[CALL TO ORDER]
          [00:00:10]
          GIVEN BY FATHER SHANE BAXTER OF SAINT ANTHONY CATHEDRAL, OKAY. HE MAY NOT MAKE IT SO. AND, IF EVERYONE WOULD PLEASE SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONES. AND IF YOU SO CHOOSE, PLEASE STAND AND REMAIN STANDING FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. DO DO WE HAVE A, PA. PASTOR TUBBS, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO RETURN THANKS. OR GIVE GIVE THE INVOCATION. EXCUSE ME. WE'RE NOT ABOUT TO EAT YET. 
          ALL THINGS DO WORK TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD OF THOSE WHO LOVE YOU AND ARE CALLED ACCORDING TO YOUR PURPOSE. AND AS WE COME TODAY, GOD, WE ASK FORGIVENESS OF ALL OF OUR SINS. WE ASK YOU TO BLOT OUT ALL OF OUR TRANSGRESSIONS. LET NOTHING HINDER US. OH GOD, AS WE GO FORTH TO DO THE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE CALLED UPON US TO DO, WE PRAY FOR THIS COUNCIL, OH GOD. AND WE ASK YOU TO USE THEM TO LEAD THIS CITY IN A WAY THAT WILL BE PLEASING UNTO YOU. EVERY DECISION THAT THEY HAVE TO MAKE. 
          OH GOD, LET IT BE GOD. BREATHE AND WE ASK YOU, OH LORD GOD, TO ALLOW YOUR SPIRIT TO MOVE ALL OVER THIS ROOM SO THAT YOUR PRESENCE WILL BE MANIFEST, KNOWING THAT YOUR WILL WILL BE DONE. WE COME AGAINST ANY DIVISIVENESS OR ANYTHING THAT MAY TRY TO HINDER THE MOVE OF GOD, AND WE JUST ASK YOU, OH LORD GOD, TO BE YOUR BEST HERE TODAY. AND WE KNOW THAT WHEN YOU ARE PRESENT THAT ALL THINGS DO WORK TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD, FOR THOSE WHO LOVE YOU AND ARE THOSE WHO ARE CALLED ACCORDING TO YOUR PURPOSE. THESE BLESSINGS WE ASK IN THY SON JESUS NAME, AMEN. 
          AMEN. THANK YOU. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 
          ROLL CALL PLEASE, MAYOR WEST, PRESENT MAYOR PRO TEM NEAL PRESENT COUNCIL MEMBER. DAURIO ABSENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. GOETZ. PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. TURNER. ABSENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. SHORE. 
          [PRESENTATIONS]
PRESENT AND COUNCIL MEMBER. SAMUEL. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A COMMUNICATIONS UPDATE FROM OUR CITY OF BEAUMONT COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT. NOW. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. IN THIS WEEK'S CITY ANNOUNCEMENTS, WE WANT TO RECOGNIZE OUR LOCAL YOUTH ATHLETES WHO COMPETED IN THE TEXAS AMATEUR ATHLETIC FEDERATION OR TAF, MEET IN BROWNSVILLE JULY 25TH THROUGH 28TH. WE HAD 130 STUDENTS, AGES 6 TO 18 PARTICIPATED IN THE BEAUMONT TRACK CLUB. THIS YEAR, AND SEVERAL OF THEM QUALIFIED TO GO TO THE STATE MEET AND OF THOSE WHO COMPETED, WE WERE ABLE TO BRING HOME 23 MEDALS. SO GREAT JOB TO ALL THE YOUTH WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE PROGRAM AND WORKED TO KEEP UP THEIR TRAINING OVER THE SUMMER. GET READY TO HEAD BACK TO SCHOOL WITH OUR SPECIAL CLASSIC MOVIE NIGHTS, INCLUDING HIGH SCHOOL MUSICAL. THIS FRIDAY, AUGUST 9TH AT THE HISTORIC JEFFERSON THEATER. DOORS OPEN AT SIX. THE MOVIE STARTS AT SEVEN. ADULT TICKETS ARE JUST $6. KIDS UNDER 12 OR $4. YOU CAN CHECK OUT THE LIST OF ALL THE UPCOMING MOVIES ON THE BEAUMONT EVENTS FACEBOOK PAGE. AND SPEAKING OF HEADING BACK TO SCHOOL, OUR SIX LOCAL LIBRARIES ARE STOCKED WITH RESOURCES THAT CAN HELP YOUR CHILD EXCEL IN THE CLASSROOM. 
          THE TEXSHARE DATABASES PROVIDE RESOURCES LIKE MANGO LANGUAGE LEARNING TO HELP YOU TACKLE A NEW LANGUAGE LEARNING EXPRESS, WHICH PROVIDES PRACTICE TESTS AND HOMEWORK, HELPS FOR GRADES THREE AND UP, AND TUMBLEBOOKS, WHICH HELPS YOUNGER KIDS LEARN TO READ. THE STAFF IS ALSO WORKING TO BRING KHAN ACADEMY TO OUR LIBRARY SYSTEM IN THE NEAR FUTURE, TO HELP WITH A VARIETY OF SUBJECTS. OUR LOCAL LIBRARIES ALSO PROVIDE A QUIET ENVIRONMENT FOR STUDYING, WHICH IS FREE OF DISTRACTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE AT HOME. SO STOP BY AND HELP JUMPSTART YOUR CHILD'S SUCCESS IN SCHOOL. THIS YEAR, AND BEAUMONT STUDENTS WILL HEAD BACK TO CLASS MONDAY, AUGUST 12TH AND WE WISH THEM ALL A GREAT SCHOOL YEAR. THANK YOU. AND FOR THOSE THAT ARE HERE FOR PRESENTATIONS AND WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE, NOW IS THE TIME TO DO SO. AND THANK YOU FOR COMING. ALL RIGHT, NOW IS THE TIME FOR ANY CITIZEN WHO WISHES TO SPEAK. YOU MAY MAKE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON A CONSENT AGENDA, REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE, 5 OR 6 AND 13, OR ANY OTHER TOPIC. ITEMS FOUR AND SEVEN THROUGH 12 HAVE ALREADY BEEN HEARD IN PUBLIC HEARING. THEREFORE, CITIZENS CANNOT SPEAK ON THAT ITEM. BUT THE CITY CLERK WILL CALL YOUR NAME WHEN IT'S YOUR TIME TO SPEAK. WHEN YOU 
          [00:05:03]
APPROACH THE PODIUM, PLEASE SAY YOUR ADDRESS, YOUR CITY AND STATE. YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. THE GREEN LIGHT WILL COME ON WHEN YOU APPROACH THE PODIUM, AND THE RED LIGHT WILL COME ON WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP. PLEASE REMEMBER THAT YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO YIELD TIME TO OTHERS AND PLEASE BE REMINDED THAT MYSELF NOR COUNCIL CAN RESPOND WHENEVER YOU'RE MAKING COMMENTS, BUT SOMEONE FROM OUR OFFICE WILL CONTACT YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANY AT THIS TIME, MAYOR. 
          [CONSENT AGENDA]
OKAY IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA? MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. SECOND, THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA? PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION IS CARRIED. THANK YOU. MATCH. ALL 
          [REGULAR AGENDA]
RIGHT, IS MR. CITY MANAGER MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER ONE, PLEASE? YES MAYOR. 
          COUNCIL TO DISCUSS AND GIVE DIRECTION TO THE CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING AN ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION AS TO WHETHER MEMBERS OF COUNCIL INTERFERED WITH THE HIRING OF A NEW POLICE CHIEF AND THE RECOMMENDATION COMES WITH THE DENIAL OF RESOLUTION. AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. DO WE NEED TO HAVE A MOTION FIRST TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION MOVE TO APPROVE? THERE'S A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? NFL, FOR LACK OF A SECOND? IT DOES. IT DIES FOR LACK OF A SECOND. OKAY. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER TWO? COUNCIL TO CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH LEGACY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, LLC FOR THE ACQUISITION OF 2575 PRIMROSE BEAUMONT, TEXAS. AND IT COMES WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO? MAY I HAVE A QUESTION BEFORE WE MOVE ON FROM THAT? WOULD IT WOULD IT DYING? CAN WE PLEASE EXPLAIN THE OPTIONS OF WHAT TOOK PLACE WITH THE PREVIOUS ITEM? SO THERE WAS A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT MOTION DID NOT RECEIVE A SECOND. SO THE ITEM DIED FOR A LACK OF SECOND. THERE WAS NO MOTION, ADDITIONAL MOTION MADE. SO THEREFORE THERE WAS NO ACTION TAKEN ON THE ITEM. ALL RIGHT. HAS THERE. YES, SURE. THEY CAN COME BACK TO THE AGENDA. IS THAT CORRECT? THE ITEM CAN COME BACK TO THE AGENDA AT THE REQUEST OF A COUNCIL PERSON WITH A SECOND. YES. THANK YOU. AND FOR CLARITY, BECAUSE IT'S ON THE AGENDA TODAY BEFORE THE MEETING IS CONCLUDED, IT CAN BE CIRCLED BACK. IF THAT'S THE DESIRE OF COUNCIL AS WELL. YES OKAY. ITEM TWO COUNCIL TO CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH LEGACY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, LLC FOR THE ACQUISITION OF 2575 PRIMROSE. PRIMROSE BEAUMONT. EXCUSE ME. AND A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO? MOVE TO APPROVE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER TWO? PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER THREE, PLEASE? COUNCIL, CONSIDER RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE INSPECTION OF WATER UTILITY SERVICE LINES BY REPUBLIC METER, INC. OF DALLAS, TEXAS, THAT COMES WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER THREE? SO MOVE APPROVAL. IS THERE A SECOND FOR APPROVAL? SECOND, THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER THREE. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, COUNCILMAN NEILL? THANK YOU. MAYOR MR. MANAGER, SINCE THIS IS EPA DRIVEN, IS THIS GOING TO BE REIMBURSED TO THE CITY, SAID CHRIS, SHAKING HIS HEAD. WHO AND I DON'T, AND BART'S NOT HERE, SO. MOLLY, MOLLY, MOLLY. GOOD AFTERNOON. SO THE EPA HAS SENT DOWN AN 
          [00:10:13]
UNFUNDED MANDATE FOR THIS LEAD SERVICE LINE INVENTORY THAT IS REQUIRED OF EVERY WATER SERVICE IN THE NATION. WE ARE APPLYING FOR FUNDING FROM THE WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. WE'VE GOTTEN SOME. WE'VE SCORED FAVORABLY. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY CONFIRMATION THAT WE WILL RECEIVE ANY MONEY BACK. WE'RE ACTIVELY PURSUING EVERY AVENUE WE CAN TO, GET REFUNDED ON THIS, BUT AT THIS TIME, WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONFIRMATION OF FUNDING. SO WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DON'T DO THIS? WE WILL THEN BE IN VIOLATION, NOT JUST TO THE TC, BUT TO THE EPA AND THE THEY'VE NOT DETERMINED YET EXACTLY WHAT THOSE FINES AND PENALTIES WILL BE, BUT WE EXPECT THAT THEY WILL BE SEVERE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN GOETZ. I PREVIOUSLY HAVE BEEN ADVISED THAT WE HAVE FOUND MAYBE ONE LEAD PIPELINE IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. IS THAT ACCURATE, OR DO WE HAVE SO FAR, SO FAR, WE HAVE IDENTIFIED ONE, AND WE THIS SURVEY WORK WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT WORK, IT IS A BEST VALUE SINCE OUR PUBLIC METER IS ALREADY GOING TO BE INSPECTING THE METERS THEMSELVES. ADDING THIS ADDITIONAL TASK AT EACH OF THE METERS TO IDENTIFY TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE INSPECTION, WE HOPE WILL YIELD POSITIVE RESULTS, THERE ARE MANY CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES THAT HAVE ENCOUNTERED MUCH MORE. SO WE ARE HOPEFUL THAT BECAUSE OF OUR EARLY ADOPTION OF BEING A LEAD FREE CITY, THAT THIS WILL WORK OUT IN IN OUR FAVOR AND THAT WE WON'T HAVE TO RUN INTO THIS ISSUE AND THE ONE LEAD PIPELINE THAT WAS FOUND, WHAT WAS DONE WITH THAT? OR IS IT STILL IN THE GROUND WE'RE STILL WORKING ON EXACTLY. BECAUSE IT'S ON THE PRIVATE SIDE, WE ARE STILL WORKING THROUGH HOW THAT HOW THAT IS GOING TO LOOK. BECAUSE ONCE YOU SET THAT PRECEDENT FOR THAT FIRST ONE, YOU KNOW, HOW IS THAT GOING TO CONTINUE MOVING FORWARD? WHAT ARE THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE, CUSTOMER TO RECEIVE SOME KIND OF FINANCIAL RELIEF AS THEY WORK THROUGH THAT? BECAUSE IT'S ON THE PRIVATE SIDE, WE CAN'T USE CITY FUNDS TO DO THOSE REPLACEMENTS. OKAY. COUNCILMAN TURNER, MISS MOLLY, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE REASONINGS THAT THERE WOULD BE LEAD PIPING? AND, I MEAN, I'M PRETTY. I'M. I'M GLAD YOU DID. LET US KNOW THAT THE ONE THAT WAS FOUND WAS ON THE PRIVATE SIDE, BUT CAN YOU KIND OF SPEAK TO SOME OF THE REASONINGS THAT COULD COME ABOUT IT COULD COME ABOUT BECAUSE OF THE, JUST THE, THE AGE OF THE SERVICE, THAT WAS THE, STATE OF THE ART AT THE TIME THAT THOSE LINES WERE PUT IN, WE ARE ALSO INVESTIGATING NOT JUST IF IT'S LEAD, BUT IF IT IS A GALVANIZED PIPE, BECAUSE THE GALVANIZED DOWNSTREAM OF LEAD, WE HAVE TO CERTIFY THAT IT WAS OR WAS NOT. WE'RE ALSO DOING THE EXTENSIVE LEAD TESTING AT THE SERVICES TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR CITIZENS ARE NOT HAVE MAYBE DON'T HAVE FIXTURES IN THEIR HOME THAT ARE PRODUCING LEAD. BUT WE'RE, OTHER THAN THAT, YOU KNOW, ONCE EVERYTHING STARTED GOING TO PLASTIC, THEN THAT, FOR SURE, BY THE 70S, THAT'S WHEN YOU START TO SEE MORE OF THE PLASTIC PIPES. THEN THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE LEAD AND THE GALVANIZED LINES STARTED TO GREATLY REDUCE. 
          OKAY. SO THE PLASTIC MORE IS THE PVC THAT YOU KIND OF SEE IN A LOT OF PEOPLE PUTTING IN PVC, PEX, HDPE, THOSE TYPES OF MATERIALS. OKAY. THANK YOU, MISS MOLLY. YOU'RE WELCOME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER THREE. PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER FOUR, PLEASE? COUNCIL, CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR THE CONVEYANCE AND DEDICATION OF PRIVATE STREETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE CITY OF BEAUMONT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2405 TO 2499 WEST CALDER ROAD. AND THAT ITEM COMES WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL, DENIAL. BUT IF COUNCIL SO CHOOSES TO APPROVE, AN ITEM WOULD HAVE TO BE INCLUDE A PLAT PRODUCED BY A LICENSED SURVEYOR. MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING OFFICE PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE STREETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION, FOR ITEM NUMBER FOUR, MOVE TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR THE CONVEYANCE AND 
          [00:15:02]
DEDICATION OF PRIVATE STREETS IN THIS PROPERTY. THERE IS A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? THERE'S A MOTION. AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER FOUR. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OR WOULD THAT BE DENIAL. IS IT. NO I MOVE TO APPROVE IT. AND THAT WAS THE SECOND. OKAY. COUNCILMAN FALLSHAW, CITY MANAGER, FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY, COULD THE STAFF EXPLAIN TO US, THE, IT SAYS AN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IS DEFINED AREA THAT ALLOWS A RESIDENTS TO FIND LOCAL OR TO FUND LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH A TAX BASE BOND. COULD YOU EXPAND ON THAT JUST A LITTLE BIT FOR CLARITY, I'M ASSUMING THAT, THERE'S A TAX FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY'RE THE ONES WHO HAVE TO SERVICE THAT DEBT. AND COULD YOU PERHAPS GIVE US A LITTLE MORE CLARITY ON THAT, YES. COUNCIL MEMBER, I'M GOING TO ASK OUR DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, ENGMAN, TO ADDRESS THAT. YES SO WE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF AN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, WHAT THOSE ARE, YOU SEE A LOT OF THEM IN, LIKE, THE DALLAS AREAS AND WHATNOT, SHOULD CITIZENS WANT CERTAIN THINGS THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY IDENTIFIED IN THE CIP OR THINGS LIKE THAT? THEN THERE IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE AN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WITHIN THOSE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE 60% OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO BE IN FAVOR TO PETITION TO COUNCIL TO CREATE THIS DISTRICT. THAT DISTRICT WOULD THEN BE, IT WOULD IT WOULD BE A FUNDING MECHANISM TO REIMBURSE THE CITY FOR, COSTS TO, IN THIS CASE, BRING THE INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY A MILLION DOLLARS, YOU KNOW, UP TO CITY SPECIFICATIONS TO THEN DEDICATE TO THE CITY. WE DISCUSSED THAT WITH THE, WITH THE APPLICANT, MR. HOLLIMAN OF THIS, REQUEST, AND HE MENTIONED THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOT IN FAVOR OF CREATING THAT AND TO HOW THAT FUNDING WORKS IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY WOULD, WOULD FUND THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THEN, COME UP WITH A ASSESSMENT PLAN WHERE EACH YEAR THOSE, THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS WOULD BE LEVIED ON EACH PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN THAT DISTRICT. SO THEY DECLINED THAT. AND SO NOW THEY ARE PAYING PROPERTY TAX, THOUGH THEY DO PAY TO THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. BUT THEY DECLINED THIS OPTION. SO THE BURDEN OF THIS WOULD FALL ON THE CITY COMPLETELY. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND MY MOTION AND ASK FOR THE SECOND TO, BE WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE PLAT BE PRODUCED BY A LICENSED SURVEYOR PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE STREETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT? MR. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THERE IS A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER FOUR. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION IS CARRIED. FOR THE RECORD, MAYOR, CAN YOU MAKE SURE THAT YOU CONCLUDE THAT THAT WAS A MOTION WITH CONDITIONS, A MOTION WITH CONDITIONS AS STATED? ALL RIGHT, MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER FIVE, PLEASE? YES, MAYOR. ITEM FIVE. COUNCIL, CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF STOP LOGS FOR THE PINE STREET WATER PRODUCTION PLANT. AND IT COMES WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER FIVE? MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND, THERE IS A MOTION AND THERE'S A SECOND FOR APPROVAL. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER FIVE, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING I. AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER SIX, PLEASE? COUNCIL, CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE. CHANGE ORDER NUMBER FIVE TO THE CONTRACT WITH GULF COAST. A CRANE COMPANY FOR THE FOURTH STREET ROADWAY REHABILITATION REHABILITATION PROJECT. AND IT COMES WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX? MOVE TO APPROVE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER SIX. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? COUNCILMAN TURNER, FOR ME, AS AS ALWAYS, I KIND OF I KIND OF STRUGGLE WHEN WE GET TO CHANGE ORDERS. CHANGE ORDERS GREATER THAN TWO AND THREE. WE'RE CURRENTLY AT CHANGE ORDER NUMBER FIVE. CAN WE KIND OF GET INTO DETAILS OF WHY WE'RE IN A PLACE TO WHERE WE'RE ALL THE WAY 
          [00:20:05]
AT CHANGE ORDER NUMBER FIVE, AND THERE'S MORE REVENUE THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH AND MORE THINGS WE HAVE. SO CHANGE ORDER NUMBER FIVE IS FOR REDUCTION IN THE COST. THAT'S WHY IT'S IN PARENTHESES. SO IT'S LESS MONEY. WE'RE AT $2 MILLION COMING BACK OKAY I STILL WANT TO EXPLAIN THOUGH OKAY. SO AS WE WORK THROUGH A LARGE PROJECT LIKE FOURTH STREET, THEY'RE GOING TO BE SURPRISES ON THE ROAD. YOU KNOW, WE DO THE FULL INVESTIGATION AS BEST AS WE CAN. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, WE'VE NOT MASTERED X RAY VISION TO ELIMINATE ANY SURPRISES UNDERNEATH. SO THIS CHANGE ORDER NUMBER FIVE GENERALLY WOULD HAVE BEEN WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER A CLOSEOUT, CHANGE ORDER. SO WE'RE ZEROING ZEROING OUT ALL OF THE LINE ITEMS TO ADJUST THE FINAL QUANTITIES IN THIS CASE IT'S A DEDUCTION BECAUSE THERE WERE ITEMS THAT WERE NOT USED, AND WE'RE ALSO COMING WITH ADDITIONAL TIME. SO WE'RE CLOSING EVERYTHING OUT ON THE CONTRACT EXCEPT FOR THE PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS, AT THE BNSF RAILROAD, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVE TO COME TO COUNCIL IF WE FIND A DIFFERING SITE CONDITION OR IF WE REALIZE THAT WHAT WE HAVE PROPOSED MAYBE WAS NOT THE BEST METHOD. ONCE WE GET INTO THE CONSTRUCTION AND WE CANNOT AUTHORIZE THE CONTRACTOR TO DO ADDITIONAL WORK WITHOUT BRINGING A CHANGE ORDER BEFORE YOU AND HAVING IT BE EXECUTED, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THEM TO TAKE THE RISK. BECAUSE AT ANY TIME THE CHANGE ORDER COULD BE REJECTED. WE DO THE BEST THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, ON A $6 MILLION PROJECT, WE SPENT ABOUT A YEAR IN THE DESIGN, WE ALSO DID STORM SEWER REPAIRS AS A SEPARATE CONTRACT. AND, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CHANGE ORDERS IN A GIVEN CONTRACT. BUT WE, YOU KNOW, BE HAPPY TO SHARE ALL THE DOCUMENTATION OF HOW WE GOT TO THIS POINT. WE REALLY DO WANT TO TRY TO REDUCE THEM. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF WE INSIST ON REDUCING THE NUMBER OF CHANGE ORDERS, IT RAISES THE CONTRACTOR'S RISK IN THE CONTRACT AND WE WILL SEE THE CONTRACTOR IS NOT GOING TO ABSORB THAT RISK. WHAT THEY'LL DO IS THEY'LL INCREASE THEIR PRICES. AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STRIKE THAT BALANCE AS WE MOVE THROUGH THE CONTRACT. ON THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT SIDE, GOT HIM JUST MAKE SURE IT'S STILL COMPETITIVE, YEAH. IN MOST CASES YOU DON'T SEE A RETURN. SO I MEAN, IT'S REAL GOOD TO SEE A RETURN, BUT THAT WAS JUST ONE OF MY CONCERNS TO KIND OF EXPLAIN HOW WE HOW WE GOT HERE AND EVEN THAT SIDEWALK PROJECT, THIS REVENUE WOULDN'T AFFECT IT. RIGHT? RIGHT. IT WOULD NOT. AND THIS WAS AGAIN, WE'RE AT BNSF'S, MERCY, WE ACTUALLY WERE PLEASANTLY SURPRISED THAT WE EXPECTED IT COULD HAVE BEEN GREATER THAN SIX MONTH TIME FRAME BEFORE THEY WERE GOING TO MOBILIZE. WE GOT A SURPRISE PHONE CALL AND THEY SAID, YEAH, WE'LL BE THERE IN 30 DAYS. SO WE'RE ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY CLOSE OUT THIS CONTRACT, ZERO OUT ALL THE LINE ITEMS EXCEPT FOR WHAT'S GOING TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PEDESTRIAN CROSSING, ON ALL OUR MAJOR PROJECTS, WE ARE INCLUDING PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS, WHERE THE WHERE THEY INTERSECT A RAILROAD, IT'S JUST THAT'S THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT WORK, SOME RAILROADS ARE EASIER TO WORK WITH OTHERS, AND THEY'RE MORE OPEN TO IT, BUT WE'RE CONTINUING AS WE IDENTIFY THE OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK WITH THESE RAILROADS AND MISS MOLLY, LASTLY, WHILE WE'RE ON THIS TOPIC, OFTEN WE ARE OUT IN THE COMMUNITY AND WE DEAL WITH CITIZENS WHO HAVE CONCERNS AND REFERENCE TO RAILROADS AND SOMETIMES THE CONVERSATIONS MAY NOT GO AS PLEASANT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ARE REAL BIG ON TIMELINES AND GETTING THINGS DONE. BUT ONE THING I LEARNED SINCE I'VE BEEN IN GOVERNMENT, WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH OTHER ENTITIES, LIKE NOT OFTEN, WE'RE ON OUR OWN TIMELINE. THEY THEY SHOWED UP ON THE EIGHTH DAY, SO THEY THEY HAVE A LOT OF, PULL THAT, YOU KNOW, WE SIMPLY CANNOT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO WORK THROUGH THEIR PROCESSES, WE'RE WORKING WITH A DIFFERENT RAILROAD, ON THE RAILROAD. 
