2.A.Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding short term rentals of real property.(Staff Presenter: Tony McIlwain, Development Services Director)

[2.A.Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding short term rentals of real property.(Staff Presenter: Tony McIlwain, Development Services Director) ]

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THAT BRINGS US TO SECTION TWO.

REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS THIS AFTERNOON 2A IS TO RECEIVE A REPORT, HOLD A DISCUSSION AND GIVE STAFF DIRECTION REGARDING SHORT TERM RENTALS OF REAL PROPERTY.

THE PRESENTER THIS AFTERNOON IS TONY MCILWAIN, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR.

MR. MCILWAIN.

THANK YOU, AMANDA.

I'M READY. GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL.

I'M BRINGING TO YOU TONIGHT A RELATIVELY SHORT BUT IMPACTFUL PRESENTATION REGARDING SHORT TERM RENTALS, SEEKING TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK AND DIRECTION AT THE CONCLUSION OF THIS PRESENTATION.

SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS SOME OF THE TOPICS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HIT TONIGHT DOING THIS DISCUSSION.

BASICALLY WHAT OUR SHORT TERM RENTALS, THE PROVIDERS, HOW THE CITIES REGULATE THESE TYPES OF ACTIVITIES.

WHAT IS BURLESON EXPERIENCING IN TERMS OF ISSUES AND COMPLAINTS? THE LEGALITY OF ANY ACTIONS WE UNDERTAKE WITH THE REGULATION OF STRS, SHORT TERM RENTALS.

WHAT ARE OTHER CITIES DOING REGARDING SHORT TERM RENTALS? AND THEN LASTLY, REGULATION OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOLLOWED BY NEXT STEPS.

SO IN GENERAL, WHAT IS THE SHORT TERM RENTAL? IT REFERS TO AN ACTIVITY IN WHICH ONE PARTY THE HOST AGREES TO RENT OUT ALL OR PART OF A HOME TO ANOTHER PARTY, THE GUEST ON A TEMPORARY TIME LIMIT BASIS.

THE DURATION OF THAT TIME CAN RANGE ANYWHERE FROM A DAY TO MULTIPLE DAYS TO MULTIPLE WEEKS.

THERE'S NO PRECISE LEGAL DEFINITION FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS, AND WHAT YOU'LL SEE IS A LOT OF COMMUNITIES LOOKING AT BEST AVAILABLE DATA TO DEFINE THIS

[00:05:06]

TERM. GENERALLY, STAFF HERE DEEMS SHORT TERM RENTALS TO BE SOMETHING LESS THAN 30 DAYS IN TERMS OF A STAY.

SO FOR THOSE WHO MIGHT HAVE BEEN ON THE COUNCIL A FEW YEARS AGO, MY PREDECESSOR PROVIDED A PRESENTATION TO YOU ALL AND LISTED SOME OF THE PROVIDERS FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS.

THAT'S VERY MUCH THE CASE NOW.

WE'VE GOT SOME OF THOSE ON THE SCREEN THERE.

IT'S NOT EXHAUSTIVE.

IT COULD BE A NON CORPORATE ENTITY.

IT COULD BE ANYBODY LEASING OUT THEIR PROPERTY ON A LIMITED DURATION.

SO HOW DOES THE CITY REGULATE AND ENFORCE SHORT TERM RENTALS? CURRENTLY, WE HAVE NO EXISTING STR REPORTING OR REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS.

NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES ESTIMATES OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, ANYWHERE FROM 8 TO 10 RESPONSE CALLS FROM CONCERNED NEIGHBORS REGARDING WHAT THEY DEEMED TO BE RENTING OF PROPERTY, AND SO IT'S COMPLAINT DRIVEN IN NATURE.

SOME OF THE FEEDBACK THAT PLANNING STAFF AS WELL AS NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES STAFF HAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY.

RESIDENTS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THEY BELIEVE TO BE A TRANSIENT ELEMENT WITHIN THEIR RESPECTIVE COMMUNITIES.

RECURRING, UNFAMILIAR PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND A LOT OF CASES, MULTIPLE CARS PARKED IN FRONT OF A HOME, IN SOME CASES DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR, AND THEN YOUR MORE CONCERNING ISSUE BEING THAT OF IS IT A COMMERCIAL USE IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA? SO CURRENTLY WHAT WE HAVE ON THE BOOKS IN OUR OLD TOWN OVERLAY DISTRICT, WE HAVE A DEFINITION FOR BED AND BREAKFAST AND THAT IS AS CLOSE AS WE COME TO GETTING CLOSE TO THE SHORT TERM RENTAL PHENOMENON THAT WE SEE.

STAFF DOES NOT CONSIDER BED AND BREAKFASTS TO BE SHORT TERM RENTALS, AND SINCE THE TERM IS NOT DEFINED IN OUR CODE NOR LISTED AS AN ALLOWABLE USE, IT LEADS ITSELF TO INTERPRETATION DEPENDING ON THE STAFF PERSON THAT IS ASKED A QUESTION.

I WANT TO MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN A SHORT TERM RENTAL OF A HOUSE OR ROOM AGAINST THE LONGER TERM RENTAL OF THE SAME PROPERTY WHICH WE WOULD DEEM TO BE A LEASE SOMETHING GREATER THAN 30 DAYS.

HOWEVER, THAT DOESN'T PRECLUDE SOMEONE WHO'S RENTING ON A SHORT TERM, WHO'S LEASING OUT A SHORT TERM RENTAL TO DO SOMETHING LESS THAN 30 DAYS.

WE DON'T HAVE A DEFINITION OR A THRESHOLD, SO PEOPLE ARE FREE TO LEASE OUT GREATER THAN 30 DAYS IF THEY WANT TO.

SO IN TERMS OF WHAT CAN WE LEGALLY REGULATE, WE'VE GOT SOME BULLET POINTS TO THE LEFT OF THE SCREEN.

YOU CAN LEGALLY DEFINE A STR.

IMPLEMENT LAND USE REGULATIONS.

YOU CAN IMPLEMENT REGISTRATION AND INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS IF YOU DEEM THEM TO BE NECESSARY.

YOU COULD SUBJECT THEM TO HOTEL MOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES.

YOU CAN LOOK AT A HIGH LEVEL OF ZONING SCRUTINY, THAT BEING A SUP OR PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.

YOU CAN REQUIRE HEALTH AND SAFETY REGULATIONS AND OCCUPANCY LIMITATIONS.

NOW, WHEN I SAY LEGALLY, THIS DOESN'T MEAN THAT SOMEONE IS PROHIBITED FROM SUING THE CITY IF THIS TYPE OF ACTION IS UNDERTAKEN, BUT WE HAVE SEEN THESE ELEMENTS IN OTHER CITIES ORDINANCES.

WE'RE NOT TRACKING WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF OR EMBROILED IN A LAWSUIT, BUT WE'VE SEEN THEM IN SOME OF THE LOCAL CITIES.

OFF TO THE RIGHT, WE'VE GOT FOUR CASES THAT MORE OF YOUR WELL KNOWN CASES REGARDING SHORT TERM RENTALS.

TWO OF THEM EXCUSE ME, THEY'RE MOSTLY HERE IN THE METROPLEX AND WE'VE GOT TWO OF THOSE CASES IN AUSTIN.

THEY DEAL WITH EVERYTHING FROM HOMESTEADING.

THEY DEAL WITH ISSUES AS TO WHETHER OR NOT PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE BEEN PRECLUDED FROM REASONABLE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY IN TERMS OF THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY.

IN SOME CASES, IF THERE'S ENOUGH DEMONSTRABLE EVIDENCE THAT THE CITY HAS IDENTIFIED A PROBLEM AND HAS RESPONDED ACCORDINGLY WITH A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF AMPLE FEEDBACK, AND THE REGULATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED HAVE AT A MINIMUM ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES, THE COURTS HAVE BEEN SOMEWHAT FAVORABLE TO THESE TYPES OF REGULATIONS.

