Good evening. Good evening. Today, September 26, 2024. You're attending a scheduled session of the Howard County Board of Appeals. I'm Chairperson Jean Ryan. The purpose of the session is to review and propose amendments to the Board's administrative practices, procedures, and policies. Any amendments will clarify specific requirements and standards and make stylistic and technical corrections to the current rules of procedure to then be submitted to the Howard County Council for review and approval. We have a few preliminary matters to address this nearing the first being the meeting minutes board members. You have each had the opportunity to review the meeting minutes from September 19th, 2024. Are there any questions, comments, or concerns about the minutes? Okay, seeing none, can I please get a motion to approve the meeting minutes of September 19th, 2024? So moved. At first by Ms. Fokom. I second. At second by Ms. Yu. Madam Administrator, can you please call the roll? Chair Ryan. Approved. Ms. Fokom. Approved. Ms. Harris. Approved. Ms. Volkham. Approved. Ms. Harris. Approved. Ms. Schoo. Approved. Ms. Phillips is absent. Great. The motion has passed and the meeting minutes for September 19, 2024 have been approved. One last matter. So in attendance there, Ms. Schoo, Ms. Volkham, Mr. Ryan. Ryan, Ms. Harris as we just heard is online and is able to communicate and we can see that she's there and Ms. Philips is absent tonight. For those of you that may not be able to visually stream this at one or anybody on the same page about who's here. So we have an agenda add on board members that I want to bring your attention. The board recently received a motion for reconsideration and responses related to the board of appeals case BA 790D. The office of law is confirmed that the board's decision in order has been appealed to Howard County Circuit Court. Under section 2.212 subsection D of the Howard County Code, once an appeal to the Circuit Court is filed, the board no longer retains jurisdiction to suspend its decision in order or to consider a motion for reconsideration. Accordingly, no further action is required by the board regarding the motion for reconsideration submitted to the board earlier this week, unless any board member disagrees. So it seems like the board members are in agreement that no further action is necessary. Moving on to the primary purpose for tonight's meeting. So before we begin, I want to make sure all board members are working off the same spreadsheet prepared by staff. The document we'll be using tonight is the most recent and was emailed to everybody by Miss Miller at 12.26 pm today. The file if you're looking, is 58 kilobytes. Each member's also received a hard copy at their positions tonight. The proposed rules we will discuss tonight were sent out weeks ago. However, the spreadsheet we'll be working off of has been updated to incorporate decisions made by the board during our previous work sessions. I want to thank you all for your continued hard work as we update our rules of process and procedure. Your perspectives are valuable and I appreciate the dedication each of you brings to this critical work. Our task is sizable and we must move along at a realistic pace to complete it. To help facilitate this process more effectively, I'd like to share some updated guidelines for our work sessions. The work session is dedicated to reviewing specific proposed rules submitted by an individual member and shared with the entire board in advance of our meeting. General questions or discussions needed to be addressed outside of the meetings either before or after so that we can keep on track with our deadlines. Each member has been asked to review the proposed rules before we meet, ensuring any suggestions are relevant and never done it. So a couple quick points. So the protocol, when we're going to have a discussion, when discussing a rule, each member may elect from one of three options. You can, when calling, you can either agree with the rule as written, a proposed alternative rule with specific language and on the same topic, where you could verbalize that you disagree with the proposal. That would be the appropriate response if a member does not support a proposal and is not prepared to make any specific suggestions for an alternate or new rule about the same point. That will count as your vote of no support for a given proposal. Let's keep comments concise and focused on the specific rule at hand while always maintaining the spirit of courtesy. Each member will have two minutes to speak including any questions and answers about each proposed rule. Members should combine any comments to the specific subject and language of the proposed text. If the spreadsheet includes a general question or comment by a member, we will not be discussing that tonight and we will move to the next item. Members should feel free to have their general questions and comments addressed however that needs to be done before or after the work session. As the chairperson is responsible for conducting the meeting and will be forced to cut off any member who does not respect the two-minute rule, please don't make me do that as respect should be mutual. We'll follow the numeric council district order starting with the member proposing a rule. Once the two-minute time allotment is up, I'll call on the next board member in numeric order based on which council district the member resides. For example, I reside in district five, so if I proposed a rule, I would go first, and then when my two-minute allotment was up, it would move on to District 1 and District 2, then District 3, then District 4 until all members of the opportunity to speak and be heard. Members can reserve, there are a lot of two-minute time, and speak at the end of the round, I will call on any member who reserve time in order to, in the order described above. Regardless of when members elect to speak, each board member will only have two minutes of reserve time. If responding to a member who has the floor, please be quick and concise in your question or response out of respect for that member's diminishing time. Alternatively, a member who is essentially agreeable to a proposed rule may respond with no comment when called upon. Hearing that, I will call upon the next board member in the order detailed above. Perform amendments, those are amendments that are used to strike or alter a word or a few words in the text under consideration. However, those amendments have no substantial change on the text under considerations. Essentially these are amendments related to technical language and not to the core of the proposed role. We will not discuss performance amendments during this current round of scheduled work sessions. Instead that type of review will be reserved for subsequent work sessions during which the board will review and discuss the first rough draft of all proposed rules after they've been prepared by staff. No, that was a lot. Any questions? Okay, let's get into it. So, you know, questions. So, Mr. Chair, there are a lot of things need to be absorber, so I think we just go and then we'll discuss a lot of the way. Okay, because really there are a lot of things to be absorbed. So I think we just go and then we'll discuss along the way. Okay, because really there are a lot of things to the rules. You have you just arrived. There are a lot of things to remember. So yeah. So I hear so so what we're going to do is the rules have been proposed and submitted to all the members well in advance of tonight. So so we need to make decisions. We've all had the opportunity to speak to each other, speak to Office of Law, to do your research online, to speak to the administrator. So we need to move forward. We are substantially behind in our proposal. And this is just the first round. We still have three more rounds of our view on the rules. So we're going to move forward as I discussed in each member of two minutes to task any questions to make any comments. But in order to keep it moving forward, so we can at least get the first round draft done, we need to stick to that format. So where we left off was 2.204J. If you're looking on the spreadsheet prepared by the staff and given to the members today that is line. I'm right. I'm right saying that's the way. 7. 9. 9. 7. 7. Okay. I wrote 78. I knew that was wrong. So 76. Okay. Let me get my sheet here. I have my little handy dandy timer too. So, 76. Let me get my timer. So it's my rule, so I have nothing to say about it don't need to discuss or pass or prove. So essentially, well, so if you're okay with as it's written, you might want perhaps language changes or something, but essentially the core of the rule you're okay with, then you just say what I say, you just say you agree or pass whatever. The other option is that you could say, since we're for example in this rule we're talking about the preliminary hearings and things of that nature. So if you're like, listen, I have another rule about a preliminary hearing that is substantially different than the rule is being proposed. So I'd like to propose that rule. Okay? Okay. Or then no. Or of course the last thing is you'd be like, I reserve my time. So in other words, I'll wait to hear what everybody else thinks. Okay. Yeah. I have an objection. Okay. For Paul's room. And moving on to... Where's my pet? Moving on to... Miss Phillips and I hear... Miss Harris. I am fine as it is. Okay. Miss Forkup. I'm fine as it is. Okay. Ms. Forkup. I'm fine with the role. Excellent. Thank you everybody. We are moving on to number 79. Line number 79 and that is proposed by me as well and I have nothing so going on to miss you Yes, ma'am Just a gestant You were the initiator of you maybe just you know, whoever Proposes it just kind of overview why And help you know, whoever proposes it just kind of overview why, and then just drop behind the road and help us rotate them. So I actually thought about that and when reviewing, I appreciate that. The thought was when I reviewed the tape last time, that's from our last meeting, that's what I did, and that's what led to protracted conversations. So that's why I figured if we can at least get the rule, this was my way of thinking, but I'm open to suggestions. If we can at least get the rule into a draft form, that staff can give back to us, then we can have a more in-depth conversation, because this is allowing us to do rule, inner rule, out-of-rule. Yeah. Okay. So we were, where were we? Oh, I'm sorry. So we were on line 80. This is 79. I'm sorry. Yes. 79. I apologize. Go ahead. So miss you. Yes. The quorum part, right? So this one, or? 39 is. I'm still confused. This is on the record appeals. I'm going to make sure you can see decision. It breaks down, essentially, just for the fireflies. Why is it breaking down? Yeah. One thing breaks down to different aligns. So that's why I'm confused here. Yeah. Are you are you talking about the item that begins online 77 and goes down through Seven? Yeah, I'm just using because it's too hard like be because the way like in order to tell people to fall along I'm using the Excel spreadsheet line 79 So we have okay, so we have sound he 6, 17, 8 and I agree they're all nine and that I do have I do have some comments on the quorum which it's above 80 and I don't know where is it belong to. So quorum I'm looking right here. That's the next item. Yeah it's the next item. Okay. Yeah so off, yeah. Okay. Any? I don't have any questions. Okay, hold on, we're not. Miss you. No, I'm fine. You're good, okay. Moving on to Miss Harris. I'm sorry. Yeah, I'm fine with going to. Okay, Miss Forkum. I'm fine. Okay, great. So that's 70. And bear with me while I try to keep up here. Okay, so we're now at 80. So what happened to 77? Let me just take a pause here for a second. So you're okay with that, Mr. Sanders? Yeah, I just, okay. I'm just trying to figure out. So the rule, yeah. So the way they, I was trying to just, quickly, I was trying to figure out how to facilitate this because the rule, while one rule is broken up in several Excel spreadsheet lines. So that's why I'm just referencing the line instead of, because it's right, is that clear? You're referencing the last line. So it would begin like your... The block, the Excel spreadsheet. The last block, the better. Gotcha. Yeah. So I was just confused. I thought you were jumping to 80. That's what I was confused about. But you're starting with 77. We just went through, we did 77, 78, 79. Okay. So now we're on quorum, right? Let me just make sure we're right here. Yeah. Okay, right. 