Aug 20, 2024 City Council

[CALL TO ORDER]

[PRESENTATIONS]

[PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA/CONSENT]

[CONSENT AGENDA]

[01:43:10]

THE WATER AND WASTEWATER INCREASE WILL AVERAGE OUT TO ABOUT 5.8%. TOTAL NEXT SLIDE. IT

[01:43:18]

[01:43:28]

[01:43:33]

[01:43:40]

[01:43:49]

[01:43:54]

[01:44:01]

[01:44:11]

[01:44:16]

[01:44:22]

[01:44:31]

[01:44:36]

[01:44:43]

[01:44:49]

[01:44:59]

[01:45:05]

[01:45:12]

[01:45:26]

[01:45:33]

[01:45:39]

[01:45:46]

NEXT NEXT SLIDE. WATER PROJECTS TOTAL 4 TO $6,000,440 FOR 2025. HAS PAID FOR IT THROUGH AN ASSORTMENT OF METHODS TO GO BONDS, REVENUE BONDS, GRANTS AND OPERATING FUND. NEXT WASTEWATER.

JUST GO TO THE TOTAL BECAUSE IT'S TOO MANY TO TRY TO READ. NEXT ONE TOTAL OF 27 925. AGAIN, WE WANT TO GET OUR WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS IN AND IN GOOD SHAPE, TO WHERE THEY'RE PROVIDING THE SERVICE THAT WE NEED. NEXT AND AS WE WRAP IT UP, BUDGET CALENDAR AGAIN, I MENTIONED AUGUST 16TH, WE FILED THAT BUDGET. THE 20TH IS TODAY WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT WITH THE CITY MANAGER, AND YOU'LL BE LOOKING AT A PROPOSED TAX RATE. ACCEPTING THE CIP AND SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS WITH COUNCIL. WE'LL BE COMING BACK ON SEPTEMBER 17TH WITH YOUR CONSIDERATION. AND ADOPTING A BUDGET. CAPITAL PROGRAMS ACCEPT AN APPRAISAL AND RATIFYING THE BUDGET AND TAX RATE, FOR SURE. AND THE NEW FISCAL YEAR WILL START OCTOBER 1ST. THANK YOU.

NEXT SLIDE. AND AS I WRAP UP, I'D JUST LIKE TO THANK THE PEOPLE WHO DID THE REALLY, REALLY HARD WORK IN DOING THIS WORK, OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR, MICHELLE RAY, DID YEOMAN'S WORK IN GETTING THIS DONE WITH HER BUDGET ANALYST, DUNCAN BROWN, WHO WORKED TREMENDOUSLY ON IT, AND AMY SMITH IN THE DEPARTMENT AND BRIDGET AVEC, THEY DID GREAT WORK. A LOT OF HOURS, A LOT OF TIME. AND WHAT THEY DID TO MAKE US ALL LOOK GOOD. AND OF COURSE, THE TWO ASSISTANT CITY MANAGERS, JUNE ELLIS AND CHRIS BOONE, WORKED HARD. BUT THE DIRECTORS AND CITY STAFF, THEY THEY DID THE WORK AND PUTTING IT TOGETHER. YOU KNOW, WE GET THE CREDIT SOMETIMES, BUT THEY DO THE WORK FOR SURE. AND OF COURSE, THIS COUNCIL FOR THE WORK AND YOUR PATIENCE AND WORKING THROUGH THIS DOCUMENT. WE APPRECIATE YOU FOR DOING THIS. USUALLY I DO THIS FROM THE

[01:50:07]

AND ALONG WITH THE POLICE TRAINING MODULE, IT INCLUDES THE FIRE TRAINING MODULE THAT EVERY

[01:55:06]

BUT IT'S A GREAT TOOL. I'VE SEEN IT IN OTHER CITIES AND IT'S PRETTY AWESOME. OKAY ALL RIGHT.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE RIGHT NOW. OKAY. MR. WILLIAMS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. AS YOU RECOGNIZE, THE TOP PRIORITY OF COUNCIL WAS QUALITY OF LIFE. AND THEN AS, OUR NEW COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR RECOGNIZED, THE FASTEST GROWING SPORT IN THE COUNTRY IS PICKLEBALL. BUT WHAT I DIDN'T SEE IN HERE WAS ANY PICKLEBALL COURTS BEING CONSTRUCTED OR EVEN PLANNED FOR. MAYBE I MISSED IT, BUT CAN YOU SHOW ME WHERE THAT IS? YEAH, I THINK PICKLEBALL. IT SHOULD BE IN THERE. I THINK THE FIRST PART, THE FIRST YEAR SHOULD BE THE JUST FOR THE DESIGN AND ENGINEERING OF THE COURTS AND THEN THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION THE NEXT YEAR. SO THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT TOO. BUT I DIDN'T SEE IT. OKAY. AS YOU WENT THROUGH THIS, IS IT SOMEWHERE IN HERE? IT'S JUST LOOKING AT CFP.

IT'S IN THE. CAN I THINK DESIGN DESIGN FOR NEXT YEAR AND THEN CONSTRUCTION THE YEAR AFTER? YEAH, WE START TO DESIGN NEXT YEAR. MONEY WE HAVE MONEY IN IT TO START WITH THIS BUDGET. OKAY.

THAT'S WONDERFUL BECAUSE THAT'S ACTUALLY A SPORT THAT WILL BRING PEOPLE INTO OUR COMMUNITY. AND FOR TOURNAMENTS, THEY CAN STAY IN OUR HOTELS, EAT IN OUR RESTAURANTS. THEY'VE ALREADY HAD SOME NICE PICKLEBALL TOURNAMENTS OUT AT THE ATHLETIC FACILITY. AND WITH INCREASED COURTS, THEY CAN MAKE THOSE BIGGER. ONE THING I DID WANT TO ALSO ASK YOU ABOUT IS THAT YES, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET AND SOMETIMES THE WAY YOU ACCOMPLISH THAT BALANCED BUDGET IS YOU HAVE TO PULL FROM RESERVES IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR REVENUE MEETS YOUR PROPOSED EXPENDITURES. THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING. THIS COMING YEAR, ISN'T IT? THERE THERE IS A DEFICIT. UNLESS YOU PULL FROM RESERVES. WELL, AGAIN, THIS IS TERMINOLOGY. I WOULDN'T CALL IT A DEFICIT BECAUSE THE DEFINITION SAYS YOU. IT'S THE DOLLARS YOU BRING IN PLUS RESERVES. BUT YOU CAN'T EXCEED. YOU CAN'T GO UNDER YOUR REQUIRED FUND BALANCE. YOU KNOW, SOME DOLLARS YOU BRING IN THAT YEAR OR YEAR BEFORE YOU EXPEND THEM. AND THAT ADDS FOR IT TO, YOU KNOW, WE ISSUED 60 MILLION IN DEBT OR A MONTH AGO, A FEW WEEKS AGO, BUT THAT MONEY IS NOT GOING TO BE EXPENDED NEXT YEAR, SO IT WON'T BE REFLECTED IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET. SO THERE ARE CERTAIN TIME, TIMING THINGS TO THAT. THEY JUST CAN'T SHOW IN THAT PARTICULAR YEAR'S BUDGET. SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT VARIABLES THAT PLAY INTO THAT, THAT'S JUST ONE OF THEM. BUT BUT AGAIN THE YOUR FUND BALANCE IS TREMENDOUSLY HEALTHY. AND THAT'S IT. ACCORDING TO THE DEFINITION. THAT'S A BALANCED BUDGET. THANK YOU. MAYOR. COUNCILMAN TURNER APPRECIATE YOU. BEAR WITH ME, GUYS. SO I SEEN A DECREASE IN THE FIRE BUDGET BY ROUGHLY $2 MILLION. THAT, DEFICIT IS THAT A REPRESENTATION OF THE OVERTIME REDUCTION PROPOSED, YES. SO I WAS PAYING ATTENTION TO THAT. I SEEN A BIG DROP IN THAT BUDGET, WHICH IS GOOD, CHIEF. THAT'S A GOOD LOOK, THE SECOND THING THAT WAS A CONCERN OF MINE IS OUR FIRE AND POLICE ARE THE BIGGEST EXPENDITURES OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, WHICH COMES OUT TO BE ROUGHLY 60%, ANOTHER CONCERN IS, AND I'M GLAD WE ADDRESSED IT, I WANT TO EXPLAIN WHY WE CAME UP WITH THE HR INCENTIVES FOR FIRE AND POLICE, BECAUSE 64% OF OUR POLICE OFFICERS WORK IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, BUT LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. AND UNDERSTAND OUR CITY MAKES OUR REVENUE OFF PROPERTY TAXES AND SALES TAXES. AND YOU SEE, THE PROPERTY TAXES ARE ROUGHLY 31% CORRECT. AND THEN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, 75% OF OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT LIVES OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, BUT WORKS INSIDE THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. AND I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT, WHEN

[02:00:02]

[02:05:02]

AND THEN THEY HAVE TO BACK THAT DEBT WITH REVENUES FROM THE CITY, YOU KNOW, WHICH TYPICALLY MEAN TAXES. AND SO YOU GO OUT AND YOU CAN EITHER SOMETIMES YOU PUT IT ON A BALLOT OR THE VOTERS VOTE ON THESE PROJECTS, OR SOMETIMES WITH SOME CO PROJECTS, COUNCIL CAN ISSUE OR COUNCIL CAN ISSUE THE DEBT THEMSELVES. SO MAJOR THINGS YOU MENTIONED A WATER PARK OR A MAJOR PARKS ANY, ANY REALLY MAJOR PROJECT, IT CAN GO ON THE BALLOT AND CITIZENS VOTE FOR THEM. IF I MISS SOMETHING. STAFF KNOW THAT WAS THAT WAS ON POINT. I JUST WENT OUT. WE GOT THIS COMING UP PRETTY SOON, AND I JUST WANT TO TAKE EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO EDUCATE THE COMMUNITY AS OFTEN AS I CAN, BECAUSE THESE ARE SOME BIG TICKET ITEMS COMING UP. BUT OVERALL, Y'ALL DID A GREAT JOB WITH THE BUDGET. I REALLY LIKED HOW YOU ACTUALLY WERE ABLE TO INCREASE THE BUDGET, INCREASE STAFF SALARIES WITHOUT A POPULATION GROWTH. THAT'S REALLY IMPRESSIVE. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN SHAW. THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER AND YOUR STAFF FOR THE HARD WORK IN PUTTING THIS BUDGET TOGETHER AND THE THOROUGHNESS IN WHICH YOU PRESENTED IT. HAVE FOUR QUESTIONS. I'LL GO THROUGH THEM VERY QUICKLY. NUMBER ONE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A ZERO BASED BUDGETING, AS COUNCILMAN GOETZ MENTIONED. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR HARD WORK TO GET US TO THAT, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE, PROJECTING 167 MILLION REVENUE, 170 MILLION EXPENDITURES. WE HAVE AN UNDER THREE, 3.1 MILLION, WE HAVE OUR FUND BALANCE. WE CAN PULL IT OUT OF.

AND I UNDERSTAND, THAT LEAVES US WITH AN OVER 9 MILLION OF WHAT THE POLICY REQUIRES. OKAY, SO I GUESS MY CONCERN IS, A ZERO BASED BUDGET FOR ME IS DOLLARS IN DOLLARS OUT, EQUAL COME TO ZERO. TAKING MONEY OUT OF THE FUND BALANCE TO MAKE UP THAT DIFFERENCE FOR ME IS NOT A ZERO BASED BUDGET, BUT I CAN UNDERSTAND WE GET INTO SEMANTICS AND I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. I GUESS MY CONCERN IS IF WE CONTINUE AT A $3 MILLION A YEAR DEFICIT, LET'S SAY OVER FIVE YEARS, SIX YEARS, SEVEN, EIGHT, TEN YEARS, THEN WHERE DOES THAT PUT US? AND SO HOW WOULD YOU AND THE STAFF SPEAK TO THAT, THAT IF WE CONTINUE ON THIS AT $3 MILLION A YEAR, LET'S SAY, BECAUSE BEAUMONT IS WHERE IT'S AT RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE LOOKS LIKE. WHERE WOULD WE BE IN TEN YEARS WITH OUR FUND BALANCE? WELL, IT DEPENDS, YOU KNOW, USE ZERO

[02:10:04]

IT'S NOT A DEFICIT BUDGET. YOU'RE ACTUALLY GROWING YOUR FUND BALANCE TREMENDOUSLY. YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A 35% ABOVE REQUIRED FUND BALANCE DOLLARS TO USE ON PROJECTS AND IN ACCORDING TO YOUR BUDGET DEFINITION, YOU CAN USE THEM. BUT YOU KNOW, WE WON'T BE RUNNING A DEFICIT BUDGET. IF IT WERE A DEFICIT BUDGET, WE'D BE SAYING A WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY. I DON'T VIEW THIS AS A DEFICIT BUDGET BECAUSE YOU HAVE EXPENDITURES AGAIN, THAT COME IN ONE YEAR VERSUS ANOTHER YEAR, AND IT DOESN'T ALWAYS EQUAL UP. YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT IF WE'RE GOING TO DO A WHATEVER NEW ROAD AND WE ISSUED THAT DEBT FOR THAT $10 MILLION FOR THAT ROAD. BUT WE CAN'T GET TO BUILD IT UNTIL THE NEXT YEAR. IT GOES IN THE NEXT YEAR. BUT THE REVENUE SHOWS IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR, SO IT WON'T ALWAYS ADD UP DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR. SO IT'S LIKE AN ACCRUAL SYSTEM IN FINANCING. I THINK THAT'S THE WORD. IT COULD. YES THAT'S A GOOD ANALOGY. SO I UNDERSTAND HOW COMPLICATED THAT CAN GET. JUST KNOW THAT I LOOK FORWARD TO THE DAY WHEN WE HAVE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE SPEND IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE TAKE IN. SO. AND I KNOW WE ALL WANT THAT SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO REACH INTO THE BALANCE AND PULL CASH OUT TO TRY TO MAKE THOSE NUMBERS MATCH.

