[00:00:01]
RIGHT.[Community Services Committee on November 7, 2023.]
AFTERNOON.THIS IS TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7TH, 2023.
IT IS 4:04 PM AND WE ARE, UM, MEETING WITH THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE.
AND WITH ME OUR, UH, COMMITTEE MEMBERS, JEFF BASS AND CARISSA DUTTON, AND A WHOLE ROOM FULL OF, UH, STAFF AND GUESTS.
SO, UH, LET'S START OUT WITH THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
UM, COMMITTEE MEMBERS, HAVE YOU HAD TIME TO REVIEW THE MINUTES FROM LAST MONTH? AND DO YOU HAVE ANY CORRECTIONS OR DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION? DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
UM, ITEM TWO IS PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UM, ANYONE HERE TO FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT'S ALREADY ON THE AGENDA DOES NOT APPEAR.
ITEM THREE, WE'RE GOING ON TO ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
THREE A IS TO DISCUSS FALL 2023, NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY GRANT APPLICATIONS AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
YOU SHOULD HAVE THE, UM, APPLICATIONS IN FRONT OF YOU, AND HOPEFULLY YOU'VE HAD TIME TO LOOK AT THEM.
ALL RIGHT, MR. BOLLINGER, OR DO EITHER ONE OF YOU WANNA LEAD OFF AND START US WALKING THROUGH THESE? YEAH, GO AHEAD.
UM, WELL, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMITTEE.
UH, I AM LAURA DELA VEGA, THE SENIOR PLANNER WITH NEIGHBORHOOD VITALITY.
I'M HERE WITH MY SUPERVISOR, MR. SCOTT BOLLINGER.
AND, UM, WE ARE HERE TO PRESENT TO YOU THE THREE FALL MATCHING GRANT, UM, APPLICATIONS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED THIS CYCLE.
UM, THEY ARE DUCK CREEK ESTATES, RAIN, UH, PECAN GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND RAINBOW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, NOW I KNOW THE PACKET THAT I SENT WAS QUITE THICK
SO JUST KICKING IT OFF WITH DUCK CREEK ESTATES, UM, THEY ARE REQUESTING FUNDS TO REFACE THEIR ENTRYWAY SIGNS, AS WELL AS UPDATE THE LANDSCAPING ALONG, UM, AT THEIR ENTRANCES AND ALONG WIND JOYCE AND DUCK CREEK.
UM, NOW, UM, REFACING THE, UH, MONUMENT SIGN COULD BE SEEN AS A MAINTENANCE TYPE PROJECT, WHICH IS INELIGIBLE THROUGH MATCHING GRANT.
UM, AND LANDSCAPING IS ALSO INELIGIBLE THROUGH, UM, MAN MATCHING GRANT AS WELL.
UM, THEY ARE WELCOME TO SUBMIT, UH, IN FUTURE CYCLES IF THEY PLAN TO DO HARDSCAPING.
UM, HOWEVER, UM, THIS IS, UH, AS THEY APPLIED.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I DO, YEAH.
COULD, UH, LAURA OR SCOTT, COULD ONE OF YOU EXPLAIN HOW THE, UM, REPLACING THE SIGN IS A MAINTENANCE ISSUE? SURE.
SO, UM, SO TYPICALLY, UH, I MEAN, THEY'RE REQUESTING TO REPLACE IT BECAUSE IT'S OLD AND WORN, UM, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT IS TYPICALLY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF HOAS.
AND SO, UM, UM, THAT WOULD BE WHAT WE DECLARE AS MAINTENANCE.
WHAT IF THEY PRESENTED IT AS THEY WERE, I'M JUST, JUST HYPOTHETICALLY ASKING HERE, IF THEY PRESENTED IT AS A DIFFERENT DESIGN, DIFFERENT STYLE, UPGRADE, WHATEVER, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT, WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED MAINTENANCE AS WELL? SURE.
SO, UM, GENERALLY, AND THIS, THESE MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED BY MATCHING GROUND, I, I DON'T REMEMBER, BUT, UM, SO WE, WE VIEW THOSE AS THE USEFUL LIFE, UM, OF THE, OF THE SIGNS THAT WOULD BE, I THINK, IN LINE WITH CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, WHICH IS THE SOURCE OF THIS FUNDING, THE, THE BOND FUNDING.
SO, UM, SOMETHING LIKE REFACING AN EXISTING SIGN THAT, THAT TO US SOUNDS LIKE A MAINTENANCE TEST TYPE ACTIVITY, THAT THAT'S YOUR DECISION.
BUT, UM, THAT'S WHAT WE HAD, WE HAD LINED OUT IN HERE.
IF YOU'RE REPLACING THE SIGN, IT, IT SORT OF IS THE SIGN READY FOR REPLACEMENT? YOU KNOW, IF, UM, IF YOU HAVE A, IF YOU HAVE A SIGN THAT'S ONLY A FEW YEARS OLD AND WE JUST WANNA CHANGE THE DESIGN, THAT WOULD MOST LIKELY NOT BE ELIGIBLE WITH CAPITAL FUNDING BECAUSE YOU'RE, YOU'RE REPLACING SOMETHING THAT HASN'T OUT OUTLIVED ITS USEFUL LIFE.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S SORT OF THE QUESTION HERE.
HAVE, HAVE THESE SIGNS OUTLIVED THEIR USEFUL LIFE AND, AND ELIGIBLE FOR CAPITAL FOR CAPITAL FUNDING.
AND IF I BELIEVE READING THROUGH THE PACKET THAT THIS SIGN, UH, WE PAID FOR IT BACK IN 2007.
[00:05:01]
THEY DID, UM, APPLY FOR, UH, TO INSTALL THE ENTRYWAY MONUMENT SIGNED.UM, HOWEVER, THEY HAD ALREADY COMPLETED THE WORK, UM, WHEN THEY DID THE APPLICATION.
SO, UM, BUT WE WERE, SO THE FUNDS DIDN'T ACTUALLY GO TO THE INSTALLATION OF THESE PARTICULAR MONUMENT SIGNS, BUT IT DID, UM, IT, THEY WERE A, WE, THEY WERE ABLE TO USE THE FUNDS FOR, UM, I BELIEVE LIGHTING AND, UM, SOME OTHER ITEMS REGARDING THE ENTRYWAY.
AND I UNDERSTAND, AGAIN, FROM READING FURTHER IN HERE THAT THEIR ORIGINAL APPLICATION WAS FOR REFACING, NOT FOR REPLACING.
