[1. DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
[00:00:04]
ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE.
MORNING. GLAD TO SEE EVERYBODY TODAY BRIGHT AND SHINY AT 8:30 A.M..
I'M OFFICIALLY CALLING THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO ORDER.
I WANT TO WELCOME EVERYBODY THAT'S HERE TODAY.
COULD WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? MAYOR BROWN PRESENT.
COUNCIL MEMBER LEWIS WILL BE HERE LATER.
COUNCIL MEMBER FINKLEA PRESENT COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN.
I'M HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER PORRETTO.
PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER RAWLINS.
[3. PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS]
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3 IS OUR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS. AS YOU KNOW, THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE HAS PROBABLY BEEN HERE MANY TIMES BEFORE.YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS HERE.
EITHER FORTUNATELY OR UNFORTUNATELY WE CANNOT RESPOND TO THOSE.
BUT GLAD TO HAVE YOUR COMMENTS AND WE ARE MAKING NOTE OF THOSE FOR SURE.
LET'S START MR. AJ WILLIAMS I HAVE HERE.
MR. WILLIAMS, YOU DIDN'T EVEN ALLOW YOU TO GET SEATED, SIR.
YES, SIR. BEACH PATROL? RIGHT. BEACH PATROL? WE ALREADY HAVE A VACANT FIRE DEPARTMENT BUILDING ON 55TH AND Q AND A HALF I BELIEVE IT'S A ABANDONED BUILDING.
THIS USED TO BE FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR MARINE DIVISION.
THAT BUILDING IS JUST SITTING THERE ROTTING.
YOU KNOW, RATHER THAN BUILD A NEW BUILDING FOR THE SHORE PATROL, WE ALREADY HAVE ONE.
I THINK WE DON'T NEED TO BUILD A NEW BUILDING.
WE ALREADY HAVE AN EXISTING BUILDING, A VERY NICE BUILDING.
VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, MR. WILLIAMS. APPRECIATE IT.
HOW ARE YOU ALL TODAY? FINE. SO MY NAME IS GUS CANABAL, 2200 MARKET STREET, GALVESTON, TEXAS, 77550.
I'M HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF REEF GRAND BEACH DEVELOPMENT, L.P..
REEF ON. THIS IS ITEM 4C WHAT I'M SPEAKING ON.
REEF OWNS A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE AREA WHERE THE RESTRICTED USE AREA IS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED UNDER THE CITY'S AMENDED BEACH ACCESS PLAN THAT YOU ALL ARE CONSIDERING UNDER 4C.
THAT IS A CONCERN THAT IS PRESENT ACROSS GALVESTON ISLAND AND GALVESTON BEACHES.
REEF REQUESTS THAT IF THE SPECIAL OR THE RESTRICTED USE AREA IS GOING TO REMAIN IN FRONT OF ITS PROPERTY THAT THE CITY PLACE ADEQUATE SIGNAGE AND ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS AT STEWART BEACH, WHERE THE CARS WILL ACCESS THE RESTRICTED USE AREA TO ENSURE THAT THE RESTRICTIONS ON THE RESTRICTED USE AREA ARE RESPECTED BY EVERYONE.
REEF FEELS THAT THIS WOULD HELP ENSURE THE SAFETY OF ALL BEACH GOERS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CUSTOMERS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE AND ANY OTHER THE THE PUBLIC AT LARGE BECAUSE WE WOULD REMIND COUNCIL THAT AS PART OF THIS AMENDMENT PROCESS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME WHEN ALL OF THIS BEGAN, DID DEDICATE A PUBLIC
[00:05:01]
PARKING AT BEACH ACCESS 1C THAT WAS DONE IN CONSIDERATION OF THE REMOVAL OF THE RESTRICTED USE AREA.SO THERE I MEAN, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT PUBLIC PARKING IS STILL GOING TO BE THERE.
SO THERE WILL BE THE POTENTIAL FOR POTENTIALLY POOR INTERACTIONS BETWEEN CARS AND BEACHGOERS.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR DECISION.
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS SARAH BURGESS AND I'M A RESIDENT OF GALVESTON DISTRICT FOUR.
I HAVE A BACHELORS OF SCIENCE IN OCEAN AND COASTAL RESOURCES FROM TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY AT GALVESTON.
I'M A CHAIR OF GALVESTON CHAPTER OF THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION.
SURFRIDER'S MISSION IS TO PROTECT WAVES, BEACHES, AND OCEANS FOR ALL PEOPLE, AND WE DO SO AS COASTAL ENTHUSIASTS WHO FISH, SWIM, SURF, PADDLE, DIVE, AND ENJOY THE WATER. I'M GIVING THIS COMMENT OFFICIALLY ON BEHALF OF OUR ORGANIZATION, AND THIS COMMENT PERTAINS TO AGENDA 4C AND 4D AS LISTED ON TODAY'S CITY COUNCIL AGENDA.
THIS IS POOR DEVELOPMENT PRACTICE ON A COASTLINE ON THIS ISLAND.
COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB IS ACTUALLY QUOTED AS SAYING IN THE MARCH 2024 HEARING AND REFERENCING THE SOLARIS BUILD PROJECT, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE PROJECT, REQUESTING THIS VARIANCE QUOTE, WHERE IT'S POSITIONED AT THE END OF THE SEAWALL, IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST EROSIVE SPOTS THAT THERE IS.
WE DO AGREE WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER SITUATION LIKE THAT.
THE EXEMPTION IS PROPOSED IN AN AREA LOCATED AT THE WEST END POINT OF THE GALVESTON SEAWALL, WHICH IS EXPERIENCING AND WILL CONTINUE TO EXPERIENCE FLANK EROSION SO LONG AS THE SEAWALL REMAINS IN PLACE.
THIS RUA THIS RELOCATING THIS RUA FROM A PLACE THAT IS CURRENTLY USED, KNOWN ABOUT AND RELIED UPON BY RESIDENTS AND VISITORS ALIKE. FOR THE SHORT TERM GAIN OF ANOTHER PRIVATE DEVELOPER AS IT'S BEING REQUESTED BY THE MARGARITA DEVELOPER MARGARITAVILLE DEVELOPMENT WE OPPOSE THIS AMENDMENT.
AS WE'VE SEEN AND HEARD, PRESENTED BY INDIVIDUALS REPRESENTED AND REPRESENTATIVES OF ORGANIZATIONS AT PUBLIC MEETINGS LIKE THIS THE MAJORITY USE OF THIS AREA IS CURRENTLY WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE LAW, AND THERE ARE OUTLIER CASES OF THE ONES WHO ARE MISUSING THE AREA.
AS WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY MAY SOON UNDERTAKE A FUTURE, LARGER STEP IN UPDATING OUR CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SURFRIDER GALVESTON LOOKS FORWARD TO ENGAGING ON THAT MATERIAL IN THAT PROCESS, AND WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF OUR COMMENTS TODAY.
GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JOE HEWITT, 415 EAST BEACH DRIVE.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY.
THE BUNDLE AMENDMENTS UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE NOTABLY DIFFERENT FROM EXTENDING CONCRETE 200FT FROM THE LINE OF VEGETATION ON AN ERODING BEACH TO REMOVING VEHICLES FROM THE BEACH.
BUT THEY DO HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON.
THEY'RE BEING DRIVEN BY DEVELOPERS DEMANDS.
IT WAS SUGGESTED BY COUNCILWOMAN MARIE ROBB, WHICH HE MENTIONED AT THE LAST MEETING THAT PASSING THESE AMENDMENTS IS IN GALVESTON'S BEST FINANCIAL INTEREST. HOWEVER, I QUESTION WHETHER THIS IS TRULY THE CASE OR MERELY THE CONTINUATION OF A LONG STANDING HABIT OF OPTING FOR THE EASIEST SHORT TERM SOLUTIONS. WHILE DEVELOPMENT IS OFTEN ASSOCIATED WITH ECONOMIC GROWTH, SUBSTANTIAL RESEARCH SHOWS THAT LARGE SCALE PROJECTS CAN NEGATIVELY
[00:10:05]
IMPACT CITIES IN MANY WAYS, FROM RANGING FROM ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION TO TRAFFIC CONGESTION TO INFRASTRUCTURE STRAIN, UNFORESEEN FINANCIAL BURDENS, SOCIAL INEQUALITY, LOSS OF COMMUNITY IDENTITY, AND HARM TO LOCAL BUSINESSES.IT IS CONCERNING TO SEE THAT DEVELOPERS ARE BEHIND THESE AMENDMENTS.
