8.A. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Changing The Zoning From Residential, Single-Family (R-1) Zoning District To Restricted Residential, Single Family (R-0) Zoning District On Various Properties As Provided In The Attached Map), In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Planning Case Number 21P-048; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (P. Milburn)

[8.A. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Changing The Zoning From Residential, Single-Family (R-1) Zoning District To Restricted Residential, Single Family (R-0) Zoning District On Various Properties As Provided In The Attached Map), In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Planning Case Number 21P-048; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (P. Milburn)]

ITEM 8A CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

CHANGING THE ZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY R1 ZONING DISTRICT TO RESTRICTED RESIDENTIAL. SINGLE FAMILY R0 ZONING DISTRICT ON VARIOUS PROPERTIES THAT'S PROVIDED IN THE ATTACHED MAP IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

PLANNING CASE NUMBER 21P-048 MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT. VERY GOOD.

YES. PETE, HOW ARE YOU, SIR? NICE TO SEE YOU. OK.

OK. CASE 21P-048 IS THE REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING IN ORDER TO DESIGNATE THE AREA AS A RESTRICTED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY R0 ZONING DISTRICT AND THIS AREA SHOWN IN THE MAP IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS DENVER COURT NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE DID SEND PUBLIC NOTICES.

WE SENT 446.

WE RECEIVED 102.

93 OF THOSE WERE IN FAVOR AND NINE WERE IN OPPOSITION.

ESSENTIALLY, THIS REQUEST WILL ELIMINATE THE LAND USE OF SHORT TERM RESIDENTIAL AND THE R1 ZONING DISTRICT IF IT WERE TO CONVERT TO THE R0 ZONING DISTRICT.

NOTE THE CRITERIA AND THE STAFF REPORT.

AT LEAST 78 PERCENT OF THE DWELLINGS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ARE OWNER OCCUPIED, AND THIS PETITION WAS INITIATED BY 76 PERCENT OF THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND BASED ON THIS PROPOSAL MEETING, THE CRITERIA OUTLINED IN THE LDRS STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, AND AT THE SEPTEMBER 21ST 21ST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST.

AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.

THANK YOU PETE. APPRECIATE IT.

COUNCIL ANY ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS POINT? ONE QUICK QUESTION, MAYOR.

YES, SIR. WE'RE CLEAR THAT THIS IS THE EXISTING SHORT TERM RENTAL PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE GRANDFATHERED UNDER THIS.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

VERY GOOD. IT IS 5:59 P.M.

I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM 8A.

AND I'M GOING TO START ON MY LEFT HERE.

IS THERE ANYONE ON THE LEFT STARTING WITH THE FRONT ROW AND MOVING BACK THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT? COME FORWARD, PLEASE, MA'AM.

MY NAME IS SANDRA STEPHENS AND I'M AN OWNER OCCUPIED RESIDENT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

I DIDN'T SUBMIT A FORM, BUT I'M AGAINST IT.

I BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY WITH THE RULES IN PLACE AT THE TIME.

I BELIEVE IN FREEDOM OF PROPERTY OWNERS TO DO WHAT THEY WANT WITH THEIR PROPERTY.

AND I REALLY RESENT ALL THE GOVERNMENT MANDATES COMING IN AND TAKING AWAY OUR LIBERTIES.

I DON'T PLAN TO RENT OUT MY PROPERTY AS A VACATION RENTAL, BUT I DON'T WANT ANYONE

[01:00:03]

TELLING ME WHAT I CAN AND CAN'T DO WITH PROPERTY THAT I OWN.

AND IF THERE'S SO MANY OWNER OCCUPIERS IN THIS AREA, WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? THIS IS A VACATION ISLAND.

THAT'S WHAT ATTRACTS PEOPLE HERE.

THAT'S WHAT ATTRACTS PEOPLE TO INVEST HERE.

AND I'M ALSO A REAL ESTATE INVESTOR, SO I REALLY AM SUPPORTIVE OF, YOU KNOW, FREE PROPERTY RIGHTS, BASICALLY.

SO I'M REALLY DISAPPOINTED AT THIS WHOLE THING, ESPECIALLY THAT A MAJORITY CAN OVERWHELM PEOPLE WHO OWN THINGS AND TELL THEM WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANYONE ELSE ON THAT ROW OR THE ROW BEHIND THERE, ANYONE ON THIS LEFT SIDE THAT WOULD LIKE COME FORWARD, SIR.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. HELLO, MY NAME IS ROBERT BOOTH.

I'M THE OWNER AND RESIDENT OF THE HOME, LOCATED AT 4807 DENVER DRIVE.

I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE.

I'M AN ATTORNEY HAVING PRACTICED LAW IN THIS ISLAND FOR 18 YEARS, AND IT'S GOOD TO SEE SO MANY FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS IN THE ROOM TODAY.

I WANT TO ADDRESS JUST A VERY, VERY NARROW TOPIC REGARDING THE LEGALITY OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE. YOU MAY HAVE HEARD THERE'S AN AUSTIN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION, WHICH STRUCK DOWN SHORT TERM RENTAL BANS IN AUSTIN.

IT'S MY OPINION THAT THE ZA'ATARI CASE DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS ORDINANCE AND THAT THE CITY HAS THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO ENACT THE ORDINANCE THE ORDINANCE.

THERE WERE SEVERAL KEY DIFFERENCES WITH THE AUSTIN ORDINANCE THAT ARE NOT PRESENT IN THIS ONE. FIRST, THE AUSTIN COURT OF APPEALS STRUCK DOWN THE BAN BECAUSE AUSTIN TRIED TO BAN EXISTING SHORT TERM RENTALS.

AS COUNCILMAN COLLINS HAS SAID, THIS DOES NOT APPLY RETROACTIVELY.

EXISTING STRS ARE ALLOWED.

SECOND, THE AUSTIN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION HAS A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT OCCUPANCY LIMITS THAT WERE A FEATURE OF THE AUSTIN BAN.

THAT BAN LIMITED THE PROPERTIES TO HAVING 10 PEOPLE AT A TIME OR 6 UNRELATED ADULTS LIVING THERE. THE AUSTIN COURT OF APPEALS FELT THIS BAND THIS VIOLATED THE FREE ASSEMBLY CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION.

DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT FEATURE IS PRESENT IN THIS IN THIS ORDINANCE.

THERE'S A LONG DISCUSSION THAT I THINK THAT WAS REALLY WEIGHED ON THE AUSTIN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION. AND THEN LASTLY, THE AUSTIN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION IS NOT BINDING ON THIS CITY COUNCIL.

AND THAT'S BECAUSE THE AUSTIN COURT OF APPEALS HEARS DISPUTES THAT ARISE FROM AUSTIN, NOT FROM GALVESTON.

AND HERE THE GALVESTON WOULD LOOK TO THE HOUSTON COURT OF APPEALS.

I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S A SIMILAR DECISION OUT OF THE HOUSTON COURT OF APPEALS.

AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THERE'S NOT A DECISION FROM THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT WHICH WOULD INVALIDATE THIS ORDINANCE OR THE R0 ZONING.

SO IN CLOSING, I URGE THE COUNCIL TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE, AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO MOVE TO THE HOTBED SECTION HERE OVER HERE.

SO LET'S START WITH THE FIRST, SECOND OR THIRD ROW.

ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS ISSUE? YES, MA'AM. COME FORWARD.

HI, MY NAME IS PAT MUSCOTT.

I LIVE ON THE 4700TH BLOCK OF WOODROW AND I AM FOR THE REZONING OF DENVER COURT.

I CAN TELL YOU I WAS INVOLVED IN THIS EFFORT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.

IT WAS A SMALL GROUP.

WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT SHORT TERM RENTALS MOVING INTO OUR AREA AND NOT ONLY THE ONES THAT WERE THERE ARE CONCERN REALLY WAS WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN MORE AND MORE COME INTO OUR COMMUNITY.

AND THAT WAS OUR ISSUE.

I CAN TELL YOU UP FRONT, WE ARE NOT AGAINST SHORT TERM RENTALS, BUT WHAT WE ARE PRO IS IN KEEPING OUR DENVER COURT A RESIDENTIAL AREA.

THAT WAS WHAT WAS IMPORTANT FOR US, AND WE HAD A GRASSROOTS EFFORT.

WE WENT TO OUR COUNCILMAN WHO TOOK US TO GALVESTON PLANNING.

THEY WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO TO SEND IN AN APPLICATION TO REZONE OUR COMMUNITY, AND WE FOLLOWED THOSE STEPS ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

IT TOOK US TWO MONTHS.

IT WAS HARD.

BUT IN AUGUST WE TURNED IN 251 SIGNED PETITIONS OF HOMEOWNERS TO KIND OF GIVE YOU A DISPLAY OF THIS.

THIS IS DENVER COURT AND THE GREEN SEA IS ALL OF THE HOMEOWNERS HOMES THAT SIGNED THE PETITION. SO I THINK OVERWHELMINGLY WHAT WE GOT FROM GOING DOOR TO DOOR WAS FINDING OUT

[01:05:05]

THAT PEOPLE WERE WANTING TO SAVE THE COMMUNITY.

AND THE KEY WORD HERE IS COMMUNITY.

SO I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MYSELF AND FOR ALL OF THOSE THAT SIGNED THE PETITION TO VOTE YES TO REZONE DENVER COURT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH [APPLAUSE].

ANYONE ELSE ON THAT ROW COME FORWARD, YES, SIR.

I DIDN'T SIGN A FORM, BUT MY NAME IS KEVIN [INAUDIBLE].

I LIVE AT THE 4800 BLOCK OF SHERMAN.

AND MY, MY WIFE, MY SON AND I ALL LIVED THERE.

BUT WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO BEING EMPTY NESTERS AND WE GOT A SENIOR AND WE WERE LOOKING AT MOVING AND WE HAD A HOUSE IN DENVER COURT AND THEN WE LOOKED AT OTHER PLACES AND IT'S LIKE, THERE IS A SENSE OF COMMUNITY, JUST A SENSE OF NEIGHBORHOOD THERE.

AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, AND THEN WE JUST WE BOUGHT A SMALLER HOUSE IN DENVER COURT FOUR BLOCKS AWAY OR, YOU KNOW, TWO BLOCKS AWAY, I GUESS, FROM WHERE WE WHERE WE WERE BEFORE.

AND IT'S THE SENSE OF KNOWING YOUR NEIGHBORS AND THAT SENSE OF COMMUNITY IS IT'S THERE AND IT'S APPARENT.

AND YOU TALKED ABOUT THE HOUSING BOARD EARLIER MAYOR WHERE YOU TALKED ABOUT ATTAINABLE, AFFORDABLE, QUALITY HOUSING.

AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE NEIGHBORS HERE ARE.

THEY'RE SEEKING THEY'RE SEEKING THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE ARE QUICKLY STARTING TO EVAPORATE IN GALVESTON.

AND IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE JUST, YOU KNOW, WE MAINTAIN THOSE WHERE WE CAN.

AND SO THAT WAS JUST KIND OF MY TWO CENTS ON ON WHERE THIS IS.

I'M FOR THIS AND I THINK I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GOOD THING JUST TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. SO APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.

[APPLAUSE] ANYONE ELSE ON THAT ROW? HELLO. HELLO.

I AM THE OTHER ANGELA BROWN IN TOWN.

MY NAME IS ANGIE BROWN.

MY HUSBAND, KIDS AND I LIVE IN THE 4800 BLOCK OF SHERMAN.

WE'VE LIVED THERE FOR 14 YEARS.

WE MOVED TO GALVESTON IN 2005 AND WE BOUGHT ONE OF THE VICTORIAN HOUSES IN THE EAST END.

AT THAT TIME, WE LIVED, LOVED LIVING CLOSE TO ALL THE RESTAURANTS ON 14TH STREET, WALKING EVERYWHERE WE WENT. SEEING TOURISTS WALK BY ON THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE.

SOMETIMES THOSE TOURISTS WOULD STOP IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE AND TALK ABOUT IT.

TAKE PICTURES OF THE HOUSE.

WE LOVED IT.

BUT THEN WE, THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS, DECIDED TO OPEN THEIR HOUSE AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL.

IT'S THE FIRST ONE I HAD EVER HEARD OF BEFORE.

THIS WAS ABOUT A YEAR BEFORE AIRBNB EVEN WAS A THING.

THIS THESE THIS FAMILY BOUGHT IT FROM OUT OF STATE AND THEY STARTED RENTING IT OUT EVERY WEEK OR EVERY WEEKEND, AND THERE WASN'T A SINGLE PARTY WHILE WE LIVED THERE.

IT WAS BEAUTIFULLY MAINTAINED.

IT WAS A HUGE, BEAUTIFUL, GORGEOUS VICTORIAN HOUSE, BUT THERE WERE CONSTANT ISSUES AND IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE THE OWNERS LIVED OUT OF STATE.

GUESTS SAT AROUND THE POOL OR ON THE PORCHES, TALKING UNTIL LATE AT NIGHT.

WE CAN OFTEN WE COULD OFTEN TELL THAT THEY WERE TRYING TO BE QUIET.

THEY WERE TRYING TO WHISPER.

BUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, WHEN IT'S 10 FEET FROM YOUR WINDOW, EVEN WHISPERING SOUNDS REALLY LOUD AND PEOPLE LAUGH AND THEY FORGET TO WHISPER, AND IT'S REALLY HARD TO SLEEP THROUGH THAT. AND THAT WAS A CONSTANT ISSUE.

WEEK AFTER WEEK WITH DIFFERENT PEOPLE EVERY WEEK.

PLUS, WE HAD TO CLEAN UP CIGARETTE BUTTS AND OTHER SMALL TRASH ALONG OUR FENCE LINE.

EVERY TIME OUR TODDLER WANTED TO PLAY IN THE BACKYARD, I HAD TO GO OUT AND MAKE SURE THERE WERE NO CIGARETTE BUTTS IN THE GRASS, AND WE HAD TO LISTEN TO A STREAM OF OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE FROM PEOPLE WHO WERE HANGING OUT AT THE POOL NEXT DOOR.

WE COULD HAVE ADDRESSED THE TRASH WITH NEIGHBORS, BUT HOW DO YOU TELL A GROUP OF ADULTS WHO ARE VACATIONING AND LAYING AROUND A POOL TO PLEASE WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE? WHEN IT'S A NEW SET OF PEOPLE EVERY TWO OR THREE DAYS? PLEASE WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE.

PLEASE WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE, PLEASE WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE.

I HAVE A TODDLER. IT'S JUST A CONSTANT PROBLEM.

THE SHORT TERM RENTAL WAS NOT THE ONLY REASON THAT WE DECIDED TO MOVE, BUT WE DECIDED THAT THE EAST END WAS NOT THE PLACE FOR OUR GROWING FAMILY.

AND SO WE DECIDED TO LOOK FOR A MORE FAMILY FRIENDLY, FAMILY FRIENDLY NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND WE PUT OUR HOUSE ON THE MARKET AND MOVED TO DENVER COURT IN 2008.

IT'S A QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD.

THERE'S VERY LITTLE TRAFFIC.

CERTAINLY NO TOURISTS ARE TAKING PICTURES OF OUR HOUSE THERE.

THE NEIGHBORS MOSTLY KEEP TO THEMSELVES, BUT WE ALL DO KNOW EACH OTHER AND EVERYONE KIND OF KEEPS AN EYE ON THINGS TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY GOING ON.

IF THERE'S AN UNUSUAL CAR OR A SUSPICIOUS PERSON, WE TEXT EACH OTHER.

IS THAT YOUR CAR? DO YOU HAVE SOMEONE VISITING? WE ALL WATCH OUT FOR EACH OTHER, AND THAT'S REALLY HARD TO DO WHEN THERE'S A SHORT TERM RENTAL ON YOUR BLOCK BECAUSE THERE'S A CONSTANT STREAM OF DIFFERENT CARS AND.

[01:10:02]

APPRECIATE IT [APPLAUSE].

WOODROW SINCE 2016, BUT PRIOR TO THAT, I LIVED AT 4804 SHERMAN IN 1983, SO I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF DENVER COURT SINCE 1983.

WE HAVE ONE DAUGHTER.

SHE MOVED OFF AND WENT TO COLLEGE AT A&M, GRADUATED FROM A&M, CAME BACK TO GALVESTON, WHICH IS WHAT WE WANT.

WE WANT OUR CHILDREN TO COME BACK TO GALVESTON.

SHE MARRIED.

SHE LIVES ON SHERMAN.

SHE'S RAISING HER CHILDREN.

I WANT FOR HER WHAT SHE HAD.

SHE WANTS FOR HER CHILDREN, WHAT SHE HAD.

PLEASE ALLOW THESE YOUNG FAMILIES TO CONTINUE TO HAVE A LOVING, QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

[APPLAUSE] ANYONE ELSE ON THAT ROW, THE ROW BEHIND THAT? YES, SIR, COME FORWARD.

MY NAME IS JOE MUSIC, AND I WAS RAISED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

TRICK OR TREATING AT ALL OF THESE HOUSES, AND THEN MY 38 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER CAME ALONG AND WE WENT TO GRANDMA'S HOUSE.

SO WE TREATED ALL OF THOSE HOUSES, AND NOW I'VE GOT TWO KIDS AT HOME.

SAME THING. THAT'S WHEN I GO SEE ALL THE NEIGHBORS.

I WANTED TO MENTION THAT I OWN 10 RENTAL PROPERTIES ON GALVESTON ISLAND.

I'VE HAD VACATION HOUSES THAT LEASED SHORT TERM ARE PRESENTLY DO NOT.

IN FACT, I AM A MEMBER AND VOTED IN FAVOR OF [INAUDIBLE] COVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND THE BAY MEADOWS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AS THEY BOTH HAVE ADOPTED RULES TO RESTRICT SHORT TERM RENTALS. I WAS IN FAVOR OF THESE RESTRICTIONS.

I PRESENTLY HAVE THREE HOMES IN THE DENVER COURT SUBDIVISION.

I MOVED MY DAUGHTER INTO ONE OF THEM, ONE OF WHICH WAS A VACATION RENTAL PRIOR TO MY BUYING IT, AND NOW IS A TWO YEAR LEASE.

THERE IS A SHORT TERM VACATION RENTAL ONE DOOR DOWN FROM MY HOMESTEAD.

THE POLICE HAVE BEEN THERE MANY TIMES.

THE TENANTS AND GUEST FOR THE WEEKEND OFTEN MAKE EXCESSIVE NOISE THROUGHOUT THE EVENING AND LATE INTO THE MORNING HOURS.

AT TIMES THERE HAVE EVEN BEEN AS MANY AS 20 VEHICLES PARKED NOT ONLY ON THE STREET BUT IN THE NEIGHBOR'S FRONT YARD.

THERE HAVE BEEN OCCASIONS WHEN FIREARMS HAVE BEEN DISCHARGED IN THE BACKYARD AS MANY AS FIVE TIMES. IT HAS AT TIMES BEEN A NUISANCE WITH BLARING MUSIC AND EVEN FOUR WHEELERS SQUEALING FIGURE EIGHTS IN THE STREET.

GOLF CARTS HAVING RACES, BLINDING LIGHTS SHINING TOWARDS MY WINDOWS AND THEY PARK IN EVERYBODY'S DRIVEWAY YARD.

AND THEN YOU HAVE TO GO FIND OUT WHO IT IS TO HAVE THEM MOVE.

SO I'M IN FAVOR OF OF RESTRICTING THIS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH [APPLAUSE].

ANYONE ELSE ON THAT ROW THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK THE ROW BEHIND THAT, ANYONE ELSE ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IT IS 6:13 PM.

I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8A.

AND I'M BRINGING THAT BACK TO COUNCIL COUNCIL.

ENTERTAIN A MOTION. OH, I'M SORRY.

I APOLOGIZE. WE HAVE WRITTEN COMMENTS ON THIS SECTION AND DO WE HAVE ANYBODY THAT'S VIRTUALLY ATTENDING THAT WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT JANELLE? NOT THAT I SEE ONLINE.

ALL RIGHT. IF YOU COULD READ THE WRITTEN COMMENTS, PLEASE, MA'AM.

OK. WE RECEIVED SIX WRITTEN COMMENTS RELATED TO THE DENVER COURT PETITION.

AND I'M GOING TO READ THEIR NAMES.

DENNIS SHEEHAN ASKED THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE PETITION.

OLIVIA NORDHAWK SUPPORTS THE DENVER COURT PETITION.

TRUDY DAVIS STRONGLY URGES THE REQUEST TO REZONE DENVER COURT BE APPROVED.

OLIVIA NORD HOOKE SUPPORTS THE DENVER COURT PETITION.

