Aug 10, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING

ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR ABSTENTIONS? IF NOT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ITEM ONE A AS PRESENTED, PLEASE SAY, AYE.

PUBLIC WORKS FOR BEING SELECTED AS THE TOP PUBLIC WORKS LEADER FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM UH, TWO A.

SO RECOGNIZE KEVIN HARVILLE FROM

[a. Recognize Kevin Harvill from Public Works for being selected as the Top Public Works Leader for the State of Texas.]

GOOD EVENING, UH, MAYOR AND COUNSEL, I'D LIKE TO INVITE KEVIN TO COME UP HERE FOR A MINUTE.

UM, AND, UH, AS YOU SAID, UM, WE'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE HIM FOR, UH, BEING AWARDED THE TOP PUBLIC WORKS LEADER OF A YEAR, UM, THE TEXAS SECTION OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION.

IT IS A GREAT HONOR IF YOU CONSIDER ALL THE PUBLIC WORKS PROFESSIONALS ACROSS THE STATE OF TEXAS.

THERE ARE TENS OF THOUSANDS AND, UM, KEVIN WAS RIGHTLY, UH, SELECTED AS A TOP LEADER OF THE YEAR FOR 2023, SO WE'RE VERY PROUD OF HIM.

UM, THERE WAS A LENGTHY, UM, APPLICATION, UH, FORM THAT WE SUBMITTED, UH, THAT LISTED EVERYTHING, UH, ALL THE REASONS WHY KEVIN DESERVES THIS AWARD.

I'M NOT GONNA READ THROUGH THE SIX PAGES OR SO, UH, THAT WE WROTE, BUT, UM, I DO WANNA HIGHLIGHT A FEW THINGS.

UH, SOME THINGS THAT HE'S ACCOMPLISHED IN HIS, UM, YOU KNOW, 13 YEARS AT THE CITY OF BAYTOWN.

UH, 18 YEARS AT THE CITY OF DALLAS.

UM, I'VE WORKED PERSONALLY WITH KEVIN FOR, UH, ALMOST EIGHT YEARS NOW.

AND, UM, I CAN ATTEST TO, UH, THE TYPE OF LEADER THAT KEVIN IS.

UM, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HE'S ACCOMPLISHED RECENTLY, UM, HE STARTED A, UH, COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE PROGRAM, UH, FOR THE CITY OF BAYTOWN WHEN THE STATE CHANGED THE RULES AND MADE, UH, GETTING A CDL MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE.

UM, KEVIN DECIDED TO FIND OUT, FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GET THAT TRAINING, UH, UH, AND DO IT IN-HOUSE, UH, CHEAPER AND BETTER.

UM, KEVIN DEVELOPED A, OR, OR STARTED A SAFETY RODEO FOR ALL THE PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES WERE, UH, TRAINED ON DOING PROCEDURES SAFELY.

AND, UH, WE, WE STRESS SAFETY IN OUR DEPARTMENT.

UH, KEVIN STARTED A STAMPED, UH, CONCRETE PROGRAM.

SO WE GOT, UH, WHEN WE, UH, TRIED TO DO COLORED AND STAMPED CONCRETE, UH, CONTRACTORS THAT WE CHOSE, WERE DOING IT, UH, POORLY AND EXPENSIVE.

SO KEVIN STARTED A PROGRAM WHERE HE TRAINED THE EMPLOYEES, UH, IN-HOUSE TO DO, UH, MUCH BETTER WORK AT A BETTER PRICE.

AND YOU CAN SEE THE FRUITS OF THIS IF YOU GO ON GARTH ROAD SOUTH OF 1 46 OR MOST RECENTLY ON, UH, WARD ROAD, UH, WHERE WE DID COLORED AND STAMPED CONCRETE AND, AND MADE GREAT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE, THE CITY.

AND, UH, THOSE AREAS.

UH, HE, UM, INSTITUTED A SKILL-BASED PAY PROGRAM FOR, FOR HIS TRAFFIC EMPLOYEES, UH, SO THEY COULD GET HIGHER PAY AS THEY GAINED GREATER SKILLS.

UM, HE DID SOMETHING SIMILAR FOR A FACILITY TECH CERTIFICATION PROGRAM.

UM, HIS EMPLOYEES GET HIGHER PAY WHEN THEY GET MORE CERTIFICATIONS AND LICENSES.

AND, UM, SO THESE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HE'S DONE.

I DON'T THINK HE REALLY DESERVED AWARD FOR WHAT HE'S DONE, BUT FOR WHO HE IS.

AND I CAN TELL YOU WHO KEVIN IS, AND IF YOU WORKED, I KNOW MANY OF YOU HAVE WORKED WITH KEVIN, UM, AS WELL AS I HAVE, AND I CAN TELL YOU WHO HE IS.

HE IS DEPENDABLE.

[00:05:01]

UH, WHEN I GIVE AN ASSIGNMENT, UM, TO KEVIN, I CONSIDER IT DONE BECAUSE IT IS DONE USUALLY BEFORE THE DAY IS OVER AND I GET AN EMAIL SAYING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S DONE.

UM, THAT'S A, A, YOU KNOW, A GREAT FEELING TO HAVE TO KNOW THAT I CAN ALWAYS DEPEND ON KEVIN.

UH, I CAN TELL YOU KEVIN IS INNOVATIVE.

UM, SOME OF THE PROGRAMS THAT I LISTED HERE SHOW THAT HE IS ALWAYS TRYING TO, UH, DO THE BEST WITH THE TAXPAYER FUNDS THAT HE HAS AND TO, UH, IMPROVE THE CITY.

AND, UM, LIKE I SAY, HE HAS WAYS OF INNOVATIVELY USING TAXPAYERS TO, UH, DOLLARS TO, UH, ACHIEVE THE BEST PRODUCT POSSIBLE.

AND LASTLY, I THINK HE DESERVED BECAUSE HE IS CARING.

UH, HE CARES MOSTLY ABOUT HIS EMPLOYEES.

UH, A LOT OF THE PROGRAMS HE STARTED ARE BECAUSE HE CARES ABOUT HIS EMPLOYEES.

UH, HE WANTS TO SEE THEM DO WELL AND SUCCEED.

AND, UM, HE, HE LIVES THIS EVERY DAY.

UH, HE CARES ABOUT THE CITY.

HE WANTS TO SEE THE CITY, UH, THRIVE AND GROW AND, AND BE A BETTER PLACE.

UH, AND HE CARES ABOUT THOSE.

HE WORKS FOR, HE ROUTINELY MAKES ME LOOK BETTER THAN I AM.

SO I DO APPRECIATE EVERYTHING HE'S DONE.

HE IS VERY DESERVING TO BE THE TOP PUBLIC WORKS LEADER OF THE YEAR.

SO JUST WANT TO PRESENT THAT TO KEVIN AGAIN.

WE HAVE, UH, WE HAVE HIS FAMILY HERE.

WANNA INVITE THEM UP TO TAKE A PICTURE.

WELL, MY CAMERA DOESN'T WORK NOW.

THAT'S WEIRD.

WE'RE LATE FOR PRACTICE.

TWO, GET PERFECT.

UH, I'D LIKE TO, TO JUST PROVIDE COMMENT ON THE RECOGNITION THAT MR. HARVILLE JUST RECEIVED.

HE'S AN EXTREMELY HUMBLE GENTLEMAN, BUT, UH, AS, AS MR. SIMINO EXPRESSED, IF, UH, WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT YOU NEED TO BRING PUBLIC WORKS IN, HE'S ON IT.

I MEAN, HE'S GOING TO GET IT DONE.

AND THERE'S JUST TIMES WHERE YOU JUST LOOK AT HIM AND LOOK AT HIS CREW.

THEY RESPECT HIM.

HE, AND IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT GETTING THE JOB DONE, IT'S IN THE MANNER OF HOW YOU DO IT.

AND THAT'S WHAT, UH, FOR ME AS MAYOR, WHEN, WHEN WE HAVE A CITIZEN CONTACT YOU, UH, A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE MY PHONE NUMBER AND, AND I JUST WORKED AT THE, THE CHAIN OF COMMAND.

AND WHEN, WHEN WE KNOW, UH, KEVIN HAR HARVILLE'S ON IT, OR HIS CREWS, WE KNOW IT'S GONNA GET DONE AND IT'S GONNA GET DONE QUICKLY.

AND SO HE'S A TRUE PUBLIC SERVANT, UH, FOR OUR CITIZENS.

BAYTOWN.

HE'S INVALUABLE TO WHAT HE BRINGS TO PUBLIC WORKS AND TO THE ENTIRE CITY.

SO WITH THAT, I WANNA PERSONALLY THANK YOU ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND COUNCIL.

YES, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

SO NEXT I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA COME DOWN.

I HAVE A PROCLAMATION TO READ.

UM, UH, AND THEN I'VE GOT, UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A, UM, OPPORTUNITY FOR A PHOTO.

I'D LIKE COUNSEL TO JOIN ME IN, IN THIS PROCLAMATION I NEED THESE.

SO BEFORE I READ THIS PROCLAMATION, IT'S, IT'S FOR, UH, INDIAN INDEPENDENCE DAY, WHICH IS AUGUST 15TH.

BUT, UM, I WAS ABLE TO ATTEND, I THINK IT WAS IN 2019.

WE HAD A REALLY BIG CELEBRATION HERE AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER, UM, ALL DAY CELEBRATION.

AND THE INDIAN COMMUNITY IS VERY IMPORTANT TO OUR CITIZENS, CERTAINLY NOT JUST AS AN EMPLOYER, UH, AND THE EMPLOYEES, BUT JUST WHAT THEY BRING THE COMMUNITY TO CELEBRATE YOUR CULTURE AND CERTAINLY YOUR INDEPENDENCE DAY TO, TO BE ABLE TO DO IT.

ONCE AGAIN, I'M VERY HAPPY AND PLEASED TO, TO, TO CERTAINLY PRESENT THIS PROCLAMATION.

I BELIEVE MAYOR PRO TIMM LESTER MAY BE ABLE TO, TO COME BY, UH, SATURDAY FOR, FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME TO, TO CERTAINLY, UH, REPRESENT, UH, THE CITY, UH, IN A CAPACITY.

BUT WE JUST WANTED, UH, TO TELL YOU, WE, WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND CERTAINLY, UH, WE, WE CERTAINLY HOPE THAT YOU HAVE A GREAT CELEBRATION, UH, THROUGHOUT THIS WEEKEND.

SO, SO WITH THAT, UH, , I MEAN WE WE'RE GONNA PRE I'M GONNA READ THIS AND THEN WE'LL, WE'LL PRESENT IN JUST THAT.

THE INDIAN INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT WAS LED BY MAHATMA GANDHI, DHA NARU, AND SHAR PATEL.

WE HAVE INDIAN INDEPENDENCE DAY.

SO WHERE IS THE INDIAN INDEPENDENCE ACT OF 1947 WAS APPROVED BY THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT, WHICH ALLOWED THE NSTITUTE ASSEMBLY OF INDIA TO WRITE THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, MARKING THE BEGINNING OF INDIA'S INDEPENDENCE.

AFTER MANY YEARS OF BRITISH RULE,

[00:10:01]

AND THROUGH THEIR MESSAGE OF NON-VIOLENCE AND CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, THEY INSPIRED CIVIL RIGHT LEADERS FROM AROUND THE WORLD, THE YOUTHFUL COUNTRY THAT INDIA IS MADE NOTABLE ADVANCES IN EDUCATION, HEALTH, TECHNOLOGY, AND IN THE EN AND THE ENVIRONMENT.

IN ITS 75 YEARS SINCE INDEPENDENCE, WE ARE SO 75 YEARS.

GREAT.

INDIA'S INDEPENDENCE DAY IS ONE OF INDIA'S THREE NATIONAL HOLIDAYS AND IS CELEBRATED BY 1.3 BILLION PEOPLE ACROSS THE COUNTRY WITH FLAG, FLAG HOSTING CEREMONIES, KITE FLYING AND PARADES.

WHEREAS WE RECOGNIZE THE SUCCESS AND ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE INDIAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY IN TEXAS AND CERTAINLY IN OUR COMMUNITY HERE IN BAYTOWN.

WE CELEBRATE INDIAN'S CONTRIBUTION TO THE WORLD.

NOW, THEREFORE, BRANDON CILLO IS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS.

DO HEREBY PRO PROCLAIM AUGUST 15TH, 2023

[b. Present a proclamation designating August 15th, 2023 as the Indian Independence Day.]

AS INDIAN INDEPENDENCE DAY IN BAYTOWN AND URGE ALL CITIZENS TO EXPRESS THEIR SUPPORT AND RECOGNITION OF THIS HOLIDAY SHARED BY SO MANY.

WE NEED TO GO DOWN.

CAN WE COME? YES, ABSOLUTELY.

YOU THE LADIES, EVERYBODY.

SUCH A BEAUTIFUL LADIES WITH US TOO.

I KNOW.

WE'LL GET HERE AND WE'LL JUST KIND OF JUST JOIN AND FILL IN HUNDREDS OF LIGHTS UNDER THE LIE, UNDER THE LIE.

GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN.

IT'S BEEN A WHILE, RIGHT? YOU, YOU, YOU, THE HEAD WHO'S THE HEAD REPRESENTATIVE OR HER BABY Y ON THE SIDE? BOTH.

BOTH? OKAY.

HERE Y'ALL HOLD THAT AND COME ON.

BACK UP.

MORE WE'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THE PROCLAMATION HERE.

OH, Y'ALL CAN GET A LITTLE CLOSER FOR THE PICTURE.

YEAH, A LITTLE CLOSER.

AH, THAT'S PERFECT.

NO, YOU'RE GOOD.

SO I, I BELIEVE WE HAVE TWO CITIZENS THAT, SO TO SPEAK.

READY? ONE, TWO, AND ONE.

AND I THINK COUNCILMAN, UH, WHAT'S THE, WHAT TIME WOULD YOU LIKE? TWO? TWO O'CLOCK.

TWO O'CLOCK? TWO 30.

TWO 30.

TWO 30 AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER, OR? UH, YES, I'LL BE IN THERE.

SO HIS NAME.

SO WE CAN, WE'LL, WE'LL GET SOME INFORMATION SO IT, WE'LL GET IT TO, BUT YEAH, I'LL BE OKAY.

OKAY, NEXT WE HAVE, UH, ITEM THREE, WHICH IS CITIZEN COMMENTS.

[3. CITIZEN COMMENTS Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 551, prohibits the City Council from discussing, deliberating, or considering, subjects for which public notice has not been given on the agenda. Issues that cannot be referred to the administration for action may be placed on the agenda of a future City Council Session.]

LET'S SEE.

IS THERE SOMETHING? OKAY.

THE PURPOSE OF CITIZEN COMMENTS IS TO GIVE ALL INTERESTED CITIZENS THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS.

EVERYONE DESIRED TO SPEAK SHOULD HAVE EITHER SIGNED THE APPROPRIATE LIST IN THE FOYER OR EMAILED THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO THE POSTED TIME OF THIS MEETING.

EACH OF CITIZENS SHALL GIVE HIS OR HER NAME AND ADDRESS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A PROPER RECORD OF THESE COMMENTS.

THE RULES ALLOW, UH, EACH PERSON ONE MINUTE TO SPEAK.

A CI A CITIZEN MAY PASS HIS OR HER TIME TO ANOTHER PERSON WHO HAS REQUESTED TO ADDRESS COUNSEL.

HOWEVER, NO CITIZEN'S REMARKS SHALL EXCEED THREE MINUTES IN TOTAL.

EITHER THE ONE MINUTE OR THE THREE MINUTE LIMIT MAY BE EXTENDED BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO BE AS BRIEF AND TO THE POINT AS POSSIBLE.

PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THE CITY COUNCIL CANNOT DISCUSS OR DELIBERATE ON ITEMS FOR WHICH PUBLIC NOTICE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN ON THIS AGENDA.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE FIRST WE HAVE, IS IT GLADYS GARCIA? OKAY.

YES, MA'AM.

UM, IF YOU DON'T MIND COMING TO THE MICROPHONE AND JUST, UH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO STATE YOUR, YOUR STREET ADDRESS AS FAR AS NUMBER, BUT JUST WHAT STREET YOU, YOU'RE ON.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

THIS IS MY FIRST TIME IN THE CITY MEETING AND I HAVE LIVED HERE FOR 19 YEARS.

MY NAME IS GLADYS GARCIA.

MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT FIRST.

UM, I DECIDED TO SHOW UP.

AND WHAT, WHAT STREET DO YOU LIVE ON, MA'AM? I LIVE ON 7 7 1 1 OMAHA DRIVE.

BAYTOWN, TEXAS 7 7 5 2 1.

YEAH, WE COULD JUST RESTART OUR TIME.

THAT'S FINE.

IF WE MAY GO, GO AHEAD.

OH YEAH, I'M HERE.

I HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED THE CITY OF BAYTOWN SINCE WE MOVED HERE.

WE SUPPORTED THE SCHOOLS AND EVERYTHING THAT WE DO.

WE VOLUNTEER A LOT OF OUR TIME FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR FUTURE OF THIS CITY.

WE LOVED WHERE WE LIVE.

WE CALL HOME.

[00:15:01]

WE PLAN TO LIVE HERE AS LONG AS THE, WE FEEL THE SAME WAY.

WE THANK YOU.

WE ARE VERY THANKFUL FOR THE IMPROVEMENT THAT'S DONE THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

WE HOLD PRIDE ON IT AS MUCH AS YOU GUYS AND THE WORK.

AND ONE THING THAT HAS BROUGHT ME IN, AND I'M PRETTY SURE IT'S VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE, IS ON THE SOCIAL MEDIA ABOUT THESE WAREHOUSES THAT WILL BUILD BUILDING ACROSS THE STREET FROM US.

OUR STUDENT, OUR KIDS GO TO SCHOOL IN THAT CORNER.

I'M NOT TOO SURE OR POSITIVE IF THERE'S A WAY THAT THESE 18 WHEELERS WILL GIVE RIGHT AWAY TO THESE BUSES AND EVERYBODY THAT'S GOING TO BE TRANSPORTING KIDS.

THAT'S JUST MY BIG CONCERN.

