[00:00:06]
          MEETING OF THE LAGO VISTA CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER AT 1:01 P.M. ROBIN, PLEASE NOTE THAT WE HAVE 
          [II.	EXECUTIVE SESSION]
ALL OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE. WE ARE GOING TO CONVENE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO ONE CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL CONCERNING ALL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEMS REQUIRING CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT ADVICE AS NEEDED. PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071 AND TWO. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE EVALUATION OF THE CITY MANAGER. THIS IS UNDERNEATH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONAT 3:07 S APPROPRIATE. DEEMED APPROPRIATE 
          [Ill.		ACTION ON EXECUTIVE SESSION ]
IN CITY COUNCIL'S DISCRETION REGARDING NUMBER ONE. CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL CONCERNING ALL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEMS. REQUIRING CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT ADVICE AS NEEDED PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071. ANY ACTION. NO. ACTION. 
          THANK YOU. AND NUMBER TWO, DISCUSSION REGARDING THE EVALUATION OF THE CITY MANAGER UNDERNEATH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.074. ANY ACTION? NO. ACTION. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU SIR. AND IF YOU WOULD, WE'RE GOING TO STAND AND SAY THE PLEDGE AND HAVE THE INVOCATION. 
          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. AND NOW THE TEXAS FLAG. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE. TEXAS. ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. IF YOU WOULD REMAIN STANDING, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MISTER MAYOR PRO TEM IS GOING TO LEAD. OR DO YOU HAVE SOMEONE I'M GOING TO. I'M GOING TO LEAD. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. OKAY. ETERNAL FATHER, IN THE SHARED SPACES OF GOVERNANCE, WE HUMBLY GATHER. SEEKING YOUR DIVINE WISDOM. GUIDE US, OH LORD, AS WE DELIBERATE OVER THE PULSATING ISSUES OF OUR CITY. EMPOWER OUR DISCERNMENT, ILLUMINATE OUR JUDGMENTS AND PLANS WITH YOUR CELESTIAL INSIGHTS. MAY WE STEWARD THE CIVIC RESPONSIBILITY DILIGENTLY AND CREATE A BEACON CITY FOR ALL. WITH HOPEFUL HEARTS, WE SEEK YOUR GRACE FOR BETTER JUDGMENT, KNOWING THAT YOU, KNOWING THAT IN YOU LIES WISDOM BEYOND MEASURE. IN ALL WE DO OR DECIDE HERE TODAY. MAY YOU BE REFLECTED IN GLORIFIED FIRST AND FOREMOST. AMEN. AMEN. THANK YOU SIR. PLEASE TAKE YOUR SEAT. THANK YOU SIR. OKAY. WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEMS OF COMMUNITY 
          [VI.	ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST]
INTEREST. AND WE'RE UNDER PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.0415, THE CITY COUNCIL MAY REPORT ON ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. EXPRESSION OF THANKS, GRATITUDE, AND CONDOLENCES. INFORMATION REGARDING HOLIDAY SCHEDULES. RECOGNITION OF INDIVIDUALS. 
          PROCLAMATIONS. REMINDERS REGARDING CITY COUNCIL EVENTS. REMINDERS REGARDING COMMUNITY EVENTS AND HEALTH AND SAFETY ANNOUNCEMENTS. AND LET ME. I'VE GOT MY ANNOUNCEMENTS HERE. I'VE GOT A BUNCH OF THEM, WITH THE WINNER BEING ANNOUNCED AT THE END OF THE COMPETITION THAT WE SAW EARLIER, THE PUMPKIN DECORATING NUMBER ONE FALL CLEANUP DAYS. THE CITY'S ANNUAL FALL CLEANUP DAYS EVENT IS STILL UNDERWAY TODAY UNTIL 6 P.M. AT 5901 MUNICIPAL COMPLEX, WAY NEXT TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, JUST OVER HERE. THIS EVENT PROVIDES RESIDENTS WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAFELY DISPOSE OF ITEMS. A VALID FORM OF ID IS REQUIRED TO VERIFY RESIDENCY. THE LAST DAY FOR THIS EVENT IS SATURDAY, THIS SATURDAY, OCTOBER 18TH FROM 8 TO 4. A FULL LIST OF ACCEPTED AND NON ACCEPTED ITEMS IS AVAILABLE ON THE CITY WEBSITE. 
          NUMBER TWO PLAQUE OF APPRECIATION CEREMONY. THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA WILL HOST A PLAQUE APPRECIATION CEREMONY ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21ST AT 11 A.M. AT THE TACO BAR LOCATED AT 7708 LOWMAN FORD ROAD, SUITE B103. THE CITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT WILL RECOGNIZE YOU AND HANNAH. HOW DO YOU SAY THEIR LAST NAME? THANK YOU FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY THROUGH THEIR FOUR SUCCESSFUL LOCAL RESTAURANTS LAKESIDE SUBS, THE BURGER BAR, THE TACO BAR AND RECENTLY LEGACY BARBECUE NUMBER THREE MOVIE ON THE GREEN. THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA WILL KICK OFF ITS MOVIES ON THE GREEN SERIES ON FRIDAY, OCTOBER 24TH AT THE LAGO VISTA GOLF COURSE. IT OPENS AT 6:30 P.M. AND THE MOVIE WILL BEGIN AT DUSK WITH A SHOWING OF HOCUS POCUS. BRING ON YOUR GOLF CART, LAWN CHAIRS OR BLANKETS AND ENJOY A MAGICAL NIGHT UNDER THE STARS. ADMISSION IS FREE AND COSTUMES ARE WELCOME. NUMBER FOUR VETERANS DAY CELEBRATION. THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE LAGO VISTA ISD, INVITES THE COMMUNITY TO JOIN US AS WE CELEBRATE AND 
          [00:05:01]
HONOR VETERANS DAY ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 11TH, 2025 AT 11 A.M. THE LAGO VISTA HIGH SCHOOL GYMNASIUM. A LUNCHEON WILL FOLLOW THE CEREMONY FOR ALL VETERANS IN THE MAC. WE ENCOURAGE RESIDENTS TO COME TOGETHER IN GRATITUDE AND RECOGNITION OF THE BRAVE MEN AND WOMEN WHO HAVE SERVED OUR COUNTRY. NUMBER FIVE CHRISTMAS TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY. THE CITY OF VISTA INVITES THE COMMUNITY TO KICK OFF THE HOLIDAY SEASON AT OUR ANNUAL CHRISTMAS TREE LIGHTING EVENT ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 1ST, 2025, FROM 5 TO 8 P.M. IN THE CITY HALL PARKING LOT. JOIN US FOR THE EVENING OF FESTIVE ENTERTAINMENT, FOOD, FAMILY FUN AND A SPECIAL VISIT FROM SANTA CLAUS. TOGETHER, WE'LL COUNT DOWN TO THE LIGHTING OF OUR BEAUTIFUL DECORATED CHRISTMAS TREE AND CELEBRATE THE START OF THE HOLIDAY SEASON IN LAGO VISTA. NUMBER SIX. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, WE'D LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THE WINNER OF OUR FIRST ANNUAL PUMPKIN DECORATING CONTEST, WHICH WAS ORGANIZED BY THE EMPLOYEE APPRECIATION COMMITTEE. 
          THIS YEAR'S ENTRIES WERE OUTSTANDING, AND OUR COUNCIL JUDGES HAD A TOUGH TIME SELECTING JUST ONE WINNER. DRUMROLL, PLEASE. THANK YOU. AFTER DELIBERATION, I AM PROUD TO ANNOUNCE THAT THE WINNER OF THE 2025 PUMPKIN DECORATING CONTEST IS MARGARITAVILLE BY THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TEAM. CONGRATULATIONS TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR DEPARTMENTS AND STAFF WHO PARTICIPATE. IT WAS WONDERFUL. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU COUNCIL. WE APPRECIATE IT. Y'ALL JUST DON'T GET USED TO THAT. Y'ALL WON'T WIN THE NEXT CONTEST. THE CHRISTMAS DECORATIONS. JUST SAYING. OKAY I WILL START DOWN AT THIS END. SO MANY COMMUNITY EVENTS THAT YOU WANT TO ANSWER THE JANUARY. WHAT ABOUT THE THING ON THE 12TH, THE SWEARING IN. DID YOU EXCUSE ME? NOVEMBER 12TH WE'LL HAVE THE CANVASING OF THE VOTES FROM THE ELECTION, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE AN EVENT. I THINK IT NORMALLY TAKES PLACE IN THE MEETING ROOM OVER AT THE LIBRARY, WHERE WE'LL BE SAYING GOODBYE TO FOLKS LIKE ME WHO ARE LEAVING, AND ROBERT'S AND THOSE WHO ARE COMING IN. SO IF YOU WANT, I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO DO IT HERE. MAYOR. OKAY. VERY GOOD. AND IS IT 3 TO 5? I THINK WE'RE DOING THE CANVASING AT 230. OH AT FIVE. CANVASING IS AT FIVE AT FIVE. AND THEN TO FOLLOW WILL BE THE THE EVENT. THE EVENT OKAY. VERY GOOD. OKAY. SO JUST BE AWARE NOVEMBER 12TH WE'LL REMIND EVERYBODY ON THE SIXTH ABOUT THAT. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE DOWN HERE. YEAH I HAD SO TWO THINGS FOR ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH. I HAD MENTIONED IN OUR LAST MEETING THAT THIS MONTH, OCTOBER, IS THE PUMPKIN PATCH. SO PUMPKIN, GO BUY A PUMPKIN FROM ROLLING HILLS. ALSO THE ANNUAL FALL FESTIVAL FOR ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH WILL BE THIS COMING SATURDAY FROM 10 TO 3. AND I DO THINGS. THE BIG EVENT NORTHLAKE CHURCH WILL BE MEETING HERE IN THIS PARKING LOT BEFORE WE HEAD OUT TO OUR PROJECT. SO THOSE WHO ARE VOLUNTEERING FOR THAT, THANK YOU FOR DOING SO. AND OH, THE SAINT MARY'S FALL FESTIVAL THIS LAST WEEKEND. DID YOU GO FOR WERE YOU AT THE DUNKING BOOTH AT ALL? I WAS NOT OH, YOU ADAM AND AND THEN FATHER, I GUESS SO. ANYWAY, IT WAS THIS PAST WEEKEND. I'D NEVER SEEN SO MANY CARS DOWN THERE FOR FALL FEST, SO IT WAS A HUGE SUCCESS. THEY DUNKED US ALL DAY LONG. MR. PRINCE, MYSELF, MR. BENFIELD, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT I GOT WET CONSTANTLY FROM 11 TILL 
          [VII.	CITIZEN COMMENTS]
NOON. BUT IT WAS A LOT OF FUN SO I HOPE PEOPLE ENJOYED THE FALL FESTIVAL. OKAY, WE WILL MOVE ON TO CITIZEN COMMENTS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, COUNCILS ARE PROHIBITED FROM ACTING OR DISCUSSING OTHER THAN FACTUAL RESPONSES TO SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. 
          ANY ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA? AND I'VE GOT A BUNCH OF CARDS FROM FOLKS. MR. PERRIN, I THINK YOU WANTED TO SPEAK. THANK YOU. MAYOR. COUNCIL. MY NAME IS GERALD PERRIN. MY WIFE, VICKI, AND I RESIDE AT 3604 MOUNT LAUREL ROAD HERE IN LAGO VISTA. HAVE FOR 11 YEARS NOW. I'M ALSO THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE LAGO VISTA GOLF COURSE APPRECIATION GROUP. I CAME BEFORE YOU GUYS A FEW MONTHS AGO TO MENTION THAT WE WERE HAVING OUR SECOND ANNUAL GOLF TOURNAMENT FOR THE LAGO VISTA GOLF COURSE, WHICH ALL PROCEEDS GO TOWARDS THE GOLF COURSE. THAT GOLF COURSE IS THAT TOURNAMENT IS THIS SATURDAY, OCTOBER 18TH. IT'S AT 9:00. WE HAVE A SHOTGUN START. 
          WE HAVE ROOM FOR A FEW MORE PLAYERS. AND ALSO I'D LIKE THAT. AS I SAID BEFORE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PLAY GOLF TO HELP US WITH THE GOLF COURSE. YOU CAN COME BY AND DONATE FUNDS. AND AS TO AS OF RIGHT NOW, I'VE GOT CLOSE TO $500 DONATED FROM PEOPLE THAT WILL NOT BE PLAYING GOLF. SO WE'VE GOT ANOTHER DAY BEFORE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THE CUT OFF. AND IF YOU COULD PARTICIPATE IN ANY WAY, WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. AND I TOLD YOU I WAS GOING TO 
          [00:10:06]
PUT A TEAM TOGETHER. YES YOU DID. I FORGOT THAT I'M GIVING BLOOD SATURDAY MORNING. I DON'T CARE, MAYOR. IT DOESN'T MATTER. IT'S A SCRAMBLE. BUT COME BY AND I MAKE A DONATION. CAN I JUST LEAVE A DONATION AT THE. AT THE CLUBHOUSE? OKAY. AND DO WHO DO I MAKE IT OUT TO THE LAGO VISTA GOLF COURSE AS ALL PROCEEDS. LIKE I SAID, EVERYTHING IS GOING TO THE GOLF COURSE. THERE'S NONE OF THE MONEY'S GOING TO ANY OF THE WARS. THE WARS THAT WERE GIVEN FOR THE TOURNAMENT ARE PROVIDED BY GREG AND DEVON. AND ALSO I HAVE A A ROUND, A ROUND OF GOLF FROM THE JOINT VENTURE GOLF CLUB. SO EVERYTHING THAT WE RAISE IS GOING TOWARDS THE GOLF COURSE ITSELF. AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, IT'S FOR ITEMS THAT DID NOT MAKE THE BUDGET. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING. SO EVERYTHING GOES TOWARDS THE GOLF COURSE. SO IF YOU CAN PARTICIPATE IN ANY WAY WE WOULD DEFINITELY APPRECIATE IT. BEFORE I LEAVE, I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO FOR THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA. WE APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. AND I WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO AMANDA. WHEN I WAS AT THE DINNER LAST WEEK, I TOLD YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT IT WAS THE EXTENSION OF WHEN YOU COULD TURN YOUR THING IN. I SENT IT TO HER AND SHE POSTED IT AGAIN THIS MONDAY. SO IT DID GO OUT ON THE CITY'S SOCIAL MEDIA THIS MONDAY LETTING PEOPLE KNOW THAT THEY HAD THROUGH THIS FRIDAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. YOU BET. AMANDA CHAVARRIA YES, YES. COME ON. FORWARD. IS THAT HOW YOU SAY THAT? CHAVARRIA? CHAVARRIA. BUT YOU SAY CHAVARRIA. CHAVARRIA. YEAH. AS LONG AS YOU'RE NOT IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. BECAUSE THEN THEY REALLY, REALLY MESS WITH KIDS WITH THAT LAST NAME. I JUST WANTED TO ACTUALLY SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I SAW A LOT OF WORK BEING DONE ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD THIS PAST WEEK. I NOTICED THAT YOU HAD ALSO BROUGHT BACK SOMETHING FROM NEPAL THAT MR. OWEN IS NOT HERE, BUT HAD BROUGHT BACK UP. AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND I ALSO SAW THAT Y'ALL HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THE STR ORDINANCE, AND I'LL BE SPEAKING TO THAT AS WELL WITH A COUPLE RECOMMENDATIONS IF YOU DON'T BRING THEM UP. I THINK WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IT AT YOUR ROUNDTABLE, AND THERE WAS A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT HAD INPUT ON IT, BUT JUST IN GENERAL, I JUST WANT TO COME UP HERE AND SAY THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK. AND I'VE BEEN SEEING A LOT OF YOU OUT AT THE COMMUNITY EVENTS THIS PAST FALL, AND IT'S BEEN A REAL ENLIGHTENING AND FUN. SO IT'S REALLY GOOD TO SEE EVERYBODY OUT ABOUT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. I'VE GOT MR. DAVE STEWART AND YOU HAD MISS LORI DICK GIVE THREE MINUTES SO YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES. WE APPRECIATE IT IF YOU'RE SURE. YEAH. SO THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE, I WAS TELLING YOU THAT THE TYPE ONE CONVERTER WE ORIGINALLY LOOKED AT FOR 600,000. I TOLD YOU, I THOUGHT YOU COULD DO IT FOR A MIL AND A HALF. I TALKED TO TK TO FIND OUT WHO WAS MANUFACTURING IT NOW, AND THEY SAID THEY'VE SORT OF GOTTEN AWAY FROM THE FIRST GENERATION. AND THEY TOLD ME ABOUT A SECOND GENERATION CLOTH MEDIA FILTER. AND SO I CALLED THE MANUFACTURER OF THE PICTURE THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU. AND HE TOLD ME THAT FOR ONE MGD UNIT, HE WOULD DROP IT ON THE GROUND WITH START UP FOR ABOUT $250,000. THAT'S AN OVER THE PHONE NUMBER. SO I HAD 100 K TO IT. MAYBE THE ADVANTAGE OF A MODULAR UNIT IS THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO GO ON WITH THE SEWER PLANT, AND IT CAN BE RELOCATED WITH NO LOSS OF FUNCTION. IT JUST NEEDS TO BE HOOKED UP AGAIN. ALREADY WENT OVER TO TO THE PRICE. IT'S ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE PICKUP TRUCK AND IT'S FULLY AUTOMATIC. CAN BE INTEGRATED WITH THE SKADA. I WOULD ADD A CONCRETE SLAB FOR IT TO SIT ON AND PUT A A METAL ROOF OVER IT TO KEEP THE SUN OFF IT, BECAUSE SUN TENDS TO GROW ALGAE. IF IT HITS WATER WITH NUTRIENTS IN IT DIRECTLY. BUT ALL THAT COULD STILL BE DONE FOR LESS THAN A HALF A MILL. SO THERE WAS A CONVERSATION ABOUT THERE'S A HESITATION TO DO TYPE ONE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE CUSTOMERS WITH THREE YEARS WORTH OF HISTORY BEFORE YOU CAN EXEMPT THEM FROM PONDS AND DO THAT WELL. THE CITY HAS THREE QUALIFIED AREAS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE 210 THAT CAN BE CONVERTED OVER TO THE 305 SIZEMORE FIELD, THE BOYS BASEBALL FIELD AND THE GIRLS BASEBALL FIELD ALL HAVE A 25 YEAR HISTORY OF PURCHASING WATER, AND THAT COULD BE USED IMMEDIATELY TO ELIMINATE THE POND REQUIREMENT. BARK PARK HAS 25 PLUS YEARS. IT WAS PUT IN THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WAS PUT IN IN 1998. SO THAT ONE'S A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED, BUT THERE ARE THREE THAT ARE WITHIN 300FT OF THE EFFLUENT LINE GOING OUT TO THE CEDAR BREAKS. 
          AND IT WOULD BE VERY SIMPLE TO DO AN IN-HOUSE PROJECT. THE AND THEN YOU HAVE SUNSET PARK, WHICH WOULD DIRECTLY BENEFIT AS WELL. AS SOON AS YOU COULD FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THE WATER AND THE POWER OVER THERE. SO BY CONVERTING THE TYPE ONE WATER AND PUTTING THESE BALL FIELDS 
          [00:15:07]
ON EFFLUENT, YOU'RE DOING THE TAXPAYERS OF LAGO VISTA AND THE TAXPAYERS A FAVOR. LAGO VISTA BENEFITS BECAUSE ANY DRINKING WATER THAT IS REPLACED WITH EFFLUENT WATER TO IRRIGATE THESE FIELDS REMAINS IN THE PLANT. IT'S GOING TO BASICALLY BE UNSOLD, AND IT'LL ALLOW FOR FUTURE HOUSES TO BE BUILT WITHOUT EXPANDING YOUR WATER PLANT. THE SECOND BENEFIT IS, IS THAT THE SCHOOL WILL BE PAYING ACCORDING TO THE ORDINANCE THAT WE PASSED IN 2018, THE SCHOOL WILL TAKE PAYING HALF OF THE WATER COST FOR THEIR IRRIGATION THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY PAYING. SO LAGO VISTA TAXPAYERS BENEFIT DOUBLY AND THE WHILE THE OUT OF TOWN LBUSD TAXPAYERS BENEFIT FROM THE WATER REDUCTION. SO I I'D LIKE TO SEE THE TYPE ONE CONVERTER MOVE FORWARD. AND AS FAR AS THE GOLF COURSE GOES, IT'S BASICALLY LIKE A REAL HEAVY DUTY T SHIRT. YOU'RE NOT GETTING ANY PLASTIC THROUGH IT. SO THERE'D BE NO PLASTIC IN ANY OF THE PONDS. THAT JUST LEAVES YOU WITH HAVING TO RESOLVE YOUR DUCKWEED PROBLEM, WHICH I TALKED WITH COUNCILMAN BENEFIELD ABOUT EARLIER TODAY. COUNCILMAN PRINCE, AND IT LOOKS LIKE THEY GOT THAT UNDER CONTROL. SO WE'RE GOING TO WIND UP WITH A NEW IRRIGATION SYSTEM THAT YOU DON'T CLEAN THE HEADS ON. THANK YOU SIR. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. MR. KING. DID YOU HAVE SOME COMMENTS OKAY. MY NAME IS DAVID ALARCON. AND NOW THAT WE CONCLUDED SOME WELL DESERVED PATS ON THE BACK FOR A WHOLE BUNCH OF GOOD THINGS HAPPENING, IT'S ALSO TIME FOR ACCOUNTABILITY. I AM BACK UP HERE AGAIN RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND WHAT I CAN ONLY DESCRIBE AS AN INSATIABLE DESIRE TO CONSISTENTLY HARASS PEOPLE IF THEY HAVE EVER HAD SOME SORT OF WAY OF FIGHTING BACK, OR ANY SORT OF ANIMOSITY. THIS WOULD BE THE FOURTH TIME SINCE OUR NEW CITY MANAGER WHERE I HAVE BEEN TOLD, GO AHEAD, DISREGARD WHAT THEY'RE DOING. IT'S NOT IT'S NOT IMPORTANT. THEY'RE WRONG. DON'T WORRY, THEY WON'T HARASS YOU AGAIN. FOUR TIMES KEEPS HAPPENING. THERE HAS NOW BEEN MULTIPLE INSTANCES WHERE POLICE HAVE HAD TO BE CALLED BECAUSE OF HARASSMENT. THERE IS CHARGES THAT HAVE BEEN FILED AND STILL THERE IS NO SUCCESSION TO THE CONSTANT NONSTOP HARASSMENT. IF YOU ARE IN A POSITION WHERE YOU NEED TO WALK UP AND DOWN A HILL, YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO WALK UP AND DOWN THAT HILL. IF YOU ARE EITHER INCAPABLE, IMPOTENT OR UNWILLING TO DO SO, YOU DO NOT NEED THAT JOB. FIVE MINUTES BEFORE COUNCIL. AS I'M PULLING UP, I GET ANOTHER NOTE NOTIFICATION. HEY, YOU'VE GOT ANOTHER STOP WORK ORDER ON XYZ PROPERTY FOR LACK OF IRRIGATION OR SORRY FOR LACK OF EROSION CONTROL, AND YOU HAVE BROUGHT MATERIAL ONTO THAT SITE. EVERY ACTIVITY BEING DONE IS PERMITTED UNDER WHAT'S IN OUR ORDINANCES AND HOW OUR PERMITS ARE EXPLAINED ONLINE EVERYWHERE ELSE. IF THE INSPECTORS HAD OR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAD SPENT FIVE MINUTES TO WALK BEYOND THE STREET TO THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY, THEY WOULD SEE ALL OF THE EROSION CONTROLS. IF THEY SPENT TEN MINUTES TO GO RESEARCH LCRA GUIDELINES, THEY WOULD SEE THAT I'M ABOVE AND BEYOND THEIR MINIMAL REQUIREMENTS, WHICH ARE LACK LUSTER FOR MOST OF THE VARYING TOPOGRAPHY OF LAGO VISTA. IF WE WOULD SPEND ANY TIME CONFIRMING OR FOLLOWING STATE LAW WHERE YOU NEED TO REACH OUT TO SOMEBODY BEFORE ISSUING THINGS SUCH AS STOP RECORDERS OR CITATIONS, WE WOULD NOT BE AT SUCH A LARGE RISK FOR CONSTANT LAWSUITS. BUT UNTIL WE HIRE COMPETENT STAFF OR DIRECT OUR STAFF TO STOP VIOLATING RIGHTS AND BREAKING LAWS, I'M GOING TO STILL BE UP HERE CALLING THAT OUT. I DON'T MEAN TO YUCK THE A LOT OF GOOD IS BEING DONE. THIS COUNCIL HAS GOT A LOT OF IMPROVEMENTS DONE IN THE CITY, BUT UNTIL WE REMOVE ALL OF THE PEOPLE OR FIX THEIR BEHAVIOR, IT IS COMPLETELY WORTHLESS. WE GET A NEW DEVELOPMENT LEAD. SHE'S JUST STARTED. SHE'S ONLY HAD A WEEK. I GOT TO GIVE HER GRACE. SHE'S INHERITED A HUGE PROBLEM AND I'M NOT TRYING TO BAD MOUTH HER. BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN HERE FOR YEARS WHO HAVE NEVER IMPROVED THEIR DECISIONS, WHO CONTINUE TO MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES, AND IF THEY NEED TO BE EMPLOYED, THEN WE NEED TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER IF WE VALUE KEEPING THE DEVIL WE MAY KNOW OR NOT VIOLATING THE RIGHTS OF OUR CITIZENS. I'M. I'M OUT OF TIME. THANK YOU SIR. OKAY, THAT WAS ALL THE FOLKS THAT I HAD SIGNED 
          [VIII.	CONSENT AGENDA]
          [00:20:04]
UP FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS. SO I'M GOING TO MOVE ON. AND WE WILL GO TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE TO BE CONSIDERED ROUTINE BY THE CITY COUNCIL, AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL NOT BE SEPARATE DISCUSSION ON THESE ITEMS. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. AND AS OF RIGHT NOW, I'M GOING TO PULL ITEMS NUMBER FIVE, SIX AND EIGHT. IF THERE'S ANYBODY ELSE WHO WANTS TO BRING TAKE ANYTHING ELSE OFF, SPEAK NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE. OKAY WITH THAT THEN I'M GOING TO READ IN THE REST OF THESE ITEMS. ROBIN, REMIND ME IT WAS THE SEPTEMBER 25TH MEETING MINUTES. OKAY, SO JUST NOTICE I'M GOING TO READ IN ITEM NUMBER THREE. THERE WAS A MODIFICATION, MADE A CORRECTION OF MISS OWENS TITLE AND AND HER NAME. AND SO THAT WAS CORRECTED. AND SO WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR MOTION TO PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA JUST REFERENCE THAT PLEASE. SO ITEM NUMBER ONE ACTION REGARDING THE AUGUST 7TH, 2025 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES. NUMBER TWO, ACTION REGARDING THE SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2025 CALLED CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES NUMBER THREE ACTION REGARDING THE SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2025 CALLED CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES. NUMBER FOUR CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 25 2160 AUTHORIZING THE DISPOSITION OF CITY SURPLUS PROPERTY AND ITEMS. SEVEN CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2510 1603 REQUEST TO REZONE A PARCEL OF LAND FROM C-1, A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL DISTRICT, TO C TWO GENERAL COMMERCIAL RETAIL DISTRICT ON APPROXIMATELY 1.8681 ACRES OF LAND ADDRESSED AS 8039 BRONCO LANE, TEXAS 78748 AND BEING LOT FIVE, BLOCK A OF VISTA RETAIL SUBDIVISION ADDITION, LAGO VISTA, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS, SAID PROPERTY GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS APPROXIMATELY 680FT EAST SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF BRONCO LANE AND BARKER RANCH ROAD AND 242FT NORTHWEST OF THE POST OFFICE SITE. AND THOSE WILL BE THE ITEMS THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA. AND. NO, I PULLED THAT ONE. YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. ALL RIGHT. MAYOR, TAKE A STAB AT THIS. OKAY. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVED ITEMS ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, AND SEVEN ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ. WHILE ALSO STATING THAT ON NUMBER. THREE. NUMBER THREE, THAT THE NAME AND TITLE CORRECTION THAT WAS SENT TO ROBIN IS MADE SECOND MOTION BY ZOE. AND I'VE GOT A CORRECT EXCUSE ME A SECOND BY MISTER ROBERTS. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I ANY OPPOSED? NAY, HEARING NONE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY, SO I AM GOING TO MAKE MY NOTES HERE. I'M GOING TO READ IN FIVE AND SIX TOGETHER. IT'S A SIMILAR ISSUE ON BOTH OF THEM. 
          SO NUMBER FIVE CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 25 DASH 1016 ZERO ONE AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A REZONING FROM TEMPORARY RESTRICTED TIER ONE TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL RETAIL C-2 WITH THE CONDITIONS OF APPROXIMATELY FOUR CONDITION OF APPROXIMATELY 4.035 ACRES. IDENTIFIED AS TRAVIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT PROPERTY ID NUMBER 984238, AND ALSO NUMBER SIX CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 25, TEN 1602. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A REZONING FROM TEMPORARY RESTRICTED TIER ONE TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL RETAIL AC-2 WITH CONDITIONS ON APPROXIMATELY 3.776 ACRES, IDENTIFIED AS TRAVIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT PROPERTY ID NUMBER 999032. AND ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, I'M GOING TO GIVE MR. FRANK ROBBINS CREDIT FOR BRINGING THIS TO MY ATTENTION. WHEN PNC TOOK UP THESE TWO ITEMS, MISS RACHEL RICH, PNC MEMBER, WAS THE ONE THAT MADE THE MOTION ON APPROVING THESE TWO ITEMS. BUT SHE INCLUDED SOME CONDITIONS OF THE APPROVAL THAT WERE NOT PASSED ON TO COUNCIL. WHEN WE CONSIDER THIS ON 717. AND SO I'M GOING TO READ IN AND MY UNDERSTANDING, SPEAKING WITH THE LIAISON TO PLANNING AND ZONING IS THAT THE APPLICANT WAS THERE AT THE TIME THESE CONDITIONS WERE READ OUT AND THE APPLICANT WAS AMENABLE TO THESE. SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S BEING DONE THAT'S A CONTROVERSIAL. BUT THESE WERE THE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS THAT SHOULD BE MENTIONED IN THE ORDINANCE WHEN IT IS PROPERLY CREATED AND SIGNED OFF BY MYSELF. SO, 
          [00:25:06]
NUMBER ONE, THAT THE CONDITIONS ADOPTED AN ORDINANCE 24. THAT'S 080 1 TO 0 ONE SHALL APPLY, THAT THE PROPERTY SHALL BE PART OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR ALL THE PROPERTIES SHOWN ON PAGE 11 OF THE PNC PACKET FROM THAT DAY. NUMBER THREE, THAT THE PROPERTY SHALL HAVE ACCESS TO LOWMAN FORD ROAD THROUGH A SINGLE ACCESS DRIVE. FOR THE THREE TRACKS SHOWN ON PAGE 11 OF THE STAFF, REPORT NUMBER FOUR THAT THE PROPERTY SHALL HAVE ACCESS AND HAVE CITY APPROVED SHARED ACCESS AGREEMENT WITH THE ADJOINING PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH. AND NUMBER FIVE THAT THE PARKING LOT STUB OUTS, SHARED PARKING ACCESS POINTS SHALL BE SHOWN ON ANY SITE PLAN REQUIRED FOR THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING THOSE REQUIRED BY CONDITIONS STATED IN THE CONDITION NUMBER ONE ABOVE. THE RECOMMENDATION ALSO INCLUDES A PROPOSED TIA RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO REVIEW A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ON THE THREE TRACKS SHOWN ON PAGE 11 OF THE STAFF REPORT. THE RECOMMENDATION WAS TO ALLOW THIS TO MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT A CONCEPT PLAN. AT THIS STAGE, THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO COME BACK ONE WITH ONE AT THE CONCEPT PLAN WITH A CONCEPT PLAN. SO THOSE WERE THE ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT WERE REQUESTED WITH BY THE MOTION BY MISS RICH. AND I BELIEVE IT WAS A UNANIMOUS APPROVAL BY PNC TO INCLUDE THOSE CONDITIONS. YEAH, I THINK IT'S AN EXCELLENT IDEA TO MOVE IT FORWARD BASED ON THOSE ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS IN THE MOTION MADE BY MISS RICH AT PNC. AND HAD I KNOWN ABOUT THAT IN THE PACKET ORIGINALLY, I WOULD HAVE BEEN A DIFFERENT OUTCOME FOR ME AT LEAST. EXACTLY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YES, SIR. DOES THERE NEED TO BE ANY ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS REGARDING THE NO STORAGE UNITS? NO. THOSE ARE ALREADY IN THE CONDITIONS IN THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. 
          AND NO GAS STATION AND NO STORAGE. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THOSE TWO ITEMS? WHAT YOU READ, JUST FOR THE RECORD HERE, APPLIES EQUALLY TO ITEM FIVE AND ITEM SIX. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEP. IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MAYOR. YES, SIR. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE AN ADOPT ORDINANCE NUMBER 20 5-1 1601 AND ORDINANCE NUMBER 25, DASH ONE OH 1602. SUBJECT TO AND ADDING THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE READ OUT BOTH AT THE PNC MEETING AND THAT YOU JUST READ OUT. AND. 
          THAT THOSE BE PART OF PART AND PARCEL OF THE. WORK THAT THESE THAT THIS DEVELOPER STILL HAS TO DO. THANK YOU. MOTION BY MISTER DURBIN, SECOND SECOND BY MISTER ROBERTS. AND JUST JUST TO CLARIFY, MAYOR, THOSE ARE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. YEP. OKAY. I'VE GOT A MOTION BY MISTER DURBIN AND A SECOND BY MISTER ROBERTS. 
          DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NAY. HEARING NONE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. SO THAT WAS BOTH ITEMS FIVE AND SIX. THOSE CITY ORDINANCES. MAYOR, FOR CLARIFICATION, CAN I. CHARLES, DO YOU WANT US TO DO THAT OR DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT INTERNALLY? YOU GUYS TELL US. DON'T LET THEM JUST DO IT REAL QUICK. CHRIS, SINCE THEY DID THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE LEGISLATURE, I'LL DO THEM. SO IF WE CAN, I WOULD YOU WRITE OUT, ROBIN, IS THAT GOING TO BE IN A. I CAN GIVE YOU THIS. OH, THAT'S EVEN BETTER. I WAS GOING TO ASK FOR THAT. I'M GOING TO GIVE IT TO YOU. THANK YOU SIR. I'LL KEEP IT. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. OKAY. 
          WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTIONS FOR THE RELEASING OR VACATING OF THE UTILITY EASEMENTS. AND MR. WEST THIS IS I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THIS ITEM. BUT I WILL SAY I DROVE BY THIS LOCATION AND IT SEEMED LIKE EVERYTHING WAS FINE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS OUR PUBLIC WORKS FOLKS HAVE DONE THE SAME. 
          DIDN'T SEE ANY ISSUES WITH DRAINAGE THAT WOULD CAUSE THEM TO NOT WANT TO RELEASE THIS PARTICULAR EASEMENT BUILDING, I WOULD SAY, IS THAT THERE APPEARED TO BE AN ILLEGALLY PARKED VEHICLE ON THE OPEN LOT THAT I BELIEVE THEY WANT TO CONSOLIDATE INTO THEIR PRIMARY LOT. AND I BELIEVE THAT'S A SITUATION THAT SHOULD BE REMEDIATED BEFORE ANYTHING, ANY EASEMENT HAS BEEN RELEASED FOR THEM SO THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR PLOT REPLANTING. 
          EXCUSE ME. AND THAT WAS THE ONLY COMMENT. I WOULD JUST ADD THAT THE MY CONCERN IS YOU'VE GOT THEY OWN THE ADJACENT LOT. I THINK IT'S TO THE WEST OF THEM. IF I IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, ON THE TO THE WEST OF THEM AND THEY'RE ONE OF THE EASEMENT ABATED OR REMOVED. 
          [00:30:03]
HOWEVER IF WE REMOVE IT AND THE LOT ISN'T REPLATTED, THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD STOP THEM FROM SELLING THAT LOT. AND NOW THE LOT HAS NO MORE EASEMENT FOR UTILITIES. SO I THINK ANY APPROVAL TODAY SHOULD BE CONDITIONED UPON BOTH. THE POINT YOU MADE, WHICH I DO AGREE WITH. AND THEY. THAT IT SHOULD ONLY BE REMOVED, THAT THE EASEMENT ONLY BE REMOVED IF IT IS SUCCESSFULLY REPLATTED AS PART OF THE PLANNING PROCESS. YES. IF IT'S IT'S CONDITIONED UPON A SUCCESSFUL REPLAT. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? I DO? YES, SIR. 
          OKAY, SO THIS IS SOMEWHAT OF A GENERIC COMMENT. PARKS AND REC ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS EXPRESSED CONCERNS TO ME ABOUT THE RELEASING OF EASEMENTS AND WHETHER ANYONE IS TAKING A LOOK AT THE RELEASE OF EASEMENTS WITH RESPECT TO THE PARKS AND REC USE OF CITY LANDS AND SPECIFICALLY TRAIL OPTIONS. RIGHT. SO WOULD THIS WOULD THIS EASEMENT, FOR EXAMPLE, BE A POTENTIAL PART OF A CITY TRAIL? AND MY MY FEEDBACK TO THEM IS I DON'T I DON'T BELIEVE ANYONE ON CITY DID THAT. AND I THINK THAT PARKS AND REC COMMITTEE, THAT WOULD BE A GREAT THING FOR YOU TO DO. BUT I KNOW IN THIS CASE THEY HAVEN'T DONE IT. SO THEIR REQUEST WAS THAT WE AND DAVID WAS THERE. THEIR REQUEST WAS THAT CITY SOMEWHERE BETWEEN PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES KIND OF CHECK THE BOX AS WE'RE RELEASING ANY PROPERTY OR LOOKING AT SELLING ANY PROPERTY, THAT THERE'S NOT AN IMPLICATION TO THE PARKS RECOMMENDATION THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. JUST PERSONALLY LOOKING AT THIS, THIS IS ON A CUL DE SAC OFF OF PASEO DE VACA, AND THE EASEMENT RUNS FROM THE FROM THE PROPERTY AT THE BACK END OF THIS CUL DE SAC TO AN UNPAVED ROAD BEHIND THE PROPERTIES. PALOMINO COVE. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, AS I LOOK AT IT, I DON'T SEE WHERE IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY A PART OF A TRAIL. SO I THINK WE'RE OKAY ON THIS FACTOR. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO THROW OUT, YOU KNOW, IF STAFF WILL KIND OF BEAR THIS IN MIND AS WE'RE LOOKING AT FUTURE EASEMENTS. 
          THAT WOULD BE GREAT. I'M ONLY COMING AT THAT. I THINK IT'S A GOOD POINT. THIS IS A UTILITY EASEMENT, NOT A GENERAL ACCESS AGREEMENT. SO EASEMENT. SO WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RUN A TRAIL THROUGH THERE. IT'S SIMPLY AN EASEMENT THAT ALLOWS US ACCESS FOR UTILITY PURPOSES. 
          AND THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION I THINK THAT'S THAT'S A GREAT POINT. SO IN IN THIS CASE, IF STAFF HAD DONE IT THEY COULD SAY, OH, IT'S A UTILITY EASEMENT NOT A GENERAL ACCESS. SO NOT APPLICABLE. RIGHT. EXACTLY. YEP. ANY OTHER. DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT. YEAH I JUST THINK THAT THIS THIS THIS IS PREMATURE IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE WE DON'T WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR WHEN THEY WHEN THEY DO GO TO CONSOLIDATE IT. AND SINCE IT ANY, ANYTHING WE DO TODAY IS GOING TO BE CONDITIONED ON THAT, ON THE CONSOLIDATION AT SOME POINT, AND IT'S NOT COMING INTO EFFECT UNTIL THEN. TO ME, IT JUST SEEMS EARLY IN THE PROCESS AND WE SHOULD TAKE IT ALL UP AT ONCE. AND JUST FOR INFORMATION GATHERING PURPOSES. ROB. WHAT? SO COULD WE I DON'T FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE WITH YOU. I MEAN, YOU'RE KIND OF WE'RE CONDITIONALLY ALLOWING THE CART TO GO BEFORE THE HORSE, RIGHT? CORRECT. BUT CAN WE LOOK AT THIS IN A WE DON'T APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLATS OR PLATS UP HERE ON COUNCIL. IS THERE AN ALTERNATE. SO WE CAN'T LOOK AT EVERYTHING HOLISTICALLY. DO YOU HAVE IS THERE ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE TO CONDITIONALLY APPROVING IT TONIGHT THAT'S VIABLE? WELL, IF WE CONDITIONALLY APPROVE IT TONIGHT I GUESS, I GUESS THAT'S OKAY. BUT IT'S JUST IT JUST SEEMS I DON'T LIKE BREAKING THESE PROCESSES UP INTO TWO CHUNKS WHEN WE COULD HANDLE IT ALL AT ONCE IS IF OUR AGENDAS ARE LONG ENOUGH. NO, I AGREE, I JUST WE DON'T. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO HANDLE IT ALL AT ONCE. IS THERE ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE? IS I ACTUALLY SPOKE TO OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR EARLIER ABOUT THIS AND ALL FUTURE EASEMENT RELEASES. THERE WILL BE A PLAT INCLUDED IN THE PACKET SO Y'ALL CAN SEE WHAT THE FINAL OUTCOME WILL BE, SO WE'LL KNOW WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. SO WE SEE THE PROPOSED PLAT. SO REALLY THE ONLY THING MISSING TONIGHT. SO IT WOULD STILL BE IN THE FUTURE. 
          IT WOULD BE STILL CONDITIONED LIKE WE'RE CONTEMPLATING THIS EVENING. BUT WITH THE PLAT IN FRONT OF US. YES. WHAT WE'RE LACKING TONIGHT IS THE VISUAL AID OF SEEING THE ADJACENT LOT. 
