[00:00:01]
WE'RE GOING TO START WITH AN INVOCATION, BRANT, ARE YOU HERE? SO MANY PEOPLE.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY.
[INVOCATION] LORD, I DO APPRECIATE BEING HERE AND LIVED IN THIS CITY OF AMARILLO WHERE WE CAN START MEETINGS WITH CHRISTIAN PRAYER OR BIBLE VERSES APPEARED IN OUR NEWSPAPER, WHERE OUR CITY MANAGER DEDICATED OUR NEW BALLPARK WITH A PRAYER, A READING ROMANS 13:1 LORD THAT NO AUTHORITY EXCEPT EXIST EXCEPT THROUGH YOU AND THESE OFFICIALS ARE INSTITUTED BY YOU, LORD.
SO THANK YOU FOR THIS CITY COMMISSIONER AND OUR POLICE OFFICERS, FIREMEN, EMT, THOSE THAT ARE SERVING AS SPOKEN OF MR. SHERLYN TODAY AND I ESPECIALLY LIFT HIS FAMILY UP.
JUST SIX DAYS AGO, WE REGRETFULLY HAD TO MARK THE FIVE YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF THE PASSING OF HIS SON IN LINE OF DUTY DEATH.
I PRAY OVER THESE PROCEEDINGS LORD AND I PRAY OVER THE JESUS TEACHINGS FROM THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT.
I PRAY THAT OUR LIGHT WILL SHINE IN FRONT OF ME AND THAT THEY WILL SEE OUR GOOD DEEDS AND GIVE GLORY TO THE FATHER THAT'S IN HEAVEN.
THANK YOU, LORD, FOR ALL IN ATTENDANCE.
THANK YOU FOR BLESSING AND KEEPING US ON ALL THINGS.
THANK YOU MOST OF ALL, THE LORD FOR CHRIST JESUS THE RISEN SAVIOR HIS NAME I PRAY, AMEN.
WOULD YOU JOIN US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEASE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
THANK YOU AT THIS TIME, WE HAVE A PRESENTATION REGARDING EVERY DROP COUNTS,
[PRESENTATION]
SO MR. CITY MANAGER I'LL HAND THAT TO YOU.WE'VE GOT JULIA ALLEGRETTI FROM UTILITIES, JULIE, HI THERE.
YEAH, SO WE'RE HERE TO PRESENT THE WINNERS OF OUR YEARLY EVERY DROP COUNTS CONTEST AND WE HAVE A QUICK LITTLE SLIDESHOW AND PRESENTATION FOR YOU GUYS.
[VIDEO] SO FIRST, WE KIND OF GO OVER WHY WE DO THE CONTEST, WE DO THE CONTEST TO CREATE AWARENESS FOR THE NEED OF WATER CONSERVATION IN THE CITY OF AMARILLO.
AS WE KNOW, WATER IS ONE OF OUR PRECIOUS RESOURCES.
THE CONTEST, THE CONTEST WAS OPEN.
OK, THE CONTEST WAS OPEN TO STUDENTS IN THE AMARILLO COMMUNITY.
WE HAD AGE GROUPS RANGING FROM KINDERGARTEN ALL THE WAY TO SENIORS IN HIGH SCHOOL.
THE PARTICIPANTS WERE ASKED TO SHOW US WHAT THEY THINK IS THE MEANING OF EVERY DROP COUNTS.
[INAUDIBLE] SORRY WE DID PICK A TOTAL OF 13 WINNERS BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE CONTEST, WE DO CREATE A CALENDAR THAT WE'RE GOING TO GIVE OUT NEXT YEAR.
IT'S A FREE CALENDAR WITH ALL OF OUR WINNERS.
SO WE'RE GOING TO START WITH THE FIRST CATEGORY, WHICH WAS OUR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH SECOND GRADE CATEGORY.
SO THAT'S ONE OF OUR RUNNERS UP A DROP SAVING ANOTHER ONE.
THIS CATEGORY IS THE CUTEST BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE MOST, LIKE, PRECIOUS DEPICTIONS OF IT.
AND THEN THE NEXT ONE, WE HAVE WHAT WE SHOULD ALL KNOW, TURN OFF THE WATER WHEN YOU'RE BRUSHING YOUR TEETH.
AND HE WENT INTO DETAIL WITH A TOOTHBRUSH AND A LITTLE HAND AND EVERYTHING.
AND THEN OUR NEXT ONE IS OUR WINNER.
HER NAME IS KEIRA ESPINOZA FROM PUCKETT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
EVERY DROP REALLY DOES COUNT AND IT DOES.
YOU'VE GOT THE COW DRINKING WATER.
YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO HAVE THE FLOATING PIZZA AND BUTTERFLY IN DETAILS BECAUSE WE KNOW, YOU KNOW, WATER IS IMPORTANT TO EVERYTHING.
AND THEN OUR NEXT CATEGORY IS OUR THIRD THROUGH FIFTH GRADE CATEGORY.
THEY START GETTING A LITTLE BIT MORE INTRICATE HERE.
OUR FIRST DRAWING IS OUR I'M SORRY, THREE WINNERS FROM THIS ONE, TOO.
THEY'LL GET FIVE DISCOVERY CENTER PASSES AND FIVE WONDERLAND PASSES.
THREE WILL BE FEATURED IN OUR CALENDAR.
THIS ONE WAS KIND OF A WATERCOLOR ONE, SO IT'S HARD TO SAY, BUT EVERY DROP COUNTS IN
[00:05:01]
AMARILLO AND IT'S CADILLAC RANCH.THAT'S ONE OF OUR RUNNERS UP THIS ONE.
IT WAS ALL DONE IN PENCIL AND THE DETAIL, EVERY DROP OR EVERY DROP COUNTS.
THOSE ARE ACTUALLY ROCKS BECAUSE THEY'RE DEPICTING XERISCAPING AND HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS AND HOW MUCH WATER THAT CAN SAVE FOR US.
OUR WINNER IN THIS CATEGORY IS STELLA LONGORIA FROM BUSHLAND ELEMENTARY.
SHE'LL BE GOING TO MIDDLE SCHOOL IN BUSHLAND SHE'S EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
WE HAVE AMARILLO EVERY DROP COUNTS, AND THAT'S THE SKYLINE.
SO THAT WILL BE ONE OF OUR FEATURED WINNERS, MIDDLE SCHOOL CATEGORY.
WE DID THE SAME PICK THREE FIRST WINNER WILL RECEIVE WONDERLAND PASSES AND A FIFTY DOLLAR DINING CARD.
SO THAT ONE DON'T TAKE SO LONG SHOWERS.
I THINK IT'S ADVICE, WE CAN ALL TAKE.
OUR NEXT ONE, EVERY DROP COUNTS OUR WATER, OUR HOME.
AND THEN OUR WINNER IN THAT CATEGORY IS BODHI WARD FROM BONHAM MIDDLE SCHOOL.
AND HIS IS IT'S AMARILLO GUYS SAVE SOME FOR HIM AND IT'S A THIRSTY LITTLE LIZARD.
SO OUR NEXT AGE CATEGORY IS HIGH SCHOOL.
WE HAVE FIVE WONDERLAND PASSES AND A FIFTY DOLLAR DINING CARD FOR THEM AS WELL.
SO THIS ONE WAS KIND OF AN OVERFLOW CATEGORY, WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A YOUNGER KIDS THAT FELL INTO THIS ONE, WE DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF HIGH SCHOOLERS, BUT THIS IS ONE OF OUR RUNNERS UP.
EVERY DROP COUNTS REFLECTION INTO THE WATER, WHICH IS KIND OF CUTE DETAILS.
THE NEXT ONE IS EVERY DROP COUNTS, ALL DROPS MATTER, EVERY DROP COUNTS, AND IT'S JUST.
YOU CAN TELL THE SWEET LITTLE FACE THAT THIS WAS ONE OF THE YOUNGER ONES THAT FELL INTO THIS CATEGORY.
SO OUR WINNER FOR THAT ONE IS EVAN RAMOS FROM RANDALL HIGH SCHOOL.
AND THIS IS HIS DRAWING SAVE WATER SAVE EARTH.
WE LOOK AT ALL OF THEM DOESN'T MATTER THE AGE CATEGORY, THEY'LL GET FIVE WONDERLAND PASSES, A FIFTY DOLLAR DINING CARD AND A FIRE HD TABLET, AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE ON THE COVER OF OUR CALENDAR NEXT YEAR.
AND THAT WINNER IS EMMA BORRON FROM WESTOVER JUNIOR HIGH, AND THAT IS HER DRAWING EVERY DROP COUNTS AND IT REALLY THAT'S ONE THAT I ACTUALLY BROUGHT BECAUSE THE SLIDE JUST DOESN'T DO IT JUSTICE.
YOU CAN SEE EVERY SINGLE LITTLE IF YOU GUYS WANT TO LOOK AT IT, EVERY SINGLE DETAIL ON THAT.
AND IT WAS ALL DONE WITH COLORED PENCILS.
SO EMMA IS OUR WINNER THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO MAKE IT TODAY, BUT THEY'RE WATCHING IT, SO.
AND THEN, LIKE ALWAYS, WE WANT TO THANK OUR COMMUNITY SPONSORS, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW WE KEEP THIS CONTEST GOING WITH OUR SPONSORS.
AND THE FINAL THING, THE POINT OF THE CONTEST IS DO SOMETHING EVERY DAY TO SAVE WATER.
EVEN IF IT'S SMALL, EVERY DROP COUNTS.
AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THE FEW OF THE WINNERS THAT WE'RE ABLE TO COME IN.
WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE THEM THEIR PRIZES.
[APPLAUSE] OK, DO YOU WANT TO TAKE A PICTURE.
WE LOVED YOUR DRAWING IT WAS GREAT.
AND OUR THIRD THROUGH FIFTH WINNER IS STELLA.
[APPLAUSE] AND BODHI, OUR MIDDLE SCHOOL WINNER.
YES, AND THANK YOU TO THE PARENTS WHO MADE AN EXTRA EFFORT TO BECOME FOR THOSE AWARDS.
WE LOVE HEARING THE FAMILY NOISES IN THE ROOM TODAY.
I THINK YOU HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT BEFORE WE MOVE TO OUR NEXT ITEM.
RIGHT, AS A COURTESY, I'M MAKING AN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT A NOTICE WAS POSTED IN THE NEWSPAPER RELATED TO TAKING ACTION TO AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF
[00:10:01]
OBLIGATION, BUT NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN AT THIS MEETING.AND WE MOVE THIS ITEM TO THE SEPTEMBER 14TH MEETING.
DO YOU WANT TO VISIT ABOUT STEPHANIE? YEAH, I ALSO WANTED TO ANNOUNCE TO EVERYONE AND I APOLOGIZE, I DID NOT BRING HER ACCOMPLISHMENTS, BUT I WILL RECITE SOME OF THEM TO YOU.
OUR NEW CITY SECRETARY THAT WE MADE AN APPOINTMENT EARLIER THIS WEEK OR EARLIER LAST WEEK, RATHER.
STEPHANIE STARTED WITH US IN THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.
SHE ALSO WORKED AS THE ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND ALSO AS PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER.
SO SHE'S BEEN DOING A LOT OF THINGS FOR US.
AND NOW SHE'S GOING TO BE TAKING OVER IN THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE AFTER THE RETIREMENT OF OUR LONGTIME CITY SECRETARY, FRANCIS HIBBS, BACK IN MAY.
SO WE'RE REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO WHAT STEPHANIE'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO BRING TO THE TABLE.
SHE COMES TO US WITH UNDERGRAD MASTER'S DEGREES FROM W.T.
AND IS ALSO CURRENTLY WORKING ON HER MUNICIPAL CLERK CERTIFICATION AS WELL.
SO LOTS OF EDUCATION, LOTS OF TALENT, LOTS OF OPPORTUNITY.
AND I AM EXCITED ABOUT WHAT SHE'S GOING TO DO WITH THE CITY.
STEPHANIE, DID I GET ALL THAT RIGHT? YEAH, OK, GOOD DEAL.
WHEN YOU GET A CHANCE PLEASE WELCOME STEPHANIE.
[PUBLIC ADDRESS]
[APPLAUSE] OK, AT THIS TIME, WE'LL MOVE TO PUBLIC ADDRESS ON OUR AGENDA AND I'LL PASS THE MICROPHONE TO OUR MODERATOR, JEN.OK, THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN TODAY'S CITY COUNCIL MEETING, YOUR INPUT AND YOUR OPINIONS ARE IMPORTANT TO US AND WE'RE GLAD YOU'RE HERE TO SHARE THEM AT EACH POSTED MEETING.
WE INVITE OUR FELLOW COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO ADDRESS CITY COUNCIL REGARDING POSTED AGENDA ITEMS TO ENSURE EVERYONE IS ABLE TO SPEAK.
WE LIMIT EACH SPEAKER'S TIME TO THREE MINUTES AT THE END OF THREE MINUTES, A WARNING BEEP WILL SOUND FROM THE DAIS TO ALERT YOU.
YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS TO WRAP UP YOUR THOUGHTS.
WE ASK THAT YOU STAY WITHIN THE THREE MINUTES ALLOTTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT AND STATE LAW SPEAKERS ARE ASKED TO LIMIT THEIR COMMENTS TO ITEMS ON POSTED AGENDAS.
DOING SO WILL ENSURE THAT WE ARE FOLLOWING THE GUIDELINES AND WE ARE ABLE TO HAVE AN EFFECTIVE MEETING FOR ALL.
IF YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM THREE B, WE ASK THAT YOU MAKE YOUR COMMENT DURING THE PUBLIC ADDRESS OR DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT NOT BOTH.
IN ORDER TO ALLOW TIME FOR ALL SPEAKERS.
IT IS YOUR CHOICE WHICH TIME YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.
SO IF I CALL YOUR NAME, IF YOU'D RATHER SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, JUST WAVE YOUR HAND AND I'LL SET YOUR PACKET ASIDE.
THE FIRST SPEAKER IS ED [INAUDIBLE].
WE DO HAVE OVERFLOW IN ROOM 305 AND 306, SO IT MAY TAKE A SECOND FOR PEOPLE TO GET DOWN.
HI, I'M ED [INAUDIBLE], AND THE FIRST THING I WANT TO DO IS I WANT TO THANK YOU AND LET YOU KNOW THAT I RESPECT AND HONOR YOU FOR GIVING YOUR TIME TO SERVE THE PEOPLE.
AND YOU'VE USED YOUR GOD GIVEN GIFTS OF LOVE, POWER AND OF SOUND MIND TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS FOR THE PEOPLE, AND I THANK YOU FOR THAT.
I SAW A DESIRE IN THE CULTURE FOR UNIFORMITY RATHER THAN UNITY, AND THIS IS DISAPPOINTING TO ME FOR THE SIMPLE FACT THAT IF WE HAVE UNIFORMITY, IT'S KIND OF LIKE A HUSBAND AND WIFE.
IRON SHARPENS IRON, BUT IF THEY BOTH AGREE, ONLY ONE IS NECESSARY.
AND THIS WITH ALL OF YOUR GOD GIVEN GIFTS.
RATHER THAN JUST UNITY, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERYBODY IS IN AGREEMENT.
THEN ALL BUT ONE ARE UNNECESSARY, AND THAT'S PROBABLY THE DEFINITION OF A DICTATORSHIP, SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT HAVING A DIVERGENT VIEW.
BE PROUD OF IT AND KNOW THAT GOD GAVE YOU THAT ABILITY TO INVESTIGATE.
AND I WILL SAY THIS, THAT I HAD AN EXPERIENCE IN MY MUCH YOUNGER LIFE WHERE I OFFERED TO SERVE THE PEOPLE JUST LIKE YOU DID, AND THEY DIDN'T SEE ANY DIFFERENCE IN ME AND MY
[00:15:05]
OPPONENT.SO THEY DIDN'T SEE ANY REASON TO VOTE FOR ME, SO I DIDN'T GET TO SERVE.
BUT YOU BEING TRANSPARENT AND YOU OVERCOMING YOUR LEANINGS, YOUR OWN PERSONAL OPINIONS TO LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE AND DO THEIR WILL.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR TRANSPARENCY IN ONE AREA.
AND THAT IS I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU'RE ABLE TO PURCHASE SOMETHING WITH SURPLUSES, WITH RESERVES THAT YOU HAVE FROM THIS POCKET OR THAT POCKET, YOU GOT TOO MANY POCKETS FOR ME TO KEEP UP WITH.
SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK THAT YOU GET IT DOWN TO SIMPLE TERMS FOR US, SIMPLE PEOPLE AND BE VERY TRANSPARENT ABOUT IT.
AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY AT THIS TIME.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BE EFFICIENT, WE HAVE A LONG AGENDA, SO AND WANT YOU TO [INAUDIBLE] WHAT YOU FEEL LIKE IS [INAUDIBLE] OK UP NEXT IS GINA [INAUDIBLE].
AGAIN, WE DO HAVE OVERFLOW IN ROOM 305 AND 306, SO IT COULD TAKE THEM A SECOND TO GET DOWN HERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, TERRY GLOVER 5707 BURGETT MR. STANLEY, WELCOME.
YOU HAVEN'T HAD THE PLEASURE OF HAVING ME AT THE LECTERN.
AND IT'S BEEN A WHILE COUNCIL MEMBERS, I KNOW YOU ALL MISSED ME.
I AM HERE ACTUALLY TO SPEAK ABOUT AGENDA ITEM THREE A, UNFORTUNATELY MY TIME DOES NOT ALLOW ME TO STAY FOR THE ACTUAL PUBLIC HEARING DUE TO CARING FOR A FATHER IN LAW.
SO I JUST WANTED TO COME AND REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO DIVE IN AND DO THE HOMEWORK ON THIS ONE.
AND I WANT YOU TO BE VERY CAUTIOUS AND CAREFUL ABOUT SINGLING OUT FOR THE GREATER GOOD OF ONE PERSON OR THREE PEOPLE VERSUS THE GREATER GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY THAT THIS DECISION AFFECTS.
NORTH HEIGHTS REZONING EFFORTS HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR A VERY, VERY LONG TIME.
AND I'M SURE YOU'VE HEARD TAIL.
I KNOW SOME OF YOU HAVE HAD THE PLEASURE OF ATTENDING A BUS TOUR, AND IT'S ALL BEEN VERY INFORMATIVE AND EDUCATIONAL.
I HOPE THERE HAVE BEEN SOME THAT HAVE SPENT LONGER THAN I ON THIS, BUT I HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR THE BETTER PART OF A YEAR ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.
AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT NOTHING PROPOSED WAS DONE SO LIGHTLY WITHOUT CONSIDERATION AND CERTAINLY WITHOUT LOOKING AT IT FROM MULTIPLE SIDES.
THIS IS NOT A SELFISH PROPOSITION.
WE MAKE THIS IS A PROPOSITION MADE FOR THE GREATER GOOD OF NORTH HEIGHTS AS A WHOLE AND ITS FUTURE.
I WOULD CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE TIME TO EXPLORE THE ECONOMIC IMPACT THAT PROPER ZONING CAN HAVE ON AN AREA OF TOWN.
AND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ECONOMIC IMPACT FOR ONE INDIVIDUAL OR TWO INDIVIDUALS.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE OVERALL ECONOMIC IMPACT FOR A COMMUNITY AND THE POSSIBILITY TO HAVE THINGS LIKE GROCERY STORES AND NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES IN THE COMMUNITY WALKABLE, WHERE PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO GET TO THOSE SERVICES WHEN THEY NEED TO WITHOUT A VEHICLE AND WITHOUT HAVING TO DEPEND ON OUR EVER GROWING AND EVER CHANGING BUS LINE, BUT CERTAINLY STILL NOT ABLE TO MEET THE NEEDS OF ALL PEOPLE.
MELODIE GRAVES, PRESIDENT OF NORTH HEIGHTS ADVISORY ASSOCIATION, ASKED ME TO MAKE A STATEMENT ON HER BEHALF.
SO THEY ARE QUARANTINED CURRENTLY.
AND SHE WANTED ME TO LET YOU KNOW THAT SHE HAS STARTED AN ONLINE PETITION IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
SHE HAS GATHERED VERIFIED SIGNATURES FROM PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN NORTH HEIGHTS IN SUPPORT OF THIS UPWARDS OF 60 IN ABOUT 24, 36 HOURS.
SO PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY DO SUPPORT THIS.
THOSE THAT OPPOSE ARE VERY LOUD, THEY'RE VERY, VERY LOUD, BUT THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS RIGHT.
LOUDER DOES NOT ALWAYS MAKE YOU MORE RIGHT.
AND I ASK YOU TO CONSIDER THAT AS YOU MOVE FORWARD.
[00:20:02]
LASTLY, I WANT TO TAKE MY LAST FEW SECONDS TO THANK MR. MILLER AND LET YOU KNOW THAT YOUR CITY STAFF AND PLANNING ARE ROCK STARS AND THEY HAVE WORKED THEIR HIND ENDS OFF ON BEHALF OF THIS PROJECT.UP NEXT IS GINA [INAUDIBLE] IF SHE'S HERE OTHERWISE, JAMES [INAUDIBLE].
AND AFTER THAT IS MICHAEL FORD.
THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE HERE FOR THE HEARING THAT DID NOT SIGN UP ONLINE, AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, BASED ON A PREVIOUS HEARING, THAT THOSE FOLKS DON'T HAVE TO REGISTER UNDER PUBLIC ADDRESS.
THEY CAN THEY CAN SPEAK IN THE HEARING, THE CONTEXT OF THE HEARING.
SO I JUST WANTED TO VERIFY THAT THERE'S A COUPLE OF FOLKS BACK THERE WHO WANTED TO SPEAK AND HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO OR DID NOT REGISTER.
HELLO, MY NAME IS MICHAEL FORD.
MADAM MAYOR, THE COMMENTS MADE BY THE PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR REGARDING VAERS DURING THE LAST MEETING WERE NOTHING SHORT OF INSULTING.
FIRST, SHE DESCRIBES CDC VAERS THE EXACT SAME SYSTEM THAT THE CITY OF AMARILLO DIRECTS VACCINE RECIPIENTS TO REPORT ALL ADVERSE EVENTS TO AS AN UNRELIABLE EVENT REPORTING SYSTEM, LEAVING A VERY STRONG IMPRESSION THAT THE REPORTS IN THE SYSTEM CANNOT BE TRUSTED.
THEN SHE MADE THE CONFIDENT STATEMENT THAT THERE ARE FEWER THAN 8,000 TOTAL ADVERSE EVENTS IN VAERS AND CERTAINLY ONLY A FEW DEATHS.
UNFORTUNATELY, OUR PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR APPARENTLY DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO NAVIGATE A GOVERNMENT DATABASE AS THE TOTAL OF ADVERSE EVENTS REPORTED TO VAERS EXCEED 540,000, NOT 8,000.
AND COVID VACCINE DEATHS ARE MORE THAN A FEW, WITH REPORTS TOTALING OVER 12,000, WHICH IS TWICE AS MANY DEATHS AS ALL DEATHS REPORTED TO VAERS FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS THROUGH 2020.
EVEN THE CDC, ON ITS SELECT ADVERSE EVENTS REPORTING PAGE, ADMITS TO OVER 6,000 DEATHS, BUT IS REMARKABLY SILENT ON THE TOTAL NUMBER OF REPORTED ADVERSE EVENTS.
SO THE FALSE INFORMATION ON COVID VACCINE ADVERSE EVENTS IS SHOCKING, BUT NOT SURPRISING.
AND WHY DO I SAY UNSURPRISING? BECAUSE THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ARE NOT UNUSED TO THE ISSUANCE OF FALSE INFORMATION.
AT THE LAST REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WAS BARRED FROM PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE FALSE STATEMENT THAT STATE LAW ONLY ALLOWS MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK ON ITEMS LISTED ON THE AGENDA.
I'M VERY HAPPY TO EXPLAIN THAT EXCRUCIATING DETAIL IN RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS, BUT NOT IN MY THREE MINUTES.
CONVERSELY, THE CITY ATTORNEY DOES ENFORCE CLEAR AND OBVIOUS RESTRICTIONS ON THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE AGENDAS AND THE STATE LAW REQUIRES.
AND I'LL CONCLUDE MY EXAMPLES WITH THE LAST VIOLATION OF LAW OF THE CITY COUNCIL GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION WITHOUT NOTICING EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT HAS DONE SO FOR EVERY EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR WELL OVER FOUR YEARS.
THE ACTION YOU TAKE IS A BODY THAT BENEFIT FROM AN UNLAWFUL CLOSED MEETING CAN BE REVERSED EITHER BY MANDAMUS OR INJUNCTION.
BUT THAT'S NOT THE WORST OF IT.
WHEN YOU RETURN FROM YOUR ILLEGAL EXECUTIVE SESSION.
YOU HAD A SINGLE VOTE ON HOWARD SMITH'S MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION OTHERWISE KNOWN AS A MOTION TO END DEBATE.
THE CITY COUNCIL NEVER VOTED ON THE TAX INCREASE, WHICH WAS THE MAIN MOTION THAT WAS LEFT PENDING AND REQUIRED A SECOND VOTE, BUT IT DIED ON ADJOURNMENT.
SO IF THE CITY COUNCIL CANNOT FOLLOW THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT OR ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER REQUIRED BY THE CITY CHARTER, HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY EXPECT THE CITY COUNCIL TO PROPERLY OVERSEE SOMETHING AS COMPLEX AND CONSEQUENTIAL AS A VERY PUBLIC VACCINATION PROGRAM WHERE THE CITY IS IN VIOLATING INFORMED CONSENT REQUIREMENTS BY ISSUING BLATANTLY FALSE INFORMATION FROM THIS PODIUM AND FROM THAT MICROPHONE TO EVERY PERSON TUNING IN LIVE OR ON THE INTERNET? THE FAR BETTER COURSE WOULD BE FOR THE CITY TO BEGIN ADVOCATING FOR EARLY TREATMENT AND PROVIDE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WITH EFFECTIVE LIFE SAVING AND CHEAP THERAPEUTICS ALONGSIDE PUBLIC VACCINATION PROGRAM TO CREATE TRUE AND SIGNIFICANT OPTIONS AND TRUE INFORMED CONSENT.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
AND AFTER THAT IS [INAUDIBLE] HERMAN MOORE.
I'M HERE TO REMIND YOU GUYS ABOUT THE NEEDS OF THE SENIOR POPULATION OF AMARILLO AND THE TRUST THAT WE PLACED IN YOU TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE THINGS YOU SAID IN YOUR CAMPAIGN, SUCH AS TO REPRESENT ALL THE PEOPLE OF AMARILLO.
AND I ALSO SPECIFICALLY REPRESENT THE SENIOR CITIZENS ASSOCIATION OF AMARILLO.
AND AS YOU KNOW, AFTER SERVING THE SENIOR CITIZENS OF AMARILLO FOR 47 YEARS, WE
[00:25:01]
LOST OUR LOCATION.AND BECAUSE WE LOST OUR LOCATION WELL BEFORE WE LOST OUR LOCATION, WE PROVIDED THE SENIOR CITIZENS WITH ACTIVITIES, SOCIALIZATION, NUTRITIOUS MEALS, WHICH SO MANY OF THEM DEPENDED ON.
AND SINCE WE LOST OUR LOCATION, WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE MEALS.
SO THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE, BECAUSE IT WASN'T JUST THE ASSOCIATION MEMBERS, IT WAS THE PUBLIC AS WELL.
THEY COULD COME AND GET THOSE MEALS AND YOU WOULD BE AMAZED AT HOW MANY PEOPLE CAME AND ATE THOSE MEALS AND WERE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE NUTRITIOUS MEALS, NOT FROZEN THINGS THAT YOU JUST STICK IN THE MICROWAVE.
ARE YOU SPEAKING TO THE BUDGET ITEM ON THE AGENDA? IS THAT WHAT ITEM YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT? I GUESS? WELL, I DON'T KNOW.
I BELIEVE SHE'S SPEAKING TO ITEM ONE B IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AMERICAN RESCUE FUND PLANS.
AND ANY WAY, THOSE MEALS WERE AT VERY REASONABLE PRICES ANYONE COULD AFFORD, YOU KNOW, IN LARGE.
WELL, I SAY THAT IF YOU WERE HUSBAND AND WIFE, IT WAS TWELVE DOLLARS AND YOU COULD HAVE PROBABLY FOUR MEALS OUT OF THAT.
AND SINCE WE LOST OUR LOCATION, LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE THE SENIORS HAVE LOST THEIR ACCESS TO THE ACTIVITIES, TO THE SOCIALIZATION, TO THE NUTRITIOUS MEALS.
AND WHAT YOU GUYS ARE YOUNG ENOUGH.
THE SENIOR POPULATION HAS LIVED HERE, WORKED HERE, PAID OUR TAXES HERE, VOTED HERE.
WE HAVE PUT YOU IN OFFICE TRUSTING YOU TO TAKE CARE OF US.
AND WE HAVE NOT BEEN TAKEN CARE OF.
AND THE CITY OF AMARILLO HAS NEVER, NEVER FINANCIALLY SUPPORTED THE AMARILLO SENIOR CITIZENS ASSOCIATION.
AND WE'RE NOT ASKING YOU TO TAKE ANY MONEY OUT OF YOUR BUDGET.
NOW, WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR YOU TO DO IS TO KEEP US IN MIND FOR THE AARP MONEY THAT WE NEED THE TWO MILLION DOLLARS TO BUY A LOCATION THAT WE CAN PUT OURSELVES INTO AND THEN BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO EXIST.
AND I DON'T EVEN I'M PROBABLY NOT EVEN SUPPOSED TO SAY THIS, BUT IF WE DO NOT GET THE MONEY THAT WE NEED FROM YOU GUYS, THE SENIOR CITIZENS ASSOCIATION WILL CEASE TO EXIST.
IT'S WE'RE A VERY BIG POPULATION IN AMARILLO AND WE NEED YOUR HELP.
AND SOMEDAY WHEN YOU'RE MY AGE, YOU'RE GOING TO WANT THESE SERVICES FOR YOURSELF.
[APPLAUSE] UP NEXT IS MILDRED DARTON.
AND ALAN ABRAHAM I'LL WAIT FOR THREE A.
OK, I THINK THAT'S IT THEN, MAYOR.
[1.A. Review agenda items for regular meeting and attachments]
PACKET THAT YOU WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT OR NEED MORE INFORMATION ON JUST RIGHT UP FRONT COUNCIL.EVERYTHING OK, MOVING ON TO ITEM ONE, B IS A CORONAVIRUS UPDATE MR.
[1.B. Coronavirus update]
CITY MANAGER, ALL RIGHT MAYOR WE'VE GOT CASIE STOUGHTON, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH HERE TO GIVE US THE UPDATE.SO AS OF TODAY, THERE ARE A TOTAL OF 37,110 CASES OF COVID-19 REPORTED IN POTTER AND RANDALL COUNTIES.
THAT'S AN INCREASE OVER YESTERDAY OF 188 CASES.
WE HAVE 2,053 ACTIVE CASES AND WE'RE UP TO 783 DEATHS HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
SINCE JULY 22ND, WE HAVE HAD AN INCREASE OF 1,499 ACTIVE CASES.
THE FIVE DAY NEW CASE AVERAGES AT 148 NEW CASES PER DAY.
ADULT BED UTILIZATION AT OUR HOSPITALS IS AT 73 PERCENT.
ICU UTILIZATION IS AT 65.5 PERCENT AND VENTILATOR UTILIZATION IS AT 54.5 PERCENT.
CURRENTLY, THERE ARE 98 PATIENTS WITH COVID-19 HOSPITALIZED IN OUR LOCAL HOSPITALS, WITH 50 OF THOSE PATIENTS IN ICU AND 30 ON VENTILATORS.
WE REMAIN AT LEVEL ORANGE FOR THE NEXT WEEK.
NEXT WEDNESDAY WOULD BE OUR TWO WEEK MARK WE WILL REVIEW THE DATA AND MOVE EITHER TO RED STATE OR ORANGE OR GO DOWN TO YELLOW.
HOWEVER, TWO OF THE FOUR METRICS DO YOU REMAIN IN ORANGE.
AND TWO OF THOSE FOUR METRICS ARE IN LEVEL RED.
YESTERDAY OUR GA 34'S HOSPITALIZATION PERCENTAGE WAS AT 10.23 PERCENT.
THAT MEANS THAT 10.23 PERCENT OF ALL OF OUR HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS DO HAVE COVID-19.
SO AND THAT IS FAIRLY CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE OF TEXAS.
IT'S REALLY HOSPITALIZATIONS ALL OVER THE STATE OF TEXAS ARE INCREASING SOME UPWARDS OF 20 INTO THE 20, 23 PERCENT AREA.
SO CERTAINLY WE'VE SEEN AN INCREASE ALL OVER THE STATE.
GONZALEZ, AS OF THIS MORNING, WE HAVE RIGHT AROUND 19 PATIENTS IN OUR IN
[00:30:07]
E.R.HOLD, WHICH MEANS THAT THOSE PATIENTS ARE WAITING FOR A HOSPITAL BED, WAITING IN THE E.R., WAITING TO BE ADMITTED INTO THE HOSPITAL.
STAFFING AND BED AVAILABILITY CONTINUE TO BE A CONCERN.
OUR HOSPITALS ARE ALSO CONSIDERING HOLDING ELECTIVE PROCEDURES BASED ON THE NEXT DAY'S BED AVAILABILITY, WHICH CERTAINLY WILL AFFECT OUR, YOU KNOW, LOVED ONES, THOSE PEOPLE THAT WE KNOW WITH THOSE ELECTIVE PROCEDURES.
WITH THE SCHEDULING BEING SO TIGHT ON ELECTIVE PROCEDURES, SO JUST WANT TO AGAIN REITERATE MASKING AND VACCINES, DISTANCING IF YOU'RE SICK, STAY HOME, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY SEEK COVID TESTING OUR HOSPITALS CANNOT FIGHT THIS ALONE.
THERE ARE ONLY SO MANY BEDS IN OUR HOSPITALS.
I WAS LISTENING TO AT A PRESS CONFERENCE YESTERDAY, A HOSPITAL OUT OF BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA.
CATHERINE O'NEAL, THEIR CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, WAS PROVIDING THAT PRESS CONFERENCE.
SO IF YOU HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO LISTEN TO, THAT WOULD CERTAINLY ENCOURAGE IT.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SHE SAID WAS THAT THESE ARE THE DARKEST DAYS OF THE PANDEMIC BY, YOU KNOW, LOOKING INTO THE WALLS OF THEIR HOSPITAL.
THESE ARE THE DARKEST DAYS OF THEIR PANDEMIC OF THE PANDEMIC THERE IN BATON ROUGE.
I THINK THAT WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT AT THAT POINT YET, BUT WE'RE NOT FAR BEHIND LOUISIANA.
SO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE RIGHT NOW.
SO ANYBODY IS VACCINATED TODAY OR CERTAINLY SLOW THAT TIDE IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
MASKING CAN MAKE IT A MORE IMMEDIATE IMPACT BY SLOWING THE SPREAD OF TRANSMISSION RIGHT NOW.
SO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
SO WE'RE SEEING A LOT OF BREAKTHROUGH OCCURRING IN VACCINES AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
ENOUGH THAT HONESTLY, I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF I SHOULD BE SITTING HERE WITH THE PATIENTS THAT I SEE EVERY DAY AND THEY COME IN AND THERE APPEAR TO BE HEALTHY.
AND I'M NOT EVEN SURE WHETHER THEY'RE CARRYING OR NOT.
AND I'M WITHIN A VERY SHORT DISTANCE OF THE ORIGINATION OF WHERE THEIR VIRUS IS GOING TO BE COMING OUT.
AND SO AND WE'RE NOT EVEN SETTING IT SIX FEET APART HERE.
AND NOT EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM IS ACTUALLY FOLLOWING THE SKIPPING THE ROW THING.
AND SO WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY SOCIAL DISTANCING VERY WELL IN HERE.
I'M NOT EVEN SURE THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING THIS LIVE AND MAYBE THAT THIS SHOULDN'T UNTIL WE SEE THE DELTA VARIANT PASS THROUGH, WHICH IT'S BEEN SHOWN TO.
IT'S A IT'S FAST UP, IT'S FAST DOWN AND IT GOES ON.
I'M NOT EVEN SURE WHETHER WE SHOULD BE DOING THIS LIVE AND WHETHER IT SHOULDN'T BE ON ZOOM FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.
BUT I THINK AT THE SAME TIME, THE GOVERNOR DID NOT RE UP THE ABILITY TO EVEN USE THE ZOOM MEETING AFTER A CERTAIN TIME.
IS THAT CORRECT? I AM NOT SURE ABOUT THAT.
WE HAVE TO GET TO, I GUESS, CITY ATTORNEY TO GIVE US AN OPINION ON WHETHER OR NOT THOSE MEETING RULES IN THE LEGISLATURE EVEN HAD SOME BILLS FILED ON THOSE.
AND I'M I DIDN'T FOLLOW THEM CLOSELY, SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE STATUS IS ON THAT.
THE SUSPENSION ENDS SEPTEMBER THE 1ST, I BELIEVE.
DID ANY OF THOSE BILLS PASS, BRYAN? NO.
MAKING THE VIRTUAL OR DIGITAL MEETING OPTION PERMANENT? THAT IS CORRECT NONE OF THOSE PASSED, SO.
I'M HONESTLY, I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT ME, I MEAN, I'VE I'VE BEEN TO THE VACCINATION PROCESS AND I NEVER GET SICK.
I PROBABLY SHOULD KNOCK ON WOOD ON THAT ONE.
BUT THERE ARE A NUMBERS THAT AREN'T.
A FRIEND THAT WAS A DENTIST THAT HAD BOTH SHOTS OF MODERNA AND HE'S PASSED AWAY.
WENT TO FLORIDA, CAME BACK, GOT COVID AND ENDED UP BEING IN THE HOSPITAL ON A BED AND THEN PASSED AWAY, AND WHENEVER YOU BEGIN TO SEE SOME OF THOSE KIND OF THINGS LIKE THAT, I THINK I DON'T WANT TO RAIN IN ON ANYBODY'S PERSONAL RIGHTS I'M VERY MUCH FOR PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO HAVE THEIR PERSONAL RIGHTS.
BUT ALSO AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE POSITION THAT WE'RE IN, AND I THINK WE NEED TO BE CONSIDERING THAT.
SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME THINGS THAT I THAT I KIND OF I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY
[00:35:01]
EVEN DISCUSS THAT ON DURING THIS OR NOT OR WHETHER WE CAN.I DON'T WANT TO BE INADVERTENTLY SPREADING SOMETHING THAT I DON'T BECAUSE I THINK THAT I WOULD PROBABLY BE ASYMPTOMATIC AND, YOU KNOW, I'M EVEN QUESTIONING JUST DOING WHAT I DO, WHETHER I DON'T NEED TO PROBABLY TEST ON A WEEKLY OR BI WEEKLY BASIS JUST BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M COMING IN CONTACT WITH AND WHICH MEANS WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH MY FAMILY AND MY FRIENDS AND MY COLLEAGUES AND YOU GUYS.
AND I THINK IT'S I THINK WE STILL HAVE SOME.
ALL POLITICS ASIDE, THIS IS SERIOUS.
DEFINITELY, WE WANT ALL POLITICS ASIDE, BECAUSE WE JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT PEOPLE'S HEALTH, SO WE DO TRULY THAT'S IMPORTANT AND IT'S NOT A POLITICAL ISSUE FOR ME AT ALL.
ACTUALLY, NEVER REALLY HAS BEEN.
I THINK WE HAVE TO I JUST DON'T I PERSONALLY, I DON'T WANT TO BE A REASON FOR SOMEONE ENDING UP IN A HOSPITAL, HONESTLY.
OK, WELL, I THINK WE CAN DEFINITELY TAKE YOUR CONCERNS GOING FORWARD IN HOW WE SET UP THE COUNCIL CHAMBER TO DO MEETINGS, I MEAN, ANY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO WE WOULD ONLY HAVE TWO MORE MEETINGS, I GUESS, WHERE WE COULD DO THE DIGITAL OPTION BEFORE SEPTEMBER 1ST.
SO I THINK IT JUST SHOULD BE WE SHOULD AT LEAST TALK ABOUT IT.
AND YOU ALL MAY COMPLETELY DISAGREE WITH ME, AND I'M FINE WITH THAT, BUT I THINK IT'S WORTHY OF DISCUSSION.
OK, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT EDDY IS BRINGING UP? I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT.
CAN YOU GRAB YOUR MIC, PLEASE.
I THINK HE BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT HE'S TRYING TO BE CAREFUL.
IF WE CAN HAVE TWO MORE MEETINGS ANOTHER WAY LET'S DO IT.
MAYOR I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH MEETING EITHER VIA ZOOM OR IN PERSON, BUT IT IS OBVIOUS TO ME TODAY THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE SOCIAL DISTANCING THAT WE NEED RIGHT HERE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
AND OF COURSE, WE HAVE TWO OTHER ROOMS THAT HAVE BEEN ALLOTTED, YOU KNOW, FOR PEOPLE TO SPREAD OUT.
AND THAT'S NOT REALLY HAPPENING.
SO AND WE'VE GOT TO BE AN EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, FOR OUR CITY AND WE DO HAVE TO HAVE THE CONCERN AND SAFETY FOR OUR CITIZENS.
AGAIN, NOTHING POLITICAL, JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO THE RIGHT THING.
I LOVE THE [INAUDIBLE] FAMILY, AND JONATHAN WAS A GOOD FRIEND OF MINE IN HIGH SCHOOL.
I'VE LOST TOUCH WITH HIM AS WE GET A LITTLE OLDER, BUT REALLY GOOD PEOPLE.
AND I HATE TO SEE ANYONE LOSE THEIR DAD AND GO THROUGH THAT.
AND SO YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S NOT POLITICAL.
AND WE ALL HAVE PEOPLE THAT WE KNOW THAT HAVE BEEN SICK AND, YOU KNOW, BOUNCE RIGHT BACK.
BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE PEOPLE THAT WE KNOW THAT WE ASSUME ARE HEALTHY AND THEY DON'T.
I AGREE WITH YOU THAT THE EXTERNAL IS A FOCAL POINT AND THERE'S SOME PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY THERE.
I DON'T WANT TO DISREGARD OR NOT PAY ATTENTION TO THE INTERNAL, YOU KNOW, SO MY QUESTION IS A LITTLE BIT OF WHY ARE WE NOT PROMOTING AND SETTING THAT EXAMPLE SOMEWHAT MORE FOR INTERNAL IMMUNITIES, BUILDING THAT STRONG IMMUNE SYSTEM AND TAKING CARE OF SOME OF THOSE THINGS? MORE SO.
AND I'M TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT WE ALL AGREE WITH, YOU KNOW, VITAMINS, MINERALS, WATER, EXERCISE, HEALTHY DIET.
AND SO I THINK WE'RE WANTING TO DO THAT.
I JUST I THINK WE FEEL SO HANDICAPPED WITH THIS THING THAT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO REALLY PUSH.
AND SO I THINK THE VAERS DATA AND I THINK ACCURATE ACCOUNTING IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE YOU'RE BRINGING UP BREAKTHROUGH CASES AND THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
AND THAT'S NOT POLITICAL, THAT'S FACTUAL DATA THAT WE NEED TO BE PAYING ATTENTION TO.
AND WE NEED TO BE ADVISING OUR PUBLIC WITH AS MUCH OF THAT DATA AS WE CAN.
BUT THEN I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO BE PUSHING FOR THERAPEUTICS AND THINGS THAT DOCTORS AND PRETREATMENT CLINICS ARE WILLING TO DO.
NOW, I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE AS A CITY CAN DO THIS AT OUR CLINIC.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE SOME LIMITATIONS.
BUT AS A CITY IN SETTING THAT RIGHT EXAMPLE, I THINK WE SHOULD BE PUSHING AND AND TRYING TO TAKE GROUND AGAINST THIS ILLNESS IN OTHER WAYS, NOT JUST IN THE WAYS OF PUTTING ALL OF
[00:40:01]
OUR EGGS IN ONE BASKET.I DON'T KNOW ANY OF US THAT BELIEVE THAT ALL YOUR EGGS IN ONE BASKET IS ALWAYS A GOOD PLAN.
AND SO I MEAN THAT IN THE WAY OF JUST ADVOCATING FOR A VACCINE AND EVERYBODY GET YOUR VACCINE AND IT'S ALL ABOUT THE VACCINE.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH ANYONE WHO WANTS TO TAKE THAT SHOT, GETTING THAT SHOT.
AND I WANT TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE AND I WANT IT TO BE INFORMED CONSENT.
BUT THEN EVERYBODY WHO'S NOT COMFORTABLE WITH TAKING THAT, WHAT ARE WE DOING TO ASSIST THEM AND TO HELP THEM AND TO SET THAT RIGHT AND TO SET THAT EXAMPLE.
AND SO, CASIE, I KNOW LAST TIME, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD YOU WOULD ADDRESS THE VAERS DATA.
DID YOU HAPPEN TO BRING THAT? I KNOW MR. FORD SPOKE.
AND I WOULD I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT ARE THE ACTUAL NUMBERS AND IS THAT AN ACCURATE ACCOUNTING OF WHAT HE GAVE US? BEFORE WE GO TO THAT QUESTION, CAN I JUST ASK YOU COLE DO YOU HAVE A DO YOU HAVE A THOUGHT YOU WANT TO SHARE ABOUT HOW WE SHOULD SET UP OUR MEETINGS FOR SOCIAL DISTANCING MASKING JUST BEFORE WE MOVE OFF OF THAT SIDE POINT THAT WE KIND OF WERE ON? CAN WE HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS? YES.
SO LET ME ASK YOU, IN THE WAY OF BEING ABLE TO DO A ZOOM MEETING, YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO DO THAT TWO MORE TIMES AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRED BY STATE LAW TO GO AHEAD AND MEET IN PUBLIC JARED.
IS THAT RIGHT? ARE WE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE COULD DO A ZOOM MEETING FOR THE LAST REGULARLY POSTED MEETING? YES.
IF YOU HAD A MEETING LATE IN AUGUST, YOU COULD.
BUT THEN GOING FORWARD WE COULD SET UP JUST A DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENT THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO SOCIAL DISTANT MORE.
WE COULD GO TO A DIFFERENT LOCATION THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T DO IT BEFORE, BECAUSE IT'S VERY HARD.
MICROPHONES AND VIDEO ARE SET UP FOR THIS ROOM.
THEY'RE NOT SET UP THAT WAY IN THE CIVIC CENTER.
AND IT MAKES IT VERY HARD FOR PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE AND HEAR EVEN JUST PEOPLE THAT ARE WATCHING AT HOME, WHICH THANK YOU.
IF YOU'RE WATCHING AT HOME OR WATCHING A REPLAY OF THIS, WE APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE STAYING ENGAGED.
SO DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION COLE? YES, MA'AM, I BELIEVE SO.
AND THEN TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, NO, I DON'T HAVE A AN OUTLOOK OR A PLAN ON HOW WE WOULD SIT AND HOW WE WOULD FURTHER ELIMINATE TRANSMISSION OF THIS.
OK, SO THAT'S REALLY THAT'S MY ADDRESS.
I MEAN, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT VACCINE AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THERAPEUTICS.
AND I THINK WE HAVE TO WE CAN ADDRESS ALL OF THOSE DEALS AND AND LET THAT BE DONE.
I THINK OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS, ARE WE DOING THE THINGS TO PERMIT TRANSMISSION? AND I THINK AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE'RE GOING THROUGH ANOTHER BUMP.
AND IT'S A SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH OF A BUMP THAT NOW THAT WE'RE BACK UP AT 10 PERCENT OF HOSPITALIZATION RATE.
AND AND HONESTLY, THAT'S THE PART I CARE ABOUT.
I'M AND PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE DON'T GET ME WRONG.
I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT CASE NUMBERS.
I'M WORRIED ABOUT SEVERE DISEASE AND WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING WITH THOSE PEOPLE WITH SEVERE DISEASE AND HOW DO WE PREVENT SEVERE DISEASE? WELL ONE OF THOSE WAYS THAT WE AS A GROUP HAVE CONTROL OVER IS INDOOR MARKETING.
SOCIAL DISTANCING AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS, AND I THINK THOSE IT BEHOOVES US AS LEADERS TO DO THE THINGS WE CAN TO PROTECT PEOPLE THE BEST THAT WE CAN.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE AT LEAST ADDRESSING THIS PART OF IT, TO THE THINGS THAT ARE IN OUR CONTROL.
