[Community Services Committee on February 1, 2022.]
[00:00:02]
ALL RIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON.UM, THIS IS TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 1ST, 2022.
AND THIS IS A MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE.
UM, I AM CHAIR DEBRA MORRIS, AND WITH ME, OUR COMMITTEE MEMBERS, UM, COUNCILMAN ROBERT VERA AND DEPUTY MAYOR PRO TEM, BJ WILLIAMS, AND A WHOLE ROOM FULL OF STAFF.
SO WE WILL GET STARTED, UM, UH, COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
HAVE YOU ALREADY HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES? YES.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING.
DO I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND? OKAY.
AND WE HAVE A, A HUGE, UM, AGENDA TODAY WITH A LOT OF ITEMS. SO I'M GOING TO ASK US ALL TO BE AS THRIFTY WITH WORDS AS WE CAN SO WE CAN SPEED ALONG.
SO, UM, ITEM NUMBER ONE WAS APPROVAL OF MINUTES, WHICH WE'VE DONE.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS TO DISCUSS FUNDING OPTIONS FOR SIDEWALKS AND SPEED HUMPS.
THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING AND WHO'S RUNNING WITH THAT JUDGE.
OR ELSE THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL FACE YOU WITH A MICROPHONE.
UH, SO YOU RECALL FROM THAT RECORDING.
SO YOU RECALL FROM LAST MONTH, UH, WE STARTED AS A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE SIDEWALK PARTICIPATION PROGRAM IN PARTICULAR, UH, KIND OF DID, DID A LITTLE IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
SO WE WANT TO REPORT BACK ON KIND OF A STATUS UPDATE ON THAT PARTICIPATION PROGRAM.
UM, DIDN'T TALK SO MUCH ABOUT SPEED HUMPS, BUT HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT THAT AND, AND HOW WE CAN HELP FUND THOSE AS THE REQUESTS COME FROM NEIGHBORS.
UM, SO I'D REALLY, I GUESS, KICK IT OVER TO STEVE OLIVER, UM, FOR THE PARTICIPATION PROGRAM UPDATE THANK YOU.
ANY OF YOU WHO WANT TO EVER GET SOMETHING? I LOVE FLOW CHARTS, SO ALWAYS FEEL FREE TO GIVE THEM TO ME.
THANK YOU, KIM MORSE AND KATHLEEN WILLIAMS. UH, THE SIDEWALK COST SHARE PROGRAM, OBVIOUSLY THAT WAS A PROGRAM THAT IS SLOWLY TRANSITIONING FROM ENGINEERING TO OUR DEPARTMENT.
WE ACTUALLY KIND OF GAVE YOU AN UPDATE OF WHERE WE ARE.
I KNOW MICHAEL KEEPS RECEIVING OCCASIONALLY REQUESTS AND THEY'RE HANDLING SOME OF THOSE REQUESTS, BUT AS WE RECEIVED THEM, WE ARE GOING OUT AND MEASURING AND LOGGING THAT INFORMATION, RECORDING, DETERMINING WHICH ONES QUALIFY FOR THE, UH, THE RE THE COSTUME, WHICH ONES DOWN.
AND THEN OBVIOUSLY IF THEY DON'T QUALIFY FOR THE COST SHARE, THEN WE ARE NOTIFYING THE CITIZEN THAT THEY DO NOT QUALIFY FOR THE SHARE.
BUT WE ARE IN THAT, UH, WE LOOKED AT, AT FLOURISH FIRST BUBBLE ON THE FLOAT SHORT, IT SAYS FIELD REVIEW AND ESTIMATE.
WE HAVE, WE CURRENTLY HAVE A BACKLOG OF 99 REQUESTS.
ALL OF THEM HAVE BEEN REVIEWED.
ALL OF THEM HAVE BEEN MEASURED.
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING ESTIMATES FOR ALL OF THOSE.
THEY, THEY ESTIMATE SHOULD BE COMPLETED WITHIN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO.
WE HAVE SET UP A MEETING WITH REVENUE RECOVERY FOR LATER THIS WEEK, WEATHER PERMITTING TO, UM, SIT DOWN WITH OUR ADMINISTRATIVE PERSON AND THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE PERSON.
AND WE'VE, WE'VE LOOKED AT, WE'VE LOOKED AT SO FAR, THE ONES WHERE THE CITIZEN'S REQUESTED.
WE'VE STILL GOT SOME WORKING ON WHERE SOMEONE ELSE KIND OF REQUEST THAT SOMEBODY FIXED HER SIDEWALL.
SO THE ONES THAT ARE VOLUNTARY REQUESTS, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE WORKING ON THOSE.
WE'RE GOING TO SIT DOWN WITH THOSE WITH THEM AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL GOOD WITH THE PROCESS AND HOW THE PROCESS WORKS.
CAUSE WE WILL, WE HAVE DETERMINED THAT WE WILL COME UP WITH THE RALEIGH ESTIMATE.
WE WILL PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO CUSTOMER SERVICE AND THEY WILL APPLY THE APPROPRIATE DISCOUNTS, UH, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THEY QUALIFY FOR THE CDBG, WHETHER THEY QUALIFY FOR THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, WHETHER THEY QUALIFY FOR THE SENIOR DISABLED.
SO ONCE THAT, ONCE THAT WE HAVE DETERMINED THE PROCESS IS GOOD, THEN WE'RE GOING TO START FUNNELING THOSE REQUESTS TO, TO THE, UH, REVENUE RECOVERY PERSONS.
WE'LL PROBABLY START, YOU KNOW, IN BATCHES, TRY TO TRY TO LOOK COORDINATE FOR TWO THINGS GEOGRAPHICALLY, AND ALSO BY DATE OF REQUESTS.
AS SOON AS THE REQUESTS CENTER WE'LL GO THERE.
SO AS WE GET THEM, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO JUST FLOOD THEM ALL OF A SUDDEN WITH, BECAUSE THEY ARE, AS WHAT COREY HAD INDICATED TO ME IS THEY'VE BEEN A LITTLE SLOW TRYING TO ON THIS BOB, BECAUSE THEY HAVE JUST BEEN FLOODED WITH THEIR TAX IT'S THE TAX SEASON.
SO THAT'S KIND OF TAKING PRECEDENCE NOW, BUT WE'RE AT THE POINT NOW WHERE WE CAN GET GOING.
[00:05:01]
THAT.SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE FLOW CHART, LIKE I SAY, WE'RE, WE'RE AT THE POINT WHERE IT WOULD BE THAT SECOND, THAT SECOND BOX THERE, WHERE IF WE'RE GOING TO SEND IT TO THEM, AND THEN, THEN, THEN WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE FORM, THE FORM INVOICE THAT WILL GO OUT.
AND WE JUST BASICALLY FILL IN THE NUMBER.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A CALCULATION, ALL THE CALCULATIONS DONE ON THE SPREADSHEET.
AND THAT IN THAT NUMBER GOES TO THEM, THEY FILL IN THE NUMBER IN AND SEND IT OUT TO THE RESIDENCE.
AND OF COURSE THEN THE, UH, YOU GO TO THAT DAMN DECISION POINT IS OKAY IF THE OWNER LOOKS AT THAT AND SAYS, YES, I WANT, I WANT TO DO THAT.
I'M OKAY WITH THAT INVOICE THAT I WILL PAY THAT INVOICE.
NO, IF NOT, IT JUST GOES INTO THE, IT JUST GOES INTO THE, TO THE DEAD, I GUESS, MORE THAN THE DEAD LETTER FILE AS IT WAS.
AND WE'RE, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT COMPELLING PEOPLE THAT MAKE, THAT MAKE THE REQUEST ON THEIR OWN.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO COMPEL THEM TO FIX IT.
IF THEY CHOOSE THE SIDE THAT THAT'S JUST BEYOND THEIR MEANS TO MAKE THE REPAIR.
BUT IF THEY DO SAY YES, THEN WE WOULD, WE WOULD NOTIFY THAT.
THEN REVENUE RECOVERY WOULD SEND AN EMAIL TO US THAT LET'S GO AHEAD.
GO AHEAD AND START TO GET A WORK ORDER GOING.
AND THEN ONCE WE GET THE WORK ORDER GOING, ONCE WE COMPLETE THAT WORK ORDER, THEN WE WOULD HAVE A FINAL, WE'D HAVE A FINAL INVOICE NUMBER.
AND SO THAT INVOICE NUMBER, IF THAT, IF THAT REQUIRES THAT THEY PAY MORE THAN WE WOULD HAVE TO RE INVOICE THEM WITH A FINAL BILL, IF WE OWE THEM MONEY, THEN WE COULD, WE WOULD END UP WE'RE FUNDING MONEY WHEN THAT'S, IT THAT'S A DECISION POINT, WHETHER THE BALANCE IS DUE OR THE BALANCE IS CLEAR, THERE'S REALLY ALMOST, YOU COULD CREATE A THIRD DECISION POINT WHEN THE BALANCE IS CLEARED, WHERE IT'S WITHIN.
I THINK THEY TYPICALLY, IF THEY'RE WITHIN $5, THEY DON'T HAVE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO, IT'S JUST NOT WHAT THEY EFFORT TO TRY TO CLICK OR TO COLLECT OR TO REFUND $5.
SO ANYTHING BEYOND THAT, THEN THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD EITHER MAKE A REFUND OR, OR MAKE THE REQUEST AND THEN EITHER PAY THAT.
AND LIKE I SAY, IF THE, IF THE OWNER WANTS THEIR DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, PAYS AND DOESN'T CHOOSE TO PAY, THEN, THEN THEY WOULD, UH, THEY WOULD EITHER GO IN AND THEY ADD IT IN THE, IN, IN THE LANE.
BUT GENERALLY THE LANE IS GOING TO BE MORE TYPICALLY ON THE ONES WHERE THE CITIZEN DIDN'T REQUEST IT, BECAUSE AT THIS POINT, IF THEY'RE REQUESTING IT, AND THEN THEY CHOOSE AFTER THE FINDING OF HOW MUCH IT COSTS, THEY SAY, NO, I CAN'T AFFORD THAT.
OR I JUST, I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT.
THEN, THEN IT JUST, IT, IT SITS IN THE, IT SITS IN THE KIND OF THE DEAD LETTER FILE AS IT WERE.
UM, STEVE, LET ME JUST PUT A PAUSE ON THIS.
THIS IS REALLY GOOD AND YOU MAKE IT REALLY EASY TO, TO SCAN DOWN AND, AND SEE THE, THE, HOW THIS WORKS.
SO FOR THE PURPOSE OF, OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE, AND I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GREAT THING FOR EVERYBODY ON COUNCIL TO HAVE ACCESS TO, BY THE WAY, I THINK THIS IS NICE AND CLEAR.
UM, OUR DIRECTIVE HERE IS TO BASICALLY TALK ABOUT HOW TO FUND SIDEWALKS AND, UM, HOW TO FUND ON OUR END SIDEWALKS AND, AND STREET HOMES FOR CITIZENS.
SO THIS KIND OF GOES OUT, THE PROCESS IS EXCELLENT.
THIS KIND OF GOES OUTSIDE OF OUR FUND FUNDING DECISION.
SO THIS WAS ONE OF THE PROBLEMS SOLVING THINGS THAT I REQUESTED LAST MONTH TO SAY, HOW ARE WE GOING TO GET THROUGH THIS? AND YOU, YOU GOT IT.
UM, I HOPE THAT THE 99, THAT THE BACKLOG OF 99, WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET TO ZERO IN A VERY SPEEDY WAY.
SO, UM, I GUESS, YEAH, AS THAT SITS, WE'RE LOOKING, WE'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY IF EVERYTHING WORKS OUT, PROBABLY START, START SENDING THOSE INVOICES, THOSE LETTERS FOR WEEKS.
AND DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATE FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT WILL TAKE TO EAT THROUGH THE BACKLOG AND BRING THEM TO RESOLUTION? I WOULD THINK IT WOULD TAKE THE BETTER PART OF THIS FISCAL YEAR, AT LEAST IF NOT LONGER, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO, I MEAN, WE'VE GOT A FUNDING STREAM AND A LOT OF IT'S GOING TO DEPEND UPON THE FUNDING AVAILABLE THAT WE'VE GOT IN THE CIP.
I THINK WE'VE GOT A LITTLE OVER A MILLION DOLLARS IN THE CIP, SO IT DEPENDS.
IT REALLY IS GOING TO DEPEND UPON HOW MUCH OF THAT FUNDING GETS EXHAUSTED.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO WITH GENERALLY LOOK AT THAT ON A FIRST COME FIRST SERVE BASIS, BUT WE'RE ALSO TRYING TO GROUP THOSE TOGETHER.
WE'RE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF ACTUALLY BIDDING OUT OUR OWN, UH, CONCRETE SIDEWALK AND CURB AND GUTTER REPAIR PROGRAM.
NOW THE CURBING DINNER'S GOING TO BE A HUNDRED PERCENT FUNDED BY THE CITY, BUT WE ARE GETTING THOSE REQUESTS AS WELL.
I THINK WE HAVE 116 OF THOSE REQUESTS.
THOSE, WE EITHER TRY TO TAKE CARE OF THEM WHEN OUR CONTRACTORS IN THAT AREA, OR MAYBE THIS NEW CONTRACT THAT WE JUST OPENED A DAY THAT'S AT THAT QUOTE UNQUOTE LAST MILE CONTRACT WILL PROBABLY PICK OFF A LOT OF THOSE AS PART OF THAT.
AND THEN SOME OF THEM, IF THEY'RE ON STREETS THAT ARE, DO YOU KNOW, THAT ARE BEYOND THE POINT OF REPAIR
[00:10:01]
AND MAYBE THEY'RE SCHEDULED FOR REPLACEMENT, THOSE WE'LL JUST TELL THEM, NO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT NOW.WE'LL FIX IT WHEN THE STREET GETS FIXED.
BUT YEAH, IT WOULD, IT WOULD PROBABLY TAKE THE BETTER PART AT LEAST A YEAR TO TAKE, TO GET THAT BACK LANE.
AND IN THE PROCESS, WE'LL PROBABLY BE RECEIVING ADDITIONAL, WE'LL BE RECEIVING ADDITIONAL REQUESTS.
SO WE'LL TRY TO ACCELERATE THAT AS BEST WE CAN.
I THINK SOME OF THAT MAY BE FUNDING CONSTRAINTS.
YEAH, BECAUSE THE 99 BACKLOG, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THAT ACCUMULATED FROM JANUARY LAST YEAR, SO IT ACCUMULATED OVER AN ENTIRE YEAR.
SO IF WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO RUN A YEAR BEHIND, THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
SO, BUT THAT'S ALSO OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, ABOUT HOW TO FUND.
SO THAT'S AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ISSUE AND IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE SOME ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS.
AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIND A WAY, JUDGE, YOU'RE LOOKING AT ME THE, ON THE, YOU ASKED ABOUT FUNDING.
SO IN THE CIP AND I WAS AT A MILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR FOR SIDEWALK PARTICIPATION PROGRAM.
I KNOW WE HAVE A MILLION THIS YEAR, BUT I THOUGHT THAT WAS THAT INCLUDED SOME CARRY OVER THAT THE, THE PROGRAM WAS THREE AND A HALF MILLION OVER SET.
WAS IT THREE AND A HALF OVER SEVEN YEARS.
