January 5, 2023 Mountain View City Council Special Meeting

Video

Transcript

[00:01:16] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: The content represents unedited versions of computer generated captioning of city council meetings, which should neither be relied upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript. Please select show captions in Zoom to view captioning. You may also click on the carrot, the up arrow, next to the show captions button, to select your preferred captioning language, alter captioning settings, such as font size, or view the full transcript in a side panel. This meeting will be conducted in accordance with California government code section 54953E as authorized by resolution of the city council. Please contact city.clerk at mountain.gov to obtain a copy of the applicable resolution. All members of the city council are participating in this meeting by video conference with no physical meeting location. Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting live may do so at mountain view.letstar.com, youtube.com forward slash mountain view Gov, and on Comcast channel 26. As noted on the media agenda, members of the public may provide oral public comments during the public comment period by visiting mountainview.gov forward slash feeding to enter the zoom webinar or by phone by dialing 669-9128 and entering webinar ID 843-512-67142. Any emails received by 430 PM today were received directly by the city council. Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. 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. Thank you. The city clerk will take attendance by roll call.

[00:03:04] City Clerk Heather: Council member Abbe Koga? Council member, can I?

[00:03:08] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Here,

[00:03:08] City Clerk Heather: Council member Metachek?

[00:03:11] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Here?

[00:03:11] City Clerk Heather: Council member, show Walter?

[00:03:13] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Here?

[00:03:13] City Clerk Heather: Vice Mayor Hicks. Mayor, Mayor Ramirez?

[00:03:18] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Here.

[00:03:19] City Clerk Heather: You have a corn?

[00:03:21] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Well, now proceed to item 4.one, options for filling a council vacancy. Translation services are available for this item, we will now hear from our interpreters.

[00:03:33] Unknown Speaker: Buenos noches a todo quamos asadir, con el articulo, que sonas optiones, para, una vacante, con el consejo. Si es que ocupatra duccion el Español, por favor o prima el culabulo, al impreor de supantaye que dice interpretación y selecione español. Gracias.

[00:03:57] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Um, is there Chinese translation as well or Spanish only? Okay. Uh, we will now proceed to the presentation. City clerk. Uh, Heather, please, we'll present the item. Whenever you're ready.

[00:04:10] City Clerk Heather: Good evening, mayor and council members. Let me share my screen real quick. And hold on just a 2nd. Go ahead and play next. There we go. Okay. So, um, we'll do a high-level overview of the options available uh, in filling the seat vacated by former council member Sally Lieber, and then city attorney Logue, city manager McCarthy and I are available for any questions that you have. So the charter gives the council 2 options for handling a vacancy and states that the council must either appoint a new member within 30 days of the vacancy commencement. So in this case, on or before January 29th. Or call an election on or before January 29th. There's no mechanism for the council to either appoint someone to serve as an interim. Um, until an election can be held or leave the seat vacant until the next general municipal election in November of next year. Uh, in the past 10 vacancies, 7 were filled by appointments, 2 were close enough to general municipal election, that those vacancies were just folded, um, into that election and one was filled by special election in 1985. We'll go back. The early estate recommended for an election would be August first, which would essentially be a standalone election, since it's highly unlikely that any other jurisdiction would need to consolidate on that date. Um, and it's the highest estimate that we received from the council, so around 21 million. The other option is the November 7th date, which may see some consolidation from other jurisdictions, so might be a little bit lower in cost, but we won't have that information until later in the year. We provided some examples of timelines for each process, which were pulled from the report, but as you can see, again, both options come with the same time constraint, which is that appointment has to be completed by January 29th. Um, or a special election needs to be called by January 29th. Finally, the decisions that need to be made this evening are 1st and foremost, whether to choose appointment or an election. If it's appointment, we have several items that you'll need to weigh in on this evening to set the process in motion. And if it's an election that the council chooses, then you'll need to set a date and give direction to staff to work with the county and bring back resolutions calling that special election. Um, funding for that would be included in your 2324 budget process. So with all of that, I'm going to stop. Share now. I can get to it. Seem to have lost my cursor. There we go. Okay. So, if you have any questions. Kimber, Jennifer, and I are available and I'll turn it back over to you guys. Thank you.

[00:07:39] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Does any member of the council have questions? Council member of the Toga.

[00:07:47] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Aaron. Happy New Year to everyone. Um, so I had a couple questions and, um, sorry, I didn't get them in earlier if we had the opportunity I probably went out last night. Um, so I have 2 questions I have, um, one, um, is the, for a special election, is the timeline, um, suggested for, like the earliest August, is that our staff's recommendation or is it, like, the county or the state, like, could we potentially do something sooner?

[00:08:23] City Clerk Heather: The county requires that the resolutions be delivered 125 days in advance of the election, and the nomination period has to, you know, um, be substantially the same as any other election that we would run, so 113 days to 88 days prior to the election. If, We could technically have it a little bit earlier. But the issue that we're running into is that you won't have a new council member until after your summer break starts. So in an effort to, accommodate the break that you've already set up for yourselves and in the kind of flow of work that staff kind of relies on through that break, um, we suggested the August 1st date because it wouldn't substantially change, um, how long you would have it, and, uh, active council member for.

[00:09:19] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, you know, normally we have elections, primary elections like in June, um, if we were to try to do something like that, just to be uniform with past election dates, um, could we do that?

[00:09:34] City Clerk Heather: Um, So this is an odd year. So there's no primary.

[00:09:38] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Right.

[00:09:39] City Clerk Heather: The only date that the county has an election already scheduled for is May, which we've missed already missed the cutoff for calling that election. And it's an all-mail ballot election, which the elections code does not allow us to participate in. So we have to have an election with male and vote centers. So a June date, we could still make it based on the date, the days required before, for all of the postings and so forth. It would just be, uh, It would require you to meet during your break.

[00:10:19] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: during our break, um, in the summer?

[00:10:22] City Clerk Heather: Yes. Yeah. Yeah, because the county get 30 days to count ballots, and once we have them, we're legally required to declare that result at the next regular meeting, which you technically have, but are, you know, kind of taking a break from based on your annual schedule. So we'd have to meet in July to certify the votes.

[00:10:45] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. Okay, great. Um, and then are we able to add any other items, if we were to call a special election, um, for example, um, the, you know, transit oriented tax item that we didn't do this past year that we were planning to. Could we add something like that or any kind of charter cleanup amendment, anything else to the ballot?

[00:11:13] City Clerk Heather: I'll take the 1st part of that. And then I think that maybe the city manager, the city attorney would have some weigh in on that. Um, some things you can put on a special election, some things you cannot. Um, so technically, there may be room to put something on there. Of course, that was not part of the estimate that we received from the county. Um, so that would be a wholly separate thing. Um, but there are some restrictions when it comes to um, finance stuff. Um, so I'll turn it over to the attorney or the city manager.

[00:11:49] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Thank you, Heather, um, Jennifer Logue, city attorney. I would have to research it. I don't think charter amendments can go on special elections, and it would depend on, um, what kind of tax measure you are talking about. So I would require a research. It also, I think, would be very difficult for for me to pull together an ordinance, a tax measure, or charter amendments in this short period of time in order to get it on, um, the ballot in June. You would be talking about just having the city attorney's office do a lot of other stuff would go by the wayside in order to pull something like that off. Um, in time for June. So, the Charter Amendment one, though, I'd have to look, I'm pretty confident those can't go to special elections, but I'd have to double check that.

[00:12:39] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: I was actually primarily interested in, you know, the TOT, frankly, so that's the one that if, um, we could put on the same ballot would be, um, you know, beneficial.

[00:12:52] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Thank you. Council member show up.

[00:12:59] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Well, basically, I had the same questions that council member. Uh, Abi Koga had. So thank you for asking those. But I have to say, I am still confused about the timeline beer. So let's talk a little bit more about this timeline. Um, it seems to me that, um, when I added it up, there, there was, like, 60 extra days in here that longer than, um, it absolutely had to be. And, um, So what, what do we have to do before the 125 days for the, um, that the county needs happens? I mean, I know there's work, but I don't know what it is.

[00:13:44] City Clerk Heather: There is work that we need to do. Um, that's not necessarily the reason why the August 1st date was suggested. So, um, let's, let's just say that if you had an election the beginning of June, um, and you want to pick days that are gonna work with having a nomination period that spans, um, for full weeks, right? So Monday through Friday for 4 full weeks. So if you had it in the beginning of June, the county is not getting us, the results until the beginning of July, and then you're going to have to have a meeting that you weren't was not on your adopted schedule in order to certify that election. And that's going to mean a lot of work that staff is going to have to do over the summer break, where we're normally trying to get caught up on a whole bunch of other things. So, um, since you're not meeting during that time anyway, We had figured that the August date, August 1st date with more closely aligned with when you were planning to come back from your summer break anyway.

[00:14:53] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay, so there's a four week nomination period. In other words, there has to be, where'd that come from?

[00:15:01] City Clerk Heather: That's the election code requirement.

[00:15:03] Councilmember Pat Showalter: That's the election code. So that doesn't matter whether it's a filling vacancy or a new.

[00:15:07] City Clerk Heather: Correct. Okay. It's a normal nomination period. It doesn't change for a special election.

[00:15:12] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay. So, um... all right. Well, I think the idea that we're really not gonna meet, from the end of June, until mid September, is, um, highly unlikely. Uh, it has... I suppose there might have been one or two years where that happens, but it's certainly not standard operating procedure. So we'll... we'll see. There's just a lot of work that the city does, and things are, you know, may very well come up that we need to do to meet in there. But, um, but thank you, I understand it better now. It's that four weeks that, um, is really not fungible. It's a given. And... And the fact that the county requires the resolution's 125 days in advance. Right, so it's sort of, like, 4 weeks plus 125 days is the, is the amount you absolutely have to have before the election.

[00:16:08] City Clerk Heather: In that ballpark, yeah.

[00:16:09] Councilmember Pat Showalter: In that ballpark. Okay, thanks. Now I understand it much better. Thank you.

[00:16:16] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Are there any other questions? I did have, uh, of council member commit.

[00:16:24] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thanks so much, mayor. Um, so one of the questions I had was, um, about, uh, public input. So we have a very active public. And so for both processes, um, can, can staff kind of reiterate what, I mean, aside from the election, uh, should we go that route, we know that people would be able to to vote. If we go, the appointment process could stuff maybe outwind a little bit about how public, um, maybe able to, to provide that input aside from the outreach that we've received over the winter break.

[00:17:02] City Clerk Heather: So some people, so some people have su- sent, um, For example, we have the 6 suggested questions as an attachment. Some people have, um, provided council members with ideas of alternate questions. Um, we're gonna open it up for public comment. And so before we go to public comment, I thought it would be informative for us to be able to share with the public, how they might be able to provide input aside from, you know, direct outreach to council members, um, as well as, you know, uh, commenting tonight and how we how we might be able to incorporate that. Should we go in a, you know, quite mid route?

[00:17:41] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So that would be helpful. Thank you.

[00:17:43] City Clerk Heather: Yeah, um, so, you know, as you can see, the, from the staff report, the appointment timeline is is tight, right? And there's really not a lot that we can do about that because it's dictated by the charter. So aside from this evening, providing input, as you said, you know, reaching out to the council, um, as a group and providing, um, you know, suggested questions or, um, input on process. Really, after tonight, the if the council decided to move ahead with appointment. Really after tonight, the only thing that you could spend more time on are the questions that you would ask during interviews. Because if you move with appointment tonight, to set everything in motion correctly, we kind of have to get everything nailed down as far as the application and any questions you may wish to include in the application. Um, the interview process, the timeline, everything kind of has to be set tonight because we have such a narrow frame, um, to work with. So, um, that would, that would be my recommendation is that people, uh, contact the council and, you know, speak at this meeting or if you choose to, um, defer nailing down the interview questions that you would ask during interviews for the January 24th meeting. Um, you could do that and that would be another opportunity for people to weigh in. But, um, Aside from the questions that you ask live during the interview, everything else kind of has to get nailed down tonight.

[00:19:23] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. I appreciate that clarification and some things since, um, I've had the, the joy of being on the council's policy of, or, you know, uh, being part of the, um, sorry, Cark, um, the council appointment review committee, we've received a lot of feedback from the CPPC, the council policies and procedures committee, but given that this is a, the professional, this would be uh, an appointment for a vacancy, those, see, the, what comes from the CPPC would not be necessarily the same guidelines for this process. And tonight we would be going through what we would do, correct? I just want to clarify that too, for, for all of us.

[00:20:04] City Clerk Heather: The, the, the, so if I'm understanding it correctly, the process that's outlined in council policy K2 for appointment of body members is a great place to start because you've already got something in writing and it's already, uh, process that the public is familiar with and that you all are familiar with. So, um, we definitely have kind of woven a lot of that into our recommendations as far as the the process for, um, your interview structure. The only thing that I would say is a little bit different is since these are likely to be a longer, a little bit longer interview than and more in-depth and certainly very, very important. Um, that you would, it would be a good idea to set the interview order ahead of the interviews, whereas when you have, you know, APC and whatnot. We kind of have a maybe an order that could be moved around. So that would be the only real deviation that we would recommend, but certainly the policy that you already have on the books for that is a great place to start.

[00:21:09] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. I, you know, I do have a couple comments because I think one of the things we've moved to, um, is group interviews as part of the recommendation, um, and have it kind of around Robin style. But, you know, I would hope that we could augment that to have, you know, individualized interviews for this, but I think that that's something council can discuss. Is that correct? I might ask city attorney low to weigh in on the interview process the council has utilized in the past versus what would be appropriate moving forward.

[00:21:48] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: So, when you talk about a group interview, Round Robin, I did not, I was not able to watch this, um, the EPC interviews. So I'm not familiar with the process, but when you're talking about Round Robin, are you talking about, they're all, basically, they're all in the room, and then you're kind of going, you know, through each one of them and now asking the questions. And in changing that. Are you saying that potentially for this process, you would have maybe, if hypothetically, if we're doing this in person, you're having one person at the podium, and you're asking them all the questions at once, and then the next person comes up to the podium?

[00:22:25] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I think the process would be fine. Yeah, so to clarify, you know, when in the past, well, one, I hope that these can be in person, but I feel like this is deviating into comments and not questions. But I just wanted to clarify because the council policies and procedure had had changed policy K2, to move to a group interview style. And so, yes, it was, it would start in basically alphabetical order. One person would start, they would have the question, and then it would move to the next person in alphabetical order, and people would get an allocated time. Um, but kind of given that we are coming back in person starting January 10th. Um, you know, my hope is that we, we would have the council does have the opportunity to maybe move towards, um, being able to, to augment the process, should we see fit, and I wanted to clarify if we have that opportunity, and it sounds like your answer is yes.

[00:23:25] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Yeah, I think that you could, you know, change slightly the process that you use under K2 for EPC for this one. Um, as far as interviewing, um, I just want to, you know, be clear that everyone would be in the room. Anyways, hearing the question.

[00:23:44] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yeah. So, okay. Yeah. That's that's not my concern. I think it's it's always a logistical challenge depending on we don't know how many applicants. Should we go down an application route? We don't know how many applicants. So I thought I'd ask the question now. So, um, you know, another another question I have, um, is what we've done in the council appointment review committee is we have our application process for EPC. There are supplemental questions. And then the council appointment review committee actually has an opportunity to change questions. Um, should we see fit and we are able to do the same with EPC and we have that that time period. So, um, to to circle back, um, City Quicklazer, my question is, you know, tonight, we could come up, should we go the appointment route? We could come up with, um, an application process, maybe a draft lift of list of questions, and then we would have an opportunity to revisit them and perhaps even discuss further, uh, when we go through the interview process, correct?

[00:24:50] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Yeah, you, you, you could, um, as long as, you know, we would recommend that the questions be the same for each applicant and asked in the same order, um, you don't necessarily need to have them delivered ahead of time to applicants, but if you do want prepared applicants, that, that there might be an argument to be made for that. So, um, but that would be up to the council to decide what they wanted to do.

[00:25:17] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay, great. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Thanks, Mayor.

[00:25:23] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Bye, Snare Hicks.

[00:25:27] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Well, I'm glad council member committee started opening this line of questioning because I was gonna say these questions for comments, but I think it is probably works better to open up some of them as questions instead. And I'll preface my questions by saying, these are all about the appointment process. I'm actually open to either, um, either the, uh, special election or the appointment process, but I do have some questions about how the appointment process, um, might work, and a lot, and I have, like, council member committee, I've been getting a lot of, uh, enquiries and, uh, suggestions, a lot of good ones, and, and also a lot of ones that kind of, are very different, and we couldn't do all of them. Um, so, one of the questions that someone has asked me is whether we could have a forum, um, because we can continue to hold virtual forums, if we could have a forum, um, that's lengthier, that would be a special council meeting on a day that we don't have, um, we don't have selected yet, so that we could have the forum, uh, residents could watch, and then, I suppose, we could have in person too. That's just not the way this person ask it. People could watch, and then we could make our decision on a different date. Is that something that, uh, that would be feasible? And again, I'm not... There's a lot of possibilities here. So I'm not married to this particular one, but I just wanted to know if that would be a possible option, you know, pick, like, a Thursday night, special council meeting forum, um, and have a, you know, a more, um, thorough, you know, something that's more like the League of Women voters style forum. If we're looking at the timeline, proposed, and understanding that, um, you know, in the report, we had floated a January 26th interview date that we now know has several, um, conflicts. Um, I think we're going to be hard pressed to fit something like that in, and I see city manager McCarthy's hand is up. So I'm sure that she has some input on this as well.