AND I THINK THE POINT, VERY EASILY WITHIN OUR CONTROL.
OK, SO MR. CITY MANAGER, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE HEARING FROM DISCUSSION HERE, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF GOING FORWARD, WE COULD KEEP IN MIND AS WE'RE SETTING THE MEETING UP THE ROOM UP, THAT WE WOULD DO SO IN A WAY THAT MEETS THE CDC GUIDELINES AND BETTER ALLOWS FOR SOCIAL DISTANCING AT THE COUNCIL TABLE, BUT ALSO IN THE AUDIENCE.
I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, NO, STAY ON THAT TOPIC.
I WAS GOING TO GO TO SOMETHING SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, OK? I THINK IT'S OK TO GO TO SOMETHING SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THEN I THINK COLE KIND OF HAS THE RUDDER A LITTLE BIT.
TO COUNCILMAN STANLEY'S QUESTION ON VAERS, CASIE MAYBE UP TO SPEED MORE THAN YOU KNOW, SHE'S SHE NEEDS TO ON THAT.
HOWEVER, WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT OUR LANE IS HERE AT THE CITY, OUR LANE IS NOT TO ANALYZE OR DO ANY TYPE OF DATA COMPILATION OR ANALYSIS ON VAERS DATA.
OUR JOB IS TO PUT VACCINATIONS IN PEOPLE'S ARMS, TO COMMUNICATE TO OUR PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT OUR SITUATION IS WITH REGARD TO COVID WAYS THAT THEY CAN MITIGATE AS RECOMMENDED BY CDC AND DSHS.
BUT AS FAR AS ANYBODY THAT HAS CONCERNS ABOUT VAERS DATA OR WANTS TO DEBATE OR LITIGATE THAT, THAT NEEDS TO BE REFERRED TO THE PROPER AUTHORITY IN THIS CASE THAT'S DSHS OR CDC REALLY IS THE ONE THAT TAKES THE VAERS DATA ALONG WITH FDA.
BUT AS FAR AS WHAT WE DO AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NATIONAL POLICY, NATIONAL POLICY IS CREATED AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, WE DON'T CHANGE NATIONAL POLICY
[00:45:05]
AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.WE EXECUTE ON NATIONAL AND ALSO STATE DIRECTIVES WITH REGARD TO OUR HEALTH DISTRICT.
SO I ONLY SAY THAT TO SAY IT'S GOOD TO KNOW IF YOU KNOW, BUT OUR JOB, OUR ROLE, NOT OUR JOB, I DON'T EVER SAY IT'S NOT MY JOB, BUT OUR ROLE IN THIS SITUATION IS NOT TO COMPILE OR ANALYZE VAERS DATA, BUT IT IS TO ACCURATELY REPORT TO THE VAERS DATABASE ANY INCIDENTS THAT WE HAVE AS A RESULT OF THE VACCINATION.
BUT LIKE I SAID, CASIE BEING THE PERSON THAT SHE IS, PROBABLY IS WAY MORE UP TO SPEED ON VAERS THAN I OR ANYBODY HERE IS REQUIRED TO BE SO GOOD.
[INAUDIBLE] I 100 PERCENT AGREE.
VITAMINS ARE GREAT AND EATING HEALTHY.
AND I FULLY SUPPORT THAT THE CITY WOULD TAKE A POSITION THAT MAKES THOSE A PRIMARY WAY TO ADDRESS THE HEALTH OF OUR CITY, NOT JUST FOR COVID, BUT FOR LOTS OF I MEAN, THERE'S SO MANY GOOD TAKEAWAYS FROM EATING HEALTHY, EXERCISING AND TAKING VITAMINS.
SO THAT IS ACROSS THE BOARD, I THINK A GREAT IDEA.
I APPRECIATE THE SPEED WITH WHICH VACCINES PROTECT PEOPLE SPECIFICALLY FROM COVID WHEN IT HAS SUCH DEADLY CONSEQUENCES.
SO I CAN SEE THE BENEFIT OF BOTH THINGS, BOTH THE THERAPEUTICS, BOTH THE INTERNAL THINGS THAT YOU POINTED OUT.
BUT I ALSO VALUE THE SPEED WITH WHICH A VACCINE CAN PROTECT SOMEONE'S LIFE.
AND SO I HAD A QUESTION JUST FOR CASIE BEFORE WE EVEN GOT INTO THIS DISCUSSION, WHICH WAS WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO PROTECT SOMEONE FROM GETTING COVID? AND WHAT DID THE GOVERNOR HAVE TO SAY YESTERDAY IN HIS PRESS RELEASE? SO THE BEST WAY TO PROTECT SOMEONE FROM GETTING COVID IS BEING VACCINATED.
THE YOU KNOW, IF YOU ARE TO BE HEALTHY AND TO LIKE WE TALKED LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, VITAMINS.
AND YOU HAVE TO YOU KNOW, YOU NEED TO CERTAINLY TALK TO YOUR DOCTOR ABOUT WHAT VITAMINS ARE APPROPRIATE FOR YOU.
I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD JUST GO RAKE OFF THE SHELF AT WALGREENS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED TO TAKE APPROPRIATE VITAMINS FOR YOURSELF.
YOU NEED, YOU KNOW, EXERCISE, STAYING AT A HEALTHY WEIGHT, DRINKING WATER.
YOU KNOW, THOSE THINGS ARE VERY HEALTHY.
IF YOU ARE AT A HEALTHY IF YOUR BODY IS HEALTHY, IF YOU ARE EXPOSED TO COVID, THEN YOU HAVE A BETTER CHANCE AT A GOOD OUTCOME.
AND I'M SPEAKING VERY GENERAL TERMS HERE, IF YOU ARE MORE UNHEALTHY, WHEN YOU IF YOU ARE EXPOSED TO COVID, AND YOU GET COVID, THEN YOU HAVE A GREATER CHANCE AT A POORER OUTCOME.
BUT THE VITAMINS THEMSELVES ARE NOT GOING TO CURE OR PROTECT THEY DON'T PUT LIKE THEY'RE NOT A VACCINE.
SO THEY'RE NOT GOING TO CURE OR PROTECT YOU SPECIFICALLY AGAINST COVID.
BUT WILL THEY HELP? THEY CAN HELP BECAUSE.
STARTED AT A MORE HEALTHY IF YOUR BODY IS MORE HEALTHY THAN LESS HEALTHY WHEN YOU GET COVID, THEN YOU ARE AT, YOU HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF A BETTER OUTCOME.
AND THAT IS IT'S ALL ABOUT THE RISKS HERE, RIGHT? LIKE YOU WANT TO DECREASE YOUR RISKS SO THAT YOU HAVE A BETTER CHANCE AT A BETTER OUTCOME.
SO IT'S LIKE PUTTING IT THIS WAY.
SO, LIKE, ONE OF THE BIG ONES THAT'S TALKED ABOUT IS VITAMIN D.
WELL, HERE'S THE DEAL WITH VITAMIN D IS IF YOU'RE VITAMIN D DEFICIENT, IT'S A HUGE ASSET AND HELPS WITH COVID.
BUT I GET MY VITAMIN D LEVEL CHECKED EVERY YEAR AND BECAUSE OF THAT I TAKE VITAMIN D SO THAT MY LEVEL'S GOOD INCREASING IT ACTUALLY DOES THE OPPOSITE IT BEGINS TO HAVE DELETERIOUS EFFECTS ON MY BODY.
AND SO TO SAY ACROSS THE BOARD THAT VITAMIN D IS GOING TO BE.
AND I'M JUST USING THAT BECAUSE I DO KNOW ABOUT THE THERAPEUTICS.
I'M LOOKING AT WHAT I'M SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.
I'M WORKING OUT, I'M TAKING VITAMINS.
I'VE GOT THE BEST COOK IN THE WORLD LIVING IN MY HOME.
AND STILL AND STILL YOU JUST THERE'S THERE'S THESE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ACTUALLY GO INTO THAT.
AND I THINK THEY'RE IMPORTANT.
BUT ALSO, YOU HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT THOSE, TOO.
I THINK IT'S A GREAT TALKING POINT AND I'M GLAD WE'RE HEARING THAT VIEWPOINT.
AND BUT I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING IN THE STATEMENT THE GOVERNOR PUT OUT YESTERDAY, HE UNEQUIVOCALLY SAID, PLEASE, ALL TEXANS SHOULD GET THEIR VACCINES.
AND HE EVEN STATED VACCINES ARE SAFE.
IT'S NOT JUST EDDY SAUER OR GINGER NELSON OR FILL IN THE NAME.
I MEAN, PEOPLE IN HIGH OFFICES ARE SAYING THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO PROTECT
[00:50:07]
AGAINST THE COVID VIRUS.AND WE WERE SAYING THAT BECAUSE WE CARE ABOUT INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE, BUT WE ALSO CARE ABOUT THE HEALTH OF OUR ENTIRE CITY.
AND IF PEOPLE ARE WAITING RIGHT NOW AS WE SPEAK TO GET A BED IN THE EMERGENCY ROOM, THAT MEANS AMBULANCES THAT PULL UP THERE CANNOT OFFLOAD THEIR PATIENTS.
AND THAT MEANS THE NEXT CAR WRECK ON I-40 WILL HAVE FEWER AMBULANCES TO RESPOND TO THAT SITUATION.
IT IS AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION THAT WE ALL RESPECT WHETHER TO GET THE VACCINE OR NOT GET THE VACCINE.
BUT WE CAN'T TURN AWAY FROM THE TRUTH THAT IT HAS RIPPLE EFFECTS ACROSS THE HEALTH OF OUR COMMUNITY JUST IN THAT ONE SITUATION THAT I JUST TALKED ABOUT.
SO I DISAGREE SLIGHTLY IN THE WAY OF PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.
AND IT MAY NOT BE THE CITY'S LANE OR ROLE TO REPORT THE DATA FROM CDC.
I THOUGHT WE DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF THAT.
I THINK WE DO A GOOD JOB OF REPORTING CASES, REPORTING HOSPITALIZATION, THINGS LIKE THAT.
I'M CONCERNED THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU TAKE A VACCINE AND YOU'RE RELYING ON THAT AND THAT MAY NOT HAVE THE IMPACT THAT WE WERE HOPING FOR.
I'M CONCERNED ON THE OTHER SIDE THAT YOU'RE HAVING MORE ADVERSE EFFECTS AND SIDE EFFECTS FROM THIS.
ANY MEDICINE THAT IS GIVEN HAS AN EFFECT AND A SIDE EFFECT.
WE KNOW THAT I'M NO DOCTOR, BUT BUT I UNDERSTAND THE WAY THAT MEDICINES WORK AND THERE'S RISKS WITH EVERYTHING.
AND SO I PERSONALLY FEEL LIKE I HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY AS A ROLE MODEL, ELECTED OFFICIAL TO BE ABLE TO GIVE AN ANSWER IF PEOPLE ASK ME AND WHEN THEY SEND ME AN EMAIL AND THEY DON'T STOP.
AND SO I GET EMAILS AND I GET CONCERNS OF TWO THINGS, MAINLY, ONE, THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE, WHICH IS I ALWAYS WOULD ADVOCATE AND I BELIEVE WE WOULD ALL ADVOCATE THAT IT IS YOUR PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND THAT YOUR PERSONAL FREEDOM TO DECIDE WHAT YOU PUT IN YOUR OWN BODY AND WHAT YOU DO NOT.
AND SO IN THE WAY OF PROMOTING A VACCINE, THAT'S FINE.
I ALSO WANT TO PROMOTE FREEDOM JUST AS MUCH.
BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, THE ACTUAL DATA THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT, I'M LOOKING TO USE OUR HEALTH OFFICIAL TO TELL ME I TRUST THAT IS VAERS ACCURATE OR NOT.
IT IS IT ALSO COMES WITH A SET OF PARAMETERS BECAUSE CDC ANALYZES THAT DATA AND THERE ARE ADDITIONAL STEPS THAT ARE TAKEN.
YOU KNOW, SO THIS THE PUBLIC FACING VAERS, YOU KNOW, THEIR QUERY SYSTEM, THEIR DOWNLOADABLE DATABASES, THAT IS THE THAT'S THE PUBLIC FACING.
AND SO THERE IS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT THE PUBLIC THAT WE, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC HEALTH WE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO.
AND SO THAT IS THAT IS WHY THEY HAVE THE DISCLAIMER THAT THIS IS NOT THIS VAERS IN THE PUBLIC FACING FORMAT IS NOT ONE TO TO BE APPLIED UNIVERSALLY OR TO MAKE SCIENTIFIC ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT, BECAUSE THEY ARE THEY'RE MAKING THEY'RE DOING THAT ANALYSIS ON THE BACK SIDE.
AND THAT THERE'S THERE ARE THERE ARE FURTHER STEPS THAT TAKE PLACE, JUST LIKE WITH THE JOHNSON AND JOHNSON VACCINE.
THERE WERE THOSE REPORTS ALL WENT INTO VAERS.
CDC SAID, HEY, WE'RE GETTING YOU KNOW, WE'RE SEEING THESE TRENDS.
LET'S PAUSE THE VACCINE UNTIL WE CAN DO FURTHER ANALYSIS.
AND CDC AND FDA SAID, NO, THIS IS A SAFE PRODUCT.
AND SO WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE VACCINE.
BUT UNTIL THEY UNTIL WE GOT, YOU KNOW, THE THE DOCUMENTATION THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT, WITH ALL OF THE PROVIDERS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES PAUSED ON GIVING THAT VACCINE.
SO WE DIDN'T GIVE ANY VACCINE AFTER THAT PAUSE TOOK PLACE.
AND SO THAT IS THAT'S THE WAY THIS SYSTEM IS USED.
I THINK ALSO WITH REGARD TO QUESTIONS OF IS THE VACCINE SAFE? OUR DATA ON THAT IS NOT CREATED HERE LOCALLY.
WE TAKE GUIDANCE FROM CDC AND FROM DSHS ON BOTH OF THEIR WEBSITES, THEY SAY THE VACCINE IS SAFE AND EFFECTIVE.
THAT'S WHERE WE TAKE OUR GUIDANCE AND OUR DIRECTIONS ON HOW WE DO WHAT WE DO AND WHAT WE DO.
NOW, A LOT OF THAT COMES FROM DSHS, BUT DSHS IS INFORMED AND GUIDED BY CDC, SO.
I THINK TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, WE HAVE TO REFER TO OTHER AREAS, AND IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO THEN HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH US ABOUT THAT, IT REALLY WELL, WE'RE NOT THE
[00:55:01]
PLACE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.WE NEED TO ALWAYS BE TO ANYBODY THAT WOULD SEND THE E-MAIL TO YOU.
THEY NEED TO BE REFERRED TO THE AUTHORITY THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO ONE ANSWER THE QUESTION WITH THE DATA OTHER THAN JUST REFERENCING THEIR WEBPAGE, BUT ALSO HAS THE ABILITY TO CHANGE POLICY IF THEY CAN CONVINCE THEM THAT IT IS NOT ACTUALLY SAFE.
AND I ONLY SAY THAT TO HELP REFER THOSE PEOPLE TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE THE APPROPRIATE ENTITY TO HELP THEM AND HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.
BECAUSE IN MANY CASES IT'S NOT ACTUALLY A QUESTION OF IS IT SAFE, IT'S A I WANT TO HAVE A ROBUST CONVERSATION WHERE WE SHARE AND EXCHANGE IDEAS THAT AREN'T THE SAME.
BUT AGAIN, THAT'S NOT HER ROLE.
I JUST WANT TO GET THEM IN FRONT OF THE RIGHT PERSON THAT CAN HELP THEM.
OK, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS FROM COUNCIL, QUESTIONS FOR CASIE? YES, COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH, ANOTHER COUNCIL MEMBER EARLIER.
WHAT KIND OF ARRANGEMENT WE SHOULD HAVE FOR OUR MEETINGS.
I THINK WE OUGHT TO BE SOCIAL DISTANCE.
SETTING UP IN THE CIVIC CENTER, BUT THERE'S A BIG ENOUGH ROOM WHERE WE COULD BE SOCIAL DISTANCE AND THE AUDIENCE COULD BE SOCIAL DISTANCE ALSO.
I WOULD TELL YOU THAT I THINK SOCIAL DISTANCING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN LOCATION.
OK, YOU KNOW, WE SET THESE TABLES UP.
Y'ALL MAY NOT CARE OR EVEN BE WONDERING, BUT THIS DYNAMIC OF US SITTING IN A STRAIGHT LINE MAKES IT REALLY HARD TO WORK AS A TEAM.
IT MAKES IT HARD TO GET MY ATTENTION AS THE CHAIR OF THE MEETING.
WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO SAY OR YOU WANT TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT, I SPEND A LOT OF TIME WITH MY THE BACK OF MY HEAD TO HALF THE PEOPLE THAT I'M HAVING THE MEETING WITH.
SO IT'S A VERY AWKWARD ARRANGEMENT.
OVER TIME, WE GET USED TO EACH OTHER WORKING AS A TEAM AND WE UNDERSTAND CUES OR RHYTHMS OF THE MEETING.
BUT IF YOU MAY NOT RECALL, BACK IN 2017 WHEN THE FOUR OF US WERE ELECTED TOGETHER, WE SPENT FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS MEETING DOWN ON THE TABLE, DOWN TABLES, DOWN ON THE FLOOR, BECAUSE IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR US TO GET TO KNOW EACH OTHER AND TO GET INTO A RHYTHM TOGETHER.
SO AND THEN WE MOVED UP ON THE DAIS AND IT WAS BETTER.
SO WE'RE OFFERING THAT SAME OPPORTUNITY TO US AGAIN AS WE BRING ON COUNCIL MEMBER STANLEY.
WE WANTED A CHANCE FOR US AS THE FIVE OF US TO BE AS HEALTHY A TEAM AS WE POSSIBLY CAN BE.
AND SO WE'RE BACK DOWN ON OFF OF THE DAIS AND AT TABLES SO WE CAN SEE EACH OTHER'S FACES, BECAUSE A LOT OF COMMUNICATION THAT HAPPENS IS NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION.
SO I THINK TAKING ALL OF THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO MEETINGS SAFELY, SOCIALLY DISTANT.
AND OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT YOU GUYS TO BE A PART OF THAT PROCESS, TOO.
SO WE'LL CITY MANAGER, YOU GUYS WORK ON THAT FOR US.
AND AS FAR AS FRIDAY'S MEETING, WE WILL WORK TO ANALYZE SOCIAL DISTANCING IN THIS ROOM BECAUSE WE WILL NEED TO HAVE THAT MEETING HERE IN THIS ROOM BECAUSE WE HAD TO DO PUBLIC.
WE HAVE TO NOTICE THAT IT'S ALREADY POSTED IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
HOWEVER, IN THE NEXT REGULAR SESSION, THEIR NEXT REGULAR MEETING WE HAVE AFTER FRIDAY'S MEETING, WE WILL DEFINITELY IMPLEMENT AT, WHETHER IT'S HERE OR AT ANOTHER LOCATION, APPROPRIATE MEASURES TO ONE SOCIAL DISTANCE AND ALSO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE NOT JUST SOCIAL DISTANCING FOR CITY COUNCIL, BUT ALSO FOR CITIZENS AND STAFF.
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT IN GOING THROUGH THIS AND DOING THIS, I WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOME SORT OF IT WOULDN'T BE OPEN ENDED, THAT WE WOULD BASICALLY HAVE A METRIC.
SO LIKE IF IT'S HOSPITALIZATION, WHEN OUR HOSPITALIZATION GETS BACK BELOW MAYBE FIVE PERCENT, THEN THAT.
I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE SET UP FOR AN INFINITY TYPE OF A DEAL.
I THINK IT'S I THINK IT IS ALARMING THAT OUR HOSPITALIZATION RATE IS AT 10 PERCENT AND HAS BEEN HOLDING FOR THAT WAY FOR A PERIOD OF TIME NOW.
AND SO THAT'S I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT PART'S IN IT.
I DON'T WANT TO DO THIS FOREVER.
I JUST FEEL LIKE THAT WE'RE IN A POTENTIALLY CRUCIAL STATE AT THIS POINT.
JUST AND IT MAY BE JUST FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.
IF WE LOOK AT THE DATA FROM ALL ACROSS THE WORLD, WE SEE THAT THIS RISES, DOES ITS THING DROPS OFF, AND THEN WE'RE BACK TO.
I THINK A METRIC IS A GOOD IDEA.
[01:00:01]
JARED, DO YOU THINK THERE'S ANY REASON WHY YOU COULDN'T DO THAT? NO MA'AM.I THINK THAT IT'S GREAT TO HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
AND WE'RE STILL LEARNING HOW TO WORK TOGETHER AS A TEAM.
AND THERE'S A TREMENDOUS, I HOPE, AMOUNT OF GRACE INVOLVED IN THAT.
WE'RE STILL LEARNING, WHICH MEANS WE CAN STILL IMPROVE HOW WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER AS A TEAM.
SO WE'RE I THINK THAT'S EXCELLENT DIALOG.
AND I WOULD JUST REMIND COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT IT IS SO IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO SPEAK UP IF YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION, BECAUSE AS OUR WE HAD A SPEAKER AT THE PODIUM TODAY SAY, WELL, WE DON'T WANT UNIFORMITY.
AND UNITY ENCOMPASSES ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS.
AND IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY, THE FIVE OF US, TO VERBALIZE THOSE DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS, WHETHER THEY'RE SUPPORT OR CONCERN OR QUESTIONS.
WE CAN'T WORK ON IT TOGETHER AS A TEAM IF WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT IT.
AND I WOULD ADD TO THAT THAT TIMING MATTERS.
YOU SEE US OUR AGENDA IS ARRANGED IN A WAY THAT WE DO OUR DISCUSSION ITEMS UP FRONT.
USUALLY THEY HAVE THE MOST WORK INVOLVED TO THEM WE'RE STILL BUILDING THOSE PARTS OF THE SHIP.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE MIGHT SPEND 30 MINUTES ON ONE ITEM, HEARING CONCERNS, QUESTIONS, HAVING DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.
AND TIMING MATTERS BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE IT'S IMPORTANT TO BRING UP YOUR CONCERNS AND YOUR QUESTIONS ONCE IT GOES ON TO THE ACTION AGENDA.
IT'S VERY HARD FOR US TO CHANGE IT AT THAT POINT.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SORT OF WHAT HAPPENED LAST TIME WAS WE HAD HAD ALL THAT DISCUSSION ABOUT IT AND WE HADN'T HEARD EVERY CONCERN.
IT HADN'T BEEN VERBALIZED WHILE WE WERE IN THE DISCUSSION BUILDING MODE.
SO IT'S SO IMPORTANT FOR THAT TO HAPPEN, FOR YOU TO VERBALIZE YOUR CONCERNS, BUT FOR YOU TO ALSO KEEP IN MIND THE TIMING OF HOW OUR TEAM WORKS ON THINGS THAT ARE ON THE AGENDA.
SO GREAT DISCUSSION, GREAT FEEDBACK FOR CASIE.
AND I HOPE WE HAVE ROBUST DISCUSSION ON EVERY SINGLE ITEM, ESPECIALLY IN OUR DISCUSSION AGENDA, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE'RE REALLY DOING OUR WORK TOGETHER AS A TEAM.
WE CAN'T BUILD A SOLUTION FOR A CONCERN WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT.
AND THIS IS WHERE WE'RE BUILDING SOLUTIONS.
[1.C. Partnership for Development Progress]
IS THIS DISCUSSION PART OF THE AGENDA.ITEM ONE C IS A PARTNERSHIP FOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRESS UPDATE.
THE CITY MANAGER, FLOYD HARTMAN, TO GIVE IT TO US AND THEN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE.
SO MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE TODAY AND UPDATE YOU ON THIS PARTNERSHIP FOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRESS.
THIS IS AN INITIATIVE TO CREATE A WAY FOR AMARILLO TO GROW.
SO JUST QUICKLY, A MISSION STATEMENT AND A VISION STATEMENT FOR THE GROUP IS TO CREATE A DEVELOPMENT FOCUSED, BASED APPROACH TO CONTINUE A SUSTAINABLE GROWTH IN CITY OF AMARILLO.
FOR DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR, THE CITY MUST FIND A SUSTAINABLE AND PREDICTABLE SOURCE TO INCREASE LOTS AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT PUTTING DEVELOPMENT COST ON AMARILLO PROPERTY TAXPAYERS.
THAT ALSO GOES IN THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS TO RATEPAYERS.
BUT THIS, AS YOU'LL SEE IN THIS UPDATE, THIS IS A COMMUNITY WIDE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGED PROCESS, AS WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MEETINGS.
AND THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY FOR NOT ONLY FOR STAFF, BUT ELECTED OFFICIALS AND OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS TO COORDINATE IN THIS EFFORT.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT INITIATED THIS IS IN THE FINE PRINT ON THIS SCREEN, AS WE'VE HEARD FROM OUR COMMUNITY, THAT THE LACK OF LOTS AND OTHER THINGS HAVE BEEN PUSHING DEVELOPMENT TO THE COUNTY.
SO THIS IS A DIRECT ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS DIRECTLY HELD, A LITTLE HISTORY OF WHY WE'RE HERE AND WHERE WE'RE AT RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT.
I JUST WANT TO THROW UP THE POPULATION OVER THE HISTORY OF AMARILLO AND THOSE MOMENTS OF GROWTH THAT YOU SEE THROUGHOUT OUR HISTORY.
WE'RE IN THAT THAT GROWTH MOMENT.
YOU SEE THAT WE CONTINUE TO GROW CONSISTENTLY.
WHAT THIS IS, IS WHEN WE HIT THIS THRESHOLD OF 200,000 PEOPLE, WE NEED TO HAVE THIS AT A DIFFERENT LEVEL AND HAVE OUR ABILITY TO SERVE OUR COMMUNITY AT THAT LEVEL.
PUT IT ANOTHER WAY, [VIDEO] THIS NEXT SLIDE SHOWS IT.
HERE'S THE ANNEXATION HISTORY OF THAT SAME TIME FRAME FROM THE 1890S UNTIL NOW.
AND I DON'T WANT TO GO INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE GROWTH OVER THOSE DECADES WITH THIS KIND OF SLIDE IN RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT.
[01:05:04]
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR US CURRENTLY? AND WHY ARE WE WHERE WE HAD A BRIEF HISTORY BUILDING PERMITS.YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS SLIDE THAT BUILDING PERMITS, THESE ARE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, BUILDING PERMANENT HOMES, IF YOU WILL, OVER THE LAST DECADE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT WE HIT A LOW POINT AND MADE SOME CHANGES IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS OF 2013 AND 14.
AND THAT DEVELOPED WE DID A SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IN 16.
WE CREATED CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT, SOME SIP PROCESSES IN 2016.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S HAD A POSITIVE IMPACT.
BUT FROM WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY, THAT WE STILL HAVE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE.
AND THAT'S WHAT THIS PROGRAM AND INITIATIVE WILL TAKE US TO.
AGAIN, WHY ARE WE HERE? YOU LOOK AT DEVELOPMENT OVER THE HISTORY OF CITY OF AMARILLO AND WHAT WE SEE IS THAT THERE ARE CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS THAT WERE PUT OFF.
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A DRAINAGE CHANNEL THAT AND YOU CAN SEE THE EROSION FROM THE SATELLITES OF EROSION WHEN A SUBDIVISION WAS APPROVED.
AND THEN THAT WAS NOT ADDRESSED.
IT WAS JUST PUSHED OFF TO EITHER THE TAXPAYERS OR FUTURE GENERATIONS.
AND THAT EROSION CHANNEL IS STILL THERE.
AND THAT AND YOU SEE THE PICTURES IN THIS THAT THAT IT WAS JUST A VERY BASIC APPROACH TO THAT EROSION CHANNEL AND THOSE CHALLENGES OUT EXIST ALL OVER THE CITY.
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE NOT BEING ABLE TO BE PUT IN AT THE TIME OF THE DEVELOPMENT OR ANY TIME IN BETWEEN NOW DUE TO THESE SAME BUDGET CONSTRAINTS THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT DURING THIS BUDGET.
SO HERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE, AND THIS ONE IS A ROAD EXAMPLE, THIS IS DOWN ON 46 BY OSAGE, WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT HAS GROWN HOUSES AND DEVELOPMENT OCCURRED, BUT THERE WAS NEVER ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ROAD ITSELF.
AND THAT'S THE BOTTOM PICTURE WHERE THOSE INFRASTRUCTURES ARE LACKING AND THAT CAN CREATE THE TRAFFIC CHALLENGES, THE DRAINAGE CHALLENGES AND ALL THOSE INFRASTRUCTURE CHALLENGES THAT WE DEAL WITH THAT HAVE BEEN PUT OFF FROM ONE GENERATION TO THE NEXT.
HERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF ARDEN ROAD AND THIS EXAMPLE OF WHERE THE VOTERS APPROVED IN 2016, THE IMPROVEMENTS TO MAKE THOSE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING THIS DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT FOR ARDEN ROAD ITSELF.
BUT YOU CAN SEE IN THE PICTURES ABOVE THAT THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS THAT WE HAD IN PLACE ALWAYS MOVED THE SUBDIVISIONS FORWARD IN APPROVAL WITHOUT CONSIDERATIONS FOR THAT OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
AND YOU CAN SEE NOW THAT THE TAXPAYERS ACTUALLY FUNDED ARDEN ROAD IN 2016 BOND ELECTION.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS WITH THIS PLAN.
WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE FUTURE AND GET THAT STAKEHOLDER INPUT? SO I KNOW THIS SOUNDS A LITTLE WORDY, BUT THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHERE WE ARE.
DECADES AGO, WE WERE ABLE TO ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THIS ISSUE.
HOWEVER, THE COMBINATION OF BELOW AVERAGE TAXATION, AN ABOVE AVERAGE PARTICIPATION IN THE CITY IN THE MOST RECENT YEARS HAS CREATED WHERE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT IS CHALLENGED.
AND WE NEED TO BE IN A LEADING.
WE NEED TO BE IN A POSITION WHERE WE'RE LEADING THE WAY TO ADD LOTS FOR LONG TERM GROWTH.
I'M NOT GOING TO READ THIS TO YOU VERBATIM, BUT THAT'S A COMBINATION OF WHAT'S UP THERE.
BUT THE OFF SITE INFRASTRUCTURE HAS BEEN PUSHED BACK AND PUSHED OFF FROM GENERATION OR TO THE TAXPAYER.
AND AND WHEN THAT OCCURS, SUCH AS THE TAX INCREASE IN 2016 RELATED TO THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, WHAT SUFFERS IS OUR MAINTENANCE PARKS STREET.
AND THOSE FUNDING SOURCES THAT Y'ALL ARE STRUGGLING WITH IN THIS CURRENT BUDGET IS WHERE THAT SOURCE OF THAT CHALLENGE HAS COME FROM.
THOSE COMPETE AGAINST EACH OTHER FOR THAT AVAILABLE FUNDING.
AND THAT LACK OF A PLAN FOR THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IS IMPACTING OUR ABILITY TO ADD LOTS AND THAT LONG TERM GROWTH FOR AMARILLO MAINTENANCE COST OF EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE INCREASES EXPONENTIALLY AS WE GO THROUGH TIME.
SO THE COST OF MAINTAINING A STREET FROM THE 1950S NOW IS MUCH MORE AND INCREASED AS THE YEARS GO ON.
SO WHAT IS SACRIFICED IN THAT IS THOSE IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARKS, AMENITIES AND THOSE OTHER THINGS.
BUT IT ALSO SACRIFICES OUR ABILITY TO MAINTAIN THOSE EXISTING STREETS INFRASTRUCTURE, DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WITHOUT HAVING TO GO TO THE TAXPAYERS OR RATEPAYERS TO DO IT.
AS YOU'VE SEEN OVER YOUR TENURE, YOU'VE SEEN RATE INCREASES IN WATER AND SEWER TO COVER THOSE GROWTH COMPONENTS WITHIN THAT WITHIN WATER AND SEWER.
YOU'VE ALSO SEEN THOSE RATE INCREASES COVER REPLACEMENT.
[01:10:02]
BUT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS HOW DO WE CREATE A SYSTEM? SO, AGAIN, WHY CAN'T WE JUST STAY THE SAME AS WE ARE? BECAUSE AND I HAVE TO CREDIT STAFF WITH A LOT OF THIS, WITH THIS STATEMENT HERE, PREDICTABLE UNPREDICTABILITY IS BASICALLY WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING OVER THE LAST FEW DECADES FROM A FUNDING SOURCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DEVELOPMENT ARENA.WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THAT STAGE, THAT IS SOME OF THE CRITICISMS THAT WE HEAR FROM OUR DEVELOPERS THAT THAT WE DON'T HAVE A CONSISTENT WAY WITHIN OUR BUDGETING PROCESS TO BRING THOSE PROJECTS FORWARD FOR FUNDING OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO NEW DEVELOPMENT.
IT CONTINUES TO BE A CHALLENGE.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS SLIDE, THE CURRENT MODEL DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR THE GROWTH AND NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY IN A SUSTAINABLE MANNER.
AND WHAT DOES PROVIDE COMFORT FROM THE COST OF THE TAXPAYER, THE RATEPAYERS? AND THAT MODEL IS NOT SUSTAINABLE.
WE'VE HEARD THAT FROM OUR COMMUNITY.
SO WHAT IS A RESULT OF OUR CURRENT MODEL, SUBSTANDARD SERVICE TO THE NEW SUBDIVISIONS? I CHALLENGE YOU TO FIND A DEVELOPER THAT SAYS WE'VE MET EVERY NEED IN A TIMELY MANNER FOR WHAT THEY WANT AND WE HEAR THAT STIFLE DEVELOPMENT MARKET BECAUSE OF THAT LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE PLACES AND OUR DEVELOPMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BRINGS CUSTOMERS IN, ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE SEE IS INFRASTRUCTURE RELATED TO THAT, ABOUT TAXPAYERS PAYING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE COST.
THAT HAS BEEN A RESULT OF THIS MODEL THAT WE DO.
IF YOU RECALL, THE FIRST SET OF PICTURES I LOOK AT, THERE'S A DRAINAGE CHANNEL THAT WAS JUST HAS BEEN PUT OFF FROM GENERATION TO GENERATION AND THAT OCCURS IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS RELATED TO SUBDIVISIONS.
SO THE BOTTOM LINE HERE, AMARILLO CAN'T AFFORD NOT TO.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT, BRINGING THOSE STAKEHOLDERS IN WITH YOU TO FIND OUT WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH THIS PROCESS.
WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF AMARILLO? WE DID SET A GOAL WITH THIS INTERNALLY.
WE WANT THAT NUMBER TO BE A THOUSAND LOTS AVAILABLE SO THAT WE'RE WELL AHEAD OF THOSE PERMITS AND THEN WE CAN READJUST THAT GOAL AS WE GO INTO THIS AND WE SEE HOW AMARILLO GROWS.
BUT THE FIRST THING WE WANT TO DO IS ACCOMPLISH THAT THERE'S A THOUSAND LOTS AVAILABLE AHEAD OF THOSE PERMITS THAT YOU SAW IN THAT PREVIOUS SLIDE.
WELL, THAT'S I FIGURE THE NUMBER THAN WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW.
AND THE THE ULTIMATELY THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS PDP PARTNERSHIP FOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRESS PROCESS IS GOING TO CREATE A PROGRAM, A POLICY, A PROCESS, RATHER, THAT IS FINANCIALLY SUSTAINABLE AND WILL ALLOW DEVELOPMENT TO HAPPEN AS FAST AS THE MARKET WANTS TO DEVELOP IT.
THE SKY'S THE LIMIT AS TO HOW FAST IT CAN GO ONCE WE'RE FINISHED WITH THIS.
SO THAT'S WHY WE NEED ALL OF OUR STAKEHOLDERS AND OUR STAKEHOLDERS ARE NOT JUST DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS AND TRADESMEN AND REALTORS AND ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THAT MARKET.
THEY'RE ALSO RESIDENTS WHO MIGHT WANT A PLACE TO BUY OR WHO MIGHT PAY TAXES.
SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS, EVERY ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE IS A STAKEHOLDER IN THIS PROCESS.
WE NEED THEIR INVOLVEMENT AND THEIR INPUT TO BE ABLE TO COME TO A RESULTING PROCESS THAT WILL FACILITATE GROWTH AS FAST AS OUR COMMUNITY WANTS IN A WAY THAT RESPECTS EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE STAKEHOLDERS.
OK, SO THAT GETS ME TO THIS LINE.
YOU'VE COVERED MOST OF THE LIST ON THIS SLIDE FOR ME.
BUT AS YOU RECALL, THE LAST DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD, EACH ONE OF YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ADDRESSING STAKEHOLDERS AND WE'VE GOT THOSE LISTED HERE AND THERE ARE OTHERS.
BUT HOW DO WE GET TO THAT GOAL? HOW DO WE REACH THAT GOAL AND HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE THAT PROVIDES FOR THAT ONGOING, SUSTAINED DEVELOPMENT? SO MEET WITH THOSE LOCAL LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS AND THE OPPORTUNITY AS YOU ALL DISCUS THIS IS FOR THIS INFORMATION TO BE AVAILABLE FOR YOU TO MEET THOSE STAKEHOLDERS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND YOU'LL SEE THE NUMBER FIVE IS A POINT, THE PDP COMMITTEE, A COMMITTEE THAT HELPED GUIDE US THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND IDENTIFY THOSE CHALLENGES, ALONG WITH A HIRED CONSULTANT.
AGAIN, WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS WOULD COME IN FOR YOUR APPROVAL HERE.
IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A PROPOSAL FOR A CONSULTANT TO BE HIRED, HELP GUIDE US THROUGH THIS PROCESS SUCH THAT WE CAN IDENTIFY THOSE MECHANISMS. WHAT'S AVAILABLE FOR US TO USE THROUGH THE STAKEHOLDER INPUT, THROUGH THAT EXPERT KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE DONE WITH BEST PRACTICES, WHAT IS AVAILABLE IN AMARILLO, WHAT IS AMARILLO DONE IN THE PAST? WHAT IS AMARILLO DOING NOW AND WHAT DOES AMARILLO NEED TO DO IN THE FUTURE
[01:15:01]
THROUGHOUT ALL OF THOSE GROUPS TOGETHER? BUT THE NEXT STEPS THEN ARE TO APPOINT THIS COMMITTEE, HIRE THAT CONSULTANT, POINT THIS COMMITTEE AND THEN SEE THE BOTTOM LINE, UTILIZE THAT INPUT FROM THIS COMMITTEE TO IDENTIFY THAT PATH FORWARD.AND WE NOTICE THERE ARE NO SOLUTIONS RECOMMENDED IN THIS PRESENTATION.
WE'RE GOING TO RELY ON THAT INPUT AND GO FORWARD IN A MANNER THAT INVOLVES THOSE STAKEHOLDERS AND EVERY EVERYBODY'S NEEDS, INCLUDING YOU AS ELECTED OFFICIALS TO GUIDE US THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND REGULAR UPDATES.
SO WITH THAT, THERE'S SOME I'M OPEN TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE US INCLUDE.
BUT I'M READY FOR QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT.
WHAT'S YOUR TIME FRAME ON THIS PROCESS TO REACH TO GO FROM STEP ONE TO STEP SIX, HOW LONG ARE YOU EXPECTING TO BE ABLE TO.
OBTAIN A PLAN TO MOVE FORWARD? OVER THE NEXT TWO MONTHS, WE WOULD ANTICIPATE TO BE THROUGH STEP FIVE, IDENTIFYING STEP SIX IS GOING TO BE PREDICATED ON WHAT THAT INPUT IS.
SO WE WOULD EXPECT TO HAVE A LONG WAY DOWN THE ROAD BY THE FIRST OF THE YEAR ON STEP SIX, INCLUDING IDENTIFYING WHERE WE'RE GOING.
BUT STEP SIX INVOLVES YALLS COMMITMENT TO HELPING APPOINT THAT COMMITTEE THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
SO I SAY STEP FIVE IS AN EASIER TIME TO DELINEATE.
OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS, WE MONTH AND A HALF, TWO MONTHS, WE COULD BE AT STEP FIVE.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A SOMETHING BEFORE US ABOUT HIRING A CONSULTANT IN LESS THAN TWO MONTHS.
IS THAT AN RFP IT'S ALREADY IT'S A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS, SO IT'S AN RFQ.
THIS PROCESS IS A VERY DETAILED PROCESS, LIKE YOU SAID, A LOT OF STAKEHOLDERS, IT GETS IN SOME VERY TECHNICAL INFORMATION.
I HAVE SEEN THESE PROCESSES TAKE OVER TWO YEARS.
I'VE SEEN THEM TAKE LESS THAN 18 MONTHS.
WE'RE GOING TO PUSH VERY HARD WORK, VERY DILIGENTLY WITH OUR COMMITTEE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE POINT AND WORKED VERY HARD WITH OUR CONSULTANTS, WHOEVER THEY ARE, TO GET A PROCESS DONE THAT WILL HELP US MOVE FORWARD AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
BUT I WOULD NOT EXPECT THAT TO TAKE MUCH LESS THAN 18 MONTHS IF WE CAN GET THERE.
SO I WOULD SAY EARLY IN 2023 IS WHEN WE WOULD BE SHOOTING TO TO HAVE THIS IN PLACE, READY TO EXECUTE AND IMPLEMENT AND FACILITATE GROWTH.
SOME OTHER THINGS YOU'RE GOING TO SEE COORDINATED ALONG THAT TIMEFRAME, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE OUR SPECIFICATION MANUALS UPDATED, OUR POLICY MANUAL UPDATED, INCLUDING HOW WE APPROACH THAT.
BUT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ORDINANCE UPDATES.
YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE THINGS COORDINATED AS WE STEP THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND IDENTIFY THOSE NEEDS.
THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF THINGS BROUGHT FORWARD, ESPECIALLY MANUALS AND UPDATES TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE THAT COORDINATE WITH WITH CURRENT STATE LAW.
THERE'S BEEN SOME STATE LAW CHANGES.
SO WE'RE GOING TO BRING A LOT OF THINGS FORWARD, COORDINATED WITH THIS, INCLUDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE THAT COORDINATE WITH WHATEVER THE OUTCOME OF THIS IS THAT THAT'S COORDINATED IT WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT ANDREW AND HIS TEAM WILL BE BRINGING FORWARD, THAT IN THIS BUDGET THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT APPROVING.
SO THINGS LIKE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ARE GOING TO TIE INTO THIS PROCESS AND THESE THINGS WILL ALL WORK TOGETHER.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S GOING TO BE A VERY IN-DEPTH LOOK AT THIS PROCESS.
SO THESE IDEAS THAT COME FROM THESE STAKEHOLDERS AND THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS THAT WE IDENTIFY CAN BE BROUGHT INTO THOSE PROCESSES, WHETHER THAT'S SPECIFICATIONS OF WATER AND SEWER, STREET ROADS, SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE RELATED TO SURETIES AND WHATEVER THOSE ITEMS THAT COME FORWARD IN THOSE WILL ALL BE BROUGHT FORWARD IN THIS PROCESS.
WE TALKED LAST TIME YOU ALL HAD GREAT IDEAS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR HOW WE COULD REACH OUT AND ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY, I THOUGHT WAS A GREAT IDEA.
WE TALKED ABOUT SETTING THOSE MEETINGS UP.
I'M THINKING THAT MAYBE IT'S A GOOD IDEA FOR THOSE MEETINGS TO BE POSTED SO THAT ALL OF US COULD BE THERE TO HEAR THE FEEDBACK FROM EACH ONE OF THESE DIFFERENT GROUPS.
AND IF THAT'S OK WITH YOU GUYS, THEN I THINK LET'S JUST ASK THE STAFF TO ARRANGE THOSE MEETINGS AND THEN WE'LL GET NOTICE AS THEY'RE POSTED ABOUT WHEN THEY'RE HAPPENING.
AND WE CAN ALL BE THERE TO LISTEN TO THE FEEDBACK AND HAVE A BETTER VIEW OF OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'RE GETTING AS WE AND I THINK EACH ONE OF THOSE MEETINGS WILL BE AN OPEN OPPORTUNITY.
WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO SERVE ON THE COMMITTEE? AND THEN WE'LL GATHER UP THOSE NAMES AND HAVE A LOOK AT THEM, THE FIVE OF US, AND
[01:20:03]
PUT A COMMITTEE TOGETHER.ANYBODY HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT? OK, MR. CITY MANAGER, ANY REASON WHY WE CAN'T GO THAT ROUTE? NO MA'AM, THAT'LL WORK.
WE'LL HAVE ALL OF OUR STAFF THAT ARE SETTING UP EACH ONE OF THESE MEETINGS AND ARE WORKING AS LIAISONS, COORDINATE WITH CITY SECRETARY AND [INAUDIBLE] SECRETARY TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE ALL POSTED.
OK, FLOYD, AND IT WOULD BE 10 OR 12 GROUPS.
YEAH, I THINK AT LEAST SIX AND PROBABLY SUBCONSCIOUS CONTRACTORS NEED TWO OR THREE.
SO WHAT DO YOU SAY, 10 OR 12 I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY RIGHT.
I NEED SOME MORE MEETINGS TO GO TO.
YEAH, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY RIGHT.
HOW MANY LOTS ARE AVAILABLE TODAY? WE DON'T HAVE AN EXACT COUNT.
NOBODY'S BEEN TRACKING AVAILABLE LOTS IN CERTAIN PARAMETERS, BUT WE ESTIMATE WORKING WITH PRAD APPROXIMATELY 900 OR A FEW MORE.
SO THIS IS A 10 PERCENT INCREASE WITHIN THE FIRST STEP.
AGAIN, THOSE GOALS WILL BE ADJUSTED IF WE HAVE SUCCESS OR OR WHATEVER WE SEE IN THE FUTURE WILL ADJUST THOSE GOALS.
BUT WE ANTICIPATE RIGHT NOW, FROM WHAT WE SAW IN PRAD, APPROXIMATELY 900 PLUS.
NOW, THAT ASSUMES THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT ALL OF OUR AVAILABLE LOTS FOR DEVELOPMENT INSIDE THE CITY OF AMARILLO WANT TO DEVELOP OR AT LEAST DO NEW LARGE DEVELOPMENTS, BUT THAT DOES INCLUDE A LOT OF INFILL AND OTHER THINGS.
THOSE WOULD BE LOT AVAILABLE TO BUILD ON.
YEAH, SO ALL OVER THIS INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, NOT EMPTY LOTS THAT ARE UNDEVELOPED.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ETJ.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT [INAUDIBLE].
BUT THIS PROCESS WILL FACILITATE ETJ DEVELOPMENT AS FAST AS THE MARKET WANTS TO DRIVE IT.
WELL, IT WILL FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT AND ANNEXATION OF ETJ AS FAST AS IT WANTS TO DO THAT.
SO IN ALL OF THIS THAT WE ALSO TALK ABOUT EXACTLY BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVE SOME JURISDICTION OVER THE ETJ AND HOW THINGS HAPPEN, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE ARE SOME COMMUNITIES THAT ARE IN THE ETJ THAT WILL BE DIFFICULT AT BEST TO EVER ANNEX THEM INTO THE CITY.
AND SO GOING FORWARD, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A PLAN THAT BASICALLY THESE ETJ PROJECTS ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE TURNED OVER, CAN BE ANNEXED AT SOME POINT INTO THE CITY WITHOUT THERE BEING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF DIFFICULTY? BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THERE IS SOME.
THE ANNEX ABILITY OF AN ETJ SUBDIVISION IS A HUGE COMPONENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND SO THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS YES, THAT WILL BE EVALUATED WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND COORDINATED WITH THE OUTCOME OF THIS AND SUBDIVISION CHANGES THAT GET US TO A CONTEMPORARY LOOK AT THAT ANNEXABLE PRODUCT THAT'S BEING DELIVERED IN THE ETJ, JARED DID YOU HAVE MORE TO ADD? YEAH, YEAH.
WHATEVER WE DO THROUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROCESS AND THROUGH THIS PROCESS IS GOING TO ALSO BE INFORMED AND WILL HAVE TO BE INFORMED BY RECENT CHANGES IN STATE LAW WITH REGARD TO HOW ANNEXATIONS CAN TAKE PLACE, HOW MUCH APPROVAL HAS TO BE YOU HAVE TO HAVE OF THOSE PROPOSED OR OF THOSE THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING ANNEXATION.