I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IF YOU PURSUE AN STR REGULATION, YOU CANNOT DISCRIMINATE BASED ON RACE, GENDER OR RELIGION, AGE AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

SO STAFF REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING CITIES WITH REGARD TO SHORT TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS AND BY AND LARGE. THEY WERE PRETTY ROBUST IN SOME OF WHAT WAS REQUIRED.

[00:10:02]

SOME CITIES REQUIRE MAPS AND PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.

THEY REQUIRED THE NAME OF THE PROPERTY OWNER TO BE LISTED ON A PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENT.

THEY HAVE OCCUPANCY LIMITS AND THRESHOLDS IN TERMS OF MAXIMUM OCCUPANTS PER ROOM, MAXIMUM OCCUPANTS PER RESIDENCE.

THEY HAVE PARKING PLAN REQUIREMENTS.

IT RUNS THE GAMUT AS TO WHAT SOME CITIES ARE INCORPORATING IN THEIR SHORT TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS, AND THEN YOU SEE SOME CITIES THAT DON'T HAVE ANY REGULATIONS AT ALL.

YOU'LL SEE THAT KELLER HAS NO REGULATION, MANSFIELD HAS NO REGULATION, AND OUR LOOK NORTH RICHMOND HILLS HAS NO REGULATIONS AND YOU'VE GOT CITIES THAT HAVE, AGAIN, ROBUST REGULATIONS.

COPPELL IS THE ONE THAT HAS EXCUSE ME, EULESS IS ONE THAT HAS ROBUST REGULATIONS AS WELL AS GRAND PRAIRIE.

I WANT TO PAUSE HERE BECAUSE IN WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DALLAS, THAT IS STILL UNDERGOING A REVIEW OF THEIR SHORT TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS.

WE SEE A COMMON THREAD OF WHO'S ALREADY PROVIDING THAT AS A SERVICE, AND CITIES ARE TRYING TO BE RESPONSIVE TO THIS IN TERMS OF IT BEING A MARKETPLACE, BECAUSE THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT IS.

SO BEFORE YOU, YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF OPTIONS.

YOU CAN SIMPLY CHOOSE TO NOT DO ANYTHING, AND WE CAN ENFORCE ANY COMPLAINTS THROUGH OUR NORMAL CITY PRACTICES, MOSTLY PRACTICES THAT WOULD INVOLVE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES OR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, [INAUDIBLE] MUSIC, PARKING, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

YOU CAN REGULATE VIA AN ORDINANCE WHICH ADDS SOME REGULATORY TEETH TO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU MAY DEEM AS BEING NECESSARY TO HEARKEN TO IN THIS ORDINANCE.

STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND IF YOU DO PROCEED DOWN THE PATH OF AN ORDINANCE, AT A MINIMUM, YOU LOOK AT A REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT.

PAYMENT OF A HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX, AND THEN PUT IN ENOUGH DEFINITION STRENGTH IN OUR CODE TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF SINGLE FAMILY ZONED AREAS.

YOU CAN LOOK AT CERTAIN INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU'RE INTERESTED IN AND THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON IN TERMS OF ALL THE THINGS YOU WANT TO HAVE.

WE'RE PREPARED TO TALK ABOUT THIS IN LENGTH WITH YOU IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU DESIRE, BUT OUR RECOMMENDATION, COUNCIL, IS THAT YOU ALLOW US TO AT LEAST TAKE A LOOK AT PROVIDING YOU WITH AN ORDINANCE FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION SO THAT WE CAN HAVE SOMETHING FROM A REGULATORY STANDPOINT TO PROVIDE ANSWERS TO INDIVIDUALS INTERESTED IN DOING SHORT TERM RENTALS HERE IN THE CITY AND ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.

THAT CONCLUDES THIS PRESENTATION.

MY CONCERN ABOUT ALL THIS IS VERY SIMPLE, AND THAT IS WHAT I DON'T WANT US TO DO, IS CREATE A SITUATION THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE TO CREATE. NOW, RIGHT NOW, WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THERE ARE VERY FEW COMPLAINTS OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS [INAUDIBLE] COMPLAINT AND AGAIN, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THERE WON'T BE MORE AS THE POPULATION GROWS, BUT FOR ME IT'S EITHER. I DON'T MIND THE RESTORATION.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S A BAD IDEA.

THAT WAY, YOU CAN KEEP UP WITH WHAT'S GOING ON.

FOR ME, I WOULDN'T WANT TO GO MUCH PAST THAT AT ALL, BECAUSE NOW WE'VE CREATED A SITUATION THAT WE MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO IN A COURT OF LAW, GET BY WITH AS FAR AS ENFORCEMENT.

SO THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS ON IT.

THANK YOU. I DO THINK WE HAVE SOME ISSUES IN OUR CITY.

I'M NOT DISPUTING NECESSARILY THE NUMBERS, BUT I DO THINK THAT MAYBE WE MISS OUT ON SOME NUMBERS, SOME THINGS MAYBE THAT ARE CALLED INTO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT WE DON'T ACTUALLY CAPTURE OR TRACK BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A REGISTRATION PROCESS NOW.

CORRECT. SO THERE'S WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE DON'T KNOW.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF WHAT YOU HAVE HERE AS FAR AS YOUR RECOMMENDATION.

I WOULD LIKE TO ADD ONE, THOUGH, AND THAT WOULD BE TO REQUIRE A FIRE FIRE INSPECTION ANNUALLY.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT.

BASED ON WHAT WE UNDERSTAND LEGALLY, WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO, AND WE DON'T WANT TO IMPEDE ON THE RIGHTS OF WHAT PEOPLE CAN DO WITH THEIR OWN HOMES.

I DO AGREE WITH REQUIRING THE REGISTRATION AND THE HOTEL MOTEL TAX.

I THINK THAT WILL BE A GREAT PLACE TO START FOR NOW AND SEE WHERE WE GO FROM HERE.

I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF HEARTBURN WITH THE IDEA OF TAXING THIS FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.

[00:15:02]

ONE IS WE ALREADY COLLECT MORE HOT/MOT TAX THAN WE CAN SPEND, FRANKLY, JUST BASED ON THE MOTELS AND OTHER PAYERS HERE IN TOWN, AND I DON'T SEE ANY NEED TO COLLECT THE TAX THAT WE ALREADY HAVE A HARD TIME TRYING TO DO SOMETHING USEFUL WITH IT, BUT THE OTHER REASON AND IT'S A MORE PRESSING REASON IS BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE ABILITY TO SET UP YOUR HOME AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL IS IMPORTANT TO SOME OF OUR CITIZENS THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO DO THAT, AND WHEN THEY DO THAT, THEY'RE IN COMPETITION WITH OTHER PEOPLE DOING THE SAME THING IN OTHER CITIES AND IN THE COUNTY WHERE THIS TAX IS NOT COLLECTED.

SO I FEEL LIKE BY COLLECTING A TAX, ESPECIALLY A TAX, WE DON'T NEED TO COLLECT THAT WE'RE PUTTING OUR OWN CITIZENS AT A DISADVANTAGE IN WHAT COULD BE A COMPETITIVE MARKET.

I'M PERSONALLY A FREQUENT FLIER OF AIRBNBS AND VRBOS AND OTHER THINGS BECAUSE FOR MY FAMILY, MOSTLY BECAUSE OF MY HANDICAPPED SON'S RESTRICTED DIET AND THE NEED FOR MY WIFE TO HAVE A WAY TO COOK FOR HIM WHEN WE'RE TRAVELING, THAT'S OUR PREFERRED TYPE OF ACCOMMODATION BECAUSE YOU JUST DON'T GET THE KIND OF THINGS WE NEED IN YOUR TYPICAL HOTELS AND MOTEL ROOMS. SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS.

