[1. DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
[00:00:06]
GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE THAT MAY BE LISTENING.
IT IS APRIL 22ND, IT IS 5:00 P.M.
AND THIS IS THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF GALVESTON.
WELCOME ALL RESIDENTS THAT MAY BE WATCHING THIS PARTICULAR BROADCAST.
WELCOME TO THE MEETING TONIGHT AND TO STAFF.
BEFORE WE BEGIN, THIS IS OUR FIRST IN-PERSON MEETING HERE AT CITY HALL.
AND AS I THINK I SPEAK FOR ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS I'M REALLY ENJOYING, THIS IT IS NICE TO GET BACK TOGETHER AS A GROUP.
SO IT'S REALLY, REALLY GOOD TO SEE EVERYBODY.
FROM THE STANDPOINT COUNCIL, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, SINCE TO MAKE SURE IF WE COULD FOLLOW THE CONDUCT AND PROTOCOL WE HAVE ON THE ZOOM MEETINGS, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, JUST RAISE YOUR HAND AND WE'LL GO IN THAT ORDER AS WE MOVE THROUGH ALL THE AGENDA ITEMS HERE.
BUT JANELLE, IF YOU COULD DO A ROLL CALL, PLEASE MA'AM.
MAYOR DR. BROWN. PRESENT. MAYOR PRO TEM COLLINS. PRESENT.
COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON IS ABSENT. COUNCIL MEMBER SCHUSTER.
HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER QUIROGA. PRESENT.
COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB. PRESENT.
GOOD. WE HAVE EVERYBODY PRESENT.
THANK YOU. AND NELLIE'S GOING TO BE DOING OUR ITEMS FOR US TONIGHT.
ARE THERE ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST?
[4. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST]
COUNCIL, I'M GOING TO DECLARE ONE ON ITEM 8 U IS IN OUR CONSENT ITEMS AND IS THERE ANY OTHER CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS? HEARING NONE. ALL RIGHT, JANELLE, HAVE WE'VE BEEN JOINED YET BY MINISTER [INAUDIBLE]? NO SIR NOT YET? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO ITEM FIVE, IF WE COULD, PLEASE, NELLIE, IF YOU COULD READ 5 A,
[5.A. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Amending A Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay Zoning District Development Schedule On Property Commonly Known As West Isle - Approximately 100.79 Acres Adjacent To Pointe West Subdivision, And Which Is Legally Described As 100.79 Acres Of Land Out Of Abstract 121 Hall & Jones Survey TR 1-7 Acres 219.885, A Subdivision, In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas; Planning Case Number 21P-010; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; And Providing For An Effective Date (D. Henry)]
PLEASE, MA'AM. YES, SIR.ITEM 5 CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, AMENDING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT ZONING DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE ON PROPERTY, COMMONLY KNOWN AS WEST ISLE.
APPROXIMATELY 100.79 ACRES ADJACENT TO POINTE WEST SUBDIVISION.
IN WHICH IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS 100.79 ACRES OF LAND OUT OF ABSTRACT 121 HALL & JONES SURVEY TR 1-7 ACRES 219.885, A SUBDIVISION, IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON TEXAS.
PLANNING CASE NUMBER 21P-010 MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU NELLIE, THIS IS I GUESS CATHERINE OR WHO WILL BE INTRODUCING THIS TIM.
I'LL BE TAKING ALL THREE ITEMS TONIGHT DR.
BROWN. ALL RIGHT. GO RIGHT AHEAD, SIR.
THANK YOU, SIR. GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
AND THE ACTION REQUEST IS AN AMENDMENT PUD AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 19-056 WHICH APPROVED THE ORIGINAL PUD IN THIS CASE EXTENDS THE PUD SCHEDULE IN THE SAME GEOGRAPHIC FORM AS WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED JUST AMENDING THE SCHEDULE.
NELLIE COULD YOU ADVANCE THE SLIDE.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. SO YOU WILL SEE THIS IS WEST ISLE SUBDIVISION IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION OF 32 LARGE LOTS ON 100.79 ACRES PRIVATE STREETS ARE ANTICIPATED IN THIS SUBDIVISION.
YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. THERE WE GO. THESE ARE QUITE LARGE LOTS, THEY ARE 8 FEET WIDE, AND THEY'RE SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET DEEP.
THE AREA THAT IS CREATING A PRETTY GOOD AMOUNT IS LOCATED SOUTH OF [INAUDIBLE] SUBDIVISION.
THE OWNER IS CRVI HPW TRS, INC.
AND THE APPLICANT IS JONES AND CARTER AS THE ENGINEER.
AGAIN, THERE'S NO CHANGE TO ANYTHING IN THIS PUD EXCEPT THE SCHEDULE.
THEY HAD SOME DELAYS WITH THEIR ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS APPROVAL.
[00:05:01]
BUT THEY'RE NOW APPROVED, IN FACT, THEIR TXDOT STORM WATER PLAN IS ALSO APPROVED.SO THE CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE CAN COMMENCE.
NEXT SLIDE. THIS WOULD BE THE AMENDED SCHEDULE AND AS YOU CAN SEE, FOURTH QUARTER 2021 IS WHEN THEY WOULD BEGIN ON SITE CONSTRUCTION.
SO IT SHOULD BE COMING UP PRETTY SOON. THERE WERE 12 NOTICES SENT, ZERO RETURNED.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THEIR REGULAR MEETING INDICATED APPROVAL.
APPRECIATE IT. JUST AS A SIDE NOTE, WE HAVE ASSISTANT MINISTER JEREMIAH NARCISSE WITH US.
JEREMIAH, IF YOU DON'T MIND, WE'RE GOING TO FINISH THIS ITEM, SIR, AND THEN WE'LL BE RIGHT WITH YOU FOR THE INVOCATION IN JUST A SECOND.
YOU'RE WELCOME, SIR. ALL RIGHT, TIM, COUNCIL, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM YOU'D LIKE TO ASK? I'D JUST LIKE TO ASK ONE THING.
ARE WE GOING TO HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH BEACH ACCESS OR ANY KIND OF PROBLEMS WITH THE GLO OR CITY ORDINANCES OR YOU'RE THE PRO.
WELL, I KNOW THAT BEACH IS AT THE END POINT SAN LUIS IS HEAVILY TRAVELED, BUT I WOULD ASSUME TIM THEY'LL BE PUTTING BOLLARDS UP.
I'M HAVING TROUBLE HEARING YOU.
I WOULD ASSUME THAT THEY WON'T BE DRIVING ON THAT BEACH.
ACTUALLY, THEY HAVE NOW APPLIED FOR THAT.
SINCE THAT'S [INAUDIBLE] BEACH AREA AND THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LAND BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, WITH THE DEVELOPABLE PORTION OF THOSE LOTS AND THE WATER THEY HAVE NOW APPLIED FOR THAT. OK, ARE THEY GOING TO PUT BOLLARDS AROUND THE PERIMETER OF PROPERTY.
THEY HAVEN'T INDICATED THAT THEY WILL IT'S REALLY A SUBSTANTIAL DISTANCE AWAY FROM THE WATER. DO YOU KNOW, IF HE'S INTERESTED IN NATURAL GAS.
[LAUGHTER] I WOULD IMAGINE THAT THEY WOULD BE.
THAT'S WHAT PASSES FOR AN INSIDE JOKE AROUND HERE RIGHT NEED TO SIGN THEM UP.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. TIETJENS? COUNCIL.
I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 5A, IS THERE ANY ONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, JANELLE IS THERE ANYONE.
ANYONE ONLINE LISTENING TO THIS THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT? ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC PLEASE CLICK RAISE YOUR HAND AND BE PREPARED TO SPEAK WHEN YOUR NAME IS CALLED, IF YOU JOINED BY TELEPHONE YOU CAN PRESS STAR 9 TO RAISE YOUR HAND.
IS THE APPLICANT ON. I BELIEVE SHE IS.
YES, LINDSAY, GO RIGHT AHEAD, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.
HI I'M HERE WITH JONES AND CARTER AND I WAS JUST GOING TO LET YOU GUYS SPEAKERS] BUT I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
APPRECIATE IT. AND IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ON THE LINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? WHAT ABOUT THAT TWO COMMENTS IN THAT CHAT BOX.
OK, HEARING NO RESPONSE ON THAT.
JANELLE, DO YOU HAVE ANY WRITTEN COMMENTS ON THIS OR IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE CHAT BOX THAT PERTAINS TO THIS ITEM? LET ME [INAUDIBLE] SHE WAS HERE, BUT SHE'S ALREADY COMMENTED.
NO, SIR. NO OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ONE.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM AND BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL FOR ACTION.
I MOVE TO APPROVE. I SECOND IT.
WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM COUNCILWOMAN ROBB SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN QUIROGA.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? IT IS UNANIMOUS.
TIM WE'LL COME RIGHT BACK TO YOU IN JUST A SECOND.
AND I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE YOU TO THE COMMUNITY.
[3. INVOCATION]
WE HAVE ASSISTANT MINISTER JEREMIAH NARCISSE FROM AVENUE L BAPTIST CHURCH.WE WANTED TO HONOR REVEREND JOHNSON, WHO IS STILL NOT WITH US THIS AFTERNOON, TO HAVE HIS
[00:10:04]
CHURCH GIVE THE INVOCATION.JEREMIAH, IF YOU DON'T MIND, BEFORE YOU GIVE THE INVOCATION, IS THERE ANY UPDATE YOU HAVE ON REVEREND JOHNSON, SIR? GOOD EVENING TO EVERYONE.
AS FAR AS UPDATES MY UNDERSTANDING FROM MS. BRIDGET JOHNSON HIS CONDITION IS THE SAME AS IT WAS YESTERDAY.
SO, OF COURSE, WE ARE STILL MONITORING AND STILL CHECKING AS BEST AS WE CAN WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WAS GIVEN TO US.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR FOR THAT UPDATE.
AND THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE FOR THE INVOCATION, SIR.
LET US BOW ETERNAL FATHER WE COME TODAY.
FIRST OF ALL, THANKING YOU FOR YOUR MANY BLESSINGS THAT YOU HAVE GIVEN ONTO US MORE BLESSINGS THAN WE DESERVE TO LOOK BEYOND OUR MISTAKES AND SHORTCOMINGS.
AND YOU STILL PROVIDE PROVISIONS FOR US WAYS THAT WE CAN NEVER REPAY YOU FOR SO GOD WE COME IN THIS DAY ON THIS MEETING TO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU HAVE DONE FOR US AND WHAT YOU WILL DO.
AGAIN I COME TODAY JUST MERELY AS A VESSEL FILLING IN FOR PASTOR JOHNSON.
I ASK THAT YOU WILL JUST CONTINUE TO RESTORE HIS STRENGTH DAY BY DAY AND THEN THAT THIS MEETING WILL BE WHAT YOU WILL HAVE IT TO BE IN DECENCY AND IN ORDER THAT WE CAN COME TOGETHER IN AGREEMENT AND ASK MEN AND WOMEN TO BE ABLE TO PERFORM THOSE THINGS, THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE IN THIS COMMUNITY AND ABROAD.
SO WE THANK YOU FOR THIS PRIVILEGE JUST TO COME TOGETHER.
I ASK THAT YOU WOULD JUST CONTINUE TO BLESS THIS COUNCIL IN A VERY SPECIAL WAY.
THOSE WHO ARE IN THE MEETING, THOSE WHO ARE ON THE PHONE AND THOSE WHO ARE ON THE ZOOM.
WOULD YOU CONTINUE TO ENRICH THEIR LIVES, GIVE THEM WISDOM, KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING.
WE THANK YOU. WE LOVE YOU, LORD IN JESUS NAME.
AMEN. THANK YOU, MINISTER NARCISSE.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. APPRECIATE THAT.
THANK YOU, SIR. HAVE A GOOD ONE.
YOU TOO. TELL THE REVEREND OUR PRAYERS AND THOUGHTS ARE WITH HIM.
THANK YOU, [INAUDIBLE]. ALL RIGHT.
[5.B. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Granting A Planned Unit Development (PUD), On Property Commonly Known As 7228 Jones Road, 7224 Jones Road, 2315 72nd Street, And Adjacent Parcel And Legally Described Herein, In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas; Planning Case Number 22P-011; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (D. Lunsford)]
MOVING TO ITEM 5 B NELLIE IF WE COULD, PLEASE.YES SIR ITEM 5 B CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS GRANTING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 7228 JONES ROAD AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON TEXAS; PLANNING CASE NUMBER 22P-011 MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.
THANK YOU MAYOR. OK, THIS IS CASE 21P 11, THE ACTUAL REQUEST IS A PUD APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A RELATIVELY SMALL SCALE MULTI-FAMILY COMPLEX OF A REDEVELOPMENT THE BASE ZONING IS R1.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP, THERE'S TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE SITE RIGHT NOW, [INAUDIBLE] I'M SORRY, DEMOLISHED IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT THE MULTI FAMILY COMPLEX, WHICH [INAUDIBLE] JONES ROAD.
WE ANTICIPATE IT TO BE A TWO STORY MULTI FAMILY COMPLEX, OF ABOUT 40 UNITS, TWO BEDROOM UNITS EACH, PLUS GROUND LEVEL PARKING.
IT'S LOCATED NORTH OF JONES ROAD BETWEEN 72ND AND 73RD STREET AND INCLUDES ALL THE FRONTAGE [INAUDIBLE] ACROSS JONES AND THEN IT BACKS UP TO A PARTIAL ALLEY.
AND THE OWNER IS RICKY MORALES.
THE APPLICANT IS MICHAEL GAERTNER, I BELIEVE MIGHT BE ON THE LINE [INAUDIBLE] ON THE LINE [INAUDIBLE] THE APPLICANT SOUGHT REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FOR THREE THINGS LAND USE SIGNAGE, WHICH IN THIS CASE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO 20 SQUARE FOOT SIGNS ON JONES ROAD TO IDENTIFY THE COMPLEX AND THEN THE THIRD REQUIRES A SETBACK WHICH WAS MOVED FROM A 20 FOOT SETBACK TO A 10 FOOT SETBACK AS THEY BUILT TWO LOTS.
