San Angelo City Council 4-6-21

[0:00:00] on tuesday april the 6th and we will call this meeting to order we will start today's meeting with our chaplain prayer and pledges and we have gary and marcella jenkins here to lead us in the prayer and pledges mayor gunter members of the city council and all that are here today good morning will you join with me as we pray father in heaven in the name of jesus we bow before you to say thank you for another day that you have blessed us to come together and to assemble to take care of the business of running the city we ask you for your wisdom for your favor we ask you father to endow the members of the city council with the knowledge and the understanding and wisdom they will need to take care of the business of this city we thank you dear lord for each and every person that's here we seek your guidance and your counsel and we pray god that you will be pleased with that which we do as we glorify you in jesus name amen i pledge united allegiance of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty justice for all honor the texas flag i pledge allegiance to the texas one state under god endless and indivisible we have four proclamations this morning

[0:02:10] and we will start off with the first one which is the proclamation of april 2021 as i choose angelo state month and i'm sure we've got general hawkins president hawkins here in the audience with perhaps some other folks here so please come forward 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 contribute to higher education at asu angelo state university with an enrollment of 10 775 undergraduate and graduate students is an integral part of the city and a citadel of higher learning in west texas asu employs 420 faculty members 560 staff members and 750 student workers who are a vital part of this community 51 431 students have graduation from asu since its inception in 1965. over the years angelo state university's educational opportunities have grown to include one doctoral degree in physical therapy 31 master's programs 50 undergraduate programs and over 100 majors and concentrations this year angelo state university is celebrating its 92nd graduating class the month of april 2021 will be celebrated as i choose angelo state month at angelo state university by current and future students faculty staff

[0:04:11] and alumni through campus events social media and local media outlets therefore i brenda gunter mayor of the city of san angelo texas on behalf of the city council do hereby proclaim april 2021 as i choose angelo state month in san angelo and call upon the citizens of our area to recognize this remarkable display of pride in our community in the comprehensive educational opportunities at angelo state university would you like to offer some comments mayor gunter the city council and all the members that are present here today we thank you for this opportunity to recognize i chose angelo state month and the reason behind that is we want to be the university here in san angelo such that san angelo is known as a college town where the graduates do graduate and they do go out to do great things in the world and we want to recognize three individuals if we could that have chosen angelo state one from howard college one from lakeview high school and the other from central high school morgan fowler from howard college daisy hair from lake view high school and our sally opinion mermaid is from central high school is going to be looking into animal science here at angelo state daisy is going to be looking into history and i believe morgan is going down to nursing kinesiology route so thank you very much our next proclamation is

[0:06:41] national autism acceptance do we have someone in the audience to come forward and accept the proclamation april is autism acceptance month and is an opportunity to recognize the contributions of individuals with autism and to dedicate this time to the cause of better understanding and responding to autism autism affects an estimated 1 in 54 children and 1 in 4 adults early diagnosis and intervention tailored to individual needs can have lifelong benefits it is known that with proper education training and community living options individuals with autism can lead distinguished productive lives in their communities and strive to reach their fullest potential it is an honor to take part in the annual observance of autism month to address the diverse needs of individuals and families affected by autism the abc center for children is an autism program with the mh mr services for the concho valley spearheading an awareness effort in order to educate parents professionals and the public about autism highlighting the need for early intervention therefore i brenda gunter mayor the city of san angelo texas on behalf of the city council do hereby proclaim april 2021 as national autism acceptance month in san angelo texas and encourage all citizens to share the responsibility in promoting autism awareness and witness whereup i have here until i set my hand and have caused the officials official silda city of san angelo to be affixed the sixth day of april 2021.

[0:08:44] congratulations and please offer us some words thank you we want to thank you i'm greg rowe with mhmr and i have with me the abc center for children program of mhmrs and with ashley all wine our program director and ashley i know i don't want to put you spot would you introduce your staff please and ashley is also a board certified behavior analyst we're very honored to be able to serve folks and promote awareness of autism as the mayor said in the proclamation one in 54 folks are diagnosed with autism and our goal is to work with kids work with their families to improve communication skills social skills and improved behavior and get the word out that autism is something that can be worked with and people can improve and do better in school and do better in life so thank you very much for your support mayor and city council and thank you very much [Applause] our next proclamation is a proclamation of of the military child do we have folks here to accept this proclamation if so please come forward i see some uniforms so come on since 1986 the department of defense has

[0:10:54] recognized military children during the month of april the commitment and sacrifice of our military's youngest heroes in supporting the brave men and women of the u.s armed forces is worthy of honor and celebration the unique demands upon the children of our military personnel do not go unnoticed from often being the new child in school or the feeling of missing a parent deployed while serving our country here in san angelo we are blessed to have goodfella air force base strong military families that call our community home add so much to our west texas community today and for the month of april we will make a special effort to lift up our military families and to salute them and the contribution and resilience of our military children as part of this salute san angelo isd is partnering with the city of san angelo to honor our military families and children the city and s-i-s-a-i-s-d invite all our san angelo community to join in our salute and gratitude therefore i brenda gunter mayor the city of san angelo texas on behalf of the city council and together with san angelo independent school district administrators principals educators staff and students do hereby prolly proclaim proudly proclaim the month of april as month of the military child and urge all citizens of san angelo to acknowledge the occasion of this honor sorry to acknowledge the occasion of this month in honor and recognition of the outstanding strength of our military children and their families in gratitude of their sacrifice therefore i brenda gunter mayor the city of san angelo texas on behalf of the city council and together with san angelo independent school district administrators principals educators staff and students do hereby proudly proclaim the month of april as month of the military child and urge all citizens of san angelo to acknowledge

[0:12:58] the occasion of this month in honor and recognition of the outstanding strength of our military children and their families in gratitude of their sacrifice and witness whereof i haven't here unto set my hand and have caused the official seal the city of san angelo to be affixed the sixth day of april 2021. congratulations thank you mayor gunter and members of the city council we are so proud of our military students and all of the sacrifices and hard work that they do and very appreciative of our partnership with goodfellow and we have colonel boomshire here this morning oh chief boomershire i'm sorry chief boomer and my apologies and uh teresa goodwin who is our liaison she helps us to help facilitate where our students transition to san angelo and really feel comfortable and a part of our community and a part of our schools so we cannot say thank you to her enough and of course we have dr deathloff here who will speak here in just a moment but i do want to invite you all to celebrate with us all month long we kicked off um on april 1st thanks to asu president general hawkins we appreciate you helping us salute all of our families it means so much coming from you who has had that experience as a military child and on the service side so thank you for your service and thank you for sharing that message and we will continue to celebrate all month long y'all can tune in on our facebook page tomorrow we will do a live read-aloud with colonel byrd lauren bird who is a also a parent of a glenn moore student she will do a live read-aloud of the brand new kid by katie couric that talks about the special experience of a military child so we're excited about that and we will have even more going on just stay tuned to our facebook page and then for the uh next week we will be doing spirit week we invite you all to dress up in purple on april 15th because that is the color to show your support and just join us in supporting these

[0:14:59] kids and these families they add they do add so much to our west texas community so now i'm going to let dr deathloff speak just for a moment good morning and thank you whitney first i just want to recognize the mayor and city council for your efforts and service so thank you for your service to our community i also want to lift up the really the interconnectedness of the proclamations that we heard today saisd we certainly want to lift up our students with autism i think it's an incredible highlight that president hawkins mentioned our lakeview graduate and central graduate we want them to choose the university of choice in texas angelo state university so we're excited about lifting up all the all the proclamations this morning and certainly uh april being the month of the military child we have 778 direct connections with goodfellow air force base with our military children so 778 military children attend saisd and they certainly enrich the fabric of our school district and community my spouse is a a military child and she reminds me that she is much more worldly and gifted than i am almost daily so uh we do want to lift up our our military children and i i just want to thank you for for your service and those in the audience who have served as well so thank you for the proclamations mayor and it's a privilege to work in direct partnership with goodfellow air force base i really appreciate this effort and the understanding that our families serve along with us our families do serve and our children serve and i can't thank you enough for making san angelo and saisd for making this a home for them while they're here they feel welcomed they feel included and they feel like just for as long as we have them that they do have a home so thank you

[0:17:02] for that uh [Applause] and our last recognition is of mary cleveland for her retirement after 30 years with the city of san angelo and mary is not here today to receive this proclamation but it is as follows billing and receipts manager mary cleveland is retiring from the city of san angelo after 31 years of dedicated service mary started working with the city back in 1990 as an accounts payable clerk and worked her way up through the finance department while earning an accounting degree in her free time while all of her co-workers will miss mary she certainly deserves her retirement her hard work and diligence have greatly benefited our city and it is safe to say that her institutional knowledge base and ways of finding answers to difficult situations will be greatly missed by both customers and co-workers alike all who work with mary consider her to be not only a valuable asset to our city but also an enjoyable presence in the office

[0:19:04] we know mary will enjoy traveling and spending time with her husband jimmy who also recently retired from the city spoiling her grandkids listening to her favorite rock and roll music and reading an entire library full of books we wish her the best in all of her future endeavors the city of san angelo has been blessed by mary's commitment and service to this place we call home therefore i brenda gunter mayor of the city of san angelo do hereby recognize and applaud mary cleveland for her achievement and positive determination to make a difference in our community let's give mary a round of applause [Applause] we have one last proclamation of the fair housing month do we have anyone here to receive this proclamation today please come forward we have lots of folks come on we love that herds are good the fair housing act enacted on april 11 1968 enshrined into federal law and the goal of eliminating racial segregation and ending housing discrimination in the united states the fair housing act prohibits discrimination in housing based off race color religion sex familiar status national origin and disability and commits recipients of federal funding to affirmatively further fair housing in their communities the city of san angelo is committed to the mission and intent of congress to provide fair and equal housing opportunities for all our social fabric the economy health and environment are strengthened in diverse inclusive communities more than 50 years after the passage of the fair housing

