* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [Call to Order] [00:00:07] WE WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TO ORDER. AT THIS TIME, WE WOULD ASK THAT EVERYONE PLEASE STAND FOR A SILENT PRAYER OR MEDITATION, AFTER WHICH THEN I WILL LEAD YOU IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. OKAY, READY? BEGIN. I PLEDGE, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. JOANNE, WILL YOU PLEASE DO THE ROLL CALL? COMMISSIONER BECERRA. HERE. COMMISSIONER, HANG HERE. COMMISSIONER LEWIS. HERE. COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ. HERE. CHAIR WILLIAMS. PRESENT, LET THE RECORD SHOWS ALL FIVE PLAN COMMISSIONERS ARE PRESENT. THANK YOU. THIS EVENING WE [APPROVAL OF MINUTES] HAVE OUR MINUTES FROM OUR REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 14TH, 2024. DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY CHANGES AT THIS TIME? OKAY, SEEING NONE, THE MINUTES ARE ADOPTED AS PRESENTED. WE'RE NOW REACHED [ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ] THE PART IN OUR MEETING WHERE WE ALLOW FOR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. I HAVE ONE CARD IF THAT GENTLEMAN WILL PLEASE COME FORWARD. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES? UH, YES. UH, GOOD EVENING. UH, I COME TO AN UNDERSTANDING THAT YOUR BUILDING AND SAFETY INSPECTOR HAS BEEN HARASSING AND INTIMIDATING A NEIGHBOR OF MINE HERE IN WEST COVINA FOR A FEW MONTHS, ACTUALLY GOING INTO A COUPLE OF YEARS. THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE, HE BROUGHT IT TO THE ATTENTION OF YOUR, UH, FAT CHINESE MAYOR, UM, WU. AND MR. WU WOULDN'T ADDRESS THE ISSUE THAT WHY WERE YOU ASKING THIS INDIVIDUAL PERSON HISPANIC, MEXICAN AMERICAN? WHO F*****G CARES WHAT HE IS? HE'S A MINORITY. HE HAS MORE THAN ONE CAR. THEY'RE ALL REGISTERED. THEY'RE IN HIS PROPERTY, NOT BLOCKING ANYONE'S ACCESS TO A SIDEWALK. AND SOME WHITE M**********R FROM BUILDING A SAFETY HAS THE NERVE AUDACITY TO GO THERE AND ASK HIM, NO, NOT ASK HIM. TELL HIM HE'S GONNA BE CITED FOR HAVING MULTIPLE VEHICLES THAT ARE REGISTERED TO BE REMOVED OFF HIS PROPERTY AND PLACED IN SOME TYPE OF GARAGE. NOW, WHOSE F*****G BUSINESS IS THAT OF, OF THIS COMMITTEE HERE? BECAUSE YOU NEED TO GO BACK AND, AND REVIEW SOME OF YOUR ORDINANCES ON THIS F*****G S**T OF HARASSMENT ON THIS ISSUE. BECAUSE WHEN HE CAME OUT OF THAT FEDERAL COURT WITH A SMILE ON HIS FACE TELLING ME THAT HE F*****G WON THIS CASE AGAINST WEST COVINA FOR HARASSMENT BY BUILDING AND SAFETY INSPECTORS, AND ESPECIALLY THE YOUNG PIECE OF S***S THAT GO TO HIS HOUSE AND KNOCK ON THE DOOR, AND THEY LEAVE A NOTE ON HIS DOOR AND RUN AWAY FROM HIM. WHAT THE FUCK'S THAT ALL ABOUT? I THOUGHT WE WERE ALL SUPPOSED TO BE ADULTS AND NEIGHBORLY AND LEARN TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY BY SAYING, HEY, WHITE M**********R, COME BACK HERE. I WANNA KNOW WHAT THIS LETTER'S ABOUT. WELL, HE KNEW WHAT IT WAS ABOUT. IT WAS ABOUT SOME RACIAL F*****G MINORITY S**T THAT YOU AS INDIVIDUALS, AND FOR ALL I KNOW, MS. BE THERE, UNDERSTANDS THAT A F*****G W*****K HAS AS MUCH RIGHTS AS A N****R LIKE ME TO COMMUNICATE WITH PEOPLE ABOUT WHY WE'RE BEING HARASSED AND INTIMIDATED. CHAIR, I I JUST WANNA SAY, I DON'T WANNA TAKE AWAY, I DON'T WANNA TAKE AWAY FROM HIS TIME. YEAH, BUT YOU, I HAVE THE FORCE, SIR. AND THE TIME IS RUNNING. THERE'S A POLICY ON YOUTUBE WHERE YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO USE PROFANITY. I DIDN'T FINISH. WELL. WELL, SO THE REASON WHY, THE REASON WHY I'M SPEAKING LIKE A WHITE N****R IS BECAUSE I HAVE A RIGHT TO SPEAK. LIKE ONE, I HAVE EVERY MOTHER F*****G RIGHT TO SPEAK WHAT'S ON MY MIND AND NOT BE A F*****G HYPOCRITE TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT. MR. GUTIERREZ, WHOEVER THE F**K YOU ARE, BECAUSE I KNOW UNDER 42 SC 1983 AND UNDER OTHER CONDITIONS OF LAW, ESPECIALLY LIKE, 'CAUSE I KEEP EMPHASIZING N****R LIKE ME TOO, [00:05:01] WHICH COMES FROM BRANDON BURG VERSUS OHIO, US 3 95 4 4 4 19 69, IN WHICH A KK CLAN WAS SPEAKING TO A REPORTER ABOUT THE BUSINESS OF THE CLAN. AND BECAUSE SOME RACIST M***********S DECIDE TO PUNISH HIM FOR WORDS, SPEAKING OUT AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT, YOU DECIDE TO ARREST HIM, PUT HIM IN JAIL. 'CAUSE AS YOU SEE, YOU HAVE ONE OFFICER BACK THERE. AND IF I'M SAYING SOMETHING SO OFFENSIVE, SO THREATENING, WHY ISN'T THAT OFFICER UP ON MY ASS LIKE SOME WHITE N****R WITH A GUN TO MY HEAD SAYING, HEY, M**********R, DON'T BE USING THAT LANGUAGE. BUT WHEN YOUR OFFICERS APPROACH PEOPLE THAT IF THEY FEEL BLACK OR BROWN, STAND BACK, GET BACK. NO, YOU DON'T SPEAK THAT WAY. THEY GO, HEY, M**********R, I TOLD YOU, GET YOUR ASS TO THE GROUND NOW. PUT HIM ON THE GROUND WITH A KNEE ON HIS NECK. AND WHAT HAPPENS TO THE POOR PERSON? EITHER GET INJURED OR DIE. SO THE REASON WHY I SPEAK THE WAY I SPEAK IS BECAUSE A WHITE N****R AND A BROWN N****R AND SOME F*****G A*****E, JUDGE BY THE NAME OF GARY C ETO FROM CARSON, ALLOWED ME TO BE HEARD IN COURT WHEN I TOLD HIM, YEAH, THOSE FOUR F*****G B*****S ACCUSED ME OF AN, OF ALLEGEDLY SENDING SOME BAD INFORMATION THROUGH THE WEBSITE, WHICH ISN'T TRUE. SO IF I CAN'T SAY WHAT SOMEONE ACCUSED ME OF SAYING, THEN I'M NOT AMERICAN. NOW, IF I COULD SPEAK LIKE AN AMERICAN AND HOLD BACK THE PROFANITY, THEN WHAT? THAT, THAT MAKES ME EDUCATED PROFESSIONAL. NO, IT DOES NOT. THAT'S THE REASON WHY THIS WORLD IS SO F****D UP. SIMPLIFY, FAGGOTS, WALKING AROUND HERE, WAVING A FLAG, TRYING TO, TRYING TO BE WHAT YOU'RE NOT. GOD HATES FAGGOTS. GOD WILL ALWAYS HATE YOU IF YOU ARE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT GOD, YOUR F****D UP BIBLE SAYS. 'CAUSE EACH TIME I COME TO THESE MEETINGS, YOU HAVE SOME F*****G A*****E UP HERE FROM SOME CHURCH GIVING PRAYER, THAT'S GREAT. BUT KEEP YOUR PRAYER TO YOURSELF. THIS IS A F*****G MEETING. THIS IS A F*****G PLACE WHERE LIVE PEOPLE SPEAK BECAUSE THEY'RE TIRED OF THE NONSENSE AND B******T OF INTERRUPTIONS. THANK YOU. MOVING RIGHT ALONG. I SEE THAT TONIGHT WE HAVE NO PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS AT THIS TIME. JOANNE, [2. PLANNING COMMISSION EMAIL ACCOUNTS] WILL YOU PLEASE, UM, PRESENT THE FIRST NON-HEARING ITEM? GOOD EVENING, HONORABLE CHAIR WILLIAMS, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS THE, UM, PLANNING COMMISSION EMAILS ACCOUNT. WE HAVE THE IT DIVISION MANAGER HERE. UM, WILL, HE WILL BE GOING OVER THE, THE INFORMATION REGARDING THE EMAIL ACCOUNTS. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS BOOK CHAIR. UH, MY NAME'S WIL TRUJILLO. I'M THE IT MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF WEST COVINA. IN YOUR AGENDA PACKET, YOU HAVE THE COMPUTER SYSTEM USE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY, UH, FOR YOUR REVIEW. UM, THE CITY'S COMPUTER SYSTEM USE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY DEFINES THE RULES AND GUIDELINES FOR USING CITY-OWNED COMPUTERS AND RESOURCES SUCH AS EMAIL, INTERNET, SOFTWARE, AND SYSTEMS. THIS POLICY APPLIES TO ALL CITY EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS, INTERNS, AND ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS WHO USE THE CITY'S NETWORK DEVICES AND TECHNOLOGY. THE POLICY AIMS TO PROTECT BOTH CITY ASSETS AND THE PRIVACY OF THE EMPLOYEES. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE OUT, UH, THE, THE POLICY IS ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT OUTDATED, BUT, UH, REST ASSURED THAT IT'S CURRENTLY BEING UPDATED THROUGH ITS PROPER PROCESS AND CHAIN OF COMMAND. UM, THIS IS WHY YOU HAVE THE COMPUTER SYSTEM USE POLICY RECEIPT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, WHICH IS THE SHEET HERE. UM, THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT PRETTY MUCH ACKNOWLEDGES THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THE COMPUTER SYSTEM USE ADMINISTRATION POLICY, AND STATES THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY MAY UPDATE THE POLICY AT ANY TIME. SIGNING THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT WILL ENABLE YOU TO RECEIVE A CITY ASSIGNED EMAIL ACCOUNT@WESTCOVINA.ORG. UM, TO DO EVERYDAY CITY BUSINESS WITH YOU WILL BE ABLE TO ACCESS YOUR EMAIL VIA THE INTERNET THROUGH A BROWSER OF YOUR CHOICE. UH, ONCE IT'S ACKNOWLEDGED IS SIGNED AND PROVIDED TO YOUR REPORTING DIRECTOR, THE EMAIL ACCOUNT WILL BE CREATED AND PROVIDED TO YOUR DIRECTOR'S, UH, DISSEMINATION SO THAT SHE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH THE CREDENTIALS, [00:10:01] UH, NEEDED TO LOG INTO YOUR ACCOUNT. ADDITIONALLY, WITH YOUR NEW EMAIL ADDRESS AND CREDENTIALS, YOU'LL RECEIVE A HOW TO LOG INTO YOUR CDSI EMAIL ACCOUNT WALKTHROUGH DOCUMENT, AND IT'LL PRETTY MUCH GIVE YOU DIRECTIONS ON HOW TO LOG IN FROM WHATEVER WEBSITE YOU'RE YOU'RE USING. UM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE CITY ASSIGNED EMAIL ACCOUNTS. IS IT A CASE THAT WE'LL NEED TO CHANGE OUR PASSWORD EVERY, IS IT 90 DAYS OR CORRECT. SO IT'S EVERY 90 DAYS, AS YOU SAID. MM-HMM. . AND THAT'S FOR SECURITY PURPOSES. SO IT'LL JUST ASK YOU TO, UM, PUT IN YOUR NEW, UH, PASSWORD THAT YOU WANT, AND IT PRETTY MUCH UPDATES IT. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DID ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION. THE POLICY STATES THAT EMPLOYEES ARE TO DELETE ALL ELECTRONIC MESSAGES, INCLUDING THOSE THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE RETAINED SO LONG AS A PROCEDURE FOR RETAINING A COPY OF THAT MESSAGE OR FOLLOWED IS SET FORTH ABOVE, UH, AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK, INCLUDING MESSAGES IN THE SENT MAIL FOLDER. YEAH. LIKE WHAT DOES THAT, LIKE I MENTIONED PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IT'S, THIS IS A POLICY THAT WAS CREATED IN ABOUT, I THINK, 2000. SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT, UH, THE PROCESS WAS BEFORE. OBVIOUSLY TECHNOLOGY IS, IS WAY MORE ADVANCED NOW, SO YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE TO DO THAT ANYMORE. OKAY. SO THEY WANTED YOU TO PRINT OUT AND KEEP A COPY AND THEN DELETE IT. OKAY. , I GUESS THE PROCESS BEFORE. OKAY. SO WHAT IS THE PROCESS NOW? IT DOESN'T MATTER. IT'S GONNA BE RETAINED REGARDLESS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THAT'S GOOD, . I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT. I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS A LITTLE STRANGE. RIGHT. I'VE NEVER SEEN A POLICY THAT SAYS, UH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO DELETE ALL ELECTRONIC MESSAGES EVERY WEEK. RIGHT. AND I THINK IT WAS FOR STORAGE, STORAGE PURPOSES. OKAY. THAT'S, AND THAT'S NO LONGER AN ISSUE. NO, NOT AT ALL. IT'S ALL CLOUD-BASED. NO. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. PERFECT. THAT'S ALL I HAD. ANYONE ELSE? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THIS IS JUST TO RECEIVE IN FILE. OH, OKAY. MOVING [3. STUDY SESSION - PLANNING COMMISSION STANDING MEETING RULES] ON. ITEM NUMBER TWO, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A STUDY SESSION. UM, JOANNE, WILL YOU BE PRESENTING THE SECOND ITEM? YES. AND I THINK IT'S A RECORD TODAY. WE DON'T HAVE THIS. I THINK THIS IS THE ONLY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IN A LONG TIME WHERE WE DON'T HAVE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION , BUT WE'LL JUST DO VERBAL. OKAY. UM, SO THIS IS REGARDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION STANDING MEETING RULES. IT'S VITAL, UM, TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES AND RULES IN CONDUCTING MEETINGS IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT MEETINGS ARE PRODUCTIVE, ALLOW ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TO BE HEARD, AND ALLOWS DECISION MAKING, THE DECISION MAKING BODY TO RENDER VERY CLEAR DECISIONS WITHOUT ANY CONFUSION. THE LAST TIME THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED THE STANDING RULES WAS IN 2013. UM, IT WAS FIRST ADOPTED IN 1995 AND THEN REVISED IN OH THREE AND LAST REVIEWED IN 2013. SO IT'S BEEN OVER 10 YEARS SINCE THIS, SINCE THIS BODY HAS LAST REVIEWED THE STANDING RULES. SO IT'S BEEN LONG OVERDUE. UM, ONE OF THE ITEM, ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING BE CHANGED IS THE SEC THE RULES PERTAINING TO THE SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSION. THE CURRENT RULE STATES THAT THE SECRETARY IS THE PLANNING, THE PLANNING DIRECTOR, SINCE PLANNING IS NO LONGER ITS OWN DEPARTMENT, THERE IS, THERE HASN'T BEEN A PLANNING DIRECTOR IN A LONG TIME. SO IT'S PROPOSED THAT IT BE CHANGED TO COMMITTEE DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, DEPUTY COMMITTEE, DEV DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, OR DESIGNEE. UM, SINCE THE CURRENT RULES DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY LEEWAY ON, ON THE DESIGNEE, IT'S IMPORTANT TO ALLOW FOR THAT FLEXIBILITY IN CASE, UM, THE, THE DIRECTOR OR DEPUTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR IS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING. UM, ANOTHER ITEM THAT, THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE CHANGED IS TO UPDATE, TO UPDATE THE, THE RULES, UM, AS IT APPLIES TO THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. SINCE THE ROBERT, THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER IS CONSTANTLY CHANGING, UM, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE RULES ALSO BE UPDATED, UM, TO [00:15:01] REFLECT ANY CHANGES FROM THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER. UH, IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS ANY QUESTIONS, STAFF AND THE CITY ATTORNEY IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANSWER. DO ANY OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE RULE CHANGES? I, I HAD ONE QUESTION JUST PERTAINING TO, UH, KEEPING US APPRISED OF ANY UPDATES ON, UH, ROBERT'S RULES. UM, I, I'LL, I'LL SAY THIS. UM, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY UPDATES COME TO ME IN, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE 10 YEARS OR SO. UM, SO I WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO SEE, UH, AN UPDATE PROVIDED, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST TO ME, BUT EVERY COMMISSIONER WHO SERVES IN THE CITY AND PROBABLY TO THE COUNCIL TO SOME DEGREE. UH, THAT WAY WE CAN ALL STAY UPDATED ON THAT. UM, THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY SORT OF ASIDE REQUEST. SO IN THE LAST 10 YEARS THAT IT