80. Yes. So we're on 80. I got nothing, so to you, miss you. So the way I read it is, by default, everybody needs to attend in person unless for some compelling circumstances and then you need to write a request permission 48 hours ago before the schedule session. So I feel that this is quite a big difference between how we practice now. And my concern is that could discourage future board members to consider if one of us, if you know, their new board members come on board, they would consider the time commitment and you know, each board member has different scenarios and what if they have, what if they're a single parent. They need to be at home with their kids. They don't have to be with them all the time. They can, you know, the kids can take care of them. They can be in the meeting, but they have to be just physically in time. I'm just giving you a circumstances. You're excluding a big pool of potential candidates for this board. And the pool is not big to start with, given the big commitment of this board. So I do have concerns about this. It happens that this board, all the board members are more flexible in time. They can come to, again, you know, they can come to the meeting during daytime, physically be here. But we need to, this is not just for us. We are making rules for many years to come. And I don't want to have a situation that next board will think who made this rules? And I just need to consider that. Fair enough. We move on to Ms. Harris. I don't have a, just one comment about the virtual requesting permission within 48 hours. I think that if there's a need for a virtual, it may be something that's last minute. And I just don't think that it's going to be virtual. And it's the last minute emergency or something somewhere that they can't come in person. I just think the 48 hours is something. But still, I like the length except for 48 hours. I just think it needs to be addressed where it's an option if it's needed. Okay. And then by the chair. And maybe there's a time, a number of times that we do it in a year. Maybe that's the caveat to make sure it's not used. Okay. Do you want to propose any specific wording changes or anything that we could take action on or? So we could change the language, well I will propose any member requesting to participate virtually in us request permission writing from the chair as soon as the need is known, maybe some language as early as possible. Okay. And that's the only change. Okay. Maybe you should already participate virtually in a council year. Do you want that included so we can consider it that last part? Well, I like to ask how people feel about it for you included. Okay. Makes sense. For the role of three. Okay. Good. So we will hold on. I'm trying to learn to use the timer. Give me a second. I'll get to it. Okay. Miss. Workup. So I'm kind of strict when it comes to rules. And you take a job anywhere you take a job. You have certain considerations. Your boss expects you to be in it nine and leave it five. That's what you do. If you take a job as a person on this board, you abide by the rules. I think the rules have been kind of loose about what goes on myself. And I think that the way this rule is stated is is fine ample. And I think that yes, the pool might be small out there for what we choose, for how they're chosen. But we're all throwing together here. We have no decision on who comes into the board. And I think these rules are good. It lets people know exactly what the commitment is. And it is a commitment. So that's how I feel that I have no problem with these rules. With this rule. Okay. Can I ask a question? Sure. Let me just, sorry, I'm trying to learn the time or kill. For some reason, I thought there was an absence clause in this one, but I can't all see it from here. You have to scroll down into the, there's only so many characters that will display without drilling. Yeah, it's missing. It's in there. So, Mrs. Could you scroll down to... Oh, it's not like I mean. Oh, yeah, the copy cuts off, yeah. The copy? But it's up on the screen, yeah, you can see it. Okay. Just scroll down to... Mr. No, I think it's up a little higher. It's... It's... It's in a chair right? Yeah. The language that makes things that I was proposing, it's embedded like you have to... I see. I'm sorry, I didn't hear you cut off. Oh, I'm sorry, my timer was cut off. Go ahead, what was that? You said something about the language. I was saying that the language in the paragraph about actions was what I was trying to to say About the proposed change in the language, but that was the long thing. Okay Make it so because people are gonna know it's you know between hour. I know I won't know until I know I can't get there But I have you know Stingray circle census with an elderly parent. Yeah. I'm sorry, I'm just trying to follow your point. Are you saying the language that appears in absence is what you're recommending to be put in for the virtual? Well, that's when the, I'm going to be it. It says, I'm able to attend a nobody chairperson in the board, in writing as soon as the member becomes aware of the anticipated issue. As soon as possible, as soon as possible, as the member becomes aware that they need to to be in the right position. She just wants to borrow that. She just wants to borrow that. Oh, you sit, Robyn, oh, you, I'm sorry. Ms. Harris, are you saying that you're okay with the rule now in reading the absence, the way it's staying? So what I'm saying is the language that's highlighted right now is what I was recommending to change in out 40, at least 48 hours as soon as that person is aware. Instead of the 48 hours, that's the only recommendation I have. And if no one else likes that recommendation, I'm okay with the way it is, I just thought the 48 hours is... Okay, so... You know, something that's... Let me go quick. So I didn't use my two-minute time saw. I'll go because I waved it. So because I wanted to hear the feedback. So the reason I put that to explain that, the reason I did it 48 hours is, so we will need to, there's a couple of reasons. One, like that it should be a less minute thing, but not so less minute that it's an absence. If that makes sense. So the virtual, it's, the expectations are that you'll be here in person. If you can't be here in person, well then the virtual would be the default. But that should be, you know, only used to, I got the flu or something like that, I would imagine. Otherwise, you know, you use Board of Matter for Committed. The last thing becomes absent. So if you are 48 hours out and you're like, I can't do it, well we need whoever the chairperson is and needs time to call up the reserve person. And so that would be the reason because theoretically if the chairperson whoever it is says, listen, you gotta be hearing you're like, well, if I can't be a is says listen you got to be here and you're like well I if I can't be virtual I'm not going to be here well you know that would be an absence then and we know three absences you know you shouldn't be on this board so that's why the thought was giving the 40 hours gives enough time to get the reserve person the alternate person whatever that term we decided up I don't know if that makes sense for you. So that's why it was in there. I don't know if that makes sense. It does accept with a part where if I have a clue, I'm not going to know who to eat out at the time. Well, then you'd be absent. Yeah. Then you'd be absent. No, or I would want to participate in virtual. Because I don't want to get it. I don't want to get it. I don't want to get it. I don't want to get it. I don't want to get it. I don't want to get it. I don't want to get it. I don't want to get it. I don't want to get it. I don't want to get it. I don't want to get it. I don't want to go through all of this with that assumption and not a backup exact part doesn't get it. We'll never go through everything to change. Yeah. It's a big piece of, you see my fan? So, yes, so my time is up, so I don't want to. Okay, so we have, we have one proposal to improve and So can we talk about absence because I didn't see that it's in that in that thing What's it in the show up in the computer my computer and show up on paper? So we have never Okay, so so Well, I mean you didn't see it, Paris Fair. Yeah. Okay. Well, Paris Fair. You didn't see it, I'm not gonna say no. But let's, if we could get to, let's, so we'll break it out this way. We're talking about the virtual part. So we, and then we will go to the absence, like you said, because you're in a heavy opportunity to review it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, of course. We have one, so is it correct, Miss. Yeah, I want to make sure I'm trying to keep telling you. So you're like, no, I'm not with the virtual part. Is that you're kind of on a facial photo? I'm OK with the notification part. I'm not OK with the language for compelling circumstances. So the default is in person, and unless you have some say you have sickness that contentiousy cannot come. And things like that, I would assume, or stuck in the traffic, I guess. Something like that, well, at least 48 hours. So that's not the situation and more so That's something I I have Question about the the compelling circumstances so but you're no for so you're no for that's written right now right? Correct. Okay. I that's why I just want to make sure I have an accurate. Okay, Miss Harris You're proposing alternate is for come you're with it, and I'm okay with it. Yeah, so we're, yeah, so we're, well, time is play, we have one proposal, we have one no and two yeses. Okay, so I can suggest that we would, if it's just that virtual paragraph, at the moment that we could put that in and just go back to that virtual paragraph on the review of the draft. Because the other sections, I heard that the other sections were okay the quorum and the attendance It's just the language So that's a little do that's a good suggestion so in the case where we have a split like this or not whatever