Jul 25, 2023 City Council on 2023-07-25 3:00 PM (Special Called Meeting)

[00:00:02]

GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE DENTON CITY COUNCIL.

IT IS TUESDAY, JULY 25TH, 2020 3:03 P.M..

WE DO HAVE A QUORUM.

I'LL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.

TRADITIONALLY, WE'VE MADE A CHANGE.

AND SO FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY OR AND FOR CITY STAFF, WE'VE MADE A CHANGE FOR THOSE TRACKING ALONG THAT WE WE CHANGE THE WAY WE DO OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

BUT WE'VE WE'VE DEVIATED FROM THAT PATH A BIT.

HERE WE ARE, WEEK TWO.

SO I'M JUST GIVING COUNCIL ADVANCE NOTICE THAT I'M GOING TO HAVE MORE TO SAY ON THIS AGENDA ITEM THAT'S BEEN PULLED.

BUT AT OUR RETREAT WE TALKED ABOUT NOT HAVING STAFF HERE.

ERGO, THERE'S NO OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ON THESE THINGS BECAUSE WE HAD HAD HAD AN AGREEMENT THAT HOW WE WERE GOING TO CHANGE PROCEDURALLY, THAT AGAIN, WEEK TWO, WE'VE DEVIATED FROM THAT.

AND SO I JUST NEED TO GET A CONSENSUS FROM COUNCIL HOW WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED.

SO WE'RE EITHER GOING TO GO BACK TO THE OTHER WAY AND STAFF WILL JUST UNDERSTAND THEY'RE BACK BECAUSE WE COULDN'T UPHOLD OUR END OF THE BARGAIN OR WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THE PATH WE DISCUSSED AND NOT BE PULLING THINGS AND HAVE.

BUT I JUST I'M AT A DISADVANTAGE BECAUSE SOMETHING'S BEEN PULLED.

I DON'T GET A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT IT.

IT GOT VOTED DOWN LAST WEEK WHEN WE WEREN'T COMPLETE.

SO IT'S JUST IT'S A POINT OF FRUSTRATION FOR ME THAT WE SAID WE'D DO ONE THING, WE'RE NOT DOING IT.

AND SO WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE OTHER SYSTEM AND HAVE THIS STAFF SITTING HERE READY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

BUT WE IT'S NOT AN AGENDA.

I DON'T HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM HERE.

I'M TAKING CHAIR'S LIBERTY TO JUST GIVE EVERYONE A HEADS UP THAT WHEN THIS IS PULLED AND WHEN THERE IS AN AGENDA ITEM THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT LATER THIS EVENING, I'M GOING TO HAVE A LOT TO SAY. SO THAT TAKES US BY AGENDA TO OUR.

WE DON'T THERE'S NO WE HADN'T GOT TO THE FIRST ITEM.

SO IT'S THE FIRST ITEM IS WORK SESSION.

WE'VE REMOVED THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT IT OTHER THAN CITIZENS.

SO I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO.

I UNDERSTAND YOU WANT TO TALK.

ME TOO. BUT WE HAVE A QUESTION ACTUALLY.

STATE YOUR STATE, YOUR QUESTION.

I'M JUST NOT SURE HOW WE CHANGE.

WE DID AGREE FOR SOMETHING ELSE.

WHAT? WHAT CHANGED? I MISSED IT. WELL.

WELL, IT WAS YOUR AT YOUR RECOMMENDATION.

YES, SIR. AND SO WHAT YOU RECOMMENDED WAS THAT STAFF NOT BE HERE WAITING AND THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, IF THEY'RE ON THE AGENDA AND THEY'RE PLACED ON CONSENT, WE SHOULD THEN AND I'M PARAPHRASING TRUST STAFF'S ANALYSIS OR LEAN ON STAFF'S ANALYSIS.

BUT WE SHOULD THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE HERE TO SIT IN THE ROOM TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

WE'LL GET THAT'S GOING TO BE PART OF MY REQUEST IS TO GET THE THE THE GET THE.

MEETINGS MINUTES FROM THAT RETREAT.

AND SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AND WE'LL HAVE EVERYTHING AND SAID CONCISELY AS CAPTURED IN THE MINUTES VERSUS MY MY RECOLLECTION.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

JUST SO YOU KNOW, I'M STILL HOLDING FAST TO MY ORIGINAL REQUEST.

SO I AGREE WITH YOU. SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE CHANGE IS, BUT I LOOK FORWARD TO TALKING ABOUT IT LATER THIS THIS EVENING.

YEP. THAT TAKES US TO OUR WORK SESSION.

[WORK SESSION]

[1. Citizen Comments on Consent Agenda Items]

SO THEN THAT THAT TAKES US TO CLARIFICATIONS ON ITEMS.

[2. Requests for clarification of agenda items listed on this agenda for public hearing and individual consideration.]

THIS IS QUESTIONS ON THE AGENDA ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA OR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

SO INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, PUBLIC HEARINGS.

ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCIL MEMBER WHAT'S.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. I HAVE A QUESTION ON OUR ITEM FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

HOLD ON. YES. ITEM R5, A THE ONLY ITEM FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION THAT WE HAVE ON THE CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE REGARDING A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION I HAD JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THE THIS OUT PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR THE INDIVIDUAL SESSION.

SO THERE WAS SOME QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THIS WAS A THREE BEDROOM OR A FOUR BEDROOM, AND I WAS WONDERING IF STAFF HAD ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO EITHER VERIFY THAT OR TO GIVE US SOME REASONABLE ANALYSIS OF WHAT WE BELIEVE IT IS, BECAUSE FOR ME, THAT WOULD BE DISPOSITIVE AS FAR AS HOW MANY BEDROOMS OR BATHS THAT IT HAS.

MAYOR COUNCIL.

SCOTT MCDONALD, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

LAST WEEK WE HAD A PHONE CONFERENCE WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE OF OXFORD HOUSE.

WITHIN THAT CONVERSATION, WE WE VETTED THE QUESTION ON NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. THEY INDICATED THE HOUSE IS A FOUR BEDROOM, TWO BATH.

I HAVE SINCE ASKED TO VERIFY I JUST BECAUSE OF THE SHORT NOTICE I DID THIS YESTERDAY AFTERNOON, I WASN'T ABLE TO GAIN ACCESS IN ADVANCE, BUT THE REPRESENTATIVE WAS WAS VERY CONFIDENT.

[00:05:03]

I WILL SAY DECADES LAST RECORDS SHOW THAT IT IS A AN ATTACHED STRUCTURE WITH AN ENCLOSED GARAGE.

AND YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THAT THERE'S NOT AN ENCLOSED GARAGE.

SO AT SOME POINT, WORK WAS PERFORMED TO ENCLOSE THAT GARAGE.

IF I MAY FOLLOW UP, MAYOR.

THANK YOU. SO WHEN YOU SAY THAT THE LAST I MEAN, HOW DID WE GET THE POTENTIAL DATA THAT IT WAS A THREE BEDROOM, ONE BATH, DID THAT COME FROM DCAD OR IS THAT COME FROM SOME OTHER LISTING? THAT WAS JUST WHAT WE HAD SEEN AND HEARD FROM ZILLOW AND OTHER REAL ESTATE LISTING SERVICES WHEN IT WAS UP FOR SALE.

OKAY. DO WE KNOW HOW LONG AGO THAT THAT INFORMATION? I DO NOT OFFHAND.

OKAY. SO AT SOME POINT IT'S BEEN REPRESENTED AS A THREE BEDROOM, ONE BATH.

CORRECT. I DON'T WANT TO SAY OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION, BUT EITHER IN A LISTING FOR SALE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT INFORMATION HAS BEEN WHAT'S BEEN COMMUNICATED, CORRECT? ALL RIGHT. AND I DON'T THINK DCAD SPELLS THAT OUT.

THEY DO NOT. YEAH.

BUT I GUESS I WOULD SAY IF IT'S THREE BEDROOM, ONE BATH OR FOUR BEDROOM, TWO BATH, THE VALUATION WOULD BE VERY DIFFERENT BASED UPON EITHER ONE OF THOSE CONFIGURATIONS.

SO IT'D BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT HAS BEEN REPRESENTED TO DCAD AS WHAT THE ACTUAL CONFIGURATION OF IT IS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THAT.

SO CORRECT. SO REPRESENTATIVES SAID IT'S FOUR BEDROOM, TWO BATH.

CORRECT. WE'VE SEEN OTHER DOCUMENTATION MAY BE OLDER, THREE BEDROOM, ONE BATH, BUT WE'VE NOT PHYSICALLY PUT OUR EYES ON IT TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT WHAT IT IS.

CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE THAT INFORMATION. YOU BET.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION OR PUBLIC HEARING? MAYOR PRO TEM. THIS IS JUST A QUESTION OF PROCESS.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE EXECUTIVE SESSION MEETING ON THE RELATED ITEM.

IS THIS ITEM STILL GOING TO BE ON THE AGENDA FOR LATER TONIGHT REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER COMES OUT OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION? OKAY. THANK YOU.

THAT'S ALL I HAD, MR. MAYOR.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. WHAT? OH, THAT TAKES US TO OUR FIRST WORK SESSION.

UM. ITS ITEM.

[A. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding an update on the 88th Session of the Texas Legislature. [Estimated Presentation/Discussion Time: 1 hour, 30 minutes]]

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

RYAN ADAMS, CHIEF OF STAFF.

AND THIS IS A PRESENTATION THAT'S A RECAP OF THE 88TH SESSION OF THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE, WHICH WENT THROUGH FROM JANUARY TO LATE MAY THIS YEAR.

SO EVERY TWO YEARS WE HAVE A 140 DAY BIENNIAL SESSION.

SO EVERY TWO YEARS SESSION OCCURS AND IT LASTS STRAIGHT THROUGH FOR ABOUT FIVE MONTHS.

THIS PARTICULAR YEAR FILING BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 14TH.

THAT WAS THE FIRST DATE THAT BILLS COULD BE FILED FOR THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

THE SESSION ACTUALLY BEGAN ON JANUARY 10TH AND BILLS WERE FILED ALL THE WAY UP THROUGH MARCH 10TH.

AND THE FINAL DAY OF SESSION WAS ON MAY 29TH.

JUST AS A REMINDER, COUNCIL DID ADOPT A LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM EARLIER IN THE FALL, AND THAT'S WHAT STAFF USED AS WE RESPONDED TO TO LEGISLATION TO DRAFT LEGISLATION THROUGH THE SESSION, WE BASED OUR ADVOCACY ON THE POLICY DIRECTION CONTAINED WITHIN THAT LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM.

SO WE DO HAVE JACKSON WALKER, OUR LEGISLATIVE CONSULTANTS HERE TODAY.

THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE SESSION AND THEY CAN STAND FOR QUESTIONS AFTER THAT.

FOLLOWING JACKSON, WALKER STAFF WILL COME UP AND REVIEW A COUPLE OF HIGH IMPACT BILLS THAT WE WANT TO COMMUNICATE TO COUNCIL AND THEN PROVIDE SOME NEXT STEPS.

SO GO AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.

THANK YOU ALL FOR HAVING US TODAY.

CAN I MOVE THE SLIDES FORWARD OR DO I NEED TO TELL SOMEONE? YOU CAN DO IT. OKAY.

GOT IT. THANK YOU.

I'M DENISE ROSE, AND IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE HERE IN FRONT OF YOU ALL TODAY.

I AM ONE OF THREE MEMBERS OF THE JACKSON WALKER GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS TEAM AND THE TWO OTHER MEMBERS ARE HERE WITH US TODAY.

KATE GOODRICH AND LISA QUINTANA.

MOST OF YOU HAVE MET MYSELF AND KATE.

LARISSA JOINED US IN JANUARY.

SHE CAME FROM WORKING AT DOING SOME CITY LEVEL WORK, AND SHE ALSO WAS A MALC FELLOW IN THE 2019 SESSION.

WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE HER ON OUR TEAM.

SO I AM GOING TO FOCUS TODAY REALLY ON GIVING YOU A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE SESSION JUST TOPICALLY AND TALK ABOUT HOW WE WORK WITH THE STAFF HERE AT THE CITY OF DENTON, ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE AND WHAT WE SEE COMING DOWN THE PIKE.

[00:10:01]

SO WE SAW ABOUT 14% MORE BILLS FILED.

THAT'S OVER LAST SESSION, ABOUT 10% OF THOSE FILED IMPACTED CITIES.

THAT IS A PRETTY LARGE NUMBER.

WE ALSO SAW A VERY BIG INCREASE IN REVENUE.

THE STATE HAD AN UNPRECEDENTED, ALMOST $33 BILLION SURPLUS THIS SESSION.

MOST OF THAT WAS DUE TO RECORD SALES TAX INCREASES AND COLLECTIONS AND OIL AND GAS REVENUES.

AND ABOUT HALF OF THAT WAS SPENT DURING THE REGULAR SESSION.

AND YOU CAN SEE ON THIS SLIDE WHAT THEY SPENT THAT MONEY ON.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THEY DID ALLOCATE THE MONEY FOR PROPERTY TAX RELIEF DURING THE REGULAR SESSION.

THEY DID NOT COME TO A SOLUTION ON HOW TO ACHIEVE THAT UNTIL THE SECOND SPECIAL SESSION, WHICH WE'LL TALK ABOUT A LITTLE BIT LATER.

AND THEN THE OTHER THEME OF MORE WAS THAT THERE WERE MORE VETOES THIS SESSION AND GOVERNOR ABBOTT ALMOST BROKE THE RECORD FOR VETOES THIS SESSION.

HE VETOED 76 BILLS AND ABOUT NEARLY ALL OF THOSE VETOES CAME WITH A MESSAGE OF THE LEGISLATURE MUST FOCUS ON PROPERTY TAX EXCUSE ME, PROPERTY TAX RELIEF FIRST.

SO THEY WEREN'T NECESSARILY SUBJECT TO THE AN OBJECTION ABOUT THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE BILL ITSELF, BUT IT WAS ABOUT THEM NOT FINISHING THE PRIORITIES.

SO THIS IS A PRETTY BUSY SLIDE AND I JUST SHARE IT WITH YOU TO ILLUSTRATE THE VERY FEW COMMONALITIES THAT TEXAS LEADERSHIP HAS IN COMMON WHEN IT COMES TO LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES.

AND THE REASON THAT I BRING THAT UP IS ONLY BECAUSE IT MATTERS AS IT RELATES TO BILLS PASSING, ESPECIALLY AS IT GETS LATE IN SESSION WHEN PRIORITIES OF ONE CHAMBER HAVEN'T PASSED, OR VICE VERSA.

SO WE SPEND TIME DURING SESSION.

YOU KNOW, WE THINK THAT WE KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE TAKING UP MOST OF THEIR BANDWIDTH.

WE ASSUME CERTAIN THINGS WILL BE TOP OF THE AGENDA.

AND THEN THERE ARE THE ACTUAL THINGS THAT END UP TAKING UP A LOT OF TIME, THE THINGS THAT WE DIDN'T NECESSARILY SEE COMING.

PER SE, THIS IS JUST A SLIDE TO SHOW YOU ALL WHAT THEY DID.

SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON THIS SESSION AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THEY'RE NOT ALL THINGS THAT WERE ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE SHOWING LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES.

MANY OF THEM WERE NON CITY RELATED.

SOME OF THESE PASSED, SOME OF THEM DID NOT PASS.

BUT IT'S JUST A GENERAL ILLUSTRATION OF WHERE THEY SPEND THEIR TIME, WHETHER THIS IS ON DEBATES ON THE FLOOR WHERE THEY CAN OFTEN SPEND HOURS OR ENTIRE DAYS ON ONE BILL.

THIS MIGHT BE IN A COMMITTEE HEARING.

WE HAD A NUMBER OF COMMITTEE HEARINGS THAT WENT ALL NIGHT THIS SESSION INTO THE EARLY HOURS OF THE MORNING.

AND SO THAT IMPACTS THE WAY THAT PEOPLE INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER AND LEVELS OF EXHAUSTION, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SOME OF THESE WERE CITY RELATED.

YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THE RIGHT HAND COLUMN, SUNSET BILLS, PROPERTY TAXES, OBVIOUSLY THE PREEMPTION BILL.

AND WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THOSE IN MORE DETAIL AFTER OUR OVERVIEW.

AND THEN I THINK THAT MOST PEOPLE ARE GENERALLY FAMILIAR WITH HOW WE ENDED UP IN TWO SUBSEQUENT SPECIAL SESSIONS RIGHT AFTER THE REGULAR CONCLUDED.

BUT JUST A BRIEF RECAP AS WE GOT TO THE LAST DAY OF SESSION, WHICH IS SINE DIE ON MAY 29TH, NEITHER CHAMBER HAD AGREED ON THE METHOD BY WHICH THEY WERE GOING TO PROVIDE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF, SO THEY'RE CONSTITUTIONALLY REQUIRED TO ADJOURN AFTER THE 140TH DAY.

AND THE GOVERNOR IMMEDIATELY THAT EVENING CALLED THEM BACK INTO A SPECIAL SESSION.

SO THEY CAME BACK ON MAY 30TH AND BEGAN WORK AGAIN ON TRYING TO ADDRESS PROPERTY TAX RELIEF.

THE HOUSE PASSED THEIR VERSION OF A BILL AND ADJOURNED A COUPLE OF DAYS LATER.

THE SENATE WORKED THE ENTIRE 30 DAYS AGAIN, THEY DID NOT COME TO A COMPROMISE AND THE THE FIRST SPECIAL SESSION.

SO THEY CAME BACK YET AGAIN ON JUNE 27TH TO START AGAIN.

AND ABOUT TWO WEEKS INTO THE SECOND SPECIAL SESSION, THEY DID REACH A COMPROMISE AND THEY PASSED A COMPROMISE, THEIR PROPERTY TAX RELIEF PACKAGE.

AND THIS IS A VERY HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY OF WHAT IS IN THAT.

BUT IT DOES INCREASE THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION.

IT INCLUDES THE APPRAISAL CAP CIRCUIT BREAKER, AND THE AMOUNT IN THE BUDGET IS ABOUT $12 BILLION.

THE TOTAL PACKAGE IS $18 BILLION.

[00:15:02]

I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT LATER AS WELL.

SO HOW DO WE ALL WORK WITH THE CITY OF DENTON AND WHAT DO WE DO? THIS IS JUST A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF OUR WORK WITH THE TEAM HERE.

WE TRACKED ALMOST 800 BILLS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND THOSE INCLUDE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT TOPICS.

WE SPENT TIME THIS SESSION IN MULTIPLE COMMITTEES, WHETHER THAT WAS SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, WHETHER THAT WAS HOUSE COUNTY AFFAIRS.

IT'S A REALLY WIDE RANGE OF ISSUES THAT IMPACT THE CITY.

WE WEEKLY MEET WITH STAFF AND COMMUNICATE A NEEDED ACTION EVERY WEEK AND CONVEY WHAT'S GOING ON.

WE HAVE A TRACKING SYSTEM FOR BILLS THAT WE SHARE ON A WEEKLY BASIS, SHOWS BILLS THAT ARE MOVING, BILLS THAT ARE GOING TO BE HEARD IN COMMITTEE, BILLS THAT ARE GOING TO THE FLOOR WHEN IT GETS TO THAT POINT OF SESSION.

AND WE HAVE AN ONGOING CONVERSATION WITH STAFF ABOUT HOW TO RESOLVE POTENTIAL ISSUES WITH THESE BILLS.

WE COMMUNICATE WITH THE LOCAL DELEGATION, THE CITY'S POSITION IS WE ALSO COMMUNICATE WITH MEMBERS THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY IN THE DELEGATION, THAT ARE ON COMMITTEES OF JURISDICTION WHERE THESE BILLS ARE BEING HEARD.

SOMETIMES THAT INCLUDES BRINGING AMENDMENT LANGUAGE TO AN OFFICE TO SAY, WOULD YOU CONSIDER CHANGING THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF YOUR BILL? AND IT ALSO IT INCLUDES US SHEPHERDING BILLS THROUGH THE ENTIRE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS TO PASSAGE.

IF THAT IS PART OF THE CITY'S PRIORITY.

WE WORKED ON THE QUALIFIED HOTEL PROJECT BILL.

WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING ON THAT THIS SESSION, AS WELL AS A NUMBER OF OTHER BILLS.

WE HELPED STAFF CRAFT TESTIMONY.

A LOT OF TIMES THAT INCLUDES PROVIDING WRITTEN TESTIMONY OR ORAL TESTIMONY TO A COMMITTEE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.

SO IT'S A IT'S A NONSTOP, EVER CHANGING BACK AND FORTH PROCESS, AND IT REQUIRES A LOT OF COMMUNICATION WITH THE TEAM HERE, WHICH WE REALLY APPRECIATE.

SO LOOKING AHEAD, I HAVE A REAL TIME UPDATE ON THIS SLIDE.

IT BECAME OUT OF DATE OVER THE WEEKEND.

OUR TEAM GOT SOME UPDATED INFORMATION.

WE DO BELIEVE THAT THE NEXT SPECIAL SESSION WILL BE IN OCTOBER FOLLOWING THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL.

THAT SPECIAL SESSION WILL BE ON SCHOOL VOUCHERS OR EDUCATION SAVINGS ACCOUNTS, AS WELL AS MOST LIKELY, THE ENTIRE SLATE OF BILLS THAT WERE VETOED BY THE GOVERNOR BEING ADDED BACK TO PASS AGAIN.

SEPTEMBER 1ST IS IMPLEMENTATION DATE FOR MOST BILLS, NOT ALL OF THEM.

AND THEN IT'S ALSO THE START OF THE STATE FISCAL YEAR WHEN THE BUDGET BECOMES EFFECTIVE, SEPTEMBER 5TH WILL BE THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF ATTORNEY GENERAL KEN PAXTON THAT WILL BE HELD IN THE SENATE.

WE'RE NOT ENTIRELY SURE HOW LONG THAT WILL LAST ON.

ON NOVEMBER 7TH, THE STATE WILL HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ELECTION THAT DOES INCLUDE THE PROPERTY TAX H.J.R THAT PASSED IN THE SPECIAL SESSION ON IT ALSO INCLUDES THE RIGHT TO FARM H.J.R.

THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO ESSENTIALLY DO WHAT THEY WANT WITH THEIR LAND.

WE ANTICIPATE INTERIM CHARGES COMING LATER THIS YEAR OR POSSIBLY INTO NEXT YEAR, DEPENDING ON THE IT MAY BE AFTER THE PRIMARY ELECTION.

WE'RE NOT QUITE SURE.

THERE'S NEVER A REAL SET TIME ON WHEN THAT'LL HAPPEN.

BUT THOSE WILL BE ISSUES THAT PEOPLE WANT TO LOOK AT OVER THE INTERIM.

THEY SOMETIMES WILL TURN INTO DISCUSSION POINTS OR BILLS FOR THE NEXT SESSION.

THEY ESSENTIALLY ARE HOMEWORK FOR THE LEGISLATURE AND THEN IN MARCH, WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER ELECTION.

WE'LL BE BACK IN THAT CYCLE AGAIN.

SO I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE.

I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO TALK IN MORE DETAIL ABOUT BILLS MORE SPECIFICALLY, BUT THAT IS AN OVERVIEW OF THE WORK THAT WE DID AND.

WE'RE VERY HAPPY TO BE HERE.

I'LL TURN IT OVER TO RYAN.

WELL, IF ANY, I WAS GOING SAY IF ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR JACKSON WALKER ABOUT THE SESSION, WE CAN TAKE THOSE FIRST BEFORE WE GO INTO BILLS.

SO CAN WE DO YOU CAN YOU IDENTIFY WHICH BILLS WE'RE GOING TO SPEAK ON? RIGHT. SO IF THERE'S QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE THAT WE CAN HANG ON TO THOSE AND ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THE OTHERS.

SO CAN YOU IDENTIFY WHICH BILLS WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO DETAIL ON? SURE. OR JUST IS IT? IF IT'S ON A PARTICULAR SLIDE, IT'D BE THE ONES THAT ARE ON THE THAT ARE ON THE SLIDES.

OKAY. THE ONES THAT ARE NAMED IN THE SLIDES.

GOT IT. SO THE EVERYTHING FROM SLIDE 12 TO 1617.

YOU PLAN ON TOUCHING ON.

YES, SIR. PERFECT.

[00:20:01]

IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ON ONE OF THOSE PARTICULAR, THEN LET'S TAKE IT UP AS WE GO THROUGH IT IN DETAIL TO TO KIND OF EXPEDITE THE PROCESS QUESTIONS OUTSIDE OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO DETAIL ON.

COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND. THANK YOU.

WILL THE WILL THE PAXTON IMPEACHMENT TRIAL BE THE ONLY ORDER OF BUSINESS THAT THE SENATE CONSIDERS? OR WILL THEY WILL THEY DO THEIR REGULAR JOB AND DO THIS AS WELL? WE UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WILL WAIT TO CALL THE SPECIAL SESSION UNTIL THAT'S CONCLUDED.

OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER.

WHAT'S. YEAH, AND I DIDN'T SEE IT IN THE SLIDES, SO IF IT IS CORRECT ME AND I'LL HOLD THE QUESTION FOR THEN ON YOUR SLIDE NINE, YOU TALK ABOUT H.J.R.

64, WHICH IS THE LOCAL OPTION EXEMPTION FROM AD VALOREM TAXATION BY A COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY OF ALL OR PART OF THE APPRAISED VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY USED TO OPERATE A CHILD CARE FACILITY.

SO WHAT THE VOTERS WILL BE VOTING ON IS TO GIVE THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES THAT OPTION, BUT THEN THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES, MEANING, LET'S SAY US, THE POLICY MAKERS, WE WOULD HAVE TO IMPLEMENT THAT AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.

THAT'S THIS VOTE IS NOT EXEMPTING.

I MEAN, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO HELP WITH AFFORDABLE CHILD CARE.

BUT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S THE PROCESS HERE.

I WILL HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT AND GET BACK TO YOU BECAUSE I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE WHAT THE PROCESS WILL BE AFTER THE IF THE AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED BY THE VOTERS.

OKAY. I CAN ANSWER THAT.

OKAY. WE'VE ACTUALLY LOOKED AT THAT BILL.

AND YES. SO THIS WOULD PROVIDE THE CONSTITUTIONAL ALLOWANCE FOR CITIES TO ACTUALLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT.

SO IT WOULDN'T AUTOMATICALLY ADOPT ANYTHING FOR THE CITY OF DENTON FOR ANY TAX EXEMPTION FOR CHILD CARE SERVICES.

ONCE THAT AMENDMENT PASSES, GIVING CITIES THE AUTHORITY TO DO IT, THE CITY WOULD THEN HAVE TO TAKE IT UPON THEMSELVES TO PASS AN ORDINANCE TO THAT EFFECT.

AND IF JUST A REAL QUICK FOLLOW UP, IF IF ANYTHING PASSES IN THAT NOVEMBER ELECTION, WHEN DOES IT BECOME EFFECTIVE? IS IT JUST ARE THEY DIFFERENT IN EACH INDIVIDUAL BILL WHEN THEY BECOME EFFECTIVE OR IS IT JANUARY 1ST? OR DO WE KNOW THAT THAT IS A THAT'S A GREAT I THINK IT'S A I BELIEVE IT'S EFFECTIVE WHEN IT'S PASSED.

BUT LET ME GET SOME LET ME GET SOME INFORMATION ON THAT.

I DON'T QUITE KNOW.

YEAH. THANK YOU. IS IT JANUARY 1ST? JANUARY 1ST.

THANK YOU. THAT'S WHY YOU BRING THE LAWYERS.

YEAH. OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCIL MEMBER ESSER. YEAH.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE SORT OF OVERVIEW, AND I DIDN'T QUITE GET UNTIL NOW THAT THERE'S A RAFT OF LEGISLATION THAT'S GOING TO COME BACK THAT WAS VETOED, YOU KNOW, AS IN PREFERENCE FOR ACTION ON THE TAXES.

SO IS IS ANY OF THAT IS COVERED HERE THAT MIGHT BE CITY RELATED OR OR IS THERE THERE WERE A FEW BILLS THAT IMPACTED CITIES AND THAT'S ACTUALLY ON OUR LIST OF THINGS TO GO BACK THROUGH AND LOOK AT.

THERE WERE SOME THAT WERE VERY LOCALLY SPECIFIC, SOME MUD BILLS THAT GOT VETOED.

THERE WAS NOTHING THAT I SAW THAT WE WERE.

VERY STRONGLY OPPOSED TO.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THESE BILLS COME BACK AND THEY THEY CAN CHANGE.

SO OBVIOUSLY, WE'LL BE TRACKING ALL OF THAT.

THANK YOU. MAYOR PRO TEM.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE TO ASK IN THE BACKUP QUESTIONS WAS SORT OF A SCORECARD FOR HOW OUR LOCAL DELEGATION DID.

DO WE AND I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO UNLESS YOU HAVE IT OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, BUT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF BILLS, SO ACTUALLY THAT WOULD PROBABLY GO ON TOO LONG, BUT IT WOULD HELP MAYBE IF YOU COULD GET TO TO COUNCIL.

CERTAINLY. SO PARTLY JUST SO THAT WE CAN KNOW HOW TO INCREASE OR DECREASE OUR ADVOCACY AS WELL FOR OUR LOCAL DELEGATION.

I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON PULLING TOGETHER WITH THE STAFF.

I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. WE CAN GO INTO THE DETAILS.

OKAY. OKAY, SO PICKING UP WHERE DENISE LEFT OFF.

SO WE OBVIOUSLY AS STAFF, WE WORK WITH JACKSON WALKER.

