City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Regular council meeting for city copper co held March 3rd, 2026 is called to order at 6:05 p.m. Please stand for the invocation by Miss Hart followed by the pledge of allegiance. Please bow with me in prayer. Dear heavenly father, we are just thankful for this beautiful day. We ask that you be at ever presence in this um in this facility today, Father, watching over our decisions and conversations. continue to protect our public safety and having cover and protection over them and also for our soldiers that are serving here and abroad. Father God, we ask for peace and comfort during this time and continued blessings over our families in Cove. In Jesus name we pray. Amen.

Amen. Please join the pledge our nation's flag to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And to the Texas flag. Honor the Texas flag. I aliance to the Texas one state and indivisible. Please be seated.

Madam Secretary, please call the role. Mayor Yansy here. Christina Estrophus here. Rita Hogan here. Howard Hawk here. John Hail here. Dale Chudway here. Vana Hart here. Jack Smith here. All right. We got a full house. We move to item D. Announcements. None for me, Mr. Mayor. None for me, sir. Howard? Oh, no, sir. Okay, Ryan.

Yes, sir. I have several announcements. Uh, and we're going to start uh with uh the most recent ones or soonest ones coming up. Um, this Friday, March 6th, uh, from 6 pm to 900 pm at the Coppers Cove 6 civic center is the under the sea adaptive dance. Uh, go to the parks and rec department page web page and you can get more details on that. Um, the following day, March 7th, is the under the sea daddy daughter dance. Saturday at 6 PM also at the Coppers Cove Civic Center. On March 12th, encourage our residents to uh come and attend the 2026 state of the city town hall uh from 5:30 p.m. to 700 p.m. at the Coppers Cove Civic Center. Uh Mayor Yansy will provide a state of the city address and then we'll open it up for a town hall. All things Coppers Cove. Uh, the Covers Cove Public Library is hosting the Touch a Truck event with our big trucks on March 17th from 10:00 a.m. to 12 noon uh at the Coppers Cove Public Library. Uh on March 19th, um we are hosting our No Trash Spring Break Bash. Uh this will be at 2990 East Business 190. Um from 8:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. Come and enjoy uh cleaning up and helping keep our community clean. Um big date, March 25th, the city of Coppers Cove, Coppers Cove is celebrating its 140th 47th year of as a city. Uh we will be celebrating on March 28th at 11:00 a.m. at Allen House which is at 401 North Main Street. Uh and then March 28th from 3 to 8:00 PM at the Cover Coivity Park is Springfest.

Uh many musical artists and activities and events, food, come and enjoy and have fun. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Ryan. I have nothing, sir. Thank you. Nothing, Mr. Mayor. I don't have anything, Mr. Mayor. Okay. No announcements. All right, we move to item E, citizens forum.

At this time, citizens will be allowed to speak for a length of time not to exceed five minutes per person on any item which is listed on the agenda and items not listed on the agenda. 30 minutes total has been allotted for this section. Pursuant to section 551.042 042 the Texas Open Meetings Act. Any deliberation or decision about the subject of inquiry which is not listed on the agenda shall be limited to a proposal to place a subject on the agenda for a subsequent meeting. All right. Is there anyone to speak during citizens forum?

Hi, my name is Francis Fischer. I live in Temple, Texas and uh I'm a co-owner of Journey Home Rescue. We are a foster based rescue serving Bell County and at times we've supported animals coming from Coppers Cove as well as our work depends on partnerships with shelters, veterinarians, and community programs because none of us can solve the animal welfare challenges alone. I'm here tonight because of the proposed ordinance amendments do not align with the current animal welfare industry standards and that matters not just for animals but for shelter staff and for public trust. Before the new shelter was built, city leadership publicly stated that the facility was benchmarked against Mount Pleasant and designed specifically so it would not require additional staffing. Staffing limits were identified as a top priority. That tells us something important. The shelter was designed around physical and human constraints first. And that makes policy decisions even more critical. Because when staffing is limited, ordinances must be reduced to workload, not increase it. Right now, these amendments risk doing the opposite. The proposal expands enforcement involving cats without creating a framework to protect or manage community cats. Industry standards, including guidance from the Association of Shelter, Shelter Veterinarians, and National Animal Care and Control Association recognize that community cats require a different approach than owned pets. Decades of research showed that trapping and impounding unsocialized cats increases shelter intake but does not reduce outdoor population. These cats are often feral or minimally socialized. Confinement causes extreme stress, high

illness rates, low adoptability, and ultimately higher euthanasia rates. That outcome is hard on animals and hard on staff and damaging to public confidence. Journey Home Rescue actively supports TNVR, trap, neuter, vaccinate, and return. And we partner with local programs like Snip and Tip that work daily with community cats across this region. The science behind this approach isn't new, not experimental. It's decades old, and widely widely acceptable across modern animal services. So the question becomes, why would an ordinance move toward enforcement models that the field has already learned does not work? And given what has been publicly discussed about staffing limitations and the growing concerns about whether parts of the new facility has even fully usable or isolation or quarantine, council should be asked an important operational question. Will these amendments increase the burden on the already limited staff and in turn increase stress and risk of the animals in their care? Because when workload rises beyond capacity, outcomes decline no matter how new build the building is. I also want to respectfully ask the council to consider the role of animal advisory committee. These are positions meant to reflect current expertise and evidence evidence-based practices. The support of policies that conflict with wellestablished community cap management standards raises serious questions about whether modern best practices are fully considered. This is not about criticism. This is about alignment. If staffing capacity was the guiding principle in building the shelter, then ordinances should follow

the same logic. reducing intake, supporting prevention, procting pre protecting animals and unnecessary confinement. I respectfully ask the council to pause and ensure these amendments include a clear framework for community cat management consistent with modern industry standards moving forward because good policy protects staff, animals, and the community at the same time. Thank you all for your time. Anyone else to speak during citizens forum?

