[00:00:01]
I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE FEBRUARY MEETING OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION.
COULD WE HAVE THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE? COMMISSIONER NORBY? HERE.
COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR OUR MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15TH.
SO, ANY ORDER A SECOND? IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MINUTES? DID ANYONE SEE ANY CHANGES THEY THOUGHT NEEDED TO BE MADE? IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE MINUTES? SEEING NONE.
COULD WE MOVE TO THE VOTE PLEASE? SORRY FOR THE SECONDARY.
IT WAS COMMISSIONER WISE AS A MOTION AND THEN, AND ANOR WAS SECOND.
ANOR WAS THE SECOND I HAD MY MIC OFF.
IN THE INTEREST OF OUR GUEST TIME, I'M GONNA MOVE ITEM THREE UP IN THE AGENDA.
SO COULD I HAVE A MOTION ON THE RECOMMENDATION TO DISCUSS AMENDMENTS PROMO PROPOSED TO LOBBYIST ORDINANCE LONG BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 2.8 BY THE AD HOC COMMITTEE? AND IF APPROPRIATE, PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
RIGHT NOW, LET'S JUST MOVE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION.
I SECOND MOVE BY COMMISSIONER SHOTWELL.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DE BENEDICTUS.
UM, BEFORE I GO INTO COMMENTS BY THE COMMISSIONERS OR A DISCUSSION, I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE OUR CITY'S EQUITY OFFICER.
SHE'S AGREED TO COME IN AND GO OVER WITH US, HER THOUGHTS ON THE DOCUMENT AND ANY, ANY, ANY THOUGHTS SHE HAS ON WHERE WE MIGHT HAVE GONE ASTRAY.
IT'S GONNA BE MORE Q AND A, SO AS, AS QUESTIONS COME UP, A DIALOGUE UNLESS
SO YOU WANT US TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS? YES.
SO I GUESS I'LL START THEN WITH THE FIRST QUESTION BECAUSE THIS IS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S COME UP A LOT IN PUBLIC COMMENT ASKING IF WE HAD RUN THIS BY YOU AND IF THIS MEETS THE CITY'S EQUITY STANDARDS, AND ARE THERE AREAS HERE OR DOES IT, DOES IT MEET THE CITY'S EQUITY STANDARDS? AND IF NOT, WHAT AREAS DO WE NEED TO TAKE A NEW LOOK AT? WELL, GOOD AFTERNOON.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
I DO APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU ALL TODAY.
HONESTLY, I DO NEED MORE TIME TO GIVE A DETAILED, UH, EQUITY, YOU KNOW, ASSESSMENT.
BUT, UM, THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS THAT, OR UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, YOU KNOW, WITH SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN THAT I WOULD JUST POSE, UH, FOR CONSIDERATION.
AND SO YOU WOULD LIKE MORE TIME, WOULD YOU BE MORE PREPARED TO MAKE THAT REC REPORT TO US IN MARCH? YES.
UM, THEN I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO COMMISSION OR THE VICE CHAIR WHO'S GOING TO GIVE A REPORT FOR THE AD HOC.
UM, FIRST, UH, AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE AD HOCS BEEN IN PLACE FOR TWO YEARS.
UM, AND, UH, WE'VE BEEN BEFORE THE COMMISSION A COUPLE OF TIMES.
I JUST WANNA BRING UP TO DATE, UH, THE CHAIR AND I HAD INITIALLY MET WITH LONG BEACH FORWARD AND THE NONPROFIT PARTNERSHIP AT THEIR REQUEST.
WE MET WITH THEM TWICE BEFORE THE AD HOC REVISED THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE SUBMITTED TO THE, UH, FULL COMMISSION AND THE AD HOC, THE ENTIRE AD HOC MET WITH THEM AGAIN LAST WEEK AFTER THE REVISED RECOMMENDATIONS WERE POSTED ON THE PUBLIC WEBSITE.
ALTHOUGH, ADMITTEDLY, THERE WAS A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME BETWEEN THE POSTING AND, UH, AND OUR MEETING DRIVEN BY THE NEED TO HAVE EVERYTHING POSTED ON THE PUBLIC WEBSITE.
UM, THE TWO ORGANIZATIONS DO OPPOSE ANY REQUIREMENT FOR 5 0 1 C3 NONPROFITS TO REGISTER WHEN THEY LOBBY AND EXTENSION OF THE STATUTE TO NON LOBBYING ADVOCACY.
UM, TO THE EXTENT THE COMMISSION MOVES FORWARD WITH THE AD HOC RECOMMENDATION ON THESE TWO ISSUES, THE NONPROFIT PARTNERSHIP AND LB FORWARD REQUESTED THAT WE CONSIDER A HIGHER REVENUE THRESHOLD FOR EXEMPTION AND MORE LIMITED SCOPE OF ADVOCACY.
UM, AT THIS TIME, WE'RE NOT CHANGING OUR RECOMMENDATION,
[00:05:01]
BUT WE LOOK FORWARD TO A ROBUST DISCUSSION WITH THE ENTIRE COMMISSION ON THOSE ISSUES.UH, THE TWO ORGANIZATIONS ALSO RAISED A SIGNIFICANT CONCERN ABOUT THE REQUIREMENT THAT REGISTRATION FILINGS CONTAIN THE NAMES OF PERSONS INVOLVED IN THE LOBBYING EFFORT.
AND AGAIN, WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A DISCUSSION ON THAT ISSUE.
THE NONPROFIT COMMUNITY ALSO IS UNDERSTANDABLY CONCERNED ABOUT POTENTIAL IMPACT ON COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES BETWEEN THE CITY AND NONPROFITS.
IT IS NOT THE INTENT OF THESE RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO REACH COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES.
FOR EXAMPLE, THOSE INVOLVING GRANT OR CONTRACTING ACTIVITIES.
THE AD HOC COMMITTEE IS RECOMMENDING A NEW EXEMPTION THAT IS NOT IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE ORDINANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO REQUIRE REGISTRATION OR REPORTING ON COLLABORATIVE RELATIONSHIPS.
UH, I, I THINK WITH THOSE, UH, POINTS, UH, EVERYONE HAS SEEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, UM, AND, UH, UH, MUCH FOCUSED ON THOSE ISSUES.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE AD HOC GOES BEYOND THOSE ISSUES, AND I WOULD OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
UH, COMMISSIONER WEISS, YOU HAD SOMETHING TO ADD, UH, JUST, JUST BRIEFLY, WHICH IS THAT WE DID, UM, ALSO LOOK RECENTLY AT SOME OF THE, UM, REPORTS THAT ARE FILED IN LOS ANGELES AND IN OAKLAND, WHICH ARE ENTITIES WHERE NONPROFITS ARE REQUIRED TO, TO FILE.
AND, UH, THE ONES IN OAKLAND REQUIRE THAT THEY STATE THE TOPIC THAT THEY ARE ADVOCATING ON AND THE POSITION THEY TOOK.
SO I LOOKED AT A COUPLE OF THEM.
ONE WAS AN ENTITY THAT WAS, UM, WAS, UH, LOBBYING ABOUT, UH, ZERO EMISSIONS IN THE OAKLAND COURT.
ANOTHER ONE WAS, UM, UH, I'M GONNA CALL IT A LEGAL AID ORGANIZATION.
IT WAS CALLED CENTRAL LEGAL DE LA RAZA, AND IT WAS IN 2020.
AND THEY WERE LOBBYING FOR, UM, UM, EVICTION MORATORIUM AND, AND TENANTS, TENANTS RIGHTS TYPES THINGS.
UH, LOS ANGELES DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT TOPICS BE REVEALED, SO BE STATED.
SO ALL THAT IS SHOWN IS THAT THIS PERSON AND THIS ORGANIZATION, WE'RE TALKING TO THESE PEOPLE, UM, AND NOT EVEN THOSE PEOPLE, IT'LL JUST SAY CITY COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, SORT OF SOME TITLES.
SO, UM, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT HAS THAT, UH, CAME INTO US, UM, THROUGH SOME WORK THAT STAFF DID AT OUR REQUEST.
SO I'D JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT THE AD HOC DID MEET AGAIN YESTERDAY TO, TO GO OVER AGAIN THE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED BY THE NONPROFIT PARTNERSHIP IN LONG BEACH FORWARD.
AT OUR MEETING OF LAST WEEK, UM, WE, WE HEARD THE CONCERNS LOUD AND CLEAR AS THE VICE CHAIR INDICATED.
WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY RECOMMENDATION ON CHANGING THE THRESHOLD DOLLAR LIMIT AT THIS TIME BECAUSE WE'D LIKE TO HAVE A ROBUST DISCUSSION OF THE COMMISSION.
UM, THE ONE AREA THAT WE, WE THOUGHT MORE DEEPLY ABOUT AND WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT THERE BE A CHANGE IN THE REPORT THAT WENT TO YOU IS THE REQUIREMENT.
THE NAMES THAT THE NAMES OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT ATTEND THE LOBBYING MEETINGS BE DISCLOSED.
UM, COMMISSIONER WEISS HAD ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER NAMES HAVE TO BE DISCLOSED AT THE COUNCIL MEETINGS, AND IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT.
SO WE THOUGHT IN, IN CONFORMITY WITH HOW THOSE COMMUNICATIONS ARE HANDLED IN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS, IT WOULD BE BEST IF WE COULD PULL THAT REQUIREMENT OUT.
UM, THERE WAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT VERY, VERY PROMINENT PEOPLE COMING INTO OUR CITY FROM OUTSIDE THE CITY TO LOBBY OR ADVOCATE WITH OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR.
UM, AND IT WAS DECIDED THAT WE NEEDED TO, TO LEAN IN THE MANNER OF SUPPORTING THOSE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO KEEP THEIR IDENTITIES QUIET FOR FEAR OF OTHER RETALIATION OR OTHER FORMS OF, UM, OF ACTIONS THAT COULD BE TAKEN AGAINST US.
IF SOME VERY PROMINENT PERSON COMES IN, WE ARE GOING TO RELY ON THE MEDIA AND PEOPLE WITH CAMERAS TO LET US KNOW THAT THOSE PROMINENT PEOPLE ARE COMING INTO OUR CITY TRYING TO ADVOCATE BECAUSE SOMEBODY WHO'S VERY WELL KNOWN WOULD HAVE A FACE THAT'S GOING TO BE EASILY
[00:10:01]
RECOGNIZABLE.SO, UM, WITH WHATEVER WE DO TODAY, WE WOULD LIKE THE RECOMMENDATION TO COME BACK TO US SO THAT WE COULD ELIMINATE THAT PORTION OF THE RECOMMENDATION.
AND I'M GONNA GIVE EACH OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS A CHANCE TO GO THROUGH AND MAKE ANY COMMENTS THEY WANT BEFORE I OPEN THE FLOOR TO THE PUBLIC.
SO WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO START NOW? I APPROPRIATE TIME TO ASK QUESTION.
SO ONE, I JUST WANT TO, I, I THINK IT'S A GREAT BODY OF WORK AND IT'S A, I KNOW THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF EFFORT OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS PUT INTO IT, UH, WITH, UM, AND I APPRECIATE THE DILIGENCE THAT WAS PUT IN LOOKING AT A LOT OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS.
THESE ARE MORE JUST QUESTIONS, UM, AND POINTS.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IF WE HAVE, HOW WE'VE THOUGHT 'EM THROUGH.
NUMBER ONE IS WE ACTUALLY PUT THIS ON THE CITY STAFF.
I'M SORRY, WE MAKE A PROPOSAL WITH THESE RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS THAT THIS IS THE SUBJECT OF THE AMENDMENT, BUT WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY PROVIDING THE DRAFT LANGUAGE OF THE AMENDMENT.
AND I WANNA KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE WHY, AND WOULDN'T IT BE BETTER IF WE ACTUALLY GAVE THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE OF THE AMENDMENT.
SO THE REASON THAT THERE'S NO ACTUAL LANGUAGE IS BECAUSE THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE HAS TO BE WRITTEN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
OKAY? SO WE HAVE MA WE ARE MAKING PROPOSALS THAT THEY CAN ADOPT, THEY CANNOT ADOPT.
AND IF THEY CHOOSE TO GO FORWARD, THEY WILL THEN ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO HAVE HER STAFF WRITE, WRITE THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE.
SO WE TRIED TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE IN THE REPORT AS CLEAR AS POSSIBLE AS TO THE INTENT SO THAT WHATEVER CITY ATTORNEY TAKES UP THE DRAFTING OF THOSE WILL HAVE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE INTENT WAS.
UM, WITH REGARD TO RECOMMENDATION NUMBER THREE, UM, WE REQUIRE IN THE PROPOSAL OF THE RECOMMENDATION OR WOULD REQUIRE A SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF EACH MUNICIPAL QUESTION, ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION, ET CETERA.
AND WITH REGARD TO MUNICIPAL QUESTION, UM, THAT'S WHERE I THOUGHT THAT WAS SOMEWHAT VAGUE.
UH, WE COULD POSSIBLY HAVE A MUNICIPAL QUESTION WHERE SOMEBODY IS CALLING IN AGAIN ABOUT, YOU KNOW, A PERSONAL CONCERN ASSOCIATED WITH POTHOLES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UH, WHAT IS REALLY CONTEMPLATED BY A MUNICIPAL QUESTION, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE REPORTED IF I BELIEVE
UM, WE DEFINITELY ARE TRYING TO AVOID DEALING WITH, UH, REQUIRING REGISTRATION FOR THE SITUATION LIKE POTHOLES, TREES, ET CETERA.
AND WE PUT LANGUAGE IN THE RECOMMENDATION TO THAT EFFECT.
UM, MUNICIPAL QUESTION, ONE OF THE EXAMPLES THAT COMMISSIONER WISE MENTIONED WAS, FOR EXAMPLE, EARTH JUSTICE LOBBYING THE CITY OF OAKLAND ON, UH, UH, A SEEKING TO HAVE THE PORT OF OAKLAND BECOME ZERO EMISSION ENTITY.
UM, THAT'S A MUNICIPAL QUESTION.
UM, IN, IN THE DRAFTING WHICH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WOULD BECOME RESPONSIBLE FOR, IT'S GONNA, IT, IT IT WILL HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFULLY DRAFTED TO ENSURE THAT WE DON'T HIT AN INDIVIDUAL RESIDENT WHO IS TRYING TO GET POTHOLES FIXED OR TREES TRIMMED, OR A TRAFFIC LIGHT AT A CORNER, ET CETERA.
AND WHAT I'M BALANCING HERE IS I, THE DESIRE FOR TRANSPARENCY ON ONE HAND AND JUST THE ABILITY TO COMPLY MY, I WILL COME AT IT WITH THE ABILITY TO COMPLY.
AND, AND ONE OF THE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE SAFEGUARDS AGAINST THAT WOULD BE THE REQUIREMENT THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO REGISTER UNTIL YOU'VE HAD THREE CONTACTS IN A SINGLE MONTH OKAY.
BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO REPORT, EVEN IF YOU'VE NO REPORTING OR REGISTRATION, NO REPORTING BEFORE YOU'RE REQUIRED TO REGISTER.
ONCE YOU'RE REQUIRED TO REGISTER, THEN YOU REPORT EVEN A SINGLE CONTACT THE NEXT MONTH.
THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD, UH, COULD I JUST ADD TO THAT TOO? I WANNA POINT OUT THAT THE, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING ARE AMENDMENTS OR CHANGES TO THE EXISTING ORDINANCE.
SO THE EXISTING ORDINANCE REQUIRES BUSINESSES OR ORGANIZATIONS TO REPORT.
IT DOESN'T REQUIRE ME AS A HOMEOWNER TO, TO REPORT WHEN I CALL ABOUT MY TREE.
SO I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY ALREADY TAKEN CARE
[00:15:01]
OF.ONE OF THE, I I REALIZED AS I READ SOME OF THE COMMENTS, UM, I'M GOING A LITTLE FARTHER THAN JUST RESPONDING, BUT SOME OF THE COMMENTS IS THAT I THINK THERE IS, THERE IS SOME MISUNDERSTANDING BECAUSE OF WHAT THIS FOCUSES ON, THAT EVERYTHING ELSE DOESN'T, THAT NOBODY ELSE IS REQUIRED TO DO THAT ANYTHING THAT'S NOT, THAT ISN'T THE SITUATION.
BUSINESSES AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTINUE TO BE REQUIRED TO REPORT.
THE NATURE OF THE REPORT UNDER THESE RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD BE EXPANDED.
AND THEN THE EXEMPTION FOR NONPROFITS, FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD BE MODIFIED.
AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SCOPE OF THAT MODIFICATION TODAY, AND WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT FOR, FOR A LONG TIME.
UM, AND TO THE EARLIER POINT ABOUT, UM, HOW THIS IS WRITTEN, I JUST WANNA POINT OUT THE EXEMPTION ABOUT, UM, ABOUT, UH, WHAT DO WE CALL 'EM, UM, COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS.
THAT'S PART, IT'S, IT'S THE SECOND TO LAST PARAGRAPH IN RECOMMENDATION EIGHT.
AND PERHAPS IF WE'RE GONNA BE REDOING THIS A LITTLE BIT, WE SHOULD EXPAND THAT A LITTLE BIT TO EXPLAIN WHAT WE, WHAT WE MEAN BY THAT.
SO, UM, SO ANYWAY, I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S BEEN A LITTLE, THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY HAVE THE STATUTE THERE TO SEE WHAT WE'RE AMENDING AND CHANGING.
SO I HOPE THAT'LL HELP A LITTLE BIT IN THE CONVERSATION.
UM, IN THE SPIRIT OF COMPLIANCE, WE ALSO, UH, REQUIRE THE NAMES OF ALL INDIVIDUALS, UH, INVOLVED IN THE CONTACT, WHICH I APPRECIATE, INCLUDING THOSE ENGAGED IN THE PREPARATION OF THE LOBBYING OR ADVOCACY CONTACT OR THE WORK.
I'M CONCERNED THERE JUST BECAUSE OF JUST THE POTENTIAL FOR SOMEBODY HAVING A MINOR, UH, CONTRIBUTION INADVERTENTLY BEING LEFT OFF.
UH, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN SITUATIONS BEFORE AND TRYING TO COMPLY WITH SIMILAR TYPE OF REQUIREMENTS.
AND, UH, IF THEY WEREN'T ACTUALLY IN THE ROOM AND PART OF THE, YOU KNOW, FACE OF MAKING THE CONTACT, I'M QUESTIONING IF THEY REALLY NEED TO BE IDENTIFIED AND WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THAT PART BE ELIMINATED.
THAT, THAT NONE OF THE NAMES BE REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED.
AND THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS BASED ON, WE HAVE, WE'VE EXPANDED THE SCOPE OF THE ORDINANCE TO CONCLUDE NON LOBBYING ACTIVITY, BUT WE LIMIT IT JUST TO THOSE HIGHEST ITEMS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED IN RESPONSE TO THE SURVEY.
I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT KIND OF THAT, AGAIN, I LIKE THE BRIGHT LINE OF THOSE SPECIFIC TOPICS ON ONE HAND, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, THERE COULD BE OTHER TOPICS THAT WE'RE NOT THINKING OF THAT WOULD MERIT BEING INCLUDED.
UM, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER ITEM THAT WAS ON THAT LIST WAS CANNABIS.
AND I KNOW THAT THAT IS RE THAT HAS GENERATED WHEN THE CITY IS CONSIDERED THOSE ISSUES, A LOT OF INTEREST WITHIN THE CITY.
UM, AND THERE'S ALSO A LOT OF MONEY ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
UM, SO, AND THAT'S JUST ONE, I DON'T, THERE MAY BE OTHER THINGS THAT WE WEREN'T EVEN ON OUR LIST, SO THAT WAS A POTENTIAL CONCERN OF JUST LIMITING IT TO THE FOUR.
AT THE SAME TIME, I ALSO APPRECIATE THE, UH, THE DIFFICULTY OF, UH, YOU KNOW, THE BRIGHT LINE WOULD JUST BE MATTERS THAT ARE, HAVE BEEN IZED OR WILL BE AGENDIZED HAVE BEEN AGENDIZED OR WILL BE AGENDIZED.
UH, UM, IF I COULD JUST ONE NOTE ON THAT, A LARGE PART OF THE LOBBYING EFFORT THAT WE DID SEE ON THE CANNABIS ISSUE DID RELATE TO TAXES, AND IT WAS LICENSING FEES, WHICH MAY NOT BE, YOU KNOW, SUBSUMED WITHIN TAXES, BUT, BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF, A LOT OF LOBBYING ABOUT TAXES ASSOCIATED WITH CANNABIS SALES.
SO SOME OF IT WOULD BE CAPTURED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT OR ASK QUESTIONS BEFORE I GO TO THE PUBLIC CHIEF? YES.
UM, AND I AGAIN, REALLY WANNA APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, ALL THE WORK AND I THINK, UM, YOU SAID IT'S BEEN A TWO YEAR EFFORT, UM, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR, YOU KNOW, GIVING US THESE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND I THINK FOR, YOU KNOW, A VAST PART OF THEM, I, I AGREE.
UM, GOING BACK TO THE, THE NAMES, IT WOULDN'T HAVE TO NECESSARILY BE ON THE FORM AS, UM, STATED, BUT IF SOMEONE HAS REACHES THAT THREE CONTACT THRESHOLD, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO REGISTER.
RIGHT? SO THEY WOULD BECOME A REGISTERED, NOT AN INDIVIDUAL ACTING ON THEIR OWN BEHALF.
SAY IT'S AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ACTING ON THE BEHALF OF A NONPROFIT, THEN THE NONPROFIT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO REGISTER IF THEY WERE ACTING ON BEHALF OF THE NONPROFIT OR A BUSINESS.
I, I THINK IN OUR MEETING, UM,
[00:20:01]
THE, OUR SUBSEQUENT MEETING YESTERDAY TO TALK ABOUT THE, THE INFORMATION AND THE IDEAS THAT WERE, UH, PROVIDED WHEN WE MET WITH THE NONPROFIT LEADERS, UM, WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING THE PEOPLE THAT ARE EMPLOYED BY THE NONPROFIT OR THE ORGANIZATION THAT'S LOBBYING, THAT THEIR NAMES WOULD BE DISCLOSED AND THAT ANYONE ELSE THAT WAS IN THE ROOM, I MEAN, IF THERE, IF THEY MIGHT WANT THEIR NAME LISTED, I DON'T KNOW,SO FOR PEOPLE THAT WANTED TO REMAIN ANONYMOUS, THAT THEY WERE AT THE MEETING, THEY COULD, THEY COULD REMAIN, UM, ANONYMOUS, BUT, BUT, BUT THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES ATTENDING THE MEETING AREN'T THE ONES FILING, IT'S THE ORGANIZATION THAT'S FILING.