SO ON THE FRONT PAGE HERE, IT SAYS REPLACE, WHICH IS I THINK WHAT'S CAUSING SOME CONFUSION.
UH, BUT THE ACTUAL APPLICATION SAID TO REFACE THE, SO THAT'S WHAT THEY ACTUALLY ASKED FOR.
AND IT ENDED UP BEING LISTED AS REPLACING EXISTING SIGNS WITH NEW SIGNS.
SO I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW THAT HAPPENED, BUT, UM, I WOULD AGREE WITH THE, WITH THE REFACING, THAT DOESN'T MATCH.
UH, THAT'S, THAT'S MAINTENANCE REPLACING.
IF IT WENT IN, IN 2007, I WHAT THE EFFECTIVE LIFE THAT WE CONSIDER FOR AN ENTRYWAY MONUMENT, JUST AS A GOOD RULE OF THUMB, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, 20 YEARS.
BUT SO THIS WOULDN'T, IF IT'S, THERE'S SIGNIFICANT WEAR AND TEAR THERE, THAT CAN PLAY INTO IT ALSO.
SO BASICALLY THEIR REQUESTS, IN THIS CASE, NEITHER ONE OF THEM MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR THIS PROGRAM.
THE LANDSCAPING CAN'T DO THAT, BUT THEY CAN COME BACK IN THE NEXT CYCLE AND, UM, REQUEST HARDSCAPING, RIGHT.
AND, UM, THEY WOULD HAVE TO, I GUESS, WOULD WE REMOVE THE DEAD AND DYING LANDSCAPING MATERIALS? WOULD WE REMOVE THAT IF WE WERE GOING TO BE PAYING TO REPLACE IT WITH HARDSCAPING? IS THAT SOMETHING WE DO OR NOT? WE HAVE NOT CONTEMPLATED THAT BEFORE.
WELL, COMMITTEE, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS WAS A, UH, A, A SWING AND A MISS.
AND IF YOU READ ON THROUGH HERE, IS THIS THE ONE WHERE THEY ALSO HAD THE HOA PERSON WHO SUBMITTED IT CHANGE? YES.
THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION WITH THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION.
SO YOU MENTIONED THAT IT SAID REFACE, I'M LOOKING AT THE APPLICATION, IT SAYS REPLACE ON THE ONE THAT I'M LOOKING AT.
AND WHERE, WHERE DID IT SAY REFACE? DID THEY HAVE AN EARLIER SUBMISSION AND CHANGE IT? SO THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS THAT THEY SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION, UM, SPECIFICALLY SHOWS, UM, JUST REPLACING THE PARTICULAR AREA ON THE MONUMENT SIGN THAT HAS THE NEIGHBORHOOD NAME.
UM, EVEN IN, UM, I THINK SOME SUBSEQUENT EMAILS, UM, THE CONTRACTOR WAS ASKING, HEY, DO WE WANNA POWER WASH THE BRICK BEHIND IT SINCE WE'RE KEEPING THE BRICK? UM, AND JUST REPLACING THE SIGNS.
SO THE ACTUAL MONUMENT ITSELF IS REMAINING, IT'S JUST THE ACTUAL, UM, PLATE, THE FACING, UM, THAT, THAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO REPLACE.
I'M SORRY, I ADDED THAT CONFUSION, BUT YES, I KNOW I, I HAD READ THIS EARLIER, BUT IT WAS THE, THE ACTUAL QUOTE LINE ITEM QUOTE THAT WAS GIVEN TO US THAT SAID REFACING.
AND IT WAS NOTHING IN HERE FOR A QUOTE FOR ACTUALLY REPLACING THE WHOLE MONUMENT.
SO YOU'RE INCLUDING ALL THE BRICK STRUCTURE AS PART OF THE SIGN? NO, THAT ISN'T WHAT THEY ASKED.
NO, THE BRICK IS NOT INCLUDED.
JUST, JUST THE PART THAT SAYS DUCK CREEK ESTATES, RIGHT? YES, SIR.
SO AGAIN, COMMITTEE, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THIS WAS A SITUATION WHERE THEY'RE GONNA NEED TO COME BACK TO US AND, AND TRY AGAIN WITH THINGS THAT WILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS PROGRAM.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T SEE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN EVEN PARTIALLY APPROVE BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT'S, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? NO, MA'AM.
I, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT I, I DO FEEL THAT THE, UH, SIGN REPLACEMENTS NOT A MAINTENANCE ISSUE.
I FEEL THAT IT DOES QUALIFY IF IT WAS A SIGN REPLACEMENT.
WELL, THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS ON THE APPLICATION.
CAN YOU GO OVER THAT AGAIN PLEASE? WITH THE, THE REQUIREMENTS WE REQUIRE THROUGH THIS PROGRAM THAT THEY SUBMIT LINE ITEM QUOTES TO SHOW THE PRICES THAT THEY THEN, SO CAN YOU GO INTO THAT? SURE.
SO, UM, SO WE DO REQUIRE LINE ITEM CODES THAT THEY, UM, TO PROVIDE, UM, UH, AN IDEA OF EXACTLY WHAT IT IS, WHAT TYPE OF WORK IS BEING COMPLETED.
UM, AND THEY DID NOT, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD DID NOT PROVIDE, UH, THE ACTUAL COST, UH, FOR THE, UH, FOR THIS RE REPLACE REFACING
[00:10:01]
OF THE MONUMENT SIGNS.UM, BEF BEFORE THIS, UM, BEFORE THIS MEETING, OR BEFORE I SENT THESE PACKETS, THEY DID SEND AN EMAIL, UM, THAT, THAT FROM THE PERSON THAT IS IN THAT WOULD BE INSTALLING THE SIGNS WITH THE COST OF IT.
UM, THEY SENT THAT TO ME YESTERDAY,
UM, BUT, UM, BASED ON EVERYTHING THAT THEY HAVE SUBMITTED, UM, IT, IT'S JUST SHOWING THAT THEY'RE REPLACING THE, THEY'RE LOOKING TO REPLACE THIS KIND OF, UM, FACING OF, UH, OF THE MONUMENT SIGN.
AND IF YOU LOOK ON PAGE TWO OF FIVE OF THE INITIAL APPLICATION, IT SAYS REPLACE ENTRY SIGNS.
IT DOESN'T SAY REFACE, IT SAYS REPLACE.
I THINK WHAT LAURA'S SAYING IS IN THERE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION, IT SAYS REFACE, UH, EVERY MONUMENT REFACE ON ALL OF THE, ON ALL THREE OF THE, OF THE SIGNS.