IS THERE GONNA BE ANY BARRIERS TO STOP THEM FROM GOING THROUGH VILLE TO JOHN MARTIN? THERE'S TOO MANY ACCIDENTS THERE WITH 18 WHEELERS AND I KNOW YOU GUYS MIGHT EXTEND THE ROADS, BUT IT'S VERY DANGEROUS FOR OUR CHILDREN AND ALSO WHERE WE TAKE BRIGHTEST CALL HOME IN BAYTOWN.

AND THAT'S MY THANK YOU MA'AM.

THANK YOU FOR COMING.

SO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS TODAY ARE BEING HELD FOR THE PURPOSE OF GIVING ALL INTERESTED PERSONS THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS REGARDING THE SUBJECT OF, OF THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS.

NEXT WE HAVE, UH, DR.

JUNE STANSKI TO BECOME THE PODIUM.

AND JUST STATE YOUR, YOUR STREET NAME.

YOUR NAME AND YOUR NAME AND YOUR STREET NAME PLEASE.

STANSKI.

I LIVE ON DRIFTWOOD IN THE QUAIL HOLLOW SUBDIVISION.

UM, I HAVE LOTS OF FRIENDS THAT LIVE OVER THERE AT MEADOW LAKE AND WE HAVE GREAT CONCERNS 'CAUSE I, WHEN I GO TO VISIT THEM, I FEEL LIKE I'M TAKING MY LIFE IN MY OWN HANDS.

WHEN I TRIED TO ENTER JOHN MARTIN WITH MY LITTLE BITTY CAR, MUCH LESS WITH AN 18 WHEELER.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE PERSON THAT WAS BIDDING ON THAT PROPERTY HAS PULLED OUT THEIR BID.

BUT I STILL THINK IF WE WANT 18 WHEELERS ON JOHN MARTIN, IT NEEDS TO BE TWO LANES EACH DIRECTION, PREFERABLY WITH A MEDIAN IN THE MIDDLE.

THERE'S TALK ABOUT JONES ROAD.

JONES ROAD IS NOT A EAST, WEST ROAD.

IT'S NOT DEVELOPED AT ALL IN, IN THAT SAME AREA.

SO I HAVE SOME LETTERS THAT I CAN PASS DOWN THE TABLE, UH, FROM A CONCERNED CITIZEN THAT LIVES, UM, OVER THERE.

AND MY OTHER BIG CONCERN IS OUR LACK OF A GREAT SHOPPING AREA IN BAYTOWN.

THE MALL WAS NOT GREAT.

IT HAD MOLD ISSUES AND VARIOUS OTHER ISSUES.

IF, IF YOU CAN MAKE YOUR LAST COMMENT, MA'AM, WE NEED TO HAVE VIABLE SHOPPING AND NICE RESTAURANTS WHERE THE MALL USED TO SIT.

WE DON'T NEED A PUBLIC ARENA AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT WE WOULD LOVE, IF YOU LOOK AT SOCIAL MEDIA, IT'S FILLED WITH PEOPLE THAT WANT GREAT SHOPPING.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MA'AM.

ALRIGHT, MOVE ON TO, UM, WE APPRECIATE BOTH THE INDIVIDUALS THAT CAME TO SPEAK, UH, TO CITY COUNCIL THIS EVENING.

MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS FOUR A IS CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.

[a. Conduct a public hearing on the Baytown Crime Control and Prevention District Fiscal Year 2023-24 Proposed Budget.]

EVERYONE DESIRED TO BE A PART OF TODAY'S HEARING SHOULD HAVE EITHER SIGNED THE APPROPRIATE LIST IN THE FOYER OR EMAILED THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO THE POSTED TIME OF THIS MEETING.

EACH PARTICIPANT SHALL GIVE HIS OR HER HIS HER NAME, HIS OR HER NAME AND ADDRESS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A PROPER RECORD OF THESE HEARINGS.

THE RULES ALLOW EACH PERSON THREE MINUTES TO PRESENT INFORMATION.

HOWEVER, I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO BE AS BRIEF AND TO THE POINT AS POSSIBLE.

IF YOU'RE A GROUP OF PERSONS WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COUNSEL ON THE SAME SUBJECT, PLEASE SELECT A SPOKESPERSON TO PRESENT THAT INFORMATION.

AND IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE DIRECT 'EM TO ME.

SO IT IS NOW SIX 50 AND AN ORDER AN NOW CALL TO ORDER THIS PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE BAYTOWN CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT FISCAL YEAR BUDGET OF 2324.

AND I WOULD ASK STAFF TO SUMMARIZE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS HEARING.

UM, GOOD EVENING COUNSEL.

YOU HAVE THE FY 24 CCPD BUDGET BEFORE YOU, THE BUDGET HAS CHANGED SINCE IT WAS LAST PRESENTED.

UM, THE ESTIMATED COLUMN BEGINNING FUND BALANCE, AND I THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE A PRINTOUT IN FRONT OF YOU.

UM, THE BEGINNING FUND BALANCE SHOULD HAVE BEEN 787,539.

UM, AND CURRENT, WHAT WAS PRESENTED WAS 37,698.

AND THAT CHANGES ARE UNFORESEEN AND NEW INITIATIVES TO $793,609.

THE DETAILS OF THE REST OF THE BUDGET ARE IN YOUR PACKET.

UM, THIS BUDGET WAS APPROVED ON JULY 11TH BY THE BOARD AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

IT INCLUDES 2.5 MILLION IN REVENUE AND 2.5 MILLION IN EXPENDITURES.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER.

DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON ITEM FOUR? A STAFF? YOU HAVE NOT.

UH, I'M SORRY, I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

MY BRAIN JUST, UM, THERESA, I MEAN IS IT A, AM I READING IT RIGHT, THAT THE PROPOSED BUDGET WOULD LEAVE THEM WITH A FUND BALANCE ENDING IN ZERO AND IS THAT WHAT WE WANT? OR DO WE TYPICALLY LIKE TO HAVE SOME KIND OF CUSHION TO GO OVER YEAR OVER YEAR? SO THE ACTUAL CUSHION IS IN THE UNFORESEEN AND NEW INITIATIVES LINE.

SORRY, I JUST,

[00:20:01]

WHICH IS WHAT I MENTIONED, THE 793,609 MM-HMM .

THAT'S WHAT THE CUSHION WOULD BE.

I GUESS I WOULD ASK COUNCIL COUNCILMAN, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH, I GUESS, THE TITLE OF THAT LINE ITEM OF UNFORESEEN NEW INITIATIVES? OR WOULD YOU LIKE IT TO BE MODIFIED TO UNFORESEEN, UH, AND UNFORESEEN NEW INITIATIVES AND OR CONTINGENCY? THE OTHER OPTION IS WE COULD ALSO JUST ALLOW IT TO FALL IN THE FUND BALANCE.

COMMENT, I HAVE SIMILAR, PROBABLY SIMILAR CONCERNS AS MY COLLEAGUE BY PUTTING IT IN THE UNFORESEEN NEW INITIATIVES BASICALLY, AND I HATE TO SAY IT THIS WAY, IT BASICALLY GIVES THEM READY ACCESS TO THAT MONEY INSTEAD OF BEING A FUND BALANCE.

I GUESS FROM OUR SIDE, IF, IF THE CCPD BOARD IS COMFORTABLE THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA HAVE A FUND BALANCE, I MEAN, THAT'S A DECISION THEY MAKE, BUT IT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO, TO REVIEW THAT SHOULD WE MAINTAIN A MINIMAL LEVEL OF FUND BALANCE THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND DO A BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS TO GET ACCESS TO VERSUS JUST HAVING IT IN THE BUDGET.

BUT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE QUIRKY BUDGETS THAT THEY HAVE APPROVED IT, I'M ASSUMING? THAT'S CORRECT.

SO IF WE DON'T APPROVE IT, IT'S GOTTA GO BACK TO THEM AND, AND JUST PROLONGS THE PROCESS.

SO DID WE ARE, YOU KNOW, ARE WE COMFORTABLE WITH THE C-C-B-P-D BOARD MAKING THAT DECISION AND WELL, I MEAN, ASK AS IN WORK SESSION AS THE C MANAGER SAID, WE ARE JUST APPROVE BASICALLY THAT FINAL NUMBER.

AND SO DO WE NEED TO GO AND LOOK AT THE LINE ITEMS OR NOT IS THE QUESTION? I MEAN, UNLESS WE HAD SOMETHING LIKE, YOU KNOW, SOME SOMETHING ELSE.

BUT AS FAR AS IN ITS TOTALITY, THE NUMBER THAT WE'RE APPRO IS THE TOTAL BUDGET, HOWEVER, IT'S SLICED AND DICE.

AND, AND THAT WOULD BE, I GUESS MY QUESTION BACK TO FINANCE WITH THE ADJUSTMENTS THE CCPB, THAT THE CRIME CONTROL PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD, HAVE THEY APPROVED THIS? YES.

ON JULY 11TH.

THEY HAVE A RATIONALE FOR WHY THEY DID IT THAT WAY IN, UM, I DON'T THINK IT WAS A DECISION BY THE BOARD.

I THINK IT'S JUST BEEN A PRACTICE THAT THE REMAINING BALANCE, WE MOVED TO UNFORESEEN JUST TO SHOW THAT, THAT WE HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET BASICALLY AND IT ENDS IN ZERO.

BUT WE CAN ALLOW IT TO FALL IN FUND BALANCE IF WE MOVE IT INTO WHAT BALANCE, UH, CAN WE, DOES IT REALLY NEED TO GO BACK FOR APPROVAL BECAUSE WE'RE JUST SHIFTING IT DOWN, WE'RE NOT TAKING IT AWAY.

UM, I WOULD HAVE TO, DOES IT GO DEFER SCOTT FOR THIS? SO I, I THINK COUNCIL CAN SET A PRECEDENT.

THIS IS CURRENTLY HOW THE CITY'S BUDGET IS DONE AS WELL.

AND SO IF COUNSEL THIS, THIS ACTUALLY GOES TO OUR POLICY DISCUSSIONS.

IF COUNSEL WANTS TO START SETTING A PRECEDENT THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE THIS, UH, ZEROING OUT THE, THE BALANCE AND THIS JUST GONNA FALL DOWN TO GO INTO THE ENDING FUND BALANCE.

THAT CAN BE THE NEW PRECEDENT THAT IS SET.

UM, NOW THIS CAN BE APPROVED TODAY, BUT WE CAN GO BACK AND STILL TALK TO THE, TO THE BOARD.

AND IF WE NEED TO DO A BUDGET AMENDMENT WITH THE CCPD, WE CAN BRING THAT BACK AND RE RATIFY IT WITH THE COUNCIL AT THIS POINT.

UH, JUST UNDERSTANDING THAT'S HOW WE'RE GONNA BE TRYING TO MODIFY THESE BUDGETS GOING FORWARD.

OR YOU CAN DELAY IT IN OR SUGGEST A CHANGE NOW AND THEN GO BACK AND GET IT REAPPROVED FROM THEM AND THEN BRING IT BACK AND REAPPROVE IT.

YES MA'AM.

CAN JASON OR THERESA, UM, JUST TELL ME ONE POSITIVE OF, OF MOVING IT TO FROM WHERE IT'S AT RIGHT NOW.

LIKE WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD IT MAKE? UM, I THINK TO SPEAK TO COUNCIL MEMBER, HE, UM, BINNA COURT'S, UH, COMMENT, UM, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF BUDGET TRANSFERS TAKING PLACE, UM, WITHOUT, WITH APPROVAL FROM DEPARTMENTS WITHOUT HAVING TO BRING IT TO COUNCIL.

THESE TWO FUNDS THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO GO OVER ARE DEDICATED TO WHAT EXACTLY THEY ARE.

WELL, AT THIS POINT I THINK, I THINK THE CITY MANAGER WAS CLEAR.

I MEAN, IT WOULD BE PRETTY MUCH, HOW, HOW DO WE WANT TO APPROACH IT? DO WE WANT TO PUT A LABEL ON IT AS FUND BALANCE OR NOT? YEAH.

AND I'VE BEEN GIVEN CLARIFICATION THAT IF WE, THE COUNCIL DOES DENY THIS RIGHT NOW, IT WILL REQUIRE A JOINT MEETING WITH THE CCPD FOR Y'ALL TO WORK IT OUT AND THEN APPROVE IT TOGETHER.

FINE.

WHAT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION? STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION? BECAUSE THESE ARE,

[00:25:02]

UM, THAT I HAVE FULL FAITH THAT CHIEF AND I HAVE PROPER OVERSIGHT OF THIS ONE AND THAT CHIEF DOBSON AND I HAVE PROPER O OVERSIGHT OF THE OTHER ONE, KNOWING THE INTENT OF COUNSEL THAT IT'S NOT TO USE AT 43,000 JUST AS SOME KIND OF FREE FOR ALL.

SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS JUST TO APPROVE THE TWO BUDGETS AS PRESENTED.

ALRIGHT, SO WITH THAT, UM, APPRECIATE THE, THE DISCUSSION.

SO ONCE AGAIN, I GUESS I, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE FOUR A SECOND.

A IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

SORRY, WE'RE INTO A PUBLIC HEARING.

ALRIGHT, SO PUBLIC HEARING.

SO, UH, BEING THAT NO ONE IS SIGNED UP FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, I HAVE TO READ THIS TO ME.

THERE WILL BE NO ONE ELSE S DESIRE TO SPEAK OR SIGNED UP.

NOT I'LL CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING REGARD TO THE BAYTOWN, UM, CRIME CONTROL PREVENTION DISTRICT FISCAL YEAR 2324 PROPOSED BUDGET.

SO NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO, UH, THE ACTION ITEM ITSELF, WHICH WOULD BE THE ITEM FOUR B, WHICH

[b. Consider an ordinance approving the Baytown Crime Control and Prevention District Fiscal Year 2023-24 Proposed Budget.]

IS APPROVAL.

UH, SO ONCE AGAIN, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ITEM FOUR B.

MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM FOUR B, SECOND MOTION SECOND.

ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF FOUR B? FOR THE C-C-C-P-D PROPOSED BUDGET, PLEASE SAY AYE.

HEARING ON THE BAYTOWN FIRE CONTROL PREVENTION EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES DISTRICT FISCAL YEAR 2324.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED NAY.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM FOUR C.

CONDUCT A PUBLIC

[c. Conduct a public hearing on the Baytown Fire Control, Prevention, and Emergency Medical Services District Fiscal Year 2023-24 Proposed Budget.]

PROPOSED BUDGET.

UH, SO ONCE AGAIN, UH, IT IS NOW SIX FIFTY EIGHT, UH, AND I CALL THE ORDERS PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE BAYTOWN FIRE CONTROL PREVENTION EMERGENCY MEDICAL SCHOOL SERVICES DISTRICT, FISCAL YEAR 2324, PROPOSED BUDGET.

I ASK STAFF TO SUMMARIZE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING.

OH, SORRY, .

UM, THIS BUDGET REPORT YOU HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE THE LAST TIME THAT YOU RECEIVED IT.

UM, THE DETAILS ARE IN YOUR PACKET.

IT INCLUDES THE 2.5 MILLION IN REVENUE AND 2.7 IN EXPENDITURES.

THIS BUDGET WAS APPROVED ON JULY 13TH BY THE BOARD AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE.

SO TO ENTERTAIN, UH, A MOTION FOR APPROVAL ITEM FOUR D, WHICH IS THE BUDGET WE JUST DISCUSSED.

UH, AGAIN, WE'RE IN PUBLIC HEARING.

SO IS ANYONE, HAS ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM? HAS THERE BEEN NO ONE, UH, DESIRE TO SPEAK? I NOW CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE BAYTOWN FIRE CONTROL PREVENTION EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES DISTRICT FISCAL YEAR 2324, PROPOSED BUDGET.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO, UH, AN ACTION ITEM OF THIS PROPOSED BUDGET, WHICH IS ITEM FOUR D.

UH,

[d. Consider an ordinance approving the Baytown Fire Control, Prevention, and Emergency Medical Services District Fiscal Year 2023-24 Proposed Budget.]

MOTION.

WE HAVE MOTION TO SECOND, SECOND.

MOTION SECOND.

ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ITEM FOUR D AS PRESENTED, PLEASE SAY AYE.

SO THAT'S SIGNIFICANT INCREASES.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM FOUR E, CONSIDER ORDINANCE APPRO IN THE

[e. Consider an ordinance approving the Baytown Area Water Authority Fiscal Year 2023-24 Proposed Budget.]

BAYTOWN AREA.

WATER AUTHORITIES FISCAL YEAR 2324.

PROPOSED BUDGET, ONCE AGAIN.

UM, THESE IS THE FY 24 BWA BUDGET.

UM, IT HAS ALSO NOT CHANGED SINCE THE LAST TIME IT WAS PRESENTED.

THIS BUDGET INCLUDES A 6% RATE INCREASE.

UM, THERE IS $16 MILLION IN REVENUE AND $16 MILLION IN EXPENDITURES.

THIS BUDGET WAS APPROVED ON JULY 19TH BY THE BOARD, AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER.

UM, I WOULD ASK ONE QUESTION.

I THINK IT'S JUST, JUST FOR INFORMATION FOR OUR GENERAL CITIZENS WOULD BE, WHAT WAS THE BIGGEST DRIVING COST IN GENERAL TERMS OF THE 6% INCREASE? UH, GOOD EVENING, MAYOR.

UM, SO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THE IOWA BOARD LOOKED AT, UM, THE COST OF RAW WATER, WHICH IS THE WATER WE PURCHASED TO TREAT, UH, HAS INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE PAST, UH, THREE YEARS.

SO, UH, SEPTEMBER OF 2021, UH, WE RECEIVED A 12% INCREASE IN RAW WATER.

UH, APRIL OF 22, WE HAD A 5.9% INCREASE.

AND THEN APRIL OF 23, WE HAD A 9.2% INCREASE IN THE COST OF RAW WATER.

UM, AND THAT IS ONE OF THE, UH, IT'S, UM, THIS YEAR WAS, I THINK FOUR AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS FOR RAW WATER.

UM, AND THEN THE COST OF CHEMICALS HAS ALSO BEEN, UH, UH, SIGNIFICANT AND WHICH IS OUR OTHER BIG COST.

UH, ASIDE FROM PERSONNEL.

SO JUST THIS PAST YEAR, UH, THE, THE RENEWALS ON OUR CHEMICALS, UH, SODIUM HYDROXIDE WENT UP 22%.