[0:21:08] act discrimination persists and many communities remain segregated acts of housing discrimination and barriers to equal housing opportunity are repugnant to a common sense of decency and fairness therefore i brenda gunter mayor of san angelo do hereby proclaim the month of april 2021 as fair housing month in san angelo texas an inclusive community committed to fair housing and to promoting appropriate activities by private and public entities to provide and advocate for equal housing opportunities for all residents and prospective residents of san angelo texas in witness whereof i have here and to set my hand and have caused the official seal the city of san angelo to be affixed the sixth day of april 2021 on the on behalf of the san angelo association of realtors we'd like to thank the mayor and the city council for acknowledging this very important topic as you know as realtors our primary political interests are and and uh homeownership and private property rights so those are the things that we look for and the fair housing act and people having the opportunity equally to have the the chance to at home ownership is very important to us uh in that vein we're also going to be having on this 15th in the evening a training session for our realtors which is going to be a webinar it will be recorded and we'll be put on our website or our facebook page hopefully by the 16th so anybody in the public can see it giving us all the new information and the latest things that are going on in fair housing so again on on behalf of the senate association of realtors we thank you for this proclamation you

[0:24:16] uh hmm we will now move into the public comment portion of our agenda today just to remind everyone please state your name and address or smd area each citizen can speak just once per item unless asked to comment by counsel public comment will be three minutes unless extended by counsel or translation services and the proponent or opponent five minutes unless extended by counsel or translation services council has no obligation to respond to comments or questions from the public any response from a member of the city council to non-agenda comments is limited to one a statement of specific factual information to recitation of existing policy and three directing staff to place a subject on a future agenda so at this point in time we will open up the meeting to public comment do i have individuals here who would like to come forward and speak please come forward and as we said if you'll state your name and go ahead and get to the microphone please my name is justin walcott good morning good morning i live at 1818 south harrison apartment number 23. um my question is about our poisoning of our city's water supply what progress have we made and what further efforts is the city putting forward let me just say that we will we have a presentation in our regular agenda today and they will address all of your questions at that point in time okay thank you thanks for coming in this morning

[0:26:16] who else would like to come forward on public comment please good morning good morning i'm jennifer poppy smd5 my fiance and i have been here a few times and also attended a planning commission meeting regarding some driving range lights in our residential neighborhood that have been a problem with light trespass january council meeting passed the zone change of next level sports driving and including their driving range um under the guidelines that planning had set forth that the owner had to shield the driving range lights the neighbors and i have noticed no change two months after the january council meeting so i called rudy ibarra for an update he said the lights had been shielded and planning has had gone out to the facility and evaluated that but it was unsatisfactory it did not resolve the problem so i called planning and talked to jeff fisher he confirmed that planning had gone out inspected the shielding and it was unsatisfactory did not resolve the problem and he assured me that planning had sent out a notification to the owner of next level sports with options that he had to resolve the problem jeff fisher said he would give me an update he did he called about two weeks after that and let me know he left a voicemail and let me know that no further action was going to be taken per the city manager and if i had any more questions to call the city manager directly and i did i spoke to you mr valenzuela regarding the issue and told him the issue was not resolved um

[0:28:21] neighbors have not noticed any difference i haven't noticed any difference nobody's enjoying their yards due to this still after over a year this started february of last year mr valenzuela told me that no further action was going to be taken because the owner had done everything that planning had required him to do even though it didn't work mr valenzuela did tell me that he and john james the director of planning had gone out to the facility as well to evaluate the shielding and everything the owner had done but also said the same thing they noticed it did not resolve the problem they could visually see that um i i asked mr valenzuela why the other part of the ordinance also wasn't being enforced he said there was or we know that there's glare issues and glare is mentioned in the ordinance and it's still not being enforced mr valenzuela also said the reason they're not moving forward making the owner properly shield his lights and get rid of the light trespasses because the owner's attorney got involved and the owner feels harassed at this point i let daniel valenzuela know the people being harassed here are the people in our neighborhood for over a year now that cannot enjoy their properties and i guess my question today to you is why is the ordinance not being enforced um why isn't anything being done i have copies of the ordinance if anybody needs to read it to clarify any wording in it um i want those copies of the light ordinance and what it says or hold on one second go ahead dan is true we did we didn't meet actually i went out there a couple of times and met with sean box we actually had a few staff members that went out there the second time

[0:30:24] and we did review to take a look at what mr box had done and mr boggs had responded to the planned development or the planned uh development actually that we had the city council had approved certain things that had to be done on site he did do the shielding he did face the lights downward as he was expected to do he went an additional step and actually put a cover a film over the light itself to kind of reduce the glare as well so the things that was required of him in the plant development he actually did accomplish and again going out there to meet with him he also presented information comparing the previous life to the current light situation and there's very a lot of similarities as far as it was there before as well so what i was telling telling you is that as far as the planned development all that was required has been met so as far as the interpretation as far as what's in the in the ordinance there's mention of glare yes but again what he addressed with us was the fact that he had reduced that glare we know he has reduced that glare now it becomes a is it do we change the ordinance do we change make changes to the plan development what is it exactly that needs to be done but at this point what i'm saying is that what is required at mr box the next level was accomplished as far as requirements yes um again it did not resolve the issue and the ordinance is still being violated and it's not being enforced i guess that's my question why why is the ordinance not being enforced the ordinance is being enforced that has been enforced uh the this was the requirements were made to the plan development as far as what needed to be done so again when you look at the ordinance and how it's defined uh you know mr mr uh box will make a certain claim you'll make a certain claim as far as what you you experience as far as the glare uh and his is that i've done everything that has been asked of me to reduce that glare and here it is um so on our end just taking a look at what was required

[0:32:26] by council was accomplished by mr box again whether that meets your satisfaction or not even if he does more work on it his concern mr buck's concern any other work he does to it will not meet your satisfaction or anyone else's satisfaction he does feel like he's being held to a much higher standard so on our end we wanted to make sure that we took a look at what the concern was and make sure that he did address it again going back to that plan development he did address it according what was required to him all right yes i i agree with that i know he's made some changes and a lot of those changes were made prior to the january council meeting which did not help the situation at all the shielding was the only new thing added i'm i'm taking it and it still has not resolved your time limits up thank you very much can i get one question yes on what uh criteria was deemed unsatisfactory as far as the lining is it always stems from the glare situation and again what mr box was required to do was to reduce that glare what was put placed on the plant development as far as facing the lights downward doing the shielding he did those things plus he added an additional uh an additional item that wasn't required of him and he put a film on those lights as well to reduce it who deemed those efforts unsatisfactory in the long run after the visit there were certain recommendations some other ideas that could be uh that he could actually push forward and do as well but he had already met the requirements of the planned development so at that point he wasn't required to do any more than that right that limp that stops the public comment on this item any further public comment no further i'm going to read a statement concerning sudden link we'd like to address the ongoing matter

[0:34:33] with sudden link communications we are fully aware of the dissatisfaction and frustration so many of you are experiencing with your service we also understand that there are many complaints related to the lack of customer service we want you all to know that we hear you and sympathize with you and we know you have huge frustrations with your service when you entered into a residential service agreement with sudden link you agreed to contract provisions related to how disputes would be handled those provisions require arbitration on an individual basis as a result the city is not able to intervene on behalf of the citizens and any class action lawsuits against sudden link would be prohibited any disputes or issues an individual might have must be dealt with between that individual and suddenly the city cannot do anything on behalf of the citizens of san angelo regarding suddenly we understand that filing a formal dispute against a company seems daunting to many citizens so we have created information to assist you with that process the city has outlined steps including sample documents that residents can use if they wish to file a formal notice of dispute and arbitration against sudden link this information can be found at co s a t x dot u s slash sudden link there you will also find a video interview and step-by-step guidance on the notice of dispute and arbitration process including sample forms that you can use to imitate this process this information will be sent out to the public later this morning it is our hope that our citizens will utilize this information to formally voice their concerns to suddenly in the form required by your contracts

[0:36:35] we will continue to advocate for better service on behalf of our citizens but the strongest voice in the conversation is yours are we going to play that video or just put it out there later today um brian is already posted and made live the page that deals with sudden link information and that video is posted on that page and when we say that um you have entered into that contract we what we want to make sure all the individuals and there are many many many of you hundreds of you who are unhappy with sudden link service the city has forwarded your complaints to the fcc the better business bureau has forwarded your complaints to the fcc we have written certain letters that were certified and delivered to all of our representatives in congress our texas state legislators our washington dc representatives they've all received certified letters we also sent a certified letter to the ceo who is in new york city we've never received back a copy that he signed for that letter we have called his office on multiple occasions and left messages of which none of them have been returned no phone call has ever been returned so we are saying to you we will work with you we'll sit beside you if we need you need us to to help you fill out the forms and follow through we want to help you in this process because we know it's an unacceptable level of customer service unacceptable level of not understanding the bill and an ongoing changing of the bill and the information on your bill i know that many of you made phone calls to them to be told that they would do something relative to the price you are charged for your service

[0:38:37] only it never happens and then very often you get more expensive bills in the mail the confusion is unacceptable i don't know how many adjectives i can add to this conversation in terms of how unacceptable how customer service is obviously not at top of their list in terms of what they deliver to you all it's obvious customer service and individual customers are not important to them because they continue to be confusing they continue to give out bad customer service they continue to not show up on time the laundry list is very long but let's make sure that we communicate that to them on a one-on-one basis we will also ask other cities to join in this effort so that they understand it is not a san angelo only effort and i repeat we cannot do a class action suit but we can certainly make phone calls to other cities and encourage them to follow the same process as we are so that that the sudden leak organization and the company that owns sudden link hears loudly the dissatisfaction that exists with sudden link thank you yeah yes billy um what is the hindrance and i'm not sure whether this question can be answered here or not but what is the hindrance to us seeking another cable service company to provide some competition because based on what we see the only thing that's going to cause them to change is if there's some competitors out there so what is the hindrance the private you know they're a privately owned company or publicly owned company and anybody who wants to can come into this city there's no prohibition to another company coming into this city but they have to want to invest in this city and be a part of this community we are not

