San Angelo City Council 10-4-16

[0:00:00] of the San Angelo City Council and beautiful San Angelo, Texas. We're glad you here. Richard Evans, are you in the crowd? Come forward, sir. Glad you showed up because I was next in line. If you would, please stand and Richard Evans from the Lakeview Church will start us off in prayer. There's your microphone, sir. Most gracious and heavenly Father, we thank Thank you for the opportunity, first of all, to do business for our city, to represent the people, Lord, but to be entrusted by you to be responsible. Father, we thank you for the reign we've gotten, for the prosperity in our city, Lord, we ask you to bless the growth and the prosperity that's just come in the future, but Father, most importantly, let our service to you now be polite, correct, inappropriate. In Jesus' name we pray, amen. Amen. Amen. Let's get a picture. Where's Brian? Go again. He don't get a picture. Ross come up and help me with the Pledge of Allegiance, please, sir. Do the flag and do the republic for which sense one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. In the Texas Pledge, honor the Texas flag of Pledge of Allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one indivisible. Thank you, thank you. We have several proclamations this morning. The first one will be Fire Prevention Week and Ross Coleman and Tom, you're the one that does this, and it looks like we also have Sparky and we also have the Chick-fil-A cow, and anyone else who wants to come up for this will read a proclamation. Fire is a serious public safety concern both locally and nationally and homes of the locations

[0:02:06] where people are at the greatest risk from fire. Fire departments in the United States responded to nearly 400,000 home fires in a single year. San Angelo residents are responsive to public education measures and are able to take personal steps to increase their safety from fire, especially in their homes. The fire service of San Angelo is dedicated to the safety of life and property from the devastating effects of fire and they are joined by other emergency service providers, businesses, safety advocates, schools and service clubs. Therefore, I, Duane Morrison, Mayor of the City of San Angelo, Texas on behalf of the City Council. Do hereby proclaim October 9 through October 15 to 16 as Fire Prevention Week and call upon the people of San Angelo to participate in fire prevention activities at home, work, school and practice home fire safety, especially this week, which commemorates the Great Chicago Fire of 1871, which killed 250 people, left 100,000 homeless and destroyed 17,400 buildings. the truth. Thank you, sir. The microphone is yours. Thank you, Mayor and City Council. Fire Prevention Week, we observe it on the week containing October 9th because that's the anniversary of the Great Chicago Fire of 1871. As they found out in Chicago from that fire, that fire safety is a community effort and it takes everyone in the community to think about fire safety to practice good fire safety practices and prevent fires that were so devastating to Chicago and other communities over the years. When I started with the fire marshals office, the fire deaths in the United States were about 12,000 lives being lost each year. The innovation that was just coming into Vogue at that time were smoke alarms. The national theme this year is don't wait, check the date.

[0:04:10] If you're smoke alarm, especially the ionization smoke detectors are more than 10 years old, they need to be replaced. And so the national theme this year is don't wait, check the date. The Great Chicago Fire was 1871, and 1911 is when a group got together and said we need to have an annual organized commemoration of the Great Chicago Fire. That was 40 years after that date. Well, it just so happens that this is my 40th presentation of Fire Prevention Week as an officer with the City of St. Angelo and in the Fire Marshal's Office. So thank you for those years of service. As it stands right now, I'll be retiring soon. And so I won't see you the 41st one in this capacity. but I may be back as a citizen in the interest of fire safety. So thank you very much for that. In our community effort, it takes a lot of people. We do a presentation. We'll be starting in about two days, doing presentations to the schools. We do them to San Diego Independent School District, to some of the private schools in our area. And that effort is not done just by our office of fire prevention, but the San Diego Fire Department, Good fellow fire department the Department of Defense Fire Training School we all have efforts in that to make that presentation because the very young or the very old or the often the victims of fire if we teach them when they're young it's lessons they can take with them for their entire life so we like to get to the schools for that reason. We've started this year with some presentations at different businesses. We were at one business Saturday and we'll be at another one that's next Saturday and the other rest of the month. We'll be at weekends, we'll be at different businesses in town. We're really proud of the opportunity we have

[0:06:11] that Goodfellas sends out a fire safety house. That's what they did this last weekend. Chick-fil-A provided some refreshments for those people who wanted to attend the event. That's why we have the Chick-fil-A cow up here, because they've joined the efforts of fire prevention message in San Angelo. And then of course Sparky is the national spokesperson for fire prevention from NFPA. And we're fortunate enough to have Sparky on a regular basis now before we were relying on Goodfell Air Force Base to provide that, but this is our San Angelo Sparky. So I think we ought to applaud the efforts and foresight to have Sparky here. Okay. And I've watched Thomas get that award 14 times in my tenure, and I've given it to you for, but next year it's gonna be two different people doing it. You and I. Thank you, Tom, appreciate you, buddy. We have one that we have another one. This is Medical Assistant Recognition Week. Michelle Trebanstein, bring your entourage up here, please, ma'am. These are our nursing students. Medical assistant students from Howard College. Welcome to every one of you.

[0:08:13] The health of all Americans depend upon educated minds and trained hands. The practice of modern medicine at the exacting standards we now enjoy would be impossible without the clinical and administrative duties performed daily in the physician's office, clinic, laboratory, or hospital by medical assistants. These multi-skilled professionals have created professional and comforting atmosphere for patients by offering them guidance and support. The dedication medical assistants in this country have made and are making vital contributions to the quality of healthcare throughout the nation. Therefore, I, Duane Morrison, the mayor of the city of San Angelou, takes us on behalf of the city council to hereby proclaim October 17th through 21th 2016 as Medical Assistance Recognition Week and encourage the community to recognize and support the vital services provided by medical assistance for the benefits of all citizens. Michelle, come take the award and make a speech. My phone is here. I just wanted to say thank you to everybody that supports Howard College out there. The medical assistant program's been offered in Big Spring for several years. Last year was the first time we offered it in San Angelo. We had 10 graduate, seven are working locally, All 10 are working, but seven are working in our community. And as you can see, we have 14 students in the program this year. So we do make a difference. They're one of the first faces you see when you go into the clinical setting to your doctor's office or whatever. So the medical assistant does a lot more than you realize. They don't just take vital signs. They check you in. They do coding, billing, all different kinds of things. So this is our future here in San Angelo. So thank you. Thank you. We've been, we've been.

[0:10:48] Saks come on up and anyone else you want to bring with you. Habitat for humanity is a non-profit you you come medical. That's what it is. Housing ministry founded in 1976 that seeks to eliminate poverty, housing and homelessness from the world and to make decent shelter a matter of conscious inaction. In 1986 the United Nations designated first Monday of October every year as World Habitat Day to encourage the reflection on the state of our towns and cities in the basic need of adequate shelter and to remind the world of its collective responsibility for the future of the human habitat. On Monday, October 3, 2016, Habitat for Humanity of St. Angelo joined with partners around the world to rededicate themselves and recognizing the basic rights of everyone to have adequate shelter. Habitat for Humanity World a 216 joins together a single global network in communicating the message at every one of us deserves the opportunity for a better future we acknowledge that a decent place to live cannot remove various draw opportunity health and success for growing families now in generations to come. Habitat for Humanity of San Angelo has been acknowledged by Habitat for Humanity internationally is one of the most beloved Habitat communities across the globe building 77 homes in the past 20 years and currently building home number 78. Therefore, by Duane Morrison, Mayor of the City of San Angelo, Texas, on behalf of the City Council and do hereby proclaim October 3rd, 2016, as World Habitat Day to 16, and command the observance to all citizens in celebration of its significance and impact on our community. Thank you so much, ma'am, and you have a good thought. Well, you know that Habitat for Humanity builds homes. We also build strength, stability, we build self-sufficiency with families

[0:12:48] who otherwise would not qualify for the ability to buy their own home. As he said previously, we have, we are currently building our 78th home in St. Angelo. We've been here a long time. We plan to be here a long time further into the future. We are, our goal for this year is to double our home building capacity. We really wanna make a difference in terms of affordable housing. And so if you're here and you support affordable housing St. Angelo. I'd like for you to stand up on behalf of Habitat for Humanity. Thank you so much for joining us today. Would you guys like to come up? I have, I do have some board members here and some other hundred women, hundred men build up. If you'll come forward, you can join me in the picture. Hey, Mary, you're the one that's coming forward for this recognition from Finance. Someone get one short. Somebody got two proclamations. Had a tad? Did you get two proclamations? Okay.