UH, FERRIC CHLORIDE WENT UP 59% AND ZINC WENT UP 58%.

SO, UH, WE'RE FACING, UH, EXTREMELY HIGH, UH, PRICE INCREASE ON ALL OF OUR MATERIALS.

AND IF I MAY ASK THE, UM, THE RAW WATER, WHAT, WHAT ENTITY WAS PASSING OR WHAT ENTITY WAS SU WAS SUPPLYING US THE RAW WATER THAT, THAT'S THE CITY OF HOUSTON.

I JUST WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION.

I KNEW THE ANSWER.

WE ARE EXPERIENCING GROWTH AND AS A CITY AND A WATER SYSTEM.

JUST WANNA HEAR.

UM, UH, ALSO, UH, JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, UM,

[00:30:01]

SO WE HAVE TO PREPARE FOR THAT GROWTH.

AND WE HAVE A PLANNED EXPANSION OF OUR, UH, BOW EAST PLANT THAT NEEDS TO BE FINANCED.

YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT, I WANNA BRING THIS UP.

I DON'T WANNA GET INTO A BIG DISCUSSION ON IT, BUT SINCE IT DOES PERTAIN, UH, ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, I WAS, I WAS KIND OF APPROACHED JUST IN A, IN A QUESTION OF, OF WHEN WE DEPEND ON THIS OTHER ENTITY FOR OUR RAW WATER, I THINK LONG TERM IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE COULD FIND ANOTHER SOURCE OF RAW WATER.

AND I THINK A LOT OF OTHER COMMUNITIES LIKE BAYTOWN IS TRYING TO DO THE SAME BECAUSE OF THIS TYPE OF SURE.

RESPONSE THAT WE AND REACTION THAT WE HAVE TO DO.

RIGHT? OKAY.

JUST, JUST A PROOF OF THOUGHT.

WELL, AT THAT POINT, UH, WE WILL HAVE, UH, AN ITEM FOR CI WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, PROOF FOR E OH FOUR E, EXCUSE ME.

FOUR E, WE GET A SECOND.

SO THERE'S A MOTION TO SECOND FOR ITEM FOUR E.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ITEMS CAN MAKE A COMMENT.

YES, MA'AM.

SO I, I DO APPRECIATE, UM, THE MAYOR, UH, POINTING OUT THE RATE INCREASE THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE BAYTOWN AREA, UH, WATER AUTHORITY AND THE REASONS BEHIND THAT.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE BAYTOWN AREA WATER AUTHORITY IS A CITIZEN LED COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL.

AND THE MEMBERS OF THAT COMMITTEE ARE BRENDA BRADLEY SMITH, MIKE WILSON, FRANK MCKAY, THE THIRD, ALYSSA EZ, AND JIMMY SMITH.

THANK YOU, MA'AM.

SO ANYWAY, SO WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON FOUR E.

AND SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, THE FOUR E IS PRESENTED.

PLEASE SAY AYE.

MOVE ON TO FIVE A, WHICH IS A PUBLIC HEARING, SO IT DOES NOW SEVEN OH THREE AND CALL TO ORDER THIS PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE UNIFIED, UNIFIED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ULDC TO, TO CHANGE SECTIONS 1.26 AND 2.10 CONCERNING CERTAIN LANGUAGE ADDRESSING WAREHOUSE AND FREIGHT MOVEMENT, WHOLESALE TRADE.

OPPOSED? ITEM CARRIES.

[a. Conduct a public hearing for text amendments to the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) to change Section 1.26 Rezoning, Special Use Permits, and Zoning Text Amendments and Section 2.10 Land Use Conditions Table A-40, Non-Residential Categories, concerning certain language addressing Warehouse and Freight Movement, Wholesale Trade.]

I WOULD NOW LIKE STAFF TO SUMMARIZE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING.

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, UH, MARTIN SCRIBNER PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.

SO YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF ITEMS ON YOUR AGENDA TONIGHT THAT PERTAIN TO ULDC UPDATES.

UM, THEY MAY ALSO SEEM LIKE THEY KIND OF DO THE SAME THING, SO I'M GONNA TRY AND SORT THOSE OUT FOR YOU.

SO STICK WITH ME AND I, AND I'LL TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT, THAT I'M EXPLAINING THAT, UH, WITHOUT ALL THE JARGON.

SO THE AMENDMENT IN FRONT OF YOU IS PROPOSED AS TO ADD THE CONDITION OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR ANY WAREHOUSE THAT GOES INTO A GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

SO LEMME MAKE SURE THIS IS REAL CLEAR RIGHT NOW, THE CURRENT CODE AND ANYBODY WHO HAS PUT IN AN APPLICATION UP TO THE TIME THAT THIS AMENDMENT MAY, MAY GET APPROVED BY THIS BOARD, UM, IF THEY MEET THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE IN THE CODE NOW, AND THERE ARE 11 OF THEM, AND I'LL KIND OF HIT THOSE, UM, A LITTLE MORE DETAIL IN A MINUTE.

THEY CAN BUILD WAREHOUSES IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AS IT STANDS.

SO I'M BRINGING THAT UP, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THERE IS AN ITEM ON YOUR AGENDA TONIGHT.

UH, ITEMS EIGHT A AND EIGHT B, WHICH HAVE, UH, AS, UH, ONE OF OUR CITIZEN COMMENTS, UH, ALLUDED TO THAT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN.

SO ANYBODY WHO'S HERE FOR THAT ITEM TONIGHT, WE WILL NOT BE HEARING THAT ITEM.

UM, BUT THAT SAID, WE STAFF STILL BELIEVES THAT THIS IS A, UH, A BENEFICIAL AMENDMENT TO THE CODE.

AND I'LL KIND OF EXPLAIN THAT AS I GO.

SO RIGHT NOW, THE LAND USE CONDITIONS TABLE AND THE ULDC REQUIRES, AS I SAID, 11 CONDITIONS.

IF YOU WANT TO PUT WAREHOUSE IN A GC DISTRICT, I DIDN'T LIST THEM ALL OUT ON THE SCREEN, BUT THOSE ARE IN THE DETAILS OF THE STAFF REPORT.

SO THESE ARE THE ONES THAT WE COME UP AGAINST, UH, THE MOST OFTEN.

ONE IS THE HEIGHT LIMITATION OF 40 FEET.

ONE IS WHICH WAY THE BAY DOORS, UH, THE ROLL UP DOORS CAN FACE.

UH, IF THEY'RE OVER 10,000 SQUARE FOOT ON THE ROOF, THEN THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW A HEAVIER VEGETATIVE BUFFER, WHICH IS DICTATED BY THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT.

THEY DO HAVE TO BE LOCATED ON A MAJOR ARTERIAL STREET.

AND THE BIG ONE THAT WE DO COME UP AGAINST QUITE OFTEN IS THERE'S A MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACK OF A HUNDRED FEET THAT INCLUDES A 50 FOOT VEGETATED BUFFER AND A 50 FOOT OPEN SPACE BUFFER IN WHICH YOU CAN'T REALLY PUT ANYTHING OTHER THAN YOU CAN CROSS IT WITH A DRIVEWAY, BUT YOU CAN'T PUT PARKING IN THERE.

YOU CAN'T, UM, WE DO ALLOW, UH, DETENTION IN THE OPEN SPACE PART PORTION.

UM, SO ANYWAY, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT ORIGINALLY WHEN, SO I, I WASN'T HERE.

UM, BUT KINDA READING THROUGH THE ORDINANCE AND, AND MAKING SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND IT, WHEN THE CHANGE WAS

[00:35:01]

MADE TO ALLOW WAREHOUSES IN THE GC DISTRICT SEVERAL YEARS AGO, IT WAS BASICALLY SAID, OKAY, THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT, UM, WOULD FIT IN GC UNLESS YOU MEET ALL THESE ADDITIONAL BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS.

SO THESE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE MEANT TO, UM, TO, TO LESSEN THE IMPACTS ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, ON THE TRAFFIC, SO ON SO FORTH.

SO THAT SAID, THE PROCESS CURRENTLY DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING THAT GOES TO P AND Z DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING THAT GOES TO COUNCIL.

IF A WAREHOUSE COMES IN IN GC ZONE AND THEY MEET THOSE CONDITIONS, THEN THEY CAN APPLY FOR A PERMIT.

THAT'S THE PROCESS.

SO WHAT STAFF KIND OF RECOGNIZED WAS THE FACT THAT WE DO HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNED CITIZENS.

WE DO HAVE A LOT OF FOLKS OUT THERE THAT ARE WORRIED ABOUT THESE THINGS, NOT JUST IN THEIR OWN, YOU KNOW, NECK OF THE WOODS, BUT ALSO ACROSS THE CITY.

WE RECOGNIZE THAT, AND WE DO SEE THESE THINGS ON SOCIAL MEDIA, BUT WE HEAR ABOUT IT IN PERSON ALL THE TIME AS WELL.

SO THE PROPOSAL WOULD ADD A 12TH CONDITION, AND THAT IS THAT ANY WAREHOUSE FREIGHT MOVEMENT OR LOGISTIC USE, UM, WOULD REQUIRE THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO BE ISSUED, WHICH DOES GO THROUGH P AND Z.

SO THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING THERE AND THEN GOES TO CITY COUNCIL.

OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING, UH, AT THIS, UH, MEETING AS WELL.

SO THIS WOULD ADD THAT IN AND REQUIRE IT SO THAT THERE IS A LITTLE MORE TRANSPARENCY.

THERE IS A PLACE FOR CITIZENS WHO ARE CONCERNED TO VOICE THOSE CONCERNS.

UM, THE SECOND PIECE OF THE AMENDMENT IS REALLY, THIS IS KIND OF, BECAUSE IT'S MENTIONED IN TWO DIFFERENT PLACES IN THE CODE, THERE'S A LIST OF USES IN ANOTHER SECTION THAT JUST LIST OUT ALL, ALL THE THINGS THAT REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.

SO THE OTHER PIECE OF IT JUST ADDS THIS USE TO THAT LIST.

UM, WE DID HAVE A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING IN, UH, JUNE, WHICH WAS THEN, UH, UM, WE, WE WERE TO COME BACK IN JULY AND WE, THE THIS, UM, THE COUNCIL DID NOT MEET, UH, AT THAT PARTICULAR MEETING, AND THEY DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT.

UM, STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT.

AGAIN, OUR, OUR THOUGHT PROCESS IS, ONCE AGAIN, WE DO WANNA LOOK INTO THE LONG-TERM, UM, I, I GUESS IMPACTS OF ALLOWING WAREHOUSING IN THE GC ZONE AT ALL.

BUT FOR NOW, THIS IS A GOOD BANDAID.

IT DOES AGAIN, PROVIDE MORE TRANSPARENCY.

IT PROVIDES A MECHANISM FOR CONCERNED CITIZENS TO VOICE THOSE CONCERNS.

AND FOR, UH, OUR ADVISORY BOARDS AND FOR THE COUNCIL TO WEIGH IN ON THOSE AS THEY COME UP.

UM, WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'LL, I'LL JUST START WITH YOU, SIR.

YOU'RE CLOSEST AND WE'LL GO, WE'LL GO DOWN LINE.

FIRST OF ALL, MR. SCRIDNER, I WANNA THANK Y'ALL FOR, FOR PITTING SOMETHING IN PLACE, UM, AT THIS POINT TO ALLOW, UH, MORE OF A HANDLE, GET A HANDLE ON WHERE WE'RE PITTING THESE WAREHOUSES UP.

UM, HOWEVER, I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT WHY DID WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS IN THE FIRST PLACE FOR A PROCESS WE DID NOT EVEN HAVE FOR, FOR ONE OF, FOR THE ITEM THAT IS ON THE AGENDA? YEAH.

WE, WE NEVER HAD THAT YES, IN OUR, IN OUR GC PROCESS.

AND IT WAS PRETTY LINED UP CLEAR.

I'VE READ THE CODE, WHY WAS IT, WHY DID WE GO THROUGH THE SPEND THE TIME WITH THE RESOURCES AND EVERYTHING JUST TO SOMETHING WE DIDN'T HAVE FOR A PROCESS? WE WOULDN'T EVEN USE IT.

IT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

UH, I KIND OF FIGURED THAT WOULD COME UP.

SO STAFF, WHEN THIS ORIGINALLY CAME IN THE, THE PROJECT THAT'S IN QUESTION, WHEN THAT PROJECT CAME IN, WE FORESAW THAT THERE WERE, THERE MAY BE SOME ISSUES, BUT ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS WE CAN'T DO IN THE, THE WAY THE THE REGULATIONS ARE WRITTEN NOW IS WE CAN'T REQUIRE ANY ADDITIONAL, UM, UH, REGULATIONS.

WE CAN'T REQUIRE ANY ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS.

SAY WE WERE CLOSE TO A NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE WANTED AN EXTRA A HUNDRED FEET OF, OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER.

WE CAN'T REQUIRE THAT.

WE CAN ASK REAL NICE, BUT THERE'S NOTHING TO HOLD THEM TO IT.

IF THEY DO HAPPEN TO SAY, WELL, WE'LL THINK ABOUT IT, WE DO GET THINGS LIKE THAT ALL THE TIME.

SO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT WOULD ALLOW US TO NOT ONLY ASK FOR THAT CONDITION, BUT TO REQUIRE IT.

AND THEN AFTER THE FACT, IF THEY COME BACK IN AND SAY, WELL, WE'RE NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN DOING THAT ANYMORE.

WE SAY IT'S RIGHT HERE.

IT'S ONLY APPROVED WITH THAT CONDITION.

UM, REZONES DON'T USUALLY ALLOW US TO DO THAT IF IT'S A STRAIGHT REZONE AND IF IT'S ALREADY ZONED GC, THEY JUST HAVE TO MEET THOSE 11 CONDITIONS.

AND WE AS STAFF CAN'T REQUIRE THEM TO DO ADDITIONAL BUFFERING, BUFFERING TO, UM,

[00:40:01]

TO SAY YOU CAN'T GO DOWN A PARTICULAR ROAD WITH TRUCKS OR THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

ANYTHING THAT'S NOT IN THE CODE, AGAIN, WE CAN ASK REAL NICE, BUT WE DON'T, WE DON'T GET ANOTHER SHOT AT THAT.

SO THAT PARTICULAR APPLICANT, WE ASKED REAL NICE AND SAID, WE ARE WANTING TO DO THIS PROCESS.

WE'RE LOOKING AT AN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE CODE, UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THIS.

WE'RE ASKING IF YOU WOULD GO THROUGH IT SO THAT WE CAN PUT THAT ON THE RECORD.

AND THEY SAID, WE WANNA WORK WITH STAFF, WE WANNA WORK WITH THE CITY, WE WANNA BE A GOOD DEVELOPMENT, UH, PARTNER.

AND SO THEY AGREED TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

THEY GOT THROUGH EVERYTHING BUT THIS MEETING AND THEN THEY WITHDREW.

AND, AND I'D, I'D HAVE TO HAVE THEM EXPLAIN WHY THEY WITHDREW, BUT I I'M SURE YOU HAVE A PRETTY GOOD IDEA.

YES, MA'AM.

UM, WE HAVE A LOT OF, UH, I HAVE A LOT OF IDEAS ABOUT WHY THEY WITHDREW.

UM, IS THERE A WAY THAT WE AS A CITY CAN STILL NEGOTIATE WITH THEM TO MEET SOME OF THE TERMS THAT WE WOULD'VE ASKED FOR UNDER, UM, THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT? STAFF WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THEM AND WE WILL BE ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS.

UM, AND I, AGAIN, THEY WERE WILLING TO DO A LOT OF THESE THINGS BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO BE GOOD PARTNERS WITH THE CITY.

SO I, I THINK THEY STILL WILL.

IS THERE A WAY FOR US TO REQUIRE IT? NO, THEY'RE VESTED AS A, AS AN APPLICATION.

THEY'RE, THEY'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT.

SO BEFORE I ASK SOME MORE QUESTIONS, I, I'M, I'M GONNA SAY THIS OUT LOUD.

MY VIEW OF THIS IS THAT, UM, BECAUSE IT'S BECOME SOMEWHAT DRAMATIC, I GUESS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AND PEOPLE VOICING, TO ME IT FEELS LIKE I, I WASN'T IN THE ROOM WITH THE STAFF.

I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WAREHOUSE OWNER SAID WHEN THEY CAME IN THE FIRST TIME, THE SECOND TIME, BUT, UM, WHAT IT, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE ON THE OUTSIDE IS THAT THEY WITHDREW IT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANT TO HEAR THE FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY, UM, IN SUCH A PUBLIC SETTING.

AND THAT'S VERY DISHEARTENING TO ME AS A COUNCIL MEMBER BECAUSE I WOULD'VE LIKED TO BEEN ABLE TO HAVE OTHER PEOPLE, UM, VOICE HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT IT BECAUSE WE'RE A WHOLE COMMUNITY, NOT JUST ABOUT ONE WAREHOUSE AND ONE OWNER.

THAT BEING SAID, THIS MAY BE A RHETORICAL QUESTION, I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF YOU CAN ANSWER IT, BUT I WAS A LITTLE SHOCKED WHEN YOU WERE EXPLAINING HOW WE'RE GONNA TRY TO, UH, VOTE ON WHETHER TO ADD THIS, UM, SPECIAL PERMITS TO ALL FUTURE PROJECTS.

UM, SO I JUST WANTED KNOW THAT, UM, DOES ANYBODY MAY NOT BE, YOU KNOW, WHY A TOWN THAT, UM, A CITY THAT'S 75 YEARS OLD, UM, WITH HEAVY INDUSTRY AND WAREHOUSES, WHY IT WAS NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT TO BUILD IN CUSHIONS FOR WAREHOUSES? BECAUSE I'VE LIVED HERE FOR, I'M NOT GONNA TELL MY AGE, MY WHOLE LIFE, AND ME AND MY FRIENDS AND MY FAMILY AND MY NEIGHBORS, WE'VE ALWAYS SAID, WHY IS THERE A WAREHOUSE HERE? WHY IS THIS HERE? WHY IS THAT HERE? AND WE KIND OF ACCEPTED SOME OF THE BIGGER INDUSTRY AND THE WHYS BEHIND THAT BECAUSE WE'RE HISTORICALLY AN OLD TOWN.