WE ALSO WORKED WITH A COUPLE OTHER GROUPS THROUGHOUT THE SESSION.

WE HAD AN ONGOING DIALOG WITH, OF COURSE, OUR CONSULTANTS.

TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE IS A BIG RESOURCE FOR THE CITY.

THEY DO A LOT OF BILL EVALUATIONS.

THEY EVEN HAVE A BIG CITY GROUP WHERE THEY DISCUSS STRATEGY AND THE IMPACT OF LEGISLATION.

SOMETIMES LEGISLATION COMES THROUGH AND WOULDN'T YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T MAKE A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE.

SO WE TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS WHENEVER WE DO GET A COPY OF IT.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAD DME, WHO WAS VERY INVOLVED WITH THE TEXAS PUBLIC POWER ASSOCIATION AND EVALUATING LEGISLATION AS WELL.

[00:25:03]

AND THROUGHOUT THE SESSION WE HAD ONGOING ENGAGEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT HEADS.

WE HAD TO READ THESE BILLS, UNDERSTAND HOW THEY COULD IMPACT US, AND THEN HOPE THAT THEY DON'T CHANGE SIGNIFICANTLY OR AT LEAST KEEP AN EYE OUT IF THEY DO CHANGE SIGNIFICANTLY.

SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND HOW THAT IMPACT CHANGES OVER TIME.

USUALLY WHAT'S FILED IS NOT OFTEN WHAT IS PASSED IN TERMS OF WHAT THE LANGUAGE IS IN THE BILL, AND WE TOOK THAT FEEDBACK AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT INFORMED WHAT WE TELL MEMBERS OF THE DELEGATION.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS IS A VERY REAL STORY OF IF THIS PASSES POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE, THIS IS HOW IT WILL IMPACT THE CITY OF DENTON.

AND SO THAT WAS AN ONGOING CONVERSATION AS THESE BILLS ARE FILED AND AS THEY ARE AMENDED AND EVENTUALLY EITHER PASSED OR NOT PASSED.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO MENTION SOME OF THE SUCCESSES THROUGHOUT THE SESSION.

THE ONE THAT IS VERY MUCH TOP OF MIND IS A QUALIFIED HOTEL PROJECTS BILL FOR DENTON.

THIS WAS A BILL THAT COUNCIL GAVE US DIRECTION TO PURSUE BACK IN THE FALL.

THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO USE THE QUALIFIED HOTEL PROJECT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOOL THAT'S ALLOWED IN THE TAX CODE.

WE DID NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THAT.

WE HAD TO GET ADDED TO DO THAT AND WE BEGAN WORKING ON THAT BEFORE THE SESSION EVEN STARTED.

AND THE BILL THAT INCLUDED DENTON TO BE ABLE TO USE THAT TOOL WAS PASSED, I THINK THREE DAYS BEFORE THE SESSION ENDED.

SO IT WAS CRADLE TO GRAVE ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE SESSION THAT WE WORKED ON THAT AND CITY STAFF LIKE WAYNE EMERSON, OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, JACKSON WALKER, WERE INCREDIBLY INSTRUMENTAL IN MAKING SURE THAT WE KEPT WORKING TO REALLY TELL OUR STORY OF HOW THIS WOULD BE GOOD FOR DENTON AND MAKE SURE THAT THE VOTERS DOWN IN AUSTIN KNEW THAT THIS WAS A GOOD THING FOR THEM TO PASS.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS A SUBPOENA DOCUMENT COST RECOVERY BILL, WHICH ESSENTIALLY WHEN WE GET SUBPOENAS THAT WANT A LOT OF DOCUMENTS FROM THE CITY OF DENTON, WE COULD CHARGE THEM THE GRAND SUM OF $1, NO MATTER HOW MANY DOCUMENTS THEY REQUESTED OF US, AND NO MATTER HOW MUCH STAFF TIME IT TOOK.

AND SO THAT LEGISLATION WAS CHANGED.

THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH SENATOR SPRINGER'S OFFICE ON AND EVEN HAD, I THINK.

CALEB, DID YOU GO DOWN AND TESTIFY FOR THAT ONE? CALEB WENT DOWN TO AUSTIN FOR THAT ONE AND THAT ACTUALLY GOT PASSED AS WELL.

SO OUR CONCERN WAS THAT WE WERE TREATING ESSENTIALLY OUTSIDE GROUPS WHO GOT DOCUMENTS THROUGH A SUBPOENA DIFFERENTLY THAN OUR OWN CITIZENS WHO HAD TO PAY A FIRMER COST. AND NOW THEY ARE TREATED EXACTLY THE SAME.

THERE ARE ALSO A NUMBER OF BAD BILLS THAT WERE DEFEATED AND DIDN'T CANNOT TAKE CREDIT FOR ALL OF THESE, ALTHOUGH WE DID TELL OUR STORY WITH EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM.

THE TWO AT THE TOP, I THINK, ARE THE MOST TELLING.

ONE BILL, SENATE BILL 1110.

WHICH COUNCIL GOT A COUPLE OF UPDATES IN THE FRIDAY REPORTS ABOUT WOULD HAVE PROHIBITED ANY TRANSFERS FROM MUNICIPAL OWNED UTILITIES TO THE GENERAL FUND REGARDLESS OF IF IT WAS FOR A COST OF SERVICE FEE OR A REVENUE RECOVERY.

AND IT WAS REALLY GOING TO IMPACT THE GENERAL FUND, ESPECIALLY IN THOSE AREAS WHERE THE GENERAL FUND PROVIDES A SERVICE TO THAT MOU, SUCH AS HR SERVICES, FINANCIAL SERVICES THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THE GENERAL FUND FROM RECOUPING ITS COSTS ON THAT.

THERE WERE A LOT OF APPRAISAL CAP BILLS AS WELL.

IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE CURRENT SITUATION WITH APPRAISALS FOR RESIDENCES, IT'S CAPPED AT 10%.

THERE WERE A LOT OF BILLS THAT WERE FILED THAT HAD 5 OR 3% CAPS FOR NOT JUST RESIDENCES, BUT FOR ALL REAL PROPERTY.

AND THERE WERE DOZENS OF THEM.

LUCKILY, NONE OF THEM DID PASS IN THE REGULAR SESSION.

WE DID HAVE ONE BILL PASS IN THE SPECIAL SESSION THAT HAS A 20%.

THEY CALL IT A CIRCUIT BREAKER, BUT A 20% CAP ON NON HOMESTEADED PROPERTY.

AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT HERE IN A LITTLE BIT.

SO THIS IS THE PART WHERE WE GO THROUGH SOME SPECIFIC PIECES OF LEGISLATION.

NOW, STAFF WENT THROUGH AND WE LOOKED AT ALL THE LEGISLATION THAT PASSED.

AND OUT OF ALL THAT LEGISLATION, THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT THAT IT'S GOOD TO KNOW ABOUT, BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY AFFECT.

AND THERE'S OTHERS THAT THEY MAY AFFECT US IN THE FUTURE OF CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES OCCUR.

THERE ARE STILL OTHERS THAT AFFECT US IN A SMALL WAY.

MAYBE WE HAVE TO CHANGE A POLICY UPDATE SOME FORMS, YOU KNOW, CHANGE THE WAY WE DO SOMETHING IN A VERY MINOR OR MODERATE WAY, BUT WE TRY TO PULL OUT THE ONES TO PRESENT FOR YOU TODAY THAT ARE MORE SIGNIFICANT IN THEIR IMPACT.

AND SO WHAT WE HAVE IS JUST SOME BRIEF SUMMARIES OF THESE BILLS.

AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS KIND OF GO SLIDE BY SLIDE.

WE DO HAVE STAFF WHO CAN SPEAK ON THESE BILLS.

IF YOU DO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND WE'LL KIND OF GET THROUGH IT BIT BY BIT.

ONE OF THE AREAS THIS SESSION THAT REALLY TOOK A BIG SPOTLIGHT WAS DEVELOPMENT RELATED ISSUES, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO GROWTH AND TJ'S AND DENSITY.

ONE OF THE BILLS THAT WAS PRETTY PRETTY UP THERE IN TERMS OF WHAT WE WATCH AND HOW CLOSELY WE WATCH, IT WAS SENATE BILL 2038.

[00:30:01]

THIS ALLOWS PROPERTY OWNERS TO PURSUE RELEASE FROM FROM AN ETJ OF THEIR OWN VOLITION, I BELIEVE, EITHER BY ELECTION OR BY PETITION.

HOW THAT IMPACTS US.

WE ARE CONTINUING TO ASSESS.

WE ARE ALREADY WORKING ON DEVELOPING A PROCESS AROUND THIS, HOW THAT GETS REQUESTED OF THE CITY.

AS WE DEVELOP THAT PROCESS, WE'RE ALSO ASSESSING THE IMPACT TO NON NON ANNEXATION AGREEMENTS AND WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO BRING THIS BILL BACK ON AUGUST 1ST.

WE HAVE A MUD AND MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT DISTRICT WORK SESSION ALREADY SCHEDULED.

AND SO WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SENATE BILL 2038 A COMPONENT OF THAT.

WE CAN TALK IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT WHAT THIS BILL MEANS, PARTICULARLY FOR OUR ETJ AND WHAT OUR STEPS ARE GOING TO BE GOING FORWARD.

THERE ARE ALSO SOME CHANGES TO OUR PLATTING PROCESS.

THERE WAS A PLANNING SHOT CLOCK BILL, HOUSE BILL 3006 99, WHICH GAVE IT CREDIT.

IT DID HAVE SOME GOOD THINGS IN THERE.

NOT ALL OF IT WAS GOOD, BUT IT ALLOWED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION ON ALL PLATS.

SO CITIES COULD, IN CERTAIN CONDITIONS HAVE PLATS APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY BY STAFF.

IT DOES PROHIBIT SOME STUDIES BEING DONE AS A PRECURSOR OR AS A CONDITION FOR PLATTING AND IT MIGHT ALSO LIMIT RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION AUTHORITIES.

SO WE ARE ACTUALLY WORKING RIGHT NOW ON POTENTIAL DDC AMENDMENTS AND UPDATING OUR PROCESSES TO BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THIS BILL AND THEN SENATE BILL 929, WHICH DEALS WITH NON-CONFORMING USES.

THIS ONE IS SIGNIFICANT, NOT REALLY FOR HOW WE DEAL WITH NON CONFORMING USES, BUT FOR THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS THAT IT IT PUTS ON CITIES. AND NOW WITH THIS BILL, IF ANY CHANGE TO OUR DEVELOPMENT CODE COULD CREATE A NON CONFORMING USE, THE BILL SAYS WE HAVE TO LET THOSE PROPERTIES KNOW AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE CITY TO PINPOINT A SINGLE PROPERTY AND SAY, OH, WELL, THIS PROPERTY MIGHT BE A NON CONFORMING USE FOR THIS OR THIS PROPERTY HERE MIGHT.

SO THE EFFECT OF IT IS, IS WE HAVE TO NOTIFY EVERYONE, WHICH COMES AT A LOT OF COST FOR THE CITY AND POTENTIALLY A LOT OF QUESTIONS BECAUSE WE'LL ALSO BE ALERTING FOLKS THAT PROBABLY WON'T HAVE A NON CONFORMING USE ISSUE.

BUT THIS IS WHAT THE LETTERS OF THE THE BILL, THE LETTER OF THE BILL DIRECTS US TO DO.

SO WE'RE UPDATING OUR NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES AND DEPENDING ON HOW OFTEN THIS OCCURS AND THE THE COST OF GETTING THIS NOTIFICATION OUT THAT IS MANDATED BY THIS BILL, IT MAY REQUIRE A FUTURE BUDGET INCREASE FOR THESE TYPES OF NOTIFICATIONS, BUT THESE ARE THE THREE REALLY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SPECIFIC BILLS THAT WE WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION. WE DO HAVE SCOTT AND TINA HERE.

IF YOU DO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THE ON THESE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BILLS.

COUNCILMAN MCGEE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I GUESS RYAN OR SCOTT SPECIFICALLY WITH 36 TO 99, CAN YOU JUST KIND OF WALK THROUGH HOW THIS COULD LIMIT RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION? SCOTT MCDONALD, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

YES. WITHIN THE BILL THERE IS A REQUIREMENT THAT A CITY MAY NOT REQUIRE THE RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION UNLESS IT IS A FUNDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.

SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT CURRENTLY AND WE MAY BE BRINGING FORTH SOME CHANGES ON OUR MOBILITY PLAN AS WELL AS WHAT WE HAVE COMING FORWARD WITH OUR ROADWAY IMPACT FEES AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS.

SO WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH IT.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCIL MEMBER WATTS.

YEAH, JUST A COMMENT ON THAT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT MIGHT SEEM A LITTLE ONEROUS TO CITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENTS, BUT BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT WE RIGHT NOW THE CURRENT PRACTICE IS WE CAN REQUIRE RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION AND REALLY WITHHOLD APPROVAL OF A PROJECT IF WE DON'T GET THAT IN ESSENCE.

WHEREAS IF WE HAD TO TAKE IT, WE'D HAVE TO PAY FOR IT.

THIS IS SAYING YOU CAN ONLY REQUIRE THAT DEDICATION IF YOU'VE IDENTIFIED THAT ROAD AS ONE THAT'S IN A PROJECT THAT'S EITHER FUNDED.

DID YOU SAY IT HAS TO BE FUNDED? OKAY. AND THEREFORE, SO UNLESS UNLESS THE OWNER INTENDS TO INCLUDE IT WITHIN THEIR DEVELOPMENT.

IF A DEVELOPER ALREADY PLANS TO INCLUDE THAT WITHIN THEIR DEVELOPMENT, THEN THAT'S NOT THE TOPIC.

BUT IF IN FACT THE CITY HAS A REQUIREMENT FOR THAT RIGHT OF WAY BASED ON OUR MOBILITY PLAN, RIGHT, THEN IT HAS TO BE A FUNDED OR A FUNDED PROJECT.

OKAY. SO WE CAN'T ASK FOR DEVELOPERS TO DEDICATE RIGHT OF WAY IF IT'S NOT IDENTIFIED AND FUNDED AND IT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THEIR QUOTE UNQUOTE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PLAN.

WHEREAS TODAY WE CAN WHEN THIS PASSES, WE CAN'T.

CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

[00:35:02]

SO NEXT UP, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF THE MORE SIGNIFICANT FINANCE PIECES OF LEGISLATION.

ODDLY ENOUGH, THIS YEAR, DEVELOPMENT REALLY TOOK THE SPOTLIGHT.

LIKE I SAID EARLIER, FINANCE, WHICH THE PAST COUPLE OF SESSIONS, HAS BEEN REALLY THE ONE AREA OF CITY OPERATIONS THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS REALLY FOCUSED ON.

IT WAS NOT AS PROMINENT THIS YEAR.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF BILLS THAT THAT DO AFFECT US, THOUGH.

THE FIRST ONE I WILL MENTION IS HOUSE BILL TWO.

AND THAT LITTLE ASTERISK RIGHT THERE IS BECAUSE THIS WAS A SPECIAL SESSION BILL, IT PRIMARILY FOCUSED ON SCHOOLS.

IT LOWERED THE TAXES FOR SCHOOLS, INCREASED HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS FOR SCHOOLS.

BUT ONE OF THE AREAS WHERE IT IMPACTS CITIES DIRECTLY IS THE 20% APPRAISAL CAP FOR ALL NON HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES.

THIS IS A THREE YEAR PILOT PROGRAM EXCUSE ME.

AND THIS WILL COME INTO EFFECT NOT FOR FISCAL YEAR 24, WHICH WE ARE ABOUT TO GO INTO, BUT FOR FISCAL YEAR 25.

NOW WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH THE CAD.

WE EXPECT THEM TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE US INFORMATION ON HOW THIS WOULD HAVE IMPACTED US FOR FISCAL 24 SO WE CAN BETTER BUDGET GOING INTO FISCAL 25. SO THIS APPLIES ONLY TO PROPERTIES THAT ARE LESS THAN $5 MILLION IN VALUE, WHETHER THAT IS RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL, AS LONG AS IT'S NOT A HOMESTEAD PROPERTY.

THIS 20% APPRAISAL CAP APPLIES.

MOVING BELOW THAT, WE DID HAVE A COUPLE OF BILLS THAT WERE INVOLVED WITH PROPERTY TAX RATE CALCULATIONS.

THEY PARTICULARLY LOOKED AT THE UNUSED PROPERTY TAX INCREMENTAL RATE.

SO OF COURSE WE HAVE AN ALLOWANCE OF HOW FAR WE CAN GO UP IN OUR PROPERTY TAX RATE.

IF WE DON'T USE ALL THAT, THERE'S AN INCREMENT LEFT OVER THAT WE CAN USE AT A LATER TIME.

THIS REDEFINES THIS REDEFINES HOW WE CAN USE THAT, AND THAT IS NO LONGER AN OPTION FOR US, I BELIEVE, BEGINNING IN FISCAL YEAR 25 AS WELL.

THERE ARE ALSO SOME DEFINITIONS, SOME CHANGES TO THE DEFINITION OF VOTER APPROVED TAX RATE.

AND AGAIN, IT IT IT VERY SEVERELY LIMITS OUR ABILITY TO USE THAT INCREMENT BEGINNING IN FISCAL 25.

AND THEN I'LL MENTION THERE WERE QUITE A FEW PROPERTY TAX AND SALES TAX EXEMPTION BILLS.

NONE OF THEM WERE SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH INDIVIDUALLY THAT IT GAVE THE CITY MUCH CONCERN ABOUT OUR REVENUES.

FOR INSTANCE, THERE WAS ONE FOR FEMININE HYGIENE PRODUCTS.

THERE WAS ONE FOR TEXTBOOKS TAKING THE SALES TAX AND MAKING THOSE EXEMPT.

AND THERE WERE A NUMBER OF PROPERTY TAX BILLS THAT DEALT WITH SURVIVING SPOUSES OF DISABLED VETERANS, THINGS THAT WE DON'T EXPECT TO GREATLY IMPACT OUR BOTTOM LINE INDIVIDUALLY. HOWEVER, SINCE WE'RE A NUMBER OF THOSE BILLS WE'RE GOING TO KEEP AN EYE ON, OF COURSE, OUR PROPERTY TAX RETURNS AND THEN OUR SALES TAX RETURNS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE BUDGET ACCORDINGLY IN CASE THEY DO HAVE SOMEWHAT OF AN IMPACT COLLECTIVELY.

SO WE DO HAVE SOME FINANCE STAFF HERE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THESE FINANCE BILLS.

QUESTIONS ON THE FINANCE BILLS.

COUNCILWOMAN MELTZER THEN COUNCILMAN.

WHAT'S. FORGIVE ME, BUT CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU THINK THE INTENT WAS FOR HAVING THE APPRAISAL CAP APPLIED TO NON-HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES? IF PEOPLE. WHY? WHY? THERE WASN'T AN INTEREST IN APPLYING THE CAP TO A TO SOMEONE'S PROPERTY IF THEY IF THEY DO HOMESTEAD IT? I BELIEVE THAT'S BECAUSE THE HOMESTEAD APPRAISAL CAP IS LOWER THAN THE 20%.

SO THIS IS CATCHING EVERYTHING ELSE.

OKAY. AND DOES ANYONE EVER POINT OUT IN THESE SESSIONS THAT THAT GENERAL INCREASES IN PROPERTY VALUES DON'T REQUIRE ELECTED OFFICIALS TO RAISE TAXES, THAT THEY SET THE TAX RATE AFTER? I MEAN, AM I IS THAT EVER COME UP WE TRY TO EDUCATE THEM AS MUCH AS WE CAN ON THE PROPERTY TAX PROCESS.

YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. THANKS.

COUNCILMAN. WHAT'S A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON THE THERE'S A LITTLE CONFUSION.

WELL, MAYBE I'M THE ONLY ONE THAT'S CONFUSED WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE CONSTITUTIONAL BALLOT PROPOSITION IN NOVEMBER FOR PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. FIRST OF ALL, THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION WILL BE ON THERE BECAUSE I THINK TO CHANGE THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, IT HAS TO BE A CONSTITUTIONAL VOTE.

OR IS THAT RIGHT? IS THAT CORRECT? SO, YES. SO IS THAT THE ONLY THING THAT NEEDS TO BE A VOTE? WHAT'S THE OTHER PROVISION OF THE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF THAT WE WILL BE VOTING ON FOR H.R.

TWO, WHICH IS THAT THAT IS THE I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE MY CURSOR.

THAT IS THE THE ELECTION COMPONENT FOR THIS HOUSE BILL TWO.

SO IS YOUR QUESTION IS YOUR QUESTION IS THE 20% CIRCUIT BREAKER, THAT APPRAISAL CAP, DOES THAT HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY ELECTION? IS THAT YOUR QUESTION? THAT'S ONE OF THEM, YES.

IS THAT DOES THAT HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY ELECTION? YES. AND THEN THE APPLYING I'M NOT SURE HOW TO SAY IT, BUT TAKING THE SURPLUS IN ORDER TO FACILITATE SCHOOL DISTRICTS LOWERING THEIR.

NO. DOES THAT HAVE TO BE AN ELECTION?

[00:40:03]

SO THAT THAT WON'T BE ON THE ELECTION.

YEAH. SO IS THAT AN OPTION FOR THE SCHOOL FOR CURRENT FOR LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS TO LOWER THEIR.

NO. BASED UPON THAT $0.10? OR IS THAT GOING TO BE A MANDATORY THING? I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S OPTIONAL.

I BELIEVE THAT'S MANDATORY.

YEAH. AND WHEN DOES THAT TAKE EFFECT? IS THAT FOR THIS YEAR? I BELIEVE THAT TAKES EFFECT THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

BUT WE'VE NOT LOOKED TOO CLOSELY AT THE SCHOOL COMPONENTS OF THAT BILL.

BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT TAKES EFFECT IN THE INCOMING FISCAL YEAR.

OKAY. WE CAN FIND THAT.

WE CAN FIND OUT. OKAY.

BECAUSE EVERYTHING I'VE READ SEEMS TO INDICATE THAT ALL OF THESE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF MEASURES WILL BE APPLIED IN THE 2023 YEAR, WHICH I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD HAPPEN, BUT THAT THE HOMESTEAD, THOUGH, IF IT GETS APPROVED, DOES THAT APPLY THIS 2023? THAT WOULD APPLY FOR FISCAL YEAR 25 FOR CITIES.

AND THAT'S IN THE BILL.

THAT'S IN THE BILL.

OKAY. I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU MAYBE SENT OUT TO US SOME INFORMATION ON THAT, BECAUSE EVERYTHING I'M READING IS SAYING THAT A LOT OF THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO BE TAKING EFFECT THIS YEAR, WHICH I DIDN'T KNOW HOW THEY WOULD DO THAT BASED UPON CERTIFIED TAX ROLLS ALREADY BEING SENT OUT TO THIS COMMUNITY.

SO IF WE COULD GET SOME REALLY GOOD INFORMATION BECAUSE I GET A LOT OF QUESTIONS ON THAT.

AND IF IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT ANYBODY THIS YEAR, THEN I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO TELL PEOPLE THAT BECAUSE MY IMPRESSION IS FROM EVERYTHING I'M READING, THAT SOMEHOW SOME OF THESE RELIEF MEASURES WILL SHOW UP ON THE BILLS THAT WE'RE PAYING THAT ARE DUE AT THE END OF THE YEAR IN LATE JANUARY 1ST, JANUARY 31ST, 2024.

WE CAN ABSOLUTELY DIG INTO THAT BILL AND GET THE TIME FRAMES AND GET THAT TO COUNSEL.

I APPRECIATE THAT. YOU BET.

ANY OTHER FINANCE QUESTIONS? I DO HAVE I TAKE YOUR POINT THAT YOU'VE NOT DUG INTO THE SCHOOLS, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION AROUND JUST THAT PROCESS.

WHAT CAN YOU GIVE ME A 30,000 FOOT VIEW OF WHEN THEY SAY THEY'RE BUYING DOWN SCHOOL? A. TAX RATE.

WHAT IS THAT? IS THAT SEQUESTERING MONEY TO THEN ALLOW IT TO ACCRUE TO THEN THE SCHOOLS PULL FROM THAT? I JUST I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT PROCESS.

SO I WOULD BE DOING YOU A DISSERVICE TO COME UP HERE AND PRETEND TO BE AN EXPERT ON THAT.

WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT THE MONEY HAS BEEN APPROPRIATED IN THIS SESSION'S BUDGET.

SO THAT WILL BE IN EFFECT ON SEPTEMBER 1ST OF THIS YEAR.

AND THAT'S THE START OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2024.

NOW, HOW THAT WORKS MECHANICALLY WITH THE SCHOOLS, I DO NOT KNOW.

BUT WE CAN GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT.

YEAH. IF THERE'S SOMEBODY IN YOUR OFFICE THAT CAN THAT TRACK THAT SIDE OF THINGS, IF THEY COULD JUST EDUCATE ME SO THAT I CAN BE BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THAT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE COMMUNITY SEES IT ALL KIND OF TOGETHER.

AND SO THE BETTER I CAN ARTICULATE HOW THEY THEY ALL FIT TOGETHER, THE BETTER OFF.

AND TO TO RYAN'S POINT, I WONDER IF BECAUSE THE FISCAL YEAR 25 WILL START SEPTEMBER 1ST OF 2024 THAT THAT MIGHT BE.

BUT WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU.

EXCELLENT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER FINANCE QUESTIONS? GREAT. OKAY, ON TO ELECTRIC.

SO I'M GOING TO ACTUALLY DELEGATE OVER TO TERRY FOR THIS ONE WHO'S A LOT MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE ON THESE THESE BILLS THAN I AM.

GO AHEAD, TERRY. GOOD AFTERNOON.

COUNCIL MAYOR TERRY NAULTY, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER AT ONE OF THE AREAS THAT I'M RESPONSIBLE FOR AT DMC IS REGULATORY AND LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES.

AND DURING THIS SESSION WE HAD A VERY SUCCESSFUL SESSION.

FROM THE ELECTRIC'S PERSPECTIVE, WE DO THINGS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY THAN THE CITY WITH RESPECT TO OUR LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS.

THIS YEAR, I HIRED A LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS ADMINISTRATOR, A FORMER LOBBYIST WHO IS FULL TIME IN AUSTIN FOR US, AND HE WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL IN BUILDING COALITIONS WITH OTHER MUNICIPAL OWNED UTILITIES AND OTHER SEGMENTS OF THE MARKET IN IN DEVELOPING A VERY COGENT SET OF OF MESSAGES ABOUT THE BILLS THAT WERE BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE.

WE HAD WE ALSO USE FOCUSED ADVOCACY AS A OUTSIDE CONSULTANT IN LEGISLATIVE MATTERS AS WELL.

SO WE DURING THE SESSION, WE ACTIVELY TRACKED OVER 150 BILLS IMPACTING ELECTRIC UTILITIES.

AND TOGETHER WITH OUR LOBBYING FIRM AND TPA, AS RYAN MENTIONED, WE PROVIDED WRITTEN TESTIMONY

[00:45:02]

I PERSONALLY TESTIFIED AT LEAST THREE TIMES BEFORE THE SESSION.

HOUSE BILL 1500 WAS.

IT'S CALLED THE PC SUNSET BILL, AND IT WAS ACTUALLY ORIGINALLY SET UP TO AUTHORIZE THE CONTINUATION OF THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF TEXAS, WHICH IS DONE PERIODICALLY, I BELIEVE IT'S EVERY SIX YEARS OR SO.

AND AT THE END OF THE SESSION, ABOUT SEVEN SEPARATE, VERY SIGNIFICANT ELECTRIC WHOLESALE MARKET BILLS WERE CONSOLIDATED INTO THIS HOUSE BILL 1500.

SO THE RESULTS OF THIS IS REALLY THAT A NEW A NEW ANCILLARY SERVICE TO IMPROVE RELIABILITY WAS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE BILL, THE DISPATCHABLE RESERVE RELIABILITY SERVICE.

THIS IS A TYPE OF SERVICE THAT IS AVAILABLE TO GENERATING UNITS, DISPATCHABLE GENERATING UNITS THAT CAN START UP UNDER TWO HOURS AND BE ABLE TO RUN FOR CONSISTENTLY FOR OVER SIX HOURS.

AND OBVIOUSLY, THE DENTON ENERGY CENTER MEETS THAT CRITERIA.

SO IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO POTENTIALLY GAIN SOME ADDITIONAL VALUE FROM THE MARKET AS THIS PRODUCT IS BEING DEVELOPED.

THIS PRODUCT WAS WIDELY SUPPORTED BY NOT ONLY THE MUNICIPAL SEGMENT, BUT BY THE INDUSTRIAL SEGMENT AND BY THE COMPETITIVE RETAIL SEGMENT.

IT WAS OPPOSED BY THE LARGE INDEPENDENT POWER PRODUCERS FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THE DETAILS BECAUSE THAT WOULD REQUIRE A PRETTY IN-DEPTH UNDERSTANDING OF THE MECHANICS OF HOW THE MARKET WORKS.

UH, ONE OF THE PROVISIONS IN 1500 THAT WE ARE WATCHING AND WE WILL SEE REGULATIONS DEVELOPED ON IS THE FIRMING OF RENEWABLE AND INTERMITTENT RESOURCES.