UM, ENGINEERING ITEM ONE, LEGACY SIGNS, PAGES THREE AND FOUR ARE JUST FOR REFACING IT.
AND IS IT TOO LATE FOR THEM TO CORRECT THEIR, IS IT TOO LATE FOR THEM TO CATCH UP ON THIS FOR THIS CYCLE? I, I WOULD SAY SO THEY, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A COST FOR IT EITHER NOW, I GUESS WE DO NOW, BUT AS OF AS OF THIS CYCLE, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY COST FOR EITHER REFACING OR REPLACING.
UM, AND LIKE I SAID, I KNOW THEY HAD SOME, UH, I KNOW THEY HAD SOME MANAGEMENT THEY CHANGE IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS THAT PROBABLY CONTRIBUTES TO SOME OF THIS, BUT, UM, IF THEY, I MEAN, THEY'RE, THEY'RE WELCOME TO REAPPLY AGAIN IN THE FALL AND INCLUDING REPLACING THEIR MONUMENT SIGNS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED, UM, IF THEY, IF THEY HAVE THE LINE ITEM, UH, ESTIMATES PROVIDED FOR THAT ALSO.
AND THAT WOULD BE REPLACING EVERYTHING, INCLUDING THE WHOLE BRICK AND EVERYTHING, EVEN THOUGH IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THAT WOULD BE A COMMITTEE DECISION? WE WOULD, THEY'RE NOT EVEN ASKING WHAT THEY, THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR THE BRICK TO BE REPLACED.
THEY'RE JUST ASKING FOR THE FACING RIGHT.
UM, IT'S SIMPLY AN, IT'S, IT'S AN EMAIL FROM THE SIGN COMPANY THAT PROVIDED THE ESTIMATE, UM, AND IT, UH, IT'S $2,600.
UM, BUT WITH TAX, AND I DON'T THINK TAX WAS INCLUDED IN THEIR APPLICATION WITH TAX, IT'S $2,814 AND 50 CENTS.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S STILL WELL WITHIN THEIR, UM, CAPABILITY, THEY HAVEN'T USED UP THEIR A HUNDRED THOUSAND OVER.
UM, SO WHAT ARE THEY WITH? SO THE EMAIL INC WAS FROM THE SIGN COMPANY AND GAVE A QUOTE, IF THIS HAD COME TWO WEEKS AGO BEFORE WE GOT ALL THIS PRINTED UP, WOULD THAT HAVE MADE THEM ELIGIBLE? UM, I THINK THE ELIGIBILITY QUESTION LIES WITH WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS MAINTENANCE, MAINTENANCE OR NOT.
SO, UM, AND SCOTT CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
SO IF Y'ALL DETERMINE THIS IS NOT MAINTENANCE, UM, THEN UM, WE COULD POTENTIALLY ACCEPT THIS, UH, ESTIMATE.
AND SO NORMALLY A, A LIFESPAN WE WOULD CONSIDER THE USEFUL LIFE OF THIS 20 YEARS.
JUST AS A RULE OF THUMB, I'M NOT, YOU KNOW, I WOULDN'T, I HAVEN'T EVALUATED EVERY MONUMENT SIGN TO SEE, BUT I MEAN, WITH THIS ONE THERE IS, THERE IS SOME WEATHERING TO IT.
IT COULD USE REFACING FOR SURE, BUT, UM, THAT'S AGAIN, SOMETHING THAT WE HAD TRADITIONALLY CONSIDERED AN HOA RESPONSIBILITY.
UM, BUT IF THEY'RE REPLACING IT, THAT'S, THAT'S, AGAIN, THAT'S, THAT'S MORE Y'ALL'S CALL ON WHETHER THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE OR NOT.
AND AS YOU READ THIS, UM, INCLUDING THE MOST RECENT COMMUNICATION, IS IT THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE SIGN FACING THAT WOULD BE TAKEN OFF IN A NEW AND PRINTED AND PUT THERE? IS THAT HOW YOU'RE READING THAT? I WAS HAVING A HARD TIME TELLING, READING THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS HERE.
SO THE WHOLE THING THAT SAYS DUCK CREEK, IT STATES, WOULD THAT WHOLE PIECE BE REPLACED? THIS WHOLE WHITE PIECE.
IS, IS HOW I'M, IS HOW I'M INTERPRETING THAT.
UM, SEE, AND SEE, LIKE THIS MENTIONS BECAUSE IT, IT SAYS REMOVE AND DISCARD THREE EXISTING FACES, MANUFACTURE AND INSTALL THREE NEW FACES TO EXISTING MONUMENTS.
THIS MENTIONS A ACRYLIC, I'M NOT SURE BECAUSE I MEAN, YEAH, THE $2,000
[00:15:01]
FOR THREE MONUMENT SIGNS SEEMS LOW TO ME, SO I, I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S GOING ON THERE.WELL, GIVEN THAT IT WAS PUT IN, IN 2007, AND GIVEN THAT THE WHOLE, IT ISN'T THAT IT WOULD BE, UM, THAT THIS WOULD BE SANDBLASTED AND PAINTED OR SOMETHING, THIS IS ACTUALLY REPLACING THE ENTIRE FACE, NOT PAINTING IT OR TOUCHING IT UP.
I MEAN, READING THE APPLICATION AND THE WHOLE DOCUMENTATION, IT'S MESSY.
BUT, UM, I WOULD BE OKAY WITH, GIVEN THE AGE AND THE, THE STATE OF IT FROM THE PICTURES, I WOULD BE OKAY WITH, WITH SAYING THAT WE'LL COVER THAT 2000, WHATEVER THAT IS, THAT DOES SEEM VERY LOW FOR THE, FOR THE USE.
UM, ANYWAY, I, I ASSUME THAT YOU WOULD BE IN LINE.
YES, THAT'S MY OPINION AS WELL.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS, WE'RE WANTING TO START A PRECEDENT ON ALL THINGS, BUT I MEAN, IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE 2007 AND WE'VE BEEN THROUGH TORNADOES AND PLAGUES AND ICE STORMS,
SO LET'S, UH, UH, COMMITTEE, WE'RE ALL GOOD ON THAT.
AND SAYING NO TO THE, UM, THE OTHER THING THAT THEY HAD ASKED FOR, NO LANDSCAPING.
THE NEXT APPLICATION, SORRY, I'M JUST SCROLLING DOWN, IS PECAN GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, THEY ARE REQUESTING FUNDS TO INSTALL, UH, TWO PARK, TWO MURALS IN LAWN WIND PARK, UM, ONE ON THE RESTROOM BUILDING AND ONE ON THE STORAGE BUILDING.
