every every week agenda meeting and then after  this at 11:30 we will have a uh an official   meeting so we can break into EX I session and  we'll talk about that afterwards but I think   we got it down for 11:15 11:15 this whole time  okay yeah let's get going my my apologies that   that was 11:30 over here cracking do Mr manager  what do we got on the agenda uh thank you mayor   um you've got two items on the first page you  got an award and you have one person on the   public agenda on page two you have an item of  Unfinished Council business that has to do with   the uh ordinance pertaining to retaliatory EV  itions um it was continued from December 19th   we have uh prepared three amendments for your  consideration that reflect dab comments and   also in the body of the report as an analysis  of several other dab comments that were made um   and uh our uh position regarding whether those  are already covered in other ordinances so um   it's a pretty detailed report uh we're not NE  necessarily recommending the Amendments it's   up to you to determine how you want to go forward  but we are bringing the original ordinance forward   um for your consideration with as well um new  Council business number one this is a proposed   ordinance that would prohibit the cont prohibit  contributions from corporations and llc's for   municipal campaigns and that was brought forward  by council members okay can I stop right there yes   because I want to understand why the recommended  action is that's this is being declared an   emergency what constitutes an emergency in this  particular case um I I think it have more to do   with finishing up Council business now as opposed  to letting the next Council follow through with   it so there's a lot of social media chatter that  this is would this because this would affect the   next Council that they should be allowed to weigh  in on it by Rush by rushing It Forward they don't   have that opportunity and I again trying to  understand why it's a public emergency when I   hear public emergency I think of Public Health  Public Safety this in my mind doesn't so I'm   going to jump in real quick definition I wasn't  finished okay well we we we have a meeting in 10   minutes so I I could actually uh alleviate your  your concerns if you'd like all right it's a uh   consider a public emergency just like uh because  it is on the second and we already have people who   have announced for uh campaigns for next cycle so  by pushing is off that allows people to get uh to   uh roll checks into their account and it puts  the other uh people in that race in an unfair   Advantage as you know every year there is a new  Finance uh Financial uh timing which means that   every year it all resets so the emergency is  to set it for the second not put it off so that   people can bundle checks into their account uh so  it's an Ethics thing further the argument that the   next Council should be able to weigh in on this is  the same argument you could have made when it came   to the police bonuses or the Police contract which  is something that you spearheaded right and we had   mul public engagement opportunities for that right  because police is public service This only affects   candidates so if it only affects candidates  and doesn't affect your dab members then we   don't have to put out to dab if the idea is to be  more transparent this reeks of no transparency how   because we're rushing it there there's been no  public uh workshop on this we've had had no dab   engagement we just finished the previous agenda  item on the landlord tenant rights in the retal   we went back to dabs for that because you have  landlords on your dabs you don't have candidates   on your dabs who are running for office it makes  sense if you want to actually make sure the next   cycle is fair and that's what we're going to do  and like I said I'm not going to be lectured by   someone who frankly the week before I got in  did an emergency up for the very same reason   because a timing when it came to a 10-year tax uh  or or incentive agreement uh with people who own a   church next to the ballpark uh there was chatter  about that too like why would you let the next   Council the next mayor uh timing on that you guys  have done the exact same when it comes to making   sure you're tying up loose ends this isn't even  that you can interpret it that way but again every   first of the year it resets which as you know  the complexities of campaign Finance laws those   who understand that could take advantage if we  don't get this done as soon as possible if I had   it my way I get this done on the first well then  why sooner why are we waiting till now because   the campaign's just ended now oh no the caign  has been over since November we had to get we   had two months to do this we you've had two years  to do this if this was such an issue to to bring   this at the 11th hour right before a new Council  comes in Mike did try to bring this forward yeah   and we had and you know you the should chatter  in the background year ago people were throw a   fit already fundraising for campaigns bundling  checks throw in their campaigns at that moment   and therefore we held to end I'm not defending  the action of bundling checks well you're not   supporting the action to stop the bundling of  checks so I'm not sure exactly what you're doing   such a rush when there should be more public  discussion there there public discussion should   be for people who are participating in public  programs public events know the ramifications   of this action how it could be challenged  in court where where it could go from here   because I this could be a freedom of speech issue  if you look at the citizens united case uh that's   that's part of the reason it has taken a while we  have gone through multiple drives with legal this   was the one that we thought we could get past by  the end of the year and it's written snat way if   there are challenges and part of it is