Aug 04, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting

THAT BRINGS US TO 6C AND D, WHICH I WILL CALL FORWARD TOGETHER BECAUSE THERE'LL BE ONE PRESENTATION.

[Items 6.C. and 6.D.]

THIS IS TO CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF CITY OF BURLESON, AND TEXAS, COMBINATION TAX AND LIMITED SURPLUS REVENUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, SERIES 2025, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND DELEGATING AUTHORITY FOR THE SALE AND DELIVERY OF THE CERTIFICATES, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND ACTING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.

THIS IS BEFORE CITY COUNCIL ON FIRST AND FINAL READING, AND 6D IS CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF CITY OF BURLESON, TEXAS GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2025, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND DELEGATING AUTHORITY FOR THE SALE AND DELIVERY OF THE BONDS, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND ENACTING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT.

THIS IS ALSO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL ON FIRST AND FINAL READING.

THE STAFF PRESENTED THIS EVENING IS HARLAN JEFFERSON, OUR OTHER ILLUSTRIOUS DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.

>> THANK YOU, MISS COMPOST.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

NOW IT'S TIME TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO PAY FOR THE POLICE HEADQUARTERS EXPANSION.

SO BACK IN JUNE, YOU APPROVED A NOTICE OF INTENT FOR THE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION.

AT THAT TIME, YOU HAD DIRECTED STAFF TO PURSUE A PARAMETERS ORDINANCE AS A TECHNIQUE TO ISSUE THE BONDS, NOT ONLY THE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATIONS, BUT THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AS WELL.

WHAT YOU HAVE ON YOUR AGENDA TONIGHT IS A LIST OF CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATIONS EQUALING 45,260,000 IS A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION, AND YOU HAVE ON THE SCREEN A LIST OF VARIOUS FUNDS AND THE TOTAL AMOUNT PER FUND.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE SECOND AGENDA ITEM AUTHORIZED THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF 8.3 MILLION DOLLAR.

THIS WAS PART OF THE MAY 2ND, 2022 BOND ELECTION, AND WE ROUNDED THE DOLLAR AMOUNT TO THE NEAREST FIVE THOUSAND.

[00:25:02]

THIS IS A LIST OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.

YOU'LL SEE AT THE TOP, THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS LISTED.

THAT'S THE 8.3 MILLION AT THE BOTTOM SECTION OF ADDITIONAL PROJECTS, AND FUNDING IS THE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATIONS, AND YOU SEE THE TOTAL 8.3 AND 21.5 AT THE BOTTOM.

THIS IS THE ENTIRE FIVE YEAR CIP, AND WE HAVE MR. OSCAR SON, AS WELL AS MR. THOMPSON AVAILABLE TO RESPOND TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ON SPECIFIC PROJECTS.

THIS IS A FORECAST OF THE FUND BALANCE OF THE DEBT SERVICE FUND THAT AFTER WE ISSUE THE BONDS, THE TAX REVENUE FLOWS INTO THIS FUND TO PAY FOR THOSE, AS WELL AS THE SALES TAX REVENUE FROM THE [INAUDIBLE] AND 4B FUNDS.

AS YOU KNOW, IN YOUR POLICY, YOU SET A GOAL OF HAVING A FUND BALANCE OF ONE MILLION DOLLARS.

THAT WAS OUR FORECAST WHEN WE PUT TOGETHER THE NUMBERS THROUGHOUT JULY, BUT ONCE WE RECEIVED THE CERTIFIED NUMBER, ADDITIONAL HALF PERCENT, HIGHER THAN WHAT WE WERE FORECAST AND PRODUCED A LITTLE MORE REVENUE THAN WE HAD ANTICIPATED.

THE NUMBER MOVED IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION.

AS WE TALKED ABOUT WHEN WE SET THE ONE MILLION DOLLAR NUMBER, WE SAID IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO MAINTAIN IT AT ONE MILLION DOLLAR.

IT HAS ABILITY TO GROW, WHERE IT'S INTEREST INCOME, DELINQUENT TAXES, PENALTY INTEREST AND SO FORTH.

I JUST WANT TO EXPLAIN WHY WE'RE FORECASTING HIGHER THAN WHAT'S IN YOUR POLICY.

THIS IS A LIST OF THE WATER AND WASTEWATER CAPITAL PROJECTS.

FOR THE BENEFIT FOR THE PUBLIC, REMIND EVERYONE THAT BEING THE DEBT FOR THE WATER AND WASTEWATER, PRETTY MUCH ABOUT 18 MONTHS IN THE REARS.

WE MOVED FORWARD WITH THE PROJECTS WITH A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION IN THE FALL, AND THEN THE SUMMER OF THE FOLLOWING YEARS WHEN WE ACTUALLY ISSUED THE DEBT.

A TECHNIQUE WE USED TO MANAGE OUR UTILITY RATES AND KEEP THEM AS LOW AS POSSIBLE.

IN THIS CASE, WE'RE ISSUING THE DEBT FOR THE 2024 NUMBERS.

HERE'S THE WORKING CAPITAL OF FUND BALANCES.

WE'D LIKE TO REFER TO IT, FORECAST FOR THAT FUND, FOR THE WAR AND WASTEWATER FUND.

THEN THE 4A FUND.

THIS IS A LIST OF THEIR PROJECTS TOTALS THE 5.4 MILLION DOLLAR, AS WELL AS THE FUTURE ITEMS GOING FORWARD, BUT THIS IS 5.4 IS WHAT THE COS TOTAL TWO.

THEIR FUND BALANCE IS ON THE SCREEN HERE.

THE DECREASE IN FISCAL YEAR 26 IS BECAUSE OF CASH PAYMENTS FOR INCENTIVES THAT WE'RE BUDGETING, AND THEN THE FUND BALANCE STARTS TO REBUILD AFTER THAT.

HERE'S A LIST OF THE 4B CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTALING THE 7.9 MILLION DOLLARS.

THEIR FUND BALANCES HERE, IT'S RELATIVELY FLAT.

WE STARTED WITH THE 4.9 AND N WITH 4.7 MILLION FIVE YEARS OUT.

THEN FINALLY, THE TIF2 FUND IS LISTED ON THE SCREEN HERE, THE $506 THOUSANDS PROJECTS, AND THEIR FUND BALANCES ON THE SCREEN.

I'LL TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO TALK ABOUT THE PARAMETER ORDINANCE AND EXACTLY WHAT IT IS.

AS YOU KNOW, IT'S A LEGAL DOCUMENT AS ANY OTHER ORDINANCE APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL.

IT REALLY AUTHORIZED THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS.

IT'S LISTED ON THE SCREEN, BUT CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATIONS AS WELL.

DELEGATE THE FINAL AUTHORITY AND WITH SPECIFIC DETAIL TO SPECIFIC STAFF MEMBERS, AND IT'S ALSO REFERRED TO AS A DELEGATION ORDINANCE.

NOW, THE KEY ELEMENTS, YOU REALLY BASICALLY SET THE TERM, AND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS SET THE LIMITS WITHIN FOUR BOUNDARIES, THE MAXIMUM PRINCIPLE, AS WE TALKED ABOUT EARLY, INTEREST RATES, THE MATURITY, HOW FAR OUT WE GO, WHICH WE TYPICALLY GO 20 YEARS, AND FINALLY, THE LATEST SALE DATE.

THE LATEST SALE DATE FOR CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATIONS IS 90 DAYS, AND IS ONE YEAR BONDS, GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.

YOU DELEGATE THE AUTHORITY TO SPECIFIC STAFF MEMBERS, THE CITY MANAGER, FINANCE DIRECTOR, AND SO FORTH.

THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 1207.007 IS A SECTION THAT AUTHORIZES THE ISSUANCE OF AND USE OF PARAMETER ORDINANCES, WHETHER IT'S FOR NEW MONEY OR REFUNDING OBLIGATIONS.

THE ONE YEAR THAT'S LISTED IS FOR THE GENERAL [INAUDIBLE] AND BONDS THAT PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED.

WHY WOULD YOU USE THEM BASICALLY WHEN YOU THINK THE MARKET ISN'T STABLE,

[00:30:01]

AND YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE RESPONSIVE TO THE MARKET IN TERMS OF WHEN YOU CAN DO A SALE WHEN RATES ARE MOST FAVORABLE TO THE MUNICIPALITY, IS SUFFICIENT, BECAUSE IF YOU SET A SALE DATE AND THE MARKET MOVED AWAY FROM US, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO RESCHEDULE COUNCIL MEETINGS AND THAT UP ENDS THE MARKET AND SENDS A NEGATIVE SIGNAL WHEN YOU'RE RESCHEDULING BOND ISSUANCE.

THE GOVERNING BODY STILL HAS CONTROL OF THE BOND ISSUANCE PROCESS BY SETTING A CERTAIN PARAMETERS AND YOU'RE DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS IN TERMS OF OUR FINANCIAL ADVISORS, BOND COUNSEL AND SPECIFIC STAFF MEMBERS.

HERE'S A LIST OF EXAMPLES OF WHAT THE PARAMETERS COULD LOOK LIKE.

YOU COULD SET A LIMIT OF $10 MILLION INTEREST RATES OF 5%, 20 YEARS, IN TERMS OF HOW LONG THE TERMS ARE, AND THEN YOU CAN SET A MAXIMUM DATE OF 180 DAYS, FOR EXAMPLE.

IF YOU WERE LOOKING AT GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OR 90 DAYS FOR COS.

THEN THE FINAL AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THE BOND SALE WOULD LIE WITH THE CITY MANAGER OR STAFF MEMBERS YOU SELECT.

IN SUMMARY, THE PARAMETER ORDINANCES REALLY PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY ROUTE SACRIFICING OVERSIGHT.

IT'S USEFUL FOR BOTH REFUNDING AND NEW MONEY, AND IT EMPOWERS THE CITY TO STRATEGICALLY AND DYNAMICALLY RESPOND TO MARKET CONDITIONS.

I WOULD MENTION AFTER THE COUNCIL ACTUALLY AUTHORIZED THE USE OF P PARAMETER ORDINANCE BACK IN JUNE.

WE BECAME CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW TARRIFS ON AUGUST 1ST.

REALLY EMPHASIZE HOW IMPORTANT IT WAS THAT YOU DID MAKE THAT DECISION.

FORTUNATELY, THE MARKET DIDN'T MOVE AWAY FROM US.

IT'S ACTUALLY RALLYING RIGHT NOW, SO IT'S A GOOD TIME TO ISSUE BONDS.

OUR TARGET DATE IS TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK.

WE'LL ISSUE OUR PLUMINAR OFFICIAL STATEMENT TOMORROW AND PLAN ON MOVING FORWARD IF THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZE AND APPROVE THESE SPECIFIC ORDINANCES.

IN THIS CASE, THE PARAMETER IS GOING TO BE THE 45.2 MILLION FOR THE COS, THE $8.5 MILLION FOR THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.

THE INTEREST RATE IS AT 5%, IS THE LIMIT, HIGHEST LIMIT.

MARCH OF 2045, GOING OUT 20 YEARS IS THE TERM, THE MAXIMUM MATURITY TERM.

THEN WE WOULD HAVE 90 DAYS TO ACTUALLY SELL THE BONDS.

IS THE LIMIT. WE WANT TO SELL BOTH COS AND GLS AT THE SAME TIME.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE CAPPING IT AT THE 90 DAYS.

BUT AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, OUR GOAL IS TO GET IT DONE WITHIN THE NEXT WEEK.

THIS LAYS OUT THE TIMELINE THAT WE WORKED THROUGH STARTING BACK IN MAY, AND ALL THE STEPS WE'VE GONE THROUGH, INCLUDING AUTHORIZATION OF NOTICE OF INTENT, THE ADVERTISEMENT OF THE COS, AND SO FORTH.

THIS BRINGS US TO THE OCTOBER 4TH DATE WHERE THE COUNCIL WOULD CONSIDER AUTHORIZING THE ORDINANCES.

IF THE SALE DID OCCUR TODAY, THEN WE WOULD RECEIVE THE PROCEEDS.

WE WERE TARGETING BY AUGUST 28TH.

IF WE SEE NEXT WEEK, IT'D BE THE FIRST WEEK OF SEPTEMBER, WE ANTICIPATE RECEIVING THE PROCEEDS 30 DAYS LATER.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO RESPOND TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> ANYONE?

>> WE'LL NEED TWO MOTIONS ON THIS.

>> YES, SIR. THERE'S ALSO THE MOTION-SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IN FRONT OF ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS OR WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION, IF YOU PLEASE DO THAT.

FIRST UP WOULD BE 6C.

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION FIRST?

>> SORRY, I WAS A LITTLE LATE ON HITTING THE BUTTON THERE.

THE FINAL MATURITY DATE IS IN MARCH 1ST OF 2045.

I KNOW WE DO PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST IN MARCH AND INTEREST IN SEPTEMBER.

WOULD THAT SEPTEMBER PAYMENT ALREADY BE COMPLETED, OR WOULD THAT HAVE TO BE MADE IN SEPTEMBER, AND WOULD THAT BE THE FINAL DATE FOR MATURITY?

>> YEAH. I SHOULD HAVE MENTIONED OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR, MARTY SHUE, IS ALSO PRESENT TO HELP WITH QUESTIONS.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE PRINCIPAL PAYMENT, AS YOU MENTIONED, PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST, WE MAKE ALL OF OUR PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS IN MARCH.

THE LAST PRINCIPAL PAYMENT WOULD BE MADE IN MARCH OF 2045, SO THAT WOULD BE THE CONCLUSION OF THE BONDS UNLESS WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REFINANCE.

IT STILL WOULD JUST GO TO THAT DATE.

WHEN WE REFINANCE, WE CAN'T GO BEYOND 10 YEARS, SO WE STILL TERMINATE AT THAT DATE.

>> EITHER WAY, IT WOULD BE THE SAME IN MARCH. THANK YOU.

>> IS THERE A MOTION ON C?

>> ON 6C, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF CITY OF BURLESON,

[00:35:01]

TEXAS, COMBINATION TAX AND LIMITED SURPLUS REVENUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION, SERIES 2025, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND DELEGATING AUTHORITY FOR THE SALE AND DELIVERY OF THE CERTIFICATES, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND ENACTING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT.

>> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION BY ADAM, AND A SECOND BY DAN.

PLEASE VOTE. PASSES UNANIMOUS.

IS THERE A MOTION ON 6D?

>> ON 6D, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLESON, TEXAS, GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS SERIES 2025, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND DELEGATING AUTHORITY FOR THE SALE AND DELIVERY OF THE BONDS, PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND ENACTING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT.

>> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION BY ADAM, AND A SECOND BY DAN.

PLEASE VOTE. PASSES UNANIMOUS.

THAT BRINGS US TO 6C TO CONSIDER AND TAKE POSSIBLE ACTION ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 2 AND CHAPTER 6 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES, AND CITY COUNCIL POLICY NUMBER 40 BOARDS.

[6.E. Consider and take possible action on an ordinance amendment to Chapter 2 and Chapter 6 of the Code of Ordinances (Boards, Commissions, Committees) and City Council Policy #40 ( Boards). (First Reading) (Staff Contact: Amanda Campos, City Secretary)]

THIS IS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ON FIRST READING.

I AM THE STAFF PRESENTER.

I WILL GET UP THERE AND DO STAFF.

I GOT IT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THIS WAS BROUGHT BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING DURING A REPORTS AND PRESENTATION.

THIS IS BRINGING FORWARD PART OF OUR DISCUSSION FOR ACTION.THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS IN HERE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON HERE TONIGHT THAT WE WEREN'T QUITE READY TO MAKE A DECISION ON THE LAST TIME, BUT YOU DID TELL ME TO BRING IT FORWARD FOR ACTION, SO WE'LL DISCUSS IT AND MAKE THE CHANGE THEN.

THEN, ON THE FINAL READING, IT WILL HAVE ALL THE CHANGES THAT WE MAKE TONIGHT.

AGAIN, WE'RE REVIEWING THE CREATION AND PURPOSE OF THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

WE'RE REVIEWING TERMS AND MEMBERSHIP, AND WE'RE REVIEWING CURRENT BOARD STRUCTURES AND NUMBERS OF THE BOARDS THAT WE HAVE IN EXIS10CE TODAY.

THE CREATION, WHEN WE TALKED THROUGH THAT LAST TIME, WE SAID, YES, IT DID MEET EVERYTHING.

HOWEVER, IT WASN'T THE MOST IDEAL WAY, AND THAT WE DID HAVE ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT.

WE WANTED TO INCREASE THE GUIDANCE TO THE BOARD FOR THEIR PURPOSE AND STAFF AND REPORTING TO THE FULL COUNCIL, AND WE WANTED THEM TO REALLY FOCUS ON DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY NEEDS BY REMOVING THESE ITEMS THAT HAD TO DO WITH FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS OR DAILY OPERATIONS OF THE CITY.

BEFORE YOU, YOU DO HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD CHANGE THAT TO PUT THAT INTO EFFECT, REMOVING ALL THE FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR THAT.

THEN IN COUNCIL POLICY 40, WE ALSO UPDATED THAT TO GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE GUIDANCE.

THE ORDINANCE IS SETTING THE TOP RULE, AND THEN POLICY 40 GETS INTO THE GRIT OF WHAT YOU REALLY ARE SAYING IN THERE.