          THERE'S A DITCHING PROJECT NEAR WASHINGTON BOULEVARD THAT'S ONGOING. WE'RE WORKING ON A, STORM SEWER CROSSING AT FLORIDA AT AVENUE A, AND IT'S IT IT'S THEIR WORLD. WE'RE JUST. WE'RE JUST WORKING IN IT. YES, MA'AM. I JUST WANTED TO BE ON THE RECORD. WE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE A JURISDICTION OVER. WE DO THE BEST WE CAN, AND WE PAY QUITE A BIT OF MONEY FOR THE PRIVILEGE TO DO SO. THANK YOU, MISS MOLLY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER SIX? PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, PLEASE? COUNCIL, 
          [00:25:03]
CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN AUTOMOTIVE PAINT AND BODY SHOP FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3480 BENCHMARK DRIVE AND THEN A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON JUNE 17TH, 2024. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED 5 TO 1 TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. ALL LIGHTING INSTALLED. INSTALLED MUST BE DIRECTIONAL AND SHIELDED FROM ALL RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO THE EAST AND SOUTH TO CONSTRUCTION. PLANS MUST MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS OF WATER UTILITIES FOR ANY WATER AND SENATOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING ANY REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY'S BACKFLOW AND OR PRETREATMENT PROGRAMS. THREE NO PERMANENT STRUCTURE OR APPURTENANCES SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN EASEMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE FIRE AND BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS. FIVE CONSTRUCTION PLANS SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 28 .04.006. LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS AND SIX A COMMITMENT LETTER. BE RECEIVED FROM THE DEVELOPER, A PROPERTY OWNER, PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT STATING THAT THERE WILL BE NO ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY FROM FRENCH ROAD. THAT THE REZONE PORTION ALONG FRENCH ROAD IS TO REMAIN AS PARKING AND STORAGE, WITH NO FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TO TAKE PLACE ON THE REZONE PORTION. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND, SO THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? COUNCILMAN TURNER, THESE CONDITIONS ARE THEY ARE THEY STANDARD TO WHAT WE NORMALLY DO, IS IT A REASON THAT WE SEE A FEW MORE? A LOT OF THEM ARE PRETTY STANDARD, THERE'S A COUPLE, THOUGH. LIKE THE LIGHTING, I TRY TO PLACE THAT CONDITION WHENEVER THERE'S A RESIDENTIAL THAT'S NEARBY, THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS ACTUALLY, OR THE LAST CONDITION. THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT OR DISCUSSED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE RECEIVED A LOT OF OPPOSITION IN THAT AREA, AND IT WAS MAINLY CONCERNED WITH INCREASED TRAFFIC ALONG FRENCH ROAD, SO THAT WAS THE AGREEMENT THAT THEY CAME, CAME TO TERMS WITH IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. 
          THANK YOU. THOSE LAST TWO I JUST HAVEN'T NORMALLY SEEN, BUT I UNDERSTAND WHY I WANT YOU TO EXPLAIN IT. SO APPRECIATE YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. ALL THE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION IS CARRIED. 
          MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER EIGHT? COUNCIL, CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A DUPLEX IN AN RS, WHICH IS A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 221 NORTH PARKWAY DRIVE. AND IT WAS APPROVED AT A JULY 22ND, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION BY AN EIGHT ZERO VOTE. WITH THE TWO CONDITIONS, CONSTRUCTION PLANS MUST MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS BY WATER, UTILITIES FOR WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SERVICES, INCLUDING ANY REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY'S BACKFLOW, PRETREATMENT AND OUTFALL PROGRAM, AND TWO CONSTRUCTION PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE FIRE AND BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT? SO MOVED TO APPROVE. IS THERE A SECOND SECOND THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER EIGHT? PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER NINE, PLEASE? OKAY. I'LL MAKE SURE MY READING GLASSES ARE GOOD FOR THIS ONE. COUNCIL, CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARK WITHIN AN LEE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6185 FANNETT ROAD AND A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 22ND, 2024. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED EIGHT ZERO TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 24 .06.008 MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR TYPE C RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARK TWO SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 28 .04.006 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS THREE SHALL PROVIDE DIRECTIONAL LIGHTING TO REFLECT AWAY FROM THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES FOR THE PROPERTY AT 6185 FANNETT ROAD AND SURROUNDING AREAS ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD ZONE. ALL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS, INCLUDING 
          [00:30:02]
SECTION 24.05 OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT'S CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION. 
          FIVE CONSTRUCTION PLANS MUST MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR WATER UTILITIES FOR ANY WATER, AND SANITARY AND SANITARY IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING ANY REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY'S BACKFLOW AND PRETREATMENT OF FAULT PROGRAM. SIX NO PERMANENT STRUCTURE OR APPURTENANCES SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN THE EASEMENT PROPERTY, INCLUDING RV PADS SEVEN WATER AND SEWER, SEWAGE CROSSINGS AND SEPARATION SHALL FOLLOW. ALL TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TC STANDARDS EIGHT. CONSTRUCTION PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE FIRE AND BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS, AND NINE SHALL INSTALL A FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK ALONG FANNETT ROAD, EITHER IN PRIVATE PROPERTY OR WITHIN TEXDOT RIGHT OF WAY WITH APPLICABLE TXDOT PERMITS. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER NINE? MOVE TO APPROVE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR OUR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER NINE. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER NINE, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. 
          AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE PLEASE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER TEN? THANK YOU. MAYOR COUNCIL, CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDED SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW. ALLOW A MORTUARY AND CREMATORY IN AN RCR, WHICH IS A RESIDENTIAL CONSERVATION REVITALIZATION ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3510 SARAH STREET. 
          AND IT WAS APPROVED ON THE EIGHT ZERO VOTE ON JULY 22ND, 2024 BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. CONSTRUCTION PLANS MUST MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR WATER, UTILITIES FOR WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SERVICES, INCLUDING ANY REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY'S BACKFLOW, PRETREATMENT AND OUTFALL PROGRAM, AND TWO CONSTRUCTION PLANS SHOULD COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE FIRE AND BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS, AND THREE SHALL BE IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE STATE LAWS. THANK YOU. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER TEN? SO MOVED TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS? IS THERE A SECOND SECOND THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER TEN. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER TEN? PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER 11? COUNCIL, CONSIDER REQUESTS FOR A REZONE FROM AN SES RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ZONING DISTRICT TO GC MD, WHICH IS A GENERAL COMMERCIAL MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING OR A MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5210 CONCORD ROAD. AND THERE WAS APPROVED AT A JULY 22ND, 2024 PRNS MEETING BY 8080 VOTE. AND IT COMES WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL OF THE ORDINANCE. WELL, IT WAS FOR DENIAL. OKAY. IS THERE A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 11? SO MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND FOR, APPROVAL OF THE DENIAL? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE DENIAL ON ITEM NUMBER 11. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE DENIAL OF ITEM NUMBER 11? PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER 12? COUNCIL CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 28, SECTION 28 .02. 0053B OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND IT WAS APPROVED EIGHT ZERO AT THE JULY 22ND, 2024 PRNS MEETING AND THE COUNCIL WITH THE RECOMMENDATION. RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER 12 TO APPROVE? SECOND, THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 12. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? COUNCILMAN TURNER OKAY. CAN I GET SOMEONE TO STAFF TO KIND OF SPEAK TO THE REASONING THAT WE ARE DOING THIS AND KIND OF GIVE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY SOME BACKGROUND SO THEY CAN KIND OF BE IN TUNE WITH WHAT'S CURRENTLY GOING ON. YES, SIR. SO A HOUSE BILL WAS PASSED EARLIER, THIS YEAR OR I'M SORRY, LAST YEAR, WHERE IT, IT MADE US AMEND OUR ORDINANCES. SO WE DID 
          [00:35:08]
THAT THAT WAS PASSED AND THEN IT WAS NOTICED THAT IT IT REFERENCED UNNECESSARY HANDICAP WHEN THAT VERBIAGE SHOULD HAVE BEEN HARDSHIP. SO THIS IS JUST SWAPPING THOSE, THOSE TERMS OUT TO ALSO BE CONFORMING WITH HOUSE BILL 1475. OKAY. I JUST WANTED SOME CLARITY BECAUSE I KNOW WE DID, YOU KNOW, GO OVER THERE. I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO SEE WHY. BUT I UNDERSTAND NOW. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER 12? PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. 
          AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, WILL YOU PLEASE TAKE US INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING? YES COUNCIL TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO ACCEPT COMMENTS RELATED TO AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT A GRANT APPLICATION AND EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION FTA TO RECEIVE OPERATING ASSISTANCE FUNDS FOR THE BEAUMONT CIP. OKAY, I DECLARE THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN, MISS CITY CLERK, IS THERE ANYBODY THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? NO, SIR. I DON'T HAVE ANYONE HAS A HAND UP. 
          SOMEONE WANTING TO SPEAK ON THE PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS ITEM, WHICH IS JUST FOR THE BEAUMONT ZIP. YEAH, WE HAD A HAND COME UP, BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT. OKAY, SO WE HAVE NO ONE. ALL RIGHT, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE HAVE THE READING 
          [REGULAR AGENDA]
OF ITEM NUMBER 13? COUNCIL CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT A GRANT APPLICATION AND EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION. 
          FTA TO RECEIVE OPERATING ASSISTANCE FUNDS FOR THE BEAUMONT ZIP. AND IT COMES WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION. THERE IS A MOTION FOR ITEM. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER 13 MOVED TO APPROVE? IS THERE A SECOND FOR APPROVAL? I MEAN SECOND? IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL? I MEAN, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION FOR ITEM NUMBER 13? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER 13, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION IS CARRIE. AT THE CLOSE OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, THE COUNCIL WILL HOLD AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSIDER MATTERS RELATED TO CONTEMPLATED OR PENDING LITIGATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 551.071 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE. TAMIKA WILLIAMS, VERSUS THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. CAUSE NUMBER TWO FOUR JP SIX CV 0363. MR. CITY MANAGE, WILL YOU TAKE US INTO THE FIRST 
          [WORK SESSION]
WORK SESSION? YES. COUNCIL TO DISCUSS THE DOWNTOWN PROACTIVE CODE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM AND OKAY, BOTH. GOOD AFTERNOON. SO TO START, I'D LIKE TO PROVIDE A 30,000 FOOT VIEW, IF YOU WILL, OF KIND OF NOT ONLY OUR ENTIRE DOWNTOWN, BUT ALSO MORE SPECIFICALLY, WHAT BUILDING CODES HAS SPECIFICALLY BEEN FOCUSING ON HERE IN OUR CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT? IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A CLEAN STARTING AND STOPPING POINT? WHAT WE DID IS WE SET UP A GRID OF ABOUT FOUR BLOCKS FROM MAINE TO NATCHEZ, AND THEN WE WORKED FROM COLLEGE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO CALDER. AND WE DID THAT IN THREE PHASES. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PRESENTATION, WE STARTED PHASE ONE IN MARCH OF 2024, AND WE, WORKED FROM COLLEGE TO FANNIN LOOKING AT EVERY BUILDING ON THE EXTERIOR, AGAIN, WITHIN THAT, MAIN TO NATCHEZ AREA. AND THEN WE MOVED ON TO PHASE TWO, AND BEGAN AT FANNIN AND WORKED CROCKETT. AND ALSO IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT AT THIS TIME WE BEGAN MEETING MUCH MORE INTENSIVELY WITH THE BUILDING OWNERS AND TALKING THROUGH. WE REALLY WANTED TO TAKE OUR TIME AND NOT RUSH THAT PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT WAS BEING ASKED OF THEM. AND SO THAT TOOK A LOT OF OUR TIME BEGINNING REALLY LATE MARCH, EARLY APRIL, AND THEN MOVING INTO PHASE THREE, WHERE WE COMPLETED THE SWEEP FROM CROCKETT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO CALDER, WHERE STAFF LOOKED AT EVERY BUILDING IN BETWEEN THAT AREA. AND AGAIN, EVEN WITH PHASE ONE THROUGH THREE, WE CONTINUED TO MEET WITH PROPERTY OWNERS ALL THROUGHOUT THERE, AND WE'RE STILL CONTINUING TO DO THAT TODAY, THE REASON WHY WE WANTED TO SET UP A GRID, WAS NOT ONLY NOT ONLY THE REASON WHY WE WANTED TO DO IT IN THREE PHASES 
          [00:40:06]
WAS NOT ONLY BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF BUILDINGS YOU CAN SEE. THERE'S 76 PROPERTIES JUST WITHIN THAT SWEEP. WE DID. BUT ALSO ALSO, AS MENTIONED, WE REALLY WANTED TO TAKE OUR TIME. 
          THERE'S SOME THINGS I'M GOING TO DETAIL OUT FOR YOU HERE. THIS AFTERNOON, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS KNEW FULLY AND WITH CLARITY WHAT WE WERE ASKING OF THEM, ALSO, INTERIOR INSPECTIONS BEGAN IN THAT PROCESS AS WELL. SO WE STARTED WITH EXTERIOR, INSPECTIONS AND THEN SOME OF THEM, WHICH I'LL DETAIL WHAT MERITED THAT SOME OF THEM REQUIRED AN INTERIOR INSPECTION AS WELL, WHICH I'LL GO AHEAD AND POINT OUT. THE PROPERTY OWNERS WERE INCREDIBLY GRACIOUS WITH THAT REQUEST, MANY OF WHOM NOT ONLY ALLOWED US TO DO THE INTERIOR INSPECTION, BUT THEY ALSO WALKED IT WITH US AND WERE THERE, AS WE POINTED OUT, VIOLATIONS. AND WE'RE EAGER TO SEE THAT THOSE THINGS BE ADDRESSED, WE WERE LOOKING FOR UNSAFE CONDITIONS ACROSS THE BOARD, WHICH I PROVIDED THAT DEFINITION STRAIGHT OUT OF THE CODE FOR YOU, WHAT AN UNSAFE STRUCTURE IS AND THE REASON WHY WE WANTED TO WORK WITH THAT CLEAR, CLEAN DEFINITION WAS OBVIOUSLY, IT'S A CLEAR DEFINITION, BUT, WE WANTED TO REMAIN CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT OUR SWEEP AS WE LOOKED AT EACH BUILDING, AND JUST TO MAKE A QUICK NOTE FOR CLARITY, GENERALLY SPEAKING, OUR CODES ARE FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, MEANING THAT IF THERE'S NO CONSTRUCTION, THERE'S NO VIOLATION. HOWEVER, THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE AS WELL AS THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE, THESE ARE MAINTENANCE CODES. AND SO REGARDLESS OF CONSTRUCTION TAKING PLACE OR NOT, THEY PROVIDE AND DETAIL A STANDARD WHICH MUST BE KEPT FOR ALL PROPERTY OWNERS, BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, FOR PARTICULARLY THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. AND ALONGSIDE THAT POINT, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO MENTION A COMMON MISCONCEPTION HERE, THAT WHAT WE ARE ASKING OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS, UNFORTUNATELY, THANKS TO YOU GUYS, WE HAVE ADOPTED THE INTERNATIONAL EXISTING, EXISTING BUILDING CODE, WHICH PUTS EMPHASIS ON BRINGING THE BUILDING BACK TO ITS LAST OCCUPIED STATE, THERE'S A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY WITH THIS CODE BOOK, AND THAT'S, PROVIDED A LOT OF RELIEF TO THE BUILDING OWNERS. SO, TO BE CLEAR, WE ARE NOT ASKING OWNERS TO BRING THESE PROPERTIES UP TO THE LATEST AND GREATEST 2021 CODES THAT WE'VE ADOPTED. WE ARE ASKING THEM TO ADDRESS THE UNSAFE ITEMS THAT WE SEE, AND THEN IF THEY NEED TO MAKE LARGER REPAIRS, THEY HAVE ENORMOUS FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THE EXISTING BUILDING CODE TO GET THOSE DONE. WHEN YOU CONSIDER THIS AREA AS A WHOLE, THE AREA THAT WE CANVASS, YOU CAN SEE THAT 67% OF OUR BUILDINGS IN THIS AREA ARE REALLY IN GREAT SHAPE. THEY'RE COMPLIANT, GREAT SHAPE BUILDINGS. HOWEVER, WE STILL HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO, WITH THE UNSAFE BUILDING, TWO OF WHICH WE TAGGED AS AN IMMINENT DANGER, AND I'M GOING TO GET MORE INTO THAT PROCESS IN JUST A MOMENT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO I WANT TO PROVIDE A CLEAN LOOK OF STAFF'S PROCEDURE IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS. ONE OF THE MOST COMMON QUESTIONS I'VE RECEIVED IS WHAT'S THE END GOAL HERE? AND I THINK THIS, THIS FLOWCHART, IF YOU WILL, PROVIDES CLARITY WITH THAT, THERE ARE THREE POSSIBLE OUTCOMES OF OUR EXTERIOR INSPECTION. IT'S GOING TO BE ONE OF THREE OPTIONS. 
          AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING FOR UNSAFE VIOLATIONS, ONLY. AND SO IT'S EITHER GOING TO BE COMPLIANT OR IT'S GOING TO BE UNSAFE MEETING THAT DEFINITION OR IT'S GOING TO FALL INTO AN IMMINENT DANGER, WHICH I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT IN JUST A MINUTE. BUT FOR NOW, I WANT TO FOCUS JUST ON UNSAFE. IN THE EVENT THAT WE TAG A BUILDING AS UNSAFE, THE RESPONSE OR LACK THEREOF, IS GOING TO HAVE TWO RESULTS. EITHER THE OWNER IS GOING TO ENTER INTO A WORK PROGRAM, WHICH, JUST TO CLARIFY FOR EVERYONE ON THAT, WHAT WE ARE ASKING AND WHAT WE'VE COMMUNICATED TO THESE, PROPERTY OWNERS IS THAT WE ARE NOT EXPECTING ALL REPAIRS TO BE MADE BY THE DATE THAT WE PRESCRIBE. 
          WE ARE ASKING IS FOR PROGRESS, AND THAT DATE GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO FOLLOW UP WITH THESE PROPERTY OWNERS AND CHECK IN WITH THEM, SEE HOW THEY'RE DOING AND IF PROGRESS IS TAKING PLACE. WE ABSOLUTELY WANT TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO WORK WITH THEM AND EXTEND THAT, BUT THAT'S OUR HOPE IS TO ENTER INTO A WORK PROGRAM AND REALLY A PARTNERSHIP WITH THESE BUILDING OWNERS SO THAT WE CAN APPROACH THIS TOGETHER. IF THEY DON'T, IF WE DON'T HEAR FROM THEM AFTER ALL OF OUR ATTEMPTS TO CONTACT THEM, WHAT WE'LL DO IS IT'LL BE FILED IN COURT. AND AGAIN, AS WE DO THAT, AS WE FILE IN COURT, OUR WHOLE GOAL IN THAT PROCESS IS TO GET THEM TO SIGN UP FOR A WORK PROGRAM. WE WANT TO MEET WITH THEM. WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE SAW AND WE WANT TO WORK THROUGH A SOLUTION TOGETHER, BEYOND THAT, A COUPLE OF THINGS CAN HAPPEN. I'LL TALK ABOUT THE BOTTOM PART OF THIS FLOWCHART FIRST. A LOT OF PEOPLE GOING BACK TO WHAT I GET ASKED ALL THE TIME. A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK THAT BOARDING AND SECURING IS THE END GOAL HERE. THAT IS NOT THE GOAL, PARTICULARLY IN THE CODE, BOARDING AND SECURING IS A TEMPORARY MEASURE WITH A ONE YEAR ALLOWANCE BEFORE THEY HAVE TO MAKE PERMANENT REPAIRS AGAIN, WITH THE OPINION OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, THAT CAN BE EXTENDED IF WE SEE PROGRESS AND UNDERSTAND THE CIRCUMSTANCES MORE FULLY. BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, BOARDING AND SECURING IS A ONE YEAR SHOT CLOCK THAT HAS STARTED SO THAT PERMANENT REPAIRS CAN TAKE PLACE, AT WHICH POINT WE PLAN TO BRING BACK TO 
          [00:45:01]
COUNCIL, IF THAT'S STILL THAT YEAR EXPIRES AND, GET YOU ALL TO WEIGH IN ON THAT AS WELL. BUT THE OTHER ROUTE IS, AS WE MEET WITH THEM, IF WE SUSPECT STRUCTURAL CONCERNS OR THAT THE VACANT BUILDING IS NOT BEING MAINTAINED AND THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THE ROOF IS CAVING IN AND SUSPECT WATER DAMAGE INSIDE, WHATEVER IT MAY BE, OR THERE IS JUST A GENERAL COMPLAINT FROM A TENANT WITH AN OCCUPIED BUILDING, WE WILL REQUEST AN INTERIOR INSPECTION. AND THAT'S WHAT I REFERRED TO EARLIER, WHERE THEY'VE BEEN VERY GRACIOUS WITH US FOR THOSE THAT WE HAVE REQUESTED, AND WHAT I WANT TO POINT OUT HERE IS THAT A SEPARATE WORK PROGRAM WILL BE STARTED FOR THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. SO THOSE TWO TIMELINES CAN MOVE AT DIFFERENT SPEEDS. SO THE EXTERIOR WILL HOPEFULLY MOVE AT A QUICKER SPEED. AND THOSE INTERIOR REPAIRS CAN BE, ADDRESSED SEPARATELY IN A DIFFERENT WORK PROGRAM. BUT AGAIN, THE BIG GOAL HERE IS CODE COMPLIANCY ACROSS THE BOARD, NOT JUST BOARDING AND SECURING. YES, SIR. YES, SIR. OKAY. YOU'RE SAYING, CODE COMPLIANCE IS THE FIRST CONCERN. NOW BOTH ARE SOMEWHAT SUBJECTIVE. SO ARE WE SAYING SOME PROGRESS? ARE WE SAYING SUBSTANTIAL PROGRESS? THE WAY THE CODE READS IS, IN THE OPINION OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, FOR A LOT OF THESE THINGS. AND SO I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT IMMINENT DANGER IN A MINUTE, AND PARTICULARLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE THREATS TO, THE OCCUPANTS OR EVEN BYSTANDERS IN THE PROXIMITY OF A BUILDING, A LOT OF THAT COMES DOWN TO THE OPINION OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, WE NEED TO SEE SOME MOVEMENT ON THESE BUILDINGS. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? SOME MOVEMENT? AGAIN, WE'VE WE'VE DEVELOPED AND I'LL GET INTO THIS MORE LATER. WE'VE WE'VE DEVELOPED QUITE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH, AS WE MEET WITH THESE AND WE UNDERSTAND THE CIRCUMSTANCES. AND THEY'VE OUTLINED THEIR, OUTLINED THEIR PLAN TO US AND THEY'VE OUTLINED WHAT'S GOING ON WITH, CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. AND SO WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE LISTENING WELL AND TRYING TO WORK WITH THEM TO NOT COME OUT EXTREMELY HEAVY HANDED AND JUST PENALIZE THEM. BUT WE ARE PUSHING TO SEE COMPLIANCY MET. I UNDERSTAND. HOWEVER, SOME PROGRESS HAS BEEN I DON'T SEE THAT AS BEING ANY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST. SUBSTANTIAL. THAT MAY BE A LITTLE MORE INCENTIVE TO DO SOMETHING. SO BUT I'LL LISTEN TO THE REMAINDER OF YOUR PRESENTATION, SIR, THAT CONCERNS ME. SO AGAIN, SAFETY IS REALLY THE END GOAL HERE. SO WHATEVER THE VIOLATION IS, IT COMES DOWN TO SAFETY AND A DOWNTOWN. WE CAN REALLY BE PROUD OF. AND SO I KNOW BUILDING CODES ARE A SMALL PIECE OF WHAT MOST PEOPLE WANT TO SEE HERE, BUT IT'S A IT'S A FOUNDATION PIECE. AND WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND HELPING KICK OFF THIS AS WE PRESS FORWARD IN THIS PROCESS. 