IT WAS A HALF A MILLION A YEAR.
SO LIKE I SAY, WE'VE GOT A MILLION BECAUSE WE'VE GOT BASICALLY A TWO YEARS WORTH OF FUNDING.
SO OTHER THAN THAT, WE'RE AT A HALF, WE'RE ROUGHLY AT A HALF A MILLION A YEAR, AND A BALLPARK, STEVE, FOR YOUR, WE HAVE A HUNDRED SITTING OUT THERE ON AVERAGE.
THEY'RE ABOUT HOW MUCH PER REPAIR OR YEAH, I GUESS, AND MAYBE THE HOUSING THAT MUCH TYPICALLY MICHAEL, UM, ANYWHERE FROM, YEAH.
CAN, YOU CAN JUST GO FROM CHAIR TO CHAIR.
DO YOU FIND WHEN YOU LIKE ANY, ANYWHERE, MOST OF THE REPAIRS ARE AVERAGING USUALLY 1500, MAYBE A 2,500 PER PROPERTY IS ON AN AVERAGE, YOU GET A FEW PROPERTIES THAT WILL HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE, MAYBE 3000, BUT AGAIN, THAT'S, THAT'S A TOTAL, THAT'S THE TOTAL FOR THE PROPERTY.
SO IF IT'S A 50 50, IT'D BE HALF OF THAT.
AND OF COURSE WITH THE ADDITIONAL, UM, REDUCTIONS, IT WOULD ACTUALLY, THE CITY'S PORTION WOULD ACTUALLY BE MORE SO WE'LL BE PAYING MORE OUT OF POCKET.
SO THAT MONEY WILL, THAT FUNDING WILL PROBABLY GO RELATIVELY QUICK AS, AS STEVE WAS SAYING, BUT FOR THE A HUNDRED PROPERTIES HERE, OR YOU'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY IT AT THE, ON THE HIGH END, MAYBE 300,000 FOR THAT TOTAL.
SO THEY OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO CATCH UP WITH THAT.
AND THEN ANY NEW ONES THAT COME IN TRICON, IF THEY'RE USING OUR, I DON'T KNOW WHO YOUR NEW CONTRACT WILL BE WITH THAT'S THAT'S YET TO BE BID, BUT IF THEY'RE USING TRICON, UM, CONTRACT, THEY'RE USUALLY PRETTY QUICK TO GET OUT AND GET, YEAH, WE'RE USING TRACK ON NOW.
AND THEN WHEN WE GET OUR NEW CONTRACT AND IF THE NUMBERS CHANGE, THEN THAT WOULD FORCE US TO OBVIOUSLY LOOK AT OUR ESTIMATES AS WELL.
SO I MAY HAVE TO GO BACK AND RE MODIFY THE ESTIMATES DEPENDING UPON WHAT THE NEW NUMBERS STARTED OUT.
SO, UM, AGAIN, THE, THE CHARTER OF THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE IS, IS FUNDING.
THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY, UM, THIS IS ABOUT FUNDING TO MAKE IT LESS EXPENSIVE FOR CITIZENS TO GET SIDEWALKS AND STREET HUMPS.
SO THAT IS THE EMPHASIS ON THIS AGENDA ITEM.
SO THE, UM, CIP FUNDING OR OTHER FUNDING, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF THE EQUATION BECAUSE THE MORE WE GIVE BREAKS TO CITIZENS, THE MORE OF OUR FUNDING GETS APPLIED.
UM, BUT WHAT I WANT TO GET TO PRETTY QUICKLY HERE, AND AGAIN, I, I THINK ADDRESSING THE BACKLOG, LOOKING BACK, GETTING THIS CAUGHT UP AND THEN GETTING, GETTING WHERE WE ARE DEALING WITH THESE REAL TIME MOVING FORWARD.
THAT IS ONE OF MY TOP PRIORITIES BECAUSE WE CAN'T KEEP RUNNING A YEAR BEHIND.
AND, UM, MICHAEL, AS YOU WELL KNOW, UM, IT WAS AT LEAST ONE OF MY, UH, ONE OF MY RESIDENTS.
UM, THIS MAKES PEOPLE FURIOUS, UM, AND IT MAKES US LOOK REAL BAD.
AND SO FOR RIGHT NOW, UM, THIS IS VERY HELPFUL AND I WANT, I WANT TO SET THE BIGGER ISSUE ASIDE OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO CATCH UP AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO GET THIS WORKING REAL TIME, MOVING FORWARD.
I WANT TO MAKE THAT SEPARATE FROM WHAT WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS ON NOW WITH DISCUSSING RELIEVING CITIZENS, DECIDING WHICH IF ANY CITIZENS, WE CAN PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO, TO GET SIDEWALK REPAIR, TO REPLACE AND TO GET SPEED BUMPS PUT IN.
AND WE GOT MOST OF THE WAY THROUGH SOME OF THESE DECISION POINTS BEFORE.
[00:15:01]
WE TALKED ABOUT CDBG AREAS BEING, UM, AN OVERLAY, IF I'M RECALLING CORRECTLY, JUDGE, DO YOU, SO, UH, FOR CDBG AREAS, IT'S SIMPLY, UM, THE, UH, CENSUS TRACT THAT HAS A LMI INDICATOR IN IT, BASICALLY A LOW TO MODERATE INCOME CENSUS TRACT.THAT'S WHAT WE USE, I THINK FOR THE, SO ON THE SIDEWALK PARTICIPATION PROGRAM, IT'S 50 50, BUT YOU CAN GET AN ADDITIONAL, I THINK IT'S 40, 40%.
UM, IF YOU'RE IN A CDBG AREA, UH, IF THERE'S A DISABILITY OR A HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, YES.
BUT WE WERE ALSO TALKING ABOUT MAKING THAT BASICALLY A, A NO CITIZEN COST, POTENTIALLY SINCE WE HAVE TONS OF SIDEWALK MONEY, APPARENTLY, UM, WE HAD DISCUSSED THAT COUNCIL AND OUR COMMITTEE.
I'M LOOKING TO YOU ON THIS BECAUSE WE KIND OF GOT OFF THE RAILS LAST MONTH WHEN WE FOUND OUT THAT THE TALK ABOUT SIDEWALKS WAS GOING OFF A CLIFF BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T HAPPENING.
UM, DID SOMEBODY JUST PUNCH IN? OH, OKAY.
UM, SO GOING BACK OVER OUR MINUTES, UM, WE TALKED ABOUT USING THE NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY MATCHING GRANT FUNDS, UH, FOR SPEED HUMPS AGAIN, WHICH WE USED TO DO ROUTINELY.
SO NEIGHBORHOODS COULD DO THAT THROUGH THE, THE, UM, MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM.
AND, UM, JED, AT THAT POINT YOU HAD SAID THERE THAT WE COULD HAVE A SEPARATE PROCESS FOR REQUESTING THOSE KINDS OF FUNDS WHERE THE MATCHING FUNDS WOULDN'T BE NEEDED FOR THAT.
DID YOU FLUSH THAT OUT ANY, AND DO YOU HAVE SUCH A PROGRAM HANDY? SO I THINK WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME WAS, UM, IF A, IF THE SPEED HUMP HAPPENED TO BE IN AN LMI CENSUS TRACT THAT, UM, A, THAT WOULD BE SORT OF A CHECK BOX THROUGH THE SPEED HUMP PROCESS THAT THEY COULD CHECK, AND THAT WOULD QUALIFY THEM FOR THE POL, IS IT $700 THAT THEY CONTRIBUTE TO THE SPEED HUMP? UM, NOW AS FAR AS HOW WE FUND THAT, IT COULD EITHER BE THROUGH NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY GRANTS LIKE IT WAS PREVIOUSLY, UM, OR WE JUST DO A SIMPLE ALLOCATION THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS TO COVER THAT 700.
WHERE I'M AIMING WITH THIS IS GETTING TO SOME DECISION POINTS SO THAT WE CAN SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE FEEL IS WISE MOVING FORWARD.
SO WHY DON'T WE START? WHY DON'T WE MAKE IT EASY SPEED HUMPS ARE PRETTY STREAMLINED.
SO COMMITTEE, WHERE ARE YOU WITH, UM, US RECOMMENDING TO COUNCIL THAT SPEED HUMPS THAT ARE QUALIFIED.
AND, AND OBVIOUSLY WITH THE PAUL AND THE PROCESSES WE HAVE, THEY HAVE TO MEET ALL THE QUALIFICATIONS TO BE ALLOWED, TO HAVE A STREET HUMP TO BEGIN WITH.
UM, AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO I'M ASSUMING GO THROUGH THE SAME PETITION PROCESS.
UM, ONLY WITHOUT THE MONEY, IF IT'S IN A CDBG AREA, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO GET APPROVAL, BUT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO, TO ASK NEIGHBORS TO SIGN A PETITION AND SAY, I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS.
SO I BELIEVE LAST TIME FROM MY NOTES, WE GOT TO THE POINT WHERE WE SAID WITH, UH, NEIGHBORHOODS IN CDBG AREAS THAT WANT STREET HOMES, THAT THEY COULD GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS ONLY WE WOULD FUND THE OTHER HALF OF THE STREET HUMP WITHOUT REQUIRING MONEY FROM THEM.
DOES THAT MEET YOUR RECOLLECTION OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU FEEL HAS BETTER IDEAS BJ? WELL, I, YEAH, IT DOES THAT DOES.
UM, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD SUGGEST, I THINK WE WENT FORWARD WITH THE TWO.
WE TALKED ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY, CDBG FUNDING SOURCES, UH, PERHAPS, UH, AT OUR NEXT MEETING WENT FORWARD, UH, THAT, UH, WE COULD COME UP WITH SOME, UM, I'M TALKING ABOUT IT ON THE RESIDENT SIDE NOW.
UH, IF YOU COULD BRING BACK MAYBE SOME OPTIONS FOR SOFTENING THE BLOW FOR OUR RESIDENT.
UM, WE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SEVERAL OF THEM HERE TODAY AND IF A JET, IF YOU CAN LOOK AT SOME, SOME OTHER POSSIBLE OPTIONS AND BRING THOSE BACK SO THAT WE CAN SORT OF MASSAGE THOSE, THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO SAY.
W CDBG THAT THEY VERY WELL COULD BE SOME OTHER OPTIONS OUT THERE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE, BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE US COME BACK WITH SOME OPTIONS TO EXPLORE SOFTENING THIS.
[00:20:01]
UM, SOFTEN THIS ON, ON THE, UH, RESIDENT SIDE FOR SPEED HUMPS? YEAH.SO, I MEAN, JUST BRAINSTORMING A COUPLE OTHER OPTIONS.
UM, WE HAVE CENSUS DATA AVAILABLE FOR, UH, INCOME LEVELS FOR ALL OUR CENSUS TRACKS.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL COULD, FOR EXAMPLE, SAY IN, YOU KNOW, FOR CENSUS TRACKS BELOW A CERTAIN INCOME LEVEL, UH, THAT WOULD QUALIFY, UM, CDBG, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE, THE CDBG CENSUS TRACKS, THAT'S ANOTHER CRITERIA, BUT WE COULD COME UP WITH A HANDFUL TO LOOK AT.
THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE ABOUT HIM.
I'D LIKE TO SEE SOME OPTIONS, UM, YOU KNOW, FORCED TO LOOK AT AND THEN GO FROM THERE TO, TO BEGIN TO ADDRESS DRESS SIDE, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SEVERAL THINGS, SHIT, BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE JET.
I LIKE TO SEE SOME OPTIONS WHEN FORWARD, BECAUSE SINCE THE TRACK INCOME, UM, YOU KNOW, AND I KNOW IN MY AREA WE HAVE, UM, THE PETITION PIECE THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, BUT THEY, SOME OF THEM WON'T BE REQUIRED TO GET SIGNED PETITIONS.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW HOW THAT PIECE IS GOING TO WORK.
YOU IT'S, TO ME, THAT'S KIND OF A FINE LINE THERE.
UM, DO YOU, DO YOU NEED, DO YOU NEED NEIGHBORHOOD SORT OF BUY-IN OR DON'T WE, HOW, AND IF THEY DON'T NEED THE PETITION, WHAT'S IT, WHAT'S THAT LOOK LIKE? HOW, HOW DOES, HOW DO, HOW DO WE DETERMINE THAT THERE IS NEIGHBORHOOD BUY-IN IF WE ARE NOT REQUIRING SIGN PETITIONS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S DOWN THE ROAD, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING I WANT TO THROW OUT.
I'VE HAD SEVERAL CONSTITUENTS, FOR EXAMPLE, WHO HAVE HANDICAPPING CONDITIONS.
UM, THEY, AND I KNOW TWO OF THEM THAT I, THAT I KNOW VERY WELL, THEY WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR CDBG NO SIX, BUT THEY HAVE HANDICAPPING CONDITION DISABILITIES MAY PUT SO, AND I'M SURE WE HAVE SOME OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS ALL ACROSS THE CITY.
SO, UM, SORT OF TO CUT OFF MY, MY JABBERING ON THIS, WE COME BACK WITH SOME OPTIONS.
COULD YOU PUT TOGETHER A LIST? UM, AND SHE, YOU GUYS PUT TOGETHER THE LIST OF POSSIBLE FUNDING, THINGS THAT WE CAN EXPLORE.
AND THEN WE CAN SORT OF MASSAGE THE AMOUNT OF CHARITY IN HERE BEFORE TAKING ANYTHING TO COUNCIL.
CAUSE I, CAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALL THOSE OPTIONS OR WHAT THEY MAY LOOK LIKE.
SO I'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT, THAT I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL MOVING FORWARD.
ONE QUESTION ABOUT THE, YOU MENTIONED ABOUT THE SIGNED PETITION YOU'RE REFERENCING ON SPEED HUMPS.
WE REQUIRE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF SIGNATURES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
RIGHT? I HEARD YOU, SOMEBODY SAID SPINACH, GO, THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT A PROCEDURE OR, UH, WE, WE WOULD REQUIRE NEIGHBORHOOD BUY-IN, BUT NOT NECESSARILY PETITION THAT I MISSED HERE.
I THOUGHT I HEARD SOMEBODY SAY THAT, AM I, AM I IMAGINING WE WOULD STILL NEED? AND I HAD MENTIONED PETITIONS THAT DID NOT REQUIRE THEM TO SAY I'M GOING TO PAY MONEY.
I JUST WANT TO BE SURE I UNDERSTOOD THAT THE MONEY PIECE.
THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUY IN WAS THE PACE.
JUST A QUICK CLARIFICATION WHEN YOU WERE REFERENCING THE ADA, THE DISABILITIES, RIGHT.
AND WERE YOU TALKING ABOUT SPEED HUMPS WHERE WE TALKING ABOUT SIDEWALKS? I THINK SIDEWALKS, RIGHT.
I'M TALKING BOTH BECAUSE, UM, I'VE GOTTEN RESPONSIBLE FOLKS WHO, AS THEY NAVIGATE AND SOME OF THEM NOW HAVE THE MOBILE, UM, I DON'T KNOW THE MOBILE UNITS AND THEY ACTUALLY MOVE AT THE CURB IN THE STREET THAT I'VE GOT SOME FOLKS WHO ACTUALLY THEY USE THE SIDEWALK, BUT THEY ALSO USE THE STREET HOW TO, YOU KNOW, TO MOVE AROUND.