UM, THEY WILL, UM, BE INSTALLING THEM ON THREE OUT OF THE FOUR SIDES ON BOTH BUILDINGS.
SO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDINGS WILL NOT BE MURAL.
UM, THEY'VE CHOSE, THEY'VE SELECTED AN ARTIST, A MURAL ARTIST WHO LIVES IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, HE HAS ALSO, UM, INSTALLED OTHER ART, UM, PUT OTHER ART INSTALLATIONS IN GARLAND AS WELL.
SO HE'S, UM, HE'S BEEN AROUND THE BLOCK A BIT,
AND SO, UM, PUBLIC ART, UH, PROJECTS ARE ELIGIBLE THROUGH THE MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM.
UM, BOTH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE ARTIST WILL NEED TO COORDINATE WITH PARKS DEPARTMENT AS THEY, UM, HAD EXPRESSED SOME COMMENTS REGARDING, UM, COORDINATING WITH, UH, JUST THE TIMING OF INSTALLATION OF AS WELL AS, UM, UH, VANDALISM GRAFFITI AND AND SUCH.
UM, THE ARTIST IN HIS, UH, ESTIMATE DID INCLUDE A LINE ITEM FOR MAINTENANCE AND EXPRESSED THE, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, IF IT SOMETHING HAPPENED, HE COULD TOUCH IT UP.
BUT LIKE I SAID, THAT WOULD, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COORDINATE WITH PARKS DEPARTMENT, UM, ON THOSE SPECIFICS.
ANY QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS? WELL, I MEAN, WE HAD A QUESTION WITH THE, THE PARKS DEPARTMENT'S CONCERN, GRAFFITI CONCERNS.
UM, AND, AND I COULDN'T TELL READING THROUGH ALL THIS, IF, UM, THERE ARE CONCERNS THAT IF SOMEBODY GRAFFITI IT, THEN THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, IF IF IT'S JUST PUT DIRECTLY ON THE BUILDING IN SOME CERTAIN WAYS, IT, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DESTROYED TO COVER VULGARITIES AND GANG TAGS AND THINGS.
SO WHAT THEY'RE, UM, I COULDN'T FIND IN HERE WHAT THE ARTIST PLANS TO DO IN RESPONSE TO THE PARKS DEPARTMENT'S CONCERNS IN THAT AREA.
'CAUSE WHAT, SIMILAR TO LANDSCAPING, WE DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR ARTWORK THAT THEN GETS TRASHED AND PAINTED OVER, UM, TO REMOVE GRAFFITI.
AND AS THEY RIGHTLY POINTED OUT, THAT GRAFFITI DOWN IN LONG WIND IS A MAJOR CONSIDERATION.
SO, UM, SO I GUESS I HAVE A, JUST A QUESTION IS, DID, DID THAT GET RESOLVED THAT I JUST COULDN'T READ IN HERE? THAT THEY'RE GONNA BE DOING, UM, PUTTING THIS MURAL MURAL ON IN SOME WAY THAT CAN BE CLEANED OR SOMETHING? RIGHT.
SO, UM, THE MURAL WILL BE TREATED WITH, UM, ANTI
[00:20:01]
GRAFFITI COATING.UM, SO THAT CAN HELP MITIGATE, UM, CERTAIN TYPES OF GRAFFITI.
UM, BUT AS FAR AS ANYTHING FURTHER, I COULDN'T, I COULDN'T SAY THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD NEED TO CONTINUE TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS, UM, BETWEEN PARKS AND THE APPLICANT.
SO I, I MISSED THE, AND I THINK ALL OF OUR STUFF IS, IS TREATED WITH THE ANTI GRAFFITI CODING.
UM, AND I SEE ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FROM THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.
UM, WELL, I'M, I'M FINE WITH IT AS LONG HERE.
I'M, I'M SEEING THIS, UH, HISTORICALLY THE VICINITY HAS EXPERIENCED A RECURRENT, RECURRENT INCIDENTS OF GRAFFITI FREQUENTLY, TYPICALLY ONCE A MONTH.
UM, WHEN THE GRAFFITI IS INAPPROPRIATE, OFFENSIVE, UH, CODE BASICALLY GOES OUT THROUGH PAINT OVERLAY.
SO THAT'S A TOUGH ONE, BUT I HATE TO SAY LEAVE THE PARK UNDECORATED.
UM, TOTAL COSTS ON THIS ONE OR WHAT? NINE? UH, 9,300.
I LIKE THE IDEA OF DECORATING THE PARK.
I LIKE THE DESIGNS THAT THEY'VE PICKED.
I LIKE THAT THEY HAVE A LOCAL ARTIST IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO MIGHT BE MORE WILLING TO CONTINUE TO WORK.
SO I, JUST THINKING THROUGH YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE GRAFFITI.
I THINK IT'S NOT A LICENSE AGREEMENT THAT WE'LL NEED 'CAUSE IT'S ON OUR PROPERTY.
IT'S, IT'S AN ARTIST AGREEMENT THAT WE, WHERE THEY SIGN OVER THE RIGHTS TO THEIR ART, THEIR PUBLIC ART TO THE CITY.
SO WE HAVE OWNERSHIP OF IT AS A PART OF THAT AGREEMENT.
AND AS A PART OF THIS, THIS FUNDING, WE COULD PUT A PROVISION IN THAT THE ARTIST HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN IT FOR, YOU KNOW, UM, IN CASE OF GRAFFITI.
UM, AND WE COULD BUILD IN THERE SOMETHING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE COST OF MATERIALS.
WE'RE NOT GONNA PAY FOR HIS TIME AND, AND MAINTAIN IT, BUT WE'LL PAY FOR THE COST OF MATERIALS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S A, IT'S A POSSIBILITY FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
JUST THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX ON THAT.
AND I THINK HE, THE, THE ARTIST ALREADY SAID HE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO TOUCHUPS AND THINGS, BUT UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS AS STRONG AS HAVING AN ACTUAL LICENSE TYPE OF AGREEMENT OR, OR WRITTEN AGREEMENT TO SAY THIS IS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT, THAT, UM, WE'RE REQUIRING.
SO, WELL HE CHARGES A $500 MAINTENANCE FEE, UM, IN HIS ESTIMATE.
SO I'D BE INTERESTED TO KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS, WHAT THAT ENTAILS.
YEAH, THE $500 MAINTENANCE FEE.
THAT'S ACTUALLY A PART OF THE LINE ITEM.