          ALSO, ONE SMALL FOOTNOTE HERE, THIS IS WHERE THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY COULD CONTINUE THE WORK WE'RE ACCOMPLISHING HERE TODAY. AND OF COURSE, WE HAVE MISS ENGMAN HERE TO FIELD ANY QUESTIONS THAT MAY BE ASSOCIATED WITH WHAT THAT COULD LOOK LIKE. IF SO, BE IT, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, QUICKLY, I'D LIKE TO TOUCH ON IMMINENT DANGER, AND IF YOU WOULD ALLOW ME TO PROVIDE AN EXPLANATION FOR THE TWO BUILDINGS TAGGED AS SUCH, ESSENTIALLY, IT'S THE SAME PROCESS FOR IMMINENT DANGER, THE ONLY WE'RE STILL LOOKING TO GET THEM SIGNED UP ON A WORK PROGRAM SO THAT WE CAN FOLLOW UP AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS TAKEN CARE OF. THERE POSSIBLY COULD STILL BE INTERIOR INSPECTIONS, IF WARRANTED, AND A SEPARATE WORK PROGRAM TO GET TO CODE COMPLIANCE. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE THERE IS THE CODE PROVIDES LANGUAGE AS, TO ABATE THE DANGER, AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE. AND SO THAT TOO IS A, BIT OF A VAGUE TERM. BUT, EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE IS THE LANGUAGE THAT THE CODE PROVIDES. AND SO FIRST, IT IS THE OWNER'S OPPORTUNITY TO ABATE THE BUILDINGS. AND SO THEY HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO DO SUCH AS I KNOW Y'ALL ARE WELL AWARE OF, AND SECOND, IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN IT'S THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY BY CODE. AND IT OUTLINES HOW WE CAN DO THAT. BUT WE TOO WILL BE LOOKING TO ABATE THESE AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE, I'D LIKE TO CLEARLY AND PUBLICLY COMMUNICATE WITH THAT THOUGH, THAT IF WE DO THAT, IF THE CITY TAKES CARE OF IT, WE THEN UNDERGO THE LEGAL PROCESS FOR THE RECOVERY OF ANY COST TO US, BUT ONCE AGAIN, WHEN DEALING WITH BOARDING AND SECURING, NO MATTER WHO DOES IT, WHETHER IT'S US OR THE OWNER, IT CAN ONLY REMAIN THAT WAY FOR ONE YEAR. BY CODE. NEXT SLIDE. THANK YOU. SO HOW ARE WE DOING WITH ALL THIS? WELL, FIRST, AGAIN, AN ENCOURAGING RESPONSE TO THE WORK PROGRAM, OF THE BUILDINGS WE'VE TAGGED AS UNSAFE, 17 ARE CURRENTLY SIGNED UP AND HAVE BEEN COMMUNICATING COMMUNICATING WITH US. THEIR PLAN, THEIR INTENTIONS WITH THE BUILDING. AND THAT'S BEEN ENCOURAGING TO HEAR. THEN THERE WERE THOSE WHO REPAIRED SWIFTLY AND ENTIRELY SO THAT THERE IS NO LONGER A HAZARD THERE WHATSOEVER. SO TWO WERE REPAIRED ENTIRELY, 17 ARE COMMUNICATING AND WORKING WITH US ON WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO 
          [00:50:02]
TO REPAIR THOSE BUILDINGS. AND THEN FOR THOSE THAT ARE EITHER NON-RESPONSIVE, OR WE FILED IN COURT ON WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE DILIGENTLY TO FOLLOW UP UNTIL THOSE VIOLATIONS ARE ADDRESSED, IT'S JUST GOING TO BE A PROCESS THAT WE WORK THROUGH WITH THEM, AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE KNOWN THAT THIS SLIDE QUESTION. YES. COUNCILMAN YES. IS IT PERMISSIBLE TO ASK, WHICH BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN FILED IN COURT BECAUSE OWNER NOT BEING RESPONSIVE AND CITIES NOW PURSUING LEGAL ACTION. YES, SIR. SO MY LAST SLIDE WILL ACTUALLY SHOW YOU THAT IN DETAIL. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO SPEAKING OF THAT, I'D LIKE TO MAKE KNOWN THAT THIS SLIDE AS WELL AS SLIDE ONE, ARE AVAILABLE ON OUR WEBSITE, THE BUILDING CODES WEBSITE, AS A BIT OF A DOWNTOWN DASHBOARD. SO IF YOU USE IF YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, IF YOU USE THIS QR CODE, YOU WILL BE ABLE TO ACCESS OUR BUILDING CODES WEBSITE. ANYBODY CAN DO THIS WHERE THIS INFORMATION WILL BE KEPT. AND UPDATED REGULARLY. SO IF YOU EVER NEED AN UPDATE QUICKLY AS YOU'RE TALKING WITH FOLKS, THIS SHOULD BE THE MOST CURRENT AVAILABLE DATA AVAILABLE TO YOU, WE'RE AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO BE UPDATING THIS REGULARLY. AND THEN NEXT SLIDE. SO AS YOU MENTIONED, COUNCILMAN, LASTLY THIS IS A VISUAL OF THE ADDRESSES THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH, IN THIS VISUAL, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THERE ARE 13 DIFFERENT OWNERS REPRESENTED HERE, OUR OUR TEAM IS TALKING WITH THESE OWNERS ALMOST DAILY NOW, AND WE'D LIKE TO SIMPLY SAY THANK YOU TO THEM FOR WORKING WITH US TO TAKE SUCH AN ENORMOUS STEP FORWARD IN THIS, PROACTIVE PLAN, YOU KNOW, THIS TIME LAST YEAR, MUCH OF THIS WAS JUST BEING DISCUSSED. AND SINCE THEN, THANKS TO YOUR LEADERSHIP, THANKS TO TEAMMATES LIKE DELANCY WOOD AND BOYD MEYER AND OTHER INSPECTORS, PLUS OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THANKS TO MISS INGMAN'S ENERGETIC LEADERSHIP, IN OUR OFFICE, WE'RE NOW SEEING SOME REAL PROGRESS. AND SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR PARTNERSHIP IN THIS PROCESS. AND, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. I'LL BE HAPPY TO TALK THROUGH ANY QUESTIONS OR FURTHER COMMENTS. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT LAST SLIDE? IS THE OLD ANTIOCH CHURCH BUILDING DOWNTOWN REPRESENTED SOMEWHERE ON HERE? THAT'S THE BUILDING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CARTER OR COLLEGE. IT'S THE BUILDING ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PALLADIUM. BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS ON THE NICHES, SO AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WHEN THE SWEEP INITIALLY HAPPENED, YOU GUYS WERE ACTUALLY ABLE TO MEET THE PROPERTY OWNERS FAIRLY QUICKLY, AND THEY PULLED A BUILDING PERMIT RIGHT AWAY SO THEY WEREN'T NECESSARILY TAGGED ON THIS, THIS, DOWNTOWN ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM. BUT THEY DO HAVE A BUILDING PERMIT AND ARE WORKING TOWARDS IT. I ACTUALLY DROVE BY THIS MORNING AND I SAW WORKERS THERE. YES. ONE OTHER, THE OLD WORKFORCE BUILDING, WHICH IS IN A TERRIBLE STATE, THERE'S A WORK PROGRAM, THAT'S DESIGNATED HERE. WHAT WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE FOR THAT BUILDING? YEAH. SO HE HAS SIGNED UP FOR A WORK PROGRAM, THAT ONE FALLS INTO THE CATEGORY OF US TAKING THE RESPONSIBILITY AND AS AGGRESSIVELY AS POSSIBLE, GETTING IT BOARDED AND SECURED, OUR PLAN IS TO SEE MOVEMENT WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH ON THAT BUILDING SO THAT WE CAN GET THAT BOARD AND SECURED OURSELVES. OKAY. I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING THE CITY IS HAVING TO TAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF BOARDING AND SECURING THAT BUILDING. THAT'S CORRECT. HOW DOES THAT SQUARE WITH THE OWNER COOPERATING AND BEING INTO A WORK PROGRAM? BECAUSE IF YOU WON'T EVEN TAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF BOARDING THE BUILDING HIMSELF, HOW CAN WE REALISTICALLY EXPECT THAT HE'S GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN A WORK PROGRAM? SO OUR ORDINANCES ALLOW FOR THE OWNERS TO ENTER THESE WORK PROGRAMS. AT THIS TIME, HE HAS ENTERED INTO IT. WE HAVE NOT SEEN THE PROGRESS THAT WE NEED TO SEE TO BOARD AND SECURE, AND THAT'S WHY THE CITY IS GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE THOSE MEASURES. UNLESS HE WERE. HE COMES FORWARD AND BOARDS AND SECURES HIMSELF. 
          BUT AT THAT TIME, AT THIS TIME, HE IS ALLOWED BY ORDINANCE TO RECEIVE X AMOUNT OF DAYS, WHICH I THINK IS 150 AT THIS POINT. TO REPAIR THOSE THROUGH A WORK PROGRAM. BUT IF HE DOES NOT BOARD AND SECURE, THEN THE CITY MAY HAVE TO TAKE ACTION. YES, SIR. YES YES, SIR. WE TURN YOUR MIC ON. COUNCILMAN GATES, YOU HAVE MORE? I JUST DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT TO SAY. BECAUSE IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE WORK PROGRAM IS THE MAGIC BULLET THAT THE OWNER CAN SAY. I'M GOING TO SIGN UP FOR WORK PROGRAM AND JUST SIT THERE. HE'S NOT HAVING TO BOARD UP THE BUILDING HIMSELF. THE CITY IS DOING THAT, YOU KNOW, HE'S GETTING ANOTHER 150 DAYS, AFTER YEARS OF THE 
          [00:55:05]
BUILDING SITTING IN THE SAME EXACT STATE, I JUST I THE LACK OF PROGRESS IS VERY FRUSTRATING. 
          I NEVER WHENEVER WE BOARDED UP IS THAT POINT. ARE THEY OUT OF THE WORK PROGRAM. ARE THEY IS THAT STILL A PART OF THAT 150 DAYS? I'LL HAVE TO LOOK INTO THE CODE. BUT I DO KNOW THAT AT THIS POINT HE DOES HAVE THE 150 DAYS. SHOULD HE NOT BOARD AND SECURE, WHICH HE HAS NOT MADE PROGRESS TOWARDS THAT. THEN THE CITY WILL HAVE TO BOARD AND SECURE. BUT I CAN DEFINITELY LOOK INTO THE CODE A BIT MORE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, IF HE WERE TO NOT BOARD AND SECURE WHAT THAT DOES TO HIS WORK PROGRAM. MR. REED, IS THERE ANYTHING THE CITY CAN DO FOR US AS A COUNCIL? CAN DO TO STRENGTHEN OUR ORDINANCES ON THIS, TO, YOU KNOW, NOT ALLOW THIS THIS CONDITIONS TO JUST CONTINUE TO LINGER AND FESTER. SO I BELIEVE THAT THE ORDINANCE IS PRETTY WELL TEETH, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, WE DO, AND I KNOW IT'S FRUSTRATING, BUT EVEN THOUGH THE PROPERTY HAS YOU TO USE YOUR WORDS SET FOR A VERY LONG TIME, IT STILL HAS TO GO THROUGH THE DUE PROCESS PROCESS. 
          SO IF WE'RE GOING TO GIVE A NEW PROPERTY OWNER VERSUS AN OLD PROPERTY OWNER, THEY ARE ENTITLED TO THE SAME PROCESS, SO GOING THROUGH THE WORK PROGRAM HAS TO BE GIVEN TO EQUALLY OR THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO THROUGH THE WORK PROGRAM HAS TO BE GIVEN EQUALLY TO EACH PROPERTY OWNER, REGARDLESS OF HOW LONG THEY'VE OWNED THE BUILDING. AND SO WHAT'S REALLY, I GUESS, THE CONCERNING PART IS THE DUE PROCESS PART, WHICH IS THE PART WE CANNOT ELIMINATE, SO A PROPERTY OWNER DOES HAVE SHOULD BE STILL GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO THROUGH THE WORK PROGRAM INSTEAD OF GOING DIRECTLY INTO COURT JUST BECAUSE THEY'VE OWNED THE BUILDING LONGER THAN ANOTHER PERSON, OR HAVEN'T OWNED THE BUILDING AS LONG AS ANOTHER PERSON. SO, THERE'S REALLY NOT A WAY TO GET AROUND THAT. SO FOR CLARITY, THOUGH, THE 150 DAYS, DO WE BOARD IT UP BEFORE THE 150 DAYS, OR IS THAT AT THE END OF THE WORK PROGRAM THAT THEY SIGNED UP FOR, OR IS THERE TWO DIFFERENT TIMELINES IN THERE? IT SHOULD BE TWO DIFFERENT TIMELINES. SO WE TAG IT. THEY HAVE X AMOUNT OF DAYS. I THINK IT'S 30 DAYS TO BOARD AND SECURE. CORRECT ME IF THE BUILDING WAS ALSO TAGGED AS IN IMMINENT DANGER. SO OKAY, SO THAT'S AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE. SO THERE SHOULD THERE'S TWO TWO AT PLAY. THERE'S BOARD AND SECURE. 
          AND THEN THERE'S ALSO THE WORK PROGRAM. DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION FULLY. RIGHT. I MEAN, SO THE WORK PROGRAM CONTINUES BEYOND THE TIME THAT THEY HAVE TO GET THE BUILDING SECURED. AND IF THEY DIDN'T GET THE BUILDING SECURED, THE CITY STEPS IN. AND DOES THAT. BUT THEN, FILES WITH THE COURTS TO GET A LIEN. YES, SIR. BECAUSE BOARDING AND SECURING IS SUPPOSED TO BE TEMPORARY. THAT'S NOT THE END. THAT'S NOT THE FIX. UNDERSTOOD COUNCILMAN TURNER AND THEN COUNCILMAN FALLSHAW. ALL RIGHT, LISTEN TO THE PRESENTATION. I NOTICED WE DID SPEAK TO BOARDING AND SECURITY, BUT, KEY TERM WAS IN THERE FOR ONE YEAR. AND AT THE ONE YEAR, MY QUESTION IS, WHAT'S NEXT? BECAUSE IF THE CITY GOES IN AND WE BOARD AND SECURE SOMEONE'S PROPERTY AND WE DO IT FOR ONE YEAR, THEN WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP? BECAUSE I NOTICED WE GAVE THAT TIMELINE OF ONE YEAR. 
          WHAT'S NEXT AFTER THAT? BECAUSE I THINK SOME OF THE FRUSTRATION OF SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS UP HERE, ALMOST EVERYWHERE WE GO WHERE WE'RE ASKED ABOUT THE PROGRESS OF DOWNTOWN, WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP, WHAT'S GOING ON? I KIND OF FEEL LIKE MY OPINION AS A COUNCIL MEMBER. I KIND OF FEEL LIKE WE KIND OF BEEN PRETTY STAGNANT AS FAR AS WHAT'S NEXT DOWNTOWN. SINCE WE KIND OF CAME OUT WITH OUR VISION AND OUR PLAN FOR STATE OF THE CITY. YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION. 
          SO WHEN WE SAY THAT ONE YEAR AND WE DID THE WORK AND SPENT THE REVENUE TO DO IT, WHAT'S NEXT? SO THEY HAVE TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT. THEY HAVE TO BRING THAT UP TO CODE. IF THEY DON'T, BRING IT UP TO CODE, THEN OF COURSE WE'RE FILING. I THINK THAT AT THIS POINT, AND THIS IS FOR A SEPARATE CONVERSATION OF COURSE, BUT THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY COULD WORK IN CONCERT WITH THAT, AND I THINK THAT THAT'S WHY THAT'S GOING TO BE BROUGHT TO YOU GUYS AT A FUTURE, COUNCIL SESSION HERE SOON, BUT IT NEEDS TO WORK IN CONCERT. AND AS FAR AS THE PROGRESS AND WHATNOT, AS LONG IT EACH DAY THE VIOLATION IS IN EXISTENCE IS IT CAN BE FILED ON EACH DAY IS A VIOLATION. SO THAT WE COULD CONTINUE TO FILE EVERY SINGLE DAY. UNTIL, YOU KNOW, AND TRY TO COMPEL THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO MAKE CERTAIN REPAIRS, BUT I DO THINK THAT THAT'S WHERE ALSO THE ADDED VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY WILL COME INTO PLAY ON ON A FLIP SIDE, WE SAID 67% OF DOWNTOWN IS COMPLIANCE, AND COMPLIANCE IS A GOOD THING. BUT WE STILL HAVE THAT ROUGHLY 30%. AND I'M NOTICING ON HERE YOU HAVE FIVE BUILDING OWNERS NON-RESPONSIVE, THREE THAT'S FILED IN COURT. SO 
          [01:00:04]
I'VE SAID SEVERAL TIMES, AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING NOW THAT WE'RE ALL TOGETHER, DO YOU FEEL LIKE THE MEETINGS WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS WERE SUCCESSFUL IF THEY WERE NOT? WHAT ARE SOME OF THE REASONS SOME OF THE BARRIERS YOU GUYS ARE DEALING WITH BECAUSE YOU'VE BEEN WORKING AT IT FOR QUITE SOME TIME? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE ALL THE RESOURCES AND SUPPORT ARE STILL OUT TO, YOU KNOW, FURTHER EXTEND THE TIMELINE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I THINK A LOT OF FRUSTRATION IS STEMMING FROM THE DAY. YEAH. SO, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE ISSUES IS OBVIOUSLY THE NON-RESPONSIVE ONES, THERE IS NO RESPONSE. SO CHARGES HAVE BEEN FILED THERE, THE NEXT IS, YOU KNOW, THEY DO GET 150 DAYS BY, BY ORDINANCE, SO TO PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE, THAT'S FIVE MONTHS. 
          I BELIEVE THAT WE STARTED THIS IN, MARCH. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. SO THEY'RE STILL WITHIN THEIR TIMELINE TO MAKE REPAIRS, HAVE SOME OF THEM MADE REPAIRS? SOME HAVE. WELL, I THINK HOW MANY HAVE PULLED BUILDING PERMITS AT THIS POINT? I THINK PROBABLY TWO, AND THEN OF COURSE, THE ANTIOCH CHURCH THAT, THAT COUNCILMAN GOETZ MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE THEY'VE ALREADY STARTED ON THEIRS PRE, PROGRAM OR PROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM, BUT THOSE THOSE ARE SOME BARRIERS AT THIS POINT. WE'RE RIGHT NOW WE ARE IN THE DUE PROCESS. WE ARE IN THE WAITING PERIOD. WE'RE HOPEFUL TO GET THOSE BUILDING PERMITS. BUT, THAT THAT'S PROBABLY I GUESS THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST FRUSTRATING PART IS THE, THE IS THE WAIT AT THIS POINT WHICH THEY ARE ALLOWED. THEY'RE, THEY'RE ENTITLED TO. YEAH. AND AGAIN A LACK OF A RESPONSE. AND THE WAY I JUST THAT'S WHAT I MEAN WHEN THEY WHEN WE'RE MAKING THESE DECISIONS AND WE HAVE NO RESPONSE, YOU KNOW THAT THAT THAT'S JUST A CONCERN. IF WHAT DID WE EXTREME ALL MEASURES LIKE HOW ARE WE COMMUNICATING. WELL WE SEND THEM LETTERS, PHONE CALLS. ARE WE GOING BY LIKE WHAT ARE SOME OF THE TACTICS THAT WE HAVE USED. YEAH, WE'RE WE'RE CALLING I KNOW, OUR DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL BUILDING, OFFICIAL DEMOLITION COORDINATOR HAVE BEEN CALLING, EACH PROPERTY OWNER OFTEN, SOME ARE RESPONSIVE, SOME ARE NOT, WE'VE SENT OUR VIOLATION LETTERS AND CORRESPONDENCE. THEY'LL WILL CORRESPOND IN EMAIL. AGAIN, IT'S JUST KIND OF THAT WAITING PERIOD AT THAT POINT. AND HOPEFULLY WITH THE WORK PROGRAM THAT THEY SIGNED AND ENTERED INTO, ALLOWING THEM 150 DAYS, THAT THEY WILL PULL A BUILDING PERMIT AND SHOW SUBSTANTIAL PROGRESS. 
          AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS, I THINK ONE OF THE WORRIES PROGRESS IS GREAT, BUT IN THIS INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF BASED UPON OUR OPINIONS, LIKE FROM A STAFF, WHAT DO WE CALL PROGRESS? YOU KNOW, LIKE, YOU KNOW, THROWING THE PUTTING THE BOARD ON THE WINDOW. DO WE LOOK AT THAT AS PROGRESS, YOU KNOW, SUBSTANTIAL PROGRESS. JUST KIND OF GETTING A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE MEAN BY THE TERM PROGRESS. I GET IT IN THEORY, BUT YEAH. AXIALITY LIKE, WHAT ARE WHAT ARE WE CALLING PROGRESS? YEAH. AND I CAN, YOU KNOW, I CAN LET MY BUILDING OFFICIALS, ANSWER THAT. BUT, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY IF WE'RE TRYING TO THROW A PERCENTAGE OUT THERE, THEY NEED TO AT LEAST BE 30% TO 50% UNDERWAY. YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO WE NEED TO SEE SOMETHING. IT CAN'T BE LIKE I CHANGED A ELECTRICAL PLUG, AND THAT'S PROGRESS. THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S NOT SUBSTANTIAL. THAT'S NOT ENOUGH, WE NEED TO SEE SOMETHING AND AGAIN, TO GO BACK ON WHAT, THE DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL WAS SAYING, YOU KNOW, THE WHAT? WE'RE WHAT WE ARE IDENTIFYING THROUGH THESE CODES IS UNSAFE CONDITIONS, AND WE NEED THOSE UNSAFE CONDITIONS TO BE SAFE. 
          AND THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ADDRESSING AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, TAKING IT THAT STEP FURTHER OCCUPANCY. WHAT'S YOU KNOW WHAT WHAT'S TO COME IN THE NEXT YEAR THAT IS UNDER DIFFERENT ORDINANCES THAT YOU ALL HAVE REQUESTED US TO RESEARCH? MAYOR. YES IF I COULD JUST ADD, IF YOU NOTICE A LOT OF THE TILES UP THERE MARKED GREEN, WHICH AS WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING, THAT THEY'RE IN THE 150 DAY WORK PROGRAM. AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THE STATE CODE, WHICH OUR ORDINANCES ARE BASED OFF OF, GIVE A WIDE LATITUDE TO THE PROPERTY OWNER TO MAKE THE NECESSARY REPAIRS, TO BRING THEM UP TO CODE, INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. SO AS YOU AGAIN, LOOKING AT THE TILE, A LOT OF THEM ARE IN THOSE PROCESS. BUT I THINK WE HERE TODAY, I THINK WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS THAT THERE AND I WILL SAY THE DISCRETION WITHIN THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. THE BUILDING OFFICIAL HAS A DEGREE OF DISCRETION IN THE CODE. BUT I THINK WHAT WE'RE HEARING TODAY IS THAT THESE BUILDING OWNERS NEED TO MAKE PROGRESS, OR WE'RE GOING TO BE LESS LIKELY TO, BASICALLY OFFER ADDITIONAL TIME. YOU KNOW, YOU MAY RECALL ABOUT A YEAR AGO WE WERE MEETING WITH A COURT AND THE MUNICIPAL COURT, THEY, I THINK, HEARD US LOUD AND CLEAR. AND I THINK THEY'RE INTERESTED IN BEING GOOD PARTNERS TO MAKING SURE THIS HAPPENS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, AGAI, AS THEY HIT THOSE DEADLINES AND MISS THOSE DEADLINES, I THINK WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS WE WANT TO FILE COMPLAINTS UNTIL THEY'RE UNTIL THEY'RE MEETING CODE. 
          [01:05:07]
ANYTHING FURTHER COUNSELOR, WE'LL GO TO COUNCILMAN PHIL SHAW AND THEN BACK TO YOU. I'M GOOD. 
          MAYOR OKAY. COUNCILMAN. SO, SO, CHRIS, MY FRUSTRATION IS THAT WE KNOW THAT SOME OF THESE BUILDINGS, THE GILBERT BUILDING, TUNNEL HILL BUILDING. FOR YEARS, I MEAN, FORGET ABOUT 150 DAYS. I MEAN, YEARS. NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE. WHY WHY DO WE ALLOW THAT? WHY HAVE WE ALLOWED THAT? WELL CERTAINLY DUE PROCESS, BUT I THINK THAT THE. I THINK THE HOPE HAS BEEN I'LL JUST SAY THE HOPE FROM MY OPINION, LOOKING AT THIS OVER YEARS, THE HOPE HAS BEEN WITH ALL THE INVESTMENTS THE CITY HAS MADE DOWNTOWN, MILLIONS AND MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF CITY FUNDS IN INFRASTRUCTURE, PARKS, NEW, YOU KNOW, ET CETERA. ET CETERA. AND A LOT OF PRIVATE MONEY INVESTED IN DOWNTOWN. I THINK THE HOPE WAS THAT SOME OF THESE A LOT OF THESE BUILDING OWNERS WOULD LOOK AROUND AND SAY, LOOK, THIS IS A GOOD INVESTMENT. UNFORTUNATELY, OVER THE YEARS, MORE AND MORE BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN BOUGHT UP AND LEFT VACANT WITHOUT ANY INVESTMENT. AND SO IT'S JUST MY OPINION. I THINK THE HOPE WAS THERE THAT THEY WOULD MAKE THAT INVESTMENT. BUT I THINK OVER THE LAST 12 MONTHS I THINK WE'VE HEARD COUNCIL LOUD AND CLEAR THAT WE NEED TO GET SERIOUS ON DOWNTOWN ENFORCEMENT, AND THAT'S WHY BO AND BOYD AND DEMI AND, THE WHOLE TEAM DELANCEY, ALL THE STAFF HAS BEEN DOING A DEEP DIVE INTO WHAT ARE THE ORDINANCES ALLOW AND DON'T ALLOW BECAUSE, AGAIN, AS THE CITY ATTORNEY POINTED OUT, THERE IS DUE PROCESS. AND SO WE REALLY KIND OF STARTED AFRESH AND STARTED THIS PROCESS BACK IN MARCH. SO AGAIN, YOU'LL NOTICE A LOT OF THOSE GREENS THAT THERE IN THE 150 DAY. BUT AGAIN, I THINK WE HEAR LOUD AND CLEAR THAT WE'VE RUN OUT OF PATIENCE. AND SO AS THOSE GREENS HIT, THEY'RE MISSED THEIR DEADLINES. I THINK WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS WE DON'T WANT THE BUILDING OFFICIALS TO OFFER BROAD LATITUDE AND MORE TIME AND MORE TIME AND MORE TIME, BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS. I THINK WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS IF THEY MISS THEIR DEADLINES AND THEY'RE IN GREEN, THEY QUICKLY NEED TO BE IN MUNICIPAL COURT. AND WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? IN MY OPINION, IT WOULD BE $1,000 PER VIOLATION. YOU KNOW, WE CAN SAY PER DAY, BUT THAT DOES CLOG UP THE COURTS. AND, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT REALLY TOO INTERESTED ABOUT THAT. I MEAN, SOME OF THESE BUILDING OWNERS, THE ONLY WAY YOU'RE GOING TO GET THEM TO THE TABLE IS BY FINDING THEM, FINDING THE BEJESUS OUT OF THEM, WHETHER EVERY DAY. I MEAN, THERE'S JUST NOTHING ELSE THAT WILL MAKE THEM RESPONSIVE. 
          REGARDING SOME OF THEM, I THINK YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT. AND AGAIN, I WILL. I'LL MENTION AGAIN THAT DEMI BROUGHT IT UP. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT. AUGUST 20TH, WE WILL BE BRINGING FORTH THE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRY ORDINANCE, WHICH WILL GO HAND IN HAND WITH THIS, BECAUSE, AGAIN, I THINK THE PATIENCE HAS RUN OUT IN GETTING THESE BUILDINGS SAFE. 
          AND FOR FURTHER CLARITY, THE PURPLE AND THE GREEN, OR AT LEAST THAT'S HOW I SEE THEM. 
