April 25, 2024 Council Policy and Procedures Committee

Video

Transcript

[00:09:10] Unknown Speaker: Sorry.

[00:09:10] Member Lucas Ramirez: No worries at all. Good afternoon, everyone. Going to call to order the April 25th CPPC meeting. It has 208 PM. This meeting is being conducted with a virtual component. Anyone wishing to address the committee virtually may join the meeting online at HTPPS Poland slash mountain view.zoom.us slash J slash 8475-4933805 or by dialing 669-99128 and entering webinar ID 847-54933805. When the chair announces the item on which, on which you wish to speak, click the raised hands feature in Zoom or dial star 9 on your phone. And if your calls your name to provide public comment, if you are participating via phone, please press star 6 to unmeet yourself. Any emails received by 12 p.m. today were forwarded to the CPPC. Emails received after 12 PM will not be read during the meeting, but will be entered into the record for the meeting. Regionally, recently, regional and local elected and appointed bodies have been subject, subjected to disruptive, racist, verbal attacks by anonymous colors during virtual public comments. The city of Mountain View is fully committed to racial, religious, and cultural equity and justice as we strive to create a welcoming, safe, and inclusive community for all. This advisory body, sorry, this council subcommittee welcomes respectful and non-threatening public comments regarding matters over which the subcommittee has jurisdiction. Comments deemed otherwise, pursuant to the council code of conduct and the government code may be grounds for immediately terminating a speaker's comment period. Now I will ask, um, as deputy city manager, Ms. Thomas, to take the roll call, please. Uh,

[00:10:56] Ms. Thomas: mayor show Walter.

[00:10:57] Member Pat Showalter: Here.

[00:10:57] Ms. Thomas: Council member Hicks.

[00:10:58] Member Alison Hicks: Here,

[00:10:59] Ms. Thomas: share Ramirez. Thank you. Yep,

[00:11:01] Member Lucas Ramirez: here. Thank you. Item three. Minutes approval, CPPC minutes from November 28, 2023. Does anyone have any comments or questions about the meeting minutes? So you know, uh, questions or comments? Would anyone? Well, is there public comment? Do we have anyone on the line?

[00:11:19] Unknown Speaker: Um, do we have 2 people? I don't believe anyone else. Let me pull that up. Thank you very much. Um,

[00:11:31] Member Lucas Ramirez: emotion is in order to approve the minutes. I'll

[00:11:35] Ms. Thomas: make a imagine. Thank you. Would you

[00:11:37] Member Lucas Ramirez: like the 2nd emotion? My 2nd emotions? Thank you very much. Um, so we have a motion in a 2nd. Uh, let's take a roll call. You show up there? Yes,

[00:11:50] Ms. Thomas: can some memory hicks? Yes, Cher Ramirez. Yes. And then it carries 30? Thank you.

[00:11:56] Member Lucas Ramirez: Move up to item 4, oral communications, uh, item 4 is oral communications, communications from the public. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the committee on any matter, not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to 3 minutes during this section. State law prohibits the CPPC from acting on non-agendized items. Would any member of the public like to provide comment on an item that is not on the agenda? If so, please submit the blue card, or if on Zoom, click the raise hand feature or dial Star 9 on your phone. No public comments. Thank you. We will now close pro communications and move to discussion and action items beginning with 5.one revisions to council policy, A13, city council meeting, section 14, study sessions. Assistant city manager, Audrey Seymour, Seymour, Ramp, Remember, will present this item. Thank

[00:12:48] Audrey Seymour: you, Chair Ramirez. Um Council, um, has held 15 study sessions in this past year, and some interest was expressed to take a look at what the process is for our study sessions. Um, it is a section in Calco policy A13. It deals with city council meetings. Section 14 specifically, addresses study sessions, and its language is not very, um, tale about what types of items come to study sessions and how they get, um, uh, deliberated and then how direction is taken from study sessions into follow-up by staff. And so it seemed there was an opportunity to burger clarify and inform, um, what's in the policy language to the practice set, um, with alcohol desires, um, in terms of how the council has been using, uh, study sessions. Typically, they are to, um, provide a narrowing down or choice among options as it relates to a scope of service, per scope of work, um, for some new area of policy, um, or program or project. Um, There might be um, a completely developed scope that that accounts the staff is seeking confirmation of. But it's more informal so that the council really has an opportunity to provide input in a formative way. Um, so things are coming to the council kind of fully baked. Um, and, um, there are options that counsel can select from. Um, also, um, kind of in a different category, when the full council is interviewing for a board to commission, those are done under the, uh, study session. Typically, those study sessions are held earlier, the 630 start time of the regular agenda. Um, there are some ways that study sessions are similar to regular agenda items. I mean, staff obviously isn't coming in completely cold. They have done a fair amount of, of analysis and research that might have included public outreach that is then summarized for the council. Um, and perhaps even, um, formatted into a set of options or alternatives, or even a preferred alternative. Um, but still, these are items where generally there hasn't been, um, in a prior setting, clear direction from council. Um, and there are um, questions that staff wants to pose to counsel to make sure that we're on the right track. Um, so that we're not coming back for final action. Um, in, uh, with something that's fully baked, but doesn't really reflect the intent the council had it. Um, and so that's the helpful staff, they have that early check-in. Um, and what has also seemed helpful for the council is the more informal, um, setting, which not the same setting, but the structure is more informal, and there's more dialogue, um, more rounds of, of question and comment and, um, and then an opportunity at the end for that to all get summarized. Um, and for there to be an indication of where there is majority support for certain directions and, um, that that is what staff will then take to further develop the item, um, to bring back to council for action. So that's what we have, um, uh, been doing with our our study sessions, the 15 of we had last year, for example, and then there have been a few so far this year. Um, and what is proposed in your packet as a change to policy, A 13th, section 14, is to include, um, what hadn't really been there before, which states regarding the purposed benefits of study sessions, and how those are a bit different from regular business items. Um, give a little bit more definition to how staff questions are used to focus the council defact and direction. Um, and to clarify how castle feedback and direction will synthesize so that we can hopefully all be on the same page and then out of the study session. That's, I think, one of the things that, in that more informal, um, open-ended nature that studies sessions can have is a bit of the challenge is when things are more open-ended. Um, Does everybody walk out, um, having the same recollection of where the council um, ended up? Um, and then the last thing that's in the proposed changes is something that, um, uh, has come up a couple times in the past few years when, um, there's been a change by a council member, uh, in terms of the direction provided at a study session, and then, uh, one a depth clarity of what the process is, to, um, in case there is a change, the majority support, which you have provided at a subception. So I also want to acknowledge and thank Cher Ramirez for your submitting alternative language. Um, I, it's clear that you've thought about this, and I'm sure you'll want to speak to that. Um, and we, um, get to, um, the deliberation, but that's, that includes the comments that I wanted to make, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Very much. Uh,

[00:18:52] Member Lucas Ramirez: would any member of the committee, uh, like to ask any questions before I open the item to put upon? I have some questions.

[00:19:00] Member Alison Hicks: So my 1st question is when, maybe I should know this from reading it, but I don't. When you refer to council members making changes. Um, does that refer to after the meeting? So if I express myself in the meeting and I walk away and later, I'd, okay. Just to be clear on that. Maybe it says that, but it was not clear to me. Um, and then the other question... The other question I had was, and I imagine you're going to do just anyway here, but just a sort of high-level summary of, you know, because I've just read your, your proposed changes, like what mode debated it, and what are the main differences? I think I see, but, you know, I read it quickly, so maybe you can summarize that. Uh,

[00:19:50] Member Lucas Ramirez: I would be happy to, um, and it deals more like deliberation, so... wait for that. Right after public coming.

[00:19:57] Member Alison Hicks: And maybe I'll ask you further questions. Sure. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah,

[00:20:03] Member Pat Showalter: I was wondering if you had a chance to do any benchmarking of what, um, the practices in neighboring communities. I know I'm talking to some other council members. I've heard that there's some communities here nearby who have like a special meeting a month that's devoted to study sessions and, um, they, You know, they're actually held at a different time and I, I just wondered, what are the, what's, what's the range of practices? It's

[00:20:31] Audrey Seymour: a good question. Who did seek to do some online research to try to find written policies about study sessions and, um, didn't come up with much? Um, I had a conversation with one of my colleagues, um, and their practice was similar to ours, but I didn't do, um, extensive, um, outreach and conversations to to hear about different, um, bottles. Well,

[00:21:01] Member Pat Showalter: I think it was either Sunnyvale or Palo Alto. I mean, it wasn't there in far afield. That... as a, you know, a standing... Anyway, unities. Yeah. But I thought that was interesting. Because as you said at the beginning, you know, we have a lot of them. And I mean, there were 19 last year. That's a, that's a, that's a big percentage of our meetings that have, a study section. So they're, they're, you know, they're really important and they take a lot of time. Um, I guess the other thing I would wonder is the time for study sessions typically. Um, aren't they, my, my memory is that they're, you know, on the order of an hour to 3 hours each. Most of them are in the like hour and a half range. Is that right? I remember, remember, some of them were more traumatic than others, so they seem, well.

[00:21:53] Audrey Seymour: I think one to 2.5 hours probably is the, the most typical range, and we do try to estimate the amount of time that they will take ahead of time. Um, and then, um, in terms of, uh, a set aside of a day, for, um, study sessions, um, I've worked for 3 other cities and haven't ever seen that? I've, I've seen them run fairly typical or similar to the way we run them and having the same kinds of, um, challenges around, uh, you know, everyone feeling like they're clear on the same direction. Um, and that they have, the timing wise in terms of how they work into the regular meetings is, is more typical, looking at the regular meetings. Thank you. Thank you.