IT'S BEEN MY OBSERVATION THAT MOST VERBOSE AND AIRBNBS AND OTHERS ARE VERY WELL MAINTAINED BECAUSE THEY'RE IN A VERY COMPETITIVE BUSINESS.

THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE HOME IS NOT ONLY APPEALING FROM THE CURB, BUT ALSO FROM THE INSIDE AS WELL.

SO IT'S NOT UNSURPRISING TO ME THAT A LOT OF TIMES THESE HOMES THAT ARE RENTED ON SHORT TERM RENTALS ARE BETTER CARED FOR THAN THE SURROUNDING OWNER OCCUPIED HOMES OR ESPECIALLY RENTAL HOMES, LONG TERM RENTALS.

SO NOT SOMETHING I'M OBJECTING TO IN ANY WAY, AND I DON'T WANT TO LIMIT THE ABILITY OR ENCROACH UPON THE ABILITY OF PEOPLE TO BE COMPETITIVE WHEN THEY CHOOSE TO DO THIS. SO THAT'S MY THOUGHTS ON IT.

I APPRECIATE YOU SHARING THAT, AND MY FAMILY FREQUENTS VRBO AND HOMEAWAY BECAUSE WHEN WE TRAVEL, WE HAVE LITTLE ONES AND IT'S MUCH EASIER TO HAVE THE HOME FEEL AND HAVE THE ABILITY TO PUT THE KIDS DOWN AND CONTINUE DINNER OR CLEAN UP AND WITH THE HOTEL ROOM.

OFTENTIMES YOU DON'T HAVE THAT SEPARATION, AND SO IT'S DIFFICULT TO TRAVEL WITH LITTLES, AND SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THESE TYPES OF RENTALS, AND I ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT BECAUSE IT'S A HOME, THERE'S DIFFERENT POPULATIONS THAT CAN REALLY BENEFIT FROM THIS, SUCH AS OUR MILITARY FAMILIES.

I KNOW THAT THEY DON'T ALWAYS KNOW HOW LONG THEY'RE GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE, AND THEY WANT THEIR FAMILIES TO FEEL AT HOME IN A COMMUNITY AND NOT NECESSARILY JUST LOCATED ON A BASE AND FEELING LIKE THEY THEY BELONG AS PART OF A COMMUNITY, AND SO THAT'S IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE, AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, DON'T HINDER THESE OPPORTUNITIES FOR FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS THAT CAN UTILIZE THEM AND BENEFIT FROM THEM.

I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU SHARED ABOUT THE HOTEL MOTEL TAX.

INITIALLY, I WAS VERY MUCH YES, LIKE WHERE I'M TORN WITH IS IF YOU OWN A HOTEL IN OUR CITY LIMITS, YOU ARE FORCED TO COLLECT THAT, AND SO THESE ARE SAME RENTAL FOR PEOPLE TO STAY OVERNIGHT.

I KNOW THEY WOULD BE AT A DISADVANTAGE FROM A NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY THAT MAY NOT HAVE THAT ADDITIONAL TAX, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THOSE THAT ARE RENTING FOR NIGHT STAY ALREADY HAVE TO PAY THAT AND CONTRIBUTE TO THAT FUND.

SO I'M A LITTLE ON THE FENCE ABOUT THAT, BUT I DEFINITELY WOULD APPRECIATE THE REGISTRATION SO THAT WE CAN START KEEPING TRACK OF WHEN IF CALLS HAPPEN, IF THINGS HAPPEN, WE KNOW AND ALSO FOR THE HOMEOWNERS THE BENEFIT OF HAVING A COMMUNITY THAT KNOWS OUR HOME IF WE'RE NOT THERE LIVING THERE AT THE TIME AND IT'S RENTED OUT THESE ARE THE RESOURCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM AND THE CITY HAS THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT KNOWS CONTACT INFORMATION AND THINGS OF THE TRUE HOMEOWNER IN THE EVENT THAT ACCIDENTS HAPPEN OR ANYTHING HAPPENS WHILE THEY'RE AWAY.

OKAY, I WOULD AGREE.

I THINK THE REGISTRATION WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL AND IT WOULD ALLOW US TO GAUGE EXACTLY WHAT WE DO HAVE, BUT I'M WITH DAN. I DON'T THINK I'M IN FAVOR OF THE OCCUPANCY TAX.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S NECESSARY.

OKAY, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE TAX EITHER ON THE REGISTRATION.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IS THE FACT OF HOLDING PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE FOR MISBEHAVIOR.

I THINK ON THE REGISTRATION, WE NEED TO HAVE THE PERSON, THE OWNER OF THIS OR THE COMPANY THAT'S MANAGING IT WILL SEND THEM THE BILL FOR THE VIOLATION OF THE

[00:20:03]

NUISANCE AND NOT AND I DON'T WANT TO TIRE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND EVERYBODY ELSE HAVING TO RUN BY THERE AND CHECK ON IT.

I SAY WE GO BY, WE CHECK ONE TIME, WE GIVE THEM A WARNING, WE COME BACK, WE DON'T EVEN STOP.

WE JUST SEND THE BILL AND JUST TELL THEM THIS IS WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK THAT WE MIGHT BE OVERLOOKING IS THE FACT THAT WE'VE HAD FIVE IN HOW MANY YEARS OF PROBLEMS. THAT'S NOT A LARGE AMOUNT.

SO THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME SHORT TERM RENTALS OUT THERE THAT'S DOING IT RIGHT, AND I DON'T WANT TO IMPOSE UPON THEM, AND WHAT I'M ASKING ON THE REGISTRATION IS NOT GOING TO AFFECT THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY DOING IT RIGHT, BUT I'D LIKE TO HAVE SOMEBODY, NOT THE RENTERS, BUT THE OWNER, TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, TO MAKE THEM PAY. THAT'S THE ONLY WAY.

YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE IT HURT OR IT'S NOT GOING TO STICK.

SO IF WE COULD DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT BEFORE, BUT I'M NOT FOR THE TAX.

I THINK IT'D TAKE MORE TIME WITH THE CITY TO COLLECT IT AND MANAGE IT THAN IT'S WORTH COLLECTING.

I DON'T THINK IT'S WORTH IT. I DON'T WANT TO THROW THE TAXES OFF THE TABLE RIGHT NOW TILL WE DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH, BECAUSE I JUST DID TWO HOMES ON IN BURLESON AND THEY'RE CHARGING TAXES.

I JUST PULLED UP TWO DID A WEEK STAY AND THEY'RE CHARGING TAXES, SO WELL, DEPENDING ON WHAT THIS ONE'S $83 FOR FIVE DAYS. ANOTHER ONE WAS $12 BECAUSE IT WAS ONLY $30 A NIGHT.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT HOW AIRBNB AND VRBO CHARGES TAXES AND SO THEY MAY BE CHARGING TAX, THEY MAY BE COLLECTING IT, BUT WE'RE NOT GETTING IT RIGHT.

SO THERE MAY BE SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT IN REGARDS TO THAT.

THIS IS SO NEW TO ALL OF US.

I DID NOT EXPECT ANYBODY TO KNOW THAT.

SO I JUST I WAS DOING THE EXACT SAME THING.

I PULLED UP A COUPLE. SOME DON'T HAVE TAXES AND THEN THIS ONE DOES AND IT SAYS STATE.

SO I WONDER WHAT IS WHAT DIFFERENTIATES WHEN THE STATE CAN COLLECT THEIR TAXES AND AREN'T IN THE CITY.

I'M ESSENTIALLY AN AIRBNB FOR BUSINESSES AND I DO NOT CHARGE TAX.