THE REASON THAT'S GOOD IS THAT THE ORDINANCE CAN STILL STAY THERE, AND WE CAN NOT HAVE TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE EACH TIME.

WE WANT TO GIVE JUST A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT DIRECTION ON THAT.

IF WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT, I'LL KEEP MOVING FORWARD.

MEMBERSHIP AND TERMS. THIS IS WHERE WE HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE DISCUSSION.

WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MEMBERSHIP BEING NINE MEMBERS FOR EACH BOARD.

WE AGREED THAT THAT WAS STILL SUSTAINABLE.

IT ALLOWS FOR GREATER PARTICIPATION FROM THE PUBLIC, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING, WHICH DOES HAVE 10, BUT THAT 10TH MEMBER IS THE EX-OFFICIO YOUTH MEMBER ON THERE, WHICH WE THINK IS A GREAT IDEA, AND STILL REALLY WORKING VERY WELL FOR THAT BOARD AND COMMISSION.

THE TERMS. THIS IS WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE.

WE TALKED ABOUT THE TERMS. THERE ARE TWO, THREE-YEAR TERMS EQUALING SIX YEARS, EXCEPT FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING, WHICH IS CURRENTLY THREE THREE-YEAR TERMS, WHICH IS NINE YEARS.

NO TERM LIMITS ON THE YOUTH BECAUSE THEIR AGE DETERMINES THEIR TERMS, SO THEY WON'T EVER BE ABLE TO STAY ON THEIR SIX YEARS.

THE TERM LIMIT, RIGHT NOW, IT'S CURRENTLY THAT THEY HAVE TO STAY OFF THE BOARD FOR ONE FULL TERM, WHICH EQUALS THREE YEARS, AND THERE WAS DISCUSSION ON THAT.

THIS NEXT SLIDE, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS SO WE CAN GET THERE TO WHAT THE ACTION WOULD WANT TO BE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL HERE.

[00:40:03]

ON THE TERMS, CURRENTLY, I TOLD YOU WHAT THOSE TERMS WERE.

DO WE WANT TO APPLY TO ALL THE BOARDS THREE, THREE-YEAR TERMS, SO CHANGING EVERYBODY TO MATCH WHAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING IS DOING, OR DID WE WANT TO MOVE THE PLANNING AND ZONING BACK TO TWO, THREE-YEAR TERMS TO MATCH ALL THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS? AND THEN THERE WAS DISCUSSION ON CHANGING ALL THE TERMS TO ONE, THREE-YEAR TERM, OR WE COULD MAKE NO CHANGES AT ALL.

I'LL LEAVE THIS OPEN FOR THE COUNCIL TO MAKE THIS DECISION.

>> DAN, I THINK YOU HAD A RECOMMENDATION, AND THEN NO ONE KNEW HOW YOU FELT ABOUT ANYTHING.

WE DIDN'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR YOU.

IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD.

>> I DON'T. I THINK THREE-YEAR TERMS IS APPLICABLE BEST TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BECAUSE THERE'S SUCH A STEEP LEARNING CURVE WHEN YOU COME TO MATTERS AS INTRICATE AS THEY GET INTO, AS FAR AS THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

WHAT ARE WE CURRENTLY AT TWO THREE-YEAR?

>> TWO THREE-YEAR TERMS, SO SIX YEARS.

SIX TOTAL. THEY'RE THREE YEARS.

>> I'VE GIVEN IT SOME THOUGHT, AND I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY THE BEST RECOMMENDATION THAT I COULD MAKE TO HAVE IT THAT WAY; STAY AS THEY ARE, EXCEPT THE PLANNING AND ZONING GO TO THREE THREE-YEAR TERMS.

>> LEAVE IT AS IT IS. I DON'T EVEN REMEMBER WHAT WE WERE REALLY DISCUSSING.

>> IT WAS THE DISCUSSION OF INCLUDING THE PARK BOARD SPECIFICALLY TO INCREASE THEIRS TO THREE-YEAR TERMS. THEN THAT BROUGHT THE BIGGER, BROADER DISCUSSION OF TERMS ON EVERY BOARD OR COMMISSION BECAUSE THERE WAS THAT DISCUSSION ON THEM.

>> SO THE OTHERS ARE JUST TWO-YEAR TERMS?

>> NO, THEY'RE ALL THREE-YEAR TERMS.

>> THEY'RE ALL THREE.

>> THREE THREE-YEAR TERMS OF NINE YEARS FOR PLANNING AND ZONING CURRENTLY.

ALL THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ARE TWO THREE-YEAR TERMS, SO SIX YEARS IN TOTAL TO SERVE ON ALL THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

THE DISCUSSION WAS INCLUDING THE PARK BOARD.

THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE BOARD.

[OVERLAPPING] MAYOR PRO TEM, WE WERE WAITING FOR YOU TO SEE IF YOU HAD A SPECIFIC MAGIC NUMBER. [LAUGHTER]

>> I'LL CONCUR WITH THE RECOMMENDATION WE HAVE HERE.

>> I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

>> SO JUST REMAINING THE SAME, NO CHANGES TO THE TERMS?

>> YEAH.

>> THEN THE OTHER THING THAT LED INTO, WHICH WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD FOR THE COMMITTEE, WAS ONCE YOU REACH THE TERM LIMITS.

CURRENTLY, WHAT HAPPENS IS ONCE YOU REACH THE TERM LIMITS, THEN YOU HAVE TO SIT OUT FOR ONE FULL TERM, WHICH IS THREE YEARS.

NOW, YOU CAN GO TO ANOTHER BOARD IF YOU WANT TO, BUT THE CITY OF BURLESON IS BLESSED WITH NUMEROUS APPLICATIONS.

THERE'S NEVER A SHORTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SERVE ON OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT LEADS INTO A DILEMMA OF THAT.

BUT IF YOU CHANGED IT TO ONE YEAR, THEN THAT PERSON WOULD JUST SIT OUT FROM OCTOBER TO SEPTEMBER AND THEN BE ABLE TO REAPPLY.

>> I LIKE THAT.

>> I BROUGHT THAT UP LAST MEETING, I GUESS WE CHANGED IT FROM ONE FULL TERM JUST TO ONE YEAR, BECAUSE YOU CAN INCLUDE ON THE APPLICATION, HAVE YOU SERVED BEFORE, AND YOU PUT ON THERE.

THEN IT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL TO DECIDE WHETHER TO PUT THEM BACK ON OR NOT.

>> [OVERLAPPING] I LIKE THE ONE-YEAR SET OFF.

THREE YEARS IS A LONG TIME TO MAKE SOMEBODY WAIT.

>> I WILL MAKE THAT CHANGE.

WE'LL MAKE NO CHANGES TO THE TERMS, BUT WE WILL APPLY THE ONE YEAR TO SIT OFF ONCE YOU'VE REACHED YOUR TERM LIMIT INSTEAD OF THREE YEARS TO SIT OUT.

WE WILL MAKE THAT CHANGES IN THE ORDINANCE.

THEN THERE WAS DISCUSSION ON ATTENDANCE AS IT APPLIED TO THERE, AND WE MADE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS.

THIS WAS WHAT THE COUNCIL HAD DECIDED WAS OKAY WITH Y'ALL.

WE MADE THOSE CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE AND THE POLICY.

WE DID TALK ABOUT THE QUORUM ISSUE AND THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

WHILE WE WANTED TO NOT STIFLE ANYBODY FROM ATTENDING BOARDS AND COMMISSION MEETINGS, WE DID WANT TO HELP THE BOARDS MEET.

IT WAS ON ADVICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL, THAT IS, NOT CITY COUNCIL, THAT WE LEAVE UNDER TOMA, BUT WE CHANGED SOME THINGS UP.

THESE WERE THE SPECIFIC BOARDS THAT HAD A LITTLE BIT OF ISSUES.

THE REASON THAT THEY DO IS BECAUSE ONE THEY HAVE MEMBERSHIP THAT HAVE VERY SPECIFIC QUALIFICATIONS.

THOSE QUALIFICATIONS DO NOT MAKE THEM HAVE TO BE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF BURLESON.

MEETING IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT SOMETIMES.

[00:45:02]

THE BOREN PROPERTY ADVISORY COUNCIL WAS FORMED UNDER THE ACCEPTANCE AGREEMENT FOR THE PROPERTY OF RUSSELL FARMS, AND SO REMOVING THEM AND AMENDING THE AGREEMENT, BUT THEY STILL WILL FUNCTION, AND THEY'LL STILL DO EVERYTHING THEY'RE DOING.

THEY JUST WON'T BE AN OFFICIAL BOARD OR COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BURLESON.

IT'LL BE UNDER THAT AGREEMENT.

AND THEY CAN STAY STRUCTURED UNDER THERE.

THEN THE CITY ATTORNEY DID ADD SOME LANGUAGE IN COUNCIL POLICY 40 FOR THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, THE ANIMAL SHELTER ADVISORY, AND THE CITIZENS PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE, WHICH THE TERM ENDS DECEMBER 2025.

REMEMBER, WE'VE COMBINED THAT WITH THE NEW BOARD AND COMMISSION, WHICH IS PUBLIC SPACES AND CULTURAL HERITAGE.

THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT'S GOING TO HELP THEM OUT IS THAT THERE HAS TO BE THREE MEMBERS PRESENT TO HAVE A MEETING, BUT IN ORDER TO TAKE ANY ACTION, THEY WILL NEED A FULL QUORUM.

THREE MEMBERS OF THEIR COMMITTEES PRESENT WILL ALLOW THEM TO BEGIN DISCUSSIONS.

I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE.

THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE WITH PEOPLE OF DISABILITY, WE HAD A CONSULTANT THAT TRIED TO COME IN SEVERAL TIMES.

WE COULD NEVER GET A QUORUM.

THE LAST TIME WE DID, WE HAD THREE MEMBERS PRESENT, AND WE COULD HAVE HAD THAT CONSULTANT GIVE THEM THE PRESENTATION, WHICH WAS AVAILABLE FOR THE OTHER MEMBERS IN A PAPER FORM, BUT THEY STILL COULD HAVE READ THROUGH IT AND HAD ANY RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY WANTED.

THEN THEY COULD HAVE COME BACK IF THEY WANTED TO MAKE A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION TO BRING FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, WHERE THEN THAT WOULD REQUIRE A QUORUM.

THAT WAS ONE. THEN WE'RE GOING TO AMEND, AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, THE BOREN PROPERTY ADVISORY COUNCIL.

WE'LL GET INTO THE BOARD STRUCTURES.

THESE ARE THE COMMITTEES, AND NOW THE COUNCIL'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

WE'RE GOING TO KEEP UNCHANGED BECAUSE OF CERTAIN LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, THE PLANNING AND ZONING, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY.

WE ARE GOING TO KEEP UNCHANGED FOR FUNCTIONAL CORRECTNESS, THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, THE ANIMAL SHELTER, THE BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS, AND THE LIBRARY BOARD.

I WILL SAY THAT ON THE BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS, SINCE WE ALWAYS HAVE SUCH A SHORTAGE BECAUSE OF THE SPECIFICATIONS ON THOSE QUALITIES, TOO, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH DYLAN WHITEHEAD, WHO'S BEEN A GREAT ASSET TO US TO HELP US TRY TO RESTRUCTURE THAT, SO I PROBABLY WILL BE BRINGING SOMETHING BACK TO YOU GUYS SPECIFICALLY ON THAT.

RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE IT LISTED WHERE THEY HAVE TO BE LICENSED MASTER ELECTRICIANS AND LICENSED MASTER PLUMBERS.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH DYLAN TO GO THROUGH THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODES TO SEE IF THAT'S REALLY REQUIRED IN THERE, OR HAVE WE BEEN REALLY ONE OF THOSE CLASS GRADE A STUDENTS THAT WANTS TO GO THE EXTRA MILE, AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE'VE PROBABLY JUST WANTED TO GO A LITTLE BIT EXTRA.

THAT PROBABLY WASN'T A BAD THING WHEN IT WAS CREATED BACK IN THE 80S, BUT NOW IT'S JUST A LITTLE HARDER TO GET THAT FILLED.

BY THE WAY, I'LL BRING THOSE FORWARD, AND WE'LL LOOK AT THAT.

BUT IT WILL BE MEANING THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE AND THE FIRE CODE, BECAUSE THIS ALSO SERVES UNDER THE FIRE CODE, TOO.

WE USE THIS BOARD IN THERE, TOO.

COMBINING INTO THE NEW BOARD, WAS THE CEMETERY BOARD AND THE CITIZENS PUBLIC ART, RENAMING THE PARK BOARD TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD TO BETTER REFLECT WHAT THEY REALLY DO IN THEIR CONSIDERATIONS.

THEN CHANGE THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD, REMOVE THE RUSSELL FARM FROM THIS.

THE BOREN PROPERTY ADVISORY COMMITTEE WILL STILL BE ADVISING ON THAT AND HELPING WITH THAT, BUT THAT WILL NOT BE UNDER THE AGREEMENT.

THEN WE'RE GOING TO EXPAND THE OLD TOWN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

WE HAVE NOT BEGUN WORK ON THAT YET WITH TONY MCILWAIN, BUT WE WILL WORK WITH THEM, AND I'M SURE THEY HAVE SOME IDEAS ON EXPANDING THAT.

BUT THAT WON'T REQUIRE ANY CHANGES TO BE MADE IN AN ORDINANCE OR THE POLICY.

THEN THE NEW ONE THAT WE'RE ALL EXCITED ABOUT, THE PUBLIC SPACES AND CULTURAL HERITAGE BOARD.

THOSE WERE ALL STATED IN THERE.

THEN THOSE WERE WHERE WE LEFT OFF.

I THINK WE'VE GOTTEN THE GIST OF WHAT YOU GUYS WANTED.

WE'RE GOING TO REMAIN SAME ON THE TERMS. EVERY OTHER RECOMMENDATION WAS APPROVED, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE TERM LIMITS.

WHEN YOU TERM OUT, YOU JUST DO THE ONE.

THAT'S ALL I HAD UNLESS COUNSEL HAD MORE QUESTIONS ON THIS.

>> MAYOR, IF YOU COULD ASK FOR A MOTION?

[00:50:02]

>> I WAS WONDERING IF YOU LEFT.

[LAUGHTER] IS THERE A MOTION ON THIS?

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE.

SHOULD I JUST SAY AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF? I MOVE TO APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, THE CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, CHAPTER 2 AND CHAPTER 6 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND CITY COUNCIL POLICY NUMBER 40.

>> I GOT A MOTION BY VICTORIA AND THE SECOND BY DAN.

PLEASE VOTE. PASSES UNANIMOUS.

THAT BRINGS US TO SECTION 7 REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS.

[7.A. Receive a report, hold a discussion and provide staff direction on an ordinance amending Chapter 34, Article VIII, of the Code of Ordinances regulating unattended clothing donation containers. (First Reading) (Staff Contact: Tony D. McIlwain, Development Services Director)]

THE FIRST REPORT THIS EVENING IS THE 7A RECEIVER REPORT, HOLD A DISCUSSION, AND PROVIDE STAFF DIRECTION ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 34, ARTICLE 8 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES REGULATING UNATTENDED CLOTHING DONATION CONTAINERS.

THE STAFF PRESENTED THIS EVENING IS TONY MCILWAIN, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR. MR. MCWAIN.

>> THANK YOU, AMANDA. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

FOR THOSE OF YOU ON THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE, THIS WILL BE A RECAP, FOR THE REST OF YOU, IT'LL BE BRAND NEW MATERIAL, BUT BACK IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR AND MAY OF THIS YEAR, STAFF HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT PROPOSED CHANGES TO CHAPTER 34, WHICH CONTAINS THE CITY'S REGULATING LANGUAGE REGARDING DONATION CONTAINERS.

WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE ON THE BOOKS SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITS UNATTENDED CLOTHING DONATION CONTAINERS.

WELL, THE PROCESS WAS INITIATED TO PROHIBIT IT TO PREVENT DUMPING AND PROTECT THE AESTHETIC WELL-BEING OF THE COMMUNITY, AND PROMOTE A TIDY APPEARANCE.

BUT OUR ORDINANCE IS 20 YEARS OLD, AND WE'VE SEEN A RISE IN UNATTENDED DONATION CONTAINERS TAKE PLACE IN A COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT IT IS UNLAWFUL BASED ON A LEGAL CASE FROM 2015.

WE TOOK ON THE EFFORT OF DISCUSSING THIS WITH THE COMMITTEE.

THIS IS A PICTURE THAT WE PROVIDED THAT JUST GIVES YOU SOME IDEA OF WHAT COULD HAPPEN WHEN THESE UNATTENDED DONATION CONTAINERS ARE NOT WELL-KEPT AND MAINTAINED.

YOU HAVE YOUR USUAL OBSERVANCES OF LITTER, GRAFFITI, AND DUMPING.

THAT COMBINED WITH AN ACTION THAT THE SIXTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS UNDERTOOK BACK IN APRIL 6 OF 2015, MEANS THAT OUR ORDINANCE IS LIKELY UNLAWFUL.

WE THINK THAT THERE IS A DIRECT TIE IN TO FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS WITH REGARD TO INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY'S ABILITY TO PLACE THESE STRUCTURES ON SITE.

IN OUR DISCUSSION WITH THE COMMITTEE, STAFF PROPOSED SEVERAL AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 34 THAT WE HOPE DOES TWO THINGS.

ONE THAT GIVES YOU SOME REGULATION REGARDING DONATION CONTAINERS, AND THEN AN EXEMPTION FOR WHAT WE CALL BLESSING BOXES.