AND MOVING IT FORWARD, HELPS MITIGATE SOME OF THE IMPACT FOR THE OWNERS TO THE NORTH, FURTHER FOR ADDITIONAL MITIGATION MEASURES [INAUDIBLE] INFORMATION MOVE THAT ADD
[00:15:05]
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NORTH FENCE.YOU WILL SEE THAT THAT IS SHOWN AS A [INAUDIBLE] PLANNING COMMISSION, MOVED THAT THROUGH 7 [INAUDIBLE] AND THEN [INAUDIBLE] 10 FEET OF FRONTAGE THAT WAS AS A RESULT OF MOVING [INAUDIBLE] FORWARD.
THEN THEY ADDED A LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH [INAUDIBLE] 10 FOOT TALL TREES EVERY 20 FEET SO THAT CANOPY WOULD GROW OVER THAT FENCE.
AND IT WOULD [INAUDIBLE] DEGREE, POSSIBLE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
IT GOES [INAUDIBLE] NEXT SLIDE.
THIS IS A BASICALLY A 3-D SORT OF VIEW OF THE COMPLEX.
THE TWO TOP STORIES AND THREE STORIES [INAUDIBLE] THERE ARE THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AND THE BOTTOM [INAUDIBLE] PARKING LEVEL THAT'S MADE TO LOOK LIKE, YOU KNOW [INAUDIBLE] OF THE PROJECT.
THERE ARE 4 STORIES IN THESE LITTLE SORT OF [INAUDIBLE] COMPONENTS [INAUDIBLE].
AND THERE ARE MORE 5 STORIES, MORE OF A BUILDING MANAGEMENT THAN A RESIDENCE.
BUT AGAIN, I DO NOT SEE ANY OF [INAUDIBLE] R1 ZONE SO THE HEIGHT WILL NOT EXCEED THE LEVELS ALLOWED IN R1. AND [INAUDIBLE] LEVEL AS WELL.
NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. YOU WILL SEE HERE WHERE THIS SITE IS [INAUDIBLE] FAIRLY SMALL COMPLEX, BUT SURROUNDING IT TO THE WEST AND TOWARD THE NORTH ON HEARDS LANE THERE'S SOME LARGER COMPLEXES IN THE VICINITY 6 OF THEM.
AND THEN THERE'S ONE OTHER COMPLEX JUST TO THE EAST WHICH IS ABOUT THE SAME SCALE AND SIZE AS THIS ONE THAT FRONTS, JONES [INAUDIBLE] ACROSS [INAUDIBLE].
THERE WERE 36 NOTICES SENT[INAUDIBLE] FIVE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION [INAUDIBLE]. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
GOT SOME PICTURES FOR YOU, THIS IS THE [INAUDIBLE] PROPERTY LOOKING EAST SO THAT PORTION OF THAT YELLOW [INAUDIBLE] THAT YOU SEE WOULD BE ONE OF THE HOUSES THAT WOULD BE DEMOLISHED. AND THEN TO THE WEST, THAT'S ALSO ONE OF THE HOUSES THAT WOULD BE DEMOLISHED TO MAKE WAY FOR THIS [INAUDIBLE] ON THE RIGHT IS SORT OF IN THE MIDDLE OF THE [INAUDIBLE] . FINAL SLIDE IS AN ADJACENT PICTURES OF ADJACENT HOUSES AROUND, AGAIN, THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY MOVE TO APPROVED AND WITH THE ADDED TWO CONDITIONS TO FURTHER MITIGATE AND BUFFER ADJACENT PROPERTIES AROUND.
AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR STAFF REPORT.
THANK YOU TIM. APPRECIATE THAT, COUNCIL ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS POINT? YES, I HAVE A QUESTION.
MAYBE I NEED THE ARCHITECTS HERE.
BUT THE 3D RENDERING MAKES IT LOOK LIKE IT'S A LOT CLOSER TO THE STREET THAN THE SITE PLAN, DOES.
SO I'M WONDERING KIND OF WHICH IS CORRECT.
OK, SO WITH THAT SITE PLAN STILL THE OLD SITE PLAN THAT [INAUDIBLE] APPROVAL WAS MADE WITH [INAUDIBLE] SO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THAT OLD SITE PLAN IS IT MOVED BACK TO WHERE THEY ORIGINALLY PROPOSING AND THEN THE COMMISSION AND STAFF AS WELL BOTH THOUGHT IT WOULD BE MORE PRUDENT TO MOVE IT FORWARD, TO GET AS MUCH ROOM AS POSSIBLE TO THOSE SINGLE FAMILY TRACTS ON THE NORTH SIDE.
SO THEY WILL BE A AMENDING THAT SITE PLAN TO MOVE IT FORWARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
MR. GAERTNER, IS ONLINE IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO HIM.
ALL RIGHT, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IN JUST A SECOND.
JUST DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, JOHN? I MEAN, I THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IT WOULD BE NICE IF WE HAD AN ACCURATE SITE PLAN.
YEAH, LET'S FIRST SEE IF WE HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS OF MR. TIETJENS. IF NOT, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE'LL HAVE MICHAEL GAERTNER COME ON BOARD.
[00:20:02]
[INAUDIBLE] I MEAN, BECAUSE IT'S CONFUSING TO ME THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MOVED IT FORWARD TO BE CLOSER TO THE HOUSES TO THE NORTH OF IT.NO, NO, FURTHER AWAY FROM THE HOUSES. CLOSES TO JONES DRIVE.
SETBACK THEY ESTABLISHED A 10 FOOT BUILD TO LINE.
AND SO THE 3D GRAPHIC WAS PROBABLY MORE REPRESENTATIVE OF [INAUDIBLE] BALL PARK OF WHERE [INAUDIBLE] INSTEAD. BUT AREN'T THERE HOMES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF JONES ROAD? THERE ARE.
DRAWING THAT YOU HAD UP THERE, WHICH TO ME IS MORE PLEASANT.
I MEAN, MY CONCERN HERE IS JUST THAT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH, YOU KNOW, WE WON'T GET THE LANDSCAPE BEING THAT, YOU KNOW, MIGHT BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE JONES DRIVE SIDE BECAUSE OF THE BUILDING GETTING PUSHED CLOSER TO THAT SIDE.
I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THE REASONING BY PUSHING IT THAT WAY TO GIVE THE NEIGHBORS A LITTLE MORE BUFFER.
BUT I'M NOT SURE IF 10 FEET IS GOING TO BE MUCH IN THE THREE STORY BUILDING.
TIM WHAT WAS THE OPPOSITION, THE COMMENTS FROM THE OPPOSITION.
DO YOU HAVE THOSE. THERE WERE ONLY TWO.
ONE OF THEM SAID THE AREA IS OVERWHELMED WITH MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING.
AND THE OTHER ONE SAID NEGATIVE.
NO WAY. OK, IT SAYS FIVE OPPOSED THOUGH.
5 OPPOSED. BUT THERE WERE 2 THAT ACTUALLY SUBMITTED COMMENTS [INAUDIBLE].
AND I WILL ADD, THAT THERE'S THE DESIGN OF THIS STRUCTURE HAS THIS SORT OF COURTYARD IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO EAST AND WEST FRONT SIDE THAT HAS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT AREA.
IN FACT, A COMMUNITY GARDENS IS PROPOSED OUT IN THE AREA.
THE RIDE OF WAY ITSELF ALSO DOES [INAUDIBLE].
BUT THERE DOING SOME THE RIGHT OF WAY ISN'T [INAUDIBLE] GOING ACROSS [INAUDIBLE] RIGHT.
SO THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE BUT EVEN SO, THE CLOSEST POINT WILL STILL BE 10 FEET AWAY, YOU CAN GET, YOU KNOW, A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING [INAUDIBLE].
PLUS WHAT IS BEHIND THAT [INAUDIBLE] BACK TO THE BUILDING ITSELF? OK. ALL RIGHT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. TIETJENS, COUNCIL? VERY GOOD.
I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 5 B, WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE, I THINK, OF THE OWNER.
MR. GAERTNER, ARE YOU ON THE LINE, SIR? MICHAEL. YES, GOOD EVENING, HOW'S EVERYONE, THIS EVENING.
JUST FINE, MR. GAERTNER. I KNOW YOU WANT TO SAY A FEW WORDS ABOUT THIS.
GO RIGHT AHEAD, SIR. WELL, FIRST, I DON'T KNOW IF JANELLE WAS ABLE TO GET OUR PRESENTATION SO YOU CAN SEE IT OR NOT.
AND I'M NOT ABLE TO SEE THE PRESENTATION ON THE SCREEN.
SO ARE YOU ALL ABLE TO SEE YOUR POWERPOINT PRESENTATION.
I CAN PULL IT UP REAL QUICK. WE'RE GOING TO PULL THAT UP MIKE? THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
IN THE MEANTIME, I'M MICHAEL GAERTNER ARCHITECT MY OFFICE ADDRESS IS 2413 MECHANIC STREET. AND I ALSO HAVE MR. MORALES ON THE PHONE WITH ME AND THE PROPERTY OWNER BEFORE WE GET STARTED TOO MUCH INTO IT, HE JUST WANTS TO SAY A FEW WORDS ABOUT HIMSELF AND THE PROJECT AT HAND.
GO AHEAD, MR. MORALES. GOOD EVENING CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS RICKY MORALES AND I'M [INAUDIBLE] 55 YEARS.
I OWN AND I MANAGE SEVERAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND A SMALL APARTMENT COMPLEX HERE ON THE ISLAND. I SAW A NEED FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSES HERE IN GALVESTON.
[00:25:01]
AND AT A TIME.[INAUDIBLE] PURCHASED A LARGE PIECE OF THE PUZZLE IN MARCH OF 2020.
ANSWER ANY OTHER TECHNICAL STUFF YOU ABOUT IT.
THANK YOU RICKY. THANKS VERY MUCH.
AND DO WE HAVE SOME SLIDES UP? YES, SIR, WE DO.
I THINK THERE'S A SLIGHT UP AT THIS POINT.
YES. OK, SO LET'S GO ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE AND YOU'LL SEE A PHOTOGRAPH OF MR. MORALES. WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THAT.
SO THE NEXT THING I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT AND THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT SORT OF PROJECT FROM WHAT WE MOSTLY WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO BUILD UPPER AND HIGH END PROJECT, CONDOS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
YOU KNOW, MR. MORALES WANTED TO GET THE PRICE RANGE THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO APPEAL TO THE MAJORITY OF THE GALVESTON FAMILIES.
THIS IS DESIGNED TO FIT WITHIN THE INCOME LEVEL OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE AND WORK HERE IN GALVESTON. IT'S GOING TO BE AN ELEVATED STRUCTURE.
WE HAVE TO BE ELEVATED TO GET UP ABOVE THE FLOOD PLAIN.
AND IT'S REALLY NOT INTENDED TO HAVE JUST A WHOLE BUNCH OF AMENITIES.
THIS IS NOT A LUXURY APARTMENT COMPLEX THIS IS A COMPLEX TO PROVIDE SAFE SECURE HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE IN GALVESTON.
JANELLE, IF YOU COULD SWITCH TO THE NEXT SLIDE IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF APARTMENTS THAT ARE AROUND THIS PROJECT.
AND WE ARE RIGHT ON JONES ROAD.
AND YOU MAY HAVE SEEN THIS SLIDE BEFORE, BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF APARTMENTS AROUND HERE.
WHAT I THINK IS GOOD ABOUT THIS PROJECT IS THAT IT WILL SERVE AS A BUFFER BETWEEN JONES ROAD, WHICH IS A HIGH TRAFFIC COUNTS AND THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE NORTH OF THERE.
I'M JUST GOING TO MENTION THAT THIS WAS PRETTY CAREFULLY RESEARCHED BEFORE PROCEEDING AND LOOKING AT NOT JUST THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT ALSO THE GOALS THAT THE CITY, THE CITIZENS OF GALVESTON HAVE SORT OF LISTED THROUGH THE VISIONING PROCESS THAT WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH LATELY.
THIS IS A PROJECT THAT EVERYBODY SEEMS TO SEE THE NEED FOR.
WE'RE ASKING FOR THREE BASIC DEVIATIONS IF YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE JANELLE.
THAT THE LAND USE BE CHANGED TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THAT THE LAND USE, NOT THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION.
WE ORIGINALLY CONTEMPLATED ASKING FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING TO MULTIFAMILY, BUT IN COOPERATION WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WE DETERMINED THAT THAT WAS PROBABLY NOT THE RIGHT ZONING CLASSIFICATION BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED STRUCTURES UP TO 100 HUNDRED FEET TALL. AND THAT WASN'T WHAT WE WANTED TO DO IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THE PUD AFFORDS THE CITY, THE ABILITY TO RESTRICT THE HEIGHT AND WE WOULD BE RESTRICTED TO 50 FEET, WHICH IS THE EXACT SAME HEIGHT THAT YOU HAVE IN R1 RESIDENTIAL . YOU KNOW, DURING THE COURSE OF GOING THROUGH THIS, THEY RECOMMENDED THAT WE HAVE THE 10 FOOT FRONT BUILD TO LINE INSTEAD OF THE 20 FOOT SETBACK SO I'M GOING TO POINT OUT THAT THERE'S A LOT OF SPACE BETWEEN THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE RIGHT OF WAY, BUT WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF NICE LANDSCAPING ALONG JONES DRIVE THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND AND THE STREET GIVE US AN AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO DO LANDSCAPING THERE.
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK CLOSELY WITH THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THERE ARE POWER LINES. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WATCH WHAT TREES WE PUT IN AND WHAT SPECIES AND WHERE
[00:30:05]
WE PUT THEM EXACTLY SO THAT THEY DON'T CAUSE A PROBLEM WITH THOSE POWER LINES.BASICALLY, OUR GOAL IS TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF R1 AND MULTIFAMILY ZONING DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS WITH THE EXCEPTIONS OF [INAUDIBLE] MULTI-FAMILY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SLIGHTLY LARGER SIGN FOR BUILDING IDENTIFICATION AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A 10 FOOT BUILD TO LINE AS STAFF RECOMMENDED.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY HAVE ANY.
COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. GAERTNER OR MR. MORALES? YES, MARIE.
HI MIKE. SO YOU'RE PUTTING A PARKING UNDERNEATH, BUT YOU'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE THE LARGE PARKING LOT IN THE BACK.
NO MARIE ALL THE PARKING WILL BE UNDERNEATH.