you want to call it Right, so we'll include it in the first round draft is that way because that's there's a couple weeks before we'll be signing that So that will give everybody opportunity to come forward with a specific alternate. For example, like you said, Ms. Harris, you know, soon as the memory becomes aware. Does that make sense? So what's going to happen just to recap surveys on the same page? When we're done with all this, it's going to come back to us in a draft in which we're going to do this whole thing all over again. So that will give us a second crack at it to be more precise and it will give all the members a little more time to think about it. Which language stays? So the existing language at least 48 hours. Not for the note as soon as. Yeah, yeah. So for the draft, it'll be as written. But when it comes back in the first round draft, it's going to be open for discussion again. And then Ms. Zhu and Ms. Harris, everybody can take another crack at it. Right. So in the red line, Mr. Rimbley, just do the comment when you do the red line, too. That's what we'll say when we don't have majority consensus. We'll do that. That's a good way. We'll add that to our work sessions. So now we're going to capture, sorry, can we at least capture Ms. Harris a language there? Just say, some one board member proposed this. So what I would like to do I think is best is if we allow the board members to, when the first round draft comes out, I think they should submit. Can you put something in there? Yeah, but so now we're relying on staff and what's going to happen at the next round. Oh, okay. Okay, under the status. So this is my. That's perfect. So this is my concern with that. Okay. There needs to be personal accountability by the board members because right now it's all on you. And when happens when we come to the extra from they say Mr. Wimbledy, you didn't write down what I said right. No, no, no, it's on the board members to propose specific language and rules. So while I acknowledge it, I think we're setting ourselves up for failure and more debate at the next draft. Yes, Miss Harris. You're literally raising your hand I did want to interrupt but I did want to miss the opportunity to make a point. Yeah, go ahead. When you choose the language in the virtual, it's not that you have to find a replacement for that virtual session, because you're gonna be there. Yeah. So I understand your need to have the 48 hours for absences, but with the virtual, you don't, it's, you know, if you're gonna just be approving someone to be virtual and you're going to be limited to so many times a year, so it's not abused. You don't have a conflict of challenges trying to get somebody to replace that person. So, and I do, so, so, and this is one more far, but this is the point you just had more language. It says, well, so many times a year year that was in the proposal either. So that's why I think each poor member at the next round, I hear what you're saying, but it says for compelling circumstances. So theoretically, you know, John Cue public is the chair and says, no, that's not a compelling circumstance. Now you're absent. So you need 48 hours to pull them up. So, but that's why I think we say is valid. I'm not disagree with that. fully vetted proposal and at the next round, I think, I imagine well a few competing proposals and which everyone makes the most sense the board can settle on. But my concern is and Mr. Wimberley and Ms. Harred, if you disagree that I'll go with you since you're the administrative staff, but I didn't want to put too much of the onus on you to get, to think you're response over capturing what the board members are proposing because it's not inviting for the board member. I hear what you're saying and what my understanding what we would do is that if you had, if any board members have seen the red line, we have been putting comments to the side on things that are decisions that the board has not come to a consensus. And we'll do that for these two items, which is the virtual item and the attendance item. We'll take the language that's proposed here, put it into the red line, and just make the note on those two paragraphs. Okay. And then we'll do a hybrid of the idea then. So we'll do that. And then at the first round draft, we'll just kind of restate the expectations that like here are the notes from the, to refresh your memory, but each board member should bring forward the proposal that they want to have considered. Yeah, I think the, I'm sorry. I think the nose is again for us to remember. That makes sense. So for me, I agree most part of it. I just have a problem with the component circumstances in under D and under I, under attendance and under I, and I agree with most other parts. So under I, it says permission shall only be granted to components circumstances at problems with this sentence and the attendance I have concerns about absent components or instances. That's pretty much it. Yeah. Was that the site? I can't remember. Was that the second point camera was at the second point then I said we can go to ground to was that attendance or role that I can remember? It's the one you said you still couldn't see. Still you can't see. It's not apps I'm sorry attendance. Attendance, okay. I misspoke attendance. Okay. The attendance is as at the end is as absent compiling. Gotcha, okay. Yeah. Okay. Okay. the end is as absent compiling certain cases. Yeah. Okay. Okay. I'm not at the absence absence yet. So. Okay. You're okay with. Yeah. Okay. So then. Okay. So you're. Step. You're. You're good with it. Okay. So moving on to 81. Then we haven't discussed absence yet. Okay, I thought that's what we just did. Okay, go ahead, I'm sorry. Because the absent, for absence, it says if you have three times absence under any circumstances, that's how I understand the language. You're out, right? So, say what if a person for, you know, for whatever reason just sick, happened to be sick on three days? So, can we have some excused absence? Right, the absence. I thought the absence of the three was something decided on in a prior session. It doesn't it's not in this. Three absence is with 12 months. Okay. So we're off the bar ready. We made it to two rules before we blew my own time rule. So I'm not going to say anything about it. I'm just going to let it speak for itself. It's, yeah. Okay. So that was, so that was me. So now we're going to miss three Miss Harris any any thoughts on the absence close No, I'm fine with it. Okay, because I'll think we're gonna have three It's not in the row for these responsibilities. It's not in the row, right? It's not in the row. It's not in the row. It doesn't have to be consecutive. Accumulative. Miss, period. Next problem with the principal. Okay, so absence carries moving on to 81 81 is brought by me. I'll wave my hours or my time. We go to miss you 81 to miss you. Sorry. Why, why, does anyone, uh, decision? Why, I'm going to see. It's going to be my Is it a new light? Is it in one? Sorry. Are we talking about this qualification? Anyone? Yeah. The whole section is. Okay. I'll take that. Okay. I do have problems with it's all cut out. Yeah. So. Are you can I ask to use the microphone? Sorry, I'm going to hear what you said. Okay. So I do have concerns regarding board members are not allowed to participate in another board commission or task force. And I do not know what intention that is because there are other, we have dozens of boards and commissions and people Participate so I research those boards And commissions are most of them are totally unrelated just to name a few cable advisory committee plumbing committee Martin Luther King, Human Rights, LGBTQ, Behavioral Health, all-pia, Workforce Development, Social Service, Commission on Age, API Commission, Commission on Disability, Commission on Veterans, and commission for women, those are totally unrelated. So, if for whatever reason, there are, there are generally some conflict with interests, they can recuse from the board for that case. Thank you. We go to three. Miss Harris. I'm okay with the language. Okay. Ms. Borkham. I'm okay with this. Thank you. Sorry. I thought it was off and it was on. I'm fine with the rule. So am I, but I want to be responsive to misuse concerns. So the reason I proposed this rule was a fewfold. We've heard a lot so far through these meetings about how much the time required of this of this board and that couldn't agree more. So it's not, I didn't propose it for any reason, conflict. And just to be clear, this was proposed back in April. So this is before I even knew that members here belonged to other boards. This was in April. That's when I first proposed this rule. It was simply because of the time commitment. The second is, because this board is like no other board, not a single other board, task force, or commission. We are not advisory. We are a quasi judicial. This is the only board citizen board in the county that has the ability to fringe on individuals' personal property rights. And it has to comply with the rules of law. So it's a significant board and that's why I proposed the rule. So it wasn't to answer your question you asked about the TET, it had nothing to do with a conflict. Instead it was simply because the time commitment to this is so significant and the consequence of not doing a good job on this board could significantly impact somebody because we're not just advisory. So that was the answer to my two minutes room. I forgot to start it, but I'm sure about this. So can I share your words? Yeah, I'm sure about it. I'll let you know. OK, go ahead. So different people have different talents. Some people can't model that asking, some people cannot. So, and I don't think we should dictate how much time they can put in commited service, and this is a citizen board. And people, for most parties, what I'm hearing for, for different commissions board and people, for most parties, what I'm hearing for for different commissions board and including this board. I think we should encourage citizen board and the trend I'm seeing here for us making those rules, all of those rules, we are discouraging participation. And I'm not happy with that. Understood. Let me get my timer. I think I'd be better at this time or nothing. Sorry. Okay, all right. Okay. So 81 is okay. 80, remove it on to 82 is a questions, so we move on to 80. No 82 is it a question? Yeah it is and it has an answer to it. Okay. 83 is proposed by myself in Miss Forkrab. And I have nothing but Miss Forkrab said you were the second on that. I'll let you do you have anything? No. No. Okay. No, nothing. Miss, so going to one. Miss, you. Nothing. Miss Harris. I'm fine with it. Excellent. Thank you. Moving on to 84. What's the end? Ms. Forkob and Mr. Ryan. I am not the or all reserve and Ms. Fierco. No, I'm fine. Thank you. Moving on to Ms. Jiu. I'm fine. Okay. Ms. Jill. Okay. Ms. Harris. I'm fine. Thank you. Where are we? That was an 80 for 85. We're at 206, line 85, section 2 for 206. Once again, Mr. Ryan is for go up any I have no reserve miss for go I have nothing miss you miss Harris thank you okay Thank you. Thank you. Okay. We're on to the next one. So I'm going to reserve. I'm sure somebody's going to want to explain. So I'm going to reserve my time on that one. Oh, my