BUT MY GOSH, HOW DID WE GO THROUGH 75 YEARS AND NOBODY EVER THOUGHT TO DO THIS? I CAN'T SPECIFICALLY ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

UM, WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT I, I WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THIS IS ONLY IN GENERAL COMMERCIAL.

IN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.

THERE ARE, THERE ARE HEAVIER THERE REQUIREMENTS, THERE ARE MORE STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS.

THERE ARE MORE BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS, MORE DISTANCING REQUIREMENTS.

THIS MAY HELP YOU ANSWER THAT.

THE, SO, SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS FOR THAT.

THEY GET APPROVED, BUT THEY'RE HEAVIER.

SO GO AHEAD.

SO THIS MAY HELP, WHERE DID THIS TYPE OF WAREHOUSE FIT BEFORE WE SAID, UM, AND I, I WOULDN'T SIT UP HERE, BUT BEFORE WE FIT IT INTO THIS, UM, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, WHERE DID WAREHOUSES FIT IN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

OR, OR YOU COULD PUT THEM IN HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.

UM, SO JUST A COUPLE OF POINTS OF CLARIFICATION AND, UM, ONE THING THAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT AS, UM, IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE CAN'T BACKDROP BECAUSE THIS WILL BE EFFECTIVE AS OF WHENEVER WE APPROVE IT.

SO, UM, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GO BACK AND, AND CHANGE, UM, ANY CURRENT APPLICATIONS THAT ARE ON THERE.

UM, AND IN THE PAST, UM, AS YOU'VE MENTIONED, IF AN SUP WAS DENIED, PROPERTY OWNERS CAN STILL DO WHATEVER PROJECT THEY WANT AND WE JUST HOPE THAT THEY BE, THAT THEY'RE GOOD PARTNERS AND TRY TO IMPLEMENT SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT, THAT, UM, THEY WANTED ON THE SUP.

SO IF WE PASS THIS PARTICULAR ONE, ARE YOU SAYING THAT IF THEIR SUP IS DENIED ON THESE NEW GUIDELINES, THEIR PROJECT CANNOT MOVE FORWARD? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING? ANYTHING THAT'S APPLIED FOR AFTER THIS IS AFTER, AFTER THIS IS YES.

APPROVED.

YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

UH, THEY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO WITHIN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.

MY SECOND, UM, I, I THINK IT'S MORE OF A COMMENT BECAUSE I SHARE A LOT OF THE SAME FRUSTRATIONS AND I KNOW I'VE TALKED TO CITY MANAGEMENT, UM, ALREADY ON THIS AND THE FACT THAT YES, WE ARE A GROWING CITY.

UM,

[00:45:01]

UM, AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE TRYING TO, UM, CHANGE OUR REVENUE STREAMS AND, AND WE WERE BUILT ON INDUSTRY AND WE RELY ON THAT AND WE APPRECIATE THAT.

BUT AS WE CONTINUE TO GROW, I THINK WE NEED TO FIND THOSE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES WHERE THE, WHERE THE LAND IS.

AND SO I 10 IS SUCH A, SUCH A SPECIFIC CORRIDOR, UH, AND YOU DRIVE THROUGH THERE AND ALL YOU SEE IS WAREHOUSES AND JUST A FEW RETAIL HERE AND THERE.

UM, BUT I, I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO MAYBE CONTEMPLATE, UM, JUST LIKE WE DID WITH APARTMENTS AND JUST LIKE WE DID WITH ALL THE STORAGE FACILITIES, HAVING SOME SORT OF LIKE RADIUS THAT WE CAN'T HAVE ANYMORE IF YOU'RE WITHIN THIS PARTICULAR RADIUS.

UH, BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH LAND AT THE EAST THAT WE CAN BUILD FROM UNLESS WE CONTINUE TO ANNEX.

AND SO TAKING CARE OF WHAT WE HAVE NOW, UM, IF WE ADD THESE BUFFERS OR THESE RADIUSES WHERE WE DON'T ALLOW ADDITIONAL WAREHOUSES, UM, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE.

UM, I, AND SECOND, WHEN WE DID THE STUDY ON APARTMENTS, AND ESPECIALLY THE STUDY ON WAREHOUSES, WE ALSO HAD CAPACITY AND I MEAN, UH, PORT 10 LOGISTICS AND THE NEW ONE THAT THAT'S HAPPENING OVER, UM, WHERE, UM, THE ASPHALT COMPANY WAS OR CONCRETE.

AND, UM, WE HAVE SO MANY THAT WE HAVE, ARE THEY AT CAPACITY? WHY ARE WE STILL NEEDING MORE? AND SO KIND OF LIKE YOU TAKE IT FOR FACE VALUE, IF THEY'RE COMING, THAT MEANS WE NEED IT, BUT DO WE GENERALLY NEED IT? UM, AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE A WAY TO DETERMINE THE CAPACITY BECAUSE WE DID THAT WHEN WE HAD THE, ALL OF THE STORAGE FACILITIES, WE WERE ABLE TO TO SAY, OKAY, THESE, THESE ARE HOW MANY WE HAVE AND WE ARE STILL NOT AT CAPACITY, SO LET'S TRY TO BUILD IN THIS RADIUS.

UM, SO THAT'S SOMETHING I'D KIND OF LIKE TO SEE IF WE CAN PURSUE THAT AND UM, TRY TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF WAREHOUSES WE SEE ON I 10.

WE CAN PUT 'EM SOMEWHERE ELSE.

AND, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T HAVE A, AN EXACT ANSWER FOR YOU IS IN TERMS OF WHETHER THEY'RE AT, WHETHER THEY'RE AT CAPACITY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

I DO KNOW THAT THE LAND IS NOT CHEAP.

AND IF THEY DID NOT SEE THE MARKET OPPORTUNITY FOR SUCH THINGS, THEY WOULDN'T BE BUYING IT UP AND COMING TO US FOR, FOR THESE PROJECTS.

AND WE GET THEM EVERY WEEK.

WE GET A NEW ONE EVERY WEEK.

I UNDERSTAND.

UM, WHETHER IT BE ON I 10, WHETHER IT BE SOMEWHERE ELSE, IT COULD BE OF ANY SIZE.

WE HAVE ONE THAT YOU WILL SEE NEXT MONTH THAT, OR IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS, THAT IS NINE BUILDINGS, BUT THEY'RE SMALLER BUILDINGS.

THEY'RE 30,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDINGS INSTEAD OF 500,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDINGS.

SO, AND, AND, AND, AND WE ALSO HAVE ASKED THEM, OKAY, IF WE WERE TO SAY WE HAVE ALL THIS INDUSTRIAL LAND, UM, ON THE EAST SIDE OF TOWN THAT IS VACANT, WHY ARE YOU GUYS BUILDING OVER THERE? WELL, THE COST IS CONSIDERABLY MORE TO BUILD OVER THERE.

SO AGAIN, THERE IS A, THERE'S A MARKETING, UM, STANDPOINT OF THAT OR AN ECONOMIC STANDPOINT, RIGHT FROM THE, FROM THE, THE, UM, FROM THE DEVELOPERS.

UM, I, I THINK IF WE WERE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I THINK IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO GO BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AGAIN MM-HMM .

AND THEN COME IN WITH SOME REZONES, UM, TO SAY, THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE WE'RE ONLY ALLOWING THIS IN CERTAIN PARTS OF TOWN.

THEN YOU GUYS DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION AND SAY, THIS IS WHERE IT'S APPROPRIATE, SO WE'RE GONNA ZONE IT AS SUCH.

ANYTHING ELSE, WE WILL HAVE TO COME BACK AND DO THIS EVERY TIME.

SO, UM, THIS, THE, THE ONE THAT WAS ON THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT WAS HEARD AND REZONED, UM, JANUARY OF LAST YEAR.

AND, UM, THIS, YOU KNOW, CITY COUNCIL DID APPROVE THAT.

UM, THEY REZONED TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL, BUT THEY DIDN'T COME IN WITH ANY PLANS MM-HMM .

FOR ANYTHING.

AND QUITE FRANKLY, WE, WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO REQUIRE THAT.

SOMETIMES THEY'LL OFFER THAT AS PART OF THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SAY, YOU HAVE TO GIVE US A PLAN FOR THE SITE.

YOU HAVE TO TELL US WHAT'S GOING ON THE SITE THAT, AND AT THE TIME THEY JUST KIND OF SAID, YES, WE'RE GONNA PUT SOME COMMERCIAL IN THERE.

THE, THE MARKET HAS CHANGED IN A, IN A YEAR AND A HALF.

SO THEIR RE THEIR REQUEST HAS CHANGED.

SO ONE FINAL COMMENT, MAYOR IF I MAY.

YES, PLEASE.

AND YOU SAID WE CAN'T REQUIRE THEM TO SHOW US SOMETHING, SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS PUTTING UP A FENCE ON AN EMPTY LOT.

WE HAVE TO SHOW WHAT WE'RE BUILDING THERE, OTHERWISE YOU CAN'T PUT UP THE FENCE.

SO PER OUR CODES, IF SOMEONE'S GOING TO PUT UP A FENCE IN AN EMPTY LOT, WE HAVE TO SHOW WHAT

[00:50:01]

YOU'RE DOING THERE.

YOU CAN'T EVEN PUT A DRIVEWAY BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN OF SOME SORT OF HOME OR SOMETHING TO BE DONE THERE.

SO I'M JUST MAKING THAT COMMENT.

UNFORTUNATELY YOU SAID WE CAN'T DO IT FOR BUSINESS, BUT WE'RE PUTTING THAT OUT TO RESIDENTS.

IT'S A, IT'S A ZONING THING.

ZONING DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT.

NO, I GET IT.

I'M JUST MAKING THE COMMENT.

MARTIN, UM, WHY NOT JUST RESTRICT WAREHOUSING FREIGHT MOVEMENT AND LOGISTICS OPERATIONS FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL ALTOGETHER INSTEAD OF ADDING ONTO THIS ALREADY EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF REGULATIONS? THAT'S ABSOLUTELY ONE OPTION.

UH, WE ARE GOING THROUGH MAJOR UPDATES TO THE ULDC RIGHT NOW AS YOU ARE AWARE.

UM, AND SO WE ARE EXPLORING THAT OPTION.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT DOES IS IT, IT DOES BUY US A LITTLE BIT OF TIME WHILE STILL PUSHING THOSE, THOSE REQUESTS IN FRONT OF, OF THE COUNCIL, BUT ALSO AS WE DO WITH ANYTHING WHERE WE REMOVE USES FROM A PARTICULAR DISTRICT, BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FOR SIX YEARS, SEVEN YEARS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THERE ARE ALREADY, UM, A FEW, UH, WAREHOUSES OUT THERE IN GC THAT WILL THEN BECOME NONCONFORMING.

AND WE REALLY NEED A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WORK, WORK WITH THOSE BECAUSE WE, WE, I MEAN WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE MOVING FORWARD.

I CAN APPRECIATE THAT.

MY OPINION WOULD BE, I WOULD BE OKAY WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT KIND OF DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE AND, AND GIVING YOU THE, THE LENIENCY TO FIGURE OUT THE NON-CONFORMING ISSUES BECAUSE I THINK THE URGENCY IS MORE THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THAN THE ONES THAT ARE ALREADY THERE.

SO, UM, MY PREFERENCE IS NOT TO, TO ADD A 12TH ITEM TO THIS LIST, BUT I WOULD'VE RATHER HAVE SEEN AN ITEM ON HERE TO VOTE TO JUST NOT HAVE WAREHOUSING ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL.

AND THAT IS ONE OPTION.

I, I AGREE WITH, UH, COUNCIL COUNCILWOMAN BENORTH AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS MARTIN, YOU KNOW, WHY NOT JUST COMPLETELY TAKE GENERAL COMMERCIAL OR TAKE THE WAREHOUSING OUTTA GENERAL COMMERCIAL.

UM, SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT, UM, SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

BUT I THINK, UM, IN THE INTERIM, LIKE YOU SAID, THIS IS SOMETHING WE CAN PASS TONIGHT.

IT'S DONE.

WE CAN, WE, WE WOULD REQUIRE THIS, UH, SPECIAL USE PERMIT, YOU KNOW, FROM THIS POINT FORWARD.

UM, I, FOR ONE WAS SURPRISED TO FIND OUT THAT, THAT THIS WASN'T REQUIRED.

I THINK ALL OF US, IT WAS NEWS TO US.

UM, AND SO I JUST WANNA SAY I, I'M, I APPRECIATE STAFF REALIZING THAT THERE WAS A GAP THERE AND BRINGING THIS CHANGE TO US.

SO I APPRECIATE THAT.

I'M GO IN, I, I WANNA MAKE CLEAR THAT YOU SAID THE CURRENT APPLICANT WITHDREW THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, BUT THEIR APPLICATIONS STILL EXIST.

SO THEIR GRANDFATHER YES.

DO WE HAVE A NUMBER OF OTHER WAREHOUSES IN GENERAL COMMERCIAL THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT WOULD ALSO BE GRANDFATHERED? AT LEAST ONE.

AT LEAST ONE.

UM, AGAIN, I'LL PLAY SOME OF THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE HERE AND MY COLLEAGUES.

I THINK WE MISSED AN OPPORTUNITY.

UM, THIS WAREHOUSE COULD HAVE GONE IN WITHOUT COMING TO PNZ WITHOUT COMING TO COUNCIL.

I HAVE TO COMMEND STAFF FOR REACHING OUT AND SAYING, YOU KNOW, LET'S TRY TO DO A, A SPECIAL USE PERMIT SO WE CAN GET SOME ADDITIONAL GUARANTEES.

I HATE TO USE THE WORD GUARANTEES, BUT SOME ADDITIONAL, YOU KNOW, UH, ACCOMMODATIONS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GONNA GET WHAT THEY SAY THEY'RE GONNA DELIVER.

AND WHAT I MEAN BY WE MISS AN OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE WITHDRAWING THAT NOW.

AND I THINK JUST AS LONG AS THEY MEET THE 11 POINT CRITERIA, THEY CAN BUILD WHATEVER FITS.

UM, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN A LITTLE BIT MORE PROACTIVE OR A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPLANATION TO THIS COUNCIL THAT THAT WAS GONNA BE THE CASE.

UM, 'CAUSE THEN WE COULD HAVE HAD A BETTER PRODUCT.

I THINK KNOWING THAT THEY CAN GO FORWARD.

UM, I AGREE.

MY COLLEAGUES HAVING THE, THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT ADDED ON FOR FUTURE APPLICANTS GIVE US THE STOP GAP.

BUT I ALSO AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE IF, IF, IF WE'RE GONNA GO THAT ROUTE, WE BASICALLY JUST ADDED AN ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE HURDLE.

LET'S JUST GO AHEAD AND TAKE 'EM OUT OF THE GC.

WE HAVE TO BE CAUTIOUS WITH THAT THOUGH.

'CAUSE I 10 IS A MAJOR COMMERCIAL, WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH IT OR NOT.

IT'S A HEAVY COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS ALMOST SIMILAR TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL CORRIDOR ALL THE WAY FROM FLORIDA ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE CALIFORNIA.

YOU, YOU GO DOWN I 10, THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE.

YOU SEE THE CAR LOT, YOU SEE THE, YOU KNOW THE, THE, THE LOGISTICS FACILITIES.

YOU SEE TRUCK STOPS.

SO AGAIN, AS WE GROW, TRAFFIC'S ALWAYS GONNA BE AN ISSUE.

YOU SEE THE RETAIL OFF THE SIDE.

I GOT A LOT OF CALLS ABOUT THE POTENTIAL INCREASE IN IN TRAFFIC AND IT'S GOT, WELL WHAT WOULD YOU RATHER SEE THERE? WELL, I'D RATHER SEE A BIG RETAIL CENTER.

YOU DON'T THINK THAT'S GONNA INCREASE TRAFFIC AND THAT'S GONNA BE CIVILIAN TRAFFIC, WHICH IS GONNA BE EVEN HEAVIER THAN THE TRUCK TRAFFIC.

[00:55:01]

IT ALWAYS IS.

I CAN UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN WITH 18 WHEELERS AND THAT TYPE OF STUFF, BUT THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT SPECIFICALLY IN THIS CASE, AGAIN, I COMMEND Y'ALL FOR REACHING OUT, TRYING TO, TO SOLIDIFY SOME OF THE, THE BENEFITS THAT WERE GONNA HAPPEN.

'CAUSE IT'S GONNA HAPPEN ANYWAY.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S MY COMMENT IS WE JUST HAVE TO BE CAREFUL OF HOW, YOU KNOW, WE ALL WANNA SEE GARTH OR GARTH ROAD.

WE ALL WANT TO SEE YEAH, I 10, YOU KNOW, BE, BE THE, THE, THE STATEMENT THAT I I TEN'S A HEAVY, YOU GO ANYWHERE I 10, IT IS GONNA BE LOGISTICS, IT'S GONNA BE HEAVY COMMERCIAL LINE, INDUSTRIAL, YOU KNOW, HEAVY RETAIL.

IT'S, IT'S ALL THERE.

SO WE JUST HAVE TO BE CAUTIOUS WITH THAT.

BUT I GUESS AS A STOP GAP MEASURE TO GET US PAST THE CURRENT APPLICANTS THAT ARE IN STREAM AND THEN TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO HANDLE IT.

IF WE SAY NO MORE IN GC, HOW DO WE DEAL WITH THE GRANT, THE ONES THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE SO THAT WHEN THEY CHANGE HANDS OR, OR CHANGE BUSINESSES, WHATEVER, THAT THEY'RE CON CONTINUE TO OPERATE.

AND, AND I KNOW THAT'S A LOGISTIC ISSUE FOR YOU TO, TO DEAL WITH.

SO, AND AND, AND TO BE REAL CLEAR, AS YOU GUYS ALREADY KNOW, INTERSTATE CORRIDORS LIKE THIS ARE A SLIPPERY SLOPE.

WHEN DO YOU MAKE THAT CALL? BECAUSE THAT'S A REALLY ATTRACTIVE RESOURCE FOR ANY KIND OF TRUCKING, WAREHOUSING, FREIGHT TYPE OF, OF, UH, OPERATIONS.

THEY WANT TO BE RIGHT NEXT TO THAT.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE NEAR NEIGHBORHOODS.

