Sep 27, 2022 City Council

[Call to Order, Invocation, and Pledge of Allegiance]

[00:00:06]

>> MAYOR: GOOD AFTERNOON.6 P.M.. WE HAVE A FULL COUNCIL AND I CALL THIS SESSION OF THE MIDLOTHIAN CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER. WE HAVE A JOE SIMMONS WHO WILL SAY THE INVOCATION, PLEASE. PUSH THE RED BUTTON.

THANK YOU. >> IF YOU WOULD PRAY WITH ME.

FATHER, GOD, WE PAUSE TONIGHT TO TELL YOU THAT WE LOVE YOU AND WE JUST PRAY THAT YOU WOULD GO AHEAD OF THIS TIME TONIGHT AND THAT YOU WOULD BE IN THE MIDDLE OF ALL OF THE CONVERSATION, THE DISCUSSION, THE DECISIONS. GOD, ULTIMATELY REPRAY FOR OUR R CITY. UNITY IN MIDLOTHIAN, THAT YOUR PRESENCE WOULD BE FELT. GOD, THAT YOU WOULD JUST BE GENEROUS AND KIND WITH THE WISDOM NEEDED FOR THESE DISCUSSIONS AND CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE TAKING PLACE AS WE KNOW THAT THIS COUNCIL SEEKS TO MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS POSSIBLE TO LEAD AND TO GUIDE OUR CITY. SO WE PRAY THAT YOU WOULD JUST TONIGHT GIVE THEM EXTRA AMOUNT OF WISDOM, DISCERNMENT, GOD, FOR THOSE IN THE ROOM HERE TO LISTEN TO SPEAK, GOD THAT WE WOULD ALSO SPEAK WITH LOVE AND WITH KINDNESS AS WELL.

GOD, TO LISTEN TO ALSO JUST BE WILLING TO HEAR YOU SPEAK AS WELL. GOD, WE LOVE YOU, WE THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALLOWING US TO LIVE HERE IN THE CITY, WE PRAY THAT YOU WOULD AGAIN JUST ALLOW US TO FEEL YOUR PRESENCE AND FOUR YOUR PRESENCE TO BE MADE KNOWN ACROSS THE CITY WE LOVE YOU.

IN JESUS NAME WE PRAY, AMEN. >>> TONIGHT WE WILL NOT BE DOING

[2022-410]

PROCLAMATION, WHEREAS THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TOWN WATCH IS SPONSORING UNIQUE NATIONWIDE CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM ON OCTOBER 4TH, 2022 ENTITLED NATIONAL NIGHT OUT AND WHEREAS THE ANNUAL NATIONAL NIGHT OUT PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN TO JOIN FORCES WITH THOUSANDS OF OTHER COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY IN PROMOTING COOPERATION, POLICE COMMUNITY CRIME PREVENTION EFFORTS AND, WHEREAS, IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT ALL CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN BE AWARE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAMS AND TH THE IMPACT THATE PARTICIPATION CAN HAVE ON REDUCING CRIME IN THE CITY, AND WHEREAS, CRIME AND DRUG PREVENTION AWARENESS SUPPORT AND PARTICIPATION AT LOCAL ANTI-CRIME EFFORTS STRENGTHEN NEIGHBORHOOD SPIRIT AND POLICE COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS AND ACCEPTING A MESSAGE TO CRIMINALS THAT NEIGHBORHOODS ARE ORGANIZED IN FIGHTING BACK ARE IMPORTANT THEMES OF THE NATIONAL NIGHT OUT PROGRAM.

AND WHEREAS PARTICIPATION MAY BE AS SIMPLE AS TURNING ON THE FRONT PORCH LIGHT OR PLANNING NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK EVENT FOR OCTOBER 4, 2022. NOW, THEREFORE, I, RICHARD RENO, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS, AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS 27TH DAY SEPTEMBER 2022 DO HERE BY PROCLAIM OCTOBER 4TH, 2022, AS NATIONAL NIGHT OUT 2022 IN MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS, AND HERE BY CALL UPON ALL OUR CITIZENS TO JOIN THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TOWN WATCH IN SUPPORTING THE NATIONAL NIGHT OUT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MAYOR: AND THANKS TO ALL OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, THE POLICE, AND WE HAD A GREAT TIME AT THE PARK LAST TIME.

SO THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. ITEM

[2022-412]

[00:05:22]

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO YOU ONE MORE TIME.

I WANTED TO JUST REFER BACK TO THIS CHART THAT I HAD GIVEN TO YOU GUYS WHEN I FIRST SPOKE SEPTEMBER 6TH.

I JUST WANT TO COME DOWN HERE TO THE STAKEHOLDER AND PUT -- NOTE THAT THERE ARE THREE SOLID DOTS INDICATING FOR THE SOUTH OPTION, THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, CITY OF WAXAHACHIE AND ELLIS COUNTY ALL APROVEN THE SOUTHERN ALIGNMENT FOR 1387.

SINCE I VISITED WITH YOU THEN, WE HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO VISIT WITH THE PROJECT MANAGER FOR 1387, THE TXDOT PROJECT MANAGER. HE HAS INFORMED US THAT IF THOSE THREE DOTS WILL DISAPPEAR, WE HAVE A MUCH MORE FAVORABLE CHANCE OF LEAVING THE ROAD WHERE IT IS AT.

THEREFORE, ELIMINATING THE SOUTHERN ALIGNMENT.

ALSO, SINCE I LAST TALKED WITH YOU, WE HAVE GOTTEN A LETTER FROM THE CITY OF WAXAHACHIE REGARDING THE 1387 LONG BRANCH FM 664 PROJECT THAT SHOWED WAXAHACHIE AS STAKEHOLDER IN FAVOR OF THE SOUTHERN OPTION. THIS IS INCORRECT.

THE CITY OF WAXAHACHIE IS IN FAVOR OF THE NORTHERN ALIGNMENT.

IT IS BEING DISTRIBUTED TO OUR RESIDENTS AND IS FALSE INFORMATION. THIS LETTER WENT TO TXDOT, TO ALL OF THE TXDOT DISTRICT LEADERSHIP.

AND THEN KYLE BUTLER ALSO WROTE US A LETTER, THE PORTION THAT IS IMPORTANT, HE STILL THINKS THE NORTHERN ROUTE WOULD HAVE THE LESS IMPACT ON ALL THE HOMEOWNERS AND STILL BE ABLE TO CONNECT WITH NO PROBLEM FOR THE RECORD, NORTHERN ROUTE PLEASE.

KYLE IS SETTING US UP A DATE TO SPEAK BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT SO THAT ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS CAN HAVE A CHOICE AND BE HEARD. THEY ARE EAGER TO DO THAT.

I'M HERE TONIGHT, I'M JUST TRYING TO PULL IN ALL OUR LOOSE ENDS, GET EVERYBODY'S LETTERS AND SO I AM HERE TO SAY TO YOU, ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP YOU, ANYTHING I CAN DO TO HELP YOU, I'M AVAILABLE. I WANT TO DO WHATEVER I CAN, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I THINK ON THAT E-MAIL THAT I SENT TO ALL OF YA'LL, I ALSO INCLUDED MY PHONE NUMBER.

PLEASE, DON'T HESITATE TO GIVE ME A CALL.

WE NEED A LETTER FROM YOU GUYS AS WELL, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN GET FROM YOU, THAT WOULD BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL.

SO WE WANT TO MAKE ALL THESE DOTS GO CLEAR.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR: PLEASE NOTE THAT DILLOS ARE NOT IN THE CITY LIMITS. I PLEASE ASK EVERYBODY TO INDICATE, BECAUSE OF THE TOPICS TONIGHT, WHETHER YOU ARE IN THE CITY LIMITS OR NOT PLEASE. ASHLEY CRICKET.

>> ASHLEY BRICKET. >> MAYOR: MA'AM, IN OR OUT OF

THE CITY. >> I'M IN THE CITY BECAUSE YA'LL

ANNEXED ME. >> WELCOME HERE TO US.

>> YES. SO FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS TO EACH ONE OF YOU AND ASK YOU TO PLEASE PASS THE SANCTUARY ORDINANCE FOR THE UNBORN. GOD'S CHILDREN ARE TO BE CHERISHED AND THEY DESERVE TO HAVE THE HUMAN RIGHTS RESPECTED INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE WOMB. SECOND, I WOULD LIKE TO REREAD SOMETHING TO YOU. LUKE 3:12.

SOME TAX COLLECTORS CAME TO BE BAPTIZED.

THEY ASKED HIM, TEACHER, WHAT SHOULD WE DO? HE TOLD THEM, DON'T COLLECT MORE MONEY THAN YOU ARE ORDERED TO COLLECT. SOME SOLDIERS CAME TO HIM AND HE SAID -- AND SAID WHAT SHOULD WE DO.

HE TOLD THEM, BE SATISFIED WITH YOUR PAY AND NEVER USE THREATS OR BLACKMAIL TO GET MORE MONEY FROM ANYONE.

[00:10:01]

AND WHY DO YOU LOOK CONFUSED? >> MAYOR: PLEASE CONTINUE.

>> IT WAS A HUGE MESS. >> MAYOR: MA'AM.

>> YOU GUYS CAUSED A HUGE MESS. WHEN WE VOTED FOR ALL OF YOU GUYS, WE EXPECTED FOR YOU TO HOLD OUR CITY ACCOUNTABLE ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO OUR DOLLARS.

SO WITH THAT, I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT YA'LL CAN TRY TO CANCEL ME. YOU CAN KICK ME OFF OF ANYTHING YOU WANT. YOU CAN MAKE ME SIT IN THE BACK OF THE BUS. YOU CAN SAY UGLY THINGS ABOUT ME BUT I DON'T REALLY CARE THAT MUCH.

I ANSWER TO ONE PERSON AND THAT IS GOD.

AND MY JOB, MY VOCATION IS A MOTHER AND A WIFE.

AND SO WHAT THE CITY THINKS OF ME DOESN'T MATTER.

SO YOU CAN HAVE ME KICKED OFF OF ANYTHING YOU WANT.

THAT'S NOT GOING TO STOP ME FROM COMING HERE AND SPEAKING BECAUSE WE STILL DO LIVE IN AMERICA AND WE STILL DO HAVE OUR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. SO WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE TAXES, TO TALK ABOUT THAT FOR THE REST OF MY TIME AND JUST SAY THAT THERE IS NO ACCOUNTABILITY AS TO WHY THE TAX RATE KEPT GETTING CHANGED FROM THE NO NEW REVENUE.

A WHILE AGO I HAD CAME AND SPOKE AT THE CITY COUNCIL, PROBABLY ABOUT A YEAR AGO, I TOLD EVERYBODY I WAS VERY CONCERNED THAT THERE WAS SO MANY INVESTMENT FIRMS PURCHASING HOUSES AND INFLATING THE PRICE OF THEM.

AND EVERYBODY, EXCEPT FOR THE ONES THAT WEREN'T ELECTED, HAD ACKNOWLEDGED THAT, YES, THAT WAS THE CASE.

BUT LEGALLY, THE ATTORNEY SAID, THAT THERE IS NOTHING THE CITY COUNCIL COULD DO. SO THEREFORE IT IS THE PREMISE THAT HAS BEEN SET THAT YA'LL DID KNOW OUR HOUSING PRICES WERE ARTIFICIALLY INFLATED. BUT YET, YOU CHOSE TO VOTE AND INCREASE OUR TAXES ABOVE THE NO NEW REVENUE KNOWING THAT THAT WAS GOING TO INCREASE OUR TAXES MORE THAN WHAT HOMES ARE REALLY WORTH IN MIDLOTHIAN. SO I'M JUST VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE DIRECTION OF OUR CITY. AND I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU GUYS WOULD TAKE YOUR RESPONSIBILITY AND HOLD THE CITY ACCOUNTABLE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT VOTERS AND YOUR CONSTITUENTS VOTED YOU INTO OFFICE TO DO FOR US. SO WITH THAT, THAT'S IT.

OH, ACTUALLY, I WANT TO ADD ONE MORE THING.

IN ADDITION TO BEING CALLED THE CITY ACCOUNTABLE, I HOPE YOU LOOK AT YOUR JOB AS TRYING TO MAKE MIDLOTHIAN A BETTER PLACE.

TO HONOR GOD IS TO HONOR THE THINGS THAT -- THE RESPONSIBILITIES AND THINGS THAT YOU HAVE.

SO MAKING MIDLOTHIAN A BETTER PLACE, A MORE BEAUTIFUL PLACE, SO THAT THE NEXT GENERATION CAN COME AND ENJOY IT.

BUT IF WE INCREASE OUR TAXES AND WE ARE ALLOWING THINGS LIKE ABORTION IN OUR CITY, WE ARE NOT MAKING IT A BEAUTIFUL PLACE.

SO THANK YOU. I HOPE YOU GUYS HAVE A LOVELY

EVENING. >> MAYOR: PLEASE, NO RESPONSE FROM CITIZENS. IF I SHOW EMOTION, I APOLOGIZE.

I WAS BRIEFLY CONFUSED AS TO WHAT WAS SAID AND I WAS PUZZLED.

IF I HAVE SHOWED EMOTION, I APOLOGIZE.

I DIDN'T MEAN TO DO THAT NOR WAS THERE ANY INFERENCE IN MY CONFUSION. NEXT SPEAKER IS SAMANTHA FA FARNSWORTH. I'M SORRY, MY APOLOGIES.

I WILL CALL YOU LATER WHEN WE ARE ON TOPIC.

THAT'S PARTLY WHY -- I HAVE TOO MANY PIECES OF PAPER IN FRONT OF ME. THAT'S ALL THE SPEAKERS I HAVE FROM SPEAKERS TO BE -- CITIZENS TO BE HEARD.

IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AT THIS MOMENT? LISA, I HAVE YOU UNDER THE 422. YOU WANT TO SPEAK NOW? PLEASE COME FORWARD. LISA HEELY.

>> MY NAME IS LISA HEELLY AND I LIVE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.