[00:22:47] Member Lucas Ramirez: I have any other questions? Um, so you know other questions. I do not have any, so I'll turn to the public, would any member of the public like to provide comment on this item? If so, please submit a blue card or if on Zoom, click the raise hand feature or dial star 9 on your phone. No members of the public wishing to speak. Thank you. I will now bring this back for PPC, CPPC discussion. Um, I think I'll start in response to your questions, uh, committee member picks. So, I think as a as a preamble, um, I had an opportunity to speak, uh, briefly with a city manager, uh, 2 days ago. I think, and I had shared with her at that time. I was landing in a very different place from where I'm landing now. Um, I, I have felt that we struggled with study, study sessions for quite some time and and I printed up, actually. Uh, many different examples of the questions that we were asked. Um, and the conclusion I had come to was, I'm not sure that there's a lot of value in the format that we have been using for study sessions. Yes, like, um, that most, if not all of the work, could be done through, uh, new business or unfinished business, um, in a more conventional setting where there is a clear motion articulated at the end, and not always, but generally, um, I think an easier path to a shared understanding of the direction that we're providing. Um, and what I, um, appreciate it from the conversation with the city manager is that there are a lot of cases where study sessions have tremendous value for staff. Um, and so I've, I've tried to, Consolidate some of the, that, that feedback and understanding in, um, some tactical revisions to, uh, the language that we were provided. I think that there was, there's a lot of, uh, put a good material in the, the staff provided language. But what I tried to do is be a little bit more precise in establishing some guardrails. Um, and again, an overriding, 2 overriding considerations, um, staff shall retain discretion in what questions to ask and when to ask those questions, when to, um, recommend a study session format. And, uh, the other overriding consideration is really, at the end of the day, the council needs to exercise, um, some discipline, right? We need, it's the burden falls on us to be clear in the direction that we provide. And if we can't do that, then the staff are going to strike, I think, to come back with materials that meet the expectations of the council. So I'll just really quickly go through. If does everyone have a copy? Are there copies available for us? Thank you. Thank you for bringing the copies. I appreciate it. Sure. Um, So, uh, very similarly, I think, just starting off with, um, when, uh, how a study session may be placed on the agenda, it's essentially pursuant to the section of the policy that describes how every other agenda item, uh, is placed, right? It's a subject. I think section 2 says, uh, at the discretion of the city manager and city clerks. that how the, uh, agenda order would be determined. Um, and it, it's, uh, it would, uh, the same requirements of an ordinary agenda item would apply here as well, that it's properly noticed that there, there's an opportunity for members of the public to participate. And then, um, so where the next section deviates is it provides, um, some ideas for when, uh, a study session would be appropriate. It's not, um, it's not, you know, an exhaustive list, but I think it helps convey, um, for future councils and and administrations. Here's when we recognize that study sessions have tremendous value. Um, These are pretty rare, but we have had, on occasion, opportunities for the council to receive information. And the example that came to mind was October 2015. Um, Mayor, you might remember, uh, the, um, before the council discussed, uh, Tenant protections. There was a, uh, sort of like a round table with representatives from the California apartment association and and I think Julia Brody was there. It was, we don't usually do that, but it was a great opportunity to hear different perspectives from key stakeholders and then for members of the council to ask questions. So that feels like a study session, you know, far more so than a new business item. There was action taken, you know, but it was, it's the kind of format that might be sensible for when we're soliciting information, and we need to learn. Um, and that that also applies to staff too. information you need to let us know where we could have that kind of dialogue. This is an appropriate study format. And two, we've conducted interviews and study sessions. I think that's self-explanatory. Now, 3 is where I got a lot of valuable insight from the city manager. And that's sometimes we will ask staff to do something and not provide any real parameters or guidance. Um, and so staff has very little to work with. And really, they're, they're then coming back to us to say, What is it that you want us to do? Um, and city manager, I don't know if you would like to provide some examples of that, but even, you know, we're anticipating within the next few months. I think some study sessions where, basically, we're being asked to provide a scope for a program or concept that sounded good to us, you know, maybe a year ago, but we didn't really flesh out in a meaningful way. Um, And then, uh, for the, or that could also be, uh, the council goal setting or workplan discussion too. where we're all coming in tabula Russia, right? So how is it, um, that we, you know, can have, uh, the study session provides an opportunity to have a wide ranging and comprehensive discussion, um, and in a more informal way, as uh, the assistant city manager was describing, you know, it, it, there really isn't previous guidance that staff can take to us for a new business item. And the last one is sort of a catchall. There may be other occasions where a study session really is the best or only way for staff to solicit input from the council. Um, I, I feel like one thing that we, we could explore as, um, as a subcommittee and then with the full council is, maybe there are times where it would be more appropriate to, uh, provide, uh, some, uh, a council subcommittee to investigate a matter. Um, so I, for instance, I don't think we need to have multiple study sessions over, um, environmental sustainability matters because we have a council subcommittee that is well equipped to do a lot of that work. Um, you know, there might be a reason to come back to the full council to do a check-in. But generally speaking, you know, there are things that we could probably empower a subcommittee to do. that will, you know, spare staff the burden of going to a council in a study session. But really, it's at the city managers and staff's discretion about when that would apply. And then the next set of changes, um, are, uh, providing some, um, guidance for types of questions to ask, so that would be, um, in this, I'm not terribly sophisticated or technologically savvy, so my apologies I wasn't able to prepare a red lined copy. Um, but it would be any, any provisions to, to. Um, and again, it's it's not prescriptive, but it's just, it's intended to help staff prepare questions that we're going to be able to respond to with clarity, right? And I think some of the objectives or goals are to provide clarity and direction, to have, both the questions and the answers be as objective as possible, to avoid, terms that are open to interpretation. So I used an example that came from a recent study session where the 3 of us were the Brown Act group that discussed it, you know, and we never actually talked about. What is, What is high growth? If we had decided to pursue a high growth scenario? What would that actually mean? We might have different ideas on how to interpret that, even though we all voted for the same term. So it's, it's, you know, intended to help ensure that at the end of the discussion, um, everyone, the council and the staff are on the same page about what, what the direction is. Um, I made some very minor changes to some other things. So for, for two, three, um, the, uh, the language that was provided to us, I think, says, uh, mayor or staff will, um, provide a summary. Um, and I, I think the, Different mayors have different levels of comfort, um, it's a great burden, as staff knows, to try and prepare, um, notes for 7 monologues, right? And then to discern where there's a synthesis. So I know we've, each of us has had the privilege to be mayor and I think has struggled with that. So I left it really up to the discretion of the mayor, whether the mayor would take on that responsibility or invite staff to provide a summary, but so just clarifying the, the, the order of, uh, responsibility, uh, in in providing the summary. And then, um, There was, one other change, um, Let's see if I could, I, Oh, uh, so for, for, uh, 31, uh, the city clerk shall, and food, the council direction, I included the word maturity, just to clarify that there's, there's, a lot of ambiguity in the, um, the input that we provide. Sometimes somebody will say something that sounds like a good idea and nobody comments on it, but, um, it's, it may not, it may or may not be the majority will. So I think what we're asking the city clerk to do, specifically is record, uh, the items where there were, there's a clear majority, uh, requesting that staff return with a given set of items. Um, and then, so I think the rest of the document is the same. Um, I wanted to express my appreciation to staff for providing that last section, um, because I, I think we've struggled with what happens when a council member changes their mind after a meeting. Um, there have been different ways that has played out, and so having clarity, um, and how we treat. After the fact, you know, changes of, of, uh, position, I think it will be very valid. So that's, um, I was long winded, my apologies, but I hope that, uh, helps, um, I'm not wedded to this language. So I'm open, we can word smith it or ask staff to make some tactical changes, but that's the intent, really. Clarity, objectivity shared understanding. I have some other things that I can reference, but like I'll stop there and buy questions or comments.

[00:34:14] Member Alison Hicks: Okay, I have some comments and questions. Just for clarity, for me, it looks like the 1st page is mostly different. And the thing's almost all the same, except... Very minor. It kinded out one or two, one word where you put in majority. Right. Okay. So I'm trying to wrap my mind around the, the changes to the 1st page, and I'm still, I'm still thinking about that, but, let me say, the things, I guess, you know, much of this seems fine. I, I, I do take exception to the, the very 1st 3 words in special cases because, I think we do study sessions quite frequently, they don't seem to be very special cases. They seem to be common and frequent. And that's, I would hate to change to special cases because for me, I, um, I think there's tremendous value in the study sessions. I think that because of the brown act, which I value, um, you know, and keeps everything public. We have no way of having, you know, we can have a small brown act group, discussion which can be in depth in which I value, but with the whole council and also including the public, Um, it's our only opportunity to really on the ground floor when we're conceiving of something, get everybody's input. And the other piece that I, value about study sessions is, even if I, I was in a brown act with the 2 of you, I wouldn't have necessarily, I do talk to members of the public, often before a study session or another item on the agenda, but not everyone. I don't know everyone in the public who's who's interested. So I find it really valuable to, in the beginning of, you know, when we're 1st considering, uh, an agenda item, a project we're taking on to really to, to really have an in-depth discussion. Um, so to me, it's not in special cases, and this is, if we're going with the language in the 1st one, it says the purpose of study sessions is to provide an opportunity for the council to discuss policy matters. But I really think it's for the council and the public to discuss. I mean, I know you. I have it tremendously back and forth with the public at that point. It's not time. But I really think, for me, that's what it's about. Um, the problem I had, the main thing I thought this was about was to put straw poles. in here, because that, I think, I think you started doing them chair when you were mayor, and I found those tremendously helpful for clarifying what we, what the majority opinion was, because we would often go down the line, and if the mayor were to speak 1st, and we went down the line, she wouldn't have the opportunity necessarily to say whether she agreed with things, you said, and things I said, and we wouldn't even know. We wouldn't even know if there was majority, if there was consensus for certain items. So, to me, that's the main thing I want to come out of this. And I know, some people when, when they've chaired when they've been mayor, not the 2 of you actually, but they're, one of their big concerns is, is timeliness, which I understand, people can participate better if there's timeliness, but they would cut off like a 2nd round. of review, which was the opportunity a council member would have to say, oh, I also agreed with what Lucas said or whatever. So there was no way of knowing even what majority. uh, what the majority, uh, agreement was or consensus was. So to me, that's the main thing. that I want to make sure the straw poles are done. Um, Other than that, I, I'm mulling over these changes. So I'm still thinking about them, but those are my comments at this point. I do. Well,