[0:40:38] we did not invite suddenly to come into this community that was a business model that chose to be here there are companies that are looking at san angelo in terms of putting fiber down broadband is a big conversation right now but it is about private investment it's not about the city we don't own we have we have a contract to allow them to use our run right away that's the only negotiation we have or the only element that we have attached to them am i hearing you say that there is no hindrance if the community somehow wants to try to seek an additional service company to come into senator there are additional services here in san angelo well well i hear what you're saying but um really the bottom the bottom line is we don't have enough subscribers to attract a comcast an att subscriber base is not it's a it's a it's a business decision on on those other companies parts not to come to san angelo because there's not enough subscribers that's just the bottom line while it frustrates all of us we can't do anything about the number of subscribers and you know i hear you uh tommy but that was the same thing that was said about the airline that we didn't have enough business to support more than one airline well guess what starting april 21st we're going to have another airline so you know i hear what everybody's saying but well the only thing that's going to cause sudden link to do anything different is competition and that too that's my case through the mayor's point some some business has got to say we're going to make an entry into san angelo and that's not anything we can control it's a very expensive investment actually to come in it's that's one of the barriers to actually coming in

[0:42:40] there's you know we talk about fiber optics we talk about everything that would be required of that company to come in and set up shop here in san angelo there's a high risk as uh mentioned by tommy we already have all these subscribers that are with suddenly we could say well all of those will go to this other company they just came on board well the risk for that company is do we know that for sure that's going to happen if you come and invest that that huge investment on our end absolutely we would love to have competition that's exactly what we need here but right now we're dealing with what we have and we want to make sure that as mayor mentioned a while ago we go after sun link any way we possibly can to make them respond so this is what we're doing at this point but again yes billy would love to have a competition and we have talked to a couple of groups that would be interested but again that's one of the barriers is the cost associated with coming in that huge investment somebody has to be willing to make that investment and there are people in town laying fiber so there's obviously hope for some alternatives there is frontier who is here and and offers a service but again it's a question mark of whether people want to change or whether they're wanting to stay with sudden link because it's too much of a hassle not to but there is competition and there is more competition coming but it is a huge investment fiber is a huge investment on any company's part and um as san angelo exists were a small market right so people are looking for larger markets where their return on investment is greater and i understand that mayor but to be competition it has to be comparable competition and what we have now is not comparable competition it's not in our hands yeah i hear you any further public comment with none we will move into the consent agenda and i am going to pull j and k from the consent agenda so that mr witt

[0:44:44] will be able to leave when those just those items are discussed but with that do i have a motion to approve the consent agenda with exceptions of j and k don't move ami has moved second by lane all in favor supporting the consent agenda with the exception of j and k please say aye all right motion and passes so billy if you'd like to leave we will go ahead and discuss items j and k j is the second reading of ordinances one cp 21-01 amending the city of san angelo comprehensive plan changing certain lands from the neighborhood future land use to the commercial future land use being .16 acres located in the 200 block of west 23rd street and 2 z21-01 rezoning property from the general commercial heavy commercial and single-family residential zoning districts to the general commercial zoning district located at 2218 martin luther king sorry drive three lots in the 200 block of west 22nd street and one block in the 200 block of west 23rd street being 1.125 acres john yes were there particular questions about those items just in case counsel does anyone have a question on item j then may i have a motion to prove item j lane made a motion tommy seconded all in

[0:46:47] favor say aye none opposed sorry i didn't ask for public comment on that all right item k second reading of an ordinance providing for the abandonment of 6582 square feet of the south side of the west 23rd street right of way between martin luther king drive and far street do i have any questions from council on item k with none may i have a motion for approval so move by tommy second by lane any public comment on item k with no public comment on item k we will take a vote all in favor say aye aye with none oppose motion passes six zero with that it completes our consent agenda we will now move into our regular agenda comments regarding items on the regular agenda may be made by the public when each item is discussed as outlined above applicants proponents and appellants are are accepted from the time limit above and must limit their remarks to less than five minutes the first item on the agenda oh sorry welcome back billy final update regarding february water contamination so allison you're on morning mayor council allison struby director of water utilities um i've got quite a few slides for you all hopefully it's comprehensive and that i can address any questions that y'all may have sorry this is a new clicker i'm not okay sorry um i'm not going to go through the full history of what we've read what we've lived through since february 8th but i will say that on our city's website on the paul land page we have a complete timeline of events so if you would like to see

[0:48:48] all the press releases all the different maps all the different stages that we've been in test results and things of that nature that is available on the city's website and the different press releases all those videos are available but starting february 8th we received multiple phone calls in the paulin area that were complaining of odor in their water due to us not knowing what was in the water we went with a conservative approach of a city-wide bull water notice or sorry do not use notice and so we wanted to make sure that we figured out what these constituents were make sure that they were in an isolated area and all that involved testing and quite a bit of time until we could narrow down strictly that it was isolated to the paulin area and the northern industrial zone as we've kind of named those two areas so knowing that it wasn't a or it was to an isolated area it was not a source water contamination and so i know i've said that several times but i want to keep reiterating this wasn't a contamination that started out at the water plant or our source water lake nasworthy ohiv any of those that migrated through the entire system all of that water met drinking water standards but it was contaminated after the fact within the distribution system some of the current conditions paul ann area mainly the neighborhood area all the restrictions are lifted and they're back to normal use just as any other customer within the city limits or within the city the area is still valved off i want to make sure that we iterate that that water cannot flow from the northern industrial part into the paulin area or the pauline area into the northern industrial area so those both areas have one-way feeds into them where water cannot circulate through the system

[0:50:50] and we are still performing weekly testing and posting that data every thursday and friday the northern industrial area we do have mainly businesses there but however there are 29 residential customers we are delivering bottled water because they are in a do not consume do not drink area and we are still doing weekly testing there and working with tceq very diligently so that we can step them out of those restrictions and they can return to their normal water usage the results from those testing have all been clear so we aren't seeing the contaminants that we saw on february 8th and as i go through the presentation i want you to know that tceq is conducting their own and independent investigation and so they have it's separate and apart from what we're doing and so everything i'll be presenting on is what the city has done in those efforts you want to talk about at this point allison on those 29 customers what the anticipation or what the next steps are for them to get usage of their water so tceq and austin the headquarters of basically the water office we've emailed them all of the the data all of the samples our sampling plan they've they requested a whole host of information so that we could take that area back to no restrictions and we have sent them that information and they're going through it and analyzing it and they said they would get back to us later this week so that we can have that discussion on the timing of when that area would be released billy did you have a question or question thank you okay okay so because this wasn't a source water issue there we talk about it being a backflow issue and what i want i want to explain what backflow is so backflow can be or can

[0:52:53] occur in two ways either back pressure or back siphonage back pressure is when the pressure on the customer's side is higher than what the city has back siphonage is when reduced or negative pressure in the supply system and i may go through an example of back siphonage here in a second and it basically pulls what's on the customer side into the city supply side so this is a normal you know a smaller look at what how the distribution system works so water leaves our treatment facility the pipelines that serve both customer and residential are the same pipeline we don't have pipelines that serve commercial and industrial customers and then separate ones that serve residential customers it is all sent out through the distribution system but both industrial commercial customers and residential customers can be potential hazards on a water distribution system so in an instance like a main break flushing pump failure operation and maintenance firefighting purposes where they're using hydrants or a large water demand or even just a customer's increased demand can oz always call or can cause water to pull through the distribution system and in this example it is showing it could pull water from that industrial customer into the city's water supply i want to make sure i'm not forgetting any of my notes here so what's important in how we protect against this is this example is showing to put a backflow prevention device at the city's basically after the meter so between that industrial customer's private line and the city's water main i will say that tceq considers

[0:55:01] premise isolation which is this example a backflow prevention device right after the meter additional backflow measures the city of san angelo water system is what's called the water purveyor we're responsible from the water from the treatment plant through the distribution system to the furthest tap within that customer's usage so if it's a warehouse facility and there's a sink in the back corner we're responsible to the water and the safety of that water throughout the building not just to the meter all the way through the system so internal backflow prevention device and um ensuring that the say or the water is safe to drink throughout the facility is the responsibility of the water system i have some notes from tceq where they state most cross connections occur between uh the meter connection and that furthest point so it's internal backflow or across connections that we are we want to try to resolve too do you want to also talk about the residential customer because i think the conversation generally has been about backflow being a primary problem with industrial commercial customers but the truth of the matter is residential customers also have many things or opportunities to also create backflow and contamination from an individual residential customer so can you talk through that yes uh so a hose bib on the outside of the house it's a very very common way for back floor back or back siphonage to occur they i have some examples here in a second that i want to show but i also have what the little device is a hose vacuum breaker that people would install on hose bibs to keep that from happening we also have those i'm going to call them a wand in the shower but they remove and you can shower off with those

[0:57:03] sometimes the cords on them are very long and if you leave them hanging and you have a sewer back up within that bathtub that's a cross connection so you just connected the water supply to the sewer system i think let me go through these irrigation systems are a potential for cross connection rain water harvesting systems depending on how that customer has tied that system in if they tied it into the irrigation system that is also supplied by the city side that is a cross connection like i talked about hose hoses specifically water hoses being left in troughs is the example here but ponds fountains a lot of people you know they throw the garden hose in there they start filling it up and they go do other things they don't sit there and allow an air gap between what they're filling spas pools in the example over here in the top left corner of a mop sink where they've added a hose to that faucet probably to prevent splashing or to fill up buckets and those type of things but if that hose were disconnected and laying in that basin that would be a cross connection koi bond or some other pawn feature on the right this bottom deal is showing in a facility same thing a hose bib on the outside of the facility filling up maybe they're gonna spray the the grounds or something like that but filling up a chemical tank those type of things or a water makeup line where there's is not air gapped and allowing water to have a free atmospheric zone between it dumps into the basin so i want to talk about how we find