MARK MCQUADE SAYS I'M FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS, AND THEN [INAUDIBLE] FORK COMMENTED THAT HE WANTS TO SPEAK, BUT I DON'T SEE HIM ONLINE.

OK, I KNOW [INAUDIBLE] HAD ASKED TO SPEAK.

HE'S NOT ONLINE AND JESSE FOX IS ONLINE AND HE HAS HIS HAND UP.

HE WANTS TO SPEAK.

ALL RIGHT. JESSE, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, GO RIGHT AHEAD.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, THANKS FOR TAKING THE TIME TO ADDRESS THIS AND TO TO HEAR ME OUT A LITTLE BIT. I DID WRITE A LENGTHY NOTE THERE FOR YOU, BUT BUT APPARENTLY YOU DON'T HAVE IT IN YOUR PAPERS ANYWAY.

[01:15:03]

MY PROBLEM WITH I MEAN, I LIVE AT 2601 CHRISTOPHER SQUARE AT S AND A HALF AND AND 53RD STREET. IT'S A BEAUTIFUL HOME.

I LOVE LIVING HERE, BUT I GOT HERE.

WHEN I GOT HERE, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I COULD SHORT TERM RENTAL MY HOUSE IF I HAD TO. THINGS CAN HAPPEN.

YOU CAN SOMEHOW YOU NEED THE MONEY OR WHATEVER AND YOU HAVE TO DO IT.

THEN I WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO IT.

NOW I'VE DONE A LOT OF SHORT TERM RENTAL ALL OVER THE WORLD.

I'VE TRAVELED EXTENSIVELY AND THE SELF REGULATIONS THEY HAVE WITHIN THE SYSTEM BARS YOU FROM DOING THESE, THESE THINGS.

I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT ANYBODY WOULD BE ABLE TO LEASE A PROPERTY MORE THAN ONCE IF THEY HAD PEOPLE DOING DONUTS IN THE STREET AND LEAVING TRASH AND PARKING ON THE LAWNS AND ALL THAT. I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE THAT REALLY HAPPENING, AND I'VE ASKED PEOPLE ONLINE TO SHOW ME SOME VIDEOS OR SOME KIND OF PROOF THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED BECAUSE I JUST, I JUST DON'T BUY IT. BUT ANYWAY, MY REAL PROBLEM WAS THE ONLY IDEA THAT I HAD THAT I KNEW THAT ANY OF THIS WAS A PROBLEM WAS THAT SOMEBODY CAME TO MY DOOR AND THEY ASKED ME.

THEY TOLD ME ABOUT A LITTLE OLD LADY WHO WAS HAVING A PROBLEM.

AND THEY SAID THEY SHE HAD SHORT TERM RENTALS ON EITHER SIDE OF HER AND THAT IT WAS KEEPING HER UP ALL NIGHT.

AND THEN THERE WAS A CAR ALARM THAT WENT OUT IN FRONT OF HER HOUSE.

AND THAT WAS VERY DISTURBING FOR HER.

AND THEN I FOUND OUT LATER, WELL, THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A YEAR AND THEY JUST CAME UP TO MY DOOR AND SAID THAT LITTLE OLD LADY DOESN'T REALLY EXIST.

I JUST DON'T. I DON'T BUY THAT.

THAT'S THE CASE.

BUT THAT'S ALL THE INFORMATION I GOT.

AND WHEN I ASKED, I SAID, WELL, WHAT ABOUT THE TWO PEOPLE THAT ARE SHORT TERM RENTAL? MAYBE THEY'RE TAKING CARE OF THEIR ELDERLY PARENT? YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOOD REASONS TO SHORT TERM RENT AND THEY'RE PERSONAL REASONS, AND IT'S IT'S A VALUABLE IT'S TAKING YOUR MOST VALUABLE ASSET AND ALLOWING IT TO PRODUCE INCOME FOR YOU. SO IT CAN BE VERY IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE THAT.

AT SOME TIME IN THEIR LIFE, NEED THE MONEY.

I JUST COULDN'T IMAGINE THAT THEY COULD GET ALL THESE PEOPLE TO SIGN IT.

I DID GET A COPY OF ALL THE SIGNATURES AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY DID SIGN IT.

SO I'M I'M HAPPY TO BOW TO THEM ON THAT.

BUT MAN, THEY SPENT A LOT OF WORK, DOING SOMETHING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE I'VE NEVER EVEN NOTICED A SHORT TERM RENTAL ANYWHERE NEAR MY HOUSE.

NOW MAYBE THEY'RE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS INCLUDED IN THE MAP.

THERE'S NO SHORT TERM RENTAL GOING ON HERE.

I CERTAINLY DIDN'T WANT TO BE INCLUDED, SO.

THAT'S MY MAIN POINT. I THINK THAT WHAT WOULD BE FAIR IS IF THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD ALLOW A NOTE TO BE SENT TO ALL OF THE PEOPLE THAT SIGNED THIS THING AND GIVE THE OTHER SIDE OF THE THE OTHER OPINIONS AND ALSO SOME SOME KIND OF FACT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THE STORIES THEY WERE BEING TOLD WERE TRUE.

THAT'S IT. OK, SIR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR, I APPRECIATE THAT.

WE HAVE ONE PERSON ONLINE.

YES, WE HAVE TARA [INAUDIBLE], OK? AND MAYOR, IF I MAY, I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT MR. FOX'S COMMENTS WERE INCLUDED IN THE DIGITAL VERSION THAT WE SENT TO YOU GUYS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, PETE.

SO CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.

CALLING LIVE FROM THE FERRY LINE, I'M SORRY, I TRIED MY BEST TO BE THERE.

I LIVE AT 4727 CONFUCIUS PLACE.

MY NAME IS TARA [INAUDIBLE].

I'M ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT WAS WALKING AROUND WITH THE PETITION DURING THE SUMMER.

WE ACTUALLY STARTED THIS OVER THE SUMMER AND IT WAS NUMBER ONE, AMAZING TO ME.

HOW MANY PEOPLE. THIS IS NOT LIKE A BALLOT THAT YOU GO AND VOTE FOR.

THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO JUST SAID, I JUST I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT IT, I DON'T WANT TO SIGN IT WASN'T A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT REALLY SAID NO.

FOR THE MOST PART, THE PEOPLE THAT YOU DON'T SEE ON THERE THAT SAID YES WERE PEOPLE WE JUST COULDN'T GET A HOLD OF.

SO DO NOTE THAT ALSO JUST AS IN REBUTTAL, WE COMPLIED WITH WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL SET FORTH AS THE RULES OF HOW TO DO THIS AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD DELINEATION IS ALSO SET FORTH BY THE CITY. BUT I DO WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT BEHIND ME IS A VRBO.

THIS HAPPENED ABOUT A YEAR AGO, MAYBE.

AND ALTHOUGH WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY WILD PARTIES, I DO HAVE SMALL CHILDREN AND I AM CONCERNED OF WHO'S OUTSIDE MY HOUSE.

AND THERE'S PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE HOUSE ALL THE TIME.

AND YOU KNOW, FOR $167, YOU AND EIGHT OF YOUR FRIENDS CAN COME AND SPEND THE NIGHT IN MY BACKYARD, BASICALLY.

WE HAVE HOTELS FOR THIS.

WE WANT TO PRESERVE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

[01:20:01]

AND I THINK FOR OUR GROUP, IT'S REALLY ABOUT PRESERVING A NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO USE CITY COUNCIL. I WOULD SAY WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT VISION GALVESTON.

WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT REALLY RECRUITING A YOUNG WORKING CLASS AND A MIDDLE CLASS, OUR NURSES, OUR TEACHERS TO LIVE HERE.

WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM SOMEWHERE TO LIVE.

AND IF IT ALL BECOMES VACATION RENTAL, THEN YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO GO THE WAY OF THE NEXT BIG CITY THAT THAT'S HAPPENED TO.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

APPRECIATE IT. ANYONE ELSE ON THE LINE? ALL RIGHT. AND WE'VE READ ALL THE WRITTEN COMMENTS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE.

IT IS 6:20 P.M.

I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8A AND BRING THIS BACK TO COUNCIL FOR ACTION. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 8A.

IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT? I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

CAN WE VOTE ELECTRONICALLY? YOU CAN PUT YOUR MOTION AND SECOND UP THERE.

MIC] OH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PUSH THIS.

OK, VERY GOOD, IT DOES PASS, IT'S UNANIMOUS.

THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] NOW, YOU KNOW THAT THE RULES ARE ONCE YOU GET YOUR MOTION PASSED, YOU HAVE TO STAY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE MEETING, SO HAVE A NICE HAVE A NICE EVENING.

ALL RIGHT. ITEM 8B PLEASE, JANELLE.

GOOD TO SEE MR. [INAUDIBLE] ASSISTANT.

ITEM 8B CONSIDER.

MIC] IT'S LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE, TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING, IT WAS NOT A GOOD THING.

THAT GOES, ALL RIGHT, ITEM 8B PLEASE JANELLE.

[8.B. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Changing The Zoning From Residential, Single-Family (R-1) Zoning District To Restricted Residential, Single Family (R-0) Zoning District On Various Properties As Described Herein And Provided In The Attached Map And Which The Properties Are Legally Described As Hall And Jones Survey, Lots 1 – 30, Lots 21a – 29a, Reserve B1 & B2, Section 8, Pirates Cove Subdivision, In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Planning Case Number 21P-049; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (P. Milburn)]

ITEM 8B CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, CHANGING THE ZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY R1 ZONING DISTRICT TO RESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY R0 ZONING DISTRICT ON VARIOUS PROPERTIES, AS DESCRIBED HERE AND PROVIDED IN THE ATTACHED MAP IN WHICH THE PROPERTIES ARE LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS HOLLAND JONES SURVEY LOTS ONE THROUGH 30, LOTS 21 A THROUGH 21 29 A.

RESERVE B1 AND B2 SECTION 8.

PIRATES COVE SUBDIVISION, IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS. PLANNING CASE NUMBER 21P-049; MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.

CASE 21P 049 IS THE REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING IN ORDER TO DESIGNATE THE AREA AS A RESTRICTED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY R0 ZONING DISTRICT AND THE AREA SHOWN ON THE MAP IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS PIRATE'S COVE.

SECTION 8 THE HARBOR.

OF THE PUBLIC NOTICES WE SENT OUT SIXTY.

WE HAD NINE RETURNED IN.

THOSE NINE WERE IN FAVOR, NOTING THE STAFF REPORT AT THE THE CRITERIA TO ESTABLISH R0 ZONING DISTRICT, AND WE HAD AT LEAST 86 PERCENT.

THERE ARE CURRENTLY AT LEAST 86 PERCENT OF THE DWELLINGS THAT ARE OWNER OCCUPIED, AND THE PETITION WAS INITIATED BY 82 PERCENT OF THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND BASED ON THIS PROPOSAL MEETING, THE CRITERIA OUTLINED IN THE LDR STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. AND AT THE SEPTEMBER 21ST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION

[01:25:04]

VOTED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST.

AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFFS REPORT.

THANK YOU PETE ANY QUESTIONS COUNCIL FOR PETE? ALL RIGHT, IT IS 6:25 PM, I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8B.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT? COME FORWARD. YES, SIR.

HI, I'M MARK. MARK HILL, I HAVE THE PLEASURE OF SPEAKING FOR MY NEIGHBORS THIS EVENING.

EVERY DAY OF MY LIFE [INAUDIBLE] UNITED STATES BECAUSE I HAD LAND OWNERS RIGHTS AND MY FELLOW LANDOWNERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE FOR ABSOLUTELY UNEQUIVOCALLY FOR THIS R0 ZONING. WE HAVE A FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD WERE A PLANTED NEIGHBORHOOD, WE GOT A HOA AND WE GOT DEED RESTRICTIONS.

SOMEBODY MIGHT SAY, IF YOU GOT THAT, WHY DO YOU NEED IT? WHAT'S BELT AND SUSPENDERS? MY OLD FRIEND MIKE DRISCOLL, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, SAID IF THERE'S ONE PLACE YOU DON'T WANT TO GET CAUGHT WITH YOUR PANTS DOWN, IT'S THE COURTHOUSE.

AND SO BELT AND SUSPENDERS, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ON THIS, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE WHAT WE WANT TO HAVE IS A LAND OWNERS PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY. WE HAVE DEED RESTRICTIONS, BUT WE'D LIKE TO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THIS R0 AND I STAND READY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS OR TO SIT BACK DOWN AT YOUR PLEASURE.

THANK YOU, MARK. APPRECIATE IT.

IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. HILL? I DON'T THINK SO.

MARK, IF THERE ARE, WE'LL CALL YOU BACK UP.

YES, SIR. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM LIKE TO COMMENT PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD.

ANYONE THAT'S ON THE LINE OR ANY WRITTEN COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR ONE, JANELLE.

THERE ARE NO WRITTEN COMMENTS, BUT IF ANYONE'S ON THE LINE, THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.

YOU CAN USE THE RAISE HAND FEATURE RIGHT NOW.

SEEING NONE, NO COMMENTS, ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD IT IS 6:27 P.M.

I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8B.

YES, MARIE. I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO APPROVE.

I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF 8B.

IS THERE A SECOND? I HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN COLLINS.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE CAST ARE OPPOSED.

IT WILL NOT LET ME DO ANYTHING.

IT STILL SAYS YES, WE FIXED IT THAT WAY.

YOU KNOW, I DID HEAR I JUST IGNORED YOU.

ALL RIGHT. AS COUNCILWOMAN ROBB, THERE WE ARE.

ALL RIGHT. YEAH, OK.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE, PLEASE.

[INAUDIBLE] HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

THERE WE GO. YES.

HIT IT AGAIN, MARIE [INAUDIBLE] ALL RIGHT, AND IT IS UNANIMOUS FOR THOSE THAT ARE HERE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 8C PLEASE, JANELLE.

[8.C. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Creating A Planned Unit Development (Pud) Overlay Zoning District In A Residential, Single-Family (R-1) Zoning District To Construct A Single-Family Residential Development On Property Commonly Known As 0 Marina Blvd., And Which Is Legally Described As Hall And Jones Survey, Portion Of Abandoned Right-Of-Way Marina Boulevard, South Portion Of Res B; Pirates Beach Section 1 (0-5), And Portions Of Lots 67, 70, And 77; Trimble And Lindsey Section 3; In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas; Planning Case Number 21p-051; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; And Providing For An Effective Date. (A. Montalvan)]

ALL RIGHT. ITEM 8C CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, CREATING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT IN A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY R1 ZONING DISTRICT TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS ZERO MARINA BOULEVARD, AND WHICH IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS HOLLAND JONES SURVEY PORTION OF ABANDONED RIGHT OF WAY MARINA BOULEVARD SOUTH PORTION OF RESIDENTIAL B PIRATE'S BEACH, SECTION ONE ZERO THREE FIVE AND PORTIONS OF LOT SIXTY SEVEN, SEVENTY AND SEVENTY SEVEN.

TRIMBLE AND LINDSEY SECTION THREE IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

PLANNING CASE NUMBER 21P-051 MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ADRIEL, NICE TO SEE YOU.

GOOD EVENING. COUNCILMAN. 21P-051 ZERO MARINA BOULEVARD THERE WERE SEVEN PUBLIC NOTICES SENT. ONE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION.

THIS REQUEST IS TO ESTABLISH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PUD TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

THE INTENT OF THIS PART IS TO DEVIATE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND FRONT SET BACKS IN THE R1 ZONING DISTRICT ALLOW FOR A PRIVATE STREET.

REDUCE THE WIDTH OF THE PRIVATE STREET FROM 60 TO 28 AND ALLOWED FOR A DEVIATION FROM THE LDR, WHICH REQUIRES THAT IN THE STREETS TO PROVIDE A TURNAROUND.

PLEASE NOTE THE PLAN DETAILS.

ON PAGES TWO, THREE, FOUR OF YOUR STAFF REPORT.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED THIS REQUEST ON SEPTEMBER 21ST AND VOTED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST. THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS.

[01:30:02]

STAFF IS ALSO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS LISTED AS ONE THROUGH FOUR AND AND STANDARD CONDITIONS FIVE TO SEVEN ON PAGE FIVE OF YOUR STAFF REPORT.

I BELIEVE NOW WE HAVE SOME PHOTOGRAPHS.

THIS IS THE THE AERIAL OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LAST SLIDE, PLEASE.

THESE ARE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, SOUTHEAST AND WEST.

THAT CONCLUDES SELF-SUPPORT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ADRIEL.

I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU.

I KNOW IN THESE CONDITIONS.

THEY HAVE 24 MONTHS TO.

TO GET THEIR BUILDING PERMITS, WOULD YOU REFRESH MY MEMORY AGAIN ABOUT HOW LONG ONCE THAT PERMIT IS GRANTED, HOW LONG DO THEY HAVE TILL THEY START CONSTRUCTION? SO BASICALLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS PROVISION, THEY HAVE 24 MONTHS.

BUT AFTER YOU OBTAIN A PERMIT, THE PERMIT IS VALID WHILE PROVIDED YOU CONTINUE TO TO WORK ON IT AS LONG AS PROGRESS IS BEING MADE.

IT DOESN'T. IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T VOID OUT.

IT CONTINUES TO BE VALID AS LONG AS YOU'RE WORKING ON IT NOW WITH THE PROVISION IN PLACE.

IT'S BASICALLY STATING THAT THEY THEY THEY HAVE UP TO 24 MONTHS AND THIS IS A LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT WHICH WILL PROBABLY USE MOST OF THAT TIME FRAME THERE.

BUT ONCE THAT PERMITS, GRANTED THEY HAVE 24 MONTHS TO START CONSTRUCTION, SO THEY HAVE THEY NEED TO OBTAIN A PERMIT [INAUDIBLE] MONTHS FROM TODAY, IF GRANTED, BUT ONCE THEY GET THEIR PERMIT. IS THERE A TIMELINE THAT THEY HAVE TO START CONSTRUCTION FROM THAT POINT FORWARD? WELL, TYPICALLY THE PERMIT IS VALID FOR SIX MONTHS IF NOTHING HAPPENS.

OK, THANKS THAT ANSWERS THAT.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ADRIEL? ALL RIGHT. IT IS 6:32 P.M.

I'M GOING TO HOPE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ITEM, 8C DOES ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS OR THE APPLICANT HERE.

HEARING NO RESPONSE, ANYONE ONLINE, JANELLE, OR ANY WRITTEN COMMENTS.

THERE ARE NO WRITTEN COMMENTS, BUT IF ANYONE IS ON THE LINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, YOU CAN USE THE RAISE HAND FUNCTION.

SEEING NONE. NO RESPONSES.

ALL RIGHT, IT IS A 6:32 P.M.

I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION ON ITEM 8C BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL FOR ACTION.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI, THANK YOU.

SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER.

VERY GOOD. ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

VERY GOOD, LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 8D PLEASE MA'AM.

[8.D. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Abandoning Property Adjacent To 628 93rd Street And Adjacent Property Is Legally Described As Lot 1, Block 9, Massa Unrecorded Subdivision; In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas; Planning Case Number 21P-040; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject(C. Gorman)]

8D CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, ABANDONING PROPERTY ADJACENT TO 628 93RD STREET AND ADJACENT PROPERTY IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 1, BLOCK 9, MASSA UNRECORDED SUBDIVISION. IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

PLANNING CASE NUMBER 21P-040, MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND WHO FROM STAFF WILL PRESENT THIS? [INAUDIBLE] COME RIGHT UP FORWARD.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL [INAUDIBLE] DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE HERE TONIGHT.

THIS IS CASE 21P-040.

IT IS A REQUEST FOR AN ABANDONMENT OF A TRACT OF LAND THAT'S 39 40 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS ZERO POINT NINE ACRES, ITS A PORTION OF 93RD STREET RIGHT AWAY.

THAT'S NORTH OF ITS INTERSECTION WITH WEST BAY DRIVE OVER TO THE NORTH OF [INAUDIBLE] POINT AREA. THIS CASE WAS DEFERRED IN THE SEPTEMBER MEETING.

THE LAST SEPTEMBER MEETING THAT YOU HAD THE REQUESTING PARTY IS AARON AND JOANNA SMITH, WHO HAVE A LOT ABUTTING THE EAST EDGE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AT 628 93RD STREET.

THE OWNER TO THE WEST AT 9306 VISTA BELLA HAS CHOSEN NOT TO SEEK THE PROPERTY BUT HAS ENJOINED IN THE REQUEST FOR THE PURPOSES OF FILING THE ZONING AND LAND USE SURROUNDING THE TRACT. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL THERE ARE NO IMPACTS TO THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.

[01:35:06]

THERE ARE NO UTILITIES, ACCORDING TO CITY RECORDS.

TEN NOTIFICATIONS WERE SENT OF THAT NUMBER NINE WRITTEN RETURNS, THREE IN FAVOR.

