* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          ALL RIGHT. 
          [00:00:01]
GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          UM, THIS IS TUESDAY, AUGUST 2ND, 2022. 
          IT'S 4:00 PM. 
          AND THIS IS A MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE WITH ME, OUR COMMITTEE MEMBERS, COUNCIL, WOMAN LUCKED IN DISTRICT FIVE AND COUNCILMAN MOORE IN DISTRICT THREE, UH, ALONG WITH A WHOLE ROOM FULL OF STAFF AND VISITORS. 
          SO, UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. 
          FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE JULY 12TH, 2022 MEETING, UH, COUNCIL MEMBERS, COMMITTEE MEMBERS. 
          HAVE YOU HAD A MOMENT TO READ OVER THE MINUTES AND DO I HAVE A MOTION SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR. 
          AYE. 
          APPROVED. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          ITEM TWO IS TO DISCUSS FUNDING OPTIONS FOR SIDEWALKS, AND WE HAVE HERE STEVE OLIVER WITH STREETS AND CRYSTAL WITH, UM, ENGINEERING. 
          SO WE ARE READY WHEN YOU ARE. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UH, ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS TALKING ABOUT THE CONSIDERATIONS FOR OUR FULL FULL CITY FUNDING OF SIDEWALKS. 
          UH, FIRST-LINE, WE'LL KIND OF GO BACK AND COVER SOME STUFF THAT WITH THE NEW, FOR THE NEW COMMITTEE MEMBERS COVER SOME OF THE BASICS OF THE PROGRAM, THE SIDEWALK CAUTI PROGRAM WAS ADOPTED THE ORDINANCE FOR THAT TO IMPLEMENT THAT PROGRAM WAS ADOPTED IN SEPTEMBER OF 1990. 
          AND IT BASICALLY SAYS THAT, UH, THAT THEY WILL SHARE COST FUNDING ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ON TOP F AND TOP G STREETS ON THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN, WHICH ARE THE 30 FOOT WIDE AND THE 27 FOOT WIDE STREETS. 
          THE BASICALLY THE RESIDENTIAL STREETS, UH, THE STANDARD COST SHARE. 
          IF THE SIDEWALK, IF THE SIDEWALL COMETH, THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR REPLACEMENT WAS 50% FUNDED BY THE CITY AND 50% FUNDED BY THE RESIDENCE. 
          UH, THE CITY COUNCIL, UH, PASSED ORDINANCE 71 54 ON JULY 7TH, 2020, WHICH ALSO CREATED THREE OTHER DISCOUNTS. 
          AND THAT WAS, THERE WAS A 15% DISCOUNT FOR HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION. 
          THERE'S A 15% DISCOUNT IF YOU ARE LOCATED WITHIN A DESIGNATED CDBG AREA, OR THERE WAS A 10% DISCOUNT IF YOU ARE DISABLED OR YOU ARE 65 YEARS OF AGE OF OLDER. 
          SO IF YOU MET ALL THOSE THREE OF THOSE QUALIFICATIONS, YOU COULD GET UP TO 90% OF THE SIDEWALK COSTS PAID FOR BY THE CITY. 
          AND HERE'S SOME EXAMPLES OF JUST SOME WERE FUNDING. 
          STREAMS WILL BE UNDER THE DIFFERENT SCENARIO. 
          UH, THIS WAS BASED ON OUR AVERAGE. 
          UH, WE HAVE ON THE ONES THAT WE HAVE MEASURED, WE HAVE, HADN'T SEEN AN AVERAGE OF 41.4 FEET, AND THAT REPLACEMENT COSTS WAS AN AVERAGE OF $2,220 PER RESIDENTS ON AVERAGE COST OF $53 AND 62 CENTS A SQUARE FOOT LINEAR FOOT. 
          AND SO IF YOU WERE A STANDARD 50 50 COST SHARE, UM, YOUR PAYMENT, UH, YOU COULD GO. 
          AND THAT THAT'S ALSO TALKING ABOUT THAT. 
          ALSO SET UP A PAYMENT PLAN, DEPENDING UPON THE COST OF THE REPAIR. 
          YOU COULD GET A PAYMENT PLAN OF 36, 48 OR 60 MONTHS IF IT'S GREATER THAN A THOUSAND AT 60 MONTHS, IF IT'S GRAY, IF IT'S 500 TO A THOUSAND, IT'S 48. 
          AND IF IT'S LESS THAN 500, IT'S 36 MONTHS AT THE FUNDING THAT YOU COULD DO IT MONTHLY PAYMENT. 
          NOW THESE CALCULATIONS FOR MONTHLY PAYMENTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST. 
          THAT'S JUST A STRAIGHT SLED UP THERE. 
          IF THERE'S INTEREST, OBVIOUSLY IT'LL BE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER, BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THESE WERE COSTS, THE STANDARD 50 50, THE RESIDENT SHARE WOULD BE $1,110. 
          IF YOU WANTED TO GO TO THE PAYMENT PLAN, YOU COULD PAY THAT OVER 60 MONTHS OR BE AN $18 AND 50 CENTS A MONTH PAYMENT. 
          IF YOU, IF YOU QUALIFIED FOR THE, THE ELDERLY DISABLED THAT WE REDUCED IT TO $888, WHICH WILL BE ON A 48 MONTH PAYMENT PLAN, WHICH IRONICALLY IT STILL WORKED OUT TO $18 AND 50 CENTS. 
          THAT ONE, IF YOU, UH, YOU JUST GOT THE HOMESTEAD OF THE CDBG EXEMPTION, IT WOULD BE $777, OR THAT WOULD BE $16 AND 19 CENTS A MONTH ON THE MONTHLY PAYMENT. 
          IF YOU GOT TWO OF THE DISCOUNTS, WHICH IS THE HOMESTEAD OR CDBG AND THE SALARY TO STABLE, WHICH WOULD GIVE YOU A 30% DISCOUNT. 
          IN ADDITION TO THE 50%, YOUR SHARE WOULD BE $555 OR $11 AND 56 CENTS A MONTH. 
          IF YOU ARE THE STANDARD, UH, PLUS THE HOMESTEAD AND THE CDBG, WHICH WOULD GIVE YOU AN ADDITIONAL 30% DISCOUNT, IT WILL BE $4,444 OR $12 AND 33 CENTS A MONTH. 
          AND IF YOU QUALIFY FOR ALL THE DISCOUNTS, WHICH WILL BE THE 50% PLUS THE ADDITIONAL 40% DISCOUNT THAT WILL REDUCE THE PAIN, THE COST TO $222 OR $6 AND 17 CENTS A MONTH. 
          THERE'S SOME EXAMPLES OF, OF SIDEWALKS THAT WOULD QUALIFY. 
          THE, THERE ARE THE ORDINANCE STATES THAT THERE ARE VERTICAL SEPARATIONS, HORIZONTAL SEPARATIONS, AND SIGNIFICANT IF THERE'S SIGNIFICANT SPALLING, THAT WOULD CAUSE IT TO BE A TRIP HAZARD, THEN THEY QUALIFY FOR INCLUSION IN THE PROGRAM. 
          AND SO THESE PICTURES ARE JUST KIND OF SOME EXAMPLES OF SIDEWALKS THAT WOULD QUALIFY WHEN YOU SEE IN THE FIRST ONE WHERE THE SIDEWALKS TILTED, YOU'VE GOT TO TILT THE SECOND 
          [00:05:01]
ONE IT'S GOT, AND IT'S SHOWING A MORE DETAILED OF THE HEAVED HEAT BATTERY, UH, TREES IN THE PARKWAY. 
          HE GAVE A LOT OF SIDEWALKS. 
          AND THEN THE LAST ONE EXAMPLE, OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE AT THE DRIVEWAY APPROACH. 
          YOU SEE ABOUT A TWO INCH DROP OFF THERE, TWO OR THREE INCH DROP OFF WITH THE SIDEWALK, SETTLE SOME EXAMPLES WHERE IT WOULDN'T QUALIFY. 
          THESE, THESE ARE SIDEWALKS WHERE THERE'S JUST MINOR, MINOR SEPARATION IN THE, UH, SIDEWALKS FROM, FROM, FROM PANEL TO PANEL. 
          THEY WOULDN'T BE ENOUGH TO QUALIFY FOR THE TWO INCH, THE TWO INCH VERTICAL SEPARATION THAT QUALIFIES FOR THE ORDINANCE. 
          AND THEN I THINK IT'S AN INCH. 
          I BELIEVE IT WAS MICHAEL AND VERDICT, A HORIZONTAL SEPARATION BETWEEN PANELS THAT WOULD QUALIFY FOR THE, UM, FOR THAT, THAT PR FOR THE PROGRAM. 
          UH, ALTHOUGH IF, IF, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEONE DOESN'T QUALIFY AND STILL WANT TO DO IT, THEN THEY'RE THERE. 
          THEY CAN CERTAINLY PARTICIPATE AT A HUNDRED PERCENT OR THEY WOULD, THEY BE WILLING. 
          THEY CAN GO OUT ON THEIR OWN AND GET THEIR OWN CONTRACTOR AND SELECT THAT TO GIVE YOU THE FUNDING STREAM, LIKE SAY IN THE 2004 BOND PROGRAM, AS A COUPLE MONTHS AGO, I HAVEN'T UPDATED THAT, BUT WE HAD $265,000 LEFT. 
          THAT WAS FROM THE 2004 BOND PROGRAM. 
          AND THEN THERE WAS $5 MILLION SET UP IN THE 2019 BOND PROGRAM. 
          UM, THE PROJECTED FUNDING STREAM, SINCE WE DIDN'T REALLY EXPAND ANY HOLLY, THE MONIES IN 21 AND 22, WE HAD 900, $3,000 AND IT SHOWS THE FUNDING STREAM THROUGH 2027 PLUS IS REALLY 27 AND 28. 
          BUT IT AVERAGES OUT TO APPROXIMATELY $750,000 A YEAR THAT IS DEDICATED TO SIDEWALK REPAIRS. 
          NOW THAT NOT ALL THAT FUNDING IS D C IS DEDICATED TO SIDEWALK REPAIRS ON RESIDENTIAL STREET BECAUSE THE BOND PROGRAM ALSO INCLUDES REPAIRS TO SIDEWALKS. 
          ABUDDING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ON ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREETS. 
          ONE EXAMPLE, WE'VE GOT ONE THAT'S THAT ABUTS COUNTRY CLUB, AND THEY'VE JUST GOT A, IT'S GOT A LOT OF REPAIRS THAT NEED TO BE DONE. 
          AND WE'VE GOT THAT SCHEDULED WHERE THE CITY WOULD PAY A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THAT BECAUSE IT'S, BUT IT HAS TO BE A BUDDING, A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY ON THAT, BUT SAY OUR TEAR OR A COLLECTOR EXAMPLES OF THAT WOULD ALSO BE ALONG WALNUT SIT ACROSS FROM KROGER'S WHERE THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL STREETS, BECAUSE THOSE ARE ARTERIAL BECAUSE THOSE ARTERIAL STREETS IN THE CITY WOULD PAY A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THOSE, THOSE TYPE OF REPAIRS IN THE CONSIDERATIONS FOR MOVING TO THE A HUNDRED PERCENT CITY FUNDING AS OF, UH, JULY 27TH, SINCE OCTOBER OF, OF FIRST OF 2020, WHEN THE STREET DEPARTMENT TOOK OVER THE PROGRAM, WE'VE HAD 197 REQUESTS OF THOSE 166 METHOD REQUIREMENTS FOR REPLACEMENT AS PART OF THE PROGRAM. 
          AND THAT LETTERS WERE SENT OUT BY REVENUE RECOVERY TO THE RESIDENCE, UM, 25 OR 12% DIDN'T MEET THE CRITERIA FOR REPLACEMENT. 
          AND THEN THERE ARE SIX THAT ARE STILL CURRENTLY BEING EVALUATED. 
          SO WE DON'T KNOW IF THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENT OR NOT. 
          AND SO FAR TO DATE OF THOSE, 106, SIX AND EIGHT, WE HAVE RECEIVED 50 50 RESIDENTS THAT HAVE PAID FUNDS AND, AND THEY'RE GETTING THEIR SIDEWALK REPAIRS SCHEDULED BY OUR CONTRACTOR. 
          UH, AS I NOTED BEFORE, THE AVERAGE COST OF THE SIDEWALK REPAIR IS $2,220 FOR THE ONES THAT WE HAVE DONE TODAY. 
          UM, CONSIDERATIONS TALKING POINTS ABOUT MOVING TO A HUNDRED PERCENT CITY FUNDING. 
          IT WOULD ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR RESIDENTS TO PAY FOR SIDEWALKS. 
          IT WOULD REMOVE THE REVENUE RECOVERY OUT OF THE PROCESS. 
          WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE ASKING CITIZENS TO PAY MONEY, SO THAT WOULD TAKE THEM OUT OF THE PROCESS, BUT WE DO ANTICIPATE, YOU KNOW, THE UNKNOWNS WE WOULD ANTICIPATE THE REQUESTS WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE. 
          WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THAT WOULD INCREASE BY, BUT I I'M SURE IT WOULD PROBABLY DOUBLE OR TRIPLE I WOULD SUSPECT. 
          AND THEN, UH, THEREFORE THE OTHER UNKNOWN, WE DON'T KNOW BASED ON HOW MANY REQUESTS, IF WE WOULD NEED ADDITIONAL, UH, INSPECTION STAFF AND ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF TO ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM. 
          AND THEN IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE GOING TO A REQUEST PROGRAM, THEN THAT WOULD BE A POTENTIAL FOR A SIGNIFICANT, UH, WAITING LIST FOR THAT, FOR THOSE THAT CALL IN JUST BASED ON THE FUNDING THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE. 
          I'LL SEE IF I CAN CLICK TO THIS ONE WHERE I CAN PULL UP, ASKED WHAT I FIGURED, BUT I DO HAVE IT LOADED. 
          OKAY. 
          WHERE'S THE MAP ON THE MAP IS HERE. 
          THIS IS A MAP THAT, UH, MICHAEL PLUM CHICK CREATED. 
          UH, LET'S SEE IF I CAN GET THIS TO SHOOT DOWN OR IT'S THE ENTIRE MAP ON THIS, ON THE SCREEN. 
          IT'S PROBABLY SMALLER TO READ ANYONE AND THEN WE CAN BLOW IT UP LATER. 
          BUT IT'S A, IT'S A MAP THAT SHOWS FROM 2014. 
          NO. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL BLOW IT UP HERE IN A MINUTE. 
          OH, IT'S NOT, UH, DANG IT. 
          HOW THAT GETS PROJECTED ON THE SCREEN IS A GOOD QUESTION. 
          YES. 
          DO YOU CONTROL L 
          [00:10:02]
AND THEN MAY HAVE TO TRACK IT. 
          I NEED TO DROP THE OTHER ONE. 
          NOW. 
          THIS IS JUST, FOR SOME REASON WE HAVE TO DRAG IT ACROSS THE SCREEN. 
          IT ALWAYS WORKS GREAT UNTIL WE'RE READY FOR IT. 
          TECHNOLOGY IS GREAT. 
          IF IT ACTUALLY WORKS, IT'S HARD BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO A LITTLE TURNAROUND, BUT GREAT. 
          WELL, I CAN, BUT THAT'S A MAP THAT, UH, MICHAEL CREATED FROM THE REQUEST AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAD RECEIVED BETWEEN 2014 AND 2020. 
          AND THE MAP SHOWS THAT THE BLUE COLORED AREAS IS THE CDBG AREAS, BUT IT INDICATES THE NUMBER OF REQUESTS THAT THE COLORED DOTS, THE RED DOTS ARE THOSE THAT DIDN'T PARTICIPATE. 
          NOW, THEY HAD REQUESTED DIDN'T REPITCH PARTICIPATE. 
          THE GREEN DOTS ARE THOSE THAT, UH, CHOSE TO PARTICIPATE IN A PROGRAM IN A, AND WE'VE BROKEN THEM DOWN BY THE CDBG AREAS AND THE NON CB WITHIN THE CDBG AREAS. 
          THERE WERE 78 OF THE, THE 263 REQUESTS THAT CAME IN 78, PARTICIPATED 187 DIDN'T PARTICIPATE, OR 29.4, 1% OF THE OTHER RESIDENTS CHOSE TO PARTICIPATE. 
          OR THOSE ARE THOSE THAT ACTUALLY THOSE THAT HAD SUBMITTED REQUESTS ROUGHLY JUST SLIGHTLY LESS THAN A THIRD CHOSE TO PARTICIPATE THERE. 
          AND IN THE NON CDBG AREAS, UH, OUT OF 739 REQUEST, 472 DID NOT PARTICIPATE 206 67 DEAD. 
