Feb 01, 2022 Planning and Zoning Commission

WE'RE READY. OK, I'M GOING TO CALL THIS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER.

[Call to Order]

[00:00:06]

ITEM NUMBER ONE, CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING

[ITEM 1: Consider and take appropriate action regarding approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes from January 4, 2022.]

COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS CONCERNS HEARING? WOULD YOU LIKE TO READ THEM ALL THE WAY THROUGH? NO HEARING, NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION IF THEY ENTERTAIN A SECOND.

SECOND, I'VE GOT A FIRST AND I'VE GOT A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR AYE.

AYE. OKAY.

HEY, CECIL, CAN YOU SAY WHO CAN YOU SAY WHO MADE THE MOTION AND SECONDED IT? YES. CURTIS MADE THE MOTION.

MASON SECONDED.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

YOU'RE WELCOME. GOING TO ITEM NUMBER TWO CONSENT AGENDA, DEDRA

[ITEM 2: CONSENT AGENDA]

AS YOU GUYS ARE AWARE, CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ARE LISTED AND ARE TO BE CONSIDERED AS ROUTINE BY THE P&Z AND WILL BE RECOMMENDED IN ONE MOTION.

THERE'S NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS UNLESS A P&Z COMMISSIONER REQUESTS IT, IN WHICH EVENT THE ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED IN THE NORMAL SEQUENCE ON THE AGENDA.

WE ACTUALLY ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

ITS FINAL PLAT TWENTY 2022-01.

IT'S MR. RYAN VOORHEES FINAL PLOT REQUEST ON BEHALF OF DECATUR OZF, YOU GUYS DID APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT SEVERAL MONTHS BACK.

IT'S A FINAL PLAT OF LOT ONE AND LOT TWO, BLOCK ONE OF THE ROSE AVENUE ADDITION.

IT'S COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS 1555 WEST U.S.

HIGHWAY 380, AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

RYAN, DO YOU WANT TO? DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY, OR DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS? WELL, JOHN, I THINK IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

I WAS JUST LOGGING ON IN CASE YOU GUYS HAD ANY QUESTIONS.

OH, GREAT. COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS? COMPLETION DATE, I CAN JUMP IN.

IF EVERYTHING IS WORKING RIGHT, WE TRY TO BUILD THESE ON A 12 MONTH SCHEDULE.

AND SO IF ANY LUCK, SPRING OF 2023 WILL BE WILL BE DONE.

HOPEFULLY, THE FIRST BUILDINGS ARE READY TO OCCUPY THIS, ALTHOUGH I THINK THERE'S ONE ISSUE THAT'S KIND OF BEEN HELD HOLDING THIS UP.

AND EARL KNOWS, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET AN OFF SITE FORCE MAIN CONSTRUCTED JUST TO PROVIDE SEWER TO THIS SITE.

AND THAT'S THAT'S THE BIG ISSUE.

THAT WAS REALLY THE QUESTION WAS FOR EARL IS DO WE ANTICIPATE ANY SEWER PROBLEMS FOR SEWER SERVICE HERE? YES, AND MIKE MR. VOORHEES POINTED OUT THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING TOGETHER TO PROVIDE A REMEDY FOR THAT.

JUST SO P&Z KNOWS ALSO WHAT WOULD BEEN WORKING OUT WITH MR. VOORHEES, AS SOME WAYS OF REIMBURSING FOR THE COST OF IMPROVING WHAT WE CALL THE GAINESVILLE STATION OF [INAUDIBLE] WHICH SERVES NOT ONLY HIS DEVELOPMENT, BUT I FORGET IT WAS LIKE 400 ACRES OF UNDEVELOPED LAND THAT WOULD BE TRIBUTARY TO THIS STATION ALSO.

SO IT'S A GOOD CITY PROJECT THAT RYAN'S PROJECT PROBABLY SPENT OUR TIME LINE UP SOME OF THE FUNDING TO REIMBURSE MR. VOORHEES IS IN THE BOND PACKAGE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU EARL. COMMISSIONERS, ANY ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS CONCERNS ? HEARING NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

WE WE'VE. OK, I'VE GOT CURTIS TO MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE, I NEED A SECOND.

OK, I'VE GOT EILEEN AT SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE.

AYE. OPPOSE.

MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM NUMBER 3.

DEDRA.

[00:05:10]

DEDRA? OH, SORRY, I WAS MUTED.

THANK YOU. WELL, I WAS SAYING THAT ITEM THREE KEEPS COMING BACK TO HAUNT US.

[ITEM 3: SI2021-01 Follow-up discussion regarding selection criteria, process and methodology for serving on the Planning and Zoning Commission.]

AND CHERYL, IF YOU COULD GO TO THE LAST SLIDE THAT IDENTIFIES THE OPTIONS FIRST.

OK. YEAH.

BASICALLY, I THINK WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE, YOU KNOW, IF WE DON'T WANT TO CHANGE OR REDO THE APPLICATION, WE CAN LEAVE THE 15 QUESTIONS OR TOPICS FOR THE APPLICANT TO MAYBE NOT RATE THEMSELVES BUT JUST IDENTIFY WHERE THEIR PROFICIENCY IS.

YOU GUYS COULD THEN SCORE THAT, AND I'M SAYING THAT THE HIGHEST POINTS WOULD BE SEVENTY FIVE BECAUSE YOU CAN GET UP TO FIVE FOR EACH OF THOSE ITEMS AND THEN TAKE TWENTY FIVE PERCENT OF THAT SCORE.

AND THEN THE INTERVIEW, WHICH WOULD ALSO BE SEVENTY FIVE POINTS, BUT THEY WOULD GET SEVENTY FIVE PERCENT OF THAT.

SEVENTY FIVE POINTS.

THAT'S VERY CONVOLUTED, BUT IT'S BASED ON WHAT WE HAD DONE INITIALLY.

THE SECOND OPTION THAT I'VE IDENTIFIED IS LEAVE THE 15 QUESTIONS OR TOPICS FOR THE APPLICANT TO IDENTIFY THEIR PROFICIENCY.

HOWEVER, THE POINTS AREN'T COUNTED, THEIR PROFICIENCY SCORES AREN'T COUNTED AND THE INTERVIEW IS THE ONLY THING THAT IS SCORED BY THE COMMISSIONERS.

THIRD OPTION WOULD BE TO REDO THE APPLICATION ENTIRELY AND ESTABLISH A POLICY CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY BASED ON THE NEW APPLICATION.

YOU GUYS MAY HAVE SOME OTHER OPTIONS AS WELL THAT I DID NOT CONSIDER.

I ALSO WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THE INFORMATION THAT TERRY AND WILL FORWARD IT TO ME, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS VERY GOOD.

SO IF YOU COULD GO TO SLIDE SEVEN? TERRY DID SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH, WHICH WE HAD CONTACTED SOME OTHER CITIES AS WELL, AND I THINK CECIL HAD TALKED TO A COUPLE OR HAD CONTACTED A COUPLE FROM THEIR WEBSITE, BUT TERRY RESEARCH SIX OTHER BOARD APPLICATIONS AND THEIR POPULATIONS RANGED CLOSE TO DECATUR, AND SOME WERE QUITE A BIT MORE HEAVILY POPULATED THAN DECATUR.

AND SHE SAID NONE OF THEM REALLY HAD ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING KNOWLEDGE OF SPECIFIC ORDINANCES. MOST OF THEM ASK GENERAL QUESTIONS.

THERE WAS NOT AN INTERVIEW PROCESS AND AND I UNDERSTAND WE'RE PROBABLY TREADING NEW GROUND BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL WANTED WITHOUT THEM REALLY GIVING US ANY DIRECTION.

AND SHE ALSO SAID THAT THEY JUST BASICALLY IT WAS A FIRST COME, FIRST SERVED KIND OF SITUATION. CAN I CAN I INTERJECT DEDRA? YES, ABSOLUTELY.

I JUST LOOKED ON THE WEBSITES AND I LOOKED AT THEIR FORMS. I HAVEN'T SPOKE TO ANYBODY.

I DID TRY AND CONTACT SOME PEOPLE, BUT I HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY CALLS BACK.

SO I SAW THEIR FORM.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR PROCESS IS ONCE THEY RECEIVE THE FORMS, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE.

I KNOW THEY THEY ACCEPT FORMS AND THEY RETAIN THEM.

SOME CITIES RETAIN THEM FOR A YEAR, SOME FOR TWO YEARS, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY DECIDE WHO THEY'RE CHOOSING FROM THOSE FORMS. THAT'S THE PART I DON'T KNOW.

SO THEY DO ASK ABOUT GENERAL, YOU KNOW, GENERALLY LIKE WHAT WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO BRING TO THE TABLE OR WHAT KIND OF KNOWLEDGE OR EXPERIENCE DO YOU HAVE WITH PLANNING AND ZONING, BUT NOT SPECIFIC QUESTIONS LIKE OURS HAS? WELL, THAT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE WE GOT THAT FORM, THAT APPLICATION, WE LOOKED AT SOME OTHER CITIES AND PRETTY MUCH JUST COPIED IT FROM, I THINK IT WAS THREE OR FOUR OF THE CITIES SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

[00:10:02]

MY WELL, MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN IT'S BEEN EITHER FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE OR THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS APPOINT THEIR P&Z MEMBER.

AND THAT'S HOW IT WAS IN DENTON.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S STILL THAT WAY.

I COULD CHECK, BUT THAT'S HOW IT WAS IN THE CITY OF DENTON AND FORT WORTH.

SO AND TERRY ALSO OFFERED SOME ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT WE COULD ASK WHICH WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET NEXT SLIDE SHOW AND WHICH WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR YOUR PACKET.

AND I'VE I HAVE THEM UP HERE IN THE PRESENTATION AS WELL.

AND THEN HER LAST STATEMENT WAS, IN MY OPINION, IF WE WANT TO ASK ABOUT AN APPLICANT'S EXPERIENCE WITH ITEMS ONE THROUGH 15, THAT'S ON THE APPLICATION.

IT SHOULD BE MORE OF AN ESSAY TYPE RESPONSE RATHER THAN A POINT SYSTEM.

FOR EXAMPLE, DO YOU HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH ANY OF THE FOLLOWING? AND PLEASE EXPLAIN.

SO THIS IS WILL, SO FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD SAY THAT THE INFORMATION THAT TERRY PROVIDED WAS, I THOUGHT WAS REALLY AWESOME.

IT WAS IT WAS REALLY INFORMATIVE.

I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF OPTION C OR OPTION THREE, WHICH WOULD BE TO REDO THE APPLICATION ALTOGETHER TO GET AWAY FROM IT BEING SO HEAVILY WEIGHTED TOWARDS WHO YOU KNOW WHAT, WHAT KNOWLEDGE DO YOU HAVE AND ALL OF THESE SPECIFIC AREAS? I'VE SAID ALL ALONG THAT.

I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S THAT'S THAT DOES THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT, BUT IT'S NOT IT'S NOT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE'S ABILITY TO, YOU KNOW, ASK RELEVANT QUESTIONS AND BE FAIR AND THE CASES THAT ARE BROUGHT BEFORE US, I THINK THAT IS MUCH MORE IMPORTANT.