[00:38:26] Member Pat Showalter: I have some comments on, uh, One of the things I have thought over the years is a problem with study session is that there's often such a long period of time between when we have the study session and when the action item comes to us. Sometimes it's literally years. And so, you know, we've given direction in a study session. And the situation has changed really a lot. And yet, staff seems to still go with the direction that we gave with a outdated set of facts. So that's one of the things I've found over time to be worrisome about the study session is, in a sense, I think, from time to time, we have to have more check ins. I would, I would almost think we need a mini study session procedure where we're not going to do the full, you know, 2 hour thing, but we want a 0 win on things. And there have been a couple things that we've tried to do that on. But I think for me, for some, I mean, the projects, the things that we work on, housing issues, homeless issues, you know, the sustainability issues, these are not things that are handled in, you know, a 4 year term. These are things that people work on for, you know, for a long, long time. And so that's one of the things that I've always found to be a problem with the study sessions, is that get. Um, But, and then, um, And then another thing I think that was mentioned earlier that isn't in the procedure. is the problem of discipline of discussion. You know, we, we have over time, there are very members who, um, feel the need to, you know, talk a lot, and then there are other people who are very terse. And I'm not sure you can ever really get away from that. But we don't have any procedure for saying, you know, okay, we've talked for 10 minutes. That's enough. Uh, we don't even want a timer. They do in Palo Alto. Well, I don't think it would be a bad idea. But, um, you know, I mean, so we're not even aware of how long we talk. Um, but I do think that's also an issue with the timeliness is that, you know, depending on where you come in the conversation, um, uh, there's a feeling that, you know, people are getting, um, uh, we're getting tired and, uh, a little cranky and they, they don't really want to hear what you're saying. They want to get this over with. So, so I, I think the discipline, how we can bring discipline into the discussion is, is important. And I think that the straw poles helps with that because it's a way of, um, getting, you know, everybody's, uh, or, or the major, um, uh, components of people's uh, suggestions down into the record, even if you didn't talk about it for a long, long time. Just stated it. And, you know, and especially, I know when you were mayor, you would always query everybody, did we remember everything to take a straw pole on it? So if, if something had been left out, we could, you know, we could, we could ask you to add it to the list. And that was, I found that really helpful. I like that a lot. So, so I, I think that, you know, that kind of helps with the discipline for it a little bit. Although I'm not, anyway, a little bit, I would hope this. Um, Then, uh, The other thing, I, they are not a special case, they are standard operating procedure. So I don't think that calling him a special case is right. It is possible that many of these things could be handled in regular or special media agendas. Um, I wouldn't disagree with that. That is at the, um, that is at the, uh, discretion of the, um, the staff. I would also say that, um, I don't think that they're that much more, uh, I mean, they are a little more open-ended in discussion, but just a little bit. I mean, when we compare, you know, say the discussion of what we had, um, last, uh, the last meeting at the on the economic vitality strategy, that was an action item. That wasn't a study session. It went on for almost 3 hours, and it had many of the characteristics of that, and that people went through it multiple times, and, you know, it is, and, and that was good. I mean, that was the way we handled that. But if we had labeled that a study session. I mean, I guess we wouldn't have approved the document at the end. That was what was different. But still in all, the discussion was very, to me, was very similar to what we would normally have in a study session. So, um, So, I just find this a little amorphous. It's not necessarily wrong to be amorphous, but I still, and maybe it should be. Maybe we should just say the staff has discretion to, to do this, but I do, I do think that, um, the synthesis, the council direction, um, the really important. Um, their hat and and we, we've been getting little write-ups recently about that. And I think that they are helpful. So I appreciate that. Um, I don't know, do we have a process for disagreeing with them at the moment? I mean, if there's a problem. Is there, do you mean, what, what the,

[00:43:52] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: uh, summary of, um, generally I would talk to council members, um, uh, so far from what I've heard. I think we've been trying to keep it tight. So if you look at, There's actually a list of the items that came to you all last year. And we're really trying to keep it to those items that truly, where staff doesn't have direction already, or maybe it's changed so much that we need to come back, and I think this was to a earlier point you made mayor, where perhaps things were started years ago, and it's taken a long time, and so, we have had study session check-ins in that manner. And then the direction that I have received from council is to do more frequent check-ins on some of the items that do have the longer time frames. So, whether they're offygen of memos or briefings. So we've been doing things like that. So I, I have a, really add too much of the situation you just asked about or if there's a disagreement. The situation that comes up more frequently is people forgetting what happened or what the direction was and thinking that perhaps it was something that they might have said or a colleagues said. Well,

[00:45:08] Member Pat Showalter: that's why that's precisely why the summaries are good. Then I'm just saying after the summary comes out, what's the appeal process for that if we don't think if something was left out? Generally,

[00:45:16] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: someone will come to me and we'll... So we just contact you about that. Yeah, and we would go back and watch the video, but I haven't really, we haven't had that really because... No, we haven't, but you

[00:45:25] Member Pat Showalter: just need an NPO process for everything. Yes. Yeah, come to the city of the government.

[00:45:31] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: We'll watch the video and I'll look at my notes. I can't say I've

[00:45:36] Member Pat Showalter: been happy with them today, but I can imagine when a situation where I might not be and I want to know what I do about it. Yeah, if I'm not happy about it. I come and talk to you. Okay, got it. All

[00:45:44] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: right. And the summaries, I think, have really helped for that exact reason. everyone's on the same page when the mayor summarizes it at the end of the study session. So there's clarity given right then and there to the entire council. And we raised our hands. Exactly. And say, oh, I thought something else. Yeah. Yeah,

[00:46:02] Unknown Speaker: yeah. Okay. Um. I guess we, we, Another

[00:46:24] Member Pat Showalter: comment that I, I, um, we came up with recently. The problem that arose recently was we had a, you know, we had a, a change of, um, opinion after a study session. And we have a procedure, we had a procedure previously that was in a, um, a change of decision that was in a, um, a, uh, a standard action. But it was silent on study session. So I'm glad to see this added in here because we do have, we do have some pretty significant guidance given at study sessions. And um, so I think that's, that's appropriate. Do we want to put any, any kind of direction in here about the number of study sessions or the time between study sessions and an item coming to council? Um, I, I have found that to be an issue, and um, I, I think that, you know, for instance, we shouldn't have a study set, to have a study session and then 2 years later have the action item come. They have nothing in between or very little in between. That's a problem.

[00:47:37] Member Lucas Ramirez: So what's, I think, so may I, so I have, I think we, we need to be careful not to be too prescriptive in the policy because we don't know what staff needs from us to proceed, right? So, um, I'm, I'm a little reluctant to be...

[00:47:55] Member Pat Showalter: Anyway, anyway, I'm concerned about, I am concerned about that time gap. And it's a, you know, it's a qualitative thing. It's not that, that, um, So,

[00:48:04] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: mayor, if I may, um, if I look at the 2023 uh, list of study sessions, so I'm very mindful of what you said. We've talked about this as stuff. All of the items that have come to you in 2023 and 2024, except for one, have been very timely in the same generally fiscal year or work plan cycle. So there are very few cases. where there might be an item that comes, uh, in one more plan cycle, but that might be carried over and then another couple years. And the example I'm thinking of is R3 and we've already talked about that already. But if I were to look at the rest of the items in 2023. It's it's really items that you all are providing us direction on that are either coming back to you fairly shortly thereafter as a new business item, or in the case of the ledge program as as a consent item, ultimately, or you're giving direction, like, uh, on the revenue ballot measure, and we're bringing it back to you a couple months later. So we have been mindful of that and we've tried to keep that timeline within either the fiscal year or the work plan cycle. So, I think it's, it would be hard to put a hard time frame around that, but just knowing that the way we are using study sessions now is really with the intention of bringing something back to counsel within short order and surely within that that work plan cycle. Well, well, um, Council

[00:49:39] Member Pat Showalter: member Ramirez, I would like to understand a bit more about the thought of, of, how some things would appropriately be handled in, um, uh, new business or existing business.

[00:49:55] Member Alison Hicks: I speak to the item we were, I

[00:49:57] Member Pat Showalter: was trying to speak to... That's right. Um,

[00:50:02] Member Alison Hicks: in terms of the number of study sessions, I, I think we're doing a fine number and I would like to leave that to the discretion of the city manager and staff. In terms of the timeline between, maybe we could have some time where if it's over a certain amount of time, we would definitely get a memo. Yeah. That that might be something we could add. Just so that it triggers it. And the memo would be a way for us to check in. You know, we could read the memo and we could get back to the city manager if we're like now, I think conditions have changed so much that we need to do something. It was my own college. Okay, new subject. Oh,

[00:50:44] Member Pat Showalter: I was gonna ask, um, uh, uh, Council member Ramirez to talk a little bit about the, you know, the things that you think could be, uh, might be handled just as well in, um, uh, convenience or, um, existing doesn't seem, sure. No problem.

[00:51:03] Member Lucas Ramirez: No, I appreciate that the comment. I'm sorry for getting off earlier. So I thought about a few examples where, unless the staff can help me understand why I'm wrong, um, new business may have been appropriate or desirable. And one example, um, was the, uh, firearm safety legislation, where we were presented with a great deal of information that I think helped the council, uh, come to, um, the conclusion that staff had recommended for us. Um, you'll recall that, I think, hopefully I'm getting the, the, the radii correct, but when we were talking about prohibiting uh, firearm sales within a certain number of feet, um, of uh, a sensitive use, like a preschool or something. Um, we were basically given the options to implement that policy, uh, where we knew it would not impact an existing, uh, firearms, brick and mortar, uh, to be more aggressive and actively seek to try and exclude some existing, uh, arms dealers. And the, the impact of the latter would be tremendous, right? That would require extensive outreach. There's, you have to figure out the amortization period and there's some like compensation elements to it. And when presented with OSOP staff had to recommend the 250 feet. But there was the option to do more. And so what I had thought was, It might have been actually a time savings for staff to prepare the 250 foot radius ordinance. And then one thing that I was thinking, what we'd like to talk about. There are typically alternatives provided at the end of a given new business item that are not really well developed. So, for in this case, firearm safety ordinances, do not introduce the ordinances or provide other direction. But one alternative that staff may want to elevate us, you could do more than 250 feet, but it's not recommended because it would delay implementation by 2 years because you have to do all of this legal analysis and outreach and there's, you know, perhaps maybe not written in here, but a legal risk. Um, you know, so, That's an instance where I think I understand the utility of the study session, but it actually would have been more expeditious to come with the safe ordinance and then invite the council as an alternative, not recommended to uh, direct staff to come back with the more aggressive ordinance. But we would be fully, um, informed about the consequences of doing so. The other one that I thought a lot about was the Caltrain grade separation projects, and I'm really glad the community development director, assistant city managers here. It, it, I read through that and I thought, your recommendations were very sound. you know, and it was ambiguous to me about why a, why you couldn't have achieved substantially similar objectives with new business as opposed to a study session.