IT FEELS LIKE THE CLASSIC CASE OF THE TAIL WAGGING THE DOG.
WHY DO WE DO THAT? ALLOWING FOR THEIR DEMANDS, ALLOWING FOR VARIANCES AND YIELDING TO THREATS OF THE DEVELOPERS PULLING OUT IF THEIR REQUESTS AREN'T MET.
WITH CAREFUL, INTENTIONAL MASTER PLANNING IN ADVANCE THAT SUPPORTS THE RESIDENTS, TOURISTS AND THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPERS ARE STILL EAGER TO INVEST.
OVER RELIANCE ON THE DEVELOPER'S DEMANDS PUTS THE WRONG PARTY IN CONTROL.
INSTEAD, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO REGAIN CONTROL BY WORKING STRATEGICALLY AND COLLABORATIVELY WITH DEVELOPERS TO PROMOTE A MASTER PLAN, THOUGHTFUL GROWTH THAT BENEFITS THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY AND NOT JUST THE DEVELOPER'S BOTTOM LINE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MIC] IT IS LET ME FOR THE RECORD, IT'S 8:43 P.M..
OUR COUNCILWOMAN SHARON LEWIS HAS JOINED COUNCIL.
HOW DID WE GET HERE TODAY? WHY ARE WE HERE? IN A SPECIAL MEETING? WELL, THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING BASICALLY WAS DEADLOCKED.
THE VOTE DIDN'T GO THROUGH, THE AMENDMENTS DIDN'T GO THROUGH.
AND FROM WHAT WE UNDERSTAND MAYOR, YOU WERE FORCED TO CALL THIS MEETING TODAY.
SO HERE WE ARE AGAIN, RIGHT? SO RIGHT HERE WHAT I HAVE THIS IS 800, APPROXIMATELY 800 OBJECTION LETTERS, EMAILS, COMMENTS THAT HAS COME FROM ABOUT A YEAR, A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO WHEN THIS WHOLE PROCESS STARTED.
ALL THESE HAVE BEEN WILLFULLY, I WOULD SAY, IGNORED BY THE PRIOR COUNCIL, BY EXCEPTION OF A COUPLE OF MEMBERS AND A COUPLE OF THE CURRENT MEMBER COUNCIL MEMBERS. THANKFULLY WE HAVE SOME SOME NEW INFUSION OF SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO KIND OF CONSIDER ALL ASPECTS OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED, EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS, BOTH SIDES OF THE OF THE SITUATION.
AND WE ARE HERE TO HOPEFULLY THIS WILL THIS WILL NOT GO FORWARD TODAY.
AND THE LAST MEETING, IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THE COUNCIL STAFF CONTACT GLO AND FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN MAYBE GO FORWARD WITH THE TWO AMENDMENTS AND LEAVE THE THOUSAND FEET OUT OF THE THE VOTE.
AND THE GLO CAME BACK AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU CAN GO FORWARD WITH THOSE TWO AND YOU CAN TAKE OUT THE 1000FEET.
ALL WE NEED IS YOU TO TAKE OUT THE 1000FT, UPDATE THE MAP, SEND IT OVER.
IT WON'T CAUSE FINANCIAL IMPACTS TO TIARA, WHICH WAS THE REASON STATED LAST MEETING.
HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE THIS WEEKEND, THE NEW REASON MAY BE THAT WE HAVE TO VOTE ON 1000FT BECAUSE MR. TIETJENS SAYS THERE'S SOME DEAL THAT THEY'VE REACHED WITH THE DEVELOPERS DOWN THERE, AND IF WE BACK OUT OF THAT, THEN NOBODY WILL WANT TO COME TO THE ISLAND.
WELL, IF WE'RE MAKING DEALS, APPARENTLY WITH DEVELOPERS WHO DON'T WANT TO WORK WITH ISLAND RESIDENTS AND VISITORS WHO ALREADY USE THAT FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS AS IT IS, MAYBE WE NEED SOME DIFFERENT KIND OF PARTNERS, RIGHT? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE IS NO LEGALLY BINDING OBLIGATION THAT WE HAVE WITH ANY DEVELOPER DOWN THERE THAT WOULD REQUIRE US TO PUT FORWARD A 1000FT REMOVAL.
RIGHT. ANYWAY, SO MANY, MANY PEOPLE HAVE SAID NO, NOBODY ON THE PRIOR COUNCIL, THE COUPLE EXCEPTIONS, WANTED TO CONSIDER THOSE OBJECTIONS WHEN THEY WERE LOOKING AT THIS 1000FT.
YOU INVITED ME AFTER THAT MEETING AND TO COME IN AND TALK TO YOU.
WE CAME AND TALKED TO YOU WITH MR.
[00:15:01]
BROWN AT THE END OF THAT CONVERSATION, WHICH WAS AN HOUR AND A HALF, YOU STATED IT SHOULD STAY WHERE IT IS WITH THE RESTRICTIONS AND THE USE THAT IT CURRENTLY HAS.SO PLEASE STAND UP AND DO WHAT YOU SAID.
GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE.
HOWDY, HOWDY. MY NAME IS VERGIE GREB.
I'M A BOI RESIDING IN DISTRICT THREE.
THE CURRENT SPECIAL USE AREA SITUATED ON AN ACCRETING BEACH HAS PROVIDED ACCESSIBLE AMENITIES SUCH AS BEACH WHEELCHAIRS FROM THE TEXAS BEACH WHEELCHAIR PROGRAM AND RESTROOMS FOR YEARS AT THE ADJACENT BEACH FACILITIES.
RELOCATING THE SPECIAL USE AREA TO POCKET PARK ONE, WHICH IS LOCATED NINE MILES WEST AND IN A HIGH EROSION ZONE WITH CONSISTENT FLOODING AND NO AMENITIES, SEVERELY DIMINISHES ACCESSIBILITY, PARTICULARLY FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.
THIS LOCATION IS NOT SUITABLE FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH MOBILITY ISSUES.
THEY CANNOT DRIVE TO THE WATER'S EDGE.
IT DOES NOT ACCOMMODATE KAYAK LAUNCHES AND MAY CREATE CONFLICTS BETWEEN FISHING AND SWIMMING ACTIVITIES, POTENTIALLY LEADING TO SAFETY CONCERNS, WHICH IS THE AREA AT STEWART BEACH. THIS RELOCATION IS NOT EQUITABLE.
IT APPEARS THAT CITY STAFF MAY BE USING THESE PARKING STANDARDS TO POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY MANIPULATE REQUIREMENTS TO PRESERVE PRIVATE BEACH AREA FOR THE PROPOSED MARGARITAVILLE. MARGARITAVILLE DEVELOPMENT AS KYLE CLARK STATED DURING THE SEPTEMBER 19TH COUNCIL MEETING, ONLY AFTER BEING PRESSED BY COUNCIL PERSONS RAWLINS AND BROWN. I ALSO ASKED COUNCIL TO RECONSIDER THE PROPOSED CONCRETE VARIANCE FOR THE TIARA DEVELOPMENT.
AT THE MARCH PUBLIC HEARING, COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROXIMITY OF THE SOLARIS DEVELOPMENT TO THE OCEAN, CITING THE VULNERABILITY OF THE SEVERAL DECADES OLD BUILDINGS. AS QUOTED IN THE WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE SHE STATED, WHERE IT'S POSITIONED AT THE END OF THE SEAWALL IS ONE OF THE MOST EROSIVE SPOTS.
SO HOW DO THESE CONCERNS NOT APPLY TO TIARA DEVELOPMENT? BOTH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS NEIGHBOR EACH OTHER AND ARE LOCATED IN THE SAME FLOOD ZONE.