Jack, if you want to hand city secretary, she can handle.

Good evening, mayor, mayor and council members. My name is Dorothy Sanders. I'm the founder of Public Accountability for Animal Welfare or PAL. for a grassroots advocacy group focused on transparency, evidence-based policy, and fiscally responsible animal welfare practices that protect staff, taxpayers, and animals all at the same time. I also volunteer with Journey Home Rescue, and we support animals from Copper's Code. I'm here tonight regarding the ordinance amendments under consideration, specifically the provisions impacting community cats. Without a clearly defined TNVR framework, trap, neuter, vaccinate, and return, these amendment risk, increase in shelter intake, and increase in cost without reducing outdoor cat populations long term. Community cats are not owned pets. They do not behave like owned pets. When ordinances treat them the same way, the outcome is predictable every single time. Enforcement increases, traffic increases, shelter intake increases, disease spread increases, euthanasia pressure increases, staff workload increases, taxpayer cost increases, community frustration increases, and public trust declines and then the cats return. That is the vacuum effect. When cats are removed from a territory, new cats move in because food and shelter remain. Breeding resumes. The population rebounds and often at higher numbers. Track, intake, euthanize, replace, repeat. The cycle will continue. That is not a solution. It is a reoccurring tax expense. I've personally managed cat colonies since I was a teenager. When colonies are sterilized and vaccinated, populations stabilize and gradually decline. Complaints decrease, intake decreases, rabies protection increases because vaccinated cats create a public barrier in our community. In the article that I provided you on page 980, there is a chart that shows population

outcomes over 10 years. The line with the circles represents removal in euthanasia. The the lines with triangles represent sterilization based approaches like TNVR. Removal appears faster at first, but sterilization when done at high intensity achieves similar reductions over time. The difference is sustainability. The second chart to the right of that one on the same page 980, that chart compares total costs for similar population reductions. Removalbased euthanasia approaches cost significantly more over time because of replacement and repeated intake. More cats end up being treated overall, consuming more tax money. That's long-term taxpayer impact. The third chart on the top of page 981. This chart shows cost variability. The cluster dots at the top represent removal in euthanasia. The triangle dots at the bottom represent sterilization. Removal costs are much more unpredictable. Sterilizationbased programs like TNVR are more stable and easier to budget taxpayer money responsibly. Predictability matters in public budgeting. I provided the full peer-reviewed study from the Journal of Feline Med Feline Medicine and Surgery for your review. This was a 10-year modeling in open populations, meaning immigration and abandonment were included, which mirrors real life conditions. I've also included a copy of Waco City Ordinances, which I've highlighted for you, the community cat park, for benchmarking and comparison. Now, let's consider local context. Coppers Cove invested nearly $5 million of taxpayer money in a new shelter with a stated priority to not increase staffing. That means capacity is fixed. If you expand enforcement involving cats without adding a sustainable TMVR framework, you create a permanent intake

cycle inside a system that was not designed to absorb it. This is not ignoring the issue. It's about addressing it cost-effectively. So my direct request to the council is this. Add a defined TNVR and community cat management framework into these amendments. Writing in writing it is it means a lot. Define community cats separately from own pets. Allow return to field after sterilization and vaccination. Invest in prevention on the front end because prevention costs less than repeated intake and require transparent reporting so outcomes can be measured against cost. Smart and effective policies safeguard tax safeguard taxpayers, staff and animals simultaneously. Thank you for your time.

Anyone else to speak during citizens forum George McMaster, 111 Magnolia Avenue. Ladies and gentlemen, um if I had $90,000 in my name, I wouldn't be here. But if I did have $90,000 on my name, I'd invest that into my house, college fund, and my daughter, or even into my community. You know where I'm going with this. I wouldn't have put that into changing my brand's logo to some one that could put me into public disrepute or my brand into disrepute. Yes, I am very late to the party, but I am aware you guys changed the logo recently to whatever that is. I'm not here about that. I'm not here to deride the art artist. I'm here to deride the reasoning. Now, this isn't going away because I've checked social media in the past couple of months. People have targeted the parks and recreation department's logo, a long-standing logo that's very nice. That's something brand new that needs to be a waste of money on. I don't know why, but that's just people being angry about it. People have overwhelmingly overwhelmingly praised the Chamber of Commerce's new logo for retaining both the elements of the Five Hills and from their opinion having a better looking logo. Their opinion, not mine. or is it? If the EDC decides to change its logo anytime soon, please don't. I guarantee you that organization will take the community's feedback into heart so they don't make the same mistake the city made. Even taking the occasional stray change to local comment on the city's Facebook page, the popular opinion seems to be in agreement that this logo isn't what you guys need and not what we need, and the money to spend it on isn't really what we need. I'm not an expert in public relations. I'm far from it. But really, my understanding is, as charitably as I can put it, it's an extremely misplaced priority. We have other things to be worrying about. We have other things to be spending money on.

really why why do we spend why are we going to commit to spending 90 grand a year 90 grand over three years to update the logo from the iconic five hills to and this is just coming from me a a logo that looks like an ear with a hearing aid the problem here is if you take out the hearing aid you can't hear that's the other thing you're not exact the city is not exactly beating the accusation you guys are ignoring people. Again, there's a lot other there's a lot other subjects I could pin this on, but this is basically like the worst subject to try to have the allegation. You're not listening to us. Why? You're making Mr. Keller do more work trying to defend people, trying to defend this this logo. It's not needed. I would go back to the old logo and until then I still think it looks you're giving me representation to the hearing aid community. Thank you. All right. Anyone else to speak during citizens forum?