[00:54:17] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: So if I if I might speak 1st actually. So, I want to address the firearm legislation. So that was from 2022. So a couple years ago, and we've learned from that. Oh, so that's why, um, maybe aside from the Caltrain item, which we actually did go back and forth about on whether it should be a new business or a study session. I think that hopefully was the only item to where it was like, you know, this probably could have fit just fine with new business. And so we've tried to tighten that up over the last year and a half just to make sure that it really is items that wouldn't have an easier path like you'd articulated. And then as to the Caltrain grain set project. Um, we went back and forth on whether it should be a study session versus new business and I'll let dawn land on why we landed on a study session. All

[00:55:11] Unknown Speaker: right. And it was a pretty, pretty unique case that we don't take, typically face. But we were in the October, November time frame when it became very, very clear. This critical decision had to be made by counsel. But we, as staff, had not had a chance to do any analysis, any work to determine whether their staff had, something rose to the top as the best direction forward. And we were, you know, part of agenda management and timing and everything. I had to tell us the manager that at this point, This could turn not into a staff recommendation, it could be a true policy decision, because they both have benefits, they're both absolutely needed. There could be other considerations we had thought about and we were. It was very fast paced. And the study session, open up the opportunity to have more open-ended discussion with council more open-ended in terms of how council may want to proceed. Because we weren't certain whether there would be, you know, a clear direction that staff felt comfortable recommending. So by then, because study sessions can happen. before the council and then the council meeting agenda gets very full. By the time we could finish all of that analysis, which we were doing right up to where we were writing it, and, you know, that 3 page in there. Then, it started to rise the top. Oh. You know, based upon all of this, there is a staff recommendation. And there is an alternative for Castro. We were developing all that last minute. So at that point, yes, we could have flipped it to new business. But there was the other aspect of a very full council agenda that we typically face, and so we left at a study session, but it would have been a last minute flip because. And so that does not typically happen. Yeah,

[00:57:09] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: and we really thought there was so much, we thought there would be a lot of discussion among council about it just because of this binary choice. The council had not been faced with before, and the fact that the funding, the cost increased by so much, that we didn't want to come in with something fully baked for council too, on such a important issue. So, you know, I would say if that's, one of the only examples, you know, that's something we can certainly learn from. And if this policy is something that you all choose to move forward with, we would look at the upcoming items through that lens. You know, is this truly something that could be a solid recommendation, as a new business item. Or is this something that should be discussed? And I'll say too, you've all served as mayor. So you all know that frequently I may talk to you about, hey, what do you think? Could this be a study session item, new business item? You know, as things have come up in the past, I've done that. And we've done it in a gender review sometimes. Uh, with things that we know might be coming down the pike. So that also could come up sometimes is just kind of a organic discussion, you know, what the mayor may happen where it's like, you know, what, this probably is better for a study session that happened more frequently in the past. But we've gotten tighter with it. And if you look at the items in 2023. There really were items that, um, were a little more amorphous where we needed council direction 1st before coming back to you. Uh, one of the things that that I see here that we've done recently. Uh, you know, and Ed is here and could speak to this. You know, the CIP program. Possibly, that's something too, that, that could be a new business item, if it's recommendations from staff, that, that council would then react to as opposed to bringing it a study session. But if I, if I were to look at the rest of the items that we've brought, they, they need initial direction. And one of the things that uh, council was really clear about was, We want to see items that allow us the ability to help shape them at the beginning. And so that's why a lot of these policy issues have come to you so that staff isn't moving full steam ahead or moving forward and then comes back with something that isn't really the policy direction or the scope of what council wanted. So I think that what the guidelines that are suggested, it kind of helps put that parameter on it and, Continuing to refine it and continuing to look at, you know what, this could be a new business item. And let's just turn the questions into a recommendation. Um, and I think this is, I mean, this is really good because we're still, we're learning and we can, we can change as we go and just keep improving it, because ultimately the goal is to make it effective and efficient for you all to make your policy decisions. And so, if it is turning some of the things into new business, I think certainly we could be able to look at that. But your, yeah, your 2 examples, I would say are more anomalies than the norm. But...

[01:00:23] Member Lucas Ramirez: And I didn't intend to imply that this is a major problem that's occurring systemically. Um, they were they were the 2 examples that came to mind when I had thought about the question that the mayor asked. But I think, 8 a good landing places, staff really needs to retain the discretion to let us know the format that works best to get the information from us that they need to succeed, right? And sometimes it's a judgment call. Um, you know, but but if there are pretty clear um, recommendations, and sometimes there are, right? Sometimes the study session is very short, because your recommendations are very thoughtful, um, and, you know, so that they're, it reduced the administrative headache, but it also means that sometimes we could have 7 monologues when we really didn't need to have 7 monologues because we all agreed from the, from the get go. Um, so, so retaining staff discretion is a, uh, an important component, and really, I think part of the objective is, how do we make sure that, you know, that, that the staff is getting what they really need to succeed. And how discipline is a big part of that, but the questions too, sometimes, you know, invite for a more, um, uh, holistic conversation where it's very valuable, but we struggle to produce something that reflects, uh, the majority will and intent of the kids. Well,

[01:01:53] Member Alison Hicks: this has been clarifying for me. I can't think, I can't say that, I've been fairly happy with the way things have come, but I, come to us, but I have to say the 2 that you, uh, called out our ones that I could see could have come to us as new business, except for the last minute situation that you, you, uh, described. Um, Like I said, the main thing, and oh, the main thing I feel like we're not talking about the open-ended nature, I think is also a time when uh, members of the public particularly want want to weigh in. So I think, I think that's one of the valuable things about study sessions, letting not only council people, but members of the public say things we might not expect. Um, and I feel like the straw polls which you initiated have helped us figure out what majority will is. Um, I'm wondering, um, I'm wondering between these 2 what, you know, are there, is there a way to boil this down?

[01:02:58] Member Lucas Ramirez: I think so very clearly, the committee doesn't like in special cases. So, I think we would eliminate that. Um, I, uh, city manager? Yes,

[01:03:12] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: can I help provide a path? Sure. Sure. Wait,

[01:03:15] Member Pat Showalter: can I, yeah, of course. I'd just like to kind of go back a little. So step back a little bit and talk about it. Okay. Just, I want to make sure I understand, from my point of view, what are the purpose of study sessions? The purpose of study sessions are for items that need initial guidance. That's that's like the overall arching thing. The items that need initial guides or sometimes it's not initial guides, sometimes it's midway guides, but they need guidance. They don't need necessarily a specific action. They need guidance. Okay? And then, um, they also are better in an open-ended, they're supposed to be, um, uh, uh, provide for open-ended discussion, um, from the public as well as council members. And then, um, the, the questions that were asked to answer are, are typically more general than in an approval process where we're told, you know, It's more binary, you know, yes or no, I want this. And then, um, the other thing is that we use straw poles as a way to, um, make sure that the, um, the comments that were just stated, but maybe not, um, uh, There wasn't a lot of uh, oratory on, uh, get, get, get, still get captured. So those are the kind of like the basic kernels of information that I'm hearing. Does everybody agree with that? Okay, good. All right, please go for it. No,

[01:04:49] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: that was a good summary. So here's what I suggest that we can do. So if the committee desires, you can give staff direction, to just go back and uh, make some of these updates that we talked about. So kind of reframe, maybe that the 1st sentence, takeout in special cases, but reframe how it's started, I'll add language about the straw polls being taken. It is there. Yeah, so...

[01:05:15] Member Alison Hicks: Oh, okay. The back page. The 2nd page is the same with...

[01:05:21] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: My bad. My battleton. Um, and then for 2 Subsection 2, Roman numeral 3, where it says avoid subjective terms, I would just add something in there that says open to interpretation. I mean, that's what you're trying to get at. So we might not need those examples, but what you're, what you're, what you're getting at is jargon. You know, in subjective terms where people can think very differently about a term like high growth and be voting on something, but. The term itself isn't really defined. And so, I think we can get...

[01:05:56] Member Lucas Ramirez: So, so, yes, I think, you're right. subject to interpretation. I mean, these are examples that came to mind because of the R3 study session, but there's a lot of other language in there. I was reading through the, the, um, the summary provided by the city clerk, and, you know, sensitive transitions to neighborhoods. These are, those are the things that we voted on. But I think if you were to ask, you know, what each of those things may mean, you might get different opinions even from the members of the majority. Um, do you think it's helpful to include examples? We

[01:06:29] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: can go back and talk about it, maybe? I wouldn't want to be so prescriptive about the terminology, but, um, some

[01:06:36] Unknown Speaker: of this because it's, again, more value based and initial direction. Um, defining it, we require a certain amount of staff work to come up with, with what options of how you can provide sensitive transition. But if we're early enough in a project, We may, we may not be ready to give you big examples, but we know that that is something you value. So now we know we need to, yes, explore it and come up with how that could be accommodated. Because, again, it's more study session, it's more general direction. When we come back, we will be defining, well, what, what we heard and what we determine, would be sensitive transition, and then council has an opportunity, let's say, yes, that is the direction I intended, or, you know, what about this or that?

[01:07:34] Member Lucas Ramirez: I think there's probably a middle way where, if that is a value we can reasonably anticipate, Maybe some example, you know, photographs, you know, here are some examples of transitions that were very gentle or very harsh, you know? And so at least there's a preliminary understanding from the council, that's kind of what we mean. We don't have development standards. What we, we can sort of see. That's what, what a sensitive transition might look like. and say, figure out what the numbers are based on this image.

[01:08:04] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Well, what I'm hearing is very technical terminology that may not be quite understood across the board and one person might think, sense of transition means one thing or high growth. So I think, to me, I believe that we as staff can do our work in the staff report and defining what some of these things are, especially if they're very technical, and or jargony, and we can make sure that we're framing the questions in a way that avoid. Certainly, we will because it's going to be an policy, but just avoid any inference of, oh, I thought it meant this. I thought it meant that. What are we all voting on? So we can make sure that in the staff report itself that we're, we're making sure that we're doing a better job or a good job defining some of these terms or terminology. So

[01:08:57] Member Lucas Ramirez: would the committee prefer another pass at this, or do you think that with this, and then modifications recommended by staff, would be ready to go to the full council?

[01:09:10] Member Alison Hicks: I would take what the, I would have the city manager elucidate a little more what she was recommending. Okay. So

[01:09:17] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: I think if you give us direction to kind of go back and incorporate the language into the pulp, if the rest of the policy that was drafted is okay with the committee. Because this is only one section, section 14, and we can go back through and make sure that we're making these little tweaks and changes, and then the full policy itself would then come to council on consent. Uh, we can do that. And then I can make sure either myself or Audrey, we'll speak to the council members about this too and what they're going to see and what it is. Really, this is a refinement. I mean, and that's the way that I'm looking at this, and I think this can be really helpful going forward for both council and staff just to know, here's the parameters that we're going to bring study sessions in. And just even as an executive team, we're constantly talking about how we can bring items before counseling that are gonna help you make the best decisions and framing stuff reports and getting better at doing things or tweaking it based on the feedback you all have given us. So, I think uh, this would just be something that we will start to ingrain within staff of this, you know, council direction. This is how we're going to do it. This is how we're going to set up the questions. You've probably noticed that we've really tried to pull back on the number of council questions. In the past, you all may have had 4 and 5 questions and we really try and limit it to no more than 3 now. So it's at least focused and you all can give the best direction possible. So I think if that's the frame framework that we look at this as this is going to help all of us understand how we can do study sessions in the future. and how we're going to summarize the direction, how we're going to bring the staff reports, how you're going to do to draw polls, what you can do if you want to change your votes. I think that if you give us that direction, we'll bring it back. and I can talk to council members about it. other four.

