San Angelo City Council 4-3-18

[0:00:00] 8:30 a.m. and we will call this meeting to order we will start off with a prayer and our pledge Anthony would you please come forward good morning you are all familiar with the phrase we have an app for that and as a proud member of the Episcopal branch of the Jesus Movement one of the things I love about the Episcopal Church is we have a prayer for that just about anything including local government and sound government and they're short and so I'm going to offer the prayer for local government followed by a verse for sound government let us pray Almighty God our Heavenly Father send down upon those who hold office in this city San Angelo Texas the spirit of wisdom charity and justice that was steadfast purpose they may faithfully serve in their offices to promote the well-being of all people through Jesus Christ our Lord teach our people to rely on your strength and to accept their responsibilities to their fellow citizens that they may elect trustworthy leaders and make wise decisions for the well-being of our society that we may serve you faithfully in our generation and honor your Holy Name Amen and today to lead us in prayer is Bryce Boone L he is in the fourth grade at Santa Rita Bryce come on up here the flag of the United States of America the Republic nation our first Proclamation this morning it will

[0:02:38] actually be accepted by three different groups one by the city of San Angelo Health Services if you will come forward Tom Greene County Health Department neighborhood and Family Services if someone would come forward for that and good fell Air Force Base preventative medicine the week of April 2nd through the 8th 2018 is National Public Health Week and the theme is healthiest nation 2030 changing our future together the public health community protects and improves the health of all people and works to help communities be great places to live work and play the public health community plays a crucial role in promoting good health and greater longevity for the citizens citizens of San Angelo by working to immunize people against disease tracking and tracing communicable disease providing SD TD services identifying and controlling environmental health hazards infectious and vector disease providing rabies control measures improving the health of mothers and children and promoting healthy behaviors such as increased physical activity good nutrition and smoking sensation sation public health professionals develop new strategies to detect and control disease outbreaks address emerging environmental contaminants provide valuable information to people prepare for large-scale emergencies and promote healthy communities through active living plans improving the health of those experience inequality including financial citizens of color immigrants LGBTQ communities and people with disabilities will result in improved

[0:04:42] health for all National Public Health Week provides the focused opportunity to tell the story of Public Health as it helps to build and sustain safe and healthy communities for the city of San Angelo and beyond and action by community leaders to provide funding and implement policy changes that promote the community health plan goals of healthy eating active living reduced poverty improved access to health care and mental health care will make our community a healthier place to live for current and future generations now therefore I Brenda Gunter mayor the city of San Angelo Texas on behalf of the city council do hereby proclaim the week of April 2nd through the 8th 2018 as public health week in San Angelo Texas and call upon the people San Angelo to observe this week by helping our families friends and neighbors co-workers and leaders better understand the value of Public Health and adopt preventative lifestyle habits in light of this year's thing healthiest nation 2030 [Applause] I'm gonna go ahead and say a few words

[0:06:52] Thank You mayor council management for the proclamation and recognizing the importance of Public Health plays in the lives of our citizens while the community may not always see the work done by local public health the people of this community lead healthier lives and are safer because of the work done by the local health department and by all these other departments represented here today public health its laws and regulations and policies is key to preventing detecting and stopping the spread of diseases such as measles tuberculosis foodborne illnesses mosquito-borne illnesses and rabies is protecting children and adults from infectious diseases through musicians Public Health in San Angelo is providing access to safe and healthy foods for women and children through WIC clean neighborhoods through code compliance rabies prevention through animal control it's enforcing laws and regulations pertaining to restaurant inspections Public Health nuisances and smoking ordinances through the environmental health it's regulating water and sewer treatment through a water department it's ensuring kids have a safe place to play the recreation department most importantly Public Health is tracking investigating and stopping disease and other public health threats such as foodborne illness hiv/aids sexually transmitted diseases through a nursing department and in coordination whether community partners such as Goodfellow is developing and exercising emergency plans and responding to disasters through public health preparedness Public Health is all of these things and so many more things again thank you for recognizing us today and also just to say that Brent Casey and I are co-chairing the mayor's wellness partnership and so we wanted to present you with your own t-shirt [Applause] Benjamin Cruz wanted to say a few words

[0:09:09] too so thanks have anything written down but thank you again Sandra City Council members mayor for having us here to celebrate the proclamation for National Public Health Week it's a privilege to be able to work alongside our civilian counterparts at the health department here at the Goodfellow Air Force Base it's kind of we have our own little mini health department so we everything that Sandra read off as well as the mayor we offer most of those services as well and our population is a dynamic population we have people that work on base that live in the community in San Angelo as well as with people that live in San Angelo that come on base for a different variety of services so in that respect we have a shared responsibility to be able to protect the health and well-being of the citizens of San Angelo and again for Public Health it is a joint venture so we all have a role to play in public health whether it's make insuring you know children are immunized getting out and weren't exercising steps you know probably everybody a lot of people have fitbit's to keep track of that stuff but there's a lot of things that we can do for prevention and education so again it's it's not only a public health week but it's also a a week that we can all celebrate and do our part so again thank you for inviting us here to celebrate National Public Health Week I wasn't going to speak but again thank you I really can't add more to a Sandra added but I do want that people know that we have we have programs out there not only dealing with the health of individuals but the health of a community and a help on the health of neighborhoods things like affordable housing programs Animal Services code compliance efforts so we encourage

[0:11:12] everyone to go online read up on our services and call us immediately [Applause] do we have people here for Angelo State University if so if you would please come forward proclamation of I chose Angelo State month accepted by our Angelo State University Angelo State University and the community of San Angelo are partnering together in celebration of current students future students faculty staff and alumni who have chosen to participate in the auspices of higher education at Angelo State University and Angelo State University with an enrollment of ten thousand four hundred forty seven undergraduate and graduate students is an integral part of the city of San Angelo and a citadel of higher learning in West Texas and it employs 441 faculty members 550 staff members and 700 student workers who are a vital part of this community and the university has graduated forty-six thousand three hundred and twenty students since its inception in 1965 and Angelo State University educational