THOSE ARE THE SMALLER THINGS THAT WE SEE HERE IN THE CITY.

IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMITTEE THAT WE TALK ABOUT THE APPLICABILITY OF THE ORDINANCE, MEANING WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING TO BE LEGALLY NONCONFORMING.

WE'RE TRYING TO BRING ALL THESE USES INTO SOME CONFORMING ASPECT OF THE CITY'S CODE, SHOULD THIS BE APPROVED.

WE WORKED WITH OUR LEGAL STAFF TO COME UP WITH SOME DEFINITIONS THAT DRAW A DISTINCTION BETWEEN DONATION BOX.

WHAT WE MEAN BY THAT IS TYPICALLY YOUR LITTLE LIBRARIES AND YOUR BLESSING BOXES AND DONATION CONTAINERS, WHICH ARE THE LARGER ONES THAT YOU SEE THAT ALLOW FOR A LOT MORE MATERIALS, SUCH AS CLOTHING, TO BE PLACED INSIDE OF THEM.

WE DISCUSSED THE PROPOSED FEE AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE ON A SCREEN.

YOU HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT WE JUST PROVIDED AS AN EXHIBIT, AND WE DIDN'T INCLUDE A FEE AMOUNT.

WE DID DISCUSS A $100 FEE FOR THESE DONATION CONTAINERS, AND ALSO A 40-FOOT CUBIC FEET ALLOWANCE FOR YOUR BLESSING BOXES.

THAT'S A PRETTY LARGE BLESSING BOX, BUT WE TOOK MEASUREMENTS.

WE THINK THAT CAPTURES THE MAJORITY OF THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE SEE IN THE COMMUNITY TODAY.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE HAVE PROPOSED PROVISIONS THAT WE ALLOW THE PROPERTY ON WHICH YOU GIVE WRITTEN PERMISSION OR ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO BE PLACED ON A PROPERTY SITE PLAN, COLLECTION SCHEDULE, CIRCULATION PLAN, IF APPROPRIATE, ALSO GRAFFITI AND LITTER.

[00:55:02]

THAT TENDS TO BE A PROBLEM WHEN PEOPLE ARE GOING OUT TAGGING THESE STAINS WHEN TO MAKE SURE THAT THE OWNER OPERATOR HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN IT UP.

SIZE LIMITATIONS WERE DISCUSSED FOR THE DONATION CONTAINERS, AND THESE ARE THE LARGER ONES.

WE PUT IN A DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT NOT TO EXCEED 512 CUBIC FEET, WHICH IS EIGHT FEET WIDE, EIGHT FEET IN DEPTH, AND EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT.

A TYPICAL EIGHT-YARD DUMPSTER IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

A PROHIBITION WITH THEM BEING NOT ALLOWED IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND LOCATED 200 FEET FROM A RESIDENTIAL AREA.

THERE WAS A QUESTION THAT WE RAISED IN HOUSE, AND THAT'S HOW TO ADDRESS CHURCHES.

CHURCHES ARE OFTENTIMES LOCATED IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, AS ARE SCHOOLS IN SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM.

WE ARE, BASED ON YOUR ACTION AND DIRECTION TONIGHT, WE'LL GO BACK AND INVESTIGATE HOW WE CAN INTEGRATE THAT SO THAT IT GIVES A CLEAR ALLOWANCE FOR CERTAIN INSTITUTIONAL EDUCATIONAL LAND USES.

ANOTHER DISCUSSION WE HAD WAS WE HAVE WACKY WEATHER HERE IN THIS PART OF THE STATE, AND SOMETIMES WE GET STRONG DUSKY WINDS.

WE GET FLOODING CONDITIONS.

HOW DO WE DESIGN SOME OF THESE LARGER CONTAINERS TO WITHSTAND THAT? IN OUR DISCUSSION, WE DIDN'T WANT TO PUT IN SPECIFICS BECAUSE WE THINK THAT IT'S PROBABLY BEST LEFT TO THE MANUFACTURER, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO EVALUATE IF THIS IS ULTIMATELY TAKEN THE SHAPE OF A NEW ORDINANCE THROUGH OUR CO-COMPLIANCE STAFF AND BUILDING PERMIT STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT IS BUILT TO WITHSTAND THE ELEMENTS.

JUST MORE OF THE PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS WE DISCUSSED WITH THE COMMITTEE.

A BIG THING, AND YOU ALL MAY BE AWARE, IS SOMETIMES WE HAVE UNFORTUNATE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE INDIVIDUALS WILL ACCESS THESE LARGER DONATION CONTAINERS AND GET STUCK, AND SOMETIMES IT ENDS IN AN INJURY OR WORSE, DEATH.

OFTENTIMES, WE SEE IT ATTRIBUTED TO THE HOMELESS UNHOUSED POPULATION.

THEY'RE LOOKING AND GET IN THERE TO GET CLOTHING.

SOMETIMES THEY CAN'T FIND THEIR WAY OUT.

WE HAVE ANY NUMBER OF UNFORTUNATE STORIES FROM OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE HAD THESE UNFORTUNATE INSTANCES, AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT TRYING TO PUT IN LANGUAGE THAT WILL LESSEN OR MITIGATE THAT FROM OCCURRING HERE IN THE CITY OF BURLESON.

I WON'T READ ALL THOSE TO YOU, BUT IT'S BASICALLY WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE IN SOME PROHIBITIONS THAT BASICALLY DON'T PROHIBIT THE FUNCTIONALITY OF A SPACE JUST BY THE PLACEMENT OF A DONATION CONTAINER ON SITE.

WE NOW TRANSITION FROM DONATION CONTAINERS TO THE DONATION BOX.

THESE ARE YOUR BLESSING BOXES, YOUR LITTLE LIBRARIES.

WE JUST BASICALLY HAVE SOME PORTER LANGUAGE, IS WHAT I CALL IT, KEEP THE DONATION BOX CLEAN, FREE OF TRASH.

NO MORE THAN ONE ON A SINGLE PLATTED LOT OR UNPLAT TRACT OF LAND.

YOU HAVE THE BIGGER LOCATIONS, SUCH AS SHOPPING CENTER OFFICE DEVELOPMENT.

WE HAVE MULTIPLE LOTS.

WE WILL BASICALLY CONSIDER AND TREAT IT AS IF IT'S ONE CONTIGUOUS LOT.

I WANT TO GO OFF OF THE SLIDE HERE AND TALK ABOUT THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT MAY FIND THEIR WAY INTO SOME OF THESE BLESSING BOXES.

I HAD A BRIEF CONVERSATION WITH COUNCILMAN SCOTT BEFORE THE MEETING, AND HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THAT THERE HAVE BEEN INSTANCES OF ALCOHOL BEING PLACED IN THESE BLESSING BOXES.

THAT MAY BE A BLESSING FOR SOME PEOPLE, OBVIOUSLY, BUT WE DON'T WANT IT WHERE CHILDREN AND MINORS, AND PEOPLE CAN EASILY ACCESS THAT.

WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE FOODS AND FOOD SUBSTANCES THAT WILL SPOIL BECAUSE IT'S NOT A REFRIGERATED SITE.

WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE THAT PLACED IN THESE BOXES.

IT WOULD SEEM TO BE COMMON SENSE, BUT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO BASICALLY PROHIBIT CERTAIN THINGS, AND WE CAN INTEGRATE THAT INTO THE DRAFT ORDINANCE IF THAT'S YOUR DIRECTION.

WE CAN PROHIBIT ANYTHING YOU MIGHT WANT TO PROHIBIT, WHETHER IT BE NICOTINE PRODUCTS, ALCOHOL, ANYTHING THAT YOU THINK WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO ALLOW THE AVERAGE PERSON TO UTILIZE THE BOX WITHOUT HAVING TO DEAL WITH CIRCUMSTANCES INVOLVING THINGS LIKE ALCOHOL.

WITH THE BLESSING BOXES OR DONATION BOXES, WE'RE PUTTING THE ONUS ON THE OPERATOR TO MAINTAIN IT.

STAFF DOES GO BY THESE ONES THAT ARE IN THE CITY AND

[01:00:01]

DO A ROUTINE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ALERT THE OPERATOR IN A LOT OF CASES.

IT IS MAINTAINED IN PRISTINE CONDITIONS.

BUT AS A MOMENT IN TIME, SOMEBODY COMES IN, THEY RAVAGE THROUGH THE STUFF, AND SOMETIMES IT'S LEFT IN DISARRAY.

WE ARE PUTTING IN LANGUAGE THAT EXEMPTS THE SMALLER DONATION BOXES FROM COMING IN, REQUIRE A PERMIT, AND THOSE EXEMPTIONS ARE LISTED UNDER LETTER B.

AGAIN, 40 CUBIC FEET OR LESS.

NUMBERS 2 THROUGH 4, PROPERTY BEING ENTIRELY ON PRIVATE PROPERTY OR PUBLIC PROPERTY WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, MAINTAIN A NEAT, ORDERLY CONDITION AND NO MORE THAN ONE PER PARCEL OR BUSINESS LOCATION.

THE CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REVOKE THIS EXEMPTION, REQUIRE COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE IF THE BOXES FOUND TO BE CAUSE OF PUBLIC NUISANCE, BLIGHT, OR OTHERWISE VIOLATE APPLICABLE HEALTH, SAFETY, OR ZONING CODES.

THESE ARE SOME PICTURES THAT WE PRESENTED TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE THAT GIVES YOU SOME IDEA OF SOME OF THE BLESSING BOXES WE HAVE HERE IN THE CITY.

THESE ARE VERY ROUGH ESTIMATES THAT CODE ENFORCEMENT STAFF UNDERTOOK AS FAR AS THE MEASUREMENTS.

SOME OF THEM HAVE A CONSISTENT LOOK, BUT IT DEPENDS ON WHO THE PERSON THAT'S CONSTRUCTING THE BOX, THE INTENDED PURPOSE.

WE HAVE THE LOCATIONS THERE.

YOU CAN SEE WE DIDN'T MODIFY THE PICTURES, WE JUST KEPT IN VERY FRISKING CONDITION.

WE BASICALLY MONITOR THOSE AND HAVEN'T HAD A RECURRING PROBLEM WITH ANY OF THOSE.

YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET JUST A DRAFT ORDINANCE THAT DETAILS MORE THAN THIS PRESENTATION, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED.

THE PURPOSE OF MY BEING HERE TONIGHT IS FOR YOU TO GIVE FOR YOU TO GIVE DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER AS TO HOW YOU WANT TO PROCEED WITH THE ORDINANCE, WHETHER YOU WANT US TO GO BACK AND REEVALUATE IT, ADD IN SOME EXTRA PROVISIONS.

IT'S NOT A RUSH.

WE'VE BEEN OUT OF COMPLIANCE IS AT LEAST 2015, BUT WE WANT TO BRING THE CITY BACK WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE.

I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY DISCUSSION OR DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GIVE ME.

>> TONY, YOU SAID THAT ONE DONATION BOX PER PLATTED LOT?

>> ONE DONATION CONTAINER PER PLATTED LOT?

>> CAN YOU HAVE A DONATION BOX AND A DONATION CONTAINER ON THE SAME PLATTED LOT?

>> WE CAN. WE CAN DO WHATEVER THE COUNCIL FEELS COMFORTABLE WITH.

THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH HAVING THEM CLOSE TO ONE ANOTHER.

WHAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE OF IS THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE'VE GOT A NUMBER OF DONATION BOXES SIDE BY SIDE.

WE HAVE HAD THAT IN SOME AREAS OF THE CITY, AND FOUND OUT AFTER INVESTIGATION THEY WEREN'T APPROVED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.

IF THE COUNCIL FEELS THAT YOU WANT TO ALLOW A MIXTURE, WE CAN DO THAT.

>> I'D RECOMMEND WE DO NOT ALLOW MIXTURE.

>> TO ME, THE FLAVOR OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES ARE PRETTY STRICT.

I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S LIKELY TO BE ABUSED.

THE COUNCIL ALWAYS HAS THE DISCRETION TO WAIVE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.

>> WE'LL HAVE IN THESE CASES GOING FORWARD.

IF SOMEONE COMES UP WITH AN IDEA WE HAVEN'T THOUGHT OF, BUT IT APPEARS TO US THAT IT'LL BE BENEFICIAL ALL AROUND AND NOT HARMFUL TO THE COMMUNITY, WE'LL STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO REVIEW IT AND TAKE ANOTHER SHOT AT IT.

I LIKE THE CHANGES THAT YOU'VE GOT HERE.

>> MR. MAYOR, AND COUNCIL, ANY DIRECTION ON ANY PROHIBITION AS FAR AS CERTAIN THINGS YOU WANT TO EXPLICITLY CALL OUT THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE PLACED IN SOME OF THE DONATION BOXES?

>> WELL, IN THE DONATION BOXES, LIKE YOU SPOKE OF A WHILE AGO, WE DEFINITELY DON'T WANT ALCOHOL IN THERE.

IT NEEDS TO BE NON-PERISHABLE ITEMS ONLY, NO CLOTHING, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

NO NICOTINE PRODUCTS.

THESE ARE IN CITY PARKS WHERE CHILDREN PLAY.

>> WE WANT TO KEEP IT APPLICABLE FOR THAT ENVIRONMENT.

>> HOW DO WE ENFORCE THAT?

>> THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION.

>> TYPICALLY, WE HAVE CONTACT WELL, THE ORDINANCE CALLS FOR CONTACT INFORMATION TO BE PLACED ON THE ACTUAL DONATION BOX.

STAFF WOULD ROUTINELY GO IN AND MAKE A CHECK IN ADDITION TO WHATEVER THE OWNER OPERATOR IS DOING, AND THEN WE DO WITH ANYONE ELSE.

WE'LL CONTACT THEM TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE AWARE THAT WE HAVE FOUND A, B, OR C. IT BECOMES A RECURRING PROBLEM, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'LL HAVE TO BASICALLY LOOK AT WHAT WE NEED TO DO FROM A REGULATORY STANDPOINT.

[01:05:03]

IT MAY BE THAT IS NOT THE INTENT OBVIOUSLY OF THE OWNER OPERATOR, BUT WE UNDERSTAND THAT CIRCUMSTANCES HAPPEN, IT COULD BE TEENAGERS PLAYING A GAG, IT COULD BE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

WE'LL WORK WITH THEM. BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT BIG OF AN ISSUE.

I HAVE, AGAIN, MR. SCOTT, HAD INSTANCES OF PEOPLE PLACING ALCOHOL ON THERE, SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S EXPLICITLY DISALLOWED.

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU COULD DO THIS, BUT IS THERE ANY WAY TO DISPLAY THE PERMIT ON THE BOX?

>> WELL, I WAS GOING TO ASK, I THINK I KNOW WHEN I'VE GONE TO LEAVE DONATION ITEMS, IT SAYS MAYBE NOT ON ALL OF THEM, BUT SEVERAL OF THEM HAVE A LITTLE PLACARD THAT SAYS NON-PERISHABLES ONLY OR SOME LITTLE NOTE TO DISCOURAGE THINGS THAT ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE LEFT IN THERE.

THE UNFORTUNATE THING IS, THIS IS ALL VOLUNTARY COMMUNITY ENCOURAGED, AND BASED.

I'VE SEEN A NUMBER OF POSTS ON THE BLESSING BOX PAGE ON FACEBOOK, THAT'S LIKE, PLEASE STOP LEAVING PERISHABLES.

IT'S LIKE, YOU CAN SAY IT AND YOU CAN SAY IT, AND IT STILL HAPPENS.

I THINK THAT A LOT OF TIMES IT'S GOOD INTENT.

I HAD A GARDEN AND I WAS OVERWHELMED WITH ZUCCHINI, AND I WAS LIKE, WHAT DO I DO WITH ALL OF THIS ZUCCHINI? BUT IT CAN'T GO IN THAT BOX BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE PRETTY NASTY.

BUT I HATED TO THROW AWAY ALL THAT ZUCCHINI. IT STUNK.

I JUST REACHED OUT TO A LOCAL FOOD BANK AND ASKED IF THEY COULD TAKE THAT.

BUT NOT EVERYONE'S GOING TO TAKE THAT EXTRA STEP AND EXTRA INITIATIVE, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE CAN MAKE SOME LITTLE PLACARDS THAT SAYS SOMETHING LIKE, PLEASE DO NOT LEAVE PERISHABLES, ALCOHOL, OR TOBACCO ITEMS.

>> SURE.

>> WE CAN MAKE THAT INTEGRATE THAT INTO THE ORDINANCE.

>> WITH REGARD TO THE STATEMENT ABOUT THE PERMIT BEING PLACED ON THE BOX.

REMEMBER, THE SMALL BOXES DON'T REQUIRE PERMIT.

THEY'RE EXEMPTED FROM THAT.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS CLEAR TO EVERYBODY.

>> BUT YOU'RE SAYING NOT MORE THAN ONE.

HOW DO YOU CONTROL THAT IF YOU DON'T HAVE A PERMIT? WHO'S THEIR FIRST ROUTINE?

>> WE CHECK THAT RIGHT NOW, MR. MAYOR.

CO-COMPLIANCE WILL ACTUALLY GO OUT, AND WE GET A LOT OF COMPLAINT CALLS FROM INDIVIDUALS IF THAT HAPPENS.

DURING THE COURSE OF OUR PATROL, WE HAVE A LIFTING OF ALL THE BLESSING BOXES THAT WE KNOW OF IN THE CITY.