THAT WOULD BE, THAT SEEMS LIKE, IS THERE A TIMELINE? IS THERE, YOU KNOW, A NUMBER OF TIMES THAT HE'S WILLING TO DO IT FOR THAT $500? YEAH.
'CAUSE IF IT'S MONTHLY GRAFFITI, THIS, THAT'S PRETTY BAD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH, YEAH.
ALL OF MY COMMENTS ARE RELATED TO MAINTENANCE AS WELL.
UM, SO, WELL FIRST OF ALL WITH THE, THIS BEING A MATCHING GRANT AND MAINTENANCE IS NOT INCLUDED AS AN ELIGIBLE ITEM, I WOULD THINK EITHER THE WORDING NEEDS TO BE DIFFERENT OR WE'RE SETTING A PRECEDENT OR WE'RE DOING SOMETHING WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING.
UM, AS FAR AS COVERING MAINTENANCE WHEN MAINTENANCE ISN'T SOMETHING THAT'S COVERED.
UM, SECOND QUESTION I WOULD HAVE WOULD BE WITH, AGAIN, WITH THIS GOING THROUGH A MATCHING GRANT, UM, IN THE FUTURE, WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS THE MAINTENANCE RIGHTS? IT FALL BACK ON THE HOA, DOES IT FALL BACK ON US? 'CAUSE EVEN IF WE DO PAY THE GUY 500 BUCKS, THAT'S ONLY GONNA COVER MAYBE A YEAR.
YOU KNOW? SO, UM, I WOULD THINK THAT WHATEVER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT WE HAVE WITH HIM NEEDS TO BE DEFINED.
I WOULD THINK WE PROBABLY NEED TO MAKE SURE THE WORD MAINTENANCE IS NOT IN SOMETHING THAT WE'RE APPROVING.
'CAUSE I FEEL THAT'S SETTING A PRECEDENT AND, UM, YEAH, ULTIMATELY, I DON'T KNOW IF WE DO SOMETHING JOINT LIKE THIS, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LIFETIME MAINTENANCE OF THE PROJECT.
YOUR CONCERNS ARE, ARE WELL NOTED.
I WOULD SAY THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN MOST OF THESE MATCHING, UM, FUND GRANTS BECAUSE THIS IS ACTUALLY ON CITY PROPERTY, NOT PUBLIC PROPERTY.
AND SO THERE IS A DISTINCTION THERE THAT'S DISTINCTION BEING THAT IT'S IN THE PARK.
SO THIS, THIS ARTWORK IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE THE CITY'S ARTWORK.
AND SO THAT'S WHY THIS IS A LITTLE UNUSUAL.
I DON'T THINK WE NORMALLY DO MATCHING.
WE DON'T NORMALLY USE THIS, UM, FUNDING SOURCE FOR THIS TYPE OF THING OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD APPROACH AND SAID, WE THINK THIS IS A GREAT IDEA, IT'LL IMPROVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO IT MEETS THE INTENT OF WHY WE'RE DOING THESE, UH, MATCHING FUNDS.
BUT IT'S CERTAINLY A LITTLE DIFFERENT
[00:25:01]
AND THERE CERTAINLY WON'T BE ANY PRECEDENT AS FAR AS I CAN TELL.UM, UM, IF Y'ALL CHOOSE TO CONTINUE, UH, I MEAN, SO WE DO THAT WITH ART.
WHEN WE DO OUR ARTIST CONTRACTS, WE HAVE, UH, PROVISIONS IN THERE RELATED TO MAINTENANCE AND ONGOING MAINTENANCE.
AND SO, UM, IT'D BE BASICALLY PUT IN THE ARTIST CONTRACT.
AND, AND IN THIS CASE, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD MATCHES ZERO.
SO THIS IS NOT THEM USING THEIR MONEY TO IMPROVE PUBLIC PROPERTY IN THIS CASE.
SO, UM, SO CAN WE DO, CAN WE DO WHAT MR. ENGLAND HAS SUGGESTED AND GET LANGUAGE IN THERE WITH THE ARTIST CONTRACT TO ADDRESS THESE PARTICULAR CONCERNS? WE, WE'VE, WE'VE USED ARTIST AGREEMENTS ON SOME PAST PROJECTS AND OKAY.
UH, WANNA REVIEW THAT AGAIN? WELL, IF THAT'S IN PLACE, I WOULD BE HAPPY WITH THIS.
AND, AND LIKE I SAID, I, I LOVE THE DESIGNS THEY'VE CHOSEN.
I LIKE ALL THE, EVERYTHING ABOUT IT.
I JUST HEARING HOW MONTHLY GRAFFITI IS GOING ON DOWN THERE, I JUST HATE TO SEE IT DEFACE, UM, AND, AND RUINED, SO.
COMMITTEE, ARE YOU WITH THOSE, UH, PROVISOS? ARE YOU GOOD WITH MOVING FORWARD ON THIS ONE? YES.
AND THE GOOD NEWS IS THE ARTIST BLUE REALLY LIVES RIGHT DOWN THE STREET, SO HE'LL SEE IT ON A DAILY BASIS.
IT'LL ANNOY HIM IF IT'S BROKEN.
WELL AND I THINK ONCE IT'S, ONCE IT IS DECORATED, YOU'RE GONNA SEE A DROP IN THE VANDALISM.
AND THEN THE LAST OF THE THREE APPLICATIONS, UM, WAS FROM RAINBOW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THEY HAVE REQUESTED FUNDING TO, UM, REMOVE TREES IN THE, UH, CLEAN UP THE CREEK AREA, IN THE CREEK ADJACENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALONG, UM, STATE HIGHWAY 66.
UM, AND SO, UM, GREEN SPACE AND DRAINAGE CLEANUP CAN BE VIEWED AS MAINTENANCE TYPE PROJECT, WHICH IS NOT ELIGIBLE THROUGH MATCHING GRANT.
UM, AND, UM, ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS IN MOST CASES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF VEGETATION AND TREES AND SUCH.
UM, AND SO, UM, WHILE THE CITY DOES MAINTAIN A, A GOOD PORTION OF THE AREA, THERE ARE SOME PORTIONS THAT, UM, UM, THAT ARE, THAT ARE NOT MAINTAINED, UM, BY THE CITY.
AND SO, UM, THERE ARE SOME, UH, COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS, UM, JUST EXPRESSING CONCERNS ABOUT REMOVING HEALTHY TREES, UM, JUST DUE TO, UM, BECAUSE TREES PROVIDE BANK STABILITY AND UM, ARE NEEDED TO HELP WITH EROSION AND REMOVING THEM CAN, UM, PROVIDE BANK FAILURE.