          IT'S NOT JUST US, IT'S THE PUBLIC'S NOT SEEING IT EITHER. AGREED. THAT'S. I LIKE THAT. SO I DON'T THINK I SAW IT IN HERE, BUT THEY DID NOT SUBMIT A LOT CONSOLIDATION REQUEST OR 
          [00:35:03]
APPLICATION. ALL WE RECEIVED WAS THE EASEMENT RELEASE AT THIS TIME. SO MAYBE WHAT WE DO TONIGHT IS THAT WE MOTION TO TABLE THIS ITEM AND ENCOURAGE STAFF TO COMMUNICATE TO THIS PERSON OR PEOPLE, EXCUSE ME, THAT THEY NEED TO AT LEAST HAVE AN APPLICATION IN THE CODE VIOLATION ISSUES AND ALSO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION SO THAT WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE WALKING DOWN THAT PATH, AND THAT HELPS TO MOVE THE BALL FORWARD TO THEIR END GOAL ANYWAY, SO I WOULD SUPPORT ACTION ITEMS. YEAH. AT LEAST THAT WAY WE'RE NOT SETTING A BAD PRECEDENT. SO I AM GOING TO STAY AS SOMEONE WHO PUT TOGETHER SEVERAL LOT A COUPLE OF LOT CONSOLIDATIONS MYSELF. PRIOR TO CHARLES COMING ON BOARD THAT BECAUSE THE SURVEYING CAN BE SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS, A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS LIKE TO KNOW PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY, THEIR CHANCES OF GETTING THE EASEMENT RELEASE IS PRETTY HIGH BEFORE THEY SPEND THE MONEY, IN THIS CASE ON A RESIDENTIAL SIDE. RIGHT, BECAUSE THAT'S SIGNIFICANT FUNDS FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE. SO THAT MAY BE PART OF WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE. SO I'M JUST JUST STATING THAT NO PROBLEM WITH HOWEVER Y'ALL CHOOSE TO PROCEED. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. SO MY INTENTION WAS TO VOTE NO ON THIS, NOT ON THE MERITS OF IT, BUT JUST WHEN IT WAS POSTED TO THE PACKET. I DIDN'T ACTUALLY PERSONALLY RECEIVE AN UPDATE. I THINK UNTIL YESTERDAY. I FEEL LIKE THE APPLICATION WAS INCOMPLETE. I DON'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION TO MAKE A DECISION. IT WASN'T ABLE TO DRIVE BY IT LIKE YOU WERE, SO MY INTENTION WAS TO VOTE NO ON IT JUST BASED SOLELY ON THOSE MERITS. BUT I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF TABLING IT UNTIL WE GET SOME MORE INFORMATION. AS ROBIN, YOU. 
          OKAY. VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I'LL TAKE A SHOT AT IT. MAYOR. YES, SIR. I MOVE THAT WE TABLE CONSENT ITEM. CONSENT AGENDA ITEM EIGHT. THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTIONS FOR THE RELEASING OR VACATING A UTILITY EASEMENTS UNTIL SUCH TIME AS A APPLICATION TO CONSOLIDATE THE LOTS HAS BEEN FILED AND THE. THE UNLAWFUL BUILDING ON THE VACANT LOT IS TAKEN CARE OF, WHETHER IT'S BY COMING IN AND GETTING SOME CITY APPROVAL FOR IT OR TORN DOWN. A VEHICLE OR A VEHICLE. OKAY. YEAH, YEAH. UNTIL THEY GET THE OKAY, UNTIL THEY GET THE UNLAWFUL VEHICLE OFF THE LOT. YEAH. OKAY. VERY GOOD. I'VE GOT A MOTION BY MR. DURBIN. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND BY MR. ROBERTS? ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? NAY. NAY. PASSES 6 TO 1 WITH MR. BENEFIELD. IT'S CENTER. NORMAN, WHAT WAS YOUR VOTE? I'M SORRY, WHAT YOU SAW. AND IT WAS A REMINDER. NOTES THAT THE ACTUAL SURVEY HAS TO SAY THAT THE EASEMENT HAS BEEN RELEASED BEFORE THE SURVEY IS DONE. SO THAT WAS ONE THING THAT I HAD FORGOTTEN ABOUT. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. SO WE'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF A. 
          REQUIRING AT THAT TIME IT WAS MR. JEMBER. BUT I MEAN THAT WE WERE TOLD THAT IN OUR PACKETS. 
          RIGHT. BUT YOU CAN FILE YOUR LOT CONSOLIDATION APPLICATION WITHOUT HAVING DONE A SURVEY. 
          AND AS PART OF THAT PROCESS, YOU CAN ALSO REQUEST THAT THE EASEMENT BE RELEASED. AND AT LEAST WE THEN THE CITY NOW KNOWS, OKAY, YOU'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE CONSOLIDATION. 
          THIS IS YOUR INTENT. THESE ARE THE TWO. UNDERSTAND? GOT IT. BUT HE MAKES A GOOD POINT. I'M SORRY. DID YOU SAY I OR NAY WERE YOU? YOU'RE OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I GOT IT 
          [IX. 1.	Consideration and Possible action surrounding the city's strategy and priorities related to reaching an agreement between itself and the Rusty Allen Airport POA and any possible items the council would like to recommend the AAB take up for possible recommendation back to council.]
CORRECTLY. THAT ROBIN. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE ACTION ITEMS. NUMBER ONE, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION SURROUNDING THE CITY. STRATEGY AND PRIORITIES RELATED TO REACHING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN ITSELF AND THE RUSTY ALLEN AIRPORT. PO. ANY POSSIBLE ITEMS THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THE ARB TAKE UP FOR POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATION BACK TO COUNCIL. AND THIS ONE I PUT ON HERE WITH THE HOPE THAT WE'LL GET SOMETHING BACK FROM THE FAA. 
          I FINALLY REMOVED MY HEAD FROM ANOTHER REGION AND FIGURED OUT THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS SHUT DOWN. AND THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY WE'RE NOT HEARING BACK FROM THEM, AND WE MAY NOT HEAR BACK FROM THEM. I'LL HOLD OUT HOPE THAT WE MIGHT GET SOMETHING BEFORE THE NOVEMBER 6TH MEETING. IF SO, I'LL PUT IT BACK ON. MR. SLIM, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING THAT YOU'D LIKE TO ADD WITH REGARD TO THIS ITEM? NO, I MEAN, COUNCILMAN DURBIN SUBBED IN FOR ME AT THE MEETING THIS WEEK. IF HE HAS ANYTHING HE WANTS TO ADD. NO. THEY'RE ANXIOUSLY LOOKING FOR IT IN THEIR MAILBOX, BUT. AND THEY THEY. THEY DID DISCUSS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THEY WANT TO GET THAT SETTLED SO THAT THEY CAN. COME TOGETHER WITH THE CITY FOR FUNDING. THEY DO 
          [00:40:05]
WANT TO THEY DO WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN FUNDING, BUT A LOT OF IT'S DETERMINED BY WHAT THEY HEAR. BACK FROM THE FAA. DID THEY TALK ABOUT ANY OF THOSE OTHER THREE ITEMS THAT WE SENT THE FUEL TANK, ANY OF THOSE OTHER THINGS OF NOTE? I DON'T RECALL THEM DISCUSSING THE FUEL TANK. OKAY. YEAH, I NEED MORE TIME ON THIS ITEM THAN NECESSARY. YEP. I WANT TO 
          [IX. 2.	Consideration and Possible action to approve all formation documents for the Lago Vista Type B Economic Development Corporation (EDC).]
TRY TO GET TO THAT. 530 WE TALKED ABOUT NUMBER TWO CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE ALL FORMATION DOCUMENTS FOR THE TYPE B ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND SO ON. I BELIEVE THIS IS YOUR ITEM. PLEASE PASS IT. FAIR ENOUGH. 
          YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THAT'S GREAT. NO. IF I CAN GO AHEAD AND JUST QUICKLY JUST STATE THAT I'VE PUT TOGETHER A FUNDING PLAN AND ALSO HAVE A COUPLE OF PROJECTS THAT I'M ALREADY EARMARKING PLANS FOR THAT I WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH THE EDC IN ORDER TO BRING FORWARD LOFTY GOALS. ARE ABOUT 10 MILLION TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. SO HOW MUCH? 10 MILLION. 
          IS THAT ALL? BELIEVE IT OR NOT, FOR THE FIRST PROJECT, SIR. GIVE ME TIME. THAT WILL TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME, BUT WE HAVE QUITE A BIT OF COMMUNITY SUPPORT. AND SO ANYWAY, I DO I DO APPRECIATE ANY SUPPORT ON THIS. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS QUESTIONS? I DO HAVE ONE. SO. NORMA, YOU REMEMBER LAST TIME I ON THE DAIS HERE, I SAID, OH, I HAD A PIECE OF PAPER WHICH I CAN'T FIND AND I WAS TRYING TO DO FROM MEMORY. THERE WAS ONE ITEM WHICH YOU AND I DISCUSSED AFTERWARDS, WHICH I DON'T FOUND ITS WAY INTO THE PACKET. AND SO I WANT TO GO TO THAT PAGE IF I'VE GOT MY NOTES RIGHT. PAGE 58 OF THE PACKET. OH, THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT PAGE. WELL, THE SUBJECT WAS THE SCOPE. THE SCOPE OF THE EDC WILL BE ABOUT. AND THEN THERE ARE 3 OR 4 THINGS LISTED WHICH ARE ALL ABOUT BUSINESS, YOU KNOW, BRINGING BUSINESSES, ENHANCING WHATEVER THEY ARE. BUT IT DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT PARKS OR OTHER MUNICIPAL, YOU KNOW, AMENITIES KIND OF THINGS. RIGHT. AND SO I THINK WE DID WE DID WANT TO. YEAH. 
          YOU DID AGREE WITH MY PROPOSAL THAT THAT BE AMENDED. YEAH. SO MAYBE WE CAN MAYBE WE CAN FIND THAT PAGE AND DO A MOTION INCLUDE THAT IN. THANKS. YEAH. SO ARE YOU ALL TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING THAT WHERE THE SCOPE IS ON WHAT PAGE. YEAH. FOR SOME REASON THE PAGE I WROTE DOWN IS NOT CORRECT. YEAH. THIS. I BELIEVE IT'S NOW ON 57 ON A PAUL. PURPOSE AND LIMITATIONS. 
          PURPOSE AND LIMITATIONS WOULD BE RIGHT. THAT'S NOT MY PAGE 57 OF THE PACKET I'M LOOKING AT UNFORTUNATELY. SO. OH OH IT'S 57 FOR ME. YEAH. ARTICLE IV ARTICLE FOUR. ARTICLE FOUR. IT WAS A BULLET LIST OR AM I NOT? OH, I CAN'T FIND IT NOW. I'LL TELL YOU WHAT. WELL, Y'ALL ARE LOOKING. YEAH, I'M JUST GOING TO MAKE MY STANDARD COMMENT THAT I'M GONNA STICK IN THE MUD. 
          VOTE AGAINST THIS ITEM. WE DID DO AN EDC BACK IN THE I DON'T KNOW THE ODDS. AND IT FELL APART BECAUSE WE HAD NO FUNDING AND THERE WAS REALLY NOTHING FOR THEM TO DO. I THINK WE'RE STILL IN A SIMILAR SITUATION BECAUSE WE HAVE NO DEDICATED FUNDING SOURCE, SO I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST IT. I THINK IT'S A WONDERFUL IDEA. IF WE HAD A DEDICATED FUNDING SOURCE, IF WE WEREN'T IN CAPMETRO, WE COULD GIVE THEM THE PENNY. I'D BE ALL FOR IT. SO JUST FYI, MR. BURNS, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE BYLAWS? MAYBE THE GENERAL DUTIES OF THE BOARD? THAT SOUNDS RIGHT. SO I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 66 OF THE ONLINE VERSION OF THE. OF THE PACKET. OKAY, 
          [00:45:06]
6666 IS WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. AND THAT'S IN THE BYLAWS AND JUST. IN SECTION 4.04 GENERAL DUTIES OF THE BOARD. YES, SIR. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE. THAT'S NOT IT, BRAD, BUT I'M NOT FINDING IT. NORMALLY. YOU REMEMBER OUR CONVERSATION. YOU TOOK A PHOTO OF THE SECTION THAT I HAD MY NOTE ON THAT. SO IT WAS ON YOUR PHONE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. BUT THAT'S I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GONNA GET HERE IN THIS CONVERSATION. AMANDA SHOULD HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS. I BELIEVE YOU WANTED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. OKAY. I JUST FOUND IT. I JUST FOUND IT. OKAY, OKAY, OKAY, OKAY, I FOUND WHAT, A PAGE 67. THIS IS 4.04, ITEM THREE, MIDDLE OF PAGE 67. THE BOARD SHALL EXPAND, BLAH BLAH BLAH. THERE A BUSINESS RETENTION AND EXPANSION, FORMATION OF NEW BUSINESSES, BUSINESS ATTRACTION. SO IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT PARKS OR THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, AN AMPHITHEATER THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, OTHER THINGS THAT WE WOULD WANT TO EDC AMENITIES. IT SHOULD ALSO, I BELIEVE EDC TYPE B CAN DO INFRASTRUCTURE. ET CETERA. RIGHT. UNDER THE THE SCOPE OF EDC TYPE B. YES, I BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE. I'LL HAVE TO. YEAH. SO ANYWAY, THE SPIRIT OF MY COMMENT WAS I THINK WE DON'T WANT TO LIMIT THE EDC TO ONLY BE DOING BUSINESSES. WE WANT THEM TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A BROADER SCOPE THAN THAT. UNDERSTANDING IS BEES COULD DO INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS. THERE'S ALL KINDS OF THERE'S ALL KINDS OF STUFF BEES CAN DO. 
          I THINK THIS IS COULD YOU JUST REMOVE THOSE SUB POINTS BECAUSE IT ALREADY SAYS THAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW, AND THEN THAT SHOULD COVER ALL THE THINGS. MAYBE THE SENTENCE BEFORE THAT. RIGHT, WHICH TEES UP THE BULLET POINTS AND THAT THAT WOULD ADDRESS MY CONCERN. 
          YEAH I AGREE WITH THAT. YEAH. SO JUST STRIKE FROM THE CORPORATE CORPORATION'S FOCUS WOULD BE PRIMARILY IN THE AREAS OF A, B AND C. YEAH. AND SO THAT IS IN SECTION 4.04 SUBITEM THREE. CORRECT. OKAY. JUST FOR EVERYONE'S EDIFICATION, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 505.51 SECTION THAT LISTS OUT WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, MAYOR. AND THE TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT ARE TYPE B CORPORATION CAN UNDERTAKE. AND THAT INCLUDES LAND, BUILDINGS, LAND, BUILDINGS, EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES EXPENDITURES, TARGETED INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE SUITABLE FOR PROFESSIONAL AMATEUR SPORTS, PARKS AND RELATED OPEN SPACES, ENTERTAINMENT. TOURISM, CONVENTION CENTERS, PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES AFFORDING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES OF ANY KIND AND INFRASTRUCTURE FOR WATER, SEWER. 
          SO. SO THAT'S THE SECTION. OKAY. VERY GOOD. SO IF, IF, IF I CAN SUGGEST THEN MAYBE INSTEAD JUST A REFERENCE TO 505.151 WOULD BE SUFFICIENT BECAUSE THAT'S ALL YOU. THAT IS WHAT YOU CAN DO. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM. CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN ONE MORE TIME? ARE YOU VOTING. NO. YOU SAID OH, SO WE WE HAD A EDC BACK IN THE AUGHTS AND IT DID NOTHING. THEY TURNED A LOT OF FRUSTRATION BECAUSE THERE WAS NO FUNDING SOURCE. TYPICALLY WHAT CITIES DO IS THEY GET THEIR FUNDING SOURCE FROM THEIR EDC, FROM THEIR THE YOU GET $0.02 OF SALES TAX THAT YOU CAN DO. WE WE KEEP ONE RIGHT NOW WE GIVE ONE TO CAPMETRO. TYPICALLY THAT ONE THAT GOES TO CAPMETRO WOULD BE ONE THAT COULD GO TOWARDS FUNDING AN EDC. WE DON'T HAVE THAT OPTION, RIGHT. ONLY HALF CAN GO TO EDC. LET'S NOT GET TOO CARRIED AWAY. SURE. 
          BUT THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD COME FROM. AND AS A RESULT, I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO BE IN A VERY SIMILAR SITUATION AS WE WERE IN THE ODDS THAT WITHOUT A FUNDING SOURCE, THERE'S REALLY NOT GOING TO BE ANYTHING IT CAN DO AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE FRUSTRATED. AND I JUST WOULD PREFER TO FIX THE FUNDING PROBLEM FIRST BEFORE WE WE'LL PUT IN THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE. OKAY. SO WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE I KIND OF AGREE WITH KEVIN THERE. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT. SO. WE HAVE A LOT OF. WANTS IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND TO YOUR POINT, I MEAN, OR TO YOUR CREDIT, COUNCILOR BENEFIELD, YOU ENDED UP PUTTING OUT THERE WHAT IN THE COMMUNITY, WHAT WOULD Y'ALL LIKE? MANY OF THOSE ARE PARK ITEMS AND, YOU KNOW, THINGS TO BRING THE COMMUNITY TOGETHER. THE CHALLENGE IS, IS THAT WE GOT VERY SIGNIFICANT INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS RIGHT NOW WHERE OUR CASH FLOW IS ACTUALLY 
          [00:50:01]
GOING. SO TWO THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN DRIVING DOWN THIS IS THAT IT IS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT AND HAS BEEN DIFFICULT FOR US TO MAKE ANY GROUNDS TO LEAVE OUR CURRENT CONTRACTS. ALTHOUGH. 
          YAY, COUNCILOR SAM, THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING TO BEAT THAT DRUM. IN TERMS OF OUR TAX AVAILABLE TAX MONIES. THE, THE THE SECOND IS, IS THAT LIKE THE THE PREK AND OTHER INDIVIDUALS OR OTHER ORGANIZATIONS IN THE COMMUNITY TO INCLUDE K-12 ETC. YOU KNOW, THEY ARE WANTING AMENITIES AND THINGS AND NOT WAIT TEN YEARS FOR THEM, QUITE FRANKLY. SO MY DRIVE ON THIS IS ONE IS, IS THAT I'VE BEEN AROUND THE PHILANTHROPIC AND GRANT WORLD A LITTLE BIT, SO I'M WILLING TO GAMBLE. THIS IS A GAMBLE TO KEVIN'S POINT THAT POTENTIALLY THAT I CAN HELP DRIVE SOME INITIATIVE ON THIS TO REALLY BOLSTER SOME OF THE VOLUNTEER GROUPS AND PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN TRYING VERY HARD TO BRING SOME OF THIS QUALITY OF LIFE INITIATIVE HERE TO LAGO VISTA. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE'S PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM THAT HAVE ALSO STATED THAT THEY WOULD GO WALK IN RIGHT BESIDE ME TO OTHER ENTITIES THAT THEY THOUGHT MIGHT BE WILLING TO ALSO DONATE OR TO BACK UP SUCH AN INITIATIVE. ADD TO THAT THAT WE HAVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE NOW THAT CAN RELATIVELY WRITE A GRANT, OR AT LEAST THE BASIC FRAMEWORK OF A GRANT NEEDS TO BE DONE. THE CHANCES NOW FOR THE EFFORT OF VOLUNTEERS TO PUT IN THERE THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY MAYBE USE THE EDC AS A MECHANISM TO HELP REALLY HAVE THE COMMUNITY BUILD SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY WANT. I WENT AHEAD IN PREPARATION FOR THIS AND ACTUALLY WAS STARTING TO WORK ON A COUPLE OF INITIATIVES THAT CONTINUE TO COME UP, ESPECIALLY IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND SO WHAT I DID IS ACTUALLY CAME UP WITH A DONATIONS AND SPONSORSHIP POLICY TO MAYBE DO SOME OF THE INITIAL. FUNDING OF THE EDC. BUT BEHIND THAT WAS ALSO, WELL, I DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT. HERE WAS ALSO A LIST OF THE GRANTING ORGANIZATIONS AND IN WHAT ORDER THAT THE EDC CAN GO AFTER IN ORDER TO GET INITIAL FUNDS FOR THE PROJECTS. SO DIFFERENCE HERE IS THAT THERE'S A FEW MORE TOOLS. THERE'S A LITTLE MORE KNOW HOW. THERE'S A BIG PASSION ON MY SIDE TO BRING THIS FORWARD. AND ALTHOUGH IT HAS BEEN STATED MULTIPLE TIMES THAT WE COULD DO THIS THROUGH, LET'S SAY, THE CITY AND EDC THAT HAS NOT PRODUCED THE RESULTS THAT I FELT THAT HAVE GARNERED REALLY THE EXCITEMENT AND THE FUNDS COMING IN THAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO, LET'S SAY, DO A COMMUNITY CENTER WITHOUT AN INITIATIVE LIKE WHAT I'VE OUTLINED. THEN I'M GOING TO SAY THAT A COMMUNITY CENTER MAYBE COULD GET HERE IN SEVEN YEARS, BUT WITHOUT AN EDC OR OUR INITIATIVES, I THINK IT WOULD TAKE 15 YEARS OR BEYOND TO ACTUALLY GET THERE. SO THAT IS MY ANSWER. COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? I'M JUST KIDDING. YOU HAD ME A GAMBLE. YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO COME IN. SHE SAID SHE WANTED TO SPEAK, SO SHE'S. I'M SORRY. 
          I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO ADDRESS IT, BUT Y'ALL DID ADDRESS QUITE A FEW OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT, ESPECIALLY THE PART B, BUT WHAT I WAS I KNOW THAT THERE'S A BIG CONCERN ABOUT THE CAPMETRO SITUATION, BUT WITH THE FORMULATION OF AN EDC THAT ACTUALLY INCLUDES IN THE TYPE B, WHERE WE COULD ACTUALLY GO AFTER CO-OPS AND GIVE OUR THE CITIZENS ACTUALLY A WAY OUT OF CAPMETRO BY FORMULATING EDC, WE COULD ACTUALLY EXPAND UPON WHAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE WITH BUS STOPS AND WHATNOT. IF WE WIND UP GETTING OUT OF THAT AGREEMENT WITH THEM AND WE HAVE TO BUY BACK THOSE BUS STOPS, HOPEFULLY WE CAN FIGURE THAT OUT SOON. I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A BIG CONCERN ABOUT THE BUYOUT OPTION THAT CAN BE NEGOTIATED, WHERE WE CAN ONLY HAVE TO PAY FOR WHAT THEY HAVE ACTUALLY PROVIDED FOR THE CITY, MEANING WHAT THEY LEAVE WITH, LEAVE US WITH. SO THE EDC FORMULATION WOULD ACTUALLY ALLOW US TO REBRAND THOSE STOPS AND UTILIZE A CO-OP, OR GIVE THEM AN OPTION TO GET OUT. A LOT OF TIMES THE REASON THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT PASSING, THAT IS THEY'RE SCARED. AND EDC, EVEN THOUGH IT DOESN'T HAVE FUNDING, YOU GET SOME PEOPLE BEHIND IT. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF PASSIONATE CITIZENS THAT WOULD RATHER SEE MONEY GO TO EDC THAN GO TO THE CAPMETRO. WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM OPTIONS, AND EDC WOULD ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN, ALONG WITH MANY OTHER WONDERFUL PROJECTS. SO THANK YOU. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR I'LL COME TO YOU NEXT. I'M NOT TRYING TO 
          [00:55:02]
CONVINCE ANYBODY TO VOTE WITH ME. I'M JUST EXPLAINING WHY I'M VOTING THE WAY I'M VOTING. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, SPEAK FOR ANOTHER 20 MINUTES, BECAUSE, MISTER ROBERTS, I'M 100% BEHIND THIS. I THINK IT'S A GREAT STEP. AND, NORMA, I THINK YOU'VE BEEN DOING A FANTASTIC JOB ON THIS. I KNOW YOU WERE PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS TOPIC WHEN WE SERVED ON THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE TOGETHER MANY YEARS AGO, AND I KNOW GOING FORWARD WHAT WHAT IS DIFFERENT NOW IS WE HAVE YOU AND THERE'S NOTHING. THERE'S NOTHING MORE HELPFUL TO ACHIEVE A GOAL THAN PASSION, BELIEF, AND A YEARNING DESIRE TO SEE IT THROUGH. AND YOU'VE DEMONSTRATED THAT FROM DAY ONE ON THIS. AND WE ALSO HAVE SHANE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT. IN TWO YEARS, HE'LL START PROBABLY IN A FEW WEEKS, LOBBYING AGAIN ON CAPMETRO AND GETTING AHEAD OF THAT. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE JUST THE NECESSARY STEPS WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH AS WE AS WE GROW AND WE MATURE AS A CITY. AND HAVING THAT EDC IS GOING TO ENABLE US TO DO A LOT, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE ABLE TO EVER GET THE HELL OUT OF CAPMETRO, YOU KNOW? SO THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL. YES, MR. MAYOR, IF I MIGHT, THE FIRST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION THAT I DEALT WITH WAS THE CITY OF TYLER. AND IT IS NOT FUNDED BY THEIR HALF CENT SALES TAX. IT IS FUNDED STRICTLY THROUGH DONATIONS AND MEMBERSHIPS FROM THEIR PEOPLE. AND IT IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST SUCCESSFUL EDC'S IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. AND I BELIEVE I CAN GET TOM MULLINS DOWN HERE TO GIVE US A LITTLE ADVICE. IF HE'S I KNOW HE RETIRED FROM THE EDC, AND I'M PRETTY SURE I COULD GET THEIR CURRENT EDC DIRECTOR TO COME GIVE US A PRESENTATION IF I CAN'T GET MR. MULLINS DOWN HERE. SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD, POSITIVE MOVE FOR THE CITY. QUESTION ON THAT. JUST FOLLOW UP, CHARLES. WHEN WHEN IS THE APPROPRIATE TIME? WHEN IS THE OPTIMAL TIME TO HEAR FIRSTHAND ACCOUNTS AND PRESENTATION FROM SOMEONE SUCH AS THAT? ANYTIME. I MEAN, THERE'S YOU JUST HAVE TO KNOW WHO I MEAN. IS IT AFTER WE GO GET THE FIRST GRANT, AFTER WE APPLY, JUST BEFORE WE APPLY, I THINK IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL IF WE'RE GOING TO CREATE AN EDC, WHICH I BELIEVE WE WILL IS NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO GET THEM IN HERE AND GIVE US SOME PERSPECTIVES ON HOW THEY'VE MANAGED TO DO IT. WITHOUT A FUNDING SOURCE OF SALES TAX. AND THAT'S THE UNDERLYING PREMISE IS, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE ONLY AS SMART AS WHAT YOU KNOW. LET'S FIND OUT WHAT THEY'RE DOING RIGHT AND TRY TO REPLICATE THAT. AND FOR WHICH, OF COURSE, THERE'S NO BETTER FORM OF FLATTERY SOMETIMES IN THE COPIES. WHAT'S WORKING? WELL, SO BEFORE WHEN Y'ALL ARE DONE, I'VE GOT I JUST WANT TO INTERJECT SOMETHING. SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF ECHO WHAT COUNCILOR ROBERTS SAID, THANKING COUNCILOR OWEN FOR ALL THAT SHE'S DONE. WE SERVED ON EDC TOGETHER AS WELL. THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE WAY BACK THEN. AND WHEN, WHEN COUNCILOR ROBERTS WAS DOING IT AND I WAS GOING TO ECHO, I THINK WE DID GET A PRESENTATION FROM SAN ANTONIO WHEN THEY THEY SELF-FUNDED AND THEY GAVE US PRESENTATION AND THEY DEFINITELY GAVE US DOCUMENTATION. SO IT'S BEEN DONE. THERE'S THERE'S PROOF IN THE PUDDING. AND I CAN TELL YOU WHEN I WORKED ON THE GOVERNOR'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TEAM, THERE WAS A PREFERENCE TO WORK WITH EDC'S. THEY NEVER WORKED WITH THE AN AUDIT COMMITTEE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN. AND SO I THINK THAT WAS A REALLY SALIENT POINT THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING IT THROUGH THE EDC ROUTE FOR A LONG TIME. A LOT OF PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE, BUT IT'S TIME TO KIND OF HAND THE FOOTBALL OFF TO THE TO THE NEXT SIDE OF THINGS, AND I'LL BE HERE TO SUPPORT IT. SO THANK YOU, MR. BULLOCK. I JUST IF COUNCIL IF COUNCIL PLANS TO TAKE ACTION TONIGHT, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO DO IN ORDER TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AND, AND THE CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION AND ALL THAT STUFF, IS TO FILL IN SOME OF THE BLANKS THAT ARE THERE WITH THE MEMBERS. SO THOSE THAT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE ACTION, IDENTIFYING THE PEOPLE WHO WILL SERVE AS THE INITIAL BOARD AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. SO I JUST BEFORE YOU TAKE A VOTE, YOU GOT TO GET TO THAT POINT OF HAVING PEOPLE TO FILL IN THOSE BLANKS. QUESTION CAN IT BE DO WE HAVE TO NAME THE INDIVIDUALS, JUST LIKE YOU'RE APPOINTING PEOPLE TO COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION? OR CAN WE JUST MAKE A BLANKET, BLANKET, BLANKET STATEMENT THAT CURRENTLY SERVING MEMBERS OF THE EDC CAN ROLL OVER TO THIS? I MEAN, SO THE WAY THAT THE CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION IS CREATED BEFORE THE CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION CAN BE FILED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE, THE THE BLANKS OF NAMES HAVE TO BE FILLED IN. OKAY. SO YOU CAN DO THAT IN A MOTION BEFORE MOTION TO IDENTIFY THESE PEOPLE, WHOEVER THEY ARE. I DON'T I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY HAS A LIST OF NAMES WITH THEM TONIGHT. BUT WITH THAT, I MEAN, THOSE, THOSE THOSE PEOPLE HAVE TO BE IDENTIFIED. AND THEN IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF, IT ALSO IDENTIFIES, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE THE INITIAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS. AND SO THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO 
          [01:00:02]
HAVE TO BE BY A. WELL, THAT RIGHT THERE IMPLIES TO ME, IT'S JUST LIKE, WE CAN'T TAKE ACTION TONIGHT UNLESS WE HAVE A LIST OF NAMES. WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU DON'T HAVE A LIST OF NAMES OR NOT. I DON'T KNOW WHO. I DON'T KNOW WHO THAT WOULD BE OR WHAT. THAT. SO SO THE, THE GENERAL IDEA WAS THAT THE EDC MEMBER, SHOULD THEY CONSIDER WANT TO CONTINUE, THAT THEY WOULD BE ROLLED OVER TO THE EDC. SO I SAY THIS, BUT TO GO WE ALSO ARE IN THE MIDST OF OUR COMMITTEE TERMS COMING EXPIRING IN DECEMBER EXPIRING AND NEW MEMBERS COMING UP. AND SO THIS MAY BE THE FORM OF WHICH COMES FIRST, THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG. SO. I EXPECTED THAT WE WE ARE WHEN I SAY WE EAT ACT IS SHORT. AT LEAST ONE MEMBER THAT WE WERE GOING TO PICK UP POTENTIALLY TO THROUGH THE COMMITTEE PROCESS FOR WHICH IT'S NOW OPEN. CORRECT. ROBIN. 
          PEOPLE CAN THE APPLICATIONS ARE NOW OPEN. SO WE HAVE SIX MEMBERS ALREADY THERE. IF WE WANTED TO DO THIS TONIGHT, I WOULD SAY THE SIX MEMBERS THAT ARE ALREADY REPRESENTED, A COUNCIL MEMBER CAN BE PLACED ON THERE. ONE OF US CAN BE UP TO TWO CAN BE ON THERE. AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE OUR SLATE. CAN THAT BE AMENDED IN TERMS OF RIGHT AFTER. OKAY. SO THEN WE DO HAVE NAMES. YOU JUST NEED TO YOU JUST THAT JUST NEEDS TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD OF WHO THOSE ARE SO THAT WE SO THAT WE CAN THEN THEREAFTER THE FACT, YOU KNOW, PLUG THOSE INTO THE DOCUMENTS AND GET THOSE FILED. AND YOU PASSED THE ORDINANCE, MAYOR, AND THEN YOU SIGN THE ORDER IF IT WERE TO PASS, SIGN THE ORDINANCE AND SO FORTH. BUT THAT'S JUST THAT JUST NEEDS TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD. I JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE THEIR ACTUAL NAMES, READ INTO THE RECORD. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. WE JUST NEED TO IDENTIFY THEM PLACE BECAUSE IN THE AND IT DOESN'T. I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT I WOULD HAVE. I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE. I DON'T KNOW WHO THE I DON'T I DON'T KNOW WHO THEY ARE OR HOW TO PUT THOSE. BUT YOU REALLY PUT THOSE IN. BUT BUT YOU JUST NAME THEM OFF. THEY THEY ARE BE GIVEN SEAT NUMBERS IN THE BYLAWS. 
          THOSE ARE JUST, THEY'RE JUST PICKING YOU KNOW, YOU CAN DO THAT ALPHABETICALLY. IT DOESN'T MATTER. AND THEN IF, IF, IF 1 OR 2 MEMBERS OF COUNCIL ARE GOING TO SERVE, IDENTIFY THEM. 
          JUST READ OFF WHO THOSE PEOPLE ARE AND AND YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GOOD. THE ONLY OTHER THING YOU WOULD NEED TO CLARIFY IN LET'S SEE MR. RIGHT PAGE HERE. IT WAS THE QUESTION YOU BROUGHT UP ABOUT REGISTERED AGENT OF SERVICE. YEAH. FOR SERVICE. SO ON PAGE 58 OF THE PACKET AND IDENTIFIES THE INITIAL REGISTERED AGENT AS MR. WEST AND IDENTIFIES A PERMANENT AGENT AS. MR. ZENO OR SOMEONE ELSE AND JUST FILL IN THE BLANK. SO IF YOU WANT TO NAME IT PERMANENT, MR. WEST OR WHATEVER, WE CAN, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE ALL EASY EDITS TO MAKE WITH FOUR MOTIONS. WE JUST NEED TO IDENTIFY WHO THAT IS. OKAY, QUESTION, MR. DURBIN. YES, YES. 
          BASICALLY MY POSITION I'M I'M OPEN ON THIS ISSUE. I MEAN, I'M I'M IF I HAD TO VOTE ON IT TONIGHT, I'D PROBABLY VOTE NO. BUT I'M OPEN TO THE TO THE IDEA OF THIS. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR A PRESENTATION FROM A SELF-FUNDING, SUCCESSFUL ONE TO AFFORD DECIDING. YEAH, LET'S DO IT. LET ME. OR IF YOU HAD SOME COMMITMENTS LINED UP, IF YOU HAD SOMEBODY THAT SAID, I'LL STICK THIS MUCH MONEY BEFORE IT GETS FORMED, THEN I'D BE I MIGHT BE OKAY WITH IT, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU. I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM SELF-FUNDING GROUP FIRST. OKAY. MR. ROBERTS, DO YOU. I DON'T RECALL IT STATING IN HERE. DO YOU ENVISION IS THE EDC GOING TO MEET MONTHLY? QUARTERLY? IS IT GOING TO JUST STICK WITH THE SAME ROTATION AS EDC? CORRECT. YES. OKAY. EFFECTIVELY WHAT THE WHAT EDC RECOMMENDED IS THAT WE EFFECTIVELY ROLL OVER. SO THE SAME TIME, SAME PLACE OKAY. NOW WITH A PROJECT, YOU KNOW, SIMILARLY TO OTHER COMMISSIONS ETC. WE HAVE SOMETHING GOING ON. WE WOULD CALL MEETINGS MORE OFTEN. OKAY. AND THEN BRAD, A QUESTION FOR YOU IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE THE MAKEUP CHANGES AFTER DECEMBER 31ST, IS IT JUST A MATTER OF COMING IN AND AMENDING? UPDATING? YES, SIR. 
          THAT'S A SIMPLE THING. AND THEN IF IT CHANGES, YOU FILE A NEW CERTIFICATE AS TO THE, YOU KNOW, THE TREPIDATION FROM. MAYOR AND AND AND ROB, YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, I WOULD SAY SOMEBODY MAKE A MOTION, HAVE A VOTE. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IF THE THE WAY I SEE IT KIND OF PLAYING OUT IS IF IT DOESN'T PASS, THEN YOU GO TO TABLING IT OR YOU JUST DO A STRAIGHT UP, NO, YOU MAKE A NEW MOTION, YOU KNOW, JUST TO THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION ABOUT THE MEETINGS. 
          THE BYLAWS REQUIRE AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. SEAN, ON THE LISTING OF THE 
          [01:05:06]
BOARD MEMBERS. I MEAN, IS THAT A MUST IN HERE? COULD WE JUST DELETE THAT SUBSECTION B AND NOT HAVE TO LIST THE INITIAL PERSONS WHO WERE ON IT BECAUSE IT SPELLS OUT BEFOREHAND YOU HAVE TO YOU HAVE TO CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION. YOU BECAUSE IT'S A CORPORATION, YOU HAVE TO IDENTIFY THE CORPORATE, OKAY. THE BOARD MEMBERS. OKAY. WHAT DO WE HAVE TO WAIT ON THOSE NAMES ANYWAYS THEN. OR I'VE GOT NAMES OKAY, OKAY. BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY AGREED. OKAY. 
          YEAH. ZONE WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? MAYOR? ONE MORE. OH I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE IN HERE MORE THAN ONCE. SO YOU POINTED OUT BRAD, THE REGISTERED AGENT ON PAGE 58. IT'S ALSO ON PAGE 63. SO IT HAS TO BE FIXED IN BOTH THE TWO DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS. YES, SIR. THE LIST OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS IS ALSO IN TWO DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS. SO IT SHOWS UP ON PAGE 59 AND PAGE 63. AND THEN THE POINT THAT I MADE BEFORE ABOUT THIS IN THE BYLAWS, SECTION 4.04.3. SO WE HAVE A FAIRLY LONG LIST BUT A CONTAINED LIST OF THINGS. IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE NEED TO CAPTURE. SO THE NAMES HAVE TO BE SO JUST FOR PURPOSES OF THE MOTION, IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION, YOU NEED TO MAKE A FLOOR AMENDMENT TO THE CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION, WHICH IS PAGE 58. YOU NEED TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT OR AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE, WHICH WAS PAGE 63. AND AND THEN AND THEN IN THE CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION AS WELL. THAT'S THE ONE THAT HAS THE REGISTERED AGENT. PAGE 58. SO 58. PAGE 59. 
          AND PAGE 63, PAGE 63 IS THE ORDINANCE. CAN THE MOTION REFERENCE PAGE NUMBERS OR SIMPLY SAY WHEREVER REGISTERED AGENT IS REFERRED TO IN THE PAPERWORK, JUST CALL EVERYONE'S ATTENTION TO IT IN THE PACKET. ANYONE WHO MIGHT BE LISTENING. MAYOR, IF I CAN FINISH MY. SURE. 
          SO MY SUGGESTION. IT'S GOTTEN RATHER COMPLICATED. MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE THAT WE APPOINT 1 OR 2 COUNCIL MEMBERS TO FLESH OUT THE LIST OF NAMES AND MAKE THESE FIXES THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED TONIGHT, AND THEN IT COMES BACK, POTENTIALLY ON CONSENT AT OUR NEXT MEETING, WHATEVER YOU ALL WANT TO DO. I'M GOING TO TRY TO TAKE A STAB AT THIS. SO I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE FOR TO APPROVE ALL FORMATION DOCUMENTS FOR THE LAGO VISTA TYPE B ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, WITH THE FOLLOWING THAT IN SECTION 4.04 SUBITEM THREE OF THE BYLAWS THAT IT TAKES OUT THE THREE ABC AND PLACES A REFERENCE TO STATE STATUTE 505.151 AS REFERENCE. SLIGHT AMENDMENT TO THAT, IF I MAY. WE ALSO ARE PROPOSING TO DELETE THE SENTENCE. THE CORPORATION'S FOCUS WILL BE PRIMARILY IN THE AREAS OF. THANK YOU. I'LL ACCEPT THAT. THAT FOR REGISTERED AGENT CURRENTLY ON PAGE 58 AND 59, I GUESS I SHOULD ASK CHARLES, ARE YOU OKAY TO BE THE REGISTERED AGENT? THANK YOU. WITH THE. ERIC AS THE. I THINK IT WAS A BACKUP BRAD ON THAT. OKAY. AND WITH THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. PLACE ONE JUSTIN LOUCKS, PLACE TWO JEFF FLOATING. PLACE THREE JONATHAN AUTRY, PLACE FOUR. CORY WRIGHT, PLACE FIVE RUSSELL MURPHY, PLACE SIX. DON JOHNDRO AND PLACE SEVEN MYSELF, NORMA OWEN. FOR THIS INITIAL LAUNCH, DID I MISS ANYTHING ELSE? MY ONLY SUGGESTION WOULD BE THAT YOU MENTIONED REGISTERED AGENT ON PAGE 5859. I THINK MR. PRINCE POINTED OUT IT'S ALSO ON 6363. WOULD YOU JUST SAY THAT WHEREVER REGISTERED AGENT APPEARS IN THE PAPERWORK, IT NEEDS TO REFERENCE MR. WEST AND MR. Z? NO. AS THE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY REGISTERED AGENT, IS THAT AN ACCURATE? CORRECT. MAY I SAY THAT I TAKE WHAT YOU JUST SAID? LET ME JUST SAY ON PAGE 58 AND 59 ARE ANY PLACE WHERE IT STATES REGISTERED AGENT THAT MR. CITY MANAGER MR. WEST IS PRIMARY AND MR. SECONDARY. I THINK THE SAME THING IS TRUE. 