[0:59:05] these hazards or these areas of concern and that is through a customer service inspection we've been saying the term csi quite a bit and so in the water term not in a police term or anything like that is a customer service inspection and it's a inspection of the private side as i talked about of systems customers pass the meter to that furthest point on their water supply and it is to identify the potential risk the purpose of this csi is to determine if the water service can be safely provided to a site without risk of contamination we're looking for direct and indirect cross connections potential contamination hazards and the csi is also looking for illegal lead materials i will say that the csis that we had coming to our facility we're mainly looking for these top two because it was more of an investigation effort and we were trying to locate the source of the february 8th contamination mayor billy um allison do we currently have any csis on on the city staff um so currently we have been utilizing our plumbing inspectors as csis which under tceq rules a plumbing inspector meets the qualifications for a csi thank you um i want to discuss kind of the hardships that of this particular investigation so i talked about it earlier in that day one we didn't know what the contaminant was we knew it had an odor to it that wasn't drinkable water but we didn't know what those constituents were as we've discussed that had to be sent to a lab in austin and we've you know been doing that ever since of sending that to lcra labs we cannot test those constituents here locally and it is a lengthy test by the time we pull those

[1:01:08] samples get them to austin and then they undergo their testing it is a considerable amount of time and in trying to pinpoint a source time isn't on our side when it comes to that so there's plenty of time for people to change operations to do something different but also just getting back to where that source came from is is difficult the winter storm right on the back of this contamination event didn't help this investigation at all the road conditions businesses shut down those type of things let alone we were also sorry battling another water crisis of not having water to half the city and so that focused our efforts into bringing back our established water service city-wide and so we weren't able to resume that investigation until after the storm had passed and then we talked about it i believe this last time or i've done it in a press release before but the volume of contaminant that caused this event could have been less than a gallon we've looked at those you know we had one home that we sampled at that had very high volumes and based off those numbers we could back trace to what those contaminant levels uh would have been and it could have caught it could have been less than a gallon which could have been either back pressure or back siphonage with a with a smaller volumes that we saw go ahead and take a drink of water thank you um and i think it's important to note that flow of water is constant while we issued the do not use february 8 people were still flushing their toilets i'm sure there was still maybe people doing some outdoor use water did get consumed we were having to open hydrants to

[1:03:10] sample and so there the water never stopped moving we didn't get to say you know it didn't cease and stay in the pipeline so that we could back test all the way to a particular facility or a particular address to say this is where it was located and the other thing that i i want to mention that was it's a hardship and also it's good that we believe this is a one-time event it happened the one slug of water went into the distribution system and did cause the damage that it did but because it was a one-time event it wasn't a reoccurring issue we couldn't locate the source and so it didn't help with that matter you want to talk about just to clarify where it says contaminant continued to move we want to make sure people understand that the contaminant didn't continue to move into households and continue to make their water undrinkable or that we allowed contaminated water to flow to homes um outside that area so you shut the flow off yes it continued to move only at a certain level area yes ma'am um so the containment what i mean by that is yes we did valve it off it didn't migrate to other parts of the city but i may use the term a slug of water that was bad it didn't stay at the block 700 block of whatever street it continued to move throughout the system in that particular area but the restrictions were in place that were under do not use let alone do not consume so we were being i guess conservative or proactive and making sure people didn't use it unknowingly but that slug of water didn't stay still it did migrate out of the system [Music] yeah i have a question please a series of questions when you were showing us allison all of the potential you know maybe residential

[1:05:17] situations that given the small amount of contaminant that got in the system how in the world can we manage that i mean is it manageable i mean you know when you talk about your shower and maybe your sewer backs up and that hose hanging down and you know just the different scenarios you showed us um yes ma'am i guess the answer to i think the answer to your question is yes it can be managed but it will take a more rigorous backflow or cross-connection program to be implemented and that is one of the last slides that i have in this presentation is talk about our path forward lessons learned those type of things and how we go about being water purveyors protecting our citizens and making sure that this an event like this we do everything we can to make sure it doesn't happen again okay thank you i'll try to hold my questions i figured you had it coming but yes thank you so i'm going to go back to these customer service inspections because i know that that is what the crux of our investigation entailed is having these inspectors uh we brought in additional csis uh from mcallen brownwood abilene and lubbock and we greatly appreciate those folks that came to help us we inspected or we did 85 inspections of 81 sites for those facilities had to be revisited one because the storm was setting in and it didn't allow time to go through the entire facility some at the very beginning when the mcallen folks were here they had made notes to go back and check this and they were trying to get through a a series of commercial businesses and so we did do some follow up based off their investigations or inspections to go revisit and ask further questions and make sure that the proper person a

[1:07:20] lot of times if you get the admin she doesn't know a lot about the plumbing system when it comes to the facility but waiting for a maintenance guy or something that could provide more details 59 of those 81 sites received letters to address deficiencies all those letters have been mailed out and sent to those businesses um 34 of those 59 letters were to address deficiencies such as the hose bib vacuum breaker which is this device so this device i believe we bought it at lowe's yesterday screws in on the hose bib and then you would put your water hose on it this prevents back siphonage so if you do lay leave your water hose hanging or laying in that fountain or trough whatever the case may be this is the backflow prevention assembly that uh you would install so that's inexpensive so yes this was six dollars almost seven dollars six dollars 50 cents um but 34 of those 59 letters were to address buying these and their hot water heater just didn't have enough of an air gap on their on their drain line 25 of those 59 letters were to items such as adding relocating or upgrading the backflow assembly device so they may have had a double check in their uh facility and the inspector felt that based off their uses they needed to upgrade to an rpba or a reduced pressure backflow assembly that is the the i guess most um robust backflow assembly that you can buy um what does one of those cost it would depend on the size so they depending on if it's a one inch service line within the facility or if it's a four inch if we're requiring it at the meter they can be thousands of dollars hundreds of dollars it would greatly depend on the size of that

[1:09:21] service some of those 25 letters were to address soda machines and ro systems that just didn't have the right backflow assembly installed on them um say that again because that tells you again how minor an event so 25 of some of those of the 25 some were to address soda machine backflow assemblies or an ro unit backflow assembly um but what i want to i guess reiterate on this site is while we did find deficiencies and that is a scary term i know i'm not trying to downplay any of these deficiencies because they can all be culprits of this contamination what we didn't find in this investigation is the deficiency coupled with the chemical content or the ability for those chemicals to merge together to cause this event and so we did not find the source of this contamination because we did not find definitive proof of both the deficiency and the chemicals that they were using to be able to enter into the water supply do we have a time frame allison on the letters that were sent out a time frame for the deficiency to be corrected yes i believe they have 30 days and i will say that plumbers have already started calling and due to the backlog of inventory they're going to do what they can to get every you know get their customer back up and running but these yes those can be addressed well within 30 days um but again just to say that on this particular instance we can all do that but but most of us do not have in our homes the chemicals that created the problem so still could be a potential future problem but we don't have those household chemicals generally the other thing that i want to state is that we've been in communication

[1:11:26] and even attended a training with tceq regarding cross connection programs and they will say that the most robust program cannot 100 percent prevent this from happening you can put those measures in place and be as proactive and put all the protections in place but there is always going to be you know people do private plumbing work and they just don't know that what they're doing is a cross-connection and so there's always risk to the system but we will be taking steps to make sure that we mitigate those risks so billy this is to kind of answer some of your questions we've been doing these csis as a part of the plumbing permit process so when people pull plumbing permits we're looking at those either new additions those type of things to make sure that there is not a cross connection existing when they do that the downfall of that is that not everybody pulls plumbing permits when they do work to their facility or to their home high hazard backflow assemblies do have annual testing requirements and we have been enforcing that so we use what's called a vepo tracking system vepo i to my knowledge doesn't stand for anything in particular but it is an online database that we use when a backflow assembly gets installed such as an rpc or rpba the reduced pressure backflow assembly it has to be tested before it can be put into service that backflow assembly tester puts it in our system and then notifications get sent to that customer to that address location reminding them your annual testing requirements are due at this time and then we can also they they receive a series of notifications but ultimately the last one will state you know if you don't get this assembly tested you will be subject to

[1:13:31] your water service being terminated so the path forward is a more rigorous backflow and cross connection program we didn't have zero program but we didn't have a rigorous and robust program and so we're going to have to take measures to ramping up that program and as a as an idea and a tceq recommendation is uh to bring in a committee that involves stakeholders both within the city city involvement would be fire marshal because of fire flow systems have backflow assemblies on them the health department such as the soda machines those type of things uh building official and inspectors and then also the community and so one of the first thoughts that we had was reaching out to the development task force they're already an established group and most of these things would involve work that they're around plumbers backflow assembly testers and our regional tceq folks would all be people that we would involve in our committee to make sure that we're being as robust and comprehensive as possible this will result in an ordinance of adoption of additional plumbing requirements so that we make sure that we adopt and that we can have our csis go do inspections and that we have enforcement behind that to make sure that our public water system is safe for all users and it will also take a team of dedicated employees that do nothing but csi's so currently we do csi work in addition to another function and it will be proposed to bring back where we have dedicated csis that go not only just to those that are modifying or pulling a plumbing permit but go to these facilities because they haven't been to that