AND THIS IS THE ONLY REQUEST IS, IS JUST REMOVAL OF TREES AND CLEANING OUT.
I HAD HEARD OTHER THINGS ABOUT BENCHES, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER REQUESTS.
SO THE BENCHES IS PART OF A, A PREVIOUS, UM, PREVIOUS APPLICATION.
AND SO THAT SHOULD BE COMING IN OKAY.
SO YEAH, SO THAT HAS NOT IMPACTED, UM, THE, THOSE PROJECTS ARE STILL MOVING FORWARD.
UM, EVERYTHING MOVES SLOWLY THESE DAYS IN THE WHOLE WORLD.
UM, AND I SEE LOOKING AT ALL THE, AT THE PARKS DEPARTMENTS AND ENGINEERING'S COMMENTS, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT BANK STABILITY IF YOU REMOVE LIVING TREES THAT ARE, THEIR ROOT SYSTEM IS ACTUALLY SUPPORTING THE BANK.
UM, AND I SEE FROM THE, FROM PLANNING, UH, A LINK IS PROVIDED TO THE GDC TREE PRESERVATION AND MITIGATION, UM, WHERE TREES ANYWAY, UH, THIS, THIS DOESN'T APPEAR TO QUALIFY FOR THIS PROGRAM IF I AM READING IT CORRECTLY.
BECAUSE WE DON'T DO PLANTS AND VEGETATION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? NOPE.
AND THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR WORK ON THESE.
[00:30:04]
ALL RIGHT.AND OUR VISITORS FROM, UH, RAINBOW.
HOPEFULLY WE CAN, UH, WE CAN CHAT, UM, AFTERWARDS ON THIS ALL.
SO WITH THAT, I'M TRYING TO GET BACK TO MY, UH, AGENDA.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? THANK YOU MA'AM.
SO WITH THAT, THAT, UH, WE ARE AT THREE ITEM THREE B, WHICH IS DISCUSS MOBILE ICE CREAM SALES.
AGAIN, HOPEFULLY THIS IS THE LAST TIME I SURE.
UM, ALRIGHT, SO, UH, MR. ENG ENGLAND, DO YOU WANNA WALK US THROUGH, YOU GAVE US A SURE.
DOES EVERYBODY HAVE THE MOST RECENT REVISED? THERE WE GO.
I PROVIDED Y'ALL BOTH BY EMAIL AND THEN THE HARD COPIES TODAY, UM, ARE RELATIVELY, UM, UM, DI MINIMIS, BUT YET THEY'RE VERY IMPORTANT, UM, BECAUSE THEY WERE RELATED TO PERMITTING.
UM, WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THIS, UM, PARTICULAR INSTANCE IS WE HAVE A, UM, DISAGREEMENT WITH DALLAS COUNTY ON HOW ICE CREAM TRUCKS AND CARTS ARE TO BE PERMITTED OR IF THEY SHOULD BE PERMITTED.
AND, UM, THEY ARE UNDER THE OPINION THAT THEY SHOULD NOT.
UM, I HAPPEN TO DISAGREE, BUT LAWYERS DISAGREE ALL THE TIME.
SO, UM, WE ALL HAVE OUR OWN OPINIONS.
UM, BUT IT PUTS US IN A, IN A, IN A TOUGH POSITION BECAUSE HOW THE ORDINANCE DID READ PRIOR TO THE AMENDMENTS THAT I PROVIDED YOU BOTH BY EMAIL AND THROUGH THE HARD COPY IT READ THAT IN ORDER TO OPERATE AN ICE CREAM CART OR AN ICE CREAM TRUCK, YOU HAD TO, THEY HAD TO BE PROPERLY PERMITTED THROUGH THE REGULATORY AUTHORITY OR ITS
UM, UM, QUITE FRANKLY, UM, I SENT YOU THAT EMAIL.
I DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT PERMITTING AND A LITTLE BIT ABOUT DELEGATED AUTHORITY.
THE PROBLEM WITH THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO PERMIT, UM, THEY LACK, THEY MOST LIKELY LACK THE AUTHORITY UNDER STATE LAW TO DELEGATE THAT PARTICULAR ASPECT OF, OF REGULATING, UM, ICE CREAM TRUCKS OR FOOD TRUCKS IN GENERAL.
AND THE REASON BEING IS THE STATE LAW IS PRETTY CLEAR ABOUT WHO'S SUPPOSED TO ISSUE THE PERMIT.
IT SAYS THE COUNTY SHALL ISSUE THE PERMIT.
UM, AND SO THEY CAN'T REALLY DELEGATE AROUND THAT.
AND THAT'S KIND OF THE PROBLEM.
SO WE DON'T HAVE THE OPTION WHEN IT COMES TO ICE CREAM, ICE CREAM TRUCKS OR, UM, UM, AND, AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CONVERSATION ALLOWED ME JUST TO REFER TO ICE CREAM TRUCKS, REALIZING THAT I'M ALSO REFERRING TO FOOD CARTS THAT ARE OPERATING AS ICE CREAM CARTS.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE THE OPTION TO PERMIT ICE CREAM TRUCKS.
AND SO THE QUESTION WAS, IN DRAFTING THIS ORDINANCE, HOW DO WE DRAFT IT IN SUCH A WAY WHERE WE SAY THAT, LISTEN, IF THE COUNTY'S ISSUING PERMITS FOR THIS TYPE OF USE, THEN YOU'RE REQUIRED TO GET THE, IF THEY'RE ISSUING, BUT THE COUNTY'S NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT, WHICH RIGHT NOW MY UNDERSTANDING IS, AND MANDY CAN CORRECT ME AT ANY TIME, THEY'RE NOT REQUIRING A PERMIT.
AND SO IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE, UM, UM, IT WON'T BE PART OF THE ORDINANCE.
I TRIED TO BUILD SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THERE.
NOW THE QUESTION IS REALLY A POLICY QUESTION FOR Y'ALL AND FOR COUNSEL IN GENERAL.
AND THAT IS, ARE Y'ALL COMFORTABLE WITH ICE CREAM TRUCKS IN GARLAND AND ICE CREAM CARTS NOT HAVING PERMITS ISSUED TO THEM, BUT YET STILL BEING REQUIRED AND REGULATED UNDER STATE LAW AND STATE RULES, TFA RULES? AND IF YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, THEN WE CAN PROCEED UNDER THIS ORDINANCE.