AND SO I TRY TO DEVISE SOME QUESTIONS THAT WERE THAT REALLY JUST TRY TO GET AWAY FROM WHAT KNOWLEDGE BASE DO YOU HAVE AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WHERE THEY ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE KNOWLEDGE BASE. I REALLY JUST TRIED TO COMBINE IT DOWN TO WHERE IT WAS MORE, HEY, DESCRIBED WHAT YOUR WHAT YOUR KNOWLEDGE IS AND SOME OF THESE AREAS, BUT DON'T CERTAINLY DON'T SCORE YOURSELF.

I AGREE WITH TERRY THAT THEY NEED TO BE ESSAY TYPE QUESTIONS AS OPPOSED TO, YOU KNOW, CHECK CHECKING THINGS OR SCORING YOURSELF.

AND THE WAY I FORMATTED IT WAS MORE ALONG THE LINES OF TRYING TO PUT IT IN TWO SECTIONS WHERE THE FIRST SECTION WAS MORE PERSONAL BASED.

AND WHY DO YOU WANT TO SERVE AND WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BRING IN AND CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS? AND AND AND WHAT I THINK I ASKED ONE SPECIFIC QUESTION OF WHAT IS YOUR.

WELL, YEAH, BUT CHERYL, PUT UP YOUR YOUR SLIDES AS WELL, SO THAT MAY HELP YOU.

I THINK I ASK ONE QUESTION OF WHAT BUSINESS, WHAT INTERESTS DO YOU HOLD INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS OF DECATUR? IN OTHER WORDS, DO YOU OWN PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF DECATUR? DO YOU DO YOU OWN INVESTMENT PROPERTY? ARE YOU A BUSINESS OWNER AND DESCRIBE THOSE TYPES OF THINGS? BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT AS WELL IN TERMS OF HOW INVESTED ARE YOU IN THE COMMUNITY? SO I TRIED TO ASK MORE QUESTIONS WHEN IT COMES TO THAT KIND OF STUFF.

SO WHERE IT WOULD BE MORE OF A NATURAL SEVENTY FIVE TWENTY FIVE SPLIT AND WEIGHTED LESS HEAVILY ON HOW MUCH KNOWLEDGE DO YOU HAVE IN THOSE AREAS? AND DON'T GET ME WRONG, I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT'S NOT IMPORTANT, BUT I'VE SAID ALL ALONG THAT WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT, ALL OF US, WE'RE NOT EXPERTS IN ZONING OR ORDINANCES OR SIGNS OR ANY OF THAT STUFF, BUT WE WE HAVE THE EXPERTS IN THE ROOM.

SO EARLS THERE, DEDRA'S THERE, WHOEVER IS THERE, THAT WE CAN ASK THOSE QUESTIONS AND HAVE THEM BE THE EXPERTS.

SO I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARILY JUST CRUCIAL THAT SOMEBODY HAS THAT DIVERSE OF A KNOWLEDGE BASE COMING IN, BUT MORE SO THOSE OTHER EXTRANEOUS TYPE AREAS.

[00:15:05]

THIS IS WHERE WE RAN INTO AN ISSUE.

BEFORE I THINK CECIL MR. DISCLAIMER WAS ON THERE, WE STILL WOULD HAVE AN ISSUE.

OKAY. BUT BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR SCENARIO, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT, WE'RE MOVING FORWARD.

WE PROBABLY DO NEED TO HAVE IT, THOUGH AS A PROTECTION.

BECAUSE EVEN IF WE REDO THE APPLICATION AS WILL AS SUGGESTING AND I GUESS TERRY SUGGESTING WE PROBABLY YOU GUYS PROBABLY STILL WANT TO HAVE THAT ABILITY TO SAY, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH THIS PERSON MAY HAVE SCORED THE HIGHEST, YOU KNOW, WE FEEL BETTER, OR THAT WILL WORK BETTER WITH THIS PERSON.

FOR THESE REASONS, AM I CORRECT? YES. I'M SORRY, I INTERRUPTED.

NO, THAT'S OK. WHY DOES THERE HAVE TO BE A SCORE ON THOSE ON THE WILL'S AND TERRY'S IDEAS? IT'S JUST A YES OR NO TO ME.

YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE THE GRADE.

IT'S NOT A GRADE.

I THINK, CURTIS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A HARD TIME CONVINCING THE CITY COUNCIL AS TO WHY YOU SELECTED SOMEONE.

I COULD BE WRONG AND WE CAN CERTAINLY ASK THEM.

BUT HOW HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DETERMINE WHY SOMEONE IS SELECTED? WELL, WE'RE GOING TO RUN WHAT IS THEIR BASELINE? WE'RE GOING TO RUN INTO THE SAME ISSUE THEN BECAUSE ONE APPLICANT MAY HAVE SCORED HIGHER THAN THE OTHER, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO EXPLAIN TO THE COUNCIL AGAIN.

IF IF IF WE CHOOSE THE LESSER POINTS.

DEDRA, LET ME ASK YOU THIS.

DO YOU THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO IN A WORKSHOP AND FOCUS ON JUST THIS? MAYBE WE CAN KIND OF GET SOME IDEAS OR SOMETHING AND BRING IT TO THE TABLE, MAYBE ONE EVENING. WELL, WELL, CECIL, HERE'S THE THING, YOU KNOW, WE WE SAID WE WOULD BRING IT TO THIS P&Z MEETING BECAUSE YOU GUYS ONLY HAD ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT WHAT DIFFERENCE YOU'RE GOING TO GET WITH THE WORKSHOP.

I ONLY GOT TWO RESPONSES.

OH, WELL.

OR ARE YOU SAYING JUST US? NO, JUST US. BUT WELL, WE'RE HERE NOW.

WELL, YEAH, THAT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW.

WE'RE JUST PUTTING IT OFF.

WHY DON'T WE AGAIN, EACH PERSON MAKE A COMMENT AND THEN SEE IF WE HAVE CONSENSUS OR WE'RE CLOSE TO MAKING A DECISION BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT IT AND THAT POINT SYSTEM IS NEVER GOING TO WORK. EVERYBODY'S GOING TO ADD THEM UP, IN MY OPINION.

BUT THE CHECKLIST, YOU CAN CHECK THEM, BUT DON'T PUT ANY POINTS THERE.

IT'S JUST, YES, I THINK I'M HERE.

AND THEN AS WE ASK THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE HERE, WE CAN DETERMINE WHETHER THAT'S AS ACCURATE AS THEY THINK IT IS OR WE THINK THEY'RE NOT QUITE AS QUALIFIED.

BUT THE POINTS ARE GOING TO KILL US EVERY TIME, AND IT WON'T MATTER WHO IT IS.

IT MEAN IT? WHY? WHY ARE WE HAVING AN INTERVIEW PROCESS? I MEAN, I I DON'T SEE THAT THEY'RE DOING THAT, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL HAD REQUESTED. OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE THOUGHT WE MIGHT HAVE? THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE THOUGHT WE MIGHT HAVE.

I THINK THE DISTINCTION IS WE'VE NEVER HAD MORE CANDIDATES THAN WE HAD.

SO IT'S BECOME A LITTLE MORE INVOLVED BECAUSE IT IS TRYING TO DISCERN, OK, WHO WOULD BE A GOOD FIT. SO THAT'S I THINK, WHY WE ENDED UP WITH THE INTERVIEW PROCESS BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT WHAT SOMEBODY PUTS ON PAPER AND YOU ALL NEED TO MEET THEM AND TALK TO THEM. YOU MAY KNOW THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE YOUR NEIGHBORS, BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST IT'S IT'S NOT ATYPICAL.

WHEN A CITY RECEIVES MORE THAN ONE APPLICATION THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE ALL THOSE FOLKS COME IN AND TALK TO THEM.

WELL, ONCE YOU POST IT, YOU PRETTY WELL OBLIGATED TO INTERVIEW THEM.

[00:20:02]

YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT REALTORS ON HERE, WE'VE GOT LAWYERS, GOT HOMEOWNERS AND A PROFESSIONAL PERSON WITH THE BANK AND YOU KNOW, I'M A BUSINESS OWNER.

WE HAVE CECIL, BUT WE GOT A BROAD LIST OF DIVERSE GROUP OF CHARACTERS HERE.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO MAINTAIN THAT.

AND WE HAD ALL REALTORS OR ALL LAWYERS SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT MIGHT NOT BE GOOD.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A I STILL WANT THE BEST APPLICANT IN HERE, BUT I THINK IT'S GOOD TO HAVE A DIVERSE GROUP LIKE WE HAVE.

DEDRA, WHAT IF AND COUNCILMEN, WHAT IF IN THE EVENT THAT WE DO HAVE MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS FOR VACANCY, THAT WHAT ABOUT PUTTING ON THERE, THAT YOU MAY BE ASKED TO COME IN AND BE INTERVIEWED RATHER THAN HAVING IT ON THERE AS AN INTERVIEW.

OK, WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT, WHAT DOES THAT BUY YOU? IF YOU JUST INTERVIEW ONE AND NOT ALL, YOU'RE SETTING US UP AGAIN FOR FAILURE BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO SEEM FAIR.

IF YOU'RE ANSWERING ANY QUESTIONS, YOU GIVE AN ESSAY TYPE QUESTION AND THEY DO A TWO WORD ANSWER VERSUS A 10 WORD ANSWER, THE 10 WORD PERSON IS PROBABLY GOING TO GET SELECTED ASSUMING THAT THEIR 10 WORDS ARE WELL CHOSEN WORDS, I GUESS, BUT YOU CAN LEARN A LOT ABOUT SOMEBODY BY WHAT THEY GIVE YOU IN THEIR ANSWERS, SO DO WE EVEN NEED AN INTERVIEW PROCESS? AND I AND THE OTHER ISSUE WITH THE INTERVIEW PROCESSES, IT IS PUBLIC, SO WE'RE ASKING THEM TO NOT BE IN THE ROOM.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO NOT BE IN THE ROOM.

AND I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE FAIR TO INTERVIEW WITH EVERYONE IN THE ROOM.

BUT THAT IS HOW THE RULES WORK, IS THAT THEY THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO BE THERE, IT'S THEIR CHOICE. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'VE GOT SEVERAL DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THAT WE NEED TO ANSWER.

FIRST OF ALL, ARE WE LOOKING TO CHANGE THE APPLICATION ITSELF? B, DO WE WANT TO INTERVIEW OR DO WE JUST WANT TO EVALUATE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE APPLICATION? AND THEN I GUESS MAYBE SEE HOW IS THAT? HOW IS THE SCORING TAKE PLACE IF THEY'RE SCORING AT ALL? AND SO AGAIN, I'M IN FAVOR OF CHANGING THE APPLICATION TO ALL ESSAY, REFORMATTING QUESTIONS AND GETTING AWAY FROM WHAT WHAT WE'VE DONE ALREADY.

AS FAR AS THE INTERVIEW GOES, I'M I GUESS I'M SLIGHTLY IN FAVOR OF.

I COULD BE TALKED OUT OF THE INTERVIEW PROCESS, BUT I THINK I'M SLIGHTLY IN FAVOR OF IT ONLY JUST BECAUSE IF WE'RE TRYING TO GET THE BEST APPLICANT, I JUST THINK WE NEED TO GET THE BEST, THE MOST INFORMATION THAT WE CAN.

