[00:00:01]
OKAY.GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY, AND WELCOME TO THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
UH, TODAY IS TUESDAY, JULY 21ST, 2026.
TIME IS 6:00 PM SO WE'LL START AND WE'LL CALL FOR OUR QUORUM, PLEASE.
WE HAVE, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER MILLER IS ABSENT.
UH, COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON PRESENT.
AND NOW WE'LL GO TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, I MEAN NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS OUR INVOCATION.
I'D LIKE TO INVITE THE ILLUSTRIOUS PASTOR STEVE LITTLEFIELD FROM SIMONTON COMMUNITY CHURCH.
DID YOU LIKE THAT INTRODUCTION? TALL? UH, HE'S ALSO TALL.
IF YOU'D ALL PLEASE RISE AFTERWARDS, PLEASE REMAIN STANDING FOR THE PLEDGES OF ALLEGIANCE TOO.
FATHER, WE THANK YOU FOR THIS EVENING AND THE TIME TOGETHER.
WE THANK YOU THAT YOU ALLOW US TO LIVE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, A GREAT COUNTRY.
WE THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT THIS LAND PROVIDES, AND WE THANK YOU FOR THOSE WHO CAME BEFORE US PROVIDING THE WAY.
FATHER, WE LIFT UP OUR MILITARY TONIGHT.
WE PRAY FOR OUR MEN AND WOMEN DEPLOYED ALL OVER THE WORLD DEFENDING OUR FREEDOMS. WE PRAY THAT YOU WOULD PROTECT THEM AND THAT YOU GUIDE THEM.
WE PRAY ALSO THAT YOU'D GIVE PEACE TO THEIR FAMILIES WHILE THEY'RE GONE.
FATHER, WE ALSO THANK YOU FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF LIVING IN SHORE, TEXAS.
IT IS A SPECIAL PLACE, AND WE THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO LIVE HERE AND CREATING THIS PLACE.
UH, WE THANK YOU FOR THOSE THAT SERVE IN THIS COMMUNITY IN SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS.
FATHER, I THANK YOU FOR OUR MAYOR AND OUR CITY COUNCIL AND THE WAY THAT THEY SERVE THIS COMMUNITY.
I PRAY THAT YOU WOULD GIVE THEM WISDOM AND DISCERNMENT TONIGHT AS THEY CONSIDER ALL THESE DIFFERENT MATTERS ON THE AGENDA.
AND I PRAY THAT YOU WOULD GUIDE THEM.
FATHER, WE ALSO LIFT UP THOSE IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT ARE HURTING IN SOME WAY TONIGHT, MAYBE PHYSICALLY, MAYBE EMOTIONALLY, MAYBE EVEN SPIRITUALLY.
WE PRAY THAT YOU WOULD MEET THEM RIGHT WHERE THEY ARE, AND HELP EACH OF US TO KNOW HOW TO SEE A NEED AND MEET IT AND SURROUND THEM WITH LOVE AND SUPPORT AS WE CAN.
FATHER, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR BEING OUR PROVIDER, AND IN EVERY WAY, AGAIN, WE COMMIT THIS MEETING TO YOU.
IT'S IN JESUS' NAME THAT WE PRAY.
UH, IF YOU ALL PLEASE, UH, FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE US FLAG, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
I PLEDGE ALLE TO BE TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER, UNDER GOD, ONE AN INDIVISIBLE.
ALL RIGHT, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO CITIZEN'S COMMENTS, UM, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO MAKE A SMALL, A BRIEF, UH, BEFORE WE BEGIN TONIGHT'S MEETING IN EARNEST.
I'D LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO ADDRESS, UH, MANY OF THE RESIDENTS, UH, WHO ARE HERE AND THOSE THAT ARE WATCHING AT HOME, PLEASE.
UM, FIRST, I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING ENGAGED AND INFORM COMMUNITY.
AND INVOLVE COMMUNITY IS ONE OF, UH, CHER'S GREATEST STRENGTH, TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND PUBLIC TRUST ARE NOT JUST WORDS, BUT THESE ARE PRINCIPLES THAT GUIDE HOW WE SERVE THE CITY.
I WANNA RECOGNIZE THE MEMBERS OF OUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
THESE VOLUNTEERS DEDICATE COUNTLESS HOURS TO REVIEWING COMPLEX APPLICATIONS AND PROVIDING, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND SINCERELY, I I DO APPRECIATE AND WE APPRECIATE THEIR SERVICE HERE ON THE DAYS TONIGHT.
AS ALWAYS, THE CITY COUNCIL HAS AN IMPORTANT RESPONSIBILITY.
WE WILL LISTEN TO THE STAFF PRESENTATION, HEAR THE LEGAL COUNSEL, RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT, AND ASK QUESTIONS AND CAREFULLY CONSIDER ALL THE INFORMATION BEFORE US.
EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER HAS BOTH THE RIGHT AND THE RESPONSIBILITY TO SEEK CLARIFICATION AND ENSURE THAT WE HAVE THE INFORMATION NECESSARY TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS.
OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS NOT TO RUSH THE DECISION, NOR IS IT TO PRE-JUDGE ONE.
OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO FOLLOW THE LAW, RESPECT THE PROCESS, AND MAKE THE DECISION THAT WE BELIEVE IS IN THE BEST INTEREST FOR THE CITY OF SHORE.
I ASK EVERYONE THIS EVENING TO BE RESPECTFUL TO ONE ANOTHER.
WE MAY NOT ALL AGREE, BUT WE ALL CARE DEEPLY ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY.
THAT SHARED COMMITMENT IS WHAT MAKES SHORE A SPECIAL PLACE.
I'VE READ MANY COMMENTS SURROUNDING, UH, THE INOVA APARTMENTS AND APARTMENTS IN GENERAL.
AND WHILE I RESPECT THAT, PEOPLE CAN DISAGREE, WE OWE ONE ANOTHER SOMETHING THAT IS BECOMING FAR TOO RARE.
[00:05:01]
AND RESPECT.DISAGREEING WITH DEVELOPMENT IS FAIR.
SPREADING FEAR BASED ON STEREOTYPES ABOUT PEOPLE WHO MAY LIVE.
THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO TEACH OUR CHILDREN PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, CARE FOR OUR ELDERLY, SERVE OUR MEALS, STOCK OUR GROCERY SHELVES, AND KEEP OUR BUSINESSES RUNNING.
ALL DESERVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE IN A COMMUNITY.
I'VE ALSO SEEN CLAIMS THAT THIS PROJECT WILL AUTOMATICALLY BREED CRIME, BRING CRIME, AND DESTROY PROPERTY VALUES.
THOSE ARE STATEMENTS OF OPINION, NOT FACT.
CRIME IS THE RESULT OF IN INDIVIDUALS CHOOSING TO COMMIT CRIMES, NOT THE INCOME LEVEL OF THEIR NEIGHBORS.
I AM CONFIDENT THAT THE SRE POLICE DEPARTMENT WILL CONTINUE TO PROTECT THIS CITY WITH THE SAME PROFESSIONALISM, PROACTIVE POLICING AND UNWAVERING COMMITMENT THAT HAS MADE SRE ONE OF THE SAFEST COMMUNITIES IN TEXAS.
AND TO THOSE WHO POSTED COMMENTS ON SOCIAL MEDIA ROOTED IN RACISM, PREJUDICE, OR HATE, I AM EMBARRASSED.
I ASK YOU TO REMEMBER THAT EVERY PERSON IS SOMEONE'S SON OR DAUGHTER, SOMEONE'S HUSBAND OR WIFE.
SOMEONE'S PARENTS, SOMEONE'S FAMILY.
THINK OF THE KIDS, MAYBE YOUR KIDS WHO, WHO WILL READ THESE COMMENTS AND THINK IT'S OKAY TO HATE.
WE CAN DEBATE POLICIES PASSIONATELY WITHOUT ATTACKING THE DIGNITY OF PEOPLE AND CALLING THEM NAMES.
I BELIEVE THIS IS NOT WHO OR WHAT FULCHER IS.
THE FULCHER I KNOW IS A COMMUNITY BUILT ON FAITH, KINDNESS, HARD WORK, AND NEIGHBORS HELPING NEIGHBORS.
WE DON'T JUDGE PEOPLE BY THE SIZE OF THEIR PAYCHECK OR THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN OR WHERE THEY COME FROM.
WE JUDGE PEOPLE BY THE CHARACTER THEY HAVE, THE INTEGRITY THEY CARRY AND HOW THEY TREAT OTHERS.
AND FINALLY, TO THE FACEBOOK ADMINISTRATORS OUT THERE, THERE'S AN OLD LEADERSHIP PRINCIPLE THAT SAYS WHAT YOU PERMIT, YOU PROMOTE, LET THAT SINK IN WHAT YOU PERMIT ON YOUR PAGE, YOU ARE PROMOTING IT AS YOUR MAYOR.
I WILL NEVER PERMIT, PROMOTE, OR REMAIN SILENT IN THE FACE OF RACISM, HATRED, OR THE DEHUMANIZATION OF OTHERS.
WE CAN HAVE SPIRITED DISCUSSIONS AND BOY DO WE HAVE 'EM ABOUT GROWTH, ABOUT HOUSING AND THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY.
BUT WE MUST DO SO WITH RESPECT AND DECENCY.
OUR CHILDREN WILL BE PROUD TO INHERIT A CITY WHERE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ARE WELCOME.
AND HATRED IS NOT BECAUSE THIS IS FULL.
AND TOGETHER, LET'S MAKE SURE OUR WORDS AND OUR ACTIONS REFLECT THE VERY BEST OF WHO WE ARE.
AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR KIND ATTENTION.
ALRIGHT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM SIX.
AND THAT IS CITIZENS' COMMENTS.
[CITIZEN COMMENTS]
AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO SPEAK TO COUNCIL RELATING ON AGENDA AND NON AGENDA ITEMS. AND SPEAKERS ARE ADVISED THAT COMMENTS CANNOT BE RECEIVED ON MATTERS, WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF A PUBLIC HEARING.ONCE THE HEARING'S BEEN CLOSED, SPEAKERS ARE REQUIRED TO REGISTER IN ADVANCE AND THEY MUST LIMIT THEIR COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF PAGES HERE.
AND THE FIRST UP IS MR. CLIFFORD, WOULD YOU LIKE TO STEP UP TO THE, GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS PLEASE, SIR.
UH, BILL CLIFFORD, 8 6 4 2 FULCHER RUN TRACE.
THANK YOU MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THE PROPOSED BELMONT ESTATES RELA IN THE FULL SURE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
THIS PROPOSED REPL WAS SUBMITTED TO PLANNING AND ZONING EARLIER THIS MONTH WITHOUT GRADING CONTOUR LINES, WHICH RESULTED IN THE REPL BEING REJECTED BY PLANNING AND ZONING.
THESE CONTOUR LINES HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE PLANS THAT ARE SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL TO, UH, CITY COUNCIL.
WET BOTTOM DETENTION PONDS AND LAKES ARE, ARE AS WATER MANAGEMENT FEATURES ARE INCLUDED IN COMMON AREAS IN MANY AND MOST ALL SHORE SUBDIVISIONS AND IN ALL THE RE SUBDIVISIONS I'M AWARE OF ARE PLATTED AS DETENTION RESERVES, UM, WITH THE OWNERSHIP MAINTENANCE SAFETY LIABILITIES HELD EITHER BY THE SUBDIVISION HOA OR MUD.
AND THIS IS HOW THE ORIGINAL BELMONT ESTATES,
[00:10:02]
UH, WAS PLATTED THE PROPOSED BELMONT ESTATES REPL RETAINS THE ORIGINALLY PLATTED DETENTION RESERVES AND ADDS NEW DETENTION POND SLASH DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AT THE BACK OF MANY LOTS WITH WHICH WILL BE WET BOTTOM DETENTION PONDS SHARED ACROSS UP TO 50% OF THE LIGHT AREA ON WHAT ULTIMATELY WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 70% OF THE INDIVIDUAL TWO ACRE LOTS MAKING LARGE PORTIONS OF THESE LOTS UNUSABLE FOR THE HOMEOWNER.LARGE DETENTION PONDS AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT PLAT MODEL THAN FROM THE DETENTION POND RESERVE MODEL THAT P AND Z HAS SEEN ON ALL THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT PLATS.
AND IT'S CAUSED SOME CONFUSION ON HOW THE CDO APPLIES TO THIS ALTERNATE DEVELOPMENT MODEL.
WHILE THESE LARGE EASEMENTS IN THEIR ASSOCIATED DETENTION PONDS ARE NOT WHAT I THINK THE CITIZENS OF FULCHER THOUGHT DEVELOPMENT OF MINIMUM TWO ACRE LOTS WOULD MEAN IN THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, THE USE OF PROPERTY EASEMENTS FOR MITIGATION PONDS APPEARS TO COMPLY WITH AC APPLICABLE STATE LAWS.
AND THE REVISED DRAINAGE PLAN FOR BELMONT ESTATES HAS BEEN APPROVED BY FORT BEND COUNTY.
AND THE CITY COUNCIL WILL THUS PROBABLY BE REQUIRED TO APPROVE THIS REPL.
ULTIMATELY, POTENTIAL HOME BUYERS WILL HAVE TO DECIDE IF HAVING A SMALLER, USABLE LOT AREA ALONG WITH THE ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAXES, ACCESS ISSUES, THE LIABILITIES ASSOCIATED WITH A COMMON FLOOD MITIGATION POND ON THEIR PROPERTY, AND THE STRONG POTENTIAL FOR ALLIGATORS IN THEIR BACKYARD OR RISK THAT THEY WANT TO TAKE.
UM, THIS RELA APPROVAL AND PARTICULARLY SUB SUBSEQUENT RELATED PERMIT APPROVALS SHOULD INCLUDE A COMPREHENSIVE UNDERSTANDING BY THE CITY OF HOW MAINTENANCE, MAINTENANCE FUNDING ACCESS AND LIABILITY ASSOCIATED WITH THESE SHARED LOT DETENTION POND DRAINAGE EASEMENT WILL BE STRUCTURED TO ENSURE THAT THESE FLOOD MITIGATION FEATURES ARE PROPERLY MAINTAINED TO REMAIN SAFE AND FUNCTIONAL.
IN ADDITION, SINCE THE PROPOSED REPL DOES NOT FOLLOW THE INTENT, THAT WHAT I UNDERSTAND TO BE THE INTENT AND SPIRIT OF THE TWO ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, I'M ASKING CITY STAFF TO PROPOSE AND CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE MODIFICATIONS TO THE CDO TO CLARIFY THAT SHARED DETENTION POND AND LAKE EASEMENTS, OTHER SUBDIVISION RELATED STREET AND AMENITY EASEMENTS AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS DO NOT COUNT TOWARD THE MINIMUM OF TWO ACRE LOT SIZE SO THAT WE AVOID THIS SITUATION IN THE FUTURE.
NEXT UP, UH, MR. DOULA NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, JAMES DOULA.
UM, MR. MAYOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, AS A SOCIAL RESIDENT, UM, I THINK THAT CITY COU YOU, UH, CITY COUNCIL SHOULD SERIOUSLY CONSIDER POSTPONING ANY VOTE ON THIS TIME.
UM, IF IT'S AN OPTION IN REGARDS TO THE BELMONT ESTATES, UH, PLAT, UM, APPROVAL, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST TO ENSURE THAT ANY DECISION MADE IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF RE AS THE RESULT COULD BE SET, UH, RESULT COULD SET AN UNATTENDED UNINTENDED PRECEDENT.
AS A LICENSED ENGINEER IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, I'M ENTRUSTED TO PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY, PROPERTY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC AND THE PRACTICE OF MY PROFESSION.
AND I'D LIKE TO BELIEVE THAT THE CITIZENS OF CHER OF FULCHER SIMILARLY ENTRUST THOSE SAME VALUES IN THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT THEY HAVE ELECTED IN ALL CITY OFFICIALS.
I ADMITTEDLY DO NOT KNOW ALL OF THE INTIMATE DETAILS SURROUNDING THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPOSED BELLMONT ESTATE'S PROPERTY.
BUT AFTER REVIEW OF SOME OF THE GRADING PLANS AND OTHER INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN SHARED ON VARIOUS WEBSITES AND SOCIAL MEDIA OUTLETS, I DO HAVE CONCERNS REGARDING THE INCLUSION OF THE RETENTION DETENTION PONDS AS PART OF THE LOT SIZE AND THE POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS OF INCLUDING THE RETENTION DETENTION PONDS, WHICH BY DESIGN WILL SERVE MULTIPLE LOTS, BE PROPORTIONALLY INCLUDED AS EACH PART OF THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS.
FIRST OFF, UH, YOU KNOW, PRETTY MUCH GONNA BE REPEAT WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY SAID, YOU KNOW, THE CDO THAT WENT INTO EFFECT IN 2020 STATES, THAT THE LOT SIZES FOR THE RESIDENTIAL ESTATES SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF TWO ACRES.
ANY REASONABLE PERSON THAT READS THE ORDINANCE WOULD COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE INTENT IS FOR THE LOTS TO BE TWO ACRES OF UNINTERRUPTED DEVELOPABLE LAND TO PERFORM AS DESIGN.
NO FURTHER DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE DETENTION RETENTION POND AREAS, EFFECTIVELY CREATING ACTUAL LOT SIZES THAT ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN THE INTENDED TWO ACRES.
YOU KNOW, AND I'D LIKE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, IF WE LOOK HARD ENOUGH, YOU KNOW, WE CAN FIND LOOPHOLES IN ANYTHING, RIGHT? DON'T LET THIS BE A LOOPHOLE.
YOU KNOW, ANOTHER CONCERN THAT I HAVE, I MEAN, TAKE AWAY THE WHOLE TWO ACRE SITUATION, IS JUST, YOU KNOW, INCLUSION OF DETENTION AND RETENTION PONDS AS PART OF LOTS IS THE LIABILITY
[00:15:01]
THAT WILL BE BURDENED ON THE POTENTIAL FUTURE BUYERS OR RESIDENTS FOR THE CITY OF FULD THAT WOULD BE OUT THERE.YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT PROPERTY INSURANCE FOR PROPERTIES.
YOU KNOW, THE INCLUSION OF A RETENTION DETENTION POND OF THIS DESIGN WILL CERTAINLY BE VERY COST PROHIBITIVE.
YOU KNOW, ARE WE GONNA HAVE WE GONNA HAVE RESIDENCE? I MEAN, IT MAY NOT EVEN GET PURCHASED.
YOU KNOW, ANOTHER ONE IS SAFETY.
WHAT IF SOMEBODY GETS INJURED IN A PORTION OF THE DETAINMENT RETAIN AREAS, YOU KNOW, THAT IS ON THAT PERSON'S LOT.
THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PUT FENCING AROUND THAT AND BE ABLE TO CONTROL THAT.
WHAT HAPPENS THEN? ARE YOU GONNA TELL SOMEBODY, ARE WE GONNA SAY, HEY, YOU'RE GONNA BE LIABLE FOR THAT PORTION OF A DETENTION, WHICH IS SHARED AMONGST MANY PROPERTIES.
YOU'RE GONNA BE LIABLE POTENTIALLY FOR THE SAFETY AND WELLBEING OF OTHER PEOPLE.
SO THOSE ARE THE BIG, YOU KNOW, IN INTEREST OF TIME, I HAVE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS I COULD PROBABLY SAY ON IT, BUT THOSE ARE THE TWO MAIN, TWO MAIN POINTS I WANTED TO MAKE TONIGHT.
MAKE SURE I DON'T MISS ANYONE.
CAN YOU TALK WARD TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE? FOUR OH ONE NINE LEAH LANE HERE TO TALK ABOUT BELMONT.
I KNOW WE'VE HAD MANY DISCUSSIONS ON IT, THEIR LATEST PLAN, AND I BROUGHT YOU SOME LARGER PLANS BECAUSE IF YOU'RE LIKE ME, I CAN'T LOOK AT THAT TINY PRINT.
SO WHAT THEY PROPOSED HERE IS PHASE ONE, IT'S 25 LOTS, 18 OF THOSE LOTS, WE'LL HAVE MAJOR DETENTION PONDS ON THEM.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE BIG DRAWINGS, SOME OF THEM PROBABLY WILL NOT EVEN BE AN ACRE.
THE TOTAL THAT THEY'VE TURNED INTO FORT BEND COUNTY IN THE DRAINAGE PLAN, WHICH LET'S MAKE SOMETHING CLEAR.
AND I THINK MR. DOWDA HAS THAT LETTER THAT FORT BEND COUNTY GAVE US.
FORT BEND COUNTY DOES NOT APPROVE WHAT IS IN THE JURISDICTION OF FULCHER.
AND THEY SAY THAT IN BLACK AND WHITE, THEY ONLY APPROVE THE IMPACTS TO THEIR FLU.
SO LET'S KIND OF GO WITH THIS IS APPROVED, IT'S NOT APPROVED BY FORT BEND.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, FORT BEND WOULD BE HESITANT TO APPROVE IT.
THEY ALLOW WHAT THEY CALL SHEET DRAINAGE, AS I WAS TOLD, WHICH IS VERY SLIGHT CONTOURS THAT WILL LEAD WATER TO A DIFFERENT PATH.
THEY DON'T HAVE ANY OF THESE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
THEIR TOTAL PHASES THAT THEY'VE TURNED IN FORT BEND COUNTY, 74 LOTS, 52 WILL HAVE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS, 70%.
THE LOTS ARE GOING TO BE PERMANENTLY BURDENED BY EASEMENTS AND DETENTION.
THERE'S A STRONG BASIS FOR REQUIRING DRAINAGE IN COMMON AREAS.
GREEN SPACES, NUMBER ONE, ATLAS 14.
WE ALL KNOW BO ARK HAS A HISTORY OF BEING VERY LOW AND PRONE TO FLOODING.
THEY'RE RAISING THE LAND, THE, THE CONTOUR OF THE LAND SIGNIFICANTLY.
THIS CREATES LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE ISSUES.
IF DETENTION IS SPREAD ACROSS PRIVATE LOTS, AGAIN, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FROM A CITY STANDPOINT, YOU SHOULD HAVE CONCERNS BECAUSE THE MAINTENANCE CANNOT BE ASSURED.
FUTURE HOMEOWNERS MAY ALTER THESE PONDS.
GUY DECIDES HE DOESN'T LIKE THE WAY IT DRAINS.
HE CONTINUALLY THROWS HIS EXTRA DIRT AND, AND GRASS CLIPPINGS IN THERE.
ENFORCEMENT IS PRACTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM IS NOT ADEQUATELY PROTECTED, WHICH SHOULD BE ONE OF YOUR MAIN REASONS TO PAUSE ON THIS.
THERE'S PUBLIC AND SAFETY CONCERNS, STANDING WATER, YOU KNOW, MOSQUITOES, ALL KINDS OF THINGS BY APPROVING THE REVISED PLAT.
WE'RE JUST HELPING A DEVELOPER PUT HIS PROFITS OVER THE SAFETY AND WELFARE OF RESIDENTS.
HE CERTAINLY CAN TAKE OUT SOME OF THE EXTRA HOMES AND PUT RETENTION ON THAT.
NOW, AS FAR AS APPROVING HIS PLA TONIGHT, I'M NOT SURE IT REALLY CAN BECAUSE UNDER OUR CDO IT HAS TO SPECIFY WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE.
THIS PLAN DOES NOT DO THAT, IS IT'S NOT IN THE NOTES AS REQUIRED.
IT BASICALLY HAS THE RESERVES, WHICH DO NOT INCLUDE THESE PONDS.
IT'S JUST THE BIG PONDS THAT WERE APPROVED IN THE FIRST, AND THOSE ARE THE OPEN COMMON AREA PONDS.
IT SAYS THOSE ARE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY RE MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NUMBER FOUR.
IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT THESE PONDS THAT ARE ON THE PRIVATE LAND.
WHO'S GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE.
THAT IS A REQUIREMENT OF THE CDO.
ANOTHER THING THAT'S CONCERNING THE CDO REQUIRES PRINCIPAL DIMENSIONS OF THE VARIABLE WIDTH.
WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ALL THE DIMENSIONS VARIABLE.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THANK YOU.
OKAY, UM, LOOKS LIKE NEXT I HAVE, UH, BRIAN PATTERSON.
[00:20:03]
GOOD EVENING.PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.
YES, MY NAME IS BRIAN PATTERSON.
I LIVE AT 7 4 1 9 PODDAR CLAIM.
SO I, I'M JUST, UH, THE FIRST THREE SPEAKERS HAVE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB OF POINTING OUT ALL THE DETAILS, UH, OF CONCERNS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD HAVE.
I GUESS I WOULD JUST STRONGLY REINFORCE THE SUPPORT OF WHAT THEY HAVE SAID.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE THIS OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA TONIGHT AND, UH, SEND IT BACK FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION.
I THINK THIS REALLY DOES, UH, FLY IN THE FACE OF THE INTENT OF WHAT A TWO ACRE LOT IS MEANT TO BE IN AN ESTATE ENVIRONMENT.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A VERY, THE AREA ALONG BO ARC, THERE IS A VERY SPECIAL AND A REALLY UNIQUE KIND OF PLACE HERE IN SHORE.
ONE OF THE FEW THAT WE STILL HAVE THAT KINDA LAND AND THAT DEVELOPMENT.
AND IT HAS BEEN SET ASIDE AS TWO ACRE MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT.
AND THIS REALLY CLEARLY DOES NOT MEET THAT INTENT.
FULL STOP AND THAT BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
I LIVE AT 42 10 LEE LANE I HAVE WITH MY WIFE FOR THE LAST 31 YEARS.
I'D LIKE TO FIRST START THANKING THE, UH, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE FOR ALL THEIR TIME AND THE COMMITMENT TO THE RESIDENTS OF RE I ALSO WANT TO THANK KATHY WARD FOR PROVIDING THE DOCUMENTS FROM THE COUNTY TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING THAT WAS HELD ON JULY 2ND.
YOU KNOW, I WATCHED THE VIDEO OF THE, THE MEETING ON JULY 2ND, AND THE WORD DETENTION PONDS CAME UP NUMEROUS TIMES.
SO I LOOKED UP THE DEFINITION OF A DETENTION POND.
THE DEFINITION ON A DEF UH, DETENTION POND IS A SLOWLY, IT'S A POND THAT SLOWLY RELEASES, COLLECTED WATER INTO CULVERTS AND OTHER MEANS TO DRAIN.
SO I LOOKED UP THE WORD RETENTION POND, AND IT'S A DIFFERENT DEFINITION.
IT'S A PERMANENT POOL OF WATER THAT DOES NOT DRAIN MY PROPERTY BACKS UP TO THE BELMONTS ON LEE.
SO WHEN THESE RETENTION PONDS GET TO THEIR MAXIMUM MAXIMUM CAPACITY, WHEN THEY REACH THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY, WHERE'S THAT WATER GONNA GO? SAY IF WE GET A WHERE HURRICANE OR ANOTHER TROPICAL STORM, NOW I'VE ALREADY GOT PROBLEMS IN THE FRONT DITCH WITH IT NOT DRAINING PROPERLY.
SO THAT'S ABOUT ALL I GOT TO SAY.
I I RECOMMEND ALL THESE OTHER PEOPLE.
I APPRECIATE JOHN DOELL FOR SPEAKING UP.
UH, ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS IF THESE PLANS HAVEN'T BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, HOW COME THE DIRT WORK IS STILL BEING DONE AS, AS AS TODAY THEY'RE MOVING DIRT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. PROPHET.
UH, MR. DOWDALL, I DIDN'T SKIP YOU ON PURPOSE.
I KNOW YOU WERE AT THE TOP THREE, BUT I DID OVERLOOK IT.
SO, SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME? YEAH.
YOU SIGNED IN NUMBER THREE AND I ACCIDENT BEFORE I GET STARTED, WHEN THEY, UH, MENTIONED THE DRAINAGE PLAN, I GAVE EACH YOU ONE OF THESE.
YEAH, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IT, IT TELLS YOU EXACTLY WHAT FORT BEND DOES AS FAR AS JUST GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS REAL QUICK.
I KNOW EVERYBODY KNOWS YOU, BUT PLEASE.
THIS IS CONCERNING BELMONT STATES.
NOT ONLY WAS THE DENIAL, UH, CONCERNED WITH CONTOURS, BUT THE MOTION WAS ALSO MADE THAT THE SPIRIT AND THE INTENT OF THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL, UH, WAS NOT ADHERED TO.
AND THAT'S ANOTHER REASON WHY IT WAS DENIED FOR SURE.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A LOOPHOLE IN OUR ESTATE RESIDENTIAL ORDINANCE.
IT DOES NOT SAY IT HAS TO BE USABLE LAND.
BELMONT ESTATES HAD A DRAINAGE PLAN APPROVED BACK IN 2023.
WHAT CHANGED? PROFITABILITY DEVELOPERS ONLY DO CHANGES IF IT WILL BE BENEFICIAL TO THEM.
SO THEY DO NOT LOSE ANY HOME SITES, OTHERWISE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BUILD DETENTION SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THE PROPERTY AND HAVE A LOSS OF HOME SITES.
THEY DID NOT DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE INTENT.
WHAT'S INTENT ON THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL ORDINANCE? I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, IT'S NOT.
IT'S NEVER INTENDED TO USE DETENTION PONDS TO BE, TO FULFILL THE REQUIREMENT OF TWO ACRE MINIMUM.
LOTS PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT SAFETY ISSUES.
IF THESE ARE NOT MAINTAINED IN CONSTRUCTED PROPERLY, YOU COULD HAVE ACCIDENTAL DROWNINGS.
YOU CAN HAVE ALLIGATORS, EROSION, FLOODING, FOUNDATION ISSUES, LOSS OF USABLE LAND.
TRUST ME, I KNOW A LOT ABOUT THESE ISSUES.
[00:25:01]
WHO'S RESPONSIBLE? PROPERTY OWNER.HOA, THE MUD, THE ENGINEER, THE DEVELOPER.
WELL, THE CITY'S NOT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS HAVE GOVERNMENT IMMUNITY.
IF YOU HAVE A SOMEONE THAT'S COMING DOWN BO ARK AND THEY SAY, OH, THIS IS A GREAT, GREAT LITTLE STREET, I WANT A TWO ACRE LOT.
THEY GO TRY TO BA TWO ACRE LOT BELMONT STATE.
THEY SAY, SORRY, YOU CAN BUY IT, BUT ONE ACRE IS GONNA BE UNUSABLE, ONE'S USABLE.
THEY GO, YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME.
THE GOOD NEWS IS YOU GET TO PAY PROPERTY TAXES ON BOTH ACRES.
UM, THIS INTERPRETATION BY THE DEVELOPER OF THE LANGUAGE IN THIS ORDINANCE, YET AGAIN SHOWS HOW ALL THEY DO IS CARE ABOUT ITS PROFITS.
WE ALL KNOW THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE.
THE ABSENCE OF PROHIBITIONS IN THE ORDINANCE DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN A DEVELOPER IS ENTITLED TO COUNT UNUSABLE ATTENTION AREAS TOWARDS THE TWO ACRE MINIMUM.
THE INTENT OF THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL ORDINANCE IS CITY COUNCILS, NOT CITY ADMINISTRATIONS.
THEIR DECISION ON WHAT CONSTITUTES A COMPLIANT TWO ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT, IT IS HIGHLY RELEVANT, RELEVANT AND PROVIDES A STRONG BASIS TO DENY THIS AMENDMENT.
CITY COUNCIL SHOULD STAND BEHIND THE INTENT, WHICH IS TWO ACRE MINIMUM, LOT SIZE PRESERVING OPEN SPACE PRIVACY AND LOAD DENSITY, USABLE LOTS.
IF Y'ALL APPROVE THIS AMENDMENT WELL, THESE ORDINANCES ARE MEANINGLESS.
BO ARK HAS, HAS ORDINANCES, NOT HOAS.
IF YOU APPROVE THIS, IT'LL BE THE THIRD TIME.
CITY COUNCIL WAS CITED WITH DEVELOPERS CONCERNING THE BOAT ARK AREA.
AND THIS WILL SET A PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE DEVELOPERS IF APPROVED.
YOU MIGHT AS WELL LOOK FOR BELMONT STATES TO BE RIGHT BACK HERE LOOKING FOR THE SAME THING ON THE REST OF YOUR PROPERTY.
HOPEFULLY THE CITY WILL HAVE AN AIRTIGHT WORDING FOR THIS, UH, ORDINANCE VERY SOON AIRTIGHT, I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO UPHOLD THE INTENT OF THE, OF THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL ORDINANCE AND DENY THIS AMENDMENT.
AS USUAL, I, SOME PEOPLE MAY HAVE ARRIVED LATE, DID SOMEBODY NOT BE ABLE TO SIGN IN THAT WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING? OKAY.
WOULD YOU PLEASE COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE? HI.
I LIVE AT 2 8 9 0 2 WALKER LANE.
IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT IS, THAT'S THE END ON THE LEFT.
SO I HAVE A LOT OF DEVELOPER ISSUES RIGHT NOW.
UM, OUR LIVES ARE BEING CHANGED.
UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE ON OUR CITY COUNCIL.
UM, THIS WAS AN INCOMPLETE SUBMITTAL.
I'M NOT SURE WHY THIS IS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT.
UM, I'M GONNA TRY TO GET THROUGH THIS QUICKLY.
UM, I'M NOT GONNA REMAKE THE POINTS ABOUT THE TWO ACRE LOTS.
I'M NOT GONNA BORE EVERYBODY WITH THAT.
BUT ONE THING I WANNA SAY IS, UM, YOU GOT SMALL CHILDREN IN DETENTION PONDS, AND THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL AREA, SO EVERY SINGLE HOME SITE'S GONNA HAVE A POTENTIAL DROWNING, UM, AS WE SAID, ALLIGATORS, MOSQUITOES, UM, WHO'S GONNA MAKE SURE THESE PONDS ARE BEING BUILT CORRECTLY? WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO BE BUILT? ARE THEY GOING TO BE BUILT BY THE DEVELOPER OR THE HOMEOWNER? UM, WHO'S GOING TO INSPECT THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE RIGHT AND WHOSE TAX DOLLARS ARE GONNA PAY FOR THOSE INSPECTIONS? I'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT.
THESE PONDS ARE ON A HOME SITE AND EVERYBODY WANTS THEIR HOMES TO LOOK REALLY NICE, RIGHT? ESPECIALLY IN, UM, OFF OF BOAT ARK AND IN FULCHER IN PARTICULAR.
SO THIS IS AN AESTHETIC ISSUE.
THESE PONDS ARE GONNA, PEOPLE ARE GONNA WANT FISH IN 'EM, MAYBE SOME FOUNTAINS, DOCKS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO THEY'RE GONNA WANT THEM TO BE PONDS AND THEY'RE GONNA WANT THEM TO HAVE WATER IN THEM.
AND IF THERE'S WATER IN THEM AND WE HAVE A BIG RAIN EVENT LIKE WE DID WITH HARVEY, WHERE'S THAT WATER GONNA GO? IT NEGATES THESE PONDS BEING PART OF A DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
IT, IT, I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND.
AND THESE DEVELOPERS ARE TRYING TO PUSH THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR DRAINAGE TO THEIR HOMEOWNERS.
I JUST DON'T SEE ANYBODY BUYING A HOME SITE THAT HAS A DETENTION POND THAT NEEDS A FENCE AROUND IT SO THAT THEIR PROPERTY CAN BE INSURABLE.
AND WHAT HAPPENS IN 1, 2, 3 YEARS WHEN THESE HOMEOWNERS BRING SUIT TO CHANGE THIS LAW, THEY DECIDE TO FILL 'EM IN AND WE'RE RIGHT BACK WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.
AND, AND THEY GET THIS ORDINANCE, THIS, THIS, UM, REQUIREMENT OVERTURNED BECAUSE IT'S A FIRST, FIRST TIME BUYER, SECOND OWNERSHIP, THIRD OWNERSHIP.
AND THEY DECIDE THAT THIS REQUIREMENT IS RIDICULOUS AND THEY HAVE IT OVERTURNED AND THEY HAVE THESE PONDS FILLED IN.
UH, AND AND ANOTHER THING IF THEY DO, ARE, ARE REQUIRED TO FENCE THEM.
HOW DOES THAT AFFECT DRAINAGE? HOW ARE WE GONNA DEAL WITH THAT? I, I JUST, UM, SAFETY CONCERNS.
UM, IT'S NOT AN EFFECTIVE DRAINAGE PLAN.
UM, THESE DEVELOPERS KEEP COMING TO US WITH EXCEPTIONS.
THEY KNEW THE RULES BEFORE THEY BOUGHT THAT ACREAGE,
[00:30:01]
AND THEY'RE GONNA KEEP ASKING FOR EXCEPTIONS.AND IF WE KEEP APPEASING THEM, UM, I THINK WE ALL KNOW IN THIS COUNTRY WHAT APPEASEMENT GETS US, RIGHT? SO, UM, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
THEY, THEY, THEY'RE PUTTING THEIR PROFITS ABOVE.
THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY.
THEY CARE ABOUT THEIR MONEY AND THEIR PROFITS.
AND, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S ABOUT ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL YOUR COMMENTS.
AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM.
AND THAT'S SECTION NUMBER SEVEN WITH OUR CITY
[ CITY MANAGER]
MANAGER ON BRIEFINGS AND UPDATES.SO AS IS CUSTOMER EACH MONTH, QUICK, UH, PERSONAL UPDATE PLEASE TO ANNOUNCE THE FOLLOWING PROMOTIONS.
UH, WE'VE PROMOTED DOMINIC MOLINA TO THE LEVEL OF WATER AND WASTEWATER OPERATOR, UH, RI FIGUEROA FIGUEROA TO GRANTS AND PLANNING SPECIALIST.
AND LASTLY, THE PROMOTION OF ISABELLA TROIANO FROM AN INTERN ROLE TO OUR HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT.
SO GLAD TO BE ABLE TO SEE THAT TRANSITION FOR HER.
I DON'T THINK ANY OF THEM ARE HERE, BUT, UH, NO, THEY'RE OVERWHELMED.
IF NOT, I WAS GONNA GIVE THEM A SHOUT OUT.
BUT, UH, AND WE'RE ALSO PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE A NEW HIRE.
LAUREN BURTON, WHO IF YOU VISITED CITY HALL DURING THE WEEK, YOU'LL SEE SHE'S OUR NEWEST CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE.
AND THEN LASTLY, UH, DEPARTURES.
SO ANNOUNCING THE DEPARTURE OF LEO ALAMAN AS A STREETS AND RIGHT OF WAY, TECHNICIAN LINDSEY MILLER FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND NAOMI GENOVA AS A PART-TIME DIGITAL MEDIA.
AND JOSHUA SOTO HAS LEFT HIS ROLE OF WATER AND WASTEWATER OPERATOR, WHICH WAS OF COURSE ALREADY FILLED.
UM, AND THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE PERSONNEL UPDATES.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THOSE? ANYBODY? NOPE.
SO OF COURSE, EVERY QUARTER, UH, SPARK SERVICE, PROFESSIONALISM, ACCOUNTABILITY, RESILIENCY, AND KNOWLEDGE.
AND, UH, AND PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THAT THE WINNER OF THAT WAS GORAN VIVI, WHO IS OUR CIVIL INSPECTOR.
GORAN WAS NOMINATED BY HIS FELLOW COWORKERS FOR THIS AND ULTIMATELY SELECTED, UH, GORAN.
VIDOVICH, AS I MENTIONED, IS OUR CIVIL INSPECTOR.