[00:27:59] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Um, thank you, mayor, and vice mayor Hicks. So, I think when you look at the reality of the timing, we have a little over 3 weeks to go before January 29th, and we have the 2 regular meetings, one on the 10th, one on the 24th. This meeting tonight was intended to somewhat be that forum where you would hear feedback from the public. Um, certainly on what option to choose. Now, the forum that you referenced in terms of League of Women voters. That would be separate from the city holding a forum, and there's certainly, I think, would be opportunity for any outside groups, um, to hold a forum, forum like that that would be outside of what the city would sponsor. But I think just realistically, it's going to be really hard to hold another meeting, similar to this one. So I think I would want to know more from council what you will would be interested in doing in another meeting. Now, if it's about hearing feedback about the questions that people might want to pose as part of the interview process, if that's part of the feedback that you all are getting, you will have that next time that you're actually gonna be interviewing folks. You'll have an intervening couple weeks. So we could make sure that we're soliciting feedback during that, during that advertising period, whatever direction you all would want to give us tonight in the next couple weeks, we could try and incorporate that with the meeting that was proposed for the end of the month. Um, another idea is that if you get uh, feedback from the public regarding certain questions that they might want to be asking, you could also think about, should you go the appointment route? You could think about including questions on the application itself. So you could ask questions on the application, maybe some that came from the public that you're interested in knowing about. And then you could also save some for the actual interview. And I would suggest you all discuss that tonight. Um, so, I guess the bottom line is, yes, we could schedule a special meeting, but I'm not quite sure what it would accomplish other than, you know, what you all are gonna be doing tonight. And then again, in a couple weeks. So I would just want a little more clarity, I guess, on what. what you all would want to do in another meeting.

[00:30:33] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Well, thank you for clarifying the other thing I was gonna ask about, because you've raised this to me before, that actually, when we talk about questions for candidates or applicants, that we're talking about two sets of questions. The questions on the application, and then the questions that we ask them in some sort of interview, and I think that's important to be. Thank you for bringing that up. Um, I was, I was not suggesting that I was not asking about whether the League of Women voters or some other group. I think it's unlikely a group will be able to pull something together in this time, although I'd love to be surprised. Um, yeah, I was asking whether the city could, and what the resident had thought was that, um, a space of time between the interview and us making the decision would be useful. So that's why I asked. Thank you.

[00:31:26] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Council member show, Walter.

[00:31:30] Councilmember Pat Showalter: I just wanted to ask about when the Form 700 is really required. Is that required as part of your filing documents for applying or is that required before you take office?

[00:31:46] City Clerk Heather: The requirement, it would be an assuming office. We've added it in as a piece of the application process to give you all a better idea of the candidate and, you know, what what they're working with as far as their potential conflicts of interest. Um, So that could, you know, everything about the application technically is changeable, including, as we've already discussed, adding questions, the applicants would need to fill out and submit.

[00:32:21] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Oh, okay, so the form 700. I mean, obviously you need it before you assume office, but, but it's not a, it's not a, it's not a requirement for applying. I didn't remember that I needed to do one as a, um, as a candidate, and I, I could be wrong about that, but...

[00:32:38] City Clerk Heather: Oh, when you're a candidate, you do have to.

[00:32:40] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Do do them? Okay. I've been doing them since, um, the mid 90s anyway, so, yeah.

[00:32:46] City Clerk Heather: But it's strictly as a part of the application process for appointment. There's no strict requirement that someone fill out a form 700 before they take office and we've, we've chosen to add that requirement into the application, but again, all of that is, is subject to change.

[00:33:04] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Okay. Um, and, uh, just following on in the, the discussion of, um, the interview process. I do think that this is one of the interviews that really does lend itself to a group interview. And the reason I think that is because, you know, we work as a council. And it's very important to see how people interact with each other. You know, we add on to things that, you know, one person will bring something up, and, and, um, the rest of us may respond to it one way or another, agree, add on to it. And I think that, um, uh, understanding that give and take is, um, it's one of the soft uh, skills. That's very important in serving on a council. So, I don't think this one lends itself to being a single interview, as well as some of the other positions we might be looking at.

[00:34:04] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, thank you. Thank you. Are there any remaining questions?

[00:34:13] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: I have a question that is, uh, substantially similar to questions from council member command by Snur Hicks, and that has to do with, uh, what we must, if we decide to pursue an appointment process, what we must decide today and what we could potentially push out until the January 24th meeting. Uh, so for instance, there was a distinction made between questions that would be asked in the application, which we have to pick now. Um, but questions for the interview itself could be determined later. Um, would that also apply to, uh, the selection procedure, for instance, the staff of the proposal here, uh, which is pretty robust. Um, but is it absolutely essential that we determine the selection procedure tonight, or is that something that could wait until January 24th?

[00:35:09] City Clerk Heather: I would recommend that you give good consideration to the procedure that you would like to use tonight, that the more that we can solidify it tonight, the smoother your interview process goes. And so, um, as much as you can, um, get off your plate, and if you, if you'd like to get more attention to questions, you know, on the 24th, then, you know, certainly that that would be appropriate. But as much as you can nail down tonight, the better off and the more smooth the process will be overall.

[00:35:44] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Okay, and related to that, uh, we can provide direction tonight on interview questions and a selection process, that does not preclude a majority of the council in the meeting itself from changing the questions or the selection process, right? That's happened in planning commission interviews, for instance, uh, over the past several years. Um, is there anything that would, if we decide, for instance, you know, that the questions we decide, we picked today, or not appropriate, could we, do we have the discretion to change them during the, the meeting when we conduct the interviews?

[00:36:25] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: And uh, city attorney, see your hand is up.

[00:36:28] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Yeah. I think. You can. You could change the questions, and and I'm assuming you're talking about, in the beginning and the meeting before you started interviewing any particular candidate, or are you talking about some way, sometime midway through your interview process and you decide to change the questions? I think the problem that, You need to keep in mind is that, Fairness and equity considerations are going to be part of this process. Unlike an election, you know, in an election situation, the electorate is allowed to, for any reason, decide to vote or not vote for somebody, right? Reasons that are appropriate or not appropriate. I mean, that is the freedom that voters have. But in an appointment like this, you are talking about a process that does need to be fair. And so, you, you could change the questions, um, but you need to think about the fact that the person whose interviews 1st is gonna be at a disadvantage to everyone that goes after them, because everyone that goes after them is going to hear all the questions. And so you might want to think about how, how that plays out. Um, if if you want to change the questions, you know, right at the beginning of the meeting, and everybody hears what they're going to be, you know, before you start the interview process, that would probably be okay. But to the extent that someone is disadvantaged in the process, that could create issues. And so you just want to make sure that whatever you decide, it is equitable for all the candidates, regardless of whether or not they're first up or last up. Does that make sense?

[00:38:10] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: It does. I might have a follow up, but let's go to the council appointees 1st city manager.

[00:38:16] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Uh, thank you, Mayor. So, I would suggest that if you all want to, if you decide to go on the appointment route, and you want to change questions, that you would change them no later than January 24th at the regular meeting. That way, whoever is going to be interviewed, whoever will have applied, they will know the questions, they'll know the order because one of the other things that we recommend is that you will consider the city clerk doing a random drawing of the order of interviews. So I would suggest if you do change them, You talk about it tonight and then you have time to talk about it on the 24th as well. But I would, I would highly recommend that you don't go past that and change them on the fly for all the reasons that the city attorney, um, just spoke about.

[00:39:09] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: And does that also apply to the selection procedure? that we could talk about that tonight and then decide to finalize it on the 24.

[00:39:20] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Yes, I, I, you could, but again, I would say as much certainty that staff have tonight, we will do a much better job in the next 3 weeks making sure that the process is smooth and we're not uh, reacting, you know, quickly to changes that are made. But yes, you could do that, but I would advise that the direction that you give us tonight be clear and we get as much certainty this evening. And then the 24th be reserved more for the interview questions if you want to talk about that. I think there are some low hanging fruit on the application process itself that you really could just solidify tonight. Um, and some of the longer discussion, sounds like, would certainly be reserved for the interview process. So I think should that, should the application process be, and the appointment process be the route you choose? I do suggest that we try and nail that down tonight so that we can get moving on it. We only have 3 weeks.

[00:40:25] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Right. Okay. Thank you. That's very helpful.

[00:40:28] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Council number, come.

[00:40:30] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. So just a follow-up question on some of the discussions. So we kind of talked about what the timeline would be. Should we go the special election route? But for the appointment, it sounded like the 26th is not gonna be the day we're gonna have the special meeting for it to interview applicants. Is that correct? And so did staff have a new date that they were proposing? And I think, again, in the vein of trying to get as much accomplished tonight as possible, I think that that would be helpful for counsel to know.

[00:41:01] City Clerk Heather: Uh, thank you, uh, mayor and council member Kamei. So the 26th, it does appear, there are a couple conflicts, um, an anticipated conflicts for that evening. So we would suggest that council determine, again, if you choose the appointment route, um, a separate date that would need to be around that time frame. Um, The 24th council's already meeting for your regular meeting. Uh, the 25th would, you know, be the next day. So that's not ideal, but that's certainly an option, the 25th. The 27th could also be an option. Also, not necessarily ideal. It's a Friday night and you may have applicants or candidates that may not be available then. Um, so the 30th could potentially be an option, and I've already discussed this with the city attorney and city clerk. Now it is one day after the 29th, but I do think there is a way that you could do it on the 30th, and I would ask the city attorney to, um, address, address what we've spoke about, um, and how we would be able to do that on the 30th.

[00:42:10] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, uh, City Attorney Jennifer Logue.

[00:42:13] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: So, um, in doing a little bit of research, I know that our charter does have a strict 30 day deadline, but one of the things that is very common in, um, court proceedings when deadlines fall on a weekend or a non-business day, it is very common for it to be able to roll over to the next day. So because January 29th is a Sunday. I think legally we can argue that the 30th, you know, that we can roll that over to January 30th and still be technically substantially with, you know, compliant with the charter requirement. So I think you would be safe to have it on the 30th.

[00:42:50] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Great. Thank you. Thank you. Bye, Sn Hicks.

[00:42:58] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: I'm gonna ask another question that I thought I'd say for comments, but now I think it's better, um, better as a question. Um, and that is that the, when I look at the application, it's, um, it's, unless I'm reading it wrong, it's extremely brief, unlike the ones we usually use for commissions and committees. Am I missing some documentation, 'cause it, uh, we usually on the commissions and committees ask things like, um, have you ever been to, uh, you know, if you're applying for the visual arts committee? Have you ever been to a visual arts committee meeting, and ask a few questions, a few general questions on your, you know, your orientation to visual arts and your thoughts on that? And I don't see that in this application. Am I missing something? Because I would think it would need to have some of the that.

[00:43:55] City Clerk Heather: No, you're not missing anything, and that was certainly, you know, we wanted to give you all the leeway to add whatever it is that you wanted to this. So, um, however, you'd like to tailor it to capture specific information, as city manager McCarthy said, some low hanging fruit, things that you can kind of glean from the applicant just through the application process that you wouldn't need to then spend time, um, asking questions about during the interview process. So we can certainly make any changes to the application that you would like.

[00:44:28] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, great. I just wanted to clarify that.

[00:44:30] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Thank you. Council member of the COVID.

[00:44:35] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. We were talking about the appointment process. I thought of a question. Um, Is there any requirement that we have to interview everyone who applies? I guess my current concern, frankly, is if we get a large number of applications, and given the short time frame we have, um, you know, I don't think it's realistic for us to be interviewing folks for 12, 15 hours. So is there a, are we allowed to find, come up with some kind of mechanism to, um, you know, narrow down the pool to, um, more reasonable interview number?

[00:45:17] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, thank you, uh, Jennifer Logue City Attorney.

[00:45:21] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: I do not think it is legally required for you to interview every single applicant. We would just need to come up with a process by which you would eliminate applications on the front end.

[00:45:33] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Thank you.

[00:45:38] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: And that's a process that I believe the city of San Jose is using. Um, so to the extent, staff may want to explore that, uh, the city of NSA staff probably could answer whatever legal constraints they've had to overcome to provide that policy.

[00:45:51] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, are there any remaining questions? Not seeing any? So we'll proceed to public comment.

[00:45:58] City Clerk Heather: Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press star 9 on your phone. A timer will be displayed on the screen. Uh, let's allocate 2 minutes. The 1st speaker is Bruce England.

[00:46:16] Bruce England: Thank you mayor. Bruce England speaking for Mound Your Coalition for Sustainable Planning on Green Spaces Mountain View. We submitted a lot of suggested questions for the candidates if you do an appointment. We didn't take a position on whether appointment or special election is best way to go. I didn't see our letter in the records online, but I did send to all the individual council members. I hope that our letter will eventually be included in the public record. I'm not going to go over all the questions because there are quite a few, but I think the 1st one is worth stating, because it's really key to all the rest of them, and that's this, from the letter. Are you familiar with Sally's priorities and activities as a council member? And how are you prepared to carry forward her legacy? Members of the public that follow council decisions and changes in the city, no Sally Lieber, and where she stood on the issues as cited in the questions that follow, which I'm not going to say. When they voted for her, the citizens were voting for her positions. In our view, any replacement must be familiar with the city council operation issues, especially considering the incredible breadth of experience and knowledge that we're losing with Sally's departure. Thank you very much.

[00:47:29] City Clerk Heather: Thank you. The next speaker is Peter Katz.

[00:47:35] Peter Katz: Thank you, mayor and city council. It's Peter Katz, CEO of the Mountain View Chamber of Commerce. Um, I want to thank you for taking on this important task of filling the city council seat in terms of process. The chamber respects whatever decision the council chooses, be it appointment or election. The chamber remains ready to assist in any way that we can, especially disseminating the information presented tonight to our membership, via social media and our broader mailing list. We can also host a forum, if that's deemed appropriate. We rely on you to, uh, let us know what would work and what won't. But regardless of approach, the interview process itself remains an extremely critical component. And we're grateful for the care and attention invested in coming up with sample questions. As you finalize the questions to be asked, we would like to suggest four additional ones. First, if appointed, how will you develop and maintain a relationship with the business community? Second, what efforts would you take to help our existing businesses stay in Mountain View, make it easier for new businesses to enter, and reduce the number of longstanding empty storefronts? Number three, the downtown precise plan, the economic vitality strategy, and the matrix study are all important projects that the city is undertaking to ensure both short and long term economic vibrancy. How would you instruct staff to prioritize these activities? And four, what are your thoughts and ideas for improving the housing supply to meet today's requirements, including R3, as well as planning for the future? Relatedly, increased housing leads to increased attendance levels at local schools that are already near capacity. How do you plan to address this? Thank you again for your considered efforts, and we look forward to working with the new council member, whomever they may be.

[00:49:20] City Clerk Heather: Thank you. The next speaker is Robert Cox.

[00:49:28] Robert Cox: Can you hear me?

[00:49:30] City Clerk Heather: Yes, we can.

[00:49:31] Robert Cox: Okay, hi, I'm Robert speaking for the steering committee of Liverpool Mountain View. We're sad to see that council member Sally Lieber has resigned. She was a great advocate for livability in Mountain View, especially in regard to our downtown in its historic core. As the council considers how best to find her replacement. If you interview candidates, please question candidates on their ideas concerning key items on the council's agenda for the remaining of main part of Sally's term. A particular interest to us are the downtown Precise Plan Park 2, Plans for the Castro Street Pedestrian Mall, the Great Separation of Castro Street. The historical ordinance update, and the parks and rec plan. It would be great to have someone on the council who can provide expert input on these items with the excellence that Sally Lever would have. Thank you for considering our views.

[00:50:30] City Clerk Heather: Thank you very much. The next speaker is Tim McKenzie.

[00:50:37] Tim McKenzie: Hi, all. Thank you for counsel for your thorough questions really helped me kind of wrap my head around what the appointment process would look like. Um, and I think that, uh, I also found it interesting that the, uh, super majority of times that this has occurred in Mountain View history. Uh, there was an appointment process that seems reasonable, and I have plenty of faith in council to be able to do, uh, avoid the sort of fiasco where seeing with the house right now situation, with the inability to find a speaker. I am certain that council will be very thoughtful and deliberate in, uh, appointing someone if you do go that route. And I'd like to echo a little bit of what I heard from some of the previous speakers. If questions do come up of, or including the question of, uh, how, how the potential appointees understand Sally's policies and how, what their vision would be for, how they would possibly carry them forward or approach the issues, um, that because it's filling a, uh, a seat that, uh, voters had a say on a few years ago. I have plenty of faith in y'all to make an excellent decision. So good luck choosing, thank you.

[00:51:56] City Clerk Heather: Thank you very much. The next speaker is Stephen Goldstein.

[00:52:02] Stephen Goldstein: Thank you very much for letting me speak. I just wanted to, uh, ask me a question because it seemed like there was some confusion. Well, I see, there is a vacancy in the Guardian City Council, is it true that actually a person must build a position within 30 days in order being confined to the chart? If that's the case, you know, I got to say the, uh, the only way you could potentially have held an election at this point in time would be to have actually started the election as in the date which uh, Sally Liber had submitted her, uh, for her notice. But in that case, please be sure that the public record does clearly state that you are actually by charter in a very fixed deadline whether to either appoint or have an elect to already perform within 30 days. That's all I ask, and then anything else? Thank you very much for I need the chance to speak.

[00:53:07] City Clerk Heather: Thank you. The next speaker is Megan Fraley.

[00:53:19] Megan Fraley: Hi, um, thank you, counsel. Good evening. I'm here to express my concern about the potential threats to democracy posed by the special appointment process being considered. As a citizen, I believe that one of the most important principles of democracy is the right to choose our representatives through fair and open elections. By bypassing this process and making a special appointment, the city council will be disregarding the will of the people and the right to have a say and who represents them. I understand that the council and each member may have their own preferences and desires, but please, please remember that the role of an elected official is to represent the wishes of the voters. And in this case, it's replacing Sally Lieber. Please remember the special appointment process being considered not what you want as a council member, but rather what the voters wanted. In order to minimize the threat to democracy posed by special appointments, It's important that the process be as closely aligned with democratic principles as possible. This could include using a transparent and partial selection process, ensuring that all qualified candidates have an equal opportunity to be considered and publicly interviewed and allow for public input and participation. Further, it's crucial that's everything done rigorously and seriously, keeping in mind the threat to democracy, particularly in this day and age that we live in. And I would love to hear council actually discuss the philosophical ethical implications of a special appointment process, and if going forward with an appointment, have a very meaningful public conversation about how as a council. This is going to actually be as aligned with democracy as possible. Um, I urge the council to carefully weigh these considerations and to prioritize the principles of democracy in any decision to make an appointment in that vein. Really just 2 things. One, please have an open transparent process, for public input is allowed. And please keep in mind, it is not about what the council members individually want. This is not an opportunity to change the makeup, but please find an appointment that will most closely represent the values that Sally Liber has so represented for us as people who voted for her. Thank you.