SO IT'S TALKING ABOUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, GENERALLY SPEAKING, GENERALLY SPEAKING WITH ADA.
THERE WON'T BE A PARTICIPATION PROGRAM IN THAT.
IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE HAVE AN ADA COMPLAINT ABOUT HOW WE HANDLED IT, WE WOULD FIX IT.
IF THEY CAME IN AND SAID WE WOULD COME UP AND WE WOULD TAKE OWNERSHIP FROM THAT AND FIX IT, WE WERE REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAW TO FIX IT.
WELL IF WE'LL FIX THAT, THEN SCRATCH THAT POINT.
THANK YOU FOR, FOR THAT MRS. CITY ATTORNEY.
BEFORE WE TAKE IT TO COUNCIL, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE EVERYTHING IN ORDER BECAUSE IF YOU NOT READY FOR
[00:25:01]
COUNCIL, THERE WILL TEAR IT UP.NO, WE NEED TO MAKE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR.
SO ONE THING AT A TIME, SO SPEED BUMPS, I THINK, UM, BJ'S POINT IS WELL TAKEN THAT THERE COULD BE PEOPLE LIVING OUTSIDE CDBG AREAS WHO MIGHT BE IN CENSUS TRACKS WHERE WE HAVE LOWER INCOME LEVELS.
UM, SO HAVING SOME ALTERNATIVES IN, I THINK CERTAINLY INCLUDING CDBG, BUT IF THERE ARE SOME OTHER CATEGORIES THAT ARE NOT VAPOROUS, THAT THEY ARE CLEAR, THEY ARE DEFINED.
WE CAN SAY EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE SO THAT THERE'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A, UH, IT'S IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SUBJECTIVE.
SO THAT'S A, THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.
AND, AND BRINGING UP PETITIONS, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT DOING AWAY WITH THEM.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE, UM, THAT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN EXPLORING AS WELL, WHILE WE'RE ON THAT, UH, THE PETITIONS FOR SPEED HUMPS IS TURNING THAT ENTIRELY INTO AND STEVE, YOU AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS, EVEN WITH SOME OTHER THINGS INTO A CITY INITIATED THING THAT TAKES OUR CITIZENS OFF OF HAVING TO GO KNOCK ON THE DOOR OF STRANGERS IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, BECAUSE THESE DAYS, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE UNWILLING TO DO THAT, AND THEY ARE AFRAID TO DO THAT.
SO HAVING THIS BE AN A CITY INITIATED THING WHERE INSTEAD OF A PERSON WALKING A PETITION, WHERE WE MAIL LETTERS DIRECTLY TO THE HOMES AND HOPE FOR RESPONSES, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW WELL THAT WOULD WORK.
I THINK WE'RE DOING SOME OF THAT NOW WITH STREET LIGHTS, UH, FOR THE SAME REASON OF NOT HAVING YOUNG WOMEN WALKING DOOR TO DOOR KNOCKING ON STRANGER'S DOORS, BECAUSE THEY'RE SCARED TOO.
SO IT SEEMS LIKE WE SHOULD BE SHIFTING MORE AND MORE AWAY FROM PUTTING CITIZENS IN THAT POSITION.
IT'S NOT LIKE IT USED TO BE, SO YEAH, WE CAN EXPLORE THAT.
SO THEY'RE COMING FROM ALL OVER THE ROOM.
SO IF, IF YOU, IF YOU'RE TRYING TO SPEAK, RAISE YOUR HAND.
UM, SO JEN, IF YOU CAN BRING THAT BACK, UM, NEXT MONTH AND NOW SIDEWALKS, LET'S SEE WHAT KIND OF CLARITY WE CAN GET TO AS FAR AS SIDEWALKS.
SO, AND AGAIN, THIS IS HOW TO MAKE THE FUNDING ON THE CITIZENS SIDE FUNDING FOR SIDEWALKS RATIONAL AND IN REACH FOR PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD IT.
BECAUSE AGAIN, IN HOS, IN, YOU KNOW, MOST OF OUR WEALTHIER NEIGHBORHOODS, THEY CAN AFFORD NEW SIDEWALKS.
THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE, A LOT OF THE HOMES IN MY DISTRICT AND B DAYS DISTRICT AND IN, UH, MR. VARIOUS DISTRICT WEEK THAT THEY CAN'T, THEY CAN'T AFFORD IT.
SO, UM, AND ALONG THE SAME LINE, AND MAYBE THIS WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO BRING BACK, HAVE THIS BE UNIFORM.
SO IF, IF WE'RE GOING TO SAY, UM, CDBG AREAS AND CENSUS TRACKS BELOW A CERTAIN INCOME ARE ELIGIBLE FOR FREE OR REDUCED, UM, SIDEWALK PARTICIPATION, THEN, I MEAN, WE ALREADY HAVE A GREAT SIDEWALK PARTICIPATION, BUT WHERE WE WOULD GO THE LAST MILE IN PAYING SO THAT THEY CAN GET SIDEWALKS DONE.
IF I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE RIGHT, THAT WE DO 50, 50, THAT'S KIND OF THE MAX CONTRIBUTION, UM, FROM, FROM CITIZENS, UH, THEY CAN GET ANOTHER 40% IF THEY QUALIFY FOR CERTAIN THINGS, HOMESTEAD, EXEMPTION, CDBG, UM, AND THEN DISABILITY, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE, THE OTHER 10% THAT, AND SOME OF THEM AREN'T OLD, SO IT CAN BE MORE THAN 10%.
SO WE HAVE PEOPLE LIVING IN THOSE INCOME AREAS THAT ARE YOUNG FAMILIES.
THEY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO DO THIS, AND THEY, THEY DON'T SEE THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING THE MONEY TO DO THIS IN THEIR FORESEEABLE FUTURE.
SO I DON'T WANT TO, I DON'T WANT TO SAY ONLY 10%, BUT, UM, HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION SHOULD BE A NATURAL, WE CAN COUNT ON THE 50%.
SO IT COULD BE UP TO THE REST OF THAT BALANCE THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT IF THEY WERE IN ONE OF THESE LOWER INCOME AREAS.
SO IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE IT BE THE SAME BETWEEN SPEED HUMPS AND, UM, SIDEWALKS, THE UNIFORM AND THE, ON THE FUNDING SIDE, BECAUSE I KNOW THIS QUESTION WILL COME UP BOTH AT THE COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL LEVEL IS, YOU KNOW, HOW, HOW FAR CAN WE STRETCH OUR SIDEWALK PARTICIPATION PROGRAM, FUNDS MILLION DOLLARS WE HAVE IN THE POT FOR THIS YEAR AND THE PROPOSED CIP.
[00:30:01]
IF WE SAY WE GET A HUNDRED APPLICATIONS A YEAR, UM, MICHAEL, YOU KIND OF SAID ABOUT 2,500 MAX, UM, PAY OUT.SO EVEN IF WE'RE PAYING A HUNDRED PERCENT ON A HUNDRED APPLICATIONS A YEAR, THAT'S 250,000, DIDN'T HAVE MILLION, TWO AND A HALF MILLION.
I MEANT TO SAY THAT JUST TO GIVE US A SENSE THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CLOSE THAT THAT'S A A HUNDRED PERCENT PARTICIPATION ON THE CITY'S PART.
SO WE GOT GOTTA, WE DO NEED TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
WE HAVE TWO BUCKETS OF FUNDING.
WE HAVE THE PARTICIPATION DOLLARS, AND THEN WE HAVE NEW SIDEWALK MONEY THAT IS MORE MEANT FOR STAFF INITIATED PROJECTS, WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO CLOSE A GAP BETWEEN SCHOOLS AND A NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT SORT OF THING.
UM, AND SO THAT, I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S A POSSIBILITY COUNCIL COULD SAY, LET'S TAKE THAT MONEY AND ALLOCATE IT TOWARD, UM, REALLY SUBSIDIZING OF THE PARTICIPATION PROGRAM.
UM, THAT'S AN OPTION, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S OR NEW MONEY THAT WE COME UP WITH ADA FALLS UNDER THE NEW, IN THE NEW SIDEWALK FUNDING.
SO ANY RAMPS AND IN FRONT OF BEING PAID FOR THOSE ARE THE EASY ONES, BECAUSE THAT'S CLEAR, BUT, UM, OKAY, WELL, SO, AND, AND SO THERE'S LEVELS HERE, UM, ARE SIDEWALKS MORE IMPORTANT? I'LL JUST ASK YOU, ARE SIDEWALKS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SPEED HUMPS? YES, YES.
SO, UM, AS FAR AS HELPING PEOPLE, I THINK SIDEWALKS NEED TO BE OUR TOP PRIORITY BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO TRIP AND FALL ON JUST, I'VE TOLD YOU ALL THIS BEFORE I ACTUALLY FELL IN, BROKE MY FOOT ON THE SIDEWALK AND MY NEIGHBORHOOD, BECAUSE IT WAS LIKE THIS.
AND FORTUNATELY I WAS SEMI YOUNG ENOUGH TO BOUNCE INSTEAD OF BREAKING EVERY BONE IN MY BODY, BUT WE REALLY DON'T WANT THAT TO SPEAK TO PEOPLE IN OUR CITY.
SO, UM, SIDEWALKS ARE TOP PRIORITIES, SPEED BUMPS ARE IMPORTANT AND THEY'RE GREATLY DESIRED.
BUT, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO PRIORITIZING AND LOOKING AT FUNDING, I WOULD, I WOULD ALSO BE FINE, FRANKLY, WHICH IS GOING BACK TO THE WAY WE USED TO DO IT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY GRANTS, BEING LEGITIMATELY ABLE TO BE USED FOR SPEED HUMPS, UH, THAT WAY THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD TO WORK TOGETHER THAT TOOK CARE OF THEY HAD TO FORM.
UM, UM, I'M TALKING ABOUT THIS, SCOTT, THEY HAVE TO HAVE AN ORGANIZATION, A RECOGNIZED ORGANIZATION, OR NO.
AND WITH THE MATCHING GRANT UP TO $10,000, THEY DON'T MATCH.
SO THIS WOULD BE SIMPLY A MATTER OF SAYING SPEED HUMPS, WHICH USED TO BE UNDER THAT PROGRAM.
AND THAT WE TOOK OUT FROM UNDER THAT PROGRAM, THE WAY YOU JUST PUT IT BACK UNDER THAT PROGRAM.
AND THAT SORT OF JUST LEAVE THAT IN LAPS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT WOULD BE PROBABLY MY, THAT WAS ACTUALLY WHAT I, I STARTED THIS WHOLE ISSUE THINKING, OH, EIGHT, WE USED TO DO IT THAT WAY.
THEN WE STOPPED DOING IT THAT WAY.
AND A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOODS ARE IN DISTRESS.
IF WE PUT IT BACK INTO THAT PROGRAM, WE COULD JUST LET THAT RUN AND WE WOULD HAVE OUR HANDS OFF OF IT WITHOUT HAVING TO DO ANY OF THE REST OF THIS.
ARE WE TALKING SPEED? HUMPS, SPEED, HUMPS, JUST TALKING SPEED HUMPS, BECAUSE I'VE TRANSITIONED TO SIDEWALKS.
I'M I JERKED IT BACK TO SPEED HUMPS.
SO, UM, DO BOTH OF YOU RECALL WHEN WE HAD SPEED HUMPS UNDER THE MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM? BECAUSE THAT WAS FOR SOME YEARS, I BELIEVE I'M LOOKING IN MY OTHER LIFE.
SO IF, IF WE WANT TO JUST SKIP OVER THAT AND FOCUS ON SIDEWALKS AND REDUCING COSTS FOR SIDEWALKS, DO WE WANT TO JUST MAKE OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT SPEED HUMPS GO BACK UNDER THE NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY MATCHING GRANTS AND JUST LET THAT PROGRAM RUN LIKE IT USED TO, WELL, I THINK THAT'S I'M CHAIR.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD OPTION, BUT WE STILL GOT, UH, STILL THE OTHER REQUESTS THAT WE'VE MADE.
I STILL WOULD LIKE THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE, WE HAVE A NUMBER OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT DON'T HAVE FARM TO GROUPS IF YOU WILL.
SO WE DON'T WANT, I DON'T THINK WE DON'T WANT TO PUT IT UNDER NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT'S HOW THE EXCLUSIVE, EXCLUSIVELY, WHERE YOU REQUIRE A GROUP, WE WE'VE GOT TO COME UP WITH A WAY TO REACH.
THOSE ARE THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT DON'T HAVE OFFICIAL GROUPS OR ORGANIZATION.
[00:35:01]
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH BRINGING BACK THE OLD WAY, BUT I WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT THAT THERE'S ALSO A PROVISION FOR THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT DON'T HAVE OFFICIALLY FOR A FORMED GROUPS.SO WE WOULD BE ASKING YOU TO BRING BACK OPTIONS.
AND ONE OF THE OPTIONS ABOUT CENSUS TRACKS ABOUT CDBG AND ONE OF THE OPTIONS WOULD BE NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY MATCHING GRANT, WHICH THESE ARE NOT EXCLUSIVE OF EACH OTHER.
LET'S, LET'S JUST BRING THAT BACK AS AN OPTION.
CAN I THROW ANOTHER OPTION OUT THERE? UH, SO I MEAN, IT'S, AGAIN, PAUL AT $700, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, AND GENERALLY HOW MANY REQUESTS PER YEAR DO WE GET ON SPEED HUMPS? UH, I'D HAVE TO LOOK, I DON'T KNOW.
SO, WELL THEN WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THAT IS THAT, I MEAN, FROM A FINANCIAL STANDPOINT, WE'RE PROBABLY NOT TALKING ABOUT A HUGE HIT.
AND SO I THINK ONE OF THE OPTIONS TO THROW OUT THERE IS DO WE JUST ELIMINATE THE PARTICIPATION PART OF THAT ALTOGETHER, REGARDLESS OF WHERE YOU'RE AT? UM, WE'LL THROW THAT IN THERE AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
SO Y'ALL CAN LOOK AT, LOOK AT THAT CDBG TRACKS AND INCOME BASED ONE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY MATCHING GRANTS, OR DO WE JUST GET RID OF THAT ALTOGETHER AND, UM, FUND THAT THROUGH, THROUGH SOME SOURCE.
UM, AND ANY OTHER COME UP, YOU MAY THINK OF SOMETHING ELSE AFTERWARDS TOO.
UM, BUT WE'LL CHASE IT DOWN AND BRING IT BACK.
SO WITH THE SAME, WE CAN'T DO THAT ELIMINATE WITH, UM, ACROSS THE BOARD WITH SIDEWALKS, BUT TAKING THE OTHER THINGS SENSE.
UM, HAVE WE EVER, SCOTT, HAVE WE EVER HAD SIDEWALKS BE UNDER THE, THE MATCHING GRANTS PROGRAM? YES, WE DID.
SEE, THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING.
THAT WAS WHEN WE ALSO HAD SPEED HUMPS.
WE HAD BOTH OF THOSE UNDER THAT, UM, GRANT PROGRAM, SO THAT NEIGHBORHOODS COULD COOPERATE TOGETHER TO HAVE A BLOCK OF SIDEWALKS REPLACED THROUGH THE MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM.
WE'LL WE'LL, UH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKED LIKE, BUT WE'LL BRING IT BACK AS AN OPTION.
ANY OTHER OPTIONS ABOUT SIDEWALKS? I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR IT REAL QUICK FOR KEVIN.