          SO THAT PERCENTAGE RATE WAS 36.13%. 
          AND THE OVERALL CITYWIDE OF THOSE THOUSAND REQUESTS WAS 34.3, 6% REQUESTED. 
          SO WE WILL SEE THAT THE PARTICIPATION RATE AND THE CDBG AREAS WAS ABOUT 7% LOWER THAN THE NON PRESIDIO AND THE NINE CDBG AREAS. 
          SO, UH, WHERE DO YOU SEE THIS? THE REQUESTS ARE KIND OF SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THIS. 
          I MEAN, THEY'RE SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE CITY'S NOT CONCENTRATED, BUT OBVIOUSLY THERE WERE QUITE A FEW, THERE WERE PROBABLY TWO, IT LOOKS LIKE ABOUT TWO AND A HALF TIMES MORE REQUESTS FROM THE NON CDBG AREAS OF TOWN THAN FROM THE CDBG AREAS. 
          SO I'LL SEE IF I CAN PULL THE, NOW IF I CAN, OR THE OTHER WAY, WHERE IS THE ARROW COME BACK HERE. 
          I CAN GET THIS TO DROP, PULL THE, AND THEN PULL IT BACK UP, PULL IT AND SLIDE IT. 
          SO WE NOT PULL BACK UP, UM, MCKAYLA. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO PULL THE REST OF THE PRESENTATION UP. 
          NOW, IF I CAN JUST FIND IT ON THE SCREEN AND THE NEXT ITEMS, CRYSTAL'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION WITH REGARDS TO THE SIDEWALK PROGRAM. 
          OKAY, GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          UM, THANKS STEVE. 
          SO WITH, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS I REALLY DO WANT TO KIND OF FOCUS ON IS THE FACT THAT STEVE MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ANTICIPATE THE, UH, THE NUMBER OF REQUESTS THAT WE GET. 
          WE, WE ANTICIPATE THAT NUMBER GOING UP EXPONENTIALLY. 
          THE UNKNOWN THERE IS WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE ACTUAL EXPONENT? WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA, BUT, UM, IT'S KIND OF A GIVEN THAT AS SOON AS YOU PUT IT OUT THERE, THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT WE HAVE A PROGRAM IN WHICH THERE'S NO COST TO THE, TO THE RESIDENTS. 
          THE NUMBER IS DEFINITELY GOING TO INCREASE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS BEEN KIND OF ON THE TABLE OR THAT I'VE HEARD THROUGHOUT THE TIME THAT I'VE BEEN HERE. 
          JUST LISTENING TO THE CONCERNS WITH THIS PROGRAM IS THAT ONE, WE DON'T SEEM TO BE SPENDING THE MONIES THAT ARE AVAILABLE. 
          THAT'S BEEN THE BIGGEST THING. 
          UM, THERE'S ALSO BEEN KIND OF A PUSH TO NOT HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COST TO THE RESIDENTS AS A WHOLE. 
          AND THEN THE THIRD THING, I BELIEVE THERE'S BEEN SOME CONCERN OR SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE'RE GOING INTO NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          WE'RE BASICALLY DOING SPOT REPAIRS, BUT WE'RE LEAVING THE REMAINDER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE SAME CONDITION. 
          SO WE GOT TOGETHER AS, UM, BOTH THE DEPARTMENT. 
          I MEAN, AS A, AS A DEPARTMENT, WE PULLED DEPARTMENTS TOGETHER. 
          AND I ACTUALLY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH BECKY KING, WHO, UM, WITH NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY AND KIND OF JUST DID SOME BRAINSTORMING ON HOW, WHAT CAN WE DO TO MOVE THIS FORWARD, TO TRY AND ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS? UM, THE FIRST THING THAT I AM BRINGING TO THE TABLE AS FAR AS THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO PARTNER WITH THE PROGRAM WHERE THE HEART IS. 
          AND I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF SPECIFICS ABOUT THE, WHERE THE HEART IS PROGRAM, BUT IT 
          [00:15:01]
IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY GO INTO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE SOME FINANCIAL CHALLENGES. 
          AND THEY'RE LOOKING TO BRING IT UP TO CERTAIN STANDARDS. 
          THE IDEA BEHIND THIS IS THAT WITH THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT COULD COME FROM THE SIDEWALK, SIDEWALK PARTICIPATION PROGRAM, THE IMPACT THAT WE WOULD HAVE IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS WOULD BE JUST ABSOLUTELY AMAZING. 
          UM, THIS WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO GO IN. 
          WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS ALL OF THE SIDEWALKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THAT ONE FAIL SWOOP. 
          SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS, YOU KNOW, SPOT REPAIRS. 
          THE REPAIRS WOULD STILL HAVE TO MEET OUR MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE ADDRESSED, BUT WE'RE ADDRESSING THAT THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD THERE WOULD BE NO COST TO THE RESIDENTS BECAUSE IT'S ONCE AGAIN, PART OF THE, WHERE THE HEART IS PROGRAM, AND THEN WE'RE ALSO EXPANDING THESE FUNDS FAIRLY QUICKLY. 
          UM, WHEN WE'RE GOING IN, IN THAT MANNER, KEEPING IN MIND THAT WE STILL WOULD HAVE TO MAINTAIN FUNDING FOR OUR ARTERIAL ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREET REPAIRS, WE WOULD HAVE TO MAINTAIN FUNDS FOR THAT. 
          AND THEN WE WOULD ALSO MAINTAIN OUR, UM, SIDEWALK PARTICIPATION PROGRAM. 
          AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS. 
          WE WOULD SET ASIDE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FUNDS JUST BASED ON HISTORICAL NUMBERS FOR PARTICIPATION, SO THAT WE CAN COVER THOSE WHO ARE OUTSIDE OF THE AREAS THAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON. 
          THE OTHER IDEA THAT WE HAD, AND I WANT IT TO BRING IT FORWARD IS TO, UM, CONSIDER, UH, USING FUNDS FOR THE, UH, SITE, I'M SORRY, THE CONCRETE STREET REPEATER PROGRAM. 
          AND THIS IS WHERE WE GO IN AND ACTUALLY DO PANEL REPLACEMENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          THIS IS NOT THE FULL STREET REPLACEMENT BECAUSE WHEN WE DO FULL STREET REPLACEMENT, UM, THEY ACTUALLY REPLACED THE SIDEWALKS AT THAT TIME. 
          BUT WHEN WE GO IN AND DO JUST CONCRETE PANEL REPLACEMENTS, WE DO NOT TYPICALLY REPLACE THE SIDEWALKS. 
          SO THIS WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO IN, DO THE STREET REPAIRS AND THE CONCRETE REPAIRS. 
          ONCE AGAIN, LEAVING A MAJOR IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE AND ADDRESSING THOSE THREE CONCERNS THAT I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT JUST HITTING ONE SPECIFIC AREA OR ONE LOCATION LEAVING THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE SAME CONDITION. 
          WE'RE EXPANDING THE FUNDS FAIRLY QUICKLY. 
          AND ONCE AGAIN, THERE'S NO COST TO THE RESIDENTS. 
          SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT. 
          UM, AND THEN, UM, I THINK WHEN I MET WITH COUNCILWOMAN MORRIS, THERE WAS THE QUESTION OF, COULD WE CONSIDER ACTUALLY ASPHALT'S TREAT YOUR PAIRS IS WHAT I MEAN, ASPHALT STREETS AS WELL. 
          AND THE ANSWER TO THAT AS A RESOUNDING YES, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT. 
          WE WOULD DO IT IN THE SAME MANNER IN WHICH WE WERE ADDRESSING THE CONCRETE STREET REPAIRS. 
          WHEN WE GO INTO THE, AND WE'RE DOING LIKE AN OVERLAY, WE WOULD ALSO ADDRESS THE SIDEWALKS AT THAT TIME. 
          UM, SO THESE ARE KIND OF THE THREE OPTIONS THAT WE ARE BRINGING TO THE TABLE TO TRY AND GET FEEDBACK. 
          I DO NOT HAVE SPECIFICS ON HOW THESE WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED RIGHT NOW, AND I DIDN'T REALLY WANT TO DIG UP LIKE REALLY INTUIT WITHOUT GETTING SOME DIRECTION FROM THE COMMITTEE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD AN APPETITE FOR THIS AND YOU WANTED US TO MOVE FORWARD KIND OF WHAT THIS PLAN. 
          SO I THINK AT THIS TIME WE WOULDN'T BE WILLING TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE OR ANY COMMENTS. 
          OKAY. 
          I HEARD THE BEEP FROM THIS SITE FOR, WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION, BECAUSE I THINK THAT, THAT IT DOES SAY IT SUGGESTS THAT WE ARE ABOUT, UH, ATTEMPTING TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR OUR RESIDENTS. 
          I LIKED ALL THREE OF THOSE AT THE SAME TIME. 
          I ALSO AGREE WITH YOU THAT PROBABLY IF WE HAVE A SITUATION OF WHERE WE ALLOW A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE COST, UH, FOR US TO BEAR THAT YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO GET A VERY LARGE INCREASE, BUT I'M THINKING THAT STILL IS A NEED BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE 222 MORE DOLLARS A MONTH AT THIS TIME, IT'S JUST NOT DOABLE. 
          IT'S JUST, THEY CAN'T DO IT. 
          AND SO WE MAY HAVE TO COME UP WITH SOME PARAMETERS AND HAVE TO COME UP WITH SOME, UH, METHODS AND METHODOLOGY BY WHICH WE WILL, UH, LOOK AT THOSE PEOPLE AND ASSESS IF, IF, IF IN FACT THEY ARE ELIGIBLE OR NOT. 
          SO I THINK THAT THAT'S, FOR ME, ALL THREE OF THOSE OPTIONS ARE SOUNDING GOOD. 
          I WOULD CERTAINLY SUPPORT THEM. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, SO WHAT WOULD THE COST HAVE BEEN TO THE CITY FOR THE, UM, FOR THE PARTICIPATION PROGRAM, IF THE CITY HAD PAID 100% LAST YEAR OR DURING THE TIME THAT YOU LOOKED AT THE, SO THERE IS, UM, JUST, THERE'S A DEFINED AMOUNT OF MONEY. 
          THERE'S NOT LIKE, SO THERE'S $750,000 ONCE AT 750,000. 
          OURS IS EXPENDED. 
          IT'S IT'S GONE. 
          IS THAT WHAT 
          [00:20:01]
YOU'RE ASKING? UM, NO. 
          SO, UM, HOW MUCH DID, HOW MUCH WAS PAID WAS TAKEN FROM THE FUND LAST YEAR? WE'LL JUST USE LAST YEAR'S. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, SO LAST YEAR THERE WERE SOME CHALLENGES WITH, I GUESS IT MOVED FROM ENGINEERING TO STREETS AND THERE WERE SOME CHALLENGES WITH THE WHOLE PROCESS, THE OVERALL PROCESS, THE COLLECTIONS. 
          SO THERE WAS NOT ANY FUNDING THAT WAS EXPENDED LAST YEAR, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE HERE TRYING TO COME UP WITH A PLAN FOR HOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          WE DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW MUCH THAT PROGRAM IS, WAS COSTING RESIDENTS BEFORE, BEFORE LAST YEAR WE HAVE THOSE NUMBERS, BUT LAST YEAR SPECIFICALLY. 
          OKAY. 
          HISTORICALLY, HISTORICALLY I THINK MICHAEL WORKED WA WASN'T SPINNING LIKE 300, SOME THOUSAND A YEAR, TYPICALLY 200 TO 3, 300, 200, 300,000 A YEAR IN ENGINEERING WAS MANAGING THE PROJECT. 
          OH. 
          THEN IF YOU ADDED IN THE RESIDENTIAL COST, THAT WOULD DOUBLE THAT AMOUNT. 
          SO THE RIGHT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND I THINK, I THINK THE CALCULATIONS, THEY DID IT THAT, UH, INSTEAD OF 50% BASED ON IF WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THOSE, IT WOULD BE MORE LIKE THE CITY WOULD BE PAYING MORE LIKE ON AVERAGE 1 65, 65 TO 70%. 
          YEAH. 
          YUP. 
          I'M JUST, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT HOW MUCH MONEY HAS BEEN USED HISTORICALLY FOR THIS PROGRAM WHEN RESIDENTS WERE PARTICIPATING, HISTORICALLY SPEAKING TO THE 200 TO 300,000 WAS, WAS THE FULL PARTICIPATE OR THE FULL COST. 
          AND THEN WE INVOICE THE PROPERTY OWNERS, THEY REIMBURSED CITY. 
          SO BASICALLY IF YOU CUT THAT IN HALF, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED TO 150,000 WOULD BE WHAT THE CITY'S ACTUALLY EXPENDING AND WE COULD RECOUP THE OTHER HALF. 
          SO THAT THAT'S HISTORICALLY WHAT WE'VE ON AN AVERAGE OF WHAT WE SPENT PROBABLY OVER 2014 TO 2020, SOMEWHERE IN THAT, THE MAP THAT YOU SAW EARLIER. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, SO LAST YEAR, NONE OF THE ARTERIAL MONEY WAS SPENT EITHER. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? ON THE ARTERIAL PROGRAM WHERE YOU PAY 100%? UH, NOT, NOT FROM A REQUEST BASIS. 
          I MEAN, WE MADE SOME ISOLATED REPAIRS AS PART OF, AS PART OF OUR REPAIR PROGRAM AS OUR R OUR STREET REPAIR PROGRAM ON ARTERIALS. 
          BUT, AND WE WERE, WE WERE JUST BASICALLY ADDRESSING THE ABSOLUTE WORST HAZARDOUS CASES. 
          SO WE WERE NOT, WE'RE NOT GOING FULL SCALE ALONG THERE, BUT WE PROBABLY SPENT MAYBE 50 TO 50 TO A HUNDRED THOUSAND, MAYBE AT MOST ON, ON SIDEWALKS, ON LONG ARTERIALS, BUT WE WEREN'T MAKING A CONCERTED EFFORT TO DO THAT. 
          WE WEREN'T TAKING REQUESTS AND DOING THAT. 
          WE WERE JUST DOING THOSE ON PROJECTS WE HAPPENED TO BE ON, RIGHT. 
          SO WE SPENT ABOUT 650,000 OF THAT 750,000 LAST YEAR. 
          NO, NO, THERE'S, THERE'S THE REASON THAT THAT CHART SHOWS 900,000 FOR THIS YEAR IS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T REALLY EXPAND THAT MUCH MONEY IN 21. 
          THE LIKE SAY THE AVERAGE WOULD, IT WOULD HAVE, THE STREAM WOULD HAVE BEEN ABOUT 500,000 EACH YEAR. 
          AND SINCE WE DIDN'T SPEND MUCH, WE CHARGED SOME, WE CHARGED SOME MONEY BACK TO THAT BASED ON OUR PROJECTS, BUT THAT'S WHY THAT ONE IN 22 IS THE FUNDING STREAM IS HIGHER THAN IT IS IN THE OTHER YEARS, JUST BECAUSE WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T SPEND A LOT IN 20, WE DIDN'T SPEND MUCH IN 21. 
          SO THOSE UNUSED FUNDS JUST CARRY OVER TO THE FUND EVERY YEAR. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          THERE IS A DEFINED, THERE'S DEFINED FUNDING IN THE BOND PROGRAM THAT DOESN'T GO AWAY IF IT'S NOT USED. 
          RIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, THANK YOU. 
          AND AGAIN, UM, REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE THE TIME AND THOUGHT THAT WENT INTO, UM, COMING UP WITH SOME SENSIBLE AND WORKABLE SEEMS TO ME, UM, APPROACHES TO THIS. 
          SO, UM, YEAH. 
          SO WHAT, WHAT BROUGHT US HERE IS DISCOVERING THAT OUR SIDEWALK PROGRAM JUST WASN'T WORKING AND IT WASN'T HAPPENING AND YOUR DISTRICT IN MIND. 
          UM, AND I THINK AREAS OF YOURS AS WELL. 
          SO, UH, WE'RE TRYING TO FIND A BETTER WAY. 
          AND THE INITIAL THOUGHT WAS, UM, THAT WE COULD LOOK AT SIDEWALK CITYWIDE THE SAME WAY WE DO WITH STREETS AND HAVE, HAVE INSPECTIONS ABOUT WHERE THE NEED WAS GREATEST. 
          AND JUST FROM A CITY SIDE, SAY, WE'RE GOING TO GO IN AND FIX SIDEWALKS WHERE THEY NEED TO BE FIXED ONLY, UM, MR. ENGLAND INFORMED US THAT WE COULDN'T DO THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE LEGAL ISSUES WITH DOING THAT. 