IF THE COUNCIL CHOOSES TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONCRETE VARIANCE FOR THE TIARA ON THE BEACH DEVELOPMENT DESPITE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S UNANIMOUS VOTE AGAINST THE PROPOSAL, IT WOULD DEMONSTRATE A CLEAR PRIORITIZATION OF DEVELOPER INTERESTS OVER THOSE OF THE PUBLIC.
AS A PHD STUDENT SPECIALIZING IN COASTAL HAZARDS, RESILIENCE AND POLICY, I FEEL IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO INFORM THE PUBLIC AND THE COUNCIL ABOUT THE POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE PROPOSED BEACH AREA AMENDMENTS.
I STRONGLY URGE YOU TO RECONSIDER THESE HARMFUL AMENDMENTS.
THANK YOU. CAROL HOLLOWAY, CAROL.
THERE WE ARE CAROL. DIDN'T SEE YOU BACK THERE.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? I HAVE LIVED IN GALVESTON FOR OVER 45 YEARS, AND I SERVED ON THE AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR BEACH ACCESS AND DUNE PROTECTION.
I WOULD CAUTION CITY STAFF TODAY FROM REFERENCING ANY WORK THAT THE AD HOC COMMITTEE DID, BECAUSE I FIND IT TO BE DISINGENUOUS AND MISLEADING TO REFERENCE OUR WORK AFTER HAVING HAVING IT SIT ON THE SHELF ALL THESE YEARS.
I TAKE GREAT PRIDE IN THE WORK WE DID, AND I AM VERY CONCERNED THAT THE WORK WE DID IS JUST NOW BEING USED IN A VERY DISINGENUOUS WAY.
I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE NUMEROUS DEVELOPERS WHO ARE AWARE AND COMPLIANT WITH THE CITY'S BUILDING CODES AND BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION REGULATIONS.
[00:20:08]
CONFORM TO COASTAL CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS.GALVESTON IS NOT THE GREASY LITTLE PORT CITY THAT TIME MAGAZINE CALLED US IN 1983 IN THE AFTERMATH OF HURRICANE ALICIA. THAT TIME HAS LONG PASSED.
WE SHOULD NOT OFFER SPECIAL FAVORS TO DEVELOPERS WHO CANNOT BUILD ACCORDING TO OUR RULES AND CANNOT ABIDE OUR BEACHFRONT, OUR BEACH ACCESS POINTS.
IF MARGARITAVILLE AND TIARA CHOOSE TO WITHDRAW THEIR PLANS, IT IS THEIR CHOICE.
THEY ARE DEVELOPERS AND THEY RECOGNIZE THE RISKS INVOLVED.
IT IS WHOLLY UNNECESSARY IN THIS DAY AND TIME.
I URGE YOU TO KEEP THE SPECIAL USE AREA IN ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION.
DISAGGREGATING THE SPECIAL USE AREA WOULD BE AN INJUSTICE TO THE RESIDENTS OF GALVESTON, ESPECIALLY THOSE WITH MOBILITY NEEDS, BY DISPLACING THEM TO OTHER REMOTE, SCATTERED AND ERODING AREAS ALONG THE BEACHFRONT.
AND BECAUSE STAFF CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO GIVE YOU THE FACTS, I ALSO ASK THAT YOU RECONSIDER ALL THE BEACHFRONT AMENDMENTS, AS WELL AS THE VARIANCE REGARDING THE USE OF REINFORCED CONCRETE WITHIN 200FT OF THE LINE OF VEGETATION.
THE GLO RECEIVED 400 PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT SHOULD BE REVIEWED.
I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND A NO VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU TODAY.
AS A FULL TIME EAST BEACH RESIDENT, I AND MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS WERE DISAPPOINTED TO HEAR THAT THE MOTIVATOR BEHIND THE CHANGE BEFORE US WAS OUR EAST BEACH, OUR NEW EAST BEACH NEIGHBOR, MARGARITAVILLE.
I'M APPROACHING MY COMMENTS THIS MORNING FROM THE STANDPOINT OF A NEIGHBOR.
THIS IS A NEW NEIGHBOR WHO, AFTER MANY OF OUR INQUIRIES, STILL REFUSES TO COMMIT TO WILDLIFE CORRIDORS TO ALLOW WILDLIFE TO MOVE BETWEEN CRITICAL EAST BEACH HABITATS.
IN JANUARY, WILDLIFE SCIENTISTS AND LOCAL EXPERTS PRESENTED THEM WITH SCIENCE BASED DATA, INCLUDING GPS TRACKING AND VIDEO FOOTAGE SHOWING HEAVY WILDLIFE MOVEMENT ACROSS THEIR PROPERTY AND WILDLIFE CORRIDORS WERE STRONGLY RECOMMENDED. BUT TO DATE, AFTER REPEATED REQUESTS, OUR NEIGHBOR HAS BEEN UNRESPONSIVE AND NOW THIS SAME NEIGHBOR WOULD LIKE US TO REDUCE AND RELOCATE A LONG STANDING RUA, WHICH INCLUDES DISABILITY ACCESS.
BOTTOM LINE, WILDLIFE WILL BE PUSHED OUT OF ITS HABITAT, AND OUR SPECIAL NEEDS AND OTHER HARD WORKING RESIDENTS WILL BE PUSHED OFF THE BEACH THEY HAVE ADAPTED TO AND ENJOY.
AND WHY? SO OUR NEW NEIGHBOR CAN ENJOY MORE PRIVACY ON OUR PUBLIC BEACH.
WHAT DEMANDS WILL OUR NEIGHBOR MAKE NEXT WHEN IT COMES TO INFRASTRUCTURE, TRAFFIC, DRAINAGE, ETC.
GALVESTONIANS ARE RESILIENT AND TOUGH.
WE GO THROUGH DISASTERS TOGETHER AND HELP EACH OTHER BUILD BACK TOGETHER.
NOBODY IS MORE NEIGHBORLY, BUT WE ALSO EXPECT A FAIR SHAKE.
THANK YOU. BARBARA REILLY, BARBARA.
COUNCIL. I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT THE VERY WORTHY COMMENTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE BY PEOPLE
[00:25:09]
IN SUPPORT OF KEEPING THE SPECIAL USE AREA AS IT IS.I HAVE A NEIGHBOR WHO'S BEEN WHEELCHAIR BOUND FOR ABOUT 15 YEARS, AND I TAKE HIM TO THE SPECIAL USE AREA PROBABLY TWICE A WEEK, AND I HAVE FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS.
I'VE REALLY NEVER SEEN MORE THAN TEN CARS DOWN THERE AT A TIME.
BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT'S GOING ON DOWN THERE.
AND WHAT BETTER PLACE FOR THEM THAN A PLACE THAT'S BOUND, IF NEED BE, BY HOMEOWNERS WHO ARE ALSO RESPECTFUL OF THE AREA THAT THEY HABITAT AND PLAY.
SO IF I WERE A HOMEOWNER LIVING DOWN THERE, I WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE A SPECIAL USE AREA IN FRONT OF ME THAN AN UNFETTERED ACCESS BEACH WHERE ANYBODY AND EVERYBODY CAN GO TO DO THEIR THING.
SO I'M JUST ASKING YOU TO PLEASE CONSIDER WHAT THIS BEACH IS REALLY FOR.
YOU'RE WELCOME. CHULA LA SANCHEZ.
I LIVE AT 9111 TEICHMAN I'M IN DISTRICT FIVE.
SO I GOT TO READ THIS POWERPOINT LAST NIGHT.
AND WHAT Y'ALL ARE DOING AGAIN TO REVIEW THIS.
I'M HERE REALLY TO ASK YOU TO VOTE AGAINST INCLUDING THE SPECIAL USE AREA IN YOUR AMENDMENTS.
THIS IS A DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS.
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE DOING WITH THIS AMENDMENT, THE WHOLE POLICY.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE AN ENDANGERED SPECIES, THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE.
OKAY. THIS BEACH IS SO DEAR TO ME.
YOU KNOW, IT'S A FOUR MILE WALK FROM THE BOLLARDS FOR THE TO THE EAST BOUNDARY, STEWART BEACH TO 1A.
SEVERAL TIMES A MONTH, SOMETIMES TWICE IN A WEEK.
I KNOW THAT BEACH VERY WELL, AND I TRIED TO PARK OVER IN THE PUBLIC PARKING, IT'S A SWAMP.
