expect
the
time,
but
it
would
expect
a
higher
level
of
work.
Q
Yeah
I've
kind
of
gone
back
and
forth
about
this
too.
At
a
previous
meeting,
I
mentioned
that,
like
Rob
I
protect
my
time
a
lot
more
and
part
of
that
is
just
mental
health.
It's
also
opportunity
cost.
You
know
the
if
I
neglect
a
job
that
pays,
my
mortgage
I
will
get
fired
or
not
promoted
and
that
sucks
or
I
can't
attend
to
the
things
in
my
life.
That
would
make
me
happy
so,
but
that
said
recognizing
that
it
doesn't
flow.
Q
Actually
so
I
came
around
because
the
the
opportunity
cost
part
of
it
is
a
factor
as
well.
Even
for
those
of
us
who
who
consciously
choose
to
to
protect
our
time
and
the
accessibility
argument
is
important
to
me-
it's
also
a
good
like
if
it
is
a
good
time
to
reset
salaries
with
an
election
coming
up.
It
actually
might
have
been
better
to
do
it
earlier,
but
you
know
it's
as.
Q
Q
Like
most
of
us
will
not
be
voting
to
give
ourselves
a
raise,
so
there's
you
know,
there's
some
moral
Clarity
there.
So
as
for
Tiffany's
proposal,
I
guess
is
a
long
way
of
me
saying
that
and
I
would
also
support.
Doubling
the
mayor's
salary-
oh
I
forgot
to
say
so.
Q
Part
of
this,
too,
is
like
is
using
the
number
of
hours
as
a
guide,
but
not
not
memorializing
it
as
a
requirement,
because
they're
again
to
kind
of
keep
the
job
appealing
to
as
many
people
as
possible
and
also
like
the
there
are
a
number
of
other
factors
that
we
may
want
to
consider
in
the
future.
I
know
in
the
past
we've
talked
about
how
big
does
a
council
for
a
30
000
person
City
need
to
be.
We
have
one
of
the
biggest
councils
of
any
city
of
any
size.
Q
You
know
I,
like
it
I
like
having
a
word
mate
who's
supposed
to
work
with,
but
it
may
not
make
sense
in
the
future,
so
I
think
the
overall,
even
at
10.
The
overall
budget
impact
between
the
two
is
not
that
large
relative
to
like
a
90
million
dollar
budget
and
on
balance,
the
accessibility
benefits
outweigh
the
cost
of
the
taxpayer.
N
Yeah
sure
so
now
over
time,
Council
doesn't
generally
use
too
many
benefits,
but
they
have
the
ability
to
do
that,
and
so
the
potential
is
there
for
roughly
twenty
two
thousand
dollars
worth
of
benefits
per
person.
A
Thank
you
Steve.
That's
helpful
to
take
into
consideration.
I
I,
wasn't
sure
whose
hand
George
and
then
Phoebe
George.
N
So
you
have
the
ability
to
get
health
insurance,
dental
insurance,
you
have
FICA
Medicare
and
then
there's
like
a
workers.
Comp
I
mean
they're,
really
small,
but
also
it's.
N
Definitely
definitely
health
insurance
and
pension
as
well.
So
if
you
put
all
those
together,
the
potential
is
there
for
a
larger
amount.
Thank
you
and.
A
K
A
To
clarify
that's
potential:
twenty
two
thousand
per
person,
that's
above
the
stipend,
correct.
O
N
That's
that
would
be
basically
all
benefits.
Yeah.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
I
saw
Phoebe
and
then
Cynthia.
A
F
I
am
going
to
go
out
on
a
anyway
when
I
first
talked
about
or
thought
about
becoming
a
council
member
I
didn't
even
know
we
got
paid.
So
this
is
like
a
bonus
for
me
right
and
I'm
happy
about
it.
F
What
I
heard
is
most
council
members
don't
even
use
the
benefits
right,
but
what
I'm
thinking
most
about,
and
one
of
my
reasonings
for
joining
the
council,
was
to
hopefully
get
people
to
see
that
that
look
like
me,
that's
been
where
I've
been
that's
going,
where
I'm
going
to
want
to
be
a
part
of
the
council
and
do
this
work.
You
know
this
is
not
you
know.
18
thousand
is
still
not
no
whole
lot
of
money
right.
F
I've
spent
that
oh,
nothing,
let
me
stop
but
anyway,
what
I
am
saying
is
that
I
would
love
for
it
to
just
be
attractive
to
others.
To
want
to
do
this
work
right.
If
that
means
anything,
but
you
know
most
people
who
do
this
work,
do
it
from
their
hearts
or
or
just
want
punishment,
but
I
I.
You
know
so
I
just
say
that
I
want
it
to
be
more
attracting
to
people,
and
you
know:
18
000
sounds
really
good.
F
I,
remember
working
for
that
amount
of
money
at
one
time,
but
thank
you
for
letting
me
share.
Thank.
A
When
there
was
an
increase
in
Council
compensation,
it
was
for
two
reasons
one
to
be
reflective
of
the
work
of
a
council
member
and
two,
and
this
was
really
significant
and
intentional
to
diversify
and
open
up
the
possibility
of
serving
on
Council
for
other
individuals,
so
I
just
wanted
to
let
you
know
that
that
was
part
of
council's
discussion
in
the
past,
when
the
compensation
was
increased
to
the
13
141.,
it
does
sound
like
there
is
a
range
of
hours,
expectation,
there's
agreement
on
setting
the
wage
using
the
living
wage
figure.
A
But
I
was
hearing
from
a
number
of
council
members.
There
is
certainly
ebb
and
flow
budget.
Time
is
a
heavy
meeting
intensive
time
as
we're
seeing
currently
going
into
the
next
two
months,
but
in
I
heard
from
a
few
council
members
the
who
have
served
on
Council
for
some
time,
15
16
hours
is
the
reasonable
amount
of
time
expected
15
to
16
hours
a
week
is
the
reasonable.
Now
this
I
think
to
Phoebe's
point:
I
have
conversations
with
neighbors
with
residents
all
the
time.
A
J
I
would
just
and
I
for
all
the
reasons
that
have
been
brought
forward,
which
I
think
are
absolutely
reasonable.
I
do
think
we
need
to.
This
is
work
right,
I
think
we
all
know
the
work
that
you
can
put
into
it.
It's
a
black
hole
of
need.
You
can
just
put
as
many
hours
into
it
as
you'd
like
and
the
diversity
of
voices
and
the
possibility
of
bringing
in
the
broadest
view
into
council
is
important,
and
part
of
that
is
paying
people
for
the
work
that
they
provide.
J
That
being
said,
I
just
want
to
talk
numbers
a
little
bit
okay,
so
we
have
10
members
of
council
which
we
currently
pay
13
141
dollars.
Each
everybody
could
use
benefits,
but
not
everybody
does
in
the
budget,
our
budget,
just
for
staff
or
just
for
the
council
people
and
their
benefits
alone,
is
a
hundred
and
sixty
thousand
okay.
That's
now!
J
So
if
we
kept
the
salary
the
same,
everybody
used
the
benefits,
it
would
be
a
hundred
and
it
would
be
three
hundred
and
fifty
one
thousand
that's
just
keeping
the
salary
as
it
is
right
now,
so,
essentially
doubling
more
than
doubling
the
budget
so
adding
another
160,
000.
Okay.
So
assuming
everybody
uses
all
the
benefits
were
estimated.
Twenty
two
thousand
each
at
14
00
Donna's
suggestion
it
goes
from
350
351
000
to
362
000..
A
That
is
making
a
significant
assumption
that
all
10
council
members
would
opt
for
the
full
Fringe
package
and
I
I
would
caution
Us
in
making
that
assumption
again.
J
I'm
hearing
from
my
colleagues
that
a
big
component
of
this
discussion
is
to
broaden
the
diversity
of
individuals
who
are
on
Council
bring
people
with
with
varying
experiences
varying
economic
situations.
Most
likely
will
utilize
retirement
packages
we'll
utilize
health
care.
So
you
know
this
is
a
a
liability
against
the
city.
Just
like
a
potential
debt
obligation
is
in
the
city.
We
we
need
to
prepare
to
pay
it
because
it
is
part
of
a
pet
benefits
package
that
is
being
offered.
J
So
it
is
entirely
reasonable
that
you
should
look
at
that
higher
number,
because
that
actually
is
the
obligation
right.
So
again,
what
we're
talking
about
is
increasing
our
current
budget
from
160
000
to
410,
based
on
council
salary
alone,
to
go
from
13
000
to
18.99
and
I.
Guess:
I'm
going
to
go
back
to
Steve
with
another
question
which
we,
which
is
a
sort
of
an
exercise
that
we
do
during
the
budget
time,
which
is,
for
example,
and
I
I,
should
look
it
up.
J
J
I
can't
do
the
math
in
my
head,
but
so
you're,
looking
at
a
I'm
just
going
to
throw
out
a
number,
a
10
increase
in
the
tax
rate
in
order
to
increase
council
salary
from
160
000
to
potentially
410.
so
again,
I'm
just
going
to
put
that
out
there,
because
this.
These
are
the
discussions
we're
going
to
have
and
the
impact
and,
of
course,
if
you
add
money
here,
you
may
have
to
take
money
away,
someplace
else.
If
you
want
to
not
dramatically
increase
the
tax
rate,
we
haven't
even
talked
about
the
mayor's
salary.
J
I
F
H
I
think
I
mean
I.
Think
Cynthia
makes
a
valid
point
in
terms
of
of
assessing
risks
and
whatnot
I
do
find
I
I
think
that
I
understand
that,
technically
speaking,
that's
correct
from
one
160
to
400,
000
stuff
like
that,
but
again
we're
talking
about
a
hypothetical
that
doesn't
seem
to
have
been
relevant
and
again,
as
I
mentioned.
H
As
someone
who
is
I'm,
gonna
I'm
gonna
go
on
a
limb
here,
guys
I'm
going
to
assume
that
I'm,
probably
the
one
on
the
lower
income
side
of
the
members
of
council
here
I
don't
make
use
of
the
other
benefits,
and
so
even
in
a
situation
where
we
are
trying
to
make
things
more
accessible
and
open
to
folks,
it's
going
to
be
very
varied
and
so
I
don't
think
we're
going
to
expect
somebody
to
come
in
with
all
of
those
expectations.
It's
going
to
be.
You
know,
Case
by
case
and
whatnot.
L
L
So
I
would
not
support
that
I
I
do
support
arrays
and
I
just
think
it
I
think
Jorge's.
Suggestion
I'd
like
to
know
what
that
comes
to.
L
L
So
that's
a
problem,
but
to
do
this
now
before
we've
faced
all
these
other
issues,
maybe
also
problematic
in
a
different
way.
So
I
can't
accept
anything
more
than
16
Grand
a
year
and
I
would
suggest
that
the
mayor's
salary,
rather
than
being
double,
be
one
and
a
half.
A
L
Etc
right
and
I
think
I
think
Rob
contelma
was
proposing
something
like
that
as
well.
A
Okay,
so
if
we
make
a
decision
tonight
on
compensation,
council
could
also
recommend
that
in
the
future
there
be
a
process
in
place
for
examining
Council
compensation
on
a
regular
annual
basis.
E
A
We
don't
have
settled
contracts,
so
you
know
I'm
reluctant
to
go
into
what
is
is
being
proposed,
but
it
is
not
50
percent.
Q
Q
You
know
it
I,
don't
know
that
they
have
it
right
either,
because
it's
an
entire
state
with
wildly
different.
You
know
living
expenses
throughout
the
state,
but
you
know
they.
They
did
this
analysis.
They
figured
out
that
you
know
we're
still
not
able
to
attract
cannons.
We
want
and-
and
you
know
do
the
work
with
that-
that
we
need
to
do
for
this
salary
and
adjust
it
accordingly
without
you
know,
focusing
on
the
year-to-year
increase,
so
I
don't
find
it
if
that's
useful,
but
I
support
so
like
18
is
roughly
explained
different.
Q
H
Was
1826
at
18
hours
a
week
which
is
17
something
17.
A
L
Not
really
well,
according
to
my
all,
my
good
friends,
doc
makes
a
good
point
about,
should,
should
we
tie
this
to
inflation
or
or
should
we
think
of
it
as
how
much
the
job
is
for
us?
L
If
we
talk
about
how
much
the
job
is
worth
we're
going
to
spend
a
lot
more
money,
so
I
can
support
17
grand,
but
no
more
than
that
and
I
I
will
repeat
that
I.
Think
specifically,
if
we've
gone
this
much
higher
than
the
current
rate
that
the
mayor's
salary
should
not
be
double,
it
should
be,
it
should
be
one
and
a
half.
P
A
Let's
first
decide
on
the
council
compensation
what
I
have
heard
in
previous
discussion
and
tonight's
discussion.
The
two
are
linked,
but
not
necessarily
determined
one
to
the
other
and.
O
To
your
procedural
question:
Tiffany
the
this
is
a
procedural
vote
tonight,
either
way,
so
there's
nothing
wrong
with
Council
voting
as
to
what
you
want
to
see
for
council
salary.
First
then
voting
on
mayor.
Ultimately,
it's
all
going
to
get
reflected
once
there
is
a
majority
of
council
and
a
subsequent
piece
of
legislation
that
we
put
in
front
of
you.
A
Sure
Rob.
B
P
Wage
calculator
by
MIT,
the
Tompkins
County
Worker
Center,
doesn't
have
updated
numbers.
They
only
have
numbers
as
of
last
year,
but
if
you
talk
to
Pete
who's
in
charge,
he
he
said
that
they
they
will
be
updated
as
soon
as
they
can
with
the
MIT
numbers.
A
H
B
So
so
are
we
are?
We
only
talk
talking
about
setting
that
rate
for
now
and
then
in
the
future,
thinking
of
a
possibly
different
way
to
increase
that
not
using
the
living
wage,
but
using
inflation
instead
or
are
we?
Is
there
some
talk
about
using
Tompkins
County's
living
wage
with
a
consistent
number
of
hours
from
year
to
year,
or
is
that
a
later
conversation.
H
Yeah
I,
don't
want
us
to
I,
don't
want
us
to
burden
us
into
getting
into
the
into
the
weeds
here,
but
I
do
think
that
what
I
was
proposing
was
going
with
the
living
wage
now
and
then.
At
a
later
point
we
can
discuss
the
type
of
system
that
we
were
doing.
You
know
and
we
don't
want
to
I.
Don't
want
us
to
tie
our
hands
to
I
just
wanted
to.
