 We may want to take a deep dive into some of the issues that have already been placed in our lab. As you know, the judges were placed into the safety and public safety committee. That's off the table. We have nothing else other than the issues that were there. Let me tell you something. I think we can do that today. Y'all want to do that today? Yeah. This is not a problem. We can run it. If we can do that today, for us, I'm ready to do that. That would be excellent. We can do that. Yes, sir. We can do that in a second within the hour. I hope so. Yeah. We can do it in 30 minutes. Yes, sir. These were some outstanding items to clean up some of the boards and commission information and just have some resolution on some issues around boards and commissions. We have a list of action items from prior meetings with this group and some input from some council members related to the boards and commissions. What we provided is just a listing of each item that I think if we could just go item by item and decide on some resolution. There is, when we get to one of them, there is some input from staff. And when I get to that, I'll let you all know what that input is. Actually, let me forward you an email from Krista Hampton on that one. So we'll go ahead and get started. We actually have a copy. Ms. Ashley has provided us with a copy of the current board and commission handbook, which I know that there was some interest in having some standardized information and guidelines in the handbook. So I know we wanted to add how we would be appointing and reappointing to that as far as the odd and even days, I mean months before appointments. So that's in that bullet. Make sure we understand what we're advertising for the open positions on the odd month or even month. Odd month. Appointing on the even month. Yes, sir. So we will be voting on appointments six months. Yes, sir. And so we will add that reference to the guidelines. I mean to the handbook. So that's there. Also, you all had some concerns about the way we carry forward any applications. We could add that also to the guidelines. Because if they're not appointed, the applicant will need to reapply when another vacancy occurs. So that can be added as well. And then I think there was some desire to either beef up or add some information about attendance because there are some concern about people not showing up. No shows. A lot of the guidelines. The chairman of the committee could remove people for absentee. Nobody else could. Right. So to me to make it with council or the city manager like you have written. So there is a reference to attendance requirements on page seven of the of the handbook that we provided you. So we can update that information to say exactly what you're saying. Mr. Taylor. What I would do is I would just. That's the current. Now we could change that to two. If that's what you or add the reference to to no shows in addition. Yes. So we were thinking that that would be a no show. For example, if someone had a medical situation and they, you know, they were out for a period of time, we wouldn't want to penalize them for that. But if a person just has no regard for attending and just doesn't show up and doesn't have any valid reason, and that will be grounds for. I don't think actually we have that on the application. We don't have that now. No attendance. Yeah. But the city manager was the chairman recommend the council or the city manager. When they get accepted, do they sign like a commitment or anything? Because that might be a good opportunity to say, you know, on a like when accepting this position, I, you know, pledged to or whatever. Put in the. Okay. Yeah. When you submit it and maybe adding in a clause that says if appointed, I will agree to the attendance requirements or something like that. But I just was looking at it. It's on page seven. In addition to that, the process needs to be that they receive this. And we verify that they receive this and have them sign receipt of this as well. That's that would be good because it goes over everything. We get one invite judge though. I mean, I guess I don't think I don't want to get in an argument. You know, just you put it on the on the application that you know, send your meeting or just put on the application. Yeah. All rules or requirements are included in the boards and commissions. I mean, post this online. And that's it. I mean, no offense. If I got to tell you, you've got to come to half the meeting. I shouldn't put you in there. You start taking the best way to do that. You start taking some people off of these boards for not coming. Nothing. I mean, I don't think it's also crazy to have somebody sign a handbook. You know, staff here probably have to sign a staff. Another task for us to do. Sure. But as long as there's a way for us to Standardly look at attendance across the board and be able to say, Hey, these books haven't shown up. Whether it's the chair submitting their attendance logs or whatever. We just need to be able to send the message that you have. You this is a commitment. And we expect you to change me that once we give this out. Well, and personally, I think having them. When the secretary gives them their documents that they need to have. They signed for it. That's accountability. I just, I don't, I mean, the secretary is going to be the one that has to Provide us