Mar 01, 2021 Work Session

>> WHEN I LOOKED AT THE PRESENTATION, I HAVE THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE FOR LATER WOULD BE DID YOU LOOK AT THE TWO DIFFERENT STUDIES CONNECTED IN COLORADO CITIES, IN CALIFORNIA CITIES SHOWING ADU LEADS TO GENTRIFICATION IN THOSE AREAS WITH ADU APPROVALS? DID YOU LOOK AT ANY RESEARCH RELATED TO GENTRIFICATION AND THE TENDENCY FOR CRIME RATES TO RISE AT A RATE OF 4.5 PERCENT TO 6.2 PERCENT A YEAR FOR PROPERTY CRIME? HOWEVER, THERE IS A NOTED 1.4 PERCENT, 2.3 PERCENT DECREASE A YEAR IN PERSONAL CRIME.

DID YOU LOOK AT THE STUDY OF ADUS IN LOS ANGELES SHOWING 56 PERCENT OF ADUS WERE BUILT WITHOUT PERMITS, 98 PERCENT OF THOSE WERE BEING USED AS RENTAL PROPERTIES, AND THREE PERCENT OF THOSE WERE BEING USED TO HOUSE HOMELESS AND NONE OF THIS WAS BEING REPORTED TO THE CITY? DID YOU SPEAK TO THE CARLIN PD REGARDING THE POSSIBILITY OF FOUR PERCENT INCREASE IN CRIME RATES AND PROPERTY CRIMES AS TO HOW THEY WOULD HANDLE THIS AND WHAT RESOURCES THEY WILL NEED TO HANDLE THIS INCREASE IN CRIME.

IF YOU DID THESE THINGS, WHY WERE THEY NOT INCLUDED IN YOUR PRESENTATION? IF YOU DID NOT DO THIS RESEARCH, WHY? YOU SAID IN A RECENT RECORDED DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETINGS, YOU ARE OKAY WITH THESE ADUS BECOMING RENTAL PROPERTIES INSTEAD OF JUST GUEST HOUSES.

WHO WOULD REGULATE THE PROPERTIES FOR RENTERS RIGHTS.

YOU STATED AND RECORDED DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES BECAUSE COMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT OUTREACH WAS AS CENTRAL.

WHO DID YOU OUTREACH TO? DID YOU TAKE A SURVEY OF THE COMMUNITY? YOU STATED AND RECORDED DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT THESE WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE DENSITY IN THE COMMUNITY WITHOUT GOING TO MORE MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS.

WHY THE FIGHT FOR EIGHT YEARS AND MULTIFAMILY THAT WAS PASSED LAST WEEK.

THIS IS A CONTRADICTION TO EACH OTHER. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

I'VE MADE SOME NOTES HERE OF OF YOUR QUESTIONS OR POINTS AND WHEN WE GET TO THAT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, I'LL BE SURE THAT WE ADDRESS THOSE.

THEN I HAD ONE OTHER PERSON WHO HAD REGISTERED TO SPEAK, BUT ACTUALLY, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE WANTING TO SPEAK OR NOT, SO I'M GOING TO ASK JEFFREY ANDREWS, UNDER THE COMMENTS, IT HAD TO BE DETERMINED, SO I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT THAT MEANS.

>> THAN YOU [INAUDIBLE].

MR. ANDREWS, I'VE OPENED THE LINE ON OUR END.

IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS, LET US KNOW.

IF NOT, WE'LL MOVE ON.

MR. ANDREWS, I'VE OPENED THE LINE ON OUR END, IF YOU CAN UNMUTE YOURSELF. WELL, I DON'T SEE ANY RESPONSE FROM MR. ANDREWS.

I BELIEVE IF WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF PHONE CALLERS AND I BELIEVE IT'S STAR 9, I BELIEVE ON THE PLATFORM TO REQUEST TO SPEAK.

MR. ANDREWS IS NOW NOT IN THE QUEUE.

WE DO HAVE A FEW OTHER PEOPLE IN THE QUEUE.

I'LL ASK, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL AT THIS TIME? IF NOT, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR AGENDA AND OUR DISCUSSIONS FOR THE EVENING.

ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE WE WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD.

THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM 2. [NOISE] EXCUSE ME.

[2. Consider the Consent Agenda]

IT'S CONSIDERED THE CONSENT AGENDA, THIS WILL BE FOR TOMORROW EVENING.

I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY REQUESTS TO HAVE ANY ITEMS PULLED.

CONSIDERED SEPARATELY, BUT WE WILL GO THROUGH THAT AGENDA TOMORROW NIGHT AND PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THAT.

THAT WILL MOVE US ON TO ITEM 3 WRITTEN BRIEFINGS.

[3. Written Briefings]

ITEM 3A; YOUTH PROGRAMS STANDARDS OF CARE ORDINANCE,

[00:10:02]

AND THIS WILL BE UP FOR FORMAL CONSIDERATION AT OUR MARCH 16TH MEETING.

ITEM 3B; POLICE CONTACT DATA.

[NOISE] ITEM 3C; NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION LEASE RENEWALS.

AGAIN THIS ONE WILL BE UP FOR CONSIDERATION AT OUR MARCH 16TH MEETING AS WELL.

SEEING NO QUESTIONS ON THOSE WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 4; VERBAL BRIEFINGS.

ITEM 4A; COVID-19 RESPONSE,

[4A. COVID-19 Response Update and Further Actions]

UPDATE, AND FURTHER ACTIONS.

MITCH, I BELIEVE YOU'RE UP FIRST ON THIS ONE?

>> YES, SIR. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, JUST BRIEFLY AN UPDATE.

WE WILL BE HAVING OUR NEXT MASS VACCINATION EVENT THIS THURSDAY AT HOMER B JOHNSON STADIUM AGAIN WHERE WE WILL PROVIDING 2,500 VACCINES 1,500 OF THOSE WILL BE FIRST DOSES AND 1,000 WILL BE SECOND DOSES.

OUR TEAM IS GEARED UP AND READY TO GO.

WE'VE BEEN SENDING OUT NOTIFICATIONS ALL DAY TODAY THE EMAIL, THE ROBOCALLS, THE TEXT MESSAGES.

ONE THING WE DO ASK FOR OUR CITIZENS AND OUR VIEWERS THAT MAY BE WATCHING, IF YOU DID RECEIVE THE VACCINE ELSEWHERE, PLEASE LET US KNOW.

WE'VE HAD HUNDREDS WHO DO EMAIL US OR CALL US AND LET US KNOW THAT THEY NO LONGER NEED THEY GOT THE VACCINE ELSEWHERE BECAUSE WE DO FOLLOW UP AND WE WILL NOT STOP.

WE CONTINUE NOTIFYING FOLKS ALL THE WAY UP TILL THE DAY BEFORE THE EVENT BECAUSE OF THESE CANCELLATIONS.

WE ASK FOR ANYONE WHO HAS REGISTERED, WHO HAS ALREADY RECEIVED THE VACCINE TO EITHER PLEASE CALL OUR CALL CENTER AT 205-3900 OR TO PLEASE EMAIL US AND LET US KNOW THAT.

WITH THAT, I WILL PASS IT ON TO JASON AND MISTY WHO WILL PROVIDE OUR USUAL UPDATE.

>> MISTY GO AHEAD.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU, MAYOR. GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL.

IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL AGAIN.

I'LL ASK MISTY TO SHARE HER SCREEN AND I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH THE SIMILAR TO THE PRESENTATION THAT WE GAVE LAST WEEK.

IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH THIS QUICKLY AND CERTAINLY ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

YOU ALL ARE VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS SLIDE IT ILLUSTRATES THE TOTAL NUMBER OF CASES AND HOW THOSE CASES ARE DISTRIBUTED OVER TIME.

AS OF TODAY, WE HAVE 26,326 TOTAL CONFIRMED CASES.

THAT REPRESENTS ALMOST 11 PERCENT OF GARLAND'S POPULATION.

AS YOU SEE THE NUMBER IN GREEN THERE, VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE CASES ARE RECOVERED.

WE HAVE HAD A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF DEATHS REPORTED TODAY AND I'LL GO INTO DETAIL ON THAT IN JUST A SECOND.

BUT WE HAVE A BACKLOG OF DEATHS REPORTED FROM THE STATE, THAT THERE WERE 78 TOTAL BACKLOG DEATHS SO THAT'S INCLUDED IN THAT 332 NUMBER AS WELL AS SIX RECENT GARLAND COVID-19 DEATHS.

THAT'S A TOTAL OF 84 DEATHS THAT YOU'LL SEE IS A DIFFERENCE FROM YESTERDAY TO TODAY.

AGAIN I'LL GO INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL IN JUST A MOMENT ON THAT.

THE BOTTOM NUMBER THERE IN WHITE, THE NUMBER OF THE ACTIVE CASES, OF COURSE, THOSE ARE MAYBE BEST DESCRIBED AS RECENT CASES FOLKS THAT RECENTLY TESTED POSITIVE AND HAVE NOT YET MET THEIR END OF MONITORING CRITERIA.

OF COURSE, THE GRAPH ON THE LEFT ILLUSTRATES POSITIVE CASES BY SAMPLE COLLECTION DATES, THAT'S ACTUALLY THE DATE THAT THE SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED.

WE'VE HAD A REALLY NICE DOWNWARD TREND AND A LITTLE BLIP THERE AT THE VERY END, AS I MENTIONED LAST WEEK I THINK THAT TROUGH AT THE VERY END IS PROBABLY DUE TO THE WINTER WEATHER.

CERTAINLY, THE WINTER WEATHER IMPACTED THE NUMBER OF FOLKS THAT WERE TESTED.

I'M SURE THERE WERE SYMPTOMATIC FOLKS WHO SIMPLY COULDN'T GET TESTED BECAUSE OF THE WEATHER OVER THE WINTER STORM, SO I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE BLIP THERE AT THE VERY END.

MISTY IF WE'D GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, SO GETTING BACK TO THOSE BACKLOG CASES THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES, JUST COMPLETED AN AUDIT OF DEATH REPORTS FOR THE YEAR 2020, WHICH OBVIOUSLY INCLUDES THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE TIMELINE OF THE PANDEMIC.

THIS WAS A STATEWIDE AUDIT AND THIS IS A STATEWIDE ISSUE.

NOT ONLY DID THEY FIND UNDER-REPORTED DEATHS IN GARLAND AND

[00:15:03]

DALLAS COUNTY AND OUR REGION BUT THEY FOUND UNDER-REPORTED DEATHS ACROSS THE STATE.

FOR THE CITY OF GARLAND AGAIN THAT NUMBER WAS 78 DEATHS RELATED TO COVID-19 THAT WE'RE UNDER-REPORTED.

WHAT I'VE DONE HERE IS CREATED A SIMPLE BAR GRAPH THAT ILLUSTRATES WHEN THOSE CASES WERE REPORTED OVER THE PAST YEAR.

ACTUALLY, IT BLIPS A LITTLE BIT INTO THIS YEAR, ONE CASE OF AN INDIVIDUAL OF GARLAND INDIVIDUAL THAT DIED DUE TO COVID-19 BACK IN APRIL IS JUST NOW BEING REPORTED.

IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS DATA TO GIVE YOU ALL A BETTER REAL-TIME PICTURE OF THE IMPACTS OF COVID-19 ON OUR COMMUNITY.

BUT SINCE THE DATA WAS MADE AVAILABLE TO US WE WANT TO REPORT IT AND BE AS ACCURATE AS POSSIBLE EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE BACKLOG CASES AND MANY CASES APPROACHING A YEAR OLD.

BUT YOU CAN SEE THE DISTRIBUTION OVER TIME AND THAT ACTUALLY NICELY FOLLOWS THE SPIKE THAT WE HAD IN THE SUMMER AS WELL AS THE SIGNIFICANT CASE SPIKE WE HAD BACK OVER THE HOLIDAYS.

MISTY CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

OUR STAFF IMPACTS.

WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD STAFF WORKING LATE TODAY TO UPDATE THIS SLIDE.

I'M HAPPY TO SEE THAT THE NUMBER OF GARLAND EMPLOYEES THAT ARE EXCLUDED FROM WORK BECAUSE OF A POSITIVE TEST OR BECAUSE OF HIGH-RISK CONTACT IS DROPPING DRAMATICALLY.

YOU SEE THERE THAT WE HAVE 27 CURRENT EMPLOYEES EXCLUDED DUE TO POSITIVE TESTS WITH ANOTHER EIGHT EXCLUDED DUE TO HIGH-RISK CONTACTS.

WE'RE DOWN TO 35 EMPLOYEES CURRENTLY EXCLUDED.

WHICH IF YOU LOOK AT A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, WE WERE WELL OVER A 100 THERE.

THAT'S ILLUSTRATED ON THE GRAPH ON OUR NEXT SLIDE WHICH TRACKS THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES EXCLUDED EVERY FRIDAY.

EVERY DATA POINT YOU SEE ON HERE IS THE COUNT OF EMPLOYEES THAT WE HAD EXCLUDED ON THE FRIDAY OF THAT WEEK.

YOU CAN SEE THE GREEN LINE DEPICTS A COMBINATION, THE RED LINE WILL BE THE EMPLOYEES THAT TESTED POSITIVE FOR COVID AND THEREFORE EXCLUDED, THE BLUE LINE ARE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE EXCLUDED FOR HIGH-RISK CONTACT.

THEN AGAIN THE GREEN LINE IS THE TOTAL OF THOSE TWO.

MISTY, CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

FOR VACCINATIONS VACCINES FROM DECEMBER TO TODAY WE'VE RECEIVED 7,500 1ST ROUND DOSES.

WE'VE ADMINISTERED GARLAND 6,000 OF THOSE DOSES, LEAVING THE BALANCE FOR OUR EVENT ON THURSDAY.

SECOND ROUND DOSES WE'VE RECEIVED 4,000.

WE'VE ADMINISTERED GARLAND AROUND 2,800 OF THOSE DOSES.

WILL CONTINUE TO FOLLOW UP ON THOSE FOLKS THAT WE CALL THEM THE STRAGGLERS, THE FOLKS THAT WE'VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET THAT SECOND DOSE IN THEIR ARM.

WE'RE CONTINUING TO FOLLOW UP WITH THEM.

THEN ON THE BOTTOM AS OF THIS AFTERNOON ABOUT 2:00 PM, YOU'VE GOT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF REGISTRATIONS JUST UNDER 100,000 VERSUS THE CURRENT WAITING LIST.

OF COURSE THE DIFFERENCE THERE IS NOT ONLY THE NUMBER OF FOLKS THAT WE VACCINATED, BUT IT ALSO INCLUDES FOLKS THAT HAVE PULLED THEIR NAME OFF OF THE WAITING LIST BECAUSE THEY'VE RECEIVED THE VACCINE ELSEWHERE.

MISTY CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

I BELIEVE THIS IS THE LAST ONE.

THIS COVERS THE SAME INFORMATION THAT HAS JUST TALKED TO YOU ABOUT.

THIS WILL BE OUR SECOND EVENT WHERE WE COMBINE 1ST AND 2ND ROUND DOSES, JUST AS WE DID LAST WEEK.

I THINK LAST WEEK WAS A VERY SUCCESSFUL EVENT.

WE WERE A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THE LOGISTICS OF MIXING 1ST AND 2ND ROUND DOSES BUT THE PROCESS WHICH LAID OUT BY STAFF WORKED VERY WELL.

HOPEFULLY, WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET THAT PARTICIPATION UP.

WE'VE HAD A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF FOLKS THAT HAVE RESPONDED TO THE EMAILS THAT WERE SENT, BY RESPONDING TO US AND TOLD US, ''HEY, I NO LONGER NEED THE VACCINE, I GOT IT ELSEWHERE.''.

THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S WHAT WE WANT THE PUBLIC TO DO, SO THAT ALLOWS US TO INVITE EVEN MORE PEOPLE IN THEIR PLACE.

WE WANT TO GET THAT PARTICIPATION UP AS HIGH AS POSSIBLE.

WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SEND OUT NEW INVITATIONS AS WE GET CANCELLATIONS AND TO THE VIEWING PUBLIC IF YOU RECEIVED AN EMAIL WITH AN APPOINTMENT FOR THIS THURSDAY EVENT AND YOU'VE ALREADY RECEIVED A VACCINE PLEASE LET US KNOW.

WE'LL TAKE YOUR NAME OFF THE LIST AND WE'LL INVITE SOMEBODY IN YOUR PLACE.

[00:20:01]

WE WANT TO USE THOSE VACCINES AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

MAYOR, I THINK THAT IS THE END OF THE PRESENTATION.

MISTY CAN UNSHARE YOUR SCREEN.

WE'D BE GLAD TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.

>> OKAY. [NOISE] EXCUSE ME.

I GOT A FEW. DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, MORRIS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND THANK YOU, JASON.

JASON GIVEN WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE NATIONAL NEWS ABOUT NEW YORK AND NURSING HOMES AND NUMBERS, JUST FOR THE WATCHING PUBLIC, CAN WE GET A TALLY FROM YOU, A TOTAL TALLY OF HOW MANY NURSING HOME DEATHS WE'VE HAD IN GARLAND THIS WHOLE TIME SINCE IT STARTED, DO YOU HAVE THAT NUMBER?

>> OUT OF THE 332 DEATHS THAT WE ARE REPORTING TODAY, 66 OF THOSE ARE ASSOCIATED WITH LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES SO THOSE SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES.

THAT REPRESENTS ABOUT 20 PERCENT AND JUST TO GO INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL, THE BACKLOG CASES, 14 OUT OF THE 78 BACKLOG CASES WERE ASSOCIATED WITH LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES, THAT'S ABOUT 18 PERCENT OF THOSE.

IF YOU LOOK BACK AT THE REPORT FROM YESTERDAY, WE HAD 248 DEATHS REPORTED YESTERDAY.

FIFTY-TWO OF THOSE WERE ASSOCIATED WITH LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES, WHICH IS ABOUT 21 PERCENT.

WHAT I'M TRYING TO ILLUSTRATE IS THAT THESE BACKLOG CASES DON'T SEEM TO HAVE A HIGHER PERCENTAGE ASSOCIATED WITH LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES.

>> DO WE KNOW THE TOTAL NUMBER OF NURSING HOMES AND LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE IN GARLAND?

>> I KNOW THAT.

I PROBABLY CAN'T GET TO IT QUICKLY ENOUGH TO [INAUDIBLE] ONLINE, BUT I CAN ABSOLUTELY GET THAT INFORMATION.

LET ME MOVE REALLY QUICKLY HERE TO SEE IF I CAN PULL THAT OUT.

>> I WAS JUST CURIOUS.

I KNOW THE ONES THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM AND DISCUSSED AND EVERYTHING, BUT I ALSO HAVE DISCOVERED WE HAVE SOME THAT ARE ACTUALLY IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS THAT FLY LOW UNDER THE RADAR, SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS GIVEN THE SIZE OF OUR CITY.

>> THE ONES IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

THOSE ARE LICENSED MIGHT NOT BE THE RIGHT TERM, THEY REGULATED AT THE STATE LEVEL AND THEY'RE NOT REGULATED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND YOU'RE CORRECT, THERE ARE SEVERAL OF THOSE THAT COME TO OUR ATTENTION BECAUSE OF ENDEMIC BECAUSE MANY OF THEM HAVE ASKED FOR ASSISTANCE AND WE'VE PROVIDED IT.

I WILL NEED TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ON A LIST OF WHAT WE WOULD CALL THE LICENSED LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES, LOW LARGER FACILITIES, THE NON-RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES.

BUT I CAN CERTAINLY FOLLOW UP AND GIVE YOU A NUMBER THERE.

>> OKAY, THAT'S FINE. I APPRECIATE THAT.

IF WE'RE LEARNING 18-21 PERCENT OF OUR TOTAL DEATHS HAVE BEEN FROM NURSING HOMES, THEN WE HAVEN'T HAD SOME DENSELY LARGE PERCENTAGE OF OUR DEATHS THAT ARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THAT.

I THINK A LOT OF THAT HAS BEEN DUE TO YOU AND TO A LOT OF THE STAFF THAT WORKS SO CAREFULLY AND WITH MESSAGING AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

ALSO WITH YOU ALL GOING IN AND DOING THOSE VACCINES, WHICH WE HEARD A LOT ABOUT AND HEARD FROM OTHER CITIES THAT WASN'T HAPPENING.

APPRECIATE YOU ALL GOING IN AND ONE OF THE LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES IN MY DISTRICT THEY WERE FLOODING ME WITH E-MAILS GOING, "THEY'RE HERE, THEY'RE GIVING US VACCINES," SO WELL DONE WITH THAT.

THANK YOU, SIR, APPRECIATE [OVERLAPPING].

>> JASON REAL QUICK, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THE LICENSED LONG-TERM CARE FACILITIES THAT WE HAVE OUR 24.

WE'VE GOT THE BREAKDOWN ON THE OTHER DAY, ACTIVITY IN HOME TOP FACILITIES AS WELL SO IF YOU NEED THAT, I CAN GIVE YOU THAT TOO.

>> I REALLY DON'T. I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET A BIG PICTURE OF WHAT KIND OF POPULATION WE WERE LOOKING AT.

BUT I THANK YOU, MISTY, THANK YOU, JASON, THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU, MISTY. YOU'VE GOT A VERY GOOD HABIT OF SAVING ME.

>> [LAUGHTER] I WAS NEVER WILLIAMS. YOU'D NEED TO UNMUTE. I THINK WE'RE EXPERIENCING SOME DELAY WITH YOUR VIDEO.

>> OKAY. [INAUDIBLE].

>> YES, BUT YOU'RE BREAKING UP ON THIS A LITTLE BIT.

[00:25:13]

>> [INAUDIBLE] CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW, MAYOR? CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?

>> NOW WE CAN, YES. [LAUGHTER].

>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> AM I STILL BREAKING UP?

>> YES.

>> CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> I CAN HEAR YOU AND YOU'RE STILL.

>> LET ME TRY ONE MORE TIME.

>> YES, SIR. BUT YOUR VIDEO WAS THE PROBLEM.

>> CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?

>> OKAY. JASON.

>> GOOD EVENING, SIR.

>> [INAUDIBLE] OKAY. I'LL TRY TO GET TO THIS.

I'LL MAKE IT QUICKLY AND AGAIN [INAUDIBLE].

JASON, TO WHAT DO YOU [INAUDIBLE] OUR DECLINE AND OUR CASES FOR OUR CURRENT POLICIES OF CAUTIONS WE'RE TAKING, MASKING AND SOCIAL DISTANCING [INAUDIBLE] FACILITIES PLAYED INTO ENTER THE NUMBERS THAT YOU JUST SHARED WITH US?

>> WELL, SIR, I'LL REPEAT WHAT I HEARD AS THE QUESTION.

I THINK YOU ASKED, WHAT DO I ATTRIBUTE THE DECLINE IN CITY EMPLOYEE CASES WITH THE HOW DOES THAT CORRELATE WITH THE MASKING REQUIREMENTS FOR CITY EMPLOYEES? TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, I THINK UNDOUBTEDLY FROM A CITY EMPLOYEE STANDPOINT, OUR CITY ADMINISTRATION, MITCH MAY HAVE AN EXACT DATE.

BUT OUR CITY ADMINISTRATION PUT A MASK MANDATE ON GARLAND EMPLOYEES.

MAYBE AS FAR BACK AS MAY, APRIL, OR MAY OF LAST YEAR.

IT'S BEEN SUFFICES TO SAY FOR ALMOST THE ENTIRETY OF THE PANDEMIC, CITY EMPLOYEES ON DUTY HAD BEEN REQUIRED TO MASK AND HAD BEEN REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE SOCIAL DISTANCING GUIDELINES.

WE CLOSED COMMON BREAK ROOMS, CAFETERIAS ACROSS THE CITY.

THERE HAD BEEN KIOSKS FOR EMPLOYEES TO TAKE TEMPERATURES AS THEY ENTER BUILDINGS, SO EACH DEPARTMENT HAS IMPLEMENTED A METHODOLOGY TO TAKE EMPLOYEE'S TEMPERATURES AS THEY ARRIVE AT WORK.

THEN THE THING THAT GARLAND HAS DONE A LOT OF OTHER PLACES DON'T HAVE IS WE'VE GOT A CITY CARE CLINIC THAT EMPLOYEES WHO FEEL SYMPTOMATIC CAN GO TO AND ACTUALLY RECEIVE A RAPID TEST.

OUR CITY CARE CLINIC DEVELOPED THE ABILITY TO RAPIDLY TEST FOLKS FOR COVID-19.

I THINK THEY'VE GOT THAT BACK IN MAYBE JUNE OR JULY.

SO ALL OF THOSE PREVENTATIVE MEASURES, PRECAUTIONS, AND CARE THAT'S PROVIDED, ITS SICK CARE CLINIC, UNDOUBTEDLY HELPED SLOW THE SPREAD OF DISEASE, AND IN MANY CASES, IT HAD HELPED PREVENT THE SPREAD OF DISEASE, IDENTIFYING INFECTED INDIVIDUALS EARLY AND ISOLATING THEM, OF COURSE, ABSENCE OF THE VACCINE WAS THE BEST WAY TO COMBAT COVID-19.

IT WAS REALLY THE BEST TOOL THAT WE HAD IS TO ISOLATE SICK FOLKS.

SO FOLKS THAT WERE INFECTED AND COMMUNITY.

OF COURSE, NOW THAT WE'VE GOT THE VACCINE, WE'VE GOT A BETTER TOOL.

BUT TO GET BACK TO THE CORE OF YOUR QUESTION, I THINK THOSE PREVENTATIVE MEASURES HAVE BEEN A KEY TO MINIMIZING THE NUMBER OF CITY EMPLOYEES THERE AT ANY GIVEN TIME.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. ESSENTIALLY SUMMING UP WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, WHAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE HAS BEEN EFFECTIVE AND IT'S WORKING FOR US.

I JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT QUESTION WANTED YOU TO SHARE WITH THEM PROBABLY.

SOME OF THE NOISE THAT WE'RE STARTING TO HEAR ABOUT SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WERE NOT MENTIONED THE NAME.

BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT RESPONSE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, AND SORRY ABOUT THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.

>> WELL, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH YOUR AUDIO WAS GOOD AND.

>> MY VIDEO [INAUDIBLE].

>> YOUR VIDEO WAS FREEZING UP AND YEAH, IT'S NOT GOOD, BUT YOUR AUDIO WAS BACK.

>> OKAY. AT LEAST I'M HALFWAY THERE.

>> ALL RIGHT, [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] COUNCILMAN VERA.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. JASON, I HEARD TODAY THAT DALLAS COUNTY IS NOT GOING TO BE REPORTING ON SUNDAYS.

DEATHS OR WHATEVER.

ANY PRESENTATION ON HOW MANY DEATH SAYS HECK,

[00:30:06]

OR WHATEVER ON SUNDAY.

IS THAT A STATEWIDE OR JUST DALLAS COUNTY?

>> I'M NOT AWARE OF ANYTHING LIKE THAT AT THE STATE LEVEL, WE CONTINUE. LET ME BACK UP.

THE WAY THAT CASES ARE REPORTED AS IS AN ELECTRONIC RECORDS SYSTEM, AND WE GET CASE REPORTS EVERY DAY.

CERTAINLY AT THE STATE LEVEL, THOSE CASES CONTINUE TO FLOW DOWN TO GARLAND.

I WAS ON A CONFERENCE CALL WITH THE COUNTY LAST WEEK AND I DON'T RECALL THEM MENTIONING ANYTHING ABOUT NOT REPORTING ON SUNDAY, BUT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO SO FOR WHATEVER IT'S WORTH.

WE WILL CONTINUE TO REPORT OUR CASES ON SUNDAY, WE WILL CONTINUE TO RECEIVE REPORTS THROUGH THE STATE REPORTING SYSTEMS. IF DALLAS COUNTY HAS CHOSEN TO NOT REPORT NUMBERS ON SUNDAY, THAT WON'T AFFECT US.

>>THANK YOU SIR. COUNCIL MCNEAL.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. HEY, JASON. JUST QUICKLY.