[0:14:51] May I have one back? Our finance department has done it again, and it is with pleasure that I'm able to read this recognition. At a time when cynicism about government is a fevered pitch, the tax-fang citizens of San Angelo can feel confident that their tax dollars tax dollars are managed efficiently, effectively, and with crystalline transparency. That was proven yet again for the third straight year. The city's comprehensive annual financial report earned top marks from an international group of finance professionals. The City of San Angelo's Finance Department has again gained the certificate of achievement for excellence in financial reporting. That is the highest form of recognition in governmental accounting and financial reporting. The city's annual financial report for the fiscal year that in September 30, 2015 demonstrates that constructive spirit of full disclosure to clearly communicate its financial story according to the government finance officers' associations of the United States and Canada. The report is written after the city's annual financial audit conducted by external auditors, such a review and a top-notch financial report of critical components to ensuring the city is financially healthy and accountable to its tax paying public. Therefore, I, Duane Morrison, Mayor of the City of St. Angelo, on behalf of the City Council, do hereby recognize and applaud the City of St. Angelo Finance Department for its achievements and positive determination to make a difference in our community. Dean, there you go, and there's your mic. Thank you, Mayor. We're very proud of all the hard work that goes into earning this award, and we encourage you to go to our city's website and check out all of our financial information that's available there. I especially want to thank my chief accountant, Hyman Guerrero, and his staff for all of the hard work that they put into our annual audit. Thank you. Where you want it?

[0:17:12] I had most of that recognition committed to memory, but I didn't have it all. We have one more recognition. This is Public Information Office. You're gonna accept this from Brian? The City of St. Angelo's award winning Public Information Office kept winning awards. Keeps winning awards on September 19. At the state conference of the Texas Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors, our Public Information Office won six awards including two first-place trophies, remembering the fallen, Sergeant Corby Kennedy, won the prize, hurt a Glenn programming, programming impact award, the tribute to the Lake Sergeant Kennedy was deemed to be video that most influenced people's perception by touching their hearts and minds. It also won second among documentaries. The other first place award was a video entitled Game Changer about the Recreation Division, Basketball League for Special Need Children. The half dozen awards are again testament to the talent, drive and dedication of videographer Brian Groves. It also speaks to the effectiveness, efficiency, and teamwork within our two-man public information operation. It is satisfying to have their work shine when compared with other offices with far greater resources, but it's exponentially more gratifying that our citizens appreciate and embrace the engaging content the public information office produces. Therefore, I'm Duane Morrison, Mayor of the City San Angelo, Texas on behalf of the City Council, do hereby recognize and applaud videographer, Brian Groves in the public information office for their achievements and positive determination to make a difference in our community. Thank you, Brian. He's definitely right, we are a two-man office and the guy that usually speaks and has all the words is right here, so I usually stay behind the camera. I love my job and I wake up every morning, excited to go out and video and documents in Angelo, And we do a lot of informational and funny videos. And occasionally, we get to do some really meaningful videos,

[0:19:13] like the two that won first place. And it was such an honor that those got recognized for first place. Thank you. And here are the awards. It is now time for the public comment portion of our meeting. Issues or items that are not on the agenda may be raised by the public at this time. Citizens should speak from the podium begin by stating their name and limit remarks to less than five minutes. Council members may request that a discussed item be placed on a future agenda. The Council takes public comment on all regular agenda items during discussion of those items. This is your opportunity. If you wish to approach the City Council, you may do so at this time for any item that is not on the agenda. Those items will be taken in their time. So anyone that cares to speak wishes to speak or am I lying at the front? Ms. Market. morning mayor and council I just want to make sure folks know we are holding the second annual city fit 5k this Thursday at 6 p.m. we want to make sure that the community knows they can come out and force bring the whole family there's a fund run and a 5k each race is $20 and we're doing this it's just it's our biggest wellness event of the year last year we were able to raise $2,500 for art and uncommon places and we're continuing that partnership to help them fund amenities at the open-air art museum so registration continues Thursday at 4 p.m. at Unidad Park will run along the red or oil trail so I just

[0:21:17] want folks to know they can come out and enjoy that evening. We're gonna have a good time. Thank you, Margie. And also come out and recognize our red or oil trails because we've got a beautiful trail system. Four miles, isn't it? Beautiful trail system. Anybody else care to approach the council? I guess we'll call for a adjournment then. If there is no other public comment, we will close this portion of the agenda at this time. I have one note before we move on. We're supposed to have a lawyer in the house that wants to meet with us at 10 o'clock. Depends on where we are in our council meeting at 10 o'clock. It's probably going to take an hour so if we've got people to steal waiting and the lawyer's going to have to wait. Is that all right? Okay. We're going to break somewhere around 10 o'clock. Take care of a lawyer problem. All right, let's work on the consent agenda at this time. At this time I will start with Mrs. Farmer. If there is any item on the consent agenda that you would like to pull to the regular agenda or any comments that you have, this is your opportunity to name. No items to pull and don't have any comments sister. Mr. Carter. No comments to pull. No comments and nothing to pull. Ms. Gonzalez. Did help. Mr. Thomas. Since everybody's gonna do that I won't say the same. I won't pull anything. Marty and pressure on this in here. I'll pass. Mr. Richardson. K K and M K and M K and M. Yes. Okay. All right. We will pull items K and M to put them on the regular agenda for discussion. I will entertain a motion to approve the consent item consent agenda items A through Q with the exception of K and M. So move.

[0:23:17] Harry. Okay. Marty. Do you have a motion to approve as presented? Are there any comments? Council before we move forward? Do I have public comment on the consent agenda before we take the vote? If not, all in favor of approving the consent agenda with the exception of K&M, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Nay. What a 7-0 vote on that, Mr. Brian. Item K is consider authorizing the city manager to execute a memorandum of understanding with Tom Green County for the proposed Tom Green County jail facility. City would be responsible for designing inspecting construction and maintaining a sanitary sewer main and city street. Tom Green County would be responsible for extending said sewer main and city street to the proposed jail facility. Mr. Richards. Yes, I'd just like to know what the city's expenses in this and are we responsible for the design of the building? We are not responsible for the design of the actual building, we're just working together with the Tom Green County to extend sewer facility to that building because the sewer will also benefit the city as far as being able to extend services to some of those businesses along highway 67 as well. Our expenses for that, all we're obligated to or in this memory, MOU is less than 50,000 and 50,000 for the design of the sanitary sewer will provide that design to the Tom Green County, or to Tom Green County to put out per bit and then they'll be responsible for installing and actually constructing that sewer main. The sewer main on the city side. Great, yeah, okay. Thank you. All right, thank you. You want a motion to prove it? I move to approve. Question. Yes, ma'am. The agenda item does say responsible for designing. Now I can assume that that means designing of the and maintaining the Senate sewer system, but it says designing.