REALLY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS IN THE FUTURE WE WILL VERY LIKELY, UNLESS WE HAVE ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT OPPOSITE DIRECTION, MOVE WITH REGARD TO STATE LAW, WHICH IS UNLIKELY.
WE WILL ONLY BE ANNEXING NEW DEVELOPMENTS, NOT EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS, BECAUSE THOSE EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS WOULD REQUIRE 100 PERCENT APPROVAL OF THOSE PEOPLE AND IT WOULD HAVE TO BE IN THE CITY'S INTEREST FOR THEM TO EVEN REQUEST ANNEXATION IN THE FIRST PLACE, WHICH IS VERY UNLIKELY BECAUSE A LOT OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE DOESN'T EXIST, LIKE WATER, SEWER, THINGS LIKE THAT, BECAUSE THEY'RE ON SEPTIC THEY'RE ON WELLS MANY TIMES.
IF THAT SUBDIVISION WAS BUILT PRIOR TO THE POINT AT WHICH THE CITY DID A VERY GOOD JOB OF MAKING SURE THAT THE STREET INFRASTRUCTURE AND DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE WAS UP TO CITY STANDARDS, THEY'RE NOT.
SO THE COST TO ANNEX THOSE AREAS WOULD NOT BE IN OUR CITIZENS INTEREST BECAUSE IT WOULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE.
SO WE'RE REALLY GOING TO WORK WITH OUR COUNTY JUDGES, LOOK AT DOING THINGS THAT THEY WILL FIND VERY VALUABLE AND BENEFICIAL IN DOING THINGS LIKE POTENTIALLY REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE ETJ IN CERTAIN AREAS, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS.
OK, ITEM ONE D IS AN UPDATE ON THE CIVIC CENTER GARFIELD P3 COMMITTEE.
[1.D. Civic Center P3 Committee Progress update]
VERY GOOD OUR MANAGING DIRECTOR ANDREW FREEMAN, WHO'S GOING TO GIVE US A VERY QUICK PRESENTATION JUST ON WHAT THE TIMELINE IS FOR THE WORK THAT GARFIELD IS DOING AND WITH REGARD TO PHASE ONE AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS COUNCILMAN MIGHT HAVE.SIR, SO JUST A BRIEF UPDATE ON WHAT'S TAKEN PLACE SINCE THE CONTRACT WAS APPROVED BY
[01:25:03]
CITY COUNCIL ON JUNE 22ND, IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE CONTRACT APPROVAL, OF COURSE, GARFIELD STARTED TO BECOME MORE FAMILIAR WITH ALL THE STUDIES AND PLANS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE ON THE CIVIC CENTER ALREADY AS WELL WAS WHAT WAS PROPOSED IN THE BOND PROPOSAL AND EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.THEY ALSO SCHEDULED A FIELD TRIP FOR THE CIVIC CENTER.
THEY MET WITH SHERMAN, THE CITY MANAGER, KEVIN STARBUCK, AND JERRY DANFORTH.
THEY BROUGHT IN AN OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT TO WEIGH IN ON THE CURRENT FACILITY AND ANY CHANGES THEY MIGHT RECOMMEND BASED ON THEIR EXPERTISE.
AND THEY ALSO REGROUPED WITH MANAGEMENT AT THE END OF THE DAY TO KIND OF TALK THROUGH SOME OF THE INITIAL FEEDBACK THEY HAD FROM TOURING THE FACILITY AND STUDYING THE PLANS.
AFTER THAT, THEY BEGAN DRAFTING SOME IDEAS AND CONCEPTS.
MINOR, REALLY, WHAT IT'S COME TO IS THEY'RE LOOKING AT MINOR ADJUSTMENTS TO THE EXISTING FACILITY AND THEY'RE REALLY HONING IN ON WHAT KIND OF PHASES WOULD MAKE THE MOST SENSE TO MAKE THIS A MORE FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE PROJECT IN THE NEAR FUTURE VERSUS LONG TERM.
SO THAT'S CURRENTLY WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON RIGHT NOW.
THE NEXT STEPS, OR AT LEAST THE IMMEDIATE NEXT STEPS IS A MEETING OF THE P3 CITIZEN COMMITTEE.
SO WE'RE STILL FORMALIZING ALL THE MEMBERS OF THAT COMMITTEE.
WE KNOW THE ORIGINAL FIVE ARE ALL STILL INTERESTED IN SERVING AND ARE VERY WILLING TO START AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, WHICH IS GOOD.
I KNOW THERE'S ALSO DISCUSSION OF INCLUDING ADDITIONAL MEMBERS ON THAT TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROCESS.
SO WE'D LIKE TO HOLD THAT MEETING VERY SOON JUST TO GET THEIR FEEDBACK ON THIS INITIAL WORK THAT GARFIELD HAS DONE.
AFTER THOSE DISCUSSIONS AND GETTING THEIR FEEDBACK.
WE WANT TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETINGS AS WELL.
STILL TO BE DETERMINED HOW MANY, BUT HOLD THOSE PUBLIC MEETINGS AND REALLY BRING EVERYBODY UP TO SPEED ON THE DISCUSSION SO FAR AND WHAT WE ARE WORKING ON, THEY'RE ALSO WORKING ON DRAFTING A PRO FORMA FOR THE FACILITY BASED ON SOME OF THE PHASING AND THE MINOR REFINEMENTS THAT THEY'VE DISCUSSED ON THE INITIAL DESIGN.
AND THEN THEY ARE GOING TO BE ENGAGING PRICING PARTNERS BOTH AT THE LOCAL AND NATIONAL LEVEL AND WITH JARED DANFORTH, SINCE HE'S SO GOOD AT THAT AS WELL, WITH HIS PAST EXPERIENCE TO REALLY ANALYZE THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS, PARTICULARLY IN THE MARKET WE'RE IN AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE MOVING FORWARD.
SO THAT IS A VERY BRIEF AND QUICK UPDATE, BUT WE ARE MAKING A LOT OF PROGRESS.
THERE ARE ALSO NO GUARANTEES BUT ANTICIPATING THEY REALLY WANT TO GET THE REPORT WRAPPED UP BEFORE THANKSGIVING.
SO SOONER THAN WE THOUGHT, JUST SO WE'D HAVE A GOOD IDEA OF WHERE THINGS ARE HEADING BY THE END OF THE YEAR.
SO WHEN ARE THEY COMING BACK TO TOWN? SO WE WERE ANTICIPATING WE'D PROBABLY TRY AND MEET WITH THE CITIZEN COMMITTEE VIA ZOOM JUST SO WE COULD DO IT MORE QUICKLY, BUT THEN THEY ARE FREE FOR US TO SCHEDULE, GETTING THEM IN TOWN VERY SOON TO HOLD US PUBLIC MEETINGS BASED ON OUR NEEDS.
THEY'LL COME BACK ANY TIME WE NEED THEM TO, IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES, OK.
AS SOON AS WE CAN SCHEDULE AND GET EVERYTHING READY.
I KNOW I HAD VISITED WITH COUNCIL MEMBER STANLEY ABOUT SOME NAMES FROM HIM.
WE WERE ALL A PART OF APPOINTING THAT FIRST COMMITTEE.
SO, COLE, I KNOW YOU BROUGHT THREE NAMES AND VISITED WITH PEOPLE AND THOSE GUYS ARE A GREEN LIGHT FROM YOUR POINT OF VIEW; IS THAT RIGHT? YES, MA'AM.
OK, SO THAT'S MASON ROGERS, CHRISTIAN MCTHALL AND NOAH WILLIAMS? THAT'S CORRECT.
OK, THANK YOU FOR HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS.
SO WE'LL TRY TO GET THAT FINALIZED THEN AND GET THAT MEETING SCHEDULED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? OK.
I THINK WE CAN DO THE NEXT TWO ITEMS AND THEN TAKE A RESTROOM BREAK IF Y'ALL NEED TO.
ITEM 1E IS POLICY THREE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL POLICY, THE INS POLICIES.
[1.E. Policy 3: Ends Policies]
ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS OR A PLACE THEY WANT TO START IN TALKING ABOUT THAT? I THINK THE INS POLICY IS THE ONE THAT'S THE MOST DIFFICULT TO, IF YOU'VE NOT WORKED UNDER AN INS POLICY BEFORE JUST TO CONCEPTUALIZE, IT'S LIKE A FUNNEL.SO RATHER THAN SAYING HERE'S A BIG LIST OF THE THINGS THAT YOU CAN'T DO, INSTEAD YOU JUST CREATE A FUNNEL THAT SAYS, HERE'S WHERE WE WANT TO GO AND YOU CAN DO ANYTHING, CITY MANAGER AND STAFF INSIDE THAT FUNNEL WITHOUT HAVING TO INEFFICIENTLY COME BACK AND FORTH TO THE COUNCIL TO GET THEIR INPUT AND SEEK THEIR INPUT.
SO THAT'S REALLY THE IDEA BEHIND THE INS POLICY.
IT'S MORE A LIST OF WHAT YOU CAN'T DO THAN IT IS LISTING OUT EVERYTHING YOU CAN DO.
ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, RECOMMENDED CHANGES?
[01:30:10]
I LIKED IT THE WAY THAT WE DID IT.I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY GOOD, THAT'S VERY CONCISE, IT'S PRETTY PLAIN, I LIKE IT.
IS IT A POLICY THAT WE DRAFTED? YES.
AND IT'S ABOUT TWO AND A HALF YEARS OLD AND WE'VE LOOKED AT IT BEFORE TO SEE IF IT NEEDED TO BE REVISED, BUT IT DOES SAY IN OUR POLICIES THAT WE WILL LOOK AT THESE EVERY YEAR.
I DON'T SEE ANY CHANGES AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME.
SO LOTS OF GOOD INFORMATION THAT WE PUT TOGETHER.
I HAVE QUITE A FEW THINGS HIGHLIGHTED THAT REALLY STOOD OUT TO ME THAT I AM GOOD WITH THE POLICIES AS THEY ARE RIGHT NOW.
AND I DO AGREE WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THOSE EVERY YEAR AND MAKE SURE THAT WE NEED TO, YOU KNOW, THAT WE DON'T NEED TO UPDATE, CHANGE, ADD, DELETE.
COUNCIL MEMBER STANLEY, ANYTHING STOOD OUT TO YOU OR DO YOU WANT TO GIVE INPUT ON? NO, MA'AM, NOT REALLY.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE WENT OVER THIS IN OUR WORKSHOP AND I HAVE A PRETTY GOOD HANDLE ON IT, SO I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT WOULD CHANGE ON MY SIDE.
OK, COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH? WE WILL MOVE ON THEN.
ITEM 1F IS UPDATES FROM COMMITTEES AND WE HAVE PARKS AND BEAUTIFICATION COUNCIL
[1.F. Committee Updates Parks & Beautification]
MEMBER SAUER, IF YOU HAVE AN UPDATE ON THAT.YEAH, I JUST GOT THROUGH WITH THAT ONE.
THIS WILL BE A FRESH UPDATE THEN.
YEAH, AS A MATTER OF FACT, SHERMAN ASKED ME IF I'D RATHER DO THIS THE WEEK AFTER I TOLD HIM NO, I JUST AS SOON DO IT WHILE IT'S STILL FRESH IN MY MIND.
SO THIS ONE WAS WE WERE JUST REALLY PRETTY MUCH CONSIDERING THE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE HAD TO DISCUSS WERE THE BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT.
WE DIDN'T GET ADEQUATE RESPONSES ON OUR RFQ EITHER TIME.
WHAT'S HAPPENING IS, IS WE'RE GOING BACK AND TRYING TO KIND OF REASSESS AND REVALUE EXACTLY WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN TO MAKE THIS BECOME A SUCCESSFUL THING.
YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD GREAT SUCCESS WITH THE MURAL PROJECT.
AND SO THIS ONE IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT REQUIRES, IT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT SET OF THINGS AS OPPOSED TO PEOPLE COMING AND PRESENTING THEIR BUILDING AND PRESENTING SOMEBODY THAT IS GOING TO DO A MURAL.
WHENEVER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT, THAT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING.
SO WE KIND OF BEGUN TO, WELL, WE NOW HAVE IT KIND OF WE'VE INTERNALIZE THINGS ARE BEGINNING TO WORK BACK THROUGH WHATEVER.
WHAT ARE THE POSSIBILITIES OF DIFFERENT THINGS.
ONE OF THEM BEING WORKING TOWARDS KIND OF HELPING PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO WANT TO DO GOING FORWARD AND MAYBE EVEN LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT PARKS AND MAKING AN INSTALLATION SITE WHERE WHENEVER THESE PROJECTS DO COME, WHETHER THERE ARE A MURAL PROJECT OR IT'S A SOME SORT OF AN ART PROJECT, SO THAT WE'VE GOT A PLACE WHERE WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE PLACED AND WHERE IT CAN BE REAL SUCCESSFUL AND THAT CAN ACTUALLY BE DONE WITH THOSE KIND OF FUNDS AND AND JUST BEGIN TO GET SOME OF THOSE THINGS KIND OF IN PLACE.
WE'VE GOT THE THOMPSON PARK POOL UPDATE.
BOTH OF THOSE PADS ARE IN PLACE AND THAT'S BASICALLY THE PAD SITES FOR WHERE THE PROJECTS, THE JACOB BREEDING IS PREPARING, WHO IS DOING THOSE TWO PROJECTS.
THAT WHOLE SETUP IS GOING TO BE WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE BE REPLICATED IN OTHER PARKS AS FAR AS BEING ABLE TO THEN MOVE A PROJECT FROM ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER SO THEY COULD GO AROUND AND DIFFERENT PARKS OF THE CITY.
SO, BOTH PADS ARE IN PLACE, PIECES ARE NOT GOING TO BE IN PLACE YET, MR. BREEDING'S NOT QUITE FINISHED YET.
SO WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WOULD BE WHENEVER HE DOES FINISH, THE ONE THAT WOULD BE AT THE ENTRANCE, THAT ONE WOULD BE INSTALLED AND MAYBE WE WOULD TAKE HIS SECOND ONE SINCE IT WOULD BE ON THE LAZY RIVER.
AND MAYBE IF WE SET THESE PLACES UP IN DIFFERENT PARKS, WE COULD START OUT BY MAKING SURE THAT THAT PROJECT IS MADE AVAILABLE AND PUT IT IN ONE OF THE OTHER PARKS UNTIL THE NEXT YEAR WHENEVER THE POOL OPENS BACK UP AND THEN PUT IT BACK IN.
IT'S JUST GIVING US A POSSIBILITY TO REALLY BEGIN TO LET PEOPLE IN THE CITY UNDERSTAND WHAT GREAT OPPORTUNITIES WE CAN HAVE, AND IT'S CULTURALLY IMPORTANT FOR OUR
[01:35:01]
CITY THAT WE'RE BEING ABLE TO ALLOW THE ART COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES.I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE SEE THAT WHEN WE GO TO OTHER PLACES AND VISIT.
AND I THINK IT'S PART OF WHO WE ARE HERE AND AMARILLO AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING SOME OF THOSE KIND OF THINGS HAPPEN.
WE'RE ALSO GOING TO GO THROUGH.
SO WE'VE ALREADY DONE THREE ITERATIONS OF THIS MURAL GRANT PROJECT.
SO THEY'RE PUTTING PUT TOGETHER A COMMITTEE THAT'S BASICALLY GOING TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT MURAL GRANT PROJECT.
I MEAN, IT'S REALLY SMART, JUST LIKE ALL THESE OTHER THINGS, LIKE PLANNING AND ZONING, LIKE TRANSPORTATION, LIKE ALL OF THESE OTHERS, THAT WE KIND OF GO BACK AND VISIT THEM ON A FREQUENT BASIS TO MAKE FOR SURE.
ARE WE STILL BEING RELEVANT? ARE THERE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO CHANGE OR DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE WE'D LIKE TO PUT BRANDING FOR AMARILLO INVOLVED IN THESE PROJECTS AND BE ABLE TO DO THAT? SO HOW DOES THAT LOOK? DO WE NEED TO CHANGE THE SCOPE? DO WE NEED TO DO SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS? AND SO THEY'RE GOING TO CONSIDER THAT.
THERE'S A LOT THAT'LL COME OUT OF IT.
SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE NEXT YEAR.
SAUER? OK, ANYTHING WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT PUTTING ON A FUTURE AGENDA OR REQUESTING A
[1.G. Request future agenda items and reports from City Manager]
REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER? YES, MAYOR.IN REGARDS TO THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN FUNDS AND MR. CITY MANAGER AND I HAVE CERTAINLY TALKED ABOUT THAT.
BUT I KNOW THAT I'VE HAD SEVERAL CITIZENS APPROACHED ME ABOUT A STATUS UPDATE AS WELL AS SOME BUSINESSES.
SO IF WE COULD HAVE THAT ON OUR NEXT AGENDA, WHICH I THINK IS AUGUST 24TH.
AND I ALSO KNOW THAT MS. LAURA STORRS AND HER STAFF, THAT THEY HAVE BEEN KIND OF, IF YOU WILL, COMBING THROUGH ALL OF THAT INFORMATION, TRYING TO READ THE FEDERAL GUIDELINES AND DETERMINE WHERE WE CAN AND CANNOT SPEND THOSE FUNDS.
SO IF WE COULD HAVE AN UPDATE, YOU KNOW, AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME AND THEN WE CAN, YOU KNOW, LET OUR CITIZENS KNOW WHAT OUR INTENT IS AS A COUNCIL MAY BE TO DO THAT.
SO WE CAN HAVE A DETAILED PRESENTATION ON THAT CITY COUNCIL'S INPUT, GO INTO DETAIL ABOUT AVAILABLE PLACES WE CAN SPEND IT, PROJECTS WE CAN SPEND IT ON, TAKE INPUT FROM COUNCILMAN THE FOLLOWING MEETING, BRING A RECOMMENDED SPENDING PLAN OR PROGRAM PLAN THAT WILL REFLECT THE INPUT THE COUNCIL'S PROVIDED AND LET YOUR VOTE TO GO FORWARD WITH IT.
AND AGAIN, THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER.
NOW, WE'VE HAD SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS ON THIS, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.
ANYTHING ELSE? OK, LET'S TAKE A BATHROOM BREAK AND COME BACK IN ABOUT FIVE OR 10 MINUTES.
I THINK WE'RE WE'RE READY IF Y'ALL ARE ABOUT READY.
OK, WE LEFT OFF AT THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[2. CONSENT ITEMS]
ANYTHING THERE THAT NEEDS TO COME OFF FOR DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? YES.GET MYSELF SYNCED UP THERE, I NEED TO PULL ITEM NUMBER F OFF OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, PLEASE, I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN FROM THAT.
OK, WE'LL PULL ITEMS F TO HAVE A SEPARATE VOTE.
ANYTHING ELSE, COUNCIL? OK, LET'S GO AHEAD AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, MINUS ITEM F.
I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM F.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL AND SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER SAUER TO APPROVE THE ITEMS LISTED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM F.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? THAT ITEM PASSES WITH THE 5-0 VOTE AND WE WILL GIVE COUNCIL MEMBER STANLEY A MOMENT TO LEAVE THE ROOM PLEASE.
OK, MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM F ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS IT IS PRESENTED.
[2.F. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE WEST 60 FEET OF LOT 5 AND ALL OF LOT 6, BLOCK 21, REPLAT OF BLOCK “A” PARAMOUNT TERRACE UNIT NO. 4, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF AMARILLO IN SECTION 228, BLOCK 2, A.B.&M. SURVEY, RANDALL COUNTY, TEXAS, PLUS ONE-HALF OF ALL BOUNDING STREETS, ALLEYS, AND PUBLIC WAYS, TO CHANGE FROM MULTIPLE-FAMILY DISTRICT 1 TO GENERAL RETAIL DISTRICT]
SECOND.WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER SAUER TO APPROVE ITEM F AS LISTED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION ON THAT ITEM? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? THAT PASSES WITH A 4-0 VOTE.
COUNCIL MEMBER STANLY ABSTAINED AND WAS NOT PRESENT IN THE ROOM FOR ANY DISCUSSION OR THE
[01:40:02]
VOTE.MOVING ON TO THE NON CONSENT AGENDA, ITEM 3A.
[3.A. PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING 432.90 ACRES OF LAND IN SECTIONS 168 and 189, BLOCK 2, A.B.&M. SURVEY, POTTER COUNTY, TEXAS.]
MR. CITY MANAGER? ALL RIGHT.WE HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM ANDREW FREEMAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND SPECIAL PROJECTS.
THEN WE'LL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM AND THEN COUNCIL WILL BE ABLE TO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER.
BEAR WITH ME AS I READ THE CAPTION HERE.
PULL UP THE MAP SO YOU CAN KIND OF FOLLOW ALONG WITH THE CAPTION, BUT NUMBER ONE IS REZONING 294.88 ACRES OF LAND IN MILLER HEIGHTS, NORTH HEIGHTS, UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS, AMARILLO HEIGHTS ADDITION FROM MANUFACTURED HOME DISTRICT, MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ONE AND MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ONE WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 106 AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TWO.
ALSO WANTED TO NOTE THAT THE ORIGINAL NOTES INCLUDE 444.89 ACRES IN WEBSTER HEIGHTS ADDITION AND SECTION 224.
THE SECOND AREA IS REZONING 22.82 ACRES AND AMARILLO HEIGHTS, CHARLOTTE HEIGHTS, DOWNING HIGHLANDS UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS AND W.N.
MOORE'S ADDITIONS FROM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT THREE MANUFACTURED HOME DISTRICTS AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT ONE.
AND THE ORIGINAL NOTICE INCLUDE 38.27 ADDITIONAL ACRES, OR NO, A TOTAL OF 38.27 ACRES IN WINDSOR HEIGHTS ADDITION AND SECTION 224.
THE THIRD ONE IS REZONING OF 7.05 ACRES IN MILLER HEIGHTS ADDITION FROM MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT ONE AND MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ONE WITH A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 100 TO GENERAL RETAIL DISTRICT.
THE ORIGINAL NOTICE INCLUDE 58.84 ACRES WITH [INAUDIBLE], UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS, GLIDDEN AND SANBORN, TNK AND GT DAVIS SUBDIVISIONS IN SECTIONS 169, 188 AND 189.
NUMBER FOUR IS 78.98 ACRES IN THE MATTHEW HOOKE'S RE SUBDIVISION AND BLOCK 49, MILLER HEIGHTS, MILLER HEIGHTS, NORTH HEIGHTS, CLARENCE WHATLEY SUBDIVISION OF WHEATLEY'S FIVE ACRE TRACT AND UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS.
ADDITION FROM MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ONE TO MODERATE DENSITY DISTRICTS.
AND NUMBER FIVE IS 29.17 ACRES OF LAND AND MILLER HEIGHTS NORTH HEIGHTS AND UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS ADDITION FROM MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ONE WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 85 AND MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ONE TO NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE DISTRICT.
OK, SO JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW, THIS PROJECT HAS COME BEFORE CITY COUNCIL FOR DISCUSSION PREVIOUSLY.
SO JUST TOUCHING ON THE ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION, IT WAS FOR 650.15 ACRES IN THE NORTH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AREA AND JUST A LITTLE TO THE SOUTHWEST ACROSS THE TRACKS FROM NORTH HEIGHTS.
THE DESIRED OUTCOMES? TO ADDRESS INCOMPATIBILITIES AND TO CREATE A PREDICTABLE AND ORDERLY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, PREDICT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND ENCOURAGE MORE SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENT BY REMOVING INDUSTRIAL ZONING AND MULTIFAMILY ZONING FROM AREAS THAT ARE ALREADY RESIDENTIAL IN CHARACTER, ENCOURAGING RETAIL AND BUSINESS USES THAT ARE MORE COMPATIBLE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT AND REDUCING MANUFACTURED HOME ZONING DISTRICT.
AS FAR AS A STAFF ANALYSIS, IT WAS FOUND THAT IT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE VISION AND STRATEGIES AND NORTH HEIGHTS' NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, WHICH IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTED IN 2010.
IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR THE AREA ADOPTED BY THAT SAME COMP PLAN IN 2010.
IT WOULD BETTER ALIGN THE ZONING PATTERN NORTH HEIGHTS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD UNIT CONCEPT, INCLUDING AMARILLO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND IT WAS ALSO ANALYZED FOR THE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
SUITABILITY FOR THE PRESENT ZONING AND THE CHANGES WOULD PROMOTE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
THIS PLAN WAS ALSO IN COORDINATION WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE NORTH HEIGHTS ADVISORY ASSOCIATION, AND THE GOALS OF THE PROJECT OVERALL WERE AS FOLLOWS.
ALIGN THE NORTH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING PATTERN WITH ZONING PRACTICES CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT THE REST OF AMARILLO, INCLUDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD UNIT CONCEPT, IMPLEMENTING LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE NORTH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN TO ADDRESS THOSE AND INCOMPATIBLE ZONING DISTRICTS AND ENCOURAGE REINVESTMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT IN A WAY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S ORIGINAL CHARACTER.
SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNED ZONING WAS BASED ON THIS COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT AND WAS DEVELOPED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, AND FOUND THAT IT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE VISION AND STRATEGIES OF THE NORTH HEIGHTS PLAN, FUTURE LAND USE, FUTURE LAND MAP PLAN FOR THE AREA, AS WELL AS WELL AS MEETING THE GOALS OF BETTER ALIGNING NORTH HEIGHTS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD UNIT CONCEPT OVERALL.
THIS NEXT SLIDE IS AN OVERVIEW OF THE EXISTING ZONING IN THE AREA.
AND JUST SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN PLACE, YOU'VE GOT LANE [INAUDIBLE] TO THE WEST, MULTIFAMILY REALLY IN THE CORE LIGHT COMMERCIAL TO THE SOUTH, A MANUFACTURED HOME DISTRICT THERE TO THE EAST.
[01:45:01]
AND THEN YOUR NEXT SLIDE WAS THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL OF THE 650.15 ACRES THAT YOU CAN SEE IN FRONT OF YOU.THE RESIDENTIAL R2 WOULD BE ZONING, PRIMARILY INDUSTRIAL MULTIFAMILY WANTED MANUFACTURED HOME.
THE INTENT BEING TO REMOVE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USES FROM INDUSTRIAL ZONING, PROTECT FUTURE INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT NEAR THE HOMES, ENCOURAGE INFILL AND REINVESTMENT, AND REDUCE THE NUMBER OF MANUFACTURED HOMES.
IT'S RECOMMENDED THROUGHOUT THE CENTRAL CORE OF THE PLAN AREA AND THE LARGE VACANT TRACT IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER.
MULTIFAMILY ONE THAT WOULD BE THE 38.27 ACRES, PRIMARILY FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO MANUFACTURED HOME, WITH THE INTENT BEING TO BUFFER COMMERCIAL USES ALONG THE CORRIDORS FROM CORE SINGLE FAMILY AREAS RECOMMENDED ALONG AMARILLO BOULEVARD.
MODERATE DENSITY, 78.98 ACRES, PRIMARILY MULTIFAMILY, ONE TO MODERATE DENSITY, WITH THE INTENT BEING TO BUFFER BUSINESSES AND RETAIL USES ALONG THE CORRIDORS TO PROVIDE A TRANSITION AND INTENSITY OF USES TO CORE SINGLE FAMILY AREAS, ALLOW MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING TYPES LIKE DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, TINY HOMES AND SMALLER APARTMENT BUILDINGS THAT PROVIDE MORE HOUSING CHOICES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS RECOMMENDED ALONG NORTHVIEW STREET AND NW 18TH.
GENERAL RETAIL CONSISTED OF 58.84 ACRES ZONED FROM MULTIFAMILY ONE AND LIGHT COMMERCIAL, THE INTENT BEING TO ENCOURAGE USES THAT ARE MORE COMPATIBLE TO NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL ALONG AMARILLO BOULEVARD AND HELPING HUGHES STREET TRANSITION TO A SMALL BUSINESS CORRIDOR OVER TIME.
AND THE LAST AREA WOULD BE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES 29.17 ACRES FROM PRIMARILY MULTIFAMILY.
THE ATTEMPT BEING TO ALLOW BOTH RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY AND MODERATE DENSITY HOUSING TYPES AND LOW IMPACT BUSINESSES WHILE CREATING A WALKABLE, MIXED USE CORRIDOR WHERE SERVICES, JOBS AND AMENITIES ARE ACCESSIBLE TO NEARBY RESIDENTIAL.
THIS IS RECOMMENDED ON NW 18TH AVENUE IN PARTS OF NORTH HUGHES STREET.
SO THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, WHAT WENT BEFORE P&Z, AND IT WAS ALSO SENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
PLANNING AND ZONING MET AND THEY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATIONS IN A 5-2 VOTE AT THEIR JULY 19TH MEETING, WHICH REDUCED THE TOTAL ACREAGE TO 432.90.
THE AREAS THEY CHANGE, WHICH I'LL FOLLOW UP WITH A MAP AFTER THIS.
THE AREA SOUTH AND WEST OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND NORTH AMARILLO BOULEVARD BE ELIMINATED FROM THE REZONING INITIATIVE.
LAND NORTH OF 15TH AND WEST AND NORTH RUST, A.K.A.
THE CHAPMAN LAND, IS ELIMINATED FROM THIS INITIATIVE.
THE LAND ALONG AMARILLO BOULEVARD IS CURRENTLY ZONED LIKE COMMERCIAL SHALL REMAIN.
THAT COMMERCIAL WILL NOT BE CHANGED TO GENERAL RETAIL.
SO THOSE ARE THE THREE CHANGES BASICALLY REMOVED FROM CONSIDERATION.
AND THEN THERE WAS A MOTION INCLUDED OR LANGUAGE INCLUDED WITHIN THIS MOTION THAT SAID THAT ANY PROPERTY WILL BE DOWN, SO BY THIS INITIATIVE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE USED FOR ANY USE AS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR THE LIFE OF THE PROPERTY.
THE LIFE OF THE PROPERTY SHALL BE DEFINED AS ANY PROPERTY THAT DOES NOT HAVE WATER, SEWER AND ELECTRICAL SERVICE FOR 24 CONSECUTIVE MONTHS.
SO THIS IS A SLIDE, EXCUSE ME, JUST SHOWING AREAS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED BY P & Z'S RECOMMENDATION WITH THE 5-2 VOTE.
MOST OF IT IS ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE NORTH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN THE SOUTHWEST PART WHERE THE TRACKS RUN AND THEN THE GR REMOVED ON AMARILLO BOULEVARD.
STAFF'S ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATIONS WHEN IT PRESENTED TO P&Z WERE BASED ON BEST PRACTICES FOR EQUABLE LAND USE PLAN TO CREATE A SOUND PATH FORWARD FOR THE NORTH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNED AREA.
STAFF MADE THE RECOMMENDATIONS RESULT IN AN ORDERLY LAND USE FRAMEWORK THAT ENHANCES THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF NORTH HEIGHTS AND CREATES PREDICTABILITY FOR REINVESTMENT IN THE TYPES OF PROJECTS ENVISIONED BY THE PLAN IN THE FUTURE, INCLUDING HOUSING REHABILITATION, SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENT AND SMALL BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES.
SO WITH THAT SAID, COUNCIL, BEFORE YOU TODAY HAS THE OPTION TO CONSIDER P&Z'S RECOMMENDATION GO A DIFFERENT ROUTE ALTOGETHER.
REALLY THE CHOICE IS CITY COUNCIL'S TO MAKE.
I DID WANT TO ANSWER A FEW QUESTIONS THAT WE'VE GOTTEN SINCE P&Z, JUST TO ADD MORE CONTEXT TO THE CONVERSATION.
WE HAD A QUESTION OF WHY THE SOUTHWEST OF THE RAILROAD WAS INCLUDED IN THE PLAN SINCE IT IS OUTSIDE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNED BOUNDARY.
WHILE IT WAS OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY, IT DOESN'T IMPACT THE NORTH HEIGHTS AREA.
THE DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS ARE THE SAME AS THE AREA NORTH OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS, WHICH IS CURRENTLY PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING.
MCMASTER'S PROVIDES IMPORTANT CONNECTIVITY FROM AMARILLO BOULEVARD TO UNDEVELOPED LAND NORTH OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS IN THE BOUNDARY.
THE BEST LAND USE PRACTICE WOULD BE TO NOT LEAVE A STRIP OF INDUSTRIAL ZONE BETWEEN TWO RESIDENTIALLY ZONED AREAS.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDED, INCLUDING IT TO FURTHER THE GOALS OF THE COMPREHENSIVENESS OF THE PROPOSAL.
IT WAS NOT A REQUEST BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE NORTH HEIGHTS ADVISORY
[01:50:01]
ASSOCIATION, SO STRICTLY STAFF INPUT IN THE PROCESS.ANOTHER QUESTION WAS WHY IS GENERAL RETAIL RECOMMENDED ON AMARILLO BOULEVARD? SINCE IT IS A STATE HIGHWAY, IS IT TYPICAL TO HAVE CERTAIN ZONING ALONG STATE HIGHWAYS.
THAT PART INCLUDED IN THIS PROPOSAL IS PRIMARILY VACANT.
GENERAL RETAIL IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS PART OF THE CORRIDOR MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS TO THE NORTH.
IT IS A STATE HIGHWAY, BUT IT'S ALSO COMMON TO HAVE DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL ZONING ALONG THESE CORRIDORS.
PARTS OF AMARILLO BOULEVARD ARE ALSO ZONED GENERAL RETAIL, AND IT SERVES NORTH HEIGHTS IN THE SAME WAY THAT COLTER AND SOUTHEAST OR SOUTHWEST AMARILLO.
BOTH OF THOSE CORRIDORS ARE PRIMARILY ZONED GENERAL RETAIL.
IN ADDITION, THIS WAS A SPECIFIC ACTION IN THE NORTH HEIGHTS PLAN, WHICH WAS AMENDING ZONING PATTERNS, PROMOTE APPROPRIATE MIX OF BUSINESSES ALONG DESIGNATED CORRIDORS.
HUGHES STREET, S AMARILLO BOULEVARD, DIVERSIFYING COMMERCIAL MIX ALONG AMARILLO BOULEVARD, WEST OF HUGHES.
ANOTHER QUESTION WE RECEIVED WAS HOW ARE THE EXISTING BUSINESSES ALONG AMARILLO BOULEVARD IMPACTED BY THIS PROPOSAL? THERE ARE TWO BUSINESSES SOUTH OF AMARILLO BOULEVARD THAT HAVE PORTIONS THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY ZONED LIGHT COMMERCIAL AND THE OTHER PORTION IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
SO CURRENTLY THEY ALREADY HAVE A NON CONFORMING ISSUE IN PLACE.
SO IF IT WAS CHANGED TO GENERAL RETAIL, IT WOULD BASICALLY BE THE SAME SITUATION, NOT IMPACTING THE EXISTING BUSINESSES AS LONG AS THEY STAY IN OPERATION.
WHAT IF IT DOESN'T CHANGE? BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT COMPLIANT? IT'S STILL IN NONCOMPLIANCE NOW WITH THE BECAUSE IT'S SPLITTING ZONING CATEGORIES AS IT IS NOW.
OK, ONE AUTO REPAIR BUSINESS WILL BE NONCONFORMING.
[INAUDIBLE] STAFF, AS PART OF THE ZONING REWRITE PROCESS, IS RECOMMENDING A SUP FOR AUTO REPAIR BUSINESSES, WHICH WOULD GIVE THEM A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT ROUTE TO GO IF THEY DECIDE TO CREATE THAT BUSINESS.
I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS CURRENTLY IN OPERATION.
IT'S A PROPOSED PLAN FOR AUTO REPAIR SHOP? IT'S CURRENTLY OPERATING? OK, SO THEY WERE THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT EXPANDING AND HAVING ISSUES THERE.
WE THOUGHT THE SPECIFIC USE PERMANENT ROUTE WOULD GIVE THEM SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THE FUTURE TO EXPAND.
THERE ARE NO OTHER NONCONFORMING USES AS FOUND IN OUR INVENTORY.
THERE ARE TWO CHURCHES, TWO EDUCATION INSTITUTION USES, ONE PARK, 10 VACANT TRACTS AND ONE MOTEL THAT'S VACANT AND TWO RETAIL BUILDINGS ALONG AMARILLO BOULEVARD.
AND THEN WE ALSO RECEIVED A QUESTION ABOUT EXISTING NONCONFORMING BUSINESSES AND HOW THEY CAME TO EXIST IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AS WELL AS WHAT ACTION WE COULD TAKE TO ENFORCE EXISTING ZONING.
IT'S LIKELY A COMBINATION OF OF DIFFERENT THINGS HAVE TAKEN PLACE OVER THE LAST FEW DECADES.
THE ALLOWED USE IN A PARTICULAR DISTRICT CAN CHANGE OVER TIME.
BUILDINGS HAVE LIKELY BEEN OCCUPIED WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY OR PROPER PERMITTING AND THEN THE USE OF LAWS WITHOUT OBTAINING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
ONE WAY WE COULD ADDRESS THIS IS DOING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AUDIT, FOLLOWED BY ACTIVE ADDITIONAL ENFORCEMENT.
A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS REALLY THE MAIN PRIMARY WAY WE CAN ASSURE THAT THE PROPERTY PROPERTY IS BEING USED IN THE WAY THAT IT'S INTENDED TO WITH THE THE PROPER ZONING.
AND RELATED TO THAT TOPIC WAS DOES CODE ENFORCEMENT PATROL THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR CODE VIOLATIONS, INCLUDING WEEDS BURNED OUT OR VACANT ON MAINTAIN PROPERTIES? AND WE HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE OR BUILDING SAFETY WITH OUR CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICERS WHERE THEY ARE ASSIGNED CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOODS OR DISTRICTS AND THEY GO OUT AND LOOK FOR VIOLATIONS SUCH AS TALL GRASS, WEEDS, UNLAWFUL ACCUMULATIONS, DILAPIDATED STRUCTURES AND OTHER ZONING VIOLATIONS, AS WELL AS CITIZENS BEING ABLE TO SUBMIT CONCERNS THAT WE THEN FOLLOW UP ON.
AND AS PART OF THAT PROCESS, WE'RE OUT THERE CHECKING A CERTAIN PROJECT THAT'S BEEN REPORTED TO US.
WE'LL TAKE A WIDER LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SEE WHAT ISSUES WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ADDRESS AS WELL.
JUST TO TOUCH ON THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY.
AND THE NORTH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS, OF COURSE, WAS ADOPTED JANUARY 2017.
THERE'S A NORTH HEIGHTS ASSOCIATION WEBINAR AND OUTREACH IN NOVEMBER, 2020.
POSTCARDS MAILING IN A CITY HOSTED ZOOM SESSION WERE HELD AROUND THAT SAME TIME PERIOD.
MARCH 1ST, 2021 WAS A P&Z MEETING WITH LEGAL NOTICES AND PUBLIC HEARINGS.
IT WAS TABLED AT THAT MEETING.
APRIL PUBLIC WORKSHOPS WERE THEN HELD, THREE DIFFERENT WORKSHOPS, WITH INFORMATIONAL MAILINGS SENT OUT.
IN MAY, NORTH HEIGHTS ADVISORY ASSOCIATION POSTCARDS WENT OUT WITH ADDITIONAL TWO INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS.
AND THEN ON JUNE 14TH AND JULY 19TH, THERE WERE P&Z MEETINGS THAT ALSO INCLUDED LEGAL NOTICES AND PUBLIC HEARINGS.
WE DID ALSO JUST TO POINT OUT WE DID RECEIVE A PETITION AGAINST THE PROPOSAL, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE LOOKED AT IN CASE IT WOULD TRIGGER A SUPER MAJORITY OR FOUR OUT OF FIVE OUT OF CITY COUNCIL, BUT IT DID NOT MEET THE THRESHOLD TO REQUIRE THAT.
I DID WANT TO MAKE YOU AWARE THAT WE DID RECEIVE A PETITION.
ANDREW, HOW MANY MEETINGS DID YOU JUST LIST OFF?
[01:55:03]
I COULDN'T KEEP UP AS I WAS.ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, TEN.
TEN DIFFERENT MEETINGS? YES, MA'AM.
A 12 MONTH PROCESS? AND IT'S BEEN WORKING PRIOR TO THAT, EMILY HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE PRIOR TO THAT AND THEN ONGOING THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS TO VET THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND MAKE SURE FROM THE STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE THAT IT MET ZONING GUIDELINES RECOMMEND CRITERIA, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT'S NOT JUST CHANGES BEING MADE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE.
SO, ANDREW, DO WE KNOW HOW MANY ZONING MEETINGS TOOK PLACE DURING THE NORTH HEIGHTS ADVISORY ASSOCIATION MEETINGS? DURING JUST THEIR REGULAR BOARD MEETINGS? YES, DURING THEIR, NOT THE BOARD MEETING, BUT THE COMMUNITY MEETING ITSELF.
THERE WERE AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR JUST HOSTED BY THEM AND THEN ANOTHER THREE JUST WITH CITY STAFF COORDINATING WITH THEM.
SO WE HAD SOME, EMILY WENT AND GAVE MULTIPLE PRESENTATIONS AND THEY FOLLOWED UP AFTER WHERE JUST IN NORTH HEIGHTS HELD A MEETING TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION.
SO MAYBE SIX OR SEVEN MEETINGS WITHIN THE NORTH HEIGHTS ADVISORY ASSOCIATION? OK, YES, YES, MA'AM.
SO THERE WERE, THE ONE THING WAS, LET'S SAY, WEST OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDED; WAS NOT REQUESTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? CORRECT.
AND THEN THE GENERAL RETAIL WAS OR WAS NOT REQUESTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD? WAS.
WAS REQUESTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD? YES.
SO CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE REQUEST WOULD BE SPECIFICALLY ACCOMPLISHING? IF IT, YOU KNOW, IF IT DIDN'T STAY LIGHT COMMERCIAL, IT COULD BE GENERAL RETAIL OR LIGHT COMMERCIAL UNDERNEATH THAT CODE, BUT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE AN ALLOWANCE FOR LIKE AN AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR SHOP THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE IN GENERAL RETAIL? RIGHT, JUST MORE INTENSE LIGHT COMMERCIAL USES.
AS A PERSONAL FEELING, DO YOU HAVE A FEELING ON HOW IMPACTFUL THAT IS? YOU KNOW, FROM A PLANNER STANDPOINT? WITH IT BEING, YOU KNOW, THE AMARILLO BOULEVARD OR STATE HIGHWAY? JUST BASED ON THIS AREA? I THINK IT COULD HAVE SOME IMPACTS JUST KNOWING WHAT'S TAKEN PLACE TO THE SOUTH.
I THINK IT'S MORE JUST THERE SINCE IT IS VACANT, THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO TRY AND GET USES AND THAT WOULD SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEIR NEEDS.
AND I THINK GENERAL RETAIL IS MORE OF A GOAL THAN THAN LIGHT COMMERCIAL.
AND I KNOW THAT WE, PARTS OF THIS PHASE ONE UP TOP, PHASE TWO DOWN BELOW THE BOULEVARD,.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOUR INTENTION WOULD BE TO BE GENERAL RETAIL ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BOULEVARD? NO,.
NO? NO, THE PART TWO HAS GOT A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SCENARIO OF RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON IT BEING MORE INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL IN NATURE, BUT STILL TRYING TO MEET THE GOAL, BUT IT WON'T LOOK IDENTICAL TO THIS SIDE.
AND THEN JUST A QUESTION TO THE.
COUNCIL, ARE WE BEING PRESENTED WITH TWO OPTIONS HERE TO BE DISCUSSED OR ARE WE BEING PRESENTED WITH P&Z'S OPTION? YOU'VE BEEN PRESENTED P&Z'S OPTION THE WAY IT'S IN YOUR PACKET, THE WAY THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN.
BUT SINCE IT'S FIRST READING, YOU CAN, COUNCIL HAS A CHOICE TO DO ANYTHING.
THEY COULD EITHER GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION, P&Z'S OR CHANGE IT ALTOGETHER.
AND THEN BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING, WE WORK WITH LEGAL TO REVISE THE ORDINANCE TO MEAN BASICALLY WHAT YOU APPROVE.
AND WE'LL GO WITH WHATEVER COUNCIL WANTS? YES.
YOU HAVE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT WE'RE NOT BOUND BY EITHER OF THEM? CORRECT.
SO I'M LOOKING AT P&Z'S RECOMMENDATION AND I'M LOOKING AT THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL AND I SEE SOME DISPARITY THAT IS REALLY QUESTIONABLE TO ME.
AND THAT ONE PART IS, THEY HAVE MADE A DECISION TO EXTEND THE R-2 IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TWO PIECES THAT THEY CUT OUT.
AND IF I'M LOOKING AT THE EXISTING ZONING THAT WAS ALL EXISTING ZONING INDUSTRIAL, IS THAT RIGHT? INDUSTRIAL ONE? LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ONE, AND THEN HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT COMMERCIAL ON THE BOULEVARD THERE.
AND I'M SURE THAT THEY WERE ORIGINALLY SET UP THAT WAY BECAUSE THE SMELTER WAS ACROSS THE STREET, WHICH IS NOW BASICALLY UNTOUCHABLE LAND? CORRECT.
AND SO IT'S NOT NEEDED ANYMORE.
SO I, SO THE FIRST THING IS I CAN KIND OF SEE WHERE THEY'RE COMING WITH REMOVING.
I HAVE A HARD TIME WITH REMOVING THE R-2 AND LETTING IT GO BACK TO INDUSTRIAL
[02:00:05]
LIGHT.BUT BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT THAT, THAT'S WEST OF THE TRACKS, THAT PART THAT IS NORTH OF THE TRACKS THAT WAS REMOVED.
I WOULD LOVE A REALLY GOOD EXPLANATION FOR WHY IT WAS REMOVED, BECAUSE I WOULD THINK THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO HAVE SOME CONTINUITY IN THERE SO THAT YOU YOU'VE LEFT THIS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND THAT COULD DESTROY THE WHOLE THING THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SET UP WITH THE RESIDENTIAL PART BACK IN THAT AREA.
IF SOMETHING, IF THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THERE.
ANDREW, WOULD YOU PUT THAT EXISTING ZONING UP SO WE CAN ALL SEE IT? AND THEN EDDY, I'M SORRY TO BOTHER YOU, BUT WOULD YOU JUST QUICKLY WALK US BACK THROUGH BY POINTING OUT.
SO WHAT'S HAPPENED? IS ALL OF THIS WAS CHANGED TO R2 RESIDENTIAL AND SO THE ONE THAT P&Z HAS THEY KEPT THIS SECTION OUT.
THEY LEFT IT R2, MAYBE THEY REMOVED THIS AND THEY REMOVED THIS IS.
AND THE PROBLEM THAT I'M HAVING WITH THESE IS THIS IS STILL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND THIS IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
AND IT POTENTIALLY COULD JUST MESS UP THIS WHOLE PROCESS OF TRYING TO HAVE SOME CONTINUITY AND ALLOW A NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE ANY OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD.
LET'S GO TO THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF TOWN.
IT'S LIKE PUTTING THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL RIGHT NEXT TO THE GREEN WAYS TO ONE OF THOSE OTHER PLACES.
AND SO I GUESS I REALLY WANT TO KNOW THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME REALLY SOUND EVIDENCE OF WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO CHANGE THAT AND TURN THAT BACK TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, BECAUSE I'M GOING TO HAVE AN IMPOSSIBLE TIME VOTING FOR IT.
I KNOW THAT'S THE CHAPMAN PROPERTY, I KNOW HE HAS A REPRESENTATIVE HERE THAT'S MOST LIKELY GOING TO TALK DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
BUT WE DID HAVE DISCUSSIONS AND HE REALLY AT THE TIME DIDN'T HAVE A SET PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY, BASICALLY JUST DIDN'T WANT IT TO BE TOUCHED, JUST DIDN'T WANT THE CHANGE.
SO THERE IS NO JUSTIFIABLE REASON? NOT THAT THEY WOULD SHARE WITH US AS FAR AS A FUTURE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY.
OK, WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR IS A JUSTIFIABLE REASON FOR THE EXCEPTION.
MR. SHANE, YOU'RE LISTENING, RIGHT? OK, GOOD.
WE'RE GLAD YOU'RE HERE BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING THE THOUGHTS, SO.
AND SO THEN I GUESS MY NEXT QUESTION IS, IS WHY WOULD YOU, THAT WEST WOULD YOU REMOVE IT? I CAN KIND OF SEE THE FACT YOU'VE GOT THE RAILROAD TRACKS THAT RUN THROUGH THERE.
THAT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY SEPARATION.
