WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:13.320 All right so at this time I will call at 11 38 a.m. Wednesday August 10th the 00:00:13.320 --> 00:00:17.760 Economic Development Partnership Board meeting. We will begin with items for 00:00:17.760 --> 00:00:26.000 consideration under heading 1 subsection A EDP 22-050 which is consider 00:00:26.000 --> 00:00:33.680 approval of the minutes of July 20th 2022. That was attached as Exhibit 2 and 00:00:33.680 --> 00:00:39.240 sent out to the board prior to today's meeting. At this time I will entertain a motion to 00:00:39.240 --> 00:00:45.880 approve the minutes as distributed. All right it's been moved and seconded at 00:00:45.880 --> 00:00:50.560 this point. Is there any discussion or suggested edits to the minutes of the 00:00:50.560 --> 00:00:58.120 July 20th 2022 meeting minutes. Hearing none I will call the vote. All those in favor 00:00:58.120 --> 00:01:02.600 please signify by saying aye. All those opposed please signify by saying nay. 00:01:02.600 --> 00:01:09.240 And the motion carries unanimously congratulations minutes. Going down to 00:01:09.240 --> 00:01:15.520 section B EDP 22-051 receive a report for discussion and make a 00:01:15.520 --> 00:01:19.280 recommendation to the City Council regarding an amendment to the Economic 00:01:19.280 --> 00:01:25.000 Development Partnership Board ordinance. That included three exhibits that went 00:01:25.000 --> 00:01:29.920 out with the pre-meeting packet including a draft red line of the EDP 00:01:29.920 --> 00:01:33.800 ordinance changes. This is something that's been discussed for quite some 00:01:33.800 --> 00:01:38.880 time. I think everyone's aware of this coming down the pipeline to make things 00:01:38.880 --> 00:01:44.840 easier but we will go ahead and let the change be presented for discussion. Thank 00:01:44.840 --> 00:01:52.920 you. Thank you for that. So without further ado we'll get started. 00:02:13.120 --> 00:02:19.080 It's working out okay. All right so what's our objective today's we want to 00:02:19.080 --> 00:02:24.040 provide the recommended Economic Development Partnership Board ordinance 00:02:24.040 --> 00:02:32.800 changes regarding the the chamber the DIT and chambers representation. So the 00:02:32.800 --> 00:02:40.480 Economic Development Partnership Board was created in 2003. As hopefully most of 00:02:40.480 --> 00:02:45.360 you know you this is an advisory board that's in charge of implementing our 00:02:45.360 --> 00:02:51.120 economic development strategies, policy guidance, making recommendations to the 00:02:51.120 --> 00:02:56.840 City Council and chamber and reviewing any prospect perspective and Senate 00:02:56.840 --> 00:03:03.640 packages and also of course making those recommendations to City Council. The 00:03:03.640 --> 00:03:09.920 current structure of the EDP board is two City Council members, two chamber 00:03:09.920 --> 00:03:19.040 board members, two top 20 taxpayers, the UNT and TWU presidents, one member with 00:03:19.040 --> 00:03:23.760 aviation experience, one member of the Denton Black Chamber and one member of 00:03:23.760 --> 00:03:31.720 the Denton Hispanic Chamber and then lastly one at-large. So this current I 00:03:31.720 --> 00:03:37.160 guess configuration of the board came about in 2017 when there was a new 00:03:37.160 --> 00:03:43.640 ordinance passed which is which essentially added these bottom positions 00:03:43.640 --> 00:03:51.480 with the black chamber and Hispanic. So what are the recommended changes so we 00:03:51.480 --> 00:03:56.980 can look here and look at the original language and then the language that we 00:03:56.980 --> 00:04:01.800 are recommending that we add is we say two members will be nominated by the 00:04:01.800 --> 00:04:07.320 Denton Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors and those members must reside 00:04:07.320 --> 00:04:12.480 or work within the City of Denton and so I think the real substance of change 00:04:12.480 --> 00:04:18.040 that we're seeing here is that currently the members from the Chamber of 00:04:18.040 --> 00:04:21.800 Commerce from the City of Denton have to be sitting board members so that's 00:04:21.800 --> 00:04:28.760 really the substantial change that we're here to