6.A. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Granting A Variance Pursuant To Section 4-1 “Sales Near Schools, Churchs Or Hospitals” Of “The Code Of The City Of Galveston, 1982 As Amended” And In Accordance With Section 109.33(E) Of The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code; Regarding The Sale Of Alcoholic Beverages On Property Located At 3228 Broadway / Avenue J; Which Is Legally Described As “M. B. Menard Survey, Lots 4 & 5, Block 212, In The City And County Of Galveston Texas And Which Is Located Within Three Hundred Feet Of A School, Church, Or Hospital; Planning Case Number 21 Plm-00072; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (D. Lunsford)

[6.A. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Granting A Variance Pursuant To Section 4-1 “Sales Near Schools, Churchs Or Hospitals” Of “The Code Of The City Of Galveston, 1982 As Amended” And In Accordance With Section 109.33(E) Of The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code; Regarding The Sale Of Alcoholic Beverages On Property Located At 3228 Broadway / Avenue J; Which Is Legally Described As “M. B. Menard Survey, Lots 4 & 5, Block 212, In The City And County Of Galveston Texas And Which Is Located Within Three Hundred Feet Of A School, Church, Or Hospital; Planning Case Number 21 Plm-00072; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (D. Lunsford)]

>> ITEM 6A, CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AND ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS GRANTING A VARIANCE PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-1, SALES NEAR SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, OR HOSPITALS.

THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, 1982 AS AMENDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 109.33E OF THE TEXAS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CODE REGARDING THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3228 BROADWAY AVENUE J, WHICH IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS MB MONOD SURVEY LOTS 4 AND 5, BLOCK 212.

IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON TEXAS IN WHICH IS LOCATED WITHIN 300 FEET OF A SCHOOL, CHURCH, OR HOSPITAL.

PLANNING CASE NUMBER 21PLM-00072, MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.

[00:20:03]

>> THANK YOU, NELLY. TIM, GO RIGHT AHEAD, SIR.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU IN THIS ROOM AGAIN.

>> YES.

>> THIS IS CASE 21PLM-00072.

THIS IS A VARIANCE TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, SECTION 4-1, TO OBTAIN AN ALCOHOL SALES PERMIT IN A CONVENIENCE STORE.

SINCE IT'S A CITY CODE, IT COMES DIRECTLY TO YOU AND NOT THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AS WAS MENTIONED IN THE DESCRIPTION, IT'S LOTS 4 AND 5 OF BLOCK 212, THE MB MONOD SURVEY.

IT'S AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BROADWAY AND 33RD, ALSO KNOWN AS 3228 BROADWAY.

THE OWNER IS SHEZAD KAPADIA WITH TRI-STAR GALVESTON INCORPORATED, AND THEY'RE REPRESENTED BY CLYDE BURLESON.

THE CITY HAS ADOPTED RULES CONSISTENT WITH TABC 109-33, WHICH REQUIRES A 300-FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN ALCOHOL SALES, SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, AND DAYCARE CENTERS.

IT ALLOWS FOR A CITY VARIANCE PROCESS TO BE APPROVED.

I'M JUST GOING TO QUICKLY READ TO YOU WHAT BOTH OUR CITY CODE AND [INAUDIBLE] RULES STATE.

"IF THE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINES AFTER NOTICE AND HEARING THAT ENFORCEMENT OR THE PROHIBITION IN A PARTICULAR INSTANCE IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC, CONSTITUTES WASTE OR INEFFICIENT USE OF LAND OR OTHER RESOURCES, CREATES AN UNDUE HARDSHIP ON THE APPLICANT FOR A LICENSE OR PERMIT, DOES NOT SERVE ITS INTENDED PURPOSE, NOR IS NOT EFFECTIVE OR NECESSARY OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON, THE COUNCIL, AFTER CONSIDERATION OF THE HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC AND EQUITIES OF THE SITUATION, DETERMINES IS IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY, CITY COUNCIL MAY ALLOW VARIANCE FROM THIS PROHIBITION AS PERMITTED IN THE ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CODE." THE TABC HAS A RULE FOR MEASUREMENT, AND IT'S DIFFERENT FOR DAYCARES AND CHURCHES THAN IT IS FOR SCHOOLS.

FOR SCHOOLS, IT'S PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE.

CAN WE ADVANCE THAT, JANELLE? IT'S NOT TURNING, BUT NORTH IS TO THE RIGHT.

IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE OF THIS SITE WHERE THAT RED LINE IS, IN A STRAIGHT LINE, IT GOES BACK TO THE SCHOOL 230 FEET, THAT'S WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED AS VARIANTS FROM 300 TO 230 IN THIS CASE.

[NOISE] THERE'S ALSO A MEASUREMENT FROM A CHURCH, BUT THAT'S DONE IN A DIFFERENT MANNER, THAT'S DOOR TO DOOR, AND YOU DO THAT ALONG THE MOST DIRECT RIGHT AWAY PATH.

IN THIS INSTANCE, THERE'S THE MOUNT PILGRIM BAPTIST, WHICH IS 400 FEET AWAY.

THEN WHAT'S CALLED THE NEW DELIVERY OUTREACH CENTER AT 902 33RD, WHICH IS ONE BLOCK TO THE NORTH THERE AT 33RD IN SEALY.

AS YOU MEASURE THOSE DOOR TO DOOR, THAT'S JUST RIGHT AT 300.

SOME HISTORY ON THIS PREVIOUSLY, THIS SITE AT THIS CONVENIENCE STORE DID HAVE AN ALCOHOL SALES PERMIT AT ONE POINT IN TIME.

THEY NO LONGER HAVE THAT LICENSE.

HOWEVER, IN AUGUST OF 2019, AFTER AN EXTENSIVE RENOVATION ON THAT SITE, THEY DID APPLY TO THE CITY TO HAVE A LICENSE AND IT WAS DENIED AT THAT TIME.

THEY'RE REAPPLYING NOW.

AS OF THIS POINT, [NOISE] THE NOTICES, THERE WERE 35 SENT OUT, WE RECEIVED ONE IN FAVOR AND ONE OPPOSED.

THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT FOR THE PRESENTATION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU, TIM ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. TIM IN COUNCIL? OKAY, THANK YOU TIM.

IT IS NOW 5:24 PM.

I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 6A.

IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

>> YES, [INAUDIBLE] IS PRESENT.

>> COME FORWARD, PLEASE, SIR AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING OR MAKE A STATEMENT.

>> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS CLYDE BURLESON AND I'M ASSISTING TRI-STAR [OVERLAPPING] WITH THE VARIANCE REQUESTS THAT ARE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY.

I THINK TIM COVERED THE LAW PROBABLY BETTER THAN I WOULD HAVE DONE.

I'LL LET THAT STAND, BUT I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

I ACTUALLY USED TO BE AN ATTORNEY FOR THE TABC YEARS AGO.

THIS IS SHEZAD KAPADIA HE'S THE PRESIDENT OF TRI-STAR.

YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF STORES HERE IN TOWN, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, WE HAVE FOUR STORES IN TOWN.

>> WOULD YOU TALK ABOUT THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF BEING UNABLE TO SELL ALCOHOL?

[00:25:01]

>> SURE, WE RENOVATED THE STORE BACK IN 2019.

IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER, WE COULD HAVE SOME PICTURES OF WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE BEFORE, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE NOW, DRASTIC IMPROVEMENT WITH THE IDEA OF MAKING THE ECONOMICS OF THAT STORE BETTER.

WE'VE TRIED TO RUN IT THAT WAY WITHOUT A BEER VARIANCE AND ALCOHOL VARIANCE BUT THAT IS VERY TOUGH IN A PLACE LIKE ALLISON, ON A PLACE LIKE BROADWAY, IN A CONVENIENT STORE WHERE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A ONE-STOP SHOP.

IF YOU DON'T HAVE EVERYTHING, YOU MAY GET A CUSTOMER THE FIRST-TIME BUT THE SECOND CUSTOMER IS JUST GOING TO PASS YOU RIGHT BY.

WE HAVE THREE OTHER LOCATIONS, ALL OF WHICH SELL BEER AND WINE.

WE'VE NEVER HAD ANY COMPLAINTS, MY FAMILY, MY FATHER HAS BEEN IN GALVESTON FOR OVER 40 YEARS.

HE STARTED THE BUSINESS, I HAVE NOW TAKEN THAT OVER.

WE GAVE UP OUR ALCOHOL PERMIT BECAUSE OF THE OPERATING STRUCTURE WE HAD IN THE PAST, AND THAT OPERATOR DID NOT REQUIRE ALCOHOL BECAUSE IT WAS MORE BEING RUN AS A DIFFERENT PLACE OF BUSINESS.

WHEN WE RENOVATED THE PLACE AND EXPANDED THE PROPERTY, WE DRASTICALLY HAVE REDUCED BUSINESS BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF AN ABILITY TO ATTRACT CUSTOMERS OFF OF BROADWAY TO OUR STORE.

IT'S ONE ARGUMENT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE CONSIDERED IS THAT AROUND US SURROUNDING US, THERE ARE SEVERAL LOCATIONS THAT ALSO STILL SELL BEER AND WINE, SO THE PURPOSE OF NOT HAVING ONE NEAR THE DESIGNATED AREAS, IT'S SO THAT, THAT ENTIRE AREA DOES NOT SERVE BY THAT, BUT IF YOU'RE SERVICING THAT ALREADY BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAD ONE OR BEING DOCKED JUST FOR REDEVELOPING AND COMING BACK.

WE REQUEST AN ABILITY TO HAVE THE VARIANCE AND THAT'S CAN ALL I HAVE TO SHARE.

>> JUST BRIEFLY, APPROXIMATELY HOW MUCH DID YOU PUT IT IN THE RENOVATIONS?

>> ON THE RENOVATION ALONE, APPROXIMATELY 757,000.

>> AS THE PICTURE SHOW, IT'S A SIGNIFICANT UPGRADE FOR WHAT THE LOCATION WAS.

[OVERLAPPING] ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT EITHER OF US CAN ANSWER?

>> WELL, LET'S SEE, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT COUNCIL? ALL RIGHT, WE MAY CALL YOU BACK UP IN JUST SECONDS, SIR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU, VERY MUCH.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME. IS THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? HEARING NO REPLIES.

IT IS 5:27 PM, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 6A BRING THAT BACK TO COUNCIL.

TIM, I HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS, THIS CAME BEFORE COUNCIL IN 2019, IT WAS DENIED IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, SIR.

>> WOULD YOU WALK ME THROUGH THE PROCESS OF HOW THEY'RE COMING BACK TO US HERE, IS THIS THROUGH A VARIANCE THEY'RE REQUESTING NOW?

>> YES, THEY REAPPLIED FOR A VARIANCE, SECTION 4.1 IS OUR ALCOHOL CODE AND IT'S SILENT TO THE ISSUE OF RE-APPLICATION.

I'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT ON THIS AND THEY ARE ALLOWED TO REAPPLY, ESPECIALLY IF CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING AT THIS POINT.

>> I'M CLEAR IF WE HAVE A APPLICANT COMES AND SEEKS INITIALLY APPROVAL FOR GETTING A LICENSE AND NOT MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS, THEN IF THEY'RE TURNED DOWN, THEY CAN COME BACK AND REAPPLY IS THAT CORRECT?

>> I UNDERSTAND, IF THEY APPLY WITHIN A CERTAIN TIME-FRAME, IT'S RECONSIDERATION AND THEY CAN'T DO THAT, BUT THEY HAVE TO WAIT FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME, WHICH I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE [INAUDIBLE] TERM IS. [OVERLAPPING].

>> DAN CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT IF YOU WOULD SIR.

>> [INAUDIBLE] I THINK THE INITIAL REACTION WAS TWO YEARS AGO? IS THAT RIGHT?

>> IT WAS VIRTUALLY TWO YEARS AGO, ALMOST TWO YEARS AGO BUT A MONTH AND A HALF SHORT OF TWO YEARS.

[BACKGROUND]

>> OUR ADDITIONS ARE AGAINST RECONSIDERATION WITHIN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME ESPECIALLY WITH THE TRANSITION [INAUDIBLE].

I CAN'T COMMENT DIRECTLY OTHER THAN THAT.

>> OKAY, THEY'RE BACK REAPPLYING FOR THAT, SOUNDS GOOD. YES, MARIE.

>> THE PERSON WHO WAS OPPOSED TO IT, WHAT WERE THE COMMENTS?

>> YES, MA'AM. THE OPPOSITION LETTER STATES "THIS WOULD CREATE CONSIDERABLE PROBLEMS WITH TRASH AND UNDESIRABLES." THE ONE THAT WAS IN FAVOR, SIMPLY MARKED THE IN FAVOR BOX AND IT WAS RESIDENCES IN THE AREA.

[00:30:08]

>> ALL RIGHT, IF THERE'S [OVERLAPPING].

>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION, MAYOR.

>> YES, SIR.

>> TIM, THAT'S JUST ONE VARIANCE OF 70 FEET, PLUS 30 FEET.

>> IT'S 70 FEET. YES, YOU'RE RIGHT.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> YES DAVID.

>> CLARIFY THAT THE VARIANCE IS FOR 70?

>> YES, THERE ARE 230 FEET AWAY, THEY WOULD OTHERWISE NEED TO BE 300, SO THAT'S A 70 FOOT VARIANCE.

>> WHAT IS THE CLOSEST POINT, IS IT NOT THE BALL FIELD?

>> RIGHT, BUT IT'S PROPERTY LAND FOR A SCHOOL.

YES, THE DOOR OF THE SCHOOL IS CONSIDERABLY FURTHER AWAY.

