San Angelo City Council 3-18-14

[0:00:00] good morning everyone and we welcome you to this session of the San Angelo city council it is 902 and if the council is ready left wing you ready yes sir rod Wayne you ready I will call this meeting to order and as always we will start our meeting with prayer Ed Lopez if you would come forward please sir good to see you buddy please join me as we pray they're wise and loving father first let me say thank you on behalf of all who are gathered here today thank you for your many and Abundant Blessings thank you for life itself for the measure of Health that we need to fulfill our callings for sustenance and for friendship we thank you Lord for the ability to be involved in useful work and for the honor of bearing appropriate responsibilities father God in the scriptures you've said that citizens ought to obey their governing authorities since you have established those very authorities to promote peace and Order and justice therefore Lord father I pray for our mayor for the various levels of City officials and in particular for this assembled Council and I'm asking you that you would graciously grant them wisdom to govern amid the conflicting interests and issues of our times give them a sense of the welfare and true needs of our people and confidence in what is good and fitting with the ability to work together in harmony and Lord father bless them with personal peace in their lives and joy in their task I pray for the agenda set before them today please give them an assurance of what would please you and what would benefit those who live and work in and around

[0:02:03] our beloved city of San Angelo and bless us O Lord with much needed rain for it is in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ that we pray amen amen amen thank you well he's got boys like Darth Vader hasn't he and now I'm going to ask Esther why didn't Oakley Orleans come forward and they will be doing our pledge come forward ladies you all ready let's start with that one pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States one nation under God and indivisible with liberty and justice for all the Texas flag I pledge allegiance to the Texas one State under God one and indivisible thank you very much huh and just for the record may I announce that these two girls were the National Geographic spelling bee winners very good proud of you and we're going just a little bit off of agenda this morning but we have got a group of people in our audience this morning that deserve a lot of recognition and a lot of Honor because they have they have done something that's not been done before and that is our Water Valley boys basketball team that went to State and won the state tournament and represent us in the Contour Valley and in Tom Green counties as the state winners and at this time I would like for the coaches and the boys and the cheerleaders come forward we need some speeches and then I want you to introduce yourself and then we're

[0:04:06] going to take a picture this is a good looking group of kids and we're very very proud of what you've accomplished it has it's truly an honor to have you here this morning thank you here we go mm-hmm my name is Andy Copley I'm the I'm the boys basketball coach it's a huge honor for us to be here today uh we we truly appreciate the invitation anytime we get a chance to come forward and have our kids recognized we jump at that opportunity uh they're beginning to realize uh what they've accomplished uh at the time it was just a game and we tried to encourage them to keep it at just a game and then after the fact we can make it as big as we want once we take care of business but we've had the opportunity to uh coach these kids for four years and they've had just a great career not just this year these senior boys have 112 games and uh you know 43 football games just had a tremendous career academically and athletically uh and all the kids but especially these seniors but we we thank you for uh having us come this morning and allow them to introduce themselves of course no one's fired up about that that's behind me especially the young ladies but I would like to introduce first uh my assistant John York he's back here somewhere stand up okay he is our athletic director and football

[0:06:09] coach uh Manuel Gamboa the pretty one at the back uh Tara Rogers is our cheerleading sponsor here um and we appreciate the cheerleaders as well uh if uh if there's any questions I'd gladly uh field them otherwise I'll turn it over to the kids and allow them to introduce themselves so I can get them back to school uh Brant Kirkland also our high school principal uh is here as well and he's also a daddy like I am the two of these young men young men Coach York son also we're all involved as coaches as Administration and as parents on this team which is which is neat as well as as is uh Tara anything before I before I uh turn it over to these guys beginning with seniors we as a team would like to uh thank uh Mary Morrison for the invitation and we'd like to present you with a gold medal first thing I ever won but thank you again uh senior boys you can introduce yourselves um tell them your position your your class and uh anything else you'd like but I think before I before I do that I have to I have one little story uh of course at the at the state tournament this year we uh had the privilege of having Shaquille O'Neal at our game he was at the tournament being introduced as a 25-year uh old honor uh player from San Antonio Cole and in our game actually he was there and he sat on the front row right across my bench and watched us play so in our bench had one eye on him and the other eye on the game and I honestly didn't notice him honestly didn't notice him until uh the fourth period was he that whole game okay and uh someone I was I had cottonmouth the whole game I was more worried about that than I was

[0:08:10] anyone sitting across from the from the bench but he sat over there in just a a giant of a man and as the game went on and we kind of pulled away I began to kind of notice the surroundings in the environment and I noticed him but I really noticed him when the kids were all pointing at him and laughing because he was standing over there or sitting over there laughing back at us and that's when I really noticed him and you know what had happened on the court was some some kids that had gone in the game and and won back here not to name names but uh initials or Tanner counts and and uh he he was attacking the basket and lost his balance fell pretty hard uh turned the ball over uh slipped and basically caught himself with his face on the floor and I don't think Shaq would have laughed if that necessarily but our bench kind of exploded and when he was pointing at our bench and laughing you know in his teeth are about that big as well and you could just it was pretty neat and then Tanner turned around somehow he he he kept his you know his his mind because he hit his head pretty hard and he turned around and followed the kid from behind but they didn't call it he ripped the ball away and then he went and scored he probably doesn't remember it but in all that sequence was is about 10 seconds but it felt like it was about two minutes and Shaq couldn't keep himself from from laughing and then then after the game he came into the hallway and was laughing with him uh you know one-on-one as he met with our team and and took a team picture with us as he was congratulating us and and uh laughing and joking with us so it was a lot of fun having him uh there as well so not only do we get to go play in the state tournament we got to spend post game with Shaquille O'Neal that was that was pretty neat um Andrew Darby he was very kind to us as well uh both years we've gone down

[0:10:13] there uh any questions okay just circle back around we're going to take a picture right up there all righty I'm Brock Demery um I'm a senior and I am the starting power forward here at Water Valley um uh Connor Copley I'm also a senior in the starting point guard I'm Trey Hannan and I'm a senior and I'm the starting small forward I'm Kellen Kirkland I'm a senior and I'm a starting post I'm Cameron Copley I'm a freshman and I'm the started shooting guard I'm Cody Zuniga I'm a junior and I'm a post I'm Sam Shepard I'm a junior and I'm a five nine post on tenor counts Junior and I'm a guard on your face I'm John Torres uh post I'm a junior oh yeah I'm Devin glass Junior post I'm tireless I'm a freshman point guard uh I'm Asher Rogers I'm a sophomore and a wing okay you're Kate York I'm a junior post

[0:12:22] Tyler Hoover freshman post um Jared or Banky um sophomore and Ford ladies I am Abby glass and I'm a senior and I'm a cheerleader I'm Haley Rogers I'm a senior and I'm a cheerleader I'm Carrie long I'm a junior and I'm a cheerleader I'm Genevie Gutierrez I'm a sophomore and a cheerleader Katie Baker I'm a freshman and I'm a cheerleader I'm Elena McCoy and I'm a freshman and I'm a cheerleader I'm Addie York I'm a freshman I'm a cheerleader Maddie Shepard freshman cheerleader did we get them all I think so let's get them up around here I definitely outside can you hear him

[0:14:44] we'll bring it back next year when you win the next one okay next on the agenda is the west Texas hunger Coalition and I will have the ladies come forward please and as I read this and we'll present you this Proclamation it says whereas the Texas hunger initiative it's a collaborative effort both locally and Statewide whose goal is to win hunger in Texas throughout policy education research Grassroots organizing and Community Development and San Angelo is one of 12 Texas cities selected as a regional office to recruit and train Community Partners who will provide more access points for eligible residents to apply for Texas benefits including the supplemental nutrition assistance program chip tnf and Medicaid and the kids eat free summer meal program was established to support the need to relieve hunger during the summer months because more than one in four families with children in Tom Green County have times when there is not enough money to buy food that is 5400 households in San Angelo and the Tom Green County hunger initiative provides education on topics that affect the ability or inability of some residents to be food secure including gardening Church School Partnerships availability of nutritious food payday loans food desserts and the Texas hungry initiative San Angelo regional office along with sponsors Angelo State University the Tom Green County partnership for Better Health Shannon Medical Center of the cactus Hotel region 15 Education Service Center and HEB have organized the west Texas hunger Summit now therefore why Dwayne Morrison the mayor of the city of San Angelo Texas on behalf of the city council do hereby proclaim the 27th day of March 214 of the first annual West Texas hunger Summit thank you thank you who's going to make a speech here we are really excited to let you know that we are having the first annual West Texas hunger Summit on March the 27th which is a week from Thursday we would like to invite all of you to attend we

[0:16:46] are the first of the 12 regions that have been set up as the Texas hunger initiative to have our regional Summit and so we want to be very successful and be a Pioneer in this area we are excited for the topics that we have that are going to be available for you to choose the uh there are several things that you would not necessarily think of as hunger but many things contribute to somebody being hungry including something like payday loans with if you don't have enough money to pay a loan then you will cut back on how much money you can pay on food and and then different different food deserts that we have in our community and in the communities around us where there's not ready accessibility to food uh whereas if someone doesn't have a transportation to get to the grocery store and they have to walk a long distance to a bus stop then those that constitutes a food desert so there are many things that we're going to be talking about school Church Partnerships and gardening and Ministry to the homeless there are lots of different things and we think that it'll be a really benefit for anybody to come our keynote speaker is going to be talking about asset-based Community Development and that's where you look at neighborhoods within a community you find their strengths and if you are going to try to achieve some change or to reinforce the things that are already being done in neighborhoods you can look at that and look from within and always change that comes from within is that that's more sustainable so we really encourage all of you to attend the registration is only ten dollars and it does include your lunch so it's very reasonable and we really would like to have all segments of the community be present so thank you thank you man thank you you want to speak no no thank you very much I believe we have the boys club Boys and

[0:18:54] Girls Club next Ed come forward you and Harry and anyone else bring the rest of your staff up anything whereas the young people of San Angelo Texas are tomorrow's leaders and many such young people need professional Youth Services to help them reach their full potential and there is the Boys and Girls Club of San Angelo provide services to more than 4 000 young people annually and the boys and girls club is a place where few great Futures start they are at the Forefront of efforts and academic success Healthy Lifestyles good character and citizenship and whereas Boys and Girls Club organization our city help ensure that our young people keep off the streets offering them a safe and a supportive place to go and providing them with quality programs and whereas the Boys and Girls Club of San Angelo will celebrate National Boys and Girls Club week 2014 along with 91 other clubs in Texas and more than one thousand clubs Nationwide now therefore I Dwayne Morrison mayor of the city of San Angelo on behalf of city council do hereby Proclaim March 23 through March 29 214 as Boys and Girls Club week in San Angelo Texas thank you gentlemen and ladies the preacher really doesn't want me to speak because if he gets a microphone he'll be here for a while what we want to say is we've got a thousand members that we've come to the club on a regular basis it cost us about five hundred dollars a member all year long we need the support of the community it takes a whole Community to raise a child my parents said that a long time ago and I believe it's still the way it is today so we need your help we also want to encourage you any of the golfers that are out there we've got a golf tournament that's going to be on May 31st at quicksands and they're going to be a lot of sponsors uh State Farm Tony villier Al uh group is going to help sponsor some of that got any players out there it's really

[0:20:56] reasonable and it'll help the club a lot thank you so much thank you anything else and you want to make speech it's the opportunity preacher never turns on never it is a privilege for all of us standing before you uh always to be able to serve the young people of our community you know like Harry said we serve over 4 000 lives that we impact throughout the year each and every year uh and it it can't be done alone it takes all of us working together not only as a staff and as a board but as a city as well so we thank you for the opportunity that we that you give us to be able to serve the young people of our city and to keep them safe thank you so much my director of operations Aaron Hernandez my Northside unit director Mr Marion Anderson my South Side unit director Mr Michael B Hill thank you very much we have one more and this is Kenny Frankie Kenny Frankie Architects y'all come forward please Carl white you here this is a proclamation you make a difference commending the city of San Angelo and Kenny Frankie Architects for doing more doing it better and exceeding our expectations your high standards Inspire us all and this thing's heavy here you come holy Carl it's going to speak on this Carl and we're truly honored to receive this award I want to mention this this

[0:22:59] project has been a long project we started back in 2003 or 2004 if I recall and and finally finished it with the funding and all the design and studies that had to be required to do this project about 10 years later uh staff deserves a lot of credit David Knapp are on in-house architect Rick Wise also right in the middle of all the design of the project of course city council got to see several iterations of the design and get the review and comment on it and of course the public did too so this award goes to everybody here I also want to mention it really goes to Kenny Frankie Architects because they did the the brunt of the whole design of the project so I I have served this is from the Texas recreation park Society have served on that board for four years and I served on the awards committee for seven years and I was originally off and I know how difficult it is to receive this award because you basically have to compete against all the other cities that have much bigger projects much bigger staff more resources to build projects like this so it's it's a very deserving award playing a project this is the River Project the the renovation of the River Project from basically Bell Street to 14th Street and the core area which was between Oak Street and First Street by the high school it's all the renovation of the trails the lighting the bank stabilization the improvements along the way the the new Bosque area down below at Irving Street and all those improvements with the art and everything and maybe if Craig wants to speak to it was a real privilege working on this project and we are really grateful it's rare that we have an opportunity to work on a project that affects a community in such a rich and rewarding way and thank thanks to you guys thanks to the city staff and thanks to Brooks weiner James Haynes and Kai Franke in our

[0:25:02] office it was a great team project and we also enjoyed working with the contractors and subs and it's not that often we can say that so yeah that's not actually true but thank you all we really appreciate it thank you metal around one two three yeah thank you very much we appreciate you great thank you pleasure thank you thank you very much appreciate you guys one of those is yours Frankie and one of them calls thank you I wish we could start ever council meeting out with the state championship team I think that's wonderful what those kids have done we have now come to the part of our meeting where we allow for public comment we will allow the public to comment first for anything that you have that is not on the agenda then we'll take comment from the council let me read the legalities the council takes public comment on all items in the regular agenda public input on a regular agenda item will be taken at its appropriate discussion public input on an item not on the agenda our consent agenda may be identified and requested for consideration by the council at this time the council May request an item to be placed on a future agenda on our consent agenda to be moved to the regular agenda for public comment on public hearing items public input will be received on each item immediately following the council discussion and prior to any action on the item each member of the public

[0:27:05] should make the their remarks from the podium and begin by stating their name remarks by eight citizen will be limited to three to five minutes unless waived by a council meeting for all speaking on that matter no individual will be allowed to speak more than once on any one subject until every citizen wishing to comment has done so and we're going to open it up to the public first if there is anyone in the public that wishes to approach the council this is your time needs you to identify yourself and then you have three to five minutes okay my name is Bill Richardson and I have a concern about a candidate and single member district one having the name Republican on uh his signs I think it's a violation of the uh City Charter and state law a republican the name Republican as well established uh brand name for a political party and the city elections are non-partisan I have a copy of the state law here I'm sorry I only have seven copies but I'd like to distribute them give them to that City Secretary please bill okay okay the law that I'm referring to the Texas election code uh Title IX candidates chapter 143 candidate for city office and subsection one four three point zero zero three partisan candidates for home rule city office authorized a city Charter email address nominees of protestant Council uh candidates of political organization

[0:29:07] Organization for an office of a home rule City implementing regulations may be prescribed by the charter or by the ordinance under City authorization or Charter authorization my request is that Mr uh Fleming season desist from uh continuing using the name Republican on his uh signs and to come in compliance with the city Charter and state law thank you for your time thank you Bill isn't this a question for the for the ethics ethic Texas ethics is this something that they would need to get into how should we how should we go forward with this we positioned to take on this so the complainant would need to follow through with that it's not a violation of Charter because the charter doesn't have a provision but um there may be a question under state law but we don't have any standing in the matter do you hear that bill okay very quickly Charter the charter is clear following a state law it does not allow it so therefore it's not allowed I bet you're going to speak to this aren't you Jim introduce yourself you got three to five sir okay um I am Jim Ryan um smg3 uh this is a drum I've been banging for oh I don't know five six years on the Street Maintenance tax option now it has come up lately I'm glad to see it come back up

[0:31:12] uh this is something Council cannot pass on its own Council can put it on the ballot next November and allow the voters to approve or disapprove I think that the voters would approve it would increase our Street Maintenance expenditure by almost double uh about a million it it depends on the sales tax revenues but about a million and a half to 1.7 uh I think this is something that you the council should allow the voters to have a voice on and I suspect that if you do it will pass it would double our street expenditures and that's my comment for the day thank you thank you and we did discuss that at our nighttime meeting two weeks ago discussed it at some depth uh there is some there is some support you may not have all Council support but there is some support so we'll keep working on it sir we may even name it the Jim Ryan Street tax I think we should he's been he's been he's been preaching that as long as I've known him anyone else care to approach the council Pro or con Bill you've already you've already had yours sir okay I supported the Texas Street Maintenance tax I think it's a good idea it would give us a small amount of money for the

[0:33:14] streets but I think the uh the 4B sales tax needs to be re-examined I've read it over and I and we can use it for Street maintenance such as on Bell Street at the street that leads to a sports complex and under the rules for the Fort B sales tax that's allowable and we all know we need money to fix our streets thank you for the time you bet anyone else this is your chance if you want a shot at us this is your time to take it if I have no further comment from the cat from the public I'm going to ask for comment from the council anyone Charlotte yes Mr Mayor I want to take this opportunity to thank the folks in district 6 for their attendance at my town hall meeting was set up 151 chairs and we still had people standing in the room and I appreciate their participation sincerely do I also want to thank staff if it had not been for Shane and Ricky and uh Kevin and Roxanne and everybody including the city manager to help us put up chairs at the last minute extra chairs and to greet and talk to people it was an outstanding job by staff and I appreciate their assistance in it and the other thing I wanted to say is if you miss the indoor opening football game you missed quite a treat it was awesome and I you just need to go and watch those guys in their timing and the Finesse it was a awesome game and we won good anyone else any comment from Council all right let's move on to our consent agenda uh I do have one item that says we're pulling number one is this okay so number one on the consent agenda will be pulled we'll take this one up at

[0:35:17] a later date that's consideration approving the March 4 214 city council regular meeting minutes obviously there's some changes need to be made so we'll pull that one does anyone else on the council have anything from consent they need to pull and put on a regular yet the consent agenda is acceptable as is then I'm waiting for someone to move motion to approve the consent agenda with the exception of item number one second do have a motion I do have a second any further discussion any discussion from the public on the consent agenda the motion has been made that we accept it with the exception of number one all in favor please say aye aye any opposed nay put a 7-0 on that one let's move on now to number nine which is public hearing and comment Council I would ask and I've had a few requests I know that we have a large probably quite a few people here to deal with the with the ordinance on mobile homes that would be 12 13 14 and 15. and 10 and 11 are simply things that we need to staff for would it be all right with Council I have one problem the guy Ty is here for number 11 and he okay somewhere he is okay that's good that's good I don't think Tad is here is Tad here okay well if we've got someone here for 11 then we don't want to pull him out as well you want to move 10 to further on down without would that bother anybody if we move 10 okay also Jerry C has asked that we pull number 22 closer to the front because they have a meeting at 12. is there any is there any opposition to pulling number 22 closer to the front all right then I would suggest then that we take number nine that we take number 11 that we take number 22 and then we take 12 13 14 and 15 and then we'll go back to 10 and follow schedule is that all right with everyone I have a consensus