I WANTED TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MYSELF AND WHY I'M SPEAKING TODAY. I MOVED TO MIDLOTHIAN TWO YEARS AGO. IT TOOK ME ABOUT SEVEN MONTHS TO START VENTURING OUT AND REALLY GETTING TO KNOW THE STATE AND CITY I MOVED TO. IT WAS SO VERY DIFFERENT AND

[00:15:01]

I MOVED FROM A TOWN THAT WAS SMALLER AND ALMOST EVERYTHING IS CONTROLLED BY THE STATE. WHEN I LEARNED THAT WE, AS CITIZENS, COULD BE INVOLVED IN SHAPING THE PLACE WE LIVE, I WAS SO EXCITED. I JOINED GROUPS SO I COULD MEET PEOPLE, LEARN AND BE INVOLVED. I TOOK MIDLOTHIAN UNIVERSITY SO I COULD SEE ALL THE DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY AND HOW IT RAN. I THEN SIGNED UP FOR THE MIDLOTHIAN CITIZENS POLICE ACADEMY.

I HAVE ALWAYS HAD A GREAT RESPECT FOR THE POLICE AND WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT OUR DEPARTMENT.

I LOVED THE EXPERIENCE. I LEARNED A LOT AND I WAS EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO APPLY TO BECOME A CITIZENS POLICE VOLUNTEER. SOMETHING ELSE ABOUT ME YOU MAY NOT KNOW. I LIVE EVERY DAY TO SERVE GOD.

ONE OF THEM IS LIVING EACH DAY WITH KINDNESS, COMPASSION, AND SERVICE. GOD HAS BLESSED ME.

I HAVE A WONDERFUL LIFE AND HE HAS GIVEN ME A GREAT GIFT.

TRUE. I WENT THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS. MY REFERENCES WERE CONTACTED AND I WAS TOLD THAT I HAD BEEN ACCEPTED.

I PROVIDED MY T-SHIRT SIZE AND FINGERPRINTS.

THAT WAS ALL I NEEDED AND THEN I WOULD BE -- I WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES AND TO HELP AT THE NEXT ACADEMY.

THEN I HEARD NOTHING. SO I REACHED OUT TO CHAPLAIN ASHLEY ON MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12TH.

HE LEFT ME A VOICEMAIL THE NEXT DAY TO TELL ME MY STATUS AS A VOLUNTEER WAS DENIED AND IF I HAD ANY QUESTIONS TO REACH OUT TO STAB ASSISTANT CHIEF SCOTT B. I WAS IN SHOCK.

I COULDN'T IMAGINE WHY I WOULD HAVE BEEN TEND.

I CALLED ASSISTANT CHIEF BROWN AND HIS RESPONSE WAS, CHIEF SMITH FEELS THAT YOU HAVE BEEN CRITICAL OF OUR CITY MANAGER AND SINCE HE IS OUR BOSS, HE FEELS YOU WOULD NOT BE A GOOD VOLUNTEER. I WAS BEYOND UPSET.

I COULD NOT BELIEVE THIS WAS HAPPENING TO ME IN MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS. AFTER COMPOSING MYSELF, I REACHED OUT TO ONE OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND HE WAS EQUALLY SURPRISED AND CONCERNED. I'M HERE TODAY BECAUSE OVER THE LAST TWO WEEKS, THE STORY HAS CHANGED A COUPLE OF TIMES AND APPARENTLY THE ASSISTANT CHIEF DIDN'T KNOW I STILL HAD MY FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH AS A VOLUNTEER.

HIS STORY IS CHANGING AND WITH GIFT OF TRUTH I SUSPECT THAT THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME YOU ARE HEARING MY STORY.

I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF IT WAS DISCUSSED AND DP AGREED BY E THAT I SHOULD NOT BE A VOLUNTEER BECAUSE I WAS HOLDING THE CITY MANAGER AND COUNCIL ACCOUNTABLE. IT IS VERY SAD THAT NOW I HAVE LOST ALL RESPECT FOR OUR POLICE LEADERSHIP.

FORTUNATELY, I TOOK THE ACADEMY AND WE ARE VERY LUCKY TO HAVE SOME FANTASTIC OFFICERS WHO HAVE INTEGRITY AND HAVE GIVEN ALL OF THEMSELVES TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY.

I AM AN O OP OP OPT AMIST AND TS ME TO ATTEND ALL CITY COUNCIL

MEETINGS. >> MAYOR: THREE MINUTES, PLEASE.

>> I HOPE THE COUNCIL EASILY PASSES WITH THE SANCTUARY CITY FOR FULL SUPPORT. I LEAVE YOU WITH ONE QUOTE, DO WHAT IS RIGHT NO MATTER THE CONSEQUENCES.

SAM HOUSTON. >> MAYOR: THAT IS ALL THE SPEAKERS THAT I HAVE FOR CITIZENS TO BE HEARD.

[CONSENT AGENDA]

WE HAVE ETEMS, 2022-415 AND 2022-416 WILL BE REMOVED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. COUNCIL, ANY OTHER ITEMS YOU WISH REMOVED? IF NOT, THERE IS A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AMENDED CONSENT AGENDA.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA.

SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.

THE AMENDED AGENDA IS APPROVED 7-0.

[2022-415]

[00:20:04]

CHIEF. >> GOOD EVENING MAYOR, COUNCIL.

SO THE FIRST -- BOTH OF THESE GRANTS WE WILL TALK ABOUT IN -- AT THE SAME TIME, BOTH GRANTS ARE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT AND/OR TRAINING FOR THE DEPARTMENT AT NO COST.

THE FIRST GRANT, I BELIEVE, I DON'T HAVE THAT YEAND ITEM WITH ME, WAS FILED -- WE ARE GOING TO BE FILING WITH THE STATE BASED ON MONIES THAT WERE MADE AVAILABLE AFTER UVALDE INCIDENT TO PURCHASE 30 INDIVIDUAL SHIELDS FOR OFFICERS THAT MIGHT BE ENGAGED IN AN ACTIVE SHOOTER SITUATION, EITHER AT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OR ON DUTY THEMSELVES. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.

>> THIS IS A GRANT, RIGHT? >> CORRECT.

>> ARE THERE ANY STRINGS ATTACHED? THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS GOOD ABOUT GIVING STRINGS.

>> THIS IS A STATE GRANT AND IT WAS JUST ISSUED BY THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE ARE NO MATCHING GRANTS. IT WAS SIMPLY TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT TO OFFICERS RESPONDING TO ACTIVE SHOOTER SITUATIONS.

>> THE AGENDA ITEM IS TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT, REJECT, ALTER OR INTERPRET NATURE THE GRANT.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION. >> MOTION TO E APPROVE, SECOND.

MOTION APPROVED. SECONDED. PLE ASE VOTE. THE ITEM PASSES.

[2022-416]

ALTER OR TERMINATE THE GRANT. >> THIS GRANT IS OFFERING TRAINING EQUIPMENT TO THE TUNE OF $77,000 A YEAR FOR TWO YEARS.

TWO-YEAR GRANT. THERE ARE NO -- ACCORDING TO THE INFORMATION WE HAVE, THERE ARE NO MATCHING FUNDS REQUIRED OR ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR THE OFFICERS TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS

PARTICULAR GRANT. >> COUNCIL?

DO WE HAVE A MOTION. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION APPROVED. SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 7-0.

CHIEF, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M SURE THESE FUNDS WILL BE PUT TO GOOD USE. ITEM 2022-419 CONSIDER AND ACT

[2022-419]

DATE. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THIS AGENDA ITEM IS BEING BROUGHT FORWARD.

THE COUNCIL AGREED EARLIER TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY FROM MID-TEX INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT WILL BE USED FOR THE NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT HEADQUARTERS.

THE PURCHASE AMOUNT AGREED UPON WAS 330,000 AND WE HAVE ADDED ANOTHER 10,000 FOR ESTIMATED CLOSER COSTS.

AND THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT IS TO ADD THAT TO THIS YEAR'S BUDGET SO WE CAN PAY FOR THAT BEFORE SEPTEMBER 30TH.

I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF ANYBODY HAS THOSE.

>> CLARK? >> DID WE ALREADY SELL THE BONDS FOR THE POLICE STATION? I GUESS I'M CONFUSED ON VOTING FOR THE GENERAL FUND RATHER THAN USING BOND MONEY FOR THE

[00:25:06]

PURCHASE. >> I WILL LET CHRIS ANSWER THAT.

>> IT WAS DISCUSSED -- DISCUSSION IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

THIS WAS THE DIRECTION WE WERE GIVEN WHEN THE PURCHASE WAS APPROVED, THAT WE BRING THIS BACK FOR USE OF THESE.

>> THANK YOU. THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION.

>> MOTION PLEASE. >> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS

PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION APPROVED. SECONDED.

PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 7-0. ITEM 2022-420 CONSIDER AND ACT

[2022-420]

AMOUNT OF $579,473.50. >> YES, A AND THIS IS AN ANNUAL CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE. WE DID GO OUT TO BID WITH THE PUBLIC. WE WENT BACK TO TML IRP, ONE OF OUR PREVIOUS VENDORS, WENT TO SEVERAL OTHER INSURANCE PROVIDERS AND THIS WAS THE BEST VALUE.

WE GOT THE BEST COVERAGES AT THE LOWEST RATE.

WE HAVE HAD GOOD PEERNS WITH TRAVELERS OVER THIS LAST YEAR.

I WILL SAY THAT OUR WORKER'S COMP PREMIUMS DID GO UP BECAUSE WE DID HAVE A NUMBER OF WORKER'S COMP ISSUES THIS YEAR BUT WE DO BELIEVE THAT THAT'S A FAIR PROPOSAL.

AND WE DO HAVE, AS THE MAYOR READ, WE DO HAVE THE TRAVELERS.

WE ALSO USE LLOYD'S OF LONDON WHO IS VERY WELL KNOWN INSURANCE COMPANY TO BUY DOWN THAT WIND AND HAIL DEDUCTIBLE BECAUSE IT WAS VERY HIGH. WE CANNOT GET IT ANY LOWER WITH TRAVELERS. THIS IS ALL BUDGETED.

SO I WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ANYBODY MIGHT HAVE ABOUT THE INSURANCE COVERAGE. AND I DID SAY -- I THINK I SAID IT WAS BUDGETED. IT CAME IN SLIGHTLY BELOW WHAT WE BUDGETED AT A 10% INCREASE. IT CAME IN AT 9 PLUS PERCENT.

>> THANKS FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK INTO THIS.

YOU PUT A LOT OF HOURS INTO THIS.

THANK YOU. >> MAYOR: ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. TAKE A MOTION, PLEASE.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION APPROVED. SECONDED.

PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 7-0.

[2022-421]

2013-2018 TAX YEARS. >> THIS IS A NUMBER OF YEARS THAT HAVE BEEN SETTLED, AS THE MAYOR READ.

IT IS 2013 THROUGH 2018. WE HAD ONE YEAR IN THAT TIME FRAME THAT THE LAWSUIT WAS NOT FILED IN TIME.

SO THEY WERE NOT ALLOWED TO GO TO COURT.

BUT THIS DID GO TO COURT. IT WAS A SETTLEMENT AND WE WERE GIVEN THE OPTION OF DOING AN ONE-TIME PAYMENT OR HAVING THAT GO AGAINST FUTURE TAXES THAT WOULD BE COLLECTED.

AND IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN OVER TWO YEARS TO HAVE THAT.

SO WE ARE TRYING TO TAKE THIS NOW AS AN ONE-TIME HIT AGAINST PROPERTY TAXES. THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST AND OUR AUDITORS HAVE AGREED WITH THAT.

SO IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.

>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION, HUD? >> HAVE WE SET ASIDE MONEY

DURING THIS PROCESS FOR THIS? >> YES, WE HAVE.

>> THANK YOU. >> CLARK.

>> I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION, YOU DIDN'T ASK FOR ONE YET.

I APOLOGIZE. >> DO I HAVE A MOTION PLEASE?

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. SECONDED.

PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 7-0.

>> THANK YOU. >> MAYOR: I'M GOING TO READ THE

[2022-422]

[00:30:10]

ITEM 2022-422, RECEIVE A PRESENTATION FROM THE SANCTUARY CITY COMMITTEE AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE OUTLAWING ABORTION, DECLARING MIDLOTHIAN A SANCTUARY CITY FOR THE UNBORN, MAKING VARIOUS PROVISIONS AND FINDINGS; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

IF YOU WERE PART OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE, WOULD YOU, PLEASE STAND. OUR FAITHFUL CITIZENS THAT GAVE THEIR TIME FOR THIS.

>> MAYOR: THERE WERE EIGHT CITIZENS THAT PARTICIPATED.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS THERE, MYSELF, THE MAYOR PRO TEM, BUT WE ACTED AS JUST TO FACILITATE THE SESSIONS.

THIS IS ACTIONED COMPLETELY BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THE CITY ATTORNEY MADE LEGAL OPINIONS AND ANSWERED QUESTIONS.

SO WITH THAT, WE WILL GO TO SPEAKERS.

WE HAVE SEVERAL SPEAKERS. PLEASE KEEP IT TO THREE MINUTES.

I WILL GIVE YOU A 20-SECOND WARNING.

AND IF YOU WOULD WRAP UP. AGAIN, PLEASE GIVE YOUR NAME AND IF YOU ARE IN OR OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS.

NOW I WILL START WITH SAMANTHA FARNSWORTH.

>> HELLO, COUNCIL AND MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TODAY AND FOR CONSIDERING THIS ORDINANCE.

MY NAME IS SAMANTHA FARNSWORTH, OUTSIDE THE CITY.

I LOBBY FOR LEGISLATION AND PASS THINGS LIKE THE HEARTBEAT LAW AND THE PRO LIFE LAWS THAT WE HAVE THERE.

SO BACK WELL OVER A YEAR AGO, CITIZENS IN MIDLOTHIAN BEGAN THE EFFORT TO MAKE THIS CITY A SANCTUARY CITY FOR THE UNBORN.

TEXAS RIGHT TO LIFE HAS BEEN A RESOURCE THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS BUT IT HAS BEEN AN ENTIRELY CITIZEN-LED EFFORT.

CITIZENS WHO CARE DEEPLY ABOUT THIS CITY, WHO LIVE HERE, WHO PAY TAXES HERE AND WHO VOTE HERE.

AND THEY WANT TO SEE THE MOST INNOCENT AND VULNERABLE AMONG US, THOSE BEING THE UNBORN PROTECTED HERE.

SO WHILE ROE V. WADE IS KNOW OVERTURNED AND ABORTION IS MOSTLY ILLEGAL UNDER STATE LAW, THERE'S ALWAYS THE THREAT THAT THAT WILL CHANGE, THAT THE GOVERNMENT WILL BACK DOWN.