AND I CAN, I THINK I CAN GET TO THAT ONE.
I JUST CAN'T GET TO THE R2, REMOVING THE R2 ON THAT NORTHERN SECTION.
AND WHAT WE FOUND THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THE CROSS THE TRACKS, THERE ARE AT LEAST A FEW BUSINESSES THAT WOULD TURN IN A NONCONFORMING SITUATIONS THAT WE DIDN'T INITIALLY SEE WHEN WE MADE THE RECOMMENDATION.
BUT THERE IS A GOOD NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL THAT IS CURRENTLY NONCONFORMING BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED IN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TODAY.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? THE SOUTHWEST.
WHERE THOSE BUSINESSES, ANDREW? THEY ARE VERY CLOSE TO THE TRACKS, JUST ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF THE TRACKS.
OK, NOT IN THE PART THAT WAS? SAYS R2 REMOVED, JUST ABOVE MULTIFAMILY REMOVED.
HOW MANY IS A FEW? OH, FOUR? I'M GOING TO PUT EMILY ON THE SPOT, I THINK.
AND THEY'D BE ABLE TO CONTINUE AS THEY ARE EXISTING, ACCORDING TO OUR STATUTES, AS FAR AS STAYING AN ACTIVE BUSINESS, NOT BEING VACANT, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO STAY.
IT JUST IMPACTS THE FUTURE, IF THEY WERE TO EXPAND OR GO VACANT.
THEY COULD SELL IT AND SOMEBODY ELSE COULD OPERATE AS IS, AS FAR AS NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES GO.
YOU KNOW, I CAN SEE THAT PART BEING LIGHT, INDUSTRIAL, DRIVING BY THAT PART OF IT, BUT WHENEVER YOU CROSS THE TRACKS AND YOU'VE GOT ALL OF THAT.
AND REALLY THE NORTH SIDE'S COMPLETELY VACANT, THERE'S NOTHING THERE.
AND SO I WOULD, I HAVE A REAL HARD TIME SEEING THAT, LET THIS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
WHEN YOU GOT ALL THOSE COMPLETE HOMES.
IF WE COULD, I DO KNOW THAT YOU EXTENDED UP TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS, BUT THAT'S ONE ENTIRE PARCEL OF LAND, OR IT COULD BE MULTIPLE PARCELS, BUT IT'S ONE OWNER.
WHY GROW THE RESIDENTIAL ALL THE WAY UP TO THE TRACKS WITH WHAT EDDY SAYING, IF YOU'RE LEAVING IT NORTH OF THAT TO BE LIKE COMMERCIAL? WHY NOT LEAVE THE ENTIRE THING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE TRACKS LIGHT COMMERCIAL? OR YOU MEAN LIKE INDUSTRIAL? I'M SORRY, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
JUST BECAUSE OF THE HEAVY IMPACTS THAT HAVE ON A NEIGHBORHOOD.
[INAUDIBLE] REGULATIONS NOT TO HAVE ANY OF IT.
AND SORRY, THAT SOUNDED REALLY LOUD.
I JUST WASN'T EXPECTING MY MICROPHONE TO BE SO.
SO THE PART THAT'S LEFT ARE R2, BUT THERE ARE EXISTING HOMES CONSTRUCTED IN THAT
[02:05:04]
AREA.THE SOUTH OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS THAT'S BEING REMOVED THAT PRIMARILY IS BUILT OUT AS RESIDENTIAL, LIKE A PLATTED.
THERE'S JUST THOSE HANDFUL OF BUSINESSES.
AND SO THAT'S I THINK THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION THAT THEIR EXISTING HOMES NORTH OF THE TRACKS LIKE THAT'S RESIDENTIAL IN CHARACTER.
OK, SO REAL QUICK, THE REASON THAT THE P&Z CAME UP WITH THIS, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO SAY THIS, IS WHY THAT.
ARE WE INFERRING THAT THE EXISTING HOUSING UP, YOU KNOW, IS THE REASON THAT THAT IS GOING R2 AND THEN FROM THERE FORWARD IS VACANT PROPERTY ON UNDEVELOPED LAND? AND WE CAN EVEN LET P&Z TALK TO THIS.
SO RATHER THAN YOU GUYS HAVING TO OPINE, YOU'RE WELCOME TO ANSWER THE.
THE VOTE OCCURRED IN P&Z WITHOUT ANY REALLY DISCUSSION AFTER THEIR MOTION.
SO I CAN TELL YOU THE REASON WHY.
I'M GOING TO THROW ANOTHER QUESTION IN THERE THAT THEY CAN ALSO ANSWER.
SO WE'VE BEEN SITTING ON THIS COUNCIL FOR FOUR YEARS, OR MOST OF US HAVE, AND SO WE WE VOTED ON LOTS OF CHANGES FOR PROPERTY.
AND SO IF WE VOTED AND WE DID MAKE THIS R2, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHOEVER OWNS THAT PROPERTY, MR. CHAPMAN, THAT HE COULD COME AND SAY, OK, WAIT, I WANT TO DO GENERAL RETAIL HERE OR I WANT TO DO THIS OR I WANT TO DO THIS.
AND VERY LIKELY HE COULD BRING IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THAT COULD BE CHANGED AND IT COULD GO FORWARD THAT WAY.
THERE'S STILL THE ZONING APPLICATION PROCESS.
AND SO THE DEAL THAT I WOULD WANT TO DO WOULD BE IF I LIVED IN THAT PART OF TOWN AND I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL NO LONGER HAS AN IMPACT OVER THERE AT ALL ANYMORE, THE SMELTER IS GONE, BASICALLY THAT LAND IS USELESS.
AND SO THERE'S NO REASON FOR THAT TO STAY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
AND SO IT WOULD STILL GIVE MR. CHAPMAN, OR WHOEVER, IF HE SELLS IT AND IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AND THEY WANT TO DEVELOP IT IN ANOTHER FASHION, IT STILL GIVES THEM ALL THE OPPORTUNITIES TO COME IN AND TO CHANGE THAT AND THEN MOVE IT TO THERE.
AND I WOULD RATHER US HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO IN AND PROTECT THE COMMUNITY WITH AN R2 RATING AND LET THEM COME BACK AND SAY, OK, WE WANT TO DO THIS IN THIS IN THIS.
I GUESS REALLY WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN IS I'D LIKE TO SEE THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL GO AWAY FROM THAT AREA.
AND STAFF HAD THAT CONVERSATION WITH MR. CHAPMAN.
I BELIEVE CHRIS DID, TALKING THROUGH DO YOU HAVE IDEAS? DO YOU WANT GENERAL RETAIL ON THE CORNERS? IS THAT JUST WEREN'T TO A POINT THAT THEY HAVE A PLAN, BUT ABSOLUTELY, THERE'S STILL THE ZONING PROCESS.
ANYONE CAN COME IN AND REQUEST ZONING CHANGE ON THEIR PROPERTY.
AND I CAN ONLY THINK OF TWO OR THREE TIMES IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS THAT WE HAVE SAID, NO, YOU CAN'T DO THAT, THAT WE VOTED AGAINST THAT.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE US PROTECT THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY WITH AN R2 KNOWING THAT YOU CAN ALWAYS GO BACK IN AND MAKE THAT, BECAUSE LIKELY IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL IS NOT GOING TO GO IN THERE ANYWAY.
HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO COME OR THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME WHENEVER THAT TIME COMES AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT.
AND I WOULD JUST MUCH RATHER DO SOMETHING IN AN EFFORT TO PROTECT THE NORTH HEIGHTS COMMUNITY.
AND REALLY THAT'S GOING CHANGE.
OF COURSE, WE HOPE TO SEE QUICK PROGRESS AFTER.
BUT THIS IS A LONG TERM APPROACH AND THIS IS REALLY JUST SETTING A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD WITH THE REST OF THE CITY, AS FAR AS NEIGHBORHOOD UNIT CONCERNED, GENERAL RETAIL ON THE CORRIDORS AND MULTI-FAMILY ON THE EDGES AND RESIDENTIAL INTERNALLY, JUST REALLY SETTING IT UP FOR HOPEFULLY SUCCESS IN THE FUTURE.
JUST PROCEDURALLY, COUNCIL, ANDREW IS GOING TO MAKE THE PRESENTATION.
OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKING QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL WANT TO UNDERSTAND IT, THEN WE'RE GOING TO ENTER THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE'LL WALK THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
AND I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO JUST ROLL THROUGH THERE, GIVING THEM THEIR THREE MINUTES.
LET'S HEAR EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS.
AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO BRING SOMEONE BACK TO ASK QUESTIONS LIKE I ANTICIPATE WILL WANT TO VISIT WITH MR. SHANE AND HAVE AN EXTENDED DIALOG WITH HIM.
BUT IF WE COULD GET THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS WITH EVERYBODY JUST MAKING THEIR COMMENTS, THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND WE'LL INVITE TO THE PODIUM.
ANYBODY ELSE YOU WANT TO HAVE MORE DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS WITH.
ANDREW AND EMILY AND FLOYD WILL STAY AVAILABLE.
AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE DISCUSSION.
MR. PARKER, MR. FORD, ANY OTHER P&Z MEMBERS THAT ARE HERE, THEY CAN BE PART OF THAT DIALOG WHEN WE
[02:10:01]
BRING PEOPLE BACK, IF WE'VE GOT QUESTIONS.HOW DOES THAT SOUND AS FAR AS PROCESS? I THINK IT'S GREAT.
SO, ANDREW, IF YOU DON'T MIND TAKING A BREAK FOR A SEC.
AT THIS TIME, WE WILL NOW OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM 3A.
ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK FOR, ON OR AGAINST THIS ITEM WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES AT THE PODIUM TO DO SO.
I KNOW WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE WHO WERE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ABOUT IT.
ACTUALLY, WE MIGHT HAVE MORE THAN THAT.
JENNY, DO YOU WANT TO TAKE OVER FROM HERE? I THINK YOU'VE GOT THAT INFORMATION AT YOUR FINGERTIPS.
OK, THE FIRST PERSON AND IF YOU DIDN'T SIGN UP FOR AN ITEM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE AN ITEM A OR A B, SO I'M GOING TO I'LL CALL YOUR NAME ANYWAY.
SO THE FIRST ONE UP IS JOE SHANE.
AND AFTER THAT IS ELDER HERMAN MOORE.
AND IF YOU DID NOT SIGN UP AHEAD OF TIME TO COMMENT DURING THIS PUBLIC HEARING, THAT IT WASN'T REQUIRED, SO WHEN WE GET TO THE END OF THE LIST OF PEOPLE THAT DID SIGN UP, THEN, YOU KNOW, WE'LL JUST GO TO RAISING YOUR HAND AND AND TAKING COMMENT THAT WAY.
JOE SHANE OF COMING HERE AND SPEAKING, REPRESENTING GEORGE CHAPMAN AND AS YOU GUYS DISCUSSED HE OWNS THAT NORTHWEST BLOCK OUT THERE.
ONE OF THE THINGS WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT IT OF AND WE'VE ALREADY LOOKED AT IT SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE YEARS.
HE BOUGHT THIS SOMEWHERE AROUND THE EARLY 2000S AS TRYING TO DEVELOP IT IN RESIDENTIAL LOTS BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY SET UP AND PLOTTED THAT WAY.
WE CAN'T GET UTILITIES TO IT, IN WHAT WE CONSIDER TO BE A COST EFFECTIVE MANNER.
FLOYD'S TAKEN SOME ACTION AND GOTTEN SOME STUFF OUT THERE WEST OF THE VINEYARDS PROPERTY.
IT'S TO THE NORTH AND THEN BACK TO THE WEST.
WE'VE GOT A LIFT STATION NOW, BUT THAT'S A MILE AND A HALF ROUGHLY AWAY FROM WHERE WE'RE AT, TO WHERE IT WOULD GRAVITY FLOW IN THAT DIRECTION.
THERE IS WATER IN THE LOCATION AND THEN AGAIN, THERE'S DRAINAGE ISSUES THROUGH THAT AREA.
THE REASON WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, WE DON'T HAVE SOMEBODY JUST COME TO US AND SAY, HEY, WE'RE READY TO BUY THAT 89 ACRES OR HOW MANY EVER IT IS AND PUT SOMETHING THERE.
BUT WE'D LIKE THAT OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT TO BE WHATEVER WE NEEDED IT TO BE.
NOW, I HEARD YOU GUYS TALKING ABOUT THAT.
WE CAN COME BACK AND REZONE IT LATER.
HE MAY BE THE ONLY ONE THAT'S STILL INVOLVED WITH IT AT THAT TIME.
AND SO THAT'S WHY WE ASKED FOR IT TO STAY THE ZONING THAT HE PURCHASED IT AT BECAUSE IT'S HIS PROPERTY SO THAT HE HAS THAT ABILITY TO COME BACK.
HE'S NOT SAYING HE WOULDN'T ALLOW IT TO BE RESIDENTIAL.
HE'S JUST NOT HE DOESN'T HAVE A REASON.
JUST LIKE YOU'RE SAYING WE DON'T HAVE A REASON.
HERE'S A PLAN WE WANT TO DO AND MAKE IT RESIDENTIAL.
WE'D LIKE TO SEE IT BE SOMETHING THAT CAN PROVIDE SOME MULTIFAMILY AND SOME JOB OPPORTUNITIES, SOME OTHER STUFF OVER TIME.
I THINK IT'LL BE EASIER TO DO THAT, TO GO FROM I2 OR I1 DOWN TO GENERAL RETAIL OR TO RESIDENTIAL AT THE TIME.
IT'S ALWAYS MUCH MORE DIFFICULT IF ANY OF YOU GUYS HAVE EVER BEEN INVOLVED IN THE ZONING FOR US TO FLIP IT THE OTHER WAY, IT'S ALWAYS MUCH EASIER TO DOWN ZONE.
AND SO THAT'S WHY WE WERE ASKING FOR US TO TO BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
PLUS THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR SUCH A SMALL AREA TO BE COST EFFECTIVE AND ADD ANOTHER LIFT STATION TO FLOYD'S SYSTEM OUT THERE SO THAT WE'RE PUMPING AGAIN ON SOME OF THAT STUFF.
SO THAT'S WHY THAT AREA DOESN'T SEEM TO BE, THAT KIND OF A COST WOULD BE MORE PALATABLE BY SOMEBODY THAT WAS COMING IN TO PUT IN, AND AGAIN, WE HAVEN'T TALKED TO ANYBODY.
WE DON'T HAVE A WALGREENS OR A WAL-MART LOCAL SHOP OR SOMETHING THAT'S READY TO COME IN HERE.
BUT SOMEBODY LIKE THAT CAN AFFORD TO HELP DO SOME OF THOSE THINGS A LOT BETTER THAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAN.
SO CAN I ASK ANOTHER QUESTION? LET'S BRING HIM BACK.
LET'S WORK THROUGH EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO COMMENT ON IT.
AND THEN, I MEAN, JOE, I KNOW WE HAVE WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
AND SO THE LAST THING I WOULD LIKE TO JUST TELL YOU, I MEAN, WE APPRECIATE, I KNOW THAT EVERYBODY WORKED ON THIS FOR A LONG TIME AND WE APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S EFFORT TO COME UP WITH THESE IDEAS.
GEORGE HAS BEEN ON THAT SIDE OF TOWN, IS ALIVE AND HE'S CONCERNED ABOUT THAT SORT OF TOWN.
SO WE'RE NOT TRYING TO SAY WE WANT TO CONTROL THIS JUST BECAUSE HE THINKS HE'S GOING TO MAKE MORE MONEY.
HE'S OPEN TO WHATEVER NEEDS TO GET DONE TO TRY TO FIX, YOU KNOW, TO TRY TO MAKE THAT DEVELOPMENT WORK.
BUT AT THIS POINT, WE'RE NOT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY REASON TO THINK IT NEEDS TO BE RESIDENTIAL.
OK, THANK YOU, AND EDDY THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE AND HOLDING THAT QUESTIONS.
JUST MAKE A NOTE OF IT AND IT'LL LEAD TO MORE QUESTIONS.
THAT'S WHY I'M KEEPING US ON TRACK HERE.
OK, [INAUDIBLE] NEXT IS HERMAN MOORE AND UP AFTER THAT IS MILDRED DARTON.
MY NAME IS HERMAN MOORE, PASTOR OF [INAUDIBLE] CHAPEL BAPTIST CHURCH, AND THANK YOU ALL FOR EVEN CONSIDERING, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A HANDOUT.
[02:15:03]
WE'RE ASKING FOR A HAND UP.LIKE WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT PROTECTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD ME AND RESIDENTIAL.
AND WE'RE ASKING FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT LOOKS LIKE CLOSELY WHAT THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS LOOK LIKE IN AMARILLO.
HAD ONE OF THE GUYS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION SAID THAT THEY PUT, IT'S BEEN LIKE THIS FOR 100 YEARS.
WELL, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN AMARILLO LOOKS THE SAME 100 YEARS LATER, BESIDES THE HEIGHTS AND THAT'S ALL WE ARE LOOKING FOR, IS TO PUT IN RESIDENTIAL HOUSING, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WHERE PEOPLE CAN AFFORD TO LIVE AND CLEAN UP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
WE USED TO HAVE GROCERY STORES.
WE USED TO HAVE BUSINESSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THEY LEFT.
THINGS HAVE CHANGED NOW, EVEN THE WE ARE, SOME OF US INVESTORS OURSELVES, YOU KNOW, NOT LOOKING FOR NO GREAT DEVELOPER TO COME IN WITH SOME THINGS WE CAN DO FOR OURSELVES AND WE LIKE TO HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT.
WE HAVE NO STRUCTURE, THERE IN NORTH AMARILLO.
AND I POINTED OUT AT ONE TIME, YOU KNOW, CHURCH ON ONE CORNER RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE LIQUOR STORE.
ONE OF THE NICEST ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND DOWN THE STREET TO SELL ALCOHOL ONLY IN THE NORTH DOES IT LOOK LIKE THAT.
WE LIKE TO HAVE SOME STRUCTURE WHERE RESIDENTIAL IS RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS IS BUSINESS AND THAT OTHER THINGS THAT WE HAVE IN MIND.
WE'D LIKE TO PUT IN SOME PLACES WHERE I PASTOR AT THEY HAD A LOT OF VACANT LAND RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HEIGHTS WHERE WE WENT FROM FAMILY YOUTH CENTERS, OUR GOAL TO PUT IN THERE.
IF IT WERE, IF WE COULD, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT DONE AND NOT SEE A LIQUOR STORE PUT UP NEXT TO IT.
RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE NO STRUCTURE TO STOP THAT, YOU KNOW, SO WE'RE ASKING YOUR HELP, HELP US MAKE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD LOOK LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE'S.
AND AFTER THAT IS ALAN ABRAHAM.
THANK YOU, MILDRED DARTON, 2005 NORTH WEST 14TH AVENUE.
FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY A GREAT BIG THANK YOU.
THANK YOU TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THEY HAVE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND.
THEY'VE CROSSED T'S, DOTTED I'S, SEVERAL TIMES.
THIS WAS NOT A QUICK DECISION.
WE WALKED THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'VE DRIVEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE LIVE THERE.
WE NEED OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTED.
WE NEED HOMES FOR FAMILIES TO MOVE INTO.
A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T HAVE VEHICLES, THEY CAN'T GO ACROSS TOWN WHEN THEY NEED TO.
THEY CAN'T BRING SACKS OF GROCERIES ON THE BUS.
I WILL ASK THIS COUNCIL THE SAME THING THAT I ASKED THE COUNCIL BEFORE YOU.
DO THE RIGHT THING BECAUSE THE RIGHT THING IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
WE NEED THE ZONING, WE WORKED FOR IT.
WE STAYED WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WHAT ELSE CAN WE DO? THINK ABOUT IT.
WOULD YOU LIVE IN NORTH HEIGHTS THE WAY IT IS? NO, YOU WOULDN'T.
BUT THE DECISION, IS UP TO THE OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS.
TAKE A LOOK, IF YOU HAVEN'T LOOKED, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THEY CAN BE ANSWERED, AND IT PROBABLY DOES LOOK LIKE IT LOOKED 100 YEARS AGO.
I CAN ONLY TESTIFY OF 75, BUT IT'S TIME FOR A CHANGE.
AND AGAIN, I SAY DO THE RIGHT THING.
I WAS SITTING HERE SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN THE MAJORITY OF YOU WERE SWORN IN FOR THE FIRST TIME.
I DON'T KNOW WHO ASKED THE QUESTION.
I DON'T REMEMBER THE QUESTION OR THE PERSON, BUT THE ANSWER WAS STAY WITH ME FOREVER.
LEAN NOT TO YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING.
BUT IN ALL YOUR WAYS, ACKNOWLEDGE HIM AND HE WILL TRACK YOUR PATH.
[02:20:03]
UP NEXT IS ALAN ABRAHAM AND AFTER THAT IS ELAMENE TURNER.I'M ALLEN ABRAHAM, 7205 SW 35TH AVENUE.
A COMMON THEME SO FAR IS IN THIS CONVERSATION HAS BEEN A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M HERE TO APPEAL FOR.
DID YOU KNOW THAT THE BEVIN SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS ANCHORED BY ST.
ANDREWS EPISCOPAL CHURCH, WAS PLATTED IN 1926, THE SAME YEAR THAT MILLER HEIGHTS AND THE NORTH HEIGHTS WAS PLATTED AND ANNEXED TO THE CITY? SO LET'S DO A LITTLE PLAYING FIELD COMPARISON.
IF YOU'LL CRITICALLY WALK THROUGH THE BEVINS NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU WON'T SEE A LOT OF MULTIFAMILY IN THE CORE.
THIS PLAN, WHICH IS BEING PRESENTED TO YOU AS A PROPOSAL, IS FOLLOWING THAT VERY SAME PATTERN.
IT'S A REPLICATION OF ALL THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH IN OUR COMMUNITY.
BUT THE NORTH HEIGHTS DEVELOPED A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.
IT WAS PROGRAMED TO BE IN THOSE DAYS, A "NEGRO" SUBDIVISION, BUT WE'RE PAST THAT.
SO LET'S GET PAST IT AND LET'S LET'S GIVE IT A FAIR CHANCE TO BE A NEIGHBORHOOD.
AS WE KNOW NEIGHBORHOODS TO BE.
PLANNED NEIGHBORHOOD CONCEPT GOES WAY BACK.
AND IN MY KNOWLEDGE, MY OWN PARTICIPATION IN CITY THINGS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW REALLY HAS ITS INCEPTION BACK IN 2010, WHEN THE CITY OF AMARILLO TOOK ON A A MAJOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REDO.
AND THEN THAT PLAN IN 2010 AND BY THE WAY, THE BIG BUZZWORD THEN," INFIELD" AND INFIELD IN THAT CONTEXT MEANT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S ALREADY THERE RATHER THAN ALL THE OUTLAY GOING ON FOR NEW INFRASTRUCTURE, FOR SUBDIVISIONS GOING ON THE PERIMETER OF THE CITY.
THERE'S LOTS OF GOOD LAND IF IT'S PROPERLY ZONED FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT THERE IN THE HEIGHTS.
NOW, THE HEIGHTS RESIDENTS AT THE BEGINNING WERE NOT AT THE TABLE AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN AT THE TABLE IN ADVOCATING FOR THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD UNTIL THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
HERE'S 45 OF THOSE NEIGHBORS THAT MAKE UP THAT ADVISORY BOARD.
THAT'S WHERE THIS AGENDA TODAY COMES FROM, AN ADVISORY BOARD THAT THEY WENT THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS AND THEN THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED IT IN 2017.
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS HOMEOWNERSHIP AND OCCUPANCY.
THEY WANT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THEY WANT PRESERVATION OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD HERITAGE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION, MR. ABRAHAM.
I SHOULD HAVE ASKED RIGHT UP FRONT, ARE YOU FOR, ARE YOU SPEAKING FOR, ON, OR AGAINST THE ITEM? I AM SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL.
OK, AND I SHOULD HAVE ASKED AS YOU'RE COMING TO THE PODIUM, IF YOU WOULD JUST STATE ARE YOU SPEAKING FOR, ON, OR AGAINST THE ITEM THAT THAT HELPS US.
AND TRADITIONALLY WE'VE ASKED FOR YOUR ADDRESS.
IF FOR ANY REASON YOU FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE GIVING YOUR ADDRESS AT THE MICROPHONE, YOU'RE WELCOME TO GIVE THAT TO THE CITY SECRETARY OR JUST TO GIVE THE CITY THAT YOU LIVE IN AS OPPOSED TO ACTUALLY GIVING, YOU KNOW, YOUR PHYSICAL ADDRESS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT MIGHT MAKE SOME OF YOU UNCOMFORTABLE.
SO JUST WANT TO OFFER THAT AS ANOTHER OPTION.
OK, THANKS FOR LETTING ME INTERRUPT YOU.
UP NEXT IS ELAMENE TURNER AND AFTER THAT IS FRANCETTA CROW.
ELAMENE TURNER, 1601 NORTH JEFFERSON.
MR. TURNER, THANK YOU IF YOU PULL THAT MIC JUST A LITTLE.
I AM IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROPOSAL.
NAMELY, FOR REASONS ABOUT WE WERE NOT INVOLVED, WE FELT EXCLUDED FROM THE PROCESS.
WE WANT TO BEAUTIFY OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, BY ALL MEANS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, MY
[02:25:03]
QUESTION IS, WE WANT TO STAY IN THE MOTIVE BEHIND OR WHAT'S GOING ON.I MEAN, I AGREE WITH MS. MILDRED AS WELL, BECAUSE WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY.
WE DON'T WANT TO PUT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY IN YOUR HANDS ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY.
WE WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT.
WE GO TO SCHOOL, WE PARTICIPATE.
AND SO WE WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS ENTIRE PROCESS.
WE WON'T HAVE THIS, THE VISION.
WE WANT THE VISION TO BE OURS SO WE CAN HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN IT.
LIKE SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, AT ONE POINT IN TIME IN 1858, THEY HAD THE BERLIN MEETING.
YOU HAD COUNTRIES CAME TOGETHER AND DECIDED THE FATE OF AFRICA AND PEOPLE FELT LIKE, WELL, HOW DO YOU DO THIS? I WASN'T THERE.
I JUST WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS.
I WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS, YOU KNOW,.
AS MR. DOOBIE SAID, I CALL HIM DOOBIE.
WE DON'T WANT TO SEE, YOU KNOW, THINGS, WE WANT IN OUR COMMUNITIES.
WE WANT, YOU KNOW, TO FEEL SAFE.
BUT THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES IS OURS, IT IS NOT YOURS.
WE NEED TO BE EDUCATED ABOUT THIS PROCESS.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS LIKE MY FIRST TIME IN THIS SETTING.
AND I WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THIS.
AND I WAS LIKE, WHAT'S GOING ON? SO WE ABOUT HEAR ALL THIS REZONING, ALL THESE CHANGES AND CHANGE IS INEVITABLE.
WE'RE ALL FOR CHANGE, BUT THE THING IS, WE WANT TO BE PART OF THE CHANGE.
WE HAVE PEOPLE SPEAKING ON OUR BEHALF WHO I HAVE NEVER SEEN.
AND I JUST WANT TO KNOW, IT'S LIKE I HAVE AN ATTORNEY WHO REPRESENTS ME, MY FIRST DAY OF TRIAL OR COURT I MEET YOU.
I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT AND YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ME.
SO THERE SEEMS TO BE, YOU KNOW, LIKE AN ISSUE HERE.
THIS IS THE PRIMARY, MY PRIMARY ISSUE HERE, YOU KNOW, AND WE WANT TO SEE THE PEOPLE LIVE IN NORTH HEIGHTS TO SEE SOME TYPE OF BENEFIT.
IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE, WE TALKING ABOUT ONE'S HEALTH, PROSPERITY AND THE SHARING OF IN THE SHARING OF THESE THINGS.
SO WHEN WE DO THIS, WE'RE SAYING, WELL, WE WANT TO HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN THIS.
YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GOING TO BE CONTRACTORS COME IN, THEY'RE GOING TO BE SURVEYORS, ARCHITECTS, THIS WHOLE LIST OF PEOPLE.
AND THE THING IS, WILL THAT BENEFIT THE INHABITANTS OF NORTH HEIGHTS IN ANY FORM OR FASHION? THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SAYING.
I'M A BUSINESS OWNER IN AMARILLO.
SO I'M LIKE, WELL, WHY WASN'T I INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS WHEN THIS VISION WAS CREATED? I DON'T SEE THE VISION.
I DON'T FEEL PART OF THE VISION.
AND I'M SAYING, I WANT TO BE PART OF THAT, YOU KNOW, AND YOU ALL, YOUR EXPERTISE AND YOUR RESOURCES.
WE'RE LEANING UPON YOU FOR THAT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT ANY OF YOU KNOW, BUT I KNOW YOU ALL, FOR YOU ALL TO BE HERE, YOU ALL MUST KNOW SOMETHING.
AND SO WE'RE SAYING WE NEED THOSE RESOURCES TO BETTER OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR LIVES.
WE'RE NOT ASKING YOU TO SAY, WELL, COME IN, WE WILL DO THIS, DO THAT, DO THAT.
WE ASK FOR SOME GUIDANCE AND RESOURCES TO CHANGE OUR COMMUNITY, TO BETTER OUR COMMUNITY.
THIS IS WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
BUT I'M IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REZONING.
WE NEED CHANGE IN THE COMMUNITY.
WE DON'T NEED THE CHANGE HOW THINGS ARE SET UP, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, WELL LET'S CHANGE THIS AND CHANGE THAT.
BUT WE DO NEED SOME CHANGES IN OUR COMMUNITY.
SO PRETTY MUCH I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU ALL HAVING ME TODAY.
AND, YOU KNOW, ONCE AGAIN, THE POINT I WANT TO BRING HOME IS THAT I'M IN OPPOSITION TO THIS BECAUSE PRIMARILY I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS.
I KNOW YOU CAN'T GET EVERYONE TO SAY, WELL, WE NEED YOUR INPUT, YOUR INPUT, YOUR INPUT, INPUT.
BUT AS A BUSINESS OWNER, AS A PROPERTY OWNER, I FEEL I HAVE A RIGHT TO DECIDE MY FATE, LIKE ALL PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO DO SO.
AND SO I DON'T FEEL I WAS ACTUALLY ALLOWED TO EXERCISE THAT RIGHT.
I APPRECIATE YOU ALL HEARING ME.
AND THANK YOU ALL FOR HEARING ME.
UP NEXT, IS FRANSCETTA CROW, AFTER THAT AS DAVID GUTIERREZ.
A COMMENT FROM THE MAYOR OR FOR THE COUNCIL.
MY NAME IS FRANSCETTA MITCHELL CROW.
I STAY AT 1508 NORTH HUGHES STREET, AMARILLO, TEXAS, AND I AM A NATIVE OF AMARILLO.
AND I DISAGREE WITH THE ZONING ISSUE THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING HERE TODAY.
NOT BECAUSE I'M AGAINST PROGRESS, BUT BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT HAS BEEN DONE WRONG.
AND WE DID NOT, AS PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE A CHANCE TO COME TO THE TABLE.
WHEN WE FOUND OUT AND SAW WHAT THEY HAD DECIDED TO DO, IT WAS AFTER THE FACT, WHICH WAS NOT FAIR TO US.
TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION IS AGAINST THE LAW.
WE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING THAT WE KNOW TO DO TO TRY TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE.
WE HAVE TRIED TO MEET WITH THE NORTH AMARILLO ASSOCIATION.
WE HAVE TRIED TO MAKE A MEETING AND SET UP A MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE HAVE TRIED TO DO EVERYTHING THAT WE KNOW TO DO TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE AND ASKED IF IT WOULD BE FLOORED AND THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE RE DONE, BRINGING THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO
[02:30:01]
THE TABLE.RIGHT NOW, THIS DECISION IS NOT FAIR TO US BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO EXPRESS OURSELVES AND HOW WE FEEL.
I LOOKED ON THE INTERNET AND I SAW THE INITIATIVE PLAN THAT'S IN PLACE FOR SAN JACINTO AND I WISH EVERYBODY WOULD GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT AND THEN GO AND LOOK AT THE THE PLANS THAT'S IN PLACE FOR THE NORTH AMARILLO ASSOCIATION AND SEE HOW OFF COURSE IT IS.
I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE REDONE.
I THINK WE NEED TO SET IT UP LIKE THE SAN JACINTO PROGRAM HAS BEEN SET UP.
THEY HAVE SET IT UP WHERE THEY HAVE TWO PEOPLE COMING FROM THE COMMUNITY, TWO PEOPLE COMING FROM BUSINESSES TO PEOPLE COMING IN, AND THAT'S THE WAY THAT THAT COMMITTEE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SET UP, INSTEAD OF SINGLING OUT ONE ORGANIZATION OUT OF OUR COMMUNITY TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT AFFECT US.
SO WE DON'T KNOW THESE PEOPLE.
WE DIDN'T VOTE ON THESE PEOPLE.
I WAS A PART OF THE INITIAL SET UP.
MY NAME IS ON THAT LIST, ALONG WITH FREDA POWELL AND OTHERS.
I NEVER WAS CONTACTED AGAIN UNTIL AFTER THE FACT, WHICH WAS IN MARCH.
SO I'M ASKING IF YOU GUYS, IF YOU ALL WILL JUST FLOOR THIS AND RECONSIDER AND BRING IT BACK TO THE TABLE AGAIN, BECAUSE WE DO NEED TO PROGRESS AND WE WANT TO, BUT WE WANT IT TO BE DONE RIGHT.
AND AFTER THAT IS TIMOTHY GASAWAY.
HI, MY NAME IS DAVID GUTIERREZ.
MY THING IS, I DON'T AGREE WITH THE REZONING BECAUSE I INVEST MY MONEY IN THERE AND OTHER PEOPLE DECIDE FOR ME.
AND I DON'T AGREE PEOPLE DECIDE FOR MY STAFF AND THE LEADERS, THEY DECIDE FOR ME.
AND THE HOTEL THAT THEY SAY IS VACANT IS NOT VACANT.
I GOT UTILITIES READY TO MOVE IN AND I DON'T LIKE THOSE PEOPLE RIGHT THERE.
I DON'T AGREE WITH THE CHANGES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE I EVEN GOT A BUSINESS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I SEE EVERYTHING WHAT HAPPENS IN THERE AND NOBODY DO NOTHING ABOUT THE THINGS HAPPENING THERE.
AND I DON'T THINK REZONING IS GOING TO FIX THOSE PROBLEMS. TO ME, THE CITY HAD TO FIX THOSE PROBLEMS. AND BECAUSE I SEE A LOT OF STUFF THEY DON'T FIX IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT WHAT THEY SAY, WE HAVE SO MANY YEARS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE DON'T SEE NO CHANGES AT ALL BECAUSE THE CITY DIDN'T WANT TO BE OVER THERE AND MAKE THOSE CHANGES.
AND THEY ARE, THEY SORRY FOR MY ENGLISH.
I AGREEING WITH OTHER STUFF, LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE WALKING ON THE STREET TAKE THEIR NAMES AND ADDRESS AND MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE, THEY DON'T KNOW NOTHING ABOUT REZONING.
SO WE HAVE A LIST OF MORE THAN 100 PEOPLE.
THEY DON'T AGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW NOTHING ABOUT REZONING, ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THERE RIGHT NOW.
UP NEXT IS TIMOTHY GASAWAY AND AFTER THAT IS RUPERT BRASHEARS.
MY NAME IS TIMOTHY GASAWAY, I REPRESENT I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE AMARILLO AREA BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO SAY I REALLY DIDN'T PLAN ON COMING IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS THE FIRST TIME, NOT IN SUPPORT OF SOMETHING.
BUT I AM NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE ZONING CHANGES, PRIMARILY BECAUSE, AS IF YOU GOT MY LETTER, I DON'T KNOW IF IT GOT TO YOU OR NOT.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S ABOUT REPRESENTATION.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY DO THIS RIGHT AND ACTUALLY INCLUDE THE RESIDENTS OF NORTH HEIGHTS.
MANY RESIDENTS HAVE COME TO THE CHAMBER AND BASICALLY SAID, WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS IS.
HOW DID THIS GET STARTED? AND LIKE I SAID FROM MY WORK THAT I'VE DONE IN FINDING OUT WHAT WAS REALLY GOING ON, IT'S ABOUT PROCESS.
IF YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL PLAN, IT, IN PAGE 37, 39, I BELIEVE IT SAYS COUNCILMAN BOARDS COMMISSION STAFF, CITY DEPARTMENTAL BUDGETS ON AND ON OUTSIDE AGENCIES, AND ORGANIZATION IN A NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION.
[02:35:03]
THIS IS NOT WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY BECAUSE IT'S NOT NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION.SOME OF THE OTHER KEY THINGS, WHAT THE ZONING BOARD DID, THOSE THREE INITIATIVES, THAT THEY ELIMINATE IT.
OK, WE'RE NOT SAYING WE DON'T WANT TO REZONE, WE'RE SAYING WE WANT TO DO IT RIGHT.
THE CHATMAN LAND AND I'VE TALKED TO CHATMAN, THAT IS OUR FUTURE.
AND THEY DIDN'T EVEN CONTACT HIM AT ALL.
SO IF THEY DIDN'T CONTACT A GUY WHO HAS AS MUCH LAND AS HE HAS, WHO IS A DEVELOPER, THEY DIDN'T CONTACT ME AND THEY DIDN'T CONTACT THE PEOPLE WE REPRESENT.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THE DETAILS, BUT I'M TELLING YOU GUYS, DON'T STEP INTO THIS TRAP.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO DOWN THIS WAY.
THIS IS ABOUT BRINGING AMARILLO TOGETHER.
CAN YOU IMAGINE A PLAN WHERE ALL OF CHATMAN LAND FROM WHERE I LIVE ON NORTHWEST 20TH, ALL THE WAY UP TO HASTINGS BEING DEVELOPED.
WE CAN PUSH HIM TOWARD THAT VISION.
YES, WE NEED EVERYBODY'S HELP AT THIS TABLE, BUT WE CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN.
OVERLAYING NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES OVER PLACES, IT'S NOT EFFECTIVE.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE EFFECTIVE.
YOU'RE GOING OVER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY THAT HAVE NO INTENT OF LEAVING.
I MEAN, WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THIS.
AND I'M ASKING YOU, DON'T DISENFRANCHISE THIS COMMUNITY AGAIN, BECAUSE WHAT YOU'VE HEARD UP TO THIS POINT ON THAT ZONING IS NOT THE COMMUNITY.
AND THAT'S ALL THAT WE HAVE FOR TODAY.
REMEMBER CITY THE LAST TIME YOU MADE A MISTAKE, IT COST YOU FIVE MILLION DOLLARS AND IT COST RANDALL COUNTY THREE MILLION DOLLARS.
SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU NOT TO DO IT BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'VE ALREADY GOT YOUR MINDS MADE UP AND WE'VE GOT OUR MINDS MADE UP.
THIS THING IS GOING TO GO TO A LAWSUIT AND I'M GLAD FOR IT TO GO BECAUSE LIKE MALCOLM X SAID, THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN THE WORLD IS THE MAN THAT HAS NOTHING TO LOSE.
SO I WANT IT TO GO TO A LAWSUIT.
AND I WANT YOU TO GO AHEAD ON AND DO THIS BECAUSE YOUR MONEY WILL FEEL REAL GOOD IN MY POCKET.
THE PROBLEM THAT I HAD WITH THIS RACISM STARTED THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE BECAUSE THE BLACKS PUT ON ONE SIDE OF THE CITY THE WHITES WAS PUT ON THE OTHER SIDE.
NOW RACISM IS COMING BACK IN IT OR YOU SAY NO RACISM.
SO I SAY I'LL PLAY THE RACE CARD AS LONG AS IT'S IN THE DECK, BUT IF IT'S IN THE DECK AND WE'LL PLAY THE CARD.
NOW, RIGHT HERE SAYS ANY PROPERTY THAT WILL BE DOWN ZONED BY THIS INITIATIVE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE USED FOR ANY USE THAT IS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR THE LIFE OF THE PROPERTY.
THE LIFE OF THE PROPERTY SHALL BE DEFINED AS ANY PROPERTY THAT DOES NOT HAVE WATER, SEWER AND ELECTRIC SERVICES FOR 24 CONSECUTIVE MONTHS.
THIS WAS PLACED TO YOU? WELL, YOU LET THE WHITE MAN GO OFF.
I LIKE I LIKE MR. CHATMAN, BUT YOU LET HIM GO SCOT FREE.
THEN YOU GOING TO LET ME, THE BLACK MAN, WHO PROPERTY DOESN'T HAVE THAT ON THERE AND YOU GOING TO MAKE ME PAY.
YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE THAT MS. MAYOR, WHEN I WENT UP TO YOUR PROPERTY AND YOU OWN TWO HOTELS, WHEN I WENT OVER TO YOUR PROPERTY, YOUR GUARD CAME OUT AND TO RUN ME AWAY.
HE SAID, WHAT ARE YOU DOING? I SAID, I'M JUST TAKING PICTURES.
THEY GUARDED YOUR PROPERTY SO GOOD THAT HE CAME OVER, WAS GOING TO RUN ME OFF.
I SAID, WELL YOU JUST RUN ME OFF.
SAYING YOU CALL THE POLICE, I SAID BECAUSE YOU GOING TO BE ON YOUTUBE, MR. BRASHEARS, YOU'RE WELCOME AT MY PROPERTY.
AND YOU SAID THAT AFTER [INAUDIBLE].
BUT I'M JUST SAYING, AIN'T NOBODY BOTHERING YOUR PROPERTY.
NOBODY'S ASKING YOU TO CHANGE.
BUT NOW IF THEY WERE GOING TO CHANGE THE ZONING ON YOUR HOTELS THAT YOU OWN, YOU'D BE UPSET, TOO.
SO I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW.
I'M UPSET, BUT I'M AN INTELLIGENT MAN.
I KNOW WHAT I'VE BEEN DONE WRONG.
I'VE BEEN THE VICTIM OF A SYSTEMATIC COURSE OF DECEIT AND TREACHERY.
AND I HAVE DONE NOTHING TO EMILY OR ANYBODY ELSE.
ALL I'VE DONE WAS GO TO MY HOME.
I WENT BECAUSE I THOUGHT SO MUCH OF YOU.
I WOULDN'T EVEN COME DOWN TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ANYMORE BECAUSE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT I DISAGREED WITH YOU.
I SAID, WELL, RATHER THAN DISAGREE WITH HER, I'LL SAY NOTHING AND I'VE DONE THAT.
SO I'M ASKING YOU ALL I KNOW YOU'VE GOT YOUR MIND MADE UP, BUT I'M READY FOR THE GAME.
BUT I WOULD ASK YOU TO DO BEFORE YOU CROSS THE AMARILLO MILLIONS OF DOLLARS BECAUSE YOU'VE CALLED MUCH DISTRESS THROUGH THIS.
I'M ASKING YOU TO TABLE IT OR DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO WITH IT, BUT LEAVE ME ALONE.
SO, ARE YOU AGAINST THE ITEM, MR.
[02:40:02]
BRASHEARS? 100 PERCENT! OK, OK, THANK YOU.OK, AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP? OK, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? MISTY TOMASO? PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM.
MISTY TOMASO 1613B BOWIE STREET AND I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR, AFTER LISTENING TO ALL THE CONS.
I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR THE NORTH HEIGHTS.
SORRY, I'M GOING TO BE KIND OF GENERAL WITH MY COMMENTS.
ZONING CAN BE EITHER HELPFUL OR CAN PREVENT A NEIGHBORHOOD FROM BECOMING A BETTER, MORE INVITING NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGES ARE MEANT TO IMPROVE THEIR COMMUNITY AND BRING PRIDE TO THE COMMUNITY.
GOOD ZONING PROVIDES OPPORTUNITIES FOR NEW INVESTMENT IN BUSINESSES, COMMUNITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES.
IT ENCOURAGES THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO TAKE BETTER PRIDE IN THEIR PROPERTY.
IT REMOVES BARRIERS THAT MIGHT PREVENT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW BUSINESSES, ESPECIALLY ALONG AMARILLO BOULEVARD AND HUGHES.
AND I THINK IT ALSO PROVIDES OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE RESIDENTS IN NORTH HEIGHTS.
IT MIGHT EVEN PROVIDE SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR THEM TO HAVE EMPLOYMENT IN THE AREA.
A COMPREHENSIVE ZONING PLAN FOR THE FUTURE HOUSING ALSO ENCOURAGES BUILDERS TO INVEST IN A NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THIS IS IMPORTANT, AND ESPECIALLY SINCE WE'RE GETTING AMAZON BUILDING IN THERE PLACE OUTSIDE, ON THE LOOP.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE.
BUT IT WILL ALSO ENCOURAGE BUILDERS TO COME IN THE AREA AND MAKE IT RESIDENTIAL.
AND MANY THOSE PEOPLE THAT COME IN FROM AMAZON WOULD BUY SOME HOMES IN THERE AND INVEST IN THAT.
SO I AM STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF THE REZONING.
AND I ASK YOU TO PLEASE I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE LOTS OF PROPERTY PEOPLE THAT FELT LIKE THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE PROCESS.
AND ALL I CAN SAY IS, PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT WHEN YOU'RE INVITED TO COME TO MEETINGS THAT YOU COME.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE PRESENT IN THE ROOM WHO WISHES TO SPEAK FOR, ON, OR AGAINST ITEM 3A.
MY NAME IS BERNADETTE KAREEM, MY RESIDENCE IS 1601 NORTH JEFFERSON, I AM A HOMEOWNER, I AM A LANDLORD OF SEVERAL PROPERTIES AND I'M A BUSINESS OWNER ON NORTH HEIGHTS.
I DID ATTEND ALL THE WORKSHOPS THAT WENT ON CONCERNING THIS REZONING.
THERE WERE SEVERAL QUESTIONS, LIKE I SAID, THAT WENT UNANSWERED.
HOW THE WORKSHOP WAS SET UP, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT WAS IN A WAY WHERE PEOPLE COULD UNDERSTAND.
THE CITY PANEL THAT WAS THERE, THEY CAME THERE ON THE THIRD DAY, THE LAST DAY.
ME AND MR. DAVID, WE WENT AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WHAT THE NHAA SHOULD HAVE DONE, WE WENT AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD TELLING PEOPLE, ASKING PEOPLE IF THEY WERE AWARE OF WHAT WAS GOING ON.
WE GOT PEOPLE TO SIGN IN THE HOT SUN.
THERE WERE PEOPLE WHO DID NOT KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT'S IN IT FOR ANYONE.
ALL I KNOW IS, I'VE WORKED HARD FOR WHAT I'VE OBTAINED.
I'VE WORKED REALLY HARD FOR WHAT OBTAINED, I'VE SACRIFICED A LOT.
AND FOR SOMEONE TO COME IN AND TELL ME WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH MY PROPERTY, I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT.
I AM FOR CHANGE, I AM A TEACHER OF TWENTY YEARS.
I WANT TO SEE THINGS GET BETTER.
I JUST BELIEVE THAT HOW IT WAS DONE.
I THINK THAT THE STAKEHOLDERS, THE RESIDENTS, THE HOMEOWNERS, THE BUSINESS OWNERS SHOULD HAVE A SAY SO.
EVERYBODY ELSE IS GETTING THE SAY SO ON WHAT HAPPENS.
WHY? WHY SHOULD EVERYBODY ELSE GET A SAY SO IN OUR STUFF?
[02:45:02]
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S RIGHT.YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY GETS UPSET, WE ASK QUESTIONS AT THE MEETING.
OK, SEE IT'S OUR STAFF THAT WE'RE TRYING TO.
I DIDN'T GIBE MY PROPERTY RIGHT OVER TO ANYBODY.
I'M REALLY A LITTLE UPSET THAT FIRST YOU HAVE ONE ORGANIZATION, OK, REALLY AFRICAN-AMERICAN, OK, THEY DON'T REPRESENT ME.
I DON'T EVEN THINK THEY'RE QUALIFIED TO REPRESENT ME, AS A MATTER OF FACT.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THE APPLICANT, THE CITY OF AMARILLO IS TURNING IN AN APPLICATION? TO REZONE MY STUFF? I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
SO EVERYBODY SAYING, WELL, DO THE RIGHT THING.
WHAT IS THE RIGHT THING? WHAT IS THAT? CAN SOMEBODY PLEASE TELL ME WHAT THE RIGHT THING IS? BECAUSE, YEAH, YOU CAN BUILD A MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENT BUILDING, BUT IF THE PEOPLE ARE UNDEVELOPED UP HERE, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX? WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN? SO WE NEED TO EDUCATE.