SIX OPPOSED.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED UNANIMOUSLY AT THEIR 8-17-21 MEETING TO RECOMMEND DENIAL, AND THE STAFF REPORT PRESENTED AT THAT MEETING RECOMMENDED DENIAL AS WELL.

YOU WILL FIND THAT AUGUST STAFF REPORT IN YOUR AGENDA ITEMS FOR TODAY AS AS PRESENTED.

YOU ALSO FIND TWO OTHER ITEMS NUMBER ONE A SERIES OF PDF MAPS REGARDING DRAINAGE IN THIS AREA, AND THAT WAS PRODUCED IN RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THAT SEPTEMBER CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AT WHICH TIME MR. MAXWELL COMMITTED TO HAVING ELEVATION AND FLOW LINE DATA EVALUATED BY OUR CITY CHIEF SURVEYOR AND THEN TWO A SUPPLEMENTARY STAFF REPORT DOCUMENT AMENDING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION BASED UPON THE STATUS OF RIGHT AWAY DISCOVERED AFTER THAT AUGUST STAFF REPORT WAS GENERATED.

WE WILL PROVIDE YOU ALSO A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION TONIGHT WITH RESPONSES TO AN OPINION LETTER BY MR. TIM BEATON REGARDING THIS RIGHT AWAY THAT WAS SENT TO CITY COUNCIL AFTER THE AGENDA WAS POSTED. ONE ADDITIONAL POINT REGARDING THAT AUGUST STAFF MEETING, I'M STILL I'M SORRY, THE AUGUST STAFF REPORT WAS THAT THERE WAS A STATEMENT MADE IN THAT REPORT SAID ALTHOUGH UNIMPROVED, THE 93RD STREET RIGHT AWAY PROVIDES PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE BAY, IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THERE IS NO PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE BAY AT THIS TIME AT 93RD STREET.

IT IS AN UNIMPROVED UNDEDICATED RIGHT OF WAY THAT THE CITY MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE AN INTEREST IN BY PRESCRIPTION.

WE CERTAINLY DO NOT HAVE ANY TITLE SUPERIOR TO THAT IN THIS CASE.

I BELIEVE THE STAFF MAKING THE ORIGINAL THE ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION UNINTENTIONALLY PRESUMED THAT ALL RIGHTS OF WAY IMPLY AN EQUAL OWNERSHIP INTEREST, REGARDLESS OF HOW ANY RIGHT AWAY MAY HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED.

I ALSO WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT TO APPLICABILITY IN THIS CASE.

THE STAFF REPORT REFERENCED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND IN PARTICULAR, THE TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS AN OBJECTIVE T FOR ENTITLED IMPROVE INTERNAL CITY ORGANIZATION POLICIES AND PLANNING TO PROVIDE BETTER TRANSPORTATION OPPORTUNITIES.

A SUB OBJECTIVE OF PROVIDING THOSE BETTER TRANSPORTATION OPPORTUNITIES IS T 4.2, WHICH DEALS WITH ENSURING APPROPRIATE USE OF PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY.

THERE HAVE BEEN MADE NUMEROUS REFERENCES TO THOSE LAST TWO STATEMENTS.

I'M SORRY THOSE LAST TWO SENTENCES OF THAT NARRATIVE.

THOSE SENTENCES STATE: CONTINUED PUBLIC ACCESS TO BODIES OF WATER SHOULD BE A CONSIDERATION IN THE ABANDONMENT PROCESS.

NO RIGHTS OF WAY THAT PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS TO BODIES OF WATER SHOULD BE ABANDONED.

SOME CITIZENS HAVE RELIED UPON THOSE TWO NARROW SENTENCES ALONE TO CLAIM THAT THE CITY SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ABANDON THE RIGHT OF WAY PERIOD.

HOWEVER, THAT NARRATIVE MUST BE TAKEN IN ITS FULL CONTEXT.

JANELLE, CAN YOU POST THE SUPPLEMENTARY STAFF REPORT? WE WANTED TO PUT THAT ENTIRETY OF THE LANGUAGE UP SO THAT YOU CAN BETTER SEE THE CONTEXT OF THOSE STATEMENTS.

KEEP GOING DOWN. RIGHT THERE, AND YEAH, AND THAT PART THAT'S INDENTED, MAYBE MOVE THAT PORTION UP A LITTLE BIT.

THERE YOU GO. OK.

THAT PARAGRAPH MAKES CLEAR THAT THE CONTEXT RELATED TO THE ROADWAY GRID WITHIN THE URBAN CORE. THAT'S THE CONTEXT OF THAT SECTION OF THE URBAN URBAN CORE AND GRID PATTERN DISCUSSION IN THAT PORTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

IN FACT, IN THAT SAME SHORT PARAGRAPH, THERE ARE EIGHT REFERENCES TO THE TERMS URBAN CORE AND THE GRID EIGHT REFERENCES.

I DON'T SEE HOW IT CAN BE CONCLUDED THAT THOSE TWO SENTENCES ARE NOT IN THE CONTEXT OF URBAN CORE AND THE GRID.

I THINK THEY'RE INTENDED TO BE.

I CERTAINLY CAN'T, AS A DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR, MAKE THAT LEAP IN ANY REASONABLE

[01:40:04]

PERSPECTIVE. THE [INAUDIBLE] POINT AREA IS NOT IN THE URBAN CORE, NOR IS IT WITHIN THE STREET GRID. I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANY QUESTION OF THAT FACT.

SO IT RAISES THE QUESTION OF APPLICABILITY IN THIS INSTANCE.

ADDITIONALLY, IN THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPH, THERE'S A STATEMENT THAT THE THAT THE CITY HAS A DUTY TO BALANCE THE DESIRES OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS WITH THE PROTECTION OF PUBLIC LAND.

THIS DUTY TO BALANCE DOES NOT SUPPORT THE NOTION THAT THE CITY IS SOMEHOW PROHIBITED FROM ABANDONING THE RIGHT OF WAY CITY COUNCIL, AT ITS DISCRETION, MAY ABSOLUTELY ABANDON THE RIGHT OF WAY IF IT'S SO DEEMS APPROPRIATE.

THERE IS NO PROHIBITION.

AND REMEMBER, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS NOT AN ORDINANCE OR LAW.

IT IS A BASICALLY A GUIDANCE DOCUMENT IN DECISION MAKING AND IN ITS CONTEXT OF ITS OBJECTIVE, WHICH IN THIS CASE IS ENSURING APPROPRIATE USE OF RIGHT OF WAY TO PROVIDE BETTER TRANSPORTATION OPPORTUNITIES.

IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE APPLICABLE TO EITHER THE OBJECTIVE OR THE GEOGRAPHY.

IN THIS INSTANCE.

I AM ALSO GOING TO INTRODUCE OUR OUR.

OUR CHIEF SURVEY.

I'M SORRY, I MAY HAVE GOTTEN THE TITLE WRONG.

WHERE ARE YOU? OK? HE'S OUR OUR CHIEF SURVEYOR FOR THE CITY OF GALVESTON, HAS DONE SOME SIGNIFICANT WORK IN REALLY TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT IS GOING ON OUT THERE.

AND IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'LL HAVE HIM COME UP AND PRESENT JUST A LITTLE BIT BEFORE WE GET INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

HOW Y'ALL DOING, MAYOR COUNCIL? GOOD TO SEE YOU, BOSS.

YES, I'M DAVID FRISBY, CHIEF SURVEYOR FOR CITY OF GALVESTON.

GLAD TO BE HERE FOR FOR Y'ALL TO GO THROUGH THIS.

I WENT OUT AND DID A SURVEY AND TOOK GROUND ELEVATIONS BASED ON [INAUDIBLE] ELEVATION, WHICH IS THE TYPICAL ELEVATION THAT WE ALL USE IN THE COUNTRY, REALLY.

BUT IN ANY CASE, IF YOU'LL PUT THE SLIDES UP, PLEASE, WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS OF 93RD STREET AND WEST BAY AREA.

FIRST THING WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IS THE WEST BAY ROAD.

THE FLOW LINE ELEVATIONS ALONG WEST BAY, I FOUND TO FLOW FROM THE WEST SIDE OF THE WEST END OF WEST BAY AND THE EAST SIDE OF 93RD STREET.

THEY FLOW EAST AND THERE'S A DITCH THAT SHOWS THAT WILL WILL GO TO THAT IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. AND YOU CAN SEE THIS HERE.

THIS PICTURE IS DEPICTING NORTH BEING ON THE LEFT SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN, SOUTH BEING ON THE RIGHT SIDE AND EAST BEING STRAIGHT UP WEST, BEING STRAIGHT DOWN.

SO THE DITCH FLOW LINES ARE ARE CALLED OUT IN BLUE.

YOU CAN SEE THE BLUE LINES GOING BETWEEN EACH OF THE DRIVEWAYS, AND THOSE FLOW LINES START AT 167 IS WHERE THE DITCH ACTUALLY BEGINS TO FLOW.

AND THEN IT FLOWS TO THE EAST ALL THE WAY AND YOU CAN SEE THE NUMBERS 154, 158, AND THEN 139. AND THEN IT TURNS AND GOES TO THE NORTH AND IT FLOWS 111, 108, 094 AND I DIDN'T GET OUT IN THE WATER TO GET THAT SHOT BEYOND THAT.

SO BUT IT CLEARLY FLOWS EAST AND THEN TO THE NORTH WHEN IT TURNS WITH THAT DITCH THAT'S THERE ON THAT LAST HOUSE.

NOW ON THE THE WEST END OVER HERE.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS, I WANT TO POINT THAT OUT.

TYPICALLY, ALL THAT PAVEMENT IS ALMOST ALL THE SAME ELEVATION.

IT'S AROUND 3 FEET 315, 310.

THE CROWN OF THE STREET IS ABOUT THREE INCHES HIGHER THAN THAT.

THE STREET DOES HAVE A CROWN ALL THE WAY AT 93RD AND WEST BAY BOTH HAVE A CROWN.

AND SO ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET, YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY'RE TYPICALLY AROUND 314, 307, 3 FOOT. AND I POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE I WANT YOU ALL TO TAKE NOTE OF THAT.

THAT'S THE STREET.

AND THEN IF YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS 93RD STREET AND NOTICE THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT, THAT'S THE POINTS THAT SAY EP THAT'S. YOU CAN SEE IT 310.

IF YOU START ON THIS SIDE OVER HERE 310, 317, 311, 312, 308, 302.

[01:45:05]

SEE, IT'S BASICALLY THE SAME.

IT STARTS TO COME UP A LITTLE BIT WHEN YOU GET TO TEICHMANN ROAD, BUT THEN NOTICE ALSO ON THE WEST SIDE OF 93RD STREET.

THERE'S NO DITCH, THERE'S NOT A DITCH AT ALL.

AND THE GRAY JUST DROPS FROM THE PAVEMENT DOWN TO THAT WETLAND AREA, AND THEN IT JUST KIND OF DRAINS OUT FROM THERE.

BUT NOTICE THE ELEVATIONS ON THAT WEST SIDE.

THEY FLOW TYPICALLY TO THE SOUTH AND PRIMARILY FROM THE NORTH END TO THE SOUTH END.

AND THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT BECAUSE THERE'S AN INFLOW OUTFLOW PIPE THAT WE'LL GET TO IN A MINUTE, BUT YOU'LL NOTICE THOSE ELEVATIONS HOW THEY FALL 209, 203, 189, 176, 17 4 THAT ONE THAT SAYS 209.

THERE USED TO BE SOMETHING THERE WHERE THE LAND CAME OUT AND IT WAS A LITTLE HIGHER.

BUT IF I HAD RECORDED THIS WAY OR THAT WAY OF IT, IT WOULD BE LOWER AND IT COMES DOWN TO ONE POINT THREE, WHICH IS RIGHT THERE.

BEFORE YOU GET TO ALL THAT WATER AREA AND ALL THAT WATER AREA IS VERY LOW.

IF YOU'LL PLEASE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

AND IT'S WHAT I WANT US TO LOOK AT IS THE THE ELEVATION OF THIS SMALL RIDGELINE THAT'S THERE, THAT RIDGE LINE, AND WE'RE GOING TO POINT THAT OUT IN THE NEXT SLIDE.

BUT THAT RIDGE LINE HAS BEEN THERE FOR AS LONG AS I CAN REMEMBER PHYSICALLY.

REMEMBER BEING OUT THERE.

OK. AND THEN ALSO THE EVIDENCE FROM THE AERIALS, THE GOOGLE AERIAL MAPS, THE GOOGLE AERIAL MAPS, YOU CAN GO BACK IN THE ARCHIVES AND YOU CAN SEE SOME REALLY GOOD DEPICTION OF THAT RIDGE LINE THAT WAS THERE BEFORE THERE WAS ANY DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S BEEN THERE FOR LORD ONLY KNOWS HOW LONG.

BUT ANYWAY, IF YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS FROM 2006.

THERE WAS NO DEVELOPMENT WEST OR EAST OF THOSE EXISTING HOMES THAT HAD BEEN THERE, MANY OF THEM THERE FOR A LONG, LONG TIME.

AND BUT YOU CAN SEE THE RIDGE LINE UP TO THE NORTH END THERE.

IT'S IT'S SOLID.

IT'S ALL VEGETATED.

IT'S IT'S BUILT UP.

IT'S OBVIOUS THAT WATER DOES NOT FLOW TO THE NORTH, IT FLOWS TO THE SOUTH.

AND WHEN YOU DO HAVE WATER NOW, WHEN YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, STORMS LIKE NICHOLAS COME ALONG WELL, THEN THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING BECAUSE THE WATER IS BEING SURGED TO THE NORTH PRIMARILY. AND SO WHEN YOU HAVE THAT WATER SURGE AND AND YOU HAVE THE HEIGHT OF THAT, WELL, IT'S GOING TO COVER EVERYTHING SO THAT WATER WILL COVER EVERYTHING.

IT'LL GO UNTIL THE SURGE STOPS.

AND THEN AS THE WATER RECEDES, YOU WOULD SEE THE WATER LITERALLY FLOWING BACK TOWARDS THE OUTFALL, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO SEE IN A MOMENT IF YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

I WANT TO SHOW SOME MORE, IF YOU'LL.

IS THERE ANOTHER SLIDE? SORRY.

OK.

THIS IS FROM 95, YOU CAN STILL SEE THAT UPLANDS AND YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOMES OVER THERE, THE VEGETATION IS, I MEAN, IT'S IT'S CLEAR YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THE WETLAND AREA ON BOTH SIDES.

THE ONE ON THE EAST OF 93RD IS MORE PREDOMINANT IN LOWER AREAS, BUT THE ONE ON THE WEST SIDE HAS ITS LOWEST AREA DOWN WHERE IT DRAINS OUT.

IF YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS THIS IS THE RIDGE LINE THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.

[01:50:01]

I TOOK SOME ELEVATIONS ALONG THAT THAT LINE, AND I WANT TO POINT OUT 377, 373, 342, 316 316 IS ABOUT THE SAME AS THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT 334.

THAT'S ACTUALLY AT THE FENCE.

OH SURE, YOU ALL SHOULD BE ABLE TO HEAR ME.

YEAH. YES, SIR.

334 THIS IS THE FENCE LINE.

IT GOES HERE AND I WANT TO POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE YOU CAN'T CHANGE THE FENCE LINE ELEVATION. THAT FENCE LINE HAS BEEN THERE FOR AGES MANY YEARS.

YOU CAN GO BACK THROUGH THE ARCHIVES AS LONG AS YOU WANT TO GO BACK, BUT THAT FENCE HAS BEEN THERE AND IT'S THREE FOOT 309 I DIDN'T GET A SHOT HERE, BUT IT'S STILL THE SAME GRADE, BASICALLY UP TO 334, WHICH MAKES SENSE.

BECAUSE YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER SIDE AND IT'S [INAUDIBLE].

BUT THIS LINE HERE IS GOING TO BE ABOUT THE SAME AS 3 3.8.

YOU KNOW? SO NOTICE BEFORE THAT DITCH WAS DUG, WHICH IT WAS DUG ABOUT 2016.

I'M GOING TO GUESS. IT WAS DONE ABOUT THAT TIME 2016, AND IF IT HAD BEEN DONE, YOU WOULD STILL HAVE THOSE THREE PLUS ELEVATIONS ALL THROUGH THERE.

ALSO, WHOEVER DUG IT.

THEY DUG IT WITH A FLOW TO THE SOUTH.

NOT TO THE NORTH TO [INAUDIBLE] 278 ON THE FLOW LINE 241, 221, 189 AND IT GOES NOWHERE.

HAS NO OUTLET, THERE'S NO FORWARD.

THERE WAS NEVER A POLL NEVER PUT IN HERE, TO MY KNOWLEDGE AT ALL.

I COULDN'T FIND IT. IF IT'S THERE, IT'S COMPLETELY BURIED, THEN BURIED.

BUT THERE'S NO POLL.

AND SO THE WATER BASICALLY JUST IT FLOWS BACK HERE AND IT SITS.

[INAUDIBLE] BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY 189 IS MUCH LOWER THAN 3 2, 329, 334.

THERE IS AN OBVIOUS RIDGE HERE.

AND IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT THOSE ARCHIVES PICTURES, YOU CAN SEE BEFORE ANYBODY DROVE ON IT. THE PEOPLE DRIVING ON IT.

OBVIOUSLY, WHEN I FOUND YOU SEE THIS, THIS IS A PIPE.

THIS PIPE AND OTHER PIPES, HERE'S ANOTHER ONE, THIS ONE.

THEY WERE PUT HERE TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM DRIVING THROUGH THERE.

SOMEBODY OBVIOUSLY PUT THEM THERE TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM GOING THROUGH THERE, PROBABLY TO KEEP [INAUDIBLE] AND THEY JUST BYPASSED IT AND WENT RIGHT THROUGH HERE AND JUST DROVE THEIR BIG TRUCKS RIGHT THROUGH.

ANYWAY, THAT'S WHAT I FOUND BY LOOKING AT DIFFERENT INFORMATION ON GOOGLE.

CAN WE GET YOU TO COME BACK TO THE MICROPHONE? [INAUDIBLE] THEY CAN'T HEAR HIM ONLINE.

OK, COULD YOU GO BACK TO YOUR MIC THERE, SIR? THEY NEED TO HEAR YOU ONLINE THERE.

OH, OK, YES.

SO CLEARLY THERE'S A RIDGE THERE AND IT CLEARLY DIVIDES THAT WETLAND FROM THE BAY AND THERE'S NO CONNECTION AT ALL.

THE ONLY CONNECTION WE HAVE WITH THE BAY IS IN THE DITCH ON WEST BAY ROAD THAT FLOWS EAST AND THEN NORTH DOWN THAT DITCH.

THAT'S IT. THERE'S NO CONNECTION NOW WITH OFFATTS BAYOU.

WE DO HAVE A CONNECTION AND THAT'S WHAT ACTUALLY FEEDS THIS WETLAND AREA.

THERE'S A CULVERT, A 24 INCH CULVERT THAT'S BEEN THERE A LONG, LONG TIME.

IT'S A VERY OLD CULVERT.

I I CAN'T GUESS HOW LONG IT'S BEEN THERE, BUT IT'S BEEN THERE A WHILE.

PROBABLY, I DON'T KNOW, 60S, 50S, MAYBE.

BUT ANYWAY, IT'S WHAT CONNECTS THAT WETLAND AREA ON THE WEST SIDE OF 93RD STREET AND IF YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THAT THIS IS JUST DESCRIBING THAT DITCH THAT I SHOWED YOU, IT HAS A ONE POINT ONE FOUR PERCENT SLOPE TO IT AND IT GOES NOWHERE.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE, I'VE ALREADY EXPLAINED THAT.

THIS IS THAT WAS JUST SHOWING YOU A BIGGER PICTURE.

THERE YOU GO. NOW THE TIDAL FLOW, THE TIDAL INFLUENCE TO THAT WETLAND AREA COMES THROUGH THAT 24 INCH PIPE.

IF THERE IS ANY OTHER INFLUENCE COMING INTO THAT AREA, I COULDN'T FIND IT.

AND IT WOULD TAKE MORE TO TRY TO FIND IT.

BUT IF IT IS, IT'S COMING IN AGAIN FROM OFFATTS BAYOU AND PROBABLY GOING DOWN A PROPERTY

[01:55:05]

LINE UNDERNEATH TEICHMANN ROAD AND INTO THAT REALLY DEEP WATER AREA.

BUT IF YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE AND WE'LL SHOW THAT RIGHT THERE, DO YOU SEE? I'M SORRY, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO LEAVE THE MIC SO I CAN SHOW YOU OK.

YES. OH. ALL RIGHT.