          HANG ON JUST PAGE 63. THE LIST OF PEOPLE WASN'T IT IN TWO PLACES. YES. SO ANYWHERE WHERE I JUST HEARD 63 WAS IT. IT'S ALSO ON PAGE 59 ALSO ON PAGE 59. OKAY. SO ALSO FOR THE THE 
          [01:10:03]
MEMBERS I JUST LISTED ON PAGE 59 AND 63, OKAY. SO WE'VE GOT A MOTION. I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A QUESTION AND THAT IS TO BRAD. BRAD, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A REGISTERED AGENT I KNOW WE HAVE TO NAME ONE NOW, BUT SHOULD WE ALSO SAY. IN CASE. MR. WEST OR MR. ZENO IS NO LONGER WITH US, THE, YOU KNOW, THE JOB TITLE NOW, THE CURRENT CITY MANAGER HAS REGISTERED, YOU CAN SAY WE'RE THEIR SUCCESSOR, BUT WE WOULD STILL NEED TO UPDATE THE RECORDS. 
          YEAH. OR THEIR SUCCESSORS WOULD. I'D BE SATISFIED WITH THAT OR THEIR SUCCESSORS. I ACCEPT THAT ACCEPT THAT AND I ACCEPT THAT. OKAY. OH I JUST DID YOU A SECOND. OKAY. I DIDN'T CATCH THAT. SORRY. OKAY. SO I HAVE A MOTION BY MISS OWEN, SECOND BY MR. SAM. IT'S BEEN AMENDED MULTIPLE TIMES AND ALL THOSE HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? NAY, NAY, NAY AT THIS TIME. SO IT PASSES 5 TO 2 WITH MR. SULLIVAN AND MR. DURBIN DISSENTING. CONGRATULATIONS. 
          [IX. 3.	Consideration and Possible action to approve Ordinance No. 25-10-16-06 an amendment to Chapter 10, Section 2.16 (Subdivision Ordinance) to Add Cross­ Reference to Preliminary Plat Submittal Calendar; Direction to Publish Calendar on City Website. 4.	Consideration and ]
OKAY. ITEM NUMBER THREE, CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2510 DASH 1606, AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER TEN, SECTION 2.16 SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO ADD CROSS REFERENCE TO A PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL. CALENDAR DIRECTION TO PUBLISH CALENDAR ON THE CITY WEBSITE. I THINK. MR. ROBERTS, THIS IS YOUR ITEM. YES, SIR. 
          I'M JUST PULLING IT UP IN THE PACKET REAL QUICK. SECOND. TO PAGE NUMBER ON THE PACKET CHANGED ON ME. 81 IS THE COVER. PAGE 81. THANK YOU. IT'S GETTING THERE. OKAY. SO WE'VE SEEN THIS IN FRONT OF US SEVERAL TIMES. AND I THINK EVERYBODY IS NOW WELL FAMILIAR WITH IT. IT'S MORE A CLEANUP ITEM. YOU'LL RECALL THAT OUR LAST MEETING, WHAT WAS MISSING FROM THIS WAS THE ACTUAL WRITTEN ORDINANCE. THAT'S IT. SO IT NOW HAS THE ORDINANCE. I THINK IT COULD HAVE BEEN ON CONSENT, BUT I THINK EVERYBODY'S FAMILIAR WITH IT. 
          NOBODY NEEDS MORE COMMENTARY ON IT. AND IF THERE IS NO DISCUSSION, I'D BE HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? MR. ROBERTS, YOU GO FOR MR. MAYOR, MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 25-101606 MOTION BY MR. ROBERTS. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, I GOT A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NAY. HEARING NONE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. MAYOR. YES, SIR. 
          DON'T THROW ANYTHING AT ME. BUT I JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO THE EDC FOR JUST A MOMENT, OKAY? NO, NO, JUST TO CLARIFY. CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD. WHEN BECAUSE THE MOTION WAS FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE OF THE EDC DOCUMENTS IN THE PACKET, THERE WAS A DRAFT ORDINANCE THAT PROPOSED FUNDING. 
          REMEMBER THAT. AND AND WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THAT THE CITY IS NOT PROPOSING ANY FUNDING AT THIS TIME. SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTOOD THAT YOU DID NOT PASS WHAT WAS IN THERE PROPOSED AS ORDINANCE NUMBER 25. DASH 11605, WHICH IS THE FUNDING ORDINANCE. BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, FOR THE RECORD, IT IS CLEAR THAT EVERYONE'S INTENT WAS THAT THAT WAS NOT INCLUDED AS PART OF WHAT WAS PASSED. SO I JUST WANTED TO REOPEN THAT ISSUE BRIEFLY. BEFORE WE MOVE ON, DO YOU NEED US TO TAKE ANY FORMAL ACTION ON THAT, OR DO YOU NEED SOME NODDING OF HEADS? I THINK, I THINK, I THINK IF IF THE PEOPLE WHO WHO VOTED WHO, YOU KNOW, MISS OWEN AND MR. SAM, WHO, WHO PROPOSED THE MOTION AND THEN EVERYONE WHO VOTED JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT THAT'S THE CASE. AND AS LONG AS EVERYONE, I THINK WE'RE FINE, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK ANYBODY UNDERSTOOD THAT YOU WERE APPROPRIATING ANY FUNDS, BECAUSE THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE SPECIFICALLY ANNOUNCED. 
          BUT I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP. OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH. MR. MR. SAMUEL. YES. OKAY OKAY OKAY. 
          [IX. 4.	Consideration and Possible action to appoint a representative or representatives to the Capital Area Council of Governments.]
THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO GO ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPOINT A REPRESENTATIVE OR REPRESENTATIVES TO THE CAPITAL AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. WE'RE UP FOR RENEWAL AT THIS TIME. AND RIGHT NOW I'M ON THERE, AS IS MR. SAM. OBVIOUSLY I'M GOING TO BE GOING AWAY HERE SHORTLY. MR. SAM WILL STILL BE HERE, BUT YOU'LL NEED TO DECIDE. WE'VE GOT A FORM TO FILL OUT THAT TELLS THEM WHO WE WANT, AND WE HAVE UP TO TWO REPRESENTATIVES, AND SO DO I HAVE SOME FOLKS. MR. SONG, DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE? I'D LIKE TO CONTINUE. YEAH. OKAY. AND IS THERE ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO JOIN US? MR. BENEFIT, DO YOU HAVE HERE? YES, SIR. GOOD. SO MR. BENEFIT WOULD LIKE TO JOIN HIM. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT? OH, BOY. I'M JUST KIDDING. I'M JUST KIDDING. 
          [01:15:03]
JUST KIDDING. NO, I THINK THAT'D BE A GREAT TEAM UP THERE. IF THAT'S THE CASE, I WILL JUST COMMENT THAT THERE'S GENERAL ADMISSION AND THEN THERE'S THE EXECUTIVE. AND YOU WANT TO TRY AND GET INTO THE EXECUTIVE. I'VE GOT NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER. I'VE JUST BEEN A GENERAL MEMBER. 
          YOU GO TO LUNCHES ONCE A QUARTER AND SLAP BACKS AND THAT'S ABOUT IT. BUT IF YOU GET ON THE EXECUTIVE THING, I TRIED. LAST YEAR, CHRISTINE DELISLE WAS THE MAYOR OF OF LEANDER. 
          SHE WAS ON THE COMMITTEE THAT WAS SELECTING. AND I EVEN, YOU KNOW, PULLED ON HER A LITTLE BIT AND STILL COULDN'T GET THERE. BUT I THINK YOU'LL GET MORE BENEFIT OUT OF BEING ON THAT COMMITTEE IF YOU ARE ABLE TO GET INTO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. ANYWAY. IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ABOUT NOMINATING MR. SAM AND MR. BEDFORD. YES, SIR. 
          YES, I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE SHANE AND ADAM BENEFIELD TO BE OUR REPRESENTATIVES ON THE. 
          CAPITAL. KEPLER. OH, THERE IT IS. CAPITAL AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. EXCELLENT SECOND PLACE. I'VE GOT A MOTION BY MR. DURBIN AND A SECOND BY MR. ROBERTS. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON IT, NOT ON THE MOTION ITSELF, BUT JUST KIND OF A GENERAL QUESTION. WHILE WE'RE ON THE TOPIC, THE AGENDA ITEM, CAPCOF IS ALSO, I RECALL WHEN WE WERE GOING INTO OUR COMP PLAN, ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS PETITIONING TRACI ON WAS I UNDERSTOOD THAT WE COULD UTILIZE CAP COG EVEN TO HELP GET FUNDING FOR THE COMP PLAN TO HELP PAY FOR THE WORK ON IT. AND I WAS JUST WONDERING, DID YOU GUYS DID YOU EVER HAVE ANY SEE ANYTHING OR KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? I KNOW IT'S A FACT, RIGHT? JORDAN? IS THAT RIGHT? YEAH, A LOT OF A LOT OF COGS DO. SO SO WITH THAT, I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TWO GENTLEMEN, UPON APPROVAL, WE'LL TAKE ALL THE HELP WE CAN GET, YOU KNOW. VERY GOOD. OKAY. SO ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NAY. HEARING NONE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM 
          [IX. 5. Consideration and Possible action regarding revisions to the Short-term rental (STR)
Ordinance - Section 22.23 of the Lago Vista Code of Ordinances.]
NUMBER FIVE. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING REVISIONS TO THE SHORT TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE IS SECTION 22.23 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. AND MR. BENEFIELD, I BELIEVE THIS IS YOUR ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THE PURPOSE OF PUTTING THIS ON THE AGENDA TODAY WASN'T NECESSARILY AS AN ACTION ITEM TO GET THIS ORDINANCE PASSED, BUT RATHER PUT BEFORE COUNCIL AND CITIZENS. THE CURRENT CURRENT ORDINANCE, AS IT'S WRITTEN TODAY, A MODEL THAT OUR ATTORNEY SHARED FROM OKLAHOMA, SOME LEGAL ADVICE FROM TML, AND THEN ALSO JUST A RED LINE VERSION WITH SOME OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS. FULL DISCLOSURE THERE WERE SOME THINGS ADDED TO THE RED LINE THAT I DID NOT PERSONALLY ANTICIPATE GETTING APPROVED, BUT RATHER IT BEING A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION SO THAT WE COULD HAVE EXTENSIVE CONVERSATION. SO IF IT DIDN'T MAKE IT INTO THE FINAL ORDINANCE, CITIZENS OF LAGO VISTA WOULD HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING WHY. RIGHT. SO I THINK THE GOAL OF THE STR ORDINANCE IS TO THOSE THAT ARE OPERATING STRS TO HAVE A VALID PERMIT SO THAT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO COLLECT HOT FUNDS FROM THEIR GUESTS. THAT THEN WOULD BE PAID TO THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA. THAT'S REALLY THE GOAL. AND THE HOPE IS THE FINAL DRAFT CAN DO JUST THAT. PROTECT HOMEOWNERS RIGHTS TO OPERATE THEIR STR. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, LAGO VISTA COLLECT THE NECESSARY HOT TAXES TO FUND OUR PROCESSES. THAT'S IT? YES, SIR. I THANK YOU FOR PUTTING I KNOW THIS TOOK A LOT OF TIME AND I APPRECIATE YOUR DILIGENCE ON IT. I WENT THROUGH IT AND I WANTED TO PROVIDE YOU WITH MY FEEDBACK ON MY LITTLE ITEMS THAT JUMPED OUT AT ME. I DON'T HAVE CURRENT PAGE NUMBER REFERENCES THEY WERE BEFORE THE PACKET WAS AMENDED, SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. BUT UNDER SECTION B PERMIT, LICENSE REQUIRED, SECTION TWO. IT SAYS A SHORT TERM RENTAL LICENSE. RENTAL LICENSE SHALL SHALL EXPIRE 24 MONTHS LATER. I UNDERSTAND THAT OUR SOFTWARE HAS THE ABILITY TO SEND OUT THE NOTIFICATION. SO THE QUESTION IS, IS ARE WE GOING TO SEND OUT THE NOTIFICATIONS TO THE PERMIT HOLDERS, OR IS IT GOING TO BE UP TO THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE SETTING A REMINDER ON THEIR CALENDAR? IS SO IS MY PRESUMPTION CORRECT? MR. WEST JORDAN, THAT THE SOFTWARE CAN SEND OUT THAT NOTIFICATION? DOES EVERYBODY'S NODDING THEIR HEAD. YES. OKAY. YES, SIR. THIS IS A THIS IS A PAUL PRINCE DEAL. BUT I THINK BOTH ARE CORRECT. I THINK IT'S UP TO THEM TO DO IT TO MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE THEY'RE REQUIRED TO DO IT. BUT 
          [01:20:02]
WE COULD SEND OUT NOTICES. YEAH. OKAY. IT'S THEIR RESPONSIBILITY. THAT WAS ONE ITEM. AND THEN I GOT INTO THE SECTION C PERMIT AND APPLICATION. ITEM PARAGRAPH GOLF G OWNER ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. 
          AND WE SEE THIS IN THE PERMIT TERM AND FEES. AND IT'S THE THE ABILITY TO SELF INSPECT AND AND ATTEST THAT YOU ARE COMPLIANT WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OF THE ORDINANCE. AND I BROUGHT THIS I WENT THROUGH THIS LIST HERE AND I GOT FEEDBACK FROM INDIVIDUALS ON MY ROUNDTABLE MEETING. AMANDA WAS ON THE ROUNDTABLE AND SHE I WAS, YOU KNOW, SAYING, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE CITY SHOULD BE GOING OUT AND INSPECTING TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE. YOU KNOW, THE NUMBER OF FIRE EXTINGUISHERS, HOW HIGH THEY ARE. DO YOU HAVE A CHIRP? YOU KNOW, WHEN THE DOORS OPEN AND CLOSE, IF YOU DON'T HAVE A FENCE AROUND YOUR POOL, ETC. AND THE POINT WAS MADE TO ME, WE HAVE A THOUSAND PERMIT. WE HAVE 1000 NOT PERMITTED, BUT WE HAVE 1000 RENTALS, SHORT TERM RENTALS IN THE LAGO VISTA AREA AND STAFF CAN'T GET OUT TO A THOUSAND OF THESE. SO THE WORKAROUND IS YOU REALLY DO NEED TO SELF ATTEST AND CONFIRM. AND THAT'S THAT'S WHY THIS IS IN HERE. SO THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION AND I BRING THAT UP JUST IN CASE ANYBODY ELSE WAS CONTEMPLATING THE SAME. WHY WHY SHOULDN'T THE CITY GO OUT AND CHECK THESE THINGS. SO THE REASON IS WE DON'T HAVE THE STAFF FOR A THOUSAND OF THEM, ESPECIALLY ALL AT ONCE, COMING INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE. SECTION E STANDARDS OF OPERATION UNDER PARKING. IT SAYS TWO SPACES. IT LIMITS THE STR TO TWO TWO SPACES PER DWELLING UNIT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT AMENDED BECAUSE YOUR YOUR STANDARD AVERAGE HOME IN LAGO VISTA CAN OFTENTIMES ACCOMMODATE FOUR VEHICLES. FOR EXAMPLE. I THINK THE GOAL IS TO KEEP PARKING OFF THE STREET, WHICH I ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT. BUT YOU KNOW, OTHER HOMES LIKE MINE AND OTHER, YOU CAN JUST GET MORE THAN TWO. BOTTOM LINE. SO MAYBE WHEN THIS COMES BACK TO US IN THE FUTURE, MAYBE ANOTHER NUMBER OTHER THAN TWO. UNDER SECTION F ADMINISTRATION AND MONITORING. G PARAGRAPH G ACTUALLY PARAGRAPH G FEES THE $500 NUMBER. INITIAL REGISTRATION FEE 525. RENEWAL FEE EVERY TWO YEARS OF 500. I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY FEES THAT WE'RE CHARGING ARE SUPPORTED BY STAFF SAYING THIS IS HOW MUCH TIME WE PUT IN IT. THIS IS A REASONABLE FEE. I THINK THAT'S HOW THAT'S THE ORTHODOXY IN CITIES AND FEES ANYWAY. IS THAT NOT CORRECT, BRAD? I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T KNOW THE ANSWER. YES. OKAY. OKAY. THANKS. ALL RIGHT. NEXT INSPECTION AND SELF CERTIFICATION AND INSPECTION BY CODE ENFORCEMENT. I APPRECIATE THE DELAYED. YES. AND INSPECTION BY CODE ENFORCEMENT OR SELF CERTIFICATION SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR ALL NEW. OKAY. SO I'VE ALREADY ADDRESSED THAT. SECTION. HOTEL PARAGRAPH THREE, SUBSECTION TWO. MINIMUM OF ONE FIRE EXTINGUISHER PER LEVEL OF THE DWELLING MOUNTED IN A VISIBLE LOCATION. I'D LIKE TO SEE ONE ADDITION, AND THAT IS A FIRE EXTINGUISHER FOR GREASE FIRES IN THE KITCHEN. I UNDERSTAND THAT A FIRE EXTINGUISHER CANNOT PUT OUT A GREASE FIRE, KIND OF LIKE PUTTING WATER ON IT, NOT GOING TO WORK. AND THEN IF THERE'S A FIRE. AND I ALSO GOT FEEDBACK FROM AMANDA, ALSO ON MY ROUND TABLE, POINTING OUT THAT IT'D BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS REQUIRED IF YOU HAVE A FIRE PIT OUT THERE BY THE FIRE PIT. AND THEN WHEN YOU GO BACK, ADAM AND YOU RECONSIDER TWO PARKING SPACES PER STRT JUST A COUPLE SENTENCES DOWN ON SECTION HOTEL THREE, PARAGRAPH FIVE OR SUBSECTION FIVE PARKING PLAN. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. NOTED THERE AS WELL THAT IT CAN BE MORE THAN TWO. 
          IT JUST SAYS YOU HAVE TO REQUIRE PARKING PLAN. SO I GUESS YOU REALLY DON'T NEED TO DO ANYTHING WITH THAT. AND THEN GOING DOWN SAME SECTION, SUBSECTION FOUR EXISTING STR PROVISION. ANY DWELLING UNIT UNIT OPERATING AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO UNDERGO AN INITIAL INSPECTION OR PAY THE INITIAL REGISTRATION FEE. THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY SUCH. SUCH OPERATORS MUST SUBMIT A NEW APPLICATION, SIGN ALL REQUIRED CERTIFICATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS, AND PAY THE 
          [01:25:06]
RENEWAL FEE WITHIN 90 DAYS OF ADOPTION TO REMAIN IN COMPLIANCE. I AGREE THAT THE GRANDFATHERING SHOULDN'T BE IN LIEU OF THE EXISTING ORDINANCE YOU NEED TO COME AND COMPLIANCE. 
          IF YOU ALREADY HAVE AN STR PERMIT OR YOU ALREADY HAVE AN APPLICATION IN, YOU STILL NEED TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE THAT LANGUAGE CONTEMPLATES WITHIN 90 DAYS. I WOULD SUGGEST AND RECOMMEND WHEN YOUR CURRENT STR ORDINANCE EXPIRES. IF IT DOESN'T EXPIRE, THEN WITHIN TWO YEARS OR ANOTHER TIME FRAME, JUST SOMETHING MORE THAN 90 DAYS. 
          WELL, THERE'S NO EXPIRATION TO OUR CURRENT PERMITS. OKAY, SO IF YOU HAVE AN STR PERMIT TODAY, IT'S PERPETUAL. UNDERSTOOD. AND SO IN ORDER TO HAVE THESE NEW SELF ASSESSMENTS AND HAVE THEM COME INTO THE NEW PERMITS AT SOME POINT, WHETHER THAT'S 30 DAYS OR 180 DAYS OR WHATEVER THAT IS, THEY'LL HAVE TO BE SOME KIND OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THERE'S A PERMIT EVERY TWO YEARS. OKAY. 180 DAYS A YEAR, JUST SOMETHING MORE THAN 90 DAYS, I THINK TO THE BENEFIT OF THAT IS THAT IF YOU'VE GOT 1000 OUT THERE AND WE ONLY HAVE 350, 400 REGISTERED RIGHT NOW, WE PROBABLY STAFF PROBABLY DOESN'T WANT 6 OR 700 APPLICATIONS HITTING THEM WITHIN 90 DAYS. 
          I'VE NOT HEARD THE WORD 1000 FROM ANYBODY EVER. THE WORD THAT I HEARD IT FROM HER. OH. 
          I'M SORRY. COULD YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE? MICROPHONE? YOU GOTTA BE AT THE MICROPHONE. 
          THERE YOU GO. SO I WAS ABLE TO PULL THAT NUMBER THROUGH LOCAL REAL ESTATE AGENCIES AIRBNB AND VRBO. THEY'RE NOT ALL SPECIFICALLY LAGO VISTA. THERE'S SOME THAT ARE ON THE FRINGE OVER IN THE HOLLOWS ALSO THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE CONSIDERED JONESTOWN, BUT THEY ARE WITHIN OUR OR IN THE ETJ. SO IT IS COMING UP WITH OVER WELL OVER A THOUSAND. ACTUALLY, THE REPORT THAT WAS PRINTED LAST TWO WEEKS AGO, AND I'M NOT DISPUTING WHAT YOU LOOKED AT THE REPORT THAT WAS PRINTED LAST TWO WEEKS AGO AT OUR LAST MEETING FROM JILLIAN, WAS THAT WE HAD A LITTLE OVER 200 REGISTERED STRS AND MAYBE 170 NON-REGISTERED STRS. THAT PUTS THE NUMBER UNDER 500, BUT OH, WOW. I MEAN, MAYBE MAYBE THE SOFTWARE IS GROSSLY WRONG. YEAH, THE SOFTWARE IS ACTUALLY IT'S IT'S LIKE A IT'S A IT'S LIKE A LEARNING MODULE. SO IF THEY PULL OFF A SAY THEY'RE ACTIVE DATES, SAY THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ACTIVE OR THEY'RE ALREADY BOOKED AND THEY DON'T ALLOW IT TO COME BACK ONLINE UNTIL DECEMBER, IT'S NOT GOING TO SHOW UP ON YOUR REPORT. SO A LOT OF THOSE THAT ARE ALREADY THAT ARE ALREADY ARE BOOKED, IT'S NOT GOING TO SHOW UP UNTIL THEIR NEXT AVAILABLE OPENING OR THEIR NEXT REPORTING PERIOD. SO SOMETIMES THEY'LL GO IN ACTIVE AND INACTIVE. AND THAT'S WHAT I THINK IS COMING IS THE PROBLEM RIGHT NOW IS THAT SOME OF THEM HAVE MOVED TO INACTIVE TILL SPRING AND SUMMER, AND THAT'S NOT SO. IT'S NOT AS COMPREHENSIVE AS IT SHOULD BE ON THOSE THOSE REPORTING ITEMS. I THINK THAT'S WORTH LOOKING INTO. I DO DISAGREE WITH THAT THOUGH. YEAH. FOR EXAMPLE, MY HOUSE IS AN INACTIVE STR FROM LONG AGO, BUT MY HOUSE STILL SHOWS ON THE REPORT I WAS, I WOULD SAY THAT THERE WAS A FEW THAT I'VE NOTICED THAT DID NOT THAT THAT ARE LISTED AS INACTIVE AND ARE STILL SHOWING UP ON REAL ESTATE AGENCIES AND STUFF. AND THERE'S A LOT OF GYPSY, WHAT I CALL GYPSY AIRBNBS THAT I DON'T BELIEVE ARE SHOWING UP ON YOUR REPORT AS WELL. IT'S NOTED, I APPRECIATE NO, I APPRECIATE YOU SHARING THAT PERSPECTIVE. I REMEMBER YOU BRINGING THOSE NUMBERS UP NOW, BUT I HAD FORGOTTEN THAT UP UNTIL THIS POINT, IT'S STILL I WOULD LIKE TO ASK JORDAN A QUESTION ON IT, STILL A LARGE NUMBER. SO EVEN IF WE DID THAT, IT'S STILL 500 SO OR SO. JORDAN, MY QUESTION FOR YOU WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE IS 90 DAYS. WHAT WOULD YOU BE COMFORTABLE WITH FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT? I THINK SIX MONTHS IS PRETTY FAIR. HOWEVER, I DO THINK PART OF THE COST OF THE PERMIT AND THE REGISTRATION FEES COULD COVER A STAFF MEMBER TO HANDLE THE INSPECTIONS AND THE PROCESSING. 
          AND SO IT ALL GOES INTO PLAY WITH WHAT WE HAVE TODAY. STAFF WISE, I THINK SIX MONTHS IS PRETTY FAIR TO GET EVERYBODY INTO COMPLIANCE. OKAY. AND WE WOULD BE STAGGERING PERMITS AND INTAKE AND FIGURING OUT A PROCESS TO TURN AROUND TO MITIGATE ANY BACKLOGS. BUT THAT'S THE NATURE OF THE GAME. OKAY, OKAY. THERE'S A PROCESS. WOULD YOU MIND ALSO SPEAKING TO THE APPLICATION FEES OF 525 AND $500. DO YOU THINK THAT THAT'S A REASONABLE NUMBER? IS IT TOO HIGH TOO LOW? SO WE'VE LOOKED AT CITIES THAT ARE A QUARTER. I MEAN, WE WENT BURNET COUNTY, BEXAR COUNTY, WILLIAMSON, TRAVIS, AND THERE'S RANGES FROM CHARGING NOTHING TO CHARGING $1,200. I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S A SET STANDARD. I THINK IT WOULD BE BASED MORE SO ON WHAT IT COSTS TO PROCESS THESE APPLICATIONS AND THE SOFTWARE THAT GOES INTO IT AND THE STAFF TIME. I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER, AND THAT SOFTWARE IS A BIG A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER TOO. SO THAT COULD HELP TO JUSTIFY 34,000. YEAH, YEAH. JUST JUST AS A SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE, ONE OF 
          [01:30:09]
THE ONE OF THE REQUESTS OR ASKS FROM TODAY IS TO CREATE A SUBCOMMITTEE, THE 525 WAS A GENERIC NUMBER THAT WAS BROUGHT FORTH BY MR. BULLOCK ON THE OKLAHOMA ORDINANCE. BY NO MEANS WAS THAT DESIGNED TO REPRESENT WHAT WE ARE ENDORSING OR SUPPORTING IN LAGO VISTA. AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THAT HAS TO BE DATA DRIVEN. AND SO THE GOAL OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE WOULD BE TO FOCUS ON THAT EXACT NUMBER. WHAT IS IT COSTING TO PROCESS THESE APPLICATIONS AND HAVE THE SOFTWARE AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS? HOW DO HOW DO WE SUBSTANTIATE THAT NUMBER. AND THEN CORRESPONDINGLY, WHAT DOES AN WHAT DOES THE BIANNUAL EVERY TWO YEAR PERMIT, WHAT SHOULD THAT COST BASED ON THE DATA. SO THOSE NUMBERS ARE NOT FIXED OKAY OKAY. WHAT I WAS HOPING IS TO ELABORATE ON THAT IS THAT EITHER WE'RE GIVING CLEAR DIRECTION TO STAFF ON HOW THAT ANALYSIS SHOULD LOOK, OR YOU'RE GOING TO TASK THIS COMMITTEE WITH COMING UP WITH WHATEVER LANGUAGE WE WANT STAFF TO DO. AND I DIDN'T KNOW WHICH SIDE OF THAT YOU FELL ON. WELL, I WOULD LOVE THE FEEDBACK. YOU KNOW, I OBVIOUSLY WOULD LIKE TO BE ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT I MEAN, ANY ANY GUIDANCE THAT COULD BE PROVIDED WOULD BE CERTAINLY APPRECIATED. YEAH. BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE ONE THING THAT I WAS GOING TO BRING UP AND I'M JUST TAGGING ON TO COUNCILMAN ROBERTS, IS THAT IF YOU TAKE THE FIVE, 25 TIMES WHAT I HAD JILLIAN RUN A REPORT YESTERDAY AND WE DELETED OUT ALL THE DUPLICATE STRS OR 612 UNIQUE STRS IN LAGO. IF YOU MULTIPLY THAT BY THE 525, IT'S OVER 300 GRAND. TO ME, THAT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT WE'VE BEEN WORRIED ABOUT IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE RECOVERABLE COSTS ON FEES. YOU CAN'T JUST CREATE A NEW FEE THAT BASICALLY GENERATES REVENUE FOR THE CITY. AND SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT THE DEPARTMENT COMES UP WITH IS TANGIBLE. COST OF THE SOFTWARE COSTS 34 GRAND. IT COSTS MY STAFF X AMOUNT OF TIME DOLLARS TO GO OVER AN APPLICATION. IT TAKES ME TEN MINUTES TO GO OVER AN APPLICATION OR THERE'S AN INSPECTOR, IT TAKES THEM, ETC. 
          AND WE CAN PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION. IT'S IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PULL RELATIVELY EASILY FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO THEN. DO WHAT THEY CAN. I MAKE THE SUGGESTION THAT WE GO AHEAD AND FORM SUBCOMMITTEE AND MAKE JUDICIOUS USE OF THE COUNCIL DISCUSSION BOARD. DO WE NEED THE AGENDA ITEM? DO WE NEED A SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM TO FORM A SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THIS, OR IS GOOD? OKAY, OKAY. WE JUST MADE THIS AN ACTION ITEM. SO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO CREATE ONE. OH I SEE, I JUST I'D LIKE TO MOVE ON SO WE CAN TRY AND GET THESE THINGS. TAKE CARE. CAN I SPEAK. YES, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE TWO THINGS ARE IN THIS. AND ONE OF THEM BEING THE CITY IS GOING TO RESERVE THE RIGHT TO INSPECT IF THEY'RE GOING TO DO ALL THE SELF-CERTIFICATION STUFF, I WANT THEM TO HAVE AT LEAST A REASONABLE FEAR THAT SOMEBODY MAY SHOW UP AT THEIR DOOR, KNOCK ON THEIR DOOR, AND INSPECT. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S IN HERE. I DIDN'T SEE IT. BUT I THINK WE NEED TO RESERVE THE RIGHT TO THE CITY TO INSPECT. MAY I ASK TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT? IS THE INTENT AND PART OF THIS FEE ANALYSIS THAT IS BEING REQUESTED. WE CAN ADD THE STAFF THAT IT WOULD TAKE TO DO THESE INSPECTIONS REASONABLY, AND THAT SHOULD BE FACTORED INTO THE COST. THAT WOULD BE MY ABSOLUTELY ASSUMPTION. AND SO AT THAT POINT, IT'S AN AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE SAYING WE WILL BE INSPECTING AS THE CITY, IF THAT'S OF INTEREST, WE CAN PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION AS WELL. OKAY. WELL, I'D LIKE TO BRAG TO APPLY NOW, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND. ROB, DO YOU MIND IF BRAD GIVE FOR MY UNDERSTANDING OF SOME. A PREVIOUS LITIGATION THAT I READ ON STRS IS THAT THE CITY DID HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO AN INITIAL INSPECTION, NOT SELF ASSESSMENT, BUT THERE WERE LITIGATIONS ABOUT THE CITY'S COMING IN ON A EVERY TWO YEAR BASIS TO CONTINUE DOING INSPECTIONS. YEAH, I MEAN, SO. THAT'S GENERALLY ACCURATE. I THINK THE ONLY ADMONITION I WILL GIVE EVERYONE IS THE MORE COMPLEX YOU MAKE THIS, THE MORE YOU OPEN YOURSELF TO CHALLENGE IN PARTICULARLY TO THE DEGREE THAT YOU ARE IMPOSING CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, THAT YOU DO NOT ALSO APPLY TO LONG TERM RENTALS. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU KNOW WHAT, WHATEVER IT IS YOU ALL DO, THE EVERY EVERYTHING THAT SOMEBODY ADDS ON TO IT, ONE MORE LAYER OF REGULATION. YOU JUST JUST BE AWARE THAT YOU, YOU I, I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WILL TURN OUT, BUT LIKE I TOLD YOU LAST TIME, JUST THIS YEAR, THERE ARE 20 CASES IN, YOU KNOW, THE OVER THAT ARE ONGOING FEDERAL COURT LITIGATION THAT ARE THAT ARE NOT RESOLVED, THAT ARE AT SOME STAGE OF THE APPELLATE, YOU KNOW, DISTRICT COURT OR APPELLATE PROCESS IN FEDERAL COURT. SO JUST JUST, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY WE TRIED TO GIVE YOU 
          [01:35:02]
SOMETHING THAT WAS VERY LEAN AND AND AS, AS BARE BONES AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE IT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE THE LIMITS THAT ARE PLACED ON THE CITY. SO YES, I THINK, I THINK YOU CAN DO CERTAIN THINGS AND IF YOU CAN FIT IT UNDER HEALTH AND SAFETY, THEN YOU CAN DO THOSE THINGS. 
          BUT YOU JUST NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT RECURRING TYPES OF, OF, OF INSPECTIONS AND EVERYTHING OR ANYTHING THAT YOU DON'T ALSO DO TO LONG TERM RENTALS. JUST YES. YOU THERE. YEAH. NO THAT'S OKAY. AND AND I MEAN I HAVE LONG TERM RENTALS I WOULDN'T FIND SOMEBODY TO INSPECT IT. 
          AND I'VE GOT THE I'VE GOT THE RIGHT TO GO AND LOOK AND INSPECT IT SO THEY CAN CALL ME AND I'LL WALK THEM THROUGH. BUT IN ANY CASE THE I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO MAKE AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S IN HERE, IS THAT WE POST THE ORDINANCE OR THE OPERATING STANDARDS IN THE, IN THE RENTAL SO THAT I MEAN, IF WE'RE DOING SELF-CERTIFICATION, THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE'RE GOING TO KNOW. EASY. DO WE INSPECT OR SOMEBODY THAT STAYS THERE SAYS THEY DIDN'T HAVE THIS, YOU KNOW, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY FIRE EXTINGUISHERS. THEY DIDN'T DO THIS. THEY DIDN'T DO THAT. IT'S THE ONLY WAY WE'RE GOING TO KNOW. AND THEY DON'T KNOW UNLESS THEY CAN READ THE ORDINANCE. SO I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE IT POSTED IN THE, IN THE, IN THE RENTAL AND PROBABLY ON THE WEBSITE. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE. MR. JUST TO GO BACK TO JORDAN'S QUESTION OF, YOU KNOW, GIVING YOU DIRECTION OF WHAT IT IS WE WANT, I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE TAKEN A VOTE OR REALLY GOTTEN A FULL CONSENSUS FROM COUNCIL YET AS TO SPECIFICALLY HOW WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS STRS. 
          IT'S ALL THERE'S A WHOLE RANGE FROM I WANT TO FOLLOW THE LEGAL GUIDANCE. I WANT THIS TO BE AS MINIMAL AS POSSIBLE. I DON'T WANT TO GET SUED FOR IT, AND I DON'T WANT TO DO ONEROUS THINGS THAT REQUIRE US TO HAVE ANOTHER STAFF PERSON THAT WE HAVE TO GO OUT AND HIRE AND DO INSPECTIONS OF A THOUSAND PLACES. IF IT'S A THOUSAND, BUT WE HAVE OTHER ON THE OTHER SPECTRUM OF PEOPLE WHO POSSIBLY WANT TO LIMIT STRS IN LAGO VISTA. I JUST THINK WE HAVEN'T GOT THERE YET. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE SINCE YOU'RE JUST STARTING, JUST KNOW THAT IT'S THE FULL RANGE OF OPINIONS HERE. BUT WHAT I WANTED TO GET TO IS HOW THE MAYOR OVER HERE AS WELL I'D BE. 
          I WOULD LOVE TO GET INTO DISCUSSION ON WHAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE IS MAKEUP IS AND WHAT ITS CHARTER IS. AND MY ONE ASK OF THAT WAS THAT IT DOESN'T JUST INCLUDE COUNCIL MEMBERS. 
          IF WE CAN GET SOME CITIZENS AND SOME STR OWNERS AND MONSTER OWNERS INCLUDED ON IT, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE FAIR. I'M A REFEREE TO. THANKS. I JUST WANTED TO GO BACK TO WHERE I LEFT OFF BEFORE I LOST THE FLOOR. AND THEN COME BACK TO THAT AND CLOSE OUT MY COMMENTS ON SECTION I VIOLATION AND PENALTY PARAGRAPH F A LICENSE MAY BE REVOKED BY THE CITY MANAGER UPON THREE OR MORE VIOLATIONS WITHIN 12 MONTHS. I LIKE THAT, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S A NOISE COMPLAINT, BUT IF IT'S COMPLAINTS LIKE THAT, THEY NEED TO BE ADJUDICATED COMPLAINTS. 
          BUT CAN WE EVEN HAVE THIS? I MEAN, JUST SHORT 10S OR LESS? CAN WE HAVE IS THIS A PERMISSIBLE PARAGRAPH SENTENCE? I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS A DEFINITIVE CASE THAT I CAN POINT TO THAT CAN GIVE YOU CAN GIVE YOU THAT ABSOLUTE YES OR NO. OKAY. I'D LIKE TO KEEP IT IN THEN UNTIL BRAD SAYS WE CAN'T, THAT WOULD BE MY VOTE ON THAT ONE. AND THEN THE LAST COMMENT I'VE GOT AND THEN I'LL YIELD, IS JUST RESPONDING TO COUNCILMAN DURBIN ON POSTING STUFF. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE I WAS A LITTLE UNCLEAR. COUNCILMAN DURBIN, WERE YOU REFERRING TO HAVING THE ORDINANCE POSTED ON THE PROPERTY OR JUST WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER? BECAUSE IF IT'S THE LATTER, THE ORDINANCE HAS IN IT A REQUIREMENT THAT THE CERTIFICATIONS AND STUFF BE POSTED IN A LIKE RIGHT BY THE FRONT DOOR WHEN YOU COME IN. NO, I WAS TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S WHAT'S IT MAY NOT BE THE ORDINANCE, BUT IT MIGHT BE JUST A SECTION ON THE OPERATING STANDARDS, WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE. OH, OKAY. AND I MEAN, THEY DON'T NEED ALL THAT OTHER JUNK, BUT OKAY, WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE IN THE IN THE PLACE, LIKE HOW MANY FIRE EXTINGUISHERS, FIRE EXTINGUISHERS, THAT SORT OF THING. ALL RIGHT. THANKS FOR CLARIFYING, I. THEN SUBCOMMITTEE, NOT THE UNDER I VIOLATION AND PENALTY. PAUL, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ADJUDICATED VIOLATIONS. NOW ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ADJUDICATED VIOLATIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE OR ADJUDICATED VIOLATIONS OF MAYBE THE NOISE ORDINANCE? THAT'S I'M REFERRING TO BOTH, BUT THE ORDINANCE IS NOT THIS IS NOT CLEAR ON THAT POINT. RIGHT. BECAUSE WHAT I'M TRYING TO AVOID IS LIKE WE TALKED WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS INITIALLY OVER A YEAR AGO, IS YOU'VE GOT SOMEBODY MAKING COMPLAINTS TO LAGO VISTA PD ABOUT NOISE, BUT THEY HAVEN'T ACTUALLY BEEN BEFORE A JUDGE AND FINED. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT THE. AND ONE OTHER THING I WAS GOING TO 
          [01:40:06]
SAY IN HERE IS IF IT IS THE NOISE ORDINANCES OR NUISANCE ORDINANCES, ORDINANCES, WHATEVER IT THOSE ALREADY HAVE A FINE STRUCTURE SET UP. AND WE CAN'T WE CAN'T DILLY DALLY IN IT. THAT'S UP TO THE COURT. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN IS IF YOU'VE GOT A CHRONIC OWNER WHO'S NOT POLICING THEIR PROPERTY PROPERLY, THEIR RENTAL AND THESE, YOU'VE GOT THAT ONE PROPERTY THAT'S JUST THE PARTY HOUSE THAT'S ALWAYS GETTING VIOLATED. IT'S NOT FAIR TO THE NEIGHBORS THAT THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO CONTINUE THAT. I AGREE, I JUST WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THAT IN HERE, WE HAVE PROBABLY SAYS THE MINIMUM FINE FOR VIOLATION SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 500. YEAH. IT'S IF IT'S A VIOLATION OF THE NOISE ORDINANCE, THOSE ARE ALREADY SET. THAT'LL BE UP TO THE JUDGE. WE CAN'T GO AROUND AND ROB. THAT WAS ANOTHER THING THAT STILL NEEDS TO BE DONE, IS TO MAKE SURE THE FINE STRUCTURES ARE CROSS-REFERENCED WITH OUR EXISTING STRUCTURES. YEAH, EXACTLY. MAYOR, IF I MAY, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT CONVERSATION, BUT I THINK THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS ITEM WAS TO GET A SUBCOMMITTEE AND BRING AN ORDINANCE BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL INSTEAD OF TRYING TO DEBATE AN ORDINANCE THAT DOESN'T EXIST AT THIS TIME. SORRY, I'M JUST THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE WE THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS OUR COUNCIL MEETINGS SEEM TO GO A LITTLE LONG AS WE GET OFF TRACK A LITTLE BIT, BUT THAT WOULD JUST BE MY RECOMMENDATION. I'M WILLING TO STAY HERE HOWEVER LONG Y'ALL WANT. I APPRECIATED THE COMMENTS, THOUGH, BECAUSE I THINK IT HELPS THE SUBCOMMITTEE KNOW WHAT DIRECTION TO. YEAH, I AGREE, THIS IS THE FEEDBACK YOU NEED. YOU AUTHORED THIS. YOU WANT TO HEAR THE FEEDBACK SO YOU CAN CAPTURE AS MUCH OF THAT AS POSSIBLE. YEAH, I MEAN, THE GOAL IS ULTIMATELY TO BRING BACK AN ORDINANCE THAT WILL PASS, RIGHT. SO SUBCOMMITTEE. 
          ANY OTHER FURTHER CONVERSATION ON THIS ITEM? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MAKE A MOTION FOR. WELL, I THINK WE NEEDED A LITTLE DISCUSSION ON WHAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE LOOKED LIKE AND TASKED WITH. SO ADAM WANTS TO BE ON IT. MAYBE. JORDAN. I WOULD ALSO. JORDAN AND JILLIAN OR JORDAN OR JILLIAN. JORDAN AND JILLIAN. OKAY, I'D HAVE HAVE AN INTEREST IN BEING ON IT. 