UM, THE, THE 10% THAT THAT SAY I WOULD HAVE TO PAY MY CURRENT RIGHT JET ON THE, ON THE, THE CITIZENS AMOUNT.
KEVIN, IS THAT ONE PAY IN FULL, IS THAT, CAN I PAY THAT CANNOT BE THAT LIKE I USED TO SEE AS APPROACH TO, TO PAY THAT BALANCE OR DO I HAVE TO PAY IT IN FULL KEVIN, MICHAEL, OR WHOEVER CAN HANDLE IT.
THEN I THROW IT TO KEVIN, KEVIN, I THROW IT TO YOU CHRISTIE, BUT WHOEVER WANTS TO SPEAK TO THAT.
AND THEY'RE UNDER THE ORDINANCE THAT WE REVISED BACK IN JUNE, OR I THINK IT WAS JUNE OR JULY OF 20, 21 OR 2020.
I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH YEAR IT WAS.
UM, WE ADDED THAT IN THERE THAT WE EXTENDED OUT THE PAYMENT PLAN.
ALSO, THERE ARE PAYMENT PLANS BASED ON THE AMOUNT THAT YOU HAVE THAT YOU OWE, UH, THE MINIMUM PAYMENT PLAN BEING 36 MONTHS, AND THEN THERE'S 48 AND 60 MONTHS, DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH THEY OWE.
SO THERE IS A WAY TO SOFTEN THAT FOR THE, FOR THE RESIDENTS THAT DON'T HAVE THE FUNDING THAT THEY CAN MAKE A PIE PAYMENT PLAN OPTION, ACCORDING TO OUR ORDINANCE.
WOULD YOU MAKE THAT A PART OF WHAT JOE, COME BACK WITH THAT INFORMATION, MICHAEL, SORT OF, WE CAN TAKE A LOOK.
YEAH, WELL, THEY, UM, AGAIN, THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE PARTICIPATION PART OF IT, BUT, UM, IF AT TIMES WE'VE, I GUESS WE'VE PLACED LIENS FOR SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS ON, NON-PROPERTY TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT, JUST BECAUSE IT'S GOOD INFORMATION FOR YOU ALL TO KNOW THAT THAT HAPPENED.
AND IN THE CASE OF THE PAYMENT PLAN, THERE IS A LIEN PUT ON THE PROPERTY UNTIL IT'S PAID IN FULL.
AND THEN ONCE THEY'VE PAID IN FULL, WE RELEASED THE LIEN ON THE PROPERTY AND IN, IN SITUATIONS WHERE THERE'S ADA COMPLIANCE ISSUES IN THOSE, SOME OF THOSE CASES WE'VE ACTUALLY FORCED THE PROPERTY OWNERS BECAUSE THERE IS AN ADA COMPLIANT ROUTE THAT WE HAVE TO GET CORRECTED.
THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SIDEWALKS.
SO WE, WE, IN THAT SENSE, WE ACTUALLY FORCED THEM INTO THAT, THE SIDEWALK PROGRAM, THEY STILL GET ALL THE REDUCTIONS THAT THEY QUALIFY, HOMESTEAD, CDBG, ET CETERA.
UM, BUT THEY WILL BE FORCED INTO PARTICIPATING AT THAT POINT, IF IT'S AN ADA COMPLIANCE ISSUE, THAT THERE'S, THERE'S A PERSON THAT'S IN A WHEELCHAIR THAT MAY TRY
[00:40:01]
TO GET FROM POINT A TO POINT B FROM THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD OVER TO A, A, A NEIGHBORHOOD MARKET OR, OR SOME OTHER LOCATION.AND IN THAT CASE WE HAVE, UM, AND SO USING LESS THAN TERMS, BUT WE DO FORCE PEOPLE INTO IT.
AND THOSE REASONINGS, MOST PEOPLE THERE, THERE'S ONLY ABOUT THREE.
UM, I BELIEVE WE ONLY HAVE THREE SIDEWALKS AT THIS TIME AND ALL THE ONES THAT WE'VE DONE IN THE LAST THREE OR FOUR YEARS IN THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT THAT HAVE MADE THE PAYMENT PLAN.
UH, IT'S VERY FEW PAYMENT PLANS THAT WE'VE ISSUED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.
I THINK MICHAEL, I THINK ADDING TO THAT, WHATEVER WE COME OUT OF THIS, WITH THAT, THE MARKETING, I THINK THE PLAY, THE PAYMENT PLAN, WHETHER WE PUT IT OUT AS PART OF OUR MARKETING THING, THE TIMES WE'RE IN, I THINK PEOPLE WILL WANT TO PARTICIPATE.
I THINK THEY NEED TO KNOW THAT THOSE OPTIONS ON A PAYMENT PLAN, UM, FIVE, 10 YEARS AGO BACK WHEN YOU WRITE, UH, BUT TIMES HAVE CHANGED.
AND I THINK WE MAY HAVE MORE PEOPLE LOOKING TO LESSEN THE BLOW WHO WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT, BUT THEY WOULD LIKE TO LESSEN THE BLOW ON IT.
SO IF YOU CAN BRING THAT INFORMATION BACK, THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
UH, I WILL SAY WITH THAT, I HAVE WITH A LOT OF MY RESIDENTS WHO DESPERATELY WANT NEW SIDEWALKS, I HAVE GONE OVER THAT.
STAFF HAS GONE OVER THAT WITH THEM AT GREAT LENGTH.
AND THE ANSWER IS NOT JUST, NO, THEY WILL NOT LET A LIEN BE PUT ON THEIR HOUSE.
THEY'RE TERRIFIED IT THEY'RE OLD SCHOOL.
AND THEY WILL HAVE A, A MESS AND A DISASTER, BUT THEY WILL NOT ALLOW A LIEN TO BE PLACED ON THEIR HOME.
SO THAT HAS BEEN LESS USEFUL THAN IT SOUNDS IN, IN REAL LIFE SITUATIONS.
BUT THAT, THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE OFFER AND IT MAKES I WOULD DO IT, BUT A LOT OF MY CONSTITUENTS UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES AS WELL, UM, ESPECIALLY THE OLDER ONES, SO, OKAY.
AND THAT'S, AND THEN THEY JUST LIVE WITH A ROTTEN SIDE SIDEWALKS AND THEY LIVE WITH NO SIDEWALKS.
WITH THE, UM, A MENU THAT WE CAN PICK AND CHOOSE FROM NEXT TIME, AS FAR AS, UM, PATH TO MOVE FORWARD.
AND AGAIN, I LOVE YOUR FLOW CHART AND THIS MAKES IT MUCH MORE CLEAR TO ME THAT UH, YEAH.
SO LIKE I SAID, WE MAY, UM, NOT US IN THIS COMMITTEE, BUT TH THAT WOULD BE, UH, THE, HOW TO, HOW TO KICK THIS INTO HIGH GEAR, GIVE YOU ALL THE RESOURCES THAT YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO NOT ONLY CATCH UP, BUT TO KEEP THIS REAL TIME MOVING FORWARD.
SO WE'RE NOT ALWAYS A YEAR BEHIND SOMEHOW OR OTHER.
WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO DO THAT.
SO ISSUING OUR OWN CONTRACT WILL HELP, HELP EXPEDITE THAT.
WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THE NEXT, UM, ISSUE AND SEE HOW WE DO.
WE MAY STILL, THERE'S STILL HOPE.
UM, IT'S PROBABLY NOT HOPE FOR YOU.
IT'S HOPE FOR ME THAT IT WON'T BE LIFTING.
THIS SHOULD BE FAIRLY QUICK THOUGH.
WELL, YOU, YOU JUST JINXED IT BY SAYING THAT, THANK YOU SO MUCH, BUT GO AHEAD.
THIS IS, THIS IS ITEM THREE, DISCUSS A REGULATION OF FOOD, TRUCKS AND TRAILERS.
MADAM CHAIR, LADY, AND, UM, COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
YOU ALL SENT ME AWAY LAST TIME TO FINALIZE IN THEORY, THE, UH, MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLE, UM, ORDINANCE.
AND JUST AS A QUICK REMINDER, I'LL DO A VERY QUICK SYNOPSIS AND REVIEW OF WHERE WE ARE AND WHAT THIS ORDINANCE COVERS.
AND THEN WE'LL GET TO THE HIGHLIGHTED PORTION OF WATCH, WHICH IS WHAT Y'ALL ASKED ME TO ADD LAST TIME TO REVIEW.
AND SO, JUST AS A REMINDER, THE MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLES ARE VEHICLES WHERE FOOD IS PREPARED WITHIN THAT VEHICLE ONSITE.
AND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT CATERING TRUCKS, WHERE WE HAVE, UM, UM, FOOD THAT WAS PREPARED SOMEWHERE ELSE AND BROUGHT THAT'S.
THIS ORDINANCE DOES NOT COVER THAT.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIRST SECTION W THERE, THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS, IT'S THE NUMBER ONE IS PRIVATE PROPERTY.
AND WHAT THIS PARTICULAR SECTION SAYS IN ESSENCE IS THAT IF A FOOD MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLE IS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY MUST HAVE THAT CEO
[00:45:01]
FOR THAT.UM, UH, FOR THAT MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLE, THERE IS A DEFENSE TO PROSECUTION HERE, AND THAT IS FOR, UM, SPECIAL EVENTS.
AND SO IF YOU HAVE PRIVATE PROPERTY LIKE A CHURCH, AND YOU WANT TO HAVE AN EVENT WHERE YOU BRING IN SEVERAL MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLES FOR THAT EVENT, THEN YOU CAN GO AND GET A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THAT.
AND YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO GET A CEO THAT IS COVERED.
IF YOU FLIP THE PAGE TO SUBSECTION THREE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION IN ORDER TO HAVE IT, UM, YOU HAVE TO HAVE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER.
UM, IF YOU'RE GOING TO OPERATE A MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLE ON SITE, THERE IS NO ONSITE DINING AND SUB-SECTION FOR THE HOURS OF OPERATION AS DIRECTED BY THIS COMMITTEE, UM, ARE 7:00 AM TO 11:00 PM.
AND THEN NUMBER SEVEN IS THE REQUIREMENT FOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLES ON YOUR PROPERTY, UM, SUBSECTION SEVEN, A AND LESS IT'S OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED BY THE GDC OR OTHER ZONING REGULATION, AND THAT OTHER ZONING REGULATION COULD BE A PD.
AND SO IF SOMEONE, FOR EXAMPLE, UM, COUNCILMAN VIERA AND YOUR DISTRICT, I'M THINKING OF THE CARWASH, IF THEY WANTED TO COME FORWARD AND SAY, OKAY, RIGHT NOW, THIS IS CURRENTLY OPERATING AS A PRIMARY USE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT USING THE CARWASH.
THEY WOULD HAVE THE OPTION TO COME TO COUNCIL, COME TO PLAN COMMISSION AND SAY, I WOULD LIKE TO, I'D LIKE A ZONING CHANGE TO A PD THAT WOULD ALLOW THIS PARTICULAR USE.
SO THEY WOULD HAVE THAT OPTION.
AND IT WOULD, OF COURSE THE COUNCIL WOULD ULTIMATELY MAKE THE DECISION IF THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE USE ON THE SIDE OR NOT.
THE OWNER IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS WHERE THE FOOD TRUCK, THE MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLES OPERATE.
UM, THE SITE PLAN HAS TO INDICATE THE PARKING SPACES THAT THEY WOULD TAKE UP.
AND THAT HAS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
THAT IS, IT CANNOT TAKE UP SO MANY PARKING SPACES TO WHERE THE SITE'S NO LONGER IN COMPLIANCE WITH MANDATORY PARKING, UM, MINIMUM PARKING SUBSECTION, 70, Y'ALL DIRECTED THAT YOU'LL ALL WANT TO DELIMIT IT TO FIVE DESIGNATED AREAS PER PREMISE, FOR OPERATION OF THESE MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLES.
AND OF COURSE THE EXCEPTION STILL IS A SPECIAL EVENT.
AND SO IF THERE'S A, UH, THEY WANT TO HAVE MORE FOR A SPECIAL EVENT, THEY CERTAINLY COME GET A PERMIT FOR THAT.
AND THEN WE GET TO SUBSECTION E, WHICH IS THE FIRST HIGHLIGHTED PORTION, AND THIS IS ALL SENT ME AWAY AND DIRECTED THAT I COME UP WITH SOME LANGUAGE FOR, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLE BE WITHIN 500 FEET OF A RESTROOM THAT IT'S EXPRESSLY STATES, THAT THE RESTROOM IS OPEN PUBLICLY ASSESSABLE AND ALSO PERMANENT RESTROOM FACILITY.
SO WHAT YOU DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE HAPPEN IS THE FOOD TRUCK SHOW UP WITH THE PORT-A-POTTY AND DROP IT OFF.
AND THEN, UM, AND SO I THREW IN THE PERMANENT RESTROOM FACILITY IN THERE.
I'M GOING TO PUT SOME COMMENTS IN THERE.
UM, JUST, UM, FOR YOUR GRAMMAR NAZIS, I WILL IN THE FINAL VERSION, MAKE SURE I'M KIND OF SPEAKING TO YOU.
I WILL PUT COMMENTS AND AN AND IN THERE, AND IT WILL BE AN OXFORD COMMENT AS WELL.
UM, SUBSECTION SEVEN F, AND THIS IS THE 200 FEET.
UH, THE MOBILE FOOD PREPARATION VEHICLE MAY NOT OPERATE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE FRONT DOOR OF A BRICK AND MORTAR RESTAURANT, UNLESS THEY GET PERMISSION FROM THE RESTAURANT OWNER.
AND THAT IS IT ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY.
DOMAIN CITY ATTORNEY, I THINK.
I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS MINIATURE, MR. VERA, DOES THIS SUIT YOU, WHEN YOU SAY THAT THEY'VE GOT TO HAVE A REGULAR RESTROOM? YES.
POTTY, THOSE PARTY PARTIES ARE NOT GOING TO CUT IT.
THAT'S GOOD FOR THIS CAR WASH THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
CAUSE THEY GOT TO HAVE A RESTROOM.
ARE WE ALL GOOD? READY FOR THIS TO GO TO COUNCIL? YOU DID GOOD.
MOVING ON TO ITEM FOUR, DISCUSS PARK FEE STRUCTURE FOR SENIOR CITIZENS.
AND THIS REALLY SHOULD ALSO KNOCK ON WOOD BE FAST BECAUSE, AND THEY HIT US ALREADY SAID THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE QUICK WHOLE YOUR QUESTIONS.
YES, WE HAVE JUST REALLY QUICK SLIDES CAUSE I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE Y'ALL HAD THE BACKGROUND.
SO CURRENTLY AT OUR RECREATION CENTERS, WE JUST HAVE ONE OPTION FOR THE FITNESS ROOMS AND THAT'S UH, UM, ONE AGE GROUP IT'S JUST 16 AND UP.
[00:50:01]
OR THEY CAN DO $8 A MONTH AND THEY CAN DO A DAY PASS FOR $5.AND AT OUR TWO SENIOR CENTERS, UM, WE DON'T CHARGE ANY FEE FOR USE OF THE FITNESS EQUIPMENT.