I HEAR WHAT TERRY IS SAYING AND I DON'T I NEVER DID LIKE THE FACT THAT WE CAN ASK SOMEBODY TO LEAVE AND THEY MAY NOT.

THEY MAY CHOOSE TO SIT THERE AND LISTEN TO THE QUESTIONS.

I'M NEVER REALLY LIKE THAT, SO I THINK THAT IS A VALID POINT.

SO AND I AGREE WITH WHAT DEDRA SAYS IS IF WE DON'T PROVIDE SCORES, I THINK THERE ARE THE COUNCIL'S ALWAYS GOING TO JUST HAVE.

BUT I THINK THE SCORES JUST NEED TO BE MORE BASED ON WE.

WE READ THE RESPONSES OR WE LISTEN TO THE RESPONSES, TO THE QUESTIONS IN AN INTERVIEW AND THEN WE SCORE IT.

THERE'S NEVER A SELF-ASSESSMENT.

SO THE SCORES SHOULD ONLY BE THE SCORES THAT WE HAVE.

WE PUT DOWN SOME.

AND IN THAT SCENARIO, WILL, WOULD THE HIGH SCORE THEN BE THE THE ONE YOU SELECT? I THINK IT HAS TO BE, DOESN'T IT? IT HAS TO BE. I AGREE.

I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHY I WOULD SCORE SOMEONE HIGHER AND THEN SAY, WELL, I'M IN FAVOR OF, YOU KNOW, SCORE A CANDIDATE A HIGHER THAN AND THEN GO WITH CANDIDATE B.

I JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

SO WILL, IF YOU'RE GOING TO SCORE DANCERS, LET'S LOOK AT WILL I? DOES ANYBODY HAVE OUR APPLICATION LIKE WHAT KIND OF POINTS OR HOW ARE YOU SCORING THOSE

[00:25:06]

WELL, WHAT, WHAT KNOWLEDGE? WHAT IS YOUR KNOWLEDGE BASE IN THESE AREAS? AND THAT WAY THERE'S TWO SECTIONS AND YOU JUST SAY, WELL, THE GRAND TOTAL OF THE PERSONAL RESPONSES WOULD BE WEIGHTED AS SEVENTY FIVE POINTS AND IN THE OTHER SECTION WOULD BE TWENTY FIVE POINTS AND THEN FOR A TOTAL OF A HUNDRED POSSIBLE POINTS.

AND WE JUST WE JUST SCORE IT THAT WAY.

I THINK THAT'S JUST THE EASIEST WAY TO DO IT.

HOW DO YOU SCORE POINTS TO SOMEBODY PROVIDING THEIR PERSONAL INFORMATION? WELL, YOU JUST READ. YOU EITHER READ THE RESPONSES OR YOU YOU READ THE RESPONSES IN THEIR INTERVIEW AND. AND.

AND THEN INTERVIEW THEM BASED ON THAT AND THEN YOU PROVIDE A NUMBER.

WELL, I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW YOU COME UP WITH A NUMBER FOR THAT WITH WHAT TERRY WAS JUST ASKED WHAT WHAT'S YOUR CONNECTION TO DECATUR? I LIVE HERE. HOW MANY POINTS ARE YOU GOING TO GIVE THEM FOR THAT, RIGHT? YOU KNOW, I LIVE HERE, AND I USED TO WORK HERE.

HOW MANY POINTS? HOW DO YOU COME UP WITH A ONE TO FIVE? I JUST DON'T SEE THAT.

I DON'T LIKE IT.

I JUST DON'T LIKE A POINT SYSTEM AT ALL.

I CERTAINLY DON'T LIKE ANY SELF-ASSESSED POINTS THAT MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL TO ME.

AND. I LIKE THE MODIFIED APPLICATION THAT Y'ALL HAVE TALKED ABOUT WITH THOSE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, I THINK THOSE ARE VERY GOOD QUESTIONS AND WE NEED TO SEE THOSE ANSWERS AND I LIKE THE ESSAY FORM ANSWERS.

THAT'S GREAT.

I JUST I'M NOT SURE HOW TO GRADE IT.

MY THOUGHT WOULD JUST BE THAT WE ASK APPLICANTS TO FILL OUT THAT APPLICATION WITH ESSAY TYPE ANSWERS OR HOWEVER MUCH INFORMATION THEY'RE COMFORTABLE PROVIDING, AND THEN PROVIDE THOSE TO THE COMMISSION AND THEN LET THE COMMISSION WITHOUT NECESSARILY SCHEDULING AN INTERVIEW. AND LIKE, IF YOU HAVE ONE OPENING AND YOU HAVE THREE APPLICANTS AND WE'RE THEN ABLE TO GO THROUGH AND HAVE A MEETING IN WHICH WE DISCUSS HOW EACH OF US READ THESE RESPONSES AND WE COME UP WITH A CONCLUSION.

AND IF WE WANT TO GRADE THEM ONE TWO THREE, OK, BUT ARRIVE AT THE DETERMINATION IF THERE'S A CLEAR WINNER FOR THAT ONE SEAT.

AND IF SO, THERE'S NO NEED FOR THE INTERVIEWS.

AND IF WE FEEL LIKE, WELL, WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO HAVE AN INTERVIEW, THEN WE NEED TO INTERVIEW ALL THE APPLICANTS.

IT IS. I DO AGREE. IT'S NOT FAIR TO INTERVIEW ONE PERSON OR TWO PEOPLE AND NOT INTERVIEW EVERYBODY. IF YOU DECIDE THAT WE NEED THAT SECOND STEP AND WE NEED TO DO INTERVIEWS, THEN WE INTERVIEW EVERYBODY.

AND THAT MAY EVEN TURN THINGS WHO I USED TO HAVE NUMBER OF THREE MAY MOVE UP TO NUMBER ONE. IF THEY'RE A GOOD INTERVIEWER, I DON'T KNOW.

BUT AFTER WE HEAR THE INTERVIEWS, THEN ONCE AGAIN IT'S UP TO THIS BODY TO SIT DOWN AND ARRIVE AT A CONCLUSION AS THE WHO WE THINK IS THE BEST CHOICE.

YOU NEED SOMEONE. I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO THAT AT ALL.

I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO THAT AT ALL.

AS LONG AS YOU KNOW WHEN WE RECOMMEND SOMEONE TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY'RE THAT, THEY'RE TAKING OUR WORD FOR IT, THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS AND WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE.

SO I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING...

AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE ASKED FOR, A PROCESS THAT THEY CAN SEE MASON AND CAN UNDERSTAND IF WE CAN ARTICULATE THAT PROCESS THEN I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'LL GO A LONG WAY TOWARDS ADDRESSING THEIR CONCERNS.

FOR WHATEVER REASON IS IT'S ONLY THE THE P AND Z RIGHT NOW.

BUT FROM WHAT WE UNDERSTOOD OR HEARD FROM THEM OR THE MAYOR IS THAT THIS COULD GO FOR OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AS WELL.

IF WE CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE TO THEM.

SO I HAVE A QUESTION.

THE CITY COUNCIL IS THE FINAL SAY OR VOTE OR DECISION MAKER IN THIS.

WHY ARE THEY NOT COMING UP WITH THE PROCEDURE THEY WANT US TO FOLLOW AND HAVING US FOLLOW IT INSTEAD OF ASKING US TO COME UP WITH A PROCEDURE THAT THEN THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND OR

[00:30:04]

AND I HAVE TO SAY IT'S BEEN A NOT A GOOD PROCESS.

THE PROCESSES WE'VE HAD HAVE NOT BEEN GOOD.

SO THIS IS A LEARNING EXPERIENCE AND WE'RE, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO MAKE IT BETTER.

BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY JUST DIDN'T SAY THEY'RE THE FINAL, SAY THIS IS WHAT WE WANT YOU TO DO. HERE'S OUR FORM...

WELL TERRY, I'M SURE PATRICIA HAS A MORE REFINED RESPONSE.

THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WE'RE NOT ACCUSTOMED, NOT UNACCUSTOMED TOO.

WE'RE GIVEN DIRECTION, BUT NOT DIRECTION.

A LOT OF TIMES THEY DON'T KNOW REALLY WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR.

THEY JUST KNOW THAT THEY THEY WANT SOMETHING.

SO THE CHALLENGE IS FOR US TO JUST TRY TO FIGURE OUT WAY THROUGH WHAT IT IS THEY'RE WANTING. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU.

IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL IF WE HAD BEEN GIVEN CLEAR DIRECTION, BUT WE WEREN'T . WHEN WE CAME UP WITH THE APPLICATION THAT WE USE FOR THE LAST PROCESS DIDN'T DIDN'T THAT GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND THEY APPROVED IT.

NOT THAT, NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF TERRY, IT WAS JUST KIND OF INHERITED WHEN I GOT HERE AND THEN WHEN WE DID SOME MORE INVESTIGATION TO SEE WHAT OTHER CITIES WERE USING, WE FOUND THAT THAT APPLICATION WAS BEING USED.

SO WE DIDN'T CHANGE IT.

WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT.

WE JUST ASSUMED, YOU KNOW, IT HAD BEEN VETTED.

SO IF I CAN SUGGEST SOMETHING, WHY DON'T WE TRY TAKING THE QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE AND PUTTING THOSE DOWN WITH THE ONES WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH AND THINK WOULD BE GOOD GENERAL QUESTIONS AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO ASK, FOLKS, BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HEARD COUNSEL KIND OF ANALOGIZING IT TO WAS SORT OF AN EMPLOYMENT PROCESS.

SO, AND GENERALLY, WHEN YOU'RE HIRING SOMEBODY IN YOUR INTERVIEWING, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY GETS ASKED THE SAME QUESTIONS, BUT THERE'S NOT A RATING SCHEDULE, THERE'S NOT A NUMBER ASSOCIATED. SO PERHAPS THE THING FOR THE COMMISSION TO DO IS LET'S TAKE THE INPUT THAT WE'VE GOTTEN WITH THESE QUESTIONS AND Y'ALL ASK SOME REALLY GOOD QUESTIONS DURING THAT INTERVIEW PROCESS AND MAYBE ADD THOSE QUESTIONS IN.

LET'S GET THEM ON A SHEET OF PAPER.

LET'S SEND THEM TO THE HR MANAGER BECAUSE I THINK THEY MENTIONED THAT AT ONE POINT TOO AND ASK HER FOR GUIDANCE ON THIS IS HOW WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO DO THIS AS IF IT'S AN EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION.

EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT, IT'S A VOLUNTEER APPLICATION.

BUT WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO STICK WITHIN THOSE PARAMETERS BECAUSE THOSE GENERALLY HAVE NUMBERS ASSIGNED. I MEAN, WE'VE ALL INTERVIEWED PEOPLE AND YOU ASK THEM QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCE AND THEN YOU MAKE A DECISION.

AND I DON'T I THINK COUNCIL WOULD RESPECT THAT DISCERNMENT IF WE HAD A REALLY GOOD QUESTIONNAIRE AND PEOPLE FILLED THEM OUT.

AND THAT'S MY ONLY HESITATION.