[1:15:34] facility in a while random inspections and those type of things or ones that we do maybe think could be a potential health hazard so with that i'll be happy to answer any questions you have lucy i have a question allison what would you tell the residents of paulian right now that still are concerned with the water i know that you've said this is what we're going to do to make it safe and you know so many people do believe that it's safe but then you have so many people that are still concerned that they are not real sure what would you let them know um so to me the valving and the separation of the northern industrial area and the poland and the testing have resulted in none of those contaminants being present in the water um and that is factual information and available so it is the testing of the water has presented that it is uh drinking water standards and how long do you think it'll be until the other 29 residents in the industrial park uh will be able to i know that you said you were working with it tceq but i was wondering how long do you think till they still cannot use um we're working hard to see if we can't get that done this week if not as soon as possible but it will depend on tceq and austin and what what they are i guess going to be comfortable with describe what their comfort level is in terms of the water it has to test a certain level for so many days is that why it doesn't have a specific you know you have to go 10 days with clean water it those requirements they wanted to see the inspections get done and so those inspections have been sent to them showing those deficiencies and that we're getting those customers to address those deficiencies along with the testing and we have informed them that the valving will stay separated at this time too

[1:17:36] so i think with those three things it should be able to i guess allow for their decision making to come quicker but there's no specific day requirement thank you allison billy i'm allison you know when we talk about a more rigorous program i'm assuming that you're talking about citywide that we would be looking at that citywide and included in that program will be opportunities to identify what industrial users use what chemicals because i'm sure there's a different combination of chemicals that could contaminate our water and just not the three that were identified you know with this one there were more than three those were just the top three right but i'm sure there are other chemicals that when combined could produce the same result so included in that program will be the opportunity to identify what chemicals are used where yes ma'am and specifically those that are being coupled with the water supply so if they're mixing a chemical and water to create a solution that cleans something or produces something that is what we're going to be mainly looking at not because they have hand sanitizer at their sink in the in the bathroom but because they are um how they're using that chemical within their facility will be yes heavily looked at when they do these csi's of existing facilities thank you tommy awesome i assume so i didn't hear i i may have missed it but i didn't hear you specifically say those that have deficiencies that have been noted by one of the inspectors we will be going back to verify their compliance with the backflow back siphoning to address their deficiency yes we will a lot of these did require

[1:19:39] that they pull plumbing permits to do that and it is documented and the building official is copied on that letter um and so but the ones that needed to install these they would just need to give us a call back and there's instructions in that letter to do so so that we can go back and make sure that they did address what they were supposed to thank you do i have any further questions or comments anyone would like to make on allison's presentation thank you alison very good presentation i appreciate can i answer any comments from the public thank you for all your hard work may i ask if there is an opportunity for anyone from the public if they'd like to come forward at this point and ask questions or make comments is yes please come forward [Music] uh just uh you're done no jess didn't start just a few questions uh just there's a few questions just in terms of uh what was just presented here um uh two city council ago we had residents from the paulding community that basically complained that there was a aroma that came from the faucet and it was stifling to the point of nausea and vomiting uh that made their family sick so i'm not a plumber but i think we generally know that there's supply water and then there's waste water if we've already identified that this is not a source problem so it didn't come from you know from the actual source and we actually saw the display of i believe that showed that it could come from a commercial space or a residential space i know there's a lot of conversation in terms of uh putting things in place to catch it from a residential standpoint but it's hard for me to see from a backflow perspective that from the faucet that it would produce an aroma that would cause nausea vomiting that would be the

[1:21:41] i guess the issue from a backflow perspective correct allison you want to come forward to address that but yes of course again it's a mixture of what the contaminants are so there could be contaminants that have different smells from these smells or contaminants that don't have a smell that could create a problem so it just so happens in this case the contaminants that created this problem had the mothball smell to them but not all negative contaminants will have a moth ball smell correct and for that delineation uh further my point in terms of it's not a natural bacteria or virus that would call something like that would have to be something more chemical yes and i will let the our expert talk to that but correct um so we gave examples of those hoses that could be laying in ponds where you would see those bacteriological or pools those type of things but a lot of people are filling up a fertilizer jug and they lay their hose in there it's the same thing so the contamination happened to be with those set of chemicals that produced that that type of odor the top three in terms of parts per billion were benzene acetone and naphthalene any further comments or questions from the public all right with that we are going to take a 10-minute break and we will be back to move forward on the rest of the regular agenda it is 9 54. we will be back here at 10.05 bring this meeting back to order at 1006 and we will move into item b consider resolution approving the award of emergency street repair contracts due to the effects of winter storm yuri and pursuant to texas local government code 252.022 to reese albert incorporated and james d good construction incorporated in the

[1:23:45] aggregate amount not to exceed one million dollar one million dollars and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute all related documents shane you're on thank you mayor shane kelton executive director of public works as you all know with the winter storm that we had with all the snow and the ice and the lingering moisture that we collected on the streets and then the subsequent deep freeze that we had we saw significant damage all over the city uh in our in our road structure not only well all infrastructure you know water pipes and everything else as well too but our streets really took a beating around town and so as we looked at some of those some of those areas are quite large even uh you look at south jackson you look at huntington guadalupe streets you know it's kind of all over town but we actually had substantial damage to where we lost entire almost entire street segments due to the damage and so with that um to try to expedite this as we're moving into spring our wets are normally our wetter season and we we hope it's all goes well if all goes well it's going to be our wetter season and uh we wanted to to expedite the repairs on these roadways and so and some of these uh some of these repairs are actually so large and so extensive that we the city do not even don't actually own the equipment that we would need to actually do some of these repairs and so we uh we reached out to um to our um construction community and we got the two bids back or the two um um all the not bids but they were an rfp proposal so we got two proposals back and uh uh from uh from reece albert in in in good construction and and uh want to want to use these two companies to to help expedite these repairs on all these roadways around town uh and try to get them back in shape so uh we don't uh

[1:25:46] they don't get any worse than they have to be before before we can actually get them repaired and so uh the the funding is coming from uh excess uh sales tax revenues from the 2019-2020 year that have been placed back into fund balance and so those will be the funds that we utilize for for this work and we ask for y'all's approval to to move forward with this what i think is important is how quick we can get to the projects um because i know with if we do get into a rainy season the deterioration will continue and get even worse than it is it'll be a lot worse than it is right now if we start getting quite a bit of moisture and people still driving over the top of those roads they will the damage will just uh continue in exponential fashion you know rapidly so we want to we want to get on these as quick as possible so with that do i have a motion in a second any public comment was no public comment we'll take a vote all in favor say aye aye none oppose motion passes get the roads done hurry up what you waiting on [Laughter] item c first reading and public hearing of an ordinance approving standards of care for recreation summer camp held at recreation centers for children ages five through twelve and brent euron thank you mayor good morning mayor daniel council members so we have a recreation summer camp every summer it is summer camp for ages five to twelve some of them 10 13 so you'll see that in there during the summer so that's why i put the 13 in the ordinance but um they do different things last year was an issue because of covet but we still had it at a limited number and we're going to move forward with having it again this year but one of the things that we have to have because we are not a licensed daycare facility is with this ordinance signed so we're here to seek approval for that does anyone have questions for brent then do i have a motion for approval moving by lucy second by tom any public

[1:27:49] comment with none we'll take a vote all in favor say aye aye none oppose motion passes 7-0 thank you thank you item d first reading a public hearing of an ordinance approving an amendment to a planned development district pd07-03 to allow an additional use of a water processing and delivery business and related accessory uses for property located at 2909 south a m avenue and john euron thank you john james director of planning and development services as you mentioned this is amending an existing plan development for a water processing facility at the side of an old previously used as an elementary school on south a m it is an existing pd as mentioned it's in the neighborhood future land use category in our comprehensive plan you can see that it is zoned residential single family all around it and you'll see that some of the issues or concerns with this is from the neighboring residential uses as this is a proposed processing type use that is typically not allowed within a residential area but they're asking to amend the pd to allow it in some of the buildings on the campus i know this is a little confusing and it's changed since we created this slide so we did send out our notices to the surrounding property owners from those notices we received two in favor and 11 in opposition we also received petitions both in favor and in opposition there were 17 property owners that signed the petition uh opposed and seven that signed the petition in favor there were four property owners that signed both petitions so we followed up with them and all four of them revoked their opposition

[1:29:52] to to the project you'll note in the background information that this triggered a super majority vote by city council because more than 20 percent of the area of surrounding properties were opposed with those withdrawals of opposition that actually drops us to 17 of the properties around it opposed so that means that it will not now require a super majority vote but would just require a regular majority i'll also note while i'm mentioning that that the ordinance specifically in the packet mentions the super majority threshold so you'll see that ordinance back on second reading assuming you approve this that it will remove that provision in that ordinance this is just a summary i'm going to skip over it pretty quickly but we it was so complicated because of the petitions and the letters and emails and people signing both we use this chart to basically indicate who signed for and against for each property a little bit of information background on this property it was originally in 2007 approved for a planned development uh that would have allowed assisted group living as a use in the school that never actually came to fruition in 2013 another or an amendment was approved to that plan development to allow for the gymnastics academy which did go in on the site and operated there for a number of years they've since moved out as i'm sure you know you we recently had a case where they moved into a church facility this current proposed amendment as i mentioned would be used for water processing and delivery basically they would use a reverse osmosis treatment on the water to create bottled water that they would then deliver to customers so staff is recommending against this particular amendment we believe that the commercial use within the middle of a neighborhood