with attendance records because we don't attend all these Boards and commissions. We're relying on the, the, the secretary or the, the liaison or the Person that's, you know, the chair of these committees to provide us With this information. So, you know, I don't, I don't think it's that complicated to ask Somebody to, you know, sign something saying they're in receipt of Something I can't tell you how many times doing HR people say, I never saw that and we'll say, well, it's posted online and They'll say, well, I never saw that. So I just, I think it's a necessary thing just to get Piece of paper and start getting attendance records from the Secretary's because we're not going to be able to say whether We're there or not if we don't have the attendance records. And I just, I'm just trying to, you know, And I think there are other, there's other information in this Document that really is pertinent to their being on a Board or commission. So I don't think it's just attendance. There's some other things that, that are, that are pertinent. And so we can add attendance to that, to this beef that up Because there's some ethics, you know, a conflict of interest And then in here, there's some other things that are, That are important. I would post it on match board. Sure. If y'all want to put that extra make people sign it, have at it. But post it. Can you post it on match board and do an e-sign actually? Okay. Yeah, as long as it's something you can do automatically online. Make it for choosing to just post it on match sign. Put a check. Put a check. At the bottom that you've got to check. That's reasonable. That's reasonable. Yeah. I like that. That's reasonable. That's good. That's a good, that's a good way to handle that. So going back to the removing folks. So staff would keep us updated from the secretary logs of folks. Are you just going to automatically clean them off? And make it vacant once they miss two in a row? Or do we need to do anything? I guess I was thinking the easier way to do it is that we just take them off. Yeah, I mean if they violated, then yeah. And Ashley and Joe have done some of that with one committee. They've sent them notice that you are going to be removed for, you know, excessive absences. Okay, cool. Works for me. And so they get something in writing, notifying them, and then we go ahead and take them off. And then we could give you all, you know, a list or a report or provide some information to let you know that person. Because you would want to know if somebody you appointed gets removed because they didn't show up. So we can have a process of notification to you all. The process will already have been, you would have already set the process. Our job then is to just make sure that we've been notified that there's a person who's going to come off. Yes, sir. Don't you think that would be the right approach to do that? Yes, sir. So I think we've gotten pretty much handled that first bullet. Yeah, we've got to. Now we've handled all those. So the combining board of adjustments, that's the... One person can serve as a member of each one of those boards. Is that what you call on? I think it's going to be hard to come back. Well, I think legally because of the different functions, you can't have one deal. So what we would do is if you're appointed to what we would call those... If you're appointed to one, you're appointed to all. So it's the same people on all three. Most of these committees have never met. That's true. Some of them have never met. The bullshit ones never met. Because you have to have them. But you have to have them. Yeah, if somebody wants to make a repeal. So I mean, we could call these, you know, they're all... It would just be... If you're appointed, you're appointed just like Dr. Busser said. But you can't... In that way, if there ever is a meeting or multiples, they can have them. One adjourn, start the next one, adjourn, start the next one. I'm glad you don't have to have them. So I will ask legal if there's any issue with having consistent members on all the boards. And then, Prisa did say that you could eliminate both of form-based codes all together. And I'll ask legal about that. Okay? I think what you... The question really is, somebody's so long-term, if you're on one, does it prohibit you from serving on another? If you're on one, does it prohibit you? If you're on one, does it prohibit you? I think that's a good... Let's go with it. Or is it just what we would recommend for council? Right, that would be a council recommendation that you guys wanted to do that. Is there a formal vote that has to be made on that? I don't think that... Yeah, they're in the ordinance. So we may have to change the ordinance. So we'll check to see if it's an ordinance change. And then you all can make that as a recommendation when you report out to council. The next one, we have some boards that... I think you got to live in the city. And there's other boards that I think is okay if you just work in the city. Well, I think that's... We're going to need some conversation because in the past what we've done and folks submitted applications may be about the side of the city. They had worked in the city and submitted that under the city and not outside of the sort of on the community relations group that we just had. We had quite a few that do the live nor work in the