[0:37:19] okay let's see him take uh number nine which is consideration of granting a request for temporary placement of a mobile home not to exceed one year during construction of a permanent home on the same side at 3226 Lake Drive located approximately 215 foot Northeast of the intersection of the Lake Drive and West 33rd more specifically occupying the Ratliff subdivision block four lot one in Northwest San Angelo and we dealt with this our last meeting uh we asked for some clarifications and we asked him to bring it back Roxanne good morning Roxanne Johnston planner I didn't have my slide in I have it here if you'd like to look at pictures I didn't know if you wanted to in the interesting that once Miss Johnston yeah yeah we've already seen that one just go to the changes please have you changed it good deal um our applicant is here evidently he's had the conversations that we discussed at the February meeting and we weren't able to have that discussion the following meeting because we had to have notification time so here we are today nothing has really changed he still wants to go forward with his request and again because of the language within the ordinance seeing mobile home versus RV if you would like to direct staff to correct that in the future then you know that you certainly have that option but in the meantime yeah I've had a couple of conversations with him and and uh he understands that it is a year I do have a question it starts on my uh it says that it'll start March the 15th uh is there any reason why I can't start March the the to actually today or the first day we can certainly amend that because again when the report was written it didn't take into consideration that we might be postponing this yeah yeah you know and that's a good point April 1's fine okay it just he understands that it's one

[0:39:24] year and no longer so right and would you like to include the conditions that we're at the back of the report yeah oh I'm not sure I can read those for you if you'd like please the four the four conditions correct yes no that's fine yes you would still like me to read them no that's fine yeah include them I'm sorry it'll be up here too long okay and yeah I I don't I don't have a problem with it and I move approval okay a second and was there something else that you need into this motion mobile home is to post to RV um that could be put on the agenda later date but I think AJ had one Clause that she wanted in here just as a as a clarification let AJ come forward and state it and then Marty will see if you can add that as an amendment right into your emotion a directive to staff to modify the ordinance language because the ordinance as it's currently written does not allow a provision for recreational vehicles only for mobile homes so if you would like us to make that modification we can do that as part of this motion yes that's fine you will add that as an amendment money yes will you include that who did the second on that will you Rodney will you okay okay so we'll bring that back to you to Future meeting so that will allow for RVs or mobile homes for one year instead of just a mobile home it's just a clarification of the ordinance Charlotte yes I had an objection last time simply because not the person it was the staff keeping up with and seeing that these conditions are met um I still have the same objection and the reason is I went back and was looking at some stuff and on October 7th 2007 we made an exception for a mobile home at 18 35 East 28th

[0:41:29] Street for two years and the mobile home's still there and it's been a whole lot longer than two years we have no way we're not following up and that's my objection is why waste our breath if we're not going to follow up on any of this stuff so that's that's my same objection today anyone else mayor yes could I get Miss farmer to repeat that address please so we can follow up on that I have it right here for you I'll give it to you all right thank you okay and uh um well you said 1838 West no no I haven't even had it I'll take it right out of my um Charlie we do have the ability to put a tracer on on anything that again that is permitted um AJ as far as the Tracer system I mean we do have a tracer system is that correct and I want to point out since so much effort was made to use the term mobile home manufactured home since mobile homes weren't made after 74 but if you've got a head and you build them they are coming off the factory line but it's referred to as a manufactured home so you may want to change the wording we can add that word in as well yes typically we do flag these we work with our Code Enforcement Officers to go out and verify compliance for example we had one last year that we had to force it to be moved off of the lot so I've already spoken with Mr Flores and we'll check out this address let's double check that and make sure that tracer's working okay sure thank you anyone else Mr War Dog yeah I just want to let the record show that I'm totally against this idea and uh our comprehensive land use plan our zoning ordinance does not allow for mobile homes or RVs and single-family residential neighborhoods and a temporary uh authorization of that is not uh does not cure the problem and I will like to know for the record that the people now

[0:43:31] moving to approve this move to deny it at the last meeting that we had on this and and also I would like to enlarge on what Charlotte said and that is that that's not the only one in my opinion of mobile homes that are there past their one-year time frame although that's not my primary objection so I'm going to vote against this any further comment from Council you understand Deputy do you have one year okay that one year means one year all right all right uh any further counsel I do have a motion I do have a second do I have any comment from the public on this item do we need to include the April first date on there or just today or April Park starting April 1st have you got the motion man do you agree with the second on April 1 Rodney April 1st is is that when you're wanting to move it on there okay okay you'll have one year from April 1. you ready to go after we vote if you get it yes pardon me I got the I got I got the cart before the horse didn't it all right no public comment then we're going to call for the vote all in favor please say aye aye hold your hands up one two three four five Nays put a 5-2 on it April one last day of March thank you very much all right we are now going to item number 11 which is discussion and possible action regarding setting rules and regulations to allow curb cuts for rain harvesting Miss Fleming I'm going to bring one of the residents that brought this up forward to me his name is Ty Williams he had this the system designed and when he first brought it to me I was like man this is a great deal and I think it'd help us out with our water situation a lot of cities in the southwest have already started this Tucson has rules and regulations in place and a lot of small

[0:45:32] cities in the Arizona and New Mexico also had to do this what it is I'll let him kind of explain it to you and what he's wanting to do I think that this could be done in a lot of areas in the city that have especially ribbon cut Curbing and it could help save a lot of waters a lot of water a lot of water Ty I didn't reduce yourself and you had the floors good morning I'm Ty Williams I live on the south side of town kind of close to Rodney over there and uh I had an idea to capture the rain water that was coming down the street for Lawn and Landscape use and I talked to an engineering firm and they put a put a design together for me for something that we think would work and approach to Rodney about seeing what I needed to do to make that happen um well what we're really wanting to do is we're wanting to set forth have City staff put the rules and regulations that are kind of mirrored Tucson in place so that we can have the ability because he's wanting to to cut into the curbing that's out on the street you'll see on the diagram there the his curbing or our curbing actually I have the same type of curbing that he has is a flat ribbon curving instead of a raised curving like that so it's a little bit different than that um go ahead of time Ty would you explain the mechanics of that a little more pleaser basically what we're going to do is going to be more like what's pictured in this slide here the slope of the land where I'm at is pretty negligible and what we're going to have is is a storm drain in my driveway and the curb will allow it to flow into that drain into a sump that will be pumped into the storage tank in the backyard and utilized for on the landscapes okay who installs that stupid determined

[0:47:37] he will pay for it though it's not a city it's no cost to us as City taxpayers I'm just asking permission to cut occur you can do all of ours you are he will pay for his I'll pay for what yours yes sure okay yeah it's a great idea and you know a lot of areas in town won't be able to permit this because you really need a level yard and like most of Southland is is a raised elevation on the yard so you really can't do this but there are areas you know Green Acres is one area that has ribbon cut curbing our whole area over on the Southwest or southeast part of town pretty much is all ribbon cut curving and if anybody's ever watched you know it's been a long time since we've had a rain but if you've watched the rain how much water actually goes down the street and it just washes away no one gets use of it this could be a really good thing and I think Ty you you told me how many gallons can you get in just on my street it's a little cul-de-sac and there's not a whole lot of surface area to it but I mean there's over you know a small rain there's over a thousand gallons a minute running down the street a minute and the way I've got it set up I can an inch of rain I can catch about 10 000 gallons okay uh or you have a flat Street there uh running by rather than directly into the curb cut do they have some way to divert the water in there like a speed bump or some other thing in these other cities that allow you to divert the water in there well where I'm at the curb is actually the lowest point on the edge of the street and if you cut that out and then grate it into the storm drain three foot into my property are actually in the cities right away there are easement then it would flow into a drain that you could put into a tank in the backyard I'd like that answer your question uh well I wasn't referring to your specific

[0:49:40] instance I was talking about other people that that where the water's flowing by them down the street you know and it wouldn't if you had a curb cut it wouldn't necessarily divert back into the drain this winky this is not for everybody it won't work on a lot of areas in town it'll primarily it's going to be the ribbon-cut curbing areas in town and um you really don't want to go in I think I know what you're saying is you know put a little uh like deterrent or something out there to make it flow into your yard I don't think we want to go into that because then we're going to get into too many problems of people making them too high and things like that the City of Tucson if you flip back to the pictures there the the earlier pictures you can kind of see the different things they've done but nothing really goes out into the street it just kind of cuts where the ribbon cut curbing is and allows it to go into the property from there good shot I'm curious you know you have the drain and you said something where it would drain into a what does it drain into what kind of line and you said a sub pump to pump the water out to use your yard or whatever but what is the pipe or connection what that drain drains into is that your holding tank no there'll be a in my situation anyway there's going to be a pipe that runs into the backyard that dumps into an underground tank that's going to have a pump in it that'll pump it out as it's flowing into an above ground tank to where it can be stored for later use there's a small area there at the front at the curb where it holds it there and then there'll be a pump that pumps the water out of the small area to basically a big tank and hit in the back of his yard but there's a bunch if as I was researching this there's a lot of designs there's not just the design that he's come up with there's there's a whole bunch of different designs that you can do on this thank you that shows yeah yeah go ahead if you can see that up there I don't know if the south end of the curb there you can see where it's uh where it's cut right here that's going

[0:51:42] to be the where the curbs cut and it's going to allow inflow to where the the arrow is right there is going to be the drain and there'll be a PVC pipe running to the tank in the backyard which is right here which will have the sump pump in it which pumps it to a storage tank where does this uh where does this storm and flood water ultimately go if it passes your house my storm water runs down the bar ditch of grand canal and it dumps into the irrigation canal and sits there unless there's water coming out of the lake deer Gateway okay one of the other things since you're going to have a 10 000 gallon above ground tank yes sir is there any kind of Permitting problems for for having a an above ground tank in residential occupancy and if so we if we do approve this we're probably going to need to address that at the same time because it's going to be useless to him if if he can't have the tank for it in the backyard each one of those cities that I looked at had different size ranges that you could do I'm personally in favor of as big as you can get but well not as big as you can get I mean we're gonna have to put some kind of limit on right and we also need to say something in the rules and regulations that you can't resell that water I think it has to be used on the property that they're actually taking it from personal use right it has to be used on that property so um I I think that if you look at the the way Tucson especially that's the one I would like to model it after I think a lot of those those questions are in the rules and regulations that are in there but it I don't think it has the size on there and we could limit the size to you know so right now though you can put I don't think throughout the city I think you can put pretty much whatever size you want because people that collect from their from their Roots they have this size tanks now and there's no rules or regulations for that

[0:53:44] I just say you wouldn't want to limit it so much it's not yeah feasible Charlotte I think the idea is certainly well worth having Engineering in the planning department to look at the plans and look at the other cities and come up with a recommendation for the council Johnny I was just going to add that Rodney I think this is a fantastic idea and like you said it doesn't work for everybody but I think some of maybe the new developments coming on board or maybe something existing it's going it's it's a it's totally up the the landowner or the property owner to maybe install one of these in their properties but I think this is a fantastic idea I really do I feel that this is something that is good but it's gonna need some work staff's gonna have to look at this we're gonna have to and they can look at the Arizona Tucson but I do think the staff needs to look at this and put something together and then bring it back for approval do I have a consensus to move ahead on this do you want to vote or do you want just a consensus mayor yes I just want to make sure that we don't make it mandatory you know it's just a you know whoever chooses to do this yeah it'll be an option right and a lot of people won't do this because Ty's going to have to put forth a good bit of money to do this this is a long-term investment for him but if somebody is planning on staying in their house a long time this this can be a great great option for them and also a lot of people do the guttering and the and the tanks where the water off the roof and I mean that's a wonderful idea as well but I do think this needs to be explored I think he's got married well we as a city want all these ideas we want them coming forward to us with this when Todd told me about it I was like this is awesome and I started researching it this is something we need to be moving forward because as we all know we're running out of water we may need his water for drinking water that's right that's exactly right I do like Charlotte's the recommendation definitely staff can take a look at that properly vetted make sure we come back with a a good recommendation for City Council so by consensus do we allow staff to go ahead and look at this and bring back recommendations yes yes that this isn't going to be a deal

[0:55:47] that's going to be a one year or two year deal is this please I'm serious no it can't the staff can look at this pretty quickly okay because the rules and regulations are in place in Tucson I mean I think this is something that could be fairly quick but I do think they need to look at it yeah oh yeah so I agree staff if you would look at this come up with some recommendations and as soon as possible get it back to us and let's uh see if we can set some ground rules well fair enough sir thank you Ty for doing that hey thanks for your time I appreciate it alrighty we are now let's move on to 12 13. 14 and 15. do we want to take these one at a time or censor all the home do we want to group them all four of them together one at a time one at a time I thought you were gonna move 22 up that is what I said wasn't it yes sir y'all want a 22. you need brakes on it Charlotte needs a break and it's 10. and the boss needs a bank too so let's take a break and then we'll move 22 then we'll move to this water talk query nothing let's move on to number 22 this is an update and discussion on installing sidewalks along West 19th between North bright and the railroad west of Lilly Corbett and arts you are you are on the floor sir okay thank you good morning mayor council and staff um give you a quick update on where we are on 19th Street uh project uh here's a just a familiar familiarize yourself where the project is it's a 19th Street budding starting at Bryant Avenue and going West toward the railroad tracks there on 19th and to just refresh you again on September 17th a brief project or this

[0:57:52] presentation was given to the council and it was agreed then on which side of the street we would go on and it was a great way to go on the South Side there was some discussion on that the Project's going to include uh a sidewalk with crosswalks placed at different places throughout the project uh some of the challenges we're having on this project there's only two foot of right away behind the curb on 19th Street on on the south side and we really need about 10 feet of right away total which is eight feet more for a five foot sidewalk to be placed through this area and the reason we're needing a strip or an area where we can it's wider than the five feet for the sidewalk is there's some instructions in the way like I've shown some here on the trees and trees power poles and signs we're only trying to work around and not have to move all of those it'd be an expense if we put the sidewalk right at the back of the curb there's some other some other challenges that we'd face there if we put it right against the back of the curb for most places we'll be able to work around some places like this would require probably some modifications on some flower beds and some fences and things like that finally I want to show you the cause this is what we showed you back in September and right now we're still good with that the the right-of-way may change at the time we thought that was going to be totally donation and I hope it is that could be good for that if it is one thing we're running into we've identified all the property owners on this uh stretch and there's 27 Property Owners between the railroad tracks and Bryant and many of these properties after looking at the tax rolls or in Trust they're showing a deceased owner they're belong to a church there's several churches along there and what it's going to take is some research about legal or to find the party that we're actually going to be negotiating with if it's in a trust we're going to have

[0:59:54] to go find who all can sign or agree to an easement or we're making possibly looking at a license agreement to put this the sidewalk through there and we're in the beginning stages of that research right now we've we've got the property owners as it exist from the tax rolls but we're going to have to do some research and we're working with legal to get that done this could take considerable amount of time I'm sure you know if if trying to track down errors and things like that could could run into a considerable time but I'm sure we'll work on it as hard as we can to get that done quickly and efficiently while that's going on I've got some of my staff that we're proceeding on with the design and we'll have the design ready to go whenever this uh this is complete so um I'm hoping it can be done quickly but at with those obstacles in a way it's it's gonna have some challenges that's really all I had to share with you today yes ma'am I just have a question reference sidewalks did the city or did the property owner just do the sidewalk there in front of Sealy Flats to the corner it has come down it's very it's very attractive job and it kind of Curves and winds I guess since nobody at the city is familiar with it in the private property owner property okay great okay any other comments from Council John Carl going back go back a couple of slides where the trees and the poles like something like that you know after if you get the permission from the homeowners could you not do like half moons around those obstacles or would that not work instead of having to it could and we will have some places where it will be next to the curb because that that would be the ideal place to have it you know away from the house because a lot of those houses are close to the street anyway we'd also have to make sure that we followed as far as ADA requirements there of course you know so you'll have to get across driveways with the maintain our everyday access across the driveways and well I think the main thing is is to let them the the neighborhood know that

[1:01:57] we're at least you know proceeding or looking into this and moving forward it's just I've been there done that on another project where there's a an obstacle in the way so uh I appreciate you guys moving forward with it making them the neighborhood feel comfortable that you're at least listening to what their needs or likes are so Carl look forward with it what would it would it help and would it make Ida requirements first to cut it down a foot would that help anything I'd have to look back at the regularization to see if four foot is allowed I believe it is okay we make it we could we could check into that and here again you know if push comes to shove I don't I don't want this thing if there's any way that we can can keep it from taking two years to happen I mean it's already been postponed several times you know if in some of these tight spots if we could go from five foot to four foot and it would make regulations maybe that would be a solution to some of the problems okay sorry certainly put that in our exam further comment I've got one more go forward one slide the property owner they had the big uh Stone around the trees the flower bed yeah so what man that looks that's going to be tough there well we've got some money in in our estimate for addressing some things like that that we might have to rebuild part of that or we'd have to work with the property owner that would be part of a negotiation process working through there to see how we could come to terms on that but yeah and you guys are in contact with that property owner well right now we're some of these properties and I'm not sure about this one but the person that lives on the property may not be the proper person that owns the property that's what we're running into um I'm not sure about this one I haven't got to that point yet and that is on the south side of the road I think so I'm not sure there but she should be should be it is okay public comment

[1:04:02] come on Jerry you know the procedure don't you yes I do my name is Jerry see and I'm a member of Saint Paul Baptist Church and I wanted to senior leaders of wtos now this project has been on the table for about three or four years now two different city councilmen councils or three different city councils and a couple of two or three mayors now I thought when we went out there on 19th Street there was a decision made as to what side of the street that you were going to put the are you planning on putting the sidewalk on both sides of the street or one side of the street South Side Carl South Side okay there's there's no obstructions on the south side of the street the pictures that you're showing there right there with that thing on that's down there near Lily Street that's on the that's on the north side of the street and all of those obstructions uh that you're talking about is not going to affect this project and I don't see no reason for this project not to go forward immediately it has been on the table for about three years and this can has been kicked down the road enough there has been a killing on that street no one did anything about it and Craig Myers and I have walked that street and talked to every owner on that street with the exception I think of one that's just this uh that on that side of the street now I walk the other side Sally Ayana and myself walked the other side of the street when we decided she was going to put it on South side we walked that street and on both sides of the street these people agreed they are just waiting on some kind of document from the city to give the city