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. Um I hope you remember me from December 2nd council member uh meeting uh about the introduce yourself and your My name is Jeffrey Burke. Okay.

Uh I was here before about a golf course ban that was placed on me 517 days ago. No formal ban, no written anything written. This is outrageous. that you allow a city employee to act with impunity. And to me, the people above in front of me right now are acting with impunity. You failed Texas law. I requested under the Texas Public Information Act all the information for this ban, who initiated it, every email and correspondence that was involved. I was ignored. Under Texas law, you have 10 days to produce those that information. 10 days unless you have the opinion of the Texas Attorney General's office with waiver. I've contacted the Texas Attorney General's office. You have not. Finally, after all this time, the city manager contacted me today and wanted to have a meeting. How How should that go? 517 days later after I couldn't play with my friends for a golf cart a a golf cart incident that I make no excuse for today. I was arrested for that. That's crazy. I don't know what's going on in this city, but Mr. Hawk, thank you for reaching out to me

and uh and talking to the city manager. I was told by you that early February that you had talked to the city manager and that he was going to contact me. That never happened. Second time you told me that you talked to him, he was going to contact me. Never happened. Then a meeting was supposed to set up be set up. That never happened. Not only did you ignore me, you ignored state law and you violated it without a doubt. And I hope that that meeting there's a resolution, a very good resolution for both me and this city. And I will have no contact with Jeff Stoddard, your friend that you're protecting.

And for somebody, sir, we're not talking about personnel. If you want to talk about an issue, that's fine.

With a p with a past that was given a second chance. And me as a citizen, I'm just ignored and thrown to the side. That's absolutely absurd. No answers, guys. And this has gone on long enough. 517 days for damaging a golf cart that I paid for, I went to jail for, I went to court for it, and was dismissed by the district attorney as laughable. But somebody made that decision. Somebody made that decision to press charges. And I'm pretty sure I know who it was. Thank you for your time. And I hope this can be resolved very quickly.

All right. Anyone else to speak during citizens forum? Hello. Before you before you start, how what time do we start Citizens for? Do you know? No, sir, I don't. Okay. Okay. Go ahead. Thank you.

I'm Rose Brim Hall. I'm 910 Willowbrook Street here in Copper Cove. I have a colony. Well, I have two. I've been feeding for over 20 years. And it started with 15 to 20 cats and I'm now down to six. I really wish that you would work with us with the TNR. It works. It's saves stress on y'all. It saves stress on the animal. I know one day I was out feeding and this car pulls up really fast, throws a cat out the window said, "Here's another one for you." And this cat is scared to death. You know, it's not the animal's fault, it's the human's fault. But I am going to ask please work with us with TNR. We've not asked you for a penny. It comes out of our pocket. You go to my vet and you tell you put my name in there. I've got over 90 animals under my name that I have repaired, spayed, neutered, shots, whatever was needed, I did. I never asked anybody for a penny. I just asked that you work with us. TNR works. Thank you.

All right. Anyone else to speak? Okay. Okay.

Hello y'all. I'm Tammy. Thank you for letting me speak. I'm also going to um just a little bit of comments on the um the amendment that you're about to do for the microchipping. And a lot of us that you've seen a lot of TNR the wording animal at large that leaves a lot of people who try who work with cats and want to help bring the population down. A lot of us are concerned about the animals at large wording and we would very much appreciate that if you I'm not against microchipping. All of my animals have been microchipped, but of the cats that I've done over the past two years, uh, most spa most clinics do not microchip. And so we just want to make sure that when the this amendment, if you vote yes, the there's clear language protecting the community cats because animals at large, that could is up to interpretation depending on the animal control officer. And we have a lot of colonies that we take care of, a lot of cats that we take care of. I started two years ago in my neighborhood there was 20 kittens born. Last year there was four, you know. So everybody who TNR is everyone that um works together as a group in Coppers Cove and and Colleen and Belton and Temple, all of us that are trying to help bring down the cat population in our communities. We just want to ensure that animals at large is specific to owned cats. And then there are people that have owned cats that want to know how are you going to enforce this? Are there going to be fine? So there's a lot of people that are concerned that the wording is not specific and we would like to make sure that the amendment is specific. Are you going to find people? Are we going to grandfather in? How much is it going to cost? Are we going to help? Like, are I have a neighbor across the street. She's concerned. She's 80 years old, retired army. How am I going to afford this? Are they going to come and make, you know, I