WE ARE ALREADY STARTING TO SEE WEAKNESS IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT MIDLOTHIAN AND OTHER CITIES ARE PREPARED FOR THAT INSTANCE.

THIS ORDINANCE BEING IN PLACE ADDS EXTRA PROTECTIONS FOR THE UNBORN CHILDREN NO MATTER WHAT THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAY AND NO MATTER HOW HARD THEY TRY TO COME DOWN.

IN ADDITION, THIS ORDINANCE WILL PREVENT THE ABORTION INDUSTRY FROM MOVING INTO THE CITY. IT DID JUST THAT IN WIL LUBBOCK.

THEY PASSED IT AFTER PLANNED PARENTHOOD BUILT A NEW FACILITY, THEY STARTED COMMITTING ABORTIONS, ONCE LUBBOCK PASSED THE ORDINANCE, THEY HAD TO CLOSE.

IT IS A VERY EFFECTIVE ORDINANCE.

THIS ORDINANCE CONTAINS NO CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT.

IT IS JUST A CIVIL ENFORCEMENT AS MODELED BY THE HEARTBEAT LAW AND IT STARTS THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION.

SO WHILE THE HEARTBEAT LAW

[00:38:10]

>> FORTY-FIFTH IN THE STATE OF TAX TO PASS THIS ORDINANCE.

THE ORDINANCE WHICH IS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TONIGHT IS SIMILAR TO THE THOSE PASSED IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.

LIKE OTHERS PASSED IN TEXAS, PROHIBITS PERFORMING AN ABORTION AND AIDING OR ABETTING AN ABORTION WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF MIDLOTHIAN. WHAT MAKES MIDLOTHIAN ORDINANCE DIFFERENT FROM THE 44 CITIES IN TEXAS CONTAINS -- THIS ORDINANCE CONTAINS ONLY ONE METHOD OF ENFORCEMENT WHICH IS PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM. ALL OTHER CITIES CONTAIN OTHER ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM, PUBLIC ENFORCEMENT BY THE CITY GOVERNMENT AS WELL AS THE PRIVATE.

AS THE ONLY FORM OF ENFORCEMENT IN MIDLOTHIAN ORDINANCE, I CAN'T STRESS ENOUGH HOW IMPORTANT IT IS FOR THE PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM IS TO YOUR CITY. IN FACT, IF THE MECHANISM WAS IN PLACE IN ATHENS, TEXAS, BEFORE ROE V. WADE, THERE WOULD BE NO DOUBT THAT IT WOULD HAVE SAVED OVER 10,000 LIVES.

IN 1968, JUST BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT ISSUED THE LANDMARK DECISION OF ROE V. WADE IN 1973, AN ABORTIONIST PERFORMED OVER TEN THOUSAND ILLEGAL ABORTIONS IN ATHENS, TEXAS.

AT THAT TIME, BO ABORTION WAS ILLEGAL UNDER THE PRE-ROE V.

WADE ABORTION STATUTES. WHAT HAPPENED IS THE CITY OF ATHENS DID NOT ENFORCE THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS.

IN 2022, WE HAVE SEEN CITY COUNCILS LIKE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO FIND WAYS TO ENFORCE -- TO NOT ENFORCE THE LAWS AGAINST ABORTIONS -- AGAINST THE STATE LAWS OF TEXAS. THIS IS ONE REASON WHY THIS ORDINANCE IS SO IMPORTANT. RIGHT NOW, IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, ONLY ALLOWS TO SUE ABORTIONISTS AND ANYONE AIDING

[00:40:04]

>> WRAP UP YOUR TIME, PLEASE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THAT WAS THE ONLY CHANGE THAT WE RECOMMENDED.

AND I WILL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> WHEN I SAY YOUR TIME, YOU STILL HAVE 15 OR 20 SECONDS TO WRAP UP. I DON'T MEAN TO STOP IMMED IMMEDIATELY. SO HUGH REYNOLDS.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAYOR, COUNCILMEN, COUNCILWOMAN.

I HAVE STOOD HERE SEVERAL TIMES, YOU KNOW MY OPINIONS, MY FEELINGS ON THE SUBJECT. I WANT TO ADD ONE THING.

THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THAT SINCE ROE V. WADE HAS BEEN OVERTURNED, THAT THIS IS NOW A MOOT POINT.

I WOULD ARGUE JUST THE OPPOSITE. IN '73, OUR JUDICIARY, OUR SUPREME COURT TOOK AWAY THE RIGHT FOR LEGISLATURES, THE ELECTED LEVEL OF OUR GOVERNMENTS IN ALL 50 STATES TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS. SO NOW THAT GHAIFN BACK TO THE STATES. SO I WOULD ARGUE THAT NOT ONLY THE STATE BUT EVERY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT DOWN TO THE COUNTY AND CITY LEVEL NOW HAVE THE AUTHORIZATION UNDER LAW TO PROTECT THEIR CITIES AND THEIR COUNTIES AND THEIR STATES FROM ABORTIONISTS PLYING THEIR EVIL TRADE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU, COUNCIL.

>> THANK, HUGH. >> THANK, MR. REYNOLDS.

>> JOHN HAMICKER. >> GOOD EVENING MAYOR, COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING.

TALK TO YOU GUYS A COUPLE TIMES AS THIS HAS COME UP AND I GUESS I WANTED TO -- -- I LIVED IN THECITY LIMITS.

YOU ANNEXED ME. I CAME TO LIVE WITH THAT.

>> WE ALL CAME TOGETHER. >> WE ARE HERE.

THAT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT. I WANT TO CAPITALIZE ON THAT AT THE SAME TIME. I DON'T HAVE -- THIS IS THE FIRST I HADN'T BROUGHT A SCRIPT. SOMETIMES IT IS BETTER TO SHOOT FROM THE HIP. IF YOU DON'T HIT IT, YOU SCOOT CLCLOSER AND HIT IT AGAIN. I'M HITTING IT AGAIN.

WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THIS A COUPLE MONTHS AGO AND WE DIDN'T DO IT THEN. I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY FAMOUS TO QUOTE. IT IS GOOD.

IT IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU KNOW. I DON'T HAVE A BIBLE VERSE TO QUOTE. THERE'S LOTS IN THERE I COULD.

I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF STATISTICS TO GIVE YOU.

PROBABLY YOU WOULDN'T WRITE THEM DOWN OR WOULDN'T REMEMBER ANYWAY. I WILL GIVE YOU SOMETHING TO REMEMBER. LITTLE STORY.

MOVED HERE FROM A LITTLE TOWN IN EAST TEXAS 22 YEARS AGO.

WE LIVED IN A SMALL TOWN, WANTED TO MOVE BACK TO A SMALL TOWN BUT BIG ENOUGH TO OFFER THE CHILDREN THE SCHOOL AND OPPORTUNITY.

THEY ARE ALL THREE DONE WONDERFUL.

GOD HAS BLESSED US IN THAT WAY. FOR THE SAME REASONS WE MOVED HERE 22 YEARS AGO, LOTS OF PEOPLE HAVE MOVED HERE OVER THE YEARS. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, WE WANT TO KEEP -- HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU READ IN THE NEWSPAPER, NEXT DOO.

I DON'T HAVE THAT MANY FRIENDS. BUT IF YOU READ EVERYTHING ABOUT THAT, YOU SEE HOW IMPORTANT IT IS THAT WE MAINTAIN THE SMALL TOWN ATMOSPHERE. DON'T LET THE BIG CITY STUFF INFLUENCE US. KEEP THE SMALL TOWN.

KEEP US WHAT WE CAME HERE. WE CAME HERE FOR GOD AND COUNTRY. WE LIKE WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING.

MOST IMPORTANT THING TO MAKE SURE YOU GUYS NOW IS DON'T LET US DOWN. THIS IS IN FRONT OF YOU.

WHAT HAS BEEN OFFERED. TEXAS RIGHT TO LIFE, ONE LITTLE EDIT, I HOPE YOU LISTEN TO THAT. JUST MAKE SURE DON'T SCREW THIS UP. THANK YOU.

[00:45:04]

>> LINDSEY LANDON. >> YES, LINDSEY LANDEEN.

I LIVE INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS. I WAS ANNEXED BUT THAT MEANS I HAVE AMBULATORY SERVICES AND GREAT FIRE DEPARTMENT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I KNOW YOU HEARD COMMENTS IN APRIL. SO I THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK NOW. I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL FOR NOT MAKING A DECISION BECAUSE IT WAS APPARENT THAT WE NEEDED MORE TIME. YOU REALLY DO NEED NOT THE TWO SIDES TO THE ISSUE, BUT THE SEVEN SIDES TO THE ISSUE TO REALLY FEEL LIKE THEIR SIDES WERE CONSIDERED, SO I APPRECIATE THAT. TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND ON ME, I HAVE HAD TWO CHILDREN. I HAVE ALSO HAD A MISCARRIAGE OF A PLANNED PREGNANCY. I WAS BORN IN ODESSA, I GREW UP NO WAXAHACHIE, MOVED TO MIDLOTHIAN TEN YEARS AGO.

I HAVE A DEGREE IN ENTREPRENEUR ENTREPRENEURSHIP.

I'M SELF-EMPLOYED. I'M A 20-YEAR VETERAN IN MY FIELD. MY KIDS ARE THE GRANDKIDS OF JACKIE BOTASKI AS IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

FINALLY, I HAVE SPENT HOURS AND HOURS SINCE THE APRIL 26TH MEETING WATCHING AND REWATCHING THAT COUNCIL MEETING AS WELL AS FACT CHECKING. A LOT OF THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY MR. MARK LEE DIXON, I DON'T HAVE TIME TO GET INTO THOSE FIND, I CAN LATER IF ANYBODY WANTS TO ASK.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S FOLKS IN THIS COMMUNITY WHO ARE VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS. AND WANT SOMETHING DONE RIGHT AWAY. BUT THIS DOCUMENT STRESSES THAT IGNORANCE OR MISTAKE OF THE LAW IS NOT A DEFENSE.

SO IT IS NOT A DEFENSE FOR US EITHER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT.

WE CANNOT BE IGNORANT OF ANY RAMIFICATIONS THAT AN ORDINANCE IS GOING TO BRING. THE MANY ISSUES I FOUND WITH THE DO YOU MEAN, I BELIEVE WE ARE RISKING VERY NEGATIVE RAMIFICATIONS AND WILL BE A POINTLESS ENDEAVOR, CONTRARY TO WHAT SOME OTHER CITIZENS HAVE SAID, GIVEN THE NATIONAL AND STATE ATTENTION TO THIS ISSUE. WE SHOULDN'T GET CAUGHT UP IN A TREND THAT WILL BRING RE-ELECTION.

THIS IS AN OVERREACHING, CARBON COPY, PLUG AND PLAY DOCUMENT WRITTEN BY PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIVE HERE AND CERTAINLY WON'T COME TO OUR AID IF LAWSUITS OCCUR. OR IF OUR CITIZENS ARE MORE DIVIDED. YOU KNOW THE WORD PRIVACY SHOWS UP ZERO TIMES IN THE CONSTITUTION.

ZERO. BUT IT IS ASSUMED IN OUR AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO PRIVACY.

>> WRAP UP YOUR REMARKS, PLEASE. >> YES.

THESE ORDINANCES SEW CONFUSION NOT CLARITY.

1400 TEXAS CITIES ARE GOING TO COME UP WITH 1400 ORDINANCES.

ABILENE IS GOING TO SUE US BECAUSE WE HELP A RESIDENT OF THEIR CITY. THIS IS A RAPIDLY CHANGING ISSUE AND WE ARE REACHING INTO THE FUTURE AND MAKING DECISIONS FOR THOUSANDS OF MIDLOTHIAN RESIDENTS ARMED WITH ASSUMPTIONS AND I WOULD ARGUE WILLFUL PRETENDING THAT WE KNOW THE INFINITE NUMBER OF CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THEY WILL BE FACING.

THAT'S ALL, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

PASSION AND EMOTIONS ON THIS. DAMIEN MCCLINDON.

>> MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS DAMIEN MCCLINDON, I DO LIVE IN THE CITY LIMITS. JOHN LEWIS SAID WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING THAT IS NOT RIGHT, NOT FAIR, NOT JUST, YOU HAVE TO SPEAK UP. YOU HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING.

YOU HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. WELL, I STAND BEFORE YOU AS A MEMBER WHO RAN FOR THE CITY COUNCIL THIS YEAR.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY BOTHERS ME IS THAT, AS WE ARE ELECTED, EVERYBODY EXPECTS US TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THE CITY.

AND IN THIS SITUATION, IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE DEALING WITH THE ELECTED WHO HAVE MAYBE THE MONEY OR WHO HAVE THE LONG-TERM HERE

[00:50:05]

AS WE TALK ABOUT THE SANCTUARY CITY, AS THE GENTLEMAN SAID HE IS SHOOTING FROM THE HIP, I HAVE THINGS TO WRITE DOWN AS WELL.

THE THING IS WHAT I AM LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE ARE NOT DOING WHAT IS RIGHT. JUNETEENTH, SOMEBODY SAID THIS IS ABOUT FREEDOM. AND GUESS WHAT? TAKING AWAY A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO DO SOMETHING IS HER FREEDOM.

WE CAN'T KEEP DOING THINGS LIKE THIS.

I'M TRYING NOT TO GO INTO A DIFFERENT REALM ON WHAT I WANT TO SAY BUT I THINK I NEED TO SAY THIS.

THERE ARE LAWS THAT OUR POLITICAL LEADERS ARE STARTING TO MAKE IN ORDER TO KEEP THEMSELVES IN POWER.

WHETHER IT BE ELECTION, THE VOTERS RIGHTS, THAT'S NOT RIGHT.

BECAUSE WE AS AFRICAN AMERICANS FEEL LIKE WE ARE TRYING TO MOVE THINGS AWAY SO A CERTAIN GROUP OF PEOPLE CAN STAY IN POWER.

FREEDOM IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

WHY ARE WE GOING TO DO -- ALLOW THIS END TO OUR CITY.

I DO NOT AGREE WITH ABORTION BUT, AGAIN, I DO NOT AGREE TELLING A WOMAN WITH WHAT TO DO WITH HER BODY.