WE'LL CHECK THOSE, AND IF SOMETHING POPS UP, NORMALLY A CO-COMPLIANCE OFFICER, SOMEBODY ELSE IN MY DEPARTMENT, WILL NOTICE IT, AND WE'LL NOTE IT AND MAKE CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER, A BUSINESS OPERATOR.

>> WELL, THE INDIVIDUAL THAT STARTED THIS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE PROTECTED.

I DON'T WANT TO LOSE WHAT WE'VE ALREADY HAD.

LESSON BOXES ARE GREAT.

I KNOW NANCY IS CONSTANTLY PUTTING STUFF IN, YES.

IT'S A GOOD THING, BUT I DON'T WANT SOMEONE TO GET RAILROADED AND SAY I WAS HERE FIRST AND THEY'RE NOT.

>> I UNDERSTAND.

>> THE TWO BOXES THAT ARE ON CITY PROPERTY DO HAVE THE SIGNS ON.

THEY'RE NOT REPRESENTED HERE, BUT LIKE VICTORIA SAID, NON PERISHABLE ITEMS ONLY.

AFTER THE SIGNS WERE PUT UP, IT STILL CONTINUED, SO IT'S ALL ABOUT VIGILANCE AND MAINTENANCE.

THE MANAGER SHERRY, SHE GOES BY THERE DAILY AND CLEANS THE BOXES OUT, SANITIZES THEM, MAKE SURE THEY'RE CLEAN AND HEALTHY.

BUT WE CAN'T CONTROL WHAT HAPPENS AT THE OTHER BOXES.

>> I GUESS ONE QUESTION I'VE GOT IS, WHAT ABOUT A CHURCH OR A SCHOOL THAT HAS A BLESSING BOX, AND THEY OPERATE IT THEMSELVES.

WOULD THEY BE EXEMPT FROM THE $100 PERMIT FEE OR WOULD NEED TO PAY IT? BECAUSE HERE IT'S THE OPERATOR AND THEN THE PROPERTY OWNER, BUT WHAT IF THEY'RE ONE AND THE SAME?

>> I THINK IF WE WANT TO DRAW A DISTINCTION, WE CAN.

YOU'VE GOT NONPROFITS.

OBVIOUSLY, WE KNOW THAT.

I THINK EVERYBODY IS OPERATING AS A NONPROFIT, BUT IF THERE'S A DISTINCTION THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ALLOW FOR CERTAIN USES ON SITE OWNER OPERATED WITH A CHURCH A SCHOOL, I CAN TALK WITH LEGAL TEAM TO SEE HOW WE CAN PUT THAT LANGUAGE IN TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THERE'S AN EXEMPTION FOR THE PERMIT FEE.

THE SAME QUESTION APPLIES TO BLESSING BOXES ON CITY OWNED PROPERTY.

IF IT'S A PUBLIC ENTITY, DO YOU WANT TO CHARGE A FEE? WE CAN BRING THAT BACK AND WE'LL TALK IN HOUSE ABOUT IT AND BRING IT BACK TO YOU FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION OR ACTION.

>> I NOTICED THAT IT'S WRITTEN AS FAR AS WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR EXCESS DONATIONS,

[01:10:04]

TRASH DEBRIS, ETC, THAT'S THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT WE'VE CHOSEN TO MAKE RESPONSIBLE, NOT THE OWNER OF THE CONTAINER.

I ALSO DON'T SEE IT'S PROBABLY IN HERE SOMEWHERE, BUT I DIDN'T SEE WHERE WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM A PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE TO BE SHOWN AS A PART OF THE PERMIT PROCESS.

BUT IT TROUBLES ME A LITTLE BIT TO THINK WE HAVE THE RESTRICTION IN THERE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS TO BE RESPONSIBLE, BUT WHEN IT'S A SHOPPING CENTER WITH MULTIPLE PLATTED LOTS, THAT'S ONLY GOING TO ALLOW ONE BOX, BUT WHICH PROPERTY OWNER IS GOING TO GET STUCK WITH OF THE RESPONSIBILITY OF KEEPING IT UP.

SOMEBODY HAS TO BE RESPONSIBLE, THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT.

THERE NEEDS TO BE A MEANS OF MAKING CONTACT WITH SOMEONE WHEN THESE THINGS GET OVER DUMPED TO MAKE SURE THAT'S PICKED UP.

>> IF WE THINK ABOUT IT IN THE VEIN OF IT RESULTING IN A CODE COMPLIANCE VISIT, FOR INSTANCE.

TYPICALLY, MY STAFF IS ALWAYS GOING TO MAKE CONTACT WITH THE OWN OPERATOR AND THE PROPERTY OWNER, JUST TO MAKE SURE THE PROPERTY OWNER IS AWARE.

ULTIMATELY, THE PROPERTY OWNERS BEARS THE BRUNT OF IT BECAUSE PER LAW, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THERE IS A NOTICE OF VIOLATION, THEY ARE NOTIFIED.

WE WILL GO THROUGH, AND TYPICALLY, IF WE HAVE AN ISSUE NOW, IF WE KNOW IT'S THE OWNER OPERATOR, WE MAY CONTACT WITH THE OWNER OPERATOR, AND AS A COURTESY, WE MAY CONTACT WITH THE PROVIDER, HEY, BECAUSE THEY MAY BE OUT OF STATE.

WE DON'T KNOW. SAY, WE'VE GOT THIS CONDITION ON SITE, KEEPING YOU INFORMED.

NOW, IF WE GET NON COMPLIANCE, THEN WE'LL BASICALLY TRANSITION TO YOUR TYPICAL CODE COMPLIANCE ACTION, WHICH DOES REQUIRE US TO NOTIFY THE PROPERTY OWNER.

WE ALSO WILL NOTIFY THE OWNER AND OPERATOR OF THE BLESSING BOX AS WELL.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THE OWNER OPERATOR DOESN'T GET A FREE PASS, BUT WE HAVE TO NOTIFY THE PROPERTY OWNER IF THERE'S AN ISSUE.

WITH REGARD TO A SHOPPING CENTER THAT HAS BEEN CARVED UP INTO MULTIPLE LOTS, IT GETS A LITTLE TRICKY.

WE THEN TYPICALLY TRY TO LEAD OUT WITH THE OWNER OPERATOR.

THEN IF THERE'S A MANAGEMENT COMPANY, NORMALLY WHAT MISS GUELLO OR HER STAFF WILL DO IS GO THROUGH ENORMOUS LENGTHS TO MAKE SURE WE GET IN CONTACT WITH JUST A SPECIFIC RIGHT PERSON THAT WE CAN MAKE AWARE OF ANY ISSUES ON THE SITE.

WE'VE NOT HAD AN ISSUE BEFORE, BUT IF WE WANT TO HAVE THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC, WE CAN DO THAT, COUNCILMAN CLINTON AND THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM.

WE WANT TO JUST HAVE IT WHAT WAS BULLET PLATE ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT IF YOU ARE TRYING TO OPERATE ONE, WE'RE GOING TO NOTIFY THE PROPERTY OWNER SO THAT THEY'RE AWARE IF YOU'RE CAUSING AN ISSUE ON THEIR PROPERTY.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? DO YOU HAVE DIRECTION ON THIS ONE?

>> I DO. AGAIN, THERE'S NO RUSH IN YOUR MOTION TONIGHT, IF YOU WANT TO RE DELEGATE IT BACK FOR A FURTHER DISCUSSION TO COMMITTEE, WE CAN DO THAT.

WE CAN BRING BACK THE ORDINANCE FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

I DON'T WANT YOU TO FEEL THAT YOU HAVE TO APPROVE THIS NEXT TIME IS IN FRONT OF YOU.

WE'LL JUST ENTERTAIN ANY DIRECTION YOU HAVE AND PROCEED FROM THERE.

>> DOES ANYBODY WANT ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS OR ARE YOU GOOD? I THINK YOU DID A GOOD JOB.

>> WE'LL WORK ON GETTING THAT TURNAROUND FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNSEL.

[7.B. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and provide staff direction on proposed amendments to Chapter 26, Courts and Chapter 34, Environment, of the Code of Ordinances regulating noise. (Staff Contact: Tony D. McIlwain, Development Services Director)]

THAT BRINGS US TO 7B, RECEIVER REPORT.

HOLD A DISCUSSION AND PROVIDE STAFF DIRECTION ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26, COURTS AND CHAPTER 34 ENVIRONMENT OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES REGULATING NOISE.

THE STAFF PRESENTER IS ONCE AGAIN, TONY MCILWAIN, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

>> THANK YOU. COUNSEL, THIS IS AN ITEM THAT STARTED AS A CONVERSATION WITH THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER REGARDING NOISE COMPLAINTS.

I THINK YOU ALL HAVE RECEIVED THEM IN YOUR CAPACITY AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, LOUD NOISE COMING FROM SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

BASED ON THAT CONVERSATION, STAFF STARTED WORKING WITH TOASE, OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S FIRM TO LOOK AT WHAT WE COULD DO TO STRENGTHEN OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES TO PROVIDE MORE TEETH FOR THE CITY.

WHAT THAT LED TO ITS CHANGES TO TWO CHAPTERS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AS THE CITY SECRETARY JUST RELAYED TO YOU.

AS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE MANY CHALLENGES REGARDING NOISE, PARTICULARLY NUISANCE NOISE.

OFTENTIMES, WHEN STAFF ARRIVES, WE DON'T OBSERVE NOR HEAR THE VIOLATION.

THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY OFTENTIMES IS NOT PRESENT.

IT COULD BE NOISE FROM A RENTER.

THE PERSON COMPLAINING ABOUT THE NOISE OFTENTIMES IS NOT WILLING TO APPEAR OR WRITE ANYTHING THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY GET THEM INVOLVED.

[01:15:05]

SOME OF THE OF ISSUES REGARDING WHAT HAPPENS NEXT, AND THEN WE HAVE REPEAT OFFENDERS.

WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO WITH THESE CHANGES IS ESSENTIALLY GIVE GREATER CLARITY AND FLEXIBILITY WITH THE COURTS, AND ALSO WITH ANYONE LOOKING TO CALL AND COMPLAIN ABOUT NUISANCE NOISE IN THEIR PROXIMITY.

THIS SCREEN SHOWS A BROAD 1,000 FOOT VIEW SUMMARY OF SOME OF THE CHANGES.

WE'VE MADE SOME CHANGES WITH THE TEXT TO ALLOW PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE, WHICH IS BASICALLY I'VE SUBMITTED A COMPLAINT TO YOU THAT ON ITS FACE IS SUFFICIENT FOR YOU TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A PUBLIC NUISANCE EFFORTS.

WE'VE GOT ENFORCEMENT LANGUAGES HAVE BEEN CHANGED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE EXPLICIT THAT CODE OFFICER OR POLICE OFFICER IN THE COURSE OF EMPLOYMENT CAN ESSENTIALLY MOVE THESE COMPLAINTS FORWARD, A CITIZEN MAY FILE A WRITTEN COMPLAINT WITH A MUNICIPAL COURT FOR PROSECUTION AS WELL.

WE'VE GOT LANGUAGE THAT DEALS WITH CONTINUING VIOLATIONS REGARDING OR CONSTITUTING A PUBLIC NUISANCE, AND WE'VE REVISE A SECTION OF OUR PENALTIES TO EXPLICITLY STATE AT THE LAST BULLET POINT, A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE IS A NUISANCE.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ANYONE THAT IS BUT BEFORE THE COURT UNDERSTANDS THAT IS A PROSECUTION OF AN OFFENSE AND WILL NOT LIMIT THE CITY'S ABILITY TO ABATE THE NUISANCE REGARDLESS OF THE PROCEEDINGS WITH THE COURT.

YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT WILL APPEAR IN COURT AND THEN THEY WON'T CHANGE THEIR BEHAVIOR.

THE CITY CAN STILL MOVE FORWARD WITH ABATING THE ISSUE AS THE PROCESS PLAYS OUT IF IT GOES TO THE COURTS.

THESE NEXT SEVERAL SLIDES IS BASICALLY GIVES YOU SOME IDEA OF WHERE WE'VE DONE THE STRUCK THROUGH LANGUAGE REGARDING THE TEXT WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN A CODE.

AGAIN, WE TOOK OUT THE LANGUAGE REGARDING MAN-MADE AND HUMAN ACTIVITIES NOISE IS NOISE, REGARDLESS OF HOW IT'S GENERATED.

ALSO TOOK OUT PRESUMED TO BE PUBLIC NUISANCES.

THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT BASED ON TOASE LEGAL DISCRETION I RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY DO.

WE'VE PUT IN SOME WHAT I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT LANGUAGE THAT ALLOWS CITIZENS TO SUBMIT SWORN STATEMENTS WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION OF THE NOISE ORDINANCE TO SOMEONE IN THE EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY OF BURLESON.

WHETHER IT'S A CODE OR POLICE OFFICER FOR MUNICIPAL PROSECUTION.

THIS IS A SMALL TEXT, BUT IT'S BASICALLY WE STRUCK THIS WHOLE SECTION OUT.

I LEARNED THIS NEW TODAY, IF I WANT TO LET THE CITY ATTORNEY KNOW VERNON'S, TEXAS, CODE ANNOTATED? THANK YOU [BACKGROUND] YES.

WHAT WE'VE DONE IS PUT IN ESSENTIALLY A CONCURRENT PROCESS WHERE THE MUNICIPAL COURT CAN HAVE JURISDICTION ALONG WITH THE CRIMINAL COURT FOR THESE PARTICULAR CASES UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 30.00005.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO READ THAT SECTION REFERENCES OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE LAW, AND ONE OF THOSE PROVISIONS IS CONTAINED IN CHAPTER 217, WHICH DEALS SPECIFICALLY WITH NUISANCES.

IT'S A TIE IN BACK TO LANGUAGE THAT IS LINKED IN THAT GIVES THE CITY MUNICIPAL COURT SOME LEVERAGE AND CONCURRENT JURISDICTION.

WE'VE GOT IN THIS SECTION, CLEAR LANGUAGE THAT SAYS A VIOLATION OF THE NOISE ORDINANCE IS A NUISANCE.

THIS IS THE SECTION THAT I JUST ALLUDED TO WHERE TOASE RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY PUT THIS LANGUAGE IN.

AGAIN, SECTION 27.042 IS THE ONE THAT SPECIFICALLY DEALS WITH NUISANCES.

THOSE OTHER SECTIONS DEAL WITH OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE CODE AND CITY'S ABILITY TO REGULATE NUISANCES TO INCLUDE NOISE.

BUT WE THINK THAT THIS IS A GREAT LANGUAGE THAT FURTHER DEFINES THE AUTHORITY OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT.

THIS IS ADDITIONAL VERBIAGE CHANGES THAT TOASE RECOMMENDED THAT WE PUT IN REGARDING CIVIL JURISDICTION, CONCURRENT JURISDICTION.

CONCURRENT JURISDICTION OVER ITS FUNCTION PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO THE REST OF A PERSON.

AGAIN, JUST MORE OF ME PUTTING THIS INFORMATION IN FRONT OF YOU.

[01:20:02]

THIS IS ALL CONTAINED IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 26.

THIS LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, SENATE BILL 1008 WAS ULTIMATELY PASSED, AND IT BASICALLY LIMITS THE CITY'S PROHIBITION AUTHORITY PERMITTING AND FEE REQUIREMENTS.

THERE'S A COMMON REFRAIN THERE WITH A LOT OF THE BILLS THAT HAVE BEEN PASSED.

BUT WITH THIS EXCEPTION, WE WORKED WITH MR. ROBISKI TO BASICALLY PUT IN THE TEXT THAT THE LAW EFFECTUATES.

BASICALLY, WE'VE GOT IN A LIMIT ON OUR ABILITY TO ENFORCE NOISE COMPLAINTS, IF THE FOLLOWING THINGS ARE OCCURRING UNDER SUBSECTION NUMBER 1.

IF IT'S A DELIVERY, THAT'S LASTING LESS THAN AN HOUR.

DELIVERY IS ONLY FOR FOOD, NON ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, FOOD, SERVICE SUPPLIERS OR ICE, AND THERE'S A MEASUREMENT REQUIREMENT WHERE AS LONG AS YOU DON'T EXCEED 65 FEET DECIBELS, FROM THE CLOSEST RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, THE CITY HAS NO ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY.

RESTAURANTS THAT PLAY AMPLIFIED MUSIC.

THAT OFTENTIMES IS SOMETHING THAT LEADS TO A COMPLAINT.

THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE HAS LANGUAGE THAT SAYS YOU'RE EXEMPT, AS LONG AS THE AMPLIFIED SOUND IS NOT USED AT THE 10:00 PM ON SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY OR 11:00 PM ON FRIDAY AND SATURDAY.

WE THINK THAT'S GOING TO PRESENT PROBLEMS FOR US TO GO IN AND WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET CALLS, IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY.

WE FULLY EXPECT THERE TO BE MUSIC THAT WILL BE PLAYED AFTER THIS TIME.

WE EXPECT THAT THERE WILL BE MUSIC PLAYED LOUDLY BEFORE THIS TIME.

WHILE THERE IS A DECIBEL REQUIREMENT, OFTENTIMES FOR THE INDIVIDUALS COMPLAINING NOISE IS NOISE AND THEY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT, THE ONLY ABILITY THAT WE HAVE IS THAT IF THE HOUSE PREDATES THE BUSINESS THAT WAS COMING IN LINE.

