2026-10-27 - City Council Special Meeting

Good morning, everyone.

>> All right, it's 6:05, so we'll go ahead

and get started.

Um welcome to the City Council special

meeting for Tuesday, October 27th,

2026. We have two items on the agenda.

The first one is a discussion updating

on updating the ordinance for the

Economic Development Advisory Board.

And uh you know, that's something we've

been discussing for a number of months,

really for a long time, but

specifically for a number of months, uh

partly with the the mall

uh incentive proposal, and then

not being in the County Economic

Development Coalition. So,

uh this is just a continuation of that

discussion.

>> So, we last talked about this at the

Business and Community Affairs meeting,

uh October 2nd, I believe it was, uh or

October 1st.

Uh most of you were there, so so you'll

remember this, uh but our current

current ordinance says that the EDAB has

seven members.

Uh four of those have to have required

expertise,

uh suitable and appropriate knowledge

and or experience in the areas of

economics, business, finance, law,

policy analysis, and community

development.

And we also have the NEDC Executive

Director or his or her designee serving

in a non-voting ex officio capacity.

And we talked about this in October, uh

coming from your retreat over the

summer. We talked about ward specific

appointments, so eight members, uh for

one for each ward, plus an at large

member.

Uh of those, we discussed how many

should have expertise, and we settled on

seven of those uh appointments.

And then we expanded, talked about

expanding expertise uh to include small

business ownership or other relevant

experience, just recognizing there may

be some experience, some candidate who's

got this great experience that may not

fit into one of the categories in the

ordinance, but we want to give you all

the freedom to consider that person.

Um we also added language in their uh

duties and powers section to include the

uh review of the economic and risk

analyses that was added with the

adoption of the TIF ordinance.

Um and so we were left really with one

issue. I rewatched the meeting again

today just to make sure I wasn't missing

anything and I think this is the only

issue remaining and it was

whether we wanted to have nine members

uh and wait for

uh

current members to roll off, for their

terms to expire, to get up to that

representation for each ward.

Uh that would be in October of 2027

before we would get all nine members uh

appointed representing

each ward um or council member still had

a suggestion to go immediately to 11

members so that we could appoint someone

for each ward that's currently

unrepresented. And then once those uh

two members that expire in August of

2027 roll off, those terms would go away

and we would be back down to nine

members. And so I've drafted two options

for you.

Option one is nine members. Uh

You can see the addition in both of

these options in 2-3-18A,

uh we've added that experience we talked

about.

B requires uh ward representation.

Uh we've updated the uh

ex-officio [clears throat]

member uh from NEDC to the Cleveland

County Economic Development Coalition.

And then uh in 2-320, you can see where

we added the economic risk analysis. But

the biggest issue is in the composition.

So in 2-3-18A, that's nine members in

option one. At least seven would have

that required experience.

Um you can see in

section six of the ordinance, this is

not codified, but it talks about how

with the expiration of terms or

vacancies occurring that you would be

appointing members who aren't currently

represented. Of course, with the

increase from seven to nine, you'd

appoint two immediately upon the

ordinance's effectiveness,

um, which will be 30 days after

adoption.

And then in option two, we have that

11-member

Excuse [clears throat] me, that

11-member option.

Um,

the suggestion originally was to include

that in section six of the ordinance,

but it needs to be codified because it

will be a an appointed position by

council.

So, I've added that into section 2-318A

in option two,

um, where it says 11 members. Then I put

at the end effective August 4th, 2027

with the expiration of two terms or of

terms for two members, that membership

would be reduced to nine total members.

That would enable you to have ward

representation

immediately upon the effective date of

the ordinance and an appointment of

those members,

um, but then it would reduce it back

down to nine as the two current the two

uh terms that expire in 2027 uh

expire, basically. They would roll off.

Um,

right now, and this is why it's a little

funky, right now at its seven members,

we have four from ward three,

one from ward four, one from ward six,

and one from ward eight.

Those two terms that will expire,

um,

there's actually three terms expiring in

August. Two of those are from ward

uh three.

So, that that will kind of solve the

some of the problem of over over

representation there.

And that would allow you with the two

additional appointments,

um,

whether you go to nine or to 11, you'll

have two additional payments. You'll

grab two of those wards, and then in

August, you could grab the other two, or

you could grab them immediately with the

increase to 11 members.

>> Council Member.

>> Uh [clears throat] yeah, so

obviously I I prefer option two, just

cuz I'm the one that suggested it, I

guess, in the beginning. And the the

reason why I favor it is

if we're going to be asking this board

to be doing stuff

pretty quickly, I I just think it's more

important to have some kind of

representation now, as opposed to

in August. Um you know, I don't want to

get in a situation where we appoint two

people now, they're kind of handling

some stuff, they're going through

whatever their duties are, and then we

appoint two more people in August, and

they have to kind of get up to speed. Um

I also uh well, this is more of a mayor

purview for the appointments. I I don't

want to get into a situation where

after this goes into effect, we do have

four people that are interested from the

four wards, but then the mayor can

always pick two out of these four

people, and and then have these other

two have have to wait till August.