HASN'T, THESE RULES HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED. UM, SO WE'RE CURRENTLY ON THE 12TH EDITION OF THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER. SO OKAY. WHEN THEY REPUBLISH NEW ADDITIONS AND TWEAK A FEW OF THE RULES, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND UPDATE AS WE GO ALONG. UM, STAFF ALSO PLANS ON, UM, UPON SPEAKING TO THE DEPUTY STATE ATTORNEY STAFF ALSO PLANS ON BRINGING THE PLANNING COMMISSION STANDING MEETINGS RULES, UM, ANNUALLY TO THE, UM, PLANNING COMMISSION AFTER, AFTER THE ROTATION, JUST AS A REFRESHER. AND ALSO TO DISCUSS ANY CHANGES IF ANY CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL NOW, UM, ASK IF THERE ARE ANY COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO REPORT ON ANY, OR MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON ANY ITEMS. CHAIR, SORRY. UM, FOR MAY I SPEAK? NO, FOR, FOR THIS PARTICULAR, FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, IF, IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD, UM, WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN, IN THE DOCUMENT, UM, JUST TO LET STAFF KNOW. AND THEN SINCE THIS WAS INITIALLY ADOPTED THROUGH RESO, AT THE NEXT, AT THE NEXT MEETING, WE WOULD BRING IT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FORMAL ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION IN CONSENT. I THINK WE GOT THAT. THANK YOU. DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT OR ANY MATTERS TO DISCUSS? I WAS JUST GONNA COMMENT ON ONE THING GOING BACK TO THE STUDY SESSION ITEM. MM-HMM, . UM, IF, IF WE CAN, UM, ON THE PRIVILEGE OF CLOSING DEBATE PORTION, UH, THAT'S SET FORTH, AND I BELIEVE IT'S ITEM 10. UM, IT STATES THE COMMISSIONER MAKING OR THE COMMISSION MEMBER MAKING THE MOTION SHALL HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF CLOSING DEBATE BY CALLING FOR A VOTE ON THE MOTION. UM, AND ONCE THE ROLL CALL VOTE HAS COMMENCED, IT SHALL CONTINUE WITHOUT IN INTERRUPTION UNTIL COMPLETED. UH, MY QUESTION THERE IS, UH, WITH REGARD TO THE PRIVILEGE OF CLOSING THE DEBATE, HOW, HOW IS THAT, HOW IS THAT TO BE EFFECTUATED? IF THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND, AT THAT POINT IN TIME, THE MEMBER MAKING THE MOTION SAYS, WE NEED TO VOTE NOW, OR , HOW, HOW IS IT THAT STAFF WANTS US TO ADDRESS THAT? I WILL HAPPILY ADDRESS THAT UNDER THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, THE BUSINESS OF THIS COMMISSION COMES BEFORE THE COMMISSION BY WAY OF MOTION. SO UNDER ROBERT'S RULES, A MOTION IS MADE TO OPEN UP THE ITEM FOR DISCUSSION. SO THERE IS A MOTION THAT BEGINS THE DISCUSSION, AND THE PERSON WHO MAKES THAT MOTION HAS THE PRIVILEGE OF CLOSING DEBATE. AND THE WAY TO DO THAT UNDER ROBERT'S RULES IS TO CALL FOR A VOTE. SO IT'S THE MOTION DISCUSSION, AND EACH MEMBER CAN SPEAK ONCE BEFORE ANOTHER PERSON CAN SPEAK AGAIN FOR A SECOND TIME. UM, AND ONCE THE, UH, MOTION FOR A VOTE IS MADE, THE VOTE GOES THROUGH TO COMPLETION. AND THIS IS A, A OPERATIONAL DIFFERENCE OF PARLIAMENT, WHICH IS GENERALLY HUNDREDS OF PERSONS INVOLVED VERSUS A SMALL LOCAL BODY SUCH AS THIS. AND ESPECIALLY UNDER CALIFORNIA, WHERE DURING COVID, THERE WERE SEVERAL EXECUTIVE ORDERS THAT CAME OUT THAT CHANGED HOW, UM, VOTES [00:20:01] WERE TAKEN, HOW ATTENDANCE WAS, WAS, YOU KNOW, HOW THE MEETINGS WERE CONDUCTED. UM, AND THAT HAS BECOME PART OF THE PERMANENT BROWN ACT. SO BROWN ACT, UM, ALLOWS FOR ROLL CALL VOTES, AND THAT TAKES A LITTLE BIT LONGER THAN WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY CONTEMPLATED UNDER THE ROBERTS RULES. SO IF YOU DO WATCH PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE IN LARGE BODIES, IT IS A VERBAL VOTE, AND IT IS A VOICE OF ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AND THEN YOU HAVE ALL THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN FAVOR SAY, AYE, THOSE OPPOSED SAY NO ALL AT ONCE. AND THEN THOSE ABSTAINING ABSTAIN ALL AT ONCE. SO WHAT HAPPENS IS IT'S USUALLY A THREE SECOND PROCESS MAYBE. AND WHAT, WHAT CHANGED IS HOW IT OPERATES IN CALIFORNIA WITH SMALLER BODIES. UM, UNDER THE BROWN ACT AND SPEC SPECIFICALLY, THIS CHANGE CAME ABOUT IN LITTLE STEPS WITH EXECUTIVE ORDERS THAT NOW ARE PART OF THE ACTUAL BROWN ACT, UM, WITH THE ROLL CALL VOTING. SO ONCE IN THEORY, IN IN THE ACTUAL PRACTICE OF PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE, IT WOULD HAPPEN VERY QUICKLY ONCE A A VOTE IS, UM, REQUESTED, IT IS TAKEN AND IT IS TAKEN AT THAT MOMENT. SO IT'S USUALLY A VERY, VERY QUICK PROCESS. SO THERE IS VERY LITTLE ROOM FOR ANYTHING TO GET INTERRUPTED. SO TO PRESERVE THAT ESSENCE OF THE PROCESS WITH THE ROBERT'S RULES, AND THAT HAS BEEN CONSISTENT WITH ROBERT'S RULES. WE'RE KIND OF GOING BACK TO THE BASICS OF ROBERT'S RULES HERE AND TRYING TO STICK WITH WHAT IS IN THE ROBERTS RULES AND FUNCTIONALLY CREATE THESE, THIS PARALLEL OF HOW IT WORKS IN LARGE BODY PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE. SO JUST TO CLARIFY, WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO ROLL CALL VOTES UNDER THE BROWN ACT CURRENTLY, AS IT, AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS, NO LONGER IS IT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED NAY TO THE EXTENT THAT EVERYTHING WAS CHANGED DURING COVID FOR TELECONFERENCING AND TO ACCOMMODATE THAT, THERE IS ROLL CALL VOTING. YES. I JUST, I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT I DON'T THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT CHANGED, THAT DID CHANGE, AND NOW IT IS ACTUALLY EMBODIED IN THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE. SO TO THE EXTENT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME BODIES WITHIN CALIFORNIA THAT STILL MEET IN PERSON, NO BROADCAST, NO ZOOM, NO FACEBOOK, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST LIVE IN PERSON. AND IN THOSE SITUATIONS, I THINK, UM, THERE IS A LITTLE BIT SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE TELECONFERENCING SECTION DOES NOT APPLY IF IT IS NOT DONE BY TELECONFERENCE. BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE IS ABILITY FOR AN ONLINE VIDEO FORUM OR A CALL IN FORUM, UM, THINGS LIKE THAT, THERE ARE DIFFERENT RULES THAT WOULD APPLY FOR MEETINGS THAT WILL USE THAT TECHNOLOGY. SO, YES. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. I HAVE A QUESTION. GO AHEAD. AND THEN, UH, WHEN IT SAYS, IT SHALL CONTINUE WITHOUT INTERRUPTION UNTIL COMPLETED, UH, AND WHAT HAPPENS IF, UH, WHAT HAPPENS IF A COMMISSIONER WANTS TO MAKE A THEIR OWN MOTION ON TOP OF THE MOTION THAT'S ALREADY BEING HEARD? IF THERE IS A VOTE ONGOING, THE MOTION WOULD HAVE TO HOLD UNTIL THE VOTE IS DONE AND WHAT THE OUTCOME OF THAT VOTE IS FINALIZED. AND ONCE THE RESULT IS KNOWN, THEN IF THAT MOTION FAILS, THERE CAN BE ANOTHER MOTION. UM, IF IT PASSES, IT JUST PASSES. SO WHAT IF A PRESENT MOTION THAT IS BEING VOTED ON, IT DOESN'T INTERRUPT? SO YOU NEED TO KNOW THAT OUTCOME OF THAT BEFORE THERE WOULD BE A, A DIFFERENT MOTION MADE. A MAIN MOTION. UM, SO THAT MOTION SHOULD BE MADE BEFORE THE ROLL CALL? CORRECT. IF THERE IS A SUBSTITUTE OR MODIFYING MOTION, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THERE IS A, THE MAIN MOTION WOULD BE, FOR EXAMPLE, TO PASS A RESOLUTION, YOU KNOW, UM, TO APPROVE SOMETHING LIKE A COP, THEN THAT WOULD BE THE MAIN MOTION. IF YOU HAVE A, AN, AN AMENDED MOTION, A SUBSIDIARY MOTION, THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE BEFORE THE VOTING BEGINS SO THAT IT CAN BE DEBATED AND THERE CAN BE ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. BUT ONCE IT IS CALLED FOR VOTE, THE THE PERSON WHO CALLS FOR THE VOTE HAS THAT ABILITY TO TERMINATE THE DISCUSSION. SO THAT'S, THAT'S HOW WE'RE GOING BACK TO ROBERT'S RULES AND GOING BACK TO THE BASICS, SORT OF. YEAH. GREAT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, SO WE CALL MOTION, AFTER THE MOTION THERE WILL BE DISCUSSION, AND THEN AFTER DISCUSSION WOULD BE THE VOTING, THE, THERE WOULD BE A MOTION TO CALL FOR VOTE. SO THE ACTUAL VOTE HAPPENS UPON A MOTION. AND SO IF THERE IS DISCUSSION AND THE PERSON WHO MAKES THE MOTION HAS THE PRIVILEGE, AND THAT IS THE PRIVILEGE OF THE PERSON MAKING THE MOTION TO END THE DISCUSSION AND REQUEST THE VOTE AT THAT TIME. SO WHEN DOES THE DISCUSSION HAPPENS AFTER A MOTION IS MADE TO OPEN THE ITEM FOR DISCUSSION? DISCUSSION? MM-HMM, . SO YOU'RE BEING, IS THIS ON HERE? LIKE ALL THOSE SPECIFICS? NO, THE THE, YOU'RE BEING SPECIFIC ABOUT THIS, BUT YOU'RE NOT BEING SPECIFIC ABOUT OTHER STUFF ON THE RUSE. SO, UM, THE REASON WHY THAT IS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IS BECAUSE IT IS A CALIFORNIA [00:25:01] VERY SPECIFIC THING TO ACCOMMODATE THE BROWN ACT AND THE GOVERNMENT CODE THAT SPECIFICALLY OPERATES FOR THE ROLL CALL VOTING WITHIN CALIFORNIA. AND SO UNDER ROBERT'S RULES, IT IS APPLIED IN VERY MANY DIFFERENT BODIES, EVEN INTERNATIONALLY. SO THE CALIFORNIA BROWN ACT WOULD NOT APPLY TO THEM. SO THIS IS A SPECIFIC WAY FOR US TO ADDRESS THE BROWN ACT REQUIREMENTS AND STILL ADHERE TO THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER. ISN'T IT SIMILAR TO WHAT WE WERE DOING? I MEAN, WE STAFF WOULD READ THE REPORT AND THEN CHAIRPERSON WOULD OPEN UP FOR DISCUSSION, AND THEN WOULD A MOTION WOULD BE MADE, ISN'T IT SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DO ALREADY? IT IS SIMILAR, BUT IT DOESN'T ADHERE TO THE ROBERT'S RULES AND I DON'T KNOW. AND IF, IF IT IS THE WILL OF THIS COMMISSION TO SPECIFICALLY WRITE IN AN OVERRIDING RULE THAT SAYS, UM, THE CHAIR HAS THE ABILITY TO OPEN UP AN ITEM FOR DISCUSSION BYPASSING THE ROBERT'S RULES, THAT'S OKAY. BUT THE DEFAULT IS ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. SO IF THERE IS A DESIRE BY THIS COMMISSION TO SPECIFICALLY CARVE OUT THAT RULE AND SAY THAT OPENING THE DISCUSSION CAN BE EITHER BY MOTION OR BY THE CHAIR OPENING UP THE ITEM FOR DISCUSSION, THAT CAN BE ADAPTED. BUT AGAIN, THE ROBERTS RULES DEFAULTS TO AN ITEM IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION AND DEBATE THROUGH A MOTION. JUST TO SORT OF CLARIFY, MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE CAN, CAN UNDERSTAND IN THE CONTEXT OF, YOU KNOW, UNDERSTANDING WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE US SENATE EFFECTIVELY, WHAT EFFECTIVELY WHAT CALLING, UH, CALLING FOR THE ROLL CALL VOTE IS GOING TO BE, IS EFFECTIVELY THE EQUIVALENT OF A MOTION FOR CLOTURE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE IN THE SENATE WHERE YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE 60 VOTES IN ORDER TO MOVE ON TO A VOTE ON THE SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE. SO EFFECTIVELY THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THIS, UH, THAT'S WHAT THIS JUST CONFIRMS, WHICH IS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE UNDER THE, UNDER THE CURRENT ITERATION OF THE ROBERT'S RULES, CORRECT? CORRECT. UNDER ROBERT'S RULES, THE MOTION TO CALL A VOTE IS ESSENTIALLY THE CLOSE OF THE DEBATE. SO THAT IS THE PRIVILEGE OF THE PERSON MAKING THAT MOTION. SO, UM, AGAIN, IN, IN OPERATION WITH LARGER BODIES SUCH AS SENATE AND A ASSEMBLY AND CONGRESS, YOU KNOW, IT IS A MUCH QUICKER PROCESS BECAUSE IT IS A VERBAL VOTE AND IT'S A LARGE BODY. SO THEY HAVE THIS A MORE GENERAL RULE, AND THEN WE ARE ADAPTING IT TO THE SMALL LOCAL BODY, AND THIS SPECIFICALLY A FIVE MEMBER COMMISSION, BUT ALSO ADHERING TO THE BROWN ACT. SO THERE'S ALL THESE LITTLE NUANCES. WE'RE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH MULTIPLE LAWS AT THE SAME TIME, BUT ALSO RULES FOR THE, BUT NOT FOR ME. , ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? UM, I'LL JUST, I MEAN, IS THERE A WAY TO INTEGRATE SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE LAW FOR THE ROBBERY RULES OF ORDERS INTO THIS DESCRIPTION? BECAUSE IT, IT, IT, BECAUSE I JUST LOOKED UP, BRO. I MEAN, I JUST LOOKED UP SPECIFICALLY THE VOTING PART OF ROBBERY RULES OF ORDERS, AND IT'S, I THINK OTHER CITIES HAVE IT WRITTEN DIFFERENTLY AND HOW IT'S, UH, WRITTEN. IF THIS BODY WAS, THIS IS, THIS IS MORE SP SPECIFIC, RIGHT? AND THIS IS TO JUST MIMIC THE PROCESS THAT HAPPENS IN, UM, THE LARGER BODY USING THE SAME ROBERTS RULES OF PARLIAMENTARY ORDER AND EQUATING THAT VERBAL VOTE TO WHAT THE BODIES IN CALIFORNIA USE UNDER BROWN ACT, WHICH IS THE ROLL CALL VOTE. SO ONCE THE VOTING HAS BEGUN IN SENATE OR CONGRESS, UM, OR ASSEMBLY, IT IS A VERBAL VOTE, AND IT'S GENERALLY VERY QUICK. AND IT IS, YOU KNOW, THE YAYS, THE NOS AND THE ABSTENTIONS GO VERY, VERY QUICKLY. AND, UH, AND, AND IT'S, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO EQUATE THAT TO THE ROLE CALLED VOTING PROCESS. SO THE VOTING PROCESS IS STILL INTACT, UM, BUT THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER ARE NOT WRITTEN IN LAW, BUT THE REQUIREMENTS OF BROWN ACT R. SO WE'RE TRYING TO ADAPT THE OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES MM-HMM. THAT THE ROBERTS RULES PROVIDE. AND AGAIN, IT IS UP TO THIS COMMISSION IF YOU HAVE A DESIRE TO SPECIFICALLY CHANGE SOMETHING OR CARVE SOMETHING OUT SO THAT THIS PROCESS REFLECTS WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE YOUR MEETING TO RUN. THERE IS A WAY TO WRITE THAT IN VERY SPECIFICALLY, UM, TO, TO, I GUESS, OVERRIDE THE DEFAULT OF THE ROBERTS RULES. SO IF THAT IS THE DESIRE OF THIS COMMISSION, AND AGAIN, UM, THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR HERE HAS REQUESTED ANY OF THE COMMENTS, ANYTHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD IN OR CHANGE TO BE DIRECTED TO STAFF SO THAT IT CAN BE ASSEMBLED AND PLACED ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING. AND THEN THAT COULD BE DISCUSSED AND REQUESTED TO FOR AN ACTION, UM, VIA RESOLUTION AT A FUTURE MEETING. [00:30:01] BUT THIS IS JUST TO KIND OF BRING TO YOU THE, THE NEED FOR A REVIEW. UM, SINCE IT HAS BEEN, I THINK 10, 11 YEARS SINCE REVIEW, THERE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE ADDITIONS AND NEW UPDATES TO THE ROBERTS RULES AS WELL. BUT DEFINITELY THE BROWN ACT, IT HAS CHANGED A LOT. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WITH THE INTERVENING COVID AND ALL OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDERS THAT HAPPENED IN BETWEEN, WE JUST KIND OF NEED TO GET CAUGHT UP TO WHAT THE BROWN ACT, UM, REQUIRES. SO, AND, AND OPERATIONALLY TO KIND OF MESH THAT WITH HOW THE COMMISSIONS ARE OPERATING. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE. OKAY. SO LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK THERE'S, LIKE I SAY, IS, UH, OUR MOTION IS A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC. WELL, SOME OTHER CITIES MENTIONED CAN ONLY BE MADE BY A MEMBER OF THE PREVAILING SIDE OF A PREVIOUS VOTE IF SECONDED AND PASSED IT, RESENDS THE PREVIOUS VOTE AND BRINGS THE MOTION BACK FOR DISCUSSION. THE MAIN MOTION, A, A MOTION MUST BE MADE AND SECONDED TO INITIATE DISCUSSION ON AN ISSUE. A LIMITED AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION MAY BE ALLOWED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR, MAN PRIOR TO A MOTION BEING MADE. MOTIONS ARE PROJECTED ONTO A SCREEN. OH, NO, BUT, UH, UM, DIFFERENT SPECIFIC. YEAH, ACTUALLY, UM, NUMBER 11, WHICH TALKS ABOUT MOTIONS TO RECONSIDER THAT IT ACTUALLY IS EXPLAINED. MM-HMM, , DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? WELL, ENFORCEMENT OF DECORUM, SO IT SAYS, THE CHAIRPERSON SHALL ADVISE THE PERSONS THAT UNLESS THE DISRUPTION CEASES, THEY WILL BE ESCORTED FROM COUNCIL CHAMBERS BY THE SERGEANT OF ARMS. IF REFUSAL OF THE ESCORT IS MADE, THE PERSONS CAUSING DISRUPTION OF THE MEETING WILL BE ARRESTED. NOW, WHO DOES THIS APPLY TO? I BELIEVE IF IT APPLIES TO ANYONE THAT IS INTERRUPTING AND DISRUPTING AND PREVENTING THE BUSINESS OF THE COMMISSION FROM PROCEEDING, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE TIME TO REVIEW THIS. SO IF IT COULD BE BROUGHT BACK FOR THE NEXT MEETING, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE COMMISSIONERS FEEL, BUT HOW DO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS FEEL? I'M OKAY WITH BRINGING IN ONE OTHER THING THAT I WANNA TALK ABOUT IS THAT WHEN YOU MAKE A MOTION AND THEN YOU OPEN UP FOR DISCUSSION FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS, WHETHER IT'S FOR IT OR AGAINST IT, WHEN, AT WHAT POINT IN TIME DOES THE COMMISSIONER HAVE A DEBATE ABOUT THIS? SO WHEN AN ITEM COMES UP AND IT IS, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU GO DOWN THE, THE AGENDA AND YOU SAY, OKAY, WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS A COP FOR WHATEVER. UM, THEN AT THAT POINT, THE CHAIR, FOR EXAMPLE, COULD SAY, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN UP THE DISCUSSIONS? AND THEN THERE'S A MOTION MADE A SECOND. AND AT THAT POINT IN TIME, YOU WOULD PAUSE AND TAKE INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC, BECAUSE THE PUBLIC GETS TO SPEAK ON EVERY ITEM. AND THEN IF THERE ARE CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, THERE CAN BE CLARIFYING QUESTIONS ASKED. AND THEN IT CAN BE MOVING ON IN ORDER TO ALL OF THE COMMISSION FOR DEBATE. AND AFTER THE DEBATE, UM, THERE WOULD BE E EVEN EVEN IN THE MIDDLE OF A DEBATE, IF THERE IS A MOTION FOR A VOTE, A MOTION CALLING THE VOTE, THEN THE VOTE WOULD HAPPEN. AND IT, IT IS THE CLOSE OF THE DEBATE. BUT AT, IF THE DEBATE TAKES TURNS, EVERYONE HAS A CHANCE TO SPEAK, AND ALL DISCUSSIONS ARE DONE AT THAT POINT, THERE WOULD BE A MOTION TO CALL VOTE, OR THE CHAIR CAN CALL THE VOTE, AND IF IT'S READY TO VOTE, IT'LL PROCEED TO VOTE. SO IT WOULD BE MOTION, PUBLIC COMMENT, ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION, VOTE OR MOTION TO VOTE, VOTE. WOULDN'T PUBLIC COMMENT ALWAYS COME BEFORE ANY MOTION, PARTICULARLY IN A PUBLIC HEARING SETTING? UM, IN THE PUBLIC HEARING SETTING, IT'S BASICALLY THE QUESTION. THE ISSUE IS FRAMED BY THE MOTION. SO FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND, OKAY, THIS IS THE TOPIC, IT IS ALREADY IN THE AGENDA, AND THE RECOMMENDED ACTION IS ALREADY IN THE AGENDA. SO IF THERE IS A MOTION, UM, IT, IT BASICALLY BRINGS IT UP AND OPENS THE DOOR FOR DEBATE. IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE ISSUE NECESSARILY. IT IS STILL AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC TO KNOW WHAT TOPIC IS BEING DISCUSSED. AND AT THAT POINT IN TIME, IT STILL, AS SOON AS THE MOTION IS MADE, IT OPENS UP THE, THE DOOR FOR DISCUSSION AND DEBATE. AND AT THAT POINT, THE PUBLIC CAN SPEAK, UM, ON THAT PARTICULAR ITEM. AND AGAIN, AT THE VERY BEGINNING [00:35:01] OF THE MEETING, I, I, I AGREE WITH YOU, BUT I THINK, I THINK LINGUISTICALLY YOU, YOU, YOU MAY BE CAUSING SOME CONFUSION, AH, INDIRECTLY, AND I, AND, AND SO, BECAUSE YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE ITEM ITSELF AS, AS A MOTION, WHICH I UNDERSTAND, BUT I THINK, I THINK WE ALL HEAR MOTION TO APPROVE OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. AND THAT'S HOW, THAT'S HOW EVERYONE UP HERE MIGHT BE THINKING OF THIS AS A, AS A MOTION IN A VERY LITERAL SENSE OF, I MAKE A MOTION AS OPPOSED TO THE ITEM BEING THE MOTION AND THEREFORE DEBATE COMING AFTER WE MAKE PRESENTATION OF THE ITEM, AND THEN GOING INTO THE, INTO THE ACTUAL SUBSTANTIVE MOTION TO APPROVE, DENY WHATEVER IT IS, IS, IS THAT AM, AM I MISUNDERSTANDING OR SO AS LONG AS THE PUBLIC HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THEIR CONCERNS FOR AGAINST, OR ANYTHING RELATED TO THAT TOPIC OR THAT ITEM BEFORE DELIBERATION, THAT IS OKAY. THAT IS WHAT THE BROWN ACT REQUIRES. THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO SPEAK ON EVERY SINGLE ITEM. SO AS LONG AS IT HAPPENS BEFORE, IT CAN BE AS SOON AS THE ITEM IS CALLED THE PUBLIC COMMENT CAN HAPPEN, THEN THERE COULD BE A MOTION TO OPEN UP DISCUSSION, AND THEN THERE COULD BE DISCUSSION AND THEN A MOTION TO CALL THE VOTE AND VOTE, AND THAT IT COULD PROCEED THAT WAY. AND IF THIS, IF THIS COMMISSION PREFERS TO HAVE THE COMMENTS AHEAD OF ANY MOTION THAT CAN BE WRITTEN INTO THE SPECIFICS OF YOUR MEETING RULES SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A SPECIFIC ORDER OF HOW EACH ITEM WILL BE HANDLED. OKAY. SO THAT'S ACTUALLY SOMETHING I, I THINK OUGHT TO BE VERY CLEAR, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE HAVE EVER CONDUCTED A MEETING AT, AT, AT LEAST AS FAR AS THIS PLANNING COMMISSION HAS, HAS BEEN AROUND, AND I'VE WATCHED PLANNING COMMISSION SINCE I WAS A SMALL CHILD IN THIS CITY. UM, I MAY BE THE WEIRD PERSON HERE FOR DOING THAT, BUT, UM, I'LL SAY THIS, EVERY SINGLE TIME THERE WAS PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN THE SUBSTANTIVE MOTION THAT WAS BROUGHT BY AN INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONER WAS, WAS MADE AFTER THE CLOSE OF PUBLIC COMMENT. SO IT, I, I WANNA MAKE, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT I UNDERSTAND AND THAT EVERYBODY THAT EVERYBODY ELSE UNDERSTANDS IS THIS, UM, IS, IS IS WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING THAT A MOTION BEING MADE, LET'S SAY I MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF X OR Y AND, AND, UH, COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ SECONDS IT AND THEN CALL FOR A VOTE? UM, THERE, THAT, THAT THE, THE TYPICAL WAY THAT THAT IS DONE WOULD BE UNDER THE ROBERTS RULES WOULD BE THAT PUBLIC COMMENT WOULD HAPPEN RIGHT THEN AND THERE, IT HAPPENS BEFORE THE DELIBERATIONS OF THE COMMISSION. SO AS LONG AS IT IS BEFORE THE DELIBERATION OR DISCUSSION OR DEBATE, UM, THEY'RE ALL, IT'D BE EQUIVALENT PROCESS. AS LONG AS THE PUBLIC COMMENT HAPPENS BEFORE THAT, THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART. AND THAT'S HOW WE OBSERVE THE PROBLEM. I DON'T