THEY DON'T WANT TO BE NEAR, UH, SCHOOLS AND PLACES WHERE THEY CAN'T TURN AROUND.

THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR.

BUT YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU GOTTA WEIGH THOSE COSTS.

SO WE'VE GOT, IT'S A LITTLE CHEAPER LAND OVER HERE.

MAYBE WE CAN DO ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS OVER HERE.

SO IT, IT, THERE'S ALWAYS GONNA BE A A, A BALANCE THERE FOR THESE GUYS.

AND WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT IT, BUT THE TAX BASE, I MEAN, THERE'S SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF REVENUE THAT'S GONNA COME TO THE CITY WITH THIS TYPE OF OPERATION.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO BALANCE THAT AS WELL.

THAT'S MY, THAT'S MY COMMENTS MAYOR.

THANK YOU ALL.

UM, BEFORE YOU MAKE A COMMENT, UH, LET ME MAKE THIS COMMENT.

SO, UM, EXTERNAL, EVERYBODY HAS VOICED THEIR, I CAN SAY DIFFERENT.

IT WAS REALLY KIND OF A GENERAL CONSENSUS.

UM, A FEW THINGS WITH THE, I GUESS YOU SAY SPECIAL USE PERMIT.

UM, I WOULD PROBABLY AGREE IN A SENSE ADDING ANOTHER, THE DISTANCE KIND OF MORATORIUM OR WHATEVER IS PROBABLY STILL, IT'S JUST ANOTHER STOP GAP.

I THINK WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO DO, UM, AND WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE AND I THINK WE'RE ABLE TO DO IT WOULD BE, UM, THIS IS STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING MM-HMM .

UM, ITEM RIGHT NOW ANYWAY.

BUT MY PROPOSAL WOULD BE IS THAT I WANNA GET TO THE NEXT ITEM THAT WE GO AND HAVE STAFF PRESENT US WITH THE, I GUESS, ZONING CHANGE SO THAT THAT WAREHOUSES ARE NOT ALLOWED IN GC.

I THINK THAT WILL BE CLEANER AND, AND IF WE CAN DO A MORATORIUM ON THAT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

BETWEEN NOW AND WHENEVER STAFF THINKS THEY CAN DELIVER THAT TYPE OF ITEM FOR A VOTE IN CONSIDERATION, THAT WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO DO IT.

I THINK WE CAN COME UP WITH DIFFERENT WAYS.

PUT A, PUT A BANDAID.

I DON'T THINK THAT WAS, THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE WANNA DO.

I THINK STAFF WAS TRYING TO, TO PROVIDE THAT, UH, WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD AS A, I WOULD SAY, A REACTION, OBVIOUSLY, TO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.

SO WITH THAT, I MEAN THE, THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT WOULD'VE, WOULD'VE, UM, GAVE AN ADDITIONAL TOOL IN THE MEANTIME, BUT I THINK IT'S STILL BEST TO GO AHEAD AND, AND MAKE IT CLEANER AND JUST NOT ALLOWED.

UH, THAT'S WHERE THE FLUFF IS SO IMPORTANT, WHERE LI, RGC OR LI OR HI SPECIALTIES PERMITS OR WAREHOUSING OF WHATEVER MAGNITUDE AND WHATEVER SIZE.

SO, UM, LET'S GET OUTTA THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, PORTION.

WE'LL CLOSE THAT AND THEN WE'LL GO ONTO THE NEXT ITEM UNLESS YOU HAVE ANOTHER ITEM IN.

NO, I JUST WANT TO PIGGYBACK ON WHAT I'VE HEARD.

UM, AS FAR AS INFRASTRUCTURE, I KNOW THIS IS A CHALLENGE WITH I 10, BUT ONE THING, WHAT MAKES BAYTOWN GREAT IS WE BENEFIT FOR THE LARGEST INDUSTRIAL PORT IN THE UNITED STATES WITH 25% USAGE.

THERE'S PLENTY OF LAND, 11,000 ACRES OUT THERE.

LET'S BE STRATEGIC ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING, ABOUT WHAT ABOUT THESE WAREHOUSES.

I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT MOVING FORWARD, BEING STRATEGIC ABOUT WHERE WE SLAP OUR WAREHOUSES A ALONG OUR, UH, IN OUR TOWN.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

WHICH WAS BE, CONSIDER THIS TEXT AMENDMENT, UH, WHAT I JUST READ SO WE CAN OPEN UP DISCUSSION ON THAT.

SO WITH THAT, UM, LET'S SEE.

SO BAR BEING THAT NO ONE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, AND I'LL CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE TAX AMENDMENTS TO THE ULDC TO CHANGE TO SECTION 1.26 AND 2 1 0 CONCERNING CERTAIN LANGUAGE ADDRESSING WAREHOUSE AND FREIGHT MOVEMENT, WHOLESALE AND TRADE.

WE MOVE ON TO, UM, ITEM FIVE B,

[b. Consider an ordinance for proposed text amendments to the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) to change Section 1.26 Rezoning, Special Use Permits, and Zoning Text Amendments and Section 2.10 Land Use Conditions Table A-40, Non-Residential Categories, concerning certain language addressing Warehouse and Freight Movement, Wholesale Trade.]

UM, AGAIN, MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE THAT WE DIRECT STAFF, UM, DO WE HAVE TO PUT THIS TABLE, THIS ITEM IN ANY WAY? YES, SIR.

WE BE TABLE THIS AND IF COUNSEL WOULD LIKE TO SHOW THE INTENT TO HAVE A MORATORIUM ON THE 15TH, UH, PLACED ON THE AGENDA, UH, BEFORE THE WORKSHOP STARTS, AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A TIME PERIOD DEFINED BY THEN FOR Y'ALL WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY BE ABLE TO GET THAT, UH, ADDRESSED.

SO THE MORATORIUM WOULD BE THAT WE WILL NOT ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ONLY ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL, IF THERE'S A WAREHOUSE OR GENERAL COMMERCIAL, WE WOULDN'T EVEN ACCEPT AN APPLICATION.

WELL,

[01:00:01]

IS THAT THE MORATORIUM? MUCH LIKE WE DID WITH THE APARTMENTS WHILE WE WENT THROUGH THE HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT.

IF WE CAN'T PUT THAT ON UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING.

THAT'S RIGHT.

I MEAN, THIS IS OUR, WE'RE NOT JUST TABLING THIS, SO WE'LL TABLE THIS ITEM, BUT ON THE 15TH THERE WILL BE A POSTED ACTION ITEM FOR THE BOARD.

BUT I'M SAYING WHY TABLE THIS WHEN WE COULD GET THREE APPLICATIONS FOR WAREHOUSES TOMORROW? MAYOR, CAN I THROW SOMETHING OUT? SPLIT THE BANDING.

HOLD ON ONE SEC.

I THINK THE SIMPLEST ANSWER, AT LEAST FROM, FROM WHERE I SIT, BECAUSE REMEMBER, THIS IS A ZONING CHANGE.

IT DOES HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH P AND Z, P AND Z, ANYTHING THAT WE DO, IF IT'S THIS, YOU CAN APPROVE IT TONIGHT AND IT IS EFFECTIVE IN 10 DAYS.

ANYTHING ELSE YOU DO WILL NOT BE EFFECTIVE FOR AT LEAST THE NEXT 60.

SO WE CAN BE BACK IN FRONT OF YOU WITH SOMETHING IN PROBABLY OCTOBER.

THAT'D BE THE EARLIEST WE COULD DO IT.

UM, THAT WOULD GO THROUGH P AND Z IN SEPTEMBER, AND THEN WE COULD BRING IT FIRST MEETING IN IN OCTOBER.

IF YOU DO MORATORIUM, I'M NOT SURE WE CAN GET ANYTHING ACCOMPLISHED BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, BECAUSE THERE'S A VERY RIGID TIMELINE, AS WE FOUND OUT EARLIER THIS YEAR ON WHEN YOU HAVE TO DO HEARINGS, P AND Z HAS TO DO A HEARING, UM, AND HOW EVERYTHING GETS NOTICED.

SO, UH, MY SUGGESTION AGAIN, JUST STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO APPROVE THIS TONIGHT TO GIVE US THE BANDAID AND THEN WE'LL BE BACK IN FRONT OF YOU EARLIEST, UH, FIRST MEETING IN OCTOBER TO, UH, WITH A SOMETHING THAT WOULD REMOVE THAT USE FROM GC ALTOGETHER.

AND, AND SIR, I'M FINE WITH THAT.

I I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

DO WE HAVE, I'VE SEEN US DO THIS.

DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY, I KNOW WE HAVE THE 10 DAY CURE TIME, WHATEVER IT'S CONSIDERED, DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, WHERE WE APPROVE IT AS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY? NO, SIR.

NOT, UH, HERE, BECAUSE IT DOES HAVE A, A PENALTY.

SO A VIOLATION WOULD SUBJECT SOMEONE TO A FINE.

I JUST WANTED TO ASK.

I KNOW IN SOME CASES WE WERE ABLE TO DO THAT, BUT IT, I'M SURE IT JUST DEPENDS ON THE SUBJECT MATTER MAYBE, BUT, OKAY.

AND WE KNOW IT'S A BANDAID, BUT IT'S BETTER THAN YOU ARE GONNA BE NAKED FOR THE NEXT 60 DAYS.

CAN I ASK? YES, MA'AM.

UM, I DON'T KNOW THE FLOW OF, UM, PERMITS THAT COME THROUGH FOR WAREHOUSES, BUT I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED AT NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE MORATORIUM.

AND I, I KNOW YOU EXPLAINED THAT THERE'S A LOT TO THAT, BUT, UM, YOU HAVING EXPERIENCE IN YOUR OFFICE, I MEAN, IF I HAD A BILLION DOLLARS AND I WANTED TO BUILD WAREHOUSES AND I JUST WATCHED THIS COUNCIL MEETING, I WOULD BE RUNNING TO YOU IN THE NEXT 60 DAYS TO MAKE SURE AND GET ALL THE CHEAPEST LAND I CAN AND MOVE ALL MY PROJECTS.

SO, UM, I KNOW YOU JUST SAID IT'S STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO WAIT UNTIL OCTOBER.

ME NOT KNOWING ALL THE LOGISTICS OF A MORATORIUM RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I JUST, I, I'M, I'M, I'M VERY UNSURE ABOUT, WE'RE ALREADY GONNA HAVE TO WAIT 10 DAYS IF WE AGREE TO PASS THE, THE SUP.

UM, I WANNA DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE CITIZENS.

SO ARE WE SURE THAT NOT PLACING A MORATORIUM IS THE WAY TO GO? I, I MEAN, I, I REALLY WANT US ALL TO THINK ABOUT THAT.

AND I DON'T KNOW THE, THE, ALL THE LEGALITIES OF THIS, BUT WHAT I DON'T WANNA SEE, SO I GUESS, COULD YOU TELL US HOW THE TRAFFIC WOULD WORK WITH, SO WHEN WE DID A MORATORIUM EARLIER THIS YEAR FOR THE, UM, FOR THE MULTIFAMILY REZONES, IT TOOK ABOUT, I WANNA SAY IT WAS ABOUT 60 DAYS TO GET THAT MORATORIUM IN PLACE.

THAT WASN'T SUPER, UM, UH, IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WAS REALLY LIKE, WE GOTTA GET THIS DONE TOMORROW BECAUSE WE WERE IN, IN CONTACT WITH OUR DEVELOPERS AND WE SAID, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.

THIS MAY HELP YOU DOWN THE ROAD.

WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO HOLD BACK? AND THEY ALL DID.

WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING DURING THAT TIME.

WE HAD PEOPLE WITH APPLICATIONS AND WE JUST ASKED 'EM NICELY, HEY, CAN YOU HOLD BACK? BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHERE YOUR REZONES GONNA GO RIGHT NOW, BUT ONCE WE HAVE GOOD DATA, WE WILL HAVE BETTER INFORMATION FOR YOU AND FOR OUR COUNCIL.

AND WE HAD THREE OF THEM ON THE BOOKS.

THEY ALL HELD BACK AT THAT POINT.

THAT SOUNDS VERY BACKWARDS TO ME.

IF WE TOLD OUR DEVELOPERS, THIS IS WHAT THE COUNCIL AND THE CITY'S WORKING ON, TO ME THAT WOULD WORK OPPOSITE.

AND THEY WOULD SAY, OH MY GOSH, IF THEY'RE GONNA WORK ON THIS, THEN WE NEED TO PUSH OUR PROJECTS FORWARD.

I MEAN, LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED THIS PAST WEEK WHEN THERE STARTED BEING A LOT OF VOICES, AND NOW WE HAVE AN SUP PERMIT THAT'S WITHDRAWN.

SO THOSE WERE ALL IN A PLACE WHERE THEY WERE KIND OF 50 50 ON WHAT, WHAT KIND OF ANSWERS THEY WERE GONNA GET FROM BOTH P AND Z AND COUNSEL AT THE TIME.

SO NOT KNOWING AND GOING, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT MY ODDS.

CAN I WAIT THREE MONTHS UNTIL THEY GET THIS DONE AND THEN COME IN AND, AND I'LL KNOW EXACTLY WHERE I STAND IN TERMS OF THE DATA.

THAT'S WHERE THEY WERE ALL, THAT'S WHERE THEY WERE ALL AT.

AND AND AGAIN, THESE WERE FOLKS THAT WE WORK WITH, WE HAD BEEN IN CONTACT WITH, THEY KNEW WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT.

THEY KNEW WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS.

WHAT I'M SAYING TONIGHT IS I THINK WE CAN GET THE AMENDMENT DONE FASTER OR AS FAST AS WE CAN GET A MORATORIUM DONE AND AND EFFECTIVE.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THAT THIS ITEM TONIGHT IS MORE OF A BANDAID,

[01:05:01]

QUICK TIME.

I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SOME TIMELINES HERE.

LEMME ASK, WHEN WILL WE HAVE TO POST FOR OUR TUESDAY MEETING? WELL, I GUESS IT COULD BE TUESDAY OR WEDNESDAY, BUT, SO WE HAVE TO DO FRIDAY 5, 3 30.

AND, AND SO IN A SENSE, STAFF HAS TIME.

PLEASE DISCUSS, UH, I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.

LIKE, AND IF YOU THINK IT'S BETTER, JUST IT IS EASIER TO GET ON ONE PATH INSTEAD OF KIND OF DO, DO TONIGHT'S ACTION APPROVAL AND THEN NEXT WEEK MORATORIUM, AND THEN IN OCTOBER, THE, THE ZONE CHANGE ITSELF.

UM, I WOULD WOULD JUST SAY WHATEVER, WHATEVER YOU PRESENT BY TOMORROW AT THREE 30 WOULD BE WHAT WE'D PROBABLY GO WITH AS FAR AS TIMELINES.

SO RYAN RYAN'S REMINDING ME THAT, THAT, I MEAN, REALLY AGAIN, THE, THE, THE BANDAID AGAIN TONIGHT DOES PROVIDE US WITH SOME PROTECTION.

AND AGAIN, THE MORATORIUM, IF I, I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER THE EXACT, UM, TIMELINE.

THERE HAS TO BE, I THINK IT'S 30 DAYS NOTICE, AND THEN YOU'VE GOTTA GET EVERYTHING ELSE DONE, WHICH IS, UM, THERE IS A, A HEARING AT PNZ AND THEN TWO HEARINGS IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL.

AND THAT HAS TO HAPPEN WITHIN, I THINK IT'S A 12, A 12 DAY PERIOD.

I, I DON'T SEE BEING ABLE TO COORDINATE THAT BEFORE THE FIRST MEETING IN OCTOBER.

SO AGAIN, I THINK THIS PROVIDES YOU WITH BETTER PROTECTION THAN SHOOTING FOR A MORATORIUM THAT WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO LINE UP.

I MEAN, THE MORATORIUM IS JUST A STOP GAP.

WHAT I'M HEARING IS IT'S EASIER JUST TO GO AND HAVE IT, HAVE IT EX EXCLUDED FROM THE ZONE ITSELF.

I BELIEVE THAT'S, AND THAT'S FINE.

UM, RYAN, SORRY.

UH, I DO JUST WANNA MENTION A COUPLE THINGS ABOUT VESTED RIGHTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

UNDER, UNDER STATE LAW.

UM, IF WE DO NOT DO AN SUP TONIGHT, WE COULD HAVE SOMEBODY WHO APPLIES FOR A WAREHOUSE IN GC TOMORROW, AND THEY WOULD ONLY HAVE TO MEET THOSE 11 CONDITIONS.

AND IF THEY MET THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE IT.

AND BECAUSE IT IS, IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, IT'S VESTED.

AND SO WE WOULD HAVE NO PROTECTION.

YOU ALL PASSING THIS TONIGHT? YES.

YOU HAVE TO WAIT THE 10 DAYS FOR IT TO GO INTO EFFECT.

BUT IT DOES GIVE THE CITY SOME PROTECTION, UM, ON THIS, THAT, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY ONCE IT'S PASSED TONIGHT, SOMEONE CAN'T COME IN TOMORROW, TRY TO SLIP IT IN UNDER THE RADAR AND, UM, AND, AND, AND NOT HAVE TO AT LEAST GO THROUGH THE SUP, WHICH THEN REQUIRES THE PUBLIC HEARING, REQUIRES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO WEIGH IN ON AND REQUIRES THEY COULD COME CITY COUNCIL TO WEIGH IN ON IT.

SO IT REALLY IS PROBABLY THE MOST PROTECTION THAT WE CAN OFFER IN THE QUICKEST WAY.

AND THEN AS MARTIN SAID, WE CAN GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND, AND, AND FIGURE OUT, OKAY, LET'S JUST MAYBE REMOVE THIS FROM, FROM GC COMPLETELY.

AND, AND THAT VEST, THAT VESTED, UM, STATUS COMES WITH THE MORATORIUM AS WELL.

IF THEIR APPLICATION'S IN, WE CAN'T STOP 'EM FROM GOING FORWARD.

LEGALLY PROVIDE COUNSEL CONSIDERATION TO REMOVE WAREHOUSES OF ANY SIZE OUT OF GC.

THAT, THAT COMMENT THAT IF WE PASS THIS TONIGHT, THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO COME IN TOMORROW AND AND GET VESTED.

THAT'S, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

THAT'S WHAT HE SAID.

