[I) Call Meeting to Order and Roll Call]
          [II) Citizen Comment Period with City Council]
          [00:24:21]
          OF PAID VACATION THAT YOU CAN KEEP. AND WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU 32. AND IF YOU TAKE 32 PLUS 
          [00:24:28]
20, HOW MANY WEEKS DO YOU HAVE? 52 AND THE AGREEMENT WAS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A YEAR'S SALARY. 
          [00:24:36]
SO THE 52 WEEKS TO ME IS NOW THE SAME AS A YEAR'S SALARY. SO I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND FROM THE 
          [00:24:44]
COUNCIL PERSPECTIVE WHY THEY'RE TRYING TO CIRCUMVENT THE LAW THAT IS TRIGGERED BY 
          [00:24:52]
TERMINATION AND IS FOCUSED ON SEVERANCE WHEN AT THE END OF THE DAY, ALL THIS LOOKS TO ME TO BE VERY MUCH THE SAME. IS THAT A QUESTION? NO, THAT'S MY CONCERN. SO I YIELD THE FLOOR 
          [00:25:07]
IN CASE ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY QUESTIONS. WE HAD WE HAD NO INTENTION OF TRYING TO CIRCUMVENT THE LAW. WE WERE UPDATING HIS CONTRACT APPROPRIATELY. WE HAVE NEVER MADE ANY EFFORT TO CIRCUMVENT THE LAW ON THIS COUNCIL, NO MATTER WHAT. SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT ON THE COUNCIL MAY THINK WE WERE DOING. AN UPDATE. ACCORDING TO THE LEGISLATION, IT WAS APPROPRIATE NOTHING TO PROHIBIT WHAT WE WERE DOING AND WE FELT AS A COUNCIL THAT WHAT WE DID WAS APPROPRIATE. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER DARBY OKAY. SO LET ME JUST GO AHEAD AND JUST TALK ABOUT THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM. JUST COME OUT AND SAY IT. THOSE WHO ARE BRINGING THIS AGENDA ITEM, ARE WE TRYING TO SAY TO BRIAN AND AMY THAT WE ARE WANTING TO TERMINATE THEIR CONTRACT? OR ARE WE TRYING TO SAY YOU'RE FIRED? THERE IS NO REQUEST FOR TERMINATION. IT'S LITERALLY JUST AN UNDERSTANDING OF GETTING READY FOR REVIEW. TIME COMING UP. OKAY. 
          ORIGINALLY IS MAY. AND THEN LOOKING AT THE CONTRACTS AND LOOKING AT THE SORRY AMENDMENTS AND THEN SEEING HOW THE STATE LEGISLATION CHANGED FROM 12 MONTHS TO 20 WEEKS. AND WE HAD NOW WE KNOW BECAUSE WE WEREN'T HERE. WE HAD AN ATTORNEY AND EXECUTIVE WHEN YOU GUYS DISCUSSED IT. SO IS WHAT LOOKS LIKE A CIRCUMVENTION OF THE LAW. WAS THAT A LEGAL MOVE? WAS IT ALLOWED BY LAW, OR WAS IT SOMETHING THAT INADVERTENTLY WAS NOT ALLOWED TO BE DONE? THESE ARE QUESTIONS THAT WE JUST KIND OF WANT TO UNDERSTAND SINCE WE WEREN'T PART OF THAT. 