I THINK ON THAT IS THAT SOME FOLKS WOULD PUT THREE WORDS AND OTHER FOLKS WOULD PUT, YOU KNOW, 25.

SO IT'S A MATTER OF THEY NEED TO FULLY EXPLAIN WHAT THEIR ANSWERS ARE AND SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, DO YOU HAVE POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS? WELL, WE CAN SOLVE THAT IF YOU'RE ON A P AND Z COMMISSION AND YOU HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST BECAUSE STATUTE SAYS, I MEAN, YOU JUST BASICALLY FILL OUT YOUR AFFIDAVIT AND DON'T DON'T PARTICIPATE IN ANY OF THE DISCUSSIONS.

BUT THE REASON THAT'S SIGNIFICANT IS BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT ALWAYS HAVE YOU CONFLICTED OUT AND THEN WE'RE ALWAYS WORKING WITH LESS THAN, YOU KNOW, THE MAXIMUM QUORUM, AT LEAST THAT WE HAVE SO.

I JUST THINK BECAUSE THE IN MY OPINION, BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM COUNSEL, I THINK THEY LIKE THE CONCEPT OF A POINT SYSTEM WITHOUT BEING REALLY SPECIFIC, WITHOUT THERE BEING A HARD AND FAST RULE TO TIE IT TO.

THAT'S JUST MAKING IT REALLY DIFFICULT.

AND THEY'VE ANALOGIZE TOO, AN INTERVIEW PROCESS THAT YOU WOULD DO WITH AN EMPLOYEE.

SO MAYBE WE COME UP WITH QUESTIONS THAT WE THINK ARE PERTINENT.

WE CAN SHOW THEM TO THE HR MANAGER AND ASK HER FOR ANY GUIDANCE ON IF YOU WERE INTERVIEWING A PERSON WITH THESE QUESTIONS.

IS IT JUST YOUR JUDGMENT? HOW DO YOU? CAN YOU GIVE US SOME GUIDANCE? IS THERE A WAY WE CAN BE HAVE MORE OF AN OBJECTIVE STANDARD? I DON'T KNOW. THAT'S JUST ME TRYING TO GO BY WHAT THEY WERE SAYING ABOUT HR, AND THIS SHOULD BE SIMILAR TO AN INTERVIEW PROCESS.

IT'S BEEN SOMEWHAT.

OF A CRITICISM OF OUR GROUP IN MAKING A DECISION WHEN WE MADE OUR RECOMMENDATION, WE HAVE CONSIDERED EVERYTHING.

NOW THE POINT SYSTEM WAS A MESS AND WE HAD A HARD TIME COMMUNICATING, BUT I THINK WE REACHED PRETTY CLOSE.

I WON'T SAY 100 PERCENT, BUT IT WAS AWFULLY CLOSE THAT WE AGREED THE PERSON WE

[00:35:03]

WHEN THAT'S TURNED DOWN, IT HAS A TENDENCY TO MAKE ME WANT TO JUST WALK OUT THE DOOR AND SAY, YOU'VE GOT IT.

YOU DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.

UM, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HERE WAS TRYING TO NOT INVITE SOMEONE TO THE COMMITTEE, BUT THE OTHER THING IS WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE VISITING, WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE SHOWING ANY INTEREST IN EVEN SEE HOW IT WORKS.

SO I DON'T SEE HOW ANYONE HAD A COMPLAINT.

BUT THAT'S JUST ME SPEAKING OUT.

BUT I THINK PUTTING POINTS ON THERE IS WRONG WHEN A COMMITTEE MAKES A DECISION.

YOU GO WITH MAJORITY, YOU WORK TOGETHER AND FIND OUT WHAT STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES ARE.

YOU SHARE THAT AND THEN YOU TAKE A VOTE, YOU TAKE A A PRIVATE VOTE, WHICH IS YOUR TOP CANDIDATE AND THE TOP CANDIDATE GETS THE TOTAL MAJORITY.

THEN YOU'VE GOT A DECISION MADE AND WE'VE DONE THAT FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, ALL OF US, WE'VE ALL WORKED WITH EMPLOYEES AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER.

AND I DON'T KNOW, IT WAS VERY INSULTING TO ME.

IT WAS NOT A VOTE OF CONFIDENCE FOR WHAT WE'VE DONE FOR YEARS.

AND IF I'D SPOKEN AT THE PODIUM, I COULDN'T HAVE SPOKEN THAT.

BUT I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE.

WELL, AND I THINK I MEAN THE DIFFERENCE HERE.

THERE'S SOME AGITATION THAT'S GOING ON, YOU KNOW, SOME, SOME INFORMATION THAT'S BEING COMMUNICATED THAT I DON'T THINK SHOULD BE COMMUNICATED, THAT IT'S PART OF THE DISCUSSION AND THAT'S WHAT'S FUELING, I THINK SOME OF THE THE FLAMES AS WELL.

WE WOULD KNOW ABOUT THEN.

I DON'T THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS DID OR DIDN'T DO.

I JUST THINK.

IT THERE'S THERE'S PERSONALITY ISSUES, PERSONALITY CLASHES THAT IF YOU SAY THE WRONG THING OR YOU SAY SOMETHING NOT INTENTIONALLY INTENDING FOR IT TO BE.

TAKEN WRONG WAS TAKEN WRONG, AND THEN IT WAS ELEVATED AND CERTAIN COUNCIL MEMBERS GOT INVOLVED AND I THINK THAT HELPED TO FUEL TO FUEL THIS THIS.

I DON'T KNOW HOW WHAT YOU TERM IT, BUT THEM NOT ACCEPTING Y'ALL'S RECOMMENDATION.

I THINK GIVEN ANY OTHER SITUATION SCENARIO GROUP OF FOLKS OR PEOPLE INTERESTED, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A DIFFERENT OUTCOME.

THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION.

THERE'S A LOT OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, DEDRA, BUT THAT'S PART OF WHY I WANT TO GET AWAY FROM THE POINT SYSTEM, TOO.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN APPLICATION USING THOSE SAME QUESTIONS AND THE ONES THAT THAT HAVE BEEN SUGGESTED ON THE SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST BY TERRY AND BY WILL.

BUT I WANT TO TAKE THE INTERVIEW PROCESS OUT OF IT UNLESS THE DETERMINATION IS MADE THAT WE REALLY NEED TO INTERVIEW ON TOP OF THIS, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU MAY GET TWO APPLICATIONS FOR ONE SPOT, AND IT MAY BE VERY CLEAR THAT THIS GUY'S QUALIFIED AND THIS PERSON IS NOT A GUY, LADY, WHOEVER IS QUALIFIED AND THIS ONE IS NOT, AND THERE'S NO REASON TO HAVE TO SIT THROUGH AN INTERVIEW.

ALL YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS TROUBLE, THEN.

YEAH, BUT TELL ME, MASON, HOW WAS IT FOR US TO HAVE TO SCORE IT ON A POINT SYSTEM? HOW WOULD YOU? WELL, I WOULD JUST.

LET ME FINISH, PLEASE.

WHAT I SUGGEST WE DO IS WE GO THROUGH THE ANSWERS THAT THROUGH THE APPLICATIONS THAT WE GET AND ANALYZE THEM AND REACH A CONSENSUS, AND THEN WE MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS, THE CITY COUNCIL. AND IF THEY WANT TO KNOW WHY WE MADE THE DECISION, WE SAY, HERE'S A COPY OF THE ANSWERS THAT WE WERE GIVEN.

YOU READ OVER THEM AND IF YOU DON'T, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A DIFFERENT CHOICE, YOU'RE THE ONES WHO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT.

WE LOOKED AT THESE APPLICATIONS.

THIS IS THE RECOMMENDATION WE MADE.

THAT'S IT. THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION, AND THEY MAY SAY, HEY, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME POINTS, BUT I REALLY THINK THAT'S THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT THE ISSUE IS WITH THEM.

AND ARE YOU SAYING IF IF THE.

ONLY IF THEY'RE CLOSE AND WE NEED AN INTERVIEW THAT WE CAN CALL THEM IN FOR AN INTERVIEW, BUT JUST YES, I'M SAYING IF WE LOOK THEM OVER AND WE SAY, GOSH, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THIS PERSON AND THIS PERSON.

FIRST ONE, WE INTERVIEW ALL.

BUT YES, SURE. YES.

IN THE EVENT THAT I HOPE I CAN REMEMBER HOW I HAD SEEN THIS IN MY HEAD WHEN WE WERE.

WHAT ABOUT ON THE ON THE APPLICATION ITSELF? THE. JUST A THE ESSAY, NOT GRADING IT, BUT.

[00:40:07]

AND THEN ON THE SAY, HALF OF THE QUESTIONS, NO POINTS AND THE OTHER HALF OF THE QUESTIONS, WE WOULD ASSESS A POINT SYSTEM, MAYBE.

IN INDIA, ONE THROUGH FIVE.

OK, JUST JUST AS AN IDEA.

SO IF I'M READING THIS APPLICATION, OK, MAYBE I WANT TO GIVE IT A THREE.

MAYBE TERRY WANTS TO GIVE IT A TWO, MAYBE CURTIS WANTS TO GIVE IT A FIVE DEDRA, IS THERE A PROBLEM WITH THAT? BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE TRYING TO SATISFY THE COUNCIL'S NEEDS, BUT ON THE SAME HAND, WE DON'T WANT TO JUST HIRE SOMEBODY BECAUSE THEY SCORED HIGHER.

YOU KNOW, THEY AGAIN, JUST BECAUSE THEY DO SCORE HIGHER DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY'RE GOING TO NECESSARILY BE THE BEST APPLICANT FOR THE POSITION.

THERE'S A LOT OF ANXIETY THAT GOES IN, I MEAN EILEEN WAS EXPRESSING HERSELF, AND I THINK I SHARE OUR I SHARED SOME OF THAT.

BUT WHAT IF WE DID SOMETHING ALONG THAT LINE HALF AND HALF? I DON'T WANT POINT. I'M I'M AGAINST THE POINT SYSTEM, OKAY? PERSONALLY, BECAUSE IT'LL ALWAYS COME BACK.

YEAH, AND THERE'S NOT ENOUGH TRUST WITH THE CITY COUNCIL WITH US AS A TEAM BRINGING OUR TOP CHOICE, THEN WE DON'T NEED TO BE HERE.

NOW LET ME SAY THIS, A LOT OF THIS WILL BE COVERED IN THE CONSENSUS.

I MEAN, WE GET THESE, WE GET FIVE APPLICATIONS IN FOR ONE SPOT AND THEN WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION. SO WE'VE GOT TO SIT DOWN, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IN THE OTHER ROOM, I DON'T KNOW AND REALLY GO THROUGH THESE THINGS AND CONSIDER THEM.

AND IF WE COME TO VERY, YOU KNOW, SORT OF LIKE I'M GOING BACK TO LEGAL PRACTICE, BUT IT'S A LITTLE BIT LIKE BEING A JURY.

I MEAN, EVERYBODY MAY NOT AGREE.

EVERYBODY MAY AGREE COMPLETELY.

THIS IS THE BEST CHOICE.

IN WHICH CASE, OK, TAKE A VOTE.