'CAUSE IT DOESN'T COME INTO EFFECT FOR 10 DAYS.

YES, IT'D BE 11 DAYS IN SIDE DISCUSSIONS HERE.

I, I AGREE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE BANDAID IS, IS A BANDAID, BUT IF IT'S GONNA BE DRAGGING OUT FOR 30, 60, 90 DAYS TO GET ALL THIS STUFF DONE, AT LEAST IF THE BANDAID IS IN PLACE, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.

IF THEY GET THROUGH PNZ, WE STILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY NO UNTIL WE FIGURE OUT AND DO THE LEGALITIES TO, TO TAKE WAREHOUSING OUT OF GC.

SO I AGREE, I DON'T LIKE THAT IDEA OF PUTTING A BANDAID ON SOMETHING, BUT AT LEAST IT GIVES US SOME PROTECTION, UH, BETWEEN NOW AND TO WHERE WE CAN CLEAN THIS UP.

UM, SO I, I THINK THAT'S THE PLAN.

THIS IS WHAT YEAH, THAT'S, WE'LL, WE'LL, STAFF WILL PLAN.

IT'S NOT THE BEST SOLUTION, BUT IT'S A SOLUTION.

IT'S, IT'S A PATHWAY.

YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S A PATHWAY.

I MEAN, I WILL TELL YOU, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT WITHDRAWING, I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT A GOOD THING.

UH, IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE WITHDRAWING AND TAKING THEIR MARBLES AND GOING HOME.

THEY'RE, THEY'RE ABLE TO BUILD WHATEVER THEY WANT WITHOUT ANY GOVERNANCE OR REGULATION BIAS.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE CONCERN.

THAT'S WHAT, UH, THAT'S, THAT WAS MY COMMENT, MS. GARCIA AND OTHERS THAT LIVE IN MEADOW LAKE, ALTHOUGH IT MAY NOT BE A, A NEIGHBORHOOD WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF BAYTOWN.

I MEAN, THEY'RE, THEY'RE SORT OF INTERESTED IN STAKEHOLDERS ARE, RIGHT? OH, ABSOLUTELY.

AND SO I, I CERTAINLY STILL RESPECT THAT.

AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, THE APPLICANT WITHDRAWAL WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT I WAS HAPPY ABOUT.

HMM.

SO, UH, ANYWAY, LET'S MOVE FORWARD.

I THINK THE PLAN IS, SO WE RECAP IS THAT WE, WE WILL TAKE, WE'LL CONSIDER THIS S-U-P-N-G-C.

IT IS A BANDAID SLASH STOP CAP UNTIL STAFF AT ITS EARLIEST ABILITY TO

[01:10:01]

THAT'S THE PLAN.

IS EVERYBODY CLEAR ON THAT? ALRIGHT, GOOD.

I SEE HEAD SHAKING.

SO WE WILL MOVE FORWARD.

SO WE DO HAVE ITEM FIVE B TO CONSIDER, UNLESS THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL, UH, SUBSTANTIAL COMMENTS THAT NEED TO BE MADE ON FIVE B WITH THAT, UH, TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR FIVE B APPROVAL OF THE SUP AND PUBLIC HEARING.

OH YES.

WE REMOVED ON FIVE B, RIGHT? OKAY.

SORRY.

AND IT IS SEVEN FORTY THREE.

SO, UM, I ENTERTAIN MR FIVE B IS PRESENTED, MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM FIVE B, SECOND MOTION SECOND.

ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? FIVE B AS PRESENTED, PLEASE SAY AYE.

A ALL THOSE OPPOSED? THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS, COUNSEL.

SO MOVE ON TO, LOOKS LIKE IT IS SIX A

[a. Conduct a public hearing regarding proposed text amendments to the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) to change Section 2.06 Special Purpose Zoning Districts and add Section 2.081 Industrial Planned Unit Developments, to add a new zoning district.]

AND THEN I'LL CALL TO ORDER THIS PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE ULDC SECTION 2.06 AND, AND ADD 2.081 TO ADD VENUE ZONING DISTRICT.

I'LL NOW ASK STAFF TO SUMMARIZE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING.

UH, THANK YOU MAYOR AND COUNSEL.

UM, THIS IS A SIMILAR, HAS A SIMILAR FEEL TO IT.

SO AGAIN, STICK WITH ME AND I'LL, I'LL TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS DIFFERENT FROM THE LAST ONE.

UM, THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE ADDS A NEW, UH, A NEW ZONING DISTRICT TO BOTH THE DEFINITION, UH, AND THE LIST OF SPECIAL PURPOSE ZONING DISTRICTS, AND THEN HAS NEW REGULATIONS THAT WOULD APPLY TO THIS NEW DISTRICT.

THIS WOULD BE THE IPUD OR AN INDUSTRIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.

UM, HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT FROM THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OR THE PUD THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN OUR CODE? THAT, THAT SHOULD HOPEFULLY BE YOUR FIRST QUESTION.

UM, THIS IS DIFFERENT IN THAT, WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, I'LL, I'LL KIND OF GET TO THAT.

THE PROPOSED, UH, LANGUAGE WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL AREAS.

AND AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE ZONED INDUSTRIAL, NOT ZONED GENERAL COMMERCIAL.

THIS WOULD BE ZONED INDUSTRIAL WITH WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER AN OVERLAY OVER THE TOP.

SO THIS WOULD ADD MORE REGULATIONS OR ALLOW FOR FLEXIBILITY OVER THE TOP OF WHAT WOULD BE, UH, EITHER AN ALLY OR AN HIA LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.

UM, SO THIS WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE FLEXIBILITY.

IT WOULD ACCOMMODATE OR IT WOULD ALLOW US TO ADD CONDITIONS AS A CITY, WHETHER THAT COMES FROM STAFF, WHETHER IT COMES FROM P AND Z OR WHETHER IT COME COMES FROM COUNCIL.

SO REMEMBER, ANYTHING THAT GOES THROUGH THIS PROCESS HAS TO GO THROUGH A REZONE PROCESS, HAS TO GO THROUGH P AND Z, HAS TO GO THROUGH CITY COUNCIL.

DURING THAT PROCESS, IF WE SAW SOMETHING, AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO SHOW US EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE PROPOSING AND, AND TO A, A GENERAL LEVEL, AND WE COULD SAY, OKAY, WE KNOW THAT YOU WANNA REDUCE SOMETHING OVER HERE, YOU NEED TO ADD SOMETHING ELSE TO MAKE UP FOR THAT.

THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO WITH OUR PUDS.

NOW, UM, THIS WOULD BE A MINIMUM OF 10 ACRES.

SO THIS WOULD NOT BE FOR SMALL, SMALL LEVEL PROJECTS.

THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO LOCK IN A SITE PLAN.

LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN.

THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO LOCK IN A SITE PLAN.

A REGULAR REZONE TO LI OR HI DOES NOT DO THAT.

THEY CAN TELL US ROUGHLY WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, BUT AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE CAN'T REQUIRE THAT THEY EITHER SHOW US OR STICK TO IT.

THIS WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO SHOW US AND TO STICK TO IT, AT LEAST ON A GENERAL LEVEL.

UM, THE OTHER PIECE OF THAT IS OUR, OUR PUDS NOW HAVE A TWO YEAR EXPIRATION WITH A ONE YEAR EXTENSION.

THIS WOULD NOT EXPIRE.

AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE TAKING WHAT IS AN, AN INDUSTRIAL TYPE USE, AND WE'RE PUTTING SOMETHING BETTER OVER THE TOP OF IT.

WE'RE ASKING FOR MORE, AND WE'RE ASKING FOR, UH, TO LOCK IN.

IF IT EXPIRES, THEN THAT OVERLAY COMES OFF AND IT'S JUST LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, AND WE GO BACK TO WHERE WE STARTED.

SO THIS WOULD NOT EXPIRE THAT THEREFORE, IF THERE WERE ANY CHANGES TO IT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND MAKE CHANGES TO THE PUD ITSELF THAT PROVIDES MORE, UH, PROTECTION BOTH FOR THE CITY AND FOR THE THE NEIGHBORS.

SO AGAIN, HOW IS THIS DIFFERENT FROM THE PUD? I ALREADY EXPLAINED A COUPLE THINGS.

ANOTHER ONE IS THAT THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE A MIX OF USES.

THE PUD AS IT STANDS REQUIRES THIS MIX OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO KIND OF BRING DIFFERENT USES TOGETHER.

UM, AND WHY DO WE DO THAT? WHY DOES ANYBODY APPLY FOR THAT? WELL, THEY'LL COME IN AND SAY, WE ARE GONNA DO THESE USES AND WE'RE GONNA MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE INTEGRATED.

BUT WE, UM, WE WANT TO DO, I DON'T KNOW, 10 FOOT SETBACKS INSTEAD OF 25 FOOT SETBACKS.

AND WE'LL SAY, OKAY, THEN YOU NEED TO PROVIDE US WITH SOMETHING SPECIFIC THAT MAKES UP FOR THAT.

A FENCE, A BERM EXTRA, UM, EXTRA GREENERY, THINGS LIKE THAT.

UM, WE CAN ALSO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL AMENITIES.

OKAY, YOU'RE DOING A TRAIL HERE, WHAT ABOUT MORE TRAILS OVER HERE? WHAT ABOUT

[01:15:01]

WHATEVER YOU CAN THINK OF.

UM, AND THEN WE SORT OF NEGOTIATE THAT BACK AND FORTH BEFORE WE BRING IT TO THE, TO EITHER P AND Z OR TO CITY COUNCIL.

THIS WOULD BE ONE THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE A MIX OF USES.

IT IS SPECIFIC TO INDUSTRIAL PLAN OR TO INDUSTRIAL, UH, USES, AGAIN, THE MAIN IDEA IS TO LOCK IN THE SITE PLAN SO THAT WE KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING MOVING FORWARD, AND IF THEY WANT TO VEER FROM THAT, THEY GOTTA COME BACK THROUGH A PUBLIC PROCESS.

THIS HAS LESS EMPHASIS ON THOSE ADDITIONAL AMENITIES OR AN ELEVATED SITE DESIGN AND MORE EMPHASIS ON HOW DO WE LESSEN THE IMPACTS TO THE NEIGHBORS AND TO EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING ON AROUND IT.

SO AGAIN, THEY, THEY HAVE THE ABILITY DURING, IN, IN THIS PUD TO SAY, WE WANT TO LESSEN ONE OF THE REGULATIONS OVER HERE, AND WE CAN LOOK AT THAT AND SAY, NO, WE DON'T LIKE THAT.

OR WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO TO MAKE THAT MORE ATTRACTIVE AND TO CONTINUE TO PROTECT THE, THE, UH, THE, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.

UM, WE DID THAT TAKE THIS TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BACK IN JUNE.

UH, WE HAD, UH, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS.

UM, STAFF AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TONIGHT, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, UH, IN THIS PUBLIC HEARING? YES, MA'AM.

IS THERE A CURRENT PROJECT THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT IS MOTIVATING YOU TO SUGGEST THIS CHANGE? THERE WAS, THERE IS NOT NOW, UH, TENTATIVELY THAT'S CORRECT.

I SEE THE FACE.

I SEE IT.

CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE PROJECT IS OR IS IT LIKE TOP SECRET? NO, I CAN, I CAN TELL YOU.

I DON'T THINK IT'S A SECRET.

WHAT IS IT? UM, THE PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED LI DISTRICT AND ANNEXATION AT 1405 AND 1 46.

BECAUSE THEIR REZONED DID NOT ALLOW US TO LOCK IN A SITE PLAN.

AND THERE WAS, THEY'VE BEEN SITTING WAITING FOR EIGHT MONTHS NOW IN THAT RANGE.

WE SAID, LET'S KIND OF LOOK AT SOMETHING LIKE THIS THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO NOT ONLY LOCK IN A SITE PLAN, BUT ALSO TO ADD, TO ASK FOR ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT WOULD MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE ATTRACTIVE.

AND THEN AGAIN, STILL HAS TO GO THROUGH THE REZONE PROCESS, BUT STILL HAVE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AS THE BASE ZONING.

AND SO SINCE YOU SAID IT'S TENTATIVE NOW, I GUESS THEY'RE KIND OF NOT MAYBE GONNA DO IT.

AND SO THE, IF I CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WE, YES.

THEY HAVE TENTATIVELY PULLED THEIR APPLICATION.

MARTIN HAS BEEN VERY FORTUNATE TO HAVE THESE VERY QUIRKY APPLICATIONS COME THROUGH.

UM, THAT HE'S TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE ON FINDING DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS FOR THESE PROJECTS.

THIS ONE IN PARTICULAR WAS THAT IF WE DIDN'T, IF WE TRIED TO HALT IT, THEY WOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANTED TO DO THROUGH CHAMBERS COUNTY, AND IT WOULD'VE BEEN COUNTY LAND IN OUR ETJ.

AND SO MARTIN WAS TRYING TO CREATE A, A FORM, UH, TO ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT WITH OUR, WITH OUR RESTRICTIONS BUILT IN.

AND SO, UH, RIGHT NOW WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE APPLICATION WAS PULLED.

WE DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE TRYING TO GO THE CHAMBERS COUNTY ROUTE, WHICH, UM, IT JUST HAPPENED RIGHT BEFORE THIS MEETING.

AND SO WE ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THEY'RE TRYING TO GO THE CHAMBERS COUNTY ROUTE.

IF THAT'S THE CASE, WE WILL TRY TO WORK WITH THEM TO STILL TRY TO PUT THIS IN PLACE.

I'M, I'M HAPPY TO HEAR IT WAS PULLED BECAUSE I, I AM WORRIED ABOUT LEGISLATING BASED ON ONE PROJECT OR PROPERTY OWNER OR BUSINESS.

I THINK IT APPEARS PREJUDICIAL.

TALKING ABOUT THIS BEFORE.

SO, UM, I DON'T WANT TO GET IN THE HABIT OF DOING THAT, OR IF EVER PERSONALLY, SO, UM, UH, I UNDERSTAND YOUR MOTIVATION.

I'M HAPPY TO KNOW IT'S NOT GONNA APPLY TO ANYONE OR ANY BUSINESS IN PARTICULAR, AND IT'S GONNA BE JUST SOMETHING GENERIC MOVING FORWARD.

THANK YOU, MA'AM.

ANY OTHER? YES, MA'AM.

WAS THERE MORE, WAS THERE AN ABOVE AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERMITS PULLED TODAY BY BIGGER PROJECTS TODAY OR, WELL, I'M JUST WONDERING BECAUSE WE GOT I DON'T THINK SO.

WELL, BASED OFF OF WHAT'S GOING ON, I, WE'VE HAD TWO MENTION THAT WERE PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN TALKED ABOUT IN PREVIOUS, SO I'M JUST RELATED TO THIS.

UM, I, I WILL MENTION THAT THE PROJECT THAT'S RELATED TO THIS ONE MM-HMM .

UM, I'LL JUST TELL YOU, STAFF WAS PUSHING THEM TO DO MORE.

YOU WANT THIS TO GET THROUGH, YOU WANT THIS TO BE APPROVED, YOU GOTTA DO MORE AND MAKE IT ATTRACTIVE.

THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

WHETHER YOU NEED TO PUT IN MORE BUFFERING, PUT IN MORE THIS, PUT IN MORE THAT, AND THEY SAID THAT'S GOING TO TAKE OUT TOO MUCH OF THE, UH, OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR US.

AND I SAID, YOU KNOW, I'M SORRY, THAT'S, BUT YOU'VE, WHAT YOU'RE REQUESTING IS TOO MUCH SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THAT PROPERTY AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE RUNNING INTO.

SO WE'RE ASKING FOR MORE.

WE SAID, SHOW US.

WE DIDN'T EVEN SAY SPECIFICALLY.

WE SAID, SHOW US WHAT YOU CAN DO.

AND THEY JUST SAID, YEAH, WE'RE OUT.

YEAH, I REMEMBER MR. REYNOLDS

[01:20:01]

SO NOW THERE'S A CHANCE THAT WE HAVE NO OVERSIGHT.

IT'S JUST, JUST GONNA BE CHAMBERS COUNTY MAKING THE DECISION.

THE, THE WORD WAS THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD PROBABLY WALK AWAY FROM THE PROJECT ON THIS ONE.

BUT AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE CONFIRMATION OF THAT RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S KIND OF YOU'RE SAYING.

I UNDERSTAND.

I GOT A, I'VE GOT A COUPLE, UH, YES CO A COMMENT AND A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

FIRST OF ALL, I, I'M, I LIKE THE IDEA OF THIS, UM, JUST HAVING A LITTLE MORE, UM, AN AVENUE TO KIND OF ELEVATE THE LOOK OF SOME OF THIS, UM, INDUSTRIAL, OBVIOUSLY WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT INDUSTRIAL TONIGHT ALREADY, BUT ANYWHERE WHERE IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE LI HI AT LEAST WE CAN ELEVATE KIND OF THE LOOK OF THAT, UM, HERE IN BAYTOWN.

UH, A COUPLE QUESTIONS RELATED TO WHAT YOU PRESENTED.

SO YOU SAID THESE WILL NOT EXPIRE.

UM, SO IF, IF WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH A PROPERTY OWNER FOR THIS INDUSTRIAL PUD AND THEY SELL IT, DOES THAT, DOES THAT OVERLAY TRANSFER TO THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER? IT DOES.

UM, AND THE CURRENT PUD WOULD AS WELL, BUT AGAIN, THE PUD WOULD EXPIRE AFTER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME.

AND SO WHAT AGAIN, SO I I I LIKE, IT'S THE LAYERS.

SO YOU'VE GOT THE LAYER, YOU'VE GOT THE UNDERLYING ZONING.

SO, UM, SAY THE, THERE'S ONE OUT ON, ON I 10 THAT THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT ZONINGS THERE AND IT'S COMMERCIAL AND IT'S INDU OR, AND IT'S, UM, RESIDENTIAL AND MULTIFAMILY.

AND THEN YOU'VE GOT THE PUD THAT LAYS OVER THE TOP OF IT.

THE PUD IS THE ONE THAT REQUIRES ALL THE TEETH AND REQUIRES ALL THE EXTRAS THAT WE WANT FROM THEM, BUT ALSO GIVES THEM THE FLEXIBILITY TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.