          IT WASN'T ON CAMERA FOR THE WHOLE WORLD TO BE ABLE TO SEE. THAT'S FAIR TO ANSWER. SO NO, THIS IS NOT A REQUEST OF TERMINATION OF ANYONE'S CONTRACT, OKAY? JUST AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE AMENDMENTS AND THE CHANGES AND HOW AND WHY. OKAY. BECAUSE YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HOW THIS IS BEING PERCEIVED, THOUGH, BEING BROUGHT UP IN THIS KIND OF SETTING AS FAR AS WHATEVER THE ISSUES, BECAUSE I KNOW WHEN YOU TERMINATE A CONTRACT, IF IT'S WHETHER IT'S A FIRE, IF YOU'RE TRYING TO TERMINATE SOMEBODY, OF COURSE THEY'D HAVE TO EITHER DO SOMETHING ILLEGAL OR SOMETHING THAT'S BASED WITHOUT THEIR CONTRACT OR SOME FOURTH. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE AGENDA ITEM ITSELF WHERE WE STAND ON THIS. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE, MAYOR, BECAUSE YES, YOU WERE NOT INVOLVED WITH THOSE. I KNOW THAT YOU ARE ALSO INVOLVED. WHEN WE BROUGHT HIM ON BOARD AND WE WERE HAVING THOSE INTERVIEWS AT THE TIME FOR, FOR CITY MANAGER. SO I JUST WANT TO JUST KIND OF CUT TO THE CHASE TO SEE WHERE WHERE WE'RE AT ON THIS. SO THAT WAY, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WAS COMING DOWN THIS WAY ABOUT THESE TWO INDIVIDUALS RIGHT HERE. SO I JUST WANTED TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING FROM YOU FOR BECAUSE I KNOW YOU WERE NOT HERE, OR THREE OR 3 OR 3. I'M SORRY. YOU THREE, AS FAR AS THE DIRECTION ON THIS CONVERSATION ITSELF AND AND WHAT'S THE OVERALL END GOAL THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THEIR TWO CONTRACTS? SO WE CAN JUST COME OUT AND JUST BE FAIR TO THEM AND RESPECT BOTH OF THEM FOR WHAT THEY STAND FOR. AND BECAUSE, AGAIN, WHEN WE'RE STARTING TO TALK ABOUT PEOPLE'S CONTRACTS, PEOPLE'S SALARIES ON A PERSONAL LEVEL, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THEIR DAILY LIVES, THEIR LIVELIHOOD, OKAY? YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THEIR LIVELIHOOD, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THEIR FAMILIES. AND SO IT DOES GET CONCERNING. IT DOES CAN GET A LITTLE CONCERNING ON THAT POINT. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE RESPECTFULLY IN THIS CONVERSATION, WHAT'S THE OVERALL END GOAL. YES, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE BUDGET SEASON COMING UP VERY, VERY SOON. IT'S GOING TO BE VERY CHALLENGING SEASON. I KNOW BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A LOT OF ISSUES. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF AGAIN, WATER RATES ARE GOING TO BE COMING UP AGAIN ON THE CONVERSATIONS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO JUST COME OUT AND JUST BE FAIR TO EVERYBODY. YOU THREE, INCLUDING THEM. WHAT IS THE OVERALL GOAL OF THIS CONVERSATION OF WHERE WE'RE GOING AT? SO THAT WAY WE CAN BE ON THE SAME PAGE IN KNOWING WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. AND I NEED TO MAKE VERY CLEAR AND PUT ON THE RECORD. I USE THE EXACT SAME LANGUAGE THAT YOU GUYS USE TO GIVE THEM A RAISE. SO IF IT WASN'T CONCERNING, THEN THEN WHY DOES IT CONCERN YOU NOW? ALSO, THIS IS LITERALLY THE TIME FOR US TO BE LOOKING AND REVIEWING PER HIS CONTRACT. PER HIS CONTRACT, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AT HIS ANNUAL REVIEW AND NOBODY'S ARGUING THAT. WELL, THEN WE HAVE PEOPLE COMING UP HERE THINKING WE'RE GOING TO FIRE AMY AND WE'RE GOING TO FIRE BRIAN. AND I CALLED BRIAN AND HAD THIS CONVERSATION, SO IT WOULD NOT BE TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT. EXACTLY. BUT THIS IS 
          [00:30:03]
WHY WE DO HAVE THESE IMPORTANT CONVERSATIONS. LIKE YOU ALWAYS PREACH TO A LOT OF US ABOUT BEING OPEN TO THE TRANSPARENCY OF THE PEOPLE. THIS IS PERFECT SETTING FOR IT. WHAT YOU'RE DOING RIGHT NOW, IT'S EXACTLY THAT'S WHY IT'S ON HERE. AND SO THAT'S WHY THAT'S PERFECT. AND THAT WAY WE'RE NOT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AND WE'RE BRINGING IT FORWARD IN RESPECT TO EVERYBODY. SO THAT WAY EVERYBODY IS INFORMED OF WHY WE'RE BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND THE OVERALL. AND YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT, MAYOR, ALL THREE OF YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE GOT TO THE DECISION WHERE WE WERE. BUT I THINK NOW MOVING FORWARD, YOU KIND OF SEE WHERE WE'RE AT. AND I RESPECT YOUR QUESTIONS AND YOUR CONCERNS ON THAT. OKAY, MA'AM, I APPRECIATE IT. YES, MA'AM. AND I WANT TO SAY I LED WITH, WHY DID YOU GUYS VOTE THAT WAY? LIKE WHAT? WHAT CHANGED? AND THE FIRST THING THAT WAS SAID WAS THE LAW. THE LAW CHANGED. 