>> MISS FAIRWEATHER HAS A COMMENT.

>> MISS FAIRWEATHER, I'M SORRY, CAME RIGHT ON IN YES, MA'AM.

>> I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY COULD REAPPLY, THIS IS A NEW APPLICATION.

THERE ISN'T A TIME-FRAME REGARDING A PERSON APPLYING FOR TABC VARIANCE.

IF THIS PROPERTY WERE SOLD, ANOTHER OWNER WOULD BE ABLE TO COME IN AND APPLY.

IT'S THE SAME ADDRESS THEY'RE REQUESTING THE SAME THING.

IN THIS SITUATION, ACTUALLY, THERE ARE SOME CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES AS WELL, SO THIS IS A NEW APPLICATION.

>> WHAT ALL THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES?

>> AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THERE'S NOW A FACILITY THAT I GUESS IS MAYBE CONSIDERED A CHURCH.

I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS, I DON'T WANT TO ARGUE FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT FROM THE STAFF REPORT, I THINK HE IS DETERMINING THE LINE, THE AMOUNT OF FEET DIFFERENTLY BECAUSE THERE IS A BALL FIELD THAT HE WOULD LIKE THE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO CONSIDER.

AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE APPLICANT, AND IT'S A NEW COUNCIL.

THE COUNCIL IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WAS BACK IN 2019.

>> DID YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON THE DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES THAT PROMPTED YOU TO REAPPLY? [OVERLAPPING]

>> WE GOT AN OWNERSHIP CHANGE AS THE BUSINESS IS PASSED FROM FATHER TO SON WE HAVE A NEW OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY.

>> OKAY.

>> WHICH IS A DIFFERENT ENTITY AND WE HAVE A NUMBER OF CHANGE CIRCUMSTANCES.

THIS IS A DIFFERENT BUSINESS MODEL THAT'S GOING TO BE RUN AT THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION.

>> OKAY.

>> IN ADDITION, JUST TO CLARIFY, I AGREE WITH THE BOTH WHAT TIM I'M SORRY [INAUDIBLE] YOUR LAST NAME BUT I AGREE WITH HOW HE SET OUT THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS.

THE PICTURES THAT I INCLUDED, WERE ONLY JUST TO SHOW DOOR TO DOOR, THAT'S NOT HOW I'M ASSERTING THE DISTANCE SHOULD BE COUNTED.

IT'S JUST MORE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES.

>> I UNDERSTAND.

OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>THANK YOU MUCH.

>> APPRECIATE IT. COUNCIL UNLESS WE HAVE MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION SO WE COULD START THE DISCUSSION ON THIS.

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL COUNCILMAN QUIROGA. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> I'VE A SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? YES, MARIE?

>> WHAT IS IT INVOLVING THE BALLPARK? I'M CONFUSED ON THAT.

>> I MENTIONED THE BALLPARK.

I THINK IT'S A BALLPARK.

WHEN THIS CASE WAS PRESENTED TO ME FOR THE ORDINANCE, PART OF THE STAFF REPORT, AS I RECALL, THEY JUST MENTIONED THE APPLICANT SAYING THE DISTANCE FROM THE DOOR, THERE'S A BALLPARK THERE, SO THE DISTANCE TO THE SCHOOL ITSELF WOULD BE MORE FOOTAGE.

BUT, AGAIN, IF THE APPLICANT IS NOT TOUTING THAT, IT'S JUST SOMETHING I REMEMBER FROM THE STAFF REPORT.

>> MAY I HAVE A SAY?

>> YES, COME RIGHT UP, SIR.

>> THE CLOSEST EDGE OF THE PROPERTY LINE OF THAT SCHOOL IS A BALLPARK FIELD.

[NOISE] IT COVERS QUITE A BIT OF DISTANCE DOWN THE STREET.

WELL, I AGREE THAT THE CODE WOULD REQUIRE A DIRECT PROPERTY LINE MEASUREMENT FROM MY CLIENT'S LOCATION TO THE CORNER OF THAT BALLPARK.

LIKE I SAID, I JUST INCLUDED A PICTURE THAT SHOWED THE DISTANCE FROM DOOR TO DOOR.

IN OTHER WORDS, THIS ISN'T AN AREA WHERE IT'S FENCED IN SCHOOL YARD AREA.

IT'S NOT WHERE KIDS ARE GOING TO BE RUNNING ON THE STREET FROM.

THAT'S WHY I INCLUDED THAT PICTURE.

>> OKAY.

>> DOES THAT ADDRESS?

>> IF I CAN SAY THAT'S A PRACTICE FIELD.

IT USED TO BE A BALLPARK YEARS AGO.

>> OKAY.

>> IT'S A PRACTICE FIELD NOW.

>> OKAY. COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION, [INAUDIBLE]?

>> WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A BETTER WAY.

[LAUGHTER].

>> JOHN, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT SAY ON THIS? VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT.

IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I'M GOING TO CALL FOR A VOTE.

[00:35:02]

OUR ELECTRONIC SYSTEM IS NOT WORKING UP TO PARSE AND WE'RE GOING TO DO A MANUAL SYSTEM ON THAT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION AS MADE, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED, IT IS UNANIMOUS.

CONGRATULATIONS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

LET'S MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENT IF WE COULD.

[7. PUBLIC COMMENT]

WE HAVE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WANT TO COMMENT PUBLICLY.

WE'RE GOING TO START WITH OUR WRITTEN COMMENTS FIRST.

WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF THOSE.

OUR CITY SECRETARY JANELLE WILLIAMS WILL BE GIVING US A REPORT ON THOSE PARTICULAR COMMENTS. JANELLE?

>> YES, SIR. I HAVE A SUMMARY OF THE WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED BY THE PUBLIC.

THE MAJORITY ARE RELATED TO GOLF CARTS.

THE FIRST ONE IS FROM JEFFREY HILL AND SHE'S REQUESTING THAT YOU CONSIDER GRANDFATHERING IN GOLF CARTS.

MS. HILL EMAILED HER COMMENTS TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL, AND THOSE COMMENTS ARE A PART OF THE MEETING RECORD.

TIFFANY GIBSON, ROBERT DAGNAN, DREW FONTANE, VICKY SINCLAIR, LISA KING, KACKLING FOWLER, AND ALMA ZIPPEDA ARE AGAINST PARALLEL PARKING FOR GOLF CARTS.

VERONICA VON BLONDE, IS AGAINST A COMMERCIAL LICENSE BEING REVOKED FOR A DRIVER OF A GOLF CART BREAKING RULES.

DREW FONTANE, DAVE LYELL, DAVID WATERS, VERONICA VON BLONDE, AND MARTHA SMITH, ARE OPPOSED TO BANNING GOLF CARTS IN THE EVENINGS.

DEBBIE MCKEE PREFERS THE GOLF CART STAY OFF OF BROADWAY AND SEAWALL.

ROBERT DAGNAN OPPOSES THE REGISTRATION COST INCREASE.

AND MONICA MARTINEZ SAYS, PLEASE DO NOT CREATE ORDINANCES THAT PUNISH GALVESTON HOMEOWNERS.

THEN WE HAVE SOME PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS, MAYOR.

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> CAROLYN BELSKY AND SANDRA CHAMBERS ASK THAT YOU PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE CITY'S PLAN TO RECONSTRUCT WEST VENE VISTA DRIVE.

[INAUDIBLE] DOHERTY REQUESTS THAT YOU ADDRESS THE DIFFERENT APPEARANCES OF 45TH STREET AND THE MODEL 27TH STREET.

CHRISTIAN CARRIERS COMMENTED ON CITY TOURISM DEVELOPMENT TAKING OVER RESIDENTIAL IN RENTAL PRIORITY.

CLAMMY HUSSEIN ARMAND PROVIDED COMMENT ON THE HOSPITAL SYSTEM AND FAMILY SUPPORT, AND LLOYD MARTIN COMMENTED ON VEHICLES ON THE BEACH.

THAT CONCLUDES THE WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JANELLE. I APPRECIATE THAT.

WE'RE NOW GOING TO OPEN UP FOR OUR IN-PERSON COMMENTS.

JUST SOME GUIDELINES FOR THOSE THAT ARE IN THE AUDIENCE, WE ALLOW THREE MINUTES MAXIMUM FOR THOSE COMMENTS AND WE HAVE A TIMER ON BOTH SIDES OF THE FRONT OF THE DIOCESE HERE THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO SEE WHAT YOUR TIME REMAINING IS.

IF YOU COULD BE SURE TO FOLLOW THAT TIME, THAT WOULD BE VERY APPRECIATED BY COUNCIL AND EVERYONE HERE.

I WOULD MENTION TOO A LOT OF YOU, I THINK, MAY HAVE COMMENTS ABOUT GOLF CARTS.

WE'RE HAPPY TO RECEIVE THOSE.

WE HAVE BEEN INUNDATED WITH COMMENTS ON GOLF CARTS AND RECEIVE QUITE A FEW.

IF YOU FEEL THAT YOU'RE REPEATING SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE SENT TO COUNCIL BEFORE IN AN EMAIL OR TEXT, FEEL FREE TO PARAPHRASE THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE GOTTEN ALL OF THOSE AND TAKING THOSE TO HEART.

ANYWAY, HAPPY TO HAVE YOUR COMMENTS.

I'M GOING TO START, AND WHAT A WAY TO KICK OFF OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS TODAY? PUBLIC COMMENTS HERE AT THE CITY OF GALVESTON WOULDN'T BE PUBLIC COMMENTS WITHOUT SHEILA BELL.

COME ON UP, SHEILA, IF YOU WOULD.

>> [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] HOW ARE YOU-ALL DOING? GOOD TO SEE YOU-ALL.

GOT SOMETHING I WANT TO SAY. I'M ALMOST THREE MINUTES ALREADY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK GOD FOR BEING HERE, KEEPING US ALL ALIVE TO SEE THIS DAY.

THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING THAT WAS IN NOVEMBER, 2019.

IF YOU LOOK UP THAT CITY COUNCIL MEETING, I SAID THE NATION WAS GOING TO BE ATTACKED.

NATION WAS ATTACKED.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.

DANIEL, CHAPTER 2 AND 29, 28 SAYS, GOD REVEAL SECRETS. I'M A WRITER.

I WROTE A BOOK IN 2011 AND IT DETAILED WHAT CHINA WAS GOING TO DO IN JANUARY 17TH, 2012.

[00:40:02]

ALL THIS STUFF GOING ON IS NOT A SURPRISE TO GOD.

IT'S A SURPRISE TO SOME OF US.

BUT HERE'S WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW, THEY'RE NOT DONE.

KEEP YOUR MASKS, GET YOU SOME DUCT TAPE.

PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID THAT IT WAS AIRBORNE, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT GOD SHOWED ME IN 2012.

LISTEN, I KNOW WHAT PEOPLE THINK ABOUT WHAT I SAY, BUT DID YOU GO THROUGH SOME STUFF IN THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF? WE ALL DID.

I'VE BEEN WARNING SINCE 2009, GALVESTON NEEDED TO BE SELF-SUFFICIENT.

ITS OWN WATER, ITS OWN GAS, ITS OWN ELECTRICITY, ITS OWN LIVE TV NEWS STATION.

DURING A FREEZE, I WANTED TO ALMOST JUST GRAB SOMETHING BECAUSE I WANTED TO HEAR INFORMATION.

WE NEED A DAILY NEWS STATION ON THIS ISLAND WHICH WILL POPULAR.

WE HAVE TOO MANY TOURISTS.

WE HAVE TOO MANY THINGS GOING ON IN THE WORLD THAT WE DON'T HAVE A LIVE TV STATION. WE NEED THAT.

THERE'S GOING TO BE POWER SHUTDOWNS, COMMUNICATION SHUTDOWNS.

LET ME TELL YOU WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS, WHENEVER SOMEONE WANTED TO ATTACK A NATION, THEY START WITH THE LEADERS. THAT WOULD BE YOU-ALL.

DO YOU HAVE SATELLITE TELEPHONES? DO YOU HAVE WALKIE TALKIES, IN CASE SOMETHING HAPPENED, AND YOU-ALL KNOW IT CAN HAPPEN, WE ALL HEAR WHEN ALL THE STUFF ALL THE RUMORS.

WE ALL SEE IN THE SAME NEWS STATIONS.

THIS IS A GOOD CITY. IT'S FULL OF THINGS. PEOPLE WANT THIS CITY.

I SAY THIS OUT OF LOVE FOR MY CITY AND THIS NATION.

THE NATION IS GOING TO BE ATTACKED AGAIN. KEEP YOUR MASK.

WE NEED A CITYWIDE LIFE JACKET PROGRAM BECAUSE OF ALL THE WATER RISING SEA LEVELS.

WE NEED TO GENERATE A PROGRAM.

WE DON'T EVER WANT TO GO THROUGH WHAT WE WENT THROUGH THE FREEZE AGAIN.

PEOPLE NEEDED MEDICAL NEEDS.

THERE WAS ALL KINDS OF THINGS GOING ON.

A CITY-WIDE BOAT PROGRAM, AN AMPHIBIOUS VEHICLE PROGRAM, BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS SOME WATER SOMEWHERE.

WE JUST HAD IT A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO.

WARNING SIRENS, NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST, AND CENTRAL GALVESTON.

NOW, GOD SHOWED ME IN A VISION, THIS WAS THE MOST PROTECTED CITY IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD.

WE'RE NOT THERE YET. WE ARE NOT THEIR.

CITIZENS, CALL, CALL, CALL, UNTIL WE ARE.