IF YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THEM BEING UN PERMITTED, THEN UM, UM, THEN WE'LL BE BACK TO WHERE WE STARTED FROM WHERE THEY'RE JUST NOT ALLOWED IN THE CITY.
AND IT'LL BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW OTHER CITIES IN THE COUNTY, UM, IN DALLAS, IN TARRANT COUNTY FOR THAT MATTER, BUT IT'S PARTICULARLY DALLAS COUNTY.
'CAUSE DALLAS COUNTY WAS CAUGHT OFF GUARD WITH THIS, HOW THEY RESPOND TO THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, WHETHER THE CITIES WILL TRY TO ISSUE A PERMIT OR NOT, I DON'T RECOMMEND IT 'CAUSE WE LACK THE JURISDICTION TO DO IT.
AND SO IF WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD AS A POLICY MATTER TO ALLOW TRUCKS, ICE CREAM TRUCKS TO OPERATE WITHIN THE CITY, THEN I RECOMMEND THAT WE, UM, UM, UM, THAT Y'ALL PASSED THE PARTICULAR DRAFT OF THE ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF Y'ALL.
SO JUST TO, TO BE CLEAR BEFORE I OPEN IT UP FOR OTHER QUESTIONS, UM, WE UH, REMOVED THE BLANKET PROHIBITION AGAINST ICE CREAM TRUCKS OPERATING IN THE CITY OF GARLAND, WHICH WAS ROUNDLY IGNORED FOR DECADES.
UH, WE REMOVED THAT SOME MONTHS AGO.
AND SO, AND SINCE THEN THEY'VE BEEN BASICALLY DOING WHAT THEY'VE ALWAYS DONE AND JUST OPERATING ANYWAY,
SO IF WE DO NOT, UM, IF WE WANT TO ALLOW ICE CREAM TRUCKS TO OPERATE IN THE CITY OF GARLAND, WHICH THE COUNCIL SAID WE DO, THEN UM, IT PRETTY MUCH REQUIRES US TO DO SOMETHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE WITH
[00:35:01]
DALLAS COUNTY BECAUSE WHAT'S, WHAT HAPPENED? WELL, I, I'M ASKING WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DO NOTHING WE SAY, WE SAID THEY'RE ALLOWED.WHEN YOU SAY DO NOTHING, DO YOU MEAN IN REGARD TO THE PERMITTING OR THE HEALTH AND SAFETY ASPECT OF IT? OR ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT MORE IN TERMS OF THE TIME AND PLACE? I'M SAYING IF WE, IF WE JUST DID NOT SPEAK TO ANY OF THESE THINGS, INCLUDING TIME AND PLACE FOR THIS, INCLUDING TIME AND PLACE, NOW WE WENT OVER THAT EARLIER IN THIS, IN THIS COMMITTEE WITH, UM, SOME OTHER MEMBERS AND THOSE WERE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR IN COMMITTEE.
I DUNNO HOW THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE WILL FEEL, FEEL ABOUT THAT.
BUT, UM, WHAT ARE THE REPERCUSSIONS IF WE, IF WE SIMPLY DIDN'T SPEAK TO IT TO ANY OF THESE THINGS? WELL, THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION.
UM, WE WOULD BASICALLY DEFAULT TO STATE LAW AND THE T FOR RULES, UM, FOR THE HEALTH AND SAFETY ASPECT OF IT.
BUT, UM, MY READING OF IT NOT DALLAS COUNTIES, IS THAT THEY STILL WERE REQUIRED TO HAVE A PERMIT AND THEY WOULD NOT BE ISSUED A PERMIT, BUT DALLAS COUNTY AND WE WOULD HAVE NOTHING TO ADDRESS THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE.
UM, THIS ADDRESSES THAT ISSUE BECAUSE WE PUT IN THERE, I PUT IN THE WORDS, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU GO TO THE SECOND PAGE TO SECTION 2 2, 8 0.228 ENTITLED FOOD CARTS, YOU'LL SEE UNDER SUBSECTION B THAT I'VE ADDED FOOD CARTS OPERATING WITH THE CITY SHALL HAVE A VALID FOOD SERVICE PERMIT IF REQUIRED.
SO THAT'S HOW I ADDRESSED IT WITH THOSE TWO SIMPLE WORDS IF REQUIRED.
UM, AND SO IF THE COUNTY'S NOT REQUIRING IT IN SAYING THAT WE DON'T NEED, WE DON'T HAVE TO PERMIT THESE, UM, UM, THEN THAT ADDRESSES THAT ISSUE.
AND IN REGARD TO THE TIME AND PLACE, IF YOU DID NOTHING AT ALL, UM, QUITE FRANKLY, IF YOU DID NOTHING AT ALL, INCLUDING ADDED THAT PROVISION, YOU, WE COULD, AS A MATTER OF POLICY SAY WE'RE GONNA ALLOW, UM, ICE CREAM TRUCKS TO OPERATE IN THE CITY UN PERMITTED AND ONLY THING WE'RE GONNA HOLD 'EM TO ARE HEALTH AND SAFETY STANDARDS TO TEER FOUND WITHIN TEER AND THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO OPERATE WHEN AND WHERE WITHOUT RESTRICTION, UM, UM, UM, THROUGHOUT THE CITY AT THAT POINT IF WE MADE THAT POLICY DECISION.
WELL THAT WAS, THAT WAS WHAT I WANTED TO ASK BECAUSE THE COMPOSITION OF THIS COMMITTEE HAS CHANGED.
AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE HERE ARE NOW KIND OF WANTING TO MOVE IN THE SAME DIRECTION.
SO, UM, SO OPENING IT UP FOR CONVERSATION, THE QUE THE EARLIER COMMITTEE HAD CONCERNS ABOUT NOISE, UM, THAT HAD, THEY HAD RECEIVED COMPLAINTS ABOUT NOISE AND HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THE LOCATIONS, WHICH MANY OTHER CITIES WHO ALREADY HAVE THESE THINGS IN PLACE DON'T ALLOW THEM TO OPERATE.
UM, THEY LIMIT THEIR HOURS OF OPERATION FROM, I THINK THIS, THIS WAS ONE OF THE LENIENT ONES, 11:00 AM TILL DARK, UM, AND NOT AROUND SCHOOLS WHILE SCHOOLS ARE IN SESSION.
UM, AND SO THOSE WERE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN PURSUING.
AND THOSE ARE ALL CAUGHT IN HERE, UM, APPROPRIATELY.