A BIG DEBATE DURING THE SESSION WAS HOW DO WE SOLVE THE INTERMITTENCY PROBLEM ASSOCIATED WITH RENEWABLE ENERGY THAT PERHAPS DOES NOT RUN WHEN IT'S MOST NEEDED IN THE PEAK PERIODS OF THE DAY WHEN THE WIND IS NOT BLOWING? AND WHAT THE LEGISLATURE ENDED UP SETTLING ON, IT WAS PURELY A COMPROMISE BECAUSE THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR AND THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE BOTH WANTED VERY FIRM, FIRMING LANGUAGE FOR ALL RENEWABLE GENERATORS, INCLUDING EXISTING ONES.

BUT WHAT WAS SETTLED ON WAS A PROVISION THAT ONLY REQUIRES THAT FIRMING FOR UNITS THAT ARE BUILT AFTER 2027 JANUARY 1ST, 2027, THAT COULD IMPACT US AS WE ADD ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO OUR MIX OF RENEWABLE RESOURCES.

BUT WE HAVE SOME TIME AS THESE REGULATIONS WILL BE DEVELOPED AND WE'LL HAVE OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF FOCUS ON INPUT TO THAT, THAT PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THOSE REGULATIONS.

THE OTHER SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION WAS SENATE BILL 2627.

THIS ESTABLISHES THE TEXAS ENERGY FUND, A $10 BILLION FUND USED TO PROVIDE LOW INTEREST LOANS TO DISPATCHABLE GENERATORS.

THAT MEANS NON RENEWABLE GENERATORS.

AND THE GOAL HERE IS TO INCENTIVIZE THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW GAS FIRED, PEAKING UNITS IN THE MARKET TO ABATE THE INTERMITTENCY ISSUES THAT THE MARKET IS DEALING WITH NOW AND WILL CONTINUE TO DEAL WITH INTO THE FUTURE.

THIS BILL REQUIRES A VOTER REFERENDUM.

IT WILL BE ON THE BALLOT IN IN NOVEMBER.

WITH THAT, I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

QUESTIONS REGARDING THE ELECTRIC.

MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO SOME OF THESE I ASK IN THE BACKUP QUESTIONS, BUT BUT LET'S EXPAND A LITTLE BIT.

HOW DOES THIS IMPACT OR DO YOU ENVISION THIS IMPACTS OUR 100% RELIABLE RESOLUTION OR RELIABLE RENEWABLE RESOLUTION? BOTH OF THEM IN TERMS OF ABILITY TO TO MAINTAIN THAT AS WELL AS WE DON'T WANT TO BE GEORGETOWN AND FALL OFF THE WAGON AND AS WELL AS ANY OPPORTUNITIES FOR STORAGE THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN ANTICIPATED.

MAYBE IT'S DIRECTED AT FOSSIL AND THERMAL SOURCES, BUT ARE THERE OPPORTUNITIES FOR STORAGE THAT WE CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ON 2627? THERE COULD BE AGAIN, IF THIS PASSES IN NOVEMBER, THEN MONIES WILL HAVE TO BE TRANSFERRED FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO FUND THIS

[00:50:01]

AND THEN ALL THE REGULATIONS AND RULES WOULD HAVE TO BE ESTABLISHED ON HOW TO APPLY FOR THE LOANS, WHAT THE CONDITIONS OF MAKING THE LOANS ARE, MUCH LIKE THE TEXAS WATER RESOURCES BOARD OPERATES TODAY.

SO AS THAT'S DEVELOPED, THE LEGISLATURE WAS PRETTY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT TYPES OF ASSETS IT WANTS TO INVEST IN, AND THAT WAS PRIMARILY NATURAL GAS FIRED, PEAKING GENERATION THAT HAS QUICK START CAPABILITY.

THERE IS A ROOM IN THE BILL TO ALLOW FOR BATTERY TECHNOLOGIES THAT CAN RUN FOR MORE THAN SIX HOURS CONTINUOUSLY TO RECEIVE FUNDING AS WELL.

SO WE'LL HAVE TO SEE HOW THAT ALL GETS SHAPED OUT.

AND HOW DOES HB 1500 AFFECT OUR ABILITY TO GET RESOURCES? YOU SORT OF BRIEFLY TOUCHED ON IT, BUT CAN YOU GO INTO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL? YEAH. SO, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING'S A MATTER OF COST IN THE ELECTRIC BUSINESS, RIGHT? SO IF WE WANT TO MAINTAIN OUR 100% RENEWABLE GOAL, WE CERTAINLY CAN.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF WHAT THE COST WILL BE.

IF WE'RE BUYING, GENERATING RESOURCES, RENEWABLE RESOURCES THAT COME ONLINE AFTER 2027, BECAUSE THERE WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL COST ASSOCIATED WITH FIRMING OF THOSE GENERATORS DURING PEAK PERIODS OF LOW RESERVE MARGINS, CAPACITY RESERVE MARGINS, AND THOSE WOULD OCCUR IN THE SPRING WHEN THERE'S NO WIND IN THE IN THE SUMMER LIKE TODAY BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 AFTER THE SUN STARTS TO GO DOWN AND 10:00.

THOSE PERIODS WOULD REQUIRE FIRMING.

WE DO CURRENTLY HAVE AN RFP ON THE STREET, WHICH WE WILL BE EVALUATING IN AUGUST FOR 225MW OF ADDITIONAL RENEWABLE RESOURCES.

AND WE HOPE THAT MUCH OF THE RESPONDENTS THAT WE GET TO THAT WILL BE STUFF THAT IS BUILT BEFORE JANUARY 1ST OF 2027.

I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.

YEAH. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON ELECTRIC? NO, THANK YOU, TERRY. APPRECIATE IT.

SORRY. NO, I SAID TERRY.

OH, SORRY.

WELL, I HAVE TWO MORE SLIDES THAT ARE KIND OF A JUST A HODGEPODGE THAT THAT DIDN'T REALLY GROUP TOGETHER IN A GOOD BUCKET.

SO OTHER NOTABLE LEGISLATION THAT, AGAIN, WE WANT TO BRING TO COUNCIL'S ATTENTION.

SO HOUSE BILL THREE IS ACTUALLY A SCHOOL SAFETY BILL.

IT HAD A NUMBER OF SAFETY RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR SCHOOL SCHOOLS, ONE OF THEM BEING REQUIRING ARMED SECURITY AT ALL SCHOOL CAMPUSES.

AND OF COURSE, DENTON DOES PROVIDE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS TO DISD AND WE ARE CONTINUING TO WORK WITH THEM AND HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM TO UNDERSTAND HOW THEY INTEND TO IMPLEMENT THIS BILL.

SENATE BILL 12 RELATING TO SEXUALLY ORIENTED PERFORMANCES.

AND WHAT THIS BILL DOES IS IT DEFINES A SEXUALLY ORIENTED PERFORMANCE AND ESTABLISHES PENALTIES IF A PERFORMANCE IS VIEWED BY AN UNDERAGE PERSON.

AND IT PROHIBITS PROHIBITS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FROM AUTHORIZING A SEXUALLY ORIENTED PERFORMANCE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY.

THIS IS ACTUALLY SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING IN CLOSED SESSION.

BUT ONE OF THE IMPACTS OF THIS BILL IS THAT WE WILL LOOK AT FORMS THAT ARE APPLICATIONS FOR RENTALS FOR ANY TYPE OF ACTIVITY THAT TAKES PLACE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY THAT THE CITY HAS CONTROL OVER TO MAKE SURE THAT WHOEVER USES THAT, WHOEVER RENTS IT, THAT THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO VIOLATE SENATE BILL 12 AS PART OF WHATEVER THEY ARE USING THAT FACILITY FOR.

WE ALSO HAVE HOUSE BILL 2071, WHICH DEALS WITH PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATIONS.

WE'VE GOT A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ON THIS, ONE FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THIS BILL, IT'S A GOOD BILL OVERALL.

IT INCREASES AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS, BETTER TRANSPARENCY, INCENTIVIZES INVOLVEMENT WITH LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AND INCLUDES SOME TENANT PROTECTIONS AS PART OF THIS PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION BILL.

AGAIN, NO DIRECT IMPACT TO THE CITY, BUT IT DOES CONFER BENEFITS IF A PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION IS EVER ESTABLISHED.

HOUSE BILL 3092 DEALS WITH VALUE BASED FEES.

AND WHAT THIS BILL STATES IS THAT A CITY CANNOT CONSIDER THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION IN ANY APPLICATION FEES.

AND SO THAT DOES IMPACT US WITH REGARD TO OUR INFRASTRUCTURE FEES.

AND WE ARE WORKING OR CAPITAL PROJECTS IS WORKING RIGHT NOW TO CREATE A NEW FEE BASED ON HOURLY CITY COSTS.

SO THIS BILL STATES YOU CAN'T USE CONSTRUCTION VALUE AS A BASIS FOR YOUR FEES.

IT NEEDS TO BE BASED ON THE ACTUAL COSTS THAT IT TAKES TO PROVIDE THAT SERVICE.

AND SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING AT HOW TO STRUCTURE, AND I'M SURE THERE'LL BE AN UPDATE PROVIDED TO COUNCIL ON THIS.

AND WE HAVE TWO FINAL BILLS, ACTUALLY.

TWO FINAL BILLS TO WALK YOU THROUGH BEFORE WE GET TO 2127.

THESE BOTH DEAL WITH AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS.

SO THESE BILLS DEFINE AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS AND ESSENTIALLY LIMITS THEIR REGULATION WITHIN THE CITY.

[00:55:08]

THIS COULD INCLUDE THE GROWING OF ANY TYPE OF VEGETATION CROPS, THE KEEPING OF LIVESTOCK OR OTHER ANIMALS.

AND WE CANNOT REGULATE THAT UNLESS A THIRD PARTY REPORT SHOWS EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS A SPECIFICALLY LISTED DANGER.

AND THAT'S ACTUALLY LISTED WITHIN THE STATUTE.

THOSE DANGERS INCLUDE THIS IS IN THE STATUTE.

EXPLOSIONS, FLOODING, INFESTATION OF VERMIN, PHYSICAL INJURY, SPREAD OF DISEASE AND A FEW OTHER CATEGORIES.

SO IT DOES VERY MUCH LIMIT THE CITY AND OUR ABILITY TO REGULATE THOSE TYPES OF ACTIVITIES.

AND 2308 ALSO STATES THAT THE CITY CANNOT RESTRAIN AN AGRICULTURAL OPERATION THAT HAS BEEN IN OPERATION LAWFULLY AND SUBSTANTIALLY UNCHANGED FOR AT LEAST UNCHANGED FOR AT LEAST ONE YEAR.

SO I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON THESE AGRICULTURAL BILLS OR THE ONES PROVIDED BEFORE.

OKAY. NOTABLE LEGISLATION QUESTIONS COUNCIL MEMBER.

WHAT'S. YEAH. ON THE HOUSE BILL 2071, YOU SAID YOU'D GOTTEN A LOT OF QUESTIONS.

I MIGHT HAVE MISSED IT. HAVE WE RECEIVED SORT OF A DETAILED SUMMARY OF THOSE CHANGES, WHAT THEY WERE AND WHAT THEY ARE NOW? DID I MISS THAT? NOT YET, NO, SIR.

OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO GET THAT.

OKAY. SO ON TO THE AGRICULTURAL BILL.

HELP ME UNDERSTAND THIS. SO THERE'S THERE'S OBVIOUSLY STANDARD OR BEST PRACTICES FOR WHAT TYPE OF LIVESTOCK OR AGRICULTURE NEEDS, HOW MUCH LAND.

OKAY. LIKE, SO IF I WANTED TO PUT A COW IN MY BACKYARD, IS THAT I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULDN'T WORK FROM A STANDPOINT OF RAISING AND PROVIDING THE PROPER NOURISHMENT, ALL THAT.

BUT I MEAN, IF IT SAYS THAT YOU ONLY CAN RESTRAIN THEM FOR THESE CERTAIN TYPES OF THINGS.

SO I GUESS AM I UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S WHAT THIS IS SAYING, THAT WE REALLY CAN'T CONTROL WHAT WE PUT THERE UNLESS IT'S JUST PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE OR IT'S JUST NOT FEASIBLE? YEAH, IT THERE'S, THERE'S A NARROW SET OF AND SCOTT, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THERE'S A NARROW SET OF CONDITIONS THAT WE CAN REGULATE.

AND SO IF IT DOESN'T MEET, MEET ONE OF THOSE STATUTORY CONDITIONS, WE WE CANNOT REGULATE IT UNLESS THERE'S SOME OTHER STATE LAW THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF.

WOULD THAT BE ACCURATE, SCOTT HE'S GOING TO HE'S GOING TO CORRECT ME.

THAT'S A THAT'S AN ACCURATE STATEMENT.

WITHOUT KNOWING SOME OF THE OTHER PIECES, WHAT COMES OUT OF TEXAS A&M AGRILIFE.

SO WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO VALIDATE WITH THAT.

AND I DON'T THINK THE EXPECTATION IS I HAVE A 7500 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND I CAN PUT FOUR HEAD OF CATTLE ON IT, SO.

OKAY. AND YEAH, THERE'S PROBABLY SOME TYPE OF RULES OR REGULATIONS THAT SAY YOU CAN ONLY HAVE SO MANY ACRES PER PER LIVESTOCK.

IT SPEAKS TO AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS.

SO I THINK THE INTENT TRULY IS AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS, NOT NECESSARILY FOR EACH AND EVERY SINGLE FAMILY LOT.

OKAY. GOOD DEAL. THANK YOU.

YOU KNOW, COUNCILMAN HOLLAND AND MAYOR PRO TEM, THANK YOU.

GO BACK TO HB THREE, PLEASE.

ARMED SECURITY AT ALL CAMPUSES? YES, SIR. DOES THAT MEAN A SWORN PEACE OFFICER? NOT NECESSARILY.

WHO, FOR EXAMPLE.

SO I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR WHAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S PLANS ARE, BUT BUT THE BILL DOES NOT SAY IT NEEDS TO BE A SWORN POLICE OFFICER.

SO IT COULD BE ANY OTHER TYPE OF PRIVATE ARMED SECURITY.

OKAY. OKAY. AND THE PENALTY RANGE, HB 12.

THE PENALTY RANGE OF THAT.

THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

LET ME SEE IF I CAN. IT DEPENDS.

SO FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS GOING TO ENFORCE THAT CIVILLY.

THAT'S A $10,000 FINE POTENTIALLY FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.

TO THE EXTENT IT SAYS THAT CITIES CAN'T AUTHORIZE IT, THERE'S NOTHING SPECIFICALLY THAT SAYS WHAT'S THE PENALTY ASSOCIATED WITH THE CITY ACTUALLY AUTHORIZING IT? BUT THEN THERE'S ANOTHER COMPONENT THAT'S IN THE PENAL CODE.

ANYBODY THAT VIOLATES THE PENAL CODE PROVISION, IT'S A CLASS A MISDEMEANOR, I BELIEVE.

OKAY. AND DO YOU KNOW WHO'S WHO'S WHO HAS TO PAY THE WHO'S THE GUY THAT THAT GETS TO WRITE THAT CHECK? THE MANAGER.

THE OWNER FOR PRIVATE SECTOR? YEAH. YEAH.

IT DEPENDS ON THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND WHO THEY GO AFTER.

IT COULD BE THE THE PROPRIETOR, THE OWNER OF THE LOCATION, WHOEVER'S IN CONTROL OF THE LOCATION, POTENTIALLY.

I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO TARGET THE MOST RESPONSIBLE PARTY.

GOOD. THANK YOU. FIRST PERSON WHO CONTROLS THE PREMISES.

MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO ON THE ZOO, WE'RE CHANGING THE FEE STRUCTURE.

WHEN DOES THIS KICK IN? WE HAVE A DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT LEGISLATION KICKING IN AT DIFFERENT TIMES.

[01:00:05]

DO YOU KNOW? OCTOBER 1ST.

OCTOBER. OCTOBER 1ST.

SEPTEMBER 1ST. SEPTEMBER 1ST.

THEY DON'T USUALLY DO OCTOBER.

OKAY. YEAH.

AND SO ESSENTIALLY, DOES THAT MEAN THAT WE HAVE TO ADJUST OUR OUR GUIDELINES BY SEPTEMBER 1ST ESSENTIALLY IS WHAT I'M HEARING. YES.

AND STAFFS IN THE PROCESS OF DOING THAT, ENGINEERING HAS BEEN WORKING VERY DILIGENTLY.

THIS RELATES SPECIFICALLY TO CAPITAL PROJECTS, INFRASTRUCTURE, NOT NECESSARILY ALL CONSTRUCTION.

SO OUR OUR OUR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.

OKAY. TREVOR'S COMING UP.

THANKS, TREVOR.

TREVOR CRANE, DIRECTOR OF CAPITAL PROJECTS.

SO REALLY THIS WOULD AFFECT THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS BEING INSTALLED AS A PART OF PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS.

OKAY. SO HISTORICALLY, WE'VE CHARGED A FLAT FEE, 3.5% OF WHAT THOSE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS WOULD BE.

AND SO THIS BILL WOULD REQUIRE US TO CHARGE AN HOURLY RATE FOR THOSE INSPECTION SERVICES THAT WE REQUIRE ON THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THE PRIVATE DEVELOPERS ARE PUTTING IN.

AND DO WE HAVE A BALLPARK FEEL FOR HOW THAT IF WE IF WE DID NOTHING, HOW THAT WOULD IMPACT OUR FEES IF WE DID NOTHING? I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE AND REVISE.

BUT IF DO WE WHAT'S THE IMPACT OF THIS ON OUR CURRENT PROCESS? KIND OF. IT'S HARD TO TELL.

SO LOOKING AT THE THE INSPECTIONS THAT WE NORMALLY THAT WE HAVE TO DO ON THESE ON THIS INFRASTRUCTURE, MY GUESS WOULD BE THAT IT'S THE COST IS GOING TO GO UP.

OKAY. FOR THE FOR THE DEVELOPERS.

FOR THE DEVELOPERS. OKAY.

I APPRECIATE THAT. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION WAS RELATED TO WHAT COUNCILOR WATTS WAS TALKING ABOUT WITH THE THE 1750 AND 23,008.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT THE LEGISLATION LEGISLATORS MAY HAVE BEEN AFTER.

IMPROVING THE BUSINESS MODEL OF AGRICULTURE.

BUT DO WE HAVE IDEAS FOR HOW WE'RE GOING TO PREVENT THE EDGE CASES THAT ARE GOING TO BE COUNCILOR WATTS WITH HIS LONGHORN IN THE BACKYARD AND AND MY TWO CHRISTMAS TREES THAT I'M GOING TO GROW AND CLAIM ALL THESE EXEMPTIONS.

DO WE HAVE A PLAN ON THAT RIGHT NOW? WE'RE WORKING THROUGH IT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE ANYTHING DEFINITIVE TODAY.

I DON'T KNOW IF MACK IF YOU WANTED TO ADD ANY OTHER.

YEAH, THERE'S A COUPLE PIECES.

FIRST OF ALL, THE TEXAS A&M STUDIES THAT SCOTT MENTIONED, THOSE ARE GOING TO BE PROMULGATED AT SOME POINT.

WE DON'T KNOW WHEN ON THOSE THOSE ARE GOING TO BASICALLY CREATE A LIST OF THINGS THAT PEOPLE CAN DO ON THEIR PROPERTY.

AND CITIES CAN HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT TO IMPOSSIBLE TIME TO BE ABLE TO TO REGULATE DIFFERENTLY FROM WHAT THOSE STANDARDS ARE THAT A&M IS GOING TO PUT OUT.

WHATEVER THEY DON'T TOUCH ON IS GOING TO BE KIND OF THE WHAT'S LEFT OF A CITY'S REGULATION WITH THOSE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE SOME DETERMINATIONS OF WHAT WE WANT TO REGULATE, WHAT THE COUNCIL WANTS TO REGULATE, WHAT IT SAYS IS EVEN FOR THOSE PROVISIONS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOME KIND OF STUDY AND HAVE A JUSTIFICATION FOR THE ACTUAL REGULATIONS THAT WE DO PUT IN PLACE.

SO WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE TO WHATEVER DEGREE THAT WE FEEL WE NEED TO HAVE SOME PROVISIONS IN PLACE THAT REGULATE THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ACTUALLY HAVE SOME EVIDENTIARY SUPPORT FOR THOSE.

WE WON'T BE ABLE TO JUST REGULATE THAT WITHOUT THAT THAT BACKUP SUPPORT.

SO THAT'S KIND OF OUR MODEL IS LET'S SEE WHAT A&M PUTS OUT, LET'S SEE WHAT'S LEFT AND FIGURE OUT WHAT WE NEED TO REGULATE IN THOSE.

ALL RIGHT. I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU, EVERYONE.

ONE MORE, PLEASE. ANYONE COUNCILWOMAN HOLLEN, BACK TO THE AGRICULTURE SLIDE.

WHAT WAS THAT? 2499.

2323 08I BEG YOUR PARDON? CURRENTLY, CURRENTLY CHICKENS ARE ALLOWED.

NO ROOSTERS.

WILL THIS CHANGE THAT AT ALL? POTENTIALLY. YEAH, POTENTIALLY.

IS THAT RIGHT? AGAIN, IT DEPENDS WHERE WE'RE RELYING ON WHAT'S GOING TO COME OUT OF AGRILIFE.

SO WHATEVER TEXAS A&M COMES UP WITH, THAT'S KIND OF BE THE ROADMAP.

SO THEIR THEIR CHARGE IS TO TO TO CREATE THIS DOCUMENT JUST AS QUICKLY AS THEY CAN.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

SO THAT'S A SEGWAY FOR ME.

THIS DOESN'T PROHIBIT OUR ABILITY TO REGULATE OUR NOISE ORDINANCE, DOES IT? OR DOES IT TAKE PRECEDENT OVER OUR NOISE ORDINANCE? I THINK IT'S SEPARATE AND APART FROM.

SO I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE YEAH, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION.

[01:05:02]

IT JUST CAN'T DO WHATEVER IT DOES BEFORE A CERTAIN TIME, IS MY ESTIMATION, RIGHT? SOMEHOW YOU'VE GOT TO REGULATE WHAT YOU KNOW, NO DIFFERENT THAN A DOG, RIGHT? SO YOU CAN HAVE A DOG THAT BARKS MIDDAY AND THAT COULD VIOLATE THE NOISE ORDINANCE.

SO WE ALL LOVE DOGS, BUT WE HAVE RULES AND REGULATIONS.

SO I'LL BE THAT'LL BE SOMETHING I WANT TO HEAR, KIND OF WHERE WE FALL ON THAT.

THEN I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT ALSO THE HOURLY COST AND FEES THAT THAT TRANSITION.

AND MY QUESTION IS THIS, IS THAT BASED ON ARE WE ABLE TO INDIVIDUALIZE THAT ON HOW WE PAY OUR SO OUR STAFF MAKE X AMOUNT PER THEIR CERTIFICATIONS QUALIFICATIONS AND WE'RE ABLE TO UNIQUELY APPLY THOSE THOSE RATES? OR IS DID THEY STIPULATE A RATE FOR A POSITION AND IT'S CALCULATED THAT WAY.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, IF YOU RECALL SOME YEARS AGO CAME THROUGH AND DID A COST OF SERVICE AND WE CHANGED OUR FEE STRUCTURE.

WE WERE IN THE PROCESS OF UPDATING THAT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T DONE IT FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

THIS LEGISLATION OCCURRED.

SO ULTIMATELY, PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTION IS JUST MIMICKING AND IS WORKING WITH MATRIX TO EVALUATE OUR ACTUAL COST OF DOING BUSINESS, AND THAT'S GOING TO TRANSLATE INTO THE HOURLY RATE.

THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE FEE RATHER THAN IT BEING A COST OF CONSTRUCTION.

GOT IT. OKAY.

SO I UNDERSTAND THAT TO SAY THAT WE'RE KIND OF DOWN THAT PATH, WE'LL JUST WE'RE GOING TO.

OKAY. AND SO MY ONLY OTHER THING TO SAY THERE IS IF WE NEED TO GO TO A STRAIGHT 100% OUTSOURCED COMPONENT FOR THAT, RIGHT? AND THEN SO THEN WE RECEIVE A BILL AND IT'S A STRAIGHT PASS THROUGH, THEN I WOULD I'D BE ENTERTAINED THAT IF IT'S A STAFFING OR ADVANTAGE OR PRICING ADVANTAGE, JUST TO SAY HERE'S HOW MUCH IT COSTS US, HERE'S HOW MUCH IT COSTS YOU AND MOVE ON.

YOU KNOW, AND THIS IS VERY MUCH THE SAME WHETHER IT'S OUR STAFF OR WE'RE OUTSOURCED.

IT'S REALLY JUST IT'S THAT COST OF DOING BUSINESS.

SO IT COSTS US THIS AMOUNT OF DOLLARS FOR A PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR TO GO OUT AND PERFORM THE WORK, WHETHER IT'S PRIVATE SECTOR OR PUBLIC SECTOR.

THAT'S THE FEE THAT WE'LL BE CHARGING.

GOT IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE NOTABLE AS MAYOR PRO TEM? THINK. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

DO WE KNOW IF THE AG CHANGES AFFECT DOMESTIC LIVESTOCK? I'M SORRY, IT MAY.

AND THAT'S THE DEBATE IS, YOU KNOW, SCOTT HIT ON IT.

AGRICULTURAL OPERATION.

WHAT IS THAT? IS THAT A CHICKEN AND THE YARD? IS IT, YOU KNOW, GROWING THINGS, HAVING A GARDEN THAT'S UNKNOWN AT THIS POINT.

THERE'S SOME SOME DEBATE, I THINK, EVEN AMONGST CITIES AND ATTORNEYS THROUGHOUT THE STATE ON HOW FAR IS THIS REALLY GOING TO STRETCH.

BUT POTENTIALLY, IF YOU READ IT TO ITS MOST, MOST EXTREME SITUATION IS, YEAH, IT COULD BE IMPACTING PEOPLE ON WHAT THEY KEEP ON THEIR YARD LIVESTOCK WISE.

THANK YOU. YEP. OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. THAT TAKES US TO 2127.

SO THIS IS A BILL THAT I THINK A LOT OF CITIES HAD GREAT CONCERN OVER AS IT WOUND ITS WAY THROUGH THE SESSION.

THIS BILL, WHEN IT WAS FILED SHORTLY AFTERWARDS, IT ATTAINED THE SUPPORT, I THINK, AT LEAST ON THE HOUSE SIDE, SOME 70 SOME ODD CO-SPONSORS, WHICH TYPICALLY WHEN THAT HAPPENS WITH A BILL LIKE THIS, IT HAS SOME PRETTY STRONG SUPPORT AND IT'S DIFFICULT FOR AND WAS DIFFICULT FOR CITIES TO POSITIVELY IMPACT THIS BILL TO WHERE IT WOULD NOT HAVE AS MUCH OF A AS MUCH OF A DETRIMENT TO TO TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

SO THIS BILL PREEMPTS CITIES FROM REGULATING CONDUCT IN A FIELD OF REGULATION OCCUPIED BY ANY OF ACTUALLY EIGHT STATE CODES. AND THOSE ARE LISTED ON THE SIDE.

SO AND IF THE CITY REGULATES CONDUCT IN THOSE FIELDS OF REGULATION, AN INDIVIDUAL CAN BRING ACTION AGAINST THE CITY.

THEY ARE REQUIRED TO GIVE A THREE MONTH NOTICE TO THE CITY PRIOR TO BRINGING A CLAIM.

AND ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONCERNS OF THIS BILL IS THAT THE FIELD OF REGULATION TERMINOLOGY IS NOT WELL DEFINED IN THE BILL.

IT'S, I BELIEVE THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS BEEN USED IN A LEGISLATION LIKE THIS.

AND WE REALLY DON'T KNOW THE FULL EXTENT OF WHAT IS PREEMPTED CURRENTLY.

WE HAVE TO ALMOST WATCH THAT PLAY OUT.

WE DO HAVE THIS SCHEDULED FOR A CLOSED SESSION DISCUSSION IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS WORK SESSION PRESENTATION.

AND SOME OF THE MORE LEGAL ORIENTED QUESTIONS CAN BE QUESTIONS CAN BE ANSWERED THEN AND THIS IS THE LAST SLIDE.

SO JUST TO GIVE COUNCIL A HEADS UP ON OUR NEXT STEPS, WE ARE GOING TO IMPLEMENT THOSE PROCESS CHANGES THAT WE DISCUSSED, UPDATE ANY

[01:10:08]

AND THAT'LL BE BROUGHT TO COUNCIL AS NEEDED.

AND THAT IS OUR PRESENTATION.

WE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE COUNCIL MAY HAVE.

ALL RIGHT. QUESTIONS.

COUNCILOR MELTZER.

YEAH, I'D LIKE TO JUST UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT OF PROCESS FOR, FOR INSTANCE, TO, TO ACHIEVE HAVING GOOD BILLS PASSED AND BAD BILLS DEFEATED.

YOU KNOW, IS DOES THAT INVOLVE IDENTIFYING A TARGET LIST OF LEGISLATORS THAT YOU WANT TO INFLUENCE? AND WOULD THAT TARGET LIST TYPICALLY INCLUDE OUR LOCAL DELEGATION? SO THE ANSWER IS YES TO THAT GENERALLY.

SO THE WAY THAT WE LOOK AT IT REALLY JUST DEPENDS ON WHERE THE BILL'S ORIGINATING AND WHO'S FILED IT, WHAT COMMITTEE IT GETS REFERRED TO.

SO, YOU KNOW, TRADITIONALLY WHAT WE WOULD DO IS START WITH THE BILL AUTHOR THEMSELVES.

AND IF WE GOT FEEDBACK FROM THE CITY THAT SAID THIS IS GOING TO IMPACT US IN A NEGATIVE WAY, WE WOULD APPROACH THAT OFFICE AND TALK ABOUT THE LIKELIHOOD OF AN AMENDMENT.