[0:25:17] Right, that's right. Like I said, the design is approximately $50,000, or less than $50,000, and will be responsible for designing. We do have a mutual benefit for this sewer main. It says we're responsible for designing, inspecting, construction and maintaining the sanitary sewer main. That's our sewer line. It's going to be our sewer line at the end of the at the end of the day. They don't feel like it can be construed as designing the entire building. I agree with Mr. Richardson that it needed a little explanation. Other comments from council? Public comment. I do have a motion. Bill made the motion more seconded. There is no further comment. We will call for the vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Put a 7-0-11, Mr. Brian M is considered a resolution to the City of St. Angelo City Council approving a project and ratifying the authorization of the City of St. Angelo Development Cooperation Board for the negotiation and execution of a memorandum of understanding with City of St. Angelo providing funding not to exceed $63,000 for air service marketing and recruitment services for the St. Angelo Regional Airport, Mathis Field, Authorizing task order number 106 under professional services is a great move to KSA engineers and cooperated or FQ number APO 215 for such services. And authorizing the city manager or his designee to execute task order number 106 in the MOU on behalf of the city. Mr. Richardson. Yes, I believe that will require a budget amendment. And so this is not covered in the present budget. Is cost Councilman Richardson just just want to be correct that that is the air service marketing Item that you asked you're asking about that is correct. It is not an item that was budgeted for You may you may recall that Luis

[0:27:21] Spoke to you about Developments happening at the at the airport and so his department needs some assistance So if you approve it today, we will have a budget amendment and we'll be able to provide those funds to the airport. You're asking for a budget amendment at this time? No, we're asking for you to ratify CoSIDC's approval to the project, the MOU and the MOU with the city and CoSIDC and the airport. Okay, so you're gonna have to come back again and ask for a budget amendment. Let's let Morgan address the budget I'm working with Lou at the airport on preparing a budget amendment We're working through the process of what all that would entail It may require a budget amendment that we have authority to do at the city manager level Or it may require a councilman Amendment that does have to come back to the council So we're working through those details at this time and it may come back to y'all in a future budget And we will do a budget amendment it We're just working through what level of approval is required So that'll be a separate agenda item later if necessary. Okay, thank you for clarification. If I understand this role and this is taking 63,000 from the Costa DC tax budget and is paying for city services as far as the airport. So it's really Costa DC money and not city money. That's correct. Yes. I move to approve. Thank you. Got a motion to approve. Mr. Richardson approved second by Lane Carter. Do I have any further discussion from Council? Council. I have public comment on this item. It's going to be a good item. Y'all going to like this when we get it done. This is good for San Angelo. If there is no further comment, I call for the vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. And opposed nay. Put a 7-0-1 please, Brian. The regular agenda item number A, consider adopting a resolution amending the 216-2021 Capitol Improvement Plan to include a stormwater office building

[0:29:23] and reconstruction of South Jackson Street, marking you our own, ma'am. Thank you. We have the annual process where we adopt a capital improvement plan, and so the 2016 plan is what we're operating under right now. But occasionally items come up that need to be added to the plan. Of course, the city charter states that no capital project may be undertaken unless it's in the plan, and so we have these two items before you today. Expenditure of funds would be approved by the Council at a later date. This is simply ratifying that they are good projects and should be in the plan. The first item before you is a stormwater office building at an estimated cost of $130,000. The existing location is insufficient for daily operations. What's happened is we've added more and more workload to that work group and we've not given them the shop space, the office space to be able to do that. And so this would be out at our St. Anne Street location and just adding a temporary building out there, a metal building to get them going and keep them moving. that is funded by storm water restricted fees. And so it's not an item out of the general fund and it is a budgeted item that could proceed. The next project recommended for addition at this time is a reconstruction of South Jackson Street. What's going on is South Jackson Street was an asset that was identified in the recent street study as an item passed its useful life that needed to be undertaken. We did not fund it in the 10 year funding plan But because of private development happening out there right now, it would be hugely beneficial for us to be able to take those on at the same time. So we didn't have this section of the street system in our capital improvement plan at the time, but we recommend adding it at this time by putting it in the plan that will allow staff to be able to research funding sources, to go after funding opportunities, and to consider proceeding now just because of those economies of scale that are gonna happen as, and that's at South Jackson at Knickerbocker,

[0:31:24] where the new restaurant is going in for Chick-fil-A. So the private owner is having to do some addition to work to the street at this time. It would totally make sense for us to come alongside them and do that at this time. It's hugely beneficial. So we're researching how we're gonna fund that, but putting it in the plan will help us. And that's all I have for you today. Okay, this is an amendment to the Capital Improvement Plan to allow for a little extra. Are there any questions from Council on this item? Good. How many employees is it that you want this office building space for? I mean, do y'all have right now? I believe that the stormwater division is in excess of 30 employees. Many of them are out in the field most of the day. And so there will be about a dozen offices in that workspace. But there's in the morning in the yard getting all our stuff ready, getting that out and going. And so the stormwater division is one of our biggest divisions. Any other questions from Council? They're currently co-officing with Street and Bridge, which is another big division that we have it's so it's difficult for them to It's it's a crush in the mornings getting them out and out in the field it and doing what they need to do So it's quite crowded And how many dollars we're talking about for this building this storm water building is at $130,000 the estimated cost Aaron again, we're not asking for funding This is just to add this item to the capital improvement plan the CIP is basically a tool that we use City Council at a later date will discuss the funding aspects of it if we do move forward with it. We just want to add that to the CIB. Well it's not as if we have a lot of extra money this year. Certainly conscious of that. Yes sir. All right if someone wants to make a motion to add this to the capital improvement plan I will entertain the motion. Move to approve as presented. Harry. Second. Second from Lucy. Any other I have questions from council. Do I have public comment on this item? We'll call for the vote. All in favor of it as it has been presented,

[0:33:25] please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Put a 7-0 on that one. Thank you. Item number B on the regular agenda's discussion of an ordinance and possible moratorium regarding chapter 12 exhibit A zoning ordinance for bed and breakfast establishments and short-term rentals. John James. And if I told you that I was excited this morning I would be lying. We spent three hours going through this. Here several months ago we had 35 people stand up and talk and then we defeated the proposal that the city had brought forward by a 4-3 vote. But here it is again. So there's two different aspects of this but I'll let John you take over and then we'll talk about the two aspects of the of the way it's listed on the agenda. Thank you. John James, Director of Planning and Development Services. I just have a very brief presentation. I'm not going to go through everything I went through last time. But basically the question that this is brought back for is to basically ask that question. Do we allow short-term rentals in the community or not? A few questions for today. One is whether or not to bring back the ordinance. Today is just a discussion item so we're not actually you don't have the ability to approve or deny an ordinance today. The question is do we bring this back for a first reading again at some point in the future. If so, if that's your direction, then we would seek some direction on should we bring back the planning commission ordinance that you saw before or do you have any direction for us today and what type of ordinance to bring back. And then the second piece of this, as you mentioned, is what to do about enforcement in the meantime. We currently have a practice of not pursuing enforcement when there is an ordinance change in process unless you direct us otherwise we would continue that same practice. In other words, today short term rentals are not allowed in the community however because an ordinance is in process depending on your direction today, we would continue to not pursue