city. Yeah, and they had the Richland County District. Here's where I'm coming from. You know, I think if it's a zoning type issue or plan permission, BOSA, DVRC, you got to live in the city. Because age tax, if you want a hotel or restaurant in the city but live in the county, I mean, I'm fine with that. But I don't... I guess what I'm saying is things that... You can have an unwritten policy. I don't care. But there are things that evolve that every day quality of life you need to live in. So, what about if we were required for our land use committees that you have to live in the city? And that would be Board of Zoning Appeals, DVRC Planning Commission. Because we already have them split up into buckets of, like, you have advisory committees, community impact, funding, intergovernmental and land use. I really don't... Sort of the opinion that BOSA, DVRC, those things remain. I think that they're probably going to need some additional conversations. Well, it's like the Appearance Commission. You all have to live in the city. Yeah, that's right. That's right. I mean, you know, honestly, I don't have a big problem making saying you got to live in the city because they serve on the city commission. That doesn't bother me a bit. Well, actually, Pam, if we did that, that's what we've been doing, right? Trying to adhere to it. But living in the city and serving on the Board of Commission. Well, for some of them, we've allowed people who just work in the city but don't live in the city. Yeah. I think land use definitely... As long as you're getting into some of these committees, we like hotel deals. And I mean, to find a hotel, you know, from on the A-Stats Committee, to live in the city is virtually impossible. And then the intergovernmental boards and commissions, you know, they... The preference has been that those people live in the city. Because a lot of times when they're intergovernmental, people are appointing from other localities like Lexington and supporting people from Lexington so those two sections... And again, this is a little dated because there are some things on here that have sunset and aren't here anymore. Really, the funding was the H-Tax and the A-Tax of the only two really that... Could you say something like priority is given to those who live and work in the city in our section process? That says that you don't live in the city. I'll be medium here. I have no problem making it easy to say sticking with what council said in the past saying you gotta live in the city. That's what we've done. We just don't advertise that there are exceptions to it. And I think, you know, one of the issues actually that we ran into in the past, of course, again, we had folk applying side of the city that they worked inside of the city to leave that area. You mean they lived outside of the city? They lived outside of the city. And they used their work address. Yeah, that happened. And also, you know, some of the boards and commissions have very unique positions that they're recruiting for. And we had their limited people who had the qualifications for some of those. Like you're an architectural engineer or something. But those people lived... those people worked in Cologne. I'm just giving you some reference. They don't have to live with it though. That's true. I think we need to just get... back to Chase. I just think if you live in the city and you apply for the board or commission, you're qualified to do that. So are you saying that it will only be people who live in the city? Well, we've done live or work. We've done both. The last council made it... You live in the city. We've done both. We've done lived or worked in the city. I think that's probably... I mean, an interesting story. Just so you know, Richland County had somebody who lives in Wood Creek come visit me the other day. They wanted to be on... they don't apply for board and commission. They had also applied to Richland County to be on the planning commission. Personally, I wouldn't say that. The county told her point blank. This is interesting. Unless you live in the county, you can't be on the planning commission. And I'm looking at this lady going, you know Wood Creek is in Richland County. They said, if you live in the city, we disqualify you to be on the Richland County planning commission. Now, interestingly enough, technically... That's what I told her. I said, technically, I can understand that they don't... somebody who doesn't live within the jurisdiction that this committee has planning control over voting on things. But as a taxpayer in Richland County, you've got to help a legal case. Right. My point here simply is, the other areas around here are not letting... If you don't live in their intergovernmental area, they're not going to let you... So, I think... I think that that should be a recommendation that you all make to the rest of council. You'll be in the city. But if that's our current policy, what you said... When did I say that? I said, I meant to say you could live and work. I quote, the previous council changed it to where you had to live in the city. I think that was actually... No, that was Ashley. I didn't say that. Yeah. No, I didn't say that. Well, that's not getting to the point. Let's not... Let's be real honest about it. If you live in the city, you are eligible. Bottom line, I suspect if you want to get