don't think you are. Are they going to come knock on my door and see my cat the window and make me microchip? You probably aren't, but these are concerns of the citizens. And a lot of them aren't here, but we've I've I've been I knock on doors. I talk to my community. I I call people. I ask my neighbors. And these they just want to make sure the wording of this new amendment is clear. I don't think most people aren't against microchipping. Like I said, I whenever I trap a cat, I'm always hoping it has a home and I I can get it back and nine out of 10en times they're not. So, um, how are we going to how are we going to enforce this? Let's make the wording clear so we're not targeting community cats that we a lot of us have colonies we take care of. We vaccinate flee and tick medicine. If they're sick, we take them to the vets. We want to protect those animals, but we also want to ensure our citizens that the wording is clear, that it's not going to be a ridiculous fine or you're going to work with people. And are we going to enforce if we do microchip and that cat or dog is dumped? What are we going to do to that owner? How many times have my daughters and I rescued a dog or cat and they've been microchipped and the microchip company or the animal control, not here, but in other animal controls that I've lived because I'm prior military and I've traveled all over the country. The same excuse is, "Oh, we rehomed the animal. We don't know who we rehomed it to. So sorry." Is there going to be consequences for an animal that's found on the streets, a cat or a dog? for microchipping and enforcing the in cats because cats do get dumb too. Like I my cat was thrown out of a car going 65 miles an hour down the freeway. My first cat I rescued. So what are the consequences going to be when we enforce microchipping? When the owner dumps the cat and they say, "Oh, I rehomed it and it's microchipped to them." Are y'all going to hold that person responsible because they didn't change the microchip? Are we just going to play the name blame game? that that these are

some of the questions that aren't in the amendment that we would like to because I I want to see every cat microchip that that you know is owned and then if it's dumped I I would like to see them held. I would like to see consequences to those animals that are dumped because most of us that have cats, we're not going to dump our cats and microchip them and then and dump them and go, "Oh, so sorry." You know? So, uh let me summarize. I'm sorry. I said I was I wasn't going to speak. I didn't write. I'm sorry. So, we just want to make sure the wording is clear. What does animals at large mean? Are we protecting our community cats? How much is it going to cost our citizens? Is there going to be a fine? Are the people who dumped their cats and say, "So sorry, I rehomed it, but I don't know who they are." They should be held accountable because they should know who they're rehoming their pet to. I think that's it. Thank you guys.

Thank you. We all right we will close the uh citizens forum. We're going to move to item F, consent agenda.

All matters listed under this item are considered to be routine by the city council and will be enacted by one motion. There will not be separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. Item one, consideration and action on approval of city council workshop meeting minutes for February 17, 2026. Lisa Wilson, city secretary. Item two, consideration and action on approval of city council regular meeting minutes for February 17, 2026, Lisa Wilson, city secretary. Item three, consideration and action on award in a bid with Texas HomePro roofing and remodeling for quote CCPD fence labor police department fence replacement and drainage project. and we care home repair for quote number 2035 materials police department fence replacement project. Jeremy Albert, deputy chief of police.

All right, council. There are three items. Is there any item you wish to pull and consider separately? If not, is there a motion to approve the consent agenda?

Mr. Mr. Mayor. Yes. I make a motion that we approve consent agenda items F1 through three as presented. Second. Motion made by Mr. Hail, second by Miss Strous. All those in favor say I. I.

Any oppose. Motion carries. We move to item G1. A governmental body shall allow each member of the public who desires to address the body regarding an item on an agenda for an open meeting of the body to address the body regarding the item at the meeting before or during the body's consideration of the item. Item one, public hearing and action to approve ordinance number 2026-8 to adopt the 2024 International Code Council building codes as recommended by the International Code Review Ad Hoc Committee amending chapter 4 section 4-1 of the Code of Ordinances, Coppers Cove, Texas. Bobby Lewis, Development Services Director.

The time is 6:36. We'll open the public hearing.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Since January 29th, 2024, staff in the International Code Review ad hoc committee members have met 27 times in the review of the specialized code series of the 2024 International Code Council building codes along with the 2023 National Electrical Code. During this two-year period, the actual number of code books reviewed and recommended for adoption consists of 11 books in total. On January 31st, 2026, staff and the International Code Review Athog Committee completed its review of the ordinance for consideration and action by voting to recommend approval to city council as amended of the 2024 International Co- Councsil series of books, code books, and the 2023 National Electrical Code. With that, staff in the International Code Review Ad Hoc Committee recommends the city council approve ordinance number 2026-8 as presented. Council, you have any questions for Mr. Lewis? Is there anyone wishes to speak on this public hearing matter? Yes.

Good evening. My name is Jimmy Clark. I live at 3023 South FM 1116 and I was the chairman of this committee made up uh by city staff, Bobby and Kathy and the building inspectors along with Brad Williams, a local plumber, Jay Manning, a local builder, Dustin Dwald, the local builder, and you forgot in excess of 4,000 pages to add to the list of what we looked at. I I want to thank this council for allowing the industry and groups that these ordinances and these rules and regulations changes affect to allow these committees to meet to where staff and the and the actual people on the ground who are doing this work get the input and I think it's uh beneficial and I think it has been in this in this ordinance review and I want to thank y'all for the time that y'all take out of your busy schedules to work and represent our community. I work in neighboring communities and I'm proud to call Copper Cove my home.

Council, you have any questions for Mr. Clark? Mr. Clark, you and your committee, we would like to thank you for the great job y'all did with this international code. Great job.

Well, I appreciate that. It was a team effort by everybody and it's important and you all know better than anybody the affordability crisis has taken place in this country due to inflation and interest rates especially in the housing market. Our community uh vast majority of new homes that have been built in the 45 years I've been doing it and today are entry levelvel starter homes that our majority of our soldiers have bought over the years. Every rule, every regulation, everything that changes affects the cost. That's one of the things that we considered in some of the revisions that come from this international code that weren't necessarily germanine to our community and it allows people to make choices as to what they want to buy versus telling them what they have to buy. And uh I appreciate your consideration on that. And thank you.