IT EVEN HAS WETLAND PATCHES IN IT.
THAT'S THE FREE PUBLIC PARKING.
THEN I'VE TRIED TO PARK OVER IN THE THE WALK OVER AREA FOR THE GRAND BUILT, AND THE SAND DUNES COME SO FAR UP THE RAMP, I SEE MOTHERS TAKE THEIR BABIES OUT OF THE STROLLER TO GET OVER THERE.
AND YOU KNOW, THIS BEACH WAS USED FOREVER BACK WHEN VIC MACEO WAS HERE, WHEN IT CHANGED FROM THE WEST END FOR BEACH PATROL TRAINING. THE BUOYS ARE STILL OUT THERE.
MY SON WAS A BEACH PATROL IN THE 80S OR 90S, AND MY GRANDSON IS ON BEACH PATROL NOW, AND THEY USED THAT BEACH FOR TRAINING AND COMPETITIONS.
I USED TO TAKE MY BROTHER THERE UNTIL HE PASSED AWAY.
HE HAD HE WAS HANDICAPPED AND HE GOT OUT AND HE COULD SIT BY HIS CAR.
YOU KNOW, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT CAME BACK AND SAID, NO, NO, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY REPORTS.
[00:30:01]
AND THEY'RE SAYING, WELL, NOTHING EVEN HAPPENS OUT THERE, SO WHAT'S THE POINT? WHY DON'T WE CLOSE IT? SO WHICH IS IT SO MUCH GOING ON OUT THERE OR NOTHING'S GOING ON OUT THERE? YOU KNOW I'VE COME UP HERE AND I'M USUALLY ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE VOTE, AS YOU WELL KNOW, BUT I WAS ON PLANNING COMMISSION.COUNCIL SOME OF YOU WERE THERE, APPOINTED US TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS IT? WHY WERE WE NON-COMPLIANT? WHY COULD WE NOT COLLECT THE EXTRA PARKING? THANK YOU CHULA. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THAT IS ALL THE APPLICATIONS I HAVE FOR MAKING PUBLIC COMMENT.
WE HAVE ONE MORE COME FORWARD, SIR.
AND WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE THERE TOO.
GOOD MORNING SIR. GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS JEFF SINSHEIMER FIFTH GENERATION BOI, SURFRIDER FOUNDATION MEMBER.
ONCE AGAIN, I ASK THAT YOU LEAVE THE SUA LIKE IT IS.
WE KNOW YOU'RE CATERING TO GRAND BEACH AND MARGARITAVILLE.
SCATTERING PARKING INTO THE SUBDIVISION WILL CAUSE FRICTION WITH HOMEOWNERS THERE.
I ALSO NEED TO EXPLAIN TO THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS WHY I ALSO OPPOSE THE OTHER TWO VARIANCES.
HOPEFULLY THIS HURRICANE SEASON GAVE YOU ALL A NEW APPRECIATION OF WHAT STORM EROSION CAN DO.
I HOPE YOU'VE SEEN HOW BADLY THE TIARA LOCATION HAS ERODED THIS SUMMER.
SO I ASK, THEN WHY IS IT OKAY FOR TIARA? THE ARTICLE ALSO REMINDS US THAT THERE WERE ONCE SWIMMING POOLS IN FRONT OF RIVIERA, JUST LIKE TIARA WANTS IN A MORE VULNERABLE SPOT.
BUT THE RIVIERA POOLS WERE EATEN BY EROSION.
YOU ARE NEGLIGENT IN ALLOWING ANOTHER STRUCTURE TO BE IN SUCH JEOPARDY THERE.
AND AS NATURAL EROSION CONTINUES, THE PUBLIC EASEMENT WILL GET UNCOMFORTABLY CLOSE TO THAT RESORT.
THE LONG WALK FROM THE NEW TINY AND SOON TO BE CRAMPED LOT AT SUNNY BEACH IS EMBARRASSING.
REGARDLESS OF THE RESULT TODAY, MY TAKEAWAYS ARE THIS, CITY STAFF SHOULD BE MORE REALISTIC WITH DEVELOPERS ABOUT VARIANCE REQUESTS, RATHER THAN POSSIBLY LEADING THEM ON ABOUT WHAT IS POSSIBLE.
OBVIOUSLY, PER COMMISSIONER BUCKINGHAM, STAFF SHOULD ALSO BE LESS CONFUSING OR MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE FOR ME, OR LESS MISLEADING ABOUT THE GLO APPROVAL PROCESS, ESPECIALLY WHEN RELIED UPON BY COUNCIL.
INSTEAD, YOU'RE NOW IN THIS HOSTAGE SITUATION.
THANK YOU JEFF. APPRECIATE IT.
MICHAEL NIEBUR WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT WE'RE HERE YET AGAIN AS RESIDENTS, ASKING THAT YOU PUT THE NEEDS AND WISHES OF US RESIDENTS AND THE PUBLIC OVER THE WANTS AND GREED OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
WE'VE PROVIDED LIKELY MORE THAN A THOUSAND COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THESE AMENDMENTS.
CHANGES THAT, DESPITE THE CITY STAFF'S REPEATED CLAIMS, WAS NOT REQUESTED BY THE GLO.
THE GLO FOCUSES ON QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS AND WHAT IS LEGAL OR NOT.
[00:35:03]
THEY HAVE ZERO ROLE IN DECIDING AND DECIDING OR INSISTING WHAT BEACHES THE CITY HAS A SPECIAL USE WHICH IS EASIER FOR ACCESS, OR WHICH DEVELOPERS THE CITY IS PRIORITIZING, THAT THEY LEAVE THOSE CHOICES TO THE CITY.THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO NON PRO-DEVELOPER REASON TO MOVE THE CURRENT SPECIAL USE ACCESS BEACH.
WE'VE HEARD ABOUT SAFETY FROM THE DEVELOPER'S REPRESENTATIVES, MOVING FISHERMEN AND WATERCRAFT USERS ONTO MORE POPULAR AND POPULATED BEACHES WHERE CHILDREN ARE RUNNING, PLAYING AND SWIMMING MAKE THINGS MORE DANGEROUS, NOT LESS.
IF THIS IS TRULY ABOUT SAFETY, THEN WE SHOULD BE HERE HAVING THAT DISCUSSION AND NOT PUSHING THOSE BEACHES CLOSED TO AVOID ENFORCING THOSE. IN ADDITION, OUR HANDICAPPED RESIDENTS AND VISITORS MUST ALWAYS BE GIVEN PRIORITY.
WHY MOVE THAT? THE DEVELOPER IN QUESTION FOR THIS THAT WOULD BENEFIT HAS PROVIDED US NOTHING IN RETURN.
WE ARE SEEING ALL TOO OFTEN THAT THIS IS THE PROCESS.
WE'VE SEEN YOU PASS A VARIANCE FOR THE TIARA PROJECT, BUT I'LL ASK YOU, WHAT IS TIARA LEGALLY GIVEN US IN RETURN FOR THAT VARIANCE, OR WAS IT SOME SORT OF BACKROOM DEAL? THIS WAS VOTED ON UNDER THE GUISE OF A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT VARIANCE.
WE HAVE A PROCESS FOR VARIANCE REQUESTS.
IF A DEVELOPER WANTS SPECIAL TREATMENT LIKE CLOSED BEACHES, ALTERNATIVE BUILDING PRACTICES, THEY NEED TO MAKE IT A FORMAL PROCESS AND GIVE TO THE CITY MORE THAN THEY'RE TAKING. IT'S NOT THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO COVER FOR POOR BUSINESS PLANS, FROM DEVELOPERS, WHO ARE PROMISING PROJECTS TO BUYERS AND INVESTORS THAT CAN NOT EVEN BE LEGALLY BUILT YET.
I REQUEST CITY COUNCIL VOTE AGAINST THESE AMENDMENT CHANGES AND SHOW YOUR TRUE SUPPORT FOR THE RESIDENTS AND VOTERS OF GALVESTON, AND TAKE A STAND THAT DEVELOPERS NEED TO BRING MORE TO THE TABLE INSTEAD OF SEEING OUR ISLAND AS A PLACE JUST TO TAKE AND TAKE.