JUST LIKE THE YOUNG LADY SAID, IF WE PASS THIS ORDINANCE, WE ARE SETTING OURSELVES UP FOR ALL KINDS OF LAWSUITS.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I SAID AT THE FORUM IS THAT IF I'M ELECTED, IT IS MY JOB TO PROTECT THE POCKETBOOK OF CITIZENS OF MIDLOTHIAN. WE CAN'T GO AROUND JUST SPENDING MONEY WILLY NILLY. I PAY THE TACKS HERE.

EVERYBODY IN HERE PAYS TAXES. WHY ARE WE GOING TO USE OUR MONEY TO BE SUED FOR OTHER PEOPLE TO MAKE OUR -- TO GET OUR MONEY. SO WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOG K AT THESE ISSUES. ONE OTHER THING WE NEED TO DO, I KNOW MOST OF YA'LL HAVE MADE THE DECISIONS FOR THE CITY, BUT HERE'S THE THING, WE AS A PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO VOTE ON THIS SITUATION. BECAUSE THE THING THAT I SEE IS THAT IT IS DIVIDING US. LET THE VOTE OF THE PEOPLE TAKE PLACE. IF MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE VOTE YES, WE WANT SANCTUARY CITY AND THAT'S MOST VOTES, I CAN SLEEP AT NIGHT WITH THAT. BUT TO HAVE 7 PEOPLE VOTE ON SOMETHING THAT I DON'T AGREE WITH AND NOBODY HAS TALKED TO ME ABOUT IT, AND I WANT TO KNOW WHO THE PEOPLE THAT WERE ELECTED TO BE ON THE COUNCIL, WERE THEY ALREADY FOR THIS ACTION? BECAUSE IF THEY WERE ALREADY FOR THIS ACTION, ALL THEY DID IS MAKE IT READY TO MAYBE, AS WE SAID LAST TIME IN THE MEETING,

MAKE IT MIDLOTHIAN READY. >> WRAP UP YOUR COMMENTS,

PLEASE. >> YES, SIR.

>> SO WE NEED TO GO BACK, WE NEED TO PUT THIS ON THE ELECTION BALLOT FOR NOVEMBER 8 OR WE NEED TO MAKE IT A SPECIAL ELECTION.

I ASK YOU TONIGHT, DO NOT PASS THIS ACT OR THIS ORDINANCE.

THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE WITH ME TONIGHT WHO STAND WITH ME. I ASK YA'LL TO PLEASE DO NOT PUT

THIS ON, DO NOT VOTE THIS. >>.

>> THANK YOU. DANA ROWE.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, AND COUNCIL.

I SAID IN THE EARLYNER -- >> NAME AND.

>> OH, SORRY, DANA ROWE, AND I LIVE IN THE CITY.

OKAY. AGAIN, I SENT AN E-MAIL OF WHICH I KNOW YOU ALL GOT AND STATING MY OPPOSITION TO THIS ORDINANCE.

I HEARD BACK FROM TWO OF YOU. AND I THANK YOU.

I HAVE ONE THING TO SAY TONIGHT AND THAT IS, THIS ORDINANCE DOES NOT NEED TO BE DECIDED TONIGHT. IT DOES NOT BELONG HERE.

IT BELONGS ON A VOTE AND SO I HOPE YOU HEAR OUR OPPOSITION.

THANK YOU. OH, AND, MAYOR, SHOWING EMOTION

IS HUMAN. >> JOYCE HARDY.

YES, YA'LL MAY COME TOGETHER. THIS IS MORAL SUPPORT.

>> MY NAME IS JOYCE HARDY, I'M IN THE CITY LIMITS.

[00:55:06]

COUNCILMEN AND COUNCIL LADY AND MAYOR.

THIS IS LORIS TAYLOR. WE ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE -- WE ARE ASKING, WHY DOES MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS, NEED TO BE A SANCTUARY CITY? SMALL TOWN, CAUCUS ON THE ISSUES, STAY OUT OF THINGS. PARTY POLITICS BECOME THE CALLING CARD AT THE LOAFL LEVEL, SO MUCH FOCUS IS LOST ON THINGS YOU SHOULDN'T BE SAYING. WHY PASS AN ORDINANCE WHICH WOULD DIVIDE OUR CITY. THE STATE HAS PASSED THE LAW.

WHERE DOES IT SAY THE CITY MUST ACT ON THIS ORDINANCE? WHY DO YOU THINK IT HAS TO ACT? WHAT'S TO BE GAINED.

IT WILL DIVIDE OUR CITY. AND -- I'M SORRY.

IT IS ALSO A CHANCE TO BE LOOKED UPON FAVORABLY AS A POLITICIAN OR POLITICAL PARTY. IT IS NOT YOUR PLACE.

IT IS NOT YOUR JOB. PLEASE KEEP OUR POLITICS LOCAL.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

I AGREE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THAT IS ALL THE SPEAKERS THAT I HAVE WHO ARE SIGNED UP.

DOES ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME? PLEASE FILL OUT A FORM WHEN YOU ARE COMPLETED AND NAME AND WHERE

YOU ARE FROM. >> MY NAME IS ABIGAIL AUGUSTS.

AUGUSTA. I'M OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS.

I SPEAK, I URGE THE COUNCIL TO PASS THIS ORDINANCE.

A LOT OF PEOPLE I THINK ARE WORRIED ABOUT REDUNDANCY OF IT GIVEN THAT TEXAS IS PRO LIFE STATE.

HOWEVER, IN MY GENERATION ESPECIALLY, THERE IS THIS NARRATIVE THAT CIRCLES THAT THE IDEA THAT OPPOSITION TO ABORTION ONLY COMES FROM THE ELITES ABOVE THEM.

THAT IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT SOMEONE LIKE ME OR JUST PEOPLE IN THEIR EVERYDAY COMMUNITIES AND CITIES ALSO OPPOSE.

THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE TO OPPOSE, FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE LIKE THEM, FROM PEOPLE WHO THEY ARE INTERACT WITH EVERY DAY. SO PART OF THE REASON WHY I WOULD URGE THIS CITY AND OTHER CITIES ACROSS THE NATION TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE LIKE THIS IS THAT IT SHOWS THAT THIS ISN'T JUST FROM THE ELITES, WAY UP AT THE HIGHER LEVELS PUSHING THESE DOWN. IT IS EVERYDAY PEOPLE FROM THEIR COMMUNITIES WHO SUPPORT THIS. NOT ONLY DOES THAT EFFECT WHAT IS GOING ON HERE IN THE CITY THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE EXTRA PROTECTIONS IN THE CASE OF A REVERSAL OF ANY LAWS, BUT IT ALSO HELPS CHANGE PEOPLE'S PERCEPTIONS OF WHAT EVEN PEOPLE IN THE PRO LIFE MOVEMENT ARE LIKE AND THAT THEY ARE EVERYDAY PEOPLE AROUND THEM. IT AFFECTS MORE THAN JUST PASSING A LAW. IT CHANGES PEOPLE'S MINDS AND IT CHANGES HOW PEOPLE PERCEIVE THIS ISSUE.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY TODAY. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR: THAT IS ALL THE SPEAKERS.

AGAIN, PLEASE FILL OUT A FORM. >> YES, SIR, ED GARDENER, I AM WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS AGAIN BY ANNEXATION.

I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCILWOMAN, COUNCIL AND MAYOR AND SAY THIS. I HAVE HEARD TONIGHT A LOT OF PEOPLE SPEAKING ABOUT HOW THIS IS NOT A MATTER FOR YOU TO DECIDE. WHAT I WANT TO SAY TO YOU IS THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL ISSUE. NO MATTER WHAT PEOPLE TEND TO SAY, WHETHER THIS IS ONE SIDE AGAINST THE OTHER, ULTIMATELY THIS IS AN ISSUE OF PROTECTING A LIFE.

ULTIMATELY WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT LIFE AND IF ONE LIFE CAN BE SAVED BY THIS, IT IS WORTH THE TIME.

IT IS WORTH THE PAIN. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

>> THANK YOU. >> [INAUDIBLE].

>> I DECIDED NOT TO SPEAK, I MARKED NOT.

[01:00:05]

AND I'M A MOTHER OF FOUR DAUGHTERS.

FOUR LOVELY DAUGHTERS. I WILL BE A GRANDMOTHER IN NOVEMBER. AND MY OLDEST DAUGHTER HAS HAD TO HAVE -- SHE HAS HAD THREE MISCARRIAGES BACK-TO-BACK.

ONE OF THE DRUGS THAT YA'LL HAVE LISTED ON THAT ORDINANCE, SHE HAD TO HAVE. NOT BY CHOICE BUT BECAUSE HER MEDICAL DOCTOR ADVISED HER TO TAKE THAT.

AND WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS OVERSTEPPING YOUR BOUNDS.

ALL OF YOU. AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH ALL I HAVE TO SAY. YOU NEED TO STAY IN YOUR LINE, FOCUS ON THE CITY AND NOT PEOPLE'S PERSONAL ISSUES.

THANK YOU. >> DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS. TILT, MR. DAN ALTMAN WOULD COME FORWARD, ON OUR SUBCOMMITTEE, THE COMMITTEE TO THE SANCTUARY CITY COMMITTEE. WE HAD EIGHT CITIZENS INVOLVED AND DAN WILL PRESENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE.

MY NAME IS DAN ALTMAN, I LIVE IN THE CITY LIMITS.

I DID NOT GET ANNEXED, I BOUGHT A PROPERTY IN THE CITY TO BE PART OF THE PROCESS ON THESE LOCAL ISSUES.

AGAIN, THIS IS ONE THAT'S VERY GOOD.

I WANT TO THANK MY FELLOW COMMITTEE MEMBERS ON THIS.

KARINA BLACKWELL, JOAN DAVIS, JEANA MCNUT CAN I, LISA TAYLOR COOK. WE WERE APPOINTED IN MAY.

WE MET THREE TIMES SINCE THEN AND DURING THAT TIME WE WERE ASSISTED WITH ADVICE FROM A LAW FIRM.

I DO CLARIFY THAT THE ORDINANCE IS NOT A COOKIE CUTTER ORDINANCE. IT IS NOT AN ONE THAT'S BEEN ADOPTED BY OTHER CITIES. WE ARE DEVELOPING A NEW APPROACH AND I'M GOING TO EXPLAIN WHY WE HAVE DONE THAT.

WE TALKED THROUGH THAT EXTENSIVELY.

WE ACTUALLY SENT AROUND LAW REVIEW ARTICLES ON THIS PRIVATE CAUCUSCAUSE OF ACTION. I'M HAPPY TO ADDRESS WHY THAT IS GOOD AND WHY WE CAN DO THAT. THE FIRST DISCUSSION WE TOOK WAS KIND OF THE FORMED THE ORDINANCE IN THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE.

WE UNDERSTAND WE DIDN'T WANT A CRIMINAL ORDINANCE THAT WOULD PENALIZE WOMEN SEEKING ABORTIONS.

WE DIDN'T WANT CRIMINALIZE ROBUST DISCUSSION OR LIMIT FREE SPEECH IN OUR COMMUNITY. WE STAYED AWAY FROM CRIMINAL.

SO WE STAYED AWAY FROM THAT. WHAT WE LOOKED AT IS THE NEXT THING WAS ZONING ORDINANCE. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS, AS WE BEGAN OUR DISCUSSIONS, THERE ARE SERIES OF CASES OUT OF OHIO WHICH CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THAT WE CANNOT ZONE ABORTION CLINICS OUT OF EXISTENCE. EVEN AFTER ROE V. WADE HAS BEEN OVERTURNED BY THE HOBBS DECISION, THAT IS AN UNCLEAR AREA. WHAT WE TURNED TO AND WAS BROUGHT UP WAS A PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.

NOW, THESE PRIVATE RIGHTS OF ACTION BASICALLY ALLOW CITIZENS TO UNDERTAKE THEIR OWN -- BRING A SUIT AGAINST A PARTY.

THEY ARE VERY EFFECTIVE AT CONTROLLING ACTIVITIES IN THE CITY THAT CITIZENS FIND OBJECTIONABLE.

RECENT USE OF PRIVATE ACTION WAS CTEC.

THEY HAVE 30,000 PEOPLE. THEY HAVE FOUR ATTORNEYS ON STAFF, MAJOR AIRPORT, CENTER FOR BOEING.

BIG EMPLOYERS WEREN'T GOING TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW.

WE DON'T HAVE TO COMPLY. AND BUT WITH THE ABILITY, PRIVATE PEOPLE SUED, THEY WERE ABLE TO GET ENFORCEMENT OF A LAW WITHOUT SPENDING TAXPAYER MONEY. SO WE SETTLED ON THAT.

THE OTHER THING IS THAT IT DID HAVE COMMUNITY INPUT.

WE FELT THIS WAS AN OPTION THAT WOULD ALLOW PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE WITHOUT FORCING ON CITY OFFICIALS, OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, CITY STAFF TO BE IN THE PROCESS OF

[01:05:02]

AND AS WE WENT THROUGH IT, THE REAL DISCUSSION HERE, DURING THIS -- THE H HOBBS DECISION CAE ALONG.

ROE V. WADE WAS OVERTURNED. BUT WE KNOW THIS IS IMPORTANT TO GO FORWARD. FOR 50 YEARS, WE HAVE LIVED UNDER ROE V. WADE. IT WAS ENACTED BY CONGRESS -- BY NOT ENACTED BY CONGRESS. NOT AN ACT BY STATE LEGIS LEGISLATURES. THE SUPREME COURT MADE A DECISION AND WE HAVE NOT HAD IN THIS COUNTRY A ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT WHEN LIFE BEGINS AND WHEN WE SHOULD PROTECT LIFE, WHEN WE SHOULD BEGIN TO ADDRESS THAT AND WHAT STEPS TO TAKE BECAUSE EVERYONE WORKED UNDER THE FRAMEWORK OF ROE V. WADE FOR 50 YEARS. THE QUESTION IS, DID THAT ALLOW PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE FORM OF THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT AND DECISIONS. IT DIDN'T.

NOW, WE ARE IN A NEW TIME WHERE WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THINGS AT LOCAL LEVEL, STATE LEVEL AND AT A FEDERAL LEVEL.

AND MY POSITION THAT OUR CITY SHOULD TAKE AN EARLY POSITION IN THIS. OUR POSITION SHOULD BE THAT WE SHOULD ADOPT A POSITION THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE ABORTIONS TAKING PLACE IN THE CITY LIMITS OF MIDLOTHIAN.