time is still cloned down. Sorry. I'll reserve my time on that one and we move on to Ms. Jo. We are lying 86 applicability. Okay. Ms. Where are you? Ms. Harris. I think I am fine with this. Okay. So, to the beginning of the role, is that setting the precedent? Essentially, yes. Ms. Forkham. I'm good with this role. Okay. And not to believe at the point, I'll just quickly explain it because you just asked. So, yeah, essentially what I tried to do was, I'm sure the Office of Law will come, I've come and it comes to them. But essentially I tried to create some clarity around, you know, what rule controls. So in other words, if we have a rule that conflicts with the charter, well the charter will prevail. And I think we've heard the Office of Law say that. Conversely, if DPC has an internal department policy that conflicts with a rule, it would, there are rule prevails, but if they have, say, a policy about conditional use that adds on to our rule, it would be complimentary. But I'm sure the officer law will, in our first round, will give you their feedback on it. Okay, moving on. Let me restart my timer. Where we, next one was a question. So we're now on 80, 80, eight. Now, 87 was a question. So 88 is, who's from May? It's an issue. No, no. The question's versus skip and remember. It's a question. It's not a rule. It's not a rule. Yeah, yeah, it's a question. It's a rule. So we, no, we, as we said, we could discuss it before, after, but like this is to do a proposed rule. So if you propose a rule, we're voting on that. Or you can ask a question about a rule. Okay. That makes sense. But so this one is section 88. So I already, as they're moving on to No problems with that. Okay. Miss Harris. Did I go right? Miss Harris. We skipped the discussion question. We're going to pre-submission and full reports. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Yeah, you're right. Yeah, 80, 88. Okay, yes. I think I'll find that. Okay, yes. I think I'm fine with that. I'm fine with that. Okay, and miss your cup. I'm okay with this. Okay. Moving on to 88. Moving on to 89. That's my role, so I'm okay with it. Ms. Jo. I'm okay. Okay. Ms. Harris. I'm good. Okay. Ms. Pira. I'm okay with this. Thank you. Moving on to line 90, which is really significant. Well, let's break up. So line 90 to be clear if you're looking at it. As I see it, I might she starts with evidence entry and ends with part two, the administrator shall provide one copy. So that's the part we're talking. So the first three paragraphs. So I have nothing. Miss Jew. I have nothing. OK. Miss Harris Miss fear cup yes, I'm fine with this great Moving on to 91 I got nothing miss you nothing for me. Miss Harris. That's mine. Thank you, Miss Fierce. I'm fine with this. Excellent. Thank you. Moving on to 92. So this is Miss Juusule. Miss Ju, it's all you. Anyway. It says itself. It's just a hard copy into the submitted materials. Okay. So that was one, we go to two, three. Miss Harris. It's the same as before, right? I think it's redundant. Am I not, am I missing something? It's redundant. People will be just voting on. Correct? I don't think we have discussed that. I'm not, and I miss you something, it's redundant people who just voted on it. Right? I don't think we have discussed that out. I added one sentence to see, a material received by reference. The sentence I added was, the materials to show you submit, show me provided in both electronic and hard copy formats. Okay, well, that's fine. Okay. Mr. Cough. So I'm going to build on that with this Harris. So I'm not sure I understand why we would do hard copy. Is this hard copy to whom? Because we get hard copies at the time of the hearing. Correct. That's what I'm asking. Just, just codify that. Right. But that is already part of what it says in the beginning. That they have to bring six copies or how many copies with them. One copy to both of the opposing party and the board's legal advisor, one copy to each board member, the administrator shall retain one copy that's under two in line 90. Where is it? Two, number two and 90. Are you looking at the orange of the... I'm looking at the one I have right here. Oh, okay. And under an ID. Yeah. Number two. It said the administrator shall provide one copy to both the opposing party and the board's legal advisor and one copy to each board member. The administrator shall retain one copy which will serve as the only official copy of the item of record. And it says in the number one before the moving party shall remain seated and provide eight copies of the item to the board administrator. And two tells how it gets handed out. So the hard copies are already accounted for. So did they say eight or six? It says eight but it counts what those copies are for. There's six to us and the administrator and one to the opposing party and one to counsel. So why did I have a question regarding the six? I have no idea. I think I saw the somewhere of six. So it's my turn now. So the- So can I just say I opposed. Opposed? So can I say I opposed? Oh, I opposed. I opposed that particular one. So to piggyback conversation, the, so, in your defense, Ms. Judy, the first time you saw the consolidated rules was here, right? So when you wrote that rule, I'm sure you didn't have the opportunity to see the rule else prosing because we also made them simultaneously. But now, in hindsight, when compared, so the rule as we just approved talks about the electronic version being given in advance of the hearing as we do now. So essentially, this codifies the way we do it now. And then when they get there they give hard copy. You're saying you want both a hard copy as I understand your rule. You want both a hard copy and an electronic copy before the hearing, which could create a logistical issue. So that's why I will, I'll vote no on that one. I think those materials are referred to currently, even wrong, referring to the technical staff at the report and previous decisions. Those are the ones we received ahead of time, not adhering. I think there are two sets of materials we are talking about. So what I'm referring to is those materials we received a half of time now. Okay, that's how we practice. Right? What I'm saying is on top of the electronic version, we show the receive hard copy as well. I'm not asking the materials that present the adhering to submit to us a half of time with hard copies, basically. Can I make a comment? Yeah, I still got 14 seconds left. I'm sorry. So currently what happens is we do get hard copies. All we have to do is request them. Every time we have a hearing, I call or I put an email. And I say, I would like to get a hard copy. Can I pick up all the stuff ahead? Yep. And they have it for me. So I don't know why. And they make that from the electronic copies that they get. So I don't understand that it just doesn't make sense. It's redundant. I just want to codify our current practice. That's what it is. That is what we are doing now, but I want to make it a default. Right? So what if it's not happening now, but what if we request and the staff member doesn't provide? You know? And who is holding the responsibility to request? Do you want to request again and again? No. If it's a codified, then they have to provide us hard copy. Basically, that's- So since we own majority consensus, what we'll do then is we will, just trying to figure what part we, what particular part, because not like we have an agreement on the whole section, we just have, we're kind of, don't have the consensus on. But yet, yet Miss Harris. I was just I just want to make clear that when she explained what she's Washroom and I think our process is fine Waited as well. I agree with Just because Everybody's not I don't want them to automatically make our copies But then by the way, we want them and that's a lot of trees to kill so Should you ask for them and then they'll make them. So, are you changing? So, that's not the first. If I'm changing, there's so much change. Okay. Okay. All right. So, maybe we can add a pond request. But, okay. Provide hard copies. So at the next draft we can absolutely do that. But are we good with this Mr. Wembley? So we can absolutely update. So can you make the comments here, like provide a hard copy upon request? We are at 93. Thank you. 93 is May. I have not, I'll reserve, moving on to Miss Jo. I have nothing here. Miss Harris. Are we on letter E motions? We are on so I'm been using the spreadsheet to kind of track it because some of the parts are broken up so if you're looking your spreadsheet, it is line 93. Right? Yeah, line 93, see materials. Let me make sure it's on the screen right now. I'm just going to make it. Yeah. Public records, previous decisions right there. Team Rye, their public records. That's how the proposal starts. Oh, I thought we read what through that. I'm sorry. OK. Oh, I thought we read with you that. I'm sorry. Okay. Yes, that's fine. Okay. Okay, so you're okay with that. I mean, do you track the vote here? And Ms. Fierrook up? One question. 21 days. Is that business days? Is that just consecutive days? Is that hell's up? So that's a great question. Chancellor, we have to find that. And when I wrote this, I can't write. It's in the proposed definitions. I can't remember how it is. I think it's calendar days. But it's, yeah, right? OK. And I'm good with this. Yeah. OK. OK. OK. Okay. Okay, so that carries. Let me. Oh, my timer. I think it's more hassle than it's worth. Okay, so that carries. I'm sorry, what's it? Guys. There we go. We are on to what we on 94 mischew. This is the same as what I proposed for the previous section and I can change to the final request. Is he going to change the final request? Yeah. Harcopy formats. Okay. The final request. So the proposal to be clear misuse the materials shall be provided in electronic and hard copy formats upon request by my board member. By board members. Okay. That's the same. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. That's one. Miss three or miss. Miss Harris. Yeah, okay, that's one miss three or miss Miss piercup, yeah, I think it's redundant. I don't think it's necessary. I'm not for it. Okay. So I see they're done see as well. So we will once again say no, we'll carry it over to the next draft. And I think that it just is a quick sidebar. I think it will help us when we see it. Word you big. Okay. Now I can see where it. Okay, move it on. Is number line number 95 that is me I'll reserve. Miss you. I have no question for that. Okay. Miss Harris. I'm fine with that. Miss Fierga. I'm good with that. Excellent. Okay. Move it on to 96 motion. Miss Fierrogo. I'm good with that. Excellent. Okay. I'm over on to 96 motion. Miss you. This is for the motion that the time frame for the motion. I proposed they have 30 days prior to date of the initial hearing. It could be shorter, but I just want to generate some conversation here. Basically now we allow them to have motion right before and then we don't have time to our researches of investigate. Okay. Miss, where are we? Miss Harris. I think the ability to follow motion shouldn't be pigeonholed to a date based on what a typical court case, you know, you're going to have things come up at the last minute that need to be addressed. So I feel like putting a time limit on it is not doing a service to the community. Okay. Miss Peacock. I don't have a problem with this. Okay. And me. So the, so I'm going to vote know as well, but this is why. So the timeline, and you'll see the next proposal, which is motions. So the timeline right now, you know, I won't believe you're the point. We'll go over it next. So I'll vote. No. Moving on to 97 motions. So I'll just go over really quickly. So let me start my timer. So this is just a technical correction, essentially. It just requires that all motions being writing that we served on all parties. Essentially, it takes into account all the other rules that we have and condenses it into a single rule. And we change, I change the response with the board within five business days of the date of the motion that was filed. And the board may rule on it within 10 business days after filing. So the current rule I think is like 15 days or something like that. So the party is 15 days to respond. So here we say you have five days that's essentially a week. And then the board has two weeks to rule on it. Because right now there is no mechanism by which the board must rule. We could essentially never rule on anything. And there has to be accountability by everybody involved. So this gives a strict timeline that aligns accountability with the parties essentially never rule on anything. And there has to be accountability by everybody involved. So this gives a strict timeline that aligns accountability with the parties to respond, the parties to supply, and the board needs to take action. I will leave it at that. Moving on from me goes to Mijyo. So They can so your proposal is they can propose a motion anytime and So what do you mean we have ten days because usually if they so if they have the proposal motion before the initial hearing, we usually vote on that hearing as a preliminary matter. Correct? So this changes the rate now it's worded, I believe, preliminary motion. And there is no mention of motions. The only kind of motion technically that we're allowed to consider right now is preliminary by our rules. So this changes to motions as a whole and creates a timeline for responding. So it's not just preliminary motions. It's motion that's all, it's emotions that occur in the middle of a case, motions anywhere. So theoretically if we were to have a case that we're hearing X on X date and it gets carried over for four weeks or whatever They're The wait a month so this requires action by the board. So it doesn't linger So if there is a motion we need to schedule a meeting If it was not our engine only scheduled To vote on that motion is that what you're within ten days. That's with that the rule would yeah So that party's kind of resolution to that matter. Yeah. Well, it's a may rule may I'm sorry, let me be clear. Don't say must rule says may rule within 10 days. So we don't right? So if there's a if there's a hearing the next day, say they propose a motion, and then we have hearing the next day, do we have to vote on a motion on that day or so? So maybe on a motion. So it's 10 days after fun motion. Right now, so right now it's 15 days after fund most right now. So right now it's 15 days right? It's you file and then the other party is 15 days responding the board may take action. Here we've changed it to five days to respond and 10 days after that. So still 15 just requires a response from the party by five days and the board may take action 10 days after. Respond by the other party. With the five days. Yeah. So instead of being 15 days and nothing by the board, it's five days and then 10 days. Yeah, but for the board to rule on the motion, we have to have a meeting, correct? We have to have a quarrel, then have a meeting. Right. Oh, yeah a meeting. Right. Oh, yeah, right. Yeah. I don't know. I lost track of who's time that was. Who was calling in the previous class? I don't remember who was talking. I think it was you. Yeah. Okay. I think it was right. Was that okay? It was sure. Okay. Yes. So how do you feel about that motion or this proposal? I'm okay with that. Okay. Ms. Harris. So I just want to clarify on the total of 15 days has been reduced to a total of 10 days. Or are you saying the five days initially for the data response of the board will have a solution? So you can first mention the responding to the motions you'll file a written response with the board within five business days of that day. So you're talking about the other party, correct? Any person interested in responding to the motion? Yeah. OK, so they only have five days to respond to the motion. And then we have 10 days after the last response of the motion for us to vote. No, so it's five days from respond. And then our timeline, it says we may respond 10 days after the fighting of motion. So if motion counts as day zero, that anybody wishing to respond must respond by day five, and the board may respond by day 10. Does that make sense? Okay, so that basically would give us potentially five days to respond if there is someone else responding to the motion. That's the beginning of our response period. Board may rule out a motion anytime 10 business days after a filing of motion. Not within filing of motion, yeah. So that's five days after the hour- After the response, right? But that's, so it's 10 business days after filing motion. May rule on the motion any time 10 days after filing the motion. And days 10, I might have worded that wrong. I don't think that's the right time. Maybe you meant to 10 days, maybe you meant. Maybe you can stay with you meant. So I'm going to do this. Since there's confusion around it. Can we just move that over until we, because I need to, right, because I need to get clear that I'm a little confused too. Yeah. I knew what I meant, but I don't think it's written the way I thought it was. Can I ask you a question? So when you- Well hold on, we got to go miss Furco first. Oh, sorry. OK. We're gonna revert. Yeah, yeah, we're gonna table it. Right. Yeah, but I want to ask you a question. Can I just, just a quick question. So when you say may, so we don't have to respond? Well, that's why I got to look at. That's what I'm saying. I'm like, I'm confused now about what I meant. So let me let's rework that. Let me give me, because I have to go back to my notes. and also the days. Yeah. So we'll, yes. Yeah, I think. So we'll. So I seem like a simple woman I wrote, but now I don't think I wrote what I thought I wrote. So. The discussion is table. I'm not table. What is it? So it goes in the first draft and then we're going to, I don't know how you want to denote that. So what do we call it when we're just saying, like, just. Can you resubmit that? We're on board. We're going to include it in the draft. And we're going to put a comment. I don't know what else to say. Yeah, OK. Yeah, so how do you work for a number of discussions? Yeah, it needs further discussion. Yeah, yeah. But it's not table. It needs further discussion, yeah. What we discussed today, like the days and the word of may or confused us, you know. Well, we'll make the comment about the number of days in May, but Mr. Ryan said he was gonna go back and look at it and come back with what he intended. I'm gonna, yeah, when it comes to the next draft, I'll be more clear on what I was trying to convey. Because if I'm confused, then nobody's gonna be clear and it's not the way I wrote it. Yeah. Again, those are just something to remind the rest of us. I guess we will forget. Line 98. Let's me solve reserve and move on to Miss Zhou. I have nothing to say about this. Okay. Miss, where am I? 90. Miss Harris. Can you move this green to the particular one? Sure. 98. We're on motion memorandums the first line of it. Oh, yeah, there he is. Yeah, top is green. Yeah, I'm on that. OK. I'm on that. Just work up. I'm good with that. I'm good with that too. Moving on to 9. Oh, we're a little too late. Look at us making progress. We are rule 90. I'm sorry, line 99. That is proposed by me, Sal, reserve, going to Miss Harris. I'm on that. Great. Miss. I think I am because I don't see no screen. And look at that. Oh, okay. We'll just ask for it. We'll pull it up. Sure. Yeah, you can just keep me moving. You're two away to parents. Parents is before the board. We feel correct away to parents. Parents is before the board reveals correct now 999 999 except for mystery appeals described Yes, that's yeah, yeah, okay Okay Miss Fiercox yes, I'm fine with that okay Moving on to line 100. It's me. Reserve Miss Jew. I'm fine with that. I'm with that. Miss Harris. I'm okay with that. Excellent. Moving on to 101. That's me, a reserve, moving on to Miss you. I'm fine. Miss Harris. I'm fine. Miss Fira. What is your plan? Thank you. One, oh, one or two that is me. Um, Al-Rezer, Miss, uh, you. I'm fine. Miss Harris. I'm okay with that. Mr. Rickup. Thank you. Moving on to 1-0. Let me flip the page here. Moving on to 1-03. Before we go, I have a question. So I proposed this by seats red line. Is that reason for that? is that just, okay. I didn't know if somebody else, if there was like additional changes that were made. Yeah, it's got to be earlier. No, it's just the text how it came cut and paste. Oh, you know why it's cut? Okay, guys, right, right. Okay. So that's me, I'll reserve Ms that. Okay. Miss Harris. I'm fine with that. Miss Fricon. Thank you. Miss, one of four. That's me, I'll reserve Miss Chiu. I'm fine with that. Okay. Miss Harris? That's fine. Miss Fierro. Good as proposed. Miss, where are we? 105, 105 was a question, 106. So we can go ahead. Oh, well, I'll tell you. They're both you. Yeah. So it's Mischu, so 106. So I heard conversations about subpoenas, and I have impression that we do not have power to subpoena. But obviously this is the subpoena have something going on and request a risk schedule. It seems that it's not allowed. And I just want to make sure that we understand people have different circumstances and if they have to reschedule we need to honor that. Okay. That's one moving on to Ms. Harris. Can I get some feedback on just one term or council and the answers? You want to show you what would you like in this? Yeah, currently the board doesn't have the power to issue subpoenas for the parents of like different individuals to appear, where someone can request the board to issue a subpoena and then that they can be required to appear. But the way that, currently, the ways, or the way the board appeals rules are written, the board doesn't have the power to just initiate subpoena on its own without a party requesting the issuance of the subpoena. Under our current code, this board is in grand that authority. Are you relating this to us, ischuna spina or just... Under current law, section 2.208, there's a sapina section. This is existing section, not our proposed, okay? It says request for subpoena so if we are not allowed to subpoena anybody Why we allow people to request what's the what's the purpose? What just a distinction of You're not allowed on your own initiative to do it So if if currently the way how are can can he code is set off? So if a person, if a party requests a subpoena, then the board can. Oh, okay. Okay. That's so because before I thought we cannot. And so it's, it's we cannot initiate, but we do have subpoena power if somebody requests it if it wasn't Got it got