BUT THAT THAT I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN WORKING HARD ON THE BUDGET AND I JUST APPRECIATE THAT. AND I JUST WANTED TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THAT, THAT OF COURSE, THAT $3.1 MILLION LOSS IS GOING TO BE A CONCERN OF MINE BECAUSE AS I SAID OF YEARS TO COME, WHERE DOES THAT WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE US? NUMBER TWO, TO ADD TO YES. GO AHEAD. NOW ALSO PART OF THAT IS 12 MILLION BEING TRANSFERRED OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND TO THE CAPITAL RESERVE, TO PAY FOR PROJECTS. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT 12 MILLION OF THAT. THOSE DOLLARS. THAT'S. YES. TRANSFERRED OUT TO BUY DIFFERENT EQUIPMENT OR PAY FOR ROAD REPAIRS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO, SO YOU ACTUALLY GOT MORE.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT'S ACCOUNTED FOR, IT SEEMS LIKE A DEFICIT WHEN YOU ACTUALLY HAD A POSITIVE. BUT YOU JUST PAID, YOU MOVED SOME MONEY FROM ONE FUND TO THE OTHER. OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH.

THANK YOU, NUMBER TWO, YOU MENTIONED OUR OUR DEBT AT 18.5 MILLION, AND THE RATIO IS A LITTLE TOO HIGH, I DID A ROUGH CALCULATION, AND IT'S AROUND 11%, SO MY QUESTION IS FOR MY PERSONAL INFORMATION IS WHERE DO WE KNOW WHERE WE'D LIKE THAT RATIO TO BE? WHAT'S WHAT'S A TARGET FOR US TO SHOOT FOR THE NUMBER IN THE IN THE BOND RATING GROUP. BUT THEY JUST MADE THAT COMMENT TO US THAT THEY THOUGHT OUR DEBT RATIO WAS A LITTLE HIGH. DO YOU REMEMBER CHERYL? OKAY NUMBER THREE, YOU MENTIONED THAT WE CAN LOWER THE TAX RATE BETWEEN NOW AND THE 17TH WHEN WE APPROVE THE BUDGET, BUT WE CAN'T RAISE IT CORRECT BETWEEN NOW AND THE 17TH. CAN WE MAKE CHANGES TO THE BUDGET? YES. SO WE COULD ADD MONEY TO IT? YES. SO JUST A QUESTION, IS THERE AN ARGUMENT FOR US TO RAISE THAT TAX RATE TODAY TO GIVE US SOME ROOM FOR THESE ADJUSTMENTS THAT MAY BE COMING? AND THEN ON THE 17TH, WE CAN LOWER IT BACK DOWN IF WE SO CHOOSE OR NEED TO AS AS A CITY MANAGER, I WILL NEVER RECOMMEND YOU GO HIGHER THAN A VOTER APPROVED TAX RATE. WELL I WELL I YES THAT'S BUT WE CAN GO UP 3.5% IF I'M CORRECT. NO REVENUE I KNOW IS THAT NO NEW REVENUE. WE HAVE IT. BUT VOTER APPROVAL RATE I THINK WE CAN RAISE IT 3.5% WITHOUT A VOTE. CORRECT? NO.

WE'RE AT THE VOTER APPROVED RATE. WE ARE THERE NOW. SO IF YOU GO ANY HIGHER, YOU'LL BE ABOVE THE VOTER APPROVED RATE, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT SUSCEPTIBLE. EXCUSE ME TO A PETITION TO DO A ROLLBACK. OKAY. SO THEN ANYTHING WE ADD TO IT, WE'RE JUST GOING TO ADD TO THAT 3.1 $3.1 MILLION UNDER BETWEEN NOW AND THE 17TH. HAS BEEN THAT AGAIN, IF WE CAN ANY ANY ANY CHANGES WE MAKE TO

[02:15:07]

MAYOR. MR. MANAGER, A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS ON PAGE 15 AND 17 OF THE BUDGET UNDER THE ACTUALS FOR 2023, WHERE YOU HAVE PROPERTY TAXES UNDER REVENUES AND IT SAYS $6.2 MILLION, IS THAT A TYPO? SO WHICH WHICH IS THAT? CAN YOU GET THE SCREEN BACK. WHAT'S 15. WHICH ONE IS THAT? COUNCILMAN ON PAGE 15 OF THE OF THE BUDGET, NOT OF YOUR PACKAGE. OKAY, OKAY. IN THE BUDGET BOOK. YES SIR. OKAY. SO IT IS A YEAH, WE STILL HAVE A COUPLE OF ISSUES TO WORK OUT WITH OUR NEW BUDGET SOFTWARE. SO THAT'S WHAT THAT IS. THAT WILL BE CORRECTED. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MY NEXT QUESTION ON ALL THESE OTHER RECOVERY FUNDS YOU GOT COVID RECOVERY, LAURA RECOVERY AND HARVEY RECOVERY. IS ALL THAT MONEY GOING TO BE COLLECTED? SO PROBABLY NOT.

HARVEY, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE IN REALLY GOOD SHAPE, LAURA, IT LOOKS LIKE WE MAY BE A LITTLE BIT UNDER, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO KNOW UNTIL NEXT YEAR. AND COVID, WE JUST DON'T KNOW. AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I AM GOING TO ALLOCATE SOME MORE MONEY TO THE COVID FUND TO COVER SOME OF THAT NEXT YEAR, BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME ARPA FUNDS LEFT, AND I'M GOING TO TAKE THOSE TO THAT COVID FUND TO TRY TO SHORE THAT UP AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN GOOD SHAPE THERE. SO ARE WE BUDGETING AS IF WE ARE GETTING THAT MONEY? YES. AND I THINK THAT WE ARE GOING TO GET A LOT OF THAT MONEY, BUT WE DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY'S BEEN PAID FOR COVID YET FROM FEMA. OKAY. WE HAVE WE HAVE TURNED EVERYTHING IN THAT WE HAVE. AND I HAVE A BUNCH MORE REVENUE QUESTIONS. I'LL JUST EMAIL YOU ON THEM. OKAY. THANK YOU. JUST ONE MORE THING. YES, COUNCILMAN TURNER, JUST ALL I REQUEST IS IN OUR BUDGET BOOK HOW YOU HAD THE PERCENTAGES IN THE PIE CHART. YOU HAD THE PIE CHART. BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE PERCENTAGES, SO I JUST REQUEST THAT THE PERCENTAGE BREAKDOWN WOULD BE ON EVERY PIE CHART. I DON'T KNOW THAT. I DON'T THINK IT'S OUR SOFTWARE IS ABLE TO DO THAT. WE HAVE A TICKET IN TO TRY TO GET THAT TO HAPPEN. OH MAN. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I CAN DO IT ON EXCEL FOR YOU. I CAN DO IT. YEAH. THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING FOR IT. WE CAN WE CAN GET THAT FOR YOU. I WOULD JUST LOVE TO HAVE A BUDGET IF WE HAVE TO DO IT ON ANOTHER DOCUMENT. BUT I DEFINITELY WANT TO SEE IT. COUNCILMAN GAETZ, IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME THAT MY CONCERN ABOUT THE PICKLEBALL COURTS IS BECAUSE WE WERE MISSING A SLIDE IN OUR PRESENTATION, BUT THAT WILL BE SUPPLEMENTED AFTER THE MEETING TODAY. IT CONCERNS ALL OF THE PARKS PROJECTS THAT WILL BE. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT WAS MISSING THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT IS GOING TO BE SUPPLEMENTED LATER? HAVE A COPY OF THE PARKS? NO, I THINK THAT WAS THE ONLY THING MISSING. AND WE'VE ALREADY WE'VE ALREADY EMAILED IT TO CATHERINE AND VIRGIE TO GET TO YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN SHAW.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE A BUDGET BOOK. I DON'T HAVE ONE. YOU DON'T HAVE ONE. HERE YOU GO.

I HAVE YOURS COMING. OKAY. NEIL TOOK MINE. THANK YOU. AND REMEMBER, THIS IS STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS FOR THE NEXT APPROXIMATE MONTH. ALMOST. SO WE'LL BE REFINING THINGS. MY COMMENTS ARE, WE'VE HAD LOTS OF EXCELLENT PRESENTATION AND LOTS OF GOOD QUESTIONS, AND I THANK YOU FOR THAT. I WILL REMEMBER IT'S A BUDGET, AS WITH THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, OFTEN WE DON'T

[02:20:05]

[REGULAR AGENDA]

AYE. ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE PLEASE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER TWO? COUNCIL CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF RECEIVING THE PROPOSED 2025 CAPITAL PROGRAM AND SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING. AND IT COMES WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO? MOVE TO APPROV. 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 I. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE PLEASE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER THREE? COUNCIL, CONSIDER ESTABLISHING AND TAKING A RECORD VOTE ON THE PROPOSED 2024. IS THAT FOUR FIVE FOR TAX RATE AND SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING THAT COMES WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF A .659663. THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION. BUT COUNCIL CAN DO AS IT PLEASE. IS THERE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER THREE? MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND, THERE IS A MOTION AND A

[02:25:05]

IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER FOUR MOVED TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION? IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER FOUR. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? COUNCILMAN DARIO. YES IS THIS PART OF OR DOES THIS HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT PRIVATE NEIGHBORHOOD OVER THERE OFF OF WEST CALDER THAT'S WANTING US TO TAKE OVER THEIR, INFRASTRUCTURE? NO, SIR. THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE SECTION OF WEST CALDER ROAD BETWEEN FELIX STREET AND D SIX DITCH. 2O2B, THERE WERE SOME COMPLAINTS BY CITIZENS OF REPETITIVE FLOODING, ESPECIALLY DURING LARGE, VERY LARGE EVENTS LIKE HARVEY AND IMELDA. WE DID A STUDY WITH LEAD ENGINEERING AND THEY GAVE US TWO OPTIONS ON ADDRESSING SOME OF THE DRAINAGE IN THIS AREA. SO OPTION ONE WAS TO DO A LOT LESS, JUST REGRADE THE DITCH, RESET TWO CULVERTS. BUT WE DECIDED TO GO WITH OPTION TWO, WHICH IS TO DO THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN ONE, AS WELL AS UPSIZING SIX CULVERTS, ONE FROM TO 24IN ONE FROM 18 TO 24, THREE FROM 18 TO 30 AND ONE FROM 24 TO 30. AS WE GO DOWN THE DITCH TOWARDS D SIX, IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE DRAINAGE CAPACITY AND REDUCE THE RISK OF INEFFECTIVE FLOW DOWN THAT STREET. SO IT WON'T NECESSARILY FIX ALL THE PROBLEMS IN THIS AREA, BUT IT WILL IMPROVE THE DRAINAGE DOWN THAT SECTION OF WEST CALDER TO THAT D SIX DITCH. AND WE FELT LIKE IT WAS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO ADD IT AND GET IT DONE. AT THIS TIME, WITH THE DITCHING CONTRACT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER FOUR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE PLEASE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER FIVE? COUNCIL CONSIDERED AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 12, SECTION 12.12 .001 AND 12 DOT 12 .002, 12.12 .003 AND 12.12 .004. AND IT COMES TO THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.

ALL RIGHT. THERE IS A MOTION. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER FIVE? MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER FIVE, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? YES, SIR. MAYOR. YES, SIR. YEAH. COUNCILMAN TURNER, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. BOOM! THE DREAM.

THE DREAM CENTER, THE SALVATION ARMY, FAMILY SERVICES, THESE PLACES CURRENTLY AT CAPACITY.