WE WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH YOUR STAFF TO COME UP WITH THAT LANGUAGE SO THAT WE'RE JUST NOT GOING INTO AN OFFICE AND SAYING WE DON'T LIKE THIS.

WE TRY TO BRING SOLUTIONS AND SHOW HOW IT CAN BE IMPROVED IN OUR OPINION.

AND THEN FROM THERE, IF IT GOES TO A FULL COMMITTEE, WE USUALLY TALK TO ALL OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND SOMETIMES THOSE ARE DELEGATION MEMBERS AND SOMETIMES THEY'RE NOT. IT JUST REALLY VARIES.

AND FROM THERE, WE THROUGH THE HOUSE, WORK THE CALENDARS COMMITTEE PROCESS, WHICH SETS THE BILLS OR NOT.

THE SENATE IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, BUT EVENTUALLY WE WILL TALK TO A BROADER ARRAY OF LEGISLATORS AND EXPLAIN OUR POSITION.

BUT, YOU KNOW, AND GENERALLY IT'S IN GENERAL, IT'S MOST IMPORTANT FOR US TO FOCUS ON THE DELEGATION AND JUST TELL THEM THIS IS WHAT THE IMPACT IS TO DENTON AND THEN THEY WILL DO WHAT THEY WILL.

YEAH. WHEN AND AS WE AS YOU GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, TO WHAT EXTENT ARE YOU SEEKING ALLIANCES WITH REPRESENTATION FROM OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED CITIES? BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WHOLE LOT THAT COMES UP THAT'S TRULY DENTON SPECIFIC, RIGHT? SO WE COMMUNICATE A LOT WITH THE TEAM AND WHAT HTML IS DOING, HOW THEY'RE POSITIONING BECAUSE THEY WORK WITH MOST OF THE CITIES AND THEN ALSO HAVE A SEPARATE GROUP FOR THE BIG CITIES AS THEY CALL IT.

SO WE TRY TO FIND ALLIES THAT WAY, BUT SOMETIMES IT'S DIFFERENT OTHER STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN A PARTICULAR BILL, BUT USUALLY IT'S NOT JUST US GOING TO TALK TO AN OFFICE OR A MEMBER ABOUT A BILL.

I GUESS JUST SPECULATIVELY, AS A COMPLETE CIVILIAN ON THIS, I'M GOING TO THINK THAT IF IF ALL THE SIMILARLY SITUATED CITIES HAD INFLUENCE ON THEIR DELEGATIONS, YOU KNOW, I WONDER HOW MUCH OF A CORE OF A MAJORITY THAT MIGHT CONSTITUTE IT WOULD BE LARGE.

SOMETIMES THAT IS EFFECTIVE AND SOMETIMES IT'S NOT.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCILMAN HOLLER. 2127.

THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO BE GIVEN A THREE MONTH NOTICE.

IS THAT A THREE MONTH NOTICE TO CURE OR IS THAT JUST A THREE MONTH NOTICE? HERE WE COME THAT IT'S A THREE MONTH NOTICE BEFORE THEY CAN BRING A CLAIM.

GOT IT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

APPRECIATE IT. AND YOU HAVE KIND OF NOTES ON WHAT'S COMING BACK, RIGHT? COUNCILMAN. MCGEE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WHEN ORDINANCE CHANGES COME BACK TO US, THOUGH, IF YOU'RE PLANNING ON PUTTING IT THROUGH ON CONSENT, CAN YOU PUT SOMETHING IN THERE THAT LETS US KNOW THAT THIS IS A CHANGE SPECIFICALLY EMANATING FROM A LAW COMING FROM THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION? WE CAN INCLUDE THAT, JUST SO WE KNOW.

I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO ASK YOU TO NOT PUT SOME OF THIS STUFF ON CONSENT BECAUSE IT WOULD I UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR THAT.

SO JUST A LITTLE ADDENDUM TO LET US KNOW.

WE CAN DEFINITELY INCLUDE THAT IN THE IN THE AGENDA SUMMARY SHEET THAT JUST WILL MAKE IT PROMINENT.

THIS IS SUBSEQUENT TO THE 88TH SESSION, HOUSE BILL OR SENATE BILL, WHATEVER.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YEAH. ALL RIGHT.

AND YES, AND ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MAYOR.

JUST WE'RE BRINGING BACK THE DELEGATIONS, VOTING RECORD, THE IMPACTS OF HOUSE BILL TWO AND THE TIMELINES FOR WHEN IT TAKES EFFECT, THE MECHANICS FOR HOW THE WINDOW REDUCTION WORKS FOR SCHOOLS AND THE INFORMATION ON HOUSE BILL 2071.

[01:15:04]

UM, YEAH.

AND THEN JUST THE OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING UNTIL AGRILIFE COMES BACK, BUT THAT'S CAPTURED IN THERE SOMEWHERE.

KIND OF A TRIGGER FOR THAT, RIGHT? WHENEVER THAT DOES COME OUT. YES.

RIGHT. YEAH.

OKAY. OKAY.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

THAT CONCLUDES OUR WORK SESSION.

AND LET ME PULL UP THE LANGUAGE FOR CLOSED SESSION WHILE WE SET THE ROOM.

AND IT'S CRAZY.

THE CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW, AT 415, CONVENE IN, CLOSED, CLOSED, CONVENED IN A CLOSED MEETING TO DELIBERATE THE CLOSED MEETING ITEM

[1. Closed Meeting:]

CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEYS UNDER TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE.

BLESS YOU. SECTION 551.071.

SO WE'LL SET THE ROOM AND GIVE IT JUST A MINUTE.

WE'LL JUST STAY HERE. AND BECAUSE I WON'T USE UP ALL THE TIME WE NEED, SO WE'LL JUST GIVE IT A MINUTE FOR THEM TO SET THE ROOM.

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE DENTON CITY COUNCIL.

IT IS 622.

ON TUESDAY THE 25TH, WE CONCLUDED OUR WORK SESSION IN CLOSED SESSIONS.

THAT BRINGS US TO IMMEDIATELY TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

[4. CONSENT AGENDA]

BUT FOR ITEM C, MAYOR PRO TEM, I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

BUT FOR ITEM C, IS THERE A COUNCILMAN BYRD.

THERE'S A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BYRD REGARDING THE CONSENT AGENDA.

BUT FOR ITEM C, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN.

PASSES SEVEN ZERO TAKES US TO ITEM C, WHICH IS ID 231431.

[C. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton amending Chapter 2, Article II, Section 2-30 of the Code of the City of Denton (City Council requests for information or agenda items), to require a consensus of a supermajority of councilmembers for a request for a resolution or ordinance to be placed on an agenda prior to a work session on the request; providing a repealer clause; providing a severability clause, providing a savings clause; and providing an effective date.]

THIS ITEM FOR ME, THE ISSUE IS.

IT'S NOT SPECIFIC TO THIS, BUT THIS IS ONLY OPPORTUNITY.

I HAVE TO TALK TO IT AND I JUST NEED TO HEAR.

I GUESS COUNCIL NEEDS TO GIVE CLEAR DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE IF WE NEED TO REINSTATE THE PROCESS OF HAVING STAFF SIT IN FOR CONSENT AGENDA DISCUSSIONS.

AND SO AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, BEFORE WE START OUR MEETING THAT I'M GOING TO ASK FOR THAT TRANSCRIPT.

MY UNDERSTANDING OF JUST FOR CONTEXT IS WE COUNCIL GAVE DIRECTION TO BRING BACK A PROCESS BY WHICH THE STAFF DIDN'T HAVE TO SIT AND WAIT FOR COUNCIL TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THINGS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM.

THERE, THERE THERE WAS ENOUGH CONSENT OR NO VOCAL.

VOICES, DISSENTING VOICES ON ITEMS. ERGO, THEY GO INTO THE CONSENT.

THEY MOVE FORWARD. NO QUESTIONS FROM THIS SORT OF THING.

WELL, LAST WEEK WE HAD ONE PULLED AND IT FAILED.

SO THAT'S THE PROBLEM BECAUSE I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO TALK TO STAFF ABOUT IT, HAVE QUESTIONS ANSWERED BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T THERE, BECAUSE THERE WAS AN ANTICIPATION THAT IT WASN'T GOING TO BE PULLED. I DON'T WANT TO PROHIBIT ANYONE'S RIGHTS TO PULL THINGS.

I THINK THAT'S INTRINSICALLY BAKED INTO THE RIGHTS.

WE JUST NEED TO GO BACK TO OUR FORMER PROCESS BECAUSE WE THAT DIDN'T WORK.

SO THAT'S MY ISSUE.

IT'S TIED TO THIS. WE'RE BACK THIS WEEK.

I PUT THIS BACK ON THE AGENDA.

THIS IS THE ONE THAT FAILED.

SO THAT'S ALL I JUST NEEDED TO SAY THAT THAT THAT'S MY ISSUE IS.

AND SO I'LL TALK TO THE CITY MANAGER.

BUT OTHERS CAN BE HEARD ON THEIR POSITION.

BUT THAT THAT'S MY POSITION.

MY MY THOUGHT IS JUST WE NEED TO GO BACK BECAUSE WHAT WAS PROPOSED ISN'T WORKING.

AND THAT'S I WAS OKAY WITH IT.

BUT IT'S NOT NOT EVERYONE WAS OKAY WITH IT, I PRESUME.

SO THAT'S FINE.

WE JUST NEED TO CHANGE IT BACK.

I WAS GOING TO SAY, MAYOR, I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT OUTSIDE OF POSTING FOR THAT DELIBERATION OR THAT DISCUSSION ON THAT SPECIFIC ITEM, BUT IT COULD BE BROUGHT BACK AT ANOTHER TIME. SURE.

THIS IS REALLY JUST RELATED TO THE TWO MINUTE PITCH THAT WERE POSTED FOR ON THIS ONE.

OKAY, THEN THEN I'LL ARRANGE TO HAVE THAT BACK ON THE AGENDA ITEM.

[01:20:06]

MAYOR PRO TEM. YEAH.

SO FOR THIS ITEM, I WON'T BELABOR IT.

I SAID AT THE LAST MEETING WHAT MY, MY THOUGHT PROCESS ON THIS WAS THAT THIS WAS AN EXISTING TOOL.

I MENTIONED THESE COMMENTS AT THE RETREAT AND AGAIN LAST TIME, SO I'LL JUST SIMPLY SAY I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST THE MOTION TO ADOPT COUNCILMAN MCGEE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

SO GIVEN THE RULING OF THE PARLIAMENTARIAN, I GUESS I CAN'T RESPOND TO.

WHAT? THE MAYOR SAID.

JUST TO CLARIFY MY INTENT, SINCE THIS WAS MY SUGGESTION.

MR. MAYOR. DO YOU WANT ME TO.

WELL, I'M WAITING.

THE CITY ATTORNEY CORRECTED ME, SO I'M ASSUMING THAT THAT ANSWER IS YOUR.

YOUR YOUR THOUGHT IS CORRECT, AND IT WILL COME BACK BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION.

BUT, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

YEAH, THERE WAS TWO THINGS THAT CAME OUT OF THE RETREAT.

ONE WAS DIRECTION TO NO LONGER HAVE CLARIFICATION ON CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS AS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO.

SO THAT'S BEEN MODIFIED.

NOW JUST FOR CLARIFICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ITEMS, BASED ON WHAT WE SAW LAST WEEK, WE'VE MODIFIED IT FURTHER TO ALLOW FOR CONSENT TO CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS TO BE PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA BECAUSE THAT LANGUAGE WASN'T THERE.

WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE IF COUNCIL REALLY WANTED TO DO THAT, WE PUT THAT LANGUAGE BACK IN THERE, BUT WE'RE NOT SET UP FOR A DISCUSSION.

MORE BROADLY SPEAKING, ON THAT ISSUE OF HOW SHOULD WE GO ABOUT PLACING THINGS ON CONSENT, PULLING THINGS FROM CONSENT WHEN THAT SHOULD HAPPEN DURING THE AGENDA.

THAT'S THAT'S REALLY AN OUTSIDE OF WHAT WE'RE POSTED FOR HERE ON THIS ITEM.

THIS ITEM WAS FROM THE SECOND PART OF THE DELIBERATION I'M SORRY, THE RETREAT, WHICH WAS AN AMENDMENT TO THE TWO MINUTE PITCH TO REQUIRE A SUPERMAJORITY BEFORE ITEMS WENT DIRECTLY TO A COUNCIL VOTE ON AN ORDINANCE RESOLUTION.

OKAY. I'M SORRY.

DO I STILL HAVE THE FLOOR? YES. OKAY. SO I GUESS MR..

I APPRECIATE YOU BEING WILLING TO BRING THIS BACK.

I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION SO I CAN CLARIFY MY INTENT.

AND WHAT WHEN I ORIGINALLY SAID FROM THE FROM THE RETREAT WITH RESPECT TO WHAT IS ON THE FLOOR NOW, I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE TO HAVE A SUPERMAJORITY FOR THIS.

I UNDERSTAND AND I TAKE MR. WATTS HAS HAS TALKED ABOUT THIS MULTIPLE TIMES.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS WAS NOT THE PROCESS FOR DOING BUSINESS IN THE PAST.

BUT HAVING SAID THAT, WE SHOULD NOT NECESSARILY CONTINUE TO BE VICTIM FROM DOING IT THE WAY THAT WE HAVE ALWAYS DONE IT.

I BELIEVE A SUPERMAJORITY CAN.

I BELIEVE A SUPERMAJORITY IS A BRIDGE TOO FAR.

SIMPLE MAJORITY SHOULD BE ALLOWED BE ALLOWED TO DO THIS.

IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS EXPLICITLY ILLEGAL.

IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS EXPLICITLY AGAINST THE CITY CODE.

I'M AGAINST MAKING A SUPERMAJORITY THE VEHICLE FOR ALLOWING SOMETHING TO GO STRAIGHT TO A COUNCIL AGENDA.

AND I WILL JUST REMIND MY COLLEAGUES.

YOU KNOW, OFTENTIMES WHEN PEOPLE HAVE ISSUES WITH THINGS THAT WE DO OR DON'T DO, BUT BUT THEY KNOW THAT WE'LL BE CAREFUL WITH MY WORDS, BUT THEY KNOW THAT IT IS LIKELY TO GO AGAINST NECESSARILY WHAT THEY WANT, THEY ARGUE PROCESS.

THIS IS A PROCESS ARGUMENT.

IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE IS A PROBLEM.

IT'S JUST PROCESS. SO I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MELTZER YEAH, THANK YOU.

SO I RECALL IN A PREVIOUS COUNCIL WHEN THIS WAS INTRODUCED ORIGINALLY TO CREATE THE IDEA THAT FROM A TWO MINUTE PITCH YOU WOULDN'T NECESSARILY ONLY BE CLEARING SOMETHING TO GO TO WORK SESSION THAT YOU MIGHT ALSO WANT IT TO GO DIRECTLY TO AN AGENDA.

AND SO THAT WAS A MODIFICATION.

NOW WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS THAT SOME MEMBERS WANT ARE HAPPY, ARE PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH LESS PROCESS, AND SOME FEEL THAT IT'S A DELIBERATIVE, A KIND OF A DUTY OF A DELIBERATIVE BODY TO, IN GENERAL, GO THROUGH A MORE THOROUGH VETTING. IT'S A KIND OF A PREFERENCE THING.

THE AT ONE POINT IN THE CONVERSATION, THE PROPOSAL WAS TO DO AWAY WITH THE ABILITY TO GO DIRECTLY TO TO AN AGENDA. WHAT THIS IS, IS A COMPROMISE, SAYING, YES, YOU CAN GO DIRECTLY TO AN AGENDA IF IT'S CLEARLY EVIDENTLY WARRANTED.

AND HOW DO YOU KNOW IF IT'S CLEARLY, EVIDENTLY WARRANTED? YOU CAN GET ALL BUT ONE TO AGREE THAT IT'S TIME SENSITIVE OR URGENT OR WHATEVER.

ON WHATEVER BASIS YOU CAN GET ALMOST EVERYBODY TO AGREE.

SO IT'S A COMPROMISE.

AND COMPROMISE IS NOT A DIRTY WORD.

[01:25:02]

OKAY. I'LL.

COUNCILOR COUNCILMEMBER WATTS, DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? I DO HAVE A SECOND.

THEN I'VE GOT JUST A BRIEF COMMENT.

CERTAINLY I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION. YOU'RE FINE.

YEP. YOU HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MELTZER, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER WATTS.

AND WE'RE CONTINUING DISCUSSION.

COUNCILMEMBER MCGEE.

THIS WILL BE MY SECOND.

DO YOU WANT TO LET MR. WATTS GO FIRST SINCE HE HAS NOT.

NO, GO RIGHT AHEAD. I APPRECIATE THAT, MR. MAYOR. I APPRECIATE MY FRIEND FROM DISTRICT THREE.

THE CLARIFICATION THERE.

I WILL SIMPLY ADD THAT WHEN WE MAKE A PITCH AND WORK SESSION, WE CAN GIVE DIRECTION AT THAT TIME.

SO IF IF I MAKE A PITCH AND I SAY, HEY, DIRECTLY TO A PUBLIC MEETING, MY COLLEAGUES, YOU ALL THOSE OF YOU WHO AGREE OR DISAGREE, YOU CAN AGREE AND SAY, HEY, RATHER THAN A WORK SESSION, RATHER THAN GOING STRAIGHT TO A PUBLIC MEETING, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A WORK SESSION OR HEY, I'LL GIVE A DIRECTION FOR AN ESR OR SOMETHING. I BELIEVE THAT IS THE TIME WHERE WE CAN RECTIFY THIS.

I JUST DON'T THINK WE NEED ANOTHER LEVEL OF PROCESS ON TOP OF THE DIRECTION THAT WE ARE ABLE TO GIVE AND OUR TWO MINUTE RESPONSE TO THE ONE MINUTE PITCHES.

SO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBER WHAT'S.

YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, FOR THE RECOGNITION.

I HEAR I HEAR THE SENTIMENTS OF THOSE WHO DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT THIS AND AND I CAN RESPECT THEIR OPINION, BUT IT'S MORE THAN A PROCESS, AND WE'VE SEEN IT.

AS AN EXAMPLE, IN PROBABLY THE LAST YEAR OR SO WHERE WE HAVE A TOPIC THAT COMES UP.

SO I WANT YOU ALL TO WE TALK ABOUT PROCESS.

HERE'S THE PROCESS.

SOMEBODY BRINGS UP A TOPIC, GETS TWO MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT IT, THEN EACH COUNCIL MEMBER GETS ONE MINUTE TO EITHER EXPRESS SUPPORT TO MOVE IT TO A WORK SESSION.

AND IN THIS CASE, SOMETIMES, YEAH, TAKE IT STRAIGHT TO A VOTE SO YOU GET SEVEN MINUTES OF POTENTIAL DISCUSSION.

ON TOPICS THAT COULD POTENTIALLY COME STRAIGHT TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

THAT'S NOT ABOUT PROCESS.

THAT'S ABOUT AVOIDING PUBLIC COMMENT.

IT'S ABOUT AVOIDING VETTING SOMETHING DIRECTLY.

IT'S IT'S POLITICS, PURE AND SIMPLE.

AND THAT'S OKAY.

YOU KNOW, SOME WOULD SAY WE'RE A POLITICAL BODY, BUT I CANNOT GET BEHIND HAVING IMPORTANT TOPICS THAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THIS COMMUNITY SEEN COME BEFORE THIS COUNCIL, PROBABLY SOME OF THE MOST CONTROVERSIAL VOTES THAT WE'VE TAKEN IN MANY YEARS WITH VIRTUALLY NO DISCUSSION FROM COUNCIL, NO DISCUSSION OR INPUT ON HOW AN ORDINANCE SHOULD READ.

IT'S YOU DO IT OR YOU DON'T.

AND AND FOR THOSE PARTICULAR ITEMS, I THINK THAT'S SCARY.

I MEAN, WE HEAR A LOT OF TALK ABOUT DEMOCRACY.

THIS IS GOOD FOR DEMOCRACY.

THAT'S GOOD FOR DEMOCRACY.

THIS IS DEMOCRACY, THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, SO FORTH AND SO ON.

I DON'T KNOW HOW ANYBODY CAN SAY SEVEN MINUTES OF DELIBERATION, WHICH INCLUDES PRO AND CON POSITIONS AND GO STRAIGHT TO A VOTE.

MEETS ANY OF THAT CRITERIA.

SO I'M ALL FOR IT.

AS FAR AS TWO MINUTE PITCHES, WE WORKED IT OUT, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO ALL THE EXAMPLES.

BUT THE TIMES WE'VE SEEN IT GO STRAIGHT TO A VOTE, THEY'VE PRETTY MUCH HAD KIND OF.

NOT RESULTS THAT HAVE BEEN UPLIFTING TO THE COMMUNITY.

SO THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT IT UP.

AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

COUNCIL MEMBER MELTZER, YOU KNOW, PROFFERED A A POSITION THAT FOR US TO DO THAT, FOR US TO SAY WE DON'T CARE ABOUT PUBLIC INPUT, WHICH IS REALLY WHAT WE'RE SAYING ON IMPORTANT ISSUES.

IT'S GOT TO BE SOMETHING THAT IS DIRE.

IT'S GOT TO BE SOMETHING THAT IS TIME SENSITIVE.

THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO TAKE IMMEDIATE ACTION ON TO AVOID A TREMENDOUS HARM TO OUR COMMUNITY IN THE IMMEDIATE MOMENT.

AND WHEN YOU HAVE THAT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE VOTING UNANIMOUSLY.

YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO NEED 6 OR 1.

SO THAT'S MY RATIONALE FOR IT.

AND I UNDERSTAND PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH THAT.

I GET THAT. I JUST BELIEVE THAT THIS IS MORE THAN JUST A PROCESS.

THIS ISN'T MORE. THIS IS MORE THAN JUST ABOUT TALKING ABOUT LET'S CHANGE THE PROCESS.

WELL, WE ALWAYS ANYWAY, SO THAT'S THAT'S WHY I PUT IT FORWARD.

AND I APPRECIATE THE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUPPORT SOMETHING THAT IS HAS SOME COMPROMISE TO IT, BUT ALSO RECOGNIZES THAT THAT IS A REALLY HARD THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT TOOL AND IT'S A TOOL THAT SHOULD NOT BE USED EXCEPT IN REALLY DIRE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THAT KIND OF MOVING TO A DECISION IS CRITICAL AND TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.

[01:30:02]

THANK YOU, MAYOR. OKAY.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN.

THAT PASSES FOR THREE TAKES US TO ITEM FIVE A, WHICH IS ID 231191.

[A. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, regarding a reasonable accommodation in accordance with the Federal Fair Housing Act related to the maximum number of unrelated persons occupying a dwelling located at 2413 Kayewood Drive, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof; providing a severability clause and providing an effective date.]

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

HALEY ZAGORSKY, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR.

THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION REQUEST FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2413 CAYWOOD DRIVE.

IN OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR, THE OXFORD HOUSE INC.

LEGAL COUNSEL SUBMITTED A REQUEST TO STAFF FOR A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION TO ALLOW MORE THAN FOUR UNRELATED PERSONS TO OCCUPY THE DWELLING AT 2413 CAYWOOD DRIVE.

SPECIFICALLY, THEY ARE INTENDING TO HOUSE SEVEN INDIVIDUALS AT THIS PROPERTY.

BEFORE WE GO INTO MORE SPECIFICS ON THE REQUEST, I WANTED TO TRY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME UP THROUGHOUT THE DISCUSSIONS ON THIS.

SO THE INITIAL INQUIRY REGARDING THE USE OF THIS PROPERTY WAS SUBMITTED IN MID-OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR.

THAT CONCERN WAS REGARDING THE USE OF THE PROPERTY AS A GROUP HOME, POSSIBLY WITHOUT PROPER PERMITS.

SINCE THAT TIME WHEN STAFF BEGAN LOOKING INTO THIS AND WE RECEIVED THE ACCOMMODATION REQUEST, THERE HAVE BEEN A TOTAL OF SIX CALLS MADE TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THOSE INCLUDE TWO CALLS NOTIFYING THE POLICE THAT THERE HAD BEEN A VEHICLE REPOSSESSED ON THE PROPERTY.

ONE CALL THAT ENDED UP WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR SMOKE ALARMS GOING OFF.

ONE WAS REGARDING AN INQUIRY AS TO WHETHER THE HOUSE WAS VACANT AND THEN TWO OF THE CALLS WERE RELATED TO DOMESTIC DISTURBANCES.

THOSE HAVE BEEN MORE RECENT IN MAY AND JULY, AND SINCE THAT TIME WE HAVE HAD ONE CODE COMPLIANCE CONCERN LOGGED IN AGAIN, THAT WAS REGARDING WHETHER THE PROPERTY WAS BEING USED AS A GROUP HOME WITHOUT PROPER PERMITS.

I ALSO WANTED TO PROVIDE SOME BACKGROUND REGARDING THE OXFORD HOUSE AS AN ORGANIZATION.

SO THE OXFORD HOUSE INC.

IS AN ORGANIZATION THAT FACILITATES HOUSING FOR PEOPLE RECOVERING FROM DRUG AND OR ALCOHOL ADDICTION.

THEY HAVE BEEN OPERATING IN THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR OVER 30 YEARS, ACCORDING TO THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THEIR WEBSITE.

A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT HOW THESE HOUSES OPERATE.

ONCE THE OXFORD HOUSE SELECTS A HOME, THEY ENTER INTO A LEASE WITH THE PERSON OWNING THAT HOME.

EACH HOME IS INDEPENDENTLY IDENTIFIED.

THEY ARE NOT OPERATED UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF OXFORD HOUSE, INC.

IT IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENTITY, BUSINESS ENTITY CREATED FOR EACH HOME.

EACH OF THOSE HOMES IS RUN DEMOCRATICALLY.

THEY ARE SELF-SUFFICIENT IN TERMS OF FINANCING.

THE RESIDENTS CONTRIBUTE EQUAL PARTS TO THE FINANCES OF THE HOUSEHOLD EACH MONTH, INCLUDING RENT UTILITIES, AS WELL AS PUTTING MONEY INTO A RESERVE FUND FOR MONTHS WHERE THERE MAY NOT BE A FULL NUMBER OF RESIDENTS LIVING IN THE HOUSE TO HELP COVER THE BILLS.

THEY ALSO DEMOCRATICALLY SCREEN THEIR APPLICANTS IS OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROCESS THAT GOES TO A VOTE OF THE RESIDENTS ON THE HOME AS TO WHETHER A NEW APPLICANT FOR A VACANCY IN THE HOUSE WILL BE ACCEPTED INTO THE HOUSE.

AND THEY SIMILARLY ELECT OFFICERS.

EVERY SIX MONTHS. THEY ROTATE THROUGH AND ELECT A NEW SLATE OF SIX OFFICERS WITHIN THE HOME TO FILL ROLES SUCH AS THE HOUSE PRESIDENT WHO GOES TO THE CHAPTER MEETINGS.

THEY HAVE A TREASURER FOR THE HOUSE THAT KEEPS TRACK OF THEIR FINANCES, A SECRETARY THAT TAKES NOTES AND SIMILAR THINGS THAT YOU WOULD FIND IN ANY ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE.

WHEN YOU HAVE THREE OR MORE OXFORD HOUSES IN A GEOGRAPHIC AREA THAT FORMS A CHAPTER.

AND LIKE I MENTIONED, OFFICERS FROM EACH OF THE HOMES GO TO THOSE CHAPTER MEETINGS MONTHLY WHERE THEY HELP SUPPORT EACH OTHER AND DISCUSS ISSUES THAT HOUSES IN THE AREA MIGHT BE FACING.

THEN OVER THOSE WITHIN A GIVEN AREA, THERE WILL BE AN AREA SUPERVISOR WHO MY UNDERSTANDING IS WORKS FOR OXFORD HOUSE, INC.

THAT OFFERS OVERSIGHT TO HELP THE HOMES GET UP AND RUNNING, MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE EVERYTHING IN PLACE TO TO RUN INDEPENDENTLY AND THEN OFFER SUPPORT TO THOSE CHAPTER LEADERS IF MORE SIGNIFICANT ISSUES ARISE.

JUST SOME STATISTICS THAT MAY HELP ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'VE HEARD.

THERE ARE ABOUT 1700 RESIDENTS LIVING IN 280 OXFORD HOUSES IN THE STATE OF TEXAS AS OF 2020, WHEN THE SURVEY DATA ON YOUR SCREEN WAS PUBLISHED, 100% OF THOSE RESIDENTS AT THAT TIME, AGAIN, WERE FULFILLING THEIR REQUIREMENT THAT THEY ARE SOME SORT OF RECOVERY FROM DRUG OR ALCOHOL ADDICTION.

ABOUT 71% OF THOSE RESIDENTS HAD EXPERIENCED PRIOR HOMELESSNESS.

READING THE REPORT THAT GOES ALONG WITH THIS SURVEY, THEY INDICATED THE MAJORITY OF THOSE HAD BEEN HOMELESS ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION.

98% OF THOSE THAT LIVE WITHIN THE HOMES IN THE STATE OF TEXAS ATTEND SUPPORT GROUPS.

THAT INCLUDES ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS AND NARCOTICS ANONYMOUS, AS WELL AS THE SUPPORTIVE ENVIRONMENT THAT THEY RECEIVE AT THE HOME AND THROUGH THEIR CHAPTER.

AND THE AVERAGE RENT FOR THE HOMES IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN ASKED ABOUT.

AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, THE AVERAGE RENT PER MONTH IS AROUND $2,000 FOR EACH OF THESE HOMES.

[01:35:05]

OXFORD HOUSE DOES PUBLISH ON THEIR WEBSITE A CALCULATOR TOOL FOR PEOPLE TO SEE IF SOMETHING COULD FEASIBLY BE IN OXFORD HOUSE BASED ON THE RENT OF THE HOME AND THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS. AND YOU CAN TELL THAT THEY FACTOR IN UTILITIES SUCH AS CABLE, ELECTRICITY, WATER, SEWER ALL OF THOSE THINGS AS WELL AS, LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, MAKING SURE THEY'RE BUILDING A RESERVE FUND FOR EACH RESIDENT CONTRIBUTES A SET AMOUNT EACH MONTH TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S A RESERVE BUILT UP FOR THOSE MONTHS WHERE SOMEONE MAY NOT HAVE A JOB OR THERE MAY BE A VACANCY IN THE HOME.

LOOKING AT THAT AVERAGE, THAT BREAKS DOWN TO ROUGHLY 5 TO $600 PER MONTH PER RESIDENT AS THEIR TOTAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE HOUSEHOLD.

SO GETTING BACK TO THIS REQUEST WITH RESPECT TO LAND USE AND ZONING, WITH THIS ACCOMMODATION IN PLACE, THIS LAND USE WOULD BE CONSIDERED A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WHICH IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN THE R3 ZONING DISTRICT APPLICABLE TO THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE THERE IS NO ON SITE SUPERVISION OR CARE SERVICES PROVIDED AS PART OF THE OXFORD HOUSE MODEL.

THIS DOES NOT FIT THE DDC DEFINITIONS, NOR THE STATE DEFINITIONS FOR COMMUNITY HOMES AND GROUP HOMES.

OTHER USES HAVE BEEN SUGGESTED, SUCH AS HOTELS OR MOTELS ON THE PROPERTY.

AGAIN, THIS USE WOULD NOT FIT WITHIN THOSE DEFINITIONS.

THESE ARE LONGER TERM RESIDENTS.

THE AVERAGE STAY OF THEM IS NINE MONTHS, SO IT WELL EXCEEDS THE 30 DAYS WE ASSOCIATE WITH HOTELS AND MOTELS.

AND AGAIN, THEY'RE THEY'RE PAYING RENT, CONTRIBUTING TO THE HOUSEHOLD ON A MONTHLY BASIS, NOT NOT PAYING ON A DAY BY DAY BASIS AS YOU WOULD AT A HOTEL OR MOTEL.

SO THIS SPECIFIC REQUEST IS TO A PROVISION IN THE DDC THAT SAYS THAT NO SINGLE DWELLING SHALL HAVE MORE THAN FOUR UNRELATED PERSONS RESIDING WITHIN THE DWELLING, NOR SHALL ANY FAMILY HAVE MORE THAN FOUR UNRELATED PERSONS RESIDING WITH THE FAMILY.

SO AGAIN, THEY ARE REQUESTING FOR SEVEN INDIVIDUALS TO LIVE IN THIS HOME.

THE INDIVIDUALS ARE UNRELATED, BUT THEY ARE LIVING TOGETHER AND SUPPORTING EACH OTHER THROUGH THEIR RECOVERY FROM DRUG AND ALCOHOL ADDICTION AND MANAGING THAT HOUSEHOLD TOGETHER. SO LOOKING AT THE REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION, I WANTED TO START WITH SOME BACKGROUND.

I THINK YOU ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH THIS, SO WE'LL GO THROUGH IT BRIEFLY.

BUT WITH RESPECT TO WHAT IS A DISABILITY, IT IS DEFINED DIFFERENTLY IN MANY LAWS, BUT GENERALLY THERE IS A CONSENSUS AMONG STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A RECORD OF HAVING AN IMPAIRMENT THAT LIMITS ONE OR MORE OF YOUR MAJOR LIFE ACTIVITIES.

AND THERE ARE, UNDER THE FAIR HOUSING ACT THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE CURRENT USE OF DRUG AND ALCOHOL, BUT IT DOES INCLUDE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN RECOVERY FROM THOSE CONDITIONS.

SO SOMEONE WHO WAS PREVIOUSLY AN ADDICT AND IS IN RECOVERY IS CONSIDERED DISABLED UNDER STATE AND FEDERAL LAW.

ALONG WITH THAT, THE TEXAS AND FEDERAL FAIR HOUSING ACT PROHIBIT DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES THAT WOULD MAKE HOUSING UNAVAILABLE TO PEOPLE IN PART OR IN WHOLE BECAUSE OF THEIR DISABILITY. SO THAT MEANS THAT WE MAY NOT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THOSE PERSONS THAT COULD TAKE THE FORM OF DISPARATE TREATMENT WHERE WE EXPRESSLY HAVE LAWS THAT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THEM OR TREAT THEM DIFFERENTLY.

DISPARATE IMPACT WHERE WHAT MAY LOOK LIKE A NEUTRAL LAW HAS A HIGHER BURDEN ON THOSE WITH DISABILITIES.

OR IT COULD BE BY MEANS OF FAILURE TO MAKE REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION WHEN THOSE ARE REQUESTED.

SO A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IS A CHANGE OR EXCEPTION TO A POLICY OR A RULE THAT THE CITY HAS IN PLACE THAT IS NECESSARY TO REMOVE BARRIERS THAT KEEP SOMEONE WITH A DISABILITY FROM HAVING SIMILAR HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AS THOSE WITHOUT.

COURTS HAVE DETERMINED THAT THERE'S A TWO PART TEST FOR A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION.

IT HAS TO BE NECESSARY AND REASONABLE.

NECESSARY MEANING THAT THE REQUEST MUST RELATE TO THE INDIVIDUAL'S DISABILITY OR PROVIDE SOME SORT OF ENRICHMENT THAT HELPS AMELIORATE THE EFFECTS OF THAT DISABILITY AND REASONABLE MEANING THAT IT MUST NOT CAUSE AN UNDUE FINANCIAL AND OR ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN ON THE CITY AND MUST NOT REQUIRE A FUNDAMENTAL ALTERATION OF THE CITY'S ZONING REGULATIONS. WE DO HAVE A PROCESS IN OUR DDC TODAY.

IT'S PART OF THE MINOR MODIFICATION PROCESS IN SUBCHAPTER TWO.

IF YOU WERE TO GO LOOK FOR IT.

HOWEVER, IT IS VERY NARROW AND LIMITED AND ONLY ALLOWS STAFF TO APPROVE REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION REQUESTS FOR VERY SPECIFIC STANDARDS.

SO THOSE ARE THINGS LIKE SETBACKS, THE AMOUNT OF PARKING REQUIRED FOR A SITE, IT DOESN'T APPLY ACROSS THE BOARD TO THINGS SUCH AS THE PROVISION WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE TODAY.

WITH RESPECT TO THE NUMBER OF UNRELATED PERSONS.

THERE IS A CODE AMENDMENT THAT'S BEEN IN THE WORKS SINCE EARLIER IN THE SPRING.

IT'S GONE THROUGH THE CRC.

WE HAVE A DRAFT OF THAT DOCUMENT AT THIS POINT.

WE WILL BE SCHEDULING IT FOR PUBLIC HEARING IN THE COMING MONTHS.

WE'RE HOPING TO TAKE THAT TO THE COMMITTEE ON PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES JUST TO GET SOME FEEDBACK BEFORE WE SCHEDULE THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS.

BUT THAT WILL BE FORTHCOMING TO YOU ALL.

SO SPECIFIC TO THIS REQUEST.

AS I MENTIONED, IT IS TO ALLOW FOR MORE THAN FOUR UNRELATED PERSONS.

SPECIFICALLY, THE REQUEST IS FOR SEVEN.

LOOKING AT THAT TWO PART TEST WE FOUND WITH RESPECT TO NECESSITY THAT THE REQUEST IS RELATED TO THE DISABILITY OF THE RESIDENTS.

AGAIN, THAT BEING THEM BEING IN RECOVERY FROM DRUG AND ALCOHOL ADDICTION AND IT DOES PROVIDE ENRICHMENT THAT HELPS AMELIORATE THE EFFECTS OF THAT DISABILITY ON THEIR LIVES BECAUSE IT PROVIDES THE SUPPORT AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF LIVING WITH OTHERS WITH THE SAME CONDITION AND BEING ABLE TO SUPPORT EACH OTHER IN THAT HOUSEHOLD ENVIRONMENT.

SO THIS ALLOWS THEM FOR THAT INDEPENDENT LIVING OF HAVING A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WHILE AT THE SAME TIME HAVING THE BENEFIT OF LIVING WITH OTHERS AND HAVING THAT THERAPEUTIC CONDITION CREATED BY BEING ABLE TO SUPPORT EACH OTHER IN THE RECOVERY PROCESS.

[01:40:02]

THEY ARE CLAIMING THAT THE REQUEST IS REASONABLE AS IT IS NOT A FUNDAMENTAL ALTERATION OF THE CITY'S ZONING CODE AND DOES NOT CREATE FINANCIAL OR ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN FOR THE CITY. SO WITH THAT, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION REQUEST FOR UP TO SEVEN UNRELATED PERSONS TO RESIDE WITHIN THE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AT 2413 CAYWOOD DRIVE AND I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU.

QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

BEFORE WE DO THAT, LET'S DO THIS.

WELL, IF THERE'S QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, LET'S ADDRESS THOSE.

I DO HAVE CARDS OF THOSE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

I WANT TO GET TO THOSE.

BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? COUNCILMAN WHAT'S.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

WHEN YOU MENTIONED THAT EACH OF THE HOMES IS UNDER A BUSINESS ENTITY, IN OTHER WORDS, YOU HAVE OXFORD HOUSE INC IS THE UMBRELLA ORGANIZATION, I GUESS.

ARE THOSE BUSINESS ENTITIES? BECAUSE I LOOKED UP THIS ONE RIGHT ON DENTON COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT WEBSITE.

ARE THOSE ENTITIES TYPICALLY THE ENTITIES THAT ARE CREATED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER, OR ARE THESE ENTITIES THAT ARE ACTUALLY.

FOR THE INDIVIDUALS LIVING THERE BECAUSE IT SHOWS THE OWNERSHIP OF THAT PARTICULAR HOME IS IN AN LLC.

I FORGOT WHAT IT'S CALLED, BUT CORRECT.

SO MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE RESOURCES AVAILABLE ON THEIR WEBSITE AND OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE IS THE OXFORD HOUSE ENTITIES TYPICALLY DO NOT OWN THE HOMES.

THEY THEY STRICTLY LEASE THE HOMES.

SO THE PROPERTY OWNER IN THIS CASE IS NOT ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE OXFORD HOUSE ITSELF.

IT'S JUST AN ENTITY THAT OWNS THE HOME AND IS LEASING IT TO THEM THROUGH A CONTRACT.

I DON'T WANT TO MISSPEAK.

I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT FORM OF ENTITY THAT THEY CREATE FOR THESE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT WILL TYPICALLY BE LIKE OXFORD HOUSE.

CAYWOOD IN THIS INSTANCE, AND THAT IS A ENTITY THAT IS LISTED ON THE LEASE, HAS THE BANK ACCOUNT THAT EVERYONE CONTRIBUTES TO.

GOTCHA. YEAH. SO THE LLC, THAT IS THE ACTUAL OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS PROBABLY AN LLC FOR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT ASSOCIATED WITH.

OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. APPRECIATE IT.

COUNCIL MEMBER MCGEE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

YOU MENTIONED.

YOU HAVE THE COMMITTEE WAS PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES WILL BE HEARING THIS THE CODE AMENDMENT FOR CODE AMENDMENT ACCOMMODATION PROCESS. WE DO INTEND TO INFORM THEM OF OF WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED BECAUSE THEY HAVE A SIMILAR ACCOMMODATION PROCESS FOR FOR THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.

SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE AWARE AND CAN DIRECT PEOPLE THROUGH THIS PROCESS AS NEEDED.

SO THAT'S SPECIFIC TO THE CODE AMENDMENT THAT WILL BE PROCESSING LATER IN THE FALL.

WOULD IT HAVE BEEN WILDLY OUT OF PROCESS FOR THEM TO HAVE HEARD THIS BEFORE IT EVEN CAME TO US TONIGHT? THEY HAVE NO GROUNDS TO MAKE ANY FORM OF RECOMMENDATION, EVEN ON THE CODE AMENDMENT.

IT'S NOT REQUIRED THAT IT GO TO THEM.

WE'RE JUST DOING IT AS AN INFORMATIVE PIECE.

SO THEY WOULD HAVE REALLY HAD NO BEARING ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM BECAUSE THEIR PROCESS IS FOR ACCOMMODATIONS UNDER THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, NOT THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE.

FAIR ENOUGH. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. OKAY.

FIRST SPEAKER.

MISTER. MISTER URENA, IF YOU CAN COME UP AND GIVE YOUR NAME, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

YEAH. HELLO.

HELLO. THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME TIME TO SPEAK WITH YOU ALL TODAY.

MY NAME IS FERNANDO REINA.

I RESIDE AT 2411 CAYWOOD, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE HOUSE IN QUESTION.

I FEEL THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT IF OXFORD HOUSE IS GOING TO ASK FOR A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION, IT'S REASONABLE FOR US AS A CITY OR WITH RESIDENTS TO HAVE SOME EXPECTATIONS WITH THAT.

AND WHAT CONCERNS ME IS BECAUSE BECAUSE THERE IS NO OVERSIGHT OR NO LIKE MANAGEMENT PROVIDING ANY SERVICES, WHO DOES THE VETTING.

RIGHT. LIKE TO TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RESIDENTS WHO ARE THERE, THAT WE DETERMINE THAT THEY'RE THAT THEY HAVE A DISABILITY.

AND I FEEL LIKE IN NO OTHER ASPECTS OF CITY GOVERNMENT DO WE ASK LIKE THE CITY TO NOT DETERMINE WHO QUALIFIES FOR A SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION.

SO LIKE IF I NEEDED A HANDICAPPED PARKING PASS, RIGHT, LIKE YOU DON'T JUST HAND THOSE OUT, RIGHT? WE NEED TO PROVE THAT THIS ACCOMMODATION IS NEEDED.

AND I WANT TO KNOW, LIKE, WHAT ARE THE.

EXPECTATIONS THAT THAT THAT THAT THE CITY SHOULD HAVE IN ORDER FOR THEM FOR FOR US OR FOR YOU ALL TO GRANT THEM THAT ACCOMMODATION.

UM, MY CONCERN I WAS ALSO READING THE EMAIL FROM THE ATTORNEY.

UH, THAT WAS ONE OF THE ATTACHMENTS FROM NORTH CAROLINA.

AND HE PROVIDES HIS, HIS, HIS REASONS FOR REASONABLE AND NECESSARY AND.

FOR HOW YOU CAN BRING A BUNCH OF PEOPLE IN AND.

[01:45:02]

RIGHT. I FEEL LIKE HE'S KIND OF CREATED LIKE.

OXFORD HOUSE IS LIKE A MODEL, RIGHT? IT'S A FRAMEWORK THAT PEOPLE USE TO BE ABLE TO COME IN, JAM.

A BUNCH OF PEOPLE IN THERE, CHARGE RENT, MAKE PROFIT.

I GET IT RIGHT. EVERYBODY'S TRYING TO MAKE MONEY, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW ORDINANCE OR THEY CAN GET AN EXEMPTION FOR THAT.

AND I FEEL LIKE THAT'S JUST A LITTLE.

DISHEARTENING, RIGHT? I AT THIS POINT, I FEEL LIKE WHEN AS A CITY DO WE I FEEL LIKE HOW DO WE SEPARATE THE OXFORD HOUSE CORPORATION WITH THIS SPECIFIC HOUSE? LIKE IF THIS SPECIFIC HOUSE IS, WHEN DO WE AS A CITY SAY, OKAY, THIS ISN'T REASONABLE? LIKE THE POLICE ARE OUT THERE ALL THE TIME.

AND I KNOW WHAT MS..

THE ASSISTANT SIKORSKI, STATED ABOUT THE POLICE, BUT THERE'S BEEN POLICE PRESENCE AT THAT HOUSE.

WE HEAR THEM SCREAMING, WE HEAR THEM FIGHTING.

THERE'S MORE SERVICES, YOU KNOW, POLICE SERVICES COMING OUT THERE JUST THE OTHER DAY, TWO WEEKS AGO, THURSDAY NIGHT, THEY'RE CHASING EACH OTHER, SLAMMING ON THE BRAKES, 11:00 IN THE CORNER.

IT'S BECOME A SAFETY CONCERN, RIGHT? LIKE AT WHAT POINT CAN WE SAY THIS SPECIFIC NOT.

OXFORD HOUSE. BUT THIS SPECIFIC HOUSE, CAN WE HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE? OKAY, JUST ONE SECOND.

I BELIEVE YOU. YOU MAKE A YOU RAISE A FAIR QUESTION.

I HAVE THE SAME QUESTION SUCH THAT WE CAN.

MR. CITY ATTORNEY, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE MEDICAL CONCERNS AS FAR AS REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION? THE EXAMPLE MR. URENA GAVE ABOUT DISABLED TAGS, I KNOW THAT'S NOT EXACTLY IN THE CITY'S PURVIEW, BUT YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE HE'S GOING.

SO WHATEVER YOU CAN AROUND MEDICAL STUFF, I'M CERTAIN OTHERS HAVE THE QUESTION.

I HAD THE QUESTION IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THAT, I'D APPRECIATE IT.

YEAH, INHERENTLY IN A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION, IF THERE'S A PRESUMPTION THAT THE PEOPLE THERE HAVE A DISABILITY.

AND SO IF THERE WAS PEOPLE THAT WERE LIVING THERE THAT DID NOT HAVE A DISABILITY, THEY TECHNICALLY WOULDN'T NEED A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION AND THEY COULDN'T YOU COULDN'T GIVE THEM ACCOMMODATIONS.

THE CONCERN BEING HOW DO WE VERIFY IT? AND I THINK THAT'S THE QUESTION YOU'RE MAKING.

WHO MAKES THE DETERMINATION? THE CITY DOESN'T REALLY HAVE THE PURVIEW TO VERIFY EACH PERSON AND HAVE THEM COME IN AND PROVE THAT THEY HAVE THIS ONE THING THAT WE WE COULD DO AND WE HAVE THIS CONTACT INFORMATION WITH THEM. AND THEY'VE OFFERED THIS TYPE OF COMMUNICATION AS THERE IS OVERSIGHT.

AND I THINK JUST HAVING PEOPLE AT SOME LEVEL VERIFYING TO THE CITY THAT, YES, THEY ARE IN FACT DISABLED, THE PEOPLE LIVING HERE, I THINK THAT WE COULD REASONABLY ASK FOR THAT AND THEY WOULD PROVIDE THAT.

THAT CONFIRMATION, I THINK, IS PROBABLY THE MOST WE CAN DO TO KIND OF ADDRESS YOUR CONCERN OF WHO'S MAKING THE CALL.

SO JUST WANTED YOU TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

I KNOW IT'S NOT IDEAL, IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT THAT'S I HAD A SIMILAR QUESTION.

AND SO IT'S JUST IMPORTANT TO TO I FEEL LIKE THAT'S THAT'S A VALID QUESTION, VALID CONCERN AND BEST WE CAN TRY TO SPEAK TO THAT.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

AND THEN, ELIZABETH REYNA, IF YOU COULD COME UP AND GIVE YOUR NAME AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, THANK YOU. MY NAME IS ELIZABETH REINA, AND I LIVE NEXT DOOR TO THE HOUSE THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING RIGHT NOW.

AND I HAVE WRITTEN MANY EMAILS OR A FEW EMAILS TO YOU GUYS.

OH, SORRY. I HAVE WRITTEN A FEW EMAILS.

I'M THINKING THAT MOST OF YOU GUYS HAVE READ THEM.

HOPEFULLY, I DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THE DISCOURSE OF ALL OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE LAID OUT.

THERE HAVE BEEN LOTS OF INCIDENTS AND LOTS OF MAYHEM AT THE HOUSE.

TODAY I DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL FROM A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT SAID THAT WHENEVER CONSIDERING THIS THIS ACCOMMODATION THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS.

I COULDN'T AGREE MORE.

WE NEED TO CONSIDER THE INDIVIDUALS LIVING IN THE HOUSE WITHOUT PROPER OVERSIGHT AND RESOURCES AS STAKEHOLDERS.

THEY'RE VULNERABLE PEOPLE, RIGHT? IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S, YOU KNOW, ON PAPER WHAT I JUST SAW, IT SAYS, OH, THIS, THEY'RE COPACETIC LIVING TOGETHER.

AND IT'S JUST ONE HARMONIOUS PEOPLE, PEOPLE HOLDING EACH OTHER ACCOUNTABLE.

THAT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT WHAT I HAVE SEEN.

AND I'VE LAID THAT OUT IN OTHER EMAILS AS WELL.

ALSO, THROUGH EMAILS, I HAVE LAID OUT OBSERVATIONS AND PUBLIC SAFETY MATTERS THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE.

I'M A BIG STAKEHOLDER.

MY FAMILY IS A BIG STAKEHOLDER.

MY NEIGHBORS ARE BIG STAKEHOLDERS AND THE THE RESIDENTS PROVIDED NO PROTECTION ARE BIG STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL.

SINCE PLANNING AND ZONING HAS RECOMMENDED TO GRANT OXFORD HOUSE THE ACCOMMODATION OF SEVEN INDIVIDUALS LIVING IN A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE.

[01:50:04]

IT'S THE SAME QUESTION HOW DO YOU GUYS KNOW THAT THESE PEOPLE HAVE AN ACTUAL QUALIFYING DISABILITY AND THEY NEED ACCOMMODATIONS? I KNOW I'VE ASKED THIS QUESTION BEFORE AND I'VE NOT YET RECEIVED AN ANSWER.

GOT ONE KIND OF JUST A MINUTE AGO.

I SAY THIS BECAUSE THIS IS NEAR AND DEAR TO MY HEART.

I WRITE EDUCATION PLANS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES THAT QUALIFY FOR ACCOMMODATIONS.

MANY PEOPLE HAVE DISABILITIES AND HAVE NO NEED FOR ACCOMMODATIONS.

THERE'S A DIFFERENCE HERE IS THIS IS A CITY WILLING TO GIVE THIS EXCEPTION TO OXFORD HOUSE WITHOUT THE VETTING PROCESS OF IDENTIFYING THE APPROPRIATE INDIVIDUALS THAT NEED TO LIVE IN THIS HOUSE.

THERE ARE CITY COUNCILS ACROSS THE STATE OF TEXAS AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY WHO HAVE ENFORCED REGULATIONS AND STOOD UP FOR THEIR CONSTITUENTS.

CITY COUNCILS THAT HAVE STOOD UP TO INVESTMENT COMPANIES WITH THESE SHORT TERM RENTALS THAT ARE WREAKING HAVOC IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THESE WEEK TO WEEK, DAY TO DAY PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT.

I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU GUYS THE QUESTION, WHAT KIND OF CITY COUNCIL ARE YOU GUYS? ARE YOU GOING TO BE THE GUYS THAT STAND UP FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS? OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? ONE TIME MAYOR PRO TEM.

THIS IS INDIRECT FOR THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY MISS REYNA.

DO WE SO IT'S ACTUALLY A QUESTION OF STAFF AND I CAN I CAN WAIT IF YOU WOULD PREFER OR I CAN ASK IT NOW.

YEAH, LET'S LET'S WAIT.

I HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER, IF THAT'S OKAY.

SURE. BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

I WOULD I WOULD LOVE TO ALLOW YOU TO ELABORATE BRIEFLY ON DISABILITY, BUT.

BUT NO ACCOMMODATIONS NEEDED.

CAN YOU CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND THAT I HAVE A MASTER'S DEGREE IN SPECIAL EDUCATION AND I'M A TRAINED DIAGNOSTICIAN.

I CAN HAVE A DISABILITY.

I, YOU KNOW, I COULD HAVE A DISABILITY.

WE COULD ALL HAVE A DISABILITY.

THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT WE NEED AN ACCOMMODATIONS.

YOU MIGHT HAVE AN ANXIETY DISABILITY.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN I NEED AN ACCOMMODATION.

YOU CAN GO THROUGHOUT LIFE WITH A DISABILITY.

THERE'S ALCOHOLICS THAT DON'T NEED DISABILITIES OR DON'T I'M SORRY, THAT DON'T NEED ACCOMMODATIONS.

I'M SORRY. I'M A BIT NERVOUS.

I DON'T REALLY LIKE PUBLIC SPEAKING.

SURE. SO PROBABLY ALL KNOW SOMEONE THAT MIGHT HAVE BE AN ALCOHOLIC OR HAVE AN ALCOHOL OR ADDICTION PROBLEM THAT HAS BEEN A FUNCTIONING PERSON IN SOCIETY.

RIGHT. WE I MEAN, THAT'S A DIFFERENT KIND OF A THING.

PEOPLE THAT HAVE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, THAT HAVE ANXIETY DISORDERS, THEY DON'T NECESSARILY NEED ACCOMMODATIONS.

DO YOU GET WHAT I'M SAYING? KIND OF. I DO.

AND THEN I GUESS MY FOLLOW UP WOULD BE KIND OF IS THAT IS THAT INDIVIDUAL THERAPIST, THE PERSON THAT MAKES THAT DECISION, WHETHER THAT'S ACCOMMODATIONS ARE WARRANTED OR NEEDED OR WHO MAKES THAT DETERMINATION, THAT WOULD BE MEDICAL OR IT WOULD BE A TRAINED PROFESSIONAL.

I MEAN, BECAUSE ANYONE COULD SAY I NEED ACCOMMODATIONS BECAUSE I HAVE A DISABILITY, I COULD CLAIM THAT THAT IS NECESSARILY MEAN.

IT'S TRUE. CORRECT.

RIGHT. YEAH. AND THERE ARE I MEAN, THIS IS REAL.

THIS IS TRUE. THERE ARE TRUE PEOPLE THAT NEED ACCOMMODATIONS.

AND I, I FEEL LIKE THE YOU KNOW, THAT COULD BE TAKEN.

THIS IS GETTING TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF.

I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD REALLY LOOK AT AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT AND WE'RE NOT REALLY VETTING.

ARE THEY VETTING? WE DON'T KNOW.

I FEEL LIKE JUST FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN, THAT SEEMS VERY DUBIOUS BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT OF THE HOUSE ALL OF THE TIME.

RIGHT. AND SO BUT JUST ONE LAST FOLLOW UP.

SO BUT. IF THEY BECAUSE WE WE WON'T GET TO SEE IT.

SO IT MATTERS NOT BUT IF THEY HAD A A CLINICAL SOMEONE THAT SAID THIS IS NEEDED OF THOSE SEVEN PEOPLE, WOULD YOU WOULD YOUR POSITION BE THE SAME EVEN IF THEY HAD A DIRECTIVE FROM A MEDICAL EXPERT THAT SAID THEY NEED ACCOMMODATIONS, ALL SEVEN OF THEM, WOULD THAT CHANGE YOUR OPINION OR NO? WELL, MY OPINION IS THAT THERE'S TOO MANY PEOPLE LIVING IN THE HOUSE.

IT'S YEAH, I MEAN, IT DOESN'T YOU CAN TAKE ENVIRONMENT WITH FIVE INDIVIDUALS.

YOU DON'T NEED SEVEN THAT ARE CRAMMED IN.

THIS HOUSE IS SMALL AND IT'S YEAH, IT'S CREATING CRAZY JUST IN AND OUT.

AND THESE INDIVIDUALS, THEY HAVE PEOPLE COMING IN, THEY HAVE VISITORS AS WELL.

SO IT'S JUST A FLOW OF IN AND OUT CONSTANTLY THROUGHOUT THE DAY AND EVENING AND INTO THE NIGHT, LATE HOURS OF THE EVENING NIGHT.

OKAY. OKAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOUR INSIGHT.

LAST SPEAKER IS KIM MCKIBBIN.

IF YOU CAN GIVE YOUR NAME, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS KIM MCKIBBEN.

I HAVE BEEN AN OCCUPATIONAL THERAPIST FOR THE PAST 40 YEARS.

I WAS ALSO A CERTIFIED ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE COUNSELOR FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR NINE YEARS OF THAT AND SERVED AT FLOW HOSPITAL ON THEIR PSYCHIATRIC UNITS

[01:55:04]

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN THIS THAT THAT SEEM A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

AND I THINK THAT THE.

THE RESIDENTS THEMSELVES AT SOME POINT ARE SOMEWHAT BEING VICTIMIZED WITH THIS MODEL.

I KNOW THAT THIS COUNCIL CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT MODEL, BUT YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE RESULTED IN THAT.

AND BY GRANTING THIS ACCOMMODATION, YOU OPEN YOUR POLICE FORCE AND FIRE PEOPLE AND ANYONE ELSE THAT'S WORKING IN THE GENERAL AREA OPEN TO DEALING WITH THESE INDIVIDUALS.

YOU KNOW, DO THEY DESERVE ACCOMMODATION? DO THEY NOT DESERVE ACCOMMODATION? EVEN ALCOHOLICS DESERVE ACCOMMODATION.

SUBSTANCE ABUSERS.

ILLICIT DRUGS.

IF THEY ARE NOT USING DRUGS, THEY DESERVE ACCOMMODATION FOR GETTING HOUSING BECAUSE IT'S TOUGH.

HOWEVER, WHEN ANY OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS FALLS OFF THE WAGON, IF THEY START USING IT ILLEGAL DRUGS, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED ACCOMMODATION ANY LONGER.