That's just kind of my thoughts on

everything.

>> Any other thoughts?

Council Member.

>> Just so we recently

>> [clears throat]

>> appointed people to the

public safety ad hoc committee.

And

I'll take all wards are represented on

that.

Um I'll have to go look at the actual

composition, but I know

I don't believe that all wards are

represented, so

some wards it's just people just don't

want to help, or they don't know, or

they don't like, whatever. Um so, then

there's there a way to if if ward eight

doesn't have anybody [clears throat]

that wants to serve

that

on this board, that

we can find a suitable person

to

to fill that spot.

>> Yeah, we could add language to do that.

I think when we discussed it earlier

this month

there was some discussion of just

leaving those um

spots vacant until you did have an

applicant from the ward.

That's that's another possibility. I

would say that one other change I made

that I didn't mention was the quorum.

Used to provide a particular number. Now

I just have in there a majority of the

members appointed. So that if you did

have that

vacancy, we would still just be looking

at a majority of the you know, we just

had eight members, we'd be looking at a

majority of the eight versus

nine including the vacancy.

>> I'm fine leaving it if

council member can't find somebody to

fill their spot that it just sits empty

until somebody wants to walk here.

>> Let's go with the next two members.

>> Couple questions uh

the economic development coalition, did

they say, "Yeah, we'll

we'll still participate in this?"

>> Um I have

I

I have not had a chance to talk to the coalition's director. He's out of town this week. Um

I I can just tell you what our

experience has been. We've not really

had

We've had a probably a couple of

meetings since the city severed its

relationship and he did not attend

those.

Uh but he hasn't always attended every

meeting anyway. It just kind of depends

on the topic.

Um [clears throat] he's not a voting

member. Uh that position isn't a voting

position. Um so it really depends on I

think from his perspective whether he's

got something to

to add to the discussion.

>> I really like the idea of after a period

of time if you can't fill a need on this

committee, let's say you're in ward

eight

that if you

uh you

you should release it and if I have

let's say if someone already on the

board, but I have a business analyst

that's

30 years in the business that wants to

do it and they can and that's a great

fit.

Why wouldn't we consider that?

So I I envision something like okay,

thank you for relation it. I can fill

it. I've got someone just like someone

else would I would manage around this

table and would be best fit based upon

merit, right? Qualifications.

>> Yeah, and I I would just say that our

code, we have to keep in mind that our

our code gives the mayor the power to

appoint.

Um it does require consent of council.

So that's all going to be running

through the mayor.

Um

It it's not subject to a

release or anything like that from a

particular council member. Certainly the

mayor talks to you guys I think when he

wants to appoint someone

uh from your ward, but but it

per our wording set,

>> [clears throat]

>> power lies with the mayor.

>> Attention. Just a a thought on that path

that if there's a vacancy in a ward and

that council member

goes out and beats the bushes and

you could maybe there's a like a time

you got

90 days to

bring the recommendation forward or

it goes to the next available

qualified applicant for something like

that language wise.

>> Yeah, we could draft something like that

if that's what council wants.

>> Council Member?

>> Um

I was going to ask

I don't have a problem with for

obviously there's an endless pool of

applicants.

Um but I was thinking um in the spirit

of representation

like one uh suggestion from each ward if

a business owner had a business in that

ward but didn't live in it, could that

also be um a pathway towards that ward

being represented by someone who

actually does business

in it uh cuz that was kind of I feel

like the spirit of trying to have um

equal representation from the wards.

>> Yes, and we could we could draft

something that would address that. I

think that's a good suggestion.

>> Council Member?

>> I'd say I just I agree with the

suggestion where if you have if you own

a business, you know, or or even manage,

you know,

>> [clears throat]

>> general manager or whatever you want to

call it in in that area, I think that

should qualify you cuz you are invested

in the area or in that ward. Um I also

do want to echo um Council member

another member's comment where um if it's going

to be wards of specific, excuse me,

especially if it goes up to 11, you

know, there's four unrepresented wards,

it should go to these four seats we're

creating. You know, this shouldn't be an

opportunity to

to stack other other wards essentially

cuz then we're just going to have the

same problem again in a couple years.

Yeah, so if if there's no one from a

ward at that time who wants to sit on

it, hey, there's a vacancy for when they

do want to apply for it and then they

could get in right away if they're

qualified.

>> Council Member?