I DID SOME BENCHMARK DATA, UM, AND IT'S VERY COMMON FOR MEMBERSHIPS AT RECREATION CENTERS TO BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THEY ARE AT TRADITIONAL SENIOR CENTERS.
UM, BUT MOST CITIES DO HAVE SOME SORT OF A SENIOR DISCOUNT AT THE RECREATION CENTER AND THOSE RANGE ANYWHERE FROM $25 FOR A YEAR UP TO $180.
SO I SPOKE WITH STAFF AND WE TALKED THROUGH AND WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD A PROPOSED, UM, SENIOR CITIZEN DISCOUNT.
AND THAT WOULD BE AT OUR RECREATION CENTERS.
SO WE'RE BASICALLY CUTTING IT IN HALF OF WHAT AN ANNUAL UH, MEMBERSHIP IS FOR, UM, CURRENTLY.
AND WE WOULD START THAT FOR AGES 65 AND UP THAT WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION.
AND AT THE SENIOR CENTERS, WE WOULDN'T MAKE ANY CHANGES.
SO, SO THE BIGGEST CHANGE WILL BE THE 40 TO 20 AVAILABLE FOR SENIORS TO HAVE AN ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP AT THE NEW AND IMPROVED REC CENTER RENOVATIONS THAT INCLUDE NEW FITNESS FACILITIES.
AND OUR SENIORS WILL, WE'LL BE, WE'LL BE VERY APPRECIATIVE, UH, SLICING SOMETHING 50%.
SO, SO ANDY, THAT APPRECIATE THE WORK ON THIS.
YEAH, BUT MY, MY QUESTION ON THIS IS WHEN THIS GOES FORWARD, MADAM CHAIR.
SO MY NEXT STEP, WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP IN THE MR. CITY ATTORNEY, WE'LL DO IT TO THE FEE ORDINANCE AND, UM, MAKE SURE THAT THE ORDINANCE WILL PRESENT TO COUNCIL TO THE FULL COUNCIL WILL BE AMENDMENT TO THE FEE ORDINANCE REFLECTING THE NEW FEES.
SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO PART OF THE SCHEDULE FEES FOR DURING BUDGET.
W F IF THEY WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE BUDGET, WE CAN WAIT OR IF THEY WANT TO MAKE IT EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, WE CAN DO IT IMMEDIATELY.
MY CHAIR, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK OUT OF TURN, BUT I LIKE THIS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE MR. ATTORNEY ALSO.
FULLY ALL ISSUES WITH THAT SIMPLE, INCLUDING THE NEXT ONE.
SO WE ARE NOW TO ITEM FIVE, DISCUSS DOG PARK RULES, WHICH AS YOU ALL COMMITTEE, IF YOU WILL REMEMBER WHEN THIS WAS PRESENTED, UM, BASIC THINGS WERE PRESENTED TO COUNCIL.
I FORGET WHEN SIX WEEKS AGO OR SO, UM, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF THE ISSUES, A NUMBER OF THE RULES THAT WERE NOT WELL RECEIVED AND, AND INCLUDING SOME BY ME.
SO, UM, ANYWAY, ANDY, GO AHEAD.
SO WHAT WE'VE GOT HERE IS JUST TO KIND OF A SUMMARY, AND I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF THINGS HERE TO SHOW, I'M GOING TO GO ACTUALLY INTO THE PRESENTATION, THEN COME BACK TO THE ORDINANCE CHANGES JUST BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE PART OF THE DISCUSSION, WHATEVER IS DECIDED UPON.
I JUST WANTED TO PUT THE IMAGE IN EVERYONE'S MIND.
UH, WE'VE HAD THAT DISCUSSION AMONGST OURSELVES AND IS WITH ANIMAL CONTROL, UH, ANIMAL SERVICES.
SO THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THOSE SIGNS WOULD LOOK LIKE RIGHT NOW.
THEY'RE NOT IN THE MOST VISIBLE LOCATION.
SO THIS RULE SIGN WOULD THEN BE ALTERED TO REFLECT WHATEVER COUNCIL'S DESIRE IS.
AND THEN YOU'VE GOT SOME OTHER SIGNS WHEN YOU'RE THERE AND HOW YOU WOULD LOCATE THEM.
UM, HERE'S JUST SOME IDEAS WHERE WE WOULD, UH, MOVE THE ENTRY SIGNS TO WHERE THEY'RE AT EACH PADDOCK AS YOU GO IN, YOU CAN'T MISS THEM.
UM, AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE INDIVID, THESE PADDOCK RULES WOULD BE RIGHT ON THE GATE.
THEY WOULD HAVE THE LARGE DOG AND THE SMALL DOG DESIGNATION THAT THE PADDOCKS, UM, THAT WE WOULD MOVE, YOU WOULD HAVE THE CLOSED SIGN AND RED, AS YOU SEE RIGHT HERE AS PART OF THE MAIN SIGN.
AND AS WE ROTATE THE TWO PADDOCKS OUT OF THE THREE, YOU PUT THE S YOU ROTATE THE SIZE OF DOG ON THOSE.
SO IT'S, IT'S VERY CLEAR AND VERY EASY WHEN YOU WALK UP ONTO THE FACILITY.
AND THEN AS WE DECIDE WHAT THE INDIVIDUAL ISSUES ARE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO CONVEY, THESE ARE THE TYPES OF SIGNS THAT YOU'LL SEE INSIDE THAT ARE FRIENDLY REMINDERS OF THE RULES AND ETIQUETTE RATHER THAN IT BEING OVERLY HEAVY HANDED.
UM, SO AGAIN, ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE SIGNS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE INSIDE.
SO LET ME GO TO THE, KIND OF THE MEAT AND POTATOES OF THIS.
THIS IS WHAT IS CURRENTLY OUT THERE ON THE SIGNS ARE THESE, UH, DOG PARK RULES.
AND OUR INTENT WAS TO HELP CODIFY THOSE, OR AT LEAST REORGANIZE THOSE THAT MIGHT ALREADY BE IN THE CODE.
THEY'RE JUST BURIED IN DIFFERENT PLACES, MAKES IT EASIER TO FIND, UH, SHOULD WE NEED THEM? SO WHAT WE DID IS TOOK THOSE RULES THAT WERE PRESENTED TO COUNCIL BEFORE HIGHLIGHTED THE ONES THAT WE RECALL AS BEST OUR MEMORY THAT WERE OF
[00:55:01]
SOMEWHAT OF A DEBATE.AND WE'LL BRING THOSE BACK HERE FOR, TO MAKE, UH, FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
UM, SO I CAN HIGHLIGHT THOSE VERY BRIEFLY IF THEY'RE HARD TO READ.
SO NUMBER THREE, UM, WE WANTED TO CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S OBVIOUS, UM, WHAT THAT SIZE LIMIT IS, UH, FOR THE PADDOCKS AND HAVE SOME ABILITY TO ENFORCE THAT, BECAUSE THAT IS, UH, THE THINGS THAT I KNOW THAT WE DEAL WITH AND M SERVICES DEAL WITH ARE FOLKS THAT REFUSE EVEN KNOWINGLY TO FOLLOW THAT RULE.
AND IT, AND IT IS A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTOR, UH, TO, UH, DOG AGGRESSION, UH, NUMBER FIVE, UH, PICKING UP AFTER YOURSELF OR AFTER YOUR DOG RATHER, UM, NUMBER SIX, ANOTHER ONE THAT'S, UH, THAT WAS A SUBJECT OF DEBATE IS I THINK THE INTENT OF THAT AT ONE TIME WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'VE GOT FOLKS IN THERE THAT ARE ABLE TO HANDLE THE DOG.
UM, BUT PART OF THAT PROVISION PROHIBITED, UM, CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 10 TO BE IN THE DOG PARK AT ALL.
I KNOW THAT'S A GREAT SOURCE OF DEBATE.
UM, NUMBER NINE, NO WOUNDED SICK OR DOG IN HEAT SHOULD BE BROUGHT INTO THE PARK.
AND ANOTHER ONE FOR DEBATE WAS FOOD TOYS AND GLASS CONTAINERS ARE NOT PERMITTED IN THE PARK.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ON HERE THAT WE WANT TO ENTERTAIN FOR DISCUSSION? GO AHEAD.
I REMEMBER THE SESSION TO THE FINAL PIECE OF THAT CHILDREN UNDER AGE 10, ALLOW THEM IN THE DOLL PARK.
AND IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, I REMEMBER THAT THAT STIRRED UP QUITE A POT.
UM, IF WHAT, WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE OTHER CUMBERLY COMPARABLY SIDE, UH, CITIES DOING IN THAT AREA? UH, WHAT'S THE INDUSTRY, UH, MAYBE YOUR ART, WHAT WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE INDUSTRY PRACTICE ON THAT? WHAT IF, WHAT IF I, AS A PARENT, WHAT IF I'M CHILD SITTING, UH, AND I WANT TO GET OUT OF THE HOUSE AND I'VE GOT A NINE YEAR OLD AND 10 YEAR OLD, AND I WANT TO GO TO DEL PARK.
SO WHAT THIS SAYS THAT I COULD NOT TAKE MY KIDS TO THE DOG PARK, UM, TO THE PARK PERIOD, NOT TO MENTION ENTERING, YOU KNOW, THE EARS FOR THE DOG, SEXY RUN AROUND.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION FOR ME TO HAVE THAT KID IN THE PARK PERIOD IS THAT IT, IT WOULD ONLY BE IN THE DOG PARK, PADDOCKS ITSELF.
AND SO IT WOULD BE IN THE PADDOCK, RIGHT.
BUT IF I HAVE MY NINE AND 10 YEAR OLD IN THE PARK, THAT'S NOT A VIOLATION, CORRECT.
SO I'M OFFERING HERE TO THAT, TO SHOW KIND OF SOME PROPOSED OPTIONS TO LOOK AT, UM, THAT IT'D BE A PERSON OF 16 YEARS OF AGE TO HANDLE A DOG WITHIN THE PARK.
AND THEN THE BOTTOM ONE IS A PERSON UNDER THE AGE OF 12 MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY AN ADULT OVER THE AGE OF 17 TO ENTER AND REMAIN WITHIN THE DOG PARK.
UM, THOSE TWO CAN BE CONSIDERED AN ALTERED COMPLETELY SEPARATELY.
UM, I, I'M NOT GONNA SPEAK FOR ANIMAL SERVICES, BUT THERE MIGHT BE SOME CHALLENGES FOR ENFORCEMENT.
I WOULD SUGGEST THEN IF THAT'S THE INTENT OF THIS IS IT'S IN THE ADULT IT'S BEHAVIORS, CHILDREN UNDER 10 FROM BEING IN ADULT PETS.
IS THAT, IS THAT RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
THAT'S THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY WORDED, NOT PROHIBITED.
YOU'RE NOT PROHIBITED FROM BEING IN THE ADULT PART.
YOU JUST CANNOT BE IN CERTAIN PLACES IN THE DOG PARK.
SO INSIDE THE DOG PADDOCKS YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE A TENANT, IF YOU'RE UNDER 10, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO BE IN THERE AT ALL.
AND THE PROPOSED OPTION TO CONSIDER IS MAYBE THAT SHOULD BE ACCOMPANIED BY AN ADULT OVER 17, BUT IF I'M OUTSIDE OF THE PADDOCKS, IS THAT OKAY? YES, SIR.
THAT INSIGHT THAT WOULD BE IN THE GENERAL PARK AREA IS NOT AN ISSUE.
BUT THIS IS, I'M LOOKING AT IT.
THE LANGUAGE SAYS IN THE DOG PARK AND MOST PEOPLE, IF YOU UP TO THEM, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY DRIVE UP TO THE PARKING LOT AND GET OUT, THEY THINK I'M IN THE DOPE PART.
SO WHAT I'M SAYING THAT IF I GET, GET OUT OF THE CAR WITH MY NINE YEAR OLD AND MY 10 YEAR OLD I'M IN THE DOG PARK, THEY, WHEN THEY PULL UP, GET OUT OF THE CAR, MOST PEOPLE THINK I'M IN THE DOG PARK.
NOT THAT THEY WERE IN THE DOG PADDOCKS, BUT I'M AN ADULT PARK.
SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE LOOK AT THAT THE LANGUAGE, SEE IF WE CAN TWEAK THAT TO MAKE, MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THEY ALLOWED IN THE DOG PARK, BUT NOT IN THE DOG PEDICS.
NOW I THINK THAT'S A GOOD DISTINCTION JUST TO AVOID ANY CONFUSION, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE INTENT IS TO BE INSIDE THE FUNCTIONAL AREA OF THE PADDOCKS, BECAUSE THAT SIDEWALK THAT GOES BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT ACTUALLY SERVES THE GENERAL PARK,
[01:00:01]
THE RESTROOM.SO IT WAS THE INTENT WOULD NOT TO BE, TO INCLUDE THAT AREA OUTSIDE THE PADDOCKS.
I, I JUST LIKE TO SEE SOME LANGUAGE CLEAR THAT UP AND MAYBE ART MAY HAVE SOME, SOME THOUGHTS ON THAT, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO IT TODAY, BUT I'D LIKE TO, I THINK WE NEED TO CLEAR THAT BECAUSE THE GENERAL PUBLIC PERCEPTION LIKES IT.
I PULL UP, GET OUT OF THE CAR.
I'M THINKING I'M AT THE DOG PARK.
AND THAT'S THE INTENT OF THIS LANGUAGE IS NOT THAT.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY YEAR IN MADAM CHAIR THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE CLARIFY.
UM, I HAVE HEARD A LOT, LOT, LOT ON THE AGE ISSUES HERE.
UM, AND I'VE HEARD A LOT FROM ALL DIRECTIONS.
MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE THE PROPOSED THE SECOND DAY, THE BOTTLE MAY IN THE PROPOSED CHANGE, WHICH IS A PERSON UNDER THE AGE OF 12 MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY AN ADULT OVER THE AGE OF 17 TO ENTER AND REMAIN WITHIN A DOG PARK, UM, OR A DOG PADDOCK, YOU KNOW, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO REPHRASE IT.
BUT, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, WE HAD SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO SAID, AH, YOU KNOW, MY KID HANDLES MY BIG DOG AND I THINK I HATE TO SAY IT.
I THINK, I THINK THAT DOG WON'T HUNT TO STEAL A PHRASE.
SO I THINK THAT THAT, UM, JUST REQUIRING, AND AGAIN, ENFORCEMENT WOULD BE A JOKE.
UM, BUT REQUIRING THAT ANYONE UNDER THE AGE OF 12, BE ACCOMPANIED BY AN ADULT, INTO THE DOG PADDOCKS AND NOT SPECIFY THAT YOU HAVE TO BE, YOU KNOW, CHECK THEIR LICENSE, TO SEE IF THEY'RE OLD ENOUGH TO HANDLE A DOG.
UM, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT WORK ANYWAY.
AND I WOULD REALLY LIKE THINGS TO BE SENSIBLE.
AND THAT STRIKES ME, UM, UNDER THE AGE OF 12 ACCOMPANIED BY AN ADULT.
SO COMMITTEE MEMBERS IS THAT, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO YOU? I THINK IT REAL GOOD BECAUSE, UM, IF YOU'RE IN THERE AND THE DOG BITES AT 10 YEAR OLD, THEN YOU'RE IN TROUBLE.
SO YOU GOTTA HAVE SOMEBODY OVER THAT 10 YEAR OLD.