E
I
think
the
language
is
a
is
a
it's
a
good
Peg
and
we
should
respect
that,
but
another
sense,
it's
kind
of
silly,
because
we're
doing
ideally
when
we're
at
our
best
we're
we're
delivering
over
complicated
information,
we're
having
high
level
debates,
we're
communicating
clearly
with
a
whole
range
of
people,
so
I
mean
you
could
say
double
living
wage
should
be
an
appropriate
hourly
wage
for
the
kind
of
work
we
do.
E
So
it's
all
kind
of
a
silly
debate
like
how
many
hours
on
average
do
we
work
and
what
should
we
consider
our
hourly
wage?
To
be
I
mean
this
is
a
good
way
to
sort
of
fix
on
it
and
respect
the
living
wage.
But
we
also
have
to
recognize
the
limitations
of
the
approach.
I
P
I
mean
I
think
that
you
know
with
respect
to
the
to
the
taxpayer
burden,
as
well
as
the
fact
that
we
are
public
workers,
and
you
know
in
comparison
to
the
other
city
employees,
that
the
living
wage
does
represent
a
minimum
like
a
salary
for
people
to
be
able
to
live
here.
It
represents
a
a
very
like
bare
minimum
of
being
able
to
to
conduct
the
work
that
is
required
of
this
position.
I
think
just
because
the
council
is
currently
underpaid.
That
doesn't
mean
that
paying
reasonably
is
extremely
radical.
A
So
I'll
just
add
here:
this
is
a
really
useful
conversation.
I,
think
the
suggestions
and
how
we're
calculating
this
is
is
useful.
We
don't
have
to
decide
on
this
tonight
and
in
some
ways,
I
wonder
if
we
want
to
wait
until
we
are
at
full
strength.
We
don't
have
alderperson
Haynes
sharp
with
us
this
evening.
A
H
Someone
stopped
me,
but
it
seems
like
we
were
arriving
at
consensus
in
regards
to
1826
at
what
was
it.
Thank
you,
yeah
17.,
thank
you.
It
seems
like
we
were
arriving
at
consensus,
at
least
on
that
point,
and
so,
if
folks
are
comfortable
with
that
I
say
we
we
deal
with
this
now
and
if
there
are
other
things
we
need
to
kick
down
the
can.
Oh,
my
God
kick.
You
know,
let's
vote,
damn
it.
A
So
you
are
moving,
then
that
The
Proposal
is
tied
to
the
1826
living
wage,
which
is
above
the
living
wage.
We
pay
city
employees
just
want
to
make
sure
people
are
aware
of
that.
Just.
B
O
Also,
just
want
to
note
procedurally
for
any
motion,
because
this
is
a
procedural
vote
and
just
to
avoid
any
ambiguity.
I
would
suggest
that
whoever
makes
a
motion
on
this
salary
component,
in
particular,
move
that
once
I
have
to
rephrase
this
move,
that
a
local
law
be
laid
on
the
table
reflecting
the
salary
number
that
you're
proposing
and
then
to
be
super
precise,
because
these
would
normally
all
be
done
in
one
local
law,
meaning
mayor
and
Council
salaries.
O
Presumably,
that
motion
would
be
understood,
or
even
explicitly
stated
to
mean
that
that
would
happen
once
Council
has
a
consensus,
or
at
least
a
majority
around
mayor
and
Council
sellers.
K
I
J
One
last
comment
just
as
a
matter
of
context
assuming
right
now:
people
the
salaries,
we're
paying
and
then
a
20
add-on
based
on
the
number
of
people
who
take
advantage
of
the
benefits
it
would
go
from
about
160
to
205.
So
forty
five
thousand
dollar
increase
to
the
budget.
A
A
A
L
L
A
Comments
we're
ready
to
duxton
I.
Q
So
I
expect
the
mayor
to
be
doing
on
the
order
of
twice
as
much
work
as
we
are
I
mean
it.
I
can
barely
keep
up.
This
is
why
I
started
protecting
my
time
like
it
was
getting
out
of
control
for
me,
but
you
could
easily
allow
this
job
and
certainly
the
mayor's
job
who's
has
a
one
of
their
two
primary
functions.
That
I
see
is,
as
noted
in
in
the
agenda,
too,
is
being
the
legislative
head
of
the
city,
but
also
being
our
ambassador,
which
may
be
even
more
time
consuming.
Q
Yeah
likely
will
be
in
terms
of
events
and
I'll
need
to
tell
the
current
mayor
that,
but
just
feeling
cuttings
and
talking
to
people
with
resources
that
we
need
so
I'm
going
to
vote
against
this,
not
because
it's
unreasonable,
I
think
it's
fine,
but
I
I
support
a
2X
salary
for
the
mayor.
A
Okay,
I
I
will
just
draw
attention
to
what
is
in
the
packet
in
terms
of
the
duties
and
responsibilities
going
forward
with
a
city
manager
in
place
it.
You
know
there
are
25
duties
listed
and
you
see
the
red
lined
copy.
Nine
of
those
25
duties
continue
for
the
mayor.
A
Q
Yeah
I
get
that
I.
Think
too,
though,
that
the
mayor
has
been,
and
apologies
to
humayor
for
it's
our
fault
that
it's
been
this
way,
we've
recognized
this
for
years
and
haven't,
and
only
done
minor
amendments
to
to
yours
and
cilante's
salaries,
but
chronically
underpaid,
for
what
is
a
chief
executive
position
so
anyway,
to
be
more
productive.
Q
You
asking
George
I
assume
it's
not
so
I'm
gonna
ask
for
a
second
to
amend
George.
L
What
would
be
friendly
is
if
we
and
You're
gonna
laugh
at
me
for
saying
this.
If
it
was
one
and
three
quarters.
L
Would
like
to
amend
my
motion
to
one
and
three
quarters
and
somebody
with
an
abacus
could
come
up
with
that
number.
Please.
P
That's
a
little
bit
under
30
000,
which
was
the
original
proposed
number,
which
was
a
somewhere
between
two
and
two
point:
five
times
of
our
original
salary,
which
I
think
would
be
reasonable
to
me.
I
think
around
Thirty,
thirty
thousand.
A
A
Okay,
you
get
to
decide
if
that
motion
to
one
and
three
quarters
is
friendly
to
you.
So
what.
O
A
So
what
is
on
the
table
is
mayoral
compensation
at
thirty
thousand,
all
those
in
favor.
A
O
So
because
these
are
only
procedural
votes,
so
I
just
want
to
clarify
that,
and
please
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
I
am
I'm
interpreting
that
motion
in
the
same
manner
as
the
council
salary
motion
to
be
a
motion
to
instruct
us
to
lay
it
lay
on
the
table,
a
local
law
with
those
numbers
in
it.
We'll
then
have
a
subsequent
vote.
Yes,.
O
A
All
right,
so
the
local
law
will
be
laid
on
the
table
and
Council
will
have
opportunity
to
then
vote
on
that
on
September
6th.
G
O
A
Okay,
thank
you,
everyone,
so
that
addresses
agenda
item
three
we're
now
moving
on
and
we'll
wait
a
moment
until
alderperson
cantel
will
rejoins
us,
but
we
will
be
moving
on
to
the
local
law,
entitled
amendment
of
City,
Charter
and
code
to
specify
duties,
Authority
and
appointment
and
removal
procedures
of
the
city
manager.
A
A
The
recommendations,
the
edits
that
Council
provided
in
writing,
have
not
yet
been
incorporated
into
what
you
see
before
you
correct.
O
That's
right,
I
mean
there's
some
very
recent
edits
and
obviously
we
don't
know
where
council
is
on
on
some
of
those
decisions.
So
so
that's
right,
we
seem
to
be
moving
on.
Robert
I.
Believe
that's
correct.
Yes,.
O
So
I'm
right
there
I'm
sorry,
you
said
for
a
meeting
jumping
back
to
the
top
of
Jenner.
You
said
four,
you
mean
3A.
Oh
I
got
renumbered,
that's
right!.
A
O
A
So
we
are
now
looking
at
the
new
four
point,
a
which
is
the
local
law
entitled
amendment
of
City
Charter
to
specify
duties,
Authority
and
appointment
and
removal
procedures
of
the
city
manager.
So
what
I
just
indicated
Robert,
just
as
you
were
walking
back
in
what
we
have
before
us,
does
not
reflect
all
of
the
changes
any
of
the
changes
that
Council
may
have
submitted
already.
I
know
you
provided
some
comments.
Cynthia
I
think
provided
some
comment
down
and
provided
some
comments
and.
O
Just
to
be
clear
by
that,
we
need
comments
submitted
by
email
by
particular
members
of
council
right,
as
opposed
to
you
know
some
of
the
pieces
that
were
discussed
by
Council
last
time,
which
you
know
bits
of
those
were
Incorporated
a
little
bit.
But
that's
right.
Yeah.
A
Thank
you
all
right,
I
will
just
point
out
that
is
4A,
then
also
a
procedural
vote.
O
So
if
there
are
going
to
be
amendments
tonight,
then
it
will
move.
That's
right.
It
will
move
on
to
a
subsequent,
probably
need
to
lay
on
the
table
in
its
final
form.
That's
right,
yeah,.
A
Sorry
to
turn
away
from
the
microphone
if
there
are
amendments
made
tonight.
This
then
will
also
be
voted
on.
The
final
local
law
will
be
laid
on
the
table
and
will
be
voted
on
at
the
September
6th
meeting.
O
Of
council
and
I
realized
I
should
even
clarify
that
statement
say
it's
not
an
if
we
knew
that
there
were
high
odds
that
there
would
be
amendments
tonight,
so
this
has
not
been
laid
on
the
table
and
definitely
could
not
receive
a
final
vote
tonight.
It's
it's
intended
to
have
discussion
and
find
out
where
Council
wants
to
go
with
it.
A
E
A
A
And
here's
where
we
have
had
some
discussion
at
previous
meetings,
those
discussions
and
edits
have
not
been
incorporated
into
what
you
see
before
you
yet
so
comments
on
section
2,
a
one
or
let's
deal
with
one
first
Robert
I.
M
Will
return
to
the
well
on
I
will
formally
move
that
I
will
I
will
describe
but
I'm
going
to
move
the
suggestion
that
I
emailed,
which
is
under
A1
C12
A1?
The
common
Council
shall
appoint
a
city
manager
by
a
majority
vote
of
its
membership.
The
city
manager
shall
be
a
public
officer
appointed
based
solely
on
Executive
and
administrative
qualifications,
relevant
Education
and
Training,
and
experience
in
published
in
public
administration
prior
to
the
appointment.
M
If
not
already,
a
resident
of
Tompkins
County.
The
city
manager
shall
establish
residency
in
the
county
within
no
more
than
12
months
of
appointment
or
such
lesser
period
of
time
as
specified
by
Common
Council
from
time
to
time,
including
in
the
form
of
an
approved
employment
agreement.
M
Thank
you
yes,
I
personally,
my
thank
you.
I
didn't
even
realize
it,
but
yes,
I,
didn't
read
the
part
I
strike
I
am
moving
to
also
strike.
No
member
of
the
common
counselor
mayor
shall
be
appointed
as
city
manager
during
the
term
for
which
that
person
was
elected
or
within
two
years
of
expiration
of
that
person's
term.
M
It's
a
it's
a
mixed
bag
as
to
whether
or
not
cities
have
cooling
off
periods.
Two
years
is
a
very
long
time.
Most
of
the
Cities
I
surveyed
were
were
one
year
if
they
were
anything
but
I
also
think
either
there
should
be
a
provision
I'm
kind
of
looking
at
Aria
to
see
make
sure
this
is
legal.
M
There
should
either
be
a
provision
for
Council
to
waive
that
with
some
threshold,
if
we
want
to
or
just
no
cooling
off
period,
I
I
think
if
the
best
person
for
the
job
is,
you
know
on
a
future
Council
and
then
they
finish
out
their
term
and
the
next
Council
thinks
that
they
should
do
the
job
that
the
the
cooling
off
period,
in
my
view,
shouldn't
prohibit
them.
A
Look
for
responses
from
Council
on
that
I
also
and
again,
I
apologize.
My
back
is
to
the
screen,
but
Ian.
If
you
have
any
experience
that
speaks
to
this
cooling
off
period,
it
would
be
helpful
to
hear
from
you
as
well.
K
A
R
A
L
I
have
a
couple
things
I
thought
somewhere.
We
changed
the
12
months
to
six
months,
180
days.
K
O
So
you'll
see
that
what
what
it
says
here
is
within
no
more
than
12
months
of
appointment
or
such
lesser
period
of
time
as
specified
by
the
common
Council
from
time
to
time,
including
in
the
form
of
an
approved
employment
agreement.
So
if
you
look
at
this
Charter
provision,
which
says
not
more
than
12
months,
but
it
can
also
be
less
if
Council
specifies
less.
O
If
you
look
at
that
in
combination
with
the
template
employment
agreement,
that's
also
in
your
agenda
packet
tonight,
which
is
180
days
which
says
six
months,
yeah,
then,
and
and
what
that
says
in
the
template.
Employment
agreement
is
six
months
plus
up
to
another
six
month.
Extension.
If
Council
chooses
to
grant
that.
O
L
I
got
no
problem
with
that.
I
do
have
a
problem
with
simple
majority:
I
I,
don't
know
if
others
have
had
a
chance
to
read
Chris
pruz
email
to
us
late
this
afternoon.
L
He
makes
a
compelling
argument
and
I'll
repeat
that
I
think
two-thirds
is
too
much,
but
I.
Think
majority
plus
one
is,
is
the
right
balance.
L
O
D
O
I
mean
you're
right
that
the
draft
legislation
in
your
packet
uses
the
two-thirds
threshold
for
both
the
appointment
and
the
removal
of
a
city
manager,
and
that's
a
policy
decision
for
Council
to
make
they
could
be
set
separately.
O
M
So
I'm
I
definitely
want
to
hear
from
everybody
else.
I
do
just
want
to
know.
George
I'm
with
you
on
the
two-thirds
I
think
everybody's
with
us
on
the
two
thirds,
since
the
only
thing
is
that
I
would
caution
us
against
and
I
know.
Some
of
you
have
heard
me
say
this
already,
but
I
would
caution
us
against
looking
at
a
simple
majority
plus
one
as
a
compromised
position,
because
nobody
at
the
table
wanted
two-thirds,
okay.
Well,
this
is
the
first
I'm
hearing
of
it
Donna.
So.
Q
L
E
I
believe
that
I
did
say
at
the
last
meeting
that
I
believe
in
a
two-thirds
vote
for
the
appointment
of
a
city
manager
at
the
time.
I
did
not
say
what
my
reason
is,
but
my
reason
is
that
I
think
somebody
whose
start
should
start
with
the
greatest
possible
approval
to
get
off
to
a
really
positive
start,
and
so
I
do
think
that
appointment
by
two-thirds
vote
is
good.