AND WILL THESE OPTIONS BE OPEN IF WE DO APPROVE THIS TODAY? STILL SO WE HAVE AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE IN CONSTANT COMMUNICATION WITH FAMILY SERVICES AS WELL AS THE SALVATION ARMY. THE REPORTS WE'VE CONTINUED TO GET ARE THEY'RE NOT AT CAPACITY. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE REPRESENTATIVE FROM SALVATION ARMY. I DO THINK WE HAVE CHRIS ROBINSON IS HERE WITH SOME OTHER PLACE, AND HENRY'S PLACE AS REGARDING THE DREAM CENTER.

AGAIN, THAT'S JUST OUTSIDE THE CITY. BUT WE HAVE VISITED IT. WE WERE VERY IMPRESSED BY IT. WE, WE'RE WE HOPE TO STAY IN COMMUNICATION, BE ABLE TO REFER FOLKS DOWN THERE AS WELL. BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, SO FAR, NOT AT CAPACITY. YEAH. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IN THIS VOTE THAT THOSE PLACES ON THAT CAPACITY AND WE STILL DO HAVE OTHER ADDITIONAL OPTIONS. SO I JUST WANT TO THANK MR. CHRIS AND MR. WESELY FOR THE WORK YOU DO IN THE COMMUNITY.

YOU GUYS ARE DEFINITELY APPRECIATE IT. OKAY ANY OTHER YES. COUNCILMAN GETS COUNCILMAN DARIO. THERE WAS SOME COMMENTS MADE ABOUT THE AIR CONDITIONING AT HENRY'S PLACE. DO WE KNOW IF THAT'S BEEN REPAIRED OR IS SLATED TO BE REPAIRED? PLEASE. SO THE PLACE PLEASE COME

[02:30:02]

ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER BOONE, HAVE WE, GOT IN TOUCH WITH THE STATE TO SEE IF WE WERE ABLE.

WOULD BE ABLE TO RECEIVE DIRECT FUNDING, AS YOU SAY. LIKE AMARILLO, WACO COLLEGE STATION INSTEAD OF, BEING IN THE BALANCE OF STATE SYSTEM WHERE WE HAVE TO SHARE FUNDING FOR THE HOMELESS, WE HAD TO SPLIT IT A PART WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE IN IT. YES, SIR. WE HAVE COMMUNICATED BOTH WITH THE STATE AS WELL AS THE TEXAS HOMELESS NETWORK, WHICH IS THE RECIPIENT OF THOSE DOLLARS AND AGAIN, WE ARE TRYING TO TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY WHERE WE CAN GET THE DIRECT DOLLARS. BUT SO FAR WE HAVE NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL, OBVIOUSLY, WE WILL KEEP TRYING. PART OF I THINK HOPEFULLY OUR INITIATIVE AT THE LEGISLATIVE LEVEL AS WE GO TO GO TO AUSTIN, MAYBE IN THE SPRING, WILL BE TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS TO MAYBE SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME HELP FROM THE LEGISLATURE TO GET THAT DISTRIBUTION CHANGED, BECAUSE, AGAIN, WE HAVE CITIES WITH SMALLER POPULATIONS THAT ARE GETTING THE DIRECT FUNDING THAT WE NEED. OKAY. I DID SPEAK WITH, WITH OUR STATE REP MANUAL AND THEY ARE LOOKING INTO IT ALSO TO SEE IF SOMETHING THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO WHERE WE'D BE ABLE TO GET DIRECT FUNDING, LIKE SOME CITIES THAT WE'RE BIGGER THAN THAT, RECEIVE THAT FUNDING. YES, SIR. YES, SIR. COUNCILMAN TURNER THEN COUNCILMAN SHAW I'M SORRY, COUNCILMAN, I YIELD TO YOU, MY BROTHER. ALL RIGHT? I APPRECIATE YOU, YOUNG MAN. SO, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER BOONE, WE HAD FUNDING ALLOCATED TO ADDRESS THIS. WILL WE BE ABLE TO REALLOCATE THAT FUNDING AND SUPPORT ADDITIONAL HOMELESS INITIATIVES? SO WE WENT BACK AND WE LOOKED AND OVER THE PAST TEN YEARS, WE'VE ALLOCATED, $3 MILLION TOWARDS HOMELESS. OUR OUR NONPROFIT PARTNERS THAT DO THIS WORK LIKE MR. ROBINSON'S. THEY THEY DO THIS MUCH BETTER THAN I THINK WE COULD. WE'RE JUST NOT REALLY SET UP FOR THIS. SO AGAIN, GOING BACK, WE HAVE AND CONTINUE AND WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR FUNDING TO HELP THESE NONPROFITS AS A SOLUTION.

TO THAT POINT, THOUGH, AS WE GOT MORE FUNDING, FOR EXAMPLE, ARPA FUNDING DURING COVID, WE ALLOCATED, SOME, SOME OF THAT FUNDING. WELL OVER $1 MILLION IN TENANT BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE.

SO, IN OTHER WORDS, HELPING FOLKS PAY THEIR RENT, PAY THEIR UTILITY PAYMENTS, SO THAT THEY WOULD NOT BECOME HOMELESS. WE'RE HELPING THEM GET INTO A HOUSING SITUATION, WE ALLOCATED SOME UNUSED CDBG FUNDING. AND AS I SAY, ALL THIS I SHOULD POINT OUT, THIS IS FEDERAL STATE FUNDING. IT'S NOT GENERAL FUND LOCAL FUNDS. SO, WE ALLOCATED WE WERE ABLE TO FIND SOME UNUSED FUNDING. CDBG FEDERAL FUNDING TO HELP SALVATION ARMY BRING THOSE BEDS ONLINE THAT ARE THERE ON MCFADDEN. SO TO YOUR POINT, WE HAVE AND WE CONTINUE AND WE WILL TRY TO ALLOCATE AS MUCH FUNDING AS WE CAN, BECAUSE WE KNOW THIS IS AN ONGOING ISSUE THAT ALL CITIES, MOST CITIES ARE STRUGGLING WITH, AND IT'S AN EXPENSIVE ISSUE, SO WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HOUSTON IN THE PAST.

THEY'VE HAD SOME SUCCESS, LESS SUCCESS IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO. BUT A LOT OF THAT SUCCESS HAS TO DO WITH BASICALLY PROVIDING HOUSING AND THAT THAT IS EXPENSIVE. SO WE WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR, LOOK FOR FUNDING THAT WE CAN AND AGAIN, WORK WITH OUR NONPROFIT PARTNERS, WORK WITH BEAUMONT HOUSING AUTHORITY, WORK WITH THE VA, JUST TRYING TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. COUNCILMAN. THANK YOU. MAYOR, TO SPEAK TO THE QUESTION ASKED EARLIER BY COUNCILMAN TURNER, MIKE CONNOR WITH THE DREAM CENTER WAS HERE, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE HE HAD TO STEP OUT. I DID SPEAK TO HIM EARLIER IN THE DAY, AND THE DREAM CENTER IS AVAILABLE FOR THE HOMELESS, THE HOMELESS POPULATION THAT HAS AN ADDICTION AND THAT WOULD LIKE TO MOVE INTO THEIR PROGRAM, WHICH IS A NINE MONTH PROGRAM AND HELP THE HOMELESS WITH THEIR ADDICTION. BUT HE'S NOT IN A PLACE WHERE HE CAN JUST SHELTER BECAUSE THE COUNTY WILL NOT

[02:35:02]

[02:40:05]

JUST PLEASE REMEMBER THAT, THAT THESE ARE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND THAT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY. AND WE JUST CAN'T GO ON THERE. GO IN THERE, GATHER IT UP, THROW IT IN THE DUMPSTER. THIS IS THEIR PROPERTY AND WE HAVE TO RESPECT THAT. SO IT'S NOT AN EASY THING TO, TO RESOLVE. IT'S AS I SAID IT'S A COMPLICATED ISSUE. BUT AS WE AS A CITY PARTNER WITH THE NONPROFITS, I'M HOPING WE CAN WE CAN MAKE SOME PROGRESS. THANK YOU. MAYOR AND I WANT TO THANK YOU, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER BOONE AND ALL THE DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE WORKED ON THIS. IT IS A VERY DIFFICULT ISSUE. NO PERFECT SOLUTION HASN'T BEEN DISCOVERED YET. HERE IN THIS COUNTRY, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK TOWARDS IT AND HOPEFULLY OUR CHURCHES WILL CONTINUE TO SHOW UP AND WE'LL MEET THE NEEDS AS AS THEY'RE IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE, 501C, THREE S AND CHURCHES THAT ARE PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES. IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM NUMBER FIVE, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS CARRIED, MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE PLEASE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER SIX? YES. COUNCIL CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE. CHANGE ORDER NUMBER FOUR TO THE CONTRACT WITH CALLON MARINE LIMITED FOR THE RIVERFRONT PARK RESTORATION PROJECT. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX? SECOND, THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER SIX. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILMAN TURNER? YES, MR. MANAGER, OUR ASSISTANT MANAGER BOONE, ABOUT HOW MUCH LEAF IS ON THIS PROJECT. I KNOW THE DEADLINE WILL BE EXTENDED A LITTLE BIT WITH THE CHANGES. I'M GOING TO DEFER TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ON THAT. YES SIR, THE CURRENT, PROJECTED END DATE IS BY END OF NOVEMBER. AT THIS POINT. OKAY. SO TO EXTEND ABOUT 30 MORE DAYS AND MY SECOND QUESTION IS SOMETHING COUNCILMAN DARIO BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION BECAUSE HE KNEW I WAS GOING TO ASK IS A CHANGE ORDER. BUT I NOTICED IT HAS A CONTINGENCY. THE MONEY THAT'S NOT SPENT IN THAT EXTRA CONTINGENCY, HOW DOES THAT WORK? SO WE RECEIVED, FEMA FUNDING FOR THIS PROJECT. WE'VE ALSO GOT, BUT THAT'S THE LION'S SHARE. WE ALSO HAVE A ROUND $5 MILLION THAT WAS RELATED TO THAT BP OIL SPILL THAT THAT'S IN THE

[02:45:06]

MR. CITY MANAGER, MAY WE PLEASE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER EIGHT? COUNCIL CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CLEANING AND DISINFECTION OF FOUR ELEVATED STORAGE STORAGE TANKS BY UTILITY SERVICES COMPANY, INC. OF PERRY, GEORGIA, WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT? MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? COUNCILMAN? DARIO. YEAH, I JUST, ONE QUESTION FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SAID WE HAVE SIX TANKS, AND THIS IS FOR FOUR.

HAVE THE OTHER TWO ALREADY BEEN DONE COMPLETED? WE'VE ACTUALLY CLEANED AND INSPECTED ALL OF THE TANKS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. AND THIS IS OUR SECOND ROUND. SO THIS IS READDRESSING THE FIRST FOUR THAT HAD BEEN DONE. THE PRISON WAS DONE IN SEPTEMBER 2022. WEST WAS DONE IN JANUARY.

MARCH OF 22. NORTHWEST WAS APRIL OF 21 AND DISHMAN WAS MARCH OF 22. SO WHAT THIS IS GOING TO ALLOW US TO DO NOW, SINCE THIS IS OUR SECOND ROUND, 2 TO 3 YEARS FROM THE FIRST, IS ASSESS HOW DIRTY THEY GOT OVER A 2 TO 3 YEAR PERIOD AND TRY TO DIAL IN WHETHER WE NEED TO DO THIS EVERY TWO YEARS OR EVERY THREE YEARS FOR THESE TANKS. OKAY. DOES THIS INCLUDE PAINTING THEM ALSO? NO SIR. THIS THE FULL REHABILITATION WOULD INCLUDE PAINTING THE NEXT ONE OF THOSE IS GOING TO BE THE SOUTH TANK. WE DID THE SOUTHWEST OVER BY FIRE TEN THIS YEAR. WE DID ALSO THE PRISON GROUND STORAGE TANK. SO THIS IS JUST TO DRAIN THE TANK, CLEAN AND SANITIZE THE INSIDE OF IT FULLY INSPECT THE INSIDE OF THE TANK, WHICH YOU REALLY CAN'T DO WITH THE WATER IN IT AND JUST CHECK OUT THINGS ARE RIGHT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. COUNCILMAN TURNER, WAS THIS, DID THIS COME AS A RESULT OF THE CORONA STUDY? WE DID A FEW YEARS AGO? IT WAS ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY MADE IN THERE. THIS WAS ACTUALLY SOMETHING WE HAD INITIATED EVEN BEFORE THEY, PRODUCED THE STUDY. BUT IT WAS A RECOMMENDATION FROM THEM THAT WE CONTINUE THIS. IT IS A BEST PRACTICE FOR WATER SYSTEM. AND LASTLY, JUST CAN YOU EXPLAIN, THE BENEFIT OF CLEANING THESE STORAGE TANKS? WELL, WE HAVE IRON AND MANGANESE IN OUR WATER SYSTEM, AND THAT BUILDS UP OVER TIME. SO BY GOING IN AND CLEANING, THAT HELPS WITH DISCOLORED WATER AND KEEPING THE WATER, YOU KNOW, FROM HAVING THOSE DISCOLORED EVENTS, IT ALSO REALLY HELPS WITH INSPECTING THE CONDITION OF THOSE TANKS. WHEN WE SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, THE WEST

[02:50:05]

AYE. OPPOSED THE MOTION IS CARRIED. MR. CITY MANAGER, WOULD YOU TAKE US INTO THE PUBLIC

[PUBLIC HEARING]

ALL RIGHT. AT THIS POINT, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN. OH, BRANT.

GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCILMAN. MAYOR I'M NOT HERE FOR TOM. COULD BE, BUT, HIS ISSUES ARE FRONT AND CENTER. I KNOW A LOT OF YOU GUYS, THE ISSUES ASSOCIATED TO THE GILBERT BUILDING ARE OBVIOUSLY CONCERNED TO EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM, BUT I WANTED TO WEIGH IN BRIEFLY ON A COUPLE OF THINGS HISTORICALLY. ONE IS THAT I'VE WORKED DOWNTOWN FOR 40 YEARS, MY OLD LAW FIRM, WE BOUGHT THE STEADMAN BUILDING THROUGH THE PARTNERSHIP. TOM FLANAGAN WAS INVOLVED IN THAT.

AND REHABILITATED A GREAT OLD BUILDING. AND AS SENIOR PARTNER WITH WALTER HUMPHREY FOR 20 YEARS, YOU KNOW, THE BUILDING WAS VERY, VITALIZED AS OUR, A NUMBER OF THE OTHER OLD BUILDINGS WHEN I LEFT THAT FIRM, I BOUGHT THE CAO BUILDING, WHICH MANY OF YOU KNOW, IT'S ANOTHER 40 ZERO ZERO ZERO SQUARE FOOT BUILDING ACROSS FROM THE FEDERAL COURTHOUSE. AND BY HISTORY THERE, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW MORE ABOUT THE DYNAMICS, I SPENT SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS WITH MR. NEAL'S DAD REHABBING THAT BUILDING. AND AFTER I DID THAT, I WAS UNABLE TO RENT IT. AND I KEPT MY OFFICE THERE. BUT MOST OF THE REST OF THE OFFICE SPACE STAYED VACANT AT A BEAUTIFULLY 100 YEAR OLD REHAB BUILDING. THE REASON FOR IT WASN'T BECAUSE OF VANDALISM. IT WASN'T BECAUSE THERE WERE OTHER EMPTY BUILDINGS IN TOWN. IT WAS BECAUSE THERE WAS NO DEMAND FOR BUILDING SPACE DOWNTOWN. EVEN TODAY, 20 YEARS LATER, HALF OF MY BUILDING IS STILL EMPTY. AND IT'S BEEN FRUSTRATING FOR MR. PRUITT, MR. MONCLA AND OTHERS THAT RENT DOWNTOWN TO BE ABLE TO RENT ANY OF THAT SPACE BECAUSE THERE'S NO DEMAND FOR IT. THAT'S A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING, EASY ACCESS, FREE PARKING, LOTS OF IT. RIGHT ACROSS FROM THE COURTHOUSE AND SUCH. THERE'S JUST NO DEMAND. SO THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE. AT ONE LEVEL. SO WHEN YOU SEE SOMEBODY LIKE MR. FLANAGAN, WHO I'VE KNOWN FOR 30 OR 40 YEARS, WHO'S REINVESTED MOST OF HIS PERSONAL WEALTH IN BEAUMONT, EVEN THOUGH HE WAS A POOR ORPHAN, YOU START ASKING QUESTIONS. WHY WOULD YOU DO IT IN THE FIRST PLACE? IT'S NOT A VITAL TOWN TO INVEST IN. I HAVE A BUILDING IN DOWNTOWN HOUSTON THAT'S ANOTHER 1800 BUILDING THAT'S QUADRUPLED IN VALUE THE LAST 15 YEARS. NONE OF THE BUILDINGS IN DOWNTOWN BEAUMONT ARE APPRECIATING IN VALUE BECAUSE THERE'S NO DEMAND. MOST OF THESE BUILDINGS ARE EMPTY IN THE FIRST PLACE BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE MOVED ELSEWHERE. THE BUSINESSES THAT WERE HERE MOVED ELSEWHERE. NOT BECAUSE OF VANDALISM, NOT BECAUSE OF CRIME, NOT BECAUSE OF EMPTY BUILDINGS SITTING AROUND THEM, BUT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A LOT OF INTEREST IN OPERATING IN DOWNTOWN BEAUMONT. AND THIS PERSPECTIVE OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY. SO MY CONCERNS ARE FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE IN GOVERNMENT THAT WORK HERE, THAT ARE IN AND OUT OF DOWNTOWN EVERY DAY. THEIR JOBS ARE HERE EVERY DAY. THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE PEOPLE THEY TALK TO ARE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE IN GOVERNMENT THAT WORK HERE EVERY DAY, OR THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE STUCK DOWNTOWN. THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE REALITIES OF BUSINESS. I BUILT TUSCANY PARK. I'VE OWNED A NUMBER OF OTHER BUSINESS DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE. AS YOU GUYS KNOW, I'M PRIMARILY A TRIAL LAWYER THAT BUZZES AROUND THE COUNTRY. I SEE LOTS OF OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE DEVELOPED. I'VE HAD 16 OFFICES AROUND THE COUNTRY IN AREAS THAT HAD MANY OF THE SAME PROBLEMS ENDEMIC TO BEAUMONT. THANK YOU, MR. BLOOM, EVERYWHERE. BUT THEY'VE HAD WAYS OF CIRCUMVENTING IT AND GROWING.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DEAN TUCKER. AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND CITY

[02:55:03]

YOU'VE BEEN SAYING IT'S AN IMMINENT THREAT. I DON'T SEE THAT AT ALL. THIS LAST STORM. I DON'T THINK IT MOVED ONE INCH. AND THERE WAS VERY LITTLE DAMAGE, IF ANY, EXCEPT FOR SOME WATER IN THAT BUILDING. SO THERE'S A LOT OF NEEDLESS FEAR ABOUT, ABOUT THAT BUILDING. AND IT'S NOT AN IMMINENT THREAT. I'M LOOKING AT MY NOTES HERE. OH, AND THE STORM LEFT. LEFT THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WITHOUT ELECTRICITY AND DID DAMAGE TO A LOT OF HOMES. BUT I DON'T SEE ANY DAMAGE TO THAT BUILDING, I DON'T THINK IT EVEN MOVED ONE INCH, WHICH IS KIND OF WHAT I EXPECTED. BUT I DEEPLY APPRECIATE YOUR DESIRE TO PROTECT THE HEALTH AND THE WELL-BEING OF THOSE THAT LIVE IN THIS AREA. THAT'S REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT. AND I DO NOT AT ALL SEE, LIKE I SAID, THE BUILDING IS AN IMMINENT THREAT TO THE COMMUNITY. THERE ARE MANY OTHER WAYS TO MAKE BEAUMONT SAFER, WHICH WOULD BE FAR LESS COSTLY AND FAR MORE PRODUCTIVE. IF MR. FLANAGAN, WHO OWNS THE BUILDING, WANTS TO RESTORE IT, THEN HE SHOULD HAVE THAT RIGHT TO DO IT.

MY VISION FOR THIS BUILDING IS THAT THAT HE HAS THE OPPORTUNITY AND HE'S STARTING WITH A CLEAN SLATE. HE CAN MAKE THIS BUILDING AMAZING INSIDE AND HAVE IT, BEST WI-FI, HIGH SPEED INTERNET, EVERYTHING IN IT WITH NEW WIRING AND EVERYTHING WITH ALL THE NEW STATE OF THE ART. INVENTIONS.

THIS COULD BE AN AMAZING BUILDING FOR DOWNTOWN BEAUMONT THAT MANY PEOPLE WOULD WANT TO BE A PART OF. I SEE IT AS A TRAGEDY TO NEEDLESSLY DESTROY PART OF BEAUMONT'S HISTORY. I DON'T REALLY BELIEVE WE NEED PEOPLE IN BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL THAT HAVE LITTLE VISION OR RESPECT OR COURAGE TO PRESERVE OUR HISTORY. IT IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF BEAUMONT. I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS IF THIS WERE PUT TO A VOTE IN THIS AREA, I THINK MOST PEOPLE WOULD WANT TO KEEP IT.

THAT'S WHAT I FEEL. THE BUILDING HAS BEEN FENCED OFF AND PROTECTED FROM INTRUDERS. I THINK THE ROADS SHOULD BE OPEN AND FOR LOCAL BUSINESSES TO SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES. AND, I DO SEE, I DO SEE A BRIGHT FUTURE FOR BEAUMONT. IT TAKES VISION AND COURAGE AND THAT'S WHAT I NEED. SO THANK YOU, MEGAN COBB. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND STAFF. MY NAME IS MEGAN COBB. I'VE COME HERE TO TALK ABOUT BUSINESS, SPECIFICALLY RETAIL BUSINESS ON PEARL STREET HERE IN BEAUTIFUL HISTORIC DOWNTOWN BEAUMONT. I'VE LIVED IN BEAUMONT FOR A COMBINED 22 YEARS, AND IT HAS BEEN SUCH A JOY AND AN INSPIRATION TO SEE THE CITY GROW AND START TO OFFER SO MUCH MORE OVER THE YEARS. AS A MURAL ARTIST WHO GOT MY START A FEW HUNDRED FEET FROM US ON A 7000 SQUARE FOOT FREEHAND MURAL IN 2022, AND AS A BUSINESS OWNER OF A BOUTIQUE TWO BLOCKS FROM US, I SPEAK FROM VESTED INTEREST AND EXPERIENCE. I SPEAK PARTIALLY AS A BOARD MEMBER OF THE DOWNTOWN BEAUMONT CULTURAL ARTS DISTRICT, BUT MAINLY MY REASON FOR COMING HERE TODAY IS PERSONAL. MY STORE IS AT 489 PEARL STREET AND IT IS NAMED TOLUCA TRADES. THAT NAME IS A COMBINATION OF MY THREE KIDS NAMES TUCKER, LUKE AND AVA. THEY ARE THE REASONS I WORK HARD.

TOLUCA TRADES OPENED IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR AND STARTED GROWING MORE QUICKLY THAN WE COULD HAVE ANTICIPATED. A PRETTY COOL PROBLEM TO HAVE. SO I ADDRESSED THE PROBLEM AND HIRED AND WORKED AND STOCKED THE STORE ACCORDINGLY. ONE MONTH LATER, MY HUSBAND PASSED AWAY, WHICH WAS A HEARTBREAKING PERSONAL BLOW TO OUR FAMILY. TWO MONTHS LATER, THE GILBERT BUILDING BURNED AND THE BLOCK OF TOLUCA TRADES HAS BEEN BARRICADED EVER SINCE. THIS WAS A HEARTBREAKING PROFESSIONAL BLOW. IT WAS AND IS AN EVENT WHICH HAS BROUGHT MY BUSINESS AND MY FAMILY TO THE BRINK OF LOSING LITERALLY EVERYTHING I'VE WORKED FOR, I'VE SCRAMBLED TO KEEP FROM LOSING MY HOME, MY TRUCK, OBVIOUSLY MY LIFELONG DREAM, MY STORE, AND NOW I'M NOT EVEN ABLE TO WORK AT MY STORE BECAUSE BETWEEN AN ONGOING AVERAGE OF 3 TO 4 MURAL AND PAINTING JOBS, WHICH I OFTEN WORK ON AT NIGHT, AND IF I CAN FIND CHILD CARE, I HAVE TAKEN ON MANAGING FRONT OF HOUSE AT A LOCAL RESTAURANT TO AVOID LOSING EVERYTHING. I HAVE A WONDERFUL EMPLOYEE WHO WORKS AT MY STORE

[03:00:01]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS POINT, WE'LL, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MR. CITY MANAGER, WE HAVE THE READING OF ITEM NUMBER NINE. COUNCIL

[REGULAR AGENDA]