THERE WILL BE NO SURFACE PARKING OR OUTDOOR PARKING ALL THE PARKING IS GOING TO BE UNDERNEATH THE APARTMENT. SO ARE THE BUILDINGS LARGER THAN THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN OR AM I JUST READING THIS WRONG? NO I THINK YOU MIGHT BE INTERPRETING THE DRAWING INCORRECTLY.
THE BUILDING IS LARGER THAN THE REQUIRED PARKING.
GOTCHA. AND SO IT ACTUALLY THERE'S ACTUALLY SOME SPACE UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING TO DO NOT JUST THE PARKING, BUT TO ALSO DO SOME STORAGE UNITS FOR THE BUILDING RESIDENTS.
VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF MR. GAERTNER? YES WILLIAM.
WHEN WOULD BE THE PROPOSED START AND COMPLETION DATE? START, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE SET ANYTHING IN STONE YET, BUT PROJECT OF THIS SIZE AND CHARACTER, IT IS GOING TO PROBABLY TAKE ABOUT FOUR TO SIX MONTHS TO GO THROUGH THE DESIGN PERMIT PROCESS AND ABOUT A YEAR TO BUILD.
SO WE'RE PROBABLY TALKING ABOUT 18 MONTHS TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT COMPLETION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? JUST ONE MORE. YES.
THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE SUBSIDIZED OR SECTION EIGHT IS IT.
NO MARIE THIS IS GOING TO BE MARKET RATE HOUSING.
MIKE, YOU MIGHT STAY ON AND MR. MORALES UNTIL WE FINISH WE MAY HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS ON THE LINE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT? WE HAVE ONE HAND RAISED FROM BARRY LOGINS.
I HEARD THE PRESENTATION AND WAS WITH EASE WITH IT.
ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR, I CAN. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. [INAUDIBLE] JANELLE, ANY WRITTEN COMMENTS FOR ON THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT ALL? NOT ON THIS ITEM. THERE IS A QUESTION AND ANSWER.
THERE WAS A QUESTION UP THERE? SEE, I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT IS THERE A Q&A.
ADD TO THE SEWAGE SYSTEM? DID YOU HEAR THAT, MIKE? YES, I DID. WE'VE DONE A THOROUGH EXAMINATION OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES IN THE AREA.
AND I'LL JUST I'M GOING TO ADD IS WONDERFUL NOW THAT THOSE ARE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE CITY, THE GIS SYSTEM, MAKES IT A LOT EASIER TO ACCESS THAT INFORMATION.
BUT THERE IS AMPLE CAPACITY IN WATER, SEWER AND STORM [INAUDIBLE].
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ONLINE JANELLE THAT YOU SAW OR QUESTIONS? NO SIR.
I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM 5 B IT IS 5:34 P.M.
BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL FOR ANY MOTIONS.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE 5B AS PRESENTED.
ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF 5B BY COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI.
SECOND. COUNCIL MEMBER QUIROGA SECONDS.
[00:35:01]
THANK YOU MIKE FOR BEING HERE.THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD NIGHT.
GOOD NIGHT, NELLIE ITEM 5C PLEASE.
[5.C. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Changing The Zoning From Commercial, Neighborhood Conservation District, One (C-Ncd-1) To Urban Neighborhood, Neighborhood Conservation District, One (Un-Ncd-1) Zoning District On Property Commonly Known 1825 23rd Street / Tremont And Which Is Legally Described As Lots 8 – 11, Southeast Block 67, Galveston Outlots, In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Planning Case Number 21p-012; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To 5.C. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Changing The Zoning From Commercial, Neighborhood Conservation District, One (C-Ncd-1) To Urban Neighborhood, Neighborhood Conservation District, One (Un-Ncd-1) Zoning District On Property Commonly Known 1825 23rd Street / Tremont And Which Is Legally Described As Lots 8 – 11, Southeast Block 67, Galveston Outlots, In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Planning Case Number 21p-012; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (A. Montalvan)]
YES SIR. ITEM 5 C CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AND ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS CHANGING THE ZONING FROM COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT ONE TO URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT, ONE ZONING DISTRICT ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1825 23RD STREET/ TREMONT, AND WHICH IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 8 THROUGH 11 SOUTHEAST BLOCK 67 GALVESTON OUTLOTS IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON TEXAS.PLANNING CASE NUMBER 21P-012 MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT. VERY GOOD.
THANK YOU MAYOR. IT'S 21P-12 IS A REQUEST FROM REZONING [INAUDIBLE] I'M SORRY. COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION TO URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION.
SO BASICALLY IT'S DOWN ZONING TO REDEVELOP PROPERTY BY DEMOLISHING WHICH YOU ALL MAY KNOW AS THE [INAUDIBLE] BUILDING AT 1825 23RD STREET.
THE CORNER OF BERNARDO GALVEZ AND 23RD.
AND WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THAT BUILDING AND REPLACE ON THE SITE SEVEN RESIDENTIAL LOTS, WHICH THEY WOULD REPLAT IT'S A [INAUDIBLE] TRACT WHICH GOES BACK FROM BERNARDO GALVEZ AND GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE NELLIE.
THE SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL USES SURROUNDING THE TRACT EXCEPT FOR THIS SOUTH SIDE YOU CAN SEE BASICALLY [INAUDIBLE] ALL AROUND IT, JUST THIS ONE SPOT HERE ON THE SOUTH SIDE, [INAUDIBLE] THE OWNER IS TREMONT PROFESSIONAL BUILDING AND THE APPLICANT IS AL FICHERA AND [INAUDIBLE] THE PLANNING AND USE OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IS ALLOWED IN COMMERCIAL BY RIGHT AT THIS TIME.
[INAUDIBLE] THE REZONING TO URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD AND IN THIS CASE TO ALLOW FOR SMALLER LOT SIZES AND MORE AFFORDABILITY FOR 2500 MINIMUM SQUARE FEET IS REQUIRED IN THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD. AND 4 THOUSAND IS THE MINIMUM IN COMMERCIAL LOT SUBDIVISIONS.
THE LOTS IN THIS SUBDIVISION WOULD BE OVER TWENTY NINE HUNDRED SQUARE FEET, SO SLIGHTLY OVER THE MINIMUM IN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD BY A FEW HUNDRED FEET, AND THEY WOULD EACH HAVE AN ALLEY GARAGE ACCESS.
AND SO YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
SO THIS IS AN ELEVATION OF GENERAL [INAUDIBLE] SO KIND OF A BUNGALOW STYLE [INAUDIBLE] SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
OBVIOUSLY ONE WAY TO MAXIMIZE AFFORDABILITY [INAUDIBLE] BUILD UP [INAUDIBLE] HERE.
THIS WILL ACTUALLY BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE NEW HOUSING THAT GALVESTON [INAUDIBLE] HAS RECENTLY CONSTRUCTED AND THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT SEEKS THE REZONING KNOWING CLEARLY WHAT HE INTENDED TO DO KNOW AS A RESULT IN DEVELOPMENT AND [INAUDIBLE] PREPARATION UP FRONT [INAUDIBLE] WITH ZONING APPLICATIONS YOU DON'T REALLY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT TO DO YET [INAUDIBLE]. HERE WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD IDEA HE HAS DONE HIS HOMEWORK UP FRONT.
IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THERE WERE 30 SENT NOTICES AND ONE OF THEM WAS IN OPPOSITION AND THEN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS TO APPROVE.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, TIM APPRECIATE IT.
ANY QUESTIONS, DAVID? YEAH, TIM, WHAT WAS THE CONCERN OF THE ONE THAT WAS RETURNED IN OPPOSITION? ACTUALLY NO COMMENT.
THERE WAS SIMPLE JUST IN OPPOSITION. OKAY THANK YOU.
COUNCILMAN QUIROGA, AND THEN COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER.
WHAT DOES THAT DO ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ALONG THAT AVENUE? BECAUSE THAT'S PRIMARILY COMMERCIAL.
AND NOW WE CAN PUT RESIDENTIAL, I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, CHANGING THE ORDINANCE, BUT I BELIEVE ISN'T THERE A PLAN IN THE FUTURE FOR A HOTEL ACROSS THE STREET FROM THAT
[00:40:01]
LOCATION, SOUTH SIDE.WELL, IT'S SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES BY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
SO IT'S CERTAINLY [INAUDIBLE] WITH THAT.
[INAUDIBLE] PRETTY MUCH [INAUDIBLE] COMMERCIAL [INAUDIBLE] GOING FROM DOWNTOWN TO SEAWALL.
I WOULD ESTIMATE THAT HAVING SEVEN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS WILL BRING SOME TAXABLE VALUE TO THE AREA.
OBVIOUSLY, WE LOSE OUT IN SALES TAX AND THINGS LIKE THAT WHEN WE TRANSITION FROM A COMMERCIAL USE TO RESIDENTIAL.
BUT THEN, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S HIGH ON THE PRIORITY LIST OF [INAUDIBLE] YOU KNOW, SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING, THAT SMALLER FAMILIES ARE ASKING TO UTILIZE [INAUDIBLE] MIDDLE INCOME [INAUDIBLE]. OK, COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER.
IS PARKING, GOING TO BE ONSITE OR IS IT ON THE STREET.
THE PARKING IS ACTUALLY AT ALLEYS AND [INAUDIBLE] SO THEY WON'T BE PARKING ON THE STREET [INAUDIBLE] THEIR GUESTS OF COURSE WOULD BE.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO MY UNDERSTANDING DUAL STALL GARAGES.
THANK YOU ALL RIGHT. IT IS 5:41 P.M.
GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 5 C.
DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT PRESENT WOULD LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS.
AL. WELL, THIS IS AL FICHERA. YES, GO RIGHT AHEAD AL.
THANKS, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THIS PROJECT THAT WE'RE PRESENTING TO ALL TODAY THAT IS GOING IN PLACE OF THE EYE CLINIC.
THE EYE CLINIC HAS BEEN CLOSED FOR SEVERAL YEARS, HAVE BEEN USED FOR STORAGE.
AND LIKE TO REMOVE IT AND REPLACE IT WITH THE SEVEN STRUCTURES.
YOU KNOW, GROWING UP ON THE ISLAND AND BEING DEVELOPMENT FOR 45 YEARS.
YOU KNOW, I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA.
AND I REALLY WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THE TRACK IS ITS PROXIMITY TO THE BEACH, BUT ALSO THE TROLLEY RUNS IN FRONT OF IT.
AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S JUST A FEATURE THAT YOU CAN TAKE THE TROLLEY FROM HOME AND GO DOWN TO THE STRAND OR WHEREVER AND PARK IN YOUR GARAGE.
AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO DOWNTOWN WITH A CAR AND TRY TO PARK SOMEWHERE.
BUT THIS STRUCTURE WILL BE TWO STORY FACING THE BEACH AND THERE WILL BE VERY ORNATE VICTORIAN ARCHITECTURE AND WILL COMPLY TO THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS.
MATTER OF FACT, SHARON WILLIAMS IS GOING TO BE INVOLVED IN COLOR SELECTIONS.
AND EVEN THOUGH YOU DON'T KNOW WE HAVE LABELED IT, THE PAINTED LADIES OF GALVESTON, BECAUSE THEY SYMBOLIZE SIMILAR TO THE PAINTED LADIES IN CALIFORNIA AND THEY ALSO OWN A TROLLEY TRACK. AND THERE'S ALSO SEVEN OF THEM SO WE THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO DO. AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I REALLY THINK IT WOULD REALLY COMPLEMENT THE ENTRY TO 23RD STREET.
AND THERE IS A LOT OF RESIDENTIAL AROUND THIS.
DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET THERE IS A LIQUOR STORE AND A VACANT LOT, BUT THERE'S HOUSING ALL AROUND THIS. AND THE HOTEL, THAT MR. QUIROGA WAS TALKING ABOUT, THAT'S ANOTHER BLOCK FURTHER UP.
BUT ANYWAY, ANYTHING I CAN ANSWER FOR Y'ALL, I'LL BE MORE THAN GLAD TO.
COUNCIL ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS THAT COULD BE A GOOD SIGN OR YOU NEVER KNOW AL SO. YEAH [LAUGHTER]. SO VERY GOOD.
IS THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM THAT ANYONE ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT? IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT AT THIS TIME PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
I DON'T SEE ANY MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, JANELLE.
ARE THESE GOING TO BE RENTALS OR FULL TIME RESIDENTS?
[00:45:04]
FULL TIME RESIDENTS. SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD PLAN TO ME.YEAH, AND MORE RIDERS ON THE TROLLEY, YES.
HEY WE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY ON THAT RAIL TROLLEY EVERYTHING YOU NEED IN THAT AREA TOO.
VERY GOOD. I FIGURED THAT I'D LIKE TO HAVE ONE FOR MYSELF AND THAT'S NOT AS CLOSES AS I WANT TO DO TO THE OLD FOLKS HOME, BUT [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] VERY GOOD.
[INAUDIBLE] THANK YOU AL FOR BEING HERE.
I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 5C.
BRING THIS BACK FOR ACTION FROM COUNCIL.
YEAH I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
WE HAVE MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER AND SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN ROBB, ANY DISCUSSION? VERY GOOD.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, IT'S UNANIMOUS AL.
CONGRATULATIONS, NICE PROJECT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT.
VERY GOOD. WE ARE NOW MOVING TO ITEM SIX, THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION.
[6. PUBLIC COMMENT]
JANELLE, I'M GOING TO LET YOU GO AHEAD.I THINK YOU WANT TO MAKE SOME ANNOUNCEMENTS ON THIS.
WE HAVE RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 38 WRITTEN COMMENTS. ONE MOMENT LET ME GET THE SHEET HERE.
OKAY WE'VE RECEIVED A TOTAL OF THIRTY EIGHT WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS? AND 34 OF THOSE RELATED TO THE ELECTRONIC BIKE THAT COUNCIL DISCUSSED EARLIER THIS MORNING, 33 OF THEM OPPOSED A BAN AND ONE WAS IN FAVOR OF A BAN.
WE ALSO RECEIVED THREE PUBLIC COMMENTS RELATED TO GOLF CARTS.