[00:55:20] City Clerk Heather: Thank you very much. The next speaker is B. Hansen.

[00:55:28] B. Hansen: Hello, council. Um, uh, that was an outstanding, uh, Laden Friendly. Um, I hope we are really neat. We really need to move forward. Uh, with the a part of the process, uh, recognizing that, uh, we do need to keep, you know, public, uh, no, no, no. Um, a good thing and I, I really appreciate a Robert uh, Cox's statement as well. Uh, and that would add to his list, uh, housing is the most important thing, and at this point, uh, it looks like the housing element is going to be late again. Uh, and that's really, uh, the number one issue as far as I'm concerned for Mountain View. Uh, we really need to have an applicant uh, or uh, an appointment of someone who is familiar, deeply familiar with that issue. Uh, and I hope you'll keep that in mind when you make your decisions. Yeah, my time.

[00:56:35] City Clerk Heather: Thank you very much, B. The next speaker is ED Keating.

[00:56:43] ED Keating: Hello, counsel. So, Mountain View is a unique city. It's voters in 2016 past rent stabilization. So if you are choosing, as I expect you will, to add content questions to, uh, either the written application or to the interview process, I hope that, uh, exploring, um, having some way to allow the applicants to comment on Mountain View's CSFRA rent stabilization is included. When reason this is important is that there are rental housing committee, uh, appointments in your future, and in this, this person appointed, will be weighing in on the rental housing committee appointments, uh, another, um, litmus test, in a sense, or, you know, interesting point of data that you might ask about, is the applicant's positions on measure D, which would have amended the CSFRA. Uh, I support, um, whatever process you choose, and, um, I just, you know, also asking how they would choose rental housing applicants or other applicants, like a public safety advisory board, which are coming up, would also be informative. I also support that, uh, you have, uh, chosen, and I hope will, uh, stay with that choice, or have that choice ahead of you, to ask for the disclosure form as part of the process for application. Thank you very much.

[00:58:22] City Clerk Heather: Thank you. The next speaker is the caller, uh, area code 650 ending in 809. Color ending with the phone number 809. I believe you'll have to press.

[00:58:49] Leslie Bane: Can you hear me? This is Leslie Bane.

[00:58:52] City Clerk Heather: We can hear you now.

[00:58:53] Leslie Bane: Okay, thank you so much. Um, So, my comments, never forget we are here because Sally Lieber was confused about a matter of conflict of interest. A detailed explanation has not been given to the public. My best guess, which I have to guess, because I'd rather have the facts, but I don't have the facts, is that as a member of the council, Lieber felt a duty to lower Google's tax burdens on a piece of telecom equipment. But as a matter of the SPE, she has a responsibility to ensure that imposed taxes are fair for everyone. Couldn't do both so she had to resign. Under a functioning democracy, voters have the right to cast a vote for a candidate, who wants to do what is best for residents, not what is best for Google. Lee Zhang finished 4th in an election held in November. She earned about half the votes of the incumbents. Some say she should not be appointed because she lost. They argue that some unknown candidate who received 0 votes in November would somehow be a better choice. I don't follow that logic. At this point, the fact is that Zhang earned more votes than any other potential candidate. I'm not alone in my belief that Zhang would be the front runner, if a free and fair election was held, appointing anyone else, instead of requiring them to compete in a free and fair election. What can I say? That is not democracy. Please, please, please don't do this. I strongly recommend that a special election be held. I ask the city council to respect the right of voters. Choose who represents us on the city council. There is nothing more fundamental to a healthy democracy than that.

[01:00:49] City Clerk Heather: Thank you very much for your comments. The next speaker is Halla.

[01:00:57] Halla Al Shawani: Yes, hello, good evening, Mayor, council members, and council staff. My name is Hella Al Shawani. I'm a longtime resident of Mountain View. Um, I believe that uh, misleads in, uh, one over 6000 of Mountain View residents votes in the last election, which was only about two months ago. Now that the, um... And she came, you know, as you know, forthright after the three elected incumbents, now that the incumbent Sally Lieber is no longer there, she vacated her seat. It just makes a lot of sense to me, that the next person, democratically elected, by the voters of Mountain View, be mislead Xing. Um, I am wondering if there's a hybrid solution, uh, where the city council would consider appointing lead Zheng, who was democratically elected, and she would have been actually on the council, if Sally Lieber, uh, resigned, uh, before the, you know, election order did not run. However, that did not happen, and now it's, I think it's appropriate for the council to consider that. If they're not willing to, uh, appoint, um, lead Zheng, to this position, then I strongly recommend that we do special elections, even though the process is lengthy, and it is expensive. I think a democratic, truly democratic representation of the public, end council is essential. City manager, or a city attorney talked about equity and fairness. And I don't see how, you know, allowing only six people to choose a person instead of all of the residents of Mountain View would be equitable. So, I hope you consider my point. Thank you.

[01:03:00] City Clerk Heather: Thank you very much. The next speaker is Anna Marie.

[01:03:09] Anna Marie: Hi, can you hear me?

[01:03:12] City Clerk Heather: Yes, we can.

[01:03:13] Anna Marie: Perfect. Um, so thank you all for being here. I appreciate this conversation. Um, so 1st of all, Sally Lieber was an exceptional cancel member that truly understood the issues in our community. She will be greatly missed in this role. Like Meghan Franley, I am deeply concerned about upholding democracy in this process. Mountain View residents voted for Sally Lieber because of her positions on issues, and it would only be fair to put this decision back into the hands of the people. If the appointment route is taken by council, then there should be extensive actions taken to make sure that the will of the people is held in place while replacing Sally Lever. There should also be transparency when it comes to vetting any applications, um, like anything that, uh, council decides to throw out or, um, not move forward with. I'd love to see what more information about that. Uh, like many other residents, I personally, um, do not think Li Jing is a viable candidate at all. And in a special election, I believe she will not get the votes to be on council. So I really hope council moves forward with making this as democratic as possible, and upholding the fact that people, residents of Mountain View, overwhelmingly voted for Sally Lieber, because of who she is, what she stands for, and what she actually does. And the fact that she's not afraid to stand up to Google or pretty much anyone. So I'm hoping counsel does, um, the will of the people, and move forward with a special election. Thank you so much.

[01:04:54] City Clerk Heather: Thank you very much. Next speaker is Alex Brown.

[01:05:03] Alex Brown: All right, all right. You don't have to twist my arm. I'll accept the appointment tonight, save everyone all the time. Be happy to join you guys up on the dais. Oh, wait, I would actually love that. would be fun. No. I'm gonna miss Sally up there. I am looking forward to hanging out with her in the audience at council meetings again. Just like we used to. Uh, I think that the appointment process should be fair, should be transparent, and uh, as part of that, I would be happy to help organize any sort of forum or community, uh, organized interview with the, uh, the appointment. potential pointees? Canada, candidates? Those who would offer their services as uh, also member of council. Yeah, we've done it before for the various elections. I'd be happy to do it again, including the virtual component, try to include as many people as possible. I don't think an election is worth the time that we're not gonna have a full council or the money or the effort. So, I trust you guys. You figure it out. Thanks. Too much.

[01:06:22] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Seeing no other members of the public wishing to speak, we will return to the council for deliberation and action. Before deliberations start, I would like to outline the process, we will follow tonight. Council will, will 1st discuss the primary question of whether to either appoint someone to fill the vacancy or hold a special election. I will now open the floor for council discussion and determination on this 1st matter before moving on to other considerations and just a quick question for staff. Is it your preference, um, for there to be a formal motion, uh, to either conduct a special election or, um, hold an appointment process before we proceed to the 2nd step, or is it, you know, uh, is a simple show of hands sufficient?

[01:07:09] City Clerk Heather: Say a show of hands is sufficient, but if, you know, a formal motion, it feels more comfortable, then that's fine too.

[01:07:16] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, thank you. Bye, Smart Hicks.

[01:07:22] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: So, I'm just gonna start out by saying, I am, I'm actually open to, to either the special election or the appointment process. I've gotten, like, I'm sure all of you have, um, many comments from residents saying that, um, we'd be crazy to do a special election and others saying we'd be crazy to do an appointment. So, um, I guess we're crazy either way. Um, the money, but here are some of my considerations. The money is not, to me, the biggest obstacle, because we, uh, spend I could name things, but we spent a lot of money on a lot of things. The biggest consideration for me is whether the steps we take are considered legitimate by as many residents as possible. The timing for a special election is not, you know, somebody wouldn't be seated clearly as quickly, but it's also not as big an obstacle for me. You know, we have so many recusals. We're often operating with only six or fewer people. So if we're expecting to add somebody very quickly as a tiebreaker, I'm sure as soon as we do that, or another of us will disappear, and we'll be back to six people again. So, um, uh, so, on the other hand, um... So the big thing for me with the appointments is that we not that we do something much more transparent and open to the public and public input than our typical committee and commission appointment process. And I'm really pleased to have heard from two members of the public. Um, the Chamber of Commerce and whoever Alice Brown was speaking up for, um, that they would be willing to hold some kind of forum, because I think that would be tremendously helpful. Um, they, uh, and I just want to say, I've also been moved by the many thoughtful comments from residents on how to make any appointment process a more robust process, and, uh, after other people weigh in, um, you know, if we go down that route, uh, I will, I'll be adding comments about how to make the appointment process more robust. Thank you.

[01:09:51] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Council member Matachek.

[01:09:54] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. I have a question, and then I have a couple of comments. Um, but my question is, um, I had the opportunity to speak with our city attorney, um, for a while today. Um, and I ask a lot of questions, some of what you also ask tonight. And it was a really good discussion, I thought. But my takeaway from it, and correct me if I'm wrong, um, city attorney, was that if we go the appointment route, um, we're really focusing on qualifications for to serve on the council. Um, and, um, you know, I took that to main things like, do you understand how the city works? Do you know the Brown Acts, you know? Do you know how this all functions? Are you up to speed on everything? Um, rather than things like, how do you feel about a specific issue? Um, and I guess I, you know, there were a lot of, uh, comments about forums and other things where, um, and questions we might want to ask that I felt like kind of got more toward the issue. Um, area. And so I guess I'd like some clarification on, you know, do we really focus on qualifications? Can we get into the issues? Um, just some guidance on that if we go the appointment route? And if, you know, uh, the city does something to sponsor, uh, like a forum or something.

[01:11:32] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Thank you. I'm happy to address that question. So, I do, this is this is a unique situation in that it is an appointed, you would be making an appointment to a typically elected seat. And like I said, in elections, they're very different. You know, the issues, your positions on particular issues, they all matter, the voters have a right to take all that into consideration when you are, when they are voting for a particular candidate. In this appointment situation, The, it is, it is akin to, um, a job application. And so, with that in mind, you do need to have set some parameters where you are really focusing on the qualifications of the candidate, can this, or the applicant, I'm sorry, can this person come in and do the job? If there are particular issues that, um, you know, members of the public would like to, you know, hear about, you could certainly include questions that address some of the issues. I mean, it is, it's not, um, it's public knowledge, what, you know, some of the issues and things that the city will be doing moving forward. And so you could certainly include questions that are issue based. But again, I think that, you know, you ask that question of all the candidates, so that you're getting that answer from all the candidates. And it's, you know, it's not, it would be as much about the quality of the response and their preparedness and how much they know about the city as it would be, the position they took on the issue that I think you would be considering. So there is definitely a way to balance their their views on issues with their thoroughness and their ability to articulate and understand the job of a council members. So, there is definitely a balance there. I'm not, you know, I didn't intend to say that you can't address the issues, but, you know, the question should be across the board to all the candidates. So if there is a particular issue you want to address, you should frame, you know, you should prepare those questions in advance. So that everyone is that helpful?

[01:13:45] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Um, I appreciate that.

[01:13:47] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Um, You know, and so, um, moving on to a comment, uh, or two. Um, like others have mentioned, um, I'm not really thrilled that we're at this point. Um, and all the paths that we have, um, to fill the vacancy have pros and cons. There really is not a perfect path from my perspective. Um, so this is really challenging, and I think this is one of the most uh, critical. Decisions that we're gonna be making, um, in a, in a long time, certainly, from my perspective, for me. It's a very critical decision. Um, So I, um, agree with, uh, the residents who spoke up tonight saying that, um, they thought that, um, they should be the ones to select the person who fills that they can see. Um, so I would prefer that we do an election. Um, I can see where some might think that a special election, given the short time frame, um, put some people at a disadvantage who might run. Um, but, um, an election in November is quite a ways out there. And so, you know, like I said before, there really is no perfect path here for us to choose. Um, I also understand the hesitancy to spend a lot of money. But as was mentioned, um, you know. Uh, we do spend money on, um, important things, and this is certainly an important topic. Um, so I don't want to, um, you know, have that be the primary focus. For me, the primary focus is uh, letting residents choose who should fill the vacancy. Um, If we did go the appointment route, because I heard a lot of people ask questions about that and some express preference for it. Um, I feel very strongly that we should appoint somebody who is not going to run for counsel in 2024. Um, and I'm saying that because, um, An incumbent has a distinct advantage um, in an election. And that person would then be an incumbent and would have that advantage. Um, I don't think it's up to us to make somebody an incumbent. I think that's up to the residents to do that. Um, and I don't really feel like, uh, a council seat seat should be handed to anybody. Um, I think they need to earn it. So, um, to be fair to our residents, um, even though it takes a little bit longer time. Um, I do think a special election is the way to go. Thanks.

[01:16:42] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Council member, Abi Coco.

[01:16:45] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, mayor. Um, very much appreciate uh, the discussion we've had. And, um, you know, I will be honest and say that I've gone back and forth on the other appointment or election, special election, and I uh, very much appreciate uh, the public who have, um, sent in emails and and spoken up today. Um, I have similar, um, Sentiments as it's been expressed by, um, council member, Manachicken, council member, uh, or vice mayor Hicks. Um, for me, I, I, and, you know, having gone up for election many times for this position. Um, I, you know, consider, um, the job, the job of a council member extremely, um, important and, um, is a high honor. And what makes it that way is that the people of the city vote us in. Um, And so when I think about our decision today, I've been trying to, um, you know, trying to decide how I could best carry out the will of the voters who I was elected to represent. Um, And I think, and I've learned a lot. Um, you know, there are a lot of, frankly, assumptions based on what I was seeing at other um, cities that are going through similar uh, similar decision making. Um, and, um, the staff report and and our staff, um, having done the research, actually, um, Uh, came up with different answers to some of the questions or defunct some of the assumptions I had about the process. Um, so that is also, you know, um, weight, obviously, and um, where I'm leaning on on this. Um, I feel that, um, the challenge here, there's a challenge of time, and, um, and, you know, I understand the concern of cost, um, as someone who's, um, you know, always minding our budget, um, that that is a concern to me. But, um, as as Weisner mentioned, um, you know, we've been fortunate to be in a place where we have funds to, um, do many things and we've spent funds on many different things. And I think, um, you know, this is an important function that is worth the funding. And so I am leaning towards a special election. Um, mainly because I think it's important that the will of the voters be um, heard. And I'm not, frankly, um, confident that given the short time frame of an appointment process, we would have adequate be able to adequately do that. Um, I agree as council member Kane's concerns about public input. I think that is really important. But, you know, with 3 weeks, I just don't know how much of that we're going to get. And, um, and then, you know, have to base a decision on that. Um, I also think that um, you know, it was mentioned that we should focus on qualifications. Um, but you know, frankly, where you're all elected or a council member is elected, um, for many different reasons. qualifications might be one of them, but there are many other reasons why certain members are elected. And so, um, to just focus on that, I think, would be, um, uh, you know, would be incomplete. Um, and so, and as we heard, I really appreciate the many different questions that um, the public suggest members suggested. I agree. I think we should be asking a lot of those questions, but again, I think about just the reality, pragmatically, how could we do that in this very short time frame of 3 weeks or, you know, an interview process where you have maybe an hour to interview one person. Um, I think, you know, that would be frankly generous if we can do that. Um, so, um, in light of all that, again, I think that the the prudent way to go would be to hold a special election. Now, I appreciate staff's concerns about time and workload and being mindful of our, um, you know, summer vacation. But as council member, Shelter mentioned, there have been many years, where we've called special meetings, even through the summer. I think the most we had was in 2014. I would think we had like 58 meetings that year. Um, So, I, um, you know, I don't think that should hold us back and I would like to try to move up the election sooner so that we don't have the vacancy as long. And so I would propose that we try to move it up to sometime in June. And that would then, you know, we would have to probably come back in July to certify the election, but at least too, if there's some, you know, sense of who might be elected, that person can start working to get up to speed, like just like we do when we're elected in November, we have a couple of months to orient ourselves and learn about the, you know, departments and whatnot. So I, that would give that person time to do all that, um, rather than waiting until August and when we come back into session at the end of August. So my, um, I would suggest we move it up to June, the earliest weekend in June doesn't have to be the 1st week, but whatever we can do in June. Um, I know that that leaves a vacancy for a few months, but I think that just means that we, as the 6 of us, will work, will have to work harder to um, build consensus and maybe compromise. And I kind of looked at, look forward to that, um, because, you know, perhaps that will actually bring us um, closer together. Um, so, you know, I think that's something that we could very much overcome with all of our, um, you know, concerted effort. So, um, that is where my position is, that we do a special election, um, and try to hold it um, earlier in the June time frame. Thank you.

[01:23:11] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Bye, Samir Hicks.

[01:23:14] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: So, I said when I 1st spoke that I was, um, opened both and gave the room to why, um, wanted to hear from other council members, having heard from two, I am now leaning towards a special election. Um, although I also agreed with what council member Matrix said that if we appoint someone, I would like them to, to, um, promise not to, uh, not to run. Thank you. Thank you.

[01:23:48] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Any other members of the council who would like to speak? I can take a, oh, council member Shelter.