it that answers that question and also I have The the recuse not recuse risk schedule Okay, so Miss Harris, where do you stand on that proposal? See if three options. Okay, so I guess we're going to say okay. I can't hurt anything, but I still don't think I'm following the intent, but it's fine. Okay, so. Do you want me to, because there are two lines we're talking together? So that's why I think I didn't clarify the second. Okay, well, let's let's finish the go around so it's miss pure cup So my question is which one are we talking about here? We're talking about five or one or six Yeah Well, I think David I think we've heard it. Yeah, because 105 was a question. So we said we're going to do questions, but essentially the question came in through 106. So we're really done about 106. Okay. So with 106, I am not for that because in number three, as we written here compliance, it says, a person who is subpoena to appear at a hearing or produced documents may be held in contempt if the person unjustifiably fails or refuses to comply. Appears but fails or refuses to testify. Refuses to comply with a directive. So it already accounts for somebody not being able to get there. It says unjustifiably. To me that covers somebody who can't make it or needs to postpone. OK. Is that the same thing? So yeah, so that's in the next proposal we'll about talk about. Yeah, so that's why we're going to have to read ahead to see where they're competing proposals. I'm sorry. So then I'm against this I'm against this particular one. One oh six. Yeah. OK. Can I clarify so what is the fel, well, you are reading the next line, right? Is that the original one that was submitted? The orange. So one oh six is miss. Miss Zhu, one oh seven is Ms. Jew. 107 is me. Something about to do 107 next. But you were citing from 107. But you're right. I mean, it's because right. So if you cite with 106, the concerns of 106 are answered in 107. But we're not there. You're right. Does that make sense? So you were correct in. I don't know. I'm still saying no. Yeah. Okay. So I'm going to say no to because the concerns of Ms. Jew are valid and they're addressed in the next two proposals. So we're able to address those concerns there. And I'm okay to change mine just because I had it written. Okay. And it's the next one. And as long as it's being addressed, I'm okay with it. Sure. So, okay. So, since we're going to move on to 107, if it's okay, we'll do 107, 108, they're both me and they're both subpoenas. So let me start my timer. I've got to be. You need internal integrity, hold on. So a couple of things. So right, this proposed regulation is not created from nowhere. This comes from a review of all the other charter county board of appeals and their rules as well as some of the rules that were in that quasi-digital handbook that we all got. Mr. I don't think I can be wrong, but at the next go round when we get the first draft we can go into it, but I don't even think we contemplate that point made by Mr. Sanders regarding the spinners and when he first said it, I looked up my eyebrows raised, but then he clarified that so the board does have the authority to issue spinners. And but as Mr. the belief is or the content is that it's only on behalf of somebody else, but I don't think that we're even talking about that now, so I'm not going to go into that. But yeah, so this rule talks about everything we've talked about. So I will obviously vote yes for that, and we will move on to Ms. Zhu. I do not see your proposal capture the language I have, because you're saying your proposal would capture whatever in 106, which is to address the concerns that the person under Sopina for whatever reason cannot come to the hearing. And I just feel it's, we should honor that under some circumstances, some emergency, personal emergency or compelling circumstances. Did I miss something here? I don't think your proposed 108109 captures that. So, like, yeah, 108. So as Miss Fierkeberg before the compliance section, it fell to appear or provide documents unjustifiably, because if you can just do for any particular reason, well then what's the sense of a subpoena? A subpoena is compelling somebody to show up and you're going to have to explain why you didn't, if you don't. So if that person explain why, is there another chance that person can call? That's not what captured. Okay, so you're saying if that person failed to call, they have to explain, basically, right? So if the, say the reason is legitimate, and we just excuse that person or we will have that person come back to another date. Okay, I'll answer your question. Simply as I can. I believe there is a rule. Is that the end of it, Mr. Beverly? By the way. Yeah, yeah, there's a whole section of it. You're not seeing it. Oh, really? Okay. Where can you let me... Talks about exactly what you just asked. That's why I remember the right... Okay, because it's cut off. I haven't seen it. Okay. We'll see it. OK. It talks about civil titation. Because you said you can file motion and all that stuff. Because we know it cuts off at member. Where are we? So C cuts off at. But yeah, see the rest of it okay do you have more? Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. No, because right now, yeah. So, you can see this as with the sentence, members of. Yeah, it goes further. Yeah, I know. It goes more than C. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, I don't have it. Oh, the older version has it. The version we got last time. The version we got last time. I see right there. Wait, there it goes. I see seeing it. There, wait, there, I see right there. It's just because I saw a civil site. Did you see that? No, it's not there. So was it a prior version that four members are saying? Well, it's it's an early kind of, I don't know why it's not showing here though. This is the same thing. I've got it here. Well, the rest of it doesn't say it says it refused to comply with the directive of a chairperson at the hearing. It's not. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. That's right. Yeah. But this part has nothing to do with the situation I'm talking about is that if what if that person cannot come to the hearing from, you know, at all and because of some compelling circumstances, sickness, for example, or attending the funeral, right? Things like that, we should honor that. So. You have to be able to. The way that I interpret this is that under number three, it says a person who is subpoenaed to appear at a hearing or produced documents may be held in contempt if the person unjustifiably, unjustifiably is the key word to me. Unjustifiably. So if they have a funeral to attend, that's not, that's justifiable. If they're sick, it's justifiable. This is saying if it's unjustifiable. So and can I just ask Mr. Sanders? In a court of law, I know this is quasi that judicial. Do you know what happens to people who don't show up for a spina? The cork, can I show you? Are they granted any kind of excuse? Are they given leeway of any kind if they can preach it? It's done by on a case-by-case basis, but the judge would make a ruling on that issue. Right. I mean, they can issue a body attachment to have that witness come to court, that type of thing. Or, you know, it depends on what, I mean, that's, it's a case by case. I don't know if, if somebody files a motion that quashes a subpoena, I mean, they can rule on that. That would be a motion. Because a subpoena is not to me, a subpoena is not something that you do frivolously. It's something that you're doing to compel somebody to come because they refuse to come to give testimony. And normally the people who show up at our hearings, they come and they give testimony. Greatfully so. These are folks that would seem to be very rare that something like that would happen, but we have to have the ability, it seems to me, to be able to say to somebody who says, I'm not coming, I don't have to. Yes you do. And that's what this is. And you give, you have an out here just by virtue of that number there, that item there, I think. And I have to bring it back. I'm trying, where were we? Who was going? Because I lost track of it. No, it's OK. Oh, was your turn. OK, good. So you're good. I didn't run the clock, though, sorry. I always wanted to know. I don't think I'd be able to take that. Yeah, I don't think you did either. I was running the clock, though. So do you have anything more? No, I like it the way it is. Okay. So can I say something? Wait, hold on, three, four. Okay, so I just, I apologize. I lost track. Miss you you were had some questions about it Miss Harris did you go on this? Okay, so me me me I yeah, okay, I'm trying to be reasonable. Go ahead. Yeah, sure So I think What the miss the fall cops that was very different from what I proposed. My proposal is to consider the situation that that person for whatever reason, and it's reasonable. And we can rule to say, hey, you're excused for this hearing if that person had to attend a funeral or sick. But do we want to call that person back to another hearing? Do we just excuse that person for a subpoena forever just because of that day he cannot call? No. No. Well, I know. The subpoena stands. It's on the record. It's a standing, so it's like an arrest. Well, I know. The subpoena stands. It's on the record. It's a standing, it's almost like an arrest. So we call him back. Well, so I do want to keep us moving though, because we'll get another draft of this. So this rule is in and we are now moving on to rule one. Oh, I'm sorry, never mind, 109, which is me. So I will reserve and we go to miss you. I have no problems with that. Okay. Ms. Harris. I have to start about six years day evidence that's one wrong break. Correct. You're saying it, okay. What is the purpose of having if you say evidence, if it's not going to be a side factor and it can be skewed if it's no one to cooperate it? There's a reason that she's one of, one to allow your say evidence, again, my question. So this actually, I just thought I wasn't running the clock again. So this actually is cut and paced from the Office of Law. This is what it was brought up. I remember an attorney came before us and I didn't know anything about hearsay and the attorney wrote this in his brief, and the office of law, the other attorney said, you can't do hearsay in the case. And the attorney, I'm trying to be general here. The attorney said, yes, I can. And here's why, inside of all the precedent. And we asked the office of law for legal opinion. And they said, yeah, that's correct. So I literally cut and pasted with that lawyer wrote in his brief and put it here because we didn't have a rule about hearsay and we as a board didn't know one way or another. hearsay is further defined in the proposed definitions which we'll talk about later what is NISN hearsay. Does that answer your question? I'm sure the officer law is going to have a front when the draft comes out I'm sure they're going to be able to comment on it but this was literally part of a hearing like two years ago. Yeah. Yeah. Um, and if that's the case, there's a precedent. So I'll, I'll come again. Okay. I would just call it in that we are. Doesn't your evidence rule cover this, Mr. Chair? I'm sorry, what's like a Mr. Sanders? What's that, Mr. Chair? I'm trying