[00:00:08]
          MEETING OF THE LAGO VISTA CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER. IT IS 3 P.M. A QUORUM IS PRESENT. EVERYBODY HERE IS HERE EXCEPT MR. BENEFIELD. BUT HE SAID HE WILL BE JOINING US ONLINE SHORTLY. 
          [II. EXECUTIVE SESSION (Part 1 of 2)]
AND WE WILL BE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION HERE SHORTLY. WE WILL CONVENE IN CLOSED 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 551.0712. CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL CONCERNING THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.0723. DELIBERATION REGARDING THE EVALUATION, PERFORMANCE, AND DUTIES OF THE CITY MANAGER PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.074. AND I THINK, BRAD, LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT ASKING OUT HERE IF THERE WERE ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT FOLKS BELIEVE THEY'RE GOING TO ASK ABOUT IN SESSION, IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. OKAY. AGAIN, THIS WAS A THOUGHT FROM BRAD I THOUGHT WAS GOOD. THAT JUST KIND OF GIVES A LITTLE MORE TRANSPARENCY AS TO THE CITIZENS WONDER WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT BACK THERE. AND WHILE WE DO GET TO RECAP, BRAD, IT'S PROBABLY A GOOD METHOD TO LET PEOPLE KNOW BEFOREHAND AS WELL. ONLY. OH YEAH, TENT ISN'T TO LIMIT YOU TO ONLY WHAT YOU BRING UP IN ADVANCE. IT'S JUST THAT IF WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT, BRING UP THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER. AND THEN IF THERE IS A IF A QUESTION OCCURS TO YOU ABOUT ANOTHER ITEM ONCE WE'RE ALREADY BACK, THEN WE'LL ANNOUNCE THAT IN THE RECAP. BUT THAT WAY WE KNOW WE'VE ALERTED THE PUBLIC THAT WE'RE GOING TO ANTICIPATE TALKING ABOUT THESE PARTICULAR ITEMS BEFORE WE GO BACK. SO LET ME TELL YOU THE ONES THAT I WANT TO THAT THAT I INTEND TO TO BRING UP ITEM. 9.2, ITEM 9.4. ITEM 9.17. ARE THERE SOME LEGAL ISSUES THAT I WANT TO ADDRESS WITH YOU ON EACH OF THOSE? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS KNOW THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BRING UP BACK THERE AGAIN DOESN'T LIMIT YOU. AND REMEMBER, WE ARE HAVING TO HOLD DOWN THE BUTTON ON YOUR MICROPHONES NOW. MAYOR PRO TEM. THERE WE GO. THE LIGHT IS ON. I INTEND TO BRING UP ITEM 9.13 ON VEXATIOUS COMPLAINTS. AND BRAD, I DID SEND QUESTIONS TO YOUR INBOX. THANK YOU. AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO BELIEVE HE ALREADY MENTIONED IT, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE 9.9. ALL RIGHT. THERE ARE NO OTHERS. THEN WE WILLTHE COUNCILG FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE 
          [III. ACTION ON EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS]
TIME IS 401. PLEASE KNOW I HAVE ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS UP HERE EXCEPT COUNCILMAN BENEFIELD WHO WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY. HE WAS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO I WILL MAKE NOTE WHEN HE POPS BACK UP ON THE SCREEN IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE DID ITEM NUMBER ONE CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL CONCERNING ALL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEMS REQUIRING CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT ADVICE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071. WAS THERE ANY ACTION? ACTION. 
          ITEM TWO. CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL CONCERNING THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.072. IS THERE ANY ACTION? NO. ACTION. WE DID NOT ORDER. YOU MAY WANT TO REMEMBER TO PUSH YOUR BUTTON. YEAH. SORRY. WE CHANGED HOW THE MICS WORK, SO EVERYONE'S GOT TO PRESS THEIR MICS. SO FOR ANYBODY ONLINE, IF YOU'RE NOT HEARING US. I'LL TRY TO SEND OUT SOME REMINDERS THEN. ITEM THREE. WE DID NOT GET TO THAT ONE YET. AND WE WILL GO BACK INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT THE END OF THIS MEETING TO DISCUSS THAT. AND BRAD, DO YOU HAVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD IN EXECUTIVE SESSION? YES, WE DISCUSSED ITEM 9.2 RELATED TO THE BSC, AND I MADE A RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO REMOVAL OF SOME LANGUAGE FOR POTENTIAL PREEMPTION BY STATE LAW. AND WE CAN DISCUSS THAT WHEN WE GET INTO MORE DETAIL WHEN WE GET TO THAT ITEM. IF COUNCIL WANTS TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT. THEN THERE WERE LEGAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE OPERATION OF THE TREE MITIGATION ORDINANCE. AND AGAIN. THAT IS ALSO AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA. AND I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS MORE SPECIFICALLY WITH QUESTIONS AT THAT TIME. BUT I GAVE AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ORDINANCE ALSO DISCUSSED ITEM ONE. I'M SORRY, 9.17 RELATED TO THE OMBUDSMAN. AND 
          [00:05:07]
AGAIN ASK ME THAT QUESTION WHEN WE GET THERE. BUT SOME LEGAL ADVICE RELATED TO RECOMMENDATIONS TO REMOVE SOME LANGUAGE IN THAT PROVISION IN THAT PROPOSED POLICY. AND THEN THERE WERE LEGAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO ITEM 913, A POTENTIAL DISCUSSION POLICY RELATED TO VEXATIOUS COMPLAINTS. AND THEN ALSO THERE WAS THERE WERE LEGAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO 9.9 AND ADOPTION OF SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY OR REVISIONS OF SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY APPLICABLE TO COUNCIL MEMBERS. THANK YOU. BRAD. ALL RIGHT. THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO EVERYBODY. PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF UNITED STATES OF TEXAS FLAGS. FLAG. UNITED STATES OF. SHE STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS LEGEND CITY, TEXAS STATE UNDER GOD. FATHER, AS WE MEET TODAY, WE PRAY FOR A SPIRIT OF UNITY TO BE PRESENT AMONG US. 
          HELP US TO SET ASIDE PERSONAL AGENDAS AND WORK TOGETHER IN HARMONY FOR THE COMMON GOOD OF OUR CITIZENS. GIVE OUR LEADERS FORESIGHT TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF ALL, PARTICULARLY THE VULNERABLE AMONG US, AND LET OUR WORDS AND ACTIONS BE FILLED WITH RESPECT AS WE WORK TO MAKE OUR CITY A BETTER PLACE. AMEN. WE WILL MOVE TO CITIZEN COMMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH OPEN MEETINGS ACT. COUNCIL IS PROHIBITED FROM ACTING OR DISCUSSING OTHER THAN FACTUAL RESPONSES TO SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, ANY ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA. TO PARTICIPATE IN CITIZEN COMMENTS PORTION OF THE MEETING, YOU MUST SUBMIT A COMPLETED FORM. IF YOU ARE ATTENDING THE MEETING IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, YOU MUST COMPLETE THE FORM AVAILABLE AT THE LOCATION PROVIDED TO THE MAYOR PRIOR TO THE START OF THE MEETING. IF YOU WILL BE PARTICIPATING USING THE ONLINE TOOL, YOU MAY BE COMPLETE THE FORM AND SUBMIT IT BY EMAIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS INCLUDED ON THE FORM. I DID NOT HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP FOR NON-AGENDA 
          [VII. ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST]
CITIZEN COMMENTS. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? OKAY, WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST. PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.0415, THE CITY COUNCIL MAY REPORT ON ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. A EXPRESSION OF THANKS, GRATITUDE, AND CONDOLENCES B INFORMATION REGARDING HOLIDAY SCHEDULES. C RECOGNITION OF INDIVIDUALS PROCLAMATIONS D REMINDERS REGARDING CITY COUNCIL EVENTS E REMINDERS REGARDING COMMUNITY EVENTS F HEALTH AND SAFETY ANNOUNCEMENTS. CHARLES, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO KICK IT OFF? ANYBODY DOWN HERE? YES. NO. REPORT. THE ONLY THING I HAVE TO REPORT IS THAT WE, AS A REMINDER, WE DO HAVE THE LA PRIMAVERA COMING UP AT THE END OF THE END OF FEBRUARY, THE FIRST WEEK OF MARCH. IS GOING TO BE WORKING QUITE A BIT TO CLEAN UP, BUT IT'S A WHOLE COMMUNITY EFFORT, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN TOWN THAT WEEKEND. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS AWARE AND KEEPING A WATCHFUL MIND OUT FOR THE, THE, THE RACERS, THEY ARE GOING TO BE RACERS COMING IN THE NEXT TWO WEEKENDS TO JUST KIND OF CATCH THE KIND OF GET AN IDEA OF THE COURSE. SO JUST BE MINDFUL. WATCH WHILE YOU'RE OUT THERE ON THE ROADS. GET USED TO PUSHING THIS BUTTON HERE. SO FOR THE LIONS, I JUST WANT EVERYBODY TO KNOW THAT THEY ARE DOING THEIR CHILI FEAST. THERE IS NO COST FOR THE CHILI THIS WEEKEND. THAT'S AT THE HIGH SCHOOL CAFETERIA. WE JUST ASK FOR DONATIONS. THIS IS WITH MY LIONS HAT ON EVERYBODY, SO I APPRECIATE THAT. IT'S JUST IN TIME FOR OUR SUPER BOWL THIS WEEKEND, SO ENJOY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU KAREN PAUL. YEAH, TWO THINGS, BOTH FROM ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH. ONE IS SUPER BOWL. SO THIS THIS SUNDAY THE CHURCH WILL BE HOLDING A SOUP LUNCH A SUPER BOWL LUNCH. AND IT'S A FUNDRAISER FOR THE FOOD PANTRY. SO TO BRING SOUP AND OR JUST COME AND EAT SOUP AND MAKE DONATIONS, ALL DONATIONS WILL GO TO THE FOOD PANTRY. SECONDLY, IN THE HOLY WEEK, ASH WEDNESDAY IS TWO WEEKS FROM YESTERDAY, FEBRUARY 18TH, AND THERE WILL BE A DRIVE THROUGH ASH AND PRAYER SESSION AT THE CHURCH FROM 7 TO 9 IN THE MORNING AND NOON TO ONE AT LUNCHTIME. THOSE WHO WANT TO ENGAGE. THANK YOU, MR. BENNEFIELD. NOTHING. WE'RE 
          [00:10:03]
GOOD. THANK YOU. CITY POSTING ABOUT A COUPLE DOGS THAT WE HAVE AT ANIMAL CONTROL. VELMA AND SCOOBY. THEY HAVE BEEN THERE GOING ON ALMOST THREE MONTHS, SO WE ARE REALLY ASKING IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY WILLING TO EITHER FOSTER OR ADOPT THEM. THEY'RE IN SOME PRETTY SMALL CELLS OVER THERE, SO THEY WOULD DESERVE A GOOD HOME. I'VE SEEN THEM ONCE AT LEAST, AND THEY'RE SUPER FRIENDLY. AND I KNOW P.D. AND OTHERS HAVE INTERACTED WITH THEM. SO IF ANYBODY KNOWS OF ANYBODY, JUST PLEASE LET US KNOW. GET IN TOUCH WITH THE 
          [VIII.1. Consideration and possible action to approve Resolution 26-2193 supporting the Travis County Sponsored Applications to the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization’s 2028–2031 Call for Projects, which involves the Lohmans Ford Road Corridor Plan.]
CITY AND WE WILL PROCEED. I WILL GO ON TO THE ONLY ACTION ITEM THAT WE HAVE. ONE CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 26 2193, SUPPORTING THE TRAVIS COUNTY SPONSORED APPLICATIONS TO THE CAPITAL AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS 2028 TO 2031 CALL FOR PROJECTS, WHICH INVOLVES THE LOWMAN FORD ROAD CORRIDOR PLAN. AND I WILL TAKE THIS TO CHARLES. ALL RIGHT. VICTOR. GOOD EVENING. COUNCIL, IS THERE A BUTTON ON THIS ONE TO. IT'S. OH IT'S ON JOHN. OH, PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. JUST MAKE SURE EVERYONE CAN HEAR ME. SO TRAVIS COUNTY OR TRAVIS COUNTY REACHED OUT ASKING FOR KIND OF CITIES TO PASS A RESOLUTION IN ORDER TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR CAPITAL CONSIDERATIONS. THIS IS MAINLY FOR THE LOWMAN FORD CORRIDOR. BASICALLY IN A I WROTE A LOT DOWN, BUT I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE IT TO YOU STRAIGHT THIS WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT COMMITTING TO ANY CONSTRUCTION DESIGN OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE. NO FUNDS ARE BEING COMMITTED. IT'S JUST SAYING THAT WE REALIZE THAT THERE IS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT ON LOWMAN, AND THAT WE AGREE THAT SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE AND A STUDY SHOULD BE PROVIDED. ANY QUESTIONS FOR VICTOR? MAYOR PRO TEM? VICTOR? I MEAN, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I RECALL IN TERMS OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE DISCUSSIONS IS SOME OF OUR WATER INFRASTRUCTURE GOING DOWN. LOWMAN, WOULD THIS IMPACT, BY ANY CHANCE, THAT YOU CAN TELL ANY OF THE RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATIONS OR ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE? SO THIS IS ONLY STUDY. THIS IS VERY PRELIMINARY. WE STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE AND EXPRESS OUR CONCERNS AND GOVERN WHAT HAPPENS WITHIN OUR CITY LIMITS. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR VICTOR? I WILL OPEN IT UP TO CITIZEN COMMENTS. I DON'T HAVE ANYONE TO TURN ANYTHING IN. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? HEARING NONE. THEN I WILL BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. IF NOT, I CAN TAKE A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 26.2193 AS READ IN. I HAVE A MOTION TO HAVE A SECOND SECOND FROM MR. PRINCE. MOTION TO APPROVE A SECOND. MR. PRINCE, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I, I, I OPPOSED SAY NAY. IT'S APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. THREE CITIZEN COMMENTS ON WHAT 
          [IX.16. Discussion and workshop regarding policy considerations related to e-bike usage, enforcement, and public safety]
I BELIEVE IS THE E-BIKE ONE, SO I WILL. GO DOWN TO THAT ONE, WHICH I BELIEVE IS 916. YES. 
          ALL RIGHT. DISCUSSION AND WORKSHOP REGARDING POLICY CONSIDERATIONS RELATED TO E-BIKE USAGE, ENFORCEMENT AND PUBLIC SAFETY. THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS ASKED TO BE PUT ON BY MULTIPLE COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE A SPONSOR OF IT. THERE'S NOT A AGAIN THIS IS ALL WORKSHOP. THERE ISN'T A PROPOSAL FROM THE CITY ON IT. I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A BUNCH OF SOCIAL MEDIA DISCUSSION ON IT, AND OUTSIDE OF SOCIAL MEDIA DISCUSSIONS ON IT, SO I DON'T KNOW IF ANY COUNCIL WANTED TO SPEAK OR IF YOU WANT ME TO GO STRAIGHT TO LET THE CITIZENS COME UP AND TALK. OKAY, THEN I WILL GO STRAIGHT TO CITIZEN COMMENTS AND I HAVE HINES BROTHER. I DON'T KNOW IF I SAID YOUR LAST NAME CORRECTLY AT ALL. 
          CLOSE ENOUGH. OKAY, MY NAME IS HINES GREATER. I RECENTLY FROM AUSTIN HAD PROPERTY HERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME, BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, AND I'M MOVING OUT HERE AND I'VE USED BIKES. I HAVEN'T USED E-BIKES MYSELF, BUT I BIKED MYSELF AND I HAVE A SON WHO HAS A MOTORCYCLE AND I JUST WANT TO COMMENT ON. HE STARTED RIDING MOTORCYCLE EARLY, AND I WOULD 
          [00:15:08]
SAY THAT HIS MOTORCYCLE EXPERIENCE AND THE TRAINING HE GOT AND EXPERIENCE HE GOT FROM HAS MADE HIM A MUCH SAFER DRIVER. WHEN HE'S OUT ON THE ROAD AND RIDING IN THE CAR WITH ME, HE INSTINCTIVELY CAN DETECT RISKS MUCH BETTER THAN I DO. SO I I'M IN FAVOR OF MAKING THE TRAINING AVAILABLE FOR KIDS AND ENCOURAGING THEM TO, TO USE THE BIKES. AND THEN I ALSO THINK IT SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED FOR IMPOSSIBLE FOR ADULTS TO USE THEM AS WELL. I USE MY MOUNTAIN BIKE IN TOWN WAS THE BEST SHAPE OF MY LIFE. WHEN I USED TO GO SHOPPING IN THE GREAT HILLS AREA WHERE I LIVE, AND IF I HAD AN E-BIKE AT THE TIME, I PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE GOTTEN AS GOOD A SHAPE. BUT IT'S KIND OF DEMOCRATIZING. I'VE GOT EXPERIENCE RIDING E-BIKES IN IN EUROPE. THEY DO A LOT OF TOURS OUT THERE NOW, AND IT'S A GREAT WAY TO GET AROUND, AND WE KIND OF HAVE A RESORT COMMUNITY HERE. I THINK IT WOULD REALLY BE A GREAT FOR IMPROVING THE CITY'S AS A KIND OF MORE RESORT COMMUNITY. GETTING AROUND ON E-BIKES, OR DO I HAVE TO SAY THANK YOU? I HAVE JEN MILLER. I WILL START WITH JEFF MILLER. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANKS FOR HAVING US. MY NAME IS JEFF. THAT'S MY WIFE JEN. WE ACTUALLY ARE NEW BUSINESS OWNERS HERE IN LARGO. WE'RE OPENING A BIKE SHOP NEXT MONTH IN THE SHOPPING CENTER OFF OF LOWMAN FORD. SO LITTLE HISTORY ON ME. I'M A RETIRED PRO BMX RACER, AN AVID MOUNTAIN BIKER, AND E-BIKES HAVE BEEN A GAME CHANGER, ESPECIALLY FOR ME. IN MY 40S, I'VE DEALT WITH TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY. I'VE HAD SCREWS IN MY HIPS, SO I'M NOT ABLE TO DO THE THINGS THAT I USED TO ON AN ANALOG BIKE. BUT THE E-BIKE IS NICE BECAUSE I CAN GET AROUND. MY WIFE AND I MOVED HERE BECAUSE OF THE MOUNTAIN BIKE COMMUNITY. IT IS A GREAT PLACE. IT'S GREAT TO GO OUT AND SEE KIDS ON BIKES, EBIKES INSTEAD OF IN THEIR HOUSE, YOU KNOW, ON THEIR PHONE. YOU KNOW, I STARTED RACING WHEN I WAS 12 YEARS OLD, AND I CAN'T TELL YOU THE THINGS THAT I'VE LEARNED KEEPING KIDS OUT OF TROUBLE, KEEPING THEM FOCUSED AND ALL THAT BEING SAID, I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME KIND OF PROCESS AND REGULATION TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE BEING SAFE, RIGHT? WHAT I'M HERE TO SAY IS THAT MY WIFE AND I, AND THERE'S A LOT OF RIDERS LOCAL HERE WHO ARE WILLING TO HELP WITH THAT SORT OF THING. IF THERE'S A PROGRAM THAT NEEDS TO BE PUT TOGETHER, WE ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO HELP DO THAT. THE BIGGEST THING IS, I THINK THAT LAGO VISTA HAS AN INFRASTRUCTURE CURRENTLY THAT COULD REALLY, REALLY TURN THIS TOWN INTO A HUB, BECAUSE WHEN I GO OUT AND I RIDE MY BIKE OR MY MOUNTAIN BIKE, AND I SEE 20 TO 30 KIDS RIDING AROUND TOGETHER, TO ME I'M LIKE, THAT'S A GOOD THING. THAT'S NOT A BAD THING. 
          IT'S A GOOD THING THEY'RE NOT IN THEIR HOUSE, THEY'RE NOT DOING DRUGS. THEY'RE OUT HAVING FUN BEING KIDS, AND THEY'RE LEARNING HOW TO BE VIGILANT. THEY'RE LEARNING THINGS THAT YOU DON'T EVEN REALIZE. THEY'RE SITUATIONAL, SITUATIONAL AWARENESS, WHAT'S AROUND THEM, WHICH GOES BACK TO WHAT HINES SAID. IT HELPS THEM AS BETTER DRIVERS. WHEN THEY GET OLDER, THEY'RE MORE AWARE. AND HONESTLY, THERE'S STATISTICAL THINGS THAT SAY THAT THEY'RE BETTER CITIZENS BECAUSE THEY'RE THEY'RE OUT IN THE COMMUNITY INSTEAD OF JUST BEING SECLUDED. 
          SO I THINK THAT THAT'S A BIG THING FOR OUR YOUTH. I LOOK FORWARD TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS, BECAUSE WE HAVE A GREAT INFRASTRUCTURE HERE, AND THERE'S A LOT OF YOUNG KIDS THAT CAN THAT YOU NEVER KNOW. YOU NEVER KNOW WHO'S LIVING HERE. AND IF YOU GIVE THEM THE RIGHT OPPORTUNITY, WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO. AND I JUST THINK THAT THIS IS A PLACE IN TEXAS THAT IS LIKE NOTHING ELSE, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO MOUNTAIN BIKES AND DIRT BIKES AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. IT IS A PERFECT BREEDING GROUND FOR A GREAT LIFESTYLE OF OUTDOORS, FITNESS, THAT KIND OF THING. YOU HAVE THE LAKE, SO I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND DON'T BAN ANYTHING. LET'S EMBRACE IT AND GET IT RIGHT AND RAISE THESE KIDS UP TO DO THE RIGHT THING, RIGHT? LET'S TEACH THEM, YOU KNOW. SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. SO JEN MILLER GOING TO SPEAK TO THAT. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. SHE SAID DITTO. IS THERE ANYONE 
          [00:20:08]
ELSE WHO WOULD WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? HEARING NONE. I'LL BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL. I ONE QUESTION I WAS GOING TO HAVE IS FOR CHIEF FRANCO, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I THINK MOST OF THESE DISCUSSIONS I'VE SEEN SOMEWHERE BOUNCED AROUND THE SAFETY OF THE KIDS AND PEOPLE SEEING THEM OUT ON BOGGY OR LOWMAN OR SOMEWHERE. I THINK THERE'S JUST GENERAL CONCERN. CAN YOU SPEAK TO SORT OF WHAT ARE THE THE LAWS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE RIGHT NOW FOR E-BIKES AND, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, JEFF, YOU DIDN'T BRING IT UP NOW. BUT YOU MENTIONED TO ME PREVIOUSLY THERE'S DIFFERENT CLASSES OF E-BIKES. SO LIKE THERE'S ONES THAT GO TO CERTAIN SPEEDS. IF YOU COULD SPEAK MORE TO WHAT THAT IS OKAY I DO COUNCIL. SO BASICALLY ON E-BIKES RIGHT NOW IF IT'S 20 MILE PER HOUR BIKE, IT'S NOT AGAINST THE LAW TO HAVE THAT ON. IT'S CONSIDERED A BIKE. SO THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO TO FOR THEM. FOR BIKES THAT ARE GO 28 UNLESS IT'S CONSIDERED A BIKE. NOW, IF THEY GO OVER 20 MILES AN HOUR IT'S CONSIDERED A MOTOR VEHICLE. SO THOSE YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE OBEY BY THE LAWS, JUST LIKE HAVE TO HAVE A DRIVER'S LICENSE, JUST LIKE HAVING A SCOOTER. SO IF THAT'S THE ONLY LAWS THAT ARE DIFFERENT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE INSURANCE ON ONE TO GO 28 AND UNDER JUST OVER. SO I WOULD LOVE TO SEE BIKE LANES AND DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BECAUSE THE ONLY THING WE EVER GET CALLS ABOUT IS THAT SOMETIMES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROADS AND THEY DON'T LOOK WHERE THEY'RE GOING, LIKE HE'LL SAY, WE CAN GIVE CLASSES, TEACH THEM HOW TO STAY ON THOSE SIDES. THEY SHOULD BE STAYING ON. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. I, I HAD A QUESTION ON HELMETS. CAN YOU TALK TO WHAT THE CURRENT HELMET LAW STATEWIDE OR HERE. THERE'S NO THERE'S YEAH THERE'S NO HELMET NOT FOR E-BIKES OR ANYTHING UNDER A FORCE UNDER 28. IS THERE A HELMET REQUIREMENT. NO THERE IS. YES THERE IS. YES YES OKAY. SO THANK YOU. IT JUST MY OBSERVATION WOULD BE IT SEEMS LIKE ESPECIALLY MAYBE WITH THE MOST RECENT CHRISTMAS, THERE'S QUITE A FEW ELECTRICALLY ASSISTED BIKES THAT LOOK LIKE THEY'RE GOING FASTER THAN 28, BUT I DON'T KNOW. SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE ENCOUNTERING, WELL, LIKE THE ONES WE'VE HAVE COUNTERED WITH. THEY ARE THEY LOOK LIKE THEY'RE GOING FASTER, BUT THEY'RE NOT. IT'S JUST LIKE A GOLF CART. SOME OF THE PEOPLE I WOULD SAY THEY HAVE GOLF CARTS GOING 40 MILES AN HOUR AND YOU GET TO THEY'RE THEY'RE ONLY LIKE 26 MILES FOR GOLF CARTS. SO IT'S JUST IT SEEMS LIKE THEY'RE GOING FAST, BUT THEY'RE NOT. 
          I'M SORRY. WELL, I, I GUESS I GOTTA LEARN TO PRESS THIS DOWN. THE, MY, I GUESS MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE CAN WE DEVELOP A PROGRAM AS A GENTLEMAN SUGGESTED, A SAFETY KIND OF COMMUNITY ORIENTED PROGRAM AND ENCOURAGE THE KIDS TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT, ENCOURAGE PARENTS TO GET THEIR KIDS TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT? AND IT COULD BE MORE OF A WARD TYPE SYSTEM AS OPPOSED TO, YOU KNOW, PERMITTING OR PUNITIVE INITIALLY AND GET SOMETHING GOING IN THE COMMUNITY. I THINK THAT COULD CREATE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE A LOT OF FUN AND GET A LOT OF ENGAGEMENT. OKAY. YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK I'D PREFER THAT VERSUS US CONSIDERING ANY KIND OF POLICY OR ANYTHING, ESPECIALLY SINCE I'M NOT SURE ANYTHING WE COME UP WITH IS ENFORCEABLE, YOU KNOW, FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT. SO. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR PRO TEM. SO IN THE PACKET I DID PUT INFORMATION OF WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING FOR E-BIKES. 
          BUT I WILL TELL YOU KNOW, I, I PERSONALLY WAS THRILLED TO SEE KIDS OUT OF THE HOUSES AND OFF THEIR TECHNOLOGY. OH MY GOSH. AND ACTUALLY SOCIALIZING. THAT'S WONDERFUL. BUT THE HISTORY OF LAGO VISTA IS THAT WE WERE BUILT WITHOUT SIDEWALKS OR OTHER TRAILS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE, WOW, THERE MAY BE A BEGINNING OF AN INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THESE THINGS TO BE WRITTEN. I'M EXCITED THAT WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE WILLING TO HELP US, MAYBE PUT A PROGRAM TOGETHER, THAT WE CAN THEN GO AHEAD AND PROMOTE AND WOULD LOVE FOR YOU TO BE INVOLVED, ACHIEVE WITH THAT. AND I THINK, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THE BIGGEST IF THERE WAS ANY, MOST PEOPLE ARE SAYING, WOW, THE KIDS ARE OFF. THEY'RE THEY'RE TECHNOLOGY. FOR THE MOMENT, THE ONLY CONCERN WAS REALLY FOR THE KIDS SAFETY AND THAT THEY DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THEY WERE IN THE WAY, OR THEY DARTED OUT IN FRONT OF A CAR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO THAT'S BEEN OUR ENCOUNTERS WITH TELLING THE KIDS, THIS IS HOW YOU NEED TO DO IT. STAY ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND DON'T GET IN THE MIDDLE. SEE A CAR PULL OVER, PULL OVER REAL CLOSE TO THE ENDS, DON'T THERE? SOME OF THEM ARE DRIVING LIKE THEIR THEIR CARS, BUT THEY'RE I THINK YOU GUYS CAN STAY OFF THE ROAD. SO. ARE YOU. I'D LIKE TO SAY I'M REALLY HAPPY THAT WE HAVE A, YOU KNOW, BICYCLE SHOP COMING INTO THE COMMUNITY. I WAS A BICYCLE SHOP OWNER FROM 2008 TO 2013 DOWN IN GALVESTON ISLAND BICYCLE COMPANY. I WILL SAY THAT THERE WE WE HAD 
          [00:25:03]
REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS FOR EVERY BICYCLE. SO THAT WAY WE ACTUALLY KNEW IF A BICYCLE WOULD BE CONSIDERED AN A-CLASS BICYCLE BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE TO RUN. IT WOULD BE REGISTERED WITH A SERIAL NUMBER. I WILL SAY THAT AS A AS A CITIZEN, I'VE RUN INTO THREE INDIVIDUALS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I KNOW THAT THEIR POCKET BIKES, THEY ARE NOT E-BIKES AND THEY ARE THEY ARE WELL, GOING OVER 50 MILES AN HOUR BECAUSE I WAS GOING 45 AND THEY ZOOMED RIGHT PAST ME. SO I WAS ACTUALLY SPEEDING IN MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD AND ON LOMAN FORD AND BOGGY, I ALMOST HIT TWO SMALL CHILDREN WITH MY OWN CHILD IN THE CAR, AND SO I PUT MYSELF AT RISK BY GOING INTO THE DITCH AND GETTING SOME BODY DAMAGE IN MY OWN VEHICLE LAST WEEK. NOW THESE KIDS WERE UNDER THE AGE OF 12, AND I KNOW IN SOME CITIES THAT THEY ARE REQUIRING NOW THAT ONCE A BIKE IS REGISTERED, FIRST OFF, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED AFTER DARK, ESPECIALLY IF THEY DON'T HAVE LIGHTS OR REFLECTORS. AND ALSO THAT THERE'S AGE REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME CHILDREN THAT ARE SEVEN AND EIGHT YEARS OLD DRIVING THOSE 28 MILE AN HOUR BIKES THAT ARE WAY OVER POWERED FOR THEM, OR EVEN HIGHER. AND THEY REALLY SHOULDN'T BE CLASSIFIED AS E-BIKES. AND BY LAW, THEY'RE NOT E-BIKES. BUT I KNOW A LOT OF CHILDREN IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD ESPECIALLY GOT THEM FOR CHRISTMAS. SO EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT DRIVING THEM FASTER THAN 28MPH JUST BECAUSE OF THEIR CLASSIFICATION, THEY SHOULDN'T BE DRIVEN BY ANYONE WITHOUT A LICENSE. SO WHAT WOULD HAVE TO DO IS BASICALLY MAKE THE CITY AGREEMENTS ON THAT? YEAH, THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE HAVE A BICYCLE REGISTRATION THAT WAY, EVEN IF IT, YOU KNOW, THAT WAY WE COULD DETERMINE IF IT IS AN E-BIKE AND IF IT'S NOT AN E-BIKE, LIKE I SAID, WE CAN DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. DEFINITELY. BUT WE'LL HAVE TO PUT A CITY ORDINANCE FIRST AND ENFORCE THOSE LAWS. MR. HALL, DO I QUESTION REGARDING LIGHTING AT NIGHT? AND I JUST IT CONCERNS ME WHEN, YOU KNOW, SO MANY YOUNG CHILDREN ARE OUT IN NO LIGHTS, BLACK CLOTHING, BLACK BLACK BIKE AND THEY'RE NOT ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. AND SO, YOU KNOW, JUST IT CONCERNS ME THAT, YOU KNOW, I'VE TO WATCH AND BE ABLE TO WATCH OUT FOR THEM UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES. THIS IS STUFF WE SHOULD PUT TOGETHER FOR THE EDUCATION OF THESE KIDS. AND LIKE I SAID, WE PUT AN ORDINANCE TOGETHER SAYING REQUIRED LIGHTS REQUIRED. THIS REQUIRE THEM TO REGISTER. THAT'S ALL THAT NEEDS TO. MAYOR PRO TEM, I'M JUST GOING TO COME BACK ONE MORE TIME. SO WHAT I DID IS I DID DO A GO AHEAD AND DO SOME RESEARCH AND FOUND THAT THE TOWN OF HIGHLAND PARK, TEXAS, HAD A INTERESTING ORDINANCE TO FOLLOW. IT'S IN THE PACKETS. AND ON PAGE 319, I WOULD LOVE FOR YOUR COMMITTEE TO BE ABLE TO GO OR YOUR YOUR GROUP TO BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH IT AND OF COURSE, HEAR FROM YOU, CHIEF, ON ANYTHING THAT MAYBE Y'ALL MIGHT MODIFY, BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE AN EASY ONE, I THINK, BECAUSE IT ADDRESSES SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, COUNCILOR CHAVARRIA. SO I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT TO THE ATTENTION. AND IF WE'RE GOING TO DO ANYTHING AT ALL THIS AFTER GOING THROUGH MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE ORDINANCES, THIS SEEMED LIKE IT WAS BETTER SUITED FOR OR CLOSELY TIED TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY. MY ONE TAKEAWAY, TOO, IS THAT WHILE WE'RE PUTTING THAT KIND OF INFORMATION TOGETHER IS JUST, YOU KNOW, I THINK CHARLES, YOU POINT OUT, WAS AT ROUND ROCK OR SOME NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY PD PUT OUT A POST AND IT JUST KIND OF REMINDED EVERYBODY OF SOME OF THE LAWS THAT ALREADY EXIST THAT YOU PUT OUT THERE. I THINK THAT COULD BE USEFUL IF YOU GUYS PUT OUT WHAT'S ALREADY OUT THERE. AND MY OTHER QUESTION WAS, EVEN UNDER THE 28MPH, ARE THEY ALLOWED TO BIKE ON LOWMAN FOR 1431 BOGGY FORD? DEFINITELY NOT. YEAH. SO BOGGY. I'VE SEEN HIM ON BOGGY. THEY'RE STAYING ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. NOT LIKE A GOLF CART. SO THEY'RE NOT GOLF CARTS. SO THAT'S CONSIDERED A DIFFERENT THING. THEY GOTTA DO EVERYTHING LIKE BIKE LAWS. SO YOU STILL GOTTA OBEY. DO JUST LIKE BIKES DO. SO IT MIGHT BE GOOD TO PUT AS A REMINDER IF WE DO ANYTHING ON THE SOCIAL MEDIA, JUST KNOW LOWMAN. IT'S NOT OUR ROAD, BUT STILL NO. 1431 YEAH. NO. 1431 AND NO. 14 OKAY. OH YEAH. YEAH. SO JUST TO CLARIFY, ARE YOU SAYING THAT WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS NO BIKING ON LOWMAN FORD? NO. WELL, YOU CAN'T HAVE. WELL, IT'S NOT AN ORDINANCE. YEAH. IT'S JUST WE'RE SAYING E-BIKES KIDS ON 1431, THAT'S GETS A LITTLE DANGEROUS. AND WE'RE SAYING IT'S A BAD IDEA. IT'S A BAD IDEA. BUT THERE IS LAWS THAT WE 
          [00:30:03]
CAN GO AND ENFORCE A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN YEAH, THERE'S SOME LIKE, YEAH, RECKLESS, YOU KNOW, DRIVING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT BECAUSE THEY STILL HAVE TO OBEY THE RULES JUST LIKE A BIKE THEY CAN'T JUST DRIVE ON. BUT IF SOMEONE'S RIDING A BIKE, ADULT OR A MINOR. NO, NO, NO. 
          AND THEY'RE STAYING OFF THE SIDE. TO THE SIDE. NO, WE'RE JUST TALKING. YES, IT'S YES, IT IS LEGAL. THAT'S A GOOD CLARIFICATION. YEAH. MR. BENNEFIELD. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I SUPPORT I SUPPORT THE TWO MEASURES FROM THE CITIZENS THAT JUST TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE A DESTINATION COMMUNITY. WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD BE PROMOTING OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES, KAYAKING, FISHING, BOATING, E-BIKES. AND IF THERE'S ALREADY LAWS ON THE BOOKS THAT REGULATE THIS BEYOND TRAINING AND EDUCATION, I THINK WE JUST LEAVE IT AS IT IS. THAT'S JUST MY OPINION AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THIS IS A WORK SESSION ITEM, SO THERE'S NO ACTION TO BE TAKEN. IS ANYBODY GO WITH ME PROCEEDING OKAY I WAS GOING TO ASK REAL QUICK. MR. BLAIR, I SEE YOU BACK THERE. WHAT ARE YOU INTENDING TO SPEAK ON YOUR ITEM, OR WERE YOU JUST HERE TO OBSERVE? YEAH. OKAY. WELL, THEN I WILL MOVE TO ITEM FOUR AND WE WILL NEED A FORM FROM YOU, FROM THE SECRETARY WHEN YOU'RE DONE JUST TO FILL OUT YOUR NAME. 
          [IX.4. Discussion on the request from Kenneth Belaire to waive tree mitigation fees at 20902 Monroe Cove, Lago Vista, Texas 78645.]
OKAY. SO DISCUSSION ON THE REQUEST FROM KENNETH BLAIR TO WAIVE TREE MITIGATION FEES AT 20902 MONROE COVE, LAGO VISTA, TEXAS. 78645. LET ME ASK REAL QUICK BEFORE YOU GO. IS THERE ANY STAFF THAT ARE GOING TO SPEAK ON THIS? FIRST? I JUST HAVE OKAY. SO JORDAN, FIRST, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS A REQUEST FOR A WAIVER ON SOME TREES. I HAVE WE PULLED THE DOCUMENTATION. IT WAS NOTED IN THE FILE ON THE PERMIT ON FOUR 24, 25 AND SIGNED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR THAT THE THE FEE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED WHEN THEY PULLED THE APPLICATION. SINCE THEN, I BELIEVE THEY'VE BEEN CUT. YES. SO THEY HAVE BEEN CUT. THE WORK IS PRETTY MUCH DONE OR DONE. AND SO WE'RE WE'RE AT THE END OF THE PERMIT, THE TOTAL FEE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT HAS BEEN CALCULATED WAS. $750 FOR 33IN OF OAKS. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? IF NOT, THEN I WILL MOVE TO CITIZEN COMMENTS AND I WILL BRING UP KENNETH BLAIR. OKAY, SO THE THING IS JUST I'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO THIS FOR SEVEN YEARS TO BUILD A GARAGE, AND I HAD TO CUT DOWN THREE TREES. 
          AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR PUT ON THERE BECAUSE HE'S NO LONGER A PART OF THIS PROCESS. SO WHEN I HAD HIM CUT DOWN, THE ARBORIST SAID THE TREES WERE ALL LESS THAN TEN D.B.H DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT. SO I TRIED TO PRINT IT, BUT I'M TECHNICALLY DEFICIENT. 
          EVEN THE LADY AT THE LIBRARY COULDN'T GET IT CUT OFF. LEFT HALF OF THE PAGE OR WHATEVER. 
          BUT ANYWAY, I DO HAVE IT ON MY PHONE, AND SO WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS I'M PUTTING $50,000 WORTH OF VALUE, EXTRA VALUE INTO THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA. AND FOR SOME REASON, EVERYBODY'S GOT THIS HATE THING AGAINST JUNIPER OR CEDAR TREES. THE TRUE FACT BE KNOWN, THEY PUT OUT JUST AS MUCH OXYGEN AS OAK TREES. AND ONE THING IS THEY DON'T DUMP 250,000 LEAVES PER OAK TREE LIKE THE OAK TREES DO, WHICH I HAVE TO DEAL WITH ALL THE TIME. SO IF Y'ALL COULD ALL IN YOUR COMPUTERS, GO ON THE CITY WEBSITE AND TYPE IN TREE MITIGATION POLICY AND SEE WHAT COMES UP. I CAN'T FIND THAT THING ANYWHERE. THE ONLY THING I FOUND WAS ON THE BUILDERS THING WHERE IT SAYS. IF YOU HAVE 18,000 PLUS ACRES, YOU NEED TO HAVE SIX TREES. THE MAYOR CAME BY AND TOOK A LOOK, AND I COUNTED THEM A WHILE AGO. AND THERE'S 50 TREES, 37 OF WHICH ARE OAK TREES. NOW, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH CEDAR TREES. THEY DON'T BOTHER ME AT ALL. ACTUALLY, SOME OF THEM LOOK PRETTY NICE. AND WHY YOU GOT TO PICK ON CEDAR TREES? I DON'T KNOW, THEY THEY DO JUST AS MUCH GOOD AS ANY OTHER TREE MADE BY GOD. SO WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT? AND ACCORDING TO THOUGHTCO.COM, EACH TREE PRODUCES ABOUT 260 POUNDS OF OXYGEN A YEAR, AND THAT'S ENOUGH DEFEAT FOR A FAMILY OF FOUR PER YEAR. NOW, IF YOU'RE COMING IN TO LARGO FROM CEDAR PARK, YOU LOOK RIGHT ABOVE CVS. AND WHAT DO YOU SEE? A BIG BALD 
          [00:35:02]
SPOT? I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY ACRES THAT IS. IT'S A BUNCH. AND YOU'RE GOING TO MESS WITH ME ABOUT CUTTING DOWN THREE TREES, WHICH IS GIVING EXTRA VALUE TO THE CITY. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT AT ALL. I THINK IT FEELS LIKE A MONEY GRAB. IT FEELS LIKE AN AUSTIN, TEXAS KIND OF THING. PUTTING YOUR THUMB ON YOU, TELLING YOU WHAT YOU CAN AND WHAT YOU CAN'T DO. 
          AND OH, AND THEN I FORGOT. THANK YOU ALL FOR SERVING AND VOLUNTEERING. MR. WEST, THANK YOU FOR FACILITATING THIS. DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE I CAN SAY, IT'S JUST THAT I THINK IT'S UNFAIR. I DON'T LIKE YOUR TREE POLICY. IT SHOULDN'T EXIST. 
          DURING THE BIG FREEZE, I HAD FOUR BIG TREES CUT DOWN. IF EVERYBODY'S SO WORRIED ABOUT MY TREES, NOBODY CAME AND HELPED ME CUT DOWN MY. CUT THE TREES UP. BUT Y'ALL WANT TO SAY. AND WHAT I CAN DO AND WHAT I CAN'T DO. AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING YOU TO WAIVE THE $750. BECAUSE THERE'S NO APPEALS PROCESS, WHICH I FIND STRANGE. THAT'S IT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I THINK BRAD, SPEAKING TO HIS LAST POINT THERE, YOU HAD SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THE WAIVER PROCESS AND THIS AND WHAT WE WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER. YES, SIR. SO THE TREE MITIGATION, TREE PRESERVATION SECTION IS I IT'S ITEM 20. IT'S AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE IN YOUR CODE OF ORDINANCES. IT'S SECTION 20, SUBSECTION E, REPLACEMENT OF TREES REQUIRED. IT SAYS THAT IF IT IS NOT POSSIBLE OR FEASIBLE TO PROVIDE FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF INCHES TO BE REMOVED, THE OWNER OR THE CONTROLLING AGENT SHALL PAY A FEE TO THE CITY LAGO VISTA. 