[01:23:59] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um, one of the things that concerns me about a special election besides the, um, uh, the time and effort that it takes and and the money, of course, is the low turnout that is typically, um, brought about by, uh, special elections. Usually, they have about half, my understanding is they have about half to a quarter, as many people as vote in regular elections. And, um, that's that's something that, uh, really does concern me. So I, um, you know, I want to bring that up as an issue. And, um, then the other thing is, I think that, um, we have a lot on our workplate. We, um, we hear continuously from the staff about how, how they, there's, you know, there's so much that we need to do. And sometimes, I think we hear it enough that we feel a little bit like it's wolf wolf. But I don't really think that's the case. I do think that, um, our, our council has a tremendous amount of, um, uh, important policy issues to weigh in on and concentrate on. So, having that whole in our group, um, for, um, six or eight months, I find worrisome. And, um, I know I've observed over the, having lived in Mountain View a long time, I have observed that, um, uh, both processes have worked well. You know, the appointment process has worked well. We've gotten a lot. One of the things that Mountain View is blessed with, is, I think, is that a lot of really qualified people step up, to be part of our committees, to be part of council. And, um, so I think that, uh, you know, either way, we will get really good candidates, and, um... But I wanted to bring up the issue of a very low turnout for a special election, because I think that, um, it, uh, it, it's one of the, you know, it's just one of the practical problems.

[01:26:22] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Thank you. Council member command.

[01:26:30] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you so much, Mayor. Really appreciate the comments from the public and staff's analysis on this in a short turnaround. I think, um, as was expressed by some of my colleagues, this is a very challenging position, um, that that council has put in. Um, I think that that is, uh, something that we, we hadn't necessarily anticipated, but that's something that, that's part of coming along with council, is we're often put in situations, um, where we need to, to make the best decisions we can for residents. And, you know, I'd like to take a step back and say, you know, if the time period on the vacancy was different. It would trigger the special election. But given that we're at about 2 years left on council member early 1st term, we do have the option of going special election. Uh, or an appointment process. Um, you know, another part is that since we are 2 years out from any type of general election. We don't really have the opportunity for consolidation into a municipal general municipal election. The only option, really, is the special election. So I think that the timing also, um, is something that affects my my viewpoint. Given all of these factors, I am leaning towards the appointment process, and I'd like to outline why. The, should we not go the appointment process, this seat would sit vacant for about 9 months. To me, that is much more than a recusal, which I, you know, I don't live in the downtown, so that doesn't happen very often for me. So I find it an infrequent occurrence. Um, that's also 75% of the year. To have that seat bacon until September. We just received our tentative agenda list, which has many important and critical policy decisions that I believe we need a full council to discuss. Those include our housing policy housing element, our upcoming budget process, our displacement response strategy that we've been talking about for the last 4 years, our historic preservation ordinance is finally coming back, which we've also been talking about for 4 years. We've also been talking about expanding our safe parking program. All of these things, I think, are really critical policy topics that we need a full council to discuss. We also don't have an opportunity to appoint an interim, which is also why I'm leaning towards the appointment process. They do feel that we need. represent a full and representative counsel to discuss these issues. We also are looking at a potential of over $2000000 for a special election. And while we have been in a very fortunate fiscal, um, position, where the last several decades and even how we were able to allocate our ARPA funding, that ARPA funding was one time, and we are discussing the potential of facing another recession. And as we are seeing layoffs all throughout our state and our region, I find this fiscal uncertainty something that we really need to take heed to. We also know that given the registrar of voter data, which I did reach out to Shannon Boucher and her staff to ask, in a regular general election, the turnout is typically 60 to 70%. In a special election, the low road or turnout is anywhere to 25 to 35%. And that's usually, uh, you usually see a low voter turnout from hard to reach communities. The registrar voters isn't able to share disaggregated data, because it's considered unreliable, but given that we have the most recent 2020 data, will know that people could be, um, not being able to participate as fully as they like. So for those reasons, I'm leaning towards the appointment process and happy to discuss further. Thank you.

[01:30:59] Unknown Speaker: Thank you very much.

[01:31:02] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I agree with, as a member, command, compliment, very strongly. Uh, and I feel for the peculiarity of having fought this battle, in my day job, and now having to fight it again. Um, I, there are many good reasons why an appointment process is appropriate, as articulated by my colleagues, but the biggest one in my mind is cost.

[01:31:30] Unknown Speaker: We can't hear you, Mayor.

[01:31:36] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: My audio fell off. Can hear me? I'm so sorry about that. I've got technical challenges, galore going on. If I cease to be, uh, understandable, please let me know and I will call in. Um, But I, uh, I, so I agree with council member, committee, council member show Walter. I think they've each given several strong reasons why, you know, process is appropriate. In my mind, the strongest, the most compelling reason is the cost. I can't justify, I can't defend spending $2100000 on a special election. It's an extraordinary expenditure. Uh, and we'll have to, we'll be accountable to our constituents. Why didn't we spend that money on capital improvements? Why didn't we spend that money on, you know, filling the vacancies among our staffing? Um, and as council member, they rightly pointed out. A lot of our one time funding, which was so critical to sustain us through the pandemic, is gone. And now it's all our general fund that sustains us. And I worry, just as Council member Komei has said, we do find ourselves in a recession. We're gonna have to make some decisions, and it would be really nice to have $2.1 million in a reserve or available and, you know, some other, uh, fund for things that our community actually will, will need during a difficult period of time. Um, I, I, I find it so difficult to, to make any case at all for spending that much money on a special election, especially my special election. When I know, we will have many qualified, capable, and compassionate, and good people who are interested in this role, the role of time. I have absolute confidence in this council, and selecting someone who can do a good job, who can work with us. Make good decisions. It's not to say, but I trust the voters in making a good choice. The voters pick all of us, you know, so I would hope that they would continue to make the decision, but, uh, we have to be mindful, just as council member show Walter and council member, who you said that the turnout will be low. Uh, and that means some members of our community will pick. The council member who will represent every member of the community. And not even close to a majority will be able, will likely weigh in. And that's a big problem to me. Um, So I, I could not. Uh, under any circumstances support special emotion, I just don't think there's there's a compelling argument for that amount of money to be spent. Um, especially when we have many good people in our community who I think are ready to step up, fill the vacancy and serve from day one, um, and have a risk, you know, a 6 member council for, you know, 9 months or more, we do decide to consolidate, you know, for basically the full year. Uh, council member, show Walter, you're next.

[01:34:45] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Popping quick. Um, another thing I would just like to bring up is, I think that one of the most important meetings that we'll have, um, in, uh, in, in this, uh, One of the most important things that will happen this year is our goal setting meeting. We do that every 2 years. And, um, uh, I think the longer I'm on council, the more important I understand this process to be. So, um, having, uh, a full counsel to take part in that, um, and to weigh what our priorities should be. I think that that's very, very important. And getting that seat filled in time so that, um, the additional person can join us for that. Um, uh, is, uh, will really allow us to do a better job for the people of Mountain View.

[01:35:47] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member, I'll be cooking.

[01:35:51] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. So, you know, I definitely appreciate the comments that were made. Um, I, I would wanted to just, um, you know, um, offer my take, um, in terms of low voter turnout, um, you know, I, I, I watch each election and, um, even during our general elections, we've had years when we have 93% turnout. And then back in 2014, we had, I think, the lowest, at least in modern times, about 57% turnout in a general election year. So, um, you know, as much as I appreciate the concern about a special election having even lower, um, which is possible. Um, you know, I still believe in giving the voters that choice. You know, whether it's 20, 30, 40, 50% of the voting population, that's frankly more than 6 of us. And I think that's what the voter, the residents, at least, you know, the ones who have spoken. I haven't heard too many folks. I think there's one today who said, you know, they're concerned about the money and should do appointment, but I appreciate those who have entrusted in us, the decision making, but I see here, have heard, I think, from more folks who want the opportunity to vote and to choose. And, and that's what I think is worth 2 point, whatever it is. And 2100000, you know, I know is what we've been told. I think in past election, since usually that price comes down. Um, so we're not really sure. And in terms of where that funding would come from. You know, we have been fortunate. You know, I am very mindful, as you all know, about fiscal responsibility. I think I am probably the most, uh, you know, and I've been ridiculed at times for being too cautious, but, um, I also know that because of that, we have, um, saved up money and we have a lot of reserve funds and and funds that, um, we have, you know, just, yeah, in case we want to do something. And so I think this is something worth doing. And important for, you know, the voters to just have that choice. So that, um, you know, I, I make a strong argument that it is worth the money to have this special election. And, you know, I keep hearing the 9 months and whatnot, so that I would hope that folks would agree and would be willing to put in the extra meetings that we might need to do to make this election happen sooner, if we can. Um, I'm certainly willing to. You know, I've done it in the past for general, the general, um, plan updates and everything else you've done. So, yes, it's going to take us a little more effort, more time, and we'll take some money, but, I just really believe very strongly, especially in this time, day and time, you know, when we talk about democracy being a threatened, I think this is really important for us to give the voters the opportunity to vote. So, um, you know, I, I, I still stand by that option. I will say if we do go to an appointment process, I do agree with, um, council member, Mattachek, and vice mayor, that I would, uh, like to appoint someone who will commit to only doing the remainder of, uh, Sally's term and, um, you know, as I think council member, Metachek, mention. We had to run and we had to earn this and I take that very, very seriously. So I want, you know, as fair a playing field as possible, and folks who are willing to put in that commitment to run for office, um, without, you know, a leg up in any way, um, to try to give everyone a fair shot. So I would, um, hope that we would select someone who would be willing to commit to, um, being there for just the 2 years. Or the remainder of the term. Thanks.

[01:39:53] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member made a chair.

[01:39:57] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Well, uh, council member Abbe Koga just pretty much said everything I was thinking. Um, and I think, you know, the key points for me are, you know, even if there is low voter turnout, as she said, it's more than the 6 of us, um, I'm sure there's going to be more than 6 people voting. Um, and I think that's really important. This is such an important role, um, that residents should have the opportunity to decide who the person is. And I'm not too concerned about having a vacancy for a while. I think the 6 of us, um, can, um, work through issues and as I think it was the vice mayor who said, you know, with the number of recusals we have, you know, we often have less than a full council. Um, so I think we can still function very well, um, with fewer people. Um, you know, and the cost. This is an important topic. I think it's worth the money, to allow our residents to make the decision rather than us.

[01:40:57] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Bye, Samara Hanks.

[01:41:03] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: So I'll keep it short. I, you know, I, I do, I think the point that, um, about low voter turnout, and that, um, you know, low income people, and people of color are less likely to vote, and I would add kind of, uh, maybe campaign exhaustion. volunteer frequently for campaigns. You know, those, to me, are the most salient points that have been brought up. I really don't think that the difference between, you know, many councils have five people on them. I don't think that the issues that we grapple with need a full seven people. It's nice to have, uh, you know, like it would be nice right now to have, uh, uh, seventh person to be a tiebreaker here. So, so that, that can be useful, but other than that, I don't really think that, um, you know, we need to pick someone, because we can't grapple with issues, there's only three, there's only six of us. And the thing, I have to say, the thing that is most unconvincing to me is the goals and work plan, because I, honestly, I think that, um, we, our, our work plan has been over full, and those of us who have run have gotten to put very few things on, and, uh, particularly in addition because of COVID, uh, you know, I feel like I've run, and, and I promise people things, and I've run twice, and barely been able to do any of the things I promised.. And the thing I would dislike the most, is if we appointed someone who was aggressively trying to add to the work plan. In my opinion, someone who's not elected should not try to add at all. Um, so, um, so those are, those are the things that, you know, those, those are the additional things that I would weigh in on. Um, I do also agree, if we make an appointment, we should, um, it should be a person who promises not to run it again. Thank you.

[01:43:12] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. I have a couple of questions for Steph. So first, there is a staff workload impact conducting a special election. It might be helpful for us to understand what that impact will be.

[01:43:32] Steph: Um, well, you know, every general election, we dedicate all of those months to shepherding the process and helping candidates and running a nomination period and and doing all of that. So, um, there will definitely be a strain on, on our, you know, the city clerk's office resources. Um, because when we would normally be catching up on things that we set aside for the general municipal election. We're gonna be running it, you know, we're turning right back around and running another election. So, um, there's that and, um, to the question of June versus August, um, moving that deadline up, we'll have other consequences for our office as well.

[01:44:24] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Would you characterize the impact as trivial, moderate, or significant?

[01:44:32] Steph: Um, I would say that it's moderate. Modern.

[01:44:38] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Um. So, I think, um, Council member come had some facts and figures about turnout. Did we happen to know turnout in Mountain View in special elections?

[01:44:54] Steph: Uh, I went back through, so, you know, when I was doing the presentation, I noted that the special, the only special election that was used to fill a vacancy in the past 44 years was an 85, um, that was on a July 16 day. So, you know, didn't align with anything the council picked a specific day. wanted to have the election and that turnout was 12.9%.

[01:45:21] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Very high 12.9% I'm sure. Thank you. Um. Okay. Uh, and then I, I was, I, I know we haven't selected a particular procedure yet, since it's come up multiple times. Um, this, this came up in San Jose to city attorney. Can we legally, or, um, hold, can we require that an applicant, uh, not run in a following election?

[01:45:59] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: I did some quick research on that today, and I do not think you can legally prevent them from running in 2024. They can make a promise and still run. Um, I also think, you know, I'm not... I don't think it's a good idea to ask that as a as an interview question. Do you plan to run? Um, it has nothing to do with an applicant's qualifications to do the job or even their positions on a particular issue. I completely understand the sentiments that, you know, it creates, um, an incumbent, and I do understand that incumbents do tend to have advantages in, you know, they're known in elections, um, but I just don't see how you can legally prevent someone from running. That was the conclusion, as well.

[01:46:53] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Um... Well, you're an influence. Um, just postbodes well for a 6 member council for the next year. So just, um, going further into the issue of, um, commitments to run again or not, if they're appointed, um, I believe in Sunnyvale, they were able to get someone who committed not to run to, uh, to say that. Um, and I understand we can't legally require it, but there must be some way that we can ask that um, of the applicants. Yeah, because Sunnyvale seemed to have been able to do something there. So can we at least ask the question, I guess that would be the question. Did Sunnyvale ask that question?

[01:47:47] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: And I don't know if they asked the question, but from what I was heard told, um, the person who they chose, Well, it sounded like they were looking for someone who wanted, was gonna just do the 2 years and that's who they picked. You know, an applicant can state that they will not run again, or run in 2024. They can make that promise. They can make that assurance. That is their right. asking that question. And, and then making a decision where you have two perfectly qualified candidates for a position. And one says they're not gonna run, and one says they are gonna run, and that is the sole basis for excluding someone from this council, I think, creates potential problems for this council. So, I mean, you, I think it's risky. I think it is, it has nothing to do with the applicant's qualifications to serve as a council member. And so I do think that trying to exact that kind of promise from an applicant, um, would create a legal issue. But if they voluntarily state it, you know, that's their right.

[01:49:08] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. And Sunnyvale also has the, um, the, again, the peculiarity of having gone from at-large elections to, uh, district aleutions, and the case, the, um, they were filling the balancing, the balance, uh, an unexpended at-large term. Because of this issue, shows somebody who would be eligible for the districts. They were a member of the council who was outside the district. Um, uh, or that's the districts that were, that were for connection.

[01:49:43] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: A council member met a check. Thanks.

[01:49:46] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Um, so if I recall correctly, and Sunnyvale did not ask all councilmen, all applicants the same questions. Um, and they did ask one of the applicants if they were going to run and that person's, um, I believe they said they were absolutely considering it. Thanks.

[01:50:10] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Bye, smear Hicks.

[01:50:14] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yeah, I'm, so I'm getting, um, I have to say a little bit troubled by the, uh, when we talk about the application process, the lack of questions we're allowed to ask. Um, because I would hope that, uh, we would be able to ask that question about the the person's, uh, thoughts on running without making it the the sole criteria or, um, you know, one of the criteria. So that's one statement. And then there's also been, um, because, I should say, one of the reasons I'm concerned is that I think that, um, I mean, the, the decision about who sits on council is essentially a political decision. I mean, I guess that's perfectly obvious. And the idea that we're picking someone just because they're qualified kind of boggles my mind. I don't even really know what that means. I would think, you know, a good, I don't know, the adults in Mountain View are probably qualified. Um, but, uh, you know, to zoom or come into meetings, read the staff reports, and make thoughtful comments. Um, so I'm, but I do think going back to something that we talked about earlier, whether we can ask questions that include issues, comments. I think that I'm hoping that we can, in some way, at least in if we do the application process, at least in the way that some of the residents or resident groups have submitted questions regarding things like the opinions of applicants on, or how the applicants would work through some of the upcoming issues on our work plan. And the reason that I'm hoping those are okay to ask is that I've been, you know, I've been living in this city for over 20 years. I've seen a lot of candidate forums. And sometimes when people address issues, questions, It's quite clear they have no idea what they're talking about. And they just would not hit the ground running, and it doesn't really matter what my opinion is on that particular issue. I can tell they don't know what they're talking about, and they haven't been engaged. So I do... So, at the very least, if we end up going with the application process, I would like to hear people grapple with some of the things that are upcoming on our, um, you know, on our work plans, so that I, um, okay, I'm gonna repeat myself now, but so that I know that they can hit Browning. And then I do, you know, I continue to have the question of whether we can at least raise what the person thinks about, whether they would be running again. Thank you. Thank you.

[01:53:12] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Are there any additional comments or questions for members of the council?

[01:53:20] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I guess in a direct response to, uh, your last point, Vice Mayor Hicks. I agree that I think we have to be very thoughtful. Should there be 4 votes for an independent process? We like to be very thoughtful about the questions that we ask, you know, and there are some pretty clear, uh, legal guardrails that I think the city attorney has outlined. Um, and, uh, so be mindful of those. Again, should we decide to pursue an appointment process type and we make sure that we're, um, we're getting the information that we need from the applicants to make a good decision. A city attorney.