[1:06:07] permission for the right-of-way now on the side of the street that you decided where we were going to put this thing there's plenty right away there is only one place on there that might be some kind of obstruction you can make a smaller spot there there's a blue building there that used to be the club a club there that is the only place that might encroach on the on the uh the width of the sidewalk but hey we can live with that we could live with that uh at least when it's raining people will not slip off of those those sides and slide back out into the street a preacher's wife got killed right there where one of the the vacant uh uh places there she was going right across the street their neighbor came up here with us he was prepared to tell you what had happened now you're talking about it's going to take you this time and you're going to take that time and take this side of the street is not even in the equation now what you've just talked about is probably some stumbling blocks for the wrong side of the street now if this is going to be presented to be as a problem and another excuse to Kick the Can down the road there's something wrong and I don't believe that any you gentlemen up there is it's you're ready to move you're ready to act and I think that we it's past time that we do thank you thank you very much for your time and Carl I will ask is this on the North side or the South Side the north side I apologize we've got a picture in there that's erroneous but how about the rest of the pictures Well pictures here like this these wouldn't have obstructions if we have the curb five foot over see the curb would go behind the mailboxes you know behind the on both sides of those streets but uh the the land uh research that we've done so far for sure was on the south side

[1:08:08] well I don't blame you if you wasn't here when we did this back in September but that north side picture should not have been in this presentation sir if I'm not mistaken the picture on the left hand side I think that's the north side also who took these pictures these came out with presentation that we presented back in September so I recognize that September on the North side well I know the blue building he's talking about he used to be a barbecue joint didn't it Jerry that that's a picture of the blue I apologize for that not having the right now that might be the South Side the far right picture there it is but um regardless of the obstruction regardless of the instructions we definitely want to get moving on that and of course we do need to make sure that we have the property owners the actual property owners that give us permission uh and we need to move on this I know that you and I have talked Carl I know this is a priority and we definitely want to get this done sooner than later but again we want to do our due diligence make sure that we get permission from the right people of course you know so let's get that done okay and that would I would add Carl maybe you might want to tag team with Jerry C there if he's visiting with all the owners already yeah you know we're just spinning our Wheels okay I'm making the right contact and hit the delete button on that presentation please sir okay we won't use it again yeah and and I think get get pictures of the south side of the street yeah because that's what we decided on in September yeah we're going to put it on the South Side the street and I thought that's what this was yeah north side out but everything we didn't I think the word is giddy up I agree I think okay do I have further comment from the public come up Craig you know the procedures don't you sir yeah put it down for short people um Craig Myers Craig Myers West Texas organizing strategy just just one thing uh we know that uh this isn't the only project that the city has and uh so we've listened and this is true on this

[1:10:10] on the chadburn streetscape signs and uh all of these kinds of things but uh this is one that has as Jerry said been on the table for a very very long time and I know that it's frustrating when you have to trace down who the owners are but I do my work on an IBM selectric but I know people who have computers and I suspect that if the people assigned to do this had it at the top of the list that there is nobody in the United States that owns a piece of that property that could not be tagged within a relatively short period of time and as Jerry said uh between the two of us we've probably worn out several pairs of shoes walking these neighborhoods and Rio Vista and other neighborhoods to get some responses and I would suggest that you know I'd go say uh when you leave this place if your staff go find out where these people are because they're not hiding out it would take some time like several weeks thank you anyone else care to speak to this come up Bill Bill Richardson I I don't understand how you count to fund these Property Owners if you go to the uh Texas Appraisal District names and address and contact for all the people in Tom Green County is available there thank you thank you anyone else care of it speak to this anything else from Council stay honest Jerry if nothing else let's move on and when I got it out of order last time I asked if we wanted to take 13 14 15 and 16 together or do we want to take them one at a time one at a time one at a time starting with 12 not 30 12 13 14 and 15. yes okay I got one at a time from two of you I got one in time there's another

[1:12:13] let's take them one at a time okay this is the first public hearing and consideration of introducing an ordinance of the city of San Angelo Texas amending the code of ordinances of the city of San Angelo by amending appendix a fee schedule article 2000 building and construction by creating a section 2 1600 mobile home park manufactured housing park recreational vehicle park annual operators permit providing a severe severe ability Clause providing compliance with the open Texas open meetings act providing for an effective date AJ you are on thank you mayor for brevity's sake I do want to give you some overall information on the entire package of ordinances I'm just a short bit of background we've talked pretty extensively about the timeline from the beginning of this process when we first started talking about manufactured homes and RVs and related matters over a year ago so I won't go that far back most briefly however you might recall the last meeting of the housing committee was in February mid-February we've had two discussions with the Planning Commission one on February 17th we had another discussion with Planning Commission yesterday they did give us some additional edits and comments they would like us to relay to you so I'll do that here in just a moment we did have our March 4th conversation with you all in which we were given some specific edits to make and those edits are reflected in the background packet that went out for today's council meeting we provided the Planning Commission with an update so that they could see the edits that you all had suggested along with a reminder of the discussion which they had had and again we received some additional Direction we'll share with you here in a moment as we move ahead depending on the action that happens today of course you have several options you have the option to approve you have the option to deny to approve parts of the ordinances and also to postpone our table so depending on how the conversation goes if we received an approval from you today we would schedule this to come back to you on April 1st at your next regularly scheduled meeting

[1:14:16] just a quick note we will be meeting with the Tom Green County Commissioner's Court next Tuesday to go over the two items within this package that are pertinent to the county that is the interlocal agreement between the city and the county and the subdivision ordinance we've already had some preliminary discussions to include them as we've been moving through this we have received positive responses and we will continue that discussion with them as well and then the last reminder of course naturally is that the moratorium period in which we're currently moving through the expiration of that date is on May 16th so to move forward through this the order of captions that we have starts with the fee schedule so I'm going to move away from the presentation it was designed to present all at once and I'll go straight to the ordinance and we can work through it perhaps that way and handle these items separately within the background packet was items that included summaries of what the changes were in Redline form the first item caption number 12 refers to the fee schedule which is proposed to be inserted into chapter 2.6 of our main city code everything is read in this particular section because it is a new addition to the code of ordinances and so in this instance section 2.16 would simply establish the fee schedule for the permitting associated with this request there are three administrative processing fees that are outlined in the draft proposal those fees are based on the um sort of the estimate since we haven't been through this process before a staff it's based on the estimate of the time investment for performing each of these items the initial permit for a new park or expansion of an existing Park would be the more in depth of the three processes because that would require of course the site plan review of the additional spaces the additional units the additional land and the layout so that is the highest of the three fees

[1:16:19] proposed at 425 number three permit for renewal when there's not any sort of transfer expansion that's a lower fee proposal of 250 again the work investment time investment in that from staff would be significantly less theoretically and then lastly the permit for transfer of Park ownership at 100 of course of all the three processes that would be probably the simplest and fastest for processing and so we can start with that item number 12 if you'd like to have some additional discussion and comments Winky uh the only question comment I have is the number one permit for new parks 425 I don't know how how you calculated that on a per hour basis but uh it looks to me like uh you may be too low on that one we tried to be very conservative we knew based on past discussions we've had about fees that you'd like us to keep them as reasonable as possible so we were very conservative well I I personally don't want the taxpayers to Bear any of the cost of this I think you were being very conservative because you've got all that background work and you've got to appear in front of the Planning Commission and the city council and I've been involved in this now since January of 2013 and my observations are that most of these people are from out of town and and I just don't think I think you're too low on that and I'd like to see raising how did you calculate that on a per hour basis what we did was we talked to the different division managers that would have staff involved in the process and ask them to estimate how many hours of time that their staff would spend on the review and the inspection and then to their average wage for the overall submittals from the manager so I can see how if you took a more if you did not take the average of those fees it would be a

[1:18:21] higher fee of course yeah but the average wage that's not the total cost of the city that's that's just the salary part not not the overhead and buildings and in the utilities and all of that uh an engineer or an attorney would call would charge you 150 200 an hour and I don't know how many hours you've got but at a hundred dollars an hour that would be four hours and I know it's going to take you probably three times that much if I had to guess and so I I think you're I think you're too short I think the citizens are having to pick some of that up and I don't think they ought to but that's just my opinion I'd like to see you raise that quite a bit on on new parks yes sir and then I would move to approve that if we come up with a whatever amount the council comes up with Rodney can you explain to me number three a little better number three is a renewal permit and you might recall that the permit as it is drafted would be an annual operators permit so once a year you would go through the process of making an application and we would the way that we have modified the process after going through several of these discussions with different boards and commissions is an attempt to shorten that the way that it is currently drafted is that you would make application for permit we would look at your site plan and if there were no changes proposed we would simply be doing the work of processing the paperwork and notifying the Departments not including the inspection on site and so that's why that process would actually cost us less than the number one permit for a new park or an expansion Park where we would actually have to send various departments and divisions out to the side so that's the discrepancy but that's yearly correct we do that don't we have a system in place to do this we have Co code enforcement that can follow through on any of the changes that they're doing

[1:20:23] and things like that I don't think that we need that fee and first of all we don't even have the staff we're stretched thin super thin right now I don't think that we would have the staff to even do this and that's a consideration and that's when we're talking about this this is not including any of the existing parks that are in town now I know at the beginning it is it is proposed for all departments we're not an annual operators permit for anyone I'm not for that whatsoever but we did have some discussion about that at the Planning Commission meeting yesterday and they also advised that they would like you to consider and with each piece I'll give you a piece of what they shared but is regarding this piece number 12 they did indicate that they would like you to consider removing that fee for um for new parks I'm sorry for existing Parks do you guys all understand that that what we're doing is those the parts that are existing right now we're asking them to do a yearly inspection and pay a tax every single year plus five dollars per space if I'm reading that last yeah line correct that was a recommendation of our housing committee so it'd be a 250 plus five dollars for each space they have that could become cost prohibitive yeah some of these Parks have I think one that was at yesterday had 175 spots I mean that can add up and they're not right now we don't have any of those fees there and we're working just fine coding compliance can come through and do the inspections on those if there are any problems with that and when they add new spaces to do electrical and water and that we already have the Departments that are going out there to check that and they're having to pay for permits to put those things in anyways right well and to get just give you a little background on that when the committee was discussing this um it was seemed important that to them that the site plan should include signature blocks so that there would be a certification of compliance for that owner something that they would have in their records that certified their compliance so obviously a building official can't certify that the health requirements are met a planning manager can't certify for example that the building permit requirements are met so

[1:22:26] that's where that stems from but you certainly have the option to modify as you see do we do this to apartment complexes right now yes sir not nothing like this to an apartment complex no sir yearly they don't have to have an inspection and yeah fee for how many apartments they have of course you have your fire inspection that sort of thing but as far as a separate permit no sir yeah so we don't do that to them and you know I want to try to make this as fast as possible and I think that you know my my view on this and I've talked with the the park owners in town we need to grandfather and I know that's not the legal term the legal term is legal non-conforming we need to grandfather all of them in and leave them alone just leave it just as it is today not a single thing this is my opinion not a single thing should change to for them they should just keep on operating the way they are now they're already under government regulations probably more than what they'd ever want to have anyways and we're we're doing just fine the way they are now this whole thing started when we wanted to stop man camps I was one of the main ones that wanted to stop man camps and what it had what has happened here is we've gone Way Beyond man camps in fact no one's even talking about man camps anymore what we're talking about is Trailer Park and RV park owners that are already existing in this city and we're going to strap them down with the existing with new fees and new regulations which I hope that none of us up here want to do that to these people these people are all you know tax paying residents that live in our city now they're inspected they're they have everything checked out now and they're they're too cold my my opinion is we strike number three even for the new the new parts if a new part does come in we strike number three I don't think that they should be paying that that's my opinion I'm through Charlotte it's amazing I agree with him that is amazing no I I agree that the on the number three item but uh I want to back up to the very first item and and I agree with Mr wardlaw on that one I went back and pulled the chart uh AJ that you provided

[1:24:28] us about three four years ago about the actual man hours and each person that does and we were looking at our fees and what we were charging and what it amounted to the city is giving away legal service Professional Services and those fees are underwater and I would like to see the first one increased considerably I do not want fees assessed to existing mobile home or manufactured home parks I spent last week a couple of days with property owners touring these sites and um this like Mr Fleming has said this whole idea was not intended or meant to burden existing businesses to try to put them out of business or make it cost prohibitive for them to retrofit their properties uh I certainly don't want that to happen I refuse to vote for anything like that would happen and I agree with this if we can get a dollar amount to increase number one to and remove number three the other question I wanted to ask you is who was on the housing committee I'm afraid I don't have the entire list of that it was quarterback for the city manager Terry Jackson and if I can uh read some notes that I have the it started out with mayor Alvin new Paul Alexander Lance Powell Linda Parker Judy Smith Eric Scott tankersley Craig Myers David Curry Lindsay flagy candy Poole Terry Jackson Debbie Young Valerie priest Westminster Brian matz Brian Seeley Brook Claiborne Emma shapu Tim Archuleta Jerry sepsick Daniel Valenzuela Michael dang Rick Weiss Bob Salas and AJ father and Anthony Wilson are those is that the bulk of that still the majority and and the reason I ask the reason I ask is I've received numerous complaints from people in the industry Property Owners as well as home

[1:26:31] builders you know that have interest in existing parts that they Parks they were not ask or consulted to even be on the committee so I was just trying to clarify as to who was still on the committee and did I miss anyone actually when we initially started we want to make sure that we had representation from the different groups and we we did actually have uh from the RV parks a gentleman that was also on that committee as well that was very involved in the talks so we did have a very diverse group we had a lot of excellent discussion and some of those that discussion we had a lot of back and forth as far as how it would affect the RV parks and the manufactured home parks and so forth so we did have a lot of those discussions but again some of that listed did as far as dwindled down toward the end because you got to understand that this committee has been ongoing for for quite a while on trying to get this I try to get this down right uh but again I know that there was a lot of excellent work done by the committee there are still some areas that need to be fine-tuned as just like we're looking at right now and that's all we're trying to do at this point and I'm and I'm not talking against it I'm just telling you that I had received some complaints and at the time that they complained to me I didn't have all of the names of the people and who you know possible stakeholders were so but I have that now and it's maybe narrowed down some or maybe a couple have been added and I can address that but if we need to move along here you need emotion I'm I'm in favor of increasing item one to a flat 600 fee which is still in my opinion low and I'm basing that at the low of the charts for work involved and I I think I'm leaving out considerable work that is on there and I would make that motion and to Omit item three altogether how about a supplemental fee what's the reason in having a permit fee and then having a supplemental fee that's that's misleading the committee recommended the supplemental fee because

[1:28:34] they pointed out that regarding the size of the park obviously a very large Park would require far more work and review time than a small Park and so they felt that that was a way to equalize that distribution Johnny AJ a couple of questions that I had the the annual operators fee how much is it now we don't currently have this cinnamon place no no I'm okay with doing away with it uh the other one I had was back to Charlotte's question on the housing committee seems to be uh seems like there's the committee was started months and months ago and a lot of people have fallen off but maybe we don't have a quite the right representation from the current property owners now that are being affected by this and that's one that's one concern that I heard but uh I'm just throwing that out because you know that's what and then we were one member of the committee of the planning division so Mr Valenzuela and I can discuss that and as far as the the number one that permit for new parks I think I think closer to maybe a thousand dollars it was would be more because even the I think we're still shortchanging ourselves Charlie well I I I asked Charlotte to amend her emotion uh to make that either a thousand or twelve hundred dollars uh on item number one and delete item number three and leave the supplemental feed like it is it's not going to be all that much in a scheme of things uh I'm more than happy to amend my motion to the 1000 and delete item three um I uh as long as it is understood this is not existing you only want it to apply to the new parks right and what about item two leave that as written no reason the transfer of Park ownership for 100. that might be a little low too really maybe 100 transfer uh there's a lot of paperwork involved five hundred dollars yeah is that if that's agreeable I'll uh

[1:30:38] amend my motion to read item to 500. done let me throw that something here what what if we uh if we did the the supplemental fee on the permit for for new parks our expansion of existing that way we're not hurting our existing people but by the same token it's it's a way of of equalizing the playing field and whatever we come up with it six hundred dollars or a thousand dollars I think the supplemental fee uh needs to stay in there because if you have a small park it won't hurt them that much if you have a large Park they should be able to fund them so what were you saying I didn't understand you exactly what what I'm saying is on on number one Whatever fee basic fee we come up with we add the supplemental fee to that so like I said if that's the way it is now that's the way it is but if we take away item three aren't we also taking away the supplemental fee no no no no okay it would remaining okay question Johnny AJ on the the number one permit fee are there any folks in line right now with uh applications for no and so we've established the the system and ordinance we can't receive but there were some but they're they're gone for zoning actions but all of those applications have been withdrawn at this time now they may crop up again once we come out of this moratorium period with new rules in place and and I do like uh Don's idea of the supplemental feat and I want to be careful in running back to the the existing if if they expand you know I want to make sure that we're all in the same you know on the same uh ground that is going to affect them if they expand the existing is that correct person plans that have been approved for expansions and that should grandfather's not the

[1:32:42] right word but that you're correct that would be protected now any expansions for which we had not made an approval prior to this process you are correct that those would be required to come up to the new standards for that portion of the park only the parts of the park that existed at the time of this ordinance would be allowed to just continue as is ready um the way I would like to have it written is that any expansion is still 425 so then it doesn't affect any of the the owners that are in place now and there's really the expansion cannot really affects three different two RV parks in one trailer park because of the new the way the new rules are written everybody else is landlocked so it would only affect three parts I I like your motion Charlotte if you could just amend it a little bit and say that any expansion stays at the 425 and then there any new parks stay at a thousand and leave the five dollars per slot in there and and permit uh transfer 500 500 is good I think on that okay and I you know I'm I'm good with if you're transferring over you're selling it so I mean there's some money that's involved there anyways again again I want to make sure on this and I want this to be out in the public this does not affect any existing Parks these rules and regulations that we're about to implement does not affect it's a grant it's a true grandfather they don't have any new inspections they don't have any new fees they stay exactly as they are today right we'll cut we'll have to cover the inspection but for the fee item if that's part of your motion then we will write that out motion Charlotte made the motion clarify the most Charlotte gee I'm so lost now no I don't I don't have a problem uh with that at all thank you I truly do not why don't we make the the new ones a thousand the expansions 500 and the owners well he's already got it at 425 Johnny well as I'm saying make it even 500 if we're gonna you know unless you want to deal with 425 it's totally