          THEY'RE EITHER GOING TO MOVE INTO THE, FILED IN COURT OR THE REPAIRED ENTIRELY COLUMNS. AND THE PURPLE RIGHT NOW, WHEN WILL IT BE THAT THEY MOVE TO WHICH ARE THE NON RESPONSIVE TO THE FILED IN COURT. SO RIGHT NOW I KNOW THAT WELL THEY SHOULD BE MOVING QUICKLY. IT KIND OF DEPENDS ON. AND I KNOW THAT DELANCEY HAS THAT. I'M SORRY MY DEMOLITION COORDINATOR HAS THAT INFORMATION ON HAND. BUT IT DEPENDS ON WHAT PHASE THAT THEY WERE IN, SO IF IT'S NON RESPONSIVE IT'LL PROBABLY SOON BE INTO FILED IN COURT. COUNCILMAN TURNER YEAH. MAYOR THAT'S ONE OF MY CONCERNS ABOUT NON RESPONSIVE. AND WE SPEAKING OF DUE PROCESS OF HOW WE ACTUALLY TALKING OR COMMUNICATING WITH BUILDING OWNERS THAT ARE JUST COMPLETELY NON RESPONSIVE BASED. I'M SORRY. PHASE THREE WAS THE ONLY NON RESPONSE. PHASE ONE AND TWO OF ALL RESPONDED BY THIS POINT. COUNCILMAN GETS THIS PURPLE LINE. IT SAYS IT HAS FIVE DIFFERENT ADDRESSES. THAT'S WHAT I THINK. THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING AT. SO THIS WOULD BE FOR CITY ATTORNEY. YOU KNOW WE FILE SOMETHING IN COURT. A CITATION IS ISSUED PRESUMABLY SERVED UPON THE BUILDING OWNER. THEY HAVE APPROXIMATELY THREE WEEKS TO FILE AN ANSWER. SO THESE, I BELIEVE, ARE FILED IN MUNICIPAL COURT. SO IT'S A IT'S A VIOLATION OF OUR ORDINANCE, IF IT'S FILED IN CIVIL COURT, COUNCIL WOULD NEED TO GIVE PERMISSION BEFORE THAT HAPPENS. 
          [01:10:04]
SO THESE WERE FILED IN MUNICIPAL COURT. AND SO THERE WILL BE A CITATION ISSUED OR A SUMMONS ISSUED FOR THE VIOLATION OF OUR CITY ORDINANCE, AT THAT POINT, IT'S EITHER A FINE ISSUED OR IT COMES. THE JUDGE SAYS, IN LIEU OF A FINE, YOU CAN BRING THE PROPERTY IN COMPLIANCE WITHIN 30 DAYS. SO HOW ARE WE LOOKING ON THESE THAT ARE THESE FIVE THAT ARE FILED IN COURT? I WASN'T PRIVY TO THIS PRESENTATION BEFORE TODAY, SO I DON'T HAVE AN UPDATE ON ANY OF THESE PROPERTIES. BUT, PLANNING MIGHT I'LL ASK MY DEMOLITION COORDINATOR TO COME UP AND SEE IF THEIR COURT DATE HAS BEEN SE. GOOD AFTERNOON. ON FOR 48. ORLEANS THEY DID GO AHEAD AND PULL A PERMIT. SO THE JUDGE, ME AND THE DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL SPOKE. WE'RE GOING GO AHEAD AND GIVE THEM 90 DAYS TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE MAKING GOOD PROGRESS. AND THE 448, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT ONE OF THE 5 OR 48 THOSE FIVE. RIGHT THERE, ARE THE ONES IN THE LAST SWEEP. SHE'S YOU'RE SHE'S SPECIFICALLY SPEAKING TO THE ONES IN BLUE FOR 48 ORLEANS THAT WAS FILED IN COURT ALREADY. 
          OKAY, 715 AND 441 ORLEANS. I JUST FILED A THIRD TIME ON 441 ORLEANS TODAY. AND 715 ORLEANS HAS BEEN FILED THE SECOND TIME ON, WE DO NOT HAVE A COURT DATE, BUT THE LETTERS HAVE GONE OUT. 
          THE FIVE THAT YOU SEE IN THE FIRST ROW, THOSE WERE PART OF THE THIRD SWEEP, AND THEY'RE LETTERS. CERTIFIED LETTERS WENT OUT ON 715. SO THEY HAVE APPROXIMATELY 45 DAYS TO RESPOND TO THAT. SO AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER, IF THEY'VE SIGNED UP FOR WORK PROGRAM, THEN THEY'LL BE IN THE GREEN. IF NOT, THEN WE'LL I'LL BEGIN FILING CHARGES ON THOSE. COUNCILMAN TURNER, IS THERE A LIMIT ON, THE AMOUNT OF FINES WE CAN ACTUALLY ENFORCE? IS IT A SPECIFIC NUMBER THAT YOU CAN'T GO OVER? IS IT IS IT LIMITED? SO IT'S AN AMOUNT, PER DAY PER PER FINE, BUT AS LONG AS THEY'RE IN VIOLATION, THE ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR EVERY DAY THAT THERE'S A VIOLATION FOR YOU TO FILE, A CHARGE. IT'S CONSIDERED A VIOLATION. IT'S MY EXPERIENCE THAT MOST PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO PAY THE FINE, THEY CAN EITHER CONTINUE TO PAY THE FINE OR THEY DON'T, IN WHICH CASE YOU REALLY CAN'T ISSUE A WARRANT FOR A BUSINESS. RIGHT? MOST OF THESE PROPERTIES ARE HELD IN LLCS OR IN CORPORATIONS, SO THERE'S NO ONE THAT YOU CAN GO OUT AND ESSENTIALLY AND ARREST. SO HAVING A WARRANT JUST DOESN'T AFFECT EITHER, THE NEXT STEP, ONCE THERE'S A EITHER, A SHOWING THAT THEY'RE NO LONGER, RESPONDING TO, TO MUNICIPAL COURT FINES WOULD BE TO FILE IT IN CIVIL COURT TO GET ADDITIONAL RELIEF. AND THAT WAS ONE OF MY CONCERNS. I KNOW MOST BUILDINGS ARE, YOU KNOW, LLCS, OTHER ENTITIES ARE NAMED IN IT, AND WE'D SAY WE'RE GOING AFTER THE OWNER. THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING HOW WE ACTUALLY COMMUNICATING, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE GET NON RESPONSES. SO YOU COMMUNICATE WITH THE BUILDING OWNER OR THE AGENT THAT'S APPOINTED. BUT WHEN YOU FILE YOU HAVE TO FILE IN THE NAME OF THE CORPORATION BECAUSE THAT'S WHO THE BUILDING IS REGISTERED TO. AND SO THE, THE RESPONSE FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR 48 HOUR LIENS WHERE THEY PULL THE PERMIT IS THE RESPONSE THAT WE WOULD WANT TO HAVE. RIGHT? WE WANT THEM TO KIND OF KIND OF GO INTO ACTION, IF ONE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO'VE BEEN FILED IN COURT IS NON RESPONSIVE, OR THEY JUST CONTINUE TO PAY THE FINE AT SOME POINT, THE CITY ISN'T. THIS ISN'T A INTENDED TO BE A MONEY GENERATING ITEM. IT'S INTENDED TO BRING THE PROPERTIES INTO COMPLIANCE. SO AT THAT POINT WE'D HAVE TO DISCUSS OTHER OPTIONS. YEAH. BUT STILL THAT'S ONE OF MY CONCERNS. I JUST THINK, YOU KNOW, SOME THAT THAT'S JUST NON RESPONDING AT ALL. IT'S CLEARLY A DISCONNECT. SO THE NON-RESPONSIVE IF I WERE HEARD THE DEPUTY BUILDING OFFICIAL CORRECTLY IS THAT THERE'S STILL TIME FOR THEM TO RESPOND. SO THE TIME FROM THEM TO NOT RESPOND HAS NOT EXPIRED YET. AND SO THEY'RE STILL WITHIN THEIR WINDOW TO RESPOND. I THINK THAT THE TERM NON-RESPONSIVE WAS COMMUNICATED TO YOU TODAY JUST TO TELL YOU THAT THERE'S NO UPDATE ON WHERE THEY FALL IN IN THE COLOR SCHEME OTHER THAN THEY'RE NOT IN THE WORK PROGRAM. 
          THEY HAVEN'T FILED ON COURT, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN REPAIRED ENTIRELY. THEY HAVEN'T RECEIVED THE COMMUNICATION THAT THEY NEED FROM THEM YET. BUT THE TIMELINE FOR THAT HAS NOT EXPELLED. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, AGAIN, THAT DUE PROCESS ALLOWS US TO GIVE THEM THAT EFFORT. SO IF AND WHEN THEY REACH OUT, AS THE MAYOR POINTED OUT, THAT EITHER FALL ON ONE OF THOSE CATEGORIES, EITHER THEY'LL BE REPAIRED AND FULL, THEY'LL BE FILED ON IN COURT OR IN OTHER WORK PROGRAM. AND LIKE JUST ON A MINIMUM LEVEL, WHAT'S THE DOLLAR AMOUNT? YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK AT AT THE MINIMUM WITH SOME OF THESE FINES, MR. BOONE, WE COULD BE, MINIMUM. WELL, YOU COULD ISSUE A FINE FOR $1,000 PER VIOLATION 
          [01:15:04]
PER DAY. THAT'S THE MAXIMUM. YES, COUNCILMAN FALLSHAW CITY ATTORNEY. WHEN IT COMES TO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. HOA'S GET INTO CONFLICT WITH A HOMEOWNER. THE STATE OF TEXAS FAVORS THE PROPERTY OWNER OVER THE HOA. SO THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH YOU CAN DO WHEN IT COMES TO COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. AND WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH. DOES THE STATE OF TEXAS FAVOR THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNER? BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED $1,000 A DAY, WHO SETS THAT AND DOES AND DOES A LOCAL MUNICIPALITY HAVE RESTRICTIONS PLACED ON IT OF WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO BY THE STATE OF TEXAS? OKAY, SO LET ME ANSWER THAT IN PHASES, BECAUSE THOSE WERE THERE WERE SO MANY THINGS IN THAT ONE STATEMENT. SO, SO FIRST THINGS FIRST, IT'S PRESUMED THAT, TEXAS COURT FAVORS THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND HOA DISPUTES, BUT NOT ALWAYS, IT'S REALLY BECAUSE HOA GUIDELINES ARE USUALLY PRETTY VAGUE, AND THEY USUALLY DEAL WITH ESTHETICS AND NOT SAFETY OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM THE CITY. WE DO HAVE SOME ESTHETIC LAWS IN OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT MOST OF THESE THINGS DEAL WITH SAFETY AND CONCERNS, SO THE CITY DOESN'T REALLY REGULATE PRETTY. WE REGULATE SAFETY, BECAUSE OF THAT, WHEN IT DEALS WITH A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, THE FINDINGS AND SUCH ARE SET ARE LIMITED BY STATE LAW. SO PUBLIC HEALTH AND PUBLIC SAFETY ALLOWS FOR UP TO $2,000 IN FINES AND TYPICALLY IN MUNICIPAL COURT, IT RANGES ANYWHERE FROM A DOLLAR TO UP TO 2000, 2000 BEING THE MAX FOR A PUBLIC SAFETY RISK $1,000. AS IT RELATES TO MAXIMUM FINE AS IT RELATES TO A BUILDING OFFICIAL, IS PRETTY MUCH STANDARD, AND IT'S ALLOWABLE UNDER STATE LAW. SO WHO SETS THE FINE RANGE? WE HAVE WINDOW FINES THAT ARE PRETTY MUCH DECIDED BY OUR MUNICIPAL MAGISTRATE, AS WELL AS THE PROSECUTOR. KIND OF SETS LIKE THIS KIND OF SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE, AND THAT JUST ALLOWS THE JUDGE TO EITHER RAISE OR LOWER THE FINE BASED ON HIS FINDINGS. AT THE CONCLUSION OF A TRIAL, IF THEY PRESENT IT TO A JURY, IF IT GETS THAT FAR, THE JURY IS GIVEN THE FINE RANGE TO GO WITHIN THAT RANGE, RECURRING OFFENSES. THERE IS SOME POINTS, SOME ORDINANCE THAT THE CITY HAS THAT ALLOWS THIS ONE DOES NOT. BUT AT SOME POINTS IT SAYS LIKE THE FIRST FINE IS AT THIS AMOUNT. THE SECOND FINE GOES TO THIS, THE THIRD FINE IS THIS. 
          AND THEN IT CAPS OUT AT THE TOP, THERE'S NO STEP INCREASE FOR THIS ONE. SO AGAIN IN RECOMMENDATION, THE JUDGE COULD DECIDE THAT IN LOOKING AT THE FILE THAT THIS IS A REPEAT OFFENDER. AND SO EVEN THOUGH THE WINDOW FINE COULD BE SET AT 250 OR $500 FOR THIS PARTICULAR OFFENSE, HE CAN SAY, I WANT TO GO UP TO THE MAXIMUM OF 1000, BECAUSE I'VE SEEN YOU IN MY COURT SO MANY TIMES. OKAY, THANK YOU MAYOR. SO, COUNCILMAN SAMUE, SO AM I HEARING CORRECTLY THAT, THE JUDGE STILL HAS DISCRETION TO WAIVE A FINE? THE JUDGE CAN WAIVE, FINES, AT HIS DISCRETION. 
          BECAUSE IF IN THE CASE OF FOR 48 ORLEANS, WHERE THE. BY THE TIME THE CASE WAS PRESENTED TO THE COURT, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAD ALREADY PULLED PERMITS. AND SO THE JUDGE, IN LIEU OF PURSUING, YOU KNOW, CRIMINAL CHARGES OR ASSESSING A FINE, SAID THAT I'M GOING TO ALLOW EXTENSIONS. FOR THE PROPERTY TO BE COMPLETED. THAT'S THE COURT STILL HAS DISCRETION IN DOING THAT. MAYOR. 
          YES COUNT, CITY MANAGER. YEAH. TYPICALLY COMPLIANCE IS WHAT YOU WANT TO ACHIEVE. MORE SO THAN GET FINES. COLLECT FINES, BUT TO HAVE A COMPLETE ENFORCEMENT DANGEROUS BUILDING, SUBSTANDARD BUILDING PROGRAM, MULTIPLE COURT FINES ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE A KEY PART OF THAT. THERE'S NO WAY AROUND IT, BECAUSE AT SOME POINT, SOME PEOPLE, IT'S CHEAPER TO PAY THE FINE THAN FOR COMPLIANCE. SO YOU'VE GOT TO THIS COUNCIL AT SOME POINT NEEDS TO HAVE A CONVERSATION, NOT INFLUENCE WITH YOUR MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE WHO IS YOUR EMPLOYEE THAT ANSWERS DIRECTLY TO YOU AND LET YOU KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THIS THIS PROGRAM IS. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT TO US. AND WELL-BEING AS OUR DOWNTOWN AND $250 FINES WILL NOT GET IT. YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO GET ATTENTION OF THE PEOPLE OF THESE BUSINESS OWNERS THAT, YOU KNOW, AS THEY SAY, YOU CAN FIND THEM $1,000 A DAY PER DAY PER VIOLATION. IF YOU WANT TO ADD A SMALL FINE, JUST, I'VE WORKED WITH THESE AND IT IT'S NOT EFFECTIVE. YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE ALL THREE PHASES. YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE. THEY CAN WORK AS HARD AS THEY CAN, BUT IF THEY'RE NOT GETTING, WHEN IT COMES TO COURT AND ENFORCEMENT CORPORATION, THEY'LL WORK THEMSELVES TO DEATH AND NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. SO AT SOME POINT YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION, NOT INFLUENCE, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T INFLUENCE A JUDGE. BUT LET THEM KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO THIS COUNCIL TO BE ABLE TO, FIND PEOPLE AND 
          [01:20:02]
GET THOSE, GET THEIR ATTENTION, TO MAKE THEM WANT TO COMPLY. YOU TALKED ABOUT DUE PROCESS. YOU KNOW, THAT STARTS WHEN THEY START THE BUILDING COULD SIT THERE THREE YEARS, BUT DUE PROCESS START WHEN WE START THAT PROCESS AND THEN THE CLOCK STARTS TO TICKING AND WE LOOK AT IT THROUGH THAT, LENS DEALS WITH TIMELINES. WHILE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL HAS SOME LATITUDE. A LOT OF THAT THOSE TIMELINES ARE DEFINED BY THE CODE SUBSTANDARD BUILDING CODE, DANGEROUS BUILDING CODES, YOU KNOW, GOT TO GIVE SO MANY DAYS AND IT GOT TO GO HAVE A HEARING TO YOU. IN THIS CASE, THINGS LIKE THAT. SO A LOT OF IT'S OUT OF THEIR HANDS AS FAR AS WHAT'S DEFINED, IT'S DEFINED BY THE CODE. BUT WE'VE GOT TO AT SOME POINT BE ABLE TO GET FINES THAT IMPACT THIS PROGRAM. RIGHT AND BECAUSE OF THE INTEREST OF THE COUNCIL, COULD WE LOOK AT, EVERY THIRD MEETING ABOUT EVERY SIX WEEKS, GET AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE ARE WITH THE DATES ON THERE SO THAT WE'LL KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY'RE AT THOSE THRESHOLDS. AND THAT WE CAN STAY UPDATED? I MEAN, CERTAINLY BRING IT TO US SOONER THAN THAT. IF YOU NEED TO, BUT THAT WAY WE CAN. IT GIVES YOU ALL SOME TIME BETWEEN AND TO SEE IF WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS OR, PROGRESS ISN'T BEING MADE AND ALSO HOW OUR COURT, SYSTEM IS ABLE TO MANAGE THAT. YES COUNCILMAN TURNER, MAYOR. MR. MAYOR, DO YOU THINK AT SOME POINT WE WOULD NEED TO SEE IT APPROPRIATE THAT WE DID PROBABLY GET OUR JUDGE ON THE AGENDA JUST TO DISCUSS IT AND SEE HIS THOUGHTS ABOUT THE DIRECTION WE'RE GOING IN. I WOULD RECOMMEND IT. YOU KNOW, THE JUDGE IS THE JUDGE, AND YOU CAN'T TELL THEM WHAT TO DO, BUT I THINK YOU NEED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AT LEAST KNOW WHAT HE'S THINKING AND HE CAN REPORT TO WHAT YOU WHAT HIS COURT'S DOING IN THIS SITUATION. WELL, JUST TO COUNCIL, I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE MOVE ON, THAT THIS IS JUST AS AGGRESSIVE AS WE'RE MOVING ON THESE FINES BECAUSE WE ALL NEED TO KIND OF BE ON THE SAME PAGE AND THE DIRECTION OF WHAT WE ACTUALLY DOING. AND, AND TO THAT MATTER, I AGREE. AND I THINK AS IT WAS MENTIONED ABOUT CLOGGING UP THE COURTS, WE WANT TO WE DON'T WANT TO DO SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES THEM TO MOVE SLOWER BECAUSE WE'RE OVERBURDENED THEM, THEM. SO MAYBE HE CAN YOU KNOW, THEY CAN PROVIDE SOME INSTRUCTION TO US BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO BE AS EFFECTIVE AT AS POSSIBLE, BECAUSE CLEARLY THERE'S A LOT OF FRUSTRATION ABOUT THIS. SO WE CAN IF WE CAN LOOK TO GET THAT ON THE AGENDA AS AVAILABLE. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE ON, WITH THE FIRST WORK SESSION? ALL RIGHT, MR. CITY MANAGER, WILL YOU TAKE US INTO THE SECOND WORKSTATION? YES, MAYOR. COUNCIL TO REVIEW AND DISCUSS HOMELESSNESS. AND ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER DEVELOPMENT, MR. CHRIS BOONE IS GOING TO LEAD THIS DISCUSSION. GOOD AFTERNOON. TINA, ALL RIGHT. SO THE PURPOSE OF TODAY'S WORK SESSION IS TO REVIEW AND DISCUSS HOMELESSNESS IN THE CITY, YOU MAY RECALL LAST YEAR WE HAD A SIMILAR WORKSHOP ON THIS ISSUE. AND AT THAT TIME, THE CITY WAS WRESTLING WITH HOW TO BASICALLY COMPLY WITH A RECENT STATE OF TEXAS LAW, WHICH AT THAT POINT PROHIBITS HOMELESS CAMPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY, THAT PUBLIC PROPERTY MIGHT INCLUDE PARKS MIGHT INCLUDE PUBLIC FACILITIES, MIGHT INCLUDE UNDERNEATH, HIGHWAY OVERPASSES, WHICH YOU MAY RECALL, WE HAD A LOT OF CAMPING HOMELESS CAMPING, UNDER THESE UNDERPASSES. SO YOU REMEMBER, WE MAY WE HAD A WORK SESSION ON THAT, AND SO BACK THEN WE LOOKED AT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS ON TRYING TO ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS NEXT. SO ONE ACTION WE TALKED ABOUT WAS NO ACTION. AND THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS, AS I THINK WE'VE SEEN, ESPECIALLY AS YOU STARTED TO SEE THE INTERSTATES AND HIGHWAYS CLEANED OUT, YOU STARTED TO SEE SOME WOODED AREAS IN OUR CITY ALONG RAILROADS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. A LOT OF CAMPS STARTED TO MOVE INTO, ACTUALLY INTO NEIGHBORHOODS. AND SO THE CONCERN WITH NO ACTION IS THAT THAT WOULD BE PERPETUATED. AND THERE OBVIOUSLY PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERNS, NOT TO MENTION THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, WHICH IN SOME CASES, YOU KNOW, MAY ONLY BE WITHIN 50FT OF SOME OF THESE CAMPS. AND SO YOU MAY RECALL, 
          [01:25:01]
WE'VE GOTTEN SOME COMPLAINTS ON AN ONGOING BASIS FROM SOME OF THESE NEIGHBORS. SO THAT WAS ONE OPTION, THOUGH IT STILL IS. SO ANOTHER OPTION WOULD BE, THAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME TOO, WOULD BE A CITY FUNDED PRIMITIVE OR SHELTER CAMP. AND SO IN THIS CASE, AGAIN, WE LOOKED AT IN SOME CITIES, SOME CITIES GOING BACK WERE JUST SIMPLY SETTING ASIDE A SPACE FOR CAMPS, WHAT WE CALL PRIMITIVE CAMPS. SO LIKE TENTS TO BE SET UP, THEY MIGHT HAVE SOME BATHROOM FACILITIES, SOME REST, SOME, CLEANING FACILITIES, BUT IT WOULD JUST BE A PLACE. AND WE ALSO LOOKED AT SOME PALLET HOUSING, WHICH ALLOWED FOR A LITTLE MORE STRUCTURED PLACEMENT. THE ISSUE WITH THIS OF COURSE, IS COST. THERE WAS THE INITIAL COST ESTIMATE OF ANYWHERE FROM 250,000 ON UP, NOT TO MENTION THE ONGOING OPERATING COSTS. BECAUSE IF THE CITY WERE TO SPONSOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS OF COURSE, THE CITY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT OPERATED PROPERLY, SAFELY, AND IN A, YOU KNOW, A PROPER PUBLIC HEALTH MANNER, AND SO THE ONGOING COST WAS AN ISSUE. THEN FINALLY, WE TALKED ABOUT HOW IN THE WAKE OF THAT TEXAS LAW, THE HB 1925, THE STATE STARTED TO REQUIRE THAT IF CITIES WERE TO SET UP THESE LOCATIONS, THAT THE STATE, THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO GET A PERMIT FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS TO OPERATE SUCH A FACILITY, WHICH REQUIRED A VARIETY OF AMENITIES, TO BE INCLUDED IN TERMS OF ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE, ACCESS TO TRANSIT, CLEANING AND WASHING FACILITIES, ETC, AND SO THAT WAS ANOTHER OPTION THAT WE LOOKED AT AS WELL. NEXT PLEASE. AND THIS IS JUST SOME HEADLINES I SHARED, I THINK LAST, LAST TIME WHERE CITIES THAT HAD BEEN SETTING UP THESE ESTABLISHED KIND OF SANCTIONED CAMPS WERE REALLY STRUGGLING WITH THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THESE CAMPS IN SOME CASES. WELL, ISSUES OF MANAGEMENT WERE CERTAINLY AN ISSUE IN SOME CASES, CITIES WOULD SET UP THESE CAMPS, BUT NO ONE WAS TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE BENEFITS THAT WERE PROVIDED FOR THEM. IN FACT, SOME CITIES YOU'D HAVE FOLKS THAT DIDN'T LIKE THE RULES THAT WERE ASSOCIATED WITH THESE CAMPS, SO THEY WOULD SET UP AROUND THE CAMPS. SO YOU HAD SOME CITIES THAT WERE SETTING UP THOUSAND FOOT BUFFERS AROUND THE CAMPS, JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO MANAGE THOSE THOSE ISSUES. NEXT SO ANOTHER OPTION WE LOOKED AT AND AGAIN CONTINUED TO LOOK AT TODAY WOULD BE A NO CAMPING ORDINANCE. THIS THIS OPTION AGAIN, WHEN WE LAST LOOKED DISCUSSED A NO CAMPING ORDINANCE, WE WERE REALLY IN THE MIDST OF AN OUTSTANDING, CASE AT THE SUPREME COURT LEVEL, AND SO A LOT OF STATES AND CITIES WERE HOLDING OFF ON A NO CAMPING ORDINANCE OR AT LEAST ENFORCING ONE UNTIL THAT DECISION WAS WAS MADE, WHICH WAS MADE ABOUT A MONTH, ABOUT SIX WEEKS AGO. NOW, THAT WAS THE CITY OF GRANTS PASS, OREGON, VERSUS JOHNSON. AND YOU MAY BE AWARE OF THAT CASE THAT THE CITY OF GRANTS PASS, OREGON, DID PREVAIL IN THAT CASE. AND IT DOES NOW ALLOW CITIES, ESPECIALLY IN THE NINTH DISTRICT, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH TRYING TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH, WITHIN THEIR CITIES AND SO MANY CITIES. AND NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, TINA, AGAIN, JUST A COUPLE OF HEADLINES WHERE YOU SEE CITIES LIKE SAN FRANCISCO THAT HAVE TRADITIONALLY BEEN MUCH MORE LIBERAL, IN THESE REGARDS, AS WELL AS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND OTHER STATES AND CITIES ARE NOW BEGINNING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH TRYING TO ADDRESS WHAT SEEMS TO BE A GROWING AND COMPLICATED PROBLEM, SO WHERE IT BRINGS US BACK HERE TODAY AGAIN, AFTER CITY OF GRANTS PASSED DECISION IS WHAT SHOULD WE DO AS THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. AND SO AGAIN OFFERING UP THESE OPTIONS AGAIN NO ACTION DEVELOP SOME KIND OF CAMP AND THEN FINALLY WOULD BE A NO CAMPING ORDINANCE. 