[01:54:02] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: I just want to provide a little clarification. I agree that it is it is a political position. You do not have to limit the questions that you ask to only qualification type questions. You can get at the issues that are important to Mountain V residents. I think that is totally reasonable, you know, and as I noted earlier, I think that you should just make sure that the questions are the same for all candidates so that the process itself is fair and equitable, you know, but I think you can get at the issues. If you want to ask the question about whether or not they are gonna run again. I think that you can ask the question. I was just presenting a potential legal risk to asking that question. Um, you know, should... one or more of the candidates have a problem with that question. But I think you can ask the question. There, there's, it's, you know, I was just advising on, you know, how best to handle the situation fairly, and whether or not someone is going to run again, doesn't really go towards their ability to serve the city, um, and maybe they come in and do a fantastic job. And, you know, if they run as an incumbent, then that's great. They come in and do a terrible job and run as an incumbent, and maybe they don't get elected. I think it can play out many ways. So I think you can ask the question. Um, I just wanted to, you know, alert you to the potential issues that could arise with that question.

[01:55:37] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. And again, should we decide to pursue an appointment process? Um, I'm hoping personally that we can set aside some additional time to think about the questions that we might ask and solicit community, but, um, and that would be an opportunity also, I think, to be attorney for us to revisit the issue of what can we ask him, what are we, um, where is there a legal risk in asking certain types of questions?

[01:56:04] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: A council member show alter?

[01:56:08] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Well, just one thing, talking about the advantage of incompensation. It is an advantage, but I just, you know, I'm an example that it doesn't always work. So, I, um, uh, you know, I just think that, uh, there is quite a bit of variation in the number of people that run in an election. And in the 2024 election, um, for city council, there will be um, four openings. So, um, there will be at least, um, at least two, uh, new openings. And at least based on my observation, every time we have an election, where there are a number of openings, we have a lot of people that come forward. So I think the idea that, um, having, uh, an additional person who, um, uh, who is an incumbent would mean we have a sleepy election is, um, I, I, I, That doesn't ring true to me at all. Uh, I, I, it seems like when we have a few slots open on this council. We normally have, you know, uh, a really healthy group, like 5 to 10 people who come forward to, to, um, uh, I would think with 4, we would, we would easily have 10 candidates. So, so that that worry about, um, you know, about the incumbency. I don't think it's as important. Um, in this particular instance, because of where we are, as it would be sometimes, because we will have at least 2 new members. Um, uh, uh, on the council after the, the 2024 election. And, um, then the other thing I would like to say is that, uh, there are several things that I think that we should, if we do go the appointment route, which I hope we will, that we should add to, um, what we want to be included in the letter, because it's, um, it's just really open-ended right now. And we've gotten a lot of good input from the public about things that we should ask about. And that is, you know, asking people to include that information in their letter of interest, I think, would be very appropriate. Or, or to answer the questions as, you know, as, uh, separate, a separate document, that also would be completely appropriate. Um, so I, I would hope that, uh, we would, you know, that will guarantee that the process is fair, and that everyone is asked the same questions, and that we have, and that the information is available before the interviews, um, uh, to help us make decisions. So anyway, I just wanted to bring up that incumbency does not always guarantee that you will be a re election. But I am very grateful to the people of Mountain View for having elected me again. It's an honor, and, um, I very much enjoy this process. Thank you.

[01:59:29] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Council member, I'll be cooking.

[01:59:32] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, here, and I don't want to drag this on, too, along with it. I guess I, you know, had wanted to respond, and I, you know, I appreciate you. Show all to your comments. Um, yeah, and we can quarter back to all we want, but I do think that, um, over what I've seen is when there's a lot of candidates, um, incumbency, it does end up helping more because that there's a name ID factor in elections, and when you have a lot of people, folks tend to pick out the names that they know, and it's incumbents tend to have a bigger advantage there. So, in that sense, I think this would matter more in this situation. Um, but in regards to the application, um, I do agree, I think the more questions we can ask, the better. Um, and again, you know, I go back to, people are elected to counsel for, you know, very different reasons. qualifications is one of them maybe, but not the only thing. Um, and so I think the more questions we can ask. And then, um, I do think we could go ahead and ask the question of whether, you know, whether they're willing to serve just the remainder of the term. And knowing that with more robust questions. Um, that wouldn't be the only factor in our decision making. I think if we had 5 questions and that was one of them, there would be more of a case to say, oh, you know, that was the reason why this a person was selected, but if we have more questions to, um, to help us with our decision making, then I think that, um, kind of waters down the importance of that question. So, um, that, that's another, um, you know, reason, I could say, to, one, include that, the question, and then just make sure we have more questions to try to really, frankly, the key here is to try to get as, you know, as well-rounded a picture of the individual as we can, um, despite our limited time and, um, other restraints, thanks.

[02:01:37] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you So, we will, uh, council member command.

[02:01:41] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Oh, no, go ahead, Mayor. I can I can wait.

[02:01:45] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, I was, uh, gonna make an attempt at a compromise because I, I, I think, I think there could be a path to a majority for an appointment process if we make some commitments about having a very thoughtful and robust, um, um, opportunity to ask questions in the application and also in the interview. Um, and I, I was hoping that maybe we can find a majority if, if we provide, you know, 2 commitments, right? And that would be first, you know, we'll have a lengthy discussion about which questions to include in the application. And then because we'll have more time to, uh, decide which questions to ask in the interview, maybe we can ask the city attorney to maybe do a little bit more research and provide some information to the council about, uh, the legal risk or our ability to ask a question like, you know, would you run for, uh, election in 2024, if you are. Maybe that can give us some comfort about conducting the appointment process of making sure that we have the information that we need. Understanding that we couldn't only make a decision about that one, uh, point, but that, you know, it does contribute to a more holistic understanding of of the apple sense. So just an idea, but I'll go to.

[02:03:11] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Uh, great. Thanks so much, Mayor. Appreciate your efforts for a compromise. I think I was gonna try to go down that route too, you know, as I was saying in my opening comments. I think we're in a really challenging situation and if circumstances were different. We may all have, you know, switched opinions or different opinions, but kind of, given the, the timeline and the, you know, for me, it's a lot of different factors. But, um, you know, what I think is best is the appointment process. But I think despite me supporting that. Um, or and in that vein. I'd really like it to be an open and transparent process in a way. I feel like this is an opportunity that maybe we don't always get in elections, um, in terms of the public being able to weigh in on the questions that council asks, and that's kind of why I asked the line of questioning earlier on, and in the evening, which is, I really do feel that having an open public transparent process is something that's really critical. Um, And um, you know, and not necessarily having it through a special election, but still having that input process. And so I was heartened to hear both the public comment from residents saying, you know, for some of us, we elected you, you know, just, almost 2 months ago, um, and we support you and the hard decisions that you have to make. Um, but also that they know that we make tough decisions on council frequently, um, and that they know that, um, they will have an opportunity to to weigh in. And so I do want, um, and liked staff suggestion that at the meeting on the 24th, that people would be able, that council would be able to finalize, um, the questions that we would ask either at the 25th or the 30th. Um, I really appreciate similar to elections. The public can hold forums at any time and can invite the potential applicants, um, to them. And so those can happen independently of the city and of council, and I really appreciate the offers and the public comment that those opportunities would exist. So I do feel like there are paths for, um, democracy to work out to, to, to be in, in action. Um, in a timeline that doesn't leave a vacancy for for 9 months to me. That is a long time when we're talking about really critical policy issues, and in a way, Mountain View's been been a leader, and I want us to continue to do that, and we, um, So, so I'm hopeful that we can augment both the application and the questions, uh, along the process, um, and have people be able to weigh in, um, despite the quick turnaround. So thank you.

[02:06:04] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank Council member, Abby Kogan.

[02:06:07] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. So I guess I wanted to ask if we can just take a, you know, hand vote, um, and I wanted to pose the other, the other option of doing a special election, but in June, not in August and move up the timeline. So if we can just do a vote and see where we are and then we can go to the next discussion, I would appreciate that.

[02:06:32] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, let's have council member, meta check, um, provide comments, and if there are no others, and we can start on taking stock.

[02:06:41] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yeah, um, I just wanted to add that I actually think with an election, there's greater opportunity for public participation. And there are more forums. There is a longer period of time here. You can have conversations with the candidates. And in the end, it's up to the voters to decide as opposed to us. So I can't think of any other opportunity that is greater than allowing residents to vote for public input on this process and who is then representing them. Thanks.

[02:07:14] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much. Seeing no other hands up. Um, I'll start with, as counsel, as I'm Robbie Coco proposed, uh, a straw poll on conducting a special election, the lease in June, right? Um, and then if there is majority support for that, then, um, I'll ask if there is support for, um, holding an appointment process, and then we'll have another separate discussion about questions and, um, the selection process there. So first, um, Raise your hand if you support conducting a special election in June to fill. Okay, there are 3 votes for that. Oh, which, uh, so it, that's not the correction. Um, now, raise your hand if you support conducting, I think, process. Two, three, four. Okay, thank you. So there is majority support for, uh, conducting an appointment process. And now, um, we will discuss, uh, the interview process and considerations, uh, which are detailed in the staff report, include, um, I don't know if I have to read everything in the agenda flow, um, but there are a number of considerations, um, that we will have to, uh, provide direction on. Um, some of these, I think we will have to determine, uh, tonight. And then others, I think we can wait until January 24th, um, in the next, uh, council meeting where we're conducting a, uh, business to provide some direction where, um, we, where there isn't uh, a time constraint. And so that might include, for instance, whether the interviews, well, I guess we should probably determine whether they're in person or, I assume tonight. But the interview questions, for instance, can safely, I think, postpone, um, until weird. Um, so would any member of the council like to questions or provide input on the payment process? So one of the things I would really like to add to the application is whether the person has, um, uh, we do this with the committees and commissions, um, whether they've ever been to a council meeting or perhaps a certain, I don't have the details on how I would, maybe there's additional input people can have on how to phrase this. Committees and commissions ask, have you ever been, and then ask the number, that you've been to? Um, my, the reason I want to ask this, I actually think we could make it a requirement for committees and commissions, but, um, is something that people spoke about earlier, is that, um, that, uh, we could, there's the potential to get, because this sounds like an easy route to get on council. There's the potential to get, who knows how many applications, 10, 20, 30 applications, and then have to interview everyone. And I frankly don't want to interview somebody who's never been to a council meeting. Um, I don't know if I even want to interview somebody who's been to fewer than three council meetings, but other people can weigh in on that. I would like that to be, in terms of qualifications. I would like that to, that is one qualification I would have. I would like to know, um, whether the applicants have been to a certain number of counseling feedings. Um, so I think what I'm gonna try and do, and I will need some help, is, uh, writing down suggested questions, as I hear them, uh, because a majority of the council will have to provide direction on which questions to include in the application process, and I want to make sure that there's majority support for each question. So if IceMer makes a paper, you correct the question we would ask. On the application is how many council meetings have you attended or observed? Yeah, have you, I don't know whether, oh, one or the other word is more correct, attended or observed, but I, yeah, and I don't also know whether that's a way of posing it as criteria. Maybe, um, our city attorney can weigh in on that. And I also don't know whether there's a way of holding, you know, if we had a requisite threshold for a number, whether there's any way of checking up on whether the person had actually done it. So it may be, uh, you know, word of honor. Thank you. Thank you. Council member Medicin.

[02:12:21] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thanks. Um, you know, initially, I was kind of surprised that, um, um, we might just ask, uh, for a letter. Um, but then the more I thought about it, the more I thought, well, you know, maybe that's not too bad because then we'll see what they want us to know about them, um, without forcing them to, um, answers, other specific questions. Um, But, um, there are a couple of fundamental questions for me that I was thinking I would want to ask during the interviews, but I'm okay if you want to put them in the application. And one is, um, You know, why do you want to be appointed to the council? And, um, along with that, I would say, um, why do you think you are the most qualified to be appointed? And that might take a little bit of thought that maybe is more appropriate in the questionnaire or the application than in the interview. Um, I would also want to know. Um, I don't necessarily want to know the details, but I would want to know if there are any issues where they fundamentally disagree with the direction the council has chosen and would want to see something different and why. Um, but I don't want a ton of details on that. I just want to, more than anything else, I want to know. Um, Are they gonna try to change something, I guess, is the upshot of that. A decision that we've already made. Um, I also would like to know, um, what their top priorities are. And how do you propose they get tackled? Um, which I think is different than the challenges that the city might be facing, um, because your priorities might be different than some of the challenges we're working on. Um, and I'm not really sure I need to know about, um, yourself and your background or how you entered, um, how you got involved in local politics. Um, So I think I could drop those from either the interview questions or the application. I kind of feel like I'm not totally, um, hung up on which ones go in the application and which ones we ask. There's a couple that I think are more appropriate for one place to the other. So I apologize if I'm mixing them here, but I'm not totally hung up on one venue or the other. Thanks.

[02:15:10] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. And, uh, if one question isn't included in the application, we could always include it in the interviews, uh, at the, at the later time. Um, I just want to make sure I capture the questions that you are recommending, um, and they would include something along the lines of why do you want to be appointed to the council? Why do you believe you are the most qualified to serve? What are your top priorities and how would they get tackled? And then, um, share any, uh, significant disagreements you may have with previous council direction?

[02:15:48] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yeah, I guess I'd characterize that more of, um, like, future, like the direction this council has set for the future. Um, those decisions as opposed to, um, looking back, um, to something that's already been completed, so to speak. So the current issues we're facing and the decisions we've made that are, you know, starting to get implemented. Thanks.

[02:16:15] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: A council member, show Walter.

[02:16:21] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Thank you, council member, not a check for those comments. That was very interesting. Um, just kind of adding onto that and also, um, Vice Mayor Hicks. I was thinking along the city council, um, uh, I was thinking of adding these things, including them in the letter. You know, that that's, um, I was thinking we would just have a list of things we would like the letter to deal with. But that doesn't mean that that limits what the letter says, and maybe we want to say the letter can only be, I don't know, a thousand words or something. Um, if we want to limit that. But, um, Or maybe that's too many, maybe 500. I am not sure what the number of words should be, but if there needs to be a limit, so we don't get 20 pages from anyone. Um, but, uh, I would, uh, I would like to know how many, um, council meetings people have attended, and also, what was their involvement, generally, in the council meeting. I mean, did they just sit there? Did they talk? Um, you know, what, what did they do? That I think that would be interesting. Um, another thing that I would really like to, um, understand, kind of getting to that idea of, of, um, that council member, Mattachek, mentioned of, um, is, do you think the council is on the right track? Is there something that we've done that you disagree with? Um, I, uh, I think that that's, you know, that's a very interesting, um, question. And I would like to see something along those lines include it. In addition to that, I am interested in having them discuss what the concept of a community for all means to them. That has been, that's a very important council goal, I think, to most of us. And, um, it is the kind of thing that, um, it have a lot of meanings. And what someone says about that is, I think, very telling about how, what they thought about, how they want, what's their vision for the city, and how, what kind of community we want, have, that sort of thing. So I think it's a very thought provoking question, and I would like I would like that to, um, be in the letter. You know, what does a community for all mean to you? And, um... Or another way to just... If we didn't want to do that one, we could just make it more general. Um, discuss one of the council goals, and what it means to you, and what do you think, um, should be done to aggress it that isn't already being done? And, And then also, what do you think we should continue doing? Because I would really like to elicit, um, some information about the depth of knowledge and, um, Mountain View, uh, process and programs that, um, people come to, uh, uh, come to this application with. I think it's really important. Um, that they've, you know, that they really know what we're working on, and, um, they have ideas about it one way or the other. And, um, Then the other one, I think, would be a good thing to include in the letter is, what is the most serious social issue in Mountain View? And how should we deal with it? So, um, those are just some thoughts. I'd be interested in hearing other people's. Thank you.

[02:20:07] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: There were many questions in there. Council membership, Walter. I'm gonna do my best to summarize maybe some, um, high level, uh, questions that you've suggested. So the 1st was, what was your involvement in the council meetings you've attended? As a follow-up to, I believe, there was a Vice Merritt's suggestion. What does a community for all mean to you? Or mean for you? Or a broader version might be discuss one council goal or more audience to you? Um, and then, uh, what is the most serious issue, uh, in Monday that we're, uh, addressing or not addressing in along those loans? Uh, serious social issue. Social issue.

[02:20:51] Councilmember Pat Showalter: No, I think you've got it. Thank you.

[02:20:54] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: No problem. And I suppose, um, several good points have been made about asking these questions as suggestions for topics to include in a letter rather than having, like, essays in response to each one of them, so we can decide whether to have a couple of application questions that everyone must respond to, and then a more general letter that could include responses to these questions. If the applicant wants serious consideration. Hence member can make.

[02:21:32] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. So that was gonna be my question. was kind of what the package of the application would look like. So it sounds like there would be the personal information, the letter of interest, and it would be like free flowing topics that people can just expand upon as they wish. Is that, and we're giving bullet points on what they can talk about. I think for, for, for me, what I'd love to see, is the, the application look a little bit more similar to EPC and that we get that we are able to ask a set of questions. So at least we have some questions that we know that we want answered. And then if they want to use the letter of interest to talk about these other topics, that's fine with me, but from what I saw of the draft sample attachment, it was just the personal information, you know, letter of interest and that looked kind of it. And so I would just like to expand upon it to kind of get more of the, the personal information because I do think it includes, you know, have you ever attended a council meeting and some generic questions like that. That's already included when we have somebody apply for a border commission, which I would like. And then I do like the idea of a supplemental list of questions that perhaps the whole council can agree upon. Those can be, um, you know, even ones that the public suggested via email or tonight. Um, and then I like the idea of a letter of interest. It would be, for me, I would love to understand a little bit more about the potential person that we're working with. We've often talk about how a lot of the things we do is together. It's a group. And so in an interview process, You don't always have the opportunity to understand, um, someone's work style um, or their background. I do find background important. I do find experience important. Those are the things that we talk about when we get elected. So I'd love to hear those things when someone gets appointed. Um, and so perhaps the letter of interest um, can include that. So if council members are open to that, perhaps we can differentiate, which would be the supplemental questions that would be standardized and then which would be the topics for the letter of interest, that would be helpful for me. Thank you.