THAT'S IT. IT'S DONE. EVERYBODY MAY NOT AGREE IF THERE'S A LOT OF DISPUTE AND DISCUSSION OVER WHO'S BETTER, THEN AT THAT POINT IN THE CONTEXT OF US MAKING A DECISION AS A COMMISSION, WE MIGHT WANT TO SIT DOWN AND SAY, OK, WE'VE GOT THESE FIVE APPLICANTS.

YOU RANK THEM ONE THROUGH FIVE, I'LL RANK THEM ONE THREE FIVE.

YOU RANK THEM ONE TO FIVE YEAR, YOU RANK THEM ONE, THREE FIVE AND THEN LET'S POOL THOSE AND START AVERAGING THE SCORES AND SEE WHAT WE'VE GOT AND THE ANSWER MAY BE ARRIVED AT THAT WAY, BUT THAT'S A THAT'S WE DON'T EVEN GET THERE UNLESS THE PROCESS OF THE DEBATE.

WE'RE HAVING CALLS FOR IT, BUT THAT'S A LOGICAL THING TO DO.

IF WE'RE FOR HAVING A LOT OF DISAGREEMENT, THAT'S CERTAINLY A LOGICAL WAY TO SOLVE IT.

DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SHARED OUTSIDE THAT ROOM.

WELL, THAT'S JUST ESTIMATES, BASICALLY.

WELL, I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T THINK THAT IF WE WENT UP DOING IT THAT WAY THAT THE COUNCIL CAN I THINK THAT IT'S OK TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO THE COUNCIL.

BUT IF THAT'S WHAT LEADS TO THE FINAL LEADS US TO THE DECISION, SAY THE COUNCIL IS HOW DID YOU MAKE THIS DECISION WHERE WE LOOK AT ALL OF THESE? AND SOME PEOPLE LIKE THIS PERSON AND SOME PEOPLE LIKE THIS PERSON AND SOME PEOPLE LIKE THAT PERSON AND NONE OF US LIKE THIS OVER HERE, WE ALL RANK THEM ONE THROUGH FIVE HERE.

HERE THEY ARE. PERSON X CAME OUT WITH 14 POINTS AND THE NEXT HIGHEST PERSON HAD 11.

SO THAT'S THE PERSON THAT WE WENT WITH.

YOU WANT TO SECOND GUESS THAT, WELL, I LIKE IT, I LIKE IT, BUT I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM.

WE HAD FIVE APPLICANTS AND WE WERE SATISFIED WITHOUT ANY QUESTION OR WITHOUT ANY NEED FOR A VOTE THAT THIS PERSON WAS THE BEST.

THAT'S HOW WE REACH THE DECISION.

HERE IT IS. IF YOU WANT SOMEBODY ELSE.

THAT'S YOUR PRIVILEGE.

YOU KNOW, WE WENT THROUGH A LOT OF WHEN I WAS WITH JAMES, WHEN WE HAD INTERVIEW FOR SALES STAFF. OBVIOUSLY, WE HAD A LOT, A LOT OF APPLICANTS THAT WOULD WANT TO COME TO WORK FOR US. WE'D TAKE A LOOK AT AND I SAY WE THERE WAS FIVE MEN, SIX MANAGERS, AND WE'D ALL TAKE A LOOK AT THESE APPLE APPLICATIONS TO FIND OUT WHO WE THOUGHT MIGHT BE BETTER.

AND IF THREE OF US LIKED THIS PARTICULAR ONE AND THREE OF US DIDN'T LIKE, WELL, THEN MR. WOOD WOULD STEP IN AND HE'D BE THE TIEBREAKER.

BUT I THINK WE WERE FINE WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT HERE.

BUT BOTTOM LINE IS, WE DON'T EVER REALLY KNOW WHAT WE'VE GOT UNTIL WE GET THEM.

YOU KNOW, WE MIGHT THINK THAT THIS PARTICULAR PERSON MIGHT BE THE BEST ONE FOR US AND THEN COME TO FIND OUT, YOU KNOW, THEY THEY'RE REALLY NASTY.

BUT I THINK THE CONSENSUS IS THAT NOBODY LIKES THE POINT SYSTEM.

AND IF WE CAN GET AWAY FROM THAT, WELL, THEN I THINK LIKE MASON SAID, MAJORITY, YOU KNOW, MAJORITY VOTES AND LET LET THAT GO AT THAT POINT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT YOU KNOW, WE'VE

[00:45:04]

NOW, GRANTED, WE'VE NEVER HAD, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, THREE OR FOUR APPLICANTS AT ONE TIME.

BUT WHEN WE HAD, YOU KNOW, MAYBE TWO APPLICANTS, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE ALL LOOKED AT IT, YOU KNOW, AND IT WAS A MAJORITY RULE.

BUT I THINK THOSE POINTS ARE GOING TO BE A PROBLEM.

I ALSO THINK THAT THE TIME WE GIVE TO THE CITY, TO THE COUNCIL IN GOING THROUGH THIS SHOULD BE RESPECTED.

AND IF IT'S NOT, THEN WE NEED ANOTHER PLAN.

WELL, I THINK THAT THEY DO RESPECT WHAT WE WERE DOING AND I THINK AND I TALK TO MARK A LITTLE BIT, BUT THEY UNDERSTAND OUR STRUGGLES.

THEY REALLY DO. IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES YOU KNOW THAT THEY'RE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF US IN OUR DECISIONS.

BUT I THINK THAT THEY DO UNDERSTAND AND I THINK I THINK THEY ARE SOMEWHAT SUPPORTIVE, BUT THEY'VE GOT TO UNDERSTAND ALSO THAT THIS THIS POINT SYSTEM IS JUST NOT I DON'T SEE HOW IT WOULD WORK AT ALL.

IT'S JUST GOING TO CREATE SOME MORE ISSUES.

SO WHAT ABOUT JUST GOING BACK TO JUST A SIMPLE MAJORITY? YOU ARE DEDRA, I CAN'T SEE YOU, ARE YOU ROLLING YOUR EYES? WELL, NO, I'M JUST STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND CECIL WHAT ARE YOU SAYING WHEN YOU SAY A SIMPLE MAJORITY? I SAY WE KNOW WELL, IF WE'VE GOT FIVE PEOPLE IN THE, YOU KNOW, TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT WITHIN THREE THREE YESES OR TWO NO'S.

BUT YOU ARE NOT YOU ARE SAYING USE THE APPLICATION LIKE I WAS, YEAH, SO I'M SAYING USE THE APPLICATION.

OK. BUT NOT NOT THE CONTENT.

A REVISED APPLICATION? CORRECT. THE REVISED APPLICATION, AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT BY ADDING BY ADDING THE SUGGESTIONS FROM WILL AND TERRY.

AND I DO LIKE THE THE RECOMMENDATION OF, YOU KNOW, ALL OF US INDIVIDUALLY RANKING OUR CANDIDATES AND THEN PUTTING THOSE TOGETHER AND SEEING IF THERE IS A CLEAR RECOMMENDATION BETWEEN ALL OF US.

I MEAN, I THINK I CAN SEE THAT BEING A WAY TO GO.

BUT YEAH, YOU UNDERSTAND THAT.

MASON WAS SAYING. IF THERE'S A SITUATION WHERE YOU CAN'T MAKE A DECISION, THEN YEAH, THAT'S WHY YOU'VE GOT SOME KLOSE.

THAT'S FINE. AND I'M OK.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO CODIFY THIS PROCESS THAT MUCH, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO DO IT WHATEVER FITS THE SITUATION.

EXACTLY, EXACTLY.

I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT CODIFYING THAT AND BUILDING THAT IN THAT WE WILL RANK THEM.

I'M JUST SAYING THAT MAKES SENSE, AND IT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING WE WOULD DO IF WE COULDN'T REACH SOME OTHER AGREEMENT. THERE'S NO POINT IF WE COULDN'T READ, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT. THAT'S THE WAY WE WOULD PROBABLY DO IT.

AND THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, YOU KNOW, THE BUCK STOPS AT THE COUNCIL'S DESK AND IT IT IS CERTAINLY OK.

IT WOULD HURT. IT WOULD HAVE HURT MY FEELINGS, TOO, IF I HAD BEEN ON HERE AND MADE THAT RECOMMENDATION AND THEY TURNED IT DOWN AND I WOULD BE IRRITATED AND I MIGHT GIVE SOMEBODY AN EARFUL ABOUT IT. BUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS THAT'S THEIR JOB, AND IT'S OUR JOB TO TAKE IT IF THEY IF THEY MAKE A CONTRARY DECISION.

AND SO WE SHOULD BE WITH A CLEAN CONSCIENCE WHEN WE SEND THEM WHATEVER RECOMMENDATION WE DO. AND IF THEY CHOOSE TO IGNORE IT AND GO ANOTHER WAY MORE POWER TO THEM, WE'VE GOT TO LIVE WITH IT AND MOVE ON AND THEM TO GIVE US THEIR REASONS AND LEAVE IT UP TO THEM.

WHY DO YOU NOT WANT THIS PERSON SCORING SYSTEM? CAN I SAY THAT I REALLY DO LIKE THEM, EVEN A BRIEF INTERVIEW PROCESS, EVEN INITIALLY? WE ARE ALL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CITY AND OF THE CITIZENS.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD EVER WANT TO HIRE SOMEONE COMPLETELY SAT UNSEEN NOR HAVING MET THEM AND SEE HOW THEY WOULD REPRESENT US IN THE CITY WHEN THEY'RE SITTING ON THIS BOARD. EVEN JUST A FIVE MINUTE INTERVIEW OR FOR SOMETHING, SOMETHING JUST WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. WHAT ABOUT INSTEAD OF THE INTERVIEW, IF EACH CANDIDATE COMES IN, INTRODUCES THEMSELVES AND, YOU KNOW, TELLS US MAYBE WHY THEY'RE INTERESTED? I MEAN, LIKE YOU SAID, JUST A MINUTE OR TWO.

NOW WE'RE GETTING TWO APPLICATIONS.

WE GOT THE PAPER AND NOW THEY'VE GOT THE.

WELL, IT'S AN INTERVIEW. IT'S IT'S JUST TO SEE THE PERSON, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'VE BEEN WITH

[00:50:03]

GO BACK TO THE PAPER AND PATRICIA, IS THERE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THIS? IF WE'VE GOT FIVE APPLICANTS, FOUR OR THREE APPLICANTS AND WE ALL NARROW IT DOWN TO ONE APPLICANT, CAN WE BRING AN APPLICANT IN FOR AN INTERVIEW THAT ONLY APPLICANT? I THINK THAT'S A MISTAKE.

YEAH, NO. IT WOULD BE OKAY.

I MEAN, YOU, YOU CAN.

BUT I THINK THE OTHERS, IF YOU'RE GOING OFF A PAPER, THE OTHER SOMEONE MIGHT SAY, I DON'T REALLY WRITE THAT WELL.