HE INSPECTS ALL OF OUR CIVIL WORK INFRASTRUCTURE WORK, DRAINAGE, UNDERGROUND STREETS, WATER, WASTEWATER LINES, ET CETERA.
UH, HE'S BEEN, HE'S BEEN EVEN GIVEN SHOUT OUTS BY SOME OF OUR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AS WELL.
UH, HE'S RELENTLESS WHEN IT COMES TO ENSURING CONTRACTORS ARE PERFORMING WORK IN OUR CITY.
THAT IS ALWAYS UP TO STANDARDS AND SPECS.
SO AGAIN, PLEASE TO ANNOUNCE THAT GORE AND JUST THE WINNER OF THAT.
IS, IS HE HERE? I DON'T BELIEVE GORE IS GO AND OFTEN WILL HAVE TO WAKE UP AT TWO OR THREE IN THE MORNING SOMETIMES FOR WORK.
UNACCEPT, HE'S PROBABLY RESTING RIGHT NOW.
ALRIGHT, WELL CONGRATULATIONS IF YOU'RE WATCHING AT HOME.
ANYTHING ELSE MR. GOODLAND? NO, THAT IS IT.
ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS COUNSEL? NO.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM EIGHT AND THAT'S A PUBLIC HEARING.
[PUBLIC HEARING - A]
UH, NOTICES OF GIVING NOTICES HEREBY GIVEN TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS THAT THE CITY OF STER TEXAS PROPOSES TO APPLY FOR A TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT, UH, TPWD, LOCAL PARKS NON-URBAN OUTDOOR GRANT.THIS GRANT, IF AWARDED, WOULD GO INTO THE DEVELOPMENT OF BESSIE'S CREEK PARK AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE, BY AND BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULL 6:00 PM ON TUESDAY, TODAY, JULY 21ST, 2026 AT THIS COMPLEX FOR ALL INTERESTED PERSONS AND ABOVE IN THE ABOVE PROPOSED GRANT APPLICATIONS AT SAID TIME AND PLACE IF YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAR AND BE HEARD.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE NOTICE, PLEASE CONTACT KELLY STON RECREATION AND EVENTS COORDINATOR AT 2 8 1 3 4 6 17 96, EXTENSION 5 0 2 0 OR YOU CAN EMAIL HER@KRATONSHORETEXAS.GOV TEXAS SPELLED OUT.
THEREFORE, I OPEN THIS HEARING AT 6 34 AT THIS TIME AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO HEAR ANY COMMENTS ON THE GRANT? WHO WOULD OPPOSE A GRANT? JUST CURIOUS.
WELL, NOW I GOTTA WAIT A WHOLE MINUTE.
UM, ALRIGHT, IF I HAVE NOBODY COMING FORWARD, THEN WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS AT 6 34 AND 30 SECONDS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LISTENING TO THAT, FOLKS.
AND NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NINE AND THAT IS CONSENT
[CONSENT ITEMS]
ITEMS. UM, COUNSEL ITEMS UNDER THIS CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE AND GENERALLY ENACTED IN ONE MOTION.EXCEPTION TO THIS RULE IS THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY REQUEST ONE OR MORE OF THE ITEMS BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR A
[00:35:01]
SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND ACTION.SO AT THIS TIME I'LL ENTERTAIN THAT, THAT MOTION.
WHO WOULD LIKE TO, MAYOR, I REQUEST WE REMOVE ITEMS. E, J, AND P.
WAIT, AVI E WHAT'D YOU SAY? GJEJ AND P AS IN PAUL AND P AS IN PAUL.
MS. JOHNSON, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? PARDON? NO.
ANYBODY ELSE? UH, I, UH, WOULD LIKE, UM, WHICH ONE WAS IT? WHICH ONE'S A VAC TRUCK? D.
SO OMAR, MR. OMAR, WITH, UH, ITEM D, LAST CALL.
WE APPROVE CONSENT ITEMS A THROUGH C, F THROUGH I, K THROUGH O AND Q.
MOTION BEEN MADE BY MS. JOHNSON TO APPROVE THOSE ITEMS. UH, DO I HEAR A SECOND? HE DID, I'M SORRY.
ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE? I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE.
ANY OPPOSED? MOTION DOES CARRY.
NOW WE'LL GO TO 'EM ONE BY ONE.
I'LL START OFF, UH, JUST GO DOWN THE ROAD.
[CONSENT ITEMS - D]
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.SO UNFORTUNATELY, UM, SUBJECT TO CHANGE, RIGHT? EVERYTHING CHANGES.
UH, SO AFTER WE POSTED THIS AGENDA ITEM, WE DID SOME MORE LOOKING INTO IT AND THERE'S ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE PROCUREMENT METHODS OF THIS ITEM.
AND SO WE NEED TO PULL THIS ITEM FOR TONIGHT.
LET US DO OUR, OUR BACKGROUND, OUR RESEARCH OR HOMEWORK ON IT, AND THEN WE'LL BRING IT BACK WITH ALL THE INFORMATION WE NEEDED.
IF THAT WAS THE CASE, WHY WASN'T THIS PULLED EARLIER FOR STAFF? IT, IT CHANGED THIS MORNING.
WE'VE BEEN STRUGGLING TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE THIS WORK AND IT'S JUST NOT GONNA WORK.
SO THE AGENDA WAS POSTED WEDNESDAY? YEAH.
SO IF WE FIGURE IT OUT AFTER WEDNESDAY, WE, WE CAN'T CHANGE IT.
SO ANY DETAILS ON THAT? IS IT JUST PROCUREMENT ISSUES? OR THE PROCUREMENT ISSUES? YEAH.
SO THERE'S NO, NO ACTION ON THAT ITEM, CORRECT? THERE FOR NO, WE NEED YOU TO REJECT IT FOR TONIGHT.
THAT WOULD JUST MAKE IT CLEANER I THINK.
JUST, AND WE'LL JUST START OVER FRESH ON IT.
UH, MAYOR, I MOVE TO, UH, REJECT CONSENT ITEM D.
THE MOTIONS HAS BEEN MADE TO REJECT ITEM D.
ANY OPPOSED? ALRIGHT, THE MOTION IS REJECTED.
ALRIGHT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM E, MR. UTR.
[CONSENT ITEMS - E]
ALL RIGHT, SO THIS IS JUST FOR THE INFORMATION.UH, I SAW IN THE, UH, AGENDA PACKET THAT THIS IS RELATED TO GFL.
UH, SO AT THIS POINT, I GUESS WE HAVE CROSSED THE, UH, TIME LIMIT WHERE WE CAN GO LOOK FOR OTHER ALTERNATIVES AND WE ARE BOUND WITH GFL FOR THE NEXT YEAR'S CONTRACT.
IS THAT THIS IS RIGHT? NO, THIS IS IN, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTRACT THAT STILL WILL EXPIRE IN MARCH.
SO THIS IS STARTING NOVEMBER THROUGH MARCH, CORRECT? IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
SO THIS IS NOT A YEAR LONG CONTRACT FROM HERE POINT? NO.
SO THAT WASN'T CLEAR IN THE, UH, OKAY.
SO THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING THAT.
UH, THIS, SO WE HAVE VETTED THESE NUMBERS, RIGHT? I KNOW IT'S A SMALL CHANGE, BUT NONETHELESS, YES.
YEAH, THEY MATCHED UP WITH THE CPI FROM MARCH TO MARCH.
JUST LIKE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO FOLLOW.
SO THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE OVERALL CPI AND THEN THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE GASOLINE CP ADDITIONALLY.
CORRECT? I THOUGHT OVERALL CPI CAN COVER GASOLINE.
CPI THE WAY THE CONTRACT IS WRITTEN, THEY HAVE TO LOOK AT THE OVERALL CPI TAKE 90% OF THAT AND THEN TAKE 10% OF THE GASOLINE CPI.
AND IF YOU NOTICE THE GASOLINE CPI IS ALWAYS MORE VOLATILE.
AND THAT'S WHY IT'S WRITTEN THAT WAY.
SO THAT WAY THEY CAN STILL GET SOME OF THE FUEL SURCHARGE COVERAGE, UM, WITHOUT REALLY RAISING THE RATES ON EVERYONE.
VERY WELL, MAYOR, I PROPOSE COUNSEL APPROVE ITEM E.
MOTION BEEN MADE BY MR. ER TO APPROVE ITEM E.
DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND BY MR. RUSSELL.
ANY DISCRETION? HEARING NONE WILL CALL FOR A VOTE.
ANY OPPOSED? ITEM B DOES PASS.
[CONSENT ITEMS - J]
COOL.I THINK WE ALL KNOW THIS ITEM, UH, BEING THE BELMONT PLAT.
UH, BUT FIRST I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE WHY THIS PLAT IS BEING BROUGHT TO Y'ALL, UH, THIS EVENING.
[00:40:01]
MANDATED BY STATE LAW THAT WE DO BRING THIS PLAT FORWARD TO YOU AFTER IT RECEIVES A RECOMMENDATION, WHETHER POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE FROM PLANNING AND ZONING.AND, UH, SO THE LAST PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING, IT WAS RECOMMENDED TO DENY.
AND SO HERE WE ARE, WE ARE BRINGING THIS PLA TO YOU WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING AND ZONING TO DENY IT.
AND SO I WILL JUST OPEN THIS UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE, UH, WONDERFUL COMMENTS, UH, A LOT OF VALID CONCERNS.
SO I'D BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS THOSE IN THE FORM OF Y'ALL'S QUESTIONS.
SO I'LL START OFF WITH, CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THE PNZ? WHAT WAS IT UNANIMOUS? WAS IT? YES, I BELIEVE IT WAS UNANIMOUS TO DENY.
AND DID THEY UH, UH, DO, DO WE HAVE IN OUR MEETING MINUTES? I HAVEN'T CHECKED THE P AND Z MINUTES YET.
WAS IT, UM, WAS IT GIVEN THE REASONS WHY THIS WAS BEING DENIED? THERE WERE TWO REASONS.
UH, THE FIRST REASON WAS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT MET THE ORDINANCE OR THE REQUIREMENT OF OUR ORDINANCE WHEN IT STATES THAT IT HAS TO BE TWO ACRE MINIMUM LOTS.
UH, AND THE SECOND, UH, REASON FOR DENIAL WAS FOR THE LACK OF CONTOUR LINES.
I HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS THAT I'M GIVING EVERYBODY AN OPPORTUNITY BEFORE I HUG ALL THE TIME.
ALRIGHT, SO LET'S GO ONE BY ONE.
SO THE, WHAT I SEE IN THIS, UH, DRAWING WHERE THERE ARE A LOT OF, UH, INFORMATION, LOTS AND CONTOURS.
ONE THING IT SAYS IS IT REFERS TO OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DRAINAGE RESERVES ARE WESTED IN FULL SURE MUD NUMBER FOUR.
BUT THE DRAINAGE RESERVES ARE GOING TO BE DIFFERENT THAN THESE DETENTION SLASH RETENTION PONDS, IS THAT RIGHT? IT IS AN EASEMENT THAT WILL BE OWNED BY THE DEVELOPER THROUGH THE MUD.
UM, IT ISN'T NOTED ON THE PLAT THAT THEY WILL OWN AND MAINTAIN.
I MEAN THAT THEY WILL MAINTAIN IT, BUT I MEAN WE CAN HAVE THEM ADD THAT NOTE IF THAT'S THE DESIRE OF COUNSEL.
SO IT DOESN'T INDICATE REGARDING THE REST OF IT.
SO I WAS JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE DISTINCTION THAT WE ARE MAKING AS THE CITY STAFF BETWEEN DETENTION, RETENTION, AND RESERVE.
SO ON THE ORIGINAL PLAT, EXCUSE ME, ON THE ORIGINAL PLAT, THEY DELINEATED THEIR, THEIR COMMON AREA, UH, RETENTION PONDS, UM, AND MITIGATION PONDS.
MR. PROFIT IS CORRECT THAT IT, THAT TERM IS USED INTERCHANGEABLY MOST OF THE TIME, MOST PEOPLE DON'T REALLY FRET ABOUT IT, BUT THEY ARE RETENTION, RETENTION PONDS.
'CAUSE THEY DO HOLD WATER UNDER, UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
UM, THOSE ARE LISTED AS RESERVES ON THE, ON THE PLAT.
THAT WAS WAY IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED WHERE THOSE, THOSE DETENTION FACILITIES, RETENTION FACILITIES AND MITIGATION FACILITIES WERE LISTED AS RESERVES.
AND THOSE ARE, UM, NOTED AS BEING MAINTAINED BY THE MUD.
THE, WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING NOW, AND LET ME HOLD STOP YOU RIGHT THERE.
SO THAT'S WHAT I'M SEEING AS THE ITEM F ON HERE IN THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A POND THERE, THERE IS A POND TO THE, UM, I GET MY, MY BEARINGS HERE.
A POND? YEAH, WITH, WITH AN ELEVATION AS LOW AS 80 ON THE CONTOUR LINES.
I CAN'T, I CAN'T LET, LEMME GRAB MY, YEAH, THE, THE UH, BOTTOM OF THE, THE POND WILL BE AT 80 FEET.
BUT THAT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE, THE DRAINAGE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THROUGH THE LOTS.
SO THAT'S ONE THING THAT'S DEFINITELY MISSING IN MY OPINION.
THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS, WHAT DOES THE STATE ESSENTIAL ZONING REQUIRE FOR A LOT SIZE AND SORRY, FOR THE BACK AND FORTH, I'M OBVIOUSLY, I'M MORE ZONING AND CLIFF WILL BE MORE OF OUR DRAINAGE EXPERT.
UH, BUT IN THE CDO, THE MINIMUM ACRE FOR ESTATE RESIDENTIAL LOTS IS TWO ACRES.
NOW IS THAT GROSS OR NET? IT DOESN'T SPECIFY GROSS OR NET.
AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, THERE IS NO DISTINCTION OR NO, THERE'S NO, UH, THERE'S NO REFERENCE WHATSOEVER TO WHAT COULD TAKE AWAY FROM THAT LEGAL ACREAGE.
AND ESSENTIALLY THAT'S WHAT THIS PLAT DOES, IS IT'S ACTUALLY RECORDING IT LEGALLY WITH THE COUNTY THAT THESE ARE IN FACT TWO ACRE LOTS.
[00:45:01]
OKAY.BUT, UH, CDO DOESN'T DEFINE EITHER GROSS OR NET.
SO IT MAY HAVE A POND, IT MAY HAVE A HILL, IT MAY HAVE ANYTHING ON IT.
AND HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU DEFINE THAT AS EITHER A USABLE OR NON-USABLE SPACE? WE DON'T DEFINE IT AS USABLE OR UNUSABLE.
THAT'S, WE DO NOT DEFINE THAT.
AND I, WHEN I SAY WE DON'T, THE CDO DOESN'T CONTEMPLATE THAT.
I'LL JUST ADD A LITTLE CONTEXT.
ALREADY IN THIS AREA, THERE ARE PIPELINE EASEMENTS ON A NUMBER OF THESE PEOPLE'S LAND AS WELL WHERE THEY CURRENTLY CANNOT BUILD, UM, BECAUSE OF THE PIPELINES.
HOWEVER, SOME ARE ABLE TO USE FOR GRAZING FOR CATTLE OR HORSES.
BUT IF YOU DO END UP BUILDING ON THOSE, THEN OBVIOUSLY THE, UH, THE PIPELINE COMPANIES ARE GONNA BE LOOKING AT IT.
UM, ALRIGHT, MOVING ON TO MY QUESTION.
SO WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT'S GRAPHS OR NET IN OUR CDO.
UM, IT'S NOT A MATTER OF US NOT KNOWING.
IT'S A MATTER OF US NOT EVEN CONTEMPLATING WHICH ONE IT IS.
NOW I'M LOOKING AT TABLE 28 DASH TWO DASH THREE.
IN THE CDO IT SAYS, UH, ESTATE SIZE TWO ACRES OR LARGER LOTS OR PARCELS FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DWELLING.
SO THIS SPECIFICALLY TALKS ABOUT SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DWELLING AS ONE OF THE ONLY ALLOWED USES FOR THESE LOTS.
FROM A RESIDENTIAL PERSPECTIVE, THEN MOVING ON TO TABLE 28, 2 DASH FIVE DASH ONE, MINIMUM WIDTH OF 150 FEET, MINIMUM TWO ACRES.
SO I SEE AN ILLUSTRATION RIGHT NEXT TO IT.
AND THE ILLUSTRATION DOES NOT SHOW DETENTION AREA INCLUDED.
THAT ILLUSTRATION IS FOR THE PURPOSES OF SETBACKS.
IT DOESN'T CONTEMPLATE WHAT GETS PUT ON THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE SETBACKS.
THE HOUSES GARAGE AND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS ARE TO HELP YOU UNDERSTAND THE SETBACKS BETTER.
SO BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY PICTURE TO REFER TO, I DID NOT SEE THAT AS A, UH, AS A DISTINCTION MADE BETWEEN THE LAND THAT IS AVAILABLE TO THE OWNER VERSUS THE LAND THAT SO, AND EXACTLY THE SETBACKS, YOU KNOW, THE EASEMENTS, THE SETBACKS.
SO THE DETENTION PORTION OF THE EASEMENT IS NOT LISTED ON THERE? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION OF THE LAND OR THE EASEMENT IS NOT PROVIDED IN OUR ILLUSTRATIVE OR THE LAND USE GUIDANCE? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
THERE'S NO SHARED DETENTION SHOWN ON THIS ILLUSTRATION.
UH, MOVING ON TO THE NEXT TABLE, 28 DASH TWO DASH FIVE DASH TWO PERMITTED USES, I'M LOOKING AT ACCESSORIES, AGRICULTURE, RURAL AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
UH, DETENTION IS NOT A PERMITTED USE AS FAR AS JUST DESIGNATING A USE OF THE LAND GOES OF WHAT CAN HAPPEN ON THE LAND.
SO IT'S NOT A USE IN THAT SENSE OF THE WORD.
WELL, I AM GONNA DISAGREE WITH YOU ON THAT BECAUSE WHEN WE CALL THAT AS A, UH, DETENTION, WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE GONNA SEE THE CONTOURS, WE'RE GONNA MEASURE THE WATER COLLECTED WITHIN IT BECOMES A STRUCTURE TO ME.
IT BECOMES A CIVIL STRUCTURE TO ME.
LIKE A POND, SOMETHING THAT IS MEANT TO HOLD WATER AT SOME POINT.
SO A STOCK POND, THE VOLUME MATTERS.
WELL, I KNOW I'M ONLY ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION.
SO STOCK PONDS WOULD QUALIFY AS A STRUCTURE.
UH, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT WELL, EVERYTHING THAT HAS A SPECIFIC VOLUME ASSOCIATED WITH IT, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A DEFINED, UM, DEPTH WALL SIZE.
WELL, YEAH, I ONLY ASK FOR CLARIFICATION BECAUSE THERE'S MANY PROPERTIES IN THIS AREA, PARTICULARLY THIS AREA THAT HAVE EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING ON THEM, INCLUDING A CITY OWNED FACILITY.
AND THIS IS WHERE MY ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE DEFINE, LET'S SAY IF THERE WAS A HILL SOMEWHERE IN SOMEBODY'S PROPERTY, THEN I DON'T THINK WE WOULD CONSIDER TOPOGRAPHY A STRUCTURE OR A USE.
SO CAN I ASK A QUESTION REAL QUICK ON THIS? I'M BY NO MEANS AN EXPERT IN THIS AT ALL.
IT'S NOT MY, NOT MY FORTE, BUT I DRIVE BY BONTERRA ON A DAILY BASIS.
AND I DO NOTICE THAT THERE ARE QUITE LARGE PONDS ON THE BACKSIDES OF QUITE A FEW HOMES THAT DO NOT HAVE FENCES BLOCKING THEM FROM THESE DETENTION PONDS.
THESE ARE DETENTION PONDS OR RETENTION.
THESE HOLD WATER AND THIS IS WHERE OUR DRAINAGE GOES TO AS WELL.
SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE OF WHAT'S BEING APPLIED HERE AND WHAT WE HAVE ON THE BACKSIDE OF,
[00:50:01]
UH, OF BONTERRA? UH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.I THINK, I THINK THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THOSE, UH, THOSE DRAINAGE FACILITIES IN CROSS CREEK RANCH ARE, THEY DON'T ENCROACH INTO AS EASEMENTS INTO THE PEOPLE'S PROPERTY.
THAT WOULD BE THE, THE MAIN DIFFERENCE.
COMING, COMING BACK TO THE QUESTION I ASKED, SO I'M JUST TRYING TO DEFINE, OKAY, YOU MENTIONED THERE ARE SEVERAL PROPERTIES THAT ALREADY HAVE SIMILAR STRUCTURES, SO TO SAY, BUT ARE THOSE STRUCTURES REQUIRED FOR DETENTION ON THAT PROPERTY OR THEY'RE THERE BUT NOT DEFINED AS DETENTION FROM? THAT'S A DISTINCTION THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE.
THEY, THEY COULD BE, I DON'T KNOW OF ONE IN PARTICULAR THAT WE COULD POINT OUT, BUT IF YOU ARE, IF YOU ARE CONSIDERED IN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN RIGHT? AND YOU WANTED TO BUILD A FACILITY ON YOUR PROPERTY THAT PUT FILL IN THE FLOODPLAIN, YOU ARE LEGALLY REQUIRED TO MITIGATE THAT FILL.
YOU CAN DO IT ON SITE OR YOU CAN DO IT IN A MITIGATION BANK OFFSITE IF YOU WANTED TO PRESERVE YOUR PROPERTY.
SO YOU COULD LEGALLY DIG A POND ON YOUR PROPERTY TO MITIGATE THE FILL THAT YOU'VE PLACED IN THE FLOODPLAIN.
SO THERE, IT, IT COULD BE REQUIRED IN THAT SENSE.
BUT HOW, HOW DO YOU MEAN? DOES THE CITY ENFORCE THAT? DO WE GO AND CHECK IF THE YES.
EVEN THOUGH IT'S GRANDFATHERED IN, IF ANYONE GETS A GRADING PERMIT TODAY, WE RE WE WE REQUIRE GRADING PERMITS.
WHENEVER YOU BRING IN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FILL ONTO YOUR PROPERTY.
I'VE ACTUALLY SEEN THIS IN PARTICULAR.
THERE'S A HOUSE DOWN THAT, UH, AT THE, UH, BOAT ARK THAT THEY TOOK THEIR POND THAT THEY BUILT AND USED IT TO INCREASE THEIR LAND SIZE OR THEIR, THEIR, THEIR ELEVATION FOR THEIR HOME TO APPEASE THE THE FLOODING ASPECT YEAH.
'CAUSE THEY ARE RIGHT BEHIND, RIGHT, UH, BRAZOS.
YOU'RE REQUIRED, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO GET A GRADING PERMIT.
AS PART OF THAT GRADING PERMIT.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN.
YOU WOULD, WE WOULD VERIFY WHETHER YOU ARE IN THE 100 YOUR FLOOD PLAIN OR NOT.
IF YOU ARE AND YOU'RE ADDING FILL TO THAT, THAT AREA, WE WOULD NOT APPROVE IT UNLESS YOU CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU'VE MITIGATED THAT ELSEWHERE.
AND JUST OUTTA CURIOSITY, WHEN YOU SEE THESE, WHAT KIND OF LEVEL ELEVATION DIFFERENCES DO YOU SEE IN THAT WHEN YOU SAY A FIELD AND THEN TO COMPENSATE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A POINT.
WHAT KIND OF ELEVATION DIFFERENCES DO YOU SEE? IT'S GONNA BE A ONE-TO-ONE, TYPICALLY A ONE-TO-ONE RATIO.
SO YOU TAKE A, A SURVEY, SO IT'S VOLUME-BASED IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? CORRECT.
ALL SO, SO FAR ALL I CAN SEE IS THAT THIS IS ALREADY EXISTING IN SEVERAL LOTS WITHIN THE GIVEN AREA.
NOT, NOT JUST BELMONT, OUTSIDE BELMONT IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
IT IT COULD, I KNOW OF, I KNOW OF OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS IN FORT BEND COUNTY THAT HAVE ENCUMBERED, UH, PROPERTY ON THE BACK OF THEIR, OF THEIR OWNED LAND FOR DRAINAGE FACILITIES THAT THE, THE, UM, THERE IS A NO FILL EASEMENT ALONG THE PROPERTY, UH, ALONG THE BACKSIDE OF THEIR PROPERTY THAT EATS INTO THEIR, THEIR PROPERTY ACREAGE.
AND IT IS USED FOR DRAINAGE FACILITIES.
SO THERE ARE OTHER LOCATIONS THAT THIS IS, THIS HAS OCCURRED.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY PARTICULAR IN SHORE, BUT IT, IT DOES HAPPEN.
WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET IS, SO WHEN, WHEN YOU MENTION OTHER PARCELS, DOES THAT BRING THEIR TOTAL ACREAGE BELOW TWO ACRES? WITH THERE EXAMPLES THAT YOU GAVE, DOES THAT WITHIN SHORE, DOES THAT BRING THEIR TOTAL ACREAGE WITH THE DETENTION POND EXCLUDED SO SPECIFIC TO SHORE? NO.
NOW THERE ARE SOME, THERE ARE SOME MUNICIPALITIES THROUGHOUT TEXAS AND AMERICA THAT DO HAVE THEIR OWN LOCAL ORDINANCES THAT DO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LANGUAGE IS EXACTLY, BUT IT MIGHT READ SOMETHING LIKE, UH, A STATE RESIDENTIAL MUST BE TWO ACRE MINIMUM EXCLUDING, UH, DETENTION AREAS OR COMMON DETENTION SPACES.
BUT WE CAN ONLY APPLY WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR CDL, SO WE CAN ONLY LOOK FOR FULL SHEAR.
THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU GAVE THEIR EXISTING LOTS THAT HAVE DETENTION POINTS FOR THE FIELDS AND SO ON, ARE THEY VIOLATING THE TWO ACRE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT, EXCLUDING THE, THE DETENTION POINTS? THAT IS NOT LEGAL'S OPINION AND THAT'S NOT STAFF'S OPINION.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO ESTABLISH IS THAT IF YOU ARE GONNA USE A PORTION OF THE LAND FOR SOMETHING THAT IS NOT INCLUDING THE PERMITTED USES FOR TABLE 28 2 DASH FIVE DASH TWO, THEN EXCLUDING THAT USAGE, YOU SHOULD STILL HAVE
[00:55:01]
THE ESTATE RESIDENTIALS TWO ACRE MINIMUM LAW USE, IF I'M DRAWING THAT CONCLUSION.LOGICALLY YES, THAT'S THE WAY WE SEE IT.
AS OF RIGHT NOW THAT ANY ENCUMBRANCE ON PROPERTY WOULD NOT DETRACT OR, OR SUBTRACT FROM ITS LEGAL ACREAGE.
NO, I THINK WE'RE SEEING IT TWO DIFFERENT WAYS.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS THERE IS NO PRECEDENT CURRENTLY IN FULL SHEAR THAT YOU CAN USE YOUR TWO ACREAGE FOR DETENTION AS WELL AS COUNTED FOR BASICALLY HAVE THE TWO ACRES AND USE IT TOO FOR DETENTION.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, SO PLEASE TELL ME IF IT, IF, IF, IF I'M, IF THERE IS A, SAY THERE IS A TWO ACRE LOT SOMEWHERE AND THEY WANT TO BUILD A FACILITY AND THEY ADD FIELD TO THE FLOODPLAIN AND THEY REMOVE DIRT AND BUILD A POND.
THAT LOT IN OUR OPINION WOULD STILL BE TWO ACRES, IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT, SO TO CLARIFY, MAYBE I'LL PUT AN EXAMPLE IF YOU ARE TRYING TO SEE IF AN EASEMENT THAT IS PUT ON OUR PROPERTY TAKES AWAY FROM THE LAND SIZE AND I'M SAYING NO.
AND THAT COULD BE ANY TYPE OF EASEMENT.
SO I KNOW WE THOUGHT LIKE, UM, EVEN IN THE SMALLER, LIKE, UM, SEMI-URBAN RESIDENTIAL, UM, LOTS, FOR EXAMPLE, A LOT OF THEM HAVE SIX FOOT EASEMENTS ALONG THE SIDE FOR UTILITIES THAT DOESN'T TAKE AWAY FROM THEIR 45 FOOT, UM, FRONTAGE DOESN'T MAKE IT 39 FOOT, THEY'RE STILL 45 FOOT WITH A SIX FOOT EASEMENT.
IN THE SAME RESPECT, WHEN YOU HAVE EASEMENTS AROUND YOUR FENCING, BOTH YOUR FRONT AND YOUR BACKYARD, THERE ARE PORTIONS THAT YOU CAN'T BUILD SUBSTRATE STRUCTURES SEVEN FEET AROUND A FENCE LINE.
BUT THAT'S STILL PART OF YOUR, PART OF YOUR PROPERTY VALUE.
THERE, THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF ENCUMBERED PROPERTY MM-HMM
OR EASEMENTS ALL THROUGHOUT THIS CITY, WHETHER THAT BE DRY UTILITIES, WET UTILITIES, UM, CENTER POINT PIPELINES, PIPELINES, UH, SETBACKS.
UH, THE ONE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON MENTIONED IS ACTUALLY ONE OF OUR LOCAL ORDINANCES THAT ZERO LOT LINE FOR PATIO HOMES.
THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR MUST HAVE A SIX FOOT ACCESS EASEMENT SO THAT THEY CAN GET TO BOTH SIDES OF, OF THAT PATIO HOME.
AND THAT'S ENCUMBERED PROPERTY.
SEE, AND THAT'S THE CHALLENGE BECAUSE CURRENTLY IN FOR TODAY, WE ARE NOT USING RETENTION OR DETENTION PONDS IN THIS MANNER TO CONDUCT EASEMENTS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
AND THAT'S THEREIN LIES THE CHALLENGE.
LIKE, SO WE'VE GOT TO JUDGE WHETHER WE ARE DOING IT THROUGH THE LETTER OF THE LAW THAT IS ON OUR CURRENT ORDINANCES OR IF WE'RE DOING WHAT THE INTENT IS.
AND RIGHT NOW THAT'S THE STICKY, I'M GONNA SAY STICKY WICK, WICKED PROBABLY CRICKET TERM.
BUT THAT'S THE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IN HAND TODAY THAT WE AS A COUNCIL NEED TO DECIDE IS IT CORRECT LEGALLY OR DO WE, DO WE NEED TO CHANGE OUR ORDINANCES? I THINK WE DO.
WE NEED TO STRENGTHEN THEM UP BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS A LOOPHOLE, BUT CURRENTLY IT IS THE LEGAL OPINION IS ILLEGAL.
IT'S THE, AND THE, THE, THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE FROM THE STANDPOINT OF, OF, OF THE CONCERNS.
UM, AND I'LL JUST, I DON'T USUALLY DO THIS IN OPEN SESSION, BUT I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND READ THE STATUTE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S, IM BECAUSE IT'S STATUTORY.
AND SO IF YOU WERE TO MAKE A DECISION TO DENY THIS PLAT BASED ON THIS COUNT, 'CAUSE I HEARD SOMEONE GET UP AND SAY, YEAH, WE DON'T HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T DO IT, BUT IT VIOLATES THE SPIRIT AND INTENT.
WELL, UNFORTUNATELY, THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE HAS TAKEN AWAY OUR ABILITY TO DENY A PLAT BASED ON VIOLATING SPIRIT AND INTENT.
THE STATUTE READS THAT A MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY OR GOVERNING BODY THAT DISAPPROVES A PLAT SHALL PROVIDE THE APPLICANT A WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE DISAPPROVAL THAT CLEARLY ARTICULATES EACH SPECIFIC CONDITION FOR THE DISAPPROVAL.
EACH CONDITION OR REASON SPECIFIED IN THE WRITTEN STATEMENT MUST BE DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE REQUIRE TO THE REQUIREMENT UNDER THE LAW AND INCLUDE A CITATION TO THE LAW, INCLUDING A STATUTE OR MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES THAT IS THE BASIS FOR THE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL IF APPLICABLE AND MAY NOT BE ARBITRARY.
AND SO IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN OUR CURRENT ORDINANCES THAT OTHERWISE PROHIBITS SOMEONE FROM, THIS IS SUCH A NEGATIVE, IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN OUR ORDINANCE THAT OTHERWISE REQUIRES THE ACREAGE FOR A LOT SIZE TO BE COMPLETELY USABLE OR, OR STATES THAT AN EASEMENT ON THAT DOES NOT DETRACTS FROM THE, FROM THE SIZE, WHICH WE DO NOT, IS MY UNDERSTANDING,
[01:00:01]
THEN WE DON'T HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT WE CAN POINT TO THAT THEY'RE IN VIOLATION OF.UM, I GET THE EASEMENT ASPECT OF IT, BUT I ALSO WANNA POINT OUT THE PERMITTED USE ASPECT OF IT.
THE PERMITTED USE FOR THIS TO BE USED AS A DETENTION POND IS NOT EASEMENT, IT'S A USE.
I I'LL ASK LEGAL TO, TO SPEAK TO THAT.
WE DON'T REFER TO DETENTION PONDS, UH, AS USE IN ANY DISTRICT THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
I MEAN, I I CAN'T ANSWER THAT RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
I, I GUESS I COULD ASK A QUESTION.
HOW MANY, UM, DEVELOPMENTS HAVE BEEN PLATTED RESIDENTIAL HAVE A DETENTION POND, A RETENTION POND ON THEM? EVERY MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY HAS A DETENTION FACILITY AND IT, NO, NOT ONE DISTRICT IS THAT A LISTED USE? SO IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A USE FROM, FROM A ZONING STANDPOINT.
IF IT IS, THEN IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT IS IN VIOLATION OF YOUR OWN CODES.
WHILE WE POKE ON THAT SOME MORE, I WANNA ASK, ASK SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME OUT OF THE, UH, THE CITIZEN'S COMMENTS.
SO AS THESE DETENTION PONDS ARE BEING BUILT, WHO INSPECTS THEM THAT THEY HAD DONE CORRECTLY? SO EITHER, UM, SINCE THEY'RE, WE WOULD CONSIDER THEM CIVIL, WE WOULD, WE WOULD, GORAN WHO WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, WOULD DO THOSE INSPECTIONS ALONG WITH, UM, THERE WOULD BE A SECONDARY INSPECTION BY THE BUILDING PERMIT TEAM TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE BUILT TO STANDARD.
BUT MAINLY GORAN WOULD, WOULD DO THAT.
SO THE CITY DOES THAT EVEN THOUGH THE COUNTY REVIEWS THE DRAINAGE PLAN? YES, BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S IN THE CITY LIMITS AND WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INSPECTION.
UH, BASICALLY THE WAY, THE WAY IT WORKS IS THEY DEVELOP A DRAINAGE PLAN AND, AND THE RESIDENTS ARE CORRECTED, DOES MATTER WHO, WHICH DRAINAGE FACILITIES ARE INTERACTED WITH.
THIS WHOLE DEVELOPMENT DRAINS TO FLU L AND TRIBUTARY AND THEREFORE THIS WHOLE DEVELOPMENT WAS PUT INTO THE MODEL THAT FORT BEND COUNTY ESTABLISHED THROUGH HALF ENGINEERING WHEN THEY DID THE JONES CREEK WATERSHED MODEL.
UM, THEY PUT IT IN, THEY BASICALLY RUN THE MODEL.
THEY SEE WHAT THE NEW GRADING WILL DO TO THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM WATER AND THEY MAKE SURE THAT IT, UM, DOES NOT CAUSE ANY ADVERSE EFFECT IN, IN THE MODEL AND IF IT DOES, DOESN'T, UH, CREATE ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS.
THEY, THEY APPROVE THE DRAINAGE PLAN.
UM, WE DO DO AN INTERNAL REVIEW OF THE, UM, UPON LAYOUTS, THE, THE DETENTION VOLUMES AND THOSE THINGS.
BUT, UM, THE, THE MODEL ENCAPSULATES HOW WATER FLOWS IN AND OUT OF, OUT OF THIS FACILITY AS IT INTERACTS WITH THE FLU EL AND TRIBUTARY.
SO THAT ANSWERS MR. PROFIT'S QUESTION ABOUT WHERE DOES IT GO IF THERE'S OVERFLOW FOR A TROPICAL STORM, IT GOES EAST INTO THE FLU.
SO THESE DETENTION PONDS ARE, WELL RETENTION PONDS DETENTION.
SEE, DO PEOPLE JUST DO IT AUTOMATICALLY AND SORRY, RETAIN WATER? UM, SO, BUT TO, TO BE, UH, PRECISE IT, THEY ARE RETENTION PONDS.
THEY, THEY DO HAVE A WET, THEY DO HAVE A WET BOTTOM.
THERE IS A, ULTIMATELY A SIX FOOT FREE FREEBOARD IN THESE PONDS FROM THE NORMAL WATER SURFACE ELEVATION TO THE HIGH BANK.
THE 100 YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION IS AT FIVE FEET.
SO YOU STILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL ONE FOOT OF FREEBOARD FROM THE 100 YEAR WATER SURFACE EL 100 YEAR FLOOD WATER SURFACE ELEVATION TO THE TOP OF THE POND.
HOW DEEP ARE THESE PONDS? THE RETENTION PONDS IN PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS.
OH, I'D HAVE TO, LET ME, LET ME PULL THE SHEET.
AND IN THE MEANTIME, WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING UP THAT, UM, WHO ENFORCES THAT, THESE DETENTION RETENTION PONDS REMAIN MAIN TO PLAN? SO IN YEARS TIMES? YEAH, NO, EXCELLENT QUESTION.
THAT WOULD BE CODE ENFORCEMENT.
UH, MUCH LIKE THEY HANDLE ANY AND ALL OTHER LANDSCAPING AND, AND DITCHES, WHETHER THAT BE OWNED BY THE CITY, THEY ARE CONSTANTLY PATROLLING AND LOOKING AT THAT.
THEY WOULD DO THE SAME WITHIN THESE, UH, MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES IN THESE DEVELOPMENTS AS WELL.
SO THEN THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE BACK PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS? NO, NOT NECESSARILY.
THEY, THEY ACCESS ACCESSIBILITY FOR IT FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.
YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE EVERYBODY'S BACKYARD FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.
WELL, THE GOOD NEWS IS, IS IF THERE IS A PROBLEM, THE HOMEOWNER OR SOMEBODY WHO DOES NOTICE THAT THERE IS AN ISSUE GOING ON, LET'S SAY IT'S HIGH GRASS OR LET'S SAY THAT, THAT YOU CAN'T EVEN SEE THE WATER IN THESE PONDS ANYMORE BECAUSE THE WEEDS HAVE GROWN SO TALL.
WE'VE GONE THROUGH A DROUGHT, UH, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO GET THAT PICTURE AND HANDLE CODE ENFORCEMENT THROUGH THAT.
[01:05:01]
CAN GO THAT PROCESS WITH THOSE IMAGES AS WELL.THAT'S THE POINT YOU BRING UP AS WELL.
UM, IF THERE'S A DROUGHT AND WATER, UM, THE WATER LEVEL GOES DOWN.
I KNOW IN OTHER MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES IN FULCHER, THE MUDS KEEP THE PONDS FULL BY PUMPING OUT WATER FROM THE WELLS TO KEEP THEM FULL.
IS THIS GOING TO BE HAPPEN WITH THESE ONES? WILL THESE REMAIN FULL? WILL THERE ONLY BE RAIN WATER RUNOFF TO KEEP THE WATER LEVEL AT A SPECIFIC, UM, HEIGHT? SO WE HAVE ONLY REVIEWED THIS, THIS PLAN UP TO THE GRADING.