[02:23:51] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. And I agree. So Vice mayor picks. I'll take a very quick turn and then we'll go to you next. So I'm totally open to the questions that we ask explicitly and require responses to as part of the application, and a lot of these are great as prompts for the letter of interest, which I do support. Um, the only thing I want to make sure that we do include is, uh, because I don't think we do this right now with the applications for the advisory bodies, but, um, some contact information that the applicant would understand is available to the public. So not to keep comparing us to the city of San Jose, but the list of applicants is now publicly available, and most have elected to provide either a phone number or an email address. And I really like that, because that means members of the public have to reach out and say, hey, you know, I'm interested in learning more about you. What are your thoughts on items of interest? And I think right, I could be wrong, but. I think right now the council gets to see the contact information, but I don't believe that the contact information is made available in the public ads. If I'm wrong about that, my apologies. I think that's something we ought to consider. Um, making explicit on the application. experience. So I agree with the direction this is going in.

[02:25:17] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: I, yes, I really would like some, uh, way that members of the public can contact the person, of course, when we're candidates and when we're on council, we, um, we have to do that so the person, the applicants should be open to that as early as possible. I also like the idea of what, uh, council member Kameh said, of making the application, in some ways, more similar to, uh, you know, a committee or commission application with some specific questions. Um, in my mind, the most important questions, and I don't really care whether this is on the application or a later question for the interview, um, but what some members of the public have brought up, um, actually, I think it's people from, uh, livable Mountain View, and from green spaces, and from NBCSP, brought up items that are on our work plan, and what, so they listed the, the two of them together. housing element, displacement, downtown precise plan, castro mall grade separation, uh, the park strategic plan, biodiversity plan, active transportation plan. I want some point where people can, it's less hearing maybe their position on each of those. I'm thinking probably most applicants are not anti park, for example. Um, but maybe I'm wrong. Um, but just that they can engage with those issues. And that's, again, what I said earlier, that I've seen over the years when people are in forums. Some people can engage very deeply on these things, and this is somebody who's gonna be on for two years dealing with these, I think, specific items. So, I would like to know that they can engage. I think, for me, that's, so do the basics for qualifications is how they engage on the, on the issues that we have coming up. So some way of, of, including that. And then I also want us to address at some point. What I think council member at Vicoga, um, addressed is, uh, is there a way in the process of eliminating people that we think are just not worth interviewing, so we don't end up so that we can have a more thoughtful process with the number of people we do interview and not, uh, be obligated, obligated to interview, whatever, 35 people or whatever. Thank you. Which might be the number of times, one step towards that might be the number of times they've attended council meetings. So, thank you. Thank you.

[02:27:58] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: And, um, I think that's one where we will probably need a lot of guidance from the city attorney, for whatever it's worth. Um, in San Jose, I believe 4 members of the council have to express interest in interviewing an applicant in order for that accident to be interviewed by the full council. And that's 4 out of a body of 9 right now. Um, and then, Now, that's that's a very superficial analysis, and I think, you know, the city attorney Northly can provide some, and some whether that's risky or something that's perfectly acceptable. Council member might check.

[02:28:34] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yes, I think we need to define what it means to attend a council meeting. Also, um, since, you know, you can watch them after the fact. You can watch them live. In the past, you used to be able to come and sit in the council chambers. So I think we just need to be clear on what we're asking with that question. Um, Uh, and I think, uh, the vice mayor's comment about, um, wanting to, uh, see whether or not they are up on an issue and how they engage, um, with it is important. And I think you get that better when you're talking to the person, than if they're responding to a question. So I would tend to save those for the interview. Um, I do like, um, the idea of having some sort of process to narrow the, um, number of applicants we consider. Um, and I think that's kind of an interesting one that, uh, at least a certain number of council members have to have an interest in talking with them. I haven't thought of that. Um, But, um, maybe as we go through the questions, um, that people opposed, um, mayor, we could decide if it's, uh, on the application or if it's, um, part of the interview process, because I think, um, we've sent, you've got a running list, and I'm not sure I'm clear on which form that you'd be in. Thanks.

[02:30:03] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. So I think just as one potential way of getting council input, I'll read each question, and then we'll simply raise hands if we want it 1st as part of the application, and then if there's not a majority to the application, in Alaska, if it's appropriate for the interview, and then if it gets a majority there, then you can consider it as part of the interview questions. Um, let's go to the city for the 1st time, I'll go to you guys, ma'am.

[02:30:31] Unknown Speaker: I was just gonna, um, interject that it would also be helpful if, when you're determining if something's gonna be on the application, if it's gonna be one of the suggested topics for a letter of interest, or if it's an actual question that you want them to write an answer, it's similar to to the applications we have for advisory bodies now.

[02:30:51] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, thank you. Um, and actually, I want to go back very quickly. City attorney, you had unmuted yourself. I think when I was talking about making publicly available some compact information, is there, is there any concern about that?

[02:31:05] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: There wasn't. Sorry, that was an accident. No, I do not. If they voluntarily put something on there, I don't have any problem with that. Okay. Thank you.

[02:31:14] Unknown Speaker: Nice to meet you. Yeah, I just want to ask if you can run through the questions super quickly. I don't know all of them, so I don't know, you know, if I'm voting on ones in the beginning, what, I don't know what the ones to come on. I've kind of, I've kind of lost track. Thank you.

[02:31:31] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: No problem. I'm happy to do that. Uh, city manager?

[02:31:35] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Um, thank you, Mayor. I would just, uh, remind you all that you did have interest in adding a question about whether someone was gonna run for re election in 24, so I would just add that to your list. I didn't hear anyone say that in this round. I will add that, I think, with an understanding that the city attorney is gonna do a little bit more researching, and how we can ask that question.

[02:32:02] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Um, that's a member of Madachek? Sorry, I had another question. Um, we really only have to decide on the application tonight, right? Um, okay, so I know I have other questions that I would want to ask, but I think they are more appropriate in the interview, so I haven't brought those up. And that's okay, right? Because we'll have a, Chance to do that on the 28th. Or what day? Is that right?

[02:32:29] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yeah, we're gonna, well, we can bring something back to you on the 24th so you can solidify interview questions. Um, but if you think there might be some crossover just know that, you know, nothing would be able to change about the application. So if you want to interject them now, that's up to you, but yeah.

[02:32:46] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yeah, because there are, um, topics, you know, if we want to see if they're up to speed, like, I would like to know, um, what are their thoughts on livability, um, and how to improve the quality of life for our residents in Mountain View, uh, similar to other issues that have been brought up. We've heard quite a few from residents that I think, you know, if we're going to get into the issues I'd want to add. But they're much more issue focused than, uh, some of the other ones we've talked about tonight. Thanks.

[02:33:16] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Council member, Abby Cogan.

[02:33:20] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. So, um, I was going to suggest, um, maybe we go through all the questions, um, because I guess I'm mostly, I'm concerned about the issue of time with the interviews. So depending on how many questions we wanted to ask at the interview, will determine the length of the interviews or vice versa. And then, so then, um, you know, there are other questions remaining, we could potentially put them in the application, was how I was looking at it. Um, so, I mean, I don't know what the best process is if we just lay out all the questions tonight and then figure out where we want to put which question. Um, you know, there may be questions we just have to eliminate. But I think we need to kind of start to, right, pare down and figure out what the framework is in terms of, like, the number of questions and where they're gonna go.

[02:34:24] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: It makes sense. And I think right now, the plan is to have an item on the January 24th agenda in case we need it, and we can decide, if we want to, for instance, if we want to decide the interview questions tonight, and then on the 24th decide, if those questions are fine, then we don't need to spend any more time on the 24th discussing it. But if we want to change questions or or additional questions that we want to add because of public input, then at least we've got the placeholder item on the 24th to discuss the interview questions for them. So do we want to decide, you know, how many questions we're gonna put on the application or, again, the length issue, right?

[02:35:09] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Yeah, we, I believe, uh, and staff can correct me if I'm wrong. I believe we have to finalize the application questions in there.

[02:35:21] Unknown Speaker: That is correct.

[02:35:25] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: City manager?

[02:35:27] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Um, thank you, mayor. For context, I'll just let counsel know that when we interview applicants for jobs with the city, Um, typically if you have around 10 to 12 questions, That is typically a 30 to 45 minute interview. Um, sometimes the questions might be compound questions, meaning that it's one, it's like your 1st or 2nd question, but it's really kind of a couple parts to that question. And that might take a little longer. So if that gives you context for how many questions you want to ask and how long your interviews are. So if you were looking for, let's say, 10 to 15 minute interviews, then I would suggest probably no more than 5 questions. Um, and even that's gonna push it, depending on how, um, Wordy people are, because everyone interviews differently. Some people can get quickly to the answer and others take a little bit longer, but I would suggest if that's what you're kind of shooting for, 10 to 15 minutes, about 5 questions. And then determining how many you want to put in the application. If you feel like there's not enough to answer in the interview, then you can put those in the application or the interest letter. Thank you.

[02:36:52] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Let's go for it. Are there any, I'm going to read through the questions first. Are there any other questions or comments before I do? Okay. Um, and again, if my audio ceases to be understandable, let me know. Um, so the questions are, how many council meetings have you attended or observed? recognizing that we want to better define what that means. Uh, What do you want? Why, sorry, why do you want to be appointed to the council? Why do you believe you are the most qualified to serve? What are your top priorities, and how would they get tackled? Uh, what are some examples of, uh, current or future issues we are facing where you disagree with council direction? What was your involvement in the council meetings you've attended? What does a community for all mean for you or discuss one council goal and what it means to you? What is the most serious social issue in Mountain View? Um, and then there's the question of whether uh, an applicant is interested in running the 2024 reaction. pending additional patents from the city term. Were there any? Oh, uh, Council member command. Thank you.

[02:38:25] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Do you think that we might, so I guess 2 items. Do you think that we would be able to combine the meeting attendance or. With the level of involvement in the meeting you attended. I think those can go, like all of that related to the meetings can go together. And then I forgot that I wanted to bring this up earlier. In the last rounds of EPC interviews, these last ones we just had and the ones before. We asked about, I don't want to say balance, but we did ask, um, how do you consider the input of residence as well as, I think, developers or something of that nature. Um, I'm interested in response to that question. Thanks.

[02:39:19] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: And perhaps if the, if the city clerk or somebody remembers what that question is, we could refresh. Thank you. City clerk, are you in a position to, I guess we'll give you some time to find out if that's okay?

[02:39:36] Steph: Yeah, let me let me look at that. Hold on.

[02:39:39] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, thank you. Got some from your filter. Yeah, I also thought that, um, there was a question that, that, uh, council member, um, Manachek asked about, is there a decision of the council that you fundamentally disagree with, and what would you want to change? Did I? Miss that?

[02:40:01] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Um, so, and what would you change? I did not explicitly include in the question so I can add that.

[02:40:10] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Oh, okay, I didn't hear the other one. Thank you. Sorry. And then the other question I had for the clerk. Um, when you were doing your research, did you, and and we had the application procedure in the past, did you notice how many applicants there were? You know, we've been discussing how many people there might be to interview and that kind of stuff? I wondered if there was some history, of how many people actually applied.

[02:40:38] Steph: I was not able to find clear record on that. Okay. So I'd love to have a different answer for that, but this time I couldn't tell you.

[02:40:51] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: All right. Thought it was worth a try to ask. Thank you. Council member, Matt, check.

[02:41:01] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: So if we're gonna go the approach of, um, coming up with the 1st draft of, um, questions for the interview as well. Um, then I do want to add the one that was on the sample, which is, um, how can we enhance the city's livability and quality of life for our residents? Thanks.

[02:41:27] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Nice experience.

[02:41:32] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: So I'm trying to figure out our, our next steps. I know you were gonna read them when we were gonna raise our hands, but, um, I'm, there's a lot of questions here. And, uh, and so I'm trying, so we have the potential. Okay, two of the questions seem like not, they're not essay questions, or the way, well, they could be. Um, how many council meetings you've been to, and your level of involvement, and, um, are you considering running, again, could be long essay questions, or they could just be, when we do the, how many council meetings have you been to, those are just checkbox questions on the, uh, counseling committee. Uh, I mean, uh, commission and committee for the commission and committee applicants. So maybe they're not full questions. But otherwise, this is a lot of questions. And, uh, there were also the questions that, um, that residents had brought up, that I read off before, about particular, uh, things on our work plan, that people said, uh, maybe we would be better in interviews, but now it seems like this is about interviews as well. So, um, I guess we can just, so I'd like to add that one, how they, you know, how they, uh, how they would address things on our upcoming, um, pal or work plan, um, which ones they think would be important. That would be, I think, an interview question as council member Mattachek said, but I would like something more specific on those to be asked in terms of an interview. So, I don't know what we do now. We're just voting, and then the out is seems a little messy to me, the process of just voting, and we're not saying whether they go on the application or the interview. How are you seeing us proceed to take this long list of questions and work with them.

[02:43:46] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: We, we will determine, um, by majority vote, whether a question, um, would be included in the application, and then whether it's part of the application proper or it prompt for the letter of interest, and if it's neither of those things, then whether it would be a question asked in the interview itself. So we'll take many. Like voting first on whether they go, you're gonna take one set of votes on whether they go into the application, and then a second set of votes on whether they go into the interview process.

[02:44:24] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Potentially, yes. Okay, I just want to know what I'm doing.

[02:44:30] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Don't worry, I'll do my best to be very clear, and whichever, however, it's categorized by majority first, is where it will land, right? So on the 1st vote, you know, I'll say, do we want to include this on the application, right? Not as a prompt of the letter of interest, and a majority of us support that, then we don't need to take additional thoughts, it will appear on application.

[02:44:55] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Okay, now I'm hearing three things. Application, prompt in the letter, and the interview questions. Are we voting on all three of those?

[02:45:05] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes, unless we don't want to include the interview questions tonight, and we want to have that done on January 24th. City manager?

[02:45:19] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Um, thank you, Mayor. So I have an Excel spreadsheet where I have tracked, I believe, hopefully, all the questions that you have cited, there may be one, one or 2 that I've missed. Um, so I would like to share my screen. So you all can see that. And then there's also columns for whether you want it on the application, whether you want to prompt in the letter of interest. And I do suggest you decide your interview questions tonight. If there are ones that you feel strongly about and you can get consensus on. I say, let's go ahead and do it. You've already put most of them on the table. And then when we come back on the 24th, if there's things that come up that you forgot, or you might want to shift things around, then you can do that. But let's let's get a little certainty. We definitely have to have certainty for the application. But you have a little bit of wiggle room for the interview. So if you all don't mind, I can share my screen. You can see all the questions and then I'll just mark it as we go. And I see the city clerk also has her hand up. Or she just put it down. Uh, city clerk, go ahead, and then we'll, um,

[02:46:28] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I thank you, camera, for coming up with the idea of the spreadsheet. I think will help us facilitate this process. Um, did you want speak to any of this?

[02:46:38] Steph: Oh, I was just gonna, uh, circle back to, um, council member Kame. I believe what you, you all landed on for APC was, how would you balance private property rights and community benefits, and how would you consider public comments from residents?

[02:47:06] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: For my benefit, council member can make, did you want us to ask both of those? Or just the public on question?

[02:47:16] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: From what I remember, they see the 2 questions seem linked. I remember us having a long discussion about it, so to be together, I, I, don't care where they are, but I just remember that came up quite a bit. And since the majority of what we do on council is, you know, land use, I would like to hear that. Thank you.

[02:47:37] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you very much for the clarification. Um, so city manager, um, go ahead and show the spreadsheet and then we'll take a look and see if any of the questions are Neat modification.

[02:47:58] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Can you see that? If I make it, there we go. Is that big enough? Does it look weird?

[02:48:04] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Uh, it's it's, it was better earlier? Now it's very small.

[02:48:08] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Okay. All right. Is that better?

[02:48:10] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes. Yeah, that's better. Okay. Okay, so we have how many council meetings have you attended or observed, and what was your level of involvement? One question. Application, letter of interest or interview? This is gonna be hard to do if I can't see everybody. Um, But I don't want to do a roll call vote. Um, so, Let me see if I can, uh, do a battery. rent to see if I, if I can see everybody and also the, Spreadsheet. I'm having trouble doing this. I'll just do that. Okay, so let's go through these, uh, one by one, uh, for the, uh, and first, before I start, are there any modifications to the questions? Are there any other questions that you would like that?

[02:49:33] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Mayor, it's Ellen, do you see the, there's like a bar between where the Excel spreadsheet is and the column of faces, if you drag it to the left, you can see all of us. Does that work for you? I,

[02:49:53] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I, so yes, I, I just have to, I have to scroll through. I can't see everybody all at once. Okay. So I'm counting on everyone then. When you put your hand up. Keep it there for a little while so I can see everybody. Remember Mattachek?

[02:50:07] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yeah, I think, um, row 11? Um, did Council member Commade, one is, uh, the different wording that our city clerk found?

[02:50:18] Steph: Yes. Okay. Thank you. And I can see everyone. Um, do you want me to tell you how many people have their hands up? Um, I'll do the best I can. I think Okay. from a small laptop screen. Um, thank you, though. That's very nice.

[02:50:39] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: So, yes, are there any other questions? I just wanted to include the one that was kind of asked by, uh, several groups, uh, when they emailed us questions, which, um, the way they asked it was long, but basically, um, how, uh, how applicants, uh, engage with the with things on our upcoming work plan. And although that's a vague question at this point, when we talked about it, people, or at least council member Mattachek, said it would be best to put that in an interview. So maybe we don't have to flesh out exactly how it appears here. But I would like to add one on, you know, how people is that, oh, okay, you have that there. Sorry.

[02:51:35] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, so I didn't say that the way it was worded there. Um, so what do you, you want us to just go each person to go through one at a time? We will, uh, take straw poles, right? So I'll ask everyone to raise their hand as we go through each question and categorize them. Um, and, uh, I think, again, with an understanding, this is not an exhaustive list, because on the 24th, we will have another discussion about interview questions, if we want to make modifications or add questions, step back.

[02:52:15] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: I see, so you're gonna go down, read these questions and ask us to raise our hands depending on whether we want it to be in the application, uh, letter of interest or interview.