to go through. Didn't you have a rule on evidence? Doesn't that sort of cover this? I think it was wherever that is. Yeah, it's kind of saving me. That's why it will be nice when this comes out in one full draft so we can look at it. But... Yeah, you've got under... Oh, it's in there 29. Well, you don't have to definition about hearsay, which says, any evidence which would be a misball in the rules that it is. And then I think you address that here, the board is not bound by the technical evidence. Right. And I think that sort of covers the hearsay issue. Yeah. But that's for the board. Were you able to hear Mr. Sanders? Mr. Harris? Okay. I'm just throwing that out there. But we can flesh it out too further. You know, we get further to beat. I don't want anybody to think the debate's over. I just want to get through this part. And then we are three, four. Missed the period up. I'm okay as proposed. Okay, so this carry is one, ten. We are on one, this is me so I was yeah yeah I'm a place that we capture Mr. Song was comments for the next draft under the hearsay evidence sure well and I think just at your point I think dobs laws probably well I don't think I know. The Office of Law is going to get it. So after we're all done with the draft, because I don't know if you may recall, we said it's really not worth having all these other agencies look at it until we are done, because otherwise they'd be commenting on something that might not even pass us. So let's first get a first level review. So they're going to comment just so you know on everything. And I imagine there'll be another opportunity there for us to dialogue with them. But yeah, and I think I see staff already copied it so we're good. OK, what are we at? 110? That we're aware of, sorry. 110. 110 is me. I'll reserve going on to miss you. I'm fine with that. OK. Ms. Harris. I'm OK with this. Ms. Fierro. OK, I'm proposed. Great. One of 11 is me. I'll reserve Ms. Jiu. I'll bet with that. Ms. Harris. I 112. This is Miss you. I just want to add some clarification and definition for Denova appeals and that is requested by one of the citizens at the public hearing session and I just want to honor that. Okay. Miss, let me restart the timer here. Oh, it turned it off! Miss, let me restart the timer here. Oh, it turned it off. Okay, there. We're going on to three Miss Harris. Can I reserve? Yeah, of course. Let me just make it, yep. Miss, fear come. So I'm not sure I understand this. This is a definition. Would this go in the definitions page? So this is where the Denoulo mentioned. And if you look at our existing code, 2-ponded 209. And that's where the Denololo mentioned that I feel that we need to clarifyifying what Denova is. That's why I asked for a section that specifically has a list of definitions. That's me is much clearer. And because there are a lot of things that aren't defined in here and not clear for somebody who's just coming onto this board. Okay. Who was going? I'm sorry, I lost track. It was me. Okay, yeah, that was you. Okay. So I don't know exactly what to do with this. Okay. And what is legal in here? I don't know where problem with discussing briefly what Denova is in the rules, but I think that we need a section specifically that talks about definitions of what things are. That's my feeling about that. Okay. Oh, time timer. So I'm okay with it. You know, in principle, I agree with Ms. So I agree with the, you know, what's written there in principle. And I agree with Ms. Fiergobb that it should be moved to the definition section so what I I don't I'm trying to think how to do this because I don't want to toss it out But yes, I will yield my time Sorry, um actually Denova appeals is in 2.210 currently not 2.209 That's where that is What's 2.2 Conduct a board of appeals hearings and it's like the how the health things are conducted Well, it says original jurisdiction So I don't know whether, if you look at 2.210, that's where Genevo appeal starts right off. OK. If you look at that, that's how that's where it is. It's called conduct of administrative appeal hearings. Yeah, I have no problems to move to that section. Okay. That has to get me at that. I have an ideal of 2.2 or 9 per hour. Or to the definition section. I mean, we can make a note that, just say it's in the wrong place. Okay. Just, just just to make notes. Yeah. Oh yeah, you're reserved. Okay, so I apologize. Let me. It's like a lot of squirrels in this room tonight for me. Yes, Miss Harris. I'm sorry. He reserves. Go ahead. Okay. So 2.210 talks about the conduct of the administrative field, appeal hearings and the denobo appeals. They don't have a definition of denobo. Mainly this action talks about how to conduct the denobo. Right. And the order of everything. So that, so with section 1 and 2.21O, it's just about the O of the NOVO. So maybe we add something next to A for the NOVO appeals. They see definition of the NOVO in section blank. I'm kind of confused with those two sections though. 2.2.209 is conducted with water-pills hearings, original jurisdiction, and then section 2.210 says conduct of administrative appeal hearings. And basically, there are many overlaps of these two sections. But these, can I just tell you with what I, with this, these two sections are about, okay, is how do you conduct the hearing? This is the, the, who goes first, who goes second, who goes for the, for a hearing that's done under original jurisdiction, and then a hearing, which is 2.210, under administrative appeal hearings. So how do you conduct this? This is the cookbook for how you conduct and their one section is about one type and the other section is about the other type. So why one section says Denoulo appeals and the other doesn't? On the record you mean? I don't know. On the code. Yeah I mean you mean what Texas says Denoulo over the other says what? It doesn't say. Under 209 it doesn't say Denoulo. It says original. Oh, we have the jurisdiction. That's it. Okay. And under here, so both of them are talking about the order, how do we conduct hearings? Sure. Right? And different types of hearings. And one says the NOAA, and the other it doesn't. Okay. Does that make sense? So I think, so this is, so I think that's aside from the point you were making, which is you're trying to define Denova, which I think is right. And so I would recommend that we, that is a question, that is a good question. And I think we should have that answered on the next round. But to get your, this part in here now, I, did you say you were okay with moving it to definitions, or what do you want to do there? We haven't discussed the new section yet. So I would say move to the appropriate section. Maybe just say that because we... I think everybody's agreeing about that. So you got to just do that. Okay, so like the content is good. It just needs to be put in the right place. OK. So we are 1 where we're 1 13, right? So that is me, reserve, and going to miss you. I have no problem with that. I go into Miss Harris. I'm good. Miss here, come. No problem with that one. Okay. 114 is Miss You can do it for a cut. You can reserve, you can pass, you can not. You can do it everyone. We're just putting it in the same way. Okay. How reserve? Okay. So your fours are going on to me. I start the clock hold on. Okay. Um... Oh yeah, this was the new one right there. We just got right there. This one you just proposed. Yeah, yeah. Oh no, I'm totally fine with this. Yeah. 100%. Yeah. Yeah. 100%. Okay. We're good. Yeah, I'm good with that. Uh, so we're moving on to... I'm five. So we're moving on to one issue. I'm fine with that. And Ms. Harris. I'm fine with that. Excellent. Moving on to 115, which is me. I'm going to reserve going on to Miss Zhu. I'm fine with that. Miss Harris. I'm fine with that. Miss Harris. I'm fine with that. Excellent. Miss Fiercoop. I'm good. Moving on to 116. Yeah, that's okay. I'm fine. Yeah. Miss you. I'm fine with that. Okay. Miss Harris. 116. Yeah, 116. Capitalizing the word, word in appellant. Yeah, yeah, yeah, grammatical, yeah, Miss Furco. Yes, thank you. Okay. 117 is me and I will reserve and I will go on to miss you. I'm good with that. Okay, Miss Harris. me and I will reserve and I will go on to miss you. I'm good with that. Okay. Miss, who we at? Miss Harris. Yes, I'm on. Go for 10. And Mr. Hough. Yes, I proposed. Okay. Move around to one, 18, right? Yeah, one 18. I just continue with it. Reserve, Miss, June. I'm okay with that. You're not or you are. 18 right yeah one 18 I just continuation of it reserve miss Joe I'm okay with that you're not or you are I am you are okay yeah miss Harris that's fine miss here miss here go I agree Find is proposed. Sorry. One 19 Me I reserve miss I'm a good with that. Okay miss Surian miss Harris Miss Fierco. Yes, that's fine. Excellent. Moving on to 120, that is me. So I'll just talk very quickly about it. So all I did was I changed my minority opinion to dissenting or concurring. Moving on to the issue. So if they're concurring under what circumstances they need to write a opinion on that, just want to miss you. So if they're concurring under what circumstances they need to write a opinion on that, I just want to clarify this. So concurring would be, as I see it, maybe we have to clarify it in the next round, but would be, OK, so I agree with everything that's written. However, there's some other things I like that. So I agree that this is what the board said and did. This is what, but I also agree that we found X. So I agree with the outcome, but I found X because of these other reasons. So it's a concurring opinion, but list additional reasons that that individual board member felt the way they felt. As opposed to being a minority opinion, I think I just clarify that it's dissenting or concurring. So can I ask the Mrs. Sanders when you read the concurring opinions would you legally interpret that as how Mr. Chair explained? I agree pretty much. Okay. We haven't find anything. It's not the same thing. You agree with the final decision, but maybe for some other additional reasons or. You want to supplement the decision and older. Okay. And in all this closure, that was, I was, that was a rule recommended by Miss Phillips, who is in here. So that's why she had that she wanted to tag on. Okay, so that's where we're two three Miss Harris? So I just heard Mr. Sanders say it's not dissenting, it's just concurring, but I'm thinking that she means if you have a minority opinion or if you agree, you want to add to the region. Is that what I'm understanding this debate? So the- So the- If you have a really opinion, which would be the dissenting, is- So the way it was written now just to be clear, it says any member who does not agree with the majority opinion may prepare a minority opinion to be attached to the decision. So this isn't that you disagree with the majority opinion. It's that you agree and have additional. It's not that you're disagreeing. It's that, well, it could be that you disagree. That's why it says dissenting. Like so, so three of the board members or four of the board members said approved, but you said, no, it shouldn't have been approved. This is why. So that'd be dissenting. Concurring would be, I agree with everything that's written. I agree with the outcome. However, these are the additional