          SO NOT BEING ABLE TO DO IT FROM A PURELY, UM, ENGINEERING, UH, PCI, OCI RATING TO THAT'S TAKES A LOT OF, UH, PERSONAL OPINIONS OUT OF THE WAY WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOME OTHER WAY TO DO IT. 
          AND I DO LIKE THE, UM, I LIKE THE APPROACH. 
          CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE, 
          [00:25:01]
TO THE SCREEN WITH THE, UM, THERE WE GO, PARTNERING WITH NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY. 
          THAT IS, THAT IS ONE NEIGHBORHOOD A YEAR, AND IT'S A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S NEEDY. 
          AND, UM, AND I THINK IT'S A BRILLIANT IDEA TO WHEN WE'RE ALREADY GOING IN THERE AND DOING MAGIC. 
          WHY ON EARTH? SHOULD WE NOT GIVE THEM GOOD SIDEWALKS AS WELL? UM, SO I'M, I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THAT AND THE UTILIZING SIDEWALK FUNDING TO SUPPLEMENT THE CONCRETE STREET REPAIR PROGRAM. 
          AND AGAIN, UM, COMMITTEE MEMBERS, IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE CONCRETE REHAB, THAT'S WHERE THEY GO IN AND THEY CUT OUT BIG SQUARES AND THEN REPLACED THEM WITH CONCRETE. 
          SO IT IT'S, IT'S A VERY ROBUST, UM, IT'S NOT PATCHING, IT'S NOT A SMALL REPAIR. 
          IT GIVES A GOOD, ROBUST CONCRETE STREET WHEN WE'RE DONE. 
          SO, UM, I THINK THAT'S SENSIBLE TOO. 
          CAUSE IF YOU'VE GOT A CONCRETE STREET THAT'S BAD ENOUGH WHERE IT NEEDS TO HAVE BIG SQUARES CUT OUT AND REPLACE THE SIDEWALKS ARE MOST LIKELY IN BAD SHAPE AS WELL. 
          UM, I DID, AS CRYSTAL MENTIONED, UM, ASK ABOUT INCLUDING ALONG WITH THE CONCRETE STREET REPAIR PROGRAM STREETS THAT HAVE RECEIVED ASPHALT OVERLAYS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THEM LEFT OUT. 
          A LOT OF THEM ARE IN OUR OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          AND, UM, IF WE COULD, UM, SUPPLEMENT BOTH THE OVERLAY AND THE S AND THE CONCRETE REPAIR PROGRAM WITH DOING A, A REPAIR OF ANY SIDEWALKS ALONG THOSE STREETS THAT NEED REPAIR. 
          I MEAN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO TEAR OUT GOOD SIDEWALKS AND WASTE TAX DOLLARS, BUT, UM, WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW, IT'S WITH IT BEING BY CITIZEN REQUESTS. 
          SO IF I CALL AND I SAY, OKAY, I WANT MY, MY NON-EXISTENT SIDEWALK REPLACED. 
          UM, THEN BY JUST WITH THE DOLLARS AND CENTS, I CAN HAVE THAT DONE AND THERE WILL BE A SIDEWALK TO NOWHERE ON THIS SIDE. 
          AND AS I WALKED TO NOWHERE ON THAT SIDE, OR IF I ACTUALLY HAD SIDEWALKS, IT WOULD BE NICE, SHINY NEW SIDEWALK, AND THEN BROKEN SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES OF ME. 
          SO THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT IDEAL. 
          AND THAT'S, IT, IT BASICALLY IS DRIVEN BY WHO CAN EITHER COME UP WITH THE MONEY OR, UM, IS WILLING TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS OUT, WHICH SOME PEOPLE JUST AREN'T, AREN'T WILLING TO DO THAT. 
          UM, AND SETTING ASIDE FUNDS FOR ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR, UM, STREET, SIDEWALK, REPAIRS, UM, AND FOR THE COST SHARE PROGRAM, I REALLY CAN'T IMPROVE ON WHAT YOU ALL HAVE BROUGHT TO US. 
          AND THIS DOES SEEM TO BALANCE OUT A LOT AND, AND DRAW SOME LINES WHERE WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET OVERWHELMED WITH SUDDENLY EVERYBODY IN THE CITY CALLING AT ONCE. 
          UM, I WOULD SAY THAT WITH THE, THE MAP THAT YOU SHOWED THAT SHOWED FEWER, UM, REQUESTS FROM CDBG AREAS, UM, IN MY DISTRICT, AT LEAST THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THEY CALL ME, OR THEY MAY BE CALLING MY COLLEAGUES AND ASKING, YOU KNOW, SAYING MY SIDEWALKS, TERRIBLE, ARE YOU GOING TO COME FIX IT? AND WE EXPLAINED THE PROGRAM TO THEM AND SEND THEM A LINK. 
          THEY DON'T BOTHER THEN CALLING YOU BECAUSE THEY SEE IT COSTS MONEY AND THEY JUST SHUT DOWN. 
          THEY JUST GIVE UP. 
          SO, UM, SO I THINK THAT THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF NEEDS IN THE CDBG AREAS ARE PROBABLY HIGHER THAN YOU WOULD SEE INDICATED BY THE ACTUAL REQUESTS THAT YOU'VE GOTTEN WOULD BE MY ASSUMPTION. 
          ALTHOUGH WE, WE REALLY CAN'T QUANTIFY THAT NUMBER. 
          ONE THING THAT I DID NOT PUT ON THE REPORT WAS THAT I ASKED MY PEOPLE AND THEY SAID THAT THEY PUBLISHED PROBABLY AT LEAST ANOTHER 50 REQUESTS THAT WE RECEIVED, AS SOON AS THEY FIND OUT IT COSTS MONEY. 
          THEY'RE LIKE, NEVERMIND. 
          YES. 
          YOU KNOW, SO THERE ARE QUITE A FEW, THERE ARE PROBABLY LIKE SAY ANOTHER 50 REQUESTS, AT LEAST THAT WE'VE GOTTEN, THAT HAVE FALLEN INTO THAT CATEGORY OF WE'RE NOT OKAY. 
          WELL, AND THAT'S WHEN IT HITS YOU. 
          AND WHEN IT HITS US, A LOT OF THEM SAY, NEVERMIND IT AT OUR STATE. 
          SO WE, YOU CAN'T CATCH EVERYBODY. 
          BUT THE, THE MAP THAT YOU DID WAS VERY HELPFUL IN SEEING KIND OF WHERE, WHERE PEOPLE ARE SPEAKING OUT THEIR NEEDS AND, AND HOW MANY OF THEM ARE SAYING NEVERMIND. 
          UM, AND JUST NOT FOLLOWING THROUGH. 
          SO, OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, THIS IS A FOR COUNCIL. 
          I HATE TO ASK SOMETHING THAT YOU'VE PROBABLY ANSWERED A HUNDRED TIMES, BUT WHAT WAS THE REASON THAT, UH, W UH, THE VOLUNTEER, THE VOLUNTEER TO CITY, VOLUNTEERING TO LOOK AT DIFFERENT PLACES TO REPAIR THOSE VOLUNTARILY? WHY WILL THEY ILLEGAL? WELL, COULDN'T WE DO IT. 
          THEY'RE 
          [00:30:01]
NOT THERE. 
          THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT ILLEGAL. 
          IT WOULDN'T BE UNLAWFUL TO DO THAT. 
          MY ADVICE AT THE TIME. 
          AND, AND IT'S STILL, MY ADVICE IS THAT WE NEED TO BE VERY PRUDENT AND CAREFUL ABOUT THE TYPE OF DESCRIPTORS WE USE WHEN WE GO OUT AND DO AN AUDIT OF OUR SIDEWALKS OR ANY OF OUR PUBLIC FACILITIES, QUITE FRANKLY, BECAUSE UNDER THE TEXAS TORT CLAIMS ACT, ONCE THE CITY HAS BEEN PLACED ON NOTICE OF THE DANGEROUS CONDITION, THEN WE ARE OBLIGATED UNDER LAW TO FIX THAT DANGEROUS CONDITION OR WAIVE OUR SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY. 
          THAT'S ONE OF THE ONLY WAYS THAT YOU CAN POSSIBLY SUE THE CITY, UM, UM, FOR A PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM FOR A TRIP AND FALL, OR FOR A SLIP ON THE SIDEWALK IS IF WE HAD NOTICE OF A DANGEROUS CONDITION AND FAILED TO ACT ON THAT DANGEROUS CONDITION. 
          AND SO, AND I, AND CRYSTAL, YOU MAY BE FARTHER DOWN THAT WE, ME AND CRYSTAL HAD A CONVERSATION EARLIER, OR I SHOULD SAY LAST WEEK ABOUT THE RATING SYSTEM. 
          AND I THINK I W I'M PRETTY COMFORTABLE WITH, IF WE CAME UP WITH A RATING SYSTEM THAT DID NOT INCLUDE DESCRIPTORS OF, OF WHY THE SIDEWALK IS RATED A TWO VERSUS A SIX. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, IF IT'S A ONE TO THREE, IT'S CONSIDERED A DANGEROUS CONDITION, THAT WOULDN'T BE OKAY. 
          IT WOULDN'T BE WISE THE COUNCIL, IF THEY CHOSE TO DO THAT, THEY COULD DO THAT. 
          BUT IN MY OPINION, IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE WISE TO DO THAT AT THAT POINT, WE'D BE EXPOSING OURSELVES TO SOME LIABILITY. 
          UM, AND SO THAT'S ALWAYS, THE DANGER IS HOW WE'D GO ABOUT DOING IT. 
          WE CAN DO IT, WE COULD CREATE A HEAT MAP, BUT IT'S, WE JUST NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE DO THAT. 
          UH, BASED ON, UH, AGAIN, WHAT I'M HEARING, WE'RE NOT SPENDING THE MONEY AS EXPEDIENT AS WE WOULD LIKE TO, AND WE DO HAVE A MONEY'S BEING CARRIED OVER. 
          I THINK THAT WHAT MIGHT BE AN AREA THAT WE WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US PURSUE ALSO, BECAUSE THERE ARE JUST SOME AREAS, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU JUST TOLD ME THAT, UH, WHEN I FELL DURING THE ELECTION AND BROKE MY ROTATOR CUP WITH, ON CITY, UH, SIDEWALKS, AND YOU GUYS TOLD ME THAT I COULD HAVE SUED THE CITY, MICAH, PROBABLY NOT. 
          WE HAD NOTICED THAT THAT DANGEROUS CONDITION BEFORE YOU FELL, AND IT WAS ACTUALLY A DANGEROUS CONDITION. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THAT'D BE KIND OF THE POINT. 
          SO, AND THE SITUATION IS FOR US TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL DAN, ABOUT HOW WE DO THE RATING, THAT THE PRIMARY. 
          RIGHT? OKAY. 
          BUT OTHERWISE WE COULD PUT SOME TYPE OF CRITERIA IN TOGETHER THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO LEGALLY. 
          WE COULD PRACTICALLY I'LL LEAVE THAT TO THEM, TO DISCUSS OF HOW WE ACTUALLY WOULD GO BY, BUT LEGALLY, THERE'S NOT AN ISSUE WITH IT. 
          YOU NEED TO HEAR THEM. 
          ALL RIGHT, CHRIS, GOING TO WORK ON SOME OPTIONS TO SEE IF WE CAN COME TO SOMETHING THAT WOULD, UM, MAKE OUR COUNSEL HAPPY. 
          THEY WERE HAPPY, MAKE ALL OF OUR COUNCIL AND OUR COUNCIL. 
          WELL, AND ALSO WITHIN OUR CARDIOGRAPH SYSTEM, WE CAN'T, WE DO NOW HAVE THE ABILITY TO WRITE SIDEWALKS, BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO WRITE THEM, IT WOULD ASSIGN A NUMBER TO THEM. 
          SO THAT'S THE POINT. 
          IF WE WANT TO DO THAT, IT'S GOING TO ASSIGN A NUMBER TO THEM. 
          IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY SAY WHY IT'S THAT NUMBER, BUT IT WOULD ASSIGN A NUMBER. 
          AND THAT'S THE IMPORTANT KEY IS NUMBERS. 
          DON'T BOTHER ME. 
          IT'S THE WHY WE HAVE THAT NUMBER OF WHAT THAT NUMBER MEANS IS, IS WHAT, SO WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL OF WHAT WE PUBLISH AND WHAT WE SAY IN EMAILS AND WHAT WE TALK ABOUT IN TERMS OF WHAT THOSE NUMBERS ACTUALLY MEAN. 
          AND OF COURSE, IF THERE'S AN ACTUAL DANGEROUS CONDITION THAT WE'RE AWARE OF THAT, OF COURSE WE SHOULD FIX THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          WHICH GOES TO BACK TO THE ASPHALT SIDEWALKS, WE ACTUALLY HAVE. 
          I MEAN, THE ASPHALT REPAIRS, WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO GO BACK BECAUSE THE LAW REQUIRES US. 
          IF THERE IS NOT AN ADA RAMP ON A, ON A PLACE THAT WE HAVE DONE A ASPHALT REPAIR, WE'VE GOT TO GO BACK AND REPLACE THOSE WITH ADA RAMPS THAT MEET THE CURRENT STANDARDS. 
          SO WE'VE GOT SOME OF THOSE TO GO BACK AND WE WILL GO BACK. 
          AND AS WE HAVE DONE, SOME OF THOSE, WE HAVE PROBABLY TAKEN CARE OF. 
          IF WE SEE AN ABSOLUTE HORRIBLE CONDITION, WE'RE KIND OF TAKEN CARE OF THOSE, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING, WE'RE NOT, WE HAVE NOT BEEN DOING WHOLESCALE REPAIRS OF SIDEWALKS THAT MEET THE CRITERIA. 
          WE'VE JUST KIND OF LOOKED AT THIS, THE ABSOLUTE, IF THERE'S AN ABSOLUTE WORST, BAD CASE, WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS THOSE WHEN WE GET THAT, WHEN WE GET THE RAMPS. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, THE LAST TIME THAT WE WERE, WE WERE DISCUSSING DOING SOMETHING SIMILAR TO, TO OUR STREET, OCI RATINGS ON SIDEWALKS. 
          AT THAT TIME, I THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS A DEAD END, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S NOT, IT'S JUST, WE CAN RATE THEM. 
          WE JUST DON'T WANT TO PUT ANY, ANY LANGUAGE TO SCRIPTURE DESCRIPTION AND WITH STREETS. 
          IT'S WHAT FAIR, POOR MIDLAND, WHAT IS EXCELLENT, GOOD, FAIR, POOR, AND FAILED. 
          OKAY. 
          WOULD THOSE SAME DESCRIPTORS BE, UH, NOT, NOT GOOD. 
          IT'S HARD TO SAY MOST LIKELY THOSE DESCRIPTORS WOULD BE FINE, BUT THERE IS A RISK IF WE USE THOSE DESCRIPTORS, I WOULD PREFER JUST 
          [00:35:01]
TO SAY, YOU KNOW, ANY SIDEWALK THAT FALLS WITHIN A ONE, OR, YOU KNOW, I'M MAKING THIS UP, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. 
          THAT'S ACTUALLY MATHEMATICALLY ACCURATE AND DEPENDS ON SCIENCE. 
          I DON'T DO SCIENCE. 
          SO, UM, I'D BE OKAY WITH SAYING THAT IF WE HAVE A WRITING AND IT'S A ONE TO THREE, THEN THAT'S THE SIDEWALKS OF PRIORITY FIXES FOUR OR FIVE OR SIX. 
          THOSE ARE SECONDARY. 
          AND THEN ANYTHING BELOW THAT, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO WATCH. 
          WE'RE GOING TO MONITOR, BUT MAY NOT. 
          SO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          SO WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY GIVING YOU A DESCRIPTION OF, THIS IS A FAILED SIDEWALK. 
          THIS IS JUST SOMETHING THAT'S A PRIORITY FIX FOR US. 
          IT'S A PRIORITY NUMBERING. 
          RIGHT? CHRIS, CHRIS, COULD YOU LOOK AT THAT WHILE YOU'RE ON VACATION? I PRIORITY MODERATE PRIORITY, LOW PRIORITY OR ANYTHING? I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE FINE. 
          THAT'D BE PERFECTLY FINE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, WHAT CRYSTAL GIVEN, GIVEN THE CATEGORIES HERE, HOW WOULD YOU SEE, WOULD YOU SEE? UH, THAT WAS MY FIRST PREFERENCE WAS WE ACTUALLY RATE ALL OF OUR SIDEWALKS CITYWIDE AND KNOW WHERE WE ARE AND WHERE OUR PRIORITIES ARE. 