I'D RATHER, YOU KNOW, I COULD DO A BETTER JOB IF I, YOU KNOW, PRESENTED MYSELF.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW PEOPLE THAT MAY NOT LOOK SO GOOD ON PAPER, BUT THEY INTERVIEW VERY WELL AND THEY CAN COMMUNICATE BETTER IN PERSON.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY FROM WHAT I WAS HEARING AND TRYING TO KIND OF MAKE SOME NOTES AND MAKE SOME HASH MARKS BY WHO WAS AGREEING, IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYBODY'S IN AGREEMENT WITH THE MODIFIED APPLICATION WITH ESSAY ANSWERS.

EVERYBODY SEEMS TO AGREE WITH THAT.

AND WHAT WAS PROPOSED WAS PROVIDING THOSE PAPERS TO THE COMMISSION.

AND THEN YOU ALL LOOKING AT THOSE GOING THROUGH THOSE, AND IF YOU DECIDE YOU NEED MORE AND CAN'T DECIDE OFF THE PAPER THAN TO BE FAIR, EVERYONE GETS INTERVIEWED AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS KIND OF HEARING ECHOED FROM A COUPLE.

I DON'T THINK I HEARD A MAJORITY ON THAT LAST PART, BUT I DID.

ON THE FIRST TWO, EVERYBODY SEEMED TO BE ON BOARD WITH, YOU KNOW, MODIFYING IT WITH ESSAYS, SO YOU GET MORE INFORMATION AND THEN GIVING YOU ALL A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT JUST BY YOURSELVES AND FREE OF THE PRESSURE OF OTHER FOLKS IN HERE.

SO OTHER THAN OPEN MEETINGS? SO THE QUESTION TO ME NOW FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD SO FAR IS, AND I DON'T PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH IS HOW DO YOU WANT TO HANDLE THE INTERVIEW? DO YOU WANT TO RESERVE THAT AND SEE IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT? AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, TO BE FAIR, THEN IT'S EVERYBODY.

OR DO YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND DO THAT UP FRONT? OR DO YOU WANT TO RESERVE THAT AND ONLY INTERVIEW WHO YOU WANT TO INTERVIEW? THOSE ARE THE THREE OPTIONS REALLY FOR THAT.

WOULD YOU PUT A BLOCK UP THERE FOR? SHE SAID. IF WE DON'T INTERVIEW THEM, WE DON'T KNOW THEM.

AND SOMEBODY'S GETTING CHEATED OUT OF AN INTERVIEW.

SO WHICH WAY IS IT? WELL, I'M JUST SAYING THOSE ARE OPTIONS.

SO IF YOU WANT TO SAY NO, I REALLY NEED TO MEET EVERYBODY TO MAKE A DECISION.

I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE FROM ONE CITY THAT I WORKED IN.

SO WE HAD A RESIDENT WHO ALWAYS WANTED TO PARTICIPATE AND SO THAT RESIDENT WOULD COME IN AND THEY APPLIED FOR PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING.

WHAT THEY DID FOR A LIVING WAS THEY WERE A REPAIR PERSON FOR SEARS BACK IN THE DAY WHEN SEARS EXISTED. AND SO WHEN THEY LOOKED AT EVERYTHING ON PAPER, THIS PERSON COULD NEVER MEET UP. WE ALWAYS, USUALLY ALWAYS HAD PEOPLE THAT HAD DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE OR SOMETHING MORE GERMANE TO WHAT THEY WERE APPLYING FOR, AND WE GOT TO ONE BOARD AND HE WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO APPLIED. AND SO THEY CALLED HIM IN BECAUSE THEY INTERVIEWED EVERYBODY AND HE WAS GREAT AND MADE A GREAT BOARD MEMBER.

SO THAT'S WHY I ALWAYS KEEP THAT IN THE BACK OF MY HEAD.

THAT THIS GUY? WELL, THAT'S WHAT HE DID FOR A LIVING, AND HE DIDN'T REALLY EXPRESS HIMSELF THAT WELL IN HIS APPLICATION WHEN THEY WERE TALKING TO HIM ABOUT, YOU KNOW, LIFE EXPERIENCE HE HAD AND THINGS HE DID DECISION MAKING IN HIS JOB.

HE WAS SOMEONE THAT THOUGHT THAT THIS GUY IS REALLY ACTUALLY VERY CREATIVE AND HE ENDED UP BEING APPOINTED.

HE WAS THE ONLY ONE, BUT THEY COULD HAVE TURNED HIM DOWN.

SO THAT'S. AND WHAT IF YOU HAD 15 PEOPLE APPLY? WELL, I HAVE HAD CITIES THAT WILL ALSO THEY HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE APPLY THAT THEY HAVE A RECEPTION AND EVERYBODY COMES IN AND THEY MINGLE AND MIX.

SO I DON'T THINK WE'D HAVE THAT PROBLEM.

BUT I THINK IF WE ENDED UP WITH 10 APPLICANTS, WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT A DIFFERENT PROCESS.

BUT IF WE ENDED UP WITH 10, YOU WOULD PROBABLY AT LEAST WANT TO GO THROUGH, DISCERN AND SAY, WE THINK, YOU KNOW, WE TAKE A VOTE.

WE THINK THESE ARE THE TOP THREE AND WE'RE GOING TO INTERVIEW THESE FOLKS AND EVERYBODY ELSE THINKS WE'RE GOING TO KEEP YOUR APPLICATION.

USUALLY, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS CITIES WILL KEEP AN APPLICATION FOR A YEAR.

THAT'S WHY A LOT OF CITIES TRY TO HAVE A TIME OF YEAR WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS, AND THEN THEY KEEP THOSE ON FILE SO THAT THEY CAN JUST PULL FROM THOSE AS THEY GO THROUGH THE YEAR.

OTHER CITIES PUT IT OUT EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY DO IT.

SO IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, THERE'S MANY DIFFERENT WAYS.

THERE'S NOT A RIGHT AND WRONG.

YOU JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE GETTING SOME VOLUNTEERS AND LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT WE'RE WELCOMING AND WE WANT FOLKS TO COME AND PARTICIPATE.

SO SO WHAT YOU JUST BROUGHT UP THAT IS, I MEAN, DO WE HAVE A PROCESS FOR THAT OR HAS THE CITY COUNCIL SET A PROCESS FOR THAT? OR ARE WE SUPPOSED TO SET A PROCESS FOR THAT? NO, THAT WOULD BE A CITY PROCESS.

AND I DON'T I HAVEN'T PAID CLOSE ENOUGH ATTENTION TO KNOW IF WE HAVE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT ALL EXPIRE AROUND THE SAME TIME.

I THOUGHT WE DID.

I DON'T KNOW IF DEDRA KNOWS OFF THE TOP OF HER HEAD.

THEY DO. YEAH, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO.

YEAH. ALL AT THE SAME TIME.

[00:55:01]

BUT NO, IT'S NOT ALL MEMBERS.

NO. THAT'S CORRECT.

I WOULD STILL SAY.

THE THE TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU'RE WRITING A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THE PROCESS IS GOING TO BE, PATRICIA, THAT IT OUGHT TO LEAVE, THAT INTERVIEWS WILL BE OPTIONAL IF THE COMMISSION DECIDES THAT THEY'RE NEEDED.

JOHN, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT IF WE GET TWO APPLICATIONS IN AND IT'S TWO PEOPLE THAT ALL OF US KNOW PERFECTLY WELL, I DON'T SEE ANY REASON TO SAY WE HAVE TO HAVE AN INTERVIEW OF THESE PEOPLE.

I THINK IF ANYBODY ON HERE SAYS, NO, I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T KNOW. THREE OF THESE PEOPLE NEVER MET THEM BEFORE.

I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE AND TALK TO THEM.

OK, THEN WE NEED TO HAVE INTERVIEWS AND WE JUST DO IT.

BUT I ALSO WOULDN'T.

I'M NOT SURE, SINCE WE'VE ALREADY WILL ALREADY BE IN POSSESSION OF THESE ESSAY TYPE ANSWERS. I DON'T THINK THAT THE INTERVIEW NEEDS TO BE MORE STRUCTURED THAN THAT, OR TO THE EXTENT IT'S GOING TO BE STRUCTURED TO SOMETHING WE OUGHT TO FIGURE OUT AT THE TIME, BECAUSE IT MAY JUST BE EACH PERSON IS GIVEN FIVE MINUTES TO STAND UP AND GIVE US YOUR PITCH ABOUT WHY WE SHOULD GO WITH YOU AND YOUR TIME'S UP NEXT AND GO WITH IT THAT WAY.

I JUST WOULD BE UNCOMFORTABLE, SAY SOMEBODY WHO'S LIVED HERE IN THE CITY THREE YEARS, THEY WORK IN THE METROPLEX, [INAUDIBLE] INTEREST IN THE CITY.

NONE OF US KNOW NONE OF US HAVE EVER MET AND ANYBODY ON CITY COUNCIL, THAT'S SOMEBODY WE DON'T KNOW. WE PROBABLY NEED TO DO FILL IT OUT.

BUT THEN THEY SAY, WELL, WHY DID YOU INTERVIEW ME AND YOU DIDN'T INTERVIEW THE LAST GUY OR VICE VERSA? SO I THINK THAT WE INVITE ALL OF THEM IN FOR AN INTERVIEW.

BUT WHAT IF THERE'S JUST ONE? IF THERE'S JUST ONE, JUST ONE ONE, ONE APPLICANT, ONE POSITION? THERE'S NO NEED FOR AN INTERVIEW THAT TAKES CARE OF THAT UNLESS THERE'S UNLESS THERE'S SOME FLUIDITY. THEY STILL GOT TO FILL OUT THE APPLICATION, THE IN THE AFTERNOON, THE PROCEEDING, OR WE FOUND THAT THEY'VE GOT A CRIMINAL HISTORY OR SOMETHING.

WELL, THEN YOU KNOW, THAT NEEDS TO BE ON OUR QUESTIONNAIRE.

SOME CITIES HAVE THAT.

THEY ALSO ASK IF THEY HAVE PROPERTY IN THE CITY THAT'S DILAPIDATED OR THEY OWE BACK TAXES ON. AND I MEAN, WE GET IF WE GET ONE BOARD, IF A PERSON IS PROBLEMATIC, THEN I WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE GOT THE RIGHT TO SAY WE HAVEN'T FOUND A ACCEPTABLE APPLICANT YET.

BUT I MEAN, THOSE ARE SOME QUESTIONS OTHER CITIES ASK.

I LIKE WHAT MASON SAID ABOUT JUST HAVING THEM COME IN AND MAKING A THREE TO FIVE MINUTE PRESENTATION FOR THEMSELVES.

AND LET'S NOT EVEN HAVE TO ASK A QUESTION.

WELL, FOR SOME OF THEM TO TO MEET US, IT'D BE BETTER IF THEY KNEW FOR ONE ONE MINUTE.

I MEAN, JUST JUST SO YEAH, WHEN WE RECOMMEND THEM TO CITY COUNCIL, WE'RE GOING TO RECOGNIZE THEM WHEN THEY WALK THROUGH THE DOOR AND I'M GOING TO BE SOMEBODY THAT STORMED THE WHITE HOUSE, COMING IN AND A VIKING HELMET WITH THE OUT UNTIL WE'VE ACTUALLY SEEN SOMEBODY WE WE DON'T KNOW WHO WE'VE RECOMMENDED.

YEAH, EVEN ON PAPER, I MEAN, THEY COULD BE 100 PERCENT GOOD.