[0:13:18] opportunities have grown to include one doctoral degree in physical therapy twenty one master's degree programs forty two undergraduate degree programs and over 100 majors and concentrations and Angelo State University is this year celebrating his 89th graduating class and the month of April 2018 will be celebrated as I chose Angelo State month at Angelo State University by current students future students faculty staff and alumni through campus events social media and local media outlets now therefore I Brenda Gunter mayor the city of San Angelo Texas on behalf of the city council do hereby proclaim April 2018 I chose Angelo State month and San Angelo and call upon the citizens of our area to recognize this remarkable display of pride in our community and the comprehensive educational opportunities at Angelo State University so mayor thank you so much for your continued support of Angelo State University all of our City Council members and the employees of the city of San Angelo and also the citizens of San Angelo the Tom Green County area and also the concho Valley region without the support of this region in the city Angelo State would not be the great institution that it is so today we really are here one to accept the proclamation and to we would also like to take a moment to introduce a few of our newest members to the rain fam at Angelo State that will be attending Angelo State this fall we also have several of our staff members and I will introduce them as they present shirts to our new rain fan members we will the incoming ASU students come forward as I call your name and the first one that we have is from Central High School

[0:15:20] Mackenzie hole next from Lakeview high school we have Henry nakaya's and Jeff seasick our director of enrollment management will present Nick with a t-shirt and certificate [Applause] around cornerstone Christian school we have Mara Ruth and Beck to be presented a certificate in a t-shirt by Kimberly Adams director of development and alumni services [Applause] from grape creek high school Tony buy this to be presented a certificate and a t-shirt by dr. John Wagner who is the Dean of the freshman college and Center for academic excellence from wall high school we have McKenna Limbrick and she will be presented a certificate and a t-shirt by one of our own students Nikolas Lambert we also have a great partnership with Howard College and today we will be presenting a t-shirt and certificate to Addison Jones to be presented by Brook FLOTUS coordinator of the car scholarship recruitment program [Applause] if I could have anyone who has attended Angelo State or has earned a degree from Angelo State or currently attending

[0:17:21] Angelo State stand up and raise your ram horns with us really quickly don't ráma rám bells thank you very much [Applause] [Laughter] Eric are you gonna come forward for the proclamation of April as alcohol Awareness Month come on alcohol is a primary factor in the four leading causes of death for ages 10 through 21 and almost 100,000 people die each year from alcohol-related causes including drinking and driving crashes and approximately 15 million drinkers in the US are dependent on alcohol and adolescents use alcohol more than tobacco or illicit drugs and begin drinking on average at 13 years of age and young people who begin drinking before age 15 are four times more likely to develop alcohol dependence than those who begin drinking at twenty-one and

[0:19:25] alcohol abuse is linked to up to two-thirds of all sexual assaults and date rapes and is a major factor in contracting a sexually transmitted disease and the typical American will see 100,000 alcohol-related commercials before he or she turns 18 therefore I Brenda Gunther mayor the city of San Angelo on behalf of the city council do hereby proclaim April 2018 as alcohol Awareness Month in San Angelo Texas and call upon all in the city of San Angelo to support efforts to increase awareness and support for individuals and families coping with alcoholism and drug addiction in our community morning my name is reveille Dez on behalf of the alcohol and drug abuse Council and the Contra valley cares coalition we'd like to thank you all in the mayor and city council for helping us to raise awareness this month for alcohol Awareness Month it's a great opportunity to increase awareness and understanding of alcoholism it's causes effective treatment and recovery it's also a great opportunity to start the conversation with young people about the effects and dangers of underage drinking and some of our prevention team is behind us and they're busy this month helping to spread that message and promote that message and at the same time we like to thank you all because you all play a great prevention role in our community whatever role you may play in our community and so thank you again for helping us to recognize this there's alcohol awareness month thank you [Applause] at this point we will ask that everyone

[0:22:02] please turn off your cell phones I did not remind you earlier but ever obviously everyone has their cell phone turned off so we will go in to public comment issues or items that are not on the agenda may be raised by the public at this time citizens should speak from the podium begin by stating their name and limit remarks to less than three minutes council members may request that a discussed item be placed on a future agenda the council takes public comment on all regular agenda items during the discussion of those items do we have anyone here today who would like to come to the microphone if so please state your name good morning mayor and council my name is paulina levy I am the water conservation coordinator for the city of San Angelo and I just wanted to remind everyone that we are now in our spring and summer watering restrictions what that means is that residents should not water their yards more than twice a week but still with a maximum of one inch of water and they also should not be watering their yards between the hours of 12:00 noon and 6:00 p.m. which are the hottest hours of the day Thank You Paulina any further public comment there's no further public comment we will close the public comment section and move on to the consent agenda to start with item C has been pulled off from the consent agenda do I have requests from Council to pull any other items from consent agenda Tommy no ma'am Lucy Lane Billy do I then have a motion to approve the consent agenda all in favor say aye any opposed motion passes 7 0 all consent agenda items are passed exception of C which of course was

[0:24:07] pulled from the agenda we will move into regular agenda the first item a considerate resolution authorizing the negotiation and execution of airport personal property storage unit leases by the city manager or his designee an approving lease form and I think we have Louise s table here today good morning mayor and councilmembers before you we have a draft lease this lease was presented to the airport arrest report on March 1st of this year it is a standard lease and it's for aircraft I'm sorry T hangar storage units due to the geometry of the T hangars being a t we have units at the end for storage and that's what we have their rates were approved by council in December of last year and I'll be happy to answer any questions do I have any questions from Council any comments from Council do I have a motion to move to approve a present as presented a second all in favor passes 7-0 thank you very much item B consider proving a task order under RFQ es - o 4 - 1 5 - Freese and Nichols incorporated in the amount of one hundred and eleven thousand eight hundred twenty seven for the design of a storm water detention basin for Avenue P drainage improvements and authorizing the city manager to execute all related documents and Russell I think you're going to present today and this is so exciting to have this on the agenda so go what else do I need to say just to kind of give everybody here we go all right just to give everybody quick overview of what I want

[0:26:11] to be discussing today is just the project background which apparently most of you know about the scope of engineering services that will be that will be provided with this RFQ and the staffs recommendation so sorry this is a little different than what I have here thank you okay so back in 2000 we had a master drainage plan done by freezing nickels in that drainage plan they identified fifty seven key areas around town where we have drained into problems of those fifty-seven they identified top 25 and prioritization and the Avenue P project was number two on that list at AB noopy in the drainage area that comes there is approximately 460 acres and there we go it's working now just kind of give you an overview of what that looks like Avenue P is over here to the east Angelo State is over here to the west everything's flowing from from the west to the east in this general direction here's us highway 87 Chadbourne Street is over here to the east and that's a fairly large drainage area we have you know here's Johnson Street Jackson Street you know there's just a ton of area area here that's contributing to the overall runoff for that's coming to have a new P so during our evaluation or we've done several iterations of solutions for this project we looked at piping the storm water underneath Avenue P and discharging it into the red Arroyo we looked at working with upstream owners to create detention ponds and to you know control the runoff coming downstream we've also looked at