I SAY THIS OUT OF LOVE, WE HAVE THE PLEASURE OF CUTTING OFF OUR CITY IF WE WANT TO.

FORTIFY THE CITY, FORTIFY CITY COUNCIL, YOU-ALL PROTECT YOURSELF SO YOU CAN PROTECT US. GOD BLESS YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SHEILA. SHEILA IT'S GOOD TO SEE THAT YOU HAVEN'T LOST YOUR PASSION.

>> WELL, MAYOR, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BEING OUR MAYOR.

>> WELL, THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT.

>> YOU'RE MAKING SURE EVERYTHING IS [INAUDIBLE]

>> THANK YOU.

>> YOU ARE WELCOME.

>> ALL RIGHT. MOVING TO DAVID ATTAWAY. DAVID?

>> HELLO, MAYOR.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I WANT TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS ON THE ORDINANCE WITH THE GOLF CARTS.

RACHEL AND I BELIEVE THAT GOLF CARTS ARE A BIG PART OF THE TOURISM ASPECT OF GALVESTON, AND THAT IT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO MOVE AROUND THE CITY FREELY, GET ON AND OFF, AND FREQUENT MANY LOCATIONS AND SPEND THEIR MONEY IN A VARIETY OF PLACES QUICKER THAN THEY MIGHT BE IF THEY'RE IN A CAR HEADING OUT OF THE CITY, AS WELL AS IF THEY'RE WALKING UP AND DOWN THE BEACH.

WE THINK THAT THE CODES TO ELIMINATE THE GOLF CARTS FROM CERTAIN PARTS OF THE CITY LIKE BROADWAY ARE APPLICABLE BECAUSE IT'S HIGH MILEAGE DANGEROUS AREA.

BUT THE SEAWALL IS ONE OF OUR MAJOR TOURIST ATTRACTIONS HERE AND LIKE ON THE 4TH OF JULY, BRIAN CAN PROBABLY ATTEST YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE OVER 20 MILES AN HOUR ON THE SEA WALL.

WE'RE GOING TO BE JAM-PACKED.

PEOPLE MOVING UP AND DOWN IN GOLF CARTS, EITHER THOSE THAT THEY OWN OR RENT, OR THOSE THAT ARE HIRED AS SOME FORM OF TRANSPORTATION LIKE A SHUTTLE OR TAXI SERVICE, WOULD ENABLE THEM TO MOVE FREELY UP AND DOWN THE WALL AND SPEND THEIR MONEY VERSUS BEING TRAPPED.

>> CAN I INTERRUPT?

>> OF COURSE.

>> REAL QUICK. I'M RACHEL, I'M PROBABLY THE NEXT ONE.

THIS IS MY BUSINESS PARTNER AND WHAT WE BASICALLY WANT TO DO IS HAVE A SERVICE FOR TOURISTS AND LOCALS TO GET HOME SAFELY WITH KARAOKE ON A CART.

SIX PASSENGER CART.

WE'RE GOING TO DRUG TEST FOR OUR EMPLOYEES AND BACKGROUND CHECKS SO IT WILL BE VERY SAFE FOR THE COMMUNITY, AND HAVE FUN WITH IT.

BUT WE WERE TOLD NO FOR SOMETHING AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE A TAXI SERVICE.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING LIKE THAT WE JUST WANT TO BRING PEOPLE HOME SAFE, BUT WITH FUN.

WE'RE TRYING TO SEE WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO GET THAT, YES.

>> WE WOULD LIKE, LIKE YOU SAID, THE OTHER PART OF THE ORDINANCE THAT I GUESS WE OPPOSE

[00:45:02]

IS THE SEAWALL RESTRICTIONS OF DUSK TILL DAWN BECAUSE DUSK WOULD BE A BUSY TIME OF MOVING PEOPLE AROUND.

DAWN ON THE ISLAND, EVERYBODY'S PROBABLY ASLEEP, RESTING FROM WHAT THEY DID THE NIGHT BEFORE.

>> WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE BASICALLY WAIVER OR A GO PATH TO HAVE PEOPLE HAVE CART OUR CARTS AVAILABLE.

NOT NO, YOU CANNOT BE HERE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT DRINKING, WE'RE HERE TO GET PEOPLE HOME SAFE.

>> IS IT POSSIBLE TO CONSIDER A WAIVER FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLES PROVIDING TRANSPORTATION AND AN EXTENSION OF HOURS OF OPERATION UP AND DOWN THE SEA WALL.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

APPRECIATED IT. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

YEAH, APPRECIATE IT.

ROBERT [INAUDIBLE] ROBERT.

>> MY NAME IS ROBERT [INAUDIBLE] I OPERATE SALT WATER GIFT SHOP AT 1728 SEAWALL BOULEVARD, AS MOST OF YOU KNOW.

I'M ALSO HERE TODAY AS A MEMBER AND REPRESENTATIVE THE GALVESTON RENTAL ORGANIZATION.

WE'VE WORKED QUITE DILIGENTLY WITH MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THE GOLF CART ISSUE.

I THINK WE'VE MADE SOME SERIOUS PROGRESS ON IT FROM WHERE WE STARTED.

WE'RE HERE TODAY TO SAY THAT WE UNDERSTAND OUR OBLIGATIONS AS IT RELATES TO SAFETY AND PUBLIC CONCERNS.

I THINK WE'VE PUT TOGETHER A PACKAGE OF IDEAS INCLUDING MAPS IN CARTS AND THE RIGHT LANE.

I GET THAT WRONG EVERY TIME THE RIGHT LANE INDICATION IN THE ORDINANCE.

BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE NEW THINGS [NOISE] THAT POP UP EVERY TIME [LAUGHTER] THIS ORDINANCE RESURFACES, SO NOW WE'RE PROPOSING $250 AS A FEE.

WE FEEL AS AN ORGANIZATION THAT THAT'S EXORBITANT WHILE WE UNDERSTAND WE NEED TO PAY SOMETHING ADDITIONAL.

OUR GROUP WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST STARTING OUT AT MAYBE A $100.

LET'S SEE HOW MUCH REVENUE BROUGHT IN BY THE PENALTIES THAT WILL BE ASSESSED BY THE MARSHALL AND SEE IF THAT ISN'T SUFFICIENT ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THE ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS.

THE OTHER THING THAT'S COME UP IN THE MOST RECENT ORDINANCE IS THE NIGHTTIME BAN ON SEAWALL BOULEVARD.

AS WE DISCUSSED THIS AFTERNOON, WE ARE OPPOSED TO THAT.

THAT WOULD MOST SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT US IN OUR HARDEST MONTHS TRYING TO SURVIVE AS A BUSINESS SO, OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER, JANUARY, THOSE NIGHT-TIME RENTALS ARE A SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF OUR REVENUE AND BY NOT HAVING THAT REVENUE, I THINK IT WOULD IMPACT A LOT OF THE BUSINESSES.

I HAVE THE JOY OF RUNNING A GIFT SHOPS, SO I HAVE SOME OTHER REVENUE, BUT THERE ARE BUSINESSES HERE ON THE ISLAND THAT ONLY DO GOLF CARTS AND I THINK THEY WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED.

WE ALL KNOW RATHER WE WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT OR NOT, THAT SEAWALL BOULEVARD IS THE DRAW AND I THINK THERE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES PUSHING CARTS BACK INTO THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

I'VE SAID THAT I THINK TO EACH ONE OF YOU INDEPENDENTLY THAT I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD ANSWER, AND I THINK THAT IS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF I'M GOING TO RENT A CAR.

I FEEL MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE HAVING IT ON SEAWALL BOULEVARD WHERE IT'S WELL-LIT, IT'S WELL MAINTAINED AND BY PUSHING THEM INTO NEIGHBORHOODS, I THINK WE'D BE CAUSING ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS. OUR POSITION IS AS A GROUP THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE THAT FEE IT A $100 MAYBE FOR THE FIRST YEAR AND COME BACK AND RE-EXAMINE IT.

THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PROHIBITION AGAINST NIGHTTIME DRIVING ON SEAWALL BOULEVARD REMOVED.

OTHER THAN THAT, WE THINK THE ORDINANCE IS IN GOOD ORDER AT THIS POINT.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

APPRECIATE IT. MR. ALEXANDER NELSON.

>> HOW ARE YOU GUYS DOING COUNCIL?

>> GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> [INAUDIBLE] A DESCENDANT OF AN HENRY PETER PORRETTO JUNIOR.

I'D LIKE TO BRING UP SOME OF THE NON-AGENDA ITEMS OF BEACH ACCESS BECAUSE THE CITY AND THE PAPER INTENTIONALLY KEEPING THE PORRETTO BEACH ISSUES QUIET.

THE STEWART BEACH DRAINAGE PROJECT, I'VE BEEN HERE TO HELP PROMOTE BEACH ACCESS, BUT AS A RESULT, IT'S COMPLETELY FLOODED OUT PORRETTO BEACH AND OTHER ADJACENT AREAS OF STEWART BEACH.

IN FACT, MS. PORRETTO AND OTHERS RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROJECTS BEING ILL CONCEIVED.

YET YOU ALL CONTINUED AND DID NOTHING MEANWHILE, PORRETTO BEACH IS CONTINUALLY FLOODING.

I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT DONALD GLYWASKY, THE CITY ATTORNEY, APPEARS TO BE UNAWARE THAT PORRETTO BEACH AND STEWART BEACH ARE ADJOINING PROPERTIES, HE BELIEVES THEY'RE HALF A MILE AWAY FROM EACH OTHER.

THESE ISSUES WITH BEACH ACCESS ARE THE SAME ONES THAT SONYA PORRETTO HAS BEEN BRINGING UP FOR YEARS AND HAS BEEN RETALIATED AGAINST FOR.

[00:50:01]

[NOISE] THERE'S BEEN HORRIFIC RUMORS SPREAD, DISGUSTING NAMES CALLED AND VICIOUS AD HOMINEM ATTACKS COMING FROM CITY OFFICIALS AGAINST MY MOTHER, SONYA PORRETTO, WHO I'M EXTREMELY PROUD OF FOR ENDURING THIS DISGUSTING TREATMENT AND BEHAVIOR.

BUT THIS IS A GENERAL RETALIATION TACTIC LIKE FLOODING OUR PROPERTY.

THE CITIZENS HAVE BEEN ACCUSTOMED TO IT.

I'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS FOR Y'ALL.

JUST MAYBE YOU CAN SIT ON THEM.

WHAT ARE COUNCIL MEMBERS DOING TO OVERSEE THE MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC BEACHES BY THE PARK BOARD? HAVE ANY GONE OUT AND SEEING THE DIRECT RESULT AFTER DAYS OF CONSTRUCTION, THE FLOODING OF NEARBY PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS? WHAT IS OR WILL BE DONE IN THE NEAR TERM TO STOP THE FLOODING OF PRIVATE PROPERTY? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I'M REALLY GLAD TO BE OUT HERE.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU GUYS SEE THE CONSTITUENTS FACE NOT BEHIND THE SCREEN.

>> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. APPRECIATE IT.

MS. RACHEL WEST.

>> I HAVE ONE MORE THING. I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT I WENT TO THE SEAWALL AND TO THE STRAND.

AGAIN, I'M NEW HERE, SO I DON'T KNOW ALL THE TERMS THAT ARE VERY STRAIGHT, BUT I HAD THREE FULL FRONT-TO-BACK SIGNATURES OF PEOPLE THAT THINK OUR IDEA IS A WONDERFUL IDEA.

I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOING TO JUST HELP AGAIN THE COMMUNITY.

I'M HOPING WE GET A GUEST FROM THE MARSHALL, RIGHT? HE WAS THE ONE THAT IS A TOUGH ONE.

I CAN'T WAIT TO MEET HIM, [LAUGHTER] SO JUST A THOUGHT.

>> THANK YOU, RACHEL. WE APPRECIATE IT.

BRETT VON BLON.

>> SORRY, I STARTED SPEAKING BEFORE I GOT YOU.

I'M BRETT VON BLON AND I STARTED THE PROBABLY THE NEWEST GOLF CART RENTAL COMPANY.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE NEWEST.

ANYWAY, IT'S THE [INAUDIBLE] TO GOLF CARTS.

WE ARE LOCATED DOWNTOWN.

WE INTEND TO BE ON BROADWAY, OUR FRONT TO ALL BE ON 22ND STREET.

ANYWAY, I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT BURT IS SAYING.

I THINK REVAMPING OF THE EXISTING ORDINANCE IS VERY CRITICAL.

I AGREE WITH PRETTY MUCH MOST OF IT.

ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES I HAVE, WHICH I'VE OBVIOUSLY EMAILED ALL YOU GUYS, IS THE FEE OF $250.

THAT USED TO BE $25.

IT SEEMS THAT PEOPLE ARE BELIEVING THAT THE COMMERCIAL RENTAL COMPANIES ARE THE ONES THAT ARE CREATING ALL THE PROBLEMS. I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THAT.

ALTHOUGH I DO KNOW THAT THEY ARE CREATING SOME OF THE PROBLEMS, I THINK SOME RENTAL COMPANIES MIGHT BE DOING IT MORE THAN OTHERS.

WITH OUR GOLF CARTS, WE HAVE STICKERS IN OUR GOLF CART THAT SAYS STAY IN THE RIGHT LANE, SLOWER TRAFFIC, STAY IN THE RIGHT LINE.

WE HAVE SEAT BELT. EMBLEM ALREADY IN.

WE DON'T NEED AN ORDINANCE TO TELL US TO DO THAT.

WE'RE TRYING TO BE GOOD CITIZENS, DO GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICE.