WE NEED TO EMPOWER AGAIN, WE NEED RESOURCES.
I WASN'T GIVEN A CHANCE TO INVEST.
OH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THIS? HOW ABOUT THAT? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE PRESENT WHO WANTS TO SPEAK FOR, ON, OR AGAINST AGENDA ITEM 3A.
CAN'T SEE BEHIND THE PODIUM, AND I MISSING ANYBODY? MR. FORD, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON IT? NOW OR LATER? HOW ABOUT NOW? MY NAME IS DICK FORD, 3415 AIRWAY BOULEVARD, AND I'M ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND I HAVE HEARD ALL OF THESE COMMENTS BEFORE AND IT'S REALLY BEEN A INTERESTING, CHALLENGING ASSIGNMENT THAT'S BEEN GIVEN TO US.
I'M NOT FOR SURE WHAT THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS, I'M TRYING TO.
I KNOW ALL THE PEOPLE ON THAT PLANNING AND ZONING, AND 100 PERCENT OF THEM WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
THIS IS PUBLIC INFORMATION OFF OF OUR AGENDA.
IT WAS A REFERENCE OF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT SPOKE.
THE WAY WE DO IT, IT'S NOT THAT IT MATTERS.
WE DO EVERYBODY FOR IT FIRST AND EVERYBODY AGAINST A SECOND.
THAT WAY THEY CAN KEEP UP WITH IT BETTER.
WHAT WE DID, THOUGH, I SPENT OVER 50 HOURS DRIVING AROUND AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, DOC, I THINK A LOT OF YOUR QUESTIONS WILL BE ANSWERED IF YOU'LL SPEND ABOUT AN HOUR AND A HALF DRIVING AROUND, REALLY WILL.
THERE'S NATURAL BARRIERS, THERE'S RAILROAD TRACKS THERE.
YOU CAN'T GET THROUGH, WE CAN'T GET ACROSS.
IT'S JUST PROPERTY THAT'S NOT EVEN PART OF THIS AGENDA.
WE WERE AT A, WE HAD A MEETING AND ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN THAT LIVED IN THE AREA, SAID, WHY ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT PROPERTY THAT WE'RE NOT CONCERNED WITH? THAT'S NOT EVEN PART OF THIS AGENDA.
I DID GO OVER THERE AND DRIVE IT, THERE ARE SEVERAL MORE THAN FOUR BUSINESSES OR SEVERAL BUSINESSES, OF ALL OF WHICH WOULD BE IMPACTED.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'VE DONE A LOT OF ZONING, BUT I'VE NEVER HAD AN APPLICATION THAT WASN'T FILED BY THE OWNER.
AND THERE'S A LEGAL PROCESS CALLED INVERSED CONDEMNATION.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER I UNDERSTAND.
I CHALLENGE MAYBE THE MAYOR TO EVALUATE IT.
BUT WHEN YOU START TAKING PEOPLE'S PROPERTY RIGHTS AWAY A LITTLE A TIME, A LITTLE A TIME, A LITTLE A TIME, OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, YOU'VE TAKEN THEIR ENTIRE PROPERTY RIGHTS AWAY, WHICH IS ILLEGAL IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS ILLEGAL.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT THERE'S A THOUGHT PROCESS, WE DON'T WANT TO HURT ANYBODY.
WE DON'T WANT TO HURT ANYBODY.
THERE'S A GENTLEMAN I'VE NEVER MET HIM, HUTTON PLUMBING, AND HE'S GOT A BIG, NICE OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE AND HE'D BE NONCONFORMING.
BUT THE WAY THEY EXPLAINED NONCONFORMING, MR. HUTTON COULD SELL HIS PLUMBING COMPANY TO ANOTHER PLUMBING COMPANY, BUT HE COULDN'T LEASE HIS PROPERTY TO ELECTRICIAN.
AND SO HE LOSES HIS [INAUDIBLE] PROPERTY.
HE RETIRES AND THIS PROPERTY'S NOW WORTHLESS UNLESS YOU WANT TO BUILD A HOUSE THERE.
I JUST DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE THAT RIGHT.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT.
ANYWAY, I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
YOU KNOW, ONE THING I DID NOTICE, I MET AND HAD LUNCH OVER THERE AT ELVIN'S, VERY GOOD RESTAURANT, AND I WAS APPALLED AT ALL OF THE TRASH IN THE ALLEYS AND THIS AND THAT AND THE OTHER.
I LIVE OVER IN BEVINS, WHERE IS NO ALLEY, SO WE JUST PUT OUR STUFF ON THE FRONT STREET AND CALL THE CITY TO COME BY AND PICK IT UP.
TREES AND AND ALL KINDS OF TRASH AND DEBRIS.
AND THERE'S ALL THE TRASH AND DEBRIS UP AND DOWN THE ALLEYS.
AND IT'D BE NICE IF THEY JUST SEND THE TRUCK DOWN THERE AND PICKED UP EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE.
I THINK THAT WOULD HELP THE NEIGHBORHOOD A LOT.
AND ALL THE BURNED DOWN BUILDINGS.
THERE'S A LOT OF BURNED DOWN BUILDINGS OVER THERE AND THERE'S NOT ANY BURNED DOWN
[02:50:01]
BUILDINGS IN SOUTHWEST AMARILLO.I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED TO TEAR THOSE BUILDINGS DOWN.
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF MONEY SPENT ON DOING THIS PROJECT AND A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT.
I MEAN, THESE PEOPLE HERE ARE JUST INCREDIBLE WHAT TIME THEY'VE SPENT.
BUT I THINK ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS OR LESS GOOD, CLEAN THAT WHOLE AREA UP AND TEAR ALL THE BUILDINGS DOWN.
IF WE HAD IT ALL CLEANED UP AND YOU GO TO MR. HOME BUILDER AND YOU GIVE HIM FIVE LOTS, WE'LL GIVE YOU FIVE LOTS TO GO TO BUILD SOME HOUSES.
HE SAYS I'M NOT GOING, 2X4 COSTS THE SAME THERE AS IT DOES ANYWHERE ELSE.
AND I'M NOT GOING TO BUILD A HOUSE NEXT TO A BURNED DOWN BUILDING, I'M JUST NOT GOING TO DO IT, EVEN WITH FREE LAND.
SO I THINK THAT WE CAN DO SOME THINGS FOR THE AREA OTHER THAN REZONING.
I THINK REZONING MAY BE A PART OF IT.
BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AS TO WHY WE DID ANYTHING, OUR REASON, OUR PROCESS OR WE HAD FOUR MEETINGS AND WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON IT.
AND IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS AS TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE DID, BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE AND WHERE THE THOUGHT PROCESS CAME FROM.
PAUSE FOR JUST A SECOND, DICK.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM WHO WISHES TO SPEAK FOR, ON, OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? LET'S PAUSE HERE.
AND ROB, I THINK WE'LL WANT TO HEAR FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE AS WELL.
SO AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER.
AND I THINK THERE ARE SOME FOLKS THAT WE'D LIKE TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE EXTENDED DIALOG WITH.
SO DOES ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR MR. FORD? YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, MR. STANLEY.
CAN YOU TELL ME THE FIVE VOTED FOR AND THE TWO VOTED AGAINST? DO WE REMEMBER? WHO VOTED AGAINST? YOU GOT THE.
YEAH, JASON [INAUDIBLE] AND RENEE, I WOULD CONCUR.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, I DON'T KNOW THIS ONE OF THEM WANT TO VOTE AGAINST IT TOTALLY AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT RENEE'S POSITION WAS.
SO YOU'D BE HAPPY TO VISIT WITH THOSE GUYS.
I'M SURE THEY I MEAN, THEY ALL WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING, BUT BE HAPPY TO VISIT WITH THEM AS TO WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS WAS? WELL, IT SURE SEEMS AND SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE PUT YOUR TIME AND DONE THE HOMEWORK TO TRY TO BRING ABOUT A COMPROMISE.
IT DOESN'T IT DOESN'T APPEAR AS THOUGH WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, A CONSENSUS HERE THAT WE HAVE A COMPROMISE.
I FEEL LIKE WE STILL IT SURE FEELS LIKE THERE'S THERE'S SOME VOICES THAT HADN'T BEEN HEARD.
WITH THE COMPROMISE THAT YOU'VE HELPED TO PROPOSE AND NOW TAKING A FEW WEEKS TO STEP BACK FROM IT.
DO YOU FEEL LIKE THAT COULD BE BETTERED OR IS THAT THE BEST YOU COULD DO WITH THIS IN FRONT OF YOU? YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW.
I DID THE BEST WE COULD, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WHAT WE CAME UP WITH WAS A COMPROMISE.
I THINK WHAT WE CAME UP WITH WAS WHAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE GOOD FOR ONE GROUP OF PEOPLE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH SOMETHING BUT WOULDN'T DO TOO MUCH DAMAGE TO SOMEONE ELSE.
I THINK WE WERE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS AN INTENTIONAL COMPROMISE.
I MEAN, AT LEAST THAT WASN'T MY THOUGHT PROCESS WAS A COMPROMISE.
IT WAS MORE OF TRYING TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE PEOPLE INVOLVED AND NOT HURT ANYBODY WHEN SOMEONE ELSE IS NOT GOING TO BENEFIT.
AND SO THAT WAS THE THOUGHT PROCESS.
MY LAST QUESTION FOR YOU DICK.
DO YOU FEEL LIKE AND I KNOW YOU'VE PUT IN A LOT OF WORK AND I KNOW THE STAFF HAS PUT IN A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK.
DO YOU FEEL LIKE WITH GIVEN MORE TIME THAT THESE PEOPLE WOULD BE ABLE TO COME TO A BETTER SOLUTION IF IF THEY TOOK IT BACK AND WORKED ON IT LONGER? BETTER SOLUTION, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE, MAYBE SO, BUT I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT I WAS [INAUDIBLE] PASSED AROUND.
I WAS JUST FLABBERGASTED WHEN I READ IT AND WHEN WE HAD THE PEOPLE I MEAN, I THINK THERE WERE SIX PEOPLE SPOKE FOR IT AND FOUR OF THEM LIVE IN SW AMARILLO AND AND TWO OF THEM LIVE IN THE HEIGHTS.
AND THEN WE HAD EIGHT OR NINE PEOPLE SPEAK AGAINST IT AND 100 100 PERCENT OF THEM LIVED IN THE HEIGHTS.
AND I'M THINKING TO MYSELF, THAT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
I MEAN, WE'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING TO HELP THE HEIGHTS, BUT YET THE PEOPLE IN THE HEIGHTS DON'T WANT THE DEAL.
AND I JUST I THINK IT'S LACK OF COMMUNICATION.
I THINK IT'S I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.
IF I KNEW THE ANSWER, I WOULD I WOULD HAVE SUGGESTED A SOLUTION TO THOSE THAT HAVE WORKED SO HARD ON THIS.
I MEAN, THEY REALLY HAVE WORKED HARD ON THIS AND THE TIME, EFFORT, ENERGY AND AND, YOU KNOW, DOING PLANNING LONG TERM PLANNING BY THE BOOK AND COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING BY THE BOOK, THE WAY THEY TEACH IT IN COLLEGE.
AND SOMETIMES WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO REHAB AN AREA THAT'S 100 YEARS OLD, IT DOESN'T WORK THE SAME AS IT DOES IF IT'S A FRESH VIRGIN PIECE OF LAND THAT WE'RE JUST BRINGING INTO THE CITY, IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT PROCESS.
SO I DON'T KNOW AN ANSWER TO THAT.
I THINK HOPEFULLY YOU COULD I WOULD THINK.
COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I DO.
IF I'M INTERPRETING THIS RIGHT TELL ME SO, IF I'M NOT TELL ME THAT.
BUT A MOTION WAS MADE TO APPROVE THE CITY'S PLAN OR SOMEBODY'S PLAN BUT WITH
[02:55:10]
FOUR EXCEPTIONS, AND THE FOURTH EXCEPTION WAS IF ANY PROPERTY WILL BE DOWN ZONED BY THIS [INAUDIBLE] SHALL BE ALLOWED TO BE USED FOR ANY USE.WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY DOWN ZONE? OK IF A PROPERTY'S CURRENTLY ZONED LIGHT COMMERCIAL, GENERAL, RETAIL, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND IT'S NOW ZONED RESIDENTIAL, WHICH WAS THERE WAS A LOT OF THAT PROPOSED AND AT WHICH POINT IN TIME LIKE MR. [INAUDIBLE] AND THEIR COMPANY, IT WAS GOING TO BE DOWN ZONED AND HE WAS NO LONGER GOING TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THAT PROPERTY.
NOW, THE CITY SAID IT WOULD BE IT'D BE NONCONFORMING, BUT THEY'RE WHAT THEY WERE SAYING THE NONCONFORMING AMOUNTED TO WAS THAT THEY STARTED OUT AT 12 MONTHS, TRY TO GO TO SIX MONTHS.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT EVER GOT TO SIX MONTHS BUT WHAT IT WAS.
IF YOU IF YOU EVER YOU COULD YOU COULD CONTINUE DOING BUSINESS AS IT IS TODAY AND THEORETICALLY, YOU COULD SELL YOUR BUSINESS.
I THINK THERE WAS NEVER ANY REALLY.
AND THE REAL ESTATE THAT GOES WITH IT.
BUT YOU COULDN'T SHUT IT DOWN AND REMODEL IT AND LEASE IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE.
IT HAD TO BE A PLUMBING COMPANY FOREVER OR NOTHING.
AND I JUST THOUGHT THAT THAT THAT'S SO THAT WAS WHAT THE CITY WAS PROPOSING ON SOMETHING THAT IS NON CONFORMING.
AND I JUST DIDN'T THINK THAT THAT WAS RIGHT.
AND SO WHAT MY THOUGHT PROCESS WAS, AND HAD I BEEN AN ENGLISH MAJOR, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN MORE ELOQUENTLY WRITTEN.
BUT THE PROCESS WAS, WAS THAT ONCE A PROPERTY, IF YOUR PROPERTY IS DOWN ZONE, YOU GET TO CONTINUE TO USE THAT PROPERTY FOR THE LIFE OF THE PROPERTY, FOR WHAT THE CURRENT ZONING OF THAT PROPERTY IS JUST PRIOR TO THE DOWN ZONING, WHATEVER THAT ZONING MAY HAVE BEEN.
SO IF YOU COULD SHUT YOUR BUSINESS DOWN, LEASE IT TO SOMEONE ELSE, YOU HAVEN'T LOST YOUR RIGHTS TO USE OF THAT PROPERTY.
NOW, IF YOUR PROPERTY WAS VACANT FOR OVER TWO YEARS, WHEN WE'VE, NOT VACANT, VACANT'S A BAD WORD BECAUSE INSURANCE COMPANIES AND EVERYBODY HAS DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS OF WHAT VACANT IS.
BUT IF A PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE UTILITIES FOR TWO YEARS, SO YOU COULD SHUT IT DOWN, REMODEL IT, BUT IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE ELECTRICITY, SEWER AND WATER, I DIDN'T INCLUDE GAS BECAUSE YOU CAN ACTUALLY HAVE AN ALL ELECTRIC FACILITY.
BUT IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE UTILITIES, WHAT I DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE HAPPEN IF THIS PASSED WAS AN OLD BUILDING FULL OF JUNK AND WAS JUST SALVAGED FOREVER.
AND THAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN THE EXISTING ZONING.
BUT THE FACT THAT IT'S JUST COLLECTING JUNK AND THERE'S AND THERE'S A DETRIMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH NO UTILITIES, I THINK AT THAT POINT IN TIME ONE COULD MAKE AN ARGUMENT THAT IT'S REALLY NOT A IT'S REALLY NOT A BUSINESS.
AND THEREFORE THEY COULD BE DOWN ZONED TO THE, HAS TO MEET THE CURRENT ZONING THAT IT WAS DOWN ZONED TO.
AND I THOUGHT THAT WOULD GIVE ANYONE THAT HAD A VALUABLE OR EVEN A PROPER PROPERTY OF VALUE.
I THOUGHT THAT WOULD GIVE THEM AMPLE TIME TO REALIZE THAT VALUE FOR THE PROPERTY.
I'M SURE YOU CAN COME UP WITH A BETTER WAY OF SAYING A BETTER WAY DOING IT.
BUT THAT'S WHAT I CAME UP WITH.
THANK YOU, DICK, WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME VERY MUCH SO.
MR. PARKER, YOU WANT TO, IT MIGHT BE LOGICAL FOR YOU TO COME NEXT? ROB PARKER, 3005 SWEET GUM 71924, I AM CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
I'M GOING TO HIT ON A FEW ITEMS. WE DID LOOK AT THIS ITEM THREE TIMES, TWICE IT WAS TABLED.
THE FIRST TIME IT WAS TABLED WAS RIGHT AFTER COVID.
AND WE WERE REOPENING THINGS AND WE FELT LIKE THE PUBLIC AT THAT TIME REALLY HADN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY HEAR THINGS FACE TO FACE.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE DID THE WORKSHOPS.
THE SECOND TIME IT WAS TABLED, WE FELT LIKE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NEEDED A WORKSHOP.
SO WE TABLED IT, GOT A WORKSHOP, VERY PRODUCTIVE WORKSHOP.
SO WHEN WE MET THE THIRD TIME, THIS IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE CAME UP WITH.
SAUER, AS FAR AS YOUR QUESTION ON THE CHAPMAN WEIGH IN AND OUR THOUGHT PROCESS ON THAT, AND THIS IS JUST BEING IN PLANNING AND ZONING FOR SO LONG, IT'S EASY TO DOWN ZONE FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DOWN TO R2.
BUT WHEN YOU'RE R2 AND YOU WANT TO GO UP TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, THAT'S BASICALLY
[03:00:05]
A RED FLAG.AND I THINK AS FAR AS THE COUNCIL.
AND AS FAR AS PLANNING AND ZONING, IF THEY EVER CAME TO US AND WANTING TO COME FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DOWN TO R2, I TOLD JOE, I GO, THAT'S.
YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW WHICH HAND IS THE PEN IN? WE'LL APPROVE THAT AS LONG AS I'M IN THERE AND I THINK I COULD PUSH FOR THAT, BUT NOT KNOWING WHAT THE PLAN IS, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD JUST BE BENEFICIAL TO KEEP IT THAT WAY.
AGAIN, IF IT COMES TO RESIDENTIAL THAT THE OWNER WANTS TO DO, IF HE SELLS IT AND THAT BUYER WANTS TO PUT IN A RESIDENTIAL ALL THEY HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.
BUT I DON'T SEE ANY ISSUE OF REZONING THAT FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DOWN TO R2.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE PROPERTY ITSELF, IT ALREADY HAS CURB CUTS IN IT.
THERE ARE ROADS THAT ARE GRADED.
OF COURSE, THAT WAS PROBABLY 30 YEARS AGO.
BUT YOU CAN TELL WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, IT'S SET UP FOR R2.
BUT EVEN WITH THAT, WE THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, NOT KNOWING AND NOT HAVING A PLAN.
WE JUST THOUGHT IT'D BE BEST TO KEEP IT THERE.
THROUGH ALL THOSE THREE MEETINGS IN THE WORKSHOP, I WOULD SAY 90 PERCENT OF THE DISCUSSION WAS THAT AND THAT PROPERTY TO THE SOUTHWEST OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS, 90 PERCENT OF OUR DISCUSSION WAS THAT.
EVERYTHING ELSE WE WERE PRETTY MUCH FINE WITH.
I THINK THE FIRST MEETING WE HAD, YOU KNOW, I DID QUESTION ABOUT GRANDFATHERING CERTAIN THINGS AGAIN BASED UPON THE DOWN ZONING.
AND I THINK WHAT DICK ENDED UP PRESENTING PROBABLY TOOK CARE OF THAT BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO TAKE SOMEBODY'S PROPERTY RIGHTS.
AND, YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT THE NORTH HEIGHTS FROM DAY ONE AND LOOK AT IT NOW, IT AND I DID MAKE A COMMENT.
AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS AND I KNOW WHAT THE CITY'S TRYING TO DO IS.
MAKE IT MORE CONFORMING TO A CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD IN THAT'S WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE.
QUESTIONS FOR MR. PARKER, COUNCIL.
CAN I DIRECT THAT QUESTION? THAT WOULD BE ACTUALLY FOR JOE AND IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE FOR ROB ALSO.
BUT IT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH THESE GUYS OVER HERE.
OK, SO CAN YOU HAVE? I'VE SEEN US TAKE AGRICULTURAL AND MOVE IT TO SOMETHING ELSE.
COULD THIS BE AGRICULTURAL, COULD IT BE REZONED AGRICULTURAL? I SAID THE SAME THING, DR.
IF YOU GO OVER THERE, THERE'S ACTUALLY SOME CATTLE ON THE LAND.
I DROVE IT, I DROVE IT FRIDAY, ACTUALLY.
AND I WOULD SAY TO MR. FORD'S COMMENT THAT WE ALL DRIVE THE LAND.
I THINK ALL OF US HAVE FOR ONE THING, WE ALL WE ALL GOT ON A CITY BUS, ALL OF P&Z.
IF YOU WERE ON THAT BUS WITH US WHEN WE DROVE THAT LAND.
BUT I THINK ALL OF US HAVE INDIVIDUALLY GONE AND AT LEAST LOOKED AT THE LAND AND DONE THE RESEARCH.
SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.
I THINK AND BRIAN WOULD WEIGH IN ON THIS.
BUT I THINK THE WAY AT LEAST WE'VE NOTICED IS THAT WOULDN'T BE AN OPTION BECAUSE IT'D BE MORE RESTRICTIVE TO GO TO AG THAN HOW IT WAS NOTICED.
SO IT HAVE TO GO THROUGH A NEW PROCESS TO DO THAT.
BUT I THINK IT COULD BE THROUGH A DIFFERENT PROCESS ZONED AG.
BUT I THINK FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, WE'D ALSO AGREE, EVEN IF IT WAS ZONED R2 AND SOMEONE CAME WITH A PLAN, WE COULD WORK TO FIND A WAY TO ADD GR, ADD COMMERCIAL.
WHERE IT MAKES SENSE, I DON'T THINK R2 WOULD BE LOCKING THE CITY'S HANDS FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.
BECAUSE I'VE GOT TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, MY ONLY PROBLEM WITH THIS IS IT'S LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL.
AND I'VE GOT A PROBLEM WITH THE LIGHT.
AND THE ONLY REASON IT'S LIGHT INDUSTRIAL IS BECAUSE IT GOES ALL THE WAY BACK TO WHEN IT WAS THE SMELTER AND THE SMELTER IS NOT THERE.
AND I DON'T I DON'T WANT THAT COMMUNITY.
IF I LIVED NEXT TO THAT, I WOULD BE APPALLED THAT I'M LIVING NEXT TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
HEY, BLAIR, CAN I ASK A FAVOR OF YOU? WOULD YOU VACATE THAT SEAT SO MR. SHANE CAN COME AND JUST SIT HERE AND WE CAN HAVE A DIALOG BACK AND FORTH? I'M SORRY, JOE, TO LEAVE YOU STANDING BACK THERE SO LONG, OK.
[03:05:05]
SO, ANDREW, I SHOULD HAVE PROBABLY ASKED YOU TO BE SURE AND PROVIDE US THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES SO THAT WE COULD SEE THE ORDER OF HOW ZONING PROGRESSES.I MEAN, FOUR OF US HAVE HAD QUITE A BIT OF EXPERIENCE DOING THAT, BUT.
IT GOES I'LL PROBABLY MISS SOME.
BUT AGRICULTURAL, R1, R2, R3, MD? MD, MODERN DENSITY THAN THE MULTIFAMILIES.
THEN YOU GO WITH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES, OFFICE, GENERAL RETAIL, LIGHT COMMERCIAL, HEAVY COMMERCIAL, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND CBD MIXED IN THERE WITH THE COMMERCIALS.
SO THAT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL MEANS YOU CAN HAVE.
AND AND THAT WAS SO THAT'S MY ONLY ISSUE IS JUST THAT IT'S SO FAR REMOVED.
I MEAN, I WISH THERE WERE AND I WISH THAT YOU COULD PUT IT BACK INTO AGRICULTURAL AND THEN YOU COULD MOVE IT TO WHATEVER YOU WANTED WHENEVER YOU NEEDED IT.
BUT I, I JUST HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
AND YOU'D BE IN THE SAME POSITION IF IT WAS AGRICULTURAL, WE'D STILL LOOK AT ALL THE SAME CRITERIA AS FAR AS HOW.
BUT THE DEAL IS, IS, IS LET'S SAY MR. CHAPMAN SELLS IT AND SELLS SOMEBODY ELSE AND BOOM, RIGHT OFF THE BAT THEY GO OK, I'VE GOT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND THEY PUT SOMETHING IN THERE THAT'S LIGHT INDUSTRIAL THAT BASICALLY IS DEVASTATING BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT A RIGHT TO DO THAT.
AND THAT'S, DO YOU KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHERE I'M COMING FROM? YEAH.
WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS ASKING FOR PROTECTION.
R2 IS MORE OF A PROTECTION PLACEHOLDER THAN ANYTHING ELSE, BECAUSE, AGAIN, HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HE WANTS TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY, BUT THEY JUST KNOW THEY DON'T WANT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR HEAVY COMMERCIAL OR LIGHT COMMERCIAL OR ANY OF THOSE MORE INTENSIVE USES.
BUT GR AND MAYBE SOME NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES OFFICE COULD MAKE COMPLETE SENSE OVER THERE.
IT'S NOT OUT OF THE ORDINARY TO SEE AN R2 TO GO TO GENERAL RETAIL? I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD WHEN YOU SEE THIS VACANT, WIDE OPEN LAND WHERE YOU COULD PLAN FOR IT AND MAKE IT MAKE SENSE.
IT'D BE LIKE DOING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IN A SENSE AS WELL.
SO THAT COULD EVEN BE AN OPTION, A PLAN DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS A MIXTURE OF USES, IT COULD JUST BE A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, MAYBE JUST WHATEVER THAT PLAN MIGHT BE COMING AND TALKING TO STAFF AND GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS.
DO YOU WANT? LET'S LET MR. SHANE RESPOND AND WE'LL COME BACK AROUND COLE TO YOUR QUESTION IF THAT'S OK.
AND I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO TO DO THAT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THAT AND STAFF HAS ALWAYS WORKED WITH US.
I'M NOT TRYING TO SAY, BUT IT'S A TIME THING.
RIGHT? SO IF IT'S ALREADY I1 AND SOMEBODY COMES IN READY TO DO SOMETHING AND IT'S GETTING TO WHERE IT HAPPENS MORE AND MORE THAT YOU GET A PROJECT BECAUSE YOU CAN PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE.
SO IF IT GOES ALL THE WAY TO R2 AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE US 45 TO 60 DAYS TO MOVE IT TO GENERAL RETAIL OR WHATEVER PLAN DEVELOPMENT, WHATEVER WE END UP TRYING TO DO, THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT MEANS THAT THE PROJECT DOESN'T COME HERE.
SO IF IT'S I1 WE KNOW WE CAN PUT IT THERE, WE WOULD BE FINE SAYING, OK, WE'LL WE'LL REZONE IT WHEN WE GET IT IN WITH THE PROJECT CAN START.
AND NOW I CAN'T YOU MENTIONED BECAUSE ONE THING I CAN'T TELL YOU IS IF GEORGE SELLS IT SOMEBODY I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO.
IT'S NOT GEORGE'S INTENT TO TO MAKE THAT TO DOWNGRADE THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE HE THINKS HE'S GOING TO MAKE A BUCK.
SO THAT THE IDEA THAT HE WANTS TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF AND AGAIN, IT GIVES US THAT MORE FLEXIBILITY TO TRY TO MAKE IT A QUICKER DEAL AND GET SOMEBODY IN TO START DOING THE WORK AND THEN WORK BACK THROUGH STAFF SO THAT WE CAN MEET THOSE CRITERIA.
SO SO HOW WOULD MR. CHAPMAN? I MEAN, HOW WOULD YOU RECOMMEND THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD FEEL PROTECTED? BY LEAVING IT WHAT IT IS.
WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN ONE OF THE MEETINGS WAS BEING ABLE TO HAVE A GO TO MULTIFAMILY AND INTO I2.
AND SO SOME OF THE GET REZONED.
BUT THAT KIND OF DISCUSSION GOT KILLED.
SO IT WAS EITHER GOING TO BE R2 OR NOTHING.
SO IN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, YEAH, GEORGIA'S AGREEABLE TO TO SOMETHING ELSE.
HE JUST DIDN'T WANT TO GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO R2 FOR ALL OF HIS PROPERTY.
AND I TALKED TO KYLE A COUPLE OF TIMES, BUT 24TH STREET RUNS ON THE NORTH SIDE.
BASICALLY, IF IT WAS EXTEND WEST TO SMELTER AND THE SMELTER GO UP TO ALL THE WAY TO LUPER, TO HESTER OR HASTINGS LIKE IT IS NOW, ALL THOSE ARE GOING TO BE CONNECTED UP SOMEDAY, I THINK OF.
AND SO THAT WOULD BE A SECTION CORNER.
AND GRANTED WITH THE RAILROAD AND SOME OF THE TERRAIN OUT THERE, IT MAKES A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, BUT IT STILL WOULD BE.
SO THAT'S WHY WE STILL THINK THAT THERE'S IT'S VIABLE THAT IT BE SOMETHING BESIDES
[03:10:03]
JUST RESIDENTIAL IN THAT IN THAT AREA.SO, JOE, SINCE WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MR. CHAPMAN WANTS, IS THERE ANY REASON THAT HE COULDN'T BE PRESENT TODAY? WELL, HE'S 80 AND HE'S SCARED TO DEATH OF COVID, OK.
JUST [INAUDIBLE] HE'S NOT I MEAN, WHEN I GO MEET WITH HIM, WE SIT OUT IN THE BACKYARD, YOU KNOW, ACROSS A BIG TABLE.
THAT'S IT I MEAN, I'VE GOT A DAD THAT'S 84, SO I UNDERSTAND [INAUDIBLE].
MR. STANLEY, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I DID SO NOT THAT I'M NOT CONCERNED FOR GEORGE, BUT I'M LESS CONCERNED FOR GEORGE AND MORE CONCERNED FOR BUSINESS OWNERS, PROPERTY OWNERS THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVE AN EXISTING USAGE THAT'S NONCONFORMING.
AND THE LANGUAGE WHICH IS WRITTEN, WHICH I FEEL LIKE DICK HAS DONE A GOOD JOB, EVEN THOUGH HE'S NOT AN ENGLISH MAJOR, IN TRYING TO ALLOW FOR AS MUCH LATITUDE IN THE UNFORESEEN AS POSSIBLE.
SO MY QUESTION IS, IS THAT ENOUGH FOR THOSE THAT ARE THE NAYS? IS THAT ENOUGH FOR THE COMMUNITY THAT'S NOT ON BOARD? BECAUSE MY BIGGEST ISSUE IS, IS WE DON'T HAVE JUST ONE OR TWO PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE BEING REZONED AGAINST THEIR WILL.
AND SO PHILOSOPHICALLY, I DON'T BELIEVE WE SHOULD REZONE PEOPLE'S PROPERTY AGAINST THEIR WILL.
I DO AGREE THAT WE DO HAVE AN INTENT AND THE INTENT IS GOOD.
AND I DO AGREE THAT THERE'S MORE THAN ONE PATH THERE.
AND I'M REALLY LOOKING FOR TRYING TO BRING AS MANY.
I KNOW YOU MAY NOT BRING ALL, BUT BRING AS MANY INTO THE FOLD AS POSSIBLE AND DO SOME REAL COMMON SENSE LANGUAGE HERE.
THAT LEAVES US AS MANY OUTS LONG TERM AS POSSIBLY SO THAT WE DON'T GET OURSELVES HUNG UP LATER.
MY MY QUESTION, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S FOR YOU OR IF THAT'S ACTUALLY IS IT, TIM, IS THAT RIGHT? CAN I ASK HIM? SURE.
MR. GASSAWAY, DO YOU MIND COMING BACK UP? COULD I ADD ON TO THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL CONVERSATION? YES.
SO THE ONLY THING THAT MIGHT BE AN ISSUE WITH A PLACEHOLDER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, YOU CAN'T DO RESIDENTIAL IN INDUSTRIAL RIGHT NOW.
SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS TO REZONE IT.
SO I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT.
IF THEY WANTED TO BUILD HOUSES.
IF THEY WANT TO BUILD HOUSES, [INAUDIBLE] JUST NOT ALLOWED.
AND THEN WE DO HAVE YOU'RE NOT SEEING THE OTHER NONCONFORMING WE HAVE ABOUT 200 HOUSES THAT ARE NONCONFORMING LIGHT INDUSTRIAL NOW.
JUST ADDED TO THE CONVERSATION.
AND I HAVE A QUESTION IN MY MIND, TOO, JUST ABOUT IF I'M A DEVELOPER AND I'M LOOKING AT THAT, WHAT ARE THE 80 OR SO ACRES THERE NORTH OF THE RAILROAD TRACK? JOE, I MEAN, WHAT IF I WANTED TO BUILD SOME HOUSES THERE? I'M GOING TO ALWAYS BE WORRIED THAT THE PART THAT I DIDN'T BUILD ON, THE PART WE DIDN'T SHIFT TO R2 IS GOING TO HAVE SOME LIGHT SO AS A DEVELOPER, I'M NOT A DEVELOPER, BUT IT JUST MAKES ME GO, OH, I THINK I'LL PASS ON ALL OF THAT.
LIKE, I'LL NEVER EVEN I'LL NEVER EVEN PICK UP THE PHONE AND RING YOU ABOUT THE PROJECT.
IT'S BECAUSE OF HOW IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED, EVEN THOUGH THAT COULD BE CHANGED UNLESS I BUY THE ENTIRE TRACT, WHICH MAYBE I WOULD, BUT.
AND EVENTUALLY I THINK BRIAN MIGHT WEIGH IN ON AT LEAST THAT QUESTION, BECAUSE THAT DOWN ZONING QUESTION BASICALLY IS SAYING WE'RE ZONING THIS FOR NO REASON BECAUSE IT CAN NEVER CHANGE FOR LIFE OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN WE ALSO ALREADY CURRENTLY HAVE CODE THAT DISCUSSES THE TIME PERIOD OF NONCONFORMING USES.
AND THIS BASICALLY CHANGES THAT WITH THAT 24 CONSECUTIVE MONTHS WATER, SEWER, ELECTRICAL, WHICH IS PROBABLY BETTER ADDRESSED IN THE ZONING CODE THAN JUST IN A ZONING CASE.
SO I THINK IT'S JUST PROBLEMATIC TO DO IT OFFHAND.
SO ANDREW, I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THIS ALREADY, BUT CAN YOU GO BACK OVER DOWN ZONING AND JUST GIVE THE FACTUAL INFORMATION SO AS TO WHAT, YOU KNOW, EXPLAIN? THE DOWN ZONING TERMS? LESS RESTRICTIVE USE.
SO THE HIGHEST ONE WE HAVE IS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ALLOWS FOR A WIDE RANGE OF STUFF, NOT EVERYTHING, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T DO IN RESIDENTIAL.
BUT DOWN ZONING IS IF YOU TAKE THAT HIGHEST USE AND YOU DROP IT DOWN TO ANYTHING ELSE, GENERAL RETAIL, RESIDENTIAL THAT'S DOWN ZONING, UP AND DOWN IN ZONING IS MORE ACCURATE TO SAY THE STEPPING AND GRADUATION OF INTENSITIES.
SO YOUR LEAST INTENSIVE USE IS GOING TO BE AG, THEN AS YOU GO UP THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL IS VERY LOW INTENSITY USES.
BUT AS YOU STEP UP IN THE GENERAL RETAIL, COMMERCIAL, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, YOUR MOST INTENSE USE WHERE YOU HAVE THE MOST CONFLICT BETWEEN YOUR LOWER INTENSITY USES, WHICH IS WHY WHEN YOU HAVE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CHAPMAN PROPERTY, IT IS A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF A VERY HUGE CHUNK OF OF AG TYPE OR UNDEVELOPED LAND OVER THERE.
[03:15:04]
IT BUT IT IS CONNECTED TO RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE SOUTH AND ON THE EAST OF ALL OF THAT PROPERTY.SO IT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO RESIDENTIAL USES, WHICH IS I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THERE'S NEVER A PLACE WHERE THAT'S APPROPRIATE, BUT WHAT THE GOAL IN A REZONING PROCESS IS, IS TO IDENTIFY YOUR LOW INTENSITY AREAS OR TO IDENTIFY YOUR HIGH INTENSITY AREAS AND GRADUATE STEP THE CHANGE IN INTENSITY WHERE YOU DON'T GO FROM HIGH TO LOW AND PUT THOSE TWO INCOMPATIBLE USES NEXT TO EACH OTHER.
SO FUNDAMENTALLY, EVEN IF COUNCIL WANTED TO LEAVE IT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, YOU ARE SORT OF SAYING I WANT A VERY HIGH INTENSITY USE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO A VERY LOW INTENSITY USE.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO R2.
BUT THERE ARE APPROPRIATE ZONINGS THAT BELONG NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL USES, YOU KNOW, GENERAL RETAIL YOU KNOW, THERE'S A NUMBER OF USES THAT ARE APPROPRIATE THERE AND I THINK THOSE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO CONSIDER.
BUT THE WHOLE REASON WE GO THROUGH A REZONING PROCESS LIKE THIS, AND I'VE DONE IT IN A COUPLE OF OTHER CITIES, THEY ARE VERY INTENSE, VERY CHALLENGING PROCESS BECAUSE WE'RE TOUCHING PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES.
WE WERE A PROPERTY RIGHTS STATE.
BUT FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, THERE'S NOT ANY EXPOSURE IF YOU GO THROUGH THE CORRECT PROCESS, WHICH WE HAVE.
BUT I'LL ALSO SAY THE REASON THAT WE DO THIS AND THE REASON PEOPLE DON'T DO IT VERY OFTEN, LIKE I SAID, IS BECAUSE IT'S VERY CHALLENGING, BUT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T DONE IT IN SO LONG.
WE HAVE SUCH A PATCHWORK QUILT OF NONCONFORMING OR INCOMPATIBLE USES OR ZONINGS ADJACENT TO EACH OTHER.
WE ALSO HAVE A LOT OF AREAS WHERE THINGS HAVE BEEN BUILT.
AND I DON'T I CAN'T SAY AND AND ANDREW OR CHRIS OR EMILY MIGHT BE ABLE TO SAY, HOW DID THAT HAPPEN? YOU KNOW, BUT BUT ULTIMATELY, IT BOILS DOWN TO WE EITHER WEREN'T PAYING ATTENTION IN THE 50S AND 60S OR 70S WHENEVER THESE THINGS WERE BUILT, OR OR WE WERE POTENTIALLY PAYING ATTENTION, BUT NOT DOING OUR JOB OR PAYING ATTENTION TURN TURNING THE OTHER EYE.
THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT REASONS AND BUT ESTABLISHED BECAUSE IT WAS DONE IN THE PAST, IS NOT A REASON TO CONTINUE FORWARD WITH A NONFUNCTIONAL ZONING SCHEME.
AND I SAY SCHEME, ZONING PLAN IS A BETTER WAY TO SAY IT GOING FORWARD.
SO WE DO HAVE TO HAVE THE DIFFICULT I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THOSE DIFFICULT CONVERSATIONS.
THIS IS THE FIRST STEP IN A CITYWIDE PROCESS CHOSE NORTH HEIGHTS BECAUSE WE KNEW IT WAS GOING TO BE ONE OF THE MOST MOST CHALLENGING AREAS BECAUSE IT DOES HAVE THE MOST INCOMPATIBLE USES NEXT TO EACH OTHER OR THE MOST INCOMPATIBLE ZONINGS NEXT TO EACH OTHER, WHERE YOU HAVE HIGH INTENSITY, LOW INTENSITY ADJACENCIES OR LOW INTENSITY USES INSIDE OF HIGH INTENSITY ZONING AREA THAT'S NOT EVEN ALLOWED USE INSIDE THE ZONINGS.
CONVERSELY, I THINK WE ALSO HAVE HIGH INTENSITY USES INSIDE LOW INTENSITY ZONING AREAS, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN IT WASN'T EVEN ELIGIBLE FOR A VARIANCE.
SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A PRETTY HIGH ALTITUDE EXPLANATION OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND THEN ALSO A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT FOR WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH JOE AND WITH REGARD TO MR. CHAPMAN'S LAND.
OK, THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WANTED, BECAUSE WE HAVE CITIZENS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT ARE LISTENING AS WELL AS AT HOME.
AND SO WE NEED THAT FACTUAL INFORMATION AS IT RELATES TO OR IS ASSOCIATED WITH DOWN ZONING.
MR. GASSAWAY, WHILE MR. GASSAWAY'S WALKING UP, MR. MCWILLIAMS, OUR CITY ATTORNEY, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD? SORRY THAT I'M.
NO, I THINK JARED AND ANDREW COVERED IT PRETTY WELL.
I'LL JUST TAKE IT A STEP HIGHER.
MR. [INAUDIBLE], DO YOU IF YOU DON'T MIND, WE'RE TRYING TO LEAVE THAT SEAT OPEN JUST SO NOBODY HAS TO SIT NEXT TO.
WHAT I WOULD SAY IS, IS REMEMBER THAT REMEMBER WHAT ZONING IS FOR ZONING IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS BUILT UPON THIS AS THIS IDEA THAT.
SAME THAT'S THE SAME SAME QUESTION THE MAYOR WAS SAYING.
LAURA DO YOU MIND GIVING YOUR SEAT TO MR. [INAUDIBLE]? MAYBE YOU COULD.
REMEMBER, THE MOST IMPORTANT PART ABOUT ZONING IS PROTECTING THE SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE TOWN.
I MEAN, THAT YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS BUILT WITH THAT AS ITS ULTIMATE GOAL.
OK, AND SO GO BACK TO AS IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE CITY MANAGER AND BY ANDREW AS TO OK, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL.
IT JUST IT'S IT'S VERY COMMON SENSE, IT'S IT'S DOES THIS PROMOTE THE WELFARE? DOES THIS PROMOTE THE PUBLIC SAFETY OF OUR RESIDENTS?
[03:20:02]
IF IT DOES, THEN THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THIS BODY MUST USE IN ITS DELIBERATION.IT MUST IT MUST GO BACK TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IS IT WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THAT PLAN? WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF THIS REZONING ON ADJACENT LANDOWNERS? HOW DOES IT IMPACT THEIR OR PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE OR THE THE PUBLIC SAFETY OR HEALTH OF THOSE FOLKS? THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, THAT THOSE ARE THE KIND OF CRITERIA THAT THIS BODY WILL WANT TO USE IN MAKING THIS DECISION AND DELIBERATION.
SO I TOOK IT UP ON A WHOLE NOTHER LEVEL BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE THAT THAT THEY HAVE DESCRIBED IT ACCURATELY.
BUT I WANTED TO GIVE YOU SOME REAL QUICK CRITERIA TO REMEMBER TO BASE YOUR DECISIONS ON.
OK, THANK YOU, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT EXPLANATION AS WELL.
I THINK WE HAD QUESTIONS FOR MR. GASSAWAY.
ANYBODY WANT TO START US OFF? YEAH.
SO BASICALLY WHAT I'M ASKING TO RESTATE IT IS, IS IS THIS ENOUGH? CAN WE GET ENOUGH PEOPLE IN FAVOR OF THEIR PROPERTIES BEING REZONED TO OVERCOME THE PHILOSOPHICAL DIFFERENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S ROLE IN REZONING PROPERTY AGAINST AN INDIVIDUAL'S WILL? I'LL ANSWER THAT QUESTION THIS WAY.
MR. FORD'S HIS HIS ITEM FOUR THAT.
HE THAT HE WROTE IT DID GET SOME RELIEF.
HOWEVER, THERE IS STILL A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DON'T GET RELIEF IN THAT WRITING, AND THAT WOULD BE THE PEOPLE.
AND IF THEY COULD PULL UP THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE EXISTING ZONING, YOU'LL SEE WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE THEY TAKE A HUGE AMOUNT OF MF1 AND THEY WIPE IT OFF AND THEY GO TO R2.
WELL, THERE ARE A LOT OF SMALL BUILDERS, SMALL PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING INFILL BUILDING RIGHT NOW WITH PLANS IN ACTION THAT THIS WILL KILL THEM.
OK, SO LIKE I SAID IN MY LETTER, A MORE COMPATIBLE THING FOR ALL OF THAT BROWN TO GO TO WOULD HAVE BEEN MODERATE DENSITY, MODERATE DENSITY GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO DO ALL OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE WANTING TO DO ALREADY.
YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING? WE UNDERSTAND THE INDUSTRIAL PART OVER THERE.
WE FEEL VERY CONFIDENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH MR. CHAPMAN AND WE'RE GOING TO GET WHAT WE WANT OVER THERE.
ONE THING THAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED HAD WE KNOWN THAT THIS CHAPMAN LAND WAS AVAILABLE, I HAD NEVER TALKED TO HIM BEFORE I GOT INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS.
IF WE HAD KNOWN AND AT THIS POINT, WHAT WE WILL BE DOING AMARILLO AREA BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, WE WILL BE WORKING WITH MR. CHAPMAN, AMARILLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.
AND WE'RE GOING TO SAY, LOOK, GUYS, WE'VE GOT THIS 88 ACRES.
WE'VE GOT ALL OF THIS LAND THAT WE CAN DRIVE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ALONG WITH A POTENTIAL AMAZON IN THAT LAND RIGHT THERE.
THERE'S ACTUALLY SMELTER ROAD OVER WHERE THE CONTAMINATION WAS AT.
AND WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD IS THAT LAND CAN BE USED IF YOU DON'T LIVE ON IT.
SO IF YOU GO IN WITH A MAJOR WAREHOUSE OR DATA DATA CENTER.
THE PROCESS AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, WE'RE REASONABLE PEOPLE, WE JUST WANT A REASONABLE OUTCOME AND WE DON'T WANT TO HURT ANYBODY.
AND AS THE CITY ATTORNEY SAID, IT'S ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE THE COMMON WEALTH, THE WEALTH OF COMMON GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY, THE EXISTING PLAN, THE WAY THAT IT IS NOW, IT HURTS PEOPLE.
AND LIKE I SAID, DON'T HURT US.
WE DON'T NEED WE'RE WE'RE WE'RE COMING BACK ALIVE WITH YOUR HELP AND WITH PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR OWN PERSONAL PROPERTY, OUT OF THEIR OWN DOLLARS.
MF1 DOWN ZONE DOWN ZONE TO R2 CHOPS THE LEGS FROM UNDER US.
WAIT, ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. GASSAWAY? MR. GASSAWAY, I REALLY APPRECIATE I THINK ONE WIN OUT OF ALL OF THIS IS THAT
[03:25:05]
MORE PEOPLE ARE INVOLVED IN THIS CONVERSATION AND I THINK THAT IS EXCELLENT.AND I APPRECIATE EVERYONE WHO TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY AS WELL AS THEIR TIME AWAY FROM THEIR BUSINESS AND AWAY FROM THEIR FAMILY TO BE HERE TODAY AND TO WRITE A LETTER.
I THINK WE WERE ALL PROVIDED THOSE AND I REALLY APPRECIATED THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ THEM.
IT MADE ME WONDER IF IF IT GAVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT WITH STAFF ABOUT ALL OF THIS.
OK, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE MORE TIME WITH STAFF.
I HAVE MET WITH STAFF AFTER WORKSHOPS.
I MET WITH EMILY A COUPLE OF TIMES AND AS I SAID IN MY LETTER.
STAFF, THEY'VE DONE A WONDERFUL JOB IN SOME REGARDS, BUT IN OTHER REGARDS.
WE COULDN'T GET ANYTHING INTO THE NO INPUT, THE INPUT WAS ONLY BEING DRIVEN THROUGH NORTH HEIGHTS.
BUT YOU MET WITH I JUST WANT TO YOU DID SAY YOU MET WITH EMILY TWICE.
DID YOU SHARE YOUR CONCERNS WITH HER WHEN YOU MET WITH HER? YES.
AND THAT'S THE THING THAT THE CONCERNS HAVE BEEN PUT OUT THERE BY MOST PEOPLE THAT ARE SPEAKING UP.
