[ Silence ]
I should have, quote, removed my motion because I don't feel that the final motion that was put forward to and voted upon was a better clarification.
It says what's being taken away and what's being added, and that was my objective.
As to which way you voted, whether or not it has to go up, and this is something with legal. Does it have to go through a full open of discussion?
Or can a member say that I personally am reconsidering my vote and would like to change it from a yay to a nay, or vice versa, and then see how it impacts rather than doing it through a discussion?
I don't know, but, you know, we battled this out the last time in more ways than one, and it was a contentious meeting that had a lot of personal items brought in it.
That personal item's influenced, I think, the way people voted then, and I thought we were here as a representative of our council member and as a representative of the constituents of that council member and not being impacted by our personal preferences.
And the like. So, I think we're getting into some whatever aspects of legality on this, and that's all.
I'm going to hold my tongue on the propriety of this motion and when it's made and the spirit in which it's offered, and I'm going to give full deference to the chair.
This has been made in good faith, but the likelihood, if this motion were to carry and we were to reconsider, we would have to have an eight.
And we're not telling the council what's going to be on the ballot, we're making a recommendation to the council on what we think ought to be on the ballot.
We had a vote, we had a lively discussion, we had the latest of many lively discussions on this topic.
We voted, and now, if the vote was eight, six, eight, four, excuse me, eight, four, the likelihood if we reconsider and the chair changes her vote is that we're going to be seven, four, or six, five, or something that is not the affirmative eight.
So, if your intention is that we don't recommend language to the city council, and we just don't have that recommendation go forward, that's the likelihood of what happens if we reconsider this.
If we don't reconsider it, the city council will have the same conversation if they choose to put it on the ballot.
If you feel strongly about it, you can contact the city council members that you feel you're going to be the one presenting it with staff.
So, all this motion reconsider can do is take away from this committee the ability to make a recommendation, because I don't think there are eight votes for the old way or the Julie suggestion or any of those other things.
There were eight votes at the time for that, and I think we all vote by the stand.
Commissioner McClure.
Julie, do you understand or do you recall in your motion?
Julie didn't make that motion.
The motion that she had before.
She had it.
I don't think it's material whether Julie did or didn't make the motion. You're just saying that you want to change your vote from the motion that was on that one.
You're asking to reopen.
Yes, that would be much freer.
I'm just saying that's what you're seeking.
Right, yes.
Do other people want to change their vote too?
I mean, this is the second time we've voted on something twice that didn't go a certain way.
Let's call a spade a spade here.
It's the fourth time.
It's getting a little bit silly.
That's my statement, and I'm going to be quiet.
Again, Jane was a second to the motion.
And so her vote, because we started talking again instead of taking the vote, Jane didn't get to vote, and it was clear how she was going to vote, and that would put it at nine and it would still carry.
So it seems unfair to reopen it when Jane didn't get to vote on the motion she proposed.
So that's my biggest problem with reopening it. We didn't let her vote. We didn't catch her.
And so I just think it's unfair to reopen it when she didn't even get to vote on. Her vote's not counted when she was the second.
That's why I would refrain from reopening it.
I agree with Michelle.
This whole thing started the last time with a reopening what had been a vote, because at that point it was concerning, supposedly, that certain people hadn't been present for the first vote.
And if you keep doing stuff like this, you're doing such that as people read or watch, because I know several of them already have to me voiced, you know, your committee has lost its integrity.
I'll leave it at that.
Question.
Do you have the authority to do it again?
The committee has the authority to approve a motion to consider or not.
So you can bring the motion. I mean, you can say that and we can go ahead and do the motion. We choose to do that.
On any vote, any member who voted with the majority can motion to refuse.
Okay. So, has there been a motion on the floor for that?
My motion.
Has there been a second to it?
I believe I seconded it. Can I just make a comment too?
Mr. Bunchigwer?
I don't think, Chairwoman DeVray, I don't think you've lost your integrity. I think you made a genuine mistake. It's a long day. I'm going to take you with the word that you made a mistake. I think that's fine.
And if Commissioner Seigel wanted to stay to vote on it, she very well could have because it was pretty clear it was coming up and she stepped out anyway.
So I can't control that happen and that that changes the material of the vote at the end of the day. She's not here to actually vote on it. She very well could have stayed a couple more minutes.
I trust that you made a mistake. So I'm going to be voting in favor of the motion to reconsider.
Commissioner Danhout?
That same exact logic could have been used for why we've re-voted the first time. If you would have wanted to be here for the first vote, you could have been here. That's exactly what you just said.
That's correct.
I'm just putting that as a motion or as a statement that we keep doing this re-votes based on someone being or not being here. Now we've got a person who's not here and we're doing the exact same thing and using the opposite logic.
That is inconsistent at best.
That's not correct though because she never actually voted on the original motion and the reason that this language even came back up in the first place is we never reached the eight votes necessary to make a recommendation. At that point there was a lack of a recommendation.
We won't. We won't.
Commissioner Davis, would you like to speak?
Strange credulity that we're still having this conversation. You're pushing it too far. You had your second vote. You got your recommendation to City Council. You didn't like the way the vote went on the language and here we are again. We're not going to have eight votes for other language if you're changing your vote.
Whether Jane was here. If Jane was here it would be eight votes and we won't. You are hamstringing your own committee. You have the ability to do it. It's foolish. It makes us look foolish.
And what do we vote? Hearing no further discussion. All those in favor of reconsideration of the language for this first question, please raise your right hand and say aye. No, but for reconsideration. For reconsideration.
All those opposed, please raise your right hand and say nay. Motion fails. All right. We move on now to the minutes I believe. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. We move on to the minutes and the amendment as presented by Commissioner McClure. Staff has reviewed the footage.
Yes Carlotta reviewed the footage and confirmed that the statement written amendment brought by Commissioner McClure is accurate. All right. Do I hear any motion on the approval of minutes? I think we had a motion on the floor.
Would that carry through? We have a motion from Commissioner Davis, second by Commissioner McClure. All right. Any discussion of that motion in light of the new information? Staff says that it's correct.
All right. Any further discussion? All those in favor of certifying the minutes from our previous meeting with the amendment presented by Commissioner McClure, please raise your right hand and say aye. All those opposed, please raise your right hand and say nay.
Motion passes. How many concluding items? Commissioner Davis. Our final vote was unanimous just now.
All right. Seeing no further concluding items, I will close this meeting. Call this meeting to close at 729 p.m. on Thursday, November 14th. Thank you everyone. Y'all have a good night and hope safe.