THE QUESTION IS NOW WITH THE CURRENT COMMITTEE COMPOSITION, UM, I JUST WANNA OPEN THE DOOR AND SAY, DO YOU HAVE, UH, READING THIS? ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH IT? IT'S PRETTY LIGHT TOUCH, I THINK.
UM, BUT I WANTED TO OPEN THAT QUESTION BEFORE MAKING ASSUMPTIONS, HAD A CHAT ORDER.
CAN I ADDRESS ONE THING THAT I WENT BACK AND LISTENED TO Y'ALL'S, I WAS GONE LAST TIME WITH THE ROOT CANAL, BUT MM-HMM,
UM, I WANTED TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF POINTS Y'ALL TOUCHED ON LAST TIME Y'ALL MET WHEN I WASN'T HERE.
AND ONE OF THOSE WAS THE TIME RESTRICTION.
AND WHY WE, WHY I DRAFTED IN THERE, IT BE TIED TO NOAH.
AND THE REASON I DID THAT ISN'T FOR ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES.
THE REASON I DID THAT IS FOR PROSECUTION PURPOSES, WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME DEFINITE TIME AND WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO APPROVE, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PROVE THAT IT OCCURRED AT A DEFINITE TIME IN ORDER TO PROSECUTE CASES WHERE THERE'S A VIOLATION OF THESE THINGS.
SO THAT'S THE REASON IT'S SO PRECISE.
I KNOW THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATION, DOES IT NEED TO BE THAT PRECISE OR IT SEEMS KIND OF CONFUSING.
BUT YOU KNOW, THAT KIND OF COMES WITH DRAFTING ORDINANCES AND, UM, LEGISLATION, ESPECIALLY WITH CRIMINAL PENALTIES ATTACHED TO IT.
YOU HAVE TO BE VERY PRECISE AND THAT'S THE REASON IT WAS DRAFTED THAT WAY.
THE OTHER, THE OTHER TOPIC Y'ALL TOUCHED ON A LITTLE BIT WAS THE, UM, ICE CREAM CARTS.
AND UM, UM, AND FROM WHAT I COULD HEAR, AND I COULDN'T HEAR SCOTT, HE DIDN'T HAVE HIS MICROPHONE ON, SO I COULDN'T REALLY HEAR WHAT SCOTT WAS SAYING.
I SAID, I'M ASSUMING SCOTT GAVE GOOD LEGAL ADVICE WHILE HE WAS HERE, BUT I CAN'T CONFIRM THAT 'CAUSE I COULDN'T
SO I WAS GIVING HIM A HARD TIME ABOUT THAT
UM, BUT THE ICE CREAM CARTS ARE ACTUALLY, WILL BE, UM, UM, REGULATED AS FOOD CARTS.
AND SO THEY'RE JUST, THEY FALL UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF FOOD CARTS.
SO ICE CREAM CARTS AND EVERYTHING THAT GOES ALONG WITH THEM.
AS YOU THINK OF ICE CREAM CARTS, THEY THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED UNDER OUR ORDINANCE, THEY'D BE REGULATED AS FOOD CARTS.
SO THOSE ARE THE TWO ITEMS THAT I
[00:40:01]
HEARD Y'ALL HAD DISCUSSING.UM, AT SOMEWHAT LENGTH, UM, LAST TIME Y'ALL MET.
AND I THINK THAT WAS BECAUSE WITH THE, WITH THE CARTS, IT'S NOT THE PRE-PACKAGED, YOU KNOW, PRE-PACKAGED THINGS.
IT'S WHERE YOU SCOOP STUFF, YOU ASSEMBLE STUFF.
I THINK THAT WAS PART OF WHAT WE, WELL, AND THERE'S A, I DON'T WANNA GET INTO THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF IT, QUITE FRANKLY.
MANDU BE A BETTER GETTING INTO THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF WHAT IT MEANS TO, WHAT IT MEANS AS A FROZEN FOOD IS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW AND PATHOGENS AND ALL THAT, UM, UM, ICE CREAM.
AND I, I THINK THIS IS WHY THE COUNTY IS SAYING THAT WE DON'T NEED TO ISSUE PERMITS, QUITE FRANKLY, IS BECAUSE OF THIS.
THEY JUST, I WE JUST HAVE A DISAGREEMENT ON THE DISTINCTION THAT STATE LAW DRAWS BETWEEN, UM, FOOD ESTABLISHMENT AND MOBILE FOOD UNITS.
THEY NOT, THEY DON'T NECESSARILY SEE A DISTINCTION THERE.
BUT, UM, WITHOUT GETTING INTO ALL THAT, UM, YES, YOU'RE CORRECT THAT, UM, THAT WILL BE ALLOWED.
ARE WE LIKING THIS? WHICH IS A, AGAIN, A, A PRETTY LIGHT TOUCH THAT HOPEFULLY KEEPS US OUT OF, UH, LEGAL, UH, STEPPING ON THE TOES OF DALLAS COUNTY OR THE STATE OF TEXAS, BUT, UM, LETTING US REGULATE HEALTH ITEMS, UM, HAVING, GIVING US THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT AND, UM, SHOULD WE HAVE PROBLEMS COME UP.
THIS GIVES US SOME CLEAN AND EASY TO UNDERSTAND GUIDELINES, UH, SO THAT PEOPLE AREN'T JUST TRYING TO GUESS WHETHER THEY'RE IN COMPLIANCE OR NOT.
SO, NO, UH, I LIKE IT THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN UP.
WELL LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
AND WE DID WANT TO, UH, THERE WAS A PARTICULAR THING YOU WERE WANTING, UM, TO HAVE KIND OF BETTER DEFINED BY THE FULL COUNSEL.
CORRECT? I I I WE JUST NEED THE POLICY DECISION IF COUNSEL'S COMFORTABLE WITH, AS A WHOLE OF MOVING FORWARD WITH THE, THE ICE CREAM TRUCKS OPERATING WITHIN THE CITY WITHOUT A PERMIT.
'CAUSE CLEARLY THEY WILL BE DOING THAT.
WELL AND THEY DID THAT FOR, WHAT, 30 YEARS, RIGHT?
WE'RE VERY, EVERY NIGHT WE'RE AMAZINGLY, NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, THEY'RE GONNA BE OPERATING WITHOUT PERMITS.
ALRIGHT, WELL LET'S, UH, LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
UM, AND I WILL LET YOU GO THROUGH IT WITH LEGALESE AND OKAY.
IF THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION, WE ARE TO ITEM FOUR.
SO AT 4:46 PM UH, WE ARE ADJOURNED.