TWO OF THOSE OPPOSED BANNING THOSE ON THE SEAWALL AND ONE OF THOSE WAS A REQUEST TO LOWER THE SPEED LIMIT ON A PORTION OF STEWART SO GOLF CARTS CAN GET TO THE GOLF COURSE OR THE DRIVING RANGE. AND WE HAD ONE PUBLIC COMMENT RELATED TO REDEFINING SIDEWALK IN THE CITY CODE [INAUDIBLE] OF BLOCKING A SIDEWALK.
THANK YOU, JANELLE, AND THESE.
WHAT WAS THE LAST THING, SHE SAID.
GO AHEAD, EXPLAIN THE LAST ONE AGAIN, PLEASE, MA'AM.
SO THE LAST ONE SOMEONE GOT A CITATION FOR PARKING IN THEIR DRIVEWAY, BUT THEY WERE BLOCKING THE SIDEWALK.
SO THAT WOULD LIKE COUNCIL TO LOOK AT THE DEFINITION OF A SIDEWALK IN THE CITY CODE OR POSSIBLY REDEFINE THE OFFENSE OF BLOCKING A SIDEWALK.
VERY GOOD. AND THESE COMMENTS ARE POSTED FOR THE PUBLIC TO VIEW ALSO IS THAT RIGHT JANELLE. THEY ARE THEY'VE BEEN POSTED ONLINE IN THE AGENDA CENTER RIGHT NEXT TO THE AGENDA FOR TODAY'S MEETING. VERY GOOD.
DO WE HAVE. ALSO, DID YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT BEFORE WE SEE IF THERE'S ANY VERBAL PUBLIC INPUT, PLEASE? YES SIR. IF ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC ONLINE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK OR MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE COUNCIL AT THE TIME, IF YOU WOULD RAISE YOUR HAND, AND WE WILL CALL ON YOU ONE BY ONE. MAYOR IS THAT BOTH AGENDA ITEMS, AND NON AGENDA ITEMS, OR JUST AGENDA ITEMS. YES IT IS FOR BOTH. YES, SIR.
OK, JANELLE WHAT ABOUT THE FOUR COMMENTS THAT ARE IN THAT CHAT BOX? [INAUDIBLE] IF HE'D LIKE TO SPEAK I'VE ALREADY LOOKED AT THOSE AND THEY'RE NOT PUBLIC COMMENT. ANYBODY THAT IS ON LINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON ANY OF OUR AGENDA ITEMS OR NON AGENDA ITEMS, PLEASE, THROUGH THE ONLINE APPROACH HERE WITH THE ZOOM MEETING, USE THE RAISE HAND APPLICATION.
AND WE WILL CALL ON YOU, HERBERT TURNER.
HERBERT TURNER. OH, WONDERFUL.
ALL RIGHT, MR. TURNER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, SIR? YES, I WOULD. MY NAME IS HERBERT TURNER.
I LIVE ON 215 POST OFFICE STREET [INAUDIBLE] GALVESTON.
FIRST OFF, I'D LIKE TO EXPRESS THAT MY THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON. THAT [INAUDIBLE].
SAY THAT AGAIN, MR. TURNER, I'M SORRY, OK? I'D LIKE TO EXPRESS MY THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS TO COUNCIL MEMBER JOHNSON? I'M HOPING HE HAS A COMPLETE RECOVERY.
[00:50:02]
ALL RIGHT. AND I WAS ON APRIL 13TH, I WOKE UP TO FIND MY APARTMENT, BUT APPARENTLY FLOODED.THERE WAS A SEWER BACKUP THAT PUT WASTE WATER IN A CLOSET.
AND IN THE SECOND BEDROOM OF MY HOUSE, THERE WASN'T [INAUDIBLE].
JUST ABOUT EVERY EVERYBODY WHO HAD A FIRST FLOOR UNIT IN MY COMPLEX [INAUDIBLE] IT WAS FAIRLY EXTENSIVE. IT TURNS OUT THAT A SEWER LINE.
THAT A CITY SEWER LINE WAS BACKED UP AND IT TOOK A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF THAT DAY THE NEXT DAY TO CLEAR IT OUT.
THE THING IS THAT THIS ISN'T THE FIRST TIME WE'VE BEEN HAVING RECURRING PROBLEMS WITH SEWER BACKUP FOR QUITE A WHILE.
JUST WONDERING AND I'M JUST WONDERING, IS THERE ANY KIND OF A LONG TERM SOLUTION TO THIS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT ARE BLOCKING IT UP IS THE THINGS THAT SHOULDN'T BE GOING DOWN A HOUSE SEWER LINE TO START WITH.
FROM WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS, YOU KNOW, THAT GENERAL AREA WE'RE HAVING PROBLEMS. AND IT'S NOT JUST SEWER LINES WE ALSO HAVE ISSUES WITH FLOODING, STREET FLOODING.
IN THE AREA BETWEEN FERRY ROAD AND HOLIDAY DRIVE.
AND IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH FOR IT TO FLOOD AND SOME OF THAT WATER HAS ACTUALLY GOTTEN INTO SOME OF OUR CONDOS HERE.
SO I'M JUST HOPING AT SOME POINT, IS HOPE YOU LOOK FORWARD TO A SOLUTION BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY GETTING OLD? AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD ENCOURAGED US TO HAVE OUR HAVE OUR PLACE CLEANED OUT, YOU KNOW, SO ANY ACTION THAT YOU CAN MAKE THAT MIGHT BE FORTHCOMING WOULD [INAUDIBLE] AS WELL. THANK YOU.
OUR CITY MANAGER, BRIAN MAXWELL, IS LISTENING TO THIS.
AND SO HE HE CAN FOLLOW UP ON THAT, SIR.
APPRECIATE IT. JANELLE I SEE WE HAVE A NEW ONE IN QUESTION AND ANSWER SECTION.
IS THERE ANY OTHER ONES, ANY OTHER HANDS UP. NEXT IS RYAN O'NEAL WONDERFUL? HELLO, COUNCIL, MY NAME IS RYAN O'NEAL AND I'M THE OWNER OF CRAB SCOOTS.
CRAB IS THE LONGEST OPERATED SCOOTER RENTAL BUSINESS IN GALVESTON.
THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL BANNED THE DOCKLESS SCOOTER MODEL.
IN MY OPINION, THIS WAS A VERY SMART MOVE, AS WE HAVE SEEN NONSTOP PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE DOCKLESS MODEL IN EVERY MARKET WHERE THEY OPERATE.
WHEN WE STARTED CRAB SCOOTERS, WE KNEW THAT TO CREATE A SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS, SAFETY HAD TO BE OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY.
I WOULD SPARE NO EXPENSE, AND CUT NO CORNERS TO ENSURE THAT EVERY ONE OF OUR DEVICES HAD THE BEST FUNCTIONALITY AND FEATURES THAT ARE AVAILABLE IN THE SCOOTER MARKET.
BECAUSE OF THIS, WE HAD THE ABILITY TO PREVENT PROBLEMS BEFORE THEY HAPPEN RATHER THAN RELYING ON CITY ENFORCEMENT TO POLICE THESE ISSUES.
OUR SCOOTERS ARE SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW WHERE THEY ARE AND CHANGE THEIR OPERATIONAL SPECS BASED ON THEIR GPS LOCATION.
WE CAN AND DO CREATE A NO GO ZONES THAT WILL NOT ALLOW RIDERS TO OPERATED IN BIASED LOCATIONS SUCH AS PARKS CEMETERIES AND ON THE BEACH.
THIS CAN EVEN BE EXTENDED TO CREATE TEMPORARY NO GO ZONES FOR LARGE EVENTS SUCH AS MARDI GRAS. OUR SCOOTERS CAN ALSO AUTOMATICALLY LOAD AT TOP SPEED AND SLOW THEIR ACCELERATION BASED ON WHERE THEY ARE. THIS IS A FEATURE THAT SHOULD BE UTILIZED FOR THE SEAWALL SIDEWALK. MANY SCOOTERS IN GALVESTON AVAILABLE FOR RENT TODAY ARE WHISKING DOWN OUR SIDEWALKS AT SPEEDS THAT ARE JUST, FRANKLY, TOO FAST.
WITH THE TECHNOLOGY WE HAVE IN OUR SCOOTERS THIS SIMPLY ISN'T POSSIBLE.
WE ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO SET HOURS OF OPERATION ON OUR DEVICES.
NO MATTER WHAT VENDOR IS BRINGING THEM THEY WILL BE UNABLE TO START A RIDE AFTER A DESIGNATED TIME SET BY OUR TEAM.
WE ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO SHUT DOWN OUR ENTIRE FLEET OF SCOOTERS WITH THE CLICK OF A BUTTON, A FEATURE THAT WOULD BE ESPECIALLY HANDY FOR LARGE EVENTS SUCH AS ONE STAR RALLY.
WE HAVE ALL THE TOOLS WE NEED TO PROVIDE EVERY VENDOR IN GALVESTON WISHING TO RENT SCOOTERS OUR SMART SCOOTERS AT NO COST.
THIS WOULD CREATE A CENTRALIZED NETWORK OF SCOOTERS THAT WOULD BE PROGRAMED FOR THE UNIQUENESS OF GALVESTON.
GALVESTON HAS AN OPPORTUNITY AS UNIQUE AS OUR ISLAND.
BY DEFINING THESE SOLUTIONS, WE MUST BE WILLING TO WORK TOGETHER TO IDENTIFY THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEMS. THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE DOES NOT ADDRESS THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM.
WE HAVE THE BRAINPOWER AND TECHNOLOGY TO CREATE THE FRAMEWORK THAT WILL ALLOW RENTAL
[00:55:02]
SCOOTERS TO OPERATE SAFELY.IF WE TAKE THE TIME TO DO THIS RIGHT, WE WILL HAVE ACCOMPLISHED SOMETHING THAT NO OTHER CITY HAS. WE WILL HAVE THE PROS OF MICRO MOBILITY WITHOUT THE CONS.
AND THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY.
I JUST WANT TO THANK ALL OF Y'ALL.
I KNOW Y'ALL HAVE PROBABLY BEEN BOMBARDED BY OUR INDUSTRY THIS PAST WEEK AND Y'ALL HAVE REALLY HEARD US OUT WELL.
MR. COLLINS, THANKS FOR ATTENDING THE MEETING.
AND QUIROGA, MR. SCHUSTER, MAYOR BROWN, THANK YOU ALL FOR HAVING ME OUT.
AND I KNOW WE CAN FIND A SOLUTION THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.
APPRECIATE IT. JANELLE, WHO ELSE DO WE HAVE THERE? OK, NEXT, BERT [INAUDIBLE].
BERT WELCOME. HELLO, COUNCIL, MY NAME IS BERT [INAUDIBLE] I'M THE OWNER OF SALT WATER GIFT SHOP.
I AM A RESIDENT OF GALVESTON FOR EIGHT YEARS.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'M A VOTER AND I FACE ALL THE SAME CHALLENGES THAT EVERYONE ON THE ISLAND FACES. I LIVE AT 69TH STREET AND MY BUSINESS IS AT 18TH STREET AND I TRAVEL SEAWALL BOULEVARD EVERY DAY.
SO I SEE WHAT GOES ON OUT THERE AS MUCH AS THE OTHER RESIDENCES DO.
WHAT WE'VE DONE AS A BUSINESS OWNER IS ASSESS THE SITUATION AND AND INVEST OUR MONEY, MY LIFE SAVINGS. FRANKLY, IN A BUSINESS, I HAVE SEVEN EMPLOYEES THAT COUNT ON THIS BUSINESS AND FRANKLY, IT WAS SCOOTER RENTALS THAT ALLOWED US TO STAY OPEN THIS WINTER WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE THE CRUISE PASSENGERS WHO TYPICALLY HELPED TO SUSTAIN THE BUSINESS OVER THE WINTER. WE'VE ALSO JUST BEEN THROUGH WHAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST CHALLENGING YEAR THAT I CAN REMEMBER. I'M 57 YEARS OLD.
I'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS MY WHOLE LIFE.
AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE FORTY FOUR DAYS THAT WE SAT IN OUR SHOP WONDERING WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN WAS PROBABLY THE MOST CHALLENGING TIME THAT I'VE EVER FACED IN MY LIFE.
AND NOW TO BE FACED WITH A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE FOLLOWING THE RULES, WE'RE TRYING TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT AND THERE'S THE POSSIBILITY THAT THAT ONE OF OUR REVENUE SOURCES, A SIGNIFICANT REVENUE SOURCE, IS GOING TO BE TAKEN AWAY FROM US IS REALLY DEBILITATING, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVEN'T BEEN GIVEN, I THINK, A FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO COME TO THE TABLE WITH THINGS THAT COULD MAKE IT SAFER.
WE AS A BUSINESS ARE MOST INTERESTED IN HAVING A SAFE EXPERIENCE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO PAY INSURANCE. WE DON'T WANT OUR CUSTOMERS TO BE IN HERE.
WE WANT THEM TO HAVE A GOOD TIME AND COME BACK AND SEE US MANY, MANY TIMES OVER.
SO I WOULD ASK COUNCIL TO PAUSE THE ISSUE OF THE CHANGE IN THE BICYCLE AND THE BANNING OF SCOOTERS AND EBIKES ON THE SEAWALL TO ALLOW INDUSTRY TO COME FORWARD WITH WHAT I THINK WILL BE GOOD IDEAS THAT MAY BE ABLE TO ADDRESS SAFETY CONCERNS THAT COUNCIL HAS AND THAT CITY STAFF HAS.
BUT GIVE US A CHANCE TO ADDRESS THEM WITHOUT TAKING AWAY A BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY FROM US.
WE ALL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT AND I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO GO TELL MY SEVEN EMPLOYEES THAT I DON'T NEED SOME OF THEM NOW BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO A GOOD JOB. I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO SIT DOWN WITH STAFF COUNCIL AND LET THEM KNOW WHAT OUR GOOD IDEAS ARE AND HOW WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS.
JANELLE, ANYONE ELSE, PLEASE? NEXT, IS SONYA PARETO.
YES, MA'AM. WE HAVE THREE MINUTES FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT.
GO RIGHT AHEAD. THE ONLY REASON I'M HERE TODAY IS TO OBJECT TO THE COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA ITEMS TODAY THAT WERE DISCUSSED, BUT THEY ARE NOT BEING DISCUSSED THIS EVENING FOR THE COUNCIL MEETING.
AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU WERE AWARE OF THAT WHEN MS. DE SCHAUN SPOKE IN REGARDS TO THE UPCOMING PROJECTS THAT ARE PROPOSED, THAT THEY CONTAIN FALSE STATEMENTS AND FALSE INFORMATION FOR THE PERMITTING.
AND I'M JUST MAKING RECORD OF THAT.
IF THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF SUBJECTING AND THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS WE JUST LEARNED COMMUNICATING AMONGST OURSELVES THAT WE WEREN'T NOTIFIED OF A LOT OF THE ITEMS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED. SO I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS IS HAPPENING AGAIN, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE
[01:00:04]
THAT YOU WERE AWARE OF IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.JANELLE, ANYONE ELSE, PLEASE? [INAUDIBLE] ALEX NELSON.
ALEX. CAN YOU HEAR ME. YES, SIR, WE CAN GO AHEAD.
SO I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE WORKSHOP ISSUES AS WELL.
I'D LIKE TO FIRST SAY THAT I FIND IT TROUBLING THAT KELLY DE SCHAUN BLATANTLY LIED AND TRY TO MINIMIZE SOME OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE STAKEHOLDERS ADJACENT TO STEWART BEACH.
THERE ARE SOME SIGNIFICANT ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BEFORE MAKING ANY DECISIONS ON STEWART BEACH DEVELOPMENT OR OF ANY KIND OF DEVELOPMENT AND PROJECTS, ON STEWART BEACH. WHY THE DIRECTOR OR CEO OR WHATEVER TITLE SHE [INAUDIBLE] IN THE MOMENT TRIED TO MINIMIZE THESE ISSUES IS A LITTLE SUSPECT.
I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT AT LEAST ONE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS OBJECTED TO STEWART BEACH SONYA PARETO HAD SIGNIFICANT ISSUES AND HAS A COMPLETELY DETERIORATED RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARK BOARD BECAUSE OF THEIR BEHAVIOR OVER THE PAST DECADE, PROBABLY TWO DECADE, WHICH I'VE BEEN SUBJECTED TO.
NO ATTEMPT HAS REALLY BEEN MADE BY THE PARK BOARD TO REMEDY SOME OF THE CONTROVERSY CAUSED BY THE PARK BOARD WITH SONYA PARETO.
NO ATTEMPT WAS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN APPROVING OR DENYING THAT DRAINAGE PROJECT TO ASK FOR APPROVAL OR OBJECTION TO ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS ADJACENT.
THIS KIND OF JUST ERODES, THE PARTICIPATORY PROCESS JUST TURNED INTO AN ARBITRARY MANDATE.
THERE'S NO INVITATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS TO VIEW OR SEE THE PARK BOARD PLANS, NOR ARE THE PLANS PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.
AND WHEN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE PROJECT, THEY'RE HIDDEN FROM THE PUBLIC VIEW AND INACCESSIBLE TO ALL.
THE CITY AND PARK BOARD, PLAY A LARGE PART IN KEEPING SONYA PARETO IN BANKRUPTCY FOR OVER A DECADE, WHICH I'VE PERSONALLY WITNESSED.
AND SHE'S TRIED WORKING WITH YOU.
THE PARK BOARD AND THE CITY MULTIPLE TIMES, WHICH I'VE ALSO WITNESSED.
BY THE CITY AND PARK BOARD CONTINUE TO FIGHT A FAMILY WHO'S BEEN HERE LONGER THAN THE PARK BOARD. AND MOST OF THE PEOPLE ON COUNCIL IT KIND OF BLOWS MY MIND.
MY GRANDFATHER, HENRY PARETO, GAVE HIS LIFE TO THIS ISLAND, AND I'M HORRIFIED TO KNOW THAT THE ONES WHO WISH TO SEE US PUT OUT ARE IN THE MOST INFLUENTIAL POSITIONS ON THE ISLAND. I KIND OF THINK IT'S A DISGRACE THAT PUBLIC OFFICIALS ARE ALLOWED TO MAKE FALSE STATEMENTS TO THE PUBLIC IN ORDER TO OBTAIN AND USE GOVERNMENT FUNDING TO COMPETE WITH SMALL BUSINESSES. YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS YOU SHOULD REALLY BE ASHAMED YOURSELVES AND ALSO THE OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE ALLOWING THIS TO ESCALATE.
[INAUDIBLE] I REALLY JUST YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME, IT'S MY BIRTHDAY AND I'M GOING TO GO HAVE A GOOD DINNER. SO THANK YOU GUYS FOR LISTENING.
YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
JANELLE, ANYONE ELSE? YES, PAUL LINDSTROM.
PAUL GO RIGHT AHEAD. GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. HOPEFULLY YOU CAN HEAR ME.
I JUST WANTED TO TALK WITH YOU FOR A MINUTE ABOUT THE EAST END PARKING PERMITS.
AND I SAW THAT THERE WAS A PROPOSED CHANGE IN THE PERMITTING FOR THE EAST END.
AND I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT WAS DRIVING THAT.
IT WASN'T CLEAR. BUT I WISH YOU LUCK IN THE HOPE OF THE CHANGE THAT YOU'RE WANTING TO MAKE SOLVES THE PROBLEMS THAT YOU SEEM TO BE EXPERIENCING.
I GUESS THE COMMENT THAT I WOULD MAKE IS THAT THE PARKING ON THE EAST END AND ACTUALLY ALL THROUGH THE DOWNTOWN AREA SEEMS TO BE VERY INCONSISTENT.
AND ACTUALLY, DAVID COLLINS WORKED WITH ME A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO TO IDENTIFY [INAUDIBLE] IT WAS EITHER A 13 OR 15 DIFFERENT SIGNAGE OR RESTRICTIONS ON PARKING JUST IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA.
AND I HAVE YET TO SEE ANY TYPE OF CRITERIA ON HOW THAT PARKING IS DETERMINED, YOU KNOW, AND I ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT PARKING IN GALVESTON IS A PREMIUM, SO IT'S ALWAYS KIND OF BAFFLING TO ME WHEN I SEE CERTAIN AREAS THAT ARE RESTRICTED PARKING THAT ARE UNDERUTILIZED AND OTHER AREAS WHERE YOU COULD PROBABLY WELL, IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THE PARKING THAT YOU'VE GOT AVAILABLE.
AND SO I GUESS I HOPE THAT YOUR PERMITTING I GUESS THE THINGS I'LL SAY IS IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A CONSISTENT PROCESS FOR CONTROLLING THE PARKING WHERE YOU'VE GOT SOME
[01:05:05]
[INAUDIBLE] SET UP YOUR CONTROLS, THAT YOU'VE GOT SOME WAY TO FIND OUT THE [INAUDIBLE].AND IF IT'S NOT, GO AHEAD AND MAKE A CHANGE.
AND THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO UTILIZE THE PARKING WE'VE GOT ON THE ISLAND.
I WISH YOU WELL ON YOUR EAST END CHANGES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT.
JANELLE, WHO ELSE DO WE HAVE? NEXT IS LLOYD MARTIN. LLOYD.
MR. MARTIN. CAN YOU HEAR ME, YES, SIR, WE CAN.
OK, I'M SORRY, I'M LLOYD MARTIN.
I LIVE AT 41 GRAND BEACH BLVD NEXT TO STEWART BEACH HERE.
THE FLOODING OF STEWART BEACH IS MOSTLY ALL CAUSED BY THE WAY THE PARK BOARD HANDLED STEWART BEACH. THEY HAVE NO BERMS RAISED.
THEY DON'T FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS OF BEACH ACCESS AND CROSSOVER'S.
THEY GOT NO RAISED BERMS TO GO OVER.
THEY KEEP EXCAVATING CROSSOVER'S OUT.
WE HAVE BEEN FIGHTING WITH THEM FOR THREE YEARS NOW AND EXCAVATING THE PUBLIC ACCESS WHERE THE STORM SURGE COMES IN AND FLOODS THE PARKING LOT AND THEN THEY'VE RECEIVED IT WASHES EVERYTHING UP AND THE FLOODING OF WHAT THEY HAVE PLANNED THERE FOR THE DRAINAGE DITCHES, THERE'S NOTHING BUT A MOAT THERE FOR MOSQUITO HEAVEN FOR US.
THE PEOPLE IN THE PAST IT'S JUST IT'S COMICAL TO WATCH PEOPLE WALKING TO STEWART BEACH.
THEY'RE JUST SWATTING MOSQUITOES LIKE CRAZY.
AND NOW YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A DITCH THERE THAT'S GOING TO BE ONLY A FOOT ABOVE SEA LEVEL.
IT'S GOING TO HAVE WATER IN IT ALL YEAR LONG.
IT'S GOING TO HAVE MOSQUITOES UP THE [INAUDIBLE], YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE AWAY ANY BERM NOW.
SO WHENEVER YOU GET A STORM SURGE THE PARKING LOT IS GOING TO FLOOD ALL THE TIME.
THERE'S NO BERM AT ALL SO WHOEVER THAT THEY'RE GOING TO LEAVE TO STOP, THE STORM SURGES.
THEY DO NOT FOLLOW THEIR OWN THE GUIDELINES THAT ARE PUT OUT BY THE GLO ARE NOT EVEN FOLLOWED BY THEM. AND I WISH THAT IN THE FUTURE THAT THIS PARK BOARD WOULD CONTACT US AND WORK WITH US IN COMING UP WITH SOME COMMON SENSE IDEAS INSTEAD OF JUST DOING ANYTHING THAT THEY PLEASE TO DO WITHOUT EVEN CONTACTING US.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY FOR RIGHT NOW.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MARTIN. JANELLE, WHO ELSE DO WE HAVE WAITING? SETH LEO, I'M SORRY, WHO WAS THAT.
YES, SIR. HELLO, HOW ARE Y'ALL DOING TODAY? GOOD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TO LISTEN TO EVERYBODY HERE.
I AM THE OWNER OF ZIPP E-BIKES DOWNTOWN ACROSS FROM THE TREMONT.
WE'RE PRIMARILY A SERVICE SHOP, SO WE WORK ON ALL KINDS OF BIKES AND WE WORK ON ELECTRIC BIKES AS WELL.
I LISTENED TO THE WORKSHOP THIS MORNING AND I'M REALLY IMPRESSED WITH EVERYBODY'S THOUGHT ON THE DIFFERENT SUBJECTS AND LISTENING TO THE COMMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED ABOUT E-BIKES. WE HAVE A LOT OF CUSTOMERS THAT USE E-BIKES FOR TRANSPORTATION AND RECREATION.
AND SO I AM SPEAKING REALLY ON BEHALF OF THEM AND MYSELF AND MY WIFE.
WE BOTH SPEND A LOT OF TIME RIDING OUR BIKES.
MY WIFE AND I TOOK OUR KIDS TO MOODY METHODIST ON THE SEAWALL FOR YEARS THEY GO TO [INAUDIBLE] NOW WE RIDE THE SIDEWALK ON STEWART FROM OUR HOUSE ON ONE HUNDRED AND THIRD TO GET THERE. I DROP THEM OFF EVERY MORNING ON THE BIKE.
I RIDE THE SEAWALL ON E-BIKE TO GET DOWNTOWN, A LOT OF TIMES ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S TRAFFIC.
PARKING I PLAN ON RIDING THE BIKE DOWN THERE ON SATURDAY SO I DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE.
[01:10:05]
I GUESS I'M MAINLY A BICYCLE ADVOCACY POINT HERE.AND THE, YOU KNOW, THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR EAST AND WEST BIKE LANE, THERE'S NOT REALLY ANYTHING.
THE CITY HAS DONE GREAT WITH THE NORTH AND SOUTH LANES.
I SEE THAT IT JUST GOT PAINTED ALL THE WAY FROM, YOU KNOW, THE END OF TWENTY SEVENTH DOWN TO THE BEACH. I THINK THAT'S GREAT.
I THINK THAT BOOTING E-BIKES OFF THE SEAWALL, YOU KNOW, IT CONCERNS ME BECAUSE WE USE THE SEAWALL SIDEWALK FOR TRANSPORT ON E-BIKES.
BUT IT ALSO CONCERNS A LOT OF OUR CUSTOMERS AND I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE A STEP BACKWARDS FOR THE BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE ON THE ISLAND.
AND I HOPE THAT THAT'S CONSIDERED WHEN YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT IT LATER ON TODAY, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE START.
YOU KNOW, I HEARD A COMMENT JUST A MINUTE AGO ABOUT TRAFFIC AND PARKING AND THESE LITTLE VEHICLES REALLY CAN HELP WITH THAT.
I THINK THEY'RE YOU KNOW, THEY'RE CHANGING.
I KNOW THAT THERE ARE SAFETY CONCERNS.
I THINK WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT IT'S NOT JUST THE TOURISTS THAT ARE OUT THERE USING THEM. THERE'S A LOT OF OUR LOCAL CITIZENS THAT ARE USING THESE FORMS OF TRANSPORTATION.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU ALL'S TIME AND I HOPE YOU ALL HAVE A WONDERFUL DAY.
APPRECIATE IT. JANELLE, ANYONE ELSE.
YES NEXT IS TIFFANY GIBSON. GO RIGHT AHEAD.
CAN YOU HEAR ME. YES, HI HOW IS EVERYBODY.
FINE THANK YOU. I'M STEPPING IN A LITTLE LATE HERE.
I ATTENDED THE WORKSHOP EARLIER.
I THINK THAT WE MADE A LOT OF PRODUCTIVE POINTS THIS MORNING.
I KNOW I'VE SPOKEN TO A FEW OF YOU.
MY HUSBAND AND I OWN BEACHIN' RIDES WE'RE THE GOLF CART RENTAL ON 61ST AND WE HAVE A SEAWALL LOCATION AS WELL. I DO LOVE OUR 61ST LOCATION AND WE SOMEWHAT BECOME A GOLF CART PATROL ON 61ST.
AND WE DO HAVE A NICE, SAFE PASSAGE OVER THERE ON THE WAY TO SEAWALL.
ASIDE FROM THAT, I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A TOPIC OF GREAT.
AND REALLY THE CITY OF GALVESTON AND WE ARE WORKING ON THIS AS TIRELESSLY, I THINK COLLECTIVELY. AND IT'S REALLY [INAUDIBLE] I LOST A LITTLE BIT OF SLEEP OVER IT.