WE AS A CITY AND YOU AS A COUNCIL HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING BECAUSE THERE ARE NO SAFEGUARDS AT THAT HOUSE.

I'VE BEEN THERE.

I'VE BEEN IN THE YARD.

MY FRIENDS LIVE NEXT DOOR.

THEY LIVE ACROSS THE STREET.

THEY LIVE BEHIND IT.

YES. I'VE BEEN THERE WHEN THE MOTORCYCLES AND THE TRUCKS AND THE CARS AND PEOPLE BEATING ON THE DOORS OF OF THE NEIGHBORS OF THE HOUSES ASKING, YOU KNOW, CAN YOU JUMP MY TRUCK OFF? WHAT HAPPENED TO MY TRUCK? THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

SO YOU'VE GOT A SITUATION THERE THAT IS GOING TO CREATE NOT ONLY PROBLEMS FOR THE OTHER RESIDENCES, BUT IT'S GOING TO CREATE PROBLEMS FOR YOUR FOR YOUR POLICE FORCE, FOR YOUR FIRE PEOPLE, FOR THE DOG CATCHER, BECAUSE THERE'S A REALLY BIG PIT BULL THERE OCCASIONALLY.

SO MY QUESTION TO TO YOU GUYS IS HOW HOW ARE YOU GOING TO STRUCTURE THIS? HOW MANY CALLS IS IT GOING TO TAKE? IS IT GOING TO TAKE ONE POLICE CALL A DAY UNTIL YOU LOOK AT THIS HOUSE AND YOU LOOK AT IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY? BECAUSE WHO ARE YOU GOING TO CALL FOR RESPONSIBILITY? AND I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWERS TO THESE THINGS, BUT YOU'RE SETTING YOURSELF UP AND MAYBE YOU NEED TO CONTACT SOME OF THESE OTHER PLACES.

WHAT HAVE THEY DONE WHEN THEY'RE GETTING MULTIPLE CALLS? BECAUSE I'M SORRY, BUT AS AN OT, I WORK ON LIFE SKILLS AND I'VE WORKED WITH ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE AND A BUNCH OF A BUNCH OF ADDICTS IN A HOUSE DON'T HAVE VERY GOOD LIFE SKILLS.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. I DO WANT TO AGAIN PICK UP ON WHERE YOU LEFT OFF BECAUSE I HAD THAT SAME QUESTION.

WHEN IT COMES TO ACTIONS THE CITY CAN TAKE.

MR. CITY ATTORNEY, AGAIN, IF YOU CAN SPEAK TO BEST YOU CAN AROUND THE CITY'S OPTIONS ON, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE RESIDENCES, ETCETERA, ACTIONS WE CAN TAKE SPECIFICALLY AROUND KIND OF THOSE SPECIFIC CALLS AND FREQUENCY OF CALLS, THAT SORT OF THING? YEAH, I MEAN, THIS IS A CHALLENGE.

YOU KNOW, I GUESS ONE QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, THIS SHOULD UNDER THE REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IS TREATED AS A FAMILY THAT IS LIVING TOGETHER.

AND IT'S A QUESTION OF HOW MUCH DOES THE CITY GET INVOLVED IN ANY NUCLEAR FAMILY'S HOME AND THE DRUG USE IN THE HOME.

THERE'S ALWAYS THESE ISSUES OF HOW INVOLVED IS THE CITY IN WHAT HAPPENS INSIDE OF A HOME.

THOSE LIMITATIONS EXIST HERE TOO.

HOW MUCH CAN WE AS A CITY VERIFY WHETHER DRUGS ARE BEING USED OR THOSE TYPES OF ISSUES? I THINK ON THE BIGGER QUESTIONS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION, REALLY OF HOW DOES THE CITY FOLLOW UP ON ALL THIS? WE'VE GOT OPEN LINES OF COMMUNICATION WITH TOP DOWN.

THERE'S THE ATTORNEY FOR THE ENTIRE OXFORD HOUSE.

THERE ARE LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES, REPRESENTATIVES.

THEY HAVE EXTENSIVE RULES ABOUT HOW THEY PROCESS AND ENFORCE THEIR OWN RULES WITHIN THE HOMES.

SO AND THEY ARE ENFORCED.

I MEAN, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY HAD SOMEONE RECENTLY JUST WAS INVITED TO LEAVE THE HOME.

SO IT IS AN ONGOING ISSUE AS FAR AS THE ENFORCEMENT, THE CITY WILL GO.

AND IF THERE'S PROBLEMS, THE CITY RESPONDS.

IF THERE'S A CALL FOR ANY TYPE OF SERVICE, THE CITY RESPONDS, JUST LIKE WE WOULD AT ANY OTHER HOME IN THE CITY.

SO IT'S IT'S A DIFFICULT BALANCE GRANTED FOR THE CITY TO TO FIND WHERE YOU'RE ALLOWING PEOPLE TO LIVE WITHIN THE LAW TOGETHER.

AND WHAT OUR ROLE IN THAT SITUATION IS.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE CITY IS AWARE OF THE HOME, HAS CONTACT AND WILL RESPOND AS NEEDED OUT THERE.

[02:00:01]

OKAY. OKAY.

THANK YOU. AND.

SO ARE THESE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FOR THE SPEAKER BEFORE I.

YES. OKAY.

COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MISS MCEWEN, WHERE DO YOU LIVE? I LIVE IN HIGHLAND VILLAGE.

IN HIGHLAND VILLAGE.

I HAVE A BUSINESS HERE IN TOWN WHICH WILL PROBABLY BE IMPACTED BY SOME OF THESE DECISIONS.

AND THAT IS WHY I'M HERE.

MY FRIENDS ARE AROUND THAT.

ONE OF MY FRIENDS IS NOT HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE HER HUSBAND JUST PASSED AWAY.

ANOTHER ONE IS OUT OF STATE.

SO I CAME HERE TO ASK QUESTIONS ON THEIR BEHALF AND ON THE BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING IN THAT HOUSE.

IN SOME WAYS, THEY ARE VICTIMIZED BY WHERE THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY'RE BEING CHARGED.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, MA'AM. CONDOLENCES TO THAT, THAT FAMILY AND COUNCILMAN.

IS THIS FOR THE SPEAKER? NO. OKAY, THEN.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT.

AND I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO SKIP COUNCIL MEMBER BACK BACK TO THE TOP.

SO. MAYOR PRO TEM, AND THEN I'LL COME BACK TO YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. APPRECIATE THAT COURTESY.

SO MISS MCKIBBEN AND MISS REYNA BROUGHT UP SOME QUESTIONS I HAD FOR STAFF.

AND IT GOES THE QUESTIONS REVOLVE AROUND SORT OF SEEMS LIKE WE ASKED FOR TWO ACCOMMODATIONS.

ONE IS TO ACCOMMODATE A REDEFINITION OF FAMILY AND THE OTHER IS TO ACCOMMODATE A DENSITY LEVEL ASSOCIATED WITH FAMILY.

AND AND SO I GUESS THE FIRST OF THOSE QUESTIONS THE STAFF IS, IS WHAT IS THE YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE VARIOUS DEFINITIONS OF FAMILY.

AM I CORRECT IN IN MY ESTIMATE THAT ONE PART OF THE ACCOMMODATION BEING REQUESTED IS A REDEFINITION OF FAMILY? I DON'T BELIEVE THEIR REQUEST RELATES TO OUR DEFINITION OF FAMILY.

THEY ARE REQUESTING FOR SEVEN UNRELATED INDIVIDUALS TO RESIDE IN THE HOME.

AND SO OUR CURRENT DENSITY STANDARD IS THAT FAMILY UNRELATED DICHOTOMY.

AND SO THE ACCOMMODATION THEN WOULD BE THE DENSITY LEVELS.

WHAT WHY DID THE CITY ADOPT FOUR? WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF FOUR? WHY IS THAT DEEMED AN APPROPRIATE DENSITY IN NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES? I DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY OF HOW WE CAME TO THE NUMBER FOUR.

I KNOW IN MY EXPERIENCE IT'S BEEN IN THE CODE SINCE OUR PREVIOUS VERSION OF THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THE OH TWO CODE HAD A SIMILAR STANDARD.

MACK. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW ANY HISTORY ON THAT PARTICULAR REGULATION, BUT NOTHING SPECIFIC OTHER THAN THAT IS A TYPICAL ZONING STANDARD ACROSS THE NATION FOR FOR FAMILIES, FOR UNRELATED INDIVIDUALS LIVING TOGETHER.

IS THE CAP CORRECT? DO WE GENERALLY HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT WHAT THAT'S DESIGNED TO TO MEET? AND THE REASON I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS IS WHEN WE'RE BEING ASKED TO ADDRESS AN ACCOMMODATION, YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF THE STANDARD THAT YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO ACCOMMODATE.

MACK. IF YOU WANTED TO TAKE THAT ONE, GO AHEAD.

I DON'T SHORT OF JUST TRYING TO LIMIT ANY NUISANCES THAT COULD BE CREATED FROM ADDITIONAL VEHICLES AND THINGS LIKE THAT ON THE PROPERTY.

I DON'T KNOW ANY SPECIFICS WITH REGARD TO THE INTENT OF THAT STATEMENT OTHER THAN I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO KEEP IN MIND THAT IT'S FOR UNRELATED PERSONS, IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THAT A FAMILY COULD HAVE ANY NUMBER OF PEOPLE, THERE COULD BE TEN PEOPLE RESIDING IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

AND IF THEY ARE RELATED, OUR CODE WOULD SAY NOTHING TO THAT.

SO IT'S NOT THAT THE REQUEST IS NECESSARILY OUT OF LINE WITH THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WE COULD HAVE LIVING IN ANY HOME IN DENTON WITH RESPECT TO.

WE DO NOT REGULATE HOW LARGE A FAMILY CAN BE.

SO. OKAY.

SO. IF IF WE HAD A FAMILY OF SEVEN IN THE SAME THREE BEDROOM, THAT WOULD BE THE SORT OF THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES, I GUESS, WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THIS.

IF THERE WAS A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE, A HUMAN DENSITY IN IN A DOMICILE SORT OF QUESTION STANDARD THAT WE'RE APPLYING FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, FOR FIRE SAFETY, FOR RESPONSE TIMES, OTHER OTHER ISSUES OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

[02:05:02]

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE FAMILIES GET A GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD BECAUSE THEIR FAMILIES.

SO I'M STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE FOR IF WE'RE NOT IF WE'RE NOT ASKING TO REDEFINE THIS AS A FAMILY, THEN WHAT WE'RE REALLY ASKING IS TO REDEFINE THE UNRELATED.

AND THAT'S REALLY STILL WHERE I'M TRYING TO GET TO, IS WHAT IS THE BALANCE OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES VERSUS THE ACCOMMODATION, AND THEN HOW DO WE DETERMINE WHAT THE REASONABLENESS OF THAT IS.

AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS SO SO LET'S LEAVE THAT ONE THERE AND THEN I'LL FINISH UP IN A SECOND.

OKAY. WELL, NO, I MEAN, I'M ASKING STAFF AND I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION.

ASK. I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY CAN ANSWER IT DIFFERENTLY, BUT GO RIGHT AHEAD.

I'M JUST, I GUESS A LITTLE BIT OF A LITTLE BIT OF INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT WE'VE DEALT WITH IN THE PAST.

ANY TIME THAT THIS TOPIC HAS COME UP, REALLY KIND OF GETS BACK TO COLLEGE STUDENTS AND THE NUMBERS OF HOW MANY COLLEGE STUDENTS.

AND I GUESS IF I GO A LITTLE FURTHER BACK WITH MY HISTORY WHEN REVIEWING OTHER COMMUNITIES, I.E.

WE WERE LOOKING AT LUBBOCK AND IN ANOTHER COMMUNITY IN WHICH I WAS IN, JUST LOOKING AT LUBBOCK AND SAME SORT OF THING, IT WAS, IT WAS JUST TRYING TO PUT SOME CONSTRAINTS AROUND UNIVERSITY LIVING AND STUDENTS.

AND I THINK IT'S IT'S VERY COMMON IN OUR REGULATIONS AND OUR CODES THAT WE END UP WITH SOMETHING THAT IS SIMILAR, THAT IS A MODEL THAT WORKS IN OTHER CITIES. AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A GOOD BASIS FOR IT OTHER THAN THAT.

AND IT'S BEEN THAT WAY.

SOME OF OUR CONVERSATIONS IN PREVIOUS CODE UPDATES HAVE BEEN TO REMOVE THAT AND THEN THERE'S BEEN CONVERSATION TO KEEP IT BECAUSE OF THE UNIVERSITIES.

SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S A GOOD ANSWER.

WE DON'T WE DEFINITELY DO NOT HAVE A DEFINITIVE ANSWER FROM THE STAFF THAT WAS HERE FOR THE LAST, YOU KNOW, 10 TO 18 YEARS.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND I GUESS THE FINAL SORT OF FOLLOW UP IS GOES TO THE QUESTION THAT WE HEARD FROM MISS MCKIBBEN, AND THAT WAS, DO WE HAVE DOCUMENTATION THAT THAT WOULD LEND US OTHER THAN I MEAN, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT UNFAIR TO THE APPLICANT, BUT IN THE SENSE THAT I DON'T WANT TO DISCOUNT THE MATERIALS THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED TO COUNSEL, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF TRYING TO WINNOW OUT SELF-INTERESTED BIAS, DO WE HAVE ANY DOCUMENTATION THAT SUGGESTS THAT THE THERAPEUTIC MODEL OF, YOU KNOW, HAS A CERTAIN BASE MINIMUM IN ORDER TO BE SUCCESSFUL FOR THIS KIND OF THERAPY APPROACH? THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE SPEAKS TO SIX BEING A REASONABLE MINIMUM.

AGAIN, THERE'S THAT COMPONENT OF THE THE FEDERAL LAW THAT THEY THAT CHANNELS THE FUNDING FUNDING FOR THESE OPERATIONS DOWN THROUGH THE STATE.

THAT REQUIRES SIX AT A MINIMUM.

BUT THROUGH THEIR STUDIES, AGAIN, I BELIEVE IT WAS DEPAUL THAT HAS DONE MULTIPLE STUDIES.

2006, I THINK WAS THE MOST RECENT ONE THEY CITED WHERE THEY HAD A NATIONWIDE STUDY OF LIKE 800 SOMETHING OF THESE OPERATIONS, AND THEY FOUND THAT 6 TO 8 IS THE THE MINIMUM WHERE THEY START TO SEE THAT THERAPEUTIC BENEFIT OF PEOPLE TRULY HOLDING EACH OTHER ACCOUNTABLE, HAVING THAT KIND OF DEMOCRATIC SETUP WHERE EACH PERSON HAS A RESPONSIBILITY WITHIN THE HOME, HOLDS SOME SORT OF OFFICE THAT MAKES THEM ACCOUNTABLE TO THE STRUCTURE AND OPERATION OF THE HOME AS WELL AS TO THEMSELVES AND THEIR RECOVERY.

SO THAT WAS SORT OF THEIR BASIS FOR SIX BEING THE MINIMUM IS THAT'S THE NUMBER OF OFFICES THEY CREATE IN THE HOUSE THAT EACH RESIDENT HAS TO TAKE A PART IN AND HAS TO TAKE THEIR TURN BEING VOTED INTO ONE OF THOSE GIVEN OFFICES.

SO IT HOLDS THEM ACCOUNTABLE IN MULTIPLE WAYS IN ADDITION TO PROVIDING THAT THERAPEUTIC BENEFIT AND IS I'M SORRY, MR. MAYOR, ONE BRIEF FOLLOW UP.

IS THERE A IS THERE A CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE RENTERS AND THE OXFORD HOUSE OR THE OR SOME GROUP THAT'S SUPPORTING THE OXFORD HOUSE MODEL THAT THAT ENFORCES THE THE DEMOCRATIC THERAPY APPROACH? IN THE SENSE THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE THEY REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN AND IN ENGAGE EACH OTHER IN THIS THERAPEUTIC WAY? SURE. SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY DO HAVE A CHARTER FOR EACH HOUSEHOLD THAT THEY ALL ABIDE BY.

THERE IS AN OXFORD HOUSE MANUAL THAT EACH HOME HAS TO AGREE TO ABIDE BY.

AND WHEN RESIDENTS ARE FOUND TO NOT BE ABIDING BY THOSE RULES OF THE HOUSE, THEY'LL THEN HAVE A MEETING AND THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE WILL VOTE IF THE RESIDENT GETS TO STAY OR BE PUT ON SOME SORT OF PROBATION OR ASK TO LEAVE THE HOME.

SO THE RESIDENTS HAVE A DEMOCRATIC PROCESS, IF YOU WILL, TO VOTE.

WHO GETS TO COME INTO THE HOME AND WHO HAS TO LEAVE THE HOME IF THEY ARE NOT ABIDING BY THE RULES? DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION THEN?

[02:10:02]

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY DO CONSISTENTLY HAVE APPLICANTS WAITING TO GET INTO THESE HOMES.

THAT STUDY FROM 2020 AND THE DATA THEY PUBLISHED SHOWED THAT ON AVERAGE THEY GET 2.3 APPLICANTS FOR EACH VACANCY THAT THEY HAVE.

SO THERE IS MY UNDERSTANDING, AGAIN, A CONSISTENT NEED FOR PEOPLE TO BE PLACED IN THESE HOMES.

SO THERE'S THAT STREAM OF APPLICANTS THAT THEY WILL THEN HAVE TO SORT THROUGH THE APPLICATIONS AND DECIDE WHO WOULD BE BEST FIT FOR THEIR HOME.

THEY SCREEN THEM, PUT THEM THROUGH AN INTERVIEW PROCESS, AND THEN VOTE ON WHO THE NEXT RESIDENT WOULD BE.

SO I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT PROCESS TAKES, BUT FROM WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD IN THE DATA THEY'VE PROVIDED, THERE IS A CONSISTENT NEED FOR PEOPLE AND THEREFORE WAITING APPLICATIONS FOR WHEN A VACANCY ARISES.

I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. COUNCILMAN MELTZER.

YEAH. NOT NOT QUESTIONS.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE COMMENTS.

FIRST OF ALL, I WANT YOU TO KNOW I ENTIRELY HEAR AND IT'S BEEN SUBSTANTIATED.

IT'S A CHAOTIC SITUATION.

AND. AND I WOULDN'T LIKE BEING NEXT TO A HOUSE WHERE THERE ARE FREQUENT POLICE CALLS, HOWEVER YOU DEFINE FREQUENT.

THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS, IS NOT REALLY WHETHER.

THAT HOUSEHOLD OF WHETHER THESE WOMEN WILL CONTINUE TO LIVE THERE OR NOT.

YOU KNOW, I'M TRACKING THE MAIL AND THE INPUT FROM RESIDENTS.

THE PRO AND THE CON.

THERE ARE NO PRO NOBODY STANDING UP FOR THESE WOMEN'S RIGHTS TO LIVE THERE.

SO I DO HAVE THE CHOICE TO SAY I WANT TO RESPOND TO THE TO THE PEOPLE WHO I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO, YOU KNOW, SAY PROTECT MY NEIGHBORHOOD.

THAT AND BUT THE RESULT WILL BE THE SAME WHETHER IF I WERE TO VOTE TO PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR I WERE TO VOTE TO GRANT THE ACCOMMODATION Y, THE RIGHTS ARE WELL ESTABLISHED, FREQUENTLY AND VIGOROUSLY DEFENDED THE RESULT.

IF I VOTE, GIVE THE ACCOMMODATION OR IF THE ENTIRE COUNCIL AND EVERYONE HERE KNOWS THE SAME THINGS.

I KNOW THE ALMOST CERTAIN RESULT OF IF WE VOTE, YOU KNOW WE DON'T LIKE IT.

WHAT WE HEAR DON'T GIVE THE ACCOMMODATION.

THE RESULT WILL ALSO BE SAME HOUSEHOLD STILL LIVING THEIR DIFFERENCES SIGNIFICANT LEGAL EXPENSE HAVING GONE HAVING BEEN GONE THROUGH ON THE PART OF THE CITY, THE OUTCOME WILL BE THE SAME.

IT'S IT'S BECAUSE, AS YOU HEARD, THERE HAVE BEEN EXTENSIVE STUDIES DONE SUPPORTING THE IDEA THAT THAT A HOME THAT HAS FROM 6 TO 8 PEOPLE HELPS PEOPLE WITH THIS DISABILITY GO THROUGH RECOVERY.

THAT'S IT'S JUST BEEN TESTED TESTED, TESTED, TESTED.

SO I'M I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC.

I STILL LIVE NEXT. I LIVE NEXT TO A HOUSE THAT USED TO BE CALLED THE MUSIC HOUSE.

IT SOUNDS VERY DENTON, RIGHT? WHO WOULDN'T WANT TO LIVE NEXT TO THE MUSIC HOUSE UNLESS YOU KNEW THAT THE PREDOMINANT MUSIC WAS DRUMMING? YOU KNOW, I GET IT.

THAT SOMETHING THAT SOUNDS REALLY GOOD TO OTHER PEOPLE CAN CAN REALLY AND THIS IS REALLY RELATIVELY MINOR COMPARED TO WHAT YOU'RE EXPERIENCING.

BUT YOU KNOW THAT IT CAN REALLY DIMINISH QUALITY OF LIFE.

I THINK THAT THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO, OF COURSE, RESPOND WITH EMERGENCY RESPONSE AS AS NEEDED.

IDEALLY, THERE'S AN ENGAGEMENT THROUGH WHATEVER SOCIAL SERVICE RELATIONSHIPS WE HAVE TO TO TO TO HELP IN ANY WAY WE CAN. BUT THE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO LIVE WHERE THEY CHOOSE TO LIVE.

AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND PARTICULARLY THIS DISABILITY, THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO ACCOMMODATION AND PARTICULARLY THIS ACCOMMODATION.

IT'S SO THAT'S THAT'S GOING TO GUIDE MY VOTE.

COUNCILMAN WHAT'S. QUESTION FOR STAFF.

HAS THE. OH.

HEY, WHY DON'T WE GO TO THESE NEW MIKES, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.

THEY'RE NOT NEW ANYMORE.

YOU USED TO HAVE THE TOGGLE SWITCH.

SO AND I THINK THIS WAS BROUGHT OUT IN WORK SESSION THAT THERE'S SOME TYPE OF I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S CONFUSION, BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE A REPRESENTATION FROM THE OXFORD HOUSE THAT IT'S A FOUR BEDROOM, TWO BATH AND THERE SEEMS TO BE REPRESENTATION ON SOME OTHER LITERATURE THAT MAY OR NOT BE TIMELY OR IT MIGHT BE TOO OLD, BUT IT SEEMS TO REPRESENT SOMETHING DIFFERENT THREE BEDROOM, ONE BATH WITH A GARAGE CONVERSION.

BUT WE'VE NOT SEEN THE INSIDE OF THE HOUSE IS THAT WE'VE NOT WE'VE NOT VERIFIED THAT.

[02:15:05]

I'M GOING TO AFTER AT THE END OF MY TALK, MAKE A POSTPONED TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TILL THE NEXT WEEK.

I BELIEVE YOU ALL ARE SCHEDULED TO GO OUT AND LOOK INSIDE THE HOME JUST TO VERIFY THAT IT IS WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING IT IS.

IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. WE'RE WORKING WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE.

OKAY. THE LOCAL REPRESENTATIVE OF OXFORD HOUSE TO SCHEDULE A TIME TO GO SEE THE INSIDE.

SO, MR. CITY MANAGER, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG AND SORT OF MY REAL BRIEF ANALYSIS HERE FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD AND BECAUSE WE'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR AN ACCOMMODATION TO CHANGE OUR DEFINITION OF FAMILY, WE'VE BEEN GIVEN THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND THAT IS THAT PEOPLE WHO HAVE THESE TYPES OF DISABILITIES REPORTED THAT THEY CAN BE CONSIDERED PART OF A FAMILY THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY RELATED BY BLOOD OR MARRIAGE.

IS THAT CORRECT? RIGHT.

OKAY. SO THAT'S THAT'S SORT OF OUR FIRST STARTING POINT.

AND SO THE ACCOMMODATION IS TO NOT ASK US TO CHANGE OUR FROM 4 TO 6 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

IT'S SAYING, HEY, WE ARE CONSIDERED A FAMILY BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THEREFORE YOUR CODE DOES NOT APPLY WITH FOUR FOUR UNRELATED PEOPLE.

THAT'S THAT'S THE EXTENT LITTLE BRIEF HISTORY ON THE FOUR UNRELATED PEOPLE.

I'VE BEEN HERE DOING THIS A LONG TIME.

I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW THAT STARTED, BUT I CAN TELL YOU WE'VE HAD EXTENSIVE CONVERSATION OVER THE OF THE FOUR UNRELATED PEOPLE OVER THE YEARS ABOUT HOW DO YOU AND IT DOESN'T FORGET THIS ISSUE.

LET'S SAY YOU GOT SIX PEOPLE LIVING IN A RENT HOUSE.

WE'VE HAD PEOPLE THAT HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT THAT.

BUT THE ENFORCEMENT AND THE VERIFICATION OF WHO'S THERE, UNLESS SOMEONE'S WILLING TO, THEY'RE ALL WILLING TO SAY, YES, I LIVE HERE, YES, I HAVE A LEASE, THEN WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WHO'S, QUOTE UNQUOTE, LIVING THERE FOR THE PURPOSES OF OUR FOUR UNRELATED PEOPLE REGULATION.

SO THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN ACCOMMODATION TO SAY YOUR CODE DOESN'T APPLY TO US BECAUSE WE ARE A FAMILY.

THAT'S WHY I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE BEDROOM COUNT IS, BECAUSE EVEN I THINK THEIR OWN STANDARD SAYS THEY LOOK AT TWO PEOPLE PER BEDROOM, MINUS ONE WITH A MINIMUM OF SIX.

IN OTHER WORDS, IF IT'S A THREE BEDROOM, A MINIMUM OF SIX PEOPLE, I THINK THEY'RE ASKING FOR SEVEN IN THAT REGARD, WHICH ANYWAY, I LIKEN THIS TO SOMEONE WHO HAS A RENT HOUSE NEXT TO THEM.

HONESTLY, THE PROBLEMS THAT HAVE BEEN DESCRIBED, THOSE COULD VERY EASILY BE A RENT HOUSE, A RENT HOUSE FROM SOMEONE WHO OWNS IT, AND THEY RENT OUT TO EITHER A FAMILY.

YOU COULD HAVE THOSE SAME PROBLEMS OR A RENT HOUSE THAT RENTS OUT TO EITHER STUDENTS OR SOME OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO LIVE TOGETHER.

I HAVE PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF THAT.

SO THESE PROBLEMS ARE NOT RELEGATED TO JUST THESE TYPE OF, AS WE CALL THEM, TYPE OF HOMES.

THIS COULD BE ANY RENTAL PROPERTY IN THE ENTIRE CITY.

AND ALL THOSE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH IT IS ANY RENTAL PROPERTY IN ANY IT COULD BE ANY RENTAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY.

AND WE AS A CITY CAN ONLY RESPOND TO THOSE CODES THAT WE HAVE.

WE CAN ONLY RESPOND BASED UPON THE CODES THAT WE HAVE.

IF YOU HAVE A NUISANCE, WE HAVE LAWS ABOUT NUISANCE.

IF YOU HAVE NOISE ORDINANCE, WE HAVE LAWS ABOUT NOISE ORDINANCE.

IF YOU HAVE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OR THINGS SUCH AS THAT, WE CAN RESPOND TO THAT WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND OR FIRE DEPARTMENT.

BUT AS A CITY, IF THIS WAS A REGULAR RENT HOUSE, WE CANNOT TELL THOSE PEOPLE THEY GOT TO MOVE OUT.

WE CAN'T TELL THEM THAT THEY CAN.

THEY HAVE TO LIVE A CERTAIN WAY OR THEY CAN.

SO I APPRECIATE THE CONCERN OF THE THE THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I MEAN, AND AND I LIKEN IT TO WHEN I'VE HAD PEOPLE TALK TO ME ABOUT THIS ISN'T A SITUATION OF A OF A HOME WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE DISABILITIES.

IT'S JUST A HOME THAT HAS PEOPLE IN THERE THAT ARE GOING WILD, THAT ARE RENTERS.

AND WE'RE VERY LIMITED IN HOW WE CAN DO THAT OTHER THAN FORCING THE CODES THAT WE HAVE.

SO IT'S IT'S A IT'S A DIFFICULT SITUATION, BUT FOR WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY IS PUT UPON US, AND THAT IS PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, THESE TYPE OF DISABILITIES NOT I FORGOT ONE OF YOU ALL BROUGHT UP THE QUESTION OF HOW IS IT VERIFIABLE.

SO THAT IS THE QUESTION.

I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE GOT ENOUGH INFORMATION ON THAT, ON HOW WHAT IS THE GOVERNMENT TAKE AS VERIFIABLE? IS IT JUST IF THIS ORGANIZATION QUALIFIES FOR THE GRANT, FOR THE FUNDING, THEREFORE, IF THEY MAKE THE DECISION THAT THIS IS THE DISABILITY THAT THEY HAVE MOVING INTO THAT HOME, THEN THAT'S ENOUGH VERIFICATION.

BUT WHAT I WANT TO DO IS AND I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO DO ANY HARM ON THE REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION FRONT, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POSTPONE THIS TILL THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, WHICH I BELIEVE IS NEXT WEEK.