[01:11:18] Member Alison Hicks: So, I just want to check back, well, one thing that I think, 1st page is different. The 2nd page, there are only 2 things, the majority. Uh, 31 had the word majority added, and then there was something about what to do if a council member changed their mind at a study session. I think those are the only 2 changes. the same. Stainable. That's the same in both. Oh, okay. Well, yeah, but I thought there was some additional direction, maybe. Um, and then, but as for the 1st page, I just wanted to make sure since this was something that you would work on. Is that summary? Does that sound good or would you like it to come back to the seafood?

[01:12:02] Member Lucas Ramirez: Let me, so I, I, I, I don't have a, if we're anticipating significant modifications, then it should probably come back for a 2nd pass. If it's, um, I'm going to attempt emotion, right? That we approve the revisions. Oh, there, do you want to put that some things? Um,

[01:12:21] Member Pat Showalter: I was just gonna say that, that, um, I think that, again, that the number of questions is a matter of staff discretion. Right. And, um, it's fine to have 5 questions, it just depends on the subject. So, um, I wouldn't worry about that. I would just worry about, um, are the questions, um, uh, you know, are they clear? And sometimes you'll have, you know, one, one A would be. I mean, we could name a little slide. worry about that. Just if they're clear. I actually agree. Well,

[01:12:50] Member Lucas Ramirez: one example that I was thinking about is the economic vitality strategy study session, which I think had 2 questions. We're asked to evaluate the entire draft document. So one point, it's maybe one question, but it's on 120 some odd action items.

[01:13:06] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: So yeah. Well, that's helpful. Okay. Because that's different than prior direction. So that's helpful.

[01:13:13] Member Lucas Ramirez: Okay, so leaving that, that, the number of questions, really, staff has the discretion to ask the questions that they think will get the information from the council that they need. That's that's kind of where we land. So it would be to, um, uh, So I'm open to suggestions, but basically that we would move to recommend this revised text explicitly eliminating in special cases. Um, and then, uh, emphasizing or clarifying that straw polls would be an integral component of, uh, synthesizing council direction. Um, that, uh, we would, and this is under two, two, three, um, modify that language to, uh, what the city manager had recommended, which I think was avoiding terms that are subject to interpretation. I think that was the language I'd heard, um, to make other revisions as the, uh, city manager sees fit with the intent to clarify or, um, you know, make this more operationally, uh, viable. Um, and then, um, Trying to remember if there was one other.

[01:14:38] Member Alison Hicks: The purpose of this. There's not anything about the public. Oh,

[01:14:42] Member Lucas Ramirez: okay, so that we wouldn't, yes, that we would, uh, explicitly reference the intents to, uh, invite the public to, uh, provide input into the study sessions. So that would be, That would, and so that, that feels like it's, sorry, there?

[01:15:02] Member Pat Showalter: Well, I would like to also add to the purpose, the idea that, that study sessions have a, this is from the, the, the staff. Yeah, that the study sessions have a purpose to provide opportunity to discuss policy measures that bring in the idea that this is to get initial guidance. Um, it's, is it in there? So it's in one and

[01:15:28] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: not the other. So the 1st A under 14 A, it says that it's to get, uh, Okay, for the council to discuss policy matters, or which there are a range of options regarding policy scope, and this is to your point, May, or scope would be the initial part, the scope of an item, the approach that you want staff to take, or the certain direction that you want stuff to go, and or any specific policy, elements, for which we're seeking in, interim feedback or direction. So we could say initial or interim feedback. Yeah,

[01:16:04] Member Pat Showalter: I think that would be good. I think that yeah, um, Just kind of talk about where it is typically in the process. Um, it would be valuable.

[01:16:15] Member Lucas Ramirez: I would suggest, so in the revised language, that might be a revision under what's one, three. So it would, it would expand or modify that text to include a reference to interim updates as well. Well,

[01:16:31] Member Pat Showalter: it could be, but I just feel like that's, you know, that's what we, that's what these are for. To get initial guidance. That's what they're for. So I don't think we should bury it. I think it should be what's stated right up there. But some

[01:16:42] Member Lucas Ramirez: we also use study sessions to achieve things that are unrelated to guidance, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[01:16:47] Member Pat Showalter: That's true. Well, yeah, so we could say that in one. Okay. number one. The number one. Sure.

[01:16:54] Member Lucas Ramirez: Okay. I think there was also a recommendation that I liked. I don't know if we want to include it in the policy formally, but if, um, a great deal of time has elapsed between study sessions and a council hasn't, I don't know if we want to be firm on a number, but if, basically, the staff would be advised to prepare maybe an off agenda memo or a series of briefings to keep the council updated, if there are significant changes. So, is there a recommendation to include that in the policy? Yeah, sure. Okay. So then that would be, again,

[01:17:34] Member Pat Showalter: that would be a staff discretion, yeah. Right Yeah, we're

[01:17:37] Member Lucas Ramirez: not specifying the, the, just a suggestion. Um Would it be helpful to repeat that attempt at a motion?

[01:17:45] Member Alison Hicks: I think we got it between Audrey and I. Yeah, I believe we got it. Okay. And then the purpose one that Pat, uh, highlighted should be number one rather than number three. So yeah, we

[01:17:57] Member Lucas Ramirez: can move this around. We can say maybe what is currently number 3 would become number one. It's the most important one. Um, and and then with the revisions that we were talking about to clarify, this would apply also to interim. I would like that better. Thank you. Sure, no problem. Okay, I second. Any other discussion or other questions, any clarifications from staff? I have

[01:18:21] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: a clarification. So to be clear, are you all okay with us bringing it back to council on consent or would the committee prefer to review it again? I think that's your discretion link?

[01:18:30] Member Alison Hicks: I'm okay with baby. Yeah. Well,

[01:18:32] Member Lucas Ramirez: I, I, I feel like the, the modifications that we're making are pretty clear and not, not requiring a, a total revision. So I'm comfortable with that. Okay. Okay. All right, there are no other questions or clarifications, then all in favor. That passes unanimously. Thank you very much, Staff for preparing this and for walking us through this. I hope um, it was helpful. Um, okay, we will now proceed to uh, 5.2 uh, revisions to council policy, A16, positions on ballot measures and legislate the advocacy. Assistance to the city manager slash intergovernmental relations manager. Christina Gilmore will present the cycle. Sure,

[01:19:18] Ms. Gilmore: good afternoon. Sharing Council. The item we have before you this afternoon is a revision to council policy, A16, positions on ballot under the website of advocacy. Um, Council policy, A16 provides guidance and criteria for help, considers taking formal actions on ballot measures or state and legislative, state and federal legislative positions. Um, The council, um, has an adopted legislative platform that also, in addition to the council policy, provides a council with guidance on, um, how even the mayor or staff takes positions on federal or legislative advocacy. Um, at times, the council has been approached by members of the public to take possessions on matters of foreign policy or international relations, it has been the council's practice to not, um, advocate or take positions on those items. However, the council policy has not formally reflected that position. So, uh, the um, proposed changes you have before you today for um, council policy A16, Um, those 2 things. One, it clarifies the role of the adopted state for the legislative platform. Now it's got 2022, the council have adopted, and looking continues to adopt a annual platform, and then 2 formalizes the existing practice of not taking positions on international emotions or on affairs. So, those changes are contained in section 2 of the policies, um, specifically for the formal editing existing practice, and not taking a stance on international relations or foreign bears, it was contained in section 2 with a new item 4 and 5, um, that clarifies those positions. Um, so that, that food boobs, my presentation, you know, we find the will, that's or anything.

[01:21:20] Member Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. I do need to return briefly to the previous item because I made an error since this is a meeting with a virtual component. I think we will require a formal roll call vote. So my apologies. So this was for the motion I made with the 2nd from mini member Hicks regarding item 5.one remissions to council policy, A13.

[01:21:41] Ms. Thomas: I think you're actually okay. Uh, the way you did it, but, um, in case we we have it, we have the video. showing. Okay. Showing all of that. So,

[01:21:49] Member Lucas Ramirez: I've... Thank you for the clarification. I saw that I think I needed to invite you to take the roll call, but if we're okay, then I'll proceed. Thank you very much. Of course. And my apologies to Ms. Gilmore. Do committee members have any questions before I open this item to the public? questions. Um, if there are no questions, then would any member of the public like to provide comment on this item? If so, please submit a blue card or if on Zoom, click the raise hand feature or dial Star 9 on your phone. We have one, Bruce England. Thank

[01:22:27] Public Speaker Bruce England: you all. Um, Bruce England, Wisman Station Drive. I wanted to talk about the 2nd bullet point formalized existing practice of not taking a stance on International Relations and Foreign Affairs. Um, I've spoken to this quite a bit recently, specifically on what's happening in Gaza, so I won't repeat what I've said and what others have said. However, what I would like to repeat and emphasize is that we don't live in a vacuum here in Mountain View. So we create these pretty much arbitrary borders between what the city does and what happens in the larger world. As you know, it's a very complicated world. Sometimes very messy, sometimes very dysfunctional, and to disconnect ourselves from those external processes, in my view, would be a mistake. And I think that you can operate case by case. This doesn't happen very often. But in trying times it comes up, and this is one of those periods in time where you're asked to respond, you have been asked to respond. You did. And that's the way the system out to work. I think by setting rules that then tie the hands of future council members and yourselves for the time being is just not the way you should go. Just deal with these things case by case, as you always have. Don't hamper future council members with additional rules around things like this. That's my view, and I will say I feel very strongly about it. Thank you.

[01:23:56] Audrey Seymour: We also have Clara Joseph. Bye. Um,

[01:24:07] Public Speaker: similar to Bruce. I'm I'm just commenting on this. I'm really disappointed and alarmed to learn about this push. Um, to further formalize. Um, this policy and practice of not taking a stance on international relations and foreign affairs. I strongly disagree with this and find it to be dismissive and repressive. I see such a policy being used as a scapegoat for any issue that counsel and staff finds too controversial or too much of a nuisance to deal with. My question is, how are foreign affairs and international policy going to be defined, who decides what impacts Mountain View and not view residents? We don't live in a vacuum like Bruce said, we are connected to the outside world in so many ways. We all know that our economy and climate are deeply tied to national and international affairs and policies. So again, who gets to define foreign affairs and international policies? This seems subjective and again, an easy scapegoat. I think it actually restricts everyone's ability to make informed decisions in regards to policies if we want to make ethical and informed decisions. We need to be thinking about how everything is connected. This should impact financial investment decisions. If we are a city that values human rights, then we should make sure we are investing in companies that do not violate human rights. If we value the environment and the climate for future generations, then discussions need to be had about how the military industrial complex is a huge problem that impacts us here in Mountain View, given its catastrophic amount of carbon emissions annually. These are just some examples, and I'm trying to express that these, There are mountain view issues, whether or not you want them to be. Um, you know, what's happening in Gaza and Palestine is one issue, and if you want to apply this just because of that, it just seems absurd to me. And when residents come to you all concerned about different issues, hoping to find leadership and guidance in an instead net with doubling down on policy and direct opposition to our asks, it is incredibly disheartening and disappointing and really leads to people being jaded, fed up with the systems at play, and pushes residents to be less engaged. So please don't go forward with these proposed changes and formalization. I think it would be a mistake. Um, and that's all for me. Thanks. Thank

[01:26:13] Member Lucas Ramirez: you very much and thank you to members of the public who have participated in this item. I have a quick question for staff. Can a majority of the city council at any time like to deviate from an adopted council policy? That

[01:26:28] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: is a great, probably a better question

[01:26:32] Audrey Seymour: for the CEO. They'll know.