IT'S A DIFFERENT, IT'S A DIFFERENT SITUATION IF YOU'RE HIRED TO BE A LOBBYIST FOR SOMEBODY.
SO THEN, THEN THAT PERSON REQUIRE IS, IS REQUIRED TO FILE A REPORT AND THEY'RE CONSIDERED A CONTRACT LOBBYIST UNDER THE WAY WE'VE ORGANIZED THE PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING THE, THE LOBBYING.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
UM, MY SECOND QUESTION, YOU KNOW, I, AND, UH, TAKE COMMISSIONER SHOTWELL, YOUR POINT OF, I I THINK THERE ARE, THESE FOUR TOPICS ARE IMPORTANT.
UM, YOU KNOW, I I DID FIND THE TOPIC OF C CITY BUDGET TO BE A BIT VAGUE.
UM, DOES THAT HAVE TO DEAL WITH PARTICULARLY THE BUDGETING PROCESS THAT KINDA HAPPENS ONCE A YEAR, OR DOES IT HAVE TO DEAL WITH, UM, AND YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S MONEY COMING OUTTA THE BUDGET TO PARTICIPATE IN A, YOU KNOW, AN ACTIVITY.
AND THAT WAS A CONCERN OF, UM, THE NONPROFIT PARTNERSHIP AND LONG BEACH FORWARD.
ALSO IN THAT ULTIMATELY ANYTHING, ANY TOPIC YOU COULD DISCUSS COULD BE TERMED A BUDGET.
AND THAT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO HAVE DEEPER DISCUSSIONS AS COMMISSION ON.
ARE WE CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING TRANSPARENCY WHEN IT COMES TO THE ANNUAL BUDGET, OR DO WE THINK THAT, THAT THE CONSTITUENCY WANTS TO KNOW ABOUT ANYTHING THAT TRANSPIRES THAT COULD IMPACT THE BUDGET? SO THAT, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A DEEPER DISCUSSION AND DIVE ON ALSO.
SO THANK YOU FOR RAISING THAT.
UM, AND THEN MY LAST POINT I THINK IS, AND I, I SAW THE EXEMPTION, THE, THE WHAT WOULD BE A NUKE EXEMPTION FOR THE COORDINATION OF ACTIVITIES.
UM, AND THERE TOO, I THINK I HAD A, A BIT OF CONCERN, UH, BECAUSE IF IT MIGHT BE GOING TO BE A, UH, YOU KNOW, IN FRONT OF COUNCIL, WHEN DOES COORDINATION OF ACTIVITIES, YOU KNOW, IF, UH, THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, WE'RE THERE'S A IMPACTED CORRIDOR AND A NONPROFIT IS TRYING TO HELP THAT CORRIDOR OF THE CITY VERSUS NOW IT MIGHT GO IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR A VOTE.
HAVE YOU HAVE, HAS THE AD HOC CONSIDERED WHERE THAT LINE IS POTENTIALLY DRAWN BETWEEN KIND OF THE COORDINATION OF ACTIVITIES, UM, THAT CITY COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE A RE YOU KNOW, TAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON OR ASK CITY STAFF TO, TO LOOK AT FURTHER? SO AGAIN, THE REGISTRATION TAKES PLACE AFTER THERE ARE THREE CONTACTS.
IF THERE'S A SPECIFIC CORRIDOR AND THAT NONPROFIT IS WORKING WITH THE COUNCIL PERSON FOR THAT DISTRICT, AND THAT'S THE ONLY PERSON THEY TALK TO, TO, THERE WOULD BE NO REQUIREMENT TO REGISTER.
UM, THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE HAD IN A DISCUSSION.
AND THE EACH OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, THERE ARE ISSUES THAT THE RESIDENTS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT, THAT THEY WILL GO AND THEY WILL MEET AS A GROUP OR INDIVIDUALLY AND VOCALIZE THEY'RE CONCERN.
UM, THE OTHER THRESHOLD IS IF, IF THE RESIDENTS, OR IF THE PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD START COMING TOGETHER IN A UNIFIED MANNER AND START SPENDING MORE THAN $2,500, SAY MAKING LAWN SIGNS OR SOMETHING ELSE, THEN THERE WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THEY REGISTER AS A GRASSROOTS ADVOCACY GROUP.
SO THERE'S, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT DEPENDS MM-HMM.
I THINK, UH, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE, THE CURRENT LOBBYING ORDINANCE AS IT'S WRITTEN IS THAT CITY OFFICIAL CAN ALSO BE SOMEONE WHO, UM, IS IN CHARGE OF AWARDING CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY.
UM, AND DEPARTMENTS CAN AWARD GRANTS, RIGHT? AND SO SOMETIMES TO STAY IN COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE GRANTS AND CONTRACTS, THERE'S NUMEROUS CONTACTS THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S FILING OBLIGATIONS.
THERE'S, UM, THEY MIGHT TALK TO, YOU KNOW, ONE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER IN THEIR AREA, BUT THEN THEY ALSO MIGHT TALK TO THE
[00:25:01]
HEALTH DEPARTMENT OR SEVERAL PEOPLE WITHIN THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT.AND NOW THAT BECOMES TWO, YOU KNOW, 3, 4, 5 CONTACTS IN THIS MONTH.
THERE, IT'S ONE, YOU KNOW, IT MIGHT BE JUST ONE MONTH, BUT NOW THEY HAVE TO REGISTER.
AND IS THAT A COORDINATION, COORDINATION OF ACTIVITIES, OR DOES THAT KIND OF FALL UNDER THE LOBBYING? AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S CLEAR.
SO LET'S, LET'S DELINEATE LOBBYING VERSUS ADVOCACY.
SORRY, MY NOT, SO, NO, THAT THAT'S FAIR BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN A, THAT'S BEEN AN ISSUE ALL ALONG IS LOBBYING IS SEPARATE FROM ADVOCACY AND COORDINATION COULD TECHNICALLY FALL UNDER THE ADVOCACY LANE.
BUT THAT WAS PART OF THE REASON WHY THE RECOMMENDATIONS LIMIT THE, THE LEVEL OF, UM, STAFF THAT FALL UNDER THE REQUIREMENT TO DISCLOSE.
WE DIDN'T WANT IT TO HIT THAT.
IF YOU MET WITH ANY STAFF PERSON, WE LEFT IT AT THE DEPARTMENT HEAD, THE CITY MANAGER, REALLY THE HIGH LEVEL, BECAUSE A LOT OF THAT COORDINATION WILL TAKE PLACE AT A, AT A LOWER STAFF LEVEL.
IT COULD TAKE PLACE AT THE, AT THE DEPARTMENT HEAD LEVEL.
AND IF YOU START MEETING WITH A COUPLE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS AND A DEPARTMENT HEAD ON AN ADVOCACY, SAY ON, UM, ADDING LAND FOR NEW PARKS, IF YOU MET WITH TWO OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE REQUIREMENT TO REGISTER AS, AS AN ADVOCACY ORGANIZATION.
YOU WANNA ADD SOMETHING? UM, I JUST WANTED TO ADD, THERE ARE OTHER ORDINANCES THAT ADDRESS THIS KIND OF AN EXEMPTION.
SO WE DO HAVE POTENTIAL LANGUAGE, UM, AND, UH, THAT, UH, THAT ADDRESS THESE IN LEGALISTIC ORDINANCE KIND OF LANGUAGE, UH, CITY, UH, SAN FRANCISCO IS WHAT I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT.
AND YOU KNOW, I, I THINK REALLY MY CONCERN IS THAT I JUST DON'T WANT IT TO, UH, IN LONG BEACH SPECIFICALLY, RIGHT? NONPROFITS WORK REALLY HAND IN HAND WITH THE CITY OFTEN, AND I JUST DON'T WANT IT TO HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT PERHAPS ON SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT DO REALLY GREAT WORK FOR THE CITY AND DO GREAT WORK FOR PEOPLE WHO, UH, PEOPLE AND COMMUNITIES THAT MAY NEED IT MOST.
YEAH, I, I WILL SAY I WAS SURPRISED WE DON'T HAVE SUCH AN EXEMPTION IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, EVEN FOR THE CONTRACTING PROCESS SINCE COMMISSIONER NORDE.
UH, INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH EACH PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION, I JUST WANNA MAKE SOME GENERAL COMMENTS AND AT THE END, UH, VOICE MY SUPPORT OR NO SUPPORT, UH, OF SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
I BELIEVE I WAS APPOINTED AND CONFIRMED TO THIS COMMISSION IN GREAT PART TO LEND A VOICE TO THE LONG BEACH COMMUNITY AS AN ACTUAL VOLUNTEER FOR VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, UH, DURING THE LAST 20 YEARS.
WHILE, UM, WHILE I AM NOT AN EXPERT IN ETHICS, I DO HAVE 30 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN MUNICIPAL, CRIMINAL, AND CIVIL WORK.
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, I HAVE A PROFESSIONAL INTEREST IN ETHICS, SPECIFICALLY WHEN IT INVOLVES CITY LEADERS, HUMAN RESOURCES, UPPER MANAGEMENT, AND REGISTERED, UH, OR PAID LOBBYISTS.
AT OUR FEBRUARY 8TH, 2023 MEETING, I EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT RECOMMENDATIONS ONE, TWO, AND FIVE, BUT DO NOT BELIEVE SIGNIFICANT CHANGE CAME ABOUT WITH THIS UPDATED ORDINANCE.
THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT IMPROVING OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENTAL ETHICS IN THE CITY IS IMPORTANT.
NOT ONLY DOES THIS AD HOC BELIEVE SO, BUT SO DO THE MAJORITY OF THE NONPROFITS WHO PROVIDED FEEDBACK.
HOWEVER, THE BOTTOM LINE WHEN READING AND LISTENING TO THE COMMUNITY FOR ME, IS THAT THE MAJORITY OF NONPROFITS DO NOT HAVE THE RESOURCES TO PAY LOBBYISTS AND ADDITIONAL STAFF FOR REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE PURPOSES.
THE VOICES OF MANY OF THEIR MEMBERS AND COMMUNITIES WOULD, IN ESSENCE, BE SILENCED WHEN COMPLYING WITH THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.
FURTHERMORE, NONPROFITS WOULD PREFER NOT TO BUDGET OR PAY A PROFESSIONAL LOBBYISTS FOR THE ADVOCACY WORK THAT THEY THEMSELVES ALREADY DO, AND WHO ARE BETTER INFORMED AND EQUIPPED ABOUT THEIR COMMUNITY'S NEEDS.
I ASK THIS COMMISSION TO KEEP IN MIND THAT HISTORICALLY SOCIAL CHANGE, THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT AND PROGRESS IN THIS COUNTRY, WERE STARTED AND STILL CONTINUES.
I'D ARGUE BY MAINLY PEOPLE OF COLOR AND MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES SUCH AS AFRICAN AMERICANS, THE DISABLED WOMEN'S LIBERATION THAT GAINED LESBIAN MOVEMENT, VOTING RIGHTS.
ONE GREAT EXAMPLE THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY SEEING IN THE ELECTION CYCLE IS MEASURE RW, THE PROPOSED MINIMUM WAGE LAW FOR LONG BEACH HOTEL WORKERS.
[00:30:01]
I BRING THIS TO THE COMMISSION'S ATTENTION BECAUSE JUST LAST NIGHT, A VOLUNTEER FOR MEASURE RW CAME TO MY DOOR AND TOLD ME ABOUT THE MEASURE.I DIDN'T GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK HIM WHAT ORGANIZATION HE WAS AFFILIATED WITH, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE ARE NONPROFITS ON THE GROUND IN LONG BEACH AS WE SPEAK, REACHING OUT TO VOTERS DURING THESE COLD WINTER NIGHTS TO SEEK SUPPORT FOR FAIR AND JUST WAGES.
I CAN GO ON AND ON WITH A LIST OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE IMPACTED CHANGE AND POLICY.
BUT LET'S BE MINDFUL THAT THESE CHANGES CAME ABOUT FROM THESE UNDERSERVED DISCRIMINATED AND MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES OF COLOR.
THE SAME COMMUNITIES THAT ARE PRESENT HERE NOW IN FRONT OF US BECAUSE OF THEIR HARD FOUGHT WORK COMMITMENT, DEDICATION, AND GIVING MORE TO THEIR CAUSES AND COMMUNITIES, THEN AT TIMES TO THEIR OWN FAMILIES.
IT IS CRITICAL FOR OUR LOCAL NONPROFITS TO BE ABLE TO AMPLIFY THEIR STORIES ABOUT WHAT THEY SEE AS FRONTLINE LEADERS AND VOLUNTEERS, MANY OF WHICH REPRESENT LOW INCOME AND UNDERREPRESENTED, UNDERREPRESENTED COMMUNITIES OF COLOR IN LONG BEACH WITHOUT MORE BURDENSOME AND BUREAUCRATIC REPORTS AND DISCLOSURES.
IN MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, WHEN A NONPROFIT 5 0 1 C3 DOES NOT HAVE THE RESOURCES, COULD BE STAFF CAPACITY, FINANCES, GRANTS FOUNDATION, LIMITED OFFICE SPACE, THESE PROPOSED CHANGES, WHICH STIFLE THE, UM, WOULD STIFLE THEM FROM FULL PARTICIPATION IN GOVERNMENT AND BE LESS EFFICIENT IN THEIR COMMUNITIES.
ON A PERSONAL NOTE, FROM 2008 TO 2013, I SERVED ON THE BOARD OF THE CENTER OF LONG BEACH.
THE FIRST THREE, FOUR YEARS OF MY SERVICE WERE EXCRUCIATING AND EXHAUSTING BECAUSE THE BOARD HAD TO FIRE ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AND IT WAS IN NO POSITION IN ALL SENSES OF THE WORD TO HIRE A NEW EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OR ADDITIONAL STAFF.
THE CENTER HAD A SKELETAL PAID STAFF VOLUNTEERS.
WE WERE OPERATING THE RED WHERE THE BOARD HAD TO PAY HELP, PAY THE BILLS, AND WE WERE LOSING CREDIBILITY AND TRUST FROM THE COMMUNITY AND CITY LEADERS.
ESSENTIALLY, WE WERE AN OPERATIONAL BOARD MEETING TWICE A MONTH FOR TWO YEARS, AND CONSTANTLY ENGAGING THE COMMUNITY AS BEST AS POSSIBLE.
THERE WAS NO TIME FOR ANYTHING ELSE, MUCH LESS FILLING OUT FORMS, COUNTING CONTACTS, AND HOURS SPENT, ET CETERA.
THE BOARD KNEW IT HAD ONE MAIN MISSION, AND THAT WAS CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE L-G-B-T-Q COMMUNITY, AND WE WERE PROVIDING THE MINIMUM AT BEST.
IT TOOK A TOLL ON THE BOARD STAFF AND THE COMMUNITY WAS OVER OVERTLY CRITICAL OF THE ORGANIZATION.
I SHARE THIS BECAUSE UNLESS ONE HAS BEEN IN THE EXACT OR SIMILAR POSITION, ONE WILL NEVER TRULY AND FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CHALLENGES, HURDLES, AND THE STRESS UPON THE BOARD AND STAFF, AND I'M SURE THE COMMUNITY WE EXPERIENCED AFTER THE FOUR YEARS, THE CENTER BOUNCED BACK, RENEWED ITS RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THE CITY, AND BECAME A HEALTHY ORGANIZATION BOTH FINANCIALLY AND IN THE COMMUNITY.
I'M PROUD OF ALL THE WORK AND SACRIFICES THE BOARD MADE TO SEE WHERE AND HOW THE CENTER THE CENTER FLOURISHES TODAY.
IT'S TRULY A REMARKABLE STORY OF SURVIVAL AND BEING ABLE TO BEAT THE ODDS ALL DUE TO THE BOARD, STAFF, VOLUNTEERS, CITY SUPPORT, AND THE COMMUNITY.
GRANTED, MY EXPERIENCE ON THE BOARD MAY NOT BE REPRESENTATIVE OF ALL NONPROFITS AND BOARDS, BUT I STILL, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THIS, NONPROFITS EXPERIENCE EVER CHANGING STAFF TURNOVERS NEW POLICIES, NEW LAWS EVOLVING EVERYDAY TO REACH OUT, AND THEY ARE CONSTANTLY CHALLENGED WITH FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND FUNDING.
ON ANOTHER PERSONAL NOTE, MY FATHER WAS A FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF A NONPROFIT IN THE PICO UNION AREA IN DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES.
IT WAS MY FATHER'S CALLING TO ALWAYS BE OF SERVICE TO THE UNDOCUMENTED COMMUNITY.
HE FOUGHT FOR DOMESTIC WORKERS DAY LABORERS TAUGHT ESL, SO INDIVIDUALS COULD LEARN BASIC ENGLISH IN ORDER TO ADVOCATE FOR THEMSELVES AND FOR THEIR DIGNITY, WHICH LED THEM TO FEEL EMPOWERED IN THIS COUNTRY THAT SO CRIMINALIZES SO MANY OF THEIR BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS, THE RIGHT TO WORK AND THE RIGHT TO SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES.
WITH THAT SAID, WHILE ALWAYS COMPLYING WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE CITY OF LA, MY FATHER ALWAYS FELT THAT PERFORMING THOSE BUREAUCRATIC AND BURDENSOME TASKS ROBBED HIS TIME AWAY FROM DOING THIS ACT, HIT THE ACTUAL WORK OF HIS NONPROFIT AND THE COMMUNITIES HE LIVED FOR AND THRIVED IN.
THESE STORIES ARE NOT UNIQUE TO ME OR MY FATHER.
I SHARE THESE PERSONAL STORIES BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN WITNESSES TO THESE SAME OR SIMILAR STORIES FROM THE NONPROFITS
[00:35:01]
WHO HAVE ENGAGED WITH US THE LAST TWO YEARS.I DON'T DOUBT THE AD HOC HAS GREAT INTENTIONS TO BRING ETHICS FRONT AND CENTER WITH THIS LOBBYIST ORDINANCE AND TO THE CITY.
BUT I BELIEVE THE AD HOC AND THE ETHICS COMMISSION NEED TO HAVE A GREATER UNDERSTANDING HOW NONPROFITS WORK AND HOW THESE PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD IMPACT THEIR WORK AND INVOLVE IN AND INVOLVEMENT WITH THE CITY.
LET'S ALSO CONSIDER HOW THESE CHANGES WOULD IMPACT THEIR PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC AND THROUGH THE COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS.
I WANT TO BORROW THE PHRASE CHILLING EFFECT, WHICH I READ IN PUBLIC COMMENTS AND IN THE PRESS, WHICH I THINK TRULY ILLUSTRATES HOW 5 0 1 C3 NONPROFITS AND SIMILAR ORGANIZATIONS WOULD BE IMPACTED SOLELY TO JUGGLE MORE AND MORE REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS.
5 0 1 3 NONPROFITS DO NOT DO THIS DEDICATED WORK FOR PERSONAL GAIN, FINANCIAL GAIN, OR TO TURN A PROFIT.
THEREFORE, THEY SHOULD NOT BE TREATED LIKE PAID LOBBYISTS OR PAID SPECIAL INTERESTS.
THE COMMUNITIES THAT BENEFIT FROM THESE NONPROFITS ARE THE BEST EQUIPPED AND HUMBLE TO ADVOCATE FOR THEMSELVES NOT TO HAVE TO PAY A PROFESSIONAL LOBBYIST.
MY THOUGHTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, THE ETHICS COMMISSION SHOULD NOT PASS THE RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO 5 0 1 C3 NONPROFITS AT THIS TIME, SPECIFICALLY NARROWING THE EXEMPTION OF 5 0 1 C3 NONPROFITS TO ADDING MORE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS IN ADDITION TO THOSE THAT ARE ALREADY DONE TO STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
AND THREE, ADDING FURTHER DISCLOSURES.
I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THE AD HOC REVIEW AND CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING FURTHER, EXPLORE THE CITY'S EQUITY TOOLKIT.
THERE WERE SO MANY PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT MADE REFERENCE TO THIS TOOL, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE I HAVE READ ANYTHING ABOUT IT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
WORK WITH THE CITY FOR ENHANCED TRAINING ON ETHICS.
EXISTING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS AND DISCLOSURES WORK TO EQUIP NONPROFITS WITH TOOLS OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND THINKING IS ALWAYS THROUGH AN ETHICAL LENS, BE OF SUPPORT TO MAKE IT MORE TRANSPARENT FOR ALL GROUPS.
TO HAVE ACCESS TO LEADERS, NOT LESS SUGGEST MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL TO BE PART OF THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS OR POLICY PAID OR UNPAID.
SO MORE ISSUES CAN BE DISCUSSED IN PUBLIC, IN COUNCIL MEETINGS, IN IN PUBLIC AND COUNCIL MEETINGS.
THIS WAY, COMMUNITY MEMBERS WOULD GAIN MORE FAITH IN HOW GOVERNMENT IS WORKING, IDENTIFY OTHER WAYS THE CITY CAN DEMONSTRATE ITS COMMITMENT TO EQUITY, INCLUSIVITY, AND INNOVATION, AND TRULY EXPLORE WHO INFLUENCES PUBLIC POLICY VIA ACCESS TO PUBLIC OFFICIALS.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT IT IS CERTAINLY NOT LOW INCOME UNDOCUMENTED AND MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES, UH, OF COLOR THAT HAVE GREATER ACCESS TO CITY HALL.
AND AGAIN, HISTORICALLY, THIS HAS AND CONTINUES TO BE THE REALITY IN RESPECT TO ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS.
I DIDN'T SEE ANY REAL MECHANISM ON HOW TO ENFORCE VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE.
IF IT PASSES IN FEBRUARY OF 2023, I SUGGESTED FOR RECOMMENDATION NUMBER FIVE, WHICH WAS NUMBER FIVE ON THE FEBRUARY, 2023 AGENDA THAT THE CITY COLLECT DRIVER'S LICENSE OR GOVERNMENT ID OF THE REGISTRANTS, ALONG WITH A VALID SIGNATURE ON THE REGISTRATION FORM.
IF THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE CONCRETE PROOF OF A REGISTRANT'S IDENTITY, HOW WILL ENFORCE THE INORDINANCE IF IT SEEKS TO ENFORCE A VIOLATION WITHOUT A SIGNATURE AND DRIVER'S LICENSE OR ID, THERE WILL BE POTENTIALLY A PROOF PROBLEM.