WE HAVE NOT SEEN THE INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, PLANS AS FAR AS ROADWAYS AND, UM, OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT.
I DO NOT KNOW IF THEY INTEND TO HAVE WELLS OR PUMP SYSTEMS TO KEEP THE PONDS WET.
MR. GOGAN WANTS TO SPEAK TO THAT, OR I WILL.
I WILL SAY THAT, UM, THE ONE POND I'M LOOKING AT, THE, THE BASE ELEVATION OF THE POND IS 87.1 FEET AND IT, IT, IT APPEARS BASED ON THIS, THAT THE, THE NORMAL WATER SURFACE ELEVATION IS ABOUT 93 FEET.
SO YOU'VE, YOU'VE GOT ABOUT SIX FEET OF DEPTH IN THE BOTTOM OF THE POND, AND FROM THERE YOU GO UP TO 98 FEET TO THE 100, WELL, I'M SORRY, UM, ROUGHLY ALMOST 101 FOR THE 100 YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION.
SO YOU'VE GOT APPROXIMATELY EIGHT FEET OF VOL, EIGHT FEET OF SPACE FOR VOLUME, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT ONE FOOT OF FREEBOARD ON TOP OF THAT.
SO TO KIND OF GO BACK TO THE QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT WHERE THESE WOULD DRAIN IN A HUNDRED YEAR EVENT, UP TO A HUNDRED YEAR EVENT, THIS POND SHOULD KEEP ALL WATER IN.
ITS IN ITS BANKS WITH A ONE FOOT OF FREEBOARD.
IF WE, IF WE GET A A, BECAUSE THIS IS IN THE 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN, WHAT THAT TELLS US IS THAT IF WE GET LARGER THAN A 100 YEAR FLOOD, THIS WHOLE AREA SHOULD BE SEEING WATER COMING FROM ALL DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.
WHERE ARE YOU SEEING THE EIGHT FOOT DIFFERENCE? ALL I'M SEEING IS THE, THE PAD SITES ARE AT 105.
YOU'RE YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PLA, CORRECT? YEAH.
AND I'M LOOKING AT THE, THE CONTOURS.
THIS IS FROM THE, THE DRAINAGE.
SO THIS IS ONE OF THE, I'LL JUST GRAB THIS ONE REAL QUICK, BUT THIS IS, THIS IS THE, LEMME GO TO ONE THAT YOU SEE.
WE USUALLY GET THIS TECHNICAL AND PLANNING AND ZONING NOT IN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
SO SORRY FOR THE NO, IF WE ARE MAKING A DECISION HERE, WE NEED TO KNOW THIS ONE, LEMME MAKE SURE I GRAB A POND, IS, SO I'M LOOKING AT, LET'S SAY LOT TWO.
IN LOT TWO, I ONLY SEE A HUNDRED ON, ON A PLAT.
YOU ARE ONLY GOING TO GET THE CURRENT CONTOURS.
YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET THE DESIGN CONTOURS.
DO I HAVE THAT DOCUMENT IN THE PACKAGE? NO, THAT IS NOT, UM, THAT IS NOT TYPICALLY GIVEN AT A P AND ZPNZ BECAUSE IT'S NOT TYPICALLY P AND Z UM, APPROVES A PLAT BEFORE ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS ARE SUBMITTED.
SO THIS WOULDN'T NORMALLY BE AVAILABLE AT P AND Z ANYWAY.
SO POND TWO WOULD BE IN BACK OF, OKAY, SO THIS IS POND TWO.
THIS IS THE ONE THAT'S GONNA GO, I'M LOOKING AT IT UPSIDE DOWN.
IT'S THE TWO, RIGHT? YEAH, THAT'S EASEMENT TO, SO IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE THROUGH HERE.
THIS WOULD BE THAT POND RIGHT THERE.
YOU SO JUST FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING AT THE MAP, WE'RE LOOKING AT BACK OF LOTS FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX.
SO THIS IS YOUR, THIS IS YOUR CROSS-SECTIONAL VIEW.
WHILE THEY'RE LOOKING AT THAT, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR LEGAL IN THIS ASPECT.
MS. JOHNSON AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS EARLIER.
IF WE DO CHANGE OUR CDO TO ACCOMMODATE THE NECESSITY OF MAKING SURE THAT IT IS TWO ACRES OF USABLE LAND SPACE AND NOT PARTLY DISCERNED BY RETENTION OR DETENTION OR ANY TYPE OF EASEMENT, UM, IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA, THEY WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN, WOULDN'T THEY? MORE THAN LIKELY, YES.
[01:10:01]
SO HYPOTHETICALLY WE DO CHANGE THE CDO COMING HERE SOON, SHORTLY AFTER.WE CAN'T CHANGE THE DIRECTION AT, AT, AT, AS IT SEEMS RIGHT NOW BY LAW.
YES, THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD BE VESTED UNDER, THEY MORE THAN LIKELY WOULD BE VESTED UNDER CHAPTER 2 45 OF THE LOCAL GUN CODE.
AGAIN, WHERE THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE HAS INDICATED THAT A CITY CANNOT CHANGE THE RULES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME FOR A DEVELOPER WHEN THEY'VE GOT A PERMIT ON FILE AND THEY ARE ACTIVELY MOVING THAT PERMIT FORWARD.
THE GRADING PLAN WOULD ONLY GO THROUGH ENGINEERING
SO ON THAT, ON THAT FRONT, ARE WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT ESTATES FOR TWO ACRES CHANGING THE CODE? OR IS THIS GONNA BE SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT FOR OTHER RESIDENTIAL? UM, WELL, I, I THINK I, I LIKE MR. DOLL'S COMMENT ABOUT IT BEING AIRTIGHT.
AND SO I THINK IT'S REALLY AT Y'ALL'S PLEASURE.
IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL WANT TO EXTEND IT OUTSIDE OF THE ESTATE RESIDENTIAL, BY ALL MEANS, UM, I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN ANY OF THAT AND DIG INTO IT, RESEARCH IT, AND GET IT REALLY VETTED AND BRING IT TO Y'ALL.
I THINK IT MAKES THE MOST SENSE, KEEPING IT AT, AT A STATE RESIDENTIAL, UH, BECAUSE DO KEEP IN MIND WHATEVER YOU DO, UH, WHATEVER ORDINANCE CHANGE YOU DO CAN CREATE SOME PROPERTIES.
IT WOULD BASICALLY MAKE THEM, UM, NON-CONFORMING USES AT THAT POINT, WHICH CAN HAVE SOME CONSEQUENCES DOWN THE ROAD FOR THOSE.
I GUESS THAT'S MY, THAT'S MY POINT IS LIKE WHAT WE CREATE SOMETHING TO HAVE 10 OTHER PROBLEMS ON THE OTHER END.
AND IS THIS, IS THIS AN, THIS OCCURRENCE, THE FIRST OCCURRENCE THAT WE SEE THIS OR IS IT, OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN HAPPENING QUITE A BIT WITH TWO ACRE ESTATES WHERE THEY'RE USING NON-USABLE OR USABLE LAND? THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT FO SURE HAS SEEN IT.
DO WE SEE, UH, A LOT OF THESE HAPPENING? IS THIS A COMMON PRACTICE OR IS THIS KIND OF A ONE-OFF? WHAT, WHAT DO YOU THINK? UH, IT, IT'S NOT, UM, SUPER COMMON.
I MEAN, YOU, YOU CAN FIND 'EM.
I, I MENTIONED EARLIER, STATE OF CIVIL RIDGE IN MISSOURI CITY IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF IT.
THEY'VE GOT A 100 FOOT NO FILL EASEMENT ALONG THE BACK OF THE, THE ACREAGE LOT BECAUSE OF A DRAINAGE FACILITY BACK THERE.
YOU, THEY DON'T WANT ANYBODY BUILDING ANYTHING OR DISRUPTING THAT AREA BECAUSE IT IS PART OF A, A DRAINAGE FACILITY.
SO, SO THERE ARE EXAMPLES OF IT AND THERE I'M SURE WE COULD FIND OTHERS.
I THINK THERE WAS ONE IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY THAT WE, THAT WE, UM, SO THIS IS NOT A TYPICAL PRACTICE IN FULL OR NO, IT IS NOT, IT IS NOT A TYPICAL THING.
SO TYPICALLY HOS CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING OVER OR IN THE DETENTION POND AREA.
SO THAT WOULD APPLY TO ALL THESE SITES AS WELL.
ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN, I'M SORRY.
SO WHEN WE SAY THERE WERE HOAS OR MUDS THAT THEY CAN'T REALLY BUILD ANYTHING IN THE DETENTION POINTER AREA AS IT CALL CALLS AS AN EASEMENT.
SO THIS WOULD APPLY TO THESE LOTS AS WELL, RIGHT? THE HOMEOWNER OR THE MUD THEMSELVES? WHOEVER I, I, NO, I MEAN THESE WOULD BE RESERVED FOR WHAT THE EASEMENT IS REQUIRING, WHICH WOULD BE DETENTION, DRAINAGE RETENTION.
SO WOULD THIS BE IDENTIFIED IN THE, UH, DEED SOMEWHERE WHEN IT DOES GET FILED? I WOULD PROBABLY LET MR. GOGAN SPEAK TO THAT SINCE HE'S THE, I I'M JUST CURIOUS.
I ALREADY SEE PEOPLE COMING BACK AND COMPLAINING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TOLD THESE ARE TWO ACRE LOTS AND WE ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO BUILD A ONE ACRE.
THAT WOULD BE A DIFFICULT DISCUSSION TO HAVE AT THAT TIME.
SO I'M JUST MAKING SURE WE HAVE THAT.
IF YOU ALL ALLOW ME I, I'M WILLING TO SPEAK.
COUNCIL MEMBERS, COULD YOU SAY YOUR NAME INTO THE MICROPHONE SO EVERYBODY WE CAN KNOW WHO YOU'RE, THIS IS RINNI GINI, REPRESENTING HEIGHTENED CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT.
THANK YOU MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, CITY MANAGER STAFF, AND ALL THE ATTENDEES TODAY.
AND I SEE THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS.
AND, UH, I START, IF YOU ALL ALLOW ME FOR 10 TO 15 MINUTES, PLEASE CAN I SPEAK THAT LONG? BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH TO ADDRESS, PLEASE MAKE IT AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE.
I STARTED THIS PROJECT IN FIVE YEARS BACK AND I CAME TO KIND OF A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCES THEN I SEE THAT HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO MAINTAIN THE TWO ESTATE LOT CONCEPT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND WE WENT AND TALKED TO MOST OF THE NEIGHBORS THROUGH THE TEAMS CALLS AND THROUGH THE CITY, UM, FACILITATING DIFFERENT TYPES OF MEETINGS.
AND WE REALIZED THAT WE WANT TO STICK TO THE COMMUNITY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE WANTED TO DEVELOP LIKE ONE OF THE BEST COMMUNITY MATCHING UP TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UH, WE WENT AND START DOING IT AND WE GOT THE PERMIT AND WE WENT ON CONSTRUCTION.
AND THEN WHEN THE CONSTRUCTION IS HAPPENING, WE KIND OF
[01:15:01]
HAVE LIKE A FIVE FOOT RAISE THE PADS, EACH LOT WILL HAVE IT.THEN THE NEIGHBORS BROUGHT THIS CONCERN AND REQUESTED THE CITY TO SEE IF THEY SEE THAT AS MAYBE A POSSIBILITY OF WE GET LIKE A WATER QUICKLY AND THESE PADS BEEN RAISED AND WE STOP THE CONSTRUCTION AND WE TOOK A NOTE OF THE NEIGHBORS.
THIS IS ALL THIS AMENDMENT COME INTO THE, UH, IN FRONT OF THE TODAY BECAUSE OF WE WANT RESPECT THE NEIGHBOR'S COMMENTS AND OUR BUILDER PARTNER'S COMMENTS.
THEY WANTED TO SEE THAT WE COULD JUST MAKE IT THIS AS A REGULAR COMMUNITY, JUST LIKE FULL FAIR RUN, JUST LIKE A LEO ROAD OR A WALKER LANE, WHATEVER THE HOMES WE HAVE, WE WANT TO BRING IT DOWN THAT LODGE, THE ELEVATIONS FROM THAT FIVE FOOT SEVEN FOOT, THERE IS A COMMENTS ON A FULL SHARE.
THE PUBLIC, UH, FACEBOOK COMMENTS EVERYWHERE WE CAN READ.
AND THEY WANTED TO SEE THAT, THAT TO COME DOWN AND TO JUST TO ADDRESS THAT.
WE TOOK THE RESPONSIBILITY AS A RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPER AND UH, WE WANTED TO BRING IT DOWN THE LARGE TO THE REGULAR LOOK AND FEEL AND WE BROUGHT IT DOWN THE GRADING.
AND UH, I SEE THAT SOME PUBLIC COMMENTS TALKING ABOUT THE PROFITABILITY OF THE DEVELOPERS AND THIS IS ACTUALLY SPENDING EXTRA $2 MILLION TO PRODUCE THE SAME 76 LOTS, 74 LOTS.
IT'S ACTUALLY NOT A PROFITABILITY.
AND WE ARE INVESTING $2 MILLION IN ADDITION TO WHAT IT WOULD'VE OTHERWISE JUST TO ADDRESS THE NEIGHBOR'S COMMENTS.
JUST THIS IS HAPPENING BECAUSE OF THE NEIGHBORS AND WE ARE ADDRESSING THAT.
AND I BROUGHT IT DOWN THE LOT ON TRYING TO CREATE THE AMENITY POND.
EVERY COMMUNITY IN FULL SHARE, INCLUDING CROSS CREEK OR ANY COMMUNITY WHERE IT'S A DESIRABLE COMMUNITY, WE CALL THAT TODAY TO HAVE AMENITY FEATURE WHERE PEOPLE COMMENT AS ALLIGATORS MIGHT COME, EVERY COMMUNITY IN CROSS CREEK OR EVERYWHERE, WE HAVE THE SAME FEATURES.
THAT IS WHAT I'M CREATING WITH THE ADDITIONAL MONEY INVESTING INTO IT TO CREATE THAT AMENITY POND IN THE LOT FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL RESIDENT THAT IS WITH THE SPENDING EXTRA MONEY FROM POCKET IN EACH LOT FOR ABOUT $50,000 WITH INVESTING AND CREATING THAT AMENITY FACILITY.
AND WE TAKE THE, THE ISSUE OF HAVING THE ACCESSIBILITY.
THAT'S WHY WE MAY MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE BUILDER GUIDELINES, HOW THIS NEEDS TO BE PROCESSED, HOW NEEDS TO BE ACCESSED.
AND WE HAVE THE BACK FENCES WITH THE ENTRY GATES TO EVERY LOT AND THEY HAVE A PRIVATE ACCESS TO THAT BEHIND THEIR LOTS.
AND SOME PEOPLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE DRAINAGE ISSUES.
THESE LOTS, THESE WET PONDS WHERE THE WA WET BOTTOM WATER STAYING.
SOME OF THE PUBLIC CONCERN WAS IT IS TAKING AWAY THE DETENTION CAPACITY.
IT IS ACTUALLY AFTER THE DETENTION, THE VELOCITY, WHAT IT TAKES, THE VOLUMES WE ARE DESIGNING TO GO A LITTLE BIT MORE DEEPER TO GIVE AT BOTTOM DOES NOT MEAN IT IS HOLDING THE WATER.
THE DRAINAGE STUDY IS ACTUALLY REQUIRE SIX FOOT TALL TO DO WHAT WE GOT TO DO.
THEN WE WENT BELOW THAT TO CREATE THE AMENITY FEATURE FOR THE LOT.
SO IT'S ALL A MIS INTERCEPTIONS AND WRONG NOTATION INFORMATION BEING FLOATED ON A FACEBOOKS AND CONSENT WITH LOT OF INFORMATION.
I UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE COMMENTS ARE KIND OF VERY VALID AND WE TAKE THAT SERIOUSLY AND UH, WE EVERY LOT WILL HAVE SOME SORT OF EASEMENTS ON LOT OF AREAS ALL OVER HOUSTON INCLUDING FULL SHARE.
SO THAT THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE ARE CREATING AS EASEMENTS JUST LIKE ANY OTHER LOT.
AND IF WE REALLY KIND OF NAVIGATE AND GO THROUGH THAT SAME AREA, I MIGHT SEE SOME OTHER DETENTION POND SITTING ON THEIR BACKYARDS.
THAT'S ALL WE ARE CREATING HERE AND WE ARE TRYING TO CREATE THAT EXTRA AMENITY FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING AND FOR A FACT, THREE PARTNERS.
ME, MY TWO OTHER PARTNERS LIVING IN THAT COMMUNITY.
WE ARE BUILDING A HOMES THREE LOTS AND I HAVE THIS PROJECT BEEN FULLY SOLD OUT TO THE BUILDERS.
NOBODY MIGHT BE INTENDED TO BUY THESE LOTS ACTUALLY.
MR. GINI, UM, HOW WOULD YOU ADDRESS SOME OF THE AESTHETICS OF THE PONDS, WHETHER AERATION OR FOUNTAINS? AND ALSO COULD YOU SPEAK TO THE SAFETY YES.
OF THE LOTS THAT ARE DIRECTLY BEHIND PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS? SURE.
THE BACKYARDS, WE'RE DOING A FENCING WITH THE GATED ENTRIES AND
[01:20:01]
ALSO WE'RE DOING AERATION THE FOUNTAINS JUST TO GIVE THAT WATER QUALITY MAINTENANCE AND JUST MAKE SURE APPEAL AND JUST GIVE THE VALUE ADDITION TO THE LOT.AND WE ARE JUST SELLING AT THE SAME PRICE EVEN THOUGH WE ARE INVESTING MORE INTO THIS.
AND, UH, THESE LOTS BEEN COMMITTED BY THE REPUTED BUILDERS AND TALL BROTHERS BEING A 40 LOTS.
THEY'RE BUILDING A HOMES IN THIS AND THEY GREATLY APPRECIATED WHAT I'M DOING FOR THE COMMUNITY AND UH, FOR ACTUAL SUBDIVISION THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING.
SO I THINK IT HIT SORRY, GO AHEAD.
I JUST WANNA SAY I REMEMBER A WHILE BACK I MISS MS. JOHNSON AND I DID DO A TOUR, DID WE NOT, WHEN THE VERY HIGH, WE WENT TO THE VERY BACK AND THERE WAS QUITE A LARGE, UH, LAKE THERE.
I MEAN I, I WENT DOWN INTO THE BOTTOM AND I THINK IT WAS THREE TIMES HIGHER THAN ME.
AND, AND I'M NOT AN ENGINEER EITHER, BUT IT SEEMED LIKE AN AWFUL, LIKE THAT'S A LAKE, NOT A POND.
AND THEN THE OTHER ONE ON THE OTHER SIDE, IS THAT JUST NOT ENOUGH? THOSE, THOSE DETENTION POINTS THAT WHAT WE HAVE, WE KEPT IT AS IS MM-HMM
BUT THOSE WILL STILL BE THERE.
THEY'RE STILL GOING TO BE THERE.
MAYBE SOME OF THEM MIGHT BE MISUNDERSTOOD.
THAT WE ARE TRYING TO GET A MORE PROFITABILITY BY INCREASING A VOLUME OF LOTS OR SOMETHING.
WE ARE STILL MAINTAINING THE SAME NUMBER OF FLOODS.
WE ARE NOT GAINING, GAINING ANYTHING.
IN ADDITION, WE ARE SPENDING MORE MONEY TO CREATE THIS EXTRA MITIGATION.
ACTUALLY THIS MITIGATION SUPPOSED TO BE HELPING THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD, INCLUDING THE WALKER UNDER LEON ALONE.
I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS THAT I'M CREATING IS EXTRA MITIGATION UPON SPENDING MY OWN MONEY CREATING A EXTRA BENEFIT TO ANTIAR.
I THINK THAT'S WHY IS THAT A PROBLEM? THAT'S A GREAT VIEWPOINT AND I I APPRECIATE YOU SHARING THAT WITH US.
UH, ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, INDICATE IS THE PACKAGE, AS WE SEE IT, DID NOT HAVE ANY OF THESE DETAILS THAT WE ARE, YOU'RE EXPLAINING ABOUT THE, UH, I I I WAS VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH THE PNC MEETING.
I WAS NOT THERE TO ANSWER THEIR CONCERNS BECAUSE THEY'RE ASKING THE VALID QUESTIONS, BUT THERE IS NO ANSWERS TO IT.
AND, UH, THE TODAY ANSWERED WHO IS MAINTAINING THIS? MY DISTRICT IS MAINTAINING IT JUST LIKE ANY OTHER COMMUNITY.
SO EVEN THE ONES THAT ARE ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY WITH THE EASEMENTS WILL BE MAINTAINED BY, BY THE DISTRICT.
AND THEN THE UH, UM, THERE WILL BE NO, SO BASICALLY COMING TO MY EARLIER QUESTION THAT IT WOULD BE IDENTIFIED TO THE RESIDENTS THAT THEY CANNOT BUILD OVER THAT AREA.
BECAUSE THAT'S A CRITICAL ASPECT.
YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY MIGHT WANT BUILD IT AND THEN COME TO OUR, OUR ZBA AND SAY, OH, WE WANNA HAVE A VARIANCE NOW BECAUSE WE ALREADY BUILD IT.
WE WILL HAVE A DEDICATED EASEMENT ON THE PLOT THAT THEY CANNOT DO ANYTHING EVEN IN THE DEED IT'LL BE MENTIONED AND THE BUILDER GUIDELINES, IT'LL BE MENTIONED AND HYA IS GOING TO THE CONTRACT WITH THE MUD DISTRICT TO MAINTAIN THIS POND.
AND THEN THE HO AND THE MUD WILL HAVE VIGILANCE OVER THIS AS WELL? YES.
IN ADDITION TO THE CITY IN, IN ADDITION TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BY THE CITY.
THAT ANSWERS SOME OF THE QUESTIONS.
SO, AND ALSO YOU ASKED ME ONE OTHER QUESTION, HOW ABOUT LIKE A BACKUP WATER? YES, WE DO HAVE A BACKUP.
THEN WE WANT TO ADD THAT WHEN THE SECOND, UH, PLOT IS GOING TO BE COMING IN, WE WILL ADD THAT THESE DETENTIONS ARE WORKING FROM SOUTH, THEN COMING TO THE MIDDLE, COMING TO THE NORTH ONE, THEN THEY DISCHARGE INTO THE FLOOR.
THAT IS NOT ACCOUNTING THE BET BOTTOMS. THAT'S NEVER ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE VOLUME CALCULATIONS.
THAT IS IN ADDITION, WE ARE TRYING TO GIVE THAT TO GIVE THE WET BOTTOMS. SO WE ARE ACTUALLY CREATING A FIVE POND, VERY EXPENSIVE ONES, GIVING EXTRA MITIGATION ALL THIS WATER OTHERWISE WOULD'VE WENT DIRECTLY INTO THE FLOOR WHERE THE NO, THE CREEK RIGHT BEFORE WHAT I'M CREATING NOW, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING THE PROBLEM.
CAN WE GO BACK TO ONE OF MS. JOHNSON'S QUESTIONS WAS, UM, HOW WOULD WE MAINTAIN IF WE DO HAVE A DRY SEASON, ARE, DO YOU I SEE THE WELL THAT YOU HAVE, WILL YOU BE USING THAT? WELL TO MAINTAIN THE WATER LEVELS IN THE WET BOX? WE, WE, WE WERE EXACTLY PLANNING FOR ONE BACKUP.
WELL THAT IT IS GOING TO MAINTAIN CERTAIN LEVELS.
WILL THAT BE MAINTAINED ALSO BY THE MUD? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF MOVE THIS ALONG IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
PLEASE, REAL QUICK, WILL YOU BE MARKETING THIS AS TWO ACRE LOTS? NO, WE, WE, THIS IS ALREADY MARKETED AND GIVEN TO THE BUILDERS AND THEY ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THESE CHANGES AND WE PROVIDED EVERY BIT OF THE INFORMATION SINCE LAST TWO YEARS AND THEY'RE VERY HAPPY ABOUT IT.
THEY, THEY PRAISED ME FOR DOING THIS AND, UH, WE ARE PART OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE ARE GOING TO LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. GOIN AND I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR INPUTS.
[01:25:01]
UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR LEGAL MS. BOW OH, GO AHEAD.I APPRECIATE YOU TODAY COMING AND SPEAKING TO US, BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN I FEEL LIKE I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS THAN I HAVE ANSWERS COMING INTO THIS MEETING.
AND TO ME, THERE'S SO MANY EXAMPLES THAT HAVE BEEN GIVEN ABOUT THESE AMENITY PONDS, BUT ALL THE EXAMPLES WE'RE GIVING THOSE PONDS AREN'T OWNED BY RESIDENTS.
THEY ARE UPKEPT AND OWNED BY THE COMMUNITY OR THE HOA OR, OR THE MUD.
AND SO WHERE I'M FINDING MYSELF RIGHT NOW IS THESE, THIS DETENTION RETENTION HAS A SHARED PURPOSE.
SO ONE PERSON OWNING IT COULD AFFECT THEN THE REST OF IT.
AND TO ME, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A WORK SESSION THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN TO UNDERSTAND WHAT GUIDELINES DO WE HAVE.
I FEEL LIKE THIS IS SLIGHTLY KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD TO CREATE MORE ISSUES FOR INTERPRETATION WHEN THEY POP UP.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE A, A CLEAR DEFINITION OF HOW THIS IS GONNA BE UPKEPT.
I MEAN, I'M HEARING NOW THAT IT'S THE MUD.
I DIDN'T KNOW THAT BEFORE TODAY.
MAYBE SHAME ON ME, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE SHOULDN'T HAVE SOME SORT OF WORKING SESSION WITH P AND Z.
IF P AND Z UNANIMOUSLY VETOED THIS AND THEY'VE DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE IN THEIR HOMEWORK AND WE'VE PUT RESIDENTS IN THOSE POSITIONS TO HELP ADVISE US, I FEEL LIKE THERE MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WE'RE MISSING HERE.
NOW I KNOW WE HAVE TO INTERPRET THE LAW OR WE, WE CAN'T INTERPRET THE LAW.
THE LAW IS THE LAW, BUT I'M JUST, I'M SITTING HERE THINKING IF WE SET THIS PRECEDENCE TODAY, THAT IS OPENING IT UP FOR TWO ACRE, LOTS TO BE INTERPRETED MULTIPLE DIFFERENT WAYS.
WE ARE PRODUCING A 74 LOTS ON 2 27 ACRES.
THAT'S UNLESS WE ADJUST A CDO LESS THAN TWO, TWO ACRE LOTS IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS.
SO IT'S, THAT'S WHY I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS A COMMON PRACTICE OR THIS IS THE FIRST ONE WE'VE SEEN.
I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S GONNA BE 20 RIGHT DOWN, RIGHT BEHIND IT.
SO THIS IS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE, WE DO, IF WE COME ACROSS SOMETHING THAT WE IDENTIFY AS A GAP IN OUR ORDINANCES, THEN YES, CITY COUNCIL AND I, I DO WANNA RECOMMEND IN THIS INSTANCE THAT STAFF, UM, WITH LEGAL ADVICE COME UP WITH A TIGHTENING OF THE ORDINANCES WHERE DRAINAGE DETENTION AND RETENTION ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE OVERALL LAND COUNT FOR A STATE RESIDENTIAL.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD PUT TOGETHER AND THEN PRESENT BACK TO COUNCIL? WELL, BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING AND THEN COUNCIL MM-HMM
BUT THAT'S A, A DIFFERENT TOPIC THAN THE BELMONT.
SO AS FAR AS BELMONT GOES, MY QUESTION TO LEGAL IS, UM, IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE ORDINANCES, AND YOU ALREADY CLARIFIED THAT, UM, STOPS THIS COUNSEL FROM APPROVING BECAUSE YOU SAID WE ARE LEGALLY REQUIRED TO APPROVE IT UNLESS WE CAN CITE SOMETHING FROM OUR, UM, CDL.
SO WHAT I DID IS I CITED THE STATUTE RIGHT.
I HAVEN'T GIVEN YOU ANY ILLEGAL ADVICE ON APPROVAL OF DISAPPROVAL OF THIS PARTICULAR PLAT.
AND I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT, BUT NOT AN OPEN SESSION.
UM, HAS STAFF REACHED OUT TO LEGAL TO SEEK THEIR INPUT ON THIS TOPIC? EXCUSE ME.
WE'VE REACHED OUT, UH, NUMEROUS TIMES AND YOU HAVE RECEIVED THAT INPUT.
AND NONE OF THAT GIVES US ANY, UH, STANDING AS TO WHY WE WOULD DENY IT.
SO JUST BASED ON THE STATUTE, IT LOOKS LIKE IF WE HAVEN'T FOUND A WAY WHERE WE CAN DENY IT, THEN IS THERE A WAY WE CAN SEND IT BACK TO PNZ? BECAUSE THERE WERE CERTAIN MATERIALS MISSING FROM THIS WHEN THIS WAS PRESENTED TO PNZ.
SO CERTAIN MATERIALS MISSING FROM STAFF TO PNZ, YOU ACTUALLY, WE RECEIVED THE, THE PLAT ON JUNE 30TH THAT HAD THE CONTOURS, IT WAS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE BECAUSE THEY HAD FULFILLED ALL OF THE ITEMS. I AM NOT, I THINK THEY WERE LOOKING AT THE PREVIOUS PLAT THAT DIDN'T HAVE CONTOURS ON IT, WHICH IS WHAT THE BASIS OF THE DENIAL WAS.
THE PLAT ACTUALLY DID HAVE THE CONTOURS ON IT.
SO THERE WERE TWO ASPECTS OF WHY THE P AND Z DENIED IT WAS THE CONTOUR LINES WERE NOT ON THE ORIGINAL PLAT THAT WAS SUBMITTED.
AND THEIR QUESTION WAS THE INTENT OF THE CDO.
THE UNFORTUNATE PART IS BY LAW WE CAN'T JUSTIFY INTENT, UM, BECAUSE THAT WOULD SUBJUGATE US TO LEGAL ASPECT AND INTERPRETATION.
AND WE ARE NOT HERE TO INTERPRET THE LAW.
UM, IN THAT RESPECT, AGAIN, WE, WE LOOK AT TIGHTENING OUR CDO UNFORTUNATELY AFTER THE FACT.
[01:30:01]
UM, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR, IN THIS PARTICULAR INSIGHT, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE WE HAVE MUCH OF A CHOICE, WOULDN'T IT? ULTIMATELY, I'M JUST BEING SIMPLE HERE IS ULTIMATELY IN THIS ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT, THE HOMEOWNER LOOKS AT SIGNS A DEAL TO BUILD A MILLION DOLLAR HOME OR WHATEVER ON A TWO ACRE LOT AND THEY SAY, OH, BUT HALF OF IT'S, UH, A POND.OR IT GOES IN THERE AND THEN THEY CAN SAY, WELL, THAT'S OKAY.
I, I LIKE THAT POND BEING THERE.
I MEAN, IT'S REALLY UP TO THE, UH, YOU KNOW, MARKET.
HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION OF WHY THE DETENTION RETENTION ISN'T JUST BEING PUT ON A COMMON SHARED AREA OR LOT, JUST FOR CURIOSITY? SO THE ORIGINAL PLAN HAD ALL OF THE DETENTION IN A, IN A REGIONAL FACILITY.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU CAN SEE IT, BUT YOU CAN SEE ONE OF THE PONDS HERE.
THERE'S, UM, I THINK IT'S, IT'S ON THE NEXT, UH, CUT OFF.
UM, THERE ARE, THERE ARE TWO DETENTION PONDS.
THERE ARE TWO DETENTION PONDS ON, ON THE ORIGINAL PLAT AND A MITIGATION POND.
UM, THE ORIGINAL PLAN AS MR. AS MR. GOGAN MENTIONED, HAD THE, HAD THESE HOUSE PADS THAT WERE EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY TALL AND IT SLOPED AWAY RATHER QUICKLY FROM THE HOMES.
AND THEN BASICALLY THE REST OF THE REST OF THE LOT WAS CONSIDERED IN THE FLOODPLAIN AND IN A SENSE UNUSABLE.
UM, BECAUSE YOU WOULD'VE HAD TO ONE, ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO BUILD OUT THERE WAS SUBJECT TO FLOODING OR YOU WOULD HAVE TO BUILD IT UP AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO MITIGATE.
ADDITIONALLY, UH, THERE'S ALSO A RESTRICTION IN THE DEEDS OF 10,000, UH, SQUARE FOOT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO DEPENDING ON THE HOUSE SIZE, THE DRIVEWAY, POOL, PATIO, ANYTHING LIKE THAT, YOU COULD POTENTIALLY NOT, UM, BE ABLE TO BUILD ANY OUTBUILDINGS OR OTHER STRUCTURES ON THIS SITE SITE ANYWAY, UM, BASED ON THE GRADING PLAN, NOW THE HOUSE PADS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT DOWN, ADDITIONAL FILL HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE FLOODPLAIN TO GRADE AWAY FROM THOSE HOMES TO BRING THE FULL ELEVATION OF THE, THE SITE UP IN EFFECT MAKING THE, UM, THE REMAINING PROPERTY MORE USABLE.
'CAUSE NOW YOU COULD BUILD A, A BUILDING ON IT WITH LESS TO DO, UH, DOWN TO THE PONDS.
I'VE, THE, THE FILL HAS TO BE MITIGATED.
AND SO THIS WAS THE BUILDER'S, UM, REQUEST.
HE ASKED IF, IF HE COULD DO THIS, WE DIDN'T SEE ANY ISSUES WITH IT IN THE ORDINANCE.
AND, UM, THAT IS WHY IT WAS, WHY THEY PROCEEDED THAT WAY.
UH, THE OPTION TO BUILD A, A REGIONAL DETENTION FACILITY, I DON'T KNOW HOW LARGE THAT WOULD BE, BUT IT COULD BE SUBSTANTIAL.
AND, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY LOTS HE WOULD LOSE BASED ON THAT.
BUT THIS WAS THE, UM, THE ALTERNATIVE THAT HE REQUESTED.
AND AGAIN, WE, WE REVIEWED IT INTERNALLY AS STAFF AND DIDN'T SEE ANY, ANY CONCERNS WITH THE, UM, TWO ACRE LOT GIVEN THE, GIVEN THE CURRENT CDO.
IF YOU WANT TO, ALRIGHT, LET'S, LET'S MOTIVATE HERE AND REACH A, GET TO A CONCLUSION OR SOMETHING.
ARE THERE MINIMUM SETBACKS AS FAR AS HOME DISTANCE FROM THE, FROM THE WATER LINES? YES.
THINGS LIKE THAT? UH, WELL, FROM THE FRONT LOT, YES.
BUT NOT FROM THE WATER LINE TO THE BACK OF A HOME OR, OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
THEY CAN'T BUILD INSIDE THE, THE EASEMENT.
UH, THERE WILL BE, THERE SHOULD BE A MAINTENANCE BERM BETWEEN THE, UM, EASEMENT LINE AND WE'LL ENSURE THAT AS WE DO THE, THE, UH, REVIEW AND THEN A, YOU KNOW, SLOPE DOWN INTO THE, INTO THE POND AREA.
BUT THERE SHOULD BE A, UH, AT, I CAN LOOK AND SEE WHAT IT EXACTLY IS WE WE'RE GIVING A BACKLOG SETBACK.
AND SO OUR, OUR ORDINANCE IS 35 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE REAR.
HOWEVER, THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
'CAUSE THEN THEY WOULD BE ENCROACHING INTO THAT EASEMENT WHERE THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO BUILD, WHICH IS MENTIONED ON THE PLAT AS A PLAT NOTE THAT NO STRUCTURE VEGETATION OR ANYTHING THAT COULD OBSTRUCT ANY DRAINAGE.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD ASKED EARLIER AS WELL.
SO, UH, MY QUESTION AGAIN TO LEGAL IS WHAT IF COUNSEL DENIES THIS PLA TODAY, WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP IF THAT DOES HAPPEN? WELL, WE WOULD NEED, WE, I THINK STAFF WOULD NEED TO KNOW THE, I NEED, YOU WOULD NEED TO ARTICULATE THE, THE SPECIFIC REASON, UM, BASED ON THE RULES THAT YOU'VE ADOPTED.
AND THE, UH, STATE LAW ALLOWS FOR THAT WOULD'VE TO BE ARTICULATED.
[01:35:01]
ORDINANCE RELATED TO THAT, WE WOULD HAVE TO PRO PROVIDE THAT.MY GUESS IT WOULD BE A, A ZONING ORDINANCE, I SUPPOSE, UM, BASED ON WHAT I'M, THE DISCUSSION I'M HEARING.
AND THEN, UM, WE WOULD GIVE THEM A WRITTEN, GIVE THAT TO 'EM IN, IN WRITING THEN WOULD IT HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE CITY WITH THE AMENDMENTS OR NO, THEY'D HAVE TO, WELL, I'LL, I'LL DEFER TO YOU ON THE PROCESS.
SO THERE IS A 15 DAY SHOT CLOCK AND THAT'S CALENDAR DAY.
AND SO IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, SHOULD IT BE DENIED WITH A PROPER ORDINANCE THAT WE CAN GIVE TO THE DEVELOPER, THEY HAVE 15 CALENDAR DAYS TO CORRECT THAT, UH, AND BRING IT BACK TO US.
HOWEVER, AS THE CALENDAR SITS, WE HAVE NO MEETING SCHEDULED.
UH, SO UPON THAT 15 DAY WINDOW, IT IS AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED.
SO PRETTY MUCH NO MATTER WHAT WE DO TODAY, IT'S PRE A FOREGONE CONCLUSION IS WHAT WE'RE SAYING.
I I THINK THERE MIGHT BE ONE OTHER OPTION, AND I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK TOO MUCH INTO DETAIL OF IT, BUT IT COULD BE A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL.
IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A BIG CONCERN, UH, WITH THE, THE MAINTENANCE OF THIS EASEMENT AS WELL AS SOME OF THE OTHER CONCERNS THAT WERE ADDRESSED TONIGHT.
BUT IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY BOTHERING YOU OR SOMETHING THAT YOU JUST REALLY CAN'T GET OVER AT THE MOMENT, BUT WE'RE KIND OF TIED WITH THIS SHOT CLOCK, WE COULD DO A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL RELATED TO THAT ISSUE.
UH, I'M SPEAKING OFF THE CUFF HERE AS AN EXAMPLE.
LIKE, UH, CONDITIONALLY APPROVED, SO LONG AS THERE IS A CLEAR UNDERSTOOD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE HOA THAT PLEASES COUNSEL OR THAT MEETS YOUR STANDARDS OR THE CDO, RIGHT? I THINK I ALREADY CALLED THAT OUT IN THE GENERAL NOTE NUMBER NINE TO INCLUDE THE RETENTION SLASH DETENTION POINTS.
AND SO YOU COULD MAKE, YOU COULD, YOU COULD HANDLE THAT THROUGH A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL.
MR. SUGAR, THIS IS YOUR BALLGAME FOR THE RECORD.
FOR THE RECORD, THE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL REQUIRES THE SAME, IT'S THE SAME AS A DISAPPROVAL.
SO YOU'LL HAVE TO, UH, YOU HAVE THE, THE DI THE DISAPPROVAL OR CONDITIONAL APPROVAL MUST BE WRITTEN.
IT MUST BE DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE, UNDER THE CODE.