[0:28:13] purchasing homes along Avenue P creating detention ponds in those areas to help alleviate the flooding but finally in 2017 or December of 2017 we purchased some key properties that were basically the old el mejor parking lot where we're going to be looking at constructing detention ponds and that's what this solution is today and what we'll be working on and creating a set of final plans to construct that so in that scope of services they're going to be looking at our different alternatives with that drainage area you know using earthen berms versus concrete retaining walls they're going to be doing stormwater stormwater modeling you know basically creating in the computer program different stormwater events and what that's going to look like they're going to be designing the outlet to on the downstream side of the detention pond - you know regulate or control the storm water coming out of there so that it's not exceeding the capacity of the stream or Avenue P and then finally they'll be looking at the cost to construct that and looking at some different options of you know okay if the city crews do some excavation work versus doing having a contractor do it you know things of that nature we're going to be evaluating all those different options we've actually been working with recent nagels on this some already just to you know just look at what we have and you know help us establish the scope of services at to this point with that staff recommends moving forward with this proposal in the amount of one hundred and eleven thousand dollars or just a little bit over one hundred eleven thousand dollars and with that do you have any questions what is the timeframe for this task so that we better understand when actual work would be done this the the contract timeframe on here is approximately six

[0:30:15] months and you know we foresee that should shouldn't take that entire time but it's that's what we have on the contract do I have other questions or comments from Billy rustle not necessarily pertaining to the presentation but you said there were 57 areas with drainage problems right that were identified in 2000 and or the year 2000 and that list is continuing to grow so what I wondered is there any way to identify it by Street so that I could know in district 6 if there are drainage problems sure yeah we can do that we do have a just a list of all of them and it is identified by Street or you know subdivision you know the common terms and I can definitely get that to you thank you so much you said that this was drainage item number two what was number one number one was actually on Bell Street at the crossing of East Angelo drawn Bell Street which will be addressed in the Bell Street project so we're slowly plugging away I think Harry you had a comment or question a comment I am so pleased that we're finally getting to the spot this is one of the things that I ran on two years ago trying to find a solution to the the flooding issue down on an Avenue P and those residents in there and it's a campaign promise really but quite honestly those people have been living with this for 4050 years so it's something that needs to be done but as everybody sitting up here heard me say last Thursday the bottom line is is we've got drainage issues all over the city and we've got to find solutions for those so as we go forward with this thing I think we we need to continue to look at each of these and I think Billy's question as to drainage issues in her district are just as key that would be in Tom or Tommy's or Lucy's or

[0:32:17] lanes there are a lot of them that we've got to take care of so I move to approve as presented in a public comment with no public comment we will take a vote all in favor of approving the RFQ for 111,000 $827 say aye aye any host nay motion passes 7-0 we'll move on to item C public hearing the first reading of an ordinance amending appendix a article a 8.000 utility related fees a 8.00 7 water billing charges by mending the late fee Allison you're on Marilee be presenting on both items C and D so if you want to go ahead and read D as well item D is public hearing and first reading of an ordinance amending chapter 11 utilities article 11 point O 2 water and sewer system SEC section 11 point oh two point zero three six billing by amending the payment due date okay thank you so what I have before you is the current ordinance we have discussed this in a previous city council meeting in a first reading when I brought that to you we were only looking at amending this $25 set fee and what we looked at was changing it to a percentage based and we were looking at 18% as a late fee prior to the second reading coming back to you we found a critical error in changing just this portion of the ordinance and it has to do with this 28 28 day due date period what happens is we billed monthly and sometimes that 28 day and the bill date aligned together and it sorry and it the bill doesn't have time to recognize that the customer was late the previous month and it sends out that

[0:34:21] bill and their late fee will actually show up the following month so two months after they are late it is frequent that we get customers that those that are pay late fee quite often that they'll see too late fees in one month and it's because of this 28 day and the once a month billing aligned together and so what we're having to do to assess the percentage base late fee is spread that gap between when the bill is due and when the bill is going to generate so what we need to do is adjust this down to more like 25 days so on the twenty-fifth day the bill is due at that nightly update the system would recognize that that customers late assessed the late fee and then a few days later when the bill generates the late fee and the previous billing charges everything is showing up once built so what we're looking at is changing the ordinance to 25 days and we've actually been able to reduce that 18% late feet down to 15% what we're looking at in terms of revenue with 15% is approximately 1.2 million dollars this is what the revenue looked like when we were looking at an 18% late fee last time and so the average late paying bill is a hundred and thirty six dollars so they'd be looking at pain twenty dollars and forty eight cents with fifteen percent and you might ask why was it with eighteen percent it was 1.2 million dollars and now it's 15 percent for 1.2 million dollars well it has to do with the way we pulled the data initially and with those late fees showing up months later versus the next month the data set that we were pulling pulled some inaccurate data and so we feel very comfortable with this new data set that we've pulled eliminated those discrepancies and so with we were able to dwindle that down to 15% still with

[0:36:27] the same revenue requirement that you were looking at initially this is a just a chart to show how we compared to some other sisty cities that we usually compare to you'll see that while we are charging the largest percentage based late fee we're also allowing the most days are tied for the most days to pay with Odessa at 25 days most of them are at the 15 day mark so with that we're proposing a late fee of 15% on the total new charges for the month of delinquency to be assessed at the 25th day and we are put to begin this in June first the reason for that is we're already in the month of April bills for April are already going out we would like the month of May to advertise both on the bill through social media news outlets those type of things that the come June first you will now have 25 days to pay versus 28 because we recognize that some customers are very used to that 28-day cycle and so we want to make sure we advertise that well and so that would give us the month of May to do that and this was taken to the water advisory board in February of this month and they unanimously recommended that I bring this to you for approval so with that I'll take any questions Lucy I know that this has been an agenda item that you've been passionate about so I'm going to ask you if you have any questions or comments oh it's great oh let's hope everyone will be happy with that and also how you got it too fixed with the 25 days in their story it will develop like you wanted to like we wanted it to so with that I just want to thank you for your hard work thank you do I have other questions or comments Harry thank you the only comment I've got to make is is this will impact the city with about $300,000 that we have been typically