I'LL ADD THAT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE THE PROPOSED CHANGES MOVING FORWARD BE ADDED NEXT TO EX THE EXISTING ORDINANCE.
SO VISUALLY, IT'S EASIER TO UNDERSTAND THE CHANGES AND WHERE THEY FALL IN TO THE CURRENT ORDINANCE.
I DO SUPPORT THE AD HOCS CONTINUED WORK IN RESPECT TO DISCLOSURES OF CALENDAR BY CITY LEADERS.
I I, I DO BELIEVE IT MAY BE A LOST CAUSE AS CITY LEADERS MAY FIND WAYS TO WORK AROUND THAT TYPE OF REQUIREMENT.
UH, I WANT TO THANK THE AD HOC AND THE STAFF FOR ALL THE HARD WORK THAT HAS GONE INTO THIS PROCESS, WHICH HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT, AND THE COMMUNITY THAT HAS ENGAGED WITH US, UM, AND FOR THEIR PATIENTS.
SO I'D JUST LIKE TO ADDRESS THE EQUITY ISSUE BECAUSE WHEN YOU RAISED IT LAST YEAR, WE WENT, HEATHER WENT TO THE EQUITY OFFICER AND ASKED THAT IT BE LOOKED AT, BUT BECAUSE WE WERE STILL WORKING ON IT AND THERE WAS SO MUCH WORK THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE, MM-HMM.
IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE FOR HER TO TAKE HER TIME AT THAT TIME TO LOOK AT THE DOCUMENT.
UM, IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME THAT POSSIBLY SHE MIGHT NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THIS
[00:40:01]
UNTIL WE ADOPT SOMETHING.AND I EXPLAINED TO STAFF THAT I DID NOT FEEL THAT THAT WAS FAIR TO THIS COMMISSION.
THAT THIS COMMISSION NEEDED TO HAVE THE BEST INFORMATION IN ORDER TO SEND THE BEST RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO THAT IS WHY WE ARE PRIVILEGED TO HAVE THE EQUITY OFFICER HERE AS WE GET THIS CLOSER TO A FINAL.
I MEAN, IF WE'RE, IF WE ARE REALLY FAR FROM SOMETHING RATHER THAN JUST A FEW TWEAKS, SHE'S NOT GONNA BE BACK HERE NEXT MONTH.
SHE WILL COME BACK WHEN WE ARE CLOSE TO HAVING SOMETHING DOCUMENTED BECAUSE IT DOES, IT ISN'T FAIR TO HER OR THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT SHE HAS FOR US TO KEEP SENDING THIS TO HER.
SO I REALLY DON'T WANT YOU TO HAVE THE SENSE THAT WE IGNORED YOUR REQUEST.
WE HEAR EVERYTHING THAT'S BEING ASKED.
BUT SOMETIMES IT DOESN'T COME THAT QUICKLY BECAUSE THIS IS A LARGE BUREAUCRACY.
THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE THAT YOU HAD IN THERE THAT WE HAD ALSO ADDRESSED THAT I WASN'T, I I DIDN'T, I CAN'T REMEMBER.
UM, SO WITH THAT SAID, LET'S GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER.
DO, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO ADD? UM, AND IF YOU DON'T, THAT'S FINE.
'CAUSE I'M GONNA OPEN IT TO THE PUBLIC.
NO, UH, I LOOK FORWARD TO THE, THE FEEDBACK, UH, THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
THAT'S, I THINK, KEY TO HEAR FROM SOMEBODY OUTSIDE OF, UH, THE THINK BOX THAT WE'VE BEEN IN.
UH, I DO AGREE WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER SHOTWELL AND CHIEF COMMISSIONER, UH, ON THE COLLABORATION AND, UH, COOPERATION PIECES, IF THERE IS A WAY TO DELVE DEEPER.
BUT I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS HAS TO BE MOVED TOWARDS.
COUNSEL COUNCIL WILL WORK THROUGH, UH, WHAT'S, WHAT THEY WILL ENCOUNTER.
THEY KNOW HOW TO TEASE OUT THE, THAT, UM, THAT INFORMATION.
I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU'VE SAID.
UH, THE ONE PIECE THOUGH THAT, UH, STILL IS MY CHILLING EFFECT IS WHAT I FIND ALSO REPRESENTING, UM, CITIZENS, THE PUBLIC, IS THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY THAT THE CITY HAS DEMONSTRATED OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS.
UM, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE, UH, BUT AS WE SEE OTHER CITIES RAISE THE BAR, UH, THERE IS NO REASON WHY WE CANNOT RAISE THE BAR.
AND I FIND THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY THAT GOES ON, UH, IN THESE PRESSURE, THESE MOVEMENTS, THE WHERE PEOPLE HAVE, UH, SPECIAL INTERESTS AND INFORMATION AND, AND ADMITTEDLY SOME HAVE GREATER POWER AND GREATER INFLUENCE.
UH, BUT WE DO HAVE TO WORK TOWARDS MORE TRANSPARENCY.
AND THAT'S PROBABLY A MORE IMPORTANT VALUE AT THIS POINT FOR ME.
UM, BUT I, I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING THE FEEDBACK AND THE NEXT ITERATION.
UM, YOU WOULD ADDRESS KIND OF THE SAME QUESTION THAT COMMISSIONER SHOTWELL HAD ADDRESSED IN WANTING TO SEE THIS WITH THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT WOULD GO INTO THE ORDINANCE.
WHICH THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
WHY NOT? 'CAUSE THE CITY ATTORNEY IS BECAUSE THE, THE LANGUAGE, WE CAN'T DRAFT LANGUAGE.
NO, I'M SAYING, UM, PLUG IN THE CHANGES IN THE EXISTING ORDINANCE SO THAT WE CAN SEE.
WHERE THE CHANGES WOULD IMPACT.
I TAYLOR, DID YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING? AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, IT'S NOT OFFICIAL.
IT'S OFFICIAL FOR OUR WORKING.
IT WOULD JUST BE THIS IS WHERE, RIGHT.
LET US, BECAUSE I'LL ADD, SHARE THAT IT'S, UM, IT'S BEEN VERY CONFUSING FOR ME BECAUSE THE, THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE THAT WAS GIVEN TO US IN FEBRUARY OF 2023, YOU HAD RECOMMENDATIONS ONE THROUGH RECOMMENDATIONS NINE, I BELIEVE.
AND EVERY ITERATION SINCE THEN, THE RECOMMENDATION ONE CHANGES.
SO IT'S NO LONGER WHAT WAS IN FEBRUARY.
IT'S NOW COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
SO TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT, WAS THIS THE ONE IN, IN FEBRUARY, 2023? IS, IS THIS THE ONE THAT WE'RE IT'S BEEN VERY CONFUSING TO GO BACK AND FORTH.
AND IS THERE ANY WAY JUST TO KEEP IT, IF YOU'RE NOT, IF YOU'RE GONNA REMOVE RECOMMENDATION THREE FROM THE FEBRUARY MEETING, FEBRUARY, 2023 MEETING, THEN PUT RECOMMENDATION THREE DELETED OR WORKING ON IT SO THAT WE JUST FOLLOW ONE SET OF RECOMMENDATIONS, IS THAT POSSIBLE? SO THE RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE CHANGED BECAUSE THEY'VE CHANGED.
THEY ARE WHOLLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU A YEAR AGO.
AND A LOT OF THOSE CHANGES ARE BECAUSE WE HEARD PEOPLE'S COMMENTS AND WE WANTED TO MAKE A ADDRESS, THOSE CHANGES, UM, I GUESS WE COULD GO, I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THAT GOING BACK AND ROAD MAPPING IT OUT THAT WAY WOULD MAKE ANY SENSE.
BECAUSE EVEN IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT RECOMMENDATION
[00:45:01]
ONE, WHICH IS THE THRESHOLD FOR WHO'S A LOBBYIST, AND, AND MAYBE, MAYBE THAT'S WHERE PUT PLUGGING INTO THE EXISTING ORDINANCE WOULD, WOULD HELP YOU BECAUSE THE, THE THRESHOLD FOR WHO REGISTERS AS A LOBBYIST IS THE RECOMMENDATION THERE IS WHOLLY DIFFERENT THAN IT WAS WHEN YOU SAW IT PREVIOUSLY.IT WAS BASED ON DOLLAR AMOUNTS AND, AND, AND TIME SPENT.
UM, AND, AND I DO TAKE, UM, BRIDGET, ONE THING THAT YOU SAID, WHICH IS THAT WE IGNORED YOUR INPUT.
WE DIDN'T, BUT AS A CONSEQUENCE OF TAKING YOUR INPUT INTO ACCOUNT, WE WENT TO AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT STRUCTURE.
THE, THE RECOMMENDATION NUMBER ONE, NOW MM-HMM.
SO THE PAPERWORK BURDEN IS SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCED.
AND WE FELT THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT, THAT NOW MOVE UPFRONT.
AND SO I I HEAR YOU AND I UNDERSTAND 'CAUSE I LIKE TO TICK AND TIE THINGS.
AND THIS IS NOT TICK AND TIED BECAUSE IT'S SO DIFFERENT.
AND I UNDERSTAND, AND I CAN IMAGINE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE NOT SAVVY WITH LONG BEACH.GOV AND ALL THAT STUFF, THAT THEY FIND THIS CONFUSING AS WELL.
UM, BECAUSE FOR ME, IT ALMOST, I GET THE IMPRESSION, AND THANK YOU FOR CLEARING IT UP, THAT I WASN'T HEARD AS A MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION.
AND ALSO IN RESPONSE TO YOUR INPUT, WE SAID BACK THEN, WE SAID NONPROFIT EXEMPTION GONE THIS TIME, WE'VE SAID THE EXEMPTION REMAINS FOR NONPROFITS WHOSE REVENUE IS LESS THAN A MILLION DOLLARS.
IF THAT'S THE WRONG THRESHOLD, WE CAN CERTAINLY TALK ABOUT THAT.
BUT OUR HOPE WAS TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN MANY OF THE ORGANIZATIONS WE HEARD FROM WHO ARE VERY STRETCHED IN TERMS OF STAFFING AND RESOURCES.
AND THE ORGANIZATIONS AT THE TOP OF THE SPREADSHEET THAT WE SENT OUT MM-HMM.
THERE ARE ABOUT, UH, I BELIEVE ABOUT 180 NONPROFITS REGISTERED IN LONG BEACH THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED, PLUS NONPROFITS WHO ARE NOT REGISTERED IN LONG BEACH, BUT WHO HAVE REVENUES OVER THE MILLION DOLLARS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
UM, AND, AND IN THAT REGARD, AND YOU KNOW, I, I CERTAINLY THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A, A CONVERSATION AND I HOPE THAT YOU WOULD ENTERTAIN A CONVERSATION ON WHERE SHOULD THE LINE BE DRAWN RATHER THAN THE CURRENT COMPLETE EXEMPTION.
UM, BUT I DID, I, I, I THINK, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS SENT AROUND TO OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION OR NOT, BUT RECENTLY, UM, THERE WAS AN ARTICLE, JASON RUIZ IN THE LB POST WROTE AN ARTICLE ABOUT AN ORGANIZATION, A 5 0 1 C3 ORGANIZATION CALLED SUPPORTERS ALLIANCE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY, WHO HAVE BEEN OPPOSING THROUGH LEGAL MEANS, UH, HOUSING DOWNTOWN.
UH, THEY WERE OPPOSING TWO, UH, DEVELOPMENTS, UM, UH, INCLUDING ONE THAT HAD LOW INCOME SET-ASIDES, AND ANOTHER THAT I BELIEVE WAS, UM, HOPED IT WOULD HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THEIR REVENUES ARE REPORTED TO THE IRS AS $1.5 MILLION.
WE DON'T KNOW IF IN ADDITION TO FILING LEGAL APPEALS, THOSE ORGANIZATIONS WERE LOBBYING CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OR CITY STAFF.
I BELIEVE THAT LAST NIGHT, THE CITY COUNCIL DID APPROVE THOSE TWO PROJECTS TO MOVE FORWARD.
BUT I, AS A RESIDENT WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF INFLUENCES WERE BROUGHT TO BEAR.
UH, SO IS THERE A RIGHT THRESHOLD WHERE WE DON'T IMPACT THOSE ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE STRUGGLING TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO PEOPLE ON A DAILY BASIS, AND THOSE ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE SIMPLY TRYING TO WIELD POWER.
[00:50:01]
COMMISSIONERAND THAT IS, IF FOR SOMETHING, HAS THE COMMITTEE CONSIDERED WHETHER THE AD HOC COMMITTEE CONSIDERED WHETHER WE NEED TO FOCUS ON, UH, TYING TO A REGISTERED LOBBYIST OR REALLY JUST FOCUS FOR TRANSPARENCY PURPOSES ON CONTACTS? IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU HAVE AN EXTREMELY WEALTHY INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS A CAUSE THAT THEY'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT, I THINK THAT THAT'S FOR, FROM A TRANSPARENCY POINT OF VIEW, THAT'S SOMETHING WE WANT IN THE CITY, THE INDIVIDUALS AND THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY WOULD WANNA KNOW ABOUT.
NOT JUST IF THEY HAPPEN TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH, SAY, GREENPEACE, UH, FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL POINT.
AND AGAIN, IF THEY MEET WITH THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS OR THE MAYOR OR TOP MANAGEMENT, THEY WOULD NEED TO FILE A REPORT THAT THEY WERE HAVING THOSE MEETINGS.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT WOULD TRIGGER THEM BECOMING REGISTERED OR THEY JUST HAVE TO FILE THE REPORT.
ORIGINALLY, I UNDERSTOOD IT THAT THEY JUST HAD TO FILE A REPORT AND THEN I, THEY DON'T HAVE TO REGISTER AS A LOBBYIST, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO FILE AS AN ADVOCATE.
THEN IT GOES BACK, THEN I UNDERSTOOD IT CORRECTLY THE FIRST TIME AROUND.
SORRY, SUSAN'S LOOKING QUESTIONABLY.
WE DOING, I'M NOT SURE THAT IT WOULD APPLY TO A INDIVIDUAL.
INDIVIDUAL WOULDN'T BE AN INDIVIDUAL.
OH, THEY'RE CORRECTING ME THAT I'M WRONG.
BUT TAYLOR'S SHAKING HER HEAD NO.
THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE LOBBYING ORDINANCE APPLIES TO INDIVIDUALS, RIGHT? YEAH.
BUT HOWEVER, IF THEY'RE LOBBYING ON BEHALF, SO THERE'S TWO CLASSES OF PEOPLE IN THE RECOMMENDATION.
THERE'S THE FOLKS THAT ARE WORKING FOR AN ORGANIZATION THAT ARE LOBBYING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION, RIGHT? IN THOSE CASES, THE AD HOC IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE BUSINESS NONPROFIT ENTITY, WHOMEVER, REGISTERS ON BEHALF OF ALL OF THE INDIVIDUALS ACTING ON THEIR BEHALF IN THE AGGREGATE.
HOWEVER, THERE'S ANOTHER GROUP OF FOLKS WHO ARE BEING PAID FOR THEIR SERVICES.
WE KNOW IN, AT LEAST IN LONG BEACH, SOME OF THOSE FOLKS WHO ARE PAID LOBBYISTS, THEY DO THAT.
THEY'RE AN INDIVIDUAL, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO REGISTER THEMSELVES.
HOWEVER, WE ALSO HAVE GROUPS OF LOBBYISTS THAT WORK FOR FIRMS. IN THOSE CASES, THEY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE BUSINESS REGULATION.
BUT I THINK UNDER COMMISSIONER SHOT WELL'S EXAMPLE, AND LET'S SAY ELON MUSK MOVED TO LONG BEACH AND HE WERE TO START MEETING WITH THE CITY MANAGER, THE MAYOR AS AN INDIVIDUAL, NOT AS PART OF HIS CORPORATION, BUT AS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO NOW RESIDES IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH.
HE MEETS WITH THE MAYOR, HE MEETS WITH THE CITY MANAGER, AND HE MEETS WITH ONE COUNCIL MEMBER ABOUT A PROJECT THAT HE WANTS TO START UP BY THE AIRPORT WHERE ALL OF THE AEROSPACE INDUSTRY IS TAKING PLACE.
WOULD HE, AS AN INDIVIDUAL, BE REQUIRED UNDER THESE CHANGES THAT WE'RE MAKING, OR EVEN UNDER THE OLD, THE CURRENT ORDINANCE TO REGISTER? I THINK THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT COMMISSIONER SHOTWELL WAS ASKING.
WELL, WELL, MS. ANDERSON'S THINKING ABOUT THAT.
I APPRECIATE THE EXAMPLE, BUT MAYBE NOT EVEN A PROJECT, MAYBE JUST A CAUSE DU JOUR OR SOMETHING HE'S VERY CONCERNED ABOUT, VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT, BUT HE'S JUST AN INDIVIDUAL.
THOSE ARE VERY DIFFERENT QUESTIONS, RIGHT.
LOBBYING IS INFLUENCING AN ADMINISTRATIVE OR A, A DECISION OF THE CITY.
SO A PROJECT, NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INFLUENCING SOMETHING THAT'S PRETTY MAJOR.
IT'S A DECISION THAT'LL COME BEFORE COUNCIL, IT'LL COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
HOMELESSNESS IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME WHEN, AND I THINK I'M NOT ATTACHING THIS TO ANY DECISION THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE BY THE CITY CONTRACT, OTHERWISE, UH, ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, THAT'S NOT LOBBYING WITHIN THE ORDINANCE.
SO, UM, I THINK, LIKE, I HAVE TO THINK THROUGH THIS, BUT IT'S POSSIBLE DEPENDING ON THE FACTS, THAT AN INDIVIDUAL THAT IS TRYING TO INFLUENCE AN ACTION IS DOING SO TO GET THEIR PROJECT THROUGH, TO GET, AND THESE ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE YOU WANNA KNOW WHAT THE INFLUENCE IS ON THOSE PEOPLE.
ALSO, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, IF HE'S, FROM A DUE PROCESS STANDPOINT, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE MAYOR SHOULD NOT BE TALKING TO AN INDIVIDUAL BEHIND THE SCENES.
UH, IF THEY'RE TRYING TO GET SOMETHING PASSED BY COUNCIL, BECAUSE IT GOES TO A HEARING, IT'S A QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS.
IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT ALL OF THE PARTIES HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD.
COUNSEL IS CONSISTENTLY ADVISED, AND SO IS THE MAYOR.
THOSE CONVERSATIONS NEED TO BE HAPPENING IN THE PUBLIC.
RIGHT? SO IN THAT CASE, THAT CONVERSATION SHOULDN'T BE HAPPENING BEHIND THE SCENES PERIOD.
[00:55:01]
HEY, THIS IS WHAT I WANNA DO.YOU NEED TO PUT AN APPLICATION WITH PLANNING LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
RIGHT? YOU DON'T GET SPECIAL TREATMENT.
AND THAT MIGHT BE JUST BY NATURE OF THE EXAMPLE.
I THINK WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IS MAKING SURE THAT CONVERSATIONS IN THE GROCERY STORE, RIGHT, OF LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER, WHY IS, WHY IS MY TRASH NOT BEING PICKED UP? WHY ARE THE TREES NOT BEING TRIMMED? THOSE KINDS OF CONVERSATIONS.
IT'S CLEAR IN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS INTENDED TO CAPTURE.
BUT THOSE ARE ALSO NOT DECISIONS BY THE CITY.
THOSE ARE SERVICES THAT THE CITY PROVIDES.
IT'S DIFFERENT THAN A PLANNING PROJECT, AN ALLOCATION OF FUNDING, UM, GRANTING ENTITLEMENTS IN GENERAL, LIKE ISSUING PERMITS LIKE THE, THOSE A UP PERMITS, RIGHT? OF LIKE WHO GETS TO HAVE A SECONDARY UNIT ON THEIR PROPERTY.
LIKE VERY CONTROVERSIAL THINGS.
THOSE DECISIONS GO TO COUNCIL, RIGHT? THAT'S NOT THE SAME.
AND THAT'S NOT CAPTURED BY THIS ORDINANCE.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YEAH.
I WAS LESS FOCUSED ON, UH, ITEMS THAT ARE A SPECIFIC PROJECT.
'CAUSE I DO BELIEVE THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH PROCESS.
I WAS THINKING OF SAY, A CAUSE AZURE, AND SO MAYBE IT'S THE INDIVIDUAL HAS A, WANTS TO SEE THE CITY OF LONG BEACH DO A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT MORE TO ADDRESS THE DEVASTATING IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE.
SO, BUT THERE'S, THAT'S A BROAD TOPIC, BUT THAT'S THE SAME AS YOU HAVE A, UM, NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT REALLY HAS A CAUSE AZURE, MAYBE IT'S ALSO THAT THEY WANT TO SEE THE DEVASTATING IMPACT THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS HAVING ON THE INNER CITY POPULATIONS AND HEAT ISLANDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND ARE WE TRYING TO CAPTURE THOSE THINGS OR NOT WITH THE ORDINANCE? AND ARE THEY EXCLUDED OR IN THE ORDINANCE? SO WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY IS NON LOBBYING ADVOCACY.
UM, THERE'S A SPECIFIC PROVISION IN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT SAYS THAT THAT APPLIES ONLY TO BUSINESSES THAT ARE ADVOCATING FOR THE FOUR CATEGORIES.
JUST, AND SO IN THAT CASE, INDIVIDUALS, IT'S NOT INTENDED TO CAPTURE THOSE INDIVIDUALS, RIGHT? IT WOULD CAPTURE ONLY ORGANIZATIONS WHO, AND FORGIVE ME OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I'M FORGETTING THE FOUR CATEGORIES.
SPECIFIC TO THOSE FOUR CATEGORIES.
ORIGINALLY, I NEED YOU TO KNOW THAT THE COMMISSION HAD A BROADER RECOMMENDATION.
UM, I HAD FIRST AMENDMENT CONCERNS THAT IT WAS OVER BROAD.
AND SO WE TALKED THROUGH THE IDEA OF NARROWLY TAILORING THIS TO ONLY THOSE ISSUES THAT ARE SPECIFIC.
SPECIFIC ENOUGH THAT THERE SHOULD BE TRANSPARENCY SURROUNDING THEM, BUT NOT SO SUBSTANTIAL THAT THEY BURDEN THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
WE CAN BALANCE THOSE INTERESTS.
