Mar 19, 2026 City Council

[I. CALL TO ORDER, CALL OF ROLL]

[00:00:09]

MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER. THE TIME IS 230. WE HAVE COUNCILORS. PRINCE BENEFIELD, MAYOR PRO TEM OWEN, MYSELF. I THINK THAT COUNCILORS HALL AND CHAVARRIA ARE ON THEIR WAY.

MISS VAN NESS HAS EXCUSED. ABSENCE WILL NOT BE HERE TONIGHT. SO WE STILL HAVE A

[II. EXECUTIVE SESSION (Part 1 of 2)]

SECTION 551.071 ADVICE OF COUNSEL IN SECTION 1.05 TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT AND COUNSEL. CHAVARRIA HAS GONE HERE. WE WILL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSIO COUNCIL IS NOW RETURNING FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE TIME IS 403. I'LL NOW GO

[III. ACTION ON EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS]

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATIONS. BUT, I MEAN, I THINK UNDERSTANDING WHAT I THINK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THEN. YES YOU ARE. I HAD A FEW QUESTIONS.

THE FIRST QUESTION WAS, MR. PRINCE, A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT LEASING THE FACILITY INSTEAD OF PURCHASING THE FACILITY. AND SO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS RANGE AROUND WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND WHAT OUR MONTHLY PAYMENT WOULD BE THERE. I HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT OUR MONTHLY PAYMENT WOULD BE IF WE PURCHASED IT, WHAT THE DOWN PAYMENT WOULD BE, WHAT WOULD BE OUR OUT OF POCKET EXPENSE ON A MONTHLY BASIS. ONE OF THE APPEALS OF THE PURCHASE, WHICH I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND, WHICH I BELIEVE MR. WEST IS HERE TO PREPARE SOME INFORMATION FOR, IS THAT THE REVENUE THAT WOULD BE GENERATED ON A MONTHLY BASIS WOULD EXCEED OUR MONTHLY EXPENSE. AND SO IF THAT'S TRUE, WHICH I'D LIKE TO HEAR TONIGHT, THAT MIGHT PERSUADE ME OTHERWISE, IF WE CAN MAKE MONEY AND ACQUIRE AN ASSET THAT'S OF INTEREST TO ME. BUT IF IT'S JUST TO LOSE MONEY, THAT'S OF LESS INTEREST TO ME. SO I'D LIKE TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT. AND THEN. THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME EXPENSES MOVING FORWARD. FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, APPRAISALS. INSPECTIONS. SO I REQUESTED TO SEE IF THERE WAS A CONSENSUS AMONG COUNCIL TO EVEN PROCEED TO GOING INTO A CONTRACT BEFORE WE SPEND THIS MONEY, TO JUST MAKE SURE WE'RE GOING, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY ONLY BE 4000 HERE AND 10,000 THERE, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S CONSENSUS THAT THIS IS SOMETHING WE WANT TO CONTINUE VENTURING DOWN BEFORE WE SPEND ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY OR TIME. SO THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS. AND ULTIMATELY, I'D LIKE ACTION ON THE CONSENSUS OF WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO PURSUE PROCEED DOWN THIS PATHWAY, MAYOR. MR. PRINCE, I THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR

[00:05:02]

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF ATTEMPTS TO BUY SOME PROPERTY THAT DIDN'T WORK OUT THERE, YOU KNOW, WERE WE LOOKED AT AT THE POTENTIAL FOR BUILDING SOMETHING. WE'VE EVEN COMMISSIONED A STUDY THAT MR. WEST MAY TALK ABOUT MORE OF WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND WHAT IT WOULD COST TO BUILD SOMETHING ON THIS, THIS PROPERTY. SO THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR QUITE A WHILE. AND JUST RECENTLY, IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION THAT THIS THIS BUILDING, COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE CASEY BUILDING, WAS A POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY TO USE FOR CITY OFFICES. AND SO AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE OBVIOUSLY COUNCIL WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THE NUMBERS LOOKED LIKE AND WHETHER WE WOULD HAVE TO BUY IT OR WHETHER WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO LEASE IT INSTEAD. AND THIS INTERESTING LITTLE SIDE COMMENT THAT THERE ARE SOME SOME PEOPLE CURRENTLY LEASING IN THERE. AND SO THAT MIGHT BRING SOME REVENUE, WHICH WOULD OFFSET, IF NOT, IF NOT TOTALLY, COMPLETELY, AT LEAST PARTIALLY SOME OF THE CITY'S EXPENSES. SO, SO WE TO DATE HAVE DONE IT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION BECAUSE ONE OF THE IMPORTANT THINGS IN REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS IS YOU DON'T WANT TO HINDER YOUR NEGOTIATING POWER BY COMPLETELY SHARING EVERYTHING YOU'RE THINKING BEFORE YOU GET INTO ANY NEGOTIATIONS. SO WE'VE MADE NO DECISIONS. WE'VE JUST BEEN INVESTIGATING, AND WE'RE FAR ENOUGH DOWN THE PATH. THERE'S ENOUGH PUBLIC COMMENT GOING ON THAT THAT WE, WE, WE AGREED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT WE JUST WANT TO HAVE SOME OPEN PUBLIC DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. AND THAT'S THAT'S THE BACKGROUND. AND I THINK MR. BENEFIELD RAISES A COUPLE OF REALLY, REALLY GOOD QUESTIONS THERE. SO WITH THAT BACKGROUND, AND I'LL JUST I'LL FINISH BY SAYING I BELIEVE THIS IS A LONG TERM PROBLEM THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO SOLVE. THE QUESTION IS, IS THIS THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT AND THE RIGHT TIME TO DO IT IS REALLY, I THINK, THE OPEN QUESTION IN MY MIND.

AND SO IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'LL GO BACK TO YOU. YOU MAY WANT TO REITERATE YOUR QUESTIONS OR ADD TO THEM. NO, THAT'S THAT WAS PERFECT. UNLESS MR. WEST NEEDS THEM TO BE ASKED AGAIN. NO, THE LEASE PAYMENT, IF THE CITY WAS TO LEASE OFFICE SPACE, WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT $7,500 A MONTH, I BELIEVE IS WHAT WAS IN THE LEASE. CURRENTLY, THE MONTHLY TOTALS ON MONTHLY RENT FOR 2025 IS $20,927. RENT FOR 2026 IS SUPPOSED TO BE BRINGING IN ABOUT $21,493. MR. CASEY HAS OFFERED THE BUILDING TO THE CITY FOR PURCHASE FOR 3.5 MILLION. WE HAVE $1 MILLION.

WELL, ACTUALLY WE HAVE $1.1 MILLION IN A REAL ESTATE FUND. THAT IS A RESTRICTED FUND THAT CAN ONLY BE SPENT ON REAL ESTATE. SO THE SUGGESTION WAS, WAS TO PUT $1 MILLION AS A DOWN PAYMENT ON THE BUILDING. THEN WE WOULD ONLY BE FINANCING ANYWHERE FROM 2 TO 2.5 MILLION, DEPENDING ON THE APPRAISAL, ON WHAT IT COMES BACK AT. AND ROUGHLY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE GOING BETWEEN A SIX AND A 6.5% INTEREST RATE, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A PAYMENT OF ABOUT 17 TO $18,000. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT A NET POSITIVE INCOME OF ABOUT 2 TO $3000. ONCE YOU FIGURE IN SOME THINGS, IT MAY CHANGE A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, WE'VE JUST STARTED DOING THIS RESEARCH. WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN ALL THE WAY INTO IT. AND IT WOULD NOT BE GOING INTO THE BUILDING DOING ANY RENOVATIONS AT THIS TIME. IT WOULD STRICTLY BE MOVING ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES OVER THERE AS. AND KEEPING ANY REMODELING NOT TO BE DONE UNTIL THE FUTURE BECAUSE UTILITY BILLING, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND MUNICIPAL COURT WOULD STILL NEED TO REMAIN AT THIS BUILDING BECAUSE OVER THERE THERE IS NO WINDOW SPACE FOR TAKING PAYMENTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

SO LIKE I SAID, IT WAS STRICTLY B OFFICE SPACE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE. THE ONLY REMODEL WORK THAT WOULD BE DONE OVER THERE IS THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF NETWORK CABLING DONE FOR COMPUTER SOFTWARE, FOR COMPUTER SERVICES, AND PROBABLY A FRESH COAT OF PAINT ON THE INSIDE OFFICES. BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, THERE WOULD BE NO REMODEL WORK TO BE DONE. THERE WOULD BE NO PLANS TO PURCHASE ANY NEW FURNITURE AS THERE IS FURNITURE BEING COME IN WITH THE PURCHASE OF THE BUILDING. SO. MR. BENFIELD, YEAH, JUST A QUICK FOLLOW UP TO

[00:10:05]

WHAT WOULD THAT PAYMENT LOOK LIKE? THAT PAYMENT WOULD LOOK LIKE? I HAD TO DO A LITTLE MATH HERE. YOU WOULD STILL BE LOOKING AT ABOUT. 14 15,000. MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION JUST TO THAT IS, IS THERE AN ASSUMPTION THAT ONLY TWO OF THE CLIENT. TWO OF THE RESIDENTS ARE STAYING THERE? NO. RIGHT NOW, ALL OF THE LEASES ARE ARE CURRENT AND THEY'RE MOST OF THEM ARE LONG TERM LEASES. SO TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NOBODY WOULD BE MOVING OUT. WE WOULDN'T BE ASKING ANYBODY TO MOVE OUT IS IF THE CITY WAS TO GO FORWARD TO THIS. I MEAN, STRICTLY ALL. MY RECOMMENDATION IS WE KEEP LEASING OUT THE EXTRA OFFICE SPACE UNTIL THE CITY NEEDS IT AT A FUTURE DATE.

LET LET THE LEASES PAY FOR THE BUILDING. THAT WAY THERE'S NO BURDEN PUT ON THE TAXPAYERS THE LONG TERM RANGE. WE DO BELIEVE THE BUILDING COULD BE REMODELED TO HOUSE ALL OF CITY HALL IN THERE, AND THEN THIS BUILDING BE CONVERTED BACK INTO A. OR BE CONVERTED INTO A COMMUNITY CENTER AT A FUTURE DATE. AND THEN ON THE FEASIBILITY STUDY THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDERWAY, CITY HALL NEEDS TO HAVE ABOUT 15,000FT■!S. AND RIGHT NOW THE AVERAGE COST. THIS DOESN'T INCLUDE ARCHITECTURE, ENGINEERING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT IS ABOUT $600 A SQUARE FOOT FOR A CITY HALL BUILDING. WE WILL HAVE. AT OUR NEXT MEETING, WE'LL HAVE A PRESENTATION THAT SHOWS WHAT CASEY, WHAT PARK HILL HAS PUT TOGETHER FOR US. IT GETS CONFUSING BECAUSE HIS. THE ARCHITECT IS WORKING ON. HIS NAME IS CHRIS CASEY. I'LL HAVE THAT AND A FLOOR PLAN OF WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. THAT BUILDING WOULD BE LOCATED NEXT TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ON THE VACANT LOT THAT WE CURRENTLY OWN. SO. MR. BANFIELD, CAN YOU JUST TELL US WHAT THE USABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING WOULD BE? I GUESS BOTH SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM? LONG TERM, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE ABOUT 15,000FT■!S. THAT'S WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT ESD AND THE CHAMBER STAYS AS IS, AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE IS CITY. YES, THERE IS ONE SUITE IN THAT BUILDING THAT DOES NOT COME WITH THE PURCHASE, AND THAT IS THE EMILY DICKMAN REAL ESTATE OFFICE THAT IS A. THE BUILDING IS SET UP AS A CONDOMINIUM TYPE STYLE BUILDING. SO THEY OWN THEIR SUITE. MAYOR PRO TEM. CHARLES, AS WE'VE BEEN GOING DOWN THIS, SOME OF THE THOUGHTS THAT I HAD IS I WAS ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT PARK HILL STUDY.

AND WHAT IT'S STATING RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE ARE ALREADY COMPROMISED IN REGARD TO THE SPACE THAT STAFF CAN EFFECTIVELY MAINTAIN SERVICES FOR OUR RESIDENTS, AND THAT'S EXPECTED TO GO MORE ASIDE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS. I MEAN, REALLY WHAT WE'RE WANTING TO DO IS EXPLORE OPTIONS JUST TO SAY, HOW CAN WE, BETWEEN NOW AND THE TIME THAT WE HAVE THE MONEY, WHICH I THIS IS MY OWN PERSONAL FORECASTING. THE SOONEST THAT WE COULD BUILD A BUILDING AT THAT $600 A SQUARE FOOT IN TODAY'S DOLLARS IS SOMEWHERE AROUND 10 TO 15 YEARS OUT, JUST BASED ON OUR LIMITS ON OUR BOND CAPACITIES AND WHAT WE'VE GOT TO DO FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER.

[00:15:03]

BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THIS IS WORKING, BUT IT'S BARELY WORKING. AND AS NORMA WAS SAYING, OUR PRINTER, SHE WAS SAYING IS THAT WE ARE GROWING AND WE ARE GETTING CRAMPED. AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL KNOW ABOUT CRAMPED WORK ENVIRONMENTS, BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE FOR HAPPY EMPLOYEES, AND IT DEFINITELY DOESN'T MAKE FOR GOOD COMMUNITY RELATIONS. SO JUST TO KEEP THAT IN MIND, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME OPEN DISCUSSIONS AND WE ALWAYS ENJOY THE EMAILS WE GET.

IF YOU HAVE ANY ANY GOOD IDEAS OR OPPORTUNITIES, WE ALWAYS LIKE TO SEE THOSE COME IN. WELL, MR. HALL, WELL, I'M OPEN AT THIS POINT TO CONTINUE CONSIDERING ALL OPTIONS. I THINK THIS COULD BE A VERY UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO ACQUIRE THE ADDITIONAL SPACE THAT WE NEED NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO, AGAIN, IMPACT TO THE TAXPAYERS AND WHICH IS WHICH IS VERY A VERY UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY. I'M NOT SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE ANYTHING BETTER OR, OR OTHER OPTIONS THAT ARE BETTER OUT THERE. BUT, BUT I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO PURSUING THIS. THANK YOU. YEAH, I THINK I WOULD ADD THAT I'M NOT ENTIRELY SOLD ON THIS YET, BUT I'M NOT AT THE POINT WHERE I WOULD STOP THE EXPLORATION OF THIS. AND WE ALREADY HAVE AGENDIZE FOR MARCH 25TH THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE AN AGENDA ITEM. AND SO I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THAT OPPORTUNITY AWAY FROM THE CITIZENS TO COME IN AND GIVE US THEIR THOUGHTS AND OPINIONS ON IT, AND GIVE MR. WESTIN AN OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE HIS PRESENTATION. MR. PRINCE, JUST A COMMENT. MR. WEST QUOTED SOME NUMBERS WHICH WERE CASH FLOW NUMBERS. RIGHT.

AND THAT WAS WHAT OUR MONTHLY MORTGAGE SERVICE COST WOULD BE AND WHAT THE RENT IS CURRENTLY.

AND THAT WAS A POSITIVE CASH FLOW, NOT A NEGATIVE CASH FLOW, WHICH IS GOOD NEWS, BUT IT'S NOT OF NO COST TO THE CITIZENS BECAUSE WE WOULD BE TAKING 1 MILLION OR 1,000,001 OUT OF THE, OUT OF OUR, OUR REAL ESTATE FUND IN ORDER TO BASICALLY BUY DOWN THAT MORTGAGE TO A LOCATION WHERE IT'S A, A, YOU KNOW, A POSITIVE CASH FLOW. SO IT, IT WOULD BE USING THAT MONEY, WHICH CURRENTLY DOESN'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER PLAN FOR IT. SO I'M GENERALLY POSITIVE ON THIS. I THINK THE OPPORTUNITY IS, IS A REALLY GOOD ONE THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO US. I THINK IT'S A REAL NEED. IT'S A LONG TERM NEED. AND AND THEN KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. I'M IN FAVOR DEFINITELY IN FAVOR OF LOOKING AT THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NOT SOMETHING WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT. RIGHT. SO, YOU KNOW, GETTING A AN APPRAISAL OF THE PROPERTY,

[00:20:02]

MR. BENNEFIELD, MY FINAL COMMENTS, I TOTALLY AGREE THAT WE SHOULD ALLOW IT TO PROCEED AND GIVE THE CITIZENS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE THEIR CONCERNS. THE QUESTION ULTIMATELY WAS, IS DO WE WANT TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO GO DOWN AND SPEND THE MONEY ON INSPECTIONS AND. APPRAISALS BEFORE WE ALLOW THE CITIZENS TO HEAR, HEAR BACK? THAT'S ULTIMATELY THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE. I'LL SHARE THREE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE OR TWO CONCERNS AND ONE POSITIVE. AND I SHARE THIS WITH YOU, MR. WEST, ONLY FROM A. IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING INTO YOUR PRESENTATION TO HELP OVERCOME THEM, WHICH IS. I DO BELIEVE THAT CITY HALL IS MOST APPROPRIATE HERE NEAR THE LIBRARY. IT'S MOST APPROPRIATE NEAR THE POLICE STATION. IT'S MOST APPROPRIATE. IF THIS WAS GOING TO BE A COMMUNITY CENTER, IT'S MOST APPROPRIATE TO HAVE IT RIGHT HERE. I FIND A QUOTE OF $600 PER SQUARE FOOT ON PROPERTY THAT WE ALREADY OWN TO BE A HIGHLY INFLATED NUMBER. BASED ON MY RESEARCH, A STANDARD CITY HALL COST BETWEEN 190 AND 340FT■S. WHEN YOU OWN THE WHEN YOU OWN THE LAND. SO A BRAND NEW BUILDING AT 16,000FT■S BASED ON THOSE NUMBERS WOULD RANGE BETWEEN 3 AND $5.5 MILLION, NOT $10 MILLION. I THINK $6 MILLION FOR A BUILDING IS A VERY LUXURIOUS BUILDING. I DON'T THINK THAT'S ANYTHING LAGO VISTA WOULD EVEN CONSIDER. SO THOSE ARE MY TWO PRIMARY CONCERNS. BUT THE ONE THING THAT IT DOES HAVE GOING FOR IT THAT I WILL CERTAINLY CONCEDE TO THE FACT IS THE CASH FLOW POSITIVE, HAVING ESD IN THE CHAMBER AND OTHER TENANTS THERE, THAT OBVIOUSLY IS VERY ATTRACTIVE. SO THAT'S THAT'S ALL MY COMMENTS FOR TONIGHT. MR. BENFIELD, DO WE NEED TO DO ANYTHING MORE ON THE ACTION TAKEN? IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONSENSUS TO ALLOW THE APPRAISAL TO GO THROUGH, BUT IF YOU WANT TO, I FELT LIKE I HEARD CONSENSUS ON THAT. MR. WEST, DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE GOOD DIRECTION ON THAT? YES. I'LL FINISH GATHERING SOME INFORMATION AND HAVE AS MUCH OF IT FOR NEXT WEEK'S MEETING AS I CAN. THANK YOU SIR, WHAT I DON'T HAVE, WE'LL HAVE ON APRIL 2ND. ALL RIGHT. EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEM THREE, CONSULT WITH CITY ATTORNEY PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.071, TO RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE FROM THE CITY'S EMPLOYMENT LAW HR ATTORNEY CONCERNING PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE CITY'S HUMAN RESOURCES POLICIES. ANY ACTION MAYOR. NO ACTION ITEM FOR CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL TO RECEIVE UPDATED LEGAL ADVICE ON NOTICE OF CLAIM AND DEMAND FROM A BENNEFIELD. SECTION 551.071 ADVICE OF COUNSEL IN SECTION 1.05 TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT. ANY ACTION MAYOR. NO ACTION ITEM NUMBER FIVE CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.071 TO RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE REGARDING PROCEDURES FOR COMMUNICATION WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY. MAYOR. THERE WAS INTEREST IN MAKING A MOTION TO GO AHEAD AND CREATE A POLICY.

BEFORE I DO THAT, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS COUNCIL IN AGREEMENT AND HAVING CONSENSUS.

WE GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE MOTION? HEARING NONE, I'M READY FOR A MOTION. ALL RIGHT. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CREATE A POLICY REGARDING ACCESS TO CITY LEGAL RESOURCES BY COMMISSIONERS OR BOARD MEMBERS THAT ARE NOT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, TO GO TO THEIR LIAISON FOR THOSE RESOURCES. I HAVE A MOTION FROM THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND, I HAVE A SECOND FOR ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. THE DISCUSSION. MR. MAYOR, I WOULD HAVE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST WE'RE JUST WANTING TO BE CAREFUL. LEGAL HOURS ARE EXPENSIVE. RIGHT. AND SO TO THE EXTENT THAT OUR COMMISSIONERS OR CHAIRPEOPLE OF OUR COMMISSIONS HAVE WHAT THEY VIEW AS LEGAL QUESTIONS, AT LEAST RUNNING THEM THROUGH THEIR LIAISON FIRST TO SEE IF THE ANSWER CAN BE PROVIDED WITHOUT US, YOU KNOW, INCURRING BILLABLE LEGAL HOURS IS, IS REALLY THE INTENT HERE. AND SO REALLY, I THINK WE WANT TO HAVE GOOD, SOLID SUPPORT FOR OUR COMMISSIONERS SO THAT THEY'RE MAKING GOOD DECISIONS. AND WHEN THEY THEY HAVE LEGAL QUESTIONS OR QUANDARIES, THEY GET THEIR ANSWERS, WHETHER IT'S FROM COUNCIL OR, OR CITY COUNCIL OR STAFF OR WHETHER IT ACTUALLY GOES TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, I THINK IS, IS, YOU KNOW, WILL DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO. BUT HAVING THAT LIAISON AS THE BUFFER HOPEFULLY WILL SAVE THE CITY SOME MONEY WITHOUT REDUCING THE SERVICES THAT OUR CITIZENS ARE LOOKING FOR. THANK YOU. NOT SEEING ANY OTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAY NAY. IT IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM SIX CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY TO RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE CONCERNING SCOPE OF MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS RELATED THERETO.

SECTION 551.0711 ADVICE OF COUNSEL AND SECTION 1.05. TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF

[00:25:05]

GREETINGS FROM CHURCH ON THE HILL, FORMERLY FIRST BAPTIST JONESTOWN, AND A HALF OF OUR MEMBERS ARE TAXPAYERS IN LAGO VISTA. BUT SETTLE A QUESTION FOR US. ARE YOU LAGO VISTA OR LAGO VISTA HEIGHTS OR SOMETHING ELSE? I HEARD THOSE, I HEAR LAGO VISTA OR LAGO VISTA. I GUESS WE CAN TAKE A VOTE LATER. ALL RIGHT. WELL, LET'S PRAY REAL QUICK. HEAVENLY FATHER, THANK YOU FOR THIS GREAT OPPORTUNITY, LORD, ON A MOMENTOUS NIGHT TO TALK ABOUT A NEW HOME FOR THIS COUNCIL. LORD, WE PRAY FOR YOUR HOLY SPIRIT TO BE WITH THESE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND HELP THEM TO COME TO A GREAT DECISION. LORD, MAY THE FEEDBACK FROM THE TAXPAYERS AND THE CITIZENS OF THIS AREA. LORD, JUST BE SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY CAN AGREE TO GOD. I PRAY FOR PROTECTION FOR EACH OF THESE MEMBERS. GOD AS THEY SPEAK BOLDLY. LORD, ARE WE USED TO PRAY, GOD SAVE THE KING AND GOD SAVE THE QUEEN. BUT LORD, YOU'VE DIVVIED UP THE POWER IN THIS COUNTRY. YOU'VE. LORD, YOUR CONSTITUTION GIVEN US. WE'RE VERY GRATEFUL FOR EVERYTHING YOU'VE GIVEN THIS GREAT NATION. WE PRAY THAT THIS COUNCIL WILL BE IN LINE WITH WHAT YOU'VE DONE IN THIS AMERICAN MIRACLE YOU'VE GIVEN US. LORD, FOR THOSE WHO MAY BE ON THE LOSING SIDE OF SOME AGENDA ITEMS, LORD, TONIGHT, IN FUTURE MEETINGS, WE PRAY FOR HUMILITY. GOD FOR ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE TRUTH WILL WIN OUT. LORD, FOR THOSE ON THE WINNING SIDES. WE ALSO PRAY FOR HUMILITY TO ACCEPT ANY CONCESSIONS OR COMPROMISES THAT MUST BE MADE. BUT GOD FOR THE CITY AS IT GROWS. LORD, WE PRAY FOR WISDOM AND FORESIGHT. LORD, JUST BE WITH US ALL AND GOD AGAIN, WE JUST ASK FOR YOUR HOLY SPIRIT TO BE HERE AND GUIDE ALL THESE DECISIONS. IT'S IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST WE PRAY. AMEN, AMEN. THANK YOU

[VI. CITIZEN COMMENTS]

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL, APPARENTLY. ALL RIGHT. I WAS JUST ASKED TO DISTRIBUTE THIS MISS BILLY DUNCAN. IS THAT TO BE. IN PERSON OR AM I READING THIS? OKAY. ALL RIGHT, MISS BILLY DUNCAN, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. TELL ME WHEN. GO. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS BILLY DUNCAN. I'VE OWNED MY HOME HERE SINCE 2011. I SERVE AS THE MEMBERSHIP CHAIRMAN FOR THE LIONS AND AS THIRD VP OF WAYS AND MEANS FOR THE WOMEN'S CLUB. I SERVE AND CARE DEEPLY ABOUT MY COMMUNITY AND THE PEOPLE IN IT. I'M HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE SEVEN NEIGHBORS ON CAMELBACK AND HITCHING POST ARE DEALING WITH A PERSISTENT PATTERN OF FRIVOLOUS AND FRAUDULENT COMPLAINTS. I ESTIMATE COLLECTIVELY WE HAVE SUFFERED OVER 75 COMPLAINTS FILED BY ONE NEIGHBOR. WE ARE GOOD NEIGHBORS. WE FOLLOW THE RULES AND WE EXPECT THE SAME IN RETURN. RIGHT NOW, THE SYSTEM ISN'T HOLDING UP ITS END OF THAT BARGAIN. WE NEED YOU TO FIX IT. THESE FRIVOLOUS AND FRAUDULENT COMPLAINTS HAVE TRIGGERED REPEATED VISITS FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE POLICE.

ALONGSIDE THAT, WE'VE EXPERIENCED PERSONAL ATTACKS THAT GO FAR BEYOND NEIGHBORLY DISPUTES. WE'VE BEEN SUED FOR ALLEGEDLY POISONING A DOG AND FOR VOYEURISM. WE'VE BEEN SLANDERED ON COMMUNITY BOARDS AND ACCUSED OF PHYSICALLY ASSAULTING HER. WHEN SHE PASSES OUR HOME, SHE SPEWS ABUSIVE AND VULGAR LANGUAGE. SHE HAS MADE STATEMENTS THAT HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO DAMAGE OUR PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL REPUTATIONS IN OUR COMMUNITY, WHICH MAY CONSTITUTE DEFAMATION. IT IS DISRUPTIVE AND IT IS GETTING WORSE. THE EFFECT IS

[00:30:03]

YOU KNOW, JUST JUST STOP IT. YOU'RE HITTING THE HOUSE. OH, YOU'RE NO FUN, BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. OKAY, SO THEN NAME CALLING STARTS, YOU KNOW, I'M TOLD I NEED TO GO SUCK ON SOMETHING AND NEED TO WORDS THAT I REALLY KIND OF TOOK ME BACK AND WAS LIKE, WOW, THAT'S A NEW WORD FOR ME. BUT SO I THOUGHT, WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO IGNORE THIS PERSON. YOU CAN'T IGNORE A PERSON WHO WANTS TO BE SEEN ALL THE TIME. WELL, I THOUGHT, WELL, I'M GOING TO GET I'M GOING TO PUT IN A FRENCH DRAIN. SO I GOT A JACKHAMMER. YOU SEE ME WITH A JACKHAMMER, I, ACCORDING TO THIS PERSON, I DID IT EIGHT HOURS A DAY. I CAN DO IT A COUPLE OF MINUTES AT A TIME. BUT I DID USE A JACKHAMMER. HOW MANY TIMES DID THE POLICE GET CALLED? 32 TIMES IS WHAT IS WHAT RAY SAID AT CODE ENFORCEMENT. HE. IN FACT, THE LAST TIME I FINALLY GOT ANGRY AND HE GOES, I WAS IN THE WHOLE NICE, NICE HOLE. AND HE SAID, STOP WHAT YOU'RE DOING. I SAID, I'M DIGGING A HOLE IN MY YARD. I SAID, IT'S A BIG HOLE, BUT I'M DIGGING A HOLE IN MY YARD. HE GOES, STOP WHAT YOU'RE DOING. THE CITY IS GOING CRAZY OVER THESE PHONE CALLS. WE NEED IT TO STOP. I SAID, WELL, NOW, RAY, I'M MAD AND I DON'T LIKE BEING MAD. AND THE GUY BEHIND HIM WHO HAD JUST BEEN HIRED SAID, ARE YOU DOING A FRENCH DRAIN? I SAID, I AM, AND I SAID, DO I NEED PERMISSION FOR THAT? BECAUSE I LEARNED A LONG TIME AGO I HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES. AND HE SAID NO. AND I SAID, OKAY. SO I WAS DONE.