[0:38:32] getting that we will not get after June June first because we 1.5 to 1.2 so those individuals that are consistently late on their water bills that we've adjusted from 25 to 15% are being subsidized by the people that pay their water bills on time Tom Lane really there yes I could since where she's presented two items two ordinances if you want to approve it with one motion you can as long as there's no changes if there's gonna be any changes to either ordinance we'll need two separate motions it is now we will open it up for a motion do I have a motion for either item C or D or combination of C and D if you approved both C and D with a motion in a second on item C and D combined I'm going to open it up for public comment with no public comment I will ask for a vote for items c and d combined all in favor aye any opposed motion passes motions pass and passed c and d combined item e is public hearing and first reading of an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a zoning ordinance article 3 section 3 100 dot e and section 305 dot H 3 dot C and article 4 section 411 removing the use of game Hall as an individual use category and reclassifying it under indoor entertainment retail sales and services John thank you John James director planning and development services this changes a number of sections you see on

[0:40:35] this slide I'm not going to read all through those but it changes each of those multiple sections basically to remove the game hall use category the game hall category covers arcades bingo parlors billiard and pool halls and for some reason years ago that was separated into a separate use category this came up as an issue with the mall rezoning they're concerned that an arcade which they actually already have in the mall or something like a Dave & Buster's those kinds of gaming facilities under our current zoning ordinance the way we treat these actually wouldn't be allowed in that zoning district at the mall as we looked at possibly making changes to that I think what we decided was we really don't need that separate classification of game Hall so we're proposing to eliminate that it will basically be folded under the indoor entertainment use that we have that covers a number of other things like bowling alleys gems etc and so we will just incorporate those things that right now are under game halls into that definition that simplifies the ordinance but it also will allow not only the mall but any other property that has CG or CGC a zoning to have those without any special approval with that I'll be happy to answer any questions find game hall for everyone well again it it's defined in the ordinance as arcades bingo parlors pool and billiard halls those kinds of things again I'm not really sure why those were separated out I think in the past at least those may have been considered nuisance tip you know potential nuisance top activities that should be treated differently we think that that's no longer the case ik alehrer moving the name game hall but we're not reducing or extending in any way what was already included under game Hall in terms of activities correct everything under game

[0:42:37] Hall is now being folded into the indoor entertainment category that we already have do I have questions or comments from any of council members with no comments or questions I would ask for a motion a second any public comment with no public comment we will take a vote on item e eliminating the term game Hall all in favor say aye aye any opposed motion passes 7 0 the next item F is public hearing and first reading of an ordinance amending the land development and subdivision ordinance chapter 1 section 2 and section 4 subsection C regarding Appeals chapter 5 section 3 subsection a and subsection C amending submitted requirements and meeting time for the plat review committee in chapter 7 section 1 amending submittal requirements John thank you this is kind of a cleanup to the subdivision ordinance and I'll just briefly mention what each of these items does the first one is allowing interpretations to be made by the planning director with appeals to City Council right now the ordinance says anybody who wants an interpretation of the ordinance has to come straight to City Council what all of our other ordinances do is is give some staff member the authority to make an interpretation and then if the citizen disagrees with that they can appeal to Council for some reason the subdivision ordinance does not include that language and so this adds that that's really the way it's always kind of worked I mean somebody has to say well this is what the ordinance says it just it doesn't give that authority to anyone in the ordinance the next item is you may recall a few months ago we amended the ordinance that allows either the

[0:44:41] Planning Director or the Public Works Director to appeal a plat variance what we intended at the time was to allow either of those two directors to appeal a plat or a plat variance but the way we worded the ordinance only applied to the variances not the plat itself so this would clear that up by adding both plat and plants the rest of these are really changes to for example right now the our ordinance requires that to submit a plat application you have to submit 13 copies we don't need 13 copies but the ordinance says you have to do 13 copies so we're basically eliminating that requirement we're not changing it to three copies or one copy we're just changing it to say that they have to adhere to the checklist that's provided on the city's website and so that way over time if if we have different needs that change for a number of copies that can just be changed through that checklist now what our proposal is is to have run that by the Planning Commission before we change it so that we're not out there just willy-nilly making requirements without having some oversight or review but rather than write it into the ordinance we'll just have that reference to the checklist for some reason the ordinance also says that the Platte Review Committee shall meet at this certain day and time well we're not actually following that now because they meet more frequently and they don't meet on the same day that the ordinance says they should meet and so again it's just to clean up we don't think the ordinance should specify when that group should meet but we just have them meet whenever it's it works for everybody and again that's an internal staff meeting of all the departments that review plots so there's no real impact to the public on that the same with the submit all deadlines those change based on calendar issues that come up and it's so many days in advance of a Planning Commission

[0:46:42] meeting and rather than have that directly in the ordinance it will refer to the calendar that we put out each year on the city's website and the same with all of the requirements we have a list of everything that has to be included on a plat from certain labels to a North arrow to signature blocks for certain people the owner and the Planning Commission Chair and those sorts of things periodically those will have to change for some reason and rather than coming back with an ordinance amendment every time again that will just refer to the requirements as posted on the city's website so I'd be happy to answer any questions on any of those if you have them I will point out you may have noticed that the Planning Commission vote was 3-2 that was they had a little bit of concern about allowing the Director of Public Works for the planning director to appeal a plat right now the Planning Commission themselves are the final authority on plan so if they approve it or deny it an applicant has no ability to appeal to the well I'm sorry the applicant has the ability to appeal to Council if staff disagrees with that decision by the Planning Commission currently we have no ability to bring that to you and so this would change that there were two commissioners who felt that it was more appropriate for that final decision to be at the Planning Commission define interpretations there are some times where it's not clear what the ordinance says or there's something that's not specifically addressed by the ordinance so we have to make it an interpretation or determination well what does the ordinance mean in this circumstance again we do that already today and this just clarifies the process that if if we make an interpretation that the ordinance in this section says XYZ if a citizen or applicant disagrees with that then they can appeal that to the City Council is the plan the Commission

[0:48:47] believe that their authority has been diminished by not being the final vote or are there statistics that say that in fact 80 percent of their decisions are appealed I mean we have these commissions for a reason so the question mark is at what point do we start taking so much authority away from them that as a commission they no longer really feel like they have a strong vote well in 90% of the things they deal with the zoning cases those kinds of things they are recommending body to you and you all make the final decision anyway plants are the one piece that state law gives you the authority state law actually says city council decides plats but you can delegate that authority to the Planning Commission that's how it's worked in the past again we've already changed the ordinance that would allow staff to appeal a variance to you all but right now it would not allow us to appeal a plan if if the Planning Commission denies a plat that we think should have been approved we can't appeal that to you only the applicant can and likewise if they do not approve a plat that we don't think should have been approved we would have no recourse do I have other questions or comments from the council the plot still has Lane would you like to make a comment the plot still has a chance to be appealed by the applicant yes that's already in place and that would not change Billy John even though you said the Planning Department would not have a recourse if the applicant appealed if they appeal directly to the City Council would you have a chance at that time to state the planning departments position so that we could hear that because I would be you know I hate not to have the opportunity to at