THERE'S BEEN SOME CONCERN THAT THIS IS GOING TO LIMIT PEOPLE'S PRIVATE RIGHTS. IT DOES NOT.

PEOPLE ARE FREE TOG TO GO ELSEW. THEY ARE FREE TO DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT AN ABORTION IN MIDLOTHIAN.

WE ARE NOT CREATING A CIVIL CAUSE OF ACTION SO LONG AS THE ABORTION DOES NOT OCCUR IN MIDLOTHIAN.

PASSED, BUT THE JUDGE OR SERIES OF JUDGES FOUND THAT THERE WAS A PRIVACY RIGHT, EQUIVALENT PRIVACY PERSONAL SAN SANCTITY RT SO ABORTIONS COULD NOT BE OUTLAWED IN.

MICHIGAN I WAS EDUCATED IN LAW SCHOOL 30 YEARS AGO.

WE WERE TAUGHT ROE V. WADE. WE ARE A LITTLE BIT RESISTANT TO CHANGE. AS THOSE JUDGES CONSIDER IT AND WHAT THAT'S DONE, YOU WILL HAVE JUDICIAL DECISIONS.

THAT COULD OCCUR IN AUSTIN. WE WILL HAVE LEGISLATIVE CHALLENGES. LEGISLATURE IS CONTROLLED BY DIFFERENT PARTIES, THEY MAY INTERPRET LAWS DIFFERENTLY.

IT WAS -- THE HEARTBEAT BILL NAMES 12 WEEKS, WE ARE EXTENDING THAT TO CONCEPTION. THERE IS A PROBLEM EXECUTIVE, HIGHWAYS, OTHER FEDERAL MONIES TO RESPONSES WITH THE ABILITY TO ALLOW ABORTION. THE CHALLENGES WE ARE GOING TO FACE IN THIS NEW TIME WHERE WE ARE NOT UNDER THE REGIME OF ROE V. WADE, WE ARE ALL FINDING OUR WAY THROUGH THAT.

I BELIEVE THE BEST WAY TO GO FORWARD IS WITH THE ORDINANCE.

SO DOES THE COMMITTEE. FINALLY, WE ARE ASKING THE COUNCIL TO VOTE THIS. WE LIVE IN A REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY AND OUR DISCUSSION WAS THAT AS REPRESENTATIVES WE EXPECT OUR ELECTED LEADERS TO MAKE THESE HARD DECISIONS.

I KNOW IT IS A HARD DECISION BECAUSE IT IS A NEW DECISION WITH A NEW ORDINANCE. BUT I ASSURE YOU IT IS THE BEST DECISION. IT WILL PROVIDE MIDLOTHIAN, ANSWER TO OUR CONSTITUENTS FOR THIS TO BE PASSED AND THE CITY TO RECOGNIZE THAT LIFE IS AN IMPORTANT AND ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF ANY GOOD SOCIETY. THE RESPECT FOR THE SANCTITY OF LIFE IS AT THE CORE OF OUR LAWS AND MORALITY.

[01:10:06]

IT IS A VERY CONTENTIOUS ISSUE. WE DON'T WANT THAT IN OUR COMMUNITY. IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE.

WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS SAY THIS IS NOT THE COMMUNITY.

THIS IS A COMMUNITY THAT WELCOMES LIFE.

AFTER WE LOOK AT WHAT ROE HAS DONE.

WE HAVE HAD THIS EXPERIMENT OF ROE V. WADE.

WHAT HAS THAT DONE? HAS IT BENEFITED US? MADE SOCIETY BETTER? PEOPLE THAT ARGUE IT LED TO A DECREASE IN CRIME. CRIME IS GOING UP AGAIN.

IT DIDN'T HELP THERE. WE HAVE 70 MILLION AMERICANS THAT AREN'T WITH US. OUR SOCIAL SECURITY IS CRUMBLING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE YOUNG PEOPLE WORKING.

FUNDAMENTALLY, IN SOCIETY, IF YOU WANT TO HAVE PEOPLE THAT BELIEVE IN THE FUTURE, I THINK IT WAS MISS LADONE HOW WE DON'T KNOW THE FUTURE. WE MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT THE FUTURE EVERY DAY. DECISION THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT, MAKES US THE HAPPIEST IS CHILDREN.

A SOCIETY THAT DOESN'T HAVE CHILDREN ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE A SECULAR PERSON, IT IS THE END. YOU LIVE ON IN YOUR GRANDCHILDREN A. A SOCIETY THAT DOESN'T BELIEVE IN THAT, THINKING ABOUT SHORT-TERM GAINS, I ASK YOU TO LEAD IN MIDLOTHIAN AS A SOCIETY THAT THINKS ABOUT THE FUTURE AND PROTECTS THE SANCTITY OF LIFE. I WILL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT, DAN. COULD YOU LET THE GROUP KNOW

WHAT THE VOTE SPLIT WAS. >> OUR FINAL VOTE WITH THE MEMBERS THAT WERE PRESENT WERE UNANIMOUS FOR THIS

RECOMMENDATION. >> AND DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS TO -- I THINK IT WAS -- TO REMOVE THE SECTION OF THIS?

>> YES. SECTION 5 SAYS -- PROBLEM IT SAYS IN THE NEXT SECTION THAT THERE -- THIS WILL NOT BE ENFORCEABLE IF ROE AND CASEY ARE OVERTURNED.

A NULLITY. I THINK YOU SHOULD STRIKE SECTION 5. FEW FEWER PEOPLE WILL SEE THAT IT WAS STRUCK AT THE HEARING. SECTION 5, CIVIL LIABILITY,

UNDUE BURDEN DEFENSE. >> ALL OF SECTION 5?

>> I BELIEVE -- I THINK WHEN WE STRIKE THIS, I THINK WE STRIKE ALL OF THE LAST TWO SECTIONS. ALL OF IT.

I WOULD ASK THAT THE ENTIRE SECTION BE STRICKEN.

WE COVERED THIS IN OTHER AREAS. >> I WOULD LIKE TO THANK MR. ALTMAN AND COMMITTEE THAT PUT IN THE TIME TO DEDICATE TO OUR CITY. TO PUT FORTH THOUGHTFUL TO COME TOGETHER AND MAKE YOUR DECISION.

UNDER SECTION 2, PAGE 5, PLEASE HELP ME IF I AM READING IT WRONG, I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY. THE WAY I READ THAT WAS THAT IF SOMEBODY ACCUSED YOU OF HAVING AN ABORTION, YOU ARE GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT, AM I READING THAT WRONG?

>> SECTION 2 SUBSECTION C, DEFENDANT SHALL HAVE THE BURDEN

[01:15:01]

>> BURDEN IS DIFFERENT. BURDEN OF PROVING BY PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU HAD COMMITTED THE ABORTION. THERE IS NOT A CRIMINALITY

ATTACHED. >> I'M STILL CONFUSED ABOUT THAT. I UNDERSTAND THAT IS NOT CRIMINAL. BUT FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, HEY, YOU ARE STILL GUILTY UNTIL YOU CAN PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE.

AM I STILL NOT UNDERSTANDING THAT IN.

>> IT IS NOT GUILT. I GUESS WHAT YOU WOULD SAY IF SOMEONE COMMITTED -- LET'S SAY THERE WAS AN ABORTION COMMITTED BY A MEDICAL DOCTOR, THE ISSUE WOULD BECOME THEN DID YOU COMMIT THE ABORTION, YES. THE PERSON SUING YOU UNDER CIVIL ACTION WOULD HAVE TO PROVE THAT BY PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE.

THEN YOU AS A PHYSICIAN WOULD HAVE TO PROVE BY PREPONDERANCE OF THE THAT WAS A MEDICAL PROCEDURE.

NOW, REALISTICALLY IN ORDER TO BRING IN MEDICAL TESTIMONY, YOU NEED A MEDICAL EXPERT. THE PHYSICIAN WOULD BE IN A STRONGER PERSON. THE REALITY, ASSERT THE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE OTHER PARTY HAS TO PROVE BY PREPONDERANCE. MORE LIKELY THAN NOT THIS CONDUCT OCCURRED. SINCE THE DEFINITION OF ABORTION BASICALLY CARVES OUT, WE ARE USING IN THE STATUTE, THINGS SUCH AS TO SAVE THE LIFE OR PRESERVE THE HEALTH OF UNBORN CHILD, ACCIDENTAL MISCARRIAGE, ECTOPIC PREGNANCY, THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE HEAR ABOUT THAT PHYSICIANS WERE CONCERNED ABOUT BEING SUED UNDER SUCH STATUTES. WE HAVE CARVED THOSE OUT FROM ABORTION AND THEN AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION, IF SOMEONE MAKES THE CASE YOPPE YO BEYOND THOSE THRE, THE PHYSICIAN WOULD HAVE

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE. >> THE SECOND QUESTION, THIS ONE IS GOING TO BE HARD TO DEFINE, I WILL ASK IT ANYWAY.

SO WHEN WE SAY LIFE THREATENING TO THE MOTHER, HEARTBEAT BILL HAS BEEN KIND OF A GRAY AREA. NURSES, YOU ALMOST HAVE TO WAIT TO SEPTIC SHOCK BECAUSE THEY ARE SCARED WITH LICENSING.

IS THERE A BETTER WAY TO DEFINE LIFE THREATENING?

I THOUGHT I WOULD ASK. >> I THINK THE BEGINNING, TO FIND THE BET DID HE EVER BETTER DEFINITION TOTHOSE TERMSE ORDINANCES ON THE BOOKS. UNDER 50 YEARS OF ROE V. WADE, WE WEREN'T ASKING THOSE HARD QUESTIONS.

WE JUST IGNORED THEM. ABORTION AT WILL FOR WHATEVER REASON. NOW WE ARE.

AS TIME GOES ON, YES, WE WILL THINK ABOUT THOSE HARD QUESTIONS. THERE WILL BE, MANY OF US KNOW PHYSICIANS IN THE COMMUNITY, WE HAVE ALREADY WORKED HARD TO DRAFT AND CREATE THOSE PROTECTIONS IN THIS STATUTE, BOTH IN THE EXPRESS LANGUAGE OF THE ORDINANCE WHICH IS DIFFICULT TO DO AND ANTICIPATE ALL PROBLEMS, BUT WE HAVE GIVEN AN OUT FOR A DOCTOR, A PHYSICIAN THAT ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS THEM TO TESTIFY BASED ON THEIR SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE OF THE SITUATION AT HAND AND ON THEIRS, WE SAID LOW BURDEN, PREPONDERANCE, MORE LIKELY THAN NOT. IF THEY ARE BEING SUED BY A LAYPERSON, SAYING I'M THE MEDICAL EXPERT, THE LAYPERSON HAS TO FIND SOMEONE THAT WAS THERE OR HAS SOME SORT OF ACTIVE EVIDENCE OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT ROOM AND SAY THE DOCTOR WASN'T ACTING IN A LIFE-THREATENING EMERGENCY.

I THINK IT IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR SOMEONE TO MEET THAT BURDEN.

>> I KNOW IT DOESN'T SPEAK TO RAPE OR INCEST.

I'M ASSUMING THAT'S BECAUSE IT FOLLOWS THE HEARTBEAT BALL.

>> YEAH, AS DEFENSE. >> RIGHT.

WE DON'T -- WE DO CLARIFY THAT NO PERSON IN PREGNANCY, BE FORCED TO KEEP THE CHILD. WE DO ALLOW THE IDEA OF MORNING AFTER PILLS. WE HAVE THAT IN THERE.

>> I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED WITH THAT, TOO.

LIFE BEGINNING AT CONCEPTION. HOWEVER, WE ARE SAYING THAT THE MORNING AFTER PILL IS OKAY. IF LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION, THEN YOU TAKE THE PLAN B, HOW IS THAT NOT THE SAME?

[01:20:01]

>> AS I UNDERSTAND PLAN B OPERATION, WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION, PLAN B PREVENTS CONCEPTION.

IT ACTUALLY IS A BLOCKER OF CONCEPTION.

PREVENTS THE SPERM FROM PENETRATING INTO THE EGG.

WE TRIED TO LEAVE SOME ROOM. >> I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE ZONING CONVERSATION, MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY, WITHOUT THIS ORDINANCE, ZONING WOULD NOT COVER -- OR KEEP US --

AN ABORTION FROM COMING IN. >> YOU COULD PASS A ZONING ORDINANCE. UNDER THE CASE LAW THAT EXISTS, THE CASES IN OHIO WERE DECIDED. THEIR CIRCUIT COURTS AFFIRM THOSE DECISIONS AND SUPREME COURT DENIED REVIEW BASICALLY SAYING THESE DECE DECISIONS -- T WOULD BE QUESTIONABLE LEGALLY TO ENACT AN ORDINANCE THAT DIRECTS SUCH A CHALLENGE.

AS WE WORKED WITH LEGAL COUNCIL AND LAWYERS ON THE COMMITTEE AND LAY PRESUME AND SANCTUARY CITIES COMMITTEE, WE TALKED ABOUT THESE ISSUES. WE TRIED TO CREATE LAWS THAT ARE ENFORCEABLE. IF YOU ENACTED A ZONING ORDINANCE, THE FIRST PROBLEM WOULD BE WE ARE -- EVEN IF WE ARE ENACT A STRAIGHT ZONING ORDINANCE, WE WOULD STILL FACE THE PROBLEM WE ARE FACED WITH CHALLENGES.

BATTLING THE SUPREME COURT AND BECOME THE TEST CASE FOR SOMETHING THAT'S STILL ON THE BOOKS IS BASICALLY NOT SOMETHING YOU CAN DO UNDER ZONING LAWS. THE OTHER PROBLEM, WE HAVE HAD THIS ZONING WITH TATTOO PARLORS IN OUR OWN CITY, IT GETS INTO WHETHER OR NOT WHAT KINDS OF SPEECH YOU CAN REGULATE.

SEXUALLY ORIENTED BASES, WHAT ARE WE REGULATING, IT GETS VERY COMPLEX VERY QUICKLY. THAT IS A VERY UNSETTLED AREA OF

LAW. >> SO I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION I THOUGHT ABOUT IT EARLIER WAS -- HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW ANYMORE. WE TALKED ABOUT THIS FOR A YEAR.

THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT THAT WAS MADE TO ME ON WHY WE NEEDED THIS WAS TO PROTECT FROM AN ABORTION CLINIC NOT OPENING IN MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS. AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS IF THE STATE LEGISLATURE FLIPPED TO BLUE.

BUT THE THING I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS THE CITY, MUNICIPALITIES GET THEIR POWER FROM THE LEGISLATURE.

ARE WE NOT PUTTING OURSELVES IN A TEST CASE ANYWAYS ASSUMING THE STATE TURNED BLUE, NO, STATE, YOU MIGHT HAVE OVERRULED IT, WE WILL HOLD OUR ORDINANCE. IS THAT NOT A LAWSUIT IN AND OF

ITSELF? >> WE HAVE THE CONDITION PRECEDENT THAT THE STATE HAS TO TURN BLUE AND ZONING ORDINANCE ALREADY THE LAW IS ON THE BOOKS. YEAH, WOULD WE BE TESTED ON THIS? ABSOLUTELY.

IF THE LEGISLATURE TURNED BLUE, WE ARE SAYING WE DON'T WANT THE ABORTION CLINIC HERE, AND I THINK EVENTUALLY IF THE STATE DOES TURN BLUE AND THEY WANT TO A YOU VOID THESE TYPE OF ORDINANCES, THEY WILL HAVE TO CONSIDER, DO THEY WANT TO USE LEGISLATIVE POWER TO INVALIDATE SERIES OF ORDINANCES AND SMALL TOWNS. THEY MAY HAVE THE VOTES TO GRANT BORINGS IN CERTAIN AREAS. IF YOU LOOK AT THE LEGISLATURE, THEY ENACT PROVISIONS ALL THE TIME FOR CITIES OVER A MILLION.

I THINK WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN THAT SITUATION IS THEY WILL PROBABLY SETTLE ON -- THIS IS -- WE ARE HYPOTHETICAL HERE, BUT THE BIG CITIES WILL SETTLE ON MAYBE THEY WILL JUST SAY, LOOK, ANY CITY THAT HAS OVER A MILLION PEOPLE MAY HAVE AN ABORTION CLINIC.

THAT IS MORE LIKELY WHAT A BLUE LEGISLATURE WOULD DO RATHER THAN TRYING TO FORCE PUSHBACK FROM THE SMALLER COMMUNITIES.

>> MAYO. >> I'M TRYING TO COMPARE THE STATE AND WHAT THEY DO AND WHAT WE ARE SAYING WE WANT TO DO.

HOW DIFFERENT IS IT? >> THE STATE HEARTBEAT BILL IS PROBABLY -- IT STARTS AT A LATER TIME.

IT STARTS AT 12 WEEKS WITH HEARTBEAT.

I THINK IT IS A MORE -- KIND OF A BLANKET, DON'T BOTASKI ADO ABORTIONS INTHE STATE OF TE. IT WILL LIMIT EXCEPTIONS WE SEE FOR INCEST AND RAPE AND HEALTH PROBLEMS. I THINK IT IS BROADER. I THINK OURS, IN EFFECT, HAS MORE -- IT ESTABLISHES THE END OF NOT ALLOWING THE ABORTION CLINIC IN THE STATE, IN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN.

>> BUT OUR CHARTER COMPELS US TO NOT VIOLATE STATE LAW.

[01:25:04]

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> SO IF WE GO AGAINST STATE LAW, WE WOULD BE VIOLATING OUR CHARTER.

>> YES, MAYOR, WE WOULD. IF THE ORDINANCE -- THE COMMENT OF THE BLUE LEGISLATURE, WHAT KIND OF LAW DO THEY PASS? I WOULD HOPE MANY OF THE SMALLER, BLUER CITIES EVENTUALLY ADOPT LAWS LIKE THAT SO WHEN A BLUE LEGISLATURE WOMAN'S IN, COS IS A FIGHT THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE AND THEY TAKE THE POSITION THAT ABORTIONS CAN OCCUR THERE. IF THEY AFFIRMATIVELY SAY, YOU CAN'T ZONE THEM OUT OF EXISTENCE, WHICH WE KNOW ESSENTIALLY THAT'S WHAT THEY DID THE ORDINANCE ON BUILDING MATERIALS. THEY CAME IN AND SAID, CITIES, YOU -- AS LONG AS IT MEET INTERNATIONAL CODE, YOU CAN'T REGULATE BUILDING MATERIALS, IN SUMMARY.

THE LEGISLATURE HAS THAT POWER. BUT I THINK -- I KNOW BY TAKING THIS POSITION, WHAT YOU ARE TELEGRAPHING TO A FUTURE LEGISLATURE, THERE ARE CITIES OUT THERE THAT BELIEVE IN THE SANCTITY OF LIFE, YOU SHOULD NOT MAKE THOSE PEOPLE UNHAPPY WITH THAT. YOU SHOULD RULE IN FAVOR OF ABORTIONS IN BIG CITIES WHERE YOU HAVE THE VOTES FOR IT.

>> SO I'M GOING TO REPEAT CATEGORY 1 QUESTION, WHAT IS THE SUMMARY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR ORDINANCE AND STATE LAW .

>> THE STATE LAW CURRENTLY GOES FROM THE HEARTBEAT.

THERE IS A -- IT IS DESIGNED TO BEGIN AT HEARTBEAT AND IT IS DESIGNED TO PREVENT ABORTIONS AFTER THAT TIME PERIOD.

OURS IS DESIGNED AIDING AND ABETTING IN THE CITY LIMITS OF MIDLOTHIAN. SO, IN OTHER WORDS, AS LONG AS THERE'S -- IT IS -- OURS IS JURISDICTIONAL, CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, AND WE GIVE PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION BASED UNDER MIDLOTHIAN LAW. IF THAT LAW GETS CHALLENGED IN THE COURTS AND NARROWED IN ANY WAY, THERE WOULD STILL BE A PRIVATE OF ACTION UNDER MIDLOTHIAN'S ORDINANCE.

>> NO CRIMINAL PENALTY. >> I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO SAY -- CIVIL PENALTY. MY APOLOGIES.

>> SO I'M NOT SURE HOW TO WORD THIS QUESTION.

THE ONLY WAY YOU KNOW THERE WAS CONCEPTION IS THE PRESENCE OF A

HEARTBEAT. >> NO.

>> CONCEPTION TO PROVE THEIR LIFE.

>> MENSTRUATION STOPS. >> IS THAT A WAY TO PROVE

PREGNANCY? >> NO.

YOU CAN DO TESTS THAT PROVE PREGNANCY.

>> SO BASICALLY WHAT WE ARE DOING, YOU ARE ASKING COUNCIL TO DEFINE MURDER. THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE.

THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE ARE DOING.

>> I THINK WE USE THAT THE STATE HAS SAID ABORTION IS MURDER.

WE ARE NOT DEFINING MURDER. MURDER IS A CRIMINAL ACT.

>> WE ARE CHANGING THE POINT TO THE STATE AT THIS POINT, BEFORE THE POINT THERE IS NOW MURDER. WE ARE SAYING YES THERE IS.

>> NOT AS PART OF OUR ORDINANCE. THE CIVIL PENALTIES IS NOT GOING TO DECLARE A PERCENTAGE CHARGED WITH THIS AS HAVING COMMITTED MURDER. YOU HAVE VIOLATED THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN'S ORDINANCE PREVENTING ABORTION.

THAT TERM IS NOT -- THAT TERM AS WE DEFINE ABORTION IS IN PAGE 4 ABORTION. IT IS JUST THE ACT, USING A PRESCRIPTION, INSTRUMENT, DRUG MEDICINE WITH THE INTENT TO CAUSE THE DEATH OF AN UNBORN CHILD OF A WOMAN KNOWN TO BE PREGNANT. IT IS NOT HOMICIDE AS THE TERM IS DEFINED. IT DOESN'T CREATE, I DON'T THINO CREATE. CIVIL PENALTY.

IT IS NOT GOING TO BE A MURDER. DEFINITELY NOT A MURDER

CONVICTION. >> SO IF THERE IS NOT A CLINIC IN MIDLOTHIAN, TELL ME ABOUT THE TEETH THAT THIS ORDINANCE HAS.

>> IF THERE IS NOT A PLACE TO PERFORM ABORTIONS, THIS HAS

SUCCEEDED. >> IF THERE IS NOT A CLINIC IN MIDLOTHIAN, HOW CAN THIS BE ORDINANCE BE VIOLATED?

>> IF THERE ARE NOT ABORTIONS BEING PERFORMED --

>> THAT'S NOT MY QUESTION. IF THERE IS NOT A CLINIC IN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, HOW CAN THIS ORDINANCE BE VIOLATED?

. >> IT CAN'T.

THAT'S THE POINT. >> SO WE ARE PASSING ORDINANCE THAT REALLY HAS NO TEETH. IF YOU GO TO PAGE 7 SECTION 3F.

[01:30:01]

>> MAY I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE THAT.

>> WE PASS ORDINANCES TO DISCOURAGE TYPES OF BUILDINGS.

I HAVE SERVED SIX YEARS ON P&Z. I HAVE SERVED 15 ON BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. WE PASS ORDINANCES ALL THE TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT THE KIND OF BUSINESSES AND THE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT THAT OUR COMMUNITY WANTS TO SEE THAT MATCHES OUR COMMUNITY ASPIRATIONS EXIST. THIS TYPE OF FACILITY DOESN'T MEET THE IMAGE OF THE COMMUNITY WE WANT TO HAVE.

>> SO THE ULTIMATE PURPOSE OF THIS ORDINANCE IS TO KEEP ABORTION CLINICS OUT OF MIDLOTHIAN.

>> I WOULD SAY THAT IS ONE PURPOSE OF IT, YES.

>> WHAT ARE THE OTHER PURPOSES. >> THE OTHER PURPOSES IS PROBABLY THAT WE SUPPORT THE SANCTITY OF LIFE.

THAT IS IN THE TITLE. >> WE CAN MAKE A STATEMENT SEVERAL WAYS. PAGE 7 SECTION 3F, WHAT IS THE OBLIGATION OF CITY EMPLOYEES UNDER THIS ORDINANCE?

>> PAGE 7 3F. THAT IS REPORTING REQUIREMENT THAT ANY IN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN BECOMES AWARE THAT AN INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATION IS PERFORMING AN ABORTION, SHALL REPORT THAT TO THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY.

AT THAT POINT, IT IS A VIOLATE OF THE STATE LAW TO BE PERFORMING ABORTIONS THAT VIOLATE THESE STATUTES.

SO THEY ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT THAT.

>> JUST FOR CLAY FIR INDICATIONE ORIGINAL HAD A CLAUSE MAKING CITY OFFICIALS RESPONSIBLE FOR REPORTING.

WE DID TAKE THAT OUT. >> HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT FROM

WHAT'S THERE. >> IT DOESN'T SAY OFFICIALS.

>> IT DOES. >> ANY OFFICIAL OF THE CITY OF

MIDLOTHIAN. >> IT DOESN'T PUT THE

REQUIREMENT TO DO THAT. >> WE ARE MAKING A GENERAL

STATEMENT WITHOUT TEETH. >> THAT IS NOT -- I'M TRYING TO FIND THE SECTION, PAGELE, WE SAY WE DON'T WANT OUR CITY OFFICIALS INVOLVED IN ENFORCING THIS PROVISION OR ACTING IN CONCERT WITH PEOPLE OR INTERVENING AND SECTION H ON PAGE 8.

>> THE ORIGINAL ORDER NANSZ HAD ORDINANCE HADWHERE YOU COULD MAT

THROUGH THE COURT. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE ON 3F, IF ANY OF OUR EMPLOYEES ASK, IT SAYS THAT ANY OFFICIAL WHO COMES SHALL REPORT THAT INDIVIDUAL. WHAT IS THE -- I GUESS, WHAT'S THE PENALTY IF THEY DON'T? I WANT TO MAKE SURE, TOO, IF

THIS PASSES -- >> THERE IS NO PENALTY.

>> IT SAYS WE SHALL DO IT, NO PENALTY IF IT IS NOT DONE.

I JUST WANT TO EDUCATE OUR EMPLOYEES, IF THIS PASSES WHAT

THEIR OBLIGATIONS ARE. >> THERE IS NO PENALTY.

>> SO THROUGHOUT THE, THERE IS A PHRASE AID AND ABET.

IF THERE IS NOT A CLINIC IN MIDLOTHIAN, HOW CAN ONE AID AND

ABET AND VIOLATE THIS ORDINANCE? >> THEY REALLY COULDN'T BECAUSE THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS IS, YOU CAN AID PEOPLE GOING TO OTHER PLACES TO GO TO AN ABORTION CLINIC ELSEWHERE.

THIS IS ABOUT PREVENTING ABORTIONS IN MIDLOTHIAN.

THAT'S OUR JURISDICTION. >> ALSO PROVISION THAT WE MOVE

-- >> YES, WE DID.

>> ONLY ONE PLACE IN THERE THAT IT STATES THAT THIS IS OHM FOR WITONLY FORWITHIN THE CITY OF M. IT IS NOT REPEATED.

CLARK, THANK YOU. >> I GUESS I WILL TRY TO JUST GRASS AROUND FULL CIRCLE. IF THE WHOLE POINT OF THE ORDINANCE IS TO KEEP OUT ABORTION PROVIDER, DOES CURRENT STATE LAW ALREADY KIND OF DO THAT? REALLY, UNDER CURRENT STATE LAW, CAN YOU REALLY EVEN PUT ONE IN?

>> ARE YOU SAYING CAN -- >> IF PLANNED PARENTHOOD -- WE DON'T HAVE THIS ORDINANCE, PLANNED PARENTHOOD WANTS TO COME

[01:35:02]

HERE TOMORROW. >> THEY CAN, AS LONG AS THEY ARE

NOT PERFORM PERFORMING ABORTION. >> THE WHOLE POINT IS TO STOP A

PROVIDER FROM COMING HERE. >> AS OF RIGHT NOW, THEY CANNOT.

>> SO I MEAN, I GUESS I'M FOLLOWING ALONG, THAT SEEMS MORE OF A STATEMENT THAN SOMETHING THAT IS ACTUALLY RESTRICTING USE. THE OTHER THING I WAS GOING TO ASK, CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, IS THIS -- ALL OF OUR ORDINANCES TYPICALLY HAVE TO DEAL AROUND PROPERTY.