          THAT PROVISION, AS YOU KNOW FROM. STATUTORY INTERPRETATION, WHEN IT SAYS SHALL THAT'S BECOMES MANDATORY AND AND YOUR TREATMENT PROVISION DOESN'T HAVE A WAIVER OR. PROVISION IN IT. AND SO THOSE ARE THOSE ARE REQUIRED FEES. THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS FOR CERTAIN KINDS OF CERTAIN SITUATIONS INCLUDING UP THE TREES OR DISEASED OR DYING, THAT THOSE EXCEPTIONS MIGHT APPLY IF A IF IF THEY ARE CERTIFIED BY AN ARBORIST AND THE PROCEDURE IN THERE IS FOLLOWED THE YOUR BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAIVER OR REDUCTION PROVISION. HOWEVER, YOUR TREE MITIGATION PROVISION IS IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. AND SO THERE ARE YOU KNOW, I MEAN, JUST LIKE ANYTHING ELSE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, YOU CAN REQUEST A VARIANCE TO THE BOA. HOWEVER, THE VARIANCE PROCEDURE, YOU HAVE TO SHOW SEVERAL THINGS THAT LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF AN ORDINANCE RESULTS IN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AND HARDSHIPS, CANNOT BE SELF-IMPOSED OR BE PURELY FINANCIAL OR PECUNIARY, AMONG SOME OTHER THINGS. SO YOUR IF YOU'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE PROVISION IN YOUR TREE MITIGATION PROVISION SO THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CAN WAIVE FEES, YOU WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR ORDINANCE STRUCTURE, GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND SO FORTH, BECAUSE IT'S IN YOUR ZONING ORDINANCE, PROVIDE NOTICES, PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SO FORTH. THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING YOU CAN DO, BUT IT'S NOT IN YOUR ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL ON THIS? SABRINA, MY QUESTION IS TO TO MR. BALLARD, OR RATHER, SO EVEN IF WE DECIDED TO AMEND AND SEND THIS BACK TO PNC FOR, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY A PERCENTAGE REQUIREMENT, MEANING, YOU KNOW, SAY YOU HAVE 100 TREES AND YOU WANT TO GET RID OF TEN OF THEM THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED. I MEAN, THAT'S JUST AN IDEA I'M THROWING OUT THERE. IF THAT WAS TO HAPPEN, THAT STILL WOULD NOT GIVE HIM RELIEF AT THIS POINT. IS THAT CORRECT? BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE IT WAS NOT THAT WOULD BE PRO. I MEAN, YOU CAN'T GO BACK ON AN ORDINANCE THAT WAS IN EFFECT AT THE TIME. IT WOULD BE PROSPECTIVE. RIGHT. SO SO THIS IS ACTUALLY I'M LOOKING AT SECTION 20 AND CHAPTER 14, LAGO VISTA CODE ORDINANCES. AND I READ IT EXACTLY AS YOU HAVE WRITTEN OR READ OUT AS WELL. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S BEEN ON THE RECORD SINCE JUNE OF 2020. AND EVEN PRECEDING THAT, THERE WAS SIMILAR ORDINANCES IN EFFECT. SO AT THE TIME THAT HE SIGNED THIS AGREEMENT, OR HIS CONTRACTOR SIGNED THIS AGREEMENT, THAT WAS ACKNOWLEDGING THE FEE, WE CAN'T REALLY RETROACTIVELY GO BACK AND SAY THAT HE COULDN'T IS NOT LIABLE FOR IT. CORRECT. THAT'S THAT THAT'S THAT'S TRUE. YOUR ORDINANCE WHETHER IT SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T PROVIDE FOR MITIGATION OR A REDUCTION PROVISION, THAT'S A POLICY DECISION, AS IT'S CURRENTLY 
          [00:40:02]
WRITTEN AND HAS BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. IT DOES NOT, AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS. IF HE COULD COME BACK TO THE MIC REAL QUICK. YEAH. AND I WILL SEND A REMINDER FOR EVERYBODY TO MAKE SURE YOU GUYS SPEAK DIRECTLY. YEAH. OKAY. WHEN THE ARBORIST CAME TO CUT DOWN MY TREE, I THINK THE TREE POLICY SAYS IF IT'S OVER TEN INCHES, RIGHT. I HAVE A RECEIPT THAT SAYS THEY'RE ALL UNDER TEN INCHES. SO THERE YOU GO. I TRIED TO I'M A TECHNICAL MORON, APPARENTLY, BUT NO, I TRIED IT, BUT I CAN. I CAN GET IT PRINTED SOMEHOW AND GIVE A COPY TO EACH ONE OF YOU. OKAY. JORDAN, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT PART OF IT? AS A REMINDER, I SAID AT THE BEGINNING, THIS IS JUST A WORK SESSION ITEM, SO THE COUNCIL CAN'T TAKE ACTION ON IT ANYWAYS, BUT IT'S USEFUL TO HEAR THE DISCUSSION IT IS. NO STAFF WAS NOT AWARE THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING OUTSIDE. WHEN WE CALCULATE THE TREE MITIGATION FEE, IT'S BASED OFF OF A TREE SURVEY THAT'S SUBMITTED WITH THE PERMIT. AND SO THAT'S THAT'S THE INFORMATION THAT WAS USED TO CALCULATE IT. I'M PERSONALLY NOT AWARE OF ANYTHING DIFFERENT. WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF IT'S SIGNED AND CERTIFIED BY AN ARBORIST. 
          THAT'S DIFFERENT. BUT WE CALCULATE OFF OF A TREE SURVEY. SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT WHAT DOCUMENT WAS SUBMITTED VERSUS WHAT HAS BEEN PRODUCED OR HOWEVER IT WORKED OUT. SO TO TO THAT POINT, YOUR SECTION E REPLACEMENT OF PROTECTED TREES REQUIRED PROTECTED TREES ARE BETWEEN THE TEN AND 36IN IN DIAMETER. SO IF YOU HAVE A TREE SURVEY AND IT SHOWS THAT THEY'RE UNDER, THEN THE REPLACEMENT DOES NOT APPLY. BUT IT'S IT'S THE BURDEN, THE BURDEN YOUR ORDINANCE PLACES THE BURDEN ON THE PROPERTY OWNER TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO STAFF, AND IT HAS TO BE DONE BY A CERTIFIED ARBORIST AND SO FORTH. IT'S ALL SET FORTH IN THE ORDINANCE. SO IF A TREE, IF IT DOESN'T APPLY, IT DOESN'T APPLY. BUT THEY HAVE TO. IT'S THEIR BURDEN TO DEMONSTRATE THE LACK OF APPLICATION. OKAY. WE'LL ABSOLUTELY GET A COPY AND AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S WHAT WE HAVE ON FILE AND EVERYTHING IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE OR SHOULD NOT BE. YEAH. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE, MR. BLAIR, IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE TO SUBMIT TO STAFF, JUST PLEASE GET WITH THEM AND DO IT. OKAY. ACTUALLY, IF YOU COULD SWING BY, THEY CAN HELP YOU GET IT. OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR JORDAN. IF ON THE TREE SURVEY AND THE ARBORIST SURVEY, THERE'S A MISMATCH. WHICH ONE IS THE PREVAILING FAILING IT? I DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS SUBMITTED FIRST VERSUS WHAT A LOT OF IT WOULD BE TIMING AND HOW IT WAS SUBMITTED. IF THEY'RE BOTH CERTIFIED ARBORIST OR HOW IT WAS, I DON'T KNOW. WITHOUT THE DOCUMENTS IN FRONT OF ME. I DON'T HAVE A SOLID ANSWER. THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU MAYOR. SO FIRST OFF, I DO WANT TO SAY, MR. BLAIR, THANK YOU FOR COMING IN BECAUSE THIS DOES BRING TO LIGHT WHERE WE HAVE A GAP RIGHT IN OUR ORDINANCES. I CAN TELL YOU THAT OUR TREE MITIGATION ORDINANCES WERE PUT INTO PLACE BECAUSE OF THE BALD SPOT THAT IS CREATED. 
          RIGHT. AND SO AT THE TIME, IT WAS JUST AT LEAST THIS IS STRICTLY, IN MY OPINION, THAT WE JUST DIDN'T HAVE FORESIGHT AS TO THE IMPACT IT COULD BE FOR A FEW TREES, RIGHT? TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A RESIDENT BE ABLE TO DO. THE MAIN IDEA WAS TO DISCOURAGE TREE CUTTING, YOU KNOW, OVERALL, SO THAT WE COULD MAINTAIN THE WHAT WE HAVE OUT HERE, YOU KNOW, IN THIS NATURE AND WHAT PEOPLE WANT TO BE COMING HERE FOR. SO I STAY THAT AND GO, JORDAN, IS THIS AN ADMINISTRATIVE. DEPENDING ON WHAT HE'S ABLE TO SUBMIT, YOU CAN ADMINISTRATIVELY TAKE CARE OF THIS DEPENDING ON WHAT THE SURVEY SAYS. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. IF HE'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT IN HIS DOCUMENT PREVAILS OVER WHATEVER WE HAVE, WE'LL ACCEPT THAT. AND THE AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE IS ESSENTIALLY NULL AND VOID BECAUSE THE TREE SURVEY WOULD PREVAIL. HOWEVER, IF R IS PREVAILS, THEN WE HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, NEXT STEPS. BUT I, I HAVEN'T SEEN THE ORIGINAL OR WHAT HE'S GOT WITH HIM. SO WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. MY MY OTHER QUESTION IS I BELIEVE THAT COUNSELOR ROBERTS HAD IN THIS COUNCIL HAD BEEN TALKING ABOUT HAVING PLANNING AND ZONING REVISIT THE TREE MITIGATION ORDINANCES, I THINK POTENTIALLY OVER. IS THAT COMING UP BEFORE PLANNING AND ZONING? BEFORE TOO LONG? YES, MA'AM. NEXT WEEK WE POSTED AGENDA TODAY, SO WE'LL HAVE THE DISCUSSION NEXT WEEK. IT IS LISTED AS AN ACTION ITEM. WE'VE BEEN GATHERING ALL OF THE DRAFTS AND ALL OF THE 
          [00:45:02]
INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE OUT THERE AND GET IT SORTED OUT IN SOME WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. SO LASTLY AND THEN I WILL LET I WILL BE QUIET. MAYOR, WAS MISTER BILLY, YOU'VE HEARD THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE REVISITING THIS AT PLANNING AND ZONING COMING UP? I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THAT COMMISSION TO HEAR ABOUT YOUR CIRCUMSTANCE SO THAT THEY CAN UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE HAVE A LITTLE BROADER IDEA ABOUT WHAT ALL MAYBE SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN OUR IN OUR ORDINANCE AND HOW IT SHOULD CHANGE. IN THE DRAFT YOU'RE DISCUSSING, IS IT TOUCH ON THIS ISSUE AT ALL? I MEAN, MAINLY TO THE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE PERCENTAGES, RIGHT. 
          IF YOU HAVE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF COVERAGE ON YOUR LAND, I DON'T THINK IT DOES. 
          CURRENTLY AS IT'S WRITTEN. SO WE HAVE. WE'RE DOING GREAT AT THE TREE PROTECTION, BUT WE'RE NOT. THERE ISN'T A CREDIT MECHANISM IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED OR DISCUSSED OR. WHAT THE GENERAL FEELING FOR WHAT THAT WOULD BE. 
          OKAY. BECAUSE IF WE GO PERCENTAGE BASED, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT THOSE PERCENTAGES ARE. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED IN ANY OF THE DRAFTS I'VE SEEN. I MEAN, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE PNC LOOK AT THAT, BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IN RESEARCH OF THIS AND YOU AND I DISCUSSED OTHER CITIES DO IT. YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A TON OF TREES ON YOUR PROPERTY. AND MR. BLAIR'S POINT, IF YOU TAKE OUT THREE OF THEM, YOU STILL HAVE A LOT. THERE COULD BE A MIDDLE GROUND AND OTHERS ARE DOING SO. THAT'D BE GREAT TO SEE. MR. PRINCE. YEAH. SO I'M LIAISON TO PLANNING AND ZONING AND ALSO IN THE PAST BEEN THE LIAISON TO PARKS AND REC ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WHICH IS A STAKEHOLDER IN THIS TREATMENT, USE OF TREATMENT FUNDS. AND I KNOW THAT TWO THINGS I'LL SAY ONE IS THE, THE, THE GENERAL THOUGHT PROCESS OF COMMISSIONERS, BOTH I THINK, ON PLANNING AND ZONING AND PARKS AND REC, IS THAT THEY WANT THE CITY TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE IN PROTECTING TREES AND BE MORE IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING TRUE COST OF TREE REPLACEMENT. BUT I DO THINK THAT THEY HAVE NOT. I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYONE DISCUSS THE IDEA OF. AND I'LL SAY THIS ALSO, WHEN I HEAR THOSE COMMITTEES TALKING ABOUT IT, THEY TEND TO BE TALKING ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT DEVELOPERS DON'T DO HORRIBLE THINGS. AND I THINK WHAT THEY MAY NOT HAVE CONSIDERED IS INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNERS DOING SOME SORT OF AN IMPROVEMENT. ARE THERE SOME CONSIDERATIONS THAT SHOULD BE MADE FOR SITUATIONS LIKE THIS? AND SO I THINK THAT NOW THAT WE'VE HEARD IT, IT CAN CERTAINLY BE ON THE, ON THE IT'S ALREADY TEED UP FOR THE AGENDA FOR THIS COMING A WEEK FROM TODAY I BELIEVE. SO IT SHOULD BE A GOOD TOPIC OF DISCUSSION. YEAH I THINK COUNCILOR PRINCE IS RIGHT. IT'S SPECIFIC VERBIAGE CHANGE TO IT NOW IS JUST THE DIAMETER RIGHT. 
          AND THEN THERE'S A VERBIAGE CHANGE FOR PARKS VERSUS POCKET PARKS. SO THAT'S THE ONLY CHANGE THAT IS BEING SUBMITTED TO PNC. BUT I THINK IF YOU THROUGH THAT DISCUSSION CAN ADD THESE ADDITIONAL PARAMETERS AND THINK OF THAT PERCENTAGE INCREASE, I THINK IT IS APPLICABLE SOMETIMES TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, NOT JUST THE BIG DEVELOPER DEVELOPMENTS, BUT INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNERS AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING ON THEIR LOTS WHERE PEOPLE WANT TO PUT UP BARNDOMINIUM TYPE STRUCTURES THAT WE'RE NOW ALLOWING. 
          APPARENTLY IN THE CITY. I THINK WE WANT TO BE MINDFUL OF THAT. IT'S STILL APPLICABLE, BUT I THINK HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF LEEWAY IN THAT PERCENTAGE IDEA SEEMS TO MAKE SENSE, RIGHT? IF THERE'S ALREADY A LOT OF TREES ON THE PROPERTY. SO ANYWAYS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST WANT TO POINT OUT ONE THING IS ON THAT AGENDA ITEM THAT WE REFERRED TO PNC LAST YEAR THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT, YOU MIGHT NEED TO AMEND THE AGENDA TO BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT THE SPECIFICITY, THE LEVEL OF SPECIFICITY YOU DISCUSSED THIS EVENING. BECAUSE THE WAY THAT'S BEEN AGENDIZED, IT'S ONLY ABOUT THE FEE IN LIEU OF TREES. IT'S ABOUT THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THAT WAS TO DISCUSS IS THE CURRENT FEE SCHEDULE APPROPRIATE BECAUSE THE DISCUSSION ON COUNCIL WAS NO, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT ENOUGH. BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO THE DISCUSSION THAT MR. PRINCE ADDED TO IT, WHICH WAS LET'S ALSO ADDRESS THE SCOPE OF WHAT THOSE THE MONEY CAN BE USED FOR. NEITHER OF THOSE COVER WHAT YOU DISCUSSED THIS EVENING. SO 
          [00:50:01]
YOU'LL WANT TO AMEND THE AGENDA AS OPPOSED TO GETTING TO IT AND THEN TABLING IT BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE AN AGENDA PROPER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. PRINCE. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE CHAIR IF THEY WANT TO AMEND IT? YEAH. AND I WILL PROCEED. I DO SEE THE RALPH LAGO HOMES. I SEE YOU HERE. ARE YOU INTENDING TO SPEAK ON YOUR ITEM? OKAY, 
          [IX.5. Discussion at the request of Lago Homes to waive permit fees for property 21313 Cardinal Ave., permit # 11783.]
THEN I'LL GO TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE. DISCUSSION AT THE REQUEST OF LAGO HOMES TO WAIVE PERMIT FEES FOR PROPERTY 21313 CARDINAL AVE. PERMIT NUMBER 11783. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A WORK SESSION ITEM. NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. BUT I HAVE JORDAN UP HERE. YES, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THIS ONE HAS BEEN BEFORE THE COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY. THE PROPERTY IS A PRETTY LARGE RESIDENTIAL HOME. A WAIVER WAS ISSUED ON FOUR 24, 24, AND THEN A SIX WEEK EXTENSION WAS PROVIDED BY OUR CITY MANAGER. THE CURRENT FEE THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT IS $11,175.75. I BELIEVE THEY'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO THE FINISH LINE. BUT, YOU KNOW, INSPECTIONS ARE INSPECTIONS AND WE CAN'T GUARANTEE ANY SPECIFIC TIMELINES ON THAT. IF THERE'S QUESTIONS, WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. I WILL GO TO CITIZEN COMMENTS AND I'LL CALL UP RALPH. 
          AND YOU'LL JUST HAVE TO FILL OUT A CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FORM WHEN YOU'RE DONE. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAYOR. GOOD AFTERNOON. COUNCIL, I WANT TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS, IF I COULD. FIRST OF ALL, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A WAIVER OF THE PERMIT FEE. WE'RE ASKING FOR A REDUCTION TO REMOVE THE STREET IMPACT FEES AND PAYING THOSE TWICE. SO THE OBJECTIVE IS TO PAY THE $0.25 PER SQUARE FOOT VERSUS THE $0.75 PER SQUARE FOOT. AND TO CLARIFY, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET THIS RESOLVED SINCE MID-DECEMBER. THE HOUSE THE PERMIT EXPIRED DECEMBER 9TH. THE HOUSE WAS COMPLETE DECEMBER 12TH PENDING THE FINAL INSPECTION. I'M SORRY. 
          SORRY. DECEMBER 12TH. SO WE JUST MISSED THAT WINDOW BY ABOUT THREE DAYS. WE HAVE NOT RESOLVED THIS BECAUSE WE WERE TRYING TO GET THIS RESOLVED. WE TRIED TO GET INTO THE JANUARY MEETING AND THAT WAS BECAUSE OF SCHEDULING AND AND HOLIDAYS AND LIKE THAT. WE COULDN'T MAKE IT UNTIL THIS MEETING. BUT THE EXTENSION FEE IS NOT TIED TO ANY ADDITIONAL IMPACT ON THE ON THE ROADWAY. WE'VE HAD NO INCREASE IN THE FOOTPRINT, NO INCREASE IN TRAFFIC. SO THERE'S BEEN NO ADDITIONAL IMPACT ON THE STREET FEES. WE'VE ALREADY PAID THOSE. SO THE CITY ALREADY RECEIVED THE REVENUE FROM THAT. THE THE REDUCTION FEE WOULD STILL COVER ALL THE CITY'S ADMINISTRATIVE FEES. BUT BUT THE THING THAT KIND OF BROUGHT IT BRINGS US TO TALK ABOUT THIS, I THINK MORE IMPORTANTLY IS THAT COUNCILMAN BENNINGFIELD AND MAYOR SAM, WHEN YOU WERE COUNCILMAN SAM AND SEVERAL OTHERS DISCUSSED THE NEED TO REVISIT THOSE DOUBLE CHARGING OF THE IMPACT FEES BECAUSE IT DOES VIOLATE THE STATE'S IMPACT LAW FEE, WHICH BASICALLY STATES YOU CAN ONLY CHARGE A DEVELOPMENT FOR AN IMPACT FEE ONCE AND ONLY ONCE. YOU CANNOT CHARGE THAT FEE AGAIN ON THE EXTENSION OF A PERMIT. SO THIS IS A VIOLATION OF STATE LAW. 
          CHARLESTON, SOME SAY I DISAGREE. THIS IS NOT AN IMPACT FEE CHARGE. THIS IS A FEE THAT IT WAS ALL GROUPED IN WITH THE PERMIT FEE THAT MADE IT $0.75 A SQUARE FOOT FOR RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES. THE WAY IT WAS WORDED IN THE COMPUTER MADE IT MISLEADING, CALLING IT AN IMPACT FEE WHEN IT IS NOT A TRUE IMPACT FEE. BECAUSE TRUE IMPACT FEES ARE SET BY ENGINEERING STUDIES AND PUBLIC HEARINGS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE IS A WHOLE LOT OF STEPS TO GO THROUGH ON THE IMPACT FEES. AND THIS WAS NOT AN IMPACT FEE. IT'S IT WAS REFERRED TO AS SOME TYPE OF ROAD CUTTING FEE. AND I'M NOT SURE WHY THEY WORDED IT THE WAY IT WAS AND WHY IT WAS SET UP IN THE COMPUTER AND THE WAY IT WAS BEING GENERATED ON THE PERMIT RECEIPTS. BUT THAT HAS BEEN CORRECTED, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. I STILL THINK IT SAYS $0.25 FOR PER SQUARE FOOT. AND THEN, AS YOU STATED, ALL THE OTHER ROAD CUT, ROAD REPAIR, ALL THAT, THAT WE DIDN'T CUT THE ROAD AGAIN, WE DIDN'T REPAIR THE ROAD AGAIN. SO THAT WAS DONE AT THE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROJECT. SO, SO THAT'S THAT'S THE CONCERN HERE. IT SEEMS LIKE A CONFISCATORY PENALTY TO THE HOMEOWNER SITTING BACK HERE, JENNIFER SCHULER, AND SHE'S BUILT A MAGNIFICENT HOME THAT'S ADDING A TON TO THE TAX BASE OF THE CITY. AND I JUST THINK WE'RE PENALIZING HER AN ADDITIONAL $7,500 FOR NO REASON AT ALL. THE $0.25 COVERS THE CITY'S ADMINISTRATIVE FEES. AND LIKE I SAID, WE MISSED THAT WINDOW BY THREE DAYS. NO EXCUSE WILL THE BUILDER. WE SHOULD HAVE BUILT THAT. THAT HOUSE IS 14,000FT■!S UNDER ROOF, ALMOST 15,000. AND WE DID IT IN 18 MONTHS, WHICH IF YOU DRIVE AROUND, THAT'S NOT BAD. AND WE JUST HAD A PERMIT EXTENSION IN A JOINT VENTURE FOR A SIMILAR SIZE HOUSE, ALMOST IDENTICAL SIZE HOUSE, IF IT WAS $1,500. NOT TRYING TO COMPARE TO ANY OTHER JURISDICTION, BUT WE 
          [00:55:03]
BUILT IN ABOUT 12 JURISDICTIONS. THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT DOUBLE CHARGES THE IMPACT FEE OR WHATEVER WE'RE CALLING IT, BUT THE REST OF THEM ARE AROUND THAT $0.25 A SQUARE FOOT. SO IT JUST SEEMS LIKE WE'RE PENALIZING HOMEOWNERS. AND THIS IS THE ONLY JURISDICTION I KNOW THIS IS MY HOME, SO OBVIOUSLY I'M A LITTLE MORE SENSITIVE TO IT, BUT IT STILL SAYS ONLINE, CHARLES THAT IT STILL HAS AT LEAST THE LAST TIME I LOOKED, WHICH WAS IN THE LAST MONTH, PROBABLY IT DOES STILL SEPARATE THOSE TWO. SO WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A WAIVER. CERTAINLY NOT. 
          WE'RE ASKING TO PAY THE $0.25, WHICH I THINK IS MORE THAN FAIR. WE DIDN'T HIT OUR WINDOW, SO WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT. BUT BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THE ADDITIONAL $7,500 PENALTY, THE CLIENT'S FAIR. AND BY THE WAY, THE FACT THAT THIS IS A NON-ACTION ITEM IS A LITTLE DISAPPOINTING BECAUSE WE'VE TRIED TO MAKE THIS AN ACTION ITEM SINCE DECEMBER 12TH, AND NOW THE CLIENT HAS HAD A HOUSE READY PENDING A FINAL INSPECTION TO MOVE IN. BUT SHE'S SHE CAN'T MOVE IN AND NOT WILLING TO BECAUSE AS AS AS BRAD HAS SAID MANY TIMES, THERE'S NO MECHANISM TO REIMBURSE THOSE FEES. SO IF SHE DOES PAY THAT 11,000 FEE, THERE'S ZERO CHANCE SHE'S GETTING THAT BACK. SO WE'RE TRYING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO DO TO MAKE IT RIGHT FOR HER. THAT'S ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH. 
          DID I HAVE ANY OTHER CITIZENS ON THIS? I'M GUESSING MR. DAVID VON KING. SO AS FAR AS PROCESS, NO PROCESS TO APPEAL. HOPEFULLY THINGS THAT EVEN LAST YEAR, ADAM HAD BROUGHT UP. A LOT OF THESE ISSUES CAN BE RESOLVED ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND THE STAFF END THROUGH REGULAR PROCEDURES. LIKE THE PREVIOUS TREE MITIGATION ISSUE, I PERSONALLY HAVE HAD FIVE INSTANCES OF HEY, YOU NEED TO PAY THIS BECAUSE YOU CUT ONE DOWN. AND IT WAS ON THE STREET SURVEY SHOWING THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THERE. SO THERE'S AN OVERSIGHT ISSUE AND I DON'T I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHY, BUT EVEN ON WE'VE SPOKEN ABOUT THIS BEFORE TO THE TIME IT TAKES TO BUILD SOME OF THESE HOUSES OF DIFFERENT SCALES. THERE JUST THERE ISN'T A GOOD WAY TO HAVE A CUT AND DRY BLACK AND WHITE ONE SENTENCE RULE THAT APPLIES TO THESE THINGS, BECAUSE OUR OUR HILLSIDES ARE 45 DEGREES OUT HERE, SOMETIMES IT'S FLAT, SOMETIMES THERE'S FLOOD ZONES, SOMETIMES THE HOUSES ARE HUGE, SOMETIMES THEY'RE TINY, AND THERE'S JUST THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME SORT OF PROCESS FOR STAFF TO CHECK THROUGH, TO NOT WASTE ANY TIME HERE. AND THEN FOR PEOPLE TO COME BACK AND SAY, HEY, BUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT. AND THAT'S MY PIECE ON THIS ONE. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YEAH, I WAS JUST FOR CITIZEN. SORRY. SO NO MORE CITIZENS. THEN I'LL BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL AND WE'LL GO BACK TO CHARLES. YEAH. STATEMENT WAS MADE THAT THIS COULD BE HANDLED ADMINISTRATIVELY. IT CANNOT. THERE IS NOTHING NO MECHANISMS WITHIN THE ORDINANCES THAT ALLOW STAFF OR ADMINISTRATION TO WAIVE OR ALTER ANY OF THE FEES FROM THE OFFICIAL FEE SCHEDULE. COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS? TOM. SO FOR THE CITY MANAGER AND FOR JORDAN AS WELL, SO AM I UNDERSTANDING THAT WHEN WE HAVE AN EXTENSION THAT OUR CURRENT FEE STRUCTURE, AS IT IS IN OUR CURRENT ORDINANCES, REQUIRES THESE FEES TO BE PAID TWO TIMES? SO THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN, OUR PERMIT FEE IS BASED OFF OF SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHICH IS THE $0.75. IT IS NOT AN IMPACT FEE. TOTALLY SEPARATE CATEGORIES. EVEN IN STATE LAW. DO YOU HAVE TO CALCULATE THE FEES DIFFERENTLY? YOU HAVE TO ADOPT THE FEES DIFFERENTLY. IT'S COMPLETELY SEPARATE. THE WAY OUR CODE READS NOW IS THAT ESSENTIALLY AFTER YOUR PERMIT WINDOW EXPIRES, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO IT REFERENCES ANOTHER SECTION, WHICH IS BASICALLY HOW WE BILL FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PERMIT. AND SO YOU'RE GETTING HIT ESSENTIALLY WITH YOUR PERMIT BILL TWICE. THAT'S THE WAY OUR CODE READS. THERE IS NO WIGGLE ROOM IN IT. THERE IS NO PROVISION THAT SAYS WE CAN. 
          THERE'S NO GRAY AREA. SPECIFICALLY SAYS EVERY EXTENSION IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF YOUR CURRENT PERMIT FEE. WE ALLOW UP TO FOUR EXTENSIONS. AND SO IF YOU NEED THOSE FOUR, IT'S ESSENTIALLY FOUR TIMES YOUR PERMIT FEE. AND STAFF HAS NO MECHANISM FOR. MR. WEST STATED. WE HAVE NO MECHANISM FOR SHIFTING THAT OR CHANGING IT. PART OF. IT'S A PRETTY COMMON ISSUE THAT WE HAVE. IT'S BASED OFF SQUARE FOOTAGE, AND SO EVERY PROJECT FEE IS DIFFERENT, BUT IT IS THAT $0.75 PER SQUARE FOOT PLUS SOME OF THE OTHER FEES THAT GO IN THERE. 
          BUT AGAIN, IT'S NOT AN IMPACT FEE AT ALL. IT IS A COMPLETELY SEPARATE FEE. I BELIEVE IN OUR BUDGET. WE'VE ALLOCATED IT FOR ROADWAY, WHICH WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO, BUT THAT'S A POLICY. IT'S NOT AN IMPACT FEE. THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE THINGS. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO JORDAN IS WOULD YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION FOR THAT. SO IF THEY NEED AN EXTENSION WOULD YOU SUGGEST IT THEN BE 
          [01:00:02]
LIMITED. THE AMOUNT BE LIMITED TO MORE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR THE CITY. OR WOULD THERE POTENTIALLY BE OTHER COSTS THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT? WHAT WHAT WOULD YOU SUGGEST? JUST ADMINISTRATIVE COST IS A BIG ONE. BUT MORE THAN THAT. MY RECOMMENDATION IS ESSENTIALLY A FLAT FEE THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, FIRST TIME EXTENSION IS X, AND THEN IT BUILDS UP FROM THERE. 
          BECAUSE THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE, I BELIEVE, IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE, IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE STAGNANT PROJECTS OR DORMANT PROJECTS. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. I KNOW BUILDING AND STANDARDS HAS BEEN WORKING TO EXTEND THE LENGTH OF SOME PERMITS THAT PROBABLY DO REQUIRE MORE TIME, BUT I'M A FIRM BELIEVER IN ESCALATION FEES THE FIRST TIME STUFF HAPPENS, RIGHT? SOMETIMES PROJECTS GO LONG, SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, INSPECTIONS DON'T GO RIGHT, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE. BUT WHEN WE START HITTING TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX AND UP, WE HAVE A PROBLEM AND WE SHOULD BE ESCALATING TO FIX WHATEVER THAT PROBLEM IS. BUT WHAT THAT FEE IS, IT'S IT'S THE STAFF TIME. IT'S ANY COST OF SERVICE THAT MAY GO INTO IT, STUFF LIKE THAT. BUT SO SO PART OF IT'S THAT IN PART WOULD BE PUNITIVE, RIGHT, TO TRY TO GET THEIR ATTENTION AND GET THEM TO COMPLETE. SO THEN SHOULD BE PROPORTIONATE BASED ON THE PRICE COST TO THE HOME OR SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOME OR WHATNOT. I THINK IT'S A SEPARATE BECAUSE THE WAY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND PUBLIC WORKS IN SOME CAPACITIES, OUR FEES HAVE TO BE BASED IN THE COST OF SERVICE. THAT'S THAT'S THE NATURE OF THE GAME. STATE LAW SAYS THAT. AND SO WE SHOULDN'T BE WE'RE NOT DOING PLAN REVIEW AGAIN. WE'RE NOT YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF PUTTING THE PROJECT ON HOLD, YOU KNOW, CANCELING INSPECTIONS AND LETTING THE BUILDER KNOW THERE'S ADMINISTRATIVE STEPS THAT GO INTO THAT. BUT THE THE PURPOSE OF THE ORIGINAL FEE IS THE COST OF SERVICE TO GET THE PERMIT. IT'S THE STAFF TIME FOR PLAN REVIEW. IT'S THE STAFF TIME FOR PROCESSING ALL OF THAT STUFF. THAT STUFF ISN'T HAPPENING AGAIN. AND SO OUR FEE DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE BASED ON THE PROJECT SIZE AND SCALE. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE FLAT RATE. THAT ESCALATES OVER TIME, BECAUSE WHEN WE START GETTING MORE AND MORE OF THE EXTENSIONS AND THE CLOCK STARTS RUNNING OUT AFTER A CERTAIN POINT IN TIME, THEY HAVE TO REAPPLY AGAIN. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO AVOID. AND SO IT'S IT'S THE BABY STEPS TO GET TO COMPLIANCE IN THEORY. PIGGYBACK ON THAT. I THOUGHT WE HAD A DISCUSSION MONTHS AGO. I THINK MR. VAUGHN BROUGHT THAT UP. AND I THOUGHT STAFF KIND OF GAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION THAT, YES, SOME HOUSES TAKE A LOT LONGER TO BUILD, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT STRUCTURE IN OUR CURRENT ZONE IN OUR CURRENT STATUTE TO, TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT. SO WOULD YOU ALSO RECOMMEND THAT WE HAVE SOME CONSIDERATION THAT SOME HOUSES ARE SO BIG OR SO DIFFICULT IT MAY TAKE LONGER. IT'S ON THE AGENDA. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S APPROPRIATE TO. I BELIEVE SO, SO I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S APPROPRIATE TO SPEAK ABOUT HERE, BUT THE INTENT IS TO EXTEND SOME OF THOSE TIMES ON THE BIGGER PROJECTS. BUT THAT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE FEE ISSUE, BECAUSE IT JUST MEANS I KNOW THAT THIS IS THE SECOND EXTENSION, RIGHT? AND SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, EVEN WITH THIS EXTENSION, THEY WOULD STILL BE HAVING TO COME BACK FOR. AND IF WE THE ORDINANCE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED, IF THAT WAS PASSED AND APPROVED FOR THEIR PERMIT SPECIFICALLY, THEY STILL WOULD HAVE HAD TO COME BACK FOR AN EXTENSION GIVEN THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT. AND SO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN PROBABLY ONE, BECAUSE, I MEAN, THEY'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO THE FINISH LINE, AND THAT'S WHERE THAT ESCALATOR GOES IN. IT ESSENTIALLY SAYS, WE GET IT, YOU KNOW, WE'LL GO EASY, WE'LL TRY TO DO WHAT WE CAN, BUT AS WE PROGRESS, THAT'S WHEN IT'S THAT'S WHEN IT'S MORE SERIOUS. 
          AND THAT'S WHEN WE HAVE TO TAKE BIGGER STEPS TO TRY TO MITIGATE ISSUES. YES. JUST COME TO THE MIC, PLEASE. THIS WEBSITE SURE SAYS BUILDING PERMITS TO REPAIR 7500. BUILDING PERMIT FEE 3750. 
          LIKE I SAID, WHEN I TRIED TO GET THAT 3750 WE. YEAH. SO SO ON THE WEBSITE IT STILL SAYS AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WORKING OFF OF HERE. THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET RESOLVED. IS THE BUILDING PERMIT, STREET REPAIR 7004 50. THE BUILDING PERMIT FEE 3725, WHICH WE YOU KNOW, WE READY TO WRITE A CHECK RIGHT NOW AND WE'RE READY TO WRITE A CHECK IN DECEMBER. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHAT'S MISLEADING HERE. IS THAT WHAT'S THAT FOR? BECAUSE I AGREE WITH JORDAN. WE DO MAKE THE CITY DO MORE WORK EVERY TIME WE COME IN HERE AND TRY TO GET SOMETHING EXTENDED. AND THEY'VE BEEN GRACIOUS. THEY'VE ALWAYS BEEN GRACIOUS. 
          THAT'S WHY WE'VE BEEN HERE FOR 15 YEARS. BUILDING. BUT BUT THAT THAT'S THAT'S IT SAYS 
          [01:05:02]
STREET REPAIR. IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE MYGOV WEBSITE AND THE CITY'S WEBSITE. SO YEAH. SO IF I MAY. SO THIS PERMIT IS FROM WHEN HE ORIGINALLY PULLED IT IN 2024. THE FEES WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN FIXED. THEY DO NOT CHANGE AFTER THE INVOICE HAS BEEN PAID ON. ANY NEW INVOICES WOULD REFLECT THE CHANGE. AND I DON'T THINK THE ISSUE THAT CITY ON THAT. EXAMPLE, SINCE YOU'LL EXPLAIN TO ME LATER, I'M SURE YOU WILL. SO ANYTHING THAT'S ON AN MGO, IT'S LOCKED IN AT THE TIME IT WAS DONE. THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE TO IN CASE ANYBODY DOES OPEN RECORDS REQUEST AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THE FEES ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN PAID ON NEW PERMITS THAT HAVE BEEN PULLED SINCE THE CHANGE. THAT FEE IS CORRECTED AND LABELED DIFFERENTLY, BUT ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE PULLED SINCE THE CHANGE WILL SEE THE CHANGE THAT. YEAH, YEAH. AND MAYOR, I'LL JUST ADD WHATEVER MIGHT BE IN THE MYGOV, WHATEVER MIGHT BE THERE. THE LANGUAGE IN YOUR ORDINANCES IS WHAT'S GOING TO CONTROL. SO IT EVEN IF, EVEN IF THAT MYGOV DESCRIBES IT INACCURATELY, THE THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE LANGUAGE ITSELF CONTROLS. MAYOR PRO TEM. NO. I WAS GOING TO STATE THAT COUNCILOR BENEFIELD HAD HIS HAND UP A LITTLE BIT. OKAY. MR. BENEFIELD. JUST A CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY, JUST A COUPLE THOUGHTS. I FIRST OF ALL, I'M ACTUALLY REALLY DISAPPOINTED THAT THIS WAS PUT ON THE AGENDA AS A DISCUSSION ITEM. I CAN VOUCH THAT I HAVE SEEN NO LESS THAN 7 OR 8 EMAILS FROM THE FROM THE BUILDER TO GET THIS ON THE AGENDA. DATING ALL THE WAY BACK INTO DECEMBER. WE ENDED UP MISSING THE JANUARY TIMEFRAME BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE SHIFTED OUR MEETING EARLIER THAN NORMAL, AND THE FACT THAT THIS CAME FORWARD AS A DISCUSSION ITEM IS JUST YET ANOTHER DELAY TO THEM. 
          THERE ALSO WAS A ROBUST DISCUSSION AT THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION SEVERAL MONTHS AGO THAT VERY SPECIFICALLY TALKED ABOUT THESE ROAD IMPACT FEES, AND THAT IT WAS BEING A DOUBLE CHARGE. I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE BILL. IF HE POPS BACK ON WHILE AWAITING. 
          YEAH. WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR ADAM, IF HE CAN STILL HEAR US, WE'RE GOING TO GO TO MR. PRINCE. 
          OH. HE'S BACK. CAN YOU HEAR US NOW, ADAM? WE'RE NOT HEARING YOU. CAN YOU HEAR US, MR. BANFIELD? ALL RIGHT, WE'LL GO TO MR. PRINCE. SO A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS KIND OF RELATED TO OUR DISCUSSION EARLIER. DO WE ACTUALLY, IN OUR ORDINANCE, DO WE AS COUNCIL, HAVE AUTHORITY TO MAKE A DECISION TO REDUCE OR WAIVE THIS FEE? AND. WELL, I NEED TO KNOW. SO I NEED TO KNOW EXACTLY WHICH SECTION OF THE ORDINANCES I'M LOOKING AT WHAT FEE IT IS. I DON'T HAVE ANY OF THE PAPERWORK IN FRONT OF ME. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHERE IT'S WEIRD. IT SAYS IT'S IN THE BUILDINGS SECTION. IT REFERENCES EXTENSION FEES. AND THEN I THINK 3.1. AND THEN IT, IT BASICALLY REFERENCES ANOTHER SECTION WHICH TAKES YOU TO FEES. AND SO I'M LOOKING AT 3.110 PERMITS AND APPROVALS. AND THEN WE GET DOWN TO SECTION. ISSUE PERMIT SECTION J WHICH IS PERMIT FEES. I DON'T WANT TO TAKE UP CITY COUNCIL MEETING TIME. I CAN I CAN LOOK INTO THIS, BUT I DON'T HAVE I NEED THE DOCUMENTATION TO TRY TO MAKE A DETERMINATION. BUT I YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT OFFLINE AFTER THAT, THAT QUESTION I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL TO BE ANSWERED. AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION, I THINK I HEARD THE PROJECT INSPECTIONS HAVE NOT OCCURRED, BUT FROM THE BUILDER'S PERSPECTIVE, THE PROJECT IS COMPLETE. THE FINAL INSPECTION IS TO FINAL SECTION IS TO BE DONE. BUT FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, YOU'VE DONE EVERYTHING AND SHOULD PASS THE FINAL INSPECTION YOU EXPECT. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. MR. BENFIELD, ARE YOU BACK? YES, SIR. I'M BACK. CAN YOU HEAR ME? ALL RIGHT. YES. 
          SO I, I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM TODAY. YOU KNOW, I'M AWARE OF OTHER PROJECTS WHERE THE CITY MANAGER HAS APPROVED WITHOUT COUNCIL APPROVAL, EXTENSIONS. AND IT'S SURPRISING TO HEAR THAT THERE'S NOT TODAY THAT AUTHORITY FOR THE CITY MANAGER. BUT YET, JUST 
          [01:10:04]
A FEW MONTHS AGO, THERE WAS THAT AUTHORITY FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO DO THOSE EXTENSIONS. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THROUGH THIS DISCUSSION WHAT MECHANISMS ARE IN PLACE, PERHAPS MAYBE EVEN CREATIVE MECHANISMS TO ALLOW THIS BUILDER TO PROCEED FORWARD, GET THEIR INSPECTIONS, GET THIS PUT BACK ONTO THE AGENDA AT THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING. AND IF COUNCIL APPROVES THE VARIANCE, THEN THEY DON'T PAY THE FEE. IF THEY DON'T APPROVE THE VARIANCE, THEN THEY PAY THE FEE. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD PENALIZE THIS BUILDER FURTHER MONEY. THEY'VE BEEN WAITING FOR TWO MONTHS TO HAVE THIS MEETING TODAY TO FIND OUT IT'S A DISCUSSION ITEM ONLY. I'M CONFIDENT THERE HAS TO BE A MECHANISM WE CAN DETERMINE TONIGHT THAT ALLOWS THEM TO PROCEED AND THEN PAY THAT FEE IF WE DECLINE IT. I BELIEVE YOU SAID YOU'LL YOU'LL LOOK INTO THAT DURING THE COURSE OF THIS MEETING. WELL, I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN GET YOU AN ANSWER DURING THE COURSE OF THE MEETING. I NEED TO REVIEW. I DON'T HAVE THE FILE OR THE DOCUMENTS. I NEED TO REVIEW THAT AND SIT DOWN WITH JORDAN. 
          DO THAT TOMORROW. PERHAPS. I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN GET THAT DONE DURING THE MEETING. 
          OKAY. AND AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, YOU CAN'T TAKE ACTION TONIGHT ANYWAY, SO I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN DO ANYTHING TONIGHT, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN SET UP A PHONE CALL OR A ZOOM OR SOMETHING. I NEED TO SEE DOCUMENTS. OKAY. MAYOR PRO TEM, SO, COUNCILORS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IN DOING A LITTLE BIT OF PREP WORK FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, I ACTUALLY WENT BACK TO THE CHARTER SECTION 11.09, WHICH IS I'LL JUST READ IT. WE HAVE THE POWER TO SETTLE CLAIMS. THE COUNCIL SHALL HAVE THE SOLE AUTHORITY TO COMPROMISE AND SETTLE ANY AND ALL CLAIMS, AND ALL SUITS OF EVERY KIND AND CHARACTER IN FAVOR OF OR AGAINST THE CITY, EXCEPT SUITS BY THE CITY TO RECOVER DELINQUENT TAXES. NOW, THIS IS MEANT FOR LAWSUITS, I THINK, AND STUFF LIKE THAT. HOWEVER, I'M JUST SAYING IT IS A AS YOU WERE SAYING, COUNCILOR PRINCE, A OVERARCHING POWER THAT THE COUNCIL, BECAUSE OF THE BROADNESS OF IT TO USE IN CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE DEEM APPROPRIATE. CHARLES, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE DEAL. YES, I DID WAIVE FEES A FEW MONTHS AGO, BUT IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN MY EVALUATION THAT I DID NOT HAVE THAT ABILITY AND WAS INSTRUCTED NOT TO DO THAT AGAIN. SO NOW THAT I AM AWARE OF THAT, I DO NOT WAIVE FEES. I REALLY WISH I COULD HELP YOU ALL, BUT I CAN'T, I, I DON'T REMEMBER IT BEING THAT EXACT WAY. I THINK THE CONSENSUS WAS THAT ON A AS A GENERAL RULE, YOU SHOULD SEEK COUNCIL APPROVAL, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY. IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY, THEN THE BINDING ACTION OF YOUR PREVIOUS DECISION WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN IN EFFECT, BUT THAT IT WAS IN EFFECT. THEREFORE, YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY. IT WAS JUST THE CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL THAT YOU SHOULD BRING IT BEFORE COUNCIL. NOT SHALL. TO ME, IT SEEMS LIKE WE WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO BY CONSENSUS, NOT ACTION, SUGGEST THAT UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING IN OUR ORDINANCES THAT PREVENTS THAT FINAL INSPECTION FROM GOING AHEAD, PROCEED WITH THE FINAL INSPECTION AND COME BACK TO US IN OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING TO ADDRESS THE FEE. IS THAT POSSIBLE? SO THAT'S THE THE CRUX OF THE MATTER. ESSENTIALLY, WHEN A PERMIT EXPIRES AND AN EXTENSION HAS NOT BEEN GRANTED EITHER BY FEE WAIVER OR BY PAYING THAT WAIVER, THE PERMIT BECOMES ESSENTIALLY NULL AND VOID. THERE'S IT'S A PROJECT LOCKOUT. IT'S NOT A VALID PERMIT, WHICH MEANS WE WORK SHOULD NOT BE DONE, AND INSPECTIONS SHOULD NOT BE DONE. 
          WE ONLY DO INSPECTIONS AS A CITY ON ACTIVE PERMITS. AND SO IT'S A CHICKEN AND EGG THING. 
          SO OUR ON A STAFF LEVEL, OUR HANDS ARE PRETTY TIED UNTIL THIS GOES ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. 
          AND COUNCILOR PRINCE I JUST I'M TRYING TO FIND THE I WAS LOOKING AT YOUR. SCHEDULE SO I WAS TRYING TO REVIEW THAT. BUT IN THE SECTION THAT I WAS LOOKING AT BEFORE THAT AND I, I'M TRYING TO GET BACK TO THAT WEB PAGE, BUT THERE IS A SECTION THAT I JUST READ A MOMENT AGO THAT SAYS THAT PERMITS SHALL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL FEES ARE PAID. SO THERE IS NOT A STAFF DOES NOT HAVE THE DISCRETION. AS I READ YOUR ORDINANCES, TO ISSUE A PERMIT WITHOUT THE FEES ALREADY BEING PAID. AND SO WHEN THAT WHEN THE PERMIT EXPIRES, IF THERE'S NO ACTION TAKEN, IT'S NO LONGER A VALID PERMIT. AND THERE'S THERE'S FEES ON IT. 