JACKHAMMERING AFTER A COUPLE OF WEEKS AND FINISHED MY DRAIN. AND SO WE WERE GOING TO PUT IN A POOL. WE WERE GOING TO IT HAD BEEN A COUPLE OF YEARS, SO I WAS GOING TO PUT IN AN ABOVE GROUND POOL. AND THAT WAS WHEN THE. IGNORING IT AND IGNORING THE CUSS WORDS, IGNORING.

[00:35:05]

SO THAT WAS A CONCERN. SAFETY IS A CONCERN. YOU CAN'T IGNORE IT. IT DOESN'T GO AWAY. I'VE HAD A CAMERA FACING MY REAR END FOR TWO YEARS AT LEAST. AND THEN SHE FINALLY STARTED TO TALK TO ME THROUGH IT. HEY, YOU FAT, BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. AND SO I STARTED FINALLY FIGURING I'M GOING TO SHAKE IT, YOU KNOW, OH, YOU'RE PUTTING IN YOUR PANTS. IT'S LIKE, YEAH, POO GOES UP, YOU KNOW? AND SO SHE WAS TALKING TO ME THROUGH THESE CAMERAS FACING MY YARD.

BUT THE LAST THING SHE DID, SHE DID THAT SCARED ME. SINCE I NOW HAVE A FENCE, SHE'S MET ALL THE PEOPLE THAT BUILD FENCE. I WAS IN MY FRONT YARD GETTING READY TO GO IN, AND PHYLLIS, A NEIGHBOR IN FRONT OF ME, WAS WALKING TO GET HER MAIL AND UP COMES THIS LADY. SHE'D BEEN WALKING, LADY WITH PIGTAILS AND A HAT, AND SHE WAS HOLDING AN EIGHT YEAR OLD'S NAME. AND ALL OF A SUDDEN SHE GETS GOING AND I'M THINKING SHE'S GOING TO ATTACK THIS WOMAN. SHE GOES, DO YOU KNOW ME? DO YOU KNOW ME? AND IT'S LOOKING PRETTY CRAZY, BUT SHE'S GETTING LOUDER AND LOUDER AND I DECIDE PHYLLIS IS ALMOST 80 YEARS OLD. YOU KNOW, YOU JUST HAVE TO PUSH HER AND SHE'S GOING TO GO DOWN. AND SO I WENT OVER THERE AND I SAID, WHO ARE YOU? AND I LOOKED UNDER THE HAT AND THE. I SAID, CHRISTINA, CHRISTINA ARMSTRONG, SHE DOESN'T KNOW WHO I AM. AND SHE JUST STARTED. I SAID, GREAT ROLE MODEL FOR AN EIGHT YEAR OLD. YOU KNOW, JUST KEEP GOING.

SHE ENDED UP CALLING THE POLICE AND TWO COP CARS CAME. THE COP THAT STAYED WITH ME, HE GOES, NONE OF Y'ALL LIKE HER, DO YOU? I SAID, DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. I SAID, HOW OFTEN ARE YOU HERE? OH, SHE'S A FREQUENT FLIER. WELL, YEAH, WE KNOW SHE'S A FREQUENT FLIER, BUT I HAVE A DAILY. DAILY IS MY FREQUENT FLIER, SO I DON'T KNOW WHO SHE'S GOING TO GO AFTER NEXT.

BUT SHE'S NOT RIGHT. SHE'S. SHE'S IGNORING HER. DOESN'T MAKE IT GO AWAY. TAKING THE HIGH ROAD DOESN'T MAKE IT GO AWAY. PLEASE MAKE IT GO AWAY. IT'S A BIG NUISANCE. THANK YOU, MISS O'CONNOR. NEXT I HAVE ANNIE, ELAINE TINSLEY OR ANNE WITH AN E AND. SORRY. THAT'S OKAY. I'VE BEEN ANNIE. I'VE BEEN ELLEN. I'VE BEEN MANY THINGS. I'VE BEEN SEAN A LOT.

I'M GOING TO TRY TO DO THIS SUCCINCTLY. MY FIRST ENCOUNTER WITH CHRISTINE, MARY CHRISTINE ARMSTRONG WAS BACK IN 2017 WHEN I PARKED AN RV ON AN ADJACENT LOT THAT I DIDN'T KNOW AT THE

[00:40:07]

THEY WERE AT A CHRISTMAS FUNCTION AND MET US THERE. WE CAME FROM HOUSTON. ANYWAY, YEARS PAST I BOUGHT THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO MY SISTER. I'VE HAD SEVERAL ENCOUNTERS OF BEING CUSSED OUT, MUCH LIKE HAS BEEN DESCRIBED. ONE OF THE TIMES. MORE RECENTLY I WAS COMING AROUND THE CORNER IN FRONT OF DONNA AND CAROL'S HOUSE AND WE HAVE A LOT OF DEER. I FEED THE DEER, I GO SLOW IN MY ON MY STREETS FOR A REASON. I DON'T WANT TO HIT THE DEER AND I COME AROUND THE CORNER AND CHRISTINE'S OUT WITH HER DOG AND THE DOG IS IN THE GRASS OVER NEAR CAROL'S HOUSE AND I COME AROUND THE CORNER. I'M ON THE PHONE WITH MY LAWYER. I WAS IN THE PROCESS OF A DIVORCE, AND I HEAR SOMEONE YELLING AT ME AS I PULL IN THE GARAGE. I'D SAY, I HAVE TO CALL YOU RIGHT BACK BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS AN EMERGENCY. I GET OUT, I WALK HALFWAY UP MY DRIVEWAY AND REALIZE SHE'S TELLING ME I ALMOST RAN OVER HER DOG AND I SAID, WELL, I DON'T DRIVE IN THE GRASS. CHRISTINA. SORRY. WHAT IS THIS ABOUT? WELL, YOU NEED TO JUST SLOW DOWN. YOU'RE YOU'RE JUST I SAID, OKAY, WHICH IS IT? IT WAS A DRIVING RECKLESS OR WAS I SPEEDING? I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU'RE COMPLAINING HERE ABOUT? AND SHE COULDN'T DECIDE. AND I SAID, I DON'T HAVE TIME FOR THIS. I WENT IN THE HOUSE, CALLED MY LAWYER BACK AND DEALT WITH THINGS THAT WERE ACTUALLY IMPORTANT. ANOTHER TIME, RIGHT AFTER THAT, PROBABLY SIX MONTHS LATER, I'M CARRYING A DISH ACROSS THE YARD. MY SISTER'S NEXT DOOR. IT'S VERY CONVENIENT FOR THOSE KIND OF THINGS. WE HAVE FAMILY AND PARTIES AND THINGS, AND I HAVE PRIVATE ACCESS TO A POOL AND A HOT TUB. SO LIFE IS GOOD FOR A RETIRED PERSON OR SHOULD BE, BUT IT'S NOT. I LIVE DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM HER AND IT'S CONSTANT. AND EITHER CUSSING ME OUT, YOU KNOW, I'VE JUST GOTTEN TO WHERE I JUST TUNE HER OUT AND TRY NOT TO EVEN ACKNOWLEDGE THAT SHE IS IN EXISTENCE. BUT LIKE THEY SAID, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT WHEN SOMEONE WANTS TO BE KNOWN. AND THEN YOU TRY TO HAVE A DIALOG WITH THE PERSON AND THEY SCREAM AT THE TOP OF THEIR LUNGS TO DROWN YOU OUT, SHUT UP, SHUT UP, SHUT UP. AND YOU CAN'T EVEN HAVE A CONVERSATION. I MEAN, I'VE TRIED MULTIPLE TIMES. ANYWAY, THE TIME I WAS CARRYING THE DISH ACROSS THE. BOTTLE ROCKET WENT OFF IN FRONT OF ME. I THOUGHT IT WAS HER SON THAT DID IT, AND I THOUGHT HE. OKAY, HE REALIZED I SCREAMED, I ALMOST THREW THE CASSEROLE OR WHATEVER I WAS CARRYING, AND I THOUGHT, WELL, HE PROBABLY REALIZED HE SCREWED UP. SO I WENT IN THE HOUSE, TOLD MY FAMILY WHAT HAPPENED. I DIDN'T THINK ANY MORE ABOUT IT. ME AND MY NIECE COME WALKING BACK ACROSS AND I JOKINGLY SAID, DON'T BE SCARED AS LONG AS ANOTHER BOTTLE ROCKET DOESN'T GET SENT OFF, WE'RE FINE. I DIDN'T KNOW SHE WAS IN HER LITTLE CUBBY OF HER PORCH IN THE DARK. SITTING THERE. SHE HEARD ME IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE I DARED TO SAY SOMETHING AND I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW SHE WAS THERE. WENT OFF CUSSING ME OUT IN FRONT OF A 11 YEAR OLD CHILD. MISS TINSLEY, REAL QUICK, YOUR THREE MINUTES ARE UP. DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER? WHICH PERSON ARE YOU FOR? THIS, FOR THE RECORD, IS THAT PAM BRADBURY? OKAY, SO YOU COULD PUT ANOTHER THREE MINUTES UP. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. SHE CUSSES ME OUT IN FRONT OF THIS CHILD, AND SHE GOES RUNNING BACK IN THE HOUSE TO HER DAD, WHO HAPPENS TO BE A COP. BY THE WAY, WE LOVE COPS. MY BROTHER'S A COP. THIS IS JUST ABSOLUTELY INSANITY. IN MY PREVIOUS NEIGHBORHOOD, I LIVED NEXT DOOR TO SOME PEOPLE FOR SIX MONTHS. HER FAMILY WAS.

BOTH THEIR FAMILIES WERE OUT OF THE COUNTRY. SHE GOES INTO PREMATURE LABOR. SHE WOULDN'T LET ME LEAVE THE HOSPITAL. I STAYED ALL NIGHT WITH HER. I'M THAT KIND OF NEIGHBOR. I AM NOT THE KIND OF NEIGHBOR THAT HAS THIS KIND OF PROBLEMS. I AM NOT. I'M THE KIND OF PERSON YOU WANT FOR A NEIGHBOR. SHE IS NOT. AND I'M WITH THEM. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS IN MY PACKETS THAT I THINK GOT SEPARATED. I'LL SEND YOU ALL COPIES ON EMAIL. I HAVE MORE DOCUMENTS COMING THAT I'VE ASKED FOR SPECIFICALLY. I WANTED TO MENTION THOSE BECAUSE IN THE LAST YEAR SHE HAS CAUGHT. SHE WENT OUT IN HER YARD ON THE LAST MARCH 31ST. HAPPENED TO BE

[00:45:05]

JUST TRYING TO KEEP THE MEETING MOVING. NEXT UP, I COULD NOT TOTALLY MAKE IT OUT. SO I WAS READING EITHER CARRIE PHIL'S OR CONNOR PHIL'S CAROL. CAROL PHILLIPS I WAS WAY OFF. CAN'T EVEN FOLLOW ALL THAT. I'M NOT A REAL GOOD SPEAKER. I FIRST MET THIS LADY WHEN I WALKED OUTSIDE HER, LOCKED MY TRUCK UP ONE NIGHT, AND THERE WAS FIVE SQUAD CARS OUT THERE. AND I'VE GOT A PAST, AND I'M, LIKE, LOOKING AROUND, SEE IF THEY'RE COMING AFTER ME. AND I'M LIKE, I HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING. I'M GOOD, I'M CLEAN. TEN YEARS AGO, THE LORD TURNED MY LIFE AROUND.

OKAY, I'VE GOT A PAST. OKAY? AND Y'ALL ALL GOT THE PAPER THAT SHE WROTE ON ME. AND NONE OF THAT'S TRUE. I KNOW, PRINCE, I KNOW, I KNOW ALL THESE PEOPLE HERE. I PAINTED A LOT OF THEIR HOUSES. I PAINTED PART OF THIS COURTHOUSE I'VE BEEN IN SIX YEARS NOW, AND MY WHOLE LIFE HAS BEEN TURNED AROUND. THE LORD HAS BEEN HAS BLESSED ME. I'VE HAD FIVE MAJOR OPERATIONS IN THE LAST THREE AND A HALF YEARS. BUT THIS WOMAN, THE FIRST TIME SHE KEPT CALLING ON DANNY NEXT DOOR TO ME AT LEAST 30 TIMES THAT I KNOW OF. I MEAN, JUST BACK TO BACK TO BACK ALMOST EVERY NIGHT. THERE'S COP CARS OUT THERE. THAT'S INSANE, YOU KNOW? AND THEN I'M GETTING READY TO GO AND WE PUT A LETTER INTO HER TO HER LANDLORD TO NOT LEAST HER ANYMORE. BUT THAT WAS IGNORED. AND THAT'S WHAT SHE CAME AFTER ME ABOUT BECAUSE I SIGNED THAT PAPER AND THAT WAS IT. AND SHE STARTED IN ON ME. SO SHE THREATENED ME ON MY PHONE, WHICH Y'ALL GOT A COPY OF THAT. SO ANYWAY, I'M, I WALKED OUT ON MY BIRTHDAY AND SHE PULLS UP IN HER CAR AND SHE'S GOT DARK WINDOWS. I CAN'T SEE HER, BUT I KNOW WHAT SHE'S DOING. SHE'S FLIPPING ME OFF.

OKAY, WELL, I, I PULLED OUT TO GO TO THERAPY ONE MORNING AND SHE'S WALKING HER DOGS AND SHE SQUATS ALL OVER AND SHE'S GOT A LITTLE HOODIE ON. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN SHE TURNS AROUND AND SHE THAT HOODIE COMES BACK AND SHE SQUATTED DOWN AND THAT DEMON LITTLE FACE CAME OUT AND SHE FLIPPED ME OFF WITH BOTH FINGERS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S WRONG WITH HER. YOU KNOW, SHE'S GOT A PROBLEM. THERE'S ANOTHER NEIGHBOR THAT'S NOT HERE THAT TOLD ME THAT SHE WAS PASTORED.

SHE JUST WALKED PAST HER AND SHE TURNED AROUND AND STARTED CUSSING HER OUT. YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE CAMERAS AND ALL THIS STUFF FOR PICTURES OF HER, BUT THIS IS WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON.

AND I'VE HEARD HER SCREAM AND YELL AND CUSSING EVERYBODY UP AND DOWN OUR BLOCK. THIS IS

[00:50:04]

ONE OF THE TWO CODE ENFORCEMENTS THAT CAME SEPARATELY HAD TWO OF THEM COME IN DIFFERENT TIMES. CHRISTOPHER ALLEN SO WE CAN DISCUSS THIS. I MEAN, I'VE BEEN A GOOD NEIGHBOR WHEN THE CITY USES MY PROPERTY. I HAVEN'T COMPLAINED. WHEN I'VE USED MY OWN PROPERTY. THE CITY'S COMPLAINED AND I'M TIRED OF IT. JUST RECENTLY, YOU GUYS PUT A METER ON MY PROPERTY AND ALLOWED CONTRACTORS TO COME FILL THEIR TRUCKS. IF I PARK A TRUCK ON MY PROPERTY, YOU GUYS RED TAG IT. SO YOU INVITE PEOPLE TO COME PARK THERE DURING FOOTBALL GAMES? I DON'T COMPLAIN, YOU TELL PEOPLE THEY CAN COME AND SET UP ON THE PROPERTY TO SEE OFF THEIR KIDS WHEN THEY GO TO CHAMPIONSHIPS OR WHATEVER. NO COMPLAIN. I DON'T COMPLAIN WHEN I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE OF Y'ALL IS WITH LIONS CLUB OR THE PEOPLE WHO GO PICK UP THE TRASH. I DON'T COMPLAIN WHEN THEY LEAVE THE TRASH ON MY PROPERTY AND DON'T COME PICK IT UP. I PICK IT UP AND I TOSS IT, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THEM GOING AROUND AND PICKING THE STUFF UP. BUT I DON'T COMPLAIN. I JUST TAKE CARE OF IT. SO I'D APPRECIATE IF YOU HAVE A MEETING SO WE CAN DISCUSS THESE ISSUES AND GET THIS RESOLVED, BECAUSE I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE MY PROPERTY WORK FOR ME. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. HAPPY TO MEET WITH YOU. ALL RIGHT. CHARLES. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE IT. YEAH. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL THE CITIZEN COMMENTS I HAD. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY NON AGENDA ITEMS. AND THAT OFFER EXTENDS TO THOSE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. I'M HAPPY TO MEET WITH ALL OF YOU. OH WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE.

HAPPY TO DO SO. OKAY, SO I JUST GAVE YOU A THIRD OF WHAT I HAVE. I SEE THESE PACKETS RIGHT HERE.

SO I THANK YOU GUYS FOR THAT. OKAY, WITH THAT, I WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM SEVEN ITEMS OF

[VII. ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST]

ANY ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST? OH, NO, MR. BENNEFIELD, MISS CHAVARRIA, MAYOR PRO TEM. CAN I SAY ONE OTHER THING? JUST. VISIT. ANNOUNCEMENTS. I REALIZED WHAT I SAID. SURE WE ARE. IF YOU COME TO THE MIC REAL QUICK. HINES. ON SATURDAY. JEN AND JEFF MILLER ARE OPENING A BIKE SHOP OVER CLOSE TO LOWE'S AND I HAVE BOUGHT FOOD FOR PEOPLE TO BUY. ALL THE PROCEEDS ARE GOING TO A NONPROFIT FOR BIKE SAFETY AND BIKE INFRASTRUCTURE IN LAGO VISTA. APPRECIATE IT. YOU GUYS COME OUT AND SUPPORT THE CAUSE. THANK YOU. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S AT 10 A.M. ON SATURDAY. YES, MARCH 21ST. I'LL BE AT THAT RIBBON CUTTING. MAYOR PRO TEM, DID YOU SAY NO OR YES? OKAY. JUST REAL QUICK, I THINK. AND THIS IS YOU'VE GOT SEVERAL LIONS UP HERE, SIR, AND I, WE ARE LISTENING. BUT I DID WANT TO SAY THAT WE HAVE A GOLF TOURNAMENT COMING UP ON APRIL 11TH. AND SO WE ARE HAVING RAFFLE TICKET SALES. SO IF

[00:55:05]

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. THAT WAS LEFT BEHIND AS WELL. CAN I GET THAT TO YOU? IT'S A LINE. THANK YOU, MR. PRINCE. THAT'S FINE. IT WAS OKAY. I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS COLLECTING.

SO ALL I HAD TO DO WAS PICK UP A COUPLE OF BAGS. OKAY. THANK YOU. WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM EIGHT. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS. YES, MISS ERIN, COULD YOU MENTION THE FRESH FOOD FOR ALL STARTING? I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THE DAY IS THAT THIS IS COMING UP THIS FRIDAY.

YES. SORRY. THIS IS ONE MORE COMMUNITY INTEREST ITEM. COUNTRY MINISTRIES IS STARTING FRESH FOOD FOR ALL ON THE FOURTH FRIDAY OF EVERY MONTH. THEY'RE GOING TO BE GIVING AWAY FRESH FOOD HERE IN THE CITY HALL PARKING LOT FROM 9 A.M. TO 11 A.M. FRESH FOOD FOR ALL.

THERE'S NO THERE'S NO REQUIREMENTS. THERE'S, YOU KNOW, ANYWAY, FOURTH FRIDAY OF EVERY MONTH. THEY'RE STARTING IT IN IN MARCH AND THEY'RE REALLY ANXIOUS TO GET THE WORD OUT. SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY WILL CONTINUE DOING IT IN JONESTOWN ONCE A MONTH AS THEY HAVE BEEN.

AND THEN THIS IS IN ADDITION TO THAT. YES. JONESTOWN IS THE SECOND WHEN SECOND FRIDAY OF THE MONTH, AND THIS WILL BE THE FOURTH FRIDAY OF THE MONTH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS ERIN.

AND FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW, WE'VE UPDATED A SITE ON THE CITY WEBSITE TO LIST ALL THESE DIFFERENT FOOD PANTRIES. AND WHEN THEY ARE, IF YOU WANT TO GO ON THERE AND LOOK AND IF

[VIII.1. Presentation and discussion by McCoy Consulting regarding grant and fund development, including a bi-annual report update.]

DID YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION YOU NEED US TO HAVE ON THEIR. I THINK HE'S GOING TO PULL IT UP.

IT'S JUST THE NOTES REALLY, THOUGH, I WILL SAY IF ANYBODY, UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY ISSUES SCANNING THAT, IF YOU DO WANT TO PULL THAT UP, THAT'S VISUALS FOR EVERYTHING THAT I'LL GO THROUGH OR THAT I'LL DISCUSS. JUST FEEL LIKE IT HELPS EXPLAIN MY THOUGHT PROCESS. AND BY THE WAY, THIS IS JUST A MONTHLY UPDATE TECHNICALLY BECAUSE I PROVIDE AN UPDATE EVERY MONTH.

AND SO THAT WILL INCLUDE THE GRANT OPPORTUNITIES WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT MONTH. UNLESS WE'RE JUST WAITING ON KIND OF FEEDBACK ON SOME FROM PAST MONTHS AND ANYTHING NEW THAT HAS COME UP. I KNOW WE HAVE DIFFERENT CONVERSATIONS EVERY FEW DAYS. I'VE LEARNED A LOT MORE SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, FOR SURE. AND DAVID WAS NICE ENOUGH. IF HE'S STILL HERE TO GIVE YOU A REALLY GOOD OVERVIEW, ESPECIALLY OF LIKE THE CHANGES AT SUNSET PARK. ALL OF THE ABOVE. OKAY. AND I HAVE THESE ON MY PHONE TOO, IF ANYONE NEEDS TO SEE THEM. THE VISUALS.

SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT I'M FOCUSED ON IS NOW BUILDING OUT THE CIVIC CENTER IS THE MAIN FOCUS IS THE COMMUNITY CENTER. THEY CAN ALSO DOUBLE AS AN EMERGENCY SHELTER. SO I'VE GONE THROUGH ALL THE FEMA REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT. OBVIOUSLY, IF WE DO ANY EDA GRANTS OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE, IT WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE FEMA SPECS. SO THAT INCLUDES PARKING THE SIZE, THE NUMBER OF ADA PARKING SPACES, COVERAGE OUTSIDE OF THE FACILITY. SO IF THE DISASTER WAS HEAT RELATED, THEN PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO PULL UP, GET WATER, ETC. WITHOUT BEING IN THE SUN. SO ALL OF THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE SPECS THAT I'VE PUT TOGETHER. AND SO JUST TO START FROM THE TOP, WE HAVE SUBMITTED THIS PAST MONTH AN AARP APPLICATION. THEY HAVE THREE PROGRAMS THAT THEY DO ANNUALLY. AND SO WHAT I SUBMITTED WAS THE MICRO GRANT, BECAUSE THAT ONE'S FOR $5,000. AND THE GOAL IS TO PUT TOGETHER A SORT OF COMMUNITY READINESS PACKET. SO WHEN THERE IS ANOTHER DISASTER SIMILAR TO THE FLOODS, THEN THE COMMUNITY WILL HAVE THEIR OWN INTERNAL SYSTEM OF, OKAY, YOU KNOW, REACH OUT TO LIONS CLUB FOR THIS OR REACH OUT TO SO-AND-SO FOR THIS. AND THEN THEY HAVE THEIR OWN PROCESS THAT'S OUT THERE THAT INCLUDES PRINTING THE MATERIALS, DISTRIBUTING THEM, EVERYTHING. WE ALSO JUST SUBMITTED YESTERDAY OR MONDAY, THE LOWE'S BUCKET LIST, AND THAT WAS SHARED WITH NORMA, AND THAT ONE'S FOR 100,000. AND THAT WILL BE PART OF BUILD OUT OF THE CIVIC CENTER, WHICH AGAIN, I'LL COVER MORE OF WHEN WE GET FURTHER INTO THIS. AND THEN THE T-MOBILE GRANT APPLICATION IS DUE THE END OF THIS MONTH. THAT'S FOR 50,000. SAME THING. AND AGAIN, I'LL SHOW MY VISUALS THAT WILL INCLUDE THE SPACE ACROSS FROM CITY HALL, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT OF A SMALLER LOT.

AND THEN THE ONE HERE BY THE POLICE STATION IN THE LIBRARY. SO THAT IS I KNOW YOU GUYS HAVE JUST TALKED ABOUT THAT BUILDING THAT MAY BE PURCHASED. SO THIS IS OUTSIDE OF THAT. OF COURSE, THAT COULD BE THE COMMUNITY CENTER BECAUSE THAT'S DEFINITELY ENOUGH SPACE. AND THEN WE WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE TO INCLUDE THE PARKING BECAUSE THIS PARKING COULD BE REDONE.

AND NOW THAT I'VE HEARD DAVID'S NEEDS TO, FOR THE PARKING LOT CHANGES OR UPGRADES THAT COULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT AS WELL. IN TERMS OF FINDING FUNDING FOR THE THE COMMUNITY CENTER OR THE

[01:00:03]

AND THAT'S FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAM. AND THEN THE SECOND PROGRAM IS AN ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. AND IT USUALLY DOES 500,000 TO 5 MILLION OR MORE. SO THE CHALLENGE THERE IS MATCH, OF COURSE, AND THEY DO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MATCH THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS TO PUT IN BASED ON THE DEMOGRAPHICS AND THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT. SO I THINK NORMA SHARED WITH ME TODAY THAT SHE SPOKE WITH SOMEONE AT EDA. AND SO SINCE LAGO VISTA IS MORE A HIGHER END COMMUNITY, IT WILL BE 50%. SO MAY SCRATCH EDA FROM THAT.

THERE'S OTHER OPPORTUNITIES. IT'S JUST THAT THOSE TWO WOULD HAVE COMPLETELY COVERED THE COST OF EVERYTHING. SO THOSE WOULD HAVE BEEN IDEAL. NONETHELESS, THERE ARE STILL OTHER OPTIONS. THERE'S A USDA PROGRAM. IT CAN BE A GRANT SLASH LOAN. IT'S A MIX OF THE TWO. IT'S TRYING NOT TO GO TOWARDS THE LAWS IF WE DIDN'T HAVE TO, BUT THAT ONE CAN ALSO COVER THE COST OF THAT. IF WE HAD TO BUILD IT FROM SCRATCH AGAIN, I KNOW WE CAN HAVE ANOTHER CONVERSATION ABOUT IF THAT WOULD BE THIS BUILDING OR ANOTHER IF IT WERE OBTAINED. I THINK FOR THE MOST PART. AND NOAH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THE FUNDING IN ANY WAY AT ALL. AND I SHOULD HAVE PULLED THE VISUALS UP SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN SEE THEM. THAT'S MY FAULT. SO THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING DISCUSSION WITH IDAC AND NOW COMING UP WITH THE EDC.