ARE YOU SEEING THE NUMBERS REFLECTING THE DIVERSITY THAT YOU WOULD EXPECT WITH RIGHT AT 99,000 REGISTRANTS, AND DID ALL DID ADMINISTER VACCINE THAT HAS BEEN ADMINISTERED, ARE YOU SEEING THAT REPRESENTED ACROSS UP DIVERSE POPULATION, OR ARE YOU SEEING ANY AREAS WHERE WE HAVE TO DO SOME ADDITIONAL OUTREACH IN CERTAIN POCKETS OF THE POPULATION?

>> WELL, PART OF IT, THAT'S IT.

[OVERLAPPING].

>> I HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THAT, SO I CAN HELP YOU WORK THAT OUT IF THAT'S OKAY COUNCIL MEMBER MCNEAL.

WE DO NEED TO DO SOME MORE OUTREACH, WHICH IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON.

I THINK WE HAVE SEEN SOME OF THE THINGS THAT OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE AND OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY ARE SEEING THAT AND SOME OF OUR MINORITY DEMOGRAPHICS WERE LOOKING TO IMPROVE OUR REGISTRATION NUMBERS IN THOSE CASES.

OBVIOUSLY WE'RE HAVING LARGE NUMBERS DO THAT, BUT THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE TRYING TO DO TO REACH OUT TO ALL SEGMENTS OF OUR COMMUNITY TO EDUCATE THEM ON THE COVID VACCINE.

THEN OF COURSE, TO TALK THROUGH THAT REGISTRATION PROCESS AND HELP THOSE WHO NEED HELP WITH THAT PROCESS.

I THINK THERE STILL IS SOME WORK TO DO IN THAT REGARD, REACHING OUT TO ALL SEGMENTS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

>> OH GREAT. JASON, JUST TO REITERATE, I THINK WAS STILL ADMINISTERED AND FOR ALL THREE CITIES, CORRECT, CORROLLTON, COCKRELL TEXAS?

>> YES, SIR. SINCE WE ARE LISTED AS A HUB, THAT'S ACTUALLY OPEN TO ANYONE IN THE STATE WHICH USES TO REGISTER.

YES, WE ARE FOCUSING ON THE THREE STATES, I GUESS IS THE BEST WAY TO SAY.

>>IDEAL. THEN THE LAST QUESTION.

I KNOW WE HAD SCHEDULED SOME TRAINING TO DO SOME OF THAT OUTREACH, AND VOLUNTEERISM.

ANY UPDATE THERE JASON, OR MITCH ON EACH?

>> YES, SIR. WE'RE ACTUALLY RESCHEDULING THAT FOR THIS WEEK.

YOU SHOULD HAVE AN E-MAIL COMING OUT ON THAT, REACHING OUT TO LEADERS OUT IN THE COMMUNITY, CHURCH LEADERS, SOME HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION LEADERS AND OTHERS.

THAT'LL BE GOING ON COMING OUT THIS WEEK IN A ZOOM FORMAT.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU SIR. MISS. TEE, I THINK WE'RE TO YOU.

>> AGAIN, BOTH PARTS IN ONE.

I WAS JUST HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF ANYBODY HAD ANY FORM.

>> ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS, TEE.

ANYTHING THAT YOU NEED TO FOLLOW UP WITH HER ON? I DON'T SEE ANYONE IN THE QUEUE AND I WAS LOOKING THROUGH THE DATES AT TODAY AND WE'RE MEETING THIS WEEK, THEN WE HAVE OUR MEETING ON THE 15TH.

I NOTICED ON MY CALENDAR THAT ON MARCH THE 12TH, WE HAD OUR FIRST EMERGENCY MEETING ON THIS.

WE'RE REACHING THE ANNIVERSARY DATE, IF YOU WILL, OF ALL THE ACTIONS AND THINGS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE OVER THE LAST YEAR.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT YEAR IS REALLY QUITE ASTOUNDING OF HOW MUCH INFORMATION WE DIDN'T HAVE ON MARCH THE 12TH, 2020 TO HOW MUCH INFORMATION WE HAVE NOW ON MARCH 1ST, 2021.

AGAIN, THE STAFF HAS DONE INCREDIBLE JOB OF TRACKING ALL THAT DATA AND FRANKLY,

[00:35:05]

EDUCATING ALL OF US ALONG THE WAY.

I CAN TELL YOU WHEN WE CONVENE THAT MEETING A YEAR AGO, MY KNOWLEDGE OF THIS DISEASE AND WHAT WAS GOING ON WAS VERY SMALL.

NOW OVER A YEAR LATER IS VERY LARGE AS WHAT I KNOW.

IF YOU MAY TEM MORRIS?

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. MISS. TEE, I JUST WANTED TO SAY I'M IMPRESSED THAT YOU CAN EVEN SIT UP AND HAVE YOUR EYES OPEN AND TALK.

THE WORK YOU'VE DONE THESE LAST FEW WEEKS, AFTER A YEAR OF CHURNING THROUGH ALL THE COVID ISSUES, THEN GETTING SHOWER UNITS AND LAUNDRY UNITS, AND WATER STATIONS, AND CRAZY STUFF LINED UP ALL OVER THE CITY TO HELP OUR DISTRESSED APARTMENTS.

I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DO IT.

YOU MUST BE REALLY YOUNG, IS ALL I CAN SAY.

[LAUGHTER] WITH A LOT OF ENERGY, BUT VERY WELL DONE.

I CAN'T IMAGINE ANYBODY BETTER SUITED FOR YOUR POSITION THAN YOU AND YOU HAVE JUST DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB.

THANK YOU VERY, VERY MUCH.

IN YOUR WEATHER REPORTS, I FORGOT THAT.

YOUR WEATHER REPORTS AS WELL.

I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DO IT. THANK YOU, MA'AM.

>> YOU HAVE A GOOD TEAM. THANK YOU.

>> COUNSEL, MCNEAL.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON COUNCIL LADY MORRIS A COMMENT.

I JUST WANT TO SAY JASON TO YOU AND MISS, TEE IN YOUR TEAM.

JUST THANK YOU FOR THE SENSITIVITY AND THE REALLY DELICATE WAY THAT YOU'VE BEEN HANDLING A LOT ABOUT LEGACY MEMBERS OF OUR SENIOR MEMBERS WITH THE ROLL OUT, AND WITH THE REGISTRATION.

I KNOW YOU GUYS HAD JUST BEEN BOMBARDED WITH CALLS, BUT THANK YOU FOR GOING AN EXTRA MILE TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR SENIORS REALIZE THAT THEY ARE VALUED, THAT THEY ARE CARED FOR.

BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, THAT YOU ADMINISTER THOSE SERVICES IN THAT COMMUNICATION TO OUR JUST VALUED POPULATION WITH SENSITIVITY.

THANK YOU, JASON AND MISS. TEE.

>> SIR, MAYOR PRO TEM NICKERSON.

>> WELL, THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'LL LET GO OF THOSE THANK TO BOTH OF YOU.

YOU'VE DONE A GREAT JOB.

MITCH, I WANT TO ASK ONE FOLLOW-UP QUESTION.

YOU HAD REACHED OUT TO ONE OF MY CONSTITUENTS, SO, MR. DAVIDSON HERE, AND I THINK YOUR ANSWER TO HIM PROBABLY DESERVES TO MAYBE BE STATED HERE A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I KNOW OTHERS HAVE HAD SIMILAR CONCERNS AS IT RELATES TO THE SECOND DOSE VACCINATION AND THE PROCESS OF HOW THAT WORKS IF THEY REGISTERED ELSEWHERE, AND I DON'T WANT US TO DO A LOT OF REPETITION HERE, BUT I THINK IT'S PERTINENT.

COULD YOU RECITE THAT AGAIN QUICKLY JUST FOR THOSE THAT ARE MAYBE LISTENING HERE THIS EVENING?

>> YES, SIR AND I KNOW JASON AND HIS TEAM HAVE THE WAY.

I'LL TELL YOU THAT, I GUESS THIS IS A GOOD PROBLEM FOR US TO HAVE.

WE HAVE COUNTLESS PEOPLE ASKING TO COME TO OUR EVENT, BUT IT'S AFTER THEY'VE ALREADY HAD THEIR FIRST DOSE ELSEWHERE.

IN PARTICULAR A FAIR PART BUT MANY OTHER PLACES.

THEY'VE LEARNED FROM FAMILY AND FRIENDS HOW EASY AND EFFICIENT IT IS TO GET IT AT THE GARLAND EVENT.

HOWEVER, THE WAY THE STATE ALLOCATES VACCINES TO US, IF YOU'VE RECEIVED YOUR FIRST VACCINE HERE IN GARLAND, WE GET THE SECOND DOSE AS ALLOCATED TO THE SAME MANNER.

IF WE WERE TO GIVE SECOND DOSES TO SOMEONE ELSE, THAT MEANS SOMEONE ELSE WAS GOING WITHOUT A VACCINE.

SOME OF THESE OTHER SITES, I GUESS THEY'RE TRYING TO DO THEIR BEST, BUT THEY ARE CREATING CHALLENGES BY DOING SO.

WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.

IF YOU'VE HAD YOUR FIRST DOSE ELSEWHERE, YOU NEED TO GET IT AT THE SAME LOCATION, AND THAT'S WHERE YOUR SECOND DOSE IS GOING.

>> BUT I ALSO THINK THOUGH THAT IF YOU COULD ALSO RESTATE THAT IF YOU HAVE IN THE MODERNA SECOND DOSE, FOR INSTANCE, IT'S NOT THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE IT THE EXACT DAY THAT YOU GOT YOUR FIRST DOSE.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT WAS THE MAJOR CONCERN THAT YOU WERE ADDRESSING WITH MR. DAVIDSON AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS.

>> YES, SIR, AND ACTUALLY, I THINK IT'LL BE PROBABLY QUICKEST IF I LET JASON TALK ABOUT IT.

JASON, WHAT THIS WAS IS THE NOT HAVING TO HAVE THE DOSE EXACTLY ON DAY 28, THAT THERE IS THAT WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY.

THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS COMING UP THAT IF THEY DIDN'T GET IT EXACTLY ON THAT DAY, THAT IT'S STILL OKAY IF YOU GET IT A FEW DAYS OR A COUPLE OF WEEKS LATER AND I KNOW YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE, BUT IF YOU CAN HIT THAT AGAIN REAL QUICKLY, JASON.

[00:40:01]

>> SURE. IN PUBLIC HEALTH, WE GIVE SEVERAL DIFFERENT VACCINES THAT ARE A SERIES.

IN EACH ONE OF THOSE SERIES OF VACCINES, THEY'VE GOT A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION OR TIME INTERVAL BETWEEN VACCINES.

SPECIFICALLY FOR MODERNA, THAT'S 28 DAYS.

IN AN IDEAL WORLD, WE WOULD WANT YOU TO GET YOUR SECOND DOSE 28 DAYS AFTER YOUR FIRST DOSE.

NOW, WE ALSO REALIZED THAT WE DON'T LIVE IN AN IDEAL WORLD AND MODERNA DOES AS WELL THANKFULLY IN CDC.

THEY'VE GIVEN US A WIDER WINDOW THAT ALLOW US TO ADMINISTER THOSE SECOND DOSES, SO WE CAN ADMINISTER IT UP TO FOUR DAYS EARLY, WHICH WOULD BE DAY 24 OR UP TO SIX WEEKS, WHICH WOULD BE DAY 42, AND WHICH IS A PRETTY WIDE WINDOW.

BUT EVEN BEYOND 42 DAYS, BOTH MODERNA AND THE CDC SAID THAT SECOND DOSE IS VALID EVEN IF YOU GET IT BEYOND 42 DAYS.

IT'S NOT IDEAL, BUT IT REMAINS VALID IF YOU GET IT BEYOND 42 DAYS.

FOR THE FOLKS OUT THERE, IF YOUR 28 DAYS IS APPROACHING AND YOU HAVEN'T HEARD FROM US OR WHOMEVER YOU'VE GOT YOUR FIRST DOSE FROM, I'M CERTAINLY REACHING OUT BUT IF YOU DON'T GET IT EXACTLY ON 28 DAYS, THE VACCINES STILL CAN BE VALID.

THE SECOND DOSE STILL CAN BE VALID.

>> VERY GOOD. I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION AGAIN.

I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT IT ONCE BEFORE, BUT I THINK IT BEARS REPEATING, AND JUST A LITTLE HISTORICAL NOTE, THIS TIME LAST YEAR, I GOT A CALL FROM WISCONSIN MAYOR AND THEN MAYOR PRO TEM, MR. ROBERT JOHN SMITH, REQUESTING THAT I CANCEL MY TOWN HALL THAT I HAD PLANNED FOR THE FOLLOWING WEEK.

IT HAS BEEN A LONG TRIP THAT WE'VE MADE OVER THE LAST YEAR, AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THANKS TO ALL OF YOU'LL HERE WITH ME TONIGHT FOR US WORKING TOGETHER LIKE WE HAVE TO GET THROUGH THIS AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO SO.

THANKS TO ALL OF YOU TOO.

>> THANK YOU SIR. COUNCIL HEDRICK.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, AND YES, I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE ALL THE HARD WORK EVERYONE HAS BEEN DOING ON THIS.

WELL, JASON AND HIS TEAM, EVERYONE.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU JASON.

I KNOW WITH THE JOHNSON & JOHNSON VACCINE BEING APPROVED BY THE FDA THIS PAST WEEK, ARE THERE ANY NEWS ON THOSE DOSES REACHING, GARLAND?

>> NOT ON THOSE DOSES REACHING GARLAND SPECIFICALLY.

NO. WE DID RESPOND TO AN INQUIRY FROM THE STATE LAST WEEK, ASKING IF WE WOULD ACCEPT JOHNSON & JOHNSON VACCINES IF THEY WERE OFFERED TO US.

OF COURSE, OUR ANSWER WAS YES.

[LAUGHTER] WE WILL ACCEPT THEM IF THEY ARE OFFERED TO US.

I'M PARTICIPATING IN A COUPLE OF STATEWIDE CALLS, ONE TOMORROW AND ONE WEDNESDAY, THAT ARE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE JOHNSON & JOHNSON VACCINE.

I DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION IN REGARDS TO THAT VACCINE BEING DISTRIBUTED TO GARLAND DIRECTLY CURRENTLY, BUT PERHAPS AFTER THESE TEAM MEETINGS OVER THE NEXT TWO DAYS, I'LL HAVE MORE INFORMATION.

WE'LL CERTAINLY SHARE THAT WITH YOU ALL AS IT BECOMES AVAILABLE.

>> ONE FINAL QUESTION I HAD IS THAT, WE HAVE DOSES THAT ARE ALLOCATED TO EITHER FIRST DOSE OR SECOND DOSE.

IS THERE A DIFFERENCE IN THE DOSE ITSELF, IN THE SHOT ITSELF BETWEEN THAT FIRST DOSE AND SECOND DOSE, OR IS IT ALL THE SAME VIAL OR CAN YOU CLEAR THAT UP FOR ME?

>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION AND THE ANSWER IS THAT IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME.

THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER.

THOSE DOSES CAN BE INTERCHANGED BECAUSE THEY'RE EXACTLY THE SAME.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

>> COUNCIL, [NOISE] I BELIEVE WE'VE CLEARED THE QUEUE ON THIS ITEM, AND OBVIOUSLY THINGS ARE ALWAYS DEVELOPING ON THIS WITH VACCINES AND SUCH.

I NOW KNOW JASON WILL KEEP US UPDATED AS WE GO BEFORE IF ANYTHING OCCURS BEFORE OUR MEETING ON THE 15TH.

THANK YOU ALL. NEXT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 4B,

[4B. Discuss a Possible Credit to Water Bills]

DISCUSS A POSSIBLE CREDIT WATER BILLS, AND COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH HAS BEEN ABLE TO JOIN US AND HE HAD WANTED TO PUT THIS ITEM ON.

I BELIEVE WE HAVE SEVERAL FOLKS UP TO PRESENT ON THIS ITEM.

[NOISE] THERE'S WES, HERE YOU ARE, SIR.

[00:45:02]

DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION OR TALKING QUESTIONS? I WASN'T SURE.

>> MAYOR COUNCIL, WE DO HAVE A SMALL PRESENTATION.

>> IF I CAN GET [INAUDIBLE] TO BRING THAT UP FOR US.

>> THANKS, MAYOR COUNCIL FOR HAVING ME THIS EVENING.

I JUST WANTED TO DISCUSS LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE WINTER STORM FAUCET ADJUSTMENT.

YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, LISA.

WE JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF SLIDES TO DISCUSS THE ADJUSTMENTS IF COUNCIL CHOOSES TO CHOOSES TO DO SO.

THIS FIRST SLIDE HERE IS FOR THE RESIDENTS.

OUR NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS WE HAVE 63,350.

AS YOU CAN SEE WE'VE GOT A RESIDENTIAL WATER RATE TIER STRUCTURE THERE FROM 0-3,000 GALLONS.

IT'S $4.80 PER THOUSAND.

FROM 3,001-15,000 GALLONS IT'S 5.88 PER THOUSAND, AND OF COURSE OVER 15,000 IS 9.36 PER THOUSAND.

THE CURRENT BASE RATE WE HAVE RIGHT NOW FOR RESIDENCE IS $22.45.

THERE HAS BEEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE BASE CHARGE RATE ADJUSTMENT.

WE BROKE IT DOWN INTO THREE CATEGORIES.

IF YOU WANTED TO DO A 1000 GALLONS, THE CREDIT WOULD BE $5.88 FOR AN ADJUSTED BASE CHARGE OF $16.57, AND THEN THAT'S THE COST OF THE CREDIT.

FOR 1,500 GALLONS, THE CREDIT WOULD BE $8.82 FOR AN ADJUSTED BASE CHARGE OF $13.63, AND THEN THERE'S THE COST FOR THAT CREDIT.

FINALLY FOR $2,000 CREDIT, THE CREDIT IS $11.76 AND THE ADJUSTED BASE CHARGE IS $10.69.

THIS WILL BE OF COURSE A ONE TIME CREDIT.

WHEN WE DO THAT AS SOON AS COUNCIL CHOOSES WHICH WAY THEY WANT TO GO WE COULD DO THAT PRETTY QUICKLY. NEXT SLIDE.

NOW, THIS IS FOR THE APARTMENT UNIT BILLING ADJUSTMENT.

IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING BUT HOPEFULLY I CAN WALK EVERYBODY THROUGH THIS; WE'VE GOT TWO DIFFERENT SCENARIOS HERE.

THE NUMBER OF APARTMENT UNITS THAT WE HAVE IS 22,111.

NOW, THE WATER APARTMENT CHARGE IS NOT A TIERED STRUCTURE IT'S BASED ON THE COMMERCIAL RATE WHICH IS $6.38 PER 1000 GALLONS, SO THERE'S NO TIER STRUCTURE IN THERE.

THE CURRENT BASE UNIT CHARGE IS $13.31.

ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SCREEN THERE IF YOU JUST DID A STRAIGHT ADJUSTMENT FOR 1000 GALLONS, THE CREDIT WOULD BE $6.38 FOR AN ADJUSTED BASE CHARGE OF $6.93, AND THEN OF COURSE THERE'S THE AMOUNT OF THE CREDIT.

GOING THROUGH THAT SAME SCENARIO 1,500, 2,000 GALLONS YOU CAN SEE HOW THE ADJUSTED CREDITS WOULD SHAKE OUT.

IF YOU USE 2,000 GALLONS, THE CREDIT IS ESSENTIALLY $12.76 OR THE BILL WOULD BE ADJUSTED TO 55 CENTS.

THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SCREEN, WE DID A CALCULATION BASED ON THE COST OF SERVICE STUDY THAT WE DID TWO YEARS AGO.

WE DID AN ADJUSTMENT BASED ON EQUITABLE ACCOUNTING OF RESIDENTS VERSUS APARTMENTS ON THEIR BASE RATE.

THAT HELPS SMOOTH OUT THAT ADJUSTMENT SO IT'S A ONE FOR ONE RATIO.

APPLYING THAT SAME RATIO AT 59 PERCENT LIKE WE DID TWO YEARS AGO, THE ADJUSTED RATES FOR 1,000 GALLONS IS $3.49 CREDIT AND THEN $9.82 IS THE ADJUSTED BASE CHARGE.

SAME THING FOR 1,500 GALLON AND 2,000 GALLONS.

IT ATTEMPTS TO SMOOTH OUT, MAKES IT A ONE FOR ONE RATIO.

COUNCIL, ALSO JUST A REMINDER, [NOISE] IF WE DO THE APARTMENT CREDIT, THAT DOESN'T GO TO EACH INDIVIDUAL THAT GOES TO THE APARTMENT MANAGEMENT.

THE APARTMENT MANAGEMENT WILL HAVE TO PUT THAT IN THEIR QUEUE AND ENSURE THE CREDIT GETS TO THE INDIVIDUAL UNITS.

NEXT SLIDE. COUNCIL, THIS IS JUST A COMPARISON AS FAR AS

[00:50:01]

SOME AREA CITIES AROUND THE METROPLEX THAT EITHER ARE CONSIDERING OR DO NOT HAVE A DRIP CREDIT.

RIGHT NOW PLANO, RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SCREEN HAS A 2,000 GALLON DRIP CREDIT.

BEN BROOKE IS CONSIDERING IT AND I THINK RICHARDSON APPLIED A $15 CREDIT.

I THINK THEY PUT UP A RESOLUTION FOR TONIGHT'S COUNCIL.

THAT'S JUST AN OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE CITIES AROUND TOWN THAT ARE POSSIBLY APPROVING THIS DRIP ADJUSTMENT.

THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS IS OF COURSE THE SEWER CHARGE.

WE DO OUR WINTER AVERAGE BASED ON DECEMBER, JANUARY, FEBRUARY, AND MARCH, AND SO WE JUST NEED A CONSENSUS ON WHETHER WE CAN LEAVE OUT FEBRUARY AND JUST DO A THREE MONTH AVERAGE INSTEAD OF A FOUR MONTH AVERAGE.

WITH THAT COUNCIL, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTION.

[NOISE]

>> THANK YOU. LISA, IF YOU CAN UN-SHARE FOR ME.

VERY GOOD. COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH.

>> [NOISE] THANK YOU, MAYOR. CAN HEAR ME OKAY?

>> YES, SIR. GO AHEAD.

>> VERY GOOD. FIRST I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK YOU GUYS HAVE PUT INTO THE CALCULATIONS.

>> I UNDERSTOOD FROM SOME PREVIOUS COMMENTS THERE WAS AN ESTIMATE THAT THERE ARE 1-2,000 GALLONS LOST TO DRIP.

COUPLED WITH THOSE COMMENTS AND THE SUGGESTION THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL MEMBER ROBIN HAD MADE FOR US TO LOOK INTO THIS, I WANTED TO GET IT ON THE AGENDA.

I'M ABSOLUTELY IN FAVOR OF THE 2,000 GALLON CREDIT ON BOTH SINGLE-FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

I WAS WORRIED ABOUT HAVING TO PLUG ALL THESE NUMBERS BACK INTO THE COST OF SERVICE STUDY WE DID A YEAR, TWO AGO.

THEN I DIDN'T WANT STUCK ON THAT FOR A MONTH OR TWO BUT YOU'VE ACCOUNTED FOR THAT.

YOU BROUGHT UP SOMETHING THAT I'D ACTUALLY BEEN THINKING ABOUT WHICH WAS THE ADJUSTED WASTEWATER CALCULATION.

I THINK YOU'VE GOT A GOOD METHODOLOGY IN MIND JUST DROPPING OFF FEBRUARY'S AS AN ANOMALOUS MONTH.

MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT I LIKE WHAT YOU GUYS DID WITH THAT.

AS FAR AS THE MULTI-FAMILY OWNERS AND OPERATORS BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR PASSING ON THOSE SAVINGS, I KNOW THAT THE MAJORITY OF THEM TAKE THE TOTAL AND OUTSOURCE THAT BILLING TO SOMEONE ELSE SO I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THAT SAVINGS NOT REACHING THE CUSTOMERS.

IT IS ALWAYS POSSIBLE BUT I THINK IT'S VERY UNLIKELY.

I GUESS THE QUESTION I HAVE ON THE FINANCIAL SIDE IS, WITH THE NUMBERS YOU'VE PRESENTED TO US AT THE 2,000 GALLON MARK.

WHAT IS THE HEALTH OF OUR FUND BALANCE AND DO WE FEEL THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS REBATE FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE?

>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. WE DID LOOK AT THAT IN OUR FUND BALANCE, WE'VE GOT A STRONG FUND BALANCE.

I THINK WE'LL GO FROM A 138 DAYS FUND BALANCE TO MAYBE ABOUT 133, 134, BUT WE CAN WE CAN WITHSTAND IT.

>> OKAY. THAT'S NOT ANTICIPATED TO HAVE ANY NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON OUR BOND RATING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? IT'S PRETTY SMALL CHUNK OF CHANGE IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS, RIGHT?

>> RIGHT. CORRECT.

>> OKAY. WELL, LOOK, I GREATLY APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU GUYS HAVE DONE ON THIS.

YOUR CREWS DID A PHENOMENAL JOB IF WE HAVEN'T SAID IT ENOUGH ALREADY.

THE NUMBER OF MAIN BREAKS WAS SMALL THE SPEED AT WHICH WE GOT THEM RESOLVED WAS FANTASTIC.

I KNOW A LOT OF FOLKS WHO WERE WITHOUT WATER BUT WE WERE GETTING WATER TO THE METER IN JUST ABOUT EVERY CASE.

COULDN'T BE PROUD OF YOU GUYS AND THE DEPARTMENT.

>> I JUST APPRECIATE IT ALL. THANKS [INAUDIBLE] AND THANK YOU MAYOR.

>> DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM MORRIS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. COUNCILMAN SMITH CHECKED OFF A COUPLE OF MY QUESTIONS THAT I HAD.

I DO WANT TO COMPLIMENT YOU WES, ON ALREADY GOING THROUGH THE COST OF SERVICE CALCULATIONS WHICH ALSO WAS GIVING ME A MIGRAINE EVEN THINKING ABOUT.

WE GOT SOMETHING GOOD OUT OF THAT. [LAUGHTER]

>> GREAT. [LAUGHTER]

>> WAY TO GO. JUST FOR THE WATCHING PUBLIC, APARTMENTS THAT HAVE INDIVIDUAL METERS, FOR THIS PURPOSE ARE THEY COUNTED LIKE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AS FAR AS CREDITS?

>> THEY CAN BE, YES.

>> OKAY. BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO THINK HOW ELSE WE WOULD DO THEM BUT SINCE THEY'RE INDIVIDUALLY METERED.

[OVERLAPPING].

>> IF THEY'RE INDIVIDUALLY METERED WE CAN COUNT THEM AS RESIDENCE.

>> OKAY. I ALSO FAVOR THE $2,000 CREDIT.

[00:55:04]

I HEARD BASICALLY THAT A LOT OF US ON COUNCIL WERE ALL SUGGESTING [LAUGHTER] THE SAME THING BECAUSE OF LOOKING AT [INAUDIBLE] PLANS.

YOU GOT SLAMMED WITH THAT AND WE'RE VERY GRACIOUS, JUST SAYING WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT MONDAY.

BUT I DO SUPPORT THE $2,000 CREDIT AND I ALSO ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT THE MAKING IT A THREE MONTH AVERAGE INSTEAD OF FOUR THAT'S JUST COMMON SENSE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> EXCUSE ME. COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMS.

>> OKAY, MAYOR. MUST TRY IT AGAIN, IF YOU CAN'T SEE ME CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> YOU'RE DOING GREAT ON BOTH ACCOUNTS [LAUGHTER].

>> OKAY. BOTH COUNCIL SMITH AND MAYOR PRO TEM JUST READ ALL OF MY NOTES AND THEY ASKED MY QUESTION.

BUT JUST ONE QUESTION FOR YOU WES, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE 2,000 AND I'M IN FAVOR OF THE THREE MONTHS, SO ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

BUT GOING BACK TO ONE POINT WES, FOR THE CREDITS THAT ARE GOING TO GO BACK TO MANAGEMENT.

PERHAPS MAYBE MY LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE IS IMPROVING BUT IT'S NOT MAYBE WHERE SOME OTHERS ARE.

HOW [INAUDIBLE] ISSUE AND YOU EXPRESS CONFIDENCE THAT WILL IT GET BACK CREDIT TO THE TENANTS? WORST-CASE SCENARIO, WHAT IF IT DOESN'T WES? HOW WOULD WE TRACK THAT? WHAT DO WE HAVE IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT THESE REBATES DO IN FACT GET CREDIT BACK TO THE TENANTS?

>> THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION, COUNCILMAN.

BECAUSE NORMALLY WHEN WE BILL, THE BILL JUST GO STRAIGHT TO THE MANAGEMENT AND THEN THE MANAGEMENT BREAKS THAT UP BECAUSE IT'S ALL MULTI-METER, MOST OF THEM.

WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT SOME TRACKING DEVICES AND ENSURE THAT THESE GET CREDITED.

I'D HAVE TO PROBABLY GET BACK WITH YOU ON HOW WE CAN TRACK THAT.

>> OKAY. WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE BEFORE ISSUING THE CREDITS, I'M JUST BRAINSTORMING HERE WES, ISSUE IN THE CREDIT THAT WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS OR INFORMATION THAT GOES OUT TO THE MANAGEMENT WITH A STATEMENT OF ENCOURAGEMENT AND RESTATING WHAT YOU'VE JUST AN INDICATED THAT THESE CREDITS, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE COMING BACK TO MANAGEMENT AND SHOULD AT LEAST BE APPLY TO THE INDIVIDUAL TENANTS?

>> CORRECT.

>> BECAUSE MY OVERRIDING CONCERN IS, IT'S A GOOD PROGRAM.

WE MAY HAVE 80 PERCENT, NO PROBLEM BUT IT'S ALWAYS AT 20 PERCENT THAT COMES BACK.

IF I LIVE IN COMPLEX Y AND YOU LIVE IN COMPLEX W, I DON'T GET THE CREDITS.

THEN YOU AND I ARE FRIENDS AND WE TALK TO EACH OTHER.

THEN YOU SEE WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS?

>> EXACTLY.

>> CAN WE GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE THOUGHT TO THAT? WE DON'T WANT TO BE POLICE OR.

>> RIGHT.

>> WE DON'T WANT TO INFRINGE, BUT I JUST WANT TO BE SURE.

HAVE A LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE THAT WE HAVE WHEN WE ROLL THIS PROGRAM OUT, THAT MANAGEMENT UNDERSTANDS VERY CLEARLY WHAT THE CITY'S MESSAGE IS ABOUT THIS REBATE PROGRAM.

>> CORRECT, WE CAN HIGHLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO DO THIS, TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THAT.

>> OKAY. YEAH. SO PERHAPS IF YOU SHARE SOME LANGUAGE AFTER YOU BRAINSTORM WES.

>> ON HOW YOU THINK THAT, WE CAN BEST, GO ABOUT THAT.

>> TO ENSURE THAT THE RESIDENTS AND ATTENDANTS ARE PROTECTED IN THIS PROCESS. OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANKS, SIR. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

>> JUST TO ADD ONTO THAT ONE THING I THINK WHENEVER THAT WE CAN USE TO GET THAT MESSAGE ACROSS IS DURING THE LAST WEEK, WITH ALL THE ISSUES RETURNING WATER SERVICE TO APARTMENTS.

I'VE HAD ALMOST DAILY CONTACT WITH JASON SIMON WHO IS THE PRESIDENT, I DON'T KNOW, I THINK IT'S THE GREATER DALLAS DEPARTMENT MANAGERS ASSOCIATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

HE AND I HAVE BEEN AN ALMOST CONSTANT CONTEXTS,

[01:00:02]

SO I THINK WE COULD ALSO USE HIM TO GET THAT MESSAGE OUT AS WELL.

HE CAN BE A VERY GOOD CONTACT FOR THAT. COUNCILOR ROBIN.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, REALLY JUST ONE.

IF SOMEBODY ALSO HAD A BROKEN PIPE AND HAS APPLIED FOR BROKEN PIPE CREDIT, IS THIS GOING TO BE AN OFFSET TO THIS OR IS THIS IN ADDITION?

>> THIS IS AN ADDITION TO.

THIS WILL BE ON ACROSS THE BOARD.

SO THE DRIP CREDIT WAS BASICALLY ACROSS THE BOARD.

THEN IF YOU HAD A PIPE BURST, THE PIPE BURST ALSO WITH A RECEIPT OR A PICTURE WOULD ALSO BE AND ADD TO IT.

>> IT SEEMS SLIGHTLY CONTRADICTORY, BUT I DON'T KNOW.

WE CERTAINLY DID HAVE A LOT OF PIPES BURST.

>> RIGHT.

>> I'M FINE WITH THE 2000 GALLONS.

I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE.

I'M FINE WITH THE THREE MONTH AVERAGE ON THE CURE.

IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE COULD, WHEN WE BROUGHT THIS.

SEEING AS IT'S GOING TO BE ACROSS THE BOARD.

I THINK YOU COULD REDUCE THEN THE AMOUNT OF ANY WATER CREDIT THAT SOMEBODY GETS.

I MEAN, I SUPPOSE YOU MIGHT HAVE AN OFF CASE WHERE SOMEONE'S LIKE, I DRIPPED IT, BUT NOT ENOUGH AND THEN MY PIPE FROZE ANYWAY.

[OVERLAPPING] I DON'T KNOW.

SOME PEOPLE SAY THAT THEY WERE RUNNING STREAMS OF WATER AND OTHER STUFF.

>> IT'S A VARIABLE AMOUNT.

HOW MANY PHOSPHATES WERE YOU DRIPPING, WHAT WAS YOUR DRIP RATE? THERE'S A LOT OF VARIABLE INTO THAT.

SO YOU JUST SAY, OKAY, IT'S ABOUT THIS MUCH.

>> RIGHT, NO AND I AGREE WITH THAT.

I MEAN, YOU SPEND MORE STAFF TIME TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW MANY GALLONS EVERYBODY DRIPPED, AND IT'S EASIER JUST TO PROVIDE THE ACROSS-THE-BOARD CREDIT.

BUT THERE'S A SENSE OF PROVIDING DRIP CREDITS TO SOMEONE WHO DIDN'T DRIP, CHAPS ME A LITTLE BIT.

BUT IN THAT REGARD, YOU KNOW, FOR FOLKS WHO ARE WATCHING HOME RISE, OKAY.

I ASK PEOPLE ABOUT THIS.

SOME PEOPLE WERE LIKE FAIRLY ADAMANT, LIKE NO, THERE SHOULDN'T BE GRIP CREDITS BECAUSE YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT TO SAVE YOURSELF MONEY,.

>> YEAH.

>> BUT FROM A PLUMBER OR WHATEVER.

BUT YOU KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN SUCH A UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE DURING COVID WHEN SO MANY PEOPLE ARE ALREADY HAVING A TOUGH TIME AND CAN LEAD TO A CERTAIN DEGREE, IF YOU HAVE TO RUN YOUR PIPES AT A STREAM INSTEAD OF A DRIP BECAUSE YOU CAN'T HEAT YOUR HOUSE BECAUSE YOUR ELECTRIC IS OFF.

THEN YOUR ELECTRIC IS OFF AND YOU HAVE GP AND NOW, I FEEL LIKE, THAT I DON'T LIKE PITCHING IN SOMEONE THE COSTS THAT SOME OF THESE FOLKS HAD TO INCUR.

IN PARTICULAR, IT SEEMED THAT WE HAVE FEMA COMING IN, WE HAVE ALL THESE REPAIR CREDITS AND OTHER STUFF THAT OR THAT MIGHT BE COMING IT SEEMED VERY UNFAIR THAT, IF WE DIDN'T GIVE YOU A CREDIT, IF YOU DRIPPED, YOU'D PAY ALL THIS EXTRA MONEY FOR DRIPPING OR STREAMING.

YOU'D PAY MONEY. BUT IF YOU DIDN'T DRIP AT ALL, YOUR PIPES FROZE, THEY BROKE WE'LL CREDIT YOU THE MONEY FROM THE LEAK AND THE REPAIR WOULD BE COVERED BY FEMA OR INSURANCE OR BOTH.

SO IT SET UP IN A VERY UNUSUAL SITUATION WHERE YOU COULD COME OUT AHEAD BY NOT DRIPPING YOUR WATER SOMEHOW.

>> IT'S A PERFECT STORM. [LAUGHTER]

>> EXACTLY. SO GIVEN ALL OF THAT, I MEAN, I SEE THIS IS JUST A VERY ONE-OFF, UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE AND INDEFINITELY SUPPORT GOING AHEAD AND DOING THE CREDIT.

IF THERE'S ANY WAY WE OFFSET IT, THEN I'M ALL ABOUT THAT.

>> THANK YOU. THANKS.

>> COUNCILOR [INAUDIBLE].

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'LL SAY I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE CREDIT AS WELL AND WES, I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

MY ENGINEERING SIDE GOT THE BEST OF ME AND I'M WONDERING WHAT THE WASTEWATER FLOWS LOOK LIKE IN FEBRUARY COMPARED TO OUR HISTORICAL AVERAGES.

>> YOU KNOW I HAVEN'T LOOKED UP THOSE NUMBERS YET.

I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THEIR PROBLEM.

WE'RE GOING TO BE AWARDED, I ASSUME THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE.

BUT AS FAR AS HOW MUCH, BECAUSE IT WAS COMPARED AS FAR AS WHAT DID WE DO LAST MONTH, LAST YEAR? THE SAME AS LAST YEAR.

SO I PROBABLY HAVE THOSE NUMBERS HERE REAL SOON BECAUSE [INAUDIBLE] FEBRUARY ACTUALLY IT'S TODAY, SO I'LL PROBABLY HAVE SOME NUMBERS TOMORROW.

BUT I WOULD THINK IT'S PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT MORE. PROBABLY AN UP TWO.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU AND ONE THING ALSO, I KNOW I MIGHT BE CONCERNED WITH THIS CREDIT FOR APARTMENT RENTERS GOING DIRECTLY TO THEM OR NOT,

[01:05:02]

OR WHETHER THEIR LANDLORDS WOULD TAKE THE CREDIT.

MY QUESTION IS A LARGE NUMBER OF OUR CITY HAS GP AND L IS THERE, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WOULD BE A CROSSING OF FUNDS OR NOT, BUT HAVE A GP AND L COORDINATE IF THEY'RE ELECTRIC CUSTOMERS, IT WOULD GO DIRECTLY TO THEM RATHER THAN THROUGH THEIR WATER BILL.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S THAT POSSIBLY CROSSING BUT WE'RE JUST BRAINSTORMING HERE IF THAT MIGHT BE A POSSIBILITY.

ALTHOUGH I KNOW SOME RESIDENTS, EVEN IN MY DISTRICT AREN'T GP AND L CUSTOMERS, SO WE'D HAVE TO FIGURE OUT THAT ISSUE AS WELL.

>> RIGHT. OKAY.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WES, JUST ONE OBSERVATION.

>> COUNCILOR MCNEIL.

FIRST OF ALL, WHAT I'M DEFINITELY SUPPORTED THE 2K AS WELL AS THE THREE MONTH AVERAGE.

JUST WANT TO SEE IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY, AS WE KNOW, COMMUNICATE THIS OUT.

IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO JUST REINFORCE OUR WATER CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE OF THIS ISSUE, WE SEE THE CRITICALITY OF WATER.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALSO USE MESSAGING TO JUST LET EVERYONE KNOW, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE HAD RAIN AND SNOW HERE RECENTLY.

>> RIGHT.

>> BUT WE STILL NEED TO BE ABOUT CONSERVATION.

STILL DON'T KNOW IF YOU COULD DO SOME OF THAT MESSAGING IN THERE AS WELL?

>> YES. COUNCILOR, WE CAN TECHNICALLY WE ARE A CONSERVATION AS FAR AS SPRING MONTHS VERSUS SUMMER MONTHS, THERE'S TWICE A WEEK WATERING, ONCE A WEEK WATERING.

IT JUST DEPENDS ON HOW THE RESERVOIRS ARE DOING AS FAR AS THE WATER DISTRICTS.

SO TECHNICALLY WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO CONSERVE AS MUCH AS WE CAN, BUT WE CAN ALWAYS REINFORCE THAT MESSAGE.

YEAH, THAT'S ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA, YEAH.

>> ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE CLEARED THE QUEUE ON THIS SIDE THEN.

SO FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, THERE SEEMS TO BE CONSENSUS WITH THE 2000 GALLON DRIP CREDIT.

NOW I THINK ONE OF YOU SAID $2 THOUSAND CREDIT AND I IMMEDIATELY HAD SOMEBODY TEXTING ME SAYING, YES, THEY WOULD TAKE A $2 THOUSAND CREDIT BECAUSE THAT WOULD COVER THEIR WATER FOR THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS.

SO TO BE VERY CLEAR, [LAUGHTER] IT IS GALLONS, NOT DOLLARS?

>> CORRECT.

>> [LAUGHTER] THEN ALSO FOR WASTEWATER OF BASICALLY TAKING FEBRUARY OUT OF THE CALCULATION THAT I [OVERLAPPING] DIDN'T HEAR ANY OPPOSITION TO THAT.

I DO WANT US TO AS FAR AS THE MULTIFAMILY, I DO DEFINITELY WANT US TO PUSH THAT MESSAGE THROUGH THE APARTMENT MANAGERS ASSOCIATION.

OBVIOUSLY WE'LL PRESS IT WITH OUR OWN INFORMATION, BUT CERTAINLY CARRYING THAT THROUGH THERE.

SO THANK YOU WES FOR ALL THOSE CALCULATIONS.

>> MAYOR I DO HAVE JUST ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION.

>> ON THE APARTMENTS THAT ADJUSTED 2000 GALLON CREDIT WOULD BE BASED ON THE COST OF SERVICE TO 59 PERCENT RATIO, CORRECT?

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT. THAT WILL MOVE US TO ITEM FOUR C,

[4C. Audit Committee Report]

AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT. CUSTOMER ROBIN?

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. WE HAVE AN AUDIT MEDIA REPORT [INAUDIBLE] , THEY'RE ONLINE, THERE YOU'RE SIR [INAUDIBLE]

>> THANK YOU [LAUGHTER].

>> THE AUDIT COMMITTEE MET AND WE HAD LIABILITY CLAIMS ON, THE SOFTWARE LICENSING ON FOLLOW UP, THE CRAFT EMPLOYEE RETENTION AUDIT, AND WE ALSO HAVE THE CITYWIDE RISK ASSESSMENT IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2021 IN YOUR AUDIT PLAN.

I'M JUST GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO JEDD AND LET HIM READ.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR OF CITY COUNCIL.

>> THANK YOU JEDD.

THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE YOU WITH AN UPDATE FROM THE AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING.

AS THE CHAIRMAN INDICATED WE COVERED A LOT OF AUDITS.

THE FIRST ITEM WAS THE LIABILITY CLAIMS AUDITS.

THERE WERE FOUR OBJECTIVES.

THE FIRST ONE WAS TO DETERMINE IF CLAIMS WERE APPROPRIATELY PROCESSED, WERE SEARCHED, AND APPROVED.

SECOND ONE WAS TO DETERMINE IF RISK MANAGEMENT MONITORING PROCESS REGARDING THE FREQUENCY OF CLAIMS FILED AGAINST THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS.

THE THIRD ITEM WAS TO EVALUATE THE ADEQUACY OF ACCESS RIGHTS WITHIN THE SYSTEM, AND THE LAST OBJECTIVE WAS TO ENSURE THAT WHETHER THE THIRD PARTY VENDOR PAYMENTS WERE MADE FOR SERVICES PROVIDED.

[NOISE] SOME OF THE FAVORABLE OBSERVATIONS THAT WE HAD FROM THESE ARE,

[01:10:03]

SEGREGATION OF DUTIES BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS, WHEN IT COMES TO KEY RESPONSIBILITIES.

IT WAS A VERY POSITIVE OBSERVATION.

WHAT THAT MEANT WAS THE CLAIM INTAKE IS CURRENTLY BEING CONDUCTED BY THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE.

THE CLAIM EVALUATION PROCESS IS CURRENTLY CONDUCTED BY RISK MANAGEMENT OFFICE, AND THEN THE PAYMENT PROCESSING IS CONDUCTED BY THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

THERE WERE PROPER SEGREGATION OF DUTIES BETWEEN THOSE THREE FUNCTIONS.

SOME OF THE FINDINGS [BACKGROUND] FOR SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAD [NOISE] FROM THIS AUDIT: NUMBER 1; CLAIMS AND INCIDENT REPORT PROCESSING TIMELINESS.

WE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE THAT.

THE SECOND ITEM WAS ABOUT CITY NOTIFICATION OF INCIDENTS TO CITIZENS.

WE THOUGHT WE COULD DO BETTER JOB IN CONDUCTING THAT.

THE THIRD ITEM, WAS SOME DOCUMENTARY.

STRENGTHENING OF DOCUMENTATION WITHIN THE SOFTWARE ITSELF.

THE NEXT ITEM WAS; WE CURRENTLY DID NOT HAVE ANY AD HOC CLAIMS REPORTING PROCESS.

WHAT IT MEANT WAS, PERIODICALLY, WE RECOMMENDED THAT THE DEPARTMENT CAN REPORT THE NUMBER OF CLAIMS PROCESSED, THE TOTAL DOLLAR AMOUNT SPENT, TYPE OF CLAIMS, NUMBER OF CLAIMS PROCESS PER DEPARTMENT, CLAIM APPROVAL VERSUS DENIAL RATIO, NUMBER OF INCIDENTS PER DEPARTMENTS.

BASICALLY, WE WANTED A REPORT TO BE GENERATED AND THAT WOULD GO TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

THE NEXT ITEM WAS CLAIMS APPROVAL.

CURRENTLY, ANYTHING GREATER THAN 10,000 DOLLARS GOES TO THE CLAIMS COMMITTEE FOR APPROVAL.

WE JUST WANTED TO ENHANCE THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE OF THAT APPROVAL.

THE NEXT ITEM WAS TO, AGAIN, ENHANCE INTERNAL CONTROLS, WHEN IT COMES TO REVIEW OF CLAIMS STATUS, WHETHER IT WAS APPROVED OR DENIED, WE WANTED MANAGEMENT TO PERFORM A SAMPLE OR FULL VIEW TO ENSURE THAT CLAIMS WERE APPROPRIATELY DENIED OR APPROVED.

WE ALSO WANTED MANAGEMENT TO REVIEW ACCESS RIGHTS WITHIN THE SYSTEM AND RECOMMENDED SOME POLICIES TO BE UPDATED.

WE ALSO WANTED CITY TO ENHANCE THE CLAIM SUBMISSION OPTIONS THAT THE CITY CURRENTLY HAS.

BASICALLY, WE WANTED TO SEE IF WE CAN HAVE AN ONLINE SUBMISSION OPTIONS, AND ALSO IF WE CAN HAVE INSTRUCTIONS IN OTHER LANGUAGES.

THE AUDIT COMMITTEE HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AUDIT.

[NOISE] SINCE THE AUDIT COMMITTEE, I WOULD LIKE TO INFORM YOU THAT THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE WAS ABLE TO WORK WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND THE RISK MANAGEMENT OFFICE, AND WE CAME TO CONSENSUS, AND ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE CONCURRED, AND CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTING THEM.

JUST WANTED TO THANK EACH ONE OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS, ESPECIALLY THE CITY'S MANAGER, THE CITY'S ATTORNEY, AND ALSO THE RISK MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR, FOR WORKING WITH US AND ENHANCING THESE INTERNAL CONTROLS.

THAT WAS THE FIRST AUDIT.

THE SECOND AUDIT THAT WE COVERED WAS THE SOFTWARE LICENSING AUDIT FOLLOW-UP.

SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER TWO YEARS AGO WE DID AN AUDIT IN THAT AREA.

THIS AUDIT COVERED BOTH THE CITY IT DEPARTMENT, AS WELL AS THE [INAUDIBLE] DEPARTMENT, AND I'M HAPPY TO REPORT THAT OUT OF THE 22 RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE MADE, 20 OF THEM WERE FULLY IMPLEMENTED, TWO WERE PARTIALLY IMPLEMENTED.

SINCE THEN, BOTH DEPARTMENTS HAVE REMOVED APPROXIMATELY 160 SOFTWARE'S WHICH HAD NO BUSINESS PURPOSES.

THAT'S A GREAT THING, ENHANCING OUR SECURITY, WHEN IT COMES TO SOFTWARE, IT'S IMPORTANT AND MANAGEMENT TOOK IT, AND THEY IMPLEMENTED THAT.

I'M VERY HAPPY TO REPORT THAT.

THEY ALSO ENHANCED TRACKING OF CONTRACT TERMS AND VERIFICATION OF ACCURACY.

WHEN IT COMES TO PERMIT ACCURACY, USER INTERNAL REPORTS WERE DISTRIBUTED IN A TIMELY MANNER.

CONTINUE TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE TRAINING TO EMPLOYEES, REGARDING THE RISK OF IT RISKS, AND ALSO THEY UPDATED THE IT DIRECTIVE AND COMMUNICATED.

THIS FOLLOW WAS VERY IMPACTFUL, AND I WANT TO THANK THE CITY IT DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS [INAUDIBLE] IT DEPARTMENT FOR IMPLEMENTING THESE CONTROLS.

THE NEXT ITEM WE COVERED WAS THE CRAFT EMPLOYEE RETENTION CONTRACT COMPLIANCE AUDIT.

AS YOU'RE AWARE, CITY HAS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH CRAFT.

HAPPY TO REPORT THAT ONCE AGAIN, THEY WERE IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR REQUIRED TERMS AND CONDITIONS FROM THE AGREEMENT.

EVEN DURING PANDEMIC, THEY WERE ABLE TO COMPLY, SO EXTREMELY HAPPY TO REPORT THAT.

THERE WERE TWO OTHER AUDIT/FOLLOW-UPS WERE DISCUSSED DURING THE AUDIT COMMITTEE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

I WILL NOT GET INTO DETAILS.

[01:15:02]

ONE OF THEM WAS THE GPL QC CUSTOMER AGREEMENT AUDIT.

HAPPY TO REPORT THAT THEY HAVE A GOOD PROCESS IN PLACE.

ALSO TWO YEARS AGO, WE ALSO DID A POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT AUDIT AND THERE WERE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS, I'M HAPPY TO REPORT THAT THEY IMPLEMENTED MAJORITY OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.

THOSE WERE DISCUSSED IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[NOISE] THE NEXT ITEM THAT WE DISCUSSED WAS THE CITYWIDE RISK ASSESSMENT.

OUR DEPARTMENT FACILITATED A CITYWIDE RISK ASSESSMENT IN 2020.

BASICALLY THE OBJECTIVE WAS TO PROVIDE MANAGEMENT THE ABILITY TO EVALUATE THEIR OBJECTIVES WITHIN EACH DEPARTMENT, AND TO ANALYZE CURRENT RISK, AND TO EVALUATE THE INTERNAL CONTROLS WITHIN THOSE DEPARTMENTS, AND THEN RANKED THOSE RISK FROM AN IMPACT AND LIKELIHOOD PERSPECTIVE.

I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION THAT CITY DEPARTMENT, EVERY DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY MANAGER'S BRYAN BRADFORD'S OFFICE, PARTICIPATED IN THIS PROGRAM.

WE IDENTIFIED OVER 700 RISKS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

OUT OF ALL; 41 PERCENT OF THOSE RISKS WERE OPERATIONAL RISKS, 28 PERCENT WERE FINANCIAL RISK, 15 PERCENT WHERE REGULATORY OR COMPLIANCE RISK, SEVEN PERCENT WERE TECHNOLOGY RISK, AND SIX PERCENT WERE HUMANS.

THE OTHER TWO PERCENT WERE OTHER TYPES OF RISK.

I WANT TO THANK YOU AGAIN, BRYAN BRADFORD FOR HIS SUPPORT IN HELPING US GETTING THIS RISK ASSESSMENT DONE.

I BELIEVE THIS IS IMPORTANT ON GOING FORWARD, BECAUSE THE RISK CONTINUE TO CHANGE, AND IF WE'RE NOT TOP OF IT, THINGS CAN GO DOWN SOUTH AND WE DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN.

I REALLY DO WANT TO APPRECIATE EVERYONE FOR PARTICIPATING WITH THAT.

WITH THAT, WE ALSO COVERED THE ANNUAL AUDIT PLAN THAT I PROPOSED TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE.

I CAN QUICKLY GO OVER THE AUDITS THAT I PROPOSED FOR THIS YEAR.

THE FIRST ONE WAS THE BOND PROGRAM.

THE SECOND ONE WAS THE CONTRACT PROCUREMENT AUDIT.

THE THIRD ONE WAS DEVELOPMENT AND PERMITTING FEES AUDIT.

FOURTH ONE WAS ENERGY SUPPLY ADMINISTRATION AUDIT.

THE NEXT ONE WAS THE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS PROGRAM AUDIT.

THE NEXT ONE WAS THE FUEL PROGRAM AUDIT, SCORE FOR PROGRAM AUDIT, INVENTORY MANAGEMENT AUDIT, CASH COUNT, AND ONCE AGAIN, CRAFT EMPLOYEE RETENTION AUDIT.

WE ALSO HAD A FEW AUDITS THAT WE'LL CONTINUE TO PERFORM.

ONE OF THEM WAS, QUALIFIED SCHEDULING ENTITY CUSTOMER AGREEMENT AUDIT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM AUDIT, SOFTWARE LICENSING FOLLOW UP, AND INVENTORY MANAGEMENT AUDITS.

THESE WERE THE AUDITS THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON, AND WILL HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET TO COMPLETE TOWARDS THE END OF THIS YEAR.

A FEW AUDIT FOLLOW-UPS.

WE'RE ALSO IN THE AUDIT PLAN FOR COMPLIANCE OPERATIONAL REVIEW.

WE'VE DONE THAT AUDIT A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO.

WE WANTED TO GO BACK AND FOCUS ON THEIR MULTIFAMILY SIDE OF IT.

THAT'S IN THE AUDIT PLAN.

CIP REIMBURSEMENT, FIRE PERMANENT INSPECTIONS, SO THESE WERE THE AUDIT FOLLOW-UPS THAT I INCLUDED IN THE AUDIT PLAN.

AUDIT COMMITTEE APPROVED THE AUDIT PLAN.

I HOPE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WILL ALSO APPROVE THE AUDIT PLAN.

THAT EVEN REALLY FAST, I KNOW THAT, BUT THOSE WERE THE ITEMS THAT WE COVERED IN THE AUDIT COMMITTEE.

AT THIS POINT, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU ALL HAVE.

>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, SIR.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR JEDD ON THIS OR COUNCILOR ROBIN? COUNCILOR MCNEIL.

>> THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR. JENNA, THANK YOU.

MAYOR MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS A RISK REGARDING HUMAN CAPITAL.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD SPEAK TO? YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO INTO ALL THE DETAILS BUT JUST A COUPLE OF BULLET POINTS ON THAT.

>> THE HUMAN CAPITAL IS ABOUT THE SAFETY OF CITY EMPLOYEES.

BASICALLY, I KNOW A LOT OF EMPLOYEES WHO ARE IN BUSY STREETS AND ALSO IN DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE GOOD TRAININGS IN PLACE.

WE HAVE PROPER CONTROLS IN PLACE TO PROPER SIGNS, VARIOUS TYPES OF ADEQUATE TRAINING NEEDS TO BE PROVIDED TO EMPLOYEES.

HUMAN CAPITAL, THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

BASICALLY ABOUT THE CITY EMPLOYEES THAT ARE WORKING IN DIFFICULT CONDITIONS AND HOW THE CITY'S OR THE DEPARTMENT IS PROTECTING THE CITY EMPLOYEES AS WELL AS CITIZENS.

THAT'S WHAT THAT IS ABOUT.

BASICALLY, WE ASK THE DEPARTMENT TO EVALUATE THAT PROCESS, AND IF THEY CONSIDER THAT AS ONE OF THE HIGHER RISK AREAS THEN WHAT CONTROLS DO WE HAVE IN PLACE AT THIS POINT? ARE THOSE CONTROLS EFFECTIVE?

[01:20:01]

IF WE HAVE THOSE IN PLACE AND IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THOSE IN PLACE WHAT ARE WE DOING ABOUT IT? OBVIOUSLY OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE THINGS THAT THEY ARE EXPOSED TO.

OUR FIREMEN, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THE RISK ASSESSMENT IS TO EVALUATE THOSE RISKS AND COME UP WITH THE OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE.