THIS IS THAT DEEP WATER AREA RIGHT HERE.

AND ANYBODY THAT LIVES OUT THERE KNOWS THAT THAT WATER'S DEEP.

IF YOU GO TO STEP OFF IN THERE, YOU'RE GOING SWIMMING.

AND THEN THIS IS ANOTHER BIG AREA RIGHT HERE THAT'S ALWAYS GOT WATER IN IT.

PRETTY MUCH FOR THE MOST PART.

ALL THIS WATER HAS A DRAIN THAT COMES OVER HERE LIKE THIS.

COMES DOWN HERE LIKE THIS.

IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEEING HERE BECAUSE YOU KIND OF LOSE IT, BUT IT COMES IN AND THEN IT GOES OUT THIS PIPE RIGHT HERE TO THIS CANAL.

[INAUDIBLE] AND THAT'S IT, THAT'S WHERE THE WATER COMES IN AND FEEDS THIS WHOLE AREA.

IT'S NOT ANYWHERE ELSE UNLESS THERE'S A PIPE UNDER HERE THAT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT.

[INAUDIBLE] UH, CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE? THAT'S IT. SO, YEAH, IT'S YOUR TURN DON.

DID YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING OR DO YOU NEED ME TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. FRISBEE AT THIS POINT? THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST, YOU KNOW, I HAD ASSURED EVERYBODY OUT THERE THAT WE WOULD DO A THOROUGH EXAMINATION OF IT WHEN THEY BROUGHT THOSE POINTS FORWARD, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE DID IT AND I APPRECIATE MR. FRISBEE. I KNOW HE SPENT A LOT OF TIME OUT THERE, SO THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU, DAVID.

VERY, VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, SIR. DON, [INAUDIBLE] I LIKE IT DON.

MIC IS ON CORRECT.

MIC IS ON GOOD.

OK, WE TOOK SOME ITALICS.

MR. BEATON'S LETTER I.

I KNEW MR. BEATON WOULD BE WRITING A LETTER [INAUDIBLE] THE MAYOR, ONE WOULD BE FORTHCOMING AND.

THE COMMENTS IN OUR ITALICS ARE FROM HIS LETTER.

AND I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT A FEW.

HE SAYS IF THE CITY DENIES IT HAS A FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN THE LAND, WHY ARE WE TAKING INTEREST TO AFFECT THE PROPERTY WITHOUT PROVIDING NOTICE? AND THE ANSWER IS UNDER LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 272 [INAUDIBLE] ONE.

IT DOESN'T APPLY TO THE ABANDONMENT OF THE RIGHT OF WAY TO A ABUTTING LANDOWNERS, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.

HE SAYS IF WE'RE UNABLE TO REACH A CONCLUSION, WHETHER IT HAS AN EASEMENT OR NOT, HOW CAN IT DISPOSE OF THAT EASEMENT.

THAT'S DONE ALL THE TIME.

PEOPLE MAY NOT KNOW IF THEY HAVE INTEREST IN A PROPERTY, IF WHAT IF THEY HAVE AN INTEREST EXACTLY WHAT IT IS, BUT THEY CAN CONVEY THAT WITHOUT KNOWING IT PRECISELY USING A QUICK CLAIM DEED. IT'S NOT AN UNCOMMON OCCURRENCE.

BUT IF YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN PROPERTY, YOU CAN CONVEY IT WITH A QUICK CLAIM DEED. NEXT SLIDE.

WE HAVEN'T PROVIDED ANY AUTHORITY FOR THE PROPOSITION WE CAN ABANDON A PUBLIC, PRESCRIPTIVE EASEMENT.

A PUBLIC, PRESCRIPTIVE EASEMENT IS JUST AN EASEMENT.

IT JUST GOES TO HOW IT WAS ACQUIRED.

BUT AGAIN, 272 001 ALLOWS US TO DISPOSE OF THIS.

THE NEXT POINT, SAYS [INAUDIBLE] [INAUDIBLE] THAT WOULD BE US CONCLUDE THE CITY COULD NOT OWN THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE NO GRANT HAS BEEN RECORDED.

THIS IS PLAINLY INCORRECT.

LANDS MAY STILL BE CONVEYED BY DEED IN FEE SIMPLE, EVEN IF THAT DEED IS UNRECORDED.

WELL, THAT'S TRUE.

SOMEWHERE OUT THERE, THERE MIGHT BE A DEED.

BUT IF ANYBODY KNOWS OF IT, WE WE'D LIKE TO SEE IT.

TITLE COMPANY. I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT, BUT WE CERTAINLY DON'T, WE THINK IF THE BEST WE PROBABLY HAVE IS AN EASEMENT BY PRESCRIPTION.

AND. MR. BEATAN SAYS THEY COMMISSIONS TO A TITLE COMPANY IN THE PREEMINENT TITLE COMPANY TO CONDUCT A TITLE REPORT.

WHEN WE GOT THE TITLE REPORT, WE HAD AN INCOMPLETE COPY THAT WAS GIVEN US BY MS.

[02:00:02]

SANCHEZ AND WE CONTACTED STUART TITLE TO OBTAIN A COMPLETE COPY.

THEY SENT ONE THAT SAID TITLE WAS IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON AND FEE SIMPLE.

WE CALLED THEM AND ASKED HOW THEY GOT THAT.

AND THE RESPONSE WAS THAT WAS A MISTAKE, AND THEY WOULD SEND A CORRECTED COPY AND THE CORRECTED COPY IS ON THE NEXT SLIDE AND IT SHOWS THAT.

THE OWNERS OF RECORD APPEAR TO BE THE ADJOINING LANDOWNERS, [INAUDIBLE] IN FAVOR OF [INAUDIBLE] SMITH.

SO IF WE HAVE AN INTEREST, IT IS A INTEREST OBTAINED BY PRESCRIPTION.

WE DON'T REALLY KNOW IF THAT WAS EVER USED.

IF YOU SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHS, IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT IT WAS.

BUT IF WE HAVE AN INTEREST, THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD BE CONVEYING, WHERE CITY COUNCIL TO CHOOSE TO DO SO.

AND I THINK.

DID WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? I GUESS THAT WOULD. I WOULD WRAP IT UP BY SAYING STAFF RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT IS APPROVAL OF THE ABANDONMENT SUBJECT TO RETENTION OF A AN OFFERED 15 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THAT PROPERTY, SO THAT IF IN THE FUTURE CERTAIN DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS COULD BE MADE, THERE WOULD BE A LEGAL MEANS OF ACCOMPLISHING THEM, AS WELL AS PER THE APPROVED CONDITIONS IN THE ORIGINAL AUGUST STAFF REPORT. NOW I WILL JUMP OFF THAT SLIGHTLY BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL STAFF REPORT IN AUGUST OFFERED A THE ABANDONMENT SUBJECT TO A DEED WITHOUT WARRANTY, PROBABLY NOT APPROPRIATE.

IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD BE BETTER TO GO WITH THE QUIT CLAIM DEED IN THIS INSTANCE.

ALL RIGHT. YES, SIR.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

GOSH. THANK YOU, TIM.

DAVID DON, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCIL ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF BEFORE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? ALL RIGHT.

IT IS 7:02 P.M.

I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8D AND WE'LL START ON THIS SIDE ANYONE ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT.

COULD YOU POINT OUT THAT MR. LISTOWSKI HAS LEFT THE DAIS DURING THE PRESENTATION BECAUSE HE HAS DECLARED A CONFLICT OF INTEREST? IS MR. GLYWASKY SAID.

COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI HAS DECLARED A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM AND HAS LEFT THE DAIS TO AS WE DISCUSS AND VOTE ON THIS ITEM.

ALL RIGHT, WE'RE ON THIS SIDE HERE.

CAROL, DID YOU WANT TO GO FIRST AND THEN NANCY WILL HAVE YOU FOLLOW THEN? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MY NAME IS CAROL HOLLOWAY.

I AM. COULD YOU PULL THAT DOWN, CAROL? JUST A BIT. I'M SORRY.

CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES, MA'AM.

NO. I NEED TO ASK YOU SOMETHING BEFORE YOU START.

OH, WOULD YOU PLEASE CHECK YOUR EMAIL.

I JUST SENT YOU A VIDEO.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. I SAID IT TO YOUR OFFICE EMAIL.

MY NAME IS CAROL HOLLOWAY.

I AM A FULL TIME, LONG TIME RESIDENT OF GALVESTON AND RECENTLY RETIRED PLANNING COMMISSIONER. MY TAKE ON THIS CASE CENTERS AROUND BALANCING PUBLIC GOOD AND PRIVATE GAIN.

THE PUBLIC GOOD STEMS FROM THE NEED FOR BETTER DRAINAGE ON 93RD STREET AND FOR TITLE EXCHANGE NECESSARY FOR THE HEALTH OF THE INTERIOR, WETLANDS AND BIRD HABITAT, PRESERVING AND RESTORING THE DRAINAGE CONDUIT THAT RUNS ALONG 93RD STREET AND WITHIN THE CITY RIGHT OF WAY. SERVES THAT PUBLIC GOOD.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY SURVEYOR IS A VERY GOOD AND PRECISE MEASURE OF DISTANCE AND ELEVATION. I WOULD ALSO QUESTION HIS AUTHORITY WITH REGARD TO HABITAT AND WETLAND DESIGNATIONS.

THE WETLAND ON THE WEST SIDE OF 93RD STREET, CLOSEST TO THIS CASE, HAPPENS TO BE AN INTERMITTENT WETLAND.

IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT ITS TITLE THAT IT'S WET ALL THE TIME.

SOMETIMES IT'S MOST OF THE TIME IT'S DRY, AND SOMETIMES IT'S WET.

BASICALLY, WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS CORRECT WITH THE SURVEYOR DID SAY WAS CORRECT, BUT THE ACTUAL DISTINCTION OF THE WETLANDS IS A LOT MORE COMPLICATED AND AND IT SAY THE

[02:05:07]

DESCRIPTION EXCEEDS MY CAPACITY TO FULLY DESCRIBE IT, AND I THINK WE WOULD NEED A WETLANDS SPECIALIST TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT.

ANYWAY, I'M USING UP MY TIME.

WHAT I SEE IN THE PUBLIC GOOD IS NEED FOR DRAINAGE AND PRESERVATION OF WETLANDS AND BIRD HABITAT. WHAT I SEE IN THE PRIVATE GAIN STEMS FROM THE ADJACENT LANDOWNER LANDOWNER WHO DESIRES TITLE TO THE RIGHT OF WAY.

HIS JUSTIFICATION IS STATED IN THE GOALS THAT ARE IN THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AND INCLUDE PROPERTY, SECURITY AND WETLAND AND WILDLIFE PRESERVATION.

WHEN I WAS LOOKING FOR BALANCE, IT STRIKES ME THAT THERE'S A MUCH SIMPLER SOLUTION TO THIS CASE AND WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED TODAY.

IF THE APPLICANT DESIRES TO HAVE THE SECURITY HE WANTS FOR HIS PROPERTY, HE COULD FENCE IT IN ALONG HIS PROPERTY LINE THAT WOULD SERVE THE GOAL OF HIS SECURITY NEEDS.

AND IF HE WOULD STOP MOWING THE RIGHT OF WAY AND JUST LEAVE IT ALONE.

THAT WOULD MEET HIS STATED DESIRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION.

IF THE RIGHT OF WAY WERE NOT MOWED, THE LAND COULD RETURN TO A NATURALLY VEGETATED STATE SUPPORTING WILDLIFE AND THE ENVIRONMENT.

THERE IS NOTHING IN THE PETITION FOR THIS ABANDONMENT THAT LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THAT THE RELEASE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY WOULD THANK YOU, CAROL. APPRECIATE IT.

NANCY.

[INAUDIBLE] BOAT. THIS LETTER WAS SENT AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING, AND I BELIEVE IT'S IN YOUR POCKET, BUT I WAS ASKED TO READ IT.

WE'RE A 501 C WHOSE MISSION IS TO PROMOTE AWARENESS AND PRESERVATION OF COASTAL MARGINS.

WE HAVE CLOSE TO 800 ACRES IN THE GALVESTON ISLAND THAT'S BEING PRESERVED AND CONSERVED AT THIS TIME. WE ACTIVELY MANAGE HUNDREDS OF ACRES OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE.

I'M SORRY THAT CARLY CLAY CAN'T BE HERE.

SHE COULD ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WETLANDS THAT I CANNOT.

BUT WE INCLUDES EIGHT.

BUT WE PART OF WHAT WE MANAGE INCLUDES EIGHT POINT TWO NINE ACRES OF TIDAL WETLANDS ON THE WEST SIDE OF 93RD STREET, SO IT ABUTS THE THE AND TWELVE POINT EIGHT NINE ACRES OF TIDAL WETLANDS BETWEEN 91ST AND 93RD.

AND YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD ABOUT THE GALVESTON LANDOWNER, BUT SPECIFICALLY [INAUDIBLE] PROPERTY ABUTS THE CITY'S UNDEVELOPED RIGHT AWAY.

NO ONE'S MENTIONED THAT, HAVE THEY? THIS EVENING, IT'S LIKE WE HAVE AN UNDEVELOPED RIGHT OF WAY, AS WELL AS THE DRAINAGE DITCH THAT CONNECTS [INAUDIBLE] PROPERTY WITH THE GALVESTON BAY [INAUDIBLE] PROVIDE PROVIDED WRITTEN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROPOSED ABANDONMENT BECAUSE ABANDONMENT OF ANY PORTION OF THE PUBLICS LIMITED ACCESS TO [INAUDIBLE] BAY IS INCONSISTENT WITH OUR MISSION IS NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST.

WE URGE CITY COUNCIL TO ACCEPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ORIGINAL DECISION AND TO REJECT THE REQUEST TO ABANDON THE CITY'S UNDEVELOPED RIGHT OF WAY TERMINATING IN GALVESTON BAY.

[INAUDIBLE] SUPPORTS THE TENANT OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT NO PUBLIC ACCESS OF BODIES OF WATER SHOULD BE ABANDONED.

IN ADDITION, ABANDONMENT TO PRIVATE INTERESTS OF AN UNDEVELOPED PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY COULD LIMIT THE ABILITY TO MAINTAIN PROPER DRAINAGE, WHICH PROVIDES THE VITAL TIDAL FLOW TO AND FROM [INAUDIBLE] PROPERTY.

AND AS CAROL SAID, AND IT ALREADY IS HAVING CONSTRICTIVE WATER COMING THERE AND WE NEED WE NEED TO HAVE ACCESS TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT AND TO PRESERVE IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YES, MA'AM. COME ON FORWARD.

HI, EVERYBODY, COUNSELOR.

MY NAME IS BARBARA [INAUDIBLE] AND I LIVE AT 1302 HARBORVIEW HERE IN GALVESTON.

I'VE LIVED HERE FOR ABOUT 40 YEARS AND I'M JUST UP HERE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN REALLY, REALLY INVOLVED IN ISSUES REGARDING THE WETLANDS AND, YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE THAT.

ABOUT 15 YEARS AGO, TIM BEATON AND BOB RANDALL DEVELOPED THE EAST SIDE OF 93RD STREET,

[02:10:03]

AND THEY MITIGATED THAT DEVELOPMENT BY GIVING MY NONPROFIT, OF WHICH I WAS PRESIDENT.

THE WETLANDS ON THE EAST SIDE OF 93RD, WHICH ARE HEALTHY AND THRIVING.

AND AND SO WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME OUT THERE.

AND BOB AND BOB AND TIM COULDN'T HAVE BEEN MORE HELPFUL IN, YOU KNOW, MAKING THIS SOMETHING THAT HELPED EVERYBODY.

AND IT DID. IT NEEDED TO SURVIVE.

WE NEEDED TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO IT.

IT WASN'T IMPORTANT BECAUSE PEOPLE COULD GO OUT AND LOOK AT THE BIRDS.

THAT'S ALWAYS THAT'S A PERK.

BUT THAT'S NOT WHY IT'S IMPORTANT.

IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE WETLANDS ABSORB MILLIONS TIMES MORE WATER THAN UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY AND TRILLIONS MORE THAN DEVELOPED PROPERTY.

OK. THAT'S WHY WETLANDS ARE SO IMPORTANT.

YOU CAN'T MAKE MAN CAN'T MAKE ANYTHING BETTER.

I MEAN, THERE'S NO WAY IT'S THEY'RE JUST VITAL.

AND I WAS INTERESTED IN WHAT YOU SAID.

I GOT A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION THAT I DID NOT KNOW.

BUT HE SAID, YOU KNOW, IN CASES LIKE NICHOLAS, WHEN THAT KIND OF A STORM COMES THROUGH THE WATER, JUST ITS COURSE, IT'S GOING TO GO EVERYWHERE.

WELL, THOSE ARE THE KIND OF THOSE ARE THE KIND OF INCIDENTS THAT WE NEED TO BE AFRAID OF.

I MEAN, THOSE ARE THE THINGS YOU NEED TO PLAN FOR BECAUSE IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE WHEN THAT WHEN WHENEVER THE NAME OF THAT STORM WAS CAME IN.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A VIDEO.

CHULA HAS A VIDEO SHOWING THE WATER RUSHING OUT THE CULVERT INTO THE NORTH BAY, BUT THAT TO ME. THAT'S THAT'S SIGNIFICANT IN AND OF ITSELF, BUT WHAT'S MORE SIGNIFICANT IS THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT THAT LITTLE PIECE OF PROPERTY ABSORBED THAT DIDN'T FLOW BACK INTO ANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

TEICHMANN ROAD USED TO BE ONE BIG WETLANDS.

THE PEOPLE ON THE SOUTH SIDE NEVER HAD A PROBLEM BECAUSE THE WETLANDS ON THE NORTH SIDE ABSORBED ALL THE WATER.

AND THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE.

AND THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT THAT CONTROL OF OF THE WATER, ANY WATER THAT COMES INTO THAT AREA LIE WITH THE CITY AND NOT AN INDIVIDUAL LANDOWNER, BECAUSE THEN YOU LOSE ALL CONTROL. AND WHAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IF HE DIES OR, YOU KNOW, HE SELLS IT, THEN WHO'S GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE BECAUSE IT AFFECTS THAT WHOLE COMMUNITY OUT THERE AND THE CITY THOSE ARE THOSE ARE YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND IN THE CITY NEEDS TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS [INAUDIBLE].

THANK YOU, BARBARA. APPRECIATE IT.

ANYONE ELSE ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM? YOU CAN GO AT THIS POINT ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM, ANYONE LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING TIM, COME FORWARD.

LEGALITIES ARE WITH RESPECT TO DISPOSING OF IT OR PROPOSING TO DISPOSE OF IT.

AND SO I THINK I'M A LITTLE BIT SHORT HANDED TO JUST BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.

SO I I MEAN, MR. [IANUDIBLE] WENT ON ABOUT WHAT I HAD SAID AND SO DID MR. GLYWASKY, AND I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO JUST BE THOROUGH.

I'M NOT PLANNING TO TAKE VERY LONG, BUT I PROBABLY CAN'T DO IT IN THREE MINUTES.

TIM, WE'LL WE'LL BE A LITTLE GIVE YOU A LITTLE LATITUDE, BUT NOT A LOT.

WE'RE STILL. WELL, THEN LET ME GET RIGHT TO IT.

IF I COULD SEE THE FIRST SLIDE THAT WAS UP WHEN MR. WHEN I THINK WHEN MR. [INAUDIBLE] OR THE FIRST SLIDE THAT SHOWED THIS PLAT OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S ATTACHED TO THE WAS ATTACHED TO MY COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE, THE SURVEY ON THE BACK, IT'S THE LAST PAGE. AND I JUST THE VERY FIRST ONE, VERY FIRST SLIDE.

BUT I'VE ASKED IF I COULD JUST HAND THIS UP TO THE COUNCIL AND HAVE YOU ALL TAKE A LOOK AT IT. THIS IS THE SURVEY THAT MR. SMITH REQUESTED BE DONE AND THE AND WHAT I'M POINTING OUT HERE IS THIS IS A RIGHT.

THIS PIECE OF LAND MAY WELL BE OWNED BY THE CITY.

IF THE CITY OWNS IT, YOU CANNOT ABANDON IT.

YOU CAN SELL IT, BUT YOU CANNOT ABANDON.

YOU CANNOT ABANDON TITLE IN TEXAS.

THAT'S CLEAR LAW, AND THE ONLY THING YOU CAN DO WITH IT IS LAID OUT [INAUDIBLE] THE SECOND THING I SENT YOU THE OTHER NIGHT WHEN I FOUND OUT THAT STUART TITLE HAS ISSUED TWO TITLE OPINIONS, THE FIRST ONE SAYS THE CITY OWNS IT.