          [01:15:05]
IT'S NOT AN ACTIVE PERMIT. WE FROM A LIABILITY STANDPOINT, SHOULD NOT BE DOING INSPECTIONS ON A PROJECT THAT IS NOT ACTIVE. SO RELATED JUST KIND OF CHASING DOWN THIS RABBIT TRAIL. IS THERE A SCENARIO WHERE THE BUILDER COULD PAY THE FULL FEE AND BRING IT BEFORE US COUNCIL TWO WEEKS FROM NOW TO CONSIDER SOME REIMBURSEMENT OR NOT? THAT. I'M GOING TO CHIME IN THAT PREVIOUSLY WE HAVE SAID OR WE'VE BEEN ADVISED BY LEGAL COUNSEL THAT FEES PAID WERE NOT REIMBURSABLE. THEY WERE. FEES PAID TO THE CITY WOULD NOT BE REFUNDABLE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT CONTEXT THAT IS. I THAT MAY BE TRUE IN CERTAIN CONTEXTS. I CAN'T, AS I SIT HERE RIGHT NOW, TELL YOU THAT'S TRUE IN EVERY CONTEXT. I DON'T HAVE YOUR WHOLE COURT OF CODE OF ORDINANCES. I DON'T KNOW. SO THERE MIGHT BE EXCEPTIONS, BUT I'M JUST GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT IT. MAY I SAY ONE PROBABLY HOPEFULLY. FINAL THING. SO ORDINANCES ARE HERE TO PROTECT THE CITIZENS AND TO GIVE YOU, I ASSUME, A, A PROTOCOL AND SOP FOR HOW TO GOVERN A COMMUNITY. 
          I'M JUST GUESSING. I'VE NEVER BEEN IN YOUR SHOES, AND I AND I ADMIRE YOU FOR DOING IT, FOR HAVING THE DESIRE TO SERVE. BUT I GUESS IN REFERENCE TO WHAT JORDAN SAID ABOUT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT HAS DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ALLOW A FINAL INSPECTION UNLESS THE PERMITS ACTIVE. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THE COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SAY AS AS COUNCILMAN PRINCE SAID TO, HEY, LET'S ALLOW THEM TO HAVE THE FINAL INSPECTION AND PENDING A RULING IN 30 DAYS, BECAUSE WE HAVE FREQUENTLY IN THE LAST 15 YEARS, PROBABLY GOTTEN 30 CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY, PENDING LANDSCAPING OR SOME DRIVEWAY CHANGE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THIS IS REALLY ALL IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME. IF YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL HAS THE I'M SURE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS, TO SAY, HEY, WE'LL GIVE YOU THE ABILITY TO GET THIS FINAL INSPECTION. IF YOU PASS, OF COURSE, THEN THIS CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS PENDING. THE DECISION ON WHETHER THE 3750 IS REQUIRED OR THE $11,000 IS REQUIRED. IT JUST SEEMS REASONABLE. IT SEEMS LIKE THE RIGHT THING TO DO. OBVIOUSLY I'M BIASED. I'M NOT OBJECTIVE HERE. AND YOU KNOW, YOU ALL KNOW THAT. AND I KNOW THAT I'M NOT GOING TO. THESE THINGS ARE GOVERNED BY YOUR ORDINANCES. SO I KNOW WHAT IT SEEMS. BUT SO I FOUND THE, THE, THE SECTION THAT I WAS LOOKING FOR, MR. PRINCE. AND IT'S UNDER SECTION 3.113, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. NO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY SHALL BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PERMIT, INCLUDING REINSPECTION AND TREE REPLACEMENT FEES, ARE PAID AND PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL HAS BEEN INSTALLED. ACCORDING TO THIS CODE PERIOD, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL MAY ISSUE A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE FOR SPECIFIED TIMES AND UNDER ANY CONDITIONS THE MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE MAY DEEM APPROPRIATE TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THIS CODE, BUT THAT SPECIFICALLY CABINS TEMPORARY CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY RELATED TO CITY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCES. SO LANDSCAPING. SO IF ALL YOU'RE DOWN TO IS LANDSCAPING, THEN YOU CAN GET A TEMPORARY CEO. 
          BUT IF IT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE OF OF TEMPORARY LANDSCAPING OF LANDSCAPING, THEN TEMPORARY CEO IS NOT AVAILABLE. AND IT'S JUST PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD IN YOUR CODE. SO I DON'T THINK STAFF HAS THE ABILITY TO DO THAT. AND COUNCIL HAS TO FOLLOW ITS OWN ORDINANCES. IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE, YOU CAN CHANGE THE ORDINANCE. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN. AND IF I JUST TO PIGGYBACK OFF OF THAT, WE ALSO CAN'T ISSUE A CEO TO A PROJECT THAT DOESN'T HAVE AN ACTIVE PERMIT. SO WE'RE IT'S ESSENTIALLY A STANDSTILL. 
          SO IT'S KIND OF CAN WE CUT TO THE CHASE? I THINK COUNCILOR BENEFIELD RECOMMENDED GET IT ON AS AN ACTION ITEM. AND I KNOW THAT'S ANOTHER TWO WEEK DELAY, WHICH I APOLOGIZE FOR, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE THE QUICKEST WAY TO RESOLVE THIS IS FOR US TO MAKE A DETERMINATION ON WAIVING THE FEE OR NOT. AND THEN YOU CAN PROCEED. RIGHT. EITHER WE WAIVE IT THAT PORTION OF THE FEE AND YOU PAY THE APPROPRIATE PORTION, OR WE DON'T WAIVE IT. AND YOU DECIDE IF YOU WANT TO PAY IT AND MOVE FORWARD. BUT I THINK WE'RE TALKING AROUND IT A LOT AND WE'RE KIND OF OUR HANDS ARE TIED UNFORTUNATELY. SO LET'S GET GET YOU GUYS ON AS AN ACTION ITEM SO WE CAN TAKE ACTION. WELL, MY IDEA IS TO THOUGH THAT IF WE CAN GAUGE CONSENSUS UP HERE, IF YOU KNOW THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DENY THEM THE WAIVER, THEN I WOULDN'T WANT TO PULL THEM BACK OUT HERE IN TWO WEEKS JUST TO SAY NO. IF THERE'S ANYONE ON THIS COUNCIL WHO FEELS LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO PROVIDE THE WAIVER, THEN LET ME KNOW NOW SO WE CAN KIND OF GET A GENERAL SENSE, BUT I DON'T WANT TO DRAG THIS ON FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS FOR THE HOMEOWNERS AND THEN BRING THEM BACK HERE JUST TO DENY THEM. AND I THINK THAT THERE IS AN ABILITY TO HAVE SOME FINALITY FOR THEM. THEY CAN HEAR THAT. SO THAT'S ALL I'D ASK IF MEMBERS COULD REPRESENT WHAT 
          [01:20:03]
WHICH WAY THEY'RE LEANING RIGHT NOW, MR. BENEFIELD. CAN WE GET BRAD TO OPINE ON WHETHER OR NOT HE BELIEVES THE CITY MANAGER HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THIS DECISION? I WAS JUST THERE. ALL RIGHT. IT TAKES ME A SECOND TO TO WIND MY WAY THROUGH HERE. AND WHILE HE'S LOOKING, JORDAN, I GUESS WHAT WAS THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THIS? IF IT WERE AN ACTION? STAFF HAS NO RECOMMENDATION EITHER DIRECTION. I DON'T FEEL IT'S OUR PLACE. OKAY. YES. JUST TO CLARIFY FOR ME, THE POINT WAS MADE THAT THERE A PORTION OF THE FEES ADMINISTRATIVE AND A PORTION IS THEY FEEL DUPLICATIVE FEE FROM WHAT THEY PAID BEFORE. IS THAT AN ACCURATE DEPICTION OR THE WAY THAT IT'S STRUCTURED? YES, IT COULD BE SEEN AS THAT. HOWEVER, OUR CODE DOES NOT DESIGNATE EITHER OR. AND SO IT NO, IN THE SENSE THAT THAT'S NOT WHAT THE CODE SAYS. BUT I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT BASED OFF OF A SET RATE FEE AND THE COST OF STAFF'S TIME AND THE ADMINISTRATION. I CAN SEE WHERE THAT'S AN ARGUMENT. BUT THE WAY OUR CURRENT CODE IS WRITTEN, NO, IT IS NOT A DOUBLE WHAMMY. THAT IS HOW IT'S REPRESENTED ON THE ON OUR RECEIPT. AND OUR RECEIPT IS A STREET IMPACT FEES $750 PERMIT. PERMIT. SO THIS IS A CHANGE FROM THIS ON THIS PROJECT. I HAVE TO PROCEED THAT SAYS EXACTLY THAT. SO TO BE CHARGED THOSE IMPACT FEES WHEN THE STREETS WERE NOT IMPACTED, IT SEEMS CONFISCATORY THAT SEEMS LIKE A PENALTY. THAT AND AS BRAD MENTIONED, REGARDLESS OF WHAT MGO SAYS, IT'S WHAT OUR CODE SAYS. THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO TO COMPLY TO. AND THAT'S NOT THE WAY THE FEE IS ESTABLISHED. 
          THAT'S NOT THE INTENT. IT'S NOT AN IMPACT FEE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. THAT WAS I THINK THAT'S A FAILURE IN LEADERSHIP ON OUR PART, I GUESS. SO LET ME, LET ME LET ME JUMP IN FOR ONE SECOND. LET ME JUMP IN FOR ONE SECOND. SO. YEAH, Y'ALL KNOW I TRIED TO DO THIS IN REAL. I'M JUST GOING TO BE CANDID WITH ALL OF YOU TRYING TO DO THIS IN REAL TIME AND GIVE THESE LEGAL OPINIONS. AS I'M HEARING THIS ALL FOR THE FIRST TIME IS DIFFICULT. SO I'D LIKE TO BE SURE THAT I'M I'M CORRECTING THIS BECAUSE IT'S IT'S THERE ARE A LOT OF INTERLOCKING PIECES HERE. HOWEVER, I WILL POINT OUT TO YOU ALL THAT YOUR CODE SECTION .3.127 FEES UNDER. 
          CHAPTER THREE, ARTICLE 3.100 BUILDING CODES AND CONSTRUCTION FEES SECTION. IT SAYS THE CITY MAY CHARGE MAY CHARGE FEES FOR SERVICES OR PERMITS PROVIDED FOR THIS ARTICLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPENDIX A OF THIS CODE. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT INTENT OF THAT WAS TO GIVE COUNCIL THE AUTHORITY TO ALTER OR WAIVE THOSE FEES, BUT IT DOES SAY MAY. SO IF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXERCISE SOME DISCRETION, I CAN I CAN I CAN MAKE AN ARGUMENT THAT 3.127 GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO EXERCISE THAT DISCRETION BECAUSE IT SAYS THE CITY MAY CHARGE FEES IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPENDIX A, SO TAKE THAT. I MAY NEED TO DO MORE RESEARCH, BUT I MEAN THAT THAT THAT SECTION AT LEAST SAYS THAT WITH REGARD TO THESE FEES. SO MR. BENFIELD'S POINT, IT SAYS THE CITY DOES THAT ENCOMPASS THE CITY MANAGER? NO, THAT'S THE COUNCIL. SO THAT'S THAT THE CITY MANAGER I, I GUESS IN ANSWER TO MR. BENFIELD'S QUESTION, I WOULD I WOULD AGREE THAT YOUR CODE DOES NOT CONTEMPLATE GIVING THE CITY MANAGER THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THOSE DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS. THE CITY, ALTHOUGH IT DOES NOT SAY COUNCIL, I WOULD INTERPRET THAT TO MEAN ONLY THE CITY COUNCIL MAY EXERCISE THAT DISCRETION. AND JUST AS A FOLLOW UP QUESTION THERE, BRAD, DOES THAT MEAN ONLY THE COUNCIL CAN DETERMINE WHAT THE PERMIT FEE IS? MEANING IF RIGHT NOW THE PERMIT FEE IS 11,000, WOULD THE CITY, AKA THE CITY MANAGER HAVE THE ABILITY TO DETERMINE? WELL, IN THIS SCENARIO, $3,000 WOULD SEEM TO BE APPROPRIATE? OR DOES THAT ONLY OCCUR FROM A CITY COUNCIL LEVEL? I WOULD SAY ONLY CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE ULTIMATELY BECAUSE IT BECAUSE IT DEALS WITH THE ADMINISTRATION OF AN IMPOSITION OF FEES WHICH ARE SET BY THAT APPENDIX A IF IF YOU'RE GOING TO VARY FROM APPENDIX A, THEN I WOULD STRONGLY, I THINK, AS A MATTER OF LAW, THAT ONLY THE COUNCIL COULD DO THAT. YEAH, I WOULD SAY AS A MATTER OF POLICY, YOU WOULDN'T WANT STAFF LEVEL MAKING DECISIONS TO ALTER FEES THAT ARE SET FORTH IN A, IN AN APPENDIX. SO I WOULD SAY THAT HAS TO COME FROM COUNCIL. OKAY. 
          [01:25:09]
MR. HALL, THE ONLY CONCERN I HAVE IS AND I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THE SITUATION, I AM CONCERNED THAT IF WE'RE MAKING AN EXCEPTION TO OUR ORDINANCES OR CODES, THAT WE'RE DOING THAT CONSISTENTLY. AND I CAN SEE PEOPLE LINED UP EVERY TIME THEY, THEY, THEY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THIS OR EVERY TIME THAT THE CODE IS, IS APPLIED AND THEY'RE NOT HAPPY WITH IT. 
          THEY, THEY WOULD BE BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL. SO I THINK WE SHOULD BE PREPARED IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE AN EXCEPTION, THAT WE ARE PREPARED TO MAKE EXCEPTIONS, YOU KNOW, GOING FORWARD. BUT THE THE ISSUE IS, IS UNDER DEFINING HOW WE MAKE THOSE DECISIONS AND SO THAT WE'RE FAIR IN MAKING EXCEPTIONS. AND SO I THINK IT'S JUST A VERY, A VERY COMPLICATED AND SLIPPERY SLOPE TO FOR THE COUNCIL TO BE MAKING EXCEPTIONS WITHOUT THOSE THINGS BEING DEFINED. FIRST I WANT TO SAY I DO REMEMBER THIS COMING BACK. THIS COMING TO US BACK IN DECEMBER. AND I'VE SEEN LOG HOMES OUT HERE WITH SIMILAR SITUATIONS OR SIMILAR INSTANCES BEFORE. AND I WOULD SAY THAT EVEN THOUGH I DON'T WANT TO SET PRECEDENT, THAT I AM VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THIS SITUATION. 
          AND I THINK THIS GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE GO IN AND CHANGE HOW OUR OUR DETAILING IS ON OUR RECEIPTS AND ALSO MAYBE MAKE OUR RECEIPTS MORE IN LINE WITH THE ORDINANCES SO PEOPLE KNOW WHAT THEY'RE PAYING FOR. WHEN, YOU KNOW, YOU GET A RECEIPT AND IT GIVES YOU A DESCRIPTION AND THEN YOU'RE ASKED TO PAY FOR IT. AGAIN, IT'S NOT. IT'S IT DOES LEND. I CAN SEE WHERE IT WOULD LEND, YOU KNOW, SOME SOME ISSUE. SO EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT IT'S AN IMPACT FEE WHEN YOU'RE PAYING THE SAME EXACT AMOUNT THAT THAT YOU'VE PREVIOUSLY PAID, AND THEN NOW YOU'RE TRYING TO MOVE THE MOVE THE AMOUNTS AROUND TO TRY TO JUSTIFY IT. TO ME, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE FUZZY MATH AND I DON'T AGREE WITH IT. I LIKE THINGS TO BE CLEAR CUT WHEN IT COMES TO MATH. AND SO IF ON THE NEW RECEIPT, THERE'S A COMPLETE BREAKDOWN AS TO WHAT THOSE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ARE GOING TO GO TOWARDS. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT SAYING THAT WE'RE HAVING THEM PAY, YOU KNOW, $11,000 AGAIN, IS IS REALISTIC WHEN I KNOW THAT OUR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ARE NOT GOING TO BE $11,000 FOR ISSUING THAT PERMIT, WE'RE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION WHERE'S THAT OTHER MONEY GOING? SO I WOULD SAY THAT I'M I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF REDUCING, BUT I WOULD ALSO CAUTION THAT WE NEED TO GO IN AND CHANGE HOW OUR RECEIPTING, OUR RECEIPT PROCESS IS DONE. AND ALSO DO A YOU SAID AN ESCALATION PROCESS IN THE FUTURE. I DO BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE A FLAT RATE COUNCIL. I I'M NOT I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THIS STANDS FROM A PROCEDURAL STANDPOINT, BUT SECTION 3.125 RELATES TO APPEAL FROM THE DENIAL OF A BUILDING PERMIT. I DON'T KNOW IF WHERE WE ARE. 
          YEAH. I THINK WE'RE IN A LITTLE BIT OF A PROCEDURAL BLACK HOLE HERE BECAUSE BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LIVE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PERMIT DECISION TO FILE AN APPEAL. AND THAT APPEAL GOES TO BSE AND THAT'S FOR THE THE APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF A PERMIT. YOUR YOUR 3.125 DOESN'T REALLY ADDRESS FEES. THERE'S NOT A THERE'S THERE'S NOT A FORMAL MECHANISM IN YOUR ORDINANCES THAT I CAN FIND AS I'M SITTING HERE LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW THAT ADDRESSES REDUCTION OF FEES, THE THE APPEAL PROCESS REALLY CONTEMPLATES THE APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF PERMITS AND NOT ALTERING FEES. AND MR. HALL'S POINT IS A GOOD ONE ABOUT YOU DON'T CREATE A LEGAL PRECEDENT THAT'S BINDING PER SE. BUT BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO ALTER YOUR FEE SCHEDULE ON AN AD HOC BASIS, IT DOES RAISE QUESTIONS OF CONSISTENCY AND FAIRNESS FOR EVERYONE ELSE WHO CAME IN AND PAID WHATEVER IT IS THEY WERE TOLD TO PAY IN THE PAST OR IN THE FUTURE. SO. I IF, IF IF IT'S THE COUNCIL'S DECISION, WHEN IT'S PROPERLY AGENDIZED TO ALTER SOME FEES BECAUSE OF THAT SECTION THAT I READ YOU EARLIER THAT IT SAYS YOU MAY. YOU, YOU, YOU VERY WELL MAY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO IS ENTIRELY A DIFFERENT MATTER. BUT BUT NONETHELESS, YEAH, I THINK WE ARE IN A BIT OF A, A BLACK HOLE HERE AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE YOU'D BE STRIKING OUT INTO. AN AD HOC SORT OF REVISION OF YOUR, YOUR PERMIT FEE STRUCTURE. AND MAYBE YOUR FEE STRUCTURE NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED. THAT'S ANOTHER MATTER 
          [01:30:05]
THAT DOESN'T HELP. AGAIN, TODAY WE DON'T GO BACK IN RETROACTIVE. YOU GOT TO DEAL WITH THE POLICIES ON THE BOOKS AS THEY ARE TODAY. AND AND YES, LET ME ENGAGE WITH COUNSEL REAL QUICK. 
          SO I THINK I HEARD AT LEAST TWO THAT ARE OPEN TO POSSIBLY APPROVING A WAIVER. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A CONSENSUS. IF I PUT THIS ON AS AN ACTION ITEM. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ON THIS COUNCIL THAT WOULD BE OPEN TO REDUCING THE FEE AT AS AN ACTION ITEM? I WOULD BE OPEN TO IT AND I'LL JUST SAY MY REASONING AND THIS IS WHY I ASKED, IS THE JOB COMPLETE? RIGHT. IF THE POINT OF THESE ADDITIONAL FEES, AS MR. WAS SAYING, IS TO GET GET WORK DONE, YOU KNOW, SO JOBS DON'T HANG OUT THERE. AND THE FACT THAT THIS IS DONE, IT WAS DONE AT THE VERY FRONT END OF THE WINDOW THAT'S BEING PAID FOR. I'M OPEN TO HAVING A REDUCTION IN THE IN RECOGNITION OF THAT. MR. BENNEFIELD, WERE YOU INTERESTED IN A POTENTIAL REDUCTION OF THE FEE? YES, ABSOLUTELY. AND I'LL JUST STATE THE REASON WHY, AS THE BUILDER STATED, IT'S A 14,000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE. IT STANDS 60FT TALL. IT'S IN THE FLOODPLAIN. THIS LEVEL OF BUILD IS NOT ONE THAT YOU TYPICALLY SEE IN THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA. SO FROM A PRECEDENT PERSPECTIVE, THERE'S VERY FEW INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE ENGAGING IN THIS TYPE OF PROJECT THAT WOULD HAVE THESE TYPE OF BUILD CONSTRAINTS. THANK YOU INCLUDED. AND THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS OPEN TO A REDUCTION OF THE FEE. AND I'LL PUT IT AS AN ACTION ITEM ON THE FEBRUARY 19TH MEETING. SO KNOWING THAT, DO WE NEED TO HAVE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY. AND THEN WE WILL PROCEED TO THE NEXT ITEM. I WILL GO TO WHAT 
          [IX.1. Code Diagnostic update and Discussion on Potential Subcommittee and proposed fee schedule.]
CERTAINLY WON'T BE A SHORT ONE EITHER. ITEM WORK SESSION, ONE CODE DIAGNOSTIC UPDATE AND DISCUSSION ON POTENTIAL SUBCOMMITTEE AND PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE. I THINK THIS IS JORDAN'S ITEM, BUT I THINK WE HAVE FREESE AND NICHOLS HERE AS WELL. MR. I SENT YOU THE POWERPOINT. IT'S NOT LETTING YOU. MAYOR AND COUNCIL ON THIS NOTE. WE DO HAVE A SMALL STAFF PRESENTATION. I BELIEVE THERE HAS BEEN SOME MISCONCEPTIONS AS TO WHAT A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE IS AND WHY WE KEEP SAYING THAT WORD. SO WE DID WANT TO ADDRESS IT VERY QUICKLY. I AM GOING TO MAKE THIS AS SHORT AND SWEET AS I POSSIBLY CAN. I THINK THE POWERPOINT THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE PACKET GIVES A LOT OF THE INFORMATION ALREADY. SO I DON'T WANT TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE. AND THEN FREESE AND NICHOLS WILL KICK OFF THEIR PRESENTATION. WE'LL TRY TO MOVE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. YES, SIR. IS IT? I HAVE IT UP ON MINE IF IT'S EASY. JUST FOR THE RECORD, THIS THE FOLKS ON THE GOTOMEETING WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SEE THIS, I GUESS. IS THAT TRUE? OH, THIS IS THE SAME MATERIAL THAT'S ALREADY IN THE PACKET. OKAY, GOOD. GREAT. I'LL SHOW IT AS PAGE 65 OF PACKET. OKAY. SO MAYOR AND COUNCIL AGAIN I'LL TRY TO KEEP THIS SIMPLE AND SWEET. SO THE MAIN PURPOSE TODAY IS TO EXPLAIN WHAT A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE IS, WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT, AND PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT. GIVEN THAT THERE WERE QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED. OKAY. SO THE ISSUE AT A HIGH LEVEL, AND I BELIEVE THAT MANY PEOPLE WITHIN THE CITY, WHETHER IT BE BUILDERS, RESIDENTS, STAFF, COUNCIL BOARDS, ARE VERY AWARE THAT WE DO HAVE SOME ISSUES WITHIN OUR CODE. SO THERE'S TWO WAYS TO WRITE CODE AND 
          [01:35:02]
DEVELOPMENT CODE. THERE'S THE WAY THAT WE HAVE WHERE THERE'S DIFFERENT CHAPTERS BROKEN UP AND THEY COVER A TOPIC, BUT THEY DON'T INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER. AND THEN THERE'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE IS STRUCTURED IN A WAY THAT IT FLOWS THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. IT'S INTEGRATED IN A WAY WHERE YOU'RE TAKING IT STEP BY STEP, AND YOUR TOPICS ARE JOINED TOGETHER IN A WAY THAT MAKES SENSE THROUGH THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPMENT. OUR ISSUE NOW IS THAT OUR CODE IS ALL OVER THE PLACE. WE HAVE SEVERAL CONFLICTING CHAPTERS, CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, WHICH WAS NOTED BY FREESE AND NICHOLS AS WELL AS STAFF. AND SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR DAY TO DAY STUFF? FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, OUR CODE IS HOW WE OPERATE. OUR CODE IS HOW WE FUNCTION. IT'S HOW WE HOLD THE STANDARDS OF THE CITY. AND WHEN WE HAVE CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, WE CAN'T DO THAT. IT MAKES IT REALLY HARD TO GET CODE COMPLIANCE SITUATED BECAUSE WE HAVE CONFLICTING ORDINANCES. IT MAKES IT HARD TO GO THROUGH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS BECAUSE AGAIN, WE HAVE IT IN SO MANY DIFFERENT PLACES THAT IT IS NOT ONE SEAMLESS PROCESS IN WHICH WE CAN REVIEW ANY APPLICATIONS. 
          WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR RESIDENTS? A LOT OF THE TIMES YOU'LL HEAR, AND I'M SURE IT'S VERY FAMILIAR. WELL, MY NEIGHBOR DID IT A DIFFERENT WAY. OR, YOU KNOW, THE GUY DOWN THE STREET, SOMETHING WAS DIFFERENT. AND GIVEN THE WAY THAT WE'VE STRUCTURED THE CODE AND WITH THE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE INCREMENTALLY OVER TIME, THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE CONFLICTING AND THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE OKAY ONE DAY, NOT OKAY THE NEXT, BUT NOT TRANSITION THROUGHOUT THE CODE. WHICH MEANS THESE ISSUES WHERE ONE PROPERTY IS DIFFERENT FROM ANOTHER, ARE VERY COMMON BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT IT'S BEEN DONE. AND SO THEY HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS THAT STAFF DOES AS FAR AS ENFORCEMENT GOES. IT ALSO UNDERMINES TRUST. THERE'S A LOT OF TIMES WHEN CODE COMPLIANCE WILL GO OUT THERE AND SAY ONE THING, BUT IN THE BUILDING SECTION, THE BUILDERS HAVE A DIFFERENT ORDINANCE THAT SAYS IT'S OKAY FOR THEM TO BE DOING WHATEVER THEY'RE DOING. AND SO IT LEADS TO A LOT OF ISSUES AND MISTRUST. AND WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS ABOUT CONCERNS FROM PEOPLE WHERE IT DOESN'T MATCH UP OR IT DOESN'T LINE UP, WHAT IT MEANS FOR DEVELOPERS AND PEOPLE TRYING TO BUILD ON THEIR PROPERTY WITHOUT SET STANDARDS AND A PREDICTABLE PATH, IT'S REALLY HARD TO GET PERMITS PASSED THROUGH IN A TIMELY MANNER. IT'S HARD TO IDENTIFY WHAT PROPERTIES AND STANDARDS ARE, WHAT STANDARDS WILL APPLY TO YOUR PROPERTY. IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO DO THE MOST BASIC ASPECTS OF BUILDING, BECAUSE IT'S ALL OVER THE PLACE, AND THE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE MAY SAY SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE BUILDING ORDINANCE, AND IT'S A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH FOR REVIEW. WHY DOES THIS MATTER TO COUNCIL? I BELIEVE THERE MAY BE A BIT OF A MISCONCEPTION THAT THERE WAS A CATALYST FOR THIS IN ESSENCE, BUT REALISTICALLY SPEAKING, IT'S YEARS OF MINOR REVISIONS THAT HAVE PILED ON TOP OF EACH OTHER THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN CROSS-REFERENCED IN A WAY THAT MADE SURE TO GET ALL THE CONFLICTS. AND EVENTUALLY, WHEN YOU STICK ENOUGH BAND-AIDS ON A BROKEN PIPE, IT'S GOING TO EXPLODE. AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'RE AT, AND WE'RE STARTING TO NOTICE SOME OF THESE BIGGER ISSUES. MORE PREVALENTLY. PEOPLE ARE SPEAKING OUT MORE ABOUT IT. STAFF IS CALLING OUT PROBLEMS AS WELL. I KNOW PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAVE PLENTY OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW OUR ORDINANCES CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHER AS WELL. AND SO. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT THE CODE IS THE PROBLEM, IT'S THE STRUCTURE OF THE CODE AND HOW WE'VE WRITTEN IT. AND THE REASON FOR UDC IS THAT WE'RE FINDING A WAY TO MUSH EVERYTHING TOGETHER AS THE PROCESS GOES, RATHER THAN IN MIXED MATCHED, BASED ON WHEN STUFF WAS ADOPTED AND MODIFIED. AND THAT'S NOT AS CLEAN AS THE WAY A UDC READS. OKAY, A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. IT'S STRICTLY JUST AN ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK. THIS DOES NOT CHANGE POLICY. THIS DOES NOT CHANGE DENSITY. THIS DOES NOT GIVE STAFF ANY MORE AUTHORITY ANYTHING TO THAT EFFECT. IT'S STRICTLY HOW THE CODE IS STRUCTURED. AND WHY IT MATTERS. SO WHEN EVERYTHING IS SPREAD OUT OVER MULTIPLE CHAPTERS, TOPICS ARE REGULATED MORE THAN ONCE. STANDARDS, CONFLICT OR OVERLAP. INTERPRETATION BECOMES INCONSISTENT, WHICH IS A PROBLEM THAT WE FACE PRETTY REGULARLY. IT'S NO LONGER PREDICTABLE. IT'S NO LONGER A WAY THAT MAKES SENSE, AND IT STALLS THINGS OUT. SO YOU'LL SEE THAT A LOT OF OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE SPLIT OVER FOUR CHAPTERS. EACH OF THE FOUR CHAPTERS SPEAKS TO THINGS SPECIFICALLY, BUT IT'S ALSO IN ANOTHER CHAPTER THAT YOU FIND SOME OF THESE TOPICS. AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH TRYING TO MARRY THINGS UP. A LOT OF OUR PROBLEMS IN DAY TO DAY CONFLICTING INTERPRETATIONS, LONGER REVIEW TIMES, RELIANCE ON EXCEPTIONS OR NEGOTIATED OUTCOMES, WHICH, AS WE SAW TODAY, THERE'S A POLICY BLACK HOLE THAT WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT. AGAIN, IT'S NOT ISSUES FROM A COUNCIL, IT'S NOT ISSUES FROM 
          [01:40:06]
STAFF. IT'S JUST THE WAY THAT IT'S STRUCTURED AND HAVING GAPS AND CONFLICTS. AND SO, FOR INSTANCE, A REALLY GOOD ONE IS OUR DRAINAGE AND WATERSHED REGULATIONS. THEY'RE IN TWO DIFFERENT PLACES, BUT THEY'RE IN MULTIPLE CHAPTERS AND CROSS-REFERENCE DIFFERENTLY. 
          AND SO I KNOW FROM A PUBLIC WORKS PERSPECTIVE, VICTOR HAS A REALLY HARD TIME WHEN HE'S DOING REVIEW, MAKING SURE THAT EVERY BOX IS BEING CHECKED BECAUSE THERE'S 16 BOXES SPREAD OVER FOUR CHAPTERS, AND IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT. SO WHEN INCREMENTAL FIXES ARE DONE OR HAVE BEEN DONE IN THE PAST, IT ADDRESSES ISOLATED ISSUES AT THE TIME. HOWEVER, IT DOES SET OFF A CHAIN REACTION OF INCONSISTENCIES ACROSS THE REST OF THE CODE. WHAT WOULD A UDC DO? IT ASSIGNS ONE HOME PER TOPIC IN THE ORDER THAT DEVELOPMENT WOULD PROCESS THROUGH, SO YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHERE TO LOOK. IT USES CONSISTENT DEFINITIONS, IDENTIFIES APPROVAL AUTHORITIES EARLY ON SO PEOPLE KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS IS AND WHAT TO EXPECT, AND THEN ELIMINATES THAT DUPLICATION AND CONTRADICTION THAT WE SEE. AND THIS JUST HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY, WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE HAND IT OVER TO FREEZE AND NICHOLS FOR AN ADDITIONAL PRESENTATION. ANY QUESTIONS FOR JORDAN BEFORE WE GO TO FREEZE NICHOLS. MR. PRINCE, SORRY. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IN THE CASE WHERE THERE'S CONFLICTING REGULATIONS IN MULTIPLE PLACES, HAVE YOU THOUGHT THROUGH THE PROCESS FOR DECIDING WHAT THE ACTUAL REGULATION SHOULD BE WHEN THERE'S CONFLICT ALREADY IN THE CODE, HOW WE HANDLE IT TODAY, OR HOW WE WOULD HANDLE IT DURING SOME KIND OF RESTRUCTURING. THE LATTER. SO IT DEPENDS ON THE CONFLICT. THERE'S SOME WHERE STATE LAW WILL SUPERSEDE AND THAT IT IS WHAT IT IS. CAN'T CHANGE IT, IT'S THE WAY IT GOES. BUT WHEN THERE IS AN INSTANCE IN WHICH IT'S MORE POLICY AND INTENT DRIVEN, WE HAVE TO BRING IT BACK TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT FOR STAFF TO DETERMINE THAT. 
          THAT'S AT COUNCIL'S DISCRETION AS TO WHICH DIRECTION WE GO. I KNOW THERE'S SOME PLACES THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED IN THIS AT THIS BOARD AND OTHERS WHERE IT'S GOING TO COME DOWN TO POLICY DIRECTION, AND THAT'S WHEN WE HIT THOSE. WE WILL ABSOLUTELY HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT. 
          AND THAT WAS SORT OF TOSSING YOU A SOFTBALL. RIGHT. BUT BUT YOUR INTENT IS NOT TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. BUT WHEN WHEN IT'S NOT CLEAR WHAT CODE ALREADY SAYS, YOU'RE GOING TO BRING THAT BACK TO COUNCIL, POTENTIALLY THROUGH ONE OF OUR COMMISSIONS TO GET THEIR INPUT AS APPROPRIATE. WE HAVE TO I'LL HAVE TO. YEAH. IT'S NOT A THAT THAT'S THAT'S NOT A DECISION THAT STAFF COULD LAWFULLY MAKE. AND AND AS JORDAN SAID, I MEAN REALLY THERE ARE DIFFERENT KINDS OF, OF OF DISCREPANCIES OR CONTRADICTIONS OR CONFLICTS. AND, AND IT'S ONLY WHEN STAFF IS FACED WITH, WITH, WITH WHAT THE LAW WOULD CALL AN IRRECONCILABLE CONFLICT. THOSE ARE THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK TO Y'ALL TO, TO THE POLICY MAKER TO RECONCILE THE IRRECONCILABLE CONFLICT THAT JUST CAN'T BE WORKED OUT. I JUST WANT TO SAY, I JUST WANTED TO THANK JORDAN FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, BECAUSE THAT IS THIS ADDRESSES A NUMBER OF CONCERNS THAT I'VE BEEN HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY, EVEN AMONG STAFF, ABOUT WHAT AN ACTUAL UDC IS. SO I THINK THAT CLARIFICATION REALLY, REALLY HELPS THAT IT IS A FRAMEWORK. 
          IT IS NOT JUST REWRITING, IT'S A RESTRUCTURE. SO I THINK THE KEY THING WAS EVERYBODY HEARD A CODE REWRITE. THEY GOT UP IN ARMS AND THINK, OH MY YEARS, ALL MY YEARS OF WORK ARE GOING TO BE SWEPT OUT THE DOOR. NO, IT'S JUST THAT ALL THE YEARS OF WORK IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE STRUCTURED IN A MANNER THAT IT WILL BE, YOU KNOW, EASILY INTERPRETED AND CONSISTENT ACROSS THE BOARD. AND THEN, OF COURSE, IF THERE IS CONFLICTS THAT THAT IT WILL HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL OR FIRST GO BACK TO, YOU KNOW, THE, YOU KNOW, THE COMMISSION, OR IF IT GOES TO PNC OR UBSC BEFORE IT COMES BACK. SO I APPRECIATE THE TIME YOU PUT IN WITH THIS COUNSELOR. VANESSA. SO, JORDAN. YEAH, THANK YOU. BECAUSE I THINK A BIG CONCERN WAS THAT IS THIS A BACK DOOR INTO POLICY REVISION, WHICH ABSOLUTELY, WE DON'T WANT, I GUESS, AROUND PROJECT PLANNING BECAUSE ANOTHER KIND OF AREA OF DISCOMFORT I HAD FROM THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION WAS IT SEEMS LIKE A BIG, PRETTY BIG UNDERTAKING. RIGHT. AND I WASN'T HEARING ANYTHING AROUND PROJECT PLANNING. WE JUST HAD KIND OF HIGH LEVEL TIMELINES. 
          YOU AND CHARLES WERE HOPING TO GET IT DONE IN, BUT WHAT? WHERE ARE YOU GUYS AT ON THE PROJECT PLAN IN TERMS OF TIMELINES, MAJOR MILESTONES, PRIORITIZATION, LIKE WHAT'S THE 
          [01:45:02]
LOW HANGING FRUIT YOU'RE GOING TO START WITH, AND SO FORTH. AND MAYBE FREESE AND NICHOLS DISCUSSION WILL BE PART OF THIS. BUT I JUST WANT TO SEE WHERE YOU GUYS ARE AT ON THAT. AND THAT WOULD BE A BIG ASK. I WOULD HAVE IS TO PUT A REALLY ROBUST PROJECT PLAN AROUND THIS, THAT WE THEN DASHBOARD AND GET REGULAR UPDATES ON. SO FROM A STAFFING PERSPECTIVE, WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS CREATED A TABLE THAT IS AND THIS WAS INTENDED TO BE PRESENTED AT THIS WORKSHOP. THERE WAS A BIT OF A PAUSE TO TO HAVE SOME MORE EDUCATIONAL THINGS BROUGHT BEFORE TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION. STAFF HAS ESSENTIALLY DRAFTED A TABLE THAT IS OUR PROPOSED ORDER BASED OFF OF OUR CODE, THE WAY WE USE IT, AND NOT JUST DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PUBLIC WORKS. WE TALKED TO PUBLIC WORKS ABOUT IT, WE TALKED PARKS ABOUT IT. AND ESSENTIALLY THAT TABLE HAS THE PROPOSED CHAPTERS AND A PROPOSED ORDER. BUT THEN AS YOU GO THROUGH IT, IT SAYS WHAT THE TOPIC IS. THE CURRENT CHAPTERS, WHAT IS BEING CHANGED OR WHAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED, WHETHER IT'S LEGISLATIVE CORRECTIONS OR ANY NOTED CONFLICTS THAT WE ALREADY KNOW EXIST OR NO CHANGE, THAT'S ON THE TABLE AS WELL. AND THEN WHERE IT WAS IN THE PREVIOUS CODE, THE DEPARTMENT THAT IT APPLIES TO MORE SPECIFICALLY, THE BOARD, THAT WOULD IN THEORY BE THE MAIN POINT OF THAT BUFFER, ESSENTIALLY, AND THEN A SCHEDULE THAT'S ATTACHED TO IT IN A WAY THAT'S REASONABLE. SOME CHAPTERS, THERE ARE NO INTENDED CHANGES WHATSOEVER. 
          AND SO WE'RE GOING TO COPY AND PASTE THOSE, CHANGE THE SECTION NUMBERS AND CALL IT A DAY THAT'S QUICK. THAT MAY TAKE A WEEK, TWO WEEKS TO GET FORMATTED CLEANED UP AND EVERYTHING ELSE. BUT THEN THERE'S SOME CHAPTERS, FOR INSTANCE, THE THE BUILDING AND THE DEVELOPMENT CHAPTERS THAT ARE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO A LOT OF TRYING TO MARRY UP POLICY, AND THEY MAY TAKE A LITTLE BIT LONGER. AND SO THE SCHEDULE WAS BUILT ESSENTIALLY PRIORITIZING THE EASY WINS. AND THEN THE THINGS THAT WERE TAKING A LITTLE BIT LONGER. WE MAY NOT KICK OFF RIGHT AT FIRST, BUT THEY MAY TAKE A LITTLE BIT LONGER. SO THAT HAS BEEN CREATED. WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO TO SHARE THAT. IF THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION, MY INTENT IS TO ONCE THAT'S APPROVED BY EITHER A SUBCOMMITTEE OR COUNCIL OR WHEREVER THE THE BODY WILL BE TO CREATE DASHBOARDS AND TO CREATE SHAREABLE THINGS ONLINE. THIS IS A FULLY TRANSPARENT PROCESS. IT IS A VERY. IT'S A VERY OPEN PROCESS. I THINK EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE DONE OUT IN THE OPEN. IF POSSIBLE. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT IN A WAY ON OUR WEBSITE THAT PEOPLE CAN SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING, BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY IT SHOULD BE. THIS IS THE CODE. THIS IS HOW WE GOVERN EVERYTHING. WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. I'M NOT SURE WE HAVE TO FIGURE THAT OUT, BUT THAT'S THAT'S FULLY THE INTENT. AND THIS IS MY IGNORANCE. BUT WITH THE UDC, IS THAT A TEMPLATE THAT WE'VE BEEN PROVIDED. AND WE'RE THEN GOING TO ADAPT IT TO THE CITY? OR YOU'RE JUST SAYING, LET'S JUST FOLLOW A MORE LOGICAL ORDER WITH ORDINANCES THAT YOU, THE SUBCOMMITTEE OR YOU WILL CREATE. IT'S NOT A TEMPLATE AT ALL. IT'S STRICTLY AS IT IS TODAY. 
          CHAPTERS. SO WE HAVE THE CHAPTERS EXISTING. AND WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS THE SAME CHAPTER TITLES, JUST IN A DIFFERENT ORDER. THERE IS NO CHANGING. THERE IS NO STEALING FROM ANOTHER CITY. IT'S NOTHING LIKE THAT. IT'S YOU HAVE YOUR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION, YOUR ROLES AND YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES. WE HAVE ALL THAT NOW. ALREADY. I BELIEVE IT'S CHAPTER TWO. 
          IT'S JUST MOVING TO CHAPTER ONE. AND SO THAT THAT TABLE BREAKS A LOT OF THAT DOWN. MR. HALL, IS ARE THE STAFF GOING TO BE OUR CURRENT STAFF BE GOING TO BE DOING THIS PROCESS, OR IS FREESE AND NICHOLS OR OR WHO'S GOING TO BE DOING THE WORK? MY UNDERSTANDING WITH STAFF, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY VOTED ON, MADE THE DIRECTIVE. WE HAVE NOT PROCEEDED WITH WORK UNTIL HOPEFULLY AFTER THIS MEETING. I THINK MR. HALL WAS PART OF THIS DISCUSSION TODAY IS WE WERE STILL TALKING ABOUT THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND THE STRUCTURE OF IT. AND THEN WITH THE WORK OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE IS AND HOW WE GO FROM THERE. CHARLES, I WANT TO BE CLEAR. STAFF HAS NO DESIRE TO SET POLICY. WE NEED DIRECTION FROM Y'ALL ON WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IN THAT ORDINANCE AND HOW YOU WANT IT. BECAUSE LIKE I TOLD THE MAYOR, I SAID, IF I WRITE THE ORDINANCE, IT'LL BE SO STRICT. EVERYBODY'S HOUSES WILL HAVE A CERTAIN ARCHITECTURAL STYLE AND ALL OF THIS, AND WE WOULD BE SUED PRETTY QUICK BECAUSE I'D BE AGAINST STATE LAW. ARE WE GOOD TO MOVE ON TO FREEZE AND NICHOLS PORTION? OKAY. I THINK 
          [01:50:17]
I COULD DO IT. GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL FOR THOSE ONLINE. I BELIEVE THIS STARTS AT PAGE 65 OF THE PACKET. THERE WE GO. AWESOME. MY NAME IS EVAN OLSZEWSKI WITH FREESE AND NICHOLS. I'M AN URBAN PLANNER BASED OUT OF THE SAN MARCOS OFFICE WITH ME HERE TONIGHT. I HAVE GOT LAURA SOCARRAS AS WELL AS MICHAEL LAFFERTY AND GEORGE FOWLER, WHO ARE ALSO LAURA IS AN URBAN PLANNER. AND THEN OUR PROJECT ENGINEERS, GEORGE AND MICHAEL. SO THEY WERE ALL WORKING ON THIS CODE REVIEW. SO I'M HERE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE CODE DIAGNOSTIC REPORT THAT WE PREPARED. THIS PROCESS STARTED BACK IN SEPTEMBER, WHEN STAFF ASKED US TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE CURRENT CODE OF ORDINANCES AND ANALYZE IT, LOOK AT IT FROM OUR DIFFERENT AREAS OF EXPERTISE AND OFFER COMMENTS, A SUMMARY OF THE ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON BEST PRACTICES. SO IN OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER, WE CONDUCTED STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS WITH BOTH INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS. WE MET WITH INTERNAL TEAM THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT, AND IN NOVEMBER WE TURNED IN A KEY ISSUES SUMMARY WHICH BASICALLY SAYS BASED ON OUR REVIEW OF THE CODE AND WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE STAKEHOLDERS, HERE ARE WHAT WE THINK ARE THE KEY ISSUES THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED. CAN WE HELP REAL QUICK? WHAT STAKEHOLDERS DID Y'ALL MEET WITH THIS YEAR? SO WE MET WITH 11 LOCAL DEVELOPERS, SURVEYORS AND PEOPLE OTHERWISE INVOLVED WITH DEVELOPMENT, AS WELL AS ALL THE DEPARTMENTS OF STAFF, AND THEY WERE LARGO DEVELOPERS OR LARGO SPECIFICALLY. SO THE LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS WAS PROVIDED TO US BY STAFF. OKAY. IS THERE ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS IN THERE? NO, SIR. ANY CITIZENS? NO, SIR. 