[0:35:31] any enforcement against those that are currently operating until a final decision is made by the council. Just a quick reminder, a bed and breakfast is renting less than an entire home for less than 30 days, an operator must be on site, short-term rental is rental of the entire dwelling for less than 30 days, and there is no requirement for an operator to be on site. Again, everything I'm talking about here is in the proposed ordinance. As I mentioned today, short-term rentals are not allowed in the city. So the proposed ordinance, all short-term rentals would be a conditional use, which means each and every one would have to come to the planning commission for individual review, but it would not go on to the city council. The planning commission would be the final decision. These are the proposed standards. I'm not gonna read through each of these. These are the ones we talked about last time, but these are some of the standards included in the ordinance intended to help alleviate some of the negative consequences to neighbors of the use of short-term rental on the property. And if you have questions, we can come back to this to talk about some of the specifics, if necessary. The staff is recommending a couple of changes based on the conversation at the last meeting beyond what was in the Planning Commission recommended ordinance. One, we would recommend adding back in a prohibition on camping, although our proposal would allow one camping unit, which means one tent or one trailer. we would also recommend placing a time limit on the conditional use approval so that a short-term rental would have to come back for renewal every two years. That would give the neighbors the opportunity to come back. They would get notification. They could come back and bring back to the Planning Commission information about a short-term rental not being operated consistent with the expectations of the neighborhood and the Planning Commission would have the opportunity to either renew it for another two years denied if the concerns at that particular location were substantial. I just wanted

[0:37:38] to mention one thing I know there was quite a bit of discussion last time about enforcement. From the staff's perspective enforcement of a prohibition is as equally difficult as enforcement of our proposed ordinance. So at least from our perspective I want to be careful not to continue to prohibit these thinking that that is easier enforcement than having an ordinance that would allow these with some stipulations. So again, I just wanted to bring that issue up because enforcement was discussed so much at the last meeting. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have. Okay, so the two questions that's before us today is do we want as a council to bring back an ordinance allowing the STRs with provisions? That's the number one question you want answered. The number two question is do we want to allow by Council vote a moratorium until that ordinance is brought back. So I guess the first one we need to discuss is if we want to bring the ordinance back because we don't bring it back then the moratorium is not necessary anyway. All right, we spoke about this here several months ago. I like your ordinance. I think your ordinance is very good. I think that I think that one of the slowest 8th graders in town would be able to find a way around what we've got right now and still have the short-term rentals. I think you've given some very good proposals here. I think you've put some restrictions and I think you have made something that will work for every one. It will restrict what is done but would it still allow the freedom of people using their property. I don't have a problem with the ordinance as it stood. I voted for it last time. I have to vote for it again. Today, I don't mind the two things that you added. I think those are good. And it just gives the opponents a little bit more protection. That's my opinion. Council, we want to bring this back. I do like the work that you put into it and the tweaks that you have made. I still disagree with the parking and the number of people

[0:39:40] allowed to gather. We don't currently delegate or authorize how many cars a family can have parked on residential streets in the city. I mean, it's public parking. So why are we saying it's OK on Harmony Lane for you to park as many 2030 guests coming over up and down the entire residential street? But if it's at an STR, you can only have two cars. Now, actually, this would not prohibit parking in the street. this only requires that they have two parking spaces available on the side. On the side, three or four cars could could park at the side. This just requires that they have space off the street for at least two cars. And the number 20 is, I am thinking of a family reunion. I certainly wouldn't expect it to be as large as some of my family unions, which are 160 blood relatives, but 20 seems limiting, and I would like to know other council members feeling on that. The one thing that's, if I may, or if we could hear other, then I have a statement to make if we could hear other opinions from council right now. Any other opinions on this? You have a question for John. We talked about enforcement one way or the other. It's going to be equally hard to enforce regardless of whether or not we've got STRs in place This ordinance in place or whatever. Does that mean that the city's actually going to have to hire some more quote-compliance officers that may work? Saturday and Sunday We do have James here as well. I think I saw him back a little while ago. They could kind of address to that point as well

[0:41:41] I know that as far as the enforcement, as you just mentioned a little while ago, it will be basically the same thing, whether the STR0 or not, the law right now does not allow them. So again, our code enforcement has to enforce that aspect of it anyway. Will they work on the weekends? They would have to adjust, like they do at this point. They do have weekends that they do work, depending on what the workload does become. can adjust their workload as well. If they take on additional duty without adding additional capacity, something will have to give. So while we may get away with not adding an employee to enforce this, the time they spend on this will be time they are not able to spend on other code issues. The reason I asked that question is because I voted last time not to to allow these simply because I didn't want to put any more, I knew because of budget, it was gonna be difficult to put any more people on staff to take care of this. But in John's presentation this morning, he says it's going to take people to enforce it one way or the other. So I want the public to understand that he's gonna cost the city, could cost the city more dollars to enforce what we've got on the books or if we put a new ordinance out there. Any other comments, Marty? I don't have anything to add. Yes, Perkin problem is that there's too many cars perked on the street and some of these areas out around the lake for instance, and the people are able to access their property. Also, there's a problem here, and I think it should be enforced because of the people are not able to, enjoyed the properties, their private properties

[0:43:43] are being invaded by the people who are coming into these STRs. They are not family people. They are people coming off of Craigslist and every internet sites. And this issue was never brought before the Supreme Court of United States or the Supreme Court of Texas. And the vast majority of people are against this, and they don't want it. There was no 50% represented here. There's about 30 people in their families in the city who want this and basically the rest of the city, 99% of the city is against this. There was no 5050 representation here at the last meeting. Lucy? I don't have a comment. Lane of this time. Okay, shorted, make your statement. Well, I've read defined STRs. I'm calling them same trouble revisited, but I have received a notebook full of letters and emails, texts and phone calls on this issue, loaded with backup material in cases from several states including Texas, and a caseload of material from our local Association of Realtors, which was most appreciated. The information I have given the most consideration to lately in this matter is the Lake NASworthy master plan and implementation strategy that City paid $300,000 for recently to advise us on the outdated needs of our very own and unique like NASworthy. And the reason I did this is because recently the majority of the complaints came from like NASworthy, not all over the city. They came from like NASworthy. So that is why the like NASworthy master plan had a huge bearing in how I felt about this issue. It's 71 pages of facts, comparables, research, advice, and strategy to make us viable and competitive

[0:45:47] to survive in today's ever-changing development and capitalization share of the $70 billion tourism market in Texas alone. I'm sure you're wondering why I'm putting so much faith in something that does not specifically mention STRs, but the report goes further for the potential of development of our tourism activities, whether it be weightboarding, jet skiing, recreational activities, developing where the power plant used to be, residential development and commercial development. For some of you who may not know, we've had several hotel or inquiries for location at areas locations out of the lake. Some folks came forward and said they didn't really care what we did about the STRs, but we needed to do something about the wakeboarding because of the soil bank erosion that it was causing. And believe it or not, there is an answer for that exact problem in this study that we paid for, how to deal with it, how to handle it in most economical fashion that we can do that wouldn't hurt us. By following the report and creating recreational districts with restrictions in order to blend with residential is a challenge, especially since the inception of Langnazworthy for recreation, fishing, water supply has been an accepted practice until just recently. And that brings me to ask why now, after all this time, our vacationers not welcome in our city. Is it power control or intent? I don't know, but I don't condone threats from either side nor will I be accused of being soft on enforcement.