          SO WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF THESE? UM, WE WOULD STILL NEED TO SET ASIDE FUNDS FOR ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREETS. 
          AND IF WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE WITH THE COST SHARE PROGRAM, THEN SETTING ASIDE ANNUAL FUNDS FOR THAT AS WELL WITHIN OUR BUDGET. 
          BUT WHAT ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT A PRIORITY PRIORITIZING SIDEWALKS BY A RATING? HOW LONG WOULD THAT BACKING UP? STEVE? HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE TO DO AN AUDIT OF OUR, OF OUR SIDEWALK? CITYWIDE. 
          OKAY. 
          APPARENTLY WE EVALUATE THE STREETS ON ANYWHERE FROM A SIX TO 18 MONTH, 18 MONTH CYCLE. 
          SO IF WE INCORPORATE IT IN THERE, I WOULD S IT MIGHT EXTEND A LITTLE BIT, BUT I WOULD SAY PROBABLY YOU'RE TALKING TO A YEAR AND A HALF TO BE ABLE TO GET ALL OF THEM, AT LEAST A YEAR AND A HALF TO GET ALL OF THEM EVALUATED. 
          IT'S A LOT LESS TIME THAN I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE. 
          UM, WHAT WOULD SOLVE THEM HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION? I BELIEVE SO. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, JUST POINT OUT, WE CURRENTLY HAVE A FINITE AMOUNT OF MONEY. 
          YES. 
          UM, AND IF WE'RE GOING TO GO TO A RATING SYSTEM, I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT CERTAIN, BUT I'M FAIRLY CERTAIN THAT IF WE WERE TO RATE OUR SIDEWALKS ONE TO 3, 5, 4 TO WHATEVER, SMALL, MEDIUM, LARGE, UM, THAT AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE WILL PROBABLY NOT GET US THROUGH JUST A SMALL. 
          SO I WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT SETTING EXPECTATIONS, THINKING THAT WE CAN DO ALL OF THESE THINGS OR EVEN ADDRESS ALL OF THE SIDEWALKS THAT ARE RATED A CERTAIN WAY. 
          I JUST WANT TO BE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE, AS FAR AS EXPECTATIONS. 
          I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO NEED TO CHOOSE ONE OF THESE PROGRAMS TO FOCUS ON SO THAT WE CAN TRULY MAKE AN IMPACT BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING JUST A LITTLE BIT HERE AND A LITTLE BIT THERE, AND THE IMPACT IS NOT GOING TO BE WHAT, YOU KNOW, KIND OF MEETING THE EXPECTATIONS. 
          YEAH. 
          JUST FOR EXAMPLE, WE ADDED, LOOKED AT, HAD MY ASSISTANT LOOK AT SOME OF THE LOCATIONS WHERE IN YEARS PAST, WHEN WE HAD BEEN MORE AGGRESSIVE ON SIDE, WHAT WE'VE KIND OF PULLED BACK ON THAT JUST BECAUSE OF THE FUNDING, MAKE SURE WE HAVE MORE FUNDING FOR THE STREETS, BUT IN THREE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WAS ABOUT FOUR, 300 AND $350,000 IN THREE NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, WE DO 10, MAYBE A YEAR OR SOMETHING. 
          WE WOULDN'T HAVE ENOUGH OF THAT FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO DO ALL THE SIDEWALKS AND ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE WE'RE DOING. 
          YEAH. 
          WELL, THE WAY THAT I LOOK AT IT, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS CONVERSATION, IT WOULD, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING AT THIS POINT. 
          THERE IS A LOT OF HOPE. 
          AND I'M JUST THINKING AT THIS POINT THAT YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. 
          WE JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO HELP AS MUCH AS WE CAN WITH WHAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE. 
          SO I'LL SAY LET'S PUT IT IN YOUR HANDS. 
          YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, BRING US SOMETHING BACK THAT WE CAN DISCUSS. 
          UM, I'M ACTUALLY VERY HAPPY WITH WHAT YOU'VE PRESENTED AND I WOULD, UM, I'D JUST LIKE TO SEE NUMBERS ATTACHED TO IT. 
          HOW MUCH DO WE NEED TO SAVE FOR YOUR ARTERIAL STREETS? HOW MUCH DO WE NEED TO SAVE FOR THE COST SHARE PROGRAM? AND THEN LET'S PUT THE REST OF IT INTO MAKING A NEIGHBORHOOD A YEAR. 
          BEAUTIFUL. 
          I MEAN, THAT, AND THEN SEE WHERE IT GOES FROM THERE. 
          WE CAN ALWAYS DO MORE THAN ONE NEIGHBORHOOD IF THERE'S FUNDING AVAILABLE. 
          UM, BUT I NOT WITH NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY WELL, BUT I MEAN, WE DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW MUCH 
          [00:40:01]
IT IS. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, UM, IF, SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE COULD ONLY DO ONE OF THESE THREE THINGS OR ALL OF THESE ARE KIND OF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, THE PROGRAM BEING. 
          SO MY CONCERN IS, AND I KNOW, AND BECKY PROBABLY COULD SPEAK MORE TO THIS, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE NATURE, THE NEEDS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO PRIORITIZE THESE TO SAY THESE ARE THE FOUR AREAS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR PRIORITY. 
          ONE IS, UM, WHERE THE HEART IS THEN DEPENDING ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY'RE, THAT THEY'VE SELECTED, WE MAY ONLY NEED, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS OR $200,000 TO GO TO THAT PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND THEN THE REMAINDER OF THAT WOULD GO TO YOUR SECOND PRIORITY. 
          IS IT CONCRETE STREETS? IS IT ASPHALT STREETS OR IS IT THIS PROGRAM WHERE WE'RE GETTING READY TO GO OUT AND RATE THE SIDEWALKS? I JUST, WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS TRY AND PUT 50,000 OVER HERE AND 150 OVER THERE, BECAUSE THEN THE IMPACT IS NOT NEARLY AS, UM, AS GREAT IF WE ACTUALLY COMBINE ALL THE RESOURCES AND JUST FOCUS ON ONE TWO, OR, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE PRIORITIES ARE. 
          I WOULD, UM, I THINK YOU SHOULD KNOW WHERE THE SIDEWALKS ARE THAT ARE HIGH PRIORITY, JUST AS A FORM OF INFORMATION FOR YOURSELVES AND FOR US. 
          UM, BUT WHAT IF WE ADDED THAT, THAT PRIORITIZATION INTO THE, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE CD BG AREAS RECEIVE, UH, A PERCENTAGE OFF SOMEONE IN A HIGH PRIORITY AREA MIGHT RECEIVE MORE OF A PERCENTAGE OFF RATHER THAN COMPLETELY GETTING RID OF THE COST SHARE PROGRAM. 
          THEN, YOU KNOW, THAT MIGHT, I, I HAD NO IDEA THAT THERE WAS A PAYMENT PLAN FOR THAT. 
          UM, AND I'M SURE THAT ANYONE ELSE THAT'S HEARD, OH, YOU GOT TO PAY 50%, DOESN'T KNOW THAT THERE EVEN OTHER DISCOUNTS AVAILABLE. 
          SO, UM, I, I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD GO OUT AND TRY TO FIX ALL OF THE SIDEWALKS IN GARLAND. 
          I THINK THAT'LL TAKE DECADES AND, AND I WOULD, AND I WOULD RATHER SEE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE, I LIKE THE COST SHARE PROGRAM. 
          I DON'T THINK IT'S A BAD PROGRAM. 
          ONCE YOU LOOK AT THE PAYMENT PLAN, I MEAN, $7 A MONTH IS NOT A LOT OF MONEY. 
          UM, IT DOES WORRY ME THAT SOMEONE THAT'S IN A RENTAL HOME WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET THEIR SIDEWALKS FIXED BECAUSE THAT'S UP TO THEIR LANDLORD. 
          AND MAYBE THOSE ARE THINGS THAT THE CITY COULD KIND OF SUPPLEMENT. 
          SO, UM, MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO INCLUDE A PERCENTAGE OF THAT COST SHARE PROGRAM. 
          IF THEY'RE IN A HIGH PRIORITY AREA, THAT AT SOME POINT YOU FIGURE OUT, UM, AND DEFINITELY PARTNER WITH OTHER PROGRAMS, SEE WHERE THAT LEADS US AND SEE HOW MUCH MONEY WE'RE SPENDING. 
          BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH MONEY WE NEED. 
          I W ONE THING I DIDN'T POINT OUT ON THE COST SHARE AND CASTLEMAN CAUSE ONE OF THE MORRIS'S BROUGHT UP BEFORE IS IF YOU GO TO A COLLEGE, IF YOU GO TO THE PAYMENT PLAN, IT DOES REQUIRE THAT A LIEN BE PLACED ON YOUR HOUSE. 
          I SAW THAT. 
          AND, UH, I THINK SHE SAID A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE, WILL BALK AT PUTTING LANES ON THERE, THE ELDERLY, THEY WILL NOT DO IT. 
          WELL, THEY'RE ALSO, I MEAN, THAT COST WAS $222. 
          IS THERE A PRE-PAYMENT PENALTY ON THAT PAYMENT PLAN? UM, UM, ARE THEY PAYING FOR THE LIEN TO GET PLACED ON THE HOME? I MEAN, IT, IT DOES SOUND SCARY. 
          YOU'RE GOING TO GET A LIEN ON YOUR HOUSE, BUT IF YOU'RE GETTING THOSE THINGS IN RETURN, I, I, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT IT'S THAT MUCH MONEY IN COMPARISON TO HAVING A, UH, AN ACTUAL CONTRACTOR COME IN AND, AND FIX YOUR STREET. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW, I, I'M NOT AS AFRAID OF PARTNERING WITH THE CITY ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT AS MAYBE SOMEONE SOMEBODY ELSE WOULD BE, BUT THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL, I TRUST THE CITY. 
          SO I MIGHT BE IN A DIFFERENT POSITION. 
          WELL, AND A LOT OF, AND I'VE SPENT A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE AND I HAVE DESCRIBED TO THEM, THE PAYMENT PLAN DESCRIBED TO THEM THAT THE LIEN IS NEVER GOING TO PUT YOU OUT OF YOUR HOUSE. 
          THIS IS NOT THAT KIND OF LIEN. 
          UM, AND THERE'S STILL AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF RELUCTANCE. 
          AND, AND THIS IS PARTICULARLY IN OUR OLDEST NEIGHBORHOODS AND AMONG OUR OLDEST RESIDENTS AND THEY WILL, THEY WILL JUST GIVE UP AND SUFFER. 
          AND THAT'S JUST THAT I HAVE STOPPED THRASHING ON THAT BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY TO CONVINCE THEM THAT IT'S SAFE AND EASY AND WELL, SO, UM, WELL THEN MAYBE ONE OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS IS ONE THAT THE, THAT THE PARTNERSHIP WITH NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY GOES TO, YOU KNOW, YOU GET SOME PEOPLE FROM THAT AREA, RIGHT. 
          I MEAN, IT'S NOT KIND OF WHAT THAT PARTNERSHIP WOULD DO. 
          YEAH. 
          IT'S JUST ONE 
          [00:45:01]
NEIGHBORHOOD A YEAR MAKES IT REALLY SLOW. 
          I DON'T KNOW. 
          SO, UM, WELL, I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO SEE THE SIDEWALK AUDIT WITH NO DESCRIPTORS OTHER THAN PRIORITY NUMBERS. 
          I WOULD LIKE VERY MUCH TO SEE THAT. 
          SO I ALSO DON'T WANT TO HOLD THIS UP FOR 18 MONTHS TO 24 MONTHS TO GET THOSE NUMBERS, TO DO SOMETHING WITH THEM. 
          SO WHERE I AM RIGHT NOW, I LIKE WHAT YOU'VE COME UP WITH, UM, PROVIDING THAT WE ADD ASPHALT OVERLAYS TO THE SECOND, UH, BULLET POINT. 
          AND, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US, UH, MOVE AHEAD WITH THESE RECOMMENDATIONS, WITH THE ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATION THAT WE ARE REQUESTING THE CITY-WIDE AUDIT, UM, FOR, FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION OF ADDING SOME ADDITIONAL FINE TUNING AS WE SEE NEED FOR THIS. 
          AND THE, THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE HAVE TO SPEND IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE FINITE. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE SIGNING A BLANK CHECK SAYING, OH, WE'RE GOING TO SPEND $20 MILLION. 
          NO, THIS IS HOW MUCH WE HAVE FOR THIS YEAR. 
          AND WHEN IT'S GONE, IT'S GONE. 
          UM, SO, AND WE WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE ANOTHER BOND PROGRAM AND HOPEFULLY REPLENISH SOME OF THESE FUNDS. 
          BUT, UM, SO, UM, COUNCILWOMAN LOCHTE, ARE, WOULD YOU BE COMFORTABLE WITH SENDING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL LIKE THAT, TO, UM, TO RECOMMEND THESE, UM, THESE THREE WITH THE INCLUSION OF ASPHALT OVERLAYS AND A REQUEST FOR A CITY-WIDE AUDIT OF THE SIDEWALKS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION? UM, HERE WE GO. 
          HUH. 
          UM, OKAY. 
          AGAIN, WITH THE CITYWIDE AUDIT, I WOULD PREFER THAT WE MIGHT LIMIT THAT TO BREAKING THE CITY UP IN ZONES, BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S STILL A RISK EVEN WITH THE NUMERIC SYSTEM, WITHOUT THE DESCRIPTORS, THERE'S STILL A RISK THERE AND, AND WRITING A SIDEWALK, A ONE IN 2022, AND IT'S SITTING THERE WRITING AS A ONE UNTIL 20, 20, 32 THAT'S, THAT'S NOT A GOOD LOOK. 
          AND SO IF WE DID ONE ZONE AT A TIME, WE'RE SHOWING PROGRESS PROGRESS, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE ZONES MIGHT LOOK LIKE, BUT IF WE DID ONE ZONE AT A TIME, UM, AND HOWEVER YOU WANTED TO BREAK THE CITY UP, THAT WOULD BE MUCH MORE HELPFUL. 
          AND THAT WAY YOU CAN ADDRESS A ZONE AT A TIME AND MOVE ON AND, AND HOW YOU DO GO ABOUT DOING THAT. 
          I DON'T KNOW, BUT THAT WOULD BE FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, IT'D BE MUCH MORE DEFENSIBLE, JUST, JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. 
          IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I'M SAYING YOU HAVE TO DO. 
          CRYSTAL. 
          WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT HOW THIS COULD EFFECTIVELY BE, UM, BROKEN INTO ZONES? I THINK THAT'S DOABLE. 
          UM, COULD PROBABLY BREAK IT UP INTO QUARTERS, MAYBE EVEN SMALLER PIECES THAN THAT, BUT I THINK, UM, UM, THE LARGEST THAT I WOULD GO WOULD BE INTO QUARTERS, BUT LET US TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND SEE WHAT WOULD MAKE THE MOST SENSE AS FAR AS HOW WE BREAK IT UP. 
          BUT I THINK WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          WELL, COMMITTEE, I THINK MY, MY PREFERENCE AT THIS POINT THEN WOULD BE, UM, HAVE YOU ALL COME BACK NEXT MONTH WITH A, A AUDIT PLAN FOR ZONING, UH, BY ZONE FOR AUDITING THE SIDEWALKS FOR PRIORITY IMPACT? UM, I REALLY DON'T WANT TO HOLD THIS UP THOUGH. 
          THE ONE THING TOO, WITH OUR CARDIOGRAPH SYSTEM, I THINK WE COULD PROBABLY PUT THE NUMBER IN THERE, BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD EVER HAVE TO PUBLISH. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WE CAN, WE CAN HAVE THAT INFORMATION, BUT LIKE I SAY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT REQUIREMENT IS. 
          IF WE COLLECT THE INFORMATION, WE HAVE TO PROVIDE IT WELL, IF WE GET A SUBPOENA, UM, REQUESTING THAT INFORMATION, THEN YES, WE WOULD BE PROVIDING OR AN OPENS RECORD RECORD OF WEST. 
          QUITE FRANKLY, IT'S PUBLIC INFORMATION. 
          I'LL LOOK AT HOW, HOW WE CAN GET THE NUMBERS AND HOW WE CAN PRESENT IT IN A FORMAT THAT DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, THAT DOESN'T OR LIMITS OUR EXPOSURE AS, AS IT WERE. 