THEN IF YOU STRIP THAT AWAY, YOU'RE JUST STUCK WITH THOSE UNDERLYING ZONES.

SO WE DIDN'T, IN THE PROCESS OF THIS, THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT WE PLANNED FOR.

THE PLAN IS FOR THEM TO MOVE AHEAD WITH WHAT THEY'VE, WHAT THEY'VE PROPOSED.

SO AGAIN, WITH AN INDUSTRIAL LOT, IF YOU STRIP AWAY THAT OVERLAY, YOU'RE STUCK WITH I WITH LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR, OR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AND NOTHING, NO EXTRA PROTECTION.

SO IT MAKES MORE SENSE AND I THINK IN THE FUTURE AS WE UPDATE THE ULDC, WE'LL BE REMOVING THAT, THAT EXPIRATION FROM THE OTHER PDS AS WELL.

'CAUSE IT JUST MAKES SENSE.

UH, SECOND QUESTION WAS, YOU SAID THIS, THE INDUSTRIAL PUD WILL NOT REQUIRE, UM, A MIX OF ZONING OR MIX OF USES, BUT DOES IT PROHIBIT THAT, UM, SAY THEY HAD A PROPERTY WHERE THEY WANTED, YOU KNOW, TO PUT SOME MAYBE GC ALONG THE FRONTAGE, A SHOPPING CENTER, WHATNOT, WITH A WAREHOUSE LOGISTICS BEHIND IT TO KIND OF USE THAT STOREFRONT AS KIND OF A BUFFER.

DOES IT, WOULD THAT BE ABLE TO, COULD THEY DO THE MIX OF USES IN THIS PUD? UM, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN NOW? I DON'T THINK THEY COULD BECAUSE WE'D BE LOOKING AT THE UNDERLYING ZONING TO DICTATE THAT.

AND RIGHT NOW THE, LIKE A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DOES ALLOW CERTAIN TYPES OF RETAIL.

LIKE IF YOU HAD A, I DON'T KNOW, LIKE A GRANGER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I THINK IT WOULD ALLOW, AND AGAIN, THIS IS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I THINK IT WOULD ALLOW FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR A WAREHOUSE TYPE RETAIL, UM, MAYBE AMERICAN FIRST WAREHOUSE OR, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING OF THAT, THAT SCALE.

BUT OTHERWISE IT DOESN'T ALLOW, I MEAN, YOU COULDN'T PUT A MCDONALD'S IN THERE.

YOU COULDN'T PUT A SMALL CLOTHING SHOP IN THERE.

SURE.

YOU COULDN'T DO IT.

SO THIS WOULD BE, UM, THIS WOULD JUST FURTHER THOSE, THOSE REGULATIONS.

BUT WE COULD ALWAYS, IF THEY, I MEAN WHEN I SAY THE, THAT FRONT PART GC IF NEEDED AND YOU COULD KEEP IT.

YOU COULD, I I, I DON'T KNOW THE LIKELIHOOD OF THAT HAPPENING, BUT ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.

SO I BELIEVE WE'VE STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.

SO I THINK, LET SEE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

UM, I UNDERSTAND THE, CERTAINLY THE STAFF, I GUESS RESPONSE TO THIS.

SO WHEN YOU SAY ON THE SITE PLAN WILL BE LOCKED IN, UM, I GUESS THIS WOULD BE, THIS WOULD ONLY, THIS WOULD APPLY TO WHICH ZONES? LIHI ONLY LI AND HI, IF THEY'RE APPLIED FOR.

UM, WE, WE WOULDN'T ANTICIPATE THIS BEING USED EVERY TIME, BUT IT, AGAIN, IT WOULD ALLOW FOR SOME FLEXIBILITY TO KIND OF MOVE THINGS AROUND A LITTLE BIT.

HOW ABOUT, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO, IF THEY PRESENT ILLUSTRATIONS OF LIKE WHAT A FACADE WILL LOOK LIKE IF THEY'RE STACKED STONE GLASS, WHATEVER, AND SAY THIS IS WHAT WE WANNA BUILD.

AND THEN IN REALITY IT'S DIFFERENT.

SO THIS WOULD LOCK IN EVEN ILLUSTRATIONS? IT WOULD, OKAY.

AND, AND WE, WE USUALLY, WE USE THE PHRASE IN, UH, IN GENERAL COMPLIANCE WITH, SO IF IT CHANGES A LITTLE AND STAFF SAYS, YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S MAYBE NOT EXACT, BUT IT'S REALLY CLOSE AND IT'S, IT'S GOT THE SAME FEEL TO IT.

UM, AND, AND AGAIN, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO REGULATE BUILDING MATERIALS, BUT THIS IS PART OF A, AN AGREEMENT THAT WE WOULD HAVE WITH THE DEVELOPERS.

IF THEY HAVE AGREED TO THIS, THEN THEY HAVE TO HOLD FAST TO THAT.

WELL, AND I'M

[01:25:01]

GLAD YOU MENTIONED THAT.

I MEAN, WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY UNDER NORMAL CONDITIONS.

THAT'S WHY IT'S BENEFICIAL WHEN WE DO THE PUDS AND THE PIS AND, AND OTHERS THAT THEN IT ALLOWS OUR SPECIAL USE PERMITS.

IT ALLOWS US TO GO AND PROVIDE THOSE BOUNDARIES AND, AND THOSE REGULATIONS ON PROJECTS.

SO, UM, SOMETIMES IT'S, IT'S BETTER LIKE IN SOME OF THE CASES THAT WE HEARD TONIGHT WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE AN ABILITY TO AT LEAST TO TRY TO MINIMIZE IMPACT.

BUT IF THEY, IF THEY'RE HAVE THE ABILITY TO JUST SAY NO, WE'LL JUST GO OUT ON OUR OWN AND THEY HAVE THAT ABILITY TO DO SO, THAT THAT COULD BE THE CASE AND WE YOU WIND UP WITH SOMEBODY THAT'S ACTUALLY MORE IMPACTFUL.

WHICH IS SIX B IS TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE, WHICH I THINK YOU ALREADY HEARD, WHAT IT BASICALLY ENTAILS SOUGHT TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR SIX B AS AS EXPRESSED MOVE TO APPROVE SIX B SECOND MOTION.

SO WE, WE ARE IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO WITH THAT, NO ONE HAS SIGNED, SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

SO I NOW CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING, UM, BEING THAT NO ONE HAS DESIRED TO SPEAK, UH, TO THE AMENDMENT DLDC TO CHANGE 2.06 AND ADD 2.081 TO ADD ANY NEW ZONING DISTRICT.

SO THAT MEETING'S IN ENCLOSED, WE'LL MOVE TO OUR ACTION ITEM,

[b. Consider an ordinance regarding proposed text amendments to the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) to change Section 2.06 Special Purpose Zoning Districts and add Section 2.081 Industrial Planned Unit Developments, to add a new zoning district.]

UH, A MOTION TO SECOND.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIX B IS PRESENTED, PLEASE SAY AYE.

LUCKY FOR US IS ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING AND NOW WE HAVE, IT IS 7:58 PM AND I'LL CALL TO ORDER THIS PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING AND, UH, CONCERNING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE REZONING OF APPROXIMATELY POINT, UH, FOUR ONE ACRES LOCATED AT NINE NORTHRIDGE DRIVE.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED.

ITEM CARRIES.

MOVE ON TO THANK YOU.

SEVEN A, WHICH

[a. Conduct a public hearing concerning a request to amend the official zoning map to rezone approximately 0.41 acres located at 9 Northridge Drive from a General Commercial (GC) to a Mixed Residential at Low to a Medium Densities (SF2) zoning district.]

I WOULD ASK THAT TO SUMMARIZE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS HEARING.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

HOPEFULLY THIS ONE'S A LITTLE LESS CONTROVERSIAL.

UM, BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS A REZONING REQUEST OF, UH, PROPERTY AT NINE NORTHRIDGE DRIVE.

UH, REZONING IT FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MIXED, UH, RESIDENTIAL IN A LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY.

UH, HERE IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY.

IT'S LOCATED AT THE, UM, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF, UH, NORTH MAINE AND NORTHRIDGE DRIVE.

UH, THE CURRENT ZONING AS UH, MENTIONED, UH, IS UH, GC AND THEY'RE REQUESTING TO GO TO SF TWO.

UH, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DOES ACTUALLY CALL OUT FOR THIS TO BE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

UM, AND BECAUSE OF THAT, THAT IS WHY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, UM, APPROVAL OF THIS, UH, THE PLAYING IN PLAYING A ZONING COMMISSIONER HEARD THIS AS WELL AND DID RECOMMEND, UH, UNANIMOUSLY TO, UH, RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO REZONE THIS TO, UM, SF TWO.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING, UM, TO BUILD, UH, TWO RESIDENTIAL, UH, UNITS ON THE PROPERTY.

SO, OKAY.

SO ANYONE, UNLESS THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, IF NOT, UH, SO I'LL CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING.

I'LL CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE ITEM I JUST EXPRESSED.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR ACTION ITEM, WHICH IS SEVEN B, UH, WHICH IS SEVEN B, UM,

[b. Consider an ordinance to amend the official zoning map to rezone approximately 0.41 acres located at 9 Northridge Drive from a General Commercial (GC) to a Mixed Residential at Low to Medium Densities (SF2) zoning district.]

TO CONSIDER, UH, AMENDING THE OFFICIALS ZONING MAP TO RE ON APPROXIMATELY 0.41 ACRES LOCATED AT NINE NORTH RIDGE DRIVE FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MAKES RESIDENTIAL AT A LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY SF TWO, WHICH WAS DESCRIBED AS BASICALLY TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

CORRECT.

ALRIGHT, SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF SEVEN B, MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM SEVEN B.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? SEVEN V IS PRESENTED, PLEASE SAY AYE.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED, ITEM CARRIE'S.

MOVE ON AB FROM THAT ONE.

CAN ABSTAIN FROM THAT ONE.

SO, UH, MS. CITY CLERK PLEASE, UH, MARK THAT EXTENSION.

ALL RIGHT, SO THIS NEXT ITEM, UM, UH, SO THE APPLICANT DID PULL THIS ITEM, UH, MR. CITY ATTORNEY.

IS THERE ANY ACTION OR, UH, ANY ACTIVITY THAT COUNSEL NEEDS TO DO? NO, SIR.

YOU JUST TAKE NO ACTION ON THIS ITEM.

WITH THAT, UH, MS. DANSKY, YOU DID SIGN UP FOR THIS ITEM.

YOU TOLD ME IT WAS GONE, SO YEAH.

A, CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL, UH, FUND CONTINGENCY TO COVER PARTS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED IN THE MDD BUDGET.

JUST MAKE SURE.

ALRIGHT, SO WITH THAT, UM, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NINE

[a. Consider an ordinance authorizing a budget amendment to transfer funds from the General Fund contingency to cover Parks Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) that were previously appropriated in the Municipal Development District (MDD) budget. ]

SO MS. MCKENZIE, UM, COUNSEL BEFORE YOU IS A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR FY 23.

UM, THIS IS A RESULT OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE MOVED OUTTA MDD FOR FY 23 TO GENERAL FUND BECAUSE THAT WE BELIEVE THAT'S YOUR INTENT TO STILL FUND THESE PROJECTS IN 23.

SO THE PROJECTS MAJORITY OF THIS, UH, BUDGET AMENDMENT IS ABOUT THE PROJECTS.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE DETAIL IN THE PACKET, THE PARKS PROJECTS FOR SPORTS LEAGUE IMPROVEMENTS, TOMPKINS AREA PARK, THE DISC GOLF COURSE, LAKEWOOD COMMUNITY DOG PARK, AND THE WETLAND CENTER RELOCATION IN CHANDLER ARBORETUM.

UM, AND THE TOTAL FOR THAT IS $1.269 MILLION.

AND WE'RE MOVING THAT MONEY FROM CONTINGENCY BECAUSE THESE PROJECTS WILL BE LISTED IN THE GENERAL FUND CIP.

[01:30:03]

SO, UM, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ITEM NINE A AS PRESENTED MOVE TO APPROVE THE MOTION.

SECOND, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR ITEM NINE? A QUESTION? YES MA'AM.

WITH ALL THE DISCUSSIONS WE'VE HAD TODAY AND IN THE PAST ABOUT PRIORITIZING WANTS VERSUS NEEDS IS STAFF ABSOLUTELY SURE.

THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS TO SPEND $1.2 MILLION IN CONTINGENCY ON PARKS PROJECTS.

UH, MY DIRECT ANSWER TO YOU IS YES, AND THAT'S BECAUSE I GAVE MY WORD THAT THIS WOULD BE BROUGHT TO COUNCIL FOR FUNDING AND THAT THE, THE FUNDING IS AVAILABLE AND I'M NOT GONNA BACK AWAY FROM THAT.

UH, IF WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON WHERE THE FUNDING STANDS AND WHAT THAT DOES TO THE BUDGET, WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION.

BUT I, IT, I TOLD Y'ALL THAT, THAT THIS WOULD BE DONE AND FUNDED BY, OR I TOLD THE MDD BOARD THAT IT WOULD BE DONE AND FUNDED BY THE GENERAL FUND.

UM, AND SO I'M TRYING, I'M I'M TRYING TO, I WILL STICK TO MY WORD THAT THAT'S HAPPENING.

SO, SO LET ME ASK, UH, KIND OF ALONG THE LINES OF THAT.

SO WITH THIS TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO, TO THE GENERAL FUND, UM, TO THE GENERAL FUND FOR THESE PROJECTS, IS THAT A, I GUESS 23, 24 BUDGET ITEM? OR IS IT WITHIN THIS BUDGET? IT IT'S THIS BUDGET, UH, MISTAKE.

UH, 2223.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

SO, SO WE HAVE 1.75 MILLION IN THE CONTINGENCY CURRENTLY, AND SO WE WOULD BE USING THE CONTINGENCY MONEY TO FUND THIS.

UM, YES SIR.

THE REASON WHY I'M ASKING IS, WHAT I SEE IS THIS, I SEE PROJECTS THAT WERE IN A PROPOSED MDD BUDGET FOR 2324, RIGHT? NO SIR.

THEY WERE APPROVED IN 23.

I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE.

SO ALL THE PROJECTS WERE APPROVED PREVIOUS AND MDD? YES, SIR.

THAT'S WHAT I WANNA MAKE SURE.

SO THESE ARE NOT ANY PRO, UM, ANY PROJECTS THAT WERE IN THE PROPOSED, IN ORIGINAL PROPOSED, UM, MVD BUDGET? THAT'S CORRECT.

I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S ALL I ASKING.

I WANT TO YES, JUST CLARIFY, I'M STILL A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED.

YOU'RE SAYING THESE WERE IN THE 2223 BUDGET OR 2324? 2223 MDD BUDGET.

CURRENT BUDGET.

SO, AND THIS IS ALL MONEY THAT WOULD BE SPENT IN THIS BUDGET YEAR? YES, SIR.

WHICH HAS HOW MUCH LEFT IN IT? GO AHEAD.

UM, SO WHAT HAPPENED WAS THESE PROJECTS WERE LISTED AND APPROVED IN THE MDD BUDGET FOR 23 WITH ALL OUR CIP PROJECTS.

THAT FUNDING, IF IT'S NOT SPENT AT THE END OF THE YEAR, IS ROLLED FORWARD.

SO WHAT WE DID IS WE JUST MOVED THE MONEY THAT WAS IN 23 FOR MDD TO A GENERAL FUND, CIPF.

THIS IS, THIS DOES NOT ADDRESS THE PROJECTS IN FY 24 IF THEY'RE ASKING FOR DIS ADDITIONAL FUNDING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

THIS IS JUST THE AMOUNTS THAT WERE APPROVED IN MDD FOR FY 2223.

I GUESS MY QUESTION IS FOR THESE PROJECTS, MY QUESTION IS, I MEAN, THIS IS FUNDING FOR PROJECTS THAT WERE PLANNED TO BE DONE THIS Y THIS BUDGET YEAR, AND WE HAVE WHAT, A TWO A MONTH OR TWO LEFT IN THIS BUDGET YEAR? I MEAN, IS THIS REALISTIC THAT WE'RE REALLY GONNA GET ALL OF THESE THINGS DONE? I WOULD'VE TO DEFER TO PARKS CORNELL, I DON'T SEE PARKS.

WELL, NO, I DO.

BRENT, BRENT CAN ANSWER.

THIS IS NOT AN OPERATING BUDGET TRANSFER.

UM, WELL, WE'RE NOT TRANSFERRING IT INTO AN OPERATING BUDGET, WE'RE TRANSFERRING IT INTO A CAPITAL BUDGET.

SO THE CAPITAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION AND WHATEVER FUNDING'S THERE REMAINS UNTIL THE PROJECT'S COMPLETE.

SO, SHORT ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, WILL THESE ITEMS GET DONE IN FY 23? NO, BUT THE APPROPRIATION DOES NOT GO AWAY.

YES MA'AM.

THERESA MAYA? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

ALL OF US THAT WERE PRESENT AT THE MDD BOARD, I'M GONNA ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO PLEASE, UM, REMEMBER ALL THE ITEMS THAT WERE DISCUSSED HEAVILY AT MDD FOR AN EXTENSIVE AMOUNT OF TIME AND, UM, I, I REALLY WANT TO GO WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND MOVE FORWARD.

YEAH, I MEAN, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

IT IS JUST, UM, I THINK THE POINT WAS THERE WAS A PROPOSED MDD BUDGET OR THERE THERE WAS A PROPOSED MDD BUDGET WITH PRO WITH PROJECTS.

NONE OF THEM WERE REALLY DISCUSSED.

WE ONLY TALKED ABOUT BASICALLY FINANCIAL SOURCES AND WHAT SHOULD BE FUNDED HERE AND THERE.

AND SO IN MY QUESTION, WAS ANY OF THOSE PROJECTS, HAVE THEY EVER BEEN VETTED BY, IN A SENSE, COUNSEL OR MDD, BUT THESE WERE APPROVED.

THESE WERE APPROVED.

NO, THAT'S PROJECTS.

SO THAT, AND YOU ASKED THAT, AND THIS WAS AN APPROVED PROJECT.