          THANK YOU. SO WE HELD A PUBLIC MEETING ON THE KEY ISSUES WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON JANUARY 8TH, AND WE RECEIVED SOME GOOD FEEDBACK FROM THEM SAYING, WE'D LIKE YOU TO TONE DOWN THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTUALLY FOCUS ON THE KEY ISSUES WHAT YOU GUYS OBSERVE, AS JORDAN MENTIONED, THERE'S THE DESIRE TO SET POLICY AND TO LOOK AT THINGS HOMEGROWN AND DO IT HERE. SO JUST FOCUS ON THE ANALYSIS ANGLE. SO THROUGH JANUARY UP TO JANUARY 20TH, WE REVISED THE DRAFT AND PREPARED THIS FINAL DRAFT FOCUSING MORE ON ISSUES IN THE BIG PICTURE. SO WHAT IS A CODE DIAGNOSTIC. ESSENTIALLY IT'S A DOCUMENT INFORMED BY STAKEHOLDERS THAT CONNECTS YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND RECOMMENDATIONS WITH BEST PRACTICES FROM OTHER CITIES THAT IDENTIFIES KEY ISSUES AND OUTLINES STRATEGIES TO BETTER ACHIEVE THE CITY'S GOALS. WITH THE GOAL THAT THIS IS A DOCUMENT THAT HELPS CONSENSUS BUILDING AND HELPS WITH POLICY SETTING FOR ANY FUTURE CHANGES TO THE CODE. IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN PUT IN YOUR BACK POCKET AND USE AS YOU GO INTO FUTURE STEPS. SO HERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE LOOKED AT DURING THIS CODE ANALYSIS. WE LOOKED AT THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL AS THE DRAFT 2025 PLAN. WE LOOKED AT THE AMENDED INTERIM GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY AS WELL AS THE DRAFTING STANDARDS. THE ANALYSIS FOCUSED ON THE BUILDING REGULATIONS, SITE DEVELOPMENT, SIGNS, SUBDIVISIONS, UTILITIES AND ZONING CHAPTERS OF THE CODES. 
          WE ALSO TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE DEMOGRAPHICS, TRENDS AND OTHER CHARACTERISTICS OF THE CITY LIKE THE LANDSCAPING, THE TOPOGRAPHY, THE LAKESIDE CHARACTER, AND THE CITY'S DESIRE FOR THOUGHTFUL AND BALANCED GROWTH WHILE PRESERVING NATURAL BEAUTY AND CHARACTER. AS I MENTIONED, WE HAD A CODE WORKSHOP WITH CITY STAFF, AS WELL AS INTERVIEWS WITH LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. SO THE KEY ISSUES IN THIS REPORT ARE BROKEN DOWN INTO FOUR SUBCATEGORIES. THE FOUR MAIN THINGS ARE CODE STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION, CLARITY AND USABILITY, THE ZONING STANDARDS, AND THEN THE CALIBRATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO GET WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. REGARDING CODE STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION. WHAT WE HEARD IS MUCH WHAT YOU'VE HEARD TONIGHT, THAT THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ARE SPREAD ACROSS MULTIPLE CHAPTERS, WHICH CAN MAKE THE CODE DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND AND ENFORCE. THE SAME GOES FOR PROCESSES, TECHNICAL STANDARDS, AND DESIGN REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE SORT OF MIXED TOGETHER WITH PROCEDURES CROSSING BACK AND FORTH IN 
          [01:55:01]
DIFFERENT CHAPTERS. ADDITIONALLY, APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS AND ENGINEERING STANDARDS ARE EMBEDDED IN THE CODE, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY REQUIRE FORMAL AMENDMENTS. SO IF PUBLIC WORKS DECIDES THAT STREETS NEED A DIFFERENT TYPE OF PAVING, THERE'S A NEW BEST PRACTICE THAT COMES OUT THAT REQUIRES A CODE AMENDMENT RATHER THAN AN ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATE TO THE STANDARDS PACKS. SO THIS MATTERS BECAUSE FRAGMENTATION IN THE CODE INCREASES REVIEW TIME, INCREASES INCONSISTENCY AND UNCERTAINTY FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO DEVELOP. FOR RESIDENTS, STAFF EFFICIENCY IS REDUCED BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO SPEND TIME INTERPRETING THE CODE, AND APPLICANTS MAY LACK CLEAR EXPECTATIONS OF WHAT'S REQUIRED OF THEM UPFRONT. SO IN SUMMARY, THE CURRENT STRUCTURE LIMITS FLEXIBILITY AS DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES AND REGULATIONS EVOLVE. REGARDING CLARITY AND USABILITY, WHAT WE HEARD AND OBSERVED WAS THAT THE CODE DOESN'T CONSISTENTLY FOLLOW A LOGICAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. 
          SEQUENCE REQUIRES A LOT OF SKIPPING AROUND BACK AND FORTH. THERE IS NON-REGULATORY AND ADVISORY LANGUAGE LIKE ENCOURAGED RECOMMENDED. THAT CREATES CONFUSION ABOUT ENFORCEABILITY OF SOME PROVISIONS. ADDITIONALLY, REGIONAL REGULATIONS LIKE THE HIGHLAND LAKES WATERSHED ORDINANCE AREN'T CLEARLY INTEGRATED OR CROSS-REFERENCED IN THE CODE, AND APPROVAL AUTHORITIES AND PROCEDURES ARE DIFFICULT TO QUICKLY IDENTIFY. 
          THIS MATTERS BECAUSE A LACK OF CLARITY LEADS TO INCONSISTENT INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT. 
          APPLICANTS FACE UNCERTAINTY AND CLEAR, USER FRIENDLY CODES IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY AND PUBLIC TRUST IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. REGARDING THE ZONING STANDARDS, WHAT WE HEARD AND SAW IN THE CODE WAS THAT THE CITY HAS A LARGE NUMBER OF ZONING DISTRICTS, SOME OF WHICH OVERLAP MAY NOT BE FREQUENTLY USED OR INCONSISTENTLY DEFINED. THE ZONING STANDARDS ARE SPREAD ACROSS MULTIPLE CHAPTERS, SPECIFICALLY LIKE THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS IN CHAPTER THREE, SEPARATE FROM THE ZONING STANDARDS IN 14. THERE'S ALSO A RELIANCE ON PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS, WHICH GENERALLY, TO OUR EYES, SUGGEST LIMITED FLEXIBILITY IN THE BASE ZONING. PEOPLE THINK I NEED TO COME AND NEGOTIATE SOMETHING BECAUSE WHAT YOU HAVE STOCK ISN'T WORKING FOR ME. FINALLY, TRADITIONAL USE BASED ZONING DOES NOT ALWAYS RESPOND WELL TO TOPOGRAPHY. MIXED USE GOALS. IF YOU HAVE THOSE OR CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT, IT CAN BE HARD TO CUSTOMIZE. THIS MATTERS BECAUSE OF THE COMPLEXITY IN ZONING OR IN MAKING DECISIONS. 
          MAKES IT HARDER TO GUIDE DEVELOPMENT TOWARDS YOUR LONG TERM VISION. PDS INCREASES USING PDS INCREASES NEGOTIATION AND REDUCES PREDICTABILITY FOR RESIDENTS AND DEVELOPERS, AND CLEAR STANDARDS REALLY HELP ALIGN DEVELOPMENT OUTCOMES WITH WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE. 
          REGARDING THE CALIBRATION OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. THIS IS ZOOMING OUT A LITTLE BIT FROM ZONING SPECIFICALLY, BUT BASICALLY, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CAN UNINTENTIONALLY ENABLE OR DISABLE PROJECTS THAT YOU DO OR DON'T WANT TO SEE. YOU MAY BE UNINTENTIONALLY ENCOURAGING OR DISCOURAGING CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT TYPES. THE TOPOGRAPHY AND NATURAL FEATURES HERE CAN ADD REAL COST AND COMPLEXITY TO DEVELOPMENT, ZONING, SUBDIVISION AND INFRASTRUCTURE STANDARDS HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER TO AVOID CONFLICTING OUTCOMES, WHILE OVER FLEXIBILITY CAN WEAKEN PREDICTABILITY, OVERLY RIGID STANDARDS CAN ALSO DISCOURAGE WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE. SO GETTING THESE TOGETHER AND THIS IS A POLICY BASED ANGLE ON THIS, GETTING THIS TOGETHER ENSURES THAT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REFLECT YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY. THEY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS AND THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH THAT YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE CITY IN THE FUTURE. 
          NON-NEGOTIABLE STANDARDS REDUCE UNCERTAINTY, RELIANCE ON PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS, AND FLEXIBILITY THAT'S PROGRAMED IN ALLOWS DESIGN CREATIVITY WHILE STILL GETTING YOU A CERTAIN LEVEL OF QUALITY. SO IN OUR DIAGNOSTIC REPORT, WE MAKE SOME WE MAKE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGEST SOME STRATEGIES FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION MOVING FORWARD. THESE ARE LARGELY GROUPED INTO TWO MAIN BUCKETS. SO THE FIRST BUCKET IS FUNCTION AND LEGAL COMPLIANCE WHICH WE PUT FIRST BECAUSE IT MAKES SENSE TO START WITH THE FOUNDATIONS. SO MAKE THE EXISTING CODE EASY TO UNDERSTAND AND VERY CLEAR WHAT JORDAN WAS TALKING ABOUT ABOUT THE STRUCTURE FALLS RIGHT WITHIN THIS BUCKET. THE SECOND BUCKET IS POLICY AND VISION ALIGNMENT, WHICH IS DECIDING ON THE DIRECTION FOR ANY UPDATES, ANY CHANGES BEYOND JUST REORGANIZATION. THIS COULD BE CALIBRATING STANDARDS BASED ON POLICY GOALS. AND IT GOES INTO ENSURING CHANGES ARE CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT THE CODE. THE BOTTOM LINE FOR FUNCTION AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS ARE. ENSURE THE CODE IS USABLE, ENFORCEABLE, AND LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE. BEFORE MAKING ANY KIND OF POLICY CHANGES. GET YOUR FOUNDATION STRAIGHT FIRST. OUR RECOMMENDATIONS HERE GENERALLY ARE TO REORGANIZE THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO FOLLOW THE TYPICAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS. IMPROVE THE CLARITY, THE CONSISTENCY AND 
          [02:00:02]
CROSS-REFERENCING ACROSS THE CODE TO ADDRESS STATE AND FEDERAL LEGAL COMPLIANCE IN AREAS LIKE SIGN REGULATIONS, PLAT TYPES AND APPROVAL TIMELINES, NOTICE AND PROTEST, AND BUILDING MATERIAL AND DWELLING STANDARDS THAT ALL MAY BE AFFECTED BY STATE LAW. WE ALSO RECOMMEND SEPARATING TECHNICAL STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS FROM THE CODE TO ALLOW THEM TO BE ADMINISTRATIVELY UPDATED. WE RECOMMEND CONSOLIDATING THE ENFORCEMENT, THE DEFINITIONS AND NON-CONFORMING PROVISIONS INTO CLEAR, CENTRALIZED SECTIONS SO THEY ONLY HAVE TO APPEAR ONCE IN THE CODE AND THEY CAN BE CROSS-REFERENCED. 
          AND FINALLY, WE SAY IT'S GOOD TO ADD GRAPHICS, TABLES AND FLOWCHARTS. MANY PEOPLE ARE VERY VISUAL, AND GETTING INTO THE THICK WALLS OF TEXT CAN BE DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND SOMETIMES. SO FROM AN ACCESSIBILITY AND RESIDENT SERVICE PERSPECTIVE, IT'S GOOD TO HAVE THINGS THAT SHOW KIND OF HOW THINGS WORK IN A BASIC WAY. THE SECOND BUCKET POLICY DIRECTION AND VISION ALIGNMENT. THE BOTTOM LINE FOR THIS IS ALIGN DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS WITH THE CITY'S LONG TERM VISION, CHARACTER AND GROWTH GOALS. THE GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS HERE WERE TO SIMPLIFY AND CALIBRATE THE ZONING DISTRICTS TO REMOVE REDUNDANCY AND IMPROVE PREDICTABILITY. CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE ZONING APPROACHES TO SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT DESIRED DEVELOPMENT TYPES, AND REDUCE RELIANCE ON PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS TO INCENTIVIZE QUALITY DESIGN, PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATION AND SITE SENSITIVITY, AND TO COORDINATE THE ZONING SUBDIVISION INFRASTRUCTURE STANDARDS AS WELL AS PROGRAM AND FLEXIBILITY IN WHATEVER WAY YOU THINK IS BEST TO ACHIEVE THIS CITY'S VISION. SO THAT WAS A BROAD ORIENTATION TO WHAT'S IN THE CODE DIAGNOSTIC REPORT. TO SUMMARIZE, FUNCTIONAL AND LEGAL UPDATES ARE VERY IMPORTANT. THEY'RE THE BASELINE FOR EVERYTHING ELSE. BUILDING CONSENSUS AND THEN ESTABLISHING A POLICY DIRECTION IS THE SECOND STEP THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF. ONCE THE BASICS ARE OUT OF THE WAY. SO SOME STRATEGIES COMMONLY USED ARE THE UDC, LIKE JORDAN MENTIONED, CREATING AN ENGINEERING CRITERIA MANUAL, WHICH IS BASICALLY LIKE A UDC FOR TECHNICAL STANDARDS, AND THEN DEVELOPMENT MANUALS AND PROCESS DOCUMENTS WHERE YOU CAN COLLECT FORMS OR CHECKLISTS FOR APPLICATIONS, FEE INFORMATION, THAT SORT OF THING FOR PEOPLE TO USE. SO WITH THAT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. IT'S BEEN GREAT WORKING WITH STAFF ON THIS, AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK FOR LAGO VISTA. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. COUNCIL QUESTIONS. COULD YOU ELABORATE WHEN YOU SAY IT CAN REDUCE THE NEED OR NECESSITY FOR PDS? COULD YOU JUST ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT. YEAH. SO USUALLY PDS ARE YOU ARE NEGOTIATING AND ESTABLISHING YOUR OWN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OR CHANGING IN SOME WAY THE STANDARDS LIKE LOT DIMENSIONS THAT ARE IN ONE OF THE BASE ZONING DISTRICTS. SO ONE THING THAT WE SEE IN CODES IS WHEN A CITY IS USING A LOT OF PDS, THAT'S SAYING THAT APPLICANTS WHO ARE COMING IN DON'T THINK THAT WHATEVER THE STANDARDS ARE CAN WORK. NOW, THERE ARE SOME CASES WHERE THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO BUILD WHAT THE CITY WANTS TO SEE. I THINK THAT HAPPENS A LOT, BUT THERE ARE ALSO A LOT OF CASES WHERE THERE'S JUST SOME LITTLE THING THAT'S OFF. SO GOING INTO THE ZONING DISTRICTS AND LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO BUILDERS, WHAT DO DEVELOPERS, WHAT DO RESIDENTS THINK ABOUT THESE STANDARDS? HOW COULD WE ADJUST THEM AND MAYBE WORK BETTER FOR WHAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE MARKET, WHAT PEOPLE WANT TO BUILD THAT CAN HELP REDUCE PDS. TO ELABORATE ON THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S HOW I'VE SORT OF VIEWED PDS AS WELL AS SOMEONE ON PNC SAID TO ME DIFFERENTLY THIS WEEK THAT SOMETIMES PD IS NECESSARY BECAUSE YOU HAVE MULTIPLE USES ON THE SAME AREA, AND SO YOU'RE TRYING TO ENCOMPASS SORT OF LIKE THE FRONT SIDE OF IT IS GOING TO BE THIS TYPE OF ZONING USE. AND THEN THIS ONE'S BE DIFFERENT. AND THEN BACK HERE YOU GOT SOMETHING ELSE. IS THAT SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT. IT CAN BE. BUT THERE ARE ALSO WAYS TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL USES WITHIN YOUR ZONING DISTRICTS. SO ONE THING WE SEE A LOT IS A CORRIDOR DISTRICT WHICH WILL ALLOW, YOU KNOW, A MIX OF USES. YOU COULD PUT COMMERCIAL NO NO IMPACT INDUSTRIAL, MAYBE SOME RESIDENTIAL ALL IN ONE PLACE. SO THERE ARE WAYS TO PROGRAM IT NOW. I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT, PDS ARE A LOT MORE FLEXIBLE OVERALL. YEAH. SO A NUMBER OF THINGS. SOME OF THIS IS COMMENTS AND SOME OF IT'S QUESTIONS. SO THE WHAT'S IN THE PACKET TODAY IS A IS A PRETTY LONG REPORT RIGHT. 
          AND IT INCLUDES A PRESENTATION FROM STAFF AS WELL AS THE PRESENTATION USED WALKED US THROUGH. AND THEN THERE'S MATERIAL UP FRONT OF THAT. THIS IS MUCH MORE CONTENT THAN I THINK ANYBODY EXCEPT MAYBE STAFF OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS OR WEEK HAS SEEN. SO WHAT WAS SHOWN, WHAT WAS SHOWN TO PLANNING AND ZONING IN THAT DISCUSSION WAS MUCH LESS THAN THIS. AND PRESUMABLY, YOU KNOW, SAME THING, MUCH LESS WAS SHOWN TO BUILDING AND STANDARDS, JUST 
          [02:05:07]
KIND OF WAS MAKING MY OWN NOTES HERE ON ON PAGE 25 OF THE PACKET, WHICH IS IF I GO THERE, IT'S PAGE 12 OF YOUR REPORT. SO THIS IS STRATEGIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS. AND I THINK IN THERE FOR EXAMPLE, THERE ARE SOME THINGS WHERE YOU SAY THESE ARE SOME THINGS YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER. USE BASED ZONING WAS ONE POINTS INCENTIVES FOR FOR DEVELOPMENT. MODULAR HOMES IS ANOTHER ONE THAT'S IN THERE. AND I'LL JUST SAY THAT WHEN I WAS LIAISON TO PLANNING AND ZONING, WHEN YOU HAD THE DISCUSSION THERE AND IT GOT COMPLETELY WRAPPED AROUND THE AXLE BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT YOU WERE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS OF POLICY, WE SHOULD DO. AND THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF POINTS INCENTIVE. AND I THINK ONE OF ONE OF YOU ALL SAID, WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU MIGHT AWARD A DEVELOPER HIGHER POINTS FOR DOING HIGH DENSITY HOUSING. AND THEY FREAKED OUT, RIGHT, BECAUSE PEOPLE IN LAGO VISTA DON'T WANT THAT. SO BUT IT'S A GOOD ACTUALLY, IT'S GOOD CONTENT, THE STRATEGIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS. BUT THAT'S ABOUT CHANGING POLICY, RIGHT. AND THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS CODE REORGANIZATION WHICH GEORGE WALKED US THROUGH. THAT'S THINGS THAT WE AS COUNCIL MAY WANT TO CONSIDER. BUT THAT'S YOU KNOW THAT THAT THAT IS IN THERE. AND I'LL JUST SAY THE DISCUSSIONS I'VE HEARD SO FAR AND PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY BOARD HAVE BEEN FREAKED OUT BECAUSE WHAT THEY SAW, THE ONLY THING THEY SAW WAS THESE THINGS THAT SMELLED LIKE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS. AND A LOT OF THE POLICY EXAMPLES THAT YOU ALL UNFORTUNATELY QUOTED SOUNDED LIKE AUSTIN, NOT LIKE THIS. RIGHT. SO THAT GOT US INTO SOME TROUBLE IN THE PROCESS, BUT I THINK WE'RE PAST IT NOW. IF YOU GO TO PAGE 31 OF OUR PACKET, WHICH IS IF I CAN FIND IT HERE, WHAT IS IT OF THEIR, OF THEIR 18 OF THEIRS. THAT'S WHERE FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER, I'M SEEING WHAT I EXPECTED FROM THIS CODE DIAGNOSTIC, WHICH IS THIS. 
          THESE ARE VERY SPECIFIC THINGS THAT ARE MESSED UP AND NEED TO NEED TO BE CHANGED AND WHERE THEY NEED TO PUT. SO PRESUMABLY THIS THIS WHAT IS IT? IT'S 19 PAGES OF REAL SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS. AND I WOULD ACTUALLY ASK JORDAN, HAS STAFF HAD TIME TO GO THROUGH THIS AND GET A FEEL FOR DOES THIS LOOK KIND OF REASONABLY COMPLETE. AND IS IT IT'S KIND OF WHAT YOU WERE EXPECTING OUT OF THIS CODE DIAGNOSTIC EFFORT. SORRY. IT'S VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH WHAT WE WERE EXPECTING. I HAVE RECEIVED FEEDBACK FROM STAFF, FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT THERE ARE LITTLE MINUTE THINGS THAT YOU WOULD ONLY KNOW WHEN YOU WORK WITH THE CODE THAT ARE ISSUES. AND SO WE HAVE A RUNNING LIST WITH THAT AS WELL. THE THE CHANGES ARE EXACTLY WHAT I THINK STAFF HAS BEEN SEEING, AND STAFF HAS BEEN REACHING THE NEEDS TO GET FIXED. 
          AGAIN, WE USE OUR CODE EVERY SINGLE DAY FOR EVERY SINGLE THING WE TOUCH. AND SO WE'RE VERY FAMILIAR WITH A LOT OF THESE ISSUES. IT'S NOTHING. IT'S NOTHING NEW. YEAH. SO IT SO I THINK YOU KNOW THIS 19 PAGE IS GOOD. AND I JUST WISH THAT Y'ALL HAD HAD THIS TABLE WHEN YOU WENT IN FRONT OF PLANNING AND ZONING. I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A MUCH MORE PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSION, FRANKLY. BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT'S DONE IS DONE. I, I WHAT I HEARD YOU SAYING EARLIER, JORDAN WAS ESSENTIALLY JOB NUMBER ONE IS GET THINGS REORGANIZED IN A CLEAR FASHION. FIX THIS 19 PAGES OF ISSUES, PLUS THE 2 OR 20 OTHER PAGES THAT YOU STAFF AND BUILDING AND STANDARDS AND PLANNING AND ZONING MAY COME UP WITH THAT IS IS JOB ONE. AND THAT'S THAT'S NOT POLICY CHANGE. THAT'S JUST CLEANUP. AND THAT'S ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR IS MAKING OUR CODE USABLE IN OUR DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS. AS FAR AS POLICY GOES, IT WAS NEVER ON OUR RADAR. IT WAS NEVER OUR INTENT. AS PLANNERS, YOU CAN ASK US THE SAME QUESTION, AND WE CAN GIVE YOU 12 DIFFERENT ANSWERS ABOUT HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE IT. FOR INSTANCE, THE INCENTIVE ZONING DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DENSITY. IT CAN BE THINGS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. IT CAN BE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES. IT CAN BE PEDESTRIAN THINGS. IT IT'S WHATEVER COUNCIL DIRECTS. BUT IF YOU ASK A PLANNER, WE'LL GIVE YOU 12 DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO SOMETHING. WE JUST AND I THINK IN THIS WHAT IS IT. IT'S LIKE SIX PAGES OF THESE IDEAS FOR CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD IDEAS IN THERE THAT THAT WE AS COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, AND OUR COMMISSION SHOULD SPEND SOME TIME TALKING ABOUT. BUT STEP NUMBER ONE I THINK IS JUST FIX WHAT WE GOT, NOT REINVENT THE WHEEL. YEP. SO TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT. SO IN YOUR TABLE YOUR TARGET IS SEPTEMBER FOR COMPLETION. AND THAT'S JUST THIS FUNCTIONAL PORTION OF IT RIGHT. NOT AND THAT'S AGAIN OKAY. ALL STAFF IS FOCUSED ON 
          [02:10:02]
IF WE GET INTO THIS AND WE START ORGANIZING AND RUN INTO ONE OF THOSE CONFLICTS, THINGS THAT ARE POLICY BASED WILL BRING IT. AND IT MAY BE LET'S SLAP A BANDAID ON IT AND FIGURE IT OUT LATER. THAT'S THAT'S COMPLETELY FOR COUNCIL TO DICTATE. IT'S NOT OUR MAIN FOCUS IS GETTING IT CLEAR AND USABLE IS A FOLLOW UP. SO WE'LL WE'LL PROBABLY TALK MORE ABOUT THIS. BUT JUST FROM A PROJECT MANAGEMENT STANDPOINT, I THINK BEING VERY SYSTEMATIC ABOUT HOW ANYTHING LIKE THAT COMES UP. OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T WANT TO STALL THE PROCESS, BUT I THINK ONESIES TWOSIES COMING TO COUNCIL. I THINK BEING SYSTEMATIC AND MAYBE BATCH PROCESSING SOME OF THAT STUFF, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, ESPECIALLY ONES THAT MAY BE ALIGNED, THERE'S SOME ALIGNMENT BETWEEN THEM, RIGHT. OR COMMONALITY, SO THAT WE HAVE MORE OF A STRATEGIC VIEW OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IF THERE'S ANY KIND OF POLICY. SO OUR INTENT FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, EVERY WEEK WE PROVIDE UPDATES TO CHARLES ON WHAT WE'RE DOING. THERE WILL BE AN UPDATE ABOUT THIS. THERE'S BEEN UPDATES ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REWRITE AS WELL. AND SO THERE WILL ALWAYS BE SOME FORM OF PROGRESS. WE WILL BE KEEPING A RUNNING LIST OF THE THINGS THAT WE NOTE. AND IT'S A PROCESS, BUT THE INTENT IS TO BE AS. FORWARD FACING WITH IT AS WE CAN AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT JUST ONE THING. 
          AND HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THIS? WE'LL WE'LL BULK IT UP AND MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN AT LEAST PRESENT SOME OPTIONS IN SOME DIRECTION AND TAKE FEEDBACK AND GUIDANCE AND GO FROM THERE. BUT EVERYTHING HAS TO EVERYTHING THAT'S POLICY RELATED HAS TO COME BACK. SO THEN ALONG THOSE LINES, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I HOPE THE DISCUSSION OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE GOES TODAY, BECAUSE I THINK THAT CAN HELP SPEED THINGS UP A BIT FOR THEM, BUT ALSO BE THE BUFFER FOR COUNCIL TO MAKE SURE THAT THINGS AREN'T MISSING. AND I REALLY LIKE HOW THE CRC DOES THINGS. AND YOU TAKE A COUPLE CHAPTERS AT A TIME, AND THEN YOU COME IN AND YOU REVIEW IT AND YOU DISCUSS IT, AND THEN FROM THERE YOU'VE GOT MULTIPLE EYES ON IT, AND THEN YOU MOVE ON TO THE NEXT. SO MAYBE THE TABLE BREAKS DOWN WHICH SECTIONS WE'RE DOING. AND THEN WHILE YOU GUYS ARE DOING THAT, PART OF IT TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE COULD ALSO LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS. AND MAYBE THE SUBCOMMITTEE CAN FILTER THROUGH THOSE AND SAY WHICH ONES WE THINK SHOULD GO FORWARD OR NOT. AND THEN THROUGE SUBCOMMITTEE AS WELL, IT CAN COME BACK TO COUNCIL. LET ME KNOW IF YOU'RE THINKING, I DIDN'T YOU KNOW, I GOT THE RECOMMENDATION LAST MEETING TO CREATE THE SUBCOMMITTEE. I DID NOT CREATE IT BECAUSE I THINK THERE WAS ENOUGH DIRECTION FOR IT. SO I'M HOPING TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THAT TONIGHT FROM Y'ALL. YES. VOLUNTEER TO BE A COUNCIL MEMBER ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE IF YOU'RE STILL LOOKING FOR VOLUNTEERS FOR THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY WE WANT ON. RIGHT. BUT I THINK THERE'S ALREADY SOME INVOLVEMENT, RIGHT? YEAH. THE LAST MEETING, WHAT I RECALLED WAS THE LIAISON TO THE LIAISON TO BUILDING STANDARDS MYSELF AND THEN THE CHAIR OF BUILDING STANDARDS AND THE CHAIR OF BNC. ONE MEMBER FROM EACH OF THOSE, AND THEN 1 OR 2 CITIZENS. 
          THAT'S MY RECOLLECTION. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS THINKING. THANK YOU. YOU GO RIGHT AHEAD. 
          SO I ACTUALLY AM LOOKING AT I THINK IT'S ON 75 OF THE PACKET THAT STRATEGIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS. I WAS GLAD TO SEE KIND OF THE BREAKDOWN BETWEEN THE FUNCTION AND LEGAL COMPLIANCE VERSUS THE POLICY AND VISION ALIGNMENT. I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN. BOUNCING THIS AROUND WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. ET-CETERA. SO I APPRECIATE THIS SEPARATION THAT WE HAVE HERE. I THINK THAT HAS HELPED A LOT. PLUS THE EDUCATION. AND I'M WITH COUNCILOR PRINCE IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE GOOD IF IT MAYBE MAYBE BACKTRACK AND BRING THIS FORWARD TO PLANNING AND ZONING. BUT I ACTUALLY WAS SEEING TWO PATHS HERE THAT DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE ONE AND THEN THE OTHER, BUT KIND OF A. IF YOU FIRST TWO SECTIONS, POLICY QUESTIONS THAT COME UP, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THE CODE MAYBE IS JUST A NOTATED, BUT THEN IT FOLLOWS OUR NORMAL POLICY PROCESS. RIGHT. WHICH COMES BEFORE COUNCIL GETS BACK THROUGH PNC. BUT SYSTEMATICALLY GOING THROUGH THAT AS A BOLT UP, I MEAN, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE LIKE A TOTAL SEPARATION OF WE GOT A COMPLETE FUNCTION AND LEGAL AS LONG AS WE ANY POLICY PROVISIONS THAT SEEM TO BE NEEDED THAT CAN BE WEAVED IN TO OUR NORMAL VISION, POLICY AND VISION PROCESS. RIGHT? I MEAN, THAT THAT WAS A THOUGHT OF MINE. I BELIEVE WE HAVE. A BREAKDOWN. 
          [02:15:02]
I THINK THAT COUNCILOR ROBERTS PUT FORWARD THAT KIND OF KIND OF JUST MAPS OUT IN TERMS OF THE FUNCTION AND LEGAL, MAYBE SOME THINGS IN THERE THAT BASICALLY SAYS REGARDING IF THERE'S A CONFLICT IN POLICY, REALLY KIND OF GIVING PREFERENCE TO WHATEVER THE LATEST POLICY THAT WAS IN THERE, RIGHT, OF THAT CONFLICT, MAYBE COULD HELP PROVIDE GUIDANCE GOING FORWARD AND NOTED, YOU KNOW, ETC. GOING FORWARD. AND SO ANYWAY, THAT THAT WAS A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS RIGHT OFF MY HEAD. I KNOW I HAVE SOME OTHER THINGS AS WELL, BUT I APPRECIATED THE ADDITIONAL BREAKDOWN AND EDUCATION. I THINK THAT MAKES IT MUCH MORE CLEAR. OH, ONE LAST THING. I ENDED UP BASED ON THE GAP THAT WE WERE. I WAS RESEARCHING IN REGARD TO OUR WHAT CAN WE WAIVE, WHICH IS NONE ACTUALLY IN OUR PROCESS. AND SO I STATED, OKAY, YOU KNOW, WE USE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. AND SO FOR MY LITTLE AI ENGINE, I SAID, TAKE THIS CURRENT POLICY AND CONVERT IT TO A. THE UDC CODE FORMAT AND SHOW ME HOW THIS WOULD COME ACROSS AND WHAT IT DID ON ON MY PARTICULAR EXAMPLE. AND I'M GOING TO PUT THIS UP ON THE COUNCIL FORUM BOARD, WAS THAT IT DID IT IN THE NEW FORMAT. I WILL SAY IT WAS MUCH EASIER TO READ IN THE NEWER KIND OF FORMAT, AS IT WAS STIPULATING THAT IT WAS AN EXAMPLE, BUT IT ALSO PUT IN THERE. THIS IS FROM THIS CHAPTER. THIS I MEAN, IT GAVE THE EXACT REFERENCE AS IT WAS BEING PULLED OVER. AND SO, JORDAN, I HAVE, I KNOW, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO HELP ME WITH THAT. I THINK, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON WHO'S THE COMMITTEE, THEY MAY HAVE, BUT TO RECOMMEND, YOU KNOW, AS THESE THINGS ARE MOVING OVER, IT'S HELPFUL FOR THOSE OF US THAT ARE MAKING THE FINAL DECISIONS TO SEE THIS CAME FROM HERE AND IT WENT FROM HERE. 
          THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY JORDAN AND I DISCUSSED BRIEFLY YESTERDAY EVENING THAT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT STAFF IS ACTUALLY ALREADY DOING. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE USING AI OR WHAT THEY'RE DOING, BUT HOWEVER THEY'RE DOING IT, THEY'RE ACTUALLY PULLING IT OUT AND SAYING, THIS IS THE CHAPTER THAT IT CAME FROM. THIS IS THE SECTION THAT IT CAME FROM. AND THESE ARE THE BOARDS THAT WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING THIS ITEM FORWARD. SO ANYTHING THAT APPLIED, I REALLY LIKE THAT IT HAD THAT PULL OUT ON IT AND SHOWED IT. SO I'M HOPING THAT THAT THEY CONTINUE WITH THAT. IF THAT IS IF THAT ENDS UP BEING THE ESSENTIALLY APPROVED OUTLINE, BECAUSE STAFF WOULD LIKE TO GET AN APPROVAL OF THE TABLE OF CONTENTS, ESSENTIALLY, SO THAT WE AT LEAST HAVE A GOOD FOUNDATION TO START WITH. 
          THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'LL DO, IS HOW WE'RE GOING TO TRACK CHANGES. IT'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO NOTE POLICY THINGS. THE INTENT IS THAT AT THE END OF IT, WE ESSENTIALLY HAVE A MATRIX THAT SHOWS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED AND HOW WE GOT FROM POINT A TO POINT B, AND THAT'S WHERE WE START WITH THAT SOLID FOUNDATION. SO. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR PENNIES AND NICKELS OR I CAN LET THEM SIT DOWN. THANK YOU. AND THEN GO TO CITIZEN COMMENTS REAL QUICK. I HAVE MR. PAUL ROBERTS. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBERS, STAFF, ON YOUR PRESENTATION. 
          RESPECTFULLY TO FREEZE THE NICKELS. A LOT OF THAT A MAJORITY OF HIS PRESENTATION WAS ABOUT POLICY OBSERVATIONS OF, AS MR. PRINCE POINTED OUT, OBSERVATIONS THEY HAVE THAT ARE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THEY'RE DOING IN OTHER CITIES, OR WHAT THEY'RE TEACHING IN THE UNIVERSITIES OR WHATEVER THE THE POPULAR CULTURE IS, IS, IS PUSHING IN AMERICA FOR HIGHER DENSITY AND SMART CITIES. I APPRECIATE WHAT I'M HEARING FROM ALL OF YOU, WHICH IS A CONSENSUS THAT YOU'RE NOT INTERESTED IN DIVING INTO POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS. I MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE JUST ELIMINATE ULTIMATELY, WHAT YOU GUYS NEED TO DO AT SOME POINT HERE IS YOU NEED TO GIVE STAFF CLEAR DIRECTION. I DIDN'T HEAR THAT IN THE DISCUSSION JUST NOW. 
          SO INSTEAD OF LEAVING ANY OF THAT UP FOR INTERPRETATION, YOU NEED TO FORMULATE A CLEAR DIRECTION TO THEM. I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONSIDER JUST REMOVING POLICY FROM THAT DISCUSSION, AND FOCUS ON THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE DIAGNOSTIC, WHICH WAS WHAT YOU SEE IN THE OTHER PART OF OF THIS WORK PRODUCT IN THE PACKET TONIGHT, WHICH IS THE CONFLICTS BETWEEN THE THE VARIOUS CHAPTERS OF OUR ORDINANCES, NONCOMPLIANCE WITH STATE STATUTE. AND THAT'S IT. I MEAN, DON'T OVERTHINK THIS. FIX WHAT'S BROKEN AND MOVE ON. 
          THAT'S HOW YOU GET IT DONE BY SEPTEMBER. WITH THAT, I DID EMAIL TO SOME OF YOU GUYS A 
          [02:20:01]
SOME SUGGESTION ACTUALLY PUT A LOT OF TIME INTO IT. IT KIND OF ENVISIONED IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO DOWN THE FULL UDC, YOU'RE GOING TO GO ON A REAL STRICT VERSION, BASICALLY, STAFF AND A SUBCOMMITTEE NEED TO HAVE A CLEAR CHARTER. WHAT IS THEIR DIRECTION? WHAT ARE YOU BEING ASKED TO DO? WHAT ARE YOU NOT ALLOWED TO DO? WHERE DO YOU WHERE DO WE NOT WANT YOU? WHAT WHAT ROADS DO WE NOT WANT YOU TO GO DOWN? I SHARED THAT WITH SEVERAL OF YOU. I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TWEAK IT AS YOU SEE APPROPRIATE, BECAUSE I PRODUCED IT BEFORE THE CODE DIAGNOSTIC CAME OUT. LIKE LITERALLY THE DAY BEFORE AND BEFORE IT WAS PUT ONTO THE DISCUSSION BOARD, TWEAK IT AS YOU SEE APPROPRIATE, AND THEN PUT THOSE WHAT YOU THINK ARE WOULD BE GOOD RAILS, A GOOD CHARTER FOR STAFF AND FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD, AND ARRIVE AT CONSENSUS PRIOR TO THE NEXT MEETING. THAT'S MY SUGGESTION. OUTSIDE OF THAT, YOU KNOW, JUST REALLY WANT TO EMPHASIZE, WELL, WELL, THERE ARE SOME AREAS IN HERE WHERE THEY DO MAKE SOME VERY EXPLICIT POLICY, WHETHER IT'S INCREASING ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY, THAT'S VERBATIM. THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE WHERE THEY WERE LOOKING AT LAND USES AND ELIMINATING THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION AND HAVING YOUR MAXIMUM DENSITY, YOUR MAXIMUM LOT SIZE IS ONE ACRE INSTEAD OF THE THREE ACRES OR FIVE ACRES. THOSE ARE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS. STAY OUT OF THAT. IF SOMETHING COMES UP ORGANICALLY IN THIS PROCESS. I THINK ONE OF YOU NOTED MAYBE IT WAS YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, ABOUT HAVING A LITTLE ASTERISK THERE. 
          AND IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO TO, YOU KNOW, PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA AND REQUEST CONSENSUS FOR DIRECTION TO BUILDING AND STANDARDS OR PNC AND SO BE IT. I THINK IT ALSO IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT ANY POLICY DISCUSSION YOU HAVE A VERY NEW PNC RIGHT NOW. YOU HAVE A LOT OF NEW MEMBERS ON THERE. THEY'RE GOOD PEOPLE. THEY'RE EAGER, THEY'RE HUNGRY, THEY WANT TO LEARN, BUT THEY ARE NEW AND A LOT OF THEM HAVE NOT. THEY DON'T HAVE THE EXPERIENCE IN THIS STUFF, BUT I THINK THEY'LL DO A FINE JOB. I THINK EVERYBODY WILL DO A FINE JOB, STAFF INCLUDED. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER CITIZENS SIGNED UP FOR THIS? IF NOT, I WILL BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL. MISS FITNESS. YEAH. MISTER ROBERTS AGREED. I THINK WHEN WE'RE TALKING POTENTIAL POLICY CHANGES, MY SENSE WAS THAT'S AROUND DECONFLICTION, RIGHT? IT'S AS WE GO THROUGH THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW AND DECONFLICTION. IT'S NOT REALLY ADJUDICATION OF POLICY OR CREATING NEW POLICY. IT'S JUST WHERE WE NEED TO DEAL WITH POLICY TO HELP CLEAN UP THE CODE. SO THAT'S KIND OF NUMBER ONE. AND NUMBER TWO, I THINK WE HAD ALREADY DISCUSSED, AND I'M ASSUMING OUTPUT FROM TONIGHT IS TO PUT TOGETHER A CHARTER, RIGHT. FOR KIND OF SCOPING TO TO BE CLEAR TO STAFF, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THAT PREVIOUSLY. 
          SO I'M NOT SURE WHO'S GOING TO WRITE THAT CHARTER OR WHATNOT, BUT I THINK WE'VE GOT SOME GOOD THOUGHTS AROUND THAT NOW BASED ON THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT. SO YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE THING THAT THAT WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT AND JORDAN, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU. SO IN THE NEW IN THE PAST WE HAVE THESE TWO COMMISSIONS BUILDING AND STANDARDS AND PLANNING AND ZONING THAT HAD VERY CLEAR OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN CHAPTERS OF OUR ORDINANCE. HAVE YOU THOUGHT THROUGH WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN THE NEW UDC MAPPING? IS THERE CLARITY AND IN WHAT COMMISSION WOULD OWN WHAT PORTIONS OF THAT? TO AN EXTENT, THERE ARE SOME CHAPTERS TODAY THAT ARE ONE OR THE OTHER. IN THE NEW ONE, THEY'RE MERGED IN SOME SECTIONS. AND SO THE INTENT OF THE BOARDS WILL DICTATE THE CHAPTERS THEY INFLUENCE. YOU KNOW, PNC WILL ALWAYS HAVE ZONING, RIGHT. BUT BUILDING STANDARDS WILL HAVE THE PERMITTING SECTION OF IT. 
          AND WHAT GOES WITH THAT? IT'S IT'S BEEN THOUGHT OF MY CONCERN FROM A REORGANIZATION POINT IS WHEN IT GETS TO SPLITTING THOSE CHAPTERS OUT, THE THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS ON EITHER SIDE. BUT WITH THE CREATION OF SUBCOMMITTEE AND THE THE MAKEUP OF IT, I DON'T THINK WE'LL HAVE AS MANY CONFLICTS AS THERE MAY APPEAR TO BE. FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN, BOTH BOARDS WORK PRETTY WELL TOGETHER, AND THEY UNDERSTAND THE LANES TO AN EXTENT. SO WE'LL I THINK WE'LL BE OKAY. OKAY. AGAIN, I JUST THINK THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, SOMEWHERE IN THE PROCESS, BOTH OF THOSE COMMISSIONS NEED TO UNDERSTAND VERY CLEARLY WHAT WHAT THEY HAVE OWNERSHIP FOR. 
          AND THEN SECONDLY, TO TO MR. ROBERT'S POINT THAT THE GUARDRAILS I KIND OF TOOK A STAB AT THIS WHEN WE SET UP, WHEN WE FIRST TALKED ABOUT SETTING UP THIS SUBCOMMITTEE. 
          LET ME TRY IT AGAIN, HAVING HAD A FEW MORE WEEKS TO THINK ABOUT IT, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE SCOPE SHOULD BE. JUST GET THE REORGANIZATION DONE, FIX THE ERRORS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED, IDENTIFY PLACES WHERE THERE IS LACK OF CLARITY IN IN THE POLICY, OR THERE IS 
          [02:25:03]
CONFLICT IN THE POLICY AND BRING THOSE BACK TO STAFF. GET ALL OF THAT DONE BEFORE SPENDING ANY TIME OR ENERGY ON. DO WE LIKE ANY OF THESE OTHER SUGGESTIONS AND SHOULD WE PURSUE? AND I THINK ONCE THAT FIRST PORTION IS DONE, THEN THAT WOULD BE THE REPORT OUT FROM THIS SUBCOMMITTEE TO COUNCIL. AND THEN COUNCIL COULD EITHER SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH OR, YOU KNOW, GO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS AND YOU'RE DONE. OR COUNCIL COULD SAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND IF YOU DON'T MIND SPENDING ANOTHER FEW MEETINGS ON, YOU KNOW, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE SHOULD TEE UP IN TERMS OF REALLY GOOD IDEAS THAT THAT CAME OUT OF THE REPORT, BUT MAKE THAT PHASE TWO NOT NOT PART OF PHASE ONE. I JUST WANT TO SAY I DID GO BACK AND RELOOK AT THE CODE ORGANIZING THAT YOU PROPOSED. JORDAN. AND I THINK IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD IN TERMS OF THE CHAPTERS, ETC. BUT OF COURSE, ALL OF THAT WOULD GO THROUGH THE SUBCOMMITTEE FIRST. CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN MY REQUEST IS THAT WE CAN AGREE ON THE TABLE OF CONTENTS, BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF OUR STARTING POINT, AND THAT'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO MERGE EVERYTHING TOGETHER. AND SO IF WE CAN GET SOME KIND OF CONSENSUS ON THAT TABLE OF CONTENTS FROM THERE, I THINK THE REST IS GOING TO BE PRETTY SEAMLESS, BECAUSE A LOT OF CHAPTERS WILL MERGE INTO EACH OTHER, AND WE JUST HAVE TO SPLIT OUT THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. THAT'S MY REQUEST. MY, THE THE UNDERSTANDING FROM STAFF IS THE PROCESS IS TWO SEPARATE THINGS. AND OUR MAIN FOCUS IS THIS REORGANIZATION. AND SO MY ONLY REQUEST IS THAT WE CAN HAVE CONSENSUS ON THE THE STARTING POINT. CLARIFY THAT TABLE OF CONTENTS WAS IN THE EMAIL YOU SENT US, BUT NOT IN TONIGHT'S PACKET. NO, I BELIEVE MR. WEST AS WELL. IT'S NOT. NO, SIR. OKAY. SO YEAH, I STILL. YEAH. AND I STILL THINK WE NEED A CHARTER. WE WE NEED TO PUT THIS IN WRITING AND BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT IT. SO I GET THE TABLE OF CONTENTS BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF THE ORDER OF PRIORITIZATION YOU'RE SUGGESTING, WHICH I'M FINE WITH. 