I LIKED THAT GOSH, THIS LANGUAGE, BUT AS I'M READING THIS AND I'M READING IT CHILDREN BETWEEN THE AGES OF 10 AND 16 MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY AN ADULT PERIOD.
THEN THE NEXT SENTENCE SAYS CHILDREN UNDER EIGHT.
I'M LOOKING AT THE CURRENT ONE UNDER THE AGE OF 10, UH, NOT ALLOW.
AND THE DOG PARK SEND US ONE, SAYS CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 10 ARE ALLOWED IN THE DOG PARK.
IF THEY ARE COMING BY THE WINDOW, SECOND CENTER SAYS THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED IN THE DOG PARK.
HENCE THE NEED TO CLEAN THAT UP.
I DON'T HAVE THE LANGUAGE, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO CLAIM BECAUSE WE, WE NEED TO CLEAN THAT UP EITHER, EITHER IT IS, OR IT'S NOT.
YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING TO ANDY? YES, SIR.
BETWEEN SENTENCE ONE AND SENTENCE TWO IS A CONTRADICTION THERE.
SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS IS THAT THE PREFERRED OPTION TO REPLACE THAT WOULD BE THE SECOND BULLET UNDER PROPOSED.
OR IF YOU STRIKE THE LAST, THE SECOND SENTENCE OF THE CURRENT ONE, I THINK WE COULD, BUT, AND NOT LEAVING BOTH.
IT'S EITHER ONE BECAUSE AS CURRENTLY THAT'S THE LANGUAGE CURRENTLY IS THERE'S A CONTRADICTION BETWEEN THE FIRST SENTENCE AND THE SECOND ONE DOG.
AND THE CURRENT ONE THAT ADDRESS TRIES TO ADDRESS THREE SEPARATE THINGS ALL AT ONCE.
THE AGE OF THE HANDLER, THE AGE OF THOSE THAT CAN BE IN THEIR ACCOMPANIED, UNACCOMPANIED OR NOT, AND THEN KIND OF ERRONEOUSLY, THE AGENT CAN NOT BE IN THERE.
THE SECOND BULLET AT THE BOTTOM CLEANS ALL THAT UP BY SIMPLY SAYING, IT'S ATTEMPTING TO ADDRESS PEOPLE UNDER KIDS UNDER 12, HAVING AN ADULT ACCOMPANY THEM, NOT ADDRESSING THE AGE OF THE HANDLER AND NOT PROHIBITING CHILDREN UNDER 10, CLEANED THAT UP.
IT JUST NEEDS TO BE, CAN WE AGREE? BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN THE PADDOCK DIRECT PUT PADDOCK THERE.
THAT'S WHERE, OKAY, SO THE SECOND, SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATION WILL BE IS WE'RE GETTING RID OF THE CURRENT ENTIRELY AND WE'RE USING THE SECOND OF THE PROPOSALS WITH THE ONE CHANGE FROM WITHIN A DOG PARK TO, WITHIN A DOG PADDOCK.
UM, THAT COVERS IT PRETTY GOOD FOR INSURANCE.
[01:05:03]
I HAVE SOME OTHER COMMENTS, BUT DO EITHER OF YOU TWO, UM, HAVE OTHER SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON THESE THINGS.WHAT ABOUT, UM, UH, DANGEROUS DOGS? SO THAT IS, THAT IS ADDRESSED IN HERE.
UH, NUMBER 14 IN NO EVENT MAY A DOG THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS A DANGEROUS OR VICIOUS BROUGHT INTO THE PARK CRIMINAL CRIMINAL PENALTIES SHALL APPLIES, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
AND THAT MAY BE SOMEWHAT REDUNDANT BECAUSE THE CODE OF ORDINANCES ALREADY PROVIDES FOR THE RULES RELATED TO DANGEROUS AMBITIOUS DOGS, BUT IT BEARS REMINDING, UM, AND PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, SOME ABILITY FOR A PENALTY.
THE OTHER ONE THAT'S IMPORTANT IS A HANDLER SHALL IMMEDIATELY LEASH AND REMOVE A DOG THAT BECOMES AGGRESSIVE.
THAT THAT IS WHERE I THINK THE BULK OF THE ISSUES OCCUR IS WHEN YOU'VE GOT AN OWNER, WHO'S NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING AND THINKS NOTHING'S WRONG WITH MY DOG.
IT'S, IT'S NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE, BUT NOW YOU'VE GOT AN, A VERY UPSET FAMILY OR, OR WHATEVER THAT, THAT HAS JUST NOW BEEN THE VICTIM OF A, UH, AGGRESSIVE ACT THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.
SO WE REMOVE A VICIOUS DOG OR BAD DOG OUT OF THERE IS HE, UM, PERMITTED LEE CAN COME BACK.
THEY'RE ALREADY DETERMINED AS DANGEROUS AND VICIOUS BY THE CODE.
THERE, THERE SHOULDN'T BE THERE IN THE CITY LIMITS ANYWAY THAT THAT'S ALREADY ADDRESSED.
SO AGAIN, IT'S, IF THEY'RE OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED THROUGH THEM AND I BELIEVE THAT'S IN MUNICIPAL COURT, CORRECT, THAT'S ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED AND THAT DOG IS IN VIOLATION AND THAT PENALTY IS SUBSTANTIAL.
THIS IS JUST A, I JUST, I WANT TO KNOW IF W WE'RE COVERED AND SO IT'S GOOD TO KNOW.
AND I, AND FROM AN ENFORCEABILITY STANDPOINT, NUMBER 13, UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD A CHANCE TO DISCUSS THAT IF SOMEBODY DOES REPORT THAT THEIR DOG IS, UH, YOU KNOW, BEEN VICIOUSLY OR NOT, I DON'T WANNA THROW THAT WORD AROUND.
CAUSE I KNOW IT HAS A LEGAL DEFINITION, BUT AN AGGRESSIVE ANIMAL IN THE P IN THE PADDOCK.
UH, DOES THAT AUTOMATICALLY BECOME A TICKET TICKETABLE OFFENSE? MAYBE NOT.
MAYBE IT'S AN EDUCATION OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES IT ENDS UP IN A CONFLICT WITH TWO OWNERS, UM, JUST NEEDING TO BE SORTED OUT.
AND WE'RE OUR GOAL IS TO HAVE FOLKS IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY ANIMAL SERVICES RATHER THAN DEAL WITH IT LATER IN OTHER AVENUES.
DO, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY IN YOUR ORGANIZATION, A DEAD DOG PARK THERE DURING WORKING HOURS OR OPENING HOURS AND CAST MOVIE, ARE YOU ASKING IF WE HAVE A DESIGNATED OFFICER AT THE DOG PARK, UH, SOMEBODY THAT WORKS WITH YOU FOR YOU? YOU KNOW, SO WE DON'T HAVE I, ANYBODY DESIGNATED TO THE DOG PARK, HOWEVER, WE DO GET CALLS OUT THERE AND WE'LL RESPOND AS NORMAL.
AND THEY HAVE BEEN DOING A GREAT JOB OF RESPONDING.
WHEN, AGAIN, ONCE THEY'RE IN THE LOOP, THEY'VE BEEN THERE DOING THEIR JOBS.
WE'LL HAVE SOMEBODY WORKING 24 HOURS OR WE START FROM ON CALL.
THAT'S WHAT A MAN, LIKE IF THEY NEED SOMEBODY THERE, YOU CAN GET SOMEBODY REAL QUICK THERE THAT SOME OF HER WHERE THERE RIGHT AWAY.
I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE COVERED.
YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANNA HAVE NO PROBLEMS. OKAY.
MADAM CHAIR TO THAT POINT, UH, COUNCILMAN VERA, I CAN ATTEST TO IT.
UH, ART AND HIS TEAM DO AN EXCELLENT JOB.
I'VE HAD A RECENT CASE IN MY DISTRICT AND THEY, THEY JUMPED ON IT AND THEY'VE BEEN ON IT.
SO I DON'T THINK THAT'S NOT OUR, THAT'S A, ONE OF OUR STRONGEST POINT.
HE AND HIS TEAM DO A GREAT JOB OF RESPONDING TO OUR CAPES AND THEY FEEL THEY, THEY GET THEIR, TRUST ME, THEY, YEAH.
THE ONE THAT TURNED THEM IN, IN YOUR DISTRICT.
BUT I'M THE ONE THAT CALL ART BECAUSE THAT HAPPENED TO SOMEBODY.
SAYING, LET ME GET MY LAWYER, BRIAN.
AND OBVIOUSLY PUBLIC SAFETY IS OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY.
AND WE WANT, YOU KNOW, OUR CITIZENS TO HAVE FUN AT THE DOG PARK.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.
MADAM CHAIR, LADY, CAN I JUST OFFER ONE? THIS IS MORE OF A RESPONSE TO ANDY AND HIS QUESTION ABOUT THE ENFORCEABILITY OF SOMETHING LIKE WHAT HAPPENS IF A HANDLER SHALL IMMEDIATELY LEASH AND REMOVE A DOG THAT BECOMES AGGRESSIVE, KEEP IN MIND THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO CODIFY EVERY PARK RULE.
AND SO IF THE COMMITTEE IDENTIFIES RULES, THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE FROM A CRIMINAL
[01:10:01]
PERSPECTIVE, THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY NOT INCLUDE THOSE IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT THEY CAN STILL BE A PARK RULE TO WHERE IF THEY GET, IF THE PARK RULES ARE BEING VIOLATED, THEY CAN BE ASKED TO LEAVE THE PARK.AND SO YOU CAN, YOU, YOU CAN PICK AND CHOOSE WHICH ONE YOU WANT TO BE CRIMINALIZED WITH CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND WHICH ONE YOU WANT JUST TO BE ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES OF THAT BEING, BEING ASKED TO LEAVE THE PARK.
IF I, IF YOU PERMIT ME FOR SURE, THEY WOULD HELP ME FOR CLARIFICATION.
UM, UH, ONE MAYBE FOR, UM, MR. ENGLAND'S ALCOHOL TOBACCO PRODUCTS, INCLUDING E-CIGARETTES NOT PERMITTED IN THE DOG PARK.
IS THAT AN ISSUE WITH RUNNING A FILE OF STATE LAW? YES.
THE ALCOHOL, WE CAN'T REALLY DO THAT.
WE CAN HAVE A, WE CAN HAVE A RULE, UM, THAT SAYS NO ALCOHOL, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO, IT CAN NOT BE A CRIMINAL PENALTY ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
SO IF WE WANT TO HAVE A RULE THAT SAYS NO ALCOHOL IN THE PARK, WE CAN.
AND SO HOW THAT GETS ENFORCED IS ONE OF ANDY'S PEOPLE OR, OR A POLICE OFFICER SHOWS UP AND SAYS, YOU NEED TO TAKE THE ALCOHOL BACK TO YOUR CAR.
IF YOU DON'T TAKE THE ALCOHOL BACK TO YOUR CAR, UH, OR DISPOSE OF IT PROPERLY THAN, UM, YOU NEED TO LEAVE THE PARK.
AND THEN AT THAT POINT, IF THEY REFUSE TO LEAVE THE PARK AND DON'T COMPLY WITH THE ORDER TO TAKE THE ALCOHOL OUT OF IT, THEN AT THAT POINT IT'S BECOMES CRIMINAL TRESPASS AND THAT'S HOW YOU WOULD ENFORCE IT.
AND THEN OUR NEXT STEP WOULD BE THEN MAKING SURE ALL OF OUR STAFF IS EDUCATED IN THAT AS WELL AS, AS WELL AS THE NPOS AND MAKING SURE WE ALL HAVE THE SAME GOAL IN MIND AND, AND GET IT TURNED AROUND.
AND THEN THE SECOND ONE IS, IS FOOD TOYS AND GLASS CONTAINERS ARE NOT PERMITTED.
THE ONE THAT GETS A LITTLE TRICKY IS ENFORCEMENT OF TOYS.
UM, FOOD IN MY MIND MAKES SENSE.
AND NOW THAT'S A VERY COMMON ONE.
UM, HOWEVER, IT WAS KIND OF INTENDED IF I'M TOLD WHEN THE DOG PARK WAS CONSTRUCTED, THAT IT MIGHT BE GREAT FOR, UM, DOGGY BIRTHDAY PARTIES AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.
SO IF THAT'S STILL IS THE DESIRE, THEN THAT ONE MIGHT BE IN AND AN EDIT IN THAT AREA THAT MAY BE UNNECESSARY TO ENFORCE.
UM, SO I JUST WANT TO THROW THAT OUT FOR DISCUSSION GLASS CONTAINERS IS ANOTHER ONE THAT TOTALLY MAKES SENSE.
UM, BUT FOOD TOYS, I'D LOVE TO HEAR SOME FEEDBACK ON, OKAY.
I THINK THE GLASS CONTAINERS TO GO WITH, UM, FOOD, THE FOOD AND TOURIST STAYS.
I CAN SEE THAT, BUT FOOD UNTIL THAT, ALL DOGS NOW I HAVE MULTIPLE TOYS AND, AND FOOD, PARTICULARLY FOLKS BRINGING THEIR KIT IN THE CAR AND YOU'RE SITTING OUTSIDE AND YOU RE YOU KNOW, YOU EAT HOT DOG, YOU KNOW, TO TELL ME I CAN'T GET A HOT DOG IN A PARK THAT'S THAT'S OVERREACH.
SO I, I SUPPORT STRIKING THE GLASS CONTAINERS CAUSE THAT'S EVERY BECOMES A SAFETY ISSUE COULD VERY WELL BE BROKEN GLASS, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY THAT I WOULD MAKE ANDY IS STRIKE THE GLASS.
SO ME, SO THE INTENT IS TO LEAVE THE GLASS CONTAINERS AS A PARK RULE THAT NO GLASS CONTAINERS ARE ALLOWED IN THE, IN THE PADDOCK.
AND STRIKE, UH, FOOD AND, AND TOYS OFF OF IT.
SO THAT FOOD AND TOYS ARE IN FACT ALLOWED BY DEFAULT.
UM, MR. BERA, ARE YOU, ARE YOU AN AGREEMENT ON THAT? PICK IT UP, YOU KNOW, THE FOOD AND THE TOYS.
WE CAN, WE CAN ADDRESS THAT IN THE VERBIAGE.
SO, UM, I'M JUST GOING DOWN THE LIST.
AND AGAIN, SINCE I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE DOG PARK, AND SINCE IT'S IN MY DISTRICT, I, I GET A LOT OF CALLS ABOUT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE THINGS.
SO ITEM SEVEN ON OUR CURRENT PARK RULES, EACH DOG BROUGHT INTO THE PARK MUST BE WEARING CURRENT RABIES TAGS AND BE STERILIZED OVER THE AGE OF SIX MONTHS.
ALL DOGS MUST BE STERILIZED WHO RESIDE IN THE CITY OF GARLAND.
THIS, I DON'T THINK IS EVEN VAGUELY ENFORCEABLE AT THE DOG PARK AND IT CREATES DRAMA ALL THE TIME.
SO I WOULD, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF LEAVING EACH DOG, BROUGHT INTO THE PARK, MUST BE WEARING CURRENT RABIES TAGS AND STRIKING THE ENTIRE REST BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T STAND AT THE DOOR AND SAY, LET ME SEE YOUR PAPERS OR LET ME CHECK TO SEE, YEAH, IT JUST, IT'S NOT WORKING AND IT'S JUST CAUSING DRAMA.