          AND I HAVE A COUPLE CITIZENS IN MIND THAT WOULD I DON'T WANT TO NAME THEM WITHOUT TALKING TO THEM FIRST, BUT. THAT'S AT LEAST TWO CITIZENS. AT LEAST I THINK TWO CITIZENS. THREE CITIZENS, WHATEVER. WHY DON'T WE? I MEAN, THERE'S NO REASON WHY WE HAVE TO HAVE THREE. WHY DON'T WE JUST HAVE THE TWO OF YOU ALL? JORDAN. JILLIAN. AND IF YOU GET A COUPLE OF CITIZENS THAT JOIN YOU ALL IN THE CONVERSATION, THEN THE WHOLE IDEA, I BELIEVE, I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE SUPER COMPLICATED. RIGHT. BUT THE IDEA IS THAT WE WANT TO COME BACK WITH AN ORDINANCE THAT WE THINK WILL PASS AND THAT WILL PROVIDE US THE MOST COVER WITH REGARD TO LAWSUITS IN THE FUTURE. I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHAT THE COUNCIL IS LOOKING FOR. 
          YEAH, I DON'T THINK IT HAS TO BE PARTICULARLY COMPLEX. I CAN MAKE A MOTION. AMANDA, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT? OH, YEAH. GO AHEAD. I KNOW THERE WAS A BIG CONCERN ABOUT SELF CERTIFICATIONS. ONE WAY WE GOT AROUND THAT IN GALVESTON WAS THAT PART OF THE APPLICATION INCLUDED PICTURES OF THE ACTUAL FIRE EXTINGUISHERS, THE TYPES OF LOCKS. AND ALSO IT WAS A SELF CERTIFICATION THAT STATED FOR THE CARBON MONOXIDE AND SMOKE DETECTORS THAT THEY WERE CHANGED OUT EVERY 30 TO 60 DAYS OR, OR CHECKED AND TESTED. NORMALLY THE CLEANERS COME THROUGH, TEST AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE FUNCTIONAL, AND THEY JUST DO A CHECK OFF LIST THAT NORMALLY IS SUBMITTED ANNUALLY TO THE CITY, AS WELL AS PICTURES SHOWING THE FILL DATES, EXTINGUISHED DATES, OR EXPIRATION DATES OF THE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS. THAT REALLY HELPED OUR CITY MARSHALS. WHERE I'M FROM, CUT DOWN ON CUT DOWN A LOT OF THE INSPECTIONS. NOW, WHAT DID TRIGGER AN AUTOMATIC INSPECTION WAS A WAS AN ORDINANCE VIOLATION OR A NOISE VIOLATION. THEY WOULD ALWAYS COME OUT AND CHECK NOT JUST THE NOISE COMPLAINT, BUT THEN THEY WOULD CHECK EVERYTHING ELSE THAT HAPPENED WITHIN THERE. THEN OF COURSE, IF THERE WAS A CONCERN OR SAFETY HAZARD OR A POOL UNLOCKED OR UNKEPT, OF COURSE, THEN THE CITY WOULD MARSHAL OR CODE ENFORCEMENT WOULD GO OUT AND CHECK ON THAT AS WELL. SO IT CUT DOWN ON A LOT OF THE INITIAL INSPECTION ISSUES THAT PRECLUDES CITIES FROM DOING THIS. I ALSO WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE DON'T LIMIT THE APPLICATION, HAVE IT ON A ROLLING CYCLE WHERE YOU DON'T JUST DO IT LIKE SOME CITIES DO, WHERE IT'S ONLY OPEN FROM, SAY, NOVEMBER TO DECEMBER. WHAT THAT DOES IS IT CAUSES A HUGE BACKLOG ON PAPERWORK. IT TAKES VERY, VERY SLOW AND BOGS DOWN PROGRESS. SO JORDAN MADE A COMMENT ABOUT LIKE A ROLLING SCHEDULE TO KIND OF ROLL THEM OUT, ESPECIALLY FOR THE ONES THAT ARE ALREADY GRANDFATHERED IN. SO WE'RE NOT HAVING ALL OF THEM COME IN ALL AT ONCE. SO I APPRECIATE IT. THANKS. THANK YOU. MR. ROBERTS. DID YOU WANT TO PUT FORWARD A MOTION? SURE. I MOVE TO CREATE A SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THE STR ORDINANCE TO 
          [01:45:01]
INCLUDE COUNCILMAN SAM COUNCILMAN BENEFIELD, MRS. STROHMEYER AND JILLIAN DOHERTY AND AND UP TO TWO MORE YET TO BE NAMED CITIZENS. I'VE GOT A MOTION BY MR. ROBERTS. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND BY MR. BENEFIELD? ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NAY. PASS UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY. THE WORK 
          [X.1.	Discuss Holiday events and displays.]
SESSIONS, DISCUSSIONS. DISCUSS. NUMBER ONE, DISCUSS HOLIDAY EVENTS AND DISPLAYS. AND I THINK, MR. SAM, THIS WAS YOUR ITEM. YEAH. THIS IS THE HOLIDAY EVENTS ONE. YES. THIS I JUST WANTED TO HEAR FROM STAFF, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THE HOLIDAY EVENTS AND DISPLAYS THAT WE KNOW ARE PLANNED COMING UP AND TO KIND OF ELABORATE AND CLARIFY WHAT COUNCILMAN ROBERTS PASSED LAST YEAR ABOUT WHAT YOU NEED AS A CITIZEN OR ANYONE HERE TO PUT A DISPLAY OUT, BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ALREADY ON FACEBOOK ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE WERE GOING TO ALLOW THE WISE MEN AND THE WHATEVER ELSE WAS GOING TO BE OUT ON DON DRIVE. THAT WAS AN ISSUE LAST YEAR. SO MY MAIN THING WAS I WANTED TO HEAR FROM STAFF WAS, HAVE WE CLARIFIED THAT? DO WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION ON THE WEBSITE? DO PEOPLE KNOW HOW YOU CAN PUT UP DISPLAYS? HAS THAT ALL BEEN WORKED OUT? I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ON THE WEBSITE, BUT I'LL SEE THAT IT GETS POSTED. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AS LONG AS IT IS, AS LONG AS A RELIGIOUS DISPLAY IS NOT THE CENTERPIECE OF THE HOLIDAY DECORATION, THEN THOSE ARE ALLOWED. AND THAT IS FROM WHAT I READ ON TML EARLIER IN THE WEEK, I DON'T, I DON'T RECALL. THAT'S EXACTLY HOW OUR ORDINANCE THAT'S NOT WHAT WE DID HERE. YEAH. WELL, THERE WAS ALSO A QUESTION ABOUT ELECTRICITY ALONG DON DRIVE. IF WE STILL HAVE SOME SORT OF ISSUE ABOUT PEOPLE TRIPPING BREAKERS, IF WE HAVE FIXED THAT PROBLEM, NOTHING ABOUT THAT I DO, I CAN SHARE. WE'VE GOT RID OF A LOT OF THOSE DECORATIONS THAT WERE CAUSING THAT PROBLEM. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PUT THEM OUT ANYMORE. SO I'M WORKING BACKWARD ON THE LIGHTING. ON THE ELECTRICAL ISSUE. THIS CAME UP LAST YEAR. THEY WERE NOT USING LED LIGHTS AND IT WAS OVERWHELMING THE OLD ELECTRICAL LINES AND IT WAS TRIPPING. THE GFI, ACCORDING TO TAYLOR, IS HE SAID THAT STAFF WERE HAVING TO COME OUT ON OVERTIME AND ALL HOURS OF THE NIGHT TO RESET THAT. THAT'S WHAT WAS SAID. 
          THAT'S ALL I KNOW. AND THEN I THOUGHT I, ERNESTO, OR SOMEBODY MAY HAVE SAID TO ME THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO GET BIDS RIGHT NOW ON REDOING THE ELECTRICAL. DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? I DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT. I KNOW THAT THAT WAS CONTEMPLATED. 
          I THINK, EVEN AT ONE TIME. SO LED LIGHTS ARE PRESUMABLY THE SOLUTION FOR ELECTRICAL LIGHTS ON DON DRIVE AND THEN ON THE RELIGIOUS DISPLAYS. THE ORDINANCE AS I RECALL, WAS THIS WAS WHEN KOBE WAS HERE IS THE GUIDANCE WAS THAT THE THE ORDINANCE WAS DRAFTED BASED ON THE GUIDANCE THAT YOU CAN HAVE RELIGIOUS DISPLAYS. THEIR BABY JESUS, ETC. AS LONG AS IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE THEME, A PENTAGRAM AND A GOAT HEAD SKULL WITH HORNS COMING OUT OF IT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CHRISTMAS THEME. SO NO, YOU COULD NOT PUT THAT UP ON DON DRIVE AS PART OF THE CHRISTMAS DISPLAY. IT HAD TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE THE HOLIDAY OCCASION AND HISTORICALLY. AND SO AS LONG AS THAT'S MET, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE THE MAYBE WHAT WE NEED TO DO THE DIRECTION TO STAFF WOULD BE TO, YOU KNOW, REMIND PEOPLE OF THE ORDINANCE. AND HERE'S THE APPLICATION. IF YOU WANT TO POST IT, PUT IT OUT THERE. JUST GET IT OUT THERE, PUSH IT OUT. 
          SOCIAL MEDIA, IT WAS ALL STARTED BECAUSE THE PERSON WHO TYPICALLY DOES THE NATIVITY SCENE WAS PUSHED OFF TO THE SIDE. I KNOW THE MAYOR HELPED SOLVE THE ISSUE AND PUT THEM LITERALLY RIGHT ACROSS THE ROAD, RIGHT? BUT IF WE WANT TO PROACTIVELY REACH OUT TO THEM TO SO THEY KNOW, I THINK IT'S TRINITY CHURCH, RIGHT? I GUESS. IT'S OUT WEST. YEAH. THEY THE PROBLEM REALLY CAME DOWN TO THE FACT THAT WE'D NEVER REALLY HAD ANYBODY WHO COMPLAINED ABOUT IT, BUT WE HAD SOMEBODY COMPLAIN. AND THAT'S WHEN I TOOK IT UP WITH BOBBY. AND HE GOES, YOU REALLY SHOULD HAVE A PROCESS FOR APPLYING SO EVERYBODY CAN WALK THROUGH IT, UNIFIED PROCESS AND, YOU KNOW, GET APPROVED. I, I THINK THAT WAS SOME OF THE TREPIDATION I HAD WITH PASSING IT IS THAT YOU TALK ABOUT GOAT HEADS AND PENTAGRAMS. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO IF WE OPEN IT UP, WE OPEN IT UP TO ALL. AND I THAT'S JUST MY MEMORY OF IT. AND ALL I WOULD ENCOURAGE IS AS PART OF THIS CONVERSATION, THAT STAFF GO BACK AND REVIEW THE ORDINANCE THAT WE PASSED, AND ALSO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO HAVE AN APPLICATION AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE TO APPLY, AND THAT WE PUSH THAT OUT ON SOCIAL AND ALLOW PEOPLE TO APPLY AND WALK THEM THROUGH A GENERIC PROCESS THAT EVERYONE GOES THROUGH. I THINK THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN 
          [01:50:03]
REALLY, REALLY QUICK. SO MY MY REQUEST OF STAFF WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH YOUR OWN RECOMMENDATION. KEVIN WOULD JUST BE BOTH CHARLES AND BRAD. LOOK AT IT, SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS AND IF YOU WANT TO MAKE ANY AMENDMENTS TO IT, PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. AND IF IT'S GOOD TO GO AS IS, PUSH IT OUT TO SOCIAL MEDIA. MAKE SURE THERE'S THE APPLICATIONS THERE. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS AN ACTUAL APPLICATION. I JUST REMEMBER THE ORDINANCE WAS THERE. OKAY. YEAH. I THINK YOU HAD TO FILL OUT THE APPLICATION 30 DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THE EVENT, AND IT HAD TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER. BUT TO KEVIN'S POINT, ANYBODY COULD APPLY FOR ANY HOLIDAY TO PUT UP WHATEVER THEY WANTED. IT DIDN'T HAVE TO BE. SO YOU LOOKED AT IT. 
          AND KEVIN'S RIGHT ON THAT POINT. ABSOLUTELY. BECAUSE WE BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS ONE BECAUSE THAT WAS THAT WAS THE THAT WAS THE COMMENT. EVERYTHING WAS GOING JUST FINE. YEAH. YOU COULD YOU COULD HAVE A NATIVITY SCENE OVER HERE AND YOU COULD HAVE A GOAT OVER THE PENTAGRAM ON THE OTHER SIDE. YES. YEAH. YOU COULDN'T DISCRIMINATE WHATEVER. THAT WAS THE ADVICE HE GAVE. 
          HEY, BRAD, HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THAT ORDINANCE? WHEN THE ISSUE CAME UP? I THINK I THINK I LOOKED AT IT, I THINK I, I THINK I JUST STARTED YEAH. I MEAN, DIDN'T YOU START LIKE, IN JANUARY? NO. WELL, TECHNICALLY MY FIRST MEETING HERE WAS DECEMBER 19TH. OKAY. 
          WE'D ALREADY DISCUSSED IT AND. OKAY, WELL THEN I, THEN I MIGHT NOT. THEN SOMETHING ELSE CAME UP. MAYBE YOU GOT OUT OF THAT ONE. YEAH. DODGED THAT BULLET. BUT I THINK I JUST HIGHLY ENCOURAGED BOTH YOU AND MR. WEST TO REVIEW IT AND THEN COME UP WITH THE APPROPRIATE PROCESS. 
          AND IF THERE IS AN APPLICATION, GREAT. IF NOT, MAKE SURE THERE IS ONE AND WE'LL WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT IT. YEAH. AND QUICKLY BECAUSE IT COSTS A LOT OF ISSUES LAST YEAR. SO LET'S MAKE SURE WE DON'T RUN INTO THE HOLIDAY SEASON AGAIN THIS YEAR REAL QUICK. OKAY. AND THE OTHER ONE I DID BRING UP TO CHARLES AND ERNESTO AND I WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP AGAIN, I GUESS IS, YOU KNOW, I ALWAYS SEE JONESTOWN EVERY YEAR HAS THAT STAR UP ON THE HILL THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS. 
          IT'S KIND OF ICONIC AROUND HERE. I'D LOVE FOR LARGO TO FIND SOMETHING. AND I PITCHED, YOU KNOW, AS CHEAPLY AS WE COULD, PUTTING SOMETHING ON TOP OF THE GOLF BALL, WATER TOWER, YOU KNOW, TREE, A STAR OR SOMETHING, I THINK ERNESTO SAID, WELL, I DON'T THINK I HAVE THE POWER UP THERE, AND THERE'S SOME OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE INSTALLED THERE, BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT STAFF CAN THINK OF ALONG THOSE LINES TO UTILIZE SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SUPPORTING, ESPECIALLY A BIGGER STAR DONE BY THE CITY. I THINK IT'S PRIVATE. YEAH, BUT IT'S KIND OF BEEN, YOU KNOW, IT'S AROUND HERE, IT'S WELL KNOWN IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN EVERY YEAR. AND YOU KNOW, I DID LOOK AT THE WE DON'T OWN IT YET, BUT THE TESSERA WATER TOWERS GOT A LOT OF SURFACE SPACE UP THERE AND RAILINGS AROUND. AND MAYBE IN THE FUTURE THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE THERE. BUT I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT GETTING CRAZY. ONE THING I DID TALK TO THE CITY OF MANER AND THE CITY OF ROUND ROCK. YOU KNOW, THEY DO THESE LIGHTS THAT PROJECT UP ON THE WATER TOWER. AND THEY TOLD ME, DON'T DO IT. CRAZY, CRAZY, EXPENSIVE AND A LOT OF MAINTENANCE. SO THEY SAID, KEEP IT SIMPLE, WHATEVER YOU COME UP WITH. OH, THEY ALL THEY ALL TELL YOU IT'S CRAZY EXPENSIVE BECAUSE IT IS EXPENSIVE. BUT THE THE THING YOU GET OUT OF IT, I THINK, I THINK IT MIGHT BE WORTH EXPLORING. YEAH. I'M FAR PROMOTING THINGS LIKE THAT. ABSOLUTELY. THE TOWN THAT I LIVED IN FOR 30 YEARS, THEY RECENTLY PUT LIGHTS ON THEIR WATER TOWER AND, YOU KNOW, FOOTBALL GAME WEEK. THEY'VE GOT THE COLORS OF THE FOOTBALL TEAM UP THERE. HOLIDAYS. IT'S AND IT'S NOT AS EXPENSIVE AS IT USED TO BE BECAUSE THE TECHNOLOGY HAS GOTTEN CHEAPER. SO YEAH, I THINK THE WATER TOWER WOULD BE A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR THAT. THE GOLF BALL MAYBE. MAYBE NOT, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF EXTRA ROOM THERE. OKAY, BUT GIVE ME A YEAR BETWEEN ME, MR. MONTGOMERY, SCOTT AND JORDAN AND OTHER STAFF. I THINK NEXT YEAR WE'LL WE'LL COME UP WITH SOME STUFF TO REALLY MAKE THE HOLIDAYS. YEAH, BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT'D BE SOMETHING. I KNOW WE DO THE TREE LIGHTING, BUT MAYBE IT BECOMES AN ANNUAL THING WHERE WE LIGHT THE, YOU KNOW, THE WATER TOWER OR SOMETHING, AND YOU HAVE AN EVENT OR TIED AROUND IT, YOU KNOW, JUST SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YEAH. FOR THE RECORD, THE ORDINANCE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHICH WE'RE ASKING THE CITY ATTORNEY AND STAFF TO LOOK AT, IS 24 DASH 12 0502 SO RIGHT BEFORE YOU CAME ON BOARD, I'M SORRY FOR 12 0502. OKAY. THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE MEETING BEFORE 
          [X.2.	Discuss Taxpayer Savings Incentive Program.]
YOU STARTED. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER TWO, DISCUSS TAXPAYER SAVINGS INCENTIVE PROGRAM. MR. SONG, I'M HOPING TO MAKE THIS A QUICK ONE TO. WE BROUGHT THIS BACK FOR WAS LAST TIME WE GOT APPROVED ON THE BUDGET TO HAVE A LINE ITEM IN THERE JUST TO KEEP THIS CONCEPT ALIVE. WE WANTED TO HEAR IF IT WAS EVEN LEGAL THAT WE COULD DO 
          [01:55:04]
SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I BELIEVE THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS SAID THAT YES, THERE IS SOMETHING. AND SO NOW WHAT I'M ASKING IS ALLOW ME TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT WE DISCUSSED BACK THERE. I'LL DRAFT SOMETHING NEWER, PUT IT ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD THAT PUTS PARAMETERS AROUND WHAT THAT PROGRAM COULD LOOK LIKE, AND THEN WE CAN BRING IT BACK LATER ON AND THEN SEE IF THERE'S ANY COUNCIL CONSENSUS TO CONTINUE WITH IT. THAT'S A WONDERFUL IDEA. THANK OKAY. 
          [X.3.	Update from the Irrigation sub-committee.]
THANK YOU SIR. NUMBER THREE UPDATE FROM THE IRRIGATION SUBCOMMITTEE. THANK Y'ALL. JUST HAD A MEETING. YEAH, IT'S GOING GREAT. FANTASTIC. BY ALL MEANS. YOU KNOW SHANE AND. PAUL CHIP CHIME IN. VICTOR CAME TODAY WITH A HUGE PIECE OF PAPER. THE DESIGN IS AT 90%. VICTOR WAS APPEARED TO BE HAPPY WITH IT. HE WAS GOING TO TAKE THE DESIGN TO THE GOLF COURSE TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING WAS COHESIVE. THERE. WE HAD WE BROUGHT IN MR. DAVE STEWART TODAY AS A SPECIAL GUEST TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS REGARDING THE PUMP AT ON 14 AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT POND NEEDED TO BE EXPANDED. I THINK THE CONSENSUS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE WAS, NO, WE DON'T NEED AN ADDITIONAL PUMP AT THAT LOCATION. IT COULD BE CONSIDERED DOWN THE ROAD, BUT NOT TODAY. JUST BE NARRATION ABOUT DURATION. YES, SIR. THERE WILL BE A PASS THROUGH PUMP THEIR BOOSTER PUMP. BOOSTER PUMP OKAY, BUT NOT A NOT A WELL PUMP THAT ACTUALLY. PROCESSES WATER. YEAH, NOT TO SAY THAT THAT COULDN'T BE ADDED LATER ON. PAUL. YOU PROBABLY WOULD BE BETTER TO TALK ABOUT THIS MORE THAN I WOULD. THERE WAS A ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT STORAGE WATER. WHAT WE NEED TO DO. YOU WANT TO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT. YEAH. SO I AND I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO SEPARATE IT INTO TWO PIECES. SO SO WE MADE GREAT PROGRESS IN LOOKING AT 90% DESIGN THAT'S PROPOSED BY MR. HILL AND AGREEING THAT THAT LOOKS APPROPRIATE AT FIRST GLANCE. AND VICTOR AND, AND GOLF STAFF ARE GOING TO LOOK AT THAT IN GREAT DETAIL. AND ONCE THEY KIND OF GET THEIR FIRST PASS, THE COMMITTEE WILL LOOK AT IT IN MORE DETAIL. BUT WE THINK WE'RE ON TRACK FOR THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO PRETTY QUICKLY RELEASE IT FOR BID AND ULTIMATELY CONTINUE ON, OR MAYBE SLIGHTLY BETTER THAN THE SCHEDULE WE'VE WE'VE COMMUNICATED IN THE PAST. SO CONSTRUCTION IN THE I THINK FEBRUARY MARCH TIME FRAME IS WHAT THE I HEARD THROWN AROUND IN THE ROOM CONSTRUCTION START INDEPENDENT OF THAT IRRIGATION SYSTEM, BUT RELATED TO THE ENTIRE EFFLUENT DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IS THE AMOUNT OF POND STORAGE THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE IN PLACE. AND THERE WAS A RATHER ROBUST DISCUSSION AROUND WHAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE. AND ASSERTIONS WERE MADE THAT THE AS BUILTS WERE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE CAPACITY THAN THE ORIGINAL DESIGNS, AND SO WE MAY BE IN BETTER SHAPE WITH TC ONCE WE FIND OUT WHAT WE REALLY HAVE, BUT WE'VE GOT SOME HOMEWORK TO DO ON THAT FRONT. SO THERE'S A POSSIBILITY THAT AS WE GROW IN OUR EFFLUENT DISTRIBUTION CAPACITY AND THIS IS THE OVERALL SYSTEM, AGAIN, NOT JUST THE GOLF COURSE, WE MIGHT NEED TO ADD SOME MORE POND STORAGE, BUT WE DON'T KNOW IF WE WILL OR HOW MUCH WE WILL AT THIS POINT. SO THAT'S STILL HOMEWORK TO BE DONE. BUT IT'S REALLY AN INDEPENDENT, INDEPENDENT EXERCISE FROM THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM ITSELF THAT THE GOLF COURSE. AND I NEED A CLARIFICATION FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE. WAS IT SOUND LIKE THERE WAS AGREEMENT THAT SEEKING SENATOR OR SENATOR CAMPBELL AND REPRESENTATIVE TROXCLAIR LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE ADDENDUM REQUEST THAT WE HAVE IN THE TC WAS FAVORABLE, BUT I DIDN'T GET A CLEAR SIGHT. DO I HAVE PERMISSION TO GO REQUEST THOSE LETTERS FROM THEM AND HAVE THOSE SUBMITTED? YEAH, I'M GLAD YOU ASKED THAT BECAUSE IT DID FEEL KIND OF FUZZY TO ME. SHANE, I THINK THAT STAFF SHOULD COME BACK WITH A CLEARER ANSWER ON THE CAPACITY WE ACTUALLY HAVE, BECAUSE THE WHOLE POINT OF THE REQUEST IS, IS SAYING WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO BUILD ALL THIS ADDITIONAL STORAGE BECAUSE OF THESE OTHER FACTORS. AND THE FIRST THING WE'VE GOT TO DO IS FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHAT IT IS WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. BEFORE WE GO ASK FOR FAVORS FROM OUR LEGISLATORS. BUT MY TAKE, IF IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING, WE SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION TO TC LOOKING FOR A VARIANCE ON LIMITING OUR CAPACITY. NOT SO MUCH AN ASSERTION OF WHAT OUR CAPACITY IS. AND SO THE LETTER FROM, FOR EXAMPLE, FROM OFFICE WOULD BE TO APPROVE OUR APPLICATION AS ALREADY SUBMITTED AND WRITTEN. 
          THAT'S FAIR. THAT'S FAIR. YEAH I'LL AGREE WITH THAT. SO FOR COUNCIL'S BENEFIT THERE I'M WITHDRAWING MY ASSERTION. SO WE CAN STILL GO AFTER OUR OUR SUPPORT FOR OUR APPLICATION TO 
          [02:00:03]
LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF STORAGE WE WOULD HAVE TO BUILD. AND SO HOPEFULLY THAT'LL BRING DOWN THE REQUIREMENT ONCE WE FIGURE OUT WHAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE. IF WE GET THAT APPROVAL TO BUILD LESS, PERHAPS WE'LL FIND OUT. WE DON'T HAVE TO BUILD ANYTHING, OR WORST CASE, WE'LL FIND OUT. 
          WE HAVE TO BUILD A SMALL ONE. YEAH. SO DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT YOU'VE GOT. 
          SOUNDS LIKE I HAVE THE ABILITY TO HELP GET THAT LETTER. YEAH. I MEAN, IT'S PUBLIC COMMENT, PERIOD. THEY COULD BE SUBMITTING IT ANYWAYS. I'LL JUST GIVE THEM A BOOST AND GET SOME LANGUAGE WORKING WITH VICTOR AND STAFF. MAKE SURE IT'S RIGHT. AND YOU KNOW IT'S NOT NOT PROMISING ANYTHING. BUT ANYTIME WE'RE SUBMITTING ANYTHING TO ANY STATE AGENCY, I THINK THAT SHOULD JUST BE THE NORMAL PRACTICE. WE SHOULD GO GET LETTERS OF SUPPORT AND THAT WAY THE AGENCY KNOWS, HEY, I'VE GOT OTHER EYES LOOKING ON THIS. I CAN'T, YOU KNOW, JUST DISMISS IT. RIGHT. OKAY. DAVE STEWART DID MENTION HE LIKED THE INITIAL DESIGN. HE LIKED THE SPACING. HE WAS SATISFIED WITH THE KEY FACTORS THAT HE'S BEEN RAISING CONCERNS ABOUT. SO OVERALL, I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING NEGATIVE THAT CAME OUT OF THE MEETING. THERE WAS NO LINGERING OPPOSITIONS. I THINK THE SUBCOMMITTEE'S PRETTY WELL UNIFIED, AND ALL THREE OF US, I THINK, EXPRESSED THAT VICTOR IS DOING A REALLY GOOD JOB. EXCELLENT. GLAD TO HEAR. AND WE ALSO MENTIONED THAT MAYBE WE NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB AT GETTING THE PUBLIC FEEDBACK, THAT FEEDBACK TO THE PUBLIC TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT THIS PROCESS IS PERHAPS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN LAST TIME, AND THAT THERE'S A LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE THAT THE CITIZENS CAN FEEL IN THE VETTING PROCESS. GOTCHA. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. AS LONG AS WE'RE ON THIS ITEM, MR. WEST, I'VE NOTICED I'VE GONE BY THE GOLF COURSE MULTIPLE TIMES DURING THE DAY AND SEEN THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM OPERATING. I DON'T THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ALLOWED BY OUR TC BECAUSE WE'RE USING TYPE TWO EFFLUENT. YOU'RE NOT I DON'T BELIEVE YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO IRRIGATE AND THERE'S A POSSIBILITY FOR PEOPLE TO I THINK WE GOT A NEW PUMP IN AND THEY'VE BEEN EXERCISING THAT ON THE FAIRWAYS WHERE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO PREVIOUSLY. BUT I THINK THEY NEED TO REALIZE THEY'VE GOT TO RESTRICT THAT TO NIGHTTIME OR NIGHTTIME HOURS. 
          [X.4.	Update from the Finance Committee.]
WHEN THE GOLF COURSE IS CLOSED. DO SOME CHECKING ON THAT, OKAY? OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE? ACTUALLY, YES. BELIEVE IT OR NOT. SO OCTOBER 10TH, WE SENT A FEEDBACK. FEEDBACK ON THE CHART OF ACCOUNTS. WE HEARD FROM OUR REPRESENTATIVE, MATT PANTUSO, WHO LET US KNOW THAT THERE'S A NEW DIRECTOR, DOCTOR LANE. AND SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS AND WHY I'M BRINGING THIS UP IS THAT THEY WERE GOING TO MEET WITH TYLER TECHNOLOGIES ON OCTOBER 14TH. I KNOW IT'S ONLY BEEN A COUPLE OF DAYS, BUT I WONDERED IF YOU'D HEARD ANYTHING BACK ON CHECK MY EMAILS. I HAVEN'T HEARD BACK FROM THEM YET. OKAY, SO THEY THEY WERE MOVING ALONG AND ROCKING AND ROLLING WHILE WE WERE DOING OUR FEEDBACK IN TERMS OF THE CHART OF ACCOUNTS. 
          SO I TRULY APPRECIATED THAT. IN ADDITION, THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE LOOKING OVER. 
          THEY CONGRATULATED US ON ON GETTING OUR 26 BUDGET, THAT THEY ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND USE THAT BUDGET TO DO KIND OF A TEST CASE IN TERMS OF WHAT WE PASSED IN OUR CHART OF ACCOUNTS CURRENTLY AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS, THE GFOA DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION GET GUIDELINES RIGHT SO THAT WE CAN, IF NEED BE, THEY CAN HELP FURTHER TWEAK OUR CHART OF ACCOUNTS. SO I'M EXCITED. THIS HAS TAKEN JUST A LITTLE BIT LONGER, BUT NOT UNEXPECTED. AND HOPEFULLY CHARLES WILL NOT HAVE TO. AND NICOLE WILL NOT HAVE TO PULL THEIR HAIR OUT LIKE THEY DID IN THE PAST ON BUDGET SEASON. THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. ROBIN I'M ON MY YEAH OKAY. SO WE'VE ALREADY DEALT WITH. AND SO WHAT'S ON MY SCRIPT AT SIX IS 
          [X.5.	Consideration and possible action to direct staff to review and possibly suggest a potential amendment to the PIO Policy relating to maintenance responsibilities for Public Parkland.]
REALLY FIVE CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT OKAY. SO ITEM NUMBER FIVE CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO REVIEW AND POSSIBLY SUGGEST A POTENTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE PET POLICY RELATING TO MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THE PUBLIC DEPARTMENT. AND I BELIEVE, MR. ROBERTS, THIS WAS YOURS. AND I THINK YOU WERE LOOKING FOR STAFF FEEDBACK. AND I BELIEVE MR. WEST HAS PROVIDED SOME, MAYBE BETWEEN THE TWO OF YOU GENTLEMEN, WE CAN DISCUSS THIS ITEM AND FIGURE OUT WHERE WE WANT TO GO WITH IT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MAYOR. REFERRING TO PAGE 116 OF THE PACKET. THIS IS SO WHAT WE THIS ORIGINAL AGENDA ITEM, IT CAME OUT OF THE WHOLE EVERYTHING GOING ON OVER THERE AND TO SARAH WITH THE KIDS AND STUFF AND YOU KNOW, THE, THE QUASI HOA CITY OWNED PROPERTY OVER THERE MAINTAINED ETCETERA. AND WE HAD REQUESTED IN THIS AGENDA ITEM THAT STAFF COME BACK WITH ANY RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE PIT POLICY AND 
          [02:05:05]
REVIEW IT ET-CETERA. AND ON PAGE 116 OF THE PACKET IS WHERE WE'VE GOT A MEMO HERE FROM STAFF. I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHO TO DIRECT MY QUESTIONS TO ON IT. WHO DRAFTED THIS. THAT WOULD BE ME OKAY. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. QUESTION. AND FOR THOSE WHO HAVE THE UPDATED PACKET PAGE 127 OH THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. PAGE 127 OKAY. THESE I THE WAY I'M READING THIS IS STARTING WITH PARAGRAPH ONE. NO CHANGES ARE BEING RECOMMENDED AND PARAGRAPHS NUMBERED TWO AND THREE AND FOUR ARE EXTRAPOLATING FROM THE POLICY AND THEN PROVIDING GUIDANCE GOING FORWARD. CORRECT. OKAY. SO WHAT'S GREAT I REALLY LIKE NUMBERS TWO AND THREE BECAUSE IT REALLY DOES ADDRESS WHAT'S BEEN THE CRUX OF THE PIT OVER THERE. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE BULLET POINTS EVERYBODY, IT'S VERY CLEARLY SAYS PARKS AND PARKLAND DEDICATION BOND FUNDED PARKS OR PARKLAND MUST BE CLEARLY DOCUMENTED IN PIT AGREEMENTS. GREAT. BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA. THAT'S NOT THE CASE OVER THERE IN TESSERA RIGHT NOW. SO THIS IS A DISTINCTION THAT'S GREAT. BE DISTINGUISHED FROM PRIVATE AMENITIES IN ALL PLANNING AND LEGAL DOCUMENTS. THAT'S A NEW DISTINGUISHED DISTINCTION, WHICH IS ALSO IMPORTANT. AND THEN AGAIN, NUMBER THREE, SIMILAR ITERATIONS, CLEARLY DRAWING DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN PRIVATE, PUBLIC, CITY, HOA, ETC. SO I LIKE SEEING THIS. AND THEN AGAIN, I THINK YOU SUMMARIZED IT WELL, MR. WEST, WITH WITH YOUR IMPLEMENTATION NOTES, JUST MAKING SURE THAT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS PROPERLY REVIEWING THIS STAFF REVIEW AS IT WORKS ITS WAY, AS IF ANY BIDS COME TO US IN THE FUTURE, THAT AS IT WORKS ITS WAY THROUGH, IT'S GETTING THE PROPER DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE SITUATIONS WHERE YOU'VE GOT A CITY PARKLAND DEDICATION WITH THE RESULTING HOA OWNED SWIMMING POOL ON TOP, AND THEN QUESTIONS ABOUT AND THEN PRIVATE HOA MONEY IS IS PAYING FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP OF THE POOL ON THE CITY PROPERTY, AND THEN IT'S MARKETED. ANYWAY, YOU ALL KNOW THE STORY. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHY I PUT NUMBER THREE ON THERE. DEVELOPMENT AMENITIES SUCH AS POOLS AND CLUBHOUSES SHALL NOT BE FUNDED THROUGH BOND. PROCEEDS SHALL NOT BE CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA. YEAH, YEAH I DON'T I'D BE I'D LIKE TO KNOW, BUT MAYBE I DON'T REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE CONTEMPLATION WAS WHEN THIS WAS ADOPTED. YOU KNOW, CIRCA 2007, 2008. DID THEY CONSIDER THEY KNEW THAT A POOL WOULD END UP ON THE CITY? THE PARKLAND DEDICATION. THAT'S JUST SCREWY. WHY WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT ANYWAY? SO THANKS FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU, STAFF, FOR LOOKING AT THIS. GREAT, WONDERFUL. LET'S MOVE ON. 
          AND I THINK THE OUTCOME HERE IS NO MODIFICATIONS. CORRECT. BUT AS KIDS COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL, THESE ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO EVALUATE. YES, Y'ALL ARE GOING TO END UP WITH MY ONLY MY ONLY CONCERN IS IS AND THIS IS A QUESTION FOR FOR JORDAN AND CHARLES IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN WHEN YOU HAVE STAFF TURNOVER YOU LOSE THAT INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE, THIS GUIDANCE, YOU KNOW, THE HISTORICAL WHAT HAPPENED THAT LED TO THIS GUIDANCE. HOW IS THAT IS THAT GOING TO BE EVIDENT? IS THE POLICY SELF-EVIDENT TO YOUR WHOEVER COMES BEHIND YOU GUYS IN THE FUTURE? ARE THESE THINGS? I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR JORDAN, BUT I BELIEVE SHE'S WORKING ON A SET OF SOPS FOR THAT DEPARTMENT. SO THAT'LL BE PART OF THE BID PROCESS IS ALL OF THESE THINGS WILL BE LOOKED AT? EXCELLENT. THE REASON WE DIDN'T RECOMMEND ANY CHANGES TO THE POLICY IS YOU WANT TO LEAVE IT VERY GENERIC. SO DIFFERENT PROJECTS CAN BE BECAUSE THE PROJECT NEEDS TO HAVE ITS OWN MERITS ON WHY, WHAT MAKES IT A GOOD IDEA AND HOW IT BENEFITS THE CITY. WE DON'T WANT TO TIE THEIR HANDS SAYING, OH WELL, TO MAKE IT JUST TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE. I MEAN, ME PERSONALLY, I'M AGAINST KIDS, MUDS AND ALL OF THAT, BUT THAT'S MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION. WE GOT TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE COMMUNITY. 
          SO I LOVE THAT. BY THE WAY, I RAISED THIS POINT IN AN EARLIER ITERATION OF THIS DISCUSSION. I IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS WHOLE PAGE COULD SAY HID AND MUD POLICY, BECAUSE I THINK THE THINGS ON THIS PAGE WOULD APPLY TO MUD DISCUSSIONS AS MUCH AS THEY COULD. PITS. AND YOU KNOW, WHEN WE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT MR. FIREFLY IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM THERE WHEN WE HAD THE FIREFLY MUD DISCUSSION. A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT ARE CONTEMPLATED ON THIS PAGE WERE BROUGHT UP IN THAT DISCUSSION. SO I THINK THAT WE JUST IN MY MIND, WE SHOULD JUST MAKE IT, 
          [02:10:01]
YOU KNOW, ANY ANY, YOU KNOW, BOND FUNDED, WHETHER IT'S A MUD OR A PIT OR IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT ACRONYM. I'M FORGETTING ABOUT THAT. THIS IS KIND OF A GUIDELINES OF HOW WE ATTACK THEM. I, I WOULD WHOLLY SUPPORT THAT. VERY GOOD. OKAY. WE'LL NEED A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM FOR THAT. ROB'S GOT HIS HAND UP. IF I COULD CLOSE OUT MY COMMENT. SURE IS. THEN MY REQUEST. THEN MY REQUEST IS THAT COUNCIL WOULD GIVE DIRECTION TO STAFF TO BRING US BACK A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM RELATED TO THIS, RELATED TO MR. PRINCE'S SUGGESTION. SIMPLE AS THAT. AND NOT JUST AN AGENDA ITEM, BUT SOMETHING WITH PROPOSED LANGUAGE IN IT THAT WE COULD APPROVE POTENTIALLY THAT THAT NIGHT ENDED UP. YEAH. THE THE ONLY THING THAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IN, IN THIS IS IF THERE'S GOING TO BE PITS AND, AND MUDS IS SET THEM UP SO THAT THAT THIS IS WHAT CONCERNS ME ABOUT NUMBER THREE IS WE DON'T WANT TO SET THEM UP SO THAT THEY DON'T. I WOULD LIKE THESE NEW NEIGHBORHOODS TO FEEL INTEGRATED INTO THE CITY. AND I'D LIKE THE CITY TO FEEL INTEGRATED INTO THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THAT'S I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF DURING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. AND, YOU KNOW, IF YOU SET IT UP TO WHERE THEY THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD A CLUBHOUSE AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A POOL AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS AND THE REST OF LAGO VISTA GO POUND SAND. YOU CAN'T COME HERE. IT IT DOESN'T IT'S NOT CONDUCIVE TO THAT SORT OF THAT SORT OF INTEGRATION INTO THE, INTO THE CITY. YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO WELCOME WE WANT TO WELCOME NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND, AND WE WANT THEM TO, LIKE I SAY, BE PART OF THE CITY AND NOT NOT FEEL LIKE THEY'RE SEPARATE OR SPECIAL OR THAT WE'RE SPECIAL OR LOOK DOWN ON THEM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. 
          I'D I'D LIKE THEM ALL TO ALL OF US BECOME ONE, YOU KNOW, VISTAS. AND WE NEED TO WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THAT IN DEVELOPMENT, I GUESS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT, SIR. AMEN. SO I KNOW ROBERT DONLEY'S NOT HERE TONIGHT. SO HE KIND OF BEEN TEXTING ME THE WHOLE TIME ASKING ME TO SPEAK ON THIS. SO I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO BE I'M GOING TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE. BUT THE ONLY ACTIVE BID THAT'S CURRENTLY GOING ON RIGHT NOW IS ACTUALLY OUT TO SARAH. AND I KNOW EVERYBODY KEEPS SAYING THAT WE'RE GRANDFATHERED. THERE'S NOT MUCH THAT WAS A QUESTION. THAT'S RIGHT. BUT THE THING IS, IS YEAR OVER YEAR WE'RE APPROVING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF BOND MONEY. AND SO IT'S YES, WE'RE YOU KNOW, IT'S GOES BACK TO 2012. BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING THAT TAKES THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, BECAUSE GOING FORWARD WE'RE ONLY AT 30% BUILD OUT. AND SO WE LOOK AT THIS ANOTHER TEN 1520 YEAR PLAN. ARE WE JUST GOING TO SAY THAT THEY GET BY ON ALL OF THIS BECAUSE THEY'RE GRANDFATHERED IN. THAT SETS A PRECEDENT, I THINK, FOR FUTURE PEOPLE. SO I THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING THAT GOES INTO EFFECT OR LOOKED AT ANNUALLY FOR TO SARAH, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF ISSUES WITH THEM GOING FORWARD. Y'ALL ARE QUITE AWARE THAT WE'VE GOT BUILDERS PULLING OUT. WE'VE GOT ISSUES WITH WHICH I DON'T EVEN KNOW ALL THE DETAILS ON ALL OF THAT, BUT IT'S IT'S GETTING REALLY MESSY OUT THERE. WE'VE GOT HIGHLAND PULLING OUT THERE. THEY'VE ACTUALLY GOTTEN RID OF THEIR THEIR SHOW HOME. WE'VE LOST A LOT OF SALES. WE'VE HAD CONTRACTS CANCELED. AND IT'S BECAUSE OF THIS NONSENSE. AND SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL CAN DO OR WE CAN WORK TOGETHER ON GOING FORWARD ANNUALLY, ESPECIALLY WITH THESE BONDS THAT WE'RE JUST KEEP ON IMPROVING AND THE THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT HAPPENING OUT THERE. BUT WE KEEP APPROVING THESE BONDS. AND I'M LIKE, WHERE'S THE MONEY GOING? YOU KNOW, I HAVE YET TO SEE WE KNOW WHAT THE $13 MILLION THAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR THAT WAS GIVEN TO HINES HAS GONE TOWARDS IT WASN'T USED FOR CLEARING BECAUSE THAT WAS APPROVED AND PAID FOR TWO YEARS AGO. THE OTHER THING IS IS OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE OF PARKLAND. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SOMETHING GOING FORWARD ABOUT Y'ALL TAKING OVER THE OPERATIONAL COSTS OF THE POOL, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'LL HAVE TO WORK TOWARDS IN THE FUTURE, AS WELL AS THE TRAILS AND THE DEDICATION OF THOSE. SO THAT'S I THINK I THINK I'VE MADE ROBERT DONLEY HAPPY ON THAT. 
          THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY. THANKS. YEAH. THAT WAS SOMETHING HE HAD BROUGHT UP ON MY ROUND TABLE AS WELL. I FORGOT TO BRING UP. AND THAT IS ON SECTIONS TWO AND THREE OF STAFF'S RESPONSE. IS THERE ANY WAY TO MAKE THIS APPLICABLE TO ANY, ANY PARTS OF TESSERA ON THE AREAS WHERE PIT MONEY HAS NOT YET BEEN SPENT? IS THERE ANY WAY TO OR ARE THEY JUST WHOLLY GRANDFATHERED? SO I KNOW THAT'S A PRETTY BIG, DEEP QUESTION. LIKE, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE BEST WAY THAT I CAN ANSWER THIS. CAN I SAY SOMETHING AND YOU TELL ME IF YOU AGREE. YES, SIR. OUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THEM HAS BEEN MODIFIED MULTIPLE 
          [02:15:04]
TIMES. OKAY. IT'S NOT THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT. IT HAS BEEN MODIFIED. AND MY GUESS IS, IS GENERALLY WHEN IT COMES AROUND TIME TO APPROVING NEW BONDS FOR THEM IS WHEN THAT KIND OF THING COMES UP. AND SO WHILE I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF POWER WHEN IT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, WHEN WE APPROVE THE SAP, WHEN THEY COME TO US WANTING TO FLOAT BONDS THROUGH US, THAT'S WHEN WE HAVE POWER, AND THAT'S WHEN WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO POTENTIALLY RENEGOTIATE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THAT NOT BE AN ACCURATE STATEMENT. SO I THINK I THINK I THINK MY ANSWER WAS GOING TO BE SOMETHING SIMILAR, WHICH IS WE ARE, YOU KNOW, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER. AND JUST LIKE ANY OTHER CONTRACT, WE ARE BOUND BY ITS TERMS, WHATEVER THOSE MIGHT BE. AND CAN ONLY BE CHANGED BY AGREEMENT OF BOTH PARTIES. SO TO YOUR POINT, MAYOR, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. IT REQUIRES AN AGREEMENT OF BOTH PARTIES. WE ARE ALSO BOUND BY CERTAIN, YOU KNOW, REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS, RIGHT, THAT ARE SEPARATE FROM THE PIT ITSELF AND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT YOU ALSO HAVE A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT. THAT, TOO, IS ALSO A CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENT IN WHICH THE PARTIES ARE BOTH PARTIES ARE BOUND TO TO PERFORM THEIR CONTRACTUAL DUTIES. SO THE ABILITY TO KIND OF UNILATERALLY CHANGE SOMETHING AND APPLY IT TO EXISTING PITS OR EXISTING CONTRACTS, WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE THOSE ARE THOSE ARE CONTRACTS THAT HAVE BEEN NEGOTIATED. BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT A DEVELOPER COMES IN AND WANTS TO DO SOMETHING ELSE THAT'S NOT IN THE CONTRACT, THAT'S WHEN IT'S TIME TO RENEGOTIATE. YEAH. OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY, I'M 
          [XI.	STAFF AND COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS]
GOING TO MOVE ON. WE ONLY HAVE TWO ITEMS LEFT. AND THAT IS THE JOINT SESSION. AND OUR STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE STAFF LIAISON REPORTS OUT OF THE WAY, BECAUSE EVERYBODY PROMISE TO BE VERY SUCCINCT, SUPER FAST. OKAY, MR. SONG. YEAH. COUNCILMAN DURBIN HANDLED MY AIRPORT DUTIES, SO I'LL LEAVE IT TO HIM ON THE UPDATE. AND COUNCILMAN PRINCE DID THE CRC. SO THAT'S IT FOR ME. OKAY. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. SIR. MR. BENFIELD, NO UPDATES. 
          EXCELLENT. THANK YOU SIR, MISS OWEN. OKAY. VERY SHORT. EDC DID MEET. HOWEVER, THEY'RE WAITING FOR THE EDC ACTUALLY CHANGEOVER. THERE WAS A PRESENTATION IN REGARD TO OUR GENTLEMAN THAT DISCUSSED A INTERESTING IDEA FOR A PERFORMING ARTS CENTER, WHICH WAS REALLY KIND OF NEAT. 
          SO I'M JUST GOING TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. THANK YOU. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU, MR. DURBIN. OKAY. 
          FOR THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. AND I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THIS UP WHEN YOU ASKED ME EARLIER, BUT THEY DID DISCUSS AND THEY HAD A PRESENTATION ON A FUEL FILTERING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO SELL THEIR REGULAR GAS. AND THEN THIS SUPER FILTERED GAS, WHICH I HONESTLY, IF I WAS IN AN AIRPLANE, I'D PAY TO HAVE IT SO THAT WHAT IT DOES IS A LOT OF AIRPLANES NOW ARE FUEL INJECTED. AND IF THERE'S LITTLE GUNK IN THE GAS, IT WILL CLOG UP THOSE FUEL INJECTORS. AND LIKE I SAY, THEY CAN THEY CAN ASK FOR A HIGHER PRICE. AND PEOPLE WILL WOULD ESSENTIALLY FLY HERE TO FILL UP. EVEN IF THEY'RE THERE, THEY'RE ELSEWHERE. SO THEY GOT A THEY GOT A RECALL ON THAT AND THAT AND THEY NOT A DEMONSTRATION BUT A. THEY HAD A SPEAKER COME IN AND TELL THEM ABOUT IT. AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, WE MET AND THE WHAT THE ONLY THING THEY ASKED OF COUNCIL WAS IF A PNC REP CAN SPEAK WITH THE CITY, DO WE HAVE A CITY REAL ESTATE AGENT AT THIS POINT, IT'S DESIGNATED STILL, CLYDE'S GOOD. CLYDE IS DEFUNCT. DEFUNCT. OKAY. EXCUSE ME. WELL, SO I DON'T. I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ONE CURRENTLY. OKAY. WELL, IF WE GET ONE, WHAT TYPE OF INFORMATION DO YOU THINK? ACREAGE CLOSE. AND AND I CAN PROVIDE THAT FOR Y'ALL. AND I'D BE HAPPY TO MEET WITH WHOEVER WANTS TO. GREAT. THEY ONLY WANTED TO SEND ONE ADVISOR TO TALK TO HIM. SO WHOEVER GETS THE GUTS TO CALL TO TO CALL WHOEVER IT IS, JUST REACH OUT TO ME, OKAY. AND THAT WAS THAT WAS ALL THEY ASKED FOR. LIAISON WAS OKAY ON THE FUEL TANK AT THE AIRPORT. DID THEY DISCUSS ANYTHING ABOUT THE SIZE? DO WE NEED A BIGGER ONE? FUEL MORE FREQUENTLY? THEY I THINK WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO WAS DISCUSS THAT TOGETHER, ALL IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS POSSIBLE ALTERNATE FUEL TO SELL. OKAY. SO THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT MAY TAKE TWO TANKS, MAY TAKE ONE TANK, AND THEY MAY NOT WANT TO DO IT ANYWAY. SO BUT THEY 
          [02:20:05]
GOT A PRESENTATION ON IT. AND ACTUALLY IT SOUNDED LIKE A REALLY GOOD IDEA. I MEAN, LIKE I SAID, IF I'M IN AN AIRPLANE, I WANT THE CLEANEST FUEL, POSSIBLY THE DAMN THING. OKAY, EXCELLENT. MR. ROBERTS, NOTHING FROM BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. OKAY, MR. PRINCE, SO I HAVE LIBRARY, AND THEY HAD THREE THINGS THAT THEY ASKED ME TO PASS ALONG AND ASK QUESTIONS ON. SO THEY BROUGHT UP LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD, BROUGHT UP THE IDEA. AND THIS IS IN THE CONTEXT THAT THE CITY HAS JUST SET UP CITY EMAILS FOR EVERY BOARD MEMBER, AND THEY WONDERED WHETHER IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE AN ALIAS SET UP FOR THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMITTEES, SO THAT EMAILS THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN IN THAT CHAIRPERSON'S ACCOUNT WOULD CARRY FORWARD OVER TIME, SIMILAR TO WHERE WE HAVE A MAYOR ON THAT. SO IF STAFF WOULD CONSIDER THAT, WHETHER THAT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE SECRETARY AND CHAIR ALIASES FOR THE BOARDS, THAT WAS ONE OF THEIR QUESTIONS. AND THEN ON THE ON THE UPCOMING APPLICATION FORM FOR COMMITTEE MEMBERS, THERE WAS SOME QUESTION THEY RAISED ABOUT WHETHER THE FORM HAS THE ABILITY TO CHECK WHAT BOARDS THAT PERSON IS ALREADY ON. IT MAY BE ON THERE, I CAN'T REMEMBER, BUT MAYBE ROBIN, THAT'S JUST A THING FOR YOU TO INVESTIGATE. THEY FELT LIKE THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. AND THEN LASTLY, THE LIBRARY BOARD AND LIBRARY STAFF FOR FOR AT LEAST A COUPLE OF YEARS AND MAYBE MORE THAN THAT, HAS BEEN TRYING TO FIND STORAGE ROOM THAT IS TEMPERATURE FRIENDLY FOR HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS. AND THEY HAVE A STORAGE ROOM BACK BEHIND THE LIBRARY THAT THEY WOULD LOVE TO INSULATE AND, AND GET AIR CONDITIONED. BUT THAT SEEMS LIKE THAT SHOULD BE A POTENTIAL CAPITAL PROJECT, NOT IN THE LIBRARY BUDGET. AND SO MAYBE, MR. WEST, IF YOU COULD JUST THROW THAT INTO YOUR STAFF DISCUSSIONS AROUND, YOU KNOW, WHERE WHERE IN THE CAPITAL IN THE FIVE, 5 OR 10 YEAR CAPITAL PLAN THAT SHOULD FIT IN? I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE A GIGANTIC EXPENSE, BUT I DO THINK THAT'S WORTH THAT BELONGS. 
          AND THEN CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE HAD A THEY HAD SOME SOME QUESTIONS WHICH REQUIRED LEGAL INSIGHT ON. AND SO WE HAD A REALLY GOOD EXECUTIVE SESSION DISCUSSION. THEY WERE VERY HAPPY WITH HOW BRAD ANSWERED THEIR QUESTIONS SO THEY CAN MOVE ON ON THAT. AND THAT WAS IN THE CONTEXT OF INDEMNIFICATION AND BONDING. AND AND THEN THEY HAD ONE SPECIFIC QUESTION. AND, BRAD, YOU MAY HAVE ANSWERED THIS FOR US BEFORE. I WAS TRYING TO REMEMBER THEY SAID IS RANKED CHOICE VOTING AN OPTION IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, OR IS THAT EXPLICITLY NOT ALLOWED? I THINK WE COVERED THIS. I THINK WE DID, I COULDN'T I COULDN'T REMEMBER THE ANSWER QUESTION. IT WAS SOME MONTHS AGO. I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND VERIFY IT. BUT RANKED CHOICE VOTING, IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION BECAUSE OF THE. 
          REQUIREMENT OF OF A PLURALITY. AND SO I'LL GO BACK AND I KNOW I WROTE AN EMAIL ON THIS. I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND DIG IT UP, BUT I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT AGAIN. THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. AND FOR COUNCIL'S BENEFIT, THIS IS IN THE CONTEXT OF THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY SUGGESTED IN THEIR EARLIER ITERATION TO US A MOVING FROM TWO YEAR TERMS TO THREE YEAR TERMS. MOVING TO THREE YEAR TERMS REQUIRES BY STATE LAW, MAJORITY, NOT NOT JUST PLURALITY. AND SO I THINK WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, IS THERE A WAY TO MOVE TO THREE YEAR TERMS, MEET THE STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS, BUT NOT FORCE RUNOFF ELECTIONS AND THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT? THAT'S THE CONTEXT OF THE QUESTION. YEAH, OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE OKAY. RANKED CHOICE WILL ALSO PUT YOU IN THE CROSSHAIRS OF THE LEGISLATURE. THEY ARE VERY ANTI. YEAH. BUT JUST THAT'S WHY. OKAY. THE YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE DID NOT MEET. SO I'M I'D LOVE TO CHECK WITH YOU AFTER TONIGHT'S MEETING ABOUT THAT TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. 
          WE HAVE THE NEWLY STRIPED 1431 IN LOMAN FORD INTERSECTION. AND IN TRUE LAGO VISTA FASHION, THEY'RE ALREADY ON SOCIAL MEDIA. HALF THE PEOPLE SAYING IT SUCKS AND HALF THE PEOPLE SAYING IT'S THE GREATEST THING SINCE SLICED BREAD. SO I THINK WE SUCCEEDED WHILE I CAME THROUGH THE OTHER DAY AND THEY WERE RESTRIPING IT. I ALSO SAW THEY WERE WORKING WITH THE ACTUAL SIGNAL EQUIPMENT. I THINK THEY MIGHT HAVE IMPLEMENTED THE FLASHING YELLOW. I HAVE NOT BEEN THROUGH AND SEEN IT, BUT I'M HOPING THAT THAT WAS TAKEN CARE OF. AT THE SAME TIME, KYLE HAD SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO IT AT THE SAME TIME, SO IT SEEMED TO BE WHEN I WAS. AND I WILL SAY THAT WHEN I WENT THROUGH, I PURPOSELY WENT IN THE RIGHT HAND TURN LANE AND I COULD SEE THE PEOPLE NEXT TO ME, AND THIS GUY'S EYEBALLING ME. AND HE PULLED UP AND AS WE TURNED, HE WAS BEHIND THE CAR. I WAS THE FIRST ONE. UP WE GO. LIKE THIS. AND WHAT DOES HE DO? HE'S AND 
          [02:25:02]
GETS OVER RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME SO HE CAN TURN INTO THE CVS. OF COURSE, I HONKED AT HIM AND HE WAVED AT ME WITH THE SIGNAL. SO ANYWAY, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE TEXT. AND THEN CAPMETRO, I THINK, OH YES SIR, I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS SOMETHING. YES. THANK YOU MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE ALSO HAD A LOT OF COMPLAINTS THAT CAME INTO OUR OFFICE. PEOPLE WERE CONFUSED ABOUT THE LAYOUT, THE ORGANIZATION. WE'VE TRIED TO PUT OUT SOME SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS TO CLARIFY THAT. ALSO GOT IN CONTACT WITH TXDOT YESTERDAY. THEY OBSERVED SOME OF THE CONFUSION AS WELL. THIS IS SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE NORTHBOUND LANES COMING OFF OF NORMAN, TURNING WESTBOUND ON THE 1431. CURRENTLY, THERE IS AN ARROW IN THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL. 
          THERE'S AN ARROW SIGNAL THAT DOES NOT ILLUMINATE. IT'S JUST A SOLID GREEN ARROW. THEY ARE GOING TO TURN THAT BACK ON TO WHERE IT IS A SOLID GREEN. AND AGAIN, THE STARBUCKS PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GET YOU TURNING OFF OF WESTBOUND COMING SOUTH ON LOMAN. BECAUSE THEY DO. THEY TURN FROM THAT INSIDE LANE AND TRY TO GET OVER IMMEDIATELY. SO WE'RE PUTTING A LOT ON SOCIAL MEDIA. 
          SO ANYTHING THAT THAT BECOMES A PROBLEM OR THAT Y'ALL WITNESS OR WANT US TO PUSH OUT, PLEASE LET US KNOW. OH, AND THAT GUY KNEW EXACTLY WHAT HE WAS DOING. HE KNEW HE WAS WRONG, BUT HE DIDN'T CARE. AND HE HE WAVED AT ME ANYWAY. TXDOT SAID IT WOULD BE 2 TO 3 WEEKS BEFORE THEY COULD GET OUT AND FIX THE LIGHTS. OKAY, BUT THEY DO HAVE AN ILLUMINATED SIGN. WELL, BEFORE YOU GET THERE SAYING, HEY, THERE'S A NEW TRAFFIC. YES, SIR. WHATEVER THEY CALL IT CONFIGURATION HERE, AND YOU NEED TO BE AWARE OF IT. AND I THINK THERE'S ALSO A NEW FLASHING POLE. OR WAS THAT ALWAYS BEEN THERE. THERE'S, THERE'S A YELLOW FLASHING A LITTLE BIT FURTHER BEYOND THE ELECTRONIC SIGN. IT LOOKS NEW TO ME, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS OR MIGHT HAVE BEEN NEW. WHENEVER THEY START THE CONSTRUCTION, IT COULD BE. 
          THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN CAPMETRO, WE HAD OUR SMALL CITY MAYOR'S MEETING A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, AND THEY HAD SOMETHING ON TRAFFIC ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, AND THEY JUST SENT ME SOMETHING AND ASKED FOR SOME FEEDBACK. MR. I'LL PROBABLY SEND IT TO YOU JUST IN CASE YOU'VE GOT SOME. IT'S A QUICK TURNAROUND. THEY WANT IT BACK BY NEXT FRIDAY. SO ANYWAY, JUST AND THAT IS IT ON OUR REPORT. SO NOPE. OH NO I'M SORRY. YES. PUBLIC WORKS IS GOING TO START DOING SMOKE TESTS OCTOBER 21ST. SO IF YOU GET SMOKE IN YOUR HOUSE YOU CALL PUBLIC WORKS AND LET THEM KNOW BECAUSE THAT MEANS THERE'S A PROBLEM. SO WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS THEY'RE CHECKING FOR LEAKS AND STUFF IN OUR SYSTEM, IN OUR WASTEWATER SYSTEM, LOOKING FOR AREAS WHERE WE'RE GETTING I AND I, WHICH IS INFINITE INFILTRATION AND INUNDATION. IT'S BASICALLY RAINWATER, STORM WATER GETTING INTO OUR SEWER SYSTEM. WE HAVE TO TREAT IT. SO IT TAKES AWAY FROM OUR CAPACITY OF OUR PLANT. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. OKAY, I APOLOGIZE, I FORGOT 
          [X.6.	Joint Work Session with Planning & Zoning to review the proposed Comprehensive   Master Plan to begin on or after 5:30 pm.]
ABOUT STUFF. THAT'S ALL RIGHT OKAY. THAT MEANS WE'VE GOT ONE ITEM LEFT. ITEM NUMBER SIX, THE JOINT WORK SESSION WITH PLANNING AND ZONING TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN TO BEGIN ON OR AFTER 530. AND IT IS NOW 534. SO WE'RE LEGAL TO START. AND I JUST A COUPLE COMMENTS BEFORE WE GET STARTED. WE SPOKE ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN UP HERE. THERE WAS SOME DESIRE FOR THE COUNCIL THAT HAS A LOT OF INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE AROUND THIS ITEM AND ACTUALLY PUT IT OUT FOR BID AND ACTUALLY ASKED FOR THIS TO BE DONE, FOR IT TO HAVE THE LAST SAY ON IT. OBVIOUSLY, WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN A RECOMMENDATION BACK FROM PLANNING AND ZONING YET. SO THIS MEETING TONIGHT, MY HOPE IS THAT WE WILL GET A LOT OF GOOD INPUT FROM PLANNING AND ZONING. THAT'S IN FACT, THE WAY I PLAN TO DO THIS IS, IS I'M GOING TO ASK FOR Y'ALL TO COME UP AND SPEAK FIRST. WE'RE NOT GOING TO SPEAK UP HERE. I'M GOING TO ASK FOR Y'ALL TO COME UP AND SPEAK. TELL US WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN. THEN, OF COURSE, I'M GOING TO ALLOW COUNCIL TO CHIME IN. BUT THE WHOLE IDEA IS, IS IS IT IS IT SOMETHING THAT IS A PRODUCT THAT CAN BE TURNED INTO A FINAL PRODUCT THAT CAN BE VOTED ON BY THIS COUNCIL AT THE THE NOVEMBER 6TH MEETING OR NOT? AND I WOULD LIKE TO COME TO SOME KIND OF CONCLUSION ABOUT THAT. BY THE END OF THIS MEETING. I REALLY DON'T HAVE A VESTED INTEREST ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BUT I WOULD LIKE JUST FOR US TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU ALL HAVE SPOKEN AMONGST EACH OTHER. IF YOU HAVE ONE SPOKESPERSON, IF YOU EACH WANT TO GET UP AND SPEAK INDIVIDUALLY, BUT THIS IS WIDE OPEN, YOU DON'T HAVE TO FILL OUT ANY FORMS. YOU JUST RAISE YOUR HAND AND I WILL CALL YOU FORWARD AND ASK YOU TO TELL US WHAT YOU HAVE AND AND WE'LL TAKE IT FROM THERE. MAYOR, WHILE THEY'RE DELIBERATING, IF I CAN JUST ALSO COMMENT. SO IN THE PACKET THERE ARE SOME NOTES FROM MISS RICH. AND THEN MR. HUGHLEY HAD SENT APPARENTLY HAD SENT SOME COMMENTS IN THAT DID NOT MAKE IT IN THE PACKET, BUT THE CITY MANAGER DID FORWARD THAT TO ALL OF US EARLIER TODAY. I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO RATIONALIZE THE TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF COMMENTS TO SEE HOW MUCH THEY AGREE OR DISAGREE, BUT I THINK YOUR YOUR DESCRIPTION IS PROBABLY THE HIGHER LEVEL POINT OF CAN WE GET THERE FROM HERE? BUT AT SOME POINT IT MAY BE GOOD TO KIND OF, YOU KNOW, COME TO SOME AGREEMENT ON WHAT ARE THE KEY 
          [02:30:04]
TAKEAWAYS FOR US FROM THE FROM THE LIST THAT WE'VE SEEN. AND I HAD READ MISS RICHARDS INPUT AND THEN MR. HUGHLEY, JUST VERY BRIEFLY, I'M NOT EVEN SURE I WAS ABLE TO READ ALL OF IT. IT DID LOOK LIKE THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO. AND SO ANYTHING THAT CAN BE RATIONALIZED WOULD BE GOOD. AND THEN I THINK THE OTHER THING THAT IF YOU CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND, IF YOU HAVE OBJECTIONS ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN, DO THEY REALLY FOCUS AROUND, FOR EXAMPLE, EXCUSE ME, DENSITY DEFINITIONS AND THE FLUME? OR IS IT MUCH BROADER THAN THAT? AND I THINK HELPING US REALLY ZONE IN OR ZOOM IN ON WHAT WHERE WE THINK THE PROBLEMS LIE? I THINK THAT WILL HELP MAKE THE DETERMINATION. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ADDRESS IN A THREE WEEK PERIOD OR NOT? SO WITH THAT, I'M SORRY. ONE MORE BEING BEING IN THE PARKS AND REC ADVISORY GUY. I WOULD ALSO LIKE COMMENTS FROM YOU ALL. DID YOU SPEND ANY TIME THINKING ABOUT THE PARKS MASTER PLAN PART OF THIS DOCUMENT, OR DID YOU KIND OF LEAVE THAT TO SOMEONE ELSE TO LOOK AT? SO WITH THAT, PRETTY MUCH LEFT, YEAH, Y'ALL. YEAH. SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS WATCHED PNC MEETING WHERE I MADE A STATEMENT SINCE I WAS ACTUALLY PART OF CPAC AND I WAS THE HEAD OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE. WE WERE THOROUGHLY JUST. AND AGAIN, YOU GUYS CAN NOD YOUR HEAD AND AGREE. WE WERE THOROUGHLY DISAPPOINTED IN THE PRODUCT THAT HALF GAVE US. IT DID NOT REFLECT WHAT THE WILL OF THE COMMUNITY WAS. IT WAS VERY DRIVEN TOWARDS HIGHER DENSITY AND FOR US TO KIND OF LOOK LIKE AUSTIN AND HAVE THIS HYPER GROWTH, AND THERE WAS A LOT OF JARGON IN THERE THAT NO ONE HAD EXPRESSED WANTING TO PUT IN AS A COMMUNITY. I DON'T MEAN I'M SORRY. I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT, I APOLOGIZE, BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THIS, WE SHOULD HAVE THE PNC. SINCE WE HAVE A QUORUM HERE, CALL THEIR MEETING INTO ORDER. DON'T HAVE THAT IN YOUR OWN AGENDA AND SO FORTH. RIGHT. SO THEY NEED THEY NEED TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THAT PROCESS OF CALLING THE MEETING INTO ORDER. IF WE HAVE A QUORUM HERE, I DON'T THINK, LINDA, CAN YOU COME UP AND DO THAT? IT'S KIND OF EXCITING. THIS IS THIS IS SO, SO IN A JOINT MEETING SESSION, THEN THE OTHER BODY NEEDS TO CALL ITSELF INTO ORDER AND DO ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY DO. WHEN WE HAVE THIS THERE'S BEEN LIKE TWO OR. YEAH I'VE BEEN LIKE A BETTER SETUP I APOLOGIZE. MY BAD. WELL OKAY. WELL WE'RE GOING TO WING IT. 
          YES. OKAY. SO I'M CALLING THE FORMAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 5:37 P.M. AND WITH US TODAY, WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. WE HAVE RACHEL RICH, JEAN HARRIS, JEFF HEALEY, KATHY KOZA, KATIE KOZA AND DAVE SCHNEIDER AND MYSELF. AND WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS THE COMP PLAN, AND WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS IT WITH THE COUNCIL AND GIVE A HAVE KIND OF AN INTERACTION ON THE COMP PLAN. THANK YOU AGAIN. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. GOOD JOB. YEAH. SO THEY INCREASED THE DENSITIES OF CERTAIN AREAS. SO THERE'S SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS THAT I MADE IN THE PACKET TO WHAT WE ALL AGREED AND WHAT WAS APPROPRIATE. AND WHAT SEEMS LIKE THE RIGHT QUANTITY TO HAVE. THERE ALSO WERE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT CONGESTION OF COMMERCIAL IN SOME AREAS. AND THEN THERE'S SOME AREAS WHERE THERE'S INCOMPATIBILITY. SO IT DIDN'T GO FROM LIKE LOW DENSITY TO MEDIUM. IT JUST WENT FROM LIKE LOW DENSITY THEN TO HIGH DENSITY OR MIXED USE COMMERCIAL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHICH OBVIOUSLY IS GOING TO BE A HUGE IMPACT TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS AND JUST ISN'T COMPATIBLE. ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THAT IS INCREASING DENSITY ALONG THE EAST OF WHAT IS THAT WOMAN FORD. THANK YOU. OF LOWMAN. FORD. THOSE WERE SOME OF OUR MAIN CONCERNS PRESERVING GREEN SPACE. THAT WAS A HUGE TOPIC BECAUSE EVERYONE, AS YOU KNOW, AND I'VE TALKED ABOUT FOR YEARS, IS OFF ABOUT THE CLEARCUTTING AND TO SARAH AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. SO MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE DESIGNATING SPACE AND PRESERVING TREES IS GOING TO BE HUGE. WE DIDN'T GET INTO THE PARK MASTER PLAN, BUT I MEAN, WE'D BE OPEN IF YOU WANTED TO TOSS THAT BACK TO US AT LOOKING AT THAT, BECAUSE WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT THE TREE ORDINANCE. WHEN YOU INDICATE INCREASED DENSITY THAT THEY PUT FORWARD. IS THAT HOW THEY MODIFIED THE FLUME? CORRECT. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR NOT THAT I THINK THE DEFINITIONS, BUT I THINK THAT'S THE BIGGEST THING WE HAD AN 
          [02:35:02]
ISSUE WITH WHERE SOME OF THE AREAS ON THE FLUME, BUT THEN JUST THE OVERALL NARRATIVE OF WHAT THEY RECOMMENDED JUST WAS NOT WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTED. AND SOME OF THE TERMS IN THE JARGON, AND I KNOW SPECIFICALLY JEFF HUGHLEY HAS SOME THINGS THAT HE'S POINTED OUT, AND I DON'T THINK HIS COMMENTS MADE IT INTO THE PACKET OR NOT. SO THEY WERE EMAILED TO US TODAY, BUT WE DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO REALLY DIGEST THEM. YEAH, I READ THEM. I MEAN, I CAN PASS IT OFF TO WHOEVER ELSE WANTS TO SAY ANYTHING. I JUST DON'T WANT TO KIND OF BEAT THE DEAD HORSE, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU GUYS HAVE THE EXACT WORDING IN OUR RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE SENT FORWARD IN THE PACKET, RIGHT? AS LONG AS YOU'RE HERE, CAN YOU EXPRESS YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S FIXABLE IN THE NEXT THREE WEEKS OR NOT? I THINK IF WE WERE TO GET TOGETHER AND BREAK UP. I THINK IT COULD BE DONE IF THE RIGHT PEOPLE, IF WE GOT SOME SUBCOMMITTEES TOGETHER AND BROKE UP THE THE PACKET, LIKE MAYBE SOME OF US FOCUSED SPECIFICALLY ON THE FLUME, SOME OF US FOCUSED ON THE REST OF THE PACKET, MAYBE SOME OF US FOCUSED ON THE PARKS MASTER PLAN. I THINK IT COULD BE DONE. 
          BUT I JUST THINK IT'S BAD. IT'S A BAD PRODUCT ALL AROUND. AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE I WENT TO EVERY SINGLE MEETING FOR CPAC AND IT'S NOT WHAT PEOPLE WANTED. WEREN'T YOU ON THE COMP PLAN, TOO? I MEAN, THE COMP PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, THAT'S WHAT SHE'S SAYING. OH, I DIDN'T PICK THAT UP. SORRY. YEAH. WOULD IT BE HELPFUL IF WE WERE TO DO THAT, IF THERE WERE SUBCOMMITTEES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING FOLKS, IF THERE WERE SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS, WOULD THAT WORK WITH THEM? I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. AND THEN IF WE HAD SOMEONE LIKE FROM CITY STAFF TO HELP, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD PATH FORWARD. AND I THINK WE'D BE ABLE TO GET SOME MORE ACCOMPLISHED. YEAH. WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK JUST VOLUNTEERED HERSELF? YES. THANK YOU. OKAY. YEAH. AND AGAIN, AS MANY OF YOU ALL THAT WANTS TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME FORWARD. AND WITH RESPECT TO WHETHER IT'S POSSIBLE TO GET IT DONE BY NOVEMBER 6TH OR NOT, I THINK IT REALLY IS GOING TO DEPEND ON HOW HOW CONSISTENT THE PNC PERSPECTIVE IS WITH THE COUNCIL PERSPECTIVE. AND SO WE REALLY DON'T KNOW YOUR PERSPECTIVE. AND SO IT'S HARD TO ADDRESS WHETHER WE CAN GET IT DONE BY NOVEMBER 6TH OR NOT. SO IF YOU ALL ARE WE CAN FIND OUT SOME OF THAT. WE ARE THEN WE COULD GET IT DONE. SO I GUESS TONIGHT I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE'LL LEARN TOWARD THE END OF THE MEETING. MORE LIKE IS IT DOABLE OR NOT? I THINK, AND HERE'S WHAT I WOULD SAY. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK FIRST. I DIDN'T WANT US TO COLOR, BUT I'M HAPPY TO THEN OPEN IT UP TO COUNCIL FOR US TO EXPRESS OUR OPINIONS. THEN THAT'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE INFO. Y'ALL CAN COME BACK UP AT THE END AND SAY, NOW I THINK HELL NO. OR NOW I THINK ABSOLUTELY SO. BUT I WANTED YOU ALL TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK FIRST. WHAT'S THE REASON WHY? YEAH, OKAY. THANK YOU. DO YOU THINK AS WELL? FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T THINK ANYTHING. I DON'T THINK ANYTHING THAT I HAD IN MY WRITE UP, WHICH I HAVE A COPY OF HERE, IS IN CONFLICT WITH WHAT MISS RICH DID IN HERS. I HAD ORIGINALLY WRITTEN MINE UP AS TO PRESENT TO THE COMMISSION AS GUIDELINES OR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HOW WE MIGHT APPROACH TRYING TO CLEAN UP THE DOCUMENT. AND SO A LOT OF WHAT I SAID IS, IN ADDITION TO WHAT SHE HAD, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY BOTHERS ME, I'VE BEEN THROUGH THE WHOLE DOCUMENT, AND I HAVE MANY MORE NOTES THAN WHAT I PUT IN HERE. IT JUST SEEMED LIKE A VERY UNFINISHED PRODUCT. MANY, MANY TYPOS, A LOT OF BAD VERBIAGE, A LOT OF VERBIAGE THAT IS NOT FITTING FOR THE KIND OF COMMUNITY THAT WE ARE. I'LL TELL YOU THAT WHEN I BOUGHT MY HOME HERE THE WEEK AFTER CLOSING, I WAS, YOU KNOW, SEARCHING AROUND, TRYING TO LEARN MORE AND MORE ABOUT THE COMMUNITY. AND I FOUND THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON THE CITY WEBSITE. AND I WENT THROUGH THAT, AND I HAD A SUDDEN CASE OF BUYER'S REMORSE. 
          IT PORTRAYED A TOWN THAT WAS VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE SLEEPY RETREAT TOWN THAT I WAS LOOKING TO MOVE TO, AND I THINK THIS NEW PLAN DOUBLES DOWN ON THAT. I THINK IT'S GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION. IT ALSO IT'S JUST EXTREMELY UNREADABLE. YOU KNOW, YOU GOT TO THINK ABOUT WHO IS THE AUDIENCE FOR THIS. AND THERE ARE MULTIPLE AUDIENCES, BUT ONE IS, YOU KNOW, THE CITIZENRY, THE PUBLIC. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF THE CITIZENRY IS GOING TO ACTUALLY READ IT. 
          LET ME TAKE THAT BACK. FIRST OF ALL, I'M NOT SURE HOW MANY REALLY WANT TO ARE INTERESTED. 
          YOU KNOW, SOME ARE JUST FINE LETTING THINGS GO AND LETTING THE CITY DO WHAT THEY DO AND THEY TAKE A BACK SEAT. OTHERS MAY WANT TO START READING THROUGH IT, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO. THEIR EYES ARE GOING TO GLAZE OVER AFTER ABOUT THE FIRST TEN PAGES, AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT THROUGH TO WHAT THE ACTUAL PLAN IS. SO IN MY RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH I HAD 
          [02:40:01]
NOT YET DISCUSSED WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, WAS TO RESTRUCTURE THE DOCUMENT TO PRESENT THE ACTUAL ACTIONS SOONER, PUT A LOT OF THE EXTRA, WHAT I WOULD CALL EXTRA INFORMATION AND DATA, MOVE IT TO APPENDICES TOWARDS THE BACK OR A VOLUME TWO. LET THAT INFORMATION BE THERE FOR THOSE THAT WANT TO DIG IN AND DO IT FOR MORE INFORMATION, BUT SHOW THE MEAT OF IT FASTER UP FRONT. AND SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE THE SHORT VERSION OF THE FIRST POINT THAT I HAD IN MY EMAIL. TO ALL OF YOU, DOING THAT TAKES A LOT OF WORK. AND WITH THAT, WE WERE WE WERE GOING TO BREAK UP INTO THREE, PROBABLY THREE. WE HADN'T DECIDED ON THE NUMBER, BUT SUBCOMMITTEES AND TAKE DIFFERENT SECTIONS AND GO THROUGH THIS WITH A FINE TOOTH COMB AND I SUPPOSE MAKE EDITS, ALTHOUGH WE DON'T HAVE THE DOCUMENT, THE SOURCE DOCUMENT RIGHT NOW, I HAVE REVERSE ENGINEERED ONE, BUT WE WOULD STILL NEED THAT. I, I DON'T THINK WE CAN GET ALL THAT DONE IN THREE WEEKS. PERSONALLY, I THINK IT WOULD TAKE LONGER. YOU KNOW, THE OTHER OPTION IS TO FIX THE PLUMB AND THE LAND USE CATEGORIES AND BE JUST RESIGNED TO SAYING IT'S OKAY TO PUT OUT A DOCUMENT WHERE THE REST OF IT IS JUST NOT VERY HIGH QUALITY. 
          I PERSONALLY WOULDN'T LIKE THAT. I DON'T LIKE MY NAME BEING ON SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD. IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE PUT OUR BEST EFFORTS INTO IT. SO I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THE REST OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT I PUT IN MY EMAIL. YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT. ANY QUESTIONS? JUST NOT EVERYBODY UP HERE HAS EVEN HAS LOOKED AT YOUR EMAIL YET. CAN YOU JUST TOUCH ON SOME OF THE HIGH POINTS, LIKE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS? THAT WAS PRETTY, PRETTY BRIEF. THAT PART. IT'S PRETTY MUCH THE SAME AS WHAT MISS RICH, I BELIEVE. WELL, SHE DIDN'T GO THROUGH ALL OF IT IN DETAIL. LET ME SEE. LIKE, ARE THERE ANY ANY MACRO PROPOSED CHANGES THAT YOU WANT TO SEE ON THE FUTURE LAND THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP? THERE ARE. I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, RACHEL. YOU WANT TO COME UP AND TALK TO THAT. 
          SHE MIGHT BE ABLE TO. THERE ARE TWO COPIES OF IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER. SOMETHING TO POINT TO. 
          ANYTHING. LET'S SEE. THIS IS THAT IS THE PROPOSED MAP. SO I ACTUALLY KIND OF HAVE A QUESTION, SINCE WE'RE ALL SITTING UP HERE VOLUNTEERING OUR TIME, YOU GUYS AND ALL OF US, I REMEMBER WHAT HALF WAS WHEN THEY WERE AWARDED THIS CONTRACT, AND I REMEMBER HOW MUCH MONEY IT COSTS. AND I REMEMBER HOW MUCH WE ENDED UP PAYING FOR ALL THEIR OPEN HOUSES AND THEIR SURVEYS AND BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. AND THEN WE ADDED ANOTHER WORK SESSION, WHICH I WAS AT, AND I WAS ONE OF THREE PEOPLE THAT SHOWED UP FROM CPAC. IF THEY END UP GIVING US CRAP, WHAT CAN WE DO LEGALLY? BECAUSE NOW WE'RE SITTING HERE, WE'RE ALL WE'RE ALL VOLUNTEERS. LIKE, THIS IS RIDICULOUS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LITERALLY DECONSTRUCT THIS ENTIRE THING AND REBUILD IT AT OUR, OUR TIME, OUR EXPENSE. LIKE, WHAT CONSEQUENCES ARE THERE FOR THIS CONTRACT THAT WE WENT IN WITH THEM? BECAUSE IF I WAS THE TAXPAYER, I'D BE PRETTY. AND I AM. SO I DON'T THINK THEY'RE IN BREACH OF CONTRACT, JUST PUT OUT A CRAPPY WORK PRODUCT. SO AGAIN, MY QUESTION IS WHY DO WE CONTINUE TO USE THEM GOING FORWARD WHEN WE KNOW WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT UNDER CONTRACT ANYMORE. THEY'RE NOT BEING USED. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN GOING FORWARD BECAUSE I'VE BEEN TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND HAVE NEVER BEEN IMPRESSED WITH ANYTHING THAT THEY'VE DONE. AND I KNOW I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS THAT OPINION. OKAY, OKAY. OKAY. SO. SOME OF THE SPECIFIC THINGS THAT WE NOTICED ON THE MAP, WITHOUT GETTING INTO ALL THE NITTY GRITTY DETAIL. SO WE WANTED THE LAND USE CATEGORY DENSITIES UPDATED AS THE FOLLOWING. SO A MINIMUM OF THREE ACRES FOR RURAL RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL ESTATE RESIDENTIAL IS 2 TO 3 ACRES. I'M SORRY. RURAL RESIDENTIAL MINIMUM THREE PLUS ACRES. SO APPROXIMATELY 0.33 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. ESTATE. RESIDENTIAL 2 TO 3 ACRES, APPROXIMATELY HALF AN ACRE OR HALF A DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE. SORRY, I READ YOUR NOTES. LOW 
          [02:45:07]
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 1 TO 4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. MEDIUM DENSITY IS 4 TO 8 UNITS PER ACRE. MIXED USE 8 TO 18 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, AND THE COMMERCIAL, RETAIL, AIRPORT, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ARE ACCEPTABLE AS PROPOSED IN THE DOCUMENT, SO ALL THE OTHER ONES NEED TO BE UPDATED. CAN WE PAUSE AND DO WE WANT TO PAUSE AND TALK ABOUT THOSE DESIGNATIONS AND SEE IF SEE IF COUNCIL AND PNC ARE AGREEING. I CERTAINLY CAN. WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO IS ALLOW THEM TO SPEAK, AND THEN I WAS GOING TO COME UP AND ALLOW ALL COUNCIL TO SPEAK AND GO DOWN THE ROAD. ALTHOUGH IT DOES APPEAR AS IF A LOT OF THEIR RESERVATIONS WERE AROUND THE FLUME, ALTHOUGH NOT SO MUCH ABOUT THE DENSITY DEFINITION. SO I DIDN'T GET THAT. THOSE ARE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT. YEAH, THOSE ARE VERY THEY'RE ALL DIFFERENT EXCEPT FOR COMMERCIAL RETAIL. 