THEN YOU HAVE THE GRANDFATHERING CLAUSE, AND THEN THEY'RE NOT EXEMPT.

THEY ARE NOT GRANTED EXEMPTION FROM THIS.

FROM A PRACTICALITY STANDPOINT, WE'LL HAVE TO SEE HOW THAT WORKS, BUT YOU BASICALLY CAN PLAY THE MUSIC UP UNTIL 10:00 O'CLOCK OR 11:00 O'CLOCK AND BE EXEMPT PROVIDED YOU MEET THE DECIBEL REQUIREMENTS.

WE DO NOT EXPECT THAT TO MATTER TO RESIDENTS THAT ARE CALLING AND COMPLAINING.

BUT WE JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THIS IS STATE LAW, SO YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME UNHAPPY PEOPLE, BUT WE'LL GO OUT AND DO OUR DUTY AND TAKE THE DECIBEL MEASUREMENT.

BUT IF YOU'RE AT 75 OR LESS AND YOU'RE BEFORE 10:00 PM OR 11:00 PM, THE CITY'S HANDS ARE TIED.

THAT'S WHY WE THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO PUT THIS LANGUAGE IN THIS REQUIREMENT.

THAT'S A NEAT BOW ON WHAT IS BASICALLY A LOT OF MATERIAL.

BUT AGAIN, THIS WENT TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE AND THEY RECOMMENDED ACTION OR REVIEW BY THE COUNCIL.

AGAIN, LIKE THE LAST PRESENTATION.

I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

I THINK THAT THE CHIEF IS HERE.

HE CAN TALK ABOUT ANY PRACTICAL ISSUES HE MAY HAVE WITH ENFORCING NUISANCE NOISE.

BUT WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND TAKE YOUR DIRECTION.

>> THE PROBLEM I HAVE BACK WHEN OSCARS WAS BLOWING AND GOING AND THEY HAD AN OPEN AREA.

WE WERE GETTING A LOT OF COMPLAINTS.

MY PROBLEM IS IT PUTS OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT IN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT YES OR NO. IT REALLY DOES.

WE'RE SITTING THERE, I HAD A METER THAT I WENT ALL OVER THE PARKING LOT AND BARELY GOT OVER 50, BUT PEOPLE WAS HEARING IT ALL THE WAY AT THE FRONT DOOR OF HEB.

SHANNON CREEK WAS HEARING IT THE WHOLE THING.

THE DECIBEL, THERE'S MORE TO IT THAN JUST THE LOUDNESS.

THERE'S SOME WAY OR ANOTHER, IT GETS IN A CORRIDOR, AND IT GOES OUT.

BUT THE WHOLE PROBLEM I GOT HERE WAS PUTTING OUR PEOPLE IN A SITUATION WHERE THERE'S NO WIN FOR THEM.

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT SENATE BILL 1008 HELPS THE CITY IN THAT REGARD.

IF YOU'RE GETTING A DECIBEL READING IN THE 50S AND YOU CAN HEAR TRAVELING THROUGH THE AMPLITUDE, TRAVELING THROUGH AMBIENT AIR, AND IT TRAVELS GREAT DISTANCES, THIS DOESN'T HELP.

[01:25:01]

THE EXPECTATION THAT I HAVE AND OTHERS ON STAFF IS THAT IF YOU KNOW THE LAW AND YOU HAVE YOUR OWN METER OR DECIBEL READER, YOU CAN CRANK IT UP AND YOU CAN DO SO.

NOW, YOU ARE LIMITED TO A CERTAIN TIME, BUT 10 O'CLOCK ON ANY WEEKNIGHT, IT'S STILL LATE FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE TO GET UP AND GO TO WORK IN THE MORNING.

BUT WE'RE HAMSTRONG, MR. MAYOR, THAT WE CAN'T GO BEYOND THE LAW.

I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN OFFER YOU ANYTHING OTHER THAN IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN TO COMPLAINING PARTIES, BUT WE HAVE TO ADHERE TO STATE LAW AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I JUST DON'T WANT TO GET OUR TO GO OUT AND CONFRONT SOMEBODY AND NOT HAVE A RESOLUTION IT DOESN'T SOLVE ANYTHING.

>> AGREED.

>> NOW, ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS WAS THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS.

THEY HAD ONE PARTICULAR HOUSE THAT APPARENTLY, THOSE COLLEGE KIDS ENJOYED THAT AND THEY WERE PARTYING OUT IN THE FRONT YARD WITH THE MUSIC, AND THEN LEAVING THE TRASH SCATTERED EVERYWHERE, AND THAT'S MORE THAN JUST THE SOUND PROBLEM.

>> WITH THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, A LOT OF THE DIFFICULTY IS THAT THE ACTIVITY HAPPENS, AND CO-COMPLIANCE IS NOT WORKING AT THE TIME THAT THE INFRACTIONS ARE OCCURRING, BUT WE DO HAVE LANGUAGE THAT WE CAN LOOK AT IF WE HAVE RECURRING ISSUES WITH THE PROPERTY PROVIDED IT CAN BE SUBSTANTIATED THROUGH SEEING IT WITH THE NOISE.

WE DO HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO MEASURE OURSELVES THERE WORK WITH THE PROPRIETOR.

I DON'T KNOW HOW SUCCESSFUL WILL BE.

OBVIOUSLY, I'M SURE THE CHIEF HAS WAYS OF BEING PERSUASIVE WITH BUSINESS OWNERS, BUT OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT AND LIVE MUSIC WILL ALWAYS BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE IT'S JUST GOING TO TRAVEL.

>> WELL, WE EVEN HIRED A COMPANY TO MEASURE IT.

THEY PUT UP MICS EVERYWHERE AND THEY NEVER GOT OVER BARELY OVER 50 DECIBELS.

NOW YOU'RE GETTING INTO A GRAY AREA OF WHO'S WELL, I HEARD IT.

>> WELL, WE DID. [LAUGHTER] THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM.

>> YOU MEASURE IT?

>> NO.

IT'S A NO WIN SITUATION FOR NEARLY EVERYBODY.

>> I APPRECIATE THE STATE DOING THIS, BUT 70 DECIBELS, I GUESS YOU'RE PROBABLY DEAF.

I DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT NO MORE.

ANYBODY, ANY THOUGHTS?

>> TONY, THE MAYOR ALMOST HIT ON MY QUESTION HERE.

HE CAME CLOSE.

IT'S ABOUT SHORT-TERM RENTALS?

>> UNDER EXCEPTIONS 3I2, WOULD A SHORT TERM RENTAL BE CLASSIFIED AS AN OCCUPIED RESIDENCE?

>> IT'LL FIT THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW.

>> IN THE PAST, THE IRRESOLVABLE COMPLAINTS THAT I'VE HEARD HAVE BEEN DIVIDED BETWEEN BAND SOUNDS, LIKE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT WITH OSCARS AND BARKING DOGS.

I KNOW WE CHANGED THE WORD HERE WHERE IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A MAN MADE SOUND ANYMORE, WHICH WAS GOOD.

I DON'T KNOW HOW LOUD A BARKING DOG IS AT THE PROPERTY LINE, BUT IF YOU MEASURE IN A LOT OF LOTS IN THIS CITY, MANY OF THEM, IF YOU'RE 50 DECIBELS AT YOUR PROPERTY LINE 10 FEET ACROSS YOUR PROPERTY LINE IN YOUR NEIGHBOR'S BEDROOM, YOU'RE PROBABLY STILL AT 50 DECIBELS.

A DOG DOESN'T PAY MUCH ATTENTION TO THE CLOCK WHEN THEY FIRE UP AT 11:00 OR MIDNIGHT OR 2:00 IN THE MORNING, WHAT DO WE DO THEN? WE'VE HAD THIS HAPPEN.

I HAD AN EMPLOYEE THAT WAS ALMOST IN TEARS EVERY TIME SHE'D COME TO THE OFFICE BECAUSE THE DOG NEXT DOOR KEPT HER AWAKE ALL NIGHT.

POLICE CAME OUT, THE DOG STOPPED BARKING.

NOBODY WOULD DO ANYTHING.

POLICE LEAVE DOG FIRES BACK UP ON AND ON.

I WISH THERE WERE SOME WAY THAT WE COULD MAKE IT WHERE ENOUGH RECORDED INCIDENCES OF REPEATED VIOLATIONS, WHICH ARE VERY DIFFICULT TO EVEN WITNESS COULD RESULT IN SOME ACTION.

PEOPLE JUST SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO INTO THEIR BEDROOM AND HAVE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO SWEEP AND GET READY FOR WORK THE NEXT DAY WITH A PIT BULL NEXT DOOR, HOWLING ALL NIGHT LONG, THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE.

>> I AGREE WITH THAT. I LIVE WITH A HOUSE TWO HOUSES 90 DEGREES, AND IT'S LIKE DOING DOGS.

SOMEBODY COMES OUT, GO TO THE BACK.

THEY EITHER LIGHT IT UP EVEN LOUDER OR SHUT IT OFF,

[01:30:03]

OR THEY TAKE THE M IN THE HOUSE.

EVERY TIME I READ IT SAYS NUISANCE.

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION? THAT SEEMS TO BE AN OBJECTIVE WORD.

>> I BELIEVE I HAVE THE DEFINITION TO MAKE SURE IT IS OKAY.

>> YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M ASKING?

>> I DO RATHER, AND I DO NOT HAVE THE DEFINITION AS WE DEFINE IT IN OUR CODE.

I APOLOGIZE. I DON'T HAVE THAT FOR YOU, MR. MAYOR.

HOW WE DEFINE NUISANCE.

I UNDERSTAND, BUT YOU KNOW WE'RE GOOD.

>> THEN YOU'RE TRYING TO RESETTLE SOME OF THIS. AS HELPFUL AS YOU LIKE.

BUT THE REALITY OF THIS IS, THE LAW DEFINES A NUISANCE IS THE USE OR MISUSE OF PROPERTY IN A WAY THAT UNREASONABLY DISRUPTS LIFE IN THE AREA OR DETRACTS FROM ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER'S RIGHTS TO USE THEIR PROPERTY IN A REASONABLE AND EXPECTED MANNER.

NOW, THAT'S A GENERAL STATEMENT, AND IT'S ALL RELATIVELY SUBJECTIVE.

THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE RUNNING INTO IN THE NOISE AREA, AND THE POLICE CHIEF AND HIS TROOPS HAVE ENCOUNTERED THIS CONSTANTLY, IT'S A BALANCING OF RIGHTS AND EQUITIES THAT THE LAW IS ILL-SUITED TO RESOLVE.

BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE FACED WITH ARE SOME UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISIONS THAT GO BACK TO THE KENTUCKY BITUMINOUS COLD CASE THAT SAY, WHEN YOU OWN A PIECE OF PROPERTY, YOU HAVE A BUNDLE OF STICKS WHICH CONSTITUTES YOUR RIGHTS AS AN OWNER TO SELL IT, TO LEASE IT, TO USE IT FOR COMMERCIALLY REASONABLE PURPOSES.

IN MANY OF THOSE USES, YOU MAKE NOISE.

A PROPERTY OWNER OWNS IT FROM THE GROUND TO THE HEAVEN, AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO USE IT REASONABLY, AND SOME USES MAKE NOISE.

THE NEIGHBORS EQUALLY OWN PROPERTY, AND THEY HAVE RIGHTS TO ENJOY THE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY WITHOUT BEING DISTURBED.

WHAT IS THE BALANCING POINT ON THE TIGHT ROPE OF WHEN ONE OWNER'S RIGHT TO USE HIS PROPERTY UNREASONABLY DISRUPTS THE RIGHTS OF THE NEIGHBOR TO BE FREE FROM NOISE INTRUSIONS? THAT'S WHY THE STATE AND MANY LOCAL JURISDICTIONS ATTEMPT TO ESTABLISH A BALANCING POINT, A TIPPING POINT? IF YOUR DECIBEL LOAD IS GREATER THAN X, THEN PRIMATIAL, IN ESSENCE, MEANS ON ITS FACE, THAT NOISE LEVEL IS UNREASONABLE AND WILL BE PRESUMED TO DISRUPT LIFE ON THE ADJOINING LOT.

BUT THERE IS NO CERTAINTY TO THIS BECAUSE ALL HUMAN BEINGS ARE DIFFERENT, AND SOME PEOPLE CAN TOLERATE NOISE ON AN ADJACENT PROPERTY MORE EASILY THAN OTHERS.

THE STATE ATTEMPTS TO FASHION LAWS THAT WORK WITH THE AVERAGE PERSON, NOT SOMEONE WHO IS UNUSUALLY SENSITIVE TO IT, AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS DIFFICULTY.

WE CAN'T FIND AN EASY BALANCING POINT.

WE TALK TO THE STATE ABOUT IN THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODES, WHAT THEY THINK AN APPROPRIATE LEVEL IS, AND WE WORK IN LOCAL JURISDICTIONS TO TRY AND CONSTANTLY EVALUATE WHAT LEVEL OF NOISE IS SO DISRUPTIVE THAT IT UNREASONABLY IMPINGES ON OTHER INDIVIDUALS RIGHTS TO USE THEIR PROPERTY.

AS WE ACQUIRE INFORMATION, WE FEED IT TO THE STATE, WE FEED IT TO OTHER AGENCIES TO SEEK TO SECURE REVISIONS TO THE LAWS TO ALLOW US TO MORE TIGHTLY REGULATE IT.

BUT THE MAYOR IS ASKING THE LEGITIMATE QUESTION.

I WANT EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND, IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE BLIND TO IT.

THERE ISN'T A SIMPLE ANSWER BECAUSE YOU'RE BALANCING TWO SETS OF RIGHTS.

>> WE DEAL WITH THE LOUDNESS.

BEING A NUISANCE CAN ALSO BE BECAUSE OF BEING REPETITIVE.

JUST LIKE DAN, IT'S NOT THAT LOUD.

IT JUST GOES ON FOR 24 HOURS A DAY.

YOU CAN HEAR IT, AND IT'S JUST ALL THE TIME.

THE TIMING OF THE NOISE THAT IS NOT ADDRESSED IN A LOT OF THIS STUFF IS ALSO ONE OF THE ISSUES ABOUT IT.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE REAL LOUD IF YOU'RE TRYING TO GO TO SLEEP AT 11 O'CLOCK AT NIGHT, AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE CONCENTRATE MORE ON THE DECIBEL, WHICH I HAD SINCE I'VE BEEN CALLED UP ON ALL THESE PROBLEMS THAT I'VE SEEN, I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING AT 70, SO I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER.

>> THE DIFFICULTY YOU FACE AGAIN.

[01:35:02]

>> THE DIFFICULTY YOU FACE AGAIN IS THE CHARACTER OF THE PRIMARY OWNERS USE.

I THINK ALL OF US, SINCE WE LIVE IN TEXAS, AND ENJOY THE WONDERS AND SPRING OF HAIL STORMS, HOW MANY OF US SPEND SEVERAL WEEKS IN THE LATER SUMMER LISTENING TO ROOFERS, REPLACING ALL THE ROOFS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD? THAT'S REPETITIVE AND IT'S ENDLESS FOR A DAY AND A HALF, AND IT'S ON ALL HOUSES.

BUT IF THAT PROPERTY OWNER IS ENGAGED IN A LAWFUL USE OR ACTIVITY ON THEIR PROPERTY, OUR ABILITY TO REGULATE THE FREQUENCY OF THE SOUND BECOMES AGAIN PART OF THE BALANCING GAME.

IF THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING LAWFUL, IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE'RE CONTINUOUSLY WORKING WITH THE STATE ON TO SEE IF WE CAN DEFINE IT MORE TIGHTLY, BUT IT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE WILL EVER BE ABLE TO JUST ABSOLUTELY FIX.

>> THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ROOFER AND THE DOG IS EVENTUALLY THE ROOFER LEAF.

>> AS A SIDE NOTE, I JUST LOOKED UP THE TYPICAL DECIBELS OF A BARKING DOG IS BETWEEN 60 AND 110.

A DOG BARKING AT YOUR PROPERTY LINE WITH YOUR BEDROOM WINDOW 10 FEET AWAY IS GOING TO VIOLATE THIS ORDINANCE.

>> LORD HELP YOU IF YOU WALK OUT THE DOOR.

THEN IT SPEEDS UP AND GETS LOUDER.

>> I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU, TONY.

I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK YOU'VE PUT INTO IT, BUT IT SEEMS THIS IS AN ONGOING PROBLEM.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OUR NEXT STEP IS HERE? JUST WRITE IT UP, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'D USE IT.

>> I THINK THAT STAFF HAS DONE THE BEST WE COULD DO IN CONSIDERATION OF HOW THE CODE IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN IN THOSE TWO CHAPTERS, AND WE HAVE TO BRING OURSELF COMPLIANT WITH THE SENATE BILL.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S MUCH OF AN OPTION.

IT WILL ESSENTIALLY PUT EVERYBODY ON EQUAL FOOTING IN TERMS OF THEIR LEGAL RIGHTS, AND THERE WON'T BE AN AMBIGUITY IN THAT REGARD.

IT WILL NOT BE HELPFUL WITH LESSENING COMPLAINTS, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS.

WE CAN'T GO BEYOND THE STATE LAW IN THIS REGARD.

>> I AGREE AND I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT.

ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU, BUG.