          SO IF THERE MAY BE OTHER WAYS TO EVALUATE THOSE NUMBERS, THAT WE, WE'RE NOT CREATING NUMBERS, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL, I'LL LOOK INTO WHAT THAT, I KNOW THAT, THAT THAT'S A POSSIBILITY, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT OPTIONS WE HAVE TO, HOW TO CATEGORIZE THOSE LOCATIONS. 
          SO I'M TORN BETWEEN SAYING IN ORDER TO GET THIS ROLLING, RECOMMENDING, UM, WHAT YOU'VE GOT HERE TO COUNSEL FOR, FOR STARTING AND THEN MAKING ANY, ANY KIND OF SIDEWALK AUDIT, BE A SECONDARY AND SEPARATE, UM, ONE THAT IS MY PREFERENCE, UM, COMMITTEE. 
          ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          WHY DON'T WE DO THAT? YOU, YOU DID GOOD WORK ON THIS. 
          THIS IS EXCELLENT. 
          [00:50:02]
AND THIS IS AN ACTION PLAN WHERE WE CAN ACTUALLY DO IT. 
          UM, AND WITH SIDEWALKS BEING AT SUCH A HIGH LEVEL COMPLAINT AND POINT OF DISTRESS, AS FAR AS QUALITY OF LIFE, I WOULD LIKE TO NOT DELAY THIS. 
          SO WHY DON'T WE SPLIT OFF THE WHOLE IDEA OF SIDEWALK AUDITS INTO A SEPARATE ITEM AND, UM, AND JUST BRING THIS FORWARD TO COUNCIL AS A RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION. 
          ARE WE GOOD? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          APPRECIATE ALL YOUR WORK AND COMMITTEE WHILE WE ARE SWITCHING PEOPLE AROUND. 
          I AM GOING TO GO RUN AND GET A BOTTLE OF HI, JEFF. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YOU'RE WELCOME. 
          YOU DID IT FOR ME BEFORE, DIDN'T YOU? SO, UM, THE FUNDS FOR THIS SIDEWALK. 
          OKAY. 
          WE'RE ON, WE'RE STILL ON THE RECORD. 
          SO DO YOU WANT TO TALK AFTERWARDS? NO, IT'S JUST, UH, ARE THOSE FUNDS REPLENISHED EVERY YEAR? NOT REPLENISH MEAN, WELL, BECAUSE THEY KEPT ASKING, THEY KEPT SAYING 750,000 AND THEN IT IT'S FROM THE BOND. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO THAT'S THE TOTAL AMOUNT BROKEN UP HERE BY YEAR. 
          OKAY. 
          WHERE DID EVERYBODY ELSE GO GET WATER? OKAY. 
          WELL, I MUST, MUST'VE BEEN A STAMPEDE, SORRY, COMMITTEE. 
          I STARTED, UH, A RUSH FOR THE WATER. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, WE ARE MOVING ON TO ITEM THREE, WHICH IS TO DISCUSS RENTAL PROPERTY PROGRAMS AND SHORT TERM RENTAL POLICY AND COMMITTEE. 
          I'D LIKE TO, TO PAUSE A MOMENT TO INTRODUCE, UM, IN YOUR PACKET, YOU HAVE SOME RESEARCH, UM, SHORT-TERM RENTALS RESEARCH, AND I WANTED TO INTRODUCE REGINA, WHO IS INTERNING WITH ME THIS SUMMER. 
          SHE IS THE AUTHOR OF THIS WORK. 
          SO, UM, AND SHE IS HERE SITTING IN WITH US TONIGHT. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR DONNA FOR GOOD WORK. 
          OKAY. 
          ARE YOU PRESENTING? I SUPPOSE, I DON'T, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO PRESENT. 
          I WAS GOING TO, I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO CARRY ON THE CONVERSATION, THAT KIND OF A HIGH LEVEL. 
          UM, QUITE FRANKLY, WE NEED TO, UM, HAVE SOME DECISIONS MADE ON DIRECTION, UM, BASED ON SOME LEGAL CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE MOVING FORWARD THAT NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED. 
          AND, AND MOST OF THAT'S GOING TO BE DETERMINED BASICALLY ON WHAT THE COUNCIL'S APPETITE IS AND MOVING FORWARD ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS. 
          AND BY THE WAY, HER RESEARCH WAS DONE VERY WELL. 
          AND IT WAS PRESENTED VERY WELL. 
          AND I WAS IMPRESSED IN THE, AND SCOTT LEVINE. 
          MY FIRST ASSISTANT WAS ALSO, WE WERE HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT YOUR WORK EARLIER TODAY AND WE WERE VERY IMPRESSED BY IT. 
          SO JUST SO YOU KNOW. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, SO YOU, YOU PROVIDED US BRIAN THIS FROM YOU, CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO YOU PROVIDED US WITH SOME LEGAL DEFINITIONS AND SOME, UH, RED LINED. 
          UM, SO ARE THESE RECORDS YOU, THE RED LINING IS THEY'RE NOT RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          WHAT I DID HERE IS I TOOK AN ORDINANCE DRAFT THAT I HAD DONE TWO TO THREE YEARS AGO WHEN THIS LAST CAME UP. 
          IN FACT, IT MADE SOME OF THESE, UH, RED LINE PROVISIONS MAY HAVE BEEN DONE EVEN AS LONG AS SIX TO SEVEN YEARS AGO, QUITE FRANKLY, BUT BROUGHT BACK TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO AND THEY'RE BACK AGAIN. 
          AND THE REASON IS, IS BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A, A LONG HISTORY OF LITIGATION IN TEXAS WITH CITIES AND SHORT-TERM RENTALS. 
          AND THERE ARE SOME CASES OUT THERE THAT ARE CURRENTLY NOT SETTLED, UH, GRAPEVINE BEING THE PRIMARY ONE THAT WE HAVE KIND OF TAKING THEIR APPROACH. 
          AND AGAIN, SHE POINTED IT OUT IN HER RESEARCH, WE TOOK, WE'VE TAKEN A SIMILAR APPROACH TO PLANO AND THAT BEING WE'RE JUST GOING TO SIT BACK AND WATCH, SEE HOW THE COURTS SETTLE THE LEGAL ISSUES. 
          AND THEN ULTIMATELY ONCE IT GETS SETTLED BY THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT, THEN AT THAT POINT, WE'LL BE IN A BETTER POSITION TO KNOW WHAT'S LAWFUL AND WHAT'S NOT LAWFUL. 
          NOW HAVING SAID THAT NOT ALL CITIES HAVE TAKEN THAT APPROACH. 
          AND SOME CITIES ARE A LITTLE LESS RISK ADVERSE AND ARE WILLING TO GO AHEAD AND TRY 
          [00:55:01]
TO REGULATE SHORT-TERM RENTALS DESPITE THE THREAT OF A LAWSUIT AND, AND, UM, MONEY THAT GOES ALONG WITH DEFENDING AN ORDINANCE AGAINST CONSTITUTIONAL ATTACKS. 
          UM, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS, UM, SO MANY OF THE LAWSUITS THAT HAVE BEEN FILED AGAINST OTHER CITIES WHO HAVE ATTEMPTED TO REGULATE STRS HAVE BEEN ON CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS, STATE, CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS, NOT FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS. 
          UM, ALTHOUGH THERE HAVE BEEN SOME, UM, FEDERAL CLAIMS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FOR THE MOST, MOST PART, IT HAS STAYED IN STATE COURT. 
          WHAT YOU HAVE HERE ARE NOT RECOMMENDATIONS MORE. 
          SO, UH, JUST A FRAMEWORK IN WHICH TO THINK ABOUT SOME OF THE TYPES OF REGULATIONS THAT OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE. 
          SOME HAVE SURVIVED ATTACKS, SOME HAVE NOT SURVIVED ATTACKS AND LAWYERS ALL OVER THE STATE, DIFFER CITY ATTORNEYS ALL OVER THE STATE HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS ABOUT WHICH ONE OF THESE ARE VIABLE AND WHICH ONE ARE NOT, THIS IS WHAT I'VE GIVEN YOU. 
          THIS ORDINANCE THAT I'VE GIVEN YOU IS A VERY BROAD, AGGRESSIVE ORDINANCE BECAUSE I'VE LISTED PRETTY MUCH EVERY WAY THAT WE COULD POSSIBLY REGULATE THEM. 
          IF WE CHOSE TO REGULATE THEM, WHAT I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND AS US DOING AN OUTRIGHT BAN ON THEM. 
          I THINK THAT'S KIND OF CLEAR WHERE THE TEXAS COURTS ARE GOING WITH THAT. 
          AND WE KNOW WHAT THE AGS OFFICE FEELS, HOW THE AGS OFFICE FEELS ABOUT IT. 
          THEY FEEL LIKE IT'S A FUNDAMENTAL, RIGHT. 
          UH, WE KNOW HOW SOME, THE FORT WORTH COURT OF APPEALS FEELS LOCK IT THERE, THEIR FIRST COURT IN TEXAS HISTORY TO SAY THAT NOT THAT LEASING YOUR PROPERTY AS A FUNDAMENTAL PROPERTY, RIGHT, BUT HAVING A SHORT TERM RENTAL IS A FUNDAMENTAL PROPERTY, RIGHT? THAT'S THERE WAS NO PRECEDENT FOR THAT. 
          AND THAT'S NEVER THAT, AND THAT ISSUE ITSELF IS GOING TO THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT. 
          AND WHO KNOWS WHEN THEY'LL TAKE IT UP, THERE'LL BE WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR OR SO YEAR AND A HALF. 
          UM, SO THAT ISSUE IS, IS GOING TO THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT. 
          SO IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THE RED LINES THAT I PROVIDED, YOU YOU'LL SEE SOME IDEAS ON THE TYPES OF REGULATION, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I DID DO BESIDES JUST THE TYPES OF REGULATION WE COULD DO IS I PUT IN A PROVISION THAT BASICALLY INCLUDED THE SHORT TERM RENTALS INTO EXPRESSLY INCLUDED INTO OUR RENTAL ORDINANCE, INTO OUR SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL ORDINANCE AND PROVIDED A PERMITTING PROCESS AND ALSO PROVIDED A PROCESS OF WHICH IF THEY ARE IN VIOLATION OF CERTAIN NUISANCE STANDARDS AND PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES, WHICH ARE DEFINED AS YOU'LL SEE IN YOUR, IN YOUR DRAFT. 
          UM, IF THEY ARE, IF THE GARLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT RESPONDS TO THE LOCATION BASED ON A COMPLAINT FROM A NEIGHBOR, UM, AND THEY ARRIVE AND THEY HAD PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED AT ONE OF THE PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES, PRIMARILY NUISANCE ACTIVITY, LOUD MUSIC, THAT TYPE OF THING, IT COULD BE PARKING AS WELL. 
          IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNCIL WAS INCLINED TO INCLUDE PARKING PROVISIONS, UM, IN, IN THE PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES. 
          THEN IF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT RESPONDED THREE TIMES WITHIN A SIX MONTH PERIOD AND HAD PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THEY WERE IN VIOLATION OF THAT, THEN THEIR SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL PERMIT COULD BE SUSPENDED. 
          AND BECAUSE IT'S A FUNDAMENTAL PROPERTY, RIGHT, WE HAVE TO HAVE DUE PROCESS. 
          AND SO IF THEY'RE, IF THEY'RE SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL PERMIT, RENTAL PERMIT IS SUSPENDED, THEY COULD GO EITHER BEFORE THE PROPERTY STANDARDS BOARD, THAT'S JUST A PLACEHOLDER OR OUR ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT, UM, OFFICER, UM, AND THEY COULD APPEAL THAT SUSPENSION AND SEVERAL THINGS COULD HAPPEN. 
          THE SUSPENSION COULD BE OVERTURNED. 
          THE APPEALS OFFICER OR THE BOARD COULD LISTEN TO THE, TO THEIR ARGUMENTS OF WHY THEY ARE NOT IN VIOLATION. 
          THEY COULD OVERTURN IT, OR THEY COULD SAY, YES, YOU ARE IN VIOLATION. 
          THE SUSPENSION IS STILL THERE. 
          AND THEN THEY THEN HAVE A AMOUNT OF TIME TO MEET WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT AND COME UP WITH A COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT TO REINSTATE THEIR SUSPENDED PERMIT. 
          AND THAT COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT WOULD HAVE SPECIFIC TERMS INTO EXPRESSLY LAYING OUT. 
          YOU'LL NEED TO FIX THESE YOU'LL NEED TO CORRECT THESE CONDITIONS THAT YOU HAVE BEEN IN VIOLATION OF. 
          AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE THEM SIGN IT. 
          IF THEY CONTINUE TO VIOLATE THAT AGREEMENT. 
          AT THAT POINT, YOU CAN GO TO A REVOCATION AND A REVOCATION AGAIN, DUE PROCESS IS ALLOWED YOU GO, YOU GO AGAIN. 
          AND, UM, IT BASICALLY THE SAME THING. 
          IT'S A SUSPENDED PERMIT. 
          IT GOES BACK BEFORE THE BOARD BACK BEFORE A HEARING OFFICER. 
          AND AT THAT POINT IT'S REVOKED. 
          THEY DON'T MEET AGAIN WITH CODE, IT GETS REVOKED. 
          AND UNTIL THAT PROPERTY STANDS EXCHANGES HANDS, WHICH THEY COULD, THERE IS A LOOPHOLE THERE THAT COULD ALWAYS PUT IT INTO, PUT THE PROPERTY INTO THE NAME OF A LLC OR SOME OTHER ENTITY, IF THEY WANTED TO DO THAT. 
          AND THAT'S A LOOPHOLE, WHICH YOU CAN'T REALLY CLOSE, QUITE FRANKLY. 
          UM, BUT MOST ARE NOT AS SOPHISTICATED ENOUGH TO DO THAT, OR WOULD NOT WANT TO DO THAT FOR TAXING REASONS, QUITE FRANKLY. 
          UM, UM, AND AFTER THAT, IF THEY CONTINUED AFTER HAVING THEIR PERMIT REVOKED, IF THEY CONTINUED TO OPERATE AT AN STR, THEN AT THAT POINT WE CAN DECLARE THEM AS A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE AND, UM, HAVE THEIR UTILITIES POOLED 
          [01:00:01]
THAT INCLUDES WATER OR ELECTRICITY. 
          AND SO THAT'S KIND OF THE FRAMEWORK THAT'S NEW THAT I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF DUE PROCESS BUILT IN THAT. 
          UM, THE W THE, THE QUESTION FOR COUNCIL WILL BE HOW MUCH RISK ARE YOU WILLING TO TAKE ON WHAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES AND THE SECOND CONSIDERATION. 
          AND IT MAY BE EVEN MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE LEGAL IN SOME REGARDS. 
          AND I THINK THIS IS WHAT, UM, UH, WHAT BUILDING INSPECTION WILL BE CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE PRACTICALITY OF ENFORCING SOME OF THESE THINGS AS THEY ARE VERY RESOURCE INTENSIVE. 
          UM, COUNCILMAN MOORE KNOWS THAT WHEN WE HAD THAT HOUSE, THAT IT'S LIKE A HOME OCCUPATION INVESTIGATION, WHEN YOU HAD THAT HOUSE IN YOUR DISTRICT, YOU REMEMBER HOW MANY RESOURCES THAT TOOK FOR THAT ONE SINGLE HOUSE CODE, RIGHT? AND, AND SO THIS ISN'T SOMETHING, I GUESS I WOULD SAY THIS ISN'T SOMETHING AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, THAT COUNCILS SHOULD THINK THAT, OKAY, IF I HAVE A HOUSE AND I GET A COMPLAINT EVERY COUPLE OF MONTHS ON A HOUSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEN OUR PEOPLE NEED TO GO OUT THERE AND IMMEDIATELY START ENFORCING THIS ORDINANCE BECAUSE PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, THEY PROBABLY SHOULD BE RESERVED FOR VERY SPECIAL OCCASIONS, TREAT IT AS A TOOL IN THE TOOLBOX FOR TRULY PROBLEMATIC HOUSES. 
          AND, UM, AND AT THAT POINT WE CAN START GATHERING THE RESOURCES, COMING UP WITH THE PLAN AND MAKING IT A PROJECT. 
          AND WHEN I SAY A PROJECT IT'S A SEVERAL MONTH PROJECT, IF NOT SIX MONTH PROJECT, INCLUDING THE, UM, DUE PROCESS OR ANY KIND OF COURT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. 
          SO IT'S A, IT'S A, UM, IT'S, IT'S COMPLICATED FROM A PROCEDURAL AND OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE. 
          OKAY. 
          I DO LIKE THE WAY THAT YOU ROLLED ALL THIS TOGETHER, UM, WHAT COMMITTEE I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO ASK, BUT DO EITHER OF YOU HAVE A, OKAY. 