          AND WHEN PREVIOUS MAYOR MITCHELL CAME OUT TO TAKE HIS VOTE, HE SAID HE IS GOING TO MAKE WHOLE. AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS CIRCUMVENTING A LAW. IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT. WELL, IF YOU SAY THE REASON WHY YOU CHANGED IT WAS STATE LAW INTERPRETATION THAT WHAT HE SAID, WELL, YOU TAKE THAT. PLUS THE ADDING UP THE WEEKS AND FIGURING ALL THAT OUT, THAT'S TO ME THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. AND SO. WELL, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THINGS LOOK LIKE, THIS LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE TARGETING OUR STAFF. IT DOES BECAUSE I'M HAVING A CONVERSATION OUT IN THE OPEN AND NOT BEHIND THE BACK. YEAH, IT LOOKS PUNITIVE. YOU COULD HAVE CALLED ME AT ANY POINT AND ASKED THESE QUESTIONS. YOU COULD HAVE EMAILED AT ANY POINT AND ASK THESE QUESTIONS AS AN AGENDA ITEM FOR THREE OF US. I CANNOT HAVE ANOTHER FOUR. I CAN'T HAVE A FOURTH PERSON TO BE AN AGENDA ITEM. BUT WE ALL HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO ASK US ABOUT PRIOR DIRECTION. I'M ALLOWED TO TALK TO TWO OTHER MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AND I HAD ALREADY DONE THAT. 
          YOU'RE ALLOWED TO ASK ABOUT PRIOR DIRECTION. I'D LOVE TO SEE THAT THAT THAT EXCEPTION IN THE LAW WHERE I'M ALLOWED TO ASK YOU EXCEPTION IF THERE IF THERE'S ANY WAY THAT THIS DOESN'T LOOK LIKE RETRIBUTION FOR HAVING A AN ITEM PUT ON EXECUTIVE FOR CALLING YOU OUT, THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT DOES YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT LOOKS LIKE. THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. 