WE ALWAYS GIVE AN ORIENTATION BEFORE SOMEONE TAKES OFF IN THE GOLF CART.

WE HAVE A MAP JUST LIKE BURT'S SAY'S I KNOW, HE HAS A MAP.

I KNOW TIFFANY HAS A MAP.

THERE'S A LOT OF US THAT ARE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING HERE.

I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE GOING FROM $25 TO $250.

I AGREE WITH BURT.

WE'VE TALKED AS COMMERCIAL OWNERS, WE'RE OKAY WITH A HIGHER PRICE AND A PRIVATE OWNER.

WELL, BUT GOING TENFOLD FROM 25 TO 250, WE THINK THAT'S RIDICULOUS.

THAT'S ABOUT IT. I DON'T NEED MUCH THREE MINUTES.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT.

ASLAM [INAUDIBLE] ALL RIGHT.

TERESA ELLIOT, TERESA.

NICE TO SEE YOU, TERESA.

>> GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL TOO, MAYORS, CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

I KNOW THIS IS NOT PROBABLY THE PINNACLE OF YOUR CAREER IN REVENUES, AT LEAST.

SO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US ALL TO SPEAK.

I'M REALLY GOING TO TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT, THE FIRST, I DON'T THINK THAT YOU'D HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER IMPLEMENTING, BUT YOU CAN HELP US COMBAT.

IT'S THE APPRAISAL VALUES.

SOME OF US HAVE HAD OVER 300 PERCENT INCREASES, AND THIS IS JUST UNREALISTIC AND OBVIOUSLY THE SYSTEM'S BROKEN.

APPRAISAL REFORM HAS BEEN QUITE A FEW BILLS WERE

[00:55:01]

FILED THIS PAST SESSION AND DIDN'T MAKE IT THROUGH.

WHAT I'M GOING TO ASK YOU GUYS TO DO, AND I KNOW THAT THE CHAMBER AND COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR, CHERYL JOHNSON, ARE ADVOCATING FOR APPRAISAL REFORMED TO BE ADDED TO THIS SPECIAL SESSION AGENDA.

I'D REALLY APPRECIATE IF YOU GUYS, AND I'M SPEAKING AS A CONSTITUENT, AS A RESIDENT, I'LL APPRECIATE IF YOU ALL WOULD WRITE THE GOVERNOR, AND ALSO, I'VE GOT A LIST OF OTHER REPRESENTATIVES THAT YOU CAN WRITE.

I'D LOVE IT IF THE COUNCIL WOULD MAKE A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING APPRAISAL REFORM TO BE PUT ON THE SPECIAL SESSION AGENDA, SPECIFICALLY, HOUSE BILL 1568 BY REPRESENTATIVE MIDDLETON.

THAT'S A PRETTY QUICK TARGET FIX.

WE JUST CAN'T WAIT TWO YEARS FOR THIS TO HAPPEN AGAIN.

THE NEXT ITEM THAT YOU CAN AND YOU DO HAVE DIRECT IMPACT OVER IS THE TAX RATE THAT YOU ADOPT FOR YOUR UPCOMING BUDGET.

WITH APPRAISALS GOING SO CRAZY, YOU COULD LEAVE THE TAX RATE EXACTLY LIKE IT IS AND YOU'D HAVE A TON OF NEW REVENUE.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT MY BUSINESS, WE HAVEN'T HAD A TON OF NEW REVENUE COMING IN, ESPECIALLY OVER THE LAST YEAR.

I'VE HAD TO CREATIVELY MANAGE, AND CUT EXPENSES, AND BE EXTREMELY PRUDENT, AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED OUR CITY TO DO TOO.

I THINK YOU'LL DO A GREAT JOB OVERALL.

YOU DON'T SEE ME UP HERE VERY OFTEN.

I'M ASKING FOR HELP AT THIS POINT.

I HOPE THAT ALL OF OUR CITIZENS WILL DO THE SAME THING AND LET YOU GUYS KNOW THAT YOU ARE GOING TO GET ADDITIONAL REVENUES EVEN IF YOU ADOPT A LOWER TAX RATE SO THAT YOUR CURRENT TAX BILLS STAY THE SAME BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES COMING ONTO THE ROLES.

YOU WILL HAVE TO SEE ADDITIONAL REVENUES, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT THAT RATE WAY DOWN AND YOU ALL CAN BE HEROES AND REALLY, REALLY HELP OUR RESIDENTS OUT.

TWO OTHER ITEMS THAT I WASN'T PLANNING ON TALKING ABOUT, BUT SINCE I'M HERE, THE GOLF CARTS.

THANK YOU FOR MARIE ROBB, ESPECIALLY FOR AGREEING TO MEET WITH THE BUSINESS OWNERS AND DISCUSS THIS BEFORE, AND ORDINATES IS CREATED, AND YOU'LL VOTE ON IT.

THAT COMMUNICATION THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE STAKEHOLDERS IS CRUCIAL.

I WANTED TO SAY PLEASE APPOINT ALL THE PART WHERE REPRESENTATIVES THAT ARE REAPPLYING, THEY'RE GREAT SLATE, AND THANKS TO THE PART BOARD MEMBERS WHO WOULD DO SUCH A GREAT JOB.

>> THANK YOU, TERESA. APPRECIATE IT.

CHARLES BURLISON.

[INAUDIBLE] GEORGIANA MULLINS.

>> I DIDN'T THINK I WAS GOING FIRST.

I'M GEORGIANA MULLINS.

I LIVE AT 56 CEDAR LAWN CIRCLE.

I HAD BEEN DISTRESSED BY THE LIGHTS ON 45TH.

THEY'RE NOT RIGHT, THEY'RE NOT WHAT WE WERE TOLD.

THEN THE PLANTS, WHEN WE LIVE ON THE STREET WITH TOM THUMB NURSERY, ISN'T IT A SHAME THAT WE HAVE THOSE PITIFUL PLANTS AND I KNOW PEOPLE HAVE THEM IN THEIR YARD AND THAT'S YOUR CHOICE, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE THE NICEST NURSERY ON THE ISLAND ON 45TH STREET, I HAVE TALKED TO SEVERAL BUSINESS OWNERS ALONG 45TH AND THE BUSINESSES THAT HAVE HAD TO DEAL WITH THE PANDEMIC AND ALL OF THE ROAD CONSTRUCTION IS REALLY PAINFUL, AND TO SEE WHAT WE ENDED UP WITH, WHICH WAS NOT WHAT WE WERE TOLD.

BUT I THINK I THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, AND I THINK OUR COUNCILMEN FOR OUR AREA IS GOING TO SPEAK TO THIS AND THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

LARRY FRISSON.

>> [NOISE] CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

MY NAME IS LARRY GRISSOM.

I'M THE PRESIDENT OF CEDAR LAWN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.

MY QUESTIONS ARE REGARDING NOT ONLY THE RESTORATION OF 45TH STREET, BUT MAINLY THE LIGHTS THAT WERE INSTALLED.

[NOISE] NOT REALLY EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE TOLD BY THE CITY THAT WAS GOING TO BE INSTALLED.

THE LIGHTS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY TALLER, SOME OF THEM ARE AS TALL AS SOME OF THE HIGH LINES, SOME OF THEM ARE UP IN THE TREES, SOME OF THEM ARE BENT OR NOT BENT, BUT LEANING BECAUSE I BELIEVED THE BASIS TO WHAT THE POLLS ARE SET ON OR NOT ADEQUATE.

I THINK THEY WERE BUILT, IN MY OPINION, FOR A SHORTER POLE, SO IT BRINGS A SAFETY ISSUE TO MIND FOR US AS WELL AS A LOT OF OUR RESIDENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

[NOISE] A SPOKESMAN FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, I'VE HAD A LOT OF FOLKS CALLING, EMAILING,

[01:00:01]

ASKING THAT WE FIND OUT WHAT FEEDBACK WE CAN GET FROM THE CITY AS FAR AS WHAT WE COULD EXPECT TO HAVE DONE ABOUT THE POLES, MAYBE REPLACING THEM, REUSING THEM UP ON BROAD UPON THE SEAWALL WHERE THEY MIGHT ACTUALLY LOOK MORE APPROPRIATE FROM THAT.

ANYWAY, THAT'S ALL I HAD, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, APPRECIATE IT.

JIM CLAFFY.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, MR. MAXWELL.

MY NAME IS JIM CLAFFY, AND I LIVE IN A 8 CEDAR LAWN CIRCLE, AND I SERVE ON THE CEDAR LAWN BOARD, AND MY HOUSE BACKS UP TO 45TH STREET.

I'M HERE TODAY TO EXPRESS MY FEELINGS ABOUT THE 45TH STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.

FIRSTLY, BEFORE THE PROJECT BEGAN, WE WERE EXCITED TO HEAR THAT THE DESIGN WAS PATTERNED AFTER A SIMILAR EFFORT ON 27TH STREET.

THIS IS BECAUSE 27TH STREET LOOKS QUAINT, IS PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FRIENDLY, AND HAS NICE LANDSCAPING AND TASTEFUL LIGHTING.

AS THE 45TH STREET PROJECT BEGAN AND QUESTIONS AROSE, WE WERE REPEATEDLY ASSURED THAT WE COULD LOOK TO 27TH STREET AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE PLANS FOR 45TH STREET.

FOR OVER TWO YEARS, WE PUT UP WITH THE MASS LIMITED ACCESS AND PROPERTY DAMAGE THAT CAME ALONG WITH THE EFFORT.

THE PROSPECT OF A BEAUTIFUL RESULT WITH IMPROVED DRAINAGE THOUGH KEPT ME FOCUSED ON THE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL.

NOW THAT THE PROJECT IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETE, I AM LET DOWN BY THE RESULT.

FOR MYSELF, THE LIGHTS THAT WERE INSTALLED A WEEK AGO WHERE THE BIGGEST DISAPPOINTMENT.

THE LIGHT POLES APPEAR TO BE ABOUT 20 FEET TALL, WHICH IS HIGHER THAN THOSE ON 27TH.

AS A RESULT, THE LIGHTS THEMSELVES ARE AT THE SAME HEIGHT AS THE NUMEROUS UTILITY LINES THAT RUN DOWN THE STREET.

IN OUR YARD, THE LOCATION OF THE LIGHT POLE ACTUALLY COMES VERY CLOSE TO THE ELECTRIC POWER LINE, AND THIS ENCROACHED ON A LARGE OAK TREE IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE LIGHT IS BLOCKED AND THE TREE IS DAMAGED.

IN FACT, SOME OF THE NEWLY INSTALLED LIGHTS [NOISE] ARE IN CONTACT WITH UTILITY WIRES.

ALSO, OLD COBRA STYLE LIGHTS REMAINED IN PLACE AND ONLY ADD TO THE VISUAL CLUTTER.

IN MY OPINION, THE END RESULT BRINGS TO MIND AN INDUSTRIAL PARK INSTEAD OF A CITY STREET, AND IT APPEARS WE BOTH HAVE SAFETY AND UTILITY RELIABILITY CONCERNS.

ADDITIONALLY, THE LANDSCAPING WAS INSTALLED AS PART OF THE PROJECT IS A MESS.

THE BEDS ARE FULL OF CRABGRASS AND OTHER WEEDS IN THE MULCH WAS WASHED AWAY DUE TO A RAIN OF LESS THAN AN INCH OF PRECIPITATION AND DEPOSITED IN THE STREET.

IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO PLANT SOME WANDERING JEW AND WALK AWAY.

A REGULAR MAINTENANCE WILL BE REQUIRED, AND I AM LEFT TO WONDER IF IT WILL BE UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL NEIGHBORS OR HOMEOWNERS TO DO THIS WORK, IF SO, YOU CAN BE SURE OF SPOTTY RESULTS.

DOING A RECENT EMAIL EXCHANGE WITH MYSELF, MINISTERS MAXWELL, BROWN, AND [INAUDIBLE] , IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME THAT 45TH HAS A CORRIDOR CONNECTING BROADWAY WITH SEAWALL, AND AS SUCH REQUIRES SPECIAL CONSIDERATION FOR LIGHTING AND SAFETY.

IF THAT WERE THE CASE, THOUGH, THE PROJECT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PATTERNED AFTER 27TH STREET AND THE RESIDENTS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN TOLD AS MUCH.

THIS NARRATIVE HAS LED TO DISAPPOINTED RESIDENTS AND A FEELING THAT A LOT OF MONEY, TIME, EFFORT, INCONVENIENCE, AND FRUSTRATION DID NOT PAY THE DIVIDENDS WE WERE EXPECTING.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TOO.

>> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

WIS DOROTHY. WIS.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, GOOD AFTERNOON.

MY NAME IS WISTE DOHERTY.

WE LIVE AT 77 CEDAR ON SOUTH AND HAVE BEEN THERE FOR ABOUT 43 YEARS NOW.

THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME IN HEARING CONCERNS ABOUT THE 45TH STREET CORRIDOR.

AS WE ALL KNOW, GALVESTON ISLAND IS UNIQUE, AND CELEBRATING THIS UNIQUENESS IS ITS STRONGEST ASSET.

THE WELL-TRAVELED CORRIDORS LINKING SEAWALL BOULEVARD AND BROADWAY DISPLAY THE PRIDE THAT WE SHARE AS TAXPAYERS, CONCERNED CITIZENS, AND CITY COUNCIL.

THESE CORRIDORS HAVE A STREET STYLE AND SCALE REFLECTING OUR UNIQUENESS.

THE 27TH STREET CORRIDOR CORDIALLY INVITES THE TRAVELER, A GLIMPSE OF THIS CIVIC PRIDE.