YES, SIR. COME FORWARD, IF YOU WOULD.
GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
I'M STEPHEN BEAGLE, THE ARCHITECT FOR THE TIARA PROJECT.
THE SO-CALLED TIARA AMENDMENT ON REINFORCED CONCRETE WAS PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL A YEAR AGO, UNANIMOUSLY AUGUST OF LAST YEAR, THAT SPECIFIC AMENDMENT CORRECTS A PROBLEM.
THE OTHER HALF OF THE SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY DOES NOT.
YOU CANNOT BUILD TO TWO SETS OF STANDARDS.
20 YEARS AGO, WE DESIGNED DIAMOND BEACH.
BACK THEN, WE HAD AN APPROVED PLAN FOR PHASE TWO TO EXTEND BEYOND THE END OF THE SEAWALL ON THIS VERY PARCEL THAT WAS APPROVED. THAT PUD EXPIRED.
HERE WE ARE AGAIN 20 YEARS LATER, AND WE'RE PLANNING TO BUILD.
WE ONLY REQUEST A CORRECTION IN THE ORDINANCE.
THAT'S WHAT THIS AMENDMENT DOES.
ANY OTHER? WE. THIS IS MY FINAL APPLICATION STACK HERE.
ANYONE ELSE? VERY GOOD. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 4A, PLEASE, MA'AM.
[4.A. Consider for approval of the Grant Terms and Conditions (Grant Agreement) with the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM) for FEMA Public Assistance (PA) funding for Hurricane Beryl eligible costs and authorizing the City Manager to execute all necessary documents upon final approval by the legal department. (T. Wrobleski)]
ITEM 4A CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL OF THE GRANT TERMS AND CONDITIONS WITH THE TEXAS DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT FOR FEMA, PUBLIC ASSISTANCE FUNDING FOR HURRICANE BERYL ELIGIBLE COSTS, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS UPON FINAL APPROVAL BY THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT.TESSA. COME FORWARD, GIVE US A LITTLE BACKGROUND, PLEASE, MA'AM.
[00:40:01]
GOOD MORNING. TESSA WROBLEWSKI, DIRECTOR OF DISASTER RECOVERY AND GRANTS.SO THE STATE HAS A PROCESS, WE SIGN THE CONTRACT AND WE GO BY THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
AND ONCE WE MEET THOSE, WE START GETTING OUR MONEY BACK.
I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 4A.
IS THERE A SECOND? WE'LL HAVE TO DO THESE MANUALLY.
EXCUSE ME, COUNCIL MEMBER FINKLEA ON ONLINE.
WE'LL HAVE TO DO MANUAL VOTES.
OH, DID I'M SORRY SAY THAT AGAIN.
COUNCIL MEMBER FINKLEA IS ONLINE, SO WE CANNOT USE THE ELECTRONIC VOTING.
OH, YES, WE HAVE TO USE THE MANUAL.
I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF 4A, SECOND BY COUNCIL OF MAYOR PRO TEM ROBB.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO COMPLIMENT THE WORK YOU DO.
YOU DO AMAZING WORK WITH GETTING US FEMA GRANTS AND GETTING US RECOVERY FUNDS.
WE ARE BLESSED TO HAVE YOU AT THE CITY.
THANK YOU. IT'S A IT'S A TEAM TEAM OF FOLKS THAT HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS.
IT'S PAINFUL SOMETIMES, BUT THE RESULTS ARE GOOD.
CAN YOU GIVE US JUST A, LIKE, BASED ON YOUR EXPERIENCE, A TIMELINE OF WHEN WHEN THINGS CAN KIND OF START HAPPENING? WELL, IN THE PAST, IT'S TAKEN US UP TO A YEAR TO START SEEING MONEY AFTER A STORM.
EVIDENTLY THEY FINALLY GOT THEIR MONEY FOR THE NEXT QUARTER OR WHATEVER SO THEY HAVE LIFTED THAT.
SO NOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH HOPEFULLY STARTING TO GET SOME MONEY BACK.
WE WILL SEE THE MONEY BACK FROM DEBRIS REMOVAL AND EMERGENCY PROTECTIVE MEASURES THE FASTEST, BECAUSE THOSE WERE CONTINUING TO BE FUNDED BEFORE THEY, YOU KNOW, SHUT IT OFF.
AND THOSE ARE STREAMLINED PROJECTS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON.
WE'RE STILL WORKING ON THE EMERGENCY MEASURES.
WE'VE GOT ABOUT $5 MILLION, 4 TO $5 MILLION IN DAMAGES THERE.
VERY GOOD. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE IT. SURE.
VERY GOOD. MISS WROBLEWSKI IS KIND OF THE ONE UNSUNG HEROES IN THE CITY THAT YOU DON'T HEAR A LOT ABOUT, BUT VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO THE FUNCTIONING OF THIS CITY, ESPECIALLY AFTER STORMS. THANK YOU, TESSA, FOR ALL YOU DO.
COUNCIL, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE. WE'RE GOING TO VOTE MANUALLY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT IS UNANIMOUS OF ALL THOSE HERE.
[4.B. Consider For Approval A Resolution Of The City Of Galveston Authorizing The City Manager To Execute All Necessary Documents To Finalize The Purchase Of Property Located At 5909 Broadway, In The City Of Galveston, In The Total Amount Of One Million One Hundred Thousand Dollars Plus Any Closing Costs, As May Be Necessary, Upon Approval Of The City Attorney; Providing For Findings Of Fact And Providing For An Effective Date. (Legal)]
4B, CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO FINALIZE THE PURCHASE OF A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5909 BROADWAY IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON, IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $1,100,000, PLUS ANY CLOSING COSTS AS MAY BE NECESSARY UPON APPROVAL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, PROVIDING FOR FINDINGS OF FACT AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.DON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO INTRODUCE THIS? THE CITY HAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PURCHASE OF THESE OF THIS PROPERTY.
AS FOR FLOOD CONTROL PURPOSES, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE TOWARD CLOSING.
WHEN YOU GET TO CLOSING, ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS THE TITLE COMPANY REQUIRES IS PROOF OF AUTHORITY, FOR IN THIS CASE, MR. MAXWELL, TO ACTUALLY SIGN THE DOCUMENTS.
HE NEEDS SOMETHING IN WRITING SHOWING CITY COUNCIL HAS GIVEN HIM THIS AUTHORITY.
THIS RESOLUTION DOES THAT, AND IT WILL ALLOW US TO MOVE FOR CLOSING OF THIS PROPERTY.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR DON COUNCIL? THIS IS FUNDED.
I HAVE A QUESTION THROUGH IDC.
IS THAT CORRECT, BRIAN? VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT.
VERY GOOD. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS ITEM.
COUNCILMAN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS IS SECONDED THAT.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
[4.C. Reconsideration of Agenda Item Motion to reconsider the item on the September 19, 2024 “Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston Amending The Code Of The City Of Galveston, Chapter 29, The City Of Galveston’s “Beach Access And Dune Protection Plan”; Appendix A: “Beach Access And Parking Plan And Article II. “Planning - Beach Access Dune Protection & Beach Front Construction Regulations; Which Proposed Amendments Relate To Beachfront Construction Extensions And Renewals And To Beach Access And Parking At Access Points Commonly Known As, Beachtown Development, Palisade Palms, Stewart Beach, Seawall Beach Urban Park, Pocket Park #1, And Pocket Park #3; Planning Case Number 24PA-001; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject”, and waiving the requirement in City Code 2-135 requiring such motion to be entertained only at a regularly scheduled meeting. (Brown)]
[00:45:03]
ITEM 4C MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE ITEM ON THE SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2024.CHAPTER 29 THE CITY OF GALVESTON BEACH ACCESS AND DUNE PROTECTION PLAN, APPENDIX A BEACH ACCESS AND PARKING PLAN, AND ARTICLE TWO PLANNING, BEACH ACCESS, DUNE PROTECTION, AND BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION REGULATIONS, WHICH PROPOSED AMENDMENTS RELATE TO BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION, EXTENSIONS AND RENEWALS, AND TO BEACH ACCESS AND PARKING AT ACCESS POINTS, COMMONLY KNOWN AS BEACH TOWN DEVELOPMENT, PALISADE PALMS, STEWART BEACH, STEWART BEACH URBAN PARK, PARK POCKET PARK ONE, AND POCKET PARK. I CAN'T SAY THAT POCKET PARK THREE PLANNING CASE NUMBER 23 24PA-001.
MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND WAIVING THE REQUIREMENT IN CITY CODE 2-135 REQUIRING SUCH MOTION TO BE ENTERTAINED ONLY AT A REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING.
THESE BEACH AMENDMENTS ARE NOT THIS IS JUST TO APPROVE RECONSIDERING SO THAT WE CAN MOVE TO ITEM 4D.
SO I MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER ITEM 4D TODAY.
SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND BY A NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEMBERS, BOB BROWN.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS COUNCIL? PLEASE SIGNIFY YOUR APPROVAL BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
[4.D. Consider For Approval An Ordinance Of The City Of Galveston Amending The Code Of The City Of Galveston, Chapter 29, The City Of Galveston’s “Beach Access And Dune Protection Plan”; Appendix A: “Beach Access And Parking Plan And Article Ii. “Planning - Beach Access Dune Protection & Beach Front Construction Regulations; Which Proposed Amendments Relate To Beachfront Construction Extensions And Renewals And To Beach Access And Parking At Access Points Commonly Known As, Beachtown Development, Palisade Palms, Stewart Beach, Seawall Beach Urban Park, Pocket Park #1, And Pocket Park #3; Planning Case Number 24PA-001; Making Various Findings And Provisions Related To The Subject. (Brown)]
ITEM 4D CONSIDER FOR APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON.CHAPTER 29 THE CITY OF GALVESTON BEACH ACCESS AND DUNE PROTECTION PLAN, APPENDIX A BEACH ACCESS AND PARKING PLAN AND ARTICLE TWO PLANNING, BEACH ACCESS, DUNE PROTECTION, AND BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION REGULATIONS, WHICH PROPOSED AMENDMENTS RELATE TO BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION, EXTENSIONS AND RENEWALS IN BEACH ACCESS AND PARKING AT ACCESS POINTS, COMMONLY KNOWN AS BEACH TOWN DEVELOPMENT PALISADE PALMS, STEWART BEACH, SEAWALL BEACH URBAN PARK, PARK POCKET PARK NUMBER ONE, AND POCKET PARK NUMBER THREE.
PLANNING CASE NUMBER 24 PA-001, MAKING VARIOUS FINDINGS AND PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CHANGES TO THE CITY BEACH ACCESS PLAN, AMENDING THE SPECIAL USE AREA TO ITS PRIOR 2640FT, DELETING THE PROPOSED RELOCATED SPECIAL USE AREAS AT STEWART BEACH, POCKET PARK ONE AND POCKET PARK THREE.
BEACH ACCESS REQUIREMENTS AND CLARIFYING RENEWAL OF PERMITS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH TAC, AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PREPARE AND SUBMIT ALL PLANS AND DOCUMENTS TO THE GLO TO REFLECT THE AMENDED PLAN AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE.
I'LL SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BROWN AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MAYOR PRO TEM ROBB.
I'M GOING TO OPEN THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
I'D LIKE TO JUST SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THIS.
THE CITY DOES THE GLO DOES THE QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS.
THAT IS, THEY LOOK AT THE NUMBERS AND THEY TELL US IF WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS LEGAL.
THE CITY DOES THE QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS AND THAT IS PUBLIC AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT THEY FIND OUT WHAT THE PUBLIC NEEDS AND THEN THEY ASK THE GLO IF WE CAN DO THIS. THE GLO DOES NOT TELL US WHAT TO DO WITH OUR BEACHES.
SO ON THE QUANTITATIVE SIDE FROM THE GLO, GLO HAS STATED IN THEIR MOST RECENT LETTER THAT THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE IN THE TIME REQUIRED TO PROCESS THE BEACH ACCESS AMENDMENTS BETWEEN INCLUDING RELOCATION OF SUA OR NOT.
THE QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS IS THE GLO HAS RECEIVED AND RESPONDED TO ALMOST 400 COMMENTS ON THIS AMENDMENT AND EIGHT PUBLIC MEETINGS THE CITY HAS RECEIVED OVER 243 COMMENTS.
I'M NOT INCLUDING THE 10 THAT WE GOT TODAY, PLUS 175 FORM LETTERS SENT DIRECTLY TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OVER A PERIOD BETWEEN JUNE 23RD AND NOVEMBER 23RD, IN OPPOSITION TO THE AMENDMENT, AND THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE TODAY'S MEETING THE COMMENTS, WHICH WERE ABOUT 10 OF THOSE.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF OVER 800 COMMENTS, IS OPPOSED TO THE AMENDMENT.
PEOPLE WHO USE AND VALUE THIS BEACH WANT TO KEEP IT JUST AS IT IS.
AND I READ ALL 800 OF THOSE COMMENTS.
[00:50:04]
AND AMONG THOSE COMMENTS, 718 WERE IN OPPOSITION TO THE SPECIAL USE AREA RELOCATION.AGAIN, THE QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS RELOCATING 850FT OF SHORT OF SUA FROM AN ACCRETING BEACH TO POCKET PARKS ON THE WEST END, WHERE THE BEACH IS ERODING, 2 TO 5FT PER YEAR ON AVERAGE.
EFFECTIVELY PLACING MORE CARS ON A DISAPPEARING BEACH DOES NOT SOUND SUSTAINABLE, AND I'VE ALSO HEARD JUST RECENTLY THAT THE PEOPLE IN THE WEST END DON'T WANT THIS SUA LOCATED ON THE WEST END, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD.
I HAVEN'T SEEN OR HEARD ANY COMMENTS FIRSTHAND.
THERE'S NO GOOD REASON, AND I'M NOT HERE TO COMPROMISE MARGARITAVILLE RESORT PROJECT, BUT THEY AND ANY OTHER DEVELOPER SHOULD RESPECT THE NEEDS AND DESIRES OF OUR TAXPAYING CITIZENS. THE TEXAS OPEN BEACHES LAW PROVIDES FOR A PUBLIC EASEMENT ON ALL TEXAS BEACHES, AND HERE IN GALVESTON, WE PLACE A VALUE ON PROVIDING SAFE AND EASY ACCOMMODATION FOR THE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND FISHERMEN WITH NON-MOTORIZED BOATS AND OTHERS TO USE.
AND THERE'S REALLY NO GOOD REASON WE CAN'T SHARE IT WITH MARGARITAVILLE RESORT THE WAY IT IS.
YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD BE HAVING THE MANTRA WHEN WE COME TO THESE EVALUATING THESE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT IF IT'S GOOD FOR LOCALS, IT'S GOOD FOR THE DEVELOPER, AND THAT THAT SHOULD BE FIRST IN OUR MIND WHEN WE EVALUATE THESE THINGS.
DEPLOYMENT OF ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES IS BASED ON EMPIRICAL DATA.
THE COST COULD BE PAID OUT OF THE HOT TAX, NOT BY THE RESIDENTS.
AND I GOT TO SAY, I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF YOU WHO CAME HERE TODAY TO PARTICIPATE IN YOUR CITY GOVERNMENT, TAKING THE TIME OFF OF YOUR JOBS AND SHOWING UP HERE AT 8:30 IN THE MORNING. SO THE AND THE CURRENT AGAIN BY TALKING ABOUT ENFORCEMENT.
HALF OF IT TO THREE DIFFERENT PLACES, WE WOULD NEED TO STAFF AT FOUR DIFFERENT SUA LOCATIONS.
AND THE FACT WE'RE NOT DONE YET IS IS THE REASON WE'RE HERE TODAY.
SO IT'S NOT REALLY A DONE DEAL FOR THE DEVELOPERS UNTIL WE'VE HAD OUR LAST PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS.
SO I THINK WE JUST NEED TO DO A LITTLE BETTER JOB OF MANAGING THE EXPECTATIONS OF THE DEVELOPERS.