[1:34:46] I was just going with the recommendation that the that the housing committee made I'm fine either way okay AJ would you tell me what you understand yes ma'am okay and then you get me back on course okay what I have is a item number one for permits for new parks um make that one thousand dollars for item number two permit for transfer of Park ownership make that six hundred dollars strike number three altogether add language that this only applies to new parks not existing parks and 425 for the expansion of existing parks okay did I really get that right six expansion where in all this does the that's the the five dollar space fee come in does it come on expansion on new parks or both the way it's written it would apply to both okay but that's I think that's probably Fair because even when they're expanding they're not going to expand like hundreds right I mean we've looked at it they're expanding small you know maybe 20 at a time or 30 a Time yeah I just wanted to make sure I was we're all on the same page here I think are you guys all right with that that is my motion okay I second that motion the motion has been made Let's see if I've got it one thousand dollars new parks six hundred dollars expansions no uh 600 transfer 600 transfers 425 expansion uh striking number three completely there will be no annual fees and then the five dollar per Spot Will be on any and all of them and add language that it only applies to new parks yes yes and all the old ones our grandfather will take care of that and then which for the sections this one is a whale all existing Parks will are they're sealed as they are right now none of these rules apply unless they

[1:36:48] expand yeah okay we do have a motion we do have a second do we have any further Council discussion on this item it's time for the public any public discussion on this I'd like to say I like the way the council is thinking on this uh there was some bad publicity uh against some of the uh companies that sell our RVs in the city and I thought that was that aligned and that wasn't the intent of uh the council I know Council had nothing against any New York businesses in the city thank you foreign Bill Richardson oh sorry state your name you got three to five buddy no it's not going to take that long I'm Marshall gray I have the San Angelo Kelly and thank y'all for working with us at least listening to us but you got to clear something up for me transfer of Park ownership six hundred dollars what am I transferring am I transfer in the operator's permit that I don't have the land the land it'd be like a cell I don't understand I don't think I do either you know when I sell a piece of property and I've sold several over the years I go to an attorney and he fills out all the paperwork but there's not a transfer fee in there so I just need a little Clarity on that if you don't mind AJ evidently he wasn't on the committee no the committee recommended this for any sort of transfer of ownership whether it be through a sale whether it be through a probate matter whether it be through um you know foreclosure whatever it would be that would cause the transfer of that ownership the existing owner and the new owner are required to notify the city in the draft ordinance and make

[1:38:50] them aware of the change of ownership and then transfer the permit to that owner why would the city be involved why would the city be involved in that I mean that's in the transfer of ownership of probably it typically wouldn't be in fact we never even are notified when property changes hands but in order if we're going to hold people accountable for having a permit we need to know who it is that we're holding accountable well why should we charge them 600 though I don't understand what's the city doing to earn 600 or to have a 600 stake when someone sells property well and the 600 just came from you all we recommended a 100 fee to Simply do the paperwork of transferring that permit over to make sure that our records we're just transferring a permit I mean there's no working we're not expecting anything we're just it just I don't understand that as well I'm glad you brought that up Marshall because I was having problems with that and as well but we are transferring the permit there is some work yeah but one one does that cost 600 it doesn't have to be there there is paperwork and stuff involved when you have a note new owner and I'm going to say an apartment complex as an example emergency calls after hour calls uh sewer related or safety related health related who to contact if the health department it doesn't know who to go to for responsibility of certain things we have to keep updated records of the emergency contacts who to look to to fix whatever problems and that takes work internally to change and the trickle-down of Records do we charge apartment complexes when they sell or change ownership do we charge them 600. then why are we charging the motorhome the the RV came from us if you would like us to make sure that we are holding the right person accountable for violations we have to be involved in the process of ownership an example of this would be with the existing fees for for storm water for example if the city is not owner is not notified when ownership changes hands until it trickles down to us we're continuing to Bill

[1:40:55] the person that we have on file this enables us to eliminate that becoming a problem so we charge them 600 to go in and change the computer name 600 came from you all as a group I'm going to vote against this until it gets a hundred dollars is reasonable I'm going to vote against this until it goes back to 100. so anybody else the uh I think what we're hitting here is is we're comparing it to Apartments Apartments have no permit we're saying we are permitting this so the right hand has to know what the left hand's doing in on the pyramid and so that's the the fee process I think the fees too I think 600 is Success if anyone else but my opinion on this is that first of all it's not going to happen very often I think most of the the owners out here are average over 10 years don't you guys they're they're long they're long long-term owners for most of the parks that are in town now so it's going to happen very infrequently and really it's kind of like a house sell where that the owner is really not picking it up it'll be kind of kicked back onto the buyer's side it'll be concluded in the price you you see but then we don't charge a homeowner a 600 fee if they sell the state when we close on a house the state does charges fees but the city the permit department does not no but I mean something has permit we're singling this group anyhow any other public comment on this you want to be zero hi my name is my name is Corey Donaldson my brother and I own Riverbend Estates Christoval Estates and also art and discount storage in the city of San Angelo question was with regards to this annual permit is it or does it or does it not affect current owners annual permits you're talking about number three number four completely it's gone for that for noon and then what about for transfer of ownership is that for existing owners are non-existing owners it'll be for all I mean because you own it now you sell let's say you sell it next year then you would okay hey if we agree on this we haven't voted on it

[1:42:57] because it seems like with regards to like when I go to buy a property you know we have to put all utilities in our name so every single utilities you know has our new we also with with the taxing Authority like we have very strong you know relationship with the taxing Authority because in fact we spend over forty three thousand dollars a year between christovo states and Riverbend and if you had already we'd do 60 000 plus so there's many different facets that we have connectivity with the city as to understand that but that seems like one more hurdle in order to be able to sell a property I mean there's all you know you have finance and everything else along those lines and if it's just one more hurdle that they need to approve and a permit and you know transfer fee and all that it just seems like it's just laborism so that's just my two cents thank you anyone asks okay Miss Candy identify yourself and you've got three to five thank you Council candy Poole I went to San Angelo Association of Realtors but I also served on the housing committee my comment about the transfer fee um I would like to see perhaps because I didn't think about this until conversation just now that even in the state of Texas Realtors fight against the word transfer fee there are no transfer fees for property owners when they sell their property and a new buyer takes over what the housing committee said they wanted was to know who the new owner was if a part new park was to change ownership I would like to see the name change from transfer to maybe a permit operators whatever and I do believe the 600 is way too extreme for that's why we had it at 100 recommended it to be a hundred was because we felt like it was a a necessary thing for the permit which might get changed later in in the rest of this discussion but it was for the change of the permit not necessarily for

[1:45:00] the change of the owner ship it was changing permit name so we would know who was accountable I'd like to see the word transfer fee be something else and it be for that purpose and that was one permit person to know who the new um responsible party was I agree with you candy anyone else no one else call for a vote got a motion I've got a second I'm going to vote against this because I think 600 is too much and if it fails then we'll go back and make it a hundred all right it has been the motion's been made it has been saving it all in favor say aye aye hold up your hand one two three four that means four four that would be three days correct that's right all right let's move on into the next one this is number 13 which is the first public hearing and consideration of introducing an ordinance of the city of San Angelo Texas amending the code of audiences of the city of San Angelo by amending chapter 12 Planning and Development by repealing article 12 200 entitled Manufacturing Housing parks and its entirety amending chapter four entitled building and construction by adding a new article for 1600 entitle mobile home park manufactured housing park recreational vehicle park annual operators permit requiring an annual operator's permit providing for application inspection providing for annual renewal providing for grace period providing for variance providing for transfer requiring a guest register providing for notice violation providing for appeal providing for penalty providing this order to speak cumulative providing for severability Clause providing for publication the city's official newspaper AJ fastly done okay to talk about this chapter I want to take a step back for a moment and review the changes that we've made to this chapter again like the last item this would be an entirely new piece of city ordinance so it is not modifying something we have on the books now it is

[1:47:01] a new additional together let's go back for a moment to the Planning Commission meeting on the 17th of February they did have some specific consensus and wanted us to clarify the ordinance as it related to protections for legal non-conforming parks and we'll talk about what we did in that regard the original draft of this particular chapter talked about the owner having three different opportunities throughout the process where they could ask for the recognition of their non-conformities on the site provided the description and documentation of those non-conformities and if necessary provide any applicable evidence the new draft based on the comments that we heard from the Planning Commission on February 17th and what we heard from you all on March 4th about strengthening that language and making it very very easy to understand and follow is we have revised the draft to reflect the following at the time of application the property owner would simply provide a certification that all the non-conformities existed on the effective date of this ordinance you might recall that the ordinance is designed to upon second reading go into effect but there are 180 days or six months for parks to come into compliance with that so there is a six-month window there this would simply require them to let us know that all of the features on the site were there on the date of the ordinance and the ordinance goes on to say that any non-conformity is so certified are deemed as legal we don't even do the research to see when it was put into place we don't look at the ordinances that were in place at that time we simply write them all as being legal non-conformities and allow them to continue in perpetuity period That's essentially the end of that to provide just a little bit of clarity there were some questions that we received regarding the variance procedure you might remember that we have variance procedures in place right now throughout our zoning ordinance we have them through our sign ordinance it's a request essentially for deviation or relief from the minimum standards and

[1:49:04] a board with the city typically hears those requests we understand that in the future parks that are existing especially may want to continue developing in a consistent Manner and those consistencies may not be or might be contrary to the new rules on the books so we felt strongly that they needed to have an Avenue for variance but variances are not required for their legal non-conforming features as long as they're certifying that they were there on the effective date of the ordinance we have a site plan documenting them we move forward and that's the end of the story as far as that goes that certification we asked for it one time for the initial permit and they do not have to ask for that again so those are the changes that we've made based on the discussions that we've had with you all with the public with the Planning Commission Etc and let me just show you the language so you can see exactly what I'm talking about let's look down to the correct slide well actually I'm going to go straight to the draft here you want to make it like 200 percent okay so 4.1608 lays out the application process and so we have removed all of the language regarding the request for recognition and all of those items we have simply said that the application will be signed and verified and certified for existing non-conformities and then we have an entire section although it's very brief that is dedicated specifically to pre-existing Park non-conformities and it says very simply as plain as we can possibly make it I think that non-conformities that exist on the effective date of the ordinance are recognized as legal and shall be allowed to continue in perpetuity it mentions that that is

[1:51:07] subject to the regulations of article 6 and the zoning ordinance what article 6 of the zoning ordinance says about non-conformities and this Echo state law is that if a non-conforming use is abandoned for a period of over a year when it goes into effect in the future whether it be the same property owner or a new one it must come up to code so we're simply doing a cross-reference to that section and eliminating the need for any recognition description evidence Etc it's simply part of the application we do it one time and we let those existing Parks continue so question Johnny so on that part uh the the pre-existing ones as far as tell me again on the description and documentation that they have to submit we've eliminated the requirements for that that is gone all they have to do is certify that all those features were on on the park grounds when this ordinance went into effect they signed their name and that's it we keep that on file and we move forward how do they certify that we by signing the application we'll have a statement so there I want to make this real clear when they come in to us all they got to do is sign a paper and saying this is what all the differences are on that they don't have to draw a map they don't have to show all the utilities they don't have to do all that stuff and we're going to end up having to pay somebody to do that because they can't do it the site plan is part of the application process because without the site plan we have no records showing us what was non-conforming and that would mean every time a question came up the research would have to be done to try to pick that should be up to us on that because we've we've given them the permits to do these things and we've done over the years they've done their changes and when they add new spaces they have to come to us and do that I don't think that they should have to do that we require it for every kind of permit we issue a site plan to scale with a list but if you grandfathered if we've for lack of a better word if you grandfathered this property in when we've grandfathered properties in in the past we didn't make them do all do that

[1:53:09] you're right and here's the problem that we have you might remember a discussion that we had with you back in December where we talked about compliance of existing parks we have no records whatsoever showing how many of the parks in town came to be we have absolutely no evidence showing the features of any park within the city so for every complaint we receive it takes an immense amount of time and sometimes we can't find the answer of pinpointing when that particular unit came in or that particular fence was put up was a permit pulled was it not it creates an immense amount of work so we're happy to enforce the ordinance but our charge was to try to write a draft ordinance that we felt we could enforce and we feel that that information is going to be necessary to draw that Line in the Sand and so that staff whether it's us or someone new down the road will know the difference between the park as it existed and what was non-conforming and all the new features that came there after so what did the planning committee say about this they understood the need for the the side plan they were in favor they did they did say that they and I don't think we had a consensus on this but there was some discussion at the meeting yesterday about looking at some of the requirements for the site plan to see if perhaps some of this could be eliminated and I'll let them know that we would certainly look into that of course yesterday today we haven't had a lot of time to do that yeah if we vote on it then it's they're stuck with doing what we well this is the first hearing so we can bring you back a modified draft for second hearing I want to hear I want to hear from the park owners on this and their feelings on this on the side plane and the requirements because in my mind I'm thinking when I think grandfathering something in I'm thinking it's just done they're today they are they keep existing today the same tomorrow they do just what they're doing today there's no changes and that and that's why I wanted to go for them I want it to be as easy and as smooth as possible I see you're right here I see I know you I know you do and I know also I see your point on this but I also want

[1:55:11] to make this where again this was not meant to do anything to the existing owners and what we're doing is we were trying to stop man camps from coming to town and we're not even talking about man camps we're talking about hurting existing owners I'm changing things for existing owners so I'm going to want to hear how what they say about this whether I'll vote for this or not yeah we'll get them up here Charlotte I visited with some Property Owners about this exact thing and I I believe a site plan is important and they have site plans and yeah I mean it's it's just real simple just a site plan and they give it to customers who come in whether it's a telephone work or whatever you know they let them know what space and where to go but if they bring that with their application they've got one in hand they bring it they sign it and date it that's good enough they don't have to spend five ten thousand dollars to go and get a professional drawn out site plan but the site plan that they're asking for in there is not that and I'm totally fine with that and I know that they all have that you're right they're asking for there is all easements all water utilities everything and that's fine the site plan that was designed by the committee also had signature blocks so that every owner would have a certification that they complied with everything on the books and we can eliminate that we're happy to eliminate that because with without that information we can't certify compliance and that's fine that's a policy Direction really from you all yeah I'd be I would be totally fine with that doing the site plan because I know they all have site plans that's how they operate and that site plan does not have everything that we're asking I would be if they sign off saying we are in in in compliance with those things and then you we come back three years from now and find out oh well you're not in compliance well we'll find them we have coding compliance that's in place that could to go there it's saying I think a site plan is important the city needs to know how wide the driveways are how how big the the slips are and those sort of things but I agree with you the city doesn't need to know where the water meter is where the

[1:57:15] utility pole is all that sort of thing very expensive right and I I think what what Charlotte's saying is exactly right I'm totally on board with you shortly if that if we change this to just being their regular site plans I would I'm fine with that anybody else Johnny I just had a quick question on back on the side plans AJ How uh how updated are are the Google Maps if I were to Google any property could I not use that as a site plan I mean could they not do a screenshot and submit that well a site plan is designed to be to scale and to show us the dimensions of the spaces to show us what types of units are there to make sure that if it's a manufactured housing Park that they don't go over their allotted limit of RVs for example to make sure that for public safety personnel that we know how wide the the access roads are things of that nature that's why we require very specific types of site plans for building permits because we cannot issue a building permit by guessing that everything's up to compliance it's our responsibility to double check and make sure that those things are in compliance and I tend to agree with you because if for years there has been nothing there it would be nice to have some sort of record of what's there so whether they go all fancy or they just get something simple that gives us an idea what's their I'm okay with so there's one wait did you have anything on this sir is this an apartment complex I'm short of an agreement with what I'm hearing from everybody is we do need to have a site plan we need to make sure though it's not onerous and requires too much detail and the detail is not necessary to uh for the city to perform their duties and responsibilities and so maybe are we just going to go ahead and try to pass this with the with that in mind and then come back with the exact actual language next meeting I think we could do that if we if we if

[1:59:19] we just say we're not we don't want these very specific architecturally drawn side plans but just a side plan showing the park in the dimensions and then have you come back in the next reading conver and authenticate this with language okay so we'll try to come up with some modified language with kind of the bare minimum of what we think we need and let you and if we don't like what you say next week we'll the next meeting we'll vote it down and you can go back and do it again that's fine do you have anything on the Smartie do I have any public comment on this come on Bill you're next man uh Bill Richardson I think we need uh detailed site plan and showing where uh water lines are where sprinkler systems are power lines I know I worked at a hotel a few years ago and the city had no site plan they had a problem with the sprinkler system and they had to pay for the plumbing company the company that looked after the sprinklers to go out and find where the main valves were and it added a lot more time and expense to prepare the problem thank you thank you who else needs to come up ma'am you you stood up you stood up before he did and I need you to identify yourself and you have three to five you need a mark of it and um I'm representing Sun link Estates and stardust mobile home park which are two of the parks in town uh I just wanted to thank the council and uh agree with them that the language of the ordinance needs to be read carefully and considered carefully for what it actually says and I feel like probably inescapably this because of the how complicated and long this ordinance is there's been some misrepresentation and confusion about how the ordinance is described as what it does and what it actually says when the process is described as very simple and that the park owners just have to

[2:01:22] say all their features exist that kind of doesn't let us know necessarily that wait you're gonna have to put down what features exist which to me at the park owner I'm like okay I I'll do that but what are features I have to know what I'm supposed to put down in order to put it down and it doesn't give me an idea of the scope of the project or how complicated it is the language we're just reading says signed and verified by the City what does verified mean in this context it seems to imply to me the word verify that someone's going to go and check check it out but that is not represented by saying oh the city will just approve the fact that all the non-conforming Futures exist I also want to bring up a very minor point but if the council is going to approve something on the session I think it's important in the definition section of this ordinance it gives legal non-conforming features as of 2000. I'm not sure what the year 2000 has to do with anything and hasn't been brought up in any discussions um it could be just a typographic error but that also highlights the need to take out time I think with and make sure that the ordinance says everything and I want to really encourage the council not to pass anything that hasn't had time to be read through and have everyone make sure that it says what everyone wants it to say thank you thank you ma'am well we do have we will have a first reading we approve it we approve it first time and then the next meeting comes back and we approve it again so it takes two readings and two approvals for anything is lost so anything that we approve today can be changed or amended before we go forward yes sir good morning I'm Lee Brown Spring Creek Marina and RV Park

[2:03:27] one thing I would like to respectfully dis uh disagree with is the idea that we have to know what's on that property because you don't know what's on that property doesn't mean that the Departments that service out there don't know I can give you for example added Spring Creek everything we do out there is by permit we have to be permitted by the Texas Railroad Commission health permits the uh just to sell minnows and worms I have to have a bait permit from the Texas parks and long life everything that has a permit comes with annual inspections and I'm also here to tell you every time a city vehicle comes driving my by my Park I'm getting inspected the parks maintenance is instructed to look at my Park every time they drive by and make sure there are no obvious violations going on every time the code enforcement comes out because I have already obtained a permit for expansion or electrical work or what have you they're instructed to look at my Park to see if there are obvious violations that they need to address 911 every site that I have is listed with the 911 coordinator my address is listed with the 911 coordinator I have personal information exchanged with the police Lake division they know my exact cell phone number for contact information if a fire marshal comes out for inspection every fire extinguisher I've got gets inspected and don't tell me he's not looking around for anything else they're going to make sure that I'm not in obvious violation code enforcement I already mentioned them