45TH STREET WAS PROMISED THE SAME STREET STYLE AND SCALE IN ADDITION TO THE MUCH-NEEDED DRAINAGE.

IT IS THIS STREET STYLE AND SCALE THAT SHOULD REPRESENT AMBITIONS AND LONG-TERM NEEDS OF CURRENT BUSINESSES AS WELL AS NEW BUSINESSES.

THE LAMP POST DO NOT SHARE THE HARMONY OF SCALE.

THIS CAN BE FIXED.

[01:05:02]

IN DOING SO, THIS ACTION WOULD RESTORE THE PRIDE OF THOSE TRANSVERSING THIS CORRIDOR DAILY, THOSE WHO INFREQUENTLY TRANSVERSE THIS CORRIDOR, NEW VISITORS TO THE ISLAND, AND THOSE WHO WOULD SEE A BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY ON THE 45TH STREET CORRIDOR.

PLEASE, SERIOUSLY HONOR THE REQUEST TO CORRECT THE LAMP POST SCALE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, WISTE, APPRECIATE IT.

MIKE, WE HAD YOUR BETTER HALF GO FIRST, NOW WE'LL CALL ON YOU.

[LAUGHTER] MIKE DOHERTY.

>> YOU REALLY GOT TO WATCH YOUR CLOCK ON ME [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] BY THE WAY, I WAS IN YOU GUYS' PLACE A FEW YEARS AGO AND I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO.

I'M GOING TO SKIP MY EARLY PART OF THE COMMENTS.

I THINK EVERYTHING WAS THERE NEAR SAID.

BUT BEING THE OLD GUY ON THE BLOCK, I WANTED TO GIVE SOME BACKGROUND.

WHEN THE 45TH STREET PROJECT WAS FIRST DISCUSSED AS EARLY AS WHEN I WAS ON COUNCIL A FEW YEARS AGO, WE WERE TOLD WE'LL LOOK LIKE 27 STREET.

LATER WHEN I WAS OFF COUNCIL, THERE WAS A MEETING TO DISCUSS THE PROJECT.

AGAIN, WE WERE TOLD THE NEW STREET WOULD BE THE SAME AS 27TH, THAT BEING BUMP OUTS AT THE CORNERS, A CEMENT STREET, MID-HEIGHT STREET LIGHTS, WHICH EVERYONE LIKED.

A PRIOR COUNCILMAN TOLD ME RECENTLY THAT WAS HIS UNDERSTANDING ALSO UP TO HIS LAST DAY.

YOU CAN SEE THE SURPRISE WE ALL FELT WHEN THE TALL LIGHTS BEGAN GOING UP.

ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS SPOKE ON THE PHONE [NOISE] TO A CITY EMPLOYEE AS WORK BEGAN, AND THE EMPLOYEE TOLD THE NEIGHBOR, "THE CITY WAS AS SURPRISED AS YOU WERE WHEN THE LIGHTS BEGAN TO GO UP AND THEN OTHERS FROM THE CITY HAVE SORTED SECONDED THAT." NOW, THE CONTRACT FROM THE CITY IN CENTERPOINT AND WAS DATED MARCH OF 2019.

THERE IS A SENTENCE IN THAT THAT READS, "BY SIGNING BELOW, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE REQUESTED A STREET LIGHTING SYSTEM THAT IS OF YOUR OWN DESIGN AND NOT THE DESIGN OFFERED BY CENTERPOINT ENERGY," AND IT'S SIGNED BY THE CITY.

YOU CAN SEE OUR FRUSTRATION IN THE MATTER.

THE DEAL WAS MADE IN 2019 AND THE TWO COMMUNICATION WAS JUST TERRIBLE, TOTAL LACK OF COMMUNICATION, EVEN THOUGH WE REALLY HAD DISCUSSIONS, REALLY HAD TO PUSH SOMEONE THAT'S CEMENT STREET AND ALL THIS AND WE REALLY PUSHED FOR ALL THESE THINGS.

NOW IT'S TIME FOR THE CITY TO CORRECT THIS MISTAKE AND DELIVER THE PROMISE THAT WAS MADE TO MAKE 45TH LOOK LIKE 27TH STREET AND LOOK LIKE A LOT OF OTHER AREAS AROUND TOWN WHERE THESE MEDIUM HEIGHT LIGHTS ARE, SOME OF THESE NEWER MIXED-INCOME HOUSING HAVE IT, THIS ORCHARD DISTRICT HAS IT.

WE REQUEST THE COUNCIL'S SUPPORT ON THIS TO SEE WHERE WE CAN GO TO CORRECT THIS.

EARLY ON I WAS GOING TO SAY IT JUST DAMAGES THE IMAGE OF THE CITY FOR US.

IT'S JUST NOT ABOUT CEDAR LAWN, IT'S ABOUT THE IMAGE.

45TH HAS GOT SOME PROBLEMS ANYWAY WITH DIFFERENT BUSINESSES, AND NOW THIS, YOUR EYES GO TO THE TOP OF THE LIGHT AND ALL YOU SEE ARE THESE DARN WIRES.

IT'S JUST VERY TACKY-LOOKING. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MIKE. DANSY WEAH. DANSY?

>> THANK YOU ALL.

MAYOR, MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL, I'M DANSY WEAH.

MY HUSBAND AND I RESIDE AT NUMBER 84 CEDAR LAWN.

WE ALSO HAVE OTHER PROPERTY IN CEDAR LAWN WHERE MY DEAR MOTHER LIVES AS WELL.

BUT THIS IS NOT ABOUT CEDAR LAWN.

WE ARE GREAT CARETAKERS OF OUR BELOVED NEIGHBORHOOD AND OUR HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THIS IS ABOUT 45TH STREET.

I WAS SO PROUD OF ALL OF YOU TODAY ON COUNCIL AND THE FOCUS YOU HAVE ON IMPROVING THE BUSINESS CLIMATE IN OUR CITY.

IT'S SO EASY TO SAY TODAY VIA COMMENTS AND I COULD TELL BY SOME OF THE BODY LANGUAGE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND YOU MAYOR PARTICULARLY ABOUT HELPING THE LOCAL BUSINESSES.

I CAN'T THINK OF ANOTHER MORE IMPORTANT PROJECT THAN RESTORING GOODWILL AND SUPPORT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE BUSINESSES ALONG THE CORRIDOR OF 45TH.

THEY HAVE SUFFERED IMMEASURABLY.

MY DEAR FRIENDS AT THE NURSERY WHO WERE MENTIONED EARLIER, BUT THE OTHER SMALL RESTAURANTS AND SHOPS, AND JUST IMAGINE WHAT A STREETSCAPE LIKE THE ONE WE WERE PROMISED IN 2019 ON 27TH STREET HAD ACTUALLY BEEN IMPLEMENTED ON 45TH.

I THINK WE WOULD NOW BE A MECCA, AND I'LL SAY THAT TO THE CITY MANAGER,

[01:10:02]

A MECCA FOR ATTRACTING NEW SMALL BUSINESSES TO 45TH STREET, TO AN IMPROVED STREETSCAPE, A CORRIDOR THAT IS FINE, NOT BLIGHTED.

WE HAVE HAD A HUGE INVESTMENT BY ALL OF YOU AND OUR CITY FOLKS AND STAFF IN 45TH STREET AS WELL AS 27TH AND OTHER MAJOR CORRIDORS, BUT THIS INVESTMENT IS NOT PAYING OFF.

IT'S REALLY QUITE SAD.

THE INVESTMENT IN YOUR LANDSCAPING, THE PLANTS ARE DEAD, POOR CHOICE OF MATERIALS, MULCH THAT IS SPREAD UP AND DOWN 45TH STREET THAT NEIGHBORS AND BUSINESSES HAVE TO GET OUT IN THE MORNING AND SWEEP UP.

THAT'S A SAD INVESTMENT.

IT'S NOT THE CASE ON 27TH.

I DON'T KNOW WHOM YOU INVESTED IN ON THE LANDSCAPING ASPECTS, BUT YOU DIDN'T GET THAT RETURN ON YOUR INVESTMENT.

I'M A BUSINESS PERSON AND I VALUE MY BUSINESS WHICH IS COMMUNICATIONS.

I'VE BEEN AT IT A LONG TIME AS ALL OF YOU KNOW.

THE COMMUNICATION ON THIS PROJECT UNFORTUNATELY FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE HAS ACTUALLY NOT EXISTED.

WE HAD A WONDERFUL PRESENTATION AT THE BEGINNING, BACK IN 2019, WITH OUR COUNCIL REPS AND OUR OTHER CITY STAFF LEADERSHIP, BUT THAT HAS NOT CONTINUED, UNFORTUNATELY.

WE WERE IN THE DARK UNTIL WE SOLVE ONE IMPLEMENT AFTER ANOTHER, AND EACH ONE WE WERE SADLY DISAPPOINTED.

WHAT HAPPENED? WHAT WENT WRONG? CAN'T BLAME CENTERPOINT.

THEY WERE A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH AND THEY WORKED WITH US HAND AND GLOVE ON THE INVESTMENTS THAT WERE MADE INSIDE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE WANT THAT TO CONTINUE FOR EVERYONE TO BENEFIT AND OUR VISITORS AS WELL, FROM SEAWALL TO BROADWAY.

WE HOPE THAT YOU CAN FIND SOLUTIONS, WE'RE CONVINCED THAT THERE ARE SOLUTIONS.

IF WE CAN WORK TOGETHER WITH OUR COUNCIL REP AND WITH THE CITY STAFF AND OUR CITY MANAGER, WE CAN REACH A CONSENSUS TO IMPROVE THE WHOLE CORRIDOR FOR EVERYBODY.

>> THANK YOU, DANSY.

MICHELLE ADDINGTON.

>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL. I EMAILED MOST OF YOU MY COMMENTS THIS MORNING CONCERNING MY TIME [INAUDIBLE] I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT ALL OF THOSE OTHER THAN TO SAY THAT I DO THINK THAT IT'S AN UNNECESSARY RESTRAINT ON CITIZENS AND ON COMMERCE, AND I THINK THAT ULTIMATELY IT WOULD BE HARMFUL TO THE CITY.

I DO WANT TO TALK THOUGH ABOUT SOME THINGS THAT I HEARD TODAY.

I KEPT HEARING OVER AND OVER THAT A NIGHTTIME BAN IS THE LAW.

THAT'S TRUE, BUT THAT'S NOT THE FIRST AND LAST WORD.

THE NIGHTTIME BAN PERTAINS TO GOLF CARTS THAT ARE OPERATED UNDER SECTION 551.403 OF THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION CODE.

THOSE ARE THE GOLF CARTS THAT ARE OPERATING IN A MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY, THAT ARE OPERATING ON A BEACH, OR THAT ARE OPERATING ON A PUBLIC HIGHWAY WITH THE SPEED LESS THAN 35 WITHIN TWO MILES OF WHERE IT'S USUALLY KEPT OVERNIGHT AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF GOING BACK AND FORTH TO A GOLF COURSE.

THAT'S NOT THE GOLF CARTS THAT YOU'RE REGULATING TODAY.

YOU'RE REGULATING GOLF CARTS UNDER SECTION 551.404.

YES, YOU CAN ENACT A NIGHTTIME BAN, BUT IT'S TOTALLY DISCRETIONARY UPON YOU THROUGH THE POWERS THAT THE STATE GAVE YOU THROUGH THE STATUTE.

I WANT YOU TO CONSIDER, IF YOU WOULD, THAT GOLF CARTS UNDER 403, THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE THE SAFETY EQUIPMENT THAT GOLF CARTS UNDER 404 HAVE TO HAVE.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE LIGHTS, THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE HORNS, THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE SEAT BELTS, AND UNDER THE NEW LEGISLATION THAT WAS JUST PASSED ON THE 15TH, THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE TO HAVE LICENSE PLATES.

THEY'RE ALSO CARVED OUT FROM HAVING TO HAVE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE INSURED.

THE GOLF CARTS THAT YOU'RE REGULATING UNDER YOUR NEW ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.404, IT'S WITHIN YOUR DISCRETION TO DO THE NIGHTTIME BAN.

BUT I'M ASKING YOU TO PLEASE RECONSIDER THAT BECAUSE OF THE DAMAGE IT COULD DO TO CITIZENS, BUSINESSES, AND ULTIMATELY THE CITY.

THAT'S ALL I'M GOING TO SAY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MICHELLE. APPRECIATE IT.

OUR LAST PUBLIC COMMENT, TERRILYN TARLTON CHANON. TERRILYN?

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> [LAUGHTER]

>> HI, I'M CAROLYN CHARLTON SHANNON.

I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE CHAMBER.

A BUSINESS OWNER AND A RESIDENT.

BEEN A BUSINESS OWNER HERE FOR 28 YEARS.

IT'S AMAZING BILL, YOU EVEN REMEMBER WHEN I'VE RUN INTO SPACE FROM YOU AND ENDED UP MOVING TO BROADWAY TO INCREASE MY LOCATION SPACE.

[01:15:01]

BUT I'M HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT A NO NEW TAX REVENUE INCREASE.

I HAVE THREE PROPERTIES ON BROADWAY THAT I BOUGHT AND JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, ONE WENT FROM 140,000 TO OVER 482,000.

ONE PROPERTY VALUE WENT FROM 120,000 TO OVER 518,000.

ONE OF MY VACANT LOTS WENT FROM 19,000 TO OVER 60,000.

AS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, THOSE THREE PROPERTY INCREASES ALONE ARE DEVASTATING TO US AND THAT'S HAPPENING ALL OVER TOWN.

IT'S ALSO HAPPENING TO OUR RESIDENTS.

WE HAVE MANY PROPERTIES THAT WE OWN.