AND IT MUST INCLUDE A CITATION TO ANY APPLICABLE MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE.
THAT'S THE BASIS FOR THE CONDITIONAL APPROVEMENT.
AH, SO WE CAN'T EVEN, SO WE CAN'T DO THAT.
SO WE CAN'T, CAN'T, SO WE CAN'T EVEN LOOK AT A CONDITIONAL CONDITIONAL IMPROVEMENT.
'CAUSE WE CAN'T, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO POINT TO.
AND I, YOU KNOW, THE, I SENSE THE FRUSTRATION IN THE ROOM AND I ALWAYS TELL FOLKS, THE TEXAS LEGISLATURES, THE IS WHO IS HAMSTRING CITY COUNCILS ON THESE ISSUES? UM, THEY'RE THE ONES WHO ARE PUTTING IN PLACE THESE, THESE PROVISIONS THAT I'VE JUST READ TO YOU WERE PUT IN PLACE IN 2019 AND 2023.
SO THEY'RE RELATIVELY RECENT REGULATIONS BECAUSE THEY ARE, UM, DEVELOPERS HAVE VERY GOOD LOBBYISTS.
I MOVE, WE APPROVE THE BELMONT ESTATE SECTION ONE AMENDING PLAT NUMBER ONE, FINAL PLATS SECOND.
UM, MOTION IS MADE, BEEN MADE BY MS. JOHNSON TO APPROVE ITEM J CONSENT APPROVAL FOR BELMONT ESTATE SECTION ONE AMENDING PLAT NUMBER ONE.
DO I HEAR A SECOND MR. CONNOR? SECOND.
MR. CONNOR HAS SECONDED THE MOTION.
AND DO I HEAR ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON ITEM J FROM THE PUBLIC? OR NO? EXCUSE ME, MAY I? NO MA'AM.
A MOTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE AND I'M ASKING FOR DISCUSSION BY THE, UH, CITY COUNCIL.
ALL THE HEARING, NO, UH, DISCUSSION.
MR.
WE'VE HEARD EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS.
MR, MR. DO ALL NO, I'M NOT, I'M NOT ENTERTAINING ANYTHING RIGHT NOW.
UM, NOW THE, THE VOTE, THE COUNCIL HAS ALREADY VOTED AND THIS IS THE WAY IT IS.
AND YOU'VE, YOU'VE SAT AND HEARD ALL THE DISCUSSION WE HAD.
SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.
IF THERE'S ANY MORE DISRUPTIONS, UM, YOU CAN TALK TO US OUTSIDE AFTER IT'S OVER.
SO THEY GET IT SO THEY CAN HAVE MORE MONEY.
UM, I'M GONNA WAIT FOR EVERYBODY TO EXIT REAL QUICK.
THAT NEEDS TO EXIT UNLESS I'M NOT GONNA HAVE ANYBODY GO OUT THERE AND START TALKING IN THE LOBBY.
UM, THANK YOU FOR THE REST OF YOU FOR YOUR DECORUM.
UH, IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED THAT WE TAKE A QUICK, UH,
[01:40:01]
BREAK FOR ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK FIVE OR 10 MINUTES, COUNSEL.CAN Y'ALL HOLD ON? AND IT'S, IT'S APROPOS THAT IT'S ITEM P.
[CONSENT ITEMS - P]
P, UH, I'M SORRY,I DON'T MEAN TO MAKE LIGHT OF THAT, BUT, UH, MR. UTR, COULD YOU HURRY UP WITH ITEM P I'M HURRYING UP SIR.
ALRIGHT, SO ANY CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS YEAR? UH, THERE WAS SOME, SO THERE WAS SOME MINOR MODIFICATIONS.
UM, UH, I THINK TWO OF THE SCHOOL ZONES 10 MINUTES BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN THE SCHOOL TIME.
BUT THAT WAS THE ONLY, THE ONLY, UH, MAJOR CHANGE.
UM, WHEN DO THESE, UH, BECOME EFFECTIVE? THEY'LL BECOME EFFECTIVE THE SECOND YOU APPROVE THEM.
BUT WHEN WILL THEY BE IN PLACE? WE WON'T BE BEFORE SCHOOL START.
WE'LL, THEM READY BEFORE THE SCHOOL STARTS.
ONCE, ONCE THIS YEAR'S SCHOOL SEASON STARTS, THEY WILL, THEY WILL BE SCHOOL SESSION, MAYBE COUPLE, THREE DAYS OF PRACTICE FOR THE PUBLIC.
SO, WE'LL TYPICALLY WE TYPICALLY TURN THE, UH, FLASHERS ON USUALLY ABOUT TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO SCHOOL START, JUST TO GIVE PEOPLE A HEADS UP THAT IT'S COMING.
PD DOESN'T ENFORCE IT DURING THOSE FIRST TWO WEEKS.
UM, AS, AND THAT'S BEEN THE WAY THEY'VE HANDLED IT IN THE PAST, BUT THEY USE IT AS AN OP.
WE ALL USE IT AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO JUST KIND OF GET PEOPLE A ACCUSTOMED TO THE SCHOOL FLASHERS COMING BACK ON.
THE ONLY REASON I PULLED THIS ITEM WAS TO MAKE THE PUBLIC AWARE THAT THIS IS COMING.
AND PLEASE BE CAREFUL DURING THE SCHOOL ZONE TIMINGS LOOK, UH, PAY EXTRA ATTENTION AT THE CROSSWALKS AND AT STOP SIGNS AND LIGHTS AND, UH, TRY AND AVOID ANY POSSIBLE ACCIDENTS THERE.
AND I WOULD ADD, PLEASE USE THE BUTTONS WHEN YOU COME TO THE, PLEASE PRESS THE BUTTON.
IF YOU'RE CROSSING BUTTONS, PLEASE STOP FIRST.
SO CLIFF AUGUST, THEN USE THE BUTTONS SCHOOL 11TH, AUGUST 12TH.
OUR FIRST DAYS OF SCHOOL FOR KATIE AND THE RCIC.
SO I WOULD EXPECT THIS IS GONNA START TO TAKE EFFECT NEXT WEEK PRETTY, PRETTY SOON.
SOMEWHERE AROUND THAT TIMEFRAME.
OKAY, MS. BILL, COULD YOU REPEAT THOSE DATES? AUGUST 11TH FOR LAMAR CONSOLIDATED AND AUGUST 12TH FOR K-D-I-S-D AND WE'LL PROBABLY TURN 'EM ON AT THE SAME TIME.
WE'LL JUST, WE'LL JUST GET 'EM KICKED OFF A COUPLE MONDAYS BEFORE AND I TOO SHARE WITH ALL OF OUR E-BIKE.
DRIVERS BE CAREFUL WITH ALL OF OUR STUDENTS.
UM, IT TAKES TWO, RIGHT? SO SOMETIMES OUR ADOLESCENTS AREN'T THINKING THAT, THAT CLEAR.
SO PLEASE, DRIVERS BE CAREFUL.
ORDINANCE NUMBER 2026 DASH 1 54.
FIVE SECOND BEEN MADE TO APPROVE BY MR. KAR.
UH, ORDINANCE NUMBER 2026 DASH 1545.
I HEARD A SECOND MS. VOTE YES.
ANY, UH, OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE? I'LL ASK FOR VOTE.
ANY OPPOSED? AND THAT MOTION PASSES AND NOW WE'RE ON THE ITEM 10, BUT I DO ENTERTAIN A MOTION THAT WE TAKE A BREAK.
MAY I MOVE? UH, COUNSEL, TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
SO WE ARE GONNA TAKE A BREAK AT NINE AT 7 43.
HOW ABOUT GIVE EVERYBODY SEVEN MINUTES.
LET'S TAKE A BREAK BACK AT SEVEN 50.
TAKE YOUR LIFE IN YOUR OWN HANDS.
WALKING OUTSIDE, JUST KIND OF SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.
A LOT OF THINGS TO DISCUSS AND MOVE FORWARD.
I'LL CALL US BACK TO ORDER AT 7 52.
AND GOING INTO SECTION 10, ITEM A IS
[BUSINESS - A]
A CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE AN AGREEMENT FOR, UH, THE DESIGN OF THE MCKINNON WATER PLANT.UH, THE EST, WHICH IS THE ACRONYM FOR ELEVATED STORAGE TANK PROJECT W 27 A.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNSEL.
THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF AN ADDITIONAL 1 MILLION GALLON ELEVATED STORAGE TANK THAT WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL POTABLE WATER CAPACITY AND SUPPORT FUTURE GROWTH FOR FUL WATER NEEDS.
UH, THE EST IS PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON A 1.3 ACRE PROPERTY AT THE CORNER OF BO ARK IN MCKINNON ON A PROPERTY THAT THE CITY CURRENTLY OWNS.
UH, SO WITH THAT, UH, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? YES, SIR.
SO IS THIS IN LINE WITH THE STRATEGIC WATER PLANNING COMMITTEE? SINCE WE DON'T HAVE, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER MILLER HERE.
SO, UM, I WOULD REQUEST COUNCIL MEMBER CONNOR TO GIVE US SOME INPUT.
UM, AND BEN, MAYBE IF YOU CAN HELP ME HERE TOO.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, WE, THE CURRENT PLAN IS TO NOT DRILL ANOTHER WELL THERE.
SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S A BIG CHANGE.
BUT WE STILL NEED, UH, THE ELEVATED STORAGE TANK FOR WATER CAPACITY AND WATER PRESSURE ISSUES.
ALL THIS HAS BEEN RUN THROUGH THE, THE
[01:45:01]
SWIFT COMMITTEE.UM, AND IN FACT, LATER ON YOU'RE GONNA SEE IT AGAIN WHEN WE GET TO THE BUDGET.
SO
SO THERE WERE CER THIS CERTAIN PIECE WAS MISSING, WHICH WE WANTED TO KNOW THAT THIS IS IN LINE WITH OUR WATER AND WASTEWATER PLAN.
WE ARE NOT PURSUING THE WELL, BUT WE'LL STILL NEED THE STORAGE TANK NO MATTER WHAT.
AND MORE SPECIFICALLY, THIS DATES BACK TO THE 2021 WATER WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN.
UH, WHEN, IN WHICH CASE IT ACTUALLY WAS ORIGINALLY POSTULATED TO BE AT THE DOWNTOWN WATER PLANT NEXT TO HUGGINS, HUGGINS ELEMENTARY.
AND THAT MORE SPECIFIC TOO, WAS TO BASICALLY TAKE DOWN OR DEMOLISH THE EXISTING ELEVATED STORAGE TANK AND THEN BUILD ANOTHER ONE IN THIS PLACE.
AND WE THINK WE'VE MENTIONED THIS BEFORE, BUT WE FEEL LIKE IT'S, THERE'S NO NEED TO TAKE DOWN EXISTING CAPACITY IF IT ALREADY EXISTS, WE'LL JUST ADD ADDITIONAL.
MAYOR, I PROPOSE COUNCIL APPROVE AN AGREEMENT FOR THE DESIGN OF MCMAIN WATER PLAN.
ELEVATED STORAGE TANK PROJECT W 27 A, A MOTION BY MR. KAR TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER A ABOUT THE MC WATER PLANT.
SECOND CALL FOR BY MR. RUSSELL.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ANY APPROVE? ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT.
MOVING ON TO ITEM B DISCUSSION AND
[BUSINESS - B]
REGARDING SCOTERS AND POSSIBLE NEXT STEPS.SO, AS YOU RECALL, THIS WAS INCLUDED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, BUT CITY COUNCIL FIRST ADOPTED AN ORDINANCE IN OCTOBER, UH, OCTOBER 7TH, SPECIFICALLY OF 2025, WHICH WAS REALLY PROBABLY, IT CAN, CAN BE CONSIDERED A SORT OF LIGHTER LEVEL OF REGULATION.
UH, IT SPECIFICALLY REGULATES, UH, THE USE OF SCOTERS, UH, AT INTERSECTIONS AND CREATES SOME ENFORCEABLE STANDARDS FOR THE OPERATION OF BOTH MOTORIZED AND NON-MOTORIZED VEHICLES.
IT DOES INCLUDE A FINE, UM, THE BIG THING THERE I THINK IS, AND WE'LL HEAR FROM POLICE AS WELL, IT, AND I MENTIONED THIS ALREADY, IT'S SORT OF A LIGHTER LEVEL OF REGULATION.
WHEN WE ORIGINALLY TALKED ABOUT THIS, IT WAS, LET'S, LET'S GO LIGHT, LET'S GO MORE INCREMENTAL IF THE PROBLEM PERSIST.
UM, AT THAT TIME, COUNSEL WISHED FOR STAFF TO TURN AFTER AN IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD TO EVALUATE THE ORDINANCES EFFECTIVENESS, WHICH HAPPENED JUST THE NEXT MONTH.
AND WE DISCUSSED E-BIKES AGAIN IN NOVEMBER.
UM, AND THAT DISCUSSION AT THE TIME JUST LEANED TOWARDS CONTINUED EDUCATION.
UH, THE YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN PARTICULAR HAS TAKEN THIS OR HAS HAD TAKEN ON THIS, UH, THIS EFFORT.
THE YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE, UM, PUT TOGETHER UTILITY BILL INSERTS.
THERE WAS SOCIAL MEDIA CAMPAIGNS BY THE CITY'S PAGE, THE CITY'S POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE.
UH, IT WAS PUT INTO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S NEWSLETTERS.
THE YAK ALSO CREATED, UH, SCOOTER SIMON AS A TOOL TO HELP PROMOTE SAFETY AROUND E SCOOTERS.
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S GONE TO SCHOOLS DIRECTLY TO, TO EDUCATE.
AND WE'VE, WE HAVE OF COURSE BEEN ALSO IMPLEMENTING THE ORDINANCE THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE.
SINCE THAT ORDINANCE WAS ENACTED IN OCTOBER, WE'VE ISSUED ONE CITATION.
UH, BUT FROM HERE IT'S REALLY JUST AGAIN, PROVIDING THAT UPDATE CITY UP, THAT UPDATE TO CITY COUNCIL.
IF COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ANY OF THE METRICS, UH, INCIDENTS, TICKETS, ANY DETAILS, POLICE DEPARTMENT'S HERE.
IF WE'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT EDUCATION, MARIAH, THE POLICE, POLICE FOLKS CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
UM, OR IF WE WANNA TALK ABOUT WHAT DOES X, Y, OR Z NEW ADDITIONAL REGULATION LOOK LIKE, EVEN FROM A LEGAL LENS, THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
I, I JUST WANNA POINT OUT, UM, I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH A YOUNG LADY AT THE TODAY, UH, HER YOUNG SON HAS A, HAS A NEW, UH, MOTORCYCLE, BUT IT'S 100% ELECTRIC AND HE'S 14.
AND, UM, AND THEY JUST LOVE TO RIDE AROUND.
AND SO SHE WISHES THAT WE WOULD LAY, LAY OFF.
BUT, UM, I'M JUST GONNA GO OUT ON A LIMB AND SAY, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE MIGHT BE, UH, ONE OF THE FIRST CITIES TO TRY TO COME UP WITH A, UH, NOT JUST A SAFETY COURSE, BUT SOMETHING WHERE, UH, KIDS WILL E SCOOTERS AND E-BIKES TAKE A COURSE OR SOMETHING THAT, LIKE A DRIVER'S COURSE LIKE YOU DO TO GET A LICENSE AND THEY GET A BASIC, UH, A FULL SURE PERMIT THAT THEY'VE GONE THROUGH OUR SAFETY REVIEW AND HAVE A STICKER ON THEIR BIKE THAT SHOWS THAT THEY'VE DONE THAT.
AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR OWN LICENSING OF YOUNG CHILDREN ON THIS, THAT THEY'VE DONE THAT.
UH, I THINK OUT THERE, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A FREE FOR ALL, BUT THAT'S JUST SOMETHING I THINK IF, I THINK PEOPLE WERE SMART TO ME, CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
YEAH, WE CAN, WE CAN, I'LL, I'LL INVITE CHIEF TO JUST GO AHEAD AND COME UP.
'CAUSE WE, WE, WE, I'M SURE THERE'LL BE PLENTY FOR 'EM,
UH, AT ONE TIME WE USED TO HAVE GOLF CART PERMITS, BUT WAS THERE A DRIVER'S EDUCATION COURSE ATTACHED TO THAT? UH,
[01:50:01]
I, I THINK IT WAS MORE JUST THE SAFETY AND THE, THE PERMIT HAVING TO BE AFFIXED AND SOME DIFFERENT LIGHTS AND ET CETERA.I, I THINK THE QUESTION WHICH WOULD GO RIGHT TO PROBABLY PRACTICALITY IS WHO ON STAFF IS GONNA GO TO EACH PERSON'S HOUSE AND DO THOSE INSPECTIONS? OH NO.
JUST LIKE WE GO WITH THE DMV, WE, YOU KNOW, WE TAKE OUR CARS AND WE TAKE A TEST AND THEN THEY HAVE TO GO OVER SORT OF A SAFETY TEST WITH THE E SCOOTERS.
I MEAN, WHEN I GOT MY MOTORCYCLE LICENSE, I HAD TO TAKE A TEST AND HAVE A POLICEMAN IN ANOTHER CAR.
I PROVIDED, FOLLOW ME THROUGH A CERTAIN COURSE.
AND HOW OLD WERE YOU WHEN YOU TOOK THAT
SO TO MAKE, TO YOUR POINT, YOU SAID THIS WAS A 14-YEAR-OLD THAT GOT AN E MOTORCYCLE.
SO THE, THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE, YOU KNOW, TO MM-HMM
TO RIDE ONE OF THOSE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A VALID DRIVER'S LICENSE AND A MOTORCYCLE ENDORSEMENT.
SO THE MOTORCYCLES ARE NOT LEGAL AT ALL.
SO, UM, AND, AND AGAIN, I CAN BE TALKING RIGHT NOW AND TECHNOLOGY WILL CHANGE AND MAKE ME INTO A LIAR, BUT RIGHT NOW, THE DEVICES OR THE APPARATUSES THAT ARE OUT THERE NOW, THE, THE, THE VEHICLES THAT ARE OUT THERE, THEY'RE NOT, UH, ALLOWED BY LAW.
SO ON THE ROADWAY, YOU CAN HAVE A LICENSE, YOU CAN HAVE WHATEVER.
THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT PERMITTED.
THEY DON'T HAVE ALL THE THINGS THAT A MOTORCYCLE WOULD HAVE, SAFETY EQUIPMENT, ETC.
SAFETY SIGNALS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE, SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, ACTUALLY, I'M, I'M LOOKING HERE AT WHAT THE STATE OF TEXAS IDENTIFIES.
WE'VE GOT THE SCOTERS, WE'VE GOT THE ELECTRIC BICYCLES, WHICH HAVE PEDALS, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT THE E MOTORCYCLES.
AND THERE'S ACTUALLY THE DIRT BIKES TOO THAT, THAT ARE PART OF THAT, THAT WE'RE SEEING A LOT OF THOSE FULL TOO.
SO THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE REGULATIONS FOR, FOR AT LEAST THE SCOTERS AND THE EBIS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE PROBABLY OUR BIGGEST CONCERN.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING.
I KNOW THAT I PERSONALLY HAVE SEEN PROBABLY MORE VIOLATIONS ON THE FULL SHERE BEND, UH, CROSS CREEK AREA WITH THOSE TWO ITEMS THAN ANY, AND WHETHER THEY'RE ON THE SIDEWALK OR ON THE STREET, UH, THAT'S THE BIGGEST ISSUE WE'RE SEEING.
UH, SO THAT'S WHERE I THINK WE NEED TO, YOU KNOW, MR. CONNER, I FOCUS, I AGREE WITH YOU, BUT I JUST TO PUT IT OUT THERE.
A MOTORIZED VEHICLE IS A MOTORIZED VEHICLE.
REGARDLESS, UH, THIS YOUNG BOY, I SAID, HOW FAST IS YOUR E E-BIKE OR WHATEVER IT GOES, 62 MILES AN HOUR.
UM, BUT I THINK IT SHOULD JUST BE ANY MOTORIZED VEHICLE PERIOD.
I DON'T CARE IF IT'S GOT PEDALS OR IF IT DOESN'T HAVE PEDALS OR WHATEVER.
IT'S, IT'S JUST GOTTA BE A MOTORIZED.
I SAY SOME OF THE IDEAS I'VE HEARD FROM DIFFERENT CITY COUNCILS MEMBERS, JUST COLLECTIVELY HAS BEEN, CAN WE RESTRICT THESE TO PARTICULAR TIMES OF THE DAY? MAYBE SCHOOL ZONE TIMES.
UH, MAYBE WE COULD RESTRICT THEM TO PARTICULAR GEOGRAPHIC AREAS, PARTICULAR ROUTES TO SCHOOL, UM, THE SAFETY COURSE, UH, REQUIREMENTS.
MAYBE WE ATTACH FINES TO VIOLATIONS, THE PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.
UH, ANYTHING REALLY THAT YOU CAN IMAGINE.
I'VE HEARD A LOT OF CREATIVE IDEAS UP TO A TOTAL BAN.
SO I THINK UP DOING WHAT, WHAT UP TO A TOTAL BAN ON THEM.
SO I THINK THE IDEA HERE, AND ACTUALLY ANOTHER ONE WOULD BE, CAN THE CITY TAKE ITS CURRENT ORDINANCE AND APPLY TO HOA OR MUD OWNED PATHWAYS AS WELL? SO I'VE HEARD THAT, BUT WHAT OTHER IDEAS ARE, ARE THERE, SO, SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SCOTERS, RIGHT? JUST THE SCOOTERS.
ARE WE TALKING ABOUT ALL SCOOTERS, BIKES, MOTORCYCLES HERE? SO BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT, UM, UNDERSTAND THAT THE STATE LAW IS ALLOWED E-BIKES, IT'S A BICYCLE.
SO UNDER THE, UNDER, UH, WAS IT, UH, SENATE BILL 2039, IT, IT SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIES, UH, E BICYCLES.
AND THERE ARE THREE CLASSIFICATIONS.
THERE'S CLASS ONE, TWO, AND THREE.
DO NOT ASK ME WHAT THE DIFFERENCES ARE.
UH, I JUST KNOW IF THEY DON'T HAVE PEDALS, THEY'RE NOT LEGAL.
SO UNDERSTANDING THAT, UH, WE WOULD PROBABLY, AND THIS IS WHERE I WOULD LEAN OVER TO THE LEGAL SIDE AS TO WHAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO BY REMOVING BICYCLES FROM SIDEWALKS AND ROADWAYS, UM, AND THEN E-BIKES, UM, BEING IN THE SAME CATEGORY.
SO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SCOOTERS, THAT'S A DIFFERENT CATEGORY ALTOGETHER, BUT JUST KIND OF UNDERSTAND, UH, I, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE PUSHING BOTH OF 'EM TOGETHER.
AND I DO HAVE SOME DATA THAT WE CAN KIND OF GIVE YOU TO KIND OF GIVE YOU SOME OF THE IDEAS OF SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WE'VE DEALT WITH SINCE THE, UH, UM, THE ORDINANCE HAS BEEN PUT IN PLACE SO YOU KIND OF GET A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH.
AND I WOULD AGREE, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE OUT THERE.
UM, YEAH, THEY'RE NOT ABIDING BY THE LAWS.
UH, UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN YOU SEE A BLACK AND WHITE OUT THERE, THEY'RE ABIDING
[01:55:01]
BY THE LAWS.WELL, WE'RE NOT SEEING THINGS.
SO I CAN GIVE YOU THE DATA THAT YOU WANT, MAYBE HELPS YOU A LITTLE BIT.
UM, SOME PROBABLY IS NOT GOING TO HELP YOU TO, UH, GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING.
BUT JUST TO KIND OF OVER A NINE MONTH PERIOD, WE'VE HAD NINE INCIDENTS, NINE CRASHES.
UH, FOUR OF THOSE WERE IN SCHOOL ZONES.
FOUR OF THOSE WERE AT INTERSECTIONS.
THREE OF THOSE WERE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, WHICH WE, WE DON'T DO ACCIDENTS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY UNLESS IT IS A, A SERIOUS INJURY.
AND I KNOW MR. GOODLAND SAID THERE WAS ONE, UH, WE ACTUALLY UPDATED THAT AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH THIS DATA.
WE'VE ACTUALLY WROTE THREE THAT DIDN'T INVOLVE AN AC AN ACCIDENT.
SO UNDER THE POLICY, WE'VE WRITTEN THREE, UH, BUT WE'VE WRITTEN A TOTAL OF EIGHT THAT HAVE SPAWNED FROM ACCIDENTS OR COLLISIONS.
AND THAT WHETHER IT BE, UH, THE CYCLIST, UH, WHICH WE HAVE, UH, LET ME, LEMME KIND OF GO DOWN HERE.
UH, SIX OF THOSE INVOLVED INJURIES, FOUR MINOR TWO, UH, SERIOUS INJURY.
UH, FOUR OF THOSE WERE THE FAULT OF THE CYCLIST.
AND AGAIN, UM, WHETHER IT BE BICYCLIST OR WE DON'T HAVE A DISTINCTION.
SO THREE OF THOSE WERE AT FAULT OF THE VEHICLE.
AND THEN TWO OF THOSE WERE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
AGAIN, WE DON'T, WE DON'T INTERPRET FAULT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
SO, UH, BECAUSE WE CAN'T ENFORCE ANYTHING.
SO THE BICYCLE, YOU'RE SAYING YOU DON'T DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A E-BIKE AND A REGULAR PEDAL BICYCLE? RIGHT.
WHEN WE, WHEN WE HAVE OUR REPORTS, WE DON'T HAVE, UH, I CAN TELL YOU PROBABLY THREE OF THESE ARE, ARE E-BIKES.
UH, BUT TO BE DISTINCTIVE, WE DON'T, WE'RE NOT CAPTURING THAT DATA.
WE ARE NOW, BUT WE'VE NOT BEEN CAPTURING THE DATA ON CRASH REPORTS 'CAUSE THEY DIDN'T ASK FOR THAT DISTINCTION.
UM, SO WHAT ABOUT ANY OF THOSE SCOOTERS? E SCOOTERS, UH, ON THE, ON THE ACCIDENTS? YEAH.
TWO, TWO SCOTERS AND BOTH OF THOSE, THE SCOOTERS WERE NOT AT FAULT.
UH, ONE WAS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND ONE WAS NOT.
UH, WE HAD, UH, 168 CALLS FOR SERVICE FOR TRAFFIC COMPLAINTS IN THE CITY IN THAT NINE MONTH PERIOD.
ONLY 15 OF THOSE INVOLVED ATVS, BICYCLE SCOOTERS, ALL THE THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OF THOSE COMPLAINTS, THERE WERE ONLY TWO THAT INVOLVED SCOOTERS.
UM, KIND OF UNDERSTANDING THE DATA THAT WE WERE, WE WERE TRYING TO PUSH TO, UM, THE ENFORCEMENT ASPECTS AND THE THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO TO HELP MINIMIZE THE INJURIES OR ANY INJURIES OR ANY, ANY COLLISIONS OR ANYTHING.
IT JUST, IT HAS TO BE ENFORCEABLE.
IF WE'RE GONNA PUT A AGE LIMIT ON HELMETS, SOMEBODY HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW OLD I, I NEED TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE HOW OLD THAT PERSON IS THAT NEEDS A HELMET NOW.
I CAN TAKE A 6-YEAR-OLD VERSUS A, A 15-YEAR-OLD, BUT I DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A 14 AND A 15-YEAR-OLD.
AND I CAN'T VERY WELL STOP PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THEY'RE 15.
UM, WE TALKED ABOUT THE PERMITTING.
BUT HOW DO I KNOW WHO HAS A PERMIT AND WHO DOESN'T? WHO TOOK THE CLASS AND WHO DIDN'T? SO AGAIN, I'M, I'M FOR ANYTHING THAT YOU'D LIKE TO DO, BUT, UH, WE HAVE TO BE ENFORCEABLE.
AND AS MR. GOODLAND SAID, THE ORDINANCE WE HAVE HELPS US WITH OUR INTERSECTIONS AND HELPS US WITH OUR COLLISIONS.
AS WE SEE THESE, THESE, THESE, UH, INFRACTIONS, WE CAN DEAL WITH THOSE.
UM, BUT THAT'S THE KEY RIGHT THERE.
IF WE'RE ABLE TO SEE THEM MM-HMM
AND WHILE WE ARE WITNESSING IT, WHEN THEY SEE A BLACK AND WHITE, THEY WON'T.
BUT I CAN COME UP TO AN INTERSECTION.
THERE WERE TWO INSTANCES WHERE I ALMOST RAN OVER A CHILD BECAUSE THEY DID NOT STOP.
I WENT TO MOVE AND I JUST HAPPENED TO GLANCE OVER AGAIN.
THEY DIDN'T STOP FOR THE INTERSECTION.
I MEAN, WE'VE HAD OFFICERS COMING TO WORK, HAVE HAD COLLISIONS WITH THEM.
UH, WE'VE HAD A CITY EMPLOYEE.
UH, WE, WE WE'VE HAD THE SAME SITUATION.
UH, I, I'M NOT HERE TO SAY IT'S NOT A PROBLEM.
I DON'T CARE WHAT NUMBERS YOU PUT.
'CAUSE I AGREE WITH YOU, UH, WHEN YOU HAVE 40 BICYCLES GOING DOWN THE ROADWAY AT ONE TIME DOING WHEELIES AND ALL THAT.
UM, I THINK FROM A CITY STANDPOINT, WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING THAT WE POSSIBLY CAN EDUCATION WISE, UH, INTERVENTION WISE, YEAH.
WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHAT WE WANNA DO.
BUT AGAIN, ARE WE TALKING SCOOTERS? ARE WE TALKING BICYCLES? I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BECAUSE MM-HMM
I MEAN, SCOOTERS ARE, I SEE 'EM ALL THE TIME.
BUT BIKES, E-BIKES, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
BICYCLES, I MEAN, I SEE CYCLISTS ON THE ROAD.
WELL, CYCLISTS ON THE ROAD ALSO HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE RULES OF THE ROAD.
SO A CYCLIST AND AN E-BIKE HAD THE SAME RULES ON A ROAD, BUT AS AN E-BIKE BEING RIDDEN BY AN ADULT MALE OR ADULT FEMALE.
'CAUSE MOST ARE, MOST ARE NOT, THEY'RE MOST MOSTLY
[02:00:01]
BEING RIDDEN BY CHILDREN.SO A CYCLIST HAS TO BE RIDDEN BY AN ADULT AND IT'S A OR NOT IN HIS FASHION OR A BIKE.
A KID WITH A BIKE ON THE STREET.
MY CHILD RIDES, MY CHILD RIDES THIS BICYCLE EVERY DAY TO AND FROM ACROSS MAIN INTERSECTIONS.
BUT I'VE ALSO TAUGHT THEM, WHEN YOU COME TO AN INTERSECTION, YOU STOP.
SO A MOTORIZED BIKE IS WHAT WE'RE SAYING.
SO THERE'S THREE CLASSES OF E-BIKES.
THE FIRST ONE IS A PEDAL ASSIST AND THE ENGINE CUTS OUT AT 20 MILES PER HOUR.
THE SECOND CLASS TWO IS THROTTLE ASSIST, AND THE ENGINE CUTS OUT ONCE IT HITS 20 MILES AN HOUR.
AND THE THIRD IS HIGH SPEED PEDAL ASSIST, WHERE THE ENGINE CUTS OUT AT 28 MILES PER HOUR.
NOW, A COLLISION WITH A PEDESTRIAN AND SOMEBODY ON AN E-BIKE AT 28 MILES PER HOUR COULD CREATE SIGNIFICANT INJURY FOR BOTH PARTIES INVOLVED.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER.
IS THIS APPROPRIATE TO BE ON OUR SIDEWALKS? DO WE WANT TO AGE RESTRICT THEM, PERHAPS HAVE HELMET LAWS, I THINK OTHER CITIES ARE LOOKING TO ENFORCE, BUT WHERE ARE WE GONNA DRAW THE LINE? I, I MEAN, WE COULD OUTRIGHT BAN THEM, BUT THEN THERE HAS OTHER, UM, IMPLEMENTATIONS AND ISSUES WITH THAT AS WELL FOR PEOPLE ARE BUYING AND SPENDING A LOT OF THEIR OWN HARDENED MONEY AND THE ENJOYMENT OUT OF IT.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD RESTRICT THEM THAT MUCH, BUT WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AFTER THE SAFETY OF NOT ONLY THOSE THAT ARE RIDING THE BIKES, BUT ALSO THE PEDESTRIANS AND THE VEHICLES ON THE ROAD AS WELL.
I MEAN, THERE'S BEEN MANY NEAR MISSES WHERE, I MEAN, I MYSELF HAVE ALMOST HIT SOMEONE COMING OUT ON AN E-BIKE.
IT, IT, IT'S EXTREMELY DAUNTING AND TOUGH PROBLEM TO SOLVE.
BUT I, I AGREE, THE INCREMENTAL APPROACH.
WE'VE ONLY HAD ONE FINE IMPLEMENTED, SO, OR ISSUED SO FAR, ACTUALLY, WE'VE HAD THREE THAT WE HAVEN'T, THAT HAVEN'T INVOLVED AN INCIDENT, BUT, UH, EIGHT ALL ALTOGETHER.
COULD YOU TELL ME SOME MORE ABOUT YOUR, UM, COLLABORATION WITH L-C-I-S-D AND K-K-D-I-S-D? I KNOW, UM, UH, CONSTABLE CHAD NORVAL WAS TALKING ABOUT THAT EARLIER THIS WEEK.
SO, UH, THE CONSTABLE CONTACTED ME PROBABLY ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO AND ASKED ME IF WE WOULD PARTNER WITH THIS, WITH, UH, WITH HIM INVOLVING AN, AN EFFORT TO HAVE THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS CURB, THE PROHIBITED VEHICLES, THE, THE, THE E MOTORCYCLES, UM, NOT ALLOWING THEM ON CAMPUS.
UH, WE FELT THAT THAT WAS A, A VERY GOOD DETERRENT.
IF I WANTED TO DRIVE A FOUR WHEELER TO SCHOOL, I ASSURE YOU THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WOULD'VE AN ISSUE WITH IT.
UM, SO, UH, BECAUSE IT'S A PROHIBITED VEHICLE, SO WHY ARE WE ALLOWING PROHIBITED VEHICLES ON SCHOOL PROPERTY? SO WE FIGURED THIS WOULD BE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE, UM, THAT DETERRENT FROM THIS KIDS RIDING THEM IN THE MORNINGS AND IN THE AFTERNOONS, UH, TO AND FROM SCHOOL.
SO, UH, I KNOW, UH, THAT, THAT WE, WE SENT A LETTER TO, UH, L-C-I-S-D, WHICH, UH, I SIGNED.
AND THEN, UH, I KNOW THERE'S A LETTER TO, UH, K-D-I-S-D, WHICH I SUPPORT.
I'M JUST, MY SIGNATURE'S NOT ON THAT.
I WAS NOT HERE ON SIGNING DAY.
UM, BUT, UH, AGAIN, I THINK THIS IS A PLAN, PART OF THE PLAN.
WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING BACK FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
UH, I, I KNOW I TALKED TO, UH, OR I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING FROM, FROM CONSTABLE NORVILLE, BUT I KNOW THAT, UH, THERE WAS A RECENT POSTING OF THAT.
BUT I THINK THAT'S A, A, A GOOD STARTING POINT, UM, FOR, FOR THINGS, UH, AT LEAST TO MINIMIZE, UH, THE USE OF THOSE, THOSE VEHICLES.
'CAUSE AGAIN, THESE, THESE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE RIDING THEM.
I MEAN, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, AND, AND, AND AGAIN, WHAT IS, WHAT CAN WE, YOU KNOW, WHAT CAN WE DO ONCE THEY'RE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY OR THINGS LIKE THAT? WE'RE VERY LIMITED.
UH, I CAN TELL YOU SOME OF THE INCIDENTS WE'VE HAD OF THE 15 CALLS FOR SERVICE, UH, PROBABLY ABOUT EIGHT OF THEM, UM, BY THE TIME WE GET THERE, WE CAN'T FIND THEM.
UM, AND THEN FROM THAT POINT, THE ONES THAT WE DID FIND ON THE E MOTORCYCLES ARE THE ONES THAT WERE ILLEGAL.
WE COULDN'T ISSUE CITATIONS BECAUSE THEY WERE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
SO, SO I GUESS SOME, THERE'S E-BIKES, SOME THAT ARE MOTORIZED WITHOUT PEDALS.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE THE ONES WE'RE AFTER.
WHETHER THEY HAVE PEDALS OR NO PEDALS.
SO IF THEY HAVE PEDALS ARE OKAY, BUT IF THEY HAVE PEDALS, BUT WE, I MEAN, AS A POLICE OFFICER, RIGHT, YOU'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING, RIGHT.
IT'S NOT ABOUT WHAT I THINK IT'S ABOUT WHAT THEY CAN ENFORCE.
SO I THINK THE THING THEY CAN SEE IS PEDALS VERSUS NO PEDALS.
AND I THINK IF NO PEDALS ARE NOT, ARE, THEY'RE NOT LEGAL NOW, RIGHT? NOPE.
SO THEN THAT'S, THAT'S AN EASY, BUT IF THEY HAVE PEDALS, THIS IS LIKE A CYCLIST ON THE, ON THE STREET TOO.
IT'S LIKE MS. JOHNSON'S SAYING THERE'S THREE CLASSES AS TO, AND ALL THREE CLASSES ARE APPLICABLE TO, TO, TO THE STATE LAW.
UM, IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW THEY'RE USED AND ALL THAT.
AND I CAN, I CAN TELL YOU THIS, UH, IT'S GREAT THAT THEY COME OUTTA THE FACTORY LIKE THAT, BUT THEY TRICK THESE THINGS OUT WHERE THEY'RE, THEY, THEY, THEY GO PRETTY FAST.
[02:05:01]
SO, UM, IT MAY SAY 40 MILES AN HOUR, BUT MM-HMMWELL, I THINK THE, UM, THE SENATE BILL YOU MENTIONED CHIEF.
UM, I, IT NEEDS TO BE, LIKE, MOST THINGS NEED TO BE, UH, TIGHTENED UP A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE IT SAYS SIDEWALK USERS ARE BICYCLES, MOTOR ASSISTED SCOOTERS, UH, DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT E-BIKES ON SIDEWALKS.
ELECTRIC, PERSONAL ASSISTIVE MOBILITY DEVICES.
THAT'S A, COULD BE ANYTHING I COULD NEED THAT ASSISTED ELECTRIC WHEELCHAIR.
WELL, OR MY BICYCLE, ELECTRIC BICYCLE COULD BE THAT SKATEBOARDS, WHICH ARE NOW ELECTRIFIED, BELIEVE IT OR NOT.
AND THEN IT SAYS, AND SIMILAR DEVICES ON THE, NOW, WHERE DO YOU GO WITH THAT? I MEAN, SIMILAR.
SO MAYBE WHEN I TALK TO THE GOVERNOR, WE COULD TALK ABOUT THAT.
SO, I DID WANNA SAY SOMETHING.
THERE IS A CITY IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA CALLED GILBERT.
IT'S ONE OF THE SUBURBS OUTSIDE OF PHOENIX WHO TOOK THE SAME APPROACH.
THEY TOOK THE, NOT ICAL, THEY TOOK THE STEP APPROACH TO TRY AND MITIGATE THE SAME ISSUES, SAME ISSUES THAT PRETTY MUCH EVERY CITY IN EVERY STATE, IN EVERY COUNTY, ALL ACROSS THE, UH, ALL ACROSS THE US AND WHEREVER THEY SELL THESE THINGS.