THAT'S THE OBLIGATION UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
IT HAS TO BE NARROWLY TAILORED.
WE CAN'T JUST, WITH A BRIDE, WE, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY, EVERYBODY HAS TO DISCLOSE THEIR CONTACT WITH ALL OFFICIALS.
BUT THAT'S ALSO HOW THE, I THINK THE AD HOC, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR YOU GOT TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE TRANSPARENCY IN THE CALENDARS IS PROVIDING A MECHANISM THAT THERE IS TRANSPARENCY OF WHO THEY'RE MEETING WITH WITHOUT EXTENSIVELY BURDENING THE PUBLIC.
THE BURDENS ON THE PUBLIC OFFICIAL, THERE'S A PUBLIC INTEREST IN THAT DISCLOSURE.
AND I WOULD JUST ADD, I, AND I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE AD HOC, UH, ADDRESSING IT FROM THE ACTUAL OFFICIALS CALENDAR, BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE IS STRONGLY NEEDED.
SO IT TO MS. ANDERSON'S POINT WAS GETTING MORE OF THOSE FOUR CATEGORIES THAT GO BEYOND WHAT IS AGENDIZED OR OFFICIALLY BEFORE THE CITY.
AND I THINK THAT THAT'S, WE'VE ALREADY HAD THAT DISCUSSION.
DID I SEE YOUR HAND UP? MS. ANDERSON ANSWERED IT AT THE END.
SO, SO GOING, GOING BACK COUNSELOR
ARE YOU ASKING IF THOSE FOUR CATEGORIES ARE CAPTURED BY THE LOBBYING PORTION OF THE ORDINANCE? OR DO YOU WANT, YOU'RE SAYING THEY SHOULD BE SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT? I AM WONDERING IF WE COULD EXTEND IT BEYOND ENTITY TO, BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE AD HOC AND COUNCIL HAS ALREADY HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT INDIVIDUALS.
[01:00:02]
AND I JUST, I, I, I NEED, I GUESS I NEED A LITTLE BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHY INDIVIDUALS, IF THEY'RE ATTEMPTING TO INFLUENCE LEGISLATIVE OR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS, WOULDN'T REQUIRE.SO THE INDIVIDUAL PORTION OF IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE AD HOC FELT STRONGLY ABOUT.
MY CONCERN WAS THE SCOPE OF ALL, ALL COMMUNICATIONS, NOT THAT ARE NOT ATTACHED TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION THAT'S OVERBROAD.
SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS SPECIFIC TO, UM, THE CATEGORIES, THE FOUR CATEGORIES AND LIMITING CATEGORIES, UM, THE BUSINESS VERSUS INDIVIDUAL.
UM, THAT WAS A DECISION MADE BY THE AD HOC THAT'S OUTSIDE.
SO I WOULD HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THAT MORE.
'CAUSE THEY ORIGINALLY CAME UP WITH BUSINESS AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.
UM, BUT WHAT I WOULD NEED SPACE WHERE PEOPLE AREN'T STARING AT ME TO LIKE DIGEST HOW
WELL, MY EXPERIENCE, MY INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE WITH ADVOCACY AND WHERE CALL TO ACTIONS CAN GO, YOU KNOW, OFF THE RAILS GOES TO YOUR POINT.
AND THAT IS INDIVIDUALS AND I DO LIKE IF, IF THE AD HOC, UH, THEY NEED TO EXPLORE THIS, THEY'RE THE EXPERTS.
UM, BUT WHY NOT INCLUDE INDIVIDUAL AND ENTITY THAT IS AFFECTING THESE FOUR MATTERS.
YOU KNOW, THE FOUR SUBJECTS, UH, WHERE IT IS, UH, BASICALLY A CALL TO ACTION ON LEGISLATIVE OR ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER ON THESE FOUR, THE FOUR TOPICS.
UM, WHY NOT EMBRACE INDIVIDUALS THERE TOO? AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WANTED THAT ORIGINALLY.
ORIGINALLY IT'S ALWAYS BEEN BUSINESS ONLY BUSINESSES.
UM, I DON'T, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR YOU.
IF WE EXTEND IT TO INDIVIDUALS, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL IN THE WAY THAT WE DO THAT.
UH, YOU KNOW, I'VE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF BEING ABLE TO BE PRESENT IN THE DISCUSSIONS OF THE AD HOC.
WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, UM, HOW THAT IMPACTS THE COMMUNITY IN GROUPS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE ANY FUNDING AND THERE'S A PROBLEM IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND NOW THEY'RE COMING TOGETHER TO, UM, MAKE A CHANGE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THERE'S CRIME.
THE INTENT OF THE COM, THE AD HOC, IF I MAY MM-HMM.
AND I IS THAT HOW YOU ENDED? COULD YOU, I'M GONNA STOP TALKING, BUT HOW YOU GOT TO THE BUSINESS, UM, FOLKS ONLY THAT WAS THROUGH THAT CONVERSATION, RIGHT? YEAH.
THAT WAS, YOU WANNA GO COMMISSIONER WISE, IF THAT'S WHAT THE ORDINANCE ISN'T THAT WHAT THE ORDINANCE, HOW THE ORDINANCE IS ALREADY WRITTEN? MM-HMM.
IF YOU'RE AN INDIVIDUAL ACTING IN A CERTAIN CAPACITY IF YOU'RE BEING PAID.
BUT IF I JUST WANNA GO TALK TO EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER OH NO.
THREE HOURS A DAY FOR THE WHOLE MONTH,
IF, IF, I MEAN, JUST SAYING IF I WERE TO DO THAT, I STILL DON'T HAVE TO REGISTER.
I MEAN, I'M WORKING FOR ME BECAUSE THAT'S NOT NOBODY ELSE.
IT'S LIKE PUTTING THE, WHAT I WOULD CHALLENGE THIS COMMISSION IS THAT WHATEVER PARAMETERS THAT YOU PUT ON IT, ON LOBBYING AND ADVOCACY IN THESE THINGS, YOU HAVE TO REALLY THINK THROUGH LIKE WHAT IS THE NTH DEGREE OF THE IMPACT, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT, TO UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE OF WHAT IT IS THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING.
I'M GONNA PUT A HOLD ON OUR DISCUSSION FOR A FEW MINUTES AND I WAS HOPING TO GET MICHELLE BILEY A NONPROFIT PARTNERSHIP BEFORE SHE LEFT.
'CAUSE I KNEW SHE HAD AN APPOINTMENT TO GET TO, BUT WE MISSED IT.
SO I'M GONNA OPEN IT TO PUBLIC COMMENT NOW.
AND I'D LIKE TO WELCOME ALANDRA INTERPRETER IF ANYONE NEEDS INTERPRETIVE SERVICES.
IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? PLEASE? SHOULD WE JUST LINE UP PLEASE? OKAY.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
DO I HAVE TO STATE MY NAME? I JUST SAY MY COMMENTS, IS THAT RIGHT? VERY GOOD.
UH, DEAR COMMISSIONERS, WHAT CONTINUES TO RESONATE WITH ME ABOUT THIS WHOLE DISCOURSE IS THAT THE CITY WILL CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE NONPROFIT
[01:05:01]
ORGANIZATIONS WILL BE EVEN MORE OVERBURDENED AND HURT BY THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE.AS WE WERE HEARING EARLIER TODAY.
AND IN TURN, WHAT THIS WILL DO, IT WILL HURT COMMUNITIES.
THE WORK THE NONPROFIT SECTOR DOES IS NOT FOR PERSONAL GAINER PROFIT, BUT FOR THE GREATER GOOD.
NONPROFITS WORK FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS, RESIDENTS, AND OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
ALSO, NONPROFITS NEED TO RAISE, UH, FUNDRAISE FOR EVERY LAST BIT OF RESOURCE THAT THEY DO HAVE FOR PROGRAMS. AND MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, THESE RESOURCES ARE SCANT.
THE CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE WILL PARTICULARLY, UH, PLACE, UH, THOSE LOOKING AT PLACING ADDITIONAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS WILL PLACE UNDUE BURDEN ON THE TIME AND RESOURCES THAT NONPROFITS DO HAVE.
ALL OF US IN THE SECTOR UNDERSTAND AND ACTUALLY APPRECIATE THE NEED FOR TRANSPARENCY.
HOWEVER, TREATING NONPROFITS LIKE PAID LOBBYISTS IS A MOVE IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.
FURTHERMORE, IF ADDING ADVOCACY ACTIVITIES, UH, TO THE COMMISSION'S OVERSIGHT IS ON THE RADAR, THIS, UH, MORE THAN LIKELY FALLS OUTSIDE THE CHARTER AND ALL OF THIS EFFORT.
IF ALL OF THIS EFFORT ORIGINATES FROM A TACTIC TO INTIMIDATE AND EVEN SILENCE NONPROFITS, THEN THERE ISN'T MUCH IN THE WAY OF TRANSPARENCY AND TRUST BUILDING THAT THE CITY WILL ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISH THROUGH THIS EFFORT.
I ECHO A LOT OF WHAT COMMISSIONER AVE UH, WAS COMMENTING ABOUT THE UNDUE BURDEN, UH, ON THE LOCAL NONPROFIT COMMUNITY.
AND THANK YOU FOR JUST ARTICULATING THAT SO WELL AND REALLY PAINTING A PICTURE OF WHAT THAT ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE.
HONESTLY, THIS DOES NOT REALLY MAKE SENSE, UH, MOVING IN THIS DIRECTION, THIS WILL HURT OUR COMMUNITIES, AND WE DO URGE YOU TO NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH THE REVISIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE LOBBYING ORDINANCE.
I I WOULD JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY A POINT THAT IS, UM, IN CIRCULATING THAT IS NOT CORRECT IN THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.
IN A WAY, SEEK TO ADD TO, OR TAKE AUTHORITY FOR THIS COMMISSION, THESE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THEM TO CONSIDER ADOPT OR NOT ADOPT.
NOTHING IN HERE RECOMMENDS THAT ANY AUTHORITY BE GIVEN TO THIS COMMISSION.
OVERSIGHT WOULD BE WITH CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
THIS COMMISSION WOULD HAVE NO INPUT OTHER THAN CONTINUE DOWN THE ROAD LOOKING AT THE POLICY.
AND IF IT, IF COMMISSION DOWN DECIDED THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE TO STRENGTHEN POLICY, COULD MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.
BUT THERE IS NOTHING TO GIVE ANY AUTHORITY IN THIS.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
I THINK THE POINT REALLY HERE IS THAT THE CHANGES ARE NOT HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY.
UH, MY NAME IS G LAS SUAREZ AND I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ARTS COUNCIL FOR LONG BEACH, A 5 0 1 C3 EXEMPT ORGANIZATION, AND AS A 5 0 1 C3.
WE REPORT OUR ADVOCACY EFFORTS ON OUR ANNUAL NINE 90.
WHEN APPLICABLE, WE ARE DEDICATED TO ENHANCING LIFE THROUGH THE ARTS HERE IN OUR CITY.
OUR MISSION IS FEUDED BY PASSION AND VALUES, NOT POLITICS OR PROFIT.
WE ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT THE COMMISSION'S OVERALL GOAL TO IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY.
UH, OUR BOARD MEMBERS ALSO CON, UH, CONTRIBUTE TO THIS TRANSPARENCY BY FILLING OUT THE FORM 700 EVERY YEAR.
HOWEVER, THE PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS RAISE SOME SERIOUS CONCERNS.
THE CITY OF LONG BEACH HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN INCREDIBLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE ARTS COUNCIL, BUT WE FEAR THAT SHOULD THESE PROPOSALS GO INTO EFFECT, IT WOULD HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT ON OUR ABILITY TO ADVOCATE FOR OURSELVES AND THE WORK WE DO ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE ARTS AND CREATIVE COMMUNITY HERE IN LONG BEACH.
IT'S FORCED, IF FORCED TO COMPLY WITH ALL THESE, UH, MEASURES.
THE ARTS COUNCIL WILL EFFECTIVELY BE DISSUADED FROM ENGAGING WITH OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS, JEOPARDIZING THE VITAL SUPPORT WE RECEIVE FROM OUR LOCAL LEADERS.
AND OF COURSE, IN BEING TRANSPARENT, CURRENTLY, UH, WE ARE FORTUNATE TO HAVE RECEIVED FUNDING, UM, TO CONTRACT A CONSULTANT LOBBYIST WHO HELPS US NAVIGATE THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT LANDSCAPE ON BEHALF OF OURSELVES AND MANY OF THE NONPROFITS WE REPRESENT, UM, FOR THE ENTIRE SECTOR AND DIGEST, MANY TIMES, OFTEN HARD TO RE DOCUMENTS, UM, LIKE WITHIN THE COMMISSIONS LIKE TODAY.
SO LET ME BE CLEAR, THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS PROPOSED WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY DETRIMENTAL TO THE ARTS COUNCIL AND OUR FELLOW NONPROFIT PARTNERS AND PUBLIC DISCOURSE IN GENERAL.
[01:10:01]
IT'S DISAPPOINTING THAT DESPITE THE CONCERNS, UM, RAISED, UM, IT CONTINUES TO GO FORWARD.UM, THIS ADVOCACY WILL BE PENALIZED.
UM, MY TEAM IS DEEPLY WORRIED THAT IF WE GET SOMETHING WRONG IN THIS PROCESS, HOW WILL IT HARM US AND THE RESIDENTS THAT WE SERVE.
UH, WE HAVE SUBMITTED A, UH, I HAVE A LETTER TO SUBMIT, UH, OUTLINING ALL OF OUR CONCERNS AND PROVIDING ALTERNATIVE, ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTIONS TO YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS.
I HOPE THAT THIS COMMISSION WILL HEAR, UM, OUR PLEAS AND COLLECTIVE VOICES AND NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH RECOMMENDING TO COUNCIL.
UM, YOU WILL ALSO HEAR TONIGHT FROM OUR BOARD MEMBERS AND, UM, IN SOME GREATER DETAIL.
I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THESE LETTERS TO THE CLERK.
UM, I HAVE COPIES FOR ALL OF YOU.
I REALLY WANNA THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME, WHAT YOU SEE AS ALL.
I CAN'T MAKE A GUARANTEE THAT THEY WILL MAKE IT IN, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN ASKING FOR FROM THE, THE BEGINNING, IS THAT IF YOU THINK THERE'S A BETTER WAY TO BUILD THE MOUSE TRAP, PLEASE HELP US.
THE MOUSE TRAP WAS PROBABLY NOT A GOOD ANALOGY HERE, BUT IT NO, THANK YOU VERY, VERY MUCH FOR TAKING THAT TIME.
AND, AND THE CLERK WILL TAKE THAT AND GET IT TO US.
I AM THE BOARD PRESIDENT OF THE ARTS COUNCIL FOR LONG BEACH.
AND, UH, I'M HERE TO DISCUSS RECOMMENDATION NUMBER THREE.
UH, YOU'RE ASKING US TO DO, UM, MONTHLY, UH, WITHIN FIVE DAYS RE BUSINESS DAYS REPORTING OF, UH, FOLKS WHO ARE, UH, IN CONTACT WITH, UM, THE ORGANIZATIONS, UH, THAT, THAT WOULD BE DEFINED AS LOBBYISTS.
UH, WE ARE FEELING THAT THIS IS A VERY CUMBERSOME, UH, EXPERIENCE HERE.
WE WOULD HAVE TO PULL STAFF AWAY FROM THEIR DUTIES, UH, SUCH AS ARTS, EDUCATION, UH, SUCH AS PUBLIC ARTS IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE RECORDS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, TO, UH, UH, CONFIRM TO COMPLY WITH YOUR, UH, WITH YOUR REQUIREMENTS.
WE ARE ASKING, THOUGH, THAT MAYBE YOU CONSIDER IF THIS IS GOING TO MOVE FORWARD.
IT MAY BE QUARTERLY, MONTHLY IS, UH, TOO MUCH.
IT JUST REALLY ENDS UP BEING VERY CUMBERSOME.
UH, WE DON'T HAVE THE STAFF THE TIME.
IT WILL REDUCE OUR EFFECTIVENESS IN THE ARTS AND CULTURE SECTOR, NO DOUBT.
AND PROBABLY OTHER NONPROFITS, UH, FEEL THE SAME WAY.
BUT WITH US AS THE ARTS COUNCIL FOR LONG BEACH, WE ARE DOING THINGS ACROSS THE STATE.
UH, OUR WORKLOAD IS ALREADY MIGHTY.
AND, UH, IF WE'RE HAVING TO NOW FOLLOW EVERY CONVERSATION THAT WE MAY HAVE WITH ELECTED OFFICIALS OR IMPORTANT PEOPLE IN SUPPORT OF THE ARTS, UH, AND CULTURE, COMMUNITY IS JUST A LOT.
SO WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER GOING QUARTERLY AS OPPOSED TO MONTHLY.
I AM ALSO ON THE, UH, BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR THE ARTS COUNCIL OF LONG BEACH.
AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT, UH, RECOMMENDATION NUMBER FOUR, AND WE HAVE SOME CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS ABOUT RECOMMENDATION NUMBER FOUR, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH THAT THRESHOLD FOR OUR ANNUAL REVENUE FOR NONPROFITS.
UH, AS YOU MAY KNOW, UH, THE ARTS COUNCIL RECEIVES FUNDING FROM PRIVATE SOURCES, UH, AS WELL AS, UM, FUNDING FROM CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY, CALIFORNIA ARTS COUNCIL, THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, UH, CORPORATE ENTITIES AND OTHER, UH, ORGANIZATIONS, UH, AS WELL AS INDIVIDUALS.
BUT ANOTHER LARGE PORTION OF OUR FUNDING, UM, IS WHAT WE CONSIDER PASS THROUGH MONEY, UM, THAT FUELS OUR RE-GRANTING EFFORTS FOR ARTISTS AND COMMUNITIES, UH, THAT THE ARTS COUNCIL SUPPORTS.
THIS IS MONEY THAT WE RECEIVE FROM OTHER ENTITIES WITH THE SOLE PURPOSE OF PASSING IT ALONG TO OUR PARTNERS, LOCAL ARTISTS, UM, AND PROJECTS THAT WE HELP SUPPORT RIGHT HERE IN LONG BEACH.
UH, SO FOR CLARIFICATION, AS THE PROPOSAL IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, UM, WE ARE UNCLEAR ABOUT THESE, UM, BUCKETS OF GOVERNMENT AND RE-GRANTING, RE-GRANTING FUNDS THAT WE'RE RECEIVING, UM, ARE ROLLED INTO THAT $1 MILLION IN ANNUAL REVENUE.
UM, SO WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
HOW DOES THAT MONEY, HOW DO THOSE FUNDS, UM, OPERATE WITHIN THE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS? UM, AND GIVEN THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH COMPLIANCE OF THE PROPOSALS, HAVE YOU HEARD, HAVE YOU'VE HEARD FROM SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES, LIMITED RESOURCES, UH, THAT ALL NONPROFITS FACE, UM, AND THE OVERHEAD COSTS? WE ALSO ASK THAT THE COMMISSION
[01:15:01]
CONSIDER INCREASING.AND I KNOW WE TOUCHED ON THIS A LITTLE BIT EARLIER, UM, ABOUT THE ANNUAL REVENUE, BUT CONSIDER INCREASING THIS THRESHOLD FROM 1 MILLION TO 300, FOR 1 MILLION TO 3 MILLION IN ANNUAL REVENUE.
UM, AND SO, UH, WITH THAT, I WOULD CONCLUDE BY SAYING THAT THE ARTS COUNCIL FOR LONG BEACH IS OPPOSED TO RECOMMENDATION NUMBER FOUR, UH, UNLESS AMENDED.
I'M AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF A NONPROFIT THAT SERVICES HERE IN LONG BEACH, AS WELL AS THE PAST CHAIR OF A COMMISSION HERE IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH AND A LIFELONG RESIDENT HERE.
I'M HERE BECAUSE AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE ONLY FIVE OR SIX, UH, NONPROFITS REPRESENTED TODAY.
AND PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU'VE BEEN HEARING.
SO I WANNA SAY THANK YOU TO ALL THE COMMISSIONERS THAT SPOKE IN THIS PREVIOUS TIME PERIOD ABOUT THE ISSUES THAT WE ARE ALL FACING AS NONPROFITS DEALING WITH AN ORDINANCE THAT IS REALLY CREEPING FROM LOBBYING TO NON ADVOCACY OR ADVOCACY ITEMS. UM, SO I WANNA SAY, ESPECIALLY COMMISSIONER NORBET, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID.
I HOPE EVEN AFTER THAT CONVERSATION THAT THE, THAT WE STILL HAVEN'T GOTTEN THERE.
YOU GUYS STILL HAVEN'T GOTTEN THERE.
AND, BUT I'M NOT GONNA TALK ABOUT THOSE THINGS 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE IS HERE TO TALK ABOUT.
WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO EVEN COME TO THIS COMMISSION TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WITH YOU.
AND I'M THE ED OF A MILLION DOLLAR ORGANIZATION THAT SHOULD HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO ACTUALLY SIT DOWN AND TELL YOU HOW MANY TIMES I TALK WITH PEOPLE.
I WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
I AM HERE BECAUSE I CAN'T PUT THIS ON ANY OF MY STAFF.
THEY ARE ALREADY OVERBURDENED.
AND SO INSTEAD, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR IS SPENDING TIME DRIVING BACK TO A CITY TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WITH YOU.
AND THIS IS THE PROBLEM ALSO, WE'RE ALREADY REGULATED AS NONPROFITS WE'RE REGULATED.
IT SAYS THAT WE CAN'T USE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF OUR TIME AND OUR, UM, EXPENDITURES TO DO THIS KIND OF WORK.
WE DO THAT ALREADY WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND, AND IN SOME WAYS WITH THE STATE GOVERNMENT.
AND WE ARE THEN BEING ASKED TO DO IT AGAIN HERE WITH THE CITY OF LONG BEACH.
AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT YOU'RE TALKING TO TALKING ABOUT THESE NONPROFITS REALLY ARE DEALING WITH THE MARGINALIZED CITIZENS IN OUR COMMUNITY.
AND HONESTLY, ONE OF THE BEST WAYS TO FIND OUT WHAT THEIR ISSUES ARE IS TO GO TO THE NONPROFITS AND HAVE A CONVERSATION LIKE OUR MAYOR DID LAST YEAR.