WHEN IT COMES TO RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, IS THERE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER NINE? IF THE COUNCIL ALLOWS, I DON'T WANT A MOTION TO APPROVE DEPENDING ON HOW THE QUESTION GOES. OKAY MOTION IN A SECOND. HE'S ASKING TO SUSPEND THE RULE IN THE MAYOR'S ALLOWED IT. THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO 60 DAYS AGO WHEN WE REQUESTED THIS ITEM TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO US AND THE REQUEST WAS A COUPLE DIFFERENT THINGS. ONE, A FENCE GOES UP AND TWO, AN ENGINEERING STUDY BE PROVIDED TO COUNCIL AND TO THE CITY. THE HAS A ENGINEERING STUDY BEEN PROVIDED. SO WE RECEIVED THE FIRST ENGINEERING STUDY, WHICH WAS A FIELD SURVEY REPORT THAT WAS BASICALLY TO ASSESS WHAT THE DAMAGES WERE. THAT WAS RECEIVED ON JULY 26TH. IT'S IN Y'ALL'S PACKET. WE DID RECEIVE SO INTERNAL PROCESSES TO GET THIS ITEM ONTO THE AGENDA, I HAD TO SUBMIT BY AUGUST 12TH, WITHIN HIS WORK PROGRAM, HE HAD UNTIL AUGUST 17TH TO GIVE A FULL ENGINEERING REPORT, HE DID SUBMIT THAT AUGUST 16TH, I BELIEVE THAT HE PRINTED OUT, SOME COPIES FOR Y'ALL. IF HE DIDN'T, THEN I HAD STAFF PRINT OUT THOSE COPIES. AND BY HE, I MEAN THE PROPERTY OWNER, BUT IF WE CAN GO AHEAD AND PASS ALONG THE ENGINEER REPORT THAT WE RECEIVED, IT BASICALLY OUTLINED AND I'LL LET HIS HIM AND HIS STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, KIND OF REPORT ON WHAT THAT IS. BUT FROM WHAT I COULD SEE, IT WAS A PLAN TO SHORE THE WALLS. AND FOR THAT TO BE COMPLETED BY JANUARY 9TH, 2025. MAYOR AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO ASK THAT WE REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING JUST FOR THE PURPOSE. IF Y'ALL HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER SO THAT WE'RE NOT NOT OUT OF ORDER. IF THAT'S OKAY, I'LL REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING SO THAT WE CAN RECEIVE THIS REPORT AND HAVE IT PRESENTED. THANK YOU. AND COULD THE PROPERTY OWNER COME TO THE PODIUM AND ADDRESS THE COUNCIL? COUNCIL? CITY MANAGER BOONE. YEAH. MAYOR, IF I COULD JUST ADD A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT MISS INGMAN WAS, WAS STATING AGAIN FRIDAY PRETTY LATE IN THE DAY. FRIDAY WE RECEIVED WHAT Y'ALL ARE BEING, WHAT Y'ALL ARE RECEIVING NOW. GOOD AFTERNOON.

FROM SOME OF. YOU SO. IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO START MR. MAYOR OR WAIT FOR THE DISTRIBUTION, YOU CAN MAY BEGIN. OKAY. WELL GOOD AFTERNOON AND THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO BE HERE. AND ON THIS IMPORTANT TOPIC, I AM TOM FLANAGAN, AND I AM THE PRESIDENT OF BEAUMONT

[03:05:06]

[03:10:05]

[03:15:16]

AND I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THE ENGINEER, BUT I JUST CURIOUS AS WHERE DO WE STAND AS A CITY? IS THE BUILDING SAFE? SO ON OUR ENGINEERING REPORT THAT WE PROCURED, THE RECOMMENDATION WAS DEMOLITION, ON PAGE THREE OF THE INTERIM STRUCTURAL RESTORATION PLAN THAT MR. FLANAGAN SUBMITTED, SAYS WHILE CLEARING THE WORK IS PROGRESSING IN MID-OCTOBER, A GENERAL ASSESSMENT OF THE BUILDING'S STABILITY AND STATUS OF THE ADJACENT STREET ACCESS CAN BE PERFORMED, KNOWING THAT, I CAN'T SAY THAT THIS IS SAFE OR THAT IT WOULD NOT BE A THREAT TO LIFE OR PUBLIC SAFETY BECAUSE THE ENGINEERS HAVE NOT SAID ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. SO TO SO IN BECAUSE I HAVE NOT RECEIVED A PROFESSIONAL OPINION, OR A RECOMMENDATION ASIDE FROM THE ONE THAT WE RECEIVED ON OUR VERY FIRST STRUCTURAL ENGINEER REPORT, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE SAYING THAT THIS IS A SOUND AND THAT MY ASSESSMENT REMAINS FOR DEMOLITION. OKAY. THE PASSAGE THAT SHE'S READING FROM AND I'LL LET MR. FUSI, EXPLAIN THAT WAS AT THE JUNCTURE THAT AFTER THE DEMOLITION IS COMPLETED AND THE SCAFFOLDS ARE ADDED, HOW MANY? SIDEWAYS? I CALL THEM SIDEWAYS.

THE 65 FOOT BEAMS WILL HAVE TO BE ADDED AT THAT TIME. WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADD SOME, BUT UNTIL WE HAVE FULL ACCESS, SHE CAN'T SAY THE CITY CAN'T SAY. OUR ENGINEERS CAN'T SAY HOW MANY. BUT WE HAVE A GOOD IDEA. OKAY, LET ME ASK YOU A FEW MORE QUESTIONS AND THEN I KNOW YOUR ENGINEER WOULD LIKE TO COME. HOW HOW LONG HAVE YOU OWNED THE BUILDING? I BOUGHT THE BUILDING FROM THE CITY. FOR ANYBODY WHO DOESN'T KNOW, VACANT FOR 40 YEARS, WE DIDN'T MAKE IT VACANT.

THE CITY DIDN'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT. WE THOUGHT WE WERE DOING A GOOD THING. OKAY.

AT THE TIME, I MENTIONED WE WERE BUYING OTHER BUILDINGS THAT NOBODY ELSE WANTED. THAT'S WHAT I'VE DONE. AND I REALLY THOUGHT THE CITY WOULD MOVE FORWARD ABOUT DOWNTOWN. BUT INSTEAD WE FOUGHT FOR 20 YEARS AT EACH OTHER'S THROATS. AND SO THE PROGRESS WASN'T MADE. BUT I WOULD SAY IT'S BEEN GOING ON 18 YEARS NOW. 18 YEARS. THAT'S A GUESS. OKAY. AND AGAIN, CITY MANAGER TO THE STAFF, THE QUESTION I HAVE AND REMIND ME, DID WE DID WE GIVE MR. FLANAGAN 60 DAYS TO GET BACK TO US WITH A PLAN? IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. AND DO WE FEEL LIKE HE'S MET OUR REQUEST? ARE WE SATISFIED WITH HIS RESPONSE? WHAT WE RECEIVED WAS TO SHORE THE WALLS. AND ESSENTIALLY IT WOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO PRE-FIRE. ESSENTIALLY. SO IT STILL WOULD HAVE IPMC VIOLATIONS. THAT'S NOT CORRECT. SO, MAYOR, IF I COULD AND I'M ONLY JUMPING IN HERE BECAUSE I KNOW YOU ALL HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW WHAT WAS WHAT WAS SUBMITTED. AND AGAIN, WE JUST GOT IT. I THINK FRIDAY EVENING. SO OBVIOUSLY STAFF HAS LOOKED AT IT, BUT YOU ALL HAVE NOT HAD THE ABILITY. AND I'M SURE MR. FLANAGAN AND HIS ENGINEER WILL WILL, YOU KNOW, ENLIGHTEN US ON WHAT THEY'VE SUBMITTED, BUT I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF RESTATE THAT AS YOU ALL RECALL, BACK IN JUNE, THERE WAS A HEARING THAT WAS RESET AND

[03:20:04]

[03:25:03]

OKAY, OKAY. AND YOU CAN GO DOWN AND SEE THAT I HAD LUNCH AT CROCKETT STREET TODAY. THERE WERE DOZENS OF CARS ON THE PARKING LOT, AND SOME OF THOSE CARS WERE WALKING IN TO MR. LANG'S BUILDING. I'M A REGULAR AT HIS BUILDING. OKAY, FOR CHUCK'S. AND DO YOU FEEL LIKE ALL YOUR BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN SECURED DOWNTOWN? BECAUSE I'VE DRIVEN AROUND AND SEEN WINDOWS KNOCKED OUT AND SOME BUILDINGS NOT SECURED? THE ANSWER IS YES. BUT I WILL TELL YOU THIS. SINCE THE FIRE THE NIGHT OF THE FIRE, TWO PLATE GLASS WINDOWS, ABOUT HALF A LITTLE ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE UPPER PORTION OF THAT IN THE SAN JACINTO, WERE KNOCKED OUT THE NIGHT OF THE FIRE. POLICE WERE TOO BUSY TO COME OUT. I UNDERSTAND THAT NIGHT, BUT SINCE THE FIRE WE'VE HAD 15 DIFFERENT VIOLENT CASES OF DAMAGE OR INTRUSION. THERE WAS A BREAK IN IN THE FIRST CITY BUILDING A ROBBERY LAST WEEK. OKAY, THAT'S NOT OUR BUILDING. SO YES, WE ARE CONSTANTLY DOING THAT AND WE'RE COMMITTED TO IT. IN THE LAST MEETING, YOU ASKED ME IF I WAS COMMITTED TO THE WORK PROGRAM THAT THE CITY PUT OUT. I AM OKAY, I HAVE OTHER THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THIS CITY FOR SECURITY. WHEN WE GET THE OPPORTUNITY, BUT I'M. I'M WILLING. YOU SAID SOMETHING EARLIER. EVERYBODY HAS TO DO THEIR PART. WE'RE WILLING TO DO THAT. AND I BELIEVE THAT'S A TRUE STATEMENT. WELL, AND I AND I AGREE WITH YOU 100% THAT I WANT THE CITY AND YOU TO PARTNER TOGETHER WITH ALL THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS DOWNTOWN, ALL OF US WORKING TOGETHER, BECAUSE I DO APPRECIATE THE CONTRIBUTION YOU'VE MADE TO DOWNTOWN. AND I DO WANT US TO PARTNER TOGETHER.

I DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE THE CITY AS BEING HOSTILE TOWARDS YOU. I DON'T THAT'S NOT MY INTENTION AT ALL, YOUR PROSPERITY BECOMES THE CITY'S PROSPERITY. AND SO WE WANT TO WORK TOGETHER. BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE TO. WE HAVE TO FACTOR IN ALL THE OTHER BUSINESS OWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS.

AGAIN, BECAUSE OF THE HIGH CONCENTRATION, YOU'RE BUILDING AND THE CONDITION OF IT, WHETHER IT'S, BROKEN WINDOWS OR NO FIRE ALARM, NO SECURITY SYSTEM, WHATEVER IT MAY BE, YOUR BUILDING NOW CAN IMPACT MY BUILDING. AND SO THAT'S THAT'S MY CONCERN. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I LOOK AT IS IN ANY, ANY DANGER OF FALLING, I UNDERSTAND THE COUNCIL'S CONCERN, PARTICULARLY MR. DARIO'S CONCERN, ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY. AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY TO TACKLE THIS ISSUE IN THE RIGHT WAY. AND WE HAVE A GOOD PLAN TO DO IT. AND WE'RE PREPARED TO GO TO WORK. GOOD. THANK YOU. MAYOR. COUNCILMAN NEIL. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. SO MY UNDERSTANDING LAST TIME WAS THAT WE REQUESTED A PLAN TO BE BROUGHT BACK FOR US. THAT BASICALLY SHOWS WHAT THE NEXT STEPS FORWARD ARE. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WAS INTENDING ON THE BUILDING TO BE DEMOED OR ALL THE, MISCELLANEOUS DEMO THAT YOU HAD TO DO IN THE SHORING UP. WE KNEW THAT IT WAS GOING TO TAKE ENGINEERING STUDIES TO DO THAT. IT'S MY OPINION THAT BASED OFF OF THE INFORMATION THAT HE'S PROVIDED WITH A TIMELINE THAT THAT MEETS THAT, LIKE COUNCILMAN SAID, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WANTS TO TEAR THE BUILDING DOWN. MY RECOMMENDATION IS NOT KNOWING IF HE'S GOING TO FINALIZE THE DEAL OR NOT IS TO GIVE. GIVE HIM ENOUGH TIME TO GET TO THAT NEXT PROCESS, RATHER THAN REHASHING THIS WHOLE THING OUT. AND WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT? I MEAN, WE SAID 60 DAYS AGO, BRING THIS TO US AND THEN WE'LL GO TO THE NEXT STEPS. AND I PERSONALLY FEEL THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED. AND WE WANT TO IF, IF ANY BUSINESS IS HURT, EVEN THOUGH. I FEEL LIKE IT'S A TRIAL FOR SOMETHING WE DIDN'T DO. BUT THAT HAPPENS TO ALL OF US, RIGHT? IN LIFE. OKAY, I'M BIG ENOUGH TO HANDLE THAT ALL RIGHT. BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING WE CAN DO WITH ANYBODY THAT'S BEEN HURT FROM THIS, WE'VE ALREADY BEEN WORKING WITH THE SHOPS ACROSS THE STREET.