down to it, that would be illegal. But that's... You're exactly right. Well, it's really up to you all. What you would like to do, if you wanted to be that they live in the city, and that's the requirement, then that's fine with me. Because I know of several instances where folk lived outside of the city, worked inside, applied with a city address, were elected, and then they bound out. Sure. I'm sure that happened. What I encourage you to do is give yourself some flexibility, because you will have someone as a candidate that you may be interested in that you think is... or someone on council was interested in, they work in the city, but they don't live in the city. But it's up to you all, whatever your preference is. I don't have... I think, consensually, we've decided that it's... Concretized. Concretized on living in the city. There was another good one yesterday. I'm trying to remember what it was. The best quote ever. The best quote ever he had yesterday for Diabetes Month is something good is in life. I am making that into a t-shirt. Something good is in life. You remember in Dix, the birds chirping in the tree? Yeah. You told my consequences. Hey, I'm with you, brother. That's consequences, right? Pam, are we clear? Yes. We can discuss it if you want to in a city work session. I think the best thing for us to do is a simple thing. Works for me? Absolutely. I would tell you, the University of South Carolina pretty much says you have to be a University of South Carolina. You've got to be a state resident to serve on the University Board. Because it's a state board. Yeah. I put it on Match Board, too. Checkbox. So I'm a resident of the city and I live within the city of the University of South Carolina. Checkbox. Great. So the next group was the sunsetting of some committees. And those committees are listed and when they last met or their next scheduled meeting. So we were going to talk about either sunsetting them at the next Should we, do we have to I guess we'd have to say them at the next meeting. Which ones were sunsetted. And then have it on record and then have the plan for if it's not the next meeting or hasn't already occurred then state the date of the sunset. I thought I heard Ms. Herbert say that the last meeting was the last meeting of the affordable housing task force and she had to spin it off into something else. She had turned it into many sub, she had turned it into some sub-committees. Yours did sunset on homelessness. It was started as an ad hoc of course. Didn't it have a sunset deal? Yeah, on September 21st. It was six months. And then the advisory committee we had talked about since we're going to give that equity study to community relations that they would kind of That's modernization committee's done. So there I don't know if we have to sunset some of these, I'd say equity you say is done or we moved it to community relations. Right, community relations council. That's gone. Affordable housing, I'm pretty sure I thought I heard her say that. No, I think that she just said that instead of one big committee into like a development sub-committee an advocacy sub-committee and so they are still meeting. Okay, then that's not a sunset. We need to vote on how I would keep that one until we know because they're like launching a campaign and yeah. Four term rentals, we need to give them a sunset. Howard will Howard, you know what's going on. I mean, I'm not going. I think this thing is being extended out in the effort to try to recruit additional votes. That they may not be there and I mean it's causing upheaval and they should be able to reach a decision by pick the day, March 30th. So if we did that and we sunset it at March 30th that simply means that you got something to take. They got to bring it or end it March 30th. Why are you saying that? I'm open for discussion. Well, I think March 30th is an appropriate time. I think March 30th. Which anywhere? I don't care, I don't care either but I think we need to I was just saying that in all of court. That's fine. I think they're letting them know that they need to have something for us. Like a report out from that. Let's not set it out in March 30th. Okay. This may also solve itself considering some stuff that's happening at Richmond. I think I thought you were going to tell us that. Tax modernization is done. Let's just say for example the county where the only in commercial not in residential that only applies in non-incorporary residents. They got no security or security notice. Okay. So really the ones we're going to continue is short-term rentals and affordable housing. Right. Let's just make sure just for the record. Those things that are sun-setted are the advisory committee. Yes sir. Tina's committee the affordable housing committee we broke that up. It's staying though. It's staying where it's at. It's being constituted. I think it should be left as it is. They're just meeting in smaller groups. Yeah. They have two subcommittees. That's sun-setted. Good. The next bullet was administrative policy committee to vote on the method to appoint council members to boards and commissions. Rotate every two years or based on term limits. For example about things like Bull Street commission comment I think that if we where we have just two appointments or whatever these things if we rotate our council members across every two