[01:26:40] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: I would imagine if it's the whole council. The or the majority of council, since council sets, the council policies, you could. Yes,

[01:26:50] Unknown Speaker: not an agenda. Yeah. Thank

[01:26:53] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: you. Yeah, it's not on an agenda. What are you saying? If it's on an agenda. Oh, yeah. Can be done on the fly. Right. Yeah. Oh, if it's the if it's at least 4 of you. Okay. Thank you.

[01:27:06] Member Lucas Ramirez: Other questions or comments? I

[01:27:07] Member Alison Hicks: have comments, but not questions. All right, go for it. So, I've lived in Mountain View for, so I'm, uh, gonna vote against the last part. The, uh, red lines number four. I think that's on foreign policy, and international affairs, because I've lived in Mountain View for 25 years now. And as far as I know, it's only been twice that people have come to council, uh, to talk about foreign policy. One was, when the Iraq war had not yet started. 2nd Iraq War. Here's direct war. Um, and then now with the Israel and Gaza situation. And I thought council, you know, council made the decisions that they made and explained them perfectly well without this. I didn't agree with it either time, but um, perfectly well without having ours, without banning ourselves from speaking on it. And I don't think, I think that things that happen internationally do affect us locally, one of the big ways is that we, we're a country that spends a tremendous amount on, you know, distributing weapons abroad. And the last time that we had public speakers speak on the Israel and Gaza situation in front of us. Right before that, I think, if I remember right, there was a study session where we were talking about affordable housing and maybe homelessness as well. You know, countries that spend less on weapons tend to spend, have more money to spend on particular, on transportation infrastructure, mass transit, on housing, and homelessness. And. This is a policy that ends up affecting us. I also think that that, um, people are increasingly questioning the wars were involving ourselves, Sam. Um, and that there are moral issues, um, and then there's also blowback, which is what 911 was, for instance. Um, and so I think there are a number of things that, um, I think there are a number of ways that it affects us locally, and I, I, I think that we can work through this and discuss or not discuss it without formally banning ourselves, banning council. I'm discussing it. So I would prefer not to do that.

[01:29:30] Member Pat Showalter: Thank you. Well, there's two things that I think of, that are sort of part of our existing system of, that there really are long parts. One is, we have 2 sister cities, you know, um, uh, Belgium, or Hustlet, Hustlet, Milton. Also, okay. visit, I guess, um, and, um, and a lot of Japan. And we have had, you know, particularly with Japan, we've had a very warm, beautiful, uh, relationship with that. In a sense, That's a poor and a peg. Um, uh, I think we all feel like it was a positive one, but it's foreign fair, right? You know, it's, it's, it's outside of this country. And then another thing is, um, the very nature of our economy, um, They have business connections all over. Yeah, all over the world, and do welcome people from other countries here to do business. I mean, I recently spoke, for instance, at a byproduct, by frost conference, which was a, um, a group of Scandinavian company, too, to come to Silicon Valley on a regular basis to, um, do work in. We have a lot to learn from them, particularly on sustainability issues. So, and yet, you know, I feel like, uh, issues of war, and providing for the common defense, um, which are, you know, the 2 things you mentioned, are they Iraq war in Gaza, are, are very clearly, not in our, you know, they're not in our purview. So I, you know, on the one hand, I, When I 1st read this, I thought it was okay. And then when I thought about it more, I thought, well, maybe not, because there's so many layers to this. So I, I, I haven't really, I don't quite know where to land at the moment. Maybe you can convince her. Well,

[01:31:38] Member Lucas Ramirez: I mean, I, I, I, so he, I, I have, um, a general philosophy about council policies, the council policies, we can't, legally, bind the hands of a future council. The only way we could do that is by placing an amendment to the charter that the voters approve. That's the only way we could truly tie the hands of a future council. Um, so if a majority of the council wants to deviate from policy, They're free to do so. Any, you know, given council meeting, a majority can say, we want to do something different from what the council policy stipulates. Um, and we can even write in some flexibility here if the committee would prefer. Um, I think council policies actually are more valuable and protective for the staff, who sometimes may be placed in a position where there's a judgment call to be made or there's some discretion. And without some guidance, there aren't very many good ways to discern what does a majority of the council really want to do. Um, so in my opinion, right? The, the, Organization can be protected, the staff who actually, a lot of who do the work, um, are protected by a council policy that provides some guidance for how to respond in a certain context. So in this case, I think the value of this is to make clear that when the staff are in a position to prepare the, the, the, uh, advocacy platform or, uh, a position on a given matter, you know, that is outside of the immediate boundary of the city, then, you know, they can turn to this policy or to the legislative platform for guidance. And so what the way I think this could put this could do is, you know, if as staff, future staffs, prepare future legislative, uh, advocacy platforms for future councils, they would look at this policy and say, oh, well, it's pretty clear that the council really intends for us not to include a position. Um, pertaining to foreign matters. City council can say, well, policy, notwithstanding, we really want to take a position on a given issue. So I feel like this is, it, we, we just legally camped, deny a future council, an opportunity to win on a given matter if they really want to. But I do think this has value for staff in the preparation of policy documents that have to go to council for approval. Um, Because they got to start somewhere. They need some level of guidance, and this provides some guidance where none currently exists on a very narrow, uh, range of issues, right? Most of the time we're not contemplating international matters or foreign matters, because it's very rare that we will need to. Um, but, uh, this would basically provide, uh, a clear, uh, reference point for staff on, this becomes something that they they do need to think about. So, uh, that was a little, uh, convoluted, but I think, I see this as as helpful for staff, and not actually tying the hands of a future capsule. I think it has merit, at least some of the other recommendations too, if a majority of the body does not wish to include 4, that's okay. Uh, 4 and I guess maybe five. Um, But, uh, I think it also, it, it, it can be, Challenging for a community that insists on, A council taking a position on a matter. There is no guidance for them either, and so they will continue to ask and the council can continue to sit there and do nothing as we have been doing for the past several months. And that's okay too. Um, I feel, I feel there is some value in this, at least from, from a guidance to staff perspective.

[01:35:33] Member Pat Showalter: We did issue a statement. So we did that. Right, which would. So we did take. Well,

[01:35:39] Member Lucas Ramirez: this, that was the majority. Great richy

[01:35:41] Member Alison Hicks: washy position. But the council the

[01:35:44] Member Lucas Ramirez: council did that, right? Like the council recommended to staff that, you know, something be prepared in light of significant public interest, but they wouldn't have done that without explicit permission from the council. Do you remember Hicks?

[01:36:00] Member Alison Hicks: Um, so I just don't say this as a significant problem that staff's been struggling with that we need to put in writing. Maybe I'm wrong. Um, but also, um, I'm not clear on the legal implications. So the statement that the majority of counsel did want to put out. I'm not sure whether it's a... I mean, I feel like I would have to talk to the city attorney to know if we could do even that in the future, whether it would be a multi-step process. I

[01:36:33] Member Pat Showalter: don't know, I don't think you have to have a rule about everything. I guess, um, Uh, um, you know, at 1st I thought this was a really good idea. I think, well, wait a minute. There were all these other things. And, um, you know, we do, we have We have a community that has so many people in it, who just moved here from other, um, you know, from other countries, and, you know, we do have a long-standing practice of being very welcoming. That's, you know, that's our, I mean, that's kind of our role and we, we, that's very seriously. So, I don't know, I'm just a little, I don't think we need to. maybe we don't need. We could stay silent on this. Can we just stay silent on her? Well,

[01:37:21] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: so I've been thinking as you all are talking, and when this came up in item 8. Counsel unanimously referred this to this, saying that you wanted to explore taking a statement against, uh, or making a statement that you would not, uh, consider more policy matters. So, if this committee chooses not to, then I think that the chair will need to report that out to the body. And then if other council members feel differently, it would need to be discussed as a council and not end this committee. Um, so, I mean, sure you could choose to do nothing. But again, this was referred to this committee by everyone. To do something. So, yeah, maybe people have changed their minds also or just kind of feel differently or want more time to be introspective about it. But yeah, I think the chair would need to report. It out and then see if, uh, Oh, it's the same or strongly or if you all want to discuss it as a body.

[01:38:33] Member Lucas Ramirez: How about an amendment? So 4 would, would, include an explicit indication that a majority of the council may elect to take formal position on behalf of the city, if we would need to figure out. Wait, we can,

[01:38:53] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: we can look at the wording, but this would not preclude, preclude a majority of counsel taking, uh, a position on a matter of important city or something like that. So that gives an out. So it would be almost kind of like, in general, the city council wouldn't take positions on foreign policy matters, however, a majority of council may choose to take a position on a matter that's important to the city. And

[01:39:23] Member Pat Showalter: and yet, on the other hand, we, we, you know, we support, like matters of friendship, like, the sister cities program. That, that, um, I think, has a very, um, good track record and people are really, is a good idea. Am I alone in that? I mean, in thinking that, yeah, I mean, don't you think that's sort of an example of how this would be viewed. Well,

[01:39:49] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: it's a great example to your point of our, uh, extension of, it's, it's more of a governance, uh, with sister cities. It's it's, to your point, it's a friendship, um, Exchange of ideas, culture, how we do things and it's, it's certainly a, and like a nation building or community building from that aspect. But I wouldn't suggest that it's similar to taking a position on like a really heavy foreign policy issue, but you're right, cities do have relationships with sister cities, most cities do, but that's more of a. Yeah, we, and we wouldn't comment on foreign policy issues that are occurring in those countries. So it's more of a exchange of ideas, exchange of information, uh, relationship building, really. Well,

[01:40:45] Member Pat Showalter: could we strengthen our, you know, our governing. I mean, look, wait a minute, I mean, look back here and look at this. I mean, really, what we want to do, we want to say that we focus on state and federal issues, because that's what we focus on. We don't local state, local state and yeah, vocal and state. That's really what medical.