          THE AIRPORT, THAT'S FINE AS IS. EVERYTHING ELSE NEEDS TO BE UPDATED TO WHAT I JUST SPOKE TO AND WHAT'S IN DIFFERENT FROM WHAT STAFF HAD IN THE THING OR DIFFERENT? BOTH. CORRECT. BOTH. 
          OKAY. YEP. CURRENT AND PROPOSED. I STILL WOULD COME BACK TO. IS THERE MORE THAT PLANNING AND ZONING WANTS TO CONVEY TO US BEFORE WE START WEIGHING IN? YEAH, I DON'T WANT TO USURP Y'ALL'S CHANCE TO SPEAK FIRST. BUT I KNOW THAT. YOU GET THAT TALL GUY THERE. I THINK YOU NEED A TALL PERSON. SOME OF THE AREAS, RACHEL, YOU MIGHT WANT TO PULL THE MIC AND JUST HOLD IT SO YOU CAN. YEAH. THANK YOU. SOME OF THE AREAS THAT ARE ON HERE JUST AREN'T COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT'S NEXT TO IT. ONE EXAMPLE WOULD BE OKAY. OKAY, AM I CRAZY OR DOES THIS LOOK LIKE THIS? THESE ARE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES THAN THE NAMES THAT WERE ON THERE. THAT'S THE PROPOSED ONE FROM HALF FUTURE LAND USE MAP. CORRECT. IS THIS THE MOST UPDATED ONE? YES, IT'S THE MOST UPDATED ONE. BUT. YEAH, THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS IN OUR PACKET. BUT THIS IS NOT THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE. RIGHT. IT'S NOT THAT'S THE MOST BUT THAT'S THE ONE THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH NOW. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WORKED WITH. SO IT'S LIKE A BIG SURPRISE. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT. IT IS SURPRISING YOU. SO THIS. HEY, RACHEL, THIS IS WHAT WE WERE SENT. WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WORKED ON. AS THE MOST UPDATED FUTURE LANGUAGE. I'M COMPARING THAT MAP TO WHAT'S IN THE PACKET OR IN THE COMP PLAN ITSELF. ONLY DIFFERENCE I'M SEEING IS SOME COLORS. AND THAT MAY ALSO BE ATTRIBUTED TO PRINTING. IF IT'S LIKE A COLOR TONE, IT IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE THE HALF, THE HALF, THE HALF MAP THAT WAS PRODUCED, FOR EXAMPLE, THE BLUE ON THAT MAP IS ALL A STATE, WHICH, BY THE WAY, I'M, I'M GOOD WITH. BUT THAT'S NOW A STATE. THE HALF PRODUCT HAD LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL THERE. JUST SAYING. 
          OH, YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT. THIS IS THAT'S THE THAT'S THE HALF. YES. THAT IS THE COMP PLAN. OH BUT HALF'S PRODUCT WAS DIFFERENT THAN THIS HALF. THIS IS OH THIS IS HALF PRODUCT. 
          YEAH OKAY. SO THAT IS OKAY. IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT COLOR. I THOUGHT THEY HAD LOW DENSITY. 
          NOT JUST OH IT'S NOT JUST WHAT I'M SAYING OKAY. YEAH YEAH YEAH. SO. THE RESTROOM. IS THIS IS THE BEST OF THE MAP TO THE WALL. AND THE COLORS ARE DIFFERENT. ALL THE BUT THE THE SAME. SO WHY DO YOU WHY DO YOU NOT HAVE. THIS MAP. YES, BECAUSE WE PRINTED THIS ONE. I WAS ASKED TO PUT ALL THE STREETS AND STUFF ON THERE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE DID. AND THEN THE COLORS CHANGED WHEN WE PRINTED IT. WELL, THE COLORS AND THE CATEGORIES CATEGORIES SHOULDN'T HAVE CHANGED. BUT LOOK AT YOUR LEGEND AND THEN LOOK AT WHAT'S HERE AND. WHERE IS THIS TERM THAT THIS. IS SAYS RIGHT HERE ON THE LEFT WHICH IS RIGHT HERE. COLORS ARE MEDIUM. YES. 
          [02:50:08]
REFERENCE. LEGEND. THE LEGEND IS DIFFERENT IS IT. THAT IS A MIXED USE. IT'S RIGHT HERE. 
          OKAY. THIS IS ONE. UTTER EVERYTHING. FROM SCALE. RIGHT. SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE DETAIL. WE CAN DO IT. OH YEAH I THINK IT'S MAINLY JUST COLOR DIFFERENCES. YOU KNOW, WE SPENT ALL THIS MONEY ON CONSULTING FEES ON. ANY. YEAH. ANY MORE BECAUSE WE HAVE THOSE EXTRA. 
          YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. JORDAN, WHILE WE'RE ALL LOOKING. WELL THAT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO DO THAT YOU KNOW, JUST A LITTLE BIT. YEAH. WE'RE GOOD OKAY. OKAY. WHILE WE'RE LOOKING TO SEVERAL A WHILE BACK, PNC ALSO LOOKED AT AND I BROUGHT IT UP WHEN BOY WAS HERE. YEAH. THE ISSUES I HAVE NOT ONLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, WHAT IS DENSITY IS WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IS IT HALF ACRE MEANS THIS. SO WHAT I WAS SEEING AND WHAT WE WERE SEEING AND, AND SOME OF THE COMMISSION MEETINGS WAS THAT WE WERE ALLOWING DEVELOPERS TO DEFINE WHAT THAT MEANT, WHAT HIGH DENSITY, MEDIUM LOW RESIDENTIAL. AND SO IN TERMS OF WHAT WE WE NEVER DEFINED THAT WE WORKED ON IT, WE NEVER DEFINED OR GOT TO A POINT WHERE WE MAYOR, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME FOLLOWING. CAN CAN WE STOP THE BACKGROUND CONVERSATIONS, PLEASE? I'M HAVING A HARD TIME TRACKING THE PERSON THAT HAS THE MICROPHONE. 
          SO SO JUST. AND A COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN. I DO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE. KATHY, WOULD YOU MIND PAUSING UNTIL THEY'RE DONE? SHUT UP. THIS IS WHAT THEY GAVE US AS WELL AS THE DOCUMENT IS IN PROGRAM DESIGN. IT'S NOT I KNOW WHAT THAT IS. IT'S NOT THE EASIEST THING TO UPDATE. SO THEY WOULD HAVE UPDATED THE GIS UNTIL WE MADE A DECISION AND UPDATED THE INDESIGN FILE. 
          AFTER THE DECISION WAS MADE ON CHANGES. SO THIS WOULD BE THE WORKING MAP OF OUR GIS MODELS. 
          YEAH, BUT IT'S NOT WORKING, RIGHT? THAT'S UNFORTUNATE. YEAH. NO, HALF DID NOT GIVE US THE MAP THAT THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON UNTIL WE MADE SOME SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR GIS FILES RECENTLY. 
          OKAY. GO AHEAD. SO MINE ARE ABOUT PERIODS AND COMMAS AND ALL THAT. IT'S BASICALLY PINNING DOWN THE WHAT IS DENSITY. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN. AND GIVING A NUMBER TO THAT AND NOT. AND SO MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THAT I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN IN THREE WEEKS. THE OTHER ISSUES I HAD ARE THE PARKING AND PARKLAND DEDICATION, THE LEASE LEASE, THE FEES IN LIEU OF FOR THE TREE AND PRESERVATION. WE TALKED ABOUT. AND WE'VE HAD DRAFT ORDINANCES FOR THAT FOR A WHILE, BUT WE TALKED ABOUT DOING THINGS LIKE THOSE CLUSTER COMMUNITIES OR CLUSTERING TREES SO THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE IN LAKESIDE WHERE YOU HAVE A MOONSCAPE. SO THERE THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WHEN I STARTED LOOKING AT THE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN, THOSE KIND OF CALL OUT THOSE, BUT IT PRESUMES THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE THOSE THINGS IN PLACE. SO NOT HAVING ALL THOSE THINGS IN PLACE AND TIED DOWN AND BUTTONED UP WHERE WE KNOW WHAT THE PARKLAND AUTHENTICATION, THE FEES IN LIEU OF WHEN I WORK FOR ANOTHER COMMUNITY. WE DID LIKE FAIR MARKET VALUE SO THAT YOU COULD ASSIGN A DOLLAR TO THAT. IT DOESN'T TAKE ON SCIENCE, AND IT DOESN'T TAKE A BUNCH OF LAWYERS AND REAL ESTATE PEOPLE. BUT THERE ARE THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO TO DO THAT. SO FOR ME, IT ISN'T JUST ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN AS IT STANDS IS A STARTING POINT. AND SO BEING ABLE TO THEN, JUST LIKE YOU WERE DOING A MARKETING PLAN AND YOU ROLL THAT OUT TO MAKING ACTIONABLE ITEMS, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF THOSE THINGS IN PLACE. BUTTONED UP, PINNED DOWN, SHORT TERM RENTALS IS ANOTHER THING THAT WE STARTED WITH ORDINANCES THAT WE KIND OF GET TO THIS POINT, AND THEN THERE'S ALL THESE STAFFING CHANGES AND WE NEVER FINISHED WHAT WE STARTED. AND SO IT PRESUMES THAT THERE ARE ALL OF THOSE THINGS IN PLACE AND THEY AREN'T. AND SO GOING FORWARD, YOU CAN'T SAY, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO KILL THESE TREES OR WE'RE NOT GOING TO WE HAVE PRESERVATION, WE HAVE DRAFTS, BUT WE HAVEN'T BROUGHT THEM FORWARD AND SAID, LET'S FINALIZE THIS. AND THAT'S THE SAME THING WITH PARKLAND DEDICATION. IT'S THE SAME SAME THING WITH ALL THE DENSITY AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE STARTED IN OUR VOLUNTEER TIME, BUT WE NEVER FINISHED AND WE NEVER. SO WE NEED TO HAVE THOSE IN PLACE AS WELL BEFORE WE SAY, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THIS. SO THAT'S SOME OF MY ISSUES. OKAY. IF I COULD, I WANT TO KIND OF ASK BRAD A QUESTION HERE. SO I'M HEARING SOME THINGS FROM KATHY THAT MAKE ME THINK THAT THE EXPECTATION OUT OF THE COMP PLAN, MAYBE NOT SO MUCH THE FLUME, BUT THE COMP PLAN IS THAT IT WILL DICTATE SOME 
          [02:55:05]
THINGS THAT WILL, FOR EXAMPLE, STOP US FROM HAVING MOONSCAPES IN THE FUTURE. AND I THINK THAT'S AN AN UNREALISTIC EXPECTATION BECAUSE THERE ARE ORDINANCES THAT HAVE TO BE PASSED RIGHT AFTER THE FACT THAT WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT. THE THE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN IS NOT GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THAT. IT'S NOT GOING TO TAKE CARE OF SPECIFICS ABOUT STRS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT'S A IT'S A OVERARCHING PLAN FOR OUR COMMUNITY WHERE WE'VE CAPTURED WHAT THE CITIZENS WANT. AND THEN COUNCIL AND PNC AND THE REST HAVE TO GO DO THE NUTS AND BOLTS WORK TO PUT SOME OF THOSE ORDINANCE IN PLACE THAT MAKE US BE THE COMMUNITY THAT'S BEEN VOICED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN. YES. YES. OKAY. YES. OKAY. SO I JUST WANT TO BE REALLY CLEAR. I DO THAT THAT THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. WE'RE NOT GOING TO SOLVE MOONSCAPES OR ANYTHING ELSE. WITH THE COMP PLAN WE CAN SET OUT IN THE COMP PLAN THAT THIS IS WHAT WE ASPIRE TO, AND THAT THEN P AND Z AND COUNCIL AND THE REST OF THEM WILL GO WORK ON THOSE. AND WE HAVE BEEN. SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE BEEN WE HAVE NOT FINALIZED THOSE WE'VE NOT BROUGHT THEM TO, BUT WE HAVE BEEN IN THE PROCESS OF NORMALLY YOU WERE ON SOME OF THOSE, YOU WERE ALSO. SO WE HAVE BEEN DOING THAT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WHAT WAS FEARFUL FOR ME IS READING THOSE THOSE SECTIONS AND, AND IT PRESUMED OR ASSUMED THAT WE HAD THOSE THINGS IN PLACE ALREADY. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT IGNORING THEM, BUT THAT WE HAVE MOVING THEM FORWARD, AND WE'RE CONTINUING TO DO SO. SO THAT'S DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. I FOUND MY SPECIFIC COMMENTS. IF YOU COULD COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE I'LL JUST READ IT AGAIN. SO THIS IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF A LONG ONE. BUT IT HAS SOME SPECIFICS IN IT. AND I READ THIS AT THE PNC MEETING WHEN WE MADE OUR I'LL JUST PUT IT IN RECOMMENDATIONS. SO I PUT DESPITE MULTIPLE REQUESTS FOR SPECIFIC INFORMATION, TOOLS AND DATA NECESSARY TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS AND THOUGHTFUL RECOMMENDATIONS, IT HAS BECOME CLEAR THAT WE ARE NOT BEING GIVEN THE RESOURCES OR SUPPORT REQUIRED TO DO SO. UNFORTUNATELY, AT THIS POINT, WE'RE UNABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH CONFIDENCE AND PROVIDING FULLY INFORMED INPUT ON THE COMP PLAN. WE REMAIN INCREASINGLY DISSATISFIED. DISSATISFIED WITH THE LACK OF CLEAR, COMPLETE AND TIMELY RESPONSES FROM CITY STAFF. THIS IS BEFORE JORDAN AND OTHER STAFF HAVE STARTED. SIDE NOTE OUR QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS HAVE NOT BEEN ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED, NOR HAVE WE RECEIVED THE CONSTRUCTIVE ENGAGEMENT NECESSARY TO SUPPORT MEANINGFUL COLLABORATION. AS A RESULT, WE ARE NOW ONLY IN A POSITION TO OFFER GENERAL HIGH LEVEL RECOMMENDATIONS RATHER THAN DEFINITIVE CONCLUSIONS. BELOW ARE SEVERAL OF THE OBSERVATIONS AND CONCERNS WE'VE IDENTIFIED SO FAR. SO THEY'RE GOING BACK TO WHAT I SAID EARLIER. THERE'S DISREGARD FOR COMMUNITY INPUT. THERE APPEARS TO BE A SIGNIFICANT DISCONNECT BETWEEN WHAT THE COMMUNITY AND CPAC EXPRESSED DURING THE PLANNING PROCESS AND WHAT IS REFLECTED IN THE CURRENT DRAFT OF COMP PLAN. INCOMPATIBLE LAND USE. LAND USE. THERE ARE AREAS IN THE PLAN WHERE PROPERTY COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS ARE NOT BEING FOLLOWED. FOR EXAMPLE, LARGE ACREAGE PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO SMALLER PARCELS, WHICH RAISES CONCERNS ABOUT LONG TERM COMPATIBILITY AND PLANNING, COHERENCE, PARKS AND GREEN SPACE PRESERVATION PARKS AND GREEN SPACES MUST BE CLEARLY DEFINED, PRIORITIZE AND PRESERVED AS CONSISTENTLY REQUESTED BY BOTH THE COMMUNITY AND CPAC MEMBERS. SMARTER, SUSTAINABLE GROWTH GROWTH MUST BE ALIGNED WITH THE CITY'S CAPACITY AND RESOURCES, WHICH WE ALL KNOW ARE STRAINED. WE MUST REMAIN WITHIN OUR MEANS TO ENSURE LONG TERM SUSTAINABILITY AND QUALITY OF LIFE. 
          MAINTAINING COMMUNITY IDENTITY IT WAS MADE CLEAR THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS THAT RESIDENTS DO NOT WANT LAGO VISTA TO EMULATE CITIES LIKE AUSTIN OR CEDAR PARK, YET THE CURRENT PLAN SEEMS TO REFLECT AN AGENDA PUSHING IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. NEED FOR MORE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE, THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PARKS AND GREEN SPACE IS A CONSISTENT THEME. THE CURRENT NARRATIVE SURROUNDING A PUBLIC BOAT RAMP APPEARS TO BE DRIVEN BY A SMALL NUMBER OF OPINIONS, NOT THE BROADER COMMUNITY OR CPAC. CONSENSUS, EMERGENCY AND EVACUATION PLANNING THERE'S AN URGENT NEED TO IDENTIFY, OR AT LEAST A GENERAL OUTLINE OF WHAT THE EMERGENCY OR EVACUATION ROUTES ARE TO ENSURE COMMUNITY SAFETY IN THE EVENT OF A CRISIS. 
          I ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE SPECIFICS ON THE FLUME FOR DENSITY. MIXED USE, COMMUNITY CLARIFICATION ON HOUSING TYPES. WE RECOMMEND REMOVING THE STATEMENT THAT STANDALONE APARTMENTS ARE NOT DESIRABLE FROM THE MIXED USE COMMUNITY SECTION THAT'S ON PAGE 40. 
          SPECIFICALLY, THIS PHRASING IS OVERLY RESTRICTIVE AND MAY UNNECESSARILY LIMIT FLEXIBILITY IN FUTURE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT. PRESERVATION OF COMMUNITY CHARACTER. THERE APPEARS TO BE A LACK OF FOCUS ON PRESERVING THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY, 
          [03:00:04]
DESPITE THIS BEING A CONSISTENT PRIORITY EXPRESSED BY BOTH COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND CPAC THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. THIS DISCONNECT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED EXPLICITLY IN THE PLAN. 
          CLARIFICATION ON WORKFORCE HOUSING TERMINOLOGY. THE TERM WORKFORCE HOUSING IS USED THROUGHOUT THE PLAN, BUT IT APPEARS TO FUNCTION AS A REBRANDING OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AS CLEARLY STATED IN NUMEROUS MEETINGS, THE COMMUNITY HAS EXPRESSED A DESIRE NOT TO EXPAND THIS TYPE OF HOUSING WITHIN LAGO VISTA. THE TERMINOLOGY SHOULD BE CLARIFIED AND THE PLAN SHOULD BETTER REFLECT THE COMMUNITY'S POSITION ON THIS ISSUE. REPLACE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITH FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY. WE SHOULD TRY AND MOVE AWAY FROM USING THE TERM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. IT TENDS TO EVOKE IMAGES OF INDUSTRIALIZATION WHICH DOES NOT ALIGN WITH CHARACTER OR APPEAL OF LAGO VISTA. PEOPLE ARE DRAWN TO A QUIET LAKESIDE COMMUNITY IN THE HILLS, NOT TO A HUB OF ECONOMIC EXPANSION, WHICH MAY RESONATE MORE WITH DEVELOPERS THAN WITH RESIDENTS. IN MANY CASES, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DOESN'T CARRY A POSITIVE CONNOTATION FOR THE BROADER COMMUNITY. OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLANS HAVE TAKEN A MORE MEANINGFUL APPROACH WITH TERMINOLOGY. FOR EXAMPLE, FISCAL ALTERNATIVES LIKE FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY, WHICH ARE USED BY KYLE, LIBERTY HILL, AND TAYLOR, MAY BETTER REFLECT LAGO VISTA VALUES AND LONG TERM GOALS. AND THEN WE JUST WANTED TO REITERATE THERE'S BEEN A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY, COOPERATION AND RESPONSIVENESS TO OUR REPEATED REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION NECESSARY TO MAKE INFORMED RECOMMENDATIONS AND DECISIONS. 
          WHILE WE'RE EAGER AND COMMITTED TO FULFILLING OUR RESPONSIBILITIES, OUR EFFORTS HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANTLY HINDERED BY THE CITY'S FAILURE TO PROVIDE THE TOOLS, DATA AND SUPPORT REQUIRED FOR SUCCESS. WE WOULD LIKE TO CONCLUDE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS WITH A BROADER POINT. IF LAGO VISTA INTENDS TO CONTINUE OPERATING COMMISSIONS, COMMITTEES AND BOARDS COMPRISED OF SORRY, COMPOSED OF DEDICATED VOLUNTEERS WHO ARE GIVING THEIR TIME AT THE EXPENSE OF THEIR FAMILIES, CAREERS AND PERSONAL LIVES, THE CITY MUST DEMONSTRATE A GREATER COMMITMENT TO SUPPORTING THESE INDIVIDUALS. THIS INCLUDES PROVIDING TIMELY INFORMATION AND CLEAR COMMUNICATION AND MEANINGFUL COLLABORATION. THE CITY MUST DO BETTER, AND I'M PRETTY SURE WE STILL FEEL THAT WAY. AND THIS IS JUST A REFLECTION OF THAT. RACHEL. IS THAT WHAT IS THAT THE SAME WHAT YOU JUST READ? ALSO, WHAT'S EXACTLY IN OUR PACKET. NO. OKAY. 
          SO THAT ONE'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. YOU READ THAT AT TWO MEETINGS AGO. TWO MEETINGS. 
          YEAH. YEAH, I WATCHED THAT. I DIDN'T WATCH THE LAST ONE, BUT I WATCHED THE MEETING WHERE YOU READ THAT I WAS TRACKING MUCH OF THAT IN THE PACKET. OKAY. WHAT I SEE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU READ THERE, WHAT YOU HAVE IN THE PACKET AFTER YOU, WHEN YOU SPOKE, YOU SPOKE ABOUT CLARIFICATION OF WORKFORCE HOUSING TERMINOLOGY. AND THEN YOU, YOU CLOSED OUT WITH FOUR ADDITIONAL PARAGRAPHS THAT READ EVERYTHING CURRENTLY DESIGNATED RURAL RESIDENTIAL. AND OUR ADOPTED FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOULD REMAIN AS SUCH. ANY CHANGES PROPOSED BY HALF ASSOCIATES TO THIS DESIGNATION AND THEIR DRAFT FLUME SHOULD BE REVERSED AND RESTORED TO MATCH OUR EXISTING ADOPTED FLUME. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO INCREASE DENSITY ANYWHERE IN LARGO. IT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE AND WE DO NOT HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE RESOURCES TO SUPPORT IT. THAT'S JEFF'S NO, THAT'S RACHEL'S. RACHEL'S. I CAN SWEAR, JEFF, I THINK JEFF HAD SOME SIMILAR LANGUAGE. YEAH, I READ THAT EXACT THING. JEFF. SO WHAT WAS COUNCILOR ROBERTSON'S READING IS. SO AFTER TWO MEETINGS AGO, AFTER I READ WHAT I DESCRIBED, WE DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT MORE, AND THEN WE WERE ASKED FOR MORE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THAT. OKAY. AND THEN YOU GO ON PLAN PDS SEEKING A DIFFERENT LAND USE DESIGNATION, WHETHER RURAL, RESIDENTIAL OR OTHERWISE, MUST FOLLOW THE FORMAL FLUME AND PD AMENDMENT PROCESS. THIS ENSURES THAT BOTH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL CAN PROPERLY EVALUATE PROPOSED LAND USE IN PUBLIC SESSION. THIS STANDARD SHOULD APPLY EVERYWHERE IN LARGO, AND ESPECIALLY TO ALL AREAS ON THE EAST SIDE OF TOWN, WITH ONE EXCEPTION WHEN RANCH ON THE CURRENT FLUME. WHEN RANCH IS DESIGNATED LOW DENSITY, THAT'S THE CURRENT, THE ADOPTED ONE. BUT THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING OF EARLIER. BUT HALF DRAFT SHOWS IT AS A STATE. RURAL RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE A MORE APPROPRIATE DESIGNATION FOR THAT PROPERTY. AGAIN, I WANT TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE NOT DESIGNATING AREAS IN THE FLUME UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE DEVELOPED A CERTAIN WAY, OR TO GIVE DEVELOPERS ENTITLEMENTS PRELIMINARILY PRELIMINARY, PRELIMINARY. THERE IS A PROCESS TO FOLLOW AND IF THEY HAVE CERTAIN ENTITLEMENTS, DENSITY, ZONING AND THEY WANT TO CHANGE IT, THEY NEED TO FOLLOW A PROCESS AND NOT TRY TO GET WHAT THEY ARE SEEKING IN A SNEAKY BACKDOOR WAY. DOES ALL OF THE PNC AGREE WITH WHAT I JUST READ FROM THAT RACHEL WROTE? DOES ANYBODY DISAGREE WITH THAT? COULD I CLARIFY? YEAH. THIS IS 
          [03:05:06]
AN OBSERVATION AND IT'S NOT IT'S NOT A DISAGREEMENT WITH HALF. AND IT'S NOT A WELL, IT'S SORT OF IS IT. DISAGREE WITH HALF. LARGO HAS GROWN TREMENDOUSLY LIKE IN THE LAST TEN YEARS. AND WHEN WE DID THE LAST, WHEN WE DID THE LAST COMP PLAN, WE WENT ABOUT IT IN A CERTAIN WAY, AND THE RESULTS WERE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THEY ARE NOW IN THAT PREVIOUSLY WE DID WANT HOUSING, LIKE FOR ENTRY LEVEL PEOPLE, AND THEY DID WANT HOUSING FOR RETIRED PEOPLE. THEY WANTED THEY, THEY, THEY SAID THAT THEY WANTED A LIFE CYCLE HOUSING OR WHATEVER FROM, YOU KNOW, OKAY, THIS RESULTS KIND OF INDICATES THEY DON'T THEY DON'T I SAY THEY I MEAN, RESIDENTS DON'T WANT WORKFORCE. HOUSING IS IS THE TERM THAT THEY'RE USING. I THINK THAT MAY BE A FUNCTION OF THE FACT THAT WE'VE HAD SO MANY. THE GROWTH THAT WE'VE HAD HAS BEEN LARGE, BUT IT'S BEEN IN ONE PARTICULAR AGE RANGE. I MEAN, WE USED TO BE AN OLDER GROUP AND NOW WE ARE HEAVILY YOUNGER, FAMILY ORIENTED. AND I THINK MAYBE THE. MAYBE THE PEOPLE WHO LIVED HERE BEFORE WHO ARE OLDER WERE NOT ADEQUATELY. WE DIDN'T GET THEIR INPUT ADEQUATE ENOUGH. WE HAD A LOT OF MEAT, WE HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS AND WE HAD A LOT OF INPUT. BUT I THINK MAYBE TO GET TO THE DEMOGRAPHIC, THE OLDER DEMOGRAPHIC, WE WE MAY NOT HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB IN GETTING THE INPUT FROM THOSE PEOPLE. AND IF WE HAD, MAYBE THE RESULTS WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT AS FAR AS WANTING A BROADER ARRAY OF HOUSING. SO MY CLARIFYING QUESTION FOR YOU WOULD BE, HOW DO YOU THINK THE OLDER DEMOGRAPHIC IS NOT BEING REPRESENTED IN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP? WHAT WOULD YOU WANT TO SEE DIFFERENT? I'M, I'M, I'M MORE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE WELL I'M MORE TALKING ABOUT THE THE FEEDBACK OF LIKE NOT SPECIFICALLY SAYING THAT THEY WANTED HOUSING FOR SENIOR CITIZENS AND FOR THE WORK AND FOR THE WORKFORCE, THAT THEY'RE MORE FOCUSED ON KEEPING DENSITY LOW. AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULDN'T EQUIVOCATE, KEEPING DENSITY LOW WITH NOT HAVING. BECAUSE TYPICALLY, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SENIOR CENTERS OR IF YOU'RE TYPICALLY TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, YOUNG WORKERS, THOSE YOU KIND OF THINK OF MORE APARTMENT TYPE FACILITIES, THAT'S JUST KIND OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, WORKER HOUSING AND OLDER CITIZEN, SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING IS. SO PEOPLE ARE THINKING, WE DON'T WANT LOSE. WE WANT TO KEEP THE LOWS DOWN. WE WANT TO KEEP THE LOWS DOWN. BUT WE'RE NOT THINKING THAT, WELL, OKAY. WE DO WANT TO KEEP THE LOWS DOWN, BUT WE DO STILL NEED TO MAKE PROVISIONS FOR THE OLDER FOLKS AND THE WORKER FOLKS. AND THIS IS MY INPUT. IT'S NOT A RESULT. IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A COMMITTEE INPUT. IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEVER WE NEVER GOT AROUND TO THE COMMITTEES TO ACTUALLY TO FOR ME TO SAY THAT, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT WE MAY NOT HAVE GOTTEN INPUT FROM THE DEMOGRAPHIC THAT WE DID BEFORE, BECAUSE NOW THE DEMOGRAPHIC THAT RESPONDS MORE IS YOUNGER. YOU KNOW WHAT'S INTERESTING, THOUGH, IS THAT THE MEDIAN AGE THAT REPORTED IN THE 2030 COMP PLAN FROM 2016 WAS PUT AT 47 YEARS OLD, AND THE CURRENT ONE IS 53. 17% OF OUR POPULATION IS. WE ACTUALLY WENT UP IN AVERAGE AGE, YOU KNOW, 20 IN THE LAST TEN YEARS, I WOULD SAY I WOULD NOT HAVE GUESSED THAT AT ALL OF THE PUBLIC MEETINGS WITH HALF. 
          I WOULD SAY THE AVERAGE AGE. I WOULD SAY 80% OF THE PEOPLE WERE 65, 70 PLUS. SO I THINK HALF, I THINK THEY WERE ACTUALLY VERY WELL REPRESENTED. YEAH, YEAH. I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 136 OF THE PACKET, WHICH IS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS FROM, YOU KNOW, THEY DID A SURVEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC FORUMS, RIGHT. ONLINE SURVEY AND SOMETHING LIKE 37%, THE LARGEST PERCENTAGE CLASSIFIED THEMSELVES AS STAY AT HOME, RETIRED, NOT CURRENTLY EMPLOYED. SO THAT WAS PRETTY WELL. BUT FOR FOR THE PURPOSE OF MOVING THE MEETING ALONG, KEVIN, I WOULD I WOULD YOU KNOW, I READ WHAT RACHEL SAID. EVERYBODY AGREES WITH IT. LINDA WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE NEEDS OF THE ELDERLY AND THE WORKFORCE. I'M JUST SUMMARIZING. THANK YOU. 
          PAUL. HAPPY TO HELP. GO AHEAD. AND THIS IS KIND OF A A PROCESS SUGGESTION. YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY I THINK IT WAS JEFF SAID, NO WAY. WE CAN'T WE CAN'T FINISH THIS AND DO A CREDIBLE JOB IN 
          [03:10:04]
THREE WEEKS. AND I KNOW THERE IS, I WOULD SAY, LAUDABLE TO SAY, CAN WE FINISH THIS UNDER THE CURRENT, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL THAT WE HAVE BECAUSE OF THE, THE BUILT IN, YOU KNOW, KNOWLEDGE? I THINK THE ANSWER IS NO, I DON'T THINK WE CAN. AND SO WE HAD THE THE COMP PLAN, THE 20 I THINK IT'S CALLED THE 2010 COMP PLAN. RIGHT. THAT THE OR THE ONE THAT'S CURRENTLY IN PLACE. RIGHT. 2030 2030 PLAN WHICH PASSED IN 2016. YEAH. OKAY. THAT WAS ONE THAT I THINK NONE OF US HAVE BEEN REALLY PROUD OF. THIS ONE IN MY MIND IS WORSE, NOT BETTER. AND SO KIND OF LIKE WE DID WITH THE THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE, WE SAID, OKAY, THERE'S SO MANY THINGS WRONG. LET'S JUST START. LET'S JUST START OVER. AND I KIND OF FELT LIKE WE'RE ALMOST THERE, THAT WE MAY NEED TO SET UP SOME SUBCOMMITTEES. AND IT'S JUST CITIZENS AND STAFF AND COUNCIL, AND WE DON'T HIRE ANY CONSULTANT. BECAUSE WHAT I SEE IN THIS PLAN IS IT'S A LOT OF THEIR BOILERPLATE. IT'S A TON OF STUFF. TALKING ABOUT THE MEETINGS THAT THEY HELD TO SAY, WE DID A GREAT JOB OF GATHERING DATA, BUT THEN THE CONTENT IS EVERYBODY, WHETHER IT'S THE PLANNING AND ZONING, WHETHER IT'S CPAC, WHETHER IT'S THE PARKS AND REC COMMITTEE, WHETHER IT'S COUNCIL, EVERYBODY'S SAYING THIS DOESN'T REFLECT REALITY AT ALL. SO I DON'T I DON'T THINK IT'S FIXABLE. I THINK YOU JUST HAVE TO SAY THIS. THIS IS SUCH A BAD PRODUCT. LET'S GET A FLUME. LET'S GET THAT CLEARED UP BECAUSE THERE'S SOME THINGS WE NEED ON THAT. BUT THE WHOLE THE WHOLE THING, I THINK IT'S WE NEED A COMPLETE REDO, WHICH IS NOT A THREE WEEK PROCESS. IT'S PROBABLY A, YOU KNOW, A NINE, 6 TO 9 MONTH PROCESS. THAT IS EFFECTIVELY WHAT THEY DID RECOMMEND. WHAT PMS DID, DID RECOMMEND WAS TO TO TO START OVER. THEY THEY WERE THEY HAD A DESIRE TO HAVE A COUPLE DIFFERENT SUBCOMMITTEES. AND YOU CAN SEE WE GOT A REALLY GOOD PNC RIGHT NOW. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE THAN, THAN THE COUNCIL PRETTY QUICK. AND THEY BUT THEY AND THEY WORK HARD IN THEIR, THEIR DESIRE WAS TO SPLIT IT UP AND HAVE HAVE ONE GROUP, ONE SUBDIVISION WITH FRANK LOOKING AT THE LAND USE TYPE STUFF AND ANOTHER SUBCOMMITTEE LOOKING AT THE, YOU KNOW, THE BULK OF THE REST OF THE THINGS, THEY MAY HAVE HAD A THIRD ONE, SOMEBODY HAD PROPOSED A THIRD ONE AT ONE POINT. I FORGET WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO DO, PROBABLY FOR PARKS. YEAH. PARKS. OKAY. AND, AND AND YOU KNOW, THEY THOUGHT, WELL, YOU KNOW, IF WE, IF WE DO IT THIS WAY, WE, YOU KNOW, WE, WE CAN GET IT DONE AND WE CAN GET IT DONE RELATIVELY QUICKLY. 
          AND IT'LL BE A BETTER PRODUCT. THEY ASKED CHARLES, DO YOU NEED, DO WE HAVE TO HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON A CERTAIN TIME, OR IS THERE A TIME LIMIT? NO. AND AND CHARLES RIGHTLY SAID IT'S BETTER TO BE RIGHT, HAVE A GOOD ONE THAN A FAST ONE. AND SO, YEAH, I'M IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH YOU, PAUL, BECAUSE THAT THAT ALIGNS WITH THAT ALIGNS WITH WHAT WHAT PNC SAID. AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT MY GUYS. SO WORKING IN A COMMUNITY YOU KNOW THE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS A IS A VISION FOR YOU KNOW HOW WE WANT TO LIVE, HOW WE WANT TO INTERACT, WHERE DO WE WANT TO BE. RIGHT. SO ON PAGE 226, THERE WAS SOME GUIDING PRINCIPLES. BUILD A GATHERING PLACE FOR COMMUNITY. PROTECT OPEN SPACES. SO WHERE ARE THOSE OPEN SPACES AND NATURAL AREAS. YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF GROWING, WHERE ARE THOSE SPACES THAT WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, LIKE TO BE THAT ARE ADVANTAGEOUS FOR OUR PARTICULAR COMMUNITY TO GROW? IF YOU IF YOU TAKE EACH OF THESE AND MAKE THEM LIKE A DONKEY ON A, ON A PINPOINT AND GO, WHERE WOULD YOU PUT THIS RIGHT? THAT EXERCISE NEVER HAPPENED, IN MY OPINION. IT REALLY GOT INTO. 
          THEY THEY PULLED IT INTO, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS OR WHATEVER THAT WHERE TAKING THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES, YOU KNOW, WHERE IS IT THAT YOU FEEL THAT WE NEED OUR STREET CONNECTIVITY, RIGHT. PUT THE PIN THE TAIL ON THE DONKEY. RIGHT. BECAUSE LOGO IS SO BUILT OUT RIGHT NOW. SO THERE'S SOMETHING CALLED APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY IN TERMS OF FACILITATION. AND WHAT THAT SIMPLY MEANS IS THAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE FORWARD. WHAT DO YOU WANT? WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS THAT THROUGH HAS FACILITATION, IS IT TURNED INTO WHAT'S WRONG? AND WHEN YOU GET INTO WHAT'S WRONG, THEN YOU END UP WITH A REALLY BAD PRODUCT. ALL RIGHT. 
          [03:15:01]
SO I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THERE IS DATA IN HERE. YOU KNOW LIKE OKAY. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ENCOURAGE A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES. ALL RIGHT. WELL WHAT IS THE GAP THAT WE HAVE THERE. MY DEFINITION OF WORKFORCE OR WHAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IS WHERE ARE OUR POLICE OFFICERS. WHERE'S OUR STAFF. HERE AT CITY HALL. WHERE'S OUR NURSES? WHERE'S OUR TEACHERS GOING TO LIVE? RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY OF THAT HOUSE HERE. YES OR NO? IF IF WE DON'T AND WE FIND THAT'S A GAP, PIN THE TAIL ON THE ON THE MAP, WHERE DOES THAT GO? AND SO I FEEL LIKE HAVING THAT INITIAL RESETTING IS GOING TO BE AN IMPORTANT PART OF THIS PROCESS. 
          IF, IF PLANNING AND ZONING AGREES IN THIS COUNCIL AGREES. FROM THERE, YOU CAN TAKE A LOT OF WHAT HAP HAS DONE. AND TO JEFF'S POINT, RIGHT, MAKE THE BIG PICTURE PIECES REALLY EASY FOR PEOPLE TO DIGEST AND ALL THE DETAIL GOES BEHIND IT IN THE SECOND SECTION. SO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO PUT MY THOUGHTS OUT THERE FROM A FACILITATOR WHO'S WORKED IN A LOT OF COMMUNITIES IN TERMS OF TRYING TO GET TO WHERE WE WHERE THEY WANTED TO GO AND HAVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE THAT THEY WANTED. I REALLY THINK THERE ARE SOME BASIC PIECES IN HERE THAT CAN BE PRESERVED, YOU KNOW, PULLED OUT, LIKE I SAID. BUT GOING ON THAT WE ACTUALLY WOULD HAVE A CHANCE AT MAKING THIS A QUICKER PRODUCT THAN TRYING TO RETROFIT AND FIX, BECAUSE I WANT TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, I WITNESSED A CONVERSATION WHERE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WHERE DO WE WANT TO HAVE I'M GOING TO CALL IT LIKE A DOMAIN LIGHT, YOU KNOW, AND A GATHERING PLACE, YOU KNOW, IT HAS A SHOPS, MAYBE SHOPS ON THE BOTTOM. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE LIVING ON TOP ARE REALLY NICE, YOU KNOW, RESTAURANT ON TOP, QUAINT LITTLE SHOPS, YOU KNOW, WHERE, YOU KNOW, WHERE IS THAT? AND BY HAVING IT ON A PLACE RATHER THAN A PIN, THE TAIL ON THE MAP KIND OF THING, EVERY PLACE HAD SOMETHING WRONG WITH IT. AND SO THEREFORE IT WAS ALMOST LIKE WE EXED OFF ALMOST EVERY PLACE. OKAY. SO ANYWAY, I JUST, I THINK WE ACTUALLY DO HAVE SOME VERY, VERY TALENTED FACILITATORS IN THE COMMUNITY. IF WE WANTED TO PULL SOMEBODY IN FOR A DAY TO LEVEL SET THIS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THE PERSPECTIVE, IF WE COME FROM START WITH PAGE 226 AND THEN BUILD IT OUT FROM THERE, THAT POTENTIALLY WE COULD GET TO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT CAN MAKE SENSE. I WAS LOOKING THERE IS SOME ADDITIONAL DATA, CHARLES, THAT I FOUND LACKING FROM HALF, YOU KNOW, TO THEIR POINT IN ORDER TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE SOME OF THIS ACTUALLY FEASIBLE, LIKE, YOU KNOW, HOW FAST CAN YOU GROW AND WHERE IS THAT? YOU KNOW, OUR QUESTIONS AND CURRENTLY IN OUR COMMUNITY. SO. WELL, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. 
          SO YEAH, I MEAN I I'M KIND OF GOING BETWEEN THE TWO COMMENTS THERE FROM COUNCILOR OWEN AND COUNCILOR PRINCE. I DON'T WANT TO SCRAP EVERYTHING BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THIS TO PROLONG FOR ANOTHER YEAR OR TWO, BUT OBVIOUSLY IT'S CRAP. I MEAN, I SAID IT FROM THE BEGINNING. I DIDN'T LIKE GOING WITH HALF. I DON'T LIKE GOING FOR CONSULTANTS FOR THESE THINGS, AND I KNOW IT'S TIRING TO HEAR ME SAY IT AGAIN, BUT IN IN MY OPINION, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A PRODUCT OF PML. PML LOVES PUSHING THESE CONSULTANTS ON CITIES AND CITIES. GET THESE COOKIE CUTTER PRODUCTS. AND YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT. SO I LOVE THE IDEA OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE. I REALLY LOVE JEFF'S IDEA OF, YOU KNOW, YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, A DETAILED VERSION AND THEN ONE THAT THE CITIZENS CAN READ. BUT TRUTHFULLY, I JUST WANT THE ONE THAT THE CITIZENS CAN READ. I THINK THAT THE SHORTER CONCISE IS BETTER. KEEP IT BROAD, AND THEN WE WILL FILL OUT THE NUTS AND BOLTS THROUGHOUT ALL THE COMMITTEES, WHICH IS FILLED WITH YOU GUYS. ANYWAYS, A LOT OF THE THAT WAS MY PROBLEM WHEN I FIRST READ THIS. I MEAN, THE SURVEYS ARE ONLY AS GOOD AS THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED. GOVERNMENT IS NOT A GENIE BOTTLE THAT YOU RUB AND GET EVERYTHING YOU WISH FOR. AND SO WHEN YOU ASK BROAD QUESTIONS OF DO YOU WANT TO HAVE MORE PARKS AND GREEN SPACES? WELL, YEAH, EVERYONE'S GOING TO SAY YES. 