years time or at least offered it or at least offered it. I think we ought to this way. We ought to appoint today we just appoint you to the comment board at no certain time. That's right. I think it would be and I know it takes time but I think it would be most helpful with every member of the primary city council to rotate through the comment system for just for two years at a time in understanding that bus system. I would also say that sometimes what happens to this human nature you know this part better than me that we serve on these boards to be advocates for the citizens not necessarily advocates for these boards. Lots of times you can stay on too long and lose that objectivity you need to have. Again do I want to be on the comment board for four years? Absolutely not. Would I like a two-year term where I understand the impact and the financing of the bus systems and bring a fresh look from the city's perspective on an ongoing basis like the bus stops downtown and things like that. I think that would be helpful so I'd like to see us make that recommendation to council that all the current and the second piece of that would be current numbers we just need to think on the current numbers if they serve for more than two years we take everybody that's sitting in this position and say okay you're as of January 1st or whenever you are appointed the two-year term begins then you roll off two years from there. In other words you have four, interestingly enough we have four new council members and three and some of the three have been on boards for three and four years and then the same thing with the COC I mean everybody ought to have to be on the COC board for at least two years so you understand what the current thing is and again I mean it's something you gotta you know me and Will and Howard Will's the vice chair of the COC That sounds good to me Yeah it does and I think what I hear you saying Martella is that two years every person who sits around the table has the opportunity to be in conversation with a board like Thomas and it gives an overwhelming view of what's taking place in that bus every member and here's the exception if you're in a leadership position it's sort of a second consecutive for example Mr. Brennan is the vice chairman of the COG this year the opportunity to be the chairman next year I would not want to take that away from the decision to come Okay So it does so getting back Councilman Taylor about how you start do you want us to get you a list of people who are currently on you know because I'm following you to say do you start it and then they serve two years and then you switch them or do you go ahead and figure out who's been on for two years already Here's the issue because of the way our elections run every two years if we go to January we can appoint people who may lead by not running for reelection or not winning in November So the question would be if people are certainly become been on it for a year so everybody stays on their position there until January of 24 Okay and then when the new council convenes in 24 firms rotate at every election time we're never losing people in the middle of a two year time Okay that makes sense Y'all I mean if you think this is something that's good we probably have a couple folks that might not like it so we probably it gives an opportunity for leadership to sort of spread its wings and of course I've never served in the comic book Never it would give a person an opportunity to serve and to get a full picture of what that bus system is I mean just comment but it could be certainly applicable to anything else I mean it's all a comic full street commission Lake Murray country Transitions Transitions Tell me about that Who's that now Who's that now That's cold Midlands housing alliance I was like there's a housing there Midlands housing alliance Anyway I just I think Definitely That's a good idea Make the note that the council member is in leadership position or in line for a leadership position they can I think Howard right now I think is chairman of the bull street Will is in line we wouldn't take Howard out in the middle of his chairmanship but if Will is in line to be the next chairman of the god it can be very good for the city department you wouldn't want to take him out easily Makes sense Your next bullet was consider if appointees can serve on two competing committees and be appointed to the same committee for another jurisdiction while serving on a city board I have a problem with that and that's why I've asked for an update about rotating off the chair for the age tax because she can't serve as both Richland county and city assembly What is a competing committee We were referring to this individual who's on Lexington That's the second one Let's just say cannot serve or cannot be appointed to the same committee for another jurisdiction Yeah, but there could be something that's named slightly different but serves the same purpose I mean, it's just a word but my thing is The only reason I'm making that up is the two competing committees implies it's internal Got it So, do you want to think of the example that you were thinking about one committee you want to make that a separate bullet serve on one committee at a time because of the exception of our appeals Yes, sir serve on only one committee at a time and you cannot serve on the