          BUT WE NEED A WRITTEN OUTPUT FROM THIS. CAN WE WORK ON THAT IN THE DISCUSSION BOARD? I THINK. ARE YOU STILL GOING. SO IN HERE YOU HAD THE PROPOSED IS THE CHAPTER ARTICLE TITLE. IS THAT THE ORGANIZATION THAT YOU WERE SUGGESTING THAT WE COULD LOOK AT VERSUS WHAT OUR CURRENT IS DOES NOT HAVE TO BE THAT MY PRIMARY FOCUS IS THE ORDER OF OPERATIONS. THAT'S OUR DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. THAT'S FROM A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE, FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE PERSPECTIVE. THAT'S THE WAY WE DO THINGS. WHAT WE CALL IT CHAPTER, TITLE, ARTICLE, NO PREFERENCE. OKAY. SO THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE CURRENT ORDER THAT Y'ALL WORK IN THAT THAT IS IS IN THIS BASICALLY MATRIX THAT WAS SENT. OKAY, OKAY. I JUST AM TRYING TO GET MY HEAD WRAPPED AROUND WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS LIKE WHERE WE WERE OR WHERE YOU WERE SAYING, OKAY, THAT'S ORDER OF OPERATIONS. GOTCHA. OKAY. THANK YOU. MAYBE RESEND IT OUT IF YOU COULD. 
          OKAY. SO IT'S AT THE TOP OF OUR NEXT. OKAY. THE ONE THE EASY ONE I THINK IS THERE'S CONSENSUS THAT WE ARE GOING FORWARD WITH THE UDC. RIGHT. WE CAN ENCAPSULATE THAT. WE CAN ENCAPSULATE THAT. THERE'S A SUBCOMMITTEE. MY QUESTION ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE I THOUGHT THAT I HAD WAS BECAUSE I WANTED IT TO HAVE TWO CITIZENS, NOT NECESSARILY ON THE COMMITTEES TO DO THAT, WITH TWO COMING OFF OF BOTH OTHER COMMITTEES. IT PUTS ME AT LIKE NINE. AND I THOUGHT ABOUT WHY NOT JUST HAVE ONE, JUST HAVE THE CHAIR FROM THE CHAIR FROM BILLING AND STANDARDS. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE HAD TO HAVE TWO FROM EACH OF THEM. WHAT COUNCILS THOUGHTS ON THAT. SO THAT WOULD BE THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE CHAIRS OF TWO COMMITTEES AND TWO CITIZENS. 
          WELL, FIRST OF ALL, SAY GIVEN THE SCOPE, I'M NOT SURE WE NEED EVERYBODY THAT'S ALREADY ON THE COMMITTEE, BECAUSE IF THE SCOPE IS REALLY JUST FIX THESE ERRORS THAT FREESE AND NICHOLS AND STAFF HAVE IDENTIFIED AND GET IT REORGANIZED. YOU KNOW, THE CHAIR OF EACH PLANNING AND ZONING, BUILDING AND STANDARDS, IF THEY IF THEY FOUND SOMETHING THE STAFF AND NICHOLS MISSED, THEY MAY BRING IT IN THERE. I'M NOT SURE THAT BEYOND STAFF AND THOSE TWO CHAIRS, WHY WE EVEN NEED, FOR EXAMPLE, COUNCIL MEMBERS ON AT THIS PACE. BECAUSE IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A POLICY DISCUSSION, IT'S JUST A, A CLEANUP. SO RATHER THAN GROWING IT, I'D BE WE COULD 
          [02:30:03]
ALMOST SHRINK IT. MR. BENFIELD, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP. NO. OKAY. MR. HALL. WELL, I JUST I TOTALLY AGREE. I MEAN, IT'S JUST A REORGANIZATION, AND THAT CAN ALMOST BE DONE AT A STAFF LEVEL. YOU KNOW, ONCE WE AGREE ON THE TABLE OF CONTENTS IN TERMS OF HOW THINGS ARE ORGANIZED. SO SO I AGREE IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A LARGE COMMITTEE. I THINK I DO I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING MULTIPLE EYES ON IT THOUGH. IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT PROJECT. 
          I THINK MANY EYES ON IT TO MAKE SURE THAT NOBODY'S MISSING ANYTHING. YOU'RE BE SURPRISED THE THINGS THAT YOU MISS. YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING SOMEHOW, HAVING JUST A FEW MORE EYES ON IT. AND. YOU KNOW, I AGREE, DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A HUGE, YOU KNOW, A HUGE COMMITTEE, BUT. I THINK FOR I THINK THAT THIS IS MORE ABOUT RESIDENT EASE, SOME OF OUR MEMBERS THAT ARE REALLY WATCHING WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW, HAVING ANOTHER EYE OR TWO ON THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE A GOOD IDEA, JUST SO THAT THEY FEEL LIKE IT'S NOT JUST TOTALLY THE CITY RUNNING THINGS OVER AGAIN. I AGREE, I THINK THIS IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD, RIGHT, IN TERMS OF HOW WE'RE TAKING THINGS AND MOVING THINGS OVER. BUT JUST FROM A. AGAIN, KIND OF OPTICS OR TRANSPARENCY OR WHATEVER. I KNOW, JORDAN, YOU STATED THAT YOU WOULD BE PUTTING THINGS OUT ON THE COUNCIL FORUMS OR ON THE FORUMS SOMEHOW SO THAT PEOPLE CAN SEE. 
          I JUST STILL FEEL THAT RESIDENTS PROBABLY FEEL LIKE THERE WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER, ANOTHER CITIZEN OR SO TO BE ABLE TO REALLY HAVE THEIR EYES ON THIS WOULD ALLEVIATE OR AT LEAST LET US SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT SOMEBODY THAT HAS NO SKIN IN THE GAME ON COUNCIL RIGHT NOW OR IN THE CITY. RIGHT. JUST KIND OF OVERSEEING THE PROCESS, REALLY. OTHER THOUGHTS ON I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY, I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE A COUPLE OF CITIZENS ON THERE JUST FOR TRANSPARENCY MATTERS. I MEAN, I'D STILL I HAVE A GREAT INTEREST IN BEING ON IT. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE OTHERS THAT DON'T OR DO. I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE DIRECTION. SO BETWEEN WHAT YOU AND CHARLES SAID, LET ME PROPOSE THIS. AND I'M I'M OKAY WITH WHERE YOU WERE GOING. SO THE THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED, THE TWO COMMISSION CHAIRS AND STAFF AS NEEDED, AND TWO ADDITIONAL CITIZENS. AND THEN THE QUESTION WOULD BE, HOW DO THOSE CITIZENS GET ASSIGNED? I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE TWO NAMES IN MIND OR. YOU HAVE A NAME IN LINEUP OR YOU HAVE A NAME IN MIND WITH. YOU KNOW. I HAD TWO THAT I WAS THINKING OF AND PAUL ROBERTS AND AND RACHEL, THE TWO THAT I WAS THINKING OF. YEAH. I GUESS THE OTHER QUESTION WAS, AGAIN, IT WAS A LITTLE CONFUSING TO ME. THE LAST MEETING, CHARLES REQUEST WAS FOR ME TO CREATE A SUBCOMMITTEE AS MAYOR. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT WE REALLY WANT TO DO IS BRING IT ONTO AN AGENDA TO FINALIZE IT NEXT WEEK. THANK YOU. BRAD, IF YOU WERE SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT THAT, THE LAST MEETING. YEAH, YEAH. JUST FOR PURPOSES OF CLARITY OF WHAT IS BEING CREATED AND WHO'S ON IT, I THINK THAT THAT'S COUNCIL ACTION AUTHORIZING THIS, THIS COMMITTEE FOR BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF WHAT IT'S REVIEWING AND ITS CHARGE, I THINK IS WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. I'M GOOD WITH THAT STRUCTURE. I CAN PUT IT AS AN ACTION ITEM. ON THE 19TH, I WOULD ASK THE COUNCIL GETS ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD IN THE NEXT WEEK AND WORK ON THE TABLE OF CONTENTS THAT JORDAN HAS PUT OUT, AND PUT SOME PARAMETERS AROUND IT. AND IF I MAY ASK A FOLLOW UP, AS FAR AS THE CHARTER FOR THE SCOPE OF WORK, CAN WE DO THAT WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE APPOINTING, OR DOES IT NEED TO BE A SEPARATE PROCESS, OR I GUESS, WHAT'S THE PREFERENCE? DO WE HAVE TO FORMALLY DO THE CHARTER 
          [02:35:01]
DEPARTMENT? DO WE IF WE CAN SPELL IT OUT ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD OR I THINK, YEAH, IF WE CAN DRAFT IT AND ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD, IT CAN BE PART OF THAT SAME ACTION ITEM. 
          SO WE KNOCK THEM BOTH OUT AS PART OF THE SAME ACTION. I FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE GOOD DIRECTION RIGHT NOW. THAT'S THAT LOOKS LIKE A NO. A LOT OF IT IS JUST I THINK LOCKING IN THE DETAILS AND GETTING THAT ACTION APPROVED SO THAT WE CAN PROCEED. BUT STAFF IS FULLY READY TO MOVE. WE JUST NEED TO GET THE GREEN LIGHT TO DO IT. SO I'LL GET YOU THE SUBCOMMITTEE TOMORROW. OKAY. SEND IT OUT AND WE'LL GET ON THE DISCUSSION BOARDS, RESEND THAT EMAIL, AND THEN I'LL GO AHEAD AND PUT IT BACK ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD. AND WE'LL START HAVING THAT DISCUSSION THAT TALK TO ME. IT FEELS LIKE WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE ON CONSENSUS ON THE MEMBERS AND THE SCOPE AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT GETTING IT DETAILED ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD, FORMALIZING IT IN TWO WEEKS. YES, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY ALL STAFF NEEDS IS A GREEN LIGHT AND WE'RE READY TO START. SO. ALL RIGHT DISCUSSION AND I WILL MOVE TO I THINK I HAVE ANOTHER 
          [IX.15. Discussion and possible direction regarding establishment of a Utility Advisory Committee.]
CITIZEN HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER 15, WHICH IS DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE DIRECTION REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF A UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND THIS IS MAYOR PRO TEM OWENS ITEM. I'M NOT GOING TO READ WHAT'S IN THE PACKET AS TO WHY I BROUGHT THIS UP, BUT I WILL SAY THAT I REALLY OBSERVED, AS WE WERE HAVING DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE PROJECTS FOR OUR WATER AND WASTEWATER, THEY GOT PRETTY COMPLEX. AND I ALSO NOTICED THAT ANY OF OUR VENDORS THAT WE HAD. WERE NOT BRINGING TO LIGHT NAUGHT. I DON'T THINK IT WAS IN THEIR SCOPE, YOU KNOW, NEW TECHNOLOGIES OR NEW WAYS FOR US TO BRING OUR SYSTEM FORWARD, MAYBE IN A MORE COST EFFECTIVE WAY. AND WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING IN THE. AD HOC IN THE COMMUNITY IS THAT WE'VE GOT AND I'M GOING TO SAY DAVE STEWART, JIM CASON, THERE'S ELECTRICIANS NAMED BILL. I WILL TELL YOU THAT THERE IS ANOTHER. COMMUNITY MEMBER THAT HAS SOME FINANCIAL EXPERTISE THAT I TAP INTO ON OCCASION THAT BETWEEN ALL OF THEM, I START GETTING A PRETTY GOOD HANDLE ON WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE COMMUNITY IN, I MEAN, IN REGARD TO OUR WATER AND WASTEWATER. AND I JUST THOUGHT, WELL, IS THERE A WAY MAYBE TO FORMALIZE THIS, TO GIVE US. AND I'M GOING TO SAY THIS WAS ON MY PART, JUST TRYING TO GET A HANDLE ON ALL THE COMPLEXITIES AND EXPERTISE THAT I FEEL THAT THIS CITY NEEDS, THAT WE REALLY, I DON'T THINK, CURRENTLY HAVE. NOW, THAT SAID, I THINK OUR STAFF IS FABULOUS. I THINK YOU GUYS ROCK. I MEAN, YOU'VE JUST PROVEN YOURSELF OVER AND OVER, BUT I THINK THERE'S AN EXTENSION OF THIS. WE GOT VALUE. LET'S SAY, YOU KNOW, FROM DAVE STEWART BRINGING FORWARD, YOU KNOW, SOME NEW TECHNOLOGY IN TERMS OF OUR WAITRESS AND WATER AND WATER AND WASTEWATER. AND THEN OF COURSE, COUNCIL BENEFIELD, YOU KNOW, HAS GOT SOME OF THAT EXPERTISE AS WELL. AND HE, YOU KNOW, SET UP FOR, ARRANGED FOR A TOUR, I THINK, OF SOME OF THAT NEW TECHNOLOGY. I JUST FEEL LIKE THERE'S A GAP. AND THEN POTENTIALLY RIGHT NOW FOR THE SHORT TERM, IF WE HAD A UTILITY COMMITTEE THAT WAS AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS NO QUASI JUDICIAL OR ANY, YOU KNOW, POLICY MAKING, ETC. THAT'S STILL BACK WHERE IT WAS, BUT JUST AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO HELP US AT TIMES, LOOKING AT OUR CIP PROJECTS AND MAYBE LENDING AN ADDITIONAL HAND. NOW, THIS WOULD BE VERY HIGH LEVEL AND VERY SPECIFIC EXPERTISE THAT WOULD BE ON THIS COMMITTEE. SO ANYWAY, I WILL LEAVE IT AT THAT AND JUST LET EVERYBODY ASK THEIR QUESTIONS IN REGARD TO THIS COMMITTEE. MR. HALL. WELL, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. IT SEEMS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THAT WE WE ARE IN DOING FIXED THINGS AS, AS THEY BREAK AND, AND LOOK AT INSTALLING SOMETHING NEW LIKE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE GOT WHEN WE NEED MORE OF. BUT TO TO GO BEYOND THAT AND LOOK AT AS, AS, AS WAS DISCUSSED, THE THINGS THAT WE COULD BE DOING SHOULD BE DOING, LOOKING AT IT FROM A BROADER PERSPECTIVE, FROM A 
          [02:40:05]
PLANNING PERSPECTIVE, AS A AS THE CITY GROWS, AS OUR NEEDS CHANGE, SOMETHING THAT CAN ADDRESS THOSE. AND WE'VE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS IN THE IN PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. 
          BUT TO HAVE THAT KIND OF EXPERTISE SAY, HERE'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. AND AND THAT WILL BETTER POSITION US AND BETTER PROVIDE SERVICE NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE. MISS VANESSA. 
          YEAH, I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. I THINK BEING ABLE TO LEVERAGE THAT EXPERTISE IN A MORE SYSTEMATIC FASHION, AS OPPOSED TO AD HOC HELP US WITH THIS EMERGENT NEED WOULD BE GREAT. 
          AND I WOULD SAY IT'S PART OF WHAT MAYOR PRO TEM HAS PUT TOGETHER IS PROVIDING KIND OF SOME INITIAL PROJECTS THAT WE'D WANT THEM TO LOOK AT, WRITE SOME INITIAL BOGEYS, IF YOU WILL, BOTH, AS COUNCILOR HALL MENTIONED, KIND OF MORE STRATEGIC PLANNING AND THEN TAKING IT DOWN TACTICALLY TO THE ASSISTANCE THAT WE NEED ON UPCOMING PROJECTS. SO I LOVE THE IDEA. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT I LIKE THE IDEA AS WELL. WHEN YOU INVOLVE CITIZENS OUTSIDE OF STAFF, YOU YOU KIND OF GET THE OUT OF BOX THINKING AND THAT IT'S NOT REALLY CONSTRAINED BY THOUGHTS OF BUDGET OR DEPARTMENTAL STRENGTH OR THOUGHT. AND SO IT'S YOU GET A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT COULD BE, RATHER THAN WHAT PEOPLE ARE DEALING WITH ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS. AND THEY'RE THEY FEEL VERY LIMITED OR WHAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DO. SO I THINK HAVING THIS WOULD BRING US SOME INSIGHT AS TO POSSIBILITIES THAT WE MIGHT NOT HAVE LOOKED AT BEFORE, AND DEFINITELY WITH WITH THE NEWER TECHNOLOGY OR ALTERED LIKE ALTERNATE IDEAS. I THINK IT'S I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. I MEAN, AS, AS AN ADVISORY BOARD, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW. MR. PRINCIPAL. WELL, FOR ME IT'S ALL ABOUT BALANCE, RIGHT? SO WHAT WE DON'T NEED IS WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, COMMITTEE THAT QUESTIONS EVERY SINGLE DECISION OR ACTION OF STAFF. WE NEED TO LET STAFF DO THEIR JOB. I THINK THE IRRIGATION SUBCOMMITTEE THAT WE HAD ACTUALLY WORKED PRETTY WELL. AND YOU KNOW, VICTOR, TOWARDS THE END OF IT SAID, YOU KNOW, IT WAS USEFUL ENOUGH TO ME THAT EVEN THOUGH THIS TASK IS DONE, I'D KIND OF LIKE TO KEEP IT GOING. THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, SO I FELT LIKE HE MUST HAVE VIEWED IT AS MORE HELPFUL THAN, THAN OVERHEAD. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN, IF WE CAN BE IN THAT MODE. AND I THINK THAT FOCUSING ON BIG CIP PROJECTS, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, A LOOK AT THE THE OVERALL MASTER MAINTENANCE PLAN KINDS OF THINGS, BUT NOT NOT NOT SCRUTINIZING EVERY SINGLE DECISION OR HAVING TO, YOU KNOW, APPROVE EVERY SINGLE DECISION THAT STAFF. SO FINDING FINDING THAT, THAT, THAT BALANCE POINT RIGHT WHERE IT PROVIDES, YES, INSIGHT THINKING OUT OF THE BOX. 
          BUT IT'S NOT JUST SOMETHING THAT STAFF ULTIMATELY VIEWS AS OVERHEAD AND SLOWING THEM DOWN AND GETTING THEIR JOBS DONE. AND I THINK WE CAN DO IT. I THINK THE IRRIGATION SUBCOMMITTEE PROVED THAT WE CAN DO IT IN A WAY THAT THAT STAFF WILL FIND MORE HELPFUL THAN, THAN, THAN OVERHEAD. YEAH, I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA, ESPECIALLY THE INNOVATION SIDE. 
          YOU KNOW, IN MY MIND, THIS MIGHT JUST BE IN MY MIND OR THINGS ARE NOT SET IN STONE ABOUT HOW THESE EXPANSIONS LOOK AND WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO HAPPEN. AND WHEN I'M THINKING ABOUT HOW TO BE CREATIVE, TO GET US MORE FUNDING, WHAT WE'RE CONTINUING TO HEAR IS YOU GOT TO BE A LITTLE MORE INNOVATIVE. THEY HAVE TO BE, YOU KNOW, QUOTE UNQUOTE, GREEN AND REUSE IS ONE OF THOSE. A COMMITTEE LIKE THIS CAN HELP DO ALL THAT RESEARCH AND TRACK DOWN VENDORS AND TALK TO OTHER CITIES WHERE STAFF IS BUSY DOING THEIR DAY TO DAY JOBS. AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE THIS GROUP OUT THERE THAT COULD DO THAT. SO THAT'S WHY I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. AND I WILL GO TO CITIZEN COMMENTS BECAUSE I HAVE ONE MR. DAVE STEWART. ONE OF THE REASONS I FIRST BROUGHT THIS UP TO A COUPLE OF THE COUNCIL PEOPLE WAS THAT THE REPORTS THAT ARE REACHING COUNCIL ARE UNBALANCED, AND I WAS TRYING TO THINK OF A WAY TO PUT IT, BUT THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT LOOKING AT GROWTH ON EVERY LEVEL OF EVERY COMPONENT. THE WATER, WASTEWATER AND EFFLUENT DISPOSAL. WHEN YOU GET A WATER MASTER PLAN, IT'S REAL HEAVY THERE, BUT IT DOESN'T TELL YOU WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE WATER THAT COMES BACK FROM THE HOUSES. AND YOU GET A WASTEWATER PLAN THAT'S TELLING YOU TO SPEND, YOU KNOW, $46 MILLION THIS YEAR. SO, AND I BUILT A SYSTEM AND IT'S VERY, VERY COMPLEX. IT HAS 11 
          [02:45:01]
DIFFERENT PRESSURE POINTS. AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS JUST TO GET AN OVERVIEW AND FILL IN THE HOLES YOU GOT, YOU KNOW, YOUR DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS PUT HIMSELF THROUGH SCHOOL TO GET A CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, WHICH HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE. SO WE'VE GOT THE TALENT HERE. THEY JUST DON'T HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE. AND, YOU KNOW, WITH A LITTLE FILL IN THE HOLES FOR THEM, LET THEM MAKE THE DECISIONS, LET THE COUNCIL DECIDE WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO FUND. BUT WE CAN THROW SOME IDEAS AT YOU THAT WILL GET YOU WHERE YOU NEED TO GO FOR A WHOLE LOT LESS MONEY THAN WHAT FREESE AND NICHOLS HAS BEEN THROWING YOUR WAY. THERE'S MORE COST EFFECTIVE WAYS TO DO THIS AND REESTABLISH PARTNERSHIPS WITH DEVELOPERS WOULD BE A HUGE ONE. SO ANYWAY. MR. WEST, DID YOU SEND OUT THAT ANALYSIS ON THE GOLF BALL AND BIKE AND TANK TO THE REST OF THE COUNCIL? I BELIEVE I DID, BUT I'VE SLEPT SINCE THEN. OKAY. WELL, THAT'S IF YOU ALL GOT I SENT IT TO THEM TO REVIEW FOR THEM TO DISPOSE OF OR TO PASS OUT AS THEY SAW IT. BUT I WANTED THAT TO BE AN EXAMPLE OF THE TYPE OF WORK THAT YOU GUYS WOULD BE GETTING FROM US. I MEAN, THE MOST THING I SAID WAS THAT WE NEED TO START FUNDING THE GROSS CLOSED TANK. AND, YOU KNOW, BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF TRIBAL KNOWLEDGE THERE THAT THE COUNCIL COULD HAVE RUN AFOUL OF HAD THEY SOLD THE CAPACITY BELONGING TO THE TWO DEVELOPERS. SO, YEAH, WE'LL GET THE IDEAS. 
          THOSE ARE YOUR IMPLEMENTERS. THANK YOU, MR. STEWART. MR. ROBERTS. CAN I JUST ASK QUICKLY, WAS THAT EMAIL TO US OR. I DON'T RECALL SEEING IT. WAS IT OKAY. SO. ALL RIGHT, MR. ROBERTS. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBERS. JUST A COUPLE THINGS. AFTER MR. STEWART RAN FOR CITY COUNCIL A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, I BROUGHT THIS FORWARD. I PUT IT ON OUR AGENDA FOR THE CREATION OF UTILITY SUBCOMMITTEE, AND IT WAS SHOT DOWN AT THAT TIME. I'M GLAD TO SEE THE RECEPTIVENESS OF THIS COUNCIL FOR SOMETHING THAT IS CLEARLY OF HUGE BENEFIT TO THE CITY. THE INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE ALONE, FROM FROM THAT ONE INDIVIDUAL. WHAT THE CONCERNS, WHICH I DON'T THINK ARE INVALID FROM, FROM COUNCIL COUNCILOR PRINCE IS HE CITED THE IRRIGATION SUBCOMMITTEE AS BEING AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THESE THINGS CAN BE BENEFICIAL TO THE CITY. BUT IS WHAT'S BEING IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME, IS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED TONIGHT A SUBCOMMITTEE OR IS IT A NEW COMMITTEE? IF IT'S A NEW COMMITTEE, WHICH IS FRANKLY SOMETHING I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF IT BEING NEW. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO HAVE COMMITTEES JUST TO HAVE COMMITTEES INDEFINITELY. IF YOU WANT TO GO DOWN THE ROUTE AND CREATE A COMMITTEE, GIVE IT A GIVE IT A TWO YEAR EXPIRATION DATE, FOR EXAMPLE, SET IT UP, IT HAS A TWO YEAR PURPOSE. AND THEN IN TWO YEARS YOU GUYS DECIDE, DO YOU WANT TO KEEP IT GOING STILL? WHAT ELSE? WHO WOULD THE COUNCIL LIAISON BE? IS THERE GOING TO BE A STAFF LIAISON. YOU NEED TO RESOLVE THAT. IS IT GOING TO BE LIKE THE OTHER NON QUASI JUDICIAL COMMISSIONS OR COMMITTEES? AND IS TOMA NOT GOING TO APPLY TO THAT COMMITTEE? AND ARE THE MEETINGS GOING TO BE IN HERE LIKE OTHER COMMITTEES IN RECORDING? OPEN ENDED QUESTIONS THERE FOR YOU GUYS TO TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT I HOPE THANKS. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER CITIZENS WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? HEARING NONE I BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL. MAYOR PRO TEM. SO AS YOU WERE HEARING TONIGHT, I ACTUALLY WAS BRINGING THIS FORWARD AS A PROPOSAL FOR A ADVISORY COMMITTEE, NOT AS A SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT WAS OPEN TO HEARING IN TERMS OF CREATING THE CHARTER. IT SOUNDS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE IRRIGATION SUBCOMMITTEE AND GOING AHEAD AND PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, ONE OF THE OTHER ITEMS THAT I DID THINK ABOUT, AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT IN DISCUSSIONS WITH MR. STEWART, IS THAT THIS COMMITTEE IS A SHORT TERM NEED, REALLY. SO THERE A SUNSET OR, YOU KNOW, A TIME LIMIT ON IT IS PROBABLY NOT A BAD IDEA. AND SO I WAS BRINGING THIS FORWARD IN ORDER TO KIND OF GET A LITTLE MORE FEEDBACK FROM EVERYBODY IN REGARD TO WHAT WOULD Y'ALL LIKE TO SEE IN REGARD TO THIS? NOW, 
          [02:50:04]
I SAY THAT IN REGARD TO THE COUNCIL, BUT I'M ALSO GOING TO SAY, CHARLES, YOU KNOW, IN REGARD TO STAFF, RIGHT, IN TERMS OF HOW THEY SEE THAT MAYBE SOME ADDITIONAL, YOU KNOW, THIS EXPERTISE HAS BEEN WORKING OR CAN WORK. AND AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE IRRIGATION SUBCOMMITTEE AND WE'LL CREATE THE CHARTER JUST LIKE WE DO FOR ANY OF THE OTHER ADVISORY COMMITTEES. SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WHERE I WAS, I THINK THAT THE INDIVIDUALS THAT I HAD IN MIND, AT LEAST THE FIRST FOUR HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE TO ME AT ANY TIME TO BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH INFORMATION. BUT I WAS JUST TRYING TO MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE, A LITTLE MORE FORMAL, LIKE ONGOING. SO IT'S NOT AD HOC. MAYBE WE CAN GET AHEAD OF A FEW THINGS AND THAT THE COUNSELOR GETS MORE INFORMATION FASTER, RATHER THAN IT BEING IT'S BEEN GREAT AND IT'S BEEN ORGANIC, BUT I THINK WE COULD USE IT A LITTLE MORE FORMALIZED FOR THE TIME BEING. CHARLES, I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A TOPIC WITH STAFF AND MYSELF IS WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY ON CONSULTANTS, AND WE DON'T FEEL LIKE WE'RE GETTING THE INFORMATION WE NEED OR PRIORITIZED IN THE ORDER THAT IT NEEDS. SO. WE NEED SOME GOOD DIRECTION ON WHERE WE'RE GOING BECAUSE I DO NOT AGREE WITH OUR CURRENT SEB PLAN. I THINK I HAVE MENTIONED THAT A FEW TIMES, AND WE NEED TO REALLY STRUCTURE OUR NEEDS AND PUSH THE WANTS FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD. NOW. MR. HALL, JUST A QUESTION. I IT'S IT'S ALMOST LIKE IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE THIS GROUP AS A GROUP OF ADVISORS TO BE, YOU KNOW, CALLED UPON FOR THEIR FOR THEIR ADVICE AND IDEAS AND INFORMATION AT VARIOUS TIMES. I, YOU KNOW, I CAN SEE A, A PERIOD OF TIME WHEN, WHEN WE MAY HAVE THEM VERY BUSY AS WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT OUR OVERALL STRUCTURE, CITY WATER, SEWER AND THEN AT, AT A CERTAIN POINT WHERE IT'S SORT OF LIKE A PLANNING PROCESS, THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS, WHERE OKAY, THEN, THEN THEN THAT INPUT HAS BEEN GIVEN. BUT THINGS CHANGE OVER TIME AND NEW CHALLENGES ARE ARE MET. SO I CAN SEE I CAN SEE A POTENTIAL USE OF THE COMMITTEE IN SOME FORM AS, AS AVAILABLE TO PROVIDE INPUT AT VARIOUS TIMES AFTER, AFTER WHATEVER PERIOD OF TIME THAT THEY WOULD BE THE MOST, MOST HELPFUL, MOST BENEFICIAL FOR THEIR INPUT. SO, YOU KNOW, JUST I'M JUST OPEN TO, YOU KNOW, IS THIS A TIME LIMITED AND AND THE COMMITTEE IS DISSOLVED OR DOES IT OR IS IT AVAILABLE AS NEEDED IN THE FUTURE? MAYOR PRO TEM I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY AGAIN, I'M OPEN TO HEARING EVERYBODY'S THOUGHTS BECAUSE THIS IS NOT DONE YET. RIGHT? THIS IS WHAT THIS DISCUSSION IS ABOUT. I DID WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ERNESTO AND VICTOR AND OUR STAFF REALLY HAVE INPUT AS TO HOW ARE THIS EXPERTISE IS HELPFUL. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY FOR MYSELF, I REALLY FELT LIKE THERE WAS A INNOVATION, TIMING, PERSPECTIVE THAT I DON'T I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE'VE GOT A TRUE HANDLE ON GOING FORWARD. NOW, PART OF THAT IS ME LOOKING AT HOW TO FUND SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING THAT WE NEED, SO THAT'S WHERE THAT'S COMING IN. AND SO I'M GOING, WELL, OKAY. WHAT'S THE IMPLICATION IF WE IF WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY AT THE TIME THAT Y'ALL ARE SAYING THAT WE HAVE THE NEED, IS THERE AN INNOVATIVE WAY FOR US TO SKIRT THAT? THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE WE NEED TO BE HAVING SOME EXPERTISE IN THIS NOW. YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT. I AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I REACH OUT TO THE INDIVIDUALS THAT I HAD IN MIND, ONE OF THE PRIMARY ONES BEING DAVE STEWART, LOOKING FOR JUST AVENUES. WHO ELSE CAN I TALK TO IN REGARD TO THIS? BUT THIS WAS JUST A WAY FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS THAT A LITTLE BIT EASIER, A LITTLE MORE TRANSPARENT, BRING IT OUT SO OTHER PEOPLE CAN BE EDUCATED AS WELL. AND TO HAVE THAT OPEN DISCUSSION AS WE TRY TO NAVIGATE OUR WATERS IN TERMS OF HAVING ALL AT THE SAME TIME, YOU KNOW, OUR RECAPITALIZATION OF OUR SYSTEM, OUR EXPANSION OF OUR SYSTEM AND OUR REPAIR OF ALL THE REST. SO FROM JUST FROM A FINANCIAL TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT IS ALSO PART OF THE IMPETUS OF THIS THAT I WAS LOOKING FOR. SO THANK YOU GUYS. I THINK ON THE ON THE BOARD, IF I COULD GET MORE ADDITIONAL INSIGHT, I'M HAPPY TO LOAD UP THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. AND SO THANK YOU. ARE YOU OPEN TO IT 
          [02:55:06]
BEING A SUBCOMMITTEE? THE BENEFITS TO BEING A SUBCOMMITTEE THAT DOESN'T TAKE WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT TOMA. WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT PUTTING NOTICES OUT. WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT SCHEDULING IT WITH OTHER COMMISSIONS MEETINGS HERE. TWO YEARS ON IT. HAVE A SUNSET. CONTINUE ON OR NOT. AND I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO RECOMMEND THE SAME THING THAT WAY I WASN'T GOING TO HAVE TO BE WITH TOMA AND THEN TWO YEARS WITH A RENEWABILITY CLAUSE ON THERE AS NEEDED, BECAUSE IT COULD WE COULD GO PAST THAT TIME FRAME AND NEED NEED THAT SUBCOMMITTEE AND THE TO CONTINUE. BUT YES, I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO RECOMMEND SUBCOMMITTEE AS WELL, AS LONG AS THEY HAD A GOOD GENERAL OUTLINE OF DIRECTION AS OUR IRRIGATION COMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE. MR. HALL AND I JUST WANT TO COMMENT THAT INNOVATION DOESN'T CHANGE TECHNOLOGY IMPROVEMENTS, NEW PROCESSES, NEW PROCEDURES. 
          THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF AN ONGOING THING. SO, I MEAN, THERE'S JUST BEEN EXAMPLES RECENTLY WHERE WHERE THIS NEW TECHNOLOGY, NEW WAY OF FILTERING WATER, NEW NEW PROCESSES THAT WERE CHEAPER AND MORE EFFECTIVE, THAT'S GOING TO BE ONGOING. SO TO HAVE THIS GROUP AVAILABLE AS, AS OUR CONSULTANTS REALLY TO HELP US IDENTIFY THOSE AS, AS, AS WE DEAL WITH WITH THESE ALONG INTO THE FUTURE, IT'S GOING TO BE HELPFUL. MR. PRINCIPAL, I LEAN TOWARDS MORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE THAN A COMMITTEE MODEL. AND I THINK AND AGAIN, I WAS AN INSIDER ON THE IRRIGATION SUBCOMMITTEE. SO THOSE OF YOU ON COUNCIL WHO WERE OUTSIDERS BE INTERESTED IN YOUR PERSPECTIVE. BUT I FEEL LIKE THE SUBCOMMITTEE WAS SOMEWHAT INFORMAL, BUT DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF COMMUNICATING. MR. BENFIELD DID A NUMBER OF POSTS AND HAD SOME PRETTY DETAILED REPORTS. I WROTE SOME NOTES MYSELF. THE STAFF DID A NUMBER OF REPORTS. ONE THING I THINK THAT WAS HELPFUL WAS WE HAD THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THAT, AND STAFF WAS ABLE TO KIND OF GET A FEEL FOR WHERE COUNCIL'S HEAD WAS. WE NEVER MADE ANY DECISION. ANYTIME A DECISION NEEDED TO BE MADE, WE BROUGHT IT BACK INTO COUNCIL. BUT WE WERE ABLE TO KIND OF, YOU KNOW, NOT CHASE DOWN THINGS THAT WERE. IT'S LIKE, NO WAY ARE WE GOING TO DO THAT, RIGHT? THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. SO I THINK THAT ALLOWED US TO MOVE MAYBE A LITTLE MORE QUICKLY. AND THEN ALSO BECAUSE IT WAS NOT A FORMAL COMMITTEE ON A FORMAL MEETING ON THE THIRD THURSDAY OF EVERY MONTH OR WHATEVER, STAFF WAS ABLE TO SAY, HEY, WE HAVE THIS BIG QUESTION WE NEED TO ADDRESS. CAN YOU GUYS GET TOGETHER NEXT TUESDAY? AND WE DIDN'T ALWAYS GET EVERYBODY THERE, BUT WE HAD ENOUGH OF A FORUM TO MAKE THIS, I THINK, HAVE SOME HELPFUL DISCUSSIONS. SO I THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO GO. ANY OF YOU WHO WERE ON COUNCIL BUT WEREN'T IN THAT SUBCOMMITTEE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A IF YOU FELT LIKE YOU YOU WEREN'T GETTING THE INFORMATION, YOU WANTED TO BE MORE OF AN OPEN MEETING KIND OF FORMAT, I'D SAY, YOU KNOW, CHIME IN AND LET ME KNOW. THAT CERTAINLY WASN'T MY PERSPECTIVE. BUT I WAS AN INSIDER ON THAT COMMITTEE. SO YOU HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO TAKE THIS TO THE DISCUSSION BOARD AND LEAVE A LOT OF ITEMS THAT. OKAY, THEN WE WILL PROCEED. AND THAT WILL BE I PLAN TO PUT THAT ON THE 19TH. OKAY. I'M HOPING THIS ONE'S REALLY FAST AS WELL. SO THAT'S WHY I'M GOING TO BRING IT UP REAL QUICK DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION REGARDING DISSOLUTION OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. UPON COMPLETION OF ALL REQUIRED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION DOCUMENTS. AND MY HOPE AGAIN WAS THAT THIS IS SIMPLY TO GET IT TO A PLACE WHERE I CAN PUT IT ON THE 19TH FOR ACTION. EVERYTHING I HEARD WE WERE CLOSE. SO I'LL GO BACK TO MAYOR PRO TEM. WELL, THIS IS JUST CLEANUP TO BASICALLY LAUNCH THE EDC. THERE WAS AN OFFICIAL ITEM ON THERE THAT BECAUSE WE WERE IN THE MIDST OF GETTING OUR. WE HAD NOT FULLY APPOINTED OUR LAST MEMBER FOR AT THAT TIME. SO I WENT AHEAD AND STEPPED IN IN ORDER TO GET THE THE EDC. AND SO I WAS PUT ONTO THE BOARD. SO THERE ACTUALLY IS A RESIGNATION IN THERE FOR ME OFF OF THAT BOARD. AND THEN THE THE ACTUAL APPOINTMENT OF OUR RECENT COMMITTEE MEMBER TO THAT BOARD. SO REALLY IT'S JUST CLEAN UP UNLESS Y'ALL HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS? I'M JUST GOING TO SAY ITEMS UNDER THE WORKSHOP. YEAH. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BRING THIS BACK BECAUSE I SAW ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD YOUR RESOLUTION, BUT IT'S NOT ON HERE. RIGHT. I'M. JUST CONSENSUS TO PUT IT AS AN ACTION ITEM. SO IT'LL BE THERE 
          [03:00:07]
ON THE 19TH. NICHOLAS IS STILL ON CHARLES. YES, YES, THEY'RE STILL ON THERE FOR IMPACT FEES. 
          [IX.12. Discussion on proposed impact fee by Freese & Nichols.]
ALL RIGHT. SO WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER 12. DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED IMPACT FEE BY FREESE NICHOLS. AND GO TO JORDAN OR STRAIGHT TO FREEZING NICHOLS. WE WILL PROBABLY GO TO FREEZING NICHOLS. THIS WAS A PROJECT THAT WAS STARTED PRIOR TO MY STARTING WITH THE CITY, AND THEY FINALIZED IT. AND THEN THEY SENT US A PROPOSAL, WHICH I BELIEVE I PUT IN THE PACKET. 
          ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE FOR FREEZE, NICHOLS. HI. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH. SO THIS IS JUST AN UPDATE TO THE WATER, WASTEWATER AND ROADWAY IMPACT FEE PROGRAM. THE LAST STUDY WAS COMPLETED IN DECEMBER OF 2021, AND WE'RE REQUIRED BY LAW TO UPDATE THESE EVERY FIVE YEARS. 
          I DID HAVE A QUESTION, JESSICA. MY MEMORY WAS YOU. I THINK YOU LED THE WATER IMPACT FEE DISCUSSION. AND ANOTHER GENTLEMAN READ THE THE STREET ROADWAY IMPACT DISCUSSION. 
          THOSE HAPPENED AT THE SAME TIME BUT WASTEWATER CORRECT TWO AT THE SAME TIME. BUT NOT ALL THREE OF THEM WERE AT THE SAME TIME. DO YOU REMEMBER ALL THREE AT THE SAME TIME? WE DID WATER, WASTEWATER AND ROADWAY, AND EDDIE HAAS LED THE ROADWAY TEAM. AND YOU MAY REMEMBER THAT LAST TIME ROADWAY WAS A NEW PROGRAM. SO WE HAD TO HAVE THE TWO STEP PUBLIC PROCESS FOR THAT. SO YOU DID YOU YOU WERE THE LEAD ON BOTH WATER AND WASTEWATER. AND THAT HAPPENED AT THE SAME TIME. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND THAT WAS IN 21. CORRECT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I DON'T HAVE ANY CITIZENS SIGNED UP FOR THIS. MISTER ROBERTS. JESSICA, NICE TO SEE YOU AGAIN. GOOD TO SEE YOU. ONE OF THE THINGS, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE ISSUES YOU RAN INTO WHEN WE DID THIS SEVERAL YEARS, I THINK WAS ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO WHEN IT WRAPPED UP, WAS THE BIFURCATION BETWEEN THE TWO DIFFERENT ZONES WAS BOGGY AND SHORELINE, AND A LOT OF FOLKS DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND. LET ME SAY THIS DIFFERENTLY. NO, IT WAS NO. THE THE NORTH AND SOUTH DEMARCATION LINE WAS BOGGY AND SHORELINE. THAT'S WHERE IT WAS. BECAUSE WHAT THEY DID IS THEY ENVISIONED IT WAS A HIGHER RATE. I THINK IT WAS LIKE $3,500, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, 2700. IT WAS A LOT MORE. IT WAS ABOUT DOUBLE THE DOUBLE THE AMOUNT IN THE NORTH ZONE VERSUS THE SOUTH ZONE. AND SO A LOT OF PEOPLE VIEW THAT AS LIKE ALMOST LIKE TAXATION. WELL, WHY IS IT WHY IS IT MORE EXPENSIVE UP HERE. THAT'S NOT FAIR. AND WHAT THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IS THAT THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE WHAT THE STUDY LOOKS AT IS WHERE IS THE ANTICIPATED GROWTH? THUS, WHERE DO WE NEED TO RECOVER THE IMPACT FEES TO PAY FOR AND COVER THE COST OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT? BUT ONE THING I LEARNED AFTER THE FACT, AND THIS IS MY QUESTION, IS, IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE A SINGLE FEE? NOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THE STATUTES HAVE CHANGED OR NOT. DO YOU STILL NEED TWO DIFFERENT AMOUNTS, OR CAN YOU GO TO A SINGLE ASSESSMENT? THAT'S MY QUESTION. THANK YOU. THAT IS A VERY GOOD QUESTION. SO ON ROADWAY CHAPTER 395 REQUIRES THAT WE HAVE SIX MILE ZONES. WE AREN'T ALLOWED TO HAVE A ROADWAY SERVICE AREA THAT EXCEEDS SIX MILES IN RADIUS. AND UNFORTUNATELY, DUE TO THE SHAPE OF THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA, WE ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE TWO SEPARATE ZONES TO TO STAY WITHIN THOSE REGULATIONS. 
          NOW, WE COULD, BY POLICY, DECIDE TO CHARGE THE SAME FEE IN THE NORTH ZONE AND THE SOUTH ZONE. BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE A SEPARATE CALCULATION AND SEPARATE POTS OF MONEY FOR THE NORTH AND SOUTH ROADWAY ZONES. YES. MR. ROBERTSON, SIR. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD ALREADY IN THE SCOPE OF WORK PRESENT OPTIONS ON, OR DO YOU NEED THAT DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL? SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS WE'RE GOING TO CALCULATE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE IMPACT FEE FOR BOTH THE NORTH ZONE AND THE SOUTH ZONE. AND THEN WE CAN GUIDE COUNCIL ON POLICY DISCUSSION. BUT OUR JOB IS GOING TO BE TO RECOMMEND THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE. AND THEN BY POLICY YOU CAN ADOPT SOMETHING DIFFERENT. SO HOW WILL HOW WILL THE COUNCIL SEE WHAT A SINGLE 
          [03:05:01]
FEE WOULD LOOK LIKE. WOULD THEY NEED TO ASK FOR THAT AT THAT TIME, OR DO YOU NEED THAT QUESTION NOW? WHAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DO IS WE'RE IS IF, LET'S SAY THAT THE THE FEE IN THE SOUTH ZONE IS LOWER, YOU COULD DECIDE TO ADOPT THAT SAME COLLECTION RATE IN THE NORTH ZONE. GOT IT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL THE CITIZEN COMMENTS BACK TO COUNCIL I JUST I'M LOOKING AT THE MAP HERE. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, IT IS SOUTH OF SHORELINE. PARTIAL PORTION OF IT IS SOUTH OF BOGGY PORT. BUT THEN IT NATIONAL BECOMES THE THE DIVIDER. SO IT'S KIND OF NORTH OF NATIONAL. THERE WAS ONE ZONE AND NORTH OF NATIONAL NORTH OF SHORELINE WAS ONE ZONE. AND AND SOUTH OF THAT WAS ZONE. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A WORKSHOP ITEM THAT WILL COME BACK ON THE 19TH FOR AN ACTION. SO IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, THEN I WILL PROCEED. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR OUR FREEZE, NICHOLS. APPRECIATE YOU BEING 
          [IX.6. Budget update from Finance Department.]