[01:41:10] Member Alison Hicks: Yeah, and that, uh, So you want to say that we focus on state, in our legislative platform, we focus on state and local issues. And that to, um, add any positions or actions in support of or opposition to foreign policy or international affairs, it would take, It would take, did you say, the majority of council? Yes, that's true. Anything. Takes the victory. I don't know. I mean,

[01:41:48] Member Pat Showalter: that's what somebody had said. I think it needs more. I think I need more thought on this. So we

[01:41:53] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: have it in the purpose already, to your point, Mayor. So it's a great and we it is captured. It's in the purpose of the policy, exactly what you're saying. Where is the purple? Um, do you look like it? The purpose is to establish a policy governing positions on ballot measures and state and federal policy. So that's exactly what the mayor just said, that focused on state and federal policy. Well,

[01:42:38] Member Alison Hicks: it could, number 4 could say the city council does not generally take positions or actions in support of our opposition. Well, the city council generally does not take positions, um, regarding foreign policy and international affairs. I mean, we generally don't. I don't know if we ever have.

[01:43:02] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: And then we could just say, however, the council majority may choose to take decision on a matter of local matter that is of importance to the city.

[01:43:12] Member Alison Hicks: Yeah, that would be fine. I mean, I, I, it's not a general part of our legislative platform. It's certainly not something that we're constantly doing. I would. No, it would have to be an upset, an exception. Right. Well,

[01:43:25] Member Lucas Ramirez: I guess what, what, one way to think about this is in future, uh, legislative advocacy platforms, the staff would then have guidance, not to think so broadly, you know, beyond federal management. Oh, totally, I'm fine. Now, but if a majority of the city council says, we really want to include in our federal, or, I guess, now, international legislative platform, a reference to something that is of importance to the to the community. You know, they retain, to clarify that they retain that discretion to do so. Um, I did want to ask, since this policy is before us, if, um, there would be support in eliminating 2 A one C. Um, which is something that we did in the most recent update to those legislative, uh, platform. One C is intended to protect or increase local control. We explicitly eliminated that in the legislative platform. Yeah,

[01:44:26] Member Pat Showalter: let's get them rid of that. I need emotion. Yes, emotion. I move to strike, is intended to protect or increase local control. Are we doing each one

[01:44:39] Member Lucas Ramirez: separate? Well, would you be willing to move the other modification as well? I'm

[01:44:44] Member Pat Showalter: not still again in modification life, somehow.

[01:44:46] Member Lucas Ramirez: So to amend, for the new red light for, to include language, allowing a majority of the city council, to take a position on a matter of importance.

[01:45:01] Member Pat Showalter: No, I really think we should just strike 4 and 5 too. Okay. We can do that. Okay. I agree with that.

[01:45:07] Member Lucas Ramirez: So then the motion would to uh, recommend to the full city council, uh, the revised policy, eliminating 2 A, one, C, and red line 4 and red line. I'm

[01:45:21] Member Pat Showalter: sorry, I know I was one of the one.

[01:45:23] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: Red line 4 and five. So 4 was just a staff suggestion, so we would just wouldn't even take that to counsel. Okay. And then five, you are saying that you wouldn't include the terms foreign policy or international affairs issue. So it would just remain the same, right? Bye. Yeah. So, so you're not taking any action on anything related to foreign policy. So we would just make that clear in the in the sack before. And then a calculty loop to pull it. Override. You have colleagues. Correct. Yeah. And you can, you would discuss it at that time, which I will expect that there would be a discussion not to a one C. Because it is in your ledge platform with an asterisk, so.

[01:46:09] Member Lucas Ramirez: I thought we got rid of that. I thought we just struck it out. Miss

[01:46:12] Ms. Gilmore: Gilmore. We worked pretty hard

[01:46:13] Member Lucas Ramirez: to get that out. So,

[01:46:15] Ms. Gilmore: in 2022, the council adopted an asterisk on certain policy statements with contained in the legislative platform that indicated that, you know, we would monitor, support, repose, legislation, that was, um, would affect the book control. And so, um, for this year, for 2024, the council, um, elected to remove those asterisks that were contained, I think, on, I can't recall the number of policy statements. Um, However, I don't know that the, um, asterisk was meant to, as the council, the council direction was meant to eliminate local control from other policy statements. So that's a question as the manager McCarthy has just stated that we have to go back to the council for discussion. But the Astris were eliminated from the legislative platform. So it was a, a prior council action, and then the new council action was to, to the, the power council action was to add the asterisks, and then the new council action was to, which is what's now done. So

[01:47:32] Unknown Speaker: what were the asterisks for again? I

[01:47:35] Ms. Gilmore: have to go back and look at the 2022 and 2023 adopted legislative platform, but I recall there was, um, a motion to add the astrik, um, that refer to local control to a number of policy statements within the adopted platform in 2022 and 2020. Because

[01:47:54] Member Pat Showalter: essentially we wanted you to evaluate whether it

[01:47:59] Ms. Gilmore: would affect the legislative statements would affect local control, either positively or negatively. Yeah. The

[01:48:08] Member Lucas Ramirez: asterisk was pretty clearly designed to facilitate city opposition or neutrality on housing and land use things, land use issues that would preempt local control. The reason why I don't think this is appropriate is because we actively facilitate things like ADUs, which are a preemption at local role, and the council, you know, supported, um, using SP 35 on city-owned property, facilitating maybe 2162 for the Danco project. Like we're, we're telling people to use the state preemptions. And I feel like it's, it's incredibly, um, confusing. On the one hand, say, we categorically, you know, oppose these preemptions, and then on the other hand, to facilitate and direct folks to use them, you know, I think on a, like kind of like the where we're landing with the federal, with the foreign affairs thing. piece by case basis, if the staff says this is a real problem. They recommend opposition, totally get it. We could consider that, but the categorical opposition doesn't make sense. Or is that a second?

[01:49:22] Member Alison Hicks: No, I was counting. I'm raising my hand. That's right. Yeah, that's basically what I was going to say that I've seen it move more towards a case by case basis and in particular, when I was mayor and spent time with the mayors from all the cities in the county, I became more familiar with the stance that in, you know, kind of more affluent communities where where actually a lot of corporate leaders who make decisions on who to hire and so from when to do layoffs. But the mayors were saying there, you know, there's no homeless people in our area. We shouldn't have to do anything on this, and so it kind of, kind of leads me to understand where, from time to time, although I like local control. I'm a planner. I like to control things. But it does seem that from time to time, people are, frankly, shirking their responsibilities, and from time to time, you do need more state control. So, I'm seeing it as a case by case situation. So

[01:50:33] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: I think we, what we would need to do, because this is just one aspect of the policy, this is just the position on ballot measures and then state and federal advocacy. Um, what we can do. So the direction I'm hearing, I guess you have, but so far where you've blended, is to delete, um, the 2 A, one, C, local control item. And then we just would not include any of the newly drafted language that staff program. Well, 4 and five. I think we were accepting that. Yeah, there were other ones. And then, uh, Audrey has a suggested edit too, uh, language to, um, A

[01:51:12] Audrey Seymour: one city, because there are some areas where we really do have a strong position to, um, uh, retain local control and the ballot measure, um,

[01:51:25] Ms. Gilmore: the California Business Roundtable, proposed ballot measure that would basically revenue. Yeah,

[01:51:30] Member Lucas Ramirez: but that one, I think that's include it under B, right? Protect or increase local revenues. I think so I agree with with committee member Hicks, that this removes a categorical opposition and allows for staff discretion to say, you know, this one's fine. We've already been doing this. We're happy to support it because it's been helpful to the city, but over here, you know, this preemption is a problem and here's why. So it allows that discretion. Would

[01:51:58] Member Pat Showalter: it be better to say protect or increase local control as appropriate? Or something like that. I mean, so that would, that would, yeah, that would bring in the case by case evaluation part.

[01:52:10] Member Pat Showalter: I really think this is going to be a policy question. Are you all fun? how you, how you think about going to. I'm

[01:52:18] Member Lucas Ramirez: gonna quote my mayor and say you don't need a rule for everything. And in this case, I mean, an explicit prohibition against supporting things that preempt local control doesn't feel consistent with how we've actually been using some of the state preemptions that have been created. Ms. Robert, what was your suggestion?

[01:52:41] Audrey Seymour: Um, that if you wish to acknowledge the case by case nature of it as part of the policy, rather than just something that staff knows that it can do, you could change, C, to say something like, is intended to identify, um, opportunities where it is consistent with counsel's policy direction to retain global control. I think

[01:53:14] Member Alison Hicks: that's a good attempt, but I don't, I don't know that it's any more clear than just crossing it.

[01:53:19] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: I mean, but also on the G. I mean, G is kind of the catchall category of it. Oh yeah, whatever, the city manager, i.e. also staff, knows that it's consistent with the policy direction that the council is moving. Now, I will say that there are some times where a council member might be interested in legislation that they might come talk to staff or myself and we know it may not be consistent and so, you know, it doesn't move forward as a city. supported position or opposition, um, and generally we will just watch legislation if there's something of interest. Um, so, and and you certainly can do this to be consistent. And we would just bring this forward and, you know, it's just more of a heads up and you all can have that policy discussion at that time. So, um, Mayor,

[01:54:21] Member Lucas Ramirez: would you like to restate the motion and then we'll see if there, I don't think there has been a 2nd yet. Did

[01:54:27] Member Alison Hicks: you state the motion? I 2nd. Oh, you did? Well, no, I'm doing that right now because I think I understood. It was so basically... Yeah, it was basically

[01:54:36] Member Pat Showalter: crossing out AIC. And that read us the red. Oh, the red part of five. Yeah, okay. Yes. But

[01:54:48] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: just to be clear, this wouldn't even come to council, because this was just staff's recommendation for this committee.

[01:54:55] Member Lucas Ramirez: So yes, but I think we also heard that you would need to include in the staff report that the committee evaluated the direction provided by the full council to include language like that. What

[01:55:05] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: we would do is we would probably just state that. We wouldn't include the language that Stack proposed and that you rejected or you would just say that in the staff report that it can be chose not to move forward with a general statement about getting involved in foreign policy related matters. We'll figure out how to work with it, but we would just state that in the staff report. We wouldn't include this language at all. But

[01:55:29] Member Alison Hicks: you will say, The, that we eliminated AIC. Correct. Correct. Thank.

[01:55:41] Member Lucas Ramirez: Any other comments or questions? Uh, and so we'll take the role call. Right? Uh,

[01:55:47] Ms. Thomas: uh, near Shewald.

[01:55:48] Member Pat Showalter: Hi,

[01:55:49] Ms. Thomas: can't the number hits?

[01:55:50] Member Alison Hicks: Yes.

[01:55:50] Ms. Thomas: Cher Ramirez?

[01:55:51] Member Lucas Ramirez: Yes.