          I HAVE HANDED OUT A DRAFT. ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU, JUST FOR CONSIDERATION. OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE NOT ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER THAT OR VOTE ON IT TODAY, BUT THE IDEA BEHIND A NO CAMPING ORDINANCE WOULD BE TO, ESSENTIALLY PROHIBIT PUBLIC CAMPING. THE DEFINITION OF WHICH IS TAKEN LARGELY OUT OF THE STATE'S DEFINITION OF WHAT CAMPING IS, OR A CAMP. THE IDEA BEHIND THIS ORDINANCE WOULD BE TO, FIRST AND FOREMOST PUT THE ONUS OF ENFORCEMENT ON THE 
          [01:30:02]
PROPERTY OWNER, TO PROHIBIT THIS FROM HAPPENING. THIS MIGHT BE DONE THROUGH A NO TRESPASS WARRANT, FROM THE PUBLIC PROPERTY OR FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER. IF THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS, ENDORSING THE CAMPING ON THEIR PROPERTY, THEN THEY TOO COULD BE SUBJECT TO, A VIOLATIO. 
          AND AGAIN, THE WAY WE WOULD HANDLE THIS IS STAFF IS WE WOULD CERTAINLY NOTIFY THE PROPERTY OWNER IN WRITING, WE WOULD ALSO NOTIFY ANY OCCUPANTS OF THE PROPERTY IN A VARIETY OF WAYS THAT MIGHT INCLUDE HANDING OUT FLIERS. I A LOT OF CITIES PUT OUT SIGNS 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE TO LET FOLKS KNOW THAT CAMPING IS NOT ALLOWED, AND ALSO, WE WOULD ASK OUR ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AS WELL AS OUR PEACE OFFICERS TO INFORM THE INDIVIDUALS, OF THE AVAILABILITY OF SHELTERS. SO THE SALVATION ARMY WITHIN OUR CITY HAS ABOUT 60 BEDS, 65 BEDS, FAMILY SERVICES HAS ABOUT 24 BEDS. AND DISCUSSING THE AVAILABILITY OF THOSE BEDS ON A REGULAR BASIS. FAMILY SERVICES IS USUALLY AT ABOUT AN 88% OCCUPANCY RATE. AND THEN IN DISCUSSION WITH THE SALVATION ARMY, THE FEEDBACK WE'VE GOTTEN FROM THEM IS THAT THEIR THEIR FACILITIES ARE NEVER FULL. SO AT THIS POINT, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE IS AVAILABILITY FOR THESE FOLKS TO GO. SO AGAIN, OUR ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AS WELL AS OUR PEACE OFFICERS WOULD BE ASKED TO LET THOSE FOLKS KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME FACILITIES OUT THERE. ALSO, YOU NOTICED ON TODAY'S AGENDA THAT WE'RE STILL WORKING WITH LEGACY CDC TO TRY TO DEVELOP A NON-CONGREGATE SHELTER, WHICH COULD HELP OUT IN THIS EFFORT IN THE COMING IN THE COMING MONTHS. AND YEARS. AND THEN ALSO, WE HAVE TAKEN A TOUR, ALTHOUGH WHILE IT'S NOT IN THE CITY PROPER, THE DREAM CENTER CENTER IS JUST SOUTH OF OUR CITY LIMIT, AND THAT IS A VERY IMPRESSIVE OPERATION DOWN THERE. AND AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO REFER FOLKS TO. SO AGAIN, WHERE WE ARE TODAY IS JUST LOOKING AT THOSE THREE OPTIONS, AND NEXT STEPS WOULD BE FOR COUNCIL TO TRY TO GIVE US SOME GUIDANCE, SOME FEEDBACK, APPROVE ANY NEEDED ORDINANCES IN THE NEAR FUTURE, IF THAT IS THE DESIRE OF THE COUNCIL AND THEN BEGINNING IMPLEMENTATION, INCLUDING BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS FOR FY 25. COUNCILMAN TURNER, ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS, I SEE WE WERE PRESENTED WITH A DRAFT OF THE OF A POSSIBILITY OF A NO CAMPING ORDINANCE. BUT ONE THING I'VE SEEN SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL THAT'S BEEN PRETTY CONSISTENT IS IF PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS ALLOW YOU KNOW, CAMPING TO GO ON ON THEIR PROPERTIES. I JUST WANT SOME CLARITY ON HOW THAT WOULD WORK. I KNOW YOU TOUCHED ON IT, BUT YOU CAN HAVE SOMEBODY WHO HAS A PROPERTY IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEY ALLOW IT. 
          YOU KNOW, IT HAPPENS. AND IT'S BEEN THAT CASE SOMETIMES IN BEAUMONT. YES, SIR. AND WE KNOW WITH THOSE EXIST RIGHT NOW, TODAY. AND SO THE IDEA WOULD BE TO GIVE THE PROPERTY OWNER, BECAUSE IN SOME CASES THEY DON'T EVEN LIVE IN THE CITY. GIVE THAT PROPERTY OWNER WRITTEN NOTICE. 
          BUT THEN AGAIN, ALSO THE OCCUPANTS, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, COMMUNICATE WITH THEM, GIVE THEM INFORMATION ON WHERE THEY COULD GO. WE COULD PUT OUT SIGNS, COULD PASS OUT FLIERS THAT, YOU KNOW, ENFORCEMENT OR SWEEPS WILL BE BEGINS SOON. AND THEN THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE AGAIN, YOU COULD FILE ON THE OWNER, TO IN MUNICIPAL COURT TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE. BUT I THINK THE BEST THING TO DO IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT WOULD BE ONGOING SWEEPS. SO AGAIN, LETTING FOLKS KNOW, GIVING THEM AMPLE NOTICE THAT WE WOULD BE COMING IN, AND THEN ABATING THOSE PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES. YEAH. THIS THIS ORDINANCE ADDRESSES PRIVATE PROPERTY. YES, SIR. PRIVATE AND PUBLIC, COUNCILMAN NEAL, I'D BE IN FAVOR OF VOTING FOR THIS. NO CAMPING ORDINANCE. NEXT MEETING. 
          MAYOR COUNCILMAN GOETZ. SO WOULD I. COUNCILMAN FALLSHAW JUST TO CLARIFY, JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY, AND MY REASON FOR ASKING THIS QUESTION IS BECAUSE, I THINK IT WAS THOMAS JEFFERSON WHO SAID YOU MEASURE A SOCIETY BY HOW IT TREATS ITS WEAKEST PEOPLE, I'VE ALWAYS WANTED TO APPROACH THIS ISSUE WITH COMPASSION, BUT YET IT'S AN ISSUE THAT HAS TO BE ADDRESSED FOR ALL THE CITIZENS. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU FEEL THERE ARE ENOUGH BEDS, THEY ARE EMPTY BEDS IN BEAUMONT TO ACCOMMODATE OUR HOMELESS. OUR HOMELESS GROUP DEMOGRAPHIC, BUT THEY'RE JUST NOT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF IT BECAUSE I'VE ALWAYS HAD A QUESTION OF HOW MANY, HOW MANY HOMELESS DO WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE IN BEAUMONT? WHAT'S THE COUNT AND HOW MANY BEDS ARE AVAILABLE? YES, SIR. SO THE LATEST COUNT WAS THE POINT IN TIME COUNT, EARLIER THIS 
          [01:35:04]
YEAR, AND WE AND THE COUNT DID COME BACK AT JUST OVER 400 UNSHELTERED. SO THAT IS A GOOD AMOUNT OF FOLKS. AS MENTIONED, IF YOU DON'T INCLUDE THE DREAM CENTER, WE HAVE ABOUT 100 BEDS LOCALLY. SO THAT'S YOU KNOW, YOU'RE AT A 25% RATIO. SOME CITIES AND STATES HAVE HIGHER RATIOS, BUT MOST DON'T HAVE A 1 TO 1. TO YOUR POINT, IT IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE. I, WE THROUGH WE THE CITY THROUGH OUR CDBG FUNDS THAT WE GET I MENTIONED THE HOME ARP MONEY THAT WE RECEIVED AND ARE TRYING TO GET THAT OUT. WE DO PARTICIPATE IN THE SOUTHEAST TEXAS HOMELESS COALITION. WE HAVE A HOMELESS MAYOR'S HOMELESS COMMISSION. AS YOU ALL KNOW, IT'S A COMPLICATED ISSUE. AND SO WE TRY TO HELP THE NONPROFITS THAT ARE DOING THAT GOOD WORK TO TRY TO HELP. AND I AND THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION, IS WE CONTINUE TO BE AGGRESSIVE IN TRYING TO FIND SOURCES OF FUNDING TO TRY TO HELP THOSE NON-PROFITS, AND WE'VE DONE THAT FOR YEARS, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT. I WILL SAY THAT BEAUMONT IS AT A DISADVANTAGE BECAUSE WE ARE YOU KNOW, THE HOUSTON'S OF THE WORLD AND THE AUSTIN'S AND EVEN SOME SMALLER CITIES IN OUR STATE. THEY GET DIRECT FUNDING FOR HOMELESS. AND WE DO NOT WE HAVE TO COMPETE WITH ABOUT 200 OTHER COUNTIES. 
          SO OUR OUR FUNDING IS LIMITED, BUT I ALWAYS SAY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THIS ENDS IT ENDS UP AT THE FOOT STEPS OF CITIES. BUT CITIES DO NOT REALLY HAVE THEY'RE NOT IN A GOOD POSITION TO TRY TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM. I ALWAYS THINK IT IS A STATE AND FEDERAL ISSUE. WE JUST DO NOT HAVE THE FUNDING. BUT I DO THINK THAT THAT'S THE BEST THING TO DO IS KEEP PURSUING THAT FUNDING AND TRY TO GET THAT TO OUR LOCAL NONPROFITS AND I AND I UNDERSTAND THAT EVEN IF WE HAD ONE FOR ONE, THERE'S A THERE'S A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THAT DEMOGRAPHIC YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO GET THEM INTO FACILITY BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO BE IN THESE FACILITIES THAT HAVE RULES AND REQUIREMENTS. AND SO I GET IT THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO WANT TO GO IN THERE. BUT YOU'RE SAYING RIGHT NOW OUR BEDS THAT ARE AVAILABLE WERE NOT FULL. THAT'S THAT'S THE REPORTING WE'RE GETTING FROM SALVATION ARMY. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN TURNER AND COUNCILMAN GAETZ, ONE OF MY QUESTIONS I KNOW WE HAVE A HOMELESS COALITION, BUT I'M JUST REALLY INTERESTED TO SEE THE PERSPECTIVE. DID YOU DISCUSS THIS WITH THE ACTUAL MEMBERS OF THE COALITION, THE MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COALITION AND SUPPORT WITH THE DIRECTION, BECAUSE, I MEAN, IN MY OPINION, A LOT OF THESE PEOPLE WHO DO THIS DAILY ARE WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE EXPERTS IN REFERENCE TO IT. SO HAVE WE GOT FEEDBACK FROM THE PARTICIPANTS AND THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY DO IT DAILY? YES, SIR. SO WE'VE BEEN MEETING THAT COALITION HAS BEEN MEETING FOR MULTIPLE YEARS NOW. AND THIS THIS SAME CONVERSATION IS WHAT WE HAVE AT THOSE MEETINGS. AND WE'RE STRUGGLING, WE'VE TALKED IN THE PAST ABOUT A CAMPING ORDINANCE, AND IF THAT'S THE COUNCIL'S DESIRE, WE CAN CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, BRING IT TO THEM BEFORE WE BRING IT BACK TO Y'ALL. BUT IT THE FRUSTRATIONS THAT WE'RE HAVING HERE TODAY, THAT'S WHAT THAT I KNOW. COUNCILMAN GETS SERVED AS THAT CHAIRMAN FOR MANY FOR A LONG TIME. AND IT'S THE SAME KIND OF DISCUSSION AS TO NO SIMPLE ANSWER, BUT, COUNCILMAN GAETZ. WELL, I SAID A MINUTE AGO, IT'S I WOULD SUPPORT THE NO CAMPING ORDINANCE, AND I DO, I WOULD PROPOSE A HYBRID WITH THE PRIMITIVE CAMP BEING AN OPTION BECAUSE WHAT YOU JUST SAID IS TRUE. THERE ARE SOME THAT WILL NOT GO TO A SHELTER, AND THEY ARE GOING TO WANT TO CAMP. SO ONE ALTERNATIVE, I GUESS, IS THEY WILL FIND YOU'RE JUST NOT GOING TO DO IT IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. THAT'S CERTAINLY AN OPTION. ANOTHER OPTION MIGHT BE TO ALLOW SOME SORT OF PRIMITIVE BOY SCOUT STYLE CAMPING ON LAND THAT THE CITY OWNS. YES THERE WILL BE, MONETARY OUTLAY FOR THAT. MAYBE THERE'S SOME GRANT FUNDING THAT CAN HELP OFFSET SOME OF THAT. BUT DOES THE CITY OWN LAND? THAT WOULD BE SUITABLE FOR A PRIMITIVE CAMP THAT IS AWAY FROM RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND BUSINESS CORRIDORS? SO WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS ABOUT A YEAR AGO, WE TOOK AGAIN, I MENTIONED IT EARLY THIS EARLIER, THE STATE TDCA TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, AS A RESULT OF HB 1925, HAS WHAT'S CALLED A HOMELESS INDIVIDUAL CAMPING PLAN HIKE, BASICALLY IT IT AS I MENTIONED, 
          [01:40:03]
IT'S A PERMIT THAT ALLOWS CITIES TO OPERATE SUCH A CAMP AS LONG AS THEY GET A PERMIT AND PROVIDE THE CERTAIN AMENITIES THAT ARE OUTLINED IN THIS, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WE DID LOOK AT SOME POSSIBLE SITES AND, YOU KNOW, WE FEEL LIKE THERE MIGHT BE SOME POSSIBLE SITES. THE CONCERN, THOUGH, IS THE COST, NOT JUST THE INITIAL COST, WHICH WE DID INCLUDE IN THE BUDGET THIS YEAR TO TRY TO GET THAT STARTED. BUT IT'S THE ONGOING COST. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWED THAT PICTURE OF A PRIMITIVE CAMP, THAT THE CITY WAS OPERATING? IT WAS KEEP GOING. 
          THERE'S. YEAH, THERE SOMETHING LIKE THAT NOW, SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS KIND OF WHAT I'M ENVISIONING. AND, YOU KNOW, SURPRISINGLY, SOMETHING LIKE THAT'S GOING TO COST MORE THAN YOU MIGHT THINK IT WOULD. BUT YOU KNOW, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE US AT LEAST CONSIDER AS PART OF THIS SOLUTION, BECAUSE, I KNOW THAT SOME OF THE PEOPLE WILL NOT GO THERE AND WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH BEDS FOR 400 PEOPLE IN OUR SHELTERS. SO IF THEY DO START TAKING ADVANTAGE OF IT, IF WE ENFORCE A NO CAMPING BAN, THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO SOMEWHERE, RIGHT? THEY'RE EITHER IF THEY'RE IF THEY'RE TOLD BY A POLICE OFFICER, YOU CAN'T CAMP HERE. I KNOW IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY. AND THE GUY SAID YOU COULD I'M TELLING YOU, YOU CAN'T BECAUSE THE CITY COUNCIL SAYING YOU CAN'T. AND THERE ARE QUESTIONS. 
          WE OKAY, WHERE AM I SUPPOSED TO GO? WELL, THE ANSWER IS GOING TO BE EITHER TO A SHELTER OR OUTSIDE THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, OR IF WE IMPLEMENT A PRIMITIVE CAMPING, FACILITY LIKE THIS, THAT WOULD BE A THIRD ALTERNATIVE, I WOULD NOT WANT THE CITY TO HAVE TO BE IN A POSITION TO OPERATE SOMETHING LIKE THIS. ALTHOUGH A 24 OVER SEVEN. PRESENCE WOULD BE REQUIRED. THIS IS WHERE IT WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR SOME OF THESE NON-PROFITS THAT ARE VERY INVOLVED IN THE HOMELESS COMMUNITY TO STEP UP, AND SOME HAVE SAID THEY WOULD, TO BE WILLING TO OPERATE A PRIMITIVE CAMPSITE LIKE THAT. AND I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, SINCE YOU'RE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION, IS THERE AN APPETITE FROM ANYBODY ELSE ON COUNCIL TO EXPLORE THIS? AND IF NOT, WE JUST GO WITH THE FLAT OUT NO CAMPING, ORDINANCE. AND THAT'S THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. 
          COUNCILMAN FALLSHAW, I DON'T LIKE THIS QUESTION, BUT I AS A COUNCIL, WE ALWAYS HAVE TO ASK IT, IT'S. BUT I'M ASSUMING, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A FACILITY LIKE THIS OR AN OPPORTUNITY LIKE THIS TO HELP OUR HOMELESS COMMUNITY, BUT I'M ASSUMING WITH THE EXPENSE OF THE COST. THERE'S EXPOSURE TO LIABILITY. CITY ATTORNEY. AMEN. I CAN TELL BY THE SMILE ON YOUR FACE. SO WITH ANY VENTURE, THERE'S GOING TO BE A LEVEL OF LIABILITY IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, YOU WOULD NOT BE ACTING ESSENTIALLY, YOU WOULDN'T BE AFFORDED ALL OF YOUR PROTECTIONS THAT THE CITY GOVERNMENT USUALLY HAS. IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SO ONCE YOU CREATE THIS FACILITY THERE, THERE ARE SOME RESTRICTIONS TO THE STATE OF TEXAS IMPOSED THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO ACCESS TO TRANSIT ACCESS. TO HEALTH CARE AND AMENITIES. WE'D HAVE TO ENSURE THAT. BUT ALSO, ESSENTIALLY, WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY OF THE INDIVIDUALS INSIDE THE CAMP. SO SO WE WOULD NEED TO PROVIDE SOME TYPE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT. YOU WOULD NEED TO PROVIDE SOME TYPE OF SECURITY AND PROTECTION. YES SIMILAR TO WHEN WE ESTABLISH, SHELTERS DURING THE STORM, WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE IN OUR SHELTER. WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR SAFETY. WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR CARE. THERE WILL BE NO DIFFERENT IN THIS IN THIS SITUATION. WELL I'M SAYING NO DIFFERENCE IN THIS SITUATION. OBVIOUSLY, THEY CAN COME AND GO AND EGRESS, BUT WE WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR SAFETY. AND WE ARE WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT, THAT WAS PROVIDED. WELL, THERE'S WAYS AROUND THAT. NO, THE STATE OF TEXAS REQUIRES SECURITY. IF YOU CONTRACT WITH A NONPROFIT AND PASS THAT RESPONSIBILITY ON TO THE NONPROFIT THAT IS OPERATING THE SITE, TO PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF PROTECTION, THEN THAT BECOMES INCUMBENT UPON THE NONPROFIT THAT'S DOING IT. YOU KNOW, ARE THEY STILL GOING TO SUE THE CITY? THE ANSWER IS YES, SURE. THEY'RE GOING TO SUE THE CITY, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO SPEND SOME MONEY TO GET OUT OF IT, PROBABLY. SO, WILL INSURANCES BE INVOLVED AND ATTACHED? ABSOLUTELY, THE QUESTION WASN'T ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD BE COMPLETELY ISOLATED. IT WOULD WE 
          [01:45:03]
BE EXPOSED. SO THE SHORT ANSWER TO A VERY LONG, DRAWN OUT LEGAL CONCLUSION WOULD BE YES, THE AND THE EASIEST ANSWER IS TO NOT DO IT. AND MY QUESTION WAS, IS THERE ANY, HE'S AND, YOU KNOW, JUST HAVE NO CAMPING ANYWHERE IN THE CITY. SO BUT MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE AN APPETITE FROM ANYBODY ON COUNCIL, TO LOOK AT OPTION NUMBER TWO? AND IF THERE'S NOT, IT DOESN'T HURT MY FEELINGS. I MEAN, THAT'S I JUST WANT TO KNOW. BUT I GUESS I WANT TO BE FAIR TO, TO COUNCILMAN FELSHER ON THAT QUESTION. AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT, THAT HE WAS ASKING WHETHER TO SAY NOT TO DO IT. I THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME, SOME, SOME TEMPLATES AND SOME CITIES WHO'VE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN HAVING ALTERNATIVE WHAT THEY CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE CAMPING, ALTERNATIVE SHELTER SITES, AND THE STRUCTURE, WHAT IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO IS HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU WANT TO SPEND? WELL, AND THAT GOES BACK TO JUST I NEEDING INFORMATION BECAUSE IT'S CALCULATED RISK IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU THE EXPOSURE YOU WANT TO MITIGATE IT THE BEST YOU CAN LIMIT IT THE BEST YOU CAN. THEN YOU MAKE YOUR DECISION IF YOU WANT TO DO IT OR NOT. BUT I JUST THINK THIS COUNCIL NEEDS TO BE FULLY AWARE OF WHAT WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING AT AND THAT EXPOSURE THAT THIS WILL BRING, BECAUSE AS I SAID, I'VE ALWAYS WANTED TO APPROACH THIS ISSUE WITH COMPASSION, BUT YET HAVE A HAVING A RESPONSIBILITY TO ALL THE CITIZENS AND TO THE CITY ITSELF TO PROTECT IT FROM ANY FINANCIAL EXPOSURE TO SOME MAJOR LAWSUIT. SO IT'S OPERATING COSTS. AND I CAN JUMP IN. BUT WE'VE WE'VE RESEARCHED THIS TO NAUSEAM, BUT THE CITY OF HOUSTON HAS A HOUSING FIRST INITIATIVE. 