[0:47:48] There seems to be considerable differences in opinion as to definitions of residential, commercial and everyone forgetting about recreational, but since this particular topic concerns the majority of recreational out there, it does have some bearing on what we decide in my opinion. The state of Texas, as far as I know to this date, defines and classifies STRs as residential. I'm not interested in California's definition, especially in light of the fact that just last month, their governor signed a bill, a law, saying how many times a day that a Cal can pass gas. So I'm not really interested in what California is doing. But I am interested in what Texas is doing, and I am interested in San Angelo. I believe we can work out the ordinance, as John has done and provided in trying to make this a workable deal. I still believe that there is some tweaking. I don't believe John has given or even has been given this report to know how much it talks about the residential merging with the commercial and there's some things in here that we definitely need to consider that an ordinance might affect, I don't want to do this again in just a couple of years or a year or what's going on now with residential development up there. I don't want to do this again to include people that are going to advertise the recreational benefits in the areas. I don't know about the rest of the council members, but I have received phone calls from Littlefield, Texas, Grandbury, Grand Perry, Texas, Littleton, Colorado, Florida, all with people, all of a sudden asking why their vacation dollars are no longer welcome in St. Angelo. That they were introduced to St. Angelo who didn't even know what it

[0:49:53] was until their child went to his shoe out here. And coming out to visit their children while they were in school, they fell in love with our city and our recreational areas and things that the city has to offer. And all of a sudden they're met with signs that they're not welcome and they're not wanted and they can't stay and that saddens me that we put out that kind of message when I don't believe that the good people of San Angelo truly feel that way. There are bad apples in every barrel and it takes strict enforcement and if we as a council have to register STRs and see how many complaints that they get in a year before their license or their registration to operate in our city is pulled then we need to do so. But I'm not interested in putting anybody out of business and I'm certainly not interested in running anyone's peace, quietful enjoyment of life that they're entitled to by owning a piece of property. I don't want that to change and I do believe we can work this out. I am requesting a moratorium so that we can work out the language for our future and to also work out the language to fit in the plan that was out there. And I think John's done an excellent job of trying to get to that. And if it needs a moratorium to relieve the staff and council members from these constant complaints, well, why aren't you out there? Why aren't the police at their door shutting them down? Do this? You know, that kind of hateful talk in business, brobling or whatever you want to call it, I just don't see as necessary. It's a patient time to work toward this since this has been a practice that's been accepted by everyone until just recently.

[0:51:55] If you're shaking your heads and I see that you are out there, the police reports don't indicate there's been a problem. They've gone back and checked the police reports and if you're having problems, you're not going through the proper sources to take care of these problems, that laws are already in place to take care of. And that's my feeling on the matter. I agree with you. I totally get everything that you said. I think it's time that I would like to make a motion to bring back the ordinance for reconsideration with the provisions. You have a motion to bring it back with the provisions that John has given to a half a second. Thank you. We have an emotion and a second to bring the ordinance back. Let's be the current ordinance that was presented last time. It will be with the two provisions. With the two provisions. With the two provisions that there would be a two-year, and that what was the other one? One-tent. Yeah, one-tent, one-trailer, and every two years would have to be re-evaluated. And that is the motion that includes those two provisions to the ordinance that was brought to us last time, but questions, Harry? Well, I think Brian's got a point of order, or he is, we really don't need to vote on this. Is that right? No, the vote today is to bring it back, or not to bring it back. You can vote, or you can do by consensus, but the thing that I was gonna ask for clarification on the motion, do you wanna include language about a moratorium on enforcement in the meantime? Do you wanna add that to your second? Yes. Okay, the motion has been made that we bring this proposal back with the two additions, with the moratorium to allow staff time to work on this. I really don't know what else they're going to do. Personally, I'd rather take care of this today, but as with what John James says, we cannot

[0:53:56] vote on this today because the language is not correct. Is that right? It'll also need to be published in the paper. You brought it back. So we can't vote on this today. So the motion is that we bring it back and allow moratorium period so that the enforcement will not happen until we have a final decision. That's your motion? That's your second. Any further comments from Council? Yes. Okay. First of all, nobody is saying tourists are not welcome. That's a misleading statement. St. Nancy with people have opened hearts and they love tourism, but they do not want people coming in, disturbing them under property, and the Lake Natsworth Association has set out a place there for commercial development and recreation, and further study on recreation. And it's adjacent to what you want to call it to the residential areas. In no way did that study allow for STRs or commercial development in residential neighborhoods. That's misleading. I respond. That wasn't my implication. The study is implying that we need to relook at and change, make some changes out there to current districts or zoning because of commercial and residential and recreational. It wasn't my intention to be misleading. However, I received phone calls yesterday and was sent picture photo IDs and was invited out to verify and see for myself. And I did and I have a picture of it and I'd be happy to show it to you that the signs that are being placed that says neighborhoods are for neighbors, not vacationers. That sends a message about tourism. vacationers are not welcome. Well, that's a definite message.

[0:55:56] Nice. Well, that is brought on because the vacationers that are coming into their this day are not normal vacationers. They are coming in from different parts of the state. They are coming in, they're brought in on Craigslist and there's other lists. They're not family and they have no respect for the neighbors. Mr. Richardson, the lake is public. Yes, let's not let's let's not let this conversation deteriorate as far as one thing I'd like to ask is if we're going to bring this back, can we have a task force put together by the people that are here from both sides to work with planning division to tweak the ordinance. And I believe there has one a rough draft been presented or drafted up. If it's going to come back, we need their input, a representative from each side. I agree with Lane. I think that's something that can be worked out with the Planning Department. And I might clarify, Lane, what you're saying is a one representative from each side. That makes it easier for staff versus having to deal with a whole lot of people. So if we have one representative, and we had some initial applicants who came to us, so it would. Yes, if this is going to be brought back, what we can do and is pull them together, put those two, you know, and see if they can come up with something based on what we've started with here. If we cannot come to a resolution, then we'll bring what we originally brought along with the two comments from each side, if there is no resolution that can be reached. So you'll have all three of those things in front of you, or if one can be worked out one unified and I think that's something John James can work out that way if this gets brought back we have I personally think we've had we have had both sides

[0:57:58] that is very very Hindley and very they have stated their position I don't see that it would do any good to have two people or a whole group of people working I mean we know the positions we know the positions of both sides it's been very It's been very, very well stated. For three hours, it was well stated. So we know the two sides. If John wants to bring him in and talk more, then that would be up to him. But I personally don't see any sense any reason for it. I'd like to make one more comment. Yes, sir. The Lincoln Asward Association has overwhelming members have overwhelmingly voted against the short-term rentals. All right. Now let's open this up for some public discussion. Here's what we learned last time in the 35 comments that we heard. We heard that you do not want short term rentals because they will decrease property values. We've heard that one. We've heard you do not want short term rentals because it will increase the traffic. We've heard you do not want them because it will increase the noise. You do not want them because it will increase the parties. It will, you do not want them because you do not know your neighbors and they are not a regular people in the neighborhood. And we've also heard that you do not want them because it will put too many people in the neighborhood. Those are the ones that I just jotted down that I can remember, but I think that gives a pretty good overview of what we heard last time. If there is anyone in the audience that has anything other than these things to say, we will listen. But if you're gonna come up and say the exact same things over again, then we've already heard them. So if you've got something that is not in this list that I made, we will listen to the public comment. We'll let you two to three minutes. Yes, Marty. We're not discussing whether or not to vote, yeah, or nay on the. You'll bring it back with the moratorium, is there a bill?