LIKEWISE, JUST IN TERMS OF PUTTING THE QUESTIONS OUT THERE, AND BY THE WAY, WE HAVE ONE OF OUR LONG TERM MEMBERS, DON JOHN ROWE, IN THE AUDIENCE THERE. THE LONG TERM CONVERSATION WAS, HOW CAN WE MAYBE GET SOME OF THESE ITEMS THAT WE WOULD LIKE, WHICH ARE QUALITY OF LIFE AT A LOWER PRICE POINT, OR MAYBE JUST THROUGH GRANTS AND GRANT MATCHING AT ALL? AND SO WE'VE BEGUN THIS EXERCISE IN THE MEANTIME, IN LOOKING AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER, WE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD THE 4TH OF JULY FLOOD. HOW CAN WE MAKE THAT MAYBE BRING SOME RESILIENCE TO THE COMMUNITY AND PROVIDE A CRISIS CENTER FOR US TO BE ABLE TO HAVE LOGISTICS OUT OF IT? SO

[01:05:04]

AND FROM MY EXPERIENCE, IT'S A DIFFERENT I DON'T WANT TO SAY BATTLE, BUT IT IS A DIFFERENT BATTLE THEN COMMUNITY COMMUNITY. BECAUSE OF COURSE, IF IT WERE LAGO VISTA COMPARED TO A REALLY POOR STRUGGLING COMMUNITY, IT WOULDN'T BE ON THE SAME LEVEL VERSUS A NONPROFIT SUPPORTING ANOTHER NONPROFIT OR 500 1C6 WITH THE SAME MISSION AND JUST EXPANDING AND HELPING THEM REACH THEIR GOALS. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WORLD, OF COURSE, WHICH I KNOW, YOU KNOW, AND HE KNOWS. SO THAT'LL HELP A LOT. AND I'VE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS TOO, AROUND TRYING TO PARTNER WITH SOME OF THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, STAKEHOLDERS IN THE COMMUNITY. ALLISON WITH THE CHAMBER HAS BEEN REALLY GREAT, AND I THINK THAT MAYBE A GOOD AVENUE, IF THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY, IS TO TRY AND GET ON THE SAME PAGE WITH EITHER APPLYING TOGETHER WITH THEM BEING A DIFFERENT TYPE OF ENTITY AS WELL, AND WITH US ALL HAVING THE SAME GOALS ESSENTIALLY, AND JUST WORKING AT IT TOGETHER TO GIVE US MORE OPPORTUNITY. THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. MEMBERS. ANY QUESTIONS, MISS CHAVARRIA? WHEN YOU'RE SUBMITTING THE GRANT APPLICATIONS, ARE YOU INCLUDING IN IN YOUR PLAN, A ADMINISTRATOR FEE THE GRANT ADMINISTRATOR. SO YOU'RE NOT. SO EVEN IF WE GET IT, THAT'S NOT IT'S NOT GOING TO FUND OUR LIKE REQUIREMENTS FOR REPORTING. AND THAT'LL BE A FINANCIAL BURDEN ON THE CITY. NO, I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF I ACTUALLY PUT THAT IN DETAIL IN MY CONTRACT, BUT NO, I, I'VE ALWAYS SAID I'D DO THAT MYSELF. AND YEAH, I JUST HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE IN GRANT WRITING. AND I JUST KNOW ABOUT THE, THE COORDINATOR REQUIREMENTS AND THEN THE, SOMETIMES THE REPORTING TO, TO CONTINUE TO REMAIN ELIGIBLE FOR IT. AND ESPECIALLY LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE BENCHMARKS THAT HAVE TO BE MET. AND THEN OF COURSE, MATCHING. SO FEDERAL GRANTS ARE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU START HAVING TO COME UP WITH THE MATCH BASED OFF OF YOUR, YOU KNOW, YOUR MEAN AND AVERAGE INCOMES, WHICH WOULD PROBABLY PRECLUDE US FROM QUALIFYING FOR A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FEDERAL GRANT. BUT THESE SMALLER MICROGRANTS, I'M REALLY HAPPY YOU'RE GOING AFTER THESE. IT'S LIKE EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE LESS THEY'RE MORE REALISTIC FOR US BECAUSE AGAIN, AS YOU KNOW, IF IT WERE A COMMUNITY THAT IS TRULY, YOU KNOW, HOUSING POPULATION DECLINING EVERY YEAR, HIGH CRIME RATES, IT'S LIKE IT IS WHAT IT IS IN THAT SITUATION.

YEAH. THERE'S A LOT OF THERE'S A LOT OF WANTS HERE IN LAGO THAT WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO MEET. YOU KNOW, WE WERE, YOU KNOW, VERY NEEDS FOCUSED. AND SO ANY GRANTS THAT CAN HELP WITH SOME OF THESE WANTS TO KIND OF, YOU KNOW, APPEASE AND, AND SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY IS, IS VERY HELPFUL. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT, ESPECIALLY THE T-MOBILE GRANT. I KNOW THAT THEY ACTUALLY GIVE OUT THESE QUITE FREQUENTLY. AND THEN THE ENERGY GRANTS. I REALLY LIKE THE SOLAR IDEA. I'VE SEEN THAT UTILIZED IN SMALL RURAL COMMUNITIES FOR BASEBALL FIELDS AND SOCCER FIELDS, WHERE INFRASTRUCTURE JUST WAS NOT BUILT OUT. SO THAT'S THANK YOU FOR THAT. THANK YOU. OKAY. I DON'T WANT TO KEEP TALKING FOREVER. I'LL NEVER SIT DOWN AGAIN SINCE I'LL JUST SAY THAT, MR. PRINCE. I'LL JUST SAY THAT I DID GO TO THAT LINK AND IT'S IT'S NICE PICTURES AND GREAT VISION STUFF. SO I ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO LOOK AT THAT. I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S SETTING A VISION FOR SOME REALLY NICE THINGS IN THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA. AND OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A LOT OF WORK AND FIGURING OUT THE FINANCES THAT HAS TO HAPPEN BETWEEN HERE AND THERE. BUT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S AT LEAST NICE TO HAVE THE VISION LAID OUT OF WHERE IT HELPS TO HAVE THE VISUAL. I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO GIVE YOU ALL 20 PAGES AND BE

[01:10:02]

WHERE IT COVERS THE GOLF COURSE. SO I MEAN, LIKE EVEN THAT, AND WE TALKED ABOUT TOO, DOING SOMETHING LIKE A NAMING CAMPAIGN TO GIVE BUSINESS OWNERS A CHANCE TO, BUT, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY DO A SERVICE FOR SERVICE, WHETHER THAT IS PUTTING ARTWORK OUT THERE. IF WE COVER THE WILDLIFE THERE, THE ACTUAL NATURE ELEMENTS, ETC. MAKING IT LIKE A LEARNING EXPERIENCE ALONG THE WAY. BUT IT COULD ALSO BE A TRAIL LIKE MISSISSIPPI BLUES TRAIL, YOU KNOW, A NATURE TRAIL, AND IT CAN BE A LEARNING EXPERIENCE AND A TOURISM OPPORTUNITY AT THE SAME TIME THAT'S OUTDOORS. SO GETTING MORE IDEAS, BUT WE'LL JUST KEEP GOING. YOU KNOW, IT'S MUCH APPRECIATED. AND I THINK TO PIGGYBACK, WE DON'T HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS POINT RIGHT NOW. IF YOU COULD GET WITH THE CITY SECRETARY AND YOU CAN ASK TO FILL OUT A FORM.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YES. ON THIS ITEM. BUT ON THE SORT OF THE TOURISM PART OF IT, YOUTH SPORTS. THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR DAVID AS WELL. YOU KNOW, I KEEP HEARING FROM THE YOUTH BASEBALL LEAGUE, THE SOFTBALL BASEBALL THAT THEY CAN'T COULD HAVE THESE SORT OF WEEKEND EVENTS THAT BRING TOURISM HERE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE LIGHTS AT SUNSET. THEY DON'T HAVE A PROPER PATHWAY THAT TAKES THEM DOWN TO THE BALL FIELDS, AND THEY DON'T HAVE PROPER PARKING WHEN THERE'S ALSO SOCCER GOING ON. SO ANYWAY, OTHER ONES, SMALL ONES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT CAN TAKE LITTLE PARTS OF THAT. I MEAN, I KNOW THE LIGHTS IS A HUGE UNDERTAKING BECAUSE WE HAVE TO RUN MORE UTILITIES OUT THERE, BUT YOU KNOW, GETTING A PATHWAY, GETTING EXTENDED PARKING, THINGS LIKE THAT. CAN THAT HELP HELPFUL. AND I'M NOT NO EXPERIENCE IN SPORTS, BUT MY HUSBAND TALKS ABOUT IT ALL THE TIME BECAUSE HE DID TRACK WRESTLING, FOOTBALL, ALL THAT GOOD STUFF OF THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT CAN COME INTO A COMMUNITY IF THEY CAN HOST ANY KIND OF EVENTS. AND I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THAT AT THE CHAMBER LUNCHEON YESTERDAY WITH THE ARCHERY AND ALL THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT COULD COME HERE JUST BECAUSE OF THAT. SO, I MEAN, IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO ADD MORE TO THE OUTDOOR ASPECTS, THE RECREATION AND BUILDING AROUND THAT. AGAIN, ME AND SPORTS. NO, BUT I AT LEAST HAVE HIS GUIDANCE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. WELL, DAVID, DO YOU KNOW IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TO HELP ON ANY OF THOSE ITEMS TO HELP THESE YOUTH SPORTS LEAGUES, TO GET OUR FIELDS TO A LEVEL WHERE THEY CAN HOLD WEEKEND TOURNAMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT? YES. YEAH.

ACTUALLY, YEAH. AS BRITTANY INDICATED, WE TOURED SUNSET PARK YESTERDAY AND TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE ONLY UTILITY PRESENT OUT THERE CURRENTLY IS POTABLE WATER. THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. RECENTLY, EVEN THE SEPTIC SYSTEM THAT SERVES THE RESTROOM HAS BEEN TWICE OVERWHELMED. AND WE'VE HAD PLUMBERS OUT THERE AT SIGNIFICANT COST TO THE COMMUNITY. SO, YANA, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THOSE ISSUES. YOU KNOW, WE'VE JUST BUILT THE PARKWAY. I'M SORRY, THE NEW ROADWAY ENTRY INTO THE PARK. AND WE'VE GOT A GRANT OUT NOW IN HOPES OF GETTING SOME SOLAR LIGHTING ALONG THAT. BUT YEAH, JUST GETTING THINGS BECAUSE THE LEAGUE COMES CONSISTENTLY SAY, BOY, IT'D BE GREAT TO HAVE LIGHTS OUT THERE. THAT'S TRUE. BUT IT'S A LONG STRETCH TO BRING ELECTRICITY OUT THERE AT ALL AND THEN TO BUILD LIGHTING ON TWO FIELDS. IT'S VERY, VERY COSTLY. BUT YEAH, BRITTANY HAS ALL OF THAT AND WE ARE CONTINUOUSLY LOOKING AT OPPORTUNITIES AS WELL. BUT YEAH, THERE'S A GREAT NEED OUT THERE, NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. THANK YOU.

YOU'RE WELCOME SIR. MR. HALL, I MET WITH BRITTANY YESTERDAY IN FACT, AND WE DISCUSSED, YOU KNOW, OTHER KINDS OF FUNDING SOURCES THAT SOME OF WHICH SHE'S REFERENCED. BUT CERTAINLY THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A BUSINESS TO RECEIVE SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE AND APPRECIATION FOR SPONSORING SOME OF THE COSTS THAT THAT WE NEED TO INCUR FOR FOR OUR FACILITIES AND OTHER THINGS.

AND SO, AGAIN, I, I JUST ENCOURAGE THAT YOU TO CONTINUE DOWN THAT LINE OF THINKING.

THANK YOU. AND THAT WORK. AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN FIND SOME BUSINESSES THAT ARE WILLING TO STEP FORWARD IN ADDITION TO T-MOBILE AND, AND HELP IMPROVE OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. I

[01:15:04]

CITIZENS CAN PUT THEIR PROPERTIES ON THERE AS WELL. ARE YOU GUYS FOCUSING ON ANYTHING THAT CAN HELP BRING FILMS HERE? I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT CAME UP ON MY LIST BEFORE THIS WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT CL1, C SIX OPPORTUNITIES, AND THAT CAME UP TOP OF THE LIST AS A NUMBER ONE OPPORTUNITY FOR LAGO VISTA. BUT TEXAS IN GENERAL, SINCE IT IS SUCH A BIG FOCUS FOR THE STATE AND I DIDN'T LOOK THROUGH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, I KNOW IT OPENS JANUARY AGAIN, AT LEAST FOR 2027, SO I'M ASSUMING THAT MEANS IT'S CLOSED FOR 2026. BUT SAME THING AS EVEN WITH CDBG, WHICH I THINK PASSED THE POINT OF TRYING TO DO THAT. AND I READ CDBG FOR MISSISSIPPI AND I WAS LIKE, YEAH, IT'S TOO LATE TO TALK ABOUT APRIL. I DID THE CBG, CBG DOWN IN GALVESTON AFTER HURRICANE IKE AND HARVEY. AND SO ALL THE COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANTS, THE SBA ASSISTANCE AND DISPERSIONS. AND SO IT IS A QUITE AN UNDERTAKING, BUT IT HELPS SO MANY BUSINESSES JUST GET BACK ON THEIR FEET AND COMMUNITIES GET BACK ON THEIR FEET. SO EVEN IF WE HAVE TO DO MATCHING, I MEAN, I WOULDN'T COMPLETELY EXCLUDE IT. YEAH.

BECAUSE THERE IS CERTAIN AREAS IN THIS CITY THAT, YOU KNOW, REALLY COULD BENEFIT FROM SOME OF THAT, BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AN EXTENSIVE UNDERTAKING FOR THE REQUIREMENTS FOR IT, AND WE WOULD HAVE TO SHOW A SIGNIFICANT NEED FOR THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION. OUR THOUGHT PROCESS WITH THAT WAS LIKE, EVEN IF IT'S TOO LATE TO DO IT FOR THIS YEAR, WE CAN STILL BUILD IT OUT AND HAVE IT READY TO GO. AND I DON'T KNOW IF I SHARE THIS OR NOT. I WENT AHEAD AND CONTACTED DIFFERENT CITY DEPARTMENTS TO GET FIRM DATA FOR THE IMPACT FROM THE FLOOD OF 2025, AND THERE WAS A LONG LIST OF REQUIREMENTS, OR AT LEAST OF RECOMMENDED ITEMS FOR EDA GRANTS. AND SO I SAID, EVEN IF WE DON'T GO FOR THIS, THIS IS STILL GOOD INFORMATION HAVE DOCUMENTED FOR ANY APPLICATION, ASKS EVERYBODY FOR PICTURES. AMANDA SHARED PICTURES AND I CAN'T REMEMBER WHO ELSE I KNOW PUBLIC WORKS DID BUT SHOWED WHEN HE SENT ME THE OUTAGES THAT WERE REPORTED DURING THAT TIME OR DOCUMENTED. OF COURSE I HAVE A MILLION PICTURES. AMANDA FOUND A TON FROM FACEBOOK, I BELIEVE THAT SHE SHARED WITH ME JUST RECENTLY ON TOP OF WHAT SHE ALREADY SHARED. BUT JUST SO WE CAN BUILD OUT ALL THAT DOCUMENTATION, I DID THE LAST TEN YEARS OF DISASTER DECLARATIONS FOR ALL OF TRAVIS COUNTY. SO THEN THERE'S THAT DATA SUPPORTS. AND IT'S NOT JUST THE STORY BECAUSE I ALWAYS WORRY ABOUT THAT TOO. BUT THEY DON'T KNOW US FROM ANYBODY ELSE. SO OBVIOUSLY THE MORE WE CAN PUT OUT THERE OTHER THAN WORDS TO SELL THE NEED AND SHOW THE NEED, SO THEY DON'T THINK WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR SOMETHING OR A HANDOUT, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. NEVER HANDOUTS ALWAYS HAND, ALWAYS HAND UP. YEAH, I MIGHT JUST HELP US AND THEN WE GOT IT FROM THERE. OKAY. WITH THAT I'LL GO TO CITIZEN COMMENTS. I HAVE HINES AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. YES. ON THE GRANT STUFF. I USED TO TEACH GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS OR CO-TEACH AT AT THE MBA SCHOOL, AND I'M WILLING TO NOT BILL AND HELP OUT WITH THE PROJECT, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S DEALING WITH BIKES, BIKE INFRASTRUCTURE, AND, YOU KNOW, GETTING THIS TO BE A RESORT COMMUNITY AGAIN. YEAH.

APPRECIATE IT. THAT'D BE GREAT. ALL RIGHT. NO OTHER COMMENTS? NOTHING ELSE FROM COUNCIL.

[Items IX.1 & IX.2]

COUNCIL CAN ASK THE STAFF. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC MEETING FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK. JORDAN MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS REQUESTED AT THE FEBRUARY 19TH MEETING FOR DISCUSSION. THIS ORDINANCE DID GO TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON MARCH 12TH. IT WAS TABLED AND REQUESTED TO COME BACK AFTER SOME THINGS HAD BEEN CLARIFIED OR CLEANED UP ON THE ORDINANCE ITSELF. THE REASON IT'S HERE TODAY, WE NOTICED FOR BOTH MEETINGS AT THE SAME TIME, BECAUSE OF THE WINDOW OF NOTICE THAT'S REQUIRED UNDER STATE LAW. AND SO THERE'S SOME THINGS TO FIGURE OUT. THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED AT P AND Z REGARDING WHICH DISTRICTS THIS SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN.

HOWEVER, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY PUBLISHED, WE PUBLISHED BACK IN FEBRUARY UNDER THE DIRECTIVE OF THE BOARD, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT. STAFF RECOMMENDS, AT A MINIMUM, HOLDING THE PUBLIC HEARING SO WE CAN CHECK THAT BOX. AND THEN REGARDLESS OF THE ACTION TAKEN, THAT'S THE WAY THAT WE CAN PROCEED. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT IN TIME

[01:20:02]

COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MR. BENNEFIELD? IS IT APPROPRIATE AT ALL, AT LEAST TO SET UP EXACTLY WHAT BROUGHT US HERE, LIKE SO THE PUBLIC CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THIS IS BEING PRESENTED. KIND OF THE UNIQUE SITUATION. MAYOR, JUST. MR. POTENTIALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE PREVIOUS QUESTION OF MR. BENNEFIELD. AGAIN, I BELIEVE THAT THESE TWO ITEMS, ITEM NUMBER ONE AND ITEM NUMBER TWO ARE REALLY THE SAME ITEM. AND I HAD SENT A NOTE TO STAFF ABOUT THIS CONFUSION. I, I, I THINK THESE WERE SET UP AS TWO SEPARATE ITEMS BECAUSE OF THE HISTORY OF THE WAY THIS CAME ABOUT. BUT THERE'S REALLY TWO ORDINANCES IN, IN 9.1 AND 9.2 THAT ARE ADDRESSING THE EXACT SAME ISSUE. AND IT WOULD MAKE NO SENSE FOR US TO PASS BOTH OF THESE ORDINANCES FOR ADDRESSING THE SAME ISSUE. SO I, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK WHETHER WE COULD IN FACT, READ BOTH OF THESE IN BECAUSE THEY ARE, IN MY VIEW, ANYWAY, IN REALITY, THE SAME TOPIC, IF I MAY PIGGYBACK OFF OF THAT ONE, IS OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THE NEXT ITEM IS THE ORDINANCE ITSELF. AND SO IT'S THE EXACT SAME TOPIC, THE EXACT SAME ITEM.

IT'S JUST ONE IS ONLY OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ONE IS FOR CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION. I APOLOGIZE, I MISREAD THAT. I THOUGHT YOU HAD ITEMS ONE AND TWO TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING. SO THAT'S MY MISTAKE. YES, SIR. I'M SORRY. YEAH. ONE AND TWO SHOULD BE READ IN TOGETHER. THAT'S. THAT'S FINE. THANK YOU. SORRY FOR THAT. REAL QUICK, LET ME READ THAT IN ITEM NINE TWO CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2020 6-3 1901 OF THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 14, ALSO KNOWN AS ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. SPECIFICALLY, EXHIBIT A, PART FOUR, TABLE B BY ADDING A NEW USE CATEGORY FOR INDOOR INVENTORY STORAGE AND ALLOWING SUCH USE IN ALL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, PROVIDING FOR PURPOSE AND INTENT. PROVIDING THE AMENDMENT. PROVIDING FOR USE. DESCRIPTION. PROVIDING FOR A FINDING OF FACT CLAUSE. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY.

PROVIDING FOR REPEAL. PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PROVIDING FOR PROJECTS AND TRANSITION CLAUSE, PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION AND PUBLICATION CLAUSE AND PROVIDING AN OPEN MEETINGS CLAUSE. I JUST WANTED TO HEAR MAYOR DO THAT AGAIN. I'M GOING TO TRY TO MAKE THEM LONGER NEXT TIME. SO AS FAR AS MR. BENFIELD'S REQUEST, WE HAD A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER APPROACH US ABOUT DOING A PROJECT. OUR CURRENT ZONING TABLE, AS EXPANSIVE AS IT IS, HAS CERTAIN GAPS IN IT THAT DON'T HAVE A FIT, WHETHER IT'S BY DEFINITION, BY STATE, DEFINITION, OURS OR BY RIGHT. AND SO THROUGH DISCUSSIONS WITH THE COUNCIL, IT WAS AGREED UPON THAT WE WOULD ADD A USE TO THE USE TABLE THAT WAS HEAVILY RESTRICTED TO ALLOW FOR INDOOR INVENTORY FOR BUSINESSES THAT AREN'T RETAIL FACING BUT NEED A BIGGER SPACE. IS THAT TRANSITION POINT FROM A BUSINESS IN THEIR HOME TO, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY A LARGER SCALE? WITH THAT BEING SAID, THROUGH THAT REQUEST, THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT DISTRICTS IT SHOULD BE IN. WE HAD DISCUSSED COMMERCIAL BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW IT IN C ONE, WE SHOULD ALLOW IT ACROSS THE BOARD. AND THEN AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING, THERE WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT. WE HAVE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS FOR AIRPORT AND UTILITIES AND GOLF, WHICH ARE SEPARATE. AND THEN WE HAVE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AS WELL. AND SO THAT IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET AS WELL. REGARDING THOSE DISTRICTS SPECIFICALLY. MR. BENNEFIELD, I HOPE YOU DON'T MIND IF I JUST EXPAND BRIEFLY AND INTERRUPT ME IF WHAT I SAY IS NOT 100% ACCURATE, IS, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THERE WAS A INDIVIDUAL WANTING TO BUY A PIECE OF PROPERTY, AND HE WAS GOING TO USE THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY FOR HIS BUSINESS. HE DOES LIKE OUTDOOR LIGHTING, HOLIDAY LIGHTING, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. AT THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS, THEY DON'T DO ANY RETAIL SERVICE. EVERYTHING IS THEY LEAVE THEIR OFFICE AND THEY GO OUT INTO THE FIELDS AND THERE'S A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF MATERIALS THAT THEY NEED TO STORE INSIDE THEIR BUILDING.

RIGHT? THEY'RE NOT LOOKING TO HAVE CONNEXES OUT BACK. THERE'S NOT LIKE ADDITIONAL STORAGE FACILITIES. EVERYTHING THAT THEY WANT IS GOING TO BE INSIDE THEIR BUILDING. AND THESE ARE ITEMS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO USE TO INSTALL THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. BUT BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE A RETAIL LOCATION, IT'S CONSIDERED TO BE STORAGE AND NOT INVENTORY. SO THESE PARTICULAR INDIVIDUALS CANNOT, BY OUR CODE, STORE THEIR OWN BELONGINGS IN THEIR BUILDING, INSIDE THEIR WAREHOUSE TO BE USED FOR RETAIL INSTALLATION AS PEOPLE PURCHASE. SO THAT'S KIND

[01:25:08]

OKAY, MR. HALL, YEAH, I SUPPORT THAT. I AM CONCERNED THAT PLANNING AND ZONING IS NOT SEEING THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE. AND THERE ARE SOME NUANCES IN THAT. SO, YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM LINDA, CHAIRMAN, AND WHETHER THEY SHOULD IN FACT SEE THE ORDINANCE AND HAVE A CHANCE TO TO GIVE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS. AND IF I MAY, TO THAT NOTE, THE ORDINANCE THAT P AND Z SAW IS THE ORDINANCE THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU. THEY HAD RECOMMENDED CHANGES AS FAR AS CLEARLY IDENTIFYING WHICH DISTRICTS WE WERE GOING TO BE PUTTING THIS

[01:30:01]

[01:35:05]

THAT'S THE END OF MY COMMENTS, IF YOU HAVE ANY. THANK YOU. I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER. MR. PRINCE, I HAVE COMMENTS ON THAT, BUT I WOULD PREFER TO TO HEAR WHAT MR. HARRIS HAS TO SAY BEFORE MY COMMENTS. OKAY, MR. HARRIS. SINCE THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BECOME A PART OF OUR CITY CODE. I AGREE WITH WHAT MISS EYRE SAID. THE ORDINANCE SHOULD BE ACCURATE. THAT COMES BEFORE PLANNING AND ZONING, AS WELL AS WHAT COMES BEFORE CITY COUNCIL. AND EVEN IN THIS NEW VERSION, THE SAME ERRORS THAT WERE POINTED OUT DURING THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING ARE INCLUDED IN. AND I SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR ITEMS ONE AND TWO BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SAME IN ESSENCE. SO I'M GOING TO REFER TO AGENDA ITEM NINE TWO SAYS CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER. AND NOW IT'S BEEN GIVEN A NUMBER. SO IT'S GONE UP A NOTCH. IT'S NOW A VIABLE ORDINANCE FOR YOU ALL TO LOOK AT, CONSIDER AND APPROVE. BUT IT HAS THE EXACT SAME ERRORS IN IT. SO TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE THAT'S UNDER ITEM NINE TWO, IT'S IT'S A BAD ORDINANCE. IT'S THERE'S MISTAKES IN IT. AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS RELATED TO THE FACT THAT. ON AGENDA ITEM NINE ONE, THERE IS A STAFF REPORT WHICH WE DID NOT HAVE. WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY OF THIS INFORMATION THAT'S INCLUDED UNDER AGENDA ITEM NINE ONE. IF WE DON'T HAVE ALL OF THE INFORMATION, HOW ARE WE POSSIBLY GOING TO BE ABLE TO COME TO A THOUGHTFUL CONCLUSION AND OFFER UP A A RECOMMENDATION? WE WOULD BE REMISS, I BELIEVE, AND WHICH IS WHY THE ACTION THAT WAS TAKEN WAS TAKEN. I HAD AN INITIAL COMMENT REGARDING THIS ORDINANCE AND AND THAT WAS WHY CAN'T WE JUST USE THE CURRENT WAREHOUSE LAND USAGE THAT'S ALREADY IN THE CODE? HAD THIS BEEN INCLUDED? THAT MIGHT HAVE ANSWERED MY QUESTION BEFORE WE EVEN GOT STARTED. LIKE I SAID, WE DID NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION. AND SO WE WERE KIND OF ASKED TO DO A JOB WITHOUT ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WAS REALLY NECESSARY. AND IT'S MY OPINION THAT TO PASS THIS ORDINANCE AS IT'S WRITTEN, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS ORDINANCE, IF THAT'S WHAT IT'S IF THAT'S WHAT HAS BEEN DEEMED WHAT'S NEEDED, WHICH IT SEEMS THAT'S THE CASE. ONCE AGAIN, I DIDN'T HAVE ACCESS TO THIS WHEN I SAID, WHY CAN'T WE JUST USE WAREHOUSE INSTEAD OF ADDING ANOTHER WHOLE LINE TO OUR CODE? I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S A BIG LINE, BUT WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO STREAMLINE, CUT BACK, GO THROUGH OUR CODE, AND NOW WE'RE MONKEYING WITH IT BEFORE WE EVEN HAVE FINISHED THIS UNIFICATION PROCESS. SO IT JUST SEEMS A LITTLE OUT OF WHACK. THANK YOU, MR. HARRIS. I ALSO HAVE HEINZ SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM AS WELL. SOMEWHAT IRONICALLY, LAST WEEK I STARTED DRAFTING AN ORDINANCE I CALL THE ENTITY FRANKENSTEIN ORDINANCE THAT I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE. WHO WANTS TO BE THE LUCKY RECIPIENT OF WHAT I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE? YOU CAN SEND IT TO ME IF YOU'D LIKE. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. THANK YOU. I DID HAVE ONE WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENT AS WELL FROM MR. PAUL ROBERTS. MAYOR, I HAVE TWO SEPARATE POINTS ON THIS ITEM. FIRST, ON THE ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT. I THINK THE PACKET NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED BEFORE COUNCIL TAKES FINAL ACTION. THE COVER PAGE SAYS PLANNING AND ZONING IDENTIFY CLERICAL INCONSISTENCIES. WANTED A CORRECTED DRAFT AND DID NOT FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION, BUT THE ORDINANCE ITSELF RECITES THAT P AND Z REVIEWED THE AMENDMENT AND TRANSMITTED ITS RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL. THOSE STATEMENTS ARE INCONSISTENT. THE PACKET ALSO SAYS STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS USE IN C1, C2, C3, AND L1, WHILE THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE SAYS ALL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS AND THE PACKET ADMITS THERE ARE DRAFTING ERRORS, INCLUDING DUPLICATE SECTION NUMBERING AND A REFERENCE TO AN ATTACHMENT THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE AMENDMENT. I THINK COUNCIL SHOULD BE CAUTIOUS ABOUT

[01:40:04]

THE LOGIC BEHIND THIS AMENDMENT IS THAT NOT ALL STORAGE USES ARE THE SAME. STAFF'S RATIONALE IS THAT LIMITED INDOOR INVENTORY STORAGE, WHEN ENCLOSED AND ACCESSORY TO A COMMERCIAL USE, SHOULD BE DISTINGUISHED FROM WAREHOUSE LOGISTICS AND DISTRIBUTION USES.