[2:05:29] the local fire department that will cover my area comes out on regular basis to come look at the park to make sure that they can respond properly that means getting their trucks into the situation they know my Park intimately they know exactly where the dumpsters are we tend to have some people dumping and having fires out there on a regular basis we are inspected we're looked over you may not say it's official inspection but every Department that's going to be required to come out and approve us when we turn in this site plan is already doing it so I say it's not required please don't make us do it thank you sir anyone else here to come in same rules Donaldson yes please thank you my name is Corey Donaldson I own RiverBend christova in our discount storage is my brother a couple things one is when I came in on Sunday I drove every single RB in Mobile Home Park that I could find in the city of San Angelo and I found 18. I think I missed one somewhere but of those of those 18 that I found 15 most these Parks have been built anywhere between 20 years ago and 65 years ago they're on very small parses of land there's nowhere they can go I mean it's the even the lots are very very small there's only three that potential for expansion and that would be the two RV which are beautiful facility I mean it's amazing and also side note is the last couple days I've met some of the most amazing operators and owners I mean it is amazing how great some of these Mobile Home Park and RV owners are but with that is that there's nowhere for people to expand so if you're worrying about people going to make bring in all these mobile homes and RVs it's not possible when they were built you know 30 40 50 60 years ago these homes are worth 12 by 40s today the average size home is 16 by 80. the other one is that over the last couple years or the last eight years my brother and I spent over several million dollars at Riverbend Christoval upgrading

[2:07:31] utility infrastructure electrical alone Christoval was over half a million dollars all that is documented it's all been permitted we have 9-1-1 coming out we have Code Compliance we have electrical we have fire we have pretty much every branch that comes out to our Parks already the other thing is one of this thing is when all said and done this gas boom is not good for any of our mobile home and RV park owners we have a small blippin screen right now where maybe occupancy that's maybe a little bit less than 100 is going to be 100 but with where our primary competitor is Apartments not not stick Built Homes so they're building all these stick all these apartments there's four Apartments they're building the motels when when the dust settles in the gas leaves all of a sudden there's gonna be a lot less demand and there's going to be a lot more Supply and we're all gonna be fighting for that and we're gonna have to you know ratchet down our rates we're going to rent concessions in order to be able to keep our Parks full the other thing is this has really been done on other real estate asset classes I know for Self Storage we don't go through as much as we do for mobile home parks and RV parks so is that being done for apartments as well and in particular who we serve for our at least for us is 40 seniors and 60 of families and if that 40 seniors for example River Band we charge 175 right now or we charge 185 we charge three years ago three years ago 175. we went up 5.2 percent on them if we go up anymore in ten dollars they can't they wouldn't be able to absorb that but very differently you know I said I tried to book a room at Staybridge the other night 269 with taxes 305. it's a little safe to say I'm not saying it's State Bridge I'll tell you that but I think that that's really what it is is that for us for mobile home park owners and RV park owners when the dust settles in this gas and it's going to come in you know I've seen in different areas where we have other Parks it's coming as quick as and it's left just as quick all right that and they don't have the water issues that city of San Angelo has so again just my two cents good points thank you sir anyone else Marshall gray San Angelo KOA this is not

[2:09:38] so much about the site map although it's part of the whole thing when y'all started this process 14 15 months ago whatever it was I was under the impression it was for new parks mobile homes RV and that's the way I continue to operate for the past 14 15 months well I came to a point where I wanted to put in park models doing business the way I always had a higher contract and what does he do he goes down and buys a permit or gets a permit does the work gets inspected life is good well now we're changing all that I can't operate under that set of rules anymore I've got to I guess get a variance to do anything I want to because now I'm either grandfathered or I'm not and I that's that's such a gray area right now listening to all y'all I don't know what's going on I've got sixty thousand dollars in two units at my part that I can't hook up because I can't get electrical to them I got a sewer permit you know two weeks later I couldn't get an electrical permit because of the moratorium and the moratorium does involve existing RV manufactured on Parks see I've heard from several of you all that it wasn't supposed to this ordinant one's supposed to but it does yeah it it it wasn't supposed to and that's the way I operated I read the standard times and I thought it was all we're all worried about the man camp but now you're trying to micromanage my business you want to see my books my gas register and hey next you'll want to see my tax records my financial records which KOA already does so that's neither here nor there but don't if you want to manage my business then you need to take a vested interest in it like well said Charlotte I had the question with reference to the moratorium and not getting permits issued for existing

[2:11:40] businesses and I called Daniel uh and I have the moratorium I happen to get a copy of it it was provided to me by Roxanne and it it does not say existing it was not the intent or I if permits inspections need to be talked to because it's not supposed to stop work from going on existing businesses and the moratorium does say new I mean it's hey John the moratorium itself as far as the existing businesses I believe that correct me if I'm wrong it addressed expansion of even the existing is that correct on the moratorium expanding the capacity of the park okay and that was forbidden until the mortar and Zone was that correct correct okay okay and we did confirm with our city attorney's office on that and Marshall that's not what we intended that's just the way it happened I guess that's the law of unintended consequences um so that all is too because I understand it was only for new parts he's right on that I mean when we started this out this was not supposed to be it was not supposed to be for existing I think most of us up here agree with that and it was for new camps so why are we even talking about this grandfather of man and to be done they don't where did the expansion wording come in I wonder do we want to just hold off on all of this until we can get this worked out well I don't want to hold off too much because he's sitting there with sixty thousand dollars well he's invested and he can't even connect we could put we could put Marshall on the agenda and take care of that I mean that's that's something that was not intended we can fix that problem well but I don't want to create an ordinance it's just going to cause more problems and it's not only Marshall I there's one in my district that I've been contacted that's the same way he's trying to upgrade his his facilities and and he can't even though he's done the electrical work by a licensed and bonded electrician he can't

[2:13:42] get it turned on because of all the stuff that we're doing mayor you've got another Corey hold up let's get Brian wants to talk got another one yeah regarding uh the expansion that you asked if I might uh the moratorium was intended as provided by state law to maintain the status quo of the developments that were in place so uh therefore any changes were termed as an expansion of what was on sale can we pull him out and let him get going on that mayor if I may let me yes specifically I think he's gonna we're gonna have to put it on the agenda and vote to get him to get to exams no why yeah but I don't know if we can even do that without because it's already under the moratorium we had um met um with the park owner and um proposed one of the provisions under the ordinances to apply for a hardship and um so we've been in discussions with him I just want to help him out and the other Park owner too these guys are losing money every day that they're not they're not renting out their spaces well we did uh in invite the current owners that felt that they had um they were eligible for a hardship variance from the moratorium to submit the paperwork to the department for review and then later scheduling on Council agenda but perhaps if the owner contemplated that the new laws would be in place by by the time the hardship app would be reviewed then perhaps he didn't move forward again though to me we're just when you say grandfather they it just needs to be the way it was I mean they shouldn't even have to apply for a hardship I mean it should be just because the use was legally non-conforming and as the legal term is we missed a term when we put the

[2:15:46] moratorium in we missed the term your time my name is Brian Brown and I would say true Village on 29th Street we continue to use the word grandfather legally non-conforming is the legal term I believe we're going to continue as we go through this process of these chapters to baby step everything pertaining to the existing parks in town I would like to propose to council that if your intent is to grandfather the existing Parks under the rules and regulations that we are under currently to please take in consideration and and eliminate us from this ordinance all together and please vote favorably in doing so he's got a very good point there from all parts of it he's got a very good point that we just take all of the existing points that we the ordinance applies only to new parks from this point forward and everyone that's in business right now it's they continue to work under the same room with due respect we're going to stair step through this and we're going to be here until probably four o'clock this afternoon and every one of these projects because at two o'clock I get I get an adjournment motion from winky so well we're going to be here for a while as we baby step through these chapters it's going to pertain every one of these existing parks and we're going to address these same issues and the grandfather none legally non-conforming issue will come up and hopefully we will continue to vote favorably that the existing Parks will be grandfather so I would propose to the council to consider eliminating altogether the existing parks and grandfatherness out of this I agree with you and if I can get emotion we'll just do it that way we'll just we'll just stop these proceedings I move that we accepted all existing parks and RV parks and mobile home parks in the in the city continue going as they are now and pulled out of this ordinance not including this ordinance at all second okay thank you Jim and it's not just this ordinance it's the red now we have three all of them willing to be four

[2:17:48] because that last one that last one is this same thing was the same the same problems were involved in the last one yeah good morning my name is Jim Turner and I think one of the issues that we're looking at here is really we're using one term when we actually need to have two we're using the term expansion for both growing larger adding more space things like that but we're also using it listening to what I'm hearing we're using expansion to mean upgrade we have some people that are doing things to improve their park within the existing boundaries when we need to Define expansion of these Parks here as expansion in the number of available slots and land size anything done within their existing number of spaces and footprint as far as property goes need to be considered an upgrade not expansion and that needs to be where we need to clarify it we need to allow these people to upgrade as much as they need to to be competitive expansion would be if they go out and buy an adjacent lot and then they should fall under the new regulations just to keep it fair to a certain degree but even there on that when they're expanding into new land only that new land should be what's considered expansion and in fact an additional park that's attached to their existing one so that they we don't give them an unfair Advantage we need to have it to where anything that happens within their footprint today is an upgrade if they add another 10 acres 20 acres adjacent to it that's considered a new park for the permit process not necessarily for land ownership Etc but as far as we're concerned on the

[2:19:53] planning that's the new park that's not going to affect anything they do within the boundary of the existing area that's how this needs to be approached thank you Rodney I had Jim I like everything you just said except for when they do there there are three parks in the city right now that can expand two of them are RV parks and one is a mobile home park I I feel as though we we're just we're going to cut off their head on this deal on the new regulations if you make them follow let's say that they do let's say Marshall goes out and buys five acres which is for sale back there's hundreds of Acres actually for sale behind them right now and we put the new regulations in place which says a thousand foot setback thousand foot well he's gonna have to buy it 10 15 acres in order just to make a little bitty footprint of trailers in the middle of that because there's in that area that he's in his own residential back there you have to be a thousand foot away from the residential area according to these new ordinances what I would like to see is that any existing park that's in place today the footprint that's there today if they were to purchase or one of the parks one of the RV parks is not even an own Park it's a lease Park we own the land land the city does if he expands over there I would like to him to be able to expand or them all three of them to be able to expand under the regulations that they're under right now today because they can't expand none none of the three could expand I think under the new regulations it just couldn't work they couldn't have the right so basically we weren't we're we're putting in place rules that are going to stop free enterprise stop their growth and continue to service the community the way that they're servicing right now so I I like what you said everything except for the new if it and I think that it needs to be land that's that's already adjacent to their land we come up with some kind of language on that that land that's already adjacent to them of course you don't want to if they open up a new park a new park they follow the new rules but if they just expand and each one of these guys I know that Lee has expanded a couple times two

[2:21:56] or three times probably over the years each you know ever probably ever so many years he sees a need to do that and if we put him under these new rules he won't be able to do that so that's the only disagreement I have with that everything else I agree with you on and I think that's a valid concern but at the same time the reasons for the satin black provisions and the provisions you're adding here don't disappear just because it's an existing park and if we're encroaching on existing property we need to have at least the spirit if not the full setback there so that the only reason to have a setback is to prevent damage to property owners and property values now and giving one group the ability to do that damage unfairly also need to be taken into consideration the reason for having new expansion come under the same rules is if there's a reason to do it from one set of people their existing business we don't want to encroach on but at the same time everybody needs to be playing by a similar set of rules going forward and that includes an expansion especially thank you no I'm not going to agree with that y'all know who I am now you're still Marshall yep but I would we've started a lot of conversation I got this draft 18 days ago Matt and since that time we've got in touch with a lot of y'all because we had never seen this before we weren't involved in developing it discussing it and I understand there's a guy that owns the RV park that was on it he resides in San Angelo but his Park is somewhere else and maybe he was wanting to build one I don't know but just if we're having all this discussion how can we even

[2:23:59] I mean we're having discussion but how can you vote on this thing I mean it's too ambiguous it's too confusing it's too contradictory and this group behind me we got together and had a meeting and just think if we had all been involved we might have a workable project a project right now I'd rather take a little longer on this and get it right than trying to piecemeal this thing together Lee were you fine with the motion that I made to to exclude it from all ordinances yes I mean just exclude all the current owners that are in place today to exclude them from all ordinances all four of the ordinances yeah all of you guys are in favor of that right so you would be fine if we did vote on that um we've got a motion and we've got a second that we exclude all existing Parks from any of this ordinance that they it's a totally different they work under one set of rules any new parks Works under and others we understand it I've got a motion I've got a second I mean may I please yes sir AJ if I could did you actually did you want to make another comment before I make my comment yeah I would just like to uh add a little bit to that we're talking about delaying uh action we're act I'd just like to give you another reason why to delay action uh it has been pointed out and we found out for sure yesterday that no current Park owner of the San Angelo Texas was ever consulted on any of this we do have representation from Tech Association Campground owners we have National representation from KOA and I have with me the standards by which RV parks should be built I say because of this that we should consider not doing anything

[2:26:02] except what y'all are discussing now because as an RV park owner we are covered actually by different rules than mobile home parks because everything is being lumped together Marshall and I and other RV park owners are looking at losing rights to the state of Texas affords us for example RV parks operate under a SAT Services agreement not a tenant landlord agreement I provide services they sit on a site gain benefit of my services we also have a that the reason we do that is because the state of Texas protects us with utilities in that somebody does not pay the utilities or Site Services I can say you no longer have services please remove your trailer please remove your motorhome that's according to the state of Texas we have theft of services if they wish to use our services and disappear without paying I have legal ramification I can't do that under tenant landlord agreements these are all under Texas penal codes trespass I have specific written Texas Penal Code RV park language that is defined by the Texas Penal Code I'm sorry the trespass Texas Penal Code 30.05 RV parks are specifically listed however the opinion of tech Association Campground owners is that you start lumping us together we start losing our rights such as this so I would suggest that we start over I don't know if that's a awful hard word since we're running out of time here actually gained some benefit from people who know what we're doing this actually includes the specifications for how RV sites should be built just for Grant just for grins we're trying to approach this from the idea of

[2:28:05] man camps at this time if you put it properly in the ground according to the National Fire Protection Association 1194 it's a minimum of ten thousand dollars per site that's not putting anything on typo that's just being able to park a trailer there right there we've already got some of our problems solved so I think if you would consider holding off let's regroup and take care of this properly with local Campground owners being involved I think we can solve a lot of this mess pretty quick thank you Daniel mayor's gonna say that we have a motion and a second as far as to um uh just to do away with a grandfather we can leave everything the way it is at this point but make the other changes I just want to make sure that there's been a lot of work that's been done at this point and AJ I want to talk to you and and make sure that we have any concern that you may have about uh going back that way we don't have a problem going back and meeting with this group but as far as the way it is drawn up right now as far as emotion has been made what concerns do we have at this point I think as long as we have clear direction that will help because we haven't had that throughout the process and we did draft the sections for zoning to respect those non-conforming existing Parks we've written that into the permitting process um perhaps it's not worded the way people would like it to be worded we can re try another you know try to try to do that again the kind of looming date is the May 16th deadline which is the expiration of the moratorium so as long as you're you're all comfortable with that and you're comfortable with perhaps making yourselves available for special meetings if it if the need arises to meet the May 16th deadline staff can act accordingly we just need I think some clear Direction well I'm just saying maybe we could sit down with this group to make sure they go through what we currently have and make sure that any concern that they have is vetted out and we we take care of that and make sure we come back because the intent was to come

[2:30:06] here and make sure that we didn't affect those current uh Park owners and that exactly was our intent it's obvious that there's a lot of concerns out there that we need to address with them and actually have a sit down and make sure that we go through that highlight and make sure that before it comes back up here again that we have a pretty clear understanding that this is what is agreeable for everybody I agree and I think we also need to make sure that we include the city attorney's office in that process because most of the language that we put together was in an effort to make all parties happy but also follow the law so that's an added complication we need to keep in mind and I might also add that on number 12. we have already changed the grandfather because we are charging existing Parks if they sell or transfer we're charging them a fee and that was not part of the rules that they that they exist under now so we we say we've grandfathered them we've already added additional fees to them that didn't exist before this ordinance and I think it's time to back off I think it's I think it's time to well I think we've gone too far well we've heard I've already made the motion in a second we're going to have to vote on this that's right I I am saying this to be perfectly clear this is all non-conforming trailer parks and RV parks within the city limits at this time should be stricken from all four ordinances that's the motion that I made and that also will go back and redo number 12 that we just voted on but I'm saying all I'm with you I'm with you so I think this is an easy deal just let's vote on it and I think they're happy with that and one last comment actually I was at the Planning Commission yesterday they resoundingly you know Contin together had the exact same messages all of you have today so they they were with it and I think for all of us as Park owners we would love to be just excluded from this because it seemed like it started with the man camps and it's again a tangent all the way out here A Million Miles Away let's bring back to the man camps and leave it there yeah okay the most the motion is that the existing camps as they exist today non-conforming that are non-conforming that they will be left under legal rules they will they will be

[2:32:09] left under the rules as they are today and that any new camps then will come under the new rules however we enact them well they will be taken actually they'll be taken from the ordinances the four ordinances that we're looking at today so any legal non-conforming parks that are in place today will be taken from the ordinances they'll be stricken from it excluded they'll be excluded from any of the new ordinances that's how and could I ask for clarification I just wanted a clarification um council member they will not be subject to any of the new regulations even if they do any future expansion or revamping of the current status one thing at a time here I don't want them in the new ordinances so I think that that affects them even on the the future future stuff too is the way I would see it yeah they can do anything not anything but they can do what they're the rules that they're in place there right now am I correct well it looks to me if they're going to expand they're going to have to get a permit just like oh they did yesterday they're going to have to do it anyway but they should be under the rules that are important that's the old rules clarification yes sir Winky you're not you're not uh it's just in connection your emotion you're you're not suggesting that we uh uh table these other ordinances today not at all we move forward all that weekend I'm in total agreement of all your the other stuff of the new parks that's where we you and I are both together on that that's what we were we came in here to do is to stop those new parks the man camps not Parts the man camps from coming in so I think the new regulations are all will help that but I want to my motion is to exclude all the existing RV and trailer parks mobile home parks that are in the city and move forward with the ordinance the other ordinances after your motion is yeah then we can vote on that separately I don't have a