          AND AT THE LOWEST TIME IN INFLATION, THEY WERE AVERAGING A MILLION PLUS TO OPERATE THAT, AND SO THEY'RE HOUSING FIRST DOESN'T HAVE ANY SCREENING PROCESSES. IF YOU ARE HOMELESS AND YOU NEED A PLACE TO STAY, THEY PUT YOU IN THEIR PROCESS AND THEY, THEY, THEY PUT YOU IN, HOUSING. THEY IF YOU IF YOU'RE ABLE TO WORK, THEY HELP YOU FIND WORK. IF YOU'RE NOT AND THEY DON'T, THEY HELP YOU FIND YOUR BENEFITS. BUT THEY HAVE APPROXIMATELY, 4 OR 5 FULL TIME STAFF MEMBERS AND THE REST ARE KIND OF CONTRACTED. THEY HAVE THESE CONTRACT SERVICES THROUGH THEIR NONPROFIT AGENCIES. BUT THAT THAT MILLION DOLLARS IN OPERATING VERY LOW PERCENTAGE, MAYBE LESS THAN 5% FOR SALARIES OF THOSE EMPLOYEES, EVERYTHING ELSE WAS PURELY AROUND HOUSING, AND SERVICES THAT THEY WERE PROVIDING. MR. BOONE, MAYBE I UNDERLYING DID I PICK UP ON THAT YOUR YOUR FEELING IS THAT THIS TYPE OF AN ISSUE IN OUR COMMUNITY REALLY NEEDS TO FALL ON THE SHOULDERS PRIMARILY OF NONPROFITS THAT THE GOVERNMENT REALLY WE'RE NOT GOOD AT. WE'RE NOT GEARED UP FOR THIS OR WE'RE NOT GOOD AT IT. AND TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S POINT TO GET BETTER, A LITTLE BETTER AT IT, LIKE THE HOUSTON, WHICH HAS BEEN HELD OUT AS KIND OF A GOOD EXAMPLE, ALTHOUGH YOU CAN GO THROUGH DOWNTOWN HOUSTON AND SEE IT'S NOT PERFECT RIGHT TODAY. AND THAT IS IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE. IT IS BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO IT'S NOT JUST SHELTER. IT IS. YOU'VE GOT TO SURROUND SOME OF THESE FOLKS WITH A LOT OF SERVICES, WHICH MEANS CASEWORKERS, WHICH MEANS NONPROFITS. THE CONSTELLATION OF WHICH THAT HOUSTON HAS. WE DON'T HAVE, YOU LOOK AT PERMIT, YOU LOOK AT INTERIM HOUSING, YOU LOOK AT PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING WHERE YOU'VE GOT IT'S NOT JUST AN APARTMENT WHERE YOU CAN GIVE SOMEBODY THE KEYS. IT'S GOT TO BE A WHOLE BUNCH OF SERVICES AROUND IT. AND THEY, THEY, THEY'RE ABLE TO DO MAKE PROGRESS OVER THERE AND THEN IT AND THEN IT'S OTHER HOUSING. SO IT'S JUST VERY EXPENSIVE. AND SO AGAIN AND WHAT HE'S NOT SAYING IS THAT WE HAVE 400 NOW. BUT ONCE WE HAVE AN INITIATIVE TO PROVIDE SERVICES, THAT 400 BECOMES 800 BECOMES A THOUSAND. AND BEFORE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A MUCH BIGGER POPULATION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO HOUSE AND THAT JUST KIND OF UPS THE COST. AND I THINK THAT THAT WAS THAT'S THAT'S A VERY THAT'S A VERY HARD THING TO ADMIT. BUT HOUSTON STARTED OFF WITH A VERY CONTAINED HOMELESS PROBLEM AND THERE'S NO END IN SIGHT TO THE TUNNEL TO THEIR HOUSING FIRST PROGRAM, BECAUSE EVERY DAY THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE GETTING OFF THE BUS IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON AND COMING TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON BECAUSE THEY HEARD THAT THERE WAS FREE HOUSING THERE. AND TO THAT POINT, WE ARE ON A WE'RE ON A DISADVANTAGE BECAUSE WE ARE ON I-10, WHICH IS A CORRIDOR. AND SO WE ARE ON IN THE SUNBELT. SO THE CLIMATE'S A LITTLE BIT BETTER THAN SOME PARTS OF THE COUNTRY. SO, YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, I THINK BECAUSE OF WELL, I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT, COUNCILMAN NEILL THANK YOU MAYOR. SO BACK TO COUNCILMAN GOETZ'S QUESTION. YOU KNOW, I 
          [01:50:04]
COULDN'T SUPPORT THE PRIMITIVE CAMP, THE SIMPLE FACT THAT THE FACILITIES THAT WE HAVE NOW ARE NEVER FULL. AND SO I THINK UNTIL YOU HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WHAT WE HAVE NOW IS FULL, WHY WOULD YOU DO WHY WOULD YOU DO MORE, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO USE IT, I THINK, TO COUNCILMAN NEAL'S POINT. I'M SORRY. REAL QUICK, PART OF WHAT WE ALSO WERE TALKING ABOUT, AND I DIDN'T INCLUDE IT IN MY IN MY PRESENTATION, BUT WAS TO STAY IN COMMUNICATION WITH SALVATION ARMY AND FAMILY SERVICES AND HOPEFULLY LEGACY IF THEY GET UP AND AS WELL AS THE DREAM CENTER AND IF THEY EVER GET TO THAT POINT WHERE THEY'RE AT 100% AND THEY NEED HELP, MORE HELP IN MY OPINION. AGAIN, LET'S TRY TO GET THEM SOME DOLLARS TO EXPAND THEIR OPERATIONS BECAUSE THEY'RE A LOT BETTER AT THIS THAN I THINK WE WOULD BE. AND THE ONLY THING I WAS GOING TO SAY, COUNCILMAN, IS WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE THOSE THAT JUST WILL NOT USE A FACILITY, EVEN IF IT'S AVAILABLE AND NOT NOT YOU KNOW, THEY JUST WON'T DO IT. SO, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY ONE SOLUTION IS, OKAY, WELL, HERE'S A TICKET TO HOUSTON. YOU GO OVER THERE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S. YEAH, THAT'S THE WAY THEY USED TO DO IT. YOU KNOW, WE JUST BUY THEM A TICKET AND THEY'D BE SENT OUT. SO, COUNCILMAN SAMUEL, SO I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. WHAT ARE WE SAYING WITH THIS PROPOSED CAMPING, ORDINANCE, HOW IS WHAT DO WE EXPECT TO HAPPEN TO AREAS LIKE OFF OF CABLE AND OFF OF CONCORD, WHERE THERE ARE SOME OF THESE VACANT LOTS? ARE BECOMING CAMPS, WHAT'S HAPPENING THERE, IS THAT HOW ARE THEY GOING TO BE PROHIBITED? MOVED WHERE THEY WHERE THEY'RE GOING IS ONE ISSUE, WE ALSO LOOKING AT, THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT. AND, JAIL. ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE BECOME A PART OF THIS, THIS WHOLE, ISSUE. AND I HOPE WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT. I CAN'T SAY I CAN'T SUPPORT THE PRIMITIVE SHELTER CAMP. NOT BECAUSE OF MY INHUMANE FEELING, BUT I'M. I'VE UNDERSTOOD THAT MANY OF THOSE THAT ARE HOMELESS ARE NOT WILLING TO GO INTO FACILITIES. SO ARE WE REALLY RESOLVING THAT ISSUE OR ARE WE MAKING IT? I JUST NEED TO HEAR MORE ABOUT HOW WE'RE HOW THIS IS GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED, HOW WE'RE GOING TO DEAL WITH MY CONCERN. AND THE ELEPHANT THAT'S IN THE ROOM, WHERE IS IT GOING TO BE? SO I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO DEAL WITH THIS AND HOW IS IT GOING TO BE EQUITABLE, FOR ALL? AND ARE WE GOING TO OVERTAX ANY OTHER, ANY PARTICULAR AREAS OF OUR CITY AND JUST FROM HAVING BEEN A PART OF THE US CONFERENCE OF MAYORS AND GOTTEN TO BE IN SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS AND ONLINE DISCUSSIONS, YOU KNOW, MY CONCERN IS WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE ISN'T A TRUE REFLECTION OF WHAT THESE PRIMITIVE CAMPS LOOK LIKE. BECAUSE FIRST OF ALL, THERE'S GOING TO BE THREE PRIMITIVE CAMPS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO EXCLUDE ANY SEXUAL OFFENDERS FROM ANY CAMP, AND THEN YOU HAVE TO EXCLUDE CHILDREN FROM CAMP. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT THREE DIFFERENT CAMPS AT A MINIMUM. AND, AND FROM THE CONVERSATIONS THAT I'VE HAD, I HAVE YET TO HAVE A SINGLE CONVERSATION WITH A MAYOR FROM ACROSS THIS COUNTRY THAT RECOMMENDS PRIMITIVE CAMPS THAT THEY HAVEN'T HAD SUCCESS, AND THE COST AND LIABILITY FROM BEDBUGS TO EVERYTHING ELSE HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT. AND IT IS AN ONGOING PROBLEM. AND AGAIN, NOT EVEN GETTING THEM FULL. IT'S CAPACITY HASN'T BEEN AN ISSUE BECAUSE YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE RULES LIKE THE SALVATION ARMY OR OTHERS, THAT WHEN PEOPLE ARE COMING INTO THESE CAMPS TO KEEP PEOPLE SAFE BECAUSE YOU ARE ASSUMING TO BE PROVIDING PROTECTION TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THESE CAMPS. SO I WHAT WE'RE COMING UP WITH IS THIS IS AN EXTREMELY DIFFICULT ISSUE, BUT I, I WOULD SURE HATE FOR THE CITY TO COMMIT TO SPENDING A LOT OF TAXPAYER FUNDS THAT WE DON'T HAVE ON SOMETHING THAT WE CAN SHOW NO EVIDENCE OF BEING SUCCESSFUL ANYWHERE IN THIS COUNTRY. SO THAT AND RIGHT NOW, 
          [01:55:06]
IGNORING THE FACT THAT WE HAVE HOMELESSNESS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS THAT IS AFFECTING PROPERTY VALUES AND AFFECTING PEOPLE, FEELING COMFORTABLE LETTING SOME OF THEIR KIDS OUT TO PLAY, I THINK WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT AS WELL. AND CURRENTLY WE HAVEN'T BEEN ADDRESSING IT. SO I THINK NO ACTION BY THIS COUNCIL IS FAILING OUR PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE PAYING PROPERTY TAXES AND EXPECT A DEGREE OF SAFETY. AND SO I WOULD I WOULD CERTAINLY PROPOSE THAT WE TAKE ACTION. I KNOW THAT CHRIS ROBERTSON HAS TAKEN OVER THE CHAIR OF THE HOMELESS COALITION. THEY NOW HAVE UNDER THEIR ROOF AT HENRY'S PLACE, SEVERAL CASE MANAGERS. 
          THEY HAVE MADE GREAT SUCCESS IN TRANSITIONING PEOPLE OUT OF HOMELESSNESS THAT ARE INTERESTED IN BEING HOMELESS. AND I'M SURE HE THEY ARE TRACKING THOSE AND THEY HAVE PROVIDED THEM AT THE HOMELESS. COALITION. AND I THINK, AS I KNOW MYSELF, WE WANT TO HELP ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO HELP THEMSELVES OR AND PROVIDE THEM SERVICES TO, WHETHER IT'S MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES, ADDICTION, TRANSITIONING SERVICES, WORK, PLACEMENT. BUT FOR THOSE THAT JUST WANT TO LIVE OFF THE GRID IN OUR CITY THAT'S AFFECTING OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS, I THINK WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO THEM AS WELL. SO IT IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE. BUT, I DON'T I JUST HATE FOR US TO TAKE NO STEP AT ALL AT THIS POINT. COUNCILMAN GAETZ. OKAY. SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS OPTION ONE IS NOT AN OPTION. WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING. THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE AN APPETITE FOR OPTION TWO, FROM ANY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER. NOBODY HAS, EMBRACED THAT. SO THAT'S OFF THE TABLE. THAT LEAVES OPTION THREE. SO MY QUESTION TO YOU, CHRIS, IS DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE DIRECTION? YES, SIR. OKAY. COUNCILMAN TURNER. YEAH, I ACTUALLY AM OPEN TO MULTIPLE OPTIONS. AS COUNCIL MEMBER GAETZ SAID, I WAS WHEN WE BROUGHT IT FORWARD THE FIRST TIME. BUT IF THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL, ISN'T THAT JUST WHAT THAT'S JUST WHAT IT IS. YOU KNOW, MY BIGGEST THING IS, AGAIN, WE'RE SAYING WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THEM. BUT THE QUESTION IS TO WHERE AND AT SOME POINT YOU GOT TO BE REALISTIC. THESE ARE PEOPLE. SO MY QUESTION IS YES, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THEM. BUT TO WHERE ARE WE SAYING WE'RE MOVING THEM OUT OF BEAUMONT? LET'S JUST BE TRANSPARENT, NOT BEAT AROUND IT, BECAUSE CLEARLY WE'RE SAYING THEY HAVE TO MOVE, BUT WHERE ARE WE MOVING THEM TO? AND AGAIN, I THINK I THINK SOME WILL GO TO THE SALVATION ARMY. SOME MAY MOVE ON, SOME MAY GO TO THE DREAM CENTER, AGAIN, WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT IT MUCH HERE TODAY, BUT WE ALL KNOW THAT THE REASON THEY GOT INTO THIS SITUATION, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THEM ARE DOWN ON THEIR LUCK. BUT SOME MOST THE MAJORITY ARE SUBSTANCE ABUSE, MENTAL ISSUES. AND THOSE ARE OBVIOUSLY VERY DIFFICULT ISSUES TO SOLVE, WHICH THE CITIES ARE NOT IN GOOD POSITIONS TO SOLVE. 
          AND THAT'S WHY I GO BACK TO IF WE FOCUS ON THE PUBLIC HEALTH ASPECT AND IF WE FOCUS ON, AGAIN, TRYING TO TRYING TO LOOK FOR ADDITIONAL RESOURCES FOR THOSE NONPROFITS, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE HOPE IS, IS IN THOSE NONPROFITS, BECAUSE WE DON'T DO THAT KIND OF STUFF. 
          WELL WE'RE JUST NOT SET UP FOR IT. BUT IN THE SUCCESSES I'VE SEEN, IS THERE NONPROFITS AND DARE I SAY, THE FAITH BASED NONPROFITS SEEM TO HAVE THE BEST SUCCESS RATE, TRYING TO SOLVE A VERY DIFFICULT ISSUE. YEAH. CHRIS AND I KNOW IT'S A TOUGH CONVERSATION, BUT SOMETIMES YOU GOT TO HAVE THE TOUGH ONES, WE HAVE ALLOCATED FUNDING AND THIS FUNDING WAS THERE LAST YEAR, AND NOW IT'S THERE AGAIN. THIS YEAR, CITY, OUR POPULATION HASN'T GROWN IN OVER 30 YEARS. LET'S JUST TALK ABOUT IT. INFLATION IS GOING UP. SALARIES ARE GOING UP. BUT THE REVENUE IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT ISN'T GOING UP. AND THE COUNCIL WANTS TO HAVE A HEALTHY FUND BALANCE. WE'RE AT A TIME WHERE IT'S TIME THAT WE REALLY GOT TO MAKE TOUGH DECISIONS. SO THIS, THIS, THIS MONEY THAT WE'VE BEEN HAVING ALLOCATED HAS BEEN SITTING, I JUST WANT CLEAR DIRECTION OF WHAT'S THE PLAN WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE FUNDS THAT HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED? ARE WE GOING TO WORK WITH NONPROFITS AND SUPPORT THEM OR LIKE I JUST DON'T WANT IT TO SIT. IF IT'S A NEED, I NEED TO KNOW WHAT WE PLAN ON DOING WITH IT. RIGHT. SO WE IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH OPTION THREE, THOSE FUNDS WOULD BE, HELP US IN DOING THE CLEANUP, DOING THE OUTREACH, YOU KNOW, GETTING US TO WHERE WE NEED TO GET TO, IN TERMS OF THE BASICALLY THE ORDINANCE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I THINK FOR FUNDING 
          [02:00:05]
THE NONPROFITS THAT COMES THROUGH FEDERAL AND STATE MONEY. AND AGAIN, WE'LL PURSUE THAT. I DON'T I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO USE GENERAL FUND TO HELP SOME OF THOSE NONPROFITS, BUT, SOMETHING WE COULD LOOK AT. BUT BUT RIGHT NOW, THE IMMEDIATE PURPOSE WOULD BE TO ENFORCE THAT ORDINANCE, IF APPROVED. MAYOR COUNCILMAN BOONE, I YOU ALLUDED TO IT, AND HERE IT SAYS COST, TO HIRE CONTRACTOR FOR ABATEMENT, BUT YOU ALLUDED TO THIS FOUR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF HOMELESS, ONE OF THEM BEING PSYCHOTIC. AND SO YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS, BUT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE GO OUT TO A SITE TO REMOVE PEOPLE AND THEY'RE PSYCHOTIC? DOES LAW ENFORCEMENT GET INVOLVED AT THAT POINT, SO POLICE DEPARTMENT IS HERE, I THINK, CHIEF JACK AND. AND I THINK THEY ARE HERE TO PASS THE BALL TO THEM, THE DETAIL. YEAH. I MEAN, BECAUSE THIS IS AN UNCOMFORTABLE CONVERSATION AND I GET IT. BUT AS I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN TURNER, WHEN WE DO THESE THINGS, WE GOT TO REMEMBER THESE ARE HUMAN BEINGS AND BE COMPASSIONATE. BUT YET I DO AGREE WE HAVE TO TAKE ACTION, BUT WE HAVE TO DO IT IN A COMPASSIONATE WAY. BUT I'M JUST WONDERING, WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN YOU GO OUT TO A SITE AND YOU YOU GIVE THEM A WARNING AND THEN AND HERE COMES THE MAN. HE'S HE'S GOT ALL THE ANSWERS. SO HOW DO WE DEAL WITH A PERSON THAT'S EITHER PSYCHOTIC OR, HAS AN ADDICTION? AND WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE PERSON THEN AT THAT POINT? SO I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING IS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO HANDLE THAT LIKE WE WOULD ANY OTHER CALL WHERE WE RAN ACROSS A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE. WE WOULD WANT TO GET, MENTAL HEALTH CERTIFIED OFFICERS INVOLVED, FIND OUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE ISSUE IS AND THEN SEE IF WE CAN DIRECT THEM. FOR SOME HELP. THAT WAY, IF WE'RE GOING TO BE ENFORCING A CLASS C, ORDINANCE, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT MOST LIKELY SCENARIO WOULD JUST BE A TICKET WOULD BE ISSUED. SO IF WE MADE AN ARREST, YOU KNOW, WE TAKE THEM TO JAIL, THEY'RE GOING TO GET BOOKED RIGHT BACK OUT. WE'RE STILL ON THE HOOK FOR THE FEE FOR THAT DAY FOR JAIL, THERE THERE'S NOT GOING TO KEEP THEM ON THAT. SO. BUT I'M SORRY. BACK TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE. WE WOULD HANDLE IT LIKE WE WOULD ANY OTHER ANY OTHER CALL WHERE WE WEREN'T ACROSS, BUT WE KNOW THE TICKET IS USELESS. YES, SIR. A WARRANT WILL BE ISSUED, AND THEN THEY'LL GO TO JAIL AND GET RIGHT BACK OUT. THEY'RE GOING TO TEAR THE TICKET UP. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PAY IT, RIGHT. WHY WOULD THEY? BUT I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER IS THAT IT'S BEEN POINTED OUT AND ALL THIS IS THAT THEY'RE THEY'RE CLEANING UP THE CAMPS SO THE PEOPLE WON'T HAVE THE STUFF THAT THEY HAD. 
          AND WHERE WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM OTHER MAYORS IS THAT THEN THEY, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF OTHER SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES STEP IN AND HELP THOSE THAT MAY WANT TO BE HELPED, BUT PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO KEEP PUTTING UP THEIR TENTS OR OR THEIR BEDDING IN PLACES WHERE IT GETS SWEPT UP. SO THAT IS WHERE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE BY HANDCUFFS THAT THE SOLUTION IS GOING TO BE FOUND. RIGHT. SO AND I'M NOT AND I KNOW THERE'S NO EASY ANSWER TO THIS I GET IT. BUT BUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SWEEPING THEIR STUFF UP, WE ALSO KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO WAREHOUSE THAT. WE CAN'T TAKE THEIR STUFF AND THROW IT IN A DUMPSTER THAT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY. CORRECT. SO THERE IS A DIRECTIVE IN THE STATE LAW. SO IF WE'RE ENFORCING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY UNDER THE STATE LAW, THEN THAT LAW ACTUALLY REQUIRES US TO TAKE THEIR PROPERTY. HOW'S IT, CATALOG IT, LOG IT IN, AND THEN HAVE SOMEONE AVAILABLE TO RELEASE IT TO THEM WHENEVER THEY SHOW UP TO TAKE IT. SO THAT CREATES A WHOLE SET OF ISSUES, THE ORDINANCE AS PROPOSED DOES NOT HAVE THAT IN THERE. BUT THEN YOU RUN INTO A PROBLEM OF IS IT ABANDONED PROPERTY? DO WE GIVE DO WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE IT WITH THEM, WE SHORT ANSWER IS NO. WE SHOULD WE SHOULD NOT BE JUST TAKING PEOPLE'S STUFF AND THROWING IT AWAY. WELL, I GUESS PART OF MY REASON FOR ALL THIS WANTING TO BE SAID IS FOR THE COMMUNITY TO UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE SAY, WELL, JUST FIX THE HOMELESS PROBLEM. IT'S NOT THAT EASY OF A FIX BECAUSE THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE STILL HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AS CITIZENS OF THE COUNTRY. THEY MAY BE HOMELESS, BUT THEY STILL HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. AND SO WE JUST CAN'T SHOW UP TO A CAMPSITE, LOAD UP THEIR STUFF AND A DUMP TRUCK AND HAUL IT TO THE DUMP. IT'S THEIR PROPERTY, AND WE HAVE TO RESPECT THAT. SO AGAIN, THIS IS A BURDEN THAT'S GOING TO BE PLACED ON BEAUMONT PD. AND I'M JUST WANTING EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. I'M ALL FOR MOVING FORWARD. BUT I'M JUST SAYING IT'S NOT JUST AN EASY THING OF LOADING UP THEIR STUFF AND HAULING IT OFF SO THAT GOES BACK TO WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE BEGINNING. AND ONE OF THE WAYS THAT THE ORDINANCE IS PROPOSED WOULD BE WE WANT TO PARTNER. IN OTHER WORDS, LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN'T ALWAYS BE THE 
          [02:05:01]
LEAD ON THIS. WE CANNOT ARREST OUR WAY OUT OF THIS PROBLEM. IF WE COULD, IT WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM ANYMORE, ANYWHERE. SO, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THE RIGHT SERVICES INVOLVED. ANOTHER THING ABOUT THE ORDINANCE IS, WHEN YOU WHEN YOU ADDRESS THE PROPERTY ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY ORDINANCE, WHEN YOU ADDRESS THE PROPERTY OWNER, I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GET MORE MILEAGE THAN ACTUALLY HAVING TO DEAL WITH WITH THE INDIVIDUALS, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO GO SOMEWHERE. IF WE WRITE THEM A TICKET AND THEY PICK UP THEIR STUFF, THEY'RE GOING TO GO, YOU KNOW, TO THE NEXT CAMP. THAT'S JUST THE REALITY. AGAIN, WE CAN'T ARREST OUR WAY OUT OF IT. SO WE WANT TO BE GOOD PARTNERS AND INVOLVE OTHER SERVICES WHEREVER WE CAN GET THOSE INVOLVED. IF IT'S MENTAL HEALTH OR SOCIAL SERVICES, WHATEVER, THAT'S REALLY KIND OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS THIS, BECAUSE GOING AROUND AND CLEANING OUT A CAMP AND JUST ARRESTING PEOPLE IS NOT GOING TO WORK. YEAH. COUNCILMAN TURNER, MY QUESTION, CHIEF, WAS, IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, YOU GUYS, I'VE SEEN IT WITH MY OWN EYES UNDERNEATH THE FREEWAYS AND THE UNDERPASSES. YOU KNOW HOW HOW IS THAT WORKING? THE CITY PUSHED YOU GUYS TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE WITH IT, BUT AGAIN, YOU TAKE THEM LIKE YOU SAID. WE HAVE TO PAY TO ACTUALLY GET THE PRISONER IN, AND THEN IT GETS RIGHT BACK OUT. CAN'T PAY THE TICKET. AND IT'S LIKE, WELL, YOU BRING THEM. HOW HOW HAS THAT WORKED FOR Y'ALL? SO FAR? SO AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOTTEN DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL THAT, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL WANTED TO FOCUS ON THAT. SO WE HAVE DONE THAT, I THINK YOU'LL, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T SEE THAT AS MUCH NOW AS YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T. PART OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE CONSTRUCTION, IN FAIRNESS. PART OF IT, THOUGH, HAS TO DO WITH, WITH, WITH POLICING. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ENFORCEMENT. IT'S A MATTER OF SPENDING THE TIME TO GET OUT AND TALK TO THEM AND TRY TO GET THEM TO MOVE ON WHERE WE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ASKED FOR COOPERATION FROM TXDOT FOR, YOU KNOW, LIKE TRESPASSING, TRESPASSING LAWS REALLY WORK BETTER FOR US, HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF DIRECTION FROM AUSTIN, THEY'RE NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN DOING THAT, WHICH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S IT'S THEY'RE THE PROPERTY KEEPERS. SO THAT'S THEIR DECISION. SO, YOU KNOW, WE'VE TRIED TO MOVE THAT, BUT LIKE I SAID, WHEN WE MOVE THAT IT THE PROBLEM JUST MOVES. AND YOU KNOW, COLLEGE AND I-10, IF THEY'RE NOT UNDER THE BRIDGE, THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOWN ON LNVA OR, I'M SORRY, D6 PROPERTY. SO AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE FACING. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO POINT OUT BECAUSE I SEE Y'ALL ARE ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK. I SEE Y'ALL DEALING WITH IT. BUT AGAIN, THEY'RE MOVING TO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. THAT'S WHY I SAID I WANT TO BE SPECIFIC. I UNDERSTAND WE'RE SAYING NO CAMPING AS A CITY, BUT ARE WE SAYING YOU KNOW, WHY NOT BEAT AROUND? ARE YOU SAYING YOU JUST DON'T WANT THEM IN BEAUMONT? IT'S A COMPLICATED PROBLEM. AND IT DOES PUT, YOU KNOW, PUTS LAW ENFORCEMENT IN A PRECARIOUS POSITION. APPRECIATE YOU CHIEF. YES, SIR. COUNCILMAN. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY? SO AT THIS, AT THIS POINT, IS THERE A CONSENSUS ABOUT. I AGREE WITH YOU, MIKE. OPTIONS BUT YEAH. ABOUT MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS OR IS THERE ARE Y'ALL WANTING TO LOOK AT OTHERS AND WHAT THOSE OTHERS WOULD BE. COUNCILMAN GETS SAYS OPTION THREE OPTION WHICH IS THE NO CAMPING ORDINANCE IS AND THAT'S WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING. YES, YES. OKAY I THINK YOU HAVE YOUR WE'LL BRING IT WE'LL BRING THAT BACK TO Y'ALL PRETTY QUICKLY. AND I WILL JUST AGAIN REITERATE THAT, WE'LL MONITOR, THE SHELTERS AND IF THEY GET TO ABOVE FULL, WE'LL LET Y'ALL KNOW. BUT AGAIN, WE'LL BE LOOKING FOR FUNDING TO HELP THOSE ORGANIZATIONS OUT BECAUSE AGAIN, THEY DO THEY DO A MUCH BETTER JOB THAN WE COULD IF WE COULD GET THE NUMBERS, PRESENTED TO COUNCIL ABOUT THE PROGRESS THAT THEY'RE MAKING THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CASE MANAGERS AT SOME OTHER PLACE IN TERMS OF TRANSITIONING PEOPLE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY ARE MAKING THEY'VE MADE SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT FOR THOSE THAT ARE LOOKING TO MAKE THOSE TRANSITIONS. YES, SIR. WE'LL GET THAT, I JUST, I'LL MAKE A LAST COMMENT FROM FOR ME, IT'S NOT THAT I'M NOT CONSIDERING THE INDIVIDUALS, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I REALLY HAD DIFFICULTY IN DEALING WITH IS WHEN SOMEONE CALLS ME OUT TO THEIR HOUSE, AND THERE'S A LOT TO. AND PEOPLE ARE JUST ALL OVER 
          [02:10:02]
THE LOT. TRASH IS THERE. AND THAT'S WHAT THEY HAVE TO DEAL WITH. THEY CAN'T GO OUTSIDE. 