AND, YOU KNOW, OUR ORDINANCES AND AND OUR LDRS ARE THERE TO PROTECT US, TO PROTECT ALL OF US AND ENSURE THAT WE HAVE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ON THE ISLAND, AND THAT THE DEVELOPERS RESPECT EVERYBODY HERE ON THE ISLAND.
IT'S ONLY FAIR, AND I KNOW THEY BRING A LOT OF A LOT OF MONEY AND WE ALL WE ALL UNDERSTAND THIS.
YOU KNOW, WE ALL LIVE IN A TOURIST CITY THAT CAN EXPAND BY 4 OR 5 TIMES OVER A WEEKEND.
AND WE WE UNDERSTAND THAT AND WE CHOOSE TO LIVE HERE.
WE CHOOSE TO LIVE WITH THE TOURISTS BECAUSE IT'S A PARADISE.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST ALL WE NEED TO DO IS JUST BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE NEGOTIATE WITH DEVELOPERS, AND HOW WE MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THE PUBLIC'S INPUT ON ALL THESE THINGS.
AND THAT'S ABOUT ALL I HAD TO SAY ON THAT.
COUNCILMAN PORRETTO AND THEN COUNCILWOMAN ROBB I COUNCILMAN BROWN I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID, I REALLY DO.
I THINK WHEN YOU HAVE A BIG GROUNDSWELL OF PUBLIC COMMENT THAT IT'S GOOD TO LISTEN.
AND THAT'S BEEN ONE OF MY ISSUES WITH THE ENTIRE REGULATORY PROCESS, WHERE JUST BECAUSE YOU GO THROUGH THE STEPS AND GET THE PUBLIC COMMENT BACK, I THINK WHEN THAT HAPPENS, WE SHOULD REEVALUATE AND NEGOTIATE WITH RESIDENTS AND NEGOTIATE WITH WITH LOCALS AND NOT FEEL LIKE EVERYONE'S GETTING SQUEEZED OUT.
THE SPECIAL USE AREA, THE HANDICAPPED INDIVIDUALS THAT USE IT HAVE AN INTEREST AS WELL.
I'M JUST FROM THE THE NEW GUYS UP HERE.
I REALLY THINK THAT WE HAVE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE FORWARD IN THIS WHOLE NEXT YEAR.
I THINK IT'S JUST A IT'S A IT'S A PRACTICE THAT'S MUCH NEEDED IN GALVESTON.
[00:55:02]
AND I'M HOPING IN THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, I'M HOPING TO PUT SOMETHING ON THERE THAT WILL MOVE THAT IN A STEP OF THE RIGHT DIRECTION, AND THAT RESIDENTS AND FUTURE DEVELOPERS AND CURRENT DEVELOPERS CAN CAN LIVE WITH THAT PROCESS.AND IT'S ALL NOT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
COUNCILWOMAN ROBB. I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN SAID.
MATTER OF FACT, I HAD ACTUALLY CALLED THE MAYOR YESTERDAY ASKING TO MAKE THE SAME MOTION.
I THINK THE SPECIAL USE AREA AND WHAT THEY WERE DOING TO REPLACE IT WAS INAPPROPRIATE. I KNOW I HAD A NUMBER OF CONCERNED RESIDENTS THAT THEY WERE MOVING THE 500FT TO POCKET PARK ONE.
THEY ASKED ME IF THEY SHOULD COME THIS MORNING.
I TOLD THEM I'D BE GLAD TO REPRESENT THEM BECAUSE I KNOW HOW HARD IT IS.
AND I APPRECIATE THOSE OF YOU WHO DID COME TODAY.
BECAUSE THEY WERE WITH ADDING THE 500FT TO POCKET PARK ONE, THEY WERE BASICALLY TAKING THE ISSUE THAT EXISTS WITH EIGHT MILE ROAD AND MOVING IT TO SEVEN AND A HALF MILE ROAD WHICH WOULD PRESENT A PROBLEM.
BUT I ALSO AM CONCERNED WITH THE FACT THAT WE RECEIVED MISINFORMATION FROM STAFF, AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT.
I MYSELF TOOK THE TIME TO MEET WITH COMMISSIONER BUCKINGHAM.
AND SHE CLARIFIED THAT THE INFORMATION THAT WE WERE GIVEN ABOUT THAT IF WE CHANGED IT IT WOULD AFFECT THE ENTIRE PLAN.
AND SO I'M CONCERNED THAT WE'VE RECEIVED MISINFORMATION.
THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PROPOSED TIARA PROJECT AND THE OTHER PROJECT.
THE TIARA PROJECT AND THE THE ORDINANCE THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH IT IS TIED TO THE FACT THAT THEY ARE 40% BEHIND THE SEAWALL.
AND IT IS ALSO A REQUIREMENT OF TXDOT THAT THEY PROVIDE A DRAINAGE DITCH.
TIARA SAID THEIR PROJECT BACK AS FAR AS PRACTICABLE.
THE OTHER PROJECT WAS MOVING THEIR PROJECT BASICALLY ONTO THE BEACH.
SO THERE ARE MAJOR DIFFERENCES, WHICH IS WHY I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE TIARA PROJECT AND THE OTHER TWO AMENDMENTS BECAUSE I HAVE PEOPLE WHO I THINK IT'S THE MORE PERSONALLY IN REPRESENTING DISTRICT SIX WHERE WE HAVE STILL A LOT OF AREAS WITH CARS ON THE BEACH.
WE'VE HAD CHILDREN HIT BY VEHICLES.
WE HAVE A HOMELESS CAMP SETTING UP ON THE BEACH.
WE HAVE MULTIPLE PEOPLE WHO ARE WANTED FOR WARRANTS SITTING OUT ON THE BEACH.
AND I THINK WE HAVE TO I FORGET WHO SAID IT ABOUT.
WHAT'S THE POINT TO HAVING ORDINANCES IF YOU DON'T FOLLOW UP ON THEM? AND I THINK, I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT.
I AM ALL ABOUT HAVING THE PUBLIC HAVE OPEN USE OF THE BEACH, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO FACE THE FACT THAT WE LIVE WITH A 3.5% TAX CAP, AND IF WE DON'T EVER HAVE NEW DEVELOPMENT, NONE OF US WOULD BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO LIVE HERE.
BECAUSE WE WOULD CONSTANTLY BE RAISING TAXES AND SERVICES AND SO FORTH.
ANYWAY I ECHO WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN SAID, AND I'M GLAD WE ARE GOING TO VOTE.
I HOPE I'M GOING TO CALL FOR THE VOTE TO MOVE.
WE HAVE A FEW OTHER COMMENTS, I THINK COUNCILMAN FINKLEA.
[01:00:01]
I'M DONE.I'D LIKE TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB FOR PUTTING TOGETHER THIS MOTION.
IF YOU RECALL, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE RELOCATION OF THE SPECIAL USE AREA.
WE ASK THEM TO SPEND THE TIME AND DUE DILIGENCE AND CONSIDERATION OF ALL THESE IMPORTANT TOPICS.
SO, COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BRINGING THAT FORWARD.
THE OTHER THING IS, I'D LIKE TO THANK GUS AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF REEF.
HIS PUBLIC COMMENTS TODAY DEMONSTRATED A WILLINGNESS TO LISTEN TO THE CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS AND OFFERED UP ACCOMMODATIONS, AS WELL AS RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING SIGNAGE AND ENFORCEMENT IN ORDER FOR EVERYONE TO ENJOY THE SPECIAL USE AREA TOGETHER.
AND THEIR COMMENTS ARE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO ME.
THE SAME THINGS I HEARD TODAY, YOUR ADJECTIVES OF SAYING THAT THIS WOULD BE HARMFUL, THAT IT WAS AN INJUSTICE, THAT WE NEED A FAIR SHAKE, THAT WE HAVE PEACEFUL PEOPLE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY, THAT IT CAUSES FRICTION, THAT WE SHOULD NOT RECEIVE WITHOUT ANYTHING IN RETURN. SO I'M JUST SAYING THAT AND I APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE OVER HERE GETTING THOSE 400 COMMENTS BECAUSE IT WAS VERY HELPFUL.
SO I GUESS I'LL TAKE IT ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO.
SETH, ARE YOU STILL HERE? SO JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, LIKE HOW I GUESS PUBLIC THE SPEECH IS.