THE SECOND ONE SAYS IT'S OWNED BY THE ABUTTING LANDOWNERS.

BUT INTERESTINGLY, THE SECOND TITLE OPINION IS INCOMPLETE BECAUSE, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM

[02:15:05]

THAT DIAGRAM, THE ABUTTING LANDOWNERS ARE THREE, NOT TWO.

IT'S NOT JUST SMITH AND LISTOWSKI, IT'S SMITH, LISTOWSKI AND ARTISTS BOAT, AND WHAT IS BEING DONE HERE IS TO TAKE A RIGHT OF WAY.

IF IT IS A RIGHT OF WAY YOU MAY OWN IT, IN WHICH CASE YOU CAN ABANDON IT.

YOU'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PUBLIC SALE, WHICH IS A DIFFERENT STATUTE, WHICH MR. HOPPUS LAID OUT IN THAT LETTER THAT I SENT TO YOU ALL THE OTHER DAY WHEN I GOT A COPY OF THE NEW TITLE OPINION.

THE. THE INTERESTING THING HERE IS THAT THE STATUTE, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE THAT HANDLES ABANDONMENT OF OF RIGHTS OF WAY SAYS THAT YOU CAN DO IT TO THE ADJOINING LANDOWNERS, THE ABUTTING LANDOWNERS, BUT YOU CAN'T LEAVE ONE OF THEM OUT AND YOU CAN'T FINESSE THE PROBLEM BY CUTTING THE RIGHT OF WAY.

IT'S A RIGHT OF WAY.

IT'S A SINGULAR THING.

THAT'S WHY I DREW A CIRCLE AROUND IT ON THAT MAP.

IT IS.

YOU CAN'T CUT IT IN HALF TO FINESSE AN OWNER THAT DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE ABANDONMENT, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'VE DONE HERE.

WHAT STAFF HAS DONE, WHAT MR. SMITH HAS DONE, WHAT MR. LISTOWSKI IS PROPOSING THAT YOU DO IS YOU'RE GOING TO BIFURCATE.

IT OFF NORTH SOUTH.

AND AND NOT AND NOT INCLUDE SO AS NOT TO INCLUDE ARTISTS BOAT, WHO IS THE ADJOINING LANDOWNER, AND AS MR. COPPICE, WHO'S ONE OF THE BEST LAND LAWYERS IN THE STATE, HAS POINTED OUT IN THAT EMAIL I SENT YOU. THAT'S NOT GOING TO FLY.

THAT IS NOT AN EQUITABLE WAY TO TREAT AN BUDDING LANDOWNER.

THE LAST THING I'M GOING TO SAY IS WHAT THIS BOILS DOWN TO IS WHETHER OR NOT THERE HAS BEEN PUBLIC USE AND THERE IS PUBLIC USE FOR THIS FOR THIS PIECE OF LAND.

AND I THINK YOU'LL SEE WHEN MS. SANCHEZ COMES UP AND THE OTHERS SPEAK AGAINST THIS PROPOSED ABANDONMENT THAT THERE HAS BEEN, THERE WAS A ROAD UNTIL SOMEBODY PUT A FENCE.

IN FACT, MR. SMITH HAS A FENCE AROUND THE WHOLE RIGHT OF WAY, NOT JUST THE PART HE WANTS ABANDONED.

HE HAS A PART. HE HAS A FENCE GOING ALL THE WAY UP TO WEST BAY ROAD, AND HE'S GOT A CHAIN ON THAT. AND THAT'S NOT HE'S NOT EVEN ASKED FOR THAT TO BE ABANDONED YET.

AND YET HE'S HE'S TAKING IT OVER.

HE'S MOWING IT AND HE'S MAKING IT HIS OWN BEFORE HE EVER COMES TO COUNCIL.

AND NOW HE'S IN HERE AND HE GOES TO WHOEVER PUT THIS TOGETHER, SAID, WELL, OUR IS NOT GOING TO AGREE TO THIS. THEY'RE ADJOINING LANDOWNERS AND IT'S FINE.

WE'LL JUST WE'LL JUST CARVE THAT PIECE OUT.

WELL, THAT'S THAT'S GERRYMANDERING.

GERRYMANDERING A SINGULAR RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH WHICH I DON'T THINK THE GOVERNMENT CODE THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE WILL COUNTENANCE MR. MR. HOPPUS CERTAINLY DOESN'T BELIEVE IT WILL.

IT'S A BAD IDEA.

YOU ALSO HAVE AN UNRESOLVED ISSUE.

AND BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE'VE LOOKED AT ALL THE STUFF OUT THERE TO FIND OUT WHO REALLY OWNS IT, THE FEE OF THIS BECAUSE SMITH AND LISTOWSKI THEIR FEE OWNERSHIP ISN'T ESTABLISHED BY THE PLAT THAT WE FILED.

WE FILED THE PLAT ON THE PROPERTY, RIGHT WHEN WE BUILT WEST BAY ROAD, BOB AND I DID.

AND IT'S NOT IN MR. LISTOWSKI PLAT EITHER, THAT THEY OWN THAT SECTION OF LAND.

IT'S JUST MISSING.

SO THERE'S A REAL QUESTION AS TO THE OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND.

FOR ALL THESE REASONS, THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA AT THIS TIME.

AND THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS I TALKED TO BETTY MASSEY, WHO WAS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE OF THE GROUP THAT PUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AND SHE WAS WENT TO THE WHOLE THING WITH ME.

AND I THINK SHE WOULD BE STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH MR. [INAUDIBLE] RESPECTFULLY, THAT THIS IS NOT BECAUSE IT'S NOT HIS CLAIM THAT BECAUSE THIS IS NOT WAS NOT IN AN ORIGINAL GRID OR THE ORIGINAL URBAN CORE, THAT IT'S NOT COVERED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND BY THE INTENTION OF IT.

IT CERTAINLY WAS. STAFF CERTAINLY SAW THAT AND THAT'S WHY IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY VOTED AGAINST AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND WE THINK THAT WAS THE RIGHT DECISION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

VERY GOOD. NEXT, BOB.

GOOD EVENING. THIS WHOLE SCENARIO REMINDS ME OF TRYING TO MAKE A MOVIE WITH A POLAROID CAMERA. THERE'S BEEN SO MANY BITS AND PIECES TRYING TO PASTE TOGETHER TO MAKE SOME KIND OF COMMON SENSE OUT OF THIS SITUATION.

SO I JUST WOULD LIKE I KNOW YOU HAVE THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT,

[02:20:01]

AND WE'LL RESPECT THAT.

BUT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU THREE THINGS TO THINK ABOUT.

THE FIRST IS BEEN TALKED ABOUT OWNERSHIP VERSUS CONTROLLING INTEREST.

DOES THE CITY OWN IT? I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S CONSENSUS ON THAT.

CONTROLLING INTEREST MEANS MANY THINGS ON THE SURFACE, AND BUT WHEN YOU START TALKING FEE SIMPLE, IT'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

SO IS THERE A CONSENSUS ON WHETHER YOU JUST HAVE CONTROLLING INTEREST ON THE SURFACE OR DO YOU OWN IT PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

THE SECOND THING IS PUBLIC VERSUS PRIVATE PUBLIC COMES IN MANY FORMS. THE PUBLIC THAT I'M REFERRING TO IS NOT SO MUCH ABOUT THE UTILITY ASPECTS OF THE DITCH, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE WETLANDS AND THE WATCHABLE WILDLIFE THAT NEED REPRESENTATION IN THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST.

I AGREE WITH THE SURVEYOR THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN A NATURAL RIDGE ALONG THAT AREA.

I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 40 YEARS.

I USED TO WALK THAT RIDGE WITH A HOME CART, WINDSURFING GEAR AND SAILED ALL OUT IN WEST BAY FOR YEARS.

I KNOW EVERY SQUARE FOOT OF THAT PROPERTY PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT FROM 20 YEARS, 25 YEARS AGO. WHICH BRINGS ME TO THE FACT THAT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, WE HAVE TO SOMETIMES ELEVATE OUR CONCERNS TO THE FEDERAL LEVEL, AND THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT YARDSTICK FOR MEASURING PUBLIC INTEREST.

AND THAT'S [INAUDIBLE] ABOUT TO BE REOPENED.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE OUT THERE NEXT WEEK TO LOOK AT THE PROPERTY, TO LOOK AT ALL THE ACTIVITY THAT'S TAKEN PLACE AND MAKE THEIR ASSESSMENT.

I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THEM DUE DILIGENCE TIME TO MAKE THEIR DECISION, PERHAPS BEFORE YOU MAKE YOURS, BUT I KNOW WE ALL HAVE AGENDAS TO FOLLOW.

THE THIRD IS THEORY AND PRACTICE.

TONIGHT, I SAW A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION FROM THE SURVEYOR, BUT THERE'S TWO THINGS THAT BOTHER ME ABOUT THE PRESENTATION ON THAT INFORMATION.

ONE THERE WAS AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH LABELED 1995.

I BELIEVE THAT WAS 2005.

I THINK IT'S OFF BY 10 YEARS.

I CAN ELABORATE ON THAT IF SOMEBODY HAS A QUESTION.

THE SECOND IS THAT THE TOPO THE SPOT GRADES CONVENIENTLY STOPPED WHERE THE SOURCE OF PLACEMENT OF PHIL, WHETHER IT WAS AUTHORIZED OR UNAUTHORIZED, IS YET TO BE DETERMINED.

BUT WHEN SHOVEL TESTING IS DONE TO DO THE THREE PARAMETER APPROACH ON WETLANDS, IT'S GOING TO OK. GO AHEAD AND A FEW MORE SENTENCES, BOB, AND WE'LL WIND THIS UP.

THIS IS A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY TO USE THIS 20 PLUS ACRES BECAUSE YOU NEED IN PLANNING FOR DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS A HALF ACRE FOOT PER ACRE TO ABSORB THE ADVERSE CONDITIONS OF MOTHER NATURE. AND YOU HAVE THAT WITH SURPLUS HERE, AND IT CAN MAKE A FINE EXAMPLE IF YOU JUST RESPECT AND RETURN IT TO THE WAY THAT IT WAS AND LEAVE IT ALONE.

I SAID THAT BEFORE, AND I'LL SAY IT AGAIN TONIGHT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

NEXT. HELLO, MAYOR, COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS RAMON SANCHEZ I AM A RESIDENT OF TEICHMANN ROAD SINCE 1995.

AND I THINK IN THIS WE ARE DISCUSSING THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT WE ALL WANT TO PRESERVE WETLANDS. I HOPE AND I HAVE IN THE COMMENTS OF THE SURVEYOR, I HAVE THE I AGREE WITH HIM.

ONE THING THAT HE SAYS THAT THE DRAINAGE GOES TO THE SOUTH.

I DISAGREE ABOUT THE CULVERT BECAUSE THE CULVERT IS GETTING THE WATER.

BUT IN THE EAST SIDE, IN THE WETLANDS OF THE EAST SIDE OF THE [INAUDIBLE], NOT IN THE WEST SIDE OF 93RD, WHICH IS THE WETLANDS THAT WE ARE CONCERNED.

BUT WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT HOW THE WATER GETS INTO THE WETLANDS.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY DRAINS AFTER RAIN OR ANYTHING.

BUT WE ARE INTERESTED IN HOW THE WATER GETS INTO AND I THINK THE AREA IN DISCUSSION IS THE POINT IS ONE OF THE POINTS WHERE THE WATER COMES IN.

IF WE WE IF WE DON'T, IF WE CLOSE THIS THING AND IF WE GIVE THE ABATEMENT ABANDONMENT TO THE TO THE OWNER IS GOING TO BE LIKE GIVING THE WHAT THE CHICKEN COOP TO THE FOX.

[02:25:04]

THEY IS GOING TO FULFILL UP THIS THING AND THEN THIS IS GOING TO STOP IT.

THERE IS NOT ONLY THAT THAT IS SOUTH OF THE AREA THAT WE ARE TALKING, THAT ENTRANCE OF WATER IS ALREADY CLOSED BECAUSE THEY FILL UP, PROBABLY ILLEGALLY.

THEY THEY FILL UP SO THAT TRUCKS WOULD GO INTO THE INTO THE SUBDIVISION THAT THEY CREATED THERE WHILE THEY WERE BUILDING HOUSES.

SO ANYWAY, MY BOARD IS PLEASE DENY THE ABANDONMENT.

THIS IS A FULL FULL MOUTH TO SAY THIS THIS WORD.

BUT THEN THEN I AM FOR DENIAL OF THE ABANDONMENT, AND I WOULD WONDER IF THE CITY SECRETARY CAN GIVE THIS PRESENTATION TO THE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NEXT, CHULA.

THANK YOU. I HAVEN'T STARTED YET.

DID YOU GET THAT VIDEO? DID YOU GET THE VIDEO, COULD YOU PUT IT ON, PLEASE? HELLO, MY NAME IS [INAUDIBLE] SANCHEZ.

I'M FINE WITH THAT, JUST ONE SECOND.

CHULA, LET'S GET YOUR VIDEO FIRED UP.

TAKE MY TIME. CAN YOU START OVER WHEN YOU GET THE VIDEO UP? IT HADN'T STARTED YET.

OK. WELL, THERE THERE, IT'S GOING, YOU KNOW, I WENT OUT THERE THE DAY AFTER NICHOLAS, I COULDN'T GET OUT THERE IN THE BEGINNING BECAUSE THE WATER WAS SO HIGH AND I HAVE A BIG TRUCK. FINALLY, THE DAY AFTER I GOT OUT THERE AND YOU KNOW, NUMBERS ARE GREAT.

I APPRECIATE TOPO MAPS, LOVE MAPS.

BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF NUMBERS THAT WERE OMITTED AS SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE SAID.

I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE BEEN OUT THERE AND SAY, CAN YOU TAKE THIS? CAN YOU TAKE THIS SPOT ELEVATION? HOW ABOUT THIS ONE? HOW ABOUT WHERE WE'VE GOT FILL IN THE ROAD TO THE BACK END UPON [INAUDIBLE]? THOSE NUMBERS ON THERE, NOT ON THAT MAP.

IT'S A PICK AND CHOOSE KIND OF THING.

HERE'S MY STORY.

MY MY PICTURE BOOK LETTER TO CITY COUNCIL, IF YOU'LL TURN.

ACTUALLY, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PICTURES IS THE ONE ON THE INSIDE COVER.

THE NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAP IN A GLANCE YOU CAN SEE WHERE 35 PERCENT WETLANDS OUT THERE. THE CULVERT AT THE CORNER OF 93RD AND TEICHMAN THAT THEY REFER TO THAT IS WORKING BEAUTIFULLY. IT'S BEEN REPLACED.

IT WAS CRACKED. IT'S OVERWHELMED.

WE CAN SEE IT ON DAYS LIKE WE'VE HAD THIS PAST WEEK.

AND WITH NICHOLAS, IT WAS BLOWN OUT OF THE WATER, WATER ON TOP OF IT.

YESTERDAY WE HAD HIGH TIDE AND THAT BIG RAIN AND IT CAN'T.

IT'S WAY HIGHER ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TEICHMAN THAN ON THE WETLANDS SIDE OFFATTS BAYOU AND IT TAKES HOURS FOR IT TO DRAIN OUT.

ALSO, THE NORTH SHORE OF BY PONTICELLO AND THE [INAUDIBLE] FILLING THAT IN HAS MADE THOSE WETLANDS HIGHER.

AND SO THE WATER HAS TO GET REALLY HIGH ON THOSE TO REACH THOSE SHORES.

SO THE AREA NEXT TO PONTICELLO IS DRYING UP.

KEVIN SUMNER'S TALKED ABOUT THAT.

SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK GIVEN WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN MY LETTER HERE, MY PICTURE BOOK, THAT WE SHOULD BE GIVING OVER FREE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE DRAINAGE FOR 26 ACRES OF STREETS, HOMES AND WETLANDS OUT THERE TO A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL.

I DON'T CARE IF IT'S MR. SMITH OR SOMEBODY ELSE, I MEAN, OR MR. LISTOWSKI OR ANYBODY YOU KNOW REASONABLY AT THE VERY BEGINNING IN SUMMARY, I'LL SAY IT'S

[02:30:01]

A MYSTERY TO ME WHY THE CITY IS BENDING OVER BACKWARDS TO GIVE THIS LAND AWAY.

UNBELIEVABLE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.

THEY HAVE WORKED. THERE'S SO MUCH INK AND SO MANY HOURS GIVEN TO THIS.

THANK YOU FOR YOU WHO'VE GONE OUT THERE TO MEET WITH ME.

YOU KNOW, WHEN THE TWO DEVELOPERS ON EITHER SIDE DECIDE TO BUILD BULKHEADS, AS MR. LISTOWSKI TOLD ME THIS PAST WEEK THAT HE'S GOING TO HAVE IT BULK HEADED BY THE END OF THE YEAR, AS THEY SAID THEY'LL DO.

THE HOMES OUT HERE WILL BE IN A BATHTUB AND THE WETLANDS WILL BE FURTHER CHOKED, TIDAL FLOW WILL BE ENDANGERED ALONG WITH ALL THE BIRDS AND WILDLIFE WE ENJOY AS PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND THE LARGEST AS IT'S BEEN SAID, THE LARGEST LANDOWNER IN TEICHMANN THEY'RE NOT EVEN HERE, THEY'RE NOT EVEN AT THE PLACE.

THANK YOU, [INAUDIBLE]. ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? I'M GETTING READY TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

YES, SIR.

BEEN ACCUSED BY A LOT OF PEOPLE OF WANTING TO GET RID OF WETLANDS.

MY LOT DOESN'T HAVE ANY WETLANDS, THE PER.

AND WE HAVE A FULL LEGAL TEAM.

THERE IS NO WETLANDS ON THE EASEMENT.

HOW IS ME GETTING THE ABANDONMENT DONE AFFECTING ANYTHING THEY'VE TALKED ABOUT? I'M A WETLANDS PERSON.

I'LL DONATE ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TO THE CITY TONIGHT FOR WETLANDS PRESERVATION.

THEY PAINT ME ON THIS BROAD BRUSH AND THEY DON'T KNOW ME FROM ADAM.

I'M SAYING THIS IF THERE'S NOT A DITCH, THE WETLANDS CAN'T DRAIN.

THAT IS NOT A SALTWATER WETLANDS, AND I'VE GOT PROOF AND I CAN PRESENT YOU 5000 PAGES OF IT.

PUSA FRESHWATER.

IT CANNOT BE TOUCHED AND IF IT DOES, IT VIOLATES NATIONAL REGULATIONS.

AND IF YOU PUT A DRAIN UNDER THAT STREET THAT THEY'RE ALL TALKING ABOUT WETLANDS.

I'M A WETLANDS PERSON.

YOU CAN'T DRAIN HEAVY SALTWATER.

AS HER VIDEO SHOWED, 90 PERCENT OF THAT WAS RAINWATER, WAS IT NOT? IT WAS RAINWATER RUNNING OUT TO THE BAY.

SO I'M HERE TO SAY I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, I'D LIKE TO BUILD A HOME HERE, AND WHEN I'M ACCUSED OF TRYING TO STEAL PROPERTY FROM SOMEBODY ARTIST BOAT, THEY DO OWN A SECTION.

MR. LISTOWSKI'S DEVELOPMENT OWNS A SECTION.

I MEAN, NOT OWNS, BUT ABATES IT.

I ABATE IT. IT'S THE CITIES.

YOU'RE GOING TO DO WHAT YOU WANT WITH IT.

ANYTHING THAT IF IT'S NOT GIVEN TO ME IF I BUY IT FROM THE CITY AT WHATEVER VALUE IT'S PLACED ON IT, IT WILL BE A RESIDENCE.

AND BY THE WAY, I NEVER FENCED IT.

THE FENCE WAS THERE WHEN I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.

THE ONLY THING I'VE DONE BAD AND I'M SORRY FOR IT.

I MOWED IT AND MAINTAINED IT SO PEOPLE COULD WALK OUT THERE AND ENJOY IT.

AND YES, THE CHAIN WAS THERE BEFORE I EVER BOUGHT IT.

THE FENCING HAS BEEN THERE FROM DAY ONE.

AND WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS IF IT DOESN'T WORK OUT, I'M GOING TO EIGHT FOOT FENCE, MASSIVE FENCE AND BUILD MY HOME AND IT'LL BE WHATEVER IT IS.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT NICE AND I'VE TOLD THE CITY 15 FOOT EASEMENT I'LL PAY FOR THE WHOLE THING. HERE'S AN EASEMENT.

DO WHATEVER YOU NEED TO DO.

I'M NOT THERE TO DESTROY WETLANDS.

I'M THERE TO BUILD MY HOME AND MOVE HERE.