I THINK THAT SAME IMPACT BASED REASONING SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN THE HOME OCCUPATION CONTEXT IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. A LOW IMPACT HOME BUSINESS THAT OPERATES ENTIRELY INDOORS HAS NO CUSTOMER OR CLIENT TRAFFIC, NO ON SITE RETAIL SALES, NO OUTDOOR DISPLAY OR STORAGE, AND NO MATERIAL IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT FROM A BARBERSHOP MECHANIC, SHOP, FOOD BUSINESS, FLORIST OR SIMILAR USE THAT BRINGS TRAFFIC, PARKING, NOISE, ODORS AND OTHER VISIBLE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY INTO A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.

UNDER THE CURRENT CODE, THE CITY MANAGER CAN APPROVE A HOME OCCUPATION ADMINISTRATIVELY IF IT MEETS THE CHAPTER, AND ONLY CERTAIN NON-COMPLIANT, UNLISTED OR PROHIBITED USES GETS PUSHED FORWARD FOR PNC AND COUNCIL REVIEW. SO I'M NOT ASKING COUNCIL TO SOLVE THE ISSUE TONIGHT. I'M ASKING COUNCIL TO CONSIDER A FUTURE REFERRAL TO PNC TO STUDY WHETHER CHAPTER 14 SHOULD CREATE A CLEAR DISTINCTION FOR LOW IMPACT HOME OCCUPATIONS AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS USING THE SAME COMMON SENSE, IMPACT BASED LOGIC THAT IS BEING APPLIED HERE. ARE THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? HEARING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION AT 543 AND I WILL COME BACK TO COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION, MR. PRINCE. SO I WILL AGREE WITH SEVERAL STATEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THAT THIS IS WAY MORE CONFUSING THAN IT SHOULD BE. IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN VERY SIMPLE. THE PACKET THAT WAS PUT IN FRONT OF PLANNING AND ZONING WAS CONFUSING, AND CAME IN AT THE LAST MINUTE, AND MY INTERPRETATION OF THE PLANNING ZONING DISCUSSION WAS, THIS IS SO MIXED UP THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO RENDER AN OPINION, AND SO BRING IT BACK TO US WHEN IT'S WHEN IT'S CLEAN. I DO I'LL REITERATE THAT I THINK WE ON COUNCIL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EITHER SAY, THIS IS STRAIGHTFORWARD, LET'S JUST GET IT DONE AND FINISH IT TONIGHT. OR WE CAN SAY, LET'S SEND IT BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING.

LET THEM HAVE A CLEAN PACKET AND REVIEW IT AND THEN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. THE TRADE OFF IS THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS OWNER HAS OR POTENTIAL BUSINESS OWNER HAS BEEN TRYING TO WORK HIS WAY THROUGH THE THE MUD ON THIS. AND WE AS A CITY ARE MAKING IT HARD FOR HIM TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S IN THE CITY'S BEST INTEREST, FRANKLY. RIGHT. SO I PREFER SOMETHING THAT JUST GETS IT DONE. I RESPECT OUR OUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THEIR STATEMENT THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO OPINE ON SOMETHING THAT IS, YOU KNOW, IS INCOMPLETE. I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY VERY APPROPRIATE. MR. ROBERTS RAISES A REALLY GOOD POINT THAT THE THE THE ORDINANCE ACTUALLY SAYS THAT PLANNING AND ZONING REVIEWED AND APPROVED IT. THAT'S NOT CORRECT. THEY DIDN'T THEY REVIEWED IT FOR WHAT THEY HAD AND SAID, WE'RE NOT READY TO APPROVE THIS BECAUSE THE PACKET IS TOO CONFUSING. SO THAT IS CLEARLY, CLEARLY AN ISSUE. I WHEN I FIRST READ THROUGH THIS, I LOOKED AT ITEM NUMBER ONE, WHICH DOES HAVE AN ORDINANCE ATTACHED TO IT. 9.1 HAS AN ORDINANCE ATTACHED TO IT LABELED X X X X X. THAT.

LOOKING AT THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM CORRECT 9.1 ON PAGE. PAGE 16 OF THE PACKET HAS AN ORDINANCE LABELED ORDINANCE X, X X X X, AND THEN 9.2 ALSO HAS AN ORDINANCE ATTACHED TO IT, WHICH MR. HARRIS RIGHTLY POINTED OUT ACTUALLY GOT A LEGITIMATE NUMBER ASSOCIATED.

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

WHICH ONES DOES IT REALLY MAKE SENSE FOR? AND THEN STAFF IN THE PACKET TONIGHT AND I'M TALKING ABOUT PAGES 13, 12, 13 AND 14 OF THE PACKET GOES THROUGH EACH OF THOSE INDUSTRIAL OR COMMERCIAL ZONES AND LAYS OUT A RATIONALE ON WHY IT SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GET A CHECKMARK FOR THIS, THIS USE CASE. SO THE THE ORDINANCE SAYS C1, C2, C3. IT DOES NOT SAY L I.

[01:45:07]

HOPEFULLY. HOPEFULLY. THAT'S GOOD. I, I JUST FEEL THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR A REASON AND THAT'S SO THAT WE'RE NOT UP HERE TRYING TO CLARIFY AND DEBATE THINGS THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE A CHANCE TO DISCUSS AND MAKE A CLEAR RECOMMENDATION ON.

AND SO I REALLY FEEL THAT IT SHOULD SHOULD GO BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING FOR THEIR FOR THEIR FURTHER DISCUSSION AND FOR US TO GET A CLEAN RECOMMENDATION FROM THEM. THANK YOU, MR. BENNEFIELD. I COULD PROBABLY GO EITHER WAY. I AGREE WITH MR. PRINCE. IT DOES LOOK LIKE 9.1 IS A CLEANER VERSION. THE SCRIVENER. FOR THE MOST PART, ALL THE SCRIVENER ERRORS ARE CORRECTED. IT DOES SEEM LIKE THAT IS THE ORDINANCE THAT ULTIMATELY WAS DESIGNED TO BE PASSED TONIGHT. IF ACTION WAS TO BE TAKEN, IT LOOKS CLEAN, IT LOOKS PURE. IT LOOKS LIKE WHAT THE INTENT OF IT WAS. SO I'M FINE PUTTING IT TO VOTE AS WELL. I'M ALSO TOTALLY FINE SENDING IT BACK TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. I'M ALSO FINE DOING THE SCRIVENER CORRECTIONS AND BRINGING IT BACK TO CONSENT AGENDA. SO I'M PRETTY EASY. BUT I'M ALSO TOTALLY FINE VOTING ON IT TONIGHT, BECAUSE I DO THINK IT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE PROCESS.

AND SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT MR. ROBERTS SHARED, I THINK, ARE CORRECTED IN THIS 9.1 THAT DON'T APPLY. AND I WAS GOING TO SPEAK ON THAT AS WELL. SORRY, MAYOR. I AM NOT SURE WHY.

THERE'S TWO VERSIONS OF THE ORDINANCE. THE ORDINANCE LISTED WITH 9.1 IS THE CORRECT ORDINANCE TO BE REVIEWING. THAT'S AN AGENDA POSTING ERROR ON MY PART. WE SHOULD BE DOING A FINE TOOTH COMB. I DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE THERE WERE TWO SEPARATE AGENDA ITEMS. USUALLY IT'S ALL LUMPED INTO ONE, WHICH IS WHAT WE DID HERE AT THE MEETING AS WELL. SO THE CLERICAL ERRORS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED IN THAT NEW ORDINANCE. IT'S AS REFLECTED AS WHAT WAS DISCUSSED BOTH HERE AND AT THE P AND Z. THE ONLY CAVEAT TO THAT IS THE PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDATION, WHICH, IF COUNCIL CHOOSES TO MAKE A MOTION, WOULD STRIKE FROM THAT ORDINANCE. WE CAN CHANGE THE LANGUAGE AND SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, IT DIDN'T HAPPEN OR NO RECOMMENDATION COULD HAVE BEEN MADE OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, OR WE JUST REMOVE IT ENTIRELY. AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS THE QUESTIONS REGARDING THE DISTRICTS THEMSELVES. AND SO IT WAS INTRODUCED IN THOSE THREE COMMERCIAL CATEGORIES THAT ARE A LITTLE A LITTLE WONKY. AND THEN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AS WELL, THOSE THINGS WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED IN ANY MOTION IF IT IS MADE TONIGHT. BUT ASIDE FROM THAT, THE ORDINANCE IS A CLEAN VERSION AND IT IS AS IT SHOULD BE PRESENTED. I KIND OF WANT TO ASK MISS ERIN AND JEAN, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE POLICY THAT'S WITHIN THIS 9.1 ORDINANCE THAT YOU'RE HEARING ABOUT TONIGHT? I KNOW YOU DIDN'T GET TO HEAR IT AS A COMMITTEE. WOULD YOU HAVE CONCERNS THAT THE COMMISSION MADE A RECOMMENDATION TO COME BACK TO THEM? AND IT MAY NOT. I

[01:50:15]

AND THEN SECTION TWO SAYS, WHICH SHALL BE PERMITTED IN C ONE, C TWO AND 3Z3C. MAYOR, I THINK MY RECOMMENDATION IS IS YOU KNOW, AT THIS POINT I THINK THIS IS AN UNUSUAL ONE. WE THAT CAME TO COUNCIL AND YOU ALREADY HAD A KIND OF A SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT ORIGINATED THIS BEFORE IT WENT TO Z. SO IN THAT RESPECT, IT'S YOU KIND OF HAD A POLICY DISCUSSION IN ADVANCE BEFORE IT WENT TO Z. MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. HOWEVER, GIVEN THE ISSUES AND CONCERNS, I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF FLOOR AMENDMENTS UNLESS I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE AND EXACTLY WHERE THEY GO. AND SO IF IF IT'S MORE THAN JUST A SMALL AMOUNT OF FLOOR AMENDMENTS THAT ARE EASILY TRACKED, THEN MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO GET A CLEAN VERSION AND COME BACK AGAIN. I THINK IT'S JUST EASIER AND CLEANER FOR THE PUBLIC. I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU, YOU KNOW, THE PUBLIC HEARING ONES ARE A LITTLE MORE ORGANIZED AND THERE'S A LITTLE MORE SCRUTINY OF THEM TO HAVE THIS MANY ISSUES BETWEEN THE TWO. PLUS, I READ BOTH IN AND WE'RE NOW SAYING THAT THE SECOND ORDINANCE IS BASICALLY NOT USABLE, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST THE PERSON WE TURN THESE MIX UP. YEAH, THE MICS ARE. I'M GOING TO. I'LL BE I'LL BE REAL LOUD FOR A SECOND. WHAT I'LL JUST I'LL JUST SAY THAT I'M NOT FROM A, FROM A, FROM AN AGENDA PERSPECTIVE. I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT'S IN THE PACKET. THE AGENDA PUTS THE PUBLIC ON NOTICE ON WHAT YOU'RE DOING. AND SO THE FACT THAT THE AGENDA PACKET MIGHT HAVE TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS ISN'T ISN'T A CONCERN, BUT IT'S JUST THE VERSION THAT YOU'RE PASSING. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THAT WE GET A CLEAN VERSION, GET IT EXACTLY THE WAY YOU WANT IT. I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU DISCUSSED AND WHAT WE WANT AND THE REASONS FOR IT, BUT LET'S JUST GET A CLEAN VERSION AND BRING IT BACK. AND THEN YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA NEXT TIME WITH A CLEAN VERSION. AND YOU'VE DONE, YOU'VE DONE YOUR PUBLIC HEARING. AND I THINK IT DOESN'T NEED ANOTHER DISCUSSION AS LONG AS IT'S A CLEAN VERSION, UNLESS YOU WANT TO SEND IT TO G FOR SUBSTANTIVE FEEDBACK. BUT AGAIN, THIS WAS A THIS WAS AN UNUSUAL SITUATION. AND THE WAY IT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD, AND YOU MAY NOT HAVE HAD THE BENEFIT OF THAT DISCUSSION, BUT BUT YOU ALL KNOW WHY IT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD AND WHAT OCCASIONED IT. SO IT'S A LITTLE UNUSUAL IN THAT RESPECT. YEAH, YEAH. I'M NOT HEARING A POLICY CONCERN FROM P AND Z. IT'S JUST THIS ISSUE. SO I WOULD HOPE THE COUNCIL WOULD GO WITH THAT. YEAH. THANK YOU MAYOR. MISS EYRE CAUGHT ANOTHER ISSUE THERE WHICH I HAD NOT CAUGHT. AND SO I THINK WE'VE GOT SEVERAL RIGHT. SO C ONE, C2C3. AND LEE NEEDS TO BE IN THE TITLE WHICH IT'S NOT. THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE MULTIPLE FLOOR AMENDMENTS. SO IT'S TAKE THIS AS STAFF DIRECTION NOT FLOOR AMENDMENTS. AND IN IN IN SECTION ONE AS SHE RIGHTLY POINTS OUT, IT SHOULD SAY SOMETHING LIKE WITHIN ALL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS AS DEFINED IN SECTION TWO TO FIX THAT ERROR. RIGHT? AND THEN THE WE HAD PROPOSED THAT MAYBE WE WOULD STRIKE THE LANGUAGE ABOUT THE PLANNING AND ZONING REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION, BUT INSTEAD LET'S SEND IT BACK AND GET THEIR RECOMMENDATION. SO I GUESS IT'S GOTTEN CONFUSING ENOUGH. I'M, I'M WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THIS. LET'S LET'S CLEAN IT UP, GET IT BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING. THEY MAY CATCH SOME MORE THINGS THAT DIDN'T COME UP TONIGHT. AND HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE SEE IT RIGHT AFTER IT GOES THROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING, THEN WE'LL KNOCK IT OUT PRETTY QUICKLY. I'M OPEN TO A MOTION. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE WE SEND THIS ITEM BACK TO PLANNING AND ZONING WITH CLEANUP OF THE ORDINANCE DOCUMENTATION, PER OUR DISCUSSION TONIGHT FOR THEIR REVIEW AND POTENTIAL RECOMMENDATION. I HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCILOR PRINCE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I HAVE A SECOND FOR MR. HALL. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? MR. BENFIELD NOT ASKING YOU TO AMEND YOUR MOTION? MY QUESTION IS, IS DO YOU FEEL LIKE SINCE THE FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S CONSENSUS. DO YOU FEEL LIKE STAFF COULD NOT MAKE THE NECESSARY CORRECTIONS? BRING IT BACK JUST ON THE CONSENT AGENDA IN TWO WEEKS AND JUST GET THIS BUSINESS OWNER ON THEIR WAY BY SENDING IT TO P AND Z. ALTHOUGH I DO SUPPORT THAT, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT. THAT WILL DELAY IT PROBABLY A MONTH AND A HALF.

[01:55:01]

YEAH. SO I THINK I THINK WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EITHER THE FIRST CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK IT'S ONLY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FIRST OR THE SECOND MEETING IN APRIL FOR COUNCIL FOR COUNCIL. I THINK THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. SO A TWO WEEK DIFFERENTIAL, THAT'S A TWO WEEK DIFFERENTIAL, WHICH IS NOT NOTHING. BUT I MEAN THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO IT'S UP TO YOU KNOW IT'S UP TO YOU ALL. YOU COULD PROCEED AS MR. BENEFIELD SUGGESTED, IS PUTTING IT ON CONSENT WITH THE APPROPRIATE AMENDMENT TO TO REFLECT THAT IT WENT TO P AND Z AND THERE'S NO FORMAL RECOMMENDATION. OR YOU GO THROUGH P AND Z AND THEN YOU BRING IT BACK AND, YOU KNOW, SECOND MEETING. SO EITHER ONE IS LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE. MAYOR, IF I MAY, ANOTHER QUESTION AND STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY SENSE OF THIS POTENTIAL BUSINESS OWNER? THEIR TIME SENSITIVITY ON THIS DOES THIS TWO WEEKS? WOULD IT BE A MATERIAL DIFFERENCE TO THEM? SO THE REASON THAT WE WERE EXPEDITIOUS IN THE EXECUTION OF THIS WAS DUE TO THEIR TIMELINE. AND I'M AFRAID THAT WE'RE GETTING TO THAT POINT WHERE THEY'RE SLOWLY SLIPPING. I DON'T HAVE AN EXACT TIMELINE OR POINT OF REFERENCE.

IT WOULD BE IN THEIR CONTRACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER, BUT IT CAME UP IN DISCUSSION THAT THE THE CAUSE BEHIND THIS BEING HANDLED THE WAY IT WAS IS DUE TO TIMING ITSELF. AND WE'RE WE'RE RIGHT AT THAT LINE AS FAR AS PUBLIC NOTICES GO FOR OTHER ASPECTS OF THIS ISSUE. MR. PRINCE, GIVEN THAT ALTHOUGH YOU DID NOT ASK FOR AN AMENDMENT, YOU MADE SOME THOUGHTFUL SUGGESTIONS. AND SO I WANT TO AMEND MY MOTION, AND THEN MR. HALL CAN DECIDE IF HE STILL WANTS TO SECOND IT TO DO AS YOU SUGGESTED, MR. BENNEFIELD, THAT WE'VE GIVEN STAFF PRETTY CLEAR DIRECTION, THAT THEY GO OFF AND REWORK THIS AND AND MISS ERDEN, COMMISSION MEMBERS ARE NOT ARE NOT KNOWN TO BE SILENT MEMBERS. AND SO IF THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT THEY IDENTIFY, YOU KNOW, PLEASE ENSURE THAT STAFF IS AWARE OF THAT. BUT I WOULD SUGGEST THAT STAFF CLEAN UP THIS ORDINANCE PER OUR DIRECTION TONIGHT AND BRING IT BACK IN THE FIRST MEETING IN APRIL ON CONSENT AGENDA. ALL RIGHT. MR. PRINCE HAS PROPOSED AN AMENDMENT TO HIS MOTION. MR. HALL, DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT PROPOSED AMENDMENT? NO, I DO NOT. AND I, I AGREE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT IT SHOULD GO BACK TO P AND Z. I FEEL PERSONALLY IT SHOULD GO BACK TO P AND Z, AND SO I CANNOT SUPPORT THAT. OKAY. THE AMENDMENT DOES NOT GO FORWARD.

AND SO I. I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE PROCEDURAL PROPER PROCEDURAL MECHANISM AT A MINIMUM. MR. HALL THEN WITHDRAWS HIS SECOND. OKAY. I THINK THAT GIVES SOMEONE ELSE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A SECOND. COULD MR. PRINCE ALSO JUST MAKE SURE HIS. HE CAN WITHDRAW HIS. I MEAN, MR. PRINCE CAN WITHDRAW HIS. IF MR. HALL IS WITHDRAWING HIS SECOND, MR. HALL CAN. I MEAN, MR. PRINCE CAN WITHDRAW HIS HIS MOTION AND WE START ALL OVER AND SOMEBODY MAKES A BRAND NEW MOTION. I'D PREFER THAT. OKAY, LET'S DO THAT THEN. I THINK THAT'S THE CLEANER METHOD FOR REFLECTION IN THE MINUTES I WITHDRAW MY SECOND. OKAY, MR. PRINCE, I WILL WITHDRAW THAT ORIGINAL AMENDMENT TO MY ORIGINAL MOTION AND MAKE A NEW MOTION THAT STAFF TAKE THE DIRECTION FROM OUR CONVERSATION TONIGHT, CLEAN UP THE ORDINANCE AND BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL FOR ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. IN THE FIRST MEETING OF APRIL. I HAVE A MOTION FOR MR. PRINCE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I WILL SECOND THAT AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE STAFF TO POST IT ON THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION BOARD, GIVING OPPORTUNITY FOR P AND Z TO, YOU KNOW, WEIGH IN SO THAT CITY COUNCIL CAN REVIEW THEIR NOTES. AND WE CAN, IF HAVE TO, WE CAN REMOVE IT FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AT THE NEXT MEETING. BUT HOPEFULLY EVERYTHING IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AND IT JUST GOES THROUGH. SO I SECOND, I HAVE A SECOND FOR MR. BENNEFIELD WITH NOTES. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. NAY. ALL RIGHT. IT IS APPROVED 5 TO 1.

[X. CONSENT AGENDA]

[02:00:02]

OKAY. ANY OTHERS? ALL RIGHT. THEN WE WILL GO FORWARD WITH THOSE THAT ARE NOT REMOVED. I HAVE ITEM NUMBER ONE ACTION REGARDING THE FEBRUARY 19TH, 2026 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AND ITEM THREE ACTION REGARDING THE MARCH 5TH, 2026 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE TWO ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THOSE TWO ITEMS AS READ IN. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. I SECOND, FOR ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAY NAY. THOSE TWO ITEMS ON THE CONSENT

[X.2. Action regarding the March 2, 2026, City Council Called Meeting Minutes. ]

[XI.1. Consideration and possible action approving the Unified Development Code Guidelines.]

AND THEN THERE WAS ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD, AND THEN THERE WAS COMMENTARY AND FEEDBACK, AND SHE UPDATED THAT IN MY VIEW, PRETTY WELL. SO I THINK THAT FROM THAT, THE, YOU KNOW, THE LAST VERSION POSTED ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD, IN MY VIEW, UNLESS STAFF HAS OTHER COMMENTS OR CONCERNS, SHOULD BE READY TO GO AS THE, AS THE GUIDELINES FOR THIS THIS COMMITTEE. MY ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF IS ONCE THOSE GUIDELINES ARE IN PLACE, YOU KNOW, WHAT COULD BE OUR NEXT ACTIONS? I THINK WE WERE KIND OF WAITING ON THIS BEFORE A MEETING. YOU KNOW, WHEN IS STAFF READY FOR US TO START HAVING THOSE MEETINGS? SO WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS OUR CODIFIERS HAVE UPDATED THE PROOFS OF OUR ONLINE CODE, REFLECTING ALL THE ORDINANCE CHANGES. WE ARE TAKING THAT AND PUTTING IT INTO AN EXCEL SHEET SO THAT WE CAN EASILY NAVIGATE THIS PROCESS AND TRACK CHANGES THROUGHOUT. I'M GOING TO NEED A WEEK OR TWO TO GET THAT SITUATED, BUT AFTER THAT, WHENEVER A MEETING IS CALLED, THERE WILL BE MATERIAL TO START DISCUSSING. IF WE'D LIKE TO MAKE THAT INFORMATION LIVE IN ADVANCE, MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO IT. THERE'S NOTHING SUBSTANTIAL IN THERE. IT'S JUST THIS IS THE CODE LAYOUT VERSUS THE TABLE OF CONTENTS THAT WAS AGREED UPON BY COUNCIL. OKAY. ARE YOU SEEING ANY IMMEDIATE QUESTIONS

[02:05:02]

IT IS HOT THAT THAT'S A MOTIVATING FACTOR. I DO HAVE. I DO HAVE A CONCERN. ON PAGE 45 IT SAYS UPDATES ARE LIMITED TO. AND THEN UNDER THE FIRST BULLET IT SAYS INCLUDE INCLUDES IN THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE. RECOMMENDATIONS SHOULD BE RESOLVED WITH THE MOST RESTRICTIVE LANGUAGE PERMITTED THAT PRESERVES THE INTENT OF THE EXISTING ORDINANCE. I THINK THAT PARTICULAR LANGUAGE SHOULD BE CAUTIONED THAT NOT ALWAYS AN ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNED TO BE WRITTEN AT THE MOST RESTRICTIVE POSSIBLE MEASURE. AND SO IF IT'S THE COMMITTEE'S OR ATTITUDE TO GO INTO THIS SAYING, IF THERE'S TWO CONFLICTS AND THE WAY WE'RE GOING TO RESOLVE THAT CONFLICT IS JUST REVERTING TO THE ABSOLUTE MOST RESTRICTIVE, IF WE TAKE THAT APPROACH OVER AN ENTIRE DOCUMENT, WE WILL HAVE STRENGTHENED INADVERTENTLY MANY OF OUR CODES AND ORDINANCES WITHOUT EVEN REALIZING IT. AND THAT'S NOT REALLY THE INTENT OF THIS SUBCOMMITTEE, RIGHT? THE INTENT OF THIS SUBCOMMITTEE IS TO LOOK AT ORDINANCES THAT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED OVER THE YEARS AND TO TRY TO CLEAN THAT UP. AND I THINK WHAT THIS LANGUAGE COULD DO IS WE END UP WITH A MUCH MORE RESTRICTIVE CODE THAN WHAT WE INTENDED. SO THAT'S MY ONLY CAUTION. I, I UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S IN THERE. I JUST DON'T LOVE THE IDEA THAT IN EVERY SCENARIO, WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH THE MOST RESTRICTIVE POSSIBLE MEANS THE OTHER ISSUE THAT I HAVE IS THAT, AND I'M NOT GOING TO VENTURE INTO CODE COMPLIANCE OR ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT LATER. BUT FOR EXAMPLE, I'VE HEARD PEOPLE SAY, WELL, MANY OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO THAT WE HAVE ISSUES WITH, CODE COMPLIANCE WILL BE RESOLVED DURING THIS REVIEW. WELL, I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT EITHER. THIS IS NOT A RESOLUTION COMMITTEE. THIS COMMITTEE IS DESIGNED TO SIMPLY IDENTIFY ISSUES WITHIN OUR CODE SO THAT APPROPRIATE RECOMMENDATIONS CAN BE MADE TO THE APPROPRIATE COMMISSIONS OR TO COUNCIL. AND SO EVEN BEFORE THIS SUBCOMMITTEE HAS EVEN BEEN DEVELOPED, THERE'S ALREADY PEOPLE SAYING, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO CLEAN THAT UP WHEN WE DO THIS REVIEW, AND WE HAVEN'T EVEN BEGAN. AND WE'RE ALREADY SAYING WORDS LIKE, THIS IS MORE OF A LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE.

SO I AM VOTING YES FOR THIS. IT'S JUST CAUTIONS THAT I'M THROWING OUT THERE. I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE WORK PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL IN THE BEGINNING, SO THAT YOU GUYS DON'T GO A MONTH OR 2 OR 3 DOWN THE ROAD AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN REALIZE IT'S NOT BEING THE AIR CAME ON. I CAN TALK LONGER. I DON'T WANT TO SEE THREE MONTHS GO DOWN THE ROAD. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WE REALIZE, YOU KNOW, THE WORK PRODUCT IS NOT EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE EXPECTING. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MAYBE MORE RED LINES ON THE FRONT END SO THAT WE CAN SAY, YES, THIS IS THE RIGHT PATH. THIS IS REALLY GOOD INFORMATION. KEEP GOING. AND SO IF I MAY, IN THE MATRIX THAT WE'VE CREATED, IT WAS MADE ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT STAFF WERE NOT POLICY ANYTHING. IS IT LEGISLATIVELY COMPLIANT, YES OR NO. IS IT IN THE ORGANIZATION THAT WAS AGREED UPON? YES OR NO? THAT'S TO THE EXTENT OF OUR. CHANGES, SO TO SPEAK. WE'RE HERE TO ADVISE AND GUIDE. TECHNICALLY, WE'RE HERE TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE INFORMATION IF IT'S REQUESTED DURING IT. BUT THOSE ITEMS OF CONFLICTION ARE MEANT TO BE FLAGGED FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND PASS THAT TO WHICHEVER BOARD IT MAY APPLY TO. WE HAVE NO INTEREST IN NECESSARILY DICTATING WHAT DIRECTION THOSE CONFLICTS GO. ALL STAFF IS GOING TO DO IS FLAG IT, AND THE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL DETERMINE WHERE TO GO WITH IT. PER THAT MATRIX. I AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO ORDER. OUR DISCUSSION BOARD DOESN'T LIKE EXCEL SHEETS, ACTIVE ONES. AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE IT PUBLIC BUT NOT EDITABLE, SO PEOPLE CAN SEE IT AND INTERACT WITH IT AND SEE WHAT'S GOING ON, BUT NOT MAKE CHANGES THAT MAY, YOU KNOW, YOU DELETE A COLUMN. IT'S GOING TO GET MESSY REALLY QUICK. SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH ALL OF THAT. BUT MY INTENT IS TO MAKE ALL OF THIS PUBLIC. IT'S THE FOUNDATION OF OUR CITY. WAY TO GO, DAVID. IT'S THE FOUNDATION OF HOW WE REGULATE. IT'S THE FOUNDATION OF HOW WE HANDLE BUSINESS. AND IT MATTERS TO CITIZENS. IT MATTERS TO RESIDENTS, IT MATTERS TO BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS. AND SO IT SHOULD BE A PUBLIC PROCESS.