[0:50:49] least hear both sides and definitely we would we would present that the concern from our standpoint is if the Planning Commission approved a plat that we think is not legally sufficient to be approved once they approve it it's done there's there's no ability to appeal that to you all to perhaps make a different decision regularly you know we were discussing that I can't think of a single plan that we would have appealed over the last two or three years so I don't think it's it's not gonna become a regular regular occurrence we just think that's a in most other instances in our ordinances both the applicant and staff have the ability appeal the Planning Commission's decisions if if there's a dispute any further question or comments do I have a motion I'll make the motion that we approve as presented is there a second thanks Lucy and any public comment good morning mayor and commissioners Terry Jackson I actually sit on the Planning Commission and there were two of us that voted against this because you know it gets to a point where if everything is brought back to the City Council and appealed by the Planning Department perhaps they don't need us and so that's the thinking behind that and I'm welcome to answer any questions if you have them any questions for Terry a Billy I don't know that it's the question but just a comment what I heard him what I heard John say Terry was that this doesn't happen that frequently he's not had the availability for it to happen at all so in the past if we did not approve a plat then the person that brought that to the planning director to

[0:52:52] the Planning Department brought it to City Council and appealed it this would open up a bigger can of worms where if they you know theoretically not saying that they would or that this would happen but if they decided they did not like a certain plan or didn't like the area or didn't like our vote then they can just bring it here an appeal it and likewise you could if you didn't agree with what the planning no director nothing Commission only the director the planning director would be the only person Kim has the ability the Planning Commission does not so if they say no and the Planning Director doesn't think that lives within the realm of the legal issues has the right to appeal it and so would the person submitting the flat request which right now that person has the availability to do that so the only difference would be the planning director would now also have that ability to change that to bring it to council on the plants right now Billy the way they work is the Commission approves or disapproves it if they approve it then it goes into effect immediately it does not come to the council for a vote well I guess and I absolutely do not want to diminish in any way the Planning Commission's role in what they do because I think you're a very valuable asset my only concern is how does this council get to hear both sides of it you know to me applying and a new designation is you know pretty significant to our city and pretty important so I guess that's my the only way it's ever been heard by the City Council is with an appeal and that would be by the proponent that brings you know if they were turned down then that comes to City Council and they still will have that opportunity yes they still have that yes ma'am but obviously the Planning Commission was a little mixed in terms of their points of view because it's a three to very very close 3m is a close vote so there were people on both sides of it that had an

[0:54:56] opinions on yes thank you do I have any further questions comments from the public John did I hear you say that this is the only portion of the this is the only ordinance portion that Planning Department cannot bring back to the council everything else is already in place for you to bring an appeal back if if the Planning Commission feels like it's it's something that's significant yes now remember like I said earlier almost everything that the Planning Commission does is recommending to you all the only ones that there the final decision on I believe are the plats the plat variances and conditional use approvals so the conditional use approvals and the variances now can be appealed by either the applicant or the well it's both the planning director and the Director of Public Works for plants and let me remind you one thing with plants plants are not like zoning in that they're discretionary you decide does it look good is it fit for the neighborhood by state law plants are required to meet the definitely the definitions of things like lot size and do they have adequate water and streets but if they meet all of those they must be approved if they don't meet all of those they must be denied and so it's it's not like again it's not discretionary so it's a pretty black-and-white conversation because earlier you mentioned about the legal issues that that you might want to bring forward in terms of bringing it to council even if the Planning coming up the yeah plant the Commission decided that they didn't want to prove it or prove it it's all very cut and dry

[0:56:59] legally is that what you're saying yes and what would be the issues that would go outside the black and white perspective that would make its appealable it would really be a case where the Planning Commission approved a plat that we thought did not meet the legal requirements that would really be the only circumstance in which we would appeal instance they approved it and they were approved to do certain you're saying oh that's not good that's wrong you can't change it it's what you're telling is correct right now unless the applicant appeals once the Planning Commission makes that decision its final that's right the interpretations of the checklist it's gotta be a legal issue the checklist is really what's required to be on the on the drawing of the plat but it's it's what's in the subdivision ordinance basically whether or not they meet all of the requirements of the ordinance we're kind of what this was supposed to be a public comment time period council conversation that was earlier so with that do I have any further public comment Terri but I just thought of something else with that being said what what we go by is the Commission is everything that is presented to us in the presentation so as far as I know it's already legally in place when it's presented to us therefore there should not be any issues with the plants that we approve is the way I see it thank you I'll try to sit down yes tom my question here and keep it in layman's term for me and I see both sides of this but what I'm thinking about is maybe if we run into an area where they're either trying to consolidate a couple plants

[0:59:02] or to separate some plants and those might be in different zones and those might be you know where somebody wants to take it into one where it's actually one plant might be commercial versus another one's lot is that where this would come into play where you know is this actually pretend because I see that happening now I actually don't think because the way we do plots is we apply the standards for each zone to the part of the plat that's in that zone that would be the original zoning you're asking about reply denied Tom right yeah well when a property's plaited they're subject to the requirements of the zoning district at the time they plaid so if it was planted years ago under one zoning and today it's a different zoning if they come in to reap lat they then have to meet the requirements of the new zoning I think the circumstances I could think of where this might be an issue is where we believe it does not meet the standards of the ordinance and so we recommend denial of the plaid and the Planning Commission approves it anyway disregarding what we believe to be a violation of the we've seen that on a couple that SNK brought here where they were wanting to pick up like the street or the back alley well that's the variance and now that we already do have the ability to appeal that and you saw one of those not too long ago and so we already have that ability if they're asking not to build the road to the certain width or something like that we already have the ability to do that this would be to appeal the entire plat itself Daniel I think you want to comment I think Terry makes a really good point you know I know that the the Planning Commission acts in a manner that they want to do everything in a legal fashion I do appreciate that as far as recommendations I think if anything this is more kind of a check and balance to make sure if we have a question about an item that may not be by ordinance I do feel we should has some type of ability to take a look closer look at that but again I think it