AND IF YOU DON'T, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW ANY OF THESE PEOPLE, BUT THERE'S PEOPLE IN GALVESTON THAT KNOW AARON SMITH AND WHAT KIND OF PERSON I AM, AND I'M A PERSON OF MY WORD AND I DON'T SPEND MY LIFE TALKING ABOUT WETLANDS WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN EASEMENT ABANDONMENT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WETLANDS.

THERE ARE NO WETLANDS ON THE EASEMENT.

BUT I APPRECIATE YOU ALL'S TIME AND ALL THIS.

I APOLOGIZE FOR ALL THE HOURS Y'ALL HAVE HAD TO DO THIS.

I REALLY DO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC? I HAVE SOMEONE ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT? YES, MA'AM. DOCTOR COLE, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO SPEAK NOW.

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

IN 2019 WHEN I WAS ON COUNCIL WE VOTED TO SPEND OVER TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TO PURCHASE WATERFRONT PROPERTY TO PROVIDE DRAINAGE OF THE ENGLISH BAYOU CELAYA NEIGHBORHOOD THEY'RE IN A BOWL.

TODAY YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU COUNCIL HAS BEFORE YOU A VOTE TO ABANDON PROPERTY.

THE CITY ALREADY OWNS THAT IT SERVES THE EXACT SAME PURPOSE.

WATERFRONT PROPERTY THAT CAN DRAIN AN ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WHY WOULD WE GIVE THAT UP, ESPECIALLY WITH INCREASED SEA LEVEL AND INCREASED STORMS

[02:35:05]

COMING OUR WAY? THE CITY SPENT SCARCE TAX DOLLARS TO BUY TWO LOTS WITH CAD VALUE OF TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS, TAKING THEM OFF THE TAX ROLLS TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT COUNCIL CAN DO TODAY WITH A SIMPLE AND FREE VOTE TO DENY ABANDONMENT OF 93RD STREET.

IT WON'T COST A THING TO KEEP THE LAND THAT DOES A PRICELESS JOB OF DRAINING A NEIGHBORHOOD. WHY WOULD WE WANT TO NEED TO ENGINEER A METHOD THAT MOTHER NATURE CAN TAKE CARE OF FOR US? PUBLIC LAND ADJACENT TO THE BAY SHOULD NEVER BE RELINQUISHED, WE CAN'T GET IT BACK, IT SAYS SO IN THE COMP PLAN, BUT IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED THAT THIS ONLY APPLIES TO THE URBAN CORE AND I WOULD ASK WHERE IS THE URBAN CORE? DOES THAT STOP AT 25TH STREET? DOES IT STOP AT 35TH? SIXTY SIXTH.

NINETY FIFTH.

VISION GALVESTON HAS ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT WE HAVE INCREASED ACCESS TO THE BAY THROUGH PUBLIC AND NONPROFIT LANDS.

WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO DO THAT NOW, BUT IF WE GIVE UP THIS LAND, THAT PROPERTY WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO BE ABLE TO BE A PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE BAY.

THE CITY NEEDS THIS PROPERTY FOR DRAINAGE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE CITY HAS A GOAL TO KEEP PUBLIC LANDS ADJACENT TO THE BAY.

VISION GALVESTON HAS A GOAL TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ACCESS AREAS TO BAY WATER.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED UNANIMOUSLY TO DENY THIS.

THE ORIGINAL STAFF REPORT RECOMMENDED DENIAL.

PLEASE VOTE NO AND DENY THIS ABANDONMENT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JACKI.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER ONE ON LINE? NO, SIR. ANYBODY IN WRITTEN COMMENTS, PLEASE.

THE CITY RECEIVED EIGHT WRITTEN COMMENTS RELATED TO THE ABANDONMENT.

ALL ARE AGAINST THE CITY ABANDONING THE PROPERTY, AND THE COMMENTS ARE FROM LODI MASSIE, JOHN MILLER, JENNIFER MILLER, ELIZABETH SANCHEZ KENNEDY, KEVIN SUMMERS AND LANE KENNEDY.

OK, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

VERY GOOD. IT IS 7:37 PM.

I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 8D.

TIM, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

IS ARTISTS BOAT INVOLVED WITH THIS ABANDONMENT IN ANY WAY IS THEIR LAND BORDERING ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE.

THEIR LAND. THEIR LAND DOES YES, IT'S THE SAME ORIGINAL FIRST MAP, ACTUALLY MR. BEATON'S MAP SHOWED IT AS WELL.

THE ARTIST BOAT DOES, ABUT PART OF THIS PROPERTY.

BUT THE WAY ABANDONMENT APPLICATIONS WORK IS WE RECEIVE WHAT'S APPLIED FOR.

AN ABANDONMENT OF A RIGHT AWAY DOES NOT HAVE TO BE THE ENTIRE RIGHT OF WAY ALONG ITS LENGTH. IT HAS TO BE THE ENTIRE RIGHT OF WAY ALONG ITS WIDTH.

OK, SO AND STATE LAW TALKS ABOUT BASICALLY A CENTER LINE INTEREST TO THAT ABANDONMENT.

IF THE ARTIST BOAT WOULD HAVE ENJOINED IN THIS APPLICATION, WE WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO PURSUE IT THAT WAY.

THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS APPLIED FOR.

THE APPLICATION CAME IN WITH THE TWO ABUTTING OWNERS THAT ARE NEXT TO IT IN THE GEOGRAPHY OF THAT MAP, AND THEY ARE THE ONLY TWO ABUTTING OWNERS THAT ABUT IT FOR THAT GEOGRAPHY RIGHT THERE. BUT AGAIN, THE CITY WOULD HAVE IF THE ARTIST BOAT WOULD HAVE LIKED TO ENJOIN IN THAT APPLICATION, THE CITY WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO PROCESS IT.

ABSOLUTELY. AND LET ME SAY SO, LET ME BE SURE I'M CLEAR.

THE PORTION OF LAND THAT THEY'RE SEEKING, THE ABANDONMENT AN THIS ABANDONMENT IS THE ABANDONMENT OF THE EASEMENT.

IT'S ABANDONMENT OF WHATEVER INTERESTS THE CITY MIGHT HAVE.

IT'S AN EASEMENT. WE'RE NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT OUR INTEREST IS, QUITE FRANKLY, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SUGGESTING A QUITCLAIM DEED BECAUSE THAT BASICALLY STATES WE ABANDON WHATEVER INTEREST WE HAVE.

WE YOU KNOW, WHATEVER INTEREST THAT MIGHT BE, WE'RE ABANDONING TO THE ADJACENT OWNERS AT THEIR REQUEST. THAT'S THEIR, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAD FEE TITLE AND WE HAD A GENERAL WARRANTY DEED THAT SAID, IT'S YOU KNOW, IT'S THE CITIES.

WE BOUGHT IT, WE CONDEMNED IT.

[02:40:02]

WHAT HAVE YOU? WE COULD PERHAPS CONVEY FEE TITLE, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT INTEREST WE HAVE. SO IT'S OUR ONLY ABILITY IS TO CONVEY WHATEVER INTEREST THAT WE MIGHT HAVE IN THE PROPERTY, WHICH AT MOST WOULD BE A DEED WITHOUT WARRANTY IN THIS CASE OR EVEN BETTER, A QUITCLAIM DEED, BUT THAT PROPERTY RIGHT THERE, AS IT'S CONFIGURED HAS TWO ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS ALONG IT AND THE CITY HAS ABANDONED, YOU KNOW, PARTIAL RIGHTS AWAY ALONG THE LENGTH OF A NARROW STRIP OF LAND.

WE'VE DONE THAT NUMEROUS TIMES IN THE CITY.

AND MY 32 YEARS OF WORKING AND PLANNING AT THREE DIFFERENT CITIES IN SOUTHEAST TEXAS ALL THREE CITIES HAVE DONE IT THAT WAY.

IT'S VERY ROUTINE, VERY COMMON.

IT'S NOT, NOT UNUSUAL BY ANY MEANS.

AND YOU KNOW, THE ASSOCIATIONS THAT PLANNERS DEAL WITH THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION ALSO SUGGESTS, YOU KNOW, THAT METHOD.

SO IT'S REALLY PRETTY TYPICAL.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, DON.

EXCUSE ME, BEFORE WE.

DON YOU WERE GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT QUESTION THAT POINT.

WE CAN'T FIND ANY WRITTEN DOCUMENTS ACCEPTED AS RIGHT AWAY IF IT IS A RIGHT AWAY, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED BY A PRESCRIPTION. CERTAINLY NOT AWARE OF ANY DEED FLOATING AROUND OUT THERE THAT CONVEYS THIS FEE TITLE. AGAIN, AS I SAY, IF IT WAS ACQUIRED BY PRESCRIPTIVE USE, THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE ACQUIRED FROM THE COUNTY.

BECAUSE THIS WAS UNINCORPORATED LAND AT SOME POINT.

THE APPLICATION IS TO ABANDON THE RIGHTS OF WAY.

OK. WE HAVE COUNCILMAN COLLINS AND THEN MARIE.

DAVID. TIM, IF I COULD, YOU SAY THAT WE CAN ABANDON LONG THE LENGTH OF A RIGHT AWAY BECAUSE CLEARLY WE DO THAT.

I CAN THINK OF EXAMPLES OF WHERE WE'VE DONE THAT.

YOU KNOW, YOU OWN AN ALLEY.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO ABANDON THE WHOLE ALLEY.

YOU CAN ABANDON HALF OF IT OR WHAT, BUT YOU SAID YOU CAN'T DIVIDE IT LONGITUDINALLY.

THAT'S CORRECT ALONG ITS WIDTH.

YEAH DIVIDED ALONG.

IN OTHER WORDS, YOU COULDN'T CUT THAT IN HALF THIS WAY.

YOU COULDN'T ABANDON. NO, BECAUSE THEN THE THE PORTION OF RIGHT OF WAY THAT REMAINS IS NOT USABLE FOR THE TRAVELING PUBLIC, FOR STRAIGHT RIGHTS OF WAY, FOR EXAMPLE.

NOW. AND SO THE CITY HASN'T MADE A PRACTICE OF DOING THAT.

OK, I UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE BUT DO WE HAVE AN ARRANGEMENT? ARE WE IF WE VOTE YES, ARE WE ABANDONING THE ENTIRE WIDTH THIS SECTION.

IF THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN APPLIED FOR, HOWEVER, WHAT'S BEING RECOMMENDED IS SAVE AND EXCEPT THAT'S A GOOD PRESENTATION.

WHAT IS? OK. OK.

SO WE WOULD ABANDON IT AND HE WOULD CONVEY THE 15 FEET TO US.

OK. I DON'T THINK I'M COMPELLED TO BELIEVE THAT THE CITY OWNS THIS.

I MEAN, DO YOU.

I STAND IN YOUR COMPANY? YOU KNOW, I MEAN, BECAUSE IF THAT'S THE CASE, I WOULD THINK THERE ARE AREAS ALL OVER THE CITY WE MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO PROVE THAT WE DON'T OWN SOMETHING.

WE'RE RIGHTS OF WAY.

AM I WRONG ABOUT THAT? SURE. TRIPLE NEGATIVE.

WELL, I'M NOT EVEN SURE WHERE THE QUESTION ARISES OF WHO OWNS THIS PROPERTY OR WHETHER WE HAVE A FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN IT.

YOU KNOW, THE TITLE THAT YOU TALKED TO SUGGESTED IT WAS A MISTAKE TO HAVE SAID THAT TO BEGIN WITH AND SUBMITTED A SECOND TITLE REPORT.

IT ARISES BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO.SO I'M NOT TERRIBLY COMPELLED BY THAT, I'M ALSO I JUST AT THE RISK OF IRRITATING A NUMBER

[02:45:05]

OF PEOPLE I KNOW AND LIKE, I'M ALSO NOT MOVED BY PEOPLE GOING INTO AN AREA BUILDING AND SAYING, LET'S STOP BUILDING HERE BECAUSE I DON'T WANT ANYTHING ELSE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. AS MR. SMITH SAYS, THIS DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WETLANDS TO ME.

AND IF WE, YOU KNOW, IF HE CONVEYS THAT 15 FEET BACK TO US, THAT SEEMS TO SATISFY WHAT EVER DRAINAGE REQUIREMENT WE WOULD HAVE THERE.

MR. MAXWELL, DOES YOUR STAFF AGREE WITH THAT.

I MEAN YOU KNOW.

BUT YOU KNOW, BUT IT'S NOT WETLANDS.

AM I RIGHT. SO I MEAN, SO.

I DON'T KNOW THIS. YOU KNOW, I'M SORRY, I JUST DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT COMPELS ME TO WANT TO HANG ON TO THIS, AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE NOT ABANDONING THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF IT IS IT DOESN'T ALSO DOESN'T SEEM TERRIBLY IMPORTANT, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE RESIDENTS OUT THERE THAT WANT TO ACCOMPLISH THIS BECAUSE THEY WANT THIS TURNED INTO A PARK AND IT'S NOT LIKELY TO BE CONVERTED TO A PARK.

THAT WELL, THAT'S BEEN STATED.

AND. WELL, IT'S GO RIGHT AHEAD, DAVID.

WELL, WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE IT AS A STREET, EITHER, WHICH IS WHY IT EXISTS TO BEGIN WITH. I MEAN, I JUST I CAN'T SEE US USING IT AS A STREET, SO, YOU KNOW, SO LONG AS THE DRAINAGE IS ACCOMPLISHED.

I DON'T SEE WHAT WE'RE LOSING.

I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND PEOPLE HAVE SOME OTHER PROPRIETARY INTERESTS IN IT, I'M NOT CONVINCED I'M HEARING THE WHOLE STORY HERE, BUT AS LONG AS WE'RE MAINTAINING THE DRAINAGE HERE. ALL RIGHT.

COUNCILWOMAN ROBB.

I'M GOING TO MOVE THAT WE APPROVE WITH THE 15 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN IT.

WELL, YOU'RE MOVING FOR APPROVAL OF THE ABANDONMENT WITH.

15 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE ABANDONMENT WITH THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT OF 15 FEET, DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO THAT? I'M GOING TO SECOND THAT.

ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A SECOND TO THAT, LET'S ANY DISCUSSION AT ALL.

I WANT TO SAY A FEW THINGS.

THIS IS WHAT I LOVE ABOUT GALVESTON, EVERYONE'S PASSIONATE ABOUT THEIR POSITION ON THIS, AND I GREATLY APPRECIATE THE INPUT FROM THE RESIDENTS OUT THERE.

THEY'VE RESEARCHED THIS AND GIVEN A LOT OF DETAILS ON THIS AND A LOT OF INFORMATION ON THIS THAT REALLY SHEDS A LOT OF LIGHT ON THIS CASE.

ALSO, I APPRECIATE THE EXTENT THAT STAFF HAS GONE TO ON THIS.

I THINK THEY'VE REALLY SPENT SOME TIME.

TIM HAS THE SURVEYOR, OTHER INDIVIDUALS DON IN THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT ON THIS.

I FEEL IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I THINK I FEEL AS COUNCILMAN COLLINS DOES.

I DON'T AS LONG AS WE'RE MAINTAINING THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON THERE.

I DON'T SEE THE CONCERNS WITH THIS CASE.

AND I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS QUITE A BIT.

I'VE BEEN OUT THERE A NUMBER OF TIMES LOOKING AT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? LET'S CAST YOUR VOTE, PLEASE.

IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITH COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI DECLARING A CONFLICT.

ALL RIGHT, LET'S MOVE TO ITEM.

LOSE TRACK OF THE TIME HERE.

[9. PUBLIC COMMENT]

WE'RE IN PUBLIC COMMENT, AND I THINK THE PEOPLE THAT STAY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT OUGHT TO RECEIVE A MEDAL IN THEIR OWN.

SO WE HAVE REQUEST AND I TOOK THOSE PUBLIC COMMENT REQUEST AND I HAVE PUT THOSE IN PRIORITY AND I AM GOING TO CALL ON FIRST THE DIGNIFIED MR. DAVID MILLER. DAVID, COME ON UP AND.

[02:50:04]

IT'S A PLEASURE TO SEE YOU, SIR.

IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU, DAVID.

THANK YOU. BEFORE I GET INTO MY LITTLE THING HERE, I WANTED TO COME EARLIER.

THIS IS MY SECOND MEETING OUT OF THE HOUSE IN ALMOST TWO YEARS AND ONE WAS LAST WEEK WHEN THIS AND MY NAME GOT CALLED IN EACH ONE OF THE MEETINGS.

WHAT I REALLY WANT TO SAY IS IF THE CITY MANAGER WOULD TURN AROUND A LITTLE BIT.

I WANT TO COMPLIMENT AND SAY CONGRATULATIONS TO MS. LEWIS, AND I WANT TO LOOK AT THESE TWO BOOKENDS.

YOUR LADIES GOT THESE MEN IN THE MIDDLE OF THERE.

I USED TO KNOW THAT LADY THERE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY OF TALKING TO HER MANY TIMES AND IF I'M NOT CONVERTING TOO MUCH, SHE GAVE ME A HAT.

I WEAR [INAUDIBLE] I THINK I'M IMPORTANT WHEN I WEAR IT.

ANYWAY, WHAT I WANT TO SAY IS I'M HERE IN TERMS OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY OVER ON 33RD.

I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT'S ON THE AGENDA WHEREVER IT IS.

I SERVED ON A PLANNING COMMISSION PROBABLY LONGER THAN ANYBODY IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON, I THINK SIX MAYORS FROM A BUNCH OF COUNCIL PEOPLE AND VERY FEW OF THE MANY MEETINGS, I CHANGED A LOT OF THINGS ON COUNCIL MEETING BEFORE THE CITY ATTORNEY, GOT HERE BEFORE MR. BROWN THE NOW MAYOR, WHO GOT HERE [INAUDIBLE] AND OLD COUNTRY, BOY.

WHEN WE HAD THINGS ON COUNCIL NO ONES THAT WOULD COME TO THE MEETING, I SAY, IF YOU'RE THAT DEPARTMENT HEAD, YOU BETTER BE AT THIS MEETING.

AND THE CITY ATTORNEYS, YOU KNOW THAT MR. BROWN AND THE CITY ATTORNEY.

IF YOU'RE HERE BECAUSE I MAY WANT TO ASK YOU A QUESTION.

AND I TOLD MR. BROWN, I'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS ABOUT WHEN YOU GOT ON COUNCIL HAS PEOPLE USED TO GET UP THERE, WAS APPOINTED TODAY AND THEY'D BE MAKING A DECISION.

[INAUDIBLE], YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT QUICK.

ANYWAY, MY CONCERN IS ABOUT A PIECE OF PROPERTY.

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME.

A PIECE OF PROPERTY. AT 33RD AT AND MS. JACKSON IS [INAUDIBLE] IT? IT'S AN ALLEY. SHE [INAUDIBLE] I WAS OVER VISITING HER BUSINESS.

I NEVER BEEN INSIDE. I DON'T DRINK, SO I DON'T HAVE VERY MUCH REASON TO GO TO CLUBS.

I'M GOING TO HAVE TO START DRINKING OR SMOKING DOPE OR SOMETHING AT THIS AGE.

[LAUGHTER] [INAUDIBLE] WITH ME.

I DON'T EVEN DRINK COFFEE.

SO MY CONCERN IS ABOUT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

I THINK THIS I'D LIKE TO SEE THE CITY.

LET MS. JACKSON PURCHASE THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS SET TO ENTER HER PROPERTY ON THE WEST END, SHE WANTED TO IMPROVE A PROPERTY.

IT WOULD PUT IT BACK ON THE TAX ROLL.

I KNOW IT CAN BE DONE.

WE CLOSED THE WHOLE STREET DOWN HERE FOR THE CHURCH A COUPLE OF BLOCKS DOWN.

AS I TOLD YOU, I SERVED MANY YEARS.

PEOPLE BUILT IN THE STREETS AND WE LET THEM DO THAT.

COUNCIL LADY ROBB. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT ANYWAY.

AND THIS LADY IS HAVING A VERY STILL. MAYOR.

OK, I'M BACK ON. YEAH, THANK YOU.

SO THIS LADY WANTS TO IMPROVE HER PROPERTY, AND I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE TERMS THAT WHY SHE MAY, OR MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY BECAUSE I KNOW IT COULD BE DONE. I WILL SAY THIS AND I'M GOING TO SHUT UP.

I REMEMBER BACK IN THE DAY WHEN I USED TO COME PRESENT THINGS TO COUNCIL ABOUT HOUSING, ABOUT THE CITY RESTORING THE HOUSES, WHAT HAVE YOU AND A GENTLEMAN WAS TALKING.

YOU GOT A CHANCE TO TALK FOR A LONG TIME.

AND WHEN I GOT UP TO TALK.

CUT ME OFF IN THREE MINUTES.