[2:34:11] problem with that okay thank you I don't either yes ma'am one more one short one short comment very short you need a mark of a son like a stardust um I'm not gonna be repetitive I do agree and support and when I add my voice to that but I also wanted to point out an advantage to doing it that way even to um those of you who are concerned about existing parks and would like a site plan would like changes in this way or that way that can certainly be handled later separately from this if right now you handle the existing parks and then the moratorium uh time constraint will no longer be in place because you can deal with us later it doesn't there's no rush you've been dealing with us for the last however many years even if there's concerns it's not an urgent concerns surely and I would ask that you um then maybe put in place some kind of guidelines for uh working with us on working out new ordinance at that do address us if you want to go that way thank you thank you and mayor if I might ask is the motion to ex to change what was presented instead of tabling because I think it's it I would recommend that we just table now because what was presented is different than what you're asking we're going to have to put bike work on 12 again right okay but 12 12 just affects the trailer parks here my motion is to my motion I made it my motion is the is to exclude all legal non-conforming parks and and trailer RVs and trailer parks that are in the city remove them from All Foreign ordinance even from the even from that but in 12 we just voted that they've sold a transfer they would pay a 600 fee which is not what they live under now okay then the three other ordinances that we're talking about now we're talking about this one and the two more we haven't even gotten to yet well if we're going to kill them if we're going to stop it today then we're going to have to go back and change 12 and take them

[2:36:14] out of 12 as well I I would prefer to do that I mean if I didn't vote for 12. I was voted I voted against 12. so but we're we're we're making two we're saying they stop today what is allowed today allows today but then on 12 we said you will now have to pay a 600. you don't say that I didn't say that four of us said that we would have to pay it in the future so we can't have both ways it seems that we could change that in the next meeting we have a legal the second reading okay okay since uh the the new owner the uh legally non-conforming owners would not be uh required to obtain a permit then the new ordinance wouldn't affect them at all I mean the ordinance under item 12 wouldn't it wouldn't affect because it's a new ordinance right and then they right okay and if we don't have a problem with that but I'm just trying to understand council's direction as to the legally non-conforming uses not just we're allowing them to maintain the status quo by not uh but with regard to expansion I'm reiterating what I said before I'm just trying to understand that they would the whole purpose of the moratorium was to give us time to develop um ordinances that would protect the public health safety and Welfare and so the idea that there's a set of business folks that are not going to be subject to any future regulations is is what I'm hearing and just trying to to grasp emotion the motion's been made it's been segmented I agree with you on that but I think that we'll talk about the expansion in the future we'll have to do there's a possibility of doing variance we'll do it on the next meeting we have to approve it the second time we'll make adjustments in Marty uh what happens if the property sells the the the the existence no they still fall under the same they have to well if because what are

[2:38:18] you going to do they're going to have to go in there with a thousand foot setback on that they won't be subjects to any other just asking that's how that's what a true grandfather or legal non-confirming Clause is it will go on basically forever as long as the turtle farms okay Johnny no no I was saying Okay Candy and Harry were up I know this has been a long time and we've had a lot of argument on this but I'm going to disagree with Rodney on this your grandfather Harry Thomas it's grandfathered for the pro for the present owner only if we're going to do this we need to do this in such a way that if it sells the new owner comes under the the new ordinance and and I believe that's exactly the way we intended to start this as we went down the line yeah we we talked about the moratorium however long ago it was we started back in September or whatever the time frame was and and one of the things we said at that time was also expansion now whether that was our intent to use that word or not we did and I think it's in the council meetings minutes so the point being here is is we're not going to solve these issues today I agree with you we should work with the park owners come to the best language that will help the city not get the man camps as we intended but we need to we need to move forward on this we're spending a lot of council time a lot of Staff time a lot of public time and we need to get get this completed in the moratorium time frame thank you candy pool Council I would just tell you that the way I understand the motion that Rodney has made before you would undo anything from item number 12 because it overrides I'm not an attorney but the motion then being all four taking out the existing uh parks would be out of all four no matter what number 12 had been done and I think this is

[2:40:22] very good I was on the housing committee we need to deal perhaps now with just the new which was what we started with it was the man camp thing we wanted to make sure that San Angelo's quality of life was maintained as it progressed existing sort of started being talked about with this motion you will take everything that has a legal non-conforming existing out of all four of the ordinances you'll deal just with the new and then that will take care of the moratorium and I believe that that motion would take care of all of it if you passed it thank you candy thank you we beat this horse to death let's take a vote and the motion is do we stop existing Parks as they are right now or under the rules that are in force right now anything that happens after the rules are enacted would be under a different set of rules is that pretty well so much for all four ordinances for all four artists all in favor say aye aye aye any opposed nay nay we got a six one on that thank you existing parks it doesn't make nothing you're not involved in this from now on it is 1204 and I have had bad all I can stand for a while I think it's time to break for lunch and do our executive let's see how long this is is everybody in agreement that we break okay let me read the executive executive session on the division of government code Title Five open government ethics subtitle a open government chapter 551 open meeting sub chapter D exceptions to requirement the meetings be opened under the following section section 5510712 to consult with this attorney on the matter in which the duty of the attorney to the governmental body under the Texas disciplinary rules professional conduct State Bar of Texas Clear the context with a chapter regarding one takes this open meeting act and two City water rights is relate

[2:42:24] to settlement agreement between City Hickory water on Conservation District number one city of Brady calls number 2779b and 3293b in the 119th District Court Consul County Texas calls of 03996 and 198th District Court of McCullough County Section 551072 delivery at the purchase exchange leadership value real property regarding Lake nazworthy it is 1205 and we are now an executive and I expect this will take an hour around 15. oh I was gonna save 30 minutes let me get an hour we're gonna we're gonna try and be back here we're gonna try and be back here about 1 15. that's the go let's go ahead and get this started it is 113. where's Johnny Johnny's not here okay Johnny Silvis is left so there's just six of us to finish this up so any tie votes we'll have to work with it next week I have had a couple of requests and because of some time issues we're ready to go to 14 14 and 15 are primarily going to be staff items but I've had a request from 21. this is the consideration of probing approving a proposal for the development of the dog park as part of the red arroya and the young woman that wants to speak to this is a student she's missing school and she wants to get back as quickly as is possible so if Council does not have a problem I would like to pull 21st first next and also 19 Mark Barta is speaking on this and Mark has a plan to catch so if the council will approve I would like to bring 19 next and then we'll go back 14 15. any problems with Council let's go to 21. consideration approving a proposal for the development of the dog park is part of the new red Royale Trail project brother white you are on sir yes sir I don't believe we've really talked to the city council about a dog park before we've started to talk about it with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and I just want to give you a quick history of where we're talking about

[2:44:26] doing this and just a quick background when we did the parks recreation open space master plan just recently a dog park did list number two as the item that the respondents to the survey said this is important to us is the next facility you add to a park or whatever facility you add consider a dog park but it's our number two item we've looked at two locations to build the dog park along with Bridge area which I'll show in a second an area by the red arroya next to the trail we're conceiving developing we've talked to the board they recently at the last meeting recommended approval of moving forward with the dog park costs could range from 50 to 100 150 000 for development depending on where we do the park it's cheaper it's on the lower end if we tied in with existing or new parking areas as part of the red Warrior Trail if we have to go to an area we have to build a parking lot then we'll look at the more expensive costs and then annual maintenance or estimated about eight to ten thousand dollars a year and that's really just for limited Mowing and liver pickup and some of the maintenance of the drinking fountain water and lights of course we've we've been tried to encourage a group to lease some property and actually develop and maintain a dog park that hasn't come through yet but I think we've got the right ailments in place now to move forward as a city project with some donated funds this is the Lone Wolf Park location this is Avenue L Paint Rock Road the old fire training center the fire station here here's the water treatment plant the South Concho River this is one area we've looked at doing the dog park ideal you need at least about two acres to do one and you divide that up between small dog area and large dog area one disadvantage to this side a couple of disadvantages it doesn't have parking yet and there's power lines that go through it we could have the dog park

[2:46:28] underneath the power lines but it's not the ideal situation the next location is at the road auroria here's uh if you're familiar with the trail that's being proposed to be developed I think that we talked about here soon the two locations we're looking at one is on the west side of college Hills Boulevard this is the parking we're anticipating developing off Middlebrook Road as part of that project this is college Hills unit at Park this is parking we're proposing to add as part of that project we've got two locations here because it's not quite the two acres we need in total it would have to split it up probably put the small dog park here and the larger dog park here or vice versa another option is on this side which we could put it all together small and large dog area but we don't have parking here we'd have to drive build a short drive and some parking and then build the park just a few examples of other cities this is and the ones that I've seen personally this is Wiggly Field in Denton South Denton it's it's quite a distance from the parking area parking area is about a football fields length away here's an area for large dogs medium dogs and small dogs this is Abilene we're taking a road trip up there for a few hours in the next few weeks to check this one out we've already got cost estimates on this one but it's there by the zoo on the west the east side of the city off the loop and it uh it's actually one of the ones first ones I've seen that are actually separated so it is done elsewhere this is the large dog area this is the smaller dog area and they fortunately they already had parking available this is cedar bark Park and Round Rock councilman Silvis has seen this one he could speak to if you were here he actually was so excited when he saw this on a Sunday he called me and said we have to get one of these but it's it's huge I couldn't the

[2:48:31] pitcher doesn't even Encompass at all it's got a large entrance area to wash the dogs drinking fountains for dogs of course maintenance access they actually have friends of the dog park which we would love to have as well to help maintain it notice board to put notices of course the dispensers for the doggy bags which will be placed in trash cans they actually have a pond we're not suggesting we have a pond obstacles for dogs so they could run around or jump through right now we're working on a collaborative plan with the Girl Scouts one girl scout in particular local businesses for support as well and uh and we being the city working together collaboratively collaboratively the question is does the council want to see this project move forward we think we have the right elements in place to do so our proposal is not to ask Council for money to develop the park our our plan is to see what monies we could raise and then come back to council with a plan and the money that we've raised to see if you want to move forward and of course if you do want to move forward we can come back and show you our design of where we think the the park could fit well and what those costs would be but it really depends on whether we could tap into a parking lot or not so uh I'd like to bring in Megan who's the Girl Scout to talk about how she's going to help with this project hello I'm Megan um I have some few fundraising ideas of how to get this started um of course I've mentioned before the pavers like at the library we could have people of deceased pets they could write their names on them or people that are just love dogs they can have their name on the park as a memorial also we could have companies such as like Petco and

[2:50:35] like other vets they could donate money and have a sign up on the fence Maybe or we could even do a walkathon kind of like the breast cancer walk where they could take pledges owners could bring their dogs take pledges and walk around like Unidad over where the there might be the dog park and we could also have an adoption event there to get some publicity out and get San Angelo excited for all of this I think that'd be helpful we could also have a bake sale there and tie this giant event together and get everybody to get excited for it and get some money raised for it we could also talk to local groomers and have them have a dog wash there and so people could bring their dogs and get them bathed and groomed and they could donate the proceeds to the dog park um project um that's about it oh I also found a couple grants there's a Petco grant that I've been looking at and I'm gonna apply for that one there's a Walmart one that's about three thousand there's also the American Kennel Club and there's a couple others I found but I'm going to research more into it's about all right all right thank you for your time thank you you better watch your job Carl really Council let's discuss this all right I'm all in favor of this especially if we can keep the cost down we need and I think Carl already knows this if we can tie it back into the parking lots which we're already going to have anyways you think it will be on the bottom end of that the estimate that you gave right right if we do the the first option we're looking at we're looking at probably about 50 to 60 thousand dollars not including any kind of like you said you want to look at the fundraising options and things like that first and then we'll see how much we've exactly yes we're not asking Council for money right now Charlotte I think it's great it's needed uh listening to national news this

[2:52:40] weekend and I understand that Americans spend 55 billion that's where the B dollars a year on their pets um lots of animals I like the area of the Aurora you know it is a flood zone so it the future of being built out is not going to happen it ties together with the other parks in the area and I think it's wonderful I'd like to see Council proceed and it's Central centrally local yes which is even better the Lone Wolf thing kind of because itself to the side of the city I think it's be better right in the center okay I know we've been dealing with this since since I've been on Council there's been requests for this from different areas and never could get much traction but then Megan wasn't pushing those I think it's a wonderful idea do we need do we need the motion do you need a consensus what do we need here motion to approve concept move forward second do we have any further public comment Council candy Poole a lot of hearing from me today uh the San Angelo Association of Realtors has already met on this we have a committee that would be looking at this as one of the projects for us as well that we might could be a help in this maybe with fundraising but we'd like to help Megan in some way just letting you know that some of the city's other businesses are for this thank you thank you any further comment from the public on this any further comment from Council then we do have a motion that we approve the concept to allow staff to develop the idea of a dog park and to find ways to pay for it and then bring it back to us for a final all in favor please say aye aye any opposed nay put a 6-0 on that one thank you Megan

[2:54:43] the next thing we're going to consider we'll bring number 19 which is consideration and possible action regarding improvements to city-owned land lease but the council Valley Archery Association Mr Dixon good afternoon Council uh let me see if I can find which one we are I have today with me uh Mr Mark barter the president of Concho Valley Archery Association is going to give a short presentation as soon as I figure out how to work this basically they want to do some improvements to the archery range scan it down yeah how are we doing sorry um they want to clear some trades to increase some Park parking areas and wind some existing roads for Target Transportation this is a very heavily wooded Mesquite patch basically out at the lake in the Archery Association released this property from the city since the early 90s and they're currently extends into 2017. so with that I'll bring up Mark for the presentation and we'll be short and sweet again my name is Mark Barta I'm the president of the concert Valley Archery Association mayor council how's everybody doing we appreciate this opportunity to visit with y'all according to my members of my club that are in their 80s they have leased this land concert Valley archery under different names from the city of San Angelo since the 50s we appreciate this opportunity to be able to lease this land and provide this opportunity what I wanted to tell you just brief history about the archery club uh briefly we have over 200 members we actually service a lot of folks and a lot of

[2:56:45] individuals in this community archery is on an extremely uh popularity we have just started a 4-H archery club and we have over says 40 but since we did this slideshow we've actually have 60 members from the ages of 8 and 17. not only do we have youth we never charge yous we provide equipment for them uh Angelo State students use our facility Goodfellow we actually provide our facility at no cost to the girls and boys club Boy Scouts when they ask us to we actually have saisd classes that come as an honor for them having good attendance and good grades we show and have them have a day at the archery club we have monthly shoots we have state qualifiers and we were actually up for a state championship where we would bring five or 400 to 500 Shooters but with the increase of our hotel usage we're not at the top of that list right now Ricky has already described what we would like to do we are in a very unique position we've had an opportunity where we've had a donation of equipment Fuel and labor to do this work for us and that's why we wanted to come to you and actually do and do this this is our front gate of the archery club it's on the way to the middle cultural park and what I'd like for you to see on the right where you walk where you look to the that slide that's our main parking lot last month I had 81 Shooters in that small area I had people parking up and down Red Bluff Road what we would like to do is widen to the left side of that screen our parking lot basically the same size there's another picture of our parking lot coming from the static range out to Red Bluff Road and what we want to do is basically make a mirror image of that on the other side there's a picture of what we'd be cutting through mainly Mesquite brush we're going to look at maybe doing a fundraiser cutting trees down uh if 4-H wants to do it to raise money uh do whatever but we do have folks that will come in and take care of this haul off the trash do everything the only thing we're not sure of is we would like to

[2:58:47] possibly put base down for a parking lot the only advantage in that would be the amount of uh mowing or upkeep to it but on the other hand we've had a lot of members that have said it looks so nice to have a good grass mode so we haven't made that decision we would hopefully get direction from Council on that there's 91 Acres we lease from you is we fight an everyday battle to keep nature from taking it over that's just a picture of the underbrush we're continually cutting and doing things what we actually do is we set targets up and through this where people can walk take animals take their dogs kids whatever and they shoot and enjoy it another picture of just the underbrush we're hoping someday maybe we can get another entity in there to help us clear the brush it is a concern but it's hard to do it when you have a club and you can only imagine trying to keep a hundred acres uh in this situation one thing we need to do is this is our static range where we keep targets up for people to shoot we would like to remove a few trees in this area we never asked for this before but now when we have 60 children shooting bows and arrows those are those trees in the way could cause a safety issue we also this range goes back about 50 yards we would like to make that static range to go all the way back probably to be able to handle 70 80 yard targets you never know someday San Angelo may have an Olympic champion and they need that distance to shoot so they can practice and we have kids shooting bow and arrows that direction here's a picture an overhead of where the area that we have and I think this next slide is a Google map that actually shows the increase of the parking area that we would like to do uh if not as you can see along that road we will have people parking up and down that road we shoot the first Saturday of the month and we have other shoots during the year this is just some pictures I've got people of our last shoot that was parking in the brush there was nowhere to park they were driving their pickups in there and then here's another picture of how crowded it is in our area and as you can see we're full and and we would really like to have this opportunity I would hope there are there any

[3:00:50] questions I possibly could answer for Council Winky uh I'm not sure what you're asking us to do number one but number two on those trees or those mesquite trees you're wanting to cut down yes sir only mesquite trees okay we have no nothing on our property we're hoping to widen the parking lot we would also like to take the roads some of the roads are too narrow for us to drive a pickup in and we need to take a few Mesquite trees up and down and around those roads so that we can make them navigable to put targets out so what do you need from us permission I'm sorry thank you the reason we're here today on the lease it specifically says no trees may be removed from the least premises without the prior written consent of the city council and that's what we would request from you today would allow them to remove the necessary Mesquite tree and underbrush to accommodate their needs Rodney this is yours yeah I went out there and I looked at this and I think I talked to you a couple months ago on this uh situation and this is only a positive for us as a city I mean to help out our residents and the lease there this already is on their land he's not asking for more land he's just asking to clean it up and make it actually he's asking to make it safer for our residents to park and not parked on the street so this is kind of a no-brainer plus any Mesquite you get off of there is just how much how much water do we have that's the picture of the lake right across from there that's right and I'm glad you brought that actually I would like to I'm all in favor of let's get rid of Mesquite trees and really on we need to come back I think and talk about this situation in all areas around the lake out there we know how much mosquitoes all the way around there and how many hundreds if not thousands of gallons of water they use so but for this I for this item I'm totally in favor of them increasing the parking lot size taking out all the trees they want and widening their roads through there that we talked about and also taking out the few trees that's already in the mode area to make it safer for your anybody else just roughly how big is that area that's marked off we didn't