          AND I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT THINKS SO, BECAUSE MY PHONE HAS BEEN BLOWN UP ALL WEEKEND LONG WITH QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS. WELL, THEY COULD HAVE CALLED ME. THEY COULD HAVE CALLED US. WE'RE ALL AVAILABLE. AREN'T YOU THE ONE THAT JUST SAID, IF YOU WANT TO KNOW, YOU CAN CONTACT US. IT WAS ALREADY AN ITEM AT THAT POINT. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS? SO I'M JUST GOING TO CALL THE BS FOR WHAT IT IS, THE INTENTION BEHIND EVERYTHING THAT YOU ALL HAVE BEEN DOING. Y'ALL HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR TIME SHEETS, PAYROLL STUBS, VACATION EXPLANATIONS WHY SOME SORT OF SICK LEAVE, YOU KNOW, WAS TAKEN HERE, WASN'T TAKEN THERE WAS DOCUMENTED HERE, WASN'T DOCUMENTED HERE, OR WAS DOCUMENTED HERE. ALL OF THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS ADDING THIS TO THE AGENDA, CREATING A HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT FOR OUR STAFF AND NOT JUST OUR EXECUTIVE TEAM. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE ENTIRE ORGANIZATION, ALL OF THAT THAT IS FELT, THAT IS FELT BY THE SHENANIGANS THAT ARE BEING PLAYED. AND IT IS NOT A PROPER USE OF THE RESIDENTS TIME. IT IS NOT A PROPER USE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS. TO ME, IT'S EGREGIOUS, AND IT'S ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS THAT YOU ARE DOING THIS TO OUR CITY STAFF, WHICH HAS BEEN NOTHING BUT WELCOMING. I KNOW THAT FROM MY EXPERIENCE, I'M BRAND NEW TO THIS. I HAD NO PRIOR RELATIONSHIP TO OUR CITY STAFF WHATSOEVER, AND I CAN TELL YOU FROM THE MOMENT THAT COUNCIL MEMBER MEDINA AND I EXPERIENCED ONBOARDING STAFF HAS BEEN NOTHING BUT RESPONSIVE, SUPPORTIVE, HELPFUL, AND NOT TRYING TO PUT THEIR OWN WANTS ONTO WHAT IT IS THAT WE WANT. 
          AS STAFF, WE ARE CONSTANTLY ASKED, WHAT DO YOU WANT? COUNCIL MEMBER WHAT DO YOU WANT? LIKE ALL WE WANT TO DO IS MAKE YOU HAPPY. WE'RE HERE TO SERVE YOU AND TO SERVE THE RESIDENTS. 
          SO JUST TELL US, GIVE US THE DIRECTION AND INSTEAD OF HAVING A CONVERSATION THAT ASKS THESE QUESTIONS, INSTEAD OF MAKING A PHONE CALL TO TO BRIAN OR TO AMY OR SITTING DOWN WITH THE BOTH OF THEM, Y'ALL DECIDED TO PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA. WHEN WE ALL KNOW THAT WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM ALL THE TIME TO CLARIFY QUESTIONS, IT'S THAT SIMPLE. SO YOU CANNOT SIT HERE AND LIE TO US AND TELL US THAT IT IS NOT YOUR INTENT TO TRY TO TERMINATE OUR STAFF, THAT IT IS BLATANTLY OBVIOUS TO EVERYONE. WHY DO YOU THINK WE HAVE MEMBERS OF OF RESIDENTS COMING UP AND SPEAKING OUT ABOUT THIS? AND THAT'S BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT MORE. 
          IF YOU THINK IT'S THAT THAT'S A LOT. THERE'S A LOT MORE COMING BECAUSE THIS IS RIDICULOUS. 
          THIS IS NOT A CIRCUS. THIS IS ACTUAL GOVERNANCE. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE UPSET THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE ALL THE POWER THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE, BUT WE ARE A COUNCIL OF CHECKS AND BALANCES. WE ARE NOT A STRONG MAYOR SYSTEM, AND THERE'S JUST CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO DO, BECAUSE THAT IS NOT WHAT'S PRESCRIBED TO US BY LAW. AND SO I JUST THINK THAT WE WOULD ALL BE DOING OURSELVES A FAVOR IF WE WERE JUST HONEST, IF WE WERE JUST HONEST ABOUT OUR MOTIVATIONS AND WHAT OUR GOALS ARE. I THINK THEY DESERVE THAT 
          [00:35:04]
AS HUMAN BEINGS, BECAUSE THIS IS THEIR LIFE AND THE ACCUSATIONS BEING THROWN AROUND. 
          JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE SOMETHING ALSO DOESN'T MAKE IT ILLEGAL. THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF THAT HAPPENS RIGHT NOW THAT I DON'T LIKE, AND IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ILLEGAL. AND JUST BECAUSE IT'S YOUR PERCEPTION OF THAT, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THAT'S FOUNDED ON ON YOU BEING ACCREDITED ATTORNEY. THERE'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE. THERE'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN THIS AND THE ACCUSATIONS THAT ARE CONSTANTLY BEING THROWN AROUND LIKE VIOLATIONS, CODE, ETHICS, WHATEVER, ALL OF THAT, ALL OF THAT TO ME IS ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING THAT YOU WOULD DO THAT TO ANOTHER HUMAN BEING, ESPECIALLY SOMEONE WHOSE ENTIRE CAREER IS IN DOING THIS. YOU CAN RUIN SOMEONE'S CAREER FOR THEIR LIFETIME BY THROWING AROUND THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE THROWING AROUND. OKAY, IS THAT FOR ME OR IS THAT FOR EVERYBODY? FOR ALL OF Y'ALL? BUT I WAS ALSO LOOKING AT YOU, SO I SAW THAT. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT HOUSE BILL WAS TO BE FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE FOR TAXPAYER FUNDS. AND SO THE LEGISLATURE FELT THAT IT WAS ON THEM IN ORDER TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF SEVERANCE THAT CAN BE PAID WHEN YOU DECIDE TO TERMINATE A CITY OFFICIAL. AND THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THESE CONTRACTS ARE NOT INEXPENSIVE. THEY ARE A GOOD DOLLAR AMOUNT. 
          AND I WONDER HOW MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS EVEN KNEW WHAT WAS IN THE CONTRACT. SO PART OF THIS WAS JUST KIND OF GETTING IT ON ON RECORD WHAT THE THOUGHT PROCESS WAS. YOU KNOW, WHAT THAT CONVERSATION LOOKED LIKE. AND CLEARLY, YOU KNOW, WELL, SO THE STATE'S GOING TO LIMIT WHAT WE CAN PAY YOU OUT IN SEVERANCE, WHICH IS EFFECTIVELY CHANGING YOUR CONTRACT. SO WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO AROUND THAT AND WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU, YOU KNOW, 32 WEEKS OF VACATION TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. I FIND THAT TO BE VERY DISINGENUOUS. REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE INTENT WAS, IT EFFECTIVELY CIRCUMVENTS LAW. AND I FIND THAT TO BE PROBLEMATIC FOR A LEGISLATIVE BODY TO GO AROUND WHAT THE LAW SAYS IN ORDER TO SAVE TAXPAYER FUNDS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT THIS IS ALL BEING INTERPRETED BY PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT CREDIT ATTORNEYS, WHO ARE APPLYING THEIR OWN PERSONAL INTERPRETATION TO FIT THEIR OWN NARRATIVE, TO FIT THEIR CAMPAIGN MESSAGING OF DELIVERING AHEAD TO THEIR VOTERS, TO THE PEOPLE THAT SUPPORTED THEM. AND THIS IS NOT BEING INTERPRETED BY SOMEONE WHO IS AN UNBIASED LEGAL EXPERT IN THIS. SO THERE MAY BE THE APPEARANCE AND YOU MAY FEEL THAT THERE'S AN APPEARANCE, AND THAT'S A VALID THING TO FEEL, BUT IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT IS ACTUALLY LEGALLY FOUNDED. OKAY. SO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS CALL A POINT OF ORDER. AND THE NEXT TIME SOMEBODY MAKES AN ACCUSATION, I'M GOING TO CALL ANOTHER POINT OF ORDER. YOU MAY NOT GET TO TELL US HOW WE FEEL. AND OUR RULES OF COUNCIL SPECIFICALLY STATE YOU CANNOT MAKE ACCUSATIONS INFERRED OR OTHERWISE. SO DON'T SIT UP HERE. AND PLEASE DON'T SIT UP HERE AND TELL US WHY WE'RE DOING SOMETHING. WE ALL SPENT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME RESEARCHING AND LOOKING. IT STARTED OFF BECAUSE, AS I SAID BEFORE, WE ARE OBLIGATED TO LOOK AT THE CONTRACT EVERY YEAR. NOW, MAYBE YOU GUYS DON'T WANT TO. MAYBE YOU GUYS DON'T CARE. 