HE SAID, I WANNA KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OUR COMMUNITIES, NONPROFITS, WHY DON'T YOU COME TOGETHER AND WE'LL HAVE A CONVERSATION THAT SHOULD BE ON EVERYBODY'S MIND AS A POLITICIAN, AS A DEPARTMENT HEAD AND HERE IN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THE STAFF FOR BEING HERE.
I KNOW MANY OF YOU FROM THE PAST WORK I'VE DONE, BUT THE COMMISSIONERS FOR DOING THIS.
BUT WE REALLY HAVE TO THINK ABOUT WHAT ADVOCACY IS, WHICH WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO ALL DAY.
AND LOBBYING IS, AND I'M VERY EXCITED THAT AN ORGANIZATION HERE CAN HIRE LOBBYISTS, BUT MOST OF US CANNOT.
WE HAVE TO COME AND DO THIS WORK ON OUR, ON OUR OWN.
AND SO YOU'RE ADDING AN EXTRA BURDEN THAT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH.
I, I APPRECIATE ALSO THE, THE MOVING THE THRESHOLD FROM A MILLION TO 3 MILLION.
I WOULD SAY THAT'S $5 MILLION BECAUSE EVEN, UM, IF YOU'RE NOT GONNA PLAY OUT THE PASS THROUGH MONEY FOR MANY OF US AS ORGANIZATIONS, 'CAUSE A LOT OF US ARE BRINGING IN FUNDS FROM, UH, WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, FROM, UM, RECOVERY FUNDS TO GIVE TO OTHER PEOPLE TO GIVE TO OTHER PLACES.
IF YOU'RE NOT GONNA DEAL WITH THAT, THEN 5 MILLION HAS TO BE THE THRESHOLD THAT YOU LOOK AT.
AND, UM, YOU NEED NONPROFITS LIKE THIS CITY NEEDS THEM MORE THAN ANYTHING.
AND I DO NOT, I DO NOT WANNA PUT DOWN YOUR WORK AT ALL.
YOU ARE ALL DOING VERY HARD WORK ON TOP OF YOUR DAILY JOBS, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
BUT TO REALLY LISTEN TO THE NONPROFITS AND REALLY LISTEN TO THOSE FOLKS THAT ARE TRYING TO GIVE SOLUTIONS, PLEASE TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT AND VOTE NO TODAY.
HELLO, MY NAME'S CHRISTINA HALL.
I AM THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY INITIATIVES AT THE NONPROFIT PARTNERSHIP.
AND THE FIRST THING I WANNA HIGHLIGHT IS ORGANIZATIONS HAVE BEEN HERE MANY, MANY TIMES TELLING YOU WHAT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS SHOULD BE.
AND SO THAT IS THE FIRST THING I WANNA SAY BECAUSE YOU SAID WE HAVEN'T BROUGHT YOU SOLUTIONS AND WE HAVE.
THE OTHER THING I WANNA HIGHLIGHT IS SOMETHING NO ONE ELSE HERE HAS BROUGHT UP.
AND THAT IS THE, THE SPACE IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS AROUND FISCALLY SPONSORED ORGANIZATIONS.
BEFORE I WAS AT THE NONPROFIT PARTNERSHIP, I WAS AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF A FISCALLY SPONSORED ORGANIZATION WITH A BUDGET OF $250,000 AT THE MAX, BUT THE NINE 90 OF MY FISCAL SPONSOR WAS $50 MILLION.
AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I'D LIKE YOU TO KNOW THAT FISCAL SPONSORS SUPPORT THE WORK OF THE SMALLEST, TINIEST ORGANIZATIONS IN OUR COMMUNITY BY DOING BACK OFFICE SUPPORT.
IT WAS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO DO PAYROLL, IT WAS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO DO EVERYTHING BECAUSE WE WERE SO TINY.
BUT I WAS ABLE WITH THEIR BACK OFFICE HELP, HAVE HR, HAVE INSURANCE, HAVE SOMEONE DOING MY PAYROLL, BUT I DIDN'T TOUCH ANY OF THAT MONEY.
[01:20:01]
A GOOD DAY.AND SO IF WE REALLY WANT TO SUPPORT THE WORK OF CHINESE ORGANIZATIONS AND THE MOST GRASSROOTS, WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT FISCALLY SPONSORED LANGUAGE THAT'S IN YOUR ORDINANCE.
IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE TO USE THE FISCAL SPONSOR'S BUDGET BECAUSE IT IS THE FISCAL SPONSOR'S BUDGET.
IT IS A ROLL UP OF EVERYTHING THAT THAT AGENCY DOES AS WELL AS A ROLL ABOVE EVERY FISCALLY SPONSORED ORGANIZATION THEY HAVE.
BUT EVERY FISCALLY SPONSORED ORGANIZATION HAS THEIR OWN BUDGET.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE YOU SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON THAT PARTICULAR RECOMMENDATION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS JESSICA QUINTANA AND I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CENTRO CHA.
BEEN WITH THE ORGANIZATION FOR OVER 25 YEARS.
LIVED IN THE CITY OF LONG BEACH FOR 64 YEARS.
UM, BEEN IN THE NONPROFIT SECTOR FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
UM, OUR ORGANIZATION, UH, WORKS ON QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES, UM, WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN SYSTEM IMPACTED.
UH, WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD ON COVID-19, UM, PROVIDING HEALTH EQUITY CLINICS ALL THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF LONG BEACH.
WE MUST HAVE ACTIVATED OVER 60 PLACES AND SPACES WHERE A LOT OF FOLKS DON'T DARE TO STEP IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS AND SCHOOLS AND PARK NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND, YOU KNOW, OUR TEAM WAS OUT THERE.
WE NEVER CLOSED DOORS DURING THE PANDEMIC.
WE SERVED THE MOST VULNERABLE COMMUNITY, OUR IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY, OUR OUR YOUTH, OUR ADULTS.
AND WE'VE SEEN THE CRISIS DUE TO THE ECONOMIC AND THE, UM, PANDEMIC.
WE'RE STILL COMING OUT OF RECOVERY.
AND SO IT SURPRISES ME THAT WE WOULD EVEN BE HAVING THIS CON KIND OF CONVERSATION THAT OUR ETHICS COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF LONG BEACH, KNOWING THAT WE HAVE A HEALTH EQUITY, THAT WE HAVE A RECONCILIATION PLAN, THAT THESE ARE ALL POLICIES THAT ARE DRIVING OUR CITY RIGHT NOW.
AND WE, SOME FOLKS HAVE THE AUDACITY TO EVEN BRING THIS TYPE OF, UM, CONVERSATION TO THE TABLE WHEN WE HAVE EVEN GONE THROUGH RECOVERY.
SO IT'S VERY DISAPPOINTING AS A CITY LEADER, A RESIDENT, A MOM, A GRANDMA, UH, WHO HAVE CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN.
AND THEN NOT TO MENTION THE HARD WORK OF OUR NONPROFIT WORKERS WHO HAVE WORKED DILIGENTLY THROUGH THIS, THROUGH THE PANDEMIC THE LAST PAST THREE YEARS.
AND REALLY, WE ARE, WE'RE NOT OVER THIS RECOVERY.
WE'RE, WE'RE NOT GONNA SEE RECOVERY FOR THE NEXT FIVE TO 10 YEARS FOR MOST COMMUNITIES AND MOST RESIDENTS.
AND SO, UM, I REALLY URGE THIS COMMISSION TO VOTE THIS DOWN TO RECOMMEND NO TO CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE THAT'S JUST GONNA CONTINUE TO BE ANOTHER FIGHT.
SO, UM, HERE ON BE, AGAIN, ON BEHALF OF CENTRO CHA, OUR COMMUNITY, UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S IMPORTANT.
IT'S A RESPONSIBILITY OF YOU ALL HERE.
AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW, COME OUT TO OUR ORGANIZATIONS, TALK TO OUR PARTICIPANTS, TALK TO OUR WORKERS WHO ARE OUT THERE DAY IN AND DAY OUT SEVEN DAYS A WEEK WORKING IN THE COMMUNITY TO SAVE LIVES THROUGH THE PANDEMIC, THROUGH THE CURRENT VIOLENCE, UM, THAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING IN THE COMMUNITIES BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN.
SO THIS IS THE LAST THING OUR COMMUNITY LEADERS SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT.
SO THANK YOU SO MUCH, UH, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND FOR LISTENING.
ALRIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY.
I'M PRESIDENT, CEO FOR THE DOWNTOWN LONG BEACH ALLIANCE.
UM, AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK THE COMMISSION FOR THE WORK THAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS ON ESTABLISHING THIS ORDINANCE AND REVIEWING IT, UH, FOR THE STAFF AND THEIR TIME AS WELL.
UM, I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE CITY'S NINE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS.
UM, I SPOKE BACK IN MARCH, MAY WHEN THIS HAD COME UP ORIGINALLY, AND JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS A CLARIFICATION ON THE EXEMPTION REQUIREMENT FOR BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS.
UM, IF YOU RECALL, BIDS ARE ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY.
UM, THEY ARE SUBJECT TO BOTH THE CALIFORNIA BROWN ACT AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST.
UM, BUT ALL THE BIDS ARE ALSO NONPROFITS.
AND SO BASED ON THE REC THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE BEING PUT FORWARD, THEY'RE CAPTURED WITHIN THAT, UH, C FOUR TO I BELIEVE C SEVEN, UM, CLEAR CLASSIFICATION THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT.
AND SO I DO WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UH, LIKE OUR C3 COLLEAGUES HERE, UH, THAT YOU RECOGNIZE THAT BIDS ARE ANYWHERE FROM VOLUNTEER ENTITIES WITH ONE PART-TIME STAFF MEMBER TO, UH, LARGER ENTITIES LIKE MYSELF.
BUT WE ARE CONSTANTLY WORKING WITH CITY STAFF ON ISSUES THAT AFFECT OUR VARIOUS DISTRICTS.
UM, WHETHER IT'S IN NORTH LONG BEACH AND UPTOWN, WHETHER IT'S IN MIDTOWN OR IN DOWNTOWN.
UM, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT STREET LIGHTS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SIDEWALKS.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT I THINK, UH, PUTS A LOT OF ONEROUS, ESPECIALLY ON THOSE VOLUNTEER ENTITIES, UM, THAT HAVE PERHAPS A BUSINESS OWNER WHO'S JUST WORKING PART-TIME TO DO THAT WORK.
UM, SO IT IS SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE CLARITY ON.
UM, BUT THEN AGAIN, I WOULD ALSO, UM, LIKE TO ECHO THE COMMENTS OF, AGAIN, MY C3 COLLEAGUES HERE,
[01:25:01]
UM, WHO TALKED ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL BURDENS AND REGULATIONS PLACED ON THEM GIVEN THE FACT THAT THEY ARE ALREADY REQUIRED TO ADHERE TO TRANSPARENCY LAWS AS WELL.SO, UH, WOULD LIKE SOME CLARITY.
AND AGAIN, THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME.
SO WE ARE QUICKLY TRYING TO FIND IT.
THE, THE BIDS AS WE WERE ADVISED AFTER THE, THE MEETING LAST YEAR ARE QUASI-GOVERNMENT ENTITIES.
YOU ARE PART OF THE CITY, SO YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO BE EXEMPT IN HERE.
WE'RE TRYING TO FIND, AND IT MAY BE THAT, DID YOU FIND IT? I DID RIGHT BEFORE, UH, RECOMMENDATION NUMBER ONE, UH, THE COMMISSION, YOU WANNA TURN ON YOUR MIC, I'M SORRY.
THE COMMISSION SUPPORTS CONTINUED APPLICATION OF SEVERAL CURRENT EXEMPTIONS FROM DISCLOSURE, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, CITY BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS, MEDIA WHEN NEWS GATHERING AND ADVOCACY AND PUBLIC MEETINGS, OTHER PUBLIC PUBLIC ACCESS FEATURES PROVIDE ADEQUATE TRANSPARENCY FOR THOSE ACTIVITIES.
AND I THINK THAT THE CLARITY WOULD JUST BE ON, ALTHOUGH IT'S IN THAT PIECE, YOU'RE STILL, I BELIEVE IT'S IN RECOMMENDATION THREE, WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT NONPROFIT C FOUR THROUGH C SEVEN, WHICH I BELIEVE ALL THE BIDS ARE C SIXES BECAUSE THEY'RE CONSIDERED MEMBERSHIP ORGANIZATIONS.
WE'LL, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT GETS CLARIFIED THERE ALSO.
IS THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO AS WE GO THROUGH, BECAUSE I, I HAVE A SENSE THAT THIS IS GONNA COME BACK TO THE AD HOC, DID YOU NEED TO LEAVE? OKAY.
UM, I HAVE A SENSE, THIS IS GONNA COME BACK TO THE AD HOC, BUT THE AD HOC NEEDS TO KNOW WHERE THE, THE WILL OF THE ORGANIZATION IS ON CHANGES, WHAT AREAS WE'RE OKAY TO GO THROUGH.
SO IF WE START WITH RECOMMENDATION ONE, IS THERE ANYTHING IN THERE THAT SOMEBODY THOUGHT NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED OR LOOKED AT FURTHER BY THE AD HOC? AND THAT'S THE ONE THAT, THAT SIMPLIFIES THE WAY THE LOBBYISTS HAVE TO, UM, HAVE TO REPORT NOW.
RIGHT NOW IT'S BASED ON THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS THAT ARE EXPENDED AND, AND THE TIME SPENT PUTTING TOGETHER INFORMATION.
AND IT, THE AD HOC BELIEVES THAT THIS IS A SIMPLIFICATION IN THAT, IN THAT IT WOULD BE THE THREE CONTACTS.
ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT? COMMISSIONER SHOTWELL? SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, UM, AN ENTITY THAT DOES NOT HAVE THREE CONTACTS WITH SAY CITY COUNCIL, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, WOULD THERE NOT BE TRIGGER, WOULD NOT TRIGGER THE REQUIREMENTS, WOULDN'T HAVE NO REPORTING OBLIGATIONS, CORRECT? NO, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO REGISTER.
THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO REGISTER.
THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO REGISTER AND WOULD NOT HAVE REPORTING OBLIGATIONS, I DON'T BELIEVE.
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S A REPORTING OBLIGATION FOR AN ENTITY THAT'S NOT REGISTERED.
AND I APOLOGIZE 'CAUSE I KEEP GOING BACK TO OUR OWN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT WHERE IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH HAVING REGISTERED OR NON-REGISTERED WHO'S INFLUENCING US.
AND THEN WELL REMEMBER THIS IS WHO'S INFLUENCING THE CITY.
WE HAVE MUCH TIGHTER PARAMETERS THAN ANYONE ELSE AND WE SET THAT UP SPECIFICALLY FOR OURSELVES TO HOLD OURSELVES TO A DIFFERENT STANDARD.
SO THEN WHAT I'M KIND OF HEARING IS THAT THE COMMISSION THINKS THERE'S SOME CLARIFICATION THAT NEEDS TO GO IN TO FURTHER CLARIFICATION IN THIS RECOMMENDATION IN TERMS TO CONTACTS AND WHEN REGISTRATION TAKES PLACE.
AND FURTHER CLARIFICATION ON ON THE SECOND BULLET POINT, INDIVIDUALS WHEN YOU'RE REFERRING TO INDIVIDUALS, AND WE WERE EARLIER DISCUSSING EXAMPLES OF SOMEONE IN THE GROCERY STORE WALKING UP TO THE COUNCIL MEMBER.
ARE WE TALKING ABOUT INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE ASSOCIATED WITH AN ORGANIZATION OR JUST MYSELF WALKING IN AND SAYING, HEY REX, WHAT'S GOING ON? SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE PAID TO MAKE THE CONTACT.
BUT WE, SO WE'LL, WE'LL LOOK AT HOW WE CAN MAKE ALL OF THAT CLEARER.
ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY INPUT FOR THE AD HOC THERE? RECOMMENDATION TWO, REPLACE EXPENDITURE LOBBYISTS WITH THE GRASSROOTS LOBBYISTS.
DO YOU WANT TO KIND OF EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE THERE? WELL, ACTUALLY THE TITLE IS SIMPLY, UH, TO BE MORE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT AN EXPENDITURE LOBBYIST IS.
UM, AN EXPENDITURE LOBBYIST IS SOMEONE WHO IS SOLICITING OTHER PEOPLE TO INDIVIDUALLY LOBBY.
AND SO IT WOULD BE THE EFFORT TO GET A GRASSROOTS
[01:30:01]
LOBBYING CAMPAIGN OFF THE GROUND.AND THE ORGANIZATION THAT IS TRIGGERING THE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING CAMPAIGN WOULD BE THE ORGANIZATION WOULD BE THE ONE REQUIRED TO LOBBY.
TO REGISTER BECAUSE THE INDIVIDUALS ARE THEN SIMPLY EACH INDIVIDUAL'S MAKING ONE CONTACT.
BUT IT COULD BE A HUNDRED INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE MAKING A SINGLE CONTACT.
BUT IF AN ORGANIZATION SOLICITED THEM AND EXPENDED $2,500 IN THAT SOLICITATION, THEN THE ORGANIZATION WOULD BE REQUIRED TO REGISTER.
WE COULD DELETE RECOMMENDATION NUMBER TWO.
IT'S, I THINK IT'S JUST INTENDED TO BE A CHANGE TO THE TITLE.
IT'S RIGHT NOW THERE IS SOMETHING CALLED AN EXPENDITURE LOBBYIST AND WE DON'T THINK THAT'S A VERY GOOD TITLE FOR IT 'CAUSE IT'S REALLY ABOUT GRASSROOTS LOBBYING.
SO WE'RE JUST CHANGING THE NAME TO GRASSROOTS LOBBYIST, WHICH, SO THAT'S ALL.
AND I COME BACK TO WHAT I WAS SAYING WHERE YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT.
CAN I SEE THIS IN THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE OF HOW IT FITS IN? OKAY.
BECAUSE THIS TO ME IS VERY CONFUSING.
I THINK YOU'VE ASKED FOR TWO THINGS.
AND SO I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND THAT.
'CAUSE I DID GO BACK TO THE FEBRUARY THING TO SEE WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT AND, AND I SEE WHAT YOU MEANT FROM THAT.
AND I THINK WE COULD PUT, FOR YOUR BENEFIT AT LEAST, 'CAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHO ELSE IS GOING BACK THERE.
I HADN'T LOOKED AT FE THE FEBRUARY RECOMMENDATION SINCE LAST OF MARCH, I DON'T THINK.
BUT UM, I WOULD GO, WE COULD PUT IN THERE THIS PREVIOUSLY WAS RECOMMENDATION, WHATEVER, OR YOU KNOW, THESE TWO, YOU KNOW, AND WE CHANGED THE ORDER OF SOME OF THEM FOR DIFFERENT REASON.
I MEAN, THE WAY THAT WE PRESENTED THEM.
SO I UNDERSTAND THE CONFUSION, BUT I I I THINK WE COULD DO THAT.
THE OTHER PROBLEM IS SEEING IT IN CONNECTION WITH THE EXISTING ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT'S A RECOMMENDATION TO THAT.
SO I I I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW WE COULD DO IT, BUT I THINK WE, WE COULD DO IT.
WHAT WE WILL NOT DO, BECAUSE WE CAN'T DO IT, IS WE CAN'T DRAFT THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE.
SO I GUESS WE COULD, WE COULD TAKE, I MEAN, 'CAUSE I HAVE A COPY OF THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE.
'CAUSE YOU KNOW, I WALK AROUND WITH IT IN THE SAME WAY THAT SOMETIMES WE SWAP WORD PERFECT DOCUMENTS AND WE PLUG IN OUR INPUT.
CAN'T THAT SAME FORMAT AND BE DONE.
AT, BUT WE COULD PROBABLY CONVERT THIS ORDINANCE TO A WORD DOCUMENT AND STICK STUFF IN IT FOR, SO WHAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IS A SOLUTION.
I, I THINK WE NEED TO TALK THROUGH WHAT REDLINING LOOKS LIKE AND BE VERY CAREFUL, LIKE MY OFFICE IS CURRENTLY ALREADY ASSISTING YOU IN WRITING THE ETHICS ORDINANCE, WHICH IS AN EXCEPTION THAT WE'RE MAKING, RIGHT? WE DON'T NORMALLY WRITE ORDINANCES WITHOUT COUNSEL TELLING US TO, IN THIS CASE, IT MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL TO JUST HAVE COMMENTS OF LIKE, THIS RELATES TO RECOMMENDATION ONE, THE CHANGE HERE IS GOING TO BE X, Y, Z OR LIKE HIGHLIGHT, THESE ARE GOING, THESE DEFINITIONS ARE GOING TO BE ELIMINATED AND REPLACED WITH BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
BECAUSE RIDING AN ORDINANCE TAKES A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME.
NO, HE IS NOT ASKING, ASKING AND I, I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT A RED LINE, WE'RE STARTING TO TRAVEL IN THAT DIRECTION.
SO NO BUBBLE, AS LONG AS WE CANS MAKE COMMENTS AND BUBBLES, I THINK THAT THAT MIGHT HELP YOU.
UM, AND THEN LIKE DIGEST AND PUT EVERYTHING WHERE IT'S SUPPOSED TO LIVE IN THE ORDINANCE.
AND I THINK THEN RECOMMENDATION THREE, WHEN YOU HAVE THE ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU WILL SEE THAT THERE'S VERY LITTLE INFORMATION THAT'S REQUIRED FROM THE LOBBYIST RIGHT NOW.
SO WHAT, WHAT THE AD HOC WAS TRYING TO DO WAS ASK FOR SPECIFIC INFORMATION.
AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT WE'LL HAVE TO TAYLOR, WOULD THERE BE ANY RE REASON THAT WE COULDN'T ASK FOR EITHER A DRIVER'S LICENSE OR A BUSINESS LICENSE AS COMMISSIONER A ANNOVA HAD SUGGESTED IN CASE THERE'S ENFORCEMENT ISSUES? BECAUSE IF IT'S AN ORGANIZATION, I'M PRESUMING THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A LICENSE TO DO BUSINESS IN THE CITY.
UM, IF THEY'RE DOING BUSINESS IN THE CITY, IN THEORY, THEY SHOULD HAVE A LICENSE.
IF I CAN GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT QUESTION, JUST BECAUSE I KNOW THAT FOR OUR BUSINESS LICENSE DEPARTMENT, THIS ISSUE HAS COME UP WITH UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS OR UNDOCUMENTED INDIVIDUALS.
AND SO IT WOULD BE BETTER IF I HAD THE SPACE TO CONFIRM, UM, BEFORE RESPONDING TO YOU ON THAT ONE.