UNDERSTAND. WHEN DOES THE DELIBERATION TAKE PLACE? THE DELIBERATION IS YOUR DISCUSSION. OKAY. THAT'S AFTER THE PUBLIC SPEAKS, CORRECT. SO THE PUBLIC GETS TO SPEAK BEFORE THE DELIBERATION SO THAT THE BODY HAS A CHANCE TO ABSORB, CONSIDER AND LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC BEFORE DECIDING AND DISCUSSING THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DELIBERATE NOW OR NO, WE JUST, SHE OPENS DISCUSSION. SHE WOULD OPEN DISCUSSION AS LONG AS THERE IS A MOTION, THERE'S, THE DEBATE CAN HAPPEN AMONGST THE COMMISSION SO THAT THERE'S A DIFFERENT PORTION WHERE THE PUBLIC CAN SPEAK BEFORE DELIBERATION AND WHETHER THE MOTION HAPPENS, UH, BEFORE THE PUBLIC COMMENT OR RIGHT AFTER, AS LONG AS THE PUBLIC COMMENT IS TAKEN BEFORE THE DELIBERATION BY THE BODY AND THE DISCUSSION AND DEBATE AMONGST THE COMMISSION PRIOR TO THE VOTE. THAT'S THE ORDER. SO THE PUBLIC COMMENT COMES FIRST, THEN THE DEBATE, AND THEN A DECISION. SO AS LONG AS THAT COMES BEFORE, IT CAN BE AFTER A MOTION OR BEFORE A MOTION. AND IT'S UP TO YOU HOW YOU WANT TO ARTICULATE THAT IN YOUR SPECIFIC RULES. HAVEN'T WE ALWAYS DONE THAT? HAVE WE BEEN OUT OF ORDER ? WELL, I GUESS I THINK WE HAVE, WE HAVE, THERE'S CONFUSION ABOUT MOTION. I THINK THERE'S A LITTLE BIT CONFUSION ABOUT MOTION. WE USE A LOT OF MOTION TONIGHT. SO LIKE COMMISSIONER LEWIS WAS SAYING THAT WE NORMALLY AS COMMISSIONERS, WE SAY WE MOTION PROOF OR BE MOTION TO DISAPPROVE, BUT THAT'S A MOTION. HOWEVER, WE'RE ALSO USED TO THE FACT THAT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE, NUMBER TWO, NUMBER THREE, AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, STAFF WOULD DO THE REPORT AND THEN WE WOULD OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS, WHETHER IT'S FOR OR AGAINST IT. AND THEN NORMALLY THE STEP THAT WE NORMALLY FORGET TO GO THROUGH IS THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE A DEBATE ABOUT IT. AND THEN RIGHT AFTER THAT IS WHEN AFTER ALL THE COMMISSIONERS [00:40:01] HAVING THEIR, WHETHER THEY APPROVE IT OR DISAPPROVE IT OR LIKE IT OR NOT LIKE IT, OR HAVING QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR FOR SOME OF THE PUBLIC, UM, AFTER THAT IS WHEN WE NORMALLY MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OR SOMEONE MAKE A MOTION, AND THEN THERE'S SOMEONE WHO NEED TO HAVE A SECOND. SO ANOTHER COMMISSIONER NEEDS A SECOND. TRADITIONALLY, THAT WAS SORT OF LIKE THE PROCEDURES THAT I GUESS I'M USED TO AFTER SEVERAL YEARS. BECAUSE WHEN YOU SAY MOTION AT THE BEGINNING, MOTION, WHICH IS TO US IT'S AN AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE, NUMBER TWO, OR NUMBER THREE OR NUMBER FOUR, WHATEVER IT IS THAT WE HAVE ON THE LIST. FOR EXAMPLE, ONE, WE COULD TALK ABOUT ALCOHOL. ONE, WE COULD TALK ABOUT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE. IT COULD BE ALCOHOL RELATED, A STORE RELATED ITEM NUMBER TWO COULD BE SOME BUILDING PROJECT, A HOME BUILDING PROJECT VERSUS ITEM NUMBER FOUR. IT COULD BE, I DON'T KNOW, COULDN'T THINK OF ANYTHING RIGHT NOW, A SCHOOL. SO THAT'S TO ME IS LIKE A, INSTEAD OF A MOTION ONE, MOTION TWO, MOTION THREE. THAT WOULD BE TO US IS THE AGENDA ITEM, NUMBER ONE, NUMBER TWO, NUMBER THREE. AND THEN THAT'S WHAT I'M USED TO AFTER A FEW YEARS THAT WE WOULD HAVE STAFF DO THE DISCUSSION ON THAT AGENDA ITEMS. AND THEN WE HAVE OPEN UP TO PUBLIC MEETINGS. AFTER THE PUBLIC MEETING'S DONE, THEN THAT'S WHEN THE COMMISSION COMMISSIONS HAVE THEIR DISCUSSIONS AND WHETHER COMMISSION SOMETIMES HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR QUESTION FOR THE PUBLIC. AND AT THE END, THIS IS THE PORTION THAT WE SOMETIME FORGET TO GO THROUGH. AND THEN WE JUST RUN STRAIGHT INTO VOTING BEFORE THE DISCUSSION OF THE COMMISSION. SO THE DEBATE, YOU CALL IT A DEBATE OR A DEBATE, DISCUSSION, DELIBERATION, THEY'RE ALL EQUIVALENT TO THE SAME THING WHERE THE BODY DISCUSSES BEFORE TAKING AN ACTION. SO THE, IT SEEMS LIKE LATELY WE HAVE BEEN MISSING THAT DEBATE PORTION, IT APPEARS, AND THEN WE JUST GO STRAIGHT INTO VOTING. SO THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EACH OF YOU TO TAKE THIS HOME. AND BECAUSE THIS IS A STUDY SESSION, GO THROUGH IT AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT WORKS OPERATIONALLY, BECAUSE WHAT HAS BEEN OPERATIONALLY, UM, THE NORM HASN'T BEEN WRITTEN DOWN IN THE RULE. SO IF THIS IS THE COMMISSION'S DESIRE TO DO IT AS CALLING THE ITEM, HAVING PUBLIC COMMENT, OR HAVING THE PRESENTATION, SO THERE'S MORE INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC, AND THEN TAKING PUBLIC COMMENT, THEN HAVING A MOTION AND THEN A DISCUSSION AMONGST THE COMMISSIONERS, AND THEN A VOTE, THAT IS OKAY, THAT IS, YOU CAN DO THAT IN THE RULES. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF IT, IT'S NOT WRITTEN INTO YOUR MEETING RULES. THE DEFAULT GOES TO THE ROBERT'S RULES, WHICH IS WHAT I WAS DISCUSSING. SO IN THE DEFAULT, WITHOUT ANY SPECIFIC MENTION OF HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO HANDLE BUSINESS, THE CURRENT BYLAWS SAY ANY OF THOSE WILL DEFAULT. NON-SPECIFIC PROCEDURES WILL FOLLOW ROBERT'S RULES. SO IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC PROCESS IN MIND THAT WORKS AND THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE ARTICULATED ASIDE FROM AND UM, KIND OF OVERRIDING THE ROBERT'S RULES DEFAULT, PLEASE PUT YOUR EDITS IN THERE, PUT SOME COMMENTS IN THERE AND GET THAT BACK TO STAFF SO WE CAN GET IT CRAFTED INTO THE NEXT ROUND OF THE DRAFT BYLAWS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER AND PERHAPS APPROVE. IT MAY BE A COUPLE OF MEETINGS. THIS MAY NOT BE LIKE A ONE AND DONE MEETING KIND OF THING BECAUSE THIS IS HOW YOU DO BUSINESS. AND SO IT IS UP TO THIS COMMISSION TO DECIDE HOW YOU WANT TO COM YOU KNOW, CONDUCT YOUR BUSINESS. AND IF IT'S NOT STRICT ADHERENCE TO ROBERT'S RULES, THEN I RECOMMEND THAT IT IS WRITTEN INTO YOUR MEETING BYLAWS OR YOUR MEETING RULES, SO THAT YOUR RULES THAT APPLY TO THIS PLANNING COMMISSION IS WHAT GOVERNS. SO IF IT'S SILENT AND THERE'S NOTHING SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED, IT WOULD DEFAULT TO ROBERT'S RULES. SO AS IT SITS TODAY, THERE IS NO SPECIFIC MENTION, BUT IF IT IS THE DESIRE OF THIS COMMISSION TO HAVE THE ITEM, THE STAFF PRESENT FACTUAL INFORMATION AND DO THE PRESENTATION, TAKING PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN MOTION, AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION, THEN A VOTE YOU CAN SPECIFY IN THE, UM, RULES, THE MEETING RULES TO HAVE IT IN THAT ORDER. I WOULD JUST RECOMMEND THAT IT'S WRITTEN SOMEWHERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'M NOT SURE THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD DISCUSSIONS. I, I'VE NOTICED THAT THE CHAIR WILL NORMALLY ASK, IS THERE ANY COMMENTS BY THE COMMISSION OR ANYBODY HAS ANYTHING THEY WANT TO ASK OR QUESTIONS? AND IF WE SAY NO, THERE IS NO DELIBERATION AND THERE MAY BE NONE THERE, BUT IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMISSION TO DISCUSS AND DELIBERATE. YEAH. [00:45:01] AND THEN, UH, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. AND THEN FOR ENFORCEMENT OF THE QUO, UM, SEE, THE CHAIRPERSON HAS, UM, THE AUTHORITY TO DO, UH, TO DO THE, THE, THE