          YES, NO, GO, GO FOR IT. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, BRIAN, LET ME JUST SAY THAT, UH, BASED ON WHAT I HAVE READ YOU, DID YOU PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THIS AND ESPECIALLY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT, UM, YOUR INTERNS NAME AGAIN, FIRST NAME IS REGINA REGINA, ESPECIALLY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT SHE PUT TOGETHER. 
          IT ALLOWED ME TO TAKE A LOOK AT ALL OTHER CITIES. 
          IT'S LIKE DALLAS IS PROBABLY, THIS HAS THE MOST TO SAY ABOUT, UH, AND, AND RIGHTFULLY SO, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO PROBABLY BEGIN TO SEE A LOT MORE OF THIS TYPE OF SITUATION HAPPENING HERE IN THE COMMUNITY, IN THIS CITY. 
          SO I'VE, I'VE HEARD ABOUT, WE WANT TO APPLAUD YOU AND THE MANNER BY WHICH YOU PUT IT TOGETHER, THIS VERY STRATEGIC, UH, IT FLOWS THE DUE PROCESS, SEIZURES, PROCEDURES, ALL THE WAY THROUGH THERE. 
          UH, THE, THE CONCERN THAT I WAS HAVING A, YOU JUST HELPED ME WITH THAT. 
          THE CONCERN THAT I'M HAVING IS THAT I SEE THIS SOMEWHAT SIMILAR THOUGH, TO WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE HOS, UH,  USED TO HAVE SO MUCH POWER AND SO MUCH AUTHORITY OVER WHAT COULD TAKE PLACE AND PUTTING LIENS ON HOMES AND TAKING HOMES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. 
          AND A COUPLE OF YEARS BACK, YOU KNOW, THEY HAD THIS OVERHAUL OF THE HOA AND WHAT DID THE LEGISLATOR DO? THEY GAVE HIM MUCH MORE POWER TO THE HOME OWNER AND TOOK A LOT OF AWAY FROM HOS. 
          AND I THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT I'M SEEING TAKING PLACE HERE IS THAT, UH, WHAT THE LEGISLATURE DOESN'T WANT TO HAPPEN IS FOR PEOPLE WHO OWN PROPERTY, YOU OWN THE PROPERTIES, YOU'RE A PROPERTY. 
          HE SHOULD HAVE SOME RIGHTS ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO WITH IT. 
          AND IF YOU WANT TO LEASE THAT PROPERTY OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, THEN I SEE THAT, HEY, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO SO OF COURSE, THAT AGAIN IS WITH SOME PARAMETERS THOUGH. 
          AND SOME OF THAT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH PUBLIC SAFETY HAS A LOT TO DO WITH HOW ARE YOU DEALING WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. 
          SO I DID HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THOUGH, EITHER RELATED TO THE PROCESS, IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          AND I'D LIKE YOU TO JUST SPEAK TO THIS. 
          IT'S NOT LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS IN ORDER FOR A PERSON THOUGH, TO, UH, LEASED A HOME ON A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, THE FIRST THING THEY HAVE TO DO IS GET A SINGLE FAMILY PERMIT. 
          BUT WHAT ABOUT THAT FAMILY? WHO'S NOT GOING TO LEASE THE HOUSE OR RENT THE HOUSE OUT TO SOMEONE THEY'RE GOING TO GO TO FLORIDA FOR TWO WEEKS AGO TO AN HOUR AND FOR A MONTH, OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE WHILE THEY DO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL. 
          DO THEY STILL HAVE TO DO A SINGLE FAMILY? YES, THEY WOULD HAVE TO UNDER THIS ORDINANCE AS IT'S DRAFTED ANY, I THINK IT SAYS 32 DAYS THAT ACTUALLY NEEDS TO BE AMENDED BECAUSE I FOUND A TAX PROVISION. 
          THIS IS NOT SOMETHING Y'ALL ARE INTERESTED IN, BUT I FOUND A TAX PROVISION THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE UNDER 30 DAYS, BUT I'LL, I'LL FIX THAT AS WE, AS IT MOVES ON. 
          BUT YES, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION IS IF YOU ARE WANTING TO DO A, USE YOUR HOUSE AS AN AIRBNB, AS YOU GO TO FLORIDA FOR A MONTH OR TWO, TWO WEEKS, YOU'LL NEED TO COME IN AND DO GET A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT, A SINGLE FAMILY, SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL PERMIT FIRST. 
          AND THAT INCLUDES AN INSPECTION. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND, UM, UM, AND ANYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE HOUSE, LIKE A FIRE EXTINGUISHER 
          [01:05:01]
OR WHATEVER ELSE THAT'S REQUIRED UNDER OUR S S SFRS, UM, PERMITS, UM, THEN THEY'LL COME IN AND THEY'LL DO THAT, BUT YET SHE WOULD HAVE TO DO THAT FIRST SUSPENSE, YOUR QUESTION. 
          AND I SAW SOMETHING, I THOUGHT THE 32 DAY, BUT THERE WAS SOMETHING THERE ALSO ABOUT 60 DAYS. 
          WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE IN THOSE TWO THINGS? I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE 60 DAYS IS YOUR REFERENCE. 
          UH, LET'S SEE. 
          YEAH. 
          65. 
          YEAH. 
          TEMPORARY TENDENCIES TENDENCIES. 
          THAT'S WHERE YOU HAVE A, WHERE YOU PURCHASE A PROPERTY AND THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY, Y'ALL REACH AN AGREEMENT AND SAY, CLOSING IS ON JULY 1ST, BUT YOU, YOU CAN STAY IN THAT PROPERTY UNTIL SEPTEMBER OR AUGUST 1ST. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THAT'S JUST FOR THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE YOU HAVE YOUR HOLDOVERS, OH, THE 32 DAY OR LIMIT THAT YOU HAVE HERE. 
          YOU'RE DOING THAT BECAUSE ANYTHING ABOVE 32, THEN GOLDEN TO A RENTAL PROPERTY. 
          RIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          VERY GOOD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          APPRECIATE IT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, COUNSEL. 
          OKAY. 
          YEP. 
          I'LL JUST RAISE ME DOWN FROM NOW. 
          DON'T NEED TO USE THIS CAUSE ALL THE MICS ARE HOT. 
          OKAY. 
          RIGHT. 
          I KNOW IT KEEPS TURNING IT OFF. 
          UM, SO HOW, HOW WILL WE ENFORCE PARKING VIOLATIONS? THAT'S KIND OF, IT'S A BIG QUESTION. 
          ISN'T IT? UM, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE. 
          IT WOULD, IT WOULD REQUIRE A QUITE FRANKLY IT WOULD REQUIRE SOME ADMISSIONS FROM PEOPLE WHO DID IT AND IT, WHERE IT WOULD NOT BE SUCCESSFUL IN A LOT OF CASES, IF NOT MOST CASES, BUT IT'S STILL THERE. 
          IF YOU CAN GET SOMEBODY TO ADMIT THAT NUMBER ONE, THAT THEY'RE AN OCCUPANT OF THE STR OR THEY'RE A GUEST OF THE STR AND THEY PARKED OUTSIDE OR WITHIN 500 FEET, I THINK IT SAID ON A PUBLIC STREET AND THERE'S MORE THAN TWO OF THEM. 
          THEN AT THAT POINT YOU COULD, UM, UM, ENFORCE IT, BUT IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO PROVE THAT CASE UP. 
          IT'S JUST THERE AS A TOOL AS LIKE ANY PARKING VIOLATION THAT WE HAVE IN A RESIDENTIAL, THEY'RE VERY DIFFICULT VIOLATIONS FOR PORES. 
          IT'S JUST SOUNDS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE SO DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE IN MANY WAYS. 
          UM, AND UM, I KNOW THAT MOST OF THIS IS ALREADY COMPLAINT DRIVEN. 
          IS THERE ANY WAY THAT THE CITY CAN LOOK AT WEBSITES LIKE BRBO AND AIRBNB IN ORDER TO IDENTIFY HOMES THAT ARE SHORT-TERM RENTALS THAT MAYBE HAVEN'T BEEN REGISTERED? YES. 
          THEY SAY, OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          YOU'RE CORRECT. 
          IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE A LOT OF THIS. 
          THAT'S THE REASON IT'S NOT ALWAYS AND DIFFICULT, EVEN AS MUCH RESOURCES AS IT TAKES FROM BUILDING INSPECTION AND CODE ENFORCEMENT AND OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND EVEN OUR CITY MARSHALS. 
          UM, EVEN THEN EVEN IF WE THROW TONS OF RESOURCES AT A PROBLEM, YOU'RE NOT GUARANTEED OF SUCCESS. 
          THE DIFFICULTY TO PROVE SOME OF THE OFFENSES, SOME OF THEM ARE NOT AS DIFFICULT, BUT SOME BLOCK YOU, YOU JUST POINTED OUT PARKING IS VERY, IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT PROVISION TO ENFORCE, AND IT MAY NOT BE SOMETHING COUNCIL IS WILLING TO. 
          IN FACT, THE LAST TIME WE PRESENTED WHEN THAT ONE PARTICULARLY COUNCIL DID NOT LOCK THAT ONE IN PARTICULAR. 
          I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE, IF YOU HAVE MULTIPLE PEOPLE AT THE DWELLING, UM, AT THE STR, THEN YOU CAN, I MEAN, IF THEN YOU CAN KIND OF GET INTO THE WHOLE OCCUPANCY LIMIT THING. 
          I JUST DON'T KNOW IF A PARKING LIMIT IS, IS EVEN SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD TRY BECAUSE OF THE DIFFICULTY THAT COMES WITH ENFORCING IT. 
          UM, I WOULD MUCH RATHER TIME BE SPENT ON, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A PARTY HOUSE NEXT TO ME, PLEASE GO CHECK IT OUT. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, THEN PERMITS ARE LOOKED AT AND IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE EASIER. 
          I DON'T KNOW. 
          I JUST, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE PART OF IT ONLY BECAUSE OF THE EXTREME DIFFICULTY THAT IT WILL TAKE TO PROVE IT. 
          AND IN MOST CASES, I DON'T THINK THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO PROVE IT. 
          I'M DONE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WELL, MY, MY FIRST, MY FIRST THOUGHT IS OCCUPANCY LIMITS ARE THAT IS THE BIG, BIG, BIG REQUEST. 
          UM, FROM THE, UM, SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN MY DISTRICT WHO ARE CREATING HAVOC, THE PROBLEM IS THEY'VE GOT 20 TO 30 PEOPLE JAMMED INTO A FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE AND WE HAVE NOTHING AND NO WAY TO STOP THEM. 
          UH, WE WOULDN'T ALLOW THAT IN A REGULAR RENTAL HOME, BUT WITH THIS, WE HAVE NO WAY TO STOP IT. 
          SO OCCUPANCY LIMITS 
          [01:10:01]
BY JUST BY NATURE SHOULD REDUCE THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES. 
          AND SO I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE THAT, UM, EFFECT AND PROBABLY REDUCING THE PARKING. 
          SO WHEN YOU'VE GOT, UH, 20 DIFFERENT, UH, CONTRACTORS, DESCENDING ON A NEIGHBORHOOD, YEAH. 
          THAT'S THE ISSUE ISN'T AS MUCH THEIR VEHICLES AS IT IS THE SHEER VOLUME OF PEOPLE. 
          SO, UM, YOU ADDRESSED OCCUPANCY IN HERE AND IT LOOKS, IT LOOKS TOTALLY REASONABLE TO ME. 
          UM, LET ME, LET ME GO AHEAD. 
          NOT TO THROW A WET BLANKET ON THE, ON THAT PARTICULAR ONE, BUT THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAD A SIMILAR PROVISION AND THEIRS AND THE COURT DID FIND THAT THAT WAS RESTRICTING OR RESTRICTIVE OF LAWFUL ASSEMBLY. 
          AND, UM, AND IN PARTICULAR, THE COURT POINTED OUT THAT OTHER SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES THAT WEREN'T RENTAL PROPERTIES, THEY DIDN'T HAVE OCCUPANCY LIMITS LIKE THAT. 
          YOU COULD, YOU COULD HOST A PARTY OF 30 AND YOU'D BE OKAY. 
          AND SO THAT'S THE DIFFICULTY IT'S JUST SO YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SAYING YOU DON'T, I'M JUST GIVING YOU FULL DISCLOSURE THAT THE, WE HAVE A COURT OUT THERE THAT DID NOT LIKE THAT TYPE OF PROVISION. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT I WAS THINKING IN, IN READING, UM, I THOUGHT IT WAS THAT SAME CASE THAT A LOT OF THE PROBLEM WAS ALONG WITH AN OCCUPANCY LIMIT. 
          THEY FORBADE, AND I SEE IT'S IN HERE PROHIBITED HOURS FOR OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES. 
          THEY PROHIBITED, UM, NOT ONLY HOURS, BUT THE ASSEMBLY OF PEOPLE LIMITING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE AND THE COURT DIDN'T, DIDN'T LIKE THAT BECAUSE WE'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE BIG PARTIES. 
          RIGHT. 
          UM, THAT'S MY POINT ABOUT THE OCCUPANCY LIMITS IS THAT'S THE RISK. 
          BUT HAVING SAID THAT ALSO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT DISCUSSED ENOUGH ABOUT THE AUSTIN CASE IS THAT, UM, UM, IT WAS, THE COURT WAS MAKING ITS DETERMINATIONS AND ITS FINDINGS BASED ON AN ORDINANCE THAT WAS IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE, ON STRS THAT WERE IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE ORDINANCE BEING PASSED. 
          AND SO THAT WAS A BIG COMPONENT OF IT. 
          AND THAT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION ABOUT WHAT'S A VESTED, RIGHT? AND WHAT'S NOT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, ALTHOUGH THEY DIDN'T USE THE TERM VESTED. 
          I DON'T BELIEVE IN THE, IN THE OPINION OF THE COURT, THAT IS WHAT WAS ACTUALLY BEING DISCUSSED. 
          AND SO THERE ARE SOME DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THAT AND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE MY OPINION IS, IS THAT STRS HAVE NEVER BEEN LAWFULLY ALLOWED IN THE CITY, BUT THAT POSITION IS CONTROVERSIAL AND THAT POSITION WOULD BE ATTACKED. 
          AND I DON'T KNOW. 
          AND THAT'S ONE OF THE POSITIONS THAT, UM, GRAPEVINE HELD AS WELL IS THAT THEY'VE NEVER BEEN ALLOWED AND THAT'S UP FOR DEBATE. 
          AND SO AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S UNSETTLED, JUST SO YOU KNOW. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, WITH, WITH THE PROBLEM, WITH THE PROBLEM, STRS THAT WE'VE GOT, THE COMPLAINTS ARE OCCUPANCY HIGH NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS FROM NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE OF PARKING NOISE, MAINLY PARKING AND NOISE. 
          UM, AND I DO LIKE THE NOTIFICATION OF NEIGHBORS WITH CONTACT INFORMATION. 
          THAT'S UM, I THINK I SAW THAT IN HERE. 
          MAYBE I SAW THIS FOR GIANNA'S. 
          UM, DO YOU HAVE THAT IN HERE? I NEED TO. 
          OKAY. 
          BECAUSE IT IS IN HERE. 
          OKAY. 
          AND A LANDLINE MUST BE REQUIRED. 
          YEAH. 
          W WHAT HAPPENS A LOT OF TIMES IS IN CITIES, NEIGHBORS COMPLAIN, AND THE POLICE HAVE NO CONTACT NUMBER OTHER THAN MAYBE THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO LIVES IN TOWN LIVES TWO STATES OVER. 
          YEAH. 
          AND SO THERE'S NOBODY THEY CAN CALL ON SITE TO SAY, HEY, SOMEBODY NEEDS TO COME OUTSIDE AND TALK TO THE POLICE. 
          SOMEBODY NEEDS TO TURN DOWN THE MUSIC, YOU NEED TO PULL THE PARTY INSIDE. 
          UM, AND SO A LOT OF TIMES, BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE DON'T HAVE LINE LANDLINES ANYMORE. 
          UM, THIS WOULD REQUIRE ONE UNDER THE PERMIT. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UM, COUNCILMAN MOORE, YOU SAID YOU HAD SOMETHING ELSE TO ADD. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          NO, UH, WHAT I'M GETTING THROUGH ALL OF THIS IS THE LEGISLATORS. 