I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH MR. LANG. I BELIEVE HE WOULD SAY THEY MAY BE OVERREACTING, BUT THAT'S HIS TENANT. BUT I DON'T WANT ANYBODY HURT. BUT WE HAVE TO. WE COULDN'T JUST START DOING THIS THE NEXT DAY WITH THE FIRST CONTRACTOR. WE HAD TO BE DELIBERATE ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING, AND WE HAVE A GOOD PLAN. WE'RE READY TO MOVE FORWARD. IF WE CAN DO IT FASTER. WE CERTAINLY WILL. WELL, MR. FLANAGAN, I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM YOUR ENGINEER. I MEAN, REAL CONCERN FOR ME IS OPENING UP OUR ROADS, AND I'VE HEARD WHAT YOU SAID, BUT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT OPENING UP OUR DOWNTOWN ROADS AND DOING THAT SAFELY. AND ALSO, WHEN YOU WHEN YOU MENTIONED COMPLETE IN JANUARY, A COMPLETE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE THAT COMPLETE IS BECAUSE CLEARLY, IF

[03:30:02]

MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO HEAR MY COMMENTS HERE. MY NAME IS ROB FISHER. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF ALLIANCE ENGINEERS. WE ARE A MULTI-DISCIPLINE ENGINEERING COMPANY HERE IN DOWNTOWN BEAUMONT. OFFICE IN 470 ORLEANS, WE HAVE BEEN CONTRACTED BY THE BY THE BUILDING OWNER TO PROVIDE CERTAIN STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH THE IDEA OF UNDERSTANDING THE STRUCTURAL STABILITY OF THE BUILDING AND HELP, MR. FLANAGAN PUT TOGETHER PLANS TO RESTORE THE STRUCTURE DOWN THE ROAD AS IT AS AS APPROPRIATE, ONE OF THE KEY THINGS AS AS I HEAR THE DISCUSSION THAT I THINK EVERYBODY NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND IS THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS A STABLE BUILDING OR AN UNSTABLE BUILDING, NECESSARILY. THERE'S DEGREES OF STABILITY. SO THIS IS KIND OF ENGINEER ESE, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. BUT THAT BUILDING IS CURRENTLY STABLE. IT'S NOT MOVING, NOW WHAT WILL IT DO UNDER CERTAIN EXTERNAL LOADS LIKE, YOU KNOW, AN EARTHQUAKE OR SOME LIVE LOADS EQUIPMENT BEING INSTALLED IN THE BUILDING AND STRESSING THE BUILDING THAT THEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT, WELL, WHAT'S THE STABILITY IN THOSE CASES? SO THE DIFFICULT THING FOR US RIGHT NOW IS TO DETERMINE WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE STRUCTURE. WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO EXTERNAL LASER SCANS, MR. FLANAGAN. CONTACTED US, I THINK THE MORNING AFTER THE FIRE AND PUT US RIGHT TO WORK THAT WEEKEND TO DO THAT LASER SCAN TO DETERMINE THE DISPLACEMENTS, THE MOVEMENT OF THE OF THE BUILDING'S EXTERNAL WALLS. THE ISSUE THERE, THOUGH, IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE ORIGINAL DRAWINGS FOR THE BUILDING. WE DON'T KNOW TO WHAT DEGREE THE CONSTRUCTION, THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING WAS. AND SO WE WERE ABLE TO ANALYZE THE BUILDING AGAINST A PERFECT CUBE OF A BUILDING TO BASICALLY SEE, YOU KNOW, ARE THOSE WALLS DISPLACED SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THE VERTICAL PLANE? WE SUBMITTED THAT REPORT TO YOU GUYS, BACK IN JUNE OR WHATEVER. AND OUR OBSERVATION WAS THAT THERE WAS NO SIGNIFICANT DISPLACEMENT FROM THE VERTICAL. ALSO, WHEN YOU WHEN YOU DO A VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE OUTSIDE, THERE ARE SOME CRACKS IN THE IN THE MASONRY.

THOSE CRACKS COULD LIKELY HAVE BEEN THERE FOR A LOT, A LOT OF YEARS. YOU WALK AROUND ANY CITY WITH OLD MASONRY BUILDINGS AND YOU'LL SEE CRACKS. SO WE DIDN'T WE COULDN'T COME UP WITH ANYTHING. THAT SAID, THE BUILDING WAS AT THAT POINT IN IMMINENT DANGER OF FAILURE. MR. FLANAGAN THEN INSTRUCTED US TO CONTINUE THE, THE WORK, AND WE DID INTERNAL DRONE VISUAL INSPECTIONS OF THE BUILDING TO DETERMINE, AGAIN, WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE CONSTRUCTION, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THOSE ORIGINAL DRAWINGS AND WE'VE DETERMINED THAT IT'S, STACKED MASONRY BEARING WALL CONSTRUCTION. BASICALLY, YOU BUILD A WALL BY STACKING UP A BUNCH OF HEAVY BRICK, AND THEN YOU, YOU PUT THE FLOORS IN WITHIN THOSE, WITHIN THOSE WALLS. THAT DOESN'T QUANTIFY THE STABILITY OF THE BUILDING OR ITS LOAD BEARING CAPACITY. IT'S JUST THAT'S JUST HOW THE BUILDING IS BUILT. SO WE NEED TO GET MORE INFORMATION, WITH MORE CLOSE

[03:35:04]

THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE ACROSS THE STREET, THE HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE FROM EXXONMOBIL THAT ARE HAVING TO GO ROUNDABOUT WAY TO LEAVE DOWNTOWN. AND THEIR JOB, BECAUSE OF THE BARRICADED STREET. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR, THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE CITY WOULD IMPOSE IF WE ARE TO GIVE YOU ADDITIONAL TIME, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. SO I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO ME. BUT MY OFFICE DID PREPARE A BACKUP ORDINANCE IN THE EVENT THAT THIS HAPPENED, BECAUSE I'M A GIRL SCOUT AND I COME PREPARED. SO, OBVIOUSLY THE CONDITIONS ARE BASED ON WITH PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND OUR BUILDING OFFICIALS CAME UP WITH. BUT OBVIOUSLY, COUNCIL HAS THE ABILITY TO ADD OR SUBTRACT FROM THAT. DEMI. I'M SORRY. DIRECTOR EAMON, DID YOU WANT TO. JUMP IN ON THAT? YES, I CAN READ, SOME OF THE CONDITIONS. SHOULD A COUNCIL DECIDE TO EXTEND TIME. I DO WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT STAFF DOES RECOMMEND DEMOLITION. HOWEVER, GRANTED, THIS EXTENSION OF TIME, CONDITION NUMBER ONE BEING THE EXTERIOR WALLS, ROOF AND ELEVATED FLOORS SHALL BE RESTORED TO THEIR ORIGINAL STRUCTURAL CAPACITY AS IDENTIFIED BY STRUCTURAL ENGINEER REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF TEXAS AND COMPLETED WITHIN 150 DAYS NO LATER THAN JANUARY 10TH, 2025. THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL OBTAIN ALL APPLICABLE PERMITS. REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. CONDITION NUMBER TWO. THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL SUBMIT A RESTORATION PROGRESS REPORT TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL EVERY 60 DAYS TO ENSURE SUBSTANTIAL PROGRESSION OCCURS UNTIL THE BUILDING COMPLIES WITH ALL CODES AND ORDINANCES, THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL APPEAR BEFORE CITY COUNCIL ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE AGENDA AFTER JANUARY 10TH, 2025. TO REPORT ANY FINDINGS OR PROGRESS DURING RESTORATION OF THE GILBERT BUILDING AND DISCLOSE INTENT TO MAKE ALL NECESSARY REPAIRS TO COMPLY WITH THE 2021 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. AND LASTLY, NUMBER THREE, THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL RENDER PAYMENT TO THE CITY OF BEAUMONT WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THIS DATE OF THIS ORDER FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE USE OF 34 WATER WALL BARRICADES FOR 328 BOWIE STREET, THE GILBERT BUILDING, IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,320 THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL PAY ALL INVOICED AMOUNTS FOR THE CONTINUED USE OF SAID BARRICADE. I HAVE A QUESTION ON NUMBER ONE. THE. SO HAVING ALL THE EXTERIOR WALLS, ROOF AND THE ELEVATED FLOORS ALL 100% COMPLETED AND 150 DAYS IS I DON'T EVEN THINK THAT'S FEASIBLE. SO THE 150 DAYS, RIGHT NOW FROM IF, IF WE WERE TO OR IF Y'ALL WERE TO GRANT AN EXTENSION OF TIME FROM TODAY TO JANUARY 9TH, OUTLINED IN HIS RESTORATION PROJECT, THAT

[03:40:06]

ALSO, THE WORK PROGRAMS ARE TRADITIONAL. WORK PROGRAMS FOR RED TECH STRUCTURES ARE ALSO GIVEN THE SAME 150 DAYS AND ARE GRANTED EXTENSIONS REASONABLY BASED ON, SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE OR HOW FAR THEY ARE INTO THE PROJECT. SO IT'S CONSISTENT WITH OUR CURRENT PRACTICE. COUNCILMAN TURNER, THEN COUNCILMAN GOETZ, UNLESS I MISHEARD, ARE WE PLANNING TO KEEP THE STREET BLOCKED OR IS IT STILL A REQUIREMENT OR SO? OUR STRUCTURE, WHEN WE DID OUR STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS. AND AGAIN, YOU CAN JUMP IN WHENEVER YOU LIKE. IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT IT REMAIN AT LEAST SOMEWHAT PROTECTED UNTIL THERE WAS A DEGREE READING. AND I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT READING THEIR REPORT, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY NEED TO EXCAVATE THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING TO ASSESS THE BACK WALL TO DETERMINE IF THE BUILDING CAN EVEN BE REPAIRED, OR THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING, YOU HAVE AN ENGINEER, A STUDY HERE WHO SAYS THAT THERE'S SOME DEGREE OF STABILITY INTO THE BUILDING, HOWEVER, OUR OUR STAFF AND OUR ENGINEER STUDY HAS SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAVING THE STREET REMAIN CLOSED. WAS THEIR RECOMMENDATION. SO, OBVIOUSLY, IF COUNCIL WAS OF THE MIND TO REMOVE THE BARRICADES OR SAY THAT THE BARRICADES COULD BE REMOVED, THERE IS SOME ASSUMED RISK. WITH THAT, I WILL ASK, I BELIEVE ON YOUR TIMELINE. IS IT JANUARY 9TH, 2025 FOR THE STREET TO OPEN, OR IS IT BEFORE THEN, THERE'S ONE DECISION POINT IN, I THINK IT'S LATE OCTOBER WHERE ONCE WE GET IN THE BUILDING, WE MAY FIND THAT IT IS STABLE, SUFFICIENT TO MEET THE CITY REQUIREMENTS. SO THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY IN, SAY, MIDDLE OCTOBER FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. AND THEN IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN THEN BY THE TIME THAT WE COMPLETE THE STRUCTURAL RESTORATION, THAT'S THAT WOULD. SO UNDER THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE, COUNCILMAN TURNER, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, BASED ON HIS RESPONSE, I'M SORRY, I DON'T WANT TO CALL YOU. KEEP CALLING YOU THE ENGINEER. WHAT WAS YOUR NAME AGAIN? ROB ROB. AND, ROB RESPONSE, THE 60 DAY REQUIREMENT FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER OR MR. FLANAGAN TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE WILL BE INCLUDED IN THAT STUDY. ESSENTIALLY, THEY WOULD THAT WOULD GIVE THEM ENOUGH TIME TO HAVE DONE THAT, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL WANTS TO KNOW. SO THEY WOULD EITHER ESSENTIALLY COME TO COUNCIL AND SAY, WE'VE DONE WE'VE DONE THAT STUDY, AND THIS IS WHERE WE STAND AND PROVIDE AN UPDATED ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION OR STUDY. YEAH. WITH THE STATE APPROVED ENGINEER, MY CONCERN WAS WAS THE, YOU KNOW, CONFLICTING REPORTS WITH THE TIMELINES. I WAS, YOU KNOW, REALLY CONCERNED WITH GETTING THAT STREET BACK OPENED UP. BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE SECURE IN DOING SO. THAT'S WHY I WANT TO SEE FROM BOTH PERSPECTIVES WHERE WE ARE EXACTLY. COUNCILMAN GOETZ AND COUNCILMAN BELSHAW. SO AGAIN, OUR CONCERN WOULD BE, PUBLIC SAFETY IN GETTING THOSE STREETS OPEN, IT'S ONE THING THAT COULD HAPPEN ADVERSE TO THE CITY IS IF THE BUILDING WERE TO COLLAPSE AND WE HAD OPENED THE STREET AND IT FALL ON A PEDESTRIAN OR A CAR DRIVING DOWN THE STREET, WHICH WOULD RESULT CERTAINLY, IN PROBABLY SOME FORM OF LITIGATION, ONE OF THE WAYS THAT THE CITY CAN PROTECT AGAINST THOSE TYPES OF CONTINGENCIES IS THROUGH AN INSURANCE POLICY. I'LL DEFER THIS TO MISS REED, BUT, YOU KNOW, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE AS A CONDITION OF THIS TO REQUIRE SOME SORT OF INSURANCE OR INDEMNIFICATION, THAT WOULD NAME THE CITY AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED OR, IN SOME WAY PROTECT THE CITY IN THE EVENT THAT SOME CALAMITY WERE TO OCCUR. I'M COGNIZANT OF YOUR STATEMENTS THAT IT SURVIVED A HURRICANE AND, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T REASONABLY THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO BE PROACTIVE AND PROTECT THE CITY AGAINST POTENTIAL LIABILITY. SO WHAT DO YOU THINK, MR. I THINK A REASONABLE COMPROMISE WOULD BE TO IF YOU'RE LOOKING OR IF THEY'RE INTERESTED, BUT AGAIN, THEY'RE IN THEIR ENGINEER HAS SUGGESTED OR HIS ENGINEER SUGGESTED THAT THE BARRICADES REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO, ASSESS THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING. IF THEY'RE ASKING TO REMOVE IT FOR FINANCIAL REASONS AND HE WANTS TO OBTAIN AN INSURANCE POLICY AND LISTED THE CITY AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED, I MEAN, THAT'S AN OPTION, BUT I THINK I'M NOT GIVING HIM LEGAL ADVICE. BUT THERE'S A GUY WITH A DEGREE SAYING, I WANT YOU TO GIVE US LEGAL ADVICE. I'M JUST