SO YEAH, THIS ONE COLLECTED I DID A WEEK STAY SAYS $130 IN TAXES ACCOMMODATIONS TAX IS WHAT IT SAYS. RONNIE WHERE DO YOU STAND ON TAXES? WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THE TAX PART? NO, I DON'T LIKE THE TAX PART.

I DON'T MIND THE REGISTRATION.

WE CAN SIT HERE AND GET IN A SITUATION WE DON'T WANT IN AS FAR AS ADDING THIS AND THAT AND WHATEVER, BUT REGISTRATION IS RELATIVELY EASY, MAYOR.

THAT'S ABOUT ALL I WANT TO GET INTO ON THIS DEAL RIGHT HERE.

I DON'T WANT TO GET OVER OUR HEADS IN THIS AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE A PROBLEM WE'VE CREATED FOR OURSELVES IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

HOW ABOUT WE DO THE REGISTRATION WITH THE ABILITY TO COME BACK ONCE WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE HAVE? BUT I DON'T WANT TO BURDEN THE CITY WITH COLLECTING TAXES AND HAVING TO MANAGE THAT.

BUT NO, I AGREE.

I'M NOT SAYING WE DO IT.

I THINK WE JUST NEED TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH ON THIS AND FIND OUT THE TAXES THAT THEY ARE CHARGING.

WHO IS IT GOING TO AND WHAT IS IT FOR BECAUSE IT SAYS HOTEL TAX IN THERE AS WELL.

THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS. SO BEFORE WE SLAP THAT ON THEM, LET'S JUST GO FIND OUT AND GET SOME HISTORY POSSIBLY IF AIRBNB OR WHOMEVER DOESN'T REQUIRE THEM TO CHARGE TAX AND THEY'RE DOING IT ON THEIR OWN.

PART OF OUR STIPULATIONS WITH REGISTRATION IS THAT THEY CANNOT CHARGE TAX.

UNLESS IT COMES BACK TO THE CITY, THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO COMPONENTS OF THE TAX.

ONE IS A STATE TAX THAT'S LEVIED AND THE OTHER IS A CITY LOCAL OPTION TAX.

SO WE CAN LOOK AT THOSE OPTIONS AND BRING YOU SOME SCENARIOS.

I THINK A LOT OF THESE NATIONAL WEBSITES, THEY'RE ALWAYS GOING TO ADD SOME ESTIMATE ON THOSE FOR THE FEES THAT YOU WOULD HAVE, AND THEY'RE GOING TO SHOW THAT TO YOU WHETHER THEY ACTUALLY CHARGE THOSE OR NOT AND COLLECT THEM AND THEN REMIT THEM TO THE STATE COMPTROLLER OR THE CITY'S.

I'M NOT SURE, BUT WE'LL GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT.

YEAH. SO THE STATE DOESN'T REQUIRE--THE STATE DOES REQUIRE A HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX AND THEY WILL NOT WAIVE IT.

SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COLLECT THE STATE.

THE PROVIDER WOULD COLLECT THE TAX AND THEY WOULD REMIT IT TO THE CONTROLLERS.

OKAY, SO WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.

THE REGISTRATION, GO FORWARD WITH THE REGISTRATION.

YES, I HEARD TWO OF THE THINGS MENTIONED.

ONE WAS FIRE INSPECTION AND MR. JOHNSON MENTIONED HAVING POINT OF CONTACT INFORMATION.

I GUESS WE CAN INCORPORATE INTO THE REGISTRATION.

YES, I AGREE.

WE'RE ON BOARD. OKAY, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I DID HAVE ONE SPEAKER CARD THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY DOING WHAT THEY ASKED YOU TO DO.

[00:25:05]

SO IT'S BY TODD HULSEY.

I URGE THE COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF, DIRECT STAFF TO REGULATE SHORT TERM RENTALS BY ORDINANCE.

OTHER CITIES IN THE METROPLEX HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH SHORT TERM RENTALS, AND I BELIEVE THAT BURLESON SHOULD GET IN FRONT OF THE ISSUE BEFORE WE ALSO BEGIN TO HAVE PROBLEMS WITH SHORT TERM RENTALS. THANK YOU.

THANKS, TODD. [CHUCKLING] THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL THAT'LL MOVE US ON TO SECTION THREE PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS.

WE HAVE NO PROCLAMATIONS OR PRESENTATIONS FOR THIS EVENING, SO THAT MOVES US ON TO 3C COMMUNITY INTEREST ITEMS COUNCIL

[3.C.Community Interest Items]

, BUT WE HAD A [INAUDIBLE] AND CREATED A DEAL.

IT WAS SATURDAY NIGHT, I BELIEVE, AND IT WAS SET UP TO HELP THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WITH ABUSED WOMEN, I BELIEVE.

NOW, THAT SAID, BETTY LOU IS REALLY, REALLY UPSET WITH ME BECAUSE I GOT THE WRONG DATE AND I PROMISED HER I WOULD BE THERE AND NOW I'VE GOT TO GET ON MY HANDS AND KNEES AND BEG FOR HER FORGIVENESS, BUT IT WAS A GREAT DEAL THAT SHE DID SET UP, AND I THINK IT WAS QUITE A SUCCESSFUL FUNDRAISER, AND I'M ASHAMED OF MYSELF FOR NOT BEING THERE.

IT'S OKAY, RONNIE.

BRIEFLY, JUST A NOTE OF THANKS TO PUBLIC WORKS STAFF AND FIRE AND POLICE FOR THEIR HANDLING OF THE ICE EVENT THAT WE HAD LAST WEEK.

THANKS FOR BEING ON TOP OF IT.

GETTING AHEAD OF IT. PUBLIC WORKS GUYS DID A GREAT JOB.

I WANT TO ADD ON TO THAT AND SAY, YES, THANK YOU TO ALL OF THEM, BUT ALSO THE STAFF, ESPECIALLY COMMUNICATIONS.

THEY DID A REALLY GOOD JOB KEEPING UP WITH STUFF ON SOCIAL AS WELL AS CITY MANAGER AND HIS STAFF, EMAILING US REGULARLY, KEEPING US UPDATED WITH THE REGULAR WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE CITY AND GRATEFUL THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TOO SERIOUS AND EVERYTHING TURNED OUT OKAY, AND WE'RE BACK WITH SOME WARM WEATHER.

I'M NOT GOING TO ADD MUCH ON TO THAT.

I'M JUST GOING TO SAY I AGREE.

CITY STAFF, Y'ALL DID AN EXCELLENT JOB AND I THANK Y'ALL, AND THAT INCLUDES EVERYBODY FROM OUR FIRST RESPONDERS ALL THE WAY TO THE ONES THAT WERE KEEPING THE COMMUNITY UPDATED ON THE SOCIAL MEDIA SITES.

GREATLY APPRECIATE YOU.

SAME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU TO ALL OF OUR AMAZING STAFF.

WE ARE GRATEFUL THAT YOU CHOSE THIS CITY TO SERVE IN AND THAT YOU SERVE OUR CITIZENS, OUR COMMUNITY SO WELL.

SO THANK YOU.

SAME THING WE'VE GOT THIS COUNCIL IS REALLY, REALLY BLESSED WITH THE STAFF WE HAVE AND THE COMMUNICATION, AND IT'S EVEN GETTING BETTER EVERY DAY.

SO YEAH, IT MAKES OUR JOB A LOT EASIER.

WE APPRECIATE IT. OKAY, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

[4.CHANGES TO POSTED AGENDA]

THAT BRINGS US TO SECTION FOUR.

CHANGES TO THE POSTED AGENDA.

4A IS ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED OR WITHDRAWN.