IT'S IN OUR BEST INTEREST, IN EVERYONE'S BEST INTEREST TO FIGURE OUT THE SAFEST WAY TO DO IT, TO DO THIS, AND HOW CAN WE GET THERE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SUCH AN INFLUX OF CARS AND I KNOW WE'RE CONTRIBUTING TO THAT DEFINITELY.
WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH OUR PEERS IN THE INDUSTRY TO FIGURE OUT SAFER WAYS TO DO THIS. I CAN GIVE YOU EXAMPLES ON WHAT WE ARE DOING.
WE HAVE A TWENTY FIVE YEAR AGE LIMIT.
WE GPS TRACK ALL OF OUR CARTS.
I'LL SAY WE ONLY HAVE TWENTY FIVE GOLF CARTS.
IF YOU HAVE FOUR TIMES THAT AMOUNT, I KNOW THAT WOULD GET TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT. BUT AS GPS TRACKING THE CARTS HAS ACTUALLY BEEN REALLY VALUABLE BECAUSE I CAN ACTUALLY CONSTANTLY MONITOR WHERE THEY'RE AT.
I HAVE EYES ON THE SEAWALL SO IF SOMEBODY SAYS SOMEBODY IS MISBEHAVING IN A CART, I CAN USUALLY PINPOINT IT PRETTY QUICKLY.
BUT WE HAVE LESS CARTS, I KNOW, THAN SOME OF OUR PEERS DO.
SO, BUT IT IS WE'RE YOU KNOW, WE'RE WORKING VERY HARD TO GET THIS UNDER CONTROL.
I THINK IF ANYTHING, I JUST BEG A CHANCE [INAUDIBLE] YOU KNOW, SOME OF OUR OTHER AGE, I THINK I MENTIONED AGE LIMIT.
CHILDREN ON THE BACK OF CARTS.
AND AS WELL, I GET NERVOUS SEEING CHILDREN ON THE BACK OF THE CARTS, THE LAST THING I WOULD WANT TO HAPPEN IS A CHILD FALL OFF THE BACK OF ONE OF OUR GOLF CARTS.
SO YOU KNOW, WE'RE WORKING ON AGE LIMIT ON THE BACK OF THE CART.
IF THEY ARE UNDER A CERTAIN AGE BEING ACCOMPANIED BY AN ADULT, WE HAVE NO PROBLEM.
IF THEY CANNOT SAFELY RUN IN OUR CART AND WE ARE ALSO VERY, WE'RE ACTUALLY PLEASED ABOUT THE INSPECTION. BECAUSE IF YOU AND I HAVE REQUESTED RECORDS THAT IN SOME OF THE RESEARCH
[01:15:07]
THAT I'VE DONE, A MALFUNCTION OF THE GOLF CART.LUG NUT TIRE COMING OFF REALLY COMING OFF.
APPRECIATE IT. JANELLE WHO ELSE DO WE HAVE? WE HAVE A FEW COMMENTS ON THE Q&A AND THE CHAT SO I'LL READ THOSE AT THIS TIME.
FROM JOHN BALVIN I TOO AM OPPOSED TO E-BIKES AND E-SCOOTERS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE SEAWALL. TODAY I SAW ONE DRIVING TOO FAST ALTHOUGH THERE WEREN'T A LOT OF FAMILIES OUT TODAY. I WALK THE SEAWALL MOST DAYS.
NEXT IS [INAUDIBLE] I LIVE, AT 215 POST OFFICE STREET APARTMENT 901 AND MY UNIT WAS COMPLETELY FLOODED FROM SEWAGE ALSO FROM A CITY MAIN.
WHAT IS THE SOLUTION? WHAT IS THE MAINTENANCE.
NEXT IS FROM DARWIN [INAUDIBLE] I'M ALSO OPPOSED TO AN E-BIKE BAN ON SEAWALL.
THIS CONSIDERATION SEEMS UNWISE ESPECIALLY ON EARTH DAY.
TODAY THERE ISN'T A BIKE LANE OR ALTERNATIVE TO RIDING SLOWLY IN TRAFFIC CAUSING CONGESTION AND SAFETY CONCERNS.
THIS CONSIDERATION IS NOT BENEFICIAL TO THE COMMUNITY OR ENVIRONMENT.
PLEASE CONSIDER BETTER ALTERNATIVES OR OPTIONS FOR YOUR ATTENTION.
NEXT IS FROM MIGUEL ORTIZ PEDEGO GALVESTON CONCURS WITH SALT WATER SHOP ON ALL OF THIS.
OUR E-BIKES DON'T GO ANY FASTER THAN A TRADITIONAL BIKE.
THE PEDAL ASSIST FUNCTION JUST MAKES IT EASIER FOR RIDERS TO PEDAL FURTHER WITHOUT GETTING AS TIRED. AND THAT INCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT.
VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, JANELLE.
AND THANK YOU TO EVERYONE THAT MADE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
[7.A. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Amending The Code Of The City Of Galveston, As Amended Chapter 9, “Bicycles”, To Amend Regulations, Procedures, And/Or Definitions; And To Make Clarifications, Rename, Renumber And Rearrange The Chapter As Applicable; Providing For Penalties And Fees As Applicable; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; Providing For An Effective Date. (Legal)]
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM SEVEN NOW.THESE ARE ORDINANCES NOT REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARINGS.
CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, AS AMENDED CHAPTER 9, “BICYCLES”, TO AMEND REGULATIONS, PROCEDURES, AND/OR DEFINITIONS; AND TO MAKE CLARIFICATIONS, RENAME, RENUMBER AND REARRANGE THE CHAPTER AS APPLICABLE; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES AND FEES AS APPLICABLE; MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THANK YOU. THESE DO NOT REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING.
COUNCIL I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER ITEM 7 A TO ALLOW STAFF TIME TO DO RESEARCH TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL WITH THE GUIDANCE ON THIS SUBJECT AND ALSO TO GIVE THE PUBLIC TIME TO GIVE INPUT AS WE FORMULATE OUR THOUGHTS ON THIS SUBJECT.
THERE'S A SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN ROBB.
IS THERE A DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
[7.B. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Amending "The Code Of The City Of Galveston 1982, As Amended”, Chapter 34, "Traffic” Section 34-118. Regarding Residential Parking Permits; Providing For Regulations, Clarifications, And Amending Requirements; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; Providing For An Effective Date. (D. Buckley)]
ITEM 7 B, PLEASE NELLIE.CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, AMENDING "THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON 1982, AS AMENDED”, CHAPTER 34, "TRAFFIC” SECTION 34-118. REGARDING RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR REGULATIONS CLARIFICATION AMENDING REQUIREMENTS MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. VERY GOOD.
WE DISCUSSED THIS COUNCIL THIS MORNING AT LENGTH FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PARKING ORDINANCE.
I THINK WE OUGHT TO I'D LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS SO WE CAN OPEN DISCUSSION ON THIS COUNCIL.
I'LL SECOND, I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.
MOVE TO APPROVED BY COUNCILMAN COLLINS, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER.
NOW, LET'S HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THIS.
I DID RAISE MY ONE CONCERN THIS MORNING WITH MR. BUCKLEY ABOUT THE 24 HOUR PARKING OF THE RV'S.
I THINK THAT SHOULD BE AMENDED TO BE 48 HOURS TO REALLY ALLOW PEOPLE OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN AND PACK AND PREPARE THEIR RV'S FOR TRAVEL.
I DON'T WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO STORE THEM ON THE STREET, BUT I THINK IT SOMETIMES TAKES MORE THAN 24 HOURS TO MAKE ONE READY TO TRAVEL.
SO YOUR MOTION, DAVID, TO BE CLEAR, WOULD BE FOR APPROVAL WITH THE AMENDMENT TO INCREASE? THAT IS CORRECT.
IS THAT UNDERSTANDABLE DAN. YES, SIR.
AND ACTUALLY, STAFF SUPPORTS THAT CHANGE.
[01:20:03]
IT MAKES IT CONSISTENT WITH THE ALREADY EXISTING ORDINANCE RELATED TO MONOPOLIZING THE CURB WHICH IS 48 HOURS.COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER, THAT WITH THAT ADDITION IS THAT NEEDS YOUR APPROVAL.
YEP. ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, MARIE.
THERE WAS ONE OTHER THING YOU BROUGHT UP THAT WAS VERY AND ABOUT THE PERMANENT PASS.
AND THERE WAS THE BUSINESS ABOUT TRAILERS AND THEN THE VERBIAGE ABOUT PASSES AND PERMITS VERSUS JUST PERMITS.
YOU RECALL THAT THIS MORNING MR. BUCKLEY? I DO, ACTUALLY, THERE'S THREE MODIFICATIONS TO THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THE COUNCIL FOR AGENDA.
THE FIRST BEING THAT WE CHANGED THE DEFINITION OF TRAILER BY CHANGING JUST THE LEADING WORD, MAKING IT TRAILER.
AND THE ADDITION. THE OTHER ADDITION IS THE CHANGE FROM 24 TO 48 HOURS.
AND THE THIRD IS ON THE PENALTIES WHERE IT READ PERMIT.
YOU CAN'T YEAH. SO THERE WAS CHANGE.
WE ADDED PASS. WE CHANGED THE TRAVEL TRAILER TO TRAILER AND WE'RE MODIFYING 1 34 20 TO 24 TO 48 HOURS.
AND I WOULD SO MOVE THANK YOU.
SO WE HAVE THOSE THREE CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US THIS MORNING.
COUNCILMAN COLLINS HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WE SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
IT IS UNANIMOUS, THANK YOU, DAN.
MOVING TO ITEM 7 C AND 7 D, BOTH THOSE ITEMS HAVE BEEN PULLED FROM THE AGENDA.
[Items 7.C. & 7.D.]
WE MENTIONED THIS IN WORKSHOP THIS MORNING BY REQUEST OF STAFF FOR FURTHER CLARIFICATION.THEY WILL BE BRINGING THESE ITEMS BACK TO US AT A FUTURE DATE AND NOW MOVING TO.
DO WE NEED A MOTION TO DEFER THOSE.
I'M JUST ASKING IF WE REQUIRE IT OR NOT.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR A DEFERRAL OF ITEM 7 C AND 7 D.
VERY GOOD. THERE WAS THE NOISE FROM THE HEAVENS IN THIS CASE.
[LAUGHTER] VERY GOOD. SO VERY GOOD.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT COUNCIL? ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
[8. CONSENT ITEMS]
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM EIGHT, PLEASE, NELLIE, IF YOU WOULD.ITEM 8 CONSENT ITEMS. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHALL BE CONSIDERED FOR ACTION AS A WHOLE, UNLESS ONE OR MORE COUNCIL MEMBERS OBJECTS. THE CITY MANAGER IS AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS UPON FINAL APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
THERE'S ANY ITEMS WE WOULD LIKE TO PULL AND ADDRESS INDIVIDUALLY.
I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND ITEM 8 U I DECLARED A CONFLICT ON THAT.
I'D LIKE TO PULL THAT OUT FOR THE REST OF THE COUNCIL TO ACT ON THAT.
ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE PULLED.
SO. VERY GOOD, ANY OTHERS COUNCIL.
ALL RIGHT, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS 8 A THROUGH 8 T.
AND WE ARE EXCLUDING FROM THIS MOTION ITEM 8 U AND 8 I.
SECOND. I SECOND. FROM COUNCILWOMAN ROBB.
VERY GOOD. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
LET'S TAKE ITEM 8 I NOW, IF WE COULD.
[8.I. Consider For Approval Authorizing The Sale Of The Property Located At 2601 Winnie St., Galveston, Texas 77550 Legally Described As ABST 628 M B Menard Sur Lots 6 & 7 (5-0) BLK 326 Galveston, With All Proceeds Directed To The Galveston Police Department's Local Asset Forfeiture Fund To Be Used For Law Enforcement Purposes In Accordance With Applicable State Law. (V. Hale)]
NELLIE, COULD YOU READ THAT INDIVIDUALLY, PLEASE, MA'AM? YES, SIR. ITEM 8 I CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2601 WINNIE ST., GALVESTON, TEXAS 77550 LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS ABST 628 M B MENARD SUR LOT LOTS 6 & 7 (5-0) BLK 326 GALVESTON, WITH ALL PROCEEDS DIRECTED TO THE GALVESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT'S LOCAL ASSET FORFEITURE FUND TO BE USED FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE STATE LAW. VERY GOOD.[01:25:01]
YEAH.THIS IS A VACANT LOT AND I LOOKED AT THE SUPPLEMENTS, THAT WAS ADDED TO THIS AND IT SHOWS THAT THE LOT IS VALUED AT ON THE TAX ROQUETTE FOR TWENTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS AND EVERYBODY KNOWS OUR TAXES HAS GONE UP.
PROPERTY LAND IS WORTH EIGHTY 90 THOUSAND JUST ON THAT LAND THAT WE WANT TO SELL.
I THINK IT'S BEST THAT WE KEEP THAT AND NOT SELL IT RATHER THAN LEASE IT SO WE CAN GET REVENUE FROM IT. IF SOMEONE WANTED TO LEASE IT THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY OR BUILD.
WE'RE RIGHT NOW, LEASING PROPERTY FROM NEXT DOOR TO SHRIMP AND STUFF WHERE WE CAN PULL THESE PEOPLE OUT AND HAVE OUR OWN BUILDING RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM CITY HALL.
WE'RE PULLING THEM OUT OF THERE.
WE'RE GETTING NOW WITH [INAUDIBLE] THEY'RE GOING TO BE VACATING THAT BUILDING AND MOVING BACK TO THIS BUILDING. THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE BACK TO THIS BUILDING.
WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO MOVE TO DO YOU KNOW.
FOURTH FLOOR. OK, SO THEN AGAIN, I HATE TO SELL ANY PROPERTY.
YOU KNOW, I HAVE A COUPLE OF PIECES OF PROPERTY I JUST KEEP.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S ESCALATING IN VALUE.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF WE DECIDE TO SELL IT, WHAT'S THE PROCESS ARE WE GOING TO DO IS IT GOING TO BE CLOSED BID OR ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT THAT WE'RE GOING TO ACCEPT BASED ON THE SURROUNDING AREA OR ARE WE GOING TO BASE IT ON THE CENTRAL APPRAISALS DISTRICT? I'M PRETTY SURE THAT PLACED A HIGHER VALUE ON THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY.