[01:55:52] Ms. Thomas: Harry's 30. Thank you very much. Um,

[01:55:56] Member Lucas Ramirez: so now we will, uh, thank you for our presentation for guiding us through that conversation. We'll now move to 5.3 routine council policy and procedures, agenda topics, deputy city manager, Kimberly Thomas to respect this informational lab. Thank

[01:56:12] Ms. Thomas: you, Cher. We wanted to advise the committee that there are 2 outstanding items that are able to be existing this fiscal year. Now, the balance of your items, which include 5 have been completed as of the action here today. And so those items will be looking to be scheduled in May or June. And that includes the shoreline ticket item that is something that we've had on our list for a while. It is in an overly urgent matter, so it will be scheduled for that time. In addition, there will be an open-ended, at least as far as I understand it right now, discussion of addressing Zoom bombing, to get some additional feedback from the VA. And so that will be... Uh, a city manager, uh, McCarthy is jumping in to advise on that. So I would just say, when

[01:56:58] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: this came up, the last meeting that you all had. What was it? 4 meetings ago when the Zoom bombing happened. I know, it's that long ago, right? 3 medium? The 3 meetings? Memorable. Time is a time is a construct to me. Okay, so however long ago it was. Um, but we, you know, not on because it's classic, but not on web. Haven't received any other, really all made sense then. So citywide, we've received impact, had their Zoom bombing, and then council had won too. So, I would just say, talk about this, or you can kind of table it unless it becomes something that you feel is actually an issue for the council. So just leave that to your discretion. Do you want feedback now?

[01:57:48] Member Lucas Ramirez: So we we do have to go to the public. So any other questions on this item? Oh, discussion. Okay, so well, let's 1st before we get to discussion with any member of the public like to provide comment on this item, if so, please submit a blue card, or if on Zoom, click the raise hand feature, or dial Star 9 on your phone. We

[01:58:06] Unknown Speaker: have one, Bruce England. Thank

[01:58:09] Public Speaker Bruce England: you all, Bruce England again, Westman Station Drive. Okay, I wasn't anticipating this would come up in your meeting. The Zoom bombing thing. Um, Yeah, I think it's already been sort of alluded to here in the introduction, but it happened really once at council meeting, um, and then there was another instance where it came up briefly too, at another city meeting, and that's it. And so it hasn't really been a problem. So I will just voice support for tabling this item and then just seeing how it goes, you know? There are going to be disruptions. That's just the world's a messy place once again. And these things will come up occasionally. And I don't think you should worry too much about it unless it becomes a truly ongoing issue over an extended period of time. Thank you. Thank

[01:58:55] Member Lucas Ramirez: you very much, any of those. Other members of the public? Thank you. So we'll now proceed to deliberation. I did want to, um, so I, I, I had sent an email to the city clerk, which I think you had received also a city manager, um, suggesting that this might be broadened to amending the policy to explicit, the, the council, uh, meeting governance policy to it, at least reference that we allow virtual participation. Because right now, the council policies are totally silent on virtual participation, and it might be good at least to have some parameters for, 1st, the council has a policy, saying it is our preference to allow virtual participation, and then to provide parameters on when and where. Is it literally every meeting? Is it just council meetings, say just council and subcommittee meetings, because right now there's an inconsistency, as we know, as members of the CNC, the CNC does not have a virtual participation, but the CPBC does. So it might be good. I don't feel that there is urgency in this, but I do think it might be valuable to have staff come back at some point with some tactical updates to existing policy to recognize and formalize virtual participation. Is that parent? So

[02:00:20] Member Alison Hicks: are you seeing that as a different item or a modification of this item? Modification of this item? Okay. Okay, so it's, you want, an item on virtual participation, our policy for virtual participation at meetings, which could include some discussion of, of addressing Zoom. Sure.

[02:00:44] Member Lucas Ramirez: So it would be the, the, scope of discussion would be wider than just Zumba bombing, it would be, we should probably modernize our policy to recognize that we have hybrid meetings because right now, we have no policy. Okay. Of any other comments or questions? Oh,

[02:01:04] Member Pat Showalter: I just wanted to say that, uh, you know, right after we had that at the next, I think, was agenda. Um, review meeting, we had a little discussion about the logistics of how we were going to handle it. It seems like we've got a good plan now. So I think we're, we're good. You know, we're ready to handle it. So I think that's where we need to be right now and that's okay. Um, then um, I can see how and you might want to. I don't know, if staff thinks it would be useful to have a procedure on, um, virtual participation. We could definitely have one. I think everybody's kind of for it, but you're right, it's not in here. Do we need a procedure on that? I mean, what would the procedure? What value would the procedure provide? Does staff have a? It would likely

[02:01:56] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: just make everything uniform for the committees. So we probably need to go back 1st and even see what's happening. All the committees because I was unaware of. Yeah, that may or may not be happening.

[02:02:10] Member Pat Showalter: And the other thing is, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's been brought up when we asked about it, that it's, that it's largely an, um, equipment problem. It is. You know, that yeah. And, um, so we wouldn't want to do anything that would make the, um, for consistency's sake, that would make, uh, scheduling and needs more difficulty. So, I'm, I'm not, it's kind of a... Well,

[02:02:35] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: and likely to that point, those committees that don't use it probably have equipment issues, but that's what I need to find out. Is

[02:02:46] Member Alison Hicks: it just CNC that doesn't use it? The council

[02:02:49] Member Lucas Ramirez: finance committee did not in our last meeting, and I don't, there was a, we had a special, well, but that, that's the thing as, you know, the, the public could have participated for a component of that, because there was an item unrelated to the, um, external auditor interviews. So, it's, it's, you know, I think having, this is why I think a policy has some value, right? Like I said, we denied, not that we would have had very much public input, but in theory, somebody could have provided input on the single audit. You know, which is the only time for the public to provide input. doesn't go to council for approval. Um, so. But

[02:03:30] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: there was public comment options. I mean, someone can...

[02:03:35] Member Lucas Ramirez: Yeah. So that, that's, but so, you know, it's, the equity or at least the consideration of when do we want to allow virtual participation? Is it literally everything or is it not literally everything? And if it's not literally everything, then what are some of the guardrails or when we would consider it? So

[02:03:55] Member Alison Hicks: it sounds like, it sounds like it might. be, um, something that, something that we could, because of this, this one incident and possible ones in the future, that we could, could have some policy on, but it's not, doesn't seem urgent. It's not urgent. Okay. And I have to say, in addressing the zoom bombing situation, it's a disturb, I find it very disturbing. And I just want to say one of the reasons I feel comfortable just letting it go and hoping it doesn't happen again is I think that the, our current mayor handled it very professionally, and was very unruffled, at least I sit next to her, and she said she was fine. And if you were more disturbed by it, having to chair that, I would say, no, we have to talk about it. But since you seem to be able to handle it, I'm willing to just wait and see. So kudos to you. Um,

[02:04:51] Member Lucas Ramirez: so, I, any other comments or questions, um, staff, is that, I guess we can leave it up to staff discretion, but you feel that, um, you, Do you need any other information for us about modifying what is currently item seven? Uh,

[02:05:08] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: no, I think just let's let us discuss it, because we may have to add something like to the greatest extent possible. We just need to see what's happening and where. So we'll have the discussion. I don't anticipate this would come back in May or June. We need one time. But I think for sure the shoreline ticket item and then we'll have the discussion. We'll get to it. Oh,

[02:05:29] Member Pat Showalter: I do have another question. I'm sorry. Just... You know, we have that, that paragraph at the beginning about, you have to, basically, you have to speak similarly, et cetera. Yes. Do we have to have that?

[02:05:44] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: No, we just included that. Before it happened and then when it happened and no, it's a script and if you don't want to see it, we can.

[02:05:54] Member Pat Showalter: You know, we have an BCDC too, and it just seems like it, it starts the meeting on such a negative note. Yeah. I really, I mean, I wonder does it add anything. Does anybody who is going to do that? I put people

[02:06:07] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: on notice. I think we had people drop off after they realized they were. Oh. Yeah. And there were there were other people that were going to speak that then... That one night. Yes. Yeah,

[02:06:19] Member Lucas Ramirez: we saw it. So I, one thing to keep in mind is some of these folks are sophisticated and some of them are not, right? The folks who come in and just use profanity. Maybe we should do it for a while.

[02:06:29] Member Pat Showalter: Anyway, I would, you know, not, I would not like to have to say, or for the mayor, whoever it is, to have to say that forever, because I just think it, it starts the media in such a, you know, such a negative, um, uh, notion, and we, you know, for local government, we want people to feel welcome is to be, you know, a place that they feel comfortable and, and, um, feel like good things are happening, and we don't want to sort of start out with, Yeah,

[02:06:55] City Manager Kimbra McCarthy: we, it's come to our attention, or, and I actually, it's, I was thinking the same thing. actually that, you know, it's kind of sometimes been between it and, you know, the reason we started out doing that, if you all recall, was the zoom bombing started happening, I believe it was at the end of 23 in all of the cities around us. And so we were like, it was like putting people on notice. Look, we know what you're doing. If you come to Mountain View, you're going to be cut off. I mean, that and you talk, you know, in a way that's disruptive to the meeting, you're going to be cut off. And that's why we did that. And other cities were doing that too. So it was consistent at the time with what was happening. And then for us, it just didn't happen until March. So we, you know, had quite a bit of time where we read that statement and then now we're in a different period. So I think it's fine if we take it out of the script. And then what, now we have, we have our drill down and if someone's gonna be disruptive and just get around here to cut them off really fast.

[02:07:54] Member Lucas Ramirez: Well, we do have to be mindful, though, right? First Amendment, right? Yes, yeah. One other thing I would encourage my colleagues to at least be mindful of is we're not the targets of those attacks, but there might be people who are participating in the meeting who are, and it hits them a lot harder than it might hit us. And I feel like I we, for those of us who aren't the ones being subject to that. It'll be terrible commentary. We can shrug it off. After a while, it is very grating, but if you're sitting there and you weren't anticipating that and you hear that, it hits you.

[02:08:28] Member Pat Showalter: Right. Well, that's why we want to cut them off really fast. As soon as it's obvious they're misbehaving. Oh, no. Yeah, I, I mean, I, Like when kids have a temper tantrum, because as soon as it starts, you put them in the corner, or they can have it by themselves, and then they don't want to do it because that, the whole thing is to have an audience. Well, let them have an audience. Any

[02:08:51] Member Lucas Ramirez: other comments, questions, clarifications?

[02:08:54] Member Pat Showalter: All right, well, scene

[02:08:55] Member Lucas Ramirez: none. I think we're on to the final item. Um, oh, I, I, I put my, uh, Like, here it is. I thank you. item six. The next item is committee staff comments, questions, or committee reports. No action will be taken on any questions raised by the CPPC at this time. Do any CPPC members? No problem. Do you need it? Um, or staff have comments or questions? I'm not seeing any. Uh, we will now move on to the final item adjournment. This meeting is adjourned at uh 408 PM. That is.

• ← Previous
• Next →