I DON'T KNOW OF ANY AND THEN 4B ITEMS TO BE WITHDRAWN FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION BY THE CITY COUNCIL STAFF OR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IN ATTENDANCE. ITEMS TO BE ADDED TO THE CONSENT AGENDA WOULD REQUIRE AN OFFICIAL VOTE BY CITY COUNCIL.

ARE THERE ANY ITEMS TO BE WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT AGENDA FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BY STAFF OR ANY MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE IN ATTENDANCE? ANYBODY? I HAVE ONE.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEPARATELY DISCUSS F THE FIVE YEAR CONTRACT WITH PRIORITY DISPATCH CORPORATION.

THE MEDICAL DISPATCH.

6F, PLEASE.

OKAY.

I WANT TO LOOK AT AND I JUST WANT TO OFFER A COUPLE OF COMMENTS, BUT ON THE ITEM ABOUT JCSUD, ITEM 6B.

OKAY, CITY COUNCIL HAS REMOVED ITEMS 6B AND 6F FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION.

SO THAT'LL BRING US ON TO SECTION FIVE CITIZENS APPEARANCES.

EACH PERSON IN ATTENDANCE WHO DESIRES TO SPEAK TO CITY COUNCIL ON AN ITEM NOT POSTED ON THE AGENDA SHALL SPEAK DURING THIS SECTION.

A SPEAKER CARD MUST BE FILLED OUT AND TURNED INTO MY OFFICE HERE PRIOR TO ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL.

EACH SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED 3 MINUTES.

I HAVE NO SPEAKER CARDS FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT POSTED.

ITEMS I DO HAVE SOME FOR POSTED ITEMS. SO IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AT THIS TIME ON AN ITEM NOT POSTED ON THE AGENDA? I SEE NONE. THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO SECTION SIX CONSENT AGENDA.

[6.CONSENT AGENDA]

[00:30:01]

ALL ITEMS LISTED IN THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE ENACTED IN ONE MOTION.

THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THE ITEMS. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

AUTHORIZES THE CITY MANAGER TO IMPLEMENT EACH ITEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY STAT WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO TONIGHT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSENT AGENDA IS ITEMS 6A THEN ITEMS 6C, D, E, THEN ITEMS 6G THROUGH 6M.

MAYOR, IF YOU COULD ASK FOR A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AS STATED.

IS THERE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND, A MOTION BY JIMMY AND A SECOND BY RICK.

PLEASE VOTE. PASSES UNANIMOUS.

[6.B.Consider approval of an interlocal agreement with Johnson County Special Utility District (JCSUD) regarding placement of JCSUD water facilities within the City of Burleson's right-of-way of Lakewood Drive. (Staff Contact: Errick Thompson, Deputy Director of Public Works)]

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 6B.

CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AN INNER LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH JOHNSON COUNTY SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT REGARDING PLACEMENT OF THE JCSUD WATER FACILITY WITHIN THE CITY OF BURLESON'S RIGHT OF WAY OF LOCKWOOD DRIVE.

THE STAFF CONTACT IS ERIC THOMPSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.

I DON'T NEED A PRESENTATION ON THIS, BUT AS YOU ALL KNOW, I'M A CONTRACTOR WORKING IN CITY RIGHTS OF WAY, AND I'VE SEEN HOW WE DEALT WITH FRANCHISE UTILITIES LOCATED WITHIN OUR RIGHTS OF WAY.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE'RE GIVING JCSUD A LITTLE DIFFERENT CONSIDERATION THAN WE WOULD SAY ATMOS ENERGY OR OTHER ENTITIES THAT LOCATE THEIR FACILITIES WITHIN OUR RIGHT OF WAY AND CHARGE CUSTOMERS FOR THE SERVICES.

FOR SOME REASON ON THIS, WE'VE DECIDED THAT IF WE DO A FUTURE REALIGNMENT OF OUR ROADWAY THAT WE ARE AGREEING TO PAY FOR THE REALIGNMENT OF THEIR FACILITIES AS WELL.

IS THERE A REASON WHY WE WOULD TAKE THAT RESPONSIBILITY ON? SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST, WE'RE SAVING THEM THE COST OF PURCHASING EASEMENTS, WHICH THEY TYPICALLY HAVE TO DO BECAUSE THEY DON'T TYPICALLY LOCATE WITHIN RIGHTS OF WAY. WE'RE GIVING THEM THE EASEMENTS.

WHY ARE WE ALSO AGREEING TO PAY IF WE EVER NEED TO MOVE THEIR LINE? WE'RE BEING FAIRLY--SORRY, ERIC THOMPSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.

WE'RE BEING CONSISTENT WITH HOW WE TREAT THE OTHER UTILITIES, ALLOWING THEM TO PUT THEIR LINE OR THEIR FACILITIES INSIDE THE RIGHT OF WAY, BUT WE'RE NOT CHARGING THEM A FRANCHISE FEE FOR THAT, CORRECT? NO, SIR. THERE'S NOT A FRANCHISE FEE, BUT IT'S SAVING TIME ON THE PROJECT TO KEEP THE CONSTRUCTION ON SCHEDULE AND UNDERWAY.

JUST LIKE ANY OTHER UTILITY.

IF WE REALIGNED OR EXPANDED THE ROADWAY LATER, THE CITY COULD HAVE COST TO RELOCATE THOSE UTILITIES AS WELL. DAN, IS THAT NORMAL TO HAVE A ROYALTY OR A FRANCHISE FEE ON IT? ON OTHER JOBS? CITY CHARGED A FRANCHISE FEE AGAINST AT&T TO SAY, FOR INSTANCE, OR ONCOR OR WHOEVER SERVES THEIR CUSTOMERS WITHIN THE CITY.

SO THEY HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST IN IT, BUT TYPICALLY, WHEN IT RELATES TO THOSE ENTITIES LOCATING THEIR FACILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, IT'S DONE AT THE BEHEST OF THE CITY THAT IT'S TYPICALLY ALLOWED TO BE DONE, BUT IF THE CITY EVER DECIDES THAT THE ROADWAY NEEDS WIDENING IMPROVEMENT, LOWERING RELOCATION, THAT THOSE OCCUPANTS ARE REQUIRED TO REMOVE THEIR OWN FACILITIES AND PUT THEM WHEREVER THEY NEED TO GO IN ORDER TO MAKE THE REALIGNMENT.

FOR SOME REASON IN THIS AGREEMENT, WE'VE DECIDED TO TAKE ON THAT EXPENSE FOR JCSUD, AND, YOU KNOW, I COULD MAKE AN ARGUMENT THAT IF IT WERE OUR WATERLINES SERVING OUR CITIZENS, WE'D HAVE TO PAY TO RELOCATE THOSE AS WELL, BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS WE'RE CHARGING THOSE CUSTOMERS, JCSUD IS CHARGING THOSE CUSTOMERS, NOT US.

SO WHY ARE WE DOING THAT? THAT'S A VALID POINT. WE WOULD ALSO PAY TO RELOCATE THOSE OTHER UTILITIES IF WE DECIDED TO MOVE THE ROAD LATER.

YOU'D BE PAYING TO RELOCATE WHAT FACILITIES? WHICH ONES? AT&T, ATMOS, ONCOR, BUT THEY WILL REIMBURSE US, IT SAYS, HERE, FOR GRASS, SIDEWALK CURBING AND PAVEMENT AS A RESULT OF THE REPAIR.

WELL, THAT'S IF THEY NEEDED TO COME AND REPAIR THEIR FACILITY LATER.

OKAY.

THAT'S ANOTHER QUESTION I HAD ABOUT REPAIRS OF THE PARAGRAPH.

I'M SORRY I TOOK A SCREENSHOT OF IT, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE PAGE NUMBER.

SORRY, BUT IT'S UNDER ITEM TWO OF MAINTENANCE AND THE AGREEMENT.