[1:31:55] is a little bit too intense for that area some of the concerns include traffic from delivery vehicles coming in and out as well as noise i'll come back to the traffic because the planning commission did actually recommend approval of this and i'll mention some of the stipulations that they placed on it to address some of those concerns regarding noise that's really a concern about the actual processing of the water and how loud that process might be the planning commission as i mentioned did disagree and they recommended approval some of their thinking was that when this was used as a school there was a lot more traffic than what this particular use would generate and similarly with the gymnastics facility uh there would be more traffic now some of the flip side arguments to that is that the school and gymnastics facilities those traffic periods were very limited you know drop off and pick up at school or very limited times of drop off and pick up at classes with the gymnastics gym but i think it is it is a fair argument that the delivery of this water would not create the kinds of traffic that a gymnastics facility or school would you have information that you want to share now or does it it comes later in the presentation how much traffic the water delivery i might defer to the applicant on that they did say that it would be a limited number of trips and as you'll see one of the limitations placed on this at least recommended by the planning commission is to limit it to the size of vehicles to basically what the proponent has suggested that they would be using is just a full-size pickup truck with a trailer there wouldn't be box trucks or 18-wheelers coming and going and so i think that in the planning commission's mind that addressed a big concern of the neighbors i shouldn't say that that ameliorated the concerns of the neighbors they are still opposed but that was a limit place that the

[1:33:57] planning commission thought would help there is no limit on the comings and goings of those vehicles though i think the the proponent would say that they didn't expect many but i think we all hope that if they can any is not a number may i say oh right now that's and they may have more specific answer but i think we would all hope a business like this would go in wherever they go and be successful so i think their hope would be that their delivery numbers would rise over time and that would increase some of the traffic the question mark number or one question anyway is okay so they're water delivery where do they get the water so it's one thing about having it in a warehouse and then delivering it but you also have to have product coming into the warehouse so where does the water come from where does the plastic bottles come from because it's one thing about delivery but you got to get it there first and somebody's got to deliver and i'm assuming it will be delivered and larger than pickup trucks well and i would defer that question to the applicant the water they're processing on site so i'm assuming they're using city water putting it through a treatment process and bottling it but you're right they're going to have to get the bottles from somewhere and they're going to have to be brought in but that question did not come up and they have not answered so i would assume they would be able to answer that one and so we allow i mean the other question i have we allow someone to bottle the water that we have from our water system and resell it yes i assume so most bottled water that you buy is actually treated municipal water from somewhere that they do some additional treatment i'm only asking because so many people say our water tastes terrible and so i'm just wondering who's going to be the customer to buy this bottled water is all i can say and many people complain that our water is very expensive so it's got to get a lot more expensive when you bottle it so i'm just saying um john could you go back to the slide where

[1:35:59] you were showing the parameters for the area yes um so what's outlined in red there is the entire property right that's the entire school property that's right okay and i noticed there were several buildings on that property so if this is approved they could do anything they want to on that property pretty much right well limited to the water processing but yes they could go in in any building now i think the applicant can probably tell you which of the buildings they plan to use and so if that's a concern you could this isn't a commit uh a condition recommended about the commission uh but you could limit it to an individual building or um something like that if if that's made sense for you you go back to the slide that had the buildings okay so the building that they're talking about is simply the one on your left the one on the right is adjacent to that but the owner i believe owns all of that property they own all the property and so i would defer to them on what their plans are in terms of which particular buildings and again if they're successful they they may expand to use some of the other buildings for excess storage or of empty bottles or filled bottles but again i would defer to them on what their actual operations any other kind of business other than bottled water on this property where it's written they could technically still do the assisted living or a gymnastics right but another thing that would fit within that pd right but nothing else beyond that that's correct but any other commercial business could go in there could not no it's it's a pd that limits it to those specifically listed uses the other concern i have in driving by the property is the terrible terrible condition the travis school is in and the question mark is i can't imagine ones

[1:38:00] would have the ability to expand that business into that school based off of the condition that that school in it looks like it's had many many many more productive days in its life i should add you'll see this on to partly answer those questions uh you'll see it on the conditions that the planning commission recommended but they also recommended a condition that would not allow retail sales so you couldn't go to that facility to buy your bottled water or to pick it up it would be a delivery only business and so here are those recommended conditions vehicle limit based on gross vehicle weight and those are all defined in our truck route ordinance no on-site retail sales signage would have to meet rs1 standards which limits it to a small signage they couldn't have big signs or lit up signs office space is allowed but only related to that particular business they couldn't use the facility for other kinds of office uses the hours would be limited again that was to address some of the concerns of the neighbors so that there wouldn't be late night or early morning kinds of activities so 7 a.m to 7 p.m that their lighting would be shielded so as not to affect the neighbors and it would be turned off between 10 p.m and 7 a.m and then no outdoor storage allowed so any of the storage of their empty bottles filled bottles would all have to be interior to one of the buildings it could not be outside you know in a fenced yard or anything like that that was a pretty quick overview but i'd be happy to answer any other questions if you have them mayor yes tommy john did it happen to arise at the planning commission meeting did they seek other locations for this business i don't recall that being asked but again that would be a question for the applicant you know my assumption is it's just because the proponent owns the property and wouldn't have to

[1:40:02] seek another location okay thank you so i'm just going to go back to this water concept so there's a customer for bottled water using city water yes i think the short answer is yes we have other other water suppliers in town that provide bottled water to businesses and homes and typically that is city water now what they will say is they put it through another filtering process so where does that filtering process happen that is that is what happens on this side and so that's the concern of the neighbors that that might be a allowed process now again the application i should let them speak for themselves but the applicant has said that it's not that loud i think they equated it to a running diesel uh pickup which isn't quiet but it's you know it's not super loud it would be from 7am to 7pm so it would be a consistent noise diesel noise level from 7 a.m again that's a question for them it may be periodic they may run it turn it off then run it again later i don't know that it's a continuous operation but that would be a question they might be able to answer well let's do this do i have for go ahead lane well let's make a motion before we start taking public comment because he can make a presentation i think or i don't care do you want him to make a presentation before we um get a presentation all right let's go ahead and have a br if is the applicant in the audience i'm assuming so if you'll come forward good morning good morning gabriel the owner at travis elementary and are you also the one who's going to be operating the business no ma'am so there's a person who's operating the

[1:42:03] business here as well he is not because i think we have a lot of questions for the operator of that business that i think we have to get from him i'm not comfortable having it just be a the property owner commenting i think we have to have the business owner commenting as well today that's my perspective but let's do this let's go ahead and have questions presented to you that council might want answered we'll start with that so who has a question for jack my first question would be the lease of the property would be the entire pd or just to the gymnasium just in the gymnasium okay um i'll have some others here in a second if someone else has questions do i have uh tom yeah i mean we've had discussions about this so how many vehicles will you have running in or will the proprietor owner have running in and out of there sorry now just one uh three quarter or one ton pickup please talking to the mic jack if you don't mind thank you yeah one three quarter or one-ton pickup starting out and then as business picks up he said possibly two or three he has the same business model in odessa texas and he said right now they run it with three trucks and they've been operating there for years is it in a residential area i'm not sure because the issue is not the business concept it's about being in a residential area so again i think we need to have some reference to that right and just visiting with all the neighbors and i even on a march the 3rd i sent out a letter to approximately 50 other neighbors in most all the feedback that i'm getting from the neighbors is most of them would even sign up for the business i'm just having very few people that are against it i think originally what had happened a couple of the neighbors had gone around and said that it was going to be run with 18 wheelers running and this is the feedback i'm getting from my neighbors the business was going to be run with 18

[1:44:05] wheelers running up down the streets 24 hours a day running over kids and we were selling methamphetamines so once i explained this to i mean i can't tell you how many hours i've spent trying to catch every one of the neighbors i've had three of them that did not sign my in favor of that was against the opposition letters they're just off art so what i did i sent out a letter i gave everybody about a week i had the owner of the business that will be excuse me we'll be leasing the building i had them come out and we just put on a presentation very few people showed up because very few people were in opposition of it everybody said matter of fact most of them said they would sign up for the service when you had your public meeting how many showed up um i'm going to say i visited with about five or six out in the parking lot and then maybe three came in to the actual gymnasium listened to the presentation that gem was built for our band and it's got sound dampening walls and you know it's basically it's tin on the inside and there's holes all in it so it just absorbs lots of noise and the all of this equipment running at the same time is basically about 78 decibels which is that roughly of a diesel pickup at idle um with the doors closed you will not hear any noise even from the highway much less across the street to the neighbors we we did run some tests on that as well even with the doors open you you just there's is there's not much noise there to deal with um so are you the owner to the property adjacent to it like the school part is that also your property yes ma'am well when you say adjacent to everything that was inside the red yes so that's all your problems yes ma'am and you don't know do you see yourself selling it to him in the future to the owners of this business dispensary

[1:46:06] possibly this it's a lease right now it's a two-year lease um and he would be limited to it's just for the gymnasium not for any other property right but like in the future would you be thinking of leasing it later on is what i'm saying leasing it to this guy right uh sure yes ma'am yeah if he wanted to extend the lease now regardless if he if if he let's say he completes his lease in two years and then he goes okay i want to buy it plus i want to buy this other part because i'm going to expand now that's possibly so yes but the way i understand it with this pd it would be limited to or y'all could limit it to the gymnasium only the gymnasium and that parking lot and you know that's kind of our agreement right now okay thank you do i have questions from other council members is there anything we've brought up that we we haven't brought up that we should have i mean as far as discussions here because i mean we're going to have several people come behind you and talking this work i guess have you paid property tax on this yes okay how long have you owned the property sir how long have you owned the property since 2008. okay so it's been on the tax roll since 2008. yes sir and the only thing if y'all do approve it what i would like to add um and i'm good with all of the possible conditions on number six though all outdoor lighting shall be turned off between 10 and 7 a.m i've had lights on there you know since 2008 i have not had one complaint on them if we could if you know because it's kind of a security issue if you just turn all your lights off at night i think it makes a the neighborhood a lot safer having lights on so if i could um scratch that so that we could leave the current lighting on at night in there since 2008 since it's the exact same lighting yes or hadn't done anything to it but no additional parking lot lights stadium lighting shining down correct is