[0:59:58] Yeah, just to bring it back so that the comments need to be whether or not to bring it back. And that is the agenda item, whether or not we bring it back. So if you have a comment on whether or not to bring it back, that will be within the agenda. And I was making it a little broader than what it actually was. But I mean, we listened to public comments, but we really already heard them. And next time it will, just for clarification for everybody here, it will be a public hearing. So the ordinance will come for a public hearing next time, whatever is presented in that ordinance. So yes, this discussion should be related to whether or not to bring back an ordinance. With a more toy. Yes, ma'am. My name is Kim Leaveo, welcome. Everybody that came up again, I know I sent you all a video, and I hope you all got a chance to watch it of what actually happens with these short-term rentals. I know that a lot of you went out and visited the exact same property and saw it in a different light from the other side of the fence. And I am asking that you enforce what currently is on the books so that we do not have to continually put up with this. If you saw that video, would you want that next to you? So I think until you decide what you're gonna do, you have allowed this for long enough, it needs to be enforced. If at a later date you choose to do something different that it's not illegal to do, then so be it. But right now, this is on the books, I think it needs to be enforced. And if you haven't seen the video, is on YouTube and I will send it out to everybody one more time. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. My name is Anna Martinez and we are owners of a short term rental. For those of you that are not for those of you that may not be aware

[1:02:05] of the video that was posted on Facebook, the people you saw on this video was a group of military students that were celebrating their accomplishment. Part of this video shown on Facebook shows it was a daytime at 2 p.m. The other part of the video does not show a time. I chose not to respond on Facebook. Being a serviceman and a woman clearly demonstrates that they are disciplined and responsible good citizens. A good neighbor would communicate as good neighbors, and not have a hidden camera. They could have asked them to tone it down, and I bet they would have. If not, then they could have called the police. Two days prior to their stay, I met with them personally at the Lake House. I explained the Lake House rules to them. They did not damage our property. They did not damage the house. There was no damage to our neighbor's property. They were just having fun. These men were military. We should have felt safe. I know who we went to again. Our late counselors were into military this last weekend, who were celebrating completion of their difficult training. It is my understanding recently the police were called out to venue on Beatty Road. And they found out it was not at the location they were sent to. And instead, it was a couple of houses down where people were just having fun jumping into the water from a dock. And we're getting a little bit off. We're getting a little. We're getting off or we're not. Are you in favor of the moratorium

[1:04:05] and bringing it back? Are you against it? Yes, or I am for tourism, Liam. Bring it back with the moratorium. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Do I have any further comment? My name is June Bell, I live at 2654 Kings Road. I got to experience two short-term rentals in my neighborhood the summer of 2015. These are not just weekend rentals. There would be groups come in on Monday, leave on Wednesday, another group come in on Thursday, leave on Sunday. It was constant throughout the summer. It was constant turnover, constant strangers in my neighborhood. I live on a dead end street. If you're going to bring this back, you do need to revisit even those ordinances. You're talking about limiting the parking. It's a dead end street with a fire hydrant. They parked, they blocked my property, the street we had to call the police a number of times because it was blocked. It wasn't safe. Now, how many times are we going to waste our police officer's time calling and calling calling again. You know, you try and again we're getting all passed. Well, are you for the being brought back with the moratorium? Yes, you're going to bring it back. I would request that you also or support that you have two people because you just don't understand motorhome backed into a driveway that takes up more parking boat trailers. It's a congested area. It's not a one-size-fits-all out there. It needs to be restricted. If you're going to bring this back and you need to hear both sides, I lived it. The other question you need to ask is if this was in your neighborhood, how would you feel if every home around you was a short-term rental? It's no fun.

[1:06:07] If you can answer those questions, I'm all for tourism. I lived at the lake for a long time. I understand this, however, I want a 60-year-old woman tells me that I need to get used to the fact that if I live at the lake that she can park on my property, that I should get used to it, I don't think that's, I mean, how would you feel? And it came from a 60-year-old woman. I was appalled. How would you feel? That's my home. and you have to put up with it day after day after day. I was very, at first, I tried to work with my neighbors, but it gets old. And you get real tired and you run out of patience. So you need to ask yourselves those same questions. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. My name is Randall Scotty. And I'd like to speak to a couple of things that Charlotte had brought up. The signs that are out there that we are responsible for placing say neighborhoods are for neighbors, not short term or not vacation rentals. I don't consider that hateful whatsoever. I don't consider San Angelo against tourism because our group doesn't want short term rentals. We have a wealth of empty hotel rooms, we have plenty of restaurants, pubs for these people to visit. I do not think that we're sending a message that San Angelo is against tourism. I would like to also echo what Kim Olibo had to say is that the video that she took was an off-season. It did go way into the night. The camera wasn't hidden. She was standing out on

[1:08:08] the back porch. In addition to that, I'd like to talk about the moratorium. We have two issues within this moratorium that's being proposed. One, I have a question for you, are we still taking application from short-term rentals to pay the hot? If we still are, there's a problem with that. Getting to the second part of the moratorium, what I'm hearing from you is the moratorium would be, we're not gonna enforce the ordinances that are on the books in regard to having a short-term rental. The second piece to the moratorium is some of these vacation rentals approximately five are on leased city property. Were the lease prohibits subletting of said property? I see no reason why these people have been getting away with this operating illegally for I don't know how long. why doesn't the city go ahead and enforce that I had heard that the reason was they didn't have any complaints well I took care of that last week we have open complaints and I spoke with James Flores he is aware of it so to make a long story short I am against the moratorium without a doubt and I I have to say that I'm against bringing this thing back and going through this again when our council has already voted four to three against it. Thank you for your time. Hello again, I've seen you before.

[1:10:09] My name is Debbie Walls, if you don't remember. Some of you know me. I have to say about the moratorium and where you're going, my word is failure. That's my word. The thing I don't hear from you is majority. We push the ballot button trusting you to come and represent what is best for the majority of people in your districts. And I've heard that from one person who said, I had two to 300 contacts and six people were for it. And that was at the August meeting, Mr. Richardson said that and I appreciate that. It seems overwhelmingly that the majority of people that come and speak and that you have heard from stand against this. And we continue to push it and don't understand that. Oh, there are wonderful people who want STRs or who need to supplement their income possibly by running out their homes. But I feel like the more and more that I hear and see and what's happened in these meetings is it's not what the majority wants. Mr. Richard just said, you talk about the lake. You constantly say the lake is public. Absolutely it is. Tens of thousands of people every year go out there and enjoy that lake and it's awesome. But the majority of them don't have to stay at home out there. The homes at that lake are private just like every other single residential area, single family residential area in San Angelo. And that's what the majority efforts are asking you for is that's what we want that's what what's what we'd like our representatives to present to us. Remember years ago another council faced a tough issue and conversations went on forever but the vote finally came down to making San Angelo smoke free. A lot of people liked it a lot of people didn't

[1:12:10] like it but the majority of people came out and spoke and the council based decisions on that. I would just ask that you do the same thing again. Thank you. Thank you all so much. By the way that was the smoking ordinance was taken to the people and the people voted. It was not done up here. Yes, I have even considered that. Hi my name is Holly Jett. Mary you said if we could comment on something other than the complaints that had brought up. My question is in residential neighborhoods registered sex offenders are supposed to report themselves. What do we do? How well are we screening people that are actually in our neighborhoods? We have two young children and two widows that live on our seven-house cul-de-sac. How do we really know about our safety of those that are most vulnerable to sexual predators? We're just supposed to allow these people to come into our neighborhoods where our children play and where there are women who are widows who live in these homes. How well are we screening these people to know what kind of people are coming into our neighborhoods? What protection do we have? Thank you. Good morning, ma'am. My name is Nancy Neering. I have lived in San Angelo for two years. Love it. Followed the college student who was appalled at the fact that I followed her here until she found out that I bought a house on the lake. So I'm gonna kind of flip this from the other comments that have been made. I live two doors down from a short-term rental. And I always make it a point to either swim down or walk over. I like to find out where these people came from.