NOT -- I COULD BE WRONG. THAT ACTUALLY DEAL WITH AN INDIVIDUAL AND THEIR -- I DON'T WANT TO SAY HEALTH.

NONE OF OUR ORDINANCE STRICTLY GO TO INDIVIDUALS AND WHAT THEY DO. IT IS MORE ABOUT UPKEEP

PROPERTY. >> WE HAVE CURFEWS, LIMIT WHEN PEOPLE CAN BE OUT IN PUBLIC, WE HAVE DISORDERLY CONDUCT.

I HAVEN'T READ THE MUNICIPAL CODE.

PROPERTY IS THE BIG PART. >> THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING, I FORGET ABOUT THE TEEN CURFEW. ISN'T THIS MY BIGGESTISH SHOE BH THIS, IT IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE. IF YOU LOOK LIKE YOU ARE GOING THE OTHER WAY, YOU ARE DRUG THROUGH THE STREETS.

HOW MUCH SHOULD AUTHORITY SHOULD A LOCAL GOVERNMENT HAVE INTO THE REGULATION AND MOVEMENT OF A PERSON? I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE TO GO DOWN.

WE ARE NOT A BLUE CITY, WE SET PRECEDENT, THIS IS OKAY FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO EXTEND THAT FAR INTO SOMEONE'S LIFE.

COULD WE SAY, CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, MOST OF THE THINGS WE CONTRABAND IS WEED, WE WILL SAY MARIJUANA IS LEGAL AND THE STATE SAYS IT IS NOT. I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A VERY BACK

AND FORTH NO CLEAR-CUT WAY. >> I RESPECT YOUR POSITION, COUNCIL. BUT AS A CITY OFFICIAL, YOU ARE AN OFFICIAL OF A HOME RULE CITY. YOU ARE THE FIRST ORGANIZATION, GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION THAT PROTECTS THE HEALTH AND WELFARE AND WELL-BEING OF YOUR CITIZENS. YOU MAKE DECISIONS.

I PICKED ON THE CURFEW, GIVE HEE MORE TIME I WILL THINK OF SOME MORE. BUT THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THE CURFEW CAME IN, I THOUGHT, WOW, MIDLOTHIAN DOESN'T NEED A CURFEW. WE HAVE 6,000 PEOPLE.

BUT AS WE GET TO 30,000 PEOPLE AND WE HAVE -- I DON'T WANT TO BLAME THE KIDS, SOMEBODY PUTTING GRAFFITI ON PARK EQUIPMENT, MAYBE WE DO NEED A CURFEW. THOSE ARE DECISIONS WE EXPECT YOU TO MAKE AS REPRESENTATIVE. THERE ARE CONTROLS YOU MAKE.

EVERY DECISION HAS TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS BEST FOR ITS RESIDENTS. HOW WE FEEL IN THE CITY WE WANT TO SEE IS WHAT WE ARE VOICING TO YOU.

OVERWHELMING MAJORITY VOICE HAS SPOKEN TONIGHT.

THE ONES THAT SPOKE TO US AND PEOPLE ON THE COMMITTEE.

WE SUPPORT SENDING THE MESSAGE THAT THE CITY WE WANT TO LIVE IN IS ONE WITHOUT AN ABORTION CLINIC.

IF I COULD WRITE AN ONE SENTENCE ORDINANCE, NO ABORTION CLINICS, WE WOULD BE HAPPY. BUT WE CAN'T WRITE THAT ORDINANCE. THE ORDER THANS WE ARE WRITING IS WE ARE NOT GOING TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO AID THAT, ABET THAT AND BEGIN DEVELOPING ABORTION SERVICES IN OUR TOWN.

WE DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT, THAT ARE GOING TO LEAD TO ABORTIONS IN OUR CITY. THAT'S WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO

ACCOMPLISH HERE TONIGHT. >> I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT NINE JUSTICE TOOK THE QUESTION OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE.

YOU WANT SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS TO DO THE SAME THING.

WE CAN ACCOMPLISH WITH A RESOLUTION THAT WE ARE A SANCTUARY CITY. OTHERWISE, WE SHOULD GIVE IT TO THE PEOPLE AND SAY, THIS IS NOT WHY YOU ELECTED COUNCIL, TO MAKE THIS TYPE OF DECISION. THAT'S PROBABLY THE CRUX OF THE ARGUMENT. WHERE THIS DECISION SHOULD BE MADE. THIS PARTICULAR DECISION, I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE OF MIDLOTHIAN ARE SAYING, THIS TYPE OF DECISION, WE WANT THE COUNCIL TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS.

WE WANT YOU FOR ROADS AND POLICE.

I GO BACK TO THE PRE-- BUT THIS ISSUE I THINK IS BEYOND THE

SCOPE OF COUNCIL. >> MAYOR RENO, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE. LET ME BEGIN WITH THIS.

COMPARING YOUR ROLE TO U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICES IS NOT

[01:40:03]

THEY CAN ONLY DECISION WHETHER OR NOT SOMEONE -- SOMETHING VIOLATES U.S. CONSTITUTION. THEY CAN'T TELL US WHERE TO PUT ROADS BECAUSE IT IS NOT A FEDERAL QUESTION.

THEY CAN'T TELL YOU WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD HAVE A CURFEW.

IT IS NOT A FEDERAL QUESTION UNLESS IT VIOLATES THE FIRST AMENDMENT. SO UNLESS IT TRIGGERS.

THE POINT BECOMES -- >> SO WE ARE THE MIRROR OPPOSITE

OF EACH OTHER. >> LET ME JUMP IN.

>> HUD. >> I JUST WANT TO REMIND US, WE NEED TO BE SPEAKING TOWARD THE AGENDA ITEM.

MR. ALTMAN IS NOT THE ORIGIN OF THIS ISSUE.

HE IS HERE TO INFORM US. HE VOLUNTEERED HIS TIME FOR THE CITY. I WISH WE WOULD ADDRESS HIM ACCORDINGLY. I CALL THE VOTE.

>> THE PURPOSE OF IS FOR THE COMMITTEE, COMMITTEE DISCUSS THE ORDINANCE. THIS ORDINANCE IS THE CITY COUNCIL'S ORDINANCE. THE CITY COUNCIL IS NOT HERE TO RUBBER STAMP WHAT THE COMMITTEE DID.

PRESENTING THE COMMITTEE'S FINDINGS, IF YOU WILL, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ORDINANCE, WENT BACK TO TEXAS RIGHT TO LIFE, THEY MADE THEIR COMMENTS, COMMITTEE DISCUSSED IT. IT IS YOUR ORDINANCE.

FOR YOU TO DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT --

>> THERE NEEDS TO BE A DISCUSSION.

>> WITH THAT BEING SAID, -- >> MAYOR.

MY RESPONSIBILITY AS CITY ATTORNEY TO YOU CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION AS OPPOSED TO CALL FOR VOTE.

>> THAT'S WHERE I'M HEADED. >> IF MR. ALTMAN, IF YOU WILL YIELD FOR A WHILE. HE CAME UP HERE AND PRESENTED, I THINK VERY WELL, THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMITTEE AND WHY THEY DID AND WHY. WE MAY HAVE MORE QUESTIONS.

BUT I THINK NOW IT IS TIME FOR COUNCIL, AND THIS IS WHERE JOE HAS BEEN PUSHING ME, NOW TIME FOR THE COUNCIL TO DISCUSS AMONGST OURSELVES. I BELIEVE WE ARE A WAYS FROM TAKING ACTION. WE NEED TO DISCUSSION AMONGST OURSELVES WHAT WE THINK ABOUT THIS AND PROS AND CONS.

>> AGAIN, I CALL THE VOTE. >> MR. ALTMAN, THANK YOU.

I WASN'T TRYINGS TO DEBATE YOU. I WAS TRYING TO HE HAD SKATE EDUCATE MYSELFON WHAT THE COMMID ABOUT.

>> THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE PROCESS.

I'M GLAD WE HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS ENGAGED.

ONLY BY DOING THAT WILL WE FIGURE OUT ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS YOU WERE ASKING. THANK YOU, MEMBERS.

>> THANK YOU. I DO THANK THE COMMITTEE, THEY WERE CITIZENS THAT REALLY ENGAGED AND CARE ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY. I THINK WE HAD A FAIRLY GOOD CROSS-SECTION OF DISCUSSION. SO COUNCIL?

SOMEBODY -- WALTER? >> I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

I WANT CLARIFICATION. THERE WAS A COUNCIL MEMBER WHO CALL FOR A VOTE. JOE, WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO?

>> IN ALL DUE RESPECT, I WOULD ASK THAT THE COUNCIL HAVE DISCUSSION. YOU FORMED A COMMITTEE.

THE COUNCIL DOES NOT WANT TO RUBBER STAMP WHAT THE COMMITTEE DID. IF THERE IS NO DISCUSSION AND

YOU ARE HUNDRED PERCENT HAPPY. >> BUT THERE A MOTION TO VOTE ON? THERE IS NO MOTION.

>> THAT'S FINE. WE CALL FOR A MOTION.

>> I THINK WE ARE TRYING TO HAVE DISCUSSION.

SO I BELIEVE WE ARE TRYING TO HAVE DISCUSSION.

IS THAT WHAT WE ARE ALL AFTER? >> I JUST WANT TO MAC MAKE SUREI

GOT EVERYTHING. >> I ONLY HAVE ONE QUESTION.

I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT IT TO YOU, MR. ALTMAN, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE? I HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES OF THIS.

I WENT HEAVILY THROUGH THE FIRST ORDINANCE.

I RECOGNIZE THE CHANGES IN THE SECOND ORDINANCE.

AND I HAVE HEARD THE POSITION FROM THE COMMITTEE AND THE GROUPS PUSHING THIS ORDINANCE TO BE PASSED TONIGHT.

[01:45:02]

>> WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION. THE WIDER MAJORITY WAS THAT THE -- I THINK WE CAME AROUND TO THIS, UNANIMOUS, BUT IF THE STANDARD PROCESS IS WITH A REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY AND REPUBLIC IS THAT ELECTED LEADERS ARE ELECTED TO MAKE DECISIONS AND PASS ORDINANCE, BECAUSE THEY HASH IT OUT, THEY TAKE OUT LANGUAGE, THEY, FOR EXAMPLE, LOOK AT SECTION 5 AND SAY MAYBE THAT SHOULDN'T BE IN THERE IN LIGHT OF WHAT JUST HAPPENED, ABLE TO TAILOR THE LANGUAGE BASED ON THEIR EXPERIENCE AND THEIR FOR WHAT GOVERNMENT NEEDS. MUCH LARGER CONCERN, IF YOU OPEN UP THE ELECTION, MONEY COMES IN FROM BOTH SIDES THAT ARE OPPOSED TO THIS ISSUE. WE BECOME A SHOW WHERE BOTH SIDES ARE POURING MONEY IN AND MAKE AGO DECISION.

MAKING A DECISION. IF THERE IS POPULAR SUPPORT AGAINST THE ORDINANCE, THOSE OPPOSING IT ALWAYS HAVE THE OPTION, THIS IS WHAT WE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION IN OUR COMMITTEE MEETING, THEY ALWAYS HAVE THE OPTION OF PETITIONING TO GET A QUESTION AND A COUNTER, EITHER A COUNTER ORDINANCE ON THE BALLOT WITH LANGUAGE THEY LIKE OR THEY COULD EVEN POINT FOR AN OUTRIGHT APPEAL OF IT. IF THE PEOPLE OPPOSED TO THE ORDINANCE, MAJORITY OF THE CITY, KIND OF WHAT OUR DIRECT WAS WE TAKE FROM THE COUNCIL, THEY WANT TO SEE SOME TYPE OF ORDINANCE LIKE THIS PASSED. THOSE ARE THE TWO REASONS I WOULD GIVE WHY THE -- YOU AND THE OTHER MEMBERS SHOULD VOTE TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE RATHER THAN PUTTING IT OUT TO VOTE.

>> I'M GOING TO KEEP IT IN COUNCIL, THANK YOU, DAN.

I GUESS TO YOUR QUESTION, NOW I FEEL BAD USE I'M GOING TO PICK OFF SOMETHING YOU SAID, TO THE ATTORNEY'S POINT, I THINK IT IS TIME FOR US TO TALK. IF THERE IS AN OUTCRY OF SUPPORT AGAINST THIS, THEY CAN PUT IT ON THE BALLOT.

THE SAME IS TRUE IF THERE IS THAT LARGE OF SUPPORT FOR IT.

THE ARGUMENT ABOUT -- I HAVE HEARD THIS ARGUMENT, PERSONALLY I THINK IT IS A TERRIBLE ONE, BOTH SIDES ARE GOING TO DUMP IN MONEY. SO OUR CITIZENS ARE SO WEAK IN THEIR BELIEFS THAT THEY CAN BE BOUGHT? I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT. SO I DON'T THINK GOING TO PUBLIC VOTE AND PEOPLE DUMPING MONEY IN IS GOING TO CHANGE SOMEONE'S TRUE CORE VALUE ON HOW THEY FEEL IF THE CITY SHOULD HAVE THIS.

WE ARE OFFICIALS AND MAKE DECISIONS, BUT WE WON'T EVEN GO AFTER BONDS WITHOUT TALKING TO OUR CITIZENS.

NOW WE ARE GOING TO SAY, HEY, THIS ONE IS ON US? I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT EITHER.

SO FOR ME, I THINK WE SHOULD JUST LET THE CITIZENS VOTE ON IT. WE HAVE THEM VOTE ON HOW MUCH MON WE BORROW WHEN WE NEED TO BORROW MONEY.

I THINK THAT ONE IS -- THIS ONE IS A BIGGER MAGNITUDE AND WE SHOULD LET THEM HAVE THE SAY IN IT.

>> I HAVEN'T SAID A WHOLE LOT. I HAVE THOUGHT A LOT.

AND I'M DEFINITELY AGAINST ABORTION, NO QUESTION ABOUT T THAT. AS FAR AS, WHAT CLARK JUST SAID, I THINK THIS IS AN ISSUE WE NEED THE WHOLE COMMUNITY TO DECIDE ON. THIS THEY ELECTED US TO MAKE DECISIONS. THIS IS A PERSONAL DECISION THAT I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH. I THINK WE SHOULD --

>> I WOULD SAY IT IS -- THIS IS A DECISION THAT PROTECTS OUR CITY. THIS IS A DECISION THAT ADDS AN EXTRA LAYER OF PROTECTION FOR OUR COMMUNITY, FOR OUR CITIZENS, FOR THE UNBORN IN OUR COMMUNITY FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS.