[01:35:04]
BUT IS THERE ANY OTHER INFORMATION THAT YOU, ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS FEEL SHOULD BE IN A REPORT THAT'S FILED? OR DO YOU THINK WE PRETTY MUCH HIT THE, THE HIGHLIGHTS HERE? YEAH, THIS IS WHERE WE'LL CLARIFY TOO WHAT IN ABOUT THE OPTION FOR INDIVIDUALS REPORTING, RIGHT? RIGHT.AND THEN THE, THE OTHER THING THAT THIS REQUIRES THAT IS NOT REQUIRED NOW IS THAT IF THERE'S ANY WRITTEN INFORMATION THAT'S PROVIDED TO THE PERSON THAT IS BEING, THAT THEY'RE MEETING WITH, IT WILL HAVE TO BE POSTED, IT'LL HAVE TO BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE TO POST SO THAT THE PUBLIC HAS ACCESS TO THE SAME INFORMATION THAT GOES TO EITHER THE DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE, THE DEPARTMENT HEAD, OR THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER.
UM, TWO POINTS, ONE ON THE POINT YOU JUST MADE.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHERE, AGAIN, I'M GETTING BACK AT.
I WOULD LIKE, IF I HAD MY PERFECT WORD, I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT FOR ALL INFORMATION THAT'S BEING PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF REGISTERED OR NOT REGISTERED, REGARDLESS OF THEY'RE HAVE HAD THREE CONTACTS OR NOT HAD HAD ONE SINGLE CONTACT.
JUST SO THAT THERE'S TRANSPARENCY, JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE.
THE QUESTION I HAVE WITH REGARD TO QUESTION NUMBER THREE, THAT LITTLE, THAT NET WAS WE SAY, UH, SUBMIT A MONTHLY REPORT WITHIN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS AND CLEAN THAT UP IN THE SENSE OF, YOU KNOW, ARE WE CALLING FOR A MONTHLY REPORT OR WE CALLING FOR A REPORT WITHIN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF DAYS AFTER THE, AFTER THE CONTRACT.
SO THAT THEN GOES BACK ALSO TO THE EXISTING ORDINANCE.
AND I THINK WHEN YOU SEE IT LINED OUT WITH THE EXISTING ORDINANCE, RIGHT NOW, THE EXISTING ORDINANCE HAS IT, IT HAS TO BE FILED, IT'S ACTUALLY ON A QUARTERLY BASIS, SEMI-ANNUALLY BY THE 15TH OF THE MONTH AFTER.
SO REALLY WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS RATHER THAN HAVING THESE PROLONGED PERIODS OF TIME FOR THE FILING OF THE REPORTS, REPORTS HAVE TO BE FILED ON A MONTHLY BASIS BY THE FIFTH DAY OF THE MONTH.
BY THE FIFTH DAY OF THE MONTH OR THE FIFTH DAY.
OH, IT'S FIFTH DAY FOLLOWING THE MONTH, NOT THE UHHUH.
AND THAT WAS, AND THAT WAS REALLY, UH, UH, AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INFORMATION IS STILL TIMELY WHEN THE PUBLIC SEES IT.
AND, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE, THE, IF THE COMMISSION IS READY TO REALLY HAVE A DISCUSSION ON DO WE KEEP NONPROFITS TOTALLY EXEMPT, DO WE? NOW LET'S, LET'S, LET'S, LET'S GO.
THERE'S KIND OF A COUPLE OF THINGS HERE.
SO THERE ARE SOME NON-PROFITS THAT RIGHT NOW ARE EXEMPT THAT WE CLARIFY THAT NOBODY HAS SAID SHOULD REMAIN EXEMPT.
SO THOSE ARE THE 5 0 1 C FOURS THROUGH SEVENS, AND THOSE ARE TRADE ASSOCIATIONS.
ARE WE ALL OKAY WITH LEAVING THAT IN? OKAY.
SO IT'S THE 5 0 1 C THREES THAT ARE THE, THE CONCERN.
SO FOR THOSE IN THE BACK WHO DIDN'T HEAR WHAT I SAID, RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A BLANKET EXEMPTION IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE FOR ALL NONPROFITS.
WE ARE CLARIFYING THAT 5 0 1 C3 FOURS THROUGH SEVEN WOULD HAVE NO EXEMPTION REGARDLESS OF THE SIZE OF THE ORGANIZATION.
AND THE COMMISSION HAS SAID THAT THEY'RE OKAY WITH LEAVING THAT THOSE ARE TRADE ASSOCIATIONS THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD POSSIBLY IMPACT THE, WELL, IT WOULD IMPACT THE CONVENTION CENTER, SOME OF THOSE LARGER TRADE ASSOCIATIONS.
UM, THE COMMISSIONER JUST WITH THE, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT, JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE ALSO CLARIFY.
THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY COMMENT THAT I, YEAH.
5 0 1 C THREES, THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING NEXT.
WE WILL CLARIFY THAT THE BIDS ARE EXEMPT REGARDLESS, BECAUSE THEY ARE A GOVERN, THEY ARE A PART OF THE CITY.
THEY ARE RECOGNIZED, THEY'RE ALMOST LIKE A QUASI CITY DEPARTMENT.
UM, SO THE REMAINING 5 0 1 C THREES AND THE DEBATE GOING BACK AND FORTH TODAY HAS BEEN WHETHER THERE SHOULD BE TRANSPARENCY ON THE PART OF THE 5 0 1 C THREES, WHETHER THERE SHOULD BE A TOTAL EXEMPTION FOR 5 0 1 C THREES.
IS THERE A DOLLAR THRESHOLD? ARE WE READY TO HAVE A DEEPER DIVE ON THAT RIGHT NOW? OR DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE IT OPEN? DO WE LEAVE IT AT $1 MILLION? DO WE TAKE THE DOLLAR AMOUNT UP? DO WE PULL THE 5 0 1 C THREES OUT? TOTALLY.
AND I WILL THROW THAT OUT ON THE FLOOR CHAIR.
I BELIEVE THAT, UH, MY POSITION IS CLEAR ON THIS RECOMMENDATION
[01:40:01]
IN RESPECT TO, UH, C THREES.UM, I BELIEVE THEY SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE EXEMPT AS THEY CURRENTLY ARE, REGARDLESS OF THE SIZE.
I THINK I SEE BRAINS TICKING AND TRYING TO MAKE A DECISION, REALLY THINK OUT THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS.
AND I THINK THERE'S ONLY ONE COMMISSIONER.
SO WHAT I'M GONNA SUGGEST IS THAT, THAT PART GO BACK TO THE AD HOC WITH NO DOLLAR AMOUNT, THE QUESTION MARK, BASICALLY.
AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A DEEPER DISCUSSION BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD FROM SOME OF THE NONPROFITS THAT MAYBE A, DO A HIGHER DOLLAR THRESHOLD WOULD BE APPROPRIATE SO THAT SOME NONPROFITS DO REPORT.
IT'S GONNA BE A WHILE BEFORE THIS COMES BACK TO THE FULL COMMISSION.
AND I THINK THAT GIVES EACH OF YOU SOME TIME TO REALLY THINK ABOUT WHERE THAT DOLLAR MARK GOOD HIT.
UM, WE WERE PROVIDED SOME INFORMATION BY THE NONPROFIT PARTNERSHIP ON THE SIZE OF THE ORGANIZATIONS IN THE CITY.
AND AS THE VICE CHAIR HAD INDICATED, THERE ARE ABOUT 128 THAT WOULD HAVE TO REPORT AT THE $1 MILLION.
BUT THERE'S ALSO THE DISCUSSION OF THE PASS THROUGH ORGANIZATIONS THAT I THINK SHOULD GO BACK TO THE AD HOC.
AND THEN THE QUESTION ON, UM, OH, WHAT IS THE FINANCE, THE FISCALLY SPONSORED, FISCALLY SPONSORED? SO LET'S SEND THOSE QUESTIONS BACK.
BUT LET'S, I'M GONNA RECOMMEND THAT WHEN IT COMES BACK FROM THE AD HOC, THAT THERE BE NO SPECIFIC DOLLAR AMOUNT AS TO THE THRESHOLD.
AND THEN WE CAN, WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION AT THAT TIME.
IS THAT OKAY? COMMISSIONER WEISS? YEAH, I WOULD HAVE A QUESTION IF ANYONE HAS ANY OTHER THOUGHTS.
I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO READ EVERY COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WERE HANDED INTO US, BUT, UM, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS THAT THEY THINK WE SHOULD HAVE REGARDING, UM, REPORTING BY 5 0 1 C THREES? UM, AND I'LL JUST TELL YOU SOME OF THE THINGS THAT, THAT CONCERN ME.
UM, AND I'LL JUST SAY BY WAY OF BACKGROUND, I, I'VE WORKED JUST TO YOUR PERSONAL, YOUR PERSONAL COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER, VE I'VE WORKED WITH NONPROFITS THE ENTIRE TIME I'VE BEEN IN LONG BEACH, I'VE STARTED A NONPROFIT.
IT'S, IT'S, I THINK THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF MONEY IT EVER HAD WAS $250,000.
I, I, ALL THE NONPROFITS I'VE WORKED WITH, I LOVE, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK THEY DO WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL WORK.
UM, BUT, BUT I AM ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE INFLUENCE THAT NONPROFITS HAVE THAT THAT THE PUBLIC DOESN'T, DOESN'T KNOW ABOUT.
AND THAT IS WHAT I AM STRUGGLING WITH.
I'M NOT LOOKING TO PUT ANY BURDENS ON ANYBODY, BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE PUBLIC TO KNOW SOME NONPROFITS BUILD HOUSING PROJECTS AND, AND I THINK THE PUBLIC, THAT'S SOMETHING THE PUBLIC WOULD, WOULD WANNA KNOW ABOUT.
I MEAN, I'M TALKING ABOUT LOW INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS, NOT, NOT NECESSARILY NOT LUXURY CONDOMINIUMS OR WHATEVER, BUT SO THAT'S, THAT'S ONE THING.
THERE ARE NONPROFITS FROM, I'M JUST GONNA SAY OUTTA TOWN
BUT THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T, WE DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHO THEY ARE OR, OR, OR EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE, WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
SO, SO, SO ANYWAY, IF, IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS.
SO THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT I TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN I, WHEN I LOOK AT THIS.
SO I'M INVITING ANY OF YOU THAT HAVE CONCERNS LIKE THAT, THAT YOU WANT US TO THINK ABOUT AS WE, WE THINK ABOUT HOW WE WOULD, WOULD TAILOR THIS, THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
IF I COULD NOTE, UM, SO WHEN WE LOOKED AT OTHER CITIES THAT DO NOT HAVE AN EXEMPTION FOR 5 0 1 C THREES, UM, LA CITY, OAKLAND, SACRAMENTO, AND SAN DIEGO, WHICH ARE OTHER CALIFORNIA CITIES, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF SOME OF, SOME OF THE NONPROFITS SAID THEY WORK ALL OVER THE STATE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR EXPERIENCE IS WITH THOSE OTHER CITIES.
UM, AS WE MENTIONED, THERE ARE, THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, A MUCH
[01:45:01]
SMALLER NUMBER OF NONPROFITS THAT MEET THE $1 MILLION THRESHOLD, AND THE NUMBER GETS EVEN SMALLER AT 2 MILLION OR HIGHER.SO I THINK WE'LL GO BACK AND WORK ON THIS AND WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION ON, DIVE INTO THE QUESTION, BECAUSE I'M NOT THINKING THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE A RECOMMENDATION BACK UNTIL PROBABLY MAINLY BECAUSE I, THE DISCUSSION.
SO I HAVE, I, UM, CHAIR, CAN I JUST, UH, ON, I WANTED TO SUPPORT THE, THE TENSION, UH, THAT COMMISSIONER WEISS WAS ALSO POINTING OUT OF THE BETWEEN TRANSPARENCY AND THE BURDEN.
AND I'M, I'M TRYING TO WEIGH THAT MYSELF.
UH, ONE QUESTION IS, UH, YOU'RE ALREADY GONNA BE WORKING WHAT THE CRITERIA IS BECAUSE WE, WE'VE HAD IT POINTED OUT A FEW DIFFERENT TIMES THAT THE, THE DOLLAR THRESHOLD, MAY REVENUE MAY NOT WORK, SOME ORGANIZATION MAY GET A HUGE AMOUNT OF REVENUE IN ONE YEAR.
UM, MAYBE IT'S A BEQUEST AND A, AND A WILL OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT THAT HAS TO BE, UH, ADDRESSED.
MIGHT MORE SIGNIFICANT QUESTION.
I SUPPORT, UH, NOT HAVING BIDS AND NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATIONS BROUGHT WITHIN THE GAMBIT, BUT HAS THE COMMITTEE LOOKED AT THE DESIGNATION PROCESS FOR THE BIDS AND NIS, UH, TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS ACTUALLY AN OFFICIAL DESIGNATION BY THE CITY THAT THEY ARE IN, UH, A BID.
UH, AND IT'S NOT SOMEBODY JUST TRYING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A LOOPHOLE.
SO THERE, I BELIEVE THERE IS A PROCESS FOR HER PHONE.
UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, THEY CAN REGISTER WITH THE CITY.
IT, THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE, UM, THE PURVIEW OF THIS TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW THE CITY MIGHT IMPROVE THAT PROCESS.
BUT I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT OKAY, YES, THERE IS, THERE TECHNICALLY IS A PROCESS, BUT, UM, IT'S A VERY EASY PROCESS.
SO I THINK WE, I THINK WE KNOW WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT.
I WANNA MAKE CLEAR THE NON LOBBYING ADVOCACY IS NOT JUST APPLICABLE TO NONPROFITS, IT'S ALSO NON LOBBYING ADVOCACY BY PRIVATE COMPANIES.
SO THIS IS NOT ELON MUSK HIMSELF, BUT TESLA'S COMING IN.
THERE'S NOT SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA, BUT THEY WANT TO SHAPE THE AGENDA AND THEY ARE ADVOCATING FOR LAND USE AND ZONING ISSUE.
PERHAPS THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT LAND USE AND ZONING.
GEE, I'D LOVE TO COME TO LONG BEACH, BUT BOY, YOUR ZONING PROCESS IS SO DIFFICULT.
UM, SO THOSE KINDS OF CONVERSATIONS WOULD ALSO BE CAPTURED UNDER NON LOBBYING ADVOCACY, WHETHER OR NOT THAT THAT TERM IS ALSO APPLICABLE TO NONPROFITS.
ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT PART? ALRIGHT, NUMBER SIX.
I'M PART OF HEARING, SORRY, I KEEP FORGETTING TO TURN ON THE MIC.
I NEED YOU ALL TO REALLY SPEAK UP.
NUMBER SIX IS THE DISCLOSURE OF CALENDAR INFORMATION BY THE CITY LEADERS.
I THINK I HEARD KIND OF UNANIMOUS THAT EVERYONE IS OKAY WITH THAT AND THAT THE CITY LEADERS THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED ARE, OKAY, SO WE'RE OKAY WITH SIX.
COULD PUT THE BURDEN ALSO ON ANY DOCUMENTATION RECEIVED THAT THEY ALSO POST JUST A THOUGHT.
COMMISSIONER DE BENNETT DICKUS.
SORRY ABOUT THAT LA LAST ADD IN.
BUT, UH, I'VE ALWAYS FOUND THAT, UH, WHEN BOTH SIDES DISCLOSE, UH, THE INFORMATION FLOWS FASTER AND BETTER, USUALLY.
SO FOR, FOR THOSE IN THE BACK, COMMISSIONER DE BENEDICTUS ASKED THAT WE ALSO LOOK AT HAVING THE CITY LEADERS POST ANY DOCUMENTS THAT ARE PROVIDED TO THEM DURING MEETINGS WITH THE PUBLIC OR THE, THE PEOPLE, THE MEETINGS THAT THEY HAVE.
[01:50:01]
IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN DOES NOT HAVE ANY ENFORCEMENT TEETH.AND SO THIS WOULD SET, THIS WOULD RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY SET UP SOME STAFFING AND, UM, THE ABILITY FOR BOTH THE CITY CLERK AND THE ATTORNEY OR THE CITY PROSECUTOR TO ACTUALLY ENFORCE THE CODE.
ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT? AND NUMBER EIGHT IS CLARIFYING.
SO CLARIFIES PRIMARILY RIGHT NOW THE ORDINANCE HAS AN EXEMPTION FOR, UM, LABOR UNIONS.
AND IT WAS SPECIFICALLY PUT IN PLACE SO THAT AS NOT TO IMPACT THE ABILITY OF THE UNIONS TO REPRESENT THE BEST INTEREST OF THEIR EMPLOYEES.
IS SOMEBODY SMOKING OUTSIDE THE DOOR? THAT'S, I WAS WONDERING WHERE.
YEAH, THAT'S WHERE, LET'S MAKE MY WALK.
SO IT WAS PUT IN PLACE SO AS NOT TO HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT ON THE ABILITY OF THE UNIONS TO REPRESENT THE BEST INTEREST OF THE EMPLOYEES THAT THEY REPRESENT WITHIN THE CITY.
THAT MEANS THAT AS OTHER UNIONS HAVE COME INTO THE CITY AND ASKED THE CITY LEADERS TO TAKE ACTIONS THAT IMPACT EMPLOYEES THAT ARE NOT EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY, THOSE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS SHOULD HAVE FILED AS LOBBYISTS.
THAT'S BEEN UNCLEAR IN THE ORDINANCES IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN.
AND THIS WOULD ASK THE COUNCIL TO MAKE THAT CLEARER IN THE FUTURE ORDINANCE.
THAT THE ONLY EXEMPTION IS FOR LABOR UNIONS WHO ARE IN THE PROCESS OF REPRESENTING THE INTERESTS OF THE EMPLOYEES IN THE CITY.
SO TO COMMISSIONER NOVAS POINT ABOUT HOTEL WORKERS, IF A UNION WERE TO COME TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND ASK THAT THERE BE AN INCREASE IN SALARY FOR EMPLOYEES AT A HOTEL, THEY WOULD NEED TO BE REGISTERED AS LOBBYIST ALSO.
ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY, SO I'M GONNA, UH, THE MOTION WAS JUST FOR, UH, REPORT.
TAYLOR, WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE ANY OTHER, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A DISCUSSION, WE'VE HAD A DISCUSSION WITH RECOMMENDATIONS.
GOING BACK TO THE AD HOC, DO WE NEED TO TO MAKE A SPECIFIC MOTION ABOUT THOSE OR CAN WE JUST ADOPT THE MOTION? THAT WAS TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION.
SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY, IT'S WHETHER DO YOU HAVE TO CAPTURE ALL OF THE THINGS YEAH.
WHETHER I HAVE TO CAPTURE, SO, UM, JT ALREADY MESSAGED ME ABOUT THIS.
UM, WHAT THIS APPEARED TO ME, THERE WAS A LOT OF FEEDBACK THAT CAME TODAY.
UM, THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD THIS PROCESS WAS CONSENSUS BUILDING.
SO IF YOU DIDN'T OBJECT TO IT, THERE WAS AGREEMENT.
I THINK BECAUSE OF THAT, THE MOTION CAN BE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THE FEEDBACK BACK TO THE A THAT YOU RECEIVED FROM THE FULL COMMISSION BACK TO THE AD HOC, UM, FOR CONSIDERATION AND A REPORT BACK.
SO, UH, YOU MADE THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
SO WILL YOU ACCEPT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO ACCEPT THE INPUT AS PROVIDED DURING THE DISCUSSION TO BE REFERRED BACK TO THE AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER WORK ON THE I THE REPORT? YES, I DO.
YOU SECOND IT SO YOU ACCEPT IT ALSO.
SEEING THAT, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE'LL GO TO A VOTE PLEASE.
AND JUST TO RECAP FOR THE AUDIENCE BEFORE, SO WE'RE NOT TAKING A VOTE TO ACCEPT THIS, IT'S GOING BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER WORK.
I WANNA THANK EVERYONE FOR TAKING THE TIME AGAIN TO COME OUT.
UM, MOVING BACK TO NUMBER TWO IN OUR AGENDA, TYLER HAS A REPORT FOR US ON WHERE WE STAND WITH THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT.
DO WE HAVE TO END AT FIVE? I THOUGHT WE HAD TILL SIX.
[01:55:01]
OKAY.BUT I WANNA GET TYLER'S REPORT IN 'CAUSE I KNOW HE IS WORKED REALLY HARD ON IT.
WHAT'S HER NAME? ALANA, DO YOU THINK IT'S POSSIBLE THAT MAYBE YOU COULD ATTEND AND WE'LL SCHEDULE IT WHEN YOU'RE AVAILABLE, OUR NEXT AD HOC MEETING AND KIND OF GO OVER WITH US SOME OF THE EQUITY ISSUES SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE WE GET THOSE ADDRESSED? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
UH, TAYLOR AND I WERE JUST HAVING A SIDEBAR ABOUT THE BEST WAY TO PROCEED WITH NEXT STEPS.
SO I THANK YOU ALL FOR ALLOWING ME TO BE HERE.
PART OF YOUR CONVERSATION TODAY.
ALSO WANTED TO THANK THE PUBLIC WHO ENGAGED IN, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR DIALOGUE.
ANY OF THE CONCERNS THAT CAME UP ARE A LITTLE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT, UM, CAUGHT MY ATTENTION DURING MY INITIAL READING.
SO LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU ALL, UM, OR JOINING YOU AT YOUR AD HOC MEETING.
YEAH, WHAT I'D LIKE TO SCHEDULE DOWN THE ROAD, I WORKS WITH YOUR SCHEDULE AND I SEE YOU HAVE A TOOLKIT THERE.
BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE REALLY GREAT IF YOU COULD COME AND GIVE US A TRAINING ON WHAT TYPES OF THINGS TO LOOK.
'CAUSE WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT A LOT OF POLICIES WITHIN THE CITY.
SO I THINK IF WE CAN PLUG PART OF YOUR BRAIN INTO OUR BRAINS, THEN WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER WE SEND TO YOU TO LOOK AT IN THE FUTURE WILL BE A RATHER QUICK REVIEW BECAUSE WE'LL ALREADY BE THINKING IN THE WAY THAT YOU THINK.
I'D BE HAPPY TO, UH, PRESENT A TRAINING TO YOU ALL.
OKAY, NOW TYLER, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON OUR PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUESTS.
AND, UH, TO BE FULLY TRANSPARENT, I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF THE BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF WHAT THE REQUESTS BEFORE HAVE BEEN FROM THE COMMISSION AND WHAT THE INTERESTS ARE.