[02:20:02]

TO BE ABLE TO GET ADDITIONAL DATA.

AND THE PRIMARY PIECE OF DATA IS HOW MANY BEDROOMS ARE IN THERE BECAUSE WE DON'T REALLY KNOW.

I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN TOLD WHAT IT IS.

WE'VE GOT SOME CONFLICTING INFORMATION SOMEWHERE ELSE.

IT'S A ONE MINUTE INSPECTION.

YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY WALKS IN, LOOKS COMES BACK OUT, AND THAT THAT'S DISPOSITIVE FOR ME.

THAT'S IMPORTANT. I'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT BECAUSE IF IT'S A THREE BEDROOM, ONE BATH, THAT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE.

BUT AGAIN, FOR A FAMILY, THE DEFINITION OF A FAMILY, A FAMILY COULD HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE OR MORE IN A THREE BEDROOM, ONE BATH.

SO I REALLY SYMPATHIZE WITH THE PROBLEMS AND I WISH THEY WEREN'T OCCURRING UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY COULD OCCUR.

WHETHER WE'VE LABELED THIS AS ONE OF THESE SITUATIONS OR ONE OF THESE HOMES OR NOT.

I'VE HAD HIM BESIDE SOME OF MY PROPERTIES.

I'VE HAD HIM BESIDE SOME OF MY FRIENDS PROPERTIES AND YOU KNOW, WE CAN TAKE THE ACTION THAT WE NEED TO BASED UPON OUR CODE, BUT WE CAN'T MOVE PEOPLE OUT UNLESS THERE'S A HEALTH ISSUE, UNLESS THERE'S A SAFETY ISSUE.

I MEAN, IF THE HOUSE IS DILAPIDATED, IT'S HALFWAY BURNED DOWN OR, YOU KNOW, THE CEILINGS ARE FALLING IN, THE ROOFS CAVING.

IF THERE'S A HEALTH AND SAFETY VIOLATION, THEN THE CITY CERTAINLY CAN TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO GET PEOPLE OUT OF UNSAFE CONDITIONS.

AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO BE LOOKED AT.

BUT. SO, MR. MAYOR, AT THIS TIME, NOT TRYING TO CUT OFF DEBATE, BUT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM TILL EITHER NEXT WEEK OR THE DATE CERTAIN WHEN THAT INSPECTION COULD BE COMPLETED AND COUNCIL IS NOTIFIED OF THE RESULTS OF THAT.

SO, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW TO WORD THAT.

I MEAN, I THINK THEY CAN GET IT DONE BY NEXT WEEK.

SO NEXT WEEK WOULD BE FINE.

I'D LIKE TO SECOND, MR. MAYOR.

WE'LL DO IT DECENT AND WE'LL FLIP IT.

COUNCILMAN. MCGEE.

SECOND. THANK YOU.

AND JUST GIVING YOU A HARD TIME.

SO I DIDN'T SEE IT POP UP, THAT'S ALL.

I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW I WAS GOING THERE.

I APOLOGIZE. MAD AT ME LATER.

SO I WAS TELLING YOU, I'M JUST GIVING YOU A HARD TIME.

OKAY? NO.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER WATTS, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCGEE TO POSTPONE TO OUR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING, WHICH IS AUGUST 1ST, TO GIVE STAFF TIME TO EXECUTE THE INSPECTION AND IS THERE BUT CONTINUING DISCUSSION.

SO COUNCILMAN MALTO, YOU BACK IN QUEUE OR NO? YES, COUNCILMAN METZLER.

YEAH. YOU KNOW, I'D LOVE TO NOT HAVE TO TAKE A VERY UNPLEASANT VOTE IN FRONT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE SORT OF JUSTIFIABLY UNHAPPY ABOUT THE SITUATION.

I DON'T SEE THAT THE OUTCOME OF THAT INSPECTION WOULD CHANGE THE IT WOULD WEIGH ON THE CONSIDERATIONS WE HAVE TO VOTE ON.

SO I DON'T SUPPORT THE THE POSTPONEMENT.

I'M INTERESTED IN HAVING THE INSPECTION TAKE PLACE, BUT I DON'T SEE THAT IT ALTERS WHAT WE NEED TO DO.

COUNCIL MEMBER. MCGEE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I JUST BEEN SITTING HERE LISTENING.

I APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUES AND YOUR YOUR THOUGHTFULNESS, THE WAY WE'RE PARSING OUT THE SITUATION.

THIS IS THIS IS A DIFFICULT, DIFFICULT DECISION.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY TO YOU ALL, I APPRECIATE THE WAY THAT WE ARE GOING THROUGH THIS METHODICALLY.

I ALSO APPRECIATE THOSE OF YOU WHO SHOWED UP TO LEND YOUR VOICE TO THE CONVERSATION TONIGHT.

SO THANKS FOR COMING OUT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YEAH.

COUNCILMAN BYRD. ONE OF THE WORDS THAT I ACRONYMS THAT I ONE OF THE FIRST ACRONYMS THAT I LEARNED WHEN I STEPPED ON BOARD HERE WAS NIMBY.

AND THAT'S NOT IN MY BACK YARD.

AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR SOME OF US WHO'S BEEN SETTLED TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF PUSHBACK ON NEW THINGS HAPPENING AROUND US.

MY HOME, WHEN I MOVED IN MY HOME, I DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING BEHIND OUR HOME BUT TREES AND WE ENJOYED THE EXTRA SPACE.

AND ONE DAY I SAW A LITTLE PINK FLAG COME UP AND I WAS SO NERVOUS ABOUT THAT.

I CALLED MY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER AND I GAVE HIM AN EARFUL.

BUT IT JUST HAPPENS.

CHANGE HAPPENS.

THINGS ARE JUST NOT THE SAME.

AND WE DON'T WE DON'T.

WE DON'T HAVE THIS PENCHANT FOR WANTING THINGS TO BE DIFFERENT FOR US.

AND THIS IS A GROWING CITY.

PEOPLE NEED THINGS.

THERE ARE A VARIETY OF PEOPLE THAT ARE MOVING HERE, HOMELESS PEOPLE, WEALTHY PEOPLE, WHOEVER.

THIS IS A PLACE TO BE.

[02:25:01]

I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S WORD OUT IN THE NATIONAL COMMUNITY THAT IF YOU WANT TO EXCEL AND GET YOURSELF BACK UP ON YOUR FEET, THERE'S A NUMEROUS WAYS THAT YOU COULD DO THAT HERE IN DENTON, BECAUSE WE ARE SO COMPASSIONATE AND EMPATHETIC.

I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE.

THIS HOME GOES TO OUR MANTRA.

ONE OF OUR THINGS THAT WE'RE VERY PROUD OF HERE IN DENTON IS THE TERM INCLUSION.

WE WRITE IT ON EVERYTHING AND WE DO OUR BEST TO ACCOMMODATE.

THE BEST WAY THAT WE CAN.

SO I KNOW THE MOTION IS TO POSTPONE.

I AM GOING TO DENY THAT BECAUSE AGAIN, I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE MUCH DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THAT WE ADDRESS THIS IF THERE'S FOUR BEDROOMS OR THREE BEDROOMS. SO I'M GOING TO VOTE NO TO THAT.

BUT I ALSO WANTED YOU ALL TO LET YOU KNOW THAT WHILE ALL OF THIS IS GOING ON, THERE IS A SUPPORT SYSTEM HERE IN DENTON.

IF IT'S OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT, IF IT'S OUR MENTAL HEALTH COMMUNITIES, WE HAVE SO MANY DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES OUT HERE.

BUT I JUST THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE MINDFUL THAT WE ARE AN INCLUSIVE CITY AND WHATEVER GOES WITH THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE'LL HAVE TO MANAGE ON OUR ON OUR OWN.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. YEAH, I THINK THERE'S THERE'S THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT ANYONE ON THE DAIS, THE VAST, VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE OF THE COMMUNITY EMBRACE AND RECOGNIZE THE VALUE OF INCLUSION OR THEY WOULDN'T BE IN DENTON.

THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE KNOWN FOR.

IT'S IN OUR KEY PRIORITIES.

AND SO.

WELL, THE VOLUME WENT UP. THAT'S COOL.

THE BUT ANYWAY, THE SO I THINK THAT IS A A COMMON FEATURE.

I WILL I WILL BE VOTING YES TO THIS NOT BECAUSE I'VE MADE UP MY MIND, BUT BECAUSE I THINK IF THERE'S PIECES OF INFORMATION THAT VARIOUS COUNSELORS NEED TO TO MAKE THAT FINAL DECISION, THEN AND THEY NEED A WEEK TO TO GET THAT INFORMATION, THEN THAT'S FINE.

IT'LL ACTUALLY GIVE ME ADDITIONAL TIME TO TO MAKE MY FINAL DECISION AS WELL.

SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

COUNCILMAN WHAT'S. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

MR. CITY ATTORNEY, IS THERE I MEAN, MY THOUGHT IS I UNDERSTAND THAT OUR DEFINITION OF FAMILY IS IMPUGNED UPON US BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WITH THIS PARTICULAR DISABILITY.

IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN HAVE SOME TYPE OF I MEAN, I WANT TO SAY METRICS OR INFORMATION THAT SAYS, OKAY, THIS IS THESE PEOPLE HAVE THIS DISABILITY AND THEY'RE HERE AND WE'RE HERE TO HELP THEM.

IN OTHER WORDS, ARE WE HELPING? ARE THEY GRADUATING FROM THIS HOME TO TO LIVE IN SUSTAINABLE HOUSING TO, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF TRANSITIONAL HOUSING THAT THEY'RE MOVING ON TO BE MORE SELF SUSTAINING, THAT IT ACTUALLY IS HELPING? NOW, I KNOW WE'VE GOT STUDIES THAT SHOW THAT OR SHOW THAT LIVING IN THAT ENVIRONMENT IS HELPFUL, BUT YET DO WE HAVE STUDIES THAT SHOW THAT JUST NOT LIVING THERE FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME? BUT THE POINT OF THAT IS TO HELP THEM DEVELOP THE LIFE SKILLS AND THINGS SUCH AS THAT, THAT HELP THEM WHERE THEY WON'T NEED NECESSARILY THAT TYPE OF SUPPORT.

IS THAT SOMETHING I MEAN, I GUESS WE CAN'T REALLY I MEAN, I GUESS I WOULD JUST ASK STAFF TO ASK THE ORGANIZERS IF IF THEY MEASURE THAT AND IF SO, HOW IS THAT MEASURED AND IF WE'RE ABLE AND IS THAT PROPRIETARY INFORMATION OR I GUESS MY FINAL QUESTION IS THIS.

IS STATE FUNDS THAT THIS ORGANIZATION RECEIVES, IS THAT CORRECT? THROUGH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT? THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, YES.

IS IT MY UNDERSTANDING THAT ANY ORGANIZATION THAT ACCEPTS STATE FUNDS IS OPEN TO OPEN RECORDS REQUESTS, OR IS THAT NOT.

THAT'S NOT CORRECT. NOT NECESSARILY CORRECT, NO.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. GOSH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO SHOOT ME DOWN THAT THAT HARD MAN.

GOLLY. WE WILL INQUIRE ABOUT THEIR THEIR METRICS.

YEAH, YEAH. I'M TEASING YOU.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT.

THAT'S WHY WE HAVE YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

COUNCIL MEMBER MCGEE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST A QUICK POINT OF INFORMATION AND THIS CAN EITHER BE FOR FOR YOU OR THE MADAM CITY MANAGER AFTER THE VISIT.

HOW WAS THAT INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT IS SEEING GOING TO BE COMMUNICATED TO US BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING? IS THAT GOING TO COME AND WORK AS OUR CLOSED? LIKE HOW ARE YOU GOING TO. I GUESS IT DEPENDS ON THE TIMING OF WHEN THE INSPECTION CAN OCCUR.

IF IT CAN HAPPEN THIS WEEK, WE COULD GET SOMETHING TO THE COUNCIL EITHER IN THE AGENDA POSTING AND THE EYES OR MONDAY IS THE INSPECTION.

[02:30:08]

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, COUNCILMAN MELTZER I'M GOING TO GO AT SOME POINT HERE.

COUNCILWOMAN MELTZER OKAY.

I WAS GOING TO CALL THE QUESTION, BUT I DON'T MEAN TO PREVENT YOU FROM SPEAKING.

YEAH. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.

HEY, CHIEF, I HAVE A QUESTION.

IF YOU CAN HELP ME OUT, PLEASE.

FORMER CHIEF OF THE STILL JUST CHIEF DIXON.

WE'VE BEEN CALLING HIM CHIEF ALL DAY BY ACCIDENT.

I DID IT ONCE EARLIER, TOO.

NO, NO, I DON'T. I DON'T KNOW ANY OTHER NAME.

HE HAS. HE'S.

HE'S STUCK WITH IT.

SO I DO WANT TO COMMUNICATE FROM A BEST YOU CAN, UNDERSTANDING, YOU KNOW, JUST FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE, WHAT IS THE BEST WAY FOR NEIGHBORS, ANY NEIGHBORS, ANYWHERE IN THE CITY? HEY, THERE'S AN ORDINANCE VIOLATION TO CREATE THAT TRACK RECORD TO MAKE IT EASY FOR PEOPLE TO KIND OF UNDERSTAND AND HOW HOW DISPATCH HAS HAPPENED, HOW, YOU KNOW, HERE'S OUR HOTSPOTS, ALL THOSE THINGS.

I KNOW WE HAVE A MAP THAT SAYS HERE'S A HOTSPOTS, BUT WHAT WHAT ADVICE DO YOU HAVE FOR RESIDENTS IF THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT ANY ACTIVITY IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD? I WANT TO REPORT IT.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE I CREATE A TRACK RECORD OR A HISTORY OF THESE ISSUES.

WHAT'S THE BEST WAY FOR THAT REPORTING TO THEN GET CONVEYED TO THE CITY AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS? SO THERE'S A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS THAT THEY CAN GO ABOUT THAT.

THEY CAN GO ONLINE AND DO A REPORT DIRECTLY ONLINE.

THEY CAN ALSO CALL DOWN TO THE CITY PROSECUTOR AND THEY CAN TALK TO STEPHANIE BERRY DIRECTLY TO TALK ABOUT IN THESE ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS, THEY CAN GO DOWN AND PERSONALLY FILE. SO IF YOU HAVE LOUD NOISE OR LOUD DOGS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, DO YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO DOWN AND TALK TO THE PROSECUTOR AND SWEAR TO AN AFFIDAVIT YOURSELF WITHOUT HAVING THE POLICE INVOLVED SO YOU CAN CALL AND MAKE ON A NON-EMERGENCY LINE THAT'S THREE, 4 OR 9 8181. YOU CAN CALL AND MAKE A REPORT ONLINE OVER THE PHONE OR YOU CAN CALL THE PROSECUTOR FOR THOSE MINOR CLASSY ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS. OKAY.

AND SO THEN PICTURES, VIDEOS, AUDIO, DOES THAT HELP? HURT DOESN'T MATTER.

IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER.

THEY ALWAYS HELP. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THOSE, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO UPLOAD THOSE DIRECTLY TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THEY'LL CONTACT YOU AFTER YOU MAKE YOUR INITIAL REPORT AND THEY HAVE A METHOD.

THEY CAN GET THOSE UPLOADED TO THEM.

SO IF I'M TRACKING WITH YOU SO I CAN GO IN ANYWHERE IN THE CITY, HAVE A CONCERN, FILE THAT ELECTRONICALLY UPLOAD WHATEVER FILE I HAVE SUPPORTING INFORMATION THAT ALL GETS UPLOADED.

SOMEONE REACHES OUT TO ME, SO YOU'LL GET THEY'LL HAVE TO UPLOAD IT AFTER SOMEONE CONTACTS YOU SO THEY CAN TALK YOU THROUGH HOW TO DO IT.

OKAY. GOT IT. OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. ABSOLUTELY.

AND THEN THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT I'LL SAY IS EVERYONE'S ALREADY SAID THAT THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE DECISIONS BEFORE US, WHAT FACTORS INTO MY DECISION IS HOW WE TREAT THE ENTIRE CITY, HOW WE LOOK.

JUST LOOKING AT THE ENTIRE CITY AS MY FOCUS TO MAKE SURE EVEN HANDED BEST WE CAN.

AND CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW AND IT'S BEEN TO THE TUNE OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, THE CITY USES OUR ARPA FUNDS TO PLACE FAMILIES EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN A HOTEL THAT'S NOT A HOTEL SUITE.

THAT IS A HOTEL ROOM WITH ONE BATHROOM, AN ENTIRE FAMILY.

AND SO IT'S HARD FOR ME TO PROCESS THROUGH THIS AND UNDERSTANDING THE CITY, SPENDING MILLIONS TO DO EXACTLY THAT IN A SMALLER SPACE.

SO THAT FACTORS INTO MY DECISION.

BUT I BUT I WON'T CONCEDE.

NOT ONE INCH ON.

PEOPLE ENJOYING THEIR PROPERTY AND MAKING SURE THEY'RE COMFORTABLE THERE IN THEIR HOME.

AND PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN HOW TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS.

AND IF THEY DON'T WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS, THEN THEN THAT MAY BE A CHALLENGE FOR THEM TO BE IN DENTON, BECAUSE THAT IS THAT'S CRITICAL.

SO THAT THAT'S WHY I ASKED CHIEF THOSE QUESTIONS.

THAT'S WHY I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT EVEN IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, I GET EMAILS.

I MEAN, WE ALL GET THEM AND EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD THERE'S SPEEDERS, THERE'S THIS, THERE'S THAT.

AND SO I CONSTANTLY FOLLOW UP ON THOSE THINGS AND CONSTANTLY MAKE SURE BEST TO MY ABILITY THAT WE'RE MAKING SURE WE ADDRESS THOSE THINGS TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE COMPORTING THEMSELVES AS EXPECTED OUTSIDE THEIR HOME, INSIDE THEIR HOME IS IS ABSOLUTELY A CHALLENGE.

SO THAT'S THAT TO ME IS IMPORTANT.

THAT'S WHAT GUIDES MY DECISION, IS MAKING SURE WE CAN ACCOMMODATE BOTH THOSE NEEDS AND AT THE SAME TIME

[02:35:08]

AND AND I DON'T WANT TO WADE INTO THAT JUST BECAUSE BLESS YOU IF THERE'S A STEP CHILD, I DON'T I DON'T EVEN LIKE THAT WORD. RIGHT.

BUT THAT'S A REAL THING.

SO THERE'S STEPCHILDREN, THERE'S ADOPTED CHILDREN, THERE'S ALL THOSE THINGS.

AND I DON'T WANT TO BE JUDGE AND JURY OF WHAT IF SOMEONE THEY COULD TAKE IN A FAMILY.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S JIMMY BUTLER, BASKETBALL PLAYER, TALKS ABOUT HE WAS HOMELESS.

HIS MOM KICKED HIM OUT WHEN HE'S A TEENAGER.

AND ANOTHER FAMILY TOOK HIM IN AND THAT BECAME HIS FAMILY.

NO BLOOD RELATIONSHIP.

I'M SURE AT SOME POINT THEY ADOPTED HIM DOWN THE LINE.

BUT INITIALLY HE'S JUST LIVING WITH THEM.

RIGHT. AND SO THERE'S THINGS THAT HAPPEN WHERE PEOPLE ARE DOING GOOD THINGS, GREAT THINGS IN OUR COMMUNITY TO HELP PEOPLE.

AND I NEED TO BE SENSITIVE TO THAT.

AND THAT FACTORS IN. BUT AGAIN, NONE OF THOSE THINGS SHOULD AFFECT THE NEIGHBORS AND HOW A HOMEOWNER SHOULD COMPORT THEMSELVES HERE IN THE CITY OF DENTON AND HOW PEOPLE SHOULD FEEL SAFE AND SHOULDN'T HAVE NOISE AFTER CERTAIN TIMES, THAT SORT OF THING.

SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT TO SAY THOSE ARE KIND OF THE THINGS THAT GUIDE MY DECISIONS.

WE'LL VOTE ON THIS MOTION TO POSTPONE.

I'LL JUST FULL TRANSPARENCY BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO POP UP HERE IN A MINUTE.

I DON'T SUPPORT THAT.

I THINK WE HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS WHEN WE HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS.

AND THE CITY IS PLACING FAMILIES IN HOTELS, ROOMS WITH ONE BATHROOM, ONE ROOM.

NO TELLING HOW MANY PEOPLE, BUT THEY'RE OFF THE STREET, THEY'RE SAFE, THEY'RE TAKEN CARE OF.

AND SO I CAN'T IN ONE HAND SAY THAT'S GOOD FOR THE CITY TO DO IT, AND THEN ON THE OTHER HAND, SAY IT'S NOT THE A A BEDROOM OR TWO DIFFERENCE OVER HERE IS GOING TO MATTER IN MY DECISION.

I HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION AND I'LL COME TO THAT.

BUT BEFORE US NOW IS THE MOTION TO POSTPONE.

AND WE HAVE A MOTION.

A SECOND. MR. MAYOR. IS THIS NEW? YEAH. YEAH.

YOUR ARGUMENT.

BUT I'M NOT YOUR ARGUMENT.

YOUR OBSERVATIONS ARE VERY COMPELLING.

AND I CAN'T SAY WITH WITH AUTHENTICITY THAT IF IT CAME BACK AS A THREE BEDROOM THAT I WOULD VOTE AGAINST THIS.

SO I THINK IT'S AND AGAIN, FULL TRANSPARENCY.

THAT LAWYER IN ME WANTS TO ARGUE STUFF.

SURE. SO I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION.

I THINK IT'S I DON'T THINK THE DIFFERENCE.

IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFERENT.

AND SO I'M GOING TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION TO POSTPONE AND AND THEN JUST MOVE FORWARD FROM THERE ON WHAT'S GOING BECAUSE I IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE FOR ME. I JUST I STILL WANT THE INFORMATION.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THE INFORMATION.

BUT I DON'T THINK THAT INFORMATION WOULD SWAY MY VOTE TO VOTE AGAINST IT.

SO I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER DONE THIS BEFORE, BUT I'M GOING TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION.

WELL, I GUESS I THANK MY COLLEAGUE AND THAT MEANS I, TOO, HAVE TO WITHDRAW.

RIGHT? AND LET'S GO. I HAVE TO REMAKE IT.

YEAH, YOU CAN. YOU CAN REMAKE IT IF YOU'D LIKE.

YEAH, I'M GOOD.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. OKAY, COUNCILMAN HARLAN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO POSTPONE.

OKAY. COUNCILMAN HOLLAND HAS A MOTION TO POSTPONE.

IS THERE A SECOND? MAYOR PRO TEM.

I WOULD BE HYPOCRITICAL WITH MY PREVIOUS RATIONALE IF I DIDN'T SUPPORT THE SAME RATIONALE THIS TIME.

IF COUNCILOR WATTS NO LONGER HAS AN ISSUE, THAT'S FINE.

WE CAN REACH A DECISION. BUT IF COUNCILOR HOLLAND HAS NEEDS SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, THEN I WOULD BE HYPOCRITICAL NOT NOT TO SUPPORT IT FOR THE SAME RATIONALE.

SO I'LL SECOND. OKAY.

COUNCILOR MCGEE, QUICKLY, WE'RE GOING TO VOTE.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I APPRECIATE THAT RATIONALE.

BUT WE CAN ALSO COUNT VOTES AND WE CAN PRETTY MUCH SEE HOW THIS VOTE IS GOING TO GO.

SO THAT IS WHY I AM NOT I DID NOT MAKE THE MOTION AND THAT IS WHY I DON'T SUPPORT THE MOTION TO TO TABLE.

OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, MAYOR? JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS MOTION IS ALSO TO POSTPONE UNTIL NEXT WEEK.

IS THAT TO POSTPONE UNTIL NEXT WEEK? YES. OKAY. YEAH, NEXT WEEK, AUGUST 1ST, AFTER THE INSPECTION.

OKAY. MOTION POSTPONED IS WHAT'S BEFORE US.

YES OR NO? LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN.

[02:40:04]

DOES IT TELL YOU WHO WHITE ON.

THERE WE GO. OKAY.

AND SO MOTION TO POSTPONE FAILS.

I'LL TAKE A MOTION.

I'LL MOVE APPROVAL.

COUNCILOR WATTS. MOTION BY MAYOR HUDSPETH SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER WATTS.

DISCUSSION. I'LL SAY THIS THEN.

AS I STATED BEFORE, I'M COMMITTED TO MAKING SURE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE VOICES ARE HEARD AND THAT WE ADDRESS THOSE UNDERLYING ISSUES AND YOU SHOULD ENJOY HAVE THE ENJOYMENT OF YOUR YOUR HOME.

NO QUESTION.

AND THAT THAT'S UNWAVERING.

THAT SET ASIDE FROM THE LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES AND OR THE THE INFORMATION WE'RE GOING TO HAVE.

I'M NOT GOING TO GET PEOPLE'S MEDICAL INFORMATION.

I'M NOT GOING TO GET THOSE THINGS. I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT MAKING SURE WE KEEP OUR COMMUNITY SAFE.

I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT MAKING SURE WE DO ADDRESS THINGS, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT HEAD ON WITH THIS ORGANIZATION.

WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS GET CREATIVE AND MAKE SURE WE'RE ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS.

I THINK WE'RE WELL ON THAT WAY BECAUSE WE HAVE REGULAR CONTACT WITH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT FOR OXFORD HOUSE AND AND WE'RE ABLE TO INSPECT.

AND SO THERE'S WE'RE BUILDING TRUST, RAPPORT, AND THAT IS HOW WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE WE HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE, TO MAKE SURE WE'RE MAKING GOOD DECISIONS.

AND EVERYONE'S ABLE TO BE GREAT NEIGHBORS AS BEST THEY CAN OR WILL WILL LIKE WHEN YOUR TEETH KIND OF WANT TO GO A LITTLE WONKY AND THEY PUT BRACES ON THERE, HEY, WE'LL REEL YOU IN AND MAKE SURE EVERYBODY ALIGNS NICELY AND COMES IN STRAIGHT.

MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU, MISTER MAYOR.

AND I TRULY, HONESTLY APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS.

I, I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU AND THE REST OF COUNCIL TO MAKE SURE THAT WELL, LET'S, LET'S PUT IT THIS WAY.

GOOD NEIGHBORS OR GOOD NEIGHBORS AND, AND MAKE SURE THAT WE PUT IT THAT WAY.

AND I WOULD JUST SAY IN THAT THERE WERE A LOT OF GOOD IDEAS FLOATED ABOUT THINGS THAT WE WOULD LIKE STAFF TO LOOK INTO, PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES, SUCCESS OF MODELS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

I HOPE THAT STAFF TOOK GOOD NOTES.

WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE TO AID WHAT THE MAYOR SAID, THAT THAT GOOD NEIGHBORS ARE GOOD NEIGHBORS.

SO THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN MELTZER.

I ALSO WANTED TO WEIGH IN COMPLETE ALIGNMENT WITH YOUR COMMENTS, MAYOR.

AND I'D ALSO ADD THAT AS WE GO INTO SETTING OUR OWN PRIORITIES, WHICH IS COMING UP FOR COUNCIL, THAT WE BE AWARE THAT THERE IS IN GENERAL IN DENTON A HUGE LACK OF EVEN THOUGH WE CAN THINK OF SPECIFIC EXAMPLES WHERE THERE ARE RESOURCES, THERE'S IN GENERAL A HUGE LACK OF RESOURCES FOR ADDICTION TREATMENT AND MENTAL HEALTH, AND IT JUST POPS UP IN EVERY OTHER ASPECT OF LIFE.

SO AT SOME POINT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE THE BULL BY THE HORNS THERE.

AGREED. YEAH, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY UNDERLYING CAUSE THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS.

SO ANY OTHER ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SEEING NONE. LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN.

PASSES. SEVEN ZERO.

TAKES US TO OUR NEXT ITEM.

THANK YOU, EVERYONE.

[A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas amending the Denton Development Code related to Short-Term Rental uses, specifically amendments to Section 5.3.5T.1.b and 5.3.5T.2.e.iii related to removing the primary residency requirements associated with a short-term rental property; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof; providing a severability clause and an effective date. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted [6-0] to recommend approval of the request. Motion for approval by Commissioner Smith and second by Commissioner Pruett. (DCA23-0002a, Short-Term Rental Primary Residence Code Amendment, Ron Menguita)]

[02:45:01]

SPECIFICALLY AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 5.3.

5T1B AND 5.3.5.2 E.

TRIPLY RELATED TO REMOVING PRIMARY RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SHORT TERM RENTAL PROPERTY.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. MEMBERS OF COUNCIL.

ROMY GUIDO, PRINCIPAL PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

AS STATED IN THE INTRODUCTION, THIS CODE AMENDMENTS RELATE TO SHORT TERM RENTAL PRIMARY RESIDENCE.

JUST QUICKLY BACKGROUND ON THIS ITEM.

THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE HAS BEEN WORKING FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS NOW RELATED TO SHORT TERM RENTAL.

THIS PARTICULAR CODE AMENDMENT IS A PART OF THOSE QUESTIONS OR THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CRC, BUT THE ONE THAT IS INCLUDED TONIGHT IS AN IMPORTANT PART.

AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE WE'VE RECENTLY HEARD FROM A FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT, FROM THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT, THE DECISION BETWEEN STARK VERSUS THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS THAT SHORT TERM RENTALS AS THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE OF THE OWNER IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, THE STAFF FELT THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO BRING FORWARD THIS PARTICULAR CODE AMENDMENT IN ADVANCE OF THE OTHER POTENTIAL CODE AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON, BECAUSE THE CODE AMENDMENT WOULD WOULD RELIEVE ANY POTENTIAL LEGAL CHALLENGE THAT WOULD COME IF WE DID NOT.