I FEEL PRETTY CAUGHT UP WITH WHAT GOES ON IN GALVESTON.
I WOULDN'T REALLY SAY THERE'S MANY PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THE FENCE.
WE ARE VERY OPINIONATED PEOPLE, WHICH I LOVE ABOUT US.
AND YOU KNOW, MIKE, SINCE YOU'RE HERE IN THE ROOM ONE VOTE, YOU KNOW, WE THERE'S 50 PEOPLE THAT LIKED YOU AND 51 THAT LIKED ME, YOU KNOW, LIKE, THAT'S PRETTY, YOU KNOW, PRETTY DAMN GOOD EQUALIZATION.
AND SO WE HAVE TO LISTEN TO BOTH SIDES.
AND, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO BRING UP THE THE RINEHART'S.
YOU KNOW, THE RINEHART'S ARE A LOCAL FAMILY THAT HAVE REALLY DONE INCREDIBLE THINGS AT BEACHSIDE VILLAGE, AND THEY ARE A FAMILY THAT'S KIND OF CAUGHT, YOU KNOW, CAUGHT IN THE CROSSFIRE OF OF OUR 50 AND 50.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT SPECIAL ATTENTION IS PAID TO THIS WITH THE AMENDED PROPOSAL THAT THEY'RE KIND OF TREATED WITH KID GLOVES BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT'S REALLY KIND OF BEEN UNFAIR TO IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE GLO OPENS THESE PERMITS, REVIEWS AND FINALLY APPROVES THEM WITHOUT OPENING OTHERS IN THE MEANTIME WOULD GET US IN THE SITUATION THAT BEACHSIDE VILLAGE IS IN.
SO I REALLY WOULD HOPE THAT WE CAN PAY ATTENTION TO THAT IN ANY WAY.
JUST TO SEE THAT, THAT THAT'S PART OF THE PROCESS OF SEEING THAT THROUGH.
I AM I AM HAPPY FOR THIS MOTION BECAUSE IT'S A IT'S A FIGHT THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK WAS IT WAS WELL WORTH IT AND IT PAID, YOU KNOW, IT IT CREATED SOME ATTENTION SOMEWHERE THAT I THINK WE NEEDED TO LISTEN TO.
[01:05:03]
SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR ALL THE EMAILS THAT I'VE GOTTEN.I DON'T MAKE A REAL CLEAR DECISION SOMETIMES.
AND THAT'S WHAT I LOVE ABOUT THIS ISLAND.
WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER AND BE RESILIENT AND BE STRONG AND BE OPINIONATED.
THAT'S WHO WE ARE AND I LOVE IT.
I WANT TO MAKE A FINAL STATEMENT BEFORE WE VOTE.
FIRST OF ALL, I'M 110% IN SUPPORT OF EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID HERE.
THIS HAS BEEN A LONG, CUMBERSOME PROCESS FOR THESE AMENDMENTS, AND SOMETIMES I GET INDIVIDUALS CONTACTING ME AND SAY, THIS IS JUST THE BUREAUCRACY THAT'S INVOLVED WITH THESE AMENDMENTS AND GETTING PUBLIC INPUT.
AND TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND BACK TO COUNCIL IS CUMBERSOME.
BUT IN A WAY, IT'S NOT BECAUSE WHAT IT DOES IS IT BRINGS US BACK TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
WE'VE GOTTEN GOOD, GOOD INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC.
WE GET INPUT, IT GOES TO PLANNING COMMISSION, COMES TO COUNCIL, WE GET CLARIFICATION FROM THE GLO.
OUR STAFF WORKS DILIGENTLY TO TRY TO GET INFORMATION TO US ON THIS.
AND THEN WE TAKE WHICH IS MOST IMPORTANT INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC.
AND THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.
THIS IS SOMETHING ALSO THAT WE HAVE A LEARNING WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO LEARN FROM.
I THINK COUNCILMAN BROWN SAID IT THE BEST.
THIS IS A LEARNING PROCESS FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC WE ARE NOW, I HATE TO SAY THIS, AND I HOPE I DON'T JINX US, BUT WE'RE IN THE CATBIRD SEAT WHEN IT COMES TO MANAGING DEVELOPMENT ON THE ISLAND.
YOU PROBABLY SAW THE ARTICLES IN SOUTHERN LIVING NOT TOO LONG AGO, LAST WEEK, CALLING GALVESTON THE BEST UNDISCOVERED BEACH TOWN IN THE SOUTH. IF I WOULD EXPAND THAT, I WOULD SAY, EXCUSE ME, I SAID, UNTIL THEY WROTE ABOUT IT.
WELL, THAT WAS SOUTHERN LIVING.
WASHINGTON POST KIND OF PUT US IN THE CROSSHAIRS.
BUT THE MATTER OF THE FACT IS, IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO SAY YES TO EVERYTHING THAT COMES ALONG, THAT WE CAN BE A CHOSEN. THAT WE CAN PICK AND CHOOSE AND PICK THOSE PROJECTS THAT IN COUNCIL'S MINDS, ARE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
I WOULD ECHO COUNCILMAN RAWLINS FEELINGS.
I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET DOWN THERE FOR A LITTLE WHILE.
FINALLY FOUND MY WAY DOWN IN THERE.
AND SETH BROUGHT THIS TO MY ATTENTION DURING THE CAMPAIGN ABOUT THIS PROJECT HERE.
SO WHAT I LIKE ABOUT IT, THOUGH, IT'S AN EXTREMELY ATTRACTIVE BEACH.
IT'S ALMOST A PRISTINE BEACH DOWN IN THAT AREA.
AND WHAT IS SO NICE ABOUT IT, IT'S RESERVED.
BUT WHAT REALLY IS IMPORTANT, IT'S RESERVED FOR THOSE THAT HAVE ADA CONCERNS.
AND THAT IS SO IMPORTANT FOR INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE MOBILITY CONCERNS AND OTHER CONCERNS TO BE ABLE TO GET UP AND CLOSE AND PERSONAL WITH OUR NATURAL RESOURCES HERE.
AND I GREATLY, GREATLY APPRECIATE ALL THE COUNCIL'S THOUGHTS ON THIS.
I'M GOING TO CALL FOR A VOTE ON THOSE.
THE DEVELOPERS HAVE DONE WORK A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE PUT WORK INTO THIS, AND MY GOAL IS TO HIT THIS BEFORE WE TURN IT INTO A DIVISIVE ISSUE WHERE WE HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING CALLED WHERE EVERYONE CAN LIVE WITH THE DECISION.
AND THAT COUNCIL COMES TO A CONSENSUS BEFORE WE GET TO THIS POINT, BEFORE WE PUT IN COUNTLESS MAN HOURS AND FOR ALL PARTIES INVOLVED, I THINK WE SHOULD DO IT AHEAD OF TIME.
[01:10:02]
THIS ISSUE HERE IN FRONT OF US TODAY.HOPEFULLY THAT WILL BE THE CASE IN THE FUTURE.
AND FOR FOR JUST THIS SPECIFIC AREA.
I'VE HEARD FROM BOTH, I GUESS BOTH SIDES OF IT, THAT WE DO NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB OF SIGNAGE ENFORCEMENT, AND I THINK THAT WOULD QUELL A LOT OF THE PROBLEMS HERE. A&M GALVESTON WHEN WE HAD A CLASS WITH THE GLO, THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIGGEST PROBLEMS THAT THAT PARTICULAR CLASS POINTED OUT AND KIND OF GOT SOME PUSHBACK FROM THE GLO.
BUT I THINK WE NEED TO WORK ON SIGNAGE AND MAKING THINGS MORE READABLE FOR THE LAYMAN.
AND I'M SURE THAT SOME PEOPLE STUMBLE UPON IT THAT, YOU KNOW, KIND OF HAVE HAVE AN ISSUE.
BRIAN, ALONG THOSE LINES, COULD YOU GET WITH THE GPD, OF COURSE, AND PARK BOARD, SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO SET UP SOME TYPE OF CONSTANT SUPERVISION DOWN IN THAT AREA OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS COUNCILMAN BROWN'S MOTION? IT IS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL OF OUR ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA.
THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR BEING HERE.
THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.