[1:14:11] How did they pick San Angelo? I will say 90% of them are from Midland and Odessa. It's mainly families that can't afford to go an expensive vacation but would like to take their kids and spend some time on the water. Never ever have I had to complain about them. Most of them, like I said, are families with children. Yes, we did have one incident Saturday night that I think could have completely been resolved by just a simple, hey, do you think you can turn it down? And it was the military people. I love having the short-term rentals. I would rather rather have short-term rentals than have someone that I just we just completely don't do not want on that street that's locked into a lease for a complete year. Plus I've made tons of new friends out of this and a lot of them are repeats that keep coming back and they have every single one of them has thanked us endlessly for the hospitality that San Angelo has offered them. And that's really all I have except one more thing. For the gentleman that yes got a little out of hand Saturday. I'm not going to go to what they do frilly and we're getting off tax. I am I just want to say thank you. If you ever have to call 911 for a medical emergency thank your responders because that's exactly where they came from as I did last time I'll I'll restrict it to three minutes two comments please one is on a comment that was made earlier and the others on an implication that was made earlier this

[1:16:12] is Mitchell we have a direct exact agenda issue here yes sir and the issue is is where we whether we want to bring this back with the moratorium or whether we we don't want to bring it back. And we've got, we've been all over playing field of this, but the only thing that we were able to talk about is, do we bring this back with the moratorium or moratorium, or do we not bring it back? So. Not bring it back. The lake may be public, the water, the properties are private. And this is not a lake, Naz, where the issue of the approximate 35 STRs in San Angelo, eight of them are on the lake. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Candice Levy and I'm against bringing back the ordinance just to touch on the first the video that the first two speakers talked about and that that that day the owner of the property was called and the police were informed as well. So just to stay focused I you know reinforcement for sure needs to address and then also talking about and that we're not for vacationing. We have better breakfasts. We have places on the lake that people from outside the town can come and it doesn't have to be short-term rentals. Thank you. Thank you, Dan. I'll make one comment before we go. I'm going to touch on what Ms. Debbie said. You can obviously see the majority and I like majority rules also. So I don't know what wording we have to bring back but you mentioned about the smoking ordinance and that was put on a ballot so if we can maybe look at putting this on a a May ballot how do what can

[1:18:17] we do who needs to make that motion a voter citizen council it would have to come from a referendum of the citizens or an initiative Right, it'd go through a petition process with the with the right amount of signatures from the last election Same exact way it's spelled out in the charter and anybody that had any questions on that could call my office Or this probably the city attorney's office to get any answers about that, but Yeah, it had to go through the same process that the smoking ordinance went through In the meantime, you know, you can still go through this process and try to reach a happy medium Sorry to come back up, but I just want to address that. If you look at the city charter and you look at the ordinance, the way it typically works is if somebody wants something added to the ordinance, or they want a new ordinance, those people, so in this case, the STR people that want this new ordinance, typically it would be their responsibility to go out, get 25% of the last mayoral vote, which was 5100 people, it would be their responsibility to get a petition, five people come up to submit that, then them come up with the petition. For some reason, this has come kind of opposite. Those of us that the majority of San Angelo that is wanting to defend this now are the ones that are happening to come up with this referendum, which we do have the support to do that, but at what cost to the city is that gonna be? From what I've heard from past, actually city attorneys is a minimum of $20,000. So the scenario can play out as this ordinance comes up, then we come with a referendum with it, and then the city is gonna lose $20,000 to $30,000 to put this on a ballot.

[1:20:17] I did not read anywhere that a city council member could not come up just like this has come up, where they can come up and say, this ordinance needs to go on the ballot. Am I incorrect with that? Looked generally, and we cannot find any provision that allows a council member to put it on an election. Brian and I have discussed calling the Secretary of State's office to discussing it with them if that is an option. But everything we found said that in order for a new ordinance to be brought up, you have the initiative of referendum. It's only available to home rural cities who have it in our charter, which we do. So if you wanted to bring an ordinance forward, that's called an initiative. If you want to have an ordinance that's been passed repealed, that's a referendum. Both require a petition to be put on a ballot. It is a special election, which means It doesn't necessarily fall in a general election date, which is why it will cost the city 20,000 plus, probably $30,000 to do that. This new ordinance, I mean, this isn't a new ordinance, so this is a text change, which we would be trying to stop. That can be allowed from, where did this all originate? Because it wasn't from a referendum, it didn't come up, but it got originated somewhere. Normally, ordinances are just passed by the council. If the citizens decided they wanted to do something separate from what the council's action is, that's where you have the referendum and the initiative process. But normally the ordinances are presented and approved by council on a regular basis. Are you saying that this thing? We are all task again. We are all task. I don't see it. Other people were discussing. There is a specific agenda item, ma'am. And ma'am, you can call me and I'd be glad to discuss it. Okay, thanks. If there's any other public comment, we've got time for a couple more. We'll take them. I'd like to call a point of order.

[1:22:18] I don't particularly like being centric for defending the citizens. I don't understand you, Mr. Richardson. I feel that you censored me. How did I censor you? Cut off the conversation when I was talking about what the councilman, Charlotte said. What would you like to add, sir? Nothing at this time. If I've censured you, I apologize. Anything you have to say, you have the floor. Thank you. I'd like to make an amendment to this president ordinance. I'd like to require the homeowners to be able to get to that properly within two hours if there was a problem. Would you add that to your motion? Say it again, I'm not sure. I'd like the property owners to be available to come to the property of the STR within two hours if they're called about a disturbance at that property. Would you like to add to your motion that property owners of an STR the in a position so that they could be at the property within two hours if there is a problem? Would you like to add that to your motion? No, because we're just bringing it back. A motion has been made, it has been seconded. And then the council member has the right to amend that motion. Yes, not until we vote on it. With there is a motion and a second on the floor. No, as soon as the, it would have to get a second. You could make the motion to amend it, but it would have to get a second. But right now there is a motion on the floor and a second to take it as presented with the addition of the two. I just asked her if she wanted to amend her motion, she said no. So we have to go through this one first. That has to be decided by council, not one member. And Rogers, rules of orders allow any council member to amend any motion that's before council. This motion must be either voted up or down.

[1:24:22] After this motion is voted up or down, then you have the right to make another motion with what you want in it. And if you can get a second, we'll vote on that. But the motion has already been made, it is already on the floor, it has been seconded, And we must take care of this one first. Okay. Can you clarify the motion? You said no. Can you clarify the motion? The motion has been made that we accept that we come back with that we come back with a ordinance that includes one tent or one trailer per lot and that they have to re-register every two years, but we would take the the ordinance that was sent to us several months ago with those two additions and that is what we would bring back. That also has been seconded. That's on the floor it has to be handled. There is no way to amend because the one that made the motion refused to amend it. That's not true. With the moratorium. And the moratorium and also the moratorium was part of the motion. And just as a point of order we have not adopted Robert's rules of order for this governing body that could be something that would be adopted in the future, so that that is not something that we have currently adopted for this body. Yes, sir. Did you have something? We need some. Am I right on this? We need to vote on the motion that's on the floor. Okay. The motion is out there. It must be handled either up or down. If there's some other motion, if it fails, if there's some other motion or some other amendment, then there could be another motion made, which I will allow you to make. But first, we have to take care of the one that's already out there. Does this include the task course. No. Motion does not include the task force. No. But staff intends to tense clarify that staff intends to at this point, as I mentioned, contact the original applicants, which were when we were dealing with this, which Mr. Gossett and Mr. Mitchell from a HONO Emergency Representative, and then we would need y'all to either direct this as to what one or two short-term rental