Was there a in your estimation, Jim, was there a uh do you anticipate a big change as far as affordability? There will be an there will be an impact from this this ordinance that we have uh adopted uh we've been working under in 2015, but I I would have to say that it's minimal uh through the work that's been done. And remember, these code councils are international. They're from all over the country. A lot of times vendors sit on these code counsel recommendations and quite frankly they're trying to sell a product. Yeah.

And and what is the best and what uh some of these code councils uh adopt are not necessarily what everybody can afford. Everybody has the option to add these extra things at their house if they want to pay for it. But if it's in the code, they don't have the option. They have to pay for it. And I think that we've addressed a lot of that in this review that we did. Okay. Council, any other questions? No, sir.

Okay. All right. The time is 6:41. We will close this public hearing. Council, do you have any action to be taken on this item. Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve item G1, ordinance number 2026-8. I'll second. Motion made by Mr. Hog, second by Miss Hogan. Is that correct? Okay. Any other discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Thank you, Bobby. Thank you, Jimmy. Appreciate it. We move to item H, action items.

Item one, consideration and action to approve resolution number 2026-9, establishing the capital improvements advisory committee to review and make recommendations to the city council for the implementation of the water and roadway impact fee study report. Bobby Lewis, development services director. Mayor and Council on the the uh capital improvements advisory committee is an advisory committee whose purpose is to review and make recommendations to city council pertaining to the implementation of impact fees on new development for public infrastructure. The primary functions of the committee will be to advise and assist the city in adopting land use assumptions, review the capital improvement plan regarding water and roadway capital improvements, monitor and evaluate the implementation of capital improvements plan. Advise the city of the need to update and revise the land use assumptions, capital improvement plan, and impact fees. Submit to city council a report evaluating the progress of the city and achieving the capital improvement plan and identifying any problems in implementing the plan or administering impact fees. With that staff and the Kimney uh the city's impact fee consultant Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc. recommend the city approve resolution 2026-9 as presented. Okay.

Council, any questions for Mr. Lewis? All right. Is there action to be taken on this item? Mr. Mayor? Yes. I make a motion that we approve resolution number 2026-9 as presented. Second. Motion made by Mr. Hail, seconded by Mr. Treadway. Any other discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Right. The motion carries. We move to item H2.

Consideration and action to authorize a city manager to execute a professional services agreement with HDR Engineering Inc. for the planning study to improve the safety and mobility of people and goods across an existing atgrade highway rail crossing called the Coppers Co. railroad flyover project, which the city was awarded federal funding from the Federal Railroad Administration Railroad Crossing Elimination Program to develop this project. Bobby Lewis, development services director.

Mayor and council, on January 10th, 2025, the city received a grant for the Copper Cove railroad flyover planning study. On September 4th, 2025, the city of Coppers Cove sent a request to the cove leader for us for requests for qualifications for professional consulting services. On October 8th, 2025, the city received five requests for qualifications. In December 11th, 2025, staff completed its evaluation of those five firms and determined that HDR Engineering Inc. received the highest score for this project. The planning study will determine a preferred alternative for providing at least one atgrade separated crossing in the city. The planning study will also evaluate other potential safety opportunities and improvements at three identified crossings. On February 9th, 2026, HDR Engineering submitted its proposal. The project will include planning activities including stakeholder and public engagement, identification of a full project inventory, conceptual design, and establishment of an implementation plan. With that, city staff recommends the city council authorize the city manager to execute a professional service agreement with HCR Engineering, Inc. for the Copper Co. Railroad flyover project.

All right, council, you have any questions for Bobby? Mr. Mayor, I just I have one question. How long will the study you think approximately take? The um the grant is good for three years and so we're hoping to get that done in two be honest with you. Thank you. And this is for a determination of at least one flyover project. Oh yeah, the best crossing city. Okay. All right. Council, any more questions? All right. Is there action to be taken on this item? Mr. Mayor? Yes.

I make a motion to authorize the city manager to execute a professional services agreement with HDR Engineering Incorporated for the planning study to improve the safety and mobility of people and goods across an existing atgrade highway rail crossing called the Copper Scope Railroad Flyover Project. Second motion made by Cassard, seconded by Mr. Treadway. Hail messed up again. All right. Any other questions? This uh I got to tell you, this is a long time in coming. Yes. Yes, it is. Long time ago coming. All right. All those in favor say I.

I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you, Bobby. We move to item H3. Consideration and action on ordinance number 2026-9 amending chapter 3, articles 1 through13, sections 3-1 to 3-145 of the city of Coppers Cove Code of Ordinances regulating microchipping animals at large and renaming the animal shelter. Jeremy Alber, Deputy Police Chief.

Good evening, mayor, city councilman, city council, and city manager. A a bond election for the construction of a new animal shelter passed in 2021. City staff recommended a facility name change to the Coppers Cove Animal Care Facility. The name change of better align with the capabilities of the new facility and will provide in will provide in caring for animals and not just serving as a shelter. Code of ordinance chapter 3 will require amendments as a result of that name change. In addition, the animal shelter advisory committee will change to the animal care advisory committee to remain consistent with the new facility name. Uh to further enhance public safety, improve animal welfare, reduce taxpayer costs associated with stray animals, and modernize local animal control practices. The animal shelter advisory committee is supporting staff's city staff's recommendation of adopting an ordinance requiring all owned dogs and cats within the city to be microchipped. Code of ordinance chapter 3 must be amended to facilitate a microchip mandate. The animal shelter advisory committee also recommends changes to code of ordinance section 338 animals at large to remove the exemption for cats that remain at the owner's or on the owner's premises. The ordinance amendment will remove this exemption making it unlawful for any person owning or having charge care, custody or control of a cat along to allow the animal to be at large. Uh, so city staff recommends that city council hold the we already held the public hearing last time and that we take action on ordinance number 22 26-9 amending chapter 3 of the animals and foul articles 1 through 13 sections 3-1 to 345 of the city of Coppers Cove code of ordinances.