UM, SEVERAL YEARS LATER, THEY JUST DID AN OUTRIGHT BAN BECAUSE CHILDREN KEPT GETTING HIT, CHILDREN KEPT GETTING HURT, ADULTS KEPT GETTING HIT ON SIDEWALKS.
THERE WERE DOGS THAT WERE ALSO, OR ANIMALS THAT WERE ALSO, UH, AFFECTED AS A 20 MILE AN HOUR BICYCLE RUNS OVER A ANKLE BITER, SO TO SPEAK, CHIHUAHUA, CHIHUAHUA THAT'S BEING WALKED.
SO WE CAN TAKE THE STEP APPROACH AND TAKE TWO YEARS TO GET THERE, BUT STILL END UP IN THE SAME SITUATION.
BECAUSE THE ISSUE IS, AND I COMMEND CHIEF AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS TO GET TOGETHER WITH THE LOCAL DISTRICT, THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ON THE EDUCATION.
MARIAH AND I EVEN DID A VIDEO RIGHT IN FRONT OF, UH, RANDALL ELEMENTARY.
AND IF YOU WATCH THE VIDEO RIGHT AT THE VERY END, YES.
ONE GENTLEMAN GOING, OR ONE YOUNG GENTLEMAN GOING RIGHT ACROSS THE MIDDLE OF THE INTERSECTION, KIND OF A SLAP IN THE FACE.
UM, SO WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? DOES THE, IS THE EDUCATION WORKING? BECAUSE FROM WHAT I SEE, IT'S NOT, OR AT LEAST NOT TO IT, NOT TO IT, ITS EXTENT THAT IT SHOULD BE, BECAUSE I'M SEEING THESE INFRACTIONS ON A DAILY BASIS.
UM, JUST TODAY, HUNT ROAD GENTLEMAN ON A SCOOTER HAS TAKEN THE ENTIRE LANE.
WHAT ARE YOU DOING? I'M IN AN 8,000 POUND TRUCK AND I'M SITTING BEHIND YOU WHILE YOU'RE DOING 10 MILES AN HOUR.
WHEN, WHEN DOES THE SAFETY SUPERSEDE THE USABILITY OF A, OF A VEHICLE? WHEN IS THE SAFETY OF YOUR, OF YOUR CHILDREN REALLY COME INTO PLAY WHEN YOU'RE NOT MAINTAINING, OR YOU'RE NOT TEACHING YOUR CHILDREN WHAT'S RIGHT OR WRONG? SO I, THAT'S MY POINT.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S BEEN NINE INCIDENTS OR NINE CRASHES WITH THESE TYPES THAT, THAT, THAT WE'VE AND HOW MANY YEARS? HOW MANY? NINE MONTHS.
WITH THE, WE, WE'VE ONLY HAD THE ORDINANCE IN NINE MONTHS.
SO I WAS QUITE VOCAL ON THIS LAST YEAR WHEN WE BROUGHT THIS ORDINANCE, BECAUSE I REALIZED THIS WAS SOMETHING WE NEEDED, WE NEED TO ADDRESS.
UM, OVER THE LAST YEAR OR SO, I'VE SEEN, I'VE TALKED WITH SEVERAL RESIDENTS, UH, EVEN TEACHERS, UH, PEOPLE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, UH, WE HAVE A FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER, MS. KATES, WHO, UM, HAS ALS ALSO PROVIDED SOME INSIGHTS.
UH, ONE OF THE THINGS, WE ARE TALKING TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
ONE IS A MORE, UH, DIFFICULT ASPECT OF WHETHER, HOW TO LIMIT THESE, UH, INCIDENCES AND WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT THIS.
THE SECOND IS WHETHER WE CAN EXTEND THESE SAME ORDINANCES OVER ONTO THE HOA OWNED PROPERTIES, WHICH ARE PRIVATE PROPERTIES, JUST TO HAVE A UNIFORM APPLICATION OF THE LAW.
BECAUSE WHAT I'M SEEING IS MAJORITY OF THE ROADS HAVE INTERCONNECTING TRAILS, AT LEAST IN CROSS CREEK.
AND IT'S VERY EASY FOR SOMEBODY TO TAKE A TRAIL VERSUS A ROAD AND NOT BE SUBJECT TO THIS JURISDICTION TILL ONLY A CERTAIN PORTION OF THE TIME.
AND IT BECOMES VERY DIFFICULT FOR OFFICERS TO ENFORCE ANY OF THAT IF THEY ARE ON THESE PRIVATE TRAILS.
SO THAT'S A LOW HANGING FRUIT, IN MY OPINION.
IF THE HO IS WILLING TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO EXTEND THE CITY'S ORDINANCES ONTO A SPECIFIC ONES ONTO THE OA PROPERTIES, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN EASILY ACHIEVE AND AT LEAST HAVE A UNIFORMITY OF THE ORDINANCE WHEN IT COMES TO ENFORCEMENT.
OBVIOUSLY, WE'LL HAVE TO DO, UH, STEP BY STEP IF WE WANT TO GO COMPLETELY BAN.
THERE ARE SOME OTHER PROBLEMS THAT YOU WILL SEE RIGHT NOW.
[02:10:01]
UM, THIS HAS BECOME A PRIMARY, UM, WAY FOR MANY STUDENTS TO GET TO SCHOOL AND BACK WHERE THEIR PARENTS EITHER DON'T HAVE TO DROP THEM OFF, OR IF IT'S A, YOU KNOW, UH, AND THEY, THEY DON'T HAVE REGULAR BIKES, THEY COULD USE E-BIKES OR S SCOOTERS.UH, IF YOU TAKE THAT AWAY, AND IF THE, THAT MAY INCREASE THE TRAFFIC AND THE LINES TO THE SCHOOL AND BACK OVERALL IN, UH, IT MAY OR MAY NOT NECESSARILY HELP YOU.
YOU HAVE A LOT MORE ROAD RAGE INCIDENCES WITH PARENTS TRYING TO RUSH THROUGH THE SCHOOL ZONES.
SO IN GENERAL, I WOULD SAY THIS IS NOT, THE FULL BAN WOULD NOT BE, UH, PRACTICAL.
I THINK THERE WOULD BE A LOT MORE PUSHBACK AGAINST THAT FROM A LOT OF PARENTS.
CAN I JUST, UH, INTERJECT HERE IN INTEREST OF TIME TOO, IS, UM, PERHAPS WE COULD REACH OUT TO OTHER CITIES THAT LIKE GILBERT AND SEE WHAT KIND OF REPERCUSSIONS THEY'VE HAD BY GOING COMPLETE BAND.
IS THERE OTHER CITIES THAT ARE DEALING WITH THE SAME THING THAT HAVE IMPLEMENTED SOMETHING? WHAT ARE THE RESULTS THERE? IS THAT POSSIBLE? AND WE CAN, THAT THE, WHAT WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT IS, UM, THIS GILBERT, I GUESS IS IN ARIZONA, SO THEY'RE GONNA HAVE DIFFERENT STATE LAWS.
SO, UM, SO FOR EXAMPLE, IN TEXAS, UH, I HAVE NOT LOOKED AT THIS ISSUE, UM, IN DETAIL.
THIS REALLY HASN'T RISEN TO OUR LEVEL YET.
AT, AT ANY COMMUNITY WHERE WE REPRESENT MM-HMM
I CAN TELL YOU THAT THERE ARE A BUNCH OF DEFINITIONS OUT THERE, AND THEY'RE SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE, THE TRANSPORTATION CODE.
THERE'S MOTOR SCOOTERS, THERE'S MOPEDS, THERE'S MOTOR ASSISTED SCOOTERS, THERE'S MOPEDS, THERE'S ELECTRIC BIKE BICYCLES, THERE'S DIFFERENT NAMES FOR 'EM.
THEY HAVE DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS.
WE HAVE DIFFERENT AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO HOW WE CAN REGULATE THEM.
I'M, I'M, I DON'T, WE, WE'LL HAVE TO DIG INTO THE WEEDS WITH THE CHIEF WITH THAT TO, TO SEE WHERE OUR AUTHORITY LIES.
FOR EXAMPLE, UM, YOU CANNOT, MY UNDERSTANDING, AND I HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK THIS, IS THAT YOU CAN'T BAN ELECTRIC BICYCLES WHERE YOU ALLOW REGULAR BICYCLES, BICYCLE MM-HMM
AND SO YOU COULDN'T PUT, IF YOU WANTED TO BAN THE ELECTRIC BICYCLES, AND I, I PERSONALLY HAVE AN ELECTRIC BICYCLE, AND IT'S, IT'S A ASSISTED, I HAVE, I HAVE TWO, I HAVE NON-ELECTRIC AND ELECTRIC.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S ASSISTED AND I THINK IT GOES UP TO LIKE 20 MILES AN HOUR, AND I CAN PEDAL IT.
UM, UM, AND I RIDE IT ON THE ROADS AND I WEAR A HELMET, AND I FOLLOW THE TRAFFIC LAWS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO WHEN YOU'RE RIDING A BICYCLE OR AN ELECTRIC BICYCLE.
UM, BUT IF YOU BAN ELECTRIC BICYCLES, YOU'LL HAVE TO BAN BICYCLES AS WELL.
SO LET'S, LET'S TRY TO LET ATTACK THE FIRST EASIER TARGET FIRST AND SEE IF WE CAN BRING THE UNIFORMITY ACROSS THE CITY AND THE PRIVATE LEON, HOA LAND.
LET ME JUST JUMP IN THERE ON THAT.
WE, WE HAVE, JURIST AND CHIEF MIGHT KNOW MORE ABOUT THIS THAN I DO.
BUT WE HAVE JURISDICTION, WE, WE, THERE IS, THERE IS A VEHICLE FOR THE CITY TO ENFORCE, UM, ITS, UH, ROAD FOR THE CITY, FOR THE POLICE TO ENFORCE TRAFFIC LAWS ON STREETS IN H HOAS, IT REQUIRES A VOTE OF THE HOA AND IT REQUIRES A CONTRACT AND AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY, CORRECT.
SO THERE'S THOSE STEPS, BUT IT'S ONLY ON PUBLICLY DE DEDICATED ROADWAYS, NOT ON PRIVATE, NOT ON ANYTHING THAT, THAT, THAT IS A TRAIL SYSTEM THAT'S NOT DEDICATED ON A PLAT AS A PUBLIC ROADWAY.
WHATEVER WE CAN GET, I THINK AT THIS POINT IS BENEFICIAL WHERE WE CAN, SO IF IT TAKES ANOTHER 20% EXTRA ROADS OFF ON THE, UM, OF THESE, UH, HIGH SPEED BIKES, THEN THE, LET'S DO THAT.
THAT WOULD BE MY FIRST REQUEST.
I, I THINK JUST FOLLOWING ON FROM THAT, THERE ARE HARDLY ANY HOA OWNED ROADWAYS.
WE'RE ESSENTIALLY TALKING ABOUT BON TERRA AND A COUPLE OF OTHER SECTIONS OF CROSS CREEK RANCH.
I THINK WHAT WE'RE PROBABLY TRYING TO DO IS APPLY THIS TO THE TRAILS ALONG THE PIPELINE, EASEMENTS ALONG THE CREEKS.
AND I THINK CHARLIE'S SAYING THAT WE CANNOT DO THAT, UNFORTUNATELY.
SO, SIDEWALKS, TRAILS, WE HAVE NO, I THINK THAT'S WHERE PEOPLE HAVE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS BECAUSE THEY'RE ZOOMING THROUGH THE, I I THINK THE SIDEWALKS RIGHT.
NO, SEE, THAT'S, WE, WE CAN'T EVEN GET THROUGH THAT.
AND, AND THIS IS JUST THE INTERPRETATION, I PROMISE YOU.
UM, OUR INTERPRETATION OF HOW THE OFFICERS ARE LOOKING AT THINGS, WHEN WE LOOK AT SIDEWALK, WE LOOK AT WHAT THE CITY EASEMENT WOULD BE, UH, JUST ACROSS THE STREET.
WE GO OUT IN THE WOODS, THEN WE COME BACK TO THE STREET AND WE GO BACK OUT IN THE WOODS.
AT WHAT POINT WOULD THE CITY HAVE OVERSIGHT BASED ON THE SIDEWALK? AND, AND THEN
[02:15:01]
I THINK THERE'S A RUMOR THAT JUST CROSS CREEK ALONE HAS 50 MILES OF, OF, OF TRAILWAYS.SO, UM, YOU KNOW, NUMBER ONE, HOW DO WE GET BACK THERE AND ENFORCE IT? NUMBER TWO, CAN WE ENFORCE IT? AND AS I SAID BEFORE, WE'VE HAD, UH, PROBABLY FIVE OF THE CALLS OF THE 15 THAT WE'VE HAD, THEY WERE ON PROHIBITED BIKES IF THEY WERE ON THE STREET, BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, AND THAT'S HOW WE'RE DEEMING THAT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY, UH, BECAUSE IT'S OWNED BY THE HOA AND WE CAN'T ENFORCE HOUSE RULES ON THAT.
UM, SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT CHARLIE'S SAYING IS THAT, UM, WE'D HAVE TO COME UP WITH SOME TYPE OF AGREEMENT THAT WE COULD DO THAT.
AND I THINK BASED ON SIDEWALKS, THAT'S PROBABLY, AT LEAST MY UNDERSTANDING, WE CAN'T DO THAT.
IF I CAN GET DATA ON PEDESTRIAN ISSUES, LIKE, SO NOT YEAH.
ARE YOU INCIDENTS? OH, YOU CAN JUST SEND IT TO US, BUT I THINK WE NEED MORE INFORMATION TO KIND OF DIGEST THIS.
I HAVE BIKES, E SCOOTERS, WALKERS.
I WANNA SEE INTERSECTION ACCIDENTS, BECAUSE I THINK ALL THIS IS IMPORTANT TO THIS DISCUSSION.
AND, AND I DIDN'T ADD THAT, BUT WE'VE HAD ONE AUTO PEDESTRIAN, UM, IN THAT NINE MONTH PERIOD AS WELL.
SO WHEN IT COMES TO THE E MOTORCYCLES AND THE DIRT BIKES AND THE ATVS, THOSE ARE ILLEGAL REGARDLESS, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.
REGARDLESS IF IT'S AN HOA OWNED PRIVATE PROPERTY, UM, NO, BECAUSE THAT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY.
IT'D BE LIKE IF YOU HAD 20 ACRES AND YOU WROTE IT OUT, I CAN'T DO NOTHING ABOUT THAT.
SO, TO ME, I THINK THAT'S AN AREA IN WHICH I'M GOING OUT ON A LIMB HERE.
I, I WOULD ASSUME MOST HOAS ARE NOT A BIG FAN OF PEOPLE RIDING ATVS OVER THEIR GRASS AND RIPPING IT UP AND THINGS OF THAT SORT.
I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD BE AN EASY ONE TO TRY TO PARTNER WITH THE HOAS TO SAY, LOW HANGING FRUIT STARTING THERE.
CAN WE GET SOME PARTNERSHIP? AND THEN YOU SEE IT AND YOU'RE ABLE TO TICKET IT.
I THINK YOU GET A LITTLE BIT TRICKIER WHEN IT COMES TO THE SCOTERS AND THE ELECTRIC BICYCLES, BECAUSE IN THEORY, THE POINTS HAVE BEEN MADE.
THERE'S A LOT OF TRANSPORTATION ISSUES THAT PEOPLE ARE USING THAT FOR.
IT'S NOT CAUSING PER SE DAMAGE, BUT I WOULD THINK HOAS WOULD, WOULD LIKE THE PARTNERSHIP WITH FUL PD ON THE, THE E MOTORCYCLES, DIRT BIKES, ATVS.
I, I THINK WE GET INTO, AND I'LL LET CHARLIE, I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE GET INTO THE PRIVATE PART.
BUT WHEN, IS IT PRIVATE PROPERTY? WHEN IS IT NOT? NO.
AND SO JUST BECAUSE THEY WANNA PARTNER AND NOW WE'RE FORCING THEIR HOUSE RULES AS FAR AS WHAT WE CAN ENFORCE.
AND AGAIN, I'LL, I'LL FALL BACK TO, I, I, I THINK PROBABLY SOMEBODY ALSO NEEDS TO BE IN THIS CONVERSATION IS PROBABLY OUR PROSECUTOR, BECAUSE WHOM, WHOMEVER WE CITE OR WHATEVER, IT HAS TO BE PROSECUTED IN COURT.
AND SO THOSE INTERPRETATIONS NEED TO BE THERE.
AND AGAIN, I THINK THE, THE, YOU KNOW, CHARLIE AND M DO A GREAT JOB AND GIVING US GOOD DIRECTION, BUT IT'S ALSO THE INTERPRETATION OF HOW IT'S GOING TO BE PROSECUTED AND HOW IT GIVES US BETTER DIRECTION AS HOW WE'RE GONNA ENFORCE IT.
AND, AND WE WOULD'VE, I ABSOLUTELY WOULD'VE RECOMMENDED THAT WE BRING OUR PROSECUTOR INTO THE DISCUSSION ONCE WE GOT BEHIND THE SCENES.
'CAUSE THE PROSECUTOR IS THE INDIVIDUAL WHO'S GONNA HAVE TO REVIEW THE LAW AND ENSURE THAT THEY CAN, THAT THEY CAN, THAT THEY CAN PROSECUTE IT IN COURT.
UM, TRAILS THE ISSUE WITH, WITH TRAILS IS IT'S ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, AND IT'S, AND TRAFFIC LAWS DON'T APPLY ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
AND SO WHAT, WHAT IS BEING ASKED IS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE IS THE HOA HAS RULES IN PLACE THAT IT WANTS THE, THE CITY'S POLICE OFFICERS TO ENFORCE THEIR PRIVATE RULES, WHICH THEY CANNOT DO.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, EDUCATION'S A BIG PIECE, AND I KNOW WE'VE, WE'VE CITED THE YAK, BUT THE YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION THAT WAS STARTED LAST YEAR, UM, REALLY WEIGHED INTO A LOT OF THIS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW.
BUT I THINK FURTHER PARTNERSHIP WITH K-D-I-S-D AND LAMAR CONSOLIDATED ISD TO SAY, HEY, THESE, LET'S PARTNER ON A EDUCATION ON WHAT PEOPLE CAN BE DOING.
AND B, IF THESE ITEMS ARE SHOWING UP AT SCHOOL, I LIKE THE CONCEPT OF HAVING THAT BE A, A, A BAN BY THE, THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
BUT OF COURSE, THAT TAKES PARTNERSHIP.
I, AND, AND I WOULD JUST SAY THIS KIND OF FOOD FOR THOUGHT, UH, BANNER FROM OUR PARKS, UM, SOME OF THE ISSUES WE'VE BEEN HAVING HAVE BEEN IN OUR CITY PARKS.
UM, AND I THINK KELSEY'S ALLUDED TO A, A PROBLEM OR TWO BACK, UH, WHERE WE'RE DEALING WITH PEOPLE AND THEY'RE JUST, I MEAN, WE SPEND A LOT OF MONEY ON OUR PARKS AND OUR IN THE SIDE MM-HMM
AND ALL THE THINGS IN THERE TO HAVE 'EM BE TORE UP, YOU KNOW, FOR KIDS TRYING TO HAVE FUN.
AND SO, UM, AGAIN, I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS WE GO THROUGH, MAYBE IF WE DO SOMETHING, WE DO RESTRICT, UH, CITY, CITY PROPERTY AS FAR AS WHERE WE CAN RIDE.
WE HAVE THE LATITUDE TO DO THAT.
UM, BUT, UH, BUT I, I CAN JUST TELL YOU, I CAN TELL COUNSEL, WHEN IT COMES TO E MOTORCYCLES AND ANYBODY'S LISTENING TO THIS, I OWN 'EM.
UH, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING AFTER.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS HAVING, UM, I DON'T REALLY NEED THE ORDINANCE ON THAT ONE, SO WE'LL JUST FALL BACK ON STATE LAW AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'LL BE OBVIOUSLY A LITTLE BIT MORE VISUAL ABOUT DEALING WITH THAT TO SET THE MESSAGE.
UM, I JUST DON'T KNOW WHEN YOU GOT A 12, 13-YEAR-OLD KID, UH, I CAN'T, IT'S HARD TO WRITE A CITATION TO THEM.
[02:20:01]
ON THE PARENT WHO'S IN HOUSTON, AND IT JUST BECOMES VERY CUMBERSOME.WE'LL COME UP WITH A SOLUTION.
THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO, AND I APPRECIATE THE UPDATE.
THANKS TO OUR LEGAL COUNSEL AS WELL FOR SETTING SOME OF THESE THINGS STRAIGHT.
REAL QUICK ON, ON THAT INCIDENT RIGHT THERE WITH, YOU KNOW, PARENTS ARE IN HOUSTON, CAN, DO YOU CONFISCATE THE VEHICLE? UH, YOU KNOW, I'M, THAT'S A TRICK QUESTION.
AND THE REASON BEING IS BECAUSE, UM, I DON'T REALLY HAVE A POLICY ON THAT.
UM, AND BASED ON THE CITATION, YEAH, IT'S AN ILLEGAL VEHICLE, BUT IT'D BE LIKE TOWING A CAR.
UH, GENERALLY WHAT WE WANNA DO IS WE'LL, WE'LL WRITE THE CITATION AND WE DON'T WANNA TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THAT.
WE DON'T WANNA TAKE POSSESSION OF THAT.
SO, UM, COULD WE, UH, MAYBE IF IT, YOU KNOW, IF IT WAS ON THE ROADWAY OR WHATEVER, BUT, UM, I, WE HADN'T GOT THERE YET.
SO WE'VE GOT SCHOOL STARTING HERE IN ABOUT A MONTH.
AND WE'RE SO GOING RIGHT BACK ON THE STREETS.
UH, THOSE OF YOU HERE AND THOSE OF YOU WATCHING THIS ISSUE HAS PRETTY MUCH TAKEN A LIFE OF ITS OWN IN THE LAST 72 HOURS.
UH, FULCHER SEEMS TO BE THE, THE, THE TOWN THEY'RE LOOKING AT, UH, ESPECIALLY ON THIS SIDE OF TOWN.
SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO ADDRESS IT AND MOVE FORWARD, TRY TO COME UP WITH A, WITH A PLAN, UH, ESPECIALLY, YOU KNOW, NOT ONLY SCHOOL, THEN YOU GOT CHRISTMAS.
AND SO THERE'LL BE MORE OF 'EM ON THE STREETS.
SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THAT WE MOVE FORWARD ON THIS.
UH, LET'S DON'T LET IT LAY AND SEE WHAT WE CAN COME UP.
THAT'S SAFETY BEING THE NUMBER ONE CONCERN.
AND, AND, AND IF I COULD JUST SAY ONE THING, NOT TO BELABOR THE, BUT I, I, YOU KNOW, I SAID THIS BEFORE, YOU KNOW, UM, THE PROBLEM STARTS AT HOME, RIGHT? AND I THINK THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, RATHER THAN ALLOW, UM, COUNSEL TO MAKE THE, THE DETERMINATION AS TO WHAT WE NEED TO DO AND WHAT'S AN ABSOLUTE, THAT'S WHERE THE EDUCATION REALLY STARTS.
WELL, I CAN TALK TO YOUR KID IN SCHOOL.
UH, WE, AND WE HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB IN THAT TRYING TO, TO, TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION AND, AND WHAT THE EXPECTATIONS ARE.
BUT I THINK, UH, IT STARTS THERE.
AND SO FOLKS ARE GONNA GET UPSET IF YOU HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION AS TO WHAT TO BAN AND WHERE, YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY CAN DRIVE AND ALL THAT, BECAUSE THEY ARE SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY.
BUT I THINK THE EXPECTATION, AND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, RAISING SIX CHILDREN, UH, I KNOW THERE'S AN EXPECTATION, AND, AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT STARTS.
SO YOU KNOW, ANYBODY THAT'S LISTENING TO ANYTHING THAT WE CAN, UH, DO, BUT I THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, BEFORE YOU DO MAKE A DECISION TO BAN THINGS, UH, THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA TO, UH, FOR PARENTS TO, UH, ADDRESS THAT WITH THEIR KIDS.
[BUSINESS - C]
PRELIMINARY OPERATING IN CAPITAL BUDGET.I BET YOU MS. JOHNSON WISHES SHE WAS STILL IN AUSTRALIA.
I'M SORRY, BUT, UH, I KNOW THINGS TAKE A LOT OF TIMES, FOLKS, SOMETIMES WE JUST, WE JUST GOTTA HASH IT OUT.
SO THANK YOU FOR STICKING WITH US.
THANK YOU COUNSEL FOR YOUR CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT.
WE ARE NOW ON THE SECOND LOOK AT THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET.
UH, THE FOLLOWING SLIDES THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO HERE IS JUST IN RESPONSE TO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS AND FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED ON THE JULY 7TH.
UH, WE'RE GONNA PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF ADDITIONAL DETAILS INTENDED TO PROVIDE SOME GREATER CLARITY, UM, MAINLY AROUND STAFFING PROJECT PRIORITIES AND THE UTILITIES FUND.
ONE THING ON THE TIMELINE, I JUST WANTED TO SAY AS I SPOKE WITH THE COUNTY, UH, SO JUST TO KIND OF REFINE THE AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER DATES.
SO WE WILL GET THE CERTIFIED TAX ROLL AND THE NO NEW REVENUE AND VOTER APPROVAL RATES BY AUGUST 7TH, NO LATER THAN AUGUST 7TH.
SO WE PROBABLY SHOULD BE GETTING IT A LITTLE BIT BEFORE THEN SO WE CAN FORMULATE OUR, UH, REVENUE PROJECTIONS AND OUR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE TAX RATE.
AND WE'LL BE BRINGING TO YOU ON THE AUGUST 18TH FRAME.
SO I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO PUT THAT, PENCIL IT INTO YOUR DIARIES.
YOU DEFINITELY WANT TO ATTEND THAT MEETING TO RECORD YOUR VOTES ON THE AUGUST 18TH.
SO AS FAR AS THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET GOES, I'M JUST GONNA RUN THROUGH REAL QUICK AS A REMINDER FOR THE GENERAL FUND, 'CAUSE IT IS OUR LARGEST AND MOST COMPREHENSIVE, UH, WAYS OF SPENDING OUR FUNDS IN THE CITY.
SO I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO SHOW YOU WHERE WE'RE AT FOR FISCAL YEAR 27.
THERE'S NOTHING, UH, MATERIALLY DIFFERENT ON THIS SLIDE OTHER THAN WE ADDED $20,000 TO THE PERMIT REVENUE LINE.
AND THAT'S JUST IN RESPONSE TO THE FIRE MARSHAL.
SO WE HAD THE CORRESPONDING EXPENDITURES BRINGING FIRE MARSHAL SERVICES IN-HOUSE FOR SIX MONTHS VIA CONTRACTOR.
SO WE JUST WANTED TO ADD THE CORRESPONDING PERMIT REVENUES OR, UM, UH, FEES THAT WE MIGHT GET FROM THAT.
SO WE JUST INCREASED REVENUES BY 20, UH, THOUSAND DOLLARS.
BUT THE OVERALL PICTURE IS THAT THE GENERAL FUND REMAINS STRONG AND BALANCED.
[02:25:01]
REVENUES EXCEED OUR OPERATING EXPENSES BY ROUGHLY $374,000.UM, SO IT'S A MODEST SURPLUS, UH, CONTINUING TO FUND OUR CITY'S PRIORITIES.
AND WE'RE, UM, INTENTIONALLY GONNA KEEP THIS AT THIS AMOUNT HERE.
'CAUSE AS WE CONTINUE TO REFINE THE BUDGET AND WE GET CLOSER TO, UM, KNOWING WHAT THE HARD REVENUE NUMBERS ARE, THAT NUMBER IS GONNA CHANGE A A BIT.
SO WE WANTED TO LEAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A SURPLUS ON THERE TO ALLOW ANY CHANGES IN THE REVENUE LINES.
BUT EVEN WITH THAT, OUR CASH BALANCE AT THE END, WHEN YOU TAKE OUR FUND BALANCE OVER THE OPERATING REVENUES, WE'RE AT 38%.
UH, EVEN WHEN YOU TAKE OPERATING REVENUES PLUS THE TRANSFERS AND THE TRANSFERS ARE GOING TO CAPITAL PROJECTS, WE'RE AT 35%.
SO WE'RE WELL OVER OUR TARGETED 25%.
NOW, WHAT IS THAT AMOUNT? BRINGING US DOWN TO THE 25 THAT WOULD GIVE US, UH, ADDITIONAL CASH? IT'S 2.3 MILLION.
AND, UH, I KNOW YOU'RE DYING TO KIND OF VOTE ON WHICH PROJECTS WE'D LIKE TO SPEND THAT MONEY ON.
WE DO HAVE A SLIDE FOR OUR BULLPEN PROJECTS, UH, WHEN WE'RE BRING SOME SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW WE MIGHT SPEND THAT FUNDS A LITTLE BIT LATER IN THE PRESENTATION.
THE NEXT SLIDE REALLY IS JUST A REITERATION OF OUR REVENUES.
UH, AGAIN, WE JUST ADDED THE $20,000, UH, FOR THE PERMIT REVENUES FOR THE FIRE MARSHAL.
UM, THE BIGGEST THING I JUST WANTED TO REMIND YOU IS YEAR ON YEAR, WHICH IS WHAT THAT BRIDGE IS SHOWING YOU AT THE BOTTOM IS TAKING YOU FROM 26 TO 27.
AND WHAT HAS CHANGED PRIMARILY IS JUST THE ORGANIC GROWTH IN OUR TAX AND SALES TAX REVENUE OF THAT BAR, OF THAT 2.3 MILLION THAT YOU SEE IN THE FIRST BLUE BOX.
UH, 1.2 IS THE RESULT OF THE VOTER APPROVED REALLOCATION FROM EDCA TO THE GENERAL FUND.
AND I, I BRING THIS UP 'CAUSE I JUST KIND OF WANNA LEAD INTO THE SALES TAX.
UH, THANK YOU MS. BO FOR ASKING FOR, TO BRING A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY ON WHAT IS OUR SALES TAX TREND.
AND I HAVE THAT ON THE NEXT SLIDE HERE.
SO THIS KIND OF DATES BACK FROM 2014.
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE WERE MUCH SMALLER AS A CITY AND AS A NUMBER OF BUSINESSES.
AND WE'VE HAD A SERIES OF GROWTH OVER THESE LAST, UH, YEARS HERE.
UH, WE FEEL CONFIDENT 'CAUSE I WANTED TO SHOW WHAT OUR FISCAL YEAR 27 PROJECTIONS WILL BE YEAR ON YEAR.
WE'VE KIND OF ASKED OURSELVES AND CHALLENGED, IS THAT 10% STILL SUSTAINABLE? UH, WE'VE KIND OF HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A BACK OF THE ENVELOPE LIST OF THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE COMING ONLINE THAT'LL CONTRIBUTE TO THAT 10% PLUS.
WE JUST FEEL LIKE THIS IS A GOOD CONSERVATIVE PROJECTION TO DO FOR KIND OF ORGANIC GROWTH IN THE SALES.
UM, AND THEN THE ADDITIONAL, AND THAT'S THAT GREEN BAR YOU SEE AT THE BOTTOM.
THAT IS THE PRECISION, THE, THE PORTION THAT'S THE VOTER APPROVED SALES TAX.
SO THAT'S MOVING FROM THE EDCA TO, UH, THE GENERAL FUND.
AND THEN THE, AND THE FURTHER SLIDES, WHEN I TALK ABOUT PERSONNEL SPECIFICALLY PD, OF THAT 1.2 800,000 OF THAT IS GOING FOR PUBLIC SAFETY INVESTMENTS.
AND THAT CAME FROM THE POLICE COMMITTEE THAT TOOK PLACE, UM, IN DECEMBER.
SO WE'RE ACTIONING THOSE, WE'RE PUTTING THOSE IN PLACE.
I'LL SHOW THOSE IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL.
THE OTHER 400,000 WE'RE USING, UH, FOR STRATEGIC PROJECTS, UH, THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
AND THESE ARE KIND OF GROWTH PROJECTS, UM, OR JUST MORE PROJECTS THAT EDC WOULD APPROVE OF FOR SURE.
SO WE'RE TALKING DRAINAGE, UM, LANDSCAPING AROUND THE WEST PARK AND OUR MAJOR THROWAWAYS.
UH, WE ALSO HAVE SOME AREAS GOING TO PARKS.
SO THAT'S JUST A PLACE OVER FOR PROJECTS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH FOR THIS ACCESS FUNDS.
NOW I WILL SAY THAT, I'M JUST GONNA CAVEAT ON THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
UH, WE'RE STILL REFINING THOSE NUMBERS.
UH, ALONG WITH CHIEF WE WILL HAVE THE POLICE COMMITTEE, UH, RESURFACE.
YOU MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS ON THAT.
'CAUSE THAT IS THE LAST AGENDA ITEM IS KIND OF THE SCOPE TIMING.
AND WE WILL NEED A COUNCIL MEMBER TO, UM, KIND OF JOIN THAT POLICE COMMITTEE GOING FORWARD.
UH, BUT REALLY ABOUT THAT IS WE'LL KIND OF RUN THROUGH WHAT ARE OUR PROJECTIONS THAT I HAVE ESTIMATED FOR THE POLICE INCREASE.
IS IT VALID? IS IT SEEM, UH, FAIR AND, UH, WHAT WAS INTENDED? SO THAT NUMBER COULD CHANGE JUST A LITTLE BIT.
UM, SO, BUT FOR A PRELIMINARY STANDPOINTS, WE THINK WE'RE AT A GOOD PLACE.
ALRIGHT, DO YOU WANT QUESTIONS LATER OR NO? OH, PLEASE DO RIGHT NOW? YEAH, QUESTION.
I THOUGHT Y'ALL WERE GETTING A TIRED FROM DISCUSSION.
NO, PEOPLE HAVE TRIED THAT BEFORE.
SO, UH, COMING TO THE MAY, 2026, UH, WE HAD THE WATERS DECIDE TO REASSIGN THE QUARTER SENT FROM EDCA TO, UH, GENERAL FUNDS.
UH, WHICH, UH, WE, THE PREMISE MIND WAS, OKAY, WE ARE GONNA MOVE THAT TO HELP THE PD BASED ON THE POLICE SALARY COMMITTEE MEETINGS, UH, OUTCOME OF, UH, REQUIRING 1.7 MILLION THE FIRST YEAR TO MEET THE TARGETS.
NOW WE, WE KNEW WE WERE GONNA GET NO MORE THAN 1.2.
I THINK YOUR ESTIMATE SHOWS $1.165 MILLION.
[02:30:01]
IN THIS CHART? I SEE, UM, I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 209 FROM THE PACKAGE, WE HAVE ABOUT $811,870 FOR THE POLICE COMPENSATION TO 55% PLUS THREE NEW SWORN OFFICERS IN VEHICLES.IT SEEMS LIKE ALMOST A 50% DROP IN OUR ESTIMATE FROM WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS JANUARY TO THIS JULY.
SO A SPAN OF SIX TO SEVEN MONTHS IN THE NEED COMING DOWN FROM 1.7 MILLION TO JUST A HUNDRED 900 MILLION OR 900,000 MM-HMM
WELL FIRST IT ACTUALLY, IT DOES END UP BEING A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN 800.
SO 800 IS, WELL, LET ME GO BACK AND FIRST SAY THERE'S A, THERE'S A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT THAT'S SHOWN HERE, AND IT'S SHOWN FOR ALL STAFF.
THE POLICE PERCENTAGE OF THAT NUMBER IS 127,000.
SO YOU WOULD LAYER THAT ON TOP OF THE 811 AND GET, UM, 938,000.
SO STILL, WHERE, WHERE'S, WHERE'S THE DELTA FROM THERE? UH, AND I THINK CHIEF, IF YOU IS HERE, CAN HELP SPEAK TO THAT, BUT IT MOSTLY IS JUST STAFFING.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE CLARITY ON IT DOESN'T MATTER.
WE, WE WILL, WE WILL STILL HAVE 1.165 MILLION COMING IN FROM THE MOVE OVER REVENUE OF WHICH WE'LL BE USING 937,000.
SO IT'S NOT A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
I JUST WANT TO RECONCILE THE 1.7 WITH THE 937,000 AS THAT'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE ESTIMATED EARLIER THIS YEAR VERSUS WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW.
WHAT ARE WE NOT GETTING? WHAT ARE WE CHANGING? HOW ARE WE BEING SO FRUGAL NOW THAT WE WEREN'T IN JANUARY? UH, YES SIR.
WHEN, WHEN WE HAD THE COMMITTEE, UM, WE ANTICIPATED SIX STAFF MEMBERS.
UM, AND WE EVALUATED THAT WE SPENT MANY, MANY HOURS AS WE WERE PREPARING FOR THE BUDGET PROCESS TO LOOK AT WHAT WE WERE LOOKING STAFFING WISE AND IN AND ANTICIPATING.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE JUST FINISHED UP LAST WEEK WITH A COMPREHENSIVE STUDY FOR THE, FOR THE DEPARTMENT, WHICH WOULD GIVE US AND YOU A BETTER IDEA OF OUR POTENTIAL GROWTH AND WHERE WE NEEDED TO BE, WHETHER IT BE UP OR, OR OUT.
UM, BUT WE LOOKED AT WHERE WE WERE AT, WE LOOKED AT OUR CURRENT OPENINGS AND WHERE WE, HOW WE'VE BEEN FUNCTIONING.
AND TO KIND OF HELP GET TO THAT 1.2 MILLION, IF I THINK IS WHERE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE, UH, WE, WE FIGURED WHAT WE WOULD DO IS WE WOULD DO WITHOUT THOSE THREE POSITIONS PLUS A, A VEHICLE OR TWO, UH, TO HELP WITH THAT.
BECAUSE WE JUST THOUGHT THE SALARIES WERE GONNA BE A LITTLE BIT MORE OR MORE OF THE PRIORITY.
UH, IT DOESN'T HURT OUR OPERATIONAL, IT DOESN'T HURT WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IT REALLY DID TAKE AWAY IS SOME OF THE SUPPORT MECHANISMS THAT WE HAD, LIKE TRAINING AND SOME OF THE THINGS WE, WE WE'VE BEEN DOING WITHOUT.
UH, AND AGAIN, JUST TRYING TO HELP US WITH A BETTER FOOTHOLD IN, IN, IN CREATING THE SALARY OPPORTUNITIES WE WERE, WE WERE LOOKING FOR.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT INPUT.
SO WHAT WE'RE, WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT YES, WE REEVALUATED SOME OF OUR PRIORITIES FROM THAT MEETING.
AND THIS WAS THE INTENT OF THE COMMITTEE ANYWAYS, IS TO SEE EVERY SIX MONTHS WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE IT, MAKE THINGS BETTER.
AND IF WE CAN, THEN WE'LL HAVE TO GO FIGURE OUT ADDITIONAL FUNDING.
THANKFULLY WE ARE MOVING IN THE, IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION INSTEAD OF NEEDING MORE FUNDS, WE'RE SAVING MORE FUNDS, I THINK, AND STILL MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE 55% OF THE TARGET RANGE AND ALL THE OTHER EXPENSES THAT THE FULL SHARE PD HAS.
SO THAT DEFINITELY IS A POSITIVE MOVEMENT IN FUNDS IN MY OPINION.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WHERE WE ARE GETTING THAT DEDUCTION FROM 1.7 TO 900,000.