          BUT THAT'S NOT EVERYBODY SITTING UP HERE. SOME OF US DO CARE. SOME OF US DO WANT TO LOOK AT IT. THERE WILL COME A TIME WHEN BRIAN LANGLEY RETIRES OR DOESN'T WANT TO STAY. OR MAYBE IT'S JUST TIME FOR A CHANGE. I DON'T KNOW. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE IS LEGAL. CAN I CALL FOR A POINT OF ORDER? MAYOR? I DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO CALL A POINT OF ORDER. THAT'S ONLY FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ASK OF THE MAYOR. 
          NOT CORRECT THE MAYOR RULES ON THE POINTS OF ORDER. YEAH, BUT IN THE IN THE EVENT THAT IT IS A MAYOR, THEN THE COUNCIL RULES WHAT THE WAY THAT TYPICALLY THIS WORKS UNDER RULES OF PROCEDURE IS THAT A MAYOR WOULD TELL SOMEBODY THAT THEY'RE OUT OF ORDER AND THEY CAN'T SPEAK, AND THEN SOMEBODY ELSE COULD CALL THE POINT OF ORDER IF THEY DISAGREED. RIGHT. SO WHEN THE MAYOR DOES IT, THEN THIS IS WHAT WE JUST DID THIS, DIDN'T WE? I SWEAR WE JUST WENT THROUGH THIS. AND I CALLED THE POINT OF ORDER. AND THEN YOU ALLOWED THE COUNCIL TO MAKE THE DECISION. CORRECT. BUT TECHNICALLY, WHAT YOU SHOULD SAY IS THAT YOU'RE OUT OF ORDER AND YOU NEED TO STOP SPEAKING. YOU SHOULDN'T ACTUALLY CALL A POINT OF ORDER BECAUSE THE POINT OF ORDER IS A QUESTION. OKAY, THEN YOU ARE OUT OF ORDER THEN. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. SO AGAIN, WE WANTED WE DIDN'T WANT THIS TO BE OUT HERE US WE WANTED TO BE IN THE BACK TALKING TO THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS AND HAVING A CONVERSATION. I WAS HOPING IT WOULDN'T BE LONGER THAN 10 OR 15 MINUTES. AND YET HERE IT IS 45 MINUTES LATER. 
          AND SO APOLOGIES TO EVERYBODY WHO'S HAD TO SIT AND WITNESS THIS. THIS IS NOT A COMFORTABLE SITUATION. NOT FOR BRIAN, NOT FOR AMY, NOT FOR ANYBODY UP HERE. I THINK IT GOT A LITTLE HOSTILE, AND I WAS HOPING THAT IT WOULDN'T BE SO HOSTILE IN THE BACK. I MEAN, I KNOW WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY PLACED ON THE AGENDA, SAME VERBIAGE, SAME LANGUAGE LAST YEAR, WE CERTAINLY DIDN'T HAVE THIS UPROAR. AND I WAS HOPING WE WOULDN'T HAVE IT AGAIN THIS 
          [00:40:01]
YEAR. BUT HERE WE THINK WE'D ALL BE THE SAME PEOPLE UP HERE AS WE ARE BACK. THERE. WE ARE. 