[03:45:06]

[03:53:26]

[03:55:02]

AND I UNDERSTAND THE, THE, THE FRUSTRATION WITH THE BARRICADES AS OPPOSED TO THOSE LOCAL BUSINESSES. I MEAN, IT'S PERSONALLY AFFECTED ME GETTING TO ONE OF MY FAVORITE, SHOPPING HABITS. BUT I UNDERSTAND THE NECESSITY OF IT AS WELL. SO OKAY I UNDERSTAND. OKAY. THANK YOU, A CONCERN, ONE WE'VE NOT I'VE NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW EITHER OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED TODAY, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AT LEAST A WEEK. WE CAN HAVE A SPECIAL SESSION NEXT WEEK, OR WE CAN HAVE HAVE THIS SAME ITEM COME BACK FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. BUT I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE DOCUMENTS. THEN I CAN MAKE AN INTELLIGENT DECISION BECAUSE THE SUPPLEMENTAL, THE SECOND, DECISION OPTION THAT WAS GIVEN, IT APPEARS THAT IT CALLS FOR MORE TIME. BUT THAT'S NOT THE TYPE OF TIME I WOULD NEED. I'M THINKING ABOUT THE TIME TO REVIEW THE DOCUMENTS AND MAKE A DECISION OF WHAT WE DO AT THAT TIME, AS OPPOSED TO, ALLOWING THEM TO GO WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT WE'RE GOING TO EXTEND THIS FOR SIX MONTHS OR HOWEVER AMOUNT OF TIME AND PUT MORE MONEY IN. THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M WANTING TO DO. I'M WANTING TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET AN ASSESSMENT OF WHERE IT IS TODAY, EVALUATE IT FOR MYSELF. THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED, LISTENING TO THE PROFESSIONALS AND THEN MAKE A DECISION NEXT WEEK OR THE FOLLOWING WEEK. COUNCILMAN DARIO AND THEN COUNCILMAN TURNER. YES, I KEEP HEARING Y'ALL MENTION, STATE OF TEXAS APPROVED ENGINEER THE ENGINEER THAT INSPECTED US FOR THE CITY OF BEAUMONT WAS THAT FITZ AND SHIPMAN OR ARE THEY STATE OF TEXAS APPROVED ENGINEERS? THEY ARE. AND THEY'RE THE ONES THAT RECOMMENDED DEMOLITION. CORRECT. AND THEY STILL BELIEVE THAT WAY. DO YOU KNOW WE HAVE HAD NO, NO OTHER DECISION COME OUR WAY FROM THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE RECEIVED.

OKAY. AND ALSO, AS FAR AS US REVIEWING THIS, MR. BOONE DIDN'T YOU SAY THE STAFF HAD ALREADY REVIEWED ALL THIS STUFF AND CAME UP WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FOR DEMOLITION? AGAIN, LET ME JUST RESTATE THE CHRONOLOGY HERE, THAT IN JUNE WE HAD A HEARING AND BASED ON WHAT THE ENGINEER TOLD STAFF, WE WAS RECOMMENDATION OF DEMOLITION. OKAY. AND SO THIS IS SIMPLY REOPENING THAT HEARING. WE AS STAFF HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY STATEMENT FROM AN ENGINEER THAT WOULD CONFLICT WITH THAT ORIGINAL STATEMENT. AND THAT'S WHY OUR RECOMMENDATION STANDS FROM JUNE. WE DIDN'T CHANGE IT. HAD WE AND MAYBE WE MAYBE IT'S UNREALISTIC, BUT HAD WE HAD GOTTEN A STATEMENT FROM AN ENGINEER SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT? THIS THING IS ABSOLUTELY STABLE.

IT WILL NOT FALL. WE MAY HAVE CHANGED OUR RECOMMENDATION, BUT WE DID NOT. WHAT WE GOT WAS A

[04:00:05]

WE THEN CAME BACK AND SAID, HEY, THE LAST TIME THIS WENT TO COUNCIL, THERE WAS A AN INTEREST FOR COUNCIL TO ALLOW FOR REHABILITATION. AND SO WE DRAFTED ESSENTIALLY A SECOND ORDINANCE OR A, A WORK PROGRAM ORDINANCE. TO PRESENT TO COUNCIL IN THE EVENT THAT MR. FLANAGAN CAME AND SAID, HEY, I STILL WANT TO REHAB THE BUILDING. SO WHAT HAPPENED IN JUNE IS THAT THE ITEM WAS TABLED. AND FOR 60 DAYS TO ALLOW THESE THINGS TO HAPPEN. BEFORE WE WROTE THE AGENDA ITEM WAS DONE. WE HADN'T RECEIVED ALL THAT MATERIAL BY THE TIME WE GOT THE ENGINEERING STUDY. THIS HAD ALREADY BEEN RECEIVED. THE CONDITIONS SPECIFICALLY ITEM ONE, IS BUILT AROUND HIS ENGINEERING STUDY TO, HEY, GIVE ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET INTO THE BUILDING, TEAR DOWN THE FLOORS SO THAT I CAN ASSESS THE BACK WALL, WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM THE ENGINEER, RON. THAT'S A WEIRD RIGHT, BUT THE ENGINEER IS THAT AN ASSESSMENT OF THE BUILDING? IT'S AN ENTIRETY CAN BE DONE. ONCE THEY'VE DONE, THEY'VE DONE THAT. AND SO HE'LL BE ABLE TO SAY, OR AT LEAST PROVIDE AN EXPERT OPINION AS TO THE DEGREE OF STABILITY OF THE BUILDING, WHETHER OR NOT THE BARRICADES CAN BE REMOVED, THE TO PARAPHRASE, WHETHER OR NOT REHABILITATION OF THE BUILDING IS EVEN FEASIBLE AT THAT POINT. IF AND THAT'S ALL THAT'S ALL BUILT INTO THE CONDITIONS, WOULD IT BE FEASIBLE OR DO YOU THINK IT WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE IF FITZ AND SHIPMAN LOOKED AT THIS REPORT AND THEY TOLD US WHAT THEY THOUGHT NOW, OR THAT THEIR OPINION MAY CHANGE? I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK. TRY TO SPEAK FOR WHAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT SAY I DO. I WOULD EXPECT THAT THEY WOULD BE RELUCTANT TO, BASED ON THE FACT THAT IT'S BASED ON ANOTHER ENGINEER WHO'S WHO'S GIVEN A QUALIFIED STATEMENT. AND AGAIN, WHILE YOU KNOW IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE TIME, IT'S THE IDEA IS THAT BY OCTOBER OR NOVEMBER, THEY SHOULD HAVE A CLEAR IDEA OF WHAT WHAT THE SITUATION. AND ONE LAST THING. AND I AGREE WITH YOU, MADAM CITY ATTORNEY, YOU CAN'T COMPROMISE ON SAFETY, BUT. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY FOR THESE FOLKS WHOSE BUSINESSES ARE BEING AFFECTED TO FIND SOME KIND OF WAY TO SEE IF WE CAN. WE CAN HELP THEM OUT. AND I'M. YES, I'M. I'M ALL ABOUT LIKE MR. FLANAGAN SAID. I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY AND I STILL AM. AND EVEN HIS ENGINEER SAID, NO, HE WOULD NOT. HE COULD NOT WALK AROUND THAT BUILDING WITH HIS FAMILY RIGHT NOW. HE JUST SAID THAT I HEARD HIM OKAY. COUNCILMAN GOETZ. SO I THINK THAT WE HAVE THE FITZ AND SHIPMAN REPORT IN OUR PACKET. AND ACTUALLY SOME OF THE THINGS THAT IT SAYS IN THE REPORT ARE IN THE REPORT ARE BEING A LITTLE BIT MISCONSTRUED TODAY, ONE OF THE THINGS IS THAT, IT SAYS AFTER THE FIRE IS FULLY EXTINGUISHED, WHICH IT IS NOW, THE STREETS CAN BE REOPENED TO TRAFFIC. IT DOESN'T SAY OR RECOMMEND IN HERE THAT THE STREETS BE BARRICADED. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE JUST DECIDED TO DO. IT SAYS THE SIDEWALKS ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING SHOULD REMAIN CLOSED. SO ACTUALLY, OUR OWN ENGINEER SAYS THAT THE STREETS CAN BE REOPENED TO TRAFFIC. HE ALSO SAYS THAT, LET ME GO BACK AND FIND WHERE I READ THIS. HE'S TALKING ABOUT THE BUILDING BEING STRUCTURALLY UNSOUND, AND THAT IN A STRONG WIND EVENT, WILL LIKELY CAUSE, AT A MINIMUM, A PARTIAL COLLAPSE OF ONE OR MORE EXTERIOR WALLS. WELL WE DID HAVE A STRONG WIND EVENT, AND NONE OF THE WALLS COLLAPSED. SO

[04:05:06]

THE FOURTH FLOOR IS 100% IN PLACE. SO THE BASICALLY THE ROOF IS GONE, BUT THE FOURTH FLOOR IS IN PLACE. AND YOU CAN IMAGINE THAT'S NEAR THE TOP OF THE BUILDING. THAT'S A, THAT'S A, THAT'S A REINFORCING. SO THAT'S ALSO GOOD, WE DO NOT SEE ANY SIGNS OF IMMINENT STRUCTURAL FAILURE IN THE BUILDING OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING. THE WALL STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING INTERIOR. WHO KNOWS? THERE'S STUFF HANGING ALL OVER THE PLACE. AND BUT FOR THE CONCERN THAT THE COUNCIL HAS FOR AN OUTSIDE AN OUTWARD FAILURE OF AN EXTERIOR WALL, WE'RE NOT SEEING

[04:10:05]

THAT'S JUST THE NATURE OF RISK AND WORK. SOME OF THOSE TECHNIQUES IN THE CITY MAY HAVE SOME OF THAT RISK ASSESSMENT PRACTICE THAT WE WOULD REALLY WELCOME AN OPPORTUNITY TO JUMP IN THERE. AND WITH WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE STRUCTURE NOW, WE'D BE MORE THAN WILLING TO HELP FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, WHERE ON THE RISK SPECTRUM IS THIS SITUATION AND DOES IT WARRANT A ROAD CLOSURE IF AND IF I SPOKE ABOUT NOT BEING COMFORTABLE ABOUT WALKING AROUND THE BUILDING EARLIER, I MISSPOKE. I AM COMFORTABLE WALKING AROUND THE BUILDING AS AN INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN OF BEAUMONT. NOT I'M NOT. I'M NOT TELLING YOU AS A LICENSED ENGINEER THAT YOU SHOULD DO THA.

I NEED DATA TO DO THAT. MY PERSONAL JUDGMENT. I RIDE MY BIKE AROUND THERE ALL THE TIME.

SO. BUT THE POINT THAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE IS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN WHERE WE ARE NOW, WHERE WE'RE STUCK WITH THE ROAD CLOSED. AND FITZ AND SHIPMAN DID SAY OPEN IT, AND WHERE AND WHERE WE'RE GOING, WHERE WE CAN SAY, ABSOLUTELY, YOU CAN OPEN IT. THERE'S PROBABLY SOME PROGRESS TO BE MADE THERE. SO WE'D LOVE TO BE A PART OF THAT. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN. TURNER. COUNCILMAN DARIO, THEN COUNCILMAN GOETZ, AND THEN COUNCILMAN GOUGH. I'M RUNNING OUT OF COUNCILMAN'S.