MY HUSBAND AND I, AND THOSE RATES HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ROOF.

NOT ONLY THAT, COVID-19 SHUTDOWN CITY HALL FOR ALMOST A YEAR AND A HALF, BUT MOST OF THE BUSINESSES STAYED OPEN ON THIS ISLAND AND HELPED THE ECONOMIC DRIVING FORCE IN THIS TOWN.

I HOPE YOU ALL DON'T EVER FORGET THAT BECAUSE THOSE WERE ROUGH TIMES FOR US AND THEY WERE SCARY TIMES TOO.

THEN THE FRIEZE, MANY OF US ARE STILL GOING THROUGH BROKEN PIPES AND NOT HAVING THE HOT WATER.

THAT HAS ALSO HURT US.

THE SHORTAGE OF EMPLOYEES.

THAT HAS BEEN PROBABLY THE MOST OVERWHELMING PART OF ALL OF THIS.

IT'S I'M EXHAUSTED BECAUSE OF THE SHORTAGE.

WE DO ASK THAT YOU PLEASE SUPPORT US BY HELPING US CUT THOSE TAXES AND KNOW THAT YOU'LL WILL DO THAT.

YOU'VE SEEMED TO BE VERY, VERY OPEN-MINDED ABOUT EVERYBODY IN BARRE COUNTY, SO WE GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT.

LAST BUT NOT LEAST, WE WOULD LIKE FOR YOU ALL TO HELP US SUPPORT IN GETTING THE LEGISLATURE TO PUT ON THEIR SPECIAL SESSION ABOUT THESE EVER-INCREASING INSANE TAX VALUE INCREASES WITH YOU I KNOW THAT IT CAN BE DONE, BUT WE NEED THE CITY SUPPORT AND WE NEED FOR YOU ALL TO BE ACTIVE AND VOCAL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I DO APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO AND SO DOES THE CHAMBER. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU TOO MA'AM. VERY GOOD.

WE DO HAVE ONE OTHER APPLICANT OR EXCUSE ME, ONE UNDER CITIZEN WOULD LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT, TIFFANY GIBSON, TIFFANY.

ONCE TIFFANY IS FINISHED, I'LL CALL IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE IN THE BODY AND STILL WANTS TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT WE'LL CALL ON YOU. TIFFANY GO RIGHT AHEAD.

>> I HEARD I HEARD YOU GUYS WERE TALKING ABOUT GOLF CARTS TODAY.

[LAUGHTER] I REALLY WANT TO ITERATE WHAT BRETT AND BERT HAD TO SAY.

I KNOW I EMAILED EVERYBODY, SO I PROBABLY NEED ABOUT 30 SECONDS.

[NOISE] AS MUCH AS I WOULD LOVE FOR PEOPLE TO COME HERE TO GO TO THE STRAND.

I TRY TO PUSH PEOPLE IN THAT DIRECTION AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, BUT SEAWALL IS REALLY OUR LIFE BREAD.

WHILE THE NIGHTTIME BAND MAY NOT AFFECT US TOO MUCH DURING OUR PEAK SEASON, IT WILL AFFECT US.

I WISH I HAD A PERCENTAGE AS FAR AS WHAT THE IMPACT WOULD BE.

FINANCIALLY, I DON'T BUT I CAN TELL YOU IN THE WINTER TIME OR AN OFF-SEASON, IT WILL BE EXTREMELY DETRIMENTAL.

I WOULD LIKE TO NOT PUT MY EMPLOYEES ON UNEMPLOYMENT THIS WINTER.

WE DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO SCRATCH AND WHAT BUSINESS WE CAN AND THAT WILL ABSOLUTELY KILL US.

THERE ARE BUSINESSES WHO ARE ACTUALLY LANDLOCKED ON SEAWALL AND THEY DON'T HAVE THAT SIDE STREET.

WE HAVE TWO LOCATIONS, ONE IN 61, ONE ON SEAWALL.

I MEAN, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO WHETHER IT BUT I THINK THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS HAVE REALLY CONSIDERED EXACTLY WHAT IT MIGHT DO TO US AS AN INDUSTRY IF WE TAKE CARTS OFF OF SEAWALL, AFTER DARK.

THEN WHAT MY FEES GOING FROM 1,400 TO 14,000, WHICH IS WHAT THEY WOULD BE, IT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT, AND TO DO IT BOTH AT THE SAME TIME.

I MEAN, IT'S BASICALLY YOU'RE JUST CUTTING OUR HEAD OFF.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

>> THANK YOU, TIFFANY. APPRECIATE IT.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT? THANK YOU.

IT IS 6:19 PM.

WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT.

MOVING TO ORDINANCES NOT REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARINGS.

[8.A. Consider For Action An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Adopting The Homestead, Elderly, And Disabled Ad Valorem Tax Exemptions For Tax Year 2021, Pursuant To Chapter 33, Section 33-24 Of The Code Of The City Of Galveston 1982, As Amended; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (M. Loftin)]

ITEM 8A, NELLY.

>> ITEM 8A, CONSIDER FOR ACTION AND ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS ADOPTING THE HOMESTEAD, ELDERLY, AND DISABLED AD VALOREM, TAX EXEMPTIONS FOR THE TAX YEAR 2021, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 33, SECTION 33-24 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, 1980 AS AMENDED.

MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.

>> MR. LOFT GO RIGHT AHEAD, SIR.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS IS THE RENEWAL FOR TAX YEAR 2021 OF THE EXEMPTIONS THAT ARE EXTENDED TO HOMEOWNERS WHO LIVE IN THEIR HOME ON THE ISLAND.

THE CITY IS AT THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT FOR THE BASIC HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, WHICH IS 20 PERCENT OF ASSESSED VALUE TO ARRIVE AT TAXABLE VALUE.

[01:20:05]

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OTHER EXEMPTIONS FOR OVER 65 HOMEOWNERS WHO OCCUPY THEIR OWN HOME AND DISABLED HOMEOWNERS.

THE BENEFIT TO TAXPAYERS IS ABOUT 10 PERCENT OF THE TAXES THAT ARE PAID IN.

IT'S A SIGNIFICANT THING TO LOOK AT EVERY YEAR AND AFFIRM.

WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU RENEW THEM AT THE EXISTING LEVEL.

>> THANK YOU, MIKE. APPRECIATE IT.

COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. LOFT?

>> YES, MARIE.

>> I WE'D JUST LIKE TO MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> WE HAVE MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM MS. ROBB SECONDED BY MR. COLLINS, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED.

IT IS UNANIMOUS.

ITEM 8B, PLEASE NELLY.

[8.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” Article Ix, “Golf Carts”, Of The Code Of The City Of Galveston, 1982, As Amended, Relating To “Golf Carts, Neighborhood Electric Vehicles And Off Highway Vehicles; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; Providing For Penalty For Violation, And Providing For An Effective Date. (Legal)]

>> ITEM 8B CONSIDERED FOR APPROVAL IN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, ADMITTING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, 1982 AS AMENDED.

CHAPTER 34, TRAFFIC, ARTICLE 9, GOLF CARTS OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, 1982 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO GOLF CARTS, NEIGHBORHOOD ELECTRIC VEHICLES, AND OFF HIGHWAY VEHICLES, MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT PROVIDING FOR PENALTY FOR VIOLATION IN PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> COUNCIL TO START THIS DISCUSSION OFF, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCES SUBMITTED TO US RECENTLY BY MR. GORSKY, AND WE'LL HAVE MR. GORSKY OUTLINE THOSE ADDITIONS TO THE ORDINANCE THAT WERE BASICALLY BROUGHT TO YOU BY OUR CHIEF OF CITY MARSHALL'S.

I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE THAT ORDINANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS.

I'D LIKE TO REMOVE THE PROHIBITION OF NIGHTTIME DRIVING ON THE SEAWALL.

I'D LIKE TO REMOVE ALSO THE SECTION IN THE ORDINANCE THAT SAYS THAT WE HAVE A MAXIMUM THEY CANNOT CHARGE MORE THAN A MAXIMUM OF $10 FOR INSPECTION.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE LOWER THE PERMIT FEE TO $150.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT?

>> I WILL SECOND ON THAT ONE.

>> WE HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GORSKY.

LET'S OPEN THIS UP TO DISCUSSION.

COUNCIL. YES, DAVID.

>> REMOVING THE PROHIBITION ON NIGHTTIME DRIVING ON THE SEAWALL AS IT WAS WRITTEN IN THE ORDINANCE, I'M IN FAVOR OF DOING THAT.

BUT MR. GORSKY, CAN YOU GIVE US SOME GUIDANCE ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 551403 AND 404 AND HOW THAT APPLIES HERE.

BECAUSE I'M NOT YOUR LAWYER YOU ARE OUR LAWYER.

[LAUGHTER] I READ IT.

THE TRANSPORTATION CODE IS PRETTY DENSE.

WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION THIS MORNING.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT STATE LAW SAYS ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO GIVE THE IMPRESSION WHEN WE REMOVE THIS PARTICULAR PROHIBITION THAT SUDDENLY THAT STATE LAW DOESN'T APPLY BECAUSE IT'S STILL DOES.

SEVERAL THINGS IN STATE LAW GO ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE TODAY IN AND IF YOU'D ADDRESS THAT, I'D APPRECIATE IT.

>> I'D BE HAPPY TO.

WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE SINCE MARCH 25TH OF THIS YEAR.

WE'VE GONE THROUGH A NUMBER OF PERMUTATIONS, INCLUDING SOME THAT WE'VE HANDED OUT FOR THE SITUATION OF COUNCIL SINCE THE WORKSHOP THIS MORNING, WHICH INCLUDES AN ADDITIONAL BUDGET AND AN ADDITIONAL CHANGE TO REFLECT A CHANGE IN STATE LAW THAT WE WILL NOT REQUIRE LICENSE PLATES FOR VEHICLES DRIVEN ONLY WITHIN MASTER PLANNED IMMUNITIES.

THAT WAS A CHANGE THAT JUST CAME ABOUT.

IT'S EFFECTIVE TODAY, SO WE HAVE INCLUDED IT IN THE WITNESS.

STATE LAW STATES THAT YOU CANNOT DRIVE A GOLF CART AT NIGHT.

THAT IS THE STATE LAW.

WE HAVE REMOVED THAT FROM THIS ORDINANCE.

WE HAVE REMOVED DRIVING AT NIGHT FROM THE SEAWALL.

THE FACT THAT WE DON'T PUT IT IN ITS ORDINANCE DOES NOT TAKE AWAY ANYTHING FROM STATE LAW OR WHATSOEVER.

IF YOU'RE DRIVING DOWN THE HIGHWAY AT NIGHT IN A GOLF CART AND DPS COMES UPON YOU, WHETHER THEY CHOOSE TO ENFORCE STATE LAW,

[01:25:03]

THAT'S PURELY UP TO THEM.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MARSHAL'S OFFICE WILL BE CHIEFLY IN CHARGE OF THIS AND THEIR FOCUS IS ON THE ENFORCEMENT OF CITY CODES.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?

>> IT DOES.

>> ALL RIGHT.

DON JUAN, WE'RE ON THIS SUBJECT.

COULD YOU OUTLINE AGAIN WHAT THE ADDITIONS TO THE ORDINANCE ARE THAT YOU BROUGHT FORWARD TO US IN THIS AMENDED ORDINANCE TODAY?

>> INSTEAD OF REFERRING TO REGISTRATIONS, WE ARE CHANGING IT TO LICENSE PLATES BECAUSE WE DON'T REGISTER GOLF CARTS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.

WE GET A LICENSE PLATE FOR THEM, SO THAT'S WHAT THEY WOULD CALL IN THE PLANNING DIVISION AS A TEXT AMENDMENT.

I KID ABOUT THAT ALL THE TIME.

WE HAVE PROVIDED PRIVATE SUGGESTION OF THE MOTION THAT THE GOLF LICENSE PLATE BE PUT ON THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE TO THE LEFT SIDE AS MUCH AS PRACTICAL SO THAT IT CAN BE READ BY OUR LICENSE PLATE READER AS HE'S GOING DOWN WHATEVER STREET THEY GO DOWN.

I'VE PUT IN THE CHANGE REQUIRED BY STATE LAW THAT YOU DON'T NEED A LICENSE PLATE IF YOU'RE GOING TO OPERATE SOLELY WITHIN A MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY.

THAT'S FINE. FROM THE DRAFT THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, WE'VE REMOVED THE 10-DOLLAR FEE.

NOW WE'RE GOING TO REDUCE THAT PERMIT FEE FOR COMMERCIAL OPERATORS TO $150.

>> THAT'S THE MOTION. YES, SIR.

>> WE WILL MAKE THAT CHANGE.

FROM THE EARLIER EDITIONS, WE HAD REQUIRED SEAT BELTS THAT WERE REQUIRED FOR A FACTORY-INSTALLED SEATING, THAT RAISED AN ISSUE BECAUSE THE BACK SEATS THAT FACE TOWARD THE REAR OR AFTERMARKET, THEY'RE NOT FACTORY-INSTALLED.

SO WE MADE THAT CHANGE AND PUT A SEAT BELT REQUIREMENT OUT THERE SO THAT THE KIDS DON'T FALL OFF THE BACK OF THE GOLF CART OR OTHERWISE PUSHED.

WE'RE REQUIRING THE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS OF SEATBELTS, TAIL LAMPS.

ONE OF THE DISCUSSION ITEMS FROM THE MARCH 25TH AGENDA WAS THE EXPRESSION BY CITY COUNCIL, THAT THE FOCUS SHOULD BE ON SAFETY ISSUES ON THIS.