AND THAT'S OUR INTENT. MAYOR, I JUST WANT AND I'M NOT SURE I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.

MR. BENFIELD'S. CONCERN BECAUSE I HAD SO THAT SECTION THAT YOU READ OFF ABOUT RESOLVING IT WITH THE MOST RESTRICTIVE LANGUAGE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SECOND BULLET POINT UNDERNEATH

[02:10:01]

THANK YOU, MAYOR. WELL, I WAS GOING TO STATE WITHOUT DIRECTION, YOU KNOW, IN HERE I THINK THAT WHAT ARE THE CONCERN LIGHT AND SOME OF THE COMMUNITY WAS CONVERSELY, THAT IT COULD BE THE MOST LENIENT THROUGHOUT THE DOCUMENT AS WELL, WHEN WHAT WE'RE SEEKING IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, TO CLEAN IT UP AND BE COMPLIANT WITH LAW. AND I'VE TALKED TO JORDAN MULTIPLE TIMES ABOUT THIS, ABOUT HOW THESE THINGS WOULD COME FORWARD WITHIN SECTIONS IN ORDER FOR US TO REALLY SEE WHAT IS HAPPENING THERE. SO I, BECAUSE OF THE THE CONVERSATION AND THE COMMUNITY, THAT'S WHY I REALLY DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT AT THE TIME AND KNOWING THAT IT WOULD COME FORWARD. BUT LIKE I SAID, THE, THE CONCERN CONVERSELY, WITHOUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN THERE, MAYBE IT NEEDS TO BE TWEAKED OR REWORDED. THE OPPOSITE COULD BE TRUE TOO, IN TERMS OF LENIENCY.

SO AND JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON THAT, I'LL SHUT UP VERY QUICKLY. BUT IT. SO BACK TO THE POINT ABOUT MORE RESTRICTIVE VERSUS LESS RESTRICTIVE. BUT WHEN READ WITH THE SECOND ONE, IF THE LESS RESTRICTIVE ONE WAS ADOPTED LATER, THEN THEN THEN THAT'S THE MORE RECENT WILL OF THE BODY. RIGHT. AND SO, SO THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT MOVING PARTS THERE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK THROUGH. AND BUT AGAIN, THAT REALLY ONLY APPLIES TO UNRESOLVABLE CONFLICTS. IF YOU CAN OTHERWISE HARMONIZE IT, THEN YOU HARMONIZE IT. SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL. YEAH, I'M JUST GOING TO POINT OUT THAT IT SAYS PRESERVES THE INTENT OF THE EXISTING ORDINANCE. SO THAT JUST, JUST THAT SECOND PORTION OF THAT SENTENCE FOR ME IS WHAT MADE ME OKAY WITH THIS, BECAUSE IT'S PRESERVING THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE. SO AND THEN OF COURSE, THE SECOND BULLET POINT, CORRECTING INTERNAL CONFLICTS AND CONTRADICTIONS. SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WAS ADOPTED AFTERWARDS THAT WAS THE WILL OF THE BODY, CLEAN IT UP, JUST LIKE YOU SAID, BUT PRESERVING THE INTENT OF THE EXISTING ORDINANCE. THAT'S FINE.

I'M SURE WE'RE GOING TO RUN ACROSS ORDINANCES THAT WE DON'T BELIEVE ARE WE EVEN NEED ANYMORE. SO HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET RID OF THOSE AS WELL. SO I, I'M OKAY WITH GOING FORWARD WITH THIS. I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT'S A GOOD GUIDELINE AND ULTIMATELY IT'S ALL GOING TO COME BACK TO US ANYWAY. SO IF AT THAT POINT WHERE WE'RE NOT AGREEING OR, YOU KNOW, THERE'S MORE DISCUSSION THAT NEEDS TO BE HAD, THESE ARE JUST RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE CAN GO FORWARD WITH IT FROM THERE. MR. BENNEFIELD. I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT, AND I DO HAVE A LOT OF CONFIDENCE THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL BE ABLE TO DISSECT AND BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THE INTENT OF THOSE THINGS. BUT AGAIN, THAT BECOMES HIGHLY POLITICAL BECAUSE THIS SUBCOMMITTEE HAS A LOT OF AUTHORITY TO MAKE CHANGES TO CONFLICTING ORDINANCES BASED ON THEIR INTERPRETATION OF WHAT TWO THINGS ARE SUPPOSED TO MEAN. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A COMPLETE ITEMIZATION OF EVERY ONE OF THOSE THAT COMES FORTH. SO IF THERE'S ONE THAT SAYS TEN AND ONE THAT SAYS 15, AND YOU GUYS GO WITH THE 15 BECAUSE IT'S MORE RESTRICTIVE AT THE END OF THE DOCUMENT, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE EACH OF THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE NOT COMPATIBLE WITH EACH

[02:15:05]

NOT ONLY DOES IT HELP US IN THE SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT IT'S ALSO FOR THE CODIFIERS. WHEN THEY GET INTO THIS, IT'S TO HELP THEM. THEY'VE WORKED VERY HARD ON TRYING TO GET OUR CODE CLEAN AND ORGANIZED, AND I KNOW ROBIN HAS BEEN ON THE PHONE WITH THEM A LOT, AND SO WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR THEM EITHER. MR. PRINCE YEAH, I'LL JUST POINT OUT THAT UNDER THIS BULLET LIST, WE'RE LOOKING AT PAGE 45 OF THE PACKET UNDER THE BULLET LIST, THE TEXT THAT'S UNDERLINED. I THINK WE'VE MADE THIS POINT. YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAMMERED IT HOME VERY CAREFULLY.

THIS THIS BODY IS NOT EMPOWERED TO MAKE POLICY CHANGES. AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE COULD POTENTIALLY EITHER KEEP ALL OF THESE BULLETS OR COMPLETELY REMOVE THE FIRST BULLET. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT REALLY MATTERS IN THE END, BECAUSE WHAT WE NEED TO DO AS WHAT WE COUNCIL HAVE SAID, THIS, THIS COMMITTEE NEEDS TO DO IS JUST KEEP A LIST OF EVERYTHING. AND WHEN THEY WHEN THEY FIND THERE'S CONFLICT, WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE CONFLICT. NOW, THERE'S NO REASON WHY THEY CAN'T COME BACK AND SAY THERE'S CONFLICT. AND WE THINK THE ANSWER SHOULD BE THIS. BUT AS LONG AS WE GET TO SEE WHAT THE CONFLICT IS, AND THEN WE CAN EITHER AGREE OR NOT WITH THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION, I THINK WE'LL BE FINE. CHARLES, YOU ALL NEED TO REMEMBER, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS BOARD HERE MAKES THE FINAL DECISION ON ALL THE ORDINANCES. SO YOU WILL HAVE THE WHOLE DOCUMENTS AND EVERYTHING IN FRONT OF YOU, PROBABLY FOR A FEW WEEKS BEFORE YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON THIS. BUT YOU ALL MAKE THE FINAL RULING ON THIS, NOT THE BOARD. THE BOARD'S JUST GOING TO HELP STREAMLINE THE PROCESS, MAKE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS. YOU ALL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION. COUNCILOR CHAVARRIA, I DON'T THINK THAT WAS REALLY, YOU KNOW, OUR CONCERN. I THINK IT WAS MORE OF A WHAT'S BROUGHT. WE WERE AFRAID OF. OR IT WAS BROUGHT TO SEVERAL PEOPLE'S ATTENTION. THEY WERE AFRAID OF LOSING INFORMATION. SO IF THERE WAS ONE THAT WAS MORE RESTRICTIVE, BUT THERE WAS ONE THAT PREVIOUSLY WASN'T, AND THE ONLY ONE WAS PRESENTED TO US WITHOUT THE OLD ONE TO COMPARE, THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE. BUT EVERYTHING JORDAN HAS LAID OUT, ESPECIALLY WITH AN EXCEL SHEET WITH A RED LINE, THAT GIVES ME CONFIDENCE THAT THIS WILL BE THIS WILL BE FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD, AND ANYTHING THAT'S MISSING, WE CAN NOW REVERT BACK AND LOOK. AND THEN EVEN IF WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT MINUTES OR THINGS ABOUT CITY COUNCIL DECISIONS, YOU KNOW WHY? WHY WAS WHERE, WHERE DID THE HISTORY COME FROM? WHY IS THAT ORDINANCE EVEN PASSED? IT'LL BE GOOD TO HAVE THAT IN THAT FORMAT. THANK YOU. IF IT'S THE WILL OF THE BOARD, WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SEND IT IN ADVANCE OF IT BEING DONE, EVEN IF IT'S JUST THE FIRST CHUNK TO SEE THE OUTLINE AND THOSE COLUMNS AND HOW WE'RE STRUCTURING IT. I CAN ONLY DO WHAT I KNOW I NEED FOR THIS PROCESS. IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS FOR COLUMNS OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, WE CAN ADJUST. THAT'S, YOU KNOW, I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE YOUR, YOUR LAYOUT WITH THE COLUMNS JUST, YOU KNOW, JUST TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT WE COULD EITHER POSSIBLY ADD OR MIGHT BE EVEN DUPLICATE. YEAH. THANK YOU, MR. PRINCE. OKAY. IF NO OTHERS.

OH, MAYOR PRO TEM NO, I WAS GOING TO SAY IF YOU WERE GOING TO CALL FOR A MOTION. I WAS JUST GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION. I'M READY FOR A MOTION, MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. WE GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE GUIDELINES, AS IN HERE, JUST TO MAKE IT EASY, WITH ALL THE STIPULATIONS OF JORDAN AND WHAT SHE'S GOING TO BE PROVIDING. I HAVE A MOTION FROM THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A SECOND FROM COUNCILOR CHAVARRIA. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. IT'S APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. WE WILL MOVE TO

[XI.2. Consideration and possible action regarding the establishment of the Infrastructure Planning Advisory Subcommittee and approval of the attached charter.]

[02:20:05]

I'M GOOD. I STARTED FEELING A BREEZE. IT'S WORKING NOW, SO I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT IT. FOR THOSE AT HOME ARE THE AIR CONDITIONING WASN'T WORKING FOR A WHILE IN HERE. IT'S GETTING HOT. THANK YOU, MR. PRINCE. ALL RIGHT, I'M AT COUNCIL. DISCUSSION OR MOTION? MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING ADVISORY SUBCOMMITTEE CHARTER AS PRESENTED, CONTINUING THE EXISTING ADVISORY WORK WHILE EXPANDING ITS SCOPE TO ADDRESS BROADER INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING. I HAVE A MOTION FROM THE MAYOR PRO TEM.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND, I HAVE A SECOND FOR MR. HALL. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. IT IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER. I'M SORRY, MAYOR, JUST REAL QUICK, I DO. I JUST I FAILED AND I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO VICTOR, WHO WAS VERY INSTRUMENTAL IN HELPING TO GUIDE A LOT OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE IN THIS FINAL CHARTER. HE DID GREAT WORK AND I JUST

[XI.3. Consideration and possible action to approve a Franchise Agreement with Pedernales Electric Cooperative (PEC).]

MAYOR PEC REQUESTED THAT THE COUNCIL DO NOT TAKE ANY ACTION UNTIL THEY'VE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW OUR REDLINE VERSION AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEND BACK THEIR REDLINE VERSION, AND THEY HAVE SEEN THIS VERSION. YES, IT HAS BEEN SENT TO THEM AND THEIR LEGAL COUNSEL IS REVIEWING IT NOW. THEY REACHED OUT YESTERDAY AND ASKED THAT WE DO NOT TAKE ACTION TONIGHT. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. HALL? ANY CITIZEN COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? NOT HEARING ANY? I'M OPEN TO A MOTION FROM COUNCIL. I'M HAVING MORE DISCUSSION OR A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE ACTION. ITEM NUMBER THREE. DO YOU WANT TO PUT A TIME FRAME ON IT? DO WE STILL P C I GUESS.

YEAH. LET'S MAKE IT THE SECOND MEETING OF APRIL. CHARLES. THAT SEEMS TO WORK. IT SETS UP. WE DON'T HAVE IT BACK BY THEN. WE JUST TABLE IT AGAIN. OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCILOR CHAVARRIA. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? I HAVE A SECOND FROM THE MAYOR PRO TEM. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? WELL, THAT JUST SIMPLIFY. I MEAN, I GUESS RATHER THAN SAYING IT COMES BACK AND THEN WE MIGHT HAVE TO TABLE IT AGAIN. IF WE JUST SAY TABLE IT UNTIL STAFF IS READY FOR IT TO COME BACK ON THE AGENDA, THEN WE'RE. THE ONLY REASON I DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT IS BECAUSE I WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS AGENDIZED APPROPRIATELY, LIKE ONCE WE GOT, YOU KNOW, SO IF WE KEPT IT ON THE SECOND MEETING, WE COULD GO AHEAD AND AGENDA, HAVE IT ON THE AGENDA AND NOT WORRY ABOUT IT. IF GETTING PUSHED BACK FURTHER INTO MAY. OKAY. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. IT IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY TO TABLE THAT ITEM UNTIL THE SECOND MEETING IN

[XI.5. Consideration and possible action regarding the creation of the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee to meet requirements under Texas state law related to impact fees and for council to give direction.]

[02:25:05]

I HAVE A MOTION FROM THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND COUNCILOR PRINCE, A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION QUESTION? DO WE. YOU MAY HAVE SAID, AND I MISSED I APOLOGIZE. DO WE HAVE A TIME FRAME IN MIND TO NAME NAMES AND ACTUALLY TAKE NEXT STEPS ON THIS? I'D LIKE TO. AT THE APRIL 2ND COUNCIL MEETING. THAT GIVES US A COUPLE OF WEEKS TO COME UP WITH SOME NAMES AND TALK TO SOME CITIZENS, BUT THIS WOULD JUST CREATE IT. AND NOW WE HAVE TO COME BRING THIS BACK ON AN AGENDA AND PUT FORWARD SOME APPOINTMENTS. MR. BENNEFIELD IS THERE, IS THERE NOT? IS THERE A CONCERN ON JUST BRINGING THIS BACK WITH THE NAMES AND JUST A JUST APPROVING IT ALL AT ONE GO INSTEAD OF APPROVING IT NOW AND THEN, NOT HAVING ALL THE INFORMATION OF WHO'S GOING TO SERVE ON IT. AND I MEAN, TO ME, I KIND OF LIKE HAVING ALL THE INFORMATION IN FRONT OF ME TO I MEAN, I SUPPORT THE, THE, THE REQUEST. IT'S JUST I'D LIKE TO SEE WHO'S ON IT. I HAVE NO CONCERNS WITH THAT. I WAS JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE TAKING ACTION AND THAT WE CAN TELL THE STATE THAT WE ARE. FROM, FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, EITHER APPROACH, EITHER CREATE IT TONIGHT AND STAFF IT BASICALLY NEXT TIME OR DO IT ALL AT ONCE. BUT PROBABLY DO DO SOMETHING NEXT TIME. YEAH. OKAY. WELL, WE CURRENTLY HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. I'LL SECOND, I THINK WE HAD A SECOND FOR REFERENCE, ALTHOUGH ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. IT IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. ALL

[XII.3. Discussion and possible direction regarding the City’s Code Compliance and Code Enforcement program.]

[02:30:08]

AND OUR CODE NEVER DEFINES WHAT IS AN IMPROVED SURFACE. AND SO I WENT AND LOOKED IT UP. AND SHE'S RIGHT. IS THAT COMPACTED SOIL? IS THAT DECOMPOSED CRUSHED GRANITE? IS IT A PAVER? WHEN I WANTED TO PARK A BOAT, I CAME IN HERE AND THEY SAID, NO, IT HAS TO BE CONCRETE. AND THAT CONCRETE CAN'T JUST BE FOR THE WHEELS. IT HAS TO BE THE ENTIRE SHADOW OF YOUR TRAILER. RIGHT.

AND I KNOW CITIZENS THAT WENT OUT AND SPENT THREE, FOUR, $5,000 TO COMPLY WITH THAT. BUT NOW THERE'S THIS AMBIGUITY SAYING, NO, IT ACTUALLY CAN BE MUCH LESS THAN THAT. AND SO I THINK WE LOOK AT THAT AND SAY, OKAY, AS A CITY COUNCIL, WHAT WHAT ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT? WHY ARE WE NOT ENFORCING THEM? WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE THERE'S AMBIGUITY IN THE LANGUAGE OF WHAT IS AN IMPROVED SURFACE. OKAY, WE'LL SEND THAT TO THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION. LET'S GET A RECOMMENDATION FROM THEM. LET'S BRING IT BACK. LET'S CORRECT IT AND LET'S ENFORCE. I'VE HEARD FROM MR. WEST THAT ENFORCEMENT IS NOT AS EASY AS IT MAY SEEM, THAT YOU KNOW, THAT SOME THINGS ARE JUST NOT ENFORCEABLE. WELL, I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM MR. BULLOCK WHETHER THAT'S TRUE OR NOT. ARE THESE THINGS ENFORCEABLE? DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT. YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW. WE ALL SAW ON THE NEWS ABOUT THE GUY OUT ON THE STREET THAT THE SWAT HAD TO GO ON TO. RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GUYS FELT, BUT I WAS PERSONALLY EMBARRASSED. I MEAN, HIS WHOLE HIS WHOLE YARD WAS FILLED WITH TRASH. AND THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE THINK LAGO VISTA IS. WE'RE TRASHY. THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT I HEAR OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. AND IT'S BECAUSE WE DON'T ENFORCE OUR CODES. AND SO I BELIEVE THAT ENFORCEMENT IS A MECHANISM THAT CAN BE ENFORCED, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT WANTS TO BE ENFORCED. AND I'D LIKE TO HEAR ALSO FROM MR. BULLOCK TO OPINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE ENFORCEABLE AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. SO MOVING FORWARD, THERE'S CLARITY. I HAVE SEEN EXAMPLES OF THE CITY WHEN IT WANTS TO ENFORCE, IT ENFORCES, AND I'M NOT GOING TO BRING UP SPECIFIC EXAMPLES BECAUSE I WAS ASKED NOT TO, BUT I COULD PROVIDE SPECIFIC EXAMPLES WHERE THE CITY HAD NOTED TO ENFORCE, AND THEY FIGURED OUT A WAY TO ENFORCE.

[02:35:04]

FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE STATEMENT AND CLEAR THE RECORD. I HAVE NOT GOT THE AUTHORITY TO DISMISS ANY CITATIONS. I HAVE NOT DISMISSED ANY CITATIONS. SO THAT IS TOTALLY WRONG. AND IT IS ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT ISSUED ANY PARKING VIOLATIONS OUT TO SARAH, THAT THEY WERE ONLY RED TAGGING A VEHICLE THAT WAS ILLEGALLY PARKED. WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS OR NOT, I DON'T KNOW. I DIDN'T SEE IT, BUT CODE ENFORCEMENT IS HARD TO PLAY, WHICH WHICH IS THE WEEDS ON WEEDS SINCE THAT'S ONE OF THE BIG TOPICS, IS ONE ORDINANCE SAYS 12IN. ONE ORDINANCE SAYS 24IN. WHICH ORDINANCE DO I GO BY? I HAVE OFFERED UP A SOLUTION. ADOPT THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. WE ALREADY ARE UNDER THE 2015 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. I HAVE OFFERED UP THE SOLUTION. LET'S ADOPT THE 24 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, NOT CHANGE ANY OF OUR OTHER CODES, BUT WITH THE CAVEAT THAT IF THERE IS A CONFLICT, THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE OVERRIDES YOU. LET ME HAVE THAT AUTHORITY. CODE ENFORCEMENT CAN GO TO WORK AND DO A LOT OF THINGS, BECAUSE I FOUND LOTS OF INCONSISTENCIES THIS PAST WEEK BECAUSE I'VE BEEN WORKING ON CODE COMPLAINTS FOR A FEW RESIDENTS IN THE TOWN THAT I HAVE BEEN RECEIVING EMAILS ON. THE MAYOR HAS BEEN RECEIVING EMAILS ON FOR SEVERAL MONTHS NOW, AND I'VE BEEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ACTUALLY HELP THOSE CITIZENS AND ENFORCE THOSE COMPLAINTS.

I'M ALSO WORKING WITH OUR ONE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER TO MENTOR HIM AND GET HIM TO WHERE HE IS COMFORTABLE DOING WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO AND GET THINGS DONE. JUST LIKE I CAN SHOW YOU WHERE THINGS ARE GETTING DONE. NOW, THE HIGHLAND LAKES GOLF COURSE IS BEING MOWED BECAUSE THE CITY TOOK ACTION. OFFICER ALLEN SENT ALL OF THE CERTIFIED LETTERS AND ALL THE DOCUMENTATION. IT TOOK A LITTLE BIT LONGER TO GET A CONTRACTOR OUT THERE TO MOW IT, BECAUSE WE HAD TO GO THROUGH THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS BECAUSE OF IT, OF THE COST OF THAT. SO WE WENT THROUGH THAT PROCESS, WE GOT IT DONE. NOW I'VE GOT PEOPLE THAT ARE UPSET BECAUSE IT'S MOWED. I'VE GOT PEOPLE THAT ARE THANKING ME BECAUSE IT'S MODE. SO I DON'T KNOW WHICH WE'RE SUPPOSED TO GO HERE, BUT CODE ENFORCEMENT CAN BE DONE. I HAVE AN EXTENSIVE HISTORY IN CODE ENFORCEMENT, AND I WANT I WANT CODE ENFORCEMENT DONE BECAUSE WHEN CODE ENFORCEMENT IS DONE AND DONE CORRECTLY, IT HELPS THE COMMUNITY. IT PROTECTS THE COMMUNITY, HELPS THE NEIGHBORS.

NOW, IF YOU'VE GOT NEIGHBORS GOING AGAINST NEIGHBORS AND IT'S NOT A TRUE CODE VIOLATION, THOSE NEIGHBORS NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WORK THEIR SITUATION OUT AMONGST THEMSELVES AND NOT TRY TO DRAG CITY STAFF INTO. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CITY HAS A POLICY IN THE PAST THAT WHEN IT'S A NEIGHBOR VERSUS NEIGHBOR COMPLAINT, IT'S NOT A CODE VIOLATION COMPLAINT.

THERE IS A PROCESS TO WHERE THEY CAN GO TO THE MUNICIPAL COURT WINDOW AND FILE AN OFFICIAL COMPLAINT, AND THEN THE MUNICIPAL JUDGE WILL MAKE A DECISION ON HOW THAT IS HANDLED.

BUT IF IT'S A LEGITIMATE COMPLAINT, I HAVE NO ISSUE, NO QUALMS ABOUT ISSUING A SUMMONS TO COURT AND LETTING THAT PERSON EITHER COME IN AND PAY A FINE OR COME BEFORE THE JUDGE.

AND IF THEY COME BEFORE THE JUDGE, I CAN ASSURE YOU MY CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WILL BE HERE TO TESTIFY THAT THEIR REPORT IS ACCURATE. SORRY IF I'M A LITTLE CRANKY ON THIS, BUT I TAKE THIS VERY PERSONAL. WELL, CHARLES, I GUESS TO MR. BENFIELD'S CORE QUESTION IS THE STATUS OF HOW WE DO CODE COMPLIANCE BASED ON ANY SORT OF MISSING GUIDANCE YOU'RE GETTING FROM CITY COUNCIL, OR ARE THERE OTHER FACTORS AND ISSUES THAT ARE GOING ON? NO, IS MY UNDERSTANDING. CITY COUNCIL WANTS CODE ENFORCEMENT ENFORCED IN THE CITY, AND I AGREE WITH THAT PHILOSOPHY. MR. PRINCE. WHAT I BELIEVE WE'VE HAD CONSENSUS ON IN SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS IS THE IDEA THAT WE HOPE MANY OF OUR CITIZENS WOULD WANT TO FOLLOW THE RULES IF THEY UNDERSTOOD THEM. AND SO STEP ONE, AND I BELIEVE THIS HAS BEEN COUNCIL CONSENSUS.

STEP ONE SHOULD ALWAYS BE, YOU KNOW, EDUCATION AND INFORMATION. TRY TO ENCOURAGE CONFORMANCE AND COMPLIANCE. SO STEP ONE IS COMPLIANCE. BUT I THINK THE ISSUE THAT THE CITY HAS HAD IN THE PAST IS STRUGGLE FROM MOVING FROM ATTEMPTS TO GET COMPLIANCE INTO ENFORCEMENT FOR THOSE WHO ARE THE, THE ONES WHO REALLY HAVE NO INTEREST IN FOLLOWING THE RULES. AND SO

[02:40:03]

AND TO THIS DAY, I REALLY FEEL LIKE I'M SO THRILLED THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS UPDATE. AND IN AN EFFORT TO TRY TO MAKE THINGS AT LEAST UNDERSTANDABLE BY OUR RESIDENTS IN THE AREA, THE NEXT THING THAT HAPPENED, I SAID, OH, OKAY, IF I HAVE TO, AND I HAVE PEOPLE COME TO HELP ME UNPACK, I CAN HAVE A CAR, YOU KNOW, RIGHT THERE BY THE DRIVEWAY. THREE DAYS, I HAVE THREE DAYS. I WILL TELL YOU THAT I WAS ABIDING BY THAT WHEN I GOT ANOTHER LETTER THAT SAID NOT EVEN DOING THAT. BUT AT THAT POINT, I WILL SAY THAT I DOVE DEEP INTO OUR ORDINANCES AND DID WHAT I HAD TO TO UNDERSTAND. AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT THE REASON THAT I'M ON

[02:45:03]

I HAVE HEINZ. WHEN MY ELDEST WAS VERY YOUNG, TO MY WIFE'S CHAGRIN, IN CHURCH DURING A CHILDREN'S SERVICE. AFTER THE SERVICE, THE ASSISTANT PASTOR ASKED, DO ANY OF THE KIDS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? AND MY SON RAISED HIS HAND AND MY WIFE STARTED TO MAKE A BEAD FOR THE DOOR, AND HE ASKED, WHY CAN SOME PEOPLE DO THINGS AND OTHER PEOPLE CAN'T? SO ON YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT IMPROVED SURFACE, WHAT IF IT'S CONSIDERED A TRASHED SURFACE BY THE CITY AND THE CITY DID IT? WHAT IF THEY DID IT BY DOING STAGING YOU GUYS IN YOUR CODE? YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO STAGE ON ONE PROPERTY AND BUILD ON ANOTHER. AND THE CITY USED MY PROPERTY WITHOUT PERMISSION TO STAGE IT, TURNED A THIRD OF IT INTO IMPERVIOUS COVER. I MEAN, YOU GUYS USE MY MY LOT CONSTANTLY. I MEAN, EVERY MONTH IT'S USED. I'VE GOT PICTURES OF YOU GUYS PARKED ALL OVER IT. BUT IF I WANT TO DO SOMETHING, I GET RED TAGGED. WHAT THE HELL? YOU KNOW, SERIOUSLY? AND YOUR CODE ENFORCEMENT YOU GUYS OPERATE ON EVERY TIME I HEAR SOMETHING, SOMEBODY COMPLAINED, RIGHT? SO ALL OF YOUR ENFORCEMENT EFFORT IS, LIKE, NOT ALL OF IT, BUT

[02:50:01]

WHAT THE HELL? YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS HAD A LONG DISCUSSION HERE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE ORDINANCE AND WHATEVER. I WAS TALKING TO THE DEVELOPMENTS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GUY. HOW CAN YOU DEVELOP ANYTHING IN THIS COMMUNITY IF YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION LIKE THIS ABOUT THIS STUFF? SO AGAIN, THE POLICING SERVE US. DON'T POLICE US. SERVE US TO PLEA. SO ANYWAY, WE HAD TO GO TO A DIFFERENT CHURCH BECAUSE MY WIFE, NOT MY KID. THANK YOU GUYS. ANY OTHER CITIZENS WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM RIGHT NOW, MR. BUTLER KING. I JUST WALKED INTO THE ROOM HERE, SO I APOLOGIZE IF I'M DOUBLING DOWN ON ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID, BUT AND I SAY THIS WITH THE CONTEXT OF THERE'S A LOT OF NEW STAFF, THERE'S A LOT OF NEW CHANGES, THERE'S A LOT OF POSITIVE PROGRESSIVE CHANGE HAPPENING. BUT I HEARD I HEARD A VERY GOOD METAPHOR RECENTLY, WHICH WAS GENERALLY WHEN YOU CLEAN OUT YOUR BATHROOM, YOU FLUSH BEFORE YOU START SCRUBBING. SO THERE'S STILL SOME PROBLEMS THAT REAR THEIR HEAD OVER AND OVER. AND NOT JUST CODE COMPLIANCE, NOT JUST ENFORCEMENT, BUT THERE HAS TO BE ONE TRUST BACK AND FORTH, BUT A LEVEL OF COMPETENCY FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO GO ENFORCE THINGS, WHETHER IT'S ON THE DEVELOPMENT OR THE CODE ENFORCEMENT END. AND THERE'S PERSONALLY BETWEEN ME, CLIENTS WHO'VE REACHED REACHED OUT TO ME, CLIENTS ON THE CONSTRUCTION END, EVERY INTERACTION I'VE EVER HAD. AND THIS MIGHT JUST BE, YOU KNOW, INCIDENTAL. I CAN'T THINK OF MORE THAN 4% OF THE INTERACTIONS WHERE THE ENFORCEMENT WAS BLATANTLY INCORRECT OR, I MEAN, I WAS JUST IN HERE THE OTHER DAY. CAN YOU GO LOOK AT YOUR ORDINANCES? THAT'S NOT WHAT IT IS. LET'S JUST GO LOOK AT THEM. AND THEN THE LOOK OF GLEE. OH, YEAH. NO, IT SAYS THAT. OKAY. YEAH. OH, NO. YEAH, YOU WERE RIGHT. IT'S EVERY SINGLE TIME. AND YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP HAVING THE PROBLEM OF TWO DIFFERENT CAMPS AT OPPOSITION WITH YOU. OH, NO ONE'S ENFORCING ANYTHING. DANG.