same committee for another jurisdiction as ours Let me ask you this You can't serve on a committee for another jurisdiction I mean, that's kind of like dual office holding a little bit of that Can you be on the age committee for the City of Columbia and the Planning Commission where it's in town I think you could I don't know that there That's not complicated this thing Only serve on one city committee That's correct And you can't be appointed to the same realistic roles And Ashley Maybe it's you, maybe it's Tina Saxon but just can you keep us updated about the age task committee because we do need any chair Yeah, they met they met because that was Missy's presentation last night I know that came out of their most recent meeting The H tax met They met Those recommendations came out of H tax? No, I know that they met recently I was just because she was talking about all that I'll send an email I thought it was January, I could be wrong I know they have a meeting to do that but I think they had a meeting most recently but we can verify that because they do have a meeting to do that Right, Mr. Taylor That's coming up Okay, so we'll check on that Administrative policy committee to discuss term limits for the citizens advisory council to Columbia Police Department So I don't think the citizens advisory has term limits, let me I think we're here globally is there a term limit I know there are some Yes, there are some for specific ones, but there's not a global term limit My only concern with that would be if there's some statutory reason why they have a particular term limit I mean we can look and check on that That's just my only concern Is it not somewhere in the policy where there is a term limit? So in the guidelines or in the documentation for a lot of these they have term limits that are stated and they're different though I mean some are shorter than others but they vary They're kind of a little bit all over the place actually It just depends on the committee but I do think there was some reason why those boards or commissions chose their terms whether it be for consistency, continuity I think that was some there's some reason for it I don't know if we would want to do it the same for everybody We know that there is we know that perhaps there are term limits They're different They're different for every board and commission I mean some of them I don't think there are some that don't have term limits at all They don't have term limits at all and then there are ones that have specific term limits The other question is would you want to set term limits for those that don't have term limits at all and then leave the other ones I think we should have a standard for your term for those that don't have term limits If there has not been if there is not a term limit set poker just sort of served forever why not set this thing at either two or four years at the two year rate there's everybody an opportunity to either rotate in or rotate off and get a taste of that but I think it would be to our higher advantage to look at a four year term Yeah I think four years fine but I also think we have some issues with people that have been sitting on particularly aged tax for way longer than that How long the term are you talking about? Four years and there's not a term listed currently I don't think so For citizens advisory councils you can serve up to two consecutive terms of four years so eight years Do you think that's too short? Eight years? No you said four years She's talking about one term one term is four years and then two consecutive terms What about non-consecutive terms? What about two terms? Period So for some of these where there's these random ex-officio members and stuff that's like not What do we do? There's like random committees that people have appointed these fake ex-officio members and they aren't in statute or anything I got a level I agree with you I have a problem with that Age tax There's one that's even worse than that Freeing a parent They got 11 non-voting members That's actually the next bullet For example we have somebody who gets direct funding from age tax serving as ex-officio for the last 25 years If we need institutional knowledge it's called a phone or email and you can pick up the phone or you can email them for information So what's the process to change that? I don't know that there is a process I mean I think that it's just something we've done and I guess you could Right You can stop doing it Who is weep? Council The prior councils You can put these non-voting members on Yeah But for 25 years I know I already just sent an email to all of you What do we do? Can we bring this up at work session and get consent from everyone? Here's the issue I totally agree with what you do I think we gotta adopt the policies Right now we don't have a policy Okay so I would say that we cannot have non-voting members That's what I'm saying Like you said I think there had to be a consistent that we need to adopt a policy that simply says that you want to have ex-officials members and if you've got how many folks did you say a few minutes ago? 11 folk 11 folk on CPAC and then a couple of folks that have been participating on H-tax for 20-plus years Well it would seem to me that there be some policy as it relates to non ex-officials Do you need to have ex-officials? No, because they're not in statute