          I DON'T IT DOESN'T BOTHER ME. YEAH, BUT WHAT I'M JUST SAYING IS WE CAN BICKER. LIKE I'M FEELING LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE PARENTS AND WE DON'T WANT TO ARGUE IN FRONT OF, YOU KNOW, THE LITTLE ONES. I DON'T WANT BRIAN TO FEEL LIKE HE'S NOT WANTED. I WANTED TO GET A GOOD IDEA OF THIS CONTRACT. THAT AND I HAVE EVERY SINGLE RIGHT TO DO THAT. ALL OF US DO. AND WE SHOULD NOT BE MADE TO FEEL GUILTY OR TO WEAPONIZE AGENDA ITEMS TO SAY, HEY, YOU DON'T LIKE STAFF. AND WHEN I HEAR THINGS LIKE EVERYONE, I DON'T KNOW WHO EVERYONE IS BECAUSE I HAVE A GREAT RELATIONSHIP WITH A LOT OF STAFF. SO WHEN EVERYBODY'S SCARED OR EVERYONE IS TERRIFIED OR WHATEVER IT IS THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBERS VERBIAGE YOU WANT TO USE, IT NEEDS TO BE TONED DOWN. NOT EVERYBODY FEELS THAT WAY. YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY. YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR ME. YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR ALL THE STAFF. IT'S A TERM YOU USE FREQUENTLY. IT PROBABLY IS. AND FEEL FREE TO CALL ME OUT. I'M OKAY WITH THAT. I DO HAVE A QUESTION IN REGARDS TO AGENDA ITEM. AMY, WILL YOU REFRESH MY MEMORY ON THE TIMELINE OF WHEN THE CHANGE WAS BROUGHT UP AND WHEN IT TOOK EFFECT? BECAUSE I'M THE CHANGE TO THE LAW DID NOT GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL SEPTEMBER 1ST OF 2025. THIS CONTRACT WAS APPROVED BEFORE THAT. OKAY, SO TO USE THE WORD CIRCUMVENT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE. WELL, I WATCHED THE VIDEO AND MAYOR MITCHELL CAME OUT HERE AND SPECIFICALLY SAID THE YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO DO THIS TO MAKE WHOLE BECAUSE OF THE LAW. AND YOU ALSO SAID IT WAS BECAUSE OF STATE LAW. IT WAS DOING THE RIGHT THING. WELL, IF YOU FEEL LIKE IF YOU WELL, THIS HAS BEEN DISPUTED. OKAY. SO YOU SAY IT'S THE RIGHT THING. THE STATE SAYS, HEY, WE WANT TO CAP IT SO WE DON'T GET TO MAKE THE LAWS, WE JUST GET TO FOLLOW THEM. AND SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT. AND ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS ALL ALLEGED. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS VERY CLEAR AND ON RECORD THAT IT MIGHT BE YOUR INTERPRETATION, BUT THAT IS MERELY IT. IT IS MERELY AN INTERPRETATION BY SOMEONE WHO IS NOT A LEGAL PROFESSIONAL. YEAH. WHAT IS IT? SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT VERY, VERY CLEAR. WHAT ARE YOU SAYING? IS IT YOU SAID IT'S ALLEGED. WHAT IS IT ALLEGED THAT THIS. IT'S MERELY JUST YOUR UNPROFESSIONAL INTERPRETATION THAT THIS WAS MEANT TO CIRCUMVENT THE LAW. 