[02:52:26] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes, to make sure there's majority support for where these questions will be. Okay, thank you. No problem. Council member Mattachek.

[02:52:37] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Sorry. Um, on row 12? Um, wouldn't that be the work plan, not the tent, the towel? Because, um, I think we want to look longer term than the town, because that just goes through the 1st quarter, and I'm not sure that's been published yet either. Thanks.

[02:53:01] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Are there any? remaining questions or comments about questions?

[02:53:08] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Mayor, if I may. I just want a little more clarity on what I just changed for row 12. So we have the current strategic work plan, which is what applicants would see in January. The upcoming work plan, they're not going to know about yet. So I can change this to say what agenda items on the current strategic work plan or what items on the, on the current strategic work plan are important to you. Does that work? Okay.

[02:53:36] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Thank you. I'm not seeing any other hands up for questions or comments. So what we will do then is go down each of these questions, um, and then I'll ask, uh, in the order, uh, as they appear on the spreadsheet, whether they should be on the application itself, which means everybody must respond to it. whether it should be a prompt for the letter of interest, which means they're strongly encouraged to respond to it, and if they don't, that's good for the council to take into consideration. And whether, uh, and if neither of those things, then whether we should consider it, uh, for the interview, uh, meaning. So the 1st, um, and I'll just go based on number. So, what is listed as question two, how many council meetings have you attended or observed and what was your level of involvement? Raise your hand if you think it ought to be in the application itself. So there's majority support for that. Um, question three, why do you want to be appointed? Should it be in the application? Raise your hand. So this one, two. Three, Emily, Stephen, 3 for that. Uh, so should it be a prompt for the letter of interest, raise your in it. One, two, three. Or five. Okay, so maturity support. Uh, question four. Why do you believe you were the most qualified to serve? Should that be in the application? Raise your hand. There is not majority support for application. Um, and actually, this might help. I started to be rude, but city clerk, um, and city manager, would you mind, um, uh, stopping your video, because then I think that means all of the members of the council will be shifted up in my, yes, that's perfect. Uh, okay. helps a little bit. Um, uh, the question, uh, why do you believe you are the most qualified to serve, so that's question four. Um, So application one more time, my apologies. There's no support for them. Should it be in the letter of interest? raise your hand. One, two, three. Or yes, the majority support, the letter of interest. Thank you. What are your top priorities, and how would they get tackled? Could that be in the application? There's not majority support. Um, letter of interest. I'm not seeing majority support for that. And then should it be an interview question? One, two, before, yes. If you question six. Uh, should that be in the application? One, no, uh, should that be in the letter of interest? One, two, three. I'm only seeing three. Should that be an interview question? Are there any good issues you disagree with the council service? One, two. Okay, so I think we've got majority support for the interface. Um, the next question is, what does community for all mean for you? Should that be in the application? One, two, three. A council member commit, your screen. Oh, just go. Okay, good. That's four. So yes. So that should be, that, that got 4 votes, that, that will be in the application. Um, Question eight, discuss one council goal and what it means for you. Should that be the application? Two, three, four. Yes. That is in the application. Uh, nine, what is the most serious social issue in Mountain View? Should that be in the application? One. There's not majority support. Letter of interest. One, two, three. Um, C 3, council member command. I know you're having some technical, um, or activity problems. Um, Let me just make sure that you're still there. Uh, Council member Kameh, are you able to uh, give it an audio vote. Hope she didn't drop off. Um, okay. So we'll press on. So, uh, question 9. What is the most serious social issue? I think there was not support for the application? With the letter of interest, did we already do that? I think there was 3 for a letter of interest. Is that right? Show your hand. One, two, three, four. Okay, there you are. I think you canceled my recommendation that does have majority support. Um, so question 10 is is the one that will require a little bit of research, um, Uh, before we vote on the city attorney, do you have a preference for how we would So let's say in the event you've, you know, there's a legal risk, but it's not illegal to ask. How would you like us to consider this question? This is the question about whether or not they're going to run in 2024, correct?

[02:59:34] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Right, yes. Um, honestly, I don't I don't think it matters if you do it on the as an application question, or if you do it in person. And I don't think it is flat out. I can tell you now. It's not flat out illegal to ask that question. So, it's not, it's not flatly illegal. That much, I feel comfortable with saying.

[02:59:57] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Um, so then we'll go ahead and vote as if there were any of the other questions. So, is there support for including, uh, Council member Matachek? Do you want to speak to this?

[03:00:08] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Sorry, one clarification. I guess I want to make sure we get, um, good responses to this one. And so, you know, that is very definitive. Do we need to be a little bit more less definitive and say, are you, um, thinking of running? Um, or are you gonna run, you know, any variation of that? Um, because some people say, well, I don't know for sure if I'm going to run, and then they might say no, and then they run. You know, how do you, how do we make it so we get uh, the response we want.

[03:00:48] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, um, is everyone? Oh, thank you. Is everyone comfortable with the notification? I've not seen any chance raised, so, um, then, um, is there support for including question 10 on the application itself? Express your hand. One, two... Yes, there is majority support for including the application itself. Um, And now question 11, how can we enhance the city's livability and quality of life for our residents? Is there support for including that on the application? No, the letter of interest. No, and then the interview. One, two, three, yes. I'm sure you support for that. And then what items on the council, sorry, on the current council strategic work plan are important to you? Support for including that on the application? The majority on the letter of interest. One, two, three, four. So yes, 4 for that one. And then, uh, the final question, how would you balance? Actually, I think we did have a question about public comment. Okay, they are tied together. Biologies. Um, okay, so question 13, which is 2 questions. Um, is there support for including that on the application? Is there support for including that on the letter of interest? Oh, council member, show Walter. How would you balance private property rights along with residents? Does that make sense?

[03:02:43] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Private property rights with public benefits, I think, is the question that was often asked in the EPC, um, questionnaire. Uh, so I, I, I wouldn't interpret this literally, but I think it's, it, what Council member Kame was suggesting was that we include the questions that we've asked in the most recent planning commission interview process.

[03:03:08] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I feel better with the Czech word and thank you. Thank you. And city clerk, do you have your handout?

[03:03:15] Steph: Oh, I was just gonna, um, give the city manager the wording from our last APC meeting, which was how would you benefit? how would you balance private property rights and community benefits? And how would you consider public comments from residents?

[03:03:36] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: property rights and community benefits, yes. From residents. Perfect. Thank you for the clarification. Um, so raise your hand if you support, including that in the application. One. Okay, uh, in the letter of interest. One to. Um, and then as an interview question. One, two, three, four. Okay, so majority of support. Okay, um, we are a very thoughtful and deliberate as much. Are there any final comments or questions about, uh, about the questions. There are still some other questions that I'll have to ask about the appointment process, based on the agenda, the other, um, Sydney manager, I think we can take, um, the, uh, red question. But it's me, Hicks, go ahead.

[03:04:45] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: So I assume that the interview questions can be tweaked. Um, I okay, good. And then I'm gonna be a pain about this one. There was one, the one question on the work plan. The way it's worded, I felt that what several of us have talked about was putting that as an interview question, and I'm not really interested in having somebody just name one or two things from the work plan that they're interested in. To me, that gives me no information. They're gonna have to deal with those. So I'm kind of making a plea now. Maybe I'm speaking out of turn, but for switching it to the interview, because I think it's kind of, I forget where it landed, but maybe it was a prompt in the letter of interest, I think it's not a very useful prompt. So if people are willing to do that, they can, and if not, you know, it landed where it landed. Is there support for recategorizing that question as an interview questionnaire?

[03:05:45] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Two, three, four. Okay. So we have successfully recategorize that question. I can't believe a council member show will superintended to pursue him. And learning. Um, okay. Uh, so then that ends the discussion about the questions that we will ask the applicants. Um, although we will retain the item on the January 24th meeting to discuss the interview questions, if we want to add questions or make provisions. Okay, uh, city manager McCarthy.

[03:06:20] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Thank you, Mayor. I just want to reiterate, so where you all landed was, you have 4 questions for the application. You have 3 questions or kind of prompts for the letter of interest. And then there's 5 interview questions. So when we come back on the 24th, what we'll do is we'll just make sure that all of this is included in the staff report, and then you can discuss these 5 questions that you've landed on for your interview, tweak them, change them, but I would just remind you, well, don't be adding, you know, 4 other questions unless you want 30, 45 minute interviews. So I would try and stick to that 5 or 6 question range, and you're already at five. So just letting you all know where he landed, but we'll make sure to have all this in the staff report.

[03:07:08] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Fantastic. Thank you. Council membership, Walter.

[03:07:13] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Well, two things. I'm a little concerned that, um, we don't seem to have captured too many of the questions that, um, we received in emails, um, from, uh for the application process. And if we only have one more question left, and that's a bit of a problem. But, for instance, I don't think we really got any of the questions from the Chamber of Commerce included. Um, but, uh, I'm wondering if, um... Well, what I really want to talk about is the interview process itself. We, um, we haven't really, uh, talked about that very much, and, you know, we could have group interviews. Uh, we could have an, uh, interview process that was essentially like a candidate forum where the person who got to be 1st on a question, um, rotated and, um, uh, everybody got a turn to be 1st. You know, typically in a, in a candidate form, everybody gets their, you know, minute opening or, and then we go into questions or something along those lines. Um, Or we could have separate interviews. And I would really like to discuss that a little bit. I personally think that, um, particularly if we have nine or less, um, applicants, and we don't really have any knowledge about how many applicants we'll get. I think that's a handle, that's a group that you can handle in a sort of a forum or situation. And I do think that that kind of, um, process allows you an opportunity to see how people interact with one another, which is, um, uh, important. So that's what I wanted to bring up now, is how are we gonna do this interview process? Or are we going to talk to one person for 15 minutes, and another person for 15 minutes, and another person for 15? 15 minutes? Or are we going to, we could conceivably... I know when I got interviewed for the EPC, we had four people that were interviewed at a time, and they had several groups. So I just want to bring that up and say, How are we planning to do it? 'Cause I don't think we've... or if we've gotten that nailed down?

[03:09:29] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I didn't understand that, and I wanted to, I think it's something we should be talking about. It's a good question, and we have not talked about it. But if it's okay with everyone on the council, I'd like to ask the questions, um, in the agenda flow as they appear, and I think as we answer some of those questions, you could inform how we can get the interview process itself. Is that okay? Okay. Okay. So, remember, come in?

[03:10:06] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. Thank you. Apologies. I have to, I've been switching back and forth. I have connectivity issues today. Um, so I'm comfortable with adding, um, a question, really, the, the, Mr. Katz brought up from the chamber. I know that we have our ad hoc group of council members who've been working on like the pedestrian mall in the downtown. So I don't know if it's better suited to defer to them if there's a question that they would like to add, but I think that might be a good, like, letter of interest prompt or, um, maybe even in the application process, but I do think that's something we have talked a lot about as a council, so I'm happy to include that in a, in either the application or the letter of interest since we've kind of maxed out in the, um, in-person interview questions. Thanks.

[03:10:54] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, my my apologies, can you repeat that question one more time? There was a, I didn't write down, um, Peter Katz from the Mountain View Chamber. I think he had brought forward a a couple different questions related to the business community, and I was just trying to hear what council member show Walter said, and sharing before we moved on that I was open to including a question like that, but I didn't want a wordsmith it yet. I see council member Manachek's handup. She's always our expert, Ward Smithers. So would defer to her or someone else to come up with something. So, um, I, I will let that happen. Thanks. Okay, thank you. So, so if there's a recommendation to include a question related to what Mr. Katz had suggested, then we'll take another set of notes to be had. Um, Council member manage.

[03:11:44] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yeah, sorry, um, I wasn't gonna worth those, but I agree that we should add, um, a question, um, regarding our small businesses, especially, but, um, I guess, um, you know, I'm, uh, struggling a bit with, is this the appropriate time to make this comment, um, since you said we wanted to discuss the process later, but I really, uh, feel that given the importance of this appointment, I was expecting to spend more than 10 to 15 minutes with each person. Um, I, I want to make sure I have uh, lots of um, information about them and see how they respond to things. Um, and so I don't feel like we've maxed out on the number of questions that we can ask um, during an interview. I was thinking more like 30 minutes. Thanks.

[03:12:43] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Um, and, and, uh, we can add additional questions tonight or reserve the January 24th community to, included quite, um, other questions too, because I think there will be members of the public who will suggest additional questions that it might, uh, think about. Um, I scare hands.

[03:13:03] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, I have to say, I actually kind of prefer these more specific questions about issues we grapple with, and a lot of the questions that came from the public are those, and I did like, I actually liked all the questions that Peter Katz raised, but we can't ask all of them. So I encourage him to, he said he might hold a forum, and I encourage him to do so. But I think I'm kind of going in the direction that council member Metitrick did the one on small businesses or retaining businesses. Um, perhaps we, I think it was the last question that, uh, Mr. Katz asked. Perhaps we could even capture that one. And I would be open to putting it, you know, any place in the interview or, um, or as a, uh, you know, one of the questions, uh, on the application.

[03:14:01] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Uh, so I see that Mr. Katz is still in the attendees list, so what I'll suggest is that, um, Peter, if you can hear us, or or me, can you please send in an email, um, the questions that you had recommended, um, or at least send it to the city clerk. And then once we have those questions, we can come back and decide whether to include them on the application, as a prompt for the letter of interest, or in the interview process, it's like, in that way. We're not asking what the question is, we will know what certainty. what those recommendations are. So we'll come back to that. But first, uh, I want to go through the questions that staff have asked in the agenda flow. And the 1st is regarding the application timeline, which includes approving the date of applicant interviews. and whether interviews will be conducted in person or remotely via Zoom. Um, so, uh, let's start with the application timeline. Um, which, uh, I believe is included in a catch, attachment one, potential timeline for payment. But they look at that, and then there are no comments or questions, and you can just do a straw.

[03:15:34] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Council member Medichek.

[03:15:37] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Thanks. The only comment I have is, um, under the bullet point about advertising, the last one, other methods is directed by council, and I think it would be useful to send, um, information to the neighborhood associations for distribution to all the neighborhoods. And, you know, the city has interest lists for different topics. And I was wondering if any of those um, would be appropriate or the email distribution list for um, the newsletter uh, that the city sends out. Um, I feel like email's a great way to reach a lot of people and you've already got social media on there. That's another great way. But I think the city has quite a few different email lists that could be used. Thanks.

[03:16:25] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. And so I think that's a reasonable suggestion that hopefully doesn't really need a boat, but um, city step is it's simple enough to promote the opportunity in, uh, for instance, the neighborhood lists and, um, in other, uh, email lists that we may have.

[03:16:44] Steph: Yeah, we can certainly work with the communication staff to get it out to all of the distribution lists that we have and and contact the various neighborhood groups for sure.

[03:16:54] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. That's a member of a coke.

[03:16:57] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. I think that's great. Um, the only change that we talked about earlier is the conflict on the 26th or the conflicts. So, um, if we can do it on the 30th, I think that would be the best state we have left to choose from or the 25th, I guess, but I think the 30th would be the preference. Um, city manager, did you want to win on that question?

[03:17:21] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Um, certainly. Thank you, mayor and council member, Abbe Koga. So I would just say, um, when we, when you all select a date. I've heard interest from Councilman Romatachek saying perhaps 30 minute interviews, maybe some of you are interested in shorter interviews, but depending on how many applicants you have. Let's say there's 10 people. That's 5 hours worth of interviews if it's 30 minutes each person. Um, obviously, you can figure out a process to narrow it down, which we should talk about. Um, but if you want to have it on the 30th, then you got to think about your starting time. Because I don't know that you'd want to start, you know, at 5 or 6 and go that long, maybe you do, but just think about that, just in terms of how many applicants you have and how long the interview is.

[03:18:18] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Council member, I'll be cooking.

[03:18:20] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Uh, yes, thank you. Thank you, city manager. Um, so, yeah, I was thinking among those lines, um, 30, 30 minutes would be fine, but, um, I would like to suggest that we find a way to, um, reduce the number or, or come down to, I'm just going to say, 5 finalists, maximum five. And and then we can plan accordingly. Um, I'll say on the 30th, I actually have gonna be in all day interviews at MTC for our finalists or the executive directors. I'm gonna be pretty interviewed out already, so I don't want to be interviewing 10 or more applicants and I think 5 is a reasonable number anywhere between 3 to five. So that would be my suggestion. Thanks.

[03:19:14] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Um, so, I think a majority of the council, let's do a quick straw pull, straw pull on this, is there support for having some preliminary process where we would weed out applicants that were interested in interview. sort of like the San Jose process. So raise your end, if you support, end of additional processing. Council member, council member command. Thank you.

[03:19:42] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So, um, before we, we vote on if we're, we're comfortable with that, can you maybe enlighten us on on what San Jose is using for the criteria or who is determining this and what's the, Um, Uh,

[03:19:59] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: there there are no established criteria. Each individual council member submits.

[03:20:04] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I think it's, um, it's 4 or 5 names from the list, and if 4 or more council members expressed interest in interviewing that person, and that person chances to the interview process. And 4 is less than a majority, since there are only 9 members of the council now. Um, you know, core is is indication of is a, you know, substantial interest, but it's not majority support. Um, it doesn't have to be that, that's, that's the process that they're using. Right. But, But

[03:20:40] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: to clarify, the city of San Jose is a full-time city council, right? So they review, the council members review all the applications, and then via their city clerk, they submit these names. Is that correct? Is that what you're saying? Okay. So, you know, I think that, um, I think I would be a little bit more comfortable with a criteria that was kind of accessible to the to the public and just kind of letting people know what we might be using as a barometer. You know, I, I appreciate the comments about wanting to make sure we have a good sense of who the individual is and I agree with that. Um, So I don't feel constricted by a certain time with which we do the interviews. I do feel it's important to as much as possible. Um, you know, if we're, if it's an open and public process to apply, then I think we need to have an open and a public process in which we let people know what the criteria is, that we will be, um, reviewing the applications. So before we do it. So that's kind of the comment that I have there. I feel a bit uncomfortable taking a vote on saying that we weed out people if we don't discuss what the weeding out process is. And since we are a part time council, not a full-time council, I do think there's like a slight variation there. Um, and I, you know, where everyone and their staff, I'm assuming council staff will be reviewing these applications. I, you know, we could do that, um, but I want to just have an open discussion about that first. Thanks.