IT CAN BE EXACTLY LIKE SHE SAID.

IT COULD BE THE TOTAL OPPOSITE.

THEY FEEL EVERYTHING PERFECTLY HAD THE OPPOSITE EXPERIENCE THAT YOU HAD.

YEAH, WAL-MART WENT THROUGH THIS PHASE WHERE THEY GOT SUED FOR EVERYTHING, SO THEY WOULD CHANGE EVERY YEAR HOW THEY DID THE APPLICATION PROCESS FOR MANAGEMENT.

SO IT GOT DOWN TO THE POINT WHERE I HAD TO DO THE THE INTERVIEWS OVER THE PHONE AND I HAD A LIST OF QUESTIONS AND I COULDN'T ASK ANYTHING ELSE EXCEPT THOSE QUESTIONS, I HAD TO WRITE THEIR RESPONSES AND AND ANALYZE THAT.

WELL, THIS ONE GUY, HE JUST BLEW IT AWAY.

I MEAN, HE ANSWERED EVERYTHING PERFECT AND ALL THE OTHER SIX APPLICANTS I HAD WHAT DIDN'T EVEN COME CLOSE.

SO HE GOT IT.

THAT WAS THE WORST PERSON I EVER HIRED IN MY LIFE.

HE LASTED ABOUT THREE WEEKS BECAUSE HE HAD GONE THROUGH SO MANY APPLICATIONS AND HE KNEW WHAT THE ANSWERS TO GIVE.

HAD I SEEN THAT GUY? I WOULDN'T HAVE. I WOULDN'T HAVE PICKED HIM.

HE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ON MY MY RADAR.

WELL, GOING BACK AGAIN WITH WHAT MASON'S PROCESS WAS AND WE TAKE A LOOK AT THE APPLICATION.

AS A GROUP, WE MAKE A CONCISE DECISION AND IF WE'RE ALL MAJORITY, IF WE'RE ALL ON BOARD, THEN WE'RE GOOD TO GO.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, LET'S SAY THAT WE KNEW THE APPLICANT OK, BUT IF THERE WAS ANOTHER APPLICANT THAT WE DID NOT KNOW, THEN WE WOULD NEED TO PROBABLY BRING THEM ALL IN FOR AN INTERVIEW AND AGAIN, GIVE THEM A TIME LIMIT AND OR MAYBE RESTRICT US TO TWO QUESTIONS APIECE TO ASK THE.

I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK IF WE JUST HAVE ONE PERSON, THEY SHOULD STILL COME UP AND MAKE THE LITTLE THREE

[01:00:02]

I THINK MAYBE LET'S JUST HIRE THEM ALL AND THEN LET'S JUST GET RID OF THE ONES WE DON'T LIKE AFTERWARDS.

YEAH, IF THEY EVEN DO LIKE A ONE MINUTE INTRODUCTION, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ANYTHING ELABORATE. THEY DON'T HAVE FIVE MINUTES ON THAT PODIUM IS A LONG TIME TO SAY TO ALL OF THEM WHILE THEY'RE HERE, THANK YOU FOR APPLYING.

WE APPRECIATE THE TIME YOU SPENT ON YOUR QUESTIONS AND WE HOPE YOU WILL CONTINUE TO HELP US SUPPORTERS. MY CONCERN IS I DON'T WANT TO CALL THIS AN INTERVIEW BECAUSE THEN I'M AFRAID THE COUNCIL MEMBER IS GOING TO SEE.

WE NEED TO SEE HOW THAT INTERVIEW PROCESS IS GOING TO WORK.

THAT'S REALLY WHERE I'M TRYING TO COME FROM IS TO SAY, WILL LOOK THIS OVER AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IF WE IF WE WILL VERY LIKELY ASK THEM AFTER THAT TO TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES TO US AT A PUBLICLY AT A MEETING BRIEFLY.

BUT THE INTERVIEW THERE WON'T BE AN INTERVIEW PROCESS.

THE DETERMINATION WILL BE BASED ON WHAT WE THINK OF THESE EXPECTATIONS THAT WOULD EXTEND THE PROCESS IF WE REVIEW IT ONE TIME AND THEN WE DECIDE THAT WE WOULD LIKE THEM TO COME TO INTRODUCE HIM. YES, WE'RE GOING FROM.

BASICALLY, ONE ONE MEETING TO OVER TWO MONTHS.

YES, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S A BAD THING BECAUSE IF WE GET THESE LONG APPLICATIONS THAT WE NEED TO REALLY SIT DOWN AND GO OVER AND TALK ABOUT CONVERSE ABOUT, I DON'T KNOW THAT I WANT TO DO THAT THE SAME NIGHT THAT I'VE GOT PEOPLE STANDING HERE WANT TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES.

I'D KIND OF LIKE TO HEAR WHAT EVERYBODY HAS TO SAY ABOUT THIS AND FEEL LIKE WHETHER WE'VE GOT A CONSENSUS OR WE'RE CLOSE TO IT AND DIDN'T HAVE A MONTH TO SLEEP ON IT.

AND, YOU KNOW, MEET THE PEOPLE HAVE A CUT OFF POINT FOR THE FIRST NIGHT.

WE WE DISCUSS UP TO HERE AND THEN WE STOP AND THEN THE NEXT MEETING, WE PICK UP HERE AND MOVE FORWARD. YEAH.

YOU KNOW, CAN YOU READ SOMETHING LIKE THAT? OK, SO I'M LISTENING AND I'M MAKING NOTES, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHEN I HEAR CONCERNS.

SO WE GOT THE FIRST TWO PARTS DOWN.

IT'S ONLY THE THIRD PART, WHETHER WE ARE.

AND WE DON'T I HEAR THAT WE SOME OF US DON'T LIKE THE WORD INTERVIEW, SO MAYBE IT IS AN INTRODUCTION, AN INTRODUCTION, AND WHAT YOU COULD DO IS, I MEAN, BECAUSE P&Z COMMISSIONERS, YOU CAN DISCUSS THEM WITHIN A CLOSED SESSION.

THEY ARE ONE OF THE ONES THAT YOU CAN DO THAT YOU CAN'T INTERVIEW THEM WITHIN A CLOSED SESSION, BUT YOU CAN DISCUSS THEM WITHIN A CLOSED SESSION SO YOU ARE ALLOWED THAT OPTION.

SO YOU COULD I MEAN, JUST BECAUSE THEY COME HERE AND YOU LOOK AT THEIR APPLICATIONS AND THEY INTRODUCE THEMSELVES DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION THAT NIGHT.

YOU COULD HAVE THAT PROCESS TO HAVE THEM FILL OUT THE ESSAYS.

YOU ALL LOOK AT THOSE.

WE HAVE A CLOSED SESSION.

YOU TALK ABOUT THEM AFTER THEY'VE INTRODUCED THEMSELVES, AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO THINK ABOUT IT NEXT MONTH. YOU'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.

THE ONLY TIME THAT WOULD BE A PROBLEM IS IF WE HAD A BUNCH OF PEOPLE THAT WERE NOT ON THE COMMISSION AND WE HAD TO FILL THEM QUICKLY, BUT WE COULD HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING TO BRING BACK AND DO THAT.

IF THAT'S OKAY WITH ME, THAT'S OK.

IF WE'RE IF WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THEM TO HAVE AN INTRODUCTION TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES BRIEFLY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS.

THAT'S OKAY KNOWING THAT WE THEN HAVE.

IN THE NEXT MONTH'S MEETING TO GO OVER THE APPLICATIONS AND TO EVALUATE THAT COMPARED TO THE WAY THEY PRESENTED THEMSELVES, THAT'S OK WITH ME.

BUT I THINK SPREADING THE DECISION OVER TO MEETINGS FOR THAT PURPOSE, WHATEVER ORDER IT COMES IN, IT'S PROBABLY NOT A BAD THING.

NOBODY CAN ACCUSE US OF NOT HAVING REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT IT, AND WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT GETTING PRESSURED INTO A CORNER OF A CLOCK TO FEEL LIKE WE'VE GOT TO MAKE THIS DECISION TONIGHT. WELL, YOU'RE GOING TO RECEIVE THE APPLICATIONS IN THE PACKET, SO YOU'LL HAVE ALL THOSE TO BE THINKING ABOUT BEFOREHAND.

AND SO IF YOU JUST WANT TO HAVE THEM COME UP AND MAKE AN INTRODUCTION AND SLEEP ON IT FOR A MONTH AND THEN COME BACK AND DO IT, YOU COULD DO THAT THEN TOO.

SO I THINK IF WE'RE OUTLINING A PROCESS, THEN THE MAIN THING IS TO SAY, COUNSEL, WE'RE GOING TO USE THESE GENERAL QUESTIONS TO ASK FOR ESSAYS.

THOSE WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE PACKET.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE FOLKS COME IN, GIVE US AN INTRODUCTION.

AND THEN NEXT MONTH WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND MAKE A DECISION.

WE'RE NOT. IT'S NOT A POINT SYSTEM, IT'S THIS WE JUST MAKE THE FINAL DECISION AND WE SEND THAT TO THE COUNCIL AND WE CAN GIVE THEM THE APPLICATIONS FOR THEM TO LOOK OVER TOO AND ... LET THEM DO WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO.

WHY NOT? AND I'M OK, SO WE'RE GOING TO GET RID OF THE POINT SYSTEM.

WE'RE GOING TO REDO THE THE PROCESS.

BUT AFTER WE GO THROUGH THIS INTRODUCTION AND I LIKE THE IDEA OF TELLING THEM, YOU KNOW, WE'LL BE BACK IN CONTACT WITH YOU.

THANK YOU FOR COMING IN.

LOVE EVERY ONE OF YOU.

BUT I THINK WAITING ANOTHER 30 DAYS IS GOING TO BE TOO LONG.

I'D LIKE TO SEE THE PROCESS.

MAYBE IN A FOLLOWING WEEK, WE CAN MAKE A PHONE CALL.

[01:05:02]

I DON'T MIND HAVING A SPECIAL MEETING.

DO I THINK A MONTH AWAY THIS LONG TO? I AGREE WITH CECIL THERE, BUT I THINK THAT WE'RE GETTING EVERYTHING ON THE TABLE AND I THINK IT'S STARTING TO COME TOGETHER.

AND I THINK WE'RE FINALLY FEELING BETTER ABOUT GETTING RID OF THE POINTS AND KIND OF AN EASIER PROCESS BECAUSE LET ME TELL YOU, THAT WAS A STRUGGLE AND WE ALL KNOW THAT.

I MEAN, MASON WASN'T BACK THERE IN THE BAG, BUT YOU COULD UNDERSTAND.

BUT I WANT TO TELL YOU, IT WASN'T ALL THAT PLEASANT ALL THE TIME OUT HERE, EITHER.

THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS.

HAVE YOU JUST BEEN THROUGH THIS? AND I DON'T WANT TO FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TO MAKE THE DECISION THAN THAT, THAT THEY INTRODUCE THEMSELVES? YEAH, IT'S NOT GOOD TO HAVE THEM SITTING THERE GOING, OR THEY CAN PICK ME LIKE YOU BETTER THAN ME.

THAT'S JUST NOT GOOD.