AS PART OF THE RECORD, WE'VE PROVIDED THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS SHOWN THERE WERE ACCIDENTS, SOME OF THEM MAJOR THAT INVOLVE THESE GOLF CARTS SO THE SAFETY CONCERN IS TO MY MIND FAIRLY WELL ESTABLISHED.

I REALLY THINK THAT IS PRETTY MUCH IT.

THE STREETS THAT WE HAVE LISTED AS BEING NO-GO AREAS ARE REALLY THERE FOR CLARIFICATION.

THEY HAVE BEEN IN THE CITY CODE SINCE 2010.

BUT IT REALLY WASN'T EXPLICIT, IT SAID OR IS OTHERWISE BANNED UNDER STATE LAW.

WE'VE JUST LISTED THEM BECAUSE IT MAKES IT EASIER TO KNOW WHERE YOU CAN GO AND WHERE YOU DON'T.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S REALLY ANY CHANGE HERE AND WE CERTAINLY ARE NOT BANNING GOLF CARTS ON THE SEAWALL.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?

>> IT DOES, YES, SIR.

COUNCIL, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? YES, MARIE?

>> AS EVERYBODY KNOWS, I WAS THE ONE THAT OPENED THIS CAN OF WORMS, AND I STILL HOLD TO THE FACT THAT I DO NOT THINK THAT GOLF CARTS SHOULD BE ON THE SEA WALL BECAUSE I THINK IT IS TOO MUCH OF A SAFETY ISSUE.

I WAS WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO CONTROL IN THE EVENING.

I'M A PRO-BUSINESS PERSON, BUT I JUST THINK THE SAFETY ELEMENT THAT'S INVOLVED IN THIS IS A SERIOUS ONE.

I'M ALSO CONCERNED THAT WE'RE NOW LOWERING THE RATE TO $150 BECAUSE HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY? BRYANT QUESTION TO YOU.

[01:30:01]

HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR THE CODE ENFORCEMENT? MY DISTRICT ALREADY HAS A LACK OF POLICE AND MARSHALS, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A WHOLE SEPARATE POLICING ALL NIGHT LONG ON THE SEAWALL.

>> MY QUICK MATH IS WE RAISE ENOUGH FOR ABOUT ONE MARSHAL TO DO THIS AND WE'LL STRETCH THEM AS FAR AS WE CAN.

>> SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ONE MARSHAL COVERING ALL GOLF CARTS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE ISLAND? JUST SO EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT ISSUE.

I PERSONALLY DO NOT BELIEVE THAT 250 IS TOO MUCH TO PAY WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT THE RENTAL COST OF GOLF CART IS, IT COVERS ABOUT A DAY AND A HALF RENTAL.

I THINK WE'RE MAKING A MISTAKE BY PUTTING AN ORDINANCE IN PERIOD, THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO FOLLOW UP ON BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE MARSHAL COVERAGE.

I THINK ALSO LOWERING THE FEE IS GOING TO MAKE FOR A LOT MORE RENTAL COMPANIES TO COME HERE.

I THINK IN THIS CASE WE ARE PUTTING TOURISTS ABOVE OUR CITIZENS, AND I REALLY THINK IT'S A SHAME.

I'M IN FAVOR OF THE ITEMS THAT HAVE TO DO MAKING THE GOLF CART SAFER, EVEN THOUGH I KNOW I HAVE PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT THAT WOULD LIKE TO SEE NO SEAT BELTS AND SO FORTH AND SO ON.

MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT ARE OPPOSED TO GOLF CARTS ON THE SEAWALL.

I HEAR THAT OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

I AGAIN THINK IT'S A SHAME THAT WE'RE PUTTING BUSINESS AND TOURISTS OF OUR CITIZENS AND THEIR CONCERNS.

I THINK IT'S USELESS TO CREATE AN ORDINANCE WITHOUT ANY WAY TO POLICE IT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO.

I THINK IT'S A SHAME FROM WHEN WE HAD OUR MULTIPLE HOUR DISCUSSION TODAY.

WE'VE NOW GOT AN ORDINANCE TO READ SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR CITIZEN UNDERSTAND WHAT A PLANNED COMMUNITY IS BECAUSE IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN WE ONLY HAVE THREE.

ONE IS AVIA, ONE IS BEACHSIDE VILLAGE AND ONE IS BEACH TOWN.

>> WELL, SINCE YOU ASKED, THE STATUTE USES THE PHRASE MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY AS REFERRED TO IN THE PROPERTY CODE, AND THERE IS NO DEFINITION OF A MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY ANYWHERE IN THE LEGISLATION.

BUT THERE IS AN AG OPINION WHERE THEY SAY THAT A MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY IS A SUBDIVISION, AND SO I WISH THE LEGISLATURE HAD BEEN A LITTLE BIT MORE THOUGHTFUL ON THIS.

>> NOW YOU'RE SAYING THAT ANY SUBDIVISION IS THAT A MASTER PLAN, SO NOW WE'RE NO LONGER GOING TO [OVERLAPPING].

>> THEY GOT TO HAVE HOMEOWNER'S COMMUNITY.

THEY GOT TO PAY FEES, THEY GOT TO DO ALL SORTS OF STUFF.

>> IN THE VAGUE DEFINITION OF THE MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY, WE WILL NOT REQUIRE LICENSES ON THOSE?

>> IF IT'S OPERATED ONLY WITHIN THAT COMMUNITY.

IF YOU HAVE A GOLF CART AND YOU LIVE IN I THINK LAFITTE'S COVE IS A MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY AND YOU JUST STAY WITHIN LAFITTE'S COVE YOU'RE FINE.

IF YOU LEAVE LAFITTE'S COVE TO GO AROUND THERE'S A PIZZA PLACE ON RIGHT THERE.

YOU'VE LEFT THE MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY AND IT WOULD BE BETTER IF YOU HAD A LICENSE PLATE.

>> BUT ACTUALLY, THERE'S PPOA WHICH MAKES ALL OF THE PIRATES PROPERTIES BY THE DEFINITION YOU SAID AS A MASTER PLAN.

THAT WOULDN'T BE THE CASE BUT IT WOULD BE THE CASE THEN FOR LIKE ISLA DEL SOL, WOULD IT BE ABLE TO DRIVE THEIR GOLF CART OVER TO THE WESTERN BAR GRILL BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A

[01:35:03]

DIFFERENT, "UNDEFINED MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY".

>> I DON'T THINK WHAT IS AT THE WESTERN BAR AND GRILL PROBABLY ISN'T PART OF THE MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY.

>> WELL, CIO HAS THE SAME PPOA, SO NCL ITSELF WOULD BE A MASTER PLAN.

I'M JUST SAYING.

>> WHAT THE DEFINITION NEED TO BE.

>> I THINK WE NEED TO DEFINE THAT.

I'M VERY SURPRISED THAT WE HAD SO MANY DRAMATIC CHANGES ON SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING NOW FOR A LONG TIME.

I DON'T KNOW, ESPECIALLY WITH THE CHANGES THAT CAME DOWN TODAY OR THAT CAME DOWN FROM LAST SESSION OR THAT WE'VE REVIEWED TODAY.

MAYBE WE DO NEED TO TABLE THIS ONE MORE TIME, BUT I'M JUST REALLY SURPRISED THAT THREE HOURS WE WENT AWAY AND EVERYTHING CHANGED DRAMATICALLY.

>> JOHN.

>> I SECOND THE MOTION AND I'M OKAY WITH HOW IT WAS PRESENTED.

MY BIG CONCERN HERE IS THAT THE MAIN REASON THIS GOT BROUGHT UP IS BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF GOLF CARTS THAT WE'VE SEEN RECENTLY, MAINLY BECAUSE OF THE RENTAL COMPANIES THAT HAVE COME TO THE ISLAND.

I'M WILLING TO DO THE $150, GO DOWN ON THAT WITHIN THE ORDINANCE, AND CONSIDER THAT AS A PROBATIONARY PERIOD, AND HOPEFULLY COME A YEAR, WE CAN LOOK AT THAT AND SEE IF THERE IS A PROBLEM OUT THERE STILL.

IF WE NEED TO PUT MORE MARSHALS ON IT, THEN WE NEED TO INCREASE THAT FEE TO PAY FOR THOSE MARSHALS.

I'M TRYING TO BE BUSINESS-FRIENDLY HERE, BUT ALSO WE NEED TO HAVE THE MONEY, THE REVENUE TO ENFORCE THE ORDINANCE.

I'M FOR THAT, I'VE NEVER BEEN FOR BANNING THEM AT NIGHT OR ON SEAWALL.

I'VE GOT A LARGE PART OF MY DISTRICT THAT'S IN THE SEAWALL AREA, AND I HAVE A LOT OF RESIDENTS IN MY DISTRICT THAT HAVE GOLF CARTS AND THEY WANT TO DRIVE ON THE SEAWALL, AND SO I'M ALL FOR KEEPING THAT THE WAY THAT IS ALLOWING GOLF CARTS AT NIGHT.

THAT'S THE MAIN REASON WHY I SECOND THE MOTION, AND I'M OKAY WITH IT AS A SENSE.

>> ALL RIGHT. BILL.

>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE TWO POINTS.

I'M PRO-BUSINESS.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT SPLIT IN HALF AND GO TO 125.

[NOISE] THE OTHER THING IS WE'RE LOOKING AT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY TO BE GENERATED IS TO OFFSET THE COST OF HIRING ANOTHER MARSHAL.

BUT IF THE POLICE ARE OUT THERE RIDDING AND THEY SEE A VIOLATION, DON'T YOU THINK THEY'RE GOING TO STOP THAT VEHICLE? WHETHER IT'S A CAR, WHETHER IT'S A GOLF CART, WHETHER IT'S A MOTORCYCLE, OR EVEN A BICYCLE, THEY GET STOPPED AT NIGHT FOR NOT HAVING LIGHTS.

TO ME, IT ALL DEPENDS WHAT COUNSEL WANTS, BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE IT GET DROPPED DOWN TO 125 RATHER THAN 150.

BUT AGAIN, IT'S WHATEVER WE CAN WORK OUT. I'M ALL FOR IT.

>> DAVID, AND THEN WILLIAM. WILLIAM, GO AHEAD.

>> I AGREE WITH JP DOWN THERE.

I THINK WE CAN ARGUE ABOUT 125, 150, 175 BECAUSE GOLF CAR COMPANIES, THEY SAY A 100, WE SAY 251, 175 MIDDLE, AND WE CAN ARGUE OVER $75 HERE AND THERE, BUT THE OVERALL IDEA IS TO GET IT TO PAY FOR THE REGULATIONS AND THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

BILL, YOU'RE RIGHT POLICE OFFICER DRIVING DOWN THE SEAWALL IS GONNA SAY SOMETHING.

I DO LIKE THE ORDINANCE, I LIKE WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW, BUT I DO AGREE WITH JP DOWN THERE, I THINK A YEAR FROM NOW, IF WE DO STILL SEE THE ISSUES AND WE NEED TO REVISIT THIS, THEN I'M ALL FOR IT.

>> DAVID.

>> I AGREE WITH YOU ALL THAT IF WE START AT 150 AND NEXT YEAR WE DON'T SEE THE COMPLIANCE, IF IT'S STILL A PROBLEM, THEN IT GOES UP.

MAYBE WE'LL GET LUCKY AND IT'LL GO DOWN BECAUSE WE HAVE WE HAVE COMPLIANCE, BUT WE HAVE TO TAKE SOME STEPS.

I DO I DO WANT TO REMIND BOTH MARSHAL'S OFFICE AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT MANY OF THESE ARE TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS OR TRAFFIC CODES.

SO IT'S NOT JUST UP TO THE MARSHAL'S OFFICE TO ENFORCE THIS, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS A RESPONSIBILITY HERE TOO.

WE GET USED TO SEEING A LOT OF THIS, AND WHEN THERE WERE ONLY 40 GOLF CARTS IN TOWN, NOBODY CARED.

[01:40:05]

NOW WE HAVE LITERALLY THOUSANDS OF THEM BOTH ON THE SEAWALL.

[INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] NO, YOU'RE NOT RENTING 1,000, BUT THERE, BUT THERE ARE WELL OVER 1,000 GOLF CARTS IN TOWN BETWEEN RENTALS AND HOMEOWNERS.

BUT HONESTLY, THE PROBLEMS ON THE SEAWALL, THE PROBLEM IS WITH RENTALS, IT'S WITH THE TOURISTS.

THAT'S WHERE THE PROBLEM WAS GENERATED TO BEGIN WITH.

THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM PRIMARILY CAUSED BY RESIDENTS.

RESIDENTS DO GET CAUGHT IN IT BECAUSE THIS IS TRAFFIC CODE.

I DO WANT TO RE-EMPHASIZE THAT MANY OF THESE THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT INCLUDING IN THIS ORDINANCE ARE STILL EXTANT IN STATE LAW.

DON'T BE SURPRISED AS MR. [INAUDIBLE] SAID, IF YOU GET PULLED OVER BY DPS ON THIS.

ONE QUICK ITEM, DAN, WOULD YOU DEFINE HIGHWAY? BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A TERM THAT'S BANDIED ABOUT IN STATE LAW THAT DOESN'T REALLY MEAN WHAT WE COMMONLY THINK OF AS A HIGHWAY.

>> DO I GET TO WRITE A THESIS ON THAT? [LAUGHTER] [NOISE]

>> NO.

>> TWENTY-FIVE WORDS OR LESS WOULD BE PREFERABLE.

>> HIGHWAYS INCLUDE FMS, STATE ROADS.