SO AS MENTIONED IN THE INTRODUCTION, THERE ARE TWO SECTIONS THAT WE'RE AMENDING RELATED TO REMOVING THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE SHORT TERM RENTAL PROPERTY.

THE FIRST SECTION IS 535T1B, AND YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN WE'RE PROPOSING TO ADD IN THE SENTENCE MANAGED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER OR BY A MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND STRIKING THROUGH THE APPLICANT'S PRIMARY RESIDENCE PART OF THE CODE AMENDMENT.

THE SECOND ITEM OR SECOND SECTION OF THE CODE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO AMEND IS 535T DUE TO E, TRIPLE E IS TO REMOVE THAT SECTION OR THAT PROVISION THAT THE OPERATOR.

IT IS UNLAWFUL TO OPERATE A SHORT TERM RENTAL IN ANY LOCATION THAT IS NOT THE REGISTRANT'S PRIMARY RESIDENCE.

SO AGAIN, REMOVING THAT CLAUSE.

THAT BEING SAID, THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS PARTICULAR CODE AMENDMENT.

STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDS THIS CODE AMENDMENT AS IT MEETS THE SECTION 274D OF THE CODE AMENDMENT AMENDMENTS SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL.

WITH THAT, I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY. AND QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IF ANYONE CARES TO SPEAK, YOU CAN COME DOWN, SPEAK, AND THEN FILL OUT A BLUE CARD.

MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO, SO JUST TO PUT SOME SOME PERSPECTIVE ON IT.

THE THE CRC ALSO INCLUDED CONCEPTS LIKE THIS AS WELL AS OTHER ADDITIONAL THINGS.

AND THOSE ARE THOSE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKED AT BY THE PNC AND COUNCIL.

WHEN AND WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO COME TO PUBLIC HEARING? SURE. THOSE PARTICULAR ITEMS WILL BE, AT LEAST FOR NOW, WE'RE TAKING AN EFFORT TO REACH OUT TO THE COMMUNITY.

THE CRC FELT THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO HEAR FROM THE COMMUNITY, SO WE WILL BE HOLDING A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT TOWN HALL MEETING ON AUGUST 17TH, FOLLOWED BY A VIRTUAL TOWN HALL MEETING ON AUGUST 21ST.

FOLLOWING THE FOLLOWING THAT THERE WILL BE A SURVEY OUT ON OUR WEBSITE RELATED TO SHORT TERM RENTALS, COLLECTING ALL THE INFORMATION FROM THOSE TOWN HALL MEETINGS, AS WELL AS A SURVEY WE WILL PRESENT AS BACK TO THE CRC, HEAR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.

HOPEFULLY THE PLAN AFTER THAT IS TO BRING IT TO THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION AND ULTIMATELY TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITHIN, I'D SAY, IN THE FALL, SEPTEMBER OR SO.

I APPRECIATE THAT, RON. THANK YOU.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING.

DOES ANYONE CARE TO SPEAK? IF SO, YOU CAN COME ON DOWN.

SEE NO SUDDEN MOVEMENTS.

I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

MAYOR PRO TEM I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE ITEM.

IS THERE A SECOND, COUNCILMAN HOLLAND.

SECOND. OKAY.

MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM BECK, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN HOLLAND.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN.

[02:50:29]

[B. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing a Special Sign District on an approximately 152 acre property generally located on the southwest corner of Bronco Way and North Bonnie Brae Street in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; adopting an amendment to the City’s official zoning map; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $500.00 for violations thereof; providing a severability clause and an effective date. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted [6-0] to recommend approval of the request. Motion for approval by Commissioner Smith and second by Commissioner Cole. (SD23-0001a, Denton High School Special Sign District)]

GOOD EVENING. I'M JULIE WYATT, PRINCIPAL PLANNER, AND I'M PRESENTING SD 23 0001A TO YOU.

BEFORE WE GET INTO THIS TO THE MEAT OF THE REQUEST, I JUST WANT TO TALK REALLY BRIEFLY ABOUT SIGN DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY OF DENTON.

WE DON'T OFTEN SEE THESE.

I THINK THE LAST ONE THAT WE SAW WAS IN 2015.

SO IT'S BEEN A WHILE.

OUR SIGN REGULATIONS ARE INTENDED TO BALANCE A PROPERTY OWNER'S NEED FOR FOR TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE COMMUNITY, WITH OUR COMMUNITY'S ESTHETIC GOALS AND OUR SAFETY GOALS.

SO OUR SIGN CODE IS INTENDED TO BALANCE THAT.

IT'S IN OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES.

IT'S ACTUALLY CHAPTER 33 OF OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES.

AND WITHIN THOSE REGULATIONS, WE LOOK AT THINGS LIKE THE TYPES OF SIGNS, THE SIZE OF THOSE SIGNS, THE NUMBER THAT ANY INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER CAN HAVE, AND THEN THOSE SETBACKS.

AND ONCE AGAIN, THOSE ARE INTENDED TO MINIMIZE ANY NUISANCES OR RISKS TO PUBLIC SAFETY.

BUT LIKE A LOT OF CODES, IT CAN'T CAPTURE EVERYTHING RELATED TO SIGNS.

AND SO WITHIN CHAPTER 33, SECTION 33.18, IT ALLOWS FOR SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICTS.

AND WE THINK OF THOSE AS ESSENTIALLY PDS FOR SIGNS.

SO IT ALLOWS SOME OF THOSE DEVIATIONS.

AS LONG AS IT HAS A COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PACKAGE THAT'S SUPERIOR TO WHAT WE TYPICALLY SEE.

SO THAT IS JUST THE BACKGROUND OF SIGNS.

AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE SPECIFIC REQUEST.

SO THIS IS THIS REQUEST IS FOR DENTON HIGH SCHOOL.

IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR, THE DENTON ISD BUILT A NEW HIGH SCHOOL, DENTON HIGH SCHOOL AT OFF OF BONNIE BRAY AT AT BRONCO WAY AND IT WAS OPENED LAST YEAR.

IT'S 152 ACRE CAMPUS.

IT HAS FRONTAGE ON THREE ROADWAYS, BRONCO WAY, WHICH IS THE COLLECTOR TO THE NORTH.

ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE CAMPUS, WE HAVE NORTH BONNIE BRAE STREET, AND THAT IS AN ARTERIAL.

AND THEN WE HAVE WESTGATE DRIVE TO THE WEST OF OF THE PROPERTY, AND THAT IS A NEIGHBORHOOD STREET.

THE CAMPUS IS LARGE.

IT HAS FIVE STRUCTURES, SIX ATHLETIC FIELDS, EIGHT TENNIS COURTS.

IT HAS OUTDOOR MARCHING BAND PRACTICE AREA, ADMINISTRATIVE AND ADMINISTRATION AND VISITOR PARKING, STUDENT PARKING AND AN OUTDOOR AREAS.

THERE ARE FOUR DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS AND THOSE ARE ASSOCIATED WITH VARIOUS ACTIVITIES AND PURPOSES.

SO WE'VE GOT THREE CONNECTIONS ON BRONCO WAY THAT TAKES YOU TO STUDENT PARKING, TO VISITOR PARKING, ALSO TO THE FINE ARTS CENTER.

WE ALSO HAVE THERE'S ALSO A DRIVEWAY ON BONNIE BRAE, AND THAT IS THE BUS LOOP.

AND IT ALSO IS A DIRECT PATH TO THOSE ATHLETIC, ATHLETIC FIELDS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CAMPUS.

THERE ARE NO DRIVEWAYS TO WESTGATE, NOR THOUGH ANY PROPOSED WITH THIS REQUEST.

SO DUE TO THIS CAMPUS SIZE, THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS AND VISITORS THAT VISIT THE DIVERSE ARRAY OF ACTIVITIES AND THOSE VARIOUS DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS, DENTON ISD NEEDS TO RELY ON SIGNAGE TO COMMUNICATE INFORMATION TO THE SCHOOL COMMUNITY AND ALSO TO DIRECT MOTORISTS.

AND REALLY, THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HERE WITH THE REQUEST TONIGHT.

SO I WON'T READ THE WHOLE SIGN DISTRICT TO YOU.

IT'S IN YOUR BACKUP. I JUST WANT TO GIVE A SUMMARY TO YOU.

IT REALLY INCLUDES FIVE MODIFICATIONS.

THE FIRST ONE RELATING TO CHANGING THE MESSAGE THROUGH ILLUMINATION, THE SIZE AND THE SIDE CODE.

THAT'S CALLED THE EFFECTIVE AREA SIGN HEIGHT SETBACK FROM A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

AND THEN THE NUMBER OF SIGNS, THE SPACING OF THAT.

SO I WANT TO TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT THE REQUEST AND THEIR SIGN.

THEIR SIGN PACKAGE.

THE REQUEST INCLUDES THEIR THEIR GROUND SIGNS AND IT INCLUDES SEVEN GROUND SIGNS.

AND THE SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICT INCLUDES A SITE PLAN.

SO THAT CONCEPT OF WHERE THOSE SIGNS WOULD BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY AND THEN THOSE ELEVATIONS OF THE SIGNS.

THE SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICT ALSO ALLOWS FOR WALL ATTACHED TEMPORARY AND WIND DEVICE SIGNS.

BUT THOSE WOULD JUST NEED TO MEET OUR MINIMUM STANDARDS THAT ARE ALREADY IN SUBCHAPTER OR IN CHAPTER 33.

SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THOSE SPECIFIC SIGNS, WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES.

[02:55:03]

FIRST, MONUMENT ONE, THAT'S THE PRIMARY SIGN ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CAMPUS ON BRONCO WAY.

IT'S ACTUALLY ALREADY BEEN INSTALLED.

IT IS A PRIMARY ENTRANCE ENTRY SIGN.

IT'S NINE FEET TALL.

IT'S CONSTRUCTED WITH MASONRY AND AN LED SCREEN.

WE HAVE MONUMENT TWO LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF BRONCO WAY AND NORTH BONNIE BRAE THAT ALSO HAS ALREADY BEEN INSTALLED.

IT'S THAT SECONDARY ENTRY MONUMENT.

IT'S FOUR AND ONE HALF FEET TALL IN MASONRY.

AND THEN THE REMAINDER SIGNS ARE WAYFINDING SIGNS.

THOSE ARE THOSE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS.

THEY'RE PROPOSING TO HAVE THEM AT EACH DRIVEWAY CONNECTION AND THEN ONE INTERNAL SITE, AND THAT'S TO DIRECT THOSE MOTORISTS TO THOSE DIFFERENT PARTS OF CAMPUS.

THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL FOR A SPECIAL SIGN.

DISTRICT TALKS ABOUT THINGS LIKE COMPATIBILITY IN IN THINGS LIKE THE COLOR OF THE SIGNS, THE MATERIALS AND THE SHAPE OF THE SIGN.

SO STAFF HAS REVIEWED WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING AND HAVE DETERMINED IT IS COMPATIBLE.

AND REALLY LOOKING AT THE FOLLOWING CONSIDERATIONS, THE THE GROUND SIGN PACKAGE IS, IS IF APPROVED, WOULD BE WOULD WOULD BE CONSISTENT AND ANY OTHER GROUND SIGNS WOULD REQUIRE AN AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICT.

SO IT KIND OF GIVES CERTAINTY AS TO WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

THEY ARE PROPOSING THE COHESIVE COLORS AND MATERIALS AND DETAILING, SO IT PROVIDES SOME UNITY FOR THE SIGN.

PACKAGE MAY REDUCE THAT VISUAL CLUTTER WITH A LOT OF DISPARATE SIGN TYPES.

SO IT'S THAT CONSISTENT AND UNIFORM DESIGN, EXCEPT FOR MONUMENT NUMBER ONE.

ALL OF THE OTHER REMAINING GROUND SIGNS ARE SMALLER AND SHORTER THAN WHAT THE CODE WOULD TYPICALLY ALLOW.

IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SCALE OF THE CAMPUS AND THOSE EXISTING BUILDINGS AND THEN THOSE COLORS.

THEY ARE PROPOSING PURPLE AND GOLD LETTERING, WHICH IS THE SCHOOL COLORS OF DENTON HIGH SCHOOL ON NEUTRAL BACKGROUNDS, THAT MASONRY BACKGROUND AND ALSO A GRAY BACKGROUND ON THE WAYFINDING SIGN. SO IT HAS THAT NEUTRAL BACKGROUND.

ONE OF THE THING I DO WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS ILLUMINATION.

SO UNDER OUR CURRENT REGULATIONS, THE THE CODE PROHIBITS SIGNS WHICH HAVE ANY INTERMITTENT ILLUMINATION, INCLUDING FLASHING, FADING REVOLVING OR BLINKING LIGHTS OR ANY TYPE OF MOVING, TRAVELING OR CHANGING MESSAGE BY MEANS OF ILLUMINATION, EXCLUDING TEMPORARY HOLIDAY LIGHTS AND LIGHTS USED FOR TIME AND TEMPERATURE SIGNS.

STAFF HAS ANALYZED THIS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THEIR REQUEST AND HAVE DETERMINED THAT THIS LANGUAGE IS A LITTLE RESTRICTIVE AND THAT IT GROUPS THOSE CHANGING MESSAGE BY ILLUMINATION WITH INTERMITTENT ILLUMINATION, THINGS LIKE BLINKING AND FLASHING, THOSE THINGS THAT COULD CREATE A NUISANCE.

WHEN WE LOOKED AT WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, WE KIND OF LOOKED AT IT AKIN TO THOSE SIGNS, IF YOU RECALL, WAY BACK WHEN, WHERE SOMEBODY WOULD GO OUT AND CHANGE THE MESSAGE PHYSICALLY.

REALLY, THIS LED LIGHT IS JUST THE THE NEW VERSION OF THAT, THE NEW TECHNOLOGY OF THAT CHANGING MESSAGE.

SO IT REALLY IS CONSISTENT WITH HOW SIGNS HAVE BEEN USED FOR A VERY LONG TIME WITHIN THE CITY OF DENTON.

SO DENTON HIGH SCHOOL OR DENTON ISD PROPOSES TO ALLOW CERTAIN ILLUMINATED SIGNS BUT PROHIBIT THAT INTERMITTENT ILLUMINATION BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU GET THE BLINKING AND THE FLASHING THINGS THAT COULD CREATE A SAFETY HAZARD OR SOME SORT OF NUISANCE, BUT ALLOW THE MESSAGE TO CHANGE ON THE MARQUEE BY MEANS OF THAT ILLUMINATION. I'M A LITTLE MORE IN DEPTH ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE DO WANT TO THINK ABOUT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ANYTHING THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING WOULD NOT CREATE A NUISANCE FOR NEARBY RESIDENTS.

THERE IS A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD ACROSS THE STREET NOW.

THERE IS AN HOA LOT BETWEEN THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND THE SIGN THAT DOES HAVE SOME TREES IN IT.

BUT BUT IT IS ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL.

SO WE TALK TO DENTON ISD.

THERE THEY THE SIGN DISTRICT PROPOSES THAT THAT MESSAGE WOULD NOT CHANGE MORE THAN ONCE PER 24 HOURS AND THAT IT WOULD BE TURNED OFF BY 830 EVERY EVENING. AND THAT WAY IT WOULD REDUCE ANY OF THOSE GLARE IMPACTS TO THOSE ADJACENT RESIDENCES.

SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE ON YOUR SCREEN WHERE THAT SIGN IS.

IT IS IN THAT YELLOW CIRCLE.

IT'S RIGHT HERE AND IT IS ADJACENT TO THOSE RESIDENTIAL.

I WENT OUT AND TOOK PICTURES.

SO I STOOD ACROSS THE STREET AT ABOUT THIS LOCATION AND LOOKED BACK AT THE SIGN.

AND THAT'S WHAT THE SIGN LOOKED LIKE FROM ACROSS THE STREET.

AND THEN ALSO LOOKED AT THE RESIDENTIAL FROM KIND OF THE VANTAGE VANTAGE OF THE OF THE SIGN.

AND SO YOU CAN SEE THOSE RESIDENTIAL HOMES ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SIGN.

PUBLIC OUTREACH WAS SENT OUT.

WE HAVE RECEIVED TWO LETTERS IN OPPOSITION AND THEY ARE SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND ONE LAYER OR ONE LETTER IN FAVOR.

[03:00:05]

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST.

IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THEY ALSO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST.

A REPRESENTATIVE FROM DENTON ISD IS HERE THIS EVENING AND WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION.

BUT THEY'RE HERE TO FIELD ANY QUESTIONS AND I WILL ALSO BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

AND JUST IN CASE I DID, LET'S SEE.

IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING, SO I'LL OPEN THAT JUST IN CASE I HADN'T ALREADY.

MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. AND I'LL BE REAL, REAL BRIEF, I HOPE.

AND THAT IS I LET ME LET ME START OFF WITH I'M GOING TO VOTE YES.

BUT HAVING SAID THAT, WHAT IS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE DIGITAL MARQUEE AT THE ENTRANCE OF BRONCO WAY AND THE DIGITAL MARQUEE OF T.W.

IN THAT THEY'RE BOTH INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT BODIES AND I BELIEVE ONE PURSUE IS PURSUING OUR APPROVAL TONIGHT AND THE OTHER IS NOT.

AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DISTINCTION.

MACK DO YOU WANT TO ANSWER THAT OR DO YOU WANT ME TO? I CAN TAKE A SHOT. SURE. I MEAN, THE THE UNIVERSITIES OR STATE INSTITUTIONS, WE CAN'T REGULATE THE STATE PROPERTIES.

THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS NOT A STATE ENTITY.

IT'S IT'S MORE OF A A LATERAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY, WHICH WE DO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE.

AND THAT COMES UNDER THE PURVIEW OF OUR CODES.

SO STATE DOESN'T HAVE TO HEAR ANYTHING, DOESN'T HAVE TO ABIDE BY OUR CODES.

SCHOOL DISTRICT DOES.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.

COUNCILMAN MELTZER. YEAH.

I HAVE A QUESTION ALSO.

YOU WOULD NOT BE ENTERTAINING MOTIONS UNTIL AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED, CORRECT? YES. SO MY QUESTION IS NOT TO MOVE.

JUST WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE TWO NEIGHBORS WHO SUBMITTED OPPOSITION? IS IT DO WE KNOW ANYTHING MORE THAN OPPOSED? ONE WAS RELATED.

ONE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WHAT THE OPPOSITION WAS.

THE OTHER WAS RELATED TO CONCERNS ABOUT WESTGATE AND AND AND THAT THOROUGHFARE.

SO LESS ABOUT THOSE EXISTING SIGNS AND MORE ABOUT JUST THE CHANGING NATURE OF THE AREAS.

OKAY. COUNCILOR HOLLAND.

GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD EVENING, I GUESS.

DO I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S THREE SIGNS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? TWO HAVE ALREADY BEEN INSTALLED? WELL, DENTON ISD MAY HAVE TO.

IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THE TWO I CAN SAY FOR CERTAINTY THE TWO MONUMENTS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED.

THE WAYFINDING SIGNS.

ONE OF THEM LOOKS REALLY, REALLY PERMANENT.

HOWEVER, I WAS TOLD THAT IT IS POTENTIALLY TEMPORARY, BUT I'M GOING TO HAVE DENTON ISD COME UP AND ANSWER THAT.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.

WHAT I CAN SAY IS THERE ARE TWO MONUMENT SIGNS THAT ARE INSTALLED AND THERE ARE SOME TEMPORARY SIGNS AROUND THE FACILITY THAT HAVE BEEN INSTALLED JUST SO THAT PEDESTRIANS OR DRIVERS LIFE SAFETY WOULD KNOW TO HOW TO GET TO FACILITIES THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY.

SURE. SURE. IF YOU CAN GIVE US YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

ABSOLUTELY. SORRY. I'M BRANDON BOYTER.

I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CONSTRUCTION PLANNING AND GROWTH FOR THE DISTRICT.

I'VE BEEN THERE SINCE LAST APRIL, SO ABOUT A YEAR AND THREE MONTHS.

AND SO I KIND OF ADOPTED THIS PROJECT A LITTLE BIT, BUT I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.

MY QUESTION SIMPLY IS, ARE YOU ASKING FOR A PERMIT FOR ONE OR MORE SIGNS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN INSTALLED? YES. SO THE TWO MONUMENT SIGNS HAVE BEEN WHEN I SAY MONUMENT, SIR, I MEAN THE LED SIGN, AS WELL AS THE ONE OTHER SIGN THAT IS MADE OF BRICK.

THOSE HAVE BEEN INSTALLED.

WE ARE ASKING FOR THOSE SIGNS TO BE ENTERED INTO THE SIGN ORDINANCE OR ALLOW US TO DO THOSE SIGNS.

AND YES, THEY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED.

SO WE HAVE PUT THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE.

THERE'S NO DOUBT WE'LL TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THAT.

WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT THAT WAS THAT I AM A REPRESENTATIVE OF DSD.

THAT WAS DONE BEFORE I GOT HERE.

WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED NEW POLICIES WHERE THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN.

I THINK THE THE MEMBERS CAN TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE OTHER PROJECTS GOING INSIDE THE CITY RIGHT NOW THAT WE'VE ALREADY PLACED PERMITS FOR THAT SIGN.

WE DID HAVE A CONTRACTOR THAT WAS AMBITIOUS, I WILL SAY, AND PUT THOSE SIGNS IN PRIOR TO GETTING APPROVAL.

THEY WERE ON THE ORIGINAL PLANS.

THEY DID NOT GO GET A SIGN PERMIT.

AND THAT'S ONCE THAT HAPPENED IS WHEN WE IMMEDIATELY STOPPED AND WE BACKED UP AND WENT AND TALKED TO THE CITY AND ASKED FOR PERMISSION AND SAID, HEY, WE HAVE VIOLATED.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT.

WHAT CAN WE DO? THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? LET ME SEE. NO.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YEAH. OKAY.

[03:05:02]

SEEING NONE. COUNCILMEMBER MELTZER.

YEAH. I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT. THAT I MIGHT HAVE FELT DIFFERENTLY HAD I KNOWN THAT THEY'D ALREADY BEEN BUILT BEFORE PERMISSION WAS ASKED.

I DON'T LIKE THAT. BUT YOU DON'T.

YOU DON'T LIKE DISCOVERING THAT EITHER.

I TAKE IT THAT HAVING BEEN SAID, I HAD THE OCCASION TO GO OUT SEVERAL TIMES TO HELP PLAN THE DISD MARIACHI FOLKLORICO SHOWCASE, AND IT'S A FANTASTIC CAMPUS.

I'M SO PROUD THAT THE PUBLIC SCHOOL IN OUR COMMUNITY IS SUCH A GREAT FACILITY LIKE THAT.

IT REALLY SHOWS VISION.

IT'S WORTHY OF A VERY SIGNIFICANT SIGN THAT REFLECTS THAT PRIDE.

THE KIND OF MOVING MESSAGE THING I SEE COMMONLY USED BY SCHOOLS AS A VERY EFFICIENT WAY TO GIVE DAILY MESSAGES AND THE WAYFINDING SIGNS ARE SORELY NEEDED.

IT IS SO EASY TO GET LOST ON THE CAMPUS AND JUST TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THE FRONT DOOR IS, YOU KNOW THAT WILL BE A GREAT THING.

SO I MOVE APPROVAL.

OKAY. MAYOR PRO TEM.

I WILL ALSO SECOND BOTH THE MOVEMENT AND THE ADMONISHMENT TO TRY TO KEEP THE CART AND THE HORSE IN THE RIGHT ORDER.

GREAT. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MELTZER, A SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM BECK, AND I THINK I CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT JUST IN CASE IT IS CLOSED.

AND SO LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN.

NET PASSES SEVEN ZERO TAKES US TO CONCLUDING ITEMS.

[7. CONCLUDING ITEMS]

SOME OF YOU ALL MAY KNOW THAT THE CITY HAS BEEN VERY GENEROUS IN BEGINNING THIS PROCESS FOR THIS PROJECT, THE QUAKERTOWN PROJECT.

SO I RECEIVED SOME INFORMATION FROM THE FOLKS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THE QUAKERTOWN STORY IS ONE THAT NEEDS TO BE TOLD AND THEY HAVE MOVED ON TO ANOTHER PHASE AND IT SAYS, WE NEED YOUR HELP.

IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT THE AMAZING STORY OF QUAKERTOWN IS SHARED THROUGHOUT THE DENTON COUNTY AND BEYOND.

THE COMPLETION AND CIRCULATION OF THE FILM WILL PRESERVE THE HISTORY OF THIS COMMUNITY FOR GENERATIONS TO COME.

YOUR CONTRIBUTION MOVES THE STORY FORWARD.

I WILL SAY THAT NOW THAT WE'VE MOVED ABOVE AND BEYOND THE THE LAST STEP, THE NEXT STEP IS FOR THE COMMUNITY.

THEY'RE ASKING FOR US TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS FILM THAT'S GOING TO BE MADE A DOCU SERIES THAT'S A FOUR PART FILM THAT IS BEING PUT TOGETHER AS WE SPEAK FOR THIS AMAZING STORY ABOUT QUAKERTOWN.

THEY SAY YOU CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT THE QUAKERTOWN STORY AT DENTON.

BF THAT'S DENTON BLACK FILM FESTIVAL.COM/QUAKERTOWN FILM PROJECT.

THERE YOU CAN OFFER TO GIVE A DONATION TO THIS PROJECT.

THEY'LL HAVE THE PAYPAL SET UP AND IT'S FOR LOGAN.

I MEAN LOG LOG F F AT GMAIL.COM.

THIS IS A CROWDFUNDING SOURCE.

THIS IS OUR TIME FOR US AS A COMMUNITY.

THIS IS A COMMUNITY WIDE PROJECT.

IT'S NOT JUST FOR THE MEMBERS OF SOUTHEAST DENTON AND IT'S NOT JUST FOR A COUPLE OF PEOPLE.

THIS IS FOR ALL OF US TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS MOVIE, THIS DOCU SERIES THAT THEY'RE GOING THAT THEY'RE MAKING.

AND THEN THIS IS GOING TO LEAD US TOWARDS A REALLY BEAUTIFUL MEMORIAL HERE IN QUAKERTOWN PARK SOMEWHERE LATER ON IN THE FUTURE.

SO WE'VE GOTTEN THE APPROVAL.

WE'RE STORIES ARE COMING IN, AND NOW IT'S TIME FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DONATE TO THIS QUAKERTOWN FILM

[03:10:04]

I'VE TAKEN THIS ON AS MY PROJECT TO BE ABLE TO GIVE TO THIS CITY.

I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG I'LL BE SITTING IN THIS SEAT, BUT WE'LL KNOW THAT THIS IS A PROJECT THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE AND IT WAS TIME.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAYOR.

APPRECIATE IT. SURE.

COUNCILMAN MCGEE. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT HERE TO WISH A HAPPY ANNIVERSARY TO ONE OF MY BEST FRIENDS, IRA BURCHARD AND HIS WIFE.

HAPPY EIGHTH ANNIVERSARY TO THEM.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO MY BROTHER COMING UP.

AND HAPPY BIRTHDAY TODAY, TOO, TO MY GRANDMOTHER, YOUR GREAT GRANDMOTHER WHO WAS BORN BACK IN 1906.

SO YOU CAN DO THE MATH ON THAT.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU.

OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NONE. I HAVE JUST QUICK THINGS BEFORE WE CLOSE OUT.

SO IT'S CEMETERY CLEANUP IS GOING ON.

TEXAS VETERANS MUSEUM IS OR ORGANIZATION IS SPONSORING THAT CLEANUP ALONG WITH THE CITY.

THAT'S THURSDAY, THE 27TH FROM 8 A.M.

TO 5 P.M. ANYTIME THERE AND IT'S BEHIND BAYLOR SCOTT AND WHITE HEART HOSPITAL THERE ON WHAT IS THAT MAYHILL DRIVE AT THAT POINT THEN THERE'S A VETERANS FUNDRAISER PUT ON BY FORMER ENLISTED MARINE MARK ROY THAT'S ON THE 28TH OF THIS MONTH, 630 TO 1030 AT THE AMERICAN EAGLE HARLEY-DAVIDSON DEALERSHIP THERE IN CORINTH.

AND THEN CONGRESSMAN BURGESS IS MOVING HIS ENERGY EFFICIENCY SUMMIT.

IT'S ON SEPTEMBER PARDON ME, THIS MONTH, 29TH.

IT'S JULY 29TH, AND IT'S ON AT NCTC ON HIGHWAY 114.

AND THAT STARTS I FORGET WHAT TIME IT STARTS IN THE MORNING.

YOU CAN FIND IT ONLINE.

HE POSTED IT AND I DIDN'T NOTE THAT.

BUT IT'S THE 29TH.

IT'S SATURDAY MORNING.

BUT THE NEW LOCATION IS A CRITICAL PART.

HE USED TO DO IT HERE AT UNT.

AND THEN LASTLY, JUST LOOK UP IF YOU WOULD BE SO KIND.

DENTON TEACHERS, WELCOME.

THE EVENTS ARE COMING ON. THERE'S A COUPLE COMING UP BETWEEN NOW AND OUR NEXT MEETING, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE SUPPORT THEM OR THAT YOU'RE AT LEAST AWARE AS SCHOOL GETS BACK STARTED AND TRY TO SUPPORT OUR TEACHERS AND ADMINISTRATORS.

SO AT 817, WE'LL CONCLUDE TONIGHT'S MEETING.

THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.