>> I'd rather focus on the side of the

knowledge and expertise. So, you mean

tell me if I have someone with 30 years

of experience, I have someone on the

board, say it's a lawyer or whatever it

is,

been on it for a year or so,

and I have a guy say, "Yeah, I really

have a desire to do this. This is my

background." And um okay, noted.

And there's an opportunity where you

guys aren't filling for your ward,

thinking, "Why wouldn't I present that

to my counterparts and say, 'Hey, look,

I got the guy that could fill this

position or the or the lady?'"

You know,

why wouldn't you do that?

>> Council Member?

>> It kind of ties

a couple of points is is

maybe it is the compromise

um I will just continue using ward eight

as example. I don't have somebody that

wants to do it, ward three does.

Um qualified person

>> [clears throat]

>> um council says, "Hey, you can do it."

Um

until

ward eight finds a qualified person to

do it. Is that a compromise we could

somehow strike and do?

>> I think it probably be like the next

seat that comes available

we'd [clears throat] be looking at for

Ward 8 resident.

>> Okay.

So, sticking with just like a two-year

two-year

Are we talking two-year terms?

>> I don't think you'd probably appoint

somebody and then remove them.

>> That's how it sounds. Logistically, it

sounds a bit tough.

>> I mean, unless it was like a you want a

term fill in for an indeterminate amount

of time. But, I think it would be if we

did that, then it's the next opening is

going to

you know, but

>> And not the worst idea I've ever had,

guys.

>> [laughter]

>> Council Member.

>> Um yeah, I just

wanted to say that I agree with another

member on um the business owners

just because Ward 7 is very tough to get

representation on any of the committees.

Um

so, I I do put the word out there. Um

some people like will comment and act

like they're um but then it doesn't go

anywhere. So, um

So, [clears throat] I agree with um

definite that would help me possibly get

someone from Ward 7 as if we made it

available to business owners in that

area.

>> Yeah, Council Member.

>> I just like to say that

kind of what we talked about about most

experienced person going into position

it's kind of what I chose to do for Ward

1 with the safety.

There's not a Ward 1 representative on

there because

there was in another ward, you know, a

guy that basically ran a major part of

our safety and security for our

whole entire area and everything for

several several years that was available

and not being appointed by anybody else.

So, they're rep reached out to me and

said, "Hey, what do you think?"

And of course, I went with that because

he did bring some of the most experience

that possible to the table, you know, so

I do agree with that kind of concept

about it and stuff also.

>> Yeah. Um and my my personal preference

as mayor, as you all know, is to

try to get representation from your

wards and people that you all support.

Um

cuz yeah, even though I can appoint it,

still need council members to vote for

it. And I'd like to not appoint people

by five to four votes.

>> [laughter]

>> Uh

for them or us.

>> [clears throat]

>> I I I do like to have some flexibility.

I

preference that we try to fill them with

ward people who either live in or

own a business. I think that's a good

uh

And it may not even have to be owned. It

could be a managed business. I'm not

sure, but

um

try to get

make that the priority, but leave the

room to be able to

if nobody else is available, we can't

Nobody applied from a couple of wards to

be on the public safety committee, so

And yeah, same. I we've in ward seven

tried to get people had people that have

done it and then we've appointed them

and then they've resigned like in a

month cuz they for whatever reason

realized they didn't want to do it or

couldn't do it or whatever.

And so uh but preference for trying to

appoint wards uh people from a different

wards and have representation from

across the city, but

I would prefer not to have it locked in

where it I I would not like to have a

seat just be vacant for six months cuz

we can't find anybody from ward seven or

ward whatever, so

uh that would be my preference is to

have that be the

priority, the guide,

but

if unavailable,

be able [clears throat] to

go with a business owner manager or

someone from some other ward who is

notably qualified to do.

>> Council members?

>> No the I'm missing is it's in there.

You've had the words in there all along.

Business owner is an option. It's It's

in there now. It's in this option,

right?

Business owner is qualified to do.

>> business ownership, but I think the

question is more

the ward representation. [clears throat]

If they just manage or own a business in

another ward, say they live in ward

three, but they have a business in ward

seven, could they qualify for the ward

seven appointment?

>> Yeah, I don't see any problem with that.

I mean, if I'm doing, you know, I got

millions of dollars invested in my

business in your particular ward, why

wouldn't I?

That just makes sense.

I mean, maybe it's 120 [clears throat]

days. If it's vacant for 120 days,

[laughter] I would release mine. Hey, I

I can't find a qualified man.

No matter what the ward it was.

>> Yeah.

Council Member.

>> I was just going to say I

agree with the earlier comments. And

like if there's someone in

ward three that is more

uh qualified, and that's who I choose as

the ward five representative,

I would kind of think I mean, that's

still ward five picking, even though

they don't.