[1:01:04] just kind of sets up a kind of a checks and balance in place to make sure that we're sharing that it has meet the the law requirements Alaine do you have a question or coming really understand checks and balances but I don't want to be able to take all the authority away from our commissions and boards to where there's loopholes covered up every which way that can be appealed to us I mean that that's taken authority away from our appointees that we trust to make those decisions for us so I just remind you that almost every other board and Commission with a few exceptions their decisions are recommendations to you all them you make the final decision it's very rare this is one of the few cases where they have the final decision and let's say they make a decision that that you all think hey that we think they made the wrong decision you would have no recourse to have that brought to you all for reconsideration of it because there's simply no authority to do that would this seal the hole up to where this would be the final little checks and balances with the Planning Commission on appeals of any such yes it would mean any item that they consider could be appealed I'm not mistaken we have a motion and a second on this item as presented so we need to take a vote on this item as presented so all in favor say aye aye any opposed one day passes six zero I mean six one sorry item G public hearing and first reading of an ordinance amending appendix a article a 8.000 utility related fees a 8.02 o rebates by rebates by amending the discussion of biannual rebates allison o mayor and council again what I

[1:03:08] have before you today is a discussion that you hear every April in November what's on the slide or the presentation before you is how the current or how the ordinance currently reads every April in November is required to be on a city council agenda that we bring the water operating unbalanced to you to discuss about giving rebates to our customers it is counsels determination to determine if the rebate is appropriate the rebates occur in May or in December or as soon as practicable and council determines the amounts and methodology for providing the rebates what we're doing today we can we will be discussing the fund balance information but we are looking at amending this ordinance to change so that you could allow for periodic reviews of the utilities fund balance and it would be at City Council's direction versus just April in in November just to go over a brief history of this ordinance it was adopted in 2006 shortly after its adoption rebates were granted to customers in the form of waiving the base fee for two months and in another instance they reallocated fund balance dollars to pay for some capital improvement projects so for the past 12 years this has been on the agenda twice a year but these are the only two instances and really only the first one to me classifies as a rebate to customers the other one really was just a budget amendment that moved fund balance dollars to pay for a capital improvement so it wasn't really a rebate to customers so I feel like this customer this ordinance gives a false sense of hope to residents when they see it on the council agenda twice a year that they're going to be giving a rebate and when reality we've really only done that one time right now we're looking at the end of this fiscal year

[1:05:13] at an Indian fund balance of 4.4 million dollars the 75 day fund balance goal is 5.9 million this is in line with the REA plan we weren't expected to hit that seventy five day fund balance goal until year four and five of the rate plan so even though we aren't at that fund balance goal it we are on track with the rate plan that has been adopted the utility has some very large capital needs that you you all are very aware of we've got some water supply projects hopefully in the near future both short term and long term we have some much-needed capital improvements to the water treatment and wastewater treatment facility both of those are very expensive projects and we talked about this at the last strategic strategic planning workshop but I just want to bring it up one more time as we are trying to keep up with the street program in terms of replacing water and sewer infrastructure underneath that Street we are paying for the we are cash funding that portion of the street program in terms of with the Belle Street project it was a twenty two million dollar project but twelve million dollars of that was to per place water and sewer so this year we are spending a lot of money in terms of capital improvement and these needs are not just in Belle Street they're citywide and so we also have water and sewer line replacements that will fall outside the street program that will also be big projects so I didn't want to bring this up just to make it doom and gloom but we do have a lot of very expensive projects coming on and I think it's essential that we have a healthy fund balance and that we we don't give this idea to customers that we're going to be giving rebates when really we need to be focused on these priorities for the utility so with that we recommend that the financial condition of the

[1:07:17] water operating fund be reviewed on a periodic basis to determine whether a rebate to water customers is appropriate it would still be at your discretion and when that would be appropriate and if a rebate is determined to be appropriate the same requirements as we're in the ordinance previously City Council would determine the methodology and the amounts to be rebated to customers so that is still all in the ordinance and with that I'll take any questions you can't do most cities uses their fund balance in terms of days I believe the rate consultant provided us that the 75 day fund balance goal is kind of a common number for most utilities and operations join a volunteer ski director finance the GF OE does recommend a fund balance goal of 90 days of operating expenditures we have set as a goal for our city at 75 day fund balance goal for the waterfront so base office the recommended 90 we live with 75 and we're still underneath the 75 days with our current fund balance and we tend to be right now in a drought if I'm not mistaken yes ma'am do I have questions or comments for Allison on this issue Billie on one of the previous slides that the infrastructure that's being done under the new roadways is pay-as-you-go the issuing of debt has been for the street portion of the projects we are paying as we go with the water and sewer infrastructure that's wonderful thank you and that's of course with the exception that you would say like on the Bell Street where there's 12 million dollars of water and sewer line that's a part of that project because people and I want to repeat that because people keep saying I can't believe council approved a 22 million dollar reworking of Bell Street they don't understand that there's 12 million of

[1:09:21] that 22 million that's actually water and sewer lines it's not a 22 million dollar road project and that's important that we note that do I have further questions or comments from Alison for Alison are you asking that we re review bringing it back on an April and November basis no I am the ordinance change will remove the April and November requirement and just be at the council's direction and periodic review bringing up about a rebate in April in November correct yes ma'am unless you ask for it we certainly can ask for it if we feel it but right now we're in a drought under our 75-day and would you re review those projects that need to be funded or taken care of yes ma'am we have short-term and long-term water supply needs capital improvements to the water treatment and wastewater treatment street program the biggest one currently Belle Street College Hills to be coming up and water and sewer line replacement that is outside the street program such as the sulfur draw project and we've got some other water line projects that do fall outside the street program we have an expected dollar amount on the capital improvements needed on the water treatment wastewater treatment facilities those are being evaluated with the water supply engineering feasibility study at this moment depending on what we do with the wastewater and what water source we bring in we'll drive those capital needs at the plant thank you do I have yes Harry thank you I just want to make sure that the citizens understand that the seven people up here are still looking out for their interests so I would suggest that we even though we're going to take out the April November from the ordinance that we have you come back at least twice a year and review these things so the citizens understand that we're doing due diligence on this yes I

[1:11:26] don't want the conversation to end just because we remove the April November we still need to be communicated to about where we stand on the water fund balance okay and if I could suggest I think bringing it up at the November time frame is the most appropriate because that is when we close the fiscal year April really we haven't even hit our busiest season in terms of cells with water and so in April we really don't know what kind of summer is going to bring in terms of those revenue projections so I think November if if you're okay with that would be the most appropriate of the two months to bring that back that's great with that said do I have a motion motion to approve second we have any public comment on this presentation with no public comment I will ask for a vote on item G all in favor say aye any opposed passes 7-0 item H second reading and adoption of amending appendix a fee schedule for the fine ordinances article a 11.000 fire and rescue service fees section a 1 1.001 service fees subsection f ambulance transport transfer fees to adjust set fees tina good morning again this is the ambulance fee item that you asked us to bring back after we had received more information from our consultant we have received that information and so these slides have been updated to reflect that information we're starting out with the ALS type 1 emergency the current fee is $830 the proposed fee at 875 and the cost of service is thirteen hundred five dollars for that one do you want me to go through all the way okay the Ale is Type 2 emergency the current fee is 955 we're proposing a increase to 1010 dollars with a cost of service of eighteen hundred and eighty nine dollars