HERE. THANK YOU. I WILL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, BUDGET UPDATE FROM THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT. I HAVE NICOLE. ERIC, DO YOU GOT THE POWERPOINT? I SAID SEND IT TO YOU. WHILE CHARLES SETTING THAT UP IN THE PACKET YOU WILL FIND THE REVENUE AND EXPENSE REPORT FOR THE FIRST QUARTER DECEMBER 31ST. AGAIN, THESE ARE NOT 100% FINALIZED NUMBERS. THESE ARE AS CLOSE AS WE HAVE AS OF RIGHT NOW, REVENUE AND EXPENSES THAT ARE IN THE COMPUTER SYSTEM. AGAIN, I SAY AS OF RIGHT NOW, DECEMBER IS NOT 100% BALANCED AND POSTED THE FINANCIALS. HOWEVER, THIS IS THE MAJORITY OF THE REVENUE INTO THE COMPUTER SYSTEM AND EXPENSES. AS WE RUN A NET 30, WE TRY TO GET AS MUCH IN AS WE COULD. AND ONCE HE GETS IT PULLED UP, WHAT I DID WAS THE MAIN KEY POINTS THAT I WENT TO IS COUNCIL HAD ASKED FOR ANY MAJOR VARIANCES. SO THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION WOULD BE HIGHLIGHTING ANYTHING THAT WAS WITHIN, YOU KNOW, A A BIGGER THAN 5% VARIANCE FROM WHERE WE SHOULD BE. WE SHOULD BE AT ABOUT 25% FOR REVENUE COLLECTED AND EXPENSES GOING OUT. SO I WILL WOULD HIGHLIGHT ANYTHING THAT IS A BIGGER DIFFERENCE THAN AROUND A 5% OF OUR REVENUE AND OUR EXPENSES. I LIST POTENTIAL REASONS FOR THEM. 
          IF THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, ANYONE CAPITAL EXPENSE THAT WAS EXPENSED ALL AT ONCE. WE HAVE SOMETIMES ANNUAL FEES, THINGS LIKE THAT OR REVENUE. SAME SCENARIO. IF THERE'S ANY MAJOR REASONS THAT WOULD HELP EXPLAIN IT. AND I WILL NOT TAKE CREDIT FOR THE SLIDES. ERIC DID THAT. 
          SO THE FIRST SLIDE HERE YOU CAN SEE WE'LL START WITH THE GENERAL FUND AND IT'LL START WITH REVENUE. THE FIRST THING THAT WOULD STAND OUT IS ON NON-DEPARTMENTAL. THEY ARE AT ONLY A 1.6% OF REVENUE. THE BIGGEST CAUSE OF THAT WOULD BE BECAUSE NON-DEPARTMENTAL LARGEST REVENUE SOURCE IS LOG OFFICE. OBVIOUSLY THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED YET. THAT WILL HAPPEN IN NOVEMBER. SO THAT WOULD BE THE REASONING FOR THAT NON-DEPARTMENTAL TO NOT BE OUT THERE. 25% OF REVENUE RECEIVED ON THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REVENUE SEEM SIMILAR. THEY ARE ONLY AT A 13.85% REVENUE AS OF RIGHT NOW. ACROSS THE BOARD, ALL OF THE REVENUE STREAMS SEEM TO BE DOWN. THE ONE THING THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S TRACKING IS THEIR REINSPECTION FEES. AT 26%. 
          POLICE DEPARTMENT REVENUE, THEY'RE AT A CAN I MAKE A QUESTION? DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS A DEPARTMENT WHERE EXPENSES TEND TO TRACK REVENUE PRETTY STRONGLY. RIGHT. REVENUE COMES IN. THERE'S EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH IT. SO I WOULD EXPECT IF WE'RE WAY UNDER ON REVENUE, WE SHOULD ALSO BE UNDER ON EXPENSES. NOT THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT, BUT OUR EXPENSES FOR I 
          [03:10:08]
KNOW YOU'RE ON REVENUE NOW, BUT IT'S DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. OUR EXPENSES FOR NON-PERSONNEL PORTION OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DOWN AS WELL AS JORDAN IS NODDING HER HEAD. SO? SO I WILL LEAVE EXACT PARTS TO EACH DEPARTMENT HEAD. I CAN'T SPEAK TO EXACT AS FAR AS THAT. I. I LOOKED BIG PICTURE AND THINGS THAT I AM PERSONALLY AWARE OF. ARE YOU GOING TO IN THESE SLIDES YOU'RE GOING TO DO VARIANCES ON EXPENSES AS WELL AS OKAY PERFECT. IT GOES IN THE ORDER OF THE REPORT. YES, SIR. SO IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, SAME SCENARIO. THEIR REVENUE IS DOWN. THAT WOULD BE THE SCHOOL THE SRO, THE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER IS AGAIN THEIR LARGEST FUNDING SOURCE. THE SCHOOL USUALLY PAYS US IN ONE LUMP SUM TOWARDS THE END OF THEIR YEAR. 
          SO USUALLY WE SEND AN I SEND AN INVOICE OUT TO THEM ABOUT THE END OF JUNE JULY AREA. SO AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE WHY THEY'RE RUNNING BEHIND THE I WILL SAY OR NOTE, PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING REVENUE LOOKS LIKE IT'S OVER AND IT'S HIGH. THAT WOULD BE BECAUSE WE BUDGETED ZERO FOR THE STREET ROADWAY IMPACT FEE. THAT IS BECAUSE IT WAS RUNNING. THE IMPACT FEE WAS COMING INTO THE PUBLIC WORKS STREET REVENUE SOURCE, WHICH WE KNOW IMPACT FEES NEED TO BE COMPLETELY RESTRICTED FUNDS. AND SO AS OF THE 2526 BUDGET, WE CORRECTED THAT BEHIND THE SCENES. IT WAS NOT BEING MAPPED CORRECTLY. SO A JOURNAL ENTRY WILL BE DONE TO CORRECT THAT. AND IT HAS BEEN CORRECTED AS OF TODAY TO MOVE FORWARD, TO BE MAPPED CORRECTLY BEHIND THE SCENES. SO THAT'S JUST A NOTATION. SO YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THAT ON THAT ONE THERE'S A CAPMETRO CONTRIBUTION WHICH IS A PRETTY BIG WRITE IN THAT PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING. DO WE EXPECT MORE FROM CAPMETRO OR OVER THE COURSE OF THIS FISCAL YEAR, OR WE THINK THAT'S ALL WE'RE GOING TO GET? I IT'S NOT ALWAYS A GUARANTEE. IT KIND OF DEPENDS ON ALSO WHAT THEY HAVE AVAILABLE. I KNOW THAT VICTOR HAS BEEN WORKING WITH CAPMETRO, AND I KNOW THIS PAST YEAR WE GOT A PRETTY LARGE CHUNK. HE MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT BETTER ON WHAT'S FORESEEABLE. YEAH. SO YOU'RE THINKING THAT 35,000 WE GOT IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF THIS FISCAL YEAR MAY BE ALL WE GET FROM THEM. OKAY. IS THAT THE BUILD BETTER CENTRAL THING? AQUATICS OBVIOUSLY SAME SCENARIO. THE POOL IS HAS NOT OPENED. LIBRARY REVENUE IS DOWN AS AS OF YET. I HAVE NOT HEARD OF ANY MAJOR GRANTS OR ANYTHING THAT THE LIBRARY HAS APPLIED FOR. I KNOW THAT THEY'RE VERY GOOD AT THAT, AND THEY'RE GEARING UP AND THEY, I'M SURE, WILL APPLY AND RECEIVE THAT QUESTION. I THINK FROM MY TIME AS LIBRARY BOARD LIAISON, I REMEMBER THAT A LOT OF THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY FUNDS, THEY JUST BUY THINGS. IT DOESN'T FLOW THROUGH OUR BOOKS. 
          AGREED? YES, SIR. YES, SIR. THERE'S SOME GRANTS AND THINGS COMING INTO THE LIBRARY THAT WE DON'T SEE. AGREED? YES, SIR. OKAY. AND THEY PAY DIRECT FOR THOSE EXPENSES AS WELL. SO THAT DOES NOT HIT OUR BUDGET AS WELL. YES, SIR. NOW, TO GET TO THE EXPENSES ON THE ADMIN SIDE, THE ADMIN SIDE IS HIGH. THERE WERE SOME UPFRONT INSURANCE EXPENSES THAT CAME OUT. THAT'S A LITTLE BIT ABOVE WHAT WAS SCREENSHOT HERE THAT WAS ACTUALLY NOT BUDGETED AT ALL. IT WAS AN OVERSIGHT I BELIEVE, IN REMOVING FROM THE BUDGET. IT IS NOT A SPECIFIC PERSONNEL ON THAT INSURANCE. AS FAR AS LIKE OUR LIABILITY PROPERTY, IT'S KIND OF JUST A GENERIC LIKE ERRORS AND OMISSIONS THAT THE GENERAL FUND ADMIN AND THE UTILITY ADMIN KIND OF SPLIT. 
          AND SO THAT WILL HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED. THERE WAS ALSO THE LIKE THE TEXAS STATE CHART OF ACCOUNTS ANALYSIS THAT THEY WERE HELPING US WITH THAT WAS NOT ORIGINALLY PLANNED. SO THERE WAS A COUPLE UNFORESEEN EXPENSES THERE. CITY SECRETARY BUDGET IS HIGH. THAT IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE SHARED WEBSITE EXPENSES. IT'S AN ANNUAL FEE THAT WE HAVE TO PAY ALL AT ONCE. 
          SO AGAIN, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THESE WILL BE ONE TIME FEES THAT WE PAY UP FRONT AND THEN IT'LL LEVEL BACK OUT AS WE GO THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, BUILDING AND MAINTENANCE. AS OF RIGHT NOW, IT'S TRACKING A LITTLE HIGH. WE DID SOME UPGRADES, IF YOU REMEMBER THE LED LIGHTS 
          [03:15:03]
THROUGHOUT ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT TYPES OF THINGS. PARKS AND REC EXPENDITURES. THE BIGGEST THING IS BECAUSE THE SUNSET DRIVEWAY, OBVIOUSLY THAT WAS ONE BIG EXPENSE. IT GOT DONE AT THE VERY FRONT OF THE YEAR, AND THAT IS DONE. SO THAT PROJECT WILL BE CLOSED OUT. NO MORE EXPENSES COMING OUT OF THAT LINE. THERE WAS ALSO SOME MAJOR UPGRADES AND AND PROJECTS DONE. CANOPIES FOR SUNSET BALL FIELD, PICKLEBALL COURTS WERE IMPROVED, RAMPS FOR THE WALKWAY AND SOME TREE PROJECTS. I'M SORRY FOR THE PERCENTAGES THAT YOU'RE SHOWING. ARE THESE FOR THE QUARTER OR FOR THE YEAR? QUARTER? WELL, THAT'S WHERE WE STAND AS OF RIGHT NOW FOR THE QUARTER. WHAT WE'RE AT. AND THEN ON THE FOR CHARLES ON THE CITY HALL REMODELING. I HOPE THERE'S NO MORE OF THAT COMING RIGHT NOW. IS THAT IT FOR THE YEAR? YEAH. THERE WAS I WILL NOTE ON THE BUILDING MAINTENANCE. THERE WAS ALSO A LITTLE BIT OF MISCODING SOME OF THE INVOICES THAT CAME IN WERE FOR MULTIPLE BUILDINGS, AND THAT WAS AN OVERSIGHT. SO IN DOING ALL OF THIS, WE HAVE LOOKED DEEPER INTO THE BUDGET AND ANY QUESTIONS THAT ANYBODY HAVE ON THEIR INDIVIDUAL BUDGET. WE HAVE BEEN RUNNING DETAIL LISTINGS. I WILL SAY THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW THINGS THAT, IF THEY WERE QUESTIONED, WAS MAYBE PUT TO THE WRONG LINE ITEM OR AGAIN HAD BEEN FOUND AND MISCODED OR REALIZED, YOU KNOW, ONCE WE LOOKED AT THE INVOICE DEEPER THAT MAYBE A VENDOR SUBMITTED INVOICE THAT WAS FOR TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, AND THAT WAS JUST AN OVERSIGHT BY WHOEVER RECEIVED THE BILL FIRST. SO THERE MAY BE MINOR ADJUSTMENTS THAT YOU SEE THAT WOULD EVEN BACK OUT. GENERAL FUND IT. I WILL SAY ON BOTH IT IT'LL GENERAL FUND AND UTILITY. IT'S GOING TO BE A SIMILAR SCENARIO UPFRONT. ANNUAL FEES FOR SOFTWARE LICENSES, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. IT'S A ONE CLUMP UPFRONT GOLF. SO BEFORE YOU JUMP TO THAT, I TEED UP BEFORE JORDAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES EXPENSES IS RIGHT AT 25.9. SO FOR WHATEVER REASON THE REVENUE IS DOWN, BUT THE EXPENSES ARE NOT DOWN. BUT THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WORTH, WHICH IT MAY BE WORTH TAKING JUST A LOOK AT. ON THE GOLF COURSE. GOLF COURSE REVENUE IS SLIGHTLY DOWN. THE ONE NUMBER THAT SEEMS TO STICK OUT AS BEING THE LOWEST OF REVENUE IS HANDICAP FEES. HANDICAP FEES ARE SIMILAR AS FAR AS IT'S AN ANNUAL. IT IS AN ANNUAL THING THAT PEOPLE PAY FOR. AND SO I BELIEVE THAT THAT ANNUAL RENEWAL JUST HAS NOT COME UP YET. SO I BELIEVE IT WILL CATCH UP. WE ALSO JUST FINISHED THE COLDEST MONTHS AND FREEZES. SO I HAVE OBVIOUSLY I BELIEVE THAT THAT HAS SOME TO DO WITH IT. ONE OF THE LAST GOLF REPORTS, MONTHLY REPORTS WAS THAT MEMBERSHIPS WERE DOWN. 
          IS THAT WHAT GENERALLY HAPPENS? LIKE THEY GO DOWN IN THE OFF SEASONS AND THEN PEOPLE PICK BACK UP IN THE I, I WOULD SAY I THINK WHEN THE COURSE DOESN'T LOOK THE BEST AND IT'S THE COLDEST, PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO COME SIGN UP FOR AN EXPENSIVE MEMBERSHIP. THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT IS GOING AND SIGNING UP FOR A MEMBERSHIP WHEN IT'S CHRISTMAS TIME AND THANKSGIVING AND ALL THAT KIND OF THING. I WILL SAY, WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IS A LOT OF GIFT CERTIFICATES COMING THROUGH FOR FOR FORM OF PAYMENT. SUSAN MADE THE COMMENT LITERALLY TODAY WAS LIKE, OH MY GOSH, ANOTHER GIFT CERTIFICATE. SO PEOPLE HAVE BOUGHT GIFT CERTIFICATES AS GIFTS FOR CHRISTMAS. JUST AS A SIDE NOTE, GOLF COURSE EXPENDITURES. THE MAINTENANCE BUDGET IS SLIGHTLY OVER AGAIN. LIABILITY UPFRONT COST FOR THEIR INSURANCE IS WHAT PUT THEM A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN NORMAL UTILITY FUND ON THE UTILITY FUND REVENUE. EVERYONE SAW THIS IN THE PACKET, AND IF ANYONE TRIED TO PAY THEIR BILL ONLINE IN IN JANUARY, YOU SAW THERE WAS A GLITCH IN THE SOFTWARE WHEN THE BILLING WENT OUT. WHEN THE BILLING WENT OUT, IT PICKED UP AN EXTRA READ. AND SO THERE WAS A MISCOMMUNICATION. WE GOT IT FIXED. HOWEVER, IT SOMEHOW MESSED WITH OUR ACTUAL REVENUE LINES. WE DO HAVE A CALL INTO ENCODE, BUT THE READ IS WHAT OUR COMPUTER SYSTEM IS SAYING CURRENTLY IS THE BLACK NUMBERS. ABOVE AND BELOW ARE THE ACTUAL FIGURES. IF YOU GO THROUGH AND I WENT THROUGH AND WENT AND READ, FOUND THE. FILE 
          [03:20:07]
THAT WAS ORIGINALLY SENT TO THE TO OUR BILLING DEPARTMENT, OUR BILLING PROCESSOR. I FOUND THE ORIGINAL FILE AND GOT THE TOTAL DOLLARS, AND THEN I FOUND THE ONE THAT WAS POSTED, AND I DID THE MATH AND CAME UP WITH WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE HAD. AND SO THAT'S WHAT I PUT UP THERE. BUT BESIDES THAT, WE ARE ON TRACK. AGAIN. UTILITY. IT IS A LITTLE BIT OVER FOR THOSE ANNUAL EXPENSES THAT CAME UPFRONT. PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN IS A LITTLE BIT OVER. THEY HAD TO PAY GIS REFRESHING AND SOME DRAINAGE ANALYSIS AND OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT. WATER TREATMENT PLANT ONE THERE WERE SOME EMERGENCY REPAIRS TO INTAKE, BARGE ONE, CLARIFIER MAINTENANCE, AND THEN SOME ONE TIME ANNUAL WATER INTAKE, WATER TANK INSPECTIONS. EFFLUENT DISPOSAL. IS THAT THE ONE THAT WAS. YES. IS THAT SOMETHING WE STILL MAY GET BEAT UP ON? SMALL. I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. SUBMITTED. TO. WE'RE AWARE OF THAT. THE STATE IS COVERING THE LOCAL MATCH AND WE APPLIED FOR THAT TOO, RIGHT? YES. EFFLUENT DISPOSAL. THEY NEEDED A NEW PUMP STATION AND SOME MAJOR IRRIGATION REPAIRS. I BELIEVE WE'VE WE'VE HEARD ABOUT CEDAR BREAKS. THAT WAS ALREADY SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO COUNCIL'S ATTENTION. SOME SMALL THINGS WERE WERE BROUGHT TO STAFF'S ATTENTION AND STAFF TRIED THEIR BEST TO KIND OF HANDLE AND MITIGATE SOME THINGS AT THE VERY BEGINNING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE BEFORE. OBVIOUSLY, THE MAJOR REPAIRS CAME IN FRONT OF COUNCIL LIFT STATION EXPENDITURES, THE LIFT STATION REHAB AND DESIGN, AND THERE WAS SOME MAJOR ODOR CONTROL CHEMICALS AND THINGS THAT NEEDED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF. CIP IMPACT AND DEBT SERVICE ON THE CIP ON REVENUE. WE DID NOT BUDGET FOR THE INVESTMENT INTEREST. IT WAS AN OVERSIGHT ON MY PART. I WILL SAY, ON THE IMPACT FEE REVENUE. IT IS DOWN BECAUSE, AGAIN, THE REMAPPING OF THE STREET IMPACT FEE REVENUE, WE BUDGETED FOR IT. HOWEVER, IT IS NOT BEING MAPPED THERE CORRECTLY. SO ONCE I DO THAT JOURNAL ENTRY THAT THOSE FUNDS WILL COME OVER INTO THE IMPACT FEE FUND CORRECTLY. DEBT SERVICE EXPENDITURES HAVEN'T SPENT ANYTHING BECAUSE OUR FIRST PAYMENT ISN'T DUE UNTIL THE 15TH OF THIS MONTH. MY FIRST QUESTION IS CAN WE BE SENT THAT? I DON'T KNOW IF WE WERE SENT THAT PRESENTATION, IT JUST GOT FINISHED YESTERDAY. SO IT CAN BE SENT? YES, WE CAN POST IT TO THE WEBSITE TO, I DON'T KNOW, COUNCIL. MAYBE ONCE THE ACTUAL NUMBERS IN AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET SO WE CAN PLAY AROUND WITH IT OR. START. OKAY. YEAH, YEAH I WAS I WAS GOING TO SAY I KNOW AS SHE FINISHES UP EACH MONTH, ANYTHING THAT SHE PUTS OUT, SHE NOW KNOWS THAT WE ARE IMMEDIATELY, ESPECIALLY COUNCILOR PRINCE AND I ARE GOING TO SAY, CAN WE PLEASE HAVE THAT IN EXCEL, LIKE IMMEDIATELY? SO WHAT I HEARD UP HERE IS, YOU KNOW, MAPPING ERRORS. THERE WAS A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE ENDED UP CATCHING ON THOSE SPREADSHEETS. 
          I KNOW WE'RE GOING THROUGH ALL OF THESE UPGRADES AND MOVING IN CODE FROM LOCALLY HOUSED IN REGARD TO OUR SERVERS TO GOING ONLINE. NOW WE'RE GOING TO BE AND I KNOW I OWE YOU SOME DATES FOR THE AT LEAST, THAT I'M AVAILABLE FOR THE FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING. BUT I KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE GOING INTO THE CHART OF ACCOUNT UPGRADE 
          [03:25:03]
BEFORE TOO LONG. SO I WOULD JUST ASK THAT AMONGST THAT THAT WE DISCUSS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW THE HOW WE'RE CATCHING SOME OF THESE MAPPINGS, DO WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF THOSE AS WE DO OUR, YOU KNOW, CHART OF ACCOUNTS. AND THEN ARE THOSE POTENTIALLY GOING TO REOCCUR? I WOULD ASSUME, YOU KNOW, IN A PROCESS LIKE THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE MISTAKES. HOW ARE WE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CATCH THEM TO KEEP IT ON TRACK. SO JUST THAT'S MORE JUST COMMENTS AND THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO. MR. PRINCE TO SEVERAL COMMENTS. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU. THIS IS A BIG STEP FORWARD. I APPRECIATE THAT IT. AS YOU LOOK AT THIS AND YOU LOOK AT ALL OF THESE LISTS, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT DIDN'T SOUND LIKE THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S A RED FLAG, BUT ARE THERE ANY YELLOW FLAGS WHERE YOU'RE LIKE, WE NEED OR THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR NEEDS TO KEEP AN EYE ON THIS OVER THE NEXT QUARTER OR TWO TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WE'RE OKAY. ARE THERE ANY DEPARTMENT LEVEL EXPENSES WHERE WHERE YOU THINK SOME MORE ATTENTION NEEDS TO BE PAID? AS OF RIGHT NOW, I WOULD SAY NO. OKAY. EVERY WEEK AFTER THE CHECK RUN IS DONE, ROSE DISTRIBUTES THE EXPENDITURE REPORT TO EVERY DEPARTMENT HEAD. AND THEY ARE EXPECTED TO REVIEW THEIR OWN EXPENDITURE REPORT. I WILL GIVE KUDOS TO DAVID BECAUSE HE COMES BACK EVERY SINGLE WEEK WITH A QUESTION AND SAYING, CAN YOU PLEASE PRINT ME THIS LINE? I WANT TO KNOW EVERY SINGLE THING THAT CAME OUT OF IT. SO WE I WILL SAY WE DO HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE VERY, VERY DILIGENTLY LOOKING THROUGH AND ASKING QUESTIONS. AGAIN. I WILL ALSO GIVE KUDOS TO ROSE AND SAYING BRINGING HER ON STAFF HAS BEEN GREAT. SHE IS VERY DILIGENT ABOUT CHECKING EXPENDITURES AND HOW PEOPLE ARE CODING THINGS. I THINK THAT OUR STAFF HAS GOTTEN BETTER THAN PREVIOUSLY AND THINGS ARE BEING WATCHED A LITTLE BIT MORE CAREFULLY AND SCRUTINIZED, PROBABLY MORE THAN THEY HAD BEEN. AND CHARLES AND I HAD THE CONVERSATION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FROM HERE, FORWARD BUDGET MEETINGS, DEPARTMENT HEADS, BEING IN HERE AND TALKING TO EVERYONE ABOUT BEING MORE DILIGENT AND REQUESTING THAT THEY ARE PAYING AND RECOGNIZE THIS IS THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE FISCAL YEAR. AND AS WE GO ALONG, YOU'LL GET, YOU KNOW, YOUR PENCIL WILL GET SHARPER AND SHARPER. BUT ONE THING THAT I WOULD LIKE AS PART OF YOUR PRESENTATION IS JUST SORT OF THE MACRO PICTURE, YOU KNOW, ON OUR BIG FUNDS, ON ON THE GENERAL FUND AND THE UTILITY FUND, ESPECIALLY THOSE TWO ARE WE DO BEST YOU CAN TELL. 
          ARE WE ON TRACK TO TO BE ABOUT ON BUDGET FOR REVENUE AND EXPENSES, OR DO YOU THINK WE'RE WE'RE TRENDING SO THAT WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BE ABOVE OR BELOW IF YOU CAN JUST KIND OF GIVE A, YOU KNOW, QUALITATIVE TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU CAN SAY, I'M CONCERNED THAT IF THIS KEEPS GOING AS IS, WE COULD BE 10 TO 20% BELOW ON REVENUE AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR. 
          THAT'S THE KIND OF COMMENTS I WOULD I WOULD MIGHT HELP. OKAY. YEAH. AND AND THEN THE LAST THING AND THIS IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING, IT'S NOT IN YOUR PRESENTATION BUT IN, IN THE THE MATERIAL, WHICH I THINK IS IN THE PACKET OF THE BALANCE OF THE FUNDS. AND I JUST PRINTED OUT THE QUARTERLY ONE HERE WE HAVE ON THIS SHEET, WE HAVE 36 LOGIC ACCOUNTS AND 18 OF THEM ARE INTEREST ON THE OTHER 18. AND I'M WONDERING, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO CONSOLIDATE? BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS NOW IS THERE'S, FOR EXAMPLE, A DEBT SERVICE INTEREST ACCOUNT WHICH EARNS SOME INTEREST, AND THEN THERE'S A TRANSFER OUT WHICH GOES INTO THE DEBT SERVICE ACCOUNT. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT JUST MAKES IT HARDER TO READ AND TRACK. 
          YOU KNOW, MY, MY, MY BANK ACCOUNT. I DON'T HAVE A SEPARATE INTEREST CHECKING ACCOUNT. I HAVE JUST CHECKING. RIGHT. AND FOR ME, IF WE COULD, WE COULD COMBINE THESE 218 ACCOUNTS INSTEAD OF 36 LOGIC ACCOUNTS. IT'D BE EASIER TO KEEP TRACK OF THESE. I'M HOPING TO GET IT DOWN TO LESS THAN 18 ACCOUNTS AT THE TIME. IT'S ALSO EVEN BETTER, BUT TO THE EXTENT WE CAN SIMPLIFY IT AND MAKE IT EASIER TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON. YES, THAT WAS A QUESTION I ACTUALLY JUST RECENTLY ASKED IS WHY WAS INTEREST SET UP INTO ITS OWN ACCOUNT? BECAUSE THAT MAKES NO SENSE TO ME. I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT. AND LIKE I WAS VISITING WITH NICOLE THIS WEEK, THAT THAT NEXT QUARTERLY REPORT WILL BE A LOT DIFFERENT THAN THIS ONE. AND THIS IS THAT'S THE ONE I LOOK AT THE CLOSEST AND START ASKING HARD QUESTIONS AND DEPARTMENTS AND STUFF, BECAUSE WE'LL BE AT THE HALFWAY MARK OF THE FISCAL YEAR. WE OUGHT TO KNOW AT THAT POINT WHERE WE'RE GOING TO FINISH OUT THE YEAR EXPENDITURE EVERY. ANY OTHER 
          [03:30:05]
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR THE BUDGET RELATED? ACTUALLY, WHERE ARE WE AT ON THE CHART OF ACCOUNTS? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S STILL BEING WORKED ON? OKAY. AUDITORS WERE ON SITE THIS WEEK. AND SO SOME OF THOSE CHART OF ACCOUNT QUESTIONS WERE QUESTIONS I WAS TRYING TO HAVE WITH THEM. AS FAR AS ASKING ABOUT CHANGING SOME OF THE CHARTS. CHART OF ACCOUNTS AND MOVING LARGE CIP PROJECTS INTO THEIR OWN FUND. AND ALL OF THAT UNDERSTANDING IF THAT WAS POTENTIALLY SOMETHING THAT WE COULD FIX FOR THE 2425 ALREADY, AND THEN THAT WAY MOVING FORWARD SO THAT WE COULD GET A BETTER IDEA. I KNOW THAT THAT IS ONE OF COUNCIL'S LARGEST REQUESTS. AND SO THAT WAS ONE THING THAT WE HAVE ALREADY ASKED THEM ABOUT. AND TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY AGREE WITH US AND, AND THEY KIND OF GUIDE US AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. SO WE ARE IN THE WORKS TRYING TO MAKE IT HAPPEN, WHICH IS WHY CHARLES REQUESTED A MEETING WITH YOU. I THINK Y'ALL ARE GOING TO LIKE THIS AUDITING FIRM. I'VE ALREADY BEEN IMPRESSED WITH THEM. AND THEY ARE. THEY'RE THE I LIKE IT BECAUSE THEY REAFFIRMING WHAT I'VE ALREADY TAUGHT. THAT HELPS. BUT YES THEY THEY'RE THEY'RE REAL SHARP. AND THESE GUYS WORK LATE INTO THE NIGHT. WE WERE EMAILING AT MIDNIGHT LAST NIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S IT. THEN WE CAN PROCEED ONTO THE 
          [IX.10. Discussion regarding the Franchise Agreement with Pedernales Electric Cooperative (PEC).]
NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. NICOLE. THANK YOU. NICOLE I WAS GOING TO JUMP TO. NUMBER TEN DISCUSSION REGARDING THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH PECK. AND THAT WOULD BE CHARLES OR VICTOR ON THAT. AND I THINK, AGAIN, WE'RE STILL JUST TRYING TO GET TO A PLACE WHERE WE CAN ACTUALLY BRING IT FORWARD. ARE WE THERE YET? WE'RE CLOSE. I BEEN DOING REDLINE COPIES ALL DAY. OR I SAY I CHATGPT BEEN DOING IT, TRYING TO INCORPORATE A LOT OF THE INFORMATION THAT VICTOR PROVIDED ME. SO THAT IS NOT IN THE PACKET. BUT I DID GIVE Y'ALL A HAVE A DRAFT OF A COPY PRINTED OUT. ROBIN LAID UP HERE ON THE DAIS FOR EVERYBODY TO LOOK AT. I THINK SINCE MOST OF US ARE PICKING THIS UP TO READ IT, IT SAYS WE HAVE NOT LOOKED AT IT. THIS MIGHT BE GOOD TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING TO PUSH IT FORWARD. OR WE CAN PUT THIS ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD AND OTHER TOP FIVE. I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO PUT THE RED LINES ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD. AND MY RECOMMENDATION. WE STILL HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME, SO LET'S LET'S PUSH IT TO THE NEXT MEETING AND DISCUSS IT MORE, BECAUSE I HAVEN'T EVEN HAD A CHANCE TO SEND THIS TO STAFF FOR REVIEW YET. YEAH. CAN I ONE WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A BIT IN THE PAST, I RAISED THE CONCERN THAT FRANCHISE FEES REALLY ARE PASSED THROUGH TO OUR CITIZENS. RIGHT. AND SO I SEE IN THE RED LINE PROPOSAL TO CHANGE FROM 2% TO 4%, WHICH WOULD BRING MORE REVENUE TO THE CITY, BUT IT WOULD COME FROM THE CITIZENS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT. AND I'M NOT SURE IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT. RIGHT. I'M NOT SURE I'M OKAY WITH THAT. 4% IS WHERE IT'S CURRENTLY AT NOW. YEAH, THE 2% WAS WHAT PECK HAD ASKED US TO DROP TO. SO JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I CITED THIS OUT FOR CLARITY. I KNOW WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE PROVISION ABOUT AUTOMATIC RENEWALS, AND SO I JUST WANT TO ENSURE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LETTING THE AGREEMENT EXPIRE, THAT PECK JUST DOESN'T TURN OFF ELECTRICITY IN LAGO VISTA. ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE THERE ARE OTHER ENTITIES THAT THAT WOULD BE THE CASE. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. WE CAN HAVE A PROVISION OF REVISITING THE CONTRACT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T PUT OURSELVES IN A POSITION TO WHERE SOMETHING JUST BECAUSE IT SAYS, OH, YOU'RE EXPIRED. SORRY, NO MORE ELECTRICITY, LAGO VISTA. NO, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. 
          PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION WOULDN'T LET THE ELECTRIC COMPANY JUST TURN THE POWER OFF. 
          AND PLUS, THAT WOULD BE A BIG HIT TO THEIR REVENUE SOURCE IF THEY TURNED OUR ELECTRICITY OFF. 
          MR. BENFIELD, JUST PIGGYBACKING ON WHAT COUNCILOR PRINCE WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT. WITH THAT 
          [03:35:02]
2% TO 4% FEE, YOU KNOW, I WAS I WAS A PROPONENT OF KEEPING IT AT 4% BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT WAS GOING TO AFFECT OUR BUDGET. I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT I THINK THAT FOUR REDUCING FROM 4% TO 2% WOULD BASICALLY PUT SOMEWHERE LIKE A 200 TO $250,000 BUDGET DEFICIT THAT WE WERE COUNTING ON. BUT AS I LOOK THROUGH THE THROUGH THE AGREEMENT, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THIS AGREEMENT ACTUALLY TAKES INTO EFFECT UNTIL WHAT, AUGUST. AND WITH OUR NEW BUDGET CYCLE STARTING IN SEPTEMBER, YOU ACTUALLY COULD REASONABLY LOWER THAT FEE FROM 4% TO 2% IF COUNCIL WANTED TO, WITHOUT IT REALLY AFFECTING OUR BUDGET, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A ADJUSTMENT IN SEPTEMBER TO COLLECT THOSE ADDITIONAL FUNDS, YOU'RE EITHER YOU'RE EITHER GOING TO COLLECT THOSE FUNDS FROM PECK, OR YOU'RE GOING TO THOSE FUNDS THROUGH TAXES. SO THAT WAS JUST MY $0.02. BUT I DO I DO THINK YOU CAN LOWER THAT TO 2%. BUT IT WOULD IT WOULD REQUIRE A AN INCREASE IN THE. IN THE RATE. FURTHER COMMENTS I DON'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS AND I WILL PROCEED ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. WE 
          [IX.2. Discussion on An Ordinance Of The City Of Lago Vista, Texas, Amending Chapter 9, Article 9.8, Section 9.805 Of The Code Of Ordinances Also Known As “Duties And Powers”; Providing For A Finding Of Fact Clause; Providing For Severability; Providing For A Repealer; Providing An Effective Date; Providing For A Projects In Transition Clause; Providing For A Codification And Publication Clause And Providing An Open Meetings Clause.]
WILL GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER TWO, DISCUSSION ON AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER NINE, ARTICLE 9.8, SECTION 9.805 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, ALSO KNOWN AS DUTIES AND POWERS PROVIDING FOR A FINDING OF FACT CLAUSE. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. 
          PROVIDING FOR A REPEALER. PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PROVIDING FOR A PROJECTS AND TRANSITION CLAUSE. PROVIDING FOR A CODIFICATION OF PUBLICATION CLAUSE AND PROVIDING AN OPEN MEETINGS CLAUSE. AND I HAVE JORDAN MAYOR AND COUNCIL. SO THIS ONE A LOT OF THE CHANGES WERE MINOR. IT RELATES TO THE AUTHORITIES AND DUTIES OF THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I KNOW THAT BRAD HAS EXPRESSED SOME CONCERNS ABOUT SOME OF THE WORDING THAT'S IN THERE. MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT. THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION HAD WORKED ON THIS PRIOR TO MY COMING ON BOARD, AND SO I MAY NOT HAVE ALL THE BACKSTORY, BUT I THINK I KNOW THE INTENT. COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THAT? WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT? WERE YOU GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE ESTHETIC GUIDELINES? WELL, I'M ASSUMING PIGGYBACKING OFF OF BRAD. WE HAVE TO BE VERY COGNIZANT ABOUT THAT AND THE FACT THAT STATE LAW HAS CHANGED. AND SO. QUITE FRANKLY, THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO EITHER REMOVE IT OR. WELL, THERE IS NO WAR REALLY. SO. COUNCIL, I GAVE YOU MY ADVICE BACK IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. THIS IS ON THE ITEMS THAT WE DISCUSSED, OBVIOUSLY WITH Y'ALL'S CONSENT. I'M HAPPY TO GIVE LEGAL ADVICE OUT HERE IN THE OPEN. AND AS JORDAN MENTIONED, YOU'RE NODDING YOUR HEAD AS JORDAN. AS JORDAN MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, IT CHANGES TO STATE LAW OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS WITH REGARD TO MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY TO REGULATE BUILDING MATERIALS. YOU, YOU, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE MORE STRINGENT STANDARDS THAN, THAN BASELINE BUILDING CODES. AND THAT INCLUDES FOR ESTHETIC PURPOSES. 
          SO. ANYTHING THAT. YOU. OKAY, SO I DON'T HAVE THE LANGUAGE TO MAKE IT A PAGE. THE THE LINE IN THE FIRST SECTION THAT THAT SAYS THAT PSC CAN REGULATE OR CREATE ESTHETIC STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES. SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT. I MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO STRIKE THAT FROM ANY PROPOSAL THAT YOU OR TO. ADOPT. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS NOT AN ACTION ITEM TONIGHT, BUT I WOULD RECOMMEND STRIKING IT BECAUSE I THINK IT IS PROBABLY PREEMPTED BY STATE LAW AND AN INVITATION TO LAWSUITS. I THINK COUNCIL IS NEITHER HAD AN AGREEMENT TO REMOVE THAT. WE'LL BRING THIS BACK. ABSOLUTELY. I READ UP ON THIS A LITTLE BIT AFTER LAST NIGHT'S BUILDING STANDARDS MEETING, AND IT'S IT'S QUITE CLEAR THAT IT IS ALREADY CAUSING A NUMBER OF LAWSUITS. SO I WOULD SAY THAT WE NEED TO REMOVE THAT COMPLETELY. AND SOME OF IT CAME DOWN TO EVEN JUST STUCCO AND DIFFERENT TYPES OF FACADES. AND YEAH, IT WAS PRETTY, PRETTY BAD. 
          [03:40:06]
IT WAS NOT EVEN WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT HOA STUFF, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST REGULAR. 
          OKAY. WELL, I THINK THAT'S SOUNDS LIKE THE ONE CHANGE TO BRING IT BACK WITH. OKAY. THANK 
          [IX.3. Discussion on An Ordinance Of The City Of Lago Vista, Texas, Amending Chapter 3, Article 3.1, Section 3.110 Of The Code Of Ordinances Also Known As “Permits And Approvals”; Providing For A Finding Of Fact Clause; Providing For Severability; Providing For A Repealer; Providing An Effective Date; Providing For A Projects In Transition Clause; Providing For A Codification And Publication Clause And Providing An Open Meetings Clause]
YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THAT EITHER. SO I WILL PROCEED ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, DISCUSSION ON AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER THREE, ARTICLE 3.1, SECTION 3.110 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, ALSO KNOWN AS PERMITS AND APPROVALS PROVIDING FOR A FINDING OF FACT CLAUSE. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. 
          PROVIDING FOR A REPEALER. PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PROVIDING FOR PROJECTS OF TRANSITION CLAUSE. PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION OF PUBLICATION CLAUSE AND PROVIDING AN OPEN MEETING CLAUSE. AND I HAVE JORDAN MAYOR COUNCIL. AGAIN. THIS IS ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION FROM THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION. THE THE BIGGEST CHANGE YOU'LL NOTICE IS AN EXTENSION ON THOSE PERMIT TIMELINES. SO ANYTHING OVER 5000FT HAS NOW 5000FT■S HAS NOW BEEN EXTENDED UP TO 24 MONTHS, WHICH I BELIEVE RIGHT NOW IT'S 12. AND THEN ANYTHING UNDER 5000 GOES FROM 12 TO 18. MULTIFAMILY WILL STAY ON THE SAME 24 MONTH SCHEDULE. THERE'S A LOT OF CLEANUP AND CLARIFICATION IN THE ORDINANCE ORDINANCE ITSELF TO TRY TO. IT WAS VERY CONFUSING ORDINANCE WHEN IT STARTED. JUST AS TO WHO HAS AUTHORITY OVER WHAT. AND THOSE CLARIFICATIONS YOU'LL NOTE IN THE PACKET, THERE'S QUITE A FEW, BUT IT'S MOSTLY LANGUAGE CLEANUP. WITH THAT, THEY'VE ALSO ADDED THAT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CAN HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GRANT EXTENSIONS TO AN EXTENT IF THERE IS A HARDSHIP PROVEN UP AND APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, THOSE ARE GOING TO BE YOUR MAIN CHANGES THAT YOU SEE. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. MY QUESTION WAS IS I'VE HEARD ABOUT THE DISCUSSION OF HARDSHIPS, AND THAT'S ACTUALLY A LEGALLY DEFINED THING, AND WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT THE VSC HAS BEEN DEALING WITH IS DEFINITIONS. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE GOING WITH THE WHAT THE LEGAL DEFINITION IS ON WHEN WE WHEN WE BRING THIS FORWARD TO US, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY GRAY AREA ON THAT FOR THE WHAT'S CONSIDERED A HARDSHIP AND WHAT'S. SO I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK OUR CODE AND WHAT OUR CODE DEFINES IT AS. AND IF OUR CODE IS WITH STATE LAWS DEFINITION OF HARDSHIPS BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION, IT GOES BACK TO THE CONFLICTING ORDINANCES. 
          AND SO WE CAN DO A DEFINITIONS CHECK AND BRING THAT UP AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING TO DISCUSS. 
          BUT IF IT'S NOT DEFINED OR IT'S UNCLEAR, WE DEFAULT TO STATE LAW, PERIOD. SO IF IT IS DEFINED, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IN COMPLIANCE. IF NOT, WE'LL EITHER PUT IT IN OR DEFAULT TO, JUST AS DEFINED BY STATE LAW. I REMEMBER THE RECOMMENDATION OR SOMEONE SAYING THEY, YOU KNOW, DIDN'T WANT TO GRANT SOMEBODY A HARDSHIP JUST BECAUSE THEIR DOG DIED AND THEY WERE HAVING SOME, YOU KNOW, GRIEVING ISSUES. BUT IT ACTUALLY HAD TO BE A HARDSHIP THAT WAS IMPACTING THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING. YOU KNOW, WEATHER CHANGES, NATURAL DISASTER, YOU KNOW, HEALTH RELATED ISSUES OR FUNDING THAT IS REVOKED OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. AND THAT WOULD BE SO WE WOULD HAVE TO THE WAY IT READS NOW, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE WHATEVER STATE LAW DEFINES AS HARDSHIP. IF WE ARE GOING TO FOCUS SOMETHING MORE ON THE LINES OF FORCE MAJEURE ACTS OF GOD THAT NOBODY CAN CONTROL, AND THAT'S OUR DEFINED HARDSHIP, HARDSHIP. WE NEED TO DEFINE IT DIFFERENTLY THAN HARDSHIP, AND IT NEEDS TO BE CLEARLY SPELLED OUT AS TO A FORCE MAJEURE EVENT OR, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT. 
          AND SO WE CAN WE CAN SEE WHAT THAT IS. I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A SITUATION WHERE IT'S A LOT LIKE THE VARIANCE PROCESS, WHEN YOU HAVE TO PROVE A HARDSHIP. I THINK THE STATE DEFINES A HARDSHIP AS NOT WHAT THE INTENT OF THE BSC WAS. SO WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT. 
          ABSOLUTELY. MR. PRINCE, I HAVE A KIND OF A LARGER SCOPE QUESTION. SO WE HAVE BEFORE US HERE TWO ITEMS THAT ARE ORDINANCE CHANGES SUGGESTED BY OUR COMMISSION. ARE YOU IS YOUR INTENT FOR FOR PLANNING AND ZONING AND BUILDING STANDARDS TO CONTINUE TO PUSH ITEMS LIKE THIS THROUGH THAT ARE MAYBE IMPORTANT TO THEM IN PARALLEL WITH THIS UTC CLEANUP EFFORT? OR ARE YOU TRYING TO KIND OF PUT THOSE ON HOLD WHILE WE DO THE UTC CLEANUP? SO FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, THERE'S LITTLE FISH AND THERE'S BIG FISH. AND SO JUST FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE PERSPECTIVE, ANYTHING IN THE DEVELOPMENT REALM THAT APPLIES HAS TO BE HELD UNDER THE STANDARDS OF THAT CODE AT THE ADOPTED TIME. AND SO IF WE CONTINUE TO MAKE 
          [03:45:03]
INCREMENTAL CHANGES OVER THE NEXT 6 TO 9 MONTHS, WHILE WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, EVERY INCREMENTAL CHANGE HAS TO BE KEPT FOREVER AND TRACKED WITH THE PROJECTS THAT APPLIED UNDER THAT CODE. AND WE HAVE WE CAN'T WE HAVE TO KEEP IT FOREVER. AND SO LITTLE FISH, NOT A BIG DEAL. THEY'LL TRANSITION OVER. NOT WORRIED ABOUT IT. LIKE THE POCKET PARK THING, FOR INSTANCE. WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE PARK IN THE UPDATE. RIGHT. AND SO STRIKING SOMETHING LIKE THAT ISN'T DOESN'T CAUSE HEARTBURN WHEN IT COMES TO BIGGER CHANGES OR THINGS THAT IMPACT THE DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING OVER THE NEXT 6 TO 9 MONTHS. I, DEPENDING ON THE ORDINANCE AND EVERY ORDINANCE, WILL BE DIFFERENT. THERE WILL BE SOME CONCERNS. AND IF WE GET INTO THIS REWRITE AND IT CONFLICTS WITH SOMETHING WE JUST ADOPTED, WE HAVE A BIGGER ISSUE. IF ESPECIALLY IF WE DEFAULT TO WHAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY. AND IT JUST IT GETS A LITTLE WONKY DEPENDING ON THE ORDINANCE ITSELF. SO ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, YOUR INTENT IS TO KIND OF WORK THOSE WITH THE CHAIRS OF THE TWO COMMISSIONERS. 