factors I've personally found. Right? Does that make sense? Yes, no, I just want to make sure I understand that that's what that's what because when I heard Mr. Sanders say it's not descending, I just want to make sure that it is descending or concurrent, either one because if you're thinking is gone, then moving minority opinion wouldn't, wouldn't you expect it at this as well? Right, right. Oh, okay. No, no, it's it this is why. Right. Oh, OK. No, no, it's the language is written, yeah. OK. Yeah, I'm fine with it. OK. Mr. Gerber. Unless there's some reason that it would slow down getting to be our 30 day, you know, we have to put some time frame parameters around this so we could meet the 30 day window. Yeah, we. We have time frame parameters around this, so we need the three-day window of decision-in-nord. Yeah, you just approved that. The time frame to give a dissent to current opinion to the Office of Law was in the previous rule. I did. I did. There's no better fit for that as well. No, no, this is all figured into the time period. So as a board member in the previous rule, I think it reads that you have a certain amount of time to notify the officer law. Does that make sense? It does, it makes sense to people that have to carry out the worst. Yeah. I'm not fit in the seat, so I't know, you know, I feel uncomfortable. Okay. I don't know the process in the matter of part of it. Well, and you're still going to get it on the round. We're also going to get another round to go at it. So once it's put into a word document first, I'll look at will be able to see any gaps or inconsistencies or. Okay. And then you also all be able to accommodate it makes sense from what they're doing because we're imposing things for them without knowing their end, you know, their time from whatever they else they had going on other than the board of heels. And let's be our own counsel. But it makes sense, it makes sense. I do, that's a different rule though, the timeline. But yes, I agree. But they're going to, so the office of law but yes I agree but they're gonna so the Office of Law as we said before they're gonna comment on everything they're gonna get what's all done yeah okay okay okay okay I miss you did you went right. I'm sorry. OK. My head's spinning. I'm sorry. Um, the, uh, no, no, no, no, no. I'm trying to keep track of my paper. We did that. So we're on 121. That is me and I will reserve and go to Mischew. I'm fine with that. OK. Miss Harris. I'm OK with this. Okay. Miss Harris. I'm okay with this. Miss Fierco. Yes, thank you. Okay. Moving on to 120, uh, two. That's me, I reserve, moving on to Miss Schoo. I'm okay with that. Okay. Miss Harris. Yes, I'm fine. Minus Fierco. Yes, I'm proposed. Great. Moving on to 123. This is just a separation of paragraphs but moving on to miss you. I'm good with it. Miss Harris. I'm fine. Miss Fierco. I'm fine. All right. Miss Fierco. Yes, that's fine. Thank you. 124 is me. I'll reserve and going on to miss you. I'm gonna go to the weather. Okay, Ms. Harris. I'm good with this. Ms. Fierro. Yes, very good. 125, I'll reserve going on to Miss June. I'm gonna go to the weather. Ms. Harris. I'm going to miss you. I'm going to miss Harris. I'm Miss. Great. Miss Fierck. Good as proposed. Thank you. Moving on to 126. That's me. I will, I got nothing to say there. So moving on to miss you. I'm going to miss Harris. So, moving on to Miss you. I'm going to go with it. Okay. Miss Harris. I'm fine. Miss...Firca. I'm going with that. Excellent. 127 is me that's literally capitalizing a word. I'm fine with it. Miss you. I'm fine with it. Miss Harris. I'm fine with it. Miss Harris. I'm fine with it. Miss Fierco. Yes, Mr. And that is it. All right. We're done. We're done. Wow. 8.30 folks. We've killed it. Nice. So, next steps. So, we're off for the holiday next Thursday. We have a hearing tentatively, well not tentatively, we do have a hearing the following week, which is October 17th. So, that we will say tentatively the plan is that staff will get us a first version rough draft of everything we just talked about. I'm going to say this you correct me at the wrong time, missouri. And that instead put an Excel spreadsheet, I mean we can have the Excel, but I think what would be better is if we could have an in a word document with line numbers that we can point to. Yeah yeah and then we will go through this all over again. And and date you're looking for that Mr. Wimbley went so so so we talked we get the 10 so we talked tentatively that we have a hearing scheduled which is scheduled for eight hours and we have no reason to think it wouldn't be but there are some motions filed there and I have no idea how the board is going to find. So in the event that hearing doesn't materialize or is concluded very quickly, we would tentatively like to since we are all going to be here, move to have our work session on that day, which would be up to October 17th. So, and we can talk about that agenda, you know, noticing that, just that there could be a potential for work session. So theoretically, if we could get the first draft, you know, like around what, I don't have my calendar. It's like. We haven't to talk about the new section yet. So. Oh, what am I saying? You're absolutely right, me too. Oh, I am. So you're absolutely right. I totally skipped. Oh, crap. I totally skipped the whole new section. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. And I think we have a new section. Do they then? I'm sorry. You're absolutely right. So I'm sorry. I got ahead of myself. So we have the new section. These are rules that have not yet been contemplated. So that's definitions, training, all that stuff. So we, so forget what I said about getting a rough draft to us. So the same rule applies if on the 13th of, no, I'm wrong. Let me give you the date. You have on the 17th, which is, you know, essentially two weeks. Three weeks right whatever. Anyway, if our next hearing date, if the hearing is concluded early, then we would move to go into the work session to pick up on section three. But we'll, the administrative will send out a notice with the new calendar. to go into the work section to pick up section three. But the administrative will send out a notice with the new calendar. But I just wanna give everybody a rough, essentially take away from this is, if our hearing doesn't go the full day, if it's concluded early, we'd move to go to the next section of rules, so be prepared for that. And then we'll get what Mr. Wimbledy and everybody to figure out the calendar for drafts and everything. But I really want to thank everybody. This was awesome. You did a great job. Any thoughts, comments, questions before we recess? I have a question. Yes. So the next thing I'm please. His hair is the new section. Is that already written up somewhere? So we haven't set a due date because we were waiting. We had a due date and then we kind of said forget that for a second because you really don't know what new rules to write until we come up with these rules. So if it's okay with the board, it can be like a day or so to come up with these rules. So if it's okay with the board, it can be like a day or so to come up with that I got to look at a calendar again and make sure everything makes sense so that staff has enough time to do their thing, that way we have enough time. But so to answer question as of today they haven't been given the due date. But keep on submitting them if you haven't. But they're not actually due as it yet. Does that make sense? I think so. Yeah. So we will confer when Miss Berkis back and send something out early next week on dates. Yeah. OK. OK. I'm going to wait two dates, unfortunately. Well, we're going to look at the calendar students who have been on the calendar. But October 17th, Mr. Chairs, we have a hearing that date. Yes, sir. And that's good. That would be the earliest for a work session. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. OK, thank you. Is it? OK, so then 630, the 630 date we're going to add to the market. Let me just let me look at our calendar and make sure that we're right here. Let me I want to make sure I'm to right. 10th in the evening. There's do we have one scheduled for that? There's some. Okay, let me take a look. Now, well, that can't we we have planning for that night. So that doesn't make sense. Yeah, so let me make me because that might not be. Let me just take a little bit of calendar real quick. I'll fill in my calendar. Yeah, we're working on it. That's a rule. We're going to talk about how to make sure our communications are, give me one second. Clear, because I didn't show it in my phone, and that's why I want to make sure I'm going to our calendar that I share it with Berk on the, I show us today and their next meeting is 1017 and the AM for hearing So yeah, I apologize if that was a hell date that wasn't made clear because Yeah, so and I imagine because like you said there was another yeah, so correct Mr. Sanders that the next time we meet is 1017 I'm sure it's one of the want to confirm. I have a question. Yes ma'am. Is it possible? Not that I would like to have this as a wonderful reading material in airplane. Is it possible to get the new revision? revision sometime before I go away like by the seventh and on a paper copy so we can review it. That's what a week and a half. Yeah. So we have everything through today as a word already. You guys are ready to give it us. So it's just today. If you're talking about an award document. Yeah, today they gave it to us as a word, but only up until today. Oh, yeah, but I'm talking about now. Now this is the... Exactly, right. So I'll defer to you. Is that a possibility? I mean, I'm not... We can take a look at it. Let's have a conversation tomorrow. We'll send out an email. We will do our best to get stuff to you. I don't need it to hear from you tomorrow on it. Just give yourself a day or so. But yeah, if we could have that, because that way we have the ability to review that, even if we're gonna work on new session, the new chapters, it gives me some time to really, I'm gonna come back and not prepare it anyway. I'm gonna have to catch up. So to really, I'm going to come back and not prepare it anyway. I'm going to have to catch up. It would be fine. Yeah, I know. And to be clear, so we're going to, this is all talked. Don't worry. There's going to be an email that follows all this with dates and due dates and everything. But just to take away our next meeting is 17th, we're going to get first round draft of sections one and two. Members should still be submitting any rules as they occur for part three. And that same email will say when the final due date is for the part three rules, because we're not meeting for part three until, as it looks right now, until a while out. So, but that might change based on hearing. And then, Ms. Berg is back. So, what email should members be using now? Because before was Mr. Khan and Ms. Berg, who should we be sending rules to? I would still send it to that council board. Like that is the generic email account that goes to the board office. And I get a copy of that as well. So that is the best email to use. Great. Anything else? Awesome job, everybody. And we are adjourned. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.