[1:13:30] BLS emergency the current fee is 770 proposing at 8:10 and a cost of service of $1,099 BLS non-emergency the current fee is $600 proposed at 6:30 with the cost of service of 687 and the mile mileage fee for the per patient mile the current fee is $10 with a proposed fee of $12 and a cost of service of $16.53 transfer out of the city but still in county the current fee is $100 proposing a B of $150 with a cost of service of 139 dollars and then transfer out of the county as current fee of $200 with a proposed fee of $250 and a cost of service of $252 standby services the current fee is $340 which is $85 per hour after four hours and the proposed fee is $400 with $100 per hour after four hours with the cost of service at $402 was one hundred dollars per hour after four hours and that concludes the fees that we're presenting we can go back through them if you'd like start with the first one do I have questions or comments from City Council all right on type 1 emergency if the current fee is 813 we're proposing 875 and the actual cost of service is 1305 I think you really I think we need to look at that as being a little higher proposed fee my comment Lane do you have a question I have a comment while you were going through the numbers I was doing percentages on the calculator yeah they're all between 5 & 5 & a half percent that we're proposing we the intent was not to increase drastically all at one time but we can certainly increase these numbers as you would direct us to do I was doing the proposed fee to cost of service what percentage that proposed fee is to the cost this one right here is at 67% some

[1:15:34] of them were or closer to 80 can we can we get a consistent percentage if we're not going to do the cost of service can we get a consistent percentage of the proposed fee to what it actually costs sure that's that's your prerogative and like I said right now all the proposed increases are between five and five and a half percent and that we proposed Tommy you had a question and I may agree last meeting that we were going to look at this annually now because we were as folk far below the cost of service so going I think what the chief had mentioned to us initially when presented and then last on second reading last time as well that we didn't want to create sticker shock for for the citizens and so we would look at it annually so that just FYI I guess to remind the council what we agreed to last time or we may not agreed to but we talked about as you know the larger the number the lesser the percentage so the reality is is I think that we can in my mind bump a few of these up a little bit and still be without sticker shock because if you have a current fee of 8:30 proposed three of proposed proposed fee of 875 but a cost of service of 1305 I think this one could already go up just a little bit more let me ask the chief of question might you is there any percentage that is that would be valid in your judgment that your cost of service goes up annually about how much or is that really not a fair question whether that is going to depend on the infrastructure that gets put in place you know as we build new stations all that gets depreciated into these cost also the training center the cost of new ambulances all those kinds of things are gonna get depreciated in there and they're gonna drive some of those numbers up we have a new station new station comment will come online at the

[1:17:36] end of September hopefully have a new truck coming new ami when it's coming yes so all these things you know as you replace like two of the other stations that we were placed they were probably on the books for $100,000 because they were built in the 60s versus you know two to three million dollars when they were built just a few years ago may I ask and repeat if you would when was the last time we increased these fees and you had the comparison of other cities at this point I think in one presentation we had the comparison to other cities in terms of what they charge we did and I don't believe these are on this slide right now they were on the first one that we presented back at the first of March I don't have those slides with me at this time but they are in your background if you have your background information with you let's pull it up and again repeat when was the last time we raised these fees 2012 they went upstairs over six years from the last time that we increased these fees may or some of some of those are city operated some of those are privately operated as far as - councilman Carter's comment we could go back and if you council gives us a percentage they'd like I'm set to we can go back and do those calculations and bring those up to say eighty percent of cost or whatever the council deems that they would like to get to at this point Daniel if I may I know that we look at the numbers and percentage-wise as Lane mentioned a while ago that's a huge jump up now we are talking about coming back every year until we get it to a level that we know it will be right let's save over the next three to four years because back every year we may divide up the difference over a four year period and say we'll make our adjustments accordingly because this would be this is significant this is a huge number right here but again we don't want to

[1:19:39] give our citizens a sticker shop but we also know that if we don't adjust it enough then we'll be struggling year after year so even if we decide that we can divide it up over three to four year period as the chief comes up here we can adjust those numbers upwards as well but at this point I definitely would not recommend going too close to that 1305 at this point we slimy it son do you have a comment Brian and one of the reasons you see some of these large differences those runs are different categories those runs that have those big differences or higher levels of care and there's the federal government sets a weighting system called relative value units so they base everything off a base transport where you're basically doing nothing and then after that there there's multipliers for each of those categories and runs so that's one reason you see like that one that's the second highest type of run that you make a list who would be the highest we don't make a lot of those runs but you saw it went from what we charge from 955 to the cost of that run being nearly nineteen hundred dollars and that's one of the reasons it'd be like going to the ER for getting stitches or going there to get a surgery I mean that's the difference you're talking about Lane did you have a comment I'm just doing some calculations can you cycle through these real quick to each one that yeah each one of them I'm just trying to find a consistent basis chief Dunn said we could increase it to a percentage of the cost of service or we could instead of going around the 5% increase mark we could do a different percentage increase as well and you're saying right now the slides that you're presenting as it's all based off of a five point five percent increase I have BLS and an ALS type one and two is there a fourth well then you had the other categories of mileage yes so far type 1

[1:21:43] is 67% ALS type 2 is proposed at an increase of 1.6% how much 1.6 percent and why did you make a decision to do 1.6 percent versus 5.5 percent how much is it it would also depend on where you want to end up what is your goal for where those fees ultimately end up if our goal is to exactly cover cost three years from now then it and there are multiple ways to get there but daniels talk about smoothly increasing those rates so we don't create a crisis for anybody I think I think that holds a lot of water I don't think we want to create a crisis for anybody on the other hand we have fees that don't cover cost of service and we haven't raised fees since 2012 so you're 6 years in the hole if you are six years without any increases so I think there needs to be once again a consistency in terms of what we're doing and we might not ever get up to the cost of service but let me also repeat that as far as I know health cost services continue to increase and one of the highest increases people are getting in their lives so even though we don't want to do that I probably would I could assume that these numbers in terms of cost of service if we look at it next year and the next year next year they're going to go up at a faster rate then we're going to increase the costs because that's what's happening with health care so what's realism attached to this conversation we don't want to continue to go backwards in terms of covering the same percentage today with our fees versus cost of service and find ourselves in a big hole next year the next year in the next year because I can guarantee you that cost of service is going to go up and we get into the argument of subsidizing by the taxpayers