struck  down those parts that are struck down will be   removed then make it a chartered ordinance so  that we can actually use home rule so that way   we have more protection we can use home can't do  that because you won't get the five votes we can   use home rule with our ordin and I'm not going  to entertain you're obviously not a support of   limiting bundling checks from llc's that's okay  you can vote no make your argument from the bench   that could be your your big hurah but we're going  to move forward on ethical campaigning and I said   one way you don't have if you don't have uh faith  in our legal team and you as a lawyer want to make   that argument from the bench go for it but we're  going to move forward with what Mike has been   working on for years now and that year tried to  suppress for years now no I have not suppressed   any action on this Mass good question yeah thank  you I'm just curious why packs aren't included   because you can bundle checks and packs just as  easily as you can llc's that was that was part of   it that um legal had some concerns about this is  the one that they felt the strongest about being   able to survive challenges we've had a couple  of years of um citizens united just seeing what   the lawsuits are coming through um what what the  decisions have been this is the one working with   Jennifer that I think our legal department feels  the strongest about being able to survive legal   challenges so it's really not solving the problem  it's just a a section of the problem a section of   the problem it's not solving and if you guys would  like to chat with them and um Nate Johnson who's   been um really good on this as well he can walk  you through it and explain why they feel better   about not having packs in their as right and also  PS fall under the Kansas ethics uh laws and have   to be disclosed you can't bundle into a pack  without disclosing information into a pack that   you don't have to disclose if you bundle llc's  uh also um packs are subjected to uh audits llc's   aren't so this does solve the problem the problem  of bundling checks from llc's by one person who   might own 70 llc's giving you $7,500 checks well  everyone else can only give you $500 checks that   person becomes more vital to your political LLC  they can still only give you 500 right but we   have people who participate in politics who own  70 llc's and to give $7500 checks from each LLC   and some of those llc's actually aren't aren't  linked to a name or have the same exact PO box   that you can't do that with a pack and again  like I I get frustrated because we had these   conversations about difference between a pack the  difference between a super pack the difference   between a Campaign Committee the difference  between a party and it's just frustrating to   find seasoned elected officials who still either  don't understand the finites of this or they   potentially don't understand because the Normal  public don't have to deal with this every day uh   and it's just throws mud in the water and so to  say this doesn't solve the problem of bundling   checks then cool what's your problem with it you  can still bundle your checks but we think that   that is a problem this will solve that problem and  please don't imply what I understand and what I don't all right we now have three minutes um  number two would adopt a number of Provisions   to implement the parking plan that the council  approved back in March of this year it would   address um parking management issues including  the installation of new equipment uh as well   as the fee structure and fine structure uh  number three would approve a project for the   construction of a new community center in  plan view plan View Park the funding plan   um for this project is outlined in the council  report page three number four would approve a   design contract for three new recharge basins  at the a ASR site um number five would approve   the project budget and public art components  for the Commerce and St Francis Improvement   project number six would amend the unified  zoning code to better Define nightclubs and   and regulations for the location of nightclubs  in the city number four is a zoning change uh in   district one difference between the mapc  and dab recommendations on page five uh   number two is also zoning change in District  Six it's a difference between dab and mapc recommendations uh the bottom uh on on  Council agenda there's a placeholder for   the results from my performance evaluation  all I have on page five nothing on page six   nothing on page seven on page eight number  four would approve fund a funding agreement   for the city's participation in the organized  crime drug enforcement task force uh items 6   S 8 and N would approve home funding for the  construction of affordable single family homes on page nine number 10 it would approve outside  Council to handle the city's workers compensation   cases uh mayor that is all I have all right  uh any questions I see none uh before we go   into Executives or excuse me into our special  meeting I do want to recognize that uh we have   um a special guest with us today we have sopia  today is her sixth birthday uh she got to uh   have a choice of fun things to do today and she  decided to come in here uh and hang out uh with   her mom and uh sopia how are you Sophia I can't  see you TR move over move over TR Sophia welcome   we're so glad you're here uh thank you for uh  taking a part uh in your city government are   you having fun yeah awesome all right so with that  uh we are um going into our uh special meeting uh so so the regular meeting of the city council  special meeting uh has been um announced uh to   the public within uh two hours before this  meeting uh actually much more than that uh   so it's December 29th we'll call the special  meeting to order um reading of the call of the   meeting by the city clerk city clerk pursuant to  section 2.4.2 one0 of the code of the city of wiah