          THAT'S THE INTENT. I AGAIN LIKE THE PERMIT EXTENSIONS. IT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT WE DO NEED AND IT SHOULD BE IN THERAPY. RIGHT. NOT AS WORRIED ABOUT THAT. THE AUTHORITY'S IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD BE A LITTLE MORE HESITANT OF BECAUSE ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE GIVING AUTHORITY TO CITY STAFF, IN THIS CASE, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, IF THAT CHANGES, OR THAT'S NOT THE DIRECTION THAT GOES, BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETHING CONFLICTING, AS WE SAW TODAY WITH THE THE PERMIT EXPIRED OR THE EXTENSION, IF WE GET IN THIS WEIRD GRAY AREA AND AUTHORITY CHANGES, WHATEVER HAPPENS FROM WHEN THIS ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED TO WHEN WE CHANGE, IT FALLS UNDER A DIFFERENT SET OF REGULATIONS. SO YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR, WELL, MY NEIGHBOR DIDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT, YOU KNOW. AND SO IT GETS A LITTLE IT GETS A LITTLE WONKY. 
          AND I PREFER TO NOT PUT US IN A SITUATION WHERE WE WILL LOSE TRUST WITH THE COMMUNITY AND WITH OUR BUILDERS, AND IT'S IT'S A TOUCHY AREA TO BE. ON THIS ONE. YEAH. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. OKAY, SO AS I'M THINKING ABOUT THIS, I ACTUALLY WANT TO REFER THIS TO BE RUN. I GUESS UNLESS WE APPROVE IT, IT'S NOT THERE FOR THEM TO RUN THROUGH THE CODE, RIGHT? OR INTO THE NEW FORMAT. I'M. I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT DOING TOO MUCH OF THIS. NOW, THAT SAID, I'M GOING TO I WILL JUST SAY I'M A BIG PROPONENT OF CHANGING THE TO THE 18 MONTHS AND 24 MONTHS AND THAT PIECE OF IT. BUT THE CHANGE OF AUTHORITIES AND STUFF. I'M I'M WITH YOU ON THAT. I REALLY DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT COME THROUGH AT THIS POINT IN TIME, ACTUALLY. WOULD JUST LIKE TO MINIMALLY PULL OUT MAYBE SOME THINGS THAT WE FEEL REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE IS TRULY, TRULY NEEDED. AND THEN LET LET'S PUT IT BACK ON THE BACK END OF WHEN WE DO THE POLICY UPDATES. AND THIS MAY EVEN BE A PRIME EXAMPLE. THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THE POLICY VERSUS. 
          THIS IS IT. YOU KNOW, THIS IS HOW WE'LL APPROACH IT. THIS IS HOW WE'LL COME BACK AND SAY IT. 
          IT'S A PERFECT EXAMPLE. YEAH, I WAS GOING TO MAKE THE SUGGESTION THAT I BRING THIS UP ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD WHERE WE JUST PULLED THIS OUT AND SEPARATE THOSE INTO TWO DIFFERENT THINGS AND DO THE DO THE TIMELINE NOW, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT IS GOING TO BE WHAT'S CARRIED FORWARD IN THE FUTURE. BUT THE THE ACTUAL. I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH, YOU KNOW, CHANGING SOME OF THE THINGS I DO, I THINK THAT'S A BIG PROBLEM RIGHT NOW IS, IS KEEPING THE TRUST OF THE COMMUNITY AND OUR BUILDERS AND CHANGING SOMETHING THAT MIGHT GET CHANGED AGAIN IN SIX MONTHS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA. IT NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT. SO I WOULD I KNOW THE THE PSC HAS BEEN WORKING ON THIS AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT WON'T GET ADOPTED. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF IT'S SHOULD BE DISCUSSED RIGHT NOW. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE SENDING THIS TO THE DISCUSSION BOARD. SO THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. THEN I WILL PROCEED ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. OKAY. I'LL JUST GO INTO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT DISCUSSION OF WORKSHOP ON 
          [IX.8. Discussion and workshop on Emergency Preparedness.]
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS. I THINK THE. WE I ORIGINALLY PUT THIS ON HERE, THERE WAS A FEW UPDATES I WAS GOING TO GIVE. BUT CHARLES, YOU'VE ADDED IN THERE AS WELL. YOU STILL NEEDED 
          [03:50:04]
TO DESIGNATE WHO STEPS IN IN YOUR ABSENCE, AND YOU PUT FORWARD ERIC ZENO. I JUST START THERE FIRST. I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT, AND WE CAN PUT THAT ON THE 19TH. IF EVERYBODY IS GOOD WITH THAT. SEEMS LIKE ERIC'S GOT THE MOST MUNICIPAL EXPERIENCE OUT OF ALL OF MY STAFF OUTSIDE OF MAYBE DAVID, BUT ERIC'S GOT THAT EXPERIENCE HERE IN LARGO, AND I THINK HE WOULD BE A REALLY GOOD DEAL. AND I'VE BEEN COLLABORATING WITH ERIC QUITE A BIT LATELY, AND. HE'S PRETTY SHARP. WITH THAT. SO THE OTHER PART OF IT WAS JUST SORT OF TALKING ABOUT THE LARGER EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON. I DID SEE AN EMAIL. 
          MAYBE WE ALL DID. CHARLES, YOU ASKED EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS HEADS TO GET YOU THEIR DEPARTMENT. SOP'S. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE GOTTEN ALL OF THEM YET. YOU GOT SOME. BUT AT SOME POINT WHEN WE REALLY HAVE THIS CONVERSATION, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ALL THOSE TOGETHER. AND WE DON'T HAVE THOSE RIGHT NOW IN FRONT OF US. AND THE CONCEPT BEHIND THAT IS OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE OUR OVERALL EMERGENCY PLAN THAT EVERYBODY IN TRAVIS COUNTY HAS. BUT HERE IN CITY HALL, I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR US TO BETTER FORMALIZE AND PUT IN SOP'S WHAT WE HAVE. I SENT CHARLES A FRAMEWORK FOR AN SOP FOR EVERY DEPARTMENT, AND WHAT IT REALLY IS, IS SORT OF A GUIDELINE OF ALL THE THINGS THAT EACH DEPARTMENT SHOULD BE THINKING OF. IF WE ARE, YOU KNOW, GOING INTO A POTENTIAL EMERGENCY AND SOME OF THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE A LITTLE MORE DUTIES, LIKE PUBLIC WORKS, YOU KNOW, IT'D BE HELPFUL TO KNOW THEIR INVENTORY OF EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE ON HAND AT THAT TIME. AND THE IDEA IS WHEN THIS GETS FINALIZED IS IN PLACE, YOU KNOW, IN THE DAYS LEADING UP TO A POTENTIAL LIKE COLD WEATHER EVENT, EVERY DEPARTMENT, WE SHOULD PULL THAT TOGETHER. WE PULL THROUGH AND LOOK AT IT, MAKE SURE EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING DURING THIS. AND THEN WE HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE DOING SOME TABLETOP EXERCISES THIS YEAR. AND I THINK WE CAN'T REALLY DO THOSE UNTIL WE HAVE THESE DONE. 
          AND THAT WAS MY MAIN FRAMEWORK ON THIS. SO SINCE I DON'T HAVE ALL THAT, MY INTENT WILL BE TO JUST CONTINUE TO BRING UP THIS ITEM AS WE FILL THIS OUT. WE DO HAVE A MEETING. I SET UP TOMORROW AT NOON AT 10 A.M. WITH TO DISCUSS THEIR MITIGATION GRANTS TO TRY AND GET GENERATORS FOR OUR VARIOUS WATER INFRASTRUCTURE. SO I WILL REPORT BACK TO YOU ALL WHAT WE HEAR THERE. AND THEN I'VE REACHED OUT TO A COUPLE OUTDOOR SIREN COMPANIES, AND CHARLES HAS REACHED OUT TO ONE AS WELL. I GUESS I WASN'T AWARE THAT. I REMEMBER YOU GUYS HAD A CONVERSATION, MR. PRINCE, BUT I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THERE WAS A COMPANY THAT TURNED IN A FULL PROPOSAL FOR IT AND HAD MAPPED THINGS OUT. SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE COMPANIES. I REACHED OUT AND THEY SENT ME THE MAP. SO A LOT OF THAT IS JUST WE'RE COVERING OUR BASES AGAIN FOR WHEN TRAVIS COUNTY EVER FINALLY SIGNS THAT AGREEMENT WITH THE WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND THIS FUNDING PROGRAM COMES FORWARD, THEY CAN SEE HOW FAR DOWN THE ROAD WE ARE. ON PREPARING FOR THIS. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAD MY UPDATES. I WILL KICK IT BACK TO YOU ALL. 
          PRO TEM. YEAH, I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU, MAYOR, FOR STARTING TO PUT THIS TOGETHER. 
          WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT FOR QUITE SOME TIME, AND AS I DID A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL HAS STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS IN REGARD TO PREPAREDNESS UNDER CODE CHAPTER 418, AS I UNDERSTAND IT. AND IF WE HAVE GAPS SEPARATING OUR EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FROM THE STATE STATUTE, THAT ACTUALLY CAN AFFECT OUR ELIGIBILITY FOR STATE AND FEDERAL REIMBURSEMENT ON SOME OF THESE ITEMS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE. SO GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS IS NOT JUST A GOOD THING TO DO. IT ACTUALLY IS FISCALLY IMPORTANT AS WELL AS STATUTORILY IMPORTANT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT. THANK YOU. NO FURTHER COMMENTS ON THAT. I CAN PROCEED ON TO THE NEXT ITEM AGAIN, WE WILL SEE THIS ITEM AGAIN VERY SOON. THEN I WILL GO 
          [IX.7. Discussion and workshop on preparing the City of Lago Vista Strategic Work Plan for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.]
BACK TO NUMBER SEVEN DISCUSSION AND WORKSHOP ON PREPARING THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA STRATEGIC WORK PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2526. YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T GIVE GOOD DIRECTION. I THINK WHEN I PUT THIS OUT, WHAT I INTENDED THIS ITEM TO BE WAS EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS STRATEGIC PLANS THAT WE HAD SOMEWHAT DISCUSSED EARLIER IN THE YEAR, AND I WAS HOPING WE'D GET TO A PLACE TO GO, FINALIZE THEM AND PUT THEM FORWARD. BUT THIS ONE APPEARS TO BE THE GENERAL CITY OF STRAT PLAN THAT YOU SEE IN THE PACKET. SO. UP TO COUNCIL ON HOW MUCH YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT. BUT IT WASN'T EXACTLY WHAT I WAS SHOOTING FOR. I WANTED ALL THE DEPARTMENT WANTS BECAUSE I WANT THAT TO BE FINALIZED. AS IT'S FEBRUARY. YOU GUYS ARE ALREADY PARTIALLY COMING THROUGH THE YEAR, AND I KNOW A NUMBER OF YOU SUBMITTED THEM. I THINK WE COULD DO A LOT OF THAT WORK AGAIN ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD. AND IF WE COULD DO THAT, AND THEN I COULD GET US TO A PLACE WHERE WE CAN JUST COME TOGETHER AND FINALIZE IT. YEAH, I THINK WE'LL HAVE IT FINALIZED BY MARCH. I'VE GOT THE LAST 1 OR 2 IN THIS WEEK, SO I THINK WE'LL GET A FINAL DRAFT PUT TOGETHER 
          [03:55:05]
BY THE MARCH 1ST MEETING IN MARCH. I'M JUST NOT CLEAR ON WHAT'S IN THE PACKET. SO THERE IS THIS LAST YEAR'S WORK PLAN OR THE ONE WE'RE CURRENTLY IN THE MIDDLE OF. AND THEN ON PAGE 219 OF THE PACKET, THE FOLLOWING SOMETHING LABELED CITY OF LAGO VISTA STRATEGIC PLAN 2026. WHAT IS THIS AND WHO WROTE THAT? COULD BE AN EARLY OUTLINE THAT I SENT TO CHARLES FROM SIMPLY HOW I WANTED ALL THE DEPARTMENTS TO BE BROKEN DOWN, AND HOW SIMPLIFIED I WANTED IT TO BE. YOU KNOW, THE LAST YEAR'S PLAN WAS SORT OF IDEALISTIC AND HAD THESE LARGE OVERARCHING OBJECTIVES AND GOALS. AND I THINK I SENT HIM THIS OTHER DOCUMENT OF, I WANT IT TO BE MUCH MORE DIRECT. I WANT EACH DEPARTMENT TO LITERALLY SPELL OUT EVERY QUARTER, WHAT ARE YOU WORKING ON AND ACHIEVABLE GOALS RATHER THAN THESE PIE IN THE SKY CONCEPTS OF THINGS. BUT THAT DOCUMENT IS IT STARTS ON PAGE TWO. 19 IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S JUST A REFERENCE. JUST A REFERENCE. OKAY. THAT'S HELPFUL AND I AGREE WITH YOU. I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT. AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO MOVE THE STRATEGIC WORK PLAN INTO A SPACE WHERE IT'S MORE MEANINGFUL AND USEFUL FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. AND EVERY TIME WE TALK ABOUT IT, IT'S LIKE WE WANT GOALS THAT ARE SPECIFIC AND MEASURABLE, AND SOMEHOW WE KEEP, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT HADN'T GOTTEN THERE YET. SO IF WE COULD, WE COULD REALLY MOVE THE NEEDLE ON THAT THIS YEAR. THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED. WELL, OUR GOAL IS TO MOVE THAT NEEDLE AND GET IT SET TO WHERE WE ACTUALLY ARE ABLE TO PHYSICALLY TRACK EVERY ALL THE ITEMS THAT ARE OUTLINED FOR EACH DEPARTMENT AND EACH QUARTER GIVE YOU A GOOD UPDATE THAT SHOWS, HEY, WE'RE AT YELLOW, GREEN WHEREVER TO SHOW THAT WE'RE ON TRACK AND MAKING PROGRESS. I THINK THAT'S GREAT. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, BASED ON MY CORPORATE HISTORY, I THINK YOU CAN EASILY USE THAT AND DO SOME GRADING AND SAY, YOU KNOW, AT A DIRECTOR LEVEL, YOU HAD THESE GOALS, YOU EXCEEDED THIS ONE. YOU DROPPED THE BALL ON THIS ONE. AND HERE'S YOUR FEEDBACK FOR THE FOR THE YEAR. SO I THINK IT COULD BE REALLY GOOD IN TERMS OF MANAGING YOUR DIRECTORS AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WHAT SUCCESS MEANS IN THEIR JOB. SO IT SHOULD BE A GOOD THING FROM EVERYONE'S PERSPECTIVE TO REALLY MAKE THIS MORE QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE. YEAH, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY I'M JUST GOING TO SAY DITTO. THANK YOU. AND I WILL SAY I ACTUALLY PUT TOGETHER A BEGINNING OUTLINE AND WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER OUR STRATEGIC PLAN TO ALSO BE A THROUGHPUT FOR ORGANIZATIONAL HEALTH, RIGHT, IN TERMS OF THE OVERALL CITY. AND SO I LOOK FORWARD TO KIND OF, YOU KNOW, BEGINNING DISCUSSIONS ON THIS. THAT'S NOT RIGHT NOW, BUT I ALSO WANT TO DO A QUICK SHOUT OUT FOR STAFF, BECAUSE EVERYBODY THAT I HAVE TALKED TO, TO INCLUDE THE LVPD HAS BEEN JUST WONDERFUL IN TERMS OF WHEN I SAY, I WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT YOUR STRATEGIC PLAN, THEY GO, OKAY, MISS, WHEN CAN WE DO THAT? SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK, THANK YOU EVERYBODY. I DON'T HAVE ANY CITIZEN COMMENTS ON THIS ONE AS WELL. SO I WILL PROCEED ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. I'M GOING TO GO TO NUMBER 11 DISCUSSION REGARDING THE INTERLOCAL WHOLESALE WASTEWATER AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF JONESTOWN. THIS IS ONE THAT ACTUALLY ROBIN MADE ME AWARE OF, AND I SAW IT WAS ON THEIR AGENDA AS WELL. I'M GOING TO LET CHARLES EXPLAIN IT. I STILL HAVEN'T FIGURED IT ALL OUT. I'M GOING TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, BECAUSE THEY JUST ROBIN FOUND IT ON THEIR AGENDA. THEY SENT IT OVER TO US, AND THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED PRIOR TO MY TIME THAT NEVER GOT. I THINK IT WAS EVEN PRIOR TO MOST OF Y'ALL'S TIME THAT NEVER GOT FINALIZED ON THE CITY SIDE, WHERE WE SAID IN ORDER, IT'S A CHANGE TO THE NUMBER OF LAWS OVER IN THE HOLLOWS. AND IT WAS DURING TRACY'S TIME AS CITY MANAGER AND APPARENTLY LAGO VISTA NEVER FINALIZED IT. SO NOW YOU KNOW TRACY'S OVER IN JONESTOWN. SHE REMEMBERED IT, OR SOMEHOW IT CAME UP. AND SO THEY'RE TRYING TO CORRECT IT. AND IN THEIR PROCESS, IF YOU READ THE DOCUMENT, IT SEEMS THAT EVEN THEY WERE CONFUSED AT THE TIME ABOUT THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF LAWS THAT THEY WERE ADDING. AND SO NOW THEY'VE CORRECTED IT TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE AND SENT IT BACK TO US TO HAVE FINALIZED IF ANYBODY UP HERE HAS ANY HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE ON IT. AND HOPEFULLY I SEE OPINIONS. MR. PRINCE, JUST A COUPLE OF COMMENTS AS I READ IT. THIS IS ABOUT WASTEWATER, NOT WATER, RIGHT? SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE PROVIDING WATER TO THEM. YES, WE'RE PROVIDING WASTEWATER. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S UNUSUAL ABOUT THE SITUATION IS THAT THE WAY WE CHARGE FOR WASTEWATER IS BASED ON WATER USAGE. AND SO WE HAVE AT SOME 
          [04:00:03]
POINT NEGOTIATED A FLAT WASTEWATER FEE FOR EACH OF THESE HOMES. AND THAT ALL THAT ALL PREDATES ME. I DID NOTICE IN THE EPISODE NUMBER ONE, IT'S WASTEWATER, NOT WATER. AND NUMBER TWO, IT SEEMS THAT THEY CROSSED OFF 400 LOUISE AND INCREASED IT TO 410. SO WE'VE BEEN DELIVERING THIS SERVICE TO SOME NUMBER OF HOMES OVER THERE FOR YEARS, LONG BEFORE I WAS ON COUNCIL. APPARENTLY. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY CURRENTLY ARE BUILT OUT AND HOW MANY THIS 400 OR GOING TO FOUR, TEN OR FUTURE BUILD THAT THEY WANT TO PUT ON THE SAME WASTEWATER LINES THAT ALREADY EXIST. BUT, YOU KNOW, LOTS OF QUESTIONS AROUND THE SPECIFICS OF THIS. I THINK WE'RE ALREADY KIND OF EMBEDDED WITH THEM ON PROVIDING THE SERVICE TO A PORTION OF THE HOLLOWS, ANOTHER PORTION OF THE HOLLOWS, WHICH IS UNDER THE SAME POE, IS IN THE CITY OF LA VISTA. RIGHT? SO I THINK THESE ARE KIND OF ALMOST CITIZENS OF THE CITY, BUT NOT QUITE. SO. 
          YEAH, I THINK WE WE NEED TO DO THE RIGHT THING HERE, BUT LET'S NOT DO SOMETHING THAT'S INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE YOU ARE PRECIOUS. MEMBER. TOM. YEAH, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THAT COUNCILOR RON SMITH WAS THE ONE THAT REALLY KNOWS THIS INSIDE AND OUT. AND THERE WERE THERE WAS A CHALLENGE WITH THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT THAT HE SAID. NEVER GOT CORRECTED. AND SO I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT THAT WAS AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME. I'M HAPPY TO REACH OUT TO COUNCILORS PRIOR COUNCILOR SMITH, BECAUSE WE TALK QUITE OFTEN ACTUALLY ON LIONS ACTIVITIES. BUT HE IS MORE THAN WILLING. I'LL JUST EVEN ASK IF WE KNOW WHEN THIS IS GOING TO COME ON. IF WE NEED HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE, HE MIGHT BE WILLING BECAUSE HE COMES TO LAGO VISTA QUITE A BIT. SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GET THAT PAST HISTORY IF WE NEED TO. I CAN GO TO CITIZEN COMMENTS. IF MR. ROBERTS HAS SOME MEMORY OF THIS. 
          THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I WASN'T ON COUNCIL AT THE TIME, BUT I WAS ATTENDING ALL THE COUNCIL MEETINGS AND PRNS MEETINGS LIKE I CONTINUE TO DO NOW. AND AS I RECALL, IT WAS A I DON'T RECALL IF THERE WAS A PD AMENDMENT. THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN TO THE HOLLOWS OVER THERE. AND AS YOU KNOW, SEVERAL OF THEIR LOTS ARE IN THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA. AND I REMEMBER I EVEN RECALL SOMETHING, A DISCUSSION AROUND FIRE PITS. I REMEMBER ROY WAS ADAMANT ABOUT THE, THE PD, I THINK, OR SOMETHING IN THAT AGREEMENT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED OPEN FIRE PITS. AND I DON'T KNOW IF I'M SAYING THAT IN CASE IT JARS YOUR MEMORY. BUT ANYWAY, YEAH, THERE WAS JUST TEN ADDITIONAL LOVES. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. I DON'T KNOW WHY. I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING MORE. SO THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. AND NICOLE. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY CURRENTLY I BELIEVE THEY'RE AT ABOUT 211 CONNECTIONS. AND THE WAY THAT THEY CAME ABOUT, WHAT WE CHARGED THEM IS WE TAKE OUR CITYWIDE AVERAGE PLUS 25%. SO WE TAKE WHAT OUR CITYWIDE AVERAGE IS WHEN WE GET OUR CITYWIDE AVERAGE AT IN. IT STARTS IN MAY. BUT, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW WE'RE DOING OUR WINTER AVERAGING FOR THE TAKE THE FOUR MONTHS THE TWO LOWEST. WE GET WHAT OUR WINTER AVERAGE IS. WE FIGURE THAT WE ADD A 25% MARKUP. WE NEED TO COMMUNICATE THAT WITH JONESTOWN AND LET THEM KNOW SO THAT THEY CAN GET THAT TO THEIR COUNCIL AND ADOPT IT AND ALL THAT TYPE OF INFORMATION. OUR CITYWIDE AVERAGE HAS NOT CHANGED IN A FEW YEARS, SO IT HAS NOT BEEN A BIG ISSUE. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY REAL QUICK, AS I RECALL, RON SMITH TALKING ABOUT THIS, I THINK HE SAID THERE WAS SOMETHING IN THE AGREEMENT THAT WAS NOT CALCULATED. RIGHT. AND SO IT GAVE A PRETTY GOOD DISCOUNT TO THE JONESTOWN RESIDENTS OVER LAGO VISTA. NOW, AGAIN, HAS THAT BEEN CORRECTED OVER TIME? I DON'T KNOW, BUT I'M THAT'S WHY I'M A LITTLE BIT TOUCHY ON THIS ONE IS IT WAS SPECIFICALLY IN REGARD TO HOW THE CALCULATION WAS DONE. IT ORIGINALLY WAS NOT DONE JUST RIGHT. MADAM. SO CURRENTLY YOU SAID HOW MANY HOOKUPS DO THEY CURRENTLY LIVE? I BELIEVE IT'S 211. I CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT THEIR EXACT STATEMENT EVERY MONTH THEY SEND US. IF ANYONE NEW CONNECTS INTO IT, THEY SEND ME THE THE ADDRESS AND THEN THEY DO HAVE TO SUBMIT THOSE TARPON IMPACT FEES TO US. SO AT THE END OF THE MONTH, IF THEY HAD ANYBODY TAP INTO THE CITY'S LINE THAT NEEDS TO CREATE A NEW ACCOUNT, THEY SEND A CHECK WITH THE ADDRESS AND EVERYTHING AND THE DATE THAT THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WAS ISSUED. AND 
          [04:05:04]
THEN WE ADD THEM TO THE CITY OF JONESTOWN STATEMENT. OKAY. SO ONE OTHER QUESTION. SO THEY'RE ASKING BASICALLY FOR ANOTHER TWO. WELL, I GUESS I GUESS ORIGINALLY IT WAS CONTRACTED FOR 400 AND NOW THEY'RE JUST SO NOW THEY'RE GOING THEY SAID 410 IS I GUESS IS THE ULTIMATE. SO NOW SO THEY'RE PLANNING ANOTHER 200 BUILDS BASICALLY OVER THERE THAT WOULD BE TIED INTO US. YES. 
          SO IF IT IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, IF THE AGREEMENT WAS THEY COULD HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 400. AND NOW THEY'RE SAYING THAT THEY COULD HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 410 WOULD BE WHAT, WHAT I UNDERSTAND SAYING THAT BASED ON THE RED LINE THAT'S IN OUR PACKET, I HAVE NO OTHER KNOWLEDGE AND I, I DON'T HAVE 100% FULL RECOLLECTION. I WAS HERE WHEN IT ALL HAPPENED. I WAS NOT IN THE POSITION THAT I AM NOW, SO I DON'T REMEMBER EVERYTHING. I DO REMEMBER SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT HAPPENED. THEY GAVE US X AMOUNT OF MONEY UP FRONT AND ALL THE DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, ABOUT THE TAP AND IMPACT FEES AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. DO YOU REMEMBER ABOUT WHAT YEAR THAT WAS? BECAUSE I'M A RESEARCH JUNKIE. I CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT. I WAS GOING TO SAY, AND I WANT TO SAY, LOOK UP HULA W E W U L A I WANT TO SAY THAT WAS WHAT THE ORIGINAL GROUP WAS OR HOW IT STARTED. I COULD BE WRONG. OKAY, I KNOW THERE WAS SOMETHING WITH THAT AND I COULD BE MIXING THEM UP, BUT MY ORIGINAL THOUGHT WHEN I SAW THIS WAS THAT THIS IS A JOB FOR BRAD. I JUST THOUGHT, THIS IS A AN AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT FROM OUR NEIGHBORING CITY, AND IT'S BASED ON HISTORY THAT NOBODY UP HERE HAS. AND MY QUESTION WAS, WOULD WE SEND YOU TO GO TALK TO THEIR ATTORNEY AND SEE EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING ON AND TO REVIEW THE AGREEMENT, BECAUSE ALL THEY DID WAS AMEND SOME AGREEMENT FROM TIME AGO. AND I REMEMBER MY FIRST QUESTION TO CHARLES WAS, DO WE EVEN AGREE WITH ALL THE STUFF THAT'S IN THERE? DO WE WANT TO REOPEN THIS NEGOTIATION? AND IT'S ALL PREDICATED ON APPARENTLY THEY'RE CLAIMING THERE WAS ALREADY SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT MADE THAT WE JUST DIDN'T IT WASN'T DONE CORRECTLY. THERE ISN'T. THAT. GREAT. YEAH. WELL, STAFF HAS BEEN LOOKING FOR THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT THAT THIS ONE'S AMENDING, AND WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIND A COPY OF IT YET, HAVE WE, ROBIN? YEAH. WE HAVEN'T FOUND IT. SO YEAH, BECAUSE CURRENTLY IT'S HERE. LAGO VISTA WAS PREVIOUSLY WAS MAINTAINING TWO OF THEIR LIFT STATIONS AND THE MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WASN'T VERY CLEAR ON WHAT THE CITY NEEDED TO DO. AND BASICALLY WE WERE GOING TO DO ALL THE MAINTENANCE. AND THEN AFTER LOOKING AT THAT AGREEMENT, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN DOING THAT. THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING MINIMAL TOUCH, YOU KNOW, CARE OF THE FACILITIES. SO WE DID MEET WITH THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO. WE CAME TO SOME TYPE OF AGREEMENT, BUT THAT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT. OKAY. SO AGAIN I COME BACK TO BRAD. I MEAN, I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE HISTORY THIS IS WHAT THE AGREEMENT IS. AND KIND OF SOMEBODY NEEDS TO HEAR FROM JONESTOWN DIRECTLY WHAT EXACTLY HAS HAPPENED. WE'LL FOLLOW. I'LL FOLLOW UP WITH YOU IN THE COMING DAYS AND WE'LL WORK AND WE'LL FIGURE SOMETHING. I DO LIKE COUNCILOR OWEN'S SUGGESTION, THOUGH, OF SOMEONE, AND SHE'S A GREAT CANDIDATE FOR IT, TO HAVE AN IN-DEPTH CONVERSATION WITH MR. SMITH, BECAUSE HE WILL HAVE ALL OF THE HISTORY. SO FINDING WHAT CONTRACTS WE ACTUALLY HAVE IS IMPORTANT, AND SEEING IF THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT HE WOULD ADVISE US TO, YOU KNOW, IF HANDS ARE COMING BACK OUT TO GET FIXED CORRECTLY, MAYBE PUT THEM IN TIMES. BRAD AS WELL. NO MORE COMMENTS ON THIS, THEN I WILL PROCEED ON TO ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE FUTURE DIRECTION CONCERNING VEXATIOUS COMPLAINANTS. THIS WAS AN ITEM THAT I BROUGHT FORWARD BECAUSE I'VE HAD A NUMBER OF CITIZENS COME TO ME ABOUT NOT NONSTOP COMPLAINTS FROM NEIGHBORS OF ALLEGED CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND THEN CODE COMPLIANCE COMES AND THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES, BUT THE COMPLAINTS CONTINUE TO COME IN AND THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE BEING UNNECESSARILY HARASSED AND THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE THERE IS ANY PROTECTIONS FOR THEM WHATSOEVER. SO I LOOKED IT UP AND THERE ARE CITIES WHO HAVE THESE SECTIONS IN THEIR CODE TO KIND OF HELP FOR THOSE SITUATIONS, AND THE ONLY REASON I BROUGHT IT FORWARD WAS TO SEND IT TO BRAD AND SAY, CAN YOU RESEARCH THE LEGALITY OF HAVING A VEXATIOUS COMPLAINT IN SECTION IN OUR CODE, IF THAT'S A DIRECTION THAT CITIES GO AND IT WOULD HOLD UP IN LAW, IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONSIDER? SO FOR ME, THERE'S NO PROPOSAL TIED TO IT. I JUST WANTED MORE LEGAL INFORMATION 
          [04:10:04]
ON IT. WELL, I'VE NOT I'M NOT PERSONALLY FAMILIAR WITH IT. AS I MENTIONED TO YOU ALL BEFORE, THERE ARE SOME, I THINK, SOME LEGAL CONCERNS WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT. AND I KNOW THERE'S SOME LEGAL CONCERNS I NEED TO THINK ABOUT WITH REGARD TO KIND OF THE SCOPE OF WHAT THAT COULD BE. 
          YOU DON'T WANT IT TO BE OVERBROAD SO THAT IT, IT IT. EXPOSES THE THE CITY OR INDIVIDUALS AND TO POTENTIAL LIABILITY. BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO IT. I KNOW MAYOR PRO TEM OWEN, YOU HAD SOMETHING YOU SENT OUT TO BRAD, SO PLEASE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. 
          ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? I DIDN'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS ON IT AS WELL, 
          [IX.17. Discussion and Workshop Regarding the Feasibility and Policy Considerations of Creating an Ombudsman-Style Function (position) to Address Citizen Concerns and 3 Complaints.]
SO I WILL PROCEED ON TO ITEM NUMBER 17, DISCUSSION AND WORKSHOP REGARDING THE FEASIBILITY AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS OF CREATING AN OMBUDSMAN STYLE FUNCTION, POSITION TO ADDRESS CITIZEN CONCERNS COMPLAINTS. AND I HAVE MAYOR PRO TEM OWEN ON THIS ITEM. 
          THANK YOU MAYOR. YES, THIS ACTUALLY HAS BEEN IN DISCUSSION FOR PROBABLY, WHAT, A COUPLE OF YEARS I THINK, MAYOR SAM. AND REALLY IT'S WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY. BACK THEN IT WAS MORE KIND OF LIKE A CITIZEN MEDIATION THING. BUT WHEN IT CAME DOWN TO IT, WHAT WE FOUND OUT, OR AT LEAST IN RECENT RESEARCH, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR $950 WITH ONE OF OUR EMPLOYEES BEING ABLE TO TAKE THIS MEDIATION TRAINING, WE MAY BE ABLE TO HAVE OUR OWN MEDIATORS ON STAFF HERE AND BE ABLE TO DEESCALATE SOME THINGS THAT COULD GO FURTHER INTO HIGHER ESCALATION. NOW, WE ALREADY HAVE A GOOD NEIGHBOR MEDIATION PROGRAM ON OUR WEBSITE. THIS WOULD BE AN ENHANCEMENT TO THAT. I THINK IT KIND OF IN A WAY, IT CAN KIND OF FIT INTO SOME OF THE VEXATIOUS STUFF. BUT I WILL SAY, I THINK THERE'S SOME MEMBERS HERE THAT WOULD HAVE APPRECIATED HAVING SOMEONE TO FEEL LIKE THAT THEY COULD TALK TO IN ORDER TO BE HEARD WHEN THEY FELT LIKE THEY WERE NOT BEING HEARD AT THE TIME. AND I THINK ACTUALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE I THINK WE HAD A WAS IT 2 OR 4 EMPLOYEES, MAYOR, THAT THOUGHT THAT OUR WERE WILLING TO GO THROUGH THIS PROGRAM? ALL RIGHT. WELL, I DEFINITELY JUST WANTED TO PUT THIS FORWARD TO SEE IF Y'ALL WOULD SUPPORT THAT RUNNING BECAUSE IT'S REALLY MINIMAL COST AND WE ALREADY HAVE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE WILLING TO DO THAT. AND I THINK ANYTHING THAT WOULD ALLOW CITIZENS TO BE HEARD AND MAYBE REDUCE SOME POTENTIAL LIABILITY OR, OR CONFLICT IN THE FUTURE, I THINK IT'S WORTH IT. I WOULD ACTUALLY EXPRESS MY SUPPORT OF THAT AS WELL. I KNOW THAT WE DO HAVE SOME TRAINING AND EDUCATION MONEY IN THE BUDGET, AND I THINK THAT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD PLACE TO APPLY IT. MR. PRINCE, I, I WANT TO GET CLEAR IN MY MIND, ARE YOU THINKING THE SCOPE HERE IS BOTH MEDIATION CITIZEN TO CITIZEN AND CITIZEN TO CITY THIS. I DID DO SOME BACKGROUND. I MEAN, THIS WOULD SERVE REALLY KIND OF AS AN EARLY VOLUNTARY STEP IN CONFLICT DE-ESCALATION. DE-ESCALATION. IT'S NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE HERE. WOULD THEY BE A MEDIATOR TOWARDS THE CITY? I MEAN, I'M JUST LEARNING ABOUT BECAUSE THERE ARE GUARDRAILS ON THIS AND VERY REAL GUARDRAILS, IN FACT. OUR ATTORNEY ACTUALLY SAID YOU WANT TO BE CAREFUL WITH THESE THINGS. AND THAT WAS RED FLAG. SO IT DOES NEED TO BE STUDIED. AND WHATEVER WE PUT INTO PLACE THIS WAS BEGINNING TO SEE. WOULD WE BE INTERESTED IN DOING THAT LAST TIME. YOU KNOW, IT WAS THE COST OF THE PROGRAM. AND IT TAKES A WEEK FOR THE STAFF MEMBER, YOU KNOW, TO DO THAT. AND SO THAT WAS THE STOPPER. AND I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT STOPPER REMOVED. BUT THEN WE WOULD PUT A CHARTER AROUND IT. WE DO NEED TO GET SOME LEGAL ADVICE JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT OVERSTEPPING BOUNDS. YEAH. AND I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE SAID LEADING INTO MY QUESTION, I, I HAD MADE A SUGGESTION AND I THINK IT WAS ACTUALLY WHEN WE WERE HAVING THE DISCUSSION WITH THAT POLICE CHIEF AT THE TIME THAT I THINK THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY, A NEED FOR SOMEONE IN THE CITY TO HAVE AN OMBUDSMAN ROLE WHERE THEY TAKE A MORE NEUTRAL VIEW. THEY'RE 
          [04:15:08]
THEY'RE NOT ON THE CITY SIDE. THEY'RE IF ANYTHING, THEY WOULD BE THEY WOULD WANT TO BE ON THE CITIZEN SIDE. IF THEY CAN HELP THE CITIZEN RESOLVE THEIR ISSUE WITH THE CITY. FOR ME, THE BIGGER ISSUE HERE IS THE CITY SHOULD MAKE IT MAKE A STRONG EFFORT TO HELP CITIZENS FEEL LIKE THE CITY WANTS TO HELP THEM SOLVE THEIR PROBLEMS WITH THE CITY RIGHT NOW, SHOULD WE GET INTO THE SPACE OF MEDIATING CITIZEN TO CITIZEN? AND THIS YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE. THAT'S RIGHT. SO OKAY, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE THERE'S AN AGREEMENT HERE THAT REALLY THE SCOPE HERE IS IF A DEVELOPER OR A CITIZEN, THEY WANT TO, YOU KNOW, THEY WANT TO GET THEIR MONEY BACK ON A FEE OR THEY WANT TO BUILD A FENCE THAT'S TALLER AND THEY CAN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT. 
          AND THEY'RE SO FRUSTRATED. IS THERE SOMEBODY THEY CAN TALK TO THAT KNOWS THE WAY THE CITY WORKS, THAT KNOWS HOW TO DEESCALATE AND HELP THEM GET THEIR PROBLEM SOLVED? I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT. AND SPENDING A LITTLE BIT OF TRAINING MONEY FOR SOME PEOPLE TO KNOW HOW TO BE HOW TO EFFECTIVELY DO THAT, AS LONG AS THAT'S REALLY THE EMPHASIS IS TRYING TO MAKE THE CITIZENS FEEL LIKE THE CITY CARES ABOUT OR SOMEBODY AT THE CITY CARES ABOUT. MY PROBLEM IS TRYING TO HELP SOLVE IT. I, I DON'T WANT TO JUMP IN HERE TOO MUCH, BUT I JUST WANT TO ADD THE, THE ONE THING THAT YOU NEED TO KEEP IN MIND IS THAT IT'S EASY TO ENVISION WHAT WE NEED TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT THIS QUESTION, RIGHT. WHAT I CAN'T DO IS TO GIVE I CAN GIVE YOU GUYS LEGAL ADVICE. YOU'RE MY CLIENT. I CAN'T GIVE THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC LEGAL ADVICE. RIGHT. SO THAT'S THAT'S THE THAT'S THE CAVEAT HERE TO ALL OF THAT, WHICH IS THE OMBUDSMAN SHOULDN'T BE GIVING LEGAL ADVICE. THEY NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT THAT. AND THEN I, YOU KNOW, WELL, LET'S ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO OPINE ON THIS AND TELL THE THIRD PARTY, THIS IS HOW YOU DO THIS. THIS IS WHAT YOU DO. THAT'S PROBABLY NOT SOMETHING THAT AND THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I CAN DO. SO I JUST WANTED TO IF I COULD TEMPER THOSE KINDS OF EXPECTATIONS UPFRONT OKAY. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. NO. THE ONLY THING THAT I NEEDED ON THE LEGAL WAS TO MAKE SURE ANY POLICY WE PUT INTO PLACE ON THIS, THAT WE DO NOT GET OURSELVES IN TROUBLE. AND I DO NOTE DULY NOTED. ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE HAD IN HERE WAS OR THAT I HAD JUST PULLED OUT, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF PUTTING A STARTING POINT, WAS THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF RECORDS. AND REALLY, AS A CITY, WE CANNOT DO THAT. YOU SAID TO STRIKE THAT PART OF IT. SO YEAH, WE'LL STRIKE THAT PART OF IT. SO THERE YOU GO. MISS. QUESTION. 
          WHERE I'M FAMILIAR WITH THIS WITH ORGANIZATIONS IS THAT OMBUDSMAN ROLE IS THAT'S THAT PERSON'S ROLE. YEAH. SO IT'S NOT LIKE A SIDE JOB FOR STAFF. SO IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE FOR KIND OF LINE STAFF IF YOU WILL, TO BE IN THAT ROLE. SO I DON'T I WASN'T SURE WHAT YOU ENVISIONED AS WOULD THIS BE A NEW HIRE AND AN IMPORTANT ROLE FOR THE CITY OR HOW WOULD THIS WORK? AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S DIFFERENT IN, YOU KNOW, MUNICIPALITIES FROM OTHER TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONS. SO JUST. I'LL LET THE MAYOR, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF SOME OF THE BACKGROUND THAT HE HAD, I ACTUALLY WAS LOOKING AT STAIR STEPPING THIS PROGRAM TO SEE. SO WE HAD A COUPLE OF BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE WOULD ACTUALLY NEED OF, OF THIS MEDIATION. RIGHT. 
          OR, OR THIS BEING ABLE TO DISCUSS. SO I WAS THINKING IF WE HAD A COUPLE OF EMPLOYEES THAT WERE WILLING TO BE CERTIFIED, THEN THAT WOULD BE A STARTING POINT ON THIS PROGRAM. 
          NOW, OF COURSE, WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD THE GUARDRAILS. AS I WAS JUST SAYING, WITH BRAD, MAKE SURE THE GUARDRAILS ARE THERE SO THAT IT'S VERY CLEAR, AS COUNCILOR PRINCE WAS SAYING, AND IF WE DO THAT, I MEAN, POTENTIALLY THIS COULD GROW INTO ITS OWN AND SHOULD BE ITS OWN ROLE IN THE FUTURE. BUT RIGHT NOW, I THINK WE'RE KIND OF STAIR STEPPING INTO IT. I KNOW AT THIS POINT IN TIME WE HAVE TRAINING BUDGETS. WE DON'T HAVE ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEE BUDGETS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. BUT IF WE BEGIN LOOKING AT THIS NOW, MAYBE BY THE TIME WE GET TO THE ACTUAL NEXT FISCAL YEAR, RIGHT IN IN ACTUALLY KEEPING THIS IN MIND FOR THE FUTURE BUDGET, I THINK TO YOUR POINT, WE CAN NIX THE OMBUDSMAN NAME. 
          I THINK THAT'S A HOLDOVER FROM A SLIGHTLY SEPARATE IDEA. THE TRAINING IS FOR MEDIATION. IT'S MEDIATION TRAINING. SO I THINK MEDIATION IS THE TERM THAT WE SHOULD USE. IT'S A 40 HOUR BASIC MEDIATION TRAINING TO GET A CERTIFICATION. BUT YEAH I CAN SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. A BONDSMAN IS A VERY SPECIFIC TERM AND MUTUAL PERSON THAT A DIFFERENT ENTITY IS. AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS. YEAH. I GOING BACK FIVE YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS FIRST ELECTED, THIS WAS A TOPIC THAT I BROUGHT UP NUMEROUS TIMES WITH VARIOUS CITY MANAGERS AND WHERE I WAS COMING 
          [04:20:06]
AT IT FROM. MR. DAVID WILL APPRECIATE THIS. I WAS COMING AT IT FROM I WAS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, AND I FOUND IT INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TO WORK MY WAY THROUGH THE PROCESS TO START A SMALL BUSINESS. AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WHILE STAFF AT THAT TIME WAS NOT LIKE THEY WERE ANTAGONISTIC TO ME, IT WAS LIKE THEY HAD NO INTEREST IN GOING OUT OF THEIR WAY TO HELP ME. THEY WERE TOO BUSY OR WHATEVER. RIGHT. AND SO I ACTUALLY, AT GOING BACK FIVE YEARS AGO, I FLOATED THE IDEA WITH A NUMBER OF PEOPLE, WE NEED TO BE A PLACE THAT IS EASY TO DO BUSINESS WITH. WHETHER YOU'RE A CITIZEN TRYING TO BUILD A FENCE OR YOU'RE A DEVELOPER TRYING TO BUILD A HOUSE, RIGHT? YOU NEED TO BE A CITY THAT'S EASY TO DO BUSINESS WITH. AND I HAD FLOATED THE IDEA OF LET'S MAYBE IN OUR BUDGET, PUT IN A PERSON THAT IS HIGHLY EXPERIENCED IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES AND THE FLOW AND THE PERMITTING PROCESS, BUT HAVE THEM NOT WORK IN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, HAVE THEM WORK IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. 