X, Y, AND Z. ALL THE, ALL THE DIFFERENT DESCRIPTIONS ARE ON UNDER FORCE BEND DECORUM. NOW, UM, WHAT I'M NOT, THIS IS, IS NOT RELATING TO OUR CURRENT CHAIR, I'M JUST SAYING FOR YEARS TO COME, , UH, IF, LET'S JUST SAY A CHAIR WANTED TO REMOVE SOMEONE FROM THE AUDIENCE, BUT A MAJORITY BODY DI DISAGREES WITH THAT DECISION, COULDN'T THAT MAJORITY BODY OVERRULE A CHAIRPERSON? IF THE CHAIR IS PRESIDING OVER THE MEETING, THE CHAIR HAS THE AUTHORITY TO, TO EITHER CALL A RECESS OR DEEM IT A DISRUPTION. UM, AND THAT IS THE PRIVILEGE OF THE CHAIR. BUT A DISRUPTION WOULD BE A DISRUPTION THAT PREVENTS THE BODY FROM CONDUCTING BUSINESS. IT WOULDN'T BE JUST SIMPLY AN OPINION. NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT LIKE THE LAST RESORT, ABOUT REMOVING SOMEONE OR, OR ARRESTING SOMEONE. AND THAT THE, IT'S VERY RARE. IT'S VERY, IT WOULD BE VERY DISRUPTIVE SO THAT THE BUSINESS CANNOT CONTINUE. AND THAT IS USUALLY WHEN IT IS GOING TO BE TRIGGERED, IS IF THERE, LET'S SAY FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS A, UM, EMERGENCY IF WE HAVE, SO YOU'RE SAYING, BUT, BUT YOU'RE SAYING THREE VOTES COULD NOT OVERRIDE THE CHAIRPERSON ON A DECISION LIKE THAT, ON PROCEDURE, ON JUST RUNNING THE MEETING AT THE, NO, NO, NOT, NOT THAT PART AND THE LAST RESORT PART. SO LET'S JUST SAY, LET'S JUST SAY, AND AGAIN, THIS IS NOT ABOUT OUR CURRENT COMMISSION, I'M JUST SAYING FOR YEARS TO COME, UM, IF THERE WAS A CHAIRPERSON WHO MADE, LET'S JUST SAY A RADICAL MOVE TO REMOVE SOMEONE JUST BECAUSE, OR BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T LIKE THAT PERSON, THEN IT WOULD BE A POINT OF ORDER, THEN IT WOULD BE UP TO ANOTHER COMMISSIONER TO SAY IT'LL BE A POINT OF ORDER, BE A POINT OF ORDER THAT IT IS IPRO, THEN IT REQUIRES OR REQUIRED THREE VOTES AT THAT TIME, RIGHT. OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT WOULD BE A MOTION, A POINT OF ORDER AND A DISCUSSION AND GOING BACK TO THE RULES TO SEE IF IT COMPLIES WITH THE RULES. AND AGAIN, THE DISRUPTION WOULD BE SEVERE ENOUGH. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE WAS AN EARTHQUAKE RIGHT NOW AND THINGS ARE FALLING OFF FROM THE CEILING, CEILING, THAT IS A DISRUPTION ENOUGH TO CAUSE A STOPPAGE OF BUSINESS. YEAH. AND AT THAT POINT IT IS UP, IT IS THE PRIVILEGE OF THE CHAIR. YEAH. TO RECESS OR ADJOURN AND TO SAY, WE HAVE A DISRUPTION, WE CANNOT CONTINUE. OH, YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT. I'M JUST SAYING THE LAST RESORT PART. SO CAN THAT, SO WHAT YOU JUST INDICATED, CAN THAT BE INTEGRATED UNDER THIS, UNDER THIS ENFORCEMENT AND DECORUM DIVISION OF THE DOCUMENT? UH, AS I GUESS LET ME, I, IF YOU HAVE PROPOSED LANGUAGE, I WOULD DEFINITELY URGE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS. YOU JUST, YOU JUST SAID IT ABOUT POINT OF ORDER, AND THEN THAT'S INDE IN THE ROBERTS CALLING PROMOTION. SO YEAH, THOSE DEFAULT TO ROBERT'S RULES. I KNOW, BUT WE'RE BEING SPECIFIC. SO CURRENTLY BE SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT TOO. AS A, AS AN ADDITIONAL LETTER ON THE BULLET POINTS, I WOULD LOVE SOME CLARIFICATION IF YOU CAN SPECIFICALLY PEN IT AND GET IT TO STAFF SO THAT IT CAN BE IN DRAFT FORM OF WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE. I DON'T WANNA PUT WORDS IN ANYONE'S MOUTH. SO I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, REQUEST THAT YOU SPECIFICALLY REQUEST AN ADDITION THAT SPECIFIES UNDER THIS CIRCUMSTANCE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN. THAT WAY IT CAN BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION BEFORE AN ADOPTION. YEAH, BECAUSE I KNOW, I KNOW THERE WAS A MATTER AT THE CITY COUNCIL LEVEL WHERE SOMETHING LIKE THAT OCCURRED, BUT I'M NOT GONNA GO INTO SPECIFICS, BUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT OCCURRED, BUT OKAY. BUT YEAH. SOUNDS GOOD. THANK YOU, . ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, SO IT'S UNDERSTOOD. UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS FOR LANGUAGE, THEN YOU'LL GET THAT TO STAFF AND WE'RE AT LEAST LOOKING AT CONTINUING THIS ITEM TO OUR NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. UM, THIS ITEM IS JUST A STUDY SESSION, SO UNLESS YOU WANTED AN ADDITIONAL STUDY SESSION, IT WOULD BE, UM, RECEIVE AND FILE TODAY. THERE IS NO ACTION ITEM FOR TODAY, BUT THIS IS A WAY FOR YOU TO SEE WHAT IS CURRENTLY, UM, AS OF THE LAST REVISION OF 2013 OF WHAT WAS IN THERE AND WHAT THE PROPOSED CHANGES MAY BE. AND IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL CHANGES, DEFINITELY THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO GET ADDITIONAL MARKUPS AND THINGS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THE NEXT VERSION OF THE BYLAWS. UM, AGAIN, THAT ANYTHING THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO DEFAULT TO ROBERT'S RULES, I WOULD STRONGLY RECOMMEND PUTTING IT IN WRITING FOR STAFF TO BE ABLE TO INCORPORATE ALL OF THAT AND TO PRESENT IT TO YOU AT AN ACTUALIZED MEETING WHERE YOU CAN HAVE A FULL DISCUSSION, UM, AND THEN TAKE ACTION TO EITHER, UM, AMEND BY A, YOU KNOW, A ADOPTING A RESOLUTION BECAUSE IT WAS ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION AT THE BEGINNING. THAT AMENDMENT WOULD BE BY RESOLUTION, SO, OKAY. OKAY. [00:50:02] OKAY. WE HAD THAT. THANK YOU . UH, SO I, I WOULD LIKE, UH, AN ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION OR STUDY SESSION FOR THE NEXT MEETING TO OCCUR IF THE COMMISSION'S OKAY WITH IT. OKAY. UH, THROUGH THE CHAIR. LET ME ASK JOANNE, UM, FROM, FROM THE COMMENTS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS, I, IN, IN MY NOTES, I, UM, I, I BELIEVE THAT THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSIONER HAS AN IN, UM, AN INTEREST IN CHANGE, UM, CHANGING THE, I GUESS THE, THE WAY MOTIONS ARE TAKEN OR, UM, PUBLIC HEARING, UM, ITEMS ARE HEARD, UH, FROM THE, THE, FROM THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER TO HAVE STA. UM, THE FIRST POINT IS TO HAVE PRESENT THE, DO THE PRESENTATION, UM, PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN QUESTIONS AND THEN DELIBERATION AND THEN CALL FOR THE VOTE. IS, IS THAT CORRECT OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT YOU STILL WANNA DISCUSS FURTHER? NO, I THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS BASICALLY, I THINK, UM, THE COMMISSIONERS WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND WE HAD A CHANCE TO TAKE IN THEIR INFORMATION AS WELL AS THE STAFF'S PRESENTATION BEFORE WE WENT INTO OUR DELIBERATION. OKAY. AND THEN AFTER OUR DELIBERATION, THEN MAKING A MOTION FOR A VOTE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANKS FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. AND THEN I, I'LL JUST ADD ON ONE OTHER THING. IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER STUDY SESSION, I DO THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE HAD, YOU KNOW, MAYBE ALONG WITH OUR PACKET, PDF COPY THE OF THE MOST CURRENT ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER SENT OVER TO US, IF THAT IS AT ALL POSSIBLE, THAT WAY, UM, THAT WAY WE CAN UNDERSTAND OR WHERE, WHERE WE WILL BE DEVIATING POTENTIALLY. WOULD YOU LIKE THE ACTUAL BOOK, WHICH IS CURRENTLY ABOUT AN INCH AND A HALF THICK, OR WOULD YOU LIKE IT'S NOT THAT BAD, UH, SUMMARY OR JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS. 