[1:48:10] that written in the description john we're not seeing is that something that we need to add if this does pass i still would like to hear from the business owner yeah i'm i i want uh jack to have an opportunity to explain everything from his perspective we have people in the audience who i want to hear from but i'm going to ask that we not make a motion for approval today until the business owner himself can be here to answer our questions because i think we need to be able to do that regarding the lighting um it does not limit it to because because of the limits of hours there was no limit on the amount of lighting uh you could if you take away the you know the prohibition on lighting overnight for security lighting um you could have some sort of provision that only the existing lighting or only lighting required for security etc that could be i'll just add one more thing based on your comment mayor one option that you have you could table this until the next meeting you could also simply approve it on first reading and then when we come back on second reading we could as a public hearing but we can anyone who's attended this morning and would like to offer public comment we certainly want to hear from you and then we will table the vote until the next meeting okay so any further questions for jack with none we will open it up for some public comment and anyone who would like to come forward and comment please do morning good morning i'm mike wise i'm the i serve as the chancellor for the catholic diocese of san angelo uh before i begin i kind of like to set the record straight could you put that map back up again yeah see that number section 11 there

[1:50:13] all that in red uh we own that western two and a half acres of that point that out again i'm not sure i understand what era you're talking about so yeah area 11 yes okay yeah right that that western two and a half acres there uh next to those residences we own that okay so that's been completely disregarded in this discussion so we need some clarification john why would that be highlighted as if that's the entire property we're talking about and it's owned by different people you go with this right here the only thing i can say is that perhaps the i mean we get this information from the appraisal district roles and their records so their records may be out of date uh we can definitely before the next meeting go research that and make sure we've got the boundaries correct okay yeah we purchased that maybe a month or two ago okay so recently so they might not have updated them right uh i i guess the other question i would have is you know uh regard notwithstanding majorities and super majorities and all this sort of thing the staff for the planning commission that examined section uh or looked at seven criteria uh in regards to section 212 g of the zoning ordinance said that six of the seven criteria were not met and because of that they recommended that this be

[1:52:14] disapproved now my question would be why would the planning commission when only six of these seven criteria six of these seven when only one of these seven criteria you know uh was favorable and the only reason that was is because the building was already there why would they just completely disregard not only the recommendation of their own staff but completely disregard section 212g i'd like an answer to that question all right john is there well you know i guess without the ordinance in front of me i don't specifically know the 212g that's the one with the criteria is that well i mean i guess the short answer is as i mentioned staff is recommending denial and in your packet we included the rationale that we had for denial based on those criteria uh obviously the planning commission makes their independent judgment and after reviewing all the information and hearing all the public comments they believed that it was a reasonable use of the property and so recommended approval those criteria are all uh subjective criteria that i mean otherwise we would look down a checklist and say yes it's good or no it's not that's why we have a public process like this for you all to make that judgment so part of what you're doing is reviewing an application in a lot of all those criteria and and making i think we still deserve seeing what those six out of the seven are about i think we need to understand that do you it's it's in the uh staff report i would like it read in public i'll pull that up and we can get that one has a copy of it right now so the first criteria is is it

[1:54:22] compatible with uh plans and policies so the adopted comprehensive plan um again our the staff position is that excuse me the staff position is that because this is designated as a neighborhood that this type of intensive commercial activity is not consistent with that recommendation the second one is is it consistent with the zoning ordinance again the underlying zoning of the surrounding area is residential single family and so again with the same logic that this commercial use is perhaps too intense for that surrounding single-family area the next one is compatible with the surrounding area again these in some ways these are a little redundant but by the same rationale that bringing traffic and potential noise into the neighborhood with homes so close may not be consistent or compatible with the surrounding area are there changed conditions i think the change conditions are that this was a school schools and churches are generally allowed in residential areas and they're very difficult to deal with because once once they close you're not going to put a single family home and so what do you do with the closed school or church and often people want to look at possible you know limited commercial activities gymnastics facilities things like that and each one of them are very difficult when they come to you to determine is that compatible with the surrounding neighborhood i think the the changed conditions are that some of the previous uses of this school site have gone away and so it's sitting there vacant and so one argument in favor of this would be putting that facility to some use would be beneficial to the community um effect on the national environment we did not believe there would be any negative impact on the natural environment community need we believe that there is a community need for commercial uses however staff's

[1:56:25] opinion is that it's not necessarily an appropriate use at this particular location and then is it consistent with the development patterns of the area and again as an area for neighborhood development this may be uh too intensive of a use for the surrounding area thank you for reading that for public mr weiss yes your head tom what's the church going to do with the property we would foresee in the coming years uh on that two and a half acres that we purchased probably putting a gymnasium in it for the kids to use um it would also be possible to expand the school into that area the church school yeah the uh i guess some other can a couple other quick concerns i have is is you know talked about the condition of those uh schools my friend you mentioned yourself how how what poor condition of the schools are um for a year so maybe two years we we had been considering buying that whole thing but we've looked at those buildings very very closely and what with the asbestos abatement and everything that would be needed for them and the condition that they're in we felt that you'd almost be better off just to level them and rebuild so but i suppose that's you know for somebody else to decide what they'd want to do i don't see that this is going to be just a retail business um it can't be retail i think manufacturing is what it is yeah and and you know i just don't feel that's fitting for residential area where the churches are and so on and you know somebody mentioned the lighting you know on whether it disturbed people or not well i don't know about that but we already saw how that went on an

[1:58:27] earlier case this morning so i wouldn't have a whole lot of positive comments on that but uh in general we just feel that the this particular intersection of a m and oxford is a pretty busy intersection as is because there's a lot of traffic comes down a m a lot that comes down oxford we just don't feel that the added traffic is is i think becomes starts to become a safety issue for the kids uh at cold school there thank you very much for the public comment please come forward state your name your address or smd area please hi my name is flo loyka at 2790 harvard and i'm in lanes district 5. one of my neighbors got colvin so he wrote a letter and i'd like to share it with you if i may good morning i'm aaron meyer and i reside with my wife and three children at 2793 harvard avenue directly across the street from the property in question 2909 south a m avenue this has been an interesting and confusing experience when the first letter went out i like many of my neighbors really didn't know what to think the average person just isn't knowledgeable on the ins and out of zoning along with the pros and cons of proposed changes it's unfortunate that we were asked to vote on something we were not knowledgeable on initially i was somewhat neutral on the idea i didn't like the idea of living next to a commercial property but didn't have any real factual well thought out reasons why and even expressed this to the property owner thankfully on february the 15th and then again on march the 15th the planning commission provided all the information required to know that this is without a doubt a horrible idea section 2 212 g of the zoning ordinance requires that the planning commission

[2:00:28] and city council consider at minimum seven factors in determining the appropriateness of any rezoning request the report provided by the planning commission the subject matter exports showed that this request does not meet six of the seven categories this should be case closed based on the information alone but the zoning committee chose to ignore the information including the valid concerns of adding noise and traffic during the march 15th zoning committee meeting one member argued that since the property used to be a school the residents were accustomed to having extra noise in the neighborhood so there's no problem with the business being started this is deeply flawed logic as many residents myself included did not live here at that time and really caused him to question the motive behind such a statement i should not have to pay for the sign the sins of others who lived in the neighborhood at that time me included additionally the zoning committee suggested increasing the business from nine to five to seven to seven the we've been promised by jack gabriel the current property owner that the business will have no noticeable noise and we will not hear absolutely anything from the street in front of the property i'm concerned that should be inaccurate and we hear the hum of machinery 12 hours a day who's going to police this problem my guess is that no one is and the residents will be stuck with this burden that will without question lower property values additionally there is a concern of spot zoning occurring should this pass it will only become easier for more areas surrounding the property being rezoned for commercial purposes i do understand that this is great for business but this is a quite peaceful neighborhood that will be ruined should this occur finally i ask that you please consider whether or not you would want a commercial business right outside your front door

[2:02:30] consider the potential negative impact this would have on you your family your home's value and your neighborhood should the proposed rezone pass you will hurt a wonderful neighborhood while it may not impact you directly please do not force others to live with a problem that you yourselves would not be willing to live with thank you for your time okay on me i've lived there 40 years i was there when the school was there i was there when the gymnasium this is for kids this is not for financial gain i just don't think this is appropriate there's plenty of commercial businesses around town i was a business owner for 35 years i owned alltex irrigation and supply on jackson a wonderful thriving business with four employees with my it was a multi-million dollar business jack needs to take the business and go somewhere else i understand he owns the property but he knew it when he bought it he knew it was residential he knew that it was a school uh so that's my feeling thank you for the public comment with none we have a motion to table the item do i need to go ahead and take a second on that do i have a second on that second by billy any further public comment on tabling this item if not we'll take a vote all in favor of tabling this item say aye aye any opposed one a post six one item will be tickled thank you we'll move on to item e first reading and public hearing of ordinances establishing a process and standards for encroachments into the public right-of-way an ordinance amending the city code of ordinances chapter 12 planning and development creating a new article 12.10 regarding encroachments and related revisions to

[2:04:33] the sign regulations in article 12.04 and 2 an ordinance amid need the city code of ordinances chapter 8 offenses and nuances articles 8.05 and 8.06 regarding obstructions and john you're on thank you again john james director of planning and development services i'm going to go through some of this pretty quickly because there's a lot of information but in short this is establishing a formal process for encroachments into the right-of-way this is currently not in the ordinance but we do have a process that's that's been used for for decades but this basically puts it into the code but one of the main things that this does is also create a process for administrative approval by staff right now if anybody wants to install you know a canopy downtown even in some cases light fixtures or benches or planters anything like that that goes into the public right-of-way has to come to you all for approval this part of what this will do is allow an administrative option for some of those minor things and i'll get into what those include in just a minute it does also codify some of the design standards for example if you're putting in something in downtown you have to maintain ada compliance for the sidewalk you can't block the sidewalk and things like that so as i mentioned the current process requires all encroachments to come to the city council there's a 450 fee it takes usually four to six weeks to go through that process the new process will be similar for some things it will still go to city council but it creates a new administrative option for some encroachments that would reduce the time uh to two to four weeks uh we're proposing a fee that you'll see at the next item our next next council meeting when this is on second reading for those administrative fees would be reduced to 200 for those this was reviewed by all city departments that we would be affected it was also run by the development task