SO I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF JUST LEAVING IT.
EACH DOG BROUGHT INTO THE PARK MUST BE WEARING CURRENT RABIES TAGS, PERIOD.
UM, THE, YOU KNOW, NO WOUNDED SICK OR DOG, AND HE SHALL BE BROUGHT INTO THE DOG PARK.
I, AGAIN, I'M NOT SURE HOW ENFORCEABLE THAT IS OR HOW MANY PEOPLE WILL PAY ATTENTION TO IT.
BUT, UM, THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT THAT'S VERY MUCH.
[01:15:01]
IS THIS PARTICULAR RULE GONNA MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE? BUT, UM, SO IT'S, IT'S FINE THAT I'M NOT HAVING ANY, AND I DIDN'T HEAR ANY OBJECTIONS ON COUNCIL TO THAT PARTICULAR ONE.UM, NUMBER 11, THE ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS ARE NOT PERMITTED IN THE DOG PARK.
I THINK THE ALCOHOL IS GOING TO GIVE US NO END OF GRIEF, BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN THROUGH, ESPECIALLY OVER THE PANDEMIC WITH THE FACT THAT WE CAN'T FORBID ALCOHOL IN OUR PARKS, WHICH AT CENTRAL PARK IS A CONSTANT BANE OF MY EXISTENCE BECAUSE PEOPLE COME THERE AND GET DRUNK AND THROW THEIR BEER BOTTLES DOWN EVERY STINKING WEEKEND.
SO SAYING ONCE YOU STEP INTO THE PADDOCKS, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME SEEING THAT MAKE SENSE OR EVEN BE SENSIBLY.
UM, I MEAN, IF, IF THEY'RE DRUNK IN PUBLIC, WE CAN CALL THE POLICE.
UM, IS IT COMMON IN DOG PARKS TO FORBID TOBACCO PRODUCTS? NO, I DON'T KNOW.
I THINK YOU SEE THAT OCCASIONALLY BECAUSE IT'S A CLINIC, IT'S A MAINTENANCE ISSUE.
IT'S JUST A CLEANING UP ISSUE.
I DON'T THINK THAT IT, TO MY KNOWLEDGE FALLS UNDER A SAFETY ISSUE AND IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE FIRST, AND THEN IT ENDS UP BEING PROBLEMATIC, THEN WE CAN STRIKE THAT AS WELL.
THE, THE CALL THAT I'M AWARE OF INVOLVED, WHAT WOULD ALREADY QUALIFY AS A PUBLIC INTOX.
AND SO IT WOULD BE REDUNDANT OR PROBLEMATIC TO PILE ON WITH A RULE AND NOT AN OFFENSE.
ARE YOU OKAY WITH STRIKING NUMBER 11? LET ME ASK YOU SOMETHING GREAT ABOUT THIS.
YOU MEAN TO TELL ME THAT WE ALLOWED ALCOHOL IN OUR PARKS? YES.
STATE LAW SAYS WE HAVE TO REALLY, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT I DIDN'T EITHER TILL NOT TOO LONG AGO.
MR. ENGLAND EDUCATED ME ON THAT.
A TABC, WHICH IS THE CODE FOR THE TACO, UM, THE ALCOHOL AND BEVERAGE CODE.
IT PREEMPTS ALL LOCAL REGULATION ON THE POSSESSION AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC.
AND SO OTHER THAN ZONING, UM, THE, UM, LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES ARE, ARE PREEMPTED FROM, IN, FROM CRIMINALIZING, UH, THE, THE, THE POSSESSION AND THE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL.
NOW, THERE ARE NOW THE EXCEPTION TO THAT IS IF YOU HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT'S OLDER THAN I THINK 1984, I THINK IT IS MAYBE 82, WHICH DALLAS DID.
SO DALLAS CHALLENGED THAT PREEMPTION ROLE.
AND ONE, BECAUSE THERE NO ALCOHOL IN PARKS WAS OLDER THAN 1982 HOURS IS NOT.
AND SO WE DO NOT FALL UNDER THAT, WHICH IS WHEN THAT, THAT SECTION OF THE TABC WAS ACTUALLY PASSED.
SO WE CAN'T TELL THEM THAT THEY CAN'T LEAVE BY RULE.
IN OTHER WORDS, I'LL BE IN THE ORDINANCE.
I KNOW, BUT I MEAN, WE COULDN'T TELL HIM TO LEAVE.
AND IF THEY DON'T LEAVE THEN CRIMINAL TRESPASS, THAT'S DIFFERENT.
SO ARE WE TALKING ABOUT IN PARKS? WE COULD TELL THEM WE COULD PUT A RULE THAT SAYS, SAYS THAT AND THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WOULD KILL THEM.
IT'S DIFFICULT WITH YOUNG POLICE OFFICERS BY FRANKLY, AND, AND LEAVE ME, I'VE BEAT THEM OVER THE HEAD WITH THIS, UH, THE PREEMPTION ISSUE AND HOW WE CAN NOT BE, EVEN THOUGH IT SAYS NO ALCOHOL AND PARKS ON THE SIGNS, THAT'S NOT A CRIMINAL OFFENSE.
SO I'VE TRIED TO TELL THEM, BUT WITH YOUNG OFFICERS THAT THEY FORGET OVER TIME, UM, THERE'S SOME MYTHS OUT THERE THAT THE FIELD TRAINING OFFICERS WHO USED TO ENFORCE IT CRIMINALLY.
AND SO IT'S, IT'S A DIFFICULT ONE.
IF YOU PUT THE RULE IN PLACE, YOU RUN THE RISK OF AN OFFICER TRYING TO ENFORCE THAT CRIMINAL.
SO YOU CAME, PUT A SIGN THAT SAYS, NO, ALCOHOL, YOU CAN, AND WE HAVE THOSE IN POCKET.
BUT IT BECOMES, UH, AN ENFORCEMENT BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OF THAT RULE.
AND I WOULD, TO YOUR POINT WOULD LOVE TO HEAR THE INPUT OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BEFORE I WEIGH IN ON THAT, THAT GOES BACK TO WINNING SERVE OR WHATEVER THE CALL THAT PARKED GOT THERE, THEY DRINK A LOT.
IT'S NONE OR NO, THE ONE IN NO WINDSURF WINDSOR.
BUT HAVING THE POLICE IN FORCE RULES THAT AREN'T LAWS, IT'S PROBLEMATIC TO THEM.
AS LONG AS WE CAN PUT A SIGN THERE SAYS NO ALCOHOL.
I MEAN, SOME OF THEM DO SOME, YOU KNOW, I RATHER HAVE IT THERE.
WELL, LET'S LOOK, LET'S CIRCLE BACK TO THAT BECAUSE WE HAD SAID WE WERE GOOD WITH STRIKING THAT WHOLE, UM, REQUIREMENT, AND THEN THE PADDOCKS, NO SMOKING.
I MEAN, THERE'S NO CIGARETTES IN THE PADDOCK TOBACCO FROM, I THINK THAT WAS AGAIN, WHEN THE RULES WERE PUT TOGETHER, THAT I THINK THAT TELLS ME THAT'S REALLY
[01:20:01]
A MAINTENANCE ISSUE MORE THAN IT IS A HEALTH AND SAFETY, BUT YES, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T SMOKE AND DO, THEY GOT THE DOG OUT THERE AND THE GUY SPOKEN AND THE WIND IS COMING TO HIM, HE'S NEVER GOING TO BE HAPPY ABOUT IT.AND WE'VE HEARD THAT I'VE HEARD IT FOR MANY YEARS, THIS, THAT ISSUE.
AND IN BALL FIELD AREAS, IT BECOMES VERY, VERY CONTENTIOUS ABOUT PERSONAL RIGHTS AT THAT POINT THAT ARE DIFFICULT TO PUT STAFF IN THE MIDDLE OF IT IS JUST MY PERSPECTIVE, BUT WE'LL CERTAINLY HONOR WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE AND THE COUNCIL RECOMMEND.
I SAID, IT'S JUST SOME BEHAVIOR.
AND IF YOU PUT A RULE OUT THERE, THEN YOU EXPECT EXPECTED TO ENFORCE IT.
AND PEOPLE GET MAD AND PEOPLE GETTING MAD AT YOU, YOU KNOW? AND I THINK IT'S ANOTHER, IT'S ANOTHER DISCUSSION.
WE NEED TO TALK AT SOME POINT ABOUT THE SUN AND SNOW.
CAUSE I, I HAD CALLS ON HER ALL THE TIME.
WE STILL GOT THE SIGNAGE OUT THERE.
SO, BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION.
UM, THE ONLY ONE I'VE GOT ON HERE IS ART.
HOW DO WE ENFORCE 16? THEY CAN CALL US.
UM, AND WE'LL TRY TO WITNESS MISS WHAT WE CAN.
AND OBVIOUSLY IF IT IS CAUSING AN ISSUE, ROLLING UP DOWN THE DOGS, FROM MY STANDPOINT, WE COULD JUST ASK HIM, PLEASE REMOVE YOUR DOG FROM THE PADDOCK AND COME BACK NOW THE TIME, MAYBE WHEN IT'S NOT AS PACKED, DO YOU THINK THAT'S A NECESSARY RULE PERSONALLY? I DON'T.
UM, BUT THAT, YEAH, I MEAN, I'M ASKING YOU BOTH PERSONALLY AND PROFESSIONALLY, BECAUSE THEN WE'LL GET CALLS ALL DAY.
WELL, THEIR DOG BARKED TWICE, OR YOU KNOW WHAT IT MAY BE.
SO WHAT IS EXCESSIVE AND HOW DO WE DISTINGUISH THAT? SO FOR ME, THAT'S AN ASSET OF A HOLDER I'M FOR STRIKING 16.
CAUSE THAT'S WHY I RAISED THAT QUESTION.
CAUSE WHAT, WHAT MAYBE WHAT IS ACCESS TO YOU MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED TO ME.
RIGHT? SO IT COMES DOWN TO PERSONAL.
THEN YOU GET INTO CONFLICTS WITH FOLKS AND IT'S A JUDGMENT ISSUE.
RIGHT? I WOULD SUGGEST STRIKING 16.
I MEAN, MR. VERA, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? I'VE GOT A QUESTION.
I MEAN, UH, UM, YES AND NO ON THAT, BECAUSE IF THE DOG IS HAVING A GOOD TIME, HE MIGHT BE BARKING AND YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE US SHOUTING AND PLAYING BALL, YOU KNOW? SO, SO WE'RE SAYING TAKE OUT THAT RULE SO THAT NOBODY'S GOING TO BE CALLING ART TO SAY THE DOG IS BARKING AND HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT IS EXCESSIVE? IS IT FOUR BARKS THAT ARE EXCESSIVE? IS IT SIX AND A HALF? ZERO TOLERANCE ON MY DOG MARKET? NOT EVERYBODY.
ARE YOU OKAY WITH 16 BEING STRUCK? SO THAT'S NOT A RULE WE'RE TRYING TO ENFORCE.
WELL, WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THERE GOING TO BE, DOGS ARE GONNA BARK, YOU KNOW, TO ME, I'M LIKE YOU ROUND SOME KIDS AND SAID, THAT KID TALKS TOO MUCH.
AND OVER HERE IT SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? DOESN'T, THEY CAN'T TALK MORE.
IT BECOMES A STRICTLY A JUDGMENT ISSUE, HOW MUCH? AND THEN THAT PUTS OUR STAFF IN THE MIDDLE OF 20 TIME BEFORE THEY CALL ART.
DID IT BAR FIVE TIMES? DID THEY BLOCK 20 TIMES? IT'S A JUDGMENT AREA.
AND I DON'T THINK IT ADDS TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOG PARK EXPERIENCE FOR ANYBODY.
SO THAT'S WHY I HAVE RECOMMEND ELIMINATE IT.
SO WHAT'S YOUR RECOMMENDATION ART? MY RECOMMENDATION IS WE STRIKE THAT AND THAT'S A LOW PRIORITY CALL FOR US.
I MEAN, IF WE GET A CALL ABOUT A DOG BARKING AT THE DOG PARK, IT'S GOING TO BE HOURS BEFORE WE RESPOND.
ARE WE IN AGREEMENT STRIKING NUMBER 16.
WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THIS AND AGREED TO IT, BUT NUMBER 11, ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS, INCLUDING E-CIGARETTES ARE NOT PERMITTED IN THE DOG PARK.
WE SAID TO STRIKE THAT ENTIRE THING.
AND WE ALREADY SAID YES TO THAT, BUT ARE WE STILL YES.
TO THAT? JUST STRIKE IT OR WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT SOMEBODY SMOKING? WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE THEM ALONE.
CAUSE THEY'RE IN THE OUTDOORS.
I MEAN, FROM MY STANDPOINT, IN THE ANIMAL STANDPOINT, IT, I DON'T THINK IT AFFECTS ANIMAL SERVICE ANY.
SO THE, WELL, MY PROBLEM IS THERE'S SOME OF THEM THAT DON'T SMOKE AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A GUY SMOKING AND, AND HE'S OVER HERE AND THIS SMOKE IS COMING TO THIS GUY AND HE MOVES OVER THERE AND ANOTHER GUY IS SMOKING OVER THERE.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING I WOULD PERSONALLY
[01:25:01]
MAKE STAFF RIGHT TO REGULATE.UM, PEOPLE CAN, THE PADDOCKS ARE HUGE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE BEEN OVER THERE.
SO IF SOMEBODY IS BOTHERING YOU OVER HERE AND IT'S BIG AND THERE'S ALWAYS WIND, THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER AREAS IN THE PADDOCK THAT YOU CAN GO TO, TO GET AWAY FROM THEM.
I HAVE NOT SEEN A TON OF PEOPLE OUT THERE, ALL SMOKING AT ONCE.
BUT THE MAIN THING IS DO, DO WE WANT TO SPEND STAFF TIME CHASING DOWN PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THE OUTDOORS SMOKING.
WE CAN TRACK IT DOWN, BUT IF IT GETS BAD, THEN WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING, RIGHT? OH, I JUST READ THAT.
SOME, SOME RESPONSIBILITIES, THERE'S SOME PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY BETWEEN CONSENTING ADULTS.
THERE'S SOME, SOME THINGS CITY CAN ENFORCE.
AND IF YOU KNOW, I'M A NON-SMOKER AND YOU'RE A SMOKER.
AND THEN I SAY SOMETHING TO YOU ABOUT CIGARETTES.
I CAN MOVE TO THE SIDE OF THE PARK.
I DON'T, I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO CALL CITY STAFF TO COME IN AND SELL A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ME AND YOU JUST BECAUSE YOU WERE SMOKING.
I'M NOT THAT AS TWO ADULTS, WE OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
I JUST SAID, BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE RULES YOUR BACK, COME OVER, THERE WAS A BEER, MY HAND IT'S OKAY, FINE WITH ME.
IF YOU'RE FRESH, IF YOU WANT TO DRINK A BEER, FINE.
I JUST DON'T WANT TO PUT OUR STAFF BECAUSE IF WE MAKE RULES AND PEOPLE CALL AND SAYS, THE GUY WAS OVER THERE WITH THAT BEER AND I CALL ANIMAL SERVICES AND THEY DIDN'T RESPOND.
WELL, WE GET THOSE KINDS OF CALLS.