>> THAT BRINGS US TO 7.C RECEIVER REPORT,

[7.C. Receive a report, hold a discussion and provide staff direction regarding a neighborhood empowerment zone (NEZ) program and draft ordinance. (Staff Contact: Tony McIlwain, AICP, CFM, Development Services Director)]

HOLD A DISCUSSION AND PROVIDE STAFF DIRECTION REGARDING A NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE PROGRAM AND DRAFT ORDINANCE.

THE STAFF PRESENTER IS TONY MCILWAIN, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR.

>> THANK YOU. MAYOR AND COUNCIL STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING WITH THE POLICY AND EVALUATION COMMITTEE DISCUSSING NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONES.

THIS WAS A DISCUSSION ITEM THAT INITIATED WITH COUNCILMAN SCOTT, AND WE DOVE INTO IT TO EXPLAIN WHAT THEY ARE, HOW THOSE WORK.

YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR THAT FORT HOOD USES A LOT OF THESE NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONES.

SOME OF YOU, I'M SURE FAMILIAR WITH THEM.

BUT THE ENABLING LEGISLATION FOR NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONES IS CONTAINED IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 378, AND IT'S EXPLICITLY SUPPOSED TO DO FOUR THINGS.

CREATE THE CREATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, INCLUDING MANUFACTURING HOUSING, AND INCREASE IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THAT ZONE, AN INCREASE IN THE QUALITY OF SOCIAL SERVICES, EDUCATION, OR PUBLIC SAFETY PROVIDED THE RESIDENTS OF THE ZONE, AND THE REHABILITATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE ZONE.

THERE'S AN EMPHASIS ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND I'LL GET INTO THAT IN JUST A MOMENT.

WHAT DO YOU AS ELECTED OFFICIALS AND WHAT POWERS DO YOU HAVE IN THE CITY POWERS? WHEN YOU LOOK AT NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONES, COUNCILS RESERVE THE RIGHT TO WAIVE OR ADOPT FEES REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS IN THE ZONE.

YOU CAN ENTER AGREEMENTS, TYPICALLY NOT MORE FOR 10 YEARS THAT WILL BENEFIT THE ZONE FOR REFUNDS OF MUNICIPAL SALES TAX OR SALES MADE IN THE ZONE? YOU CAN ABATE MUNICIPAL PROPERTY TAXES, NOT 100%, BUT JUST ON THE INCREMENTAL INCREASE OF IMPROVEMENTS MADE IN THE ZONE, AND SET DURATIONS FOR THAT PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT, AND YOU CAN DO SOMETHING SUCH AS SETTING BASELINE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, ENERGY STAR PROGRAM, FOR INSTANCE, IS ONE THAT COMES UP TO ENCOURAGE ALTERNATIVE BUILDING MATERIALS TO BE USED IN THE ZONE TO LESSEN MAINTENANCE AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION.

HOW DOES ONE ADOPT A NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE? WELL, WE HAVE TO FIRST,

[01:40:01]

ADOPT A RESOLUTION THAT A DETERMINATION OF SECTION 378.002 IS MET, PROVIDED DESCRIPTION OF THE ZONE AND FIND THAT THE CREATION OF THE ZONE WILL BE BENEFICIAL.

NOW, THIS IS ALL ALSO WRAPPED INTO THE TEXAS TAX CODE, WHICH IN SECTION 312 GIVES SOME INSTANCES OF HOW REINVESTMENT ZONES WORK, AND NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE GOES HAND IN HAND REINVESTMENT ZONE, AND THAT IS THE LANGUAGE IN THE TEXAS TAX CODE.

THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO ADOPT.

NOW, IN OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE COMMITTEE, WE DID INFORM THEM THAT YOU CAN CREATE MORE THAN ONE ZONE, AND YOU CAN INCLUDE MORE THAN ONE AREA IN A ZONE.

THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THE PROVISIONS AND CRITERIA FOR REINVESTMENT ZONES, AND I'VE GOT THOSE BULLETED OUT.

SOME OF THE LANGUAGE IS HARSH IN THE FACT THAT THEY USE WORDS SUCH AS SUBSTANDARD, SLUM, DETERIORATED, OR DETERIORATING, WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT WE SEE WIDESPREAD EVIDENCE OF THAT, BUT WE DO THINK THAT HOUSING IS JUST LIKE ANYTHING ELSE.

OVER TIME, IT WILL DETERIORATE AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE SOME PROGRAMS THAT MAY BE HELPFUL TO OUR CITIZENS IF WE SEE THAT THERE'S AN AREA THAT COULD BE BENEFICIAL THAT CAN BENEFIT FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE.

>> THERE ARE MANY OTHER CRITERIA THAT ARE LISTED IN TEXAS TAX CODE 312.

I DIDN'T GO INTO THOSE, BUT BASICALLY, WHAT I DO WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS THE NOTION OF ABATING PROPERTY TAX.

THE WAY IT WORKS IS THAT IF YOU HAVE A PROPERTY PRIOR TO REINVESTMENT, THERE'S A CAD APPRAISAL.

CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT WILL GIVE YOU AN AMOUNT THAT THEY THINK IS WORTH.

YOU GO IN AND YOU IMPROVE YOUR PROPERTY THROUGH THE PROGRAM.

THE NEXT YEAR, YOU SHOULD SEE A CHANGE IN YOUR VALUATION, AND WHAT CITIES CAN DO IS CAPTURE THAT CHANGE AND THEN PROVIDE SOME ABATEMENT OR REFUND, IF YOU WILL, OF PROPERTY TAXES ON THAT PROPERTY.

>> IS THE CAD NOTIFIED OF THE PROCESS? DO THEY GET INFORMATION AND WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING TO IT?

>> BECAUSE THE ISSUE I'M HAVING RIGHT NOW IS PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES' VALUES AREN'T GOING UP.

IS THAT IN THE PROCESS?

>> IN WORK WITH THESE IN THE PAST, THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO NOTIFY THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT IF WE HAVE A PROGRAM AND THERE'S A PROPERTY PARTICIPATING IN THE PROGRAM.

WHAT WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY OVER IS HOW THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE VALUATION AFTER THE IMPROVEMENT OCCURS.

YOU THEN, NOW DISCUSSING WITH THE COMMITTEE, YOU HAVE THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT NOT DOING ANNUAL APPRAISALS.

YOU'RE GOING TO A THREE-YEAR CYCLE.

WHILE THIS IS AN OPTION THAT A MUNICIPALITY CAN USE, WE THINK, IN REAL TIME, WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE PROPER THING FOR BURLESON TO UNDERTAKE, BECAUSE WE THINK IT WILL BE ONEROUS TO TRY TO TRACK IT, AND WE THINK THAT THE BENEFIT IS MINISCULE COMPARED TO MAYBE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TO PLACE INTO THE PROPERTY.

I GOT SOME EXAMPLES I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH, MR. MAYOR, THAT DETAILS THAT OUT FOR YOU.

FOR THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, PLEASE JUMP IN BECAUSE THEY WORK REALLY HARD WITH CITY STAFF ON THIS IN A POLICY AND VALUATION COMMITTEE.

WE DISCUSS EXAMPLES.

WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT THAT REQUIRES COUNCIL ACTION.

RELEASE OF LIENS CAN TAKE PLACE.

YOU CAN WAIVE DEVELOPMENT FEES.

NOW IF YOU WAIVE A FEE, THAT'S A FEE THAT'S NOT COLLECTED, IT GOES INTO THE GENERAL FUND.

IF YOU ABATE PROPERTY TAXES, THAT'S MONEY THAT ESSENTIALLY IS UNDOING ANY VALUATION INCREASE THAT WE MIGHT SEE.

SAME THING FOR REFUNDS OF MUNICIPAL SALES TAX, BUT THAT TAKES ON A DIFFERENT ANIMAL BECAUSE WE DIDN'T LOOK AT COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.

WE JUST LOOKED AT RESIDENTIAL IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE.

WE HOPE THAT IF THE COUNCIL UNDERTAKES THIS ACTION, WE WILL SEE A REDUCTION OR A MITIGATION OF POSSIBLE BLIGHT SITUATIONS, OR IF WE SEE SOMETHING TRENDING TOWARD THAT DIRECTION, WE CAN HOPEFULLY GET IT REDIRECTED, EXTENDING THE LIFE CYCLE OF HOUSING, ENCOURAGING NEW INVESTMENTS, AND WE THINK THAT WHEN YOU INVEST IN A NEW AREA, YOU TYPICALLY GET FRESH EYES, FRESH MONEY, AND THEN YOU GET MORE ATTENTION PAID INTO AN AREA AND YOU HAVE THIS RESIDUAL EFFECT WHERE YOU HAVE A REDUCTION IN ANY ACTIVITY, SUCH AS, I CALL IT THE WHOLE STUDY WITH BROKEN WINDOWS.

[01:45:03]

YOU START IMPROVING THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU SHOULD SEE LESS INSTANCES OF THINGS SUCH AS VANDALISM AND THINGS OF THE LIKE.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MET WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OVER SEVERAL MEETINGS AND DISCUSSED SOME OF OUR RECORDS WITH REGARD TO THE CALLS THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT RECEIVED VERSUS THE CALLS THAT CO-COMPLIANCE RECEIVED, AND WE ESSENTIALLY PUT TOGETHER A MAP.

A HEAT MAP IS WHAT WE CALLED IT.

WE, FROM THERE, STARTED CARVING OUT AREAS THAT WE THOUGHT WERE APPROPRIATE BASED ON THE NUMBER OF CALLS THAT WE RECEIVED.

SOME OF THESE CALLS WERE FOR HIGH WEEDS AND GRASS, SOME OF THEM WERE TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS THAT WE BASICALLY HAD IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR INTERSECTION, BUT WE BASICALLY DID OUR LEVEL BEST TO PUT TOGETHER A NEIGHBORHOOD CONFIGURATION AROUND THE PREVAILING NUMBER OF CALLS THAT WE HAVE IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TOWN, AND IT LED TO ESSENTIALLY THREE LARGER AREAS; HILLERY HEIGHTS, MONTCLAIR ADDITION, AND CRESTMOOR PARK NEIGHBORHOODS.

EXCUSE ME. WHAT DO THESE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE IN COMMON? THEY'RE OLDER HOUSING STOCK.

WE'VE GOT THE MAP GRAPHIC.

WE HAVE A LOT OF PROPERTIES IN GREEN THAT'S 1960'S HOUSING STOCK.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT HAS BEEN IMPROVED SINCE THAT TIME, BUT THAT WAS INITIAL CONSTRUCTION DATE.

THEN FOLLOWED BY PROPERTY CONSTRUCTION IN '70S, '80S, AND THE LIKE.

THIS MAP IS MEANT TO GIVE YOU, COUNCIL, AN IDEA OF THE, I CALL IT CENTROID AREA THAT STAFF LOOKED AT, AND WE TOOK THIS TO THE A POLICY AND VALUATION COMMITTEE TO GIVE A DISCUSSION AND GIVE STAFF SOME IDEA OF HOW TO FINE-TUNE THIS INTO SOMETHING THAT WAS MORE WORKABLE THAN ALL THESE PROPERTIES THAT WE HAVE SHOWN ON THE MAP.

BACK IN AUGUST OF LAST YEAR, WE DID THE INITIAL BRIEFING AND SHOWED THIS TARGET AREA TO THE COMMITTEE.

THEY DIRECTED STAFF TO FOCUS ON RESIDENTIAL USES AND ONE TARGET AREA.

WE BOUGHT THAT BACK IN APRIL, AND PART OF THE DELAY WAS TO ALLOW FOR A FULL COMPLEMENT OF PARTICIPATION WITH THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.

BUT WE DISCUSSED HILLERY-MONTCLAIR COMMUNITY AS AN TARGET AREA THAT WE THOUGHT MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE LARGELY BECAUSE OF THE AGE OF THE HOUSING STOCK.

WE DROVE THE AREA.

IT'S ACTUALLY WELL KEPT, BUT WE THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD STILL BENEFIT FROM HAVING JUST ANOTHER FEATHER IN THE CAP THAT THEY COULD USE.

WE ALSO DISCUSSED WHAT THE CITY CURRENTLY DOES, WHICH IS THE HOME REBATE PROGRAM.

NOW I WILL SAY THAT THAT IS ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK BECAUSE IT'S BEEN OFFERED AS A SUPPLEMENTAL REDUCTION, BUT THAT IS A PROGRAM THAT IS AVAILABLE FOR RESIDENTS ALL OVER THE CITY TO USE, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE WILL BE LIMITED TO THOSE AREAS AS DESIGNATED BY THE COUNCIL.

FOLLOWING OUR DISCUSSIONS, THE COMMITTEE ASKED THAT WE BRING THIS FORWARD TO YOU FOR FULL DISCUSSION.

THIS IS THE AREA IN QUESTION THAT WE DISCUSSED WITH THE POLICY AND VALUATION COMMITTEE.

AGAIN, WITH THE POSITIVE NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE OUTCOMES THAT WE'RE HOPEFUL FOR.

WE'RE LOOKING AT 464 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ALL RESIDENTIAL, STRUCTURES OVER 60-YEARS-OLD, AND AN AVERAGE APPRAISAL VALUE OF $218,787.

THAT'S AS OF LAST YEAR.

WHAT'S INTERESTING IS THAT ASSESSMENT FALLS BELOW THE HUD CRITERIA.

BASED JUST ON EVALUATION OF THE HOUSING ALONE, IT FALLS BELOW THE HUD CRITERIA.

THAT'S AGGREGATE DATA.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT INDIVIDUAL HOMES.

>> COUNTY?

>> SIR.

>> IS THIS FOR HOME OWNERS, OR DEVELOPERS, OR RATE MODELERS GOING TO GET INVOLVED IN THIS, OR WHO CAN APPLY FOR THIS?

>> THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN APPLY.

>> JUST THE PROPERTY OWNER?

>> YEAH. THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN APPLY.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, NOW, IF YOU ARE AN INVESTOR, YOU'RE STILL A PROPERTY OWNER.

OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU'RE A RENTER, IT'S OWNED BY SOMEONE.

ANYONE CAN EXPRESS INTEREST, BUT ULTIMATELY WE WANT TO HAVE THE PROPERTY OWNER APPLY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE PROGRAM.

>> MAYOR, THIS DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A HOMESTEAD.

YOU CAN OWN MULTIPLE PROPERTIES AND STILL APPLY.

>> DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MR. MAYOR?

>> YEAH.

>> WE DOVETAIL INTO INCENTIVES.

THE CITY STAFF, NAMELY, MS. DUELLO AND MR. WHITEHEAD, WENT ABOUT CALLING MULTIPLE CITIES, AND THIS TOOK SEVERAL WEEKS TO FIND OUT WHAT PROGRAMS THEY OFFER.

WE KNOW ON THE LEFT, THOSE ARE FEE WAIVER EXAMPLES THAT WE CAN DO.

ON THE RIGHT, WE WANTED TO FIND OUT, WELL, WHO WAS DOING TAX ABATEMENT? THE ONLY ONE WE CAN CONFIRM IS FORT WORTH, THEY HAVE 78, AND THAT WAS AS OF LAST FISCAL YEAR.

WE ARE EITHER UNAWARE OR WE DO NOT KNOW IF AMARILLO,

[01:50:03]

BEAUMONT, COMMERCE, LAREDO, NOLANVILLE, AND PLANO, WE DON'T KNOW THE STATUS OF THEIR PROGRAMS, IF THEY'RE ONGOING.

A LOT OF CITIES WERE IN A PROCESS OF DISCUSSING THAT WITH THEIR COUNCILS.

THE ONE THAT WE GOT CONFIRMATION ON WAS FORT WORTH.

AGAIN, THE TAX INCENTIVE IS ONLY FOR THE VALUE CAPTURE, THE DELTA, IF YOU WILL, BETWEEN THE PRE-IMPROVEMENT AND THE POST-IMPROVEMENT.

IT'S NOT THE ENTIRETY OF THE STRUCTURE.

I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE IN THE NEXT SLIDE, OR MAYBE THE NEXT TWO SLIDES.

HERE, YOUR FEE WAIVER CITIES, EVERYTHING FROM TAX ABATEMENT TO WATER AND SEWER TAP FEES.

YOU'VE GOT SOME CITIES THAT HAVE PRETTY ROBUST PROGRAMS. AMARILLO PROVIDES A FAIR AMOUNT OF FEE WAIVERS IN THEIR PROGRAMS. THEY DON'T DO LIEN WAIVERS, THEY DON'T DO CONSTRUCTION ABATEMENT, BUT THEY DO EVERYTHING ELSE.

CITIES HAVE A HABIT OF IMITATING ONE ANOTHER, AND SO YOU SEE A LOT OF THE SAME ACTIVITY TAKING PLACE IN CITIES THAT WE REVIEWED.

THIS IS JUST IMPROVEMENT CRITERIA FOR SOME OF THE OTHER CITIES.

I WANT TO HAVE YOU FOCUS ON A PERCENTAGE IMPROVEMENT.

FORT WORTH IS 30% IMPROVEMENT AS APPRAISED BY TARRANT CAD.

AMARILLO IS 20% BY THE POTTER-RANDALL APPRAISAL DISTRICT.

BEAUMONT DOESN'T HAVE A PERCENTAGE, BUT THEY SAY SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT, AND THAT WILL BE 50,000 OR GREATER.

COMMERCE, NO INVESTMENT, JUST NEEDS TO BE LOCATED WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE.