          THEY THEY'RE AFRAID TO LEAVE THEIR HOUSE. SO I MEAN, IT'S A TOUGH DECISION. BUT, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO TRY TO FIND ALTERNATIVES. TO ADDRESS THE CONCERN. BUT IF IT'S NOT NEXT DOOR TO ME, IT'S NOT THAT BAD, BUT IF I'M HAVING TO LOOK OUT MY WINDOW, THAT'S EVERY DAY. IT'S A PROBLEM. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO, COUNCIL MEMBER. COUNCIL MEMBER. COMMENTS. MAYOR, MAY I, ON ITEM ONE, THAT WAS MOVED. NOW WITH THAT ITEM, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S AN UNDERSTANDING WHY I ASK THAT THAT COME UP AND I DO I DID HEAR OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND I LISTENED IN THAT, THIS IS NOT A MUST, THAT THE STATE HAS TO HEAR, A REQUEST FOR AN OPINION. THEY MAY, BUT I UNDERSTOOD OUR ATTORNEY IN HER PROFESSIONAL OPINION, THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WILL BE DONE. WITH THAT, I BEGAN TO TRY TO THINK OF OTHER ALTERNATIVES. AND ONE, LET ME PREFACE THIS BY SAYING I, I'M HAPPY WITH THE DECISION, WITH TIM AS OUR CHIEF, I'M NOT LOOKING FOR ANY WAY TO GO BACK, BUT ONE THING I FOUND, IF INDIVIDUALS ARE NOT MADE AWARE OF THE LAW AND TRULY UNDERSTAND IT, THEN THEY WILL CONTINUE TO TREAT IT AS THEY HAVE IN THE PAST, I THINK OUR CHARTER WAS VERY IS VERY CLEAR ON HOW THIS SITUATION SHOULD HAVE TRANSPIRED. AND I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, MADAM ATTORNEY, WE HAVE BEEN CODIFIED AS A, MUNICIPALITY THAT, OPERATES UNDER 143. IS THAT CORRECT? YES CORRECT. AND THAT'S BEEN CODIFIED. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, THOSE ARE THE RULES THAT WE ARE TO FOLLOW. YES. OKAY. NOW, AS I WENT BACK, IS IT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COMMISSIO, THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGED VIOLATIONS? LES VIOLATIONS OF WHAT EXACTLY OF THE OF 143 SO NO. SO THE COMMISSION SERVES TWO PURPOSES. THE FIRST BEING TO HEAR CHALLENGES AND COUNTER CHALLENGES, FOR CIVIL SERVICE PROMOTIONAL EXAMS, AND THE SECOND BEING IF A CIVIL SERVICE INDIVIDUAL IS DISCIPLINED OR RECEIVES, ANY TYPE OF ADVERSE ACTION, AND THEY WANT TO CHALLENGE THAT, THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO CHALLENGE IT THROUGH CIVIL SERVICE, AND LASTLY, THE CIVIL SERVICE DOES INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS AS IT RELATES TO THE PROCESS. SO ANY PROCESS INVOLVING CIVIL SERVICE, WHICH WOULD BE, THE PROMOTIONAL EXAM, THE ACTIONS OF THE DIRECTOR, THE CIVIL SERVICE DIRECTOR, SO ON AND SO FORTH, OR ANY VIOLATIONS ALLEGEDLY OF THE PARTICIPANTS UNDER CIVIL SERVICE. YES. THOSE TYPE OF COMPLAINTS WOULD GO TO THE COMMISSION AND POTENTIALLY GO TO THE COMMISSION. YES. OR IT COULD GO TO DISTRICT ATTORNEY. 
          YES OR, THERE'S ONE OTHER, OR TWO A STATE REPRESENTATIVE OR A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE STATE COULD FORWARD A CONCERN LIKE THAT. IS THAT CORRECT? IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY, YES. OKAY. THIS IS NOT TO SANCTION ANYONE, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE REALLY LUDICROUS OF 
          [02:15:01]
ME TO THINK, IF BY CHANCE, I WERE CORRECT THAT WE DID VIOLATE THE CHARTER OR 143, IT WOULD TAKE A VOTE OF THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL TO SANCTION OURSELVES. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I BELIEVE IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS AS TO WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DEAL WITH THOSE SELECTIONS. SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I'M, I WILL MOVE THAT. WE REMOVE THIS FROM THE AGENDA FOR TODAY AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HOW WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO EVALUATE OUR CHARTER, IF THAT'S AN ISSUE, IF THEY'RE IF THE CHARTER IS SOMEWHAT IN CONFLICT WITH, THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OR THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, I'D LIKE TO KNOW. AND INTERPRETATION BECAUSE THIS ALL COMES DOWN TO THE CITY MANAGER HAS THE AUTHORITY TO NAME SOMEONE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT FINGER MEANS. THAT WAS FROM MIKE AS COUNCILMAN GATES. OH, OKAY. SO IF THE CITY MANAGER HAS THE AUTHORITY TO NAME A PERSON THAT THEY FEEL MEETS THE QUALIFICATIONS OF A POSITION, AND IT'S TO BE CONFIRMED, CONFIRMED MEANS TO PUT IT INTO AN ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION SO THAT IT WILL BE RECOGNIZED AS AN ACT OF THAT. CHIEF, THAT'S NOT OPENING THE DOOR FOR US TO PUT OUR PERSONAL OPINIONS, BECAUSE 143 DOES SAY THE APPOINTMENT OF DIRECTORS ARE OF CHIEF OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THAT DOES NOT MEAN WE CAN INTERFERE AND INTERFERENCE WOULD BE, VOTING AGAINST AN APPOINTMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. IF THEY MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS. THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IT. SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW FROM OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT WHAT WOULD BE THE PROPER WAY TO FINALLY COME TO A FINAL ANALYSIS OF WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO TELL US WHETHER THERE IS AN OBJECTIVE OR NOT. SO I KNOW THE COUNCIL IS ITCHING TO GET IN, BUT SINCE I AM THE CITY ATTORNEY, I GET TO GO FIRST ONE. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH OUR CHARTER. WE DID OUR ENTIRE CHARTER REVIEW, I BRING IN SOMEONE THAT I HIGHLY RESPECTED WHO HAS DONE CHARTERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY, WHO WAS THE UTMOST EXPERT IN THIS FOR THIS EXACT REASON, EVEN THOUGH I'VE DONE MUNICIPAL LAW MY ENTIRE CAREER, I SERVE ON TWO BOARDS, BOTH WITH THE STATE OF TEXAS AND INTERNATIONALLY. AND NOT TO TOOT MY OWN HORN, BUT IS RECOGNIZED IN MY FIELD BY MY COLLEAGUES AS SOMEONE WHO IS EXPERIENCED IN THIS AREA, I WANTED SOMEONE WHO WOULD, OUT OF DOUBT, COULD COME IN AND TELL YOU THAT OUR CHARTER WAS GOOD AND IT WAS NOTHING WRONG. THERE IS NO THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG WITH OUR CHARTER. OKAY. LET ME NO NO NO NO, COUNCILMAN, COUNCILMAN, I'D LIKE TO ASK COUNCILMAN. I'LL LET YOU FINISH. AND SO I WANT TO ADDRESS EVERY ONE OF YOUR POINTS BEFORE I, BEFORE I FORGET WHAT YOU'RE TALKING, I SUGGEST YOU WRITE IT DOWN. THE SECOND POINT TO THAT IS 143 SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT YOU ARE TO CONFIRM WHAT WE ARE MISINTERPRETING IN THAT WORD. IS THE WORD CONFIRMED? CONFIRM DOES NOT MEAN RUBBER STAMP. THE CITY MANAGER HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO PICK. COUNCIL HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE. AND I TOLD YOU THIS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, YOU CAN GO DOWNSTAIRS, YOU CAN VOTE YES. YOU CAN VOTE NO. YOU CAN VOTE TO TABLE. THAT IS ALWAYS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF COUNCIL. YOU ARE NEVER RESPONSIBLE TO RUBBER STAMP A CONFIRMATION. THAT IS NOT THE PROCESS. THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF. 143 WHEN YOU SAY NO. THE SECOND PART TO THAT IS THERE IS NO CONFLICT BETWEEN OUR CHARTER AND 143. AS I DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING, THERE'S A HIERARCHY IN PLACE, MEANING THE CHARTER SAYS YOU DO NOT INTERFERE. BUT 143 GIVES YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPROVE HIS APPOINTMENT. WE DO IT ALL THE TIME. IT DOES NOT SAY APPROVE. IT SAYS CONFIRM. AND IF YOU IF YOU WANT TO DO SYNONYMS AND ANTONYMS, CONFIRM AND APPROVE OR RIGHT AROUND THE SAME. BUT THEY'RE NOT THE SAME. I SAID RIGHT AROUND, BUT I DIGRESS. THE REALITY IS, IS THAT COUNCIL DID NOT VIOLATE IT BY VOTING NO. 
          THERE WERE SOME VERY THIN LINES IN THAT AS IT RELATES TO SOME BEHAVIOR BY COUNCIL THAT COULD 
          [02:20:05]
BE INTERPRETED TO HAVE BEEN OVERSTEPPING OR INTERFERENCE, AND WE CAN GIVE SOME WE CAN GIVE SOME CLARITY. IT IS MY OPINION THAT COUNCIL GAVE DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER ON WHO THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS APPOINTED IN THEIR POLICE CHIEF, AND THEY GAVE VERY, VERY DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS. AND SOME PEOPLE MIGHT DECIDE AND MIGHT INTERPRET THOSE DESCRIPTIONS TO BE FAVORABLE TOWARDS ONE PARTICULAR CANDIDATE. AND THAT'S NEITHER HERE NOR THERE. BUT THERE WAS DIRECTION GIVEN TO THE CITY MANAGER THAT THEY WOULD THE COUNCIL WANTED TO SEE A LOCAL CANDIDATE. DIRECTION IS NOT INTERFERENCE. INTERFERENCE AS DEFINED IN OUR CHARTER SAYS THAT YOU CANNOT TELL THE CITY MANAGER WHO HE SHOULD HIRE. YOU CANNOT TELL THE CITY MANAGER WHO HE SHOULD FIRE. YOU CANNOT TELL THE CITY MANAGER WHO HE SHOULD DISCIPLINE AND YOU SHOULD NOT ENGAGE IN THE DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS OF THE CITY. I CAN TELL YOU THAT HAPPENS QUITE OFTEN AMONGST THIS COUNCIL. AND SO OUR CHARTER DOES NOT HAVE A SELF-GOVERNING, OR OUTSIDE GOVERNING THING, WHICH MEANS THAT THE COUNCIL IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SELF-GOVERNING SO THAT MEANS WHEN THE COUNCIL MEMBER OR MEMBERS OF COUNCIL VIOLATE THE CHARTER, IT IS NOT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY ATTORNEY OR THE CITY MANAGER TO CORRECT YOU. IT'S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF COUNCIL TO CORRECT COUNCIL HAS ALSO ADOPTED DECORUM RULES, WHICH MEANS THAT WHEN COUNCIL VIOLATES THEIR RULES, WHEN COUNCIL IS OUT OF ORDER, IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF COUNCIL TO SELF-CORRECT. WHEN A QUORUM OR ALL OF YOU ARE OUT OF ORDER, THEN IT'S JUST PURE CHAOS. OKAY, SO IF I DISAGREE WITH YOUR PERCEPTION OF YOUR OPINION, WHO DO WE GET? WHO CAN WE TURN TO GET CLARITY? BECAUSE IT SAYS NEITHER CITY COUNCIL NOR ANY COMMITTEES SHALL DICTATE THE APPOINTMENT OF ANY PERSON DICTATING WOULD SAY, HIRE CANDIDATE A HIRE SOMEONE FROM WITHIN. AGAIN COUNCIL IS ENTITLED TO GIVE DIRECTION, WHICH COUNCIL DOES VERY OFTEN. 
          AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE HEARD DURING A PRESENTATION THAT YOU WERE GOING TO GIVE DIRECTION TO THE CITY MAGISTRATE AS IT RELATES TO HOW HE HANDLES FINES. THAT'S DIRECTION. SOME PEOPLE COULD SAY THAT'S INTERFERING WITH THE DUE PROCESS OF THE COURT. I SAY DEPENDING ON HOW YOU REFERENCE THAT, IT COULD BE DIRECTION GIVING YOUR PREFERENCE, OR YOU CAN GET REAL, REAL CLOSE TO OVERSTEPPING. WELL, MY QUESTION IS TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COUNCIL, YOU CAN GET YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE TO WRITE A LETTER TO DETERMINE THAT THERE'S A VERY THANK YOU. THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE GIVES YOU A LIST OF INDIVIDUALS WHO CAN SEEK OPINIONS AS IT RELATES TO OFFICIAL. WHAT I NEEDED TO KNOW. THANK YOU. I WILL MOVE THAT WE REMOVE ITEM ONE FROM THE AGENDA. 
          IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE REMOVED. IT'S OUT. SO Y'ALL REMOVED IT ANYWAY OR YOU JUST PASSED IT. 
          THE ITEM FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. OKAY, THAT'S FINE. OKAY, AT THIS POINT WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS. WELL, SINCE I JUST NO, I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF THROW ONE THING OUT THERE BASED ON THE CITY ATTORNEY'S SAYING YOU CAN GO TO A STATE REPRESENTATIVE TO SEEK AN ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION ON WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY CHARTER HAS BEEN VIOLATED. THERE'S ALREADY AN ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION THAT SAYS WE AS THE AG WILL NOT ENGAGE IN LOOKING AT CITY CHARTERS FOR A VIOLATION, YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S THAT'S ALREADY OUT THERE. SO IT'S AN EXERCISE IN FUTILITY. BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE CERTAINLY WELCOME TO GO DOWN THAT PATH IF YOU WANT TO. SO WITH STATE REP IS ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS LISTED THAT CAN REQUEST AN OPINION. SO RIGHT, A STATE REPRESENTATIVE CAN REQUEST AN OPINION. BUT THE RESPONSE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WILL BE TO REFERENCE A PREVIOUS AG OPINION SAYING WE'RE NOT GOING TO WE'RE NOT GOING TO LOOK AT HOME DISAGREEMENTS. THE RESPONSIBILITY OF AG IS TO ADDRESS, INTERPRETATIONS OF EXISTING STATE LAW, NOT CITY CHARTERS THAT ARE GOVERNED BY THIS, BY THE CITIES. THAT'S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. THE SECOND POINT TO THAT IS THAT THE AG WILL NOT GIVE AN ADVISORY OPINION, AND THEY WILL NOT INTERPRET THE LAW AS IT SHOULD BE. SO IF YOU'RE ASKING THE AG, EVEN IF YOU ASK THE STATE REPRESENTATIVE TO GIVE AN INTERPRETATION OF 143, IT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE CONFIRMATION PROCESS. THE AG WILL REFUSE TO RESPOND SOLELY ON THE FACT THAT THEY WILL NOT TELL YOU WHAT THE LAW SHOULD BE. THEY ONLY TELL YOU WHAT THE LAW IS. COUNCILMAN 
          [COUNCIL COMMENTS]
GAETZ, WE'RE IN. COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE IN THIS DISCUSSION TODAY ON TWO VERY IMPORTANT TOPICS. NOT THAT ANY OF THEM AREN'T IMPORTANT, BUT SPECIFICALLY WITH THE DOWNTOWN ENFORCEMENT OF, BUILDINGS THAT ARE DILAPIDATED AND OUR 
          [02:25:04]
HOMELESSNESS ISSUE. AND I'M, I'M GLAD THAT WE HAVE PROVIDED SOME DIRECTION TO MR. BOONE TO, WHICH WAY WE AS A COUNCIL WANT TO GO ON THIS AND, LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE NON-PROFITS TO CRAFTING SOME SOLUTIONS TO, THOSE THAT MIGHT NOT WANT TO CAMP IN THE SHELTERS, BUT, YEAH, CLEARLY THE HOMELESS ISSUE IS AN IMPEDIMENT TO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT. I'VE HEARD IT FROM SO MANY PEOPLE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A BIG HOMELESS PROBLEM WHEN WE DO, DOWNTOWN IN THIS AREA. SO, IT'S ONE MORE STEP TO TRY TO MAKE DOWNTOWN GREAT AGAI. THANKS, COUNCILMAN TURNER. SO IF COUNCIL MEMBERS VIOLATE THE CHARTER, LIKE, WHAT'S THE WORST THAT CAN HAPPEN? JUST TO SANCTION CENSURE? SO IN THE PAST, WHEN A COUNCIL OR INDIVIDUALS HAVE VIOLATED THE CHARTER, THERE HAS BEEN A PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL. I THINK YOUR DECORUM, RULES OF DECORUM REQUIRE YOU TO PRESENT THAT TO THE MAYOR. THE MAYOR PRO TEM, AND THEN COUNCIL VOTES TO DETERMINE, WHAT THAT IS. IT'S TYPICALLY A CENSURE, IT HAS NO BEARING. YOU CAN'T REMOVE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL FROM THEIR POST. YOU CAN'T EXPEL THEM FROM MEETINGS, SO, SO FOR LACK OF, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, IT'S A IT'S A SLAP ON THE WRIST. IF THAT. IT'S A THAT'S A VERY GOOD TERM. SO, SO BASICALLY PER CHARTER, ALL WE CAN DO IS THE PUBLIC REVIEW. BUT EVEN WITHIN THE PUBLIC REVIEW IS NOTHING WE CAN DO OUTSIDE OF OURSELVES. BEING RESPONSIBLE TO STAY WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE CHARTER THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO OPERATE AND GOVERN BY. CORRECT. OKAY YES. SO AGAIN, THE CHARTER DOESN'T COUNCIL HAS NOT ADOPTED AN ETHICS COMMITTEE OR AN ETHICS POLICY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AND SO YOUR CHARTER DOESN'T HAVE AN ENFORCEMENT ANGLE. SO THERE'S NO ONE IN, IN OUR ORGANIZATION THAT THAT LOOKS TO EXCUSE ME, THAT LOOKS TO ENFORCE A CHARTER, WHICH MEANS THAT IT RESTS WITH COUNCIL AS A, AS A BODY. SO IT'S INCUMBENT ON COUNCIL TO AID, DETERMINE IF THERE'S BEEN A VIOLATION OF THE CHARTER. BE WHAT ACTUALLY NEEDS TO BE TAKEN IS A REFERENCE TO THAT, THAT VIOLATION. AND THEN SEEK TO CARRY THAT OUT, MY BIG CONCERN OF MINE IS, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE TRANSPARENCY, BUT JUST TO SAY, AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE VIOLATE THE CHARTER ALL THE TIME AND WE'RE NOT DOING NOTHING ABOUT IT. FOR ME, IS A BIG PROBLEM BECAUSE WE'RE ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO OPERATE AND GOVERN OURSELVES BY THAT DOCUMENT. SO I THINK BETWEEN US COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE NEED TO HAVE SOME TRANSPARENT CONVERSATIONS ON IF WE'RE GOING TO OPERATE WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HOLD OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO OPERATE THE RIGHT WAY WITHIN IT. AND THE BIGGER CONCERN OF MINE IS, FOR ME ON GOVERNMENT. THE PROCESS IS ALREADY EXTREMELY SLOW, AND I FEEL LIKE RIGHT NOW THIS CURRENT STATE OF THE COUNCIL, AS FAR AS PLANS, MEETINGS, MORALE, COMMUNICATION, THIS MAY BE THE MOST STAGNANT IT'S BEEN FOR ME SINCE I'VE BEEN ON HERE. EVEN WHAT WE GOT GOING ON WITH DOWNTOWN, WHAT DIRECTION WE'RE IN, IT'S SO MANY DISTRACTIONS WE DON'T EVEN MEET TO FOCUS ON THE THINGS I FEEL LIKE WE TRULY NEED TO FOCUS ON. SO WHEN I SPEAK TO THINGS LIKE THE CHARTER, I'M ALMOST TO THE POINT WHERE WE HAVE A CITY MANAGER WHERE IF SO MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE OPENLY JUST VIOLATING THE CHARTER, HOW ARE YOU ABLE TO EVEN EFFECTIVELY REALLY DO YOUR JOB? AND MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS US BEING A HINDRANCE TO WHAT? YOU CAN'T REALLY GO OUT AND PERFORM YOUR JOBS BECAUSE WE WON'T BE REAL WITH EACH OTHER AND TRANSPARENT AND TALK ABOUT LANES. ARE WE STEPPING TOO FAR, YOU HAVE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF BEING OPEN WITH US IF WE ARE STEPPING TOO FAR. I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN HONEST WITH ME IN CONVERSATIONS, AND I APPRECIATE IT, BUT STILL, EVEN AS ME, I THINK WE ALL NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. IF WE ALL STEPPING TOO FAR TO KEEP STRUCTURE. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, I SAY IT'S STAGNANT BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THE STRUCTURE ISN'T THERE AND WE'RE NOT HAVING THE COMMUNICATIONS. SO THAT'S WHY I WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S THE WORST THAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN IT COMES TO VIOLATING THE CHARTER? AS A COUNCIL, I'VE NEVER BEEN TO AN INSTANCE LIKE THIS, MIKE. NOT TRYING TO BEAT YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT I KNOW YOU HAVE. SO. LIKE WHAT? WHAT DID WHAT TOOK PLACE WERE WE ACTUALLY DID DO SOMETHING ABOUT VIOLATIONS OF THE CHARTER. HOW DID IT COME ABOUT? BECAUSE I DID NOT VIOLATE THE CHARTER. SO I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THAT. COUNCILMAN GETZ DIDN'T VIOLATE THE CHARTER. IT WAS A DECORUM, 
          [02:30:01]
POLICY OF COUNCIL. AND SO THERE'S NEVER BEEN A DOCUMENTED INCIDENT, WHERE COUNCIL MEMBERS OF COUNCIL HAVE VIOLATED THE CHARTER. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, THERE'S A THIN LINE BETWEEN PROVIDING DIRECTION TO YOUR TO YOUR APPOINTEES AND THEN YOU PROVIDING, INTERFERENCE. AND SO I THINK THAT I THINK ON A, ON A, ON A VERY THIN LINE, IT'S TO THE CITY MANAGER TO TELL YOU YOU'RE OVERSTEPPING THAT LINE OR WHEN YOU'RE GETTING CLOSE TO THAT LINE, BECAUSE SEEKING DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL. COUNCIL, ROLE IS TO PROVIDE VISION AND TO PROVIDE DIRECTION FOR THE CITY, AND I THINK THE MANAGER DOES A REALLY GOOD JOB OF TRYING TO INCLUDE COUNCIL IN THOSE DECISIONS, TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT COUNCIL, THAT YOUR GOALS AND YOUR VISIONS, YOU SAW IT IN THE BUDGET PROCESS. THAT WAS JUST SINCE THE CITY MANAGER HAS BEEN HERE, WE'VE HAD A VERY OPEN, TRANSPARENT BUDGET PROCESS WHERE COUNCIL HAS, YOU KNOW, ASKED FOR THEIR THEIR ITEMS TO BE INCLUDED AND THEIR WISH LIST AND HOW WE HANDLE THE CIP. THAT'S THE DIRECTION AND THAT IS AT HIS BEHEST, TO MAKE SURE THAT COUNCIL HAS A BUY IN IN THE DIRECTION AND THE FUTURE OF THE CITY. SO SOME OF THAT COULD BE SEEN FROM THE OUTSIDE LOOKING IN AS OVERSTEPPING OR INTERFERENCE. 
          BUT THAT IS THAT IS HIM SAYING, I WANT TO HEAR WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. I WANT THAT IS HIM SEEKING YOU TO BE A PART OF THAT PROCESS. RIGHT. HOWEVER, COMMA, IT COULD ALSO BE REALLY, REALLY CLOSE TO THE LINE OF GETTING INVOLVED IN THE DAY TO DAY ITEMS WHEN YOU START SAYING, WHEN WE BRING ITEMS TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL ON, THE STAFF ALWAYS PUTS IT IN THE AFFIRMATIVE OF THE RESOLUTIONS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. BUT YOU CAN AND YOU DO DENY, YOU DO REJECT, YOU DO ADJOURNS. THAT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF COUNCIL. AND THAT IS NOT AN INTERFERENCE WITH THE DAY TO DAY. THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE ELECTED TO DO. I UNDERSTAND THAT. SO EARLIER YOU STATED SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS VIOLATED THE CHARTER ALL THE TIME. I SAID DAILY, DAILY. OKAY. DAILY STILL ALL THE TIME. SO TO TAKE IT, TO TAKE IT A STEP FURTHER, HAVE WE EVER HAD A COUNCIL MEMBER IN THE PAST DEALT WITH FOR ALL THE VIOLATIONS OF THE CHARTER, WHETHER IT BE. BUT SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE THREE AND A HALF YEARS, I HAVEN'T SEEN IT. SO HAS IT TAKEN PLACE BEFORE ME IN YOUR TENURE? SO THROUGH A PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION, I THINK THAT THIS PROVISION, BECAUSE THIS ISN'T A NEW PROVISION, BUT I THINK THROUGH A PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION, IT JUST WASN'T AS SEVERE, COUNCIL WASN'T INCLUDED AS MUCH. AND SO THAT, THAT, THAT INTERFERENCE IN THE DAY TO DAY WAS, IS LOOKED ON AS, AS, AS HEAVILY, AS HARSHLY, UNDER THIS NEW ADMINISTRATION, THE CITY MANAGER'S TAKING GREAT PAINS TO EXPLORE WITH COUNCIL THE HIERARCHY IN WHICH HE WANTS TO GO. CITIZENS COUNCIL, THE PEOPLE THAT REPORT TO YOU, I.E. MYSELF, THE CITY MANAGER, THE CITY CLERK, THE CITY MANAGER, AND THEN EVERYBODY ELSE. AND SO HE'S ASKED AND GIVEN VERY GOOD DIRECTION TO COUNCIL IS YOU COME TO ME WHEN YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH STAFF, YOU ANYBODY WHO REPORTS DIRECTLY TO ME SHOULD GO THROUGH ME, I KNOW COUNCIL CALLS THE CHIEF OF POLICE. THAT'S AN APPOINT. THAT'S THAT'S AN EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY MANAGER. I KNOW COUNCIL CALLS THE FIRE CHIEF. THAT'S A POINT. THAT'S AN EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY MANAGER. I KNOW COUNCIL CALLS THE WATER UTILITIES DIRECTOR, AND WE CAN GO ON AND ON THROUGHOUT THE LIST. THAT HAPPENS. THAT IS AN INTERFERENCE WITH THE DAY TO DAY AS IMPARTED BY THE CITY MANAGER ASKING FOR YOU TO ONLY COMMUNICATE WITH HIM DIRECTLY AS IT RELATES TO HIS EMPLOYEES. AGAIN, THAT GOES BACK TO MY POINT, MY QUESTION. SO MY QUESTION. WAIT A MINUTE. MY QUESTION WAS, HAS ANYTHING EVER BEEN DONE? THE ANSWER IS NO. SO THAT'S MY POINT. SO MY NEXT THING THAT I'M ASKING THE CITY MANAGER AND I DON'T MIND ASKING IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE DON'T WE NEED TO HAVE THESE KIND OF CONVERSATIONS. ARE YOU SOMETIMES IN THE POSITION WHERE YOU FEEL LIKE COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE INTERFERING WITH YOUR DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS? I'M NOT SAYING YOU HAVE TO NAME WHO. YEAH, BUT DO YOU FEEL THAT WAY? BECAUSE AGAIN, IF YOU DO, THIS IS A CONVERSATION WE NEED TO HAVE AS A COUNCIL AND IT NEEDS TO STOP. I THINK WHENEVER THAT HAPPENS TO ME, AJ, I TYPICALLY TELL YOU ALL OF YOU, I THINK YOU'RE OVERSTEPPING. I SAID, MIKE, I THINK YOU'RE CROSSING THE LINE. WE MIGHT NEED TO STOP RIGHT HERE OR WHOEVER IT IS. I DON'T HESITATE TO DO THAT. BUT WILL I STOP YOU? MAYBE NOT. MAYBE YOU KNOW. BUT I'M GOING TO PROTECT THE ABILITY AND THE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY MANAGER. THAT'S WHAT WE DO AS CITY MANAGERS. OUR ETHICS CLAUSE IS TO DO THAT. SO? SO YOU HAVE TO GOVERN YOURSELVES. COUNCILS LIKE SHARI SAID, CITY 
          [02:35:09]
ATTORNEYS AND CITY MANAGERS DON'T GOVERN COUNCILS. COUNCILS GOVERN COUNCILS. AND SO YOU HAVE TO WHATEVER YOU DO AND THINGS ARE NOT RIGHT, OR YOU'RE BREAKING A RULE OR LAW, IT'S UP TO YOU TO ADDRESS IT. IT'S NOT UP TO US TO ADDRESS IT. I'LL MAKE YOU AWARE OF IT, YOU KNOW. 