>> Okay. Any other questions, comments?

>> [snorts]

>> Do you prefer a time limit as suggested

for trying to get a representative from

a particular ward and then opening it up

for other ward representation?

>> Council Member.

>> Say we we started out with 90, and

someone said six months, and then I

said, "Well, 120 days if 90 is too

close." It doesn't matter me, but we

I don't feel we should leave a seat

vacant on something like this.

>> Yeah, if if a really you know, important

issue to council's going forward to the

committee,

you know, you don't want to risk not

getting the full input, I think, but

>> I thought it was like no more than 60

days. You know, we should be able to

find somebody

>> If there's a qualified applicant from

>> to at least say yes or no, and if not,

>> Yeah.

>> Council Member.

>> I I was going to go with I was going to

say 30 days because like as the seat's

expiring, you you'll put out an

announcement like, "Hey, this person

doesn't want again." or "Hey, there's

going to be a seat open. Get your

applications in." And then that's still

30 days to submit an application. And I

imagine if someone is submitting an

application, even if they're not

appointed within that 30 days, well, you

know, the application's working through.

You're not just going to jump the gun

and

cut them off when they have an

application in. So, I I I think that's

fair to basically say, "Hey, you have 30

days to to get your application in." And

then if there are no applications or if

there's no qualified applications, then,

you know, that's when the Mayor can

discuss with that rep about getting

someone else to fill the seat

temporarily or for a full term, however

that works.

>> Sounds fair.

>> Well, this not be like other boards

where the applications are open and kept

for 2 years.

So,

yeah, I I think 30 days is

even though I expect Although, adding

the business owners did make me think of

somebody who might be willing to do a

ward, too.

Yeah.

Um someone owns a business there, but

doesn't live in the ward, so.

>> Yeah.

Ward 7 has a lot of houses, but not

many businesses, actually. So,

uh but it has the universities, so there

should be somebody around.

But can someone there

>> Um

I also don't want to lose the plot on

that it was supposed to be a diverse

group of people, so

even if there are houses, they might

have home occupations.

Home occupations is something we are

adding to many of the developments we

keep approving, so I would like to have

somebody

if they're wanting to weigh in on some

of the things, especially when we talk

about sales tax rebates or anything

else.

>> I had that in my notes from the last

meeting, but I was thinking a small a

home occupation is probably going to

fall under small business.

>> Okay.

>> Uh so,

uh if you think we need more specific

language, I can add that, but I

>> Uh I was thinking more of the messaging

and what we're looking for these

positions. Uh

you know, I respect that there can be a

spectrum

of qualified opinions.

>> I think diversity comes especially on

this particular thing. It comes

especially, right? What is your

specialty? Well, I don't need three

lawyers in the same corporate

experience. No, I need a finance guy, I

need an analyst, I need, you know,

that's your diversity.

The

as far as number of days,

to me 30 days a little tight. So, I like

to get discussion with the person I'm

going to recommend. So, there might be

two or three. I think for me personally

30 days is a little tight. I like to see

60 days, but I I knew 30, but

beating the bushes sometimes, we're just

talking this one economic development,

right? We're not talking talking others.

Okay. I can live with 30, but it's still

tight to sit down with two or three

people.

>> going to suggest maybe 45 because maybe

you find someone within 30, but then

we've got to get it on an agenda.

So, that would give us a little bit of

time if we have December with one

meeting.

>> We still have

leeway regardless. It's

can't find anybody within that amount of

time for the award winning

>> It's not mandatory.

>> But yeah, I think 45

Any other thoughts on this?

Okay.

>> Okay.

I will work on drafting it and the plan

we talked about earlier in the month was

to have it on your agenda. I think

November 10th is the first two second

two say first meeting and then second

reading the second meeting week

Thanksgiving. That way it'll be in

effect by the end of [clears throat] the

year

get going with what we want them to do.

>> Is anybody opposed to staff doing

>> I guess this is more like a

Sorry, this is more like a

administrative question, but even if we

approve it, obviously it takes 30 days

to go into effect, but could we still

open up the applications right away at

least to get that process started or

>> Yeah, okay. That's fine. Okay.

>> So, did we settle on 11?

Option two? [snorts]

Okay.

>> [laughter]

>> I was sitting here thinking, "Do I want

to go back to my desk? Okay, which one?"

>> All right.

>> Okay, great.

>> Okay.

>> Thank you.

>> Thank you. All right, item two is

consideration of adjourning into an

executive session as authorized by

Oklahoma statutes to discuss potential

settlement of pending tort claims

arising from claims filed by two claimants.

I will entertain a motion to adjourn out

of the special meeting and convene into

an executive session.

>> Motion to adjourn.

>> Second.

>> All those in favor, say I.

>> I.

>> All those opposed?