I DON'T THINK THE WORDING IS CLEAR THAT JCSUD SAID, IS TO PAY FOR THE RESTORATION OF OUR SERVICES IF THEY HAVE TO DIG UP THEIR LINES UNDER OUR FACILITIES.

THE WORDING DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE CLEAR AND WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY COPY THE ENTIRE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT VERBATIM, BUT THERE'S ADDITIONAL TEXT IN THE ACTUAL

[00:35:08]

DOCUMENT THAT WOULD BE EXECUTED.

CAN WE HAVE OUR ATTORNEY REVIEW THAT PHASE, THAT SEGMENT OF IT, AND SEE IF WE ARE CLEARLY STATING THAT REPAIRS TO THEIR LINES WILL NOT INCUR EXPENSES ON OUR PART TO RESTORE OUR FACILITIES? CAN WE AT LEAST GET THAT? OKAY.

NO, NO, NO, NO. I DON'T WANT TO HOLD ANYTHING UP.

I WANT TO PASS THIS. I WILL VOTE FOR IT, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE THE POINTS THAT I THINK WE'RE.

FIRST OF ALL, I THINK WE'RE A LITTLE UNCLEAR ON THAT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME BETTER WORDING IN THE FINAL VERSION.

AS FAR AS THE OTHER POINT GOES.

I'LL CONCEDE THAT AND LET'S JUST MOVE ON BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET THIS THING GOING.

WE DON'T WANT TO HOLD IT UP. COUNCILMAN MCCLENDON, I DO WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR COMMENT REGARDING THE FRANCHISE FEES.

WE DON'T ACTUALLY HOLD THE CCN IN THAT AREA.

THEY HAVE THE RIGHT FOR THE CCN, SO THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROVIDE WATER IN THAT AREA, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE THEM A PLACE TO PUT THEIR WATER LINE.

THAT'S THE POINT. CORRECT. SO WE'RE GIVING THEM A SERVICE FOR FREE AND YET AGREEING TO PAY THEIR POSSIBLE FUTURE EXPENSES AS WELL.

THAT'S WHERE I'M HAVING HEARTBURN WITH THIS, BUT AS LONG AS THIS PROJECT KEEPS GOING, I CAN LIVE WITH THIS.

IT'S THE ONE SHOT DEAL AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, BUT I DON'T LIKE IT.

MR. MAYOR PRO TEM, CAN WE JUST PASS IT SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY? AND THAT WAY WE CAN LOOK INTO IT A LITTLE FURTHER.

I'D LIKE TO PASS IT TONIGHT.

I DON'T WANT TO HOLD THE PROCESS, BUT I WANT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO REVIEW THIS SECTION TWO UNDER MAINTENANCE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT SETTING OURSELVES UP FOR JCSUD TO DENY PAYMENT FOR SOME EXPENSES THAT THEY MAY COST US DOWN THE LINE.

THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR AND WITH THAT SAID, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT ITEM.

HANG ON JUST A SECOND, DAN.

LET'S DO ONE THING. DOES ANYBODY WANT TO HEAR THE PRESENTATION? NO. OKAY, SO WE GOT A MOTION.

A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE STIPULATION THAT CITY ATTORNEY WILL REVIEW THIS PARAGRAPH.

I HAVE A MOTION BY DAN AND A SECOND BY TAMARA, PLEASE VOTE.

DAN, I CAN'T FIND IT.

THERE YOU GO. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUS.

[6.F.Consider approval of a five-year contract with Priority Dispatch Corporation for the sole source purchase of the Medical Priority Dispatch System in the amount not to exceed $188,537. (Staff Contact: Paul Bradley, Director of Public Safety Communications)]

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THAT WILL BRING US TO 6F CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A FIVE YEAR CONTRACT WITH PRIORITY DISPATCH CORPORATION FOR THE SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF THE MEDICAL PRIORITY DISPATCH SYSTEM IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $188,537.

STAFF CONTACT IS PAUL BRADLEY, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS.

HI, PAUL. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING UP.

I REALLY WASN'T LOOKING FOR THE ENTIRE PRESENTATION, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO NOT JUST PUT THIS IN CONSENT, BUT HIGHLIGHT THE ADDITIONAL TRAINING THAT OUR DISPATCHERS ARE GOING TO ENDURE, AND I WAS KIND OF CURIOUS AND I'M LOOKING AT THE TIMELINE ON SLIDE 14, BUT IF IT'S JUST SOFTWARE, IS IT COMPLETELY NEW EQUIPMENT? HOW DOES IT WORK WITH OUR CAD? BUT REALLY, I JUST WANTED YOU TO KIND OF IF YOU COULD, JUST OVERVIEW WHAT THIS ENTAILS, BECAUSE IT WILL BE A WHOLE THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL PIECE LIKE.

I ASSUME OUR DISPATCHERS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO, BASED ON YOUR PRESENTATION AND KIND OF GAUGE WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL IS HAVING DIFFICULTY BREATHING.

BASICALLY, IT'S A TRIAGE OVER THE PHONE AND KIND OF WALKING INDIVIDUALS THROUGH STEPS, IF NECESSARY, TO GET STARTED ON CPR OR IF SOMEBODY IS IN LABOR.

SO I JUST WANTED TO BRING THIS FORWARD FOR THE COMMUNITY TO GET A BETTER LOOK AT IT, AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THE WHOLE PRESENTATION.

BUT I JUST KIND OF WANTED AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE TRAINING IS GOING TO ENTAIL.

I NOTICED THAT YOU SAID YOU WANT IT STARTS IN AUGUST.

WE GO LIVE, HOPEFULLY IN OCTOBER, SO WE WANT IT CLOSE TO, BUT IS IT DO PEOPLE FROM THIS PROGRAM COME AND TRAIN HANDS ON OR IS IT ALL COMPUTER? COULD YOU JUST TELL US A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT IT? SURE. SO THE TRAINING IS THREE DAYS JUST FOR THE PROTOCOL, AND THEY COME TO US TO CONDUCT THAT TRAINING AND THEN OUR FOLKS TAKE A CERTIFICATION TEST AFTER THAT TO SHOW THAT THEY'VE MASTERED WHAT THEY'VE LEARNED.

THERE IS SEPARATE REMOTE TRAINING TO LEARN HOW TO USE THE SOFTWARE FOR THE PROTOCOL.

SO THAT'S HANDLED REMOTELY.

SO WHEN WE'RE DOING PROTOCOL, THAT'S LIKE, OH, THIS PERSON'S HAVING SHORT OF BREATH.

MAYBE YOU NEED TO WALK THEM THROUGH X, Y, AND Z STEP.

CORRECT. SO IT ALL USED TO BE GUIDE CARDS, AND NOW IT'S THROUGH THE SOFTWARE, SO IT GUIDES YOU EXACTLY THROUGH CHOOSE YOUR RESPONSES AND THEN WE'LL DIRECT YOU OTHER DIRECTIONS TO GIVE INSTRUCTIONS OR WHATEVER YOU NEED TO DO FOR THAT.

VERY NICE. SO THEY CAN THOSE STEPS WILL POP UP LIKE CLICK YES OR NO IF THIS IS THE ANSWER THAT YOU'RE GETTING AND IT'LL GUIDE THE DISPATCHER ON HOW TO TELL THE INDIVIDUAL WHO'S CALLED IN LIKE HOW HOW TO PROCEED.

IT SAYS SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF THE COMMUNICATION WITHIN THE CAD, LIKE BETTER PREPAREDNESS FOR OUR FIRST

[00:40:06]

RESPONDERS THAT ARE GOING ON SITE, WHETHER THAT'S POLICE OR FIRE AND WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE ENCOUNTERING.