I
wanted
to
I,
don't
know
if
I'm
out
of
order
or
not,
but
I
wanted
to
ask
Rob.
M
May
I
respond,
sorry
sure
I
as
I
was
reviewing
16
City
Charters
I
saw
that
language
in
Canandaigua
and
I
think
we
hadn't
elaborated
on
our
qualificational
requirements
and
so
I
just
thought
that
I
would
be
putting
a
little
bit
more
Clarity
on
what
it
is
that
we
are
expecting
to
be
the
minimum
qualifications
for
the
position.
B
So,
just
to
talk
about
the
first
about
the
majority,
simple
majority
versus
majority,
plus
one
versus
two-thirds
I
I
didn't
really
Express
this
at
the
last
meeting.
But
I've
talked
a
couple.
People
about
it,
I,
don't
really
think
of
simple
majority,
plus
one
as
a
compromise,
because
my
position
on
this
and
I
think
especially
around
severability,
maybe
but
I.
Think
Donna
makes
a
good
point
about
appointment
as
well.
B
Is
that
I,
one
of
the
things
I've
felt
was
one
of
the
benefits
of
having
a
city
manager
is
to
have
the
stability
that
a
city
manager
has
across
the
the
years,
and
that
does
not
mean
that
it's
a
lifetime
appointment,
that's
not
at
all
what
I'm
implying,
but
there
is
a
there,
will
be
mechanisms
whatever
we
decide
about
how
often
that
gets
reviewed
annual
reviews
and
other
contractual
obligations,
but
I
do
think
it's
important
to
recognize
that
I
think
it
should
be
a
high
bar
now
I.
B
Don't
think
necessarily
that
high
bar
needs
to
be
two-thirds,
but
a
simple
majority
plus
one
would
indicate
that
there
needs
to
be
some
protection
from
those
fluctuations
of
Elections
and
the
shorter
terms
of
officials.
So
that's
what's
driving
me
to
think
of
that
and
I.
Don't
really
think
of
it
as
a
compromise,
I.
Think
of
it
as
a
higher
bar
than
simple
majority,
just
making
a
point
so
and
I'll.
A
And
let
me
sure,
let
me
make
a
point
turn
to
Jorge
and
then
I'll
turn
to
to
Ari
for
input.
I
do
want
to
remind
Council,
and
this
is
under
update
on
the
search
process
for
city
manager.
There
is
a
position
description
that
is
developed
that
includes
qualifications
I'm
looking
at
Robert
when
I'm
saying
this,
so
you
had
included
some
statement.
Additional
information
on
qualifications,
but
I
will
point
out
that
that
is
in
a
job
description.
A
H
So
I
think
all
Council
knows
at
this
point
that
I've
come
out
in
favor
of
a
simple
majority
for
appointment
and
removal
of
the
city
manager,
because
I
believe
that
if
the
city
manager
can't
get
on
the
same
page
with
a
simple
majority
upcoming
Council,
then
that
makes
it
very
it
defeats
the
whole
purpose
that
we
are
trying
to
accomplish
I,
think
with
efficiency
and
having
Council
balance
policy
and
constituent
Services,
while
the
city
manager
handles
day-to-day
Logistics
and
administration
of
the
city.
H
While
the
council
retains
Democratic
oversight
an
agency
over,
you
know
that,
via
the
appointment
and
removal
of
the
city
manager
and
I've
heard
from
a
lot
of
my
colleagues
about
you
know,
the
fluctuation
in
council
could
lead
to
A
disruption
in
the
city
manager.
For
the
for
those
colleagues
to
have
those
concerns.
H
What
are
the
hypotheticals
in
your
mind
that
you're
thinking
of
in
terms
of
that
situation
happening
because
that's
I'm
struggling
to
find
that
scenario
unfolding
given
that
I
think
it's
the
correct
posture
to
assume
good
faith
of
an
incoming
Council
and
city
manager
and
to
be
completely
clear,
I'm,
not
accusing
folks
of
not
assuming
that,
but
I
would
just
like
some
more
clarity
as
to
what
exactly
those
hypotheticals
are
of
a
flux.
If
a
new
of
a
newly
fluctuated
Council
comes
in,
you
know,
there's
High
turnover
and
there's
new
members
of
counsel.
K
B
Well,
I
I
want
to
first
thing
that
I
think
is
really
important
to
point
out.
Is
we're
not
saying
that
you
need
unanimous
consent
to
get
rid
of
someone
I'm
just
saying
you
need
seven
instead
of
six
and
I
think
there's
a
level
of
stability
that
can
come
with
the
many
things
that
we
do
that
last
for
years
as
initiatives
that
that
maybe
need
the
opportunity
to
have
the
stability
of
someone
working
on
those
for
years.
So
let's
talk
about
things
like
labor
contracts
right.
B
Those
negotiations
can
first
go
on
for
a
long
time,
but
then
those
contracts
go
on
for
a
long
time
and
I
think
it's
important
to
give,
and
it's
not
about
the
person
right.
It's
not
giving
the
city
manager
that
stability,
it's
about
giving
the
city
that
stability
and
so
I
mean
there
are
lots
of
hypotheticals
that
can
go
in
both
directions.
Right
I
mean
I.
B
Think
the
the
way
you're
asking
the
question
makes
me
wonder
if
you
don't
understand
that
it
could
be
the
other
way
around
too
right
and
so
I
mean
I,
think
there's
hypotheticals
that
can
go
in
both
directions.
That
might
not
actually
benefit
the
city.
All
I'm
asking
for
is
I.
Think
it's
a
high
bar
and
I
think
that
a
simple
majority
I
think
needs
to
be
checked
and
one
more
would
make
me
feel
more
comfortable
and
that
still
gives
the
console
the
ability
to
terminate
well
I
think
to
Donna's
point.
B
The
hiring
is
is
more
about.
You
know
our
unanimous
support
in
the
process.
We
just
went
through
to
identify
someone,
but
but
that's
I,
don't
know
if
that
helps
I
I
mean
because
you
know,
scenarios
could
get
pretty
crazy.
A
A
B
I'll,
just
to
the
second
part
which
I
didn't
get
to
talk
about
earlier,
I,
do
think
that
the
last
part
of
that
sentence,
which
talks
about
or
any
equivalent
training
or
combination
of
experience
really
does
give
us
the
flexibility
that
we
need
to
hire
someone.
But
it
does
give
us
some
guidance,
so
I
think
mayor
your
question
about
whether
it
should
exist
here
or
it
exists.
B
A
B
Doesn't
belong
in
a
local
law,
totally
understand
that
yep
I
think
that's
I
thought
that's
what
I
said,
but
and
then
the
last
part
I
I
mean
I.
Think
the
revisions
made
if
I'm
following
I
think
I'm
following
the
right
document
that
has
read
our
additions
and
and
deletions
in.
It
seems
to
also
work
and
I.
Think
to
the
point
of
what
was
deleted.
B
D
R
Sure
can
you
hear
me?
Okay,
first
of
all,
I
can
see
you
so.
Okay,
thank
you.
You
know
so
to
the
comments
that
have
been
referenced.
Obviously,
the
local
law,
the
job
description,
the
the
references
to
those
qualification
additions
or
clarifications
that
Robert
reference
certainly
are
in
line
with
what
you
would
want
to
see
in
a
city
manager
whether
or
not
they
reside
in
that
local
law,
language
or
the
job
description.
R
Language
is
up,
for
you
know,
Council
to
reference
the
the
cooling
off
period
to
Robert's
references
on
where
that
exists,
and
it
is
a
bit
of
a
mixed
bag
out
there
in
Arrangements,
where
there
is
a
cooling
off
where
there's
not
and
there's
periods
of
time,
I
will
say
respectfully
to
to
that
comment
or
that
a
position
that
he
is
taking
I
tend
to
to
favor.
R
You
know
something
that
resembles
the
language
as
it's
written
if
there's
no
cooling
off
period
time
that
all
referenced,
just
sort
of
the
looks
and
the
Optics
from
where
I
sit
as
the
professional
administrator
having
someone
go
right,
having
the
ability
to
go
right
from
you
know
that
elected
office
position
to
the
city
manager,
just
not
sure
the
the
look
that
you
would
want
to
give
off
in
that
direction.
But
I
do
respect.
Obviously,
the
position
and
the
statement.
M
I
fully
agree
with
what
you're
saying
Ian
I
think
I
would
be
either
happy
to
withdraw
that
cooling
off
period
exception
or
if
we
could
include
a
provision
that
would
something
like
with
the
unanimous
consent
of
council.
It
could
waive
the
cooling
off
just
something:
I
I,
don't
I,
don't
like
closing
doors
on
people,
but.
O
Right,
you
had
asked
that
question.
Yes,
I
believe
it's
I
I
see
no
reason
I'm
interested
in
encs
differently,
but
I
see
no
legal
impediment
to
including
the
cooling
off
period.
That's
written
into
the
legislation
currently
in
the
draft,
while
saying,
however,
Council
can
override
that
by
you
know,
unanimous
consent
or
something
yeah,
I
I
think
that
is
acceptable
if
it
were
to
be
written.
That
way.
R
E
Don't
know
I
just
don't
know
how
that
would
work
in
practice.
So
if
I
want
to
apply
for
this
job
and
I
do
not
I,
wouldn't
I
would
have
to
take
it
on
faith
that
before
I
bother,
applying
I
would
have
to
take
it
on
faith.
That
I
would
be
get
unanimous.
Support
that
seems
risky
to
the
applicant
am
I.
Does
that
make
sense
I.
D
O
E
M
I
did
but
am
given
the
given
the
way
that
we've
I
think
that's
most
conducive
to
the
editing.
I'll
actually
just
withdraw
the
motion
and
just
suggest
that
we
continue
making
line
edits
like
we're
doing.
A
F
I
agree
with
only
one
year:
I
just
feel
like
we
talk
about
the
cooling
off
period,
the
more
I
stay
away.
The
less
I
want
to
be
involved.
F
A
O
And
as
we
speak
of
the
it
that's
being
retained,
I
just
want
to
note,
with
apologies
that
there's
a
stray
word
in
in
the
draft
there,
which
is
the
word
be
so
I
think
it's
intended
to
say.
No
member
of
common
counselor
mayor
shall
take
office
rather
than
b
take
office.
K
A
That
was
another
question.
I
think
that
Robert
raised,
but
was
it
specific
to
a
one
or
was
it
further
in
the
in
the
document?
It.
M
O
Yeah
I
can
speak
to
that.
The
the
difference
is
just
a
matter
of
clarity
and
not
substance,
legally
speaking,
and
in
HR
terms
as
well.
Somebody
is
their
date
of
appointment
is
the
day
that
they
take
office,
but
it
seemed,
as
we
were
just
reviewing,
seemed
clearer
to
to
be
explicit.
O
That's
about
taking
office
that
that's
the
trigger,
so
that
that
is
that
piece
and
the
other
item
I
was
going
to
mention
earlier
is
is
just
that
there
are
and
of
course
I
don't
have
it
in
front
of
me.
There
are
a
few
other
cities
that
do
have
the
majority,
plus
one
or
two-thirds
thresholds,
I.
Think
and
now
I
managed
to
not
have
it
in
front
of
me
as
I'm
speaking,
but
I
think
it
included
rye
and
Canandaigua
and
another
one.
A
Q
Know
tomorrow's
Point
instead
of
voting
on
this
whole
paragraph,
let's
just
vote
on
on
individual
changes,
so
I'll
move
changing
that
to
majority.
A
G
A
And
then
there
was
agreement
I'm
bookending
this
there
was
agreement
on
the
last
sentence:
the
cooling
off
period
to
reduce
within
one
year
after
expiration
of
that
person's
term.
D
A
What
I
do
not
recall
is
the
interior
of
that
paragraph.
Once
again,
I
will
say
that
the
qualifications
that
Robert
recommended
are
in
the
position.
Description,
I,
thought,
I
heard.
Rob
Gerhard
say
that
not
problematic
to
include
those
also
here
in
A1.
Is
that
right?
S
Yeah,
thank
you.
I
I
just
wanted
to
say
that,
in
terms
of
the
the
job
description
and
the
qualifications,
there
are
occasions
when
we
may
want
to
change
those
qualifications,
and
so
I
guess
I
I.
Maybe
this
is
a
question
for
Ari.
O
Yeah
I
think
that
I
think
that's
what
the
mayor
was
getting
at
as
well,
so
to
the
extent
that
you
change
the
qualifications
in
a
manner
that
doesn't
meet
the
language
that
Robert
was
proposing,
then
yeah.
O
You
would
have
that
issue,
I'll,
say
I,
don't
recommend
reflecting
in
the
city
Charter
detailed
job
qualifications,
we
don't
do
it
for
other
positions
and
and
I
would
recommend
the
language
more
along
the
lines
some
of
what
we
had
in
the
draft
there
and
then
not
that
I
disagree
with
the
other
language
might
add.
I
just
wouldn't
put
it
into
the
city.
Charter
I
would
put
it
into
the
job
description,
which
Council
can
also
vote
for.
M
Will
follow
the
Aria
living
and
guidance
of
always
do
the
legislative
action
at
the
lowest
level
necessary
and
we'll
we'll
withdraw
that
middle
qualifications?
Piece.
A
Great,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
Shelley
for
adding
that
and
Shelly
and
Ari
for
clarifying.
What
really
was
my
intent
at
getting
at
that
okay
on
to
A2.
Are
there
any
suggested
edits.
A
All
right,
Donna
and
then
Robert.
E
I
would
like
to
delete
the
phrase
at
its
pleasure
in
the
sentence
preserve
the
common
council's
right
to
terminate
the
employment
of
a
city
manager.
M
I
have
two
questions:
one
I
guess
they're,
both
also
for
Ari
one,
how
material
would
that
change
be
given
that,
where
silent,
my
understanding
is
New
York,
State,
labor
law,
because
it's
an
at-will
employment,
State
and
then
the
second
piece
being
does?
Could
you
if,
if
we
were
to
go
along
with
Donna's
proposed
change
here,
could
you
explain
the
exhaustive
list
of
cases
in
which
someone
could
could
be
terminated,
essentially
right
because
I
mean
I?
M
Remember
you
saying
at
our
last
meeting
that
there
are
many
instances
where
one
may
wish
to
revisit
the
employment
engagement
of
an
individual
that
do
not
rise
to
the
threshold
of
like
you
know,
dereliction
of
Duty
and
malpractice,
and
things
like
that.
O
Yeah,
that's
right.
Also,
I
I
do
have
a
specific
answer
to
your
question
before
I
answer.