          AND TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, I AGREE ELENA'S LEGISLATORS ARE SAYING THAT WHY SHOULD WE TAKE 12 INCHES AWAY FROM THE HOMEOWNER? BECAUSE THE HOMEOWNER IS NOT THERE ANYMORE. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, THE SAME PRIVILEGES THAT EVERY OTHER HOME IN THE CITY HAS ACCESS TO THIS HOMES, JUST CONTINUE TO HAVE THE SAME ACCESS. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE HAVE TOO MANY PEOPLE RIGHT NOW IN MY HOME, IF I HAVE TOO MANY PEOPLE ON THE STREETS, MY NEIGHBOR AND I HAVEN'T GONE AND DONE WHAT I NORMALLY DO, WHICH IS TALK TO MY NEIGHBORS ABOUT IT. 
          THEY'RE GOING TO CALL THE POLICE, THE POLICE GOING TO COME OUT, AND THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THAT FOR ME, IF IT'S TOO NOISY, TOO LOUD, OR THE CASE MAY BE LET OUT, SAME THING IS GOING TO HAPPEN. 
          AS IT RELATES TO SOMEONE THAT I AM LEASING THE HOUSE OUT TO, OR THAT I'M DOING THIS SHORT TERM, OR AT LEAST TO. 
          SO I THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REALLY ATTEMPTING TO SAY HERE. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, IF 
          [01:15:01]
YOU TAKE A LOOK AT, UH, PAGE, UH, WELL UNDER THE AREAS, UH, SECTION 26 63 AND SHALL PROVIDE EACH OWNER OF IMMEDIATELY ADJOINING PROPERTIES, INCLUDING PROPERTY IS LOCATED ACROSS THE ALLEY, THEN STREET WITH A WRITTEN NOTICE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS THAT THE PREMISES WILL BE USED AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL. 
          HOW ARE THEY GOING TO DO THAT? AND WHY, WHY SHOULD THEY ANYWAY, I QUESTIONED THAT I QUESTION, UH, SECTION 26 67, THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN NO OUTSIDE ACTIVITIES BY MANAGERS, SPONSORS RESIDENTS, INVITEES CLIENTS, ALL PATRONS ON A PREMISE IS USED AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 9:00 PM AND 7:00 AM. 
          WHAT A PARTNER DON'T START THE SEVEN TO EIGHT, 10, WHATEVER. 
          AND I MEAN, I'M NOT THAT FAR REMOVED FROM BEING A PARTY ANIMAL TO KNOW THAT, UH, SECTION 26 68, EACH SHORT-TERM RENTAL PREMISES SHOULD HAVE NO MORE THAN TWO VEHICLES PARKED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE PREMISES. 
          I WANT A PUBLIC STREET, THE RIGHT OF WAY WHERE SUCH VEHICLE IS OWN OPERATOR CONTROL BY A MANAGER I'M WITH YOU. 
          I JUST DON'T SEE HOW WE'RE GOING TO GO ABOUT DOING THAT. 
          AND SO TO A CERTAIN EXTENT OF WHERE I AM WITH OUR ORDINANCES, I REALLY THINK THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING. 
          WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN WHAT WE HAVE IN PLACE PRESENTLY. 
          BUT TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, A LOT OF, IF WE TRIED TO PUT SOME TYPE OF ENFORCEMENT IN PLACE, THAT'S GOING TO CAUSE LITIGATION, IT'S GOING TO CAUSE US TO HAVE TO BE IN COURT BEHIND SOME THINGS. 
          I LIKE WHAT YOU'VE SAID, AND THAT IS, THIS IS HERE FOR A REASON. 
          AND THAT REASON IS FOR THOSE SITUATIONS THAT WE HA WE JUST, IF YOU GET THEM BOUND UP IN COURT OR GET THEM HAVING TO DEAL WITH THE POLICE AND GET THEM, THAT'S GOING TO STOP A LOT OF IT. 
          BUT IN THE WAY OF REALLY GOING THROUGH AND REALLY GETTING A CONVICTION AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, I JUST DON'T SEE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT GO WAY OUT BEFORE US, SORRY. 
          WELL, I DO LIKE THE ABILITY FOR THE CITY TO, UM, GET RID OF REPEAT OFFENDERS. 
          I THINK THAT'S REALLY THE MAIN PROBLEM IS THAT YOU HAVE SOME HOMES THAT ARE REPEATEDLY BOTHERING THEIR NEIGHBORS AND MAKING THEMSELVES A NUISANCE. 
          AND, UM, WHAT, WHAT DOES STAFF NEED IN ORDER TO MAKE THOSE PROBLEMS GO AWAY? AND THAT'S REALLY THE BIG QUESTION. 
          SO IF THAT IS ANSWERED WITHIN THESE PAGES, THEN THAT'S WHAT I WANT. 
          IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS OR WANT TO SEE OTHER THINGS IN THERE, PLEASE LET US KNOW. 
          UM, WE'RE OPEN. 
          UM, RICK, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU COME UP AND JOIN MR. ENGLAND? AND THAT'S THE WHOLE THING, THIS COMMITTEE, THIS, THIS IS A TOOL AND ONLY A TOOL. 
          THIS ISN'T SOME PROGRAM WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE STAFF DRIVING UP AND DOWN AND, AND STALKING STRS. 
          THIS IS SOMETHING. 
          SO WHEN WE HAVE AN EXPLOSION OF COMPLAINTS, LIKE WE ARE HAVING THAT, WE'RE NOT LEAVING STAFF GOING TO A HOUSE AND HEARING HORRIBLE, DREADFUL THINGS AND SAYING, I'M REALLY SORRY, BUT WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS HORRIBLE, BUT IT'S LEGAL. 
          WE HAVE NO LAWS TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. 
          AND YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'VE GOT 26 PEOPLE JAMMED IN ON TOP OF EACH OTHER IN A HOME, UM, WE CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT THAT AND IT'S BAD NEIGHBORS. 
          UM, WE CAN ADDRESS CURRENTLY UNDER OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE, WE CAN ADDRESS IT. 
          IT'S A LOT OF WORK LIKE WE'VE SAID BEFORE. 
          THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN PLACE ALREADY TO ADDRESS IT. 
          AND I LIKED WHAT YOU'VE SUGGESTED IS, AND THAT IS TAKE MUCH OF WHAT THAT IS HERE IN THIS DRAFT AND JUST THE CHANGES ALONE AND CHANGING THE PERMITTING PROCESS A LITTLE BIT TO INCLUDE, TO EXPRESSLY INCLUDE THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS INTO THE SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL PERMITTING, AND TO PROVIDE THAT DUE PROCESS TO REVOKE OR TO SUSPEND REVOKE, AND THEN ULTIMATELY IF NEEDED PULL UTILITIES, UM, THAT ALONE, UM, ALTHOUGH IN LENGTHY PROCESS THAT ALONG COULD, THAT ALONE COULD BE A CHANGE THAT'S WORTH LOOKING INTO. 
          UM, AND QUITE FRANKLY, IT'S FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, IT'S THE MO IT'S THE SAFEST APPROACH. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT EXPLAIN TO ME WHY WITH THE, 
          [01:20:01]
UM, STR IN THE SUMMERFIELD HOA, WHICH THEY HAVE THE FORESIGHT TO SAY, NO STRS COULD BE THERE. 
          WHY IS IT WITH THEM ADVERTISING? UM, 20 PLUS PEOPLE ARE WELCOME TO COME STAY IN OUR FOUR-BEDROOM HOUSE. 
          AND THAT THAT'S HAPPENING. 
          THAT THERE'S VIDEOS, THAT THERE ARE CONSTANT COMPLAINTS FROM NEIGHBORS IN EVERY DIRECTION. 
          WHY HAVE WE BEEN HELPLESS TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? CAUSE I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT WE HAVE NO LAWS AGAINST THAT. 
          WE HAVE NO OCCUPANCY LIMITS FOR STRS. 
          WELL, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU'RE COMPLAINING ABOUT. 
          OBVIOUSLY, IF IT'S A PUBLIC NUISANCE IN THE TERMS OF LOUD NOISES AND PARTIES AND THAT TYPE OF THINGS, WE CERTAINLY HAVE LAWS AGAINST THAT. 
          WE'VE ALWAYS HAD LAWS. 
          IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OCCUPANCY LIMITS, THEN WE, WE DO NOT HAVE LAWS AGAINST THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO OCCUPANCY, WE DO NOT HAVE A WAY RIGHT NOW TO SAY YOU ARE JAMMING TWENTY-FIVE AND 30 PEOPLE INTO A TWO SMALLER. 
          AND THAT'S A QUESTION IT'S THERE. 
          THERE'S A GOOD REASON. 
          AND IT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT TESTED WELL. 
          THEY, IN FACT, WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN TESTED, THEY FELT THE TEST THERE HASN'T BEEN A FINAL CONCLUSION TO IT, BUT, UM, OCCUPANCY LIMITS ARE A PROBLEM BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU'RE TREATING LEASED PROPERTY PROPERTIES DIFFERENTLY THAN YOU'RE TREATING, UM, UM, SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES THAT AREN'T BEING LEASED. 
          AND WE ALREADY HAVE OCCUPANCY LIMITS WITH OUR RENTAL REGISTRATION PROGRAM. 
          DO WE NOT? WE DON'T HAVE OCCUPANCY LIMITS. 
          WHAT WE HAVE IS WE HAVE, UM, UM, HOW MANY PER BEDROOM WELLING, WE HAVE DWELLING LIMITS. 
          AND SO THERE'S A DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHO CAN LIVE THERE AND WHO CAN STAY THERE AND WHO CAN SPEND TIME THERE. 
          AND SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY IN THE, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, RICK AND CORRECT ME. 
          I DON'T BELIEVE WE DON'T HAVE, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING THAT SAYS, IF YOU OWN A 1300 SQUARE FOOT BEDROOM, YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO HAVE 30 PEOPLE IN INSIDE THAT HOUSE AT ONE TIME. 
          NOW WHAT WE DO HAVE IS WE HAVE THE PROPORTIONALITY LIMITS THAT SAY, IF YOU HAVE A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE, THEN, THEN YOU HAVE TO, YOU CAN'T HAVE MORE THAN FOUR UNRELATED INDIVIDUALS LIVING THERE. 
          WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, THAT'S DIFFERENT LIVING THERE AND BEING THERE ARE COMPLETELY TWO DIFFERENT STANDARDS. 
          YEAH. 
          SO IF WE'RE, IF WE'VE GOT SHORT TERM RENTALS, UM, YOU'RE SAYING THAT, THAT, THAT IS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN A LONG-TERM RENTAL, AS FAR AS HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN BE THERE VERSUS GUESTS COMING FOR A PARTY AND LEAVING PEOPLE, STAYING THERE, SLEEPING OVERNIGHT. 
          I, I, WE COULD DO THE, AGAIN, HOW WOULD YOU ENFORCE IT? AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO STAY THERE OVERNIGHT? DOES THAT MEAN THAT I'M GOING TO STAY AT THE PARTY? I MEAN, COUNCILMAN MOORE IN HIS YOUNG DAYS, YOU KNOW, AT FOUR 30, YOU KNOW, HE'S AROUND TO, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT MY WIFE'S NINE BROTHERS AND SISTERS, WHAT MY 11 UNCLES AND AUNTS OWN THANKSGIVING, ESPECIALLY IF IT COMES ON A THURSDAY, WHICH IT NORMALLY DOES, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE 30 PEOPLE SPENDING THE NIGHT, FIRST OF ALL, AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A HUNDRED AT THE HOUSE, BARBECUE AND PLAN DURING MY NOSE IN THE POOL. 
          AND THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN FOR THREE DAYS. 
          AND THAT'S WHY I GO TO EVERY NEIGHBOR AND TELL THEM WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW. 
          WE'VE NEVER HAD THE POLICE TO COME OR ANYTHING ELSE, BUT I'M SAYING THAT IF I CAN DO THAT AT MY HOUSE, THEN WHY ARE WE GOING TO PUT THAT DISTINCTION ON SOMEONE ELSE THAT'S LEASING, LET'S DEAL WITH YOUR HOUSE, MR. YOU'RE NOT LIVING IN THEIR HOME. 
          AND EVEN UNDER OUR RENTAL ORDINANCE, THE PEOPLE YOU NAMED THE RELATIVES. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          I DIDN'T, THAT'S MY OCCUPANCY NOW. 
          THAT'S ALL I'M TALKING ABOUT. 
          BUT EVEN IN OUR RENTAL ORDINANCE, IT'S, IT'S NO MORE THAN FOUR UNRELATED ADULTS. 
          SO WE, I HADN'T SEEN THAT LANGUAGE. 
          YEAH. 
          RELATED UNRELATED. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, I, YOU KNOW, I GOT YET ANOTHER, THERE'S A LARGE GROUP OF PEOPLE, DISTRESSED NEIGHBORS WHO ARE PLANNING TO SHOW UP IN FRONT OF COUNCIL IF THIS EVER GETS IN FRONT OF COUNCIL. 
          AND THEY JUST SAID, YOU KNOW, OUR COMMUNITY IS STARTING TO FEEL AS THOUGH BUSINESS OWNERS IN GARLAND HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN HOMEOWNERS PROFITS OVER PEOPLE. 
          IT SEEMS YOU'RE ALLOWING LIKE WE'RE MAKING PROFITS. 
          UM, IF I, IF I MAY ADD, UH, EXCUSE ME, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK THE BIGGEST CONCERN IS THE REVOLVING DOOR OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE COMING INTO NEIGHBORHOODS, EVEN IN A SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL PROPERTY, YOU'VE GOT PRETTY MUCH SOME STABILITY OF THE SAME PEOPLE LIVING THERE. 
          BUT WHEN YOU HAVE CLIENTS RENTING THESE SHORT-TERM RENTALS ON A CONTINUAL BASIS, THE CLIENTS CHANGE, THE PEOPLE CHANGE. 
          THEY SEE DIFFERENT PEOPLE COMING INTO THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS THAT CREATES UNCERTAINTY. 
          I DEFINITELY LIKED THE IDEA OF A PERFORMANCE BASED SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO SUSPEND OR EVEN REVOKE A SHORT-TERM 
          [01:25:01]
RENTAL LICENSE, UM, TO, TO GET RID OF THE REPEAT OFFENDERS. 
          I DO LIKE THAT. 
          UM, AGAIN, THE BIGGER, THE BIGGER CONCERN. 
          IF YOU SPLIT THIS APPLE IN HALF THE, THE PROGRAM WE HAVE NOW, CURRENTLY WE INSPECT THE PROPERTY. 
          WE MAKE SURE THAT THE CLIENTS ARE, HAVE, HAVE A SAFE PLACE TO LAY THEIR HEAD AT NIGHT. 
          UH, WE NEVER GET COMPLAINTS FROM CLIENTS THAT THE PROPERTIES ARE, YOU KNOW, THEIR SAFETY HAZARDS OR WHATEVER THAT THE PROPERTIES ARE IMMACULATE. 
          MOST OF THEM, OKAY. 
          UH, THE CAN CONTINUAL COMPLAINTS WE GET, OR THE, OR THE BY-PRODUCT OF THE, THE CAPACITY, THE, THE PARKING, THE NOISE, THE TRASH THINGS OF THAT NATURE. 
          SO IN THE REVOLVING DOOR OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE. 
          SO, UM, THAT'S KIND OF IN A NUTSHELL, SO, AND TO BE CLEAR, IT'S NOT THAT THAT THE NOISE ORDINANCE CAN SOLVE EVERY ISSUE THAT ARE RELATED TO THESE WITH THE OVERCROWDING. 
          AND THE PROBLEM WITH NOISE IS, AS YOU ALL KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST THE MUSIC OR I PARTY IN THE BACKYARD OF THE SWIMMING POOL. 
          IT'S ALSO THE COMING MORNING OF TRAFFIC AT THREE IN THE MORNING, THREE 30. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND HOW YOU RESOLVE THAT? I DO DO NOT KNOW IT'S A, IT'S A RISKY VENTURE. 
          AND AGAIN, IF, IF COUNCIL IS WILLING TO, IF THEY HAVE THE APPETITE FOR THAT RISK, THEN OUR OFFICE IS CERTAINLY WILLING TO DO OUR BEST TO DEFEND ANY LAWSUITS THAT COME. 
          UM, UM, THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL NEEDS TO DETERMINE WHAT THEY, THEY NEED TO DETERMINE WHAT THEIR RISK APPETITE IS. 
          AND THEN FROM THERE, WE CAN DEVELOP A, IF THEY TELL ME THAT THEY HAVE A VERY HIGH RISK APPETITE HERE, THEY REALLY ARE INTERESTED IN SOLVING THIS PROBLEM, THAT WE CAN COME UP WITH A VERY AGGRESSIVE ORDINANCE TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE. 
          IF THEY SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE, DON'T, OUR TOLERANCE, ISN'T REALLY ALL THAT HIGH. 