I WONDERED ABOUT THAT, AND I CAME TO COUNCIL A COUPLE MEETINGS LATER AND I HAD FIGURED IT OUT WHY THEY LET HIM TALK.

HE WAS A DIFFERENT COLOR FROM ME.

HE WAS SHORTER THAN ME. HE WASN'T AS OLD AS I AM.

AND EVERYBODY THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO SEE IF SOMETHING THAT WAS RACIAL.

BUT WHAT I FIGURED OUT WAS HE HAD ON A SUIT AND I HAD ON SOME JEANS, SO I WORE A SUIT TO THE NEXT MEETING. SO YOU LET ME TALK BECAUSE I HAD A SUIT ON.

AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

HAVING SAID THAT, FIND A WAY TO LET THIS LADY PURCHASE THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY SO THAT SHE

[02:55:01]

COULD IMPROVE HER BUSINESS.

WE HAVE A PROBLEM.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE SANDBORN MAP.

IF YOU SEE HOW MANY BACK WHEN I WAS A KID, HOW MANY PEOPLE LOOK LIKE ME HAD BUSINESSES AND WE DON'T HAVE NONE IN GALVESTON NOW.

Y'ALL OUGHT TO BE BENDING OVER BACKWARDS TO HELP THIS LADY GET HER BUSINESS.

AND I THINK YOU'LL DO THAT AND I APPRECIATE IF YOU WOULD.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR CALLING ME.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE SAID, YOU KNOW, I'M HUNGRY.

I'M AN OLD MAN. I'M I'M A THOUSAND YEARS OLD.

I NEED TO GO HOME AND EAT.

SO I THANK YOU. YOU SAY YOU JUST TOLD PEOPLE THEY SHOULDN'T LEAVE.

I'M LEAVING.

BYE BYE. [LAUGHTER] GLAD TO SEE YOU, MR. MILLER. THANKS FOR BEING HERE.

SHEILA BELL.

THANK YOU. HELLO, OUR ILLUSTRIOUS MAYOR, OUR KNOWLEDGEABLE CITY COUNCIL AND BEAUTIFUL RESIDENTS OF GALVESTON.

GOD BLESS YOU. SO GLAD TO BE HERE TODAY.

I GOT TO GO REAL QUICK.

EVERY TIME I PASS DOWN 23RD STREET, THERE'S A SCHOOL THAT HAS A WHOLE BUNCH OF BOATS ON THE SIDE OF IT. THAT SCHOOL KUDOS FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE READY IN CASE OF A FLOOD.

THEY CAN EVACUATE SAFELY, STUDENTS AND STAFF, AND IT'S BEEN FLOODING A LOT AND IT FLOODS A LOT. THAT'S DOWNTOWN ON 23RD.

SO I BELIEVE EVERYBODY ON THIS ISLAND NEEDS A LIFE JACKET, LIFE JACKET AND A BOAT IF IT'S A CANOE LIKE THEY HAVE OR WHATEVER YOU GOT.

I WISH THE CITY COULD GET TOGETHER ON THAT SO THAT WE'RE NOT ALWAYS DEPENDENT ON SOMEBODY ELSE TO RESCUE US. LET'S RESCUE OURSELVES.

AROUND 2005.

OH, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT.

MAIN THING. THIS IS A SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2015 USA TODAY ARTICLE.

ENERGY HACKED ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY NINE TIMES IN FOUR YEARS.

ANYBODY HAD A POWER OUTAGE? YES, OF COURSE WE HAVE.

SO WE NEED AN ENERGY COMMITTEE, AN ELECTRICITY CUT OFF COMMITTEE, SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT SO THAT IF IT'S GENERATORS, IF IT'S SOLAR POWER, WHATEVER, WE GOT TO DO THAT NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS TO THE NATION OR WHATEVER.

GALVESTON HAS STILL GOT LIGHTS ON.

MY HUSBAND IS ON A MACHINE AND THAT WAS A PROBLEM IN FEBRUARY, AND HE'S NOT THE ONLY ONE.

SO LET'S HOPE THAT WE CAN GET TOGETHER AND GET ON THAT.

IN 2005.

I'M A WRITER GOD SHOWED ME THAT THERE'D BE A LOT OF HACKING GOING ON.

ANYBODY HEARD ABOUT HACKING? OF COURSE YOU HAVE EVERYTHING.

EVERY MAJOR SYSTEM IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAS BEEN HACKED, AND IT'S NOT OVER.

PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THIS, BUT I'M GOING TO TELL YOU.

INTERNET IS A RELIGIOUS SYSTEM.

THE BEHOLDER OF INTERNET'S ALGORITHM OWNS IT.

PICTURE A SIX BILLION DOORS THAT EACH HAVE A KEY, BUT ONLY ONE PERSON HAS THE MASTER KEY.

SO NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, SOMEBODY'S GOING TO GET HACKED.

GET YOU SOME COMPUTERS THAT ARE OFFLINE.

STORE YOUR DATA.

CITIES ARE GETTING HACKED, SO WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT.

NOW I'VE BEEN WRITING ABOUT AN ATTACK WITH NEEDING MASKS SINCE 2012.

MY BOOKS BEEN COPYWRITTEN FOR YEARS OF COURSE NOBODY WAS LISTENING TO ME, BUT THEY'RE LISTENING NOW BECAUSE IT'S HAPPENING, WE LIVE IN IT.

WHEN IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S AN ALL CLEAR AND THEY'RE TELLING PEOPLE NOT TO WEAR MASKS, PUT THEM BACK ON. PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID THAT IT WAS AIRBORNE AND HE WAS RIGHT.

50 CITIES, 50 STATES, EXCUSE ME, IN JUST A MATTER OF WEEKS, EVEN WHEN THEY SAY, DON'T WEAR A MASK WHEN I GOT A WHOLE LOT MORE.

WELL, WE'LL SEE YOU BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING, SHEILA.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE THREE MINUTES YOU GIVE ME.

THANK YOU SHEILA.

DANNY ASBURY.

DANNY ASBURY? ALL RIGHT, TED ELLIS.

AND WE HAD LEON PHILLIPS, I DON'T SEE LEON, OH, THERE'S LEON, I'M SORRY.

OH. MAYOR COUNCIL LEON PHILLIPS, PRESIDENT OF THE GALVESTON COALITION FOR JUSTICE . BRIEF HISTORY AROUND 1999

[03:00:07]

NOT BARBARA SANDERSON [INAUDIBLE] GOT A GRANT FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

SHE TORE DOWN ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY EIGHT UNITS OF PUBLIC HOUSING BETWEEN 32ND AND 34TH.

SHE REPLACED THEM WITH THIRTY EIGHT SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

IN THE MIDST OF THIS HAPPENING, WHAT WE FOUND OUT WAS THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAD BEGUN TO USE A TERM CALLED DESEGREGATION OF POVERTY, IN THAT DESEGREGATION.

HOW DO YOU DESEGREGATE POVERTY? THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN DO IT WITH AN INDIVIDUAL THAT HAS A LEASE ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY IS TO TEAR THE PROPERTY DOWN.

THE LEASE IS NO GOOD ANYMORE.

IN THE MID 2000S, BETWEEN 43RD AND 46TH STREET PALM TERRACE WAS TORN DOWN. TWO HUNDRED AND NINE UNITS.

REPLACED WITH TWENTY FIVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, 16 DUPLEXES.

WHEN IKE HIT ALL OF PUBLIC HOUSING WAS DESTROYED.

DISTRICT ONE IS SUFFERING.

AND WHAT IT'S SUFFERING FROM IS GENTRIFICATION.

WE HAVE NEW PUBLIC HOUSING UNITS, WE HAVE VILLA ON THE STRAND.

WE HAVE CEDAR AT CARVER PARK, WE HAVE FIFTY ONE PERCENT PUBLIC HOUSING IN BOTH UNITS.

WE HAVE FORTY NINE PERCENT MARKET RATE.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THAT MEANS THAT UNITS THAT WERE CLOSE TO BEING 90 PERCENT AFRICAN-AMERICAN ARE NOW DIVIDED UP, WHICH MEANS THE VOTING POWER OF DISTRICT ONE IS BEING DEPLETED.

SO AS MY LAST GO HERE IS, I HOPE WHEN YOU'RE REDOING THE REDISTRICTING LINES, YOU KEEP IN MIND THAT THERE WAS A RULING BY THE COURT THAT DISTRICT ONE WOULD REMAIN A MINORITY DISTRICT.

THANK YOU, LEON. IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU.

THANKS FOR BEING HERE.

WELL, WE HAVE ONE MORE I THINK ONLINE, JANELLE SAYS.

YOU HAVE TWO NOW. NOW WE HAVE TWO.

THEY'RE MULTIPLYING.

ALEX NELSON.

HI, COUNCIL. I'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON ONE ISSUE ON THE AGENDA AND ONE NON AGENDA.

THE PARK BOARD POSTED A FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, CALLED A FONSI FOR SHORT ON ITS WEBSITE WITH A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, OR EA, ON OCTOBER 7TH, 2021.

THE FONSI AND EA ARE ABOUT THE PROPOSED STEWART BEACH DRAINAGE PROJECT.

HAVE ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THOSE DOCUMENTS AND COMPARE WITH THE PRIOR SUBMISSIONS REGARDING THE STEWART BEACH DRAINAGE PROJECT? IF YOU COMPARE THE DOCUMENTS, YOU'D SEE A LOT OF RED FLAGS WITH THE INCONSISTENCIES.

COUNCIL MEMBERS KNOW THEY NEED TO BE HYPER VIGILANT IN REVIEWING ANYTHING THE PARK BOARD DOES, GIVEN THE ISSUES THAT HAVE ARISEN OVER THE YEARS WITH THE MISMANAGEMENT OF THE BEACHES. MANY OF THE RESIDENTS OF THIS TOWN REMEMBER WHEN STEWART BEACH PARKING LOT AND BEACH WAS FULL OF FLUFFY SAND.

NOW, AFTER THE PARK BOARD'S MINING AND HARDENING OF SAND, THE PARKING LOT, IT'S A COMPLETE MESS. THE PARK BOARD WANTS TO NOW SPEND TAXPAYER FUNDS TO FIX WHAT IT CREATED.

WHETHER THE FUNDS COME FROM THE IDC, STATE OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT IT IS TAX DOLLARS.

BUT AT A MINIMUM, SHOULDN'T THE TAXPAYERS GET ACCURATE AND COMPLETE INFORMATION WITH THE CITY AND PARK BOARD PUTTING A PRIORITY ON TRANSPARENCY TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC IS FULLY INFORMED? I URGE COUNCIL TO PUT A PRESS RELEASE OUT ABOUT THE FONSI AND EA AND OUTLINE THE ISSUES WITH THE DOCUMENT IN LAYMAN'S TERMS FOR RESIDENTS SHOWING WHAT HAS BEEN OMITTED, MISREPRESENTED AND WHAT ACTION CITIZENS CAN TAKE IN RESPONSE.

I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO PROVIDE AN OUTLINE OF INCONSISTENCIES OR ASSIST TO THAT END, THE INFORMATION SHOULD BE POSTED IN ALL THE CITY'S SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS SENT TO EVERYONE WHO SIGNED UP FOR CITY EMAIL [INAUDIBLE].

ALSO BE POSTED ON THE CITY WEBSITE AND HOME PAGE AS A BANNER.

LET'S MAKE SURE WE USE ALL THE EASY, TO USE MODERN COMMUNICATION CONVENIENCES THAT MAKE SURE MANY PEOPLE GET NOTICED AS POSSIBLE.

COUNCIL SHOULD ALSO EXTEND THE PUBLIC COMMENT DEADLINE PAST NOVEMBER 5TH.

WITHOUT DETAILING ALL THE TECHNICAL INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE FONSI AND EA EVERYONE ON COUNCIL AND ALL CITIZENS SHOULD BE CONCERNED WITH HOW THE PARK BOARD IS PROCEEDING.

A COUPLE OF CONCERNS I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ARE FIRST, THE LACK OF NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC ON SOMETHING SO IMPORTANT AS ALTERING OUR BEACHES IN A BEACH TOWN SUBJECT TO HURRICANES AND

[03:05:03]

TROPICAL STORMS IS CONCERNING.

SECOND, THE EA FAILS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF OIL AND GAS PIPELINES, WHICH RUN THROUGH STEWART BEACH.

THAT DESPITE THE FACT THAT PIPELINES SHOW UP ON STAFF REPORT DOCUMENTS UNDER ENGINEERING PLANS, A PRESENTATION WAS MADE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOWING THE EXISTENCE OF THOSE PIPELINES. THIRD, THE PARK BOARD'S FONSI AND EA OMITS THE FACT THAT THE PARK BOARD ADMITTEDLY MINED OR HARVEST THE SAND FROM STEWART BEACH OVER THE YEARS AND FINALLY THE PARK BOARD ALSO ASSERTS THAT THERE ARE NO WETLANDS THAT WILL BE IMPACTED.

WHY SUCH A POSITION WOULD BE TAKEN WHEN JUST DAYS EARLIER, THE PARK BOARD ANNOUNCED VIA THE GALVESTON DAILY NEWS THAT IT WAS SEEKING A WETLANDS DELINEATION ON STEWART BEACH? WHY IS A WETLAND DELINEATION BEING REQUESTED AFTER AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WAS DONE AFTER NUMEROUS DOCUMENTS OVER THE YEARS SHOW THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD CAUSE FLOODING IN OTHER AREAS? NOW UNDER ITEM 11 D NUMBER ONE, THE PARK BOARD HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY CONSENT FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS SOUTH OF SEAWALL BOULEVARD.

NO EASEMENTS EXIST AND CURRENTLY AND FALSE REPRESENTATIONS WERE MADE ABOUT PENDING LITIGATION. I DON'T THINK THE PUBLIC WOULD APPRECIATE THE USE OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. THIS SHOULD BE DEFERRED.

I HOPE MY COMMENTS AREN'T SUMMARIZED OR WATERED DOWN.

I'D LIKE TO SEE THEM PUBLISHED IN THEIR ENTIRETY IN THE MINUTES OF THIS COUNCIL MEETING.

THANK YOU. TIME IS UP.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. NELSON. AND WHO ELSE DO WE HAVE JANELLE? SHERRY ZACHARY.

GO AHEAD, CAN YOU HEAR US? YES, GO RIGHT AHEAD.

YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THE PORT OF GALVESTON HAS CHANGED IT FOR THE TAXES THAT WE HAVE TO PAY FOUR DOLLARS EVERY TIME WE GO INTO THE PORT OF GALVESTON.

AS OF RIGHT NOW, ACCORDING TO OUR ORDINANCE, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CHARGE THAT FEE TO THE CUSTOMER. ALL OF THE OTHER TRANSPORTATIONS CAN DO SO BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOVERNED BY OUR ORDINANCE. SO WE'RE ASKING IF WE CAN GET IT APPROVED TO CHARGE THE FOUR DOLLARS TO THE CUSTOMER BECAUSE IF THE TRIP IS FIVE DOLLARS, WE GO OVER TO STARBUCKS WITH THE CUSTOMER.

WE'VE MADE ONE DOLLAR ON THE TRIP.

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SEE IF WE CAN GET Y'ALL TO APPROVE THAT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE. ALL RIGHT.

ANYONE ELSE, JANELLE? ALL RIGHT, WE ARE NOW THROUGH THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION AND WE'RE MOVING TO ORDINANCES

[10.A. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Amending Chapter 32, "Streets, Sidewalks, And Public Places" Of The Code Of The City Of Galveston 1982, As Amended By Requiring City Of Galveston Approval Before Any Writing Or Drawing Can Be Done On Any Street, Sidewalk, Or Other Public Property; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject And Providing For An Effective Date. (Listowski/Brown)]

NOT REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARINGS.

ITEM 10A PLEASE.

ITEM 10 A CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 32 STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND PUBLIC PLACES OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, 1982, AS AMENDED BY REQUIRING THE CITY OF GALVESTON APPROVAL BEFORE ANY WRITING OR DRAWING CAN BE DONE ON ANY STREET, SIDEWALK OR OTHER PUBLIC PROPERTY, MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS COUNCIL.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD.

MR. GLYWASKY DOES THIS INCLUDE ANY MEDIUM, INCLUDING CHALK? IT INCLUDES CHALK.

HAS EXCEPTIONS FOR AS YOU SAW THE CHILDREN AND OTHER THINGS.

WELL DONE, THANK YOU.

THIS WAS BROUGHT TO US BY COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI.

DON, DID YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS OR.

I HAD MY HAND UP AND I MOVE TO OH.

ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE MOTION FOR.

I WOULD LIKE TO ADD I HOPE THAT IF A 13 YEAR OLD IS MAKING A HOPSCOTCH, THAT WE WOULD NOT ARREST HIM SINCE IT'S LIMITED TO 12 YEAR OLDS AND DOWN.

I WOULD ASSUME THEY WOULD USE DISCRETION ON THAT.

BY ALL MEANS.

WE HAVE A MOTION IS THAT DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT.

I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. WE HAVE COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

10B, PLEASE NELLIE, EXCUSE ME, JANELLE.

[10.B. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Amending Chapter 10, “Building Code” Of The Code Of The City Of Galveston, 1982, As Amended”, By Amending Article VIII, “City Of Galveston Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance”; Providing For An Effective Date; And Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (D. Ewald)]

10B CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 10 BUILDING CODE OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON 1982, AS AMENDED BY AMENDING ARTICLE EIGHT CITY OF GALVESTON FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.

[03:10:04]

DAVID, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR SUBJECT? THANK YOU.

MICHELLE OLIVER THAT THE FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE WAS REQUIRED, A REVISION IN ORDER TO REMAIN AS CURRENT CLASS SIX RATING.

AND A CLASS SIX, OF COURSE, GIVES EVERYBODY A 20 PERCENT DISCOUNT ON THEIR FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUMS TO THE MAJORITY OF THE POLICYHOLDERS OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON.

WHAT WAS CHANGED WAS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CAUGHT IN THE 2018 REVISION, BUT IT WAS CAUGHT THIS TIME AROUND, I GUESS IT WAS A DIFFERENT SPECIALISTS THAT REVIEWED OUR ORDINANCE.

IT WAS THAT AND IT WAS JUST A MINOR CHANGE THAT FOR NEW AND SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES, INCLUDING MANUFACTURED HOMES THE LOWEST FLOOR AND ALL SERVICING EQUIPMENT SHALL BE ELEVATED TO A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES ABOVE THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION.

AND THEN THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE FOR STRUCTURES IN THE FLOOD ZONE WE REMOVED THE NON CONVERSION AGREEMENT.

AND INSPECTIONS FOR ENCLOSURES BUILT BELOW BASE FLOOD.

AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.

THANK YOU, DAVID. ALL RIGHT.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. EWALD? YES, JOHN.

TWO QUESTIONS. WHAT EXACTLY IS SERVICING EQUIPMENT? MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT YOUR CONDENSERS? THAT KIND OF STUFF, LIKE YOU CAN SAY, WASHER AND DRYERS, EQUIPMENT, ANY KIND OF MACHINERY OR EQUIPMENT. IT'S BASICALLY IT.

IS THERE A DEFINITION OUT THERE ON THAT BECAUSE I MEAN, I'M A LITTLE, I MEAN, I'M A BUILDER AND I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THAT.

YEAH. AND THIS HAS BEEN IN PLAY.

OK, SO NOTHING HAS CHANGED THERE OF IT.

EXCEPT THE 18 INCH REQUIREMENT ABOVE BFE.

OK. AND SO, OF COURSE . RIGHT.

WE BUILT A NEW HOUSE. WE PUT ELEVATORS IN THEM.

ELEVATORS COME DOWN TO THE GROUND FLOOR.

THAT'S ALLOWED.

I MEAN, YOU CAN HAVE A REFRIGERATOR DOWN BELOW THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION.

I'M ASSUMING.

NO. YOU CAN'T. I THINK IT'S COVERED ON YOUR INSURANCE.

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE INSURANCE.

NOT A REFRIGERATOR. FREEZER IS.

FREEZER. NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE ANY OF THAT DOWN THERE, PEOPLE.

EVEN THOUGH IT'S COVERED ON YOUR FLOOD INSURANCE.

YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE THAT.

THIS IS WHEN WE INSPECT IT, WE MAKE SURE EVERYTHING'S NOT THERE.

OK, I'M NOT SAYING PEOPLE DON'T DO IT.

OK, BUT YOU KNOW.

OK, I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF.

NOT WHILE WE'RE AROUND ANYWAY. IT'S INTERESTING THAT A FLOOD INSURANCE POLICY WOULD COVER SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT IT'S AGAINST CODE TO DO IT.