[3:02:54] measure it Marty I mean it's you you could do a graphical deal of the area uh from the picture but you can't walk through it to measure it it's probably in nature wouldn't you think well probably somewhere in that place range I mean we didn't want to get that specific we just kind of that was the intent of something about that side yeah yes sir I'm sure you know and are well aware but with respect to those mesquite trees uh they just they need to be effective in what they do which is seems to me like either one of two things either uh if they grub them they need to get the Tap Root out of there or if they're just going to cut them off uh about ground level you know they need to spray them with remedy and Diesel and and try to kill those stumps so that the roots aren't still growing my understanding is that they prefer the grub method to get them out of there where it would be safe to park okay go ahead Rodney I move that we accept this how did you word this just to increase the size and the mowing how is it worded yes sir I mean if you'll just agree that they can remove the trees is kind of what we're after we can take and also widen the road right there and clear personally I don't care how many trees yeah let's take the whole 90 Acres yeah get them all off and make a field out of it we need to leave some around the perimeter it it kind of works as a fence backer on the back side where people not come in their age you know they just posted his archery range and there is danger people just walking around back there but uh I move that we accept the proposal as presented and I suck it make a field with the perimeter yep I do have a motion I do have a second round the perimeter wood fence the cut up log the old-fashioned way do I have any public comment on this I call for the vote all in favor say aye aye aye any opposed nay put a 6-0 on that one thank you Mark so sorry it took so long for us to get

[3:04:58] to you did we ever did we ever make a we never took a vote on 13 did we AJ no no we didn't because we had another motion to take care of that so I guess we really need to vote on 13 which is to renew and to provide for the inspection process for new for new Parks am I right anybody want to anybody want to move on that no I want to go over the inspection process I don't I just can't see having to go through eight departments to get an approval inspected that just yeah on a yearly basis I don't think that even the new people if there are going to be new people I don't I don't see any reason just can we hold off on that AJ can we hold off on the item yeah can we look at you can do anything now well we don't we what do you want we have a time limit on this where we've got to get this done May 16th we may have to have a special meeting well keep in mind you've got one extra meeting to play with because your next regular meeting would be the first and then you also have the meeting of the 15th right it just links the time stretches it out to have to go through eight departments to get inspections you know when we emphasize One-Stop shop and all the other things and this it just this doesn't flow I think we just take that out like I just did the other would you be happy with that and then yeah I just don't like the aid inspections so make your motion do you want to make a motion no you can do we want to do that or do we want to bring this back at the first meeting with with property what do you want to do well what my thought is um if these things come in they're going to have to be permitted to make sure that that you're going to have the plants you're going to have all those things I think just the normal inspection process is adequate because the fire marshal is going to go out and make sure that the roads are wide enough and built the right way and all those sort of things

[3:07:00] so I think just the standard process is all that we need I think it's more than adequate and I'll move that we just use the standard process that we have in place now and and remove these Provisions from it I'll second that any further comment from Council have come in from the floor on this motion has been made that we make no special Provisions for these mobile home parks the RV parks but that we in fact use the existing permitting inspection inspections that are in place right now that we move forward under the same procedures as as everyone else has to live with that Fairway state that makes sense Alicia well the ordinance States as is except there are no future inspections on even on the new units is that part of the month sure is that part of the second that's what I agree with on the second no further inspections when we follow the current laws and regulations as far as permits all in favor please say aye aye aye any opposed Nay put a 6-0 on that one let's move on to number 14. first public hearing consideration introducing an ordinance City San Angelo amending code of ordinances city of San Angelo by amending chapter 12 Exhibit C Land Development subdivision ordinance by one amending chapter 3 and title definitions by refining certain terms defining newly added terms to amending chapter four entitled classification of subdivisions by amending section 2 entitled minor subdivision or resub division adding a provision for certain subdivisions laying out spaces for manufactured housing Parks mobile home parks recreational vehicle parts number three amending chapter five entitled procedural requirements for processing sub processing subdivision Section 3 entitled stages of development review by restating subpart B minor subdivisions to add a process for plant approval of Manufacturing Housing Park mobile home park recreational vehicle park spaces

[3:09:03] and four amending chapter nine entitled subdivision design policies section one entitled Lots by restating paragraph one zoning requirements of subpart B light Dimensions amending Section 3 entitled streets and roads of part a general design guidelines restating paragraph one Public Access providing for access to park space from internal streets and adding a new paragraph seven entitled manufacturer Home Park mobile home park recreational vehicle park developments providing Paving standards and prohibiting primary access from certain streets and amending Section 8 in title street name Signs by adding a provision for Street signage on internal subdivision streets providing a severability clause and providing for an effective date AJ and I have no idea what I just read very briefly the the changes that are proposed in the draft subdivision amendments include just those items number one there was a recommendation in the zoning ordinance piece which we'll get to in a moment to specify minimum sizes for spaces that would also be echoed in the subdivision ordinance also we would be setting a maximum density of 10 spaces per acre that would be figured cumulatively we would be setting a minimum lot size of 10 acres for each park again that would be for new parks not existing Parks setting a minimum buffer of 100 feet there was a 1 000 foot measurement that you gave us and we've made that Amendment accordingly we did leave it in the subdivision piece to apply it to subdivisions within the etj simply because they don't have the ability to require that distance and so they were happy the county seemed to be happy with the 100 foot buffer so we've left it but written it is such that it only applies to subdivisions within the etj not the city limits we have also required that the internal streets be paved that was an edit that was suggested from the last meeting the recommendation from the committee to require primary access to the park not

[3:11:07] be from a local Street to try to keep that traffic on major streets and then lastly to require signage for internal Street naming for emergency vehicle access and that sort of thing so those are in short the changes but we can dive into any of those if you'd like cancel Charlotte I want to add something right here and I'm specifically speaking to AJ um I know how many hours you have spent on this it's been your evening hours weekend hours you've researched and you have worked and worked with the committee and none of us up here can possibly imagine the amount of time that you have spent on this thank you and to do it accurately and appropriately and I have to say that I came to the conclusion after reading all of your drafts Etc and so forth that this was classic classic textbook you absolutely applied your training your knowledge and your degree into redoing this and if you were building a city tomorrow starting from scratch it would be perfect right and I commend you for that I applaud the efforts that you have done on that it's been outstanding but we're not brand new we're not perfect and our city just didn't start and we're kind of setting our ways so in my opinion for this council member what we're doing up here today in no way diminishes or ridicules the work and the effort that you have put into this it's simply reaffirms that I'm acknowledging your ability and I'm just trying to make it to fit a new textbook case fit in an old existing town where we're really set in our ways and I understand thank you very much thank you well sir I'm mood to approve second well this one was easy do I have further Council comments on this Dot moved move in a second Charlotte do I have anything from the public on this

[3:13:12] yes come ahead sir this does not apply to existing parks at all good afternoon I'm Lee Brown Spring Creek Marina and RV park last council meeting I introduced myself as a man who is not satisfied I don't like the way this ordinance is written just for the fact if I decide to buy another Park in town I'm in trouble I'm gonna have to follow new rules I understand that however the problem I have is not that the ordinance is going into effect but I think it's written wrong it has wrong language it has wrong dimensions uh I'm representing RV sites I can't speak as to mobile home parks again I would like to reiterate that I want the RV parks and mobile homes separated if we're lumped together I think I lose some of my Rats the other thing is I would really like somebody to take one of these copies of the standard RV sites that's written by a National Organization the if you'll look at the ordinance or the draft I'm sorry you will notice everything's written according to mobile home specifications I don't have a problem with that except I'm not a mobile home park I'm not a mobile home operator a an RV site needs to be built a certain way some of the things that I would just like to point out to you just to show you is that they require only 10 sites per acre however if you have mobile homes on that on that acreage you're allowed if I read the code properly they're allowed to be within 10 feet of each other on boundary lines however if you build an RV site that's only 10 per acre you're requiring me to keep them 55 feet apart if I divide if I divide it equally also the definitions of what an RB is a

[3:15:18] definition of a park model the definition of sizes the definition of what's required is no way has it considered what a National Standard is they're actually written wrong and so what I'm afraid of is you start putting ordinances in that are written with wrong definitions you're going to get in trouble I'm sorry it's going to cause complications whenever you get further down the road and somebody starts challenging wrong definitions so I would respectfully disagree with this and really appreciate some more input before any actions taken on it thank you sir thank you he makes a good point call for a vote any other public comment on this I do have a motion I do have a second that we accept this as presented this is the first reading I'll call for the boat all in favor say aye aye opposed nay no okay the season A's one two three Nays got one two three just comes back next time we have a tie vote oh is it time no Johnny Johnny's not here yeah I'm voting for it so that's three against and three four so it's going to come back next time bring it back again let's go to number 15. hey can we can we get him on that committee it would really have been a nice thing had he been on the committee from the get-go the RV he the reason why I voted against this is because he does have a very good point we're talking about mobile homes and he his and and uh Marshall's situation is a totally different thing the numbers are all different and everything and I don't think anybody understands that the only way that I've went ahead and voted for it is because this ordinance has the opportunity for people to to apply for a variance so if it is an RV park and there is a problem then they can come to

[3:17:20] the city council and say this doesn't make sense according to these definitions I would like a variance and that way we'll be able to allow it so there's still a variance there's still an appeal process even if we pass the ordinance and that's the reason I voted for it okay well it's Gotta unless somebody makes another motion it's gonna somebody wants to change your vote we'll bring back I'm not first anybody gonna change bring it back on the first number 15's first public hearing consideration of introducing your ordinance the city of San Angelo mending the code of ordinances of City San Angelo Mini chapter 12 exhibit a zoning ordinance by amending article 3 use regulations Section 310 you stable restating that part of the use table designated residential use categories group living number two admitting article 3 use regulations Section 313 residential use category subpart 8 group living expanding the definition of group living number three amending article four specific use standards by redesignating section 407 is campground RV parks establancy standards for the use and development of Campground recreational ER Parks number four renumbering section 407 is 408 and remembering section 408 to 425 is sections 409 through 426 respectively number five amending article four specific use standards section 415 manufactured housing Park standards restating Manufacturing Housing Park standards number six amending Article 5 General development standard and 501 residential district standards subpart a residential district regulations modifying lot size and density requirements number seven amending Article 5 General development standards section 509 fences subpart B high standards for required privacy offenses part three maximum height and required front yards adding exceptions for MHP and MHS zoning district and special use campground RV parks number eight amending article 8 definition section 804 to find parks adding definitions providing a Cuba cumulative Clause providing a severability clause and providing an effective date AJ

[3:19:23] thank you sir okay this is probably the most comprehensive set of amendments but I'll try to work through them quickly as well first the first proposed change that you see here on the screen is regarding the use category group living one of the weaknesses of the existing ordinance that we work with is it is not in any way address Workforce housing of a temporary nature and so the committee recommended amending the definition for group living to Encompass those uses we also went through several versions of the draft as to where group looting could be allowed within the city limits and so we had a committee recommendation and then from the March 4th meeting you all had made some recommendations on edits and we've made those in the draft so as the draft is presented to you today group loading would be allowed with approval of a special use again as a reminder that comes through the Planning Commission and to you as a council to approve in the zoning districts shown here which would be the CH or heavy commercial ow or office warehouse and CG CH or general slash heavy commercial so that's the the first major change in this moving forward the definition of group living as I'm alluded to a moment ago was updated and it does include specific language for temporary housing of more than one month but less than six months and Workforce housing the reason it specifically states of more than one month is because anything less than that is considered hotel motel we don't want to create a conflict with that so that's the second change that's proposed here moving on we did catch this between the last meeting and this one so this is a kind of a new addition we noticed in doing a last minute proofreading that there is a section in the ordinance that defines campgrounds and recreational vehicle parks of less than 30 days as being a retail sale or service that seems to be across purposes with the

[3:21:25] intent of limiting where those can go and so we have recommended an edit to strike that from the existing ordinance the next large change is an additional chapter I'm sorry initial section two chapter four that outlines the specific standards for campground RV parks remember in the zoning ordinance we look at RV parks and manufactured housing Parks as two separate animals manufactured housing Parks have a dedicated zoning District campgrounds RV parks is a use type that under a special use approval can be allowed in certain parts of the community so we've made sure to maintain a separate way of looking at those two parks and within the guidelines many of these are familiar to you from the March 4th meeting but since the March 4th meeting we did add the edit here in green regarding the 1000 foot measurement from the perimeter of the park to any residential district and just for clarifications sake we took the discussion you had as to how that should be measured and codified that so it cannot be misinterpreted moving forward other changes suggested at the March 4th meeting included striking the section here in green regarding the 100 foot buffer and so we have done so accordingly there was another edit suggested to add language requiring Paving of internal streets within the park we've made that edit as well and then towards the end of article 4 we had a recommendation from a Committee Member that was concerned with having an improved surface of some sort that could withstand the weight of an RV unit and so we worked with our city engineer to come up with some different Alternatives in addition to the definition for painting we already have on the books so that there are different choices that they can select from or of course they can appeal to staff for an alternative that's not listed here as long as it

[3:23:29] meets the intent of accommodating the RV placement AJ on that one yes it's kind of moot because if he'll support a fire truck it'll support an RV this is in regards to As I understood it the space not the parking space itself which is already required to be paved and not the fire access itself which is already required to be paved but the what we would call The Pad is essentially where you would place the RV one of the committee members expressed their concern that over time the weight of those Vehicles if the ground underneath it was not supported or improved in such a way that it could support the weight of the vehicle it would create issues with the moving in and out gotcha does that help okay also we made some edits at your direction regarding the manufactured housing Park standards again a separate category from RVs the 10 contiguous Acres that was in the original draft but duplicating the language elsewhere in the ordinance talking about the rights of ways and alleys Etc accounting towards that existing acreage and again duplicating the 1000 foot perimeter distance that you'd like to see in chapter five we haven't made no additional edits from the March 4th meeting that remains exactly as it was on March 4th and then into the definitions again many of these definitions cross-reference definitions established elsewhere in our city code in the event that we didn't have those definitions we took them from sources such as the Texas Transportation code and so those remain also intact as you saw them on the fourth so in short that is the the sum of all of the changes that we have made per your direction on the fourth but we can talk about any of those items if you'd

[3:25:31] like to each down could you explain the ejt to me I mean I don't know what it is but I'd like to know the distances from city limits to County and conversation with the county is to they're going to follow these these guides or okay the etj extraterritorial jurisdiction is the area of immediately surrounding the city limits it is dictated in size based on the population of the city So based on our population is three and a half miles once we get up to a hundred thousand inhabitants or more that would bump up to a five mile radius within the etjr zoning does not apply Counties have very limited scope of authority as to what types of regulations they can pass however state law does require the city and the county to come together and have an interlocal agreement which we'll talk about on the next item that dictates who is going to take the burden of regulating subdivisions within the etj in our current Arrangement that is the city in our proposed Arrangement that is still the city as such these zoning regulations that we're reviewing on this item would not apply within that area but the subdivision ordinance regulations that you just approved in the previous item them would apply to parks within the etj that's essentially the extent of what we can apply in that area and so we've worked with the county to try to help them as much as possible by sort of pushing the limits of of what we have on the books that we can apply as each application comes in so far Mr Valenzuela can speak to this we've met with the county and we did get I think positive feedback from that meeting and then we will also be meeting with the Commissioner's Court next week to get hopefully a final approval on that I'm satisfied with this ordinance as I mean you said I'm sorry I interrupted you I can't hear out of this thing

[3:27:34] go right ahead no make your motion that's fine motion to approve is presented anybody want to say I'll second that further Council discussion I hate to say this has been easy but I'm opening it up to the public now come ahead point of order Mr Mayor let's let's don't have any repetitious presentation yes sir my comments do pertain to this ordinance only I appreciate the comment I'm Lee Brown of Spring Creek Marina and RV park some of the things in that I didn't quite get the number uh when it said that RV parks were removed from the entertainment classification that's some of the things I'm really trying to get across to you that according to the state of Texas we are entertainment and services providers so basically the city has actually taking me out of the category of motels and I can't remember restaurants what were on there according to the Texas Penal Code we are a service provider just like a restaurant or a motel hotel therefore I think the ordinance is wrong just an example of part model definition it says it's less than eight feet by 40. there are no travel trailers anywhere that are less than eight feet Park models by recreational vehicle industry is defined as a travel trailer that is read and according to the state of Texas all mine are titled as travel trailers have a square footage of less than 400 feet they don't put a dimension on it mine are actually 12 feet wide uh also in there some of the comments on no drag camping things like that I know we're talking about new services and what have you again I just want to reiterate that things are defined wrong we need to be careful

[3:29:37] thank you for the public comment further comment from the council the motion has been made do we accept this as it is presented it has been seconded and I felt real good about it before you walked up here stamp called for a vote all in favor say aye opposed no hey I think I'm going to go nay on this one as well that puts us right back where we were last time can we can we have City staff directed to to meet with Lee that's what I've done I think that's what I recommended earlier absolutely that's exactly what I want to do and make sure that we get that ironed out Lee is that fine with you you meet with them and we get these little things hammered out and bring it back and then we'll get it the way it needs to be done right okay let's just do that Daniel's right he he's the one that suggested it earlier we just need to do that on those two items but the other ones are are done we've got to do this right yeah we can't throw something together that's not right that's not legal that doesn't meet definitions and then because then we're going to have to come back and change it so we might as well do it right to start with you're right and that's the reason I voted against it we need to get it right so staff it's just not over yet we need to we need to work on it a little more we'll take care of it bring us back something that'll work AJ you're really close though you're almost you'll make it girl you're doing you'll make it you're awesome you're doing a good job you're in the RV Park here too long we don't appreciate you AJ but we just we've got to get it right all right let's go on to number 17 was for we skip number 10 are we ever going to go back to number 10. you wanna go back to it now yeah because he's here at Tad's here and I think in bed

[3:31:39] yeah can we just that's my mistake I I apologize I meant to go back to it and I just completely forgot it sorry 13. there we might clarify the motion how it was read was it a motion to approve and exclude or was it motion to approve as presented okay that's what we were thank you that's on which one ma'am thirteen thirteen no I don't know I don't think we ever did 13. all we did was was made a motion that we would exempt existing parks and that's what we voted on and that's where we quit I don't think I didn't think 13 was ever handled I didn't think we ever completed I had that was I had motion to approve and striking the inspection process oh okay that's right and we we approved that yeah what I had in the motion is motion to utilize standard inspection process the introduction was not approved no it was just one part of the the motion we approved it all except for doing the inspection that process that was my understanding yeah that we would use standard the practices that we have now to permit there would not be any special permitting yes that's what that was your motion yeah correct that was your second yes and that was our boat yeah that's what I had I just didn't have a production of that yes it was done man okay are you confused as well I'm getting there yeah let's go back pick up number 10 and I apologize Ted I just missed it this is discussion possible action regarding utilizing lake nezworthy trust funds for the construction of a police department Boathouse to be located on city property Mr Fleming uh I met with Tad probably six months ago it was early on we met the first time and I met with the police officers and we started discussing this is a project that's been thought about for probably several years now and I think that Tad and the homeowners association out at Lake nazworthy has taken under their control to to try to get this pushed through and I'm totally