SO CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT? SURE. SO WE GIVE THE INITIAL SIZE UP TO RESPONDING UNITS ABOUT WHAT THE NATURE OF THE EMERGENCY IS, AND THEN OUR RESPONSE IS THEY'RE SELECTED AND THE SOFTWARE AUTOMATICALLY POPULATE INTO CAD.

SO OUR DISPATCHER THEN UPDATE AND RELAY THE UNITS ON THE WAY WITH, HEY, WE JUST LEARNED THIS PERSON'S HAD A HEART ATTACK BEFORE.

THEY HAVE A HISTORY OF THIS, SO THEY HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF EXACTLY WHAT THE PATIENT MIGHT BE GOING THROUGH.

VERY GOOD, AND THIS CAME IN UNDER WHAT WE EXPECTED OUR FIVE YEAR I THINK IT WAS LIKE 234 AND IT CAME IN UNDER.

CORRECT. IT DID, BECAUSE WE DECIDED TO REMOVE THE QA PIECE THAT WOULD HAVE THIS COMPANY CONDUCTING IT FOR US.

WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT IN HOUSE INSTEAD AND HAVE OUR QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSON TRAINED BY THEM ON HOW TO USE THE SOFTWARE AND DO THEM IN HOUSE.

THANK YOU, SIR. I APPRECIATE IT.

I'LL ASK ONE QUESTION HERE, PAUL, FOR CLARIFICATION AND EVEN ASSURANCE TO THE PUBLIC.

THE DISPATCHERS WERE ALREADY DOING A LITTLE BIT OF THE MEDICAL QUESTIONING WHEN THEY ANSWERED THE CALL.

CORRECT. ALL THEY ASK IS TELL US EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.

SO WE'LL HAVE THE BASICS OF SOMEONE, A HEART ATTACK, SOMEONE FELL, WHATEVER IT IS BUT WE CURRENTLY TRANSFERRED OVER TO MEDSTAR.

IMMEDIATELY? IMMEDIATELY, THEY CONDUCT THE PROTOCOL QUESTIONS AND WE DISPATCH BURLESON FIRE OUT AT THE SAME TIME.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WE'RE READY FOR A VOTE FOR 6F.

CORRECT? PLEASE VOTE. I MEAN, I'M SORRY.

MOTION. MOVE TO APPROVE.

YOU ALL NEED TO HURRY UP. [CHUCKLING] SECOND.

I GOT GOT A MOTION BY VICTORIA AND A SECOND BY TAMARA.

PLEASE VOTE. PASSES UNANIMOUS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

[7.A.4139 S Burleson Blvd (Case 22-139): Hold a public hearing and consider a resolution approving a waiver to Section 5.5.E “Parking Lot/Site Layout Design Criteria” of the Design Standards Manual as amended by Resolution R-1175-10 for the parking lot design within 4139 S. Burleson Blvd. (Staff Presenter: Errick Thompson, Deputy Director of Public Works) (The Planning and Zoning Commission motion for approval passed 5-1)]

THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM SEVEN.

SECTION SEVEN DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS 7A IS 4139 SOUTH BURLESON BOULEVARD CASE 22-139.

TONIGHT IS TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING A WAIVER TO SECTION 5.5.E.

PARKING LOT SITE LAYOUT DESIGN CRITERIA OF THE DESIGN STANDARD MANUAL AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION R1175-10 FOR THE PARKING LOT DESIGN WITHIN 4139 SOUTH BURLESON BOULEVARD.

THE STAFF PRESENTER TONIGHT IS ERIC THOMPSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.

MR. THOMPSON.

THANK YOU AND GOOD EVENING AGAIN, COUNCIL.

BEFORE YOU TONIGHT, WE HAVE A WAIVER REQUEST FOR PARKING LOT STANDARDS AT 4139 SOUTH BURLESON BOULEVARD.

IT'S JUST OVER FOUR ACRES LOCATED ABOUT A LITTLE OVER SEVEN MILES SOUTH OF OLD TOWN.

THE APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER IS MR. DANIEL WELLING WITH WELLING INVESTMENTS, AND HE'S SEEKING A WAIVER TO THE PARKING LOT STANDARDS.

MORE SPECIFICALLY, THE PAVEMENT DESIGN STANDARDS MANUAL, AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION R1175-10.

COUNCIL APPROVED THAT RESOLUTION IN JUNE OF 2010 THAT INCLUDED TWO DIFFERENT PARKING LOT PAVEMENT STANDARDS, THE FIRST BEING SIX INCHES OF HOT MIX, ASPHALT OVER SIX INCHES OF LIME OR CEMENT STABILIZED SOIL AND THE OTHER OPTION IN THE DESIGN MANUAL MANUAL IS FIVE INCHES OF ON SIX INCHES OF LIME OR CEMENT STABILIZED SOIL.

THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS INFORMED THAT THE CURRENT PARKING LOT MATERIAL, THE EXISTING MATERIAL DOES NOT MEET THE CURRENT STANDARDS AND THIS WAIVER REQUEST WAS SUBMITTED.

THE PROPERTY OWNER ALSO PROVIDED A GEOTECHNICAL REPORT THAT SHOWED THAT THE EXISTING PARKING LOT MATERIAL.

PLUS AN ADDITIONAL FOUR INCHES OF FLEX SPACE, WHICH WOULD GIVE A TOTAL OF 12 INCHES OF FLEX SPACE MATERIAL WOULD BE ADEQUATE TO SUPPORT AN 80,000LBS FIRE TRUCK, WHICH IS ALSO A REQUIREMENT OF THE FOR DEVELOPMENT.

FLEX BASE IS A FAIRLY COMMON CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL USUALLY CONSISTS OF COMPLEX, COMPACTED, CRUSHED CONCRETE, LIMESTONE AND ASPHALT. IT'S USED AS A BASE MATERIAL, FOR BUILDING ROADS, FOR TEMPORARY ROADWAYS, AND THEN ALSO FOR PARKING LOTS.

THE STANDARD NOTIFICATIONS WERE MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

THIS WAS ALSO PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER AND STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO INQUIRIES REGARDING THIS REQUEST.

[00:45:07]

PLANNING AND ZONING HEARD THIS CASE RECENTLY AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER BY A VOTE OF 5 TO 1.

IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE WAIVER ITSELF, AND THERE WERE NO SPEAKERS THAT NIGHT.

SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER TO SECTION 5.5.E.

AS AMENDED BY THE RESOLUTION MENTIONED FOR THIS PARKING LOT LOCATED AT 4139 SOUTH BURLESON BOULEVARD WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION WE WANT.

WE'D LIKE TO SEE A SITE PLAN THAT DEMONSTRATES THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS ARE AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OR BASED ON THE PROPOSED USE FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY TO BE ISSUED, AND THEN WE ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE 12 INCHES OF FLEX SPACE.

AS MENTIONED A FEW SLIDES EARLIER, THERE ARE EIGHT INCHES IN PLACE NOW.

THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL FOUR THAT THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT RECOMMENDS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS THE RECOMMENDATION OR IN THE TO SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS TO HAVE A CO ISSUED, AND WITH THAT, I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.

WOULD THIS SUPPORT THE WEIGHT OF A FIRE TRUCK? YES. FURTHER, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS REPORT 12 INCHES OF FLEX SPACE WOULD SUPPORT THE 80,000LBS TRUCK.

SO APPARENTLY DOESN'T HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.

LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, WHAT ARE THEY USING THE PROPERTY FOR NOW? I THINK THE BUILDING IS BASICALLY VACANT NOW.

SO WOULD IT BE LIKE LET'S SAY IT CHANGES IF THIS WERE APPROVED AND IT CHANGES HANDS.