I'm
glad
to
let
Ian
speak
first,
because
I'm
guessing
as
you
may
have
something
to
say
on
this
topic
as
well,
but
either
order
or
you'd
like
you.
O
I'll
follow
up
yeah,
sure,
okay,
great
to
the
specific
list
of
of
causes
were
this
language
removed
that
would
still
be
available
for
a
termination.
O
I
would
Point
counsel
further
down
in
this
same
agenda
packet
that
we're
all
looking
at
tonight
in
the
template
employment
agreement
itself,
you'll
see
beginning
on
what's
labeled
as
page
four
of
that
template
employment
agreement
right
near
the
bottom,
there's
a
subsection
B
that
says
the
council
May
remove
the
city
manager
for
cause
for
purposes
of
this
agreement,
cause
shall
mean
and
then
there's
a
list
of
of
for
cause
bases
for
removal.
O
So
examples
are
failure
to
fulfill
the
city,
manager's
duties
as
required
by
this
agreement,
the
city
Charter
and
code,
and
the
city's
policies
and
procedures,
incompetence
or
inefficiency.
I'm
not
going
to
read
all
these
in
detail,
but
in
subordination
or
material
failure
to
comply
with
lawful
written
Council
directives.
O
Failure
to
follow
follow
various
laws,
habitual
willful,
neglective
duties,
habitual
impairment
of
buy
alcohol
or
drugs,
intentional
misrepresentation
of
material
facts,
material,
violation
of
City
policies,
other
bases
that
would
also
be
for
cause
or
conviction
of
you
know
any
felony
Etc
any
willful
knowing
grossly
negligent
or
negligent
breach,
disregard
or
habitual
neglect
of
any
provision
of
this
agreement,
and
all
that
goes
any
misconduct
involving
criminal
illegality,
Etc
yeah
you
get.
O
So
those
are
all
there
I
I
guess
I
do
want
to
go
back.
I
just
want
to
highlight
for
Council
and
I'm
guessing
Ian
can
help
speak
to
this.
The
question
of.
O
O
One
way
to
address,
that
is
to
say,
there's
not
going
to
be
a
disciplinary
process
and
I
do
want
to
be
clear
right
when
you
invoke
a
four
cause
basis
for
terminating
someone,
then
there's
also
a
process
that
occurs
to
determine
you
know
what
they
did
and
and
whether
that
rises
to
that
level
for
removal,
but
I'll
pause
here
and
let
Ian
speak
for
a
moment
and
then
I
could
come
back
and
make
perhaps.
R
Yeah
I
guess
I
guess
my
question
would
be
it's
more
of
a
question
than
a
comment
would
be
if
that
I
believe
data
has
said
the
removal
of
that
reference.
What
does
that
do
Ari?
As
far
as
it's
it's
connection
back
to
what
the
employment
agreement,
the
other
documents
speak
of
when
you
talk
about
the
causes,
if
you
remove
that
it's
pleasure,
what
does
that
do
or
not
do
to
everything
else?
That's
connected
to
this
particular
provision.
Yeah.
O
Sure
you
know
it's
a
good
question.
I
I
first
heard
this
proposal
not
very
many
hours
ago,
because
I
think
that's
when
it
was
put
forward
and
I
have
was
in
meetings
for
the
rest
of
the
afternoon.
So
I
have
not
managed
to
further
evaluate
the
impact
of
that
removal
on
the
processes
in
here.
E
E
Down
still,
it's
still
gonna
say,
subject
to
the
procedures
set
forth,
blah
blah
an
employment
agreement.
The
common
Council
has
the
right
to
terminate
the
employment
of
the
city
manager
semicolon.
E
O
And
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
as
Council
discusses
this,
that
it's
not
just
what
it
sounds
like
in
terms
of,
could
that's
actually
what
it?
This
is
a
substantive
question
right:
it's
not
it's
not
this
wording!
This
is
actual
substance.
That
does
council
want
the
ability
to
remove
at
its
pleasure,
or
is
it
looking
to
constrain
them
to
what
amounts
to
a
disciplinary
process
of
some
kind.
A
Q
I
support
keeping
it,
as
is
for
a
few
reasons,
I
mentioned
earlier,
that
having
served
on
boards,
removing
an
executive
is
a
horrible
thing,
and
no
one
does
it
lately.
I
think
chances
of
half
a
council
wanting
to
put
themselves
through
an
arduous
and
politically
fraught
removal
process
is
unlikely,
but
it's
also,
you
know
the
prerogative
and
I
think
art
made
to
give
a
bunch
of
examples
in
the
previous
meeting
of
he
just
said
two
right
now
like
that.
Q
If,
if
the,
if
the
executive
doesn't
have
the
confidence
of
counsel
or
is
not
carrying
out
the
will
of
counsel
but
not
necessarily
engaging
in
misconduct,
that's
a
gap
that
I
think
keeping.
This
feels
that
I
support,
keeping.
E
That,
yes,
I,
do
because
I
believe
that
the
as
Ari
noted
earlier,
the
employment
contract
does
spill
spell
out
reasons
that
include
insubordination,
incompetence,
inefficiency,
failure
to
do
what
he's
they're
told
so
on
and
so
forth.
E
What
I
object
to
is
any
reference
to
terminating
common
council's
right
to
terminate
the
city
manager
with
any
number
of
votes,
without
giving
any
reason
at
all.
That's
what
I
object
to
and
I
think
the
reason
spelled
out
a
through
H
are
pretty
Broad
and
could
cover
a
whole
range
of
sins,
but
at
least
their
reasons.
That's
what
I
want.
O
Laura
may
actually
I
asked
one
other
clarifying
question
of
Donna
sure,
so
so
the
clarify
and
I
apologize
I
don't
have
the
right
line
of
sight
to
look
at
you,
Donna.
The
the
clarifying
question
is
I
think
it
might
elucidate
this
conversation
to
evaluate
to
understand
whether
your
proposal
on
this
piece
is
tied
to
what
might
be
a
parallel
proposal
down
in
the
template,
employment
agreement
or
whether
you're
viewing
them
separately
and
what
I
mean
by
that
is
in
the
template:
employment
agreement
at
the
bottom
of.
What's
labeled
as
page
three.
O
Are
discretionary,
what's
called
discretionary
removal,
yes
of
the
city
manager?
Yes,
are
you
substantively
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
the
substance
of
what
you're
after
here?
Yes,
are
you
looking
to
remove
the
idea
of
a
discretionary
removal
of
the
city
manager.
E
Yes,
I
am
I,
wouldn't
I
want
to
delete
this
phrase
at
its
pleasure.
I
want
to
delete
a
subsequent
reference
to
without
any
requirement
that
cause
or
conduct
be
demonstrated
in
this
Charter
change
and
I
also
want
to
delete
a
reference
to
discretionary
removal
in
the
employment
contract.
O
And
so
perhaps
that's
very
helpful
to
understand,
probably
for
all
of
us
just
so
that
it
actually
puts
the
question
into
into
sort
of
clear
relief.
So
thank
you,
I
can
imagine
that
it's
also
at
least
to
me.
It's
helpful
as
I
think
about
this.
O
To
imagine
the
relationship
between
the
city
manager
and
the
common
Council
from
from
a
legal
standpoint
and
and
just
recognize
that,
to
the
extent
that
a
common
Council
actually
was
choosing
to
remove
a
city
manager
from
a
legal
standpoint,
I'd
much
prefer
for
the
city
in
terms
of
the
city's
interests
is
what
I'm,
referring
to
here.
O
I'd
much
prefer
to
see
the
common
Council
be
forced
to
consider
that
decision
very
carefully
through
a
higher
vote
threshold
than
through
a
narrower
set
of
legal
bases
for
the
removal,
because,
if
you
narrow
the
legal
basis
for
the
removal
you
can
end
up
with,
you
know
a
nasty
fight
to
be
a
nasty
legal
fight
over
whether
it
was
in
fact
a
for
cause
termination
If.
Instead,
you
set
a
higher
threshold
for
the
removal
in
terms
of
the
votes,
but
it's
a
discretionary
removal,
potentially
no
problem
right.
O
P
Yeah
I
mean
I
would
agree
with
Arya
I
also
want
to
Echo
duckson's
point
that,
like
I,
worry
that
we
would
be
handcuffing
ourselves
into
too
strict
of
a
legal
threshold.
I
think
we
were
elected
into
office,
for
you
know
in
certain
part,
our
discretion
and
I
think
that
the
gap
between
these,
like
legal
definitions
and
what
should
be
left
to
our
discretion,
is
too
great
for
for
me
to
personally
be
comfortable
with
I.
P
Think
there
are
cases
of
you
know,
assault
of
harassment
that
have
happened
in
terms
of
executive
boards,
public
officials
appointees
that
may
not
be
corroborated
through
a
legal
process,
but
that
you
know
publicly
still
should
call
for
a
removal
or
a
consideration
of
removal
and
I.
I
do
have
trust
in
the
voters
of
Ithaca
that
if
we
were
to
remove
a
city
manager
for
a
silly
reason,
then
we
wouldn't
you
know,
be
trusted
to
keep
our
positions.
Thank
you.
O
Oh
I
I
apologize
for
I
thought.
I
continue
to
speak
here,
but
an
important
update
that
I've
just
figured
out,
which
is
that
the
vote
thresholds
totally
can
go
at
it
any
which
direction
the
council
chooses
to
the
at
its
pleasure
element.
O
I
believe
we
are
legally
required
to
stick
with,
because
that
is
the
way
that
the
original
local
law
that
Council
passed
that
went
to
referendum
was
was
phrased.
This
is
my
yeah
I
think
we
and
I'm
going
to
double
check
that
right
now,
but
I'm.
Pretty
sure
that
that's
that's
the
bottom
line
now
Donna.
A
M
Question
for
Ian
I
wasn't
able
to
find
any
how
many,
how
many
municipalities
have
a
five-year
contract
threshold,
because
I
and
again
I
get
this
as
a
philosophical
difference
with
some
people.
But
it
seems
odd
to
me
that
you
would
have
an
appointee
that
serves
at
the
pleasure
of
the
elected
body.
Have
a
contract
10-year
longer
than
any
of
those
terms.
R
Yeah,
there's
probably
not
a
lot.
You
know
you
have
a
couple
that
are
just
annual
that
almost
become
Evergreen
Perpetual.
You
have
a
couple
that
are
two
years.
If
you
have
a
couple
that
are
four
years,
the
two
and
the
four
usually
align
with
the
individual's
term
of
office
because
they
have
a
term
specific
term
of
office
potentially
in
there.
R
So
five
yeah,
probably
rare,
unless
you
include
the
person
who
has
ever
agreed
that
turned
into
a
five-year
agreement
because
they
got
four
sort
of
just
you
know
extensions,
but
yes,
I,
believe
the
other
section
reads
in
the
employment
agreement
that
it
says
up
to
five
but
correct
me
from
my
area.
But
this
section
says
five.
So
yes
to
your
point,
that
would
have
to
be
clarified.
If
there's
disinterest
in
having
to
be
specifically
reading
five.
O
And
I
can
just
add
a
couple
specific
sites
that
you're
right.
There
are
many
cities
that
are
more
in
the
ballpark
of
two
years.
No
doubt
a
couple
examples
that
are
in
the
ballpark
of
five
years
include
Auburn,
which
I
believe
is
four
and
a
half
years
in
Rye,
which
I
believe
is
just
one
month
shy
of
four
and
a
half
years.
F
M
I'm
not
formally
moving
this
yet,
but
in
the
interest
of
maximal
flexibility.
I
personally
was
inspired
by
a
newberg's
charter,
which
has
a
flexibility
of
if
you'll.
Permit
me,
the
city
manager
may
be
appointed
a
for
an
indefinite
period
of
time
to
serve
at
the
will
of
council
B
for
a
definite
term,
not
to
exceed
two
years
at
the
expiration
of
which
the
term
the
city
manager
may
be
reappointed
from
time
to
time
in
discretion
of
the
council,
but
in
no
event
showed
any
appointment
be
for
more
than
two
years.
M
So
a
two-year
renewal,
like
Ian,
was
saying
with
the
one
years
and
then
for
a
definite
term
to
not
to
exceed
two
years,
giving
us
that
flexible
for
an
annual
contract.
Again
thinking
from
the
charter
perspective,
it
seems
to
make
much
more
sense
to
me
to
give
us
the
ability
to
give
future
bodies
the
ability
to
set
what
contract
term
they
want
for
this
person
rather
than
hard
coding
it
as
a
requirement
for
five
years
or
if,
if
not
I,
would
I
would
just
say
an
indefinite
period.
M
A
B
I
mean
just
just
for
clarification,
and
maybe
this
is
something
Ian
can
give
us
some
better
illustration
around.
But
what's
the
difference
between
an
indefinite
term
that
has
some
kind
of
process
for
reviewing
that
would
it
could
end
someone's
tenure
at
any
time
versus
a
five-year
one
that
I
assume
would
still
have
the
same
power
to
evaluate
and
terminate
under
certain
cause
or
other.
M
Reasons
I
mean
I,
guess
from
my
perspective,
I
guess.
Maybe
it's
a
for
me.
The
distinction
matters
more
once
we
finalize
what
the
removal
threshold
is
because
reappointing
versus
terminating
you
know
like
I.
It
does
matter
if
someone's
contract
is
reevaluated
every
year
and
has
to
be
reapproved,
it
doesn't
matter
if
the
threshold
is
a
simple
majority.
In
my
mind,.
E
O
So
there
are
two
elements
in
the
packet
just
to
make
sure
we're
all
clear
on
on
the
point.
One
is
the
local
law
that
you're
looking
at
right
now
and
the
other
is
the
template
employment
agreement.
O
Obviously
they
can
be
treated
separately,
though
there
certainly
are
related,
I,
believe
the
template
employment
agreement
was
proposed
at
five
years,
and
the
charter
provision
says
not
more
than
five
years,
so
those
can
go
hand
in
hand,
and
you
could
also
tweak
one
or
the
other
without
necessarily
doing
both.
A
Yeah,
thank
you
Donna
for
pointing
out
that
the
language
in
the
local
law
is
that
the
employment
agreement
shall
not
exceed
five
years,
so
that
can
include
two
three
four
four
years
George,
you
had
your
hand
up.
L
I,
don't
see
a
need
to
change
this,
and
if
we
want
to
get
a
good
city
manager,
I,
don't
think
we
should
be
saying
well
we're
going
to
renew
your
contract
every
year,
because
I
don't
think
we're
going
to
get
a
good
one.
Q
Q
M
M
The
possibility
that
they
do
not
retain
their
job
should
be
online
because
I
think,
like
I,
hear
what
you're
saying
about
renewing
the
contract
every
year
but
like
if
there's
not
whether
or
not
the
contract
term
extends
further,
and
thank
you
by
the
way
Ari
I
was
thinking
of
the
contract
itself,
not
the
not
the
charter
but
like.