          THEN WE PROBABLY SHOULD STICK TO A LESS AGGRESSIVE ORDINANCE AND WAIT AND SEE UNTIL THE COURTS FLUSH OUT, FLUSH OUT WHAT WE CAN ACTUALLY DO. 
          YEAH. 
          AND I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF, OF, UM, I MEAN, I, I OWN RENTAL PROPERTY. 
          I DON'T OWN SHORT-TERM RENTALS. 
          UM, AND AT THIS POINT NEVER WILL. 
          UM, BUT THE MAIN THING IS THIS IS A QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUE FOR NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          BECAUSE IF, IF EVERYBODY USING THESE SHORT-TERM RENTALS DID AS COUNCILMAN MORRISON AND WENT AROUND AND SAID, THIS IS GOING TO BE HAPPENING THIS WEEKEND. 
          I'LL TAKE CARE OF THAT WOULD BE A VERY DIFFERENT THING THAN WHAT ACTUALLY IS HAPPENING. 
          UM, AND, AND WE CAN'T, UM, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T REGULATE PEOPLE INTO BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS AND NON DRUNKEN PARTIERS OR ANY THAT WE CAN'T MAKE THEM DO THAT ALL WE CAN DO IS ATTACH, UM, SOME KIND OF WAY TO ENFORCE AND SHUT IT DOWN WHEN THAT'S HAPPENING. 
          AND THAT HAS BEEN THE, THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IN OUR HOME OCCUPATION ORDINANCE. 
          ONE OF THE, UM, ONE OF THE POINTS THAT THEY'RE NOT, THAT INDICATES AN ILLEGAL HOME OP OCCUPATION IS INCREASED TRAFFIC. 
          OKAY. 
          THESE STRS, AND THEY'RE NOT ALL LIKE THIS, WE'VE GOT SOME THAT ARE GREAT. 
          AND I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM A BNB, LITERALLY ACROSS THE STREET, NEVER A PROBLEM. 
          ZERO ZERO COMPLAINTS. 
          I HAVE ANOTHER ONE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS AN STR ZERO COMPLAINTS. 
          THE MAJORITY OF THEM IN THIS CITY ARE DOING JUST FINE. 
          SO THE MAIN THING IS FINDING WAYS THAT WE CAN PROVIDE ENOUGH TOOLS SO THAT IF THERE IS A COMPLAINT THAT THERE WILL BE SOME WAY TO REASONABLY ADDRESS IT. 
          I DO LIKE THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, HAVING IT BE SAID, SO MANY COMPLAINTS IN SUCH A PERIOD OF TIME THAT YOU HAVE IN HERE, IF WE CAN MAKE THAT WORK, THEN THERE'S A LOT OF THE OTHER THINGS WE MAY NOT EVEN NEED TO ADDRESS. 
          I'M NOT, I DON'T HAVE MUCH OF AN APPETITE FOR TRYING TO REGULATE PARKING JUST BECAUSE OF ENFORCEMENT ISSUES. 
          I THINK THAT WOULD END UP DRIVING US ALL CRAZY. 
          UM, IF OCCUPANCY IS, IS JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE WILL RUN INTO, UM, LEGAL PROBLEMS TRYING TO EVEN ADDRESS IT, IT, IT SEEMS CRAZY TO ME THAT WE SHOULD ALLOW UNLIMITED OCCUPANCY OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO ME LOGICALLY. 
          SO I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF, OF OCCUPANCY LIMITS SUCH AS YOU PLACED IN HERE. 
          UM, BUT HAVING, BEING ABLE TO REVOKE THEIR PERMISSION TO RENT THE HOUSE AFTER X NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME, THAT MAY BE, THAT MAY BE THE POINT THAT MAKES THE REST OF THIS WORK, EVEN IF WE DON'T, UM, PUT IN A LOT OF THESE OTHER THINGS. 
          UM, AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO, YOU ALREADY MAPPED OUT THE, UM, THE WHOLE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS OF GIVING THEM PLENTY OF TIME TO RESPOND TO IT. 
          UM, 
          [01:30:03]
OKAY. 
          I'M THINKING OUT LOUD AND I'LL STOP. 
          DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? YES. 
          UM, SO IF WE DID GO IN A STRICT KIND OF DIRECTION, I, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK INTO REQUIRING A HOMESTEAD, UM, KIND OF THING FROM THE OWNER. 
          THAT'S IF THAT'S, IF WE GO STRICT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I, I BELIEVE, I REALLY THINK THAT A STRICT POLICY WILL LEAD US TO LITIGATION, BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, LET'S LIKE, MAKE SURE THAT THE PERSON THAT OWNS IT ACTUALLY LIVES THERE THAT WOULD TAKE AWAY, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? WELL, WE'VE HAD TWO CITIES GET SUE OVER THAT VERY ISSUE. 
          GREAT MINDS WAS BOTH A TYPE ONE AND A TYPE TWO. 
          AND SO IT WAS AUSTIN WHERE IF YOU, THEY HAD THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS WHERE YOU HAD THE LANDOWNER PRESENT ON SITE, AND YOU HAD THE SECOND TYPE THAT THEY BOTH TRIED TO BAN WHERE THE LANDOWNER WAS NOT ONSITE. 
          AND, UM, UM, THE COURTS HAVEN'T LOOKED FAVORABLY ON THAT. 
          NOW WHAT WE CAN DO IS WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT IN OUR APPLICATION PROCESS, WE CAN'T ASK THE QUESTION DIRECTLY. 
          UM, AND WE ACQUIRE IS PART OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A SHORT TERM RENTAL PERMIT OR TO SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL PERMIT, EVEN, UM, THAT IT NOT BE A HOMESTEAD UNLESS THE OWNER LIVES ON SITE AND MAKE THEM GIVE US AN AFFIRMATIVE YES. 
          THAT I WILL BE THERE, OR NO, I'M NOT THERE. 
          AND IT'S NOT A HOMESTEAD. 
          AND THAT WAY WE'RE AT LEAST GETTING SOME MORE TAX BENEFIT OUT OF IT. 
          AND I'M THERE HAVING TO, BUT HAVING SAID THAT FROM TALKING WITH COREY, COREY TELLS ME DECAF IS NOT GOING TO BE VERY HELPFUL IN HELPING US BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY, THEY CAN CHANGE THEIR STATUS AND THEN GET A PERMIT AND THEY CALL BACK A WEEK LATER AND TELL D CAD I'VE CHANGED MY MIND. 
          I'M GOING TO LIVE THERE. 
          AND DECAF IS GOING TO CHANGE IT BACK TO A HOMESTEAD. 
          OH, CORY, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG ON THAT. 
          AND IT IS CORRECT. 
          AND, UH, SPEAKING WITH REPRESENTATIVE AT THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT, THEY'VE HAD SOME CHALLENGES, UH, AT THE ARB LEVEL, UH, REGARDING THAT HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION. 
          AND WHEN IT COMES TO THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, WHAT TENDS TO HAPPEN IS THAT THE, UM, HOMEOWNER, WHEN THEY ARE CHALLENGED AS TO WHY DO YOU HAVE THIS HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION? AND YOU'RE NOT THERE? I SAID, WELL, MY INTENT, IF THERE IS SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT TALKS ABOUT INTENT WHEN HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION. 
          SO, UH, WITH THAT, UH, THAT THERE HAVE BEEN NO, NO TEETH IN IT. 
          SO THEY, THEY, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO OF FORCE THAT TO REMOVE EGGS. 
          UM, THAT'S JUST KIND OF THE STATUS AT THIS POINT. 
          AND THAT'S TRUE WITH BOTH REGULAR SINGLE FAMILY RENTALS, LONG-TERM RENTALS AND STRS, BECAUSE WE HAVE SEVERAL LONG-TERM RENTALS THAT ARE LISTED BY D CAD AS HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, WHICH I THOUGHT WOULD BE A, UH, SOMETHING WE COULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT, BUT THAT IT SOUND LIKE IT IS, IT IS AN INDICATOR FOR US THAT IT IS A RENTAL PROPERTY BY NO MEANS, AM I SUGGESTING EITHER THAT THERE BE NO WRITTEN DOCUMENTATION TO DEAL WITH THIS OBJECT? BECAUSE IF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT, UH, HAVE BEEN ALREADY STATED WERE HAPPENING NEXT DOOR TO ME, UH, I WOULD NOT BE A HAPPY CAMPER, BUT I THINK THAT WHAT I'M SAYING IS I THINK THAT WE WANT TO TRY AND PUT AN ORDINANCE TOGETHER OR PUT SOME LANGUAGE TOGETHER THAT ACTUALLY DEALS WITH BOTH PEOPLE OR OFFENSIVE. 
          THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE OFFENDING THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE VIOLATING AND NOT IMPAIR THE PEOPLE WHO DO THIS. 
          AND AS YOU'VE ALREADY STATED, SHE WAS VERY WISE, NOT AWKWARD. 
          THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE FOLLOWING THE LAW, THOSE PEOPLE WHO KNOW WHAT SHOULD BE TAKING PLACE. 
          UH, I, I LIKE, AS I STATED, YOU PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO, THERE ARE A LOT OF WORDS HERE YOU'VE ADDRESSED US ABOUT EVERYTHING THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED. 
          I JUST THINK THAT A FEW THINGS, IF YOU WOULD JUST TAKE OUT A FEW THINGS THERE, AND MAYBE LIKE HER COUNSEL MORRISON SAID, ACTUALLY DEAL WITH POLICE HAS BEEN OUT THREE TIMES, THERE WAS A PROBLEM SOMETHING'S NOT HAPPENING RIGHT THERE. 
          AND SO MAYBE IF WE LOOK AT IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, UH, AND THEN FOLLOW ALL OF OUR OTHER CODES ARE THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE AND MINIMIZE SOME OF THE LANGUAGE MAYBE THAT WE HAVE HERE. 
          OH, YOU'RE ASKING A LOT, BRIAN. 
          I, AGAIN, I WILL, I'VE READ, I'VE READ SEVERAL OF THEM. 
          AND THIS WAS THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE I'VE SEEN THIS MOST COMPREHENSIVE AND THAT'S GREAT. 
          THAT'S GREAT. 
          IT SAYS THAT, YOU KNOW WHAT WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT AT THE SAME TIME THOUGH, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE FURY CAREFUL. 
          IT CAUSE THE CITY TO BE TAKEN TO COURT FOR SOMETHING THAT WE KNOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO WIN TO BEGIN WITH. 
          IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE TO ME. 
          SO, AND I, I DO THINK THAT WE CAN INCLUDE SOME, AT LEAST AN AFFIRMATION IN THERE IN THE APPLICATION 
          [01:35:01]
ABOUT HOMESTEAD STATUS, BECAUSE ALTHOUGH, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN CHEAT THE SYSTEM LIKE ANYBODY CAN, IT COULD BE HELPFUL AND PROBABLY MOST CASES, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL. 
          AND QUITE FRANKLY, IF THEY LIE ON THE APPLICATION, IT'S A VIOLATION AND WE CAN ACTUALLY, UM, UM, CHARGE THEM IN OUR MUNICIPAL COURT FOR LYING ON THE APPLICATION IF THEY DID THAT. 
          SO, YEAH. 
          GOOD. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          WELL, I'M WATCHING THE CLOCK AS WE COME UP TO PREPARING FOR DINNER AND THE COUNCIL MEETING. 
          UM, I WOULD BE VERY INTERESTED IF WE COULD, IF, IF YOU COULD COME BACK, UM, WITH A, A DRAFT OF AN UPDATED APPLICATION, THROWING EVERYTHING IN THE BOOK AT IT AND WHERE IF THEY LIE, WE WILL ACTUALLY HAVE TEETH AT THAT POINT. 
          UM, AND, AND COMMITTEE, I WOULD LIKE IF YOU ALL CAN SPEND TIME AND I WILL AS WELL LOOKING THROUGH HERE THAT THE TIME LIMITS FOR OUTSIDE ACTIVITIES, THE PARKING LIMITS, ALL THOSE THINGS. 
          THERE THERE'S A LOT THAT I WOULD SEE THAT IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S MORE HEADACHE THAN WILL BE WORTHWHILE FOR US. 
          UM, BUT IF YOU CAN TAKE TIME IN THE, IN THE NEXT, YOU KNOW, UH, TIME, FOUR WEEKS BEFORE WE MEET AGAIN AND GO THROUGH AND JUST MAKE NOTES AND, UH, AND PLEASE RETURN THEM TO MR. ENGLAND. 
          OKAY. 
          AND GIVE HIM TIME TO, UM, KIND OF LOOK AT IT AT OUR THOUGHTS AT THIS POINT. 
          AND THEN IF WE CAN COME BACK NEXT MONTH, LET ME PROPOSE THIS. 
          UM, OKAY. 
          MADAM CHAIR. 
          UM, THIS IS THE, THIS IS THE NUCLEAR VERSION OF A, OF A SHORT TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE. 
          LET ME COME UP WITH ONE, THAT'S THE OTHER END OF THE SPECTRUM THAT I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH. 
          RIGHT. 
          BUT ADDRESSES SOME OF THE CONCERNS, BUT LEAVES OUT THE OCCUPANCY LIMITS AND THE PARKING AND SOME OTHER THINGS THAT MIGHT BE PROBLEMATIC. 
          AND THEN WE AT LEAST HAVE BOTH ENDS OF THE SPECTRUM TO WORK IN. 
          IT'S A FRAME TO WORK IN. 
          AND THEN IF Y'ALL WANT TO PULL SOME BACK IN, WE CAN PULL SOME BACK IN OR HOWEVER YOU ALL WANT TO DO THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          STR LIGHT. 
          I LIKED, I LIKED THAT AND HAVING THE TWO BOOKENDS. 
          YEP. 
          UM, AND WE CAN MOVE SOME THINGS BETWEEN THEM. 
          I LIKE THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I REALLY THOUGH, I, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A DRAFT APPLICATION THAT, UM, WILL POSSIBLY BE HELPFUL AND CATCHING PROBLEMS EARLY. 
          OKAY. 
          WHAT IS THE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS AT THIS POINT FOR, UH, WITH OUR CURRENT STR, UM, REGULATIONS, IT'S, IT'S A MAXIMUM OF HOW MANY DAYS IN A YEAR THEY CAN RENT IT OUT. 
          REMIND ME, IT'S NOT 32, IT'S GOING MORE THAN FIVE DAYS A MONTH. 
          AND THE MORE THAN 30 DAY, OR IT'S TIED TO THE OWNERSHIP TOO, THOUGH. 
          IT'S DIFFICULT. 
          IT'S A LITTLE VAGUE. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE THAT TO BE LESS VAGUE, SO. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UM, I THINK THAT IF WE HAVE A LIGHT STR THING, COME UP, WE CAN GET THAT THROUGH COUNCIL AND GET SOMETHING IN PLACE QUICKLY. 
          AND THEN ONCE THINGS GET THROUGH COURT AND, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT OUR LIMITS. 
          WE CAN GO NUCLEAR AS IT WERE. 
          WE GOT THE NUCLEAR VERSION, BUT IF, BUT IF WE, IF, IF WE CAN HAVE SOMETHING THAT ALL OF US ARE COMFORTABLE WITH AND CAN GET OUT THERE AND JUST GET DONE QUICKLY, UM, I THINK THAT WOULD SERVE OUR RESIDENTS MORE THAN, UM, THEM BACK AND FORTH AND BACK AND FORTH. 
          I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF, YOU KNOW, GETTING IT EXACTLY LIKE WE WANT IT, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, AT THE TIME, YEAH, JUST WAIT, WE ALREADY HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT'S NOT WORKING. 
          SO WE JUST, WE WANT TO IMPROVE ON IT. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE WANT, IF WE CAN MAKE PROGRESS. 
          UM, AND IF IT TAKES, YOU KNOW, RE REVISITING THIS AND ANOTHER TWO YEARS, THEN SO BE IT, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE PROGRESS. 
          AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE BADLY DISTRESSED, WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO GET STAFF TOOLS, TO STEP IN AND DO SOMETHING. 
          AND, AND I LOVE THE IDEA OF JUST PULLING THE PERMIT. 
          IF YOU, IF THIS HAPPENS AND THIS MANY CALLS COME IN, YOU JUST LOST YOUR ABILITY TO USE AS, AS AN STR. 
          UM, TO ME, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THE BEST AND CLEANEST, UM, WAYS TO, TO ENFORCE ON THIS. 
          SO. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          APPRECIATE IT. 
          AND, UH, COMMITTEE NUMBER, ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS TO ADJOURN. 
          SO AT 5:40 PM, WE ARE ADJOURNED. 
          THANK YOU.
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.