ALL THEY'RE DOING IN THE LONG CONVERSATION WE HAD AT MDD WAS MOVING THEM THAT, WELL, I'M NOT SURE IF MD EVER, EVER APPROVED THE PROJECTS THAT WERE IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THEY DID APPROVE .

CAN CHANGE AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WAS BROUGHT UP.

SO THAT, THAT'S WHAT MY QUESTION WAS ABOUT.

THAT WAS IT.

THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS ABOUT.

SO, BUT I ALSO THINK PRIORITIES

[01:35:01]

THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION, WAS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING IS MDD WAS SUPPOSED TO PAY FOR THIS AND IT RAN OUTTA MONEY.

AND SO NOW WE'RE, THEY'RE ASKING US TO SUPPLEMENT IT WITH THE GENERAL FUND.

I'M NOT SURE THAT PHILOSOPHICALLY THAT'S SOMETHING I CAN SUPPORT.

WELL, YES.

QUESTION COMMENTS? I WAS GOING TO SAY SOMETHING, BUT I'M NOT SURE.

I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S CORRECT BECAUSE, UM, THAT WAS THE MDD MEETING WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT MOVING MONEY THAT WAS DIRECTED FROM PARKS BUDGETS TO THE GENERAL FUND.

UM, SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS MDD WAS OUT OF MONEY.

IT WAS THAT WE WERE REAPPROPRIATING THE MONEY AND THIS WAS ACTUALLY WHAT WAS TALKED ABOUT EXTENSIVELY ABOUT WHEN THESE PROJECTS ARE MOVED, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPETE.

I WOULD, I DIDN'T THINK THERE WAS GONNA BE SO MUCH BACK AND FORTH ON THIS ONLY BECAUSE THIS WAS AN APPROVED BUDGET.

I COULD UNDERSTAND IF WE WERE LOOKING AT PROPOSED MONIES BEING SPENT, WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT APPROVED.

AND WHEN I ASKED THE QUESTIONS, HERE WE GO WITH THE BUCKETS.

WHEN I ASKED ABOUT THE BUCKETS, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.

WHEN WE START MOVING THE MONEY AROUND AND PUTTING IT IN DIFFERENT BUCKETS, NOW WE'RE HAVING TO GO BACK AND HAVE MORE OPEN CONVERSATIONS ABOUT DID THEY APPROVE THAT TO SPEND THAT MONEY WITH IT IN THAT BUCKET, OR DID THEY APPROVE TO SPEND THAT MONEY WHEN IT WAS IN THAT BUCKET? AND THIS WAS EXACTLY MY FEAR BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME ETHICAL, I GUESS, QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT.

I DON'T KNOW IF ETHICAL IS THE WORD.

YEAH, I'M NOT SURE.

ETHICAL, I DON'T KNOW.

ETHICAL.

I DON'T, I DON'T THINK ETHICAL IS THE WORD.

IT'S A DIFFERENT WORD.

I DON'T THINK WORD.

I CAN'T THINK OF ONE.

BUT THERE'S MORE, THERE'S, THIS IS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.

IT'S CAUSING MORE QUESTIONS WHEN WE START MOVING THE MONEY AROUND.

I AND THAT, AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION WAS ARE, ARE THESE PROJECTS, WERE THEY, WERE THEY THE ONES THAT WERE IN A SENSE APPROVED IN THE 2223 BUDGET OR IN THE PROPOSED DRAFT? BECAUSE THE PROPOSED DRAFT, WE NEVER DISCUSSED THOSE, CORRECT? NO, NO.

THAT'S, THAT'S ALL MY POINT WAS YES, SIR.

TO, TO MY UNDERSTANDING.

I I, I KNOW THEY WERE APPROVED AND JUST KIND OF, YOU KNOW, LAKEWOOD AND MY DISTRICT WITH THE DOG PARK, UM, THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL $25,000 GIVEN FROM EXXON.

SO IF WE DON'T APPROVE IT, WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT $25,000 THAT EXXON PUT UP FOR THE PARK ON TOP OF THE TWO, $220,000? SO NOT ONLY WAS APPROVED, IT WAS ACTUALLY, THERE WAS ADDITIONAL FUNDING.

SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT MS. BECK COURT'S SAYING ABOUT YOU MOVING FORWARD ONCE IT NEEDS, BUT THESE, THESE WERE ALREADY SET ASIDE.

PEOPLE WERE EXPECTING THESE AMENITIES AND UM, I KNOW MOVING FORWARD WE NEED TO THINK FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE AS WELL.

BUT THESE WERE PROJECTS THAT WERE APPROVED.

I DON'T DISAGREE THAT THEY WERE APPROVED, BUT THEY WERE APPROVED AND THE MONEY'S NOT THERE ANYMORE.

AND SO NOW WE'RE BEING ASKED TO FUND THEM OUT OF A DIFFERENT BUCKET.

AND SO I HAVE TO ASK MYSELF, IS THIS THE RIGHT, I MEAN, ARE THESE THE RIGHT PROJECTS WE NEED TO GO AFTER RIGHT NOW? BUT THE MONEY, YOU GOTTA TAKE THE MDD HAT OFF.

THIS IS A COUNCIL DECISION NOW.

IT WAS APPROVED ON THE MDD BUDGET AND, AND THE FUNDS ARE NO LONGER THERE.

SO WE'RE BEING ASKED AS COUNSEL TO FUND THEM.

AND I'M, I'M SIMPLY ASKING THE QUESTION, ARE THESE THE RIGHT PROJECTS TO GO AFTER? RIGHT NOW, TAKING MY MDD HAT OFF, THE MONEY'S NOT THERE BECAUSE THE MDD BOARD PUT IT SOMEWHERE ELSE.

SO, UM, SO HERE WE ARE WITH COUNSEL KNOWING THAT THE MDD BOARD MOVED IT, I DON'T KNOW.

I MEAN THIS IS FOR CLARITY.

I, I JUST, MY, MY QUESTION WAS ANSWERED, SO THAT'S FINE.

I AT THAT POINT, IT, IT IS JUST AS IT WAS RAISED.

YES SIR.

ALRIGHT, I'M GONNA JUMP IN THERE.

'CAUSE AGAIN, WE, THREE OF US ARE SITTING IN ON CIP DISCUSSIONS.

UM, THE $70,000 FOR THE, THE SPORTS LEAGUE IMPROVEMENTS, I'M ASSUMING THAT'S A YOUTH SPORTS LEAGUE IMPROVEMENTS, DIFFERENT TITLES, I'M ASSUMING IT'S THE SAME.

SO IN THE 2223 BUDGET, IT WAS APPROVED IN MDD, WE'RE PULLING THAT OUT.

BUT I, I KNOW THAT THERE'S $20,000 FOR YOUTH LEAGUE PLAY THAT WOULD CONTINUE, IF IT'S DISBANDED, THERE'S $24,000 FOR A REPLACEMENT OF THE NATIONAL LEAGUE, UH, SCHOOL BOARD THAT'S, THEY DON'T EVEN USE THE PARK RIGHT NOW.

SO THERE'S ABOUT $40,000 WE COULD CUT OUT OF THAT 70.

THE OTHER HAS ALREADY BEEN SPENT, SO IT NEEDS TO BE APPROVED AND WE COULD TRIM THAT OUT.

THE TOMPKINS PARK AREA PARK, I'M ONE OF THOSE THAT SUPPORT FUNDING THAT BECAUSE THAT'S A MATCH GRANT.

SO AGAIN, WHETHER IT'S, WHETHER IT WAS NVD OR PUSHING BACK INTO GENERAL FUND, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT AS A COUNCIL WE NEED, THAT'S AN OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO GET A MATCHING GRANT.

AND I THINK IT'S, IT'S 50 50 FROM MY UNDERSTANDING.

CONSIDER RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION SUBMITTAL, THE US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S FY 23.

CORRECT.

SO, AND THEN THE 700,000 FOR DISC

[01:40:01]

GOLF.

AND I'M A PROPONENT OF THAT.

WE HAD AN EXCELLENT COURSE THAT'S, IT HAD TO BE MOVED.

IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THAT BACK TO BAYTOWN.

THAT WOULD BE, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S AN ECONOMIC INCENTIVE, BUT IT WOULD CERTAINLY BRING PEOPLE FROM OUT OF THE CITY TO US TO DO DISC GOLF.

I WILL SAY ON THAT ONE, I THINK THAT ONE ACTUALLY IS AN ECONOMIC INCENTIVE.

'CAUSE PEOPLE COME FROM ALL OVER, OVER AND THEY SPEND MONEY ON THAT STUFF.

YES, THEY REALLY DO.

UM, THE 220,000 FOR, FOR A COMMUNITY DOG PARK, AGAIN IN LAKEWOOD, I SUPPORT THAT 'CAUSE IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN FROM, FROM THE CURRENT DOG PARK.

AND I WOULD SUPPORT THAT IN THE GENERAL FUND.

AND AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO LOOK AT IT FROM A GENERAL FUND PERSPECTIVE.

THE $150,000 FOR WETLAND CENTER LOCATION, I, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD PROJECT, WOULD MEET THE MUSTER AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

SO I I, I CAN UNDERSTAND MY COLLEAGUE'S CONCERNS THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A GENERAL FUND, BUT IT WAS FUNDS THAT WERE ALREADY PREVIOUSLY APPROVED THAT GOT MOVED TO US.

WE NEED TO TRIM IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT 'CAUSE OF THE, THE FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS WE HAVE.

SO THAT WOULD BE MY INPUT.

WE COULD CUT THE 70,000 DOWN TO, TO WHAT THEY'VE ALREADY EXPENDED.

UM, LEAVE THE 1 29, LEAVE THE 700, LEAVE THE TWO 20 AND, AND, AND MAYBE TAKE THE ONE 50 OUT.

UM, AGAIN, I THINK THOSE MIDDLE THREE PROJECTS ARE IMPORTANT TO THE CITY.

UH, WHETHER, WHETHER IT'S MDD OR WHETHER IT'S GENERAL FUND, I'M PUTTING MY, YOU KNOW, MY GENERAL FUND HAT ON.

IF THOSE WERE COMPETING WITH OTHER PROJECTS CURRENTLY, THEY WOULD BE CLOSE TO THE TOP OF THE LIST TO BE APPROVED.

SO THAT'S MY POSITION, MAYOR AND YEP.

NO, I APPRECIATE THE INSIGHT AND, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS JUST QUESTIONS ARE ASKED, RIGHT? AND SO, UM, MY QUESTIONS ARE ANSWERED.

I'M COMFORTABLE WITH SUPPORTING THIS TRANSFER AND OBVIOUSLY THE PROJECTS.

SO WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR AS YOU SAID, MS. GRAHAM, UM, THIS BUCKET, THAT BUCKET, MDD CITY COUNCIL, AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK THE PROJECTS ARE WARRANTED.

THEY'RE JUSTIFIED.

THEY CERTAINLY HAVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND I DO PLAN ON SUPPORTING THEM.

SO WITH THAT, UNLESS THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTION OR COMMENTS, UM, OH YES.

ANYMORE.

OH, YEP.

SO, UM, IT'S TIME FOR TO CONSIDER ITEM NINE A AS PRESENTED.

UH, THOSE IN FAVOR OF NINE A I'M GONNA DO THIS BY A SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

IS THERE A MOTION? OH, CAN I GET A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? NINE.

ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? THOSE IN FAVOR OF NINE A AS PRESENTED, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ALL THOSE, UH, NOT IN FAVOR OF NINE A AS PRESENTED, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

SO I THINK THAT'S A VOTE.

UH, FIVE TWO.

SO ITEM CARRIES.

MOVE ON TO ITEM 10 A

[a. Consider a resolution authorizing an application submittal to the US Department of Transportation's FY2023 Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-Saving Transportation (PROTECT) Program on behalf of the Office of Emergency Management.]

UM, PROMOTING RESILIENT OPERATIONS FOR TRANSFORMATIVE EFFICIENT AND COST SAVING TRANSPORTATION.

OBVIOUSLY THIS IS GOVERNMENT WORK, SO THERE'S ALWAYS AN ACRONYM WHICH IS PROTECT FOR THAT LONG VERBIAGE PROGRAM ON BEHALF OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, UH, CHIEF, CHIEF, THEY HAVE YOU DOWN ON SPEAKER? I'M SPEAKING, YES.

ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT.

UH, OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT OR DIVISION OF, UH, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.

UM, DAVID , EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR.

WE'RE REQUESTING APPROVAL TO SUBMIT THIS GRANT APPLICATION, THE DOT PROTECT GRANT, UM, FOR AN EVACUATION PLANNING AND PREPAREDNESS PROJECT.

UM, THE PROJECT'S PURPOSE IS TO CONDUCT AN EVACUATION STUDY ASSESSING TRAFFIC FLOWS, VULNERABLE POPULATIONS, HAZARD SCENARIOS, IMPACTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS. THE PROJECT WILL ALSO INCLUDE A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF FUNDING FOR COMMUNITY OUTREACH, PUBLIC EDUCATION, AS WELL AS AN EXERCISE IN PLANNING UPDATE FOR OUR CURRENT EXISTING EVACUATION PLAN.

THE TOTAL GRANT IS, UH, $700,000 WITH NO FEDERAL COST SHARE.

UM, SO THIS IS, UH, MONEY THAT HAS COME OUT THROUGH THE INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, ACT AND PROJECTS, UM, WITHIN DOT.

SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS GRANT.

AGAIN, NO FEDERAL COST SHARE WITH THIS.

ANY QUESTIONS? NO, SIR.

NO QUESTIONS.

QUESTIONS, COUNSEL? HAVE NOT APPRECIATE IT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS RESOLUTION FOR ITEM 10.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

CAN WE GET A MOTION FOR 10 A PLEASE? THANK.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF 10 A AS WRITTEN PLEASE SAY AYE.

A DOES RECEIVE NOTICE REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF $61.265 MILLION UNLIMITED TAX BOND SERIES 23 BY CEDAR PORT NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, ALSO KNOWN AS CHAMBERS COUNTY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER ONE.

OPPOSED? MOVE ON TO REPORTS.

[a. Receive notice regarding the issuance of $61,265,000.00 Unlimited Tax Bonds, Series 2023, by Cedar Port Navigation and Improvement District f/k/a Chambers County Improvement District No. 1.]

MR. LAMONT COUNSEL, THIS IS A NOTICE OF A BOND ISSUANCE FROM THE NAVIGATION AND IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE ANY ACTION ON IT.

IT IS SIMPLY A MATTER OF CONTRACT THAT THEY PROVIDE US NOTICE WHEN THEY HAVE BOND ISSUANCES.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THOUGH FROM COUNSEL? OKAY, WE WILL CONSIDER THOSE RECEIVED.

WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM 11 B.

RECEIVE THE CITY OF BAY TOWN'S

[b. Receive the City of Baytown's Quarterly Financial and Investment Reports for the Quarter Ending March 31, 2023.]

[c. Receive the City of Baytown's Quarterly Financial and Investment Reports for the Quarter Ending June 30, 2023.]

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INVESTMENT REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDING MARCH 31ST AND THEN FOLLOWING THAT

[01:45:01]

WILL BE THE QUARTER REPORT FOR JUNE 30TH.

MS. MCKENZIE, YOU'RE VERY POPULAR THIS EVENING.

I KNOW, UH, MAYOR COUNSEL, I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE SECOND QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT FOR PERIOD ENDING MARCH 31ST, 2023.

UM, THE GENERAL FUND REVENUE IS 111 MILLION AT ITS 86%.

SORRY ABOUT THAT.

86% AND THE EXPENSES ARE 70 MILLION AT 47% OVER THE BUDGET LEAVING A FUND BALANCE OF 81.6 MILLION.

THE GENERAL FUND PROPERTY TAX REVENUE IS 24.5 MILLION IN SALES.

TAX REVENUE IS $10.8 MILLION.

THE VALUE OF THE INVESTMENTS IS $317.9 MILLION AND THE EARNINGS IS $3.4 MILLION.

THE UNSPENT BOND PROCEEDS IS $70.3 MILLION.

THE OTHER DETAILS ARE IN YOUR PACKET AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION.

THAT'S THE MARCH 31ST.

CAN YOU GO AHEAD AND GIVE US THE JUNE 30TH AND WE CAN CONSIDER BOTH? WELL, WE RECEIVE BOTH, I GUESS AT THAT POINT.

RECEIVE THE NEXT REPORT.

UM, THE THIRD QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT FOR PERIOD ENDING JUNE 30TH, 2023.

UM, THE GENERAL FUND REVENUE IS ONE POINT, I MEAN $121.8 MILLION.

THE EXPENSES ARE 105.7 MILLION, LEAVING A UNBALANCE OF 56.6 MILLION.

THE PROPERTY TAX REVENUE IS 25.1 MILLION AND THE SALES TAX REVENUE IS 16.1.

THE BOOK VALUE OF THE INVESTMENTS IS 277.7 MILLION WITH AN EARNINGS OF 3.5 MILLION AND THE UNSPENT BOND PROCEEDS IS 66.2 MILLION.

THE OTHER DETAILS ARE IN YOUR PACKET AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

UM, ANY QUESTIONS ON ITEMS 11, B OR C? IF NOT, WE'D CONSIDER THOSE TWO ITEMS RECEIVED AND NEXT IT'S STILL

[d. Receive the 2023 Certified Ad Valorem Anticipated Collection Rate and the Certified Excess Debt Collections from the City of Baytown Tax Assessor/Collector.]

YOU.

MS. MCKENZIE HAS RECEIVED THE 2023 CERTIFIED ED ALARM ANTICIPATED COLLECTION RATE AND THE CERTIFIED EXCESS DEBT COLLECTIONS FROM THE SEA OF BAYTOWN TAX, UH, ACCESSOR SLASH COLLECTOR.

SO THIS IS JUST A REPORT THAT THEY SENT US ANNUALLY BECAUSE THEY ESTIMATE OUR, UM, EXCESS COLLECTION RATE AND THIS YEAR THEY'RE ESTIMATING THAT IT WILL BE A HUNDRED 0.25%.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FOR ITEM 11 D.

IF NOT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO

[12. CONSENT All Consent Agenda items listed are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council Member requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda.]

CONSENT AGENDA.

I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ITEMS A THROUGH G OF CONSENT, AGENDA MOTION.

ANY ANY ITEMS THAT NEEDED TO BE PULLED INDIVIDUALLY? IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED, PLEASE SAY AYE.