[1:26:23] representatives we want to be with that would be administrative that could be handled via direction from the council might operate from the motion I guess I do have a question but it went when the if this motion passes and it comes back then there will be the opportunity to add or take away from those restrictions it's great. Yes. Thank you. Yes. Anyone else? Any comment? Not move call for the vote. And the motion has been made that we bring it back with two additions and the moratorium on enforcement. Is that the motion? Is that the second? Yes, sir. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Put a six one Alrighty, it is 10 o'clock. We have a lawyer waiting on us. So we will be going into, so we're going to have to do this. We're going to have to do this one. Low session, Executive Session of the Revision of Government Code, Title 5, Open Government Ethics Subtitle A, Open Government of Chapter 551, Open Meeting Subchapter D, Acceptions require that the meetings be open under the following sections A section 5510741 to deliberate the annual evaluation of the City Manager B section 5510711A consult with attorney with the governmental body seeks its advice of the attorney about pending or competent plated litigation regarding number one seal code program contract number two temple to construction and corporate your number three else a see section 5510712 consult with attorney with the governmental body seeks the advice of its attorney on a manner in which the duty of the attorney to the governmental body under the Texas history rules professional conduct of the state bar of Texas clearly confines with this chapter regarding one assignment of rights hickory welfare or property number

[1:28:25] two mortar for herstville agreement d section five five one deliberations about real property it is ten oh six we are now in executive number c which is a recommendation to use unallocated funds for coming to your 217 health insurance premiums in the amount of $3.2, $946,000, Lisa Martin. Good morning, Mayor, Council and City Manager. As you know, we participated in the meet and confer process and on September 27th, 28th, the membership voted on the amendment to their current contract and it was signed on September 29th. As part of the agreement with the coalition of police, their side unanimously believed that the money for the 323, approximately 323,000 was set aside. They would like that to be set aside for the insurance premiums later in the year. They believe that that does affect the most people that are employees or retirees of the city. As part of the agreement, we were to come forward today and recommend to you that that money be set aside for that purpose. I'm not prepared to bring to you any kind of premiums for next year. I intend to do that during the November meetings. So today, it's not necessarily a voting issue. It's merely to make the recommendation to you that both the coalition of police and the management side agree that that money should be placed for the insurance premiums. you need to vote or you need a consensus. I don't really need either. I just need to let you know that that's what's going on. And in November, when I come back to you with the insurance, we'll discuss that in detail. I think that was kind of the intent when we when we cubby hold that because we knew this was coming. Correct. All right. Everybody happy with that? I have any questions for Lisa? Public comment?

[1:30:25] Lisa, so we're talking about the whole city. The whole city, the employees, the fire, the police. We're insurance agreements. Yes. It's a total of 1290 members. There's 802 employees and 498 retirees. And then on top of that, it's all of their dependents as well that are covered. So it's several thousand people. Thank you. Yes. Mr. Day, I know y'all call us, what does 1% raise cost the city? I'm sorry, Morgan. valuation is $322,000, it's about $300,000, it's just over the $322,000 we have set aside to fund the general fund raises in a 1%. That was excluding police and fire though, because we expected they would be handled in a different way. 1%, we don't have an answer for 1% across the board, across all funds, but it would be be more than the 300. Okay. All right. Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you, Lisa. Thank you. All right. Item eight. Follow up with the administrative issue. Consider items discussed in executive closed session if needed. We discussed nothing that needs any action. No votes necessary. Item B is consideration of approving various board nominations. Design and historic review commission. young Turner SMD 3 to a second full-term ending September 2018 advisory board Charlie Powell SMD 3 to a sixth full-term ending October 19 I will entertain a motion to accept. So move. Harry makes the motion and Marty gets the second. Any

[1:32:27] any questions on this any comments public comment all in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Put a 7-0 on that one Brian. Number C is announcements, consideration of future agenda items. I'll start with you, Chardon? I would like to see a future agenda item to discuss and direct staff on having a written policy to add policy that whenever there is an ordinance or a policy under review by Council by staff that it be classified as under review and there can be no action of any any kind out there until the review is settled. I would like to discuss that with Council if we could. We have a typical, I mean, I don't know that it's written, we can clarify that, we'll discuss and visit with you, but that's our typical policy of operation. If there's an item under discussion, then we hold in a moratorium sort of mode until the final decision is made. So we'll visit with legal- I understand that, but in today's society with the, everybody can go online and see what ordinances are, or read what our policies are, or read what the charger says, that it would appear that we would need to update, and so it could be understood that staff needs to be allowed time to review when something is under review, so no action. Time can't be wasted by staff members when it's under review. We'll work with you and then we'll get with you and see if we need an agenda item if we can handle that administratively. I would appreciate it. Nothing at this time. How about you, Lucy? Harry? I'd like to see a future agenda item where we have Ryan or somebody from vehicle maintenance make a presentation on the amount of savings we received from the vehicle software that we installed about a year ago, however long spent.

[1:34:28] That way we can say the citizens of this was a very good thing. here that's a good idea because that's what I was saying up there. I'd like to have a review of the moving fire station four in the wisdom of that decision. I'm sorry I didn't hear that. What was that? Fire station number four. I think it's being moved off of I mean somebody's location. Yeah and And it's being moved out of a good location to redwood isolated location. And what I read in the capital improvement plan is that it's being moved to protect good fellow in case of a disaster. If that's part of the region, that's listed here. That's not the case. And four is where the fire training center is. Yeah. Yeah, the fire training center is being relocated, of course, out away from the river, out behind the animal shelter. That's under construction that was already approved by Council a while back, and before that as well, Council also authorized the purchase of land. It's not on good fellow property, the purchase of land in a location that makes their response times better. The location happens to be a little closer. We're not, that's not an item on the agenda. We can give them some more information. So if you want to holler at me, and I'll be happy to visit with you about what Council's already approved. Well, I'd like to review that, Council to review that, because it's not been moved to a better location. I can visit with you and tell you what action Council has already taken on the item. And if y'all want to change that item, that action, you're more than welcome to do that. Yes, I would like to change it. And I have one other item, not next meeting. I will not be here next meeting due to some surgeries, But the following meeting, if

[1:36:28] Hina could provide us with the report, the water area water and what bills we pay, just bring us up to date because our year is closing. Is that correct? I would like to have that brought back the second meeting in November, if I could. I have nothing. Brian, you had a couple items. Yes, I just want to get clarification on when y'all would like the first reading of the STR ordinance to occur. That way it allows planning and development to make the proper publication in the paper and to make sure that we have a seven-member council due to the nature of the meeting. First, second meeting in May of 2017. Not before December for me, but that's just for me. And I think that allows good some time to work with Teresa and John, if that's okay, because it's the holidays, I'm gonna be out for personal reasons, and then to work, Lane and I've been working with it, it allows time. If that's okay. First meeting in December is what you're asking for. First or second, you know, just in December. And a problem with that on the left, Lane? Marty agrees with you, though. No, yeah, more to you. I think it is our second meeting in December, what's the date? It'll be the 20th, but if you, able to do the first meeting on in December and then the second meeting you do it then it could go into effect on January 1 which is a kind of a clean cut off. Let's try the first meeting in December. That'll give John enough time to do what he needs to do, won't he? And also I don't know if it needs to be put on the agenda or not because I can't remember Mayor but remind me I was voted and reappointed by the porch to planes board and I don't know if it needs to come before council for that.

[1:38:28] We can put that on the next agenda. I won't be here at the next agenda, but the Port Plains Board has voted it. So I wanted to let you know. I'll just be on the next agenda. What else? And then the other item was regarding the first meeting in January. It's scheduled for January 3rd, and this is for staff planning purposes. January 3rd's probably going to be a difficult time to get a quorum, my guess is. So you could either opt to have the one meeting on the 17th. that's already scheduled, or you can do it any way you want to, but I just want to bring that up. That would be my suggestion. One meeting, January 17th. Yes. Everybody agree? Yes. Three. What else? Need you to smile the rest of the day, and I'll make a motion to adjourn. All in favor say aye. Aye. It's 1122, this meeting is over.

Transcribed 2026-07-27 with faster-whisper (base.en) · source: youtube.com/watch?v=pTHEF83nspo