Thank you Jeremy Council. You have any questions for Jeremy? So, as uh as I was rereading through all of this stuff and preparing to come up here today, I I would be remiss if I didn't at least speak a little bit about the uh concerns that other people have brought before you.

I animal control has not and will not be uh seeking to have community cats microchipped. Community cats are exactly that. community cats, they're without an owner. And in order for a microchip to be even mildly effective, you have to have an owner in order to associate that with um we do have several cat colonies within the city of Coppers Cove. Animal control officers have never gone out there looking to enforce any type of city ordinances about a community cat. Uh community cats are actually protected under the the Texas state law. Uh so ultimately in in the the long run, we're not looking to put a cat owner um or a cat caretaker into any type of jeopardy for taking care of cats. We need those people in our communities. They take care of those cats. That keeps it out of the taxpayers's dollars. largely the people that we have that take care of those community cats, they really uh facilitate it without any animal control involvement. Now, they will come in and and pick up cats periodically. Um, and when they do that, they pick them up and then they rehome them. They don't bring them back to their their little colonies. When I reached out to the different veterinarian or the two veterinarians here in town, when I reached out to them and I asked them, what does it cost? And they said that we we can't tell you that. We're not going to divulge information about the people that are taking care of the community cats. And I wasn't seeking a a person's name, right? So, they are protected. uh

they're protected by city staff in that animal control officers are not running around trying to to do anything to a community cat caretaker. Additionally, this ordinance uh or this amendment to the ordinance is not designed to do anything for a community cat. This is designed to microchipping is designed to hold an owner accountable if their animal is out and at large. So at large meaning not having care custody and control by a human being. There's only one way in which a person can care or or contain a cat in their front yard and that is on a leash or on some sort of tether device that would actually keep the cat on their property. Oftentimes what happens animal control officers end up going to a a dog owner's home and they say these cats keep coming in my backyard. These cats keep coming on my front porch. They're urinating and defecating my flower beds. My house is starting to smell. What are you going to do for me? And we have to explain to them that it may be your neighbor's cat. And if it's your neighbor's cat, it's not supposed to come off of their property. However, it often does. And when that happens, it becomes a nuisance cat to the neighbor next door. They say, "Well, why can't they have their cats in their front yard, but I can't have my dog in my front yard? I can control my dog much better than they can control their cat by verbal control, but that's unlawful for my dog to be in the front yard. It really puts animal control officers into a bad situation. So, by removing the the exemption that would allow a micro or a cat that is uh vaccinated, the current ordinance um

has in it for a cat that is on their property and vaccinated and licensed with the city that it can be on the front yard or on their property and not be considered at large. And I would submit to you that if the cat is in their backyard, nobody's going to say a word because it's contained in a fence. Cats often jump fences, though. But the only time that we're coming into contact with these community cats is when they're a nuisance animal. If it's a nuisance animal is causing a problem at somebody's residence, generally speaking, animal control does not go out and trap them those cats. The citizen does. And the citizen will trap the cat. They will bring the cat into the the shelter where animal control will go out and pick up the trap with the cat in it. If the cat is deemed to have a microchip, the goal is to hold that owner liable uh or accountable for for abandoning an animal. If it has a microchip, if it doesn't have a microchip, well, we have nowhere to start. You know, the cat's not easily identifiable without a microchip. So requiring a microchip for animals or for cats would actually help in that situation. Now people are right. There's oftent times a he said she said kind of thing of trying to determine animal ownership, but I would submit to you that the animal control officers and staff within the city. We do a pretty good job of investigating things like that. And if we can hold somebody accountable, we will. It's a class B misdemeanor. So this ordinance would not be uh it could fall under cruelty to animals, cruelty to non-livestock animals, be a class B misdemeanor. So the m the city ordinance would not have any type of control over the enforcement of that. That would be held in the county court, excuse me, the county court law. So the municipal court

and and so on and so forth would not have uh control over that. The the goal here, as I stated before, is when we find an animal, if it's microchipped, animal control officers have microchip scanner with them. They can scan the animal, find out who the owner is, find out where they live, and take the animal home. We've reduced the number of people that are or number of animals that are actually coming into the shelter and then ultimately reduce the amount of stress that the animals are under. If we can keep them out of the shelter environment, that's the best for any animal and keep them inside a a nice loving home.

Okay, Ryan, did you have any comments? No, Jeremy did it all. Okay, it's because I wore the glasses. Hey, Mr. Mayor, I had a few questions, but Deputy Chief answered all of them, so I won't ask them. Mr. Mayor,

yes. I was wondering if we uh could hear some more from uh the TNR uh people because they didn't we ran out of time during the uh public forum and this is an action item. Do they still have time to speak? If anybody still wants to I think that uh some got shut down.