I THINK THE PROCESS IS WE SEEK APPRAISAL FOR THE PROPERTY.
EXCUSE ME. WE SEEK AN APPRAISAL FOR THE PROPERTY AND THAT IS SET AS THE MINIMUM BID FOR THE PROPERTY BASED ON THE LICENSED APPRAISAL ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN WE CAN WE HAVE SEVERAL CHOICES WE CAN DO SEALED BID WITH IT LISTED WITH A REALTOR OR CHOICE.
THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT SALE OPTIONS ON IT.
YOU CAN HAVE A PUBLIC AUCTION, BUT I THINK THE SEALED BID SEEMS TO WORK THE BEST AND BRING THE HIGHEST VALUES. THIS WAS A LOT THAT WAS SEIZED I BELIEVE SOME CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.
IT BELONGS TO THE CITY BUT IT'S THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THEY ARE WANTING THE MONEY TO HELP BUILD A STRUCTURE TO HOUSE THEIR EQUIPMENT.
THE CITY IS UNFORTUNATELY PAYING TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY NOT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
BRIAN, WOULD YOU COUNCILMAN QUIROGA MENTIONED THAT WE MAY WANT TO KEEP THAT PROPERTY FOR INVESTMENT SAKE OR USE AT FUTURE DATE.
WOULD YOU COMMENT ABOUT IT? THAT'S CERTAINLY PURVIEW OF COUNCIL.
STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE SELL IT.
WE DO HAVE TO PAY TO MAINTAIN IT.
THE FUNDS CAN BE USED TO BENEFIT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND ALSO HOPEFULLY PUTS THE PROPERTY BACK ON THE TAX ROLLS.
WHAT WILL BE THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF EARNINGS TO THE CITY THAT THE BEST APPROACH IS WOULD IT BE AUCTION OR SEALED BIDS? TYPICALLY IN MY CAREER, SEALED BIDS SEEM TO BRING THE MOST OUT OF IT.
BUT WE DO PUBLIC AUCTIONS FOR FORECLOSED PROPERTY.
THEY DON'T SEEM TO SELL AS HIGH AS THOSE THAT SEALED BIDS.
WE'VE ALREADY HAD SOME INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY BY SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.
BRIAN. IF I COULD ADD SOMETHING I PROBABLY CAN ADD JUST A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THIS.
THIS IS DAN. THAT PROPERTY WAS AWARDED TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BY THE DEA.
THE PROPERTY IS AWARDED TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR POLICE USE THE USE IS FOR BEST FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS YOU GIVE THEM ADDITIONAL FUNDING.
THEY'RE NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF HOLDING PROPERTY.
IT REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY VALUE TO THEM.
SO THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH WOULD BE THROUGH AN AUCTION, WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. AND IF YOU RECALL THIS IS THE WAY WE SOLD THE OLD EMS BUILDING [INAUDIBLE] QUEUE, WHAT WE DID IS WE WENT OUT AND GOT MARKET APPRAISAL.
COUNCILMAN QUIROGA, I THINK YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT.
IT'S GOING TO APPRAISE A LOT MORE THAN WHAT IT'S ON THE CAP RECORDS FOR.
THEN WE PUT IT UP FOR AUCTION WITH A MINIMUM BID BEING THE APPRAISED VALUE.
SO WE EITHER GET OUR APPRAISED VALUE OR MORE, BUT WE DON'T SELL IT.
AND THEN ALL THE FUNDS FROM THE PROCEEDS WOULD GO TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
BECAUSE THAT IS PART OF THE AWARD TO THE DEPARTMENT.
THE VALUE HAS TO GO TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, IT CAN'T BE USED FOR ANY OTHER CITY PURPOSES. IT CAN ONLY BE GIVEN TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR SPECIFIED USES WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT. YOU DON'T CUT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET BECAUSE THEY'RE GETTING THIS MONEY DO YOU? NO, SIR.
[LAUGHTER] ALL RIGHT. DO SPECIFIED USES INCLUDE STAFFING.
CAN WE ADD MORE POLICE? I DON'T KNOW I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WOULD WORK WELL FOR COUNCIL MEMBER QUIROGA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, SIR? WELL, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE PICK THE BEST ROUTE TO MAXIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE
[01:30:04]
THAT'S GOING TO BE GIVEN TO THE CITY, WHICH WILL BE GIVEN TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.ALL RIGHT. SO YOU'RE IN AN APPROVAL OF THAT 8 I, BUT AS YOU MENTIONED, MANAGING THIS IN THE BEST ROUTE POSSIBLE FOR THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF MONEY.
I'LL SECOND THAT. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? IT IS UNANIMOUS.
[8.U. Consider For The Approval Of The Partnership Agreement/Contract Between The City Of Galveston And Yaga’s Entertainment Inc. For The Organizing, Promoting And Managing Of Mardi Gras 2022 Through 2024, Following The Terms As Identified In The Contract Agreement. The Term Is For Three Years, With An Option To Extend Two Additional Years. (D. Smith)]
ITEM 8 U DAVID I'M GOING TO TURN THAT OVER.THANK YOU SIR. NELLIE WOULD YOU BE KIND ENOUGH TO READ, ITEM 8 U FOR US, PLEASE.
CONSIDER FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT/CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GALVESTON AND YAGA’S ENTERTAINMENT INC. FOR THE ORGANIZING PROMOTING AND MANAGING THE MARDI GRAS 2022 THROUGH 2024, FOLLOWING THE TERMS AS IDENTIFIED IN THE CONTRACT AGREEMENT. THE TERM IS FOR THREE YEARS WITH AN OPTION TO EXTEND TWO ADDITIONAL YEARS.
ALL RIGHT. AND WE DISCUSSED THIS AT SOME LENGTH THIS MORNING.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SO THAT WE CAN GET THIS ON THE TABLE FOR DISCUSSION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND. SECOND. AND COUNCILWOMAN ROBB SECONDS THAT.
SO NOW WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION [INAUDIBLE] I DID A LENGTHY AMOUNT OF RESEARCH ON THIS AND I LOOKED AT THE LAST THREE CONTRACTS GOING ALL THE WAY BACK TO 2011.
AND I JUST WANT TO SAY I'M NOT AGAINST THE PROMOTER I'M PRO BUSINESS, BUT I WANT TO MAKE IT SURE THAT WE'RE FAIR WITH TAXATION.
I MEAN, WE'RE ABOUT TO SPEND AN AVERAGE OVER THAT YEAR PERIOD OF TIME, CLOSE TO TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY SIX THOUSAND THAT IS A LITTLE OVER A QUARTER MILLION.
NOW, IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE EXPENDITURES PER YEAR, THE PROMOTER IS GETTING MORE MONEY.
AND WE'RE NOT WE DON'T HAVE AN ESCALATION CLAUSE IN IT TO RECUPERATE MONEY TO OFFSET THE TAXATION THAT WE'RE USING FROM THE HOTEL MOTEL TAX.
THERE'S CONTROVERSY OVER THAT.
JANELLE, CAN YOU BRING UP THAT RULING FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE LAST PAGE? OK, JUST ONE MOMENT.
AND I'LL GO AHEAD. AND BECAUSE THAT'S A QUESTION HERE.
IS IT LEGAL? I'D LIKE TO HAVE ANOTHER OPINION, BUT AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS THING TABLED FOR AT LEAST ANOTHER 30 DAYS SO WE CAN RESEARCH THE LEGALITY.
ALSO, I RECOMMEND THAT THE COUNCIL READ THAT CONTRACT.
NOW, IF WE WERE TO HAVE AN AUDIT AND WE COULD SEE WHAT THE EXPENDITURES WERE, THEN THAT MIGHT BE A DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE CAN LOOK AT, BUT AS I SEE IT NOW, YOU KNOW, SPENDING, YOU KNOW, TAX MONEY OF CLOSE TO OVER A QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS.
AND BASED ON THE SUMMARY HERE FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
AND THE KEY POINT HERE IS GENERAL CITY PURPOSES IS THE SUPPLY OF POLICE DEPARTMENT, EMS, FIRE DEPARTMENT TO BE ON CALL JUST FOR THAT LOCATION.
DOES IT WARRANT THAT WE USE HOT TAXES TO PAY FOR THIS? SO THAT'S MY CONCERN.
SO I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE ANOTHER MONTH OFF SO WE CAN SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT IT AND REALLY LOOK AT THE CONTRACT.
LIKE, AGAIN, LIKE I'M SAYING, I'M TRYING TO BE A GOOD ADVOCATE OF THE TAXPAYERS MONEY AND I DON'T SEE A BALANCE THERE.
I THINK THAT, IN MY OPINION, THAT THE PROMOTER CAN PAY A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY TO OFFSET THAT QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS THAT IS BEING PAID OUT.
ALL RIGHT, MR. GLYWASKY, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON THAT? I DO, YEAH.
I [INAUDIBLE] OPINION EARLIER TODAY AND WHAT THIS IS, THIS IS THE AG OPINION THAT DOES WITH THE TRICKLE DOWN FUNDS DERIVED FROM THE CONVENTION CENTER.
AND WHAT THE OPINION BASICALLY SAYS IS THAT THE CHARACTER OF THAT MONEY CHANGE AS IT GOES THROUGH THE SYSTEM OF THE AGREEMENT FOR THE OPERATION OF THE CONVENTION CENTER. IT GOES INTO THE MACHINE AS HOT MONEY IT COMES OUT OF THE MACHINE AS HOT MONEY.
IT DOES NOT CHANGE ITS CHARACTER AS HOT.
SO, YES, HOT CAN ONLY BE USED FOR THE PURPOSES IN CHAPTER 351 OF THE
[01:35:02]
CODE. BUT I THINK IN THE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HEARING WHERE WE WON IN THE [INAUDIBLE] CASE, WE WERE ABLE TO IDENTIFY SEVERAL GRAY 51 PURPOSES THAT ALLOWED FOR THE USE OF HOT. AND THE HOTEL INDUSTRY AGREED THAT CLEARLY THIS SATISFYING THEIR FIRST REQUIREMENT AND IT PUT HEADS IN BEDS.WELL, MY COMMENT TO THAT IS PUTTING HEADS IN BEDS IS DIFFERENT THAN, YOU KNOW, THE THE CITY PURPOSES BEING SPENT FOR AMENITIES LIKE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TRASH PICK UP THE ALL THE SUPPLIES FOR THE TRASH.
SO I DON'T SEE THAT AS PART OF THE PROMOTION.
AGAIN, THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.
LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE HAS AN OPINION.
WELL, YOU ACTUALLY HIT ON ONE OF MY PET PEEVES.
YOU WILL NOT SEE THE PHRASE HEADS IN BEDS ANYWHERE IN THE HOT TAX STATUE.
THAT IS A PHRASE THAT WAS ADVOCATED BY THE HOTEL INDUSTRY THAT HAS BEEN ADOPTED BY [INAUDIBLE]. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL.
I WOULD COMMENT THAT YOU SAID, NO, WE'RE NOT IN A HURRY.
THESE EVENTS TAKE A LONG TIME TO ORGANIZE.
AND WE'RE LATER THAN WE NORMALLY WOULD HAVE BEEN, EXCEPT FOR THE COVID YEAR AND THE ISSUES WE HAD LAST YEAR.
AND NOT HAVING THAT CONTRACT, WE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE ADDRESSED THIS LAST FALL.
OTHER THAN THAT, SO THAT'S MY FEELING.
WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
WELL, I THINK THE 30 DAY PERIOD IS NOT GOING TO HURT THAT MUCH.
WE'RE AT APRIL AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LESS THAN A YEAR BEFORE THIS EVENT.
AND IT DOES TAKE A LONG TIME FOR THESE THINGS TO BE PUT TOGETHER.
I HEAR YOUR COMMENT, BUT THAT WOULD BE MY COMMENT.
ANY OTHER COMMENT FROM COUNCIL? ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THE QUESTION ON THIS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL.
THAT'S FOUR. ALL THOSE OPPOSED. 4 TO 1. I BELIEVE THAT EVEN WITH THE MAYOR AND REVEREND OR MEMBER JOHNSON MISSING, THAT PASSES SO I'LL TURN THIS BACK OVER TO THE MAYOR.
THANK YOU DAVID. ALL RIGHT, LET'S MOVE TO ACTION ITEMS, PLEASE.
[9.A. Discuss And Consider For Action A Request For Authorization To Expend Additional Funds For The Firm Of Denton Navarro Rocha Bernal And Zech Lowell Denton To Continue Representation Of The City In The Case Of Flores V. City Of Galveston. (Legal)]
NELLIE ACTION ITEM 9 A, PLEASE, MA'AM.DISCUSS AND CONSIDER FOR ACTION A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO EXPEND ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE FIRM OF DENTON NAVARRO ROCHA BERNAL AND ZECH LOWELL DENTON TO CONTINUE REPRESENTATION OF THE CITY IN THE CASE OF FLORES V. CITY OF GALVESTON.
DON, DID YOU WANT TO SAY HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS? YES, I GUESS I FORGOT TO RENAME THE ATTACHMENT BECAUSE IT SHOWED UP AS SOME KIND OF A WEIRD, NAME IN THE AGENDA BUT I SENT A MEMO ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS.
WE THOUGHT WE HAD THIS COVERED.
BUT AFTER THE ORAL ARGUMENT, COUNCIL FOR MR. FLORES, MR. STEPHENS, WHO DON'T GET ME WRONG, MARK IS A WORTHY ADVOCATE.
HE FILED A MOTION TO ABATE THE APPEAL TO SEE WHAT CITY COUNCIL WOULD DO ON THE CONTRACT YOU JUST APPROVED, AND ALSO TO FILE A BRIEF TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS POSED BY THE JUSTICES DURING ORAL ARGUMENT.
SO WE HAD TO RESPOND TO BOTH OF THOSE.
THOSE RESPONSES WERE FILED YESTERDAY ON TIME, BUT THOSE BILLING GOES TO THE END OF THE MONTH.