AND THEY'RE, LIKE I SAID, REALLY, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT AREN'T EVEN INFORMED AS FAR AS WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON HERE.
AND THERE'S THERE'S A VERY FINE LINE WHAT YOU'RE DOING HERE IN NORTH HEIGHTS.
AND THAT IS YOU HAVE SOLIDLY TWO GROUPS.
YOU GOT PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE ALL TOGETHER SAYING, WAIT A MINUTE, AND THEN YOU GOT ANOTHER GROUP OVER HERE THAT SAYING THIS IS WHAT WE'RE PUSHING AND WITHOUT THE TWO COMING TOGETHER, YOU ARE.
YOU ARE IT'S CREATING A REAL DIVISION IN THE COMMUNITY, A REAL DIVISION.
SO WE'RE MORE THAN WILLING TO SIT DOWN WITH STAFF, WITH NORTH HEIGHTS ASSOCIATION AND HASH OUT SOME THINGS.
BUT THE PROCESS, I'LL BANG ON IT AGAIN.
AND I KNOW FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, THE CITY IS GOING TO SAY WE DID OUR DUE DILIGENCE.
THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT WAS NOT DONE WAS PRIOR TO STAFF GETTING INVOLVED BECAUSE NORTH HEIGHTS DOESN'T REALLY SPEAK FOR THE COMMUNITY.
THEY'RE NOT A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THEY ARE SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED IN THE SAN JACINTO IS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, NORTH HEIGHTS ADVISORY ASSOCIATION, IS SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND THEY ARE NOT CONNECTED WITH THE COMMUNITY.
THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE TODAY.
DID YOU GO TO THE MEETING? YES.
EVERY MEETING THAT THERE WAS ONE MEETING OUT OF THE I THINK IT WAS THREE OR FOUR MEETINGS.
OUR LETTER CAME IN AFTER THE MEETING, BUT WE MET ALL THE OTHER MEETINGS AFTER THAT.
AND WE'VE GIVEN INPUT TO STAFF.
I'VE MET WITH NORTH HEIGHTS ONE ON ONE, THEY STILL WON'T TAKE INPUT.
SO FOR THEM TO SAY THEY ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COMMUNITY, IT'S FALSE.
THEY MAY HAVE THAT DESIRE, BUT IN ACTUALITY, THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED.
IF YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL PLAN.
THERE WERE 46 INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THAT.
ONLY THREE OR FOUR ARE INVOLVED IN NORTH HEIGHTS, AND ALL THE ONES THAT I'VE TALKED TO, NONE OF THEM WERE ASKED TO THE TABLE ON ANY OF THIS.
HOW MR. GASSAWAY WHEN YOU SAY YOU MET WITH STAFF AND THEY DIDN'T TAKE YOUR INPUT, CAN YOU GIVE ME SPECIFICS ABOUT THAT? SURE.
LIKE I SAID, IT WAS AFTER A PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING.
I THINK IT WAS A WORKSHOP BECAUSE I CAME EARLY.
I DON'T THINK IT WAS EARLY JUNE.
I CAME AND I GAVE A DIFFERENT REPORT.
MATTER OF FACT, EMILY GAVE A REPORT THAT, HEY, ALL'S WELL, EXCEPT MAYBE A FEW RABBLE ROUSERS.
AND I CAME AFTER HER AND I TOLD THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION, THAT'S THE MINORITY, THAT'S THE MAJORITY REPORT.
[03:30:01]
I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE MINORITY REPORT.PEOPLE ARE UNHAPPY WITH THIS PROCESS.
AND THAT'S THE THING ABOUT THE WHOLE PROCESS IS WE'VE LITERALLY THE BALL HAS BEEN ROLLING AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE JUMPED IN FRONT OF IT AND SAID, WAIT, HOLD A MINUTE.
AND THAT IS THAT IS WHERE WE'RE AT.
THERE ARE I MEAN, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT I DO KNOW HOW TO GO LOOK AT THE CODE AND SEE WHAT WHO HAS WHAT RIGHT AND WHATEVER, WHATEVER.
AND WE'RE NOT TRYING TO HAVE A BEEF WITH THE CITY.
WE'VE GOT TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS TO MAKE THE THINGS HAPPEN THAT WE REALLY NEED TO MAKE HAPPEN.
SO WE'RE NOT HERE TODAY TO FIGHT YOU.
WE'RE JUST ASKING TO SAY, HEY, LET'S REVISIT THIS SOME OTHER WAY.
IF I COULD HAVE STOPPED IT BEFORE WE GOT HERE TODAY, I WOULD HAVE LIKE I SAID, I PUT THAT OLIVE BRANCH OUT THERE TO THEM TO TO SIT DOWN AND LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PROBLEMS THAT THIS HAS.
THEY GOT A LOT ON THEIR HANDS.
THEY'RE NOT EVEN REALLY TAKING CARE OF THAT.
SO HOW HOW DO YOU HAVE TIME TO REZONE A WHOLE COMMUNITY? THOUSAND ACRES AND ACRES AND ACRES? IT'S IT'S A FAILURE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO LET IT STAY A FAILURE.
WE CAN STOP IT NOW, GO BACK, REVISIT, COME UP WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT EVERYONE CAN SUPPORT.
SO MR. GASSAWAY DO YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE OF A CONCERN THAT WAS BROUGHT TO PLANNING AND ZONING? THAT WAS THAT WAS A CONCERN OR AN ISSUE? LIKE I SAID, THE DOWN ZONING SPECIFICALLY OF I DROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE ARE 46 CORNER LOTS, CORNER LOTS ARE AN AMAZING THING.
MY DAD TAUGHT ME THIS A LONG TIME AGO BECAUSE, OK, GUESS WHAT YOU CAN PUT ON THE CORNER LOT? AND IT'S ALREADY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU CAN GO THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN WE REZONE THE CHAMBER.
THE CHAMBER ACTUALLY WAS MF1 AND IT ACTUALLY HAD AN EXISTING BUILDING HOUSE ON THE BACKSIDE OF IT.
IT'S IT'S ALL THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, LIKE I SAID, THOSE CORNER LOTS, YOU CAN PUT A TRIPLEX IN THERE, YOU CAN PUT A DUPLEX IN THERE, YOU CAN PUT TINY HOMES IN THERE IF THE ZONING, BUT YOU CAN'T DO IT WITH R2.
BUT YOU COULD DO WITH MF1 OR MODERATE DENSITY.
DON'T KILL A FUTURE, IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
YES, THERE ARE THERE ARE INSTANCES WHERE.
IT'S JUST GOING TO HAVE AN EFFECT.
IT'S JUST JUST GOING TO HAVE AN EFFECT THAT WE DON'T WANT.
WE DON'T WANT TO WE DON'T WANT TO NOT HAVE INCOMPATIBLE BUSINESSES AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN GENERAL.
BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO RIP THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN, THERE'S THERE'S A THERE'S A BETTER WAY TO DO IT.
I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MS. [INAUDIBLE] TO COME TO THE PODIUM IF IF YOU'D BE WILLING, MA'AM.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY I REALLY APPRECIATED YOUR LETTER IN THE TIME YOU SPENT PUTTING IT TOGETHER, BUT I DIDN'T I WONDERED WHERE ON THIS MAP IF WE COULD SHOW THE EXISTING OR MAYBE THE P&Z RECOMMENDATION.
IS IT FOR NEW YORK BODEGA AND GRILL? YEAH THE EXACT ADDRESS I WANTED TO SEE IT'S IN PART TWO.
IT'S IN PART TWO OF THE REZONING.
OK, SO CAN WE ARE WE WORKING ON IT OVER THERE? OK, I WAS THINKING IT WAS IN PART ONE.
YOUR BUSINESS IS NOT IN THE PART THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY, OK.
SO IS YOUR HOME? BOUGHT PART TWO LATER THEN.
YEAH IT'S WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PART TWO AT ALL TODAY.
IS YOUR HOME LOCATED IN THE EXISTING.
ALL OF MY PROPERTIES ARE IN PART.
WELL BESIDES THE BUSINESS BUT ALL MY RENTAL PROPERTIES ARE IN PART ONE.
OK, SO I WONDERED IF YOU COULD IDENTIFY FOR ME WE'RE WORKING ON IT, WHICH IS WHAT I WANTED TO SEE WAS THE PLAN.
[03:35:01]
THIS IS THE EXISTING.BUT I WANTED TO SEE IF IT IF YOU'RE IN ANY OF THOSE COLORED ZONES.
I HAVE A LOT OF MY PROPERTIES ARE MULTIFAMILY AND THEY'RE TRYING TO DROP THEM DOWN, I THINK, TO RESIDENTIAL.
HOW MANY? I HAVE 1605 NORTH JEFFERSON, 1505 JEFFERSON.
SO MS. [INAUDIBLE], YOU HAVE LIKE SIX.
SIX RENTALS AND THEY'RE IN THE COLORED ZONES.
AND IT'S CHANGING FROM MULTI-FAMILY DOWN TO R2.
OK, SO HOW WILL THAT AFFECT YOUR PROPERTIES AS YOU'RE CURRENTLY OPERATING THEM? WELL, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO GROW MY PROPERTIES.
LIKE I DIDN'T OBTAIN THESE PROPERTIES FOR SOMEONE TO DOWNGRADE ME.
AND I JUST WANT THAT OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.
I AM AGAINST THE WAY IT WAS DONE.
I JUST THINK IT'S A BETTER WAY TO DO IT.
YES, IT IS TIME FOR CHANGE NORTH HIGHTS NEED A CHANGE.
I WAS DRIVING DOWN [INAUDIBLE] STREET AND I GOT DEPRESSED BECAUSE I WAS LIKE, DANG, YOU KNOW, AS A LITTLE GIRL IT JUST SEEMED LIKE IT'S IN THE SAME CONDITION.
AND TO ME THAT'S SAD, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO.
BUT I THINK IF WE WERE TOGETHER, IF WE WERE TOGETHER, WE CAN GET SO MUCH DONE, IS TOO MUCH DIVISION AND IT SHOULDN'T BE THAT WAY.
IF WE'RE ALL FOR CHANGE AND ALL FOR IMPROVEMENT, WHY ARE WE DIVIDED? DO YOU UNDERSTAND? WHY ARE WE DIVIDED? WHY CAN'T WE GET TOGETHER, THE NHAA AND EVERYONE ELSE, AND COME TOGETHER WITH THE CITY AND WE ALL GET STUFF DONE BECAUSE IT IS THE CITY OF AMARILLO RIGHT? AND NORTH HEIGHTS IS IS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE CITY.
SO AS A SCENARIO, JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR AND I MAY MISUNDERSTAND WHAT DICK SAID, BUT YOU'RE MULTIFAMILY RIGHT NOW.
YOU'D BE REZONED TO R2, LET'S SAY YOU SOLD THOSE PROPERTIES ONE DAY.
THOSE ARE NONCONFORMING PROPERTIES AT THAT TIME.
AND WHEN THEY SELL, THE GRANDFATHER CLAUSE GOES AWAY.
SO YOU CAN SELL THOSE HOUSES AS RESIDENTIAL HOMES, BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE HOME BUYERS.
YOU CAN'T SELL THOSE HOUSES AS MULTIFAMILY INVESTMENTS.
BRIAN, IS THAT CORRECT? GENERALLY SPEAKING, THAT IS CORRECT.
SO IF WE CHANGE THIS PROPERTY FROM MULTIFAMILY TO R2, SHE CAN CONTINUE OPERATING IT AS MULTIFAMILY AS LONG AS SHE OWNS IT OR BUT IF IT IF SHE WANTS TO SELL IT, THE NEXT PERSON WHO PURCHASES THE PROPERTY HAS TO USE IT AS AN R2 CONFORMING PROPERTY.
IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK GENERALLY THAT'S RIGHT.
I KNOW IT MAKES A LITTLE MORE SENSE IN BUSINESS, IT'S A LITTLE HARDER WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT RENTAL PROPERTY BECAUSE A LOT OF RENTAL PROPERTY WILL ALMOST ALWAYS REMAIN RENTAL PROPERTY AND BE SOLD TO ANOTHER INVESTOR.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
SO SO IF IF SHE SELLS HER PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, LIKE WITHIN X NUMBER OF MONTHS AND THE NEW PURCHASER COMES ALONG, COULD THEY NOT CONTINUE TO OPERATE AS A MULTIFAMILY? DIFFERENT OWNERSHIP, [INAUDIBLE].
CAN THEY CAN THEY DO THAT? I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE I HEARD THAT THERE WAS A TIME SPAN IN THERE.
THE ANSWER IS NO, BECAUSE IT'LL BE A DIFFERENT OWNERSHIP.
I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.
SO OK, IF SOMEONE BOUGHT MY PROPERTY, IS IT MULTI-FAMILY SAYING WE WANTED TO MAYBE DO SOME KIND OF.
SMALL HOUSE IS SOMETHING TO GROW.
SO YOU'RE SAYING IF I IF THEY PUT MY PROPERTY DOWN, IF THEY DOWNGRADED MY PROPERTY TO R1, IF I SOLD IT, THEN THE NEW OWNER COULD, WHAT, OPERATE? OPERATE THE SAME AS YOU'RE OPERATING NOW.
LET'S JUST SAY FOR CONVERSATION.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LENGTH OF TIME IS, BUT, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A IF IT'S A YEAR OR SIX MONTHS OR WHATEVER, IF YOU SOLD IT WITHIN THAT TIME FRAME, THEN THE NEW OWNER COULD CONTINUE TO OPERATE AS YOU'RE OPERATING.
IS THAT RIGHT, MR. CITY ATTORNEY? AS A MULTIFAMILY, WHY WOULD I WANT TO BE DOWNGRADED?
[03:40:01]
WELL.GENERALLY SPEAKING, A NONCONFORMING USE CONTINUES IS GRANDFATHERED IN UNTIL A TIME PERIOD IN WHICH IT'S ABANDONED, OK, THAT USES ABANDON.
THERE ARE CERTAIN ORDINANCES THAT HAVE A TIME LIMIT, BUT TYPICALLY SPEAKING, THAT'S THAT'S WHAT CONFORMANCE NON CONFORMANCE IS ABOUT.
IT'S TYPICALLY ADDRESSED IN ONE ORDINANCE THAT APPLIES TO THE CITY THROUGHOUT THE ZONING CODE.
AND THAT'S WHY SOMETIMES THESE THINGS ARE ALWAYS BETTER HANDLED WITH JUST ONE ZONING PROCESS.
IN FACT, I WOULD BET THE NEW ZONING CODE WILL HAVE A PROVISION IN THERE ABOUT NONCONFORMISTS.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW EXACTLY IT WOULD PLAY INTO THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION.
AND I GUESS ANDREW MIGHT BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THAT.
I SEE OUR DILIGENT STAFF QUICKLY SCROLLING THROUGH THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
IF THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THE ORDINANCE AND THIS IS THEIR EXPERTISE, BUT THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THE ORDINANCE.
WELL, IT'S A BRAND NEW ORDINANCE, MA'AM.
AND SO IT'S IT'S STILL WE'VE SPENT TWO YEARS REDESIGNING THAT ORDINANCE.
SO THEY THEY ARE BELIEVE ME, FULLY UP TO SPEED ON THAT ORDINANCE.
THEY JUST HAVE NOT ADDRESSED THIS EXACT QUESTION.
MY I ASK YOU A QUESTION? SURE.
SO THE REZONING THAT'S GOING ON.
SO, FOR INSTANCE, IF I HAD A PIECE OF LAND AND I WANTED TO UPGRADE IT, I WOULD HAVE BECAUSE I OWN THE LAND, THEN I'M REQUIRED TO TURN AN APPLICATION, GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.
CORRECT? FOR THE TO GET IT REZONED.
HOW IS SOMEONE THAT DOES NOT OWN THE PROPERTY ABLE TO REZONE SOMETHING THAT'S NOT THEIRS? HOW IS THAT SO? MAYBE I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
MR. CITY ATTORNEY, YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT? YES, IT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
ZONING IS TYPICALLY BROAD AUTHORITY IS GIVEN TO CITY TO TO PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT PROVIDES FOR ALL OF ITS CITIZENRY IN A WAY THAT PROMOTES THE GOOD WELFARE AND PUBLIC SAFETY AND HEALTH OF ITS RESIDENTS.
AND SO ZONING IS IS SOMETHING THAT.
AT THE CITY COUNCIL IN THIS CASE HAS BROAD AUTHORITY OVER IN LIGHT OF THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERYBODY'S GOING TO AGREE WITH IT, OK? IT IT'S ABOUT DECIDING WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE INSTEAD OF ONE PERSON.
AND THAT THAT IS THAT IS THE ULTIMATE GOAL.
I DON'T WANT TO GET FURTHER DOWN IN THE WEEDS ON THIS, BUT THAT'S BASICALLY THAT.
AND THAT'S WHY I WHEN WHEN I ADDRESSED FREDA EARLIER, THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS BODY IS LOOKING AT THAT THAT PERSPECTIVE, BECAUSE THAT IS PART OF THE CRITERIA OF REZONING AN AREA THAT THIS BODY MUST MAKE FINDINGS ON.
OK, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, SO, OK, GO AHEAD, JARED.
WELL, I DIDN'T WANT TO [INAUDIBLE] OH, OK.
BUT TO EMILY AND ANDREW, SO MF1.
HOW MANY HOW INTENSE IS MF1? SO MF1, DEPENDING ON YOUR NUMBER OF ACREAGE WOULD BE A LOT MORE DENSE THAN RESIDENTIAL OR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES, THEY COULD JUST PACK IN A LOT MORE UNITS OF RESIDENTS THAN YOU'D SEE IN A NORMAL SUBDIVISION.
I THINK ALSO TO CLARIFY, I THINK A LOT OF THESE MIGHT BE HOUSES BEING RENTED TO RESIDENTS, WHICH WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED IN R2.
YOU WOULDN'T, BUT I THINK FOR THE MOST PART, THESE ARE RENT HOUSES, NOT APARTMENTS, BUT WE TRY TO SO YOU HAVE MD ON THE EDGES THERE AND R2 ON THE SIDES.
WE WE REALLY TRIED OUR BEST TO MAKE IT COMPATIBLE AND TRY AND ADDRESS THOSE THAT WERE EXISTING THAT WE FOUND.
MAKE IT [INAUDIBLE] WITH THE EXISTING USES.
BUT YOU'RE OF COURSE, NEVER GOING TO HAVE A PERFECT SCENARIO WHERE YOU CATCH EVERY SINGLE BUSINESS OR BASICALLY WE JUST HAVE LITTLE DOTS AND DIFFERENT ZONINGS ALL OVER.
WE'D HAVE LIKE COMMERCIAL NEXT TO MD NEXT TO R2.
SO ULTIMATELY SOMETHING HAS HAS TO GIVE WHEN TRYING TO CREATE COMPATIBLE ZONING CATEGORIES NEXT DOOR TO EACH OTHER.
[03:45:02]
AND HOW INTENSE CAN YOU GO IN R2? IS THAT SINGLE FAMILY, THOSE ARE SINGLE FAMILY, R2 R3 R1 ARE SINGLE FAMILY.THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST ONE BE MD MODERATE DENSITY, WHICH IS IN THE ORANGE ON THE SCREEN.
SO WE DO HAVE WE DO HAVE SOME ON THE PERIPHERY OF THE [INAUDIBLE].
OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ANDREW? I DID HAVE A QUESTION, IT'S MAYBE A FLOYD QUESTION BECAUSE I HAVE A CONCERN FOR MR. WHAT MR. SHANE'S BRINGING UP FOR MR. CHAPMAN ABOUT OUR ABILITY TO.
BRING CITY SERVICES RESIDENT FOR RESIDENTIAL NEEDS TO THAT SECTION NORTH OF THE RAILROAD TRACK, BUT WEST OF IT'S CURRENTLY LIGHT COMMERCIAL.
YES, MAYOR, THE CONCERNS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD, BASICALLY THE WEST, HALF OF WHAT'S ON THAT MAP IS THAT THAT WAS MOST OF THAT WAS PLATTED DECADES AGO.
AGAIN, BACK TO THE EARLIER PRESENTATION WHERE THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WERE PUT OFF TO FUTURE GENERATIONS.
SO THIS IS TYPICALLY A PLATTED AREA WITHOUT THE ROAD, STREETS, WATER, SEWER SERVING THE ENTIRE AREA.
AND WHAT MR. SHANE BROUGHT UP WAS THAT THE TYPICAL INSTALLATION OF A WASTEWATER MAIN GOING TO THE WEST IS LOST ELEVATION SUCH THAT EITHER THAT MAIN HAS TO BE UPSIZED AND DEEPENED OR SOME KIND OF LIFT STATION SERVING THOSE AREAS.
WHAT YOU DO IN THAT SIZE, THERE'S A 20 INCH WATER MAIN OVER IN HUGHES SUCH THAT THOSE WATER MAIN EXTENSION AND RIVER WATER WORKS UNDER PRESSURE, SUCH THAT IT'S MORE READILY AVAILABLE.
BUT WHETHER THAT LINE IS A TWO INCH OR SO WATER IS EASIER TO DEAL WITH ANY EXTENSION INTO THESE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT IT WASN'T PLANNED FOR PROPERLY.
SO IT IS AVAILABLE IN THOSE AREAS, IN THE OUTFLOW LINE AND AT THE BOTTOM OF THE CREEK THAT GOES THROUGH THE NORTH HEIGHTS WASTEWATER COLLECTION IS AVAILABLE, BUT IT'S GETTING TO THOSE LOCATIONS AND THAT COULD RESULT IN A LIFT STATION.
BUT TYPICALLY IT WOULD BE A LINE INSTALLATION.
SO IT BECOMES A SPECIFIC UNIT.
ONE OF THE CHALLENGES IS THAT THE PLATTING OR THE LAYOUT OF THAT MORE LENDS TO RESIDENTIAL THAN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN WE LOOK AT SIZING THE UTILITIES, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT HOW THAT'S LAID OUT.
AND WHEN YOU SEE THOSE TYPICAL BLOCKS THAT ARE TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS AND THEN A BUILDER, COLE, A SMALL A LOT IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO AN INDUSTRIAL SETTING.
SO THOSE ARE LOT PLATTED OUT THAT TYPICALLY ARE MORE CONDUCIVE TO RESIDENTIAL SETTING.
SO THAT'S THE SIZING THAT WE WOULD DO UNDER THE UTILITY PLANNING FROM LOOKING HOW TO SERVE A NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU WOULD LOOK AT THAT AS A RESIDENTIAL, BUT YET THE ZONING DOESN'T MATCH THAT.
SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT INFILL AND HOW YOU GET IT, IT'S IN MY MIND IT'S LIKE RUNNING A GO TO THE OLYMPICS THAT WE'VE BEEN WATCHING.
IT'S A IT'S A HURDLE'S ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE HURDLES THAT YOU HAVE TO OVERCOME.
ZONING BEING THE FIRST ONE THAT SAYS TO US IN PLANNING AND UTILITIES, THAT'S THE DENSITY THAT I'M GOING TO USE TO PLAN THOSE UTILITIES.
IF IT'S INDUSTRIAL, THAT'S A DIFFERENT DENSITY THAN RESIDENTIAL, IN UTILITY PLANNING.
THE RESIDENTIAL IS GOING TO HAVE THE HIGHEST DENSITIES, IS GOING TO DEMAND US BUILD THE BEST INFRASTRUCTURE THERE IS FOR THAT.
THAT'S THE TYPICAL THOUGHT PROCESSES IN THE UTILITIES.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? WELL, SORT OF.
HOW MANY HOW MANY LOTS WOULD YOU GET OUT OF 80 ACRES? JUST BALLPARK IT.
TYPICALLY FOUR TO FOUR AND A HALF PER ACRE IN A IN A RESIDENTIAL.
AND SO IF A DEVELOPER SHOWED UP AND SAID, WE WANT TO PUT 300 HOUSES OUT HERE, WHAT'S THE CITY GOING TO SAY TO THEM? IS THE CITY GOING TO SAY GREEN LIGHT, WE CAN NO PROBLEM.
OR IS THE CITY GOING TO SAY THAT'S FINE, BUT ONLY IF YOU PAY FOR A LIFT STATION? WELL, THE UTILITIES WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED, LIKELY BE A LIFT STATION.
IT COULD BE A MAIN EXTENSION THAT GRAVITY FLOWS.
THERE'D BE SOME OFF SITE, WHETHER IT'S LIFT STATION OR OFFSITE SEWER LINE, WOULD HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT.
[03:50:02]
PROGRESS CONVERSATION.WE DO NEED TO BE ABLE TO FIND A WAY FOR THE DEVELOPER TO GO TO GREEN LIGHT HIS PROJECT, HIS OR HER PROJECTS AND MOVE THEM ON WITHOUT WAITING FOR THE CITY TO STEP IN AND DO A MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT THAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE THE FUNDS TO DO AND CERTAINLY HAVEN'T PLANNED IN THEIR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
SO IT PROBABLY DOESN'T EXIST FOR FIVE OR 10 YEARS.
SO IF THEY COME TO US AND SAY, HEY, I'VE GOT THIS NEAT DEVELOPMENT THAT NEEDS, YOU KNOW, TWO FIVE, HOWEVER MUCH MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF INFRASTRUCTURE, OFFSITE INFRASTRUCTURE OR ON SITE LIKE A LIFT STATION, WE CAN TELL THEM WE DON'T HAVE IT ON THERE YET, BUT MAYBE WE'LL HAVE IT ON THERE IN FIVE OR SIX YEARS.
I MEAN, AND THAT'S THAT'S NOT A GOOD CUSTOMER SERVICE ANSWER.
DRAINAGE WOULD HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS OFFSITE, HOW TO TAKE A 300 HOME SUBDIVISION AND GET THE DRAINAGE TO AN EXISTING LOCATION WHERE IT DOESN'T IMPACT THE NEIGHBORS.
SO DRAINAGE WOULD BE A MAJOR ISSUE IN THERE, SANITARY SEWER.
A BIGGER ISSUE AND THEN THIRD ON THAT LIST WOULD BE WATER, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXIST AROUND THE PROPERTY, BUT NOT THROUGH THE PROPERTY.
SO IT'S, I KNOW THAT'S NOT A DETAILED ANSWER, BUT IT GETS YOU TO THE POINT WHERE IT'S A NEGOTIATION OF WHO'S PAYING FOR WHAT AND FOR YOU AS ELECTED OFFICIALS, THEN THAT BECOMES A COMPETITIVE THING WITHIN THE CIP.
IS IS IT SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM OR THE OTHER NEEDS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED? THANK YOU, FLOYD.
ALL RIGHT, DO WE WANT TO HEAR FROM ANYBODY ELSE? SHOULD WE LET REBUTTALS HAPPEN? WE'VE GONE A LONG TIME ON THIS ISSUE.
IF I LET YOU, PASTOR MOORE, I HAVE TO LET EVERYBODY.
I JUST WANT TO CLEAR UP SOMETHING THAT MR. GASSAWAY SAID THAT YOU AS A COUNCIL YOURSELF KNOW.
THAT THE NORTH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE EVER SINCE YOU ALL HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE.
WE'VE HAD A RELATIONSHIP WITH YOU ALL ALL THAT TIME TO SOME OF THE MEETINGS.
OUR MEETINGS ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC EVERY THURSDAY.
SO HE JUST CAME TO TOWN AND TO SAY THAT WE JUST POPPED UP THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS WRONG BECAUSE THIS COUNCIL IF ANYBODY KNOWS WE'VE BEEN WITH YOU MORE THAN WE HAVE ANYBODY.
SO HE CAME DOWN A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AND DIDN'T MAKE OUR MEETINGS.
WE WORKED ON PLANS WITH SAUER.
YOU KNOW, THAT WAS THE HOSPITAL.
SO JUST STAND UP HERE AND SAY THAT WE DON'T SPEAK FOR NORTH AMARILLO IS THAT'S NOT A TRUE STATEMENT.
WE DEVELOPED THE NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SO WE COULD HAVE ONE VOICE SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE 100 FOLKS COMING FOR YOU TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY WE DID IT THAT WAY.
AND HE WAS IN THE MEETINGS WE HAD, HE WAS INVITED COVID CUT US BACK, ALL OF US BACK ON INVITING PEOPLE WE COULD MEET IN NUMBERS LIKE THAT.
SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WE DO SPEAK FROM NORTH AMARILLO AND THIS COUNCIL KNOWS THAT.
OK, WHO WHO ELSE WOULD LIKE TO COME TO THE PODIUM AS A REBUTTAL? COME ON, MR. GASSAWAY.
MILDRED, I'LL GET YOU AFTER TIM.
FIRST OF ALL, LET ME SAY, MR. GASSAWAY IN PARTICULAR.
IN 2017, I WAS PRESIDENT OF THE NORTH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
I GOT DEPLOYED TO HOUSTON TO WORK HURRICANE HARVEY.
I WENT TO MR. GASSAWAY PERSONALLY WITH THE COPY OF THE PLAN IN MY HAND AND ASKED HIM IF HE WOULD STEP IN AND HELP DEVELOP THE PLAN.
THAT HAD BEEN PRINTED OUT AND GIVEN TO US.
BUT I ALLOWED HIM TO KEEP THE BOOK.
[INAUDIBLE] SHE WAS PART OF THE PLANNING WHEN WE HAD THE FIRST PEOPLE, OH WHAT WAS HIS NAME? KELLY SHAW.
SHE WAS AT THE MEETINGS, SEVERAL PEOPLE WAS AT THE MEETINGS.
EARLY ON, THE KICK OFF NIGHT, IT WAS STANDING ROOM ONLY IN THE CULTURE CENTER.
STANDING ROOM ONLY KICKOFF NIGHT, THOSE TWO COLUMNS OF COMMITTED PEOPLE YOU SEE IN THAT BOOK, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY ARE.
KELLY SENT EMAILS, A CALL FROM HOUSTON.
[03:55:04]
Y'ALL THEY'RE HAVING A MEETING TONIGHT, BE SURE TO GO.THE LAST MEETING THAT WAS HELD FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THEY TOLD ME IT WAS LESS THAN FIVE PEOPLE THAT ATTENDED, LESS THAN FIVE PEOPLE ATTENDED THE FINAL PLANNING FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
SO HOW DO YOU GET PEOPLE OUT, YOU INVITE THEM, THEY DON'T COME, YOU CAN'T MAKE THEM.
YOU CAN'T TELL GROWN PEOPLE WHAT TO DO.
IF THEY DON'T COME, THEY DON'T COME AND IF YOU'RE NOT THERE AT THE TABLE, THEN YOU DON'T HAVE A VOICE.
AND WHEN THE VOICE HAS BEEN SOUNDED, OH, THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE DOING, I DON'T LIKE THAT THEY DIDN'T INVITE ME.
THANK YOU, MR. TURNER, I PUT YOU ON DECK FOR NEXT, PLEASE, SIR.
SURE, MISS CROWE, YOU'LL BE NEXT AFTER MR. TURNER.
AN ATTACK ON ANYONE, I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, LIKE I SAID, I'M TRYING TO BRING THE COMMUNITY TOGETHER.
IT'S NOT ABOUT I MEAN, WE CAN GO, HE SAID.
SHE SAID THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT POSITIVE.
THAT'S NOT GOING TO HELP US HERE.
MY ANYBODY WHO REALLY KNOWS ME, I'M A OVER COMMITTER I HARDLY EVER TURN DOWN AN OPPORTUNITY TO HELP OUT.
BUT PART AND THE OTHER PART, I'VE BEEN BACK IN AMARILLO, TEXAS SINCE 2013.
LIKE I SAID, THE PERMANENTLY WHERE I CHANGED MY ACTUAL PHYSICAL ADDRESS AND MY VOTING AND EVERYTHING.
IN 2013, I ALSO CREATED THE AMARILLO AREA BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
AND IT'S IT'S IN WE ARE A VERY NEUTRAL BODY BECAUSE WE'RE REALLY ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ZONING.
IN THIS CASE, IT'S AFFECTING OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
I'VE GOT LIKE I TELL YOU, I'VE GOT GUYS OUT THERE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET HURT BY THIS.
AND THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TODAY.
I'M WILLING TO DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR AMARILLO PERIOD, AND THAT'S NOT JUST NORTH HEIGHTS.
AND LIKE I TOLD YOU, THERE IS DIVISION AND I HOPE ONE DAY WE CAN SMOOTH OUT OUR DIFFERENCES BECAUSE I'M NOT.
THEY'RE MY NEIGHBORS AND A LOT OF SITUATIONS.
LET'S HEAL IT, HEALING IT IS GOING TO BE GETTING EVERYONE BACK TO THE TABLE AND DOING IT CORRECTLY.
I WAS LIVING IN AMARILLO, I HAVE PROPERTY HERE.
ME AND MY SISTER MY MOTHER HAVE BUSINESSES HERE.
I DROVE HERE LAST NIGHT AT 9:30.
MY MAIN CONCERN RIGHT NOW IS THE SON WHO IS I'M A FIRST TIME PARENT, TWO YEAR OLD SON.
AND WHAT I'M SEEING TODAY IS HARD.
MY MOTHER SAID TO ME, YOU KNOW, WHAT STAYS WHAT HAPPENS IN OUR HOME STAYS IN OUR HOME.
YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY SAD THAT WE ARE DISENFRANCHISED AND DIVIDED ABOUT THE BETTERMENT OF OUR COMMUNITY.
YOU ALL WANT TO ASSIST US AND HELP US IN THE BETTERMENT OF OUR COMMUNITY.
YES, WE ARE UPSET ABOUT THE PROCESS.
YES, WE FEEL SOME THINGS ARE BEING TAKEN FROM US.
WHAT WAS HAPPENING, I DON'T KNOW.
I MET MR. TIM AND MS. MILDRED AND I SPOKE WITH HER.
AT WHAT'S GOING ON THE ARGUING.
I SAID WE SHOULDN'T BRING THIS TO YOUR DOORSTEP.
THIS SHOULDN'T EVEN BE AN ISSUE.
THE ISSUE SHOULD BE WHAT WE'RE SEEKING TO DO, THE BETTERMENT OF OUR COMMUNITY.
MY WHOLE THING WAS WHEN I FIRST HEARD ABOUT IT, I SAID, WHAT IS THE INTENT? I WANT TO KNOW THE INTENT.
IF YOU ALL MEANT WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT, BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS BEEN PEOPLE COME IN, THEY TAKE AND THEY BUILD.
I WON'T OWN A HOME IN THIS COMMUNITY.
I WON'T OWN A SHOP IN THIS COMMUNITY.
THIS [INAUDIBLE] MONEY FOR ONE CASE HAVE BEEN PULLED FROM.
BANK ACCOUNTS, YOU KNOW, TO BUY THESE PROPERTIES.
YOU KNOW, I WANT TO GIVE THIS TO MY SON.
I WANT TO GIVE THIS TO MY CHILD.
WHAT ABOUT SAYING, WELL, IT WAS THIS IT WAS WORTH THIS.
ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S WORTH THIS.
WE WORK FOR THIS AND THIS IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.
NOT JUST ME AS AN INDIVIDUAL, NOT JUST ME AS INDIVIDUALS
[04:00:01]
[INAUDIBLE].YOU KNOW, AMARILLO, BEEN HERE ALMOST MY ENTIRE LIFE.
I LOOK AT NORTH HEIGHTS I WANT TO SEE CHANGE THERE, I WANT TO SEE CHANGE.
BUT THE CHANGE WILL NOT BE BROUGHT ABOUT BY YOU ALL.
IT HAS TO BE US AS A COLLECTIVE.
THE PEOPLE LIVE TO MAKE THE CHANGE.
THAT'S HOW IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
WE NEED THE RESOURCES THAT YOU ALL HAVE, THE EXPERTISE THAT YOU ALL HAVE.
ME PERSONALLY, LET ME INTRODUCE ME TO A BANKER SO I CAN MAKE SOME DEALS, TO BE HONEST, YOU KNOW, BUT THIS IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.
BUT I'M JUST REALLY I'M HEART WRENCHED BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE THE I DON'T LIKE WHAT'S HAPPENING.
I DON'T LIKE TO SEE MR. MOORE LEAVE.
I DON'T WANT TO SEE US ATTACKING EACH OTHER.
WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING THIS ABOUT THIS ISSUE THAT HURTS ME.
I'M TALKING TO EVERYBODY LISTENING AND EVERYBODY HERE, MS. MILDRED.
I SPOKE WITH HER, I SPOKE WITH THIS LADY, I KNOW WHERE SHE LIVES.
MS. [INAUDIBLE], WE [INAUDIBLE] EATING LUNCH.
MR. TIM MR. MOORE, AND THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE CONCERNED [INAUDIBLE] THIS IS SAD.
MR. GUTIERREZ AND MR. [INAUDIBLE].
I JUST WANT TO INTERJECT THAT THIS WHOLE PROCESS HAS BECOME VERY TIRING MENTALLY.
IT HAS BEGAN TO AFFECT PEOPLE LIKE THIS GENTLEMAN JUST SAID.
WE HAVE DIVISION IN THE COMMUNITY.
THE PROCESS OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS NOT TO DIVIDE THE COMMUNITIES OR THE CITY, BUT TO BRING US TOGETHER IN UNITY AND PROGRESS, GO FORWARD.
THE DIFFERENT AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN SET OUT FOR MARKED OFF INSIDE OF OUR COMMUNITY FOR ZONING.
REZONING IS NOT GOING TO IMPROVE THE COMMUNITY.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BRING REVENUE TO THE COMMUNITY.
IT HAS BROUGHT THE DIVISION TO THE COMMUNITY.
AND SO NOW WE'RE IN A SITUATION WHERE NOT ONLY ARE WE NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE ZONING, BUT WE HAVE DIVISION IN OUR COMMUNITY.
I THINK THAT WE SHOULD START OVER AGAIN AND THAT EVERYBODY THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED SHOULD BE AT THE TABLE, THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
AND I THINK THAT ANY OTHER WAY THAT YOU ADDRESS THIS IS GOING TO BE UNFAIR AND IT'S GOING TO KEEP DIVISION GOING.
I'VE BEEN WORKING IN THIS COMMUNITY AND NORTH HEIGHTS COMMUNITY SINCE I WAS 18 WHEN THEY FIRST BUILT THE NORTH BRANCH YMCA, WHICH IS NOW THE [INAUDIBLE] CENTER.
I'VE RUN FOR CITY COMMISSIONER IN 2008 UNDER [INAUDIBLE] DEBORAH MCHEART.
I HAVE ACTIVELY PUT MY TIME INTO MY COMMUNITY.
AND WHAT'S GOING ON NOW IS NOT RIGHT.
AND IT NEEDS TO BE REVISITED AND READDRESSED.
AND I THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME.
I THINK THAT THE WERE THERE MOST OF THEM ARE GONE.
I THINK THEY'VE DONE A GOOD JOB.
I'M NOT AGAINST THE CITY COMMISSION.
I THINK YOU ALL ARE DOING A GOOD JOB.
BUT LET'S NOT GO BACKWARDS ON ONE ISSUE, WHICH IS THE ISSUE OF DEALING WITH NORTH HEIGHTS IN AMARILLO IN THE ZONING.
LET'S WORK TOGETHER AND LET'S PUT OURSELVES IN THE OTHER PERSON'S PLACE.
IF YOUR PROPERTY WAS BEING ADDRESSED LIKE THIS, YOU WOULD BE ACTING THE SAME WAY THAT WE ARE ACTING.
MY PROPERTY IS BEING AFFECTED BY THIS, BUT I'M NOT ANGRY ABOUT IT.
I'M NOT AGAINST WHAT THEY ARE DOING FOR ME BECAUSE IT'S UPGRADING MY PROPERTY.
BUT I'M STANDING IN OPPOSITION WITH THE OTHER MEMBERS OF MY COMMUNITY THAT OWNS PROPERTY THAT ARE NOT GETTING A FAIR DEAL AND DID NOT GET A CHANCE TO COME TO THE TABLE AND VOICE THEIR OPINION.
WE DON'T NEED TO STOP, BUT WE DO NEED TO START OVER AND DO IT AGAIN.
A LOT OF PEOPLE SAY, WELL, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY WASTED SO MUCH MONEY PRINTING UP MATERIAL AND SETTING UP MEETINGS AND DOING ALL THE, WELL.
BIG HOLE THEY GOT IN THE GROUND.
BUT THE CITY'S WORKING AROUND IT TO FIX IT.
WELL, THIS IS A MISTAKE AND IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED.
IT NEEDS TO BE STOPPED BEFORE IT GOES ANY FURTHER, BECAUSE IF IT GOES ANY FURTHER, I DON'T THINK THAT THE COMMUNITY WILL EVER COME BACK TOGETHER AGAIN.
AND THAT'S THE IMPORTANT THING.
MR. [INAUDIBLE] OR MR. GUTIERREZ.
YOU CAN GO NEXT AND THEN WE'LL LET MR. [INAUDIBLE] CLOSE US OUT.
MY CONCERN IS THIS WHAT HAPPENED TO US, TO THE SPANISH GUYS, BECAUSE WE I MEAN, WE BUY PROPERTIES OVER THERE AND WE START FIXING UP WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO US BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY FOR COMPANIES TO GO FIX OUR HOUSE.
AND THEY GIVE US A DAY A DEADLINE TO FIX WHEN YOU START SOMETHING.
[04:05:05]
SO MY QUESTION IS, WHAT HAPPENED TO US? AS A AS A BUSINESS OWNER, MR. GUTIERREZ IS THAT YOUR? A BUSINESS OWNER AND THE BUILDER A BUILDER, TOO, BECAUSE I LIKE TO DO MY STUFF ON MY OWN.I EVEN HAVE A COMMERCIAL LICENSE BUILDER.
AND I'M A SMALL, SMALL BUSINESS.
AND I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE, A LOT OF SPANISH GUYS, THEY SMALL BUSINESS, THEY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO BUY IT.
I MEAN, TO BIG, BIG COMPANIES TO WORK.
SO MY QUESTION IS, WHAT HAPPENED TO US WHEN EVERYTHING IF IS GOING TO CHANGE EVERYTHING? MR. CITY ATTORNEY, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION ABOUT THAT? FEEL FREE TO ASK HIM A FOLLOW UP QUESTION IF YOU NEED TO.
IF YOU COULD RESTATE IT AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO SAY GENERALLY SOMETHING AND YOU TAKE IT ONE WAY, JUST RESTATE WHAT YOU SAID AGAIN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
I SAID WHAT HAPPENED TO US? IF YOU GUYS DO THE CHANGE THAT FOR YOU AS THE REZONE.
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY A BIG COMPANY TO BUILD SOMETHING.
BECAUSE YOU GUYS GIVE A DEADLINE TO FINISH A PROJECT.
GOING TO GIVE US LIKE SIX MONTHS IF YOU'VE GOT A HOUSE BURNING AND YOU ASKING ME SIX MONTHS TO REBUILD THE HOUSE AND I DON'T HAVE THE MONEY.
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO US? I THINK ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT WHAT A CONFORMING OR NONCONFORMING USE IS? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ME? OK.
ALL RIGHT, NO A CONFORMING FOR SOMETHING TO BE NONCONFORMING.
YOU HAVE TO ABANDON THAT USE IF YOU'RE ACTIVELY WORKING TOWARDS IT.
SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS DRIVEN BY OTHER DEADLINES, IN MY OPINION.
YEAH, SO THAT MAY BE OUT OF YOUR CONTROL.
SHORT LINES, I MEAN, SHORT DEADLINES TO US.
WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A NONCONFORMING USE THAT'S TERMINATING, IN MY OPINION.
SO ANDREA AND EMILY, IS WHAT BRIAN'S SAYING ACCURATE WITH REGARD TO THE DRAFT ZONING ORDINANCE? SO A FIRE DOES NOT TRIGGER THE BEGINNING OF THE CLOCK.
I MEAN, ANY CHANGE WE MAKE IN OUR PROPERTIES.
I MEAN, WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY.
WELL, IF YOU IF THE VALUE OF THE REPAIRS GOES BEYOND 50 PERCENT OF THE VALUE OF THE OF THE OF THE PROUD VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AND YEAH IT WILL TRIGGER THE CONFORMANCE TO THE NEW ZONE, TO THE CURRENT ZONING CODE.
SO YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO THE FIRE BY THE TIMING DOESN'T TRIGGER THE SIX MONTHS.
HOWEVER, THE VALUE OF THE REPAIRS COULD.
SO IS THAT ANDREW, EMILY, IS THERE ANYTHING I SAID THERE THAT'S INCORRECT? ANYTHING ELSE? DO YOU HAVE ANY FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS MR. GUTIERREZ? SAY IT AGAIN? DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THAT? I'M JUST GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT ABOUT DIVIDING ABOUT DIVIDING PEOPLE IN THE AREA.
A COUPLE DAYS AGO, SOMEBODY I'VE GOT A TIRE SHOP OVER THERE IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO AFFECT MY TIRE SHOP, BUT MY BUSINESS GO DOWN TO 50 PERCENT AND SOMEBODY PUT OUT RAISES LATER BEHIND MY APARTMENT, MY HOTEL, WHATEVER.
AND I DON'T WANT TO POINT PEOPLE, BUT THEY TRIED TO DIVIDE PEOPLE, IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE SIGN, I MEAN, THIS REALLY STRONG SIGN, IF YOU LIKE TO SEE IT.
WELL, I THINK HOW IS THAT RELATED TO THIS TOPIC THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE? MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD, I GUESS, SEND US.
OK, THANK YOU, THANK YOU FOR THAT, MR. TURNER.
YEAH, I SEE IT SO I THINK WE SEE THE DIVISION AND WE KNOW THAT IT'S SOMETHING IT'S A CHALLENGE, IT'S A REAL CHALLENGE.
I DON'T KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE PEOPLE SINCE I STARTED MY BUSINESS OVER THERE.
I JUST TRY TO HELP EVERYBODY ELSE.
AND THAT'S WHEN EVERYTHING WHEN I FIND OUT THEY'RE REZONING, I EVEN TALK TO THE LEADERS.
IF YOU GUYS DO THE RIGHT THING, I DON'T I DON'T MIND TO LOSE VALUE ON MY PROPERTY.
BECAUSE WHAT I KNOW ABOUT THE ABOVE REZONE IS THEY'RE GOING TO STOP PEOPLE TO
[04:10:01]
COME AND INVEST IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.SO MY PROPERTY AND MY AND MY SELL IT TO WAL-MART AND THEY BUY IT FROM ME FOR A GOOD PRICE, BUT IF THEY DO A REZONE, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO COME AND ASK FOR MY PROPERTY TO SAY, I WANT TO BUY YOUR PROPERTY.
AND LET ME JUST BE VERY SPECIFIC, THAT'S NOT OK, WHAT YOU JUST SHOWED US A PICTURE OF, NONE OF US THINK THAT'S OK.
IT IS NOT OK WHETHER YOU'RE FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM OR YOU'RE AGAINST THIS AGENDA ITEM.
MOST BECAUSE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WE HAVE 60 PERCENT OF THE HISPANIC PEOPLE IN THE BACK OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
OK, THANK YOU, MR. GUTIERREZ, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME HERE TODAY.
AND YOU KNOW ME, I LOVE YOU, I RESPECT YOU, THIS IS THIS HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN HARD UPON US.
BUT IT DON'T MATTER TO BLACKS BECAUSE WE KILL EACH OTHER FASTER THAN ANY RACE ON THE FACE OF THIS EARTH, AND THAT'S A THAT'S A TRAVESTY.
I WAS SPEAKING ABOUT MR. GUTIERREZ SAID.
RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM THE BLACK CULTURE CENTER IS WHERE HIS PROPERTY IS.
I'M NOT SAYING THEY DID IT, BUT I'M SAYING IT RIGHT DOWN THE STREET.
THAT THAT SIGN DIDN'T SHOW UP UNTIL WE STARTED, STARTED THIS DEBATE AND IT SAYS IS [EXPLETIVE] GO HOME.
I REMEMBER WHEN EMMETT TILL GOT KILLED.
I KNOW WHAT HE'S GOING THROUGH.
I'VE GOT ENEMIES IN THIS CITY THAT I NEVER HAD, ALL BECAUSE I WAS STANDING UP FOR MY RIGHTS AND FOR MY PROPERTY.
AND THAT'S A TERRIBLE THING, THAT BUS RIDE THAT YOU ALL TOOK.
I WISH YOU WERE LET LET US TAKEN YOU ON A BUS RIDE.
IT WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC MR. [INAUDIBLE].
YOU COULD HAVE BEEN ON THE BUS.