[2:06:37] force and they had no objections to this we believe that this actually helps move forward for folks who want to put some type of encroachment in the right of way the administrative option it would require approval by both the planning director and the city engineer and some of the things that it would allow those or awnings and canopies without support posts if they do have a support post they would have to come to you all for those support posts in the right of way trees and landscaping can be approved by staff instead of having to come to the city council movable signs less than six square feet those are typical in the central business districts where a restaurant will put out a little sandwich board sign that says their specials for the day as long as they're maintaining an open sidewalk they would be able to do those without coming to you all sometimes buildings to meet ada compliance have to build like a ramp and so if their ramp doesn't go too far into the right of way those can be approved administratively as well without having to come to you all outdoor public art that's been approved by the public art commission or that's been previously authorized by city council also wouldn't have to come back to you it could auto it could be approved by staff and then certain sidewalk furniture and surfaces lighting fixtures things like that that aren't associated with a patio or dining area because if a restaurant for example wants to have outdoor seating out in the sidewalk area that would have to come to you all anyway and then basically anything that wasn't on that list would still have to come to the city council for approval also if the planning director and city engineer aren't comfortable approving something that is eligible for administrative approval those could also be sent to the city council if if it's denied by the planning director and city engineer that can be appealed by the applicant to city council as well some of the minimum standards i probably won't read through all of these but

[2:08:39] basically it's safety kinds of things not blocking fire lanes loading zones maintaining the unobstructed sidewalk clearance no closer than 18 inches to the curb that would allow for vehicle overhangs not to damage things vertical clearance this is basically consistent with the building code that there's a height limit you know an awning or a canopy can't be lower than uh say nine feet well i'm sorry that's seven feet this is a different item within vision triangles so at an intersection that area between two and nine feet has to be clear so that vehicles looking around the corner won't have something blocking their vision and then this is the seven foot clearance for things like signs lights uh awnings canopies have to maintain that height clearance so that people and and things can pass under them there are some exceptions small encroachments um less than four inches so technically now even things like a lot fixture that's directly on the building that only extends out a few inches has to come to you all for approval we've built in some exceptions for things like that or a mailbox that's out in the right-of-way trees certain trees are exempt outside the central business district we already have in a separate part of city code a requirement that removal of trees has to come to city council so this does not change that projecting signs this is consistent with the sign ordinance that's already a provision a business can have a sign that kind of sticks out vertically over the sidewalk those would still be allowed and could be approved administratively and then we have some encroachments that are governed by other ordinances like wireless communication facilities utility poles street signs this would not affect those those would still be allowed and can be approved through those other existing processes staff does recommend approval of these amendments you'll note that it does amend a few different sections of the

[2:10:42] code including the zoning ordinance and the i'm sorry the planning and development section of the code as well as the sign ordinance this did go to the planning commission they also recommended approval unanimously they did make a minor change removing a word temporary pertaining to outdoor public art as it was originally worded it would not have allowed permanent art and that wasn't really the intent so we agree with that minor edit with that i'd be happy to answer any questions i have a couple concerns two events have happened over the past year that i think have been very problematic and have been approved because quote we gave you the ma you planning not you but planning the authority to move forward without coming to council one would be the big sign that was put by the fort and the museum that's the big outdoor sign by the railroad tracks and that should have never been approved but unfortunately because it's allowed to be approved it was approved and so we didn't catch that and so now we have this horrible outdoor sign that's just horrible and then we have another one that is right now in the historic district that again there's nothing in the code or the ordinance that prevents you from approving it and i say you not to be pointing fingers at you but because it lands on your desk and you have the authority to do it and there's nothing in the ordinance that prevents you from approving it and yet i think the reality is if it would have come to a city council vote we would have not voted to allow that sign to happen so those are the reasons i would not approve this and would vote against it because it opens up the door for things like these two examples to have happened that are wrong i understand your concern i will say

[2:12:45] that those are on private property which are regulated by different standards and so these are items that would be built out in the public right-of-way basically the street or sidewalk areas but i understand that concern that you may want to see all of these and if there's any concern i will say that one of the reasons that we were asked to look at this initially was for things like canopies in the downtown that already have to go through a design and historic review commission approval and then staff has to review them to certain standards as well and it's an it's just an extra hurdle for someone who wants to put in a canopy or awning or even certain light fixtures and things like that to have to come to city council every time they want to do that and i agree with that i don't like extra hurdles put up and a time frame to continue to drag out the process of approval on something simple like this but i just want to remind everyone what happens and of course it's a different set of circumstances but those circumstances have created two really big eyesores that once done you can't get rid of and so um let's throw that out there i'll add one more thing if if the whole council agrees with that sentiment and and doesn't want to approve that i would urge you to approve the ordinance but ex excluding that section about administrative approvals because the rest of this is basically codifying our existing process and putting things in the ordinance that we've actually been doing for years and so i wouldn't in other words i wouldn't deny the whole thing if that's your feeling i'm going to take a little bit different point of view than the mayor is right now and i i appreciate her concern because what we do today will impact future councils but in my conversation

[2:14:51] with some of the business owners downtown they want to make this process not so cumbersome and so from my perspective i would like to see if not this exactly this ordinance something very similar to it because i want to i want to shorten this this length of time that it takes somebody to get something done to their property that they think will enhance it and and quite honestly i i personally think this is this is this is the direction we should be going in but i may be one of you know i may be in the in the minority on this but i would like to see something that helps these business owners get this process done quicker than what they're they're going through right now as i stated i do too i just want to make sure we prevent because we set you up for failure in that sense by approving these things that allows you to not be able to say no because the ordinance allows you administratively to do that and so you don't have the ability not to do it and then we end up with these problems so i'm not sure what direction we can take up tommy john can you if you feel like it is not appropriate in the right of way administratively you could say no couldn't you yes under under this we could either say no or simply defer it to you all for a decision so i would say if there's anything that we think might be controversial at all we would likely push it on on to you all uh it's really the everyday things that 100 of them get approved uh we want to try to make it simpler for the applicant to not have to go through as long a process i agree with harry to me to me this administratively this is this this is the the the better way to go um

[2:16:54] i would make a motion that we approve item e uh one and two as as presented do i have a second a second by harry do we have any public comment i'm just gonna make a public comment i too support simplifying and not dragging out situations to the point it becomes a negative people want to get the businesses open and running as quickly as possible my my question mark is define how do we prevent the other two examples that you're fully aware of from not happening again and whether it is language that we need to tweak a bit in this piece of it or if it's another ordinance that we need to bring back to tweak to correct that we need to know how to do that because we've got two major issues that have had to be approved because there's no reason not to approve administratively and now we're stuck with them to answer part of your question those issues are not related to this ordinance because those were on private property this only affects the right-of-way um so if if we were wanting to make changes to address that it wouldn't be in this ordinance it would have to be a difference i just need that clarification okay thank you yes lucy so what you're saying is the two incidents that the mayor's talking about that is on private property and no matter what we wouldn't have been able to prevent that from i don't know well i wouldn't say that necessarily it's it wouldn't be affected by this ordinance it's basically that the sign ordinance allows signs just by right in certain locations and those were signs that happened to be allowed under the ordinance um upon looking at them i think staff would agree with the mayor that those were not appropriate locations but our current sign ordinance allowed signs billboard signs in those locations so the fix to that is a couple of fixes one is a change to the sign ordinance another that is actually coming forward soon is some expansion to the central

[2:18:57] business district in which billboards aren't allowed or the downtown design district also which does not allow billboards so if those two areas had been included in those design districts or the central business district they wouldn't have been allowed but they just happened to have a different zoning thank you with that when there was no further public comment we'll take a vote all in favor say aye aye motion passes 7-0 item f first public hearing and introduction of an ordinance amending the budget for the fiscal year beginning october 1 2020 and ending september 30th 2021 for capital items grants and programs thank you mayor tina dierski director of finance i have a quick budget amendment for you here budgeting for some grants first of all we have the wic um program they're receiving additional funding so we're going to budget for that revenue and the expense of 193 thousand dollars next is insurance proceeds for from tml related to auto and building damage that we incurred during the storm last year again insurance proceeds from tml to replace a police unmarked vehicle from that same storm for hail damage um budgeting for that one million dollar expenditure for winter storm street repairs that we talked about earlier in the agenda out of excess sales tax this is the remaining 234 thousand dollars coming from the pfc fund balance that will fund the airport entrance road that bid will be coming back to you at the next city council meeting for award and acceptance if you should choose to do so as well as the second reading of this budget amendment which will go on regular agenda so that we can approve the bid before next these next two i believe are for additional funding to the airport from the faa related to the kobit 19 um the first one in the amount of just over one million dollars and the next one in the amount of 14 219 dollars and that's all i have for you on the budget we have any questions for tina we've known me i have a motion move

[2:20:58] approval move approval by tommy seconded by tom all in favor say aye aye motion passes seven zero we will now break for our closed session executive session and the provision of government code title 5 open government ethics subtitle a open government chapter 551 open meeting sub chapter d exceptions to retirement that meetings be opened under the following sections a 551.087 economic development negotiations regarding project 2021-029 business prospect negotiations concerning airport hangar and b 551.072 deliberations about real property regarding block 18 san angelo edition at this point we will be in closed session and so we'll be back shortly 44 a.m i mean p.m it is am i right and so item a on the agenda's follow-up and administrative issues consider items discussed in closed sessions there are none item b is announcements and consideration of future agenda items are there any with none we will call for a motion for adjournment if we adjourn all in favor say aye aye it is passed we are officially adjourned at 1244 as well

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