[3:33:43] in favor of this what they're wanting to do is right now the the police boat is stored out at the airport I believe and if there is ever an emergency they have to drive out to the airport get it out of storage go to a ramp which now there are six fewer ramps to even go to a I don't know where the closest one would be and put the boat in the water if we had an emergency in the water out on Lake nazworthy what the police would like to have is a a boat dock that's on Lake nazworthy where their boat would sit on me Lake nasworthy and it would be stored and it'd be locked up what I'm proposing to do is not use General funds for this use Lake nazworthy Trust Fund and use that money to build this and actually this summer this is not good for us but this summer could be a really good summer to build that because the lake is going to be so low it might make it easier to build the dock out there that's in place I'll let Tad kind of talk about the design of it in the area if you can and Chief and Mike Ranger I apologize to you all as well for holding you here I just missed it I missed it go ahead sir I'm Ted Logan with a like homeowners association uh I'm not sure I know how to work all this yeah yeah let's just show you cut 23. okay

[3:35:53] Cherokee or Arapahoe sign language okay uh where we're proposing to locate this is at a an old uh Pump Station an inlet uh we're gonna put it out on the Outer Perimeter toward the lake so that we're in the deepest water possible of course uh trying to get out of that Inlet and if it was ever needed to be used as a pump station again we wouldn't be interfering where it couldn't be utilized basically as Rodney was stating I mean the police are actually renting three facilities I believe right now and they can expand upon that but I think they're spending about 700 a month uh for rentals to store equipment the boats and the trailers and and what all they have and what we're trying to do and of course like he was saying the response time is 20 to 30 minutes minimal now uh this should get us where we're within five minutes uh we're going to have the boats on the water they'll have a storage room to lock up where they can have a desk material they'll have all the equipment there so uh they're ready to get in a boat and be on the lake which we've needed for years we've we haven't had many fatalities out there but when we do have a bad situation like we had two or three years ago we can't be 20 30 minutes out there somebody's going to drown so it's uh I think this is a very very much needed situation of course as he was saying uh this summer might be a a pretty opportune time just the fact that construction could be done a little for a little less but what we've laid out uh we've gone with the police department uh as far as the boat sizes the slip sizes they needed we've accommodated everything that they need here

[3:37:56] to accommodate the boats they have now our future boats allowing for a couple of feet in length if they need that down the road but these would be pretty good sized slips where they could they can get both the boat boats in and out of the water completely so that uh we're maintaining them as well as possible uh we are going to do a little storage facility over at the side here which will be self-contained basically be locked with a door we are going to do a security system tied in however they wanted a wireless security of course they would have contacts at both doors in here probably two motion detectors so that we could would be set off if you have any Ingress or egress that's not supposed to be there the lists are figured into this the overhead doors we figured in lighting and basic wiring it's pretty minimal basically these are showing light fixtures distributed throughout The Boathouse which you can kind of see where those are uh this would be one in the storage room and then basically scattered around these are going to be for basically for Chargers so that they can have Chargers immediately plugged in right at the boat there and then we've just got them probably over five feet around so as they have equipment or need anything we've just got Outlets where they can be utilized uh this is kind of the end view that would be on the lake we're going to put in some ventilation vents because again our summers are not cool we were going to put a thermostatically controlled fan on that so we are pulling some heat out of there also ventilating the little storage room

[3:40:00] so that it would get some air movement um basically that's pretty much I mean an overview of the of the structure and like I said the we're making 10 by 10 doors because these bows completely out of the water motor and all are 10 feet tall with the top little roof area they've got over the the steering wheel but uh anyway we feel like this would be a a very good asset for the city it's going to help give a presence at the lake that we haven't had with the police this is going to be pretty much centrally located it's on city property um we can have we've got good road access in and out now Gene Scotty owns a Jason property and he said he's got a ramp right there adjacent to this property and he said we can utilize that in whatever form or fashion we want if we wanted to cut a gate through between his property and this that would be fine where they could put a boat right in the water there on his uh ramp pull the trailers right through the gate over there and park right adjacent to the boat house so uh anyway this is something that we've been working on off and on for a year we feel like having course it's a it's a situation where I feel like at some point in time this is gonna be able to help us maintain the lake better give us more presence of the police on the lake and give them the ability to expedite emergency situations in a much better fashion but uh thank you Ted do you have anything to add around here no I think you did a great job one of the things that I want to also point out I believe that the all the police staff has really put in a lot of hours of work on this as well as you guys have right and this is not

[3:42:02] something that we just came up with in the last month this has been a long long process that you guys have gone through lots and lots of meetings on this and they've already had the uh an architect draw up these days right well the association it's kind of put it out there where they've you know they've spent a lot of well we you know you for y'all to put it out for bids we've got to have an architectural seal I went ahead and did that knowing that this is where we've got to go uh we had basically gotten the you know the the basic elements involved but I had Gary Donaldson go ahead and put it put it out there two scale with his seal on it approving all the structure and how it's being built so far I think Dan Charlotte the questions that I have in looking at the flat the layout uh you mentioned egress and Ingress and Cattail Lane it shows no road to get into the property uh down at the bottom there so other than by boat there's not a way to get to it yeah there is there there is I said it's not showing on the picture here that there's a road basically there it's only about 20 feet wide up there where you come off the the main cocktail road but it goes right all that little blue area basically that is all the property which gives you Ingress from that all the way down to the water on both sides of the so it's not a surface built Road there that's that's the access well it's a it's a caliche Road at this point um my other concern and I don't agree I disagree with you one bit on it's needed and they're deserving and all of that I certainly do not how much is this going to cost well ballpark I would think we're looking at 60 to 70 000. and we only have sixty thousand dollars to spend well that's that's why we wanted to get it out for beds we might come in at 50 but uh

[3:44:05] I I wasn't aware of how much was actually out there to be spent at this time I believe and Mr Dane correct me if I'm wrong but we can only spend the entries interest earnings of one year not an accumulative but the interest earnings of one year okay but that doesn't that add up after several years I'm not familiar with the one-year restriction we we can spend the inch ninety percent of the interest earnings I'm not aware of the one of only one year because we do have an accumulated amount but if Council directs that this move forward we're going to need to True up and be on firm ground when we uh say that that that source of funding is available isn't this the same fund that we pulled three hundred and thirty thousand dollars out of for our cons for our consultant I don't have any money yes but that's more than one year of Interest yes sir I'm pretty sure that so I I don't see that the year I don't see that the year and I thought we had more than 100 right now I'm looking at the current Blue Book February 28th the year to date 60 881 yeah but that's just this year there's more money that's in there I believe that's correct that there is an amount an accumulated amount that we have set aside in in that has been set aside in the operating fund uh so that there wouldn't be confusion about what was available and not available and so we might have to hire a consultant to do this then we can spend any amount of money let's please don't I I make them I move that we move forward and get staffs uh recommendation whether we can do this or not well I'm pretty sure I think we're going to find that we can use it I think what would give us Comfort is knowing a specific request amount for funding for this project so we need to maybe our move that we put it out for bid well

[3:46:09] um if it's not just something we necessarily need to publicize but that that we have a certain amount or that but if for our sake we want to make sure that the inappropriate amount of money is there and available not just that it's legal to spend but that the amount is there and available yeah and so we just want to build this facility that they've all come together on the design no problem we'll be glad to clarify we'll be clarifying emotion ready I move that we move forward with the process of getting the bids in place and then we will decide if we're going to spend the money or not going to accept the bids right anybody want to second that this will by the way in mayor for clarity's sake this does not commit you to spending the money this just there are direct staff to move forward because we would need to come back with some specific authorization Marty are you going to Second it I was wondering if Miss Tina had something she was going to interject okay I want to be sure at the police department satisfied with this well I also don't want to get the cart before the horse and and put it out there if we don't have the money for him I think she's probably I was going to say briefly we had to discussed this a little bit with councilman Fleming earlier a few months ago I think and we did at that time have about two hundred thousand dollars that was uncommitted but we had also discussed other things like the pipe rail fence and some other things so we would need to make sure what we wanted to use the remaining money that was there and we don't want to spend 200 000. we don't want to spend one hundred thousand we need to get it closer to the 50 or 60 000 if we can do that right and yeah right I think we can I think we can do it I think what's critic what she's saying though is that there are other projects out there there are several of those projects are my

[3:48:11] projects I don't know and we want to make sure that we're a project we spend that money on it on on the priority that that you set yeah and this is number one Tim did you want to talk to this um they're all number one there's one a and one b and one C yes G I think that we're very pleased and I'm I'm very appreciative of uh the Lake Homeowners Association doing the work they've done this has been in discussion for more than a year it's been in the discussion for several years uh I know especially since we took over the lake you know there was a lot of deterioration because of the boats being left out at the airport out in the anyways we had to rent facilities to keep those and and I think it's really about public safety and having the ability to get those boats out on the water as quick as possible and uh you know not working there on the lake and depend a lot on these guys to tell me what's going on but I can tell you especially in a in a water incident I think time is of the essence yes ma'am are there slips or slit boat slits available to rent on the water no now I mean I'm I don't know no I think everybody that has one is it's their personal one there are no commercial boat slips from rent out there commercial and it would have to be commercial however in order for us to do this right so we're going to save some rent money we're gonna save some rent money absolutely 700 a month we have anything to do with it do you have a place for it if we save a little I bet I can I'm sure Michael probably has some money a place for it 700 more thank you thank you yes yes we've not spent any money yet we just want to see what it's going to cost us yes 100 or 150 I mean yeah we'll turn it down Sergeant West Bowden Cincinnati Police Department I supervise the lake division most information is given here today to you all is correct information

[3:50:14] we currently have two fully equipped police boats one is stored at k k storage which is directly across the street from the airport and the other one is stored at Red Bluff storage on the corner of Red Bluff and Knickerbocker Road from a public safety standpoint what we're doing right now it doesn't make any sense at all I don't have the Manpower or a place on the water right now to to keep a boat accessible and ready for emergency situations so when we get that call whether we're on duty whether we're off duty it involves somebody having to respond to the storage get the boat hooked up onto the truck tow it to a ramp and get it loaded and then at that point now you're available to respond best case scenario 15 to 20 minutes I mean this can a boat crash possible drowning boats broken down in the main body of the water or the main body of the lake and they're taking on water or you're going to wind up with people in the water and that's just not an acceptable response time if you're in the water and you're in a bad situation if I don't get to you for 20 minutes you're probably not still going to be okay when I get there um this design that was put together we had a great deal of input on that this facility will be able to handle two boats the two we have now or anything that we would have in the in the future it's plenty uh big enough to support it one other thing that hasn't been brought up we're currently we store a bunch of our equipment body recovery things rescue devices and stuff that's stored in a city building behind Spring Creek Marina so depending on the nature of what we have right now we may have to send somebody to go get the boat and get it to the water and send somebody else to go to the storage and throw that stuff in the back of a truck and this is going to eliminate all that because everything will be in one place at one time worst case scenario if this is approved and we finally get this done worst case 50 percent better response time and I would say it's probably going to be realistic probably 70 to 75 percent quicker response time

[3:52:18] so from a public safety standpoint I can't believe this hasn't been done already a long long time ago well you just changed my mind because I was going to vote against it because I didn't have a dollar amount figure and I don't want to do that I don't want to send the wrong message to the police department or the wrong message to the people and if it's me floating out there waiting for you for 30 minutes I would have already drowned so yeah I was curious about them getting the boat in the water if we had a ramp that would work do I have any public comment on this another three three vote no no we won't have a 3-3 this time because Winky's gone there's five others here yes I'm Lee Brown's Spring Creek Marina and honestly the lake police are a very valuable asset at the lake being out there seven days a week you can really tell when they're present and when they're not and on the responses we've uh being there out there 16 years I've seen emergencies and how responses work and whenever they're on the water and ready to go it it's amazing what can happen and I think it's a good thing what they're offering thank you any further public comment anything else from the council the motion has been made did we send this out for rfps for further and then once we know what it's going to cost to bring it back for final approval so we're not spending a dime today all in favor say aye aye aye any opposed nay put a 5-0 on that one thank you gentlemen thank you I appreciate you thank you Ted we are okay we're going to push some of these some of these agenda items back but I think we need to take care of 16. yeah I know we need to take care of 16.

[3:54:20] consideration of all surviving authorizing the city manager executed revised interlocal agreement and substantially the attached Farm between the city of San Angelo Tom Green County providing for subdivision regulations within the city of San Angelo's extra territorial jurisdiction ejp Ms father briefly what we're asking you to do essentially is yes to authorize the city manager to sign this agreement this is the agreement I mentioned just a moment ago that dictates whether the city or the county has exclusive jurisdiction for subdivision regulation in the etj there are a couple of changes that we're proposing making to the document and I'll go over those very briefly with you is this what you was talking about earlier AJ just uh yes sir an interlocal agreement with the county as far as the ejt right PJ we're not proposing any changes to the city over overseeing that the changes that we are proposing is that we would um put upon ourselves the requirement to notify the county of each and every application we get in our discussions with them they they have a desire to be more aware of of development as it's occurring and so that's something we can easily do that increases our communication with the county we're also recommending spelling out very specifically who is in charge of assigning 911 addresses within the etj it's not addressed in the current agreement and there has been some confusion as a result of that so we're spelling that out very clearly that if it's within the county that the county would be assigning those addresses so that it will be consistent with the addressing scheme they use throughout the remainder of the county those are really the two major changes we've done some additional edits just in wording um of the agreement the terms are the same we're proposing that unless either a party decides that they'd like to terminate the agreement that will automatically renew itself every year and once the city manager signs this we'll be representing the same document for approval to the Commissioner's Court next week and if they approve it then

[3:56:23] the County Judge can sign it in this argument this agreement rather will wholesale replace the existing agreement on the books so we're simply voting to allow the city manager to negotiate with them to change hopefully what we want and to sign it and to sign anybody want to move on this motion to approve is presented second any further Council comment any public comment all in favor say aye aye any opposed nay put a 5-0 on that one please ma'am yeah you won one all right we've got number 17. which is the first public hearing consideration of introducing an ordinance amending the 213 214 budget origins of the city of San Angelo many of the budget for fiscal year beginning October 1-13 ending September 3214 for capital projects sell equipment new contracts Jeremy Miller good afternoon mayor and Council I've got two items for your consideration today the first item is in regards to the symphony reimbursement of Maintenance expenses this contract was approved back in October of 2012 that has a an expense and a revenue of six thousand five hundred dollars the source of funding for this item will be the reimbursed expenses revenue from the symphony this item will be budgeted going forward so we'll not have to keep bringing this to you the second item is the in regards to the Civic events Coliseum roof project this project was approved by Council on February 18th and has an expense of 728 167 dollars and the source of funding for this item will be the excess Hotel occupancy tax dollars that are currently in the Civic events fund fund balance I'd be happy to provide any additional information or answer any specific questions explain the symphony reimbursement what is that it's in

[3:58:26] regards to the the offices they have at City Hall their shared portion of the maintenance expenses that wasn't budgeted but we uh they pair a portion of what's allocated for the building so in other words the expenses of that area that they occupy is 6500 they reimburses for them and they're coming up with 6 500 to give to the city to take care of this yes sir electric and okay water I just want to be sure it wasn't the other way around because they've got a awful sweet deal as it is but it's just they're paying their share yes sir it's just a reimbursement okay any further Council comment anybody want to move on this move approval second do have a motion to approve I do have a second do I have public comment all in favor please say aye aye opposed nay drop the 501 map and two please ma'am thank you alrighty Mr Valenzuela says that we can push number 18 to another agenda we've already dealt with night team Mr Valenzuela says we can push number 20 to another agenda we have already worked on 21. we've already worked on 22. Mr bataueva says that we can push number 23 to another agenda which means that we're the 24. does the council agree with pushing days yeah can we push 17. we just got through the 17. oh excuse let's not do it again very good this Council agree with this yes yes yes number 24 is consideration of impossible action on the matters discussed in executive closation if needed there's there's nothing to disclose there's nothing discussed there were no decisions made nothing to to announce announcements consideration of future agenda items start with you Rodney you have anything sir not at this time Marty no Charlotte I think they got enough to work on Don I'd like to get Mr Dixon to give us a report on on water what the conditions are how everything's progressing uh more for the public and and what we're going to do when it gets

[4:00:30] here and what we're going to do till it gets here so I think that's an excellent idea because our water situation is very very dire and the Citizens need to understand just how dire it is so Ricky will need you to make a report on that pleaser anything else mayor yes well it doesn't require any specific future agenda item at this point uh Roland Pena our new executive director for the Development Corporation did have a priority setting goal setting session with that board last week in preparation for this group to have a similar kind of exercise with the city manager and uh I think very soon within days I think he'll have a summary and be ready for that kind of activity with this group if necessary very well we'll we'll schedule that is necessary Charlotte I do have one comment at the last council meeting I believe it was or I believe it was last kill Tuesday I had requested an accounting of The Producers Park as well as the older Rio Visto Park the funds that were committed the funds that were spent and where it was coming along I wanted to let the public know that that accounting was provided for me or to meet the very next day and I was very impressed that it was readily available and handled in everything appears to be in excellent condition and as usual in under budget so I wanted to make that comment and thank you Yeah you mentioned part and Carl comes right well it had to do with you Carl it's your your good work I was I was very impressed from his office number 26 consideration when conducting a special meeting on the week of April 21st 2014. this was requested by Mr Shane Kelton to review the RFP for the solid waste contract

[4:02:33] I have no problem anybody have a problem with it yeah no sir yeah problem Charlotte sure we'll schedule that in the morning does it do you mean what doesn't have a problem scheduling what about nine o'clock in the morning nine o'clock nine o'clock April 21. Shane Kelton garbage April 21st Sunday I don't know it says April 21th here it's a Monday is it a Monday Alicia yeah the 20th on a Saturday 15th is all night Tuesday Tuesday it's not a Monday Monday it is on a Monday 21st yeah it is a month Monday it's after a good Friday holiday Easter Sunday is the 20th is it yes it's the week of the 21st and and we're we're open to any day that week we just want to make sure that if we want it in that week of the 20th in that week of the 21st it doesn't have to be that day if that doesn't work with everybody's schedule so we can we can move that forward as we go along we're just uh hopefully uh once we meet with the committee and stuff like that hopefully the committee uh we just want to make sure that we have enough time with the council as a whole as we move through the process to ensure that we can move the process along fast enough to make sure that we don't hit any snags along the way trying to get this finalized while this council is still sitting security anybody here for preference April 21 is a Monday April 22 is a Tuesday anybody have a preference I'd prefer to get it over with on Monday earlier well we push this back I mean we're already we're pushing yes no and and that's and that's fine so we just want to anytime that week was good with us we just wanted to make sure that we everybody we could get on everybody's schedule so all right with you Martin up 21. yes sir Miss Don yes we're here yes April 21 9 o'clock Monday here very good number 27 somebody help me most all in favor say aye aye this motion it was adjourned it's 2 35.

[4:04:39] very good team

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=0voUoy1RMgQ