WE WOULD JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT.
WELL, WE FOLLOWED PROCEDURE AND THERE WERE CITIZENS ON THE BUS WITH US.
AND IF I COULD HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE CITIZENS, I'D LIKE TO SIT RIGHT BESIDE YOU, BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT I WOULD HAVE SHOWED YOU? NOW, LET'S DON'T TALK SEMANTICS OR OPINION.
THIS IS WHAT I WANT TO SHOW YOU ALL DOWN THAT BOULEVARD.
ALL OF THOSE WHITE PEOPLE THAT OWN BUSINESSES IS MAKING MAD MONEY.
BUT WHEN YOU GO ALL THE WAY ALL THE WAY DOWN THAT BOULEVARD, YOU DON'T HAVE NO BLACKS JUST MAKING MAD MONEY.
RIGHT THERE ON THE CORNER OF HUGHES AND AMARILLO BOULEVARD, THERE'S A STORE THAT'S OWNED BY GREG MITCHELL.
AND THIS STORE SALES, ALL KIND OF BOOZE.
AND I WATCHED I WATCHED PEOPLE STUMBLE OUT OF THAT STORE WITH BOOZE THAT HE SOLD.
ALL I'M ASKING YOU TO DO IS LOOK AT IT FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE.
HOW COME WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF THAT BIG MONEY? YOU KNOW WHAT THE REAL ANSWER WOULD BE IS THAT WE'RE THE DON'T NOBODY WANT TO TALK ABOUT REPARATIONS.
WE DON'T MAKE ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.
A TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.
LIKE LIKE OUR CITY MANAGER, HE MAKES OVER TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR.
WE DON'T MAKE THAT KIND OF MONEY.
WE WE WE BARELY GOT A POT TO PEE IN, OR ONE TO THROW IT OUT.
AND WE'RE DOING THE BEST WE CAN WITH WHAT WE HAVE TO WORK WITH.
ALL WE'RE ASKING YOU TO DO IS LEAVE US ALONE.
THOSE OF US THAT HAVE BUSINESSES, OUR LITTLE BUSINESS, WHAT WE DO, LEAVE US ALONE.
FOR 20 YEARS, MY BUSINESS HAS BEEN THERE AND I HAVE BOTHERED NOBODY BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU ATTACKING ME.
LIKE I SAID, IF IT WAS YOUR HOTELS, THE PROPERTIES THAT YOU HAD AND IT WAS ATTACKING YOU, YOU'D BE RIGHT HERE JUST LIKE ME.
OK, HAVE I MISSED ANYBODY WHO WANTED TO GIVE A REBUTTAL? OK, GOOD.
ANYTHING ELSE WE WANT TO DISCUSS, OR IS THERE A MOTION? ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE A MAIN MOTION? TURN YOUR MICROPHONE ON.
[04:15:14]
OK.I DON'T HAVE A MOTION, I'D LIKE TO TABLE THIS TO A FUTURE MEETING.
BRYAN, TELL US WHAT THE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE IS FOR TABLING AN ITEM.
IF THIS COUNCIL WANTS TO TABLE IT, YOU'LL HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THE ITEM AND A SECOND AND VOTE ON IT.
IF THAT HAPPENS, THEN IT WILL COME UP AT THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING AND WILL BE ON YOUR AGENDA FOR ACTION, THAT'S WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
OK, SO PROCEDURALLY, YOU HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION.
I HEREBY MOVE WE TABLE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING.
DOES COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH'S MOTION HAVE A SECOND.
IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING.
AT THIS TIME, I'LL GO BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH AND GIVE HIM THE FIRST SHOT AT JUST TALKING ABOUT, I GUESS, YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE MOTION.
WHAT BENEFIT WOULD WE RECEIVE BY TABLING IT? WELL, WE HAVE TIME TO ABSORB A LOT OF THE STUFF THAT WE'VE HEARD ANYBODY HEAR ME? I CAN HEAR YOU.
WE WOULD HAVE TIME TO THINK ABOUT ALL THIS.
DO YOU NEED MORE INFORMATION? NO.
I UNDERSTAND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN WHAT WE DO WELL WITH OUR STAFF IS IS UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, MULTIFAMILY SITS NEXT TO R2 AND THAT, YOU KNOW, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL NEEDS TO BE IN A DIFFERENT SPOT.
THAT IS NOT WHAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO DO HERE.
WE DON'T HAVE A ZONING PROBLEM IN THE NORTH HEIGHTS.
WE HAVE A COMMUNITY DIVISION IN THE NORTH HEIGHTS PROBLEM RIGHT NOW.
AND I THINK THAT THE REZONE IS JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO DIVIDE THAT COMMUNITY.
I THINK THAT IF WE'RE LISTENING AND HEARING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, WE GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY BY TABLING THIS FOR TWO WEEKS OR FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME, IF NEEDED, TO LET YOU COME BACK TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY AND DO YOUR JOB BETTER, WHICH IS WHAT THE GENTLEMAN SAID, THAT THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PRESENTED IN A WAY WHERE I COULD VOTE FOR OR AGAINST THE PRACTICALITY OF A ZONING PLAN AS PRESENTED VERY WELL BY THE CITY AND DRAWN OUT FOR A MASTER PLAN.
I'M LISTENING TO DIVISION IN A COMMUNITY NOT LOOKING AT R.F.
I LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY OF LETTING YOU GUYS DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IN YOUR COMMUNITY AND THEN BRINGING IT BACK AT A LATER DATE.
WHAT DO YOU THINK CAN GET ACCOMPLISHED OR WHAT TIMEFRAME DO YOU THINK THAT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED IN? I'M NOT VERY OPTIMISTIC WITH WHERE WE ARE TODAY, I DON'T FEEL LIKE YOU'VE GOTTEN AS MUCH OF THE WORK DONE AS IS STILL LEFT ON THAT HOG.
SO I FEEL LIKE YOU PROBABLY HAVE SOME WORK TO DO.
I WOULD TELL YOU, I THINK THIS WILL TAKE MONTHS.
DO YOU THINK IT CAN EVER BE ACCOMPLISHED THAT EVERYONE CAN AGREE WITH THE PLAN? NO.
I'M ASKING COUNCIL MEMBER STANLEY, BECAUSE I THINK HE'S MAKING A GOOD POINT.
IT IS ALWAYS A GOOD IDEA TO WORK FOR CONSENSUS.
AND, YOU KNOW, THIS HAS BEEN MORE THAN A YEAR OF WORK.
SO I'M WONDERING HOW MUCH MORE TIME.
I DON'T FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY THAT'S ON BOARD WITH THIS.
I FEEL LIKE IT'S PRETTY DIVIDED, 50/50.
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT WITH GIVEN MORE TIME THE OUTCOME COULD BE MUCH CLOSER TO A 80/20 90/10.
AND I THINK THAT THAT BEING PRESENTED PUTS YOU AND I IN THE ROLE THAT WE SHOULD SIT IN, THAT WE NEED TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON WHAT'S BETTER FOR OUR CAUSE IN A COMMUNITY BASED ON THE OVERALL WHOLE.
BUT RIGHT NOW, I THINK WE'RE HEARING AS MUCH ON BOTH SIDES.
OTHER PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION TO TABLE.
JUST A MOTION JUST FOR PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE PURPOSES, A MOTION TO TABLE MEANS IT'S GOING TO COME UP.
IF YOU WANT TO POSTPONE IT TO A CERTAIN TIME, THEN THE CORRECT MOTION IS A MOTION TO POSTPONE.
[04:20:01]
WE DO WANT THAT EVERY TIME.SO I'M GOING TO PUT MY STUFF OUT THERE BECAUSE IF WE TABLE IT, AND WE BRING IT UP IN TWO WEEKS.
I WANT TO BE I WANT TO BE COGNIZANT OF SO I WANT TO BE COGNIZANT OF WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS ARE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I ALSO FEEL THAT PART OF OUR ROLES WERE SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AT THIS IN SOMEWHAT OF A PROTECTIVE WAY.
AND ANYTHING THAT EVER SHOWS THIS PORTION OVER HERE NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL LEFT AS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, I'LL NEVER VOTE FOR IT.
I'M JUST GOING TO TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, I'LL NEVER VOTE FOR IT.
I UNDERSTAND THAT HE THAT MR. CHAPMAN DOES NOT WANT R2 BETTER COME TO SOME SORT OF AN AGREEMENT BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR IL OR L1, I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, SO IF IT COMES BACK UP AND IT COMES BACK UP AND WE VOTE FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING, I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST IT.
BECAUSE IT'S NOT PROTECTIVE OF THE COMMUNITY.
YEAH, IT'S IMPORTANT TO HEAR THOSE CONCERNS AND WHEN YOU VERBALIZE THEM, IT GIVES US A CHANCE TO WORK ON THE SOLUTION.
AND AND I APPRECIATE PLANNING AND ZONING.
I MEAN, OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ZONING DEPARTMENT COMING BACK AND TRYING TO COME UP WITH AN ALTERNATIVE, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE IN THIS ASPECT THERE THEY ARE TRYING TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY AND PROVIDE FOR PROTECTION.
I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AROUND THE EDGE OF THAT PROPERTY, EVERYTHING AROUND THE EDGE OF THAT PROPERTY'S AGRICULTURAL.
I'D BE TEMPTED TO JUST SAY MOVE IT BACK TO AGRICULTURAL AND LET THEM WORK THROUGH THAT AT SOME POINT IN TIME.
BUT THAT WAY, AT LEAST AT LEAST IT'S NOT OUR TWO AND IT KEEPS IT PROTECTED, KEEPS THE PUBLIC PROTECTED AND LEAVES IT OPEN.
I REALIZE THAT HIGHLY CONSTRAINS THE USE OF IT.
MAYBE THAT'S WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN AND YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE A REAL GOOD PLAN ON WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WITH IT GOING FORWARD.
BUT A REAL GOOD PLAN DOES NOT INCLUDE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
SO TO PROCEDURALLY, THE WAY THAT WOULD HAPPEN IS THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO STAFF TO REWORK THAT, TO CONSIDER AGRICULTURAL ZONING, PREPARE THAT FOR P&Z AND HAVE THEM CONSIDER IT, MAKE A RECOMMENDATION BACK TO COUNCIL THAT WOULD INCLUDE THAT MODIFICATION.
IS THAT CORRECT? IT GOES BACK THROUGH P&Z.
IT GOES BACK THROUGH P&Z BECAUSE AG IS A LESS INTENSE CATEGORY THAN R2, WHICH IS.
UNLESS THEY CAN COME UP WITH AN AGREEMENT, IF YOU CAN COME UP TO AN AGREEMENT, IF YOU GUYS CAN COME UP WITH AN AGREEMENT THEN I'M MORE THAN HAPPY WITH THAT.
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M ONE VOTE.
IT COULD BE 4 1, BUT AND I'M FINE WITH THAT PART OF IT, BUT I WANT TO SEE THIS.
YES, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH COUNCIL MEMBER SAUER WITH RESPECTIVE TO MR. CHAPMAN'S LAND, BUT ALSO I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THE AREA THAT WAS IDENTIFIED THAT WAS SOUTH AND WEST OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS THAT WAS BASICALLY RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.
I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF EXCLUDING THAT PARTICULAR AREA FROM THE NORTH HEIGHTS PLAN IF I HEARD THAT CORRECTLY.
THE PART THAT'S SOUTHWEST OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS.
I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF TABLING OUR VOTE FOR TODAY BECAUSE THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN GOING ON NOW FOR THE LAST AT LEAST THREE TO FOUR YEARS.
AND I REALIZE THAT WE HAVE A CORE GROUP OF CITIZENS THAT HAVE BEEN HERE IN THE COUNCIL MEETING WITH US TODAY.
BUT THERE'S ALSO OTHER INDIVIDUALS WITHIN THE CITY WHO ARE IN FAVOR OF THE REZONING.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M GOING TO GET ANY MORE INFORMATION THAT'S GOING TO BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT I ALREADY HAVE.
I KNOW WE'VE SAT IN SEVERAL MEETINGS AND YOU KNOW MYSELF, PROBABLY MORE THAN OTHERS.
I HAVE BEEN IN THE MAJORITY OF THE MEETINGS FOR THE NORTH HEIGHTS ADVISORY ASSOCIATION, AS WELL AS THE MEETINGS THAT WERE CONDUCTED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING AND THEN
[04:25:01]
ALSO BY OUR PLANNING BY OUR CITY PLANNING STAFF AS WELL.I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT WITHIN THE NORTH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD, IT IS NOT PREDOMINANTLY AFRICAN-AMERICAN OR BLACK LIKE IT USED TO BE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD TODAY, IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIVERSE.
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE AFRICAN-AMERICAN, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE BLACK, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE HISPANIC, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ASIAN, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE WHITE.
SO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS VERY DIVERSE AND THERE ARE LOTS OF INDIVIDUALS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THAT OWN PROPERTY OR HAVE SOME SORT OF A BUSINESS WITHIN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
I THINK THE MAIN ISSUE OF WHAT I'VE SPECIFICALLY HEARD HERE TODAY IS THERE IS A LOT OF DIVISION AMONGST OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND POSTPONING THE REZONING INITIATIVE IS NOT GOING TO FIX THAT DIVISION BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE DIVIDED.
REGARDLESS, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE ON THIS SIDE THAT ARE AGAINST EACH OTHER AND PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE, THAT ARE AGAINST EACH OTHER.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT ANY NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT JUST THE NORTH HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD, I DON'T KNOW IF ANY NEIGHBORHOOD CAN REALLY COME TOGETHER AND BE 100 PERCENT.
I JUST DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING.
BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE SOMEONE OR SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE AGAINST.
I WISH YOU KNOW, I HAD A MAGIC WAND TO FIX THAT.
BUT SOMETIMES WE ARE OUR OWN WORST ENEMY WITH THAT GOES FOR ALL OF US.
I THINK I RELATE MOST WITH WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER STANLEY IS SAYING, I ABSOLUTELY WANT FOR PEOPLE TO BE IN AGREEMENT AND I WANT FOR OUR JOB TO BE EASY AND THAT WE CAN JUST CARRY FORWARD WHAT PEOPLE AGREE ON AND BRING.
THAT'S THE MOTION WE ALL WANT TO MAKE.
SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT PERSPECTIVE.
WHAT ABOUT THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL CONCERN? I RESONATE WITH WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL IS SAYING, THAT HAVING BEEN TO SOME OF THOSE PREVIOUS MEETINGS, I THINK WE HAVE TO BE REALISTIC ABOUT WHAT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED, WHAT WHAT CAN BE AGREED UPON.
AND I JUST WANT TO SAY IT STRIKES ME WHAT'S THE MAGNITUDE OF THIS.
THEY'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HASN'T BEEN ACCOMPLISHED FOR DECADES.
I MEAN, I'M VERY MOVED BY WHAT PASTOR MOORE SAYS.
AND HE SAID, YOU KNOW, WE JUST WANT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO LOOK LIKE OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY LOOK.
AND NOBODY'S EVER GOING TO AGREE 100 PERCENT ON HOW TO ACCOMPLISH THAT.
BUT I HESITATE TO DELAY FURTHER.
UNLESS STAFF TELLS US THERE IS A WAY TO.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF MR. SHANE HAS AN.
I MIGHT WANT MORE INFORMATION ON THAT, BUT I THINK WHAT WE HAVE PENDING RIGHT THIS MOMENT, THE MAIN MOTION IS TO TABLE, WHICH WOULD BRING IT BACK TO US TWO WEEKS FROM NOW.
MOTION AND ASK FOR TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT.
I DON'T THINK I NEED THAT TIME.
AND I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW THAT TWO WEEKS BUYS US THE TIME THAT YOU HAD IN MIND, COUNCIL MEMBER STANLEY, TO GIVE THE COMMUNITY MORE TIME TO WORK ON IT.
DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO SAY, COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH? WELL, PART OF THE REASON I WANTED TO TABLE IT FOR TWO WEEKS, WE'VE BEEN AT THIS A LONG TIME.
COMMUNITY HAS BEEN AT IT A LONG TIME.
I'VE GOT ANOTHER IMPORTANT MEETING THAT STARTS AT SIX, AND I NEED TO BE AT.
AND SO I'M GOING TO BE LEAVING PRETTY QUICK, OK? AND THAT'S PART OF MY PERSONAL ISSUE.
WHICH MAY SHOULDN'T BE PART OF IT.
I DON'T WANT TO DELAY FOR TWO MONTHS.
WE CAN TABLE IT FOR A WEEK AND COME BACK ON THIS ISSUE.
[04:30:02]
I THINK WE'VE GOT ANOTHER ISSUE WE NEED OK.IF IT WAS TABLED, COULD STAFF WORK ON THIS R2 ISSUE LIGHT COMMERCIAL AND COME BACK IN TWO WEEKS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS ON WHERE WE MIGHT COULD GO TO ADDRESS MR. CHAPMAN'S PROPERTY? I'M GOING TO HAVE TO ASK BRYAN TO CLARIFY, I THINK ANYTHING FROM THIS POINT ON, WE'LL HAVE TO RE NOTICE, SO THAT'LL BUILD IN THE TIME FRAME FROM WHEN WE CAN BRING IT BACK.
IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN YOU'RE OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS OF, I THINK, WHERE YOU'RE AT.
BUT IF NOT, WE CAN JUST BRING BACK NEXT MEETING.
THEN WE COULD PROBABLY BE READY IN TWO WEEKS IF IT'S NOT DOING THAT.
BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE TALKED TO CHAPMAN PERSONALLY AND HE DIDN'T HAVE A PLAN, SO IT COULD TAKE MONTHS TO COME UP WITH A PLAN.
ALL RIGHT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION I'M GOING TO ASK US TO VOTE BY RAISING OUR HANDS.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR OF TABLING THIS ITEM UNTIL TWO WEEKS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
OK, THREE FOR THE MOTION, TWO AGAINST THE MOTION, WE WILL TABLE THIS ITEM AND TAKE IT UP AGAIN IN TWO WEEKS.
OK, CAN YOU HOLD IT FOR JUST A SEC? OK, I'M SORRY TO ASK.
YEAH, I THINK WE'RE ALL FEELING IT.
[3.B. PUBLIC HEARING ON FISCAL YEAR 2021/2022 BUDGET This Budget will raise more revenue from property taxes than last year’s budget by $11,855,088 which is a 22.77% increase from last year’s budget. The property tax revenue to be raised from new property added to the tax roll this year is $767,321.]
ITEM 3B IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON FISCAL YEAR 2021 2022 BUDGET.OH, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY ACTION ON THIS ITEM IS JUST A PUBLIC HEARING, CORRECT.
[INAUDIBLE] IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
HE'S NOT BUT BY LAW WE HAVE TO TAKE THEM IN ORDER.
ISN'T THAT CORRECT, MR. CITY ATTORNEY? OR IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, YES.
HAS WE HAVE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER LAURA STORRS.
OK, THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
YOU ALL HAVE BEEN THROUGH DAYS AND DAYS OF BUDGET REVIEW.
AND SO THIS JUST SUMMARIZES KIND OF THE HIGH POINTS OF OUR 2021 PROPOSED BUDGET.
SO THIS PRESENTATION IS GOING TO ADDRESS ITEMS 3B AND 3C? THAT IS CORRECT, YES.
AND SO I WILL MAKE THIS PRESENTATION.
YOU ALL CAN DO THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN VOTE ON ITEM 3C AFTER THAT'S FINISHED.
SO IN THIS PROPOSED 21 22 BUDGET, WE HAVE INCLUDED INCREASED PARK SPENDING FOR ATHLETIC FIELDS, TRAILS, PLAYGROUNDS, MOWING SIDEWALK REPAIRS, PARK BENCHES AND MUCH MORE RELATED TO PARKS.
WE'VE ALSO INCLUDED INCREASED PUBLIC SAFETY FUNDING FOR ADDITIONAL POLICE OFFICERS AND ALSO FOR POLICE AND FIRE EQUIPMENT.
WE'VE INCREASED STREET FUNDING FOR POTHOLE REPAIRS AND STREET RESURFACING.
WE ALSO HAVE INCREASED SOLID WASTE FUNDING FOR A COMMUNITY CLEAN UP PROGRAM.
ALSO INCLUDED IN THIS BUDGET IS THE FINAL FUNDING FOR THE 2016 VOTER APPROVED PROPOSITION ONE STREET PROJECTS.
SO RECAPPING OUR EXPENDITURES, THE CURRENT YEAR 2020 2021 APPROVED BUDGET IS SET AT THREE HUNDRED AND NINETY TWO POINT SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS.
IF YOU WALK THAT FORWARD TO OUR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WE ARE INCREASING IT BY THIRTY ONE POINT SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS TO A TOTAL OF FOUR HUNDRED AND TWENTY FOUR POINT FOUR MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE 21 22 PROPOSED BUDGET.
AGAIN, JUST RECAPPING, WE HAVE ALL THE SAME CURRENT SERVICE LEVELS AS THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET, PLUS ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR PARKS, PUBLIC SAFETY STREETS, THE VOTER APPROVED PROPOSITION ONE PROJECTS AND MORE.
FROM A REVENUE STANDPOINT, THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET HAS THREE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY SIX
[04:35:04]
POINT SIX MILLION DOLLARS APPROVED FROM OUR REVENUE SIDE.AS YOU WALK THAT FORWARD, WE'VE INCREASED OUR REVENUE BUDGET BY EIGHTEEN POINT FIVE MILLION DOLLARS TO A TOTAL OF FOUR HUNDRED AND FIVE POINT ONE MILLION FOR THE 21 22 PROPOSED BUDGET.
SO BRIEFLY, LET'S JUST TALK ABOUT WHAT COMES NEXT.
SO, AS MENTIONED AFTER I CONCLUDE ON THIS COUNCIL WILL NEED TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET, THEN THE NEXT ITEM WILL BE TO DO THE FIRST READING ON THE ORDINANCE TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND TO RECORD THAT VOTE.
AND THEN ON AUGUST 13TH, THIS FRIDAY, WE HAVE A POSTED AGENDA FOR 1:00 P.M.
RIGHT BACK HERE AT CITY HALL FOR THE SECOND AND FINAL READING TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND TO RECORD THE VOTE ON IT.
WE HAVE ALSO INCLUDED INFORMATION ON THIS SCREEN.
IF YOU GO OUT TO W W W.AMARILLO.GOV/BUDGET, YOU CAN FIND MUCH MORE INFORMATION RELATED TO THE PROPOSED BUDGET.
AND AS A REMINDER, AND I THINK THERE WERE HOPEFULLY SOME OUT BY THE FRONT, WE DO HAVE A REALLY GOOD ONE PAGE SUMMARY OF THE TOTAL PROPOSED BUDGET.
IT'S FASCINATING TO TRY TO RECAP FOUR HUNDRED AND TWENTY FOUR MILLION DOLLARS IN ONE PAGE, BUT THIS IS PHENOMENAL.
THIS IS A GREAT INFORMATIONAL TOOL AND WE ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO GO OUT TO OUR WEBSITE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR.
WITH THAT, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CAN ANSWER OF COUNCIL? ANY QUESTIONS FOR LAURA? OK, THANK YOU, LAURA.
AT THIS TIME, WE'LL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER.
ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK FOR, ON OR AGAINST ITEM 3 B WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES AT THE PODIUM TO DO SO.
AND PROCEDURALLY, WE'LL START JEN WITH THE FOLKS WHO'VE SIGNED UP AND THEN WE'LL OPEN IT UP AFTER THAT.
SO I'LL PASS THE MICROPHONE TO YOU.
OK, THE FIRST SPEAKER IS JESSE FREMURE AND AFTER THAT IS JAMES SCHANK.
AND THAT IS ALL THAT WE HAVE SIGNED UP.
JESSE FREMURE, 5723 SOUTH MILAM.
WOW, WHAT AN INTERESTING AFTERNOON.
I DO HAVE SOME DOCUMENTS HERE.
IT'S BASICALLY A LITTLE HISTORY OF THE PAST EIGHT YEARS.
OF THAT, WE'VE BEEN EXPERIENCING AS CITIZENS OF AMARILLO AND IN REGARDS TO CHOICES MADE BY OUR COUNCIL AND SPENDING MONEY, AND THIS LITTLE HISTORY IS JUST TO SAY TO YOU, AS A CITIZEN OVER 65, I AM NOT IMPACTED BY THE COST FROM THE PROPERTY TAX VALUE.
I WILL ONLY BE AFFECTED BY THE COST TO MY BUSINESSES HERE IN TOWN BECAUSE THEY WILL HAVE TO FUND THIS INCREASE IN COSTS AT THEIR BUSINESSES, WHICH WILL BE REFLECTED IN THEIR COST TO ME AS A PURCHASER, AS A CONSUMER.
AND IN THAT REGARD, I WILL BE HAVING TO PAY MORE SALES TAX.
AND IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET THAT SHE'S TALKED ABOUT, I HAVE THE LARGER PRODUCTION OF IT THAT SHE DOES HAVE A DEFINITION OF 45 PERCENT FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, 27 PERCENT FOR THE LET'S SEE IS THAT THE AC.
IT'S THE COUNTY THAT'S THE COUNTY.
OK, NOW, HOW IS THE COUNTY, RANDALL AND POTTER.
I WOULD THINK RANDALL WOULD BE LESS THAN POTTER.
BUT ANYWAY, I WAS AT THE AC MEETING TODAY AND THEY CUT THEIR COSTS BECAUSE THEY RECEIVED PROPERTY VALUE INCREASES.
SO THEY WERE ACTUALLY ABLE TO LOWER THEIR RATE ON THE AC BECAUSE OF THE INCREASE IN PROPERTY VALUATION.
SO I WOULD HAVE BEEN APPROVING YOUR TWO CENTS FOR THE BOND ELECTION 2016, BUT I CAN'T GO ANY FARTHER THAN THAT BECAUSE YOU'VE ALREADY RECEIVED THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE.
SO MY SENTIMENTS ARE THAT I APPRECIATE YOUR INTEREST IN TRYING TO IMPROVE THESE OTHER ASPECTS, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT HOW WE CAN CUT SOME COSTS, SOME PLACE, BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN SPENDING MONEY LIKE WE'RE BANDITS.
THIRTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS HERE.
SIXTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS HERE WHEN IT WAS SOLD.
IT WAS GOING TO BE A 38 MILLION DOLLAR PROJECT.
THESE ARE KINDS OF THINGS THAT I'VE BEEN WATCHING AND I HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST EIGHT YEARS WITH AN INCREASE OF OUR ENTERPRISE MONEY.
OUR ENTERPRISE MONEY HAS GONE UP DRAMATICALLY OVER IT RUNS ABOUT THREE AND A HALF PERCENT ANNUALLY.
AND THAT'S IMPACTING MY RETAIL PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY PAY MORE ON A LOT OF THAT ENTERPRISE MONEY THAN I DO AS A PROPERTY OWNER AND RESIDENT.
SO IN THAT REGARD, THAT'S MY CONFUSION ABOUT THIS INCREASED BUDGET.
[04:40:03]
I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SEE US FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN QUIT SPENDING MONEY ON THINGS WE DID NOT INITIALLY TALK ABOUT, LIKE TEN MILLION DOLLARS FOR THREE WAREHOUSES AND THEN RENOVAT ING SOME OF THEM FOR THE PURPOSE OR EVEN TAKEN DOWN THE CITY HALL, BECAUSE WE WANT TO BUILD AN ARENA ON THAT SPOT.I WISH YOU WOULD QUIT DOING THOSE THINGS AND JUST PAY FOR THE THINGS THAT WE NEED.
AND THAT IS PARKS AND RECREATION NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED.
BASEBALL, SOFTBALL, DIAMONDS NEED TO BE IMPROVED.
BUT THAT'S BEEN A PROBLEM FOR THE LAST TWENTY YEARS BECAUSE I WAS A SOFTBALL OFFICIAL, SO I KNOW WHAT THAT'S LIKE.
BUT AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THAT WAS AWESOME WHAT YOU HAD ON THAT LAST MISSION.
UP NEXT IS JAMES SCHANK, AND THAT'S ALL THAT WE HAVE SIGNED UP.
MAN, WHAT A BEAT DOWN, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN INTERESTING CASE, IT'S A CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF WHY THAT YOU HAVE TOO MUCH IN ONE MEETING THAT COULD HAVE MAYBE BEEN DONE AT ANOTHER TIME, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE THE BUDGETS THAT ARE CONCERNED, TOO.
BUT I'VE APPRECIATED LISTENING TO EVERYBODY AND WE HAVE A CONFUSED BUDGET.
AND IF WE GO ALL THE WAY TO THE END, THE 48 CENTS IS ABOUT A 22 PERCENT INCREASE ON THE CITY PORTION.
AND I KNOW YOU ALL REFLECTED THAT THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION ABOUT SENATE BILL TWO IN REFERENCE TO WHAT YOU CAN DO AFTER THAT.
I LIKE THE FACT THAT IF WE GO TO THE FORTY EIGHT CENTS AND IT GOES TO A VOTE, BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE A CONSENSUS AT A VOTE, THEN THAT'S WHAT THE CITIZENS ARE GOING TO SAY.
AND I LIKE THE FACT THAT IT'S GOING TO BE IN NOVEMBER, NOT IN SOME OFF PERIOD WHERE MOST DON'T SHOW UP.
I DO HAVE ONE REAL CONCERN BACK TO THE BUDGET, BECAUSE I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT IT HARD IS WHEN WE FIRST WAS PROPOSED, THE FORTY SEVEN CENTS, THE VALUES MR. CITY MANAGER ON THE NEW PROPERTY WAS ABOUT EIGHT HUNDRED AND TWELVE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED AND NINETY FOUR DOLLARS.
AND THEN WE WENT TO 48 CENTS AND IT GOES TO 822,000 OF NEW PROPERTY ADDING IN TO THAT.
AND THEN WE GO TO THE CURRENT ONE AND IT'S 767,000.
AND IT MAY BE A SIMPLE EXPLANATION THAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
BUT THAT'S A FIFTY FIVE THOUSAND PLUS DIFFERENCE, CHUMP CHANGE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING FOUR HUNDRED AND TWENTY FOUR MILLION DOLLARS IN THE BUDGET.
BUT I'M CONFUSED ABOUT DID WE LOSE NEW PROPERTY OR WHAT HAPPENED THERE.
YOU CAN'T REALLY TALK BACK RIGHT NOW AND I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE THE PUBLIC COMMENT THEY'VE PUT ON THE AGENDA WHERE YOU COULD HEAR FEEDBACK FROM PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT COULD BE GOING ON TO HELP THAT, BECAUSE WHILE WHERE YOU HAD PLENTY TODAY AND YOU LET IT GO, LIKE IN WAYS THAT I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE PRESENT WHO WISHES TO SPEAK FOR, ON OR AGAINST ITEM 3B? SEEING, NO ONE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THAT CLOSES ITEM 3B, BUT WE HAVE
[3.C. CONSIDER ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY OF AMARILLO BUDGET FOR THE 2021/2022 FISCAL YEAR. (Contact: Laura Storrs, Assistant City Manager) This is the first reading of an ordinance adopting the City of Amarillo budget for the 2021/2022 fiscal year. This budget allows for the City to continue providing effective public services, programs, and assistance to Amarillo residents in the upcoming year.]
COMING UP NEXT ITEM 3C, SO MR. CITY MANAGER.WELL WE JUST DID THE PRESENTATION, IF YOU WOULD LIKE, LAURA CAN STEP UP.
IT'S A VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD ANSWER ON WHAT MR. SCHANK WAS TALKING ABOUT, IF YOU WANT TO HAVE HER TOUCH ON THAT.
BUT THEN IT'S A MATTER OF Y'ALL DISCUSSING AND ASKING LAURA QUESTIONS OR ME.
AND I THINK DOES ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR LAURA ABOUT IT? NO, NO.
AND SHE CAN GET TOGETHER WITH MR. SCHANK AFTER.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION WITH REGARD TO ITEM 3C THEN? YES, MAYOR, WE DO.
I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT THE PROPOSED BUDGET, WHICH REFLECTS AN INCREASE IN THE REVENUE DERIVED FROM PROPERTY TAX REVENUES OVER LAST YEAR'S BUDGET.
IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED THAT WE APPROVE THE TAX RATE AN THE BUDGET AS PROPOSED.
YOU GUYS ALL HAVE THE ORDINANCE, WHICH IS COMING UP IN ITEM 3D.
YES, THIS IS FOR THE BUDGET ONLY.
SO I'LL GO BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL.
[04:45:01]
JUST ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SAY IN SUPPORT OF THAT MOTION? NO, AS I SAID BEFORE AND IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, I SUPPORT OUR POLICE, OUR FIREFIGHTERS.WE DEFINITELY HEARD IN A COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS MEETING IN REGARDS TO PARKS AND RECREATION.
SO CITIZENS SPOKE VERY LOUDLY THAT THEY WOULD LIKE FOR US TO PAY MORE ATTENTION OR DO MORE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS ON OUR PARKS.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHERE THE BIGGEST OF THE FUNDS ARE GOING TO BE ALLOCATED THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING TODAY.
SO I'M 100 PERCENT IN SUPPORT OF THAT OF WHERE THOSE DOLLARS ARE GOING TO BE SPENT AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DO.
AS A CITY WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE THAT WE HAVE THE LOWEST TAX RATE.
AND SO WE'VE ADVOCATED THAT FOR YEARS.
WE CAN HAVE THE LOWEST TAX RATE AND NOT SPEND ANY MONEY OR NOT DO ANYTHING.
AND WHAT HAPPENS IS, YOU KNOW, I CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT PREVIOUS COUNCILS AND I CAN POINT THE FINGERS, BUT THAT DOESN'T DO ME ANY GOOD BECAUSE I'M SITTING IN THE SEAT NOW.
WHERE WE ARE TODAY IS OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND EVERYTHING ELSE HAS KIND OF MUSHROOMED.
SO EVERYTHING'S FALLING APART.
I MEAN, THE THOMPSON PARK SWIMMING POOL IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THAT.
IF WE HAD BEEN ALLOCATING FUNDS, SAY, MAYBE 30 OR 40 YEARS AGO FOR THE THOMPSON PARK POOL, WE WOULDN'T BE IN THE POSITION THAT WE'RE IN TODAY.
BUT THAT'S A GREAT EXAMPLE OF I DON'T KNOW.
AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LIFE EXPECTANCY IS OF A POOL, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S 90 YEARS OLD, WHICH IN ACTUALITY IT WAS 87 YEARS OLD.
I THINK THAT ONE'S ACTUALLY SO ANYWAY, WE CAN CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE THAT AND THEN WE'VE LOOKED AT THE DATA.
I MEAN, WE LOOKED AT 10 CITIES THAT WERE LARGER THAN US IN POPULATION AND 10 CITIES THAT WERE SMALLER THAN US IN POPULATION.
AND THAT'S GOING FROM A 40 PER CENT TO 48 CENT INCREASE.
WE'RE STILL WE STILL HAVE THE LOWEST TAX RATE, BUT AGAIN, HAVING THE LOWEST TAX RATE AND NOT FIXING STREETS, NOT FIXING POTHOLES.
I MEAN, WHAT DOES THAT BUY US.
YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR? YOU KNOW, CITIZENS WANT GOOD CUSTOMER SERVICE.
YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T TAKE CARE OF YOUR EMPLOYEES, IT'S A REVOLVING DOOR.
AGAIN, YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR.
AND I'M IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE BUDGET AS IS.
I'M ALSO VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE BUDGET AND MINE ARE GOING TO COME ALONG THE LINES OF THE SAME AS THE MAYOR PRO TEM.
I THINK, AND I'M NOT LAYING IT AT ANY PREVIOUS COUNCIL, BUT THERE COMES THIS POINT IN TIME.
AND IF WE JUST KEEP ON GOING DOWN THE ROAD AND KEEPING THINGS LOW, THE FIRST THING THAT WE START LOSING OUT ON IS ALL OF THE REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE ARE HOW YOU I MEAN, IT'S LIKE THE FRIEND COMMERCIAL.
YOU'RE EITHER GOING TO PAY ME NOW, OR YOU'RE GOING TO PAY ME LATER.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, WHENEVER THE FOUR OF US FIRST WERE IN OFFICE, WE HAD A PAY ME NOW OR PAY ME LATER MOMENT.
WE HAD TO DEAL WITH THE TWO MILLION DOLLAR A YEAR BLEED THAT WAS COMING OUT OF GOLF.
AND WE HAD TO MAKE SOME HARD DECISIONS.
AND THOSE HARD DECISIONS WERE WE HAD TO INCREASE THE REVENUES COMING IN TO ALLOW FOR THOSE THINGS TO EVEN SEMI CORRECT THEMSELVES.
AND WE'RE STILL WORKING ON IT.
AND SO WE'RE SITTING IN THE SAME CASE AGAIN.
WE'VE GOT LIGHTING THAT HADN'T BEEN TOUCHED ON THESE PARKS IN DECADES, NOT YEARS, ACTUAL DECADES, TO THE POINT THAT WE'RE BETWEEN SIX AND 10 MILLION DOLLARS FROM THAT ALONE TO REPLACE LIGHTING.
I HAD THE PLEASURE OF GETTING TO MEET WITH MICHAEL KASHUBA AND MOST OF THE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATIONS IN TOWN LATE LAST WEEK AND COME TO FIND OUT NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE WE HAD THE COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, THEY'RE EVEN MORE MOBILIZED NOW THAT THEY REALIZE THAT THIS IS OUR ONLY WAY OUT OF THIS SITUATION.
AND SO WE'VE GOT TO ADDRESS PARKS.
AND ON THE SECOND HAND IS, YOU KNOW WHAT? THROUGH ALL OF THAT, WE HAVEN'T ADDRESSED TAKING CARE OF OUR STAFF.
WE HAVEN'T TAKEN CARE OF OUR FIRST RESPONDERS WITH THEIR PAY IN THE WAY THAT IT NEEDS TO
[04:50:01]
BE DONE.AND SO THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE'VE GOT TO MAKE.
I MEAN, IT'S IMPORTANT PROTECTION IN OUR TOWN, THE WAY OUR CITY IS TAKEN CARE OF.
THE REVOLVING DOOR IS A PRETTY GOOD WAY OF SAYING IT.
WE CAN'T BE LOSING SOME OF THE BEST PEOPLE THAT WE'VE GOT WORKING FOR US.
SO WE'VE GOT TO AND, YOU KNOW, AND BOTH TIMES RUNNING OR ALL THREE TIMES RUNNING FOR OFFICE.
THE TWO TOP THINGS THAT I KEPT HEARING FROM EVERYBODY WAS TAKE CARE OF OUR FIRST RESPONDERS AND TAKE CARE OF OUR STREETS.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'VE GOT TO DO.
WE'VE GOT TO MAKE UP FOR THOSE KIND OF THINGS.
WE'VE GOT TO CONTINUE THE REPAIR.
WE'VE GOT TO GET AHEAD OF REPAIRS.
WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT HAVE PLANS FOR HOW WE'RE GOING TO HANDLE THINGS.
AND SO THIS TAKES A REALLY, REALLY SHARP SWING AT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS.
AND SO I AM FULLY IN FAVOR OF US MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE BEGINNING TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE THAT WORK FOR US AND ALSO FOR THE NEXT GENERATION, BECAUSE WHAT WE DO FOR THE PARKS THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT OUR KIDS, THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT OUR GRANDKIDS, THAT'S GOING TO BE AFFECTING GENERATIONS YET TO COME.
AND SO I THINK IT'S A REAL IMPORTANT MOVE ON OUR PART THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING THIS.
SO I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS CITY BUDGET.
OH, I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THE BUDGET ALSO.
IT'S A PRETTY BIG PERCENTAGE INCREASE, BUT WHEN I LOOK AT ALL THE THINGS THAT WE DON'T HAVE THAT WE OUGHT TO HAVE AND I SEE, YOU KNOW WE BRAG ABOUT HAVING THE LOWEST TAX RATE, WELL WE'RE GIVING UP THINGS WE GOT TO HAVE.
I'VE GOT A SON IN WACO AND ONE IN PLANO, AND THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES THAT WE DON'T HAVE.
I'M VERY MUCH AND I'VE ALWAYS BEEN IN FAVOR OF THE POLICE PERSONNEL, FIREMEN PERSONNEL, EQUIPMENT THAT THEY NEED.
PROBABLY HAVE SOME MORE TO GO.
BUT WHEN WE HAVE TWO OR 300 PEOPLE SHOW UP AND TALK ABOUT LACK OF THINGS AND PARKS.
WE NEED TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE.
I WAS EVEN THINKING IN TERMS OF HIGHER TAXES THAN WHAT WE'RE GOING FOR, BUT I'M SATISFIED WITH WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AND SO.
WE CAN'T DO IT WITHOUT THE PUBLIC DECIDING THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A CHANCE TO VOTE ON THIS.
WE CAN INDIVIDUALLY ENDORSE WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING, AND SO I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF IT.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER STANLEY.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER, IF YOU'LL HEAR ME OUT, TAKING THE BUDGET IN TWO SEPARATE PIECES, BOTH LOOKING AT YOUR BUDGET BASED ON YOUR TAX RATE AND THEN LOOKING ON YOUR USER FEES, LICENSING AND FEES.
IS THAT AN OPTION THAT WE HAVE HERE IN FRONT OF US? WHY DON'T YOU GIVE US YOUR COMMENTS? I'M NOT SURE I'M FOLLOWING ON DOING IT IN TWO DIFFERENT PIECES, BUT I WANT TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND.
SO I'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME GOING THROUGH THE BUDGET, REALLY TRYING TO LEARN AND UNDERSTAND.
I CAME INTO OFFICE REALLY HEARING A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, STATING, MAN, WE JUST WE HAVE A UNSUSTAINABLY LOW TAX RATE.
WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET THERE WITH THIS UNSUSTAINABLY LOW TAX RATE.
AS A BUILDER BEING AROUND DEVELOPMENT I'VE HEARD THAT FOR YEARS.
AND SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT I REALLY ESTEEM THAT ARE GOOD DEVELOPERS ARE TELLING ME THIS AND THEY'RE LIKE, COLE, IT'S JUST NOT SUSTAINABLE.
AND SO COMING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, I'VE LOOKED FOR ARE WE SPENDING ALL OF THE MONEY AND ARE WE SPENDING IT WELL? AND SO THIS LAST YEAR, WE HAVE, I DON'T KNOW, ALMOST 14 MILLION DOLLARS IN EXCESS RESERVES THAT WE CHOSE NOT TO SPEND.
AND SO SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE FACED WITH HERE TODAY OF PARKS AND REC, THE LIGHTS NOT COMING ON, THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO PAY FOR, WE HAVE THE MONEY IN THAT BUDGET LAST YEAR THAT WE COULD HAVE SPENT.
WE DID CHOOSE TO SPEND SOME OF THAT 13 MILLION, 860,000 DOLLARS DOWN.
WE BOUGHT THE AMARILLO HARDWARE STORE FOR FOUR POINT SEVEN MILLION.
IT WAS ABOUT THREE POINT FOUR IN UPGRADES.
AND THEN THE ELEVATOR AT THE PD IS PROPOSED AT 825.
AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I GET THESE NUMBERS WRONG.
I DON'T EVER WANT TO PUT OUT INFORMATION THAT'D BE INACCURATE.
AND I'D MUCH RATHER SAY I SAID IT WRONG HERE AND NOW THAN TO HAVE TO APOLOGIZE LATER.
SO IN LOOKING AT THIS, WE STILL HAVE FOUR POINT EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS LEFT IN
[04:55:11]
RESERVES.AND THEN IN GOING THROUGH THE BUDGET WITH LAURA, WE'RE PROJECTING FIVE POINT SIX MILLION THIS YEAR IN EXCESS RESERVES.
I SHOULDN'T SAY RESERVES EXCESS REVENUES TO SAY THAT CORRECTLY.
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN RESERVES.
AND WE'RE VERY HEALTHY AS A COMMUNITY AND AS A VERY WELL-RUN ORGANIZATION.
SO, LIKE, WHAT I CAN ATTEST TO IS THAT WE WE HAVE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN INVESTMENTS AND IN RETIREMENT AND IN DIFFERENT PLACES AND IN SO MANY DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS THAT I COULDN'T EVEN TRACK THEM, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO GO THROUGH THEM.
AND SO I THINK WE ARE RAN VERY WELL.
AND I THINK THAT OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS, WE'VE GIVEN OURSELVES A METRIC OF HOW WELL WE DID.
AND WE RAN GOOD QUALITY SERVICES AND WE HAD EXCESS REVENUES LEFT OVER EXCEPT FOR THE THINGS THAT WE'VE CITED.
I WOULD LOVE TO PAY OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT MORE.
I THINK THAT THEY NEED A RAISE.
I WOULD LOVE TO PAY OUR FIREFIGHTERS MORE.
I THINK THAT THEY NEED A RAISE.
I JUST BELIEVE WE CAN DO THAT IN THE GIVEN BUDGET.
I ALSO BELIEVE THAT PARKS AND REC IS IS WAY BEHIND THE PAY SCALE.
AND SO OUR BUDGET DOES GIVE MORE MONEY TO PARKS AND REC.
BUT THEN ON TOP OF THAT BUDGET, WE'RE ALSO REALLY LOOKING AT THE REALITY OF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND TEN MILLION DOLLARS THAT WE JUST DON'T HAVE IN THIS GIVEN BUDGET THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING.
SO NOT ONLY ARE WE LOOKING AT A TAX INCREASE, BUT WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY AN ISSUANCE OF DEBT.
AND I THINK THAT'S JUST THE REALITY OF IT IN ORDER TO GET CAUGHT UP ON A FEW OF THOSE ITEMS. SO WHEN I'M LOOKING AT DO WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY WITH WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY CHARGING, I KNOW WE'VE GOT SALES TAX THAT ARE UP.
AND I KNOW WE'RE PRESENTING, YOU KNOW, A GOOD BUDGET AS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD.
BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE EXCESS REVENUES IN SEWER AND WATER.
SO, YOU KNOW, SEWER AND WATER EXCESS REVENUE, 24 MILLION DOLLARS LAST YEAR.
SO THEY RAN 84 MILLION AND THEY SPENT SIXTY ONE OR SO.
I'M SURE THOSE AREN'T CORRECT.
AIRPORT HAS EXCESS REVENUES AND THEN DRAINAGE.
AND SO LET ME ASK YOU A QUICK QUESTION.
THE REASON THAT I WOULD WANT TO SEPARATE THESE IS BECAUSE WE'RE INTRODUCING AND PROPOSING NOT ONLY A TAX INCREASE, BUT A USER FEE INCREASE.
WE'RE PROPOSING TO INCREASE FEES ON WATER, SEWER, DRAINAGE AND THE LIKE.
AND SO Y'ALL HAVE ALL READ THIS.
AM I READING THIS CORRECTLY, THAT OUR DRAINAGE FEE FOR TIER TWO WOULD GO FROM TWO DOLLARS AND 82 CENTS TO 23 DOLLARS AND 17 CENTS? NO, AND WE CAN HAVE LAURA SPEAK TO THAT.
YEAH, I'M SEEING HERE ON PAGE 33.
IS THAT AN ERROR? DID WE JUST PUT THE NUMBER DOWN WRONG? LET ME CATCH UP THERE WITH YOU.
IT'S ONLY GOING UP FOUR PERCENT.
SO I BELIEVE THE CURRENT RATE IS TWO DOLLARS AND EIGHTY TWO CENTS.
AND THEN THAT TIMES, FOUR PERCENT.
OK, SO THIS WOULD NEED TO BE CHANGED.
YES, BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT OR AS JUST AN ERROR.
WELL, IT COULD BE CHANGED BEFORE SECOND READING.
OK, WE'VE GOT FIRST SECOND READING.
THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT.
SO IN THE EXCESSES THAT WE HAVE DO WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO DO OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT WE NEED TO CATCH UP WITH THE CURRENT FEES THAT WE'RE CHARGING OUR CUSTOMERS .
COMING THROUGH SOME REALLY HARD TIMES AND BAD YEARS WITH SMALL BUSINESS AND I'M A REALLY BIG SMALL BUSINESS GUY.
I BELIEVE THAT IF WE DON'T HAVE TO CHARGE YOU THAT MUCH, WE SHOULDN'T.
AND IF WE'RE NOT FACING AN ISSUE OF, WELL, WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO TAKE CARE OF THESE FAILING PARTS OF INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH I THINK OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS AS WE HAVE THEM OUTLAID HERE WITH THESE EXCESS RESERVES.
I DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT WE CAN DO ALL THAT WORK IN A YEAR, AND THEN IF WE PROJECTED ANOTHER YEAR, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE CAPITAL PROJECTS, MONEY SET ASIDE THAT'S ACCUMULATING IS WHERE I'M COMING FROM.
SO I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF CONSIDERING LEAVING THE USER FEES, AS THEY WERE LAST YEAR FOR LICENSING AND FEES AND THEN CONSIDERING THE BUDGET ITSELF AS A STANDALONE ITEM AND TREATING THEM TWO SEPARATE WAYS.
AND I'M ASKING THAT, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU GUYS WOULD BE WILLING TO CONSIDER? CAN WE PAUSE THAT QUESTION? AND BECAUSE I THINK YOU'RE BRINGING UP SOME REALLY GOOD POINTS ABOUT BEING IN FAVOR OF RAISES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, AND YOU'RE TYING IT TO THE SAVINGS WE HAD FROM LAST YEAR'S BUDGET, WHICH GIGANTIC PAT ON THE BACK TO THE STAFF THAT WE CAME THROUGH IN THE
[05:00:01]
BLACK LAST YEAR.AND AND I SPENT SEVERAL NIGHTS LAYING AWAKE THINKING, WHAT HAPPENS IF WE HAVE TO TOUCH OUR RESERVES? WHAT HAPPENS TO OUR BOND RATING? WHAT HAPPENS IF WE, WE GOT IT'S A 400 MILLION DOLLAR OPERATION.
AND SO WE HAVE 90 DAYS OF RESERVES AND THAT'S ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS.
SO YOU'RE RIGHT, THE CITY HAS A LOT OF CASH IN RESERVES.
AND I WONDERED LAST YEAR WHAT HAPPENS ON DAY 91 WHEN WE'VE BLOWN THROUGH OUR RESERVES? I MEAN, IT WAS SCARY.
WE DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE YEAR LOOKED LIKE AND EVERY BUSINESS OWNER FELT THAT SAME WEIGHT BECAUSE THEY HAD THE SAME ISSUE IN THEIR BUSINESS.
SO I THINK YOU'RE BRINGING UP SOME GREAT POINTS.
AND I WANT TO START BY PATTING LAURA AND HER TEAM AND JARED AND HIS LEADERSHIP ON THE BACK FOR SAYING WE FINISHED LAST YEAR IN THE BLACK.
AND IT WAS BECAUSE THEY SLAMMED ON THE BRAKES AND THE COUNCIL APPROVED THAT.
AND SO WE CAN'T OPERATE THAT WAY EVERY YEAR.
IT'S NOT SUSTAINABLE FOR US TO NARROW THE FUNNEL THE WAY WE DID LAST YEAR AND HAVE THOSE KIND OF SAVINGS.
SO WITH THAT CONTEXT LAID OUT THERE, ELABORATE ON HOW WE WOULD GIVE THE POLICE OFFICERS A RAISE YEAR OVER YEAR, THAT'S A YEAR OVER YEAR COMMITMENT WITH SAVINGS THAT WE AREN'T GUARANTEED TO HAVE YEAR OVER YEAR.
NO, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
AND I THOUGHT THE SAME THING IN THE WAY OF LIKE, WELL, IT WAS A COVID YEAR.
AND ORIGINALLY I THOUGHT IT WAS THE COVID MONIES THAT WERE COMING INTO THE ACCOUNT.
WE GOT THE 20 MILLION DOLLARS OR WHATEVER IT WAS.
AND THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THIS EXCESS REVENUE.
AND SO IT WAS JUST A VERY GOOD TIGHTENING OF THE BELT.
AND I KNOW THAT WE DID THE SAME THING AS A BUSINESS OWNER.
YOU KNOW, WE LIVED OUT OF SOME SAVINGS AND WE DIDN'T YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU DIDN'T GET INTO YOUR RESERVES, BUT YOU DID HAVE TO TIGHTEN YOUR BELT.
AND I BELIEVE THAT OUR STAFF DID A GOOD JOB.
SO WE DIDN'T GET INTO RESERVES.
WE DID NOT TAKE CARE OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE PROBABLY COULD HAVE, IN MY OPINION, DURING THAT YEAR.
BUT THEN GOING FORWARD TO THIS YEAR, I THINK IF IT WAS A ONE OFF YEAR, WE'D BE SITTING IN THE SAME BOAT HERE.
AND SO WE HAVE FIVE AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS IN EXCESS REVENUES THIS YEAR.
AND I KNOW WE'RE HAVING A GOOD SALES TAX.
BUT THEN WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT WE HAVE ADDITIONAL MONEYS THAT ARE COMING IN THE FORM OF AARP.
WE HAVE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TELLING US THAT THEY ARE GOING TO PUSH SOME INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE TUNE OF ONE TRILLION DOLLARS OUT ACROSS THE NATION.
SO I THINK IF WE LOOK NEXT YEAR, AND THE YEAR AFTER, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SEE MORE OF THESE MONEYS COMING IN THAT COULD HELP US WITH SOME OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND NEEDS AND SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE HAVE.
SO I WOULD ONLY DO ONE SIMPLE THING, AND IT'S JUST A PHILOSOPHICAL VIEWPOINT.
I'M NOT GOING TO LAY OUT FOR YOU A FINANCIAL PLAN BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ONE.
BUT I WOULD JUST TURN THE THING UPSIDE DOWN AND I WOULD JUST PUT POLICE FIRE OUR EMERGENCY SERVICES FIRST.
AND I WOULD ALLOCATE THOSE MONEYS FIRST, AND THEN I WOULD BUILD MY BUDGET BACKWARDS OFF OF THAT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BOTTOM TIER, WHATEVER TIER THAT MAY BE.
AND I BELIEVE THAT PARKS AND REC SHOULD BE UP ON THE TOP TIER.
SO IN THE WAY OF SPECIFICALLY, HOW WOULD WE DO THAT? LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE PURCHASE OF AMARILLO HARDWARE, STORE IS A GOOD EXAMPLE.
AND THEN I'M CURIOUS WHY WE DON'T HAVE CAPITAL THAT IS.
AND I KNOW SOME OF THE FUNDS ARE RESTRICTED AND I'M STILL LEARNING, YOU KNOW, SO WATER AND SEWER SHOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO GO TO WATER AND SEWER, CORRECT? WELL, BY LAW, THAT'S HOW IT IS.
AND THE SAME THING WITH AIRPORT.
SO ANY SAVINGS THAT WE HAD IN AIRPORT WE CAN'T GIVE TO POLICE OFFICERS AS RAISES.
SO IF I WERE TO PULL BACK ON ANYTHING, I WOULDN'T PULL BACK ON MY POLICE.
I WOULD PULL BACK ON MY CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT I'M ONLY RESTRICTED AND ABLE TO DO OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND.
AND I WOULD DO THIS FOR A YEAR BECAUSE THIS IS NOT THE ONLY BUDGET THAT WE'RE GOING TO SET.
IT'S NOT LIKE I'M TELLING YOU, HEY, YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE THIS THING WORK FOR TEN YEARS AND THERE'S NO TELLING WHAT'S COMING.
I'M SAYING RIGHT NOW WE'RE STILL SITTING ON EXCESS REVENUES.
I'M NOT TRYING TO INTERRUPT YOU, BUT I'M JUST STILL SAYING WE CAN'T WHEN WE GIVE THE POLICE OFFICERS A RAISE, WE HAVE TO DO THAT WITH REVENUE WE ARE CERTAIN ABOUT.
AND SO LIKE EVEN IN THE SCENARIO YOU'RE SETTING NOW, I'M GOING TO JUST PICK A NUMBER.
HEY, I'M 90 PERCENT SURE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE 5 MILLION DOLLARS IN EXCESS REVENUE OR BUDGET SAVINGS NEXT YEAR.
AND WE COULD PUT THAT TOWARD THOSE POLICE RAISES.
BUT WE CAN ONLY PUT DOLLARS TOWARD PERSONNEL YEAR OVER YEAR EXPENSES THAT WE'RE 100 PERCENT CERTAIN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE.
YOU'RE NOT CLOSING THAT GAP FOR ME.
[05:05:01]
AND TELL ME WHERE I'M MISSING IT HERE, BECAUSE I MAY NOT HAVE A FULL COMPREHENSION.I THINK IT'S THE YEAR OVER YEAR COMMITMENT VERSUS THE ONE TIME SAVINGS.
SO IN YOUR CAPITAL PROJECTS, YOU'RE ABLE TO PUSH MONEY OVER INTO THAT, THAT WE BUILD THIS CAPITAL PROGRAM, YOU KNOW, AND WE HAVE THIS MONEY YEAR OVER YEAR BECAUSE THEY'RE BASICALLY ONE TIME PROJECTS.
I'M SAYING THAT I WOULD REDUCE THAT IN ORDER TO PAY FOR POLICE, FIRE PARKS AND REC.
AND SO I THEN WOULD ASK YOU, WHERE DO WE EVER HAVE SAVINGS TO APPLY TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS? BECAUSE LET'S JUST SET UP AN EXAMPLE.
IF WE NEED FIVE MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND WE ALL KNOW THOSE NEED TO BE DONE, THERE'S NO CONTROVERSY ABOUT DO WE NEED TO DO THEM OR NOT.
BUT WE'VE TAKEN AND IN ANTICIPATION OF HAVING FIVE MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR OF SAVINGS, WE'VE PUT IT FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT RAISES.
NOW, THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN EVERY YEAR.
SO WHERE ARE WE EVER GOING TO HAVE FUNDS TO GO TOWARD THOSE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS THAT WE KNOW WE NEED? AND AS A PERFECT EXAMPLE, PARK LIGHTING THE PROJECT, YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.
IT'S GOING TO BE TEN MILLION DOLLARS.
THAT'S A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT THAT WE'VE NEEDED FOR A LONG TIME, OURS ARE 60 YEARS OLD, AND WE'VE NEVER HAD THE REVENUE TO DO IT.
IT NEVER GETS TO THE TOP OF THE LIST AND WE USE SAVINGS IF WE HAVE SAVINGS TO GO TOWARD THOSE ONE TIME PROJECTS.
BUT IT'S REALLY HARD TO EVER GET ALL THOSE ONE TIME PROJECTS DONE IN THE SMALL LITTLE BIT OF SAVINGS THAT WE GET MOST YEARS.
I'M JUST THE POLICE OFFICERS BECAUSE THAT NUMBER IS STILL GOING TO BE HERE 5 OR 10 YEARS FROM NOW.
AND SO IN THIS OUTLAY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AND WITH THE EXCESS REVENUES THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE ONLY WAY THAT WE CAN EVER GIVE A SALARY INCREASE IS BY INCREASING TAXES.
IT JUST HAS TO BE ATTACHED TO REVENUE CERTAIN OF.
SO IT COULD BE SALES TAX REVENUE, ALTHOUGH, I MEAN, THAT'S A PROJECTION, TOO, LAURA AM I MISUNDERSTANDING ON THAT? AS I'M THINKING THAT THROUGH TAX REVENUE IS THE ONLY THING WE HAVE CERTAINTY ON.
I MEAN, IF YOU HAD OTHER DEDICATED REVENUE SOURCES INTO YOUR GENERAL FUND, THAT COULD COVER A RAISE AS LONG AS THOSE WERE ELEVATED TO A LEVEL THAT COULD SUPPORT THAT ONGOING COST, THAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT.
BUT YOU CAN'T UTILIZE ONE TIME SAVINGS TO FUND AN ONGOING INCREASE TO AN OPERATING COST GOING FORWARD, WHATEVER THAT IS, WHETHER THAT'S A RAISE, WHETHER YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE ANYTHING.
BUT YOU CAN'T USE ONE TIME SAVINGS.
THAT'S WHY IN OUR FINANCIAL POLICIES, WE HAVE A SECTION THAT STATES THAT ANY EXCESS RESERVES WILL BE ALLOCATED TO CAPITAL PROJECTS, TO GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECTS IN FUTURE YEARS BECAUSE CAPITAL PROJECTS ARE ONE TIME OUTLAYS AND SAVINGS, EXCESS RESERVES, THOSE BUDGET SAVINGS ARE ONE TIME SAVINGS.
YOU CANNOT GUARANTEE YOU WILL HAVE THOSE SAME BUDGET SAVINGS IN A FUTURE YEAR.
AND SO IF YOU APPROVE A RAISE WITH ONE TIME SAVINGS, YOU HAVE NOW EITHER IN THE NEXT YEAR OR THE NEXT COUNCILS THAT COME UP WOULD EITHER HAVE TO REDUCE THAT RAISE OR THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO SOME SORT OF A PROPERTY TAX RATE INCREASE OR ANOTHER DEDICATED REVENUE SOURCE INCREASE TO FUND A COMMITMENT THAT A PREVIOUS COUNCIL HAD ENTERED INTO.
WELL, I THINK IT WOULD BE MORE ACCURATE TO SAY USED THE CAPITAL MONEY TO DO A COMPENSATION INCREASE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY OR FOR ANYBODY.
YEAH, BUT ESPECIALLY WITH REGARD TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND CERTAINLY CIVIL SERVICE, PUBLIC SAFETY, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO.
SO WHEN YOU SAID REDUCE THE COMPENSATION, THAT'S NOT AN OPTION.
NO, THAT'S TRUE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.SPEAKERS] NO MATTER WHAT.
BUT IF YOU USE YOUR CAPITAL MONEY TO DO ONE TIME OR TO MAKE INVESTMENTS IN RECURRING COSTS YOU WILL HAVE TO BE ABLE TO GUARANTEE YOU THAT YOU HAVE THAT MONEY IN PERPETUITY AND THAT YOU'RE NO LONGER DOING CAPITAL PROJECTS GOING FORWARD UNLESS YOU INCREASE THE TAX RATE TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE PROJECTS OR UNLESS.
[05:10:03]
OR YOU CAN REDUCE OR ELIMINATE OTHER SERVICES.IS THAT NOT WHAT WE'VE DONE? I MEAN, WHEN WE GO TO THE TAXPAYER AND THE VOTER AND WE SAY, HEY, WE NEED ROADS, WE NEED THE STREETS, YOU KNOW, WE RAISE, YOU KNOW, 100 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS AND WE DO THIS.
AND SO THAT DOES HIT YOUR INTEREST IN SINKING, WHICH WE'RE SEEING COMING IN.
AND SO I'M NOT AGAINST AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT YOU SHOULD NEVER HAVE A HIGHER TAX RATE.
WHAT I AM SAYING IS, IS I WOULDN'T TAKE THE MONEY OUT OF CAPITAL BECAUSE IT WOULD NEVER GO INTO CAPITAL FIRST.
I WOULD WORK WITH WHAT I HAVE IN MY CAPITAL AFTER I TAKE CARE OF THE THINGS THAT I NEED TO TAKE CARE OF IN THE FORM OF PARKS, FIRE AND POLICE.
AND SO WE'RE ALL AGREEING THAT THIS IS UNDERSERVED.
WE'RE NOT COMPETITIVE IN THE MARKET.
WE NEED TO PAY FOR THESE ITEMS. AND THEN WE'RE SITTING HERE LOOKING AT MONIES THAT ARE LEFT IN THE ACCOUNT AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
WHEN WE TAKE THESE MONIES THAT ARE LEFT AND WE PUT THEM IN CAPITAL AND THEN WE GO TO OUR VOTER AND WE SAY, HEY, WE NEED AN INCREASE IN OUR TAXES TO PAY FOR OUR POLICE AND TO PAY FOR OUR FIRE.
I'M FLIPPING IT AROUND, THAT'S ALL.
I WOULD JUST GO TO THE VOTER AND SAY, HEY, I NEED A TAX INCREASE TO PAY FOR THESE ITEMS OF INFRASTRUCTURE.
AND SO THAT'S THE BEST EXPLANATION EXPLAIN IT TO HIM AGAIN WHY WE CAN'T FLIP IT.
SO IF YOU WERE TO FLIP IT SO LET'S SAY WE HAD FIVE MILLION DOLLARS IN BUDGET SAVINGS THAT WANTED TO BE ALLOCATED TO A RAISE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY OR WHATEVER ELSE, THAT FIVE MILLION DOLLARS RUNS OUT AT A CERTAIN POINT IN TIME.
AND THEN SO THE QUESTION WOULD BE, HOW WOULD YOU FUND THE RAISE PASSED WHEN THAT THOSE SAVINGS RAN OUT? ON THE OTHER HAND, IF YOU HAVE A DEDICATED REVENUE SOURCE IN PLACE, WHETHER THAT'S GROWTH IN SALES TAX, RAISING A PROPERTY TAX RATE, WHATEVER THAT IS, THEN THAT STAYS IN PLACE GOING FORWARD.
NOW, THERE IS UNCERTAINTY AT TIMES WITH SALES TAX, BUT WE HAVE BEEN VERY CONSISTENT AND WE'VE BUDGETED VERY REASONABLY IN OUR SALES TAX AREA AND NOT OVEREXTENDED OURSELVES, THINKING WE'LL BUILD IN RAISES FOR OUR EMPLOYEES, NOT KNOWING IF THESE REVENUE LEVELS ARE EVEN SUSTAINABLE.
SO IF YOU INCREASE THE PROPERTY TAX RATE TO FUND CAPITAL, THAT WOULD BE FINE.
YOU COULD JUST DO PROJECT AFTER PROJECT, YEAR AFTER YEAR.
BUT AT SOME POINT, YOUR ONE TIME BUDGET SAVINGS WILL RUN OUT AND THEN YOU WOULD BE AT THAT QUESTION OF HOW DO YOU CONTINUE PAYING FOR THOSE RAISES IN THE FUTURE? BECAUSE ONCE YOU PUT A RAISE IN PLACE, IT'S IN PLACE FOREVER.
SO LET ME STOP AND NOT BE MORE CONFUSING BECAUSE I SEE EDDY'S FACE ACROSS FROM ME AND I'M NOT I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE THE SAME FACE.
I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TAXES AND EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW, BUT.
SO TO PUSH FORWARD THROUGH THIS IN THE WAY OF I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, LAURA, I THINK THAT'S WHERE I THOUGHT I WAS THREE MONTHS AGO WHEN I GOT ELECTED THAT WE WERE OUT OF MONEY AND THAT WE'VE GOT TO GO TO THE TAXPAYER AND TO THE VOTER IN ORDER TO GET THESE RAISES OR GET ANY ADDITIONAL THINGS DONE.
THAT'S NOT WHERE I'M AT TODAY.
OTHERWISE, I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSING THIS.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION AND LET ME NOT GIVE YOU THE SOLUTION, BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE IT, BUT WE HAVE MONEY TO BUY AND SPEND THINGS ONE TIME THAT WE FEEL ARE IMPORTANT.
AND I GET THAT THE WAY THAT THE BUDGET IS ORCHESTRATED IS VERY COMPLEX AND VERY COMPLICATED.
AND I DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND IT, BUT IT SURE FEELS LIKE TO ME THAT OUR PRIORITIES GO ALONG WITH THAT COMPLEXITY.
AND SO I'M STRIVING TO TRY TO ALIGN MY PRIORITIES WITH THIS COMPLEXITY AND UNDERSTAND IT.
AND WHAT I'M ASKING IS, IS DO WE NEED THE ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR LICENSING AND FEES WHEN WE HAVE THESE EXCESS REVENUES? SO WHEN THE WATER SALES THAT WE HAVE WE ARE, YOU KNOW, ARE 24 MILLION DOLLARS OVER WHAT WE SPEND.
THAT'S A LOT OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, AND I GET IT WE CAN'T PULL THAT MONEY OUT AND SPEND IT ON POLICE.
BUT THEN HOW MUCH WATER AND SEWER CAN WE DO? I REALLY APPRECIATE.
I MEAN, YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU'RE NOT BRINGING THE SOLUTION.
YOU'RE TRYING HARD TO BRING A SOLUTION.
AND AND I RESPECT THAT AND I APPRECIATE IT.
RESPECTFULLY, I DON'T THINK YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT LAURA IS SAYING OR ELSE YOU WOULDN'T BE BRINGING THE SOLUTION THAT YOU'RE BRINGING.
SO DO YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN? SO ONE THING I WANT TO MENTION ON THE WATER AND SEWER RATES, ALSO WITH THE DRAINAGE RATES, THE INCREASES THAT ARE IN PLACE FOR THIS UPCOMING YEAR, THE LARGEST
[05:15:05]
PORTION OF THE WATER AND SEWER RATE INCREASE, IT'S A THREE PERCENT RATE INCREASE, AND THAT IS TO FUND DEBT SERVICE ON AN ANTICIPATED DEBT ISSUANCE FOR THE FIFTH YEAR OF A FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.WE HAVE TO HAVE A DEDICATED REVENUE SOURCE IN PLACE TO FUND THAT DEBT SERVICE.
AND SO OTHERWISE, WE COULD CUT OUT SERVICES POTENTIALLY ON THAT WATER AND SEWER IS PROVIDING.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT WOULD EVEN LOOK LIKE IN ORDER TO FUND DEBT SERVICE.
OTHERWISE, WE NEED TO ADJUST THE RATES TO PROPERLY PAY FOR THAT DEBT ISSUANCE.
THAT'S ALSO PART OF OUR BOND RATINGS.
WHEN WE GO TO BE RATED, THE GROUPS LOOK AT YOU'RE ABOUT TO DO A DEBT ISSUANCE.
HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY FOR THIS? YOU CAN'T UTILIZE ONE TIME SAVINGS, BUDGET SAVINGS.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE A DEDICATED REVENUE SOURCE IN PLACE.
AND WHAT WE HAVE DONE HERE AT THE CITY OF AMARILLO IS WE HAVE ADJUSTED THOSE RATES TO BE DEDICATED TO PAY FOR THAT ONGOING DEBT SERVICE.
SO IN A YEAR, WE MAY HAVE EXCESS WATER REVENUES THAT COME IN.
WE DO FLUCTUATE SOME YEARS WE'RE IN DROUGHT CONDITIONS, SOME YEARS WE'RE IN MORE WET CONDITIONS.
AND THOSE ARE ONE TIME SAVINGS THAT THEN WE ALLOCATE TO FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS.
THEY CAN'T BE USED AGAIN FOR ONGOING COSTS.
INCREASES, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THE DEBT OR THE FUNDS TO ALLOCATE TO THOSE PROJECTS.
SO WE CAN CASH FUND THOSE PROJECTS RATHER THAN ISSUING DEBT, WHICH HAS THE ASSOCIATED WATER RATE INCREASE ASSOCIATED WITH OR A WATER RATE INCREASE USUALLY ASSOCIATED WITH THEM.
I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE GOING.
YOU KNOW, I TOLD YOU I NEED LIKE SIX MORE MONTHS AND I PROBABLY DO, BUT I'M NOT AFRAID TO KIND OF JUMP OUT HERE AND TAKE OFF THROWING THINGS AROUND TO SEE WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT I CAN FIND.
I APPRECIATE YOUR ANSWERS AND HOW GOOD YOU'VE BEEN IN TRYING TO WALK THROUGH ALL THIS.
SO TODAY AND THIS MAY NOT BE THE RIGHT COMPREHENSION.
BUT TODAY WHAT I'M HEARING IS, IS THAT EVEN IF WE HAVE EXCESS REVENUES, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO SPEND THEM ON ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE MORE THAN A ONE YEAR ALLOCATION BECAUSE WE HAVE TO PAY FOR DEBT LONG TERM.
AND SO THAT TIES OUR HANDS A LITTLE BIT MORE AND THAT PUTS YOU MORE INTO AN ISSUE OF A TAX INCREASE.
AND SO, ONCE AGAIN, I'M IN FAVOR OF INCREASING TAXES TO PAY FOR FIRE, POLICE, PARKS AND REC AND OUR EMERGENCY CALL CENTER AT THE WILL OF THE VOTER.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T HAVE A BETTER COMPREHENSION TWO WEEKS AGO OF SB 2.
SO, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST I'M STEADY HERE.
BUT THANK YOU FOR LOOKING AT THAT.
I AM TRYING TO LEAVE THE WATER AND SEWER RATES AT A FLAT AND NOT PUT THOSE IN AS AN INCREASE BECAUSE I STILL DON'T SEE OTHER THAN WHAT YOU'RE EXPLAINING THAT YOU HAVE YOU'VE ALREADY OBLIGATED YOURSELF TO THIS MONEY.
SO YOU HAVE TO INCREASE THEM THREE PERCENT.
WE HAVE NOT OBLIGATED OURSELVES YET TO THIS MONEY.
THE PROPOSED DEBT ISSUANCE IS ALSO INCLUDED IN YOUR PROPOSED BUDGET.
IF COUNCIL DECIDES NOT TO INCREASE THE RATES, WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DEBT ISSUANCE.
SO THAT, AGAIN, IT'S ALL IN THIS UPCOMING BUDGET AND THAT YOU ALL ARE CONSIDERING AT THIS POINT.
DID WE ALREADY ISSUE THE DEBT FOR THE AMR. YES, WE HAVE FOR THE AMI PROJECT YES.
BUT IN DOING THAT, WE ALSO POSTPONED BY ONE YEAR.
OTHER PROJECTS AND DEBT ISSUANCE THAT WE WERE GOING TO NEED TO MAKE.
WE GOT A MILLION DOLLAR GRANT AND WE GOT A ZERO PERCENT INTEREST RATE THAT IS CORRECT.
SO THIS YEAR THAT'S IN YOUR PROPOSED BUDGET IS TRULY THE FIFTH YEAR OF THAT ORIGINAL FIVE YEAR CAPITAL PLAN THAT WAS.
PASSED BY THE 2015 COUNCIL? YES, SO NONE OF US WE'RE ON.
SO IT WAS A PLAN THAT WAS STUDIED AND IMPLEMENTED.
WELL, WE'RE IMPLEMENTING IT, I GUESS.
BUT IT WAS A PLAN THAT WAS STUDIED AND PASSED BY THE COUNCIL BEFORE THE FOUR OF US CAME ON BOARD.
AND SO NOW WE'RE DOING THE LAST YEAR OF IT.
AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A LONG WALK IN THE SAME DIRECTION.
WELL, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE HARD THINGS ABOUT THE CAPITAL PROJECTS IS, IT
[05:20:01]
SEEMS TO ME, REALLY PRETTY MUCH THE ONLY CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT REALLY COME OUT OF OUR GENERAL BUDGET ARE STREETS.AND NOW THEN WHEN WE SIT BACK AND WE LOOK AT STREETS, WE'VE GOT A PLAN OR WE'VE GOT AN ASSESSMENT OUT THERE THAT SHOWS WE NEED FOUR HUNDRED AND TWENTY MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF STREET WORK.
AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE THAT OFF WITH THE LITTLE BIT WE PUT IN THE BUDGET AND THEN WHATEVER EXCESS WE HAVE AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
AND WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET CAUGHT UP.
WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET THERE.
WELL, AS FAR AS THE MOTION IS CONCERNED, I'M WITH COLE AND THE REST OF YOU GUYS, I'M IN FAVOR OF GIVING PUBLIC SAFETY A RAISE I'M IN FAVOR OF THE PARK'S.
MAINTENANCE ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO WORK ON AND IMPROVE THE PARKS, FACILITIES, ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO WORK ON AND IMPROVE.
AND I RECOGNIZE, TOO, THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH REVENUE COMING IN TO MEET THOSE QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES, EVEN IF WE HAVE SAVINGS EVERY YEAR, WHICH SOME MOST YEARS WE DO HAVE SAVINGS BECAUSE WE PURPOSEFULLY BUDGET TO BE IN THE BLACK AND WE'RE CONSERVATIVE TO DO THAT.
BUT I'M VERY MUCH SO IN FAVOR OF PUTTING THIS IN FRONT OF THE VOTERS, LETTING THEM SAY, YES, WE WANT TO DO THE PARKS, FACILITIES AND INCREASE MAINTENANCE AND WE WANT TO DO THAT YEAR OVER YEAR, WE DON'T JUST WANT TO DO IT IN THE YEARS THAT WE HAVE BUDGET SAVINGS THAT WE COULD PUT TOWARD THAT.
AND THE SAME THING ON THE RAISES FOR THE 911 OPERATORS AND FIRE AND POLICE AND OTHER STAFF, THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO BE OBLIGATED FOR YEAR OVER YEAR.
AND SO IT GIVES THE VOTERS A CHANCE TO SAY THIS IS NOT JUST A ONE TIME EXPENDITURE.
THIS IS SOMETHING I'M IN FAVOR OF YEAR OVER YEAR.
AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO PUT THAT OUT IN FRONT OF THEM.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
ALL OF THOSE AGAINST THE MOTION.
THAT PASSES WITH A FOUR ONE VOTE.
[3.D. CONSIDER ORDINANCE APPROVING THE CITY OF AMARILLO TAX ROLL, SETTING AN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX RATE AND LEVYING A TAX ON ALL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO TAXATION WITHIN THE CITY FOR THE 2021 TAX YEAR. (Contact: Laura Storrs, Assistant City Manager) This is the first reading of an ordinance approving the City of Amarillo tax roll, setting an ad valorem property tax rate, and levying a tax on all property subject to taxation within the City for the 2021 tax year. This ordinance establishes an ad valorem tax rate of $0.40493 per $100.00 property valuation for City maintenance and operations expenses and $0.07911 per $100.00 property valuation for existing debt expenses resulting in a total ad valorem rate of $0.48404 per $100.00 property valuation. THIS TAX RATE WILL RAISE MORE TAXES FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS THAN LAST YEAR’S TAX RATE. THE TAX RATE WILL EFFECTIVELY BE RAISED BY 24.48 PERCENT AND WILL RAISE TAXES FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS ON A $100,000 HOME BY APPROXIMATELY $60.45.]
IS AND LET'S SEE, CONSIDERING THE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD APPROVE THE CITY OF AMARILLO TAX ROLL AND SETTING AN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX RATE, AS WELL AS LEVYING A TAX ON ALL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO TAXATION WITHIN THE CITY FOR THE 2021 TAX YEAR.YES, AND I WILL GO QUICKLY THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION.
THIS IS THE ONE THAT YOU ALL SAW ON JULY 19TH.
OK, WE HAVE THIS IS GOING TO BE THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE TAX RATE.
YOU WILL SEE THIS AGAIN THIS COMING FRIDAY.
WE WILL ALSO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING RELATED TO THE PROPERTY TAX RATE ON FRIDAY.
A COUPLE OF QUICK DEFINITIONS.
THESE ARE OUTLINED BY SENATE BILL 2, AND THIS IS ALL IN THE TEXAS TAX CODE, SECTION 26.
WE ARE REQUIRED TO CALCULATE A VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE THAT ALLOWS FOR THREE PERCENT ABOVE THE PRIOR YEAR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS RATE.
SENATE BILL 2 COMPRESSES THE TIMELINE FOR APPROVING A BUDGET AND REQUIRES A MANDATORY ELECTION IF AN ADOPTED TAX RATE EXCEEDS THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE.
THIS ALSO LIMITS THE CITY'S ABILITY TO LOWER TAXES IF AN ELECTION IS NOT SUCCESSFUL.
SENATE BILL TWO OUTLINES WHAT THAT TAX RATE HAS TO BE IF AN ELECTION IS NOT SUCCESSFUL.
SO REAL QUICK, OVER GOING THROUGH THE TAX RATES, THE CURRENT YEAR TAX RATE FOR 2020 IS 39 .
681 CENTS THAT MAINTAINS OUR CURRENT SERVICE LEVELS.
IF WE WERE TO WALK THAT RATE FORWARD AND ONLY INCLUDE THE INCREASE NEEDED TO FUND THE FINAL YEARS OF THE 2016 VOTER APPROVED PROJECTS FOR PROP ONE, THOSE ARE STREET PROJECTS.
WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE IT WOULD GO UP TO FORTY ONE POINT SIX EIGHT EIGHT CENTS TO PAY FOR THAT ISSUED DEBT SERVICE.
THAT'S ABOUT A DOLLAR SIXTY SEVEN PER MONTH INCREASE ON A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR HOME TO GO UP THAT RATE.
TO GO UP TO THE 2021 VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE.
THAT BRINGS US UP TO FORTY FOUR POINT THREE, THREE FOUR CENTS.
WHAT WE GET WITH THAT RATE, WE GET THE CURRENT SERVICE LEVELS.
WE ALSO GET THAT FUNDING FOR THE DEBT SERVICE ON THE 2016 VOTER APPROVED PROP ONE
[05:25:01]
FINAL STREET PROJECTS.AND ALONG WITH THAT, WE WOULD GET SOME FUNDING FOR PARKS THAT COULD GO FOR SIDEWALK REPAIRS, MOWING PARK BENCHES, ET CETERA.
AGAIN, THIS RATE ALLOWS FOR ABOUT A THREE AND A HALF PERCENT INCREASE ON THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE SIDE ONLY.
IT ALSO ALLOWS A LOOK BACK PERIOD FOR ANY UNUSED PORTION OF THAT THREE AND A HALF CENTS IN LAST YEAR.
THAT'S HOW WE GET TO THE FORTY FOUR POINT THREE FOUR FOUR, THREE, THREE, FOUR CENTS.
WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT FOR A PROPOSED 2021 TAX RATE IS FORTY EIGHT POINT FOUR ZERO FOUR CENTS.
YOU GET YOUR CURRENT SERVICE LEVELS.
ALSO EVEN MORE FUNDING TOWARDS PARKS THAT COULD GO TOWARDS THINGS SUCH AS ATHLETIC FIELDS, TRAILS, PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT.
AGAIN, THINGS THAT WE'VE HEARD IN THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE NEEDS OUT THERE THAT ARE ONCE OUT THERE TO HELP IMPROVE OUR QUALITY OF LIFE.
WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT ADDING FUNDS TO PUBLIC SAFETY.
THIS WOULD BE FOR POLICE OFFICERS, POLICE AND FIRE EQUIPMENT, INCREASES TO THE AECC, PAY RATES AND OVERALL PAY INCREASES FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.
ALONG WITH THAT, THERE WOULD BE INCREASED STREET FUNDING FOR POTHOLE REPAIRS AND RESURFACING.
AND THEN AGAIN AND MORE THIS IS INCLUDING AN ADDITIONAL INCREASE FOR ALL CITY STAFF AT ONE PERCENT.
ALSO, YOU WOULD GET YOUR 2016 VOTER APPROVED DEBT SERVICE SPENDING ON THOSE FINAL STREET PROJECTS.
AND YES, THIS IS A 22 PERCENT INCREASE ON JUST THE CITY.
LOOKING AT THE CITY'S RATE GOING FROM THE 2020 RATE TO THE 2021 RATE, IT IS A 22 PERCENT INCREASE.
IT IS NOT THAT MUCH OF AN INCREASE ON THE TOTAL TAX BILL.
WE'LL LOOK AT THAT IN JUST A SECOND.
TO GO FROM WHAT WE NEED TO FUND OUR DEBT SERVICE AND NO INCREASE TO THE O&M RATE TO GO UP TO THE PROPOSED RATE.
THAT'S A FIVE DOLLAR AND 60 CENT PER MONTH INCREASE ON ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY THOUSAND, I'M SORRY, ON ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR HOME.
IN TOTAL THAT'S SEVEN DOLLARS AND 27 CENTS.
BUT THE 560 IS WHAT GETS US THOSE ADDITIONAL FUNDS, THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR PARKS, FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND FOR STREETS.
SO LET'S LOOK REAL QUICK AT THE OVERALL TAX BILL.
THIS IS ON THAT ONE PAGE HANDOUT.
THIS IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF MANY ON OUR TAX BILLS.
WE HAVE FIVE SCHOOL DISTRICTS, TWO COUNTIES, TWO WATER DISTRICTS AND THE CITY OF AMARILLO, ALL ON A COMBINATION OF PROPERTY TAX BILLS.
THIS IS ONE WITH AMARILLO ISD AND POTTER COUNTY.
AT THE CURRENT RATES FOR ALL THE OTHER ENTITIES AND WITH THE PROPOSED RATE FOR THE CITY OF AMARILLO, THIS IS WHAT THE TAX BILL WOULD LOOK LIKE.
FORTY FIVE PERCENT OF THE TAX BILL WOULD GO TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AISD.
TWENTY SEVEN PERCENT WOULD GO TO POTTER COUNTY.
NO MATTER WHICH VERSION OF THESE PROPERTY TAX BILLS YOU LOOK AT.
19 PERCENT WOULD GO OF THE TOTAL TAX BILL WOULD GO TO THE CITY OF AMARILLO.
AND THAT INCLUDES THIS INCREASE WE'RE LOOKING AT.
AMARILLO COLLEGE WOULD GET NINE PERCENT AND IT WOULD BE LESS THAN ONE PERCENT GOING TO THE WATER DISTRICT.
AGAIN, THIS TOTAL TAX BILL CHANGE FOR THIS PROPOSED TAX RATE.
THE TOTAL TAX BILL WOULD GO UP ABOUT THREE AND A HALF PERCENT.
SINCE THE CITY OF AMARILLO IS IS A SMALLER PORTION OF THAT TOTAL TAX BILL EVEN WITH OUR RATE GOING UP THE WAY IT'S PROPOSED, IT WOULD ONLY CAUSE THE TOTAL TAX BILL TO GO UP THREE AND A HALF PERCENT.
AND AS A REMINDER, IT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, CITIZENS OVER 65 WOULD NOT SEE AN INCREASE RELATED TO THIS CHANGE IN THE PROPOSED TAX RATE.
SO HOW DO WE COMPARE? WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS AS WELL.
SO LOOKING AT THE TEN LARGER CITIES AND THE 10 SMALLER CITIES, WE'RE GOING TO BRING SOME MORE INFORMATION BACK TO YOU ALL ON FRIDAY ON WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FROM A PROPOSED STANDPOINT AS WELL.
BUT ON THE 10 LARGER CITIES BY POPULATION AND THE 10 SMALLER CITIES BY POPULATION LOOKING AT THEIR CURRENT RATES VERSUS OUR PROPOSED RATE FOR NEXT YEAR, THIS IS HOW IT GRAPHS OUT.
SO WE START WITH THE HIGHEST TAX RATE OVER ON THE FAR LEFT, AND THAT'S FORT WORTH AT 70, JUST SEVENTY EIGHT AND A HALF CENTS, JUST OVER 78 CENTS.
ARE WE? I THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENT SLIDE THERE YOU GO.
I'M GOING TO SET THIS DOWN FOR A SECOND.
SO SEVENTY EIGHT AND A HALF CENTS FOR FORT WORTH.
THIS IS THE 2020 RATES FOR ALL THESE ENTITIES.
GOING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO MIDLAND AT THIRTY SIX AND A HALF CENTS.
THERE ARE THREE CITIES OUT OF THESE TWENTY ONE CITIES INCLUDING US, THREE CITIES HAVE A LOWER TAX RATE THAN OUR PROPOSED INCREASED RATE AT FORTY EIGHT POINT FOUR CENTS.
THAT'S PLANO, FRISCO AND MIDLAND.
BUT YOU'LL NOTE ON HERE THE AVERAGE RATE IS JUST UNDER 60 CENTS.
NOW, IF WE CHANGE TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WHAT THIS DOES IS THEN IT IT LAYS ON TOP OF
[05:30:01]
THAT THE TAXABLE VALUES FOR EACH OF THESE COMMUNITIES.SO THERE'S TWO THINGS AT PLAY HERE.
SO YOU'VE GOT YOUR TAX RATE, BUT YOU ALSO HAVE YOUR TAXABLE VALUES.
SO THE WAY WE'RE TRYING TO DO AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON IS LOOKING AT THE TAX REVENUE GENERATED PER CAPITA.
SO WE TAKE THE TAXABLE VALUES FOR THE CURRENT YEAR FOR EACH OF THESE 21 COMMUNITIES.
AND THIS IS OUR CERTIFIED VALUES FOR NEXT YEAR.
SO OUR NEXT YEAR VALUES VERSUS THEIR PRIOR YEAR VALUES.
WE DIVIDE IT BY EACH OF THEIR POPULATIONS AND THEN MULTIPLY IT TIMES THE TAX RATE.
WHEN YOU DO THAT, YOU'RE GETTING A REVENUE PER CAPITA TAX, PROPERTY TAX REVENUE PER CAPITA.
YOU'LL SEE NOW AMARILLO IS ON THE FAR RIGHT AT THE LOWEST AT TWO HUNDRED JUST UNDER TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY TWO DOLLARS PER CAPITA.
AND NOW THOSE THREE CITIES, THE RED BARS ON THIS CHART, FRISCO, PLANO, AND MIDLAND, THAT HAD THE LOWER TAX RATES THAN THE CITY OF AMARILLO'S PROPOSED ONE.
THEY NOW SHIFT MUCH FURTHER TO THE LEFT.
WHAT THAT TELLS US IS THEY HAVE HIGHER TAXABLE VALUES IN THEIR COMMUNITIES PER CAPITA THAN WHAT THE CITY OF AMARILLO HAS.
SO THERE'S TWO THINGS AT PLAY.
LOWER TAX RATE AND A LOWER TAXABLE VALUE IN COMPARISON TO THESE CITIES PRODUCES A LOWER TAX REVENUE PER CAPITA FOR THE CITY OF AMARILLO.
I THINK THAT ONE THING THAT'S IMPORTANT, WE LOOK AT THIS FROM A BUDGETARY STANDPOINT, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT IT AS REVENUE BUT TO OUR TAXPAYERS THIS IS ANOTHER TITLE FOR THIS WOULD BE AVERAGE TAX OR TAXES PAID PER CAPITA, SO THE AVERAGE TAXPAYER.
YOU KNOW, HE'S PAYING TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY ONE DOLLARS ANNUALLY FOR ON THE MUNICIPAL TAXES, JUST AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION.
I THINK WE LOOK AT REVENUE AND EVERYONE THINKS OH THAT IS REVENUE.
THEY'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT REVENUE.
BUT THIS IS ALSO THE TAXES PAID PER CAPITA.
AND THESE ARE PAYING FOR SIMILAR SERVICES ACROSS THESE CITIES.
THERE ARE BASIC SERVICES THAT ALMOST EVERY CITY PROVIDES.
AND SO THERE'S A LITTLE BIT A DIFFERENT VARIANCE BETWEEN CITY TO CITY.
BUT ALL CITIES ARE GOING TO THEY'RE GOING TO PROVIDE POLICE, FIRE PARKS, STREETS, LIBRARIES, ALL THOSE BASIC THINGS.
AND THIS IS KIND OF THE BREAKDOWN ON WHAT KIND OF REVENUE THEY'RE GETTING PER CAPITA IN COMPARISON TO WHAT THE CITY OF AMARILLO GETS PER CAPITA.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS OUR PROPOSED RATE AND OUR NEW CERTIFIED VALUES, WHICH DID GO UP FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR.
AND THIS STILL PUTS US AT THE FAR RIGHT ON THIS GRAPH.
THE AVERAGE AMOUNT IS FIVE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THREE DOLLARS.
AND WE'RE JUST UNDER TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY TWO DOLLARS.
SO WHAT COMES NEXT TODAY, I'M SORRY, TODAY WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE WORKING ON THE TAX RATE.
WE'RE GOING TO DO THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TAX RATE ACTUALLY ON AUGUST 13TH.
WE ARE TAKING A VOTE TODAY ON THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE.
ON AUGUST 13TH ON FRIDAY, WE'LL DO THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TAX RATE AND WE WILL ALSO DO THE SECOND AND FINAL READING ON THE ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE TAX RATE.
THEN WE WILL FOLLOW BY A VOTE TO RATIFY THE TAX RATE.
AND THEN IF THIS RATE THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED IS WHAT WINDS UP BEING APPROVED, WE WILL HAVE AN ITEM FOR THIS COUNCIL TO CALL AN ELECTION.
AND THAT WILL ALL BE DONE THIS FRIDAY AT 1:00 P.M..
SO LAURA THE PROPOSED 2021 TAX RATE, THAT'S GOING TO BE A 24 POINT FORTY EIGHT PERCENT INCREASE, IS THAT CORRECT? ON OH, YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE NOTICE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
AND SO THAT IS AN EFFECTIVE INCREASE OVER THE PRIOR YEAR.
THERE IS ANOTHER TAX RATE TO JUST COMPLICATE THINGS FURTHER.
THERE'S ANOTHER TAX RATE REQUIRED BY STATE LAW.
IT'S THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE THAT IS COMPARING OUR PROPOSED THAT NUMBER YOU'RE SEEING COMPARES OUR PROPOSED TAX RATE TO THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE.
WHAT THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE IS, IT'S THE RATE IT WOULD TAKE TO GENERATE THE EXACT SAME REVENUE ON THE SAME PROPERTIES IN THE NEW YEAR.
AND SO IF THE SAME PROPERTIES, THOSE APPRAISED VALUES ARE GOING UP, THEN THAT NO, IT WOULD TAKE A LOWER TAX RATE TO PRODUCE THE SAME AMOUNT OF REVENUE SO THAT NO NEW REVENUE RATE COMES DOWN.
SO IN THE NOTICE OR IN THE NOTICE ON THE AGENDA, THAT COMPARES THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE TO
[05:35:01]
THE PROPOSED RATE WHERE YOU'RE SEEING THE 24 PERCENT INCREASE.THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION TO CLARIFY.
AND STATE LAW OUTLINES ALL THE NOTICES THAT WE HAVE TO DO.
IT EVEN OUTLINES THE WORDING ON THE MOTIONS THAT WE HAVE TO USE.
AND SO THESE ARE GREAT OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOU ALL TO ASK US QUESTIONS IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND IT, SOMETHING IN THE NOTICE OR THE AGENDA WORDING, BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF RATES THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO CALCULATE BY STATE LAW.
I WAS SPEAKING WITH ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND WE HAVE A NINE PAGE DOCUMENT THAT WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY AND THE STATE COMPTROLLER DIDN'T EVEN PUBLISH IT UNTIL AFTER WE HAD TO POST OUR PROPOSED BUDGET AND IT OUTLINES DETAILED CALCULATIONS THAT WE HAVE TO DO ACCORDING TO STATE LAW TO MEET ALL OF THESE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.
SO IT'S A NINE PAGE DOCUMENT AND IT CHANGED THIS YEAR, EVEN FROM WHAT WAS POSTED LAST YEAR.
SO WE'VE WORKED VERY HARD, ALONG WITH RANDALL COUNTY, WHO IS OUR TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTOR, TO ENSURE THESE RATES ARE ACCURATE.
AND AS THERE HAD BEEN SOME CHANGES THAT MAY HAVE BEEN NOTED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET, IT WAS BECAUSE THE STATE COMPTROLLER'S CALCULATION WORKSHEETS WERE CHANGING JUST SLIGHTLY.
AND WE WERE WORKING OFF OF LAST YEAR'S WORKSHEETS BECAUSE THAT'S ALL WE HAD AVAILABLE AT THE TIME.
SO IT MAKES ME REALLY APPRECIATE THE CITIZEN WHO CAME TO THE PODIUM AND SAID, JUST MAKE IT SIMPLE.
THE FIVE OF US SIT IN THAT BOAT FOR SURE.
EVEN OUR, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO HAVE DECADES OF GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING EXPERIENCE FEEL THAT SAME WAY.
BUT IT'S NOT IN OUR CONTROL TO MAKE IT SIMPLE.
WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE PROCESS THAT THE LEGISLATURE SETS OUT FOR US.
OK, DO WE HAVE MOTION? YES, MAYOR, WE DO.
I MOVE THAT THE PROPERTY TAX RATE BE INCREASED BY THE ADOPTION OF A TAX RATE OF ZERO POINT FOUR EIGHT FOUR ZERO FOUR, WHICH IS EFFECTIVELY A TWENTY FOUR POINT FOUR EIGHT PERCENT INCREASE IN THE TAX RATE.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL AND SECONDED ABOUT COUNCIL MEMBER SAUER TO APPROVE THIS ORDINANCE.
DOESN'T HAVE A NUMBER YET, DOES IT? OK, WHICH WOULD APPROVE THE CITY OF AMARILLO TAX ROLL AND SET AN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX RATE.
DISCUSSION, I GUESS, BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL.
I HAVE NO DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT.
I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD.
NOTHING FROM COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH.
NOTHING FROM COUNCIL MEMBER STANLEY.
OK, SO AT THIS TIME WE WILL ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
AND THE ITEM PASSES WITH THE FOUR ONE VOTE.
OK, ANYTHING ELSE? I GUESS WE'RE AT THE END OF OUR AGENDA.
THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.