IT WAS JUST THE, THE SUBTRACTION OF THREE POSITIONS.
UM, AND, AND MAYBE A RECLASS ON ONE.
BUT, UH, WE, WE WON'T LOSE ANY FUNCTIONALITY OR SERVICE QUALITY AT, AT ALL.
I WANNA BE CURIOUS TOO THAT, UH, WHEN THIS WENT OUT TO THE VOTE, UM, I THINK YOU SAID MR. ER, THAT SOMETIMES THESE FUNDS HAVE LEGS, FUNDS GROW FEET AND I WANT TO, UH, MAKE SURE THAT WE STAY FOCUSED ON WHY WE HAVE THAT FOR THE PD AND UH, NOT LOSE SIGHT OF THAT.
SOMETIMES IT'S EASY TO, YOU KNOW, SAY YEP.
AND THAT'S, DO WE GET SALES TAX RUNNING AND EVERYTHING IN THIS TOWN? AND IT WAS A GOOD DECISION TO PUT IN THE GENERAL FUND BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF THAT 1.2 IS STILL AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY THE PRIORITY.
IF THERE WAS RESIDUALS, WE'RE USING IT FOR THINGS THAT WILL FUND THINGS THAT EVEN THE EDC WOULD APPROVE OF.
LIKE I SAYING, THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION.
THANK YOU FOR PAYING ATTENTION TO THAT.
SORRY, 1.165 OUT OF WHICH WE ALREADY ADDRESSED THE 937,000.
SO WHERE'S THE BALANCE GOING AND WHAT ARE WE USING IT FOR? YES, SO WE HAVE THAT ON SLIDE I GUESS.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT IN THE PACKET, BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS A 2 0 9.
IS THAT THE SLIDE SIX SIX, YES.
[02:35:01]
SPECIFIC ITEM.BUT SORRY, I'M ONE THE POWER, I MEAN IT'S THE GENERAL FUND.
SO IS THIS REVENUE GOING FOR THIS, FOR THIS $1 REVENUE IS GOING FOR THIS $1 OF EXPENDITURE.
WE CAN'T SAY, BUT NEVERTHELESS, WE HAVE PRIORITIZED THESE THINGS THAT WE PROBABLY COULDN'T HAVE OTHERWISE FUNDED, WHICH WOULD BE, UH, RIGHT NOW 150,000 BEYOND WHAT WE WOULD NORMALLY DO FOR PARK PROJECTS.
IS THAT, UH, AN ADDITIONAL COURT AT A PARK? IS IT A PARKLET PROJECT? IS IT SOMETHING ELSE? WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT AS WE GO FORWARD.
BUT PARKS A HUNDRED THOUSAND TO BUILDING REPAIRS.
A HUNDRED THOUSAND TO DRAINAGE TO CAPTURE ONE OF OUR LOWER HANGING DRAINAGE PROJECTS.
IS THAT A WALKER LANE PROJECT? DOES THAT HELP US PUSH US FURTHER ALONG AT LEAH PENN, ET CETERA.
AND THEN WE'VE HISTORICALLY BEEN DOING NATIVE SEED ALONG THE TOLL ROAD.
UM, SO DO WE WANNA TAKE ANOTHER STAB AT THAT AND MORE SEATING, MORE LANDSCAPING, ET CETERA, JUST 'CAUSE THAT'S OUR MAIN CORRIDOR, BUT THOSE ARE ALL PRIORITY PROJECTS.
RIGHT? SO I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE.
SO WE TOOK THIS FUNDING AWAY FROM EDCS, BUT ALL THESE THINGS EXCEPT FOR THE A HUNDRED THOUSAND IN BUILDING REPAIRS LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING THAT EDC WOULD FUND OTHERWISE ANYWAYS.
I THINK TO BE MORE SPECIFIC, YOU COULD SAY THE EDCB COULD HAVE FUNDED A LOT OF THESE THINGS.
I THINK THE EDCA IS PROBABLY MORE RESTRICTED THAN EDCB WOULD BE.
SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT GENERALLY, PROBABLY YES.
THE OVERALL PICTURE FOR EDCS PURPOSE.
SO EDCB COULD, EDCA COULDN'T BECAUSE OF THEIR, I GUESS, CLASSIFICATION OF HOW THEY CAN SPEND THEIR, UH, SO GREATER EMPHASIS ON PRIMARY JOBS.
BUT IN GENERAL, IT'S GOING THROUGH THE EDCS EFFORTS OUTSIDE OF THE A HUNDRED THOUSAND AND DOLLARS FOR THE BUILDING REPAIR.
I THINK THOSE THINGS COULD, COULD HAVE BEEN PART OF, OR COULD BE EDCB PROJECT SPECIFICALLY.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE STAY TRANSPARENT ON THIS AND MAKE SURE THAT THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT WE'RE GETTING BY MOVING THE CO IN FROM EDC STAYS ON TARGET WITH SUPPORTING PD PRIMARILY.
AND THEN FOCUS WOULD BE ON THINGS THAT EDC WOULD DO FOR THE CITY ANYWAYS INSTEAD OF USING IT ELSEWHERE.
MOVING ON NOW TO KIND OF A SHARED SERVICE ALLOCATION WHERE WE DO REQUIRE A LITTLE BIT OF YOUR DIRECTION.
SO OF COURSE SHARED SERVICES, WE MOVE FROM THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS WHERE IT BE UTILITIES OR THE EDC TO PAIR FOR THEIR SHARE OF ITEMS, STAFFING COSTS, IT BUILDING SERVICES.
UM, THOSE ARE THE, THE KIND OF THE SIMILAR KINDA SHARED SERVICE THINGS.
UM, SO THIS IN THIS SLIDES INTENDED TO SHOW KIND OF GREATER TRANSPARENCY ON THAT.
UH, THE EDCA HAS SINCE, UM, SINCE WE LAST REVIEWED IT ON JULY 7TH, APPROVED THEIR BUDGET WITH ONE CHANGE.
UH, THEY WANTED TO REDUCE THE SHARED SERVICES ALLOCATION BY 50% TO KIND OF REFLECT THE REDUCTION IN THE SALES TAX FUNDING.
THAT WAS WHAT THEY APPROVED LAST MONDAY.
SO DIRECTION FROM COUNSEL FROM YOU, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ASKING DO YOU WANT TO HAVE THE PREMI, THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET HAS IT 100%, WHICH IS 1 0 9 109,000 BY REDUCING IT BY 50%.
THAT REDUCES THE GENERAL FUND BY 53.
ON THE FIRST SLIDE WE SHOWED THAT WE DID HAVE SURPLUS.
UH, BUT WE DO PROVIDE, WE DO NEED YOUR DIRECTION ON WHETHER YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO ADOPT THAT CHANGE INTO THE BUDGET.
SO REDUCING THE GENERAL FUND BY 53,000.
THE EDCA BOARDS, THE DECISION TO REDUCE THE SHARED SERVICES ALLOCATION BY 50%, UM, IS THAT JUST BASED ON THE REDUCED REVENUE THAT THEY'RE GETTING AT? OR IS THAT TRUE DEPICTION OF THEM NOT NEEDING AS MUCH OF SHARED SERVICES? NO, THE SHARED THE SERVICE WILL STILL BE THE SAME STAFFING LEVEL IT LEVELS AND WHATNOT.
IT REALLY IS JUST A REFLECTION OF THE REDUCTION IN FUNDING THAT THEY WILL BE RECEIVING.
LET'S, THAT SEEMS LIKE, UH, A COUNTERINTUITIVE, SO BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE ARE USING THE, YOU ARE MAKING THAT UP BY, UH, GETTING FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL FUNDS THAT WE MOVED OVER FROM THE A DC.
I I GUESS I'M NOT, NOT VERY OPPOSED TO THAT.
ANYBODY ELSE? YEAH, THAT SOUNDS FINE.
IS ANYBODY OPPOSED TO IT? LET'S ASK THAT.
I'LL MAKE THAT CHANGE FOR THE NEXT REVIEW WE HAVE.
NEXT SLIDE IS JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON THE POLICE, UH, BUDGET DRIVERS.
SO JUST TAKING THE DEPARTMENT AS A WHOLE FROM 2026 TO 2027.
[02:40:02]
I BOXED IN PURPLE.JUST THE AMOUNTS THAT WE'RE CONTRIBUTING FOR THE NEW POLICE INVESTMENTS.
SO THAT'S BRINGING THE MARK, UH, THEIR SALARY ADJUSTMENT TO THE 55%.
THREE NEW STAFF MEMBERS FOR, UM, SWORN IN POLICE OFFICERS FLEET ADDITIONS, NOT JUST FOR NEW POLICE OFFICERS, BUT TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE, UH, OLDER VEHICLES THAT THEY DO HAVE WITHIN THEIR FLEET.
UM, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF SAVINGS COMING FROM THAT.
SO IN TOTAL IT'S 811, ALMOST $812,000 JUST RELATED TO KIND OF THE POLICE COMMITTEES AND THE COMMISSION, UM, COMPENSATION COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE OTHER TWO PARTS ON THERE IS THE 4% COLA.
UM, THAT IS FOR JUST THE POLICE STAFF.
WE'RE GONNA TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS FOR THE ENTIRE, UM, CITY STAFF AND THEN HEALTH INCREASED BENEFITS, UH, THAT WE WERE SEEING ACROSS THE BOARD.
UM, SO THAT'S KIND OF THE BIGGER PICTURE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS A WHOLE AND FOR THE PERSONNEL DRIVERS.
SO, UM, AGAIN, WE JUST KIND OF WANTED TO ISOLATE THE DIFFERENT BUCKETS.
UM, OUR STAFF IS ONE OF THE LARGEST EXPENDITURES, SO WE FELT LIKE IT WAS A, YOU KNOW, PERTINENT TO KIND OF GO INTO MORE DETAIL, UM, ON THIS COST AND THE CHANGE YEAR OVER YEAR.
UH, SO WE JUST KIND OF WANTED TO SHOW WHAT THE 4% COLA IMPACT WOULD BE.
IT'S 318 AND THAT'S FOR ALL CITY STAFF.
SO THAT INCLUDES THE 127 THAT WE JUST SAW FOR PD AS WELL AS FOR THE REST OF THE CITY.
WE HAVE SIX MONTHS OF STEP, AND THAT'S FOR MERIT, WHICH WE ARE DOING PERFORMANCE BASED THIS YEAR.
HEALTH BENEFITS INCREASE, OF COURSE, YOU'RE SEEING THE POLICE MARKET ADJUSTMENT AND THAT'S, UH, NEW STAFF MEMBERS THERE ON THE END.
AND THAT'S SIX TOTAL, THREE FOR POLICE AND THREE IN PUBLIC WORKS.
UM, AND THAT'S TO BRING KIND OF MORE STREET MAINTENANCE, MOWING IN HOUSE, UM, AND THOSE KINDS OF ITEMS. SO WITH THAT, I KIND OF WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE.
I THANK YOU KAR FOR UH, KIND OF ASKING THE QUESTION.
IT WARRANTS, UH, OF A GOOD DISCUSSION.
SO BEFORE I BEGIN, I, I JUST WANNA SAY WE USE THE WORD COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT, UM, BUT I'M GONNA USE IT INTERCHANGEABLY AS WITH MARKET ADJUSTMENT.
WELL, BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST WHAT WE ARE DOING NEXT TO CPI, IT'S MORE ABOUT MARKET COMPETITIVE WITH OUR PEERS AS WELL AS PURCHASING POWER.
IT'S ALSO TRYING TO PREDICT OUR PRIOR, UM, INVESTMENTS THAT WE DID AS FAR AS A, UM, KINDA A, WE DID A MARKET COMPENSATION STUDY IN 2024, SO WE'RE JUST KIND OF TRYING TO PROTECT THAT AS WELL.
AND IT SUPPORTS SERVICE DELIVERY.
SO THE, FOR THE PAST THREE FISCAL YEARS, THE CITY HAS REALLY LIMITED IT DOWN TO OUR SET AT 2% AS FAR AS THE COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT.
WHILE THE METRO CITY AREA AND OTHER PEER CITIES HAVE CONTINUED TO INCREASE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THE 2%.
SO, AND CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW OTHER CITIES ARE DOING THEIR BUDGETS, BUT WE HAVE CANVASSED THE AREAS AND THEY'RE RANGING ANYWHERE FROM THREE TO 4.25.
SO WE ARE REALLY JUST TRYING TO KEEP PACE.
PUTTING AT 4% IS BY NO WAY TRYING TO MAKE US FIRST IN CLASS OR TRYING TO GET AHEAD.
IT'S REALLY ABOUT KEEPING PACE WITH, YOU KNOW, THE MARKET STUDIES WE'RE DOING ACROSS THE BOARD.
AND THANKS FOR THE EXPLANATION.
I DID SOME DIGGING OFF MY OWN LOOKS LIKE 4% SEEMS REASONABLE.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT GETTING AWAY BECAUSE JASON CANOPY IS NOT IN THE DIOCESE.
WELL THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT.
UH, HEIDI, DO YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT THE RETIREMENT BIT? SO THE OTHER POINT WE HAD MADE IS WE HAD, UH, MODELED IN THE 4%.
IT'S WELL WITHIN OUR BUDGET, UM, EVEN WITH, WE HAVE THE SURPLUS, SO IT IS IN PLAN.
BUT ONE THING WE DID NOT PUT IN IS THE RETIREMENT BENEFITS COMPENSATION.
IT'S SOMETHING WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE MARCH 3RD, UH, WORKSHOP.
AND WE JUST WANNA KEEP IT IN THE FOREFRONT OF YOUR MIND WHERE WE SIT WITH THIS.
UH, AGAIN, IT'S NOT IN THE BUDGET NOW, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANNA CONTINUE TO DISCUSS.
SO, UM, AS MENTIONED, THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED BEFORE WE BROUGHT THIS FORWARD TO COUNSEL, UM, AT PREVIOUS BUDGET DISCUSSIONS, WE TALKED ABOUT IT, THE POLICE, UM, COMPENSATION COMMITTEE, AND THEN AGAIN, MOST RECENTLY MARCH 3RD.
UM, THIS JUST SHOWS THIS, UH, CHART HERE SHOWS THAT FULL SURE, UM, RANKS EIGHT OUT OF EIGHT PEER CITIES FOR TMRS RETIREMENT BENEFITS.
ALTHOUGH OUR 7% EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION AND TWO, TWO TO ONE CITY MATCH PROVIDES A SOLID FOUNDATION.
SHORE IS THE ONLY CITY IN THE COMPARISON THAT DOESN'T OFFER A-T-M-R-S COLA OR UPDATED SERVICE CREDITS.
SO THIS KIND OF PLACES US AT A CLEAR COMPETITIVE DISADVANTAGE, UM, AMONGST OUR PEER CITIES.
WHILE WE'RE NOT, AS, UH, ANGELA HAD MENTIONED, WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THE FULL 586,000 RETIREMENT INVESTMENT AT THIS TIME.
WE ARE RECOMMENDING A MORE COST EFFECTIVE 4% SALARY COLA AND, UH, THAT WILL JUST HELP US PROVIDE IMMEDIATE
[02:45:01]
RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION BENEFITS.AND SINCE IT'S ALREADY A, YOU KNOW, AND AS, AS WELL AS, UH, BALANCING FISCAL YEAR 27 PRIORITIES.
SO I THINK JUST TO, TO ADD ON THAT, HEIDI, THESE OTHER CITIES WERE THE SAME CITIES THAT WERE COMPARED DURING THE PD STUDY.
SO JUST TRYING TO KEEP IT IN THAT SAME YES, SAME TEMPLATE THAT ALREADY EXISTS.
AND THE COST THAT YOU QUOTED 587,587 IS TO BRING US TO THE SAME LEVEL OF RETIREMENT COMPENSATION AS JUST THE AVERAGE HERE.
ESSENTIALLY THE, WELL, THE, BASICALLY THE A HUNDRED PERCENT SERVICE CREDIT AND THE 70% COLA, SO SIMILAR TO, SIMILAR TO ALL OF THEM, PRETTY MUCH EXCEPT FOR MISSOURI CITY.
SO THIS IS TAKEN AS A, AS AN EXCERPT OF THE HOLISTIC PICTURE BETWEEN THE SALARIES, THE BENEFITS, AND THE COMPENSATION.
AND, AND THIS IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET, BUT IT'S USED AS A HIGHLIGHT JUST AS IT WAS USED AS A HIGHLIGHT OR A COMPARISON DURING THE POLICE COMPENSATION STUDY.
UM, 'CAUSE WE LOOKED AT IT HOLISTICALLY.
IF WE, WHAT, WHAT'S, WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE BIG DRIVER FOR RECRUITMENT OR RETENTION? IS IT, IS IT RETIREMENT? CAN WE, CAN WE, CAN WE DIAL UP THE RETIREMENT BENEFITS TO GET PEOPLE? AND WHAT CAME OUTTA THAT WAS THAT ACTUALLY DOING RETIREMENT BENEFITS COULD, IN MANY CASES BE MORE EXPENSIVE.
IT'S, IT IS HERE, BUT ALSO TO, IT'S REALLY THE SALARY THAT DRIVES THAT.
THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE REALLY LOOK AT.
AND UNLESS YOU ARE WITHIN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF YEARS FROM RETIREMENT AND IT'S REALLY NOT ON THE RADAR FOR YOU, I THINK WE, WE DON'T WANNA BE LASTING OUR PEER CITIES FOREVER.
BUT RIGHT NOW, BEING ABLE TO DO ONLY ONE AND NOT BOTH, THE PRIORITY WOULD BE THE CHEAPER AND MORE IDEAL I THINK, FOR RECRUITMENT OR RETENTION SALARY.
WHERE DO WE FEATURE ON THE SALARY ASPECT? DO WE KNOW FOR THESE CITIES? FOR THE SAME PEER, UH, CITIES, I THINK WE, WE EVALUATED OVER 70 DIFFERENT POSITIONS.
IT'S, IT'S DEFINITELY NOT APPLES TO APPLES.
IT'S, I USED THIS PHRASE EARLIER, IT'S NOT EVEN APPLE.
JOB TITLES VARY, WHEREAS A POLICE OFFICER, AS A POLICE OFFICER WILL SUFFER WITH SOME EXCEPTIONS, BUT LARGELY THAT'S TRUE.
THE CRUX OF THAT, THAT THAT ROLE MIGHT BE THE SAME.
OTHER ROLES CAN VARY DRAMATICALLY.
OR THEY MIGHT HAVE A DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND A DIRECTOR OF FINANCE.
UM, BUT IT, IT VARIES DRAMATICALLY.
BUT IN SOME POSITIONS WE'RE A LITTLE BIT BETTER OFF.
SOME POSITIONS WERE BEHIND OR WELL BEHIND.
BUT ON THE AVERAGE, IT ACTUALLY FOLLOWS PRETTY CLOSELY TO THE SALARY DOSE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN RECOMMENDED.
JUST FROM A GENERAL BUDGET SIZE OF THE A D POPULATION EXPANDS OF THE A COMPARED TO THE, THE CITY'S STAFF EXPENSE.
WHERE IS THAT? MIGHT BE ANOTHER WAY TO COMPARE, COMPARE THAT.
SO WE DON'T, WE DON'T NECESSARILY, WE CAN, UM, WHERE YOU STANDARDIZE THE, THE SERVICES MM-HMM
WE'VE, WE'VE GIVEN A PRELIMINARY LOOK AT THAT AND WE, WE DO FALL BEHIND.
THAT'S WHY I THINK A COUPLE SLIDES AGO WE MENTIONED THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY FAIRLY LEAN AS A CITY.
WE HAVE ONE TO TWO PEOPLE, MANY CASES, ONE THAT DO DO PARTICULAR ROLES, SOMETIMES KEY ROLES, GIS PURCHASING, UM, AND SOME OTHERS.
SO WE, WE DON'T HAVE THE SAME DEPTH MAYBE.
OBVIOUSLY WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THAT DEPTH RETENTION IS REALLY IMPORTANT.
THANKS FOR EXPLAINING ALL THAT.
WERE THE OTHER SUPPLEMENTARY BENEFITS, UH, LOOKED AT AND ASSESSED AS PART OF THE COMPENSATION BENEFITS AS FAR AS HEALTHCARE AND WELL SUCH AS THE, UH, MILITARY SERVICE CREDITS OR UPDATED SERVICE CREDITS.
I DIDN'T LOOK AT THAT PARTICULARLY.
UM, THAT'S NOT GOING, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COST DIFFERENCE WOULD BE FOR THAT.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU DID LOOK AT THE UPDATED SERVICE CREDIT.
I DID LOOK AT UPDATED SERVICE CREDIT.
YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT THE MILITARY SERVICE CREDIT THOUGH SPECIFICALLY, CORRECT? YES.
THERE, I DON'T THINK THERE IS A MONETARY IMPACT TO THE MILITARY SERVICE CREDIT ACTUALLY.
UM, THAT JUST GOES TOWARDS YOUR VESTING AND RETIREMENT ELIGIBILITY.
SO, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, SOME OF THESE CITIES DO THAT.
SO A YEAR OF MILITARY SERVICE ISN'T, IS EQUIVALENT TO A YEAR OF CITY SERVICE.
UH, THERE'S OTHER CITIES NOT IN HERE 'CAUSE WE DIDN'T LOOK AT IT IN THE CONTEXT OF POLICE, BUT LIKE
SO A YEAR OF MILITARY SERVICE IS HALF A YEAR OF CITY, CITY SERVICE.
SO WHY WOULDN'T WE OFFER THAT? MAYBE WE SHOULD.
LEAN, YOU'RE RUNNING IT PRETTY LEAN.
UM, IS THAT SUSTAINABLE? SO I I IN YOUR VIEW, I THINK IT DEPENDS ON WHAT AREA THE CITY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO UTILITIES IS GROWING BECAUSE WE'VE BROUGHT IN SERVICES IN HOUSE AS OF JANUARY ONE OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR.
EV ALL, ALL THE OPERATIONS ARE IN HOUSE, BUT WE ALSO STILL CONTINUE TO GAIN ADDITIONAL WATER PLANTS, LIFT STATIONS WITH SOLAR, OUR PLANTS, ET CETERA.
[02:50:01]
TEAM HAS TO KEEP GROWING.AND WE WANT TO PARTICULARLY MAINTAIN DEPTH THERE BECAUSE IF WE LOSE FOLKS, IT'LL BE NOTICED WHEN WE CAN'T RESPOND TO CERTAIN INSTANCES.
THERE ARE OTHER AREAS THOUGH, LIKE FOR INSTANCE, BUILDING INSPECTIONS WHERE WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING AT WAYS TO CREATE EFFICIENCIES THERE BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THOSE, THOSE NUMBERS ARE DECLINING IN SOME CASES RAPIDLY.
SO MAYBE, MAYBE CODE ENFORCEMENT NEEDS ARE GROWING 'CAUSE OUR CITY'S GROWING, SO WE CAN ALLOCATE A BUILDING INSPECTOR FROM THAT ROLE TO CODE ENFORCEMENT.
BUT IT, I WOULD SAY IT DEPENDS ON THE DEPARTMENT, BUT NO MATTER WHAT, WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK FOR THOSE OPPORTUNITIES IN, IN SUCH A WAY THOUGH TOO THAT IT DOESN'T CREATE SERIOUS ISSUES.
I MEAN, 'CAUSE THEY'RE ALL INTERTANGLED, RIGHT? I MEAN, IF YOU'RE RUNNING LEAN, YOU DON'T HAVE RETIREMENT, YOUR RETENTION GOES DOWN.
RECRUITMENT IS HIGH IN THE BEGINNING.
YOU GOT YOUR ONE YEAR, TWO YEAR ROLL OFFS.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING IS IT'S SUSTAINABLE.
I MEAN, I MEAN IT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO, IF YOU WANT LONGEVITY WORKING FOR THE CITY OF SRE, I MEAN WE, WE PROBABLY HAVE TO, I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO CREATE A COMMITTEE FOR THAT.
WE HAVE TOO MANY COMMITTEES, BUT, YOU KNOW, WELL, I, I'LL THAT'S SOMETHING I THINK THERE'D BE TWO EXAMPLES TO SORT OF CONNECT THOSE.
SO ONE OF OUR, ONE OF OUR BUILDING INSPECTORS MOVED TO CODE ENFORCEMENT WHERE OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS MOVE TO IT.
HE DOESN'T, HE'S NOT THE GIS GUY, BUT HE IS GOING TO BE ON A, ON A LEARNING CURVE TO GET THERE.
FIRST, FIRST TOPIC BEING ASSET MANAGEMENT AND THEN LEARNING GIS SO WE CAN GET SOME DEPTH TO THAT REALLY CRITICAL ROLE.
ANOTHER AREA WHERE WE'VE NOTICED THAT WE'VE, WE'RE PRETTY LEAN IS IN THE COMMUNICATION SIDE.
SO MARIAH RIGHT NOW IS A TEAM OF ONE, TWO BUDGET CYCLES AGO.
SHE HAD A A, A SECOND EMPLOYEE WITH HER.
WE CHOSE THIS PAST YEAR BECAUSE THE EDC HAD CUT SOME OF THE FUNDING AND, AND YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE JUST WEREN'T SURE HOW THAT ROLE WAS GONNA FUNCTION IN OTHER WAYS TOO.
WE CUT IT DOWN TO A PART-TIME ROLE AND LOWERED THE SALARY.
WELL THAT PERSON, AS WE POINTED OUT EARLIER, THEY LEFT FOR ANOTHER JOB.
SO WE'VE GOTTA FILL THAT ROLE AGAIN.
BUT THAT'S WHY IN THIS PROPOSED BUDGET, WE'RE TAKING THAT FROM A PART-TIME ROLE BACK TO A FULL-TIME ROLE TO PROVIDE SOME OF THAT BACKEND SUPPORT.
SO IT'S, IT'S ITERATIVE CONSTANTLY, BUT ALWAYS EVALUATING.
IN THE NEXT CHART I'M SEEING WE ARE DOING BETTER ON RETENTION, LESS TURNOVER COMPARED TO LAST TWO YEARS.
IS THERE A WAY WE, WE, WE HAVE DONE THIS DATA COLLECTION BY NORMALIZING IT TO THE FINANCIAL OR BENEFITS RELATED COMPENSATION REASONS VERSUS OTHER REASONS THERE WE COULD DO THAT, THAT WOULD REQUIRE A LITTLE MORE NUMBER CRUNCHING.
AND THERE'S, THE ONLY WAY WE COULD REALLY GLEAN THAT IS IF THEY TOLD US IN AN EXIT INTERVIEW THAT THEY WERE REALLY FOR MORE MONEY, UH, BUT IF THEY WERE TERMINATED OR THEY LEFT AND DIDN'T DO AN EXIT INTERVIEW 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO, THEN WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CAPTURE THAT DATA.
YOU ALREADY KNOW SOME, SOMETIMES THE REASON WHY AN EMPLOYEE IS, UH, ASKED TO LEAVE OR LEAVES FOR OBVIOUS REASONS.
SO THAT WON'T NECESSARILY BE COUNTED AS A FINANCIAL OR BENEFITS RELATED REASON.
WE COULD, WE COULD TRY TO GET SOME OF THAT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO PROVIDE CAN YOU THAT, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBERS MAY NOT NECESSARILY GIVE YOU THE FULL PICTURE.
CAN YOU LEGALLY MAKE THAT DISTINCTION THOUGH, WITHOUT, THIS IS AN INTERNAL STATISTIC.
SO INTERNAL STATISTIC, BUT TO YOU, BUT YOU'RE, YOU'RE LOOKING AT AN EXIT INTERVIEW.
IF A POSSIBILITY OF A PERSON DID NOT TAKE IT, YOU CAN'T REALLY MAKE THAT JUDGMENT CALL.
WE, WE COULD TRY TO ASCERTAIN IT.
I GUESS IT'S OUR NUMBERS
THE FACT THAT WE, OUR RETENTION NUMBERS HAVE IMPROVED DRAMATICALLY.
UH, YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW HOW MUCH IT COST TO RETRAIN A NEW EMPLOYEE.
SO I THINK THERE CERTAINLY IS COST SAVINGS JUST BASED ON THAT NUMBER ALONE.
AND OBVIOUSLY THAT'S OUR GOAL IS TO RETAIN OUR EMPLOYEES.
SO WE'VE GOT A GOOD ONE YEAR TREND.
WE WANNA MAKE THAT A LONG TERM TREND.
SO LET'S, IT'S GOING DOWN
THE, THE SIX, UM, FIRST YEAR SEPARATIONS ARE ALSO, UM, AN IMPORTANT AREA TO FOCUS ON.
'CAUSE WHEN EMPLOYEES LEAVE, LIKE YOU HAD MENTIONED, WE'RE GONNA HAVING TO REHIRE, RE, RE ONBOARD, RETRAIN, THEN OUR LEAN STAFF IS EVEN LEANER FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.
AND IT'S, IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WORTH FOCUSING ON AND LOOKING AT.
AND, AND THE ZERO ON FISCAL YEAR 22, IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY, IS 'CAUSE WE DIDN'T HIRE ANYBODY THAT YEAR.
THERE WERE NO FIRST YEAR EMPLOYEES.
NEXT NOW TO THE FUN STUFF, UTILITIES.
SO THIS ONE REFLECTS THE MOST CHANGES THAT WE'VE SEEN SINCE JULY 7TH.
THIS, UH, AND IT REFLECTS AN IMPORTANT UPDATE.
SO STAFF HAS COMPLETED A MORE DETAILED LEGAL AND FINANCIAL REVIEW OF HOW IMPACT FEES, UH, MAY BE USED.
THIS REVIEW IS CONFIRMED THAT IN FACT, FEES CAN SUPPORT DEBT SERVICE FOR ELIGIBLE CAPITAL
[02:55:01]
PROJECTS.UM, THAT IS A KEY 'CAUSE IT WILL BE AUDITED PRETTY HEAVILY.
SO IT'S CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED AT THE TIME THAT THE IMPACT FEE WAS IMPLEMENTED CONSISTENT WITH CHAPTER 3 95.
SO WHAT THIS HAS DONE TO THE BOTTOM CHART FOR FISCAL YEAR 27 ON SLIDE 14 IS, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THE BALANCE BUDGET, WHICH IS THE ONE THAT IS BOLDED IN THE PURPLE BOX THERE.
AND THAT'S WHEN HE TAKES HIS REVENUES MINUS EXPENDITURES AND MINUS THE TRANSFERS.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR A BALANCED BUDGET THERE.
AND NOW THAT WE'VE PUT IMPACT FEES TO GET US THAT 25% OPERATING, UM, RATIO, WE HAVE A SURPLUS OF ONE, ALMOST 1.1 MILLION.
AND I'M SAD CAMERON MILLER IS NOT HERE TO, TO, UH, TO HEAR IT, TO FULLY APPRECIATE THAT.
THE OTHER THING YOU'RE NOT SEEING HERE IS THAT THERE'S STILL REMAINING BALANCE IN THE, UM, IMPACT FEE FUND, UH, FOR THAT REMAINDER.
SO WE'RE JUST GOING TO LEAVE THAT THERE AT THE MOMENT THAT THAT IS OUR CASH TO LOSE FOR UTILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS.
BUT WE CAN MOVE THAT OVER AT ANY TIME.
YOU MIGHT SEE THAT DURING BUDGET AMENDMENTS, UH, THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, NEXT YEAR AS PROJECTS ARISE.
BUT, SO WHAT THIS ALSO TELLS US IS WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT ANY RATE INCREASES IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE FOR FISCAL YEAR 27.
WE HAVE NOT ASSUMED OR UH, UH, MODELED IN ANY RATE INCREASE.
HOWEVER, WE CAN'T SUSTAIN THAT FOR, FOR, FOR VERY LONG.
UM, WE ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO TALK ABOUT OUR, UH, FUTURE BOND AND FUTURE PROJECT NEEDS AT THAT POINT WHEN WHENEVER THAT FUNDING KIND OF COMES TO FRUITION, WE WILL NEED TO READDRESS THE RATE INCREASE STUDY.
BUT FOR FISCAL YEAR 27, NO RATE INCREASE IS GOING TO BE NEEDED.
IT WOULD BE FOCUSED NOT ON EXISTING OPERATIONS OR DEBT SERVICE, BUT A FUTURE BOND.
AND WITH THAT, I'LL SKIP TO, SINCE WE'RE ON THAT, IT'S THE PLANNED FUTURE UTILITY BONDS.
SO THIS IS A PROJECT LIST THAT HAS BEEN WORKED, UH, ORIGINATING FROM THE ORIGINAL WATER MASTER PLAN, BUT ALSO BEEN TALKED TO AT LENGTH WITH THE STRATEGIC WATER PLANNING COMMITTEE.
AND THIS IS THE LIST AND THE NUMBERS HAVE CHANGED QUITE A BIT, UM, AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMITTEE.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR ALL'S EFFORTS AND DISCUSSING SCOPE, TIMING, UM, AND KIND OF FUNDING ALTERNATIVES AS WELL.
SO WHAT WE'RE SHOWING HERE, UM, GOING TO THE 68 MILLION DOES NOT INCLUDE, UM, THE EXPANSION FOR THE CCR FOR THE FOUR, UM, EXPANSION THERE.
UM, NOW I WILL SAY THESE NUMBERS ARE KIND OF YOUR HIGH END.
WE ARE INVESTIGATING MORE ALTERNATIVE FUNDING STRATEGIES SUCH AS GRANTS AND LOW INTEREST LOANS.
SO THAT MEANS WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO OUT FOR BONDS SO MUCH.
PLUS WE DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT LEFT OVER FROM THE PREVIOUS BONDS WE WILL USE.
UM, BUT THESE ARE THE PROJECTS WE ARE CURRENTLY IN DESIGN FOR QUITE A FEW OF THESE NOW.
AND SO THIS WOULD BE, UM, GETTING US READY TO PUT FOR CONSTRUCTION.
AND I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THIS POINT AGAIN, WE STARTED AT $155 MILLION AND WHERE WE'RE AT NOW.
AND THE, THE 96.7, INCLUDING THE, UH, EXPANSION FOR CCR IS ON THE HIGH END OF COURSE.
SO IT, IT WILL, WE'LL CONTINUE TO REFINE THAT AS WE GO.
THE, THE BIG FACTOR BEING THAT WE'VE, WE'VE, WE'VE ASSUMED WE'RE REMOVING THE MCCANNON WATER PLANT AND THE $30 MILLION IT REPRESENTS.
UM, AND LIKEWISE AS WELL WITH THIS, WE'RE ASSUMING THAT RATHER THAN THE CROSS CREEK RANCH WASTEWATER PLANT EXPANSION TO FOUR MGD BEING MANY YEARS DOWN IN THE FUTURE, AND IN WHICH CASE WE HAVE TO ASSUME SEVERAL YEARS OF INFLATION, IT'S GOING AHEAD NOW.
AND SO WE CAN REMOVE AND CUT AWAY A LOT OF THAT.
THOSE TWO PROBABLY REPRESENT A LOT OF THAT.
WE'VE ALSO CREATED AN EFFICIENCY BY NOT DOING TWO PHASES TO A TAMRON WASTEWATER PLANT, BUT INSTEAD DOING ONE PHASE TO A PRIMROSE PLANT.
AND THEN LIKEWISE, AS ANGELA MENTIONED, WE'VE SAVED SOME MONEY ON PREVIOUS BOND PROJECTS AND THAT WAS, UH, ALLOCATED AT THE JUNE 16TH, UH, CITY COUNCIL MEETING WHERE WE'VE PUT THOSE TOWARDS DESIGN ON ALL THESE PROJECTS.
SO THE IDEA IS THAT ONCE WE GO FOR THIS BOND, THOSE PLANS ARE DONE AND WE'RE READY FOR CONSTRUCTION, GET OUT AHEAD OF IT.
SO ONE COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED WE HAVE FROM YOU TODAY IS JUST DO WE WANNA ADVANCE THE CROSS CREEK, UH, ULTIMATE EXPANSION? THAT IS THE LAST LINE ITEM ON HERE.
IT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE SWIP SEA THAT WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD.
BUT WE DO WANT TO GET, UM, YOUR NODS OF APPROVAL.
IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO GET A HEAD START ON THAT.
AND HERE'S THE REASON WHY, AND I'LL, I'LL GIVE YOU A, UM, REASON IN GENERAL THIS WE ARE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO FOLLOW SIMILAR CRITERIA FOR BULLPEN PROJECTS AS WELL EVENTUALLY IS, UM, FIRST OF ALL THE CRITICALITY OF IT.
THE SECOND IS THE SOONER IT BECOMES SHOVEL READY SOONER WE HIT THE GROUND FOR CONSTRUCTION, WE LOCK IN OUR COSTS BECAUSE YEAR AFTER YEAR THEY'RE JUST GONNA BE BULGING, UH, AND GETTING BIGGER AND BIGGER.
SO IT'S EASIER IF WE CAN GET TO THE PROJECTS, UH, GET THEM HIT THE GROUND SOONER AND WE LOCK IN THOSE COSTS.
SO IF THAT THIS IS GONNA HELP US DO THAT
[03:00:01]
ON THIS BIG CHUNK OR NOW 28 MILLION IS NO SMALL AMOUNT, UH, I WOULD RATHER TRY AND MINIMIZE THOSE, UH, ESCALATIONS.AND I THINK WITH THAT, IF THAT'S THE OPINION OF COUNCIL, GENERALLY WE WOULD BRING THE DESIGN FOR THAT.
'CAUSE THAT'S PROBABLY THE ONLY ONE.
UH, NO, THERE'S MAYBE ONE OR TWO OTHER EXCEPTIONS, BUT WE WOULD BRING THE DESIGN FORWARD IN AUGUST TO GET THAT UNDERWAY.
AND BASICALLY THE SAME CRITERIA WOULD BE APPLYING, YOU KNOW, OKAY, WHAT'S THE CRITICALITY OR THE URGENCY MAXIMUM NUMBER OF RESIDENTS SERVED, THEN, UH, FACT BASED URGENCY BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, OKAY, THIS IS READY.
WE JUST NEED TO TURN KEY ON THIS ONE AND THEN FASTEST TO CONSTRUCTION SO WE CAN LOCK DOWN OUR COSTS.
I KNOW SPEAKING FOR MR. CON, UH, MR. CAM OR MR. MILLER, MR. CONNOR AND MYSELF BEING ON THE SWC COMMITTEE, WE WERE DEFINITELY ON BOARD FOR THIS TO MOVE FORWARD ON IT.
SO IT WOULD BE JUST UP FOR THE REST OF THE COUNCIL TO AGREE OR NOT, NOT, YEAH.
THANKS FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
ONE OTHER PIECE IS THE PRIMROSE WRF HAS SHOWN US EXPLORING TW DB LOAN.
THAT THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE PROBABLY A LOWER INTEREST RATE THAN ACTUALLY BONDING.
UH, THAT IN TERMS OF CRITICALITY, THE PRIMROSE WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY IS PROBABLY THE, THE MOST CRITICAL.
AND I THINK ONE, SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD COLLECTIVELY SUGGEST BEN, ANGELA AND OUR OTHERS WOULD BE THAT WE DO THAT PROJECT IN ADVANCE OF THE OTHERS.
SO WE COULD PROBABLY DELAY THE BOND FOR A LITTLE BIT IF WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH A LOW INTEREST LOAN THROUGH THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD ON THE PRIMROSE WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY.
INTEREST RATES RAISE ANYWHERE FROM 2.6 TO 2.9 VERSUS THE BONDING, WHICH WAS CLOSER TO FIVE.