Was there anybody that wanted to speak? Melody Squires 212 Robertstown Road. Um, two things. One, I know the city really doesn't want to support TNR in colonies, but a lot of places do them and it really helps out. I support uh a refuge in Austin that does senior cats. I sent Howard Hawk some info on that, but um a lot of these cats are disabled, hurt, blind, scared, and they can't be brought to a house, you know, and these owners take care of them. And you ever see them in the little breathing mask for asthma? It's really cute,

but you know, they are taken care of. And for the animal control to pick them up and try to put them in a home, they'll just be brought back or dumped back out again. So sometimes, you know, you need a little cat colonies where where they're taken care of and, you know, and more cat colonies authorized to take care of them because again, a lot are are not adoptable. Plus, you know, I was reading up on that when they are returned, they're supposed to be returned to the same area, not to a different area because then that really mixes the cats up. You know, if you pick them up in this area where a colony might have been and you bring them back or someone else dumps them out, then they're really uh traumatized again. So, I think other things need to be looked into. I know they talk about, well, we don't want to do this, rabies, this and that. But the catch and especially if they're given shots and monitored, you know, one, it reduces the population, but also helps the welfare. Like I said, a lot of cats are not adoptable and they have needs. So, one place they're blind, some of them, you know, they one has problems with the claw can't retract. So, you know, these are things that we have to look at that might be better in a small colony areas taken care of where someone looks after them and to pick them up and you know, I know they're not going to intentionally, but this is why I also think trap, neuter, vaccinate, and release is a good idea. And that's just my comments.

Okay. Mayor, if I may, I we appreciate the TNR people that are doing this. They're doing this on their own. They do this with their own dollars. And I would submit to you that if they didn't do it, we would have a much larger problem than what we currently have. I don't I wouldn't even call it a cat problem that we necessarily have because of the people that are doing TNR. It is absolutely helping animal control and that those animals are not making it into the shelters. They're generally not nuisance animals. The only time that we're dealing with a a stray animal, if you will, uh one of those uh community cats, is when it becomes a nuisance animal to either a business or a homeowner. And once the once that animal becomes a nuisance, then the citizen has an opportunity to to get a trap. And once they get the trap, if they trap an animal that is part of a TNR colony, then oftent times the that animal will end up euthanized. It's a fact. It it's I I'm not going to sugarcoat that. However, most of the time those animals are are they're smarter than the trap is and and they elude the trap. Um, so again, the the goal with this is not to affect the community cats. The goal with this is to affect the people that actually own animals because a microchip does no good if there's not an owner. An owned animal and being able to get that animal back to its residents.

Just want to take a couple minutes. Appreciate everything that the deputy chief is is saying. um the intent in place and the processes that they put in place and informally working with the TNR VR community. But what I think we're asking is for that to be in writing so if the deputy chief leaves or someone else comes behind him that they don't interpret the ordinance that you have in front of you differently. And so there's no definition of community cap in the ordinance. There's no definition of pet cat in the ordinance. If you look at the ordinance that I gave you from Waco, they clearly define community cat, owner cat, ear tipped cat in the definitions. That's what we're asking for Copper's Cove so you can keep this collaborative relationship between your animal control and your TMVR community. They want help, they want help. We just need to make sure that the policies align to protect both and not leave it up to interpretation so somebody else could come behind them and interpret it a little bit differently. That's what we're asking.

George McMaster 11 Magnolia. I don't have a cat in this fight. It's in the first dog. But I would say a source of all this definitions probably come from the same state statutes that have been mentioned but not specifically cited

because that would be helpful because if there's a definition not just from other community other municipalities but in state statute that's clearly written clearly going to be only gets changed every two years if the legislature feels like it. That'd be a great start in the ordinance itself because a few years ago I contributed to the changing of the fireworks statute to have a state clearly updated state reference to state law. So I would just hold off on this part and then get it right because we don't want to be coming back later and having all this consternation now that we fix it later like other projects have happened in the past ever. That's my words.

Okay. Did you have some comments? Right. Thank you, mayor. Uh, mayor and council, um, you you've heard a lot, uh, about the agenda item that's before you. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm Kathy Karen. Uh, I just wanted to point out a few things about TNR. When, uh, we take care, they're feral cats. They're not adoptable. They're wild. uh people that take care of these colonies, if they're friendly cats, they find them homes. If they're kittens, they tame them and they find them homes. So, the colony reduces and I just wanted to point that out. Okay. Thank you.

Right.

Yeah. Mayor and council, y'all heard a lot about the uh ordinance. Um DC Albert has provided a a very comprehensive review of the im information and uh quite honestly the limited revisions that are included in that ordinance. The revisions are focused on a name change, microchipping and uh a change to animals at large. Um this recommendation came from a body that you have given direction to and that is the animal shelter advisory committee. They provide a recommendation to you. So, if city council is considering any revisions and many of the valid comments that have been brought before you, uh, I would recommend to the council that one, you consider adopting the ordinance. We've prepared it. We've passed it through the animal shelter advisory committee. Um, and we brought it to you now a second time for consideration and provide direction to the animal shelter advisory committee who you appoint members to to consider the concerns and the comments that have been brought to you this evening and to review those concerns for considerate to uh consider revising or adopting ing into chapter 3 of our code of ordinance to address some of those things. Uh this is not the first time, mayor and council that there's been a discussion on uh community cats or in in some of the

discussions I've had feral cats. Um and so this topic is not going away. and they they they provide a really good explanation that the population is not going away without some type of effort to some extent. Um and so with that being said, uh the information that we've prepared is one valid. It has gone through the body that you created to provide those recommendations. Um, and two, you have the ability to provide direction back down to that body to address the concerns that you have as well.

Okay, council. Any questions for Ryan or Jeremy? Okay. Is there action to be taken on this item, Mr. Mayor?