          THAT WAS THE IDEA I HAD AT THE TIME, AND WHETHER THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT OR NOT. BUT YOU KNOW, SOMETHING, SOMEONE THAT TO THIS POINT, SOMEONE THAT WAS REALLY ISOLATED FROM, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER DAY TO DAY ROLE AND THEY WERE FOCUSED ON HELPING HELPING CITIZENS AND BUSINESSES TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, MAKE IT EASIER TO WORK WITH THE CITY. I'D LIKE TO SEE US GO THERE, WHICH IS MUCH BIGGER THAN JUST, YOU KNOW, PART TIME TRAINING 2 OR 4 PEOPLE ON HOW TO BE EFFECTIVE DE-ESCALATION NAVIGATORS. BUT WE GOT TO START SOMEWHERE. I WILL SAY THAT I DO AGREE WITH COUNCILOR PRINCE. I'VE SEEN WHERE WE TOWNS HAVE ACTUALLY HIRED IN SOCIAL WORKERS AND SENT THEM ON TO OMBUDSMAN TRAINING BECAUSE THEY JUST ALREADY HAD THE GOOD HANDLING OF JUST PEOPLE IN GENERAL. AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT THAT IN THE FUTURE. BUT I THINK MEDIATION TRAINING IS PERFECT AS A AS A BRIDGE FOR NOW. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. AND AND I'M GLAD THAT WE ALREADY HAVE PEOPLE IN MIND BECAUSE I THINK THE BEST PEOPLE FOR THIS TYPE OF JOB ARE THE VOLUNTEERS, BECAUSE THAT ACTUALLY MEANS THAT THEY REALLY CARE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FORGING RELATIONSHIPS AND KEEPING THEM TOGETHER. I DON'T THINK JUST PUTTING PUTTING IT OFF ON SOMEBODY IS A GOOD IDEA. I DO THINK THAT WE SHOULD TEACH OUR REACH OUT AND SEE WHO WHO WOULD BE INTERESTED IN TAKING. I DO HAVE ONE CITIZEN WHO HAS WRITTEN COMMENTS TO MISTER GENE HARRIS. GOOD AFTERNOON MAYOR, COUNCIL STAFF AND RESIDENTS. 
          WHEN I WAS READING THE COVER SHEET FOR THIS ITEM, I SAW THE GOOD NEIGHBOR PROGRAM MENTIONED. 
          HAVING NEVER HEARD OF IT, I WENT TO THE CITY WEBSITE WEBSITE TO FIND IT. WHEN I SAW IT, MY INITIAL REACTION WAS THIS IS IT A SILLY SURVEY? I STARTED GOING THROUGH IT AND WAS REMINDED. WE LIVE IN A CULTURE THAT IS SEEMINGLY MORE LIKELY TO GRAB THE KEYBOARD AND START HAMMERING OUT ANGRY BLASTS INTO THE ETHER AND THE COMMUNITY AND SAY SOMETHING WE MAY WELL REGRET WITH NO WAY TO PULL IT BACK. A CULTURE ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL. DON'T GET ME WRONG, I HAVE BEEN KNOWN TO GET ANGRY AND START RANTING AT TIMES, BUT I TRY TO CORRECT AN ERROR IF I MADE. BUT LIKE I SAID, IT IS OUT THERE. AND NOW THE PROCESS OF REBUILDING LOST TRUST. LOST TRUST STARTS, AS CHAD WRIGHT SAID, DEFECATE ON YOURSELF BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE DOES IT. THAT IS NOT A TYPO. THE LITTLE SURVEY IS A GOOD TOOL TO CHECK YOUR HEART IF IT IS USED. I THINK A PROGRAM THAT COULD POTENTIALLY RELIEVE PRESSURE ON THE POLICE OR ANY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENT BY DIVERTING AT LEAST SOME COMPLAINTS TO THE MEDIATORS WOULD BE A GOOD THING IF TWO WARRING PARTIES COULD COME TOGETHER TO HASH OUT A DISPUTE WITH SOME HELP, I BELIEVE IT IS MORE LIKELY TO ACHIEVE A LASTING PEACE BECAUSE MAYBE THEY LEARNED SOMETHING ABOUT THE OTHER. THE THING THAT REALLY CAUGHT MY EYE WAS A REFERENCE TO AN EMPLOYEE HAVING TO USE THEIR VACATION TIME TO RECEIVE TRAINING THAT COULD POTENTIALLY HELP THE CITY AND COMMUNITY IN GENERAL. $950 PER EMPLOYEE SEEMS A PRETTY REASONABLE COST FOR A FIVE DAY TRAINING THAT COULD REAP GREAT BENEFITS FOR THE CITY AND RESIDENTS. THANK YOU. I LAUGH BECAUSE THAT SILLY SURVEY WAS MY IDEA. AND I ACTUALLY FORGOT IT WAS OUT THERE. MY IDEA BEHIND THE SURVEY WAS THAT WHEN PEOPLE WERE BEING NASTY AND RIDICULOUS ONLINE, I WAS JUST GOING TO PUT A LINK TO THAT SURVEY AND IT SAYS, ARE YOU BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR? NOW THAT I REMEMBERED IT, I'LL USE IT AGAIN. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR THOUGHTS ON THIS? YEAH, JEAN BROUGHT UP A QUESTION I HAD TOO. IS THAT VACATION LIKE TAKING VACATION TIME WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO TRAINING? WHAT? WHAT WAS THAT ALL ABOUT? THAT WAS A PREVIOUS INTERIM CITY MANAGER. I'M A STRONG BELIEVER IN STAFF GETTING TRAINED, SO KNOW THAT I DO NOT REQUIRE STAFF TO TAKE VACATION TIME FOR TRAINING. 
          OKAY, WE ARE GOOD. THEN I WILL MOVE ON. OH, SORRY. DAVID. SUPER BRIEF. WE ALL WANT TO LEAVE. $950 IS VERY CHEAP INSURANCE IF IT DOES HAVE TO GO THE ROUTE. BUT IF THERE ISN'T 
          [04:25:02]
SOME SORT OF WAY TO COME TO THIS. SORRY, I WASN'T SURE IF THERE'S NOT ANOTHER WAY TO GO FROM THIS. THERE ARE MULTIPLE PEOPLE THAT I KNOW OF, MYSELF INCLUDED, WHO WOULD GLADLY HELP PUSH THIS THING TO AT LEAST STAIR STEP IT INTO EXISTENCE, BECAUSE IT WOULD SAVE A TON OF TIME HERE AND SAVE A TON OF TIME FOR STAFF. AND I MEAN, I KNOW MYSELF, I GET A LOT OF CALLS FROM RANDOM CITIZENS OR BUILDERS WHEN THERE'S SOME GRIPE AND THEY DON'T KNOW WHO TO TALK TO. AND EVEN IF IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT SHOWS UP AT THE DAIS ON ON THE REGULAR. 
          JUST LAST MONTH, BEFORE THE FREEZE HAD GOTTEN LIKE SEVEN TEXT MESSAGES. AND GENERALLY IT'S A MISCOMMUNICATION AND IT'S JUST A OH, WELL, HERE, THIS IS THE PERSON YOU NEED TO TALK TO. I DIDN'T KNOW YOU COULD GO TALK TO THE POLICE CHIEF OR. YEAH, ACTUALLY, THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE OFFICE, THE THIRD DOOR WALK IN THERE AND THERE'S JUST THERE'S A LARGE AMOUNT OF THE COMPLAINTS AND BREAKDOWNS THAT WOULD BE SOLVED IF THERE IS SOMEONE YOU COULD GO TO AND ASK TO MEDIATE. AND IT, LIKE, LOWERS TENSIONS. THERE'S PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THIS ROOM TONIGHT WHO ARE READY TO BUILD A KILLDOZER AND SOLVE THEIR PROBLEMS IN A DIFFERENT WAY, AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW WE HAD A NEW DEVELOPMENT HEAD. THEY DIDN'T KNOW WE HAD A NEW CITY MANAGER. THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHO TO TALK TO IN THESE SITUATIONS. AND THEY CARRIED ON PAST STRESSORS, PAST DISTRUST, WHICH ARE REAL. AND THAT DOESN'T JUST GO AWAY. WE HAVE WAY BETTER STAFF. WE HAVE WAY BETTER PROCESSES NOW. BUT THAT DOESN'T FIX ANY OF THE CRUD THAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST. SO I MEAN, 950 BUCKS IS CHEAP. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'LL 
          [IX.9. Discussion and workshop regarding updating, revising or potentially amending the Rules of Procedure, Ethics and Social Media Policies.]
PROCEED ON TO ITEM NUMBER NINE, DISCUSSION AND WORKSHOP REGARDING UPDATING, REVISING OR POTENTIALLY AMENDING THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, ETHICS AND SOCIAL MEDIA POLICIES. I HAD THIS ITEM PUT ON THEIR COUNCIL. I PUT OUT PROPOSED DRAFTS OF A SIMPLIFIED RULES OF PROCEDURE, A SIMPLIFIED ETHICS, AND I'VE PROPOSED NIXING THE SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY FOR CITY COUNCIL, BUT NOT FOR STAFF. STAFF WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE THEIR SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY IN HR MANUAL. I'VE PUT THESE FORWARD ON HERE JUST TO SEE IF WE CAN COME TO CONSENSUS TO GET TO A PLACE WHERE WE CAN APPROVE SOMETHING. IF WE'RE NOT GETTING CLOSE TO CONSENSUS, WE CAN CONTINUE TO DISCUSS THESE ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD. MY CONCEPTS BEHIND THE RULES OF PROCEDURE WERE TO JUST KEEP IT SIMPLE ON THE ETHICS. SAME THING. I RAN THAT ONE, AT LEAST BY BRAD, AND I SAID, DOES THIS MEET ALL THE BASES THAT WE NEED TO HAVE? AND HE ASKED TO PUT ONE THING IN THERE ABOUT THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON AN ETHICS COMPLAINT. I ADDED IT. ONE OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT BRAD AND I HAD WAS THAT A LOT OF WHAT WAS IN OUR ETHICS CODE ARE NOT ACTUALLY ETHICS, THEY'RE JUST BEHAVIORAL THINGS THAT PEOPLE WANT TO CALL ETHICS. SO I WAS TRYING TO REMOVE THAT AND REALLY JUST GET US TO NOT DO AS MR. PRINCE REFERENCED A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AGO, WE SPENT MAYBE A YEAR OR MORE, IT SEEMED LIKE ON WAS IT RULES OF PROCEDURE? THERE WAS SOME I'M TRYING TO AVOID THAT. LIKE WE COULD PASS THESE, WE WOULD HAVE A FRAMEWORK AND WE COULD MOVE ON AND DO THE WORK OF CITY COUNCIL. AND THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE IS ALREADY LOOKING AT LOOKING AT THE ETHICS ISSUE. AND SO WE WILL HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS. AND THESE DOCUMENTS GIVE YOU AN ABILITY TO HEAR SOMETHING WE COULD PUT IN AND MOVE FORWARD. BUT IF THERE'S NOT A CONSENSUS ON TO GO FORWARD, WE CAN CONTINUE KNOCKING IT OUT ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD. YES, I'D SAY I'D LIKE THE ETHICS POLICY DRAFT. AND THAT WAS ONE QUESTION I HAD, IS IF BRAD HAD ALREADY DONE A LEGAL REVIEW. SO I THINK SIMPLIFYING IT AND ALIGNING IT WITH STATE LAW, I LIKE THAT THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, IT WAS UNCLEAR TO ME BECAUSE SOME THINGS LOOKED LIKE THEY WERE REDLINED, AND THEN I DIDN'T SEE RED LINE IN THE DOCUMENT. SO I'M GOING TO HAVE TO READ THAT MORE CAREFULLY AND COMPARE IT TO THE CURRENT VERSION THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY UNDER. BUT GENERALLY I'M AFFIRMATIVELY IN FAVOR OF THAT OF SIMPLIFYING WHERE WE CAN. SO BUT THE ETHICS POLICY, I THINK, IS IN THE DIRECTION OF WHAT WE HAD DISCUSSED BEFORE. SO I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. SO I MEAN, I WOULD SAY THIS RULES OF PROCEDURE, IT'S ALMOST NOT WORTH HAVING A RED LINE BECAUSE IT'S A COMPLETE REWRITE. AND IT'S WE HAD SO MUCH CONTENT IN THE OLD RULES OF PROCEDURE THAT ESSENTIALLY THE, THE STRATEGY THE MAYOR TOOK WAS, LET'S JUST START FROM SCRATCH, BE LIGHTWEIGHT, SAY VERY LITTLE, AND JUST SAY, HEY, WE FOLLOW ROSENBERG'S RULES AND, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S A CONFLICT, WE FOLLOW THE STATE LAW AND FEDERAL LAW, RIGHT? AND THAT'S ABOUT IT. RIGHT. AND I THINK PROBABLY THAT'S THE RIGHT DIRECTION TO GO. AND I DON'T KNOW IF ALL OF YOU HAD A CHANCE TO CATCH UP ON THE MESSAGE BOARD ON THIS, BUT I DID ASK, AND I'LL GO AHEAD AND ASK IT HERE, MAYOR, AND ASK YOU IF YOU'VE THOUGHT ABOUT IT IN, IN THE BECAUSE A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAD IN THE RULES OF PROCEDURE WERE ABOUT TRYING TO. MANDATE AND MANAGE BEHAVIOR. 
          RIGHT. AND I IN MY COMMENTS ON THE MESSAGE BOARD, I KIND OF RELABELED IT AS MANNERS. RIGHT. 
          AND SO FOR ME, MANNERS MATTER. AND AND WHEN WE SPENT MANY, MANY, MANY, MANY HOURS GOING THROUGH THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, IF MY MY TAKE WAS, I WANT US TO HAVE GOOD MANNERS TOWARDS EACH 
          [04:30:07]
OTHER AND TOWARDS CITIZENS, WE AT THAT TIME, WHEN I WAS FIRST ELECTED, WE WERE IN A STATE WHERE WE OFTEN DID NOT HAVE GOOD MANNERS, AND I HEARD THAT FROM MANY CITIZENS. OKAY, I WAS JUST LIKE, MAN, YOU GUYS ARE OUT OF CONTROL KIND OF THING, RIGHT? BUT WHAT I LEARNED WAS TRYING TO INSTANTIATE THAT IN A RULES PROCEDURE DIDN'T MAKE IT ANY BETTER. AND SO I KIND OF GIVEN UP ON THAT EFFORT I DID IN THE DRAFT YOU HAD, WHICH I'M LARGELY OKAY WITH. THERE WAS ONE, ONE LINE IN SECTION 502. I QUOTED IT IN HERE. DEBATE SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH ROSENBERG'S RULES, WHICH IS FINE. AND THEN THE SECOND HALF OF THE SENTENCE, WITH DUE REGARD FOR COURTESY, RELEVANCE AND EFFICIENCY. AND AND I THINK I MADE SOME COMMENTS AND THEN MAYOR PRO TEM POSTED SOME IDEAS OF SOMETHING WE MIGHT HAVE AND WHAT I'M TAKING MAYOR PRO TEM FROM, FROM WHAT YOU POSTED IS SORT OF LEANING TOWARDS LET'S JUST HAVE SOME GUIDELINES SAY THIS IS HOW WE WANT TO BEHAVE, BUT IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE GOING TO BUILD IN RULES. AND YOU KNOW, IF YOU DO THIS, WE'LL SLAP YOUR HAND. AND IF YOU DO THAT, WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL WE'LL KICK YOU OUT OF COUNCIL FOR TEN MINUTES OR, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER. SO LET'S NOT GO INTO THAT SPACE. LET'S JUST HAVE SOME GUIDELINES FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR AND, AND ENCOURAGE AND ALLOW THE MEETING MODERATOR, WHICH IS TYPICALLY THE MAYOR, TO TRY TO GET US BACK ON TRACK. 
          IF WE IF WE DO THAT AND TRY TO SUPPORT THE MEETING MODERATOR IN THOSE EFFORTS TO TRY TO KEEP US ON TRACK IN TERMS OF JUST GOOD BEHAVIOR OVER HERE, YOU KNOW, NOT GETTING IN WHAT I SAW SO MUCH OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS IS TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS ARGUING BACK AND FORTH. AS I SAID IN MY COMMENTS, IT WASN'T ALWAYS THE SAME TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS. IT BOUNCED. RIGHT. BUT LET'S JUST LET'S NOT DO THAT. MAYBE WE JUST NEED TO TAKE A. SOFT OATH OF COMMITMENT, OF BEHAVE BETTER, BEHAVE LIKE ADULTS, NOT CHILDREN UP HERE. AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THIS EXTENSIVE PROCEDURE. THAT'S MY TAKE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE OTHER THOUGHTS ON MY QUESTION OF, YOU KNOW, HOW TO HOW TO DO THIS WITH DUE REGARD FOR COURTESY, RELEVANCE AND EFFICIENCY. I JUST IT WAS TO TRY TO COVER THE BASES ON KIND OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT A SOFT OATH. I'VE NEVER HEARD OF THAT. THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT IT WAS JUST TO HAVE SOME REFERENCE TO IT. BUT TO YOUR POINT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE SAYING YOU JUST VIOLATED THE RULES OF PROCEDURE BY BEING A JERK. I JUST I JUST WANT US TO HAVE A BASIC POLICY SO WE COULD CONTINUE FORWARD. I DON'T KNOW, YEAH. THANK YOU. AND I WILL JUST SAY MY APOLOGIES TO THE REST OF THE COUNCIL HERE THAT I TEND TO DO THINGS JUST IN TIME THESE DAYS. 
          BUT I DID DO SOME RESEARCH ON THIS IN TERMS OF, WELL, HOW OR OTHER CITIES ACROSS THE US. AND APPARENTLY THIS IS A BIG TOPIC ACROSS THE US IN ALL CITIES. AND SO AS THE TML AND THEN THERE WAS THE ICMA ACTUALLY. WHICH IS THE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION SAID SIMPLER IS BETTER. SO BASICALLY WHAT MAYOR PUT FORWARD, YES, IS THE BEST WAY TO GO. THEY CALLED IT REPUTATIONAL CONSEQUENCES IN REGARD TO ANY KIND OF CONSEQUENCES THAT WOULD BE OUT THERE. BUT THE OTHER ITEM THAT I THOUGHT WAS INTERESTING IS THAT THERE IS A TREND OF PUTTING IN JUST TO DEFINE MANNERS, MAYBE IF YOU WANT TO, OR FURTHER THOSE ITEMS THAT YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, COUNCILOR PRINCE AND THEY SAID, JUST PUT IN A A CITY COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT, IT IS NOT PUNITIVE. THERE IS NO IT JUST FURTHER DEFINES WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN TERMS OF HAVING GOOD MANNERS UP ON THE DAIS OR IN CONVERSATIONS UP HERE. SO I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THAT BACKGROUND IN TERMS OF THE RESEARCH THAT I HAD FOUND. AND BECAUSE IT ACTIVELY, WHENEVER WE PUT MORE AND MORE RULES, IT ACTUALLY WHAT THEY FOUND WAS THAT YOU HAD MORE AND MORE IT ESCALATED THE CONFLICT ON THE DAIS, AND IT DID HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT IN TERMS OF THE DIALOG AMONGST ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS BECAUSE OF THAT. SO THAT WAS ALL IT NEEDED TO SAY TO ME TO SAY, KEEP IT SIMPLE, LIKE WHERE YOU WENT WITH THAT. 
          AND THE ONLY OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS FOR EVERYONE TO MAYBE CONSIDER THE CODE OF CONDUCT. CODE OF CONDUCT. I PUT A PRELIMINARY DRAFT ON THE ON THE FORM. IT'S JUST ONE THING THAT TO BE MINDFUL OF IS JUST LET'S BE REALLY DELINEATE POLICY VERSUS GUIDELINE. SO WE 
          [04:35:06]
DON'T WANT TO CONFLATE THE TWO. SO RULES OF PROCEDURE TO ME ARE POLICY. AND THEN CODE OF CONDUCT AS YOU MENTIONED WOULD BE MORE OF A GUIDELINE. HERE'S HOW WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO BEHAVE. 
          BUT THERE'S NO ENFORCEMENT OR PUNITIVE MECHANISM. I HAD A QUESTION THOUGH, AND THEY MENTIONED REPUTATIONAL CONSEQUENCES THOUGH. WHAT DO THEY MEAN? REPUTATION OF THE CITY OVERALL? THEY MEAN REPUTATION OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO IS BEHAVING BADLY. WHAT WAS THE GIST OF THAT? YEAH, I GOT THE IMPRESSION THAT IT JUST BASICALLY CAME OUT OF THE INDIVIDUAL. SO IF THE MAYOR IS CONTINUALLY HAVING TO USE RESOLUTIONS TO CORRECT OR STOP OR CHANGE DIRECTION OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, THAT THEN IT COMES OUT AT THE END IN REGARD TO AT THE VOTERS, YOU KNOW, HAVING A DECISION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S OKAY. I'M, I'M FAIRLY ALIGNED WITH, WITH THE WHAT I'VE BEEN SEEING. BUT MY, MY CONCERN IS THAT I KNOW THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE IS GOING TO BE BRINGING THIS BACK, AND I WOULD LIKE FOR THEM TO INCLUDE THE CODE OF CONDUCT WITH WITH PUNITIVE. I THINK THAT ALL OF US, WHEN WE TAKE ON THIS RESPONSIBILITY, WE'RE WE'RE TRYING TO BE THE BEST REPRESENTATION FOR THE CITY AS WE CAN. AND BY PUTTING, PUTTING ON A BAD SHOW OR A BAD FAITH, OR AS I WOULD SAY, IS A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE CITY, REGARDLESS OF OF WHO VOTED FOR US OR NOT. I MEAN, I JUST THINK THAT THERE'S CERTAIN STANDARDS THAT WE SHOULD HOLD OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO, AND GOOD MANNERS IS ONE OF THEM. I THINK OUR INTERPERSONAL INTERACTIONS, NOT JUST HERE IN THE DAIS OR OUT HERE, BUT ALSO IN THE COMMUNITY, IS VIEWED BY MANY. AND I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY COGNIZANT OF THAT. AND I THINK THERE SHOULD BE SOME REPERCUSSIONS FOR REPRESENTING THE CITY IMPROPERLY. WELL, THAT'S JUST MY OPINION ABOUT HOW YOU'D LIKE, BUT THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. I WILL GO TO CITIZEN COMMENTS I HAVE MR. PAUL ROBERTS SIGNED UP. MR. PAUL ROBERTS IS NOW VIRTUAL. MR. MAYOR, YOU KNOW I, I WROTE A VERSION OF TO READ HERE TO YOU FOLKS OF WHAT I HAD EMAILED YOU. BUT INSTEAD I JUST WANT TO SPEAK TO A COUPLE THINGS. YOU CAN'T LEGISLATE MORALITY. YOU CAN'T LEGISLATE PEOPLE BEING NICE. WHEN PEOPLE IN THE PAST, SUCH AS COUNCILMEMBER PRINCE, REFERRED TO OF PEOPLE GETTING IN ARGUMENTS, I'M OKAY WITH THAT. HITTING ARGUMENTS ARE ACCEPTABLE. IT'S OFTENTIMES ONLY THROUGH HEATED DEBATE THAT YOU END UP GETTING TO SOMETHING, OR A MEETING OF THE MINDS. AND AS FAR AS PEOPLE BEING NICE AND BEING JERKS OR WHATEVER THE CASE IS, THE ROSENBERG RULES OF PROCEDURE ARE THE ARBITRATOR OF THAT, AND THE MAYOR IS THE ENFORCER OF THAT. IF SOMEBODY IS OUT OF LINE OFF TOPIC, THE MAYOR CAN RULE THEM OUT OF ORDER. IF YOU GO AND LOOK AT THE CURRENT ETHICS POLICY, IT ALREADY HAS A BE NICE TO EVERYONE AND WE'RE ALL GOING TO BE GREAT PEOPLE. OTHERWISE, YOU'RE A BAD PERSON. AT THE END OF THE ETHICS POLICY. AND WHAT HAS IT DONE? I THINK IT'S KIND OF LIKE EMPTY PLATITUDE. YOU PUT IT OUT THERE AND IT SOUNDS VIRTUOUS, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S IT'S NOT ENFORCEABLE. JUST LIKE THE SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY. EVERYBODY WANTS TO HAVE GOOD, HONEST DISCOURSE. AND THAT DISCOURSE SHOULD ALWAYS BE INTELLECTUALLY HONEST. THAT'S SO VERY IMPORTANT. AND I THINK ALL OF YOU HAVE THAT IN THE FOREFRONT OF YOUR MINDS AND YOUR INTENTIONS. BUT THE ETHICS POLICY, THE RULES, PROCEDURE, ALL THAT STUFF CAN BE WEAPONIZED AND IT CAN BE HELD OVER PEOPLE'S HEADS. I LIKE THE DRAFT THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER WHERE IT'S, LOOK, IF YOU'VE GOT AN ISSUE, SOMEBODY THAT YOU BELIEVE HAS HAS VIOLATED ETHICS POLICY, YOU GOT 15 DAYS TO FILE YOUR COMPLAINT. AND THEN IF YOU DON'T DO IT, MOVE ON FOREVER. 
          HOLD YOUR PEACE. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD PROVISION. THE SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY. I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO ADD TEETH TO IT. IF ANYTHING, I THINK I SAID THIS PREVIOUSLY IN MY PUBLIC COMMENTS. MOVE THAT INTO AN ONBOARDING BINDER FOR COMMISSIONERS AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. THEY DO NEED TO HAVE THAT GUIDANCE FROM COUNCIL AS TO HOW TO SET UP YOUR FACEBOOK PROFILE, DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN YOUR PERSONAL AND YOUR CITY. THAT'S ALL VERY IMPORTANT AS FAR AS THE. WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED AT THE AT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE. YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO SETTING UP A SEPARATE ETHICS BOARD IN THE CITY APPOINTED BY BY MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME THING. I DON'T THINK IT SERVES ANY 
          [04:40:03]
PURPOSE. IT SOUNDS VIRTUOUS. IT'S JUST NOT GOING TO ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING. AND IF ANYTHING THAT CAN GET WEAPONIZED ITSELF, BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S GOING TO START FILING STUFF AND SENDING IT THROUGH THERE. IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO LOSE THEIR COOL, IF THEY LOSE THEIR COOL ON THE DAIS, THAT'S WHERE THE MAYOR RULES THEM OUT OF ORDER AND REINS THEM IN. IN OTHER WORDS, I GUESS ALL THAT TO SAY, I SUPPORT WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED IN THE PACKET FOR THIS WORK SESSION. AND I DO THINK MUCH OF THE CONCERNS CAN ALREADY BE ADDRESSED WITH IN WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE CODIFIED. AND THIS CAN JUST TAKE IT A STEP FURTHER. 
          SO ANYWAY, THANKS. GOOD LUCK. I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER CITIZENS SIGN UP FOR THIS. SO MY TAKEAWAY IS I THINK I'VE GOTTEN MORE FEEDBACK. WE CAN CONTINUE ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD, AND I WILL TAKE A SHOT AT PUTTING THESE IN AN ACTION ITEM AT THE NEXT MEETING. WE'LL SEE HOW 
          [X. STAFF AND COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS]
THAT GOES. THAT TAKES US TO ROUTINE REPORTS FROM CITY STAFF. I DON'T HAVE ANY REPORTS. MAYOR. 
          PERFECT. WE WILL GO TO. YES. I HAVE TO SING OUR PRAISES. IN CASE ANY OF YOU HAVEN'T HEARD THAT WE RECEIVED THE 2025 ACHIEVEMENT OF EXCELLENCE IN LIBRARIES BOARD FROM TEXAS LIBRARY DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION. SO IT'S FIRST TIME WE'VE EVER APPLIED. WE CHECKED OFF THE TEN BOXES AND WE MET THE CRITERIA THERE. SO AND THEN JUST TO LET YOU KNOW WE WILL HAVE TAX FORMS PROBABLY I'M HOPING BY NEXT WEEK OR SO I THINK THEY MAY HAVE GOTTEN DELAYED BECAUSE OF THE BAD WEATHER. JONESTOWN'S HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM. SO WE SHOULD HAVE TEN 40S AND THEN THE BOOKLETS. AND THEN THE OTHER THING ON THE MARCH 3RD PRIMARY, THE MEETING ROOM WILL BE A POLLING PLACE FOR THAT DAY. SO I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE GENTLEMAN FROM THE TAX OFFICE TO GET THINGS SET UP AND GET THE EQUIPMENT THERE. SO ANYWAY, SO HOPEFULLY THAT WILL BE CONVENIENT FOR EVERYBODY. THANK YOU. WELL, NOT TO PROLONG IT I GUESS, BUT SINCE THE LIBRARY. 
          DAVID, I STOPPED IN TO YOUR OFFICE THE OTHER DAY UNANNOUNCED, AND HE HAD GIVEN ME SOME COOL INFORMATION. I THOUGHT AT LEAST. BUT THE APPLICATION FOR SOME MONEY FOR SOLAR LIGHTS UP AT SUNSET. SO HE'S LOOKING TO GET SOME FUNDING. JUST WANTED TO GIVE KUDOS. THAT'S THAT'S GREAT AND I HOPE WE GET IT. THANK YOU. ROUTINE REPORTS FROM CITY 
          [Items IX.11, IX.13, & IX.14]
COUNCIL BOARD. COMMISSION COMMITTEE LIAISONS. GO DOWN HERE TO MR. HALL. I ACTUALLY HAVE THREE THAT I'M REPORTING ON. THE FIRST ONE I WAS. FILLING IN FOR MAYOR SAM ON THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING AT THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. AND JUST QUICKLY, THE CURRENT OFFICERS OF THAT WERE REAPPOINTED. SO THEY WERE REELECTED. SO THERE'S NO CHANGES THERE. THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE LETTER THAT THE MAYOR RECEIVED REGARDING THE RUSTY ALLEN PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION THROUGH THE FENCE AGREEMENT AT LAGO VISTA AIRPORT. SO SOME, SOME, SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. AND I THINK A RECOGNITION THAT THE AGREEMENT THAT FOR THE THE 29 MAINTENANCE AND FUNDING AGREEMENT THAT EXPIRED IN 2024 DOES NEED TO BE RENEWED. AND I THINK THERE'S AGREEMENT THAT THAT THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN. SO THOSE THE POA HAS UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT, A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND, AND LOOK FORWARD TO DOING THAT. SO THAT'S THAT'S THE THAT'S THE KEY KEY THINGS FROM THAT MEETING, THE THE NEXT MEETING WAS IN THIS PAST TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3RD WITH THE GOLF COURSE ADVISORY COMMITTEE. GREG SAUL, THEY'RE OUR STAFF PERSON FOR THAT REPORTED. AND I THINK THERE'S A VERY POSITIVE REPORT ABOUT NO DAMAGE TO THE GREENS FROM THE FREEZE. IRRIGATION CONTRACT, OF COURSE, HAS BEEN SIGNED. AND THAT'S A BIG, BIG THING TO BEGIN IN MARCH. EXPECT TO PROBABLY BE COMPLETED BY THE END OF AUGUST, SOMETIME IN AUGUST, CLOSING 1 TO 2 HOLES AT A TIME, WHICH HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IN THE PAST, AND THE ROUNDS AND REVENUES STILL UP ON 
          [04:45:07]
THE GOLF COURSE. AND AND I THINK WHAT'S, WHAT'S VERY, VERY, VERY POSITIVE IS THAT LOOKING FORWARD TO COMING CLOSE TO BREAKING EVEN ON THE BUDGET FOR THE 2627 FISCAL YEAR AND ACTUALLY BEING IN THE BLACK FOR THE 2728 FISCAL YEAR. SO ROUNDS OF GOLF, YOU KNOW, HAVE HAVE GONE UP CONSIDERABLY OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS. FROM 2023, 2024, THERE WAS ABOUT 17,000 ROUNDS OF GOLF AND 25, 26, 32,000 ROUNDS. SO I THINK WE AGAIN, WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO THE GOLF COURSE BEING SELF-SUFFICIENT WHILE AT THE SAME TIME BEING A BETTER DISPERSAL OF OUR FLUID. AND WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS THERE. THE AND THE LAST THING, THE THIRD COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION WAS THE REGARDING THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THAT. WAS LENGTHY MEETING. THEY PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO THAT FINAL ARTICLE. 7 OR 8, I MEAN, HAS BEEN ADOPTED AND A FINAL ARTICLE THREE WAS ADOPTED. FINAL NEW ARTICLE FOUR. AND THEN THERE WAS DISCUSSIONS OF ON DRAFT ARTICLE TEN. AND SO AGAIN, THAT THAT'S CONTINUING FORWARD, THAT THOSE DISCUSSIONS, THERE'S A COUPLE MORE MEETINGS AND THEY HOPE TO BE FINISHED. BUT THAT MAY BE OPTIMISTIC. AND SO WE'LL SEE. BUT THEY'RE STILL SHOOTING FOR WRAPPING THAT UP IN THIS MONTH. AND WE HAVE THEM ON FOR THE 19TH AGENDA CRC. WE CAN PUT THEM ON THERE GIVEN A PRESENTATION. THEY WANT TO DO THAT. THEY'RE THEY'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO THAT. SO OKAY PUT THEM ON. ALL RIGHT MR. MARIO. CONGRATULATIONS AGAIN TO YOU. YOU ALL. IT'S BEEN WONDERFUL. 
          AND THEN FOR KEEP LAGO VISTA BEAUTIFUL. THEY HAVEN'T MET SINCE OUR LAST MEETING EXCEPT FOR LIKE, THE LONG TERM PLANNING GROUP OF THEM DID MEET, AND I WAS THEY REACHED OUT TO ME ON FRIDAY AND STATED THAT THEY HAVE GOTTEN THE BIDS AND BIDS IN FOR MOUNTAIN POINT FOR THE ADA SWING SET AND ACCESSIBILITY, AND IT IS FAR EXCEEDS ANYTHING THEY HAVE IN THEIR BUDGET. SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING SOME FUNDRAISERS AND ARE LOOKING FOR CONTRIBUTORS. I HAD ORIGINALLY MYSELF HAD HAD STATED THAT I'D BE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE HALF OF WHAT THE SWING SET COSTS WERE, AND I'M STILL WILLING TO DO THAT, BUT THAT WAS WOUND UP BEING LIKE $2,500, AND THE CONSTRUCTION COST IS LOOKING CLOSE TO 7 TO 8000. SO WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING A LOT OF FUNDRAISING, TRYING TO GET THAT TO BE AN ADA ACCESSIBLE AND AREA THAT THAT WILL PASS APPROVAL. DAVID. OF COURSE, THERE'S A QUITE A QUITE A FEW LOOPHOLES THAT WE HAVE TO JUMP THROUGH, AND IT'S A QUITE A BIT MORE EXPENSIVE THAN JUST A REGULAR SWING SET, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE. SO WE'LL BE FOLLOWING UP WITH THAT. AND THERE'S ALSO SOME GOOD NEWS. MR. BEAUTIFUL IS NOW OFFICIALLY LISTED AS A SPONSOR FOR LA PRIMAVERA, WHERE THEY'VE BEEN DOING THE WORK BEHIND THE SCENES FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS. THEY'VE NEVER GOTTEN RECOGNITION FOR IT OFFICIALLY THROUGH PRIMAVERA. NOW THEY'RE GETTING THEIR LOGO PUT ON THE WEBSITE, AND THEY'LL BE GETTING SOME RECOGNITION FOR ALL THEIR HARD WORK. FINALLY, FOR HELPING THEM. AND THEN THE BUILDINGS AND STANDARDS COMMISSION MET LAST NIGHT. IT WAS MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS. I WILL SAY. WE DID HAVE A CITIZEN COMMENT THAT REALLY NEEDED TO GO OVER TO PNC, SO IT WAS MORE DIRECTIONAL. THEY WILL BE ATTENDING THE MEETING THERE, AND THEN WE YOU KNOW, WE DISCUSSED THE SUBCOMMITTEE AS WELL AND WHO WOULD BE WILLING TO GO FORTH. ORIGINALLY, I BELIEVE THAT THEY HAD DISCUSSED THAT MR. FRANK ROBBINS AND HIS DAUGHTER WOULD BE INTERESTED. NOW THEY'RE SAYING PRESIDENT JIM CASON, IF AS LONG AS 
          [04:50:03]
THERE'S TWO IF WE'RE ONLY BRINGING IT DOWN TO ONE NOW, WE MIGHT NEED TO CONSULT WITH THEM TO VERIFY THAT WE AND SIGNATURE. AND THEN THERE WAS I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE ABOUT IT. 
          THERE WAS THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ON LEGALITIES AND A COUPLE OF THINGS AFTER THAT AFTER SESSION, BUT IT WAS MOSTLY JUST OR QUESTIONS FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE FORMATION. AND I TOLD THEM THAT UNTIL BUT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GIVE THEM CLARIFICATION ON THAT FOR TEN MINUTES. THANK YOU. SO I REALLY DIDN'T HAVE ANYBODY MEETING, BUT I DO HAVE IDAC HAVING THEIR LAST MEETING AS IDAC COMING UP. BUT I WANTED TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT THE GRANT WRITER DID DO HER FIRST REPORT. I HAVE PUT THAT ON THE COUNCIL FORUM IN TERMS OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT SHE HAS. SO EVERY TIME THAT SHE DOES A REPORT, I WILL GO AHEAD AND PUT IT UP THERE. HERE'S SOME AMAZING THINGS ABOUT THIS. SHE'S ALREADY IDENTIFIED. I SAID PLUS OR MINUS, I DON'T KNOW, $75,000 WORTH OF STUFF TO GO AFTER RIGHT NOW. BUT I'M GOING TO SAY, AMAZINGLY, WE GAVE HER A CHALLENGE OF COMING UP WITH A COMMUNITY CENTER THAT ALSO WOULD BE A FEMA DISASTER CENTER AS WELL. AND SHE ACTUALLY FIGURED THAT OUT. AND THEN WE SAID, WE HAVE NO MATCHING FUNDS. SO HOW DO YOU DO THAT? SHE FIGURED OUT HOW TO HAVE 5 OR 6 DIFFERENT ENTITIES, ACTUALLY WHERE WE DO GRANTS AND ONE OF LIKE SO ONE ENTITIES GRANT ENDS UP BEING THE MATCHING FUNDS FOR THE OTHER ENTITY. NOW THAT IS WISHFUL THINKING. I GAVE HER AN IMPOSSIBLE THING TO DO, AND SHE ACTUALLY CAME BACK AND FOUND A WAY TO DO IT. SO I JUST WOULD SAY EVERYBODY GIVE HER, YOU KNOW, KUDOS AND KUDOS TO ERIC FOR DRIVING THIS FORWARD BECAUSE THEY'RE THEY'RE DOING AMAZING WORK, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO ACTUALLY BRINGING IN SOME GOOD GRANTS, YOU KNOW, HERE IN THE NEAR FUTURE. THANK YOU. YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE MET. THEY'RE STILL TRYING TO FINALIZE A DATE TO DO THE CAPITAL TOUR WITH ME. WE'RE TRYING TO TURN IT INTO A LARGER ISD DAY SO MORE STUDENTS WILL BE THERE. STUDENT COUNCIL AND ANYONE ELSE THE LEO'S HAVE ASKED IF THEY COULD BE A PART OF IT. THE JOINT VENTURE LEO'S AS WELL. SO I'LL LET YOU GUYS KNOW IF THERE'S A DATE CHOSEN FOR THAT. THE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS COMMITTEE SIDE OF THINGS. I MET WITH THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE TO TALK ABOUT FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES. THEY HAVE 50% GRANTS OVER THERE. I TOLD DAVID ABOUT IT. WE'D HAVE TO BRAINSTORM SOME WAYS WHERE WE COULD, BUT THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES. THEY DID PROVIDE SOME OF THOSE SAME GRANTS BACK AT THE BEGINNING OF SUNSET. SO THEY SAID THAT'S THEY'RE STILL ELIGIBLE PROJECTS OUT THERE. I WENT WITH THE CONCEPT OF TRYING TO HELP THE YOUTH SPORTS LEAGUES ON SOME LIGHTING UP THERE. BUT THEN AFTER TALKING TO DAVID, WE HAVE A MUCH LARGER PROBLEM OF GETTING ELECTRICITY UP THERE, WHICH WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE. 
          SO THERE'S STILL OTHER PROJECTS THAT COULD BE USED FOR THAT FUNDING, AND THEY'VE OFFERED TO DO A PRESENTATION ON THE FUNDING. SO I'LL GIVE A DAVID ON THAT. I TOLD YOU, WE HAVE A MEETING TOMORROW TO TALK ABOUT FUNDING FOR GENERATORS. MET WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT THIS WEEK AS WELL TO TALK A LOT ABOUT EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SRO STUFF. I CAN TALK TO CHIEF FRANCO ABOUT THAT. ALSO, I'M DOING A MAYOR'S ESSAY CONTEST FOR THE EIGHTH GRADERS. THEY WILL DO A MAYOR FOR THE DAY ESSAY, AND THE WINNERS OF IT WILL GET TO BE MAYOR FOR A DAY AND COME UP HERE AND GAVEL US IN AND DO A WHOLE THING. I'M JUST TRYING TO SHOW THE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AND MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN COME AND GET ENGAGED HERE, AND HOPEFULLY THAT IS PROLONGED THROUGHOUT LIFE. AND THEN LCRA IS BEEN DOING THEIR WHAT'S IT CALLED, THE MASTER WATER PLAN. I SUBMITTED COMMENTS FOR THAT. 
          CENTRAL TEXAS WATER COALITION HAS BEEN SUPER HELPFUL, KEEPING US APPRIZED OF WHAT'S GOING ON THERE. THEY CONTINUE TO TRY AND HELP US TO WITH OUR REGION K CONNECTIONS. AND I KNOW WE HAD A MEETING. THERE WAS A MEETING A WEEK OR TWO AGO. CHARLES WAS ON LIKE A FRIDAY, SO WE'LL TRY AND ATTEND THE NEXT ONE. BUT PART OF OUR FUNDING REQUIREMENTS ARE THAT WE ARE INVOLVED IN THE REGION K PROCESS AND THE PLANNING. SO I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STAY ON TOP OF THAT. AND THAT'S IT FOR ME. MISS VANESSA, NOTHING REALLY TO REPORT. OUR NEXT PARK AND REC ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING IS NEXT WEDNESDAY. NOTHING FROM THE MEETING. IT WAS PROBABLY THEIR SHORTEST MEETING ON RECORD. SO PRETTY EXCITING THERE. I THINK WE WILL THERE WILL BE SOME COORDINATION, WHICH I'LL WORK TO HELP NAVIGATE. IF TURN BACK IS HEATING UP AGAIN, BECAUSE THE POA HAS EXTENSIVE ADJACENT PROPERTIES THERE. AND WITHIN 
          [04:55:05]
THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO HELP REROUTE THE DRIVEWAY A LITTLE BIT WHERE IT'S ADJACENT TO PASEO DE VACA ENTRANCE. SO ANYWAYS, IF THERE'S ANYTHING COMING UP WITH THAT, WE'LL JUST TRY TO STAY AHEAD OF THAT AND COMMUNICATE, KEEP THE COMMUNICATION OPEN ON THAT. SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, MR. TRENT'S JUST. IT'S GETTING LATE. 
          THANK YOU. YOU GOT ME BACK. YEAH. OKAY, SO READ THE TWO MESSAGE BOARD POSTS AROUND CRC BECAUSE THAT'S GOOD. AND THEN ALSO ON THE CRC. CHARLES, I KNOW YOU HAD SENT TO BRAD SOME OF THE CHAPTERS THEY'VE COMPLETED. I WANT TO SAY 2 OR 3 WEEKS AGO, THEY'VE COMPLETED A NUMBER OF OTHERS. SO IF WE HAVEN'T ALREADY PASSED THOSE ALONG THE BRAD, THAT'D BE GOOD. 
          YEAH. IT'S A LOT TO DO THIS THIS WEEKEND TO GET THEM ALL GOTTEN DONE. THEY'RE THEY'RE GETTING PRETTY CLOSE. YOU KNOW, ONCE THEY GOT THROUGH THAT CHAPTER THREE, WHICH WAS THE REALLY HARD ONE. BUT MOVING PRETTY QUICKLY, THAT'S ALL I HAVE. MR. BENNEFIELD. OKAY. ALL 
          [II. EXECUTIVE SESSION (Part 2 of 2)]
RIGHT. WELL, FOR THE AGENDA ITEMS I THINK THAT'S IT UNLESS I MISS ONE. BUT UNFORTUNATELY FOR COUNCIL, WE DID NOT GET TO ITEM NUMBER THREE FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO COUNCIL WILL CONVENE IN A CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO ITEM THREE, DELIBERATION REGARDING THE EVALUATION PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES OF THE CITY MANAGER PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION ALL RIGHT. THE TIME IS 941. WE ARE COMING OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION WHERE WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING ITEM THREE, DELIBERATION REGARDING THE EVALUATION PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES OF THE CITY MANAGER PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.074. 
          WAS THERE ANY ACTION, MAYOR? NO ACTION, NO ACTION. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE NEEDED ON THAT. RIGHT. AND THEN IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, THEN I WILL ADJOURN THIS MEETING AT
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.