I'M JUST SAYING, IF A GUY GETS OUT OF HAND, THAT'S A DIFFERENT, IF HE GETS OUT, CAN DRINK AND YOU CALL THE COPS.
AND THE OTHER ISSUE IS TO ADD TO THAT IN ANY RULE THAT WE WOULD APPLY THAT MEASURING STICK TO AS THE GENERAL PARK USER, ISN'T GOING TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT ANIMAL SERVICES CAN ENFORCE AND WHAT PD CAN ENFORCE IN THE RULE THAT DIFFERS BETWEEN A RULE ON THE CODE.
AND SO IT ENDS UP BEING A, IS THAT A GOOD USE OF THE OFFICER'S TIME? OKAY.
UM, WE'LL PROBABLY, I DON'T KNOW.
WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO GET TO GENERAL PART.
MAYBE IF WE TALK REALLY FAST, YOU COULD DO THAT.
TH THE ONLY THING ABOUT THE RULE IS WE WOULD JUST MODIFY THE SIGNAGE TO REFLECT THE COUNCIL'S DESIRE ON THE ULTIMATE.
SO THESE WERE JUST EXAMPLES TO KIND OF SHOW YOU WHAT THEY WOULD LOOK LIKE IN THE LOCATIONS TO JUST IMPROVE THE VISIBILITY AND EDUCATION.
SO, ONE QUESTION THAT I HAVE WITH THE SIGNS SURE.
A HUGE NUMBER OF THE USERS OF THE DOG PARK SPEAK SPANISH ONLY, AND THAT HAS BEEN A PROBLEM.
AND, AND SO HAVING THE RULES VISIBLE IN SPANISH AND HAVING IT, YOU KNOW, BE FEW ENOUGH WHERE IT'S NOT FINE, UM, I THINK WOULD BE IMPORTANT.
I WONDERED ABOUT ALMOST, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY, HOW MANY OF THE RULES WE CAN CREATE AS GRAPHICS THAT DON'T NEED AS MANY WORDS.
AND WE'LL, WE'LL GO BACK TO THE, ONCE WE GET THIS FEEDBACK, WE'LL GO BACK TO THE DESIGNER AND RETOOL THESE TO, AND IT MAY END UP THAT THEY'RE TWO SEPARATE SIGNS.
THAT IF THE GOAL IS TO COMMUNICATE AND KEEP PEOPLE SAFE, THEN THAT WILL DO THAT.
AND I THINK THAT THE SYMBOLOGY IS, IS SOMETHING WE'VE INCORPORATED IN OTHER, OTHER SIGNS AND ASSIGNED PLAN.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S A GREAT SUGGESTION.
AND MY OTHER SUGGESTION IS, UM, SIGNAGE PRETTY FREQUENTLY AND SCATTERED THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, IN CASE OF WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY, CALL ANIMAL SERVICES, IMMEDIATELY, PHONE NUMBER, BIG PHONE NUMBER.
I GET CALLS ALL THE TIME AND I SAY, CALL ANIMAL SERVICES.
UM, BUT WE NEED SIGNS THAT HAVE THE PHONE NUMBER FOR THEM TO CALL, RIGHT.
AND IT, AND IT NEEDS TO BE BIGGER THAN WHAT THIS SAMPLE IS SHOWING, RIGHT? THIS WILL GET LOST.
SO WILL ANOTHER GOOD SUGGESTION THAT WILL RIGHT.
AND THAT ALSO JUST HELPS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE, YOU KNOW, I, I HAVE ANOTHER WOMAN WHO HAD A DOG ACTUALLY HURT HER LEG THE OTHER DAY.
AND, AND THE GUY WAS, UM, ABUSIVE WHO HAD THE DOG AND DIDN'T, DIDN'T PULL IT OFF OF HER.
AND, YOU KNOW, SHE WAS TRYING TO RESCUE HER LITTLE DOG FROM A BIG DOG THAT WAS IN THE SMALL DOG PADDOCK AND THE DOG ENDED UP BITING HER LEG.
UM, SHE PROBABLY DIDN'T REPORT IT.
SHE SAID SHE WAS AFRAID OF REPERCUSSIONS FROM THE MAN, BECAUSE SHE'S A REGULAR THERE.
ANYWAY, WE NEED A PHONE NUMBER, EASY FOR THEM TO SEE.
UM, SO THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON SITE.
[01:30:01]
JUST ONE THOUGHT AND GETTING SCIENCE, CAN WE GET SCIENCE AT A REFLECTIVE THAT LIGHT REFLECTIVE? SO AFTER THE, I CAN, I CAN LOOK AT THAT.UH, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT, BUT I'LL CERTAINLY LOOK INTO IT.
THAT IS SHIFTS HEADING TOWARD SOME ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE THE DAYS ARE GOING TO GET LONGER.
SO PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE THERE AND, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S, WHAT'S, WHAT'S, WHAT'S THEY 30 NOW IN JULY, IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING NEW.
AND THE PARK INSIDE THE PADDOCKS IS FAIRLY WELL LIT.
WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
CAUSE I'M USING THIS PARTICULAR SIGN MATERIAL.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY HAVE A REFLECTIVE OPTION, BUT WE COULD SOLVE IT WITH DIRECTIONAL LIGHTING, SOME SOLAR LIGHTING, SOMETHING TO MAKE IT.
SO IT JUST PULLS UP AND IT'S, AND IT'S, IT'S CLEAR THE SUN'S GONE DOWN THERE AND I PUT MY LIGHTS.
I CAN SEE THESE SIGNS, YOU KNOW, DOING AT THE NIGHT.
GREAT SUGGESTION, MR. VERA, DO YOU HAVE ANY SIGNS, SUGGESTIONS? WHAT ABOUT, ARE THOSE SIGNS? LIKE, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT DOING IS TRYING TO FIND IT.
I'M GOING TO GO LOOK AT IT AT NIGHT.
CAUSE THERE IS SOME LIGHTING THERE AND LET'S SEE IF, IF IT'S NOT ADEQUATE, WE COULD DO SOME INDIVIDUAL DIRECTIONAL LIGHTING ON IT AND THERE'S SOME BETTER SOLAR LIGHTING OPTIONS OUT THERE.
SO WE CAN KEEP THE COSTS DOWN FOR RUNNING NEW ELECTRICAL.
IS THERE ANY WAY WE COULD PUT THOSE RULES A LITTLE BIGGER? THEY WILL.
WE'RE GOING TO RETOOL THE WAY THESE LOOK NOW THAT THERE'S FEWER, WE'VE GOT SOME MORE OPTIONS.
WE'LL LOOK AT, UH, ONE IN SPANISH AND SO FORTH ARE SO PEOPLE CAN SEE THEM.
I MEAN, I CAN'T EVEN SEE THEM PREMIERE AND I'M WEARING GLASSES.
AND THERE'S A FEW, I DON'T HAVE A DOG GRAVEYARDS THAT GO TO THE, MY DOG DON'T HUNT.
WELL, WE NEED TO GET YOU A DOG CLEARLY.
WHAT ARE YOU DOING? TALKING ABOUT DOG PARKS.
UM, ALL RIGHT, WELL LET'S CALL DOG PARK RULES DONE.
UM, DO YOU, IS, DID WE GIVE YOU EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO CLEAN IT UP AND BRING IT BACK TO, WE WILL, AND WE'LL GO THROUGH, LISTEN TO THE, TO THE MEETING AGAIN, JUST TO MAKE SURE WE CAPTURED EVERYTHING AND BRING THAT, UH, EARLIEST CONVENIENCE FOR THE COUNCIL AGENDA.
AND WE'RE TO NUMBER SIX, DISCUSS GENERAL PARK RULES.
YOU HAVE THE DRAFT ORDINANCE HERE.
YOU HAD ONE FOR DOG PARKS AND YOU HAVE ONE IN FOR, UH, PARK HOURS.
SO, UM, ARE YOU SURE? SO, UM, JUST TO SUMMARIZE A LOOK AT, I KNOW WE'RE PRESSED FOR TIME AND IT MAY BE A TOUGH TO TACKLE THIS ONE TONIGHT MAY BE A BROADER DISCUSSION.
AND ANOTHER ONE THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, INCORPORATE, UH, POLICE DEPARTMENT FEEDBACK.
BUT WE DO HAVE A CHALLENGE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS AND, AND THIS MAY BE ONE PART OF THE SOLUTION.
UM, WE HAVE SOME AREAS THAT, THAT CURRENTLY YOU CAN BE IN THE PARK TILL MIDNIGHT, UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SPORTING EVENTS AND POSSIBLE RENTALS, NOT A LOT THAT SHOULD BE GOING ON IN THE PARK AT THAT TIME.
UM, SO IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY FOR WHAT'S SPELLED OUT HERE ARE THE NEW PARK HOURS FOR SPRING CREEK, BOTH LOCATIONS AND WIND SURF WOULD GO 6:00 AM UNTIL 10:00 PM.
AND AT THAT POINT, THEN IT ALLOWS FOR THE SAME ENFORCEMENT THAT'S IN PLACE.
NOW IT'S JUST THE 10 O'CLOCK VIOLATION RATHER THAN, THAN MIDNIGHT.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, UH, WE WOULD THEN BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE NATURE OF THE SPORTS COMPLEX, WE WOULD NEED TO, TO KEEP THAT ADJUSTED AND MAKE IT 6:00 AM TO MIDNIGHT.
UM, IT COULD STAY 10:00 PM OR MOVE IT DOWN TO 10:00 PM.
WHAT WE WERE CONCERNED WITH DOING THAT IS POLICE DEPARTMENT MAY NOT KNOW WHICH EVENTS ARE OKAY, WHICH ONES HAVE WRITTEN AND IT GETS TO BE NOT A GOOD USE OF THEIR TIME.
UM, AND THEN THE OTHER ONE THAT IS THAT I THINK WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE SOURCE OF DEBATE WAS, UH, TRYING TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE PARKING CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE AT HALF PARK AND CENTRAL PARK.
AND THOSE ARE 100% DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.
UM, ABSORBING PARTICULARLY THE HALF PARK.
IT'S NOT, BUT ABOUT 20 SPACES AND IT'S AT A TRAIL HEAD, UH, RIGHT BY THE BASEBALL FIELD THERE AT THE DEAD END STREET, UM, BEHIND NAMING, UH, THERE, I FREQUENTLY GO THERE AND HAVE LUNCH AND I DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO PARK.
I'VE HAD PARK USERS CALL US UPSET THAT THEY GO TO WALK THE TRAILER ON THEIR LUNCH HOUR.
THEY CAN'T FIND A PLACE TO PARK.
SO THEY'RE EITHER LEFT TO LEAVE OR PARK ILLEGALLY OR BLOCK THE GPL GATED EASEMENT.
THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY SIGNED OR STRIPE, BUT IT'S GENERALLY NOT A GOOD IDEA TO GET IN THEIR WAY WHEN THEY NEED TO DO MAINTENANCE.
UM, SO THAT'S WHAT THIS PARTICULAR, UM, AND WE DID CONSULT WITH THE MARSHALL'S OFFICE TO HELP, UH, IN, IN ENFORCEMENT OF THIS.
UM, BUT I DO, I WOULD APPRECIATE FEEDBACK AND DISCUSSION ON HOW TO ACCOMPLISH THAT.
[01:35:02]
CAN WE HELP RE HOLD THIS, REVIEW THIS AND PUT THIS ON THE NEXT MEETING AT, I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THIS MORE CAREFULLY.UM, AND JUST SCANNING, IT HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, BUT I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE TIME TODAY.
SO COULD WE PUT THIS ON FOR THE NEXT, I LIKE TO BRING THIS BACK.
AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO BE HERE BECAUSE I HAVE SPOKEN TO THE CHIEF AND HE WAS NOT ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THE 10:00 PM PART CLOSURE TIME.
AND HE WAS NOT SEEING, THERE WAS MUCH DIFFERENCE CRIME WISE BETWEEN 10 AND MIDNIGHT AND THAT IT WAS A CONFUSING THING TO HAVE SOME CLOSED AT 10, SOME CLOSED AT MIDNIGHT.
AND I HAD THAT CONVERSATION WITH HIM AND I THINK THE DISTINCTION THERE MIGHT BE HOWEVER, REPORTED CRIME, NOT ALL CRIME IS REPORTED BECAUSE OUR GUYS ARE CLEANING IT UP FIRST THING IN THE MORNING AFTER THEY'VE DEMOLISHED IT.
SO, UM, AND, AND IT'S THE SAME NOW TO HIS CONCERN IS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE, IT COULD BE COMPLAINT DRIVEN IF SOMEBODY IS SEEING FOLKS IN THE PARK AT 10:00 PM AND THEY'RE WAITING UNTIL 10 0 1 TO, YOU KNOW, DROP THE HAMMER ON THEM THAT THAT ADDS TO THEIR CALL LOAD.
AND I TOTALLY RESPECT THAT AND WELCOME THEIR INPUT.
AGAIN, MY INTENT WITH THIS WAS TO BRING FORWARD AN ISSUE THAT THAT NEEDS A SOLUTION.
UH, WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS AT THIS TIME.
UM, LET'S, LET'S CIRCLE THIS BACK.
KEVIN, PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA POLICE FOR NEXT MONTH AND HAVE, UM, I HAVE CHIEF BRIAN HERE AND WE'LL GO OVER THAT.
UM, I PARTICULARLY LIKE TO HAVE THIS BACK NEXT TIME BECAUSE THE 10:00 PM THING THING THAT COME TO MIND IS, IS TOO OUT OF BON SOFTBALL COMPLEX.
WHEN SOMEONE COME IN, THOSE LEAGUES COME IN THERE ON THE, AFTER THE GAMES, THEY WERE OUT THERE UNTIL MIDNIGHT AND NOW, CAUSE YOU KNOW, WITH THE TAILGATING, THEY DON'T CLEAR THAT PARK AND YOU KNOW THAT, UM, BUT BY 10, I MEAN IT'S NEVER BEEN, I'VE NEVER HAD ANY BIG CRIME ISSUES IN ALL THE TEAMS THAT ARE COMING IN.
SO THAT'S WHY I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT THAT.
AND, AND I HOPE WE CAN REACH SOME DEGREE OF UNIFORMITY, UH, AND NOT HAVE THIS FOR THIS PART IN THIS SECTION OF TOWN AND THIS, FOR THIS PART, THAT, THAT THAT'S, THAT'S VERY CONFUSING TO THE RESIDENT.
AND FROM OUR STANDPOINT, IF I WERE TO PRIORITIZE THESE ISSUES, I AGAIN WOULD PUT THE ISSUE RELATED TO THE HIGH SCHOOLS, OVERWHELMING THE PARKS.
UH, AND IT MAY, YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A HOLISTIC APPROACH NOW, RIGHT NOW, PD HAS STEPPED UP THEIR PRESENCE AT CENTRAL PARK.
YOU'VE PROBABLY NOTICED KIND OF OVER THERE BY THE PLAYGROUND WHERE WE HAVE SOME KIND OF UNIQUE ISSUES.
UM, SO THEY'RE, THEY'VE BEEN DOING THE BEST THEY CAN WITH RESOURCES THEY HAVE.
UM, THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM SEVEN, WHICH IS A JOURN.
WE WILL COME BACK NEXT MONTH AND HIT THE FEW.
I JUST ADJOURNED, BUT I JUST PRONOUNCED IT DONE.