SO I LOOK FORWARD TO KIND OF HEARING MORE FEEDBACK AND QUESTIONS OF COURSE, UM, THROUGH THIS PROCESS SO THAT WE CAN COME BACK WITH MORE INFORMATION, UM, AND DATA THAT MIGHT BE OF INTEREST TO THE COMMISSION.
UH, BUT I DID WANT TO GIVE YOU, UH, SOME INSIGHTS INTO WHAT OUR CURRENT SYSTEM IS, UM, AND WHAT THE CAPABILITIES ARE.
AND THEN AN OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE DATA THAT MIGHT BE OF INTEREST TO THE COMMISSION.
UH, SO WE USE GOV QA AS OUR PLATFORM TO RECEIVE AND PROCESS PRA REQUESTS.
WE, UM, USE THIS ACROSS THE CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENTS WHEN WE RECEIVE REQUESTS.
WE ALSO, UM, IF WE RECEIVE REQUESTS THROUGH EMAIL OR UM, A PHONE CALL, WE CAN UPLOAD THESE REQUESTS THROUGH THE SYSTEM.
UM, AND ONE THING IS THAT THERE ARE SOME LIMITATIONS CURRENTLY IN TERMS OF THE TYPES OF DATA THAT WE CAN, UM, COLLECT AND THE TYPES OF REPORTING THAT WE CAN DO THROUGH THIS SYSTEM.
SO WE ARE WORKING WITH GOV QA, UM, REPRESENTATIVES TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEM A LITTLE BIT BETTER AND TO SEE WHAT CAPABILITIES THEY HAVE IN TERMS OF PROCESSING REPORTS.
ULTIMATELY, UM, WE'VE BEEN MAINLY USING THIS AS A, UM, SITE THAT WE CAN USE TO COORDINATE THE REQUESTS AND THE RESPONSES FROM THE DEPARTMENTS.
BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF TOOLS THAT, UH, WE'RE LEARNING STILL THROUGH GOV QA.
UM, SO SOME OF THE DATA REQUESTS AND INTERESTS FROM THE COMMISSION, UM, MIGHT BE, UM, SOMETHING THAT WE CAN LOOK INTO IN THE FUTURE.
BUT THERE ARE SOME LIMITATIONS CURRENTLY WHERE WE TYPICALLY ARE ABLE TO PULL DATA OF CURRENT REQUESTS, SORT OF A SNAPSHOT OF, UM, THE REQUESTS IN THE SYSTEM AT THE TI AT THIS, THE TIME THAT WE PULL IT.
UM, BUT NOT NECESSARILY LIKE LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF, YOU KNOW, HOW SOME OF THE REQUESTS AND TIMES HAVE CHANGED, UM, YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT THE YEARS.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT AS A AT THE OUTSET.
SO CURRENTLY, UH, JUST LOOKING AT SOME OF OUR OPEN, UH, PRA REQUESTS, WE HAVE 68 OPEN AND THIS NUMBER CHANGES DAILY.
UM, WE CLOSE REQUESTS, WE GET NEW ONES, UH, ALMOST ON A DAILY BASIS.
UM, AND THEN YOU CAN ALSO SEE JUST TIMELINES, 30 PLUS 60 PLUS AND 90 PLUS DAYS, UM, WHERE SOME OF THE PRA REQUESTS ARE AT IN TERMS OF THE RESPONSE TIMES TO, UM, ACTUALLY FULFILLING THE PRA REQUESTS.
AND LAST IS SOME OF THE LONGER TERM SIX MONTH PLUS, UM, OPEN PRA REQUESTS.
SO THIS HAS ONE BEEN ONE OF THE KEY, UH, PRIORITIES OF OUR TEAM OVER THE LAST YEAR.
IN PARTICULAR, TRYING TO DO AS MUCH AS WE CAN TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE MORE LONG-TERM OPEN REQUESTS.
SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE SEVEN THAT ARE STILL OUTSTANDING OVER THE SIX MONTH PERIOD.
UM, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO GIVE A LITTLE CONTEXT OF, UM, WHY WE MAY SEE A REQUEST THAT'S OPEN FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, SIX MONTHS OR MORE.
[02:00:01]
WE DO HAVE REQUESTS, UM, LIKE WE HAVE ON THE SLIDE THAT HAVE REQUESTED SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF INFORMATION, UH, THAT TAKES A LONG TIME TO PROCESS THOUSANDS OF PAGES SOMETIMES.UM, AND EACH OF THOSE REQUIRES SIGNIFICANT REDACTIONS OF PERSONAL INFORMATION AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO SOMETIMES THE REQUESTS THEMSELVES ARE SIGNIFICANT AND LARGE ENOUGH WHERE IT DOES TAKE A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME TO GATHER THE INFORMATION AND DO THE REDACTIONS AND ALL THE REVIEW.
UM, AND WHAT WE DO OFTEN IN THOSE CASES WHERE THERE'S A LARGER REQUEST IS WE SEND, SEND OUT THE, UM, RECORDS AS THEY ARE REDACTED AND MADE AVAILABLE.
SO WE'LL DO BATCHES ESSENTIALLY.
UM, SO EVEN FOR THIS REQUEST THAT'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, MORE LONG TERM SIGNIFICANT, WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION AND DATA ALONG THE WAY.
UM, AND THEN IN THIS CASE, THE HOPE IS THAT WE'LL HAVE ALL OF THE REQUESTED, UH, DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE, UM, BY APRIL.
SO AGAIN, JUST THINKING ABOUT OUR PROCESS, KIND OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS OF COURSE CLOSE OUT, UM, REQUESTS AS, UM, EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE, UH, SO THAT WE CAN GET THIS INFORMATION OUT INTO THE PUBLIC.
BUT, UH, THE PROCESS OF COURSE DOES REQUIRE SOME TIME TO COORDINATE WITH THE DEPARTMENTS REDACT INFORMATION, UM, PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION.
UM, AND SO WHAT WE DO AS A TEAM IS WE OFFER SUPPORT, UH, FOR THE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE COLLECTING ALL THE RECORDS AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION AND, UM, RESOURCES THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO, UH, RESPOND TO THESE REQUESTS IN A TIMELY MANNER.
AND LIKE I MENTIONED OVER THE LAST YEAR IN PARTICULAR, HAS BEEN A KEY FOCUS OF OUR DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE FOLLOWING UP WITH THE DEPARTMENTS AND, UH, SUPPORTING THEM WHERE NEEDED TO CLOSE OUT SOME OF THESE LONGER TERM REQUESTS.
UM, BUT YOU CAN SEE HERE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT TOPICS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE TAKEN LONGER TO RESPOND TO.
SOMETIMES IT'S THESE LARGE SCALE TRAVEL REQUESTS, UM, FOR DOCUMENTATION OR ONGOING SORT OF MONTHLY REPORTING INFORMATION, INVOICES, CANNABIS APPLICATIONS, UM, AND EVEN COMMUNITY HOSPITALS.
SOME OF THESE ARE OBVIOUSLY SUBSTANTIAL IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF DOCUMENTS, BUT ALSO TAKE LONGER, UM, IN TERMS OF THE REDACTION PROCESS AS WELL.
SO THAT'S, UM, JUST A QUICK SNAPSHOT OF WHERE WE'RE AT AND SOME OF THE, UM, OUTSTANDING ITEMS. AND I WOULD LOVE TO GET MORE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, AND FEEDBACK FOR, FOR THE NEXT ONE.
SO, SO YOU WEREN'T HERE AND NEITHER WAS COMMISSIONER COLEMAN.
BASICALLY THE CONCERN CAME BECAUSE THERE WAS AN ARTICLE IN THE NEWSPAPER THAT TALKED ABOUT HOW LONG SOME PEOPLE HAD BEEN WAITING FOR PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS, AND OUR CONCERN WAS THAT THINGS WEREN'T BEING PROCESSED IN A TIMELY MANNER.
TH THIS IS MUCH BETTER THAN IT WAS WHEN WE FIRST LOOKED AT IT A WHILE AGO.
I HAVE A QUESTION THOUGH, 'CAUSE THAT THE ONE THAT REQUESTED ALL OF THE TRAVEL REQUESTS FROM ONE DEPARTMENT GOING BACK SEVEN YEARS, DOES THE CITY HAVE A RECORD RETENTION POLICY? YES, WE DO.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT POLICY OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT WE DO
SO EACH DEPARTMENT HAS THEIR OWN, UM, I THINK THE CLERK TAKES ON SOME OF THE LIKE CITYWIDE ONES FOR LIKE ORDINANCES AND STUFF.
SO IT'D HAVE TO LOOK SPECIFICALLY, BUT EACH DEPARTMENT HAS A RECORD RETENTION POLICY.
THAT POLICY HAS TO BE APPROVED BY COUNSEL, UM, AND IS IN, AND THEY CAN'T CHANGE IT UNLESS IT IS APPROVED.
AND THEN AT IN STATE LAW FOR IF THERE IS NO POLICY, GENERALLY RECORDS HAVE TO BE KEPT BY THE GOVERNMENT FOR AT LEAST TWO YEARS.
SO IN SOME CASES LONGER, BUT YEAH.
UM, FOR THAT I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK SPECIFICALLY OR IF THEY HAD FEDERAL FUNDING, THEY MAY HAVE HAD TO KEEP THEM LONGER.
BUT, BUT ARE DEPARTMENTS PURGING AS NECESSARY? I MEAN, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION THAT I WOULD ASK GOING FORWARD BECAUSE I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT DEPARTMENT IT IS THAT HAD THE REQUEST FOR THE, THE SEVEN YEARS WORTH OF RECORDS, BUT 11 YEARS, IT WAS MADE IN 2020 AND IT WAS THROUGH 2013.
I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO TODAY.
SO GOING BACK SEVEN YEARS, BECAUSE IF A DEPARTMENT'S PURGING AS THEY SHOULD BE, THEN YOU, YOU CAN ALWAYS SAY, THIS IS ALL WE HAVE, BUT IF YOU HAD THEM WHEN THEY ASKED FOR IT, THEN YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO PRODUCE THEM.
SO THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE ONE OF MY RECOMMENDATIONS IS TO LOOK TO THE DEPARTMENTS AND ARE THEY, ARE THEY IN COMPLIANCE WITH A RECORD RETENTION POLICY? ARE THEY PURGING AND IF THEY ARE PURGING OR DO YOU SEND THINGS OUT TO LIKE IRON MOUNTAIN OR SOMEBODY FOR STORAGE?
[02:05:01]
YEAH, SO IT'S A COMBINATION.IN THIS CASE, I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFIC DEPARTMENT RETENTION POLICY, BUT I THINK THAT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT WHERE ULTIMATELY, UM, WE DO HAVE ITEMS THAT COME TO COUNCIL WHEN THERE'S A PURGE OF, YOU KNOW, DOCUMENTS THAT ARE PAST THE RETENTION REQUIREMENT.
AND YEAH, WE DO SEND, UH, YOU KNOW, PHYSICAL FILES TO IRON MOUNTAIN, UM, VARIETY OF PROCESSES.
BUT TO YOUR POINT, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WHEN WE DO HAVE A PRA REQUEST, YEAH, WE RESPOND AND WE PROVIDE THE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE AVAILABLE AT THAT TIME.
BUT POTENTIALLY, YEAH, IF IT'S BEYOND THE RETENTION PERIOD AND THE THE DOCUMENTS ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, KEPT AND AREN'T AVAILABLE, THEN THAT WOULD BE THE RESPONSE.
I HAD A CEO AT ONE TIME WHO WAS VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT PURGE.
HE WOULD COME THROUGH AND TELL US PURGE, BECAUSE WE CAN'T BE SUED IF YOU PURGED.
I SUSPECT IF YOU HAVE THE DOCUMENTS, EVEN IF THEY'RE PAST THEIR RETENTION, YOU'RE OBLIGATED TO PROVIDE THEM.
UM, AND SO THE QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT THESE KINDS OF SITUATIONS WILL IMPROVE PEOPLE'S MOTIVATION TO REVIEW THEIR RECORDS AND DESTROY RECORDS ON A TIMELY BASIS CONSISTENT WITH THEIR RETENTION POLICY.
UM, BUT ONCE YOU'VE NOT DONE THAT AND YOU GET THE REQUEST, IT IT IS, IT, IT TAKES GONNA TAKE A LOT OF TIME.
I, I DIDN'T MEAN TO NO, THAT'S OKAY.
UM, I, I DO, UH, HAVE A COUPLE THINGS.
FIRST, UH, I WANNA SAY I WENT BACK AND IN THE MAY PRESENTATION THERE WERE 190 REQUESTS THAT WERE OVER 60 DAYS.
SEPTEMBER, THAT NUMBER CAME DOWN TO 92, AND YOU'VE GOT THE NUMBER DOWN TO 29.
SO OBVIOUSLY A, A WONDERFUL IMPROVEMENT.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THE VOLUME IS SUCH THAT YOU'VE STOPPED THE MONTHLY MEETINGS OR ARE THE MONTHLY MEETINGS STILL HAPPENING? MONTHLY MEETINGS? YOU MEAN WITH THE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE OVERSEE? YEAH, SO OUR TEAM HAS REGULAR COMMUNICATIONS WITH THEIR LIAISONS IN EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS.
UM, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING IS EVIDENCE OF, YOU KNOW, THE, THE STRONG COORDINATION ACROSS THE DEPARTMENTS TO CLOSE OUT OUTSTANDING REQUESTS.
THIS HAS BEEN A TOP PRIORITY FOR THE TEAM AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THE TEAM HAS BEEN WORKING NOT ONLY WITH THESE REGULAR CHECK-INS WITH THE DEPARTMENTS, BUT ALSO SHARING INFORMATION ON BEST PRACTICES, HOW TO, UM, RESPOND IF QUICKLY AND, AND THAT TYPE OF THING AS WELL.
SO, UM, BUT I CAN SHARE, I, I THINK THE, THE RETENTION POLICY, UM, COMMENT IS A REALLY IMPORTANT ONE AS PART OF THAT CONVERSATION AS WELL.
UM, ALSO, I, UH, ON THE SIX, THE, THE FEW THAT ARE OPEN MORE THAN SIX MONTHS, THE SLIDE SAYS ALL REQUESTS ARE ASSIGNED TO THE CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT AS THEY INVOLVE MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS.
I ASSUME THAT'S JUST THE OVER SIX MONTHS OR ARE YOU NOW ASSIGNING ALL PRA REQUESTS TO THE CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT WHEN THERE'S A COORDINATION INVOLVED BE BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS, THAT'S WHEN WE, UM, HELP TO OVERSEE THAT PROCESS AND MAKE SURE THAT THE, SORRY, THE RECORDS ARE RESPONDED TO IN A, IN EFF EFFICIENT MANNER.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALSO INVOLVED IN KIND OF THE BEHIND THE SCENES PROCESS FOR INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENT REQUESTS, BUT WE DON'T OVERSEE THEM IN THE COORDINATION AS MUCH.
AND, UH, RIGHT NOW, OR IN YOUR MOST RECENT DATA POOL, WHAT WAS YOUR AVERAGE MONTHLY RECEIVED? MONTHLY CLOSED? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
I DO NOT KNOW, BUT WE CAN GET, I'LL TRY TO GET THAT INFORMATION TO YOU.
IS THAT DIFFICULT TO GET, I KNOW THERE WAS A QUESTION BEFORE THIS MEETING ON WHAT DATA YOU'VE GOT AVAILABLE TO YOU READILY, UM, AND YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT SORT OF REPORTS THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION CAN PROVIDE.
UM, SO THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE A HAND COUNT OR SOMETHING THEY, THE APPLICATION DOESN'T PROVIDE YOU WITH, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY ARE COMING IN EVERY WEEK, EVERY MONTH.
I THINK WHAT THE, THE LIMITATIONS ARE MORE LIKE IF WE WANTED TO GO BACK TO A SPECIFIC TIME PERIOD AND KIND OF SEARCH, THEN IT'S MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO KIND OF PULL THAT TYPE OF A REPORT.
BUT, UM, YEAH, WE CAN DEFINITELY, I, WE HAVE INFORMATION ON KIND OF WHERE WE'RE AT IN TERMS OF RECEIVING AND RESPONDING TO.
SO I'LL, I'LL WORK WITH THE TEAM TO TRY TO GET THAT INFORMATION.
YEAH, I'M, I, I DON'T WANT YOU TO CREATE WORK FOR PEOPLE, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD BE A GOOD NUMBER TO HAVE WHEN YOU ROUTINELY REPORT TO
[02:10:01]
US, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOUR AVERAGE MONTHLY NUMBERS ARE.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER WEISS? YEAH.
UM, DO YOU, DOES THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE OVERSEE THE, UM, PRAS TO THE PORT OR TO THE, UH, TO UTILITIES OR THOSE DEPARTMENTS OR JUST THE ONES THAT THE CITY MANAGER? UH, IT'S JUST THE CITY MANAGER'S, UH, DEPARTMENTS.
UM, I, AND, AND THIS DATA THAT YOU GAVE US WITH, WITH THE NUMBER THAT ARE OPEN RIGHT NOW, 68, IS THAT PRETTY MUCH LIKE AS OF, UM, FEBRUARY 1ST OR WHAT, WHAT SHOULD WE IT DOESN'T HAVE A DATE ON IT.
YEAH, THEY PULLED THAT INFORMATION LAST WEEK, SO, OKAY.
AND I WANNA CLARIFY ALSO LIKE, UM, WE ALSO COORDINATE AND WORK WITH THE ELECTED, THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT FOR THEIR REQUESTS.
NOT JUST THE CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENTS, SORRY.
UM, WELL, I, I DO THINK, AND, AND WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS BEFORE, I, I THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF, OF TRANSPARENCY IN THE CITY GOVERNMENT, UM, BECAUSE THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PUBLIC KNOWS THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THAT THERE ARE RULES THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO ALLOW THEM TO SEE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS.
AND WHEN, WHEN THE CITY GOT BEHIND AND IT BECAME PUBLIC, HOW MUCH THEY WERE BEHIND, THAT'S ONE OF THE TIMES WHEN THE PUBLIC LOSES TRUST IN WHAT'S GOING ON AT, AT, UM, AT CITY HALL.
LIKE, WHAT ARE THEY HIDING? YOU KNOW, HOW COME WE CAN'T GET THAT STUFF? SO I ACTUALLY THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR, FOR US, AS PART OF WHAT WE'RE DOING TO CHECK THIS PERIODICALLY AND PERHAPS INCLUDE THOSE KINDS OF METRICS IN THE, UM, IN THE ANNUAL REPORT AND SAY THERE WAS A PROBLEM, NOW IT'S AT THIS, AND THEN YOU START TO SEE IT CREEP UP AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IT'LL JUST LOOK LIKE WE'RE ALL, WE'RE ALL SORT OF PAYING ATTENTION A LITTLE BIT.
AND, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR, FOR EVERYBODY ON, ON BOTH SIDES OF, OF, OF THINGS, WHETHER YOU'RE IN CITY HALL OR, OR, YOU KNOW, OUT IN THE PUBLIC AS A RESIDENT.
SO, UH, I, I'D LIKE TO SEE US HAVE A CON, YOU KNOW, CONTINUAL REPORT ON THAT, JUST LIKE WE DO ON THE 700 FORMS, AND THEN INCORPORATE THOSE METRICS INTO OUR, UM, ANNUAL REPORTING OUT TO THE CITY.
WOULD HAVING A REPORT EVERY SIX MONTHS BE SUFFICIENT? YEAH, I, I THINK SO.
IT SORT OF, SORT OF, SO THAT, YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING.
WE'D HAVE TYLER REPORT TO US AGAIN IN AUGUST.
AND THEN USE THAT IN THE, UM, I MEAN, I THINK THIS WE CAN USE RIGHT NOW IN, WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE IN THE ANNUAL REPORT, BUT IT COULD BE USED PRETTY SOON TO, TO POINT OUT AND THEN GO FROM THERE.
SO THERE'S ACTUALLY A DUE DATE THAT GOT ADDED TO THE ANNUAL REPORT AS OF LAST NIGHT.
IT'LL BE EFFECTIVE IN 30 DAYS.
I BELIEVE IT'S AT THE END OF JUNE, BUT A COMMUNICATION WILL GO OUT WITH THE CHANGES TO THE COMMISSIONS ORDINANCE.
YOU, UM, GOOD THING SHOULD PROBABLY, I'LL MAKE A SEPARATE ITEM, BUT THERE WERE OTHER CHANGES, LIKE YOUR SEAT IS AUTOMATICALLY VACATED IF YOU DON'T FILE YOUR FORM 700 AND YOU DON'T GET A WAIVER AND OTHER THINGS.
SO I CAN BRING A REPORT BACK ON THAT.
AND IF, IF IT HELPED, WE SHOULDN'T DISCUSS IT, BUT YEAH, I'LL BRING, I'LL BRING A REPORT, WE CAN TALK ABOUT NEXT MONTH.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR TYLER? YES, CHAIR, UH, TYLER.
UM, THE DATA YOU PROVIDED ON SLIDE NUMBER FOUR, IS THAT CITY MANAGER OR IS THAT CITYWIDE? YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
SO THIS WOULD BE, UM, I BELIEVE IT'S CITYWIDE.
BUT, UM, THERE ARE, THERE'S A COUPLE DEPARTMENTS LIKE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE THAT PROCESS THEIR REQUEST SEPARATELY.
BUT YEAH, BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT EACH DEPARTMENT DOES THEIR OWN OR, OR CITY MANAGER HANDLES PARKS AND REC MARINE.
SO EACH, UM, BASICALLY WE USE THE DATA OR THIS PLATFORM.
GOV QA TO PROCESS THE REQUESTS, AND THEN THE REQUESTS GO TO THE SPECIFIC DEPARTMENTS.
SO IF IT'S ONE PARTICULAR DEPARTMENT, YEAH.
THEY MANAGE THE COLLECTION OF THE RECORDS.
AND THEN THEY SEND THEM BACK TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE THROUGH THE PLATFORM.
BUT IF IT'S INTERDEPARTMENTAL WHERE THERE'S, OR SOMETIMES, UH, WE GET REQUESTS THAT GO TO, UH, MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS AND LEGISLATIVE OFFICES, AND THEN THAT'S WHERE WE COME IN TO HELP COORDINATE AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY'S RESPONSIVE TO THOSE, BUT STILL UTILIZING THE SAME PLATFORM.