          BUT IT'S UP TO YOU TO ADDRESS IT, FOR SURE. AND CHERRY SAID IT'S A THIN LINE, BUT IT'S OFTEN IT AIN'T NO THIN LINE. IT'S WAY OVER THE LINE. SO. AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS, I'M GONNA I WILL TELL YOU, YOU KNOW, AND IT HAPPENS, BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S IN THE, IN THE. I CAN READ YOU THE CHAPTER IF YOU WANT ME TO. I UNDERSTAND IT. OKAY. WELL, YOU CAN, BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS A CONVERSATION THAT THAT REALLY IS OVERDUE AND NEEDS TO BE HAD. SO I DO UNDERSTAND. YEAH. SO AGAIN YOU GOT TO GOVERN YOURSELF WHEN I THINK YOU'RE CROSSING THAT LINE, I TELL YOU, HOW YOU RECEIVE IT IS UP TO YOU, I CAN'T MAKE YOU DO ANYTHING, BUT IT'S MY JOB TO SAY THAT WHAT IT IS. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, THE CHARTER SAYS THERE'S TO BE NO INTERFERENCE, BASICALLY. AND YOU JUST DREW ME IN ON THIS COURSE. YOU HAD TO, DIDN'T YOU, AJ? YEAH. PAGE 11. BUT I THINK EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS ABOUT INTERFERENCE. SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT THE ONLY PART ABOUT IT THAT I STRUGGLE WITH YOU SAY WE ALL KNOW, BUT DOING IT, I HAVE IT READY IF YOU NEED ME TO. NOTHING'S HAPPENING. I READ IT FOR ME. NEITHER DOES THIS. AND THIS IS ARTICLE FIVE, SECTION FOUR, INTERFERENCE WITH CITY COUNCIL PROHIBITED. NEITHER THE CITY COUNCIL NOR ANY OF ITS COMMITTEES OR MEMBERS SHALL DICTATE TO THE APPOINTMENT OF ANY PERSON TO OR REMOVAL FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT OR DISCIPLINE BY THE CITY MANAGER OR ANY OF HIS SUBORDINATES OR ANY MANNER INTERFERE WITH THE APPOINTMENT OR REMOVAL OR DISCIPLINE OF EMPLOYEES UNDER THE CITY MANAGER'S AUTHORITY, EXCEPT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INQUIRIES AND INVESTIGATIONS. UNLESS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS CHAPTER. THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL SHALL DEAL WITH THE CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES WHO ARE SUBJECT TO THE DIRECTION AND SUPERVISORY SUPERVISION OF THE CITY MANAGER SOLELY THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER AND NEITHER THE CITY COUNCIL NOR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL GIVE ORDERS TO ANY SUCH OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE, EITHER PUBLICLY OR PRIVATELY. AGAIN, MY COUNCIL IS WAY OVER THE LINE OFTEN SO DAILY. YEAH YEAH. WELL DAILY OFTEN IS. IT'S STILL MORE DIPLOMATIC THAN SHE IS. SO YOU'D RATHER DEAL WITH ME? WELL I STRUGGLE WITH MY FRUSTRATION. I JUST FEEL LIKE WE'RE NOT GETTING ANYTHING DONE BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE ARE TOO. IN THE DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS, AND IT'S SLOWING DOWN THE PROGRESS OF WHAT ACTUALLY CAN BE DONE. AND IT'S A DIFFERENT DIRECTION BEING PULLED EVERY DAY. INSTEAD OF REALLY FOCUSING IN ON OUR STRATEGIC PLAN, HITTING OUR GOALS, AND ACCOMPLISHING WHAT WE NEED TO ACCOMPLISH, EVEN MEETING TO TALK ABOUT THESE THINGS, YOU KNOW, SPECIAL MEETINGS OUTSIDE OF COUNCIL, I JUST FEEL LIKE WE KIND OF BEEN AT A STUCK, STAGNANT POINT. AND I'M JUST NOT IT'S JUST NOT REALLY CONDUCIVE FOR ME. SO THE REMEDY FOR THAT COUNCIL, A COUNCILMAN TURNER, IS FOR COUNCIL TO DECIDE HOW IT WANTS TO HANDLE THAT. AGAIN, COUNCIL ITSELF AS A SELF-GOVERNING BODY, AND AS COUNCILMAN, SAMUELS MENTIONED, COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO VOTE TO CENSURE ITSELF AS A WHOLE. FOR ITS INFRACTIONS, FOR INTERFERENCE. OR WE CAN JUST START FRESH AND DO BETTER TOMORROW. COUNCILMAN. AND THAT'S WHAT I MEAN. LIKE, OUR HOUSE IS CLEARLY DIVIDED, AND WE COMPLAIN WHEN WE SAY IT'S DIVISION IN THE CITY, BUT WE DIVIDE IT UP HERE, AND UNTIL WE'RE ABLE TO REALLY TALK ABOUT THAT DIVISION AND QUIT GOING AROUND IT, IT WON'T CHANGE THROUGHOUT THE CITY. IT'S JUST A REFLECTION OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF OUR CITY. THE CONTRARY, WE WANT TO ADMIT IT OR NOT. THAT'S JUST THE REALITY. 
          COUNCILMAN PHIL SHAW WELL, I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN TURNER THAT THE COUNCIL HAS TO GOVERN ITSELF WITH INTEGRITY, THAT'S THE ONLY WAY THIS REPUBLIC WORKS. THE FREEDOM THAT WE HAVE IN THIS COUNTRY, IT HAS BEEN SAID IT ONLY WORKS. IF IT'S IF PEOPLE DO WHAT'S RIGHT, THAT'S THE ONLY WAY IT WORKS. OTHERWISE, THEY ABUSE THE FREEDOM, IN THIS PROCESS, I SOUGHT COUNCIL AND THE PROCESS OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE. I SOUGHT THE COUNSEL OF OUR CITY 
          [02:40:03]
ATTORNEY, AND SHE TOLD ME WHAT I DID WAS RIGHT. THAT I'M RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROCESS TO SPEAK TO IT. AND THE CITY MANAGER'S RESPONSIBLE TO SPEAK TO THE PERSON, I ASKED HIM PUBLICLY, I DID. I EVER GIVE YOU A NAME OF A PERSON I WANTED YOU TO HIRE, BECAUSE I, I HOLD MYSELF ACCOUNTABLE. AND HAD HE SAID COUNCILMAN FALLSHAW, YOU DID. YOU TOLD ME TO HIRE THIS PERSON, THEN I WOULD HAVE PUBLICLY APOLOGIZE TO HIM. BUT I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAVE TO DO IS HAVE FAITH IN OUR OUR SYSTEM. AND WE HAVE A CITY ATTORNEY WHO'S QUALIFIED, AND SHE'S INSTRUCTED US AND, AND I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE FAITH IN HER AND LET'S MOVE ON, IF WE IF WE NEED TO BE CORRECTED AND SO BE IT. BUT FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM HER, WE DID OUR JOB, AND IT'S MESSY. I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER USED THE ANALOGY OF MAKING SAUSAGE, AND SO IT IS. 
          BUT WE DID IT. WE GOT THROUGH IT, AND, WE HAVE TO MOVE ON. AND VIOLATING THE CITY CHARTER DAILY, I, I DON'T. I'M NOT SURE I'LL TELL YOU HOW I SEE IT HAPPENING. I HOPE THE CITIZENS UNDERSTAND THIS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE LETTER OF THE LAW OF THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW. I YOU CAN BE ABLE TO FUNCTION AS A COUNCIL MEMBER AND BUMP INTO THE CHIEF FIRE CHIEF AND SAY, HEY, CHIEF, SOMEBODY WAS ASKING ME THE OTHER DAY, HOW MANY BOXES DO WE HAVE ON THE STREET EVERY DAY? AMBULANCES DO. WE HAVE EVERY DAY? HE SAID. WE GOT NINE RIGHT NOW. OH, GREAT. WELL I HAVE I TECHNICALLY VIOLATED THE CITY CHARTER BY ASKING THAT QUESTION. I GUESS, BUT WAS I TRYING TO GIVE HIM DIRECTION OR INSTRUCTION, NO, I WAS SEEKING INFORMATION. COULD I PICKED UP THE PHONE AND CALLED THE CITY MANAGER AND HAVE THE CITY MANAGER CALL HIM AND HAVE HIM TELL THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY MANAGER TELL ME. I GUESS I COULD HAVE, I AGAIN, I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT SOMETIMES AS A CITY, AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, YOU TRY AS HARD AS YOU CAN TO LIVE WITHIN THE LINES AND, AND, AND YOU DO. BUT I GUESS SOMETIMES. 
          DO YOU VIOLATE THE, THE LETTER OF THE LAW WITHOUT VIOLATING THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW? I THINK SO I DON'T I DON'T KNOW AND UNLESS HE TELLS ME DIFFERENTLY AND I WOULD YIELD TO HIM IF THE CITY MANAGER MINDS ME ASKING A QUESTION OF HOW MANY AMBULANCES DO WE HAVE EVERY DAY ON THE STREET? AND GETTING A SIMPLE ANSWER SO THAT I CAN INFORM THE CITIZENS WHO ASK ME. I DON'T KNOW THAT OUR CITY MANAGER'S WANTING US TO BE THAT RESTRICTIVE. WELL, LET ME IT DOESN'T SAY THAT. IT DOESN'T SAY CONVERSATIONS SO LIKE THAT. OKAY. SO IT DOESN'T SAY IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS GIVING DIRECTION OKAY. AND SO WELL THAT'S MY POINT. SO PICKING UP THAT SO LET'S JUST USE THAT SAME CONVERSATION. RIGHT. AND LET'S JUST SAY, THE CHIEF HAD TOLD YOU THAT HE HAD SEVEN AMBULANCES IN OPERATION. AND YOU SAID, HOW MANY ARE WE AUTHORIZED FOR IT? HE SAYS, I'M AUTHORIZED FOR NINE. AND YOU RESPONSE BACK TO THE CHIEF IS, I WANT TO SEE NINE AMBULANCES AND SERVICES EVERY DAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO SEE. THAT IS DIRECTION. AND THAT IS A VIOLATION. AGREE. AND THAT'S THAT'S THE WAY I'VE ALWAYS TRIED TO OPERATE, TO SEEK INFORMATION, BUT NEVER TO GIVE DIRECTION. AND I'VE TRIED VERY HARD TO OPERATE THAT WAY. BUT I'M JUST USING THAT AS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETIMES MAYBE WE DO VIOLATE THE LETTER OF THE LAW, BUT TRYING TO STAY WITHIN THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW. 
          BUT CAN WE DO BETTER? ABSOLUTELY. SHOULD WE TRY TO DO BETTER? ABSOLUTELY. AND, WE HAVE TO DO THE BEST WE CAN AND OPERATE WITH INTEGRITY. AND, BUT I JUST WANT AGAIN, TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT I SOUGHT COUNSEL. I WAS TOLD BY MY CITY ATTORNEY THAT I DID MY JOB. 
          I SPOKE TO THE PROCESS. AND, I LIVE WITH THAT BECAUSE I TRUST THE SYSTEM WE HAVE. THANK YOU. 
          MAYOR COUNCILMAN TIM. COUNCILMAN NEAL. NO COMMENT. MADAM. CITY ATTORNEY. OKAY. YOU CAN TELL CHRIS HAPPY BIRTHDAY. THANK YOU, MADAM ATTORNEY. HEY, CHRIS. DARIO, I KNOW YOU'RE AT HOME, WE'RE PRAYING FOR YOU. I JUST I MEAN, WE NEEDED A MOMENT OF CONVERSATION. I JUST WANTED TO TELL MY BROTHER. HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MAN. APPRECIATE WORKING WITH YOU. APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU DO. AND I HOPE YOU ENJOY YOUR BIRTHDAY. AND I PRAY FOR A SPEEDY RECOVERY ON YOUR SURGERY. 
          THANK YOU. SO I'VE TALKED WAY MORE THAN I THAN I WOULD PREFER TO DO IN COUNCIL TODAY, SO I'LL KEEP MY COMMENTS SHORT AND BRIEF WHEN I SAY THE COUNCIL VIOLATES THE CHARTER DAILY. THAT WAS AN ATTACK ON COUNCIL. THAT'S JUST TO POINT OUT HOW EASY IT IS TO DO IT AND HOW ALMOST, INVOLVED AND PASSIONATE COUNCIL IS ABOUT HEARING AND GETTING, RESPONSES FOR THE CITIZENS THAT CALL THEM, 
          [02:45:01]
AND BEING AND BEING INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS, I THINK THE MANAGER WOULD PROBABLY PREFER THAT YOU COMMUNICATE IT WITH HIM DIRECTLY, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THERE'S A VERY THIN LINE BETWEEN, INTERFERENCE IN THE DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS AND, OBTAINING INFORMATION, FROM FROM AN EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY MANAGER. BUT THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF THE PROCESS IN THE HIERARCHY. WE AGAIN HAVE AN ADMINISTRATION THAT IS WENT THROUGH GREAT LENGTHS TO PROVIDE COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS WITH A, WITH A, WITH A FLOW CHART. THIS IS WHO ANSWERS TO WHO. AND THIS IS HOW WE'RE GOING TO RUN OUR CITY EFFECTIVELY. COUNCIL IS AT THE TOP OF THAT WITH ONLY THE CITIZENS ABOVE THEM. AND, THROUGHOUT THROUGHOUT MY TENURE AS CITY ATTORNEY, WORKING WITH THE CITY MANAGER, THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN EFFORT TO INCLUDE COUNCIL IN EVERYTHING. THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN AN EFFORT TO BE TRANSPARENT, EVEN WITH THE DEALINGS OF MY OFFICE, COUNCIL IS WELCOME TO ASK ABOUT ANY CASE, ANY CASE FILINGS. I'M POINTING TO COUNCILMAN GETZ BECAUSE HE AND I TALK, VERY EXTENSIVELY ABOUT CASES THAT ARE INTERESTED OF INTEREST TO HIM AND INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS IN HIS WARD. AND I DON'T TAKE OFFENSE TO THAT, I DON'T TAKE OFFENSE TO COUNCIL, SAYING HOW THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN OUTCOME TAKE, COME OUT. AND I DON'T THINK THE CITY MANAGER DOES EITHER, AS IT RELATES TO GIVING DIRECTION, I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS, THAT WERE PROBABLY DISTURBING, THAT WERE MADE, DOING, ONE OF THE CONFIRMATION HEARINGS THAT PROBABLY COULD HAVE GIVEN, AN AIR OF INTERFERENCE, BUT MY JOB AS THE CITY ATTORNEY IS A TO DO WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY FIRST, AND THEN SECONDLY, TO ADVISE COUNCIL THE BEST WAY I CAN. AND IN DOING SO, TO ALWAYS KEEP, THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY AT HEART. WHEN ADVISING. SO I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S NECESSARY FOR US TO, TO POINT OUT THE FAULTS OF COUNCIL, AS IT RELATES TO THE DAILY INTERFERENCE RATE, I THINK THE MANAGER DOES A GOOD JOB OF PRIVATELY CORRECTING YOU. I DON'T THINK THAT IT NEEDS TO BE A PUBLIC SPECTACLE TO CENSOR THE ENTIRE COUNCIL. EVERY TIME SOMEONE PICKS UP THE PHONE TO CALL A DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR, OR TO CALL AN EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY, IT'S NOT NECESSARY, IT'S NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY. I THINK COUNCILMAN TURNER POINTED OUT, WELL, THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO. THERE'S A LOT OF PROJECTS, THERE'S A LOT OF INITIATIVES. 
          THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT REQUIRES COUNCIL ATTENTION AND THIS JUST ISN'T ONE OF THEM, THE PROCESS OF MAKING SAUSAGE AS IT RELATES TO PICKING OUR NEW POLICE CHIEF WAS PAINFUL, BUT I THINK WE ENDED UP WITH A VERY GOOD CHOICE FOR THE CITIZENS, I THINK CHIEF IS GOING TO DO AN AMAZING JOB. I THINK WHERE WE ARE NOW IN OUR PROCESS OF MOVING PAST THAT, IT WAS A VERY HEATED DISCUSSION IN OUR COMMUNITY. IT WAS A VERY HEATED DISCUSSION AMONGST COUNCIL. AND I THINK THAT THAT JUST GOES TO SHOW LIKE HOW IMPORTANT THAT POSITION IS TO THE CITY, AND HOW HOW IMPORTANT IT WAS TO PICK SOMEONE THAT WAS GOING TO DO THE BEST JOB FOR OUR CITY. I THINK WE HAVE THAT PERSON, MOVING FORWARD, I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR COUNCIL TO GET BOGGED DOWN ON THE SMALL THINGS AS IT RELATES TO WHAT BAD THING ANOTHER COUNCIL PERSON DID. 
          INSTEAD, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO GET BACK TO A PLACE WHERE COUNCIL IS UNIFIED IN THEIR VISION AND THEIR STRATEGIC PLAN, AND THEIR PURPOSE FOR DOING WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE CITIZENS. AND I'M HAPPY AND WILLING TO BE A PART OF THAT. ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER BOONE. 
          YES, SIR. I JUST WANTED TO WISH, COUNCILMAN DARIO A HAPPY BIRTHDAY. ASSISTANT CITY. MR. CITY MANAGER. OKAY, I PLAN NOT TO SAY ANYTHING, BUT IT'S BEEN A LOT SAID, YOU KNOW, IT'S ABOUT RESPECT. YOU KNOW, I RESPECT YOUR POSITION AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL. TOTALLY AND I MY ACTIVITIES REFLECT THAT. AND I WANT TO INCLUDE YOU IN EVERYTHING I DO AS PART OF THIS PROCESS. BUT TO ASK FOR THE SAME RESPECT AND THE RESPECT IN THE POSITION OF THE CITY MANAGER, IT'S NOT THE PERSON, IT'S THE POSITION. NO MATTER WHO'S SITTING IN THE CHAIR, I ASK YOU TO DO THAT. YOU KNOW, HAVING BEEN PRESIDENT OF THE TEXAS CITY MANAGERS ASSOCIATION, MEMBER OF THE INTERNATIONAL CITY MANAGERS ASSOCIATION, I'M ONE THAT HAS TO PROMOTE THAT WAY OF LOOKING AT THE POSITION. YOU KNOW, IF I DON'T DO IT, WHO WILL? I HAVEN'T BEEN PRESIDENT OF THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION, FOR SURE. SO IT'S MORE ABOUT RESPECT FOR BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS PASSED BY THE CITIZENS WHEN A VOTE BY THE CITIZENS, THEY ESTABLISHED THE RULES OF THIS CHARTER. I DIDN'T DO IT. YOU DIDN'T DO IT. THE CITIZENS VOTED THE RULES OF THAT CHARTER ABOUT INTERFERENCE AND AS A PART OF MY JOB AS A CITY MANAGER IS TO ENFORCE THE LAWS OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE LAWS. THOSE ARE THE LAWS OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT TO ENFORCE. AND SO THAT'S WHY I ENFORCED THEM. WE HAVE TO ENFORCE THEM. AND, AND SO IT'S JUST NOT THAT 
          [02:50:09]
SOMETHING I WANT TO DO. I'D MUCH RATHER NOT DO THAT TIME, BECAUSE THE ONE OF THE MOST DIFFICULT THINGS FOR A CITY MANAGER. AND WHEN I PUT THIS IN THE EMAIL, THOSE TWICE YEARLY EMAILS WHERE I TALK ABOUT INTERFERENCE TO Y'ALL, IT'S ONE OF THE MOST DIFFICULT THINGS A CITY MAN'S GOT TO DO IS TALK TO A COUNCIL ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE YOU'RE MY BOSSES. ALWAYS DIFFICULT TO TALK TO YOUR BOSS ABOUT THAT SUBJECT IN THERE, BUT I HAVE TO REMIND YOU, AT TIMES IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE TO DO WHEN YOU. AND YOU HAVE TO SEND THAT MESSAGE, YOU LET ME KNOW WHEN I'M NOT DOING IT THIS EASILY. DAILY. DAILY. THAT'S DAILY. THAT'S WHAT'S DAILY. 
          SURAT I'M GONNA GET GET IT FROM Y'ALL. NOBODY'S BASHFUL ON THIS GROUP, SO I RESPECT THAT AND I HONOR THAT. AND I GO ON JUST LIKE THE SELECTION OF THE CHIEF. I RESPECT THAT YOUR DECISION. 
          THAT'S A COUNCIL. THAT WAS A COUNCIL. IT WAS FOUR THREE VOTE. BUT WHATEVER IT IS, THAT'S THE THAT'S THE WILL OF THIS COUNCIL. WHETHER IT'S FOUR, 3526170. SO MY JOB WAS TO CARRY OUT WHAT YOU HAD SAID AND I DIDN'T HESITATE. AND COMING BACK WITH SOMETHING, I LISTENED TO YOU. I LISTENED TO ALL OF THE, THE PUBLIC OUT HERE. AND WE CAME BACK FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS GOOD FOR THE CITY. SO IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU. IT HAS TO DO WITH THE WILL OF THIS COUNCIL, AND I THINK YOU STAYED WITHIN YOUR WILL AS A COUNCIL ON THIS DAIS. AND THAT DECISION, I THINK YOU DID. I THINK THAT WITHIN CHAPTER 143 AND THE AND THE CHARTER, DID I THINK YOU VIOLATE THE CHARTER IN SOME OTHER WAYS? YES BUT I THINK IN DEALING WITH THAT, I THINK YOU DID, AND I RESPECT THAT DECISION. THAT'S YOUR DECISION ABILITY FOR YOU TO MAKE. IT'S NOT FOR ME TO MAKE. SO YOU MAKE THAT DECISION. I RESPECT IT, AND WE CAN GO ON, SO AGAIN, THIS WASN'T MY AGENDA ITEM. LET'S BE CLEAR, BUT IT GIVES US ALL AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT WE PROBABLY SHOULD TALK ABOUT, SHOULD HAVE TALKED ABOUT MORE. AND I THINK ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK. BUT WE'RE AND I'VE NEVER SAID DON'T TALK TO STAFF. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT CAME FROM. NO. THAT'S IT CARRIES THAT COMMUNICATION IS TO GIVEN THE DIRECTION. THAT'S A PROBLEM. 
          THANK YOU AND HAPPY BIRTHDAY CHRISTOPHER. THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER. CAN I HAVE A MOMENT? YES I WON'T TAKE LONG, COUNCILMAN TURNER TALKED ABOUT WE, YOU KNOW, GOVERNING OURSELF AND SO, AND MADAM ATTORNEY SPOKE ABOUT A FRESH START. WE'RE GOING TO START CLEAN TODAY. AND SO, I'LL DO THIS. I'LL SAY THIS, CITY MANAGER, IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION. THAT I'VE DONE SOMETHING PUBLICLY, AND IN DOING THAT, IT WAS A DISRESPECT TO YOU. AND THAT IS IN THE MOMENT OF DISCUSSION AND ITEMS THAT AT TIMES I GO DIRECTLY TO STAFF AND ASK THEM QUESTIONS. AND IN DOING THAT WAS SHOWING DISRESPECT TO YOU. THAT WASN'T INTENTIONAL ON MY PART. THAT WAS JUST IN THE MOMENT, JUST TALKING AND TRYING TO FIND INFORMATION, FROM THE DAIS, ADDRESSING DEMI, FOR EXAMPLE, AND ASKING HER A QUESTION WHEN I SHOULD BE GOING TO YOU FIRST AND SAYING CITY MANAGER COULD YOU, CAN WE GET THIS INFORMATION? AND SO THAT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THAT PUBLICLY, I WAS SHOWING DISRESPECT TO YOU AND SO PUBLICLY, I APOLOGIZE. AND I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I WILL IN THE FUTURE, DO MY BEST TO FOLLOW PROTOCOL AND MAKE SURE THAT I SHOW RESPECT TO YOUR POSITION AND, AND, AND ADDRESS YOU BEFORE I ADDRESS THE STAFF. THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS. AND, MR. CITY MANAGER, I CERTAINLY APOLOGIZE IF I, YOU KNOW, IF I STEP OUT OF LINE AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS AND I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATIONS, AND I KNOW I CONTINUE TO LEARN. AND I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR THE DOWNTOWN PROACTIVE CODE ENFORCEMENT AND HOPE THAT WE CAN CONTINUE ABOUT EVERY THREE MEETINGS, GETTING AN UPDATE WITH DATES ON THEIRS. AND, AND THANK YOU FOR, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER BOONE FOR THE WORK ON THE HOMELESS. ORDINANCE. AND I KNOW THAT THERE WILL STILL BE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS, BUT HOPEFULLY WE CAN BE MOVING FORWARD AND TRYING TO MANAGE THIS RATHER THAN JUST NOT DEAL WITH IT. AND WITH THAT, AND HAPPY BIRTHDAY. COUNCILMAN
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.