[1:23:47] yes sir that's that's my issue is I to ALS is most expensive that's our proposed fee is 53% of cost of service our type one sixty seven percent in our BLS is seventy three percent I'm not those would be large increases two-lane meant ALS one would be a 25% increase ALS to be a 58% increase going if we went to 80 percent of service that's a big increase but apparently your ALS too is is not a highly used service just because that you don't have that much call for that that category is something such as a code where we're using all kinds of medicines and equipment to try to bring somebody back that that's probably the primary category for that run time do I have a recommendation from Council in terms of what you would like to see in terms of this presentation and fee structure because I think Harry brinda thank you I'm gonna go back and reiterate something you just said that chief alluded to it a little while ago you bring a new station online you put two more ambulances and services then that cost of service is going to go up every year to Tommy's point if we try to find a way to get to 80 percent this year 19 xed in a hundred the following year we're always going to be chasing a target but we've got to get to a spot even if this is not used on a regular basis where the city recovers a majority of the of the money's needed for this cost of service so uh as much as as much as it pains me I think we should really try to get to an 80% for every one of these this particular time time frame today and look at what we can do in in the in the future years because

[1:25:49] I think we're going to chase that target for longer than I'm going to be on this council yes do I have other comments from anyone on Council Tina do you want to bring something to us yes we just said some quick math that 75% of the cost of service if you you all would like to hear what those numbers would be start with the first one please okay on this first slide at 75% of cause the proposed fee would be nine hundred seventy eight dollars the next slide at seventy-five percent of cost would be one thousand four hundred sixteen dollars or be less emergency a seventy five percent would be eight hundred twenty-five dollars less non-emergency seventy-five percent would actually be a bit of a decrease to $515 $515 that doesn't make sense 770 those calculators what can you say about they're always wrong this is the one that would decrease a bit to five hundred fifteen dollars next the mileage fee seventy five percent would be twelve dollars and thirty nine cents transfer out of a city still in county oh we didn't calculate that one that wasn't the proposed fee is higher than the cost rates higher than your cost of service there okay it would be 155 on that one wait a minute the

[1:27:57] proposed it can't be the cost of service would be 155 that's an error the actual cost of service is 155 not 139 withhold data okay and so the 75% would be what 75% of 155 is one let me calculate that please I'm sorry 116 25 for this one the 75% cost of service would be $189 finally on this one the the 75% would be 300 $1.50 let me ask you a question that we talked about last time when we talked about these fees a lot of these seas are covered by insurance correct most of these fees if someone has an insurance policy a lot of their insurance policy would cover these fees if they have insurance so the standby services that's a that's the football games the rodeo the things that people contract with us for so those are known costs to us so with the the new statistics that Tina presented which would be raising the feast of 75 percent of actual cost of service do I have a motion to pass a 75 percent of actual cost of service fees and clarify one thing first in the event that that would actually lower the fee to less than the

[1:30:00] cost of service would you propose something different for example on this one for example Stanley while she's looking at the 75 percent threshold affected in a positive way the first three fees the rest it all brought the fee down or had smaller impact so what I'm hearing from the counsel is you would like to take 75 percent as the new proposed fee on ambulance services only and we would leave the rest of the services at the fees that are currently proposed is that what I'm hearing from counsel then would somebody like to make that motion is that including this basic life support not an emergency because I believe that's an ambulance service but it would actually decrease our fee as 75 percent let's go back to the very beginning these first three so the type one we would raise to 75 percent of cost of service ma'am that would be 978 yes yes which is the most used type to emergency would be 75% of the 1889 which is 1416 dollars okay the next one 1416 we could round that to 1420 the other one the first one to 980 no we won't because then 75% doesn't play forget I ever said that the next one the next one would be eight hundred twenty-five dollars at seventy-five percent and that is this one right here okay so let's go back to the first one so what we're going to ask for first is a motion to approve 75% of the type 1 emergency the type to emergency basic life support emergency a

[1:32:08] 75 percent and 75 percent of the basic life support no emergencies so we would not so the first three slides will go to 75 percent the balance of the slides would be as presented is that correct your motion for that the motion would be that in slides one through three or one through three would be 75 percent of proposed cost of service the balance of the slides would be as presented do you mind if I clarify them would go ahead please motion would be to approve as presented with the exception of ALS one seventy-five percent of caused the ALS to feed 75 percent of cost in the BLS do I have a motion is there a second is there comment from the audience please there I have a question yes Brian and Teresa do we does that need to specify 75% of cost or do we need to put a number on it so that we're not forever presented at 75 percent of cost so is the cost that was presented the ordinance will read a specific number yes in the second reading it'll come back with the specific information all right thank you with no public comment yes the second reading so yes it'll be 75 percent of the cost that was presented annually and then we would review on an annual basis with new information relative to cost of service to determine proposed fees so the motion as presented do all in favor say aye any opposed motion passes 7-0 public

[1:34:17] comment oh I did yep with that we move into our closed session I'm hearing no closed session but you have an item no we don't have a post no okay there's no closed session today so the one is listed on the agenda we are not discussing today it was simply an update that we can push okay with that we're moved to item 8 follow-up an administrative issues there was no executive sessions so we don't need to do that B is consider approving various board nominations the first is the design and historic review commission connie bigger staff my appointee to a first firm for first term ending September 2009 do I have a Moute yes ma'am you can take all these together if it helps I have been asked to do them separately so with that do I have a motion to approve Connie bigger staff to the design and historic review Commission to proof all in favor passes 7-0 item B Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Francis Holland's burger as a mayor to a third term ending December 2009 may I just ask that moving forward we make sure we don't nominate someone to a term unless it or two in a position on the I've got on the commission or board without having their nomination approved all in favor say aye any opposed Planning Commission Travis Stribling SMD 5-2 a first-world term ending January 2021 to approve second oh do I need to ask for public comment on these okay all in favor say

[1:36:20] aye passes 7-0 public art Commission Julie Raymond SMD 6-2 a second term in in April 2019 motion to approve second all in favor 7-0 our announcements in consideration for future agenda items are there any with none do I have a motion for adjournment move to adjourn a second all in favor motion passes 7 0 meeting is adjourned

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=cQ2JP6Nz8p4