AT TIMES WE MAY HAVE TO SAY WE CANNOT REALLY GET ALL THE RISKS BUT WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING POSSIBLE THAT WE CAN.

THAT WAS ABOUT THE HUMAN CAPITAL RISK.

>> THANK YOU, JEDD, FOR THAT AND THAT'S WHERE I WANTED TO GO TO BECAUSE IF ONE THING WHAT COVID HAS EXPOSED IS THE FACT THAT AS WE HAVE STAFF AND AS WE HAVE OUR TEAM OUT IN THE FIELD AND SERVING OUR RESIDENTS.

THAT THEY ARE EXPOSED TO NOT ONLY JUST THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL DANGERS OR SOME OF THOSE OTHER UNFORESEEN POTENTIAL DANGERS AS WELL.

THANK YOU FOR GOING THERE.

I'M CERTAIN THAT MR. BRADFORD AND HIS TEAM WILL DEFINITELY DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE THERE. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> SIR. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? I SEE NONE. THANK YOU, JEDD FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU DO, AND THANK YOU TO THE COMMITTEE FOR KEEPING TRACK OF ALL OF THEM

>> ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO ITEM 4D,

[4D. Public Safety Committee Report]

PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERA IS THE CHAIR OF THAT COMMITTEE AND I SEE CHIEF BEHIND, IS IN THERE. COUNCIL VERA.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I HAVE CHIEF BRIAN AND DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY, MICHAEL BETZ.

WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS SUBJECT. GO AHEAD CHIEF.

>> THANK YOU, MR. VERA. THANK YOU, COUNCIL.

THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE, WE HAD TWO UPDATES TONIGHT.

ONE OF THE DISCUSSIONS WE HAD WAS ABOUT PARKING ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTY AND WHAT THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE IS RECOMMENDING IS TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING VEHICLES FROM PARKING ON CITY-OWNED PROPERTY.

THE AUTHOR OF THAT ORDINANCE IS HERE, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY, MIKE BETZ IS GOING TO EXPLAIN THAT ORDINANCE

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

[NOISE] THE PROBLEM THAT CAME TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE ESSENTIALLY REVOLVED AROUND THE FACT THAT THERE ARE PLACES IN THE CITY, THERE ARE LOTS THAT THE CITY OWNS IN VARIOUS PLACES AROUND A CITY WHERE CITIZENS WILL SOMETIMES PARK THEIR VEHICLES.

EITHER SELL THE VEHICLE OR JUST BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO PARK IN A PARKING LOT OR OTHER PLACES.

THEY JUST PULL UP ON OUR LOT SOMETIMES ON THE GRASS, SOMETIMES ON AN ALLEYWAY THAT CUTS THROUGH THE PROPERTY, SOMETIMES ON SOME PAVED AREA THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY.

THEY JUST PARK THE CAR THERE AND THEN GO BACK TO THEIR HOUSE AND LEAVE THE CAR THERE.

SOMETIMES THEY PUT THE CAR OUT THERE AND LIST IT FOR SALE ON THE CITY PROPERTY, WHICH THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO UNDER DIFFERENT ORDINANCE.

BUT WHEN YOU TELL THEM, HEY, YOU CAN'T LIST THE CAR FOR SALE, THEN THEY JUST PUT THEIR PHONE NUMBER ON.

THEY DON'T LIST IT FOR SALE AND THEY LEAVE IT ON THE CITY PROPERTY.

THAT WAS THE PROBLEM THAT WAS REFERRED TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE THAT MR. VERA BE REFERRING WAS SENT TO THE COMMITTEE.

THE RESOLUTION WAS QUITE SIMPLE.

IT BASICALLY PROPOSING AMENDING SECTION 3355 OF OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES.

TO ADD A SECTION AT THE END OF THE LONG LIST OF PARKING VIOLATIONS, MISCELLANEOUS PARKING VIOLATIONS THAT WE HAVE, THAT WOULD SAY THAT YOU MAY NOT PARK ON PUBLIC PROPERTY OTHER THAN A ROADWAY, NOT IN A DESIGNATED PARKING SPOT.

WE WANT OUR ROADWAYS TO AND CERTAINLY, PEOPLE CAN PARK ON THEM WHERE THEY'RE ALLOWED TO PARK.

BUT YOU CAN'T PARK ON PUBLIC PROPERTY OTHER THAN A ROADWAY EXCEPT IF IT'S A DESIGNATED SPOT.

THAT WAY PEOPLE CAN'T JUST COME PACK THEIR CAR DOWN ON A CITY FIELD SOMEWHERE AND LEAVE IT THERE WITH NOTHING IN THE ORDINANCE WE CAN DO TO PREVENT IT.

I THINK IS ELISA OR SOMEBODY'S GOT THIS SLIDE TO PUT UP.

WE'LL SEE IF THAT GOES UP.

WHO'S GOT THAT GIF.

>> I'M GUESSING THAT ELISA IS WORKING ON THAT NOW.

I CAN'T SEE YOU FROM WHERE I'M SITTING BUT I'M GUESSING SHE IS.

>> MAYOR, I DO NOT HAVE THE SLIDE.

>> OR I COULD BE WRONG.

>> OKAY. WELL, I CAN FIGURE HOW TO PUT IT UP. GIVE ME A MOMENT.

>> THANK YOU ELISA [LAUGHTER]

[01:25:08]

WE'LL TEST MR. [INAUDIBLE] LOOK AT THERE.

>> THAT'S MY SKILLS.

>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN.

IS IT JUST THIS ORDINANCE RIGHT HERE?

>> OKAY. IT'S VERY EASY, THIS IS OUR LAUNDRY LIST.

THIS IS WHAT WE PROPOSED AS AN AMENDMENT.

THIS IS OUR LAUNDRY LIST OF MISCELLANEOUS ORDINANCES AND DOWN HERE WE WOULD ADD NUMBER 17.

IT SAYS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY OTHER THAN A ROADWAY, NOT A DESIGNATED PARKING SPOT AND IT WOULD GO IN TWO PLACES.

ONE IS AGAINST THE REGISTERED OWNER OF THE VEHICLE HERE UNDER 3355 A AND ONE IS UNDER 3355 B.

A PERSON COMMITS AN OFFENSE IF THEY PARK AGAIN ON PUBLIC PROPERTY OTHER THAN A ROADWAY, NOT A DESIGNATED PARKING SPACE.

IF THAT'S ACCEPTABLE TO THE COUNCIL, WE WOULD COME BACK IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS WITH AN ORDINANCE.

THAT'LL BE VERY SIMPLE THAT SIMPLY WE HAD THAT, STOP SHARING AND ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ITEM.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR.

IS, JUST SAY HERE.

MAYOR PRO TEM NICKERSON.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I GUESS MIKE THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE, WOULD WE ALSO THEN BE REQUIRED TO POST NO PARKING SIGN IN THOSE LOCATIONS AND REFERENCED THE ORDINANCE NUMBER.

>> WE WOULD NOT. WE COULD POST A SIGN.

WE CAN ADOPT A DIFFERENT ORDER AND SUCH JUST REQUIRED POSTING SIGNS AND ALL THESE PLACES BECAUSE THEN THEY WOULD VIOLATE THE ORDINANCE OF PARKING WHERE IT'S POSTED NO PARKING.

IT SEEMS SIMPLER TO JUST DO THIS APPROACH.

>> ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT. THANKS.

>> ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OR THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF THIS ITEM? I SEE NONE IS THERE.

I ASSUME WITH THAT THERE'S NO OPPOSITION TO BRINGING FORTH AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ON THIS ITEM. COUNCIL VERA.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANT TO THANK [NOISE] CHIEF BRIAN AND MICHAEL BETZ FOR DOING ALL THE RESEARCH AND ALL THIS.

THIS WAS NOT JUST PUTTING THINGS TOGETHER, BUT DOING RESEARCH AND ALL OF THIS.

I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR DOING THAT.

>> THANKS, SIR. I DIDN'T SEE ANY OPPOSITION, MR. BETZ TO BRING FORTH THE AMENDED ORDINANCE. [NOISE]

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. WE'LL BRING THAT BACK TO COUNCIL.

>> OKAY, THEN THE SECOND PART OF THIS WAS DISCUSSED TOPICS RELATED TO STREET RACING [NOISE] ON GARLAND STREETS.

I'M GUESSING THAT FALLS SQUARELY ON THE CHIEF.

>> I WAS HOPING I COULD TALK ABOUT THAT TOO.

>> [LAUGHTER] AS SOON AS HIS PART WAS DONE, HIS CAMERA WENT OUT.

>> LET ME START BY SAYING, IF YOU WATCHED THE NEWS TODAY, THE DFW AREA, YOU'LL SEE HOW BIG AN ISSUE THIS IS, ESPECIALLY IN DALLAS.

NOW WHAT YOU'LL SEE IN DALLAS IS, YOU'LL SEE GROUPS OF INDIVIDUALS THAT WILL BLOCK OFF AND PRETTY MUCH CAPTURE A ROADWAY, OR CAPTURE AN INTERSECTION AND THEN RACE THROUGH IT, OR DUE DOWN AT [NOISE]THE INTERSECTION, OR WHAT HAVE YOU, CAUSE MISCHIEF.

WE'RE NOT SEEING THAT ISSUE RIGHT NOW IN GARLAND.

NOW WE'VE SEEN IT IN THE PAST, WE'VE SEEN IT IN OUR INDUSTRIAL AREA.

A FEW YEARS BACK WE STARTED PUTTING STREET HOPS IN OUR INDUSTRIAL AREA AND THAT ELIMINATED THE RACING THERE.

THEN ABOUT A YEAR AGO, WE STARTED SEEING THIS AROUND THE KINGSLEY AND FIRST AREA.

WE DEVELOPED A PLAN PRETTY QUICKLY AND WE SHOWED AN OVERWHELMING SHOW OF HORSE ONCE THEY ARRIVED.

WE DISPERSED THAT GROUP AND THEY HAVE SINCE DECIDED TO GO OTHER PLACES BESIDES THE CITY OF GARLAND TO DO THAT TYPE OF RACING.

NOW, WE DO HAVE PROBLEMS IN GARLAND.

THE TWO PROBLEMS THAT WE REALLY HAVE, ONE IS ON THE HIGHWAYS.

YOU'LL HAVE GROUPS OF INDIVIDUALS THAT WILL BLOCK ONE, OR TWO, OR THREE LANES AND THEN RACE ON THE HIGHWAYS.

IT'S REALLY CHALLENGING FOR US BECAUSE THEY'RE MOVING.

THEY'RE IN AND OUT OF OUR CITY IN THE MATTER OF MINUTES AND ONTO THE NEXT CITY.

THAT HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE FOR US.

THEN THE OTHER ISSUE WITH RACING THAT WE SEE IS A COUPLE OF INDIVIDUALS THAT WILL PULL UP TO A RED LIGHT AND THEN RACE.

THAT'S OUSTED. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO CATCH.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT, I THINK THE PERCEPTION OF THAT PROBLEM IS BIGGER THAN THE ACTUAL PROBLEM AND THE REASON IS, I THINK SOMETIMES PEOPLE HEAR BECAUSE WE WORKED SEVERAL PROJECTS OVER THE LAST MONTHS TO GET AN IDEA OF HOW BIG THE PROBLEM IS IN GARLAND.

I THINK A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE WILL HEAR THAT ENGINE

[01:30:01]

REVVING AS THEY GO THROUGH THE GEARS AND AS THEY'RE SPEEDING AND THINK THAT'S A RACE.

IT'S NOT A RACE, IT'S JUST A SPEEDING VEHICLE AND THAT IS DANGEROUS AS WELL.

SPEEDING VEHICLES ARE DANGEROUS AND WE ADDRESS THOSE, BUT MOST OF THE TIME WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS IT'S A SINGLE VEHICLE VERSUS TWO VEHICLES RACING.

NOW WE DO HAVE ISSUES WITH TWO VEHICLES RACING.

WE'VE MADE SIX ARRESTS IN THE PAST, 12 MONTHS ON INDIVIDUALS RACING, SO WE DO HAVE THAT PROBLEM.

WE WORK PROJECTS ON OCCASION TO ADDRESS IT, BUT IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO CATCH THESE TYPE RACERS BECAUSE IT'S NOT PLANNED.

IT'S A MATTER OF TWO GUYS GETTING AT A STOPLIGHT, LOOKING AT EACH OTHER, AND THEN GO IN, [NOISE] WHETHER THERE'S AN OFFICER THERE AT THE LOCATION OR NOT. THOSE ARE TWO PROBLEMS. I'LL ALSO SAY THAT THERE ARE SOME REALLY GOOD CAR CLUBS IN THE DFW AREA.

A LOT OF TIMES THESE CLUBS WILL START TO GATHER AT MAYBE THE WALMART OFF 190, AND WE'LL GET A CALL SAYING, "HEY, THERE'S A BUNCH OF RACERS IN THE AREA," BUT REALLY IT'S JUST A CAR CLUB.

THESE CAR CLUBS POLICE THEMSELVES VERY WELL.

WE LEAVE THEM ALONE AND THEY DO A GOOD JOB POLICING THEMSELVES AND THEY'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO COME AS LONG AS THEY HAVE PERMISSION TO BE ON THE PROPERTY.

WE DON'T HAVE ISSUES WITH THOSE TYPE OF CAR CLUBS.

IT'S THE RACING CLUBS WE HAVE THE ISSUES WITH.

I THINK THAT'S ALL MY UPDATES, BUT I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.

>> I KNOW CHIEF BECAUSE I KNOW I SAID THINGS TO YOU.

WHEN WE HAVE A COMPLAINT OF SPEEDING OR ETC IN A CERTAIN AREA, I DO KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO TARGET THAT AREA.

THERE'S A CERTAIN STRETCH OF ROAD OR THERE'S A CERTAIN INTERSECTION, I KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO DIRECT TRAFFIC OFFICERS, OR THE NPO'S, OR SOMETHING TO THAT AREA TO SHOW THEM THAT WE'RE HERE.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. I APPRECIATE YOU MENTIONED THAT.

WHEN WE GET A COMPLAINT OF SPEEDING, WE DO TWO THINGS.

FIRST, WE DO A SPEED SURVEY.

WE HAVE BOXES THAT YOU DON'T KNOW THEY'RE THERE.

WE PUT THEM ON A TELEPHONE POLE.

IT'S A BLACK BOX, YOU WOULDN'T KNOW IT IS THERE, BUT IT CAPTURES DATA, SO WE CAN GET AN IDEA OF HOW MANY SPEEDERS WE HAVE, WHAT THE TIME IS, AND THE TYPES OF SPEED THAT THEY'RE SEEING.

THEN WE FOLLOW THAT UP WITH ENFORCEMENT, WHEN WE DO THAT ON EVERY SINGLE COMPLAINT READ YET, WHETHER IT'S FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBER OR FROM A CITIZEN, EVERY COMPLAINT WE GET IS FOLLOWED UP WITH THAT TYPE OF ACTION. YES, SIR.

>> VERY GOOD. DEPUTY MAYOR PROTEM MORRIS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR ANNA, AND THANK YOU, JASON.

YOU AND I HAVE EMAILED AND TEXTS AND TALKED ABOUT THIS MANY TIMES BECAUSE, FROM MY HOME IN OLD DOWNTOWN, I HAD ABOUT THREE OR FOUR WEEKS STRAIGHT WHERE IT WASN'T JUST A SINGLE CAR, IT WAS LOUD MULTIPLE RACING ENGINES THAT ACTUALLY WOKE ME UP REPEATEDLY.

[NOISE] I'M OLD AND I'M ALREADY NATURALLY CRABBY, BUT THAT MADE THE CONDITION MUCH WORSE.

[LAUGHTER] THANKS FOR DOING WHATEVER YOU DID BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN NOTICEABLY BETTER IN RECENT WEEKS.

THAT BEING SAID, I AM GETTING A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT LAVON AND CASTLE, WHERE PEOPLE ARE SAYING THEY'RE WATCHING CARS LINE UP THERE, AND WATCHING SOMEBODY JUMP OUT AND DROP A FLAG, AND THEY'RE HEADING NORTH.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY COME TO YOUR ATTENTION RECENTLY AGAIN, BUT THAT SEEMS TO BE ONGOING.

I DID WANT TO ASK, [NOISE] WITH LAVON BEING A TEXT DOT HIGHWAY, DO WE HAVE ANY LIMITATIONS ON WHAT WE CAN DO THERE AS FAR AS YOU'RE CONCERNED?

>> WE DO NOT. THAT'S IN OUR JURISDICTION, WE HAVE NO LIMITATIONS.

IN FACT, ALL OF LAVON IS ONE OF OUR TARGET LOCATIONS.

I'M HOPING YOU'VE SEEN A REDUCTION IN THAT OR A PART OF REDUCTION IN THAT.

BECAUSE WHEN WE'VE DONE OUR PROJECTS IN THE PAST, LAVON IS ONE OF OUR PRIMARY TARGETS.

>> BUT FOR MY EARSHOT AT MY HOUSE, I'VE DEFINITELY SEEN A REDUCTION AND I'VE HEARD A REDUCTION.

YOU DON'T HAVE ANY TROUBLE DOING SPEED SURVEYS ON LAVON AND YOU'VE ALREADY DONE THAT IN THAT AREA?

>> WE DO NOT. WE RUN A LOT OF TICKETS ON THE BLOCK.

>> I BET YOU DO.

>> WE'VE BEEN THERE WITH OUR MOTORCYCLE OFFICERS AND WITH OUR ENABLING POLICE OFFICERS.

WE ENFORCED THE TRAPPERS IN MOST [INAUDIBLE].

>> HAVE YOU DONE A SPECIFIC SPEED SURVEY ON THAT STRETCH,

[01:35:04]

SAY BETWEEN CASTLE AND BUCKINGHAM? [NOISE]

>> I KNOW WE'VE DONE THEM ON LAVON, I CAN'T YOU TELL IT'S EXACTLY CASTLE AND BUCKINGHAM.

WE CAN'T, [OVERLAPPING] BUT I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT EXACT LOCATION.

>> WELL, IT'S BEEN REQUESTED BY CITIZENS [NOISE] IF YOU WOULD, MAYBE SURVEY IT OR WATCH THAT PARTICULAR AREA.

I'VE GOTTEN TINGED ABOUT THAT OVER AND OVER AGAIN, BUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS MAKING A DIFFERENCE.

FROM MY PERSPECTIVE DOWNTOWN, IT'S MUCH GREATLY REDUCED.

APPRECIATE THAT A LOT.

I'M SURE YOU APPRECIATE NOT GETTING TEXTS FROM ME [LAUGHTER] SAYING, "I'M AWAKE AGAIN.

MAKE THEM STOP." THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU. I BELIEVE WE'VE CLEARED THE QUEUE ON THIS ITEM.

WE'LL BE LOOKING FORWARD TO THE AMENDED ORDINANCE ON THE PARKING.

COUNCIL WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A QUICK RECESS.

LET'S HAVE EVERYBODY BACK ONLINE AT 7:45, PLEASE.

7:45. THANK YOU.

[MUSIC] GOOD EVENING. WE ARE COMING BACK FROM RECESS AT THE MARCH 1ST, 2021 WORK SESSION FOR THE GARLAND CITY COUNCIL.

WE ARE AT ITEM 4E, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.

[4E. Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s)]

[NOISE] EXCUSE ME. MR. GERUND I BELIEVE YOU'RE UP ON THIS ONE.

>> YES, SIR. MAYOR COUNCIL, GOOD EVENING.

THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE WAS TASKED TO LOOK AT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, AND WHAT STAFF'S TASK REALLY WAS, WAS TO REPORT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AS FAR AS THE CURRENT GDC REGULATIONS OF ADUS.

YOU MAY ALREADY BE AWARE WE DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN WHAT WE CALL GUEST HOUSES AND RENTAL UNITS.

WE WENT THROUGH THAT.

WE WERE ALSO TASKED TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST THAT WITH THE CITY PLANO.

THE CITY PLANO FAIRLY RECENTLY ADOPTED ORDINATES THAT LOOSENED THE RESTRICTIONS ON ADUS THERE, WHAT THEY NOW CALL BACKYARD COTTAGES, WHICH ARE FOR THE MOST PART ALLOWED BY RIGHT VERSUS AN SUP PROCESS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THE COMMITTEE LOOKED AT THE COMPARISONS BETWEEN GARLAND AND PLANO.

I HAVE A PRESENTATION CERTAINLY, AND I'LL DEFER TO MR. CHAIRMAN AS WELL, COUNCILMAN HEDRICK, IF HE HAS ANYTHING TO ADD OR ANY THOUGHTS.

BUT ULTIMATELY, THE COMMITTEE IDENTIFIED SOME CHALLENGES, INCLUDING PARKING, THE ZONING DISTRICTS IN WHICH TO ALLOW THEM THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, IDENTIFYING POSSIBLY MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE, THINGS LIKE THAT.

ULTIMATELY, THE COMMITTEE DID NOT COME AWAY WITH ANY CHANGES TO RECOMMEND AT THIS TIME TO THE GDC VERSUS WHAT WE CURRENTLY REGULATE GUEST HOUSES, THEY CURRENTLY ARE IN GARLAND ALLOWED BY RIGHT AS BOTH GUEST HOUSES AND RENTAL UNITS BY RIGHT IN THE DOWNTOWN ZONE DISTRICTS.

THEY ARE ALLOWED BY SUP ONLY.

GUEST HOUSES ARE PERMITTED BY SUP ONLY IN THE AG OR AGRICULTURE SFS ESTATE SF TEN AND SF7 ZONING DISTRICTS, WHILE RENTAL UNITS ARE PERMITTED BY SUP ONLY IN THE AG AND SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE ZONING DISTRICTS.

I'LL STOP THERE AGAIN, I DO HAVE A PRESENTATION [INAUDIBLE] , I'M HAPPY TO GO THROUGH.

>> WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT, COUNCIL MEMBER HEDRICK.

>> YES. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

MR. GERUND'S, CORRECT, WE DID CONSIDER THOSE AND WITH THE FIVE QUESTIONS THAT WE BROUGHT UP, REALLY, HE TOUCHED ON A FEW OF THEM, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GO OVER THE FIVE CONCERNS THAT THE COMMITTEE HAD IN RELATION TO IF WE MAKE ANY POLICY CHANGE HERE, AND FIRST ONE ALLOWED IN WHICH DISTRICT AND MR. GERUND DESCRIBED THE DISTRICTS THAT ARE ALREADY ALLOWED IN AND IT'S USUALLY AT THE LARGER RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.

WE HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT SMALLER RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS WOULD BE AN EVEN HAVE THE SIZE NECESSARY TO SUPPORT AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

THE SECOND QUESTION WAS THE SIZE OF THAT DWELLING UNIT IN RELATION TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE?

[01:40:01]

PLANO HAS A CERTAIN SIZE AND MINIMUM SIZE FOR THE UNIT, AND IT'S SOMETHING WE MAY CONSIDER AS WELL.

THIRD QUESTION WAS PARKING, IF THERE'S SUFFICIENCY IN THE PARKING? IF THIS WAS A RENTED DWELLING UNIT POSSIBLY OR A GRANNY FLAT FOR MAYBE A RELATIVE OF FAMILY, WILL AN ADDITIONAL PARKING BE REQUIRED FOR THIS? WE ALSO CONSIDER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE IMPACT TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ABOUT POPULATION DENSITY.

THEN FINALLY, WHO IS THE OWNER OF THE MAIN RESIDENTIAL BUILDING THERE? GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE STILL HAVE THOSE QUESTIONS, AND THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED IN THOSE DISTRICTS ALREADY, THERE'S RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS THAT I DESCRIBED EARLIER, THE COMMITTEE DECIDED THAT WE JUST WERE NOT GOING TO IMPLEMENT ANY CHANGES AT THIS TIME.

WE DECIDED THAT THE FEW NUMBER OF REQUESTS THAT WE DO RECEIVE IN ADDITION, PLANO, I BELIEVE HAS ONLY RECEIVED ONE REQUEST AS WELL, THAT THERE IS A PATHWAY TO ALLOWING THOSE IF THEY NEED THEM THIS TIME THROUGH THE SUP PROCESS.

IF WE WERE GOING TO IMPLEMENT ANY CHANGES IN THE FUTURE, WE WERE CERTAINLY GOING TO HAVE OUR OFFICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY REACH OUT TO HOAS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, AND OTHER RESIDENTS TO GET THEIR INPUT BEFORE WE MAKE ANY POLICY CHANGES.

I'M HAPPY TO HAVE STAFF PROVIDE THEIR PRESENTATION IF REQUESTED OR ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> HANG ON A SECOND. COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR. IF THIS IS ADDRESSED IN THE PRESENTATION, LET ME KNOW AND I'LL HOLD MY QUESTION.

BUT MY QUESTION IS IN REGARDS TO STORE MOTOR.

WE'VE BEEN TACKLING THIS AND THE TEAM COMMITTEE QUITE A BIT.

I'M A LITTLE WORRIED ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF IMPERMEABLE SURFACE INTRODUCED INTO NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN YOU START ADDING STRUCTURES IN CONCRETE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

I'M WAY OUT OF MY COMFORT ZONE HERE.

[LAUGHTER] DYLAN OR JERRY PROBABLY CAN HELP GUIDE ME.

BUT DO WE HAVE A LOT OF VARIANCE IN THE CALCULATIONS THAT GO INTO NEIGHBORHOOD DRAINAGE, WHERE IF THIS PROGRAM WERE WIDELY ADOPTED, THAT WE CAN HANDLE THE ADDITIONAL RUNOFF? OR MAYBE IT'S QUESTION FOR MR. BAKER.

HOPEFULLY YOU'LL GET WHAT I'M ASKING, EVEN IF I'M NOT ASKING IT THE RIGHT WAY.

THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION FOR WHOEVER WANTS TO TACKLE IT.

>> I CERTAINLY HAVE THOUGHTS ON THAT AND I DON'T KNOW IF MR. BAKER'S HERE TO ANSWER THE CITY POSITION ON THAT, I KNOW HOW THEY ARE DESIGNED.

THEY'RE DESIGNED WITH A CERTAIN RAINFALL YOU PUT IN [INAUDIBLE] VALUE INTO THAT AND THAT'S ALREADY SET, SO RESIDENTIAL AREAS TYPICALLY HAVE LOWER VALUES THAN COMMERCIAL AREAS OR INDUSTRIAL AREAS WHICH THEY HAVE A LOT MORE PAVEMENT.

IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE SIZE ON THESE ESTATE LOSS.

IF YOU HAVE A HUGE 20,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND YOU PUT IT AS 400 SQUARE FOOT STRUCTURE, THAT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE AS BIG OF A DIFFERENCE AS IF IT'S ON A 7,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND YOU HAVE THE SAME STRUCTURE.

>> THAT GOES BACK INTO YOUR DISCUSSIONS ABOUT SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOMES AND WHAT SORT OF ZONING IS ALREADY EXISTING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS THAT [OVERLAPPING] WHERE THE COMMITTEE WAS TAKING IT?

>> INCLUDING WITH THAT ALSO, YOU DON'T JUST HAVE THE STRUCTURE BUT YOU ALSO HAVE IF WE HAVE TO HAVE A PARKING SPACE, YOU HAVE THE PAVEMENTS FOR THAT PARKING SPACE AS WELL.

ALSO IN IN SIZE CONSIDERATIONS, YOU START GETTING INTO BUILDING SETBACK ISSUES THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE ALONG DEPENDING ON WHAT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY MAY BE.

>> GOT IT. PERFECT. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU MAYOR.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER RIVERA.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WOULD LIKE TO [INAUDIBLE] PRESENTATION.

>> YES.

>> PEOPLE CAN SEE YOU ALL THAT.

>> ONCE I CLEAR THE CUE, THAT'S WHERE WE'LL BE.

LET'S SEE HERE, COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMS.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR. I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION FOR MR. CHAIRMAN.

THE COMMITTEE, DO WE KNOW HOW MANY OF THESE UNITS ARE CURRENTLY IN OUR CITY AND HOW MANY REQUESTS HAVE WE RECEIVED, LET'S SAY, IN THE LAST 2-5 YEARS?