They're not in the ordinance, these are made up things and they show favoritism and no transparency and I have a problem with that My point is if we don't need ex-official members then we don't create a policy that would cater to ex-official members being on board today So the next bullet then Pam would be administrative policy or there are no non-voting members on our board and commission, period What you basically said the only people that are participating as members of board and commission are appointed by the city I mean that's the bottom line That's the bottom line That's what you do Our participants must be appointed I guess we need to notify those people who are in that space They're no longer How many folks on CPAC? And here's what you do Those folks are nice note As we clean up our policies and make things better we notice that the new policy we encourage you to if you'd like to continue as an active member of a board to apply And also you can always listen as the public But I I mean I'll say the specifics I mean we have one but the only music festival is some of the ex-officio member of H-Tax and this is no commentary on whether they do a good job or a bad job You can't take one entity that is a receiver of public funds and make that person an ex-officio member or a board and not be accountable to the appointing authority Yep Correct Same thing with CPAC So I think then the next step So now that we have these Are these things we have to then formally adopt? Or are they adopted because we have created them? It has to be formally adopted I think Some of them anyway And I think that there are several that you all need to recommend to all of council as your recommendations And I guess at that time they could adopt the ones you all are recommending because the ones that you all So like the basically like the policy related ones so the change board requirements to live in the city administrative policy that we're going to do everybody has two years and then the last three on the back I would like to see that at our next work session or whenever we are all together and get it moving Okay I think our recommendation would be what you said not bring this straight up at council so what we saw last night where it comes to surprise and grants and if you have this recommendations to council we talk through them and then we go vote Do we have to vote on administrative policy? That's my question I know that some of these with name change that's an ordinance change but could we just all say we've consented Yes, it's not a vote you just need to It has to be consensual Unless the tree ordinance one that's an ordinance That would be the only one I think because there's an actual ordinance that we'd have to change so we could do that at a work session and just at the very beginning of our conversation I said that there would probably be some subjects that we'd have to do that we need to have a work session to talk through and of course have other colleagues Yes I think what you've done today worked really well Now we will bring these as recommendations to the work session versus starting from scratch That's correct If we recommended this then the will of the council is going to agree with our recommendation or disregard our recommendation Exactly We three of we were one shot Yeah So we're good on next steps So I have a question about the number of people on a committee Right So like food policy has like 25 people and then you have others that have like eight people And so I'd like to have us consider making a recommendation in terms of like 25 people to me is not a committee it's a small conference like you're not at that point getting the viewpoints that you need some of these committees unless there's some state statute or something to maybe 10 to 15 people 25 is a lot Yeah it's a lot of people and I think that's a conversation of course I think we could I totally agree with what both people were saying as part of the work session discussion would y'all identify the committees that have more than 15 I was going to say more than 14 and there's a reason why I picked 14 because that 14 would be technically if you wanted to say everybody got two appointments but we don't want to do that but pick the number you want to say 11 I don't have a problem with 7 if we could govern with 7 on council we could govern with 7 The only thing that is an issue is if if you do have a situation where some you have people who are absent and you have it too small then they're not able to have a quorum I agree I think that's why the number like 11 odd number is always a good number Yeah if you could bring that and then our formal recommendation to council would then be that we would like to revisit the maximum number of people allowed on board so our recommendation would be 11 Okay so get you a list of all committees with 11 or more member more than 11 and then your recommendation is that you limit those to 11 members unless it's required there's some state statute for example has requirements to hoteliers restaurant but I don't think there's a certain number of people either they're like something like maybe 11 to 15 people it's not 30 people right it's not as big as the food 8 tax is small as well okay alright yes sir good work I think that completes our task today thank you very much for your interest thank you all thank you