[03:22:15] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, no problem. Um, maybe a quick, quick question for the city attorney. Um, if a majority of the council is interested in having that kind of process, where there would be some preliminary way to express interest in interviewing some applicants and weeding out those where members of the council clearly don't have interest. Um, would you feel comfortable in devising that process and coming back to us with a recommendation, or would you rather us decide what that process is in this meeting?

[03:22:55] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: So can you provide clarification on what you mean by devising that process?

[03:22:59] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: So... And I guess what I mean by that is, are you, are you suggesting that I, maybe present some potential criteria for early elimination of certain applicants? Um, or some other process by which that you would use to eliminate certain applicants? Is that the question?

[03:23:25] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Uh, yes,

[03:23:26] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: I see many members of the council have hands up, so they may have strong feelings about this. Maybe maybe we'll listen to the comments and then I'll come back. Still relevant. Um, council member command.

[03:23:40] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Oh, the other alternative, I would say, is just looking, looking back at the timeline, it looks like applications are due the 18th. Can council discuss that our meeting on the 24th what potential criteria we have based on how many applicants we receive. Because it kind of feels like a little bit cart before the horse, right? If, and so maybe that could be the compromise, which is to say, at the 24th meeting, council will evaluate the list of applications and discuss criteria for how we'd like to move forward with the interviews, um, That's my proposal. Sorry.

[03:24:19] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. I think it's a good suggestion. Nice to meet you. Yeah, I like that suggestion. In addition to that, I think the one thing we have on the application that, to me, clearly, I mean, we can use this on the 24th, but the one that, uh, that, uh, I think we put on as criteria as, uh, the one I don't remember the exact words, but the, the question regarding, uh, whether they've been to council meetings and how many. I think that we can see, maybe we can discuss it more on the 24th, but if there's, you know, a clear distinction between, um, applicants. I don't want to say that it's all a numbers game and anybody, you know, will rank them by number of council meetings and that's the only criteria. But if there's, you know, a bunch of applicants that have been to, you know, somewhere between one and 0 council meetings to me, that would be, uh, a reason to, um, to, uh, you know, screen those out. That seems to me to be the clearest criteria we have already. Thank you. Thank you. Council member, I'll be Kergen.

[03:25:29] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So I was gonna ask if we could receive the applications as soon as possible to give us the time to review the, um, review. I mean, I was expecting to review them all. Um, so it would be helpful to get them as soon as we can. So we have more time to do that. And, and, you know, I'm fine with the process waiting on till the 24th to decide based on how many applications we get, but, you know, I was expecting. We're gonna read through all the applications at some point. Um, and the issue for me was with how many were going to interview the night of the, or whatever day we picked for the interviews. So, um, the criteria, I'm sure we can talk about it, but I'm just was going to base it on the applications and the answers and come up with my, you know, top power for many interview. Um, maybe a question for staff. What, realistically, based on the proposed submission date or deadline, what would be the students we could receive the applications?

[03:26:42] Steph: We do need to do some work with the county to verify residency and voter eligibility. On applications. So if we get an application, you know, for 49. Um, On the 18th. We, we can try to have everything ready by Friday. Um, my concern. At this particular time is we would normally put the agenda out for the 24th. On this, on the 19th, right? So the right the day after we accept applications. I don't know that we can turn that around that quickly. I'm so I don't know if you want to move the application deadline up. Um, so that you can have, you know, access to all of that in a in a packet for the 24th or That's something to consider.

[03:27:54] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Uh, so, let's let's start with. The application timeline. And my favorite proof of the application timeline, then I think a lot of these other questions can be concluded. The proposed deadline for applications is 5 PM January 18. We can Reduce the amount of time. Applicants submit an application. And I would give the city for more time to prepare the application packet for us to review. Nice Mary. So how far would we have to move it up? What would the new date be?

[03:28:49] Steph: I think that if you moved it up to that Monday, the 16th by 5, we could probably turn all the applications around for the packet that would go out on the 19th for the 24th. For you to do a 1st 1st run at it. If that was, if that's the intent here, that you, you have the ability to look at applications and and narrow the field down before the 30th. Then that would be my recommendations.

[03:29:27] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, well, I'd love to hear what other people think. I mean, honestly, I think this timeline is ridiculous and I know we're constrained, but to get up, to get the word out, to get it filled out and to get us to read them. It's, um, No, it shouldn't be this way, but I understand that, no, here has made it this way, so this is what we have to deal with. Um, so I'd like to hear comments from others. Thank you. Council member, Abe Koken.

[03:29:58] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, Mayor. So, um, I guess my question was, do we need to have all the applications, um, you know, and, and, how should I say? Um, so I wasn't so concerned about having all the applications to us, um, before the meeting on the 24th. Oh, how do I do? I was one, I guess I wanted to know if we can get the applications beforehand, you know, my thought was, if they're due on the 18th, could we get them on the 20th, but do they need to be published at that time in part of the packet or are we able to just access the applications ourselves? Um, like if, you know, we were hiring somebody. Just to give us as much time to read through them. Like, I don't think the content of the applications matter so much on the 24th. It would be good to know how many we got. So then from there we could decide how many we want to narrow it down to. Um, but I wasn't, yeah, necessarily thinking on the 24th, we would do that whittling down. based on the applications. And then the Monday is actually, um, MLK day, so I don't know if that would be an issue since City Hall won't be open that day.

[03:31:28] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Oh, we would definitely want to avoid the closure. for sure. Thank you for pointing that out. Um, City Attorney Logue, do you, do you want to weigh in on the,

[03:31:40] City Attorney Jennifer Logue: Yeah, I'm not seeing any reason why they can't have the applications as they come in early. I mean, they can, I think that they can be doled out to the city council members on a rolling basis as they come in. They are shared with the council members individually for their own personal individual review. of each applicants papers.

[03:32:09] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Kent member show Walter.

[03:32:13] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Well, I think we may have actually, um, solve the problem, then, if we could just roll them out, but, because basically, it's really a number we're going to be worrying about, if we have the number of applications on the 24th, then, you know, we can do the math and figure out how many we have, um, you know, time to interview. And I honestly think it'll be a pretty manageable number because we have, there's a lot. We're asking for. I mean, a form 700, a letter of interest, uh, most people have a resume, or many people have a resume, but they probably want to redo it, uh, answering the questions. I mean, this is a pretty short time frame for people to get this stuff together. So, I don't think we're going to have, you know, hundreds. I would imagine we'll have on the order of, you know, 5 to 10, but, but, We'll see. But anyway, the other thing I was gonna say is, sometimes in these processes, you will point a subcommittee to go through the applications and say, you know, these are the ones we're going to, um, uh, interview. If we have that many, that's also a possibility. We don't have to do it as necessarily as a group. Um, and I just wanted to bring that up, because there might be... Um, that might be helpful.

[03:33:35] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Uh, thank you. I have a suspicion that we all have very strong feelings about this and it would be very difficult to find consensus on having a subcommittee. mix. Okay. Um, but I think, um, with, with the understanding that the applications can be provided to the council on a rolling basis, um, is there support for the proposed timeline. Um, That's, uh, included in attachment one. Uh, and then with the addition that on January 24th, if there's, We'll say, a significant number of applications, and we could decide what that means, then on January 24th, we would talk about this preliminary process to, uh, exclude or eliminate applications, where there was no interest in the council and interviewing the applicants. Um, and then the only other modification would be the interview date, which cannot be January 26th. And maybe the best way to do that. Um, city manager, unless you have a proposed date tonight. Is that something that we should hold a council on later or? Should we really pay a day tonight?

[03:34:58] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Um, thank you, mayor. I think you need to land on a date now. There's really not much time and you don't have many options. So we discussed the 30th. I mean, there's also the 27th. Again, it's a Friday night. I, you know, I just don't know if folks availability on Friday night is not as great as other nights, but, um, you really have till the 30th, pretty much, that's it.

[03:35:26] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay. Um, so, Thoughts on the interview date from the council, is there support for Friday the 27th or Monday the 30th? Hands for Monday the 30th, if there's support, one, two, three, four, okay, unanimous support. So then, uh, is there support for the proposed timeline, um, with the modification that the interview will be conducted, interviews will be conducted on Monday, January 3rd. raise your hand. Comes member coming?

[03:36:06] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Just wanted to clarify that we were on the same page too. I'd be interested in the in-person interviews with the, and I know we'll be doing the hybrid, um, meeting options so that people, the public can attend virtually, should they choose, but, um, I think we had, we had discussed someone had brought that up, and I think it's, so I'd like to nail that down, that I, that I would like it to be, um, in person. So I just wanted to clarify that if there's, if that's all right to amend.

[03:36:32] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Yes, yes. Um, and that was, that's the next question on the agenda, though. Is there support for an in-person interview? That's reserving, one, two, three, four, five. So unanimous support or an in-person interview process. That would occur on Monday, January 30th. Um, and then, so we've already up city park? Um, is there a time that you wanted to shoot for, do you want to leave that to the 24th? It will be easier. We know, we can, you know, give that information to applicants, but if we don't have it yet, we don't have it yet. Um, Council member out for something? Thank you there.

[03:37:15] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, you know, it's just me, but I do have, uh, these scheduled interviews for my MTC director and I'm waiting to hear back from them. Um, what time that is, that'll be, and I'll be in the San Francisco. So I imagine the earliest I can do is 5 o'clock.

[03:37:40] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Council member, Abe Koga?

[03:37:43] Councilmember Margaret Abe-Koga: Oh, sorry. So if we can wait till later, um, I can at least get an answer from hopefully tomorrow as to my commitment, um, with MTC that earlier in the day and let you know as the earliest I can get back down here.

[03:38:00] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Uh, well, if if you're pretty certain that 5 o'clock works for you, would there be general support for establishing that time right now? Does 5 o'clock work for everybody on Monday the 30th? Okay. Uh, so then there's unanimous support for 5 PM. Um, in person and then we approach the time frame, uh, approving and providing input on the applications. So now we're gonna go back. Uh, Mr. Cast did send an email, uh, with the questions. And, um, I think hopefully I'll received it, if you have not, you know, please let us know, but, um, feel free to read through them, and if there are questions you would like to include, then that was the time to suggest that we include them.

[03:39:20] Councilmember Lisa Matichak: Yeah, I think these are um, Questions that would be good to ask during the interview. And I would suggest either number one or number two. Should I read them so that members of the public know which ones they are? So, number one is, if appointed, how will you develop and maintain a relationship with the business community? And number 2 is, what efforts would you take to help our existing businesses stay in mountain view, make it easier for new businesses to enter and reduce the number of long-standing empty starfronts? I could go for either one or both of those.

[03:39:58] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Okay, thank you. We'll take a round of comments and then we'll vote. Yes, mayor hits.

[03:40:04] Vice Mayor Alison Hicks: Yes, I'm particularly interested in number 2 because I've heard, you know, a lot of interest in that, both from the chamber of commerce, downtown businesses, but also, uh, from residents. Um, you know, I think we've all been getting email from residents regarding the, how much they care about small businesses and vacancies and, and so forth. So it's number two that I'm, if we can only do one, I'm very interested in number two. And also, I'm actually interested in all of them and hope that the chamber can hold a forum as well. Thank you.

[03:40:37] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Council member for me.

[03:40:44] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I like, I like number one and 2 as, uh, Council member Mattachek suggested, and could we have one as an interview question, and one, ether, and the application, or the letter of interest, if colleagues are interested? Maybe number 2 could be the interview, um, question, since we heard vice mayor's interested, particularly in that one, and, um, we can add that to the interview. Well, you know, we can adjust questions on the 24th need be. But I do agree that that could be a good in-person one. And then, um, for the 1st question. Um, from Mr. Katz list, I would be happy to wherever that landed. Thanks.

[03:41:21] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. That's a good suggestion. Any other thoughts? Council membership, Walter.

[03:41:28] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Yeah, I'm quite partial to the 4th one. What are your thoughts, ideas for improving the housing supply to meet today's requirements, including our 3 as well as planning for the future. Um, relatedly increasing housing needs to increased attendance levels at, well, I'm not sure if we need, but that 1st part of four. I think is an excellent question, and I think it would be a good one to add to the application.

[03:41:56] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Are there any other questions? Or thoughts? Um, so, I'll propose that we use the same process that we use for the questions, um, that we considered earlier. So for question one, which is if appointed, how will you develop and maintain a relationship with business cleaning? 1st application, 2nd letter of interest, 3rd interview. Is there support for including it in the application? Is your hand? One, two. Okay. Is there support for anything in the letter of interest? One, two, three. Four. Okay, so question one will appear in the letter of interest as a prompt. And then the 2nd question is, what efforts would you take to help our existing businesses stay in your view? Uh, and then, or many components to the question? Is there support for including that as an application question, racer? Uh, letter of interest. Interview question. There is no support for including questions too as an interview question. And the other question that was brought up was the 1st part of question four. What are your thoughts or ideas for improving the housing supply to meet today's requirements as well? as well as planning for the future. for including that in the application. There's majority support for including that. Okay. That's a question. Thank you. So with that. We'll close the questions that will include in the application and layer of interest. And on the 24th, we will revisit the questions for the interview. Um, we've already discussed the advertising time frame and the deadline to apply, uh, and that was the staff recommendation, with the addition, as council member Mattachek had proposed to, uh, promoted also in the email lists that the city apes. Um, when the next question is, So the questions we've already discussed? directing the city clerk to randomly select the interview order of the applicants. Is there support for doing that? Raise your hand, one, two, three. Council member show, Walter.

[03:44:30] Councilmember Pat Showalter: Um, I think council member Kame, and I both brought up the concept of group interviews, and some of our comments, no? I did, but I was hoping that we wouldn't have to do that.

[03:44:50] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Ah, okay. Now, I, I... I think that it's, it's valuable to see how people interact, but, you know, I'm only... only one. Um, so I think a group interview is is valuable, but that's... not getting any... not getting any, uh, support. Okay. Win some lose some, I'd like to say. Um, so is there support for directing the city clerk to randomly select the interview order of the applicants? There is majority support for that. Um, now this is not on the list, but I think it's important to discuss a selection procedure, and there is a proposal, uh, attachment to, um, in the packet. Um, I think the intent is to fry to it here as much as possible to the process we use for the planning commission. It's a little bit more detailed here. Are there any questions or comments about the selection procedure? Or is there general support for the proposed procedure in the staff? Uh... See, no hands up, raise your hand if you support the selection procedure, as proposed by span, one, two, three. Okay. So there's support for that. Thank you, shorty support. Um, that's everything on the list I have. Uh, staff. Is there any additional direction that you need?

[03:46:42] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Mayor, I think we're good. Um, how about I summarize, just so that we're all on the same page? Would that be helpful?

[03:46:51] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Sure.

[03:46:52] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Okay. So we have captured all of the prior questions that council, um, determined whether they were going to be in the interview, the letter of interest. or the um, application packet itself, and then we've also added the 3 additional questions that the Chamber of Commerce proposed. We will bring those back to you all on the 24th and then you can look at them again. If you have any tweaks or changes or additions. You can talk about that at that time. And then, um, in terms of the application timeline, We have landed on applications being distributed to council members on a rolling basis as they come in. As a side note, um, I would just note that it is very typical to receive applications, most of them at the very end. So just want to make you all aware of that. But we will distribute them on a rolling basis as they come in. We will be interviewing candidates on January 30th in person at 5 o'clock PM. And at the January 24th meeting, uh, council will discuss and, uh, you will know at that point in time how many applications there were. And we will discuss a process if we need to have one if we need to select a certain number of candidates. I will say I would like to speak with my colleagues on how that process might look because I'm a little, um, I just want to make sure that it would be a smooth process for you all. So I will be speaking with the city attorney and city clerk on, um, however many applications there are if it's, if you get 30 applications, then we'll have to figure something out. So we will try and bring something to you all to react to. Um, and then in terms of the advertising time frame of the vacant position. Uh, we're okay with the deadline, the 18th, 5 PM, anything later than that will not be taken. And we will also make sure that for advertising, we will send information to the neighborhood associations to share the information and everything else we had listed, which does include, uh, City Hall connection, social, um, cities interest list. We will just make sure we do a very robust communications outreach in multiple languages through all of our channels. And then lastly, the uh, city clerk will randomly select the interview order of the applicants. And uh, you all are in unanimous support of the selection process that staff outlined. So I think, I think I captured everything, but, um, that is a summary. So thank you all for getting through this in a very clear way. Appreciate it.

[03:49:52] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Thank you for the summary. 2 quick, hopefully trivial editions. We had, I neglected to ask for support, I think for support for, um, asking for contact information from the applicants that would be made available to the public. support for that, just to show a hands to verify pool. And then I hope it goes without saying, but, um, an application that is late, or that does not include all of the materials will be deemed incomplete, and an applicant will be ineligible for an interview.

[03:50:25] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Correct. Yeah.

[03:50:27] Mayor Lucas Ramirez: Just, uh, thank you. Um, are there any final questions or comments before we conclude item 4.one? I'm not seeing any. So, um, thank you all for, um, your patience in working through this. This was difficult, but I think we've made some good and important decisions. Um, just before we adjourn, I wanted to, I was hoping there'd be sort of an IIB equivalent of prison. Um, but I don't want to, um, publicly acknowledge and and thank the staff for their incredible efforts over the past few days preparing for the storm and responding to many, many requests for service, uh, you know, public safety public works, uh, CSD. I think everybody has been involved in that. Um, and I'm, I'm very proud of her, I personally, I would, there's a lot of work and it often doesn't go recognized. So thank you very much for your efforts in surfing our residents over the past few days. Um, and with that, uh, thank you so much for joining us, the next city council meeting will be held in person with a virtual component on January 10th, 2023. Um, I am looking forward to never having to chair a meeting again or, I guess, in the context of a email. Until then, stay healthy. The meeting is during at 9.21 PM.

[03:51:43] Unknown Speaker: Thank you, everyone.

• ← Previous
• Next →