Yes. Uh the actual the only change I like that they've made is changed the animal care uh facility, Coppers Cove animal care facility. I'm not for the atlarge. Um you know, I'm afraid that if we pass this ordinance then and I I know they're not going to go out and start trapping cats and and taking them to the shelter, but I agree with some of the speakers that it's the interpretation of it is there. and and then we'll have an ordinance that says this and then we'll be doing something different. So that's my thoughts on it. Okay, Mr. Mayor. Yes.

Um first of all, I would like to say thank you to Jeremy for work um meeting with me last week and I just want to say thank you to all those that have um reached out to me regarding this item. Um I don't think I have changed much sadly. am not convinced in regards to making it a mandate for microchipping. I do believe it should be a personal choice and um because we have to incre um consider everyone and their personal choices. Um of course it's a proven fact that reunification um there's a success rate with that with bringing those pet owners to the pets with their pets. So I'm not even trying to negate that. That's proven fact. Um I also have a dog and he's microchipped. you know, that's that's my choice. I want to be able to be reunited with my pet if he happened not to listen. So, um I do believe that um we we can't put motivation to change in individuals that don't want to be changed and that's the sad thing. Um having the microchip holding people accountable, yes, I do believe that. But at the same time, you need to update your information and sometimes they people don't. Um sometimes there's um registrations of places where you're registered that are no longer existing. One sadly is save a life I believe it is that no longer exists. It's not on the registry. So I you can go ahead and get microchipped with that one and then all of a sudden you know um they're not um microchipped anymore. Um well yeah they're not registered anymore. So I will just say um again um I was like this the last time I came across my the dis um I'm just not in support of um a mandate for microchipping. Thank you.

I guess my question is there's not a mandate that you have to microchip. It only matters if the animal leaves that property. Is that right? Is that right, Jeremy?

Yes. So, we're not going to run around with a microchip scanner and find everybody walking a dog and try to scan their their animals. The if an animal is at large and is picked up by animal control and it doesn't have a microchip, then that's when we would find that out. The one of the big issues that we run into is callers. Right now there is a mandate from the city of Coppers Cove that your animal be licensed in the city and we give them a little tag, a little dog tag and that little dog tag goes on a collar. If that collar is not present with the animal, we have no clue what animal that is. So the microchip is with the the animal 100% of the time. So it really makes it so it's significantly easier to identify an animal. Most of the animals when they come into the shelter are not wearing collars. So having a microchip there, it it it does allow for the animal to be identified. But if if you're asking, are we going to go neighborhood to neighborhood, house to house, trying to find those that don't have a microchipped animal? No. And if Fluffy is not microchipped and Fluffy never leaves your house, animal control will never know. Mr. Mayor,

did you And I do and I do believe that 100% of what you're saying. Um, but it is saying here the owner or keeper of any dog or cat must must have the animal implanted with a microchip. Um, and then it just goes on for there. So I, you know, that it's just my opinion on it. Um, moving forward with whatever with whatever council wants to do. Anybody else comments?

Uh, Mr. Mayor and Council, uh, DC Aba, thank you for clarity on tonight. Great job. Uh, I would like to go ahead and approve this ordinance with the revision from the audience tonight. You want to make the motion? Yes. I'll make a motion that we approve. Let me see my paper. Ordinance 26 2026-9 amending chapter 3 with the with the revision from the citizens and the resident tonight. I make a motion that we approve this item.

What's revision? Okay. Are you are you saying with revisions or are you saying with future direction to look at Okay, Mr. Mr. May with future direction these other u potential changes. Yes sir. I make a motion. So approve as is. Approve as direction with direction from the audience tonight in the residence. Okay. Everybody get that. Mayor. Yes.

Mr. Hawk. um the direction you're giving. Are you giving direction to the animal shelter advisory committee to consider the comments that have been received tonight from those who spoken during public comment and during this agenda item? Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank for the clarity, Ryan. Is there a there's a motion? Is there a second to approve ordinance 2026-9 amending chapter 3 as presented future direction given to the animal and

advisory committee to address some of the concerns TNR I'll second that did you second that yes sir motion made and a second any other discussion All those in favor say I. I. I. Any oppose? Nay. Nay. Roll call. Christina Strous. I. Rita Hogan. Hi. Howard Hawk. Hi. John Hail. I. Dale Chadway. I. Ba Hart. Nay. Jack Smith. Nay. 52.

52. Motion carries those. But I do want to say for all of those that had comments tonight that they that were heard and they will be addressed. Okay. Mayor, may I make one comment? Go ahead.

Thank you. And and uh DC Albert um is our staff leaison to the animal shelter advisory committee. Uh all of those meetings at the animal shelter advisory committee are public meetings. They are posted just like these meetings. Um and so uh please go on to the city's website. Go to the city's agenda page. You can scroll down and sign up for notifications of the animal shelter advisory committee meetings and you will be notified every time they meet and the topics in which they will be discussing. Thank you.

All right, that's all the action items for tonight. There are no reports from staff, outside entities, advisory committees, and boards. Item J, items for future agendas. Mr. Dro, none for me, Mr. Mayor. None for me, sir. No, Mr. Mayor. I have nothing, sir. Nothing, Mr. Mayor. I have nothing, sir. No, I don't have anything. All right. There is one executive session item.

Item one. Pursuant to section 551.087 of the Texas government code, city council will meet in executive session for deliberation regarding the offer of a financial or other incentive to a business prospect reference as project hometown hero.

All right. The time is 7:16. We adjourn into executive session. The time is 7:50. We reconvene into open session for any possible action resulting from any items posted legally discussed in executive session. There is no action be taken. So at 7:50 we stand adjourned.