THE CITY DOESN'T CARE. AND THEN, BOY, THEY SURE ARE OUT HERE JUST SAYING STUFF AND TRYING TO ENFORCE THINGS AND STUFF. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PATH FORWARD IS. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF GOOD IDEAS OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS THAT WE'VE BEEN COMING TO THESE OF LIKE, WHETHER THEY'RE CALLED ADVOCACY OR WHATEVER, THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT OF SOLUTIONS, WHICH ISN'T JUST APPLICABLE TO DEVELOPMENT SIDE, BUT ALSO ON CODE ENFORCEMENT AND, YOU KNOW, STATE LAWS, YOU HAVE TO EDUCATE FIRST. BUT MAN, WE GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT OUR STAFF AND EDUCATING THEM AND SOME SORT OF PROCEDURE OR UNDERSTANDING. AND I THINK IT'LL COME WITH TIME AND WITH NOT BEING SHORT STAFFED, NOT HAVING ONLY ONE PERSON IN EACH OF THESE ENFORCING POSITIONS.

BUT WE ALSO CAN'T HAVE STUFF LIKE IF I CAME UP HERE AND I SAID, YOU KNOW, ME AND MY LITTLE GUYS, WE'RE GOING TO HANG OUT. I DON'T THINK ANYONE WOULD TAKE THAT AS OFFENSIVE OR VULGAR. LITTLE GUY IS NOT A VULGAR TERM. NOW, IF I GOT UP HERE AND COMMITTED FRAUD OR PERJURY OR LIED OR THREATENED SOMEBODY, I MIGHT GET ARRESTED FOR IT. SO IF THERE'S COMMUNICATION WITH CODE ENFORCERS OR DEVELOPMENT ENFORCERS, AND I SAY SOMETHING LIKE, HEY, YOUR LITTLE GUYS OUT HERE, HE SHOULD PROBABLY READ THE BOOK. I DON'T THINK THAT'S ON THE SAME LEVEL AS SOMEONE COMMITTING FRAUD. SO LET'S MAYBE DIAL IT BACK AND JUST ACCEPT WHEN WE'RE WRONG ON THINGS AND BE OPEN TO COMMUNICATIONS AND FORWARD SOLUTIONS. I JUST WALKED IN ON THE END OF THIS, BUT I'VE SPOKEN TO HIM SEVERAL TIMES.

THE CITY'S GOT ITS ITS UTILITIES. THERE'S ALL SORTS OF PROBLEMS. AND I THINK HONESTLY, SOMEONE COULD SIT DOWN WITH HIM AND SAY, HOW DO WE GO FORWARDS? BUT IT'S BEEN MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE CITY. THAT'S NEVER THE FIRST CONVERSATION. THE FIRST CONVERSATION IS WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG. IT'S NOT US, AND THAT'S JUST NOT PROGRESSIVE. EVERYONE'S GOING TO DO SOMETHING WRONG, EVERYONE'S GOING TO SCREW UP, AND PEOPLE ARE GOING TO USE WORDS THAT CAN BE CONSTRUED IN ANY SORT OF WAY. NONE OF THAT MATTERS. THERE HAS TO BE SOME SORT OF ROUTE FORWARD, AND NO ONE'S GOING TO BE HAPPY UNTIL THAT IS THE FIRST FOCUS. WE'RE GOING TO GO DO CODE COMPLIANCE. WE'RE GOING TO DO ENFORCEMENT. WE'RE GOING TO DO DEVELOPMENT. WHAT IS THE PATH FORWARD THAT IS MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL FOR EVERYONE INVOLVED? OTHER OTHERWISE EVERYONE'S GOING TO BE OFF AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE OF THIS PIECE. ANY OTHER CITIZENS WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? HEARING NONE, I'LL COME BACK TO COUNCIL. MAYOR PRO

[02:55:04]

PUT YOUR MOST COMMON ONES TOWARDS THE TOP AND WORK YOUR WAY DOWN. LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE, LOOK AT THE CODE, SEE HOW IT LOOKS. IF SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE TIGHTENED ON IT, SEND IT TO THE APPROPRIATE PLACE, GET IT WRITTEN AND THEN SEND OUT A PUBLIC NOTICE. SAY, HEY, WE ARE GOING TO START ENFORCING THIS. THIS IS OUR NEW CODE. THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. EVERYBODY HAS 90 DAYS TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. PUT IT IN THEIR UTILITY BILL, PUT IT ON A BULLETIN BOARD, PUT IT ON FACEBOOK, PUT IT EVERYWHERE. AND THEN AFTER 90 DAYS, START HAVING A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER ACTUALLY DRIVE IT AROUND. DON'T REQUIRE YOUR NEIGHBOR TO REPORT YOU. DRIVE AROUND, LOOK FOR THOSE VIOLATIONS. THEN IF YOU COME ACROSS A VIOLATION, TALK TO THEM, EDUCATE THEM, HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THEM. HELP THEM UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S A SAFETY CONCERN THAT YOU KNOW THAT THE PILE OF TRASH NEEDS TO BE PICKED UP, OR WHY IT COULD BE A FIRE HAZARD. LET'S TALK TO THEM. LET'S EDUCATE THEM. DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO BRING AS MANY PEOPLE INTO COMPLIANCE AS WE POSSIBLY CAN, AND THEN HAVE A PLAN OF ACTION ON HOW TO ENFORCE THEM. THEN GO TO YOUR SECOND ONE. YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THAT IS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS, BUT GO TO YOUR SECOND ONE. AND WHAT I WANT TO BE VERY CAUTIOUS OF IS I'M NOT LOOKING FOR A PENDULUM SWING. I'M NOT LOOKING FOR US TO HAVE NO COMPLIANCE. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE AT FULL COMPLIANCE. AND IT'S LIKE DRIVING THROUGH JONESTOWN AT 8:00 AT NIGHT. YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GETTING STOPPED. I'M NOT LOOKING FOR THAT EITHER. RIGHT. THERE'S THAT SWEET SPOT OF WE'RE WAY OVER HERE AND WE JUST GOT A SWING JUST EVER SO PERFECT. I THINK ONE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IS ACTUALLY SUFFICIENT.

WE'RE NOT THAT BIG OF A TOWN. I'M NOT LOOKING TO SWING IT THAT MUCH. RIGHT? JUST ENOUGH SO THAT IF THERE'S A PROBLEM, PEOPLE KNOW THERE'S A MECHANISM THAT WORKS. IT MAY TAKE US A YEAR TO GO THROUGH ALL OF OUR CODES AND SAY, OKAY, THIS IS OUR NUMBER ONE. THIS IS OUR NUMBER TWO, NUMBER THREE. BUT OVER THE COURSE OF A COUPLE OF YEARS, IF PEOPLE KNOW THAT IT'S COMING DOWN THE LINE AND YOU EDUCATE THEM AND THEN YOU EVENTUALLY WILL, YOU WILL ENFORCE, I THINK PEOPLE WILL JUST NATURALLY COME INTO COMPLIANCE. SO THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DO IF IT WAS ME. I WOULD PUT TOGETHER A PLAN OF ACTION LIKE THAT. CHARLES MAYOR, I'LL RESTATE MY POSITION. I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE THIS COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT THE 24 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. IT'S AN UPGRADE FROM OUR CURRENT CODE, THE 2015 NOT CHANGE ANY ORDINANCES. JUST HAVE THE CAVEAT IN THERE THAT IF THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE AND THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE OVERRIDES. THAT GIVES STAFF CLEAR DIRECTION ON WHAT'S THERE.

IT WILL LET THE PUBLIC KNOW WHAT'S BEING ENFORCED. TAKES ALL THE QUESTIONS OUT OF IT.

I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 23 YEARS. WELL, 2003. SO HOWEVER LONG THAT WAS THAT I GOT CERTIFIED AS A CODE ENFORCEMENT LICENSE OR LICENSE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. AND I WOULD SAY PROBABLY 85 TO 90% OF THE PEOPLE, AS SOON AS THEY GET THAT FIRST LETTER, NOTICING THAT THEY'RE IN VIOLATION, IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A VIOLATION OR IT'S NOT A SUMMONS TO COURT OR ANYTHING. IT'S JUST TO ALERT THEM OF THAT VIOLATION. I WOULD SAY 85 TO 90% OF THEM GO, COME BACK TO ME. OR THEY DID TO ME AND SAY, WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS A VIOLATION. WE'LL TAKE CARE OF IT. HOW MANY DAYS DO WE HAVE? AND THEY TAKE CARE OF IT BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT'S WHAT WE WANT IS COMPLIANCE. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO GENERATE REVENUE, NOT OUT HERE PICKING ON PEOPLE. AND CODE ENFORCEMENT HAS NOT BEEN DONE FAIRLY IN THIS TOWN FOR A WHILE.

FROM WHAT I CAN TELL, IN THE NINE MONTHS I'VE BEEN HERE, I'VE BEEN WORKING ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS, HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY FOCUS, BUT WHAT THINGS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO ME, IT WAS NOT DONE FAIRLY INCONSISTENT. THERE'S BEEN NO FAIRNESS AND NO CONSISTENCY. I DO NOT BLAME THAT ON ALL OF MY STAFF. IT'S JUST THEY WERE FOLLOWING THE DIRECTIONS THEY WERE GIVEN AND THEY WEREN'T BEING GIVEN CLEAR DIRECTIONS ON WHAT THEY NEEDED TO BE DOING. THANK YOU. CHARLES. YEAH, I'LL CHIME IN THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK ONE OF THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCES SINCE BECOMING MAYOR, FROM BEING COUNCIL MEMBERS, I SPENT MORE TIME IN CITY HALL. SO I JUST KIND OF SEE MORE OF WHAT THE STAFF AND EVERYBODY IS DOING.

AND WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT CHARLES HAS A DEEP BACKGROUND IN THIS AND HE HAS WORKED ON IT.

I, I TEND TO GO TO PEOPLE'S HOUSES WHEN I GET EMAILS ABOUT CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUES. DAVID, I'VE BEEN TO YOUR GUYS'S PROPERTY LINES. I'VE BEEN TO YOURS. AND WHAT I'VE BEEN

[03:00:04]

AND THERE'S A FEW LONGSTANDING ONES THAT HE AND I BOTH GET MESSAGES ABOUT, AND WE'RE BOTH TALKING TO THEM. AND I THINK TO I THINK IT WAS COUNCILOR CHAVARRIAS POINT, OR MAYBE IT WAS THE MAYOR PRO TEM. I THINK PEOPLE JUST DON'T REALIZE THAT THINGS ARE BEING WORKED ON BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT SEEING AN IMMEDIATE RESPONSE. THEY THINK THEY MADE THE COMPLAINT, THE CITY COMES OUT, BOOM, IT SHOULD BE OVER AFTER THAT. AND IT JUST DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY. THE STATE LAW TELLS YOU THERE'S CERTAIN CRITERIA THAT YOU HAVE TO DO, AND A PROCESS THAT YOU HAVE TO DO AT FIRST. AND IT'S KIND OF LIKE MY STEPDAD ALWAYS TOLD ME, YOU KNOW, DON'T DON'T EMPTY THE DISHWASHER UNLESS YOUR MOM IS THERE TO SEE IT. IF SHE DOESN'T, IT NEVER HAPPENED.

SO I THINK THAT'S KIND OF HOW CODE COMPLIANCE IS. IF THAT PERSON DOESN'T SEE YOU GO AND DO SOMETHING, THEY JUST DON'T THINK IT'S HAPPENING. BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT IT IS. THERE'S CERTAINLY AN IMPROVEMENT THAT THAT CAN AND NEEDS TO HAPPEN. MY MY ONE QUESTION FOR CHARLES THEN IS, IS BECAUSE I KIND OF SEE AN IN BETWEEN BETWEEN WHAT MR. BENNEFIELD AND YOU ARE SAYING, I WANT TO SEE THESE ORDINANCES CLEANED UP. I'VE ALWAYS VIEWED THE UDC PROCESS AS WE'RE GOING TO REORGANIZE THAT KIND OF STUFF, AND THINGS ARE GOING TO GET FLAGGED. AND MY HOPE WAS RIGHT AFTER THAT WHOLE PROCESS ENDS, THERE'S MAYBE THERE'S SOME OVERLAP. NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH AND CLEAN UP THOSE THINGS THAT YOU ALL FLAGGED. THAT'S WHAT I HAD ALWAYS VIEWED. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE'S DOING. I DON'T THINK SO. BUT I ALWAYS IDENTIFIED AS WE'RE ORGANIZING, WE'RE CLEANING. NOW YOU MOVE ON TO FIX THE ORDINANCES. AND THAT'S WHERE I REALLY DO HOPE WE GET LIKE A BIG BULK OF THEM.

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

THAT'LL CLEAN A LOT OF IT UP. THIS IS JUST GIVING US THE ABILITY TO WHERE THERE'S WHEN THERE'S CONFLICT, WE'VE GOT SOMETHING TO GO BACK TO BECAUSE LIKE RIGHT NOW I'VE GOT TWO DIFFERENT ORDINANCES. ONE SAYS 24IN ON WEEDS AND ONE SAYS 12IN ON WEEDS. SO WHICH WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO GO BY? 24 OR 12? ME PERSONALLY, I'M GOING TO GO BY 12. BUT IF I'VE GOT AN ORDINANCE OVER HERE THAT SAYS 24, AS SOON AS I ISSUE A CITATION TO THIS PERSON BECAUSE THEY REFUSED TO MOW, THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK TO ME AND SAYS, WELL, THIS WEED'S ONLY 23.5IN TALL. YOUR ORDINANCE SAYS 24, AND YOU REFERENCED 12 IN YOUR LETTER TO ME. SO FROM A PROCESS STANDPOINT, DO WE NEED TO PASS AN ORDINANCE THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO USE THIS GUIDELINE THAT THE NEW ONE OR HOW IS THE CURRENT ONE USED? WE WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE NOW THAT SAYS WE HAVE ADOPTED THE 2015 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. IT'S GOT A FEW LITTLE THINGS IN THERE WHERE YOU TAKE SOME OF THE COMMITTEES AND STUFF OUT OF THERE, BUT IT DOES NOT HAVE THE CAVEAT OF WHICH ORDINANCE OVERRIDES THE OTHER. SO, MAYOR, LET ME LET ME HOP IN HERE AND I'LL PIGGYBACK ON WHAT CHARLES SAID FROM A FROM AN ENFORCEMENT STANDPOINT, THE IPMC IS EASIER TO ENFORCE AND IT'S UNIFORM. AND IN THE INTERIM, YOU'RE NOT RECREATING THE WHEEL. SO I MEAN, I'M JUST I'VE GOT EXPERIENCE WITH THAT AS WELL. AND I THINK IT'S EASIER TO ENFORCE THE. SO I WOULD I FULLY SUPPORT WHAT CHARLES SAYS BECAUSE FROM A MUNICIPAL COURT PROSECUTION STANDPOINT, THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE CONSISTENCY AND TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE STANDARD IS AND WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T ENFORCE. AND THAT IS YOU DON'T NEED TO GO RECREATE THE WHEEL WITH THAT WHEN THAT ONE'S PREPACKAGED AND DONE AND EASY TO ENFORCE. THE OTHER THING THAT I'LL SAY IS JUST TO PUT TIMING INTO PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THERE WAS A MENTION OF MAYOR PRO TEM. YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT 120 TO 150 DAYS TO ENFORCEMENT. THAT'S THAT'S WILDLY LOW. AND THE REASON THAT'S WILDLY LOW IS BECAUSE THAT MIGHT GET YOU TO MUNICIPAL COURT. BUT WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER SOMEONE WHO COMES IN AND ASKS FOR MULTIPLE, YOU KNOW, CONTINUANCE AND SETS IT FOR TRIAL. AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST, I THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A PROCESS OVER WHICH AT SOME POINT THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE CONTROL OVER THE TIMING OF WHEN EVERYTHING GETS ACCOMPLISHED. IF SOMEONE WANTS TO GO TO COURT AND THEN THEY HAVE THEIR DUE PROCESS RIGHTS AND THEY GET TO, YOU KNOW, PLAY THAT SYSTEM OUT AND, AND SO FORTH. AND OCCASIONALLY WE HAVE TO REQUEST CONTINUANCES BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE

[03:05:02]

AND THERE'S NO POINT IN WASTING THE CITY'S TIME AND MONEY TO PROSECUTE A CASE THAT WE KNOW WE CAN'T, WE HAVE TO DISMISS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ALL OF THE EVIDENCE OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE. SO SO THERE'S A IT'S A MULTI-LAYERED PROCESS. BUT I THINK CHARLES'S RECOMMENDATION IS, IS A VERY GOOD ONE. I'M FAMILIAR WITH THAT CODE AS WELL. IT'S EASY TO PROSECUTE AND EASY TO UNDERSTAND. AND MAYBE THAT'S NOT WHAT IT IS FOREVER, BUT BUT AS A, AS A TEMPORARY KIND OF THING TO GET YOU INTO SOMETHING ELSE, I THINK THAT'S A VERY GOOD IDEA. BUT I JUST WANTED TO PUT EVERYONE, PUT YOU ALL KIND OF AN IDEA THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS AT THE STAFF LEVEL AND THE ISSUANCE OF CITATIONS AND EVERYTHING. BUT THERE'S A WHOLE OTHER SEPARATE PART OF THE PROCESS THAT IT GETS TO THE COURT. AND SO. ALL RIGHT, SO ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU, CHARLES. I VIEW CODE COMPLIANCE AS DEEPLY PERSONAL. I THINK YOU SEE IT'S YOUR PEOPLE'S PROPERTY. IT'S INCIDENTS WITH THEIR NEIGHBORS.

YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO GET 100% PEOPLE HAPPY WITH WHAT YOU'RE DOING. SO HOW DO YOU GO BETWEEN FOLLOWING THOSE GUIDELINES, BUT ALSO TREATING PEOPLE LIKE HUMAN BEINGS AND RESPECTING THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS? HOW DO YOU BALANCE THAT? BECAUSE SOME WILL LOOK AT THAT AND SAY, YOU'RE NOT UNIFORMLY ENFORCING THIS, AND OTHERS WILL SAY YOU'RE BEING TOO HARSH OR SOME WILL BE TOO SOFT. HOW DO YOU HOW HAVE YOU SEEN THAT BALANCE IN THE PAST? THERE'S NEVER A GOOD BALANCE BECAUSE YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE SOMEBODY THAT'S NOT HAPPY. THE BEST LUCK I'VE HAD IS GO OUT AND ACTUALLY TALK TO THE PEOPLE. I'VE HAD PEOPLE THAT HAVE CURSED ME AND CALLED AT MY HOUSE AT 530 IN THE MORNING WHEN I WENT OUT, CARRIED THE CODE BOOK OUT THERE WITH ME, SIT DOWN WITH THEM AND TALK TO THEM AND SHOWED THEM WHAT THE PROCESS IS, WHY WE'RE NOT OUT THERE JUST IMMEDIATELY WRITING CITATIONS AND STUFF. I WOULD SAY PROBABLY 95% OF THE TIME, I WAS ABLE TO COME TO A CONSENSUS WITH THE COMPLAINANT THAT WE COULD GET THIS WORKED OUT AND THAT THE PROCESS WAS MOVING FORWARD. IT'S A MATTER OF COMMUNICATION. YOU'VE GOT TO COMMUNICATE. YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE IT EASY FOR THE PEOPLE TO FILE A COMPLAINT, BECAUSE NOT EVERYBODY LIKES TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THEIR NEIGHBOR. I MEAN, BECAUSE IT CREATES A PROBLEM WHEN YOU WHEN YOUR NEIGHBOR'S COMPLAINING ABOUT YOUR NEIGHBOR, IT CREATES A PROBLEM. BUT IF YOU'VE GOT A PROACTIVE CODE ENFORCEMENT, WE'RE GOING AROUND AND SAY, OH, YOU KNOW WHAT? LOOK, THERE'S A JUNK VEHICLE IN THIS YARD. WE NEED TO SEND THEM A LETTER TO WHERE THEY NEED TO GET THAT VEHICLE MOVED OR WHATEVER. THEN THE NEIGHBOR DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THE COMPLAINANT, BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE CASES WHERE THE NEIGHBOR HAS TO BE THE COMPLAINANT. AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION IS, TO ME, THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN A POLICY DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD AT THE STATE LEVEL TOO. AT THE MUNICIPAL LEVEL IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN THE STATE LEVEL, THAT YOU HAVE SOME ORDINANCES THAT ARE VIEWED AS, THIS IS THE TOOL THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR TOOL BELT WHEN YOU GO TO THAT YARD TO GET THEM TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. BUT SOME PEOPLE VIEW THAT AS YOU ARE COMPLETELY BOUND TO FOLLOW THAT EXACTLY 100%. SO AGAIN, I'M ASKING QUESTIONS HERE BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN IN THIS WORLD. HOW IS THAT REALLY BEST HANDLED? I MEAN, DO YOU HAVE ANY LEEWAY TO USE THESE AS TOOLS IN YOUR TOOL BELT? ARE YOU GOING THERE SAYING, SORRY, THIS IS HOW IT'S WRITTEN? I HAVE TO GO ENTIRELY BY THIS AND YOU HAVE NO SAY IN IT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS ALWAYS TAUGHT AS A FIRE INSPECTOR AND EVERYTHING, ESPECIALLY ENFORCING FIRE CODES AND STUFF, NFPA IS NOT LAW. IT'S A GUIDE. IT'S TO GIVE YOU THE GOOD DIRECTION OF WHAT YOU GOT TO GO ON. I LOOK AT THE CODES THE SAME WAY. IT'S A GUIDE TO HELP GET YOU IN THE WHERE YOU NEED TO GET GET THINGS AT. AND THAT'S HOW YOU TREAT IT WITH THE CITIZENS. YOU JUST EDUCATE THEM AND COMMUNICATE TO THEM, LOOK, THIS IS A GUIDE. IT'S NOT WRITTEN IN STONE THAT WE HAVE TO DO THIS. IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN EVERYBODY THAT'S SPEEDING DOWN THE HIGHWAY, THAT'S ONE MILE OVER THE SPEED LIMIT SHOULD BE GETTING STOPPED AND WRITTEN A CITATION. BUT YOU KNOW, I KNOW WHEN I WORKED PATROL, WE GAVE EVERYBODY 7 TO 10 MILES OVER THE SPEED LIMIT BEFORE THEY GOT STOPPED. SO IT'S JUST BECAUSE IT'S A LAW OR AN ORDINANCE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME HEAVY HANDED AND ENFORCE IT. I THINK I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. IT DOES NOT. THAT WASN'T JUST USELESS QUESTIONS. I WAS HELPING ME GET TO THE ANSWER THAT MR. BENFIELD'S ASKING ME TO ASK. THAT IS THE TYPE OF CODE ENFORCEMENT THAT I THINK I SUPPORT. I THINK YOU HAVE THAT AS GUIDES YOU AS A PROFESSIONAL AND YOUR STAFF AS PROFESSIONALS. YOU GO OUT TO EACH INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY AND YOU ASSESS IT YOURSELVES AND YOU DECIDE WHAT IS FOLLOWING THOSE GUIDELINES AND FOLLOWING THE LAW AND WHAT'S DOING BEST BY THE CITIZENS. AND THAT'S YOUR PORTION OF IT. I THINK, FOR COUNCIL, MY HOPE IS THAT WE, AGAIN, WE NEED TO REALLY COME BACK AND FIX THESE ORDINANCES AND ACTUALLY DO IT AND DO IT IN A VERY ORGANIZED WAY. AND THE SECOND PART THAT I WOULD SAY IS THIS IS BOTH A TIP OF WHAT TO DO AND MAYBE WHAT I'M ASKING PEOPLE NOT TO DO. AND THAT IS IF YOU'RE RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL ANYWHERE IN ANY CITY IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY, AND YOU

[03:10:02]

GOOD JOB. WHAT I ASK COUNCIL MEMBERS TO DO, THEY'RE RUNNING OUT THERE. DON'T DO IT BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS GIVING FALSE HOPE TO THE PEOPLE WHO WANT STRICTER CODE ENFORCEMENT, AND YOU'RE GIVING FALSE HOPE TO THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT IT. IT'S AN AMBIGUOUS THING THAT'S REALLY HARD TO WORK ON. AND I JUST ASK THAT YOU DON'T POLITICIZE IT AND THAT'S IT.

MISS CHAVARRIA, I'LL SAY, I REALLY DID LIKE THE IDEA OF BRINGING THE 2030 MOST IMPORTANT ITEMS FORWARD, MAYBE DOING WHAT THEY CALL LIKE A ROUND UP CAMPAIGN, KIND OF PUT THE CITY ON NOTICE. NOW THAT WE'RE IN SPRING, WE'RE GOING TO START SEEING WEEDS AND GRASS AND EVERYTHING GROW. WOULDN'T BE A BAD IDEA TO SAY, HEY, THESE ARE WHAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON BEAUTIFICATION. YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT YOUR GRASS IS GROWING, YOU GOT DOWNED TREES, YOU'VE GOT JUNK VEHICLES, A LITTLE BIT OF BACK HISTORY. WHEN I WAS WORKING IN OR LIVED IN GALVESTON, THEY, THEY WOULD SEND OUT KIND OF LIKE A ROUNDUP, YOU KNOW, THE CITY WOULD DO IT FOR WARRANTS FOR, FOR PEOPLE KIND OF PUT THEM ON NOTICE. HEY, YOU GOT 90 DAYS TO COME IN VOLUNTARY SURRENDER, YOU KNOW, PAY YOUR DUES OR GET ON A PAYMENT PLAN OR WHATNOT. AND CODE COMPLIANCE WOULD DO THE SAME THING. HEY, WE KNOW YOU GOT DEAD SHRUBS, TREES, RODENT INFESTATION, MOSQUITOES, AND, YOU KNOW, OLD TIRES OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT. JUNK VEHICLES OR VEHICLES THAT DIDN'T HAVE REGISTRATION PARKED IN DRIVEWAYS OR ON DIRT KIND OF JUST GAVE THE CITY, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE TO COME INTO VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE, BUT ALSO A HEADS UP, HEY, AFTER, YOU KNOW, 90 DAYS, CAN'T SAY THAT YOU DIDN'T KNOW KIND OF THING. AND YOU WILL BE GETTING NOTICED AFTER THAT. IT WAS A GREAT IDEA. AND IT REALLY KIND OF HELPED BRING ABOUT A LITTLE BIT OF COMMUNITY PRIDE TOO, BECAUSE IT KIND OF GOT EVERYBODY GOING OUT, YOU KNOW, LIKE MY NEIGHBOR DOWN THE STREET, THEY'VE HAD THAT VEHICLE IN THEIR YARD FOR, YOU KNOW, SIX YEARS. AND I WONDER WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT. MAYBE THEY NEED HELP. MAYBE THEY NEED IT TOWED OFF. MAYBE THEY CAN GET IT, SELL IT FOR 500 BUCKS, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT THAT. IT CAN HELP THE COMMUNITY, COULD HELP THEM EACH OTHER IF THEY REALIZE THAT WE ACTUALLY CARED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE WAY THAT IT LOOKS. AND THEN, OF COURSE, I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF THE I PMC THAT IS, I THINK, SOMETHING THAT COULD BRIDGE US UNTIL WE GET THE CDC TAKEN CARE OF. AND THE QUICKER WE CAN GET THAT APPROVED, THE BETTER. THAT WAY WE CAN PUT IT ON, YOU KNOW, PUT IT ON THE ON THE WEB. AND THAT WAY THERE'S REALLY NO QUESTION AS TO WHICH WHICH ONE'S ALLOWED, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE PMC IS 10 OR 12IN FOR GRASS AND GRASS AND WEEDS.

CITY COUNCIL HAS TO HAS TO INSERT THAT INTO THE SECTION IT GOES IN. BUT THE 2015 THAT WAS ADOPTED, IT'S 12IN. OKAY. SO YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S BASICALLY MY OPINION ON IT, BUT I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS INTERPRETING THE LAW OR ORDINANCES AS THEY GO. SO I KNOW YOU SAID THE SPEED LIMITS AND WHATNOT, BUT I THINK THAT IF THE PERSON'S BEEN INFORMED AND THEY'RE, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD JUST KEEP LETTING THEM GET WARNINGS. CHARLES. NO, THANK YOU. I'LL SHARE WITH YOU. I INTENDED TO SHARE THIS AT OUR NEXT WORKSHOP ON APRIL 2ND IS A PLAN THAT I'VE BEEN WORKING ON ON CODE ENFORCEMENT. AND THAT'S BASICALLY WE'RE GOING TO MAKE CIRCLES OUT FROM CITY HALL AND WORK OUR WAY OUT TO WORK ON CODE CODE COMPLIANCE. I'LL SAY THAT WE HAD MENTIONED THIS BEFORE ABOUT NEIGHBOR UPON NEIGHBOR. AND THEN MY, YOU KNOW, MY EXPERIENCE, WE ACTUALLY HAD A CITY MARSHAL THAT WOULD DO THE DRIVER LIKE DO DRIVE AROUNDS. AND IT KIND OF IT HELPED. BUT THEN THERE WAS A COUPLE OF PEOPLE THAT PUSHED BACK THAT SAID WE DIDN'T WANT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY, CITY EMPLOYEES WASTING GAS DRIVING AROUND LOOKING FOR A PROBLEM. SO WE'RE GOING TO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HIT BACK ON BOTH OF THOSE. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GOING TO BE LIKE, WE DON'T WANT YOU WASTING GAS OR YOU'RE JUST LOOKING FOR A PROBLEM RATHER THAN, YOU KNOW, IT ACTUALLY BEING A PROBLEM. SO I CAN SEE THAT BOTH SIDES OF IT, BUT I ALSO CAN FEEL FOR THE NEIGHBORS THAT WANT TO SAY SOMETHING, BUT DON'T. AND THEN OF COURSE, YOU HAVE THE NEIGHBORS THAT, YOU KNOW, SAY SOMETHING ABOUT EVERYBODY. SO YOU'RE GOING TO EITHER WAY, YOU'RE GOING TO GET PUSHBACK AND YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT. MR. HALL, JUST A QUICK QUESTION. WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ADOPTING CHARLES'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT CODE? I THINK THAT'S A VERY QUICK AND AND HELPFUL POSITIVE STEP FORWARD IN THE INTERIM BEFORE WE HAVE A CHANCE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF OUR CODES AND RESOLVE CONFLICTS, AGENDIZE AND PUBLISH IT FOR BECAUSE IT BECAUSE IT CONTEMPLATES CRIMINAL PENALTIES. SO YOU HAVE TO PROPERLY AGENDA IT AND YOU HAVE TO NOTICE IT IN THE PAPER AND SO FORTH BEFORE IT BECOMES EFFECTIVE, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER FINE BASED REGULATION. SO IT'S NO DIFFERENT. MR. PRINCE. YEAH.

[03:15:11]

THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENCE THERE. BUT ON THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF DIFFERENCE. QUICK QUESTION, CHARLES, I KNOW YOU SAID THAT CURRENTLY WE EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE THE IPC FROM 2015 IN OUR ORDINANCE IS NAMED IN OUR ORDINANCES. THERE'S. THE LANGUAGE IN THERE IS NOT SPECIFIC SAYING ONE SUPERSEDES THE OTHER. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT IN THERE. CORRECT. YOU JUST MAKE THAT PART OF YOUR ORDINANCE WHERE YOU ADOPT THE 2024 AND HAVE THAT CLARIFYING LANGUAGE ON THERE. YES. OKAY. MR. RENFIELD, SO JUST TO THROTTLE THE DISCUSSION BACK A LITTLE BIT, YOU KNOW, YOU BRING UP THE POINT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE DRIVING ONE MILE AN HOUR OVER AND GETTING VIOLATIONS. I, I'M NOT LOOKING FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS PERSONALLY TO BE GOING OUT THERE WITH A RULER AND SAYING, HEY, IF I PULL THIS PIECE OF GRASS TAUNT, IT'S GOING TO BE 24IN AND YOU'RE IN VIOLATION. YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE SIX FEET TALL GRASS, THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE WE DEAL WITH. I MEAN, WHEN WHEN YOU HAVE ONE OFFICER WORKING THE STREET AND ONE GUY'S GOING ONE HOUR, ONE MILE AN HOUR OVER, ANOTHER ONE'S GOING 30, WHO DO YOU PULL OVER? YOU KNOW, I MEAN, LET'S START WITH OUR MOST SERIOUS, EGREGIOUS SITUATIONS. FIRST, LET'S EDUCATE, LET'S TEACH THEM, LET'S PUT OUT NOTICES, AND THEN WE WORK OUR WAY BACKWARDS, YOU KNOW, AND IF WE'RE OUT THERE LOOKING, IF OUR CODE IS SO SPECIFIC THAT WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S 12 TO 24IN, WELL, THAT'S FINE. LET'S DEAL WITH THE PEOPLE THAT ARE AT 36. LET'S NOT EVEN FOCUS ON THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THE THAT ARE ON THE LINE. YOU KNOW, IN FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, IF THAT'S OUR PROBLEM, THEN GREAT, WE'LL FIX THAT. BUT ALL I'M SAYING IS, IS I DO WANT CODE COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT. I JUST DON'T WANT TO GO AFTER PEOPLE WITH A TAPE MEASURE. YOU KNOW, YOU MADE A COMMENT EARLIER ABOUT USING DISCRETION, AND I CERTAINLY WOULD SUPPORT THAT. YEAH. I CAN ASSURE YOU DISCRETION WILL BE USED. AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE. I HAVE NEVER GOTTEN OUT THERE WITH A TAPE MEASURE TO MEASURE HOW TALL A WEED IS. I LOOK AT IT.

IS IT A FIRE OR A SAFETY VIOLATION? AND IS IT IS IT RODENT HARBORAGE? THAT'S THE MAIN THINGS. IT'S MORE HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES THAT I FOCUS ON THE MOST. A CAR THAT'S NOT DISMANTLED AND HAS AN EXPIRED REGISTRATION ON IT. TO ME, THAT'S NOT A JUNK VEHICLE. A JUNK VEHICLE IS IF IT'S GOT FLAT TIRES AND THE REGISTRATION IS OUT. BUT IF IT'S JUST BECAUSE THE REGISTRATION IS OUT, THAT'S TO ME, THAT'S NOT A LEGITIMATE CODE VIOLATION TO SIT THERE AND SEND LETTERS TO SOMEBODY. MR. HINES. I TOLD YOU THE SUNDAY STORY ALREADY. I GOT A CODE LETTER A WHILE BACK, AND IT WAS ABOUT GRASPING TOO HIGH ON THAT EMPTY LOT. AND A COUPLE

[03:20:04]

AND YOU CAN'T SPEED THE LAW IS YOU HAVE TO DRIVE A REASONABLE SPEED. SPEED LIMITS ARE JUST THERE FOR RECOMMENDING THE REASONABLE SPEED. SORRY TO BE A GEEKY LAWYER, BUT. I WILL SAY I ACTUALLY DROVE CHARLES BY MY HOUSE THE OTHER DAY, SO HE ACTUALLY HAS PERSONALLY SEEN SEEN MY HEIGHT OF MY GRASS. I FEEL LIKE WE'VE HAD GOOD DISCUSSION ON THIS. IF WE COULD MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM THAT WILL BE SLIGHTLY CLOSE TO THIS ONE. CAN I ASK JUST ONE MORE QUESTION? CHARLES, YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO USURP ANY KIND OF FINES OR PENALTIES OR AUTHORITIES, ALTHOUGH I DID RECEIVE A MESSAGE THAT A DECISION WAS MADE TO NOT ENFORCE ANY PARKING VIOLATIONS IN TO SARA, AND THAT YOU WERE GOING TO RELY IT SPECIFICALLY TO THE HOA, THAT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS KIND OF A WHOLE DIFFERENT SCENARIO OR SITUATION. CAN YOU IS THERE ANY TRUTH TO THOSE COMMENTS? THE ONLY COMMENT I MADE IS IF IT WAS NOT A CODE VIOLATION OR CITY VIOLATION ON THE PARKING, THAT THE HOA HAS GOT SOME KIND OF RULES WHERE YOU CAN'T PARK ON THE STREET, THAT'S A H O A PROBLEM THAT IS NOT A CITY OF LAGO VISTA PROBLEM. THANK YOU, MR. I'LL SAY, AS A LAGO VISTA RESIDENT, WE DO HAVE ORDINANCES OUT THERE. OUR RULES OUT THERE, THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE A VEHICLE PARKED OVERNIGHT UNLESS IT'S A SPOT ON THE STREET, UNLESS IT'S A SPECIAL HOLIDAY OR SOME SOME SPECIAL EVENT. AND NORMALLY YOU HAVE TO NOTIFY THE HOA. BUT WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM OVER THERE WITH PEOPLE PARKING ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE STREET, WHICH IS A CODE ENFORCEABLE ACTION. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MAYBE SOME OF THAT ENFORCED. SO PARKING THE WRONG DIRECTION, EVERYBODY WAS LIKE, OH, THAT'S AN HOA VIOLATION. I'M LIKE, ACTUALLY, THAT'S ACTUALLY AGAINST THE LAW. IT'S A CITY THING, BUT WE HAVE A PROBLEM. THE STREETS ARE SO NARROW OVER THERE THAT YOU PARK A VEHICLE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE STREET. YOU CAN'T PASS THROUGH, BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE A LINE OF CARS ON BOTH SIDES, YOU CAN'T. I CAN'T DRIVE MY TITAN THROUGH THERE.

LET'S JUST PUT IT THAT WAY. SO I'VE ACTUALLY HAD TO CALL THE POLICE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT TO ACTUALLY HAVE THEM MOVE FOR HOUSE PARTIES OR GRADUATION PARTIES, TO ACTUALLY KNOCK ON DOORS TO LOCATE OWNERS SO WE CAN, YOU KNOW, MOVE YOUR CAR AROUND THERE SO I COULD GET INTO MY OWN HOUSE. SO THAT WAS A, YOU KNOW, DESIGN DILEMMA. I DON'T THINK THEY EVER ANTICIPATED THAT MANY PEOPLE. I MEAN, MOST OF THOSE VEHICLES ARE MOST OF THOSE HOUSES HAVE THREE CAR GARAGES, LONG DRIVEWAYS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY THEY DON'T USE THEIR GARAGES FOR THEIR VEHICLES. I WILL TELL YOU THAT THAT IS A COMMON ISSUE ACROSS THE STATE. ON PARKING, ON THE STREET, IN NEIGHBORHOODS, ESPECIALLY WITH CURB AND GUTTER STREETS, BECAUSE THE STANDARD IS A 30 FOOT WIDE STREET CURB TO CURB. AND IF YOU PARK PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET, IT'S A TIGHT FIT. TO ME, THAT'S A DESIGN STANDARD THAT FALLS INTO DEVELOPMENT CODES. STREETS NEED TO BE WIDER. SOUNDS LIKE WE'LL HAVE SOMETHING ON APRIL 2ND ABOUT THIS, RIGHT? CHARLES PROBABLY WIND UP BEING THE SECOND MEETING IN APRIL BECAUSE WE GOT TO DO THE NOTICES. BUT YES, WE WILL HAVE A WORKSHOP ITEM ON THIS AT APRIL 2ND. OKAY, MOVING ON TO ITEM 12 TWO

[XII.2. Discussion and possible direction regarding short-term rental and event venue regulatory options.]

[03:25:07]

BUT IF YOU HAVE AN OVERLAY DISTRICT THAT DOESN'T EXACTLY TO CONFORM TO EXISTING RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY, THEN YOU'RE PICKING AND CHOOSING, WELL, YOUR RESIDENTIALLY ZONED AND YOU'RE IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, BUT YOUR RESIDENTIALLY ZONED AND YOU'RE OUT OF THE OVERLAY DISTRICT. AND THE QUESTION IS, DOES THAT DISTINCTION VIOLATE WHAT SOME COURTS HAVE SAID IS A FUNDAMENTAL PROPERTY? RIGHT. AND I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT BECAUSE NO COURT HAS FIRMLY OPINED ON THAT SO FAR. THERE ARE SUGGESTIONS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN YOU CAN DO IT IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. BUT THE OTHER THING ABOUT AN OVERLAY DISTRICT, YOU DON'T HAVE ONE. NOW, YOU WOULD ADOPT A NEW ONE. LET'S SAY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU CAN'T DO IS MAKE IT RETROACTIVE. AND THERE'S OTHER CASE LAW THAT TALKS ABOUT THAT.

SO TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU HAVE EXISTING STRS THAT ARE OUTSIDE ANY OVERLAY DISTRICT YOU CREATE, THEY GET TO CONTINUE OPERATING. THE OTHER QUESTION IS, WELL, JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT OPERATING AS STRS. NOW, IF IT IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT AND THEY SAY, OKAY, WELL, YOU'VE PASSED YOUR OVERLAY DISTRICT, THAT'S GREAT. BUT NOW I WANT TO EXERCISE MY FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

[03:30:03]

THEN THEY GO, BUT THAT'S A FUNDAMENTAL, RIGHT? I, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, SO THESE ARE AREAS THAT ARE, THAT CONTINUE TO GET ADDRESSED BY COURTS. AND THESE ARE THINGS THAT CONTINUE TO GET ADDRESSED BY THE LEGISLATURE. AND, YOU KNOW, SO, SO OVERLAY DISTRICTS ARE A COMMON ZONING TOOL. AND YOU CAN CERTAINLY USE THEM TO CLASSIFY STRS AS A. AS, AS A SEPARATE USE, AS YOU ALREADY DO. BUT, BUT YOU KNOW, THE CAUTION IS IF YOU ALLOW THEM IN CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL ZONED AREAS, BUT YOU DON'T ALLOW THEM IN OTHER RESIDENTIALLY ZONED AREAS. NOW THAT SAID, YOU PASS THE LAW. IT IS PRESUMPTIVELY VALID UNTIL CHALLENGED AND OVERTURNED BY A COURT AND YOU'VE EXHAUSTED ALL OF YOUR APPEALS. SO, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, YOU CAN DO IT, BUT JUST BECAUSE OTHER CITIES DO IT OR MIGHT EXERCISE IT, THAT WOULD JUST, YOU KNOW, IT, THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT CAN'T BE CHALLENGED. AND IT JUST TAKES ONE CHALLENGE TO BE AN EXPENSIVE TYPE OF THING. BUT CERTAINLY, I MEAN, I THINK, I THINK THE, THE TREND FOR MOST CITIES IN STR AND WE'VE TALKED INTERNALLY AT MY FIRM ABOUT THIS A LOT BECAUSE I MEAN, WE REPRESENT WE, I DON'T KNOW, 100 PLUS CITIES ACROSS THE STATE OF TEXAS. AND SO OBVIOUSLY IT'S AN ISSUE THAT COMES UP A LOT. AND THE CONSENSUS IS THAT THAT MOST OF THE COMPLAINTS AND THIS IS WHERE COURTS HAVE COME DOWN. MOST OF YOUR COMPLAINTS ABOUT STRS RELATE TO CODE VIOLATIONS, NOISE PARTIES, WHATEVER. I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THAT IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE A STR REGULATION THAT SAYS IF YOU'RE AN STR, YOU CAN'T HAVE BIG PARTIES. BUT IF I'M NOT AN STR AND MY KID GRADUATES FROM HIGH SCHOOL AND I WANT TO HAVE 150 PEOPLE OVER TO MY HOUSE TO CELEBRATE THIS GRADUATION, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT I CAN DISCERN A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO SITUATIONS, BUT IF IT'S AN STR AND WE OUTLAW IT IN ONE INSTANCE, BUT NOT IN THE OTHER, YOU'RE YOU'RE GOING TO GET CHALLENGED AND I THINK YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO LOSE. SO THERE ARE DIFFICULTIES IN TRYING TO PLACE LIMITS ON HOW PEOPLE CAN USE THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY IN THAT REGARD. SO THOSE ARE MY CAUTIONARY TALES.

YOU KNOW, I THINK I THINK I THINK THE BEST WAY TO GO ABOUT REGULATING STRS IS TO USE HAVE IF YOU HAVE A A CONSISTENT AND. YOU KNOW, EASILY ENFORCEABLE CODE WITH CLEAR RULES AND GUIDELINES AND EXPECTATIONS AND LIMITS AND SO FORTH. AND YOU, YOU, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE GET UPSET ABOUT. YOU KNOW, THE NICE QUIET FOLKS WHO ARE AT AN STR FOR A WEEK THAT ACT LIKE, YOU KNOW, ANYONE ELSE WHO LIVES THERE, NOBODY CARES ABOUT THAT. THEY CARE ABOUT THE BIG PARTIES. THEY CARE ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, THE HOUSE THAT GETS RENTED OUT AND GETS USED AS A, YOU KNOW, A MASSIVE, YOU KNOW, ALL NIGHT RAVE. THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE CARE ABOUT. AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO THE CLEANEST WAY, GIVEN THE DIRECTION THE COURTS HAVE GONE AND APPEAR TO CONTINUE TO BE GOING. MAYOR PRO TEM SO A LITTLE MORE IN REGARD TO THE STANDING ROOM ONLY, WE ACTUALLY HAD A COUPLE OF SESSIONS AND ONE OF THEM WAS STANDING ROOM ONLY OF PEOPLE THAT HAD STRS WAS THE OTHER SIDE OF THE EQUATION THAT WE HAD AT THE TIME. AND SO CONVERSATIONS PROGRESSED, REGULATING THE IMPACTS, I BELIEVE, IS KIND OF HOW WE'VE SETTLED OVER TIME, OPEN TO HEARING OTHER WAYS THAT WE COULD DO THINGS. BUT BASICALLY, IF WE IF WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CODE WAS CLEAR AND WE DID GO AHEAD AND DO CODE COMPLIANCE ON THE IMPACTS OF THOSE, THAT TENDED TO BE REALLY WHERE THE THE ANGST WAS IN REGARD TO HOW BRAD BULLOCK WAS TALKING. NOW, LASTLY, YOU KNOW, WE DID LOOK AT STRS. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID WAS AT THE TIME I WAS WITH IDAC WAS LOOKING AT SOFTWARE AND HOW YOU CAN IDENTIFY AND ACTUALLY COMMUNICATE AND EDUCATE THESE STRS AS TO, YOU KNOW, CURRENT CODES AND, YOU KNOW, HAVING THE IMPACTS TAKEN CARE OF. THAT FINALLY WAS IMPLEMENTED, SOMETHING WAS PURCHASED. BUT COUNCIL, AS I RECALL IT, I KNOW WE WERE DOING BUDGET AND YOU FELT THE $30,000 PRICE TAG ON IT, YOU KNOW, WAS NOT WORTH GOING AHEAD AND INSTITUTING THAT PARTICULAR SOFTWARE AT THE TIME. AND SO ANYWAY, THAT'S BEEN A PROGRESSION IN TERMS OF WE'VE BEEN LISTENING. YEAH. THE STR AND THEN LATER ON IT WAS A BUDGET THING ABOUT IS IT REALLY PRODUCING WHAT IT IS? AND SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, YOU KNOW,

[03:35:07]

BUT BUT IT GOES BACK TO THE ISSUE EARLIER ABOUT THE CODE ENFORCEMENT. MR. BENEFIELD, YOU SHOULD BE GOING AFTER THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE THREE FOOT TALL WEEDS, RIGHT. WELL, THAT'S WHAT YOU KNOW. I MEAN, YOU SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, GOING AFTER THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE, YOU KNOW, 87 CARS ON THE STREET AND WHO ARE PLAYING, YOU KNOW, EDM MUSIC AT THREE IN THE MORNING, RIGHT? THAT'S, THAT'S, AND THAT'S THE COMPLAINTS THAT PEOPLE HAVE ABOUT STRS. AND SO THAT IS THAT LOW HANGING FRUIT. IF YOU'RE GOING TO ENFORCE, ENFORCE CODE, THAT'S WHAT YOU GO AFTER BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE CLEAR VIOLATIONS. AND, AND I'LL TELL YOU, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT DIDN'T REALLY GET ASKED EARLIER, BUT I'LL JUST THE HARDER ONE OF THE HARDER ORDINANCES TO ENFORCE FROM A PROSECUTION STANDPOINT, BUT THAT GETS THE MOST COMPLAINTS. UNDERSTANDABLY NOISE VIOLATIONS. BUT YOU HAVE TO BE THERE TO HEAR THE NOISE. AND SO, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE SOMEONE WHO CAN GO OUT AND MEASURE IT FROM THE RIGHT DISTANCE AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF, AND THAT'S A HARDER THING. AND, YOU KNOW, IF THEY TURN DOWN THE VOLUME, WHEN YOU KNOW YOUR CODE GETS THERE, THEN WHAT DO YOU DO? SO, SO, BUT, BUT THAT TYPE OF CITIZEN DRIVEN COMPLAINT, THAT'S WHERE IT'S NECESSARY BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE PEOPLE CARE BECAUSE IT'S THREE IN THE MORNING AND THEY WANT TO GO TO SLEEP. OKAY. AND I WOULD ADD ON THE SOFTWARE STUFF, I REMEMBER IT WASN'T JUST ABOUT PRICE. IT WAS IT WAS RELATED. IT WAS ABOUT WHAT WAS THE VALUE WE WERE GETTING FOR THAT PRICE. AND IT WASN'T THAT HIGH. IT, YOU KNOW, WE THOUGHT THAT THERE WERE A TON MORE STARS IN THE COMMUNITY. AND WE DID THE FIRST SCAN AND THERE WEREN'T. AND I THINK THAT THERE WAS ALSO DISCUSSION THAT SOME OF THE OTHER PERMITTING SOFTWARE AND STUFF THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT WANTING COULD DO A LOT OF THAT. AND SO WHY WOULD WE HAVE THAT? BUT THEN ALSO PAY 30 GRAND FOR THAT. SO IT WAS JUST WASN'T THE VALUE. AND THEN WE LEARNED, IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT SCAN FOR HOW MANY YOU CAN PAY SOMEONE TO DO A ONE TIME SCAN OF HOW MANY STARS ARE IN THE COMMUNITY AT ONE TIME. AND SO INSTEAD OF KEEPING THIS ANNUAL CONTRACT,

[03:40:03]

NOW, WHAT YOU CAN'T DO IS YOU CAN'T SAY, OKAY, IF YOU'RE AN STR, YOU GET ONE PERSON PER 70FT■!S, BUT IF YOU'RE A REGULAR HOUSE, YOU GET TWO. YOU CAN'T DO THAT. JUST HAVE ONE STANDARD.

IT IS WHAT IT IS AND THAT'S HOW YOU LIMIT THE OCCUPANCY FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY. AND IT'S IF YOU HAVE 175 PEOPLE IN A, YOU KNOW, STAYING IN A. THEN THEN YOU REGULATE THAT THROUGH A CODE THROUGH COMPLAINTS BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR IT, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IT AND SO FORTH. BUT WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING IS THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC TO AN STR. THAT CAN JUST BE OUR GENERAL. WE ADOPT THAT. IT'S JUST ACROSS THE BOARD UNIVERSAL. AND THAT IS THE MOST DEFENSIBLE AND THE EASIEST THING TO ADOPT AND TO, TO, TO ENFORCE. AND, AND YOU DON'T TREAT STRS DIFFERENTLY IN THAT REGARD, BUT YOU, YOU KNOW, YES, IT'S, BUT IT'S A HEALTH AND SAFETY OCCUPANCY. AND THAT APPLIES THE SAME REGARDLESS OF FAMILIAL STATUS AND ALL OF THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU'RE RELATED, IF YOU'RE PACKING SEVEN PEOPLE INTO A TINY LITTLE ROOM. I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. YES, SIR. ARE THE WAY OUR PERMIT CURRENTLY WORKS WITH STRS IS IN JORDAN. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG ON THIS. THERE'S NO SET RENEWAL ON PEOPLE'S PERMITS. RIGHT. SO I THINK THAT'S TRUE. IS THAT RIGHT? I THINK THAT I THINK WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION. I THINK THAT QUESTION HAS BEEN ASKED BEFORE.

I BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE. BUT I WANT TO DOUBLE CHECK. BUT I THINK THAT'S TRUE THAT THEY DON'T HAVE ONE. THERE'S NOT A RENEWAL. YEAH. FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THERE'S NOT A MECHANISM THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO RENEW YOUR STR. SO IF WE IF IN THE NEW STR ORDINANCE, IT SAYS YOU HAVE TO RENEW EVERY TWO YEARS OR THREE YEARS. I ASSUME THAT ANY PREVIOUS PERMIT HOLDER WOULD JUST HAVE TO ADAPT TO THE NEW RULE. YEAH. I MEAN, THE PURPOSE, THE PURPOSE OF, OF, OF THAT IS I MEAN, YOU'RE OPERATING, YOU'RE OPERATING, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE A HOME BASED BUSINESS, RIGHT? AND THE PURPOSE OF THAT, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T MAKE THE FEE.

CONFISCATORY. BUT IT IS FOR THE SO THAT THEY SELF-IDENTIFY SO THAT YOU GET THEIR TAX MONEY.

AND THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY THE PURPOSE OF IT. AND SO TO HAVE THOSE RENEWALS EVERY SO OFTEN THERE ARE THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S PERMISSIBLE AS LONG AS YOUR FEE STRUCTURE IS STRUCTURED PROPERLY. BUT SOMEBODY COULDN'T SAY, HEY, I GOT A PERMIT. IT'S GOOD FOR INDEFINITE. AND NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'RE SAYING, I GOT TO DO IT EVERY TWO YEARS? YEAH, I THAT'S I, I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO POSE A YOU'RE NOT GRANDFATHERED INTO OLD FEES OR FEE STRUCTURES. THANKS. YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? IF NOT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO THE

[03:45:02]

[XII.1. Discussion regarding proposed revisions to the City of Lago Vista Rules of Procedure.]

BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REDLINE, HERE'S MY RED LINE OF WHAT YOU PROPOSED AS FINAL. AND SO THEN I POSTED ON THE MESSAGE BOARD THE FACT THAT I DID A LINE BY LINE COMPARISON OF THOSE TWO. AND THEN I HAD SOME SUGGESTIONS OF WHAT WE SHOULD DO, WHICH WAS MORE ALONG THE LINES OF MR. STARTING REALLY FROM MR. PSALMS AND THEN SOME THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, HE PROPOSED CUTTING OUT THAT I SAID WE SHOULDN'T. SO I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS READ THROUGH THAT ENOUGH TO COMPREHEND IT ALL, BUT I THINK WE'RE KIND OF IN THIS SPACE THAT YOU'VE GOT TO BENEFIELD PROPOSAL. YOU'VE GOT A SOLID PROPOSAL. YOU GOT A PRINCE PROPOSAL, WHICH IS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THOSE TWO. AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO GET TO CONSENSUS ON ONE OF THOSE THREE OR, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE GO FROM HERE. I DO KNOW THAT WE'VE SPENT OVER MY FIVE YEARS IN THE OFFICE HERE. WE'VE SPENT HUNDREDS OF HOURS ON THIS, I THINK. AND SO I'M NOT INTERESTED IN SPENDING HUNDREDS OF HOURS ON IT. BUT IF WE CAN QUICKLY COME TO SOME CONSENSUS, THAT'S EITHER THE PSALM I'LL CALL EXTREME, WHICH IS IT'S START FROM ZERO AND MAKE IT SUPER, SUPER SIMPLE. THAT'S ONE POSITION THAT'S BEEN THROWN OUT THERE, THE BENEFIELD, WHICH IS PARE IT BACK. AND I DID DO THIS, THAT I THINK OUR EXISTING RULES OF PROCEDURE, IF I REMEMBER THE NUMBERS RIGHT, IS ABOUT 26 PAGES LONG. AND I THINK MR. PSALMS REALLY PARED BACK VERSION WAS MAYBE 6 OR 9 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND MR. BENFIELD'S MARKUP BROUGHT US DOWN TO 16 PAGES. AND SO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THE VERSION I PROPOSED IN BETWEEN IS A 12 PAGE, I DON'T KNOW. BUT, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'RE AT. SO WE'VE GOT AN EXISTING RULES OF PROCEDURE THAT'S 26 PAGES LONG, HAS LOTS OF DETAIL. I THINK THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED OVER MY FIVE YEARS MAKE IT CLEAR TO ME THAT WE, WE AS COUNCIL, NEITHER HAVE THE WILL NOR THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE IN THERE. AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO SIMPLIFY IT, WHICH IS WHERE I CAME DOWN IN MY PROPOSAL. BUT, YOU KNOW, IF IF IT'S GOING TO TAKE MANY HOURS OF, OF HAGGLING OVER THIS IN ORDER TO GET TO A FINAL DOCUMENT, I'D PERSONALLY RATHER JUST SAY, LET'S DROP THE CONVERSATION AND STICK WITH THE 26 PAGES THAT WE'VE GOT WITH ALL OF ITS WARTS. I'LL SAY, I THINK ADAM WAS RIGHT WHERE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE HAD ON THIS. SO I HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW HIS I'VE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW

[03:50:03]

CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YOU REFERENCED A SUPERMAJORITY. I'M NOT REMEMBERING THAT MAYBE INCORRECTLY. DOES THE RULES OF PROCEDURE SAY THAT TO CHANGE THE RULES? OH, WE CHANGED THAT, DIDN'T WE? THAT'S RIGHT. THE LAST TIME WE CHANGED THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, WE SPECIFICALLY CHANGED THAT SO THAT WE DIDN'T GET INTO THIS 4 TO 3 FIGHT OVER CHANGING. YEP, YEP. THAT'S THAT IS A NEW FACT THAT I'D FORGOTTEN ABOUT MR. HALL. WELL, WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT VERSIONS OUT THERE, I'M NOT PREPARED AT THIS MOMENT TO TO MAKE A DECISION ON ANY ONE OF THOSE.

BUT SO FRANKLY, I'M JUST NOT PREPARED TO, TO, TO COMPARE THOSE AND DIGEST THOSE AT THIS PARTICULAR MOMENT. BUT I, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF SIMPLIFYING OUR RULES AND PROCEDURES. I DON'T KNOW THAT THE BARE BONES APPROACH IS THE BEST ONE, OR MAYBE SOME MIDDLE OR MIDDLE APPROACH IS PROBABLY WHERE I WOULD END UP. MR. BANFIELD I AGREE WITH COUNCILOR PRINCE. I JUST, YOU KNOW, I JUST DON'T SEE US GETTING TO A SIX, SIX PERSON VOTE. I MEAN, IF IT WAS AN ABSOLUTE PRIORITY FOR US TO DO THIS, I MEAN, PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, PAUL, YOU AND I COULD, YOU KNOW, DRINK A BEER ONE NIGHT AND MAYBE WE COULD POUND IT OUT AND PRESENT TO COUNCIL SOMETHING THAT ALL THREE OF US WERE UNIFIED ON AND MAYBE WE COULD GET THERE, YOU KNOW, AND SAY, HEY, I'M WILLING TO COMPROMISE HERE AND YOU'RE WILLING TO COMPROMISE HERE, AND IT ONLY MAKES SENSE. THIS GETS REMOVED, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, YIELD SOME FRUIT. BUT TO WHAT MR. PRINCE SAID, I'M JUST NOT INTERESTED IN SPENDING MORE TIME PERSONALLY AND MORE TIME FROM THIS DAIS TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT JUST DOES NOT HAVE A STRONG CHANCE OF PASSING, EVEN THOUGH I DO AGREE THAT HALF THE DOCUMENT PROBABLY OUGHT TO GO. YEAH, I MEAN, WE'LL PROBABLY PUNT THIS TONIGHT, BUT I'LL AGREE WITH MR. PRINCE'S VERSION. MAYOR. MAYOR PRO TEM WELL, JUST IN CASE THE THE THREE OF YOU GUYS GET TOGETHER AND THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A BEER PARTY GOING ON. I DO AGREE, I WOULD LIKE IT SIMPLIFIED. I DON'T THINK WE NEED ALL 26 PAGES. I REALLY WAS I LIKED WHERE COUNCILOR PRINCE WAS GOING. A BIG PART OF THAT WAS DRIVEN BY THE RESEARCH THAT I WAS SEEING IN TERMS OF HOW OTHER CITIES ARE NOW MOVING TOWARDS SIMPLER VERSIONS, BUT THEY ARE ADDING GOVERNANCE GUIDE, GOVERNANCE GUIDE AND A CODE OF CONDUCT ALONG WITH IT. AND THE REASON FOR THAT WAS THAT AS CIRCUMSTANCES AND THINGS EVOLVED, IS THAT IT WAS A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO BRING EXPECTATIONS INTO LINE, A LITTLE BIT EASIER VERSUS HAVING TO CHANGE, YOU KNOW, THE RULES OF PROCEDURE. SO ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST MY $0.02. GENTLEMEN. I'M JUST LETTING YOU ALL KNOW THAT. MR. PRINCE, A SUGGESTION. I THINK SO. SO ADAM AND SHAYNE INVESTED AT THIS POINT, I THINK THE MOST ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD ON THIS. I DID ONE PASS ON IT AND A PRETTY DETAILED REVIEW. THE OTHER THREE OF YOU. WE JUST HEARD FROM MR. SOM THAT HE FELT LIKE WHAT I PROPOSED WAS CLOSE ENOUGH FOR HIM OR THEREABOUTS. SO IF THE OTHER THREE OF YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO PARTICIPATE ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD, REVIEW THAT AND SAY IT'S CLOSE ENOUGH, AND I'D LIKE TO CHANGE THIS ONE LITTLE THING. YOU KNOW, IF IT LOOKS LIKE WE CAN GET TO AT LEAST SIX OUT OF SEVEN, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, FROM WHAT MR. BENEFIELD PROPOSED OR WHETHER IT'S MR. SOM PROPOSED OR WHETHER IT'S WHAT I PROPOSED, IF WE CAN GET TO SIX OUT OF SEVEN ON ONE OF THOSE THREE OR OF SLIGHT VARIANCE, THEN I'D BE INTERESTED IN US FINISHING IT UP. BUT IF YOU KNOW, AFTER IF THE THREE OF YOU ALL COME BACK AND SAY, I WANT THIS MAJOR CHANGE, I WANT THAT MAJOR CHANGE, THEN I THINK IT'S PROBABLY, IN MY VIEW, NOT WORTH US TRYING TO COMPLETE THIS EXERCISE. MR. I'LL SAY I DIDN'T SEE ANY LIKE SIGNIFICANT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES THAT I WOULD MAKE TO YOURS OR, OR ACTUALLY ITEMS. I DO LIKE HIS A LITTLE BIT, HIS VERSION A LITTLE BIT MORE. AND I MAY HAVE ONLY HAVE 1 OR 2 SUGGESTIONS AFTER I HAD COMPARED THAT TO THE, TO THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT, BUT THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO DO IS I UPLOADED IT THE ORIGINAL, AND THEN THAT WAY I CAN PULL IT

[03:55:05]

I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE MR. BENEFIELD. MR. WEST, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO UPLOAD THE VERSION YOU PROPOSED AS WELL? YEAH, I'LL UPLOAD IT. OKAY. WITH THAT THEN I'M GOING TO

[XIII.A. Routine Reports from City Staff.]

YEAH THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WAITING ON IS IS THE IS IT IS THE AUDIT FROM THE AUDITOR. SO WE CAN SEND IT OUT TO YOU SO Y'ALL CAN REVIEW IT BEFORE WEDNESDAY NIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

[XIII.B. Routine Reports from City Council Board/Commission/Committee Liaisons,]

MR. HALL, I HAVE ONE ACTUALLY, A MEETING OF THE KEEP LAGO VISTA. BEAUTIFUL THAT I SET IN ON SERVED AS LIAISON WHEN COUNCILOR CHAVARRIA WAS NOT ABLE TO BE THERE. AND IT WAS REALLY A GREAT, GREAT TO BE THERE. GREAT TO HEAR THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT THAT GROUP IS DOING. AND AS, AS, AND IT'S THE BEST USE OF OUR HOT FUNDS THAT WE COULD POSSIBLY BE USING THEM FOR. SO JUST FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, THEY, THEY DID 47 BAGS OF TRASH AND CLOSE TO 360 HOURS OF, OF WORK AND, YOU KNOW, IMPROVING, IMPROVING ALL OF OUR PUBLIC PLACES. THEY HAVE ALSO NOTED. AND I THINK THAT'S WORTH I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS, BUT REPAIR THE SYSTEM AND ZONES AROUND AROUND THE, THE, THE BUILDING AT THE GOLF COURSE, THERE'S, THERE WAS PURPORTEDLY SOME SORT OF AN ERROR OR DISCONNECT OR BROKEN PIPE OR SOMETHING THAT WAS PREVENTING THE, THE, THE WATER SYSTEM FROM BEING PROPERLY IRRIGATING THAT AREA. AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT WAS ACTUALLY ADDRESSED IN THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM. WORK THAT WAS WAS PLANNED TO BE DONE REGARDING OTHER THINGS. THEY, THEY MENTIONED THEY APPLAUDED DAVID MONTGOMERY SCOTT FOR HIS AMAZING WORK AND THE CHANGES THAT HE HAS DONE. AND I SECOND THAT. AND, AND ONE OF THE GOALS OVER A LONG REPORT THAT HE MADE IS TO, IS TO HAVE ALL THE ELECTRICAL AND IRRIGATION SYSTEMS OPERATIONAL ON ALL THE MEDIANS. AND SO HE'S, HE'S TACKLED THAT PROJECT AND IS WORKING THROUGH THAT. THEY MENTIONED A NUMBER OF GRANT APPLICATIONS THAT THEY HAVE MADE AND WORKING ON, INCLUDING THE GCAA GRANT APPLICATION, WOMEN'S CLUB GRANT APPLICATION.

AND THEN THEY TALKED ABOUT THE THE TRASH PICKUP ALONG LA PRIMAVERA DURING THE BIKE RACE ROUTE. AND THAT WAS AGAIN, A SIGNIFICANT. THERE IS A TRASH. TRASH OFFICE DAY IS SCHEDULED FOR APRIL THE 18TH AND THEY'RE THEY'RE ASKING FOR HELP, YOU KNOW, IN THEIR IN THEIR REGULAR PICKUP OF TRASH ALONG THE ROADS THEY HAVE ARBOR DAY PLANS APRIL THE 25TH AND THEY'LL BE IN THE LAGO VISTA LIBRARY PARKING LOT FROM 9 TO 12 THAT DAY, APRIL 25TH, THEY'LL HAVE BARTLETT TREES WITH SAPLINGS AND. AND THE. THE MINE IS GOING TO DONATE SOME PLANTS. SO THOSE WILL BE AVAILABLE. AND THEY'VE ALSO APPROVED, AGREED UPON LEVELS OF SUPPORT THAT THEY WILL RECOGNIZE FOR BUSINESS PARTNERS WITH PLATINUM AT 500 GOLD OR PLATINUM ABOVE 500 GOLD AT 500 SILVER, 250 AND BRONZE 100, AND THEY WILL BE RECOGNIZING IN-KIND DONATIONS ALSO AS PART OF THAT. AND SO VERY FULL AGENDA AT THAT MEETING. AND AS IN MY OPINION, IS ALWAYS THERE, THEY'RE DOING A GREAT JOB. MR. MINNIFIELD. MR. HALL, FOR SOMETHING ON MY

[04:00:05]

THEY DISCUSSED PLANNING PRIORITIES, POTENTIAL POLICY UPDATES FOR THE LIBRARY. TOPICS INCLUDED THE LIBRARY WORK PLAN, ALONG WITH POSSIBLE POLICIES FOR PUBLIC DISPLAYS, TEST PROCTORING AND NOTARY SERVICES. THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT GETTING THEIR SERVICES IN LINE WITH FEE SCHEDULE. THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE CHARGE HERE AT CITY HALL. ALSO, THERE WERE OFFERING TEST PROCTORING NOW AT A ZERO COST, BUT THEY ARE TRYING TO GET THAT IN LINE WITH OTHER LOCAL COMMUNITY LIBRARIES. SO THAT COULD ACTUALLY BE A POSSIBLE REVENUE STREAM. WE DO HAVE A LOT OF STUDENTS THAT COME HOME FOR THE SUMMER THAT NEED TEST PROCTORING, BUT THEY ALWAYS GO TO ALVIN COMMUNITY OR AUSTIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE OR CEDAR PARK.

AND THERE'S, THERE'S ALWAYS A CHESS PROCTORING FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. WHEN WE HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF DOING IT HERE, WE SHOULD BE UTILIZING THAT. SO THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT FEE SCHEDULES. THEY IT WAS A PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSION CENTERED ON STRENGTHENING LIBRARY SERVICES, IMPROVING CLARITY IN LIBRARY PROCEDURES, CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THE WAYS THE LIBRARY CAN BEST SERVE THE COMMUNITY. THEIR NEXT MEETING IS GOING TO BE APRIL 6TH, WHERE THEY WILL FORMALIZE THEIR WORK PLAN AND GET IT SIGNED OFF, AND THE BSC DID NOT MEET IN THE MONTH OF MARCH, BUT THEIR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING IS APRIL 1ST, AND THERE'S NO UPDATES FROM THE LAGO VISTA WOMEN'S CLUB AT THIS TIME. MAYOR PRO TEM THANK YOU. FIRST OFF, I'M GOING TO SAY THAT I TALKED TO BRIAN KOLLER, WHO IS NOW A MEMBER OF THE LBUSD BOARD, AND HE DOES A MAGNIFICENT JOB OF ACTUALLY DOING UPDATES AS TO WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE BOARD. AND SO I'VE ASKED HIM IF I COULD JUST SIMPLY TAKE WHAT HE HAS AND PUT IT ON OUR COUNCIL FORUM. HE HAS GIVEN ME PERMISSION TO DO THAT. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I DID WANT TO MAKE NOTE THAT THIS LAST MEETING THAT THE BOARD DID DECIDE TO GO AHEAD AND GRANT THE EASEMENT ACROSS BONANZA ROAD. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I SAID FOR JUST COUNCIL TO BE AWARE OF IN REGARD TO UTILITIES.

ALSO, SEVERAL OF THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ASKED ME TO COMMUNICATE THAT THEY ARE DOING THEIR STRATEGIC PLANNING, AND THEY HAVE TWO COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION SESSIONS. ONE IS MARCH 24TH THIS NEXT WEEK, AND ALSO APRIL 29TH. AND THEY ARE REALLY, REALLY LOOKING FOR INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY. I'M REALLY IMPRESSED ON HOW ACTIVE THEIR BOARD IS BECOMING AND, AND REALLY GETTING OUT TO GET THAT COMMUNITY FEEDBACK. THE ONLY OTHER ITEM THAT I HAVE IS THAT THE EDC MEETING WAS MOVED INTO APRIL. THAT BEING SAID, THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF BACKGROUND WORK GOING ON. THANK YOU, MR. ZINO. HE HAS DONE A MAGNIFICENT JOB OF BRINGING SOME RESOURCES AND EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION FROM TML, AND ALSO HAS ANOTHER GENTLEMAN, I BELIEVE THAT CHARLES RECOMMENDED TO COME AND SPEAK TO THE EDC WHEN IT'S FULL BLOWN AND UP AND RUNNING. AND OF COURSE, PART OF THEIR INITIAL MANDATE IS TO GET THEMSELVES UP AND GOING, BUT TO ALSO, FIRST AND FOREMOST, HOW DO WE SUPPORT ANY OF THE GRANT INITIATIVES THAT ARE COMING FORWARD TRYING TO SUPPORT THOSE? IF THERE'S ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO IMPACT AND MAKE THOSE, NOTCH IT UP A FEW PERCENTAGE POINTS IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO RECEIVE THOSE GRANTS. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE MET. THEY FINALLY RESOLVED. THEY HAD AN ISSUE WHERE THEY HAD COLLECTED FUNDS TO CREATE A GARDEN, BUT THEY OBVIOUSLY NEVER WENT AND DID THAT. SO THEY'VE DECIDED TO DONATE THOSE FUNDS TO THE CLUB.

SO I JUST NEED TO WORK WITH STAFF ON HOW WE CAN FACILITATE THAT. I THINK IT WOULD BE BEST TO DO THAT AT A YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING, WHERE THEY CAN MAYBE HAND THE CHECK TO CHLOEB AND TAKE SOME PHOTOS AND GET THE CREDIT THAT THEY DESERVE. THEY ALSO DECIDED APRIL 2ND, I'VE OFFERED TO TAKE THEM TO THE CAPITOL AND MEET WITH THEIR STATE REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS AND LEARN THE PROCESS. THIS IS THE THIRD YEAR I'VE DONE IT. IT STARTED WITH THE LEO'S, AND THERE WAS ABOUT SEVEN OF US AT THE TIME, THREE YEARS AGO. AND THIS YEAR THEY HAVE 50 SCHEDULED TO GO. SO WE'RE EXCITED TO HEAD DOWN THERE.

REPRESENTATIVE TRAXLER'S OFFICE HAS RESERVED AN ENTIRE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM FOR US.

SO LOOKING FORWARD TO DOING THAT. WE'LL DO THAT ALL MORNING, EARLY AFTERNOON, AND THEN DRIVE HERE AND HAVE OUR COUNCIL MEETING. SO THAT'S THE YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE AIRPORT.

WE'RE STILL, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO REVIEW THAT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND LOOKING FOR AN AIRPORT AVIATION LAWYER. THEY HAVEN'T HAD A MEETING YET, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE ONE COMING UP, I THINK, IN THE NEXT MONTH OR SO. AND THEN ON THE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS SIDE OF THINGS, WE GOT OUR APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO CONGRESSMAN MCCALL'S OFFICE FOR COMMUNITY

[04:05:02]

AND I THINK THE PLAN IS FOR P AND Z FOLKS TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO BE POSTING THEIR WORK AS THEY GO ALONG AND BRINGING IT INTO PLANNING AND ZONING TO GET THE FULL COMMISSION'S FEEDBACK AND INPUT ON IT. SO ULTIMATELY, THE FULL COMMISSION WILL BE MAKING THE RECOMMENDATION TO TO COUNCIL. AND SO I PRESUME OVER THE NEXT, YOU KNOW, COUPLE OF SESSIONS OF PLANNING AND ZONING THAT THAT CITY STAFF WILL COME UP WITH A PLAN OF WHEN THEY NEED TO BE BRINGING THINGS IN FRONT OF US. BUT ALL OF THAT IS, IS, YOU KNOW, IN FLIGHT, AS WE REQUESTED. SO APPRECIATE STAFF WORKING IN THE WILLINGNESS OF PLANNING AND ZONING PORTION SUBSET OF PLANNING AND ZONING TO DEDICATE A LOT OF WORK ONTO THIS TOPIC. THANK YOU. LAST ITEM 11 FOR CONSIDERATION OF

[XI.4. Consideration and possible action to correct the official minutes of the December 4, 2025 Regular City Council Meeting to ensure the voting record is consistent with council precedent and accurately reflects council procedure. (Part 1 of 2)]

IF THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THIS, THEN I WILL OBVIOUSLY READ MY OTHER STUFF. ARE THERE ANY CITIZENS WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM BEING NONE, COME BACK TO COUNCIL. MAYOR PRO TEM.

I KNOW WE'VE REACHED OUT TO YOU, BRAD, IN REGARD TO WHAT IS APPROPRIATE, WHAT IS LEGAL, ETC. WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A DISCUSSION. WE TALKED ABOUT MAYBE YOU GOING BACK THROUGH WHAT IS OKAY TO DO WHAT IT ISN'T IN TERMS OF DOCUMENTATION. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, WANTED TO BE ABLE TO BASICALLY BROACH IN TERMS OF WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO IN TERMS OF CHANGING MINUTES? JUST LIKE ANY OTHER ITEM. I MEAN, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. AND SO UNDER YOUR RULES, ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE PRIOR ACT, THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES WHO CAN BRING A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. THEY HAD TO HAVE VOTED IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. SO ANYBODY WHO

[04:10:01]

SO HE HAD LET COUNCIL KNOW WHY HE WAS RECUSING. AND THEN HE EXPLICITLY SAID, I'M RECUSING MYSELF FROM THIS DISCUSSION. HE ACTUALLY STEPPED DOWN FROM THE FROM THE DAIS. I DON'T RECALL YOU EVER DOING ANYTHING LIKE THAT. YOU YOU JUST, YOU KNOW, DIDN'T VOTE. AND, AND SO I, I THINK THE MINUTES ARE ACTUALLY ACCURATE TO WHAT OCCURRED THAT THAT EVENING. AND SO I'M, I'M NOT INCLINED TO, TO MAKE A MOTION TO CHANGE OR TO, OR TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE CHANGE MYSELF. WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THAT WOULD BE IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF OUR RULES AND PROCEDURE? WOULD I AGREE THAT WHAT WOULD BE IN DIRECT VIOLATION, WHAT YOU WERE SUGGESTING AS LEAVING IT AS IT IS? WOULD YOU NOT AGREE THAT THAT IS IN DIRECT DISAGREEMENT WITH OUR CURRENT RULES OF PROCEDURE, WHICH SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT EITHER AN INDIVIDUAL THAT DOES NOT VOTE IS EITHER HAVING AN EXCUSED ABSTINENCE, OR IF THEY REFUSE TO VOTE, WHICH YOU'RE ACCUSING OF, IS THAT THE VOTE WOULD GO TO THE MAJORITY. NOW, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. IT'S ONE OR THE OTHER. THAT'S WHAT THE RULES OF PROCEDURE SAYS. EITHER IT WAS A VALID EXCUSED ABSTAIN, AND IT SHOULD JUST SIMPLY SAY ABSTAIN, OR I WOULD BE REALLY WILLING TO SAY ABSTAIN. PRESIDING OFFICER DID NOT ASK FOR A REASON. I'D BE OKAY WITH THAT BECAUSE THAT'S TRUE. OR THE THIRD OPTION IS THE RULES OF PROCEDURE SAYS IF IT WAS UNEXCUSED THAT IT WOULD BE A VOTE TO THE MAJORITY. THOSE ARE YOUR THREE OPTIONS. BUT TO HAVE SOME KIND OF NO REASON GIVEN WHEN NO REASON WAS ASKED FROM THE PRESIDING OFFICER IS INACCURATE. THAT'S THE PROBLEM. SO EITHER YOU'RE GOING TO FOLLOW YOUR RULES OF PROCEDURE OR YOU'RE NOT. I STAND BY THE MINUTES CURRENTLY DOCUMENT WHAT ACTUALLY OCCURRED ON THE DICE.

MR. BOWLING, THIS KIND OF GOES BACK TO THE QUESTION THAT THE MAYOR PRO TEM ASKED. I THINK WITHOUT HAVING THAT DISCUSSION, YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO EXPLAIN SOME OF THE BACKGROUND. I'M ABLE TO EXPLAIN IT. I'M ABLE TO GIVE LEGAL REASONING. THE PROBLEM IS THAT I THINK I NEED TO GIVE YOU THIS LEGAL REASONING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND MY CONCERN IS THAT THAT THAT IT PUTS ME IN A DIFFICULT POSITION OF, OF EVEN IF I'VE GOT A MAJORITY OF COUNCIL TELLING ME, YES, WE'D LIKE YOU TO DISCUSS THIS IN AN OPEN SESSION. I'VE GOT EVERYONE SITTING HERE AND, AND I'M NOT, I WILL, I WILL. WHAT I CAN DO IS IF THERE'S INTEREST FROM COUNCIL TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, LET'S WE CAN DO THAT. I CAN GIVE A BRIEF EXPLANATION IF THAT'S

[04:15:04]

[II. EXECUTIVE SESSION (Part 2 of 2)]

[XI.4. Consideration and possible action to correct the official minutes of the December 4, 2025 Regular City Council Meeting to ensure the voting record is consistent with council precedent and accurately reflects council procedure. (Part 2 of 2)]

BUT I WAS GOING TO ASK MR. BENEFIELD, DID DO YOU REMEMBER IF YOU VOTED IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES FROM THAT ONE? IT WAS IT UNCONSENTED YES, I DID VOTE IN FAVOR. OKAY. SO THEREFORE YOU COULD MAKE THE MOTION TO. I GUESS, REVISE OR. THANK YOU. MR. BENEFIELD. I MOVE TO. IS IT RECONSIDERED? I MOVE TO RECONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER MEETING TO SIMPLY STATE. ABSTAIN ADAM BENEFIELD, AND REMOVE NO REASON GIVEN ON PAGES 118, 119 AND 120. I HAVE A MOTION FOR MR. BENEFIELD. DO I HAVE A SECOND? HEARING? NO. SECOND. THE MOTION FAILS. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION OR MOTION. MR. BENEFIELD, I MOVE THAT ANY VOTE THAT SAYS ABSTAIN. ADAM. BENEFIELD. NO REASON GIVEN. FOLLOW OUR RULES AND PROCEDURE AND GOES TO A VOTE IN THE MAJORITY. I HAVE A MOTION FOR MR. BENEFIELD. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.

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

BUT BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE SOMEHOW SAYING IT'S UNEXCUSED, THEN THE RULES OF PROCEDURE SAYS THE VOTE WOULD CAST TO THE MAJORITY. I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY IF THE THREE WORDS NO REASON GIVEN ARE IN OR OUT IN YOUR PROPOSAL, AND I'M HEARING YOU SAY THEY'RE OUT, THERE WOULD BE NO ABSTAIN. THERE WOULD BE NO ADAM BENEFIELD. THERE WOULD BE NO REASON GIVEN ALL THAT WOULD BE REMOVED. AND IT WOULD BE A VOTE SIMPLY TO THE MAJORITY, AS IF EVERYBODY

[04:20:03]

SECOND, I DIDN'T REALIZE I HAD SECONDED WITHOUT THAT LANGUAGE. SO I'M GLAD THAT I DIDN'T. I'M SORRY FOR. I HAVE A REASON FOR NOT VOTING. NO, I WILL I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR YOU MEAN LIKE FOR HIM? I WAS LIKE, I DON'T WANT TO PASS THAT. I DIDN'T WANT. AND I ACTUALLY, WHEN HE CLARIFIED, WHEN MR. PRINCE ASKED ABOUT IT, I WAS ACTUALLY WANTING TO PULL MY SECOND ON THE ON THAT I'M JUST UNCLEAR IF YOU'RE A YAY OR NAY. I TOOK THE VOTE AND I WASN'T SURE IF YOU'RE YAY OR NAY, OR IF YOU'RE GIVING A REASON AS TO WHY YOU'RE ABSTAINING. I'M NOT ABSTAINING. I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR THAT. SO IT'S A NAME. OKAY, SO THE MOTION FAILS. WAS THAT 1 TO 5 1234? YEAH, IT'S GETTING LATE. IF THERE IS ANOTHER MOTION THERE COULD BE A NO ACTION. OKAY. I'M NOT HEARING ANYTHING ELSE. THERE'S NO ACTION ON 11 FOUR. I HAVE NO OTHER PENDING BUSINESS BEFORE COUNCIL. I WILL

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.