ANY OPPORTUNITY TO SAVE THAT INTEREST IS USEFUL.
WE'LL GO BACK TO, UH, MORE CITYWIDE CIP OVERVIEWS.
NOT A WHOLE LOT HAS CHANGED IN THIS PROJECT VIEW.
AGAIN, THIS IS TAKING WHAT CIP DOES AS A PROJECT TOTALS, AND WE ARE JUST KIND OF PUTTING IN WHAT THE FISCAL AMOUNTS ARE FOR EACH, WHAT KIND OF CASH OUT THE DOOR.
AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT THESE TABLES REPRESENT.
AGAIN, NOT A WHOLE LOT HAS CHANGED.
THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A DUPLICATION IN THE STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION AROUND THE CITYWIDE FLASHING BEACONS.
IT WAS ACTUALLY A STANDALONE PROJECT, BUT IT HAS SINCE BEEN KIND OF ABSORBED IN THE CITYWIDE TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS LINE FOR 2027.
SO THEN WE DID, TOOK THAT DUPLICATION OF 250,000 AND PUT IT TO THE LEAH PENN OUTFALL, UH, CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT.
UM, AND THAT'S GONNA BE THE DESIGN PHASE FOR THAT PROJECT THERE.
SO WE WERE ABLE TO ADD ONE BY KIND OF ABSORBING THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS INTO, UH, THE TRAFFIC SAFETY PROJECT.
SO THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY CHANGE HERE.
WELL, THAT'S GOOD FOR THE BODAK RESIDENTS.
UH, UTILITY PROJECTS WE SPOKE TO.
SO I'LL SAY THAT THAT SPECIFIC PROJECT WAS ANTICIPATED IN FISCAL YEAR 28.
UM, SO WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE IT UP A YEAR AND IT WAS FORTUITOUS THAT WE SAW THAT DUPLICATION EXISTED WHILE AT THE SAME TIME WE GOT A REQUEST FOR A PROJECT DOWN THERE.
AND IT JUST, THAT WAS PERFECT TIMING.
SO WE'RE ABLE TO GET IT DONE EARLY.
SO MOVING TO THE BULLPEN OF PROJECT, SO THESE ARE NOT IN THE BUDGET AS OF, UH, AS WE HAVE DRAFTED IT.
NOW, AS MENTIONED ON THE FIRST SLIDE, WE HAVE A FUND BALANCE BECAUSE WE WERE AT 35% AND TO GET US DOWN TO 25% OF A POLICY TARGET, THAT LEAVES US WITH 2.3 MILLION.
WHAT CAN WE DO WITH THE 2.3 MILLION THAT COULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL FOR THE CITY ITSELF FOR, FOR, FOR ANY OTHER, UM, PRIORITIES THAT WE ALREADY HAVE ON OUR LIST.
AND SO THIS IS THE LIST OF PROJECTS.
THESE ARE ONES THAT WE FEEL THAT WE CAN DO.
THE FIRST TWO ARE THE ONES THAT ARE RECOMMENDED FIRST BY CITY STAFF.
ONE BEING HUGS TO CHARGER CONSTRUCTION.
UM, LOTS OF CONVERSATION HAS HAPPENED ON THAT ONE.
ZACH, YOU HAVE THE DETAILS WITH THE LANDOWNERS.
I THINK YOU, NONE OF THESE PROJECTS ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.
SO VIEW THEM ALL AS INTERCHANGEABLE, WHETHER THAT'S A PARTIAL ON ONE OR COMPLETE ON ANOTHER.
AS IT REGARDS TO HUGGINS THE CHARGER, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY TAKING THE 2022 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE FOR THE PROJECT AT THE TIME AND APPLYING AN INFLATIONARY FACTOR TO IT.
UH, VISITED WITH ONE OF THE LANDOWNERS THAT'S ON THAT ROUTE, THEIR ENGINEER WHO DESIGNED THE ORIGINAL PROJECT.
UM, WE'RE ABLE TO DO A FEW THINGS THOUGH TO TAKE THAT NUMBER DOWN.
ONE IS, OF COURSE, WE'VE ALREADY BUILT THE WATER LINE.
WE'VE GOT A 16 INCH WATER LINE THROUGH THERE.
UM, IF WE TAKE, TAKE THE SIDEWALKS OUT, THAT SAVES COST.
'CAUSE AS THE PROP PROPERTY ALONG THE ROAD DEVELOPS, THEY CAN BUILD THAT SIDEWALK.
UM, THAT ORIGINAL PLAN ALSO INCLUDED A SOUTH A SOUTHERNLY, UH, UH, CUL-DE-SAC.
SO ALL THAT PAVEMENT CAN BE REMOVED.
'CAUSE THAT'S NOT, WE'RE FOCUSED ON, WE'RE FOCUSED ON THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE TWO ROADS, UH, AND ALL THE OTHER PERS THAT'LL BE ALONG THE RIDE OF WAY, UH, STREET LIGHTS, ET CETERA, CAN BE REMOVED.
SO I'D ESTIMATED THAT WE COULD HOPEFULLY GET THAT DOWN TO ABOUT A MILLION.
THE LATEST ESTIMATE THAT CAME IN FROM THE ENGINEER FOR THAT WAS 1.3
[03:05:01]
ALL IN TO GET A TWO LANE ROAD CONNECTING HUGINS FROM KATIE CHER TO CHARGER WITH ADDITIONAL TURN LANE AT THE MAIN INTERSECTIONS.UH, AND THAT'S AGAIN, REMOVING THE SIDEWALKS AND SOME OTHER APP S AND, UM, BUT YOU SAID, BUT YOU SAID THE SIDEWALKS BY THE DEVELOPER THERE ALONG THE ROAD COULD POSSIBLY GO IN WHEN THEY PUT IN THOSE.
AND THAT'S HOW OUR ORDINANCE ACTUALLY OPERATES.
IN OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES, IF THERE'S NOT A SIDEWALK ON THAT ROAD, BUT YOU DEVELOP, THEN YOU'RE OBLIGATED TO BUILD A SIDEWALK.
SO I THINK THE BIG, THAT, THAT SEEMED LIKE A PRIORITY FROM COUNCIL LAST TIME.
GOT SOME GOOD FEEDBACK ON THAT ONE FROM THE ENGINEER.
SO THE QUESTION THERE IS, IS DO WE WANNA GO AHEAD AND JUST EAT THE FULL ONE THREE, DO YOU WANNA GO BACK TO THE DEVELOPER AND SAY, WE'RE, WE'LL DO ONE.
YOU FIGURE OUT THE REST, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? AND THEN AS FAR AS OTHER PROJECTS, THE WEST SIDE REGIONAL DETENTION OBLIGATION THAT THAT'S ACQUIRED, THAT, THAT LAND IS THE FIVE ACRE, ROUGHLY POND SITE FOR WEST SIDE DOWNTOWN.
THE CONSTRUCTION COST FOR THAT WILL BE REFLECTED IN THE WALL STREET PROJECT.
BUT THE LAND ACQUISITION COST WAS ACQUIRED BY FEE CREDITS BY OR BY, UH, POSITIVE DEVELOPMENTS BACK IN 2024.
UH, WE COULD WAIT UNTIL OVER TIME THAT FEE CREDITS ARE EATEN UP OR WE COULD GO BACK AND LEVERAGE A CASH POSITION AND SEE IF WE CAN LOWER THAT AMOUNT.
JUST GO AHEAD AND PUT SOME MONEY TOWARDS IT, ET CETERA.
UM, SEEMED LIKE WE FOCUS ON THOSE TWO.
LEAH AND PENN IS ONE THAT WE'VE ALREADY MENTIONED.
WE'VE GOT THE DESIGN MOVING FORWARD ON, WE COULD GO AHEAD AND JUST UTILIZE FUNDS FOR IT.
THAT'S ALSO A CAD ELIGIBLE EXPENSE.
UM, AND THEN THE TWO PARK DESIGN PROJECTS, DIXON ROAD DESIGN, BOAT, ARK MCKINNON, BOTH OF THOSE ARE CAD PROJECTS AS WELL.
AND THEN MAIN STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS IS REALLY JUST KIND OF DOUBLING DOWN ON WHAT THE EDCS HAVE ALREADY SUGGESTED THAT THEY'LL DO FOR THE NEXT, NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY IMPROVING DRAINAGE ALONG MAIN STREET FROM ROUGHLY LAVAL LAUNCH.
THE POST OFFICE, UH, I THINK ALONG BOTH SIDES OF MAINE DOWN TO DOZERS.
SO ABOUT TWO AND A HALF, THREE BLOCKS, UH, THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT WOULD BE, OKAY, WHAT'S THE REST OF THE STREETS SCAPE LOOK LIKE? SIDEWALK, WE GONNA GO FOR CURBS.
ONE THING I NOTE THAT MAIN STREET PROJECT IS OF COURSE VERY DEPENDENT UPON OP AND LEAH PENN IS CONTINGENT UPON VARIOUS LANDOWNERS, POTENTIALLY THE COUNTY, POTENTIALLY ANOTHER DEVELOPER NOT IN THE CITY'S JURISDICTION.
SO THOSE TWO, THOSE TWO PROJECTS, WE COULD KEEP AND ASSUME THAT IF WE, IF THEY'RE READY, WE COULD PULL THEM OUT OF THE CAD FUNDS, UH, AT THAT TIME.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, WITH ONE EXCEPTION BEING THE CITYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS, WE'VE NOT REALLY DIPPED INTO THE CAD FUNDS BECAUSE THESE PROJECTS WE KNOW ARE ON THE HORIZON AND POTENTIALLY OTHERS WE'RE EXPECTING TO END THE YEAR, FISCAL 27 AT ABOUT 4 MILLION FOR THE CAD FUND.
ON THE HUGGINS CHARGER, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT A TWO LANE ROAD.
SO NOT CONTINUING CHARGER OR NOT CONTINUING HUGGINS DOWN AS A TWO LANE DIVIDED WITH A CENTER, CENTER TURN LANE BECAUSE IT'S UNNECESSARY.
THERE'S NO TURNOFF IN THAT PARTICULAR, UH, AREA THAT, THAT, THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT BUILDING.
RIGHT NOW THERE, THERE IS NOWHERE TO TURN INTO.
UH, BUT THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT COULD HAPPEN IN OVER TIME.
SO IF SOMEBODY DOES DEVELOP THERE AND THEY INTRODUCE A DRIVEWAY CUT MM-HMM.
THEN THEY COULD HAVE THAT, UH, TURN LANE ADDED.
SO THAT OPPORTUNITY STILL EXISTS, BUT IT, WE'RE TRYING TO CUT PAVEMENT COST OUTTA THIS.
I'M LOOKING AT MAP TO CONNECT, UH, THE, THE TWO BASICALLY EXTENDING HUGGING ELEVATOR CHARGER.
RIGHT? SO WOULD THAT REDUCE THE TRAFFIC THAT YOU'RE SEEING UP AT THE CHARGER INTERSECTION WITH THE, UH, FULL SHEAR BEND
I THINK ONE OF THE BIG FACTORS IN THAT INTERSECTION OR AREA IS OBVIOUSLY THE HOGGINS CAR RIDER LINE.
SO YEAH, WE HAVEN'T, WE HAVEN'T OFFICIALLY STUDIED IT, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY, UM, HAVE SOMEBODY LOOK AT IT.
I, I AGREE WITH, I AGREE WITH ZACH THAT, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE, UM, THE STACKING OF VEHICLES ON, ON FULCHER ON, UH, KATIE FULCHER, AT A MINIMUM IT WILL GIVE PEOPLE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BYPASS THAT, THAT STACKING AND GET AROUND TO GO SOUTH.
ESPECIALLY FOR HUGGINS RIDER'S LINE FOR HUGGINS.
YOU CAN GO TO KATY FULCHER AND TRY TO GO SOUTH.
THIS WILL GIVE YOU ANOTHER OUTLET TO, TO GET THAT WAY IF YOU NEED TO.
ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE TRYING TO GO DOWN KATY, KATIE FULCHER TO GET TO HUGGINS TO TAKE YOU INTO DOWNTOWN OR TO 3 59 THAT THAT'LL GIVE YOU A BYPASS THAT YOU COULD USE.
UM, WE'RE GONNA RELY A LOT ON THE, UH, LAMAR SCHOOL DISTRICT TO HELP US GET THOSE VEHICLES OFF OF THAT ROAD.
BUT THIS SHOULD GIVE US SOME, GIVE US SOME RELIEF.
IN THAT CASE, IT SATISFIES TWO OF THE CRITERIA I WAS SAYING THE
[03:10:01]
MAXIMUM NUMBER OF RESIDENTS SERVE, BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE DO TRAVEL THROUGH THAT.AND IT'S CRITICAL, URGENT AND EASILY ACHIEVABLE.
I WOULD SAY THAT WE, THE FIRST ONE I RECOMMEND COUNCIL TO CONSIDER, AND THERE MIGHT EVEN JUST LOOKING AT THE, IF IT'S GONNA GO, ZACH, IS IT GONNA STRAIGHT ACROSS OR IS IT GONNA ANGLE DOWN TOWARDS THE CROSSOVER AT THE SCHOOL? OR CAN WE BUILD ANOTHER CROSSOVER? SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT GOOGLE MAPS, THE AERIAL IMAGERY'S OUTDATED.
THE NEW HUGINS AND THE PIPELINE WORK WAS JUST FINISHED AND THEN NOW THE CITY WILL GO DO THE, THE LAST INTERSECTION PIECE.
IT REALIGNS WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT'S SORT OF BEEN DEDICATED FOR THIS, UH, ON THE BULLPEN CONTRACT.
AND IT ENDS UP LINING RIGHT INTO, I THINK, THE MAIN ENTRY DRIVE INTO THE HIGH SCHOOL.
I THINK I, I HEAR THAT ONE CAVEAT WOULD BE, DO WE LIKE THE FULL 1.3 COST? DO WE WANNA SEE ANYTHING ADJUSTED ON THAT PROJECT? LET'S SEE IF WE CAN COM ECONOMIZE ON THAT ON AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
THAT WAY WE WILL, WE'LL STILL GET THE PROJECT STARTED, WE'LL HAVE THE BASIC NECESSARY ACCESS READY, BUT NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO, UH, LIMIT EXPENSE ON OTHER PROJECTS.
SO TRY TO TRY TO GET THE FULL PROJECT DONE, BUT TRY TO GET THAT 1.3 LOWERED A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.
I LIKE THE IDEA WHEN YOU SAID ONE AND YEAH, MAYBE THEY COULD HELP WITH THE REST.
SO SOME SORT OF CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT OR YEAH, THE OPTION TWO THAT YOU GAVE, NOT FULL 2.3, BUT GO WITH WHATEVER IS THE LEAST 1.3 OR WHATEVER WE CAN DO.
HOW DOES THAT TIE INTO THE, UH, ROUNDABOUT GRANT DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CHARGER WAY, HOW THOSE TWO INTERPLAY? I'LL ASK OUR, OUR TEAM, BECAUSE I KNOW AT OUR LAST MEETING WE TALKED ABOUT THE, THE ROUNDABOUT, THE GRANT AND DOLLARS WERE ALLOCATING THERE AND A POTENTIAL TRAFFIC STUDY.
SO I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE THIS KIND OF PLAYS INTO THAT OF COURSE.
UM, IT ACTUALLY DOES BECAUSE WE HAD A GRANT, UM, THAT WAS A SECONDARY GRANT FOR THIS SECTION AS WELL.
SO, UM, I THINK THEY PLAY IN REALLY WELL.
UM, AND JUST KEEPING IN MIND THAT WE PROPOSED ROUNDABOUT JUST ON A TRAFFIC STUDY, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WOULD BE THE PERMANENT SOLUTION 'CAUSE WE'RE JUST DOING A TEMPORARY FIX, SEE IF THERE WOULD BE A STUDY AND EVALUATION OF IT MM-HMM
SO, UM, FINGERS CROSSED IF WE'VE GOT BOTH OF THEM, THEN THAT COULD ALSO HELP WITH SOME OF THE CONSTRUCTION JUST SEEING WHAT THE FED, UH, FHWA WOULD REQUIRE.
BUT, UM, I THINK THEY KIND OF GO RIGHT IN LINE WITH EACH OTHER BECAUSE THE SPEED OF THE GRANT IS A LOT FASTER.
SO THEY COULD POSSIBLY GO ON CONCURRENTLY AND WE'D HAVE A LOT OF ALLEVIATION OF TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA.
BUT I WOULD JUST HOPE THAT BOTH OF THE FINDINGS FROM THOSE WOULD FEED EACH OTHER AND NOT JUST THEY WOULD PREEMPTIVELY JUMP TO ONE WITHOUT FINDINGS FROM THE OTHER.
'CAUSE I, I, YOU KNOW, DRIVING OVER IN THAT AREA, I THINK IT'S GONNA ALLEVIATE A LOT OF THE TRAFFIC FROM, UM, DROP OFF AT HUGGINS, BUT STILL WHO'S NEEDING TO GET ACROSS AT THOSE TIMES? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT YEAH.
AND THAT WOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE DO THE STUDY OF THE ENTIRE AREA BECAUSE THEY, THEY WERE LOOKING, WE TOLD THEM ABOUT THE, UH, CONGESTION OF ALL THE SCHOOLS
IT ALSO TAKES SOME OF THE TRAFFIC OUT OF DOWNTOWN AS WELL FOR THE SCHOOL RUN BECAUSE PEOPLE COME THROUGH, UM, HUGGINS DRIVE INSTEAD TO GO TO THE SCHOOLS AS OPPOSED TO HITTING 10 93 AND GOING THAT WAY AROUND.
SO IT RELIEVED THE PEOPLE GOING TO WORK ALONG THE 10 93 OR THE TOLLWAY AS WELL.
AND THE 10 93 CROSSOVER, KATIE CHER'S BEEN REMOVED NOW AS WELL.
SO THERE'S A, THERE'S A FACTOR THERE.
UH, ANY, ANY SUGGESTION OR PREFERENCE ON THE DELTA OF THAT, OF THAT EXCESS FUND GENERAL FUND BALANCE? UH, SO I SAW YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON THE, THE FEE CREDITS AND THE REDUCTION.
I WOULD SAY, I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IS THE REDUCED AMOUNT THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO NEGOTIATE BEFORE WE CAN GIVE YOU A DIRECTION ON THAT.
MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE IS IF THESE ARE NON CASHABLE CREDITS, THEN THEY HAVE TO COME AND DO THE DEVELOPMENT BEFORE THEY CAN CALL IN THOSE CREDITS.
I WOULD LEAVE IT AS THAT AS LONG AS POSSIBLE.
THERE IS NO REASON FOR US TO CONVERT TO CASH UNLESS THERE IS A MATERIAL BENEFIT TO REDUCING MAYBE 50% OF IT RIGHT NOW, DIDN'T WE DISCUSS BEFORE THAT THESE FEE CREDITS COULD BE PURCHASED AND THEN SOMEBODY COULD CALL, ESSENTIALLY CALL IN THE CHIPS? I DON'T THINK THESE ARE CASHABLE.
THAT WAS A QUESTION I ASKED LAST TIME.
SO THEY CAN BE SOLD TO OTHER DEVELOP, THEY CAN, CAN BE SOLD.
SO I, I-I-I-I-I THINK I HEAR BOTH MM-HMM
AND WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO FIND A BALANCE.
UM, POSITIVE DEVELOPMENTS PROBABLY ISN'T GONNA DEVELOP ANYTHING THEMSELVES.
THEY WILL SELL THESE CREDITS TO SOMEBODY ELSE.
I THINK THE ONLY ISSUE THAT COULD OCCUR, AND I I DON'T THINK THIS IS ONE, BUT IT COULD BE, UH, IS IF WE, FOR INSTANCE, JOSH HAS PROJECTED PERMIT REVENUES BASED UPON CONVERSATIONS AT CENTURY COMMUNITIES AND FULL JUNCTION, LET'S SAY, AND THEN THEY CASH THOSE CHIPS IN THE RE BUCKS, LET'S CALL THEM TO CENTURY AND CENTURY SAYS, WELL, OKAY, I'VE GOT THE CREDIT, SO I'M ACTUALLY NOT GONNA PAY YOU ANY PERMIT REVENUES.
WHAT DOES THAT DO TO OUR BUDGET? SO JUST, JUST KINDA KEEPING THAT IN THE BACK OF MIND.
BUT FUTURE REVENUE IN A LOCKDOWN NUMBER IN CASH VERSUS A CURRENT PAYMENT OF CASH,
[03:15:01]
UH, I THINK, UH, THAT NEEDS TO COME FROM, I, I'M NO ECONOMIST, BUT TO ME THAT LOOKS LIKE A, NOT A VERY GREAT DEAL FOR THE CITY.SO, NO, I, I COMPLETELY AGREE.
I'M JUST, I'M JUST FRAMING THAT UP IN CASE THAT DOES OCCUR.
SO UNLESS WE GET A SUFFICIENT REDUCTION IN THAT AMOUNT WHERE WE PAY THAT UP AND GET OUT OF IT, I WOULD SAY THERE'S, THERE'S NO MOTIVATION ON OUR SIDE TO GET THAT CLEARED OFF OUR BOOKS, BUT I CAN ASK HIM IF I'LL DO THAT.
AND WE'LL, WE'LL KEEP IT, UH, KIND OF JUST AS A FOOTNOTE, THAT WAY WE DON'T FORGET THAT IT'S THERE AND THAT KIND OF SURFACES, UM, UNBEKNOWNST TO US, SO WE CAN ALWAYS HAVE IT, THAT IT COULD POTENTIALLY COME.
SO WE'LL STICK WITH THE 1.3 FOR NOW AND WE'LL KEEP THIS BULLPEN LIVE.
UM, BUT AS WE CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION, RIGHT, AND I'M SURE THROUGH THE PROCESS OF NEXT FEW MONTHS, WE WILL SEE SOMETHING COME UP THAT'S MORE CRITICAL INERTIA THAT NEEDS THIS FUND.
I HAVE ONE QUESTION ON THE, GOING BACK TO THE HUGGINS ROAD PROJECT, THE PROPERTY ON BOTH SIDES OF THAT OR ZONE CURRENTLY AS WHAT? DOWNTOWN DISTRICT? MM-HMM
UH, ONE QUESTION ON THE SURPLUS.
ARE WE MEETING ALL OUR PCI RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEY'RE CURRENTLY FULLY FUNDED? YES, WE ARE.
UH, WE, WE DIDN'T STOP THERE TO HIGHLIGHT THAT, BUT THAT'S A, THAT'S ANOTHER BIG CHANGE YEAR OVER YEAR IS THAT THE FIRST YEAR OF THE PCI EFFORTS WAS A BIG COST.
AND YEAR TWO IS A, IS A DECREASE RELATIVE TO THAT, UH, AND NOT INSIGNIFICANT.
SO THERE WERE SEVERAL RESIDENT REQUESTS ON SIDEWALK REPAIRS THAT WILL NOW BE COVERED THIS YEAR THAT WERE PUT ON HOLD FOR SOME REASON.
OR THE OTHER, I, I THINK SPECIFICALLY WE PROBABLY WOULDN'T DO SIDEWALK REPAIRS AS PART OF OUR PCI OUR PAVEMENT CONDITION.
'CAUSE THAT WAS LOOKING AT STREETS.
UM, I CAN, YES, YOU, YOU ACTUALLY IT DID.
WE, WE DID A, AS PART OF THE PCI, WE DID A STUDY OF THE SIDEWALKS.
WE DIDN'T NECESSARILY INCLUDE THE PCI IN THE, UM, THE, THE, UM, MAINTENANCE PROGRAM WE ARE DOING.
UH, WE, WE HAVE, WE ARE AWARE OF THE AREAS BASED ON OUR, ON OUR STUDY.
WE ARE, WE DO HAVE A LIST OF REQUESTS FROM RESIDENTS, AND WE ARE WORKING ON THAT DILIGENTLY.
WE, YOU ACTUALLY APPROVED IN THE CONSENT AGENDA TODAY TO GIVE US SOME ADDITIONAL DOLLARS.
SO WE'RE GONNA GET BACK ON THAT AS SOON AS, AS SOON AS WE CAN GET THE PO WRITTEN.
AND, BUT, UM, WE, IN THIS COMING BUDGET, WE DO HAVE A, A SUBSTANTIAL, I WOULDN'T SAY SUBSTANTIAL, BUT A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY IN THE, IN THE BUDGET TO CONTINUE THAT WORK.
BUT WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING THAT OFFICIALLY UNDER THE, THE PCI PROGRAM.
IT'S ALL BEEN, IT'S ALL BEEN ROADWAY.
THEN IF WE HAVE THAT EXTRA FUNDING, YOU KNOW, THIS DIRECTLY TIES TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND SAFETY FOR THE RESIDENTS.
SO TO ME, THAT WOULD BE A PRIORITY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THOSE SIDEWALKS FIXED, ESPECIALLY IF THERE ARE ANY SAFETY ISSUES.
AND THE SURPLUS THAT Y'ALL APPROVED WAS COMING OUT OF THE SURPLUS.
THE, THE MONEY WE'RE USING, USING FOR THE ADDITIONAL SIDEWALKS CAME OUTTA THE SURPLUS FROM THE PCI THAT WE HAD IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET BECAUSE WE WOUND UP SEEING SOME EFFICIENCIES IN SOME OF THE COSTS AND DIDN'T WIND UP SPENDING AS MUCH OF THE DOLLARS AS WE HAD.
I MEAN, DO LOOK AT THE NEEDS AND THE BUDGET AND WE HAVE SOME, UH, FUNDING HERE THAT WE COULD REALLOCATE TO THAT IF WE NEED BE.
SO THAT ACTUALLY CONCLUDES OUR BUDGET UPDATES AND ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS THAT WE HAVE DONE FOR THIS CYCLE.
WE WILL, WILL BE BACK AUGUST 4TH, UH, WITHIN THE OTHER CHANGES.
PLEASE CONTINUE TO ASK QUESTIONS.
UM, AND I'LL BRING THOSE TO YOU AND I'LL SEE YOU NEXT TIME.
[BUSINESS - D]
AN UPDATE TO THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE, PLEASE.ALRIGHT, THERE'S, UH, TWO PARTS TO THIS FEE SCHEDULE THAT YOU'LL SEE.
UH, THE SECOND PART, WELL, ONE OF THE TWO PARTS, UH, I THINK KELSEY IS MUCH MORE OF, YEAH.
SHE'S, UH, THE EXPERT OF THE PARK RENTALS AND STUFF.
THE ONE UPDATE THAT I HAVE ON THE FEE SCHEDULE IS FOR A ROOF PERMITTING FEE.
UH, THIS REALLY ORIGINATED FROM, UH, ACTUALLY FROM, UH, US TALKING WITH OUR BUILDING OFFICIAL AND ALSO OUR PLAN REVIEWERS.
AND WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED QUITE A FEW INQUIRIES AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE DO THESE INSPECTIONS.
AND HONESTLY, I THINK IT'S, THAT'S BORN OUT OF TWO THINGS.
ONE, I THINK SOME JUST CURIOSITY.
THEY WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE ABIDING BY OUR ORDINANCES AND GETTING THE NECESSARY PERMITS THEY NEED.
BUT ALSO THERE ARE SOME INQUIRIES WHERE THEY'RE ACTUALLY WANTING THESE INSPECTIONS DONE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE, UH, BUILDERS AND CONTRACTORS
[03:20:01]
ARE BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE.UH, AND SO BASICALLY WHAT I DID IS I JUST LOOKED AT, UH, COMPARABLE PIER CITIES, UH, IN RELATION TO RE FOUND THEIR FEES AND LOOKED AT WHAT WE CHARGED FOR SIMILAR, UH, SERVICES, UH, WHEN WE DO OUR INSPECTIONS AND CAME OUT WITH THE $95 FEE FOR THE ROOFING INSPECTION.
I, IS THAT $95 LISTED IN THE, IN THE PACKET? YES, SIR.
AS A RED LINE OR A BLUE LINE RATHER.
I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS ON THE ROOF REROOF INSPECTION.
SO YOU ALREADY ANSWERED THAT IT IS COMMON IN THE NEIGHBORING CITIES.
UM, WHAT, WHAT IS THE COST OF THIS FOR US? SO THE COST FOR US, UH, THE, THE DIRECT COST WOULD BE, I WOULD HAVE TO ADD IT UP, UH, BUT WE HAVE OUR HOURLY RATE THAT WE PAY OUR INSPECTORS, UH, TO GO AND PERFORM THOSE INSPECTIONS.
THAT ALSO WOULD INCLUDE SOME TANGIBLE ITEMS SUCH AS VEHICLE MAINTENANCE TO GO OUT TO THOSE INSPECTIONS, GASOLINE, SOME OF THE EQUIPMENT NECESSARY TO PERFORM THOSE INSPECTIONS.
AND SO, LIKE ANY OTHER INSPECTIONS, I'M TALKING ABOUT MORE OF AN IN, UH, IN-HOUSE COST FOR REVIEWING THE DATA THAT THEY COLLECTED OR WHATEVER ENGINEERING ANALYSIS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE RUN IT.
IT'D BE THE STAFF TIME, I GUESS.
AND THAT IS ALL COVERED IN THOSE $95? YES.
UM, SO THIS, ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT A HUGE NUMBER, IT'S STILL GOING A BURDEN ON THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE ALREADY PAYING FOR THEIR DEDUCTIBLES.
SO WILL CITY BE LIABLE FOR ANY DEFECTS NOT IDENTIFIED THROUGH THIS INSPECTION? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF, NO.
AND WHY ARE WE DOING IT? WE'RE DOING IT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CITIZEN.
SO WE DO HAVE QUALIFIED ROOF INSPECTORS THAT WILL PERFORM THIS? ABSOLUTELY, YES.
WE DO HAVE, I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP.
WE DO HAVE SOME SERVICES, UH, THAT WE PROVIDE, WELL RATHER WE DO HAVE SOME INSPECTIONS THAT WE REQUIRE THAT WE DON'T PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES.
ONE OF THOSE BEING FOUNDATION REPAIRS WHERE WE ACTUALLY DO REQUIRE A THIRD PARTY STRUCTURAL EVALUATION.
WHICH WE'RE NOT QUALIFIED TO DO IN THIS CASE.
NOW I DEAL WITH THIS EVERY DAY, SO IT, IT PIQUED MY INTEREST WHY IBC IS AN ENGINEERING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION CODE.
SO WE HAVE STAFF THAT'S QUALIFIED TO PERFORM THIS EVALUATION PER I-B-C-I-B-C? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
WOULDN'T IT BE IRC INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE? RESIDENTIAL CODE? BECAUSE BUILDING CODES ARE COMMERCIAL BUILDING CODE.
THEY, WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL, SO OUR INSPECTORS ARE BOTH CER SOME OF THEM ARE BOTH CERTIFIED IN THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.
AND IN FACT, SOME ARE EVEN GO ONE STEP FURTHER AND THEY CARRY LICENSES TO PERFORM THEIR INSPECTIONS.
BECAUSE, UH, IBC TYPICALLY ADDRESSES BUILDING CODES FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, NOT, THEY HAVE ONLY A SMALL PORTION FOR RESIDENTIALS AND REFER TO IRC FOR THE REST, WHICH IS WHY I ASKED.
UM, AND THEN WE ARE BASICALLY CHECKING THINGS LIKE WIND UPLIFT RESISTANCE, ROOF DRAINAGE, FIRE CLASSIFICATION, ATTIC VENTILATION, ALL THOSE THINGS PER THE CODE.
AND WE HAVE PEOPLE QUALIFIED TO DO THAT.
I'M, I'M IMPRESSED WITH THE ABILITY FOR CODE INSPECTORS.
WELL, AND I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT WE HAVE, UH, LET'S SEE.
WE HAVE A TOTAL OF FIVE BUILDING INSPECTORS THAT INCLUDES A SENIOR BUILDING INSPECTOR AND A CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL.
SO NOT ALL FIVE OF THEM ARE QUALIFIED TO DO THAT, BUT OUT OF THE FIVE, I BELIEVE TWO OF THEM FOR CERTAIN ARE.
UM, WOULD THERE BE ANY DIFFERE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL ROOF, UM, INSPECTIONS? NOT AT THIS TIME, NO.
THEY DEPENDED WHETHER IT WAS COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL.
UH, BUT AT THIS TIME WE'RE, WE'RE KEEPING IT PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
DO WE DO THE SAME INSPECTION FOR CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION OF HOME AFTER MAYBE A DISASTER? YES.
THIS WOULD BE FOR, UH, REROOFING AND NEW ROOF.
NO, BUT I'M JUST DRAWING A COMPARISON TO AN ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF A HOME.
A NEW, WE DO NEW CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS.
DO WE DO THE RECONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS AS WELL? YES.
THEN THIS WOULD BASICALLY JUST FOLLOW THAT AND ADD EXTRA 95 FOR THE ROOF.
UM, MAY I PROPOSE, UH, COUNSEL, APPROVE AN UPDATE TO THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE IS PROPOSED.
SO MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO APPROVE ITEM D FOR THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE.
WHO SECOND THAT PLEASE? THANK YOU MR. RUSSELL.
OPPOSED? NONE ON ITEM E, PLEASE.
[BUSINESS - E]
POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2026 DASH 1546, ADOPTING A WATER CONSERVATION PLAN.GOOD, GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
SO THE WATER CONSERVATION PLANS HAVE GOTTA BE UPDATED EVERY FIVE YEARS.
UH, THE LAST TIME THIS ONE WAS UPDATED, OR ACTUALLY I THINK IT WAS CREATED WAS 2021.
[03:25:01]
I DON'T THINK THERE WAS AN UPDATE BEFORE THEN.UM, THIS YEAR I'VE BEEN FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO HAVE A WONDERFUL INTERN WHO TOOK THE EXISTING 22 1 PLAN AND UPDATED IT TO OUR CURRENT 2026 PLAN.
UH, SO I'M GONNA TURN THIS OVER TO HER.
I'M MS. WHATS HER NAME? SETTLE
SO TO BEGIN, I'LL PROVIDE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF WHAT I WILL BE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT.
UM, FIRST I'LL EXPLAIN THE PURPOSE OF THE WATER CONSERVATION PLAN, AND THEN TALK ABOUT CHANGES AND UPDATES SINCE THE 2021 PLAN WITH NEW 2031 AND 2036 CONSERVATION GOALS.
AND THEN COMPARISONS TO THE 2031 PLAN.
AND THEN FINALLY THE CURRENT MEASURES THAT THE CITY ALREADY HAS.
SO WHY IS A CON CONSERVATION PLAN NEEDED? SO TCEQ REQUIRES, UM, PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIERS TO SUPPLY AND ADOPT, UH, A WATER CONSERVATION PLAN WITH SPECIFIC FIVE AND 10 YEAR GOALS AND TARGETS.
UM, LIKE BEN MENTIONED, THE LAST ONE WAS IN 2021.
SO THE 2026 PLAN PROVIDES UPDATES AND GOALS, UM, THAT WAS MADE BY FREEZE AND NICKELS, UH, FOR THE CITY AND BEYOND JUST THESE REQUIREMENTS, THE LOCAL PURPOSE IS THAT THE PLAN SUPPORTS THE CONSERVATION PLAN, UM, OF THE WATER SUPPLY, WHICH IS A LIMITED RESOURCE AND FULL SURE IS A GROWING CITY.
AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS ARE GETTING CLEAN AND SAFE WATER.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, THE PLAN ENCOURAGES ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY, UM, BY REDUCING THE DEMAND ON OUR NATURAL WATER SUPPLY RESOURCES LIKE AQUIFERS.
AND THIS PLANT ALLOWS US TO DECREASE OUR WATER USE AND WATER LOSS.
SO THE FIRST WAS THE INTERCONNECT THAT WAS BUILT IN 2023 THAT CONNECT HYDRAULICALLY CONNECTED THE PREVIOUSLY SEPARATE SYSTEMS, CROSS CREEK RANCH AND THE CITY, UM, INTO ONE PUBLIC CONNECTED SYSTEM.
THIS WAS DONE THROUGH THE KATY FULL SHEAR ROAD.
UM, THE LARRY'S WATER CONSERVATION TOOLBOX HAS BEEN CHANGED TO THE WATER PROVIDER CONSERVATION PROGRAM.
UM, IT IS PROVIDED BY THE NORTH FORT BEND WATER AUTHORITY AND IT OFFERS A VARIETY OF PROGRAMS THAT SUPPORT OUR WATER CONSERVATION EFFORTS.
THE BIGGEST CHANGE, AS YOU GUYS MAY KNOW, IS THE ADDITION OF THE WATER CONSERVATION SUBCOMMITTEE AND FULL SHEAR NOW IS A WHOLESALE SUPPLIER.
SO WE ENFORCE OUR WHOLESALE CUSTOMERS TO IMPLEMENT THEIR OWN WATER CONSERVATION PLANS.
AND FINALLY, OUR, OUR UPDATED WATER RATE STRUCTURES FOR WASTE WATER AND WATER RATES.
ADDITIONAL CHANGES OUR IMPROVEMENTS TO OUR METERING AND A MI IN 2016.
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE TIMELINE, WE IMPLEMENTED THE NEPTUNE A MI SYSTEM AND ALSO ADDED A SMART CUSTOMER PORTAL, WHICH ALLOWS CUSTOMERS TO SEE THEIR MONTHLY USAGE.
UM, IN 2022, WE TRANSITIONED FROM THE NEPTUNE TO THE CENSUS AMIS.
AND IN 2024 WE UPGRADED OUR A MI SYSTEMS FROM THE GATEWAY ANTENNA TO CELLULAR.
AND THEN IN 2026, UH, WE APPROXIMATELY REPLACED 9,000 METERS TO THOSE SONIC OR SOLID STATE ULTRASONIC METERS, UM, MAKING OUR UPGRADE COMPLETE.
SO FOR OUR NUMERICAL NUMBERS ON OUR CONSERVATION GOALS, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS CHART, IT DEPL DISPLAYS THE 2021 TO 2025 AVERAGE AS WELL AS OUR 2031 GOAL AND 2036 GOAL.
UM, FOR OUR 2021 TO 2025 AVERAGE.
OUR TOTAL GALLONS PER CAPITA PER DAY REPRESENTS THE TOTAL WATER SUPPLIED, UM, ACROSS THE ENTIRE SYSTEM PER PERSON PER DAY.
UM, OUR RESIDENTIAL GPCD REPRESENTS THE WATER USED BY RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS, SO EXCLUDING ANY COMMERCIAL OR IRRIGATION USES.
OUR WATER LOSS GPCD IS 6.4 AND OUR WATER LOSS PERCENTAGE IS 5.9%.
[03:30:01]
WILL BE COMPARED IN THE NEXT SLIDE FROM THE PREVIOUS PLAN FOR THE 2031 GOAL.UM, AND 20 20 20 36 GOAL FOR OUR TOTAL GPCD AND RESIDENTIAL GPCD.
THAT NUMBER IS BASED ON A 0.5 ANNUAL REDUCTION.
UM, AND THEN AS YOU CAN SEE, OUR CURRENT WATER LOSS PERCENTAGE IS 5.9% AND WE HOPE TO DECREASE THAT BY 5%, UM, IN 2031 AND HOPEFULLY 3% IN 2036.
SO FOR OUR COMPARISONS, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS CHART SHOWS US THE 2021 PLANS, 2026 GOAL, AND THEN OUR ACTUAL UPDATED AVERAGES, UM, FROM 2021 TO 2025.
UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE HAVE BEEN NOT ONLY MET BUT EXCEEDED.