THIS IS A DECISION THAT WE WERE ELECTED TO MAKE.

I THINK WE HAVE A RARE OPPORTUNITY RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW

[01:50:03]

FUTURE COUNCIL MAY OVERTURN THAT.

THAT COULD BE THEIR PREROGATIVE. I CAN GUARANTY YOU, I WILL BE SITTING ON THAT FRONT ROW STANDING AGAINST THAT.

PLEASE HAVE THE DISCIPLINE TO RESPECT ALL CITIZENS THAT ARE

HERE. >> THIS IS A VERY EMOTIONAL THING. TO STAND AGAINST THIS OR TO SUGGEST SOMETHING DIFFERENT IS NOT EASY.

IT IS PUTTING YOUR PLACE IN A POSITION OF SOMETHING YOU ARE NOT SAYING. I BELIEVE IN THE SAN SANCTITY OF LIFE. THIS ORDINANCE IS GOING TO MAKE A LIFE DIFFERENCE. WHAT IT COULD DO IS PUT CITIZENS AGAINST CITIZENS INTO A DISCUSSION WE DON'T NEED.

THE STATE HAS TAKEN CARE OF IT. THIS IS THOUGHT WHY I WAS ELECTED TO BE ON COUNCIL, TO MAKE THIS TYPE OF DECISION.

WE CAN MAKE A RESOLUTION, COME OUT REAL STRONG.

LET'S DO WHAT THE COUNTY DID. THE COUNTY HAS MADE A STATEMENT THAT WE ARE A PRO LIFE SANCTUARY COUNTY.

THEY MADE A RESOLUTION. LET'S DO THE SAME THING.

BUT IF WE WANT TO MAKE AN ORDINANCE, WE NEED TO ASK OUR PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT, TO GET THEM INVOLVED:HUD?

>> WHEN WE ARE ELECTED TO PUBLIC OFFICE, YOU ARE TASKED WITH DOING WHAT THE CITIZENS -- YOU BELIEVE THEIR DESIRE IS, THEIR WANTS. IT IS NOT ALWAYS EASY.

YOU DON'T ALWAYS GET IT RIGHT. YOU VOTE ONE WAY, NEXT DAY, NEXT MONTH, YOU GO, I SHOULDN'T HAVE VOTED THAT WAY, THINGS HAPPEN.

BUT WE ARE ELECTED TO MAKE DECISIONS.

NOT ALL OF THEM ARE VOTES TO GIVE AN AWARD TO POLICE OFFICER OR FIREARM. SOMETIMES T THEY ARE REALLY TOUH VOTES. IT IS OUR DUTY, IN MY OPINION, TO STAND FIRM AND PUT YOUR NAME ON YOUR VOTE, WHETHER YOU ARE RIGHT OR WRONG, TO PUT YOUR NAME ON A VOTE AND VOTE ON ISSUES LIKE THIS. IF WE AS A COUNCIL ONLY VOTED ON THE EASY ISSUES, WHAT KIND OF COUNCIL WOULD WE BE.

I AM PROUD OF THE WORDS THAT MR. ALTMAN SPOKE.

I'M VERY PRO LIFE. I'M A CHRISTIAN.

AND THAT'S THE DIRECTION I'M GOING TO LEAVE THE CITIZENS IN.

>> I WOULD CONTEND THAT PUTTING THIS STATUTE INTO PLACE WOULD NOT SAVE LIVES IN THE IMMEDIATE GIVEN THE STATE LEGISLATION.

BUT COULD SAVE LIVES IN THE FUTURE IF THE STATE LEGISLATION OVERTURNS. IT GIVES AN EXTRA LAYER OF PROTECTION FOR OUR COMMUNITY IF THE STATE LEGISLATURE OVERTURNS.

THAT WOULD BE A DECISION THE STATE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE AT THAT POINT. I WOULD SAY LET'S DO EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN DO ON OUR SIDE IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE FUTURE OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND LET THE STATE OVERRULE IF THEY DEEM NECESSARY, BUT THAT WOULD AT LEAST GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO STAND AT THE DOORSTEPS OF THE CAPITOL AND SAY, DON'T TOUCH MIDLOTHIAN BECAUSE WE HAVE GOT OUR OWN ORDINANCES IMPLEMENTED AND WE SHOULD BE PROTECTED BECAUSE OF

IT. >> I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE.

WE WENT OVER THAT. IF THE STATE LEGISLATURE CHANGED, WE ONLY GET OUR AUTHORITY FROM THE LEGISLATURE WHICH GIVES US THE POWER TO ENACT ORDINANCES.

STATE LAW SUPERSEDES. THAT WOULD BE THE COURT CASE.

>> THIS WHOLE YEAR HAS BEEN FRUSTRATING.

ANY TIME IT HAS BEEN A COMMENT, IT IS, YOU ARE NOT CHRISTIAN.

I HAVE HAD OTHER CHRISTIANS TELLING ME, WHICH IS FUNNY.

IT HAS -- OR PRO LIFE. I DON'T THINK ANYONE IS SAYING WE ARE NOT PRO LIFE. ALL WE ARE SAYING IS I THINK THIS IS A DECISION THAT IS BIGGER THAN US.

[01:55:02]

WE SOUGHT OUT WHAT OUR CONSTITUENTS WANTED.

THEY SAY, WELL, WE HAVE -- I HAVE GOTTEN LIKE 20 EMAILS, MAYBE, FROM BOTH SIDES. SO 20 FROM BOTH SIDES AND COMMITTEE OF 6 IS GOING TO REPRESENT ALL 45,000, 40,000

PEOPLE? >> WE REPRESENT THOSE PEOPLE.

>> CAN I CLARIFY ONE THING. NOBODY IS QUESTIONING PRO LIFE OR CHRISTIANITY. IT IS A DIFFERENCE ON THAT BELIEF THAT YOU MENTIONED, IS THIS IN OUR PURVIEW OR IS IT NOT. I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT IS WITHIN OUR PURVIEW.

I WILL MAKE THAT STATEMENT. >> EVER SINCE I HAVE SAT ON COUNCIL, WE HAVE HAD THESE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. THEY GO FROM THE WHOLE REALM FROM SUBLIME TO RIDICULOUS. HOW DO YOU KNOW THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE? THE OTHER WAY YOU KNOW THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE IS GO ASK THEM. CLARK IS RIGHT.

THE BOND ISSUE, WE NEED TO KNOW THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

OTHERWISE WE VOTE. I WOULD SUBMIT THAT WHAT WE VOTE IS OUR CONSCIENCE MORE THAN WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

I RAN ON CERTAIN PLATFORMS AND I TOLD PEOPLE WHO I WAS AND THE BEST I COULD, HERE IS HOW I WILL MAKE A DECISION.

AND WHEN DECISION COMES IN FRONT OF ME, THIS IS HOW I'M GOING DO IT. SO AND PEOPLE SAY, WELL, THE PEOPLE GET TO SAY THEIR WILL AT THE NEXT ELECTION, WHETHER OR NOT THEY LIKE WHAT IS BEING DONE.

AT NO TIME TO MY KNOWLEDGE HAS THIS TOPIC EVER BEEN PART OF THE POLITICAL DEBATE. WE DON'T KNOW THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. WE ARE GOING TO STEP UP HERE AND MAKE A VOTE. I WILL FULLY SUPPORT A RESOLUTION LIKE THE COUNTY DID, THAT WE ARE A PRO LIFE CITY AND WE STAND BEHIND THAT. BUT SHORT OF THAT, I SAY THIS DECISION, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE IS.

ON THIS ISSUE, I DON'T WANT TO IMPOSE MY PERSONAL WILL.

THIS IS BEYOND ME. AND THIS IS HARD.

I HAVE STRUGGLED WITH THIS FOR THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS AND MONTHS AND FARTHER BACK. BECAUSE I HAVE FRIENDS IN TULSA THAT SAY YOU HAVE TO STAND FOR LIFE.

YOU DO WHATEVER YOU CAN TO STAND FOR LIFE.

I AGREE WITH THAT. WAIT A MINUTE, THAT'S NOT WHY I AM HERE. I HAVEN'T BEEN PUT HERE TO MAKE THIS DECISION. THIS IS BEYOND -- THIS NEEDS TO

HAVE THE VOTE OF THE PEOPLE. >> AGAIN, RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE.

THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE

THIS ORDINANCE BY REMOVING -- B. >> SECOND.

>> REMOVING SECTION 5, RESERVING FOR FUTURE USE.

>> SECOND. >> I SUPPOSE YOU WOULDN'T BE

OPEN TO GO TO PUBLIC BALLOT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO RIP THE

BAND-AID OFF TONIGHT. >> DID I HEAR A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED BY THE COMMITTEE WITH EXCEPTION OF REMOVING SECTION 5. IT WAS SECONDED.

AND WITHOUT FURTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE VOTE.

A MOTION FAILS, 3-4. DISCUSSION, COMMENTS?

A SECOND MOTION? >> MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE -- I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THIS GOES ON THE MAY BALLOT.

I CAN'T NECESSARILY SAY APPROVE IT, WE ARE NOT APPROVING IT.

WE ARE TRYING TO SET A DATE FOR IT TO GO ON PUBLIC BALLOT.

WHICH THE NOVEMBER CUT-OFF HAS PASSED.

IT WOULD HAVE TO GO ON MAY. >> [INAUDIBLE].

>> CAN A MOTION BE PUT TO VOTE? PUBLIC VOTE? WE CAN DISCUSS DEBATE LATER AS TO WHEN THAT HAPPENS?

>> I WOULD THINK YOU ARE GIVING US DIRECTION.

AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO -- >> THAT WILL HAVE THE ORDINANCE

[02:00:04]

ATTACHED TO IT AT THAT TIME. >> WE HAVE HAVE WORKSHOPS TO HAMMER OUT WHAT THE BALLOT LANGUAGE IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE IF THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE CASE.

>> OKAY. SO DOESN'T REALLY ANNIVERSARY MY QUESTION. ANSWER MY QUESTION. CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO GET THIS TO GO TO PUBLIC PAL LOT.

>> WE HAVE TO DIRECT -- AS OF RIGHT NOW, THE ORDINANCE FAILED.

SO THE ONLY OTHER MOTION IS CONSIDER ORDINANCE.

THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN ON HERE, WE ARE NOT CONSIDERING THE ORDINANCE ANYMORE. WHAT WE ARE DOING IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO BRING IT BACK TO THE BALLOT.

YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION RECOMMENDING THAT THIS GO BACK TO THE MAY ELECTION. BUT IT WILL HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL FOR A VOTE TO SEND IT OUT.

>> IF I DON'T MAKE THAT MOTION, THE ORDINANCE FAILED, IT IS G

GONE. >> AS OF RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO

OTHER MOTION. >> DO WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THE

ORDINANCE ITSELF FIRST. >> YOU DID VOTE ON THE ORDINANCE. ORDINANCE FAILED.

SO IF SOMEONE IS GOING TO MAKE ANOTHER MOTION TO BRING THIS BACK FOR CONSIDERATION, TO BE PLACED ON THE MAY BALLOT.

YOU CAN DO THAT. IT IS STILL GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE YOU AS AN ACTION ITEM TO APPROVE IT TO GO

ON TO THE M MAY BALLOT. >> CAN WE MAKE A MOTION EWE PROVING THE ORDINANCE WITH THE STIPULATION IT GOES TO PUBLIC

VOTE. >> YES, BUT IT WILL STILL HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE YOU FOR ACTION TO BE PLACED ON THE MAY Y

BALLOT. >> IF NO ONE MAKES THAT MOTION,

WE MOVE TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. >> IF NOBODY MAKES A MOTION, WE MOVE TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM WHICH IS EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> CAN WE MAKE THIS A RESOLUTION?

>> THAT IS NOT WHAT IS BEFORE US RIGHT NOW.

SO WE CAN ONLY VOTE ON THE RECOMMENDATION.

WE CAN'T REPACKAGE IT? >> NO, YOU CANNOT REPACKAGE IT.

IT IS ON THE AGENDA AS AN ORDINANCE.

NO REPACKAGING TONIGHT. >> OKAY.

>> SO WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.

THERE'S BASICALLY NO OTHER WAY TO TAILOR IT TONIGHT.

IS THAT WHAT I AM UNDERSTANDING. >> CORRECT.

>> UNLESS THERE IS A DIFFERENT MOTION.

>> IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION TO RECONSIDER -- THE ORDINANCE AMENDING AND

REMOVING SECTION 5. >> IS THERE A SECOND.

>> SECOND. >> THERE IS A SECOND.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED WITH THE REMOVE OF SECTION 5. SECONDED.

PLEASE VOTE. >> ITEM STILL FAILS, 4-3.

IN LIEU OF NO OTHER OPTIONS, THE COUNCIL WILL STAND ADJOURNED TO

THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. >>> THE COUNCIL CONVENE TO

[EXECUTIVE SESSION]

FIRE STATION NO. 4. >> MAYOR: AT.

[02:05:06]

>> ADDITIONALLY, EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR SECTION 551.072 REAL ESTATE, DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY, TO DELIBERATE THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, LEASE OR VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY ]

>> MAYOR: IT IS 8:48, COUPLE IS BACK IN SESSION.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION? >> I HAVE A FEW MOTIONS, JUST CLARIFY FOR ME, SINCE I AM NEW. THE ONE, TWO, THREE WE WROTE DOWN, IN REGARDS -- ITEM NO. 2 20,.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE PURCHASE SALE AGREEMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF NORTH 9TH AND 67 IN THE AMOUNT OF $31,000 PLUS

ASSOCIATED CLOSING COSTS. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION, SECOND, PLEASE VOTE. MOWING PASSES 7-0.

>> IN REGARDS TO ITEM NO. 2022-426, I MAKE A METION TO MOO INCREASE THE ANNUAL PAY OF THE CITY SECRETARY, BASE PAY, BY 4%

. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES 7-0. SECRETARY JOB, WELL DONE.

WE APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS. WITHOUT -- NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I MOVE THAT WE ADJOURN, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

OPPOSE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.