BUT SPECIFICALLY IN THE TRANSPORTATION CODE, CITIES ARE AFFORDED TO REGULATE THESE ON CITY STREETS.

IT'S THAT SECTION OF THE TRANSPORTATION CODE FROM WHICH OUR CODE FOLLOWS.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. THEN LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION.

IS THE STRAND A HIGHWAY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE CODE?

>> NO, I DON'T THINK IT IS.

I THINK IT'S A CITY STREET.

>> SO DRIVING A GOLF CART AT NIGHT, IF WE DON'T SPECIFICALLY PROHIBIT THAT, DRIVING A GOLF CART DOWN THE STRAND AT NIGHT, THERE'S NO PROHIBITION?

>> THERE IS NO PROHIBITION IN THE CITY CODE ABOUT DRIVING A GOLF CART AT NIGHT.

>> WELL, THEN I'LL LEAVE DPS TO DO WHAT DPS IS GOING TO DO.

>> AS THEY WILL.

>> AS THEY WILL WITH OR WITHOUT MY OPINION. THANK YOU.

>> MAY I HAVE ONE MORE. WHAT ABOUT PORT INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD?

>> THAT'S A STATE HIGHWAY.

>> OKAY.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

OH, I'M SORRY, MARIE. GO RIGHT AHEAD.

[LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND] YOU CAN TIE A STRING TO MY [OVERLAPPING].

>> SO THAT YOU SEE ME.

BUT THERE AGAIN, SO I HEAR PEOPLE SAYING, WELL, THE POLICE CAN FIND THEM TOO.

I KNOW MY DISTRICT FEELS LIKE WE NEED MORE POLICE PRESENCE, BUT NOW WE'RE GOING TO TIE MORE POLICE OFFICERS ON THE SEAWALL, AND REMEMBER THIS COVERS ALL ELECTRONIC THINGS, ENFORCING GOLF CARTS, ANY KIND OF ELECTRONIC VEHICLE THIS COVERS, CORRECT? IT'S NOT JUST GOLF CARTS.

>> GOLF CARTS AND NEIGHBORHOOD ELECTRIC VEHICLES.

>> THAT'S SOLELY IT, NOT ELECTRIC BIKES?

>> NO. I RESPECT NOT TO BRING BIKES UP AGAIN.

>> THAT'S A WHOLE ANOTHER ISSUE, YEAH.

>> I SUPPORT ELECTRIC BIKES, BUT I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THIS.

ALTHOUGH I THINK PIECES OF IT ARE BETTER GOOD, I THINK THE FEE IS TOO LOW.

I'M HAPPY THAT I DID OPEN THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE AT LEAST IT'S NOW A LITTLE BIT SAFER.

BUT WHEN WE END UP WITH 2,000 RENTAL GOLF CARTS, AND WE'RE HAVING MULTIPLE ACCIDENTS SOME WEEK, I WILL SAY I TOLD YOU SO.

I WISH I COULD CONVINCE YOU, MAYOR AND JOHN TO AT LEAST RAISE THE FEE $200, SO WE HAVE A LITTLE MORE MONEY.

WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO HAD BEEN HIT WITH APPRAISALS.

WE SAW OPENINGS OF THE BUDGET TODAY WHERE WE ARE ALREADY SHORT ON FUNDS.

WE ARE NOW SAYING WE MIGHT BE ABLE, BUT I DID THE NUMBERS RIGHT HERE, 45,000 WILL NOT COVER A MARSHAL THAT CAN WRITE TICKETS TO POLICE THIS WITH THAT NUMBER OF 150.

I THINK YOU-ALL HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THAT.

I MEAN, I WOULD BE WILLING TO ACCEPT EVERYTHING ELSE IF WE COULD JUST, LET'S TEST IT FOR A YEAR.

I KNOW IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL HIT BUT IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL HIT FOR OUR CITY AND OUR TAXPAYERS, THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TIE UP OUR POLICEMEN AND OUR MARSHALS ON GOLF CARTS, AND AGAIN, BECAUSE OF A TOURIST ISSUE.

[01:45:02]

I REALLY WISH YOU WOULD CONSIDER RAISING A FEE OF NOT 250, THEN 200, THEN WE COULD HAVE 3/4 OF A MARSHAL.

IT'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE.

OUR ISLAND IS SO BUSY, AND IT'S NOT JUST BUSY ON THE WEEKEND, IT'S BUSY SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.

I'VE SAT 20 MINUTES TRYING TO GET OUT OF KROGER'S PARKING LOT FROM JUST CAR TRAFFIC.

THAT'S NOT EVEN ACCOUNTING FOR GOLF CARTS.

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> YEAH, EXACTLY. [LAUGHTER] THE ICE CREAM IS MELTED BECAUSE SHE CAN'T EVEN GET OUT ON THE SEAWALL.

BUT I WISH YOU WOULD CONSIDER.

IT'S A SHAME THAT WE SPENT SUCH A LONG TIME DISCUSSING THIS TODAY AND THEN IT CHANGED FOR TONIGHT.

>> I'M GOING TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS ON THIS.

FIRST OF ALL, HOWEVER, THIS PLAYS OUT, WE NEED TO HAVE MORE REGULATIONS FOR GOLF CARTS.

AS SIMPLE AS THAT, THEY'VE BECOME QUITE AN INDUSTRY ON THE ISLAND, NOT ONLY FOR THE RESIDENTS, BUT FOR THE RENTAL COMPANIES.

IF WE TURN A BLIND EYE AND A DEAF EAR TO GOLF CARTS AND THE SAFETY CONCERNS THAT ORIGINATE FROM THOSE, AND WE SEE THEM HAPPENING DAILY IN OUR ISLAND, WE ARE NOT REPRESENTING OUR COMMUNITY WELL.

SO WE DO NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.

FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE CHANGES AND SO FORTH, WE'VE GOTTEN BACK AND FORTH ON GOLF CARTS.

THERE HAS NOT BEEN ONE STANDARD THAT WE FOLLOW THROUGH THIS.

OUR LAST STANDARD THAT WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME WAS TO BAN GOLF CARTS COMPLETELY ON THE SEAWALL.

WE'VE BEEN BACK AND FORTH ON THIS, AND THIS IS WHAT COUNCIL DOES.

WE DISCUSS THIS, TAKE INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY AND MAKE OUR BEST JUDGMENT TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY IN THESE DECISIONS.

I WOULD SAY THIS ON THE $150; WE CAN EVALUATE IN A YEAR AND SEE WHERE WE ARE NOW.

WE CAN SAY THAT'S QUITE A DROP FROM THE 250, BUT THAT'S STILL SIX TIMES WHAT WE'RE CHARGING RESIDENTS.

IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE TURNING TURNING A BLIND EYE TO THE PERMIT FEE AND WE'RE PUTTING A LOT OF EMPHASIS ON THE RESIDENTS ON THIS, WE STILL HAVE QUITE AN EMPHASIS ON THE VISITORS WITH THIS $150.

SAYING ALL THAT, I'M GOING TO CALL THE QUESTION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND PLEASE? ALL THOSE OPPOSED?

>> GOING TO DO THE THING THAT I SEE MULTIPLE COUNCIL PEOPLE DO, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT PROPER [INAUDIBLE]

>> WE HAVE FIVE IN FAVOR AND ONE ABSTENTION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MOVING TO ITEM 9 CONSENT ITEMS, PLEASE.

[9. CONSENT ITEMS]

>> ITEM 9 CONSENT ITEMS, THE FOLLOWING ITEM 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, CONSENT ITEMS 9, 8 THROUGH 9 FF ARE ON THE SCREEN.

>> VERY GOOD. COUNCILS, IS THERE ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO PULL OUT FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND VOTE? YES, MARIE.

>> WE'D LIKE TO PULL OUT THE TWO ITEMS THAT WE DISCUSSED IN WORKSHOP THAT HAD TO DO WITH THE TWO PARKS AND VISION GALVESTON [OVERLAPPING] TO MAKE SURE THE CONTRACT STATES THAT THEY ARE REIMBURSED AS SERVICES ARE PROVIDED.

>> WHAT NUMBERS ARE THOSE?

>> E AND F, I BELIEVE.

>> IS IT NINE, E AND F? MARIE, IF YOU'LL CONFIRM THAT PLEASE.

>> IT IS E AND F.

>> HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THOSE YET.

>> WE WOULD ALSO REMIND THE MAYOR THAT, THAT NINE L HAS BEEN REMOVED, I BELIEVE. [OVERLAPPING]

>> THAT IS CORRECT. NINE L HAS BEEN REMOVED BY STAFF. THANK YOU, DAVID.

WE HAVE MARIE WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE 9 E AND 9 F FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND VOTE.

ANY OTHER EXCEPTIONS THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE FROM THE CONSENTS?

>> YEAH, I GOT ONE.

>> YES, SIR.

>> THE INFAMOUS 45TH STREET.

>> WHAT? [OVERLAPPING]

>> SEE I THINK THAT'S THE LAST ITEM.

NINE FF.

>> NINE FF.

COUNCIL ANY OTHER? I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT ITEMS FROM

[01:50:03]

9A TO 9 EE, BUT WE WANT TO REMOVE FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSIONS FROM THAT 9E, 9F AND 9FF AND WE ARE REMOVING FROM VOTING ON 9L.

>> I WOULD SECOND THAT.

>> WE HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN COLLINS. VERY GOOD.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

[Items 9.E. & 9.F.]

LET'S MOVE TO 9E, IF YOU COULD READ THAT, PLEASE, NELLY.

>> ITEM 9E, CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND THE CITY OF GALVESTON, APPROVEN AS A PROJECT FUNDING TO VISION GALVESTON FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCHINCHOMATIC DESIGN OF IMPROVEMENTS AND PROFITABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR JONES PARK IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000.

>> WE COULD ACTUALLY DO BOTH ITEMS TOGETHER.

>> SURE.

>> OKAY.

>> LET'S READ 9F PLEASE.

>> ITEM 9F CONSIDERED FOR APPROVAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON, APPROVEN AS A PROJECT FUNDING DIVISION GALVESTON FOR PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS FOR SHIELD PARK IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000.

>> YES, MARIE.

>> I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO APPROVE WITH THE ADDITION TO THE CONTRACT THAT THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY VISION GALVESTON WILL BE REIMBURSED AS DELIVERED AT THE AMOUNTS THAT WERE APPROVED BY THE IDC.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> THANK YOU.

>>> LET'S DISCUSS THAT MOTION.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? COUNCIL MICHELLE, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ON THAT?

>> IN THE AGREEMENT ON B, I BELIEVE IT DOESN'T SPECIFY THAT EXACTLY, BUT IT DOES TALK ABOUT IDC WILL PAY VISION GALVESTON UP TO $10,000 AND NO LATER THAN 30 DAYS AFTER THE RECEIPT AND APPROVAL OF THE ACCOUNTING.

WE CAN JUST CLARIFY THAT FOR YOU.

>> JUST PUT IT IN BOTH OF THEM.

>> IT IS IN BOTH OF THEM.

BUT IF YOU WANTED TO CLARIFY THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT, WE CAN DO THAT.

>> ARE YOU CLEAR, MICHELLE, WHAT COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE] WOULD LIKE? VERY GOOD.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT IS UNANIMOUS. VERY GOOD.

WE'RE MOVING NOW TO 9 FF I THINK.

[9.FF. Consider Approval Of Change Order #7 To The Contract With Main Lane Industries, Ltd. For The 45th Street Improvements From Broadway To Seawall Project Decreasing The Contract By $742,734.85 From The Amount Of $10,860,154.44 To The Amount Of $10,117,419.59. Authorizing The City Manager To Execute All Necessary Documents Upon Final Approval By The City Attorney. (T. Pedraza)]

>> ITEM 9 FF CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 7 TO THE CONTRACT WITH MAIN LANE INDUSTRIES LTD FOR THE 45TH STREET IMPROVEMENT FROM BROADWAY TO SEAWALL PROJECT DECREASING THE CONTRACT BY 742,734.85 FROM THE AMOUNT OF $10,860,154.44 TO THE AMOUNT OF $10,117,419.59, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS UPON FINAL APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.

>> BILL, GO RIGHT AHEAD.

[NOISE]

>> WE DON'T HAVE DUDLEY HERE?

>> NO, SIR. WE RELEASED EVERYBODY AFTER THIS MORNING, WE THOUGHT WE HAD ALL THE QUESTIONS ANSWERED, I APOLOGIZE.

>> NOT A PROBLEM. MAYBE YOU CAN ANSWER THESE.

>> TRINO IS UP THOUGH, IF HE CAN ANSWER.

>> I'M ONLINE SIR.

>> TRINO IS A NEW COMER, I DON'T THINK HE CAN ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS, BUT LET'S GO AHEAD.

WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION EARLIER ON THE COMMENTS AND I TOOK SOME OF WHAT MAYAN SAID [NOISE] IN THE 17TH MEETING THAT WE HAD AND [NOISE] A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT I RECEIVED AND OF COURSE I HAD IS BECAUSE I'M DOING A LOT ON THIS PROJECT, I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT THIS PROJECT A LITTLE BIT MORE.

BUT WHAT MIKE SAID AND WHAT MR. HART CASTLE CONVEYED TO HIM THAT THEY WEREN'T TOLD WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO GET AS FAR AS BEING DUPLICATED FROM 27TH STREET TO 45TH STREET.

JUST TO READ CENTER POINT'S RESPONSE, IT SAYS HERE, [NOISE] "IT IS, CENTER POINT'S POLICY TO INSTALL STREET LIGHTS ACCORDING TO THE ILLUMINATION OF THE IESAA RECOMMENDATIONS.