WHATEVER FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

WHEN DOES THIS GO INTO EFFECT IF WE APPROVE IT TONIGHT? IMMEDIATELY. OK, THANK YOU.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. EWALD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DAVID.

ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 10B.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT? I'LL SECOND THAT. A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI.

I'M SORRY. VERY GOOD, ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? IF NOT, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

THAT IS UNANIMOUS, THANK YOU.

ITEM 10C, PLEASE, JANELLE.

[10.C. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Amending The Code Of The City Of Galveston, As Amended, Chapter 37, “Wrecker, Tow And Storage Facility”, By Amending Chapter 37, To Amend Regulations, Procedures, And/Or Definitions; And To Make Clarifications, Rename, Renumber And Rearrange The Chapter As Applicable; Providing For Penalities And Fees As Applicable; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; Providing For An Effective Date. (B. Stroud)]

10C CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON AS AMENDED CHAPTER 37 WRECKER TOW AND STORAGE FACILITY BY AMENDING CHAPTER THIRTY SEVEN TO AMEND REGULATIONS, PROCEDURES AND OR DEFINITIONS 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.

BUTCH, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU HAVE A NEW SHIRT ON, SO.

VERY NICE. ANY COMMENTS ON THIS BUTCH.

NO. THIS IS JUST GETTING OUR CHAPTER THIRTY SEVEN BACK WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE.

WE HAD BROUGHT IT TO YOU LAST YEAR.

Y'ALL BROUGHT THE NEW ADOPTED THE NEW ONE.

[03:15:01]

THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT WERE LEFT OUT THAT WE REALIZED AFTERWARDS THAT NEED TO BE PUT BACK IN THE FEES FOR THE PERMIT FEES.

THEY WERE LEFT OUT.

WE HAD TO PUT THEM BACK IN.

TDLR REQUIRES CERTAIN THINGS FOR RELEASING A CAR FROM A VEHICLE STORAGE FACILITY AND THE CITY'S WANTING TO ADD TO THAT IN ADDITION TO WHAT TDLR ALREADY HAS.

IF YOU GO TO PICK UP A CAR FROM VEHICLE STORAGE FACILITY, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE LIABILITY INSURANCE PROOF FOR THAT VEHICLE.

WHEN YOU PICK IT UP AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LICENSED DRIVER, THAT'S GOING TO DRIVE IT AWAY. WHAT WE'RE WANTING TO STOP IS IF YOU GET STOPPED ON TRAFFIC AND YOUR CAR'S IMPOUNDED BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE A DRIVER'S LICENSE OR INSURANCE AND YOU'RE SPEEDING OR WHATEVER, THEN YOU JUST GO PAY THE FEE AND GET IN YOUR CAR AND YOU'RE ON YOUR WAY AGAIN WITH THE SAME VIOLATIONS.

SO AS WE ALL KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF ACCIDENTS WITH UNINSURED MOTORIST, AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO OUR PART TO MAKE SURE AT LEAST IT HAS INSURANCE WHEN IT LEAVES THERE.

THE NEXT ONE IS A CLEANUP ON THE DISCIPLINE PART OF IT, THE ONE WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.

IF THEY PASS THREE TIMES ON ANY ONE LIST, THEIR PERMIT CAN BE REVOKED.

BUT IN ORDER TO BE SUSPENDED, THEY HAVE TO PASS FOUR TIMES, WHICH DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

SO WE'RE WANTING TO REMOVE THAT PASS THREE TIMES TO BE REVOKED FROM THERE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, BUTCH.

IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS COUNCIL FOR MR. STROUD? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

YES, MA'AM. SO WHEN YOU'RE SAYING PASSED, THEY'RE CALLED TO TOW SOMETHING AND THEY SAY, I DON'T WANT TO DO IT. WELL, THERE'S SEVERAL WAYS YOU CAN BE PASSED IF DISPATCH CALLS THE WRECKER SERVICE AND REQUEST THEIR SERVICE TO A CERTAIN LOCATION.

AND THEY DON'T ANSWER THE PHONE.

THEY LEAVE A MESSAGE, THEY HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO CALL BACK AND ACCEPT THE CALL.

IF THEY DON'T CALL BACK IN THE FIVE MINUTES, THEN THAT'S A PASS.

IF THEY TAKE THE CALL AND THEN THEY HAVE 30 MINUTES, IF IT UNLESS IT'S WEST OF ONE HUNDRED AND THIRD THEN IT'S FORTY FIVE MINUTES TO MAKE IT TO THE SCENE.

IF THEY DON'T MAKE IT TO THE SCENE WITHIN THE 30 MINUTES OR THE TIME ALLOTTED, THEN THAT'S CONSIDERED A PASS.

IF THEY GET TO THE SCENE WITHIN THE 30 MINUTES AND HOWEVER THEIR VEHICLE THAT THE WRECKER THEY BROUGHT ISN'T CAPABLE OF PERFORMING THE DUTIES IT NEEDS TO DO BECAUSE OF MECHANICAL FAILURES, THAT'S CONSIDERED A PASS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, BUTCH.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND IT. A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

IT IS UNANIMOUS.

ITEM 10D, PLEASE.

[10.D. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Amending Chapter 34, “Traffic”, Section 34-110, “Parking Totally Prohibited” Of “The Code Of The City Of Galveston 1982”, As Amended, By Adding Both Sides Of Cove View Blvd From Stewart Road To Fm 3005; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; Providing For An Effective Date. (B. Stroud)]

THANK BUTCH FOR ALL HIS HARD WORK ON THIS.

AS YOU CAN SEE, HE CAN RECITE THESE THINGS IN HIS SLEEP AND HE MAY VERY WELL DO IT IN HIS SLEEP. I DON'T KNOW, BUT I APPRECIATE ALL HE DOES BECAUSE HE'S ON TOP OF IT.

YEAH, THANK YOU BUTCH.

BETTER NOT HASSLE ANY 13 YEAR OLDS THAT ARE CHALKING OUT OF HOPSCOTCH.

[LAUGHTER] YEAH.

JANELLE. 10D CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 34 TRAFFIC SECTION 34-110 PARKING TOTALLY PROHIBITED OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON 1982, AS AMENDED BY ADDING BOTH SIDES OF COVE VIEW BOULEVARD FROM STEWART ROAD TO FM 3005 MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. YES, BUTCH.

SPEAK ON IT TOO, SINCE I'M THE ONE THAT SIC BUTCH ON THIS ONE.

WE GET COMPLAINTS BY THE DOZENS.

COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB ABOUT COVE VIEW BOULEVARD AND TRAFFIC BEING BLOCKED VISION BEING BLOCKED. IT'S TWO LANES WIDE, BUT NOT REALLY.

SO IF YOU PARK IT, HAVE FOUND IT AS A PLACE TO PARK AND LEAVE THEIR TRAILERS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

THERE'S NO THERE'S ONLY ONE RESIDENT ON THE WHOLE STREET THAT FRONTS IT AND WE'VE SPOKEN WITH THEM. AND WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THEM HAVING THEIR LAWN MOWED, THEY DON'T NEED ANY PARKING THERE. SO THEY AGREE TO THIS TOO.

SO MS. BLAIR DOES, OR MR. BLAIR DOES. VERY GOOD.

WHICHEVER ONE YOU THINK IS THE BOSS THERE.

[LAUGHTER] WE HAVE MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COUNCILWOMAN ROBB.

I'LL SECOND THAT.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

IT IS UNANIMOUS.

ITEM 10E, PLEASE, JANELLE.

[10.E. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston Approving The 2021-2022 Annual Service Plan Update To The Service And Assessment Plan And Assessment Roll For Public Improvements For The Bayside At Waterman’s Public Improvement District In Accordance With Chapter 372, Texas Local Government Code, As Amended; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject; And Providing For An Effective Date. (M. Hay)]

ITEM 10E CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON APPROVING THE 2021

[03:20:05]

2022 ANNUAL SERVICE PLAN UPDATE TO THE SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN AND ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE BAYSIDE AT WATERMAN'S PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 372 TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AS AMENDED, MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

VERY GOOD.

MICHELLE. GLAD TO HAVE YOU WITH US.

GOOD EVENING. YES, THIS IS THE ANNUAL SERVICE PLAN UPDATE FOR BAYSIDE AT WATERMAN'S PID, AND WE'VE BEEN, I GUESS, DOING THIS SINCE 2014 2015 TIME PERIOD.

SO WE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT YOU ALL APPROVE THE SERVICE ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR THIS YEAR WITH THE ASSOCIATED ORDINANCE.

SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER.

THANK YOU MICHELLE. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS.? MARIE? MOVE TO APPROVE.

ALL RIGHT I HAVE MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 10E BY COUNCILWOMAN ROBB.

IS THERE A SECOND. OK, WE HAVE SECOND BY COUNCILMAN COLLINS.

ANY DISCUSSION? HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THIS? DO THOSE GO HAND IN HAND OR IS THERE ANY? WHAT'S OUTSTANDING? THAT KIND OF STUFF. WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE WATERMAN'S PID AND I THINK BUT BASICALLY.

THAT IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE.

PROPERTY OWNERS CAN GET THEIR ASSESSMENT BILL GIVEN THE AMOUNT THEY OWED.

AS THE CAD DIDN'T HAVE THE CORRECT ADDRESS AND ALLOWS FOR A WAIVER OWNER, YEAH. YEAH, SERVICE PLAN, WE WERE REQUIRED TO ADOPT IT REVIEW AND ADOPT IT EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

OK. SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE ASK THAT EARLIER IN.

HAPPENS BECAUSE WHEN PROPERTY CHANGES HANDS THE CAD'S, NOT ALWAYS JUST IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE DAY THEY CLOSE, SO THEY CROSS IN THE.

AND THERE HAS BEEN AN UPDATE FROM THE AUGUST.

THEY DID COLLECT QUITE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THAT WITH THE NEW.

[INAUDIBLE] WHICH IS GOOD. VERY GOOD, WE HAVE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR SECONDED.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

THAT IS UNANIMOUS, THANK YOU.

CONSENT ITEMS, PLEASE, JANELLE.

[11. Consent Items]

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, AND WE HAVE CONSENT ITEMS 11 A THROUGH 11 YY.

I'M GOING TO PULL 11 YY OUT FOR SEPARATE ACTION SINCE WE HAVE A CONFLICT ON THAT.

AND IS THERE ANY OTHER CONSENT ITEMS? YES. I'M GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE.

ALL THE ITEMS, BUT FOR 11 YY? YES. OK, SECOND THAT.

ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS 11 A THROUGH 11 XX.

WE HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN COLLINS.

ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE, PLEASE.

THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

VERY GOOD. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL OF 11 YY.

[11.YY. Receive And File The Following Items: 1. COR - 10/13/2021 - Newport Galveston - Pelican Island Causeway Bridge Replacement 2. COR - 10/13/2021 - Texas International Terminals - Pelican Island Causeway Replacement 3. Certifications of Consistency for The Children’s Center for homeless programs for Rapid Rehousing, Transitional Housing/Rapid Rehousing, and Permanent Supportive Housing 4. Certification of Consistency for The Salvation Army of Galveston, Texas for homeless program for Rapid Rehousing]

IS THERE A SECOND? THIS WILL HAVE TO BE MANUAL.

I DIDN'T HAVE THIS SEPARATE ITEM IN THERE.

JUST A MANUAL VOTE ON THIS ONE.

OH, OK, VERY GOOD.

I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF 11 YY.

THE SECOND WAS COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

ALL RIGHT. SO WELL, YEAH, YOU HAVE A CONFLICT ON THAT, RIGHT?

[03:25:02]

SO THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

BUT FOR COUNCILWOMAN ROBB.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS ITEM WAS EVEN IN YEAH, I THINK JANELLE'S GOING WE'LL MOVE IT NEXT TIME.

SHE'S GOING TO CHANGE THAT.

LET'S MOVE TO 12A, PLEASE.

[12.A. Consider For Approval A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Galveston, Texas, Establishing Guidelines To Be Followed By City Staff As Well As Citizens In The Submission Of Specific Redistricting Proposals For Use In The 2021 Redistricting Process; Providing For Findings Of Fact And Providing For An Effective Date. (Legal)]

OK, LET'S SEE.

HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

OK. 12 A CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS, ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES TO BE FOLLOWED BY CITY STAFF AS WELL AS CITIZENS IN THE SUBMISSION OF SPECIFIC REDISTRICTING PROPOSALS FOR USE OF THE 2021 REDISTRICTING PROCESS, PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS OF FACT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WE WENT OVER THIS THIS MORNING, DON, DID YOU WANT TO SAY FURTHER? ALL RIGHTY, VERY GOOD, ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS COUNCIL.

AND I WOULD MOVE.

AND I WILL SECOND. A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN COLLINS.

WHICHEVER, WHATEVER WORKS.

YEAH, OK.

MOTION BY COLLINS AND SECONDED BY LISTOWSKI.

ANY DISCUSSION? YES, SIR.

IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT SOME OF THESE I THINK WE TOUCHED ON THIS THIS MORNING, COMPOSED OF WHOLE VOTING DISTRICTS.

THAT'S PRACTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE, BUT IT'D BE NICE.

WHAT MORE CAN WE ASK? THANK YOU, JOHN, AND I ARE GOING TO PLAY YEAH, I GOT TO GIVE UP SOME OF MY PEOPLE.

ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD.

THAT WAS UNANIMOUS, WASN'T IT JANELLE? YES, SIR, IT WAS. [LAUGHTER] WE'RE ALMOST THERE COUNCIL SO.

12B. 12 B CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IN CAUSE NUMBER

[12.B. Consideration Of Approval Of Mediated Settlement Agreement In Cause No. 19-CV- 2191, Sharon Davis, And As Assignee Of The City Of Galveston V. Quality Works Construction, Inc. And Insurors Indemnity Company, 56th Judicial District Court, Galveston County And Authorizing The City Manager To Execute Any Documents Necessary To Effectuate The Settlement And Release. (Legal)]

19-CV-2191 SHARON DAVIS AND AS ASSIGNEE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, V QUALITY WORKS CONSTRUCTION INC AND INSURORS INDEMNITY COMPANY 56TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT GALVESTON COUNTY. AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE THE SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE.

I MAKE A MOTION THAT THE SETTLEMENT OF THIS CASE BE APPROVED IN THE AMOUNT OF $95,000 AND THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE AUTHORIZED TO SIGN ANY ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS, AND THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BE AUTHORIZED TO FILE ANY DOCUMENTS AND TAKE ANY REQUIRED ACTION NEEDED TO DISPERSE THE FUNDS TO THE PROPER CLAIMANTS.

I'LL SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN ROBB ANY DISCUSSION? NO, SIR. ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD.

PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES ON THIS.

THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

ITEM 12 C, PLEASE.

[12.C. Discuss And Consider Approval Of The 2022 Council Meeting Schedule. (Brown)]

12C DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE 2022 COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE.

VERY GOOD. THIS IS IT'S IN OUR PACKET OF THE DATES FOR OUR 2022 DATE COUNCIL MEETING DATES.

I'M GOING TO MAKE.

GO AHEAD, MARIE. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REQUEST THAT WE ADD A SECOND MEETING EARLIER IN OCTOBER SO THAT WE CAN HANDLE THE ANNUAL CONTRACTS AND WE DON'T END UP WITH 54 CONSENT ITEMS. THERE IS THAT IN A FORM OF A MOTION MARIE.

YES. SO YOU'RE MOVING THAT WE ADOPT THE CALENDAR, AS STATED WITH THE ADDITION OF AN EXTRA MEETING IN OCTOBER FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF ANY INCREASED CONSENT ITEMS. OK IS THERE A SECOND? YOUR SECONDING, ALL RIGHT.

AND, WE HAVE SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS.

[03:30:06]

DO WE HAVE TO DECIDE ON AN EXACT DATE RIGHT NOW, OR ARE WE JUST SAYING.

NO.

MEETING IN OCTOBER, I WON'T BE READY TO GO WITH ALL THE CONTRACT RENEWALS THAT EARLY.

RIGHT? I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE WOULD ACCOMPLISH WITH TWO MEETINGS IN OCTOBER.

I WOULD AGREE. AND THAT'S WHY WE AND PART OF THE REASON WHY WE DECIDED THIS COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB PROBABLY REMEMBERS THIS NOT ONLY IS THE HOLIDAYS, BUT THAT'S WHY WE MOVE THE SECOND MEETING THE FIRST MEETING IN NOVEMBER UP TO ACCOMMODATE THE HOLIDAYS AND ALSO PICK UP THINGS. BECAUSE WE KNOW THIS IS GOING TO BE A HEAVY AGENDA BECAUSE OF ALL THE RENEWALS, AND ACTUALLY WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE MORE IN NOVEMBER.

BUT IT JUST TAKES US A WHILE BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BUDGET IS UNTIL AT THE LAST MINUTE. BY THE TIME WE GET THE CONTRACTS IN HAND AND EVERYTHING, WE DON'T HAVE IT, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD IF WE DID IT, THE TWO MEETINGS WOULD BE RIGHT ON TOP OF EACH OTHER ANYWAY.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD HELP YOU.

I MEAN, I WOULD. I'D BE GLAD TO SAY A SECOND MEETING IN NOVEMBER, BUT THIS NOVEMBER'S MEETING IS SOLELY FOR REDISTRICTING, WHERE NEXT YEAR IT WOULDN'T BE.

THIS IS A REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING IN NOVEMBER.

WE WILL ALSO BE DOING THAT.

DON SAID IT WAS SACRED IT WAS A SEPARATE WORKSHOP.

REDISTRICTING. BUT THE REASON YOU HAVE THE MEETINGS EARLY IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER IS HOLIDAY SCHEDULES, RIGHT? CORRECT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED FOR APPROVAL OF THIS CALENDAR, PLUS AN EXTRA MEETING IN OCTOBER.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE ON THAT, PLEASE.

WE DO NOT HAVE A QUORUM.

DO NOT HAVE A MAJORITY ON THAT, THAT MOTION FAILS.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE 2022 COUNCIL MEETING DATES AS OUTLINED IN OUR PACKET. AND TO ACCOMMODATE THAT, I'LL LET ME WORK WITH STAFF TO MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN STAGGER SOME OF THESE RENEWALS, THEY'RE NOT ALL UP AT THE SAME TIME.

SO YOU'RE NOT SO BURDENED WITH THAT.

I GET WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM ON THAT.

SO LET ME SEE. WE'LL WORK WITH THAT LIKE AND WE CAN WORK WITH THAT.

THAT SOUNDS GOOD, ESPECIALLY SINCE NOVEMBER MEETING IS SO QUICK.

RIGHT AFTER. YEAH.

ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PACKET AGENDA ITEM OF OUR CALENDAR.

WE HAVE A SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

IT IS UNANIMOUS.

MOVING TO ITEM 12 D, PLEASE, JANELLE.

[12.D. Discuss And Consider Appointments To The Following City Boards, Commissions, And Committees: 1. Airport Advisory Committee - District 4 2. Arts and Historic Preservation Advisory Board - Position 7 3. Building Board of Adjustments and Appeals - Positions 3 and 4 4. Cultural Arts Commission - Positions 2, 4, and 8 5. Ethics Commission - Districts 5 and 6 6. Families, Children and Youth Board - Positions 14 and 23 7. Landmark Commission - Positions 2 and 9 8. Galveston Island Redevelopment Authority/Galveston Housing Finance Corporation/Galveston Property Finance Authority - Positions 1, 3, and 6 9. Zoning Board of Adjustments - Position 6]

12 D DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPOINTMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES. ONE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE DISTRICT 4.

WE HAVE DISTRICT FOUR, COUNCILMAN QUIROGA IS NOT HERE FOR THAT, SO LOOKS LIKE JANELLE WILL PUT THAT OFF THEN.

CAN I MAKE A COMMENT? I'M GOING TO HOLD MY APPOINTMENT UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING.

OK, VERY GOOD ON ALL OF YOUR DISTRICT APPOINTMENTS ALL RIGHTY.

1 2 THREE. SOUNDS GOOD.

WE'LL MOVE AIRPORT ADVISORY TO OUR NEXT MEETING, PLEASE, JANELLE.

OKAY. ARTS AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD.

WE HAVE ONE VACANCY.

YES, WE HAVE I MOVE TO DEFER THIS.

THIS COMMITTEE IS AT THIS MOMENT DORMANT AS IT WERE.

I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THIS UP NEXT YEAR.

ALL RIGHT. MAYOR, CAN I MAKE A CLARIFICATION ON THESE POSITIONS VERSUS DISTRICTS? SO IF IT SAYS DISTRICT FOUR OR DISTRICT SIX, THAT'S DISTRICT SPECIFIC, IF IT SAYS POSITION SEVEN, THEN THAT'S JUST A COUNCIL NOMINATION, THAT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY A DISTRICT. CORRECT.