M
If,
if
the
idea
is
that
the
person
isn't
going
to
be
up
held
accountable
for
their
performance
in
a
given
year,
that
I
guess
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
like
we're
going
to
review
their
performance
every
year.
Right
so
like
we
might
not
be
renewing
their
contract,
but
we're
still.
L
L
R
I
just
wanted
to
know
just
speaking
a
little
bit
on
the
comment
that
Rob
had
just
made
earlier.
That
and
Ari
and
I
have
talked
about
this
too.
That
no
matter
I
think
you
all
know
this
and
someone
just
mentioned
it
before
I
or
after
I
raised
my
hand,
but
no
matter
what
that
the
performance
appraisal
process
will
be
happening
annually.
R
The
power
rests
and
resides
with
the
council
to
you
know,
commence
termination
proceeds
if
it's
quote:
unquote
isn't
working
out
really,
irrespective
of
what
the
length
of
the
agreement
looks
like
that
power
still
has
to
reside
there.
So
as
you,
you
know,
debate
that
term
length
just
keep
that
top
of
mind.
I
A
M
A
Again,
I'll
just
point
out
that
this
says
shall
not
exceed
five
years
and
I.
Take
your
point
that
we've
not
yet
addressed
removal.
So
why
don't
we
move
on
because
I'm
not
interested
in
being
here
until
2
A.M
duties
and
authority
of
the
city
managers?
So
this
is
section
to
be.
A
H
Ous
yes
and
I,
emailed
Council,
albeit
I,
with
not
as
much
time
but
prior
to
this
council
meeting
for
Section
I,
believe
it's.
H
Yes,
it's
2b2
right,
yeah
and
so
the
section
that
currently
reads
to
attend
all
meetings
of
the
common
Council,
a
city
manager,
May,
participate
in
any
discussion
and
make
recommendations,
but
shall
not
have
the
right
to
vote
the
language
that
I
emailed
all
of
council
today
that
I'd
like
to
submit
it's
a
very
minor
change
but
I
think
it's
just
important
for
processes
going
forward
and
you
know
allowing
the
common
Council
to
exercise
some.
You
know
agency
and
procedures
going
forward.
H
I
would
like
to
change
it
to
the
city
manager
to
have
the
following
duties
and
Authority
B
to
attend
all
the
meetings
of
the
common
Council,
the
city
manager,
in
accordance
of
the
rules
of
procedure,
that
common
Council
shall,
from
time
to
time,
adopt
to
govern
common
Council
meetings.
May
participate
in
any
discussion
and
make
recommendations,
but
shall
not
have
the
right
to
vote.
So
it's
just
one
small
line
that
does
not
terribly
change
any
terms
of
powers,
Authority
or
whatnot.
A
All
right
is
there
a
second
on
Phoebe
seconds,
all
those
in
favor
of
well
Cynthia
has
a
question
and
then
Ian
and
again
my
apologies.
My
back
is
to
you
but
I'll
turn
to
you.
If
you
had
any
comments
on
this
or
the
previous
Cynthia
go
ahead,.
J
I'm,
just
pondering
rules,
procedure,
I,
don't
think
the
city
manager
has
mentioned
in
there.
So
for
one
right
it
really
goes
into
like
how
meetings
are
structured
and
agendas
and
so
on.
It
doesn't
pertain
to
when
somebody
speaks
I'm,
not
sure.
If
adding
that
line
adds
any
advantage
or
additional
clarification
to
this
and
I
guess.
My
question
is:
what
is
what
is
the
concern
you
have
with
the
current
language
with
which,
by
the
way,
is
the
language
that
we
have
that
pertains
to
I
believe
the
mayor.
G
J
You
can
participate
in
discussion
and
make
recommendations,
but
may
not
vote
so
maybe
I'm
not
understanding
what
you're
trying
to
achieve
in
the
language
and
I'm
just
thinking
through
the
current
rules
of
procedure,
which
are
highly
administrative
and
just
trying
to
understand
sure.
H
Yeah
and
I
think
we
will
probably
have
to
at
some
point
reflect
on
the
rules
of
procedure,
as
we
move
forward
with
the
city
manager
and
and
his
Dynamics
reveal
themselves
between
the
city
manager
and
common
Council,
so
I
think
we'll
have
to
cross
that
bridge
eventually,
but
with
what
I'm
hoping
to
accomplish
with
this
is
for
a
common
Council
to
obtain
the
power
to
sort
of
set
the
the
tempo
and
interaction
with
the
city
manager
during
live
discussions
on
common
Council,
as
it
pertains
to
discussion
around
public
policy
and
policy
that
the
common
Council
would
legislate,
and
so,
as
it
stands
right
now,
the
common
the
city
manager
can
participate.
H
It
seems
like
unless
it
gets
specified
further,
simply
by
being
called
on.
You
know,
as
a
member
of
of
of
the
of
the
body
no
different
than
a
member
of
council
and
I
do
believe.
That
is
something
that
we
should
retain
within
as
elected
officials
and
in
situations
where
we
do
have.
City
staff
come
to
speak,
they're,
typically
invited
by
the
mayor
or
a
member
of
council
to
discuss
legislation
or
whatnot,
and
so
that's
what
I'm
hoping
to
accomplish.
H
J
You
just
a
quick
follow-up
foreign
follow-up.
The
mayor
is
still
the
chair
of
council
correct
and
so
the
mayor
does
ask
people
to
participate
or
not.
H
Yeah
I
mean,
if
that's,
if
that's
the
case,
I'm
just
concerned
about
the
vagueness
of
that
and
see
with
the
current
language
as
it
stands,
and
if
the
mayor
is
in
control
of
that
conversation,
as
an
elected
official
I,
think
that's,
you
know,
I
feel
a
little
bit
better,
but
I
am
a
little
concerned
about.
H
You
know
how
that
would
impact
conversations
pertaining
to
public
policy
and
legislation
if
people
who
are
not
democratically
elected
are
are
weighing
in
and
stuff
like
that,
because,
typically,
when
staff
aren't
have
insights
that
are
in
the
logistical
or
administrative
side,
it's
a
member
of
council
or
the
mayor
who
invites
them
and
that's
what
I
was
hoping
to
accomplish
with
this
legislation
or
the
sorry
this
this
language,
but
if
that's
something
that
folks
feel
is
is
already
accounted
for
with
with
as
it
stands
right
now
with
the
mayor
as
the
head
of
of
the
council
body,
that's
a
fair
point
taken.
A
And
we
certainly
have
thank
you
Cynthia,
that's
helpful.
We
certainly
have
staff
who
the
mayor
will
recognize.
You
know
they
say.
Controller
is
a
perfect
example
of
that
planning
staff.
Perfect
example
of
that
we
had
the
director
of
sustainability
here
this
evening
so
and
the
mayor
continues
to
preside
over
Council
meetings.
So
I'd
like
to
hear
the
views
of
other
council
members
on
this
particular
Edition.
A
B
Yes,
I
I
mean
I,
understand
the
intent,
but
I
I'm
not
sure
it's
needed
and
maybe
what
you're
getting
hung
up
on
the
openness
of
May
participate
in
any
discussion.
I
think
it
is
they're,
not
a
sitting
member
of
common
Council.
So
the
mayor
runs
that
common
council
meeting
and
they
may
be
asked
to
participate,
but
they
wouldn't
necessarily
just
be
able
to
do
that
without
that
invitation.
B
B
I
think
it's
I
think
it's
in
accordance
with
the
rules
of
procedure
and
I'm,
not
sure
what
the
rest
of
that
Edition
I'm,
not
sure
the
rest
of
that
Edition
is
necessary
because
I
mean
you
might
say
that
in
accordance
with
common
council's
rules
of
procedure,
but
I
don't
think
you
need
to
Define
that
it
may
get
a
it
may
change
from
time
to
time,
but
I
I,
don't
think
any
of
that
is
needed,
because
I
think
it
is
expected
that
the
city
manager
should
participate
in
meetings.
B
I
I
A
You,
through
p
other
edits,
Robert.
M
Question
for
Ari,
which
I
failed
at
asking
succinctly
a
moment
ago
so
section
B
to
E,
is
to
prescribe
the
duties
and
fix
the
compensation
of
all
officers
appointed
by
the
city
manager
and
of
all
employees
of
the
city,
not
otherwise
provided
for
in
this
Charter
I'm,
not
clear
who
that
applies
to,
because
my
understanding
was
in
existing
Charter
section.
M
Goodness
too
many
documents,
open,
I,
think
it's
37
Council
sets
those,
and
so
who
is
the
in
the
in
the
referendum?
We
had
language
that
said,
the
city
manager,
Xiao,
prescribe
the
duties
and
fix
the
rates
of
conversations
for.
M
A
specific
number
of
officers-
and
this
is
all
employees
and
I'm,
just
curious.
How
did
that?
How
does
that
interact
with
section
37
of
the
charter.
A
Turn
that
to
Ari,
but
there
is
I'll
just
state
that
Council
has
up
to
now
and
in
the
future,
will
have
to
vote
on
appointments
of,
for
example,
department,
heads
right.
However,
the
department
heads
will
have
the
responsibility
and
the
authority
to
hire
their
staffs.
They
will
work
with
the
city
manager
on
that,
but
currently,
and
in
the
future,
Council
will
not
be
voting
on
every
staff
higher.
Yes,.
M
I'm
I'm,
looking
at
e,
not
D,
not
not
the
appointments
or
things
just
the
the
prescribing
the
duties
and
fixing
the
compensations
of
all
of
it.
Essentially,
what
I'm
really
getting
at
here
is
I
know.
Council
has
had
discussions
about
how
it
may
want
to
set
the
wage
schedule
for
staff
across
the
city,
and
does
this
change
now
hand
that
solely
over
to
the
city
manager,
or
does
it
interact?
A
O
Yeah
sure
I
mean
I
think
the
short
answer
to
your
question
Robert
is
that
most
definitely
not.
This
would
not
strip
Council
of
its
ability
to
approve
labor
contracts
or
or
to
to
set.
You
know,
salary
schedules
for
the
city
staff
in
general,
I'm
trying
to
look
back
in
the
existing
City
Charter
in
C11.
My.
O
No
B6,
currently
our
Charter,
says
the
mayor:
shall
the
mayor
shall
have
power
to
prescribe
the
duties
and
fix
the
rate
of
compensation
of
all
officers
appointed
by
the
mayor
and
of
all
employees
of
the
city,
not
otherwise
provided
forward
by
this
Charter?
So
I
just
want
to
note
this
isn't
new
language
that
we
were
trying
to
introduce
into
the
mix.
We
were
simply
adapting
the
mayor's
authorities
to
the
council
manager,
form
of
government,
and
so
I
would
answer
your
question
substantively
right
now
by
saying
whatever
it
is,
that
Council
has
authority
over
right.
O
R
For
it,
I
I
was
just
going
to
say,
I,
actually,
I,
don't
want
to
money.
The
Waters
at
all
and
I
would
defer
to
Ari
but
yeah
I'm,
trying
to
process
what
Roberts
I
think
qualmer
concern
is.
R
It
does
read
pretty
encompassing
with
respect
to
the
movement
from
the
city
manager
to
that,
as
far
as
the
compensation
for
those
not
covered
under
Charter
unless
I'm
wrong
in
that
there's
more
people
covered
under
Charter
that
I
might
not
be
otherwise
aware
of
you
know,
I
guess
that
would
mean
all
of
the
all
the
deputies
on
down
and
those
not
covered
under
employment
agreements
would
thus
be
the
charge
of
the
city
manager
to
set
that
the
compensation
of
all
those
individuals
is
that
the
way
you
would
read
it
Ari.
O
Yeah
no
I
think
that's
right.
The
kinds
of
situations
that
I
can
recall
within
the
mayor's
Authority,
currently
one
maybe
pretty
random
example,
but
one
example
where
the
mayor
currently
has
some
discretion
in
authority
over
compensation
is
over.
It's
a
George's
question
to
the
the
step
level
that
somebody's
hired
over
hired
at
in
in
some
contexts
and
not
others
that
and
many
of
them
not
actually
I'll.
O
Note
as
I
backdrop
to
all
of
this
there's,
no
doubt
that
council's
budgetary
Authority
is
inviolent,
so
the
city
manager
could
never
spend
money
that
wasn't
budgeted
for
the
purpose.
To
begin
with,
I
think
that's
an
important
element
of
it,
but
but
I
I
do
think
that,
if
counsel
is
more
comfortable
with
tweaking
this
language,
this
is
not
crucial
language,
one
way
or
another.
It
was
just
an
adaptation
of
what
was
in
the
council
as
a
mayor's
Authority
currently
to
the
city,
to
the
council
manager,
form
of
government
measure.
L
O
R
Just
to
chime
in
I
mean
to
me
it's
you
know
to
me
setting
it
is
setting
it.
So
if,
if
it's,
you
know
that
a
deputy
of
some
Department
coming
in
the
way
it
reads
to
me
is
that
the
city
manager
has
that
Authority
and
ability
to
set
that
subject
to
the
budget
confines
that
the
council
has
set
in
place
for
that
budget
that
department
whatever.
R
But
it's
not
that
clear
that
it
says
things
related
to
steps
is
all
and
I'm
guessing
that
might
have
been
Robert's
inquiry
in
the
first
place
as
to
how
broad
that
ability
is
to
just
say
that
person's
going
to
make
85
95
75
by
themselves.
S
No
just
quickly
George
is
referring
to
step
plan
because
that's
the
compensation
plan
that
exists
right
now.
We
may
not.
We
may
not
necessarily
have
a
step
system
so
that
can
vary,
but
Council
would
adopt
whatever
the
plan
is
whether
it's
a
step
plan
or
a
merit-based
plan
not
recommending
or
whatever
foreign.
M
So
the
the
Genesis
of
this
question
was
looking
at
the
local
law
that
just
passed
referendum
where
again
I'll
read
unless
otherwise
prohibited
by
law.
The
same
person
may
be
appointed
to
hold
one
or
more
said
office.
Today,
the
common
Council
may
also
prior
to
each
such
appointment,
describe
the
duties
of
such
officers,
in
addition
to
a
not
inconsistent
with
the
duties
prescribed
by
this
Charter
except
is
otherwise
provided
for
and
subject
to
such
provisions
of
the
common
Council
and
to
the
provisions
of
this
Charter.
M
The
city
manager
shall
prescribe
the
duties
and
fix
the
compensation
rates
of
all
officers,
so
appointed
and
so
I
think
a
it
feels
like.
We
already
have
this
in
an
like
in
a
with
a
unless
otherwise
prohibited
by
law.