SO IS THIS WOULD THIS BE EVERY TIME A CERTIFICATE OF THIS IS ONLY FOR NOW FOR BASICALLY AN INTERIM USE? I DON'T THINK THE APPLICANT IS HERE TONIGHT.

I THINK HE MAY BE UNDER THE WEATHER, BUT WE'VE BEEN PRETTY CLEAR THAT THIS IS TEMPORARY FOR THIS INITIAL USE NOW IN THE INTERIM UNTIL A MORE PERMANENT TENANT, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, IS IS IN PLACE.

AT THAT POINT, YOU LIKELY NEED A NEW CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND THEN WE START THE WHOLE PROCESS OVER.

THE APPLICANT DID INDICATE EARLIER THAT HE WOULD ANTICIPATE THIS WOULD LIKELY BECOME A FULLY PAVED OR CONCRETE PARKING LOT AT THAT POINT WHEN THERE'S A PERMANENT TENANT.

I DON'T LIKE THIS.

I'M GOING TO REFER BACK TO I CAN RECALL THREE TIMES IN THE PAST WHERE WE'VE GRANTED A WAIVER FOR THE PARKING LOT REQUIREMENTS, AND THE ONES THAT COME TO MIND ARE, I BELIEVE, NATIONS RENT.

I THINK WE AGREED TO LET THEM HAVE A BACK PARKING AREA FOR THEIR EQUIPMENT THAT WAS NOT PAVED.

I THINK WE DID THAT FOR TRACTOR SUPPLY A LONG TIME BACK WHEN IT WAS AN AREA BACK BEHIND THEIR BUILDING WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO STORE THINGS THAT DIDN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE PAVED, AND THEN THE BIGGEST ONE, I THINK, IS BURLESON NISSAN.

WHEN WE APPROVED THEIR SITE PLAN, WE WAIVED THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AREA BACK BEHIND THE DEALERSHIP WHERE EXCESS INVENTORY IS STORED, BUT IN EACH TIME WE'VE MADE THE DIVIDING LINE BE AREAS THAT WERE NOT ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC.

SO AS FAR AS THIS GEOTECH BUSINESS GOES, I HAVE READ HUNDREDS OF GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS IN MY LIFETIME, AND IF YOU TAKE OUT ALL OF THE FLUFF AND THE IRRELEVANT MATERIAL OUT OF THIS GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, YOU COULD WRITE WHAT'S LEFT ON THE POSTCARD.

BECAUSE WHAT IT REALLY IS SAYING IS WE DRILL TWO HOLES AND IN ONE OF THEM WE FOUND NOT 12 BUT EIGHT INCHES OF FLEX BASE AND IN THE OTHER ONE WE FOUND NOT 12, BUT FIVE INCHES OF FLEX SPACE, AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THE PARENTHETICAL COMMENT.

THE 12 INCHES A FLEX BASE WOULD HOLD UP A FIRE TRUCK.

WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT? 12 INCHES OF COMPACTED DIRT WILL HOLD UP A FIRE TRUCK IF IT HADN'T RAINED RECENTLY.

SO I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT COUNTS FOR A WHOLE LOT.

IN MY OPINION, WE HAVE THE ORDINANCE THAT PARKING LOTS NEED TO BE PAID FOR A REASON, NOT JUST FOR THE SUPPORT OF FIRE TRUCKS, BUT FOR THE APPEARANCE FROM THE ROADWAY, FOR THE FACT, YOU KNOW, I DROVE BY THIS YESTERDAY AFTER THE RAIN AND EVERYTHING AND EVERY SINGLE PARKING LOT OUT THERE AND EVERY SINGLE GRAVEL STREET OUT THERE HAD A TRAIL OF WHITE CALICHE DUST OUT ONTO THE PAVEMENT WHERE IT HAD BEEN TRACKED OUT AFTER THE RECENT RAIN.

THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE PAY PARKING LOTS, BECAUSE IT KEEPS THE STREET MESS DOWN, DUST AND OTHER THINGS.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS.

I WOULD CONSIDER IF THE OWNER WOULD LIKE TO GET A WAIVER FOR THE BACK AREA THAT'S CLOSED OFF, THAT THE PUBLIC DOESN'T SEE THAT THE PUBLIC WON'T BE PARKING IN, THEN I'D BE MORE THAN WILLING TO DISCUSS THAT, BUT I'M NOT FOR THIS.

[00:50:01]

I THINK IF WE WAIVE THIS ON THE STRENGTH OF A GEOTECHNICAL REPORT THAT EVERY DEVELOPER GOING FORWARD IS GOING TO GO FIND A GEOTECH AND PAYING THREE OR $4,000 TO WRITE SOMETHING THAT SAYS 12 INCHES OF GRAVEL IS ENOUGH TO HOLD UP A CONCRETE TRUCK.

NOW WE'RE HOSTED BY OUR OWN PETARD.

SO I SAY NO.

IT'S NICE TO HAVE DAN ON HERE.

IT REALLY IS, BECAUSE I SEE EVERY POINT THAT HE JUST SAID.

I AGREE WITH THAT, AND I DIDN'T TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT'S COMING ON TO THE ACCESS ROAD OR TO THE ROAD COMING OUT.

THAT IS AN ISSUE. SO I WANT TO SUPPORT DAN ON THIS.

ANYBODY ELSE? IF YOU COULD OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:22.

I HAVE NO SPEAKER CARDS.

IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING? I DON'T SEE ANY. MAYOR, IF YOU COULD CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, PLEASE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:22.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND THEN AT THIS TIME, IF YOU COULD ASK FOR A MOTION.

IS THERE A MOTION? I MOVE TO DENY.

BEAT YOU TO IT. YOU GOT IT.

I'LL SECOND IT.

[CHUCKLING] I GOT A MOTION BY DAN AND A SECOND BY JIMMY, PLEASE--AND THE CLARIFICATION IS TO DENY THE REQUEST.

THANK YOU. I THINK I VOTED THE WRONG WAY ON THIS. IT'S STILL CORRECT.

THAT'S FINE. OKAY, CAN I CHANGE MY VOTE ON THIS? NOPE. NEVER MIND.

IT'S WHERE WE WANT TO GO.

I HAVE IN FAVOR 6 TO 1.

IT PASSES. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 7B 2825 SOUTH BURLESON CASE 22-152.

[7.B.2825 S Burleson (Case 22-152): Hold a public hearing and consider approval of an ordinance for a zoning change request from “A”, Agriculture to “C" Commercial. (First and Final Reading) (Staff Presenter: Tony McIlwain, Development Services Director) (The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval by unanimous vote)]

TONIGHT'S TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE FOR A ZONING CHANGE REQUEST FROM A A AGRICULTURE TO C COMMERCIAL.

THIS IS BEFORE COUNCIL ON FIRST AND FINAL READING.

THE STAFF PRESENTED TONIGHT IS TONY MCILWAIN, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR.

MR. MCILWAIN. THANK YOU, MS. CAMPOS.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL THIS ITEM INVOLVES THE ZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2825 SOUTH BURLESON BOULEVARD.

THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 2.66 ACRES AND WE HAVE IT ON THE SCREEN.

THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED BEFORE YOU, MR. ANDREW FEGHALI.

EXCUSE ME, IS THE PROPERTY OWNER.

HE'S LOOKING TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL ZONING TO COMMERCIAL.

THE INTENT OF THE COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT IS TO ALLOW FOR LABORATORY MANUFACTURING AND RESEARCH, WHICH IS HIS BUSINESS INVOLVING AEROSPACE, FLAMMABILITY AND FIRE TESTING.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY IN THE CITY'S EMPLOYMENT GROWTH DESIGNATION AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ALSO IN THE IH-35 OVERLAY DISTRICT, AS WELL AS THE BASELINE AG ZONING DISTRICT.

THIS IS A STREET SHOT OF THE BUILDING.