>> SURE, IN THE LAST 2-5 YEARS, I BELIEVE WE ONLY RECEIVED AND PROCESSED ONE REQUEST THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH AS FAR AS PERMIT AND SEE, I DON'T BELIEVE IN VALUES.

YOU PROBABLY COUNT ON ONE HAND HOW MANY WE ACTUALLY HAVE.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> COUNCIL, ROBIN.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. [NOISE] IT SEEMS LIKE WHAT THE COMMITTEE WAS MOSTLY LOOKING AT WAS A CHANGE OF PROCESS, ULTIMATELY FROM AN SUP PROCESS TO A BY-RIGHT PROCESS.

[01:45:03]

IS THAT GENERALLY ACCURATE?

>> WE DIDN'T WANT TO CHANGE THE PROCESS, IT'S STILL AVAILABLE THROUGH THE SUP PROCESS.

IF YOU RECALL, THERE WAS ONE MAYBE A YEAR OR TWO AGO WHERE WE HAD THE LADY COME BY AND WE APPROVED IT THROUGH THE SUP PROCESS.

SO WE DON'T THINK THAT PROCESS IS STILL ALWAYS TO HAVE A HOME AND GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

>> IF YOU WANT THE FULL BACKYARD COTTAGE EXPERIENCE, YOU'VE GOT A BATHROOM, A LITTLE COOKIE; A FULL LIVING SPACE, YOU CAN DO THAT, BUT YOU JUST HAVE TO COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN TO COUNCIL. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES.

>> IT HAS TO FIT ALL THE GMO QUIZ AND THE COMMITTEE MEANS AS WELL AND IT ALL HAS TO PASS THE BUILDING CODES THAT GET INSPECTED AND GET PERMIT AND ALL THAT.

>> OKAY. BUT I'M JUST SAYING, YOU CAN HAVE A FULLY ENCLOSED AND IF IT'S IN CERTAIN PARTS OF THE CITY, IT CAN BE, I GUESS IF IT'S DOWNTOWN YOU CAN RENT THEM OUT.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> IF IT'S [NOISE] SF-7 OR SF-10 OR I THINK SF-E, YOU CAN HAVE THAT YOU JUST HAVE TO COME FOR THE SUP.

>> I'M IN FAVOR OF KEEPING IT THAT WAY.

BUT WE DID HAVE THAT ONE IT WAS I THINK DECEMBER OF 2019.

I OPPOSED IT, BUT THEY SEEM TO BE RARE AND I THINK THEY SHOULD BE RARE.

IF PEOPLE HAVE A SPECIFIC NEED, I THINK THEY SHOULD COME TO US AND THAT GIVES US ALSO THE OPPORTUNITY AFTER A PERIOD OF TIME TO REVOKE THOSE AFTER FIVE OR 10 OR 15 YEARS.

I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE SUP WAS, I THINK IT WAS MR. JONES.

I DON'T SEE ANY REASON TO DEVIATE FROM THE SUP PROCESS.

AS IT STANDS ALREADY, I'M CONCERNED.

I THINK I HAVE A LOT OF THE DISTRICT 5, EXCEPT THEY'RE NOT PERMITTED AND THEY DON'T ACTUALLY COMPLY WITH ANY OF THE STANDARDS THAT YOU'VE DISCUSSED.

I HAVE PEOPLE LIVING IN SHEDS AND DOING OTHER STUFF.

I THINK WE HAD A FIRE AT ONE OF THESE SHEDS A FEW MONTHS AGO WHERE THERE WERE, I THINK SIX MEN LIVING IN IT AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING, THAT WOULD GIVE PEOPLE THIS FEELING OF LICENSE TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD, AND IT JUST BUILT THEM. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> I THINK AT THIS POINT WE'VE COVERED THE QUEUE.

WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND IF YOU COULD JUST GO THROUGH YOUR PRESENTATION IT DOES HAVE SOME INFORMATION IF THERE'S PEOPLE VIEWING ON WHERE THEY'RE ALLOWED, WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, ETC.

>> YES, ABSOLUTELY THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME PRESENTATION I GAVE TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE, AGAIN, GETTING A SNAPSHOT OF THE GDC REGULATIONS IN GARLAND VERSUS WHAT PLANO HAS DONE.

AGAIN, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT SOMETIMES THEY HAVE DIFFERENT NICKNAMES, BACKYARD COTTAGES, GRANNY FLATS, MOTHER-IN-LAW QUARTERS, BACK HOUSES, GARAGE APARTMENTS.

JUST A LITTLE BACKGROUND HERE.

SOME COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY HAVE BEGUN ALLOWING ADU'S YEARS MORE.

THEY DO ADDRESS HIGH HOUSING COSTS, THEY ALLOW EXTENDED FAMILY ACCOMMODATIONS, SUCH AS AGING AND PLACE FOR PARENTS AND IN-LAWS, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS WITHOUT NECESSARILY HAVING TO MOVE OUT.

JUST AS AN EXAMPLE WITH CALIFORNIA, STATE LAW REQUIRES ADU'S TO BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT AND FOR CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES TO LESSEN RESTRICTIONS ON THEM THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS.

YOU DO SEE GENERALLY MORE COMMUNITIES ALLOWING THEM ALONG THE WEST COAST AREAS, BUT YOU'RE SEEING THEM IN OTHER AREAS AS WELL.

TO GIVE A LOCAL EXAMPLE, AGAIN, THE CITY OF PLANO HAS STARTED ALLOWING WHAT THEY CALL BACKYARD COTTAGES BY RIGHT.

TO START WITH GARLAND, THE GDC MENTIONED THIS EARLIER, BUT THIS IS HERE IN WRITING, OF COURSE.

FOR GUEST HOUSES, AGAIN, THOSE ARE ALLOWED BY SUP.

IN THE AGRICULTURE, THE SF STATE SF-10 AND SF-7 ZONING DISTRICTS AND THEY ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN THE DOWNTOWN ZONING DISTRICTS AND THOSE MAY NOT BE RENTED.

RENTAL UNITS, WHICH OF COURSE, CAN BE RENTED, THOSE ARE ALLOWED BY SUP ONLY IN THE AGRICULTURE AND SF-E ZONING DISTRICT.

THOSE ARE THE REAL LARGE LOT ZONING DISTRICTS THAT CAN ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL.

THOSE ARE ALSO ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN DOWNTOWN.

JUST SOME DEFINITIONS OF EACH ONE.

GUEST HOUSE AND RENTAL UNIT ESSENTIALLY HAVE THE SAME DEFINITION JUST WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THAT DELINEATION BETWEEN WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN RENT THE UNIT OUT.

[01:50:04]

THERE IS A MAXIMUM THAT THE BUILDING AREA OF THE ADU CANNOT EXCEED 30 PERCENT OF THE FLOOR AREA OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE.

[NOISE] JUST SOME REGULATIONS, I CAN COME BACK TO ANY OF THESE IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT JUST A COUPLE OF THEM.

THINGS TO NOTE OF COURSE, IT MUST BE A TRUE ACCESSORY BUILDING.

IN OTHER WORDS, THERE HAS TO BE A MAIN HOUSE ON THE LOT, THE ACCESSORY BUILDING ADU CANNOT BE SOLD SEPARATELY FOR SALE FROM THE REST OF THE PROPERTY.

IT ALSO MAY NOT BE SUB-LET BY AN EXISTING LEASE.

I SHOULD MENTION, AGAIN, THERE'S A 30 PERCENT MAXIMUM FLOOR SIZE REQUIREMENT, 30 PERCENT OF THE FLOOR AREA OF THE MAIN BUILDING, BUT THERE'S REALLY NOT A CLEAR MINIMUM.

OUR COUNCIL HEYDRICH MENTIONED THAT EARLIER, PLANO DOES HAVE ONE WHICH I'LL GET TO IN A LITTLE BIT, BUT THERE'S NOT REALLY NECESSARILY A MINIMUM SIZE FOR THESE.

THERE'S SOME EXISTING HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS DEPENDING ON THE SIZE, MAKING THEM TO SCALE, DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE GUEST HOUSE OR RENTAL UNIT.

JUST THERE AS A STANDARD THREE-FOOT SETBACK FOR NON-STREET INTERIOR SIDE AND REAR YARDS [NOISE].

GOING TO PLANO, BACKYARD COTTAGES ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHT AND MOST OF THEIR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS PROVIDED THEY ADHERE TO THE REGULATIONS THAT THE CITY OF PLANO ADOPTED.

THEY STRENGTHEN SOME OF THE REGULATIONS BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE ALLOWING THEM THE RIGHT AND MAKING SURE THOSE WERE REVIEWED DURING THE PERMITTING PROCESS.

BY PROVIDING, IN OTHER WORDS, THAT MEANS NO PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS IS REQUIRED, SUCH AS AN SUP, THEY CAN GO THROUGH STAFF AND THROUGH THE BUILDING PERMANENT PROCESS.

WE SHOULD KNOW IT JUST AS A SIDE NOTE, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS WERE ALREADY ALLOWED FOR THEIR LARGER ESTATE, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, AND HAVE THEIR OWN SET OF REGULATIONS.

I DON'T BELIEVE THEY MESSED WITH THOSE.

THE BACKYARD COTTAGES WERE ALLOWING PLANO TO START ALLOWING THEM BY RIGHT AND THEIR STANDARD, SINGLE-FAMILY DISTRICTS LIKE THEY'RE EQUIVALENT OF THIS SF-5, SF-7, SF-10 THAT SORT OF THING.

OUR STATE RESIDENTS, THAT'S YOUR REAL LARGE HOUSES THAT HAVE YOUR LARGE, NICE GUEST HOUSE, POOL HOUSE IN THE BACK THAT SORT OF THING.

[NOISE] ONE KEY REGULATION THAT PLANO HAS IS THE OWNER PROPERTY MUST OCCUPY ONE OF THE DWELLING UNITS ON THE PROPERTY.

THEN A SIGNED AFFIDAVIT IS ACTUALLY REQUIRED TO BE RECORDED AT THE COUNTY.

THE OWNER DOES NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO LIVE IN THE MAIN HOUSE, HE OR SHE CAN LIVE IN THE BACKYARD COTTAGE, BUT THEY HAVE TO LIVE IN ONE OF THE TWO.

[NOISE] THE BACKYARD COTTAGE, AGAIN, THIS IS PLANO, BACKYARD COTTAGE MUST BE LOCATED ON THE SAME LOT AS THE MAIN DWELLING UNIT, AND A BACKYARD COTTAGE MUST NOT BE SOLD SEPARATELY FROM THE MAIN DWELLING UNIT.

GARLAND HAS A SIMILAR REQUIREMENT, AS YOU RECALL.

A MAXIMUM OF ONE BACKYARD COTTAGE PER LOT IS ALLOWED.

PLANO HAS A MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO ALLOW THESE FOR 6,000 SQUARE FEET, LOT SIZE.

HEIGHT CANNOT EXTEND OR EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE MAIN RESIDENTIAL BUILDING.

I MENTIONED THAT PLANO HAS A MINIMUM, IT'S 400 SQUARE FEET FOR BACKYARD COTTAGES, AND THEIR MAXIMUM IS 1,100 SQUARE FEET, OR 50 PERCENT OF THE FLOOR AREA OF THE MAIN DWELLING UNIT, WHICHEVER IS MORE RESTRICTIVE.

MINIMUM SEPARATION FOR THE MAIN DWELLING UNIT IS 10 FEET.

JUST A FEW ADDITIONAL THINGS PLANO HAS, THE BACKYARD COTTAGE MUST BE LOCATED BEHIND THE MAIN DWELLING UNIT, MUST BE ARCHITECTURALLY DESIGNED TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE MAIN DWELLING UNIT.

TEMPORARY BUILDINGS, ASSUME THEY MEAN STORAGE SHEDS THINGS LIKE THAT MUST NOT BE USED AS A BACKYARD COTTAGE.

BACKYARD COTTAGES AND THE OTHER CONJOINED STRUCTURES MUST BE ATTACHED TO A PERMANENT FOUNDATION SET ON THE GROUND.

I MENTIONED THIS EARLIER, BUT THIS IS AGAIN WHERE THE OWNER HAS TO LIVE IN ONE OF THE UNITS, AN AFFIDAVIT IS REQUIRED AS PART OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS AND ACTUALLY HAS TO BE RECORDED AT THE COUNTY, AND THAT FOLLOWS WITH ANY NEW PROPERTY OWNERS AS WELL.

THEY HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, THAT AFFIDAVIT EXISTS AND AGREE TO IT.

AS SOON AS THERE'S ANY VIOLATION OF THAT OR ANY CHANGE, THEN THE BACKYARD COTTAGE HAS TO BE REMOVED.

THEY HAVE SOME PARTICULAR REQUIREMENTS FOR SITE ACCESS AND PARKING.

IT'S ESSENTIALLY, SITE ACCESS HAS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD DRIVEWAY CUTS.

CURB CUTS CAN'T BE WIDER THAN 24 FEET IN WIDTH.

THEY CAN'T ACHIEVE OFF-STREET PARKING BY TANDEM PARKING.

[01:55:01]

SO THOSE TYPES OF THINGS HAVE TO BE FIGURED OUT THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS.

AGAIN, THIS IS PLANO, JUST TO WRAP IT UP, THERE ARE A FEW KEY DIFFERENCES THAT WE NOTED AS, OF COURSE, PLANO ALLOWS WHAT THEY CALL THE BACKYARD COTTAGES ADUS BY RIGHT, AND MOST RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS SUBJECT TO MEETING THE OUTLINED REGULATIONS, INCLUDING THAT THE OWNER MUST LIVE IN ONE OF THE DWELLING UNITS, WHETHER IT'S THE MAIN HOUSE OR THE BACKYARD COTTAGE.

WHEREAS GARLAND ONLY ALLOWS THEM BY RIGHT IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND BY SUP IN CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS OUTSIDE OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA.

PLANO ALLOWS THEM TO BE RENTED OUT PROVIDED THE OWNER LIVES IN ONE OF THE DWELLING UNITS, BUT THE RENT IS NOT COLLECTED FOR THE OWNER-OCCUPIED UNIT, SO THEY CAN'T RENT OUT THE UNIT THAT ALREADY LIVING, IT NEEDS TO BE THE OTHER ONE IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

GARLAND, DIFFERENTIATES BETWEEN RENTAL UNITS AND GUEST HOUSES.

IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE PLANO, THIS IS FROM MY COLLEAGUE IN PLANO, SHE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE AWARE OF THE CITY OF PLANO DID COMMUNITY OUTREACH WHEN CONSIDERING AND BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THESE BACKYARD COTTAGE AMENDMENTS, ORDINANCE.

[NOISE] COUNCILMAN HEDRICK MENTIONED THIS ALREADY, BUT HERE ARE THE FIVE CHALLENGES: PARKING, SQUARE FOOTAGE, THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE, PERHAPS THE ZONING DISTRICTS IN WHICH TO ALLOW THEM IN AND WHETHER IT'S BY SUP OR BY RIGHT.

THE IMPACT ON SCHOOL THE DISTRICT, AND OF COURSE, OWNERSHIP.

THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU. WILL, YOU CAN UNCHAIR FOR ME, SIR. COUNCIL MEMBER VERA

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. WILL, YOU MENTIONED GARAGES, DON'T WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE THEY CAN ENCLOSE A GARAGE FOR LIVING SPACE RIGHT NOW?

>> IT HAS TO BE PERMITTED.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S GOT TO GO TO THE PROPER PERMITTING PROCESS IF THAT COULD BE ALLOWED.

I SEE MR. OLK MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT THAT, SEES IT MORE DIRECTLY THAN [OVERLAPPING] MY DATA.

>> THE GDC REQUIRES THAT A CONSTRUCTION BASICALLY THAT A HOUSE HAVE TWO PARKING SPACES INSIDE AN ENCLOSED GARAGE.

WE'VE GOT A LOT OF BUILDINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY NON-CONFORMING, BUT THEY CAN'T CONVERT AN EXISTING GARAGE WITHOUT REPLACING THAT WITH ANOTHER GARAGE.

IF SOMEBODY SAID, I'VE GOT THIS GARAGE, I WANT TO CONVERT IT INTO ACCESSORY DWELLING, WE WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO BUILD US ANOTHER GARAGE OF EQUAL SIZE TO WHAT THEY WERE CONVERTING IN ORDER TO DO THAT.

[OVERLAPPING] THAT HAS TO GO ALONG WITH THAT.

[NOISE]

>> OKAY. THANK YOU, MAYOR. [BACKGROUND]

>> SIR. [BACKGROUND] COUNCIL MEMBER HEDRICK.

>> MR. MAYOR, I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON A FEW QUESTIONS THAT MS. ALICE, ASKED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING [OVERLAPPING].

>> I [LAUGHTER] GOT ONE SECOND.

>> FIRST OFF, THANK YOU, BECAUSE SHE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS IN A VERY SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME AND I WAS GOING TO ACTUALLY ASK HER TO REPEAT THEM BECAUSE SHE WAS TALKING FASTER THAN I CAN MAKE NOTES.

>> I WAS SCRIBBLING DOWN AS WELL AT THE SAME TIME.

>> I WAS JUST ABOUT TO CUE HER UP TO GET HER TO REPEAT THEM BECAUSE MY NOTES ARE A MESS.

SO GO AHEAD, SIR.

>> SURE. DO YOU WISH TO CUE HER UP OR SHOULD I GO [OVERLAPPING] AHEAD ADDRESS THEM?

>> LET'S SEE HOW YOUR NOTES COMPARE TO MINE.

>> OKAY, VERY GOOD. [LAUGHTER] JUST TO ANSWER A FEW OF HER QUESTIONS, I KNOW A LOT OF THOSE ISSUES YOU TALKED ABOUT WAS CRIME AND GENTRIFICATION.

GIVEN THE FEW NUMBER OF APPLICANTS THAT WE'VE HAD IN OUR CITY, WE DIDN'T DO ANY STUDIES WITH THE CRIME OR THE GENTRIFICATION.

ALTHOUGH, YOU COULD ARGUE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER WHETHER GENTRIFICATION IS A GOOD THING OR NOT.

PERHAPS SHE MIGHT HAVE BEEN REFERRING TO WHAT COUNCILMEN ARE BUT ALREADY MENTIONED IN THE UNPERMITTED ADUS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE THROUGHOUT THE CITY MAY BE A SOURCE, BUT AS FAR AS MY KNOWLEDGE THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY ISSUES WITH THE PERMANENT ONES.

CERTAINLY, WE WOULD USE OUR OFFICERS IN NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY TO SOLICIT NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT BEFORE ANY POLICY CHANGES, MUCH LIKE PLANO DID WITH THEIRS.

[BACKGROUND] I THINK THAT WAS [OVERLAPPING].

>> I THINK ONE OF HER QUESTIONS WAS ON THE RENTAL.

I THINK WE'VE ADDRESSED THAT THROUGH OUR ORDER IT ADDRESSES THAT.

>> RIGHT, YEAH, WE TO HAVE THE OWNER ON-SITE AS WELL.

YES, AND IT'S ONLY ALLOWED IN CERTAIN DISTRICTS.

>> ALL RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR.

THAT'S THE GIST OF MY SCRIBBLING NOTES AS WELL. THANK YOU.

[NOISE] COUNCIL ADMITTED TO PEERS

[02:00:03]

THAT THE DEVELOPER SERVICES IS NOT RECOMMENDING ANY CHANGES AT THIS TIME.

AS IT'S BEEN STATED, IT IS A FAIRLY RARE REQUEST, THE ONE THAT CAME THROUGH I DON'T KNOW, WHATEVER IT WAS LAST YEAR.

I CAN'T RECALL THE DATE, BUT I DO REMEMBER IT.

BUT, ON MY TIME ON THE COUNCIL AND EVEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, I DON'T RECALL THEM COMING THROUGH.

NOW TO THAT POINT, TO COUNCILMAN ROBIN'S POINT, THE UNPERMITTED ONES, I'M CERTAIN EXISTS, JUST LIKE THE UNPERMITTED GARAGE CONVERSIONS THAT I KNOW EXIST, AND MR. OLK, I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE A METHOD OF ADDRESSING THAT WHEN WE FIND THOSE CORRECT? YOU'RE MUTED. YOU'RE MUTED SIR.

>> SORRY, MY BAD. [LAUGHTER] YES, SIR.

WE DO [LAUGHTER] ATTEMPT TO CORRECT THOSE AND BRING THOSE INTO COMPLIANCE AS WE FIND THEM.

AS PEOPLE BRING THEM TO OUR ATTENTION, WHETHER WE FIND THEM IN THE FIELD, A NEIGHBOR CALLS, THERE'S MANY NUMBER OF WAYS THAT WE FIND THOSE.

WE DO WORK AT THOSE TO BRING THEM INTO COMPLIANCE EITHER BY CONVERTING THEM BACK OR THEY MAY GO THROUGH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND GET A VARIANCE TO CERTAIN PROVISIONS, THE ORDINATES SO THAT THEIR PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE, BUT YES SIR WE DO.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT COUNCIL.

AGAIN, NO CHANGES ARE RECOMMENDED.

IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON? [BACKGROUND] ALL RIGHT.

THAT WILL BRING US TO ITEM 4F,

[4F. Specific Use Provision (SUP) Time Periods]

SPECIFIC USE PROVISION, TIME PERIODS.

MR. GERUND, LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE UP AGAIN.

>> YES. THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS IS REGARDING TIME PERIODS FOR SPECIFIC USE PROVISIONS FOR SUPS.

THE COMMITTEE REALLY HAD A GREAT THOUGHT AS TO CREATING SOME GUIDE FOR APPLICANTS AND STAFF AS WELL, AND FOR THAT MATTER, FOR PLAN COMMISSION COUNCIL ON THESE TIME PERIODS.

IF IT'S OKAY, MAY L PULL UP THE PRESENTATION.

I THINK THAT'LL PROBABLY HELP THE TALKING POINTS A BIT MORE.

[NOISE]

>> OKAY. REALLY THE IDEA OF CREATING A GUIDE WHICH WE'VE DONE THAT'S IN YOUR PACKETS AND I'LL GET TO HERE IN A MINUTE, BUT GIVE A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THIS.

PER THE GDC, CONDITIONS FOR SUPS MAY INCLUDE A LIMITATION ON THE EFFECT OF TIME PERIOD FOR AN SUP.

NOW OCCASIONALLY UNLIMITED TIME PERIODS ARE REQUESTED AND OR APPROVED.

SOME OF THOSE FROM TIME TO TIME, BUT GENERALLY THE SUP PROCESS AS IT RELATES TO TIME PERIODS LOOKS LIKE THIS.

THE APPLICANT ONCE THEY SUBMIT THEIR SUP ZONING APPLICATION.

AS PART OF THAT, THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A TIME PERIOD.

OFTENTIMES THEIR REQUESTED TIME PERIOD ALIGNS WITH SOME BUSINESS PLAN OR LENDERS REQUIREMENT.

BUT SOMETIMES THEY FRANKLY REALLY HAVE NO IDEA.

THEY LOOK BACK AT STAFF, I DON'T KNOW, WHAT SHOULD WE REQUEST? THIS ITEM AND ULTIMATELY WHAT'S BEFORE YOU ALL RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMITTEE.

DEVELOPED SERVICES COMMITTEE HAS A GUIDE WHICH WILL REALLY HELP WITH THAT QUITE A BIT, AND SOMETHING THAT WE CAN REALLY SHARE WITH THE APPLICANTS.

WHEN IT GOES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION, OCCASIONALLY STAFF WILL HAVE A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION ON TIME PERIODS, SUCH AS WHEN THERE MAYBE CONCERNS ABOUT THE USE AND THE SHORT TERM OR LONG TERM OR IF THERE'S A PARTICULAR REDEVELOPMENT AND OR CATALYST AREA PLAN AFFECTING THE PROPERTY THAT MIGHT MAKES SENSE FOR A TIME PERIOD.

BUT OTHERWISE, IF THERE'S REALLY NO CONCERN WITH THE USE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THERE'S NO PARTICULAR LONG RANGE PLAN OF CONCERN, USUALLY STAFF WILL RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT, BARRING ANY OTHER SPECIFIC SIDE RELATED CONDITIONS.

THEN OF COURSE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES A RECOMMENDATION OFTENTIMES.

THEY HAVE A RECOMMENDATION SPECIFIC TO A TIME PERIOD THAT MAY DIFFER FROM THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.

THEN OF COURSE, ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL, WHICH DETERMINES THE EFFECT OF TIME PERIOD.

THAT TIME PERIOD IS PLACED IN THE FINAL ORDINATES FOR THE SUP.

STAFF WENT BACK, WE REALLY TOOK A SAMPLE OF GOING BACK ABOUT FIVE YEARS, IN 2016 TO 2020, AND LOOKING AT ALL THE SUP'S THAT WENT THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL.

[02:05:05]

I'LL JUST RUN THROUGH SOME NUMBERS AND STATS HERE.

THERE WERE 57 SUPS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL IN THAT TIME FRAME.

THIS IS THE ENTIRE CALENDAR YEARS OF 2016- 2020.

FIFTY SEVEN APPROVED, SEVEN WERE DENIED.

THIS IS WHEN THE QUESTION THAT COMMITTEE HAD THAT WE CAME BACK AND REPORTED ON.

ABOUT 79 PERCENT OF THE TIME PERIODS APPROVED BY COUNCIL WERE CONSISTENT WITH BOTH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

SEVERAL DENIALS WERE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL.

APPROVED TIME PERIODS, VERY WIDE RANGE.

THEY RANGE ANYWHERE FROM FIVE YEARS TO 50 YEARS TO UNLIMITED TIME PERIODS.

THE AVERAGE SUP TIME PERIOD, AND THIS IS ALL USERS, EVERYTHING THAT WAS APPROVED.

THE AVERAGE SUP TIME PERIOD APPROVED IN 2016-2020 WAS ABOUT 23.05 YEARS.

THAT NUMBER OF COURSE DOES NOT INCLUDE THE TWO UNLIMITED TIME PERIODS APPROVED.

IN GENERAL, THE SHORTER TIME PERIODS, THOSE SUPS TENDED TO BE TATTOO SHOPS, RECEPTION FACILITIES, KIOSK, AND ONE CASE A GUEST HOUSE.

THIS IS IN YOUR PACKET AS WELL.

IT'S A LITTLE MORE FORMAL LOOKING AT WANTING YOUR PACKETS GOING TO LET HER HEAD AND ALL THAT AND THEN SOME LANGUAGE.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO FOCUS IN ON THE ACTUAL TABLE AND WHAT WOULD GO INTO THIS DOCUMENT.

THIS LIST ON THE LEFT COLUMN, ALL OF THE SPECIFIC USERS THAT WENT THROUGH THE SUP PROCESS WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

THEY WERE APPROVED OF COURSE.

THE MIDDLE COLUMN IS THE AVERAGE TIME PERIOD APPROVED WITHIN THAT TIME PERIOD.

THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN SAMPLE SIZE.

SOME OF THESE USERS MAY ONLY HAVE HAD ONE THAT WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OR WE REALLY JUST HAVE THAT TO GO OFF OF ONE OR TWO MAYBE, WHEREAS OTHERS THERE MAY HAVE BEEN 10 OR MAYBE EVEN A DOZEN OR SO.

ON THE RIGHT HAND COLUMN IS THE WHAT WE CALL CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDED TIME PERIOD RANGE.

ROUGHLY BASED ON WHAT WAS APPROVED AS WE REALLY JUST TRYING TO GO OFF OF THAT AND GIVE A RANGE.

TO GO THROUGH THIS TOP CATEGORY, YOU'LL NOTICE SOME SPACES HERE.

WE TRIED TO CATEGORIZE THESE THE BEST WE CAN.

THESE USERS DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANT, DRIVE-THROUGH BANK AND ATM, RETAILS, FUEL PUMPS THAT MEANS GAS STATION, CAR WASH.

THESE ARE YOUR AUTOMOTIVE TYPE USES.

THESE WERE FAIRLY CONSISTENT IN THE TIME PERIODS APPROVED.

THEY WERE GENERALLY FROM THAT 25-30 YEAR OR 20, 25 TO 30 YEAR TIME PERIOD.

YOU CAN SEE SOME ASSOCIATED RECOMMENDED RANGES OVER HERE TO THE RIGHT. THESE USERS.