          BUT IF YOU TELL THEM, HEY, THERE'S ONLY LIKE 8% OF LAND AVAILABLE IN LAGO VISTA, AND IF THE CITY'S GOING TO SPEND MONEY ON PARKS AND REC, I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THIS LOT AND THIS LOT, AND NONE OF IT'S GOING TO BE WATERSIDE, AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANOTHER PARK OR ARROWHEAD PARK, YOU'RE GOING TO GET ANOTHER SUNSET PARK. AND THEN I THINK MORE PEOPLE ARE LIKE, OH, THAT WASN'T FUN WHEN WE DID THAT THE FIRST TIME. SO I'D SAY IF WE DO ANY MORE DATA COLLECTION TO BE SUPER DETAILED ON THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU ASK AND SAY, LIKE, THESE ARE THE OPTIONS, I KIND OF THINK OF IT LIKE SIMCITY, YOU KNOW, YOU REMEMBER THAT GAME SIMCITY, YOU CAN BUILD YOUR OWN CITY, AND AT CERTAIN POINTS OF THE GAME, YOU ONLY HAD CERTAIN THINGS 
          [03:20:02]
AVAILABLE TO YOU TO BUILD. I MEAN, JUST SAY THAT TO THE CITIZENS. WHOEVER YOU'RE YOU'RE SURVEYING, SAY THESE ARE THE FOUR OPTIONS YOU WOULD LIKELY GET. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT US TO PRIORITIZE, OR WOULD YOU LIKE US TO PRIORITIZE THIS? SO TO GET BACK TO THE POINT IS, GOING FORWARD, I SUPPORT THE SUBCOMMITTEE GROUPS. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU DON'T JUST THROW IT ALL OUT, EVEN THOUGH IT IS THERE IS NOT GOOD. AND, YOU KNOW, I SHARE YOUR FRUSTRATION THAT THEY DIDN'T LISTEN TO YOU, YOU DIDN'T GET THE PRODUCT THAT YOU PUT WORK INTO, AND WE GOT THIS INSTEAD. SO HOWEVER YOU CAN SALVAGE IT, WE'RE HERE TO SUPPORT YOU. AND THE STAFF ARE AS WELL. AND I HOPE THAT WE DO IT AS QUICK AS WE CAN AND, AND FIND WAYS TO REUSE SOME OF WHAT IS HERE. I THINK ONE BIG DIFFERENCE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS TIME IS I'VE GOT TWO TALENTED STAFF MEMBERS SITTING THERE ON THAT SECOND ROW THERE, ONE THAT'S A GURU AND PARKS, AND ONE THAT'S A GURU AND PLANNING. AND I THINK THEY CAN BRING A LOT OF GOOD IDEAS TO THE TABLE. I MEAN, I WILL POINT OUT FROM DAY ONE, SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, I DID NOT LIKE THAT PLAN. I'M NOT A HALF ASSOCIATES FAN. THEY'VE GOT SOME GREAT PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR THEM, BUT IT'S ONE OF THOSE PROCESSES. WHEN YOU DO A COMP PLAN WITH A CONSULTANT, SOMEBODY FROM STAFF HAS TO SIT THERE AND HOLD THEIR HAND AND KEEP THEM DIRECTED. AND I DON'T SEE WHERE ANYBODY TOOK OWNERSHIP OF THIS PROJECT, AND THAT'S WHY WE GOT WHAT WE GOT. AND ARE WE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING THE COMP PLAN COMMITTEE BACK TOGETHER OR THIS IS PNC NOW DOING IT, THAT THAT IS A DECISION Y'ALL Y'ALL NEED TO MAKE. I THINK PNC HAS GOT A GREAT IDEA AND A GREAT GRASP OF WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. I THINK LET THEM DO THEIR SUBCOMMITTEES WITH SOME INPUT FROM CITY COUNCIL STAFF MEMBERS AND CITIZENS AND CITIZENS CITIZENS. I'M GOOD WITH THAT. WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THAT IS THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE A DISCUSSION BOARD NOW, SO PNC COULD HELP FURTHER SOME OF THESE THINGS ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD. IF YOU COULD GIVE OUR STAFF ACCESS TO THAT DISCUSSION BOARD, TOO. SO THERE COULD BE MAYBE A LITTLE MORE BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THEM. AND JUST MAKE SURE YOU'RE IS AVAILABLE AS YOU CAN BE TO THEM. SIR. THERE ARE ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO DO TONIGHT IS STILL WITH EVERYBODY, WITH YOU GUYS PRESENT AND US PRESENT IS STILL. 
          JUST HAVE A QUICK LOOK AT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND LET'S SHARE SOME OF THIS INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE, THESE THINGS THAT WE'RE AWARE OF SO THAT IT'S OUT THERE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN FOR DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION, ESPECIALLY BY ANYBODY WHO'S GOING TO BE WORKING ON THIS IN THE FUTURE. AND AS AN ASIDE, ONE THING, AN ADDITION TO THIS COUNCIL THAT I THINK IS GOING TO BE REALLY GOOD NEXT YEAR ARE HEARING ON THIS TOPIC IS I KNOW KAREN VAN NESS, SHE WAS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE. SHE, SHE WAS ON CPAC AS WELL. SO THAT'LL BE A GOOD ADDITION UP HERE, I THINK TO PAUL, GET A PEN AND GO START WRITING ON IT, BECAUSE I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE MOST EDITS. I TELL YOU WHAT I HAD, I WENT TO FINISH GETTING COMMENTS FROM THE REST OF COUNCIL. MISS ROBERTS DID SIGN UP TO SPEAK, AND THEN WE CAN FOCUS ON SOME SPECIFIC TOPICS THAT WE WANT TO TRY AND FINISH BY THIS TIME. OKAY. AND I HAVE ONE VERY SPECIFIC. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE HEADING IN A DIRECTION OF, OF TASKING PNC TO DO A WHOLE BUNCH OF WORK ON THIS. I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE SPECIFICALLY SPLIT OUT THE PARKS MASTER PLAN, HAVE THE REC ON THAT WITH WITH OUR PARKS DIRECTOR, AND THEN HAVE PNC OWN 100% THE OTHER PORTIONS TO TWO DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT HEADS AND VOLUNTEERS LOVE IT. THERE WAS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 2030 PLAN THAT WAS DEVELOPED IN 2016 AND THIS ONE, AND THAT WAS THERE WAS NO COUNCIL PARTICIPATION. WE WERE COGNIZANT OF THAT. WE PURPOSELY DID THAT. BUT YOU HAD RON SMITH, YOU HAD DALE MITCHELL, AND I THINK THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN ONE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER THAT WAS ON IT. AND I THINK I THINK THEY HELPED DRIVE IT MORE SO THAN WHAT THIS ONE WAS DRIVEN. AND SO WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST, AND THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION, WOULD IT BE HELPFUL IF COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE INVOLVED WITH PNC? AND SHE SAID YES. AND SO I THINK IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE IMPORTANT THAT WHEN THE SUBCOMMITTEES GET PUT TOGETHER, BECAUSE PNC MEMBERS, IT'S COUNCIL MEMBERS, IT'S STAFF MEMBERS AND THEIR CITIZENS THAT ARE INVOLVED. IF WE DO THAT, I THINK WE CAN MOVE ALONG RELATIVELY QUICKLY. IF WE DON'T DO THAT, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH MORE CRAP, YOU KNOW, AND MORE FRUSTRATED PEOPLE. TO BE HONEST. CAN I JUST SAY ONE THING? IF YOU COULD PLEASE COME UP HERE. SO IF IN OTHER COMMUNITIES WE DIDN'T SEPARATE TREES AND LAND AND PARKS. AND SO I THINK THOSE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT MUTUALLY THEY'RE NOT SEPARATE. SO PARKS AND OPEN SPACE TREES, TREE PRESERVATION, THE PARKS, ALL OF THOSE I THINK THEY SHOULD BE TOGETHER. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE CLEAR CLARIFY. THAT'S WHAT YOU MEAN TOO. LIKE WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS OVER HERE AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS. I THINK THOSE NEED TO GO TOGETHER AND WORK TOGETHER. AND MAYBE THAT'S WHAT THOSE SUBCOMMITTEES, THEY TAKE THAT UP. AND IF THAT WORKS WELL FOR THEM TO WORK TOGETHER ON THAT ITEM, BY ALL MEANS DO I THINK IT SHOULD. SO THAT'S ALL. 
          THANK YOU. OKAY. WOULD YOU DONE. I'M SORRY. I'M TALKING TO MR. NO, I THINK THAT I THINK YOU'RE 
          [03:25:03]
I 100% AGREE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY MORE THAN ONE, 2 OR 3 COUNCIL MEMBERS FOCUSED WITH PNC ON THEIR EFFORT. 2 OR 3 COUNCIL MEMBERS FOCUSED ON THE PARKS PORTION. AND MAYBE IT SHOULDN'T BE THREE ON EACH, BECAUSE MAYBE WE NEED SOMETHING THAT'S, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY THAT STITCHES IT TOGETHER. SO WE'LL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE DO ALL OF THIS AND OBVIOUSLY MAINTAIN SEPARATION AND MEET OPEN MEETINGS, RULES AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. BUT I DO I DO THINK IT NEEDS TO BE A BIG TASK FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS WITH THE WITH THE LUNCH. AND I'M PERSONALLY TORN BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE I HAVE A LOT OF HISTORY ON ZONING, BUT I'M CURRENTLY FOCUSED ON PARKS, SO WE'LL SEE WHEN WE GET THERE. MR. PENFIELD, DID YOU? I WASN'T GOING TO ADD TOO MUCH. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A FEW INTERESTING POINTS, LIKE, AS THE SUBCOMMITTEE TAKES A LOOK AT THIS, I, I KIND OF LAUGHED AT LIKE PAGE 147. THE QUESTION WAS, WOULD YOU LIKE BETTER PARKS? AND THE ANSWER WAS ABSOLUTELY 85%. DO YOU FEEL LIKE PARKLAND SHOULD BE MORE FULLY DEVELOPED? ABSOLUTELY. 86%. WOULD YOU LIKE TO PAY FOR IT? AND. IT'S LIKE 5149, RIGHT? YEAH, YEAH. AND IT WAS 5050. RIGHT. SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN I, WHEN I READ THROUGH THAT, IT'S LIKE, WELL HOW HOW DO YOU ACCOMPLISH BOTH OF THOSE. YOU KNOW, AND IT KIND OF LED ME TO SOME OF THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE LIKE, WHAT IS THE TOP PRIORITIES THAT YOU LOOK FOR IN A DEVELOPER, FOR EXAMPLE? AND THE ANSWERS WERE PRESERVING THE HILL COUNTRY CHARACTER, RIGHT? IF WE WERE TO HAVE A BUILDER DO SOMETHING REALLY, REALLY GREAT, WE WOULD LIKE THEM TO PRESERVE THE TREES AND THE LANDSCAPING AND TO DO A BEAUTIFUL JOB. I FOUND NUMBER TWO TO BE INTERESTING. IT WASN'T NO DEVELOPMENT. THE ANSWER WAS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. YOU KNOW, THAT WAS THE NUMBER TWO MOST DESIRED THING. AND SO ALL OF THIS TO SAY IS I LOOK AT THIS DOCUMENT AS IMPORTANT AS OUR CHARTER THAT'S BEING WRITTEN. AND I DON'T THINK PERSONALLY, THIS IS A SIDEBAR SUBCOMMITTEE LIKE THIS IS GOING TO TAKE A LONG TIME. IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE HALF AN ASSOCIATES FIX THIS OR REVISE THIS, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE DONE CORRECTLY BY DOING IT ONCE A MONTH. I MEAN, THIS IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE DONE TO THE METICULOUS DETAIL AS THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE IS REWRITING THE CHARTER, IF IT'S GOING TO BE DONE CORRECTLY, IF WE'RE GOING TO ALL LOOK AT THIS AS A DOCUMENT, THAT'S GOING TO BE OUR GUIDING LIGHT, AND FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS, IT'S GOING TO BE UP TO I MEAN, THE MAP STILL HAS SPELLING ERRORS ON IT. 
          WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO POUND THIS OUT IN TWO WEEKS. RIGHT. IT'S GOING TO TAKE MONTHS OF DILIGENT, HARD, CONSISTENT. I MEAN, I LOOK HOW MANY PAGES IS THE CHARTER LINDA? 3545 BUT YET YOU'RE GOING TO SPEND A YEAR REVISING THAT DOCUMENT. AND HERE THIS IS 100 HUNDRED. HOW MANY PAGES? TOO MANY 200 PAGE DOCUMENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO POUND OUT IN TWO WEEKS. AND IT'S OUR GUIDING LIGHT. SO MY POSITION IS I DON'T THINK THAT WE SCRAP EVERYTHING. I DON'T THINK THAT WE KEEP IT AS IT IS. BUT I DO THINK A VERY MUCH MORE THOROUGH REVISION LOOK AT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN THIS. I THINK A WHOLE NEW COMMITTEE DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS, WITH PEOPLE THAT HAVE A FOCUS ON PARKS, THAT HAS A FOCUS ON PLANNING AND ZONING. AND I THINK THEY SPENT THE REAL TIME TO POUND THIS OUT. THEY COME BACK ON REGULAR VISITS, JUST LIKE THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE DOES. THEY CAN GET UPDATES. THEY CAN GET THAT. IT'S JUST MY OPINION. I MEAN, JUST LAST JUST LAST NIGHT, YOU GUYS WERE SAYING, HEY, WE NEED TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND ASK FOR GUIDELINES. I MEAN, WE'RE THE GUIDELINE STAGE. WE'RE NOT AT STAMPING THIS THING. WE STILL HAVE ARGUMENTS ABOUT THE FLU ON WHAT IT SHOULD BE AND WHAT IT SHOULDN'T BE. AND THERE'S THERE'S NO CONSENSUS. 
          BUT YET THIS IS GOING TO BE OUR DOCUMENT THAT DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE FOR, FOR THE NEXT. I MEAN, WE GOT TO GET THIS RIGHT. AND I DON'T WANT TO BE ON A CITY COUNCIL THAT JUST PUMPS OUT A DOCUMENT FOR THE NEXT GENERATION OF PEOPLE. AND I'M NOT PROUD OF IT. RIGHT. AND SO IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS, LET'S DO IT RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND WHY WE WANT TO GET IT DONE, I GET IT, BUT I WOULD RATHER BE THOROUGH AND CONSISTENT AND METICULOUS. YOU KNOW, LINDA, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I LIKE MOST ABOUT YOU IS HOW THOROUGH YOU ARE. AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO SIGN A DOCUMENT, YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE IT'S PERFECT. RIGHT. AND I WANT THIS, THIS DOCUMENT TO HAVE THE SAME SCRUTINY AS ANY OTHER DOCUMENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO PRODUCE THAT HAS THE SAME LEVEL OF MAGNITUDE AS OUR CHARTER. SO IT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION THAT WE DON'T FORM A SUBCOMMITTEE BASED OFF OF PNC MEMBERS EXCLUSIVELY, ALTHOUGH I THINK THEY SHOULD BE HEAVILY INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS. I THINK THIS IS AN INDEPENDENT COMMITTEE 
          [03:30:06]
THAT'S DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. YES, SIR. DAVE'S BEEN ASKING, TOO. OKAY. I'M SORRY, I JUST SAW GENE'S. HERE. GIVE ME YOUR $0.02. DAVE SNYDER, 4905. 
          GRANGER. FIRST OF ALL, I'M GOING TO OWN UP TO THE FACT THAT OF EVERYONE I'M PLANNING ZONING, I HAVE PUT THE LEAST AMOUNT OF WORK INTO THESE FOLKS BEHIND ME HAVE DEDICATED MONTHS OF THEIR LIVES FOR THIS. AND WHEN THEY CAME TO THE VERY FIRST MEETING AND SAID, THIS PLAN IS GARBAGE, THEY'RE THE ONES THAT WE SHOULD BE LISTENING TO. A COUPLE OF THEM HAD BEEN TO EVERY ONE OF THE MEETINGS IN ADVANCE WITH EVERY EVERY CITIZEN THAT CAME. THEY LISTENED TO EVERY WORD THAT THEY WERE TOLD. AND WHEN THEY TELL US THAT THAT PLAN IS WRONG, I'M GOING TO BACK ON EVERYTHING THAT THEY SAY, AND I WILL BACK THEM TO THE HILT. AND THEY DESERVE ALL OF OUR CREDIT AND APPLAUD WHATEVER WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THEM FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT THEY PUT INTO IT, BECAUSE THEY'VE LOGGED A LOT OF TIME AND THE FACT THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO DO IT AGAIN SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT THEIR LEVEL OF COMMITMENT TO WHAT THE CITY WANTS. SECOND THING IS, IS AGAIN, I'M GOING TO I GUESS I'LL BRING UP MY LACK OF EDUCATION TO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE IN THIS COMP PLAN. BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THAT COMP PLAN, I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE GOTTEN TO A POINT THAT WE WANT TO PUSH THIS OUT AND WE'RE PUSHING IT OUT FOR US. AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS IS FOR. THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR OUR CITIZENS AND FOR FUTURE CITIZENS THAT ARE COMING IN. AND IF WE DON'T HAVE THIS CORRECT FOR THE CITIZENS THAT ARE HERE, WE'RE GIVING THE WRONG IMPRESSION TO CITIZENS THAT WANT TO MOVE HERE. OKAY. THERE'S SOME THINGS IN THERE THAT I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE LEGALITIES OF, AND SPECIFICALLY THE FLUME, BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO BEAT THAT TO DEATH TONIGHT. IN MY OPINION, WHEN SOMEONE LOOKS AT THAT MAP THAT DOES NOT LIVE HERE, THEY SHOULD GET A REAL REPRESENTATION OF WHAT THIS CITY HAS LEFT TO BE BUILT OUT. AND IF WE'RE DESIGNATING THINGS AND THERE IS ROOM FOR ERROR OR THERE IS, IT'S NOT REALLY A TRUE REPRESENTATION OF WHAT'S THERE, I THINK WE'RE DOING A DISSERVICE. I'M NOT SAYING WE NEED TO CHANGE THE DENSITIES. I'M SAYING THAT WE NEED TO HAVE IT ACCURATELY REFLECT WHAT'S THERE, SO THAT EVERYONE THAT LOOKS AT IT UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S BEING BUILT. I DON'T THINK I DISAGREE WITH ANYBODY. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WHAT WE WANT THE COMMUNITY TO GO, I JUST THINK THAT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND FOR A LAYMAN. I'M HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING IT AND I'M HEARING DIFFERENT THINGS EVERY DAY. WHAT IT DOES MEAN, WHAT IT DOESN'T MEAN, WHAT THE IMPLICATIONS ARE. IF WE PASS THROUGH, THERE ARE NO IMPLICATIONS BECAUSE IT'S JUST A GUIDELINE. AND I THINK WE COULD DO BETTER BY PUTTING THOSE THINGS TOGETHER SO THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS. A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT I SAW IN THERE THAT I DIDN'T AGREE WITH, I DON'T EVEN WANT TO BRING THEM UP BECAUSE THIS ISN'T ABOUT ME. 
          THIS IS ABOUT WHAT THE CITIZENS ASKED FOR. IF THE CITIZENS SAID THAT THEY WANTED EV CHARGING STATIONS PUT IN BY THE CITY TO PAY FOR THEM, AND RACHEL SAYS, YEAH, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I HEARD, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE DO. BUT IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS JUST THROWN IN BY HEF AND THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS DISCUSSED, I THINK THOSE THINGS NEED TO BE WEEDED OUT. I THINK EVERYBODY HAS GOOD POINTS ON IT. I DO THINK THAT SPLITTING THIS THING UP INTO SECTIONS WITH SUBCOMMITTEES WILL SPEED IT UP, BECAUSE THEN THE HARD WORK YOU PUT IN IS ONLY ON 60 PAGES INSTEAD OF 260. SO I THINK WE CAN ACCOMPLISH A LOT. THERE'S NO WAY WE GET IN THREE WEEKS. 
          THERE'S NO WAY. BUT I DEFINITELY AGREE WITH ADAM AND EVERYBODY BEHIND ME THAT WE NEED TO GET THIS DONE RIGHT ONE TIME, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO STICK FOR ANOTHER SEVERAL, SEVERAL YEARS, AND WE WANT IT TO BE RIGHT. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, MR. HARRIS. I'M NOT GOING TO TALK REAL LONG BECAUSE I AGREE WITH PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID. 
          BUT IN ADDITION TO THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THERE'S ALL THE OTHER PLANNING AND ZONING STUFF THAT KEEPS FLOWING IN WITHOUT STOP TO TRY TO HAVE P AND Z TRY TO DO COMPREHENSIVE MAP AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF. AS IT'S BEEN SAID BY EVERYBODY HERE, WE'RE ALL VOLUNTEERS AND I'M NOT DEVOTED TO SPENDING MY LIFE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND P AND Z. SO THIS HAS GOT TO BE GOT TO START THERE, FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, AND THEN GET TO THE BUSINESS OF DOING IT. OKAY, I HAD A FEW COMMENTS I WAS GOING TO MAKE. I'M GOING TO TRY AND MAKE THIS COHERENT. YOU'RE RIGHT. IF WE IF WE WANT TO RESTRUCTURE THE REPORT, THERE'S NO WAY WE CAN DONE IN THREE WEEKS. I AGREE WITH THAT WHOLEHEARTEDLY. THIS MORNING I WENT THROUGH THE EFFORT OF READING BOTH THE 2030 PLAN AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THIS ONE THAT'S BEEN PUT FORWARD BY HAVE. AND I WILL BE THE FIRST TO ADMIT, I WAS HERE IN 2016 WHEN WE DID THE 2030 PLAN, AND 
          [03:35:01]
EVERYBODY AND MOANED AND COMPLAINED ABOUT FREEZING NICKELS AFTER WE'D DONE IT. 
          JUST LIKE EVERYBODY'S AND COMPLAINING ABOUT HALF AFTER THIS EFFORT. FOR WHATEVER REASON, NO ONE SEEMS TO LIKE THE OUTCOME THAT COMES. AND AND I THINK PART OF THAT COMES FROM THE FACT THAT IF THE REPORT REFLECTS SOMETHING THAT YOU DIDN'T PERSONALLY BELIEVE IN, THEN YOU DON'T LIKE IT. AND I THINK I WANT TO REALLY CAUTION PEOPLE THAT THIS IS SUPPOSED TO REFLECT EVERYONE'S VIEWPOINT, NOT JUST ONE PERSON OR A SMALL GROUP'S VIEWPOINT. AND YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THINGS IN THIS PLAN THAT YOU DON'T AGREE WITH. AND THAT'S THE WAY IT SHOULD BE. 
          IF YOU AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THE PLAN, THAT'S A PROBLEM. OKAY, THAT SHOULDN'T BE THE CASE. WITH REGARD TO THE FLUME, I GET IT. THAT'S A BIG PART OF WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE. I LOOKED AT IT AND I, I THE BIGGEST CHANGE THAT I SAW FROM THE 2030 FLUME PLAN TO THIS ONE WAS THE REJIGGERING OF HOW THEY DESIGNATED THE THE WIN RANCH AND OUT IN THE ETJ AREA THAT WAS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND THEY TURNED IT INTO A STATE. SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THE BIGGEST CHANGE THAT THEY MADE TO THE FLUME WAS TO REDUCE DENSITY, NOT TO INCREASE IT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE ANYBODY'S COMING UP WITH AN INCREASED DENSITY OUT OF THIS FLUME. OKAY. IT WENT FROM LOW DENSITY FROM A HUGE SECTION OF OUR MAP TO A STATE WHICH IS EVEN LESS DENSITY. THAT TO ME. AND I SAID, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS THINK ABOUT THAT, WHAT THIS RECOMMENDED WAS ALMOST 40% OF OUR DEVELOPABLE AREA SHOULD BE ACREAGE LOTS. 
          YOU TELL ME A SINGLE CITY THAT IS BUILT LIKE THAT, IT DOESN'T EXIST. OKAY. BECAUSE NUMBER ONE, MOST PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD IT. AND NUMBER TWO, MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH ACREAGE, PURE AND SIMPLE. SO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK REALLY, REALLY CLEARLY AT THAT FLUME AND DECIDE, DO WE REALLY WANT TO DESIGNATE 40% OF OUR DEVELOPABLE AREA AS ACREAGE SIZE LOTS? I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE BIT LUDICROUS. THE DENSITY DEFINITIONS, I GUESS I DO HAVE A QUESTION, BRAD. YOU KNOW, WE TALKED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION ABOUT DENSITY DEFINITIONS IN THE FLUME AND WHAT IT MEANS AND WHAT IT DOESN'T MEAN. BUT MY EXPERIENCE ON COUNCIL HAS BEEN THAT IF YOU ARE TRYING TO FIND A CHANGE THAT DOESN'T MATCH WITH THE FLUME, YOU GOT TO JUMP THROUGH 150 ZILLION HOOPS IN ORDER TO MAKE IT HAPPEN. AND I THINK THE SAME THING IS TRUE OF THE DENSITY DEFINITIONS. IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING OUTSIDE OF THAT, THAT'S A REAL PROBLEM. AND SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS IF WE HAVE A FLUME THAT IS SET UP THAT HAS CERTAIN DESIGNATIONS, DENSITY DESIGNATIONS, YOU KNOW, RURAL STATE, LOW DENSITY, MEDIUM DENSITY, WHATEVER, AND THEN WE HAVE DEFINITIONS OF THOSE, AND WE CHANGE THOSE FROM ONE MAP TO ANOTHER, WHICH MEANS POTENTIALLY THE DEVELOPER HAS TO JUMP THROUGH FAR MORE SIGNIFICANT. OOPS. WITH THE CHANGES IN THOSE DEFINITIONS, DOES THAT CAUSE US LEGAL PROBLEMS? EXCUSE ME? DOES IT OPEN US UP TO LEGAL CHALLENGES? SO I'M PROBABLY ONE OF THE FEW ATTORNEYS IN TEXAS, ALONG WITH A COUPLE OF MY PARTNERS WHO'VE LITIGATED THAT ISSUE. OKAY. AND SO IT IS A IT IS A THAT IS A LARGELY UNEXPLORED AREA OF THE LAW. BUT THE LITIGATION WHICH I WAS INVOLVED RELATED TO A I WON'T GET INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL, BUT IT WAS IT WAS ON THE ISSUE OF DENSITY, AND IT WAS A CITY THAT ADOPTED A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, NOT THE CITY. THIS CITY WAS NOT MY CLIENT. IT WAS A CITY THAT ADOPTED A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT HAD DENSITIES IN VIOLATION, THAT EXCEEDED THE DENSITIES SET FORTH IN THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AMONG OTHER ISSUES THAT THAT DIDN'T COMPLY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND AND SO THE QUESTION, THE QUESTION BEFORE THE COURT WAS SIMPLY CAN CITY A. BECAUSE SUE CITY BE OVER THIS? BECAUSE CITY B WHO ADOPTED SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THAT WOULD HAVE IMPACTS ON THE CITY AS THEIR TAX BASE, THEIR PROPERTY VALUES OR ALL OF THESE THINGS. AND THE COURT ULTIMATELY SAID, YES, CITY A, YOU CAN SUE CITY B OVER THIS, OKAY. SO THAT IS THAT'S PROBABLY THE ONLY CASE IN TEXAS THAT HAS ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE. BUT BUT I DO CAUTION THE CITY, I WOULD CAUTION ANY CITY THAT IF YOU ARE A IF YOU'RE ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT IS IN VIOLATION OF YOUR DENSITIES THAT ARE SET FORTH IN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THEN THEN 
          [03:40:02]
YES, THERE'S AUTHORITY NOW OUT THERE FOR THE THE PROPOSITION THAT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, YOU STILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY IT, RIGHT? IT DOESN'T ESTABLISH RIGHTS, IT DOESN'T ESTABLISH ENTITLEMENTS. BUT YOU HAVE BUT BUT ANY ZONING ORDINANCE OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU ADOPT HAS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH IT. THEY HAVE TO THEY HAVE TO MESH. BUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITSELF, AS WE DISCUSSED, DOES NOT ESTABLISH THOSE RIGHTS. AND IT IS NOT ZONING IN AND OF ITSELF. SO THE ADOPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE DENSITIES YOU SET FORTH IN THAT PLAN DOESN'T THAT DOESN'T SET FORTH THE RIGHT TO SUE THE CITY WHO ADOPTS IT RIGHT IN AND OF ITSELF, BECAUSE THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SETS FORTH DIFFERENT DENSITIES ON A MOVING FORWARD BASIS. BUT WHEN THE CITY ADOPTS SOMETHING ELSE THAT VIOLATES WITH ITS OWN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW YOUR OWN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. GOT IT. AND I THINK I WAS COMING MORE FROM THE LATTER THAT YOUR SECOND EXPLANATION, WHICH IS WE MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO OUR COMP PLAN, OUR DENSITY DEFINITIONS, THE BLOOM, AND IT MAKES IT TOUGHER ON DEVELOPERS. 
          AND DOES THAT OPEN US UP FOR LEGAL CHALLENGES. AND YOU ADVISE US, IS IT OKAY IF I SAY IT? YOU ADVISE US BACK THERE THAT NO, IT REALLY DOESN'T. AND SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS CLEARLY COMMUNICATED. BUT I DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL JUST BECAUSE THERE HASN'T BEEN AN ADJUDICATED CASE IN TEXAS THAT THAT FOUND THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE WON'T GET SUED IF WE KEEP MAKING THINGS MORE AND MORE DIFFICULT. SO SO THE COMPREHENSIVE SO THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SET, THE COURTS HAVE DECIDED FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, TRANSPORTATION PLANS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS THAT ALL GO INTO YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ARE IF WE IDENTIFY A NEW PROPOSED ROADWAY IN OUR TRANSPORTATION PLAN, WHICH IS PART OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, DOES THAT IDENTIFICATION OF THIS NEW PARKWAY, DOES THAT CONSTITUTE A TAKING OR AN ENCUMBRANCE ON SOME OF THE EXISTING PROPERTIES? AND THE ANSWER IS NO, IT IS NOT. SO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS A PLANNING TOOL FOR THE CITY THAT SETS FORTH GOALS RELATED TO GROWTH, DENSITY, INFRASTRUCTURE. WHAT CAN GO WHERE, WHAT WE WANT TO GO, WHERE IN THE FUTURE. BUT IT IS NOT ZONING AND IN AND OF ITSELF DOES NOT CONTROL THOSE THINGS. IT'S JUST THAT IT GUIDES THE FUTURE DECISIONS THAT YOU MAKE IN TERMS OF ZONING AND IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU CAN APPROVE AND THAT KIND OF STUFF. AND IF YOU APPROVE SOMETHING THAT THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THEN YOU NEED TO ALSO AMEND YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO A ZONING THAT SAYS WE'RE GOING TO PUT SOMETHING HERE, WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THIS. BUT IT'S IN IT'S IN CONFLICT WITH OUR COMP PLAN. WE ALSO HAVE TO CHANGE OUR COMP PLAN. YEAH. FAIR ENOUGH. JUST A COUPLE OTHER QUICK COMMENTS AND THEN I'LL SHUT UP. I PERSONALLY, AFTER HAVING READ THROUGH THE COMP PLAN THIS MORNING, I DIDN'T SEE ANY COMMENTS IN THERE THAT WAS EXPRESSED BY HALF THAT I DIDN'T HEAR CITIZEN'S VOICE WHEN I WAS AT THE PUBLIC MEETINGS, SO I THINK I HEARD FROM OTHERS THAT THEY FELT LIKE THERE WAS. I DIDN'T PERSONALLY SEE ANYTHING IN THERE THAT I DIDN'T HEAR WHEN I WAS AT THE PUBLIC MEETINGS. I, I PERSONALLY DID AT THOSE MEETINGS, HEAR PEOPLE SAY WE HAVE TO HAVE A WIDE VARIETY OF HOUSING WITH DIFFERENT PRICE POINTS THAT ALLOW DIFFERENT PEOPLE TO, TO LIVE HERE. YOU HEARD MISS OWEN SPEAK ABOUT IT. FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER MARION, SHE WAS ADAMANT ABOUT IT. SO TO SAY THAT THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT WERE ASKING FOR THAT IS JUST AN OUTRIGHT LIE. WE TOTALLY HAD PEOPLE WHO WERE ASKING FOR IT, AND IF THEY VOICED THAT IN THEIR PLAN, THEY SIMPLY CAPTURED WHAT THEY HEARD FROM PEOPLE WHO CAME TO THOSE MEETINGS. ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WAS BOTH IN MISS RICH'S STATEMENT AND MR. HOOLEY'S, WAS THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE DENSITY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT IT. 
          AND I WOULD JUST ARGUE AGAINST THAT POINT, BECAUSE WE'VE LOOKED AT IT VERY CAREFULLY AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH EACH ONE OF THESE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT VARIOUS DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE US. DO WE HAVE THE CAPACITY? HELL, I WHEN I WAS LOOKING THROUGH SOME OLD AGENDAS AND MINUTES, MR. STEWART, WHO CAME HERE JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AND SAID, OH, WE'RE ONLY AT 65% CAPACITY AT OUR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. THE ONE THAT I SAW FROM HIM BACK IN THE EARLY IN THE SPRING. WE'RE AT 87%, 89%. SO WE HAVE HAD A REALLY BAD PROBLEM OF GETTING POOR DATA WITH REGARD TO OUR INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY. BUT WHAT I WILL SAY IS THIS, THIS COUNCIL HAS LOOKED AT IT VERY, VERY CAREFULLY. AND MY POINT TO MR. ROBERTS, AS THE PERSON WHO HAS MADE SURE WE'VE LOOKED AT IT VERY, VERY CAREFULLY EACH TIME WE TOOK A LOOK AT A DEVELOPMENT OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN MAYOR, SO TO SAY THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND WE DON'T HAVE PLANS TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE 
          [03:45:01]
THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS JUST FLAT OUT FALSE. WE HAVE COMPLETELY MADE SURE THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO RUN INTO TROUBLE WITH. I THINK THE LAST THING I'D SAY, AND I MENTIONED THIS THE OTHER NIGHT, I THINK WE HAVE TO BE SUPER CAREFUL ABOUT HOW TOUGH WE WANT TO BE ON DEVELOPERS. I GET IT, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO DO NOT WANT DENSITY IN LAGO VISTA, I GET IT, BUT YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY VOICES. THERE ARE PEOPLE AND I'VE TALKED TO THEM. 
          CITIZENS WHO DO WANT DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSING IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS IF WE TRY AND MAKE THINGS SUPER DIFFICULT FOR DEVELOPERS, WE'RE GOING TO GET THE BETTENCOURT SYNDROME THAT MR. BETTENCOURT, WHO IS ON THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE, HE JUST LOVES TAKING MONEY FROM DEVELOPERS, AND HE LOVES GETTING LAWS PASSED THAT MAKE IT EASIER FOR DEVELOPERS TO BUILD HUGE DENSITY. AND IF WE AREN'T REASONABLE IN WHAT WE PUT FORWARD, YOU'RE JUST GOING TO GIVE HIM MORE AMMUNITION TO BRING STUFF BACK, TO THROW IT DOWN OUR THROATS. AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET THE OH, IF YOU'RE UNDER 80,000 OR IF YOU'RE UNDER 40,000, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU A PASS BECAUSE YOU'LL GET DEVELOPERS WHO GO AND COMPLAIN TO HIM AND SAY, IT'S THESE LITTLE TOWNS THAT ARE SCREWING US DOWN, AND YOU GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE TAKEN CARE OF, TOO. SO ALL I WOULD SAY IS, I'M ALL FOR HOLDING OFF, NOT TRYING TO DO THIS BY NOVEMBER 6TH, THAT WE PUT THE APPROPRIATE PEOPLE IN PLACE. I THINK IT REALLY DOES NEED TO HAVE PLANNING AND ZONING COUNCIL STAFF AND CITIZENS INVOLVED. 
          EXCUSE ME, BUT LET'S BE CAREFUL TO BE EVEN HANDED WITH WHAT WE DO, BECAUSE THE MINUTE YOU'RE NOT EVEN HANDED, YOU'RE GOING TO GET SOMETHING SHOVED DOWN YOUR THROAT THAT YOU DON'T WANT. 
          AND THAT'S ALL I GOT. OH, I'M SORRY. ONE LAST COMMENT. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO BEAT THROUGH THE FLUME TONIGHT. I REALLY DON'T IF WE'RE GOING TO PUT TOGETHER SUBCOMMITTEES THAT ARE GOING TO GO LOOK AT THIS STUFF, LET THEM GO, PUT SOME REAL TIME INTO IT VERSUS TRYING TO BEAT THROUGH IT IN A VERY SHORT SESSION. THAT WOULD BE MY HUMBLE OPINION. NO. ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO RASPY PLEASE DO. HOW DO YOU REALLY FEEL EXACTLY WHAT I JUST SAID. THAT'S ALL I FEEL. 
          SO I WENT WHEN I HAD MY ROUND TABLE ON MONDAY NIGHT. I HAD A PRETTY GOOD CROWD ON THERE, AND WE DID GO THROUGH THE WHOLE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THAT FEEDBACK THAT I HEARD FROM EVERYBODY. AND IT GOES THE WHOLE IT'S THE WHOLE TOWN, BUT I CAN KNOCK IT OUT AND PROBABLY 15 MINUTES MAX MAX, BUT I THINK PROBABLY TEN CAN SHARE MY SCREEN. STAN I'VE LOGGED IN TO GO TO MEETING AT THE MOMENT. WELL, WHILE HE'S DOING THAT, TELL ME, WHAT DO I NEED TO CLICK ON ANYTHING ON MY END I HAVEN'T EVER SHARED. YOU SHARED. YOU GOT YOUR CAMERA. 
          HIS CAMERA HAS TO BE ON, RIGHT? ISN'T THAT A SIDE EFFECT? NO. OKAY. IT'S YOUR. WHAT AM I SAYING? SHARE YOUR WINDOW. YOU WANT TO SHARE THAT ONE? YEAH. THERE YOU GO. OKAY. THERE. WELL, JUST ONE COMMENT ON THE ON THE DENSITY. WHAT I HEARD THE FEEDBACK THAT I'M HEARING ON THE INCREASED DENSITY IN THIS IS REALLY CENTERED AROUND THE MIXED USE. THE YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE MIXED USE DESIGNATIONS IN, IN OUR CURRENT FLUME. AND NOW WE DO. AND THERE'S A LOT OF IT EVERYWHERE. AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE PEOPLE ARE TALKING, WHAT PEOPLE ARE REFERRING TO, OR AT LEAST I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REFERRING TO. BUT ANYWAY, OKAY, LOOKING AT THE TOP OF THE OF THE CITY UP HERE, TRYING TO ZOOM IN. IS MY CURSOR VISIBLE? YEAH. OKAY. THERE'S ABOUT A THREE SECOND LAG THERE. OKAY. WESTERN TRAIL ABUTTING THE WILDLIFE REFUGE OVER THERE. ALL OF THIS RIGHT HERE, THIS VIOLET COLOR. THIS IS ALL MIXED USE. I REMEMBER THAT BEING DISCUSSED. I'M HEARING WHAT I HEARD ON WHAT I WAS HEARING FROM PEOPLE IS KIND OF A 50 OVER 50. DO WE WANT MIXED USE COMMERCIAL RIGHT NEXT TO THE BALCONES CANYONLANDS? I WOULD JUST BE INTERESTED IN JUST A QUICK SHOW OF HANDS OF KIND OF WHERE EVERYBODY'S AT ON THAT P AND Z, DO YOU ALL WANT TO SEE MIXED USE OVER THERE NEXT TO BALCONES CANYONLANDS? AND WHAT DO YOU MEAN MIXED USE IS IS A LAND USE DESIGNATION. SO IT WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL ON TOP, COMMERCIAL ON BOTTOM. IT'S MIXED USE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL. 
          OKAY. SO THERE'S SOME UNDECIDED PEOPLE OUT IN THE WORLD IN LAGO VISTA ON THAT, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD ANY FUTURE GROUP LOOK AT THAT. ANOTHER AREA THAT CAME UP. 