AND HE RECOGNIZED PRETTY QUICKLY HE WAS GOING TO OVERDRAW THE AUTHORIZATION COUNCIL HAD GIVEN HIM FOR THE EXTRA 25 GRAND, WHICH I THINK WAS TWO MONTHS AGO, AND ASKED FOR AN ADDITIONAL SEVENTY FIVE HUNDRED TO MAKE THESE ADDITIONAL RESPONSES.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE WILL BE SUCCESSFUL IN THE COURT OF APPEALS BECAUSE THE FACT THAT WE JUST PASSED THE NEW CONTRACT SHOWS THE OTHER ONE WAS MOOT.
WHEN I EXPECT THAT FLORES WILL FILE A WRIT TO THE SUPREME COURT AT SOME TIME, WE MAY HAVE
[01:40:07]
TO RESPOND TO IT. SO I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT WE ARE AUTHORIZED TO SPEND WHATEVER MONEY WE NEED TO DO TO GET THESE APPEALS DEALT WITH.ON THE OTHER HAND, IF YOU JUST WANT TO STICK WITH THE 7500, WE NEED TO DEAL WITH THIS APPELLATE CASE I WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT WE DO NEED TO GIVE THE LOWELLS SOME MORE MONEY.
I THINK LOWELL, WOULD APPRECIATE IT, TOO.
ALL RIGHT. [LAUGHTER] ANY QUESTIONS OF DON COUNCIL? SO THIS IS A MOTION OR REQUEST FOR AN ADDITIONAL 7500 DOLLARS? AND FURTHER TO DISCUSS.
THE DOCUMENT THAT DON HAS SENT US IS REQUESTING AN ADDITIONAL 7500 DOLLARS.
NOW, I THINK WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY, DON, IF COUNCIL FELT THAT IT WAS APPROPRIATE, WE COULD JUST SAY THAT WE WOULD.
GO AHEAD. WHEN [INAUDIBLE] FILES A MOTION TO THE SUPREME COURT THAT'S GOING TO COST US MORE MONEY, PROBABLY.
AND I'LL BE BACK, ON HANDS AND KNEES ASKING FOR MORE FUNDS.
SO IF YOU JUST WANT TO AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF WHATEVER FUNDS WE NEED TO GET THIS THROUGH THE SUPREME COURT, YOU COULD DO THAT.
OTHERWISE, JUST STICK WITH THE 7500 FOR NOW.
I'D MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS FOR NO MORE THAN SEVENTY FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT? I WOULD SECOND THAT. ALL RIGHT, ANY DISCUSSION, COUNCIL? IT'S VERY COLD IN HERE.
[LAUGHTER] MARIE SAYS IT'S VERY COLD IN HERE.
THE NEXT MEETING YEAH, VERY GOOD.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION, ALL THOSE OPPOSED.
IT IS UNANIMOUS. THANK YOU DON.
[9.B. Discuss And Consider For Action The Adoption Of A Policy Related To The Return To In Person Meetings And Associated Protocol Related To Public Attendance At City Committee Meetings. (Brown)]
ITEM 9 B DISCUSS AND CONSIDER FOR ACTION THE ADOPTION OF A POLICY RELATED TO THE RETURN TO IN PERSON MEETINGS AND ASSOCIATED PROTOCOLS RELATED TO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE AT CITY COMMITTEE MEETINGS. I PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA COUNCIL.WE'VE HAD SOME COMMITTEES GENERATE SOME INTEREST IN RETURNING TO IN-PERSON MEETINGS.
WHEN WE CHECKED BACK WITH JANELLE WHEN WE HAD THE MOTION TO APPROVE OUR IN PERSON COUNCIL MEETINGS, WE DID NOT IT WAS INTENDED, IT SEEMS LIKE, TO CONCLUDE COMMITTEES, BUT WE DID NOT DO THAT IN THE MOTION.
IT WAS ONLY FOR COUNCIL MEETINGS.
SO I'M BRINGING THIS BACK TO COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION OF ALLOWING IN PERSON COMMITTEE MEETINGS. PERSONALLY, I WOULD START THOSE IN MAY AND WE WOULD HANDLE THOSE IN THE MANNER THAT WE'RE DOING NOW WITH STAFF WOULD NOT BE IN ATTENDANCE NECESSARILY ON THOSE THAT THEY WOULD BE KEPT TO A BARE MINIMUM.
NO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE AT THIS POINT BE HANDLED IN THE SAME MANNER THAT WE'RE HANDLING OUR CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
YES SIR. ONE OF THE THINGS COMPLAINTS I'VE RECEIVED FROM PEOPLE, AND ESPECIALLY IF IT'S LIKE ZONING OR PLANNING, IS WHEN THEY HAVE A HARD TIME SEEING WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN WHEN THEY'RE COMMENTING.
SO THERE HAS TO BE A WAY OF RECTIFYING THAT.
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PUBLIC COMMENTERS OR PEOPLE WHO ARE PRESENTING CASES? PEOPLE WHO ARE PRESENTING CASES.
SAY YOU, WERE TOLD YOU HAD TO CALL ON BY PHONE, IF YOU'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT THE SCREEN, THE SCREEN HAS AT LEAST A 15 SECOND DELAY.
SO YOU'RE TRYING TO ARGUE A FACT OR PRESENT FACT AND YOU'RE NOT SEEING THE SAME SCREEN AS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE DISCUSSING IT.
SO THERE MAYBE IT'S IN CASES WHERE IT'S PLANNING OR IN CASES WHERE IT'S ZONING OR THINGS.
WE MAY ALLOW SOME PUBLIC IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE GIVING A OR SOME WAY OF DOING IT SO THAT THEY ACTUALLY CAN HAVE A REAL TIME PRESENTATION.
AND ALONG THOSE LINES, TOO, I VISITED WITH JANELLE THIS WEEK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE WHEN WE'RE STILL VIRTUAL OR A HYBRID MEETING, THAT WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ABILITIES LIKE
[01:45:02]
WE HAVE A COUNCIL HERE.BUT IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PUBLIC COMMENT TOO.
YOU KNOW THE ONE GUY POPPED UP FOR A SECOND AND THEN HE WAS TAKEN OFF THE SCREEN.
I KNOW WHEN WE HAVE TO SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, THE PIRATES PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, WHICH LATELY PULLS 100 OR SO PEOPLE, THEY LET EACH PERSON PRESENT THEIR COMMENT.
BUT MORE SO WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A ZONING THING OR TALKING ABOUT A PLANNING THING AND YOU CAN'T SEE WHAT THE PEOPLE ARE PRESENTING.
I MEAN, THAT REALLY DOES IT PUTS YOU IN A NEGATIVE POSITION AND IT, QUITE FRANKLY, ISN'T FAIR. NO, I UNDERSTAND.
MAKE A NOTE OF THAT [INAUDIBLE]. I HAVE HAD THE SAME COMPLAINT FROM PEOPLE.
YEAH, THERE'S A BIT OF DELAY IN SOME OF THOSE SCREEN TIMES.
IS THERE A REASON WHY WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE WHEN THEY CALL IN, WE ACTUALLY SEE VIDEO? YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW.
JANELLE, WHAT WERE THE QUESTION FROM THAT HAS BEEN POSED BY COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI? AND I THINK ALL OF US, WHEN WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS, CAN WE SEE THEIR VIDEO ALSO.
WITH THE CURRENT SET UP WITH THE WEBINAR AND THEY HAVE TO CALL.
THEY HAVE TO REGISTER IN ORDER TO ATTEND.
ONLY AUDIO IS ENABLED WHEN THEY'RE ATTENDEE WHEN IT'S BEEN TURNED TO IT MAY TAKE US A LITTLE MORE TIME. BUT WHEN IT'S THEIR TURN TO TALK, I COULD PROMOTE THEM AS A PANELIST AND THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THEIR VIDEO AS WELL AS HEAR THEIR AUDIO.
I'D LIKE TO TALK TO THE PEOPLE AT BAY AREA, HOUSTON.
I DO A HYBRID MEETING, WHICH I'M SO GLAD THEY'RE DOING HYBRID, BECAUSE I USED TO HATE TO DRIVE AN HOUR TO GO TO THE MEETING AND THEN DRIVE AN HOUR BACK.
BUT THE WAY THEIR SYSTEM AND LET'S SAY JOHN IS PRESENTING A SUBJECT AND I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR HIM, THEIR SYSTEM ACTUALLY SHOWS BOTH PEOPLE AND IT'S A ZOOM THEY'RE USING ZOOM MEETINGS ON THE SCREEN OR IT CAN SHOW THE COUNCIL AS WELL AS SOMEONE'S TALKING.
SO I'M GOING TO ASK THEM HOW THEY'RE GOING THAT DIFFERENT THAN WE ARE.
BUT AND IT IS ZOOM SO IT ISN'T ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE USING.
AND THAT WOULD BE IDEAL, ESPECIALLY IN SOME OF THESE MEETINGS WHEN A PERSON IS PRESENTING, YOU KNOW, THEIR DISCUSSION ITEM AND THEY CAN HAVE THAT UP THERE.
JANELLE, I THINK UNLESS I HEAR OTHERWISE, YOU COULD LOOK AT THAT FOR OUR FUTURE MEETINGS TO SEE ALL RIGHT. THAT WOULD BE GOOD.
AND COUNCILWOMAN ROBB SAYS SHE MAY HAVE SOME INPUT.
I'LL HELP YOU WITH THAT, JANELLE.
YEAH. WE CAN CHANGE THE VIEW ON THE DISPLAY, TO WHAT POPS ON THE WALL.
OK, THANK YOU. YES, THERE IS HOPE.
THERE IS HOPE. OH, SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT CAN BE DONE THEN? YES, WE CAN CHANGE IT TO WHERE THE VIEW IS A BIG BOX OF THE PERSONS VIDEO.
OK. IF THAT'S THE DESIRE THAT'S PART OF THE ZOOM SETTING IT'S JUST REALLY HOW YOU CHOOSE TO DISPLAY THE SETTING.
THAT WOULD BE IDEAL. I JUST KNOW THE WAY THEY DID IT WAS BECAUSE WHETHER SOMEONE WAS REMOTE OR IN THE ROOM OR IF LIKE I WAS REMOTE DAVID'S IN THE ROOM, WE COULD BOTH BE ON THE SCREEN AT THE SAME TIME.
ALL RIGHT. AND IT WAS VIA ZOOM AND THE DIFFERENT DISPLAY SETTINGS.
YEAH. AND I'LL FIND OUT IF WHAT THEY'RE USING OR IF THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
VERY GOOD. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT STARTING IN MAY, IF A COMMITTEE COMMITTEES BOARD WANTS TO MEET IN PERSON, IF THEY COULD WORK WITH THE CITY SECRETARY TO SET UP A MECHANISM FOR THAT.
I'LL SECOND THAT. SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN ROBB, ANY DISCUSSION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? IT IS UNANIMOUS.
THANK YOU. ITEM 9 C, PLEASE NELLIE.
[9.C. Discuss And Consider Appointments To The Following City Boards, Commission, And Committees: 1. Airport Advisory Committee - District 5 2. Families, Children and Youth Board - recommendation from the board to appoint 9.C. Discuss And Consider Appointments To The Following City Boards, Commission, And Committees: 1. Airport Advisory Committee - District 5 2. Families, Children and Youth Board - recommendation from the board to appoint Sheila Lidstone]
ITEM 9 C. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPOINTMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING CITY BOARDS, COMMISSION, AND COMMITTEES.WE HAVE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE, JOHN.
ANY ONE ON THAT? YEAH. I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE MIKE BURKE FOR THAT POSITION.
[01:50:03]
ALL RIGHT. MIKE BURKE, LET'S TAKE THESE SEPARATELY.ANY DISCUSSION OF MIKE BURKE FOR AIRPORT ADVISORY.
FAMILIES, CHILDREN AND YOUTH BOARD.
THIS THEY HAVE RECOMMENDED SHEILA LIDSTONE ON THAT.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE.
I'LL SECOND IT. MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER FOR SHEILA LIDSTONE, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER QUIROGA, FOR THE FAMILY CHILDREN, AND YOUTH BOARD.
ANY DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
AND WE'RE NOW TO OUR LAST ITEM.
[9.D. Consider For Action A Motion To Remove Clyde Wood From The Landmark Commission For Failure To Attend Seventy Five Percent Of The Landmark Commission Meetings Within A Twelve Month Period As Required By Galveston City Code Sec. 2-164.]
ITEM 9D CONSIDER FOR ACTION A MOTION TO REMOVE CLYDE WOOD FROM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION FOR FAILURE TO ATTEND SEVENTY FIVE PERCENT OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETINGS WITHIN A TWELVE MONTH PERIOD AS REQUIRED BY GALVESTON CITY CODE SEC. 2-164. MAYOR MAY I. YES, SIR.THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO MR. CLYDE WOOD WHO IS A MEMBER OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WHO WE HAVE CHATTED WITH.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE WE FACED THIS BEFORE IN THE PAST WHEN FOLKS FALL BELOW THE 75 PERCENT MARK. WE OFTEN GIVE THEM ANOTHER CHANCE TO MEET THAT BENCHMARK.
AND I KNOW MR. WOOD IS WITH US TODAY AND HE AND I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS AND HE SAID WAS FAMILY ISSUES, WHICH HE FEELS IS RESOLVED AND CAN ATTEND THE MEETINGS AND MAKE 75 PERCENT OF THEM IN THE FUTURE. SO I WOULD IN THAT MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER THIS FOR 90 DAYS? I BELIEVE THAT'S HOW WE TREATED IT BEFORE.
DEFER THIS FOR 90 DAYS TO GIVE MR. WOOD A CHANCE TO ATTEND THE MEETINGS.
TAKE A LOOK AT HIS ATTENDANCE AT THAT TIME.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE MOTION FOR ALLOWING MEMBER CLYDE WOOD ON THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO DEFER ANY ACTION ON REMOVAL FROM THAT LANDMARK COMMISSION FOR 90 DAYS TO SEE WHAT MR. WOOD'S INTEREST IS IN ATTENDING THOSE MEETINGS AND HOPEFULLY WILL BE ATTENDING THOSE MEETINGS. OK I'LL SECOND THAT.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT.
ALL RIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
THANK YOU TO ALL THOSE THAT ARE LISTENING.
WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL OF OUR AGENDA ITEMS. IT'S GOOD TO BE BACK.
WELCOME, COUNCIL. GOOD TO HAVE EVERYBODY BACK.
AND WE ARE OFFICIALLY ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.