talk about. And I'm happy to add 00:04:28.760 --> 00:04:34.560 just if there's any clarification needed currently the other two chambers don't 00:04:34.560 --> 00:04:38.600 have the requirement that it be a voting board position. The Denton Chamber of 00:04:38.600 --> 00:04:41.720 Commerce for whatever reason in the ordinance it has to be two current 00:04:41.720 --> 00:04:46.720 sitting board members. The terms are different as far as how long someone can 00:04:46.720 --> 00:04:50.720 sit on the Denton Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors than necessarily this 00:04:50.720 --> 00:04:54.920 board. What we don't want to do is hamper the continuity and 00:04:54.920 --> 00:05:00.620 institutional knowledge of saying hey we have to leave this board if we are no 00:05:00.620 --> 00:05:04.160 longer serving on the Denton Chamber of Commerce Board. Also the Denton Chamber 00:05:04.160 --> 00:05:09.960 of Commerce is limited in how many seats per our bylaws that we can give and as 00:05:09.960 --> 00:05:15.160 we push more with our DEI committee and are trying to be more diverse in all 00:05:15.160 --> 00:05:20.760 ways as far as this big business small business it really hampers our ability 00:05:20.760 --> 00:05:27.120 to bring in new perspectives and new people to carry the load of the Denton 00:05:27.120 --> 00:05:30.440 Chamber of Commerce. So it's been discussed for quite some time and I'm 00:05:30.440 --> 00:05:34.640 glad to have the opportunity now to explain that and to say that we would 00:05:34.640 --> 00:05:40.400 like on behalf of the chamber for the chamber to have the conduits here to the 00:05:40.400 --> 00:05:44.280 EDT board just as the Black Chamber of Commerce and the Hispanic Chamber of 00:05:44.280 --> 00:05:50.000 Commerce have. But they do not have to take one of the board seats which are 00:05:50.000 --> 00:05:59.200 hard to come by. Is there a motion or discussion or question? Yes Mr. Boyd. 00:05:59.200 --> 00:06:12.240 On the recommendation that's going to be struck I see that the current such 00:06:12.240 --> 00:06:18.040 member must reside or work in the city of Denton. When you say member is member 00:06:18.040 --> 00:06:25.840 the organization a member that person is selected. But with the city of Denton how 00:06:25.840 --> 00:06:32.280 many people actually live within the city limits? So you're saying if a person 00:06:32.280 --> 00:06:37.120 doesn't live within the city drawn limit, an accounting limit, a DISD limit they 00:06:37.120 --> 00:06:42.080 are not eligible to serve on this board? These would just be representatives from 00:06:42.080 --> 00:06:46.680 the Denton Chamber of Commerce. That's the same these are the same 00:06:46.680 --> 00:06:52.040 wordings in with the Black Chamber members as well. It must be reside or live in the city. 00:06:52.040 --> 00:06:58.000 It's work or live. So that member must work or live or the other Denton 00:06:58.000 --> 00:07:03.200 Black Chamber address must be in the city. I don't know I don't have the 00:07:03.200 --> 00:07:08.200 language. You don't have that many members in the Black Chamber that actually live within the 00:07:08.200 --> 00:07:18.280 tax city limits of Denton. Corent, Lulham we have members like that but not in the 00:07:18.280 --> 00:07:23.560 city. I don't think I think there's one thing this the only one we're updating 00:07:23.560 --> 00:07:28.760 is for the the the overall chamber. Right. The other two policies are staying the 00:07:28.760 --> 00:07:33.960 same. We're not updating those am I correct? That's correct. Well I'm saying 00:07:33.960 --> 00:07:41.240 that's when regulation in this ordinance that the Black Chamber members and his 00:07:41.240 --> 00:07:49.800 Senate chamber member must reside in the city. Or work. Or work. Must reside or work in the 00:07:49.800 --> 00:07:56.760 city of Denton. This being a city of... That member or you say that member? Yes 00:07:56.760 --> 00:08:01.120 according to the ordinance. I'm not arguing it away I'm just saying that's 00:08:01.120 --> 00:08:05.640 how it's worded. That they reside or work. Whoever is appointed on this board 00:08:05.640 --> 00:08:09.800 needs to either reside or work in the city of Denton in order to be talking 00:08:09.800 --> 00:08:14.920 about the city of Denton's actions. If that's the case I need to submit my 00:08:14.920 --> 00:08:23.360 resolution today because I don't live in the city of Denton. I live 10 yards in 00:08:23.360 --> 00:08:30.720 Corent. So according to this I shouldn't be on this board as of today. Do you work 00:08:30.720 --> 00:08:45.000 here? No I don't. You volunteer somewhere. We'll consider that work. No but you're right I'm just talking. Assume assumptions you know. I get a little confused with assumptions. That will probably have to be 00:08:45.000 --> 00:08:48.320 something that one of the city attorney addresses that's not something that's 00:08:48.320 --> 00:08:54.960 under my purview. Councilmember Davis. Yeah. One of the reasons why I like the 00:08:54.960 --> 00:09:00.100 change of discussion today is because it mirrors what's already in place for the 00:09:00.100 --> 00:09:02.800 other two chambers. Does the other two chambers have the requirement you're 00:09:02.800 --> 00:09:08.920 talking about? The member has to reside or work in the city. That's the only 00:09:08.920 --> 00:09:15.160 qualification that's currently on the other two chambers. So this language 00:09:15.160 --> 00:09:18.920 would be duplicating that. It's not changing it. That's what's already in 00:09:18.920 --> 00:09:28.000 place. It's mirroring it and copying it for Denton Chamber if that makes sense. So I 00:09:28.000 --> 00:09:31.600 don't think what's proposed is any change to the black chamber and Hispanic 00:09:31.600 --> 00:09:39.160 chamber but the same broader requirement on the Denton Chamber if that makes 00:09:39.160 --> 00:09:47.440 sense. Why does he have to live in the city? And back to my point I need to 00:09:47.440 --> 00:09:52.840 then excuse myself. Well so that's so outside of this order for what's already 00:09:52.840 --> 00:09:56.960 in place is an issue that you're talking about. So what's the current policies in 00:09:56.960 --> 00:10:01.000 place? Maybe we need to because we do want retired people because that's a lot 00:10:01.000 --> 00:10:05.880 of wisdom for our city. We need to address that somewhere in our policies 00:10:05.880 --> 00:10:11.880 because work or have worked or retired we need to add that wording from our 00:10:11.880 --> 00:10:16.400 policy. That's actually a very good point. For this specific issue we're 00:10:16.400 --> 00:10:20.400 lining it up so all three chambers are the same. But for our policy I think we 00:10:20.400 --> 00:10:24.120 should put on our notes to maybe come back around and check that. Can we take 00:10:24.120 --> 00:10:28.720 a recess for five minutes? Is that meaningful to everyone? Are there any 00:10:28.720 --> 00:10:35.440 objections to a quick recess? And not to be adversarial but for this item or for what he's 00:10:35.440 --> 00:10:45.280 talking about? I need to discuss something with staff and with the chair. I will say I think that Mr. Gore your point is 00:10:45.280 --> 00:10:49.160 heard and that is something that you know can be addressed. It's not something 00:10:49.160 --> 00:10:52.120 that can be voted on today because it has to be published in the agenda so much 00:10:52.120 --> 00:10:55.560 ahead of time etc. I think it's part of the conversation that's something that 00:10:55.560 --> 00:10:58.760 can be continued and I don't know if that has to do with the break that we 00:10:58.760 --> 00:11:03.760 need but I know that we can't vote on that change today. It's just part of a 00:11:03.760 --> 00:11:06.960 conversation that we're having regarding the proposed change. Is that right? 00:11:06.960 --> 00:11:11.280 Councilmember Davis? I agree with that and then just one thing I'd like to kind of put 00:11:11.280 --> 00:11:16.000 on the record before we take a break is the language and the ordinance regarding 00:11:16.000 --> 00:11:19.320 qualification and nomination and appointment. If these organizations 00:11:19.320 --> 00:11:26.080 nominate a person, the City Council approves and appoints that person and the 00:11:26.080 --> 00:11:30.920 ordinance says that person shall serve at the City Council's pleasure. So which 00:11:30.920 --> 00:11:36.760 is common language right? So I think questions of qualification and who's to 00:11:36.760 --> 