'CAUSE SO I'VE SEEN, I'VE SEEN A COUPLE OF, I'VE, I'VE SEEN A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT ITERATIONS OF THIS. I'VE SEEN SORT OF LIKE THE PAMPHLET KIND OF THING. I, DO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? I KNOW JUST THE BARE BONES WITH NO COMMENTARY STATE GIVES A MOUTH. YEAH. BUT IT, IT'S, IT, IT'S, IT'S INSTRUCTIVE AT, AT THE VERY LEAST, IT MAY NOT BE THE, THE BEST THING IN THE WORLD BECAUSE IT'S NOT ANNOTATED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AS MUCH AS I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT. BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST IT, AT LEAST IT GIVES SOMETHING I, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT, UH, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, PUBLICATION ISSUES FOR GIVING OUT A COPY OF THE PROVES RULES 'CAUSE IT'S PROPRIETARY OR SOME, SOME NONSENSE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TIME. THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA AT THE STATE LEVEL. 'CAUSE I, I WAS PART OF TWO DIFFERENT STATE COMMISSIONS APPOINTED BY TWO GOVERNORS. THE STATE, AT THE STATE LEVEL, THEY ACTUALLY GIVE YOU A LITTLE, MAYBE IS LIKE A FOUR BY SIX BOOKLET THAT HAS I THINK SOME OF THE KEY POINTS OF THE ROBERT RULES OF ORDER. IT'S, IT'S REALLY, IT'S REALLY EDUCATIONAL. THEY GIVE IT TO, MOST OF THE TIME ALL THE COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE APPOINTED TO THE STATE GET A BOOK LIKE THAT. SO I'M GETTING THAT. YOU DON'T WANT THE WHOLE BOOK. YOU WANT A SUMMARY? WELL, I WANT THE WHOLE BOOK, BUT I'LL, I'LL LEAVE THE WHOLE . I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR OF WHAT, WHAT IT WOULD, WHAT WOULD HELP YOU TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK AND, AND BE ABLE TO CRAFT THE RULES AS YOU WOULD LIKE IT. SO I JUST DIDN'T WANNA OVERWHELM YOU. IF YOU DIDN'T WANT THE WHOLE BOOK, THEN, YOU KNOW, I GUESS WE CAN WORK WITH, WITH STAFF TO GET YOU THE MATERIALS YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW THE DEFAULT OF HOW THE ROBERTS RULES, UM, OPERATE IN LARGE PARLIAMENTARY BODIES SO THAT YOU WOULD KNOW WHAT THE DEFAULT IS AND THEN YOU CAN CUSTOMIZE TO HOW YOU WANT THIS COMMISSION TO TAKE ITEMS IN WHAT ORDER. SO THIS COMMISSION DOES HAVE THAT ABILITY. I THINK THERE, I THINK THERE MIGHT EVEN BE A BOOK THAT'S, I THINK IT'S LIKE, UH, ROB RULES OF ORDERS FOR APPOINTED OFFICIALS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I THINK THERE'S A BOOK OUT THERE FOR THAT . YEAH. TRYING TO FIND WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. BUT YEAH, I MEAN, I'M NOT, IF YOU DO WANT THE WHOLE BOOK, PLEASE LET JOANNE KNOW IF YOU, IF YOU REALLY WANT THE 12TH EDITION FULL ANNOTATED . OKAY. DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY, UM, COMMENTS OR REPORTS OR ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE REST OF US COMMISSIONERS AWARE OF? [00:55:02] I HAVE, I HAVE ONE QUESTION. UM, I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF, UH, IF THE ASSISTANT, UM, CITY, CITY ATTORNEY COULD, UH, EEE EITHER NOW OR AT THE NEXT MEETING, UH, GO OVER SOME OF THE PROCEDURES. UH, OBVIOUSLY EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND, AND OBVIOUSLY THEIR SPEECH SHOULD NOT, UH, EVER BE TURNED, I MEAN, CUT OFF FROM SPEAKING. UM, AND, AND THEY HAVE THAT RIGHT TO, TO THAT FREEDOM OF SPEECH BASED UPON OUR GREAT UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. THE ONLY, UH, THING I WAS, UH, WORRIED ABOUT EARLIER WAS THE PROFANITY BECAUSE THERE IS CHILDREN AT HO KIDS AT HOME, UH, VIEWING THE VIDEO ONLINE. AND I KNOW IN THE PAST AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS, I THINK THE CHAIR WILL GIVE, UH, OR THE MAYOR WILL GIVE TWO WARNINGS TO STOP THE PROFANITY. AND THAT PERSON DID NOT STOP. WE'RE GONNA HAVE A BLACKOUT , YOU KNOW, IF THAT PERSON DIDN'T STOP THAT PROFANITY, THEN THE CHAIRPERSON HAD TO MUTE THEM, MUTE THE MIC THAT'S UP ON THE AUDIENCE, THINK THEY'RE, THEY'RE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO SPEAK. WE'RE NOT STOPPING THEIR SPEECH HERE OR JUST MUTING THE ONLINE, UH, ONLINE FEED. SO I KNOW AT THE CONS LEVEL, THEY, THEY HAVE DONE THAT. THE MAYOR, I'M NOT SURE WHAT POLICY APPLIES, BUT I WILL HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT TO SEE IF IT'S A BROADCASTING OR REBROADCASTING TYPE OF ISSUE THAT IS A BROADCAST ISSUE VERSUS FREEDOM OF SPEECH FIRST, YOU KNOW, THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS THAT ARE AFFORDED TO EVERYONE WHO COMES TO SPEAK BEFORE GOVERNMENT BODIES. SO AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE A POSSIBLY TECHNICAL ISSUE RATHER THAN A ISSUE. YEAH, I KNOW, I KNOW THERE WAS A COUPLE OF TIMES AT THE CITY COUNCIL LEVEL THAT THE MAYOR HAD TO MUTE THEM, SO. OKAY, GOOD. LOOK INTO THAT. GREAT. OKAY. AT THIS TIME, MOVING [4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT] TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, UM, JOANNE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT REGARDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT? I DO HAVE GENERAL, UM, CITY, UM, EVENT INFORMATION TO BRING UP ON MAY 30, ON MAY 30TH, 2024 AT THE WEST COVINA SPORTS SPORTSPLEX. THERE WILL BE A HEALTH AND WELLNESS EXPO IN THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY SENIOR SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT FROM 10:00 AM TO 4:00 PM AND EVERYBODY'S INVITED TO ATTEND PALM VIEW COMMUNITY CENTER. OPEN HOUSE AND ANNIVERSARY WILL TAKE PLACE ON JUNE 4TH, 2024 FROM 10:00 AM TILL 12:00 PM AND THERE WILL BE ANOTHER PAPER SHREDDING EVENT ON SATURDAY, JUNE 15TH FROM 9:00 AM TO 1:00 PM AT CORTES COMMUNITY PARK AND SENIOR CENTER. THE SUMMER CONCERT SERIES FOR THE CITY OF SCAA WILL BEGIN HERE AT THE CIVIC CENTER ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 19TH AT 6:00 PM AND IT WILL CONTINUE UNTIL JULY 3RD. ARE THERE ANY, UM, CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS OR REPORT TO REPORT ON? YES. AT THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 21ST, 2024, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED RESOLUTION NUMBER 2 2 2 4 DASH EIGHT THAT APPROVED THE FINAL PARCEL MAP NUMBER 8 3 1 5, LOCATED AT 25 39 EAST GARVEY AVENUE NORTH. UM, THIS IS THE, THE, UM, THE FINAL MAP FOR THE, FOR THE, UM, DIAMOND PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER WHERE THE SUPERMARKET IS, WAS APPROVED TO BE LOCATED IN, OVER THERE ON, UM, GARVEY IN CITRUS NEAR THE, THE FORMER NISSAN DEALERSHIP. THAT'S NOW GOING TO BE THE TOYOTA. IT WAS PREVIOUSLY TWO PARCELS AND IT WAS CONSOLIDATED INTO ONE THROUGH THE PARCEL MAP PROCESS. YOU MENTIONED SUPERMARKET, BUT DO YOU KNOW THE NAME OF THE SUPERMARKET YET OR NOT YET? UM, NOT, NOT OFFICIALLY, NO. OKAY. BUT THEY DID APPLY FOR A ALCOHOL LICENSE? MM-HMM, . AND THE ALCOHOL LICENSE IS FOR AMAZON FRESH. SO IT'S AMAZON FRESH. OKAY. OKAY. IF THERE IS NO OTHER MATTERS TO DISCUSS, [01:00:01] THEN I WOULD LIKE TO MOTION THAT OUR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURN, THE TIME NOW IS 8:05 PM. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.