          THERE IS NOTHING RIGHT NOW THAT SAYS THAT THAT THAT WAS ILLEGAL OR THAT THERE WAS ANYTHING ILLEGALLY DONE, OR IF THAT WAS THE ACTUAL INTENTION OF UPDATING HIS CONTRACT. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT COUNCILMEMBER MCKINNEY SAID. HE SAID IS BECAUSE OF THE LAW. AND MAYOR MITCHELL IN THE VIDEO SAID IT WAS TO MAKE WHOLE BECAUSE OF THE LAW. SO THAT'S NOT ALLEGED. WELL, LET ME TRY TO CLARIFY THIS. MY CONTRACT HAD A 12 MONTH SEVERANCE PROVISION IN IT. MAYOR, YOU VOTED ON THAT WHEN IT CAME FORWARD BACK IN 2023. THE GOAL WAS TO MAKE SURE I STILL HAD THAT 12 MONTH SEVERANCE PROVISION IN MY CONTRACT. IT WAS ARGUABLE THAT IT WOULD BE A PROBLEM POTENTIALLY IN THE FUTURE AFTER THE LAW CHANGED, OF WHETHER OR NOT THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE IF I EVER RECEIVED A PERFORMANCE INCREASE OR PAY INCREASE IN THE FUTURE. SO TO MAKE THAT CLEAR, THE GOAL WAS TO TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE CONTRACT AND TO MAKE IT ABSOLUTELY CLEAR THAT IT SURVIVES ANY CHANGES OF THE LAW, TO ONLY STILL PROVIDE ME WITH THE SAME 12 MONTH SEVERANCE PROVISION THAT I WAS PROMISED WHEN I TOOK THIS POSITION. THAT WAS THE INTENT, THAT WAS THE GOAL, AND THAT WAS THE REASON THAT WE BROUGHT IN OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO TALK TO THE CITY COUNCIL, TO SPECIFICALLY GO THROUGH THAT PROVISION AND MAKE SURE IT WAS DONE THE RIGHT WAY. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT WE DID. SO THERE WAS NO NOTHING THAT WAS DONE INAPPROPRIATELY. IT WAS THE GOAL WAS TO DO IT TO MAKE SURE I WAS GRANDFATHERED AND HAD THE SAME PROVISION WHEN I TOOK THIS POSITION, AND THAT WAS THE ONLY PURPOSE OF THE CHANGE. UNDERSTOOD, UNDERSTOOD. 
          BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THE STATE THOUGHT THAT PAYOUT WOULD HAVE BEEN SHOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT. 
          SO IF NOT FOR THAT LAW, THIS WOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED, IS ALL I'M SAYING. THE STATE MADE THAT CHOICE. NOT US, NOT COUNCIL. THAT WAS A STATE LAW. ANY EXISTING CONTRACT WAS GRANDFATHERED BEFORE THAT LAW. EVEN AFTER THAT LAW PASSED, ANY GRANDFATHERED CONTRACT WAS STILL APPLICABLE. THE OPTIONS WERE TO REWORK THE CONTRACT AS WE DID IT TODAY, THAT YOU'RE SEEING OR TO DO A SEPARATE SEVERANCE AGREEMENT, WHICH MANY CITIES DID THAT WITH THEIR CITY MANAGERS. AND WE TALKED ABOUT THOSE OPTIONS. THE COUNCIL CHOSE TO GO DOWN THIS PATH BECAUSE IT WAS THE SIMPLEST OPTION. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THIS IS ON PAR WITH WHAT IS TYPICAL FOR OTHER CITIES. THIS IS THIS IS WHAT'S TO BE EXPECTED. NOTHING ILLEGAL WAS DONE. IT WAS GRANDFATHERED IN. AND YOU KNOW, I'M GLAD THAT THIS CONVERSATION WAS HAD OUT FRONT BECAUSE I DON'T SEE OUR RESIDENTS AS CHILDREN THAT WE MUST PROTECT. I BELIEVE THAT THEY DESERVE THE FULL RESPONSE AND ATTENTION AND ANSWERS AND HONESTY HONESTLY, THAT WE ARE ABLE TO GIVE THEM. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK INTO 
          [III) Executive Session]
EXECUTIVE SEE, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS AGENDA ITEMS 
          [00:45:02]
A THROUGH D PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT A THROUGH E E A THROUGH E PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS FIVE, FIVE, 1.0755, 1.07255, 1.074. THAT'S IT. ALL RIGHT. IT'S 551.087715551.087. IS THAT DO WE. NO. YOU NEED TO SKIP 074 NOT. OH NO 074. AND WE'RE GOING TO ADD 087. 
          COVID-19 IS MARCH 3RD, 2026. WE ADJOURN THE. OH, YES. YEAH. WELL, I GOT TO SAY THAT ALL THE JUST THE SAME. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. WE'RE GOING TO ADJOURN OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO THAT IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.