          EVERYBODY PREFER. WELL, I DID HEAR EVERYBODY. THERE WAS A LOT OF CONSTERNATION ABOUT EFFECTIVELY COMMERCIALIZING THE WHOLE OF LOMAN FORD THAT CAME UP. AND THERE WAS ALSO, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT OF BELLYACHING ABOUT COMMERCIALIZING THE 1431 LIKE 
          [03:50:03]
YOU SEE HERE WITH THE RED. HOWEVER, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO REMEMBER THAT EITHER THAT'S THE NATURAL PLACE ALONG 1431 TO HAVE YOUR COMMERCIAL. AND IF YOU HAVE A CHOICE, DO YOU WANT IT BETWEEN THE TWO? WHERE DO YOU WANT TO PUT MOST OF THE EMPHASIS ON LOMAN OR 1431? AND THE OVERWHELMING CONSENSUS WAS 1431. SO THEN THAT BEGS THE FOLLOW UP QUESTION FOR A FUTURE GROUP OF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE NOT OKAY WITH ALL OF THIS PROPOSED COMMERCIAL ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THEN WHERE WOULD YOU MOVE? WHAT WOULD YOU CHANGE IT TO? OKAY. YOU DON'T KNOW I KNOW LIKE THIS IS WHERE THE INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE KIND OF COMES IN IS HERE WHERE YOU SEE BALD MOUNTAIN. THAT THAT WOULD BE MIXED USE COMMERCIAL. THERE WERE SOME PEOPLE SAYING, DO WE REALLY WANT TO SEE MIXED, MIXED USE ALL UP AND DOWN THERE AND THEN ACROSS THE WAY WHERE YOU HAVE RANCHO CIELO, YOU SEE HOW THEY'VE GOT I FORGOT WHAT IS THE LIGHT BROWN? THAT'S LIKE A MEDIUM DENSITY, RIGHT. SO LIKE 6 TO 8 LEWIS PER ACRE. I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS SHADING IS. SO YOU HAVE THE COMMERCIAL HERE ON THE WEST SIDE OF LOMAN, AND THEN BEYOND THAT YOU'RE GOING INTO A COUNTY HERE. BUT THESE ARE ALL THEY HAVE AN HOA. THEY CAN'T SELL THEIR LOTS AND MAKE THEM COMMERCIAL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SHOULD THAT REMAIN, THAT'S FOR PEOPLE TO CONSIDER. OH, LOOK, THIS AREA, THIS MARSHALL'S HARBOR HAS ALWAYS HISTORICALLY FOR DECADES BEEN RURAL RESIDENTIAL ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. ALL THE LOTS THERE ARE PLATTED THREE ACRES TO SIX ACRES. THERE IS RESIDENTIAL. THERE ARE RESIDENCES THERE THAT THERE WAS OVERWHELMING CONSENSUS OF REVERTING THAT BACK TO THE FUTURE. LAND USE MAP. RURAL RESIDENTIAL. RURAL RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION. ALSO, WHAT CAME UP IS A DESIRE FOR LIKE YOU HEARD MISS ARID SPEAKING TO THE FOR SENIOR LIVING. AND ONE OF THE THINGS AND WHAT I POINTED OUT TO TO FOLKS IS, IS IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT THE CITY CAN'T JUST BRING SENIOR LIVING HERE ANYMORE, THAT IT CAN BRING A HOSPITAL HERE OR A HOTEL HERE. WE CAN DESIGNATE PLACES I FORGOT WHO WAS MAKING THE POINT, YOU KNOW, PIN IT ON THE MAP. WHERE DO YOU WANT TO SEE THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT AND. THE LAST? THERE IS A PLACE RIGHT HERE. IF YOU LOOK IN THE CHINO PD, WHICH IS BETWEEN LOMAN AND AUSTIN BOULEVARD AND SHORELINE RANCH, THIS AREA HERE, THESE BACK TWO LOTS RIGHT HERE, THERE'S ACREAGE THERE WITHIN THEIR PD THAT IS DESIGNATED SENIOR LIVING. IT'S AS IT'S DESIGNATED AS THAT IN THEIR PD. 
          I WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN IS LIKE THE TOP HALF OF WHAT YOU'RE SEEING. LET ME ZOOM OUT. THANK YOU. BUT IT'S STILL CUTTING OFF THE BOTTOM HALF. SO IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A POINT FOR PEOPLE, PUT IT ON THE TOP HALF OF YOUR SCREEN. GOTCHA. APPRECIATE THAT, MR. FRENCH. YEAH, I'M WAITING FOR IT TO CATCH UP THERE ONLINE. I THINK IT HAS CAUGHT UP. IS IT OKAY? IT'S A LITTLE COLOR. 
          THAT'S GREAT. OKAY. BUT YOU CAN SEE IT, RIGHT? YEAH. SEE HOW THE COLORS DIFFERENT ON THE SCREEN. THE MONITOR IS SHOWING IT WHITE OKAY. SO IN THIS AREA HERE THESE TWO LOTS THIS IS SO WE HAVE A PLACE IN LAGO VISTA WHERE SOMEBODY COULD DO SENIOR LIVING. THERE WAS A DEVELOPER, AS I RECALL, THAT CAME IN AND HAD THAT THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY BRIEFLY UNDER CONTRACT CIRCA 2019, MAYBE 2020. BUT THEY WALKED AWAY FROM IT BECAUSE WHAT THEY DETERMINED IS IT'S NOT GOING TO BE PROFITABLE TO HAVE SENIOR LIVING IN LAGO VISTA. OUR INCOME DEMOGRAPHIC GENERALLY CANNOT SUPPORT 4 TO $5000 A MONTH FOR SENIOR LIVING. SO WHILE THERE'S A DESIRE AND YOU CAN PUT THESE THINGS IN FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH YOU CAN DO. IF YOU WANT TO GO BEYOND THAT, AND YOU WANT TO HAVE CERTAIN DISTRICTS AND CERTAIN TYPES OF, OF, OF, OF DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S WHERE AN EDC COMES INTO PLAY. ONCE IT GETS ENOUGH MONEY, IT STARTS ACQUIRING MONEY. IT CAN GO OUT THERE AND ACQUIRE PROPERTY. IT CAN COME UP WITH ITS OWN CONCEPT PLAN APPROVALS, AND YOU SHOP IT TO A DEVELOPER AND YOU SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT HERE. 
          YOU COULD FUND IT FURTHER WITH THE PEDOMETER'S. YOU KNOW, THERE'S OTHER KINDS OF FUNDING MECHANISMS OUT THERE FOR DEVELOPMENT LIKE THAT. GOING DOWN. THE WIND RANCH PROPERTY. 
          SINCE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP. I'LL SPEAK TO THAT. IF I RECALL, IT'S DOWN THERE OFF SYLVESTER FORD. IT'S I BELIEVE IT'S HERE. I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT'S SHOWING UP AS COUNTY, IS IT NOT? YEAH. 
          IT'S THIS BIG ACREAGE HERE. THERE WERE ORIGINALLY. YEAH. THEY ANNEXED IN AND THAT ONE WAS ENTITLED FOR ROUGHLY 1250. LOUISE, AS I RECALL. SO I'LL JUST LEAVE MY PERSONAL OPINIONS 
          [03:55:04]
ASIDE ON THAT FOR THE TIME. BUT OVER HERE IN THIS AREA, THIS IF YOU CAN SEE, LET ME MOVE THIS UP TO THE TOP SO PEOPLE CAN SEE ONLINE THIS AREA HERE, YOU SEE THIS, THIS VIOLET AREA FOR MIXED USE. THAT'S THE IS IT NOT SHOWING UP THERE ON THAT SCREEN OKAY. CAN YOU SEE MY MOUSE MY CURSOR UP THERE ON THE SCREEN. OH NO. LET ME TRY ANOTHER WAY. RIGHT THERE. YEAH. YOU'RE SITTING ON THAT. RANCH IS 1350. YEAH. IS WHAT IS IT, 1350. OH, NICE. SO THIS HERE IS THE PENINSULA. THEY HAVE A PD UP HERE IS FLOODPLAIN AND PARK. THIS CAME UP. DOES IT LOOK LIKE THEY'RE DRAWING SHOWS UP. OH YOU'RE RIGHT. IT'S NOT SHOWING UP OKAY I'LL FOREGO THAT. SO THIS PD THE TOP HALF OF IT. THERE'S 18 ACRES THERE. IT'S IN THE FLOODPLAIN. ONE PERSON BROUGHT IT UP. EVERYBODY AGREED THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT DESIGNATED AS OPEN SPACE PARKLAND EQUIVALENT ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. OH THEN THERE'S THE NINE HOLE GOLF COURSE THAT CAME UP. THAT'S HERE. YOU'LL NOTICE HERE ALONG 1431 WHERE THE PROPERTIES HERE FRONT 1431, THOSE ARE ALL MIXED USE. AND THEN OVER HERE YOU HAVE A MEDIUM A HIGHER DENSITY. 
          AND THEN YOU'VE GOT THE GREEN FOR OPEN SPACE. THAT'S THE OLD GOLF COURSE THERE IS. THERE IS SOME WATER WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE IN THERE THAT I WOULD REMIND STAFF THAT THAT COULD BE UTILIZED POTENTIALLY FOR EFFLUENT DISPERSAL AND EXPANDING OUR CAPACITY TO SOME EXTENT. DAVE STEWART WAS ON MY MEETING. HE BROUGHT THAT UP AT THAT POINT. OF COURSE, IT WOULD REQUIRE THE CITY PURCHASING THAT PROPERTY. A LITTLE BIT OF A PROBLEM, BUT I REMEMBER I PERSONALLY LOOKED AT THE PROPERTY AT ONE POINT, AND I THINK THE ASKING PRICE WAS AROUND 700,000. WELL, THEN HE QUOTED ME A HIGHER PRICE. ANYWAY, IT WAS HALF A MILLION WHEN IT FIRST STARTED. SO IT'S IT'S GONE UP SOME. SO HE WAS LIKE 700. BUT I MEAN EVEN IF THE CITY COULD PICK UP THE POINT DAVE MADE WAS THAT EVEN IF YOU PICKED WHATEVER THE PRICE IS 700,000, THAT BECOMES PRICELESS IN TERMS OF WATER CAPACITY EXPANSION AND STUFF. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, COULD YOU TAKE OUT A BOND TO DO THAT? HE ALSO, HE SUGGESTED THAT THE CITY OWNED HAD BEEN ACQUIRING AT SOME POINT, ROUGHLY 20% OF THESE LOTS. I DON'T KNOW, I HAVEN'T HEARD THAT BEFORE UNTIL HE BROUGHT THAT UP. TOWARD THE BOTTOM. OH, BY FOOTHILL COVE, HE WAS TALKING ABOUT FOOTHILL COVE. THAT'S WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT. FOOTHILL COVE. 
          SO THAT WAS INTERESTING. SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, TO CONSIDER HOW DO YOU HOW DO YOU WHAT DO YOU WANT TO PROJECT ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR THIS? YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE THE GATEWAY TO GETAWAY. REMEMBER THE PRESENTATION FROM MRS. JOHNDROE. SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHERE YOU LOOK AT. OKAY. DO YOU WANT THIS TO BE SENIOR LIVING? DO YOU WANT IT TO BE A DESTINATION, A FUTURE TOURIST PROJECT? YOU KNOW, WHAT DO YOU WANT IT TO BE? AND THAT'S HOW YOU. THAT'S WHY YOU WOULD DESIGNATE IT ONE WAY OR MULTIPLE WAYS ON HERE. THERE WAS A TRAIL CONSERVANCY THAT WAS ALSO INTERESTED IN GETTING ACCESS TO THAT AND CONNECTING FROM THAT AREA UP THROUGH ABOUT FAMILIES. BUT WE'VE THAT WAS TURNBACK TRAIL CONSERVANCY AND WE'VE GOT IN FACT, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE TRAIL OFFICIALLY IN ANOTHER COUPLE WEEK OR SO. I'M SORRY, IN MIDDLE NOVEMBER OVER THERE TO TO SARAH. BUT YOU ALSO CAN JUST GO UP THE EAST HAND SIDE OF CEDAR BREAKS AND WE DON'T YOU WON'T YOU WOULDN'T NEED THE OLD GOLF COURSE LAND IN ORDER TO HAVE TRAILS UP THAT WAY. SO THEY COULD DO THAT AND AND POSSIBLY MAKE A PARK AND ACTUALLY. I MEAN, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF THAT. SO THE. AND THEN LAST ITEM, ONE OF THE LAST TWO ITEMS I RECALL IS THIS AREA HERE THAT YOU SEE, YOU SEE BRONCO LANE ON THE MAP DEPICTED THE COMMERCIAL. EVERYBODY'S IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT. YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE LOGICAL PLACE TO HAVE FUTURE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR LAGO VISTA. I THE BUT WHAT WHAT JUMPED OUT AT EVERYBODY IS YOU SEE ALL THOSE LOTS BETWEEN THE AIRPORT IN PURPLE AND THE COMMERCIAL. 
          THAT'S THAT WHOLE HILLSIDE. SO WHEN YOU LOOK UP ABOVE BRONCO LANE, THIS HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS MIXED USE COMMERCIAL. DO YOU WANT TO SEE MIXED USE COMMERCIAL ON THAT ENTIRE 
          [04:00:02]
HILLSIDE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LAGO VISTA? THAT WAS A QUESTION I POSED. AND MOST PEOPLE WERE NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT. AND IN FACT, WHEN I SAY MOST LIKE EVERYBODY, THEY WERE THERE. 
          THEY WERE SAYING, NO, THAT JUST NEEDS TO BE REMAINED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AS PLATTED. 
          AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES GO THERE. NOT NOT TURN THAT INTO A CONCRETE HILLSIDE BECAUSE THAT'S THAT'S WHAT MIXED USE COMMERCIAL IS GOING TO DO TO IT. SO THAT WAS AN AREA THAT WOULD NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED OVER HERE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 1431, JUST EAST OF LOWMAN. YOU MIGHT RECALL A LAGO WAY. FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT A LONG TIME AGO. DO YOU ALL REMEMBER THAT ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, THE YOUNGERS CAME IN BEFORE US. THEY WANTED TO DO A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ON ABOUT 15 ACRES. THERE. IMPEDIMENT THEY HAD WAS THEY DID NOT GET APPROVAL FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT. THERE ARE PROPERTY OWNERS HERE THAT LIVED IN THESE, THAT LIVE ON THESE SIX AND TEN ACRE LOTS, THAT IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED AS RURAL RESIDENTIAL BY CHANGING THIS TO MIXED USE COMMERCIAL, WHICH I SUPPORT. YOU WOULD THEN THIS IS WHERE THE PLANNING COMES IN. YOU'RE SAYING BY CHANGING IT TO MIXED USE COMMERCIAL, YOU'RE SAYING TO A PROSPECTIVE PROPERTY OWNER DEVELOPER, WE ARE AGREEABLE TO PUTTING MIXED USE COMMERCIAL HERE ALONG 1431 AND MAKING IT EASIER. THE ALTERNATIVE IS IF YOU LEAVE IT RURAL, RESIDENTIAL, THEY GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND THEY HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, DEMONSTRATE TO SIX OUT OF SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS ULTIMATELY THAT THIS IS A GOOD IDEA. AND IT'S WHAT THE CITIZENS OF LAGO VISTA WOULD FIND AGREEABLE. AND THAT'S IT. I THINK THAT'S REALLY EVERYTHING. SO. YOU KNOW, AND THEN THE THE LAND USE DOES NOT, FOR MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION ON STUFF. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TURN THIS OFF. NOW, HOW DO I STOP SHARING. STOP SHARING. GOT IT. WHEN IT COMES TO THE PROPOSED, I DID LIKE THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS. YOU GUYS CAME UP WITH RURAL RESIDENTIAL ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. RIGHT NOW IS CURRENTLY ONE UNIT PER FIVE ACRES. THEY PROPOSED LOWERING IT TO THREE ACRES. I THINK THAT THAT'S SMART. EVERYTHING YOU'VE GOT OVER HERE IN THE PLATTED AREAS WHERE PDES EXIST ARE NOT SMALLER THAN THREE ACRES. SO THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE DESIGNATION. WHETHER YOU'RE LOOKING AT THAT SHORELINE RANCH PDE OR THE MARSHALL'S HARBOR PDE OR EVEN THE MONTECITO PDE, THEY HAVE A PDE. ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS REPLAT. I MAY HAVE READ IT WRONG, BUT I WAS JUST WRITING MY NOTES. I THINK THEY SAID FIVE ACRES FOR RURAL. I REMEMBER I'VE GOT THE VISUAL IN MY HEAD. YEAH. WHAT'S IN THE PACKAGE IS FIVE ACRES. OKAY, WELL, HOW'S THREE ACRES? I HONESTLY, I REMEMBER, SO I THOUGHT I SAW THAT IN RACHEL'S. NO. RURAL. RURAL, Y'ALL. Y'ALL PROPOSED DROPPING IT FROM FIVE ACRES DOWN TO THREE ACRES. AND THEN YOU CAME UP WITH A 1 TO 3 ACRE, ONE UP TO THREE ACRE DESIGNATION, I THINK IT WAS, OR 2 TO 3. AND THEN THE ONE ACRE THAT WAY. BECAUSE WHAT IS HISTORICALLY BEEN MISSING IN OUR CURRENT LAND USE DESIGNATIONS IS YOU HAVE A STATE LOTS TODAY DEFINED AS ONE ACRE, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT RURAL, RESIDENTIAL, NOTHING IN BETWEEN. 
          SO YOU'VE GOT NO TRANSITION. AND THEN SO THAT MIDDLE ONE CAPTURES THE TRANSITION PART. 
          AND THEN BACK OVER HERE. YOU KNOW, I DON'T NECESSARILY I DON'T FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE WITH YOU, KEVIN, ON WHAT YOU TOOK BIGGEST ISSUE WITH. AND THAT WAS CHANGING WHAT IS DEPICTED HERE AS BLUE A STATE, ALL OF IT JUST WITH THE ONE BIG PAINTBRUSH. I THINK YOU GOT TO GO IN THERE AND BE A BIT MORE ASSERTIVE, A LITTLE BIT MORE SURGICAL WITH IT. THAT'S EVERYTHING. THAT'S ALL MY INPUT. THANKS. I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE DO EXACTLY WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT HERE TONIGHT. WE DON'T TRY AND FINISH SOMETHING IN THE NEXT THREE WEEKS THAT WE HAVE SOME SUBCOMMITTEES PUT TOGETHER, PMS, COUNCIL STAFF AND CITIZENS, AND THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE NEW COUNCIL TAKES UP. AND THE SECOND MEETING IN NOVEMBER, I THINK THAT IS A WONDERFUL WAY TO GO FORWARD. I THINK THAT'S PERFECT. IS THERE ANY DISAGREEMENT WITH THAT? JUST PUNT IT UNTIL NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER. THAT'S WHAT I THINK IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN. 
          AND I'LL I'M FINE WITH THAT. AND. THAT'S ALL. I COMMISSION WILL ALSO TURN OUT. SO I'M COMING OFF THE DAIS HERE AND ONE MORE MEETING. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO BE ON ANY SUBCOMMITTEE AS A CITIZEN. YEAH, WELL, I'M GOING TO LEAVE THAT TO THE FOLKS THAT ARE GOING TO DEAL 
          [04:05:04]
WITH THAT SECOND WEEK MEETING. OH, NO. YES, MA'AM. YOU NEED I'M GOING TO HAVE TO COUNTER FRANK ANYWAY. SO I GOT YOU, KEVIN. YEAH, BUT BLESS YOU GUYS FOR DOING WHAT YOU DO. AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO LEAVE US HERE WITH WORKING THIS OUT WHEN YOU'VE GOT AS MUCH TIME AS YOU CAN. I SIMPLY WANT TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT ONE OF THE MISSING PIECES OF DATA THAT WE HAD WAS, YOU KNOW, BEING. I'M GOING TO SAY, FISCALLY OR INFRASTRUCTURE SOUND. THERE IS A, A GUIDELINE IN TERMS OF HOW MUCH COMMERCIAL RETAIL VERSUS HOUSING AND SUCH. WE'RE A WAY OUT OF WHACK, BASICALLY. WHAT WHAT THE ANALYSIS THAT I RAN IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO NEED TO BE PRETTY HIGH ON OUR AD VALOREM TAXES. WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A CHOICE IN ORDER TO MEET THIS, BUT A LITTLE BIT OF TWEAKING INTO THE COMMERCIAL MIXED USE, WHAT I'M SEEING HERE, I'M JUST LETTING Y'ALL KNOW THAT I HAVE THAT INFORMATION, AND I'M HAPPY TO SHARE AT THE POINT THAT Y'ALL ARE READY FOR IT. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS DOWN HERE? I AGREE HUNTING, IT'S THE RIGHT ANSWER. JUST TO THINK ABOUT WHILE WE PUNT. DAVE, I, I, I THINK YOU SAID IT ALSO THAT YOU DON'T LIVE FOR PMS AND YOU KNOW, SERVING ON COMMITTEES. I TOTALLY GET THAT. AS WE CONTEMPLATE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ONE COMMITTEE THAT DOES THIS OR MULTIPLE COMMITTEES. MY ONLY CONCERN IS COHESIVENESS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MR. WEST HAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION, THE CONCERNS, IS THAT SOMEBODY WRITES AN ORDINANCE AND THIS PERSON WRITES AN ORDINANCE, AND THIS PERSON WRITES AN ORDINANCE, AND BEFORE YOU KNOW IT, NO ORDINANCE IS COMMUNICATING WITH EACH OTHER. AND THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN IS IF WE HAD 2 OR 3 DIFFERENT COMMITTEES OUT THERE. THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE LIKE, THIS COMMITTEE IS GOING TO HAVE LIKE THIS LITTLE BIT OF DIRECTION AND THIS ONE'S GOING TO HAVE THIS LITTLE BIT OF DIRECTION. AND THEN WHEN YOU BLEND THAT TOGETHER, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THREE DIFFERENT ENTITIES NOT COMPLETELY BRINGING TOGETHER THIS PERFECT DOCUMENT. SO JUST THINK THROUGH THAT, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S BETTER TO HAVE ONE COMMITTEE THAT JUST HAS LIKE THESE GUIDELINES, THAT AND THEN THEY JUST PLOW THROUGH IT VERSUS HAVING MULTIPLE COMMITTEES. JUST THINK ABOUT THAT. YES, SIR. 
          THIS IS JUST ASKING, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE CAN ASK STAFF OR PNC WITH TO KEEP THE BALL ROLLING A LITTLE BIT? BECAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OUR NEXT MEETING AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SWEARING IN, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THE SECOND MEETING IN NOVEMBER. AND I THINK, CHARLES, WE HAVEN'T REALLY TALKED AS MUCH, BUT I THINK THAT FIRST MEETING DECEMBER, YOU'RE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE HERE. SO THAT'S GOING TO POSSIBLY BE A WORK GROUP SESSION FOR FOR COUNCIL. AND SO THEN YOU'RE TALKING THE SECOND MEETING IN DECEMBER WHEN THIS CAME BACK. SO IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE COULD ACTUALLY TASK THEM WITH NOW THAT KEEPS IT GOING A LITTLE BIT. AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, DESIGN THE SUBGROUPS HOW YOU THINK AND SEND A RECOMMENDATION BACK TO US, OR HAVE STAFF SAY WHAT THEY THINK WILL WORK BEST. I HAVE A SUGGESTION. MR. WELL, PNC DISCUSSED LAST TIME ABOUT ACTUALLY FORMING THE COMMITTEES A WEEK AND A HALF AGO, AND THEN THEY DECIDED TO TO TO WAIT UNTIL THIS JOINT MEETING. BUT THEY'RE THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH READY TO FORM THEIR SUBCOMMITTEE AND GET STARTED. I MEAN, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'VE GOT A, WHEN YOU GOT THESE SMALLER COMMITTEES AND SUBCOMMITTEES AND, YOU KNOW, REQUIRE A FORM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THEY CAN THEY CAN GET TO WORK. I SAY LET THEM START THEN. YEAH. AND IF THAT'S THE CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL, THEN OUR LIAISON CAN TAKE IT TO THEM. NOT THAT THEY'RE NOT HEARING IT RIGHT NOW. YES, SIR. SO TWO THINGS I STILL LIKE THE IDEA OF BIFURCATING IT AND HAVING THIS GROUP, THIS SUBCOMMITTEE FOCUS ON THE PARKS PLAN, THIS THIS COMMITTEE FOCUS ON THE REST OF IT. AND THEN YOU GOT TO REMEMBER, YOU'LL HAVE TWO STAFF MEMBERS IN OUR AUDIENCE THAT THAT WILL BE THAT CAN LIAISE WITH EACH COMMITTEE, RESPECTIVELY. AND THE STAFF, YOU KNOW, THEY SEE EACH OTHER EVERY DAY OR THE, YOU KNOW, WORKLOAD PENDING, BUT THEY CAN TALK TO EACH OTHER. OKAY. OUR COMMITTEE IS LOOKING AT THIS. THEY'RE LOOKING AT THIS. AND THEY CAN TALK AND TALK TALK THROUGH THE DIFFERENCES AND THEN AND THEN GUIDE, YOU KNOW, GIVE THE COMMITTEES THE FEEDBACK THEY NEED. AND THEN IF THEY NEED TO I THINK IF THE TWO COMMITTEES NEED TO DISCUSS IT, THEN THEY JUST HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM AND TALK ABOUT IT IN QUORUM. NO BIG DEAL. I HOPEFULLY I'M NOT OVERSIMPLIFYING THAT, BUT TO ME IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD WORK FINE. AND THEN THE OTHER THOUGHT WAS IN RESPONSE TO YOU SHANE, I AGREE, LET THEM START WORKING ON STUFF. TO ME, I THINK THE TWO THINGS THEY COULD THEY COULD WORK ON, I THINK ULTIMATELY, WHATEVER THEY WANT TO WORK ON, MY SUGGESTION TO THEM WOULD BE WORK ON. NOW THAT YOU HAVE A MAP, RIGHT? AND IF Y'ALL WILL START CHECKING YOUR 
          [04:10:06]
CITY EMAILS, I KNOW YOU ALL DON'T DO THEM, LINDA. CHECK YOUR YOU GOT ON. REALLY? I BET YOU HAD A LOT. WELL THEY GOT CONFIRMED. THAT'S RIGHT. ROB OWEN GOT HER STARTED. THAT'S AWESOME. ROB WAS THE TECH CONSULTANT ON THAT. WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY WITH THAT. BUT WE DISCUSSED HAVING TO ONE. OH YEAH. OH YEAH. THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS WELL SO ON THE IN RESPONSE TO, YOU KNOW, GIVING Y'ALL SOMETHING A TASK WHILE, YOU KNOW, DO WHAT YOU WANT, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT THE FLUME ITSELF. NOW THAT YOU'VE GOT THIS MAP IN YOUR INBOXES. AND I'M SURE CHARLES COULD GET A COUPLE ONE, ONE OF THESE, SOME MORE OF THESE PRINTED UP FOR YOU. AND Y'ALL CAN JUST START MARKING IT UP WITH COLORED MARKERS, YOU KNOW, MARK IT UP, BUT ALSO WORK. BUT BEFORE YOU DO THAT, MAKE SURE YOU COME UP WITH IF MAKE SURE YOU'RE IN AGREEMENT ON THOSE NEWLY PROPOSED LAND USE DESIGNATIONS. BECAUSE WITHOUT AGREEMENT ON THAT, IT'S ALL FOR NAUGHT. PAINTING IT UP. IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR DESIGNATIONS ARE GOING TO BE, BUT BECAUSE THE DEFINITIONS. 
          YEAH. BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY THE THAT'S THE TWO COMPONENTS THAT MATTER MOST IN THE COMP PLAN. 
          WHAT ARE YOUR LAND USE DESIGNATIONS. ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO PRESCRIBE FOR YOUR DENSITY. AND THEN THE OTHER IS GOING TO BE WHERE DO YOU WANT THAT. AND THEN, YOU KNOW I DID A QUICK WALK THROUGH. THOSE WERE I THINK THE THE HIGH POINTS THAT AT LEAST WERE BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION. AND I IMAGINE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT HASN'T BEEN LOST ON ANYBODY IN HERE. I THINK SOME PEOPLE WOULD AGREE. THOSE ARE SOME THINGS THAT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT. LOOK AT THOSE. SO IS THERE A CONSENSUS ON COUNCIL THAT IT'S OKAY TO GIVE MR. PRINCE, AS THE LIAISON TO PARKS AND RECS, THE INSTRUCTIONS THAT HE SHOULD GO TO HIS COMMITTEE AND ACTIVELY GET THEM ENGAGED ON WORKING ON FEEDBACK FOR THE COMP PLAN, MY ONLY CONCERN IS WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY, ROBERT, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IS THAT EACH COMMITTEE IS GOING TO WORK INDEPENDENTLY, BUT THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE STAFF THAT CAN BOUNCE BACK AND FORTH SHARING INFORMATION. ARE YOU WORRIED ABOUT WALKING QUORUM? ABSOLUTELY. I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY YOU'RE HAVING MEETINGS, YOU'RE HAVING THREE INDEPENDENT MEETINGS, AND YOU HAVE THESE STAFF MEMBERS THAT ARE SHARING INFORMATION AMONGST THE COMMITTEES. AND THAT'S JUST A WALKING FORM. I DON'T KNOW, THOUGH. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW EITHER. SO I'M NOT SURE I WANT TO MAKE SURE. SO HERE'S AN EXAMPLE. I'LL THROW A SCENARIO OUT. PARKS PLAN IS WORKING ON THIS. THE OTHER GUYS ARE WORKING ON THIS. I'M LESS CONCERNED OF THAT SITUATION. RIGHT. THEY'RE WORKING ON TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. BUT THEN, YOU KNOW, THEY SAY TO JORDAN, YOU KNOW, HEY JORDAN, CAN YOU CHECK WITH THAT PARKS AND RECS GUY THAT HAS THE BEARD AND, AND SEE IF US DOING THIS HERE IS GOING TO CONFLICT WITH WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON? OR CAN YOU SEE WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT THIS? I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT I'M GUESSING HOW IT WOULD COME UP. I DON'T KNOW. THAT'S THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO I SEE. AND THEN IF THEY NEED TO ACTUALLY DISCUSS IT, THEN THEY HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM. BUT STAFF IS KIND OF LIKE LIKE PARENTING IN A WAY, IF YOU WILL, OR GUIDANCE. I DON'T THINK IT'S ANY DIFFERENT THAN, THAN THAN STAFF COMMUNICATING WITH WITH COUNCIL OR STAFF COMMUNICATING WITH THE PNC OR, YOU KNOW, VOA OR ANY, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER ELSE. I, I'M NOT IMMEDIATELY SEEING COMMA PROBLEMS. THE PROBLEM COMES IN TO ME WHEN YOU'VE GOT WHEN THE TWO COMMITTEE MEMBERS, MEMBERS FROM EACH COMMITTEE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE FUTURE AGENDA POTENTIALLY. BUT IF THEY'RE DIFFERENT COMMITTEE AGAIN, I MEAN, THE QUORUM ISSUE, THE WALKING QUORUM ISSUE COMES IN WHERE WE'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, A, B, C, D IN THE SAME BODY TALKING TO EACH OTHER ONE AT A TIME. WHEREAS IF IT'S TWO PEOPLE FROM THIS BODY AND TWO PEOPLE FROM THIS BODY, THEY'RE TWO SEPARATE BODIES. YOU KNOW, CONSIDERING DIFFERENT THINGS, WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL. WE NEED, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO BE VERY COMPLIANT. BUT BUT I'M NOT I'M IF IT'S MEDIATED BY STAFF OR THE STAFF WHO'S THE LIAISON AND I. AND THEY COULD ALSO UTILIZE THEIR MESSAGE BOARD AS WELL. I MEAN THE MESSAGE BOARD REALLY I MEAN, THE PURPOSE OF THE MESSAGE BOARD, I CAN'T URGE YOU ALL ENOUGH TO TO DIG INTO THOSE MESSAGE BOARDS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT GETS US OUT OF, YOU KNOW, THE JAIL IS USING THOSE MESSAGE BOARDS NOW THAT THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS APPROVED THOSE. AND WE'VE GOT THEM FOR ALL EACH, EACH BOARD, THAT'S REALLY THE THE BEST WAY TO GO ABOUT DOING ANY OF THAT, COMMUNICATING BETWEEN STAFF AND MEMBERS. AND YOU CAN DISCUSS ALL THAT STUFF ON THE MESSAGE BOARD. DO IT THERE AND YOU'RE FINE. START SENDING OUT A BUNCH OF EMAILS AND THEN THEN IT DOES START TO GET COMPLEX, AND AT SOME POINT YOU FORWARD SOMETHING TO THE WRONG PERSON. AND YOU KNOW, BUT I DO THINK, YOU KNOW, I HEAR THE CONCERN THAT YOU HAVE ABOUT SOME OF VIOLATIONS, BUT YOU ALSO HEARD MR. SAM SAY, CAN WE GET MOVING SO THAT WE'RE NOT JUST SITTING STILL? SO WE GOT TO WRITE THAT FENCE VERY CAREFULLY ABOUT LET'S YEAH, LET'S TRY AND TAKE SOME ACTION. 
          [04:15:01]
BUT WE NEED TO COUNSEL EVERYBODY TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT WHO THEY'RE COMMUNICATING WITH. I'M LESS CONCERNED ABOUT PERAK AND DAVID AND MR. PRINCE GETTING INVOLVED WITH WHAT THE PNC FOLKS ARE GOING TO DO. I THINK THAT CAN COEXIST. TWO SEPARATE BODIES. EXACTLY RIGHT AND NOT HAVE MUCH OF A PROBLEM. I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE MORE AN ISSUE OF PNC IF THEY HAVE MULTIPLE SUBCOMMITTEES. RIGHT. THAT'S GOING TO BE POTENTIALLY. I THINK THAT'S THE DISTINCTION, ADAM. AND I THINK THEY NEED TO TALK THROUGH THAT. AND POTENTIALLY PNC SUBCOMMITTEES NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S WHY YOU USE THE MESSAGE BOARD OR THAT COUNCIL DISCUSSION BOARD DISCUSSION BOARD. THAT'S WHY DISCUSSION BOARDS FOR THAT PURPOSE. THAT'S WHY THAT'S WHY THE LEGISLATURE AUTHORIZED IT. SO, YOU KNOW, AVOID EMAILING AND THINGS BACK AND FORTH WHEN IT'S GOING TO BE A LARGER GROUP, DO IT ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD. AND THEN THEN THAT IS ITS PURPOSE. AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COMPLIANCE. SO SO I'M GOING TO COME BACK TO CAN I GET CONSENSUS FROM COUNCIL THAT IT'S OKAY TO GIVE MR. PRINCE THE INSTRUCTIONS THAT HE NEEDS TO WORK WITH DAVID AND ANYBODY ELSE TO GET THAT MOVING? AS FAR AS THE COMP PLAN AND ANY CHANGES THEY WANT TO MAKE TO THAT SO THAT THAT CAN BE MOVING. OKAY. YES. AND THEN WHAT ABOUT MR. DURBIN WORKING WITH PNC AND GETTING THAT WORKING, BUT BEING EXTREMELY CAREFUL ABOUT TOMA VIOLATIONS JUST SO THAT THEY CAN START TO MOVE THINGS FORWARD? MAYOR, I HAVE A SUGGESTION. SURE. SO SO THE PARKS ONE IS PRETTY WELL CONTAINED. THE THE REST OF THE DOCUMENT IS SO HUGE. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE SPECIFICALLY ASKED PLANNING AND ZONING TO USE A SUBCOMMITTEE APPROACH TO VERY FOCUSED WORK ON THE FLUME AND THE DEFINITIONS OF THE OF THE PIECES UNDER IT. SO THAT'S LIKE PAGE 232 TO 246 IN OUR PACKET TO START WITH THAT. SO THOSE, THOSE, THOSE 14 PAGES BECAUSE THAT'S THE HARDEST NUT TO CRACK IN HERE. SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT ALL THE REST OF THE STUFF. YOU KNOW, GETTING THE UPFRONT VERBIAGE RIGHT AND THE MOBILITY AND ALL THAT OTHER STUFF. WE CAN COME BACK TO THAT LATER, BUT JUST REALLY FOCUS ON THE FLUME AND THE DEFINITION OF EACH ITEM WITHIN THE FLUME. AND THEN I THINK THAT'S A BITE SIZED CHUNK THAT YOU WILL. AND BY THE WAY, THEN YOU COULD HAVE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF 2 OR 3 PEOPLE AND YOU CAN BRING THEM BACK INTO A PNC FOR FULL, OPEN DISCUSSION WHENEVER YOU WANT TO, WHEN THAT SUBCOMMITTEE IS READY AS WELL. IT SEEMS LIKE YOU COULD MAKE PRETTY RAPID PROGRESS AGAINST IT. YOU GUYS ARE ALREADY MAKING GOOD PROGRESS. IS YOUR SUGGESTION THAT THEY FOCUS ON THAT SMALL CHUNK AND THAT THERE'D JUST BE ONE SUBCOMMITTEE FOR NOW WORKING ON THAT PNC SUBCOMMITTEE FOCUSED ON THAT ONE CHUNK. PARKS AND REC SUBCOMMITTEE FOCUSED ON THAT ONE. YES, THAT IS MY RECOMMENDATION. AND THEN AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, NEW COUNCIL IN PLACE, WE SAY, HOW DO WE STITCH IT ALL TOGETHER? AND HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT IT'S COHERENT? AND I'LL JUST TELL YOU, MY PERSONAL OPINION IS YOU GOT TO HAVE A TECH WRITER THAT'S A STRONG TECH WRITER THAT IS DRIVING THE PROCESS AND THAT WILL SOLVE THAT PROBLEM, WHETHER IT'S A STAFF MEMBER OR SOMEONE WE HIRE OR SOMEONE THAT'S A, YOU KNOW, JUST HAS THAT THAT ABILITY. DOES ANYBODY DISAGREE WITH THAT? THEN WE'RE AUTHORIZING I SORT OF DO I MEAN DISAGREE A LITTLE BIT. YEAH. I MEAN I DON'T SEE WHY THE YOU KNOW, A SECOND SUBCOMMITTEE CAN'T BE WORKING ON THE OTHER STUFF BECAUSE THERE'S PLENTY WRONG IN THE OTHER STUFF AS WELL AS THE FLUME. AND, YOU KNOW, QUITE FRANKLY, THE FLUME IS LIABLE TO BE DOMINATED BY A PERSON OR TWO. AND YOU ALREADY WENT THROUGH A LOT OF THE ENGINEERS. SO, YEAH, WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT WHAT KIND OF QUESTIONS TO BRING UP. 
          YEAH, I AND I ONE OF THE THINGS I MEAN, WHAT WHAT I MIGHT SUGGEST IS TWO PERSON SUBCOMMITTEES, WHICH HELPS ON THE TOME OF VIOLATIONS BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY THERE'S NOT ONE LESS THAN A QUORUM IN THERE. YEAH. SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S YOU GUYS CAN DO IT ANY WAY YOU WANT. 
          I THINK THE REASONING BEHIND HAVING JUST ONE PNC IS, IS GOOD FROM ONE PERSPECTIVE. AND THAT IS WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT LET'S TRY AND MAKE SOME PROGRESS IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS. OH YEAH. AND THEN Y'ALL CAN OBVIOUSLY COME UP WITH ANOTHER PLAN. THE NEW COUNCIL CAN COME UP WITH A NEW PLAN IF THEY NEED TO EXPAND THAT TO MORE SUBCOMMITTEES. I THINK THE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO NOW IS JUST MAKE SURE THERE'S ENOUGH ON THE PLATE TO MAKE IT THROUGH THE NEXT MONTH OR TWO. AND I THINK FOCUSING ON THE FLUME, AND I'LL MAKE A SLIGHT MODIFICATION IN MY SUGGESTION. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR PNC SUBCOMMITTEE, A PNC SUBCOMMITTEE, TO REALLY FOCUS ON FLUME AND THE LAND USE DEFINITION. IF PNC WANTS TO SET UP ANOTHER SUBCOMMITTEE TO START WORKING ON THE REST OF THE DOCUMENT, I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT. I JUST DON'T WANT THAT TO SLOW DOWN THE FLUME FOCUS. YEAH. HOW DO YOU ENSURE THAT THAT SUBCOMMITTEE THAT'S WORKING ON THE FLUME IS DIVERSIFIED ENOUGH TO REPRESENT THE WHOLE OF LAGO VISTA? WELL, THEY'RE NOT MAKING DECISIONS. THEY'RE MAKING 
          [04:20:03]
RECOMMENDATIONS. THEY'RE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS YOU OBVIOUSLY WANT THE MOST. IF ALL THEY'RE GOING TO DO IS MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT COUNCIL IS GOING TO PICK IT APART, THEN WHY HAVE THE SUBCOMMITTEE? AND THE SUBCOMMITTEE IS DESIGNED TO BRING A FAIR AND BALANCED PROPOSAL SO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT IT AND SAY, THIS WAS EXCELLENT AND LET'S, YOU KNOW, WE'LL HAVE TO BRING IT TO THE FULL BODY OF THE PNC FIRST. BUT I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THAT WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT IT WOULDN'T BE JUST SUBCOMMITTEE. I'M SORRY, JUST PNC MEMBERS. IT'D BE PNC MEMBERS, COUNCIL MEMBERS, STAFF AND CITIZENS. THAT WOULD BE PART OF THAT SUBCOMMITTEE. I THINK THAT'S WHAT GETS YOU WHERE YOU WANT TO BE. IT'S MAYBE WANTED TO HEAR THAT MORE CLEARLY. SURE. I THINK I'M SORRY. JUST ONE LAST COMMENT AND THEN I'LL LET YOU JUMP IN. 
          I THINK YOU NEED THE SAME THING. NEEDS TO BE TRUE FOR PARKS AND RECS. I THINK IT NEEDS TO HAVE PNC, P REC MEMBERS, COUNCIL MEMBERS, STAFF MEMBERS, AND CITIZENS JUST LIKE THE PNC ONE DOES. I THINK BOTH OF THEM DO. IF WE CAN FIND CITIZENS THAT ARE WILLING TO PARTICIPATE ON THAT, THAT ARE NOT ALREADY ON THE RACK, WE COULD TRY. I WOULD ALSO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION ONCE WE GET SOME DRAFTS GOING. YEAH, HAVE A COUPLE OF TOWN HALL MEETINGS AND GET INPUT FROM THE CITIZENS. YEAH. THAT'S THE I'LL JUST ECHO THAT. I MEAN, WHEN YOU HAVE THOSE THOSE CHARETTES TOWN HALL MEETINGS, YOU KNOW THAT THAT'S REALLY THE BEST OPPORTUNITY TO GET THAT TYPE OF FEEDBACK IS WHEN YOU CAN PUT MAPS AND YOU CAN PUT UP THINGS AND PEOPLE CAN SEE IT. 
          THAT'S WHEN YOU GET THE BEST. I MEAN, THAT'S THOSE ARE I JUST SPENT THE LAST, YOU KNOW, HOUR OR SO LOOKING AT OTHER CITIES COMPREHENSIVE PLANS. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THEIR STEERING COMMITTEES AND YOU SEE 50 AND 60 AND 70 PEOPLE LISTED WHO ARE A COMBINATION OF PNC COUNCIL, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, MEMBERS OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, THOSE ARE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS THAT HAVE REAL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT. SO I THINK HAVING THAT TOWN HALL MEETING, ESPECIALLY FOR TOWN OF THIS SIZE, IS IS PRETTY IMPORTANT. I LIKE THAT A LOT. VERY GOOD. DID WE DO IT? DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY FINAL COMMENTS BEFORE WE BRING IT OUT? I THINK WE OUGHT TO SIT HERE FOR TWO MINUTES JUST AT THIS TIME. I CALLED 730. YOU'VE BEEN REALLY GOOD THE LAST 2 OR 3. WOW. THAT I WILL ADJOURN THIS M
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.