Clause
I,
don't
I
I,
especially
if
this
is
just
kind
of
like
archaic
or
not
archaic.
Holdover
language
is
what
I
just
read,
not
sufficient
for
what
the
city
manager
needs.
This
ability
to
do.
O
Sorry
so
I
I
think
what
you
just
read
would
not
necessarily
cause
individual
compensation
determinations
to
be
made
for
particular
employees.
I
think
that's
what
this
provision
is
largely
getting
at.
Council
still
has
its
budgetary
Authority.
It
also
has
the
authorities
that
you
just
read
there
and
maybe
I'm
missing
a
piece
of
it,
but
I
just
want
to
again
highlight
that
the
language
in
existing
C11
B6
Ends
by
saying
not
otherwise
provided
for
by
this
Charter
right.
O
So
if
the
charter
says
Council
decides
stuff
mainly,
but
you
want
to
catch
all,
that's
you
know
and
to
catch
anything
that
didn't
get
handled,
then
then
that's
what
this
I
believe
does
and
to
Shelley's
Point.
The
city
has
not
always
used
a
step
plan
and
and
could
at
other
times
not
so
if
you're
going
to
have
a
catch-all
which
probably
is
advisable,
I
think
that's
why
our
Charter
was
written
that
way.
Originally
it
might,
it
might
be
helpful,
but
but
again
I
defer.
D
L
O
So
in
a
budget,
Council
decides
how
much
money
to
spend
on
different
subjects
and
then
one
of
those
subjects
could
be
as
general
as
an
entire
department
or
it
might
be
a
program
within
the
department
and
then
you
get
and
then
some
of
it
might
be
for
for
Staffing
and
then
and
then
that
could
get
down
to
the
nitty-gritty
of
what
to
spend
on
each
line.
And
you
know
Council
gets
to
pick
how
detailed
to
make
its
budget
as
well.
A
I
wasn't
hearing
clear
need
to
change
the
language.
So,
let's
move,
let's
move
on
other
items
under
two,
a
through
p.
I
J
J
Think,
maybe
that's
it
I
think
it's
the
Box
on
H
I
would
like
to
add
and
revoke.
J
I've
shared
the
language
I'm,
sorry,
my
my
computer
died.
So
I
don't
have
it
with
me,
but
I
shared
it
by
email
earlier
to
execute
all
contracts.
Deeds
license
permission
licenses
that
the
city
May
authorize
to
issue
in
something
like
and
to
revoke
the
same,
should
a
violation
occur
consistent
with
the
terms
of
the
license
permit
and
so
on.
Yeah!
Oh,
yes,
could
you.
A
E
D
A
Okay,
well
it
it
is
written
I,
don't
have
the
red
line
in
front
of
me,
no
it's
in
Black
in
the
packet,
so
it
doesn't
matter
if
you're
colorblind
on
this
one,
so
the
language
on
G
that
is
proposed
that
Donna
moves
to
recommend
to
council
committee
chairs
the
mayor
and
common
Council
policy
changes
or
code
revisions
that
would
promote
efficiency
in
City
operations,
in
keeping
with
the
larger
goals
of
the
City
established
by
Common
Council.
I
A
All
right
George,
thank
you
for
your
second
okay,
any
other
changes.
M
With
approval
I'm
moving
that
we
changed,
the
affirmative
vote
of
two-thirds
to
an
affirmative
majority
vote.
A
E
So
we
have
the
Clause
here.
The
vote
must
State
the
reasons
for
removal.
How
is
that
consistent
with
our
earlier
discussion
about
the
what's
it
called
discretionary
Vote
or
something
or
removal
without
cause?
So
we
have
to
give
the
reasons
for
removal.
D
All
right
go
ahead
and
respond
if
you
would
yeah
so
stating
the
reasons
is
different.
O
Than
identifying
one
of
the
particular
four
cause
bases
of
removal
right,
the
reason
might
be
a
reason.
That's
not
included
in
that
four
cause
list,
but
it's
still
a
reason.
The
point
is
that
it
shouldn't
just
be
a
resolution
that
says
too
bad
goodbye.
It
should
be
a
resolution
that
says
then
here's
why.
A
L
I'm
not
experiencing
these
matters,
but
some
of
the
people
who
are
Ari
and
Rob
can
rob
Gearhart
and
in
Chris.
Pruell
are
all
advising
us
that
having
a
larger
voting
block
than
a
simple
majority
is
a
good
idea
for
removal
and
so
I
more
than
approval
of
of
the
person.
I
I've
strongly
believe
that
majority
plus
one
is,
is
the
way
to
go
here.
D
But
but
is
it
a
motion
George?
No,
it's.
A
Okay,
do
you
want
to
move
that
George.
K
R
Yes,
but
I,
don't
I
don't
want
to
insert
myself
in
during
emotion.
So
it's
up
to
you
mayor.
A
No,
please
please
weigh
in
it
may
inform
how
Council
moves
forward
I.
R
I
was
I
was
simply
going
to
make
the
point,
and
you
probably
would
understand
that
I
would
be
making
this
point
that
I
I
do
certainly
respect
those
on
Council,
who
may
favor
a
civil
majority
for
removal,
but
certainly
for
and
from
the
perspective
of
the
person.
Who
is
the
practitioner
and
going
to
do
the
work
as
a
city
manager
and
certainly
from
the
recruitment
perspective.
You
know
giving
off
a
look.
R
That
is
a
majority
plus
one
or
or
higher,
certainly
would
be
a
betterment
from
where
from
the
side
of
the
city
manager.
So
I
just
wanted
to
point
that
out.
I'm
sure
you
know
that,
but
just
worth
noting.
R
Sorry
I
was
on
mute,
so
this
is
funny
Robert
I
knew
you
were
going
to
ask
that
question.
So
I
actually
just
pulled
up
my
my
local
law,
because
here's,
the
thing
I
actually
didn't,
know
the
answer
to
that
question
before
having
to
look
it
up
so
I'm,
actually
just
in
the
process
of
looking
it
up
right
now,
I
I
basically
have
a
hearing
mine's
with
cause.
R
P
I
just
have
a
quick
question.
I
guess
I
mean
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
Rob's
point
was
that
there's
not
a
lot
of
precedent
set.
You
know
across
the
state
that
would
justify
more
than
a
simple
majority.
Is
there
a
reason
that
Ithaca
should
be
different
like?
Is
there
a
reason
that
this
that's
my
question
for
proponents
or
for
Ian.
O
A
I
think
there
are
three
that
have
have
a
different.
O
President,
so
actually
Canandaigua
Newburgh
Rye
are
all
examples
and
and
I
doubt
that's
an
exhaustive
list,
but.
A
I
recall
there
being
three
I
hadn't
remembered,
exactly
which
ones
I
saw
Rob
gerhart's
hand
and
then
George's
hand.
B
I'm
really
just
a
question
for
Tiffany
I
guess:
I
mean
I,
I.
Think
you're
asking
not
only
about
this
particular
piece
of
of
the
conversation,
but
are
we
different
in
you
know
across
other
spectrums,
of
a
city
manager,
role,
I,
think
tonight,
setting
the
compensation
for
the
mayor
at
a
certain
rate
compared
to
our
city
manager,
sets
us
apart
from
a
lot
of
other
municipalities,
so
we
we
are
doing
some
things
differently.
B
We
have
a
city-wide
elected
mayor,
that's
quite
different
than
a
lot
of
other
municipalities
with
the
city
manager,
so
I
feel
like
in
some
ways
we
are
doing
things
differently
and
I
I,
don't
think
we
should
pick
and
choose
which
ones
we
do
different
I
think
we
should
accept
that.
There's
good
reasons
why
we
do
some
things
differently
and
good
reasons
why
we
might
choose
to
be
in
alignment
with
others,
so
just
to
make
that
point.
L
I
appreciate
it
if
Ari
repeated
some
of
the
advantages
of
having
a
majority
plus
one
or
more
than
a
simple
majority,.
D
Sure
yeah
glad
to
I
mean.
O
I
think
some
of
the
key
ones
are
Ian
just
touched
on
the
idea
that
it
is
probably
helpful
working
for
recruitment,
which
is
no
minor
issue
in
itself
addition,
and-
and
just
you
know,
State
the
obvious.
O
The
reason,
presumably
that
it's
helpful
for
recruitment,
is
that
a
candidate
considering
coming
into
what
has
the
potential
to
be
a
politically
fraught
political
situation,
maybe
more
comfortable
doing
that
if
they
know
that
the
you
know
the
first
political
win
to
blow
through
town
may
not
topple
them
over,
so
to
speak
right,
but
but
but
it
also
just
speaks
to
stability
of
the
and
again,
not
that
somebody's
earlier
this
evening,
more
eloquently
than
me
made
this
point,
but
it
speaks
to
civility
not
so
much
of
the
city
manager
per
se
as
the
long-term
trajectory
of
various
key.
O
You
know
projects
that
that
city
manager
is
working
on
so
I
think
that's
another
important
element
and.
I
H
Right,
yeah,
I'll,
just
I,
mean
I'll
reiterate
what
I
mentioned
as
my
rationale
for
supporting
simple
majority
for
appointment,
which
is
that
again,
I
think
we
need
to
be
able
to
get
a
simple
majority
of
common
Council
needs
to
be
able
to
get
on
the
same
page
as
a
city
manager
and,
if
not
I,
you
know,
I.
Don't
think
that
this
is
it's
it's
a
work.
It's
a
working
relationship
that
that
is
is
viable
and
especially
I.
H
Think
we
need
to
seriously
take
that
into
consideration
when
we
have
moved
Democratic
engagement
with
the
chief
executive
of
the
city
to
an
unelected
position
and,
and
so
I
really
stand
by
that
and
I.
Think.
H
A
further
point
is
that
you
know
I
think
we
need
to
bring
up
the
issue
of
like
Severance
is
like
there
is
a
you
know:
there's
a
a
nice
a
nice
deal
if
you
are,
if,
if
we
have
to
you,
know,
terminate
a
city
manager,
you
know
you
know
after
prior
to
like
a
certain
period
and
so
I
think
that's
a
good
incentive.
A
good
combination
of
having
that
with
a
simple
majority.
I
think
you
know
is
the
best
of
both
worlds
in
terms
of
preserving.
H
You
know
more,
you
know
having
more
of
I,
think
my
opinion,
Democratic
engagement
or
agency
over
the
city
manager
position
and
but
also
having
that
issue
of
stability
insured
with
a
city
manager,
because
again,
I
still
think
I'll
reiterate
that
I
think
we
need
to
approach
these.
H
You
know
things
in
these
approaches
with
good
faith
in
terms
of
we
we're
expecting
in
common
Council
to
want
to
work
with
the
city
manager
and
get
on
the
same
page
with
them,
and
we're
expecting
a
city
manager
to
want
to
get
on
the
same
page
and
work
with
common
Council
and
under
those
parameters
like
I.
Think
it's
very
reasonable.
To
expect
that
a
simple
majority
would
have
a
good
reason,
a
very
a
good
reason
for
wanting
to
remove
a
city
manager
should
they
feel
the
need
to.
P
I
appreciate
your
clarification,
Rob
I
guess
I
just
wanted
to
refine
my
question
a
little
bit,
and
this
is
to
everyone
you
mentioned
that
like
there
should
be
a
good
reason
if
there
is
a
good
reason
for
us
to
stray
from
from
you
know
so
radically
from
all
the
other
city
manager
models
in
the
state
I'm
just
wondering.
Is
there
anything
in
particular
to
the
concerns
of
you
know
the
the
rest
of
council?
P
I
P
Referring
well
don't
isn't
it
true
that
other
city
manager
models
generally
stick
to
a
simple
majority.
A
Excuse
me
one
at
a
time:
Rob
I.
B
Mean
absolutely
but
I
guess,
there's
so
many
variables
and
all
the
decisions
we're
making
across
the
entire
spectrum
of
especially
in
our
region
of
municipalities
that
have
a
city
manager
that
I
I,
don't
think
it's
there's,
there's
not
an
apple
to
Apple
comparison
from
one
municipality
to
another,
and
it
may
be
true
that
the
majority
of
them
have
a
simple
majority,
but
there's
a
lot
of
other
factors
in
there.
They
may
not
have
as
many
council
members
as
we
do,
they
may
not
have
as
many
they're
they're.
B
You
know
other
factors
like
budget
size
or
the
the
the
fact
that
they
have
a
city-wide
mayor
or
not
a
city-wide
mayor,
elected
mayor.
So
there's
a
lot
of
variables
that
I
think
can
can
impact
that,
and
so,
if
it
were
as
strict
of
Apple
to
Apple
comparison,
I
would
agree
with
you.
Then
I
think
we
should
be
looking
at.
You
know
why
most
go
that
direction,
but
there's
so
many
variables
here
that
I
I
have
a
harder
time
just
making
that
a
black
and
white
connection,
but
others
I'd
love
to
hear
from
others.
B
A
G
J
If
this
is
the
majority
of
the
the
governing
body,
what
kind
of
stability
will
I
have
when
a
city
manager,
first
and
foremost,
is
going
to
be
looking
at
the
the
future
of
the
city
over
a
long
term
and
making
some
sometimes
difficult
recommendations,
because
the
the
scope
of
of
your
timeline
is
different
right,
whether
or
not
what
are
we
going
to
do
about
our
our
dam
right?
This
is
going
to
be
very
expensive,
but
obviously
high
risk
is
going
to
cost
a
lot
of
money.
What
do
we
do
about
long-term
projects?
J
I
mean
this
was
actually
one
of
the
benefits
of
the
Board
of
Public
Works
was
the
Board
of
Public
Works,
looked
at
the
operations
of
the
city
outside
of
election
cycles
and
sometimes
you're
making
decisions
that
have
were
you
making
recommendations
that
have
really
significant
financial
impacts?
That
elected
officials
don't
want
to
be
that
person
that
raises
your
water
rates
and
raises
your
sewer
rates
and
raises
all
of
these
rates,
because
it
doesn't
work
well
from
a
political
standpoint,
so
I
I
think
I'm.
Just
saying
that
I
think
we
need
to
acknowledge
that
we
do.
J
We
are
different
I,
don't
know
how
many
little
Community
or
communities
you
have
in
Upstate,
New
York
were
fully
two-thirds
and
perhaps
even
more
if
Cornell
keeps
growing
are
under
the
age
of
25
are
going
to
make
up
your
your
Council
and
and
have
very
different
perspectives
and
priorities
versus
the
city
manager,
and
so
I.
I
completely
understand
that,
of
course,
with
that
comes
uncertainty,
you
know.
Is
this
a
bad
thing?
It
doesn't
necessarily
mean
it's
a
bad
thing.