AND, UM, ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY OF ANY CASE WHERE AN INDIVIDUAL HAS SUED THE CITY IN CIVIL COURT TO FORCE YOU TO PRODUCE
[02:15:01]
A DOCUMENT BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT COMPLIED? I'M NOT AWARE, BUT, UM, AND WHEN APRIL GAVE HER LAST REPORT, THERE HAD BEEN NO SUITS TO DATE.AND YEAH, BECAUSE THAT WAS, THAT WAS PART OF OUR, I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS PART OF OUR CONCERN AT THAT TIME IN THAT, IN THAT THEY, THE, THE MEDIA COULD HAVE SUED, BUT FORTUNATELY THEY HADN'T.
WELL, I JUST THINK OF ORDINARY JOE WHO IS JUST SEEKING A DOCUMENT AND WHY DOES HE OR SHE HAVE TO WAIT NINE MONTHS FOR A PIECE OF PAPER.
AND, AND SO THE COST, THE BURDEN OF THE COST TO GO TO COURT, TO ASK THE CITY TO PRODUCE THE DOCUMENT OR SHOW CAUSE WHY HE HASN'T PRODUCED IT.
I MEAN, I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF YOU WERE AWARE OF A CASE.
YEAH, NOT, I'M NOT, BUT, UM, I DO THINK THAT, I MEAN, THIS IS A HELPFUL FORUM TO JUST EXPLAIN AND SHOW WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO TO ACTUALLY BE RESPONSIVE TO THE REQUESTS.
I THINK, UM, IN TERMS OF THE, I UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION AND KIND OF THE OPTICS.
AND, UM, THERE ARE CHALLENGES AND SPECIFIC REQUESTS LIKE I WAS TALKING ABOUT.
BUT, UM, AND THIS IS A PRIORITY.
SO I THINK THAT, UM, FOR THE REPORT OR THE COMMISSION ON A REGULAR BASIS, THIS WOULD BE HELPFUL.
WE CAN SHARE KIND OF SOME OF THESE UPDATES.
AND IT HAD, IT HAD GONE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S ATTENTION ALSO THAT THERE WAS A HUGE DELINQUENCY IN BACKLOG.
AND SO THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS ALSO SPENT SOME TIME MEETING WITH THE DEPARTMENTS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE.
SO REALLY IT'S JUST THAT THE, THE, THE, THE KNOWLEDGE BASE AS TO WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT HAS BEEN RATCHETED UP.
AND WE HAD EXPLAINED TO APRIL THAT WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, THAT NEED NOT BEING MET, SO THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS.
AND NOW TYLER'S THE ONE IN THE HEART SOUGHT SEAT, BUT HE'S DOING A GREAT JOB SO FAR.
SO CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE PRESENTATION? DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? LONNIE? DID I MISS YOU? YEAH, I, SORRY.
IF YOU, UH, DON'T MIND, TELL ME WHAT DOES THAT MEAN ON A ROLLING BASIS THAT, UH, REQUESTS ARE RECEIVED, YOU KNOW, THE, AND THE, THE REQUESTERS ARE RECEIVING DOCUMENTS.
SO SOMETIMES LIKE, UM, WE'LL HAVE MAYBE 900 PAGES OF EMAILS AND, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY IT TAKES A LONG TIME TO REDACT CERTAIN PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION, THAT TYPE OF THING.
SO STAFF WILL GO IN AND MAYBE REDACT A HUNDRED PAGES OF THOSE EMAILS AT ONE TIME.
AND INSTEAD OF WAITING FOR THE WHOLE, YOU KNOW, ENTIRE AMOUNT OF RECORDS TO BE READY FOR RELEASE, WE CAN RELEASE THOSE AS THEY'RE READY.
SO TO, IT'S, UM, IT'S NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE OF WHEN WE WOULD RELEASE, BUT, OH, HERE'S A CHUNK, LET'S GET THOSE OUT.
AND THEN WE'LL LET THEM KNOW, HEY, WE'RE STILL WORKING ON A, YOU KNOW, A NUMBER OF RECORDS AND WE'LL RELEASE THOSE WHEN THEY'RE READY AND AVAILABLE.
SO IF I WERE TO SEND A REQUEST, UH, I WOULD HEAR FROM YOU EVERY 30 DAYS, EVERY 60 DAYS.
WHAT'S THE, THE TIMELINESS ON, UH, EVEN IF IT'S, UH, NO RESPONSE YET OR WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO SATISFY IT YET? WELL, SO THE, THE MAIN REQUIREMENT IS WITHIN THE FIRST 10 DAYS IS BEING RESPONSIVE.
DO WE HAVE RECORDS OR NOT? BUT BEYOND THAT, YEAH, WE HAVE, UH, REGULAR COMMUNICATIONS THROUGH THE PLATFORM.
IT NOTIFIES THE REQUESTER, UM, AND IT'LL SAY, YEAH, WE'RE STILL WORKING ON THIS AND YOU SHOULD EXPECT A, A RESPONSE OR ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS BY X DATE.
UM, BUT YEAH, IT'LL BE, IT'S TYPICALLY MORE FREQUENT THAN 30 DAYS.
IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, GOOD IN THE NEXT WEEK OR TWO OR DEPENDING ON KIND OF WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THE REDACTION PROCESS.
YEAH, YOU MIGHT WANNA THANK THE WHOEVER YOUR TEAM, THE WIN BENEATH YOUR WINGS, EVERYONE.
'CAUSE THAT IS A, A TREMENDOUS DRIVE DOWN AND LET'S HOPE WE CAN KEEP IT AT THAT, THAT, THAT LEVEL.
I'LL SHARE THAT WITH THE TEAM.
THEY'VE BEEN DOING ALL THE WORK.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION? SO I FORGOT TO ASK FOR A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE PRESENTATION ON AN UPDATE FOR THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT PROGRAM.
I JUST MOVED RIGHT INTO WE WE DID.
SO CAN SOMEBODY MOVE IT PLEASE? UM, ALSO I'LL MOVE THAT WE RECEIVE AND FILE THIS REPORT A SECOND SECONDS.
SO MOVED BY COMMISSIONER, WE SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANNOVA.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NO PUBLIC COMMENT? CAN WE HAVE THE VOTE PLEASE? COMMISSIONER NOVA? AYE.
UM, SO WE HAVE ABOUT 30 MINUTES UNTIL WE LOSE
[02:20:01]
THIS ROOM.I'M GONNA RECOMMEND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE CONTINUE ITEM NUMBER FOUR, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S GONNA BE A LONGER DISCUSSION TO THE MARCH MEETING.
COULD I HAVE SOMEBODY MAKE THAT MOTION PLEASE? I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE CONTINUE ITEM FOUR.
SO COMM SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DE BENEDICTUS.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE.
CAN WE HAVE THE VOTE PLEASE? COMMISSIONER NORBY AYE.
WE'VE HAD A REPORT ALREADY FROM THE, UM, LOBBYING AD HOC.
IT'S A REPORT FROM THE POLICY POLICY AD HOC IS CONTINUING TO WORK WITH UH, COM, UH, THE COMMISSION STAFF.
UH, WE ACTUALLY HAVE A MEETING TOMORROW AND WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF, WE'VE RECEIVED A AS, UH, WE REPORTED LAST TIME, WE'RE TAKING A VERY COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH, UH, TO THE NEW ORDINANCE, TO A NEW ORDINANCE, ETHICS AND TRANSPARENCY ORDINANCE.
AND WE ARE HAVE NOW RECEIVED THAT OR GOING THROUGH THAT IN A MEETING TOMORROW.
DO YOU WANNA MOVE ACCEPTANCE OF YOUR REPORT? I MOVE THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE ATTENTION LIBRARY PATRONS THE LIBRARY WILL CLOSE IN 30 MINUTES.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET A LIBRARY CARD, PLEASE COME TO THE CHECKOUT DESK ON LEVEL ONE.
YET THOSE COMMISSIONER SHOTWELL AND COMMISSIONER DE BENEDICTUS, IS THERE ANY, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, CAN WE HAVE A VOTE? COMMISSIONER NORTHY AYE.
COMMISSIONER DE BENEDICTUS? AYE.
DOES THE COMMITTEE ON THE 2024 PRIMARY NOMINATING ELECTION CANDIDATE FILINGS HAVE A REPORT? WE DO.
CAN I HAVE A MOTION FIRST TO ACCEPT YOUR REPORT? ANOR MOVES.
UH, THE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE 2024 PRIMARY NOMINATING ELECTION CANDIDATE FILINGS IS PROVIDING ITS FINDINGS OF CANDIDATE FILINGS IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT RACES 2, 4, 6, AND EIGHT.
THIS AD HOC WAS RECENTLY CREATED BY THE ETHICS COMMISSION AND IT'S COMPRISED OF TWO COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER COLEMAN AND MYSELF.
IT WAS ESTABLISHED TO REVIEW CANDIDATE FILINGS FOR THE PRIMARY NOMINATING ELECTION SET FOR MARCH 5TH, 2024 BALLOT AND POSSIBLY CONTINUE TO REVIEW OF SUBSEQUENT CANDIDATE FILINGS, UH, FOR 2024, THE AD HOC SPLIT SPLIT THE RACES.
COMMISSIONER COLEMAN REVIEWED FILINGS FOR DISTRICTS TWO AND FOUR.
WHILE I REVIEWED FILINGS FOR DISTRICTS SIX AND EIGHT, THE AD HOC HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK BRIEFLY AND EXCHANGE A COUPLE OF EMAILS SURROUNDING THE PROCESS AND RESOURCES PROVIDED BY THE CITY CLERKS.
UM, WE FURTHER REACHED OUT TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE FOR A, A COUPLE OF TIMES FOR CLARIFICATION AGAIN OF THE REVIEW PROCESS AND TO UNDERSTAND THE FILING PAPERWORK.
THE AD HOC SHOULD NOTE THAT CANDIDATE FILINGS FOR LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT RACES ARE HANDLED THROUGH THE COUNTY, NOT THE CITY OF LONG BEACH.
THUS, OUR REVIEW WAS LIMITED TO CANDIDATES FOR CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT RACES 2, 4, 6, AND EIGHT.
UH, THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PROVIDED US WITH LINKS TO THE FILINGS AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION IT HAD COMPILED SUCH AS CAMPAIGN FINANCE PORTAL, THE LIST OF THE CANDIDATES, FPPC, FILING, ET CETERA, ALL OF WHICH ARE ON THE CITY CLERK'S WEBSITE AND AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
WITH THAT SAID, UH, I WILL REPORT ON DISTRICT ON RACE SIX AND EIGHT.
UH, IN DISTRICT SIX I REVIEW CANDIDATE FILINGS BY THE INCUMBENT COUNCILWOMAN SOLI SORO AND CHALLENGER.
CHRISTINA PINTO CANDIDATE PINTO FILED THE CAMPAIGN STATEMENT FORM, UH, DATED 1 13 24.
ALTHOUGH THE CANDIDATE DIDN'T FILE IT BY 1 25 24, WHICH IS MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHEN THAT DOCUMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED.
UH, I DUNNO IF YOU WANT ME TO GET INTO DETAILS, YOU TELL US WHAT YOU THINK IS PERTINENT.
UM, THEY COULD BE TYPOS AND THEY COULD BE LIKE GRACE PERIOD ISSUES.
UH, SO WE PROBABLY NEED TO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING.
UH, BUT THE CANDIDATE ALSO FILED FORM 5 0 1 FOR 2024 ON 11 13 23, ALTHOUGH IT'S EXECUTED ON 11 13 24.
SEE, SO TYPOS CANDIDATE PINTO DID NOT OR HAS NOT FILED FORM FOUR 10.
SO THERE ARE NO CAMPAIGN FINANCE FORMS TO REVIEW.
COUNCILWOMAN SORROW FILED PAPERWORK FOR TWO COMMITTEES AND PAPERWORK FOR ONE COMMITTEE THAT COVERS
[02:25:01]
TWO SEMI-ANNUAL STATEMENTS FOR 2023 AND ONE PERIOD IN JANUARY, 2024.HOWEVER, THE DATE OF ELECTION IS STILL LISTED AS 6 7 22
OTHERWISE ALL FORMS APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN FILED TIMELY.
I CHECKED IN WITH, UH, PHIL MCGOWAN, IS THAT CORRECT? UM, AND HE SAYS IT'S COMMON THAT THEY HAVE COMMITTEES AND THE DATE IS STILL OKAY.
UH, IN COUNCIL DISTRICT RACE EIGHT, I REVIEWED CANDIDATE FILINGS BY TENA THRASH INTU AND DR.
CANDIDATE THRASH INTU APPEARS TO HAVE FILED ALL FORMS TIMELY FOR ONE COMMITTEE.
HOWEVER, ONE INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE REPORT MAY HAVE BEEN FILED, UM, MAY HAVE FILED TWO OF ITS FORMS BEYOND THE REQUIRED 24 HOURS FILING REQUIREMENT.
WAS IT JUST A, IS IT A, ARE THEY EXCUSED? IS THERE A GRACE PERIOD? UM, CANDIDATE BATS APPEARS TO HAVE FILED ALL REQUIRED FORMS TIMELY FOR TWO COMMITTEES.
AFTER REVIEW, I DID NOT FIND ANY DISCREPANCIES OR TYPOS OR ANYTHING TO MAKE THE COMMISSION AWARE OF.
UH, THESE FINDINGS ARE BASED AS OF 11, UH, AS OF FEBRUARY 11TH, 2024.
I'VE NOT REVIEWED ANYTHING SINCE THEN.
IF THE SOMETHING WAS FILED IN THE LAST TWO DAYS.
I ALSO SHOULD DISCLOSE THAT I KNOW BOTH COUNCILWOMAN SORROW AND CANDIDATE THRASH AND TOOK PERSONALLY AND PROFESSIONALLY.
UH, I REMAIN OBJECTIVE AND WAS NOT INFLUENCED IN REVIEWING THEIR PAPERWORK AND WILL CONTINUE, CONTINUE TO DO SO IN REVIEWING ANY SUBSEQUENT PAPERWORK.
UH, NOW TURN IT OVER TO COMMISSIONER COLEMAN.
LOOK WHAT WE'RE OKAY WITH TYPOS ON DATES LIKE THAT.
THERE'S SO, UH, WE'LL ACCEPT THE FILING.
WE'LL, YES, WE WILL ACCEPT TYPOS.
WE REQUEST THAT THEY FILE AN AMENDMENT, BUT THE AMENDMENT IS ULTIMATELY ON THE FILER TO SUPPLY.
SO DO WE KNOW THOSE REQUESTS WENT OUT TO THE ONES THAT HE MENTIONED? YES.
ANY CORRECTION THAT WAS REQUESTED OR ANY TYPOS WE NOTICED WERE REQUESTED.
UH, I, UH, REVIEWED, UH, COUNCIL DISTRICTS, UM, TWO AND FOUR.
I REVIEWED, UH, FILINGS FOR, UH, COUNCILWOMAN, UM, CINDY ALLEN.
BOTH ARE THE CITY COUNCIL RACE AS WELL AS THE OFFICE HOLDER COMMITTEE.
I FOUND NO TYPOS ALSO, UM, LOOKED, UH, REVIEWED THE FILINGS FOR SARAH, UH, ZAI.
UM, AGAIN, UH, THERE WAS ONLY A, THERE'S DIFFERENT FILINGS THIS FILING, UM, WAS THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE BELOW THE $2,000 THRESHOLD AFTER REPORT.
I ALSO REVIEWED THE FILINGS FOR, UH, TY, UH, CIRO.
UH, I'M SORRY IF I BUTCHERED THAT PRONUNCIATION.
UM, THE FILINGS WERE FREE OF TYPOS FOR COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER FOUR.
UM, I REVIEWED THE OFFICE HOLDER ACCOUNT FOR COUNCILMAN, UH, DARRYL SUPER.
I DID REFLECT THAT, UM, THE FOUL IN THAT PERIOD.
UH, HE, HE DID NOT, WHILE HE FILED FOR THE YEAR 2023, HE DID NOT FILE FOR THE 1 24 24 FILING.
I DO ALSO WANNA POINT OUT THAT AT SOME POINT THERE WAS, THE SYSTEM SEEMED TO BE DOWN AND FOR A FEW DAYS, UM, WHEN YOU REVIEWED IT SAID THERE WAS NO FILINGS.
I THINK THAT WAS JUST AN ERROR.
UM, ON THE WEBSITE, IT HAS BEEN, UM, AS OF YESTERDAY IT WAS FIXED.
UM, AND THE FILINGS ARE BACK STILL.
THE 1 24 DEADLINE HAS COME AND GONE AND THERE'S NO FILINGS FOR THAT PERIOD.
UM, I, I ALSO REVIEWED THE FILINGS FOR HERLINDA, UH, CHICO, UH, AND THERE WAS NO, UH, TYPOS OR ERRORS.
UM, I ALSO REVIEWED THE FILINGS FOR GARY KY.
UM, THERE WAS NO, UH, ERRORS OR TYPOS.
AND I REVIEWED THE FILINGS FOR DR.
EMIRATE SAYING, UM, AND HE FILED THE FORM THAT HE WOULD'VE NOT, UH, FILED FOR THE 2000, UH, BELOW THE $2,000 THRESHOLD.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMITTEE? ARE THERE FUTURE FILING DATES THAT WE NEED SO YOU GUYS KNOW WHEN THE NEXT REPORTS ARE COMING AND WE'LL JUST KEEP YOU ACTIVE UNTIL THEN? I BELIEVE THE NEXT DEADLINE IS FEBRUARY 22ND.
UM, SO IF WE'RE HAPPY TO ACCEPT ANY INPUT OR SUGGESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, BUT, UM, I'M HAPPY TO CONTINUE THIS AT LEAST FOR 2024.
NO, IT WAS A GREAT REPORT AND ESPECIALLY KNOWING THAT EVERYONE FILED THEIR DOLLAR AMOUNTS RIGHT.
EXCEPT FOR COUNCILMAN THE RESPOND NOT, BUT HE, HE'LL GET A LETTER ALSO REMINDING HIM, UH, HE'S ALREADY BEEN NOTIFIED.
OUR OFFICE IS WORKING WITH HIM TO HOPEFULLY GET THOSE FILINGS BY END OF WEEK.
[02:30:01]
YOU.AS WORD GOES OUT THAT SOMEBODY'S LOOKING, IT WILL KEEP GETTING BETTER.
SEEING NO QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION.
IF THERE ARE NO PUBLIC COMMENT, CAN WE TAKE A VOTE ON THIS COMMISSIONER FILE? HOLD ON.
THE NEXT ITEM IS A RECOMMENDATION TO DISCUSS ANTICIPATED AN HOCS FOR UPCOMING.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY, CAN WE JUST SKIP THIS ITEM? DO WE HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE ON IT OR JUST, CAN WE JUST SKIP IT? UM, YOU CAN WITHDRAW IT.
LET ME PROBABLY, AND THEN WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT.
JUST THAT THE ITEM WAS, IF YOU'RE NOT, OR YOU CAN LAY IT OVER, I GUESS IS THE OTHER OPTION.
I'M GONNA WITHDRAW IT FROM THIS ONE.
I'M TRYING TO MOVE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE RECORDING CARD IN FIVE MINUTES AND I'M GONNA TRY AND GET HIS OUT BY THEN.
UM, CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE A MONTHLY UPDATE FROM THE ETHICS OFFICER SECONDS? THANK YOU JERRY.
REALLY QUICK, UM, STRATEGIC ROADMAP.
SO I SENT OUT AN EMAIL, UH, JUST CONFIRMING THE MAY 8TH DATE FOR OUR RETREAT SLASH UM, PUBLIC MEETING.
THAT WILL BE ONE OF OUR PUBLIC MEETINGS FOR THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS.
WE PICKED THAT DATE BECAUSE IT'S REALLY HARD TO FIND A DATE FOR ALL OF US IN THE SPRING AND SUMMER MONTHS.
UM, SO THAT RETREAT WILL BE PART OF THE STANDING MONTHLY MEETING.
UM, WE'VE HAD A COUPLE REQUESTS TO CONSIDER A DIFFERENT LOCATION, SO THE CHAIR AND I WILL TALK ABOUT THAT.
UM, I WOULD, UM, I WOULD SUGGEST NOT HAVING THE LOBBYING ORDINANCE, LOBBYIST ORDINANCE COME BACK IN MAY.
UM, WE MIGHT ALL HAVE TO DO IT WITHOUT
UM, WE ARE WORKING ON SCHEDULING THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC MEETINGS.
UM, I'M MEETING WITH COBA NEXT WEEK.
THAT'S OUR COUNCIL OF BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS, UM, JUST TO, UM, LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THE ROADMAP AND OUR INTEREST IN USING THEM AS A FOCUS GROUP.
UM, AND WE LAUNCHED THE EMPLOYEE SURVEY THIS WEEK.
JORGE AND I ARE WORKING WITH VICE CHAIR ON ACTION PLAN UPDATES AND WE'LL BRING BACK A, A MORE THOROUGH REPORT.
THE, UM, ANNUAL CODE OF CONDUCT TRAINING.
I AM ACTIVELY UPDATING THAT SCRIPT.
SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO SEE IN THAT SCRIPT THIS YEAR, I KNOW THAT YOU ALL HAVE SHARED IDEAS WITH ME, UH, WHEN WE LAUNCHED IT LAST SUMMER AND I HAVE THOSE NOTES, BUT THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE ANY SUGGESTIONS.
UM, AND THEN JORGE AND I, UM, JORGE MOSTLY ARE WORKING ON THE WEBSITE UPDATES AND ANTICIPATE THAT LAUNCHING VERY SOON.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HEATHER? SEEING NONE.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NONE.
CAN WE HAVE THE VOTE PLEASE? COMMISSIONER NORBY? AYE.
SO, UM, AT OUR LAST MEETING THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE HAVE A WAY FOR THE COMMISSIONERS TO ASK FOR THINGS TO BE PUT ON FUTURE AGENDAS.
SO THE LAST ITEM ON ALL OF OUR FUTURE AGENDAS IS GOING TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYONE WHO HAS SOMETHING THEY'D LIKE TO SEE DISCUSSED TO BRING IT UP AND IT CAN BE SCHEDULED.
SO I'M ASKING NOW, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANYTHING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE ON A FUTURE AGENDA? UH, IF NOT, CAN WE JUST HAVE A MOTION TO RECEIVE THE FILE ITEM? I I SECONDS NO DISCUSSION.
ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? LET'S HAVE THE VOTE.
IS THERE ANY GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE THE MEETING STANDS.