WE NEED TO MAKE THE DECISION AT A DIFFERENT MEETING.

BUT I WOULD HAVE HAD THEM.

BUT I THINK THAT THANKING THEM FOR COMING IN AND GIVING AN INTRODUCTION AND TELLING THEM THAT WE'LL NOTIFY THEM BY PHONE AND NOT BY MAIL, BUT BY PHONE.

AND I THINK EACH APPLICANT SHOULD RECEIVE A PHONE CALL, WHETHER IT BE FROM ME OR DEDRA OR WHOEVER. BUT EACH APPLICANT GETS A PHONE CALL AND WE THANK THEM AGAIN AND, YOU KNOW, SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY LIKE YOU.

YOU KNOW, YOU'RE HIRED.

CITY COUNCIL FINAL APPROVAL.

YEAH. YOU WERE RECOMMENDED.

YOU ARE YOUR RECOMMENDED.

AND WE'LL WAIT FOR WHAT CITY COUNCIL SAYS NOW.

NICE AND QUICK. DO YOU RECOMMEND TO HAVE THE NEXT MEETING TO HAVE IT MAKE THE DECISION THAT NIGHT? I MEAN, I MEAN, NOT THAT THEY'VE ALL TALKED YET AGAIN.

MAYBE THERE WERE JUST TWO PEOPLE THERE AND WE ALL KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.

MAYBE WE CAN MAKE THE DECISION THAT NIGHT.

YEAH, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO CODIFY ALL OF THIS.

I THINK IF WE'VE GOT A WHOLE LOT OF THINKING TO DO AND PEOPLE ARE GOING ON VACATIONS THAT THEY MAY HAVE TO JUST WAIT TILL THE NEXT MEETING.

BUT ON THE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN TALK ABOUT AFTER THIS IS OVER AND AFTER THE MEETING WHERE THIS HAPPENED IS OVER AND WE SAY, OKAY, I THINK I'LL BE READY TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING A WEEK FROM NOW.

ANYBODY BE THERE A WEEK NOW AND WE'LL MAKE THE DECISION AT THAT SPECIAL MEETING ON PAPER, OK? AND I JUST DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BUILD IT INTO THE PROCESS SO THAT IT'S CODIFIED.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US PERSONALLY.

AS FOR PATRICIA TO COME UP WITH ALL THE STUFF SHE'S LISTENED TO AND SEE SO WE CAN POINT FINGERS PRESENT THIS NEW PROPOSAL, A NEW PROCESS SO THAT WE APPROVE IT, AND ONCE WE APPROVE IT, I WANT IT TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND SAID THIS IS WHAT THEY'VE COME UP WITH.

WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU APPROVE IT, IF YOU APPROVE IT, THEN WE WILL PROCEED.

WE WILL NOT PROCEED TRYING TO FILL THIS SPOT UNTIL YOU HAVE APPROVED IT.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, YOU MAKE ONE UP.

WELL, AND THAT'S WHAT WE DID.

MASON, JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE WITH THE THE FIRST PROCESS, WE BROUGHT IT TO THEM FIRST TO GET THEM TO SIGN OFF.

AND JUST LIKE YOU GUYS ARE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION, THEY WENT BACK AND FORTH.

YOU COULDN'T GET THEM ALL TO AGREE ON EVERY POINT.

BUT THEN THEY FINALLY DECIDED TO TAKE A VOTE AND IT WAS MAJORITY RULE.

SO WAS THAT FOR THE THE MOST RECENT FORM WE USED, THAT WAS FOR THE ONE THAT HAD THE PERCENTAGE THAT IF THEY HAD APPROVED THAT, SO THEY DID.

NO, I THOUGHT YOU MEANT THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION, ONE THAT WE USED THAT THEY.

I MEAN, WE MADE OUR RECOMMENDATION, AND YOU MEAN THE PROCESS AND THE METHODOLOGY, YES, THEY DID APPROVE THAT.

THERE WERE TWO THAT REALLY DIDN'T LIKE IT, BUT THERE ARE THE FIVE VOTED YES.

AND THEY MAY GO THROUGH THAT AGAIN, BUT IT'S IT'S LIKELY YOU'VE GOT TO GIVE THEM THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE THE PROCEDURE THAT WE ARE ADOPTING FOR THEM TO APPROVE BEFORE WE MIGHT GO. YES.

IF THEY'RE GOING TO.

YOU KNOW, SO YES, THE PROCEDURES, OKAY, AND THEN TWO MONTHS LATER, NO, WE DON'T LIKE YOU IF THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT AGAIN, THAT'S JUST POLITICS.

SO ARE WE GOING TO MOVE THE MEETING A LITTLE BIT FURTHER ON FASTER? WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THE SAME QUESTIONS THAT WHAT WE'VE GOT RIGHT NOW OR ARE WE GOING TO CHANGE THOSE QUESTIONS? DO THE MODIFIED THAT PATRICIA'S TALKED ABOUT THAT INCLUDE THE SUGGESTIONS THAT FROM WILL AND TERRY? OK, ALL RIGHT.

SO WE'VE GOT THAT DOWN.

HOW LONG ARE YOU GOING TO PUT ON THE APPLICATION THAT IT'S GOOD FOR? SO SAID, YOU GUYS DIDN'T YOU GUYS SAY YOU WANTED THE APPLICATIONS TO BE AVAILABLE FOR A YEAR? THAT SOUNDS GOOD TO ME, BUT.

I THINK WE GOT TO PUT SOMETHING SOME LENGTH OF TIME, WHAT I WOULD THINK.

[01:10:05]

WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT, PATRICIA? WELL, I GUESS MY.

TYPICALLY THAT'S MY EXPERIENCE IS THAT WHEN YOU'RE DOING THIS ONE TIME OF YEAR, YOU'RE KEPT THROUGH THE YEARS AND YOU PULL FROM THOSE.

THE ONLY ISSUE I WOULD SEE WAS LIKE WITH MY ONE EXAMPLE OF MY GENTLEMAN.

AND EVERY TIME THE POOR GUY GOT CALLED BACK IN BECAUSE HE WAS ONE OF THE ONES WHOSE APPLICATIONS WERE STILL PENDING, AND I ALWAYS FELT BAD BECAUSE NOTHING HAD CHANGED.

SO USUALLY YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LITTLE CLOSER RACE THAN THAT.

SO I MEAN, YOU CAN KEEP THEM.

YOU CAN ADVERTISE FOR MORE IF YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH.

BUT I MEAN, THE THING ABOUT IF YOU KEEP IT FOR A YEAR, DOES THAT MEAN YOU'RE NOT GOING TO LET ANYBODY ELSE APPLY WHEN YOU HAVE A VACANCY FOR THAT YEAR? NO, THAT SHOULDN'T BE. OKAY.

SO WE'LL KEEP THEM WORKING TO KEEP THE OLD ONES.

BUT THEN WE'RE GOING TO STILL LEAVE IT OPEN.

LIKE, WHAT IS IT? THIRTY DAYS, DEDRA? IS THAT WHAT WE DO NOW? ONCE WE HAVE A YES, OK, SO WE'LL KEEP THE OLD ONES FOR A YEAR BECAUSE AFTER A YEAR, PEOPLE MIGHT NOT, YOU KNOW, CIRCUMSTANCES OF MY CHANGE OF ADVERTISING FOR THE NEW INSTITUTION, SOMEBODY WILL NEED TO CALL THOSE PEOPLE BACK AND SAY, HEY, ARE YOU STILL INTERESTED? YOU'RE STILL INTERESTED? YES.

THEY'VE MOVED TO NEBRASKA.

WELL, WHO DOES THAT? WHO WOULD BE IN CHARGE OF DOING THAT? THAT WOULD BE THE STAFF, THE STAFF, WHOEVER THE BORDER COMMISSION, THE SUPPORT FOR THAT WOULD BE. OK.

SO YEAH, SO WE COULD KEEP THEM FOR A YEAR.

AND THEN DURING THAT, WE'LL STILL KEEP THE 30 DAYS SO WE CAN GET OTHER PEOPLE IN CASE THEY'RE INTERESTED IN APPLYING.

AND THAT WAY, YOU DON'T CUT ANYBODY OFF FOR A WHOLE YEAR JUST BECAUSE THEY MISSED A DEADLINE TO APPLY. DEDRA, ARE YOU OK WITH THAT? YES, I'M FINE.

OK, WELL, WE'LL TRY TO GET IT WRITTEN UP AND BRING IT FORWARD FOR YOU GUYS AT YOUR NEXT MEETING. OK.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I JUST WANT TO GET THROWN OUT THERE LIKE TERRY AND WILL FOR PUTTING ALL THAT TOGETHER? YEAH, VERY MUCH, YEAH.

AND MASON HAS SOME REALLY GOOD POINTS.

ABSOLUTELY. HEY, I THOUGHT EVERYBODY DID.

EVERYBODY HAD GREAT POINTS.

AND THAT'S WHY WE WORK SO GOOD BECAUSE WE'RE DIVERSE.

I'LL TRY AND GET RID OF ME.

YEAH. I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE.

OK. DEDRA THEN WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT WHATEVER WE PUT.

WHATEVER YOU CAN PUT TOGETHER AT OUR NEXT MEETING.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

OK. GOING TO DO IT? ALL RIGHT. WELL, IT'LL BE PATRICIA AND I WORKING TOGETHER.

WHEN WE GET IT DONE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND SEND IT OUT.

SO YOU ALL CAN BE THINKING ABOUT IT BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.

YEAH. ITEM 4, DEDRA, AS FAR AS NEW AND FUTURE BUSINESS ITEMS RIGHT NOW,

[ITEM 4: Discussion of future agenda new business items, staff requests and potential special called meeting and/or workshop requests:]

SO HOPEFULLY WE'LL KNOW WE'LL HAVE A BETTER SENSE THEN.

WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO DIFFERENT FOLKS, VARIOUS FOLKS ABOUT ANNEXATION, ABOUT NEW DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS.

WE'LL SEE SO THOSE MOVE FORWARD.

YES. AND WE'LL KEEP YOU POSTED.

ARE YOU READY FOR A MOTION TO ADJOURN? ARE YOU WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THAT LAST LINE THERE? IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE POINTING AT? YEAH, IT'S THIS INTERVIEW, HIS INTERVIEW CANDIDATES.

WELL, WE DON'T HAVE ANY INTERVIEWS OR SOMETHING.

AND THAT WAS A LEFTOVER.

THAT'S AN OVERSIGHT.

JUST DISREGARD THAT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? I JUST WANTED TO SAY I JUST WANTED TO SAY WHOEVER'S TRANSCRIBING THESE MEETING NOTES LAST LAST MONTH'S MEETING WAS A LONG MEETING.

THERE WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION.

THEY DID A REALLY, REALLY GOOD JOB.

I READ THROUGH THE WHOLE THING AND I THOUGHT THEY, WHOEVER IS TRANSCRIBING THAT DOES A REALLY GOOD JOB, VERY GOOD LIKE CHERYL'S.

THAT'S TRUE. YES, SHERYL, THAT WAS REALLY WELL DONE.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

SO MOVED AND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

ABSOLUTELY AYE. AYE.

MEETING'S ADJOURNED AT 6:45.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.