J
A
Okay,
thank
you.
I
am
mindful
of
the
time
we
have
a
motion
on
the
table:
George's
motion
for
simple
majority,
plus
one
Rob
Gerhart
seconds-
that
let's
take
a
vote
on
that
motion.
All
those
in
favor
of
George's
motion.
A
O
D
A
Okay,
so
we
now
have
Robert's
Amendment
for
a
simple
majority
and
all
those
in
favor
of
simple
majority.
O
A
All
right,
what
is
council's
pleasure
continue
this
discussion.
Both
amendments
failed
or
to
leave
this
sit
for
the
moment
and
move
on.
G
M
M
Simple:
okay,
two
two
ways:
I
will
accept
simple
majority,
plus
one
with
the
inclusion
of
a
provision
that
the
executive
committee,
if
the
executive
committee
that
does
that
that
runs
the
review
process,
puts
forth
a
recommendation
to
council
that
there
be
termination
as
a
result
of
the
annual
review
process.
That
requires
a
simple
majority.
K
H
I
was
I.
Let
me
know
if
I'm,
if
I'm
getting
you
right,
Rob,
but
basically
what
we're
talking.
What
you're
talking
about
here
is
that
throughout
the
year,
if,
if
the
council
wants
to
remove
the
city
manager,
because
it's
Tuesday,
it
would
have
to
be
simple
majority,
plus
one
at
the
end
of
the
year
when,
during
the
review
period,
where
the
city
manager
is
assessed,
if
that
committee,
that
is
doing
that
assessment
recommends
termination,
the
vote
that
would
be
held
on
that
termination
would
be
simple
majority.
That's
what
Robert's
proposing.
A
Executive
committee,
as
it
has
been
defined
for
the
search
process,
is
the
chair
of
both
standing
committees.
O
O
Might
you
know
change
from
time
to
time
in
a
way
that
the
charter,
wouldn't
so
I,
would
not
rely
on
what
might
be
in
an
employment
agreement
in
terms
of
how
you
want
to
set
the
charter
thresholds,
which
are
a
pretty
fundamental
Bedrock
element,
so
I
I
in
short,
I,
wouldn't
rely
on
the
executive
committee
element
because
it's
not
something
that's
required
in
the
in
the
charter
language
to
begin
with,.
A
So
that
leaves
us
with
no
successful
motion
on
this.
So
back
to
my
question,
as
we
approach
five
of
ten
a
clock,
do
people
want
to
continue
this
particular
discussion
or
move
on
to
other
elements
in
this
document.
M
I
know
that's
what
we're
standing
at
with
this
particular
I'm.
Just
saying,
I
would
vote
the
whole
thing
down
in
that
case,
because
I
don't
support.
Two-Thirds
is
way
too
high.
A
O
O
If
that
is
what's
necessary,
it
doesn't
seem
to
me
that
the
ability
to
recruit
a
city
manager
and
go
through
that
process,
which
almost
surely
won't
be
final
before
the
October
council
meeting
anyway
in
terms
of
hired
somebody,
it
doesn't
seem
to
me
that
that
process
would
be
harmed
by
the
idea
that
most
of
this
is
in
pretty
good
Focus,
but
that
a
final
vote
on
it
might
take
until
October
council.
Do
you
see
that
differently,
Ian.
R
I,
don't,
although
there
was
a
you
know,
there's
a
couple
elements
in
this.
That
just
would
need
some
Clarity.
Certainly
when
you're
talking
about
a
recruitment
and
you're
talking
about
some
questions,
I
mean
I
want
to
say
we
haven't
gotten
to
it
yet.
But
there
was
a
question
of
like
appointments
and
things
like
that,
and
just
a
few,
a
few
things
that
we
would
want
complete,
Clarity
on
in
case
questions
come
as.
D
O
Yeah,
thank
you
and
I
just
note
to
that
point
that
we'll
both
have.
O
We
have
all
the
feedback,
we're
getting
from
Council
right
now
and
all
the
votes
you've
been
taking,
which
are
helpful
and
hopefully
that
we
can
continue
taking
depending
on
the
timing
here
and
the
rest
would
presumably
be
resolved
in
just
a
few
weeks
at
September,
6
Council,
thus
on
a
procedural
vote
level,
with
a
final
vote
after
aging
occurring
in
October,
but
you'd
be
able
to
have
a
pretty,
presumably
pretty
reliable
and
and
relatively
final
set
of
decisions
from
Council
as
of
September
6.
I
would
imagine
so
that
was
my
main
procedural
point.
A
We
may
as
well
take
that
vote
on
extending
the
meeting.
Now.
Would
someone
like
to
move
extending
the
meeting
Tiffany.
A
A
A
All
right
so
shall
we
then
what
is
council's
pleasure
move
on.
A
Poor
choice
of
word
ing:
do
we
want
to
look
at
other
elements
in
the
documents
so
that
we
can
begin
to
move
this
forward?
Other
Council
comments,
Jorge.
H
A
M
Only
suggestion
on
D1
is
the
city
manager
within
60
days
of
appointment
file
assigned
letter
with
city
clerk,
isn't
getting
any
appointed
officers
to
the
active
city
manager,
doing
temporary
absolute
disability
manager
subject
to
the
approval
of
council.
M
Unless
I
am
mistaken,
you
could
have
a
weird
Edge
case
where
this
person
could
appoint
an
acting
person
and
then
resign,
and
then
that
person
would
be
like
an
up
to
six
month.
Interim
acting
city
manager
and
I,
just
think
subject
to
the
approval
of
counsel
Smooths.
O
Yeah,
it's
I
would
argue
and
I
believe
it's
true,
a
pretty
standard
procedure
in
all
sorts
of
settings
to
have
somebody
who
is
waiting
as
the
default
acting
before
you
need
them,
and
meanwhile
I'll
also
note
that
Council
were
the
city
manager
to
appoint
someone
to
be
there,
acting
in
the
event
that
they
were
incapacitated
to
resign
whatever
it
might
be,
and
then
that
incapacitation
or
resignation
actually
came
along
suddenly,
quite
possibly
it's
not
like
Council
would
be
stuck
with
the
acting
for
you
know
you
just
said
up
to
six
months:
Council
would
be
stuck
with
them
for
no
longer
that
it
took
Council
to
hold
a
council
meeting
and
decide
on
somebody
else
to
be
acting,
and
if
I
understand
your
proposed
language
correctly,
it
sounds
like
you're
suggesting
somebody
can't
serve
in
an
acting
capacity
until
Council
convenes,
an
emergency
meeting
and
says.
O
Yes,
you
are
the
acting
one,
which
seems
like
a
liability
for
the
city.
M
I
was
with
you
for
the
first
part
of
that
no
I
I,
envisioned
it
very
much.
As
you
know,
January
5th
the
city
manager
says
like
oh
hey,
it's
the
Wednesday
council
meeting,
here's
my
person
I'm
designating,
and
then
they
would
be
the
approved
designee
in
the
event
of
an
emergency
right.
Not
that
there'd
be
an
emergency
meeting
could
be
just
the
council
approves
whoever
the
backup
person
is
yeah.
D
O
Well
I,
my
first
part
stands,
which
is
that
if
you
just
let
the
city
manager
pick,
somebody
be
their
acting,
it's
not
like
Council
gets
stuck
with
them
in
the
long
run,
but
I
do
see
your
point
that
there's
not
necessarily
a
problem.
If,
as
long
as
that,
Council
approval
occurs
in
advance
of
any
exigency.
M
My
like
somewhat
humorous
response
to
that.
It's
like
it's
pretty
hard
to
get
a
simple
majority,
so
you
know
you
wouldn't
like
it
might
be
hard.
It
might
be
more
difficult,
like
procedurally
I'm
with
you.
It
might
be
more
difficult
than
hypothetical
to
remove
the
debt,
the
unapproved
designee
and
the
sorry.
Yes,
it
might
be
harder
to
actually
remove
somebody
who
has
been
designated
without
Council
approval,
then
at
first
blush
the
charter
would
suggest.
M
Yes,
fourth
line
so
during
the
temporary
absence
for
sorry
d,
one
fourth
line
during
the
temporary
absence
or
disability
manager,
subject
to
the
approval
of
counsel.
M
I
J
J
So
right
now,
Rob's
proposal
is
the
designation
must
be
subject
to
the
approval
common
Council,
but
the
following
line
says
they
can
just
change
the
designation
at
any
time.
So.
J
I,
just
think
that
that
following
sentence
would
need
to
be
adjusted
to
capture
the
intent
that
Robert
is
going
for.
O
I
I
think
that's
true.
I
agree
with
you.
I
also
think
that
the
council
may
want
to
consider
the
benefits
that
come
with
some
degree
of
flexibility
in
the
in
terms
of
the
city
manager
adapting
to
new
circumstances
that
even
could
be
rapidly
evolving
under
some
circumstances,
without
having
to
return
to
a
council
meeting
that
more
often
than
not
is
once
a
month
and-
and-
and
you
know
we
just
talked
about-
sometimes
the
difficulty
of
getting
a
majority,
but
you
have
to
have
somebody
lined
up
to
be
acting.
O
What
if
you
have
trouble
getting
the
majority
to
approve
a
particular
person?
Also,
if
Council
views
that
as
a
rubber
stamp
and
provides
that
rubber
stamp
quickly
when
it
doesn't
seem
likely
that
somebody's
gonna
actually
have
to
take
over
in
an
acting
capacity?
O
That
person
may
be
less
carefully
vetted
that
way
than
they
would
have
been
if
the
city
manager
just
picked
them
and
then
Council
actually
evaluated
them
for
the
first
time
once
they
take
office.
So
just
just
some
thoughts,
but
I
agree
with
you.
If
you
want
to
go
in
that
direction,
you
do
need
to
remove
or
greatly
change
that
next
sentence.
R
No,
no
strong
thought
on
that
other
than
obviously
they're
an
appointed
officer
of
the
city.
So
you
know
there's
some
built-in
protection
in
place
and
it's
already
a
known
commodity.
But
I
do
understand
that
the
comment
and
the
thought
about
Council
actions.
A
A
J
So
I,
my
thinking
would
be
to
clean
this
up
a
little
bit.
I
do
support
per
the
approval
of
common
Council
and
for
flexibility,
then,
just
as
the
mayor
has
an
acting
May
or
in
a
second
acting
mayor,
Deputy
acting
mayor,
should
the
acting
mayor
not
be
able
to
serve.
That
might
be
that
second
back
up.
That
would
allow
the
removal
of
an
automatic
Amendment
at
any
time.
So
at
least
you
have
approval
of
an
acting
and
a
backup
that
both
goes
through
the
approval
of
government
Council.
A
A
You're
suggesting
two
backups
an
alternate
city
manager
and
then
an
acting
city
manager
and
an
alternate
parallel
with
what
is
currently
and
not
definite
that
it
will
be
the
case
in
the
future
mayor
acting
mayor
and
Alternate
acting
mayor,
okay,
thank
you.
M
Risk
of
alienating
everyone
with
repeated
suggestions-
well
here
all
I'll
just
say
is:
please
look
at
the
suggestion.
I
have
it's
a
large
paragraph,
I
took
from
another
city
the
suggestion
for
vacancies.
We
want
to
discuss
it
right
now,
but
just
charging
us
to
act,
I
think
somewhat
faster
and
appointing
in
the
event
that
there's
a
you
know:
death,
resignation
or
otherwise.
Appointing
someone
within
10
days
as
our
designee.
A
So
Robert
you've
provided
that
email
I've
been
in
meetings
for
Less
24
hours.
Do
you
want
to
read
where
you
would
make
an
edit
on
this.
A
Okay,
so
we
will
vote
then,
if,
if
everyone
has
the
time
to
review
what
Robert
has
provided
I
have
not
had
that
time.
Rob
Gearhart.
B
B
Well,
it
looks
like
the
current
language
is.
If
a
vacancy
occurs
in
the
office
of
city
manager
due
to
death,
resignation
or
otherwise,
the
common
Council
shall
immediately
commence
in
the
process
for
selecting
a
new
city
manager
and
what
you're
saying
is
you
just
want
to
give
it
a
definition
of
10
days.
M
Am
I
reading
that
right?
No,
so
so
the
language
there
is
basically
saying
like
we're
charging
ourselves
to
then
like
begin
the
full
search
process
and
then
the
next,
the
within
10
days
thing
is
like
providing
for
there
being
a
designee
in
the
interim
right
like
like
the
goal
being
like,
let's
find
like
as
soon
as
we
find
out
that
someone
God
forbid,
is
no
longer
in
the
office.
Let's
find
a
new
city
manager
immediately.
Let's
not
you
know.
M
O
So
maybe
I'm
missing
a
piece
here,
but
actually
I'm,
not
sure
how
that
differs
from
this
paragraph,
because
this
paragraph
says
two
things:
one
the
Atkins
city
manager
takes
over
once
the
city
manager
disappears,
and
the
other
is
that
Council
should
immediately
start
searching
for
a
new
city
manager.
Isn't
that
why
you
do
that?
Also.
M
Correct
yes,
with
with,
if,
if
we
choose
to
make
the
desert
the
the
acting
city
manager,
subject
Council
approval,
it
would
not
be
necessary
to
do
this
already
to
your
point.
It
would
largely
be
the
same
with
the
difference
in
my
reading
as
it's
currently
written
Council
could
remove
the
designate
put
in
their
own,
but,
like
I
personally,
am
reading
the
intent
of
the
acting
city
manager
as,
as
you
know,
hey
if
the
city
manager
is
on
vacation
or
they
are
like
unexpectedly
indisposable.
O
O
Course,
yeah
yeah
yeah.
So
again,
this
goes
back
to
my
point
earlier
and
and
I
I.
You
know
if
Council
wants
to
go
in
the
direction
of
a
council,
approved
acting
city
manager
designation
before
there's
an
exigency
fine
like
yes,
if
that's
the
process
Council
wants,
but
what
you're
speaking
to
in
paragraph
two
is
about
what
occurs
after
the
exigency
and
after
the
exigency.
You
want
somebody
waiting
there
to
immediately
become
the
city
manager
without
counsel
having
to
sort
through
who
that's
going
to
be
in
the
face
of
the
exigence.
M
A
D
O
You
know
I
guess
I
just
posed
a
question
that
for
Council
to
ask
yourselves
what
does
that
mean
within
10
days
to
commence
the
new
search
process?
Does
it
mean
you're
going
to
hold
an
emergency
meeting
if
you
have
an
acting
city
manager
that
you
trust
for
the
next
month
or
the
next
few
weeks
at
least
and
then
your
next
scheduled
meeting
is
until
then
I,
don't
know
what
exactly?