00:11:40.000 be on the board and who's not to be on the board are to be determined by the 00:11:40.000 --> 00:11:44.000 City Council. Now could somebody else bring something else up later on about 00:11:44.000 --> 00:11:49.480 that? Sure, but I think the ultimate decision about does someone meet the 00:11:49.480 --> 00:11:54.760 qualification in the ordinance is the council when they appoint, when they 00:11:54.760 --> 00:12:00.320 accept the nomination from the organization to appoint them. I just want to put 00:12:00.320 --> 00:12:04.280 that on the recording on the record. I think that maybe what we can do is 00:12:04.280 --> 00:12:08.560 request that be added to the next agenda that it be researched and looked into as 00:12:08.560 --> 00:12:13.520 far as where the requirement comes from if that's a requirement for all city 00:12:13.520 --> 00:12:17.720 boards. Is that a requirement just for this board and what kind of leeway the 00:12:17.720 --> 00:12:22.600 City Council has for the appointments? Does that sound acceptable to the City 00:12:22.600 --> 00:12:28.960 Attorney representative and the rest Mr. Gorey and the rest of the board? 00:12:28.960 --> 00:12:39.480 Right now it is 1150. We will reconvene at 1155 for a short break. Thank you 00:12:39.480 --> 00:12:55.000 everyone for your patience. Thank you everyone for your time. I certainly appreciate everyone and 00:12:55.000 --> 00:12:59.920 everyone's transparency and input. At this time we are going to conclude 00:12:59.920 --> 00:13:05.720 today's meeting because of the advice of the City Deputy Attorney that we may have 00:13:05.720 --> 00:13:10.440 lost form. This is something that's going to be further researched and looked into 00:13:10.440 --> 00:13:15.200 by the City Attorney's office today and as soon as there's a determination or 00:13:15.200 --> 00:13:19.360 suggestion of change or what have you we will let everyone know as soon as 00:13:19.360 --> 00:13:23.040 possible but because of the Open Meetings Act, because of other regulations 00:13:23.040 --> 00:13:30.240 that this work could run afoul of, it is on the City Attorney's office advice that we 00:13:30.240 --> 00:13:36.200 conclude today's meeting. I would ask that Councilmember Davis and Mayor Huxford would 00:13:36.200 --> 00:13:41.800 you mind staying just for five minutes for a quick conversation regarding this 00:13:41.800 --> 00:13:50.840 matter, the potential vote that didn't happen on the change of the order. It's not on the matter of who was in the board. 00:13:50.840 --> 00:13:54.800 Can I speak before we conclude the meeting just so I can have it on the 00:13:54.800 --> 00:14:00.120 record? Yes, now I don't think we have reforms, I don't think actually we have a meeting, but you can 00:14:00.120 --> 00:14:10.840 certainly speak to us. You can read my mind, but you've dealt with me enough. I'll talk to Mac more 00:14:10.840 --> 00:14:20.920 succinctly, but here we sit in a city where the charter is being challenged at 00:14:20.920 --> 00:14:26.760 every turn and we move forward, where the legal rights of officers are being 00:14:26.760 --> 00:14:32.680 challenged at every turn and yet we move forward. And in this advisory body we 00:14:32.680 --> 00:14:41.240 conclude because of a failure to nail down a detail, a miniscule detail, 00:14:41.240 --> 00:14:45.800 because if you want to drill down, if someone has a complete definition of 00:14:45.800 --> 00:14:49.720 work, because I know he's in the insurance business, so if he's getting 00:14:49.720 --> 00:14:54.000 residual from someone indenting and he checks on that, is that work? We don't 00:14:54.000 --> 00:14:58.320 have a fine definition of work. And so if we're gonna get down to this level of 00:14:58.320 --> 00:15:03.600 detail for an advisory committee meeting, then I expect the same shutdown at every 00:15:03.600 --> 00:15:08.120 level of this city and I will make that abundantly clear in the legal department. 00:15:08.120 --> 00:15:11.980 I want them to have the same approach everywhere, where not to be 00:15:11.980 --> 00:15:19.120 inconveniencing citizens for something that I think is absolutely miniscule. 00:15:19.120 --> 00:15:27.760 Quite taken. Thank you. And with that we are concluded for today. Thank you.