SO IT SUPPORTS OUR UPDATED LOWER GOALS IN THE 2026 PLAN.
AND THEN ALSO THE STATE, THE 79TH, LEMME NOT MESS THIS UP.
SO WE ALSO MEET THAT GOAL JUST FOR THE FOLKS WATCHING AT HOME.
UM, GPCD, WOULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT THE ACRONYM STANDS FOR, PLEASE? YEAH.
UM, SO IT STANDS FOR GALLONS PER CAPITA PER DAY.
SO BASICALLY HOW MUCH WATER SOMEONE USES A DAY PER PERSON.
AND THE LOSS, HOW WAS THAT CALCULATED? THE LOSS? IT LOSS IS JUST A TOTAL WATER LOSS, AND WE USE THAT FROM THE METERING.
SO WHEN WE TRACK THE METERING AND ALL OF THAT INFORMATION GETS SENT TO THE CITY.
SO THAT'S HOW WE DO OUR WATER LOSS AUDITS AND CALCULATIONS.
AND THAT IS AN APPENDIX FEE AS WELL OF THE CONSERVATION PLAN.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE FULL NUMBERS.
UM, LAST BUT NOT LEAST, UH, OUR CURRENT CONSERVATION MEASURES.
SO THE PLAN HIGHLIGHTS SOME OF THE CONSERVATION OR ALL, ALL OF THE CONSERVATION MEASURES WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
ONE OF THEM IS THE PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH.
UM, SO WE HAVE INFORMATION ON OUR WEBSITE, SOCIAL MEDIA AND MAILINGS ABOUT WATER CONSERVATION.
AND ON OUR UTILITY BILLS, WE INCLUDE INSERTS, LIKE THE IRRIGATION TIP, FLYERS, UM, ALL, AS YOU GUYS MAY KNOW, WE HAD THE INAUGURAL WATER CONSERVATION DAY THIS YEAR OR THIS YEAR, I THINK IN MARCH.
AND IT WILL BE ADDED AS A ANNUAL OUTREACH EVENT.
SO THAT IS ANOTHER OUTREACH PROGRAM WE HAVE, UM, FOR OUR CONSERVATION PROGRAMS, THE WATER PROVIDER CONSERVATION PROGRAM THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER.
UM, IT HAS FREE WATER IRRIGATION SYSTEM EVALUATIONS, ALSO CALLED THE WISE SKIES.
AND WE ALSO SEND OUT NOTIFICATIONS TO OUR HIGH WATER USERS AND NATIVE AND ADAPTIVE PLANT OUTREACH.
AND THEN AS FAR AS OUR METERING AND OPERATIONS, WE HAVE METER TESTING.
UH, WE TEST FOR LEAKS OR DAMAGES AND THEN REPLACEMENTS AND REPAIRS FOR THESE METERS.
UM, AND AS I MENTIONED, WE ALSO DO MONTHLY WATER LOSS TRACKING TO MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE CONSERVING OUR WATER, NOT WASTING IT, THINGS LIKE THAT.
FINALLY, THE POLICY AND RATES.
UH, WE HAVE WATER RATES THAT ESTABLISH, YOU KNOW, CONSERVATION EFFORTS AND KEEP THEM UPDATED.
AND THEN, UM, ORDINANCES TO THE PLUMBING FIXTURE REQUIREMENTS AND ALSO THE LANDSCAPE WATER MANAGEMENT.
UM, OVERALL THE CITY HAS MET THE GOALS IN THE 2021 PLAN AND THE UPDATED GOALS PROVIDE CLEAR DIRECTION FOR CONTINUED PROGRESS THROUGH 2031 AND 2036.
UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR PATIENCE, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
AND SOMETHING I'VE ALWAYS PREACHED, UH, IS THE WATER MY YARD YES.
AND, UM, I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT PUT INTO THE CONSERVATION AND MAYBE OWN SOME BILLS BECAUSE IT'S A VERY EFFECTIVE TOOL THAT I THINK WE NEED.
ME AND RANDY ARE ALL ABOUT IT, RIGHT? RANDY
SO, UH, AND YOU GO TO WHAT SCHOOL? ANU.
NOW THIS IS FROM THE TEXAS A AND M, UH, LIFE EXTENSION SERVICE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE EXCELLENT PRESENTATION, MAYOR.
I PROPOSED, UH, WE APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER, NUMBER 2026 DASH 1546.
MOTION'S BEEN MADE TO APPROVE, UH, ORDINANCE, UH, 2026 DASH 1546.
[03:35:01]
AND MOTION CARRIES.YEAH, YOU BETTER START LOOKING FOR A JOB NOW.
UM, ITEM F, CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION
[BUSINESS - F, G & H]
TO APPROVE THE FIRST SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATING TO APPROXIMATELY 11.8945 ACRES WITHIN THE FORT BEND COUNTY MUD NUMBER 1 51.JOSH, I, I THINK I'LL MENTION TOO, FG AND H ARE ALL RELATED, SO YOU COULD PROBABLY TAKE THEM ALL UP AT THE SAME TIME.
SO IF WE'D LIKE TO TAKE 'EM ALL AT ONE TIME, I DON'T HAVE ANY ANYBODY OPPOSED TO THAT.
UH, I THINK JOSH CAN PROVIDE SOME OVERVIEW ALSO, SAY, UH, CAROLINE, UH, ERIC WITH HANOVER IS HERE AS WELL IN THE AUDIENCE.
UH, IT IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS TO SPEAK TO THEIR, THEIR PLANS.
THE COUNCIL IS OKAY WITH US GOING WITH ALL THREE.
WELL, UH, ESSENTIALLY MUD 1 51, WHICH IS FIRETHORNE, UH, FAR NORTH OF US HERE, UH, HAS PETITIONED THE, AN, UH, THE CITY TO ANNEX, UH, APPROXIMATELY 11 ACRES OF PROPERTY.
THIS IS GOING TO BE NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF KING CROSSING AND FM 1463.
UH, THIS WAS BROUGHT TO Y'ALL, I BELIEVE, LAST MEETING.
UH, BUT BASICALLY THROUGH THIS AGREEMENT, THROUGH THE, UH, CONSENT OF ALLOWING THEM TO ANNEX THIS INTO THEIR, INTO THEIR MUD, UH, WHAT THE CITY WOULD SEE FROM THIS WOULD BE APPLICABLE CITY BUILDING CODE COMPLIANCE FOR THE MULTIFAMILY PROJECT, AS WELL AS THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT.
THERE WOULD BE, UH, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED ENGINEERING CERTIFICATION, UH, AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE CITY OF RE WHICH WE BELIEVE IS IMPORTANT AND A WIN.
UH, MOST IMPORTANTLY, UH, THROUGH THE MULTIFAMILY THERE WOULD BE A CONTRIBUTION TO THE CITY'S REGIONAL, UH, PARK FEE CONTRIBUTION, WHICH IF WE'RE AVERAGING ABOUT 300, 350 UNITS, WE'RE LOOKING AT $450 PER UNIT.
UH, WHICH AT THE TIME, I THINK IT'S PROBABLY IMPORTANT TO NOTE, UH, 2004 I BELIEVE WAS WHEN THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT WAS, UH, THE PARK FEE WOULD'VE BEEN A HUNDRED DOLLARS.
UH, LAST POINT, UH, THERE WOULD BE SOME LAND DEDICATION TO THE CITY ALONG CAN ISLAND PARKWAY, WHICH COULD BE USED TO, UH, EXPAND OR IMPROVE THAT RIGHT OF WAY OR, UH, FOR A SIGN, UH, A LANDMARK SIGN, UH, ENTERING INTO CHER'S ETJ.
UH, SO WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
AND I'LL SAY TOO, WE JUST PULLED UP A VICINITY MAP JUST FOR LOCATION REFERENCE.
UH, THIS IS UP REALLY PRETTY MUCH AT I 10.
UH, YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP, UH, KATY HIGH SCHOOL.
UH, SO WE'RE RIGHT THERE AT DOWNTOWN KATY.
THIS IS KIND OF FAR AWAY FROM RE PROPER.
UM, I'LL SAY AS WELL, THIS, THIS TRACT LAND I THINK IS CURRENTLY OWNED BY NEWQUEST.
THEY WOULD RETAIN THE HARD CORNER FOR FUTURE COMMERCIAL SITE.
UH, AND IT SITS BETWEEN I THINK FOUR DIFFERENT MUDS.
UM, THEY HAVE ALREADY, THEY HAVE APPROACHED THE FIRETHORNE MUD, WHICH IS MUD 1 51.
MUD 1 51 IS A RESIDENT RUN MUD BOARD.
THEY HAVE EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN GETTING THIS PROPERTY INTO THEIR MUD.
AND I THINK THE TAX BASE THAT REPRESENTS, UM, AND OF COURSE, MUD 1 51 WOULD EXTEND THEIR UTILITIES, NOT THE CITY'S UTILITIES, BUT MUD ONE 50 ONE'S UTILITIES TO THE SITE.
UM, I THINK THAT'S IT IN, IN TERMS OF GENERAL OVERVIEW.
SO WHERE DOES CURRENT FULL SHARE TJ GO NEAR THIS PROPERTY? ARE WE ADJACENT TO IT AT THIS POINT? IT'S IMMEDIATELY SOUTH.
SO THE FIRE THORN IS, WE ARE JUST GONNA CROSS 1463 OVER AND, UH, HAVE THIS IN OUR ETJ.
THIS WOULD BE OUR EXTREME NORTHEAST.
UH, THE 1 51, IS THAT A RESIDENT CONTROL MUD? OR IS YES.
A DEVELOPER CONTROLLED MUD? IT'S A RESIDENT CONTROLLED MUD.
AND THEY'RE REQUESTING THIS PORTION TO BE ADDED SO THAT THEY CAN GET THE ADDITIONAL TAX BENEFIT FOR THEIR MAINTENANCE OF, UH, ALL THE PROPERTIES AND SUCH.
I I THINK THAT'S SPECIFICALLY IS ITEM, ITEM H.
SO THE MUD CONSENT THAT THAT IS THEM.
UM, HOW DOES IT AFFECT THE CITY OF FULL SHERE AND THE SURROUNDING AREA IN TERMS OF, UH, COMPLIANCE WITH, UH, IF WE DIDN'T DO THIS, WHAT WOULD BE THE, UH, WHAT, WHAT BAD COULD HAPPEN IF WE DID DO THIS? WHAT BAD COULD HAPPEN? I'LL TRY TO AVOID GOOD, BAD VALUE, VALUE JUDGEMENTS, BUT I THINK IF, IF THEY, THIS OPEN COUNCIL MEETING OPINIONS ARE WELCOME
WELL, ZACH, LET'S FRAME IT THIS WAY.
IF WE WOULD NOT APPROVE THIS, WHAT, WHAT ROUTE DOES THIS OPPORTUNITY THEN GO? OR, OR WHAT OPTIONS DO THEY HAVE AVAILABLE? AND, AND BECAUSE CAROLINE IS HERE, MAYBE SHE COULD SPEAK TO THAT.
AM I ALLOWED TO? YEAH, PLEASE GO.
I THINK YOUR ANSWER IS THAT THEY PROBABLY GO TO A DIFFERENT MUD AND STILL TRY TO DEVELOP IT.
WE HAVE, WE HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE MUD.
IT'S TO THE CAROLINE, IF YOU JUST DON'T
[03:40:01]
MIND, PULL THE MICROPHONE DOWN AND, UH, PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF TO THE ENTIRE COUNCIL AND WHAT YOU, WHO YOU'RE WITH AND WHAT YOU DO.I'M CAROLINE RK, I'M WITH THE HANOVER COMPANY.
I'M A DEVELOPMENT PARTNER AND I COVER OUR HOUSTON MARKET FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES, THERE IS A MUD THAT IS TO OUR NORTHWEST WILLOW POINT MUD THAT IS WILLING TO ALSO ANNEX IN THE SITE.
SO THE, EITHER WAY WE GO, WHETHER WE APPROVE OR NOT, THIS IS GONNA HAPPEN.
I CAN'T SAY THAT WITH 100% CERTAINTY UNTIL WE CLOSE ON THE LAND AND PUT SHOVELS IN THE GROUND.
BUT WE DO HAVE A, WE DO HAVE A PATH FORWARD.
SO I GUESS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIND OUT IS WHAT'S THE BENEFIT AND THE NOT SO BENEFIT FOR US TO, TO MOVE FORWARD.
'CAUSE AGAIN, WHAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER IS THIS DOESN'T REALLY AFFECT FULL SHEAR.
SO WE DIDN'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULD, WHY YOU WERE NEEDING OUR CONSENT IF IT DOESN'T REALLY AFFECT US.
SO THE FI BUT FIRE THORN IS AN OUR E TJ MM-HMM
THAT AND THAT MUD IS AN ETJ MUD AND THEY WOULD BE EXPANDING IT.
AND THAT, THAT AGREEMENT BETWEEN JOHNSON DEVELOPMENT AND THE CITY OF S SHERE FROM 2004 DOES STIPULATE THAT IF THEY ARE TO EXPAND THEIR BOUNDARIES, THAT WE SHOULD GO IN FRONT OF THE CITY OF RE FOR CONSENT.
SEE, THAT'S WHAT WE, UH, I DON'T THINK WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME THAT THERE WAS YEAH, THAT'S A LITTLE, THAT ADDS A LOT MORE VALUE NOW TO THE DISCUSSION.
AND ALSO THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THE TAX BENEFIT AND IT'S, UH, ABOUT $154,000, THE PARK FEES.
STRAIGHT INTO OUR ACCOUNT PARK FEES.
BUT I THINK THE JOHNSON DEVELOPMENT PART WAS NOT BROUGHT UP LAST TIME THAT WE DIDN'T DISCUSS.
I, I THINK IT WAS, UM, AND MAYBE A DIFFERENT CONTEXT, BUT IT ABSOLUTELY, IT WAS, UM, ONE OTHER PIECE IS, IS WAS MENTIONED RELATIVE TO 2004 AGREEMENT.
2004 AGREEMENT WITH FIRETHORNE ACTUALLY STIPULATED A HUNDRED DOLLARS PER UNIT.
SO A LITTLE BIT OVER FOUR TIMES AS MUCH.
UM, VERY, THAT WAS PROBABLY THE CITY'S FIRST EVER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
PRETTY BARE BALANCE
SO HOW DO WE WANT PUT THIS MOTION, IF I WERE TO DO IT, BECAUSE I SEE TWO DIFFERENT ORDINANCES, UH, BEING DISCUSSED HERE.
THE 2026 DASH 1544 AND THEN 2026 DASH 7 0 9.
SHOULD WE HAVE SEPARATE MOTIONS FOR THOSE? NO, JUST INCLUDE ALL THREE.
I SAID I JUST WANT, JUST HAD ONE MORE CLARIFICATION.
SO IS THIS PART OF OUR EFFORTS TO CLEAN UP, UM, PRIOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS OR JUST MAKING SURE THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD WE'RE VERY CRYSTAL CLEAR ON WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CITY OF RE IS IN OUR ETJ AS WELL? I, I DON'T THINK I'D CALL THIS CLEANING UP AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
IT'S JUST BASICALLY ATTACHING A NEW TRACT LAND TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
BUT IN SO DOING, TRYING TO GET SOMETHING BETTER FOR THE CITY THAN IT WAS REFLECTING IN THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT.
YEAH, THAT'S VERY, IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING PARTICULARLY TO FIRETHORNE AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO IN 10 YEARS TIME, WHEN WE LOOK BACK AND REFLECT ON THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, IT'S GONNA BE VERY CLEAR CUT OF WHAT WE'VE DONE AND WHY.
SO I HOPEFULLY THAT'S AN EASY PIECE TRANSLATION.
AND THE ONLY PUSHBACK I HAVE IS I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE WELCOMED TO FHI SIGNS IN THE E TJ 'CAUSE IT GETS CONFUSING ON WHERE THE SERVICES COME FROM, SUCH AS OUR FULL PD AND WHERE THEY, UM, HOW ABOUT, YOU'RE ALMOST IN FULL SURE.
UM, YEAH, WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT $154,800 IN PARK FEES.
I THINK ONE OTHER PIECE OF THIS IS THAT MUD 1 51 WOULD, WOULD, WOULD BE EXTENDING UTILITIES TO THIS SITE AND THERE IS STILL REMAINING UNDEVELOPABLE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, THE NORTH OF THIS.
HOW STRATEGIC WOULD THIS BE FOR US FOR EXPANSION? SO AS THAT PROPERTY DEVELOPS, IF IT DEVELOPS NOW MOD 1 51 IS THAT MUCH CLOSER TO BEING, BEING ABLE TO GRAB THAT PROPERTY.
AND IF THAT'S THE ROUTE THAT, THAT, THAT THEY WENT, THEN THEY TOO WOULD HAVE TO COME FORWARD AND DO SOMETHING SIMILAR.
NOW WHO OWNS THAT PROPERTY NORTH? UH, I THINK IT'S BAIN'S FAMILY.
TRUST ACCORDING TO THE PRESENT RESTRICTION.
SO THIS IS A WAY FOR US TO KIND OF CAPTURE A LITTLE BIT MORE ETJ OR LAND AND HAVE MORE OF A PRESENCE AS WE GET CLOSER TO I 10.
HOW ABOUT THAT? IF WE MOVE EAST TOWARDS AND GO SHOPS AT K RESERVE, THAT'D BE GOOD TOO.
BUT ANYWAYS, MAYOR, I PROPOSE COUNSEL APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER.
GO ON THERE, LEMME MAKE THE MOTION.
WE CAN STILL DISCUSS 20 26, 15 44 AND 2026.
AND IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.
MOTION HAS BEEN SECONDED BY MR. RUSSELL.
NOW I ASK FOR CO UH, UH, DISCUSSION.
SO I THINK FOR JUST EVERYBODY THAT'S OUT WATCHING THIS RIGHT NOW, THE, THE LAST TIME WE HAD DISCUSSION ON THIS, MULTIFAMILY WAS VERY OF A HOT TOPIC.
AND I THINK I WANNA ADDRESS THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM BECAUSE I THINK THAT PLAYED INTO SOME OF THE, UH, COMMENTARY OR LACK THEREOF THAT WE ACTUALLY HAD AT THE LAST MEETING.
BUT I DO THINK SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAD WITH TRAFFIC WITH WATER IS NOT OF ISSUE HERE.
[03:45:01]
IS OFF OF I 10.THIS IS IN A HIGHLY DENSE AREA FOR ALL THE RIGHT REASONS.
THIS WILL BRING ECONOMIC, UH, BENEFIT TO THE CITY AND JUST KIND OF, WE TALK ABOUT IT ALL THE TIME ON COUNCIL, BUT HELPING US TO GROW RESPONSIBLY.
SO I DON'T WANT FOLKS THAT ARE OUT THERE SITTING HEARING THE APARTMENT WORD.
YOU'VE GOTTA GO LOOK ON A MAP.
YOU'VE GOTTA GO SEE WHERE THIS IS ACTUALLY LOCATED, SEE ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE IN THIS GENERAL AREA, AND IT, IT, IT MAKES SENSE FOR THERE TO BE SOME APARTMENT HOUSING THERE FOR THOSE REASONS.
AND MS BE ALSO, UM, THE, UH, THE SITS OUTSIDE OF THAT HOT SUBSIDENT ZONE OF SHORE AS WELL.
THE TRAFFIC PATTERN'S GONNA GO UP TO I 10.
IT'S GOING TO BE TAKING IT OUT OF THE CITY.
SO I, I JUST THINK I WANT PEOPLE OUT THERE, IF THEY'RE HEARING THE WORD APARTMENT, TO REALLY GO LOOK AT THE SITE, SEE WHERE IT IS, SEE WHERE, YOU KNOW, IT'S IMPACTING.
WE'VE GOT SCHOOLS UP THERE WHERE, YOU KNOW, THIS HOUSING COULD HELP BENEFIT, UM, A LOT OF FOLKS THAT, THAT ARE LOOKING FOR, UM, FOR A HOME.
AND SO I JUST, I WANTED TO BRING ATTENTION TO THAT BEFORE WE MOVED ON QUICKLY.
UM, SO THAT VERY WELL SAID, VERY WELL SAID.
CAN I ECHO, I THINK MS. JOHNSON MADE A VERY GOOD POINT LAST TIME TOO, THAT THIS KIND OF RELIEVES PRESSURE OF APARTMENTS IN PRO IN SHORE PROPER.
AND IT LOOKS LIKE A VERY NICE PROJECT.
UH, WE'VE HAD A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE I'LL ASK FOR.
MAY I NEED TO MAKE ONE MORE MOTION ON THIS SAME, BECAUSE I'VE MISSED THE ITEM F DID YOU MISS ITEM F? YEAH, MAY I PROPOSE, UH, COUNCIL APPROVE THE FIRST SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATING TO APPROXIMATELY 11.8945 ACRES SECOND WITHIN THE FORT BEND COUNTY FUND.
ON, ON ITEM F, WHICH IS, UH, MIA COPA.
AND, UM, SECOND BY MR. RUSSELL.
ITEM I, UH, IN CONSIDERATION POSSIBLE ACTION FOR RESOLUTION 26, 20 26, 7 14 TO ADOPT A MEMBER CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICS POLICY FOR APPOINTED BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES.
SO THIS WAS A REQUEST BY CITY COUNCIL, I BELIEVE, AT THE MAY REGULAR MEETING WHEN APPOINTMENTS TO BOARD AND COMMISSIONS WERE OCCURRING.
WE FOLDED THAT IN, GOT ADDITIONAL STAFF INPUT, GOT LEGAL REVIEW AND INPUT, UH, TRIED TO GET SOME ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK FROM CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, WHICH HAS LED TO THE DRAFT TONIGHT.
SO, ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS? IS THIS GONNA BE REQUIRED TO SIGN IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THEIR POSITION? I, I THINK THAT'S A QUESTION FOR, FOR COUNSEL.
I, I THINK RIGHT NOW THAT MAY NOT BE VERY CLEAR, BUT WE CAN MAKE THAT CLEAR IF NEED BE, WHICH IS, I'D LIKE TO MAKE IT EXTREMELY CLEAR.
SO EVEN FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY ON THE BOARDS OF COMMISSIONS, SIGN THIS, I THINK THAT'S THE INTENT OF THIS.
I KNOW INTENT'S BEEN THE WORD TONIGHT, BUT SETTING UP CLEAR EXPECTATIONS SO EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S EXPECTED OF THEM.
I THINK WE'VE GOT A TON OF GREAT VOLUNTEERS FROM OUR COMMUNITY THAT ARE, ARE, ARE FUNCTIONING IN THESE ROLES BUT TO HAVE A BASIS OF WHAT, WHAT IS PROPER AND WHAT IS NOT PROPER.
AND IF IN THE WORST CASE SCENARIO, WE NEED TO REMOVE SOMEONE FOR SOMETHING, WE HAVE THE BASE TO DO SO.
ONE THING THAT, UM, I NOTICED WATCHING THE NEW PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, UM, HAVE THIS YEAR WAS THE NEW ATTORNEY THAT WAS SUPPORTING THEM HAD A REALLY GOOD RUNDOWN OF WHAT THE RULES AND ROLE RESPONSIBILITIES AND REQUIREMENTS ARE OF A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBER.
AND I HADN'T HEARD THAT BEFORE AS A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER.
I HAVE THE, UM, PRIVILEGE OF BEING ABLE TO ATTEND OUR TML UM, CONFERENCES, WHERE AS A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER AND THE MAYOR, WE GET TRAINING IN THAT.
AB BOARD COMMISSIONS DON'T ALWAYS GET THAT.
AND SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT FOR EVERY NEW COMMISS OR COMMITTEE THAT GETS SWORN IN, THAT THEY HAVE THOSE EXPECTATIONS.
THIS IS WHAT YOUR ROLE IS, THIS IS WHAT YOU OUGHT TO DO.
THIS JUST GOES THAT EXTRA LEVEL.
IT'S LIKE, HOW DO YOU REPRESENT YOURSELF IN PUBLIC? HOW DO YOU DISTINGUISH WHAT YOUR PERSONAL FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS ARE VERSUS AS IF YOU'RE REPRESENTING THE CITY ON THE DAES OR EVEN OUT IN THE COMMUNITY AND PROVIDING YOUR OPINION.
IS IT SARAH JOHNSON, THE CITIZEN'S OPINION, OR IS IT COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON'S OPINION? AMEN.
THOSE ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS WE WANNA DELINEATE TO MAKE SURE THAT WHILE WE'RE NOT INFRINGING ON FIRST AMENDMENT'S RIGHTS, WE STILL WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE BEING APPROPRIATE, UM, IN THE POSITION THAT WE'VE BEEN PLACED IN AS OUR COMMUNITY HAS, HAS PUT HERE.
NOT CREATING BARRIERS, BUT JUST SETTING THE EXPECTATIONS CLEAR.
WILL THIS APPLY TO ALL THE CITY COMMITTEES AS WELL AS THE EDCS? I WOULD THINK SO.
I DON'T THINK IT, IT JUST SAYS GENERALLY CITY BOARDS, ALL THE APPOINTMENTS THAT THE COUNCIL MAKES, BASICALLY.
THIS GOES BACK TO MY EARLIER STATEMENT
[03:50:01]
THAT IT JUST, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK IT'S GREAT FREE SPEECH.IF YOU WANNA BE JOE CITIZEN, BE JOE CITIZEN.
IF YOU WANNA SERVE, BE ON THE TEAM, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, IT'D BE ON THE TEAM, BUT I CAN'T HAVE YOU DOING BOTH.
IF WE WERE TO GET INTO AN ISSUE OR A REMOVAL OR WHATEVER, UH, WOULD THAT BE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION? IT WOULD BE, I THINK UNDER THE CURRENT, UM, CHARTER.
IT DEPENDS ON, IT DEPENDS ON THE BORDER COMMISSION.
YOU CAN ONLY GO INTO, UM, CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS APPOINTMENTS AND REMOVALS, UM, FOR OFFICERS.
AND SO, UM, PLANNING AND ZONING WOULD BE APPLICABLE.
UM, ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WOULD BE APPLICABLE.
THOSE TWO WOULD BE RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
THE APPOINTMENT DEFINITELY NOT, DEFINITELY NOT PARKS.
THE APPOINTMENT AND REMOVALS BASICALLY FOLLOWS THE SAME PATENT.
SO MAYOR PROPOSES AND THE COUNCIL APPROVES BOTH WAYS.
OR THE COUNCIL COULD EVEN, UH, ASK.
I THINK, UM, THE DIRECTION HERE IS, UM, TO APPROVE.
I DO, I HAVE TO READ IT ALL? OR THE RESOLUTION? OH, GEEZ.
OH, THE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2026
[BUSINESS - I]
DASH SEVEN 14.ALL RIGHT, MR. OMAR, UH, MR. PENA HAS, UH, MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE 2026 DASH SEVEN 14.
AND I'M GONNA GIVE MS NO THE SECOND.
AND, UH, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, I'LL ASK FOR A VOTE.
ANY OPPOSED? ALRIGHT, WE GOT A, WE GOT A RES, WE GOT A, A CODE OF CONDUCT.
UH, JAY, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPOINT A NEW COUNCIL MEMBER REPRESENTATIVE
[BUSINESS - J]
TO THE POLICE SALARY COMMITTEE AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE COMMITTEE'S FUTURE.I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE, THIS COMMITTEE IS FOCUSED SPECIFICALLY ON POLICE SALARY, HOWEVER, THE POLICE BUDGET IS PRETTY MUCH THE LARGEST DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY.
SO IF WE DO CONTINUE WITH THIS COMMITTEE, I WOULD RECOMMEND EXPANDING IT TO ALL OF THE POLICE BUDGET.
IT WON'T NECESSARILY, I, I THINK IT WASN'T, WHEN IT STARTED, IT WAS TERMED AS POLICE SALARY COMMITTEE.
EVENTUALLY WE WENT INTO THE, UH, THE FULL POLICE, UH, FUNDING COMMITTEE.
I THINK THAT'S, THAT REALLY SPEAKS TO THE PURPOSE OF THE SECOND HALF OF THIS, WHICH IS TO HAVE SCOPE DEFINED AND YES.
AND JUST, WE CAN COME UP WITH MAYBE THE NEXT MEETING OR THE FOLLOWING MEETING, WHAT THAT WOULD SPECIFICALLY LOOK LIKE, IF YOU HAVE ANY.
DID YOU SIT IN ON THOSE MEETINGS, JACK? I DID.
AND IT STARTED OUT AS POLICE SALARIES, BUT THEN I DID IT SOMETIMES JUST GO OFF TRACK AND GET INTO SOME OTHER, I I MEAN, I THINK THAT WAS STILL THE GUIDING LIGHT.
I MEAN, I, I THINK TO THE EXTENT THAT ANY OTHER TOPICS WERE COVERED, AND I THINK MS. ICK WILL AGREE WITH ME.
THEY WERE ALL IN THE, ALWAYS IN THE CONTEXT OF POLICE SALARIES.
IT WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE JUST ADDRESSING THE SALARY.
IT WAS A SALARY BENEFITS, WHAT WE COULD DO TO ATTRACT, UM, THE RIGHT TALENT, THEN RETAIN THE RIGHT TALENT, AND HOW WE CAN SUPPORT ON THE THINGS THAT THE, UH, POLICE FOUNDATION OR THE CITY CANNOT DIRECT OR EDCS CAN'T DIRECTLY FUND.
SO THAT'S WHERE THE DISCUSSION, UH, STARTED.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M MISSING HERE.
I'M MISSING WHAT IS THE NORTH STAR OF THIS COMMITTEE? IS IT PURELY SALARIES? IS IT, DOES IT NEED TO BE EXPANDED? BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND ON SOME OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GOT WHEN YOU WERE TALKING BACK TO THE COUNCIL, THAT IT WAS STARTED DIVERGING.
I THINK IT WAS A DIFFERENT NAME THAT WE ENDED UP, UH, WE, WHEN WE WERE GONNA CREATE A SEPARATE BOARD FOR IT, THERE WAS SOMETHING CAN YOU REPEAT THAT NAME? UH, I, I WOULD'VE FORGOTTEN IT BY NOW, BUT I THINK MR. KNAPE CAME UP WITH IT.
IT MIGHT HAVE INCLUDED BOTH OF THOSE WORDS, BUT I, I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT IT ULTIMATELY LANDED.
SO ARE WE LOOKING AT THE POLICE? WHO ARE THE CURRENT COUNCILMAN? SO THE, THE, THE CURRENT FOLKS FROM COUNCIL WERE COUNCIL MEMBER RUPE.
COUNCILOR RU AND COUNCILOR MILLER MILLER.
SO WE WOULD NEED TO REPLACE MR. KNAPE AS A CITY COUNCIL PERSON.
I NOMINATE, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, RUSSELL OR PENA, WHOEVER IS WILLING TO ACCEPT SOMEBODY STAND UP.
SO I HAVE A, A GOOD, UH, INSIGHT.
I ALREADY ATTENDED THE CITIZEN POLICE.
DID YOU, DO YOU REMEMBER IT? YOU
[03:55:01]
REMEMBER IT.WE HAVE A GRADUAL YEAH, I, I DIDN'T WANNA GET IN TROUBLE WITH THAT ON THE WATER COMMITTEE TOO.
RK ON THE WATER COMMITTEE TOO.
IT'S WHAT WE DO HERE, SO, SO PICK, PICK.
I DON'T, ALRIGHT, LET'S DO IT.
I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT HAPPEN AT COUNCIL BEFORE.
I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 25 YEARS.
SO THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS AFTER 10 O'CLOCK.
SO I, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE A MOTION TO APPOINT MR. RICHARD RUSSELL TO THAT COMMITTEE.
I I THINK HOPEFULLY THERE'S ALSO A AGREEMENT THAT WE DO NEED SOME KIND OF CHARTERING OR BYLAWS, ET CETERA, TO COME FORWARD PRETTY SOON BECAUSE WE WOULD NEED AS, AS DIRECTED OF LAST MEETING TO MEET IN AUGUST AS WELL.
SO I HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ON THIS ONE, IF I MAY SHARE.
WE STARTED THIS, UH, COMMITTEE WITH THE, UH, THE INTENT OF, YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE THAT OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT IS COMPETITIVE WITH THE REST OF THE, UH, HIRING AGENCIES THERE ARE.
AND WE GET THE BEST OF THE SAFETY THAT WE, WE CAN MAINTAIN THE TAG THAT THE SAFE CITY IN TEXAS.
WE MADE A FEW TIMES, WE SET UP SOME TARGETS.
WE HAVE NOT JUST MET, I THINK WE HAVE EXCEEDED THE TARGETS BASED ON THE BUDGET THAT WE HAVE REVIEWED TODAY.
AND THE COURSE CORRECTION THAT WAS DONE WAS NOT THROUGH THE COMMITTEE.
THAT WAS DONE THROUGH THE CITY STAFF AND THE COUNCIL AT SOME POINT.
UM, I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE A NEED FOR THIS COMMITTEE TO CONTINUE AS AN ADVISING BODY.
I THINK COUNCIL ITSELF CAN HANDLE THAT JOB VERY WELL IN FUTURE AS WE CAN, UM, MAKE THE, UH, REQUEST TO THE CITY STAFF TO MAKE THE PRESENTATIONS EVERY SIX MONTHS TO THE COUNCIL ON WHERE WE ARE AND HOW WE ARE DOING THINGS AND WHERE WE NEED TO GO.
AND IF NEED BE, WE CAN RECONVENE THIS COMMITTEE.
BUT THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, THE STAKEHOLDERS REMAINS OPEN TO REACH OUT TO ANY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, CITY STAFF TO GIVE THEIR INPUTS.
THAT DOESN'T STOP THEM FROM PROVIDING INPUT.
IT'S JUST THE, THE CONCEPT THAT WE'RE, THIS COMMITTEE WILL REVIEW WHERE WE HAVE GONE FROM WHERE WE STARTED.
I THINK THE COUNCIL IS WELL CAPABLE OF DOING THIS.
SO WE WOULD NOT MEET AGAIN OR WE WOULD, WE WOULD MEET AGAIN, BUT MINUS THE OTHER TWO NON-CITY COUNCIL, CITY STAFF MEMBERS.
UH, WE, WE CAN JUST MEET HERE AT THE OPEN MEETINGS AND DISCUSS THAT.
AND THAT WOULD BE, PUBLIC OPINION CAN BE SOUGHT THROUGH THE MEETINGS, THROUGH THE COMMENTS, THROUGH EMAILS.
THEY'RE, UH, THE HARD PART THAT WE DID THROUGH THE LAST YEAR'S MEETINGS WAS ANALYZING, GETTING A STATUS OF WHERE WE ARE AND WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO.
AT THIS POINT, THAT PLAN IS SET FOR THREE YEARS AND WE ARE ADJUSTING AS WE GO.
SO WITHOUT THE COMMITTEE'S INPUT FROM JANUARY, THIS PLAN DID ACHIEVE 1.7 MILLION TO 937,000 IN OUR STILL MEETING TARGET.
WHY DO WE NEED TO SO DON'T BE BE ON THE COMMITTEE? SAY THAT.
SO THEN I DON'T NEED TO BE ON THE COMMITTEE.
YOU'RE IN THE COMMITTEE BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE A MEETING THAT CAN CONCLUDES NEXT MONTH AND THEN SET GIVE HAND THIS OFF TO THE STAFF.
BUT, UH, TO ME THAT IF WE CAN REDUCE THE NUMBER OF COMMITTEES THAT WE CONTINUE ONGOING, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
BECAUSE THE CHARTER, IT MEANS THAT WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE THE CITY STAFF COMMITMENT FOR THAT AND THE COUNCIL COMMITMENT FOR THAT.
AND IT JUST ADDS ON WITH NO PARTICULAR GAIN OUT OF IT THAT WE COULDN'T DO OTHERWISE.
SO THE WAY I WOULD SEE IT IS THEN WE WOULD, WE'D HAVE MR. RUSSELL, ASSUMING THAT'S HOW THE COUNCIL VOTE GOES, WE WOULD MEET IN AUGUST.
WE WOULD NOT BRING ANY FORWARD, ANY BYLAWS OR ANYTHING.
'CAUSE THEY DON'T, THEY'RE NOT NEEDED.
'CAUSE THIS, THIS ISN'T, THAT'S NOT HOW IT'S GONNA OPERATE.
AND MAYBE WHAT WE COULD DO IS AT THE BUDGET WORKSHOP NEXT YEAR, IT COULD BE A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION.
DO WE STILL FEEL LIKE WE NEED IT? DO WE NEED TO BRING IT BACK? JUST WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE AT THAT TIME? NO.
BUT DO WE WOULD LIKE THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE STATUS UPDATE EVERY SIX MONTHS ON WHERE WE ARE, WHERE WE'RE GOING MM-HMM
AND WHAT WE'RE ACHIEVING OUT OF IT.
BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE COMMITTEE'S CONFIGURATION, THE POLICE FOUNDATION WILL DEFINITELY BE ABLE TO GIVE THEIR INPUTS THROUGH ANY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS OR THE CHIEF.
UH, EDCA IS NOT NECESSARILY IN PICTURE ANYMORE BECAUSE THEY HAVE DONE THEIR PART AND PROVIDED THE FUNDING.
UM, SO THE COMMITTEE WOULD PRIMARILY BE COUNSELING STAFF.
THAT CAN HAPPEN RIGHT HERE IN OPEN SESSION WHEN WE DON'T WANNA EXCLUDE THE REST OF THE FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM THAT DISCUSSION.
SO THERE IS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO, UH, NOMINATE MR. RUSSELL.
I DIDN'T HEAR A SECOND MR. PEN.
YOU WANT SECOND? THAT? I'LL SECOND THAT.
HOPEFULLY THAT MAKES YOU FEEL A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
MR. PENA, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, MR. RUSSELL.
[04:00:01]
YOU'RE POLICEMAN, YOU GET A BADGE.AND WE'LL, WE'LL GO FURTHER WITH THAT DIRECTIONAL DISCUSSION.
UH, LET'S GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION RIGHT NOW.
IT'S A CLOSED SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 5 5 1 0 7 1.
[EXECUTIVE SESSION]
OKAY.I MOVE, WE GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH 5 5 1 0.07.
YOU GUYS ARE MOTION BY, DO WE WANT TO TAKE BOTH THE SESSIONS TOGETHER? YES.
WE'LL TAKE BOTH SESSIONS TOGETHER.
OKAY, WE'RE GO INTO EXEC SESSION AT 10 0 9 FOR ME.
I CALL US BACK, UH, AT 11:18 PM UH, OFFICIALLY.
ANY, ANYBODY HAVE ANY ACTION? NO ACTION.
UH, RESULT, SORRY, SAY THAT AGAIN? NO.
ACTION ON THE EXECUTIVE SESSION? YES.
ALSO, UH, NOW WE GO, ANY ABSENCES, UH, THAT WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT HIM? COUNSEL, COMING UP? NO.
THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 14.
MAYOR, MAY WE ADJOURN? SECOND MOTIONS HAS BEEN MADE TO ADJOURN BY MS. JOHNSON AND SECONDED BY EVERYBODY.
HE HAD HIS FIRST MOTION TODAY, SO WE'LL GIVE IT TO HIM.
ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, APPRECIATE ALL YOUR HARD WORK AND EVERYBODY AT HOME.
TIME IS 1119 AND JUST IN CASE BARRELL COMES THROUGH, I MEAN NOT BARREL, UH, BERTHA, JUST BE AWARE WE ARE ACTIVELY MONITORING THE SITUATION AT EOC.