What
that
means,
but
immediately
to
me
means
next
time.
Council
is
able
to
actually
take
some
action.
I
should
do
so.
M
I
I
will
focus
my
energies
on
D1
here
it's
it's
a
little
bit
different
still
to
my
reading,
but
I
don't
want
to
take
more
more
time
on
this
at
the
moment.
Okay,.
A
There
was
some
suggestion:
Robert
you
had
suggested
and
I
think
Cynthia.
You
had
suggested
elimination
of
e.
Do
you
want
to
expand
on
that
Cynthia?
You
had
raised
it
first,
so
let
me
ask
you
and
then
I'll
turn
to
Robert.
J
J
I,
don't
think
that
this
is
appropriate
to
include
in
the
charter
itself.
I
know
that
some
options
had
been
offered
and
sort
of
to
codify
some
element
of
it
in
the
charter.
However
I
you
know
again,
I
I'm
very,
very
reluctant
to
in
any
way
contain
the
voice
of
council
members
who
might
have
strong
feelings
about
actions
for
individuals
who
might
be
in
under
the
supervision
of
the
city
manager.
A
J
You
my.
A
E
I'm
not
in
favor
of
removing
it
entirely,
but
I
think
the
language
has
to
be
modified
and
I
actually,
like
the
examples
that
duckson
sent
around
earlier
today.
I
think
it's
important
that
it's
explicit
in
the
charter
that
we
do
not
have
any
supervisory
authority
over
staff.
We
can't
tell
staff
what
to
do
and
I
think
that
protects
staff,
and
it
also
protects
us
when
members
of
the
public
ask
us
to
tell
staff
to
do
something.
We
have
to
be
able
to
say
no
according
to
the
Charter
I
can't
do
that.
E
So
I
am
in
favor
of
keeping
language
that
makes
clear
what
the
lines
of
communication
are
without
eliminating
by
making
clear
that.
Yes,
we
still
have
conversations
and
relationships
with
staff
people
so
again,
I
like
the
language
that
Jackson
sent
out
earlier
too.
A
Okay,
Cynthia.
J
I
can
imagine
scenarios
where
instances
happen
where
a
department
had
might
be
involved
in
something
where
the
public
feels
strongly
that
that
department
head
should
be
removed
and
to
have
Silence
from
council
members
and
just
to
respond.
Nope
I
can't
say
anything
again
to
the
language
offered
publicly
or
privately
in
terms
of
a
something
that
is
strong,
that
could
come
under
the
rubric
of
giving
orders
or
making
a
strong
recommendation
publicly
or
privately
I.
I
think
this
is
silencing
and
I.
J
Don't
know
that
our
public
would
understand
if
an
instance
were
to
happen
and,
and
all
members
of
council
are
silent
and
the
response
to
say
the
chartered
is
makes
it
so
that
I
cannot
speak
publicly
or
privately
about
an
individual
under
the
purview
of
the
city
manager,
so
I'm
just
talking
politically.
This
is
very
fraught
I,
entirely.
J
Imagine
a
situation
where,
where
this
would
be
problematic
and
I'm
very
uncomfortable,
setting
ourselves
up
into
a
situation
where
we
are
binding,
the
voices
of
elected
officials
to
speak
loudly
with
regards
to
someone
who
is
under
the
purview
of
the
city
manager.
B
But
I
I,
it
does
I
mean
the
this
particular
example
of
language.
That
duxton
shared
does
say
that
we
would
be
able
to
do
that
through
the
city
manager.
It's
not
that
it's
there's
no
opportunity
to
do
that.
B
B
K
J
Let's
just
read
it
out
just
because
nobody
else
has
seen
what
we're
talking
about,
except
for
the
purposes
of
inquiries
or
and
investigations.
The
council
or
its
members
shall
deal
with
the
city
officers
and
employees
who
are
subject
to
the
direction
of
supervision
of
the
manager
solely
through
the
manager,
and
neither
the
council
nor
its
members
shall
give
orders
to
any
such
officer
employee,
either
publicly
or
privately.
So
that
is
saying
to
the
public
I'm
speaking
to
the
manager
or
the
city
manager,
and
that
is
the
end
of
something
that
you
could
say
publicly.
B
J
Okay,
fine
I,
I
I
I
agree
that
we
should
not
be
giving
orders
to
staff
don't
and
and
I
don't
I
want
to
make
that
clear.
I'm
I'm,
not
confusing
that
I,
don't
think
anybody
should
be
saying
I'm
going
to
have
you
know:
superintendent,
Public,
Works,
clear
my
street
I
I
I'm,
not
confusing
it
with
that.
J
I
am
thinking
of
a
political
situation
where
the
public
may
call
for
the
removal
of
an
individual
and
I
don't
want
to
silence
in
any
way
council's
ability
to
make
a
public
statement
about
an
individual
under
the
purview
of
the
city
manager,
who
the
public
may
be
asking
demanding
for
some
kind
of
action
and
I'm
just
trying
to
retain
that
power
of
speech.
Now,
however,
we
do
that.
J
That's
what
I'm
looking
for
now
that
may
be
considered
interference
that
might
be
considered
directing,
because
it
would
be
a
public
statement
but
I'm
imagining
the
scenario
and
I
just
don't
want
to
bind
council's
hands
again.
This
is
why
I
think
this
should
go
back
into
rules
of
procedure
and
not
in
the
charter.
A
L
O
And
I
just
want
to
note,
because
it
may
inform
the
conversation,
although
most
of
you
probably
recall
this-
that
Council
rules
of
procedure
also
have
a
language
which
we've
had
for
many
years.
I
mean
Council
rules
of
procedure.
That's
pretty
closely
parallel
to
this,
so
this
is
not
rocket
science.
In
terms
of
a
new
approach
to
City
governance.
O
The
question
is
whether
it's
in
the
rules
of
procedure
or
the
charter,
unless
Council,
wants
to
fundamentally
change
direction
from
where
we've
been
for
many
years,
and
my
recommendation
is
that,
as
you
set
up
a
council
manager,
form
of
government
then
are
amending
the
charter
that
this
seems
like
a
piece
you
might
well
want
to
have
in
the
charter.
Yeah.
O
Will
want
to
have
in
the
charter
now,
whether
it's
the
existing
language
and
Council
rules
of
procedure
or
duckson's
version
or
potentially
the
version
that
you
just
pointed
to,
though
I
think
I
might
recommend
duxton's
version
or
the
existing
rules
of
procedure
version.
B
So
I'm,
looking
at
the
first
Clause,
so
the
exception,
that
is,
for
the
purpose
of
inquiry
and
investigation.
What
I'm
not
clear
on
is
whether
that's
an
exception
to
being
able
to
talk
to
the
manager
about
this
or,
if
it's
an
exception,
to
not
being
able
to
give
to
have
those
conversations
about
an
individual.
In
other
words,
if
what
we're
looking
at
is
an
exception
or
if
we're
looking
at
investigation
or
inquiry
that
would
allow
you
to
have
that
conversation
I.
Think
it's
a
little
unclear
to
me.
What
that
is
accepting.
J
A
J
A
H
Am
usually
up
at
this
time
because
of
my
job
but
I'll
just
say
that
I
think
for
me
it's
not
a
question
of
substance
of
what's
in
I
agree
with
Cynthia,
it's
not
a
question
of
substance.
For
me,
it's
like
placement.
I,
don't
believe
that
this
Clause
is
relevant
for
the
charter.
It
should
be
retained
to
the
rules
of
procedure.
A
That's
it
Ian
is
still
here
Ian.
Could
you
comment
on
such
a
clause
in
other
documents,
in
other
municipalities,.
R
Yeah
I
believe
I
mean
I,
understand
the
issue.
I
understand
not
wanting
to
be
muted
or
silenced.
I
think
certainly,
let
me
just
speak
very
briefly
to
the
purpose.
I
think
the
purpose
is
there,
for
you,
know
the
clarity
of
roles
and
responsibilities,
and
you
know
interfering
in
those
type
of
things
that
the
city
manager
is
responsible
for,
certainly
the
city
manager
could
you
know
make
available
if
he
or
she
wanted
to
moving
forward
some
sort
of
access
or
contact
or
whatever
with
the
council
members,
but
I
mean
I.
R
Think
so
that's
the
purpose
of
sort
of.
Maybe
why
it's
there?
It's
meant
to
prevent
Direction
and
influence
untoward
influence,
not
not
inquiry,
not
those
type
of
things,
but
I
do
understand
the
concern
about
being
silenced
or
muted.
So
really
it
just
becomes.
Where
does
it
belong?
R
I
believe
it
was
sourced
Ari
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
from
other
city
manager,
former
government
Charter,
so
it
is
in
existence
in
different
places,
I'm
sure,
as
we've
talked
about
many
times
tonight,
you
will
also
find
it
in
probably
rules
of
procedure
or
Rules
of
Order
and
not
the
charter,
so
that
certainly
probably
has
a
basis
for
being
included
there
as
well.
A
Thank
you,
Ian
I
know
that
Ari
stepped
out
for
a
moment.
We
do
have
a
motion.
A
Have
not
begun
on
that.
There
are
a
number
of
revisions
to
the
rule
of
procedure,
rules
of
procedure,
as
has
been
mentioned
earlier
by
a
number
of
people.
There
is
no
mention
of
city
manager,
and
the
authority
of
the
mayor
will
change
the
addition
of
a
city
manager.
So
we're
not
there
yet
but
good
point,
because
that
needs
to
be
addressed.
A
A
K
A
M
Would
just
make
a
a
humble
suggestion
that,
in
addition
to
I
mean
I
heard
everything
already
said
about
timeline,
I
would
be
happy
to
invite
for
the.
If
we
wanted
to
discuss
the
contract,
I
think
we
could
have
a
preliminary
discussion,
perhaps
at
CA,
and
then
also
discuss
it
at
our
next
regular
meeting.
Just
in
case
people
are
sensitive
to
the
time
it
takes
for
us
to
get
through
these
things.
I
just
wanted
to
throw
that
option
out
there
as
something
I'd
be
happy
to
put
on
the
agenda.
A
F
I
am
sitting
here
saying
to
myself
like
this
is
August
and
the
city
manager
should
be
in
place
by
January
and
I'm,
not
saying
that
that
what
we're
doing
is
not
the
right
thing
to
do.
Go
through
this
and
make
sure
but
I'm
just
a
little
nervous
about
having
a
city
manager.
A
Yeah
I
I
think
you
have
raised
this.
Others
have
raised
this
here.
We
are
in
mid-august,
I
will
point
out
or
Ari.
Maybe
you
can
reiterate
the
point
that
you
made
earlier
and
Ian
please
chime
in
on
this.
This
local
law
is
not
would
not
preclude
moving
forward
with
the
the
advertisement
and
getting
applications
for
the
position.
It
would
be
ideally
helpful
to
have
greater
Clarity
on
this,
but
it
would
not
preclude
moving
ahead
with
with
the
search
Ari
and
Ian.
Would
you
weigh
in
on
that.
O
Yeah
I'll
disagree
with
that
and
say
that
I
believe
you
could
frankly
get
all
the
way
through
the
interview
process
before
these
bills
are
finalized.
I
think
it's
it's
at
the
point
that
you're
like
making
an
offer
to
somebody
that
you
want
some
real
Clarity
on
the
rules
that
they're
going
to
find
themselves
considering
as
they
as
they
evaluate
that
off.
A
No,
we
have
not
that
that's
one
of
the
things
I
did
want
to
touch
upon
tonight,
and
that
is
the
process,
but
ducks
and
I
saw
you
nodding
in
agreement.
You
want
to
voice
that
I'll.
Q
Just
say
student,
thank
you,
Ian
for
being
here
this
whole
meeting.
So
if,
during
the
interview
process,
someone
has
like
a
very
detailed
question,
actually
he's
seen
all
our
nuanced
conversations,
we've
actually
settled
most
of
the
things
so
I
feel
pretty
good
about
this.
There
are
a
couple
outstanding
questions.
I
have
full
confidence
that
Ian
can
explain
to
a
candidate
who
is
also
paying
attention
exactly
what
we're
debating
and
so
I
think
we're
in
a
pretty
good
position.
R
Yeah,
so,
as
far
as
the
recruitment
plan,
I
mean
everything's,
basically
ready
to
roll
out.
The
brochure
has
been
developed
through
a
final
draft.
Obviously
I
understand
that
people
need
to
see
that,
but
the
recruitment
brochure
has
been
modified
to
a
final
draft
has
included
the
job
description
elements,
the
procedures.
Things
like
that
I
have
spoken
with
the
mayor
with
respect
to
the
search
committee.
R
I
understand
that
at
the
previous
meeting
the
salary
range
was
was
developed
so
and
agreed
upon
so
I
had
that
remaining
pieces,
and
basically
the
discussion
tonight
as
far
as
any
sort
of
other
things
that
might
have
come
up
for
clarity
for
confirmation.
What
have
you
so
everything's
ready
to
sort
of
Press
Play
I
have
already
done
some
kind
of
preliminary
outreaches
to
individuals,
and
actually
individuals
have
made
Outreach
to
me
as
well,
so
really
ready
to
sort
of
press
play
on.
R
A
Thanks
Ian
and
Ian
has
shared
with
Shelley
and
myself.
We've
reviewed
a
first
draft
of
the
recruitment
brochure
provided
input
to
Ian
Ian
has
incorporated
those
suggestions.
I
have
not
had
opportunity
yet,
but
I
will
tomorrow
review
that
next
draft
that
you've
provided
in
and
perhaps
at
that
point
we
may
want
to
share
that
recruitment
brochure
with
Council,
and
it's
good
to
hear
that
you
are
having
conversations
with
individuals
already
and.
R
Yeah,
so
just
let
me
know,
I
mean
it
now
is
the
time
I
can
certainly
just
share
that
really.
What
allows
to
the
sort
of
the
close
to
the
final
draft
recruitment
brochure
with
the
council
and
ask
for
inputs
and
a
timely
fashion
as
possible,
knowing
you'll
be
seeing
it
for
the
first
time
and
then,
when
we
have
consensus
on
those
edits,
if
there
are
any,
then
again,
I
call
it
press
play,
we
can
we
can
get
the
full
search
commenced.
A
O
So
Laura
has
a
very
brief
recap
if
I
may
I
just
want
to
basically
remind
Council,
based
on
this
meeting,
that
procedurally
speaking
I'll
be
laying
on
the
table
these.
The
mayor
and
council
salary,
local
law,
on
which
you
did
make
decisions
that
I
will
not
be
laying
on
the
table.
Obviously
the
city
manager,
local
law
that
you
were
just
debating
Wishful,
then,
is
it
Forward
on
its
own
time
frame.