YEAH, I JUST THINK YOU KNOW, WE CAN WE PROBABLY CAN GO ABOUT THIS ON AND ON, BUT IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS THAT WE DID GIVE YOU INSTRUCTIONS. SOME TIME AGO, WITHIN 60 DAYS TO SUPPLY A, B, C, D AND YOU CAME BACK WITH A, B, C, D, WHICH WE APPRECIATE THAT TO MAKE A DECISION TODAY AFTER WE INSTRUCTED YOU TO DO A, B, C, D, I JUST I COULDN'T SUPPORT THAT BECAUSE YOU WOULD COMPLY WITH EVERYTHING WE ASKED YOU TO DO. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, YOU KNOW I THINK WE'RE AT A POINT AS A COUNCIL WHERE FISHING SHIPMENT GAVE THE REPORT THAT THE ROADS COULD BE OPEN.

YOU GUYS SAID YOU NEED UNTIL MID OCTOBER TO BE SURE IF YOU CAN SHOW UP THERE AND KIND OF AGREE WITH WHAT THEY STATED IN THE REPORT, WHICH COUNCIL MEMBER GETS. I APPRECIATE YOU GOING RECTIFY THAT BECAUSE THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION, BECAUSE ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONCERNS TO OUR BUSINESSES THAT WE CARE ABOUT AS WELL IS ACCESS TO YOUR PROPERTY. AND ME, I'M AT THE POINT WHERE I'M OKAY WITH ENTERTAINING A MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD THAT MAYBE NOVEMBER 1ST, WE CAN COME BACK AND REVISIT THE ROAD OPENING, BECAUSE WE'RE SAYING THAT'S THE AMOUNT OF TIME THEY NEED. I JUST DON'T WANT TO KEEP GOING ON AND ON WITH THIS. SO THE BACK I'M CALLING IT THE BACKUP ORDINANCE. BUT THE ORDINANCE THAT THE STAFF PRESENTED THAT PROVIDES CONDITIONS, WOULD PUT THEM AT AROUND THAT TIME FRAME. OKAY. SO, IT WOULD IT WOULD ALLOW THEM THE WORK PROGRAM TO, I GUESS, PROCEED WITH THE WORK HE WANTED TO DO THAT'S OUTLINED IN HIS ENGINEERING STUDY. CONDITION NUMBER TWO SAYS THAT HE WILL PROVIDE AN UPDATED, REPORT TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, WHICH BASED ON ENGINEERING, ROB SAID HE SAID THAT ONCE THEY GET INTO IT. SO THAT WOULD PUT THEM AROUND THE OCTOBER 29TH MEETING, SO THEY WOULD HAVE PROVIDED THAT TO, TO STAFF IN TIME FOR US TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE TO COUNCIL BY OCTOBER 29TH, FOR Y'ALL TO DETERMINE, AND IF WE GET IT SOONER, THERE'S THREE MEETINGS IN OCTOBER, OCTOBER, FIRST, OCTOBER 15TH AND OCTOBER 29TH. SO IF THAT INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED SOONER, THEN WE COULD BRING THAT TO COUNCIL SOONER TO DETERMINE WHAT THE NEXT STEPS COULD BE. AND AT THAT TIME, THERE SHOULD BE A MORE DEFINITE STUDY BASED ON WHAT HIS ENGINEER HAS PROVIDED. THERE'LL BE A MORE DEFINITE STUDY ON WHERE THEY FALL, ON THE STABILITY OF THE BUILDING. OKAY, WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYONE NEEDED TO CONTINUE, BUT, MAYOR, THIS IS KIND OF WHERE I WAS HIT, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE AT THIS POINT, WE'RE KIND OF REPEATING OURSELVES. YES I BELIEVE COUNCILMAN TURNER'S CALL FOR THE QUESTION. BUT MAYOR, YOUR PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND WE NEED TO HEAR THAT OTHER, SO IF YOU WANTED TO, THE OPTIONS ARE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. UNLESS, COUNCIL, UNLESS YOU HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR THE ENGINEER AND FOR MR. AND THE PROPERTY OWNER, YOU CAN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND

[04:15:02]

COUNCILMAN GOETZ, MENTIONED EARLIER ABOUT A STRONG WIND EVENT AND THEY SAID IT WAS 30 TO 40 MILE PER HOUR WINDS. AND I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF I COULD ASK CHIEF O'CONNOR. WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED A STRONG WIND EVENT? NOT. IT'S NOT A STRONG WIND EVENT. I DIDN'T THINK SO.

SO IT HADN'T FACED A STRONG WIND EVENT YET TO KNOW IF IT CAN WITHSTAND ONE OR NOT. THAT'S THAT'S JUST ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I DID GO ALONG WITH THAT AND I'LL BE THIS WILL BE MY LAST ONE. BUT I JUST AND TAGGING OFF OF COUNCILMAN GOETZ. FINDING A COMPROMISE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY DOESN'T LIKE, BUT TO KEEP THE SIDEWALK CLOSED NEXT TO THE BUILDING, KEEP THE STREET OPEN FOR THE OTHER BUSINESSES, LET THE CITY MONITOR THE WEATHER. AND IF WE REACH A WIND EVENT THAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, THEN WE CLOSE THE STREET AND SHUT IT DOWN FOR THAT WIND EVENT. SO IT'S OPEN. THE STREET WITH THE CONDITION IF WE REACH WHATEVER TIM TELLS US, 50 MILE AN HOUR WINDS, THEN WE CLOSE THE STREET AGAIN, BUT WE KEEP THE SIDEWALK CLOSED UNTIL AT SUCH TIME, WE FEEL IT'S SAFE TO REOPEN THE SIDEWALK, SO I YIELD. I'M NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING ELSE. MAY I OFFER SOMETHING ON THAT? SOMETHING THAT COUNCILMAN FALLSHAW SAID MADE ME THINK. SO THINK OF THE BUILDING SHAPED LIKE THIS 165 AND 65 AND THE MAIN STREET THAT WE'RE CONCERNED WITH CLOSING RIGHT NOW IS PEARL STREET RIGHT HERE. AND CHUCK SANDWICH AND THE DRESS SHOP AND THE HAIR SALON ARE RIGHT HERE. OKAY. SO THESE BEAMS, THE STEEL COLUMNS ARE STILL THERE. AND THE LONGITUDINAL BEAMS ARE STILL THERE FOR SUPPORT ON THIS WALL. OKAY THE FLOOR JOISTS, EXCEPT FOR THE FOURTH FLOOR IS ROB EXPLAINED, ARE GONE. THOSE ARE THE BEAMS THAT WE CONTEMPLATE ADDING. SO AS ANOTHER COMPROMISE, I THINK THAT'S JUST COMMON HORSE SENSE. WHAT YOU JUST SAID. MR. BUT WHY DON'T WE KEEP BOWIE STREET CLOSED IF THERE WOULD BE A RISK ASSESSMEN, I WOULD SAY THAT WOULD BE A BIGGER RISK. ALTHOUGH I DON'T DEEM IT HIGH. BUT THAT'S THAT'S JUST ANOTHER IDEA. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS. SO AT THIS POINT I WILL OPEN I'M SORRY I DIDN'T AND OPEN PEARL STREET. I UNDERSTAND SO AT THIS POINT I'M GOING TO DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? I HATE TO KEEP EVERYBODY LIKE THIS, BUT I WOULD LOVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH, CITY OFFICIALS, APPROPRIATE OFFICIAL, AND THE GENTLEMAN AT FITZ AND SHIPMAN THAT DID SAY THAT THEY WOULD RECOMMEND THE ROADS TO BE REOPENED, WE HAVE PROBABLY MORE INFORMATION ON THE STRUCTURE, THE CONDITION OF THE BUILDING THAN ANYBODY ELSE RIGHT NOW. CERTAINLY MORE THAN FITZ AND SHIPMAN HAD WHEN THEY MADE THAT JUDGMENT. SO AND OUR OPINION IS POSITIVE IN THAT DIRECTION. SO IF, IF THE CITY WERE TO WERE TO RECONSIDER WITH A, WITH A RESTATEMENT FROM FITZ AND SHIPMAN THAT THEY STAND BEHIND THEIR THEIR ORIGINAL STATEMENT TO OPEN THE OPEN THE STREETS AGAIN WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION THAN THEY HAD AT THE TIME THAT I THINK INDICATES THAT IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. THEN THAT COULD BE SOMETHING PRETTY DEFINITIVE FOR YOU GUYS TO WORK WITH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, UNLESS THERE'S NO ALL RIGHT, THEN WE ARE CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS POINT. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN GOETZ. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT THE ALTERNATIVE ORDINANCE THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US BY CITY COUNCIL, THAT PROVIDES CONDITIONS, TO ALLOW WORK TO GO FORWARD WITH THE BUILDING, TO BE COMPLETED WITHIN 150 DAYS, NO LATER THAN JANUARY 10TH, 2025, RESTORING THE EXTERIOR WALLS, ROOF AND ELEVATED FLOORS TO THEIR ORIGINAL STRUCTURAL CAPACITY. ALSO, NUMBER TWO, THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS SHALL SUBMIT A RESTORATION PROGRESS REPORT TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL EVERY 60 DAYS TO ENSURE SUBSTANTIAL PROGRESSION OCCURS. AND NUMBER THREE, THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL RENDER PAYMENT TO THE CITY OF BEAUMONT WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE USE OF THE 34 WALL BARRICADES AND CONTINUING, PAYMENTS FOR

[04:20:07]

RECOMMENDATION CAME SOMEWHERE TO CLOSE THE STREET. I'M GUESSING FROM A STAFF MEMBERS WHO WERE CONCERNED AT THE TIME. AND I'M NOT SURE IF THEY'RE HERE OR WHO SAID THAT, BUT IF WE IF WE HAVE A GOOD REASON TO WHY WE THOUGHT THEY SHOULD BE CLOSED, WE NEED TO HEAR THEM NOW. SO TO GIVE A TIMELINE ON IT, WE GOT THE ENGINEERING REPORT AS YOU READ THE, WHILE THE FIRE WAS SMOLDERING AND EVERYTHING CLOSED THE STREET, DURING THE COUNCIL HEARING ON JUNE 18TH, I BELIEVE THAT IT WAS ROB. RON. THE ENGINEER FOR ALLIANCE HAD MENTIONED THAT AT THIS TIME HE NEEDS TO OR AT THIS TIME, HE RECOMMENDS FOR THE STREETS TO BE CLOSED BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW.

AND SO AT THAT POINT, WE'VE KEPT ON WITH THAT. BUT TO LOOK AT IT, WE CERTAINLY CAN, I THINK THAT THAT WAS A GREAT IDEA TO HAVE FITS AND SHIPMENT AND ALLIANCE IN THE SAME ROOM, OF COURSE, WITH CITY OFFICIALS, AND INCLUDING THE BUILDING OFFICIALS, TO REALLY GET A SOUND, A SOUND DECISION ON THAT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SO WE HAVE A MOTION.

WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND FOR THE ALTERNATE MOTION THAT IS, BEEN READ INTO THE RECORD BY COUNCILMAN GOETZ. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE, AYE. OPPOSED? NO, NO. I VOTE IN FAVOR. SO THAT WOULD BE FOUR VOTES. AND SO MOTION CARRIES AND, AT THIS POINT I'M

[WORK SESSION]

[REGULAR AGENDA]

OKAY ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF TABLING THE WORK SESSION AND AGENDA NUMBER? ITEM NUMBER TEN TO OUR NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETING. PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION IS CARRIED. THIS POINT, WE HAVE, COUNCIL MEMBER

[COUNCIL COMMENTS]

[04:25:03]

AND IT SHOULD BE FINISHED BY. WELL, WHAT'S THE TIMETABLE FOR FINISHING IT? DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ON STAFF THAT WOULD HAPPEN TO KNOW? WHAT'S THE TIMETABLE FOR FINISHING IT? THE PAVILION AT ROGERS PARK. I THINK YOU SHOULD ANSWER TO YOU. I LOST ALL THE OTHER DIRECTORS ANYWAY. GREAT.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN TURNER. I'M NOT GOING TO BE LONG. I'M JUST GOING TO CONGRATULATE, TAYLOR'S DAUGHTER. SHE STARTS COLLEGE ON TOMORROW, SO I'M GOING TO NOT COME IN TO GET MY BROTHER OUT HERE SO HE CAN GO HOME AND BE WITH HIS FAMILY. MAN. COUNCILMAN PHIL SHAW, NO COMMENT. MAYOR. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN NEILL. MADAM CITY ATTORNEY? NOPE.

[EXECUTIVE SESSION]