LAREDO'S AT 20%, NOLANVILLE, 30%, AND PLANO IS NEW MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT WHEN YOU HAVE A PROJECT COST OR $8,000 OR MORE PER DWELLING UNIT.

THE NEZ ONLY APPLIES TO CITY PROPERTY TAXES.

THIS IS THE SLIDE I WAS TALKING ABOUT.

WITH THE CURRENT TAX RATE, WE ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.

CAN YOU WAIVE TAXES IN JOHNSON COUNTY? NO. BURLESON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT? NO. CITY OF BURLESON, YES.

BASED ON THE TARGET AREA APPRAISED VALUE, YOU'RE LOOKING AT PROPERTY TAXES RIGHT AROUND 1,450 A YEAR.

THAT'S AN AVERAGE OF WHAT YOU CAN EXPECT TO PAY BASED ON JUST THE CITY'S TAX RATE, DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY OTHER THINGS SUCH AS DISABLED VETERAN EXEMPTIONS, OVER 65, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

THIS IS A TAX ABATEMENT EXAMPLE.

WE GAVE THE COMMITTEE EXAMPLE OF, IF YOU REMODEL YOUR HOME, BEFORE THE REMODEL YOU'RE AT 218.

AFTER REMODEL YEAR 1, YOU'RE AT 262, SO THERE'S A DIFFERENCE THERE.

WE APPLY A CITY'S TAX RATE, AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT A FORGIVENESS OF $290, BECAUSE WHAT WE TAKE IS WE TAKE THE IMPROVEMENT VALUE MINUS THE VALUE PRE-IMPROVEMENT, AND WE WOULD ESSENTIALLY ABATE $290 OF THE TAXES.

IT'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY.

PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE AVERAGE REMODEL PERMIT, IT'S A SMALL CARROT, BUT IT'S A CARROT NONETHELESS.

THIS IS NOT ONE OF THE ONES WHAT STAFF WOULD BE ROBUSTLY RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ANYWAY.

I THINK IT'S HARD TO TRACK. I'VE DONE IT BEFORE.

IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO TRACK THIS, AND YOU'RE SUBJECT TO THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT'S WINS WHEN YOU DO THIS.

MR. WHITEHEAD PUT TOGETHER AN EXAMPLE OF A FEE WAIVER ESTIMATE.

A TYPICAL REMODEL FROM START TO FINISH WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, SUB-TOTAL OF $472.

YOUR REMODEL PERMIT IS GOING TO BE LESS THAN THE BENEFIT YOU GET BY DOING THE TAX ABATEMENT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE WERE TRYING TO SEE IF THE JUICE WAS WORTH THE SQUEEZE.

WE DON'T THINK THAT'S OUR ROLE, BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITIES IF YOU TALK ABOUT TAX ABATEMENT WITH REGARD TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE.

THAT'S JUST BASED ON THE AVERAGE REMODEL PERMIT WE DID FOR LAST FISCAL YEAR, AVERAGE OF $472 PER PER PERMIT.

>> IS THERE AN EXPECTATIONS ON THE AMOUNT OF REMODELING NEEDED TO BE DONE?

>> SAY AGAIN, I'M SORRY?

>> IS THERE EXPECTATIONS ON HOW MUCH REMODELING NEEDS TO BE DONE TO MEET THE CRITERIA FOR THIS?

>> I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THE SLIDE.

TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES.

YOU CAN PUT IN ANY PERCENTAGE CRITERIA THAT SOME OF THESE OTHER CITIES, FOR INSTANCE, DID.

FORT WORTH WILL SAY, YOU HAVE TO PUT IN AT LEAST 30% OF THE VALUE OF YOUR HOME.

IF YOUR HOME IS AT 218, IT'D BE THAT AMOUNT AT 30% TO MAKE YOURSELF ELIGIBLE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD [OVERLAPPING] EMPOWERMENT ZONE.

>> ULTIMATELY, THAT'S A POLICY DECISION FOR THE COUNCIL, THOUGH.

[01:55:02]

YOU CAN MAKE THAT REQUIREMENT, WHAT YOU'D LIKE FOR IT TO BE.

YOU CAN MAKE THE MINIMUM INVESTMENT WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE.

>> WHERE FORT WORTH DID 30%, THE AVERAGE APPRAISAL ON THE HOMES WAS EXTREMELY LOWER THAN THE AREA WE'RE LOOKING AT.

THIRTY PERCENT WASN'T THAT MUCH.

THE AREA WE'RE LOOKING AT, 30% WOULD BE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT.

WE'D HAVE TO GO DOWN TO 20%, PROBABLY, AS A RECOMMENDATION OR REQUIREMENT. MINIMUM 20%.

THIRTY PERCENT WOULD BE EXCESSIVE, UNLESS YOU HAD AN AREA WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS DOWN TO 100, $120,000 ON APPRAISAL BECAUSE OF THE BLIGHT.

BUT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS A GOOD NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S GOING TO GET OLDER, AND AS IT GETS OLDER, THINGS ARE GOING TO FALL APART, AND AS FAR AS THE REDUCTION IN PROPERTY TAXES OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, THE AMOUNT OF CLERICAL COST TO MONITOR THAT WOULD FAR EXCEED THE RETURN.

I WOULDN'T SUGGEST GOING AFTER THE PROPERTY TAX REVENUES.

LET'S COLLECT THE PROPERTY TAX REVENUE, AND WITHIN A COUPLE OF YEARS, WE'LL COVER THE COST OF THE FEES AND WE'LL ZERO OUT AND THEN START MAKING MONEY.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL GAIN ALSO.

WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S GOING TO GAIN IS IMMEASURABLE.

THERE'S NOT A DOLLAR AMOUNT YOU CAN PUT ON IT, BUT IT WILL EXTEND THE LIFE OF THE HOMES.

AS THE NEIGHBORS DRIVE DOWN THE STREET, THEY'LL BE ENCOURAGED TO UPGRADE THEIR HOMES.

INVESTORS WILL DO IT BECAUSE OF THE RETURN AND THE RENTAL THAT THEY CAN GET.

>> DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?

>> YEAH. THE RENTAL SIDE OF IT CONCERNS ME.

WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF LANDLORDS IN OUR TOWN RIGHT ALREADY.

SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND STUFF OF THAT NATURE, BUT THAT'S JUST PART OF LIFE.

THIS IS VERY INTERESTING.

I LIKE THE CONCEPT.

WELL, I JUST GET PARANOID ABOUT WHO'S GOING TO BE DOING IT, MONITORING.

YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE A PERMIT.

THEY SHOULDN'T PAY ANYTHING.

>> IF WE OPT TO GO WITH THE FEE WAIVER, WE WOULD WAIVE THE FEES.

SOME CITIES ARE WAVING IMPACT FEES.

WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT DISCUSSION.

I DON'T KNOW HOW TO CALCULUS FOR THAT WOULD WORK.

THE EASIEST THING FOR THE DEPARTMENT TO DO IS TO WAIVE A FEE.

BUT WE COULD PROBABLY ASSESS IF EVERYONE WERE TO COME IN AND PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM AT THE AVERAGE REMODEL, THE MATH ON THAT WOULD BE PRETTY EASY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WOULD BE IN TERMS OF BENEFIT TO THEM AND LOSS TO THE CITY.

NOT LOST, FOREGONE REVENUE TO THE CITY.

I THINK THAT'S EASIER FOR US TO DIGEST BECAUSE THE HOME REBATE PROGRAM IS PROJECTED TO GO AWAY, SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEONE TO GET SOME INCENTIVES TO IMPROVE THEIR PROPERTY.

>> I THINK THAT'S THE PIECE THAT I REALLY APPRECIATE, BECAUSE GIVEN THAT WE'RE HAVING TO BALANCE A LOT OF THINGS RIGHT NOW, AND WE'LL MOST LIKELY DO AWAY WITH THE IMPROVEMENT REBATE PROGRAM, THIS GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY, BUT IT IDENTIFIES A SPECIFIC AREA AND A SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOOD THAT JUST LIKE LARRY WAS SAYING, IF WE CAN ENCOURAGE REINVESTMENT NOW, WE CAN SAVE A LOT OF THESE HOMES AND PROLONG THEIR LIVES.

I LOVE OUR OLDER HOMES AND ENCOURAGES PEOPLE TO KEEP THEM UP AND KEEP THEM AS PART OF THE COMMUNITY.

THERE'S A NUMBER OF TOWNS ALL THROUGHOUT TEXAS THAT WISH THEY HAD KEPT SOME OF THEIR OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS, BEFORE YOU LET THEM GO WAY DOWN, AND THEN THEY JUST END UP GETTING COMPLETELY RAISED AND REBUILT WAY, WAY DOWN THE LINE.

BUT IF YOU CAN KIND OF KEEP UP, IT'S FUN, IT'S HISTORY, IT'S DIFFERENT AND ALL THESE LITTLE HOMES THAT PEOPLE HAVE IN A LOT OF CASES, THEY'VE PASSED ON TO FAMILY MEMBERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

I THINK IT'S GOOD WHEN WE CAN ENCOURAGE THE REINVESTMENT AND NOT ALWAYS THE REBUILDING OF COMPLETELY NEW AREAS.

>> AGREE. AS FAR AS RENTAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF BURLESON, YOUNG COUPLES RIGHT NOW, CITY OF BURLESON, LET'S GO THIS WAY.

THE CITY OF BURLESON ON THE MEDIAN COST FIRST STARTER HOME IS TOO HIGH FOR THE COST OF BURDEN FOR A YOUNG COUPLE RIGHT NOW.

THE COST OF BURDEN IS ANYTHING THAT EXCEEDS 30% OF THEIR INCOME.

THE FIRST-TIME HOME BUYERS, THE THI,

[02:00:02]

THE TEXAS HOUSING AUTHORITY INSTITUTE, RATES IT AT A ONE.

WE'RE AT 1.5 RIGHT NOW IN THE THAI, WHICH MEANS OUR MEDIUM COST FOR FIRST-TIME HOME BUYERS EXCEEDS WHAT THEY CAN AFFORD.

AT THIS POINT IN BURLESON RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE TO HAVE A RENTAL PROPERTY.

THAT'S THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN EXIST UNTIL THEY ADVANCE IN THEIR CAREERS TO WHERE THE COST OF BURDEN WILL BE BELOW 30% FOR A MEDIUM-PRICED HOUSE.

>> WELL, I'D MAKE A SIDE COMMENT AS WELL THAT A HOMEOWNER THAT OCCUPIES HIS OWN PROPERTY BASICALLY DOESN'T HAVE ANY INCENTIVES TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY OTHER THAN JUST WANTING TO LIVE IN A BETTER-LOOKING HOUSE.

BUT A LANDLORD COMPETING FOR TENANTS, AND ESPECIALLY ON A SHORT-TERM BASIS, BECAUSE SO MANY SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE HANDLED THROUGH VRBO, AIRBNB, AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS WHERE EACH TIME THE HOME IS RENTED, IT'S EVALUATED.

POTENTIAL FUTURE RENTERS GET TO LOOK AT THE EVALUATION, SEE WHAT PRIOR RENTERS HAD.

THERE'S A HUGE INCENTIVE.

FOR THE OWNER TO KEEP THE PROPERTY AT OR ABOVE WHAT THE EXPECTATIONS OF THE RENTER ARE.

PARADOXICALLY ENOUGH, THE GREATER INCENTIVE TO KEEP THE PLACE UP LIES WITH NON-OWNER-OCCUPIED PROPERTIES, IN MY OPINION.

>> ANOTHER DEAL IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THIS IS ACROSS BURLESON, BUT IT FITS THE MODEL, IS DELINQUENT PROPERTY TAXES.

THERE'S 2-3 HOMES ON EACH BLOCK THAT HAVE DELINQUENT PROPERTY TAXES IN THIS AREA.

IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, IN OUR CONVERSATIONS, WILL THAT BE FORGIVEN IN THE NEZ APPLICATION?

>> THAT WILL BE A POLICY DISCUSSION THAT YOU'LL HAVE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION ON.

BASED ON YOUR ACTION TONIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO BRING BACK TO YOU A WHOLE MENU, IF YOU WILL, OF OPTIONS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER.

FROM THAT MENU, YOU CAN PICK WHATEVER ITEM YOU THINK WILL BE BENEFICIAL TO INCLUDE ABATEMENT AND FORGIVENESS OF BACK HOME TAXES.

FOR THOSE OF US WHO WORKED WITH THE PROGRAM, YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF HOMES THAT WILL END UP ON A SHERIFF'S SALE, AND THEN THEY'RE ACQUIRED FROM THE SHERIFF'S SALE.

THEN, OFTENTIMES, THE NEW OWNER WILL WANT TO HAVE THE TAXES FORGIVEN.

I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT AS A STAFF BECAUSE I'VE DEALT WITH THAT BEFORE IN A PREVIOUS JOB, SO THERE ARE SOME STATE RESTRICTIONS ON OUR ABILITY TO WAIVE OR RELEASE ALREADY DELINQUENT TAXES.

IF THEY HAVE ALREADY BEEN ASSESSED AND IMPOSED, AND THAT TAX PERIOD HAS PASSED, WE MAY LOSE AUTHORITY TO ALTER THAT.

IT CAN ONLY BE EXTINGUISHED IN A SHEFF CELL WHEN IT'S SIMPLY SOLD FOR WHATEVER CAN BE BID, AND THEY SATISFY THE TAXING AUTHORITIES WITH WHATEVER PROCEEDS ARE RECEIVED.

BUT WE'LL LOOK AT IT.

BUT THERE ARE SOME RESTRICTIONS ON THAT.

>> ONE THING THAT I DO UNDERSTAND IS THAT OUR TAXING ATTORNEYS DO HAVE THE AUTHORITY, I BELIEVE, TO NEGOTIATE BEFORE IT GOES TO SALES.

>> THEY NEGOTIATE PERIODS OF REPAYMENT, AND THEY CAN NEGOTIATE SOME LIMITED AMOUNT ON PENALTIES, BUT THE BASIC TAX ITSELF IS STATUTORILY LOCKED IN PLACE.

THEY CAN GIVE THEM MORE TIME, THEY CAN REDUCE PAYMENTS, THEY CAN ALTER PAYMENT ARRANGEMENTS, BUT THERE ARE SOME RESTRICTIONS WITHIN THE TAX CODE ON ACTUALLY FORGIVING TAXES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN ASSESSED.

>> THIS HAS GOT POTENTIAL.

I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT AT FIRST, BUT I CAN SEE HOW THIS COULD BE BENEFICIAL.

>> IT'S COMPLEX, AND I KNOW I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR THE POINT, BUT THE INTENT WAS TO GET.

DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL AS TO HOW YOU WANT TO PROCEED GOING FORWARD.

THESE ARE SOME CONSIDERATIONS WE DISCUSSED WITH THE CITY MANAGER.

YOU'VE GOT THE SPECTER OF THREE-YEAR PROPERTY APPRAISAL CYCLES THAT COULD LIMIT OUR TAX ABATEMENT OPTIONS.

WHAT IF THE PROPERTY SELLS? DO WE CONTINUE TO ABATE? HOW DO WE ACCURATELY TRACK ABATEMENTS? THEN THERE'S ALWAYS THE NEGATIVE PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF WHY AM I IN A NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE.

I HAVE A GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD. WHY ARE YOU PUTTING THIS DESIGNATION ON ME? FOR DISCUSSION IS JUST FURTHER DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL AS TO IF YOU WANT US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH BRINGING YOU INFORMATION.

WE WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK WITH, ESSENTIALLY,

[02:05:03]

COME BACK WITH MORE INFORMATION FOR YOU TO BE EDUCATED ON SOME OF THE INCENTIVES THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE AND SETTLE ON THAT, ALONG WITH A REINVESTMENT ZONE POLICY, NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE RESOLUTION.

THEN, ONCE WE GET THAT, YOU START GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF SETTING UP THE PROGRAM.

BUT WE'VE GOT A POTENTIAL TIMELINE WHERE WE WOULD GET PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IF WE WANT TO SETTLE ON THIS ONE TARGET AREA AND NOTIFY THE RESIDENTS THAT WE'RE EVALUATING FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE, AND THEN YOU ADOPT RESOLUTIONS FOR THE REINVESTMENT ZONE AND NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT ZONE.

BUT THE ONE THING THAT I DON'T HAVE IN THE AIR IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE BRING BACK TO YOU AND YOU SETTLE ON INCENTIVES AND SOME OF THE BENEFITS OF THE PROGRAM, IF YOU WANT TO GO THAT ROUTE, BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE ACTUALLY PUT INTO THE DOCUMENTATION THAT WE HAVE FOR THE PROGRAM.

WE DON'T WANT TO BE OPEN-ENDED. WE WANT TO VERY LOCKDOWN TO SPECIFIC STANDARDS LIKE WE PRESENTED FROM OTHER CITIES.

IT'S GOING TO TAKE A WHILE, BUT WE CAN BRING THAT BACK TO YOU AND NOT A LONG AMOUNT OF TIME.

>> THIS PROBABLY ISN'T A CONCERN, BUT YOU GO OUT AND YOU PUT THIS IN FRONT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU GET HIT ALL AT ONCE.

MAYBE ONE GUY COMES IN AND BUYS A BUMP OF THESE THINGS, THAT'S LOST REVENUE.

THAT COULD BE A CONCERN.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS OR NOT, BUT I DEFINITELY WANT TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS.

EVERYBODY AGREEING OR ANYBODY AGAINST IT? I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS.

THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL TO HELP THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> I AGREE TO MOVE FORWARD.

THERE'S STILL A LOT OF THINGS TO WORK OUT.

HOW DO WE DETERMINE THE FUTURE APPRAISAL VALUE OF THE HOME TO GET THE 20% OR 30% OR WHEREVER WE DECIDE ON, AND A LOT OF OTHER LITTLE VARIABLES?

>> I MAY BE OUT OF PLACE, IS IT BENEFICIAL FOR THIS ACTION TO GO BACK TO THE COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER ACTION, OR DO YOU WANT TO TAKE IT ON AS COUNCIL? I JUST ASKED THE QUESTION, SO STAFF IS CLEAR ON WHAT TO DO NEXT, AS FAR AS WHO TO PRESENT IT.

>> WHICH COMMITTEE?

>> POLICY EVALUATION IS WHO LAST HAD IT IN TERMS.

>> IT'S BEEN THROUGH THE COMMITTEE, AND IT'S GONE THROUGH THE COUNCIL, AND UNLESS THE COMMITTEE WANTS IT BACK, I THINK THE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE CHANGED OR CORRECTED OR INCLUDED ARE ITEMS THAT STAFF CAN FIGURE OUT. DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

>> WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.

I THINK THERE ARE A HANDFUL OF ITEMS THAT IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR US TO GET DIRECTION.

I KNOW COUNCILMEMBER SCOTT HAD INDICATED, AS WELL AS TONY AND STAFF, HAD SAID THAT WITH REGARDS TO HOW DIFFICULT WILL BE TO KEEP UP WITH ABATEMENTS FOR THE RELATIVELY SMALL AMOUNT, THIS CLARITY FROM COUNCIL THAT THEY'RE OKAY WITH US PROCEEDING WITH AN OPTION OF NOT ASSUMING A TAX ABATEMENT AND FOCUSING OUR OTHER PROVISIONS ON LIEN RELEASES, BUILDING PERMIT, FEE RELEASES, ETC.

>> I'M GOING TO LEAN ON A SUGGESTION OF NOT GOING BACK TO A COMMITTEE SO LET'S BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL.

>> I'M GOOD ON THE LIEN FORGIVENESS AND THE PERMIT FORGIVENESS.

AS FAR AS PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT, I'M NOT A FAN OF THAT RIGHT NOW.

IT'S SUCH A SMALL NUMBER THAT WE WOULD BURN IT UP TRYING TO CALCULATE IT.

>> IT DEPENDS ON WHO'S DOING IT.

IF IT'S A DEVELOPER, THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE MONEY ON THIS; THAT'S NOTHING TO THEM.

IF IT'S A HOMEOWNER, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU SEPARATE THAT OUT.

IS AN ISSUE TO ME, TOO.

>> THE PRESENTATION THAT, UNLESS I MISSED SOMETHING, DOESN'T CLARIFY THE PERIOD OF TIME THAT THE PROPERTY TAXES ARE ABATED, IF THAT'S ONE YEAR, THAT'S NOT WORTH CONSIDERING.

>> I THOUGHT I SAW 10 YEARS.

>> IT'S UP TO 10 YEARS.

>> IT'S 10 YEARS ON SALES TAXES.

FROM SALES MADE IN THE ZONE, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY AGREEMENTS ABATING MUNICIPAL PROPERTY TAXES SAYS SUBJECT TO THE DURATION LIMITS OF 312.204.

IT DOESN'T SAY WHAT THOSE LIMITS ARE.

>> TEN YEARS IS TOO LONG.

CAN WE ADJUST THAT?

>> YOU CAN, BUT TO NOT DO IT WITHIN 10 YEARS IS JUST NOT ENOUGH MONEY.

IT DOESN'T HELP ENOUGH.

ONE FOR $400.

I CAN BLOW $400 ON A TRIP TO LOWE'S.

YOU'VE GOT TO GIVE THEM MORE THAN THAT, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE NOT GETTING RE-APPRAISALS, WHICH IS WHAT THAT NUMBER IS.

IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO ADOPT A POSITION THAT WHATEVER DOLLARS ARE SPENT OR PORTION OF DOLLARS SPENT ON THE REMODEL ITSELF IS GOING TO RESULT IN EVALUATION, EVENTUALLY, ACHIEVING THAT AMOUNT OR PERCENTAGE OF THAT AMOUNT.

[02:10:03]

WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO INVOKE THAT WITHOUT SPENDING A LOT OF TIME RESEARCHING.

>> IT'S JUST GOOD.

>> I'M SUGGESTING AND ONLY ONE MORE SUGGESTION.

>> IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO WHATEVER WE PUT IN WRITING WITH THIS TO NOT QUOTE VERBATIM THE CRITERIA, INCLUDING SLUMS AND DETERIORATING STRUCTURES, IF WE COULD JUST BY REFERENCE TO TAX CODE SECTION 312.202 WITHOUT QUOTING THE CODE.

THIS THING IS GOING TO GET CHEWED UP ON SOCIAL MEDIA IF WE START SAYING THAT THIS IS A SLUM NEIGHBORHOOD.

IF WE CAN AVOID THAT, IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO ALL, I THINK.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM, THAT'S SOMETHING WE'VE TALKED WITH THE ATTORNEYS ABOUT.

I'LL DEFER TO THEM.

WE CERTAINLY WANTED TO MAKE YOU ALL AWARE OF THE FINDINGS THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO MAKE, AND THERE'S A RESOLUTION THAT HAS TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS.

WE'LL DO IT IN THE MOST RESPECTFUL MANNER, BUT THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME THINGS WE STATUTORILY HAVE TO FIND.

ALAN, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO CHIME IN.

>> I THINK TOMMY IS CORRECT, IN ORDER TO INVOKE THE BENEFITS OF THIS PARTICULAR SECTION IN 378 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FOLLOW THE STATUTORY PROCEDURE AND MAKE THE FINDINGS.

NOW, WE'LL WORD THEM AS EUPHEMISTICALLY AS WE CAN.

BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO AT LEAST SURVIVE ANY AUDIT OF OUR ACTIVITY BY SHOWING THAT WE MADE AT LEAST THE MINIMUM REQUISITE FINDINGS TO ALLOW THE PROPERTY TO RECEIVE THAT DESIGNATION.

>> THE MORE EUPHEMISTICALLY, THE BETTER.

>> YES, SIR. WE'RE GOOD AT THAT.

>> I THINK THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL TO COME BACK WITH A MORE DETAILED PRESENTATION, GIVING YOU SOME SPECIFICS ON WHAT WE'D RECOMMEND SPECIFICALLY TO WAIVE AND DO IF WE WERE GOING TO CREATE THE NEZ, TONY.

IS THERE ANY OTHER DIRECTION YOU NEED FROM THE COUNCIL?

>> NO, SIR. I THINK WE'RE CLEAR.

MR. MANAGER.

>> THANK YOU, TONY.

>> CAN WE CALL A BREAK BEFORE THE NEXT ITEM?

>> I WAS JUST ABOUT TO SAY THAT.

>> I WAS FIXING TO SAY THAT.

>> MAYOR, IF YOU COULD ANNOUNCE THE TIME WE'RE GOING ON A BREAK.

>> WE'RE GOING INTO A BREAK AT 7:45.

[7.D. Receive a report, hold a discussion, provide staff directions on the FY 2025-2026 (tax year 2025) property tax rates, and receive any additional feedback from the City Council regarding the annual budget for FY 2025-2026. (Staff Contact: Kevin Hennessey, Interim Director of Finance)]

>> CALCULATION WORKSHEET TO FINANCE FOR REVIEW.

THIS WORKSHEET INCLUDES THE RATES OF THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE, THE M&O, NO NEW REVENUE RATE, THE DEBT RATE, AND THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE.

TO REVIEW THE PROPERTY TAX RATES.

IN 2020, THE SENATE BILL 2 WENT INTO EFFECT.

THEY HAD THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE, WHICH IS THE TOTAL RATE THAT WOULD GENERATE THE SAME AMOUNT OF TAX REVENUE FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR.

THIS IS BASED ON THE PREVIOUS YEAR TAX BASE.

TAX VALUES INCREASE, AND GENERALLY THE TAX RATE TO GENERATE THE SAME REVENUE AS LAST YEAR GOES DOWN.

THEN THE INVERSE, WHEN TAX VALUES DECREASE, THE TOTAL TAX RATE TO GENERATE THE SAME REVENUE AS LAST YEAR GENERALLY GOES UP.

THE M&O NEW REVENUE RATE, THIS IS THE M&O TAX RATE THAT WOULD GENERATE THE SAME TAX REVENUE FROM PREVIOUS YEARS.

THE M&O TAX RATE HAS A 3.5% CAP WITHOUT THE VOTER APPROVAL.

BEFORE SENATE BILL 2, IT WAS 8%, SO WITH SENATE BILL 2 IT DROPPED TO 3.5.

IF A CITY DOES GO ABOVE THAT 3.5, A VOTE IS REQUIRED.

>> I WOULD SAY TOO, THERE'S DRAFT LEGISLATION, THE SPECIAL SESSION TAKING UP THIS ITEM RIGHT NOW.

ORIGINALLY THE CAP WAS FROM 3.5%-2.5% FOR CITIES WITH POPULATIONS ABOVE 30,000, 30,000 AND BELOW WOULD REMAIN AT THE 3.5.

THERE'S ANOTHER BILL THAT WOULD CHANGE THAT CAP TO 75,000, I BELIEVE.

[02:15:07]

WHICH ONE'S GOING TO GET TRACTION? WE WILL SEE, BUT IT IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO BE MINDFUL OF AS YOU TAKE IN CONSIDERATION YOUR OPTIONS FOR THE TAX RATE BECAUSE THERE'S AMBIGUITY AS IT RELATES TO WHAT THE FUTURE OF THE CAP WILL BE.

>> THEN THERE'S THE UNUSED INCREMENT RATE.

A TAXING UNIT THAT DOES NOT USE ALL OF ITS REVENUE GROWTH IN A PARTICULAR YEAR MAY BANK THAT UNUSED GROWTH AS LONG AS THE TAXING UNIT HAS AVERAGED BELOW THE 3.5% OF THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE OVER THOSE THREE YEARS.

IN 2025, THE UNUSED INCREMENT RATE WAS CALCULATED TO BE 0.0047.

THE INCREMENT OF 1.6 CENTS USED LAST YEAR WAS FROM THE TAX YEARS OF 2022 AND 2021 COMBINED.

DUE TO THE METHOD THAT IS USED IN THE CALCULATION, THE AVAILABLE INCREMENT FOR THE PRIOR THREE YEARS VERSUS THE VOTER AUTHORIZATION RATES, THE 2022 INCREMENT OF THE $0.47 IS AVAILABLE AGAIN IN THE CURRENT YEAR.

THERE'S THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE, WHICH WAS ALLUDED TO EARLIER.

THIS IS THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS, NO NEW REVENUE RATE TIMES THE 1.035, THE 3.5% CAP PLUS THE CURRENT DEBT TAX RATE PLUS ANY UNUSED INCREMENT RATE.

THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND THE COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO UTILIZE STRATEGIES TO INCREASE THE DEBT TAX RATE TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED CIP.

FOR THE TAX YEAR 2025, WHICH FEEDS THE 2025-2026 BUDGET YEAR.

AGAIN, THE AFOREMENTIONED CURRENT RATE IS 0.4704 FOR THE M&O, AND 0.1923 FOR THE DEBT RATE, TOTALING IN THE 0.6627 FOR CONTEXT.

GOING INTO FISCAL YEAR 2026, THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE WAS CALCULATED TO BE 0.6591.

THE M&O, NO NEW REVENUE RATE AT 0.4721.

IT'S IN THE 3.5% OF THE M&O NO NEW REVENUE RATE OF 0.4886, WHICH IS ALSO REFERRED TO AS THE M&O VOTE APPROVAL RATE.

THE DEBT RATE IS 0.2285 WITH THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE BEFORE THE AFOREMENTIONED INCREMENT BEING 0.771.

WITH THAT 0.0047 UNUSED INCREMENT RATE, THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE IS 0.7218.

THIS IS THE LAST 10 YEARS OF BURLESON'S PROPERTY TAX SHOWN GRAPHICALLY.

THEN FOR CONTEXT, WE HAVE SOME COMPARATIVE CITIES, AND JUST NOTE THAT THIS IS FOR THE 2024, 2025 BUDGET YEAR.

THIS IS NOW WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING FOR THE 26 YEAR.

THIS IS THEIR CURRENT TAX RATES, AS WELL AS OUR CURRENT TAX RATE, AS YOU SEE US THERE.

HERE'S A TABLE SHOWING THOSE RATE CALCULATIONS THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED AND OFF IN THE TOTAL RATE COLUMN.

THEN IT SHOWS THE REVENUE OR THE TAX LEVY CITYWIDE.

THEN THERE'S A COLUMN THAT SHOWS THE DIFFERENCE FROM THE CURRENT ROW TO THE ONE PREVIOUS, AND THEN THE CUMULATIVE ROW CALCULATING THE CUMULATIVE TOTAL CHANGE IN THE RATES.

THE PROPOSED RATE OF 0.6989.

THAT RATE WILL PROVIDE SUFFICIENT REVENUE TO FUND THE THREE FIREFIGHTERS/PARAMEDICS AND THE ONE POLICE OFFICER WITHOUT AN M&O TAX RATE INCREASE.

>> I WANT TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO THAT.

I KNOW THE LAST TIME WE DID THIS PRESENTATION, AND I WENT THROUGH SUPPLEMENTALS AND TALKED ABOUT POTENTIAL NEED FOR TAX RATE ON THE M&O SIDE.

CLEARLY, THAT WAS BEFORE WE HAD OUR GROWTH NUMBERS, SO I ALLUDED TO THE FACT THAT THAT VERY WELL MAY CHANGE.

WE ALSO HAD NOT FORECASTED IN ANY OF THE REVENUES FROM FEES THAT WE DISCUSSED WITH THE COUNCIL SO CHANGING THE GROWTH SCENARIO, CHANGING THAT.

WE'VE ALSO MADE A SLIGHT MODIFICATION TO ASSUMPTIONS FOR A YEAR ON SALES TAX, AS WELL AS A FEW OTHER REVENUES.

WE FEEL LIKE THEY WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE EVERYTHING THAT I PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET WITHOUT HAVING TO GO UP ON THE M&O.

[02:20:07]

>> THIS BRINGS US TO ANOTHER TABLE THAT SHOWS THE SAME RATES THAT WE JUST VIEWED AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING.

IT SHOWS THE TOTAL TAX LEVY.

THEN IT HAS THE AVERAGE MONTHLY AND AVERAGE ANNUAL INCREASE TO THE AVERAGE HOME VALUE.

THIS CHART IS BASED ON THE AVERAGE HOME VALUE OF 300,210, WHICH IS AFTER THE 5% HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION.

NOTE THAT THE AVERAGE HOME VALUE BEFORE THE EXEMPTION IS $316,010, AND SO THIS HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION EQUATES TO AN ANNUAL SAVINGS OF $110.43 AT THAT PROPOSED RATE OF 0.6989.

AS WE MOVE FORWARD. THE NEXT STEPS, AUGUST 4, TODAY, CITY MANAGER WILL SUBMIT A COPY OF THE 2025-2026 PROPOSED BUDGET TO THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE IN THE CITY COUNCIL, WHICH HAS BEEN DONE.

IT'S ALSO POSTED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.

ON THE 6TH, THIS WEDNESDAY, THERE'S GOING TO BE A FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING WHERE THERE WILL BE A 2025-2026 BUDGET PRESENTATION.

ON THE 11TH, THERE'S A SPECIAL SESSION MEETING FOR THE ENTIRE COUNCIL TO REVIEW AND DISCUSS THE 2025-2026 BUDGET PRESENTATION AS WELL.

SEPTEMBER 2, WE'LL HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET AND THE TAX RATE WILL BE THE FIRST READING OF THE BUDGET, THE TAX RATE, AND OTHER RELATED ORDINANCES.

ON THE 8TH, THERE WILL BE THE FINAL READING OF THE BUDGET TAX RATE AND THE OTHER RELATED ORDINANCES.

THIS EVENING, WE SEEK DIRECTION TO PROVIDE STAFF DIRECTION REGARDING THE M&O TAX RATE AS WELL AS THE INS TAX RATE.

>> ANYBODY? [INAUDIBLE]

>> NORMALLY WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS HAVE AN ITEM LIKE THIS APPEAR BEFORE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE IN ADVANCE OF THE FULL COUNCIL FOR A RECOMMENDATION.

CLEARLY, BECAUSE OF THE TIMING OF WHEN WE GOT THAT THAT WASN'T POSSIBLE.

I WILL GIVE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME VERSION OF THE PRESENTATION I'LL BE GIVING TO THE FULL COUNCIL NEXT WEEK.

THERE'LL BE AN ITEM ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AS WELL TO TALK ABOUT THE TAX RATE IN CONJUNCTION WITH MY BUDGET PRESENTATION.

THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THERE FOR THE FINANCE COMMITTEE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE FULL COUNCIL, NOTE THAT THE FULL COUNCIL COULD NOT GIVE DIRECTION THIS EVENING.

BUT I WANT TO MAKE YOU AWARE THAT THAT IS AN ITEM THAT IS POSTED AND WILL BE DISCUSSED.

>> WE'RE GOOD. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.