THE NEXT ONE'S DOWN, FOOD PROCESSING AND STORAGE, RECYCLING, SALVAGE, YARD AND TRUCK REPAIR, TRUCK STORAGE, HIGH-RISK USE.

THESE ARE CONTRACTORS OFFICE WITHOUT OR STORAGE.

THINK WE JUST HAD ONE OF THOSE CASES COME THROUGH.

THESE ARE THE MORE INDUSTRIAL TYPE USERS.

AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE RECOMMENDED TIME PERIODS BASED ON WHAT WAS APPROVED OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

THESE WHILE HOTEL AND SELF STORAGE MIGHT NOT SEEM LIKE THEY HAVE MUCH IN COMMON, THE COMMONALITY THERE IS THESE TENDED TO HAVE MUCH LONGER TIME PERIODS THAT THESE HAD 35-40 YEAR TIME PERIODS.

TYPICALLY SELF STORAGE USERS, ONCE THEY'RE BUILT A THEY'RE THERE TO STAY.

THEY DON'T JUST SHOW UP AND LEAVE AFTER FIVE OR 10 YEARS.

THEY'RE THERE TO STAY A PRETTY LONG TIME AND SEEMS FOR THE MOST HOTELS ARE AS WELL.

THEY MAY HAVE SOME LENDING REQUIREMENTS OF COURSE, THAT WHERE THEY MAY BE REQUIRING SOME OF THOSE LONGER TIME PERIODS.

BUT ANY CASE, THAT WAS THE COMMONALITY THERE.

USE GOODS, RETAIL SALES, INDOORS.

I BELIEVE THAT WAS NOT GOODWILL.

I'M KIND OF DRAWN A BLANK. BUT MAYBE A GOODWILL.

SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES THAT CAME THROUGH A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.

BUT ANY CASE THAT PERSONAL SERVICES, WHICH WE HAD ONE OF THOSE CASES.

THAT'S BEAUTY SHOP, HAIR SALON, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.

FAIRLY CLOSE TO RETAIL IN GENERAL, 20-30 YEARS ARE THE RECOMMENDED TIME PERIOD THEY ARE BASED ON WHAT WAS APPROVED.

WE HAD ONE CELLULAR TOWER IS REALLY, REALLY MORE OF A CELL TOWER ANTENNA EQUIPMENT ON TOP OF A BUILDING.

IF YOU'LL RECALL THAT ABOUT A YEAR AGO.

THAT CAME THROUGH. THAT WAS ISSUED A 30 YEAR TIME PERIOD, SO RECOMMENDING GENERALLY 20 TO 30 YEAR TIME PERIOD.

[02:10:03]

KIOSKS. WE HAD A COUPLE OF THOSE, TWO OR THREE OF THOSE COME THROUGH.

THOSE ARE YOUR ICE DISPENSING KIOSK THAT SPECIFICALLY CAME THROUGH LAST FIVE YEARS.

THIRTEEN YEARS WAS THE AVERAGE SO RECOMMENDING 10-15 YEAR TIME PERIOD. CHARTER SCHOOL.

THIS WE JUST HAPPEN TO HAVE ONE COME THROUGH AND I BELIEVE THERE'S ONE THAT'S ACTUALLY THE SAME ONE THAT'S COMING BACK ON YOUR AGENDA TOMORROW NIGHT.

THEY WERE ISSUED A 5 SUP, BUT THE THOUGHT THERE WAS KIND OF OFFER THAT WAS UNIQUE TO I THINK A LEASE OR LEASE SITUATION WITH THE OWNER.

THE THOUGHT THERE WAS TO OFFER A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A WIDE RANGE OF 5-30 YEARS RECEPTION FACILITY.

A FEW OF THESE HAD BEEN DENIED BY CITY COUNCIL THE LAST FIVE YEARS, BUT THERE WAS ONE APPROVED FOR A PERIOD OF 15 YEARS.

SO 10-15 YEAR RANGE IS UNDER THAT RECOMMENDED COLUMN.

GUESTHOUSE. WE ACTUALLY HAVE HAD TWO THAT I RECALL.

ONE WAS ISSUED FOR FIVE YEARS, BUT THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE ON PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD THAT WAS ACTUALLY ISSUED FOR AN UNLIMITED TIME PERIOD.

I KNOW IT'S A VERY WIDE RANGE OF CERTAINLY OPENED IDEAS THERE, BUT THAT EXPLAINS WHY THERE'S FIVE YEARS TO UNLIMITED.

MAY JUST DEPEND ON THE SCENARIO.

OF COURSE SUPS ARE JUST THAT THEY'RE A CASE BY CASE SCENARIOS DEPENDING ON THE SITE AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE CONTEXT OF THE OF THE LAND AND SURROUNDING AREAS.

TATTOO SHOPS. THIS TENDED TO HAVE A SHORTER TIME PERIOD, 5.3 YEARS WAS THE AVERAGE SUP TIME PERIOD APPROVED.

FIVE TO 10 YEAR RECOMMEND TIME RANGE PERIOD IS LISTED.

WITH THAT MAYOR, I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

YOU CAN JUST SHARE YOUR SCREEN FOR ME.

SURE.

COUNCIL MEMBER HEDRICK.

YES. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR.

JUST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THAT THIS DOCUMENT THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US IS REALLY SECOND IN THE HIERARCHY OF RECOMMENDATIONS.

THE FIRST IS ALWAYS THE APPLICANT.

IF THEY HAVE ANY FINANCING NEEDS OR BUSINESS PLAN THAT REQUIRES A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD, WE WANT THAT TO GO FIRST.

BUT AFTER THAT, IF THEY COME AND THE APPLICANT DOESN'T HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT THEY WANT, LOOK INTO STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT TO PROVIDE THAT.

THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THE PLAN COMMISSIONER OF THE CITY COUNCIL COULD MODIFY IT AS NECESSARY.

JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR IN THIS DOCUMENT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE.

OKAY. THANKS SIR.

[NOISE] EXCUSE ME.

COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS OR FOLLOW UP ON THIS SLIDE? COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, WITHE.

THANK YOU-ALL FOR THE PRESENTATION.

I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

ONE FOR MR. OAK, ON THE SUPS FOR THE GROUP ON A SHORTER TIME-FRAMES LIKE TATTOO SHOPS AND THOSE KIND OF THING.

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA OF THE TURNOVER IN THOSE PARTICULAR BUSINESS CATEGORIES? ANY IDEA? [NOISE].

BECAUSE USUALLY THOSE HAVE BEEN SHORTER TIMES.

THEY'RE USUALLY FIVE TO SEVEN YEARS.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE ASKING, COUNCIL WILLIAM.

I'M ASKING FOR THOSE, AND I JUST GAVE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE.

USUALLY THOSE ARE FOR SHORTEST TIME PERIODS.

WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS THAT, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA, AND WE PROBABLY DON'T TRACK THIS, IF WE FOR EXAMPLE, WE GRANT AN SUP AND THEN STAY FIVE YEARS ON AN AVERAGE, THREE YEARS ON AN AVERAGE, TEN YEARS ON AN AVERAGE, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING THAT MAY GIVE US ANY INDICATION ON THOSE SHORT-TERM GOALS APPROVALS AS FAR AS THE TURNOVER IS? NO, SIR. WHAT WE DO SEE IS THOUGH IS IF THEY'RE STILL IN BUSINESS, THEY DO COME IN AND REQUEST A RENEWAL FOR THE SUP.

THEY WILL COME IN AND GO, "HI, I'M STILL IN BUSINESS, I WANT TO STAY IN BUSINESS, I NEED TO GO FOR ANOTHER FIVE YEARS." ANOTHER TEN YEARS.

VERY SIMILAR TO THE SALVAGE YARD.

THE RECYCLING SALVAGE YARD THAT THE COUNCIL ACTED ON A SHORT TIME AGO, THEY'LL WANT TO RENEW THOSE AND THEN THAT'S THE TIME THAT COUNCIL CAN LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF IT'S STILL AN APPROPRIATE USE FOR THAT AREA OR IF THINGS HAVE CHANGED AND IT'S NO LONGER APPROPRIATE USE.

BUT AS THEY GO AWAY, IF THEIR SUP EXPIRES AND THAT ONE GOES AWAY, WE NOTE THAT THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS GONE AND THEN THAT JUST EXPIRES ON OUT THERE.

IF SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO COME IN, WE LOOK AT THAT, YOU'D HAVE TO GO FOR A WHOLE NEW SUP IF THAT ONE IS EXPIRED.

OKAY. MY SECOND QUESTION IS,

[02:15:03]

LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS, AND WILL, IN ONE OF YOUR SLIDES YOU HAD FIVE TO 50 YEARS, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER THE 50-YEAR ONE EVEN GOING BACK IN MY OTHER LIFE AS PLANNING COMMISSIONER, IF WE DID ONE FOR 50 YEARS.

JIM MAY REMEMBER THAT ONE.

[LAUGHTER] I DON'T REMEMBER THAT ONE.

BUT MY QUESTION IS, IN THIS INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED, DOES THE COMMITTEE FEEL THAT THERE'S BEEN CONSISTENCY BASED ON THE TYPE OF BUSINESS AS IT APPLIES TO THE LEFT OF SUP? LOOKING AT THE DATA THAT YOU ALL LOOKED AT, DID YOU? THEN IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS [OVERLAPPING].

YES THERE IS.

IF YOU'LL LOOK AT THAT PERSPECTIVE AT ALL? YES, COUNCILMAN, WILLIAMS, WE'VE LOOKED AT THAT BECAUSE WHAT WE HAD TO DRAW ON WAS FIRST THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.

THAT WAS THE FIRST SOURCE OF DATA, AND THEN USUALLY THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD FOLLOW FROM WHAT APPLICANTS HAD HISTORICALLY BEEN REQUESTING.

SO THERE WAS VERY NARROW MARGIN FOR THE MOST PART.

YOU DID MENTION A FEW OF THEM THAT WERE FIVE TO 50 YEARS.

IF THERE'S A SEPARATE SPECIFIC REASON WHY THEY'RE ASKING FOR A LONGER TIME PERIOD OR EVEN UNLIMITED, THOSE WERE THROWN OUT OF OUR CALCULATIONS.

BUT FOR THE MOST PART THEY FELL IN A VERY NARROW RANGE FOR THE TYPE OF USE SHOWN.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR.

THANK YOU, SIR [NOISE] MAYOR PRO TEM NICKERSON? THANK YOU, MAYOR. I GUESS BACK TO THE CHAIR AGAIN ON THIS TOO.

AS I WENT THROUGH THAT LAST SLIDE AND WAS LOOKING AT IT, I THINK THE IDEA OF MAKING AN ATTACHMENT THAT COULD BE USED AS A RECOMMENDATION, I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA AND IT'S ALMOST LIKE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CHART YOU DON'T REALLY KNOW WHETHER IT'S THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG.

SOMETIMES THAT'S A DILEMMA THAT WE HAVE AND I THINK FROM USING OUR PAST EXPERIENCES HERE IN THIS AREA, I THINK IT MAKES THE MOST SENSE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE WE WOULD CREATE A CHART IN HAPPENSTANCE, BECAUSE IN SOME WAYS, BUSINESS THAT COMES IN AND REQUESTS A 30-YEAR AND REALLY THIS BUSINESS TYPE REALLY YOU SEE A LONGEVITY OF THAT BUSINESS OF ONLY FIVE TO SEVEN YEARS.

A TATTOO SHOP GIVES ME THAT FIRST IMPRESSION.

BUT IT'S HARD TO BE ABLE TO MATCH AN SUP UP WITH THE STYLE OR TYPE OF BUSINESS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE WE WOULD DO AT THIS POINT.

YEAH. MAYOR PRO TEM, ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS IS LARGELY THE CAPITAL CONCERNS WITH THOSE PROJECTS.

IT TAKES A LOT MORE TIME TO RECOUP THE CAPITAL FOR SOME OF THOSE LARGER INVESTMENTS WHEREAS A TATTOO SHOP PERHAPS THERE MIGHT AT LEAST IN A PLACE AND NOT HAVE THE INTENSE CAPITAL INVESTMENT THAT THE OTHERS WOULD REQUIRE.

THAT'S PROBABLY ONE REASON WHY THE DIFFERENCES IN DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS THERE.

WHO KNOWS THAT BEST THAN THE BUSINESS OWNER BECAUSE HE'S THE ONE DEALING WITH THE NOTE, OR THE LOAN, OR THAT KIND OF THING AS WELL.

I THINK THE PROCESS WE'RE CONSIDERING HERE REALLY IS A GOOD ONE AND HAS A LOT OF MERIT TO GENERATE A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE STAFF AND FOR SOMEONE WHO MAY NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS NEEDED AS FROM AN SUP ANGLE.

THAT WAS MY GOAL IN BRINGING THIS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE.

REALLY, IT WAS FOR THE APPLICANTS WHO ARE MORE INEXPERIENCED AND THEY COME IN AND SAID, ''WELL, I ASKED FOR 10 YEARS OR I ASKED FOR FIVE AND THEY SAID TEN.'' THE ONES WHO WERE CONFUSED AT THE QUESTIONS WE GET SOMETIMES IN PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL, "WHY DID YOU ASK FOR THIS?" "WELL, THE STAFF TOLD ME I COULD HAVE THAT." WELL, I CERTAINLY TRUST THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION BUT NOW WE HAVE MORE OF A FORMALIZED POLICY DOCUMENT BEHIND THAT.

YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE THAT DISCUSSION.

MAYOR, IF I COULD ADD TO THAT A LITTLE BIT.

THE THOUGHT IS THIS WOULD BE A GUIDE THAT WE WOULD HAVE AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO SHARE WITH APPLICANTS, AND AGAIN, IT WOULD BE A GUIDE.

SOMETIMES THEY MAY HAVE SOME LINEAR REQUIREMENT, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, OR HAVE A DIFFERENT THOUGHT AS THE TIME PERIOD, BUT IT WOULD CERTAINLY HELP ESPECIALLY THE ONES THAT REALLY HAVE NO CLUE.

I THINK THE THOUGHT THAT JADE AND I WERE TALKING A LITTLE EARLIER IS THAT IF COUNSEL GIVES THE THUMBS UP, MAYBE COME BACK AND MAYBE ADDRESS ON ANNUAL BASIS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE OBVIOUSLY THE NUMBERS, MORE SUPS WILL GET APPROVED, THAT MAY CHANGE SOME OF THE NUMBERS A BIT, BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE IN A YEAR OR SO AND SEE WHERE WE ARE AND SEE IF WE WANT TO MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS.

[02:20:05]

VERY GOOD. NOW I THINK THAT THIS CHART WILL BE REFERENCED OFTEN [LAUGHTER] AND FREQUENTLY.

THE COPIES YOU HAVE IN YOUR OFFICE I WOULD SUGGEST LAMINATING THEM BECAUSE I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO GET USED QUITE FREQUENTLY.

THANK YOU TO THE COMMITTEE AND THE STAFF FOR COMING UP WITH THE SLIDE.

I THINK IT WILL BE A GREAT REFERENCE TOOL MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU.

[NOISE] EXCUSE ME.

WITH THAT WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 4G,

[4G. Office of Fair Housing Program Recommendations]

OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS.

GOOD EVENING. CAN YOU HEAR ME AND SEE ME, MAYOR? THERE YOU ARE.

HI, EVERYBODY.

I DO HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION I'D LIKE TO SHARE BUT I'M NOT ABLE TO SHARE MY SCREEN.

ELISA IS STANDING BY TO HELP ME, SO GIVE ME A QUICK SECOND.

YOU'RE THERE. LIKE MAGIC.

I WANT TO BRIEFLY GO OVER A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT I SHARED WITH YOU DURING MY OVERVIEW IN JANUARY AND GET DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL ON NEXT STEPS FOR THE OUTPUTS OF YOUR HOUSING.

IN JANUARY I MENTIONED JUST THE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS BOTH TO TRANSITION AS A HEARD AGENCY AND ESTABLISH A SOLID FOUNDATION FOR GARLAND [INAUDIBLE] CHAIR HOUSING SERVICES TO CONTINUE.

BEFORE WE GO INTO THE AREAS THAT I AM SEEKING DIRECTION ON, I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE PROGRESS THAT WE'VE MADE SO FAR TODAY.

WE HAVE RE-BRANDED THE DEPARTMENT IN MANY WAYS AND PART OF THAT IS CONSISTENT PROMOTION AND MARKETING, REALLY TARGETING THE COMMUNITY, HELPING THEM UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DEPARTMENT DOES, WHAT RESOURCES WE OFFER, AND MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE A CONSISTENT PRESENCE ON ALL OF THE CITY PLATFORMS AND COMMUNITY [INAUDIBLE] AND EVENTS.

WE HAVE BEEN FOCUSED VERY KEENLY ON IMPROVING OUR INTERNAL PROCESSES, AND PART OF THAT IS CLOSELY PARTNERING WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

IN THE PATH OF YOUR HOUSING DEPARTMENT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDUCTING OUR OWN INVESTIGATION, AND NOW THAT IS COMPLETELY MANAGED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IT HAS DRASTICALLY IMPROVED THE QUALITY OF OUR INVESTIGATION, WHICH IS THE PRIMARY PRINCIPLE OF A FAIR HOUSING AGENCY.

ALSO COMMUNITY OUTREACH.

REACHING OUT NOT JUST TO PROPERTY OWNERS BUT ALSO LENDERS AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT COULD HELP US SPREAD THE WORD ON THE VALUE AND SERVICES OFFERED BY THE DEPARTMENT.

AS A RESULT OF THAT WE STARTED THIS LATE SEPTEMBER, I BELIEVE, EARLY OCTOBER, LAST YEAR.

IN 2019 FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAD JUST NINE FAIR HOUSING CASES, AND SINCE WE STARTED OUTREACH AND REALLY REFOCUSING THE DEPARTMENT WE'VE SEEN A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF INTAKE THAT WE HAVE.

WE CURRENTLY HAVE FIVE ACTIVE INVESTIGATION IN JUST A FEW MONTHS, SO WE ARE STARTING TO SEE THE FRUITS OF THOSE ACTIVITIES.

THE AREAS THAT I'M SEEKING GUIDANCE ON TONIGHT FROM COUNCIL, REALLY ARE JUST A COUPLE OF AREAS, AND I'D LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES THAT WE WILL BE FOCUSING ON FOR THE NEXT FEW MONTHS, BUT I'VE TITLED IT "BUILDING READINESS", BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME FOUNDATIONAL ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE MANAGING VERY FOUNDLING.

AS WE EXPECT TO SEE ADDITIONAL CASES COMING IN OR AS WE ARE REJOINED WITH FAIR HOUSING AGENCY, WE ARE PREPARED TO HANDLE THOSE CASES CORRECTLY, AND TURN THEM AROUND IN A TIMELY MANNER AND MEET OUR AUDIT REQUIREMENTS.

THE AREAS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW TONIGHT WOULD BE REESTABLISHING THE DEPARTMENT'S IDENTITY AND I'LL SHARE THAT WITH YOU, UPDATING OUR ORDINATE, WHICH HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE SINCE THE LATE '90S, SO LOOKING AT SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR MAKING SURE THAT'S REFLECTED WITH CURRENT REGULATION.

THEN FOR FUTURE REFERENCE, JUST EXPANDING OUR SERVICES AND LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO REALLY PARTNER MORE COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE COMMUNITY, AS OPPOSED TO BEING ENFORCEMENT-DRIVEN.

THE FIRST AREA THAT I AM SEEKING DIRECTION ON

[02:25:05]

IS CREATING A CLEAR DISTINCTION FOR THE OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING.

THE FEEDBACK THAT WE HAVE GOTTEN CONSISTENTLY FROM THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN TRANSFERRED AROUND THE CITY, BEFORE THEY GET TO US, AS WELL AS FROM OUR COMMUNITY LEADERS, AND INTERACTION THAT WE'VE HAD WITH THE PUBLIC IS THAT WHEN THEY SEE FAIR HOUSING, THEIR IMMEDIATE THOUGHT IS THAT SHE NEEDS A HOUSING ASSISTANT OR FINANCIAL ASSISTANT.

EVEN INTERNALLY, THERE IS CONFUSION AROUND WHAT FAIR HOUSING DOES, AS COMPARED TO SEVERAL OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT ALSO HAVE HOUSING IN THEIR TITLE.

HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES, THOSE ARE HOUSING-ASSISTANT-TYPE DEPARTMENT, WHERE FAIR HOUSING IS REALLY A CIVIL RIGHTS DISCRIMINATION, EQUAL-ACCESS DEPARTMENT.

SO PROVIDING SOME SEPARATION BETWEEN HOUSING DEPARTMENT WILL BE BENEFICIAL, AND THEN THE OTHER PORTION OF THE RECOMMENDATION IS MAKING THE NAME BROAD ENOUGH, WHERE AS WE IDENTIFY OTHER GRANT FORCES, OTHER ADD ON OR ANCILLARY PROGRAM, THAT IT IS BROAD ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO CAPTURE THOSE, AS OPPOSED TO JUST BEING FAIR HOUSING.

AS YOU LEAVE IT, JUST RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT I'VE PROVIDED A FEW EXAMPLES OF WHAT SOME OF THE OTHER CITIES ARE DOING THAT HAVE FAIR HOUSING DEPARTMENT.

THE ONE THAT IS CLOSELY RELATED TO WHAT WE DO IN THE CITY OF GARLAND IS CITY OF DALLAS.

THEY ARE CALLING THEIR DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING AND HUMAN RIGHTS.

THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER EXAMPLES, SUGGESTED NAMES THAT WE ALSO SHARE THIS INFORMATION WITH THE COMMUNITY LEADER IN THEIR MOST RECENT MEETING.

OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING AND HUMAN RIGHTS, OFFICE OF CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS, JUST AS A FEW EXAMPLES, SO WHAT I'M ASKING FOR DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL IS FEEDBACK ON OPTIONS FOR MAYBE DIFFERENTIATING THE DEPARTMENT FROM THE OTHER HOUSING DEPARTMENTS WITHIN THE CITY.

I'LL PAUSE THERE IF THERE IS ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE I GO TO THE NEXT AREA.

I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY IN THE QUEUE RIGHT AT THE MOMENT, BUT AS SOON AS I SAY THAT, THERE YOU GO. [INAUDIBLE] WILLIAMS. THANKS, MR. MAYOR. KRISTEN, FIRST, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OF YOUR WORK AND YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THIS, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR OUTREACH PARTICULARLY TO THE COMMUNITY, AND THEY CONSIDER COMMUNITY LEADERS, AND I KNOW THAT THIS IS REFLECTIVE OF ALL THAT INPUT, SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT OUTREACH.

I'M GOING BACK TO THE NAMING.

ARE YOU LOOKING FOR SOME SUGGESTIONS FROM COUNCIL OR? CAN YOU CLEAR THIS, PLEASE, FOR ME.

CERTAINLY. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M SPEAKING.

I'LL SHARE WITH YOU ON THE SUGGESTED NAME, THE NAME THAT WAS CHOSEN BY THE MAJORITY OF THE COMMUNITY LEADERS GROUP, JUST AS A CONSIDERATION, WAS OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING AND HUMAN RIGHTS, BUT WHAT I'M HOPING TO DO IS TO HAVE OUR NAME REBRANDED OR FROM [INAUDIBLE] AN OPTION NEXT MONTH, THE MONTH OF APRIL IS NATIONAL FAIR HOUSING MONTH, WHICH WILL BE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO RELAUNCH AND RE-COMMUNICATE THE MISSION AND DIRECTION OF THE DEPARTMENT.

I AM HOPING TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION AND HOPEFULLY GET A NEW NAME SOLIDIFIED, IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL WOULD SUPPORT.

I'LL JUST TELL MY PREFERENCES OUT NOW.

I'VE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH SOME COUNCIL FOLKS OVER IN FORT WORTH, AS PART OF THIS PROCESSES, AND THEIR OFFICE OF DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION MAKES A CLEAR DISTINCTION, BECAUSE THEY'RE [INAUDIBLE] ENERGIES THAT ARE INVOLVED IN DIFFERENT HOUSING ACTIVITIES.

THEY'VE GONE TO THE OFFICE OF DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION AND FEEL THAT, THAT IS NUMBER ONE, GIVEN THE OFFICE SOME DISTINCTION AND NUMBER TWO, HAD ENABLE CONSTITUENTS TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY WITH LESS CONFUSION IF THEY WANTED TO USE THE SERVICES OF THIS OFFICE, RATHER THAN GOING THROUGH OTHER OFFICE SIMILARLY BECAUSE THE NAME FAIR HOUSING WAS THERE, SO MY PREFERENCE IT WOULD BE EITHER, THE OFFICE OF CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS OR

[02:30:01]

THE THE OFFICE OF DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION.

THAT'S JUST MY OPINION ON THAT.

AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO GREATER THINGS TO COME FROM THIS OFFICE. THANKS, MR. MAYOR.

EXCUSE ME. COUNSELLOR MCNEAL.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MRS. SMITH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL YOUR EFFORTS ON THIS UNDERTAKING.

I DEFINITELY KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN A CHALLENGE.

REGARDING SOME OF THE CONFUSION, I DO KNOW THAT WE DO HAVE OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT HAS HOUSING IN THE TITLE.

OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU JUST SCAN IN OR GOOGLE IN FOR HOUSING, THAT MAY BE PART OF THAT, BUT DO WE THINK THAT WE JUST NEED TO REBRAND THIS DEPARTMENT OR DO WE NEED TO ALSO CONSIDER SOME OF THE OTHER NAMES THAT MAY CAUSE SOME CONFUSION? DO WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT AS WELL? I CAN ACTUALLY TAKE THAT AS A FOLLOW-UP AND SO DEPARTMENT FALL UNDER ANOTHER PIN.

THE RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT ARE JUST WITH FAIR HOUSING, BUT I CAN DEFINITELY TAKE A NOTE BACK WITH THE QUESTION AS A FIREWALL FROM TONIGHT.

THANK YOU.

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE THE SAME CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE WITH UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE DEPARTMENT'S CHARGE IS, BUT I WILL TAKE THAT AS A QUESTION FROM TONIGHT.

I THINK AS WE, YOU AND I, HAVE DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY, SOMETIMES WHEN YOU GET A CALL THAT GOES INTO OUR SWITCHBOARD, AND SOMETIMES IF WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO'S NOT A REGULAR ON THE SWITCHBOARD, THEY JUST MAY STAND FOR HOUSING.

SO JUST HONESTLY, WHEN YOU GET READY TO ROLL IT OUT, ONCE WE DO SETTLE ON A NAME, WE WOULD DEFINITELY DO THAT SOCIALIZATION WITHIN THOSE DEPARTMENTS AS WELL.

SURE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM MORRIS.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. AS FAR AS A NAME, I'M A LITTLE HESITANT TO TAKE FAIR HOUSING OUT OF IT, BECAUSE SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE COME TO UNDERSTAND AT LEAST WHAT THAT SEGMENT OF THAT MEANS.

I'M PRONE TO THE OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING AND HUMAN RIGHTS.

CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS, I UNDERSTAND IT, BUT IT ALMOST SEEMS A LITTLE REDUNDANT, BUT HUMAN RIGHTS IS A PRETTY BROAD UMBRELLA, AND IF THEY HAVE ADDING THAT ON TO FAIR HOUSING, IT SEEMS LIKE, ESPECIALLY IF WE GET BETTER DESCRIPTIONS, CHRIS AND I BELIEVE, HE'S ESC, CITY OF DALLAS, THAT IS WHAT THEY HAVE ALSO CHOSEN AS WELL.

I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT. I THINK OUT OF THE THREE, THE OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING AND HUMAN RIGHTS IS THE ONE THAT MOST APPEALS TO ME AT THIS MOMENT.

WE'LL SEE WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE THINKS. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE AT THE MOMENT.

MAYOR PRO TEM NICKERSON.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. I THINK WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER MCNEAL HAD SAID IS SOMETHING ELSE.

I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE NAMES OF THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE SIMILAR MAYBE HOUSING IN THEM AS WELL, BECAUSE I THINK I'M NOT REALLY READY TO SUGGEST NAMES YET, BUT IF THERE IS CONFUSION, WHICH THERE MUST BE, BETWEEN SOME OF THE DEPARTMENTS AS IT RELATES TO WHAT THEIR FUNCTIONS ARE, BECAUSE HOUSING IS USED IN THEM, I WOULD ALMOST RATHER US LOOK AT THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND THEIR NAMES, AND LOOK AT WHAT ALTERNATIVES WE MAY HAVE THERE AS I AM TOO LOOKING AT JUST THIS DEPARTMENT AND ITS NAMES.

I JUST WANT US TO STAY FOCUSED ON IF INDEED THE FUNCTION OF THAT DEPARTMENT IS FAIR HOUSING.

THE NAME SHOULD FOLLOW IN SOME FORM, WHATEVER THAT MAY END UP BEING.

I'M NOT YET READY TO START PICKING NAMES HERE AT THIS POINT, SO THANK YOU. I MUTED MYSELF.

COUNCIL MEMBER ALVIN. [LAUGHTER]

>> [INAUDIBLE] THANK YOU, MAYOR.

TWO THINGS; ONE, I WORRY ABOUT OVER-BROADENING A NAME, BECAUSE IF YOU THINK THINGS ARE IN CONFUSION OR BAD NOW,

[02:35:03]

WAIT UNTIL YOU HAVE A NAME LIKE DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION.

YOU'RE GOING TO GET A LOT OF CALLS AND INPUTTING QUESTIONS.

I THINK YOU COULD ASK SOME OF OUR OTHER DEPARTMENTS AS IT IS.

I THINK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS LIKE, "I NEED A LAWYER." SO THEY CALL CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, KIND OF STUFF.

BUT PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY, I FEEL LIKE AS MUCH AS I'D LIKE TO SPEND SEVERAL HOURS DISCUSSING WHAT WE SHOULD CALL THIS OFFICE, MAYBE THE FRONT OR SOMETHING, I FEEL LIKE IT'S LESS OF A POLICY DECISION AND THIS IS MORE OF AN EXECUTIVE DECISION LEFT IN THE HANDS OF THE CITY MANAGER.

WHATEVER THE CITY MANAGER AND THE SENIOR STAFF THINKS IS THE BEST NAMING CONVENTION FOR VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS, TO MAKE SURE THAT SERVICES ARE IDENTIFIED AND DELIVERED EFFICIENTLY.

I THINK I'M GOING TO BE OKAY WITH THAT.

THAT'S MY TAKE ON IT. THANKS, MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. [NOISE] COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS? [NOISE]

>>YES. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

[NOISE] KRISTEN, AT ONE OF THE EARLIER PRESENTATIONS, YOU [INAUDIBLE] I THINK, THE MISSION STATEMENT OF THIS OFFICE OUT.

I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME HERE.

BUT AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, I'M GOOD WITH LEAVING THE FINAL DECISION ON THE NAMING UP TO THE CITY MANAGER AND YOU, AND WHO'VE WORKED IN THE TRENCHES ON THIS.

BUT AS LONG AS WHATEVER NAME THAT WE COME UP WITH TIES DIRECTLY INTO THE MISSION OF THIS OFFICE.

THE MISSION OF THIS OFFICE IS UNIQUELY DIFFERENT FROM ANY OF OUR OFFICES WHERE WE REFER TO THE NAME OF HOUSING.

THERE IS A DISTINCT MISSION FOR THIS OFFICE.

AS LONG AS WHATEVER WE END UP CALLING IT SO THAT RESIDENTS AND CONSTITUENTS CAN CLEARLY IDENTIFY WHEN THEY CALL.

BECAUSE I KNOW, FROM EXPERIENCE IN THE PAST, THE CONFUSION HAS BEEN, AND WHEN YOU ARE IN A POSITION OF FRUSTRATION AND RETICULATE YOU FEEL YOU'VE BEEN WRONG, AND YOU MAKE TWO OR THREE PHONE CALLS AND YOU ARE TOLD THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT OFFICE OR YOU'RE GIVEN [INAUDIBLE] POINT THAT, AND PEOPLE GIVE UP.

THIS OFFICE IS BEING REVITALIZED SO THAT THE SERVICE THAT IS NEEDED IS CLEARLY COMMUNICATED TO OUR CONSTITUENTS AND THAT THEY SPECIFICALLY KNOW, IF I'VE GOT A SPECIFIC PROBLEM IN THIS AREA, I KNOW WHERE TO CALL.

I DON'T WANT TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME TONIGHT, MAYOR ON DEBATING THE NAMES.

BUT MY HOPE, AND AS COUNCILMAN ALVIN SAID, I'LL LEAVE THIS UP TO ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION.

BUT I JUST WANT TO BE SURE AND CLEAR THAT WHATEVER WE COME UP WITH THE NAMING, THAT THE NAMING OF THE OFFICE TIES CLEARLY BACK TO THE MISSION OF THE OFFICE.

I THINK ALSO, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AT HERE, IS SAYING LET'S LOOK AT THE OTHER OFFICES.

BUT THIS OFFICE IS IN A PROCESS OF BEING REVITALIZED.

I THINK THAT WE NEED TO GIVE PRIORITY TO ADDRESSING THESE NEEDS, AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY IF WE WANT TO LOOK AT THE OTHER OFFICES THAT HAVE NAMES INTO THEM.

THERE'S A LOT OF CONSTERNATION.

THIS PARTICULAR OFFICE UNDER THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE HAS GONE THROUGH A LOT OF PEAKS AND VALLEYS OVER THE PAST YEARS AND NOW UNDER YOUR LEADERSHIP, IT'S BEING REVITALIZED.

I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GRAB THE MOMENTUM AND MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC IS EDUCATED SO THAT THEY HAVE KNOWLEDGE.

IN SUMMARY, WHATEVER YOU NAME IT, AS LONG AS IT TIES TO THE MISSION AND THE NAME AND THE MISSION ARE COMMUNICATED VERY CLEARLY TO OUR CONSTITUENTS, I'M GOOD WITH IT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. WITH THAT POINT,

[02:40:08]

WE COULD ALL COME UP WITH DIFFERENT VARIATIONS OF THE NAME.

MY PREFERENCE IS TO KEEP THE OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING AND HUMAN RIGHTS.

I'M BASING THAT ON IF THE COMMUNITY LEADERS GROUP IS GOOD WITH THAT, THEN I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

THAT'S MY BASIS OF DECISION-MAKING THERE FOR MAJORITY OF THEM.

OFFICE OF FAIR HOUSING AND HUMAN RIGHTS WORK FOR THEM, I WOULD SAY THAT'S A STRONG VOTE.

BUT CERTAINLY, WE CAN LEAVE THIS TO ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION.

KRISTEN, ARE YOU GOOD WITH THAT? [NOISE] DON'T SAY NO.

>> ABSOLUTELY. [LAUGHTER] ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> OKAY. I WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT.

THE SECOND AREA OF FOCUS FOR JUST BUILDING READINESS IS REVEALING THE CURRENT ORDINANCE.

IN THE PRIMARY DRIVER FOR THE RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT TO EXPAND ON OUR COVERED AREA IS, ONE, THERE HAS BEEN MANY UPDATE TO CURRENT REGULATION THAT REFLECT THESE ADDITIONAL COVERAGE CATEGORY.

TWO, WE STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT AS WE DO TRANSITION AT SOME POINT BACK TO A HOOD AGENCY, THIS WILL BE A REQUIREMENT ANYWAY.

AGAIN, OUR ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED IN THE LATE '90S.

IT CURRENTLY COVERS SEVEN PROTECTED CATEGORIES WHICH ARE FEDERALLY COVERED, AS WELL AS AGE, WHICH IS UNIQUE TO GARLAND ORDINANCE.

THE RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT IS TO ADD SOME ADDITIONAL COVERAGE PARAMETERS FOR THOSE ADDITIONAL GROUPS THAT HAVE EITHER HISTORICALLY, OR THROUGH CURRENT DATA, HAVE ALSO BEEN SHOWN TO BE UNDER-REPRESENTED AS FAR AS ACCESS TO HOUSING.

THAT WOULD INCLUDE REGULATION ON COVERAGE FOR SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, AND THEN A BROAD STATEMENT THAT ENSURES ACCESS FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT MAY BE UNDER-REPRESENTED FOR PREVIOUS HOUSING OR RENTAL STATUS.

FOR EXAMPLE, IF I HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY HOMELESS, OR IF I AM INCARCERATED, OR HAVE NOT HAD MY OWN RENTAL HISTORY, TAKE FOR EXAMPLE, MAYBE A FEMALE THAT HAS ONLY LIVED WITH A SPOUSE OR A PARTNER BUT HAS NOT HAD RENTAL HISTORY IN THEIR OWN NAME, IF THEY WOULD OTHERWISE MEET OTHER REQUIREMENTS INCLUDING FINANCIAL OR OTHER ECONOMIC REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY, THAT THEY WOULD ALSO BE ALLOWED EQUAL ACCESS.

SO THE RECOMMENDATION AS FAR AS UPDATE TO THE ORDINANCE, THIS IS OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE, AGAIN INCLUDES SEVEN CATEGORIES THAT ARE FEDERAL CATEGORIES, AND THEN GARLAND ORDINANCE CURRENTLY HAS AGE.

THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, AND RE-WORDING OTHER NON-MERIT-BASED FACTORS, WHICH MAY DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACT ACCESS TO HOUSING.

THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION FOR UPDATE TO OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE.

ARE THERE QUESTIONS AS WELL?

>> OKAY. EXCUSE ME.

[NOISE] COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH.

>> [BACKGROUND] THANK YOU, MAYOR. I DON'T REMEMBER.

WE SAW SOME HOOD GUIDELINES THAT COVERED A LOT OF THESE THINGS A FEW YEARS AGO, I THINK IT'S RIGHT BEFORE I CAME ON TO COUNCIL.

IS THIS AN EXTENSION OF THE HOOD GUIDELINES, OR IS THIS TAKING IT A LITTLE FURTHER, OR HOW THIS INTERACTS WITH THOSE GUIDELINES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN PUBLISHED?

>> SURE. IT BASICALLY MIRRORS THE GUIDELINES THAT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED BY HEAD.

>> OKAY. PERFECT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE STAYING IN STEP WITH THE FEDERAL LAWS ON THIS AND IF WE ARE, THEN I THINK THIS IS EASY THING TO GO FORWARD WITH. THANK YOU, MA'AM. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> SIR. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDED WORDING?

>> I GUESS WE ARE OPEN.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I SUPPORT THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE WORDING IN ADDING THOSE AREAS OF COVERAGE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. CONSIDERING THAT AS STATED, THAT IT IS MIRRORING THE HUD WORDING, I'M FORWARD I DON'T SEE ANYBODY JUMPING IN THE QUEUE TO SAY OTHERWISE.

[02:45:07]

AT THIS POINT, I WOULD SAY, LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU, MAYOR. THEN THAT SAID I WANT TO SHARE JUST A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL AREAS THAT WE'RE HOPING TO TACKLE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PART OF THE GUIDANCE AND DRIVE FOR GIVING US A BROADER NAME JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT PROGRAMS THAT MADE BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE COMPLIMENTARY.

OVERWHELMINGLY, THE CASES THAT WE RECEIVE FOR FAIR HOUSING HAS TO DO WITH DISABILITY OR ACCESS AND THERE'S NOT REALLY A HOME RIGHT NOW FOR THOSE KINDS OF QUESTIONS OR CONCERN FOR INDIVIDUALS THAT MAY HAVE ISSUES ACCESSING CITY FACILITIES ARE PROVIDING OUTREACH AND EDUCATION FOR PROVIDERS, LANDLORDS, PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE CITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE.

ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE'RE HOPING TO EXPAND ON OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS IS TO REALLY BE A RESOURCE AND POTENTIALLY INTAKE SOURCE FOR ADA-RELATED ACCOMMODATION REQUEST AND ACCEPTABILITY CONCERN, SO LOOKING TO EXPLORE THAT.

IF WE BRANCH OUT INTO THAT AREA AND HAVE A BETTER FOUNDATION WE'LL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE COUNSEL WITH UPDATES ON THAT.

THE NEXT, REALLY SHIFTING FROM A PUNITIVE APPROACH TO COLLABORATIVE.

IN THE PAST, AS A HEAD ONLY AGENCY, IN MOST CASES, OUR PROPERTY MANAGERS AND LANDLORDS WERE ONLY HEARING FROM US WHEN THERE WAS A COMPLAINT.

WE WERE CONTACTING THEM WITHOUT ANY PRIOR PARTNERSHIP.

SO SAY, "HEY, YOU HAD A CLAIM FILED AGAINST YOU," AND SO THAT OBVIOUSLY IS NECESSARY IN SOME CASES.

BUT THE PLAN IS TO HAVE MORE OF A VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE PROGRAM WHERE WE ARE PROVIDING EDUCATION, WE'RE WORKING WITH PROPERTY OWNERS, WE'RE WORKING WITH LENDERS AND LANDLORD, MAKING SURE THAT THEY KNOW WHEN IT FAILS, HOW TO KEEP THEMSELVES ADDED THESE COMPLIANCE ISSUES AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THE CITY'S ORDINANCE AS OPPOSED TO ONLY USING COMPLAINT AS A DRIVER FOR CONTACT, SO REALLY BUILDING COLLABORATIVE PARTNERSHIPS BOTH AROUND FAIR HOUSING AS WELL WITH SOME OF THE ACCEPTABILITY ITEMS THAT WE MENTIONED.

ONCE WE START TO HAVE SOME OF THIS BASELINE PROGRAMS IN PLACE AND CONTINUING, THE PLAN IS TO START TO PROVIDE YOU WITH SOME PERFORMANCE INDICATORS OF THE IMPACT THAT WE'RE MAKING IN THE COMMUNITY AND LOOKING FOR OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND, INCLUDING OTHER GRANT FUNDING.

THEN WE'RE ALREADY TACKLING MULTIPLE LANGUAGE RESOURCES FOR BOTH OUR COMPLAINANTS AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS BUDGETS, ENSURING THAT EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE TAKE CARE OF THAT BECAUSE A LOT OF THE ISSUE THAT WE RUN INTO IS BECAUSE OUR LANDLORD ALSO HAVE LANGUAGE BARRIERS AND JUST DON'T NECESSARILY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE REQUIREMENT IS.

WE'VE ALREADY STARTED TO BUILD THE FOUNDATION IN THIS AREA.

IT'S NOT THE WAYS TO ADD IMPACT TO THE COMMUNITY THAT EXPAND BEYOND CASE INVESTIGATION AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAD BEEN THE FOCUS UNDER HUD.

THEN LASTLY, I JUST WANT TO CONTINUE TO SAY THAT OUR END GOAL IS TO EVENTUALLY BE RE-ESTABLISHED AS THE HUD FAIR HOUSING AGENCY.

IT WILL TAKE TIME IN ORDER FOR US TO HAVE THAT REENTRY WE DO HAVE TO SHOW THAT WE HAVE VERY STRONG ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICES.

THAT WE'VE INCREASED OUR CASELOAD AND WE'RE ABLE TO HANDLE THOSE CASES EFFECTIVELY.

BUT WE WILL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE HUD WITH INCREMENTAL UPDATE, THEN CONTINUE TO PURSUE REVISITING BECOMING AN AGENCY THAT IT WILL, I THINK THAT EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING TO PUT THOSE PUZZLE PIECES IN PLAY WILL DEFINITELY BETTER SET US UP FOR SOME OF THOSE FUTURE PLAN.

GO AHEAD [INAUDIBLE] IS THERE OTHER QUESTION?

>> VERY GOOD. [NOISE] IF YOU CAN UNSHARE YOUR SCREEN FOR ME, PLEASE.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER, SMITH.

>> THANKS MAYOR, AND I'LL BE QUICK ON THIS.

MS. SMITH I WAS READING THE VERY SMALL PRINT ON YOUR NEXT, THE LAST SLIDE AND IT DID TALK ABOUT RESTRICTIONS ON CHILDREN AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE RESTRICTIONS CAN COEXIST WELL WITH SENIOR ONLY PROPERTIES AND THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY DEFINED BY HUD THAT SPECIFICALLY RESTRICT CHILDREN FROM THE PROPERTY.

[02:50:04]

>> OKAY. FAMILIAR OF THAT.

THIS IS ALREADY A COVERED CATEGORY AND OUR ORDINATE, SO THAT WOULD ADDRESS CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 18, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING?

>> NO. WE'VE GOT LIKE TDHCA SENIOR PROJECTS WHERE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT CAN LIVE THERE ARE OVER A CERTAIN AGE, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT ACCIDENTALLY WRITING SOMETHING THAT COMES INTO CONFLICT WITH SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY ALLOWED BY FEDERAL LAW.

I MAY BE OVERTHINKING THIS.

I DO THAT A LOT, BUT I SEE YOUR CITY ATTORNEYS PUNCHED IN HERE, SO I'LL GIVE HIM [OVERLAPPING] A CHANCE TO SPEAK.

>> YEAH, THE ATTORNEY IS HERE [OVERLAPPING].

>> AN ACTIVE WAY YOU'RE REFERENCING [LAUGHTER].

>> THANKS.

>> [NOISE] EXCUSE ME. I'VE BEEN QUIET ALL NIGHT LONG AND NOW I'M CHOKED UP.

[LAUGHTER] THE RESTRICTIONS THAT THE QUESTION IS WORKING ON HERE, THEY WOULDN'T APPLY THOSE SENIORS FACILITIES OR THEY HAVE A SPECIAL DISPENSATION WRITTEN INTO THESE FAIR HOUSING LAWS.

>> OKAY. I'M OVERTHINKING IT. THANK YOU, SIR.

[LAUGHTER] THANK YOU, MAYOR, FOR THE INDULGENCE.

>> [LAUGHTER] ALL RIGHT.

>> OKAY. THEN I'M SORRY, I WAS TRYING TO GET TO WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING BUT YOU'VE MEANT THE POSTCARD, JUST A TIP FOR THE LANDLORDS ON COMPLIANCE, BUT YES.

>> OKAY. VERY GOOD.

COUNCIL MEMBER, MCNEAL?

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. KRISTEN, THANKS AGAIN FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

GREAT WORK. I LOVE THIS SLIDE WITH THE STATEMENTS THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE IT LESS PARENTED.

THAT'S GREAT OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE GOING TO ALWAYS NEED SOME OF THAT BIG STICK IN A BACKGROUND.

HOWEVER, ANY THOUGHTS ABOUT AND I THINK YOU MENTIONED EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION THAT NEXT MONTH IS NATIONAL FAIR HOUSING MONTH OR SOMETHING.

ANYTHING IN A CONSIDERATION ABOUT PUTTING TOGETHER LIKE AN HOA IS THEY'LL DO A YEAR OR THE MONTH OR WHATEVER THAT CASE MAY BE.

ANY THOUGHTS AROUND PERHAPS DOING THAT MAYBE SEMI-ANNUALLY FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES THAT WE MAY BE TARGETED OR THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

I DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU A BUNCH OF BUSYWORK, BUT THAT MAY BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENCOURAGE SOME OF OUR PROPERTY OWNERS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE STILL ADHERING TO THE SPIRIT OF THE POLICY.

>> SURE. JUST VERY BROADLY, WE DO HAVE IDEAS AROUND HOW WE'D LIKE TO START CAMPAIGNING.

NOW THAT WE HAVE SOME DIRECTION ON THE NAME CHANGE WE'LL BE UPDATING OUR MARKETING MATERIAL.

BUT WE ALREADY HAVE SOME PLANS IN THE BACKGROUND OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO TARGET EACH MONTH, AND FOR SOME OF OUR HIGHER FOCUS AREAS LIKE NATIONAL FAIR HOUSING MONTH, PARTNERING WITH SOME OF OUR OTHER EXISTING PROGRAMS IN THE CITY LIKE ANIMAL SHELTER AND VETERANS.

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS IN THE BACKGROUND THAT WE'LL BE ROLLING OUT A PASSION FAIR HOUSING THAT WE ALREADY HAVE READY TO GO NOW THAT WE HAVE THIS ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE.

>> AWESOME, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

[NOISE].

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> ALL RIGHT. KRISTEN, WE APPEAR TO HAVE CLEARED THE QUEUE.

I THINK WE'VE GIVEN YOU THE DIRECTION THAT YOU WERE REQUESTING.

>> THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

NOW WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM 4H:

[4H. Amendments to the Garland Development Code (GDC) Regarding Home Occupations]

AMENDMENT TO THE GARLAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING HOME OCCUPATIONS.

COUNSEL, I'VE GOT LOTS OF STAFF IN THE QUEUE ON THIS ONE.

JUDGE, YOU WANT TO LEAD US IN?

>> SURE. REAL BRIEFLY, THIS ITEM WAS TABLED AT THE DECEMBER 4TH, 2018 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AFTER BEING DISCUSSED THE NIGHT BEFORE ON DECEMBER 3RD.

IT CAME OUT OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE BACK IN OCTOBER OF 2018.

A COPY OF THE MOST RECENT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WAS PROVIDED IN YOUR COUNCIL PACKETS.

THIS IS SECTION 2.61 OF THE GDC WHICH RELATES TO HOME OCCUPATIONS.

THESE MODIFICATIONS ARE BASED ON FEEDBACK RECEIVED THROUGH THE COMMITTEE PROCESS AND THEN DURING THE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DISCUSSIONS.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF STAFF MEMBERS INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS WELL.

THE ISSUE OF HOME OCCUPATIONS WAS ALSO INTERTWINED WITH PARKING REGULATIONS AND AT THE TIME, THOSE PARKING REGULATIONS AND THE CHANGES TO THOSE REGULATIONS WENT FORWARD AND WERE MADE SHORTLY AFTER THIS TOPIC CAME UP.

IF COUNCIL RECOMMENDS AND IS INTERESTED IN PURSUING ADDITIONAL CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE, WE CAN CERTAINLY REVISIT THIS IN LIGHT OF THE PARKING CHANGES THAT WERE MADE,

[02:55:03]

THE PARKING REGULATION CHANGES, AND THEN TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT THIS ORDINANCE.

IT DID COME OUT AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE, SO WE COULD ALSO REFER IT BACK TO THAT COMMITTEE AND WORK ON IT A LITTLE BIT MORE AS WELL.

THIS WAS LONG BEFORE MY TIME HERE IN GARLAND SO THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER STAFF MEMBERS THAT HAVE LOTS OF HISTORY AND I'M SURE THEY'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL.

WE DID PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA AT THE REQUEST OF DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM MORRIS.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

>> VERY GOOD. COUNCIL I SAY WE'VE GOT LOTS OF OTHER STAFF HERE THAT CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.

DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM MORRIS.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'LL JUST SAY, I WOULD REALLY HOPE TO NOT SEE THIS GO BACK INTO THE SAUSAGE GRINDER BECAUSE IT'S BEEN GROUND AND THEN IT'S BEEN REGROUND AND RE-REGROUND.

IT'S BEEN RE-GROUND A LOT.

I SAT DOWN AND WENT OVER A LOT OF MY MOST RECENT HOME OCCUPATION COMPLAINTS.

ONE OF THEM WE JUST HEARD TONIGHT FROM MR. WADSWORTH, RECOMMENDING MORE RESTRICTIONS INCLUDING TRAFFIC PATTERNS, NOISE, AND SAFETY, TRANSIENT EMPLOYEES, THINGS LIKE THAT.

I WILL TELL, I HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE OPERATING ROOFING BUSINESSES WITH 5:00 AM GATHERING OF TRANSIENT EMPLOYEES, WAKING UP THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I'VE GOT CAR REPAIRS ALL OVER MY DISTRICT.

COUNCILMAN AUBIN, AND COUNCILMAN VERA AND I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS MANY TIMES.

ONE OF THE SPEAKERS LAST WEEK OR THE WEEK BEFORE, MS. MARTIN WAS TALKING ABOUT A FOUNDATION COMPANY IN HER NEIGHBORHOOD THAT TROUBLES HER NEIGHBORHOOD.

MY ALL-TIME FAVORITE AND I WENT OVER THE CURRENT AMENDMENT THAT'S BEFORE US JUST TO MAKE SURE WE CATCH IT.

MY ALL-TIME FAVORITE IN MY DISTRICT HAS BEEN, I HAVE A WILDLIFE REMOVAL BUSINESS BEING OPERATED OUT OF A HOME WHERE HE GIVES OUT TRAPS AND PICKS UP THINGS LIKE SKUNKS, BRINGS THEM BACK TO HIS HOUSING, AND KILLS THEM, WITH THE RESULTS THAT YOU WOULD EXPECT.

THERE'S ODORS, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF THINGS.

ODOR [LAUGHTER] HAS BEEN THERE AGAIN AND AGAIN AND HAS SAID, YOU CAN'T DO THIS, YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

IT'S LEGAL TO KILL PESTS IN YOUR HOME, BUT THIS IS A BUSINESS KILLING THINGS AT THE HOME, WHICH IS KIND OF A DIFFERENT DEAL.

I DID SEE IN THE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN CHURNED THAT IT DOES INCLUDE, THE HOME OCCUPATION DOES NOT CREATE NOXIOUS ODORS OR NOXIOUS CONDITIONS TO ABETTING OR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES SUCH AS NOISE, ODOR, LIGHT, OR SMOKE.

THAT WASN'T THERE BEFORE AND IT IS NOW.

I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS AND UNLESS WE'VE GOT SOME REAL MAJOR THINGS THAT NEED TO BE CHURNED AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS GO INTO EFFECT TO GIVE SOME RELIEF TO A LOT OF OUR DISTRICTS WHO SUFFER WITH ILLEGAL HOME BUSINESSES.

I'LL GET OFF THE MIC AND LET OTHER PEOPLE SPEAK UP.

I WOULD REALLY ASK COUNCIL TO CONSIDER GETTING THIS DOWN THE ROAD AND GETTING IT DONE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM.

MAYOR PRO TEM NICKERSON.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I AGREE.

I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.

I'M AT, THIS THING WAS TURNED AROUND BACK IN 2018.

IF YOU GO DOWN THROUGH IT, I THINK IT PRESENTS A PRETTY WIDE RANGE OF PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES THAT WOULD COVER MOST OF THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT OUR CITIZENS COMPLAIN ABOUT MR. WADSWORTH WAS IN MY DISTRICT AND THIS DRIVE DOWN THE STREET FROM ME AND I KNOW THE HOUSE IN QUESTION THAT HE IS REFERRING TO.

IT'S A CONSTRUCTION-RELATED BUSINESS, AND WE CAN STOP THAT, BUT WE NEED AN ORDINANCE TO DO IT.

IN MY MIND, I THINK WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE MAKING SURE THAT WE WEREN'T GOING TO BE INFRINGING ON THE RIGHTS OF A HOMEOWNER.

I THINK THIS ORDINANCE, CONCISELY ADDRESSES OUR PROBLEMS BUT YET MINIMIZES ANY INFRINGEMENT ON A HOMEOWNER.

THAT'S MY THOUGHTS ON IT AT THIS POINT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I DON'T HAVE THE ORDINATES IN FRONT OF ME AND I GOT TO THE PARTY LATE ON PRIOR DISCUSSION SO I'M NERVOUS ON THIS.

[03:00:02]

I HAD ONE QUESTION ABOUT A SECTION D6.

IF YOU HAVE THAT OR SOMEONE OUT THERE ON STAFF WHO HAS THAT ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF THEM?

>> YOU WANT ME TO PULL IT UP?

>> PULL IT IF YOU DON'T MIND.

>> YEAH, LET ME SEE IF I CAN DO THAT.

YOU SAID D6, RIGHT?

>> YES, D6.

>> THAT'S THE CONTRACTING LAWN CARE OR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES?

>> YES, THIS IS IT. RIGHT HERE.

OBVIOUSLY A QUESTION ABOUT THIS FROM A NEIGHBOR WHO OWNS A LAWN CARE SERVICE.

HE DIDN'T RUN, HE DIDN'T HAVE HIS EQUIPMENT ATTRACT US DOWN THE STREET.

HE'S GOT IN A STORAGE BUILDING THAT HE KEEPS THEM BUT HE ASKED THIS QUESTION.

HE DOES LAWN SERVICES ALL OVER PRIMARILY GARLAND [INAUDIBLE] SO IN ORDER TO HAVE DO LAWN SERVICE HE PULLS UP IN FRONT OF A HOUSE, JUMPS OUT, DOES THE LAWN GETS BACK TO THE TRUCK AND HE'S GONE.

HIS QUESTION WAS READING THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION, WOULD HE BE PROHIBITED OR BE IN VIOLATION IF HE PULLS HIS EQUIPMENT UP TO DO SOMEONE'S LAWN UNDER THIS ORDINANCE? THAT WAS THE QUESTION HE RAISED WITH ME SO I'M JUST RAISING THIS QUESTION.

IF YOU READ A THERE WHAT IT SAYS, TRAILER OR MOTOR VEHICLE LOADED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OR MATERIALS,

>> COUNCILMAN, WILIAMS?

>> WHEREAS THE EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS AND PRIMARILY USED FOR A COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE.

HIS QUESTION IS IF I'M OUT DOING LAWNS IN GARLAND, WOULD I BE IN VIOLATION OF THE ORDINATES IF ADOPTED? CAN SOMEBODY SPEAK TO THAT?

>> YES, SIR. I CAN. HANG ON.

COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS, THE VEHICLE PARKING REGULATION, THERE'S A SPECIFIC EXEMPTION FOR SOMEBODY.

>> I CAN BARELY HEAR YOU.

>> I'M SORRY. THERE IS A SPECIFIC EXEMPTION THAT ALLOWS SOMEONE TO HAVE THEIR VEHICLE AS LONG AS THEY'RE PROVIDING SERVICES AT THAT PLACE OF RESIDENCE, THEY CAN HAVE THEIR VEHICLE OUT THERE AND DO THAT.

>> AND SUBSECTION B ALSO ADDRESSES THAT, COUNCIL MEMBER, IF YOU LOOK AT 6A AND THEN LOOK AT 6B, IT ADDRESSES THAT.

IF IT'S BEING USED FOR UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES ON THE SITE, THEN THAT'S AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE.

>> OKAY. WE DIDN'T HAVE THE ISSUE.

WHERE LIKE I SAID, WITH A LAYMAN READING THIS SET OF THINGS YOU DON'T KNOW SO HE RAISED THAT QUESTION WITH ME.

HE HAS WHAT HE CONSIDERS AS A THRIVING BUSINESS IN SPRINGS AND IN SUMMER AND HE BECAME AWARE OF THIS SO HE JUST WANTED TO KNOW, "AM I GOING TO GET TICKETED OR CITED AND GONE IF I START DOING LAWNS AND I PARK MY EQUIPMENT TRAILER FOR 20 MINUTES IN FRONT OF A RESIDENCE?" I JUST WANTED THAT CLARIFICATION FOR HIM. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> COUNCILMAN VERA.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT OWN THEIR BUSINESS, DO LANDSCAPING LAWN, AND THEY PARK THEIR TRAILERS AND TRUCKS IN THE BACKYARD.

WHEN THEY LEAVE ABOUT FIVE O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, ALL THE PEOPLE THAT WORKED FOR THEM COME AND PARK THEIR CARS ALL OVER THE STREET AND MAKE A LOT OF NOISES WHEN THEY'RE GOING IN THE MORNING AND WAKE UP THE NEIGHBORS.

I HAVE HAD LOTS OF COMPLAINTS ON THIS TOPIC AND ITS GOING BACK TO WHEN I'VE GOT ELECTED BACK IN 2017.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR THIS LONG.

I'M WITH DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM MORRIS ABOUT LET'S GET THIS DONE OR WHATEVER WE'VE GOT TO DO.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER ROBIN.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR.

>> HERE WE FEEL PRETTY GOOD ABOUT THIS I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION WHICH IS IN THE DISCUSSION MEMO WE TALKED ABOUT, IT WOULD MAKE IT A VIOLATION TO STORE, PARK OR STAGE CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT MATERIAL ETC.

[03:05:03]

IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT BUT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT SAYS THAT IT'S ONLY AN OFFENSE IF IT'S WITHIN VIEW FROM A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, AM I GETTING THAT WRONG? IS IT ONLY A VIOLATION IF YOU CAN SEE IT FROM THE STREET?

>> THAT IS CORRECT AND THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN THERE AND THAT CAME OUT OF THE COMMITTEE AT THE TIME BECAUSE THEY WERE CONCERNED AT THE TIME OF THE ISSUE WHERE THEY RECOGNIZED THAT THERE WERE A LOT OF HOME BUSINESSES IN GARLAND WHO HAVE THESE TYPES OF SERVICES AND THEY PULLED THEIR TRAILER AND THEIR WORK TRUCK INTO A BACKYARD THAT'S FULLY FENCED AND THOSE MAY BE LOADED WITH CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL.

IT WAS TRYING TO SOLVE THAT ISSUE.

>> YEAH I TRY TO GET THAT BUT THESE ARE STILL PROBLEMATIC.

LIKE THE ONE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER OR DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM MOORE'S MENTIONED WHICH IS THAT YOU STILL HAVE THESE FOLKS SHOWING UP AT SOME EARLY HOUR.

I HAD ONE FOR A LONG TIME THAT HAD VENTING EQUIPMENT THAT WAS IN THE BACK.

IT WOULD BE ALLEY ACCESS THROUGH AN ACTUAL FENCE SO YOU COULDN'T SEE IT FROM A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY BUT AT FOUR IN THE MORNING, THEY START LOADING FENCING MATERIAL ON THIS TRAILER AND IT'S LOUD AND IT'S DISRUPTIVE.

THEN THEY DRIVE IT OUT THE ALLEY AND THEY LEFT THE ALLEY AND THE TRAILERS GO IN AND DEFENSIVE PANELS ARE BANGING AND IT'S EVERY MORNING AT LIKE 4:30 IN THE MORNING.

I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THAT.

I'M GOING TO SHARE, FOR EXAMPLE, I JUST PULLED THIS OFF SATELLITE, THIS IS AROUND THE CORNER FOR ME AND I'VE GOT A BUNCH OF THESE.

HERE'S A HOUSE. YOU CAN SEE HE'S BASICALLY CONCRETED OVER MOST OF THE BACK OF THE HOUSE HERE AND IT ACTUALLY CONTINUES ALL THE WAY OVER HERE.

SO THERE'S TRAILERS HERE AND HERE AND THERE'S A WOODCHIPPER HERE.

USUALLY, THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER LANDSCAPE TRAILERS HERE.

YET IT'S ALL FENCED BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT ALL OF THAT STUFF COMES OUT BASICALLY EVERY MORNING AND TEARS UP THE MEDIAN, PARTICULARLY AFTER IT'S BEEN RAINING AND CAUSE A LOT OF OTHER PROBLEMS. I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT TO DO. WE HAVE A LOT OF TRADESMEN AND OTHER FOLKS WHO LIVE AND WORK IN OUR CITY AND MAYBE WE NEED TO FIND SOME PLACE FOR THEM TO STORE THEIR THINGS AS WE IMPROVE THESE THINGS AROUND THE CITY BUT IT'S REALLY CREATING PROBLEMS AND SOME OF THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

I'D BE INCLINED TO SAY THAT YOU JUST CAN'T HAVE THEM IN THAT WAY IF IT'S OPERATED IN SOME DISRUPTIVE WAY.

I THINK IF SOMEONE'S VERY NON-DISRUPTIVE AND THEY'RE NOT FENCE HOLDING PANELS OUT OF FIVE IN THE MORNING, WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO GET A COMPLAINT, YOU WON'T KNOW IT'S THERE.

BUT WHEN FOLKS ARE BEING DISRUPTIVE, THAT'S WHEN WE NEED TO HAVE TWO OR THREE OF US THERE TO STOP IT.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> THAT MAY BE THE BEST WAY TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM THAT SEVERAL OF YOU ALL HAVE MENTIONED.

THAT IS THE THE GATHERING OF EMPLOYEES AT THE HOUSE AND LEAVING AT FIVE BECAUSE REALLY THE ONLY OTHER WAY TO DO THAT WOULD BE A VERY STRICT PARKING REVISION.

I'M NOT SURE WE COULD EVEN DRAFT ONE TO ADDRESS IT THAT WAY.

THE BEST WAY IT SEEMS TO ME TO ADDRESS IT MIGHT BE TO HAVE A COMPLETE PROHIBITION ON THE STORAGE OF THEM.

THERE WAS THIS LAST TIME THIS CITY COUNCIL WASN'T INCLINED TO USE SUCH A BROAD STROKE.

>> YEAH, IT DEFINITELY CAUSES A PROBLEM THAT I THINK THAT MOST OF YOU HAVE MENTIONED.

WE HAVE PEOPLE IN THAT PICTURE THAT I JUST SHOWED: IT ONLY HAD FOUR CARS OUT FRONT BUT IT'S USUALLY FIVE OR SIX.

THE HOUSE HAS LIKELY BEEN CONVERTED TO WORK-FOR HOUSING.

IT HAS A SEPARATE ENTRANCE AND SO THERE ARE LOTS OF FOLKS WHO WERE THERE.

IT CAUSES A NUMBER OF ISSUES THAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO SOLVE BY MAKING THAT KIND OF CHANGE IN PEOPLE.

AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, I HAD A GUY OPERATING A CABINET MANUFACTURING FACILITY WHERE HE HAD CONVERTED HIS GARAGE AND HAD TURNED IT INTO A 3,000 SQUARE FOOT REAL PRODUCTION FACILITY.

PEOPLE GO PRETTY FAR ON THESE THINGS.

HE KNEW WHAT TIME THE CODE INSPECTORS DID THEIR ROUNDS AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF.

SO HE WOULD HAVE A VAN DROP OFF 10 WORKERS AT 8:15 IN THE MORNING BECAUSE HE KNEW THAT THE INSPECTORS WEREN'T GETTING OUT INTO THE FIELD UNTIL AFTER 8:25.

BY THEN, THEY'D ALREADY BE IN THE BUILDING WORKING, IT'D BE DIFFICULT TO PROVE WHAT WAS GOING ON.

I KNOW IT'S REAL DIFFICULT FOR OUR CODE INSPECTORS.

[03:10:04]

I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THEY DO AND I DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO ADD A LOT MORE TO THEIR PLATE BUT I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO SOLVE. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM NICKERSON.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. BRIAN I'M READING THIS AND I GUESS TO COUNCILMAN ROBIN'S POINT WHICH I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID AND I'M JUST THINKING, DIDN'T WE ALWAYS ALREADY CATCH THAT IN THIS PARAGRAPH C OF THIS ORDINANCE A LITTLE BIT.

THE WAY AS WRITTEN, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OBTUSE BUT IT SAYS YOU HAVE AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE IF YOUR BUSINESS DOESN'T DO ANY OF THESE THINGS AND EVERYTHING HE'S MENTIONING AND OTHERS HAVE MENTIONED IS LISTED THERE.

TO ME, I THINK WE COULD STOP THAT WITH THIS ORDINATE.

>> SUBSECTION C IS DISTINCT FROM SUBSECTION D: SUBSECTION D ARE STRAIGHT PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES.

SUBSECTION C IS INTENDED CAPTURE THOSE ACTIVITIES THAT AREN'T LISTED AS STRIKE-PROHIBITED, THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BE ALLOWED.

THEY'RE ALLOWED IF THEY MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA.

>> BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THE COMPLAINTS WE'RE HEARING, IT'S ALMOST ITEMS 4, 5, 6 AND 7 OF THOSE CRITERIA ARE NOT BEING MET.

>> THEREFORE, THIS ORDINANCE WOULD OR COULD BE USED TO REMOVE THAT BUSINESS TYPE.

I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN ROBIN AS FAR AS THOSE ACTIVITIES OR OBTRUSIVE TO THE END.

BUT I THINK WE'RE COVERING IT THERE AND I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT I'M JUST SAYING I THINK WE MAY HAVE ADDRESSED IT IN THAT WAY IN A DIFFERENT MANNER.

>> YEAH. THE IDEA WITH SUBSECTION D WAS REALLY A PROSECUTION STRATEGY BECAUSE THE WONDERFUL THINGS THAT COUNCILMAN ROBIN MENTIONED WAS JUST THE DIFFICULTY IN PROSECUTING THESE CASES, IMPROVING THAT THERE'S ACTUALLY A BUSINESS RUNNING.

WHEN WE CREATE A SUBSECTION D FOR STRIKE-PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES THAT ALLOWED IT MORE EASY PROSECUTION AND MORE EASY INVESTIGATION BECAUSE THE INVESTIGATION DOESN'T HAVE TO GO INTO THE DETAIL OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, IS THIS AN ACTUAL BUSINESS HERE, WHAT'S GOING ON AT THE LOCATION.

SUBSECTION D, IF YOU'RE DOING THESE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE PROHIBITED, THEN YOU'RE IN VIOLATION AND WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO PROVE IN THE COMPLAINT THAT YOU'RE RUNNING A BUSINESS.

WE JUST HAVE TO SAY, "WE NOTICE THESE ACTIVITIES ONSITE." BUT I CERTAINLY THINK WE CAN DRAFT THE PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES THAT YOU SEE IN SUBSECTION D.

>> YEAH.

>> SPECIFICALLY, SECTION 6 OF SUBSECTION D, WE CAN DRAFT IN SUCH A WAY TO WHERE WE TAKE OUT THAT WITHIN VIEW FROM PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONE.

WE CAN JUST MAKE IT WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL ZONING.

NOW, ARE WE GOING TO CAPTURE OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT YOU MAY NOT INTEND TO CAPTURE? YES, WE PROBABLY WILL BECAUSE THAT'S A BROAD STROKE BUT IT WILL CERTAINLY HELP WITH THE ISSUE OF GATHERING A WORKFORCE AT SOMEONE'S RESIDENTIAL LOCATION AT FIVE IN THE MORNING.

AFTER MATERIALS AREN'T THERE, THEY WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO START GATHERING PROBABLY AT A STORAGE FACILITY SOMEWHERE ELSE AND THEY WOULD COMMUTE FROM THERE.

>> THIS, AND COMBINED WITH THE PARKING ORDERS THAT WE THAT WE ALSO ENACTED, TALKS ABOUT OFFSIDE VEHICLES BEING PARKED THERE EITHER IN BACK OR FRONT OR ON THE SIDE.

BUT I'M ALL FOR STRENGTHENING WHERE YOU THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE BUT I DO THINK THIS ORDINANCE IS ADDRESSING IT IN SOME WAY.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE, SIR?

>> NO SIR, I'M FINE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR. SECTION D4, I AM A LITTLE WORRIED ABOUT THAT ONE, WOULD THAT ACTUALLY CAPTURE RIDE SHARE VEHICLES SUCH AS UBER AND LYFT?

>> COUNCILOR SMITH.

>> ARE REFERENCING THE LIMOUSINE OR TAXI SERVICE?

>> YES SIR.

>> NO, THEY WOULD NOT DO RIDE SHARE BECAUSE IT'S NOT A TAXI.

A TAXI SERVICE IS A LICENSED SERVICE FROM THE STATE AND LIMOUSINE UNLESS IT'S AN ACTUAL LIMOUSINE, WE DON'T HAVE A DEFINITION THERE.

BUT WE WOULD REVERT TO THE PLAIN MEANING OF THE WORD, AND SO NO, WE WILL NOT CAPTURE THAT.

ARGUABLY BECAUSE YOU WORK AS A RIDE SHARE PERSON THROUGH EITHER UBER OR LYFT,

[03:15:02]

THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU'RE RUNNING THAT BUSINESS FROM YOUR HOUSE.

MOST OF THE TIME WHEN YOU'RE ON DUTY FOR UBER OR LYFT, YOU'RE OUT DRIVING AROUND.

>> VERY GOOD. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES SIR. THANK YOU MAYOR.

>> GOOD QUESTION SIR. DEPUTY MAYOR PROTEM MORRIS.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR. I CONSTRUCT OUT AFTER THEM.

MAYOR PRO TEM BROUGHT UP THE SECTION C. THINGS THAT WOULD SEEM TO CAPTURE MOST OF THE ISSUES THAT COUNCILMAN ORDERED AND I HAVE BEEN IN COUNSELING BURET AND I HAVE BROUGHT UP WITH TRANSIENT EMPLOYEES GATHERING EARLY IN THE MORNING.

I AM A LITTLE HESITANT ABOUT JUST SAYING ABRUPTLY THAT PEOPLE CAN'T STORE ANYTHING OF ANY KIND ANYWHERE EVEN IN THE BACK AND THAT MAY WE MAY COME TO THAT, BUT I WANTED TO ASK I WANTED TO ASK COUNSEL WITH SI 506 AND 7, WITH FIVE BEING THERE'S NO SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND NO NEED FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING, WOULD THAT NOT CAPTURE THE TRANSIENT EMPLOYEES WHO COME IN PARK ALONG THE STREETS?

>> MR. ENGLAND?

>> IT WELL, AND LET HIM MAYBE I CAN ANSWER THAT FOR BRIAN.

OUR ISSUE WITH THAT BECOMES VERY SIMILAR TO THE ROOFING.

WHEN WE WENT OUT AND INVESTIGATED THAT, THEY SAID THEY COME TO CARPOOL AND WE COULDN'T PROVE THAT THERE WAS A BUSINESS OR HOME OCCUPATION A DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH THAT ACTION.

IF A GUY WAS NOT A CONTRACTOR, IF ALL OF THE ROOFING CONTRACTOR WAS SOMEWHERE ELSE AND THOSE PEOPLE ARE COMING JUST A CARPOOL IN.

WE COULD NOT PROSECUTE WITH THAT BECAUSE WE HAD TO PROVE THAT HE HAD AN OCCUPATION.

[OVERLAPPING] SO NOT REALLY AN ENFORCEMENT ISSUE.

>> YEAH. ALL RIGHT.

[OVERLAPPING] MR. ENGLAND, YOUR SUGGESTION WITH THAT WOULD BE JUST TO REMOVE THE I'VE GONE BACK ON MY SMALL SCREEN HERE AND LAWS WHERE IT SAYS THAT THINGS COULDN'T BE STORED WITHIN SIGHT OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY.

AND SO YOUR SUGGESTION WOULD BE TO STRIKE THAT PART, AND JUST SAY THEY CAN'T BE STORED, PERIOD?

>> IF THAT'S THE COUNCILS WILL, THEN YES, I WOULD SAY THAT WE'D PROBABLY HAVE A A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ISSUE YOU'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS.

THAT IS THE ISSUE OF THE EMPLOYEES COMING TO THE LOCATION EARLY OUR MORNING, EARLY IN THE MORNING, AND THEN PARKING CARS AND THEN LEAVING, MAKING NOISE WHILE DOING THAT.

I'D PROBABLY ADDRESSED THAT IN A SUBSTANTIAL WAY.

>> I AM ALWAYS BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY SMALL BUSINESSES AND SO MANY CONTRACTORS, I AM ALWAYS EXTREMELY CAUTIOUS ABOUT MAKING SUDDEN MOVES THAT CAN BE DETRIMENTAL.

WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS FOR A LONG TIME.

WE HAVE TALKED TO A LOT OF THEM FOR A LONG TIME.

THEIR NEIGHBORS HAVE TALKED TO A LOT OF THESE BUSINESSES FOR A LONG TIME, AND IT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE USE OF A RESIDENTIAL HOME TO BE USED AS A MASSIVE STORAGE AND AND GATHERING PLACE.

IF IT IS THE COUNCIL'S DESIRE TO DO THAT, I WOULD SUPPORT MAKING THAT CHANGE THAT MR. ENGLAND HAS HAS DISCUSSED AND JUST MAKING THAT A STRONGER, EASILY, MORE EASILY PROSECUTED ORDINATES. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> [INAUDIBLE] GO AHEAD. YOU'RE MUTED.

>> [NOISE] HELLO, IN MY DISTRICT, I'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS SINCE I CAME WHEN I WAS IN IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING AND PEOPLE ARE GETTING FED UP, ESPECIALLY DOING WOOD-WORKS.

I HAVE GUYS THAT WORK ALL NIGHT COME IN AT SEVEN.

THEY SLEEP DURING THE DAY, AND THE GUY NEXT DOOR BEEN DOING HIS [NOISE] CABIN WORK USING DRILLS AND ALL THAT.

ANOTHER ONE HAS A BUSINESS ON FIRST AND AVENUE D, AND HE DON'T HAVE NO PARKING BUT HE BRINGS CARS HOME.

[03:20:02]

HE WORKED ON HIS CARS AT HOME AND PARK THEM ALL OVER THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

NOW, THAT'S THE PROBLEM I'M DEALING WITH IN MY DISTRICT. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU SIR. COUNCILOR ROBIN.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR. [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] DO YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ANY ISSUE OR MAYBE IT'S MORE FOR FOR BARKER WAS ENFORCING WHEN YOU GET TO THE LANGUAGE OF WHERE THE EQUIPMENT OR MATERIALS AND I DON'T NO WAY AROUND IT WHERE THE EQUIPMENT OR MATERIALS ARE PRIMARILY USED FOR COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE, AND WHEN DO YOU GOING TO GET A KIT? SOME PEOPLE ARE LIKE, I JUST I JUST LOVED TO COLLECT LAWNMOWERS.

IT'S MY THING AND THERE ARE PEOPLE LIKE THIS, BUT I COULD SEE THE, I MEAN, I'M SURE WE'LL HAVE SOME VERY CREATIVE RESPONSES TO THINGS LIKE THAT.

>> IN A LITTLE BIT. I CAN COMMENT ON THAT.

I'LL GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF JUST THE INDEPENDENT LANDSCAPER, THAT HAS A TRAILER WHICH HAS EQUIPMENT ON IT, AND HE DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO STORE IT OUT OF PUBLIC VIEW.

DUE TO THE CONFIGURATION OF HIS PROPERTY, HIS LIMITED SPACE.

THEREFORE, HE PARKS IT ON THE DRIVEWAY FULL OF THAT FULL OF EQUIPMENT, LAWNMOWERS OR WHATEVER, THAT THAT WILL IMPACT THAT INDIVIDUAL.

>> WELL, WHERE ARE WE GOING TO HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH PEOPLE SAYING, WELL, IF THIS IS NOT PRIMARILY USED FOR COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE.

I GO MY, I GO CUT MY MOM'S GRASS AND MY BROTHERS GRASS, I DON'T GET PAID FOR IT.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE SOME PROBLEM ALONG OR I'M A COLLECTOR OF BLOCK REEL MOWERS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR HIS BIDDING, ANY ISSUES LIKE THAT, PROBABLY NOT.

[OVERLAPPING]. [LAUGHTER]

>> PEOPLE WHO WILL TELL US CERTAIN THINGS.

WE HAVE TO OBVIOUSLY WE'VE TAKE THEM FOR THEIR WORDS UNTIL THEY PROVE THIS OTHERWISE.

IT WILL PROBABLY WILL RECUR MORE INVESTIGATIVE WORK ON OUR PART.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> I THINK THE ONE ISSUE WE HAVE BEFORE US, I THINK OBVIOUSLY WE WANT THIS ORDINATES AMENDMENT TO MOVE FORWARD, NOT TO GO BACK TO COMMITTEE.

THE ONE ITEM THAT I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS IS, DO WE WANT TO PURSUE THE AMENDMENT FOR THE MATERIAL STORAGE? RATHER THAN GO FROM IT CAN BE STORED ON SIGHT FROM IT CAN BE STORED WITHIN SIGHT, ESSENTIALLY FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

MEANING THAT THE MATERIALS CAN BE STORED AT THE LOCATION VERSUS IT CAN BE HIDDEN BEHIND THE BACK FENCE.

THAT'S GOING TO BE A TOUGH ONE, FOLKS.

I TELL YOU IT'S GOING TO SCOOP UP A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE OTHERWISE PROBABLY NOT THE ONES GIVING US THE ISSUES, AND SO THAT PART GIVES ME A LITTLE BIT OF TROUBLE.

THE EXAMPLE THAT MR. BARKER JUST USED IT'S GOING TO HIT A LOT PEOPLE THAT WE PROBABLY AREN'T HAVING A PROBLEM WITH BUT WE'RE GOING TO CREATE A PROBLEM FOR.

AT THIS POINT, I AM COMFORTABLE WITH IT BEING BEHIND THE FENCE, WHATEVER, BUT DO WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AMENDING THAT LANGUAGE TO PROHIBIT THE STORAGE ON SITE? COUNCIL, IF YOU COULD VOTE. I GUESS WOULD BE THE EASIEST WAY THAT, I'M WATCHING EVERYBODY NOD, AND SHAKE THEIR HEADS.

BUT I THINK COUNCILOR MCNEIL NEEDS TO GO GET HIS VOTING [LAUGHTER].

WE WILL NOW BE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT CHANGE.

COUNCIL MEMBERS AUBIN AND VERA WERE IN OPPOSITION OR I SHOULD SAY, THAT'S REVERSED.

LET'S SEE. MR. ENGLEN,

[03:25:03]

I THINK THIS ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN.

CAN WE HAVE THIS REFORM CONSIDERATION AT OUR MARCH 16TH MEETING TO GET IT MOVING, GET IT DONE?

>> I WILL MAKE SURE I HAVE IT DRAFTED, AND READY TO GO.

>> VERY GOOD.

>> [INAUDIBLE] I THINK WE HAVE LOST YOUR VIDEO THERE FOR A SECOND.

WELL, I THINK YOU'RE BACK NOW.

[LAUGHTER]. THAT WILL BRING US TO ITEM 5. COUNCILOR VERA?

>> WHAT WAS THE VOTE ON THAT?

>> THE CONSENSUS VOTE ON THAT WAS NOT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE COMPLETE RESTRICTION OF MATERIALS ON SITE.

IT COULD STILL BE STORED ON-SITE AS LONG AS IT IS OUT OF THE PUBLIC VIEW.

>> NOT ON THE DRIVEWAY OR IN THE STRAIGHT.

>> WELL, I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE ABLE TO BE STORED THE LUCKY TRAILER AS THE EXAMPLE THAT WAS USED, A TRAILER WITH LAWN EQUIPMENT COULD BE STORED IN THE DRIVEWAY BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT STILL PUTS IT IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR PARKING RESTRICTIONS.

FOR THOSE THAT WE KNOW, MAYBE I [OVERLAPPING].

>> IT WOULD DEPEND.

IT'S POSSIBLE THAT IT WOULD BE PROHIBITED FROM BEING STORED ON THE DRIVEWAY IF THAT DRIVEWAY WAS BLOCKED BY FANS FROM THE RIDE WAY, MEANING THE ALLEY OR IF IT'S A FRONT ENTRY DRIVE THEN I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU CAN HAVE DEFENSE FROM THE FRONT ENTRY DRIVE WOULD POSSIBLE IF IT WAS ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, I SUPPOSE, SO IT WOULD DEPEND.

>> I'M TALKING ABOUT HAVING THE CONCRETE PEOPLE HAVE ALL OF THOSE THINGS ON THE TRAILER ON THE DRIVEWAY.

BUT THEY DON'T PARK IT THE BACKYARD.

>> IF THE DRIVEWAY IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET OR THE ALLEY, THEN THEY WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT IF THAT TRAILER HAS CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ON IT.

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> THANKS, SIR.

NOW WE WILL MOVE FORWARD TO ITEM 5,

[5. Announce Future Agenda Items]

ANNOUNCE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? JUST ONE. COUNCILOR WILLIAMS BROUGHT THIS FORWARD TO ME, I GUESS A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO OR A DAY AGO.

A REQUEST FROM THE CHAMBER ON ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL BUSINESSES FOR RECOVERY FROM THE WINTER STORM.

WE HAVE THAT COMING FORWARD AS WELL AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.

>> MR. MAYOR?

>> WE ALSO HAVE THE MS BRIEF, WE ALSO HAVE THE BRIEFINGS ON THE COMMUNICATION SPACES THAT I SENT.

>> REMIND ME OF WHAT THAT ONE IS.

>> BRIEFING FROM OUR CUSTOMER SERVICE UNIT, AND CHEAP CANAL ON THE COMMUNICATIONS, PEACE FROM THE STORM.

>> WE COVERED THAT LAST MONDAY NIGHT DURING THE PRESENTATION.

MR. SLAY WAS HERE.

WE COVERED COMMUNICATIONS DURING THAT.

WAS THERE SOMETHING IN ADDITION TO THAT?

>> YEAH, WE CAN TALK OFFLINE.

>> I KNOW HE WAS HERE, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